1994-12-13 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
667 NORTH CARROLL AVENUE
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 13, 1994
MINUTES
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Gary Fickes; Deputy Mayor Pro Tem, Jon Michael
Franks. Members; W. Ralph Evans and Michael Richarme
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Jerry Farrier. Members: Stephen Apple
and Andy Wambsganss
STAFF PRESENT: Curtis Hawk, City Manager; Shana Yelverton, Assistant City Manager;
Kevin Hugman, Assistant to the City Manager; LouAnn Heath, Director of Finance; Greg Last,
Director of Community Development; Ron Harper, City Engineer; Bob Whitehead, Director of
Public Works; and, Sandra L. LeGrand, City Secretary
The Special City Council Meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Mayor Gary Fickes.
Agenda Item #2 -A, Executive Session
Mayor Fickes advised the audience that Council would be going into executive session pursuant
to Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, Sections 551.071, 551.072, 551.074, 551.076
of the Open Meetings Act to seek the advice of the City Attorney with respect to pending and
contemplated litigations, to discuss the purchase, exchange, lease or sale of real property and
to consider the appointment and evaluation of public officials, and regarding the deployment of
specific occasions for implementation of security personnel or devises.
Council adjourned into executive session at 4 :07 p.m.
Council returned to open session at 4:35 p.m.
Agenda Item #2 -B, Action Necessary /Executive Session
No action was necessary as the result of the executive session.
Agenda Item #3, Discussion: Perimeter Road Fee Ordinance.
Director of Public Works, Bob Whitehead, stated he received a draft copy of a new Perimeter
Fee Ordinance from the City Attorney, for Council to review with the current Perimeter Fee
Ordinance. Staff has gone through the current ordinance and revised and tried to condense the
old into the new proposed ordinance. The City Attorneys have raised general questions for
Council to resolve, as well as staff questions, including:
Special City Council Meeting Minutes
December 13, 1994
page two
Agenda Item #3, Continued
1) Should the ordinance provide that the developer be responsible for payment of a
fee for actual construction of the interim street or ultimate street?
According to Whitehead, in the old ordinance, it is not really clear, because the developer is
paying the $50,000 per mile fee, it really hasn't been an issue. This is not covering the cost of
the interim or ultimate street. The City, with the bond issue that was passed, are building
interim street cross sections. The interim arterial street costs are based on 1994 estimates.
Councilmember Richarme stated when the Road Task Force was active, they
worked under the assumption that materials did not change from year to year.
Is that or was that a good assumption?
Bob Whitehead stated the costs vary from year to year. Eddie Cheatham stated he feels we
should expect costs to increase with time.
2) Should the City expect the developers to pay?
Mayor Fickes stated, if the city is not ready to do it, we should not expect the developers to pay
for it. Richarme agreed. Richarme asked, does the developer in building development, place
wear and tear on roads going in and out of the development? Mayor Fickes stated he feels the
way we are doing the fees are not fair.
Director Whitehead stated he hears City Council as saying we are looking at interim roads as
it makes more sense.
Councilmember Richarme stated if we don't know what the ultimate road will be by default, it
has to be interim. Should this be impact fees or perimeter road fees?
Curtis Hawk, City Manager, stated the budget includes funds for
a consultant to do a study for the ultimate road.
Councilmember Richarme asked that drainage be included in the
study for the ultimate road.
Bob Whitehead stated the old ordinance leaves so much to the Director of Public Works. He
is recommending that those issues come out and addressed in the Developer Agreement.
Special City Council Meeting Minutes
December 13, 1994
page three
Agenda Item #4. Discussion: Assessment Sewer Program.
Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works presented information concerning costs for Lonesome
Dove Estates and Emerald Estates off -site sewer, adding, Lonesome Dove Estates is committed
to build an off -site lift station to serve both their subdivision and Emerald Estates. Staff have
been working with John Levitt on the location of the lift station. Staff has asked Levitt to design
the off -site system to locate the lift station at Lonesome Dove Avenue and Dove Street. This
would allow the lift station to serve Hunters Creek, and possibly Heatherwood Estates, Royal
Oaks and Twin Creeks. A copy of the memorandum from Bob Whitehead, dated December 13,
1994, is hereby attached to the minutes of this meeting.
Mr. Whitehead asked if we want to do this and work with the Lonesome Dove Developer.
Eddie Cheatham will get estimates for the other three (3) streets, also checking with the residents
of that area to see if they want sewer. It was noted that the City has funding through the Bonds.
Councilmember Richarme stated he is less concerned about the
money, but more concerned with which additions to sewer.
Agenda Item #5. Discussion: Northeast Tarrant County Regional Water Supply Study
The Director of Public Works, Bob Whitehead, stated at the October 12, 1994, meeting of the
Regional Water Supply Group, significant results of the study were presented. Major points
include:
Each entity's city or MUD representative concurs that the attached plan is best
to serve the need of the area.
- Of the four "Institutional Options" suggested, 4. Another Entity (such as TRA)
could manage and operate a Regional System (Third party option) was selected.
Mr. Wayne Hunter, TRA, was present and agreed that TRA was a viable option.
The consultants, Alan Plummber and Associates, were directed to request a
proposal from TRA for the management and operation of a N.E. Tarrant County
Water Supply District. Mr. Hunter suggested a two -year planning time be
programmed to accomplish this option once it is officially accepted.
- A public meeting is scheduled for January 19, 1995, 6:00 p.m., at Trophy Club
MUD #1 office and meeting room. The meeting will present and discuss the
"draft" report.
- Southlake's water supply needs are the most pressing. Therefore, this plan
addresses a second water supply line to be installed along SH 114 from the
Trophy Club MUD line. By utilizing the existing 21 -inch line to Trophy Club,
Special City Council Meeting Minutes
December 13, 1994
page four
Agenda Item #5, Continued
Southlake could withdraw 1.8 MGD and Trophy Club would still meet their
demands. The estimated cost of this supply line would be $734,400. This cost
does not include any costs associated with a buy -in rental, etc. with Trophy Club.
Also, a ground storage -pump station would need to be built at a cost of
approximately $2.5 million. The ground storage would be designed for the
ultimate flow of 7.00 MGD. Roger Unger, Trophy Club MUD, has expressed
interest in some arrangement to supply water to Trophy Club's elevated tank next
to I.B.M. The City should start negotiations with MUD soon as we will need to
start construction of these facilities, prior to TRA managing the regional system.
- By the year 2000, a 30 -inch line will need to be constructed to "loop" the system.
TRA should be managing the system and costs would be shared.
- Alan Plummber and Associates are to estimate the value of the existing "in- place"
system. Southlake's share of the value and the mechanics of a pay -back will need
to be worked out.
- Fort Worth has stated they will be involved in any agreement between Trophy
Club and Southlake as per Trophy Club's contract. Therefore, we can expect
Fort Worth's standard contract will pass through with impact fees.
The Public Works Director, Bob Whitehead, stated the committee recommended to Council to
look at Fort Worth as a supply, with TRA as Regional operator, maintaining the system.
Council adjourned for recess at 5:50 p.m.
Council returned to open session at 6:00 p.m.
Agenda Item #6, Discussion: Trail Master Plan
In October, 1994, the city entered into a contract with Newman Jackson Bieberstein, Inc. to
perform professional services for the development of a Trail System Master Plan for bikeways
and pedestrian ways for the City of Southlake.
Carl Bieberstein was present to introduce a proposed plan to the City Council. Michael Carr,
Systems Planner, and Jim Lewis and Todd Smith were also present.
Mr. Carr, Systems Planner, explained a bicycle and walking trail gives staff a sense of direction,
while reducing the barriers between neighbors. Carr explained the purpose of this plan is to
give long range development direction to a Trail System that will serve the needs of pedestrians,
bicyclists, and equestrians.
Special City Council Meeting Minutes
December 13, 1994
page five
Agenda Item #6, Continued
The Southlake Park and Recreation Master Plan set forth a related goal to conserve and enhance
Southlake's remaining natural resources to maintain the City's environmental health and quality
of life.
A slide presentation was made showing both off -road and on -road trails. Mayor Fickes stated
he feels the off -road plan will create the most controversy. The on -road plan is good.
The consultant suggested that questions regarding the plan be funneled through Kim McAdams,
Greg Last or Janet Murphy.
Agenda Item #7, Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned by Mayor Gary Fickes at 7:00 p.m.
� Of SQlj�;w44 AA/ILA
m = Ma Gary Fickes
ATTEST: r>
A dimAa/4„.„) 4,
'�,
%%%%%
Sandra L. LeGrand
City Secretary
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ADOPTING
A NEW PERIMETER STREET ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR THE
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR
DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION AND
ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING RULES AND
REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT -OF-
WAY FOR PERIMETER STREETS; PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT
OF PERIMETER FEES; PROVIDING FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF
DEVELOPER COSTS UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS; PROVIDING
RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE INSTALLMENT OF ROADWAY
IMPROVEMENTS ON PERIMETER STREETS; PROVIDING THAT
THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR
PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR
PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; PROVIDING FOR
ENGROSSMENT AND ENROLLMENT; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
_ _ WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas, is a homerule city acting under its Charter
adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter
9 of the Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake has recommended that a system
be established regulating the requirements for the installation of perimeter streets abutting areas
or developments being formally subdivided pursuant to the Subdivision Ordinance of the City
of Southlake; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake finds that this proposed ordinance
will meet a legitimate public need, clarify responsibilities of landowners and developers, assist
in carrying out the community's Thoroughfare Plan, serve to protect the public health, safety
and welfare, and fulfill the purposes of Chapter 212 of the Local Government Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
•
1 9
jj
SOUTHLAKE:
SECTION I.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
(1) Purpose. It is the purpose of this Ordinance to guide the development of a
roadway network sufficient for both existing and future traffic. This Ordinance establishes that
all developers, as defined herein, shall dedicate the required right -of -way for the type of
perimeter street proposed in the City of Southlake's Thoroughfare Plan and any amendments
thereto, whereby the City may proactively acquire adequate right -of -way for ultimate
throroughfare need, as defined in the Thoroughfare Plan and will not have to buy right -of -way
later, disrupting established residents and businesses. This Ordinance also establishes that all
developers shall pay a perimeter street fee in accordance with section 5 herein or, at the option
of the City Council, improve said street to meet the City's current Thoroughfare Plan and
pavement standards on any existing road or street that abuts the proposed subdivision where said
road or street is inadequate or substandard according to said Thoroughfare Plan.
(2) Scope. The provisions of the Ordinance shall apply to all land hereinafter defined
as new developments abutted by one or more streets now in existence or whether they are
proposed for installation by the City's current Thoroughfare Plan.
SECTION II.
DEFINITIONS
(1) General Rules. For the purpose of this ordinance, the following rules
shall be applied in constructing, interpreting, or otherwise defining the terms and provisions
hereof:
(a) Words used in the present tense shall include the future,
words used in the singular number shall include the plural
number, and words used in the plural shall include the singular.
(b) The word "shall" is mandatory and the word "may" is
permissive.
(c) The phrase "used for" shall include the phrases
"arranged for ", "designed for ", "intended for ", and "occupied
for ", and shall apply exclusively to physical uses.
(2) Definitions. For the purpose of this ordinance, certain words or terms
applicable hereto are defined as herinafter provided. Words and terms used in this
ordinance, but not defined in this ordinance shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the
Subdivision Ordinance of the City of Southlake. Words and terms defined in both ordinances
shall be read in harmony unless there exists an irreconcilable conflict, in which case the
2
i� >z /i
•
•
•
definition contained in this ordinance shall control.
(a) The City means the City of Southlake,Texas.
(b) The Developer's Agreement is a written aggreement,
approved by the City Council, which addresses the physical
public improvements which are to be installed in the
development.
(c) Perimeter street means any street which abuts or whose
width lies partially within a new development.
(d) Right -of -Way (abbreviated R.O. W .) means a strip of land,
other than a drainage or utility easement, occupied or intended to
be occupied by a street, crosswalk, sidewalk, railroad, road,
electric transmission line, oil or gas pipeline, water main, sanitary
or storm sewer main, or for another special use.
(e) The Throroughfare Plan is the written policy of the City
of Southlake recommending the roadway network necessary to
support ultimate development in Southlake and the surrounding
region.
(f) Ultimate roadway section means the R.O.W. and
pavement standards specified in the current Thoroughfare Plan.
SECTION III.
ENFORCEMENT
(1) Administration. The Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to
enforce the provisions of this Ordinance. The City Council shall determine and include in the
Developer's Agreement whether the developer shall pay a perimeter street fee or install the
ultimate roadway section.
(2) Deposit of fees. Fees paid pursuant to this section shall be placed by the City
into the perimeter street fund and shall be specifically reserved and used for the construction of
street improvements in accordance with the current Thoroughfare Plan. The Council shall
determine the timing and priority of expenditure of these funds through its capital improvement
program budgeting process.
(3) Failure to comply. Any developer who fails, neglects, or refuses to comply with
the provisions of this ordinance within its municipal boundary shall be guilty of a misdemeanor
and may be prosecuted in municipal court in addition to any other remedies available to the City
provided herein.
3
' ✓��" ))/
SECTION IV.
DEDICATION OF RIGHT -OF -WAY
(1) A developer shall be required to dedicate the required right -of -way for the type
of perimeter street specified in the City's current Thoroughfare Plan. Where a new development
borders only one side of a perimeter street, the developer shall be required to dedicate the
appropriate right -of -way as specified in the Subdivision Ordinance lying between the center line
of the perimeter street and the nearest property line of the new development. In the event that
the new development in some manner borders a perimeter street on both sides, the developer
shall dedicate the entire width of the right -of -way of said perimeter street.
(2) Under no circumstances shall a developer be required to dedicate right -of -way
along any one perimeter street greater than one -half of a one hundred twenty foot (120') right -of-
way. It shall be presumed that any right -of -way requirements greater than 120' in width are
designed to accommodate Arterial designed to provide transportation services not directly
attributable solely to the surrounding development.
(3) Wherever a developer is required to dedicate right -of -way for a perimeter street
and /or to construct perimeter street improvements, the City may require the developer to
dedicate right -of -way for ancillary drainage improvements and to install any and all necessary
supporting drainage improvements or facilities.
(4) If the perimeter street is already developed and improved as an ultimate roadway
section, the developer shall be required to dedicate any additional right -of -way needed for other
public improvements directly adjacent to the one -half of the existing street surface and right -of-
way contiguous with the subdivision. The developer shall further be required to install, reinstall,
or upgrade any curbs, gutter, drainage improvements, sidewalks, .driveway aprons, lighting or
other facilities as determined appropriate by the City Council.
SECTION V.
PERIMETER STREET FEE
(1) In the event the City Council determines that the perimeter street fee should be
paid, the Developer shall pay to the City a portion of the full cost of roadway improvements
required to upgrade said road to the ultimate roadway section (including, but not limited to,
excavation, subgrade preparation, paving, sidewalks, storm drainage facilities, utility
adjustments, engineering, and necessary appurtenances) and dedicate the necessary right -of-
way for said road or street as a condition precedent to the acceptance of the subdivision
improvements by the City for maintenance purposes and the issuance of any building
permits. The required portion will be contingent upon the type of throughfare the perimeter
street is as defined in the Thoroughfare Plan. If the perimeter street is a Local Street, the
fee will be equal to one -half of the full cost. If it is a Collector or Arterial, the fee will be
equal to one -third of the full cost. An annual estimate of the cost of said improvements shall
be determined by the Director of Public Works and the determined fee included in the City
4
) 7) ) 1 3/4
of Southlake's Schedule of Fees.
(2) If the City Council should determine that the perimeter street was constructed
as the ultimate roadway section by a prior developer on the other side of the right -of -way
under the terms and conditions of this ordinance, then the current Developer shall be charged
one -half the cost per linear foot of installing the perimeter road and related improvements
multiplied by the number of linear feet of the perimeter street abutting the new development.
This fee shall be paid to the City's Director of Finance prior to the execution of the
Developer's Agreement required by the Subdivision Ordinance. The Director of Finance
shall pay these funds, less 10% of the funds for each year the ultimate section has been in
service to the on. inal develo • er of the I erimeter street as soon as possible after verification
of all calculations, costs, and amounts by the City Council. No payments will be refunded to
the original developer after the ultimate section has been in service ten years.
SECTION VI.
INSTALLMENT OF A ROADWAY SECTION
In the event that the City Council determines that a Developer should install or
improve a perimeter street in lieu of a paying a perimeter fee, the Developer will be required
to install a minimum of two full lanes, in full conformance with the standards established by
the City's current Thoroughfare Plan. The Developer will be required to pay for all
construction, engineering, testing, and inspection costs. Any Developer constructing the
entire street surface under this provision may be eligible to receive a rebate of one -half of the
complete cost of the street structure, curb and gutter, and related drainage facilities when
development activity occurs on the opposite side of the street right -of -way in accordance with
Section V(2) of this ordinance. The City will reimburse the Developer in an amount
equivalent to one -sixth (1 /6th) of the total cost of constructing the minimum two lanes or
one -third (1 /3rd) the total cost of constructing the entire road together with ancillary
improvements by crediting the Developer against development fees owed on the remainder of
the project. In no event will the credit allowed by the City exceed one -half of the total
development fees attributable to the complete subdivision project.
SECTION VII.
This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake,
Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions
of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby
repealed.
SECTION VIII.
5
/ 7/, 9
It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses,
sentences, paragraphs, and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase,
clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by
the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality
shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, and sections of
this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the
incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence,
paragraph or section.
SECTION IX.
Any person, firm, corporation, agent, or employee thereof who violates any of the provisions
of this ordinance shall be fined not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars and No Cents
($2,000.00). Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate
offense.
SECTION X.
All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all
violations of any ordinances affecting perimeter street dedication or development which have
accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations
and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under
such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance, but may be prosecuted until
final disposition by the courts.
SECTION XI.
The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this
6
z
ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the
operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all
courts without further proof than the production thereof.
SECTION XII.
The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed
ordinance or its caption and penalty together thereon at least ten (10) days before the second
reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty,
fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, the City Secretary shall
additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten days
after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of
Southlake.
SECTION XIII.
City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to engross and enroll this
ordinance by copying the caption, penalty clause and effective date clause in the minutes of
the City Council and by filing the ordinance in the ordinance records of the City.
SECTION XIV.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and
publication as required by law, and it is so ordained.
7
•
City of Southlake, Texas
MEMORANDUM
December 13, 1994
TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager
FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Lonesome Dove Estates \Emerald Estates Off - Site Sewer
Lonesome Dove Estates is committed to build an off -site lift station to serve both their
subdivision and Emerald Estates. Staff has been working with John Levitt on the location of the
lift station. The original location has not been obtainable. We asked John Levitt to design the
off -site system to locate the lift station at Lonesome Dove Ave. and Dove St. This would allow
the lift station to serve Hunters Creek and possibly Heatherwood Estates, Royal Oaks and Twin
Creeks (see map).
John has submitted the attached cost estimate to move the lift station from the original site.
(Estimated cost of $100, $189) (See cost estimate and proposed re- alignment.)
The costs, all based on actual bids for Lonesome Dove Estates, could be shared in the following
manner:
1. Lonesome Dove Developer: (costs regardless of routing)
8" pvc 500 If. $ 18.60 $ 9,300.00
MH 2 each 2 ea. 1080.00 2,160.00
Trench safety 500 If. 1.50 750.00
Sub -Total $12,210.00
Eng /surveying 500/1810 = 27% = 2,555.00
Total $14,765.00
2. Emerald Estates Assessment Program (costs which would have been part of the
Assessment Programs)
8" PVC 855 If. $ 15.80 $13,509.00
MH 1 ea. 1080.00 1,080.00
Driveway Repair 200 If. 30.00 6,000.00
Culverts 7 ea. 300.00 2,100.00
Trench safety 855 If. 1.50 1,282.50
Subtotal $23,971.50
Eng /survey 855/1810 = 47% = 4,369.50
Total $28,341.00
Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager
Lonesome Dove Estates /Emerald Estates Off -Site Sewer
December 12, 1994
Page 2.
3. City of Southlake
8" pvc 455 lf. $ 18.60 $ 8,463.00
MH 1 ea. 1080.00 1,080.00
Extra MH depth 24 If. 90.00 2,160.00
12" bore & cassing 60 ft. 75.00 4,500.00
(culvert)
Trench safety 455 lf. 1.50 682.50
6" force main 1400 lf. 9.00 12,600.00
Additional cost from original
for upsizing 4,890.00
Subtotal 34,375.50
Eng /survey 455/1810 = 25% 2,325.50
Total Sewer $36,701.00
Pavement repairs (street budget) 20,010.00
Total City 56,711.00
Recap
Lonesome Dove Developer $14,765.00
Assessment Program 28,341.00
Total City 56,711.00
Project Total $99,817.00
You may call me if you have any questions regarding these costs.
BW
wpfiles \Idsewer.prg
PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
OFFSITE SANITARY SEWER
EMERALD ESTATES /LONESOME DOVE ESTATES
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
SANITARY SEWER
8" PVC DR 35 10' - 12' 855 if @ $ 15.80 $13,509.00
8" PVC DR 35 12' - 14' 955 if @ 18.60 17,763.00
4' STD. Conc. S.S. MH 4 ea @ 1080.00 4,320.00
Extra MH. Depth 24 if @ 90.00 2,160.00
12" Bore & Casing 60 if @ 75.00 4,500.00
6" Force Main 1400 if @ 9.00 12,600.00
Pavement Repair* 1150 if @ 17.40 20,010.00
Driveway Repair 200 if @ 30.00 6,000.00
R & R Culverts 7 ea @ 300.00 2,100.00
Trench Safety 1810 if @ 1.50 2,715.00
Subtotal $85,677.00
Additional cost to original design:
Add $2.00 /1f for up sizing force main 1,635 if $ 3,270.00
Add $10.00 /lf for up sizing bore /case 106 if 1,060.00
Add $80.00 /ea for up sizing gate valves 2 ea 160.00
Add $100.00 /ea for up sizing cleanouts 4 ea 400.00
Subtotal $ 4,890.00
Engineering /Surveying 9,250.00
Total $99,817.00
*Pavement repair - 2" HMAC (22' wide) w /6" cement modified subgrade.
. _______] .
1 I
14 � 1 Is 16 17
I
1 -I 575
C'13 1 C- 1125
\ STA4OI. 39- C-13 — •N STi9• / } 2 -- EV , 51A 10 +35' 2
5 T 1&4-90 R6q. it • S6,5.00 F - Sto3.1
Top • SSo. 00 ■
5 6 7 8 9 / 573° PM.
1 :.,it. c67,o
1
,i 1" CN rS, STA- 4025 2l'.
Top • S715- N . C- --. 11 4-1
ft - ‘,,9, 11-
4 \ v c > mo tile. Si: • 0-t 4-o
1466 6N�� Tyr- 570.0 v
------- `513.Sq C- II-- • kh - \ _ C /G 5
. ..
sr. -OU
To?- 571.00
Es" ft- 555, l.8
4 1_ 51»,0O
L5 1t -553. S0
1...01•1E5oYY1 6 ILv /E ESTATES
C. f 51Te SP9-11TiA2`( 5 ac/E1L
'Patypos -O QE- PrLi. NWAE -IT
II -15-94
CITY OF SOUTIILAKE
Trail System Master Plan
City Council Work Session
December 13, 1994 - 6:00 p.m.
AGENDA
I. Introductions
II. Review of Background Information
A. Purpose of Study (see attached)
B. Study Process
• Analysis / Opportunities and Constraints
• Preliminary Plans
• Final Plans
• Develop Standards
• Develop Costs, Phasing, and Implementation Strategies
C. General Approaches to Bike System Planning
D. Goals and Objectives of System (see attached)
E. Review Opportunities and Constraints Presented at Joint Park Board /SPIN
Committee Meetings
III. Preliminary Routing Recommendations
• Off -Road Hike and Bike Trails
• Equestrian Trails
• On -Road Bike Routes
IV. Input from Council; Questions from Floor
City of Southlake
Trail System Master Plan
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this plan is to give long range development direction to a Trail System that will
serve the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and equestrians. In accomplishing this, it is
anticipated that the system will be composed of the following components:
• A dedicated "off- road" hike /bike system located in greenbelts, linear parks,
and /or greenways adjacent to selected thoroughfares.
• A system of bicycle routes through Southlake utilizing existing and proposed
thoroughfares.
• An equestrian trail system located in the greenbelts, linear parkways, and open
space adjacent to Lake Grapevine.
Goals of Plan
The current Southlake Park and Recreation Master Plan set forth a related goal that addresses
Trail System Planning:
Goal 1: Conserve and enhance Southlake's remaining natural resources to
maintain the City's environmental health and quality of life.
Objective related to this goal: Negotiate with the development community
to provide for public access to natural features within flood plains and
wooded uplands.
As a result of initial interviews with staff and an evaluation of trail system opportunities and
constraints, we have identified the following goals for this Trail System:
• To provide a system that will encourage the creation of a linear park system along the
creek corridors and tributaries in undeveloped and unplatted parts of the city so that these
resources can be preserved and utilized for all citizens of Southlake.
• To provide a system that utilizes existing rail and utility corridors for walking,
jogging, and bicycling.
• To provide a system that connects to recognized "trail corridors" and greenways
forming an interconnected network of the Trinity River Greenway system.
• To provide a system that encourages and promotes pedestrian and bicycle access to
Lake Grapevine open space along the south shore.
City of Southlake
Trail System Master Plan
Goals of Study (Continued)
• To provide a system that allows for an appropriate mix of equestrian trails within the
context of the trail program and that provides access to the facilities available at Lake
Grapevine.
• To provide a system that links existing parks, schools, businesses, and public facilities
in Southlake and promotes bicycling, walking, and jogging as a recreational activity.
• To promote bicycle use as a viable personal transportation mode within a balanced
transportation system.
• To increase safety for both pedestrians and bicyclists through the implementation of
a carefully designed system of routes and trails and through programs carefully designed
to educate and inform pedestrians, motorists, and bicyclists.
• To provide a system that is barrier free and offers accessibility to everyone.