0657-A
ORDINANCE NO. 657..A
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF THE USE AND
DEVELOPMENT OF LAND IN THE INCORPORATED LIMITS OF THE
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; IMPOSING AN IMPACT FEE ON NEW
LAND DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTHLAKE FOR PROVIDING W ATERAND
WASTEWATER FACILITIES NECESSITATED BY SUCH NEW
DEVELOPMENT; PROVIDING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS TO
SUPPORT NEW DEVELOPMENT; STATING THE AUTHORITY FOR
ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS;
PROVIDING FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS OF THE CITY COUNCIL;
PROVIDING FOR THE ASSESSMENT, PAYMENT AND TIME OF
PAYMENT OF A WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES IMPACT
FEE; PROVIDING FOR THE ASSESSMENT, PAYMENT AND TIME OF
PAYMENT OF A ROADWAY IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FORREVIE~~V
OF WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES IMPACT FEES AND THE
FEE SCHEDULES; PROVIDING FOR THE PLACEMENT OF REVENUE
COLLECTED FROMW ATERAND W ASTEW ATERFACILITIES IMPACT
FEES AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEES INTO WATER AND
W ASTEW ATERFACILITIES IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS AND ROADWAY
IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS ESTABLISHED FOR THAT PURPOSE;
PROVIDING FOR EXEMPTIONS; PROVIDING FOR REFUND OF
UNEXPENDED FUNDS; PROVIDING FOR USE OF FUNDS DERIVED
FROM WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES IMPACT FEES;
PROVIDING THAT IMPACT FEES MAY BE PLEDGED TOWARD
PAYMENT OF BOND ISSUES AND SIMILAR DEBT INSTRUMENTS;
PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF
ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake is responsible for and committed to the provision of
public facilities and services at levels necessary to cure any existing public service deficiencies in
already developed areas; and
WHEREAS, such facilities and service levels shall be provided by the City utilizing funds
allocated in the capital budget and capital improvement plan processes and relying upon the funding
sources indicated therein; and
WHEREAS, new residential and nonresidential development causes and imposes increased
demands upon City public facilities and services, induding water and wastewater facilities, and
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\1 mpact. 00. fn6. wpd (05/19/00)
Page 1
roadways, that would not otherwise occur; and
WHEREAS, planning and zoning projections indicate that such development will continue
and will place ever-increasing demands on the City to provide necessary public facilities; and
WHEREAS, the development potential and property values of properties is strongly
influenced and encouraged by City policy as expressed in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and
as implemented via the City zoning ordinance and map; and
WHEREAS, to the extent that such new development places demands upon the public
facility infrastructure, those demands should be satisfied by shifting the responsibility for financing
the provision of such facilities from the public at large to the developments actually creating the
demands for them; and
WHEREAS, the amount ofthe impact fee to be imposed shall be determined by the cost of
the additional public facilities needed to support such development, which public facilities shall be
identified in a capital improvement plan, and
WHEREAS, the City Council, after careful consideration of the matter, hereby finds and
declares that impact fees imposed upon residential and nonresidential development to finance
specified major public facilities in designated service areas, the demand for which is created by such
development, are in the best interests of the general welfare of the City and its residents, are
equitable, and do not impose an unfair burden on such development;
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has previously adopted water, wastewater and roadway
impact fees to offset these costs in accordance with the guidelines and requirements set forth in
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to update its land use assumptions and capital
improvements plan and amend its impact fees in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 395; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the City has complied with said statute in the notice,
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.OO. fn6. wpd (05/19/00)
Page 2
adoption, promulgation and methodology necessary to adopt and amend its impact fees;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1
SHORT TITLE
This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the Water, Wastewater and Roadway Impact Fee
Ordinance.
SECTION 2
INTENT
This Ordinance is intended to impose water, wastewater and roadway impact fees, as
established in this Ordinance, in order to finance public facilities, the demand for which is generated
by new development in the designated service area or areas.
SECTION 3
AUTHORITY
The City is authorized to enact this Ordinance by Chapter 395 of the Texas Local
Government Code, as amended, ("Chapter 395") and by the Southlake City Charter which authorize
it to enact or impose impact fees on land within its corporate boundaries or extraterritorial
jurisdiction, or on land owned by persons with whom it has a water or wastewater service contract,
as charges or assessments imposed against new development in order to generate revenue for funding
orrecouping the costs of capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable
to such new development. The provisions of this Ordinance shall not be construed to limit the power
ofthe City to adopt such ordinance pursuant to any other source oflocal authority, nor to utilize any
other methods or powers otherwise available for accomplishing the purposes set forth herein, either
in substitution of or in conjunction with this Ordinance. Guidelines may be developed by resolution
or otherwise to implement and administer this Ordinance.
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.OO. fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 3
SECTION 4
DEFINITIONS
As applied in this Ordinance, the following words and terms shall be used:
(1) Assessment - The determination of the amount of the maximum impact fee per
service unit which can be imposed on new development pursuant to this Ordinance.
(2) Building Permit - Written permission issued by the City for the construction, repair,
alteration or addition to a structure.
(3) Capital Construction Cost of Service - Costs of constructing capital improvements
or facility expansions, including and limited to the construction contract price,
surveying and engineering fees, land acquisition costs (including land purchases,
court awards and costs, attorney's fees, and expert witness fees), interest charges and
other finance costs for bonds, notes or other obligations issued to finance capital
improvements identified in the Capital Improvement Plan, and the fees actually paid
or contracted to be paid to an independent qualified engineer or financial consultant
preparing or updating the capital improvements plan who is not an employee ofthe
City.
(4) Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) - Advisory
committee, appointed by the City Council, consisting of at least five members, not
less than 40 percent of which shall be representatives ofthe real estate, development,
or building industries which are not employees ofthe City, and, if impact fees are to
be applied within the extraterritorial jurisdiction ofthe City, including one member
representing the extraterritorial jurisdiction; or consisting ofthe Planning and Zoning
Commission, including one regular or ad hoc member who is not an employee of the
City and which is representative ofthe real estate, development, or building industry,
and, ifimpact fees are to be applied within the extraterritorial jurisdiction ofthe City,
one representative of the extraterritorial jurisdiction area; which committee is
appointed to regularly review and update the Capital Improvement Plan in
accordance with the requirements of Chapter 395.
(5) Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) - The plan or plans adopted in Section 9 of this
Ordinance which identify water, wastewater, and roadway capital improvements or
facility expansions pursuant to which impact fees may be assessed. The Capital
Improvement Plan may be composed of a separate Water and Wastewater Capital
Improvement Plan and a Roadway Capital Improvement Plan.
(6) City - City of Southlake.
(7) City Council (Council) - Governing body of the City of South lake.
(8) Commercial Development - For the purposes of this Ordinance, all development
which is neither residential nor industrial.
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 4
(9) Comprehensive Plan (Master Plan) - The comprehensive long-range plan, adopted
by the City Council, which is intended to guide the growth and development of the
City which includes analysis, recommendations and proposals for the City regarding
such topics as population, economy, housing, transportation, community facilities
and land use.
(10) Credit - The amount of the reduction of a impact fee for fees, payments or charges
for the same type of capital improvements for which the fee has been assessed.
(11) Existing Development - All development within the service area which has a water
or wastewater tap on the City's water or wastewater system, or which has access to
the City's roadway system as of the date of the adoption of this Ordinance.
(12) Facility Expansion - The expansion of the capacity of an existing facility which
serves the same function as an otherwise necessary new capital improvement in order
that the existing facility may serve new development. Facility expansion does not
include the repair, maintenance, modernization, or expansion of an existing facility
to better serve existing development.
(13) Final Plat - The map, drawing or chart meeting the requirements of the City's
Subdivision Ordinance on which is provided a subdivider's plan of a subdivision, and
which has received final approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission or City
Council and which is recorded with the office of the County Clerk.
(14) Growth-Related Costs - Capital construction costs of service related to providing
additional service units to new development, either from excess capacity in existing
facilities, from facility expansions or from new capital facilities. Growth-related
costs do not include:
(a) Construction, acquisition, or expansion of public facilities or assets other than
capital improvements or facility expansions identified in the capital
improvements plan;
(b) Repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements
or facility expansions;
(c) Upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements
to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency,
environmental, or regulatory standards;
(d) Upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements
to provide better service to existing development;
( e) Administrative and operating costs of the City; and
(f) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other
indebtedness, except for such payments for growth-related facilities
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 5
contained in the Capital Improvement Plan.
(15) Impact Fees - Fee to be imposed upon new development, calculated based upon the
costs of facilities in proportion to development creating the need for such facilities.
Impact fees do not include dedication of land for public parks or payment in lieu of
the dedication to serve park needs; dedication of rights-of-way or easements, or
construction or dedication of site-related water distribution or wastewater collection
facilities or internal roadways required by other ordinances ofthe City Code; or lot
or acreage fees placed in trust funds for the purpose of reimbursing developers for
oversizing or constructing water or wastewater mains or lines; or participation fees
charged as part of the Neighborhood Sewer Program.
(16) Industrial Development - Development which will be assigned to the industrial
customer class of the water or wastewater utilities; generally development in which
goods are manufactured, or development which is ancillary to such manufacturing
activity.
(17) Land Use Assumptions - Description ofthe service area and projections of changes
in land uses, densities, intensities, and population therein over at least a 10-year
period, adopted by the City, as may be amended from time to time, upon which the
capital improvement plans are based.
(18) Living Unit Equivalent (LUE) - Basis for establishing equivalency among and within
various customer classes and land uses. For water and wastewater uses, an LUE is
based upon the relationship ofthe continuous daily maximum flow rate in gallons per
minute for a water meter of a given size and type compared to the continuous daily
maximum flow rate in gallons per minute for a 1" diameter simple water meter, using
American Water Works Association C700-C703 standards.
The table of equivalencies for water and wastewater is included in Exhibit D-1.
(19) New Development - The subdivision ofland; or the construction, reconstruction,
redevelopment, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any
structure; or any use or extension of the use of land; any of which increases the
number of service units for water,wastewater or roadway services or requires the
purchase of a new water or wastewater tap. New development includes the purchase
of a water tap resulting from the conversion of an individual well to the City's water
utility and includes the purchase of a wastewater tap resulting from the conversion
of an individual septic or other individual waste disposal system to the City's
wastewater utility.
(20) Offset - The amount ofthe reduction of an impact fee designed to fairly reflect the
value of system-related facilities, pursuant to rules herein established or
administrative guidelines, provided and funded by a developer pursuant to the City's
subdivision regulations or requirements.
(21) Public Works Director - Public Works Director of the City of Southlake, or his
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 6
designee.
(22) Residential Development - A lot developed for use and occupancy as a residence or
residences, according to the City's zoning ordinance.
(23) Roadway Facility - Improvement for providing roadway service including, but not
limited to, pavement, right-of-way, drainage and traffic control devices. Roadway
facility excludes roadways which are constructed by developers, the costs of which
are reimbursed from charges paid by subsequent users of the facilities. Roadway
facilities also exclude dedication of rights-of-way or easements or construction or
dedication of off-site roadways required by valid ordinances of the City of South lake
and necessitated and attributable to the new development.
(24) Roadway Facility Expansion - Expansion of the capacity of any existing roadway
improvement for the purpose of serving new development, not including the repair,
maintenance, modernization or expansion of the existing roadway facility to serve
existing development.
(25) Roadway Improvement Plan - Portion of the CIP, as may be amended from time to
time, which identifies the roadway facilities or roadway expansions and their
associated costs which are necessitated by and which are attributable to new
development, and which are to be financed in whole or in part through the imposition
of roadway impact fees pursuant to this Ordinance.
(26) Service Area - An area defined in this Ordinance within the corporate boundaries of
the City for roadway facilities or with the corporate boundaries or extraterritorial
jurisdiction of the City or other areas served by the City for water and wastewater
facilities to be served by the capital improvements or facility expansions specified
in the Capital Improvement Plan applicable to the service area. The Service Area for
Water and Wastewater Impact Fees is set forth in Exhibit A-I. The Service Areas
for Roadway Impact Fees are set forth in Exhibit A-2.
(27) Service Unit - Standardized measure of consumption, use, generation, or discharge
attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with
generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of
capital improvements or facility expansions. Service units for water and wastewater
impact fees are expressed in Living Unit Equivalents (LUE's). Service units for
roadway impact fees are expressed in vehicle miles.
(28) Site-related Facility - Improvement or facility which is for the primary use or benefit
of a new development and/or which is for the primary purpose of safe and adequate
provision of water or wastewater facilities to serve the new development, and which
is not included in the capital improvements plan, and for which the developer or
property owner is solely responsible under subdivision and other applicable
regulations.
(29) System-related Facility - A capital improvement or facility expansion which is
W:\Southlake\Ord inances\1 mpact. 00. fn6. wpd (05/19/00)
Page 7
designated in the Capital Improvement Plan and which is not a site-related facility.
A system-related facility may include a capital improvement which is located offsite,
within or on the perimeter of the development site.
(30) Tap Purchase - The filing with the City of a written application for a water or
wastewater tap and the acceptance of applicable fees by the City. The term "tap
purchase" shall not be applicable to a meter purchased for and exclusively dedicated
to fire protection.
(31 ) Wastewater Facility - Improvement for providing wastewater service, including, but
not limited to, treatment facilities, lift stations, or interceptor mains and necessary
land or easements therefor. Wastewater facility excludes wastewater collection lines
or mains which are constructed by developers, the costs of which are reimbursed
from charges paid by subsequent users of the facilities and which are maintained in
dedicated trusts. Wastewater facilities also exclude dedication of rights-of-way or
easements or construction or dedication of on-site wastewater collection facilities
required by valid ordinances of the City and necessitated by and attributable to the
new development.
(32) Wastewater Facility Expansion - Expansion of the capacity of any eXlstmg
wastewater facility for the purpose of serving new development, not including the
repair, maintenance, modernization or expansion of an existing wastewater facility
to serve existing development.
(33) Wastewater Improvement Plan - Portion of the Capital Improvement Plan, as may
be amended from time to time, which identifies the wastewater facilities or
wastewater expansions and their associated costs which are necessitated by and
which are attributable to new development, and for a period not to exceed ten (10)
years, and which are to be financed in whole or in part through the imposition of
wastewater impact fees pursuant to this Ordinance.
(34) Water Facility - Improvement for providing water service, including, but not limited
to, water supply facilities, treatment facilities, pumping facilities, storage facilities,
or transmission mains and necessary land or easements therefor. Water facility
excludes water lines or mains which are constructed by developers, the costs of
which are reimbursed from charges paid by subsequent users of the facilities and
which are maintained in dedicated trusts. Water facilities also exclude dedication of
rights-of-way or easements or construction or dedication of on-site water distribution
facilities required by valid ordinances ofthe City and necessitated by and attributable
to the new development.
(35) Water Facility Expansion - Expansion of the capacity of any existing water facility
for the purpose of serving new development, not including the repair, maintenance,
modernization or expansion of an existing water facility to serve existing
development.
(36) Water Improvement Plan - Portion of the Capital Improvement Plan, as may be
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\1 mpact. 00. fn6. wpd (05/19/00)
Page 8
amended from time to time, which identifies the water facilities or water expansions
and their associated costs which are necessitated by and which are attributable to new
development, and for a period not to exceed ten (10) years, and which are to be
financed in whole or in part through the imposition of water impact fees pursuant to
this Ordinance.
(37) Vehicle Mile -A unit used to express both supply and demand provided by, and
placed on, the roadway system. A combination of a number of vehicles travelling
during a given time period and the distance in which these vehicles travel in miles.
SECTION 5
A~PLICABILITY OF IMPACT FEES
A. This Ordinance shall be uniformly applicable to new development which occurs
within the corporate limits of the city and its extraterritorial jurisdiction, and other areas served by
the City's water and wastewater facilities.
B. No new development shall be exempt from the assessment of impact fees as defined
in this Ordinance.
SECTION 6
IMPACT FEES AS CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
No application for new development shall be approved within the City without assessment
of impact fees pursuant to this Ordinance, and no water and wastewater tap shall be issued and no
building permit shall be issued unless the applicant has paid the applicable impact fees imposed by
and calculated hereunder.
SECTION 7
ESTABLISHMENT OF WATER AND
WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA AND ROADWAY SERVICE AREAS
A. There is hereby established a Service Area for Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
as depicted on Exhibit A-I attached to this Ordinance.
B. There are hereby established Service Areas for Roadway Impact Fees as depicted on
Exhibit A-2 attached to this Ordinance.
C. The service areas shall be established consistent with any facility service area defined
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 9
in the CIP for each utility or facility. Additions or revisions to the service areas may be approved
by the City Council consistent with the procedure set forth in Chapter 395.
SECTION 8
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
The Land Use Assumptions used in the development ofthe impact fees, attached as Exhibit
B to this Ordinance, are hereby adopted. These assumptions may be revised by the City Council
according to the procedure set forth in Chapter 395.
SECTION 9
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
A. The Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan attached as Exhibit C-l to this
Ordinance is hereby adopted.
B. The Roadway Capital Improvement Plan attached as Exhibit C-2 to this Ordinance
is hereby adopted.
C. The Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan and Roadway Capital
Improvement Plan may be amended by the City Council from time to time, pursuant to the
procedures set forth in Chapter 395.
SECTION 10
SERVICE UNITS
A. Service units are established in accordance with generally accepted engineering and
planning standards. Service units for water and wastewater impact fees are expressed in Living Unit
Equivalents (LUE's). Service units for roadway impact fees are expressed in vehicle miles.
B. The City Council may revise the service units designation according to the procedures
set forth in Chapter 395.
C. Water and Wastewater Service Units. Service units for water and wastewater fees
shall be calculated based on Living Unit Equivalents as determined by the size of the water meter(s)
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.OO.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 1 0
for the development. The meter types used to calculate the number ofLUE's shall be either simple,
compound or turbine meters.
D. The Living Unit Equivalents used for the calculation of water and wastewater impact
fees are set forth in the Table of Equivalencies - Water and Wastewater attached as Exhibit D-l to
this Ordinance.
E. If the Public Works Director determines that the water pressure in the City's
transmission main is significantly higher or lower than standard pressure such that the size of the
water meter is not indicative of actual service demand, the Public Works Director may adjust the
number of LUE's based on a smaller or larger sized meter which more accurately reflects the flow
rate and the system pressure conditions.
F. If a fire demand meter (tap) is purchased for a property, the meter size utilized to
calculate the number ofLUE's shall be the dimension ofthe portion ofthe fire demand meter which
reflects the meter size which would be required to provide residential or business service to the
property. This reduced meter size shall then be utilized to calculate the number ofLUE's.
G. Upon wastewater tap purchase for lots for which no water meter has been purchased,
service units shall be calculated based on a 1" water meter unless other data is submitted by a
professional engineer licensed in the State of Texas, which is reviewed and approved by the Public
Works Director.
H. Roadway Service Units. Service units for roadway impact fees will be established
based upon estimated vehicle miles of demand generated by the development. As calculated in this
Ordinance, a single family residential household will generate 3.03 vehicle miles of demand. Other
developments will generate demand based upon size and type of development and the service area
where the development is located. The vehicle mile demand factors used for the calculation of
roadway impact fees are set forth in the Land UseNehic1e-Mile Equivalency Table attached as
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.OO. fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 11
Exhibit D-2 to this Ordinance.
1. The Public Works Director or the City Council may approve an alternative calculation
of Living Unit Equivalents or vehicle miles of demand for a particular development based upon an
engineering report prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed to perform such
engineering services in the State of Texas which demonstrates that the number ofLUE's or vehicle
miles of demand for the development will be different than shown in Exhibits D-l or D-2.
SECTION 11
IMPACT FEES PER SERVICE UNIT
A. Computation. The maximum impact fee per service unit for each service area shall
be computed by dividing the growth-related capital construction cost of service in the service area
identified in the Capital Improvement Plan for that category of capital improvement, by the total
number ofprojected service units anticipated within the service area which are necessitated by and
attributable to new development, based on the Land Use Assumptions for that service area.
Maximum assessable impact fees per service unit for each service area shall be established by
category of capital improvements and shall be set forth in the Maximum Impact Fee Schedule By
Service Unit For Water, Wastewater and Roadway attached as Exhibit E-l to this Ordinance. The
maximum roadway impact fee which will be assessed for different uses has been calculated for each
service area as shown in the Calculated Maximum Roadway Impact Fee Assessment Schedule By
Land Use Category and Service Area which is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit E-2. The total
impact fee assessed per service unit shall be a combination of the water, wastewater and roadway
impact fees. Maximum assessable impact fees in Exhibits E-l and E-2 may be amended by the City
Council according to the procedures set forth in Chapter 395.
B. Collection rate. The amount of impact fees to be collected is set by the City Council
based upon equitable policy considerations. The factors used to calculate the collectable impact fees
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\1 mpact.OO. fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 12
are set forth in the Impact Fee Collection Schedule By Service Unit For Water, Wastewater and
Roadway and the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Schedule By Land Use Category and Service
Area Reflecting Council Collection Policies attached as Exhibits F -1 and F -2 to this Ordinance.
Exhibit F-l reflects a ten percent (10%) increase in water and wastewater impact fees on the
effective date of this Ordinance (2-22-00) and automatic percentage increases in water and
wastewater impact fees of three percent (3%) on February 22, 2001 and two percent (2%) on
February 22, 2002. Exhibit F-2 reflects the amount of roadway impact fees to be collected per
development unit in each service area after applying adopted equitable formulas and approved caps
on increases in the fees. Different fee schedules are adopted in Exhibit F-2 effective February 22,
2000, February 22,2001, and February 22,2002, respectively.
1. The amount of impact fees collected within a development shall be at the rates
in effect in Exhibits F-l and F-2 on the date that impact fees are assessed on the property.
2. The total impact fees collected per service unit shall be a combination ofthe
water, wastewater and roadway impact fees.
3. Exhibits F-l and F-2 may be amended by ordinance adopted by the City
Council from time to time, provided that the amount of impact fees to be collected shall not exceed
the maximum assessable impact fees set forth in Exhibits E-l and E-2.
SECTION 12
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT FEES
A. The approval of any subdivision ofland or of any new development shall include as
a condition the assessment of the impact fees applicable to such development.
B. Assessment of impact fees for any new development shall be at the time of final plat
approval and shall be the impact fee per service unit then in effect, as set forth in Exhibits E-l and
E-2.
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.OO. fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 13
1. Where a final plat is approved after the effective date of this Ordinance for
a development which had applied for such approval prior to the effective date of this Ordinance,
impact fees shall be assessed at the rate in effect on the date of application.
2. For a development which received final plat approval prior to adoption of
impact fee3 by the City, or for which no plat approval is required, assessment of impact fees shall
be at the time of water or wastewater tap purchase in the amount set forth in Exhibits E-1 and E-2.
3. After a development has been assessed impact fees under this or any prior
ordinances, no new impact fee shall be assessed against that development unless:
a. the final plat lapses or expires or a new application for final plat
approval is submitted on the property; or
b. the number of service units to be developed on the property increases.
4. For purposes ofthis section, a final plat shall include a plat showing and a plat
reVISIOn, but shall not include an amended plat submitted under Section 3.05 of the City's
Subdivision Ordinance.
SECTION 13
CALCULATION OF IMPACT FEES
A. Following a request for new development, the City shall compute impact fees due for
the new development in the following manner:
1. Water and Wastewater Fees
a. The number of LUE's shall be determined by the size of the water
meter(s) based on the table set forth in Exhibit D-1, or as otherwise determined by the City Council
or Public Works Director as provided in Section 10 of this Ordinance.
b. LUE's shall be summed for all meters purchased for the development.
c. The total number ofLUE's shall be multiplied by the impact fee per
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.OO.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 14
LUE (1" water meter) set forth in the applicable fee schedule in Exhibit F -1. Different fee schedules
are adopted in Exhibit F-l effective February 22,2000, February 22,2001, and February 22,2002,
respectively. These fee schedules incorporate adopted percentage increases in water and wastewater
impact fees.
d. Fee credits and offsets. shall be subtracted as determined by the process
set forth in Section 15 of this Ordinance.
2. Roadway Fees
a. The City has been divided into eight roadway service areas and for
each servIce area a specific maximum roadway fee has been calculated. The service unit
measurement is stated in vehicle miles. Each service area has a different maximum assessed
roadway impact fee per vehicle mile. The maximum assessed roadway impact fee per service area
has been calculated for different land use categories in Exhibit E-2 attached to this Ordinance.
b. For collection purposes, roadway impact fees are calculated based upon the
number of vehicle miles generated by each development unit (TRIP SU). The TRIP SU rate in
Service Areas 2 through 8 is identical. A different TRIP SU rate is applicable in Service Area 1.
c. Exhibit F-2 shows the calculation of applicable roadway impact fees per
development unit for different service areas. This figure is derived by multiplying the roadway
impact fee per vehicle mile adopted in Exhibit F-l ($493.62) times the applicable TRIP SU rate.
d. Different fee schedules are adopted in Exhibit F-2 effective February 22,
2000, February 22, 2001, and February 22, 2002, respectively. These fee schedules incorporate
applicable percentage caps on the amount of roadway impact fees to be collected.
e. To determine the actual roadway impact fee applicable to a particular
development unit, the fee in the applicable service area is multiplied by the number of development
units for that particular land use. Any applicable fee credits and offsets are then subtracted as set
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\1 mpact.OO. fn6. wpd (05/19/00)e
Page 15
forth in Section 15 of this Ordinance.
B. The value of each impact fee due for a new development shall not exceed a value
computed by multiplying the fee assessed per service unit pursuant to Section 12 by the number of
service units generated by the development.
SECTION 14
COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES
A. No water or wastewater tap shall be issued until all impact fees, including roadway
impact fees, have been paid to the City except as provided otherwise by contract.
B. Except as provided below, impact fees shall be collected at the time of the issuance
of the building permit for new development, or ifno building permit is required, at the time of tap
purchase.
C. Because fire protection is of critical concern to the community as a whole, water
demand related solely to fire protection is not subj ect to collection of an impact fee. However, if the
fire protection capacity of the fire demand meter is routinely utilized for regular residential or
business purposes as evidenced by the consumption recorded on the City's meter-reading and billing
systems, the current owner of the property shall be assessed the current impact fees for the fire
protection capacity which has been converted to residential or business use.
D. To avoid the use of fire flow volumes for domestic usage, the owner of any property
for which a fire demand meter is purchased shall be required to execute a restrictive covenant on a
form approved by the City Attorney, which shall acknowledge the right of the City to assess such
fees to subsequent owners of the property. This covenant shall be executed prior to the purchase of
the fire demand meter and shall be filed in the deed records of the County.
E. The City may provide for a different date of fee collection under any ofthe following
circumstances:
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 16
1. The City may collect impact fees at the time of platting for any development
which will utilize capital improvements which are subject to pro rata reimbursement.
2. The City may defer collection of impact fees to a later date where service for
which the fee is assessed will not be available within a reasonable period of time.
3. The City may, at its sole discretion, enter into contracts to establish a different
date of fee collection than those provided in this Section.
SECTION 15
OFFSETS AND CREDITS AGAINST IMPACT FEES
A. The City may offset the present value of any system-related facilities, pursuant to
rules established in this section, which have been dedicated to and have been received by the City,
including the value of capital improvements constructed pursuant to an agreement with the City,
against the value of the impact fee due for that category of capital improvement.
B. The City may credit impact, perimeter roadway, pro rata, acreage or lot fees which
have been paid pursuant to Ordinance Nos. 330,493,494,510,657, or other City ordinances against
the value of impact fees due for that category of capital improvement, subject to guidelines
established by the City.
C. All offsets and credits against impact fees shall be subject to the following limitations
and shall be granted based on this Ordinance and additional standards promulgated by the City,
which may be adopted as administrative guidelines.
1. No offset or credit shall be given for the dedication or construction of site-
related facilities.
2. The unit costs used to calculate the offsets shall not exceed those assumed for
the capital improvements included in the Capital Improvement Plan for the category of facility
within the service area for which the impact fee is imposed.
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 17
3. Ifan offset or credit applicable to a plat has not been exhausted within ten (10)
years from the date of plat filing or within such period as may be otherwise designated by contract,
such offset or credit shall expire.
4. The City will not reimburse the property owner or developer for an offset or
credit when no impact fees for the new development can be collected pursuant to this Ordinance or
for any value exceeding the total impact fees due for the development for that category of capital
improvement, unless otherwise agreed to by the City.
D. An applicant for new development must apply for an offset or credit against impact
fees due for the development either at or before the time of fee payment, unless the City agrees to
a different time. The applicant shall file a petition for offsets or credits with the City on a form
provided for such purpose. The contents of the petition shall be established by administrative
guidelines. The City must provide the applicant, in writing, with a decision on the offset or credit
request, including the reasons for the decision. The decision shall specify the maximum value ofthe
offset or credit which may be applied against an impact fee, which value and the date of the
determination shall be associated with the plat for the new development.
E. The available offset or credit associated with the plat shall be applied against an
impact fee in the following manner:
1. Such offset or credit shall be prorated equally among all service units, as
calculated in Section 10 and remain applicable to such service units, to be applied at time of filing
and acceptance of an application for a building permit or tap purchase, as appropriate, against impact
fees due.
2. If the total number of service units used by the City in the original offset or
credit calculation described in (1) is eventually exceeded by the number oftotal service units realized
by the actual development, the City may, at its sole discretion, collect the full impact fee exclusive
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 18
of any associated offset or credits for the excess service units.
F. At its sole discretion, the City may authorize alternative credits or offsets upon
petition by the owner in accordance with guidelines promulgated by the City.
SECTION 16
ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS
A. The City shall establish separate interest-bearing accounts, in a bank authorized to
receive deposits of City funds, for each major category of capital facility for which an impact fee is
imposed pursuant to this Ordinance.
B. Interest earned by each account shall be credited to that account and shall be used
solely for the purposes specified for funds authorized in Section 17.
C. The City shall establish adequate financial and accounting controls to ensure that
impact fees disbursed from the account are utilized solely for the purposes authorized in Section 17
. Disbursement of funds shall be authorized by the City at such times as are reasonably necessary
to carry out the purposes and intent ofthis Ordinance; provided, however, that any fee paid shall be
expended within a reasonable period of time, but not to exceed ten (10) years from the date the fee
is deposited into the account.
D. The City shall maintain and keep adequate financial records for each such account,
which shall show the source and disbursement of all revenues, which shall account for all monies
received, and which shall ensure that the disbursement of funds from each account shall be used
solely and exclusively for the provision of uses specified in the Capital Improvement Plan as system-
related capital projects. The City Finance Department shall also maintain such records as are
necessary to ensure that refunds are appropriately made under the provision in Section 19 of this
Ordinance, and such other information as may be necessary for the proper implementation of this
Ordinance.
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 19
SECTION 17
USE OF PROCEEDS OF IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS
A. The impact fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance may be used to finance or to
recoup capital construction costs of service. Impact fees may also be used to pay the principal sum
and interest and other finance costs on bonds, notes or other obligations issued by or on behalf of
the City to finance such capital improvements or facilities expansions.
B. Impact fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance shall not be used to pay for any of
the following expenses:
1. Construction, acquisition or expansion of capital improvements or assets other
than those identified for the appropriate facility in the capital improvements plan;
2. Repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements
or facilities expansions;
3. Upgrading, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve
existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory
standards;
4. Upgrading, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to provide
better service to existing development; provided however, that impact fees may be used to pay the
costs of upgrading, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements in order to meet the need
for new capital improvements generated by new development; or
5. Administrative and operating costs of the City.
SECTION 18
APPEALS
A. The property owner or applicant for new development may appeal the following
decisions of the Public Works Director to the City Council:
1. The applicability of an impact fee to the development;
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact. 00. fn6. wpd (05/19/00)
Page 20
2. The calculation of applicable service units attributable to the development;
3. The value of the impact fee due;
4. The availability or the value of an offset or credit;
5. The application of an offset or credit against an impact fee due;
6. The amount of the refund due under Section 19, if any.
B. An appeal to the City Council must be filed by the applicant with the City Secretary
within thirty (30) days following the Public Works Director's decision. The City Council shall hear
the appeal within 30 days of receipt by the City Secretary. Notice of the hearing shall be mailed to
the applicant at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing.
C. At the hearing, the City Council shall consider all relevant evidence and shall allow
testimony from the applicant, city personnel and other interested persons relevant to the appeal. The
hearing may be continued from time to time.
D. The burden of proof shall be on the appellant to demonstrate that the fee is not applicable
or that the determination of service units or the value of the fee or of the offset or credit was not
calculated according to the applicable impact fee schedule or the guidelines established in this
Ordinance. The applicant shall submit an engineering report prepared by a qualified professional
engineer licensed to perform such engineering services in the State of Texas, which demonstrates
that the applicant's burden has been met.
E. Following the hearing, the City Council shall consider all evidence and determine
whether the appeal should be granted (in whole or in part) or denied.
F. lfthe appeal is accompanied by a bond or other sufficient security satisfactory to the
City Attorney in an amount equal to the original determination of the impact fee due, the
development application or tap purchase or building permit issuance may be processed while the
appeal is pending.
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 21
SECTION 19
REFUNDS
A. Any impact fee or portion thereof collected pursuant to this Ordinance which has not
been expended within ten (10) years from the date of payment, shall be refunded, upon application,
to the record owner of the property at the time the refund is paid, or, if the impact fee was paid by
another governmental entity, to such governmental entity, together with interest calculated from the
date of collection to the date of refund at the statutory rate as set forth in Section 302.002, Texas
Finance Code, or any successor statute.
B. If a refund is due pursuant to subsection (A), the City shall pro-rate the same by
dividing the difference between the amount of expenditures and the amount ofthe fees collected by
the total number of service units assumed within the service area for the period to determine the
refund due per service unit. The refund to the record owner or governmental entity shall be
calculated by multiplying the refund due per service unit by the number of service units for the
development for which the fee was paid, and interest due shall be calculated upon that amount.
C. Upon completion of all the capital improvements or facilities expansions identified
in the capital improvements plan upon which the fee was based, the City shall recalculate the
maximum impact fee per service unit using the actual costs for the improvements or expansions.
If the maximum impact fee per service unit based on actual cost is less than the impact fee per
service unit paid, the City shall refund the difference, if such difference exceeds the impact fee paid
by more than ten percent (10%). The refund to the record owner or governmental entity shall be
calculated by multiplying such difference by the number of service units for the development for
which the fee was paid, and interest due shall be calculated upon that amount.
D. Upon the request of an owner ofthe property on which a water or wastewater impact
fee has been paid, the City shall refund such fees if:
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.OO.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 22
1. Existing service is available and service is denied; or
2. Service was not available when the fee was collected and the City has failed
to commence construction of facilities to provide service within two years of fee payment; or
3. Service was not available when the fee was collected and has not subsequently
been made available within a reasonable period oftime considering the type of capital improvement
or facility expansion to be constructed, but in no event later than five years from the date of fee
payment.
E. The City shall refund an appropriate proportion of water impact fee payments in the
event that a previously purchased water meter is replaced with a smaller meter, based on the LUE
differential ofthe two meter sizes and the per-LUE fee at the time of the original fee payment, less
an administrative charge set forth in City guidelines.
F. Petition for refunds shall be submitted to the Public Works Director on a form
provided by the City for such purpose. Within one month of the date of receipt of a petition for
refund, the Public Works Director must provide the petitioner, in writing, with a decision on the
refund request, including the reasons for the decision. If a refund is due to the petitioner, the Public
Works Director shall notify the Finance Director and request that a refund payment be made to the
petitioner. The petitioner may appeal the determination to the Council, as set forth in Section 18.
SECTION 20
UPDATES TO PLAN AND REVISION OF FEES
The City shall review the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvement Plan for water,
wastewater and roadway facilities at least every three years, the first three year period to commence
from the date of adoption ofthe Capital Improvement Plan referenced herein. The City Council shall
accordingly then make a determination of whether changes to the Land Use Assumptions, Capital
Improvement Plan or impact fees are needed and shall, in accordance with the procedures set forth
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 23
in Chapter 395, either update the fees or make a determination that no update is necessary.
SECTION 21
FUNCTIONS OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE
A. The functions ofthe Advisory Committee are those set forth in Chapter 395 and shall
include the following:
1. Advise and assist the City in adopting Land Use Assumptions;
2. Review the Capital Improvement Plan regarding water, wastewater, and
roadway capital improvements and file written comments thereon;
3. Monitor and evaluate implementation of the Capital Improvement Plan;
4. Advise the City of the need to update or revise the Land Use Assumption,
Capital Improvement Plan and impact fees; and
5. File a semiannual report evaluating the progress of the City in achieving the
Capital Improvement Plan and identifying any problems in implementing the plan or administering
the impact fees.
B. The City shall make available to the Advisory Committee any professional reports
prepared in the development or implementation of the Capital Improvement Plan.
C. The City Council may adopt procedural rules for the committee to follow in carrying
out it duties.
SECTION 22
AGREEMENT FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
The City Council may authorize the owner of a new development to construct or finance
some ofthe public improvements identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. In the case of such
approval, the property owner must enter into an agreement with the City prior to collection of
impact fees. The agreement shall be on a form approved by the City, and shall establish the
estimated cost ofthe improvements, the schedule for initiation and completion ofthe improvements,
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 24
a requirement that the improvements shall be completed to City standards, and any other terms and
conditions the City deems necessary. The Public Works Director shall review the improvement plan,
verify costs and time schedules, determine if the improvements are contained in the CIP, and
determine the method and timing of reimbursing the owner for construction costs from impact fee
or other revenues.
SECTION 23
USE OF OTHER FINANCING MECHANISMS
A. The City may finance water, wastewater, and roadway capital improvements or
facilities expansions designated in the Capital Improvement Plan through the issuance of bonds,
through the formation of public improvement districts or other assessment districts, or through any
other authorized mechanism, in such manner and subject to such limitations as may be provided by
law, in addition to the use of impact fees.
B. Except as herein otherwise provided, the assessment and collection of an impact fee
shall be additional and supplemental to, and not in substitution of, any other tax, fee, charge or
assessment which is lawfully imposed on and due against the property.
SECTION 24
IMPACT FEES AS ADDITIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATION
A. Impact fees established by this Ordinance are additional and supplemental to, and not
in substitution of, any other requirements imposed by the City on the development of land or the
issuance of building permits or the sale of water or wastewater taps or the issuance of certificates of
occupancy. Such fees are intended to be consistent with and to further the policies of City's
Comprehensive Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations and
other City policies, ordinances and resolutions by which the City seeks to ensure the provision of
adequate public facilities in conjunction with the development of land.
B. This Ordinance shall not affect, in any manner, the permissible use of property,
W:\South/ake\Ordinances\/mpact.00.fn6. wpd (05/19/00)
Page 25
density of development, design, and improvement standards and requirements, or any other aspect
of the development of land or provision of public improvements subject to the zoning and
subdivision regulations or other regulations ofthe City, which shall be operative and remain in full
force and effect without limitation with respect to all such development.
SECTION 25
RELIEF PROCEDURES
A. Any person who has paid an impact fee or an owner of land upon which an impact
fee has been paid may petition the City Council to determine whether any duty required by this
Ordinance has not been performed within the time so prescribed. The petition shall be in writing and
shall state the nature of the unperformed duty and request that the act be performed within sixty (60)
days of the request. If the City Council determines that the duty is required pursuant to the
ordinance and is late in being performed, it shall cause the duty to commence within sixty (60) days
of the date of the request and to continue until completion.
B. The City Council may grant a variance or waiver from any requirement of this
Ordinance, upon written request by a developer or owner of property subject to the Ordinance,
following a public hearing, upon finding that a strict application of such requirement would, when
regarded as a whole, result in confiscation of the property.
SECTION 26
CUMULATIVE CLAUSE
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.
Ordinance Nos. 330,493,494,510 and 657 are specifically saved from repeal and shall remain in
effect to the extent they provide for the charging of a fee not replaced by this Ordinance or other duly
adopted ordinances of the City.
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 26
SECTION 27
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE
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 28
PUBLICATION
The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed
Ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public
hearing 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, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this Ordinance in the official City
newspaper one time within ten days after passage ofthis Ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of
the Charter of the City of Southlake.
SECTION 29
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.
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\1 mpacl. 00. fn6. wpd (05/19/00)
Page 27
PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS
~
, 2000.
(i(~::;9.'!:1;;;t~i
~ ";. (? itt;' .':~
~\::~~::;;;;;;;:::::~~~"
/
DAY OF
~
MA
ATTEST:
~Jf~
CITY SECRETARY
PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS ;.5' DAY OF
.J~
EFFECTIVE: 02-22-00
, 2000.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
LJktJ~
City Attorney
~
A~
1/~/
aITY SECRETARY
W:\Southlake\Ordinances\lmpact.00.fn6.wpd (05/19/00)
Page 28
Service Area for Water and Wastewater
Exhibit A-1
~
-nr
L~ ~
/~
~ M .1
}- rilf P ~'
~ J' ~~
/' t4.j .-<
~:1 l/1 \ l\
"l, 'i t
,,~ ~ ::z
ilfh~\\ -~~~ ~JI. -
I ~~ ::;J. >- "- I
,~ h f 7I.
~ .~ ~~ Jr"
m m ~~
~ r- ,/I ~l::: lW' ~
III ;;dj IN::::! ~ h" ~
~ ~ ~ R:. .:: I- Vr. ~
Ilw= -r~~J:m
t- 5.
1m ~ n. tr~~.
:III:!: ~ ~ tfJ
~ ~ ~ e 7 :- ~
H ::l ~
; ~ ~
....l ~ J :ll RI IS
~ "/
;:j c: ,
-.d ~ 7-.r
9 1 L - - -\ ..,..
EB.. .1 q
f[ ~ ~ fm It--
\~T
., r
p~
-
./ ..-....l=l
, ~ '/'
t--l'"
Service Areas for Roadways
Exhibit A-2
~
/ - ~ ~'k~
~6
I ) 2~
. ,----,
~ i ~~ ~ A
'\lW"
-j' t
'" IlL - !IL
-,.,.F ~
........" :::I IJ=I
~., MK.~ll~~~
""""i:1::l1J1In II-4=! I~ h=h~
II ~ ~ rn [SJ! ~ 6" 'dil
~ " '""",- Hi
II i--- ~
~ 'In" t
I ~ ~
m!!1T T:\ N ~l! ffi
[l -
-< b 17 ::;:J
-
==i1~ --.-.-, I~
~
m- t'1
'/
~ ;J ~ A- r
.Jo:o 'i"1 rI !ri- r f..j
rr u - -
-
rt-1
1li I- \~7
IT' j~
P
- .Y~
./ ....IL
1 ~ ..~
y'"
Exhibit B
1999
Land Use Assumptions
Report
Developed by the
City of Southlake
For use in the
Impact Fee Study
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
LAND USE ASSUMPTION REPORT FOR IMPACT FEES
INTRODUCTION
In order to accurately determine the costs associated with providing infrastructure to new
development via impact fees, a planning study must first be conducted which determines the
amount and location of expected population and employment growth. That study, known as the
land use assumptions (LUAs) report' is described in Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government
Code as the basis from which all capital improvement plans for impact fees are to be created. It
must be updated every three years and/or as conditions for development change in communities.
To follow is the land use assumption report for the 1999 update of the water, wastewater and
roadway impact fees, as well as potentially a new stormwater drainage impact fee. The 1995 land
use assumption report has been used as the base format from which the 1999 updated
assumptions are created.
It is important to note that any revised impact fees mentioned above and the land use
assumptions upon which they are based are only concerned with the impact of future
development. Revised impact fees cannot be assessed to development that already exists nor used
for maintenance and operation of existing facilities. Therefore, this land use assumption report
will first describe a "baseline" condition in Southlake, meaning current population and
employment levels, then project expected increases in these levels based on the type, location,
quantity, and timing of various future land uses in the community. In addition, a major element
of this report will be to describe the processes used to make these growth assumptions.
CONTENTS OF THE LAND USE ASSUMPTION REPORT
The land use assumption report is divided into six categories that function to satisfy the
methodology requirements of state law. They are:
I. Study Processes: A description of the methods used to determine all the data and
variables in the report, as well as an explanation of the data sources
II. Service Area Maps (Maps 1, 2, and 3): The impact fee service areas for water,
wastewater, and roadway facilities based on the data collection zones. Note that the
service area for the potential stormwater drainage impact fee will be determined upon
completion of the water, wastewater and roadway fee updates
III. Base Data: Information on population, employment, and land use for Southlake as of
January 1999 for each data collection zone
IV. Ultimate Projections: Projections which reflect a completely developed condition based
on the city's Land Use Plan and current land use patterns
V. Ten-Year Growth Assumptions: Population and employment growth assumptions for ten
years by data collection zones and impact fee service areas
LUA Report- November 24,1999
Page 2 of 13
VI. Summary: Brief description of major findings of this report
I. STUDY PROCESSES
In order to make determinations about the current population and employment levels in
Southlake and to develop growth assumptions to be used in capital improvements planning, a
wide variety of data sources must be explored. By assimilating data of varying types and noting
both the differences and similarities of their variables, logical conclusions can be drawn to
support the inclusion of the data which is the "best fit" for Southlake and its expected growth
patterns.
A. Data Sources:
The data in this land use assumption report can be described as generally coming from several
major sources, all reasonable tools frequently used by city staff and local officials, such as:
3. Existing land uses
3. Future land uses based on the adopted Land Use Plan (1/20/98)
3. Existing zoning
3. Expected increases in occupancy of existing residential lots
3. Approved future commercial developments
3. The physical holding capacity of the city at build-out
3. Regional and local analyses performed by the North Central Texas Council of Governments
(NCTCOG)
3. Observed growth characteristics of other similarly situated cities
3. Accepted extrapolation (forecasting) techniques based on sound planning principles
B. Study Procedures:
Using the general data sources described above, the study is prepared following these major
steps:
1. Determine the data collection zones for water, wastewater and roadway facilities based on
state law requirements and determine the applicable service areas (See Section II - Service
Area Maps)
2. Collect/determine baseline data for current population and employment figures as of January
LUA Report - November 24, 1999
Page 3 of 13
1, 1999 (See Section III - Base Year Data)
3. Project population and employment growth for ten years by impact fee service areas (See
Section IV - Ten-Year Growth Assumptions)
4. Project the ultimate population and land use (by land use category) for a fully developed city
(See Section V - Ultimate Projections)
II. SERVICE AREA MAPS
Maps 1, 2 and 3, located in the Appendices, show the proposed service areas for water,
wastewater and roadway facilities respectively. The boundary for water and wastewater facilities
is the existing city limits, which is allowed by state law and remains the same 'service area as in
the initial 1990 water and sewer impact fee study and its subsequent updates in 1993 and 1996.
The proposed roadway impact fee service areas remain unchanged from the prior update, for
several compelling reasons. First, the eight (8) proposed roadway service area boundaries contain
nested traffic survey zones (TSZSI), making their integration of these standardized (by
NCTCOG, state, and federal entities) data collection zones a virtual seamless fit within the
roadway service areas. This characteristic assists greatly in the data collection and distribution
process. Secondly, the compilation of these TSZs into the proposed roadway impact fee service
areas also meets the statutory requirements for the size limitations of roadway service areas (they
can be no more than 3 miles in diameter. The TSZs, when compiled into roadway service areas,
also represent areas of fairly similar traffic generation characteristics and help to maintain
efficiencies in accounting and administration of roadway impact fees.
III. BASE YEAR DATA
Population
This section documents the current population and employment levels in Southlake. The most
generally accepted estimate of the population of local municipalities is generated by the
NCTCOG for January 1 of each calendar year. Beginning with the total count of the most recent
Census (1990 in this case), the NCTCOG demographic personnel provide current year January 1
estimates by examining building permitting and occupancy reports submitted by the respective
cities' building departments through December 31 of the prior year. After assigning "added
population" to the municipality, the NCTCOG staff submits preliminary figures to city staff to be
double-checked for any inconsistencies, anomalies, etc. Once the January 1 numbers have been
examined and approved, they are published in a NCTCOG annual report. This process, at the
time of publication of this report, has been completed by NCTCOG for January 1, 1999. Staff
has used techniques based on the NCTCOG methodology to double-check the January 1, 1999,
estimate and agrees with the proposed estimate of 21,050. Table 1 below represents Southlake's
population history from the most recent complete count (1990 Census) through the most recent
current year estimate for January 1, 1999.
I Traffic survey zones, or TSZs, are data collection boundaries used by government entities to collect information
about population, employment, travel patterns, and other statistical information.
LUA Report - November 24, 1999
Page 4 of 13
TABLE 1
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
HISTORICAL POPULATION
Compounded Annual Growth Rate
* Source: U.S. Census
** Source: NCTCOG January I adopted current year estimates
As mentioned above, the annual population estimates are based on building permitting and
occupancy data. Table 2 below represents Southlake's building permit history during the time
period of 1990-1999.
TABLE 2
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS
Year New Single-Family Permits
Source: City of Southlake Building Inspections Division
* 10/99-12/99 estimated
The above two tables have been presented to demonstrate that Southlake has been experiencing
increased residential growth since 1990, with perhaps a coming decline in that rate in the
approaching period covered by this report. Slowed, but steady residential growth is expected to
continue into the near future (further discussed in Section IV).
The 21,050 figure is suitable for use in the citywide service area calculations for water and
LUA Report- November 24, 1999
Page 5 of 13
wastewater in that form. However, this figure will need to be distributed to the eight (8) roadway
service areas by TSZ for use as a baseline figure for the roadway impact fee calculations. To
accomplish this, the difference between the 1995 population estimates by TSZ and the overall
baseline January 1, 1999, population estimate of 21,050 is allocated proportionally to individual
TSZs based on the proportional number of building permits issued by TSZ since 1995. This data
is accumulated by Southlake's Community Development department in a summary of residential
development indicating the number of planned lots, platted lots, building permits issued and
available lots by subdivision. The January 1, 1999, population estimates by TSZ can be found in
Appendix A.
Employment
Since not all land uses in Southlake are residential ones, it is necessary to also determine the
impact of future non-residential uses and calculate impact fees for them. Again, the first step in
making this determination is arriving at a baseline figure for the non-residential uses currently in
Southlake. The measure of these uses will be current employment levels.
The growth of Southlake' s employment base in recent years has become substantial enough that
a close examination of the data used to determine it must be taken. During the impact fee study
of 1995-1996, the land use assumptions for existing employment were based on an interpolation
between the NCTCOG 1990 and 2010 employment estimates by Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) code. These values were then compared to changes of zoning to
nonresidential categories since 1990 - the date of the last available data from NCTCOG - to
determine if the interpolation resulted in "under counts" and "over counts" by TSZ and/or SIC
code versus the actual development in Southlake. As a result, the employment values were then
adjusted upward to reflect major additional employment and adjusted downward where
development has not occurred. The resulting 1995 aggregate total was 3796 employees. This
total represents a more accurate, hand-adjusted total than NCTCOG's figure of 3400.
Similarly, NCTCOG's recently released employment figure for Southlake of 4,300 for 1998 is
also unrepresentative of known additions to Southlake's employment base. The most accurate
and up-to-date tabulation of employment in Southlake is maintained by Southlake's Department
of Economic Development. This business database contains a complete listing of known
businesses by type of business (readily linked to SIC codes), number of employees, and other
critical data. This database is also frequently updated to reflect additional businesses, those that
have become inactive, and other changes.
After removing home-based businesses (which occupy residential land uses) and inactive ones,
the total current baseline employment figure to be used for Southlake will be 6,332 employees.
This represents a significant increase from previously expected totals because of substantial
employment base increases in recent years.
To derive the allocation to the eight (8) individual roadway service areas, each TSZ was
examined and the proportion of the 6,332 employees were assigned to each, based on the
physical addresses of the businesses in the database. The January 1, 1999, number of employees
by roadway service area is shown in Appendix B-l. In Section IV, the process of projecting
LUA Report - November 24, 1999
Page 6 of 13
future increases (ten-year estimates) by service area will be explained. Table 3 below is a
summary of the baseline (January 1, 1999) numbers discussed in this section and to be used in
this report for projection purposes.
TABLE 3
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
JANUARY 1, 1999, POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT BASELINE FIGURES
1995
1999
21,050
6,332
Annual Increase
IV. UL TIMA TE PROJECTIONS
Population
An ultimate or holding capacity population projection was also established. This ultimate
projection is needed as an input for the ten-year projection to follow in Section V, and therefore
is calculated first in this Section.
First, known densities of development were considered. Then, based on the remmmng
developable vacant land in Southlake, densities as recommended in the Land Use Plan and
densities of anticipated development projects were applied. The ultimate population of the City
of SoutWake is a function of residential land use area (acres), housing density (dwelling units per
acre), and population density (persons per dwelling unit). Based on the land uses identified on
the Land Use Plan, the total ultimate land use areas of low density single-family housing,
medium density single-family housing, and multi-family housing is known. The area of each
residential classification was multiplied by its respective housing density and population density,
and the products were summed to obtain the ultimate population. Housing density values are
from observed existing residential development and/or current residential zoning regulations.
The ultimate holding capacity of 35,841 persons is based on the Land Use Plan and the following
process, m summary:
1. The Residential Development Summary prepared by city staff was updated to reflect the
current number of developed lots that have not been occupied. These lots represent future
population that can be counted above and beyond expected residential population in
undeveloped areas shown on the Land Use Plan. That summary shows:
1044 available lots
2. The remammg acreages of undeveloped residential land uses are multiplied by their
respective allowable densities. Note that these densities and these assumption show a
theoretical maximum allowed by zoning:
. 1 lot per acre for 1525 acres ofLDR = 1525 new lots
LUA Report - November 24, 1999
Page 7 of 13
.
2.12 lots per acre for 583 acres ofMDR = 1236 new lots
This total (2761) was then adjusted downward from the theoretical maximums (above) by
15% to account for internal right-of-way, common areas, etc. to yield 2347 lots total
.
3. The Mixed Use category currently holds 1072 "undeveloped" acres, as stated in Table 4. To
derive potential ancillary residential units from this category, the following assumptions were
made: (a) The 1072 acres can be reduced to 570 acres by virtue of approved plans (Timarron
Commercial, Town Center's future phases, Gateway Plaza, etc.) which have zoning with
little or no residential component. At 570 acres and an assumed density of 1.8 dwelling units
an acre, this yields 1026 potential dwelling units from this category.
4. The total of all lots mentioned above, or 4417 new lots are multiplied by the NCTCOG
Average Household Size (3.51), which equals approximately 15,504 new residents for these
land use categories. This figure is adjusted to 14,791 when multiplied by a 95.4 percent
occupancy rate.
Taking the total potential additions figure of 14,791 and adding it to the 1999 baseline population
of 21,050 one can estimate that the city could see a potential for 35,841 persons at build-out,
again, based on the noted assumptions.
Employment
To determine ultimate employment figures, the densities of types of non-residential land uses
(i.e. Retail Commercial, Mixed Use, etc.) were observed as they currently exist in the baseline
data presented in Section III. Next, for all of these types of uses, ultimate employment
projections were made by multiplying the known density of development (employees per acre)
times the remaining available acreages of each land use category. For most instances, this
calculated "density" of non-residential uses can be directly used to project future growth.
However, in many of Southlake's mixed use corridors, there is no existing employment density
that can be used to gauge future growth. Likewise, the employment bases in these mixed use
centers will be substantially higher than currently seen in the largely single-story office and
commercial developments used for normal projections. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a
reasonable set of assumptions about the density of growth expected in these mixed use areas (and
their respective TSZs) independent of the non-residential growth densities in other areas. For the
purpose of this report, the mixed-use centers were assigned a density based on Southlake's
existing employee per acre ratios in the Basic, Retail, and Service categories, then multiplied by
an average number of maximum stories permitted by the concepts plans for these areas. The
recently approved Sabre Group campus will approach a density of 50 employees per acre based
on the projections submitted to the city. The undeveloped mixed-use areas remaining on S.H.
114, using the method described above, approximate these densities, as well. The resulting total
projected employee base for Southlake is estimated to be 42825 employees in an ultimate state.
, .
LUA Report - November 24, 1999
Page 8 of 13
v. TEN-YEAR GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS
Introduction
In order to project a proper distribution of future land use patterns, a thorough understanding of
existing conditions is essential. Existing land use patterns have been evaluated in all prior impact
fee studies in Southlake, and that information was updated, for this land use assumptions report.
The basis for the study of current or proposed land uses is the currently adopted (1120/98) Land
Use Plan. The land use categories contained in this plan are Low Density Residential, Medium
Density Residential, Office Commercial, Retail Commercial, Mixed Use, Industrial,
Public/Semi-Public, Public Parks/Open Space, Corps of Engineers, and Floodplain. Each of the
above categories was counted and tabulated on a parcel-by-parcel basis and recorded for all areas
of the City. Table 4 shows a summary of existing land uses by acreage and percent of total
acreage in Southlake. This table is helpful in demonstrating the ability of various types of land
uses to absorb more residents (in the case of residential land uses) and employees in the case of
non-residential ones.
TABLE 4
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
DEVELOPEDIUNDEVELOPED LAND USES WITH TEN YEAR ESTIMATES
Existing Land Use Developed % of 10- Year % of Ultimate
Acres Ultimate Dev. Acres Ultimate Acres
Low Density Residential 3497 70% 4620 92% 5022
Medium Density Residential 3212 85% 3491 92% 3795
Sub- Total 6709 76% 8112 92% 8817
Single Family Residential
Office Commercial 64 16% 255 64% 398
Retail Commercial 207 45% 296 64% 463
Mixed Use 698 39% 1133 64% 1770
Industrial 294 60% 312 64% 488
Sub-Total 1263 40% 1996 64% 3119
Commercial
Public/Semi-Public 192 41% 474
Parks/Open Space 91 34% 266
Corps of Engineers 0 0% 757
Floodplain 73 8% 888
Source: City of Southlake, Community Development Department
Gross acres, includes street and alley rights-of-way
Ten-Year Population Projections
The ten-year projections for land use assumptions are based upon the policies established in the
Land Use Plan. The establishment of a reasonable growth trend is based in part on past trends,
and based in part on mathematical calculations of characteristics expected in the future of a city
like Southlake. Considering the historical population of Southlake (Table 1), it is obvious that the
city has recently gone through a high-growth period. Also, with adequate inventories of platted
lots and an adequate amount of vacant land for development, it is logical to assume that a
LUA Report - November 24, 1999
Page 9 of 13
similar, though diminishing, rate of growth will continue over the ten-year window used for the
impact fee projections. Another important factor to consider is that Southlake's projected
population density has been reduced substantially through updates of the Land Use Plan in recent
years.
There are several methods for projecting population growth based on historical population data
and on other industry-accepted modeling. A "linear" growth curve (see Appendix C for examples
of these curves) assumes a constant growth rate and takes the form of a straight line when
plotted. This was the method used to project population in the 1995-1996 report. An
"exponential" curve assumes an ever-increasing growth rate and assumes the shape of a line
curving upward. Yet another growth curve, the "logistic" curve, is deemed to be the best fit for
projecting Southlake's population. It is an "S-shaped" curve which denotes a period of historic
slow growth (from 1974-1990), followed by a sharp growth rate increase (from 1991-present),
followed by a period of decreasing growth rates as the city reaches its ultimate population. An
important function and built-in "reasonableness" factor of the logistic curve is that this
mathematical function assumes an upper growth limit. This adjusts the population growth to fit
the amount of land available for this use. The upper growth limit is detailed in Section V.
By applying the logistic curve extrapolations, data was derived showing how many residents are
expected to be added to the baseline (1999) population figure through the ten-year planning
period for the land use assumptions report. That figure of 33,060 is detailed in Appendix A.
Another necessary function of the ten-year population projections is to equate population figures
to housing units. Based on the NCTCOG figures of 3.51 persons per household and a 95.4
percent occupancy rate for Southlake, the number of additional dwelling units each year can also
be calculated. These figures are represented in Table 5 below.
TABLE 5
TEN- YEAR POPULATION PROJECTIONS USING LOGISTIC FUNCTION
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
Year
Population
% Annual Pop. Housing Units
Increase
33,060
*U sing 1998-1999 increase
LUA Report- November 24, 1999
Page 10 of 13
The next step, as in the other cases, was to disaggregate the ten-year total population figure of
33,060 and allocate to the individual TSZs that make up the roadway service areas. Using the
1998 Land Use Plan (to determine vacant land totals in the residential categories) and the
residential development summary (discussed in Section III) for developed, but not occupied lots,
expected increases in each TSZ were added to the 1999 totals for each TSZ. This "hand
assignment" resulted in a 10-year estimate by TSZ. It should also be mentioned that the Mixed
Use category was assigned a conservative amount of residential population, as it is an acceptable
use of that category, based on reasonable assumptions for that category of 10 percent single-
family.
Ten-Year Employment Projections
The baseline 1999 employment figure of 6,332 (disaggregated into the TSZs as demonstrated in
Section III and illustrated in Appendix B) is used to provide a reference point of how completely
developed (non-residentially) the TSZ zones are in 1999. This is done by determining how much
acreage is developed and how many current employees exist per developed acre in each TSZ for
each non-residential land use category. Then, using the densities established in Section IV with
the ultimate projections, a 10-year projected amount of employees was determined by assigning
an "absorption factor" of 6% of the difference between the 1999 existing employees abd the
ultimate projected employees, per year. Based on 6% absorption and the estimated number of
ultimate employees, build-out for Southlake's employee base was estimated to be the year 2017.
Deducting the 6% per year figures back from the year 2017 to 2009 (with 2009 being the 1999-
2009 projection period), the estimated 10-year employee projection was 27,498. These methods
of projecting ten-year employment figures were deemed as the more reasonable than the
approach used in 1995 for several reasons. For one, the NCTCOG projected employment figure
for the year 2010 is 9600. This figure is unreasonably low compared to the known existing 1999
employment figure of 6,332. It is unreasonable to expect only 3268 additional employees to be
added in an eleven-year period, especially considering an average of 17% per year increase has
been noted since 1995 for current types of non-residential growth, and further with known mixed
use developments coming on line of even higher densities. Therefore, neither the NCTCOG 2010
nor 2020 estimates were used for interpolation from the 1999 baseline figure.
The ten-year projected employment totals by roadway service area can be found in Appendix B-
2.
VI. SUMMARY
The data used to compile these land use assumptions were taken from various reasonable
sources: the updated (1/20/98) Land Use Plan for the City of Southlake, the North Central Texas
Council of Governments (NCTCOG) formula for deriving population from additional building
permits, and the boundary data established by the U.S. Census Bureau. The existing base data
was prepared by the City of Southlake's Community Development department and information
from the U.S. Census. The ten-year growth projections were calculated based upon reasonable
growth rates and trends based on the Land Use Plan Ultimate projections were based on the
holding capacity of vacant land using land use types as shown on the Land Use Plan and
applying densities as established by development policies in the Plan and known proposed
development plans. The land use assumptions may be summarized as follows:
LUA Report - November 24, 1999
Page 11 of 13
.
Southlake presently contains approximately 14,650 acres within the city limits of which
approximately 57% is developed. It is not anticipated Southlake will be able to expand its
municipal boundaries beyond its present limits.
. Existing population of Southlake on January 1, 1999 = 21,050
.
A logistic growth rate model was used in the ten-year population projections to account for a
continued growth period while also demonstrating Southlake's anticipated diminishing
residential growth rate closer to build-out.
.
The ten-year (2009) population projection for Southlake is 33,060.
.
The ultimate population of South lake is approximately 35,841
LUA Report - November 24, 1999
Page 12 of 13
LUA Report - November 24, 1999
APPENDICES
Page 13 of 13
APPENDIX A
CITY OF SOUTH LAKE
CURRENT.YEAR (1999) AND TEN YEAR POPULATION PROJECTIONS
Roadway 1999 1999 1999 2009 2009 2009 Traffic Survey
Service Area Dwelling Units Households Population Dwelling Units Households Population Zone (TSZ)
1 166 158 556 632 603 2220 9200
1 1 1 5 3 3 10 9219
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 14036
Sub. Total 167 160 635 606 2230
0
2 2 2 6 4 4 14 8330
2 73 70 244 109 104 426 8450
2 420 402 1410 370 353 1594 8451
2 2 2 7 11 10 35 8454
2 19 19 65 258 246 578 8492
Sub. Total 516 493 1732 752 717 2647
3 716 685 2403 808 773 2713 8456
3 803 767 2693 817 781 2743 8457
3 7 7 24 9 9 30 8493
3 32 31 109 34 33 115 19017
Sub. Total 1558 1490 5229 1669 1596 5601
4 81 77 272 83 80 280 8324
4 144 138 483 252 241 845 8452
4 52 50 175 114 109 384 8453
4 455 435 1526 596 570 1999 8464
4 2 2 6 2 2 8 8465
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 8466
4 47 45 158 101 96 338 8467
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 8468
Sub. Total 781 746 2620 1149 1098 3854
5 102 97 341 132 126 442 8320
5 3 3 10 0 0 0 8322
5 115 110 386 149 143 501 8323
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 8335
5 378 362 1269 508 485 1704 8469
Sub. Total 598 572 2006 789 754 2647
6 429 410 1440 1401 1339 4701 8470
6 632 604 2120 1441 1378 4836 8482
Sub. Total 1061 1014 3560 2842 2717 9537
7 37 36 125 186 177 623 8460
7 1096 1048 3677 1118 1069 3753 8461
7 218 208 730 232 222 780 19019
Sub. Total 1351 1291 4532 1537 1469 5156
8 57 55 192 78 75 262 8458
8 139 132 465 168 161 565 8497
8 46 44 153 167 160 561 8500
Sub. Total 241 231 810 414 395 1388
TOTAL 6273 5997 21050 9786 9353 33060
APPENDIX B-1
CITY OF SOUTH LAKE
EXISTING (1999) EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES
(WITH SQUARE FEET)
Roadway 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 Traffic Survey
Service Area Basic Retail Service Total Basic Retail Service Total Zone (TSZ)
1 4,310 0 0 4,310 5 0 0 5 9200
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9219
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14036
Sub- Total 4,310 0 0 4,310 5 0 0 5
0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8330
2 0 0 9,250 9,250 0 0 37 37 8450
2 862 0 1,250 2,112 1 0 5 6 8451
2 0 0 1,000 1,000 0 0 4 4 8454
2 0 0 401,000 401,000 0 0 1,604 1,604 8492
Sub- Total 862 0 412,500 413,362 1 0 1,650 1,651
0 0 0 0
3 0 101,149 31,250 132,399 0 88 125 213 8456
3 0 20,690 0 20,690 0 18 0 18 8457
3 0 0 750 750 0 0 3 3 8493
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19017
Sub- Total 0 121,839 32,000 153,839 0 106 128 234
0 0 0 0
4 0 6,897 1,000 7,897 0 6 4 10 8324
4 0 6,897 5,000 11,897 0 6 20 26 8452
4 0 0 2,500 2,500 0 0 10 10 8453
4 0 12,644 71,000 83,644 0 11 284 295 8464
4 0 41,379 1,000 42,379 0 36 4 40 8465
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8466
4 115,517 18,391 23,000 156,908 134 16 92 242 8467
4 0 831,034 17,000 848,034 0 723 68 791 8468
Sub- Total 115,517 917,241 120,500 1,153,259 134 798 482 1,414
0 0 0 0
5 87,931 250,575 308,750 647,256 102 218 1,235 1,555 8320
5 0 85,057 6,500 91,557 0 74 26 100 8322
5 0 29,885 0 29,885 0 26 0 26 8323
5 0 22,989 5,000 27,989 0 20 20 40 8335
5 0 0 56,750 56,750 0 0 227 227 8469
Sub- Total 87,931 388,506 377,000 853,437 102 338 1,508 1,948
0 0 0 0
6 862 57,471 26,000 84,333 1 50 104 155 8470
6 77,586 0 13,750 91,336 90 0 55 145 8482
Sub- Total 78,448 57,471 39,750 175,670 91 50 159 300
0 0 0 0
7 862 333,333 46,000 380,195 1 290 184 475 8460
7 0 1,149 7,000 8,149 0 1 28 29 8461
7 0 0 0 0 0 19019
Sub- Total 862 334,483 53,000 388,345 1 291 212 504
0 0 0 0
8 16,379 32,184 0 48,563 19 28 0 47 8458
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8497
8 32,759 31,034 41 ,000 104,793 38 27 164 229 8500
Sub- Total 49,138 63,218 41,000 153,356 57 55 164 276
TOTAL 337,069 1,882,75911,075,750 3,295,578 3911 1,638 4,303 6,332
Square Feet
Employees
APPENDIX B-2
CITY OF SOUTH LAKE
TEN-YEAR EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS
(WITH SQUARE FEET)
Roadway 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 Traffic Survey
Service Area Basic Retail Service Total Basic Retail Service Total Zone (TSZ)
1 5,710 0 0 5,710 7 0 0 7 9200
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9219
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14036
Sub- Total 5,710 0 0 5,710 7 0 0 7
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8330
2 0 0 12,254 12,254 0 0 49 49 8450
2 1,142 0 1,656 2,798 1 0 7 8 8451
2 41 ,500 523,333 357,845 922,678 48 455 1,431 1,935 8454
2 26,500 524,667 1,684,975 2,236,142 31 456 6,740 7,227 8492
Sub-Total 69,142 1,048,000 2,056,730 3,173,872 80 912 8,227 9,219
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 134,003 111,870 245,873 0 117 447 564 8456
3 0 20,690 0 20,690 0 18 0 18 8457
3 35,500 125,333 139,805 300,638 41 109 559 700 8493
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19017
Sub-Total 35,500 280,026 251,675 567,201 41 244 1,007 1,292
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 9,137 1,325 10,461 0 8 5 13 8324
4 0 9,137 6,624 15,761 0 8 26 34 8452
4 186,500 535,333 1,009,960 1,731,793 216 466 4,040 4,722 8453
4 0 16,750 94,061 110,811 0 15 376 391 8464
4 21,000 69,379 9,410 99,789 24 60 38 122 8465
4 0 193,333 0 193,333 0 168 0 168 8466
4 261,017 720,391 705,225 1,686,633 303 627 2,821 3,750 8467
4 0 1,497,701 38,750 1,536,451 0 1,303 155 1 ,458 8468
Sub-Total 468,517 3,051,161 1,865,355 5,385,033 543 2,655 7,461 10,659
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 443,431 353,241 409,032 1,205,704 514 307 1,636 2,458 8320
5 0 937,724 29,120 966,844 0 816 116 932 8322
5 0 69,885 11 ,165 81,050 0 61 45 105 8323
5 0 30,455 6,624 37,079 0 26 26 53 8335
5 73,000 -0 227,125 300,125 85 0 909 993 8469
Sub-Total 516,431 1,391,306 683,066 2,590,803 599 1,210 2,732 4,542
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 1,142 76,138 34,445 111 ,725 1 66 138 205 8470
6 77,586 0 18,216 95,802 90 0 73 163 8482
Sub- Total 78,728 76,138 52,661 207,527 91 66 211 368
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 1,142 478,000 68,330 547,472 1 416 273 691 8460
7 0 59,816 67,320 127,136 0 52 269 321 8461
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19019
Sub- Total 1,142 537,816 135,650 674,608 1 468 543 1,012
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 16,879 72,184 6,525 95,588 20 63 26 108 8458
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8497
8 32,759 41,114 54,317 128,190 38 36 217 291 8500
Sub- Total 49,638 113,298 60,842 223,778 58 99 243 400
TOTAL 1,224,8091 6,497,745 5,105,979 12,828,5331 1,4211 5,653 20,424 27,498T
Square Footage
Employees
APPENDIX C
CITY OF SOUTH LAKE
SAMPLES OF GROWTH CURVES
Linear
t:
o
+::
.!!!
:J
C.
o
a.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Year
Exponential
t:
o
+::
.!!!
:J
C.
o
a.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Year
Logistic
t:
o
+::
.!!!
:J
C.
o
a.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Year
CI1Y
OF
SOUTHLAJ.<E
N
W*E
s
~.
SERVICE AREA FOR WATER IMPACT FEES
MAP 1
CITY
OF
SOUTHLAKE
N
W*E
s
:1'
SERVICE AREA FOR WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES
I'v1AP 2
-----c:
'=;;;''''_ I _ ~'-
;=- /-;-" ~ "
" '-~-"~~~:"
, ',~.'CJ.~"" '-',
,~ 1",1~~
--.........................-
CITY
OF
SOUTHLN(E
N
W*E
s
SERVICE AREAS FOR ROADWAY IMPACT FEES
MAP 3
Exhibit C-1
City of Southlake
Water & Wastewater
Capital Improvement Plan
prepared For 1999 Impact Fee
update
Prepared By
Eddie Cheatham, P.E.
Cheatham & Associates
Lewis F. MCLain, Jr.
Fiscal Planning Consultant
February 2000
Contents
Introduction........ .... ..... ...... ...... ........................ 1
Wastewater Treatment Facilities .............. 23
Data From Land Use Assumption Report ..... 1
Denton Creek Drainage Basin ................... 24
Population ........,......................................... 2
Non-residential ........................................... 2
Main Interceptor .................................. 25
N-1......................................................... 25
N-2.......................................................... 25
N-3.........._.............................................. 25
N -4 ........... .............................. .............. . .. 25
N -5 ......... ..... ............................................. 26
N-6 ............................................................26
Standard Service Unit ... .................................. 4
DefInition and Requirements .................... 4
Table of Equivalencies ............................... 5
Existing Service Units ............................... 5
Meters In Service as of 1/1/99..................... 6
Water SFLUEs as of 1/1/99......................... 6
Projection of SFL UEs ........................... 6
Big Bear Creek Drainage Basin .................... 26
SFLUE Distribution ................................,.. 8
Main Interceptor .................................... 27
S-l ....... ............................... ...................... 27
S-2 ............................................................ 27
S-3............................................................ 2
S-4 ... ........... .............. .......:.... .................... 27
S-5 ............................................................ 27
S-6 ............................................................ 27
S- 7.............. ............... ...... .................... ...... 27
System Sizing and Capacity Allocation .......... 8
The Bottom Line (Water) ................................ 9
Water Capital Improvements Plan ................. 10
Summary of Wastewater Costs ........................... 28
Water Treatment Facilities .....................:. 10
Elevated Storage Tanks ............................. 10
Ground Storage Tanks ............................... 13
Pumping Facilities ...................................... 15
Water Supply Lines .................................... -17
Transmission System ................................. 19
Grand Total For Water .............................. 21
Financing Costs..................................................... 28
Other Eligible Costs ............................................. 31
Maximum Impact Fee .......................................... 31
Equilibrium Impact Fee ........... ......................... 31
Wastewater Service Units ................................ 21
Remaining Adoptive Steps .................................. 32
The Bottom Line (Wastewater) ....................... 23
Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan ......... 23
Appendix A - Technical Explanation of
Financing Costs
Introduction
This Capital Improvement Plan (ClP) has been prepared to fulfill the impact fee
calculation requirements of Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. These
requirements are met in the context of the City's entire water and wastewater master
plan. There is a specific requirement to produce the cost of the capacity that will be ab-
sorbed (used) over a ten-year period with the land use and growth assumptions for that
same period of time. Another way of viewing the requirement is to exclude the cost of
the capacity of the water and wastewater systems that is presently being used by the ex-
isting customers as well as the cost of the capacity that will be used beyond the ten-year
period. Therefore, the CIP cost allocation requirement for impact fee calculation pur-
poses are produced as a subset of the City's utility master planning efforts.
There are several reasons for taking this approach to satisfy the Chapter 395 re-
quirements. The City's methodology for extending the utility system has always been to
first view the expected requirements for the entire system. This master planning effort
is critical for such decisions as general site locations for water tanks and easements for
future lines. The City also has to make timely commitments for water and wastewater
treatment facilities well in advance of the needs since these capital needs are not only
large and expensive, but are done in conjtIDction with other cities being provided treat-
ment services by a central agency such as the Trinity River Authority (TRA) and the
City of Fort Worth. Finally, the City has the need to balance expansion plans with the
assurance that the ultimate customer revenue base will be in accordance with the needs
to pay for those facilities that are built totally or partially with long-term bonds.
There are some other benefits of viewing the ten-year capital requirements as a
subset of the master plans. There can be a test of reasonableness or at least a compari-
son of the cost of providing services to the existing customer base to the cost of serving
new development. And lastly, the efforts to satisfy Chapter 395 can be extended to serve
a broader need, making the expense of an impact fee .update more cost effective. Or the
preferred way of looking at the picture is that Chapter 395 requirements are similar to
what the cities should do and what Southlake does do: Chapter 395 looks at a ten-year
slice of what the City conducts in their utility master planning exercises - the City sizes
and expands the systems in accordance to expected growth plans.
Data From Land Use Assumption Report
The City's planning staff conducted a study to produce projections of land use,
growth and densities for the City of Southlake's water and wastewater service area.l
lThis report is entitled "City of Southlake, Texas Land Use Assumptions For Impact Fees"
dated November 24, 1999. This report should be consulted for details of the methodology and results
used to conduct the study. References to this report will be designated as the "LUA Report."
1
The service area is the city limits since there is no extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ)
area to be annexed or served by Southlake.
Population. There are population, housing and acre estimates that are lmide or that
can be derived from the land use study for three periods of time:
. Existing as of January 1, 1999.
. Growth for the ten-year period from January 1, 1999 to Jant\ary 1, 2009.
. Ultimate capacity or growth for the City.
. The key numbers from the land use assumption report that are used in the engi-
neering work to prepare the water and wastewater ClP are shown graphically be-
low: .
. The ultimate population estimate is 36,945 people.
. The current population is estimated to be 21,050 people. This represents 57.0%
of the ultimate population and
the ultimate water and waste-
water requirements for the
residential sector, the pre-
. dominate land use projected
for Southlake.
Population
Papu latian
. The growth for the ten-year
period is estimated to be
12,010 people. This means that
32.5% of the ultimate residen-
tial sector utility demands will
be added in the ten -year pe-
riod. When added to the exist-
ing residential base, 89.5% of
the utility demands from the
residential sector are estimated to be made by the end of the ten-year period.
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
o
1999
21,050
2009
33,060
Ultimate
36,945
Time Period -
. The remaining population, 3,885 or 10.5% of the ultimate utility demand from
the residential sector, is projected to occur beyond the ten-year period, mostly
within the subsequent five years.
Non-Residential Growth. The other major land use sector that was used to deter-
mine the requirements on the utility system is referred to as the "Non-Residential" sec-
tor. The more specific land use data that is fotmd in the L UA Report presents a sepa-
2
rate acreage accOlmting and projection by three categories: commercial, industrial and
public (primarily schools and government) for the benefit of better defming the fore-
casts.
. Office Commercial acreage is presently estimated to total 64 acres as of January
1, 1999 and 191 acres to be added in the next ten years. The ultimate projection
is for about 398 acres of Office Commercial land nse.
. Retail Commercial acreage is presently estimated to total 207 acres as of January
1, 1999 and 89 acres to be added in the next ten years. The ultimate projection is
for about 463
acres of Retail
Commercial land
use.
Non ResidentiarAcreage
1,000
800
1,800
. Mixed Use Com-
mercial acreage is
presently esti-
mated to total 698
acres as of Janu-
ary 1, 1999 and
435 acres to be
added in the next
ten years. The ul-
timate projection
is for about 1,770
acres of Mixed Use
Commercial land
use.
1,600
1,400
1,200
600
m Office
. Retciil
[] Mixed
[] Indust
. Public
o
. Industrial acreage
is presently esti-
mated to be 294
acres with 18 acres
to be added in the
next ten-years.
The ultimate acre-
age for industrial
land uses is projected to be approximately 488 acres.
Office
Retail
1999
64
207
698
294
192
2009
255
296
1,133
312
379
Ultimate
Mixed
398
463
1,770
488
474
I ndust
Public
Time Period
. Public land usage is presently about 192 acres. It is estimated that 187 acres will
be added in the next ten years. The ultimate public land use is estimated to be
474 acres.
3
For purposes of the impact fee study, these non-residential uses are compiled in
the aggregate and are separated into the three time period designations with the follow-
ing results:
. There are presently 1,455 acres, which accounts for about 40.5% of the ultimate
non-residential land usage. This acreage distribution is not believed to be repre-
sentative of the utility demand uses, however, as will be explained later.
. The non-residential sector is estimated to grow by 920 acres in the next ten.
years. This represents 25.6% of the non-residential land acreage that is estimated
to be ultimately located in Southlake.
. The period beyond the ten-year impact fee period is when the non-residential
growth is expected to continue. However, most of the water and sewer utilities
will be in place prior to the end of the ten-year period. The estimated acreage to-
tals i,218 beyond the ten-year period, which represents about 34.9% of the land
usage for this sector.
The land use growth projections for the non-residential sector are shown graphi-
cally on page 3. There is a lagging of the growth of this sector behind the residential sec-
tor, with the ultimate build-out shown to be reached in approximately 2022, some eight
years after the residential sector is shown to be built out. Again, the projections by year
are for illustration purposes since the impact fee calculations deal with the next ten
years. The perspective, however, is helpful and important for evaluating the impact fee
in the context of the master plan.
Standard Service Unit
Definition and Reauirements. Chapter 395 defInes a service tmit to mean a stan-
dardized measure of consumption, use, generation, or discharge attributable to an indi-
vidual tmit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering
or planning standards for a partict~lar category of capital improvements or facility ex-
pansions. There is a further requirement to develop a defmitive table establishing the
specific level or quantity of use, consumption, or discharge of a service unit for each
category of capital improvements or facility expansions and an equivalency or conver-
sion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including
residential, commercial and industrial. And lastly, there is a requirement that service
tmits be projected based on theLUA Report.
The standard service unit is very important in the impact fee calculation process
because it becomes the denominator in the maximum fee formula. The City ofSouthlake
has established the water meter size as the basis for detenllining a service tmit for water
4
and wastewater purposes. 'While wastewater is not typically metered, there is a direct
relationship to the water usage. Therefore, the water meter is used as a basis for estab-
lishing and defining a wastewater service lmit. This basis and application of the service
unit is used extensively in the North Texas region and is based on generally accepted
engineering and planning standards.
The standard service lmit is the typical meter for a Single Family residential
Living Unit Equivalent (SFLUE), which is a one-inch meter in Southlake. The ra-
tios of the one-inch meter to all m~ter sizes used by the residential, commercial, indus-
trial and public sectors are established by professional engineering associations to meas-
ure the sustained flowage capacity of each size of meter. The results established by
Southlake and used since the development of impact fees under Chapter 395 are as fol-
~~: -
Table I ~ Table of Equivalencies
Meter
Size'
3/4 Inch
1-lnch
1-1/2-lnch
2-lnch
3- Inch
4-lnch
6-lnch
8-lnch
to-Inch
Ratio of Other Meter Sizes
To A 1-lnch Meter (SFLUE)
0.6 times
Standard Service Unit
2.0 times
3.2 times
6.4 times
10.0 times
20.0 times
32.0 times
64.0 times
Existinl! Service Units. The first step is to calculate the number of SFL DEs as of
January 1, 1999 and then to associate the current level of water and wastewater usage
to the nlunber of SFL DEs. There were 6,454 water meters connected to the water sys-
tem as of January 1, 1999. These were distributed as follows:
5
Table II - Meters In Service January 1, 1999
Meter Non-
Size Residential Residential Total
3/4 Inch 981 0 981
1-lnch 5,068 336 5,404
1-1I2-lnch 0 3 3
2-lnch 0 59 59
3-lnch 0 1 1
4-Inch 0 4 4
6-lnch 0 0- 0
8- Inch 0 2 2
10-lnch 0 0 0
Total 6,049 405 6,454
When the water meters in Table II are multiplied by the meter ratios fOlmd in
Table I, the results are the number of SF LUEs connected to the water system as of the
beginning of the ten-year impact fee period. The resulting SFL UEs are shown in Table
III.
Table III - Water SFLUEs As of January 1, 1999
Meter Non-
Size Residential Residential Total
3/4 Inch 589 0 589
1-Inch 5,068 336 5,404
1-1/2-lnch 0 6 6
2-Inch 0 189 189
3-Inch 0 6 6
-
4-lnch 0 40 40
6-lnch 0 0 0
8-lnch 0 64 64
10-lnch 0 0 0
Total 5,657 641 6,298
Projections of SFLUEs. The current residential SFLUEs were placed on a per acre
basis. That is, the residential SFLUEs found in Table III (5,657) can be restated as
6
0.8431 SFLUEs per acre. This ratio value, however, is lower than expected for the re-
maining growth since the city uses one-inch meters only for residential customers. When
considering the estimate of population increase over the next ten years (12,010) and an
average of 3.33 persons per household, the resulting residential SFLUE increase
would be 3,607 SFLUEs.2 Using the same approach applied to the ultimate population
and housing cOlmts, the ultimate residential SFLUEs total 11,095.
The non-residential SFLUEs were computed similarly, except that the current
641 SFLUEs appeared to be lower on an acreage basis than is expected in the future due
to the more intense commercial development potential in Southlake. Non-residential
SFLUEs now equal 0.441 per acre based on 1,455 acres of developed area. The typical
SFLUE density per non-residential acre ranges from 1.0 to 3.0 or more. However, with
the weighting of public and quasi-public acreage in the calculations, these values will be
somewhat lower than pure commercial and industrial properties.
The new non-residential development is projected to rise such that the average by
2009 is 1.00 SFLUEs per acre and 1.38 SFLUEs per acre at ultimate build out. These
numbers were used as a planning factor that produced a total of 1,734 non-residential
SFLUEs added for the ten-
year period to reach 2,375
SFLUEs. The ultimate non-
residential projections are calcu-
lated to be 4,958.
Cumulative Single Family Living
Units Equivalents (SFLUEs)
12,000
6,000
This provides for a total of
5,331 SFLUEs to be added in
the ten-year period. The ulti-
mate build-out under this scenario
is for the water system to serve
16,053 SFL DEs. In the 1996 re-
port, it was estimated that the
number of water SFL UEs would
be 16,257 ultimately. This esti-
mate has been reduced to 16,053
in this 1999 update. This is pri-
marily due to a major reduction in -I
population estimates and almost a
corresponding increase in the non-
residential categories. The system
has not been resized nor should it be with small variations such as has been registered
compared to the prior studies. Therefore, this study will assume an ultimate system ca-
pacity capable of handling 16,257 SFLUEs at ultimate build-out.
10,000
8,000
4,000
2,000
o
1999
2009
Ultimate
ElRes
. Non-Res
6,321
641
9,918
2,375
11,095
4,958
Time Period
2 The arithmetic is as follows: Estimated population in 2009 (33,060) minus 1999 population (21,050)
or 12,010 additional population divided by 3.33 persons per household equals 3,607 new SFLUEs.
When added to the current connections of6,321 SFLUEs, the result is 9,918 SFLUEs in 2009.
7
System Sizing and Capacity Allocation
The total of 16,257 SFLUEs for the ultimate demand for Southlake is also very
silllilar to the ultimate estullates used in previous studies. The water SFL DEs projected
for ultimate build out in the 1993 study were 16,227 and the 1990 study used an esti-
mate of 16,138 ultilllate SFL DEs.
The ultimate SFLUE estilllate is an important number for several reasons. The
calculation has to be in direct correlation to the land use assumptions, of course, but the
ultimate SFL UEs will also fonn the basis for the ultimate sizing of the utility systems.
The tests of reasonableness that are the by-products ofthe ultimate system calculations
are to determine if the capacitv allocations for the utility systems are consistent with the
SFL UE allocations. _
If the capital improvement plan (ClP) includes all of the projects needed forulti-
mate system connections, then there should be a strong relationship between the
SFLUE distribution and the utility facility capacity allocation. The costs may be differ-
ent, as will be shown in forthcoming tables, but the capacity usage or absorption should
be similar to the SFLUE distribution. For instance, the 1999 water SFLUE allocations
that have been explained in a previous section are distributed as follows:
Table IV - Water SFLUE Distribution
Period SFLUEs Percent
Existing 6,962 42.82%
Ten-Year Period 5,331 32.79%
Beyond Ten-Year 3,964 24.39%
Total 16,257 100.00%
In the following sections, the water CIP will be described and justified. Each cate-
gory will also be allocated in tenus of capacity and cost into the three periods lmder dis-
cussion for impact fee purposes: existing, ten-year period, and beyond ten-year. The cost
of the capacity for the ten-year period will be divided by the SFLUEs for the same time
period, 5,331 SFL DEs. However, the cost of the capacity that is allocated to the existing
period can also be divided by the SFL DEs for the same period, 6,962. The same can be
done for the beyond ten-year period.
8
The Bottom Line (Water)
The 1999 update follows a more complete allocation process established in the
1996 update, because the ten-year capacity allocation is reconciled to the entire time pic-
ture - from present to ultimate build out. The 1999 update also continues the most com-
plete listing of eligible capital projects, both existing and planned. The result is a more
complete accmmting and cost allocation. However, since there is always a need to com-
pare the results of one study update with previous studies, an explanation will be pro-
vided with each category of expenditures.
The maximum water impact fee calculations, before financing costs are consid-
ered, have been computed as follows:
. For 1990 - $1,582
. For 1993 - $1,643
. For 1995 - $1,903
. For 1999 - $2,716
There are several reasons the maximum water impact fee has increased so signifi-
cantly in this 1999 update. The capital project changes will be explained in detail later.
However, part of the reason also lies in the heavier allocation of costs to the existing
SFLUEs in the two previous studies. While the focus on all impact fee studies will al-
ways be on the ten-year period, the test of reasonableness will have to include the cur-
rent cost of serving an SFLUE compared to the impact fee period and beyond that pe-
riod.
For instance, the 1990 capacity and cost allocation to the existing SFLUEs would
have produced the following results: The existing SFLUEs cost $2,486 to serve com-
pared to $1,582 estimated for the ten-year period. The 1993 study allocated the cost
similarly: The existing SFLUE cost $3,064 to serve compared to $1,643 for the ten-year
period.
The beyond ten-year periods for both the 1990 study and the 1993 study update
showed the cost per SFLUE to be even lower than the ten-year costs. T~is could have
been possible if some of the future costs to serve the ultimate users were not included,
which was the case. However, this 1999 update will show that there are direct costs as-
sociated with the capacity in each time period. The final test will be to show that the
capacity for each of the water system components are allocated such that the overall
weighted percentage of the capacity used is in direct proportion to the percentages
shown in Table IV. The costs will be different, but that is because the capacity added to
serve the future SFLUEs costs more. The basis for the differences will be explained in
the next section where the details of each project are explained.
9
Water Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)
The water CIP is discussed in six groupings. The following sections will provide
the key information for:
. "Water Treatment Facilities
. Elevated Storage Tanks
. Ground Storage Tanks
. Pumping Facilities
. Water Supply Lines
. Transmission System
Water Treatment Facilities. The 1999 update does not include costs for the water
treatment plant. Neither did the 1990 study, the 1993 update nor the 1996 update. The
City of Fort \North provides water treatment services paid for in the monthly charges.
However, these charges from Fort Worth include a "demand" charge that is based on the
maximum day and maximum hourly usage of the Forth Worth water treatment facili-
ties. These costs include an identifiable portion that relates to the excess capacity of the
treatment plant system that is for future growth. In fact, Fort 'Worth 'will be signifi-
cantly expanding their water treatment facilities to serve not only their retail customers
but also the wholesale customers.
These costs of capacity being built and held for future customers are eligible im-
pact fee costs. The City staff, consultants and Capital Improvement Advisory Committee
(CIAC) have discussed the issue of inclusion or exclusion of the water treatment facility
costs. The decision has been to omit these costs at the present time but to state that
they are eligible costs and may be considered in the future.
The City of Fort Worth does, in fact, charge the equivalent of an impact fee to
most of their wholesale customers and will likely charge Southlake in the future when
the current contract expires or is renegotiated. In that case, the City has acknowledged
that they will pass that capital fee on to the new growth. The current water "availabil-
ity" fee charged by Fort Worth to its wholesale water customers is $594.52 for a one-inch
meter.
Elevated StoraS!e Tanks. The City of Southlake presently has 5,000,000 gallons of
elevated storage tank capacity and has determined that the City will ultimately need
6,500,000 or about 400 gallons per SFLUE. These tanks provide for pressure equaliza-
tion needs as well as for fIre protection.
10
Elevated storage tanks provide for the ability to meet fire flow needs and to assist
during the peak hour of the day. Southlake needs the infrastnlcture to provide reliable
water service for the maxim.um day of the year. The maximum day at ultimate build out
is estimated to need 25,300,000 gallons of water. During that maxim1.ll1l day the pump-
ing flows during the maximur.u. hours are estimated to be the equivalent of 50,600,000
gallons per day.
The minimum storage capacity needs are determined by applying a typical hy-
draulic "load curve" showing the hourly flows with about 11 hours for the p1.ll1lpS to be
filling storage tanks and 13 hours for the storage tanks to be drawn down. This mini-
mum storage capacity is calculated to be 7,367,500 gallons. MiniIllUlll fire flow require-
ments are estimated to be 1/3 of the miniInum requirements storage or about another
3,683,750 gallons for a total of 11,051,250 gallons of minimmy storage requirements.
It is ideal to have some elevated storage capacity to meet the maximum hour of
the maximum day. Again, using the engineering load curve for a typical water system,
the 13-hour period that when the tanks are being drawn down will have 7 hours of mas-
sive water drawdowns. These maximum hours are estimated to require at least
1,681,650 gallons of assistance from the elevated storage tanks. Therefore, there is ajus-
tification for at least 5,365,400 gallons of elevated storage.
The next step is to evaluate the geographical locations of the elevated storage. All
engineering model referred to as the "Hardy-Cross" was nln to determine the criticality
of tank locations. The results indicated a need to spread the tanks strategically so that
pressure and fire flows can be assured to all areas of the City. The conclusion drawn is
that the nmllber of tanks and the economies of scale point to a configuration that justi-
fies 1. 5 MG tanks. This led to the decision to recommend two additional 1.5 MG elevated
storage tanks in the 1996 study, one of which has been built. The plans are to continue
with the facility plans sized to meet the ultimate growth needs of Southlake.
The cost of the elevated storage tanks are shown as follows:
Table V - Elevated Storage Tanks
Location
Gallons
1,500,000
1,500,000
500,000
1,500,000
1,500,000
6,500,000
11
Bicentennial Park
McGuire-ThomaslIBM
Original Elev. Tank
Miron
T.W. King
Total
Cost
Per Gal.
$0.5753
$0.5622
$1.1200
$1.2213
$1.2000
$0.9074
Costs
$862,955
$843,267
$560,000
$1,832,000
$1,800,000
$5,898,222
Location
Gallons
Cost
Per Gal.
Costs
Capacity Absorbed in 10 Years
Cost of Capacity Absorbed
32.79%
$1,934,027
SFLUEs
Cost Per SFLUE
5,331
$363
Table V shows the total cost of elevated storage tanks to be $5,898,222. This is an
increase of $632,000 from the 1996 study. The cost increase is primarily dtle to the re-
vised cost of the new Miron and T.W. King elevated storage tanks. The portion of this
cost allocated to the ten-year impact fee period is $1,934,027. ~lhen divided by 5,331
SFL DEs projected to be added during that same ten -year period, the result is an average
cost of $363 per SFLUE, an increase of $52 per SFLUE compared to the 1996 study.
The elevated storage tank highlights are as follows:
· The 1.5 MG lBM/Magl.lire tank located on N. White Chapel Road was built in
1986 at a cost of $843,267 or $0.5622 per gallon.
. The 1.5 MG Bicentennial Park tank on S. White Chapel was btiilt in 1988 at a
cost of $862,955 for $0.5753 per gallon.
· The 0.5 MG High Plane tank cost $400,000 and was moved in 1988 at a cost
of $160,000 for a total of $560,000 or $1.12 per gallon. The cost of this tank
was understated in the 1993 update by using only the $160,000 moving cost.
· The constnlction of the 1.5 MG tank in the Myron/FM 1709 vicinity was com-
pleted at the first of this year at a cost of$1,832,000 or $1.22 per gallon. This
project was estimated to cost $1,500,000 in the 1996 study.
· The last planned elevated storage tank is a 1.5 MG tank located in the TW
King/Bob Jones vicinity at a cost of $1,800,000 or $1.20 per gallon. This cost
is stated in 1999 dollars even though the tank is not planned for several more
years.
· The 1990 study included two new 1.5 MG tanks at a cost of just over $1 mil-
lion each. Neither was allocated into the ten-year period. The 1993 report in-
cluded only one tank sized to 1.0 MG and at a cost ofless than $1 million. The
differences pinpoint the variation in elevated storage tank capital cost used to
compute the impact fee in all three studies. The reasons relate to more refmed
sizing factors explained in the grOlmd storage ClP section as well as adjust-
ments for inflation.
12
Growld Storalle Tanks. The table on page 14 shows the cost allocations for the
ground. storage tanks. The City did not have any ground storage capacity in the 1990
study, even though there were plans to add 10 MG of ground storage capacity after the
first impact fee study in 1990. The City evaluated another plan in 1996 that included the
addition of 10 MG more gr01.md storage tank capacity.
The rationale for the additional ground storage included both reliability factors
and cost factors. A separate analysis was been provided prior to this ClP report. There is
a defmitebenefit for the reliability of service to have adequate ground storage so water
can be delivered to the Southlake distribution system even if the supply is intemlpted
for a short period of time. The sizing of the ground storage system was changed from 10
MG to 20 MG so that these quantities, when supplemented with the elevated tank stor-
age, could provide a full day of service at the ultimate peak flo~s of over 25 MG. This is
thought to be particularly important in a cOllllllunity that is predominately residential,
the source of most of the summer peaking demands.
The cost of gr01.md storage has been shown to be cost effective in many commtmi-
ties paying a high demand rate to the wholesale supplier. Wholesale water rates charged
by the City of Fort Worth are designed to be very costly if the wholesale customer places
sharply spiked demands on the supplier as a ratio to the quantity of water taken on an
average day. Load management capabilities are greatly enhanced with adequate grotmd
storage, and those efforts can result in lower maximum day and peak hour water de-
mands from the supplier. The concept is simple: take water on a more steady level from
the supplier by placing the water into storage and then draw down the water to supple-
ment the peaking requirements that occur throughout the day. The storage tank is an
investment while the payment of wholesale supplier demand charges is an expense.
An engineering analysis has shown that a five million gallon tank will save at
least one lnillion gallons per day (1 MGD) in peaking charges. The peaking charges com-
pute to be about $88,000 a year for each 1 MGD of demand on the wholesale supplier. A
5 MG storage tank costs about $1 million dollars. The debt service is about $80,000 and
is paid offin 20 years. Demand charges continue forever and are subject to be increased
each year. The net cost of the two 5 MG ground storage tanks is estimated to be about
$176,000 each but only if there are-tnle savings in peaking charges. This savings may
not be realized if there are a large nmllber of consecutive days that the gr01.md storage
tanks are drawn down. The City is in need of practicing basic water conservation and
load management techniques encouraged by regulatory agencies to better assure these
possible savings. The 1996 report reduced the cost of the ground storage tanks with the
recognition of these theoretical savings. However, the last two summers with extraordi-
nary dryness and record water consumption has confirmed that the savings are not
guaranteed. Therefore, the CIAC has recommended that the full cost estimates of the
last two ground storage tanks be included in the 1999 study update.
13
Table VI . Ground Storage Tanks
Location
Gallons
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
20,000,000
Pearson No.1 (Built)
Pearson No.2 (Built)
T.W. King No.1 (Built)
T.W. King No.2 (Within 10 Yrs)
Total
Capacity Absorbed in 10 Years
Cost of Capacity Absorbed
SFLUEs
Cost Per SFLUE
Cost
Per Gal.
$0.2067
$0.3230
$0.2240
$0.2420
$0.2489
Costs
$1,033,500
$1,615,000
$1,120,000
$1,210,000
$4,978,500
32.79%
$1,632,450
5,331
$306
Table VI shows the total cost of grolmd storage tanks to be $4,978,500. This is an
increase of $2,625,700 from the 1996 study. The cost increase is primarily due to the
reasons explained below.
The portion of this 1999 cost of $4,978,500 allocated to the ten-year impact fee
period is $1,632,450. When divided by 5,331 SFLUEs projected to be added during that
same ten-year period, the result is an average cost of $306 per SFLUE, an increase of
$161per SFLUE compared to the 1996 study.
The ground storage highlights are as follows:
. Pearson Tank No.1 was built at a cost of $1,033,500 or $0.2060 per gallon.
This is $33,500 greater than the cost estimate shown in the 1996 study.
. T.W. King No.1 was built at a cost of$1,120,000 or $0.224 per gallon. This is
$120,000 greater than the cost estimate shown in the 1996 study.
. The other two tanks have large increases based on both revised costs and the
inclusion of full costs as previously explained.
o Pearson No.2 was originally $1,000,000 reduced to $176,400 in the
1996 study. The revised full cost of $1,615,000 has been included in
this 1999 study update.
o T.W. King No.2 was originally $1,000,000 reduced to $176,400 in the
1996 study. The revised full cost of $1,210,000 has been included in
this 1999 study update.
14
. The cost allocation of the entire 20 MG ground storage system is being dis-
tributed evenly to all of the SFL DEs, both existing and future. This is because
all of the users benefit from the reliability and should share in the cost and in
the paten tial savings.
. The cost for all SFL DEs is $306 with all of the costs stated in at cost or in
1999 dollars. This is compared to $145 per SFLDE in the 1996 study.
Pumping: Facilities. The pumping facilities and supply lines that will be discussed
next must be understood in the context of two major decisions. The first is that the City
never had the complete cost of delivering the ultimate water needs for Southlake in the
1990 study nor in the 1993 update since the focus was only on the forthcoming ten-year
period.
Second, the present alternative being considered is part of a regional water sys-
tem that h.,as only recently been studied by the area wholesale customers and the whole-
sale supplier. A separate analysis, including a more complete description of the rationale
and cost benefit discussion, has been provided prior to this CIP report. The next result
is a schedule of pumping facility projects shown in Table VII.
Table VII - Water Pumping Facilities
Location
North Beach Pumps
North Beach Telemetry
Pearson Pump Station (Built)
T.W. King Pump Station (Under Const)
Future Pumps at Pearson
Future Pumps at T. W. KinJ!
Total
Costs
$132,243
$132,629
$2,135,000
$2,190,000
$150,000
$150,000
$4,889,872
Capacity Absorbed in 10 Years
Cost of Capacity Absorbed
32.79%
$1,603,389
SFLUEs
Cost Per SFLUE
5,331
$301
Table VII shows the project list totaling $4,889,872 and the portion of the capac-
ity cost allocated to the ten-year impact fee period. When multiplied by 32.79%, the frac-
15
tion of the SFL DEs being served as new growth in the next ten years, the resulting cost
is $301 per SFL DE.
The highlights of the pumping facilities are as follows:
. There is a requirement to meet the needs of 50.6 MGD of maximum daily
(hourly) flow. The actual sizing parameters include providing for pumping
capacity to meet peak hourly demands with the largest pmnp being out of ser-
vice. Peak hourly flows are about twice the maximum daily flows. This
equates to about 3,033 gallons (max hour) per SFLUE, when adjustments are
made for tank draw down capabilities.
. The North Beach Pump Station cost is based on a pr9ration of a larger facility
with the economies of scale for a stnlcture built in 1985. The City has 6.5
MGD of capacity rights in that facility. However, this facility will become part
of the regional system. Therefore, the costs shown in 1993 have been folded
into the water supply line costs.
. The cost to constnlct the Pearson and T.W. King Pump Stations is more than
was estimated in 1996. This is primarily due to the additional architectural
features that were built such as the building, fencing and landscaping.
o The Pearson Ptullp Station is located near the PearsonlFM 1709 vicin-
ity. The prorated capacity for Southlake is 26.0 MGD (max hour) at a
cost of $2,135,000 or about $.08211 per gallon. These pumping facility
costs have been increased from the 1996 estimate of $1,500,000.
o The T.vV. King Pump Station is located near the Trophy Club vicinity.
The prorated capacity for Southlake will be 23.3 MGD (max hour) at a
cost of$2,190,000 or about $0.09340 per gallon. These pumping facility
costs have been increased from the 1996 estimate of $1,300,000.
. The 1999 study includes future pumps at both the Pearson Pump Station and
the T.W. King Pump Station estimated to cost $150,000 at each site.
. These capacity costs are spread evenly over the time periods since the facili-
ties are planned within the next ten years and will serve all customers
equally, both existing and future.
. The ten-year cost allocation totals $1,603,389 or $301 per SFLUE, an increase
of $129 per SFL DE compared to the 1996 study.
16
Water Supply Lines. As more fully described in previous presentations with the Capi-
tal Improvements Advisory Committee, Southlake is presently moving toward partic-
ipation in the Northeast Tarrant COlmty Regional Water System (NETCRWS). The plan
is to have the individual cities operate their portion of the system and have Fort Worth
continue to be the wholesale treated water supplier.
The cost of this regional alternative is significantly higher than the alternative
considered in the 1990 study. There were no additional supply lines included in the 1990
study. In any case, the costs are greater and are reflected in the 1999 update.
Table VIII - Water Supply Lines
Location
Equity in System - Part I
Equity in System - Part II
Regional System - Phase I
Regional System - Phase II
Regional System - Phase III
Total
- Costs
$579,767
$2,815,800
$1,330,000
$2,592,000
$3,113,625
$10,431,192
Capacity Absorbed in 10 Years
Cost of Capacity Absorbed
32.79%
$3,420,388
SFLUEs
Cost Per SFLUE
5,331
$642
Table VIII recaps the Water Supply Line projects totaling $3,420,388. The capac-
ity costs are allocated to the ten-year period based on 32.79% of the new SFLUEs that
are to be served during that same ten-year period. The resulting allocation of $3,420,388
yields a cost of $642 per SFLUE, an increase of $216 compared to the 1996 study.
The water supply highlights are as follows:
. The current supply line from Fort Worth provides 6.5 MGD of capacity to South-
lake. This capacity is totally absorbed and was supplemented in by temporary
sources after 1996 and eventually from the regional water system. This cost will
become part of the regional system.
· Phase I shall consist ofa 24" water line from the T.W. King Pump Station to the
Trophy Club transmission line located on SH 114. This project has been bid and
constnlCtion is scheduled for the beginning of 2000.
17
. Phase II shall consist of a 36" water line from the FM 1709 at Pearson Lane to
SH 114 at Precinct Line and additional water lines at Fort Worth's Alta Vista
Pump Station. This project is anticipated to be constnlcted in the 200112002 time
frame.
. Phase III shall consist of a 42" water line from Fort Worth's Caylor Tank east to
Pearson Lane. This project will be shared with Keller.
. These capacity costs are spread evenly over the time periods since the facilities
are planned within the next ten years and will serve all customers equally, both
existing and future.
. The cost of serving an existing SFLUE is $642 for the ten-year period compared
to $426 calculated in 1996.
An explanation is in order to place the cost of the regional system in the proper
perspective for comparing with the supply line costs provided in the previous studies.
The total cost of the regional participation was shown to be $5,478,228 in the 1996
study. However, to make a fair comparison to that number, the previous plan to parallel
the 30" line through Keller would have cost at least $5,418,300 as shown in the following
analysis:
. The 1993 update included the cost of paralleling the Fort Worth line from the
North Beach street pump station and adding additional pumps at a cost of
$2,905,800.
. The 1993 study included $1,462,500 for a 30" line to parallel the 20" line along
FM 1709 to the Myron vicinity, some 22,500 linear feet. This project is considered
part of the City's transmission system but was an integral part of the lower pres-
sure system that was revised downwardly in the 1999 update.
. There was one other component needed to match Southlake's ultimate needs that
was not shown in the 1993 -update. The previous plan assumed that the City
would be able to purchase another 6.0 MGD of capacity in the Keller line from
Westlake, the owner of those rights with excess capacity to sell Southlake. The
cost of this capacity right has been estimated to be $1,050,000.
This makes the total net increase in cost of the regional participation to be
$59,928 more than the "second North Beach feed" alternative, although the 1999 update
would indicate a $1,109,928 increase because the 1993 update did not include the cost of
the Westlake capacity in the existing line.
18
It should also be noted that the City also evaluated an option to build their own
line to the Caylor tank location, but this option was rejected because the estimated cost
is $5,982,911, and obtaining rightswof-way and easements would be very difficult. The
documentation for this decision has been carried forward from the 1996 report to the
1999 report because of its importance to understand prior city decisions.
Transmission System. Water supplied to the Southlake system has to be delivered
through the system to subdivision mains. The transmission system costs could be allow
cated to all SFLUEs, existing and new, on a prorata basis. Many of the additions of the
water system serve new growth but also provide for more reliability to other customers
because of the nature of looping the water system. Similarly, the existing transmission
system becomes available to new growth for the same reasons.
.
However, the approach taken to allocate the capacity costs was for the existing
lines to be distributed based on existing and ten-year SFLUEs and for the future lines to
be allocated to the ten-year and beyond ten-year SFLUEs. The results are relatively the
same with the unit costs being within a few dollars per SFLUE.
The reason for allocating capacity costs under the methodology used was to elimi-
nate or to at least minimize the concern over an allocation of lines that may not be built
within the next ten years. The following table shows a SUlll1nary of the transmission sys-
tem allocation.
Table IX . Transmission Lines
Line
Variolls Existing Low Plane Lines
VariOlls Future Low Plane Lines
Various Existing High Plane Lines
VariOllS Future High Plane Lines
City Part of Over-Sized Lines (Net)
City Part of CDBG Lines
Engineering/Surveying Costs (13.5%)
and Inspection Costs (3%)
Total
Total Cost
$5,657,573
$10,670,335
$433,373
$1,159,945
$348,440
$19,727
$2,259,049
$20,548,442
Capacity Absorbed in 10 Years
Cost of Capacity Absorbed
32.79%
$6,737,834
19
Line
I Total Cost
5,331
$1,264
SFLUEs
.
Cost Per SFLUE
Table IX summarizes the Water Transmission System that totals $20,548,442.
When the ten-year capacity allocation percentage of 32.79% for the new growth in
SFL UEs projected to occur for that same time period, the result is a cost of $1,264 per
SFLUE, an increase of $427 compared to the 1996 study.
The highlights of the Water Transmission System are as follows:
. The capital costs of the transmission system had 4.een lowered in the 1996
study to reflect the savings that are associated with the regional system. The
connecting points in the northern sections of the City will eliminate the need
to install transmission lines to deliver water to those areas that fonnerly
would have been served from the southern portion of the City.
Transmission line costs for the low-pressure system were decreased by the de-
letion of the 30" line along FM 1709 that was included in the 1993 study at a
cost of$1,462,500. There was also a decrease of $185,023 for other downsized
lines. There was an addition of $147,100 for some oversizing costs not in-
cluded in the 1993 study. The overall decrease in transmission line cost for
the low-pressure system was $1,500,423.
There was an increase in costs for the high-pressure plane due to the updating
of line configuration and costs. This totaled $209,200. There was also an in-
crease for the inclusion of some line oversizing costs that totaled $57,000.
The overall cost reduction in the 1996 study compared to the 1993 study was
$1,234,223 as the projects were reduced from $14,623,340 to $13,389,117.
This reduction was largely due to the use of cost estimates that were lower
than has now been realized.
· The 1999 study includes transmission costs that go from $13,389,117 to
$20,548,442. This increases are based on current pricing information that was
discussed in detail by the CIAC. The decision was made to reflect more cur-
rent and realistic costs of the cost of constnlcting water and sewer lines in
light of efforts to minimize disnlptions to the surface environment.
. The total cost for the Water Transmission System was calculated to be $1,264
per SFLUE in the 1999 study update compared to $837 in 1996.
20
Grand Total For Water
The maximwn water impact fee, without consideration for financing
costs or any credits, is $2,716. Before the maximum fee is fmalized, financing costs
will be added, as appropriate, and credit for interest income and other offsets will be
considered.
As previously explained, the Capital Improvement Plan excludes the cost of water
treatment, an eligible cost that may be charged in the future. The following table pro-
vides a summary of the water capital costs that have been explained in this report.
Table X - Eligible Water Capital Costs
Category
1999 1999 Maximwn 1996 Maximum
Ten-Year Impact Fee Impact Fee
Capital Without Without
Cost Financing Financing
Excluded Excluded Excluded
$1,934,027 $363 $301
$1,632,450 $306 $145
$1,603,389 $301 $172
$3,420,388 $642 $448
$6,737,834 $1,264 $837
$15,328,088 $2,876 $1,903
Water Treatment
Elevated Storage
Ground Storage
Pumping
Supply Lines
Transmission Lines
Total
The isolation of the capital costs, the majority of the eligible costs for impact fee
calculations, is very helpful to compare how the ClP projects have changed, how the ca-
pacity in those projects have been allocated and how those changes have translated into
impact fee calculations.
Wastewater Service Units
The 1999 update uses the same basic methodology to establish the total number
of SFL DEs that will be served by the Southlake wastewater system as was used in pre-
vious studies. However, a different approach was taken to distribute the SFLUEs (and
therefore the capacity cost) into the three time periods: existing, ten-year and beyond.
The premise is that almost all of the water customers will become wastewater connec-
tions eventually.
21
The exceptions include irrigation accounts and customers that remain on septic
systems permanently. There are a considerable number of customers on septic systems
today, but the City has a program underway to "retrofit" the majority of these customers
over the next few years. While these are "new growth" accounts to the wastewater sys-
tem, the assumption was made that existing water SFLUEs are also existing
wastewater SFLUEs. In other words, the neighborhood sewer assessment connections
are considered "existing" so that there will be no doubt about their exclusion as future
growth and impact fee supported costs. This allowed for a more meaningful test of rea-
sonableness regarding the capacity cost for a wastewater SFL UE.
The number of wastewater SFL DEs at maturity is estimated to be 95% of the
number of water SFLDEs. This is consistent with similar cOIl:!munities with few or no
septic systems. Since this percentage will be relatively constant when adjustments are
made for retro-fitting, the water SFL DEs become the basis for calculating the waste-
water SFL DEs and distributing them into the three time periods. The following table
illustrates:
Table XI - Wastewater SFLUEs
Water Wastewater
Time Period SFLUEs SFLUEs @
95%
Existing (adjusted
for retrofitting) 6,962 6,614
Ten-Year 5,331 5,064
Beyond Ten-Year 3,964 3,766
Total 16,257 15,444
Since the wastewater SFL DE growth is based on the water SFL UE growth, the
percentage used for the distribution of capacity costs will be the same ratios as were
used in the water cost allocations, as illustrated in Table IV.
Table XII - Wastewater SFLUE Distribution
Period
Existing
Ten-Year
Beyond Ten-Year
Total
SFLUEs
6,614
5,064
3,766
15,444
Percentage
42.82%
32.79%
24.39%
100,00%
22
It is quite clear that there has been difficulty in establishing the proper cost allo-
cation factors since the wastewater system is in its infancy yet is being designed to serve
the entire City. This is why it is believed that the methodology used in the 1996 study
and continued in the 1999 update provides the fairest capacity cost allocation basis and
will be the superior approach to take in all future impact fee updates.
The wastewater SFLUEs for the ten-year period shown in Table XII total 5,064.
This will be the denominator used to calculate the maximum impact fee.
The Bottom Line-
Wastewater Cost Per SFLUE
Table XVI shows the wastewater impact fee, without fmancing costs. The fee is
calculated by dividing the ten-year capacity cost allocation by the ten-year wastewater
SFLUEs.
· The total capital cost in the 1999 update is $1,787 per wastewater SFLUE.
· This compares to $2,455 computed in 1990, $1,414 computed in 1993 and
$1,334 computed in 1996.
· The wastewater CIP discussion will focus on the reasons for these variations.
Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan
The wastewater ClP is explained and described in three broad categories:
· Wastewater Treatment Facilities.
· Denton Creek Drainage Basin Interceptor and Collector System.
· Big Bear Creek Drainage !3asin Interceptor and Collector System.
Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The City ofSouthlake will eventually be served
by two wastewater treatment facilities. About 60% of the ultimate 'flows will be in the
Denton Creek drainage basin (northern half) and be treated at the Denton Creek Plant.
This treatment plant is operated by the Trinity River Authority (TRA), but the capacity
rights (and obligations to pay) are held by Southlake and three area commlmities. This
plant is presently relatively small and is slated for expansion based on the growth esti-
mates of the entities underwriting its capital cost and operations.
23
The City is currently not connected to the Denton Creek plant, but a connecting
interceptor line has been designed and is under constnlction. Presently, the City lifts
the sewer flows from the Denton Creek Basin to gravity flow into the Big Bear Creek
collector system.
The 1990 study included a total cost of $609,700 for the initial facility plus the
expansion costs of $1,737,433 in the impact fee calculation. At that time there were no
Southlake wastewater customers connected to the system. The 1993 update did not in-
clude any wastewater treatment facilities nor does the 1999 update.
The bulk of the City's recent growth has been in Big Bear Creek Drainage Basin,
which will account for about 40% of the ultimate flows. These flows presently go to the
TRA's Central Treatment Plant. The 1990 study included $745,902 of costs in the nn-
pact fee. -
The available capacity in these two systems built for and held for future growth
are eligible impact fee costs and may be included in future impact fee updates. The
amounts included in the 1990 study explain the majority of the cost difference when be-
ginning with the 1990 cost factors. The 1990 wastewater treatment costs per SFLUE
were computed to be $893.16 recapped as follows:
. Denton Creek Plant
$677.77
. TRA Central Plant
$215.39
These costs in the 1990 study have not been included in the 1993, 1996 and 1999
updates.
Denton Creek Draina!!e Basin Intercentor and Collection System. This has be-
come a major wastewater conveyance system made up of a major interceptor and a se-
ries of collector lines in the sub-basins. The City was considering building some compo-
nents of this ultimate system as part of what was referred to as the !ISH 114 Corridor"
plan. This plan has since been revised as this impact fee study has caused a more in-
tense review of the most economical_expansionary approaches to the wastewater system,
resulting in different solutions.
The Den ton Creek Basin costs were increased in the 1999 update by $5,722,184.
This is equal to approximately $371per wastewater SFLUE~ The entire cost for this sys-
tem is $17,843,984 or about $1,155 per SFLUE.
24
Table XIII - Denton Creek Drainage Basin
Total Cost Total Cost
Line 1996 Update 1999 Update
Denton Creek Pressure System Tnmk $6,113,000 $7,565,123
N-1 Basin Lines $1,326,528 $2,381,314
N -2 Basin Lines $513,668 $1,100,707
N-3 Basin Lines $1,517,558 $2,144,577
N-4 Basin Lines $838,779 $1,152,643
N -5 Basin Lines $380,970 $823,607
N -6 Basin Lines $1,431-;297 $2,676,013
Total $12,121,800 $17,843,984
Capacity Absorbed in 10 Years 23.74% 32.79%
Cost of Capacity Absorbed $2,877,715 $5,851,042
SFLUEs 3,667 5,064
Cost Per SFLUE $785 $1,155
Other highlights of the Denton Creek system are as follows:
. The main interceptor is a $7,565,123 project, increased by $1,452,123 from the
1996 study. Of the revised amount, $4,428,640 was built in 1997. The remaining
moneys of $3,136,483 are for sections to be built in the future.
. The N-1 segment is a $2,381,314 project, increased by $1,054,786 from the 1996
study. Of this revised amount, $91,004 is related to the Coventry development
built in 1995-96. Another $472,025 is related to the Kirkwood area built in 1998.
The remainder is to be built in the near future.
-
. The N-2 segment is a $1,100,707 project, increased by $587,039 from the 1996
study. The entire revised amount is slated to be built within the ten-year period.
. The N-3 segment is a $2,144,577 project, increased by $627,019 from the 1996
study. Of this ammmt, $393,776 was built by 1995 and another $214,703 was
constnlcted in 1996. The remaining portions are to be built within the ten-year
period.
. The N-4 segment is a $1,152,643 project, increased by $313,864 from the 1996
25
report. Of the revised amount, $99,468 was built by 1995 and $130,945 was spent
on a 10" line in Shady Oaks. The other segments are slated to be built within the
next ten years. The NE corner ofN-4 is currently being served by an interlocal
agreement with Grapevine dated September 15, 1998.
. The N -5 sub-basin is a $823,607 project, increased by $442,637 from the 1996
study. The original route for N -5 has changed, as it now seems more practical to
- pump part of the flows into the N-4 basin. This area is now tmder design with ad-
justments required for SH-114 widening. The NW corner ofN-5 is currently be-
ing served by an interlocal agreement with Grapevine dated September 15, 1998.
. The N-6 project is estimated to cost $2,676,013, an increase of $1,244,716 from
the 1996 report. Of this revised amotmt, $626,508 was built in 1997 related to the
Kirkwood branch. The remainder is to be built in the next ten years or shortly
thereafter.
. The Denton Creek Drainage Basin component of the wastewater impact fee is de-
rived by a proration of the cost based on the SFLUEs that are attributable to pro-
jected new growth as a fraction of the entire system or 32.79% (5,064 SFLUEs di-
vided by 15,444 SFL DEs). This results a impact fee of $1, 155 component of com-
pared to $785 in the 1996 study.
Bil! Bear Creek Drainal!e Basin Interceutor and Collector System This portion
of the Southlake wastewater collection system is substantially built and in use. A recap
of this component of the Southlake wastewater collection system is as follows:
Table XIV - Big Bear Creek Drainage Basin
Total Cost Total Cost
Line 1996 Update 1999 Update
Big Bear Creek Pressure System Tnmk $4,300,000 $4,300,000
8-1 Basin Lines $-0- $-0-
S-2 Basin Lines - $761,925 $1,453,004
8-3 Basin Lines $231,189 $659,900
8-4 Basin Lines $1,089,289 $1,078,747
8-5 Basin Lines. $71,872 $71,872
S-6 Basin Lines $1,080,966 $946,895
S-7 Basin Lines $943,888 $1,249,953
Total $8,479,129 $9,760,371
26
Line
Capacity Absorbed in 10 Years
Cost of Capacity Absorbed
Total Cost
1996 Update
23.74%
$2,012,945
Total Cost
1999 Update
32.79%
$3,200,426
SFLUEs
Cost Per SFLUE
3,667
$549
5,064
$632
The highlights of the Big Bear Creek Drainage 8ystem are as follows:
· The main interceptor line was built in 1991 at a cosj; of $4,300,000.
· The 8-1 segment has not been built and has been determined to be unneeded
as the basin will be served through a reciprocal agreement with Keller.
Therefore, the cost assignment is zero~
· The 8-2 segment is a $1,453,004 project, increased by $691,079 from the 1996
study. Of the revised costs, Unit I was built in 1995 at a cost of $446,860 and
Unit II was built in 1997 at a cost of $467,556. The remaining portion of the
basin is slated to be built within the next ten years.
· The 8-3 segment is a $659,900 project, increased by $428,711 from the 1996
study. Of the revised costs, $250,000 was built in Continental Park Estates in
1990. The remaining segment is expected to be built in the near future.
· The 8-4 segment is a $1,078,747 project, a decrease of$10,542 from the 1996
study. Of this revised estimate, $408,000 was built in 1990; $250,000 in 1993;
and $77,550 in 1998. The remaining portions are expected to be built within
the ten -year planning period.
· The 8-5 segment is a $71,872 project that is reduced to only 23% for the por-
tion of the line that is not owned by Mobil. This cost estimate remains the
same as shown in the 1996 study.
· The 8-6 sub-basin is a $946,895 project, a decrease of $134,071 compared to
the 1996 study. Of this revised amOlmt, $620,000 was built in 1991; $300,000
was built in 1994; $19,200 is for oversizing costs paid to the developer on the
Versailles project; and $7,695 for participation on the Dalton project.
· The 8-7' segment of the Big Bear Basin is a $1,249,953 project, an increase of
$316,065 from the 1996 study. Of that revised amount, $399,639 was spent in
1996. The remaining schedule for constnlCtion within the ten-year period.
· The total Big Bear Drainage Basin, including the interceptor and all of the
collector lines is estimated to cost $9,760,371. The cost is prorated to the new
27
gTowth as a fraction of the en tire system or 32.79% (5,064 SFL DEs divided by
15,444 SFLDEs). This results a impact fee component of $632 computed to
$549 calculated in the 1996 study.
The determination of the specific line segment to be built and the tinting of the
constnlction are largely related to the direction and magnitude of growth in Southlake.
The entire project list is made a part of this capital improvements plan because of the
potential for any of the projects to be built. However, the cost allocation provides for an
even distribution of the cost to all SFL DEs regardless of the ClP schedule. The future
projects are expected to be increased only for inflation in future updates since many of
these costs remain at the 1999 dollar levels.
Summary of Wastewater Costs
The wastewater costs that ~ave been presented in this section of the report in-
clude the capital costs only. Financing costs and appropriate credits will be applied in
the next section of the report. The capital costs are recapped below:
Table XV - Eligible Wastewater Capital Costs
Ten Year 1999 Impact 1996 Impact
Category Capital Fee Without Fee Without
Cost Financing Financing
Treatment Plant Excluded Excluded Excluded
Denton Creek
Collection System $2,877,715 $1,155 $785
Big Bear Creek
Collection System $2,012,945 $632. $549
Total $4,890,660 $1,787 $1,334
Financing Costs
-
An interest cost factor of 25% is used in the water and wastewater study, the
same as was used in the roadway study and generally for the same reasons. It should be
noted that the interest rate and debt assumptions used in the maximum fee calculation
are established for just that purpose: to include the proper amount in the maximum fee
calculation. Chapter 395 provides the following direction regarding these costs:
"Projected interest charges and other finance costs may be
included in determining the amOlmt of impact fees only if the
impact fees are used for the payment of principal and inter-
est on bonds, notes, or other obligations issued by or on be-
28
half of the political subdivision to fmance the capital im-
provements or facility expansions identified in the capital
llnprovements plan ..."
The City typically issues serial bonds that mature over a twenty-year period.
These are serial bonds in that they are issued in $5,000 denominations that mature se-
rially beginning in the first or second year after the issuance of the bonds, with a certain
amount of the bonds maturing in each of the subsequent years through the year of final
maturity - the twentieth year. The bond issues are sometimes stnlCtured for the princi-
pal portion to mattu'e evenly. For instance, a level-principal maturity schedule for a $10
million bond issue would be stnlcttlred for principal to be paid $500,000 annually.
More often, however, the bonds are stnlcttrred to mattlre such that the total of
the principal and interest payments are very close to level paYJ,llents. This level princi-
pal and interest (P&I) payment arrangement is almost identical to the standard mort-
gage payment schedule except that the principal payments must be in amounts divisible
by the smallest denomination of a single bond ($5,000). For illustration purposes, level
annual payments are assumed in my model, but shown as an exact mortgage rather
than with principal payments rounded to the nearest $5,000. This methodology is used
for two reasons: i) because the calculations are very similar, producing virtually the
same results and ii) the exact mortgage method allows for the use of standard fonnulae
found in calculators and computers for verification purposes.
The annual debt service (P&I) payment on a typical $10 million bond issue, as-
suming an interest rate of 6.25% and a level principal and interest payment over 20
years, is $889,623. When this bond issue is repaid, the total annual payments will equal
$17,792,460 or $7,792,460 in interest costs. This means that the interest cost is 77.92%
expressed as a percentage of the capital project cost ($7,792,460 divided by $10,000,000).
The full amount of interest cost is not charged in the maximum impact fee for
several reasons. The portion of the capital cost attributable to new growth for the ten-year
period is theoretically paid in full by the end of the ten-year period. That is, the capital
cost used to detennine the maximum impact fee is the portion expected to serve the ten-
year growth and to be paid for by the ten-year growth if the maximlUn fee were adopted.
At the end of the ten-year period, the new-growth capital would be paid in full and in-
terest cost would cease.
An alternative for determining the interest cost to be included in the maximum
impact fee is to use the interest cost for a ten-year bond issue. This calculation would
result in an interest cost of$3,748,179for a $10 million/l0 Year bond or 37.48% when
expressed as a percentage of the capital cost.
The dilemma of how to compute interest cost is compOlmded because the City
may issue bonds in annual increments such that the $10,000,000 program could be one
single bond issue transacted at the beginning, middle or end of the ten-year window or
perhaps spread over the ten-year period in three or four increments. And fmally, the
29
City may elect to finance some portion of the projects directly from impact fees instead
of using all of the impact fees to supplement the debt service payment requirements.
Maximum Interest Cost
As A Percentage of Capital Costs:
The Solution
The interest rate cost assumption of 25% used in the maximum impact fee calcu-
lation in this water and wastewater study balances and solves all of the complications
raised in the prior section. The City issues twenty-year bonds and has to payoff those
bonds even though the portion of the capital cost related to the ten-year growth is "paid
up" at the end of the ten-year impact fee period. The solution for computing this inter-
est cost factor has to rely on some assumptions:
· Using a most conservative estimate, 60% of the water and sewer capital cost
related to new growth will be financed by long-term bonds and 40% "rill be fi-
nanced directly from impact fee moneys collected and on-hand or by develop-
ers that are later reimbursed from impact fees.
· Of the 40% offees spent directly on capital projects, the amount of interest in-
come on those moneys will be small or non-existent. Therefore, no interest
income credit is given for these monies because it is assumed that they will be
spen t very quickly.
· The bond funded water and sewer projects will be built from the proceeds of
20-year serial bonds maturing over 20 years with level P&l and an interest
rate of 6.25%.
· A theoretical escrow fund is shown for illustration purposes that could receive
the impact fee revenues, pay for the debt service payments, and earn interest
at 5% on accumulated balances.
· The impact fees would be collected evenly over the ten-year period and would
be established at a level such that the escrow flmd would "zero out" in the
twentieth year of the bond maturity.
The calculations are illustrated in Appendix A They result in a $6 million bond
issue ($10,000,000 program times 60%) would cost $4,675,472 in interest cost. When
adjusted for an interest credit of $2, 141,836 earned on the escrow ftmd, the net interest
cost is $2,533,636 or 25.34% of the entire CIP program. The percentage was
rounded to 25.00% for purposes of this study. This percentage can be applied to any
level of ClP expenditures for planning and estimating purposes.
30
Other Eligible Costs
The impact fee legislation provides for the recovery of the consulting and engi-
neering fees that are associated with conducting the impact fee study. Since the impact
fee time window is a period of ten years, there will be at least three updates. An esti-
mate of $25,000 for three updates is made for both the water utility and the wastewater
utility. Therefore, the maximum impact fee will include a component for these costs
computed as: .
· $14 for water projects ($25,000 times 3 updates divided by 5,444 SFLUEs).
· $15 for sewer projects ($25,000 times three updates divided by 5,064
SFLUEs).
Maximum Impact Fee
Based on the project configurations, cost estimates and other calculations ex-
plained in this report, the MaximlUll Impact Fee is calculated to be:
Table XVI - Maximum Impact Fees
Category
Maximum
Fee For
Water
$2,876
$719
$14
$3,609
Maximum
Fee For
Sewer
$1,787
$447
$15
$2,249
Total
Maximum
Fee
$4,663
$1,166
$29
$5,858
Capital Costs
Financing Costs
Study Costs
Total
This is the legal calculation of the maximum impact fee and reflects the maxi-
mum impact fee in the narrowest possible interpretation of the law. What it does not
consider is the reality that capital projects are funded by a combination of impact fees,
utility rates and taxes. A more realistic maximum impact fee calculation is explained be-
low.
Equilibrium Impact Fee
Today's impact fee payers become tomorrow's rate and taxpayers. The utility bills
and tax bills include a portion of the water and sewer infrastructure that is attributable
to existing customers and payable by all customers - old and new. These bills also have
to pay for utility costs of new development not recovered in the impact fee.
31
The maximum impact fee can reflect an adjustment for payments made by those
future rate and taxpayers. This adjustment equaled about 25% of the gross impact fee in
the prior study.
low:
For 1999, the Equilibrium Impact Fee and other comparative fees are shown be-
Table XVII . Equilibrium Impact Fees
HB 2045 Maximum and Current Fees Being Collected
Fee For Fee For Total
Category Water Sewer Fee
Maximwn Capital -
Cost $3,609 $2,249 $5,858
Estimate of Portion
of Future Utility/fax ($902) ($562) ($1,464)
Bills
Equilibrium Fee $2,707 $1,687 $4,394
HB 2045 Maximum $1,805 $1,125 $2,930
Current Fee $1,450 $900 $2,350
The equilibrium fee is a realistic maxil111UU, in that it is adjusted for projected
contributions from ratepayers and taxpayers. However, it is not the legalmaximlUll. It is
consistent with the approach taken to determine the maximum impact fee in the 1990,
1993 and 1996 studies. It may be well to note that recent impact fee legislation set forth
in HB-2045 was passed by both the state senate and house and vetoed by the governor
in the final hours of the last legislative session implementation deadlines. This bill
would have required several new procedures, one of which to establish that the maxi-
mum legal allowable impact fee would be no less than 50% of the cost. This calculation
is shown in Table XVII and may provide a reasonable policy decision regarding the ac-
tual fee to collect from new development. This would increase the water & sewer impact
fees by $580 or about 25%.
Remaining Adoptive Steps
While the calculation of the maxilllmu impact fee is a systematic process based on
legal parameters, planning and engineering assmuptions, and cost estimates, the re-
mainder of the process is a policy matter to be determined by the City COlmcil. The law
allows the City to set the impact fee at any level so long as the published maximum is
not exceeded.
32
The City Council is required to publish the maximum impact fees that are being
considered in advance of a public hearing. This report constitutes the legal and technical
report from the independent consultants, although the projects, costs and methodology
has been thoroughly workshopped by the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee.
This engineering and consulting report is to be placed on file with the City Secretary for
public review as of the first notice date for the public hearing published in the news-
paper.
The CIAC is required to provide written comments to the Council before the pub-
lic hearing. The Council is to receive input from the public, including ratepayers, build-
ers, developers and any other person desiring to speak for or against the impact fee
process and results.
Mter the public hearing is closed, the City Council will have been advised by staff,
consultants, community advisors and the public at large. At that point in time the im-
pact fee ordinance can be amended to include the revised maximum impact fees and the
impact fee collection schedule. LFM
33
Appendix A
Technical Explanation of Financing Costs.
(This appendix will be provided at the
November 24 CIAC Meeting)
Transportation Impact Fee Update Study
Exhibit C-2
TRANSPORTATION
IMPACT FEE UPDATE
TECHNICAL REPORT
Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc.
Suite 1800, 12700 Park Central Drive
Dallas, Texas 75251
January 2000
South lake, Texas
Roadway Impact Fee Update
January 2000
Introduction
Chapter 395 ofthe Texas Local Government Code provides cities with a mechanism
for collecting funds to finance or recoup the costs of certain capital improvements,
including roadway facilities. In April of 1996, the City of Southlake enacted
Ordinance No. 657, which is known and cited as the Water, Wastewater and
Roadway Impact Fee Ordinance.
Chapter 395 mandates that impact fees be reviewed and updated at least every three
years. Accordingly, the City of Southlake has initiated a review ofland use
assumptions, capital improvement plan, and impact fees. The City retained Kimley-
Horn and Associates, Inc., to provide professional transportation engineering services
relative to the 1999 update of the roadway impact fees. The purpose of this report is
to recommend revisions to the process by which impact fees are computed, based on
refinements to land use categories and service unit calculations. This report also
updates the calculation methodology based on the adopted revisions to the Land Use
Assumptions and the Capital Improvements Plan.
This report introduces and references two of the basic inputs to the Roadway Impact
Fee: the Land Use Assumptions and the Capital ImprQvements Plan. Information
from these two documents is used extensively in the remainder of the report. This
consists of a detailed discussion of the methodology for the computation of impact
fees. This discussion-Methodology for Determination of Roadway Impact Fees
addresses each of the components of the computation and any modifications needed
for the 1999 update. These components include:
· Service Areas
· Service Units
· Cost per Service Unit
· Impact Fee Collected Per Service Unit
· Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development
The final section of the report is Conclusions, which presents the findings of the
update analysis and the highlights of the changes between the 1995 and 1999
Transportation Impact Fee Reports.
H:\ TPTO\I project\06346400\doc\Draftl.rtf
Land Use Assumptions
The land use assumptions used in this study were developed by the City of Southlake
and are presented in a report titled 1999 Land Use Assumptions Report, dated
November, 1999.
Capital Improvements Plan
To finance roadway improvements, the city must identify the transportation projects
needed to accommodate projected growth for a ten-year period. The Capital
Improvements Plan (CIP) is a list ofthe projects. The CIP includes arterial and
collector class facilities which are part of the Master Thoroughfare Plan but, in
accordance with the requirements of Chapter 395, does not include state facilities.
The Capital Improvements Plan that is proposed for the 1999 Impact Fee Update is
listed in Table 1 and mapped in Figure 1. The table shows the length of each project
as well as the facility classification in the Thoroughfare Plan. It was developed by
the Southlake staff and represents those Thoroughfare Plan projects that the City
expects to build to accommodate the growth projected in the Land Use Assumptions
Report.
Methodology for Determination of Roadway Impact Fees
Service Areas
The eight service areas used in the 1995 Roadway Impact Fee Study are shown in
Figure 2. The service areas cover the entire corporate boundary of Southlake. They
are comprised of an integral number of traffic survey zones, a planning unit used by
the North Central Texas Council of Governments for travel modeling and
demographic estimates and projections. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government
Code specifies that "the service area is limited to an area within the corporate
boundaries of the political subdivision and shall not exceed a distance equal to the
average trip length from the new development, but in no event more than three
miles." An inspection of the 1995 zone structure indicates that the longest distance in
any of the zones is three miles, and no change is needed.
H:\TPTO\ I project\06346400\doc\Draftl.rtf
2
Table 1: Capital Improvements Plan
SOUTHLAKE -1999 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE STUDY
10 - YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
SERVICE FROM TO LENGTH LENGTH LANES li'PE % IN SERVICE
ROADWAY (Mi) (Fl.) AREA
AREA
1 N. WHITE CHAPEL BOB JONES COUNli' LINE 0.76 4,013 2 C2U (70) 100%
2 N. WHITE CHAPEL COUNli' LINE E. DOVE 1.22 6,442 2 C2U (70) 100%
W. DOVE SH 114 N. WHITE CHAPEL 0.45 2,376 4 A5U (94) 100%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - REALIGN Dove alSH 114 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT. REALIGN WHITE CHAPEL alSH 114 25%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT. REALIGN WHITE CHAPEL at DOVE 75%
N. WHITE CHAPEL SH 114 NORTH 0.06 300 4 ASU (94) 50%
3 N. PEYTONVILLE RAVENWOOD W. DOVE 1.22 6,442 2 C2U (70) 100%
SHADY OAKS FM 1709 DOVE 1.99 10,507 2 C2U (64) 100%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS SHADY OAKS at FM 1709 100%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - REALIGN DOVE alSH 114 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT. REALIGN WHITE CHAPEL alSH 114 25%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS HIGHLANDS at WHITE CHAPEL 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PEYTONVILLE at FM 1709 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS RANDOL MILL at FM 1709 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT WHITE CHAPEL at FM 1709 25%
RANDOL MILL FM 1709 NORTH 0.12 650 4 A5U (94) 500/1I
N. PEYTONVILLE FM 1709 NORTH 0.15 600 4 ASU (84) 100%
N. WHITE CHAPEL FM 1709 NORTH 0.21 1,100 4 ASU (64) 50%
N. WHITE CHAPEL SH 114 SOUTH 0.06 300 4 A5U (94) 50%
W. DOVE SH 114 WEST 0.06 300 4 ASU (941 100%
4 E. HIGHLAND N. CARROLL SH 114 0.36 1,901 4 A4U (74) 100%
N. CARROLL FM 1709 SH 114 0.69 3,643 4 MD (100) 100%
W. HIGHLAND SH 114 n. WHITE CHAPEL 0.62 3,274 4 A4U (74) 100%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS KIMBAlL atSH 114 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS KIMBALL al FM 1709 25%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - REALIGN WHITE CHAPEL al SH 114 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS CARROLL at SH 114 100%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS HIGHLANDS at WHITE CHAPEL 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - REALIGN WHITE CHAPEL at DOVE 25%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT WHITE CHAPEL al FM 1709 25%
NORTH KIMBAlL SH 114 EAST HIGHLAND 0.79 4,171 4 A5U (94) 50%
NORTH CARROLL SH 114 OWNBY 0.06 400 4 A5U (94) 100%
KIMBAlL FM 1709 SH 114 0.19 1000 6 A6D 0.5
N. WHITE CHAPEL FM 1709 NORTH 0.21 1,100 4 ASU (84) 50%
N. WHITE CHAPEL . SH 114 NORTH 0.06 300 4 A5U (94) 50%
N. WHITE CHAPEL SH 114 SOUTH 0.06 300 4 ASU 94) 50%
5 BRUMLOW E. CONTINENTAL SH26 0.76 4,013 4 ASU (86) 50%
E. CONTINENTAL BRUMLOW S. KIMBALL 0.57 3,010 2 A3U (94) 100%
S. KIMBAlL FM 1709 CROOKED LANE 0.47 2,462 4 A4D (94) 100%
S. KIMBALL E. CONTINENTAL SH26 0.19 1,003 4 A4D (94) 100%
S. KIMBALL CROOKED LANE E. CONTINENTAL 0.52 2,746 4 A4D (94) 100%
RAIL CROSSING SIGNAL BRUMLOW 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT BRUMLOW al CONTINENTAL 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS KIMBAlL atSH 114 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS KIMBALL al FM 1709 75%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS BRUMLOW at SH 26 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT CARROlL at FM 1709 50%
S. CARROL FM 1709 CONTINENTAl 1.23 6,494 4 A4U (60) 50%
N. KIMBALL SH 114 EAST HIGHLAND 0.79 4,171 4 A5U (94) 50%
KIMBALL FM 1709 SH 114 0.19 1,000 6 A6D 50"10
6 BRUMLOW E. CONTINENTAL SH26 0.76 4,013 4 A5U (86) 50%
E. CONTINENTAL BREEZEWAY S. CARROLL 0.38 2,006 2 A3U (84) 100%
E. CONTINENTAL S. WHITE CHAPEL BREEZEWAY 1.29 6,811 2 A3U (64) 100%
RAIL CROSSING SIGNAL BRUMLOW 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT BRUMLOW al CONTINENTAL 50%
SIGNAl WHITE CHAPEL al CONTINENTAL 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS BRUMLOW at SH 26 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT CARROLL at FM 1709 50%
S. CARROL FM 1709 CONTINENTAL 1.23 6,494 4 A4U (80) 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT WHITE CHAPEL at FM 1709 25%
S. WHITE CHAPEL FM 1709 SOUTH 0.17 900 4 ASU (94) 50%
7 W. CONTINENTAL S. PEYTONVILLE S. WHITE CHAPEL 1.23 6,494 2 A3U (84) 100%
W. CONTINENTAL DAVIS BLVD. S. PEYTONVILLE 0.52 2,746 2 A3U (84) 100%
SIGNAl WHITE CHAPEL al CONTINENTAl 50%
SIGNAl CONTINENTAL at DAVIS BLVD. 25%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT WHITE CHAPEL at FM 1709 25%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PEYTONVILLE at FM 1709 50%
S. PEYTONVILLE FM 1709 SOUTH 0.13 700 4 ASU (84) 100%
S. WHITE CHAPEL FM 1709 SOUTH 0.17 900 4 ASU (94\ 50%
8 JOHNSON N. PEARSON RANDOL MILL 1.00 5,260 2 C2U (70) 100%
SIGNAl CONTINENTAL at DAVIS BLVD. 25%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT RANDOL MILL at FM 1709 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS N. PEARSON al FM 1709 50%
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS UNION CHURCH at S. PEARSON 50%
N.PEARSON FM 1709 NORTH 0.09 500 4 MU (70) 50%
N.PEARSON FM 1709 SOUTH 0.09 500 2 C2U (70) 50%
RANDOL MILL FM 1709 NORTH 0.12 650 4 ASU (94) 50%
"Ii~"f..'--.._.."_'a.=.;'::..,
'.';' . ~"~'.'
;'r~ ~ _ ~~j
-;,: :.:.::.:.
.v__ ~Y,d
t.:.;..::,
~B!, .,~=~=_ · _~~
CITY OF SOUTHlAKE
TEN YEAR CAPITAl IMPROVEMENT PlaN
!.......'--:::--._-~.................,..,
Ir-t _.~..~.,-" """""'"
t t ....__.~_~:::.:::'......
. rfn1=-r;. ~ -~
. ,!:=f-,i(-/)l I \'.......
:: /' I r'.L ~~=f'" \~".-.......
~~JOK~~~~~L ~Il" :;, I.. ---("11
n I il!l~ I !!...!~:s.- 'i'
\;! I II;' :; ~ li J\LM I-~_-~J,
=. ' = , j r-"_./ -~
iil =' L- I .
~ .r----l;~ ), f:'~~~ ~."
,9! [;V Y-.~ PJ\ "l ~ I
'~C1= ,1 ,f!'! ~H-,.I II
I j "'/-1i~ \:1-1-' I ,i
"y~ I ~/ ~' I H', i
\ Ii I ~ F'~1 ~ ' 1-{ /1
\\, il':1 111
", ~ ~I,!,"
, '" \ '\"< 'r;?! F::: I I,it ,i'.' , .
i~~' '\ -,'M'Y'!'II' ~ I
f ,~'-) P-l -r I 11,! 1::::i::l=t:I'=, I
t ' t:t' It' ""Shm- I 1 " '
t " 111 I ~ IU"_ " , .. Will'"
Y IU~ lllW:-=" ,;ri~.w~ UII~~I!I!I Tiiillli~,,' i P
, , ' , , , ',,/ ---.J h '-< I I, , r' f,. 1- I ~
~'",':" ......L.'\ dJ! I' I ; ! F- t '7i>'''c~' ir~'=
~ ~.';' '" .' "I .1'" J~l \~;i ,~;
b I :'1 ~, <. , ' i ,~_\ " ~'e
M!:;-l"'l"" , ,d', H-.1/~"tQh]t1S ,']0-_ "ti~
I~te'" ",( ~if:l' \11 ~I J.: !~, f; /td' :~"
1-';' U I B , L... ,...j!, t:: / , '
,el,t:::l= ': i i !,. I ~ ,-r ::[,;,:.;:rtt. '.
RIIUlClIlIP f' '-- I' I=I' \ " I i ..n I .'~ tH '"
Hlilli'ElJII-IUllliir=:::L- I.' , ~~~11l:lP:)~ ,,,',.'
h, ~HI!lf I :' [I,T '71'>.~' JdfH:li! -;
! I Ii' I j i ~ 14 " '" I . l ~~ '.. ~
[-i. I . a--L-' ..- ~,', 1 I ( ~~iL l~
o '11 i~:::ws?f1 0 k9r'P!' ':f", I~ ::! 'turlVirr ~i I,~
! ~ Ij~~ ! ' -fJ '7,' ~
, ~ ~W.J,'T,' I ..., I r-l ~j:;j: III! '.:Fl I 'ibt):" "
~ rf i ~ n \ -"u'!1 ! .. ~h~~ !1J
~ I II~~I r~ ill ~ ~- I.,," 11 I
~ CB I' ; 'i \..L-
a: 'II ~, "'" I ! ,~/'
- ~\ I =-r v
l! --v: v 0J.' 14/~1 , .' I j /7.Y~/
-....,j \ ) v/, :. ! /o~,:/ ~c--' ~ CL.:. --
.oJ P ~/
\.--/
Legend
N CIP Roadway
. Intersection Improvements
.r- "B';."
._ .L. .'
....-...:...:....~............'.......
.., -.."
_L_' .--
-..-. ,.,
'; · c'/
,.' .~" ",..",-,.=-"-::..",. "".,-"- ..
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
SERVICE AREAS
II"'I!=E Ittr1 ~ili
'- !rMi;m'
"'"I! .'" !I! ,Mi., -
II I~_~ :L.~~ I \ I =
Ll-H' , -, b'o v'' g
J+R 'I \ :;" '" iil
itrEl I1fn;~b!/'~J"Y.(i' '\ .
uil' 'u jl,L ~ 1 ," '
Bl' ;U. ~-; ~ ! ! ~
~ i h i ~ ilL II: ;tr:::<~;;
I? i.l, I ~ m: !=='
IIle UU I'll
'~~~~I
v--............
," ...-.,
Jd '--.-........--v----"\_J\...::
~ --<~bI~T, 11 -,<
/~r=i:;L"<}k t ~,
_('L-krfTb~~~'; '\.
V . .IU! i i L"'- ~~'- ~. '" ' ----..".'
Bill JOlliSiJi~u ::q--i. ~~"",:, i
~_ tIH,L~ i iMfTIF ' . 'it: -: ,.\
;-~_=L'~__ ~' ;.,:! rp\ n r=:~'
!I I ! \G !,~"j/'~
;r- ;:::;--;; ","...J \ r f~,
-; r \1, /jr~ .
~"'=!'=f --ctl'.. f.<:41\~A ~ .--:sEl, [J..,.,"1-'
~,~ ~ ~i" i \~~~
\ !i : J LI~, '1 l'\k
\, . i :! r~;," , ",: '
"~,~~. ';' ~~'0;lII)I!",'"
'--- ,;; ,tri ~VZ~!f",
rl ,,," ~ ' f---..'l E::o~.:::j .
!p, ~1' \~ P=r :? ytQj I i ~ rg
If: ~> \i - " : i i JTEa !ill' .
JrI,!~ : '.'(IIU'-\ 'n ~ ] Fj33J WI 'i!~~nHIiI ~ r~1 J~ -
"""" , I-- --;" 'L:j ~ if ' f' 7'.'1-l_~, '~
; h.'Ii: ,'," ,:~ "." ~I""~ Ii I ilL ~~; . ,!l~- t
. ' ~,. ,-i
~I~- 'i~':,"~~~r~~~ I TT~' ,\~i~l'~.
=ulJ ! ", hi ' _ l-H.l:lI:)~ ~~ ". =[ .
. '" : ,~,- fiti J - -. . = r ;/;-:,:::,~.t--Tr-rt .., ~
j:;1r.r.- ,;.~~' f:: if-i, =I': !'y;~,hi,i ~ , ,n:=b '..=L~
'. , L!.<..>....' . ,," 'r; ,.JI'!ilIilllllh 1II1,5tftlDlI
5i!'l,i!.i,,: "."f ,',.,. m ~- ,.\! j WJ: . U'; U\ L=Hlill "/t~
" ., ,'-----'" ." "I '" - ~ '" ,"
i ,... H." .. ,-1 t: 'I i-----+- F '< ' '
. , I ,,' 'I r-1,-r .:ir''4rTIi\::,-
... ! ;i!" t;' , b. - 1 I ! ---1~ mr\.
~ i!,' 'I t:. , ....k-n.-- H1~
{"[1'II, ~ /t~~~', ;,'
_ !I f J ............~i1. "
; , ~ , I--' '...... I~f-- ' 11\ ~
i1---rn H P I( ~r cl; I ~- i\
'<;;;;j~r: i frB:t!- )\JII ~J III I!I ; ;~t ~ I~ I -f1l~lt:;\
~~ ~' , r:q I 1J., ii lj':~~ft~
. ! '- fl: H P- _ sa.H.f M"';i!i ' , ft'i r
14 ,I ""1,[ w," i I r
'= c" . it~\'" , ioioIi
r \~,
I ,\n
~. ~"-i'
, ,
'/
I,.
e
; 5
.
v.)=~!
ii' '--
It;
Service Units
The "service unit" is the measure of consumption or use of the capital facilities by
new development. In other words, it is the measure of both supply and demand for
roads in the City. For transportation purposes, the service unit is defined as a
vehicle-mile. On the supply side this is interpreted as a lane-mile of arterial or
collector street. On the demand side, this is a vehicle-trip of one mile in length. The
application of this unit as an estimate of either supply or demand is based on travel
during the average afternoon peak hour of traffic. This time period is commonly
used as the basis for transportation planning and the estimation of trips caused by
new development.
Another aspect of the service unit is the service volume that is provided (supplied) by
a lane-mile of roadway facility. This number, also referred to as capacity, is a
function of the facility type, facility configuration, number of lanes, and level of
service.
Level of service is a term used by traffic engineers to describe the performance of
various components of the transportation system. The service volumes used in the
1995 Roadway Impact Fee Study are consistent with a level of service "D". This is
an appropriate standard for the City of Southlake and is recommended that it remain
the basis for service volumes in the 1999 Impact Fee Update.
The service volumes used in the 1995 Study have been reviewed and the
determination is that they remain valid and appropriate for the intended use in the
impact fee assessment. Table 2 shows the service volumes as a function of facility
type.
Table 2: Level of Use Table
Facility Type
Median Configuration
Hourly Vehicle-Mile
Capacity per Lane
Mile of Roadway Facility
ARTERIAL
Divided
700
ARTERIAL
Two-way Left-turn Lane
700
ARTERIAL
Undivided
625
COLLECTOR
Divided
550
COLLECTOR
Undivided
500
H:\TPTO\I project\06346400\doc\Draftl.rtf
6
Cost Per Service Unit
A basic step in the impact fee process is to establish the cost for each service unit. In
the case of the transportation impact fee, this is the cost for each vehicle-mile of
travel. This means the costs to construct the roadways (lane-miles) needed to
accommodate a vehicle-mile of travel at the level of service which corresponds to the
City's standards. The cost per service unit is calculated for each service area because
each service area has a specific list of projects. The combination of the projects in
each service area comprises the Capital Improvement Plan.
The second component of the cost per service unit is the number of service units in
the service area. This number is the measure of the growth in transportation demand
that is projected to occur in the ten-year period. As noted earlier, the units of demand
are vehicle-miles of travel.
Cost of the CIP
The costs that may be included in the cost per service unit are all the implementation
costs for arterial and collector system elements on the Capital Improvements Plan.
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code specifies that the allowable costs
are".. . including and limited to the:
(1) construction contract price;
(2) surveying and engineering fees;
(3) land acquisition costs, including land purchases, court awards and costs,
attorney's fees, and expert witness fees; and
(4) fees actually paid or contracted to be paid to an independent qualified
engineer or fmancial consultant preparing or updating the capital
improvements plan who is not an employee of the political subdivision."
The engineer's opinion ofthe probable costs ofthe projects in the CIP is based, in
part, on the calculation of a unit cost of construction. This means that a cost per foot
is calculated based on an average price for the various components of roadway
construction. This allows the probable cost to be determined by the type of facility
being constructed, the number oflanes, and the length ofthe project. The cost for
location specific items such as bridges, traffic signals, or other special components
(which are not included in the unit cost) are added to each project as appropriate.
Table 3 shows the basis for the unit costs used for the Southlake Capital
Improvements Plan. Table 4 is the CIP project list for each service area with the
engineer's opinion of the probable project cost. It should be noted that these tables
reflect only planning-level opinions or assumptions regarding the future cost to
implement the CIP. Actual costs of construction and land prices are likely to change
with time and are dependent on market and economic conditions that cannot be
predicted at this time.
H:\ TPTO\ 1 project\06346400\doc\Draft l.rtf
7
m [tlo
~OOOq-OO
,... ~ > po ~ ..1'--
Oi COO
o
~o
::J-oq-r--
I:!)2:OomCD
- O'
ZOO
::J
o
~O
::J-000r--
I:!) 2: a. 00 CD
- O'
ZOO
::J
o
~O
::J-Oq-r--
I:!) 2: a. 00 CD
- O'
ZOO
::J
[tlo
OOOOq-
:t>po~1O
COO
[tlo
~O~q-q-
<l:>. mlO
COO
cf)
~
cf)
o
U
o
~O
::J-OOC')
~2:OoOOIO
- O'
ZOO
::J
......
"2
::J
>-.
ro
~
"'Cl
ro
o
0::
o
~o
::J-Oq-C')
~2:Oor--1O
- O'
ZOO
::l
o
~o
::J-Oq-C'l
C')2:Oomq-
<l:o'
ZOO
::J
C"I
v
:i5
ro
E-<
o
~o
::J-Oq-C'l
~2:Ooooq-
- O'
ZOO
::J
o
~o
::J-Oor--
C'l2:Oor--C')
00'
ZOO
::J
o
~o
::J-Oq-r--
C'l2:OoCDC')
00'
ZOO
::J
en
....
en
o
o
....
o
w
...,
o
a:
we.
~....J z
c:(c:(o
....J .... f-<(- f-
J:a:o w
.... c:( u:: Cl ~
:JO(jj~ ~ Q
~>~~ ~tJjb
c:(o~ ~w::)
LL 3: >- ::J --l u.. u. e::
OO<(o:;!;o~1-
> <( ~wO:~:r:U)
.... 0 ~Q~:r:f- z
- O><(C9QO
() a: o:o:2iI~O
o lXl
oll'l~C!f"o.:
lXl~ ,C')r--
q-~ll'l
~~
oC')
mll'lC')C!CX!
CD 'CX! C') m
--('I').,.-.q-
~~
oC')
mll'lC')C!CX!
CD 'CX! C') m
--('f')""'V
~~
OC')
mll'lC')C!CX!
co "CX! C') m
--('f')--V
~~
tOU)~~~
It)"": . ('I') 0
C')~oo:t
~~
COll'l~~~
ll'l ''"": C') 0
--C"')--v
ffl ~
o C\I
ll'lll'l~C!f"o.:
LO,....;M~~
ffl ~
OC\l
ll'lll'lCOC!f"o.:
ll'l 'C!C')m
""'('1),....('1')
ffl ~
000
oo:t~~C!f"o.:
~,....N~c:;
ffl ~
o lXl
q-~~C!f"o.:
..q-,.... . ('l").,.-
C\I~C')
~~
or--
O)LO~C!or-:
C') , ,C') 00
"'-C\J,....C\1
ffl ffl
or--
O)lt)~~r:
('I)"": . C"') to
C\l.....C\l
ffl ffl
OC\l
00>ll'l"!
lXl~Ngj
~ffl
or--
o>f"-.ll'l'"":
CO~ '0>
r--C\l.....
fflffl
r--O~
0> co ll'l "
co 'NO>
r--~y;
of"-.
o>f"-.tOr:
co~ '0>
f"-.~Y;
OCO
coC\lll'l~
ll'l "! "ll'l
coC\l.....
fflffl
OCO
coC\ltO~
to"! 'll'l
co~Eh
~ogj
LO,....lt) .
to 'N ll'l
cofflY;
.....ogj
~r:~ll'i
cofflY;
0C\l
oo:tO>to"!
oo:t~N~
fflffl
oC\l
q-0>ll'lC\!
oo:t CX! "C\I
oo:t~m
C')o~
0>C')ll'l '
C') 'No
q-fflY;
0C')
0>~ll'lCX!
C') "No
oo:t~m
00
O~f"-.~C\l~
tOcx:iC\lr:;;0
o
ll'l0
o>rof"-.8C\1~
COr--.: C\J r:E;tR-
o
ll'lo
o>rof"-.8C\l~
co r-:C\l r:Y;ffl
o
ll'lo
o>rof"-.8C\l~
C'O,....:C\J~fflEfl
o
00
<ogjf"-.~C\lo
Ltl<eiC\J~(;;;
o
00
<ogjf"-.~C\I~
ll'lcciC\lC!mffl
o
~ ~oo
LO,....f'-..COC\l,....
ll'lcciC\lC!Y;ffl
o
~ ~ 0'0
LO,....""" co C\J,....
to cciC\l C!Y;ffl
o
00
oo:t~f"-.:gC\lOO
oo:tq:C\lC!Y;ffl
o
00
oo:t~f"-.:gC\lOO
oo:tq:C\lC!y;ffl
o
ll'lo
Ol~f"-.~C\lf"-.
C')q:C\lC!Y;ffl
o
ll'l0
O>~f"-.~C\lf"-.
C')q:C\lC!y;ffl
o
C!lXlro~~~
oof"-.a:i~~~
C!f"-.~~~g
oo<Or-:fflm~
C!f"-.~~~g
lXlCOr-:fflY;~
C!f"-.~~~g
lXl<or-:fflY;~
C!oo:tg~~~
ooll'lccifflm~
C!oo:tg~~~
ooll'lccifflm~
C!C')~~~~
ooll'lll'ifflY;~
C!C')~~~~'
ootOll'ifflm~
C!C\lro~~~
oooo:tq:fflY;Y;
C!C\lro~~~
COV~~~&;
Of"-......oo:tO>~
cOC');~~!fi
Of"-.~oo:tOl~
cri(Y):;:~~(;
,0 <0
0' 0
ll'l.....
C')ffl
::;g.....
o Ol
~ffl
::;g~
o Ol
~ffl
::;g.....
o 0>
~ffl
tf!;;!
~ffl
~r:!
~ffl
::;gC\l
o f"-.
~ffl
::;gC\l
o f"-.
~ffl
cfl.co
o ~
~~
cf!.tO
0.....
~ffl
::;g~
o ll'l
~~
~u;
~ffl
~
o
o
U-
a:
W
t Cl Cl ~ C9
Zo:O: 00 z
0_@<(<(8>
f- <( >-!Z >- ..... <( .,
<( >- W W Cl w ~ a. z
> 0 0: ~ 0: 0: Z Li. 0
<( _f-.. <(f-f- <( f- (j)Cloo<(f-> of-j:::f-
ztJj~oo~g~tJjooag~tJjoo~ ~g ~~@ag~ wg~g
OWWClOLi.j:::WClOOLi.a:WClW f-U- oo:<(ooU- C9u--u-
_U-u.O:O:O:<l:U->-O:O:f-U->-Oo a:o: Zu->-a:o:--l <(a: a: 0:
~~O~WW~~WWWf-~WOO ww..::=.owww~ ~w~w
> :r: Ooo.--l:r:O:o.o.z 0:0 o.o.~:r: 0:0.0.0 wOowoo
<l:~f-~f-f-mf-<(f-f-W~<(ZOOf-f-~f-~<(f-f-f-WOf-~f-
ooo.mOOOO<l:o::JOOOO~o::J::JZoooo>o.Cl::Joooom~o:oo-oo
0~>w::J00f->ooow>ooOOO<l:w>ooo::J<l:WOOO
~W>ClOOOoo>ooooo>ooo.f-OOOoCl>OOOOOO~o.o~o
> <l: z
<l: a: <l:
a. 0 --l
to
m
ll'l
Y;
ll'l
~
ffl
ll'l
~
ffl
ll'l
Y;
ll'l
~
ffl
ll'l
~
ffl
ll'l
~
ffl
ll'l
Y;
ll'l
~
ffl
ll'l
~
ffl
ll'l
m
M
C'l
..,.
W
#.~
~w
CD
CD
M
W
#.~
~w
CD
co
M
W
#.~
~w
CD
co
M
W
#.~
~w
Ol
Ol
C'l
fh
oe~
~w
Ol
Ol
C'l
W
::;go
o M
~w
C')
Ol
C'l
fh
ae~
~w
M
Ol
C'l
W
#.gj
~w
10
Ol
,...
fh
#.~
~w
1/1
Ol
,...
fh
#.~
~fh
o
,...
C'l
fh
::;g,...
o C'l
~fh
o
,...
C'l
ffl
~N
~w
g
o
U-
a:
W
a.
!ii
o
~
z
o
j:::
o
::J
a:
f-
00
Z
o
o
--l
<l:
f-
o
f-
z
o
t=
o
::J
0:
f-
00
Z
o
o
u.f-
00
>Wo
<I:~u-
:;r:f-O:
IZ~
u.~f-
00:00
'wO
1-0.0
J:
'"
a:
::;g1/1
o 00
~w
~~
~w
::;gM
o r--
~w
::;gC')
o r--
~w
~~
~w
::;go
o to
~w
::;gm
o 1/1
~w
~m
~w
::;g0l
o C')
~w
~~
~w
::;gM
o r--
oo:t,...
C')w
::;g0l
o ..,.
oo:t,...
C')fh
::;g0l
o ..,.
oo:t,...
C')w
::;g0l
o ..,.
oo:t,...
C')w
::;gC'l
o C'l
oo:t,...
C')w
::;gC'l
o C'l
oo:t,...
C')w
::;gO
o C'l
oo:t,...
C')tIf
::;go
o C'l
oo:t,...
C')w
~~
~w
#.g
~fh
~~
~fh
~:g
~w
~~
~w
~~
~w
z
o
i=
o Z Z
Ul 0 0
0.. t= t=
U) 0 0
z::J ::J
-_z~ ~
'" 0 00 00
z - Z Z
_1-0 0
1-<1:0 0
U) e:: u. f- u. f-
Ull-OO 00
I-~wo wo
-zC9u. C9Li.
"'-<(0: <(0:
~:Ec~w....l!zw
e:: wOo wOo
Ul<l:Of-=:!:Of-
Ul - 0: 00 0 0: 00
z....lWOZWO
-<1:0.0<1:0.0
"'''' Z
Z Ul _
Ul ....I U.
M
N
I""-
o
l""-
'd"
....- g
~I""-
co
o
II)
N
co
o
M
M
'd"o
-0
~I""-
IX)
o
II)
N
<0
o
M
M
'd"o
-0
~I""-
IX)
o
II)
N
<0
o
M
M
-:to
-0
~I""-
IX)
o
o
....
II)
o
o
M
No
-0
~I""-
<0
o
o
....
II)
o
o
M
N_ g
~I""-
<0
o
....
o
II)
o
N
C\I
11)11)
;C\I
CO <0
<0
o
....
o
II)
o
C\I
N
11)11)
-C\I
U)CO
<0
o
'd"
M
M
fh
II)
IX)
<00
-II)
gll)
IX)
o
'd"
M
M
o
II)
IX)
COo
-II)
gll)
IX)
o
en
II)
M
fh
o
en
MO
aio
'd"1I)
en
o
en
II)
M
o
o
en
MO
-0
~II)
en
o
I-
o
o
u.
e::
Ul
0..
I-
U)
o
o
....I
<I:
l-
ii:
<I:
o
....I
<I:
I-
o
I-
-
:z:
Ul
>
W-
....IUl
:i:::!
Ul:E
ZUl
<l:Z
...J<I:
e::..J
Ule::
o..Ul
1-0..
U)C
OUl
O:::i
....10..
<1:0..
1-::)
ii:U)
<I:~
0_
....10
<1:<1:
1-0..
0<1:
1-0
en
o
en
o
en
I""-
....
....
o
en
I""-
....
....
o
en
I""-
....
....
o
~
:J
o
.t::
o
nl
Q)
Cii
Q:;
==
e
@
c:
i:n
C\I
<0
en
o
C\I
<0
en
o
Q)
@
en
c:
o
o
OJ
en
-c
OJ
.0
:;
o
Q)
a;
'-
o
c:
o
o
S
en
c:
o
:g
OJ
en
~
==
-0
tU
o
0:
IX)
II)
o
....
o
IX)
II)
q
....
o
....
o
<0_
....
o
r:il
c:
:is
:;
o
Q)
a;
t;
c:
o
o
e
'5
cr
e
-c
S
o
==
-c
c:
tU
c.Ei
,Q (5
0"0
Q)(;j
'{l Q)
en "-
en nl
o OJ
t; c:
- OJ
c:.t::
Q)-
EB
OJ-c
fa Q)
O--g
~5
"0. ~
'&=-Q)
>-OJ
.0::
<Jim
m OJ
'c >
Q) nl
'ltj.t::
E.!!1
_.0
c: nl
Q)-
a> .!:Q
:j::.t::
u~
~:o
"52
crc:
Q) Q)
"- en
J2 ~
:J 0-
~ :g
f-~
--l tU
<( >
6::lii
000
<(0
....
o
<0
....
o
I""-
en
~
....
o
I""-
en
~
....
o
>
....I
0..
0..
::)
U)
U.
o
Ul
:::!
:E
I
Ul
....I
o
i:
Ul
~
U)
o
o
0> I-
0>
0 Ul
0
- ~~
~
UUl
~~
0
cr:
0.
I-
...JUI-
~~~
::?~U
0.
I- .
~tUl
Ua::::!:
;;!Ww
I-a.t:
OLL
1-0
Z
~;;l""
Ut-I:;:
~ga:
tI)~~
ZUl-
0
U
...Jcr:Ul
<wI-
I-:Z:Ul
01-0
I-OU
Ul
I-
wZ
Clw
<::;
Zw
~e;
ocr:
0.
::;
~
0
cr: ~
<; ~
c 0
EU
~ 1" :g
I- <
0 Ul
0 ~~
'2 U
'5. I!: ;::w
w
0 :z: u::;
... ww
~ P Ul:>
'" cr:o
0 0 Wcr:
U 1-0.
~ ?;::;
-.:; sa
:> w Ul
IU t: ...J
...J <
Z
bJl Cl
c: iii
'2
c: I-ti:
"
0: ucr:
ww
-S ""0.
01-
.~ cr:Ul
0.0
c: U
" w
0: zu<
_:>UJ
'" ~ffi~
"' Ul
IU
E w
IU 0.
:> ~
0
15..
.5 Ul
w
z
~ ""
...J
'5. :z:
" I-
U Cl_
zu.
'i w-
...J
'"
:D :z:
I-
" Cl .-
I- z::;
w-
...J
>
0
~
I-
U)
W
W
U.
I-
U
<(
Q.
:E
z
> ~
<( II.
:: VI
0 t-
Z
<( W
0 ::;;
w
0: >
at 0
a:
at II.
at ~
,....
. ..J
W e:(
t-
~ ii:
<( e:(
....I u
:I: a:
l- e:(
w
~ >-
0 0
U) 0
~
~~OMN~~~-~ ON MN~M_N ~mm ~ m~o N OM~ mm N~~I~_.lol~~lml~_~.mNNm ~ _m~c-. ~m N._ ~N~ m MI~.
Lll lit u:t CL1 ~ t'l ~ I%t ~ q U! l"l "!.I~I~ r-.:. III CI:!. "{I~I~ CI:!. . U't "'1 . Ul U!. to: r--:. Lll1::q .Ilq . ... ~ CX!. D:!.r~ .. "1. ut q) CO! rtlO. ~ <",!1~11l! "! ... ~ .. C'l "t C1 ~ ~ C"tl~ "! CX!. ~ ~- 8t "! ~ IX!. Cl:!.1~ ,..... r-:. fit &l m &q Iltl~ C'{I~ ~ .ct IX!.
.~~~~:~~~~~i~:~iO~~~lr~~~~~i~~~~""'~~~~~~~~S~~m-8m~~~O;~~-~rem~~~~O-;~.!~m~..""'~""'''-~;O~~~~-m~
.~N""'''_~MOMN~.__N~;~_~M~~mm~_NNO-M.~NM~~M "~N~"WW-ma"NM!~"~OWWWaI~"~ ~ WW;N~a~ w~~~_~~,....o
~wg~~w W=~~ WMWWWW ~WWW~M~~WWW~W WMWWW MMM~MM; w W~~ ~~Mg ~W~m~M WWW ~~ W WMW ~~
o
I-
~_OM~~I~~~~~O~~ w.~~-.~~.~ ~ NVC ~o~m.~~.~~~~-~ NNlmN~m~ ~m N~N~~II~~Q m N~I"N ..,. Q~N~~"
ll) g~ U! <<1 IX!. II! II! ,....~ ~f~ q U! C"l. CC!. LI'!. LI'!. ..,. q, U1. a:J~ C!. II! "':. -IW.'" ll! ~ ll} C1 _ "l lit II! II! Ul t\!. . c:Q. cq, t-. "':.. ~, ell C'l tC!. CD "1 <C!. q ~ . ~I q, ""'. C"!. CI:! 'I~ <<!. "l ~ CL!. o. q "':.. ~ ''If. ill "0". ,*~ at C'\{ q II! lI) "l:I' r--; ~ ,: ~ III "1. q - q "l U1 II:!. !E? W
..,. ;r....r.._:....; ~ 2; ~ f:::: g f6 ~.!.': :!: :g ~ :g ~ (1) U; CO C;; ~ f!g i ~ ~ W-l.....:. Sf ~ i ~ l3 ~ ~ t'i g ;; :& ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~.8... ~ U; ~ _ 8 ~ (1) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;!<. ;. m m ~ g t:) ~ ~ ~ II c;; m ~ a) C1i ~ en CD l;; m .'~.' ~ ~ co ~ ~ ~ g ~I'.'.'.'~
..,. ::;\' N ,.... en l/) .... ,.... '~tl "l C\I w en Ln N l/) C"i ,... "'" CD"" LO ',-., m co CD M LO 0 N _ ,..... 0 N ,... CD ,... ,... :i~: co (") t'\I II) ..,. - ..... CO) CD ~ ..,. CD ,... l~_; co C.D 0 - ..... .... to U) ..,. ,..... CD ~: ' W _..-,..... Ll) "'I- CD mr>: T- N CD CI N "'" '
_,~,~..-~M~W~N~ ~~w~_ W....W~~,-M~~~..-~~MM~~~MMMM~~ .~M..-~MMT-WW~~~II' ~~~MM~MM~_M.~ ~M~W~W~~M_W -"_w(
M~MW qww MM W ~ M0 W M MW "MMM W M MM ';"" W MW "~MM M 'w W MM.
,iii ~ilFl ~ ~ ' ; ~ 1~
N"~_~Ooom~__OOOOOOClNNOmll)~..- iOOOOoo..,...-,...~mm~ N~ OOOOOOI~.""'. mooooo oeo. Moooomeo~moooo~ON~
~~S~MMW~.smW~WMMMM~~~~~.m ~ WWMWMWCOC?;~~~~~~~~~MMMM~M~U);..~.~~tOwMMMM~M~ ~~~0~MM~~.~WM0WN~~~
.:....~,,; .;~:~~ .;o.;.;,..:]I,\,.;aio ~d.:.;.;.;ytJ~!i,,; 8- ,..: -,.:nl.: '.,;,.; ,..: ,.:.,;,,; ,..:,.:m!J.,; ,,;.,;.;~,:
... .".'.'.'. _ a:l m.w.~. .... ..... 0 ~ (1; en a:q;,ft ~ ~ ~ 0 III (0 ..,. OJ m 'I.'-$i to 0 co N ~ co r li ;1j co ,.., N co ~~' to ...... ~ co '..:"ii>.'J m N II) 0 :'"...~.'.'";.
:~~= M~~~ ~MWW~.&~T- ~~:~WM:~~T-=~: =~~!i~~~ ~ ~~~m M~.: ;w~~
M~WW ~WM ~ WW W _www M ww ~w M ~ _.. .0 ~
11:1 ~~I w~ I II II ~I
o ~ffi ffii~~ <o<o<o<o<ojM"'~ ffi~~~~~~,'.~~ereere ",~~~~.i~ee ffi ~I~~ ~~Io M I
~ ~l4 l4~~~ ~~~~1!lurerere l4w..ww..il4........ ..l4w~l4.... ~ ~I~~ ~~,~ ~~~i...r.:.r...~.,....
~,: M W W M li.,:;:,'! M M CR g" ,;~ Mi' >,>":,',
li!1 ,~ I ~li~I' ~t
... 00 ~ <0 00 000 en~ 0000 0... ~~<o '" Ooo"'~'" 000"'0 I 0 ~o 0 0 I
~~....8~_ "'g......8<o;!;:!l-&l...~"'. 8"'...5108:!lM .~~.M... ",g8"'",.~ .M ~~80..~:!l~..~~~~851lil l!:....8;!;88 2l_I.~
o LOOCOLOLO ~11 OMtCl"''''. ..,....coT-Ln;~o "'rilJ')ri'" 10 -COOOCD :.c;.'~~MO O<OOMr.;t'o-Ori +L'lLn N <<I 0 0,.., 0 . .CO*t,<IllMOU')...,. CDr.~""1O ~ N cn.<<,~~
w ~~ri~d~~i_ci~~~_~~~~~~~~w~~ri~~~~d~~w~~~~~~~~a~~~~~driM~i.~gri~~~cir;~~~.~~~~~....~~.ci~~~~~d~~1
m~g~~m~ ~CD~~~mC"i~rem~m~~ m ~q~2~: ~mffl~~~ 2~~ ~~~ .~ ~2~~~~~~~~~O~~~~ ~.~=~~~ mre&'
"~""""I ............~~.... ....I ..~..~....~.. ....~.... ......~....~ I~ ............~~..I..~....~.. ..I....~~~ ....~
,~ I i II I I Ii I I Ii Iii I I~I I II i I
\!1~1 co~l ~ ~ ~.~ <0 .1 <0 < !!! I.:~.t.:,.:,:.. II ",'" .0 L.~,~.:..~".'.~.:
: g il ~ 1~5iil ~iili I Ii I ~I il ~&I
ii;'1 .>{'" ~',~ ~ > '><:I ~--~ im{~
~ t ~.;.,.::M.,.._,..~,....r,,:..:,;.'~...:.:.. i,J; ~'.r-.'.:,~,'J,..'...:.. 00 8 ~~.I .ii: :it\1
~..,.~.~....t..:~.:.;...';..;:; 011~111 ~ II~!~~I ~ II!!! i I ~~ I I II I III I
~ 'iit~~! I &mi~tga I ~~.:. I .:.. I .. I ... I
i i I I ~ I i ~ ~ I ~ I I II I I I
~;] 1:" t.;~.,;.,~...:.~ ,.~ ~~,1 fJ~.Q.:,: I
,. ~~~~~i-o- ~~M~~~!M1~"'oOO B" ~I...... ~~~en ~re
M..~.!.~.'.~'~.:,.m..M..~ ~..~~~~~,'....:B~~ ~rn~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~.~~~~ 5 ~~.~~ ~~I~ 6m~~
i ----,--- ....................... ............. = ..'w.. ....... =l4~.
'f;J ~I ~N ~ I] ;14 II
~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~i.~.~
_ "'~~"''''~-'''~-.---~'''~-~.'''~- ~~~~~-- ~~~...~~~~~.~ ~~"'~I--~"''''~-~r-''' ~~ ~
.~O. .en...lD~..,...,.~I~~~~ ~en~ ~~en~enl.;S"'...en..,.~~ _o"'~_O~.;I~."''''.~~''' S -en~;,I...."'. ..~o_ ~o~i..~..I'.:...;
co O'J m H ,_ ..... ,_ d1 0 %i:' m Ch m Ch" _ ~ ;2~ CD ~ ~ ~I~'..;"',':,,.'~.;:_.,',r.. ~ ,- ~ - W
;;..,.~~,,~...~',.....,...U~~UW ;~;;;I;~~ ;;~;~;~;;;~; ~~~~~~~ ~ ~I~; ~~~~ ~~~~
_~ ~~~~~.~~~ ~~ ~~~I~I~~~ ~~ I~II < <.11 ~~r~ ~~~.
"'1"'''' "'~"'''''''I''''''~ .......~~~I..."'..... ......<01..."'''' ... "'1"'''' ......1'" .......1
~~~....~.~.~..,;..:.<o~! ~~~~8!"'~: 8~0881:~:~: ~~lj~~:,.:~.;:....~.:;.,...~"'I<o~ ~ 811~ 881~ 8~~~...~.'.~,:...~,~
0: Mii':.;: :...~OMM~~;:;:': .,;~ .!?. .,; "'I.,;;;; ..."'~~: ~ ~%i
~. $$ I 11M ~<j'<; ,~ ".to
~o.:.:,...!,'~.',.,..~...;~,.',',..~~ .~N~~I1!lm~ ~~enN~~~~C;~en~ ~~~~~~re ~ ~i~~ ~"'~g ~O~O~,~~.,~..;....'h~.',~.:......'g'.t{;'..:,::...
. _ cidciddecidd cicicicicici~..,..:ddddd 00_00 - o~ 0 d~ll.i.;.' d.~
.~ -@ . .~.~..~., . . . .
~g I ~~ 1:~$i ~ j!}~
~ w;~~w:z:l~ ~~~;~~~:z::z::z: i....r...2l~~rw~~~...:z::z::z:1 ~~ ~ ~z...~re~~!~~,i,:.:~~..,:le~~ ~~re~l-w;~:z:I!iI,....!~..~U~;~:J~~CD.~~~~~~I.'.~.~.;~~CD.~~~~I-~:z:t.:.~.~~.i
>o-.....>~~.J>w~--o~~~~~~~~..t 0 ~__o>~zm_~~~~..~mo~z . ~~~. ~~ ,- .-~ ~ ,-.q ,-,-~ ~-
~ 0 W ~ ::r 0 a: if 0 > ::r::r i::I: i::I: a: 5 w ~J :I::r:I: 0 CJ Z ..... a:: a:: :J I'. ::; W - j:: J: ::; ~ ::; ~ ~ -I..'" J: lr N ~ 3: :I: ... Z ::>' - W ~ rn .... i ~ am.... L5 a: a: t~
z ~ r- en U] Cl 0 ~~@ ~ g i1: VJ en ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ;"j; :I: :x: ~ en ~ cn U] ~ ~ a: I ~ :J: 0 0 0 ,;-, ffi ~ x:: ~ ~ z cn ~ _ ~ ~ :I: m': en c( uJ !z ~ ~ ~ i= ~ OUl Il:~ l:: t: !z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .-j Cz ~ ~ rf ~ Oz &1 ~ illl1~1
~ W I -.. -.. ii Z ;lf~ > _ -.. -.. ::;::- _ _ _ z z Z en ,lf~ U] en ::;:: Ii __ iV CG I "' _ r- 0 en z z en ~.,,~ . 00 0 0", _ ca -- Z I- '-1" 0 0 0 co - Z - ..~ I W 0 - - " - - If;
o T~"' ~caca~ ft ~ ~ caen li' en -~ "'O~ ~ .~ 00 "'0"' ,1,1>~OC_co", !.k.j<2"'ca~ '!~.~
o ~z. W.-.:~~~.. ..;:.-:.._;..~~.~.. <w [k~ ([U Ow' u <c 'l"S to O'~ > > ,~r a: "~'
~. _ ^ ~ ~ ~ w i ~ ~~ ~~~~ca I"'"' 1
~,~..:,:,.i.:~,.,..! .f...,,~,,~.','..,;... ~".;::~;,... "'~ w~ iN? ~,<
~_ ~. ,~ ~~; ~I; M} ~l~!
Ul~~ ~~ ~gen~ ~Ulj:J~ t:J ~...JUl~~ I~~ ~~~~ ~ I~~~~~~~ ~ I~ci~;;!~j Iz;;!~z~ I
...~~~~~~~0~~~~~~RRR~~~~R...~~~5~~~......RR......~~9R~o99~~9~R~R~~~Ggg~g~R~~'~~~ffi~~~~~~ffi~~~~R~~
g!...........~':,.::....~.:...;..:.;:.:,.....:.:..8~:z:8~~~~~;~8~~~8~i;;~~..~;:z:~~~i~~~:z::z:;i:z::z:.~~;~~~~~~~i;:z:;I~~~~~~~~;~;...~~~!~o~;ilili!8ili~s;;~.
~cn cc0~>~< c~>~c~~~cncn,~~~Q~c~~~ccnoo~~enoo~ooc~o8~oc~~oc~~00~~O~I~OCCOC~~~~~w~cz~ ~~~~~zz~O~~~
XI .~ ~ IJ:W~I ~z ~ II~ ~um u~mm m ~om~mmJ:m I .~cJ:OI .~O~~~ f~
_ ~;:. ~ 0. ;: I ;:;:;: I~ ~U .~ ~ ;: ~.~ ~U~o. d U ::;) .
I ~~g I ~g I ~ ~ i I I I i
~ ili~ili' ~~~~~~!z . ~~~~~~~ I ~~~~~ I !z ~~ ~ ~ ~~. !z~~ .
~ ~~oc. w~~ffiwffi~ ~ ffiw~~~([~ I J~wffiffi~ ~ ~~ ffi~ ~. ~ffi ~ ~~ffi I
~~~ ~~~~Iw ~~~~~~~ w~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~:J JJ~~ J ~~~~~~ ~ ~J~~ ~~ ~~i~~ ~~wJ~ w>~~ ~~
w~w wwwW~:J >ww>>> ww >~ >>w>>w J www~ C ~O>>>O ~ CC~ >- wgcc > w~ >> d
~!~~~~~~~5B~~~~~~~i~~~wlig~~~~~~~~~~...J~~~.~!z~:J:J~f~~~f5~...J.;:!z~~~...J~~5~~~1~"~~ J~~~~~~J~~~~~~~
uill.'u~~~~ulzoo~~~~~~~Jzouu~d~~cr:~~~~~~~~~c~ooo_g~m~~~~~~~~$m~l_g~~~~z<~~~cr:~oi.:~~~z""z~~ozO~,~<z~~~~~~i.1
w .<., w cr: II: cr: w m1 ~ - I!: cr: - - - 0 ~ w ." ~ ~ - - cr: - - cr: ~ U CD ~ W W ,,' ::; ::;::;::; Ul - - - ~::;"' M::; - - Ul - W ~. I- I- - ~ ~~ Z - - < < 0 '@
~~~~~~~~.~oz~~zzz~o~~~~I.~~~~zz~ZZ~~~I~~~~'~~~2~OO~ZZZ~~~~~.~~~~~~QZ~~~~I..~.'.zzQ~~Z~~I~x~~zzwwO.I~
~~~I~~~~~~.wc(Q~~QQQ-~W~I~.I .xQQ::;QQ~-~~2rI~W~O . . .0-Q9Q- . .2~~OOO_0Q- ._~,OOW0_QW~ OW_QQ~~~.
~~~ iii~.~i~ii~r-~~~~~~ ~~Z~~~i~~i~o~ ~~~lm~oowU]5~r-~~~0Z Im~~5~ ~~VJ~~~'~~ ~~~~~' ~~~~~~M
~~~ QQQ~.Z ~QQ~~~~ Z~~ d ~~Q@MQ~z~ ~~i~ w ~mM~@~ _ ww~~ M~ ~~.~~ ~@cn~. ~~M ~
G ~~~ ~ en~~cnVJ0~ ~ oooo~ooen~~ ~ <([00000([. c~ OOlr oc. OCOO I ~oooo ~
fLfLfL ~t ffifL@~~~~ ~~ ~~fLffi~fL~ ~ cr:~~~~~rt~ cr:~ ~~ ~!lfi ~ffi ~~ ~ffiffi t~~
~ !!!. !z!!zzz?; . zz!!zz!?; I ?;zzz~ _ ?; z?; ?; I ~tz I ~tz!z .
H iii I -ii--- ! --~--i I --- I - I - I -- ~
_:'~ ~'>U ,~~ '~1 ~.,.".;.J..,"m,:~:;.:. <0 ,~"; i1: k,~,.~..r..~.;.~....
-fl,! '" ~.~.~.~.~.~....,'.,l...... M .~::~.~.t.~".!:'.. ... ~~,.,~~.....;,..,'.. ~,~ ;~.: ... i '" ..;,
, " W'" ; ~ *;1 ~I
tii:
880
0_ q 8
~Mui
.... ...
~..~
'N:
,;;,~
\\':1
~j1;
~,:;)
::<
:(~;
j;!,
m~
en en ~
Z!~~&l~
_L8i
~m!~~~~~
!di
~~',;,i~ ~ !
~~~~~~
-:ii-~j
N Jt~1 N .
i.~!
~f~~~
<0
...
o
~~
'0
::;
o
II:
u.
~
<
~
o
<
o
cr:
w
u<
>~
ffi""
Ul
Service Unit Calculation
The basic service unit used for the computation of Southlake's roadway impact fees
is the vehicle-mile of travel during the afternoon peak-hour. To determine the cost
per service unit it is necessary to project the growth in vehicle miles oftrave! for each
service area for the ten-year period beginning in the year of the ordinance update.
The growth in vehicle miles from 1999 to 2009 is based on the predicted changes in
population an:d employment for the period. The City has estimated the population,
basic employment, service employment, and retail employment for 1999, and has
projected the number of each of these demographic statistics for 2009. The source of
these estimates and proj ections is the 1999 Land Use Assumptions Report prepared
by the City of Southlake specifically for the purpose of supplying the estimates of
growth for the impact fee determination.
The population and employment statistics in the 1999 Land Use Assumptions Report
provide the "independent variables" which are used to calculate the estimated (1999)
and predicted (2009) transportation service units that are used to establish the
roadway impact fee maximum rates for each service area. The roadway demand
service units (vehicle miles) for each service area are the sum of the vehicle miles
"generated" by each category ofland use in the zone.
For the purposes of impact fees, all developed and developable land is categorized as
either residential or non-residential. The estimated and projected population is
converted to dwelling units. The number of dweIIing units in each service area is
multiplied by a transportation demand factor to compute the vehicle miles of travel
that occur during the peak-hour. This factor computes the average amount of
demand caused by the residential land uses in the service area. The transportation
demand factor will be discussed in more detail below.
For non-residential land uses the process is similar. The 1999 Land Use Assumptions
Report provides estimates and projections of building square footages for three
categories of employment - basic, service, and retail. These categories correspond to
an aggregation of categories of employment based on the Standard Industrial
Classification Code.
Building square footage is the most common independent variable for the estimation
of non-residential trips in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation Manual, 6th Edition. This statistic is more appropriate than the number of
employees because building square footage is lrnown at the time of application for
any development or development modification that would trigger assessment of an
impact fee. The City converts the number of employees to building square footage
based on the average square feet per employee for each of the three employment
categories.
The estimates and projections of dwelling units, square feet of basic, service, and
retail land uses provide the basis for the estimates and projections of the number of
peak-hour vehicle miles oftrave!. As noted earlier, a transportation demand factor is
applied to these values and then summed to calculate the total peak-hour vehicle
miles of transportation demand for each service area.
H:\TPTO\l project\06346400\doc\Draft l.rtf
10
The transportation demand factors are aggregate rates that are derived from two
sources. The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition provides the number of trips
that are produced or attracted to the land use for each dwelling unit or square foot of
building. For the retail category ofland uses, the rate is adjusted to account for the
fact that a percentage of retail trips are made by people who would be traveling past
that particular establishment anyway, such as during their trip from work to home.
These trips are called pass-by trips, and since the travel demand is accounted for in
the land use calculations relative to the primary trip, it necessary to discount the retail
rate to avoid double counting.
The next component of the transportation demand factor accounts for the length of
each trip. The average trip length for each category is based on the region-wide
travel-characteristics survey conducted by the North Central Council of Governments
in 1984. Although a new survey was conducted in 1997, the results have not been
released to provide comparable statistics. Historically, trip length has been a fairly
stable statistic so the lack of a source for updating this travel characteristic is not felt
to be a problem.
The computation of the transportation demand factor is described in the following
equation:
TDF = T * (I-Pb) * Lmax
Lmax = min (L *OD *SH, 3),
Where:
TDF = Transportation Demand Factor,
T = Trip Rate (peak-hour ~ps/ unit),
Pb = Pass-by discount (% trips),
Lmax = Maximum Trip Length (miles),
L = Average Trip Length (miles),
OD = Origin-destination reduction, and
SH = State Highway discount (% miles).
Two adjustments are made to the trip length statistic in the computation of the
transportation demand factor. The first factor is to reduce the trip length assessed to
each land use-trip by half. This adjustment is made because the transportation impact
fee is charged to both the origin and destination end of the trip. For example, the trip
from home to work is accounted for by impact fees to both residential and office land
uses. To avoid double counting, a 50 % OD reduction factor is applied i.e., only half
of the trip length is assessed to each land use.
The second adjustment is to reduce the total trip length by a factor that accounts for
the percentage of trips made on the state highway system. This is because Chapter
395 does not allow cities to charge impact fees for trips made on the state highway
system. The reduction for state highway travel is applied differently for residential
and commercial travel. Normal land development patterns (and this is valid
specifically in Southlake) results in commercial development located more
predominately on state roadways. The resultant higher land values on state highways
H:\TPTO\l project\06346400\doc\Draftl.rtf
11
and the nature of residential suburban development patterns causes residential
development to be more remote from the state roadways on average.
Based on inspection of the transportation network, residential trips are discounted by
50% for state highway travel in all of the service areas. Non-residential land uses are
assessed for each service area to ascertain an appropriate percentage based on the
state highway network configuration and the distribution of developable non-
residential land in Southlake. The resultant percentages for each service area are
shown below.
Table 5: State Highway Factor
Service Area Percent of Non-residential V chicle miles
on State Highways
1 0
2 80
3 80
4 80
5 80
6 10
7 25
8 25
H:\ TPTO\I projectI06346400\doc\Draftl.rtf
12
Table 6 shows the derivation of the Transportation Demand Factor for each of the
three commercial land use categories. The values for all variables shown in the
Transportation Demand Factor Equation are shown in the table.
Table 6: Transportation Demand Factor Calculation
Transportation Demand Factor
Lmax = 3 mi., OD = 50%
Residential Basic Service Retail State
T 1.01 0.98 1.49 2.53 Highway
L 17.21 10.02 10.92 6.43 Percent
Pb 0% 0% 0% 30% SH
Service Area 1 3.03 2.94 4.47 7.59 0%
Service Area 2 3.03 0.98 1.63 1.63 80%
Service Area 3 3.03 0.98 1.63 1.63 80%
Service Area 4 3.03 0.98 1.63 1.63 80%
Service Area 5 3.03 0.98 1.63 1.63 80%
Service Area 6 3.03 2.94 4.47 7.32 10%
Service Area 7 3.03 2.94 4.47 6.10 25%
Service Area 8 3.03 2.94 4.47 6.10 25%
The application of the demographic projections and the Transportation Demand
Factors are presented in Table 7. This Table shows the total vehicle miles by service
area for 1999 and 2009. These estimates and projections lead to the Vehicle miles
Increase 1999 to 2009, State Highway Vehicle miles Increase 1999-2009, and Net
Vehicle miles Increase 1999 to 2009. The net increase column provides the
denominator for the calculation of the maximum impact fee rate per zone.
H: \ TPTO\ I proj ect106346400\doc \Draft I .rtf
13
(I)
:0
III
I-
-
:J
a.
S
a.
0;::
I-
r:..:
W
..J
CD
<(
I-
...J W
...J en 10 ~ r:: 10 ~ .., ~ N
~ ~ w a> .., I"- ~ ~ I"- ~ 0
...J U; N a> ~ ~ 0 .., ~. 0 0 0 a>
0 ::c ~ N .,f .,f .., .,f <r5 <r5
I- W ~ N
>
...J ~ .., 0 10
~ .., N ~ 0 .., a> co .., a>
...... I"- 10 <Xl. ..,. N N r:: <Xl
0 to N <Xl N r-:
I- ~ ~
(f)::! Ol 10 .., 0 to ~
~~ Ol N ~ I"-
0 0 Ol '<l: .., 0 co ......
-w ...... to ~ N .., ll'i
=?o:: ~
~w
~O ~ to .., co I'- M ~
J:- N M
w1i: 0 I'- 10 Ol U; I'- .., co ~
>w to ~ ~ N T" N
en
0 M
00 .., to M ~ en
-< ~ T" 0 ~ co M ~
~ N ~ 10
CD
...J
<( a> M M M .., N 0 0
10 <'! <'! <'! <'! M ~ T"
o::tu r-.: ~ ~ ~ ~ r-.: <ri <ri
~o::
0
-<
u.
OW
Z~ I'- .., M M .., I'- I'- I"-
-<1i: ~ <'! <'! <'! <'! ~ ~ ~
:EW -.i ...... ~ ~ ~ -.i -.i -.i
~en
ui
z
~o ~ <Xl <Xl <Xl co ~ -a; ~
1-00 a> Ol Ol Cl'l a> Ol Cl'l
-< N ci ci ci ci N N N
CD
- -
Cl'l ~ to .., co
...J r:: <Xl 10
~ M ~ 0 co ~ r-
<X:!. N 10 ~
0 0 r-: as ~ .,f N. N
N r-: co
W Oi co .., M co.
1-0:: ~ .., 10 M to
W ~
Ww 0 0 0 0
U.o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
W- 10 0 10 0 10 0 0 I"-
0::1i: 0 N 0 0 r-: I'- 0 q ll'i
N ai M r-
-<w ; M N I"- C') 10 ; q
aen ~ M ~
en I"- 00
0 0 ~ ~ co co to
00 M N C') ~ N M q
to 0 .0 a> ~ to ~
-< .,f <Xl 1"-' as co ai r-
CD ~ co I'- ~ ..,
~ M
W
...J en C') N to N 10 -a; I'-
0 W M to to to ~ ...... 0 0
I ...J 0 0 It! I"- C') co. N 0 M 0
~ M 10 .,f N M' .,f I'- ai
W ~ ~ ..-
>
~
z en <Xl
:J U; ..- M
l- I"- to 10 ~ co 10 ~ r-
...J Z to u:; 10. a> q "1 ~ N
W ..- I'- 10 N <r5
3: :> ~ ~ ~
0
"--z
0
~ N Ol 0 to .0 N 0
U; C') N N 0 to M 0 10
t-:. N to 0 10 10 ~ q
:> 10 ...... .0 N N <Yi .,f ~
a. N
0
a.
W ...J
0 -< ~
> w ~ N M "'" 10 to I'- co
0:: 0:: 0
W -< t-
en
Q)
en
Q)
~
Cl'l
II) 0
Q) 0
.!!! II) N N to <Xl N "'" Ol
~ 10 to M 0 to
0 N to I'- Ol I'- ~
e! ~. ~ co 1'-. ~ 10 ~ N
.1:. I- ll'i a> <Yi .0 N Cl'l r-:
Q) <.l Cl'l ..- I'- N
> E a>
Ol
......
...J W ~
...J en ~ e <Xl Ol to 10 <Xl C')
-< ~ W ~ 10 "'" I"- C') "'" to l"-
I- ...J Ol. "'" a> Cl'l. N to 10 C') 0
~ ::c ~ r-: .0 ~ <t5 ai as N .,f
W ~ ...... 10
>
...J N <Xl 10 "'" 0 Ol I"-
~ ~
l"- N e to <Xl N Ol 0 ~
~ ~ <Xl O. co ~
0 ~ ll'i Ol as <Yi <Yi .,f
I- ~ ~ N
en...J co M <Xl ~ 10
w<( to I"- ~ M
0 I"- to Ol
::!tu 0 1'-. 10 Cl'l N 10 N Cl'l <Yi
"'" .,f N 10 <Yi to
~o:: ~ ~
~W
00 to 10 ~ 10 to N to
I> ~ a> M ~ ~
0 ..,. 0 o. ~ M 0 I"- 0
WO:: "'" N to N ai
>w M M ~
en
0 Ol to to 10
00 I"- <Xl 10 ~ to
10 0 M C') ~ "'".
-< ...... to M "'" 10 N ~
CD ~
0::
O...J
1-- Cl'l M C') M C') N 0 0
o~ 10 <'! <'! <'! <'! M ~ ......
-<w r-.: ~ ~ ~ ~ r-: to to
U.o::
0
z
-<
:Ew
Wo M M l"- I"- I"-
0- ?"- M C')
z1i: "'" <'! <'! <'! <'! "'" ~ "'"
Ow -.i ...... ~ ~ ...... ..t ..t ..t
-en
~
~o ~ co co <Xl <Xl "'" "'" "'"
en-
zen Ol a> Ol Cl'l Ol Ol a> Cl'l
~~ N ci ci ci ci N N N
.1-
- - 10
0 ~ to to <Xl
...J 0 to to 0 <Xl ~
~ 0 N ~ "1 M ~ a> I"-
as 0 ~ N r-:
0 0 ...... Oi r-: <Yi
~ 10 <t5 Ol
q <Xl 0 C'). I"- C') ...... "'"
t-O:: N <Yi 10 ~ <t5
w ..- ......
Ww 0 10 to 0 Cl'l
U.O M 10 10 U; N l"-
I"- ?"- M to 10 ~ Ol
W- <r5 to. ll'i 0 to ll'i
0::1i: 0 <Yi to ll'i
10 u:; to N 0 0
-<W 0 <X:!. co 10 .., to ~
aen N N ~ to ...... .0
en <Xl
0 N 0 I"- ~ <Xl <Xl 0
0 ~ 0 ~ M N N .., <Xl
00 r::: LO LO "'" I"- ~ to .,f
-< ai ll'i cO <t5 cO ~. ai N
III ll'i to M to u:; I"- ~ ~ C'!.
"'" ~
W 10
...J en "'" a> I"- ~ en ~ I'- ~
0 W .., N I"- 10 U; 10 10 10
I ::! 0 0!- N 0 ~ M to N. to
W :E M ~ N ll'i <Yi N <Xl' .,f ~ en
N
>
~
z en Ol Cl'l N l"- I"-
:J I- 10 N to "'" a> "'" M ~ <Xl
...J Z M LO to. ~ <Xl <Xl LO. ; I"-
W to l"- I'- N en
3: :> ~ ~ ~
0
z
0
~ 0 l"- e ;j!; l"- I"- to co 0
to
.., ~ ~ M LO co 0
N to to <Xl to 10 ~ M. <Yi
:> N N ll'i <Yi N en .0 ......
a. M
0
a.
w ...J
0 -< ~
> w ...... N M ~ 10 to I'- <Xl
0:: 0:: 0
w -< I-
en
en
o
o
N
Impact Fee Per Service Unit
This section presents the maximum assessable impact fee rate that is developed for
each service area. The maximum impact fee rate is the allowable cost of the Capital
Improvement Plan for the service area divided by the growth in travel that is
attributable to the level of new development projected to occur in the period covered
by the CIP, up to ten years. All of the components ofthis calculation have been
described and presented in previous sections of this report. The purpose of this
section is to document the computation for each service area and to demonstrate that
the limitations provided by state law have been addressed.
Table 8 illustrates the computation of the maximum impact fee rate computed for
service area 1. Each row in the table is numbered to make it easier to describe the
calculation. The first input is the total vehicle-miles of capacity per hour added by
the CIP. The vehicle-mile is the service unit for transportation and is based on the
capacity or level of use as shown in Table 2 multiplied by the length of the road in
the service area and the number oflanes. Line 2 is the vehicle-miles of existing use
(demand) and line 3 shows the vehicle-miles (if any) above the current capacity of
the facility, or the total vehicle-miles of existing deficiencies. The first three numbers
are used to calculate line 4, Net Amount of vehicle-miles of capacity added. The
source of these values is the (1) Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory and (2) CIP
Service Units of Supply tables in the Appendix. The subtraction ofthe values in
lines 2 and 3 from line 1 is the first step in limiting the impact fees to financing
growth needs and not existing needs or deficiencies.
The next three values establish the cost of providing the transportation facilities
needed for growth. The total cost of the CIP within the service area (line 5) is
prorated by the net to total ratio of capacity added (line 4 divided by line 1 times line
5). The difference between the cost ofthe total CIP and the cost of the growth-share
of the CIP is the Cost to meet existing needs and usage (line 7).
The value in line 8, taken from Table 7, is the Total Vehicle-miles of New Demand
Over Ten Years, based on NCTCOG trip length estimates for different types of land
uses that have been reduced to account for the 50% OD discount and a portion of
demand that is absorbed by roadways on the State system.
The Percentage of Capacity Added Attributable to Growth (line 10) is the result of
dividing line 8 by line 4, limited to 100% (line 10). This percentage, multiplied by
the Cost of Net Capacity Added (line 6), provides that the impact fee rate will limit
the fee to capacity provided for growth within ten-years. Conversely, it will not be
used to pay for capacity that will not be needed within ten years. The result is Cost of
Capacity That Is Attributable To Growth (line 11).
The bottom line (12) is the cost of capacity added (line 11) for each new vehicle-mile
of demand over the ten-year period (line 8). This value is the Maximum Fee Per
Service Unit in dollars per vehicle-mile. Table 9 presents the calculation for all eight
of Southlake's service areas.
H:\ TPTO\! project\06346400\doc\Draftl.rtf
15
Table 8: MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE AREA
SERVICE AREA: 1
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED BY THE CIP 760
2 TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND 87
3 TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICENCIES 0
4 NET AMOUNT OF VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED 673
5 TOTAL COST OF THE CIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA $ 1,441,552
6 COST OF NET CAPACITY ADDED $ 1,277,215
7 COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE $ 164,337
8 TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS 1422\
9 PERCENT OFCAPACITY ADDED ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH 211%
If Line 9 is greater than Line 4: 100% otherwise,
10 Line 8 divided by Line 4, expressed as a percentage. 100%
11 COST OF CAPACITY ADDED THAT IS ATIRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH $ 1,277,215
12 MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE UNIT ($ PER VEH-MI) $898
co co a ;:: a Cl U; Cl E\ '$. '" Cl
co ~ ll'l
~ to '" '<t co to a N to.
co I'- a ~ a '"
~ M r-: ~ u; cO r-: r-: ~ ~ ~
N Cl ll'l '" N co ffl
0 a. '" I'- a
~ a:i ~ I u;
to '<t ~ '"
ffl ffl ffl ffl
co '" a ll'l '<t N ~\ a ::R '$. Cl I'-
'" '" a 0 ll'l
"'. N ~ ll'l co N '" '" '" ll'l
'<t_ N_ 0> co co co_ M
~ ~ Cl co ~
CO ll'l M N I'- ffl
I'- Cl co N
.~ M M
ffl ffl ffl ffl
a to a '<t a ll'l to '<t ::R '$. ll'l a
to to Cl 0 N
a ~. co. ~ I'- '" I'- ll'l a I'- ll'l.
M N. I'- '<t ~ ~ a I'-
~ ~ u; u; N ~ ~ u; ~
,... ; a '" a ffl
'" t"l a t"l
u; M N M
ffl ffl ffl ffl
co I'- a ; 0 '" I'- N '$. '$. '" co
I'- '" <Xl
~ a ~ N I'- Cl co a N Cl
u; N M '" <Xl '<t ll'l I'- a <Xl ffl
cO u; N u; ~ ~ u;
CO a N <Xl N
~ ll'l ll'l ll'l
en u; M u;
ffl ffl ffl ffl
I'- co a a ll'l ~ '" ::R '$. I'- N
a co N M 0 '<t
"!. "!. 0> 0> ~ co ll'l ll'l ~ "f.
a:i -.r N.. N ~ -.r -.r (0
co ~ cO r-: M a:i ~
It) '" a; ll'l U; ffl
CX!. Cl co_
~ en ~ ~
~
ffl ffl ffl ffl
0> M a co N a N <Xl '$. '$. a ~
-.r ; <Xl
"l ~ N to to I'- '<t a (0 ~
u; ~ a a I'- "f a a
to ~ N u; r-: r-: .... .... u; ....
'It a co <Xl ....
~ .... 0>_ ....
.... en .... en
....
ffl ffl ffl ffl
I'- a a I'- ll'l a -.r to ::R '$. ....
t"l a t"l 0 0 '<t
t"l '<to Cl 0> '" to co '<t '<t to
~ N "!. a to 0> t"l t"l to N
.... u; <r5 ~
.... ffl
M ll'l ll'l Cl a
~ I'- to to
.... r-: M N
....
ffl ffl ffl ffl
a I'- a N '" N a to ::R '$. N ll'l
to I'- <Xl 0 '<t
ll'l N N 0 0> N to to a 0> q
N N t"l to .... N a '"
M r-: u; u; N .... r-: ....
N ll'l 0> ll'l 0> ....
q t"l to t"l
to u; u;
ffl ffl ffl ffl
a I'- a t"l N ll'l I'- N ::R ::R ll) co
to <Xl I'- 0 0 0>
I'- to ll'l t"l N a N co
"l N '" '<to N a ffl
~. r-: ~ .... .... r-:
..... I'- to I'-
N.. .... N.
.... .... ....
ffl ffl ffl ffl
:z:
::r: ~
~ ~
0
~ 0
E-
O ~
ell 0 ~
~ E- ~
E:l <( ~
U 0 ~ ....l E-
!:iJ ~ ~ ~ >- ~ ~ ;:J :z:
< 0 0 ~ ~ ~
E- ell ~ ~ <( ;:J - g >
~ >- !S u ell E- ~ " c ~ 0::
i:ll U >- :> ;:J 0:: .~ 8 ~
0 Z E- O ~ E- ~ g ""
0 ~ ~ 0 0:: ~ > f!a !::!
~ ~ E- "
f;I;l 0 U <( ell 0 <(~.. !::
U ~ ti: ~ ~ 0 E-
O ell o ;;. [(l ~ !3
~ ~ ~ 0 ~
0 0 U ~ ~ ~o'"
~ ~ 0 0 ~ E- O ~ ::iE 00" E- ~
f;I;l 0 2S 2S 0 ~ ~ Z ~ ~-:-:~ 0 u
~ 0 0 '<t P. ~ ~
{IJ <( E- E- E:l >- >- " x 0
en en 2S ~ ~
~ ~ ~ :l: u E- E- .S " ~
!:iJ 0 E- ~ _....l~ en
U ~ ~ ~ <( en Z U c " >- 0::
~ ~ ~ > E- ~ ~ ~ <( .. c !:: ~
0 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ oS .- ""
0 ~ ..~ U
.~ ~ ~ E- O U E- ~ U~.c <( ~
E- E- U.l ~ ~
:l: :I: :I: !3 ~ ~ :l: "-"." "-
en ::iE o Sh~
~ ~ ~ 0 Z ~ u ::iE
> > > 0 U ~ 0 > E- UJ .- Lt.. ~
~ z'- >
~ ....l ~ ~ 0 E- ....l UJO\;a 0
<( E- E- <( ugoo E-
E- E- E- E- E- en en E- 0::'- " en ~
0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ~::: .S 0
E- E- E- Z E- U U E- ""_....l U ::iE
cd
(1)
--<
(1)
t)
"E
(1)
lZl
I-<
(1)
p...
(1)
(1)
~
~
"e
~
0\
(1)
~
E-<
N
'<t
'"
.....
00
.,.,
...,
'"
::
N
Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development
The assessment of the roadway impact fee is made by multiplying the adopted impact
fee rate times the number of service units projected for the proposed development.
For this purpose the City utilizes the Land UseNehicle-mile Equivalency Table
presented as Table 10. This table lists the predominant land uses that might occur as
growth in the City of Southlake. For each land use, the development unit that defines
the development's magnitude with respect to transportation demand is shown.
Although every possible use cannot be anticipated, the majority of uses are found on
the table. If the exact use is not listed, one which is similar in trip-making
characteristics can serve as a reasonable proxy. The individual land uses are grouped
into categories, simply as a convenience, including residential, office, retail,
industrial, and institutional. The list of uses shown in Table 10 is significantly
longer than the list used in the 1995 Ordinance. The additional uses, primarily in the
retail category, will make it easier for the City staff to select an appropriate land use
and rate to use to calculate the impact fee.
The trip rates presented for each land use is a fundamental component of the land
use/vehicle-mile equivalency. The trip rate is the average number of trips generated
during the afternoon peak-hour by each land use per development unit. The next
colurrm shows that the number of trips to and from certain land uses are reduced
because these trips are already on the system. This discount for the so-called pass-by
phenomenon is applied to land uses which are convenience rather than destination
oriented.
The source of trip generation and pass-by statistics is the ITE Trip Generation
Manual, Sixth Edition. This is the latest edition (published in 1997) of the definitive
source of trip generation data. This manual utilizes trip generation studies for a
variety of land uses in the United States, and is used by traffic engineers and
transportation planners for traffic impact analysis, site design, transportation
planning, and transportation impact fee determination. The 1995 Ordinance utilized
an earlier version of the same source. This 1999 update will use the most current
source as the basis for the Land Use/ Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table. The change
in trip generation rates and the resultant change in service units per vehicle-mile is a
result of more recent data based on current trip-making characteristics and provides a
stronger relationship between the impact fee charged and the transportation needs
related to growth.
To convert vehicle trips to vehicle-miles it is necessary to multiply trips by trip
length. The adjusted trip length values are based on the 1984 Regional Origin-
Destination Travel Survey performed by the North Central Texas Council of
Governments. At this stage another important aspect of the state law is applied - the
three-mile limit on transportation service unit demand. The trip length is also
adjusted to reflect that only a part of the average trip is traversed on the City arterial
and collector network. This adjustment is necessary because travel on the state
system is not subject to impact fee assessment and neither is the portion that takes
place on local streets that are not on the thoroughfare plan. The final adjustment is to
divide the average trip length by two. This adjustment is made to avoid double
counting since fees are collected from residential land uses (travel origins) as well as
commercial and institutional uses (travel destinations).
H:\ TPTO\ 1 project\06346400\doc\Draft l.rtf
18
Table 10: Land UseNehicle-Mile Equivalency Table
LAND USE CATEGORY
DEVELOPMENT
UNIT
Acre
1,000 SF GFA
---:~= -1,000 SF GFA --_
_ n 1,000 SF GFA
____ __ !,!l.Q2 SF GFA __ _
1,000 SF GFA
Dwelling Unit
Dwelling Unit
Dwelling Unit
Dwelling Unit
Room
Room
Acre
. - ------- ---
_u~~____=--- __;:: .-
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
Seat
Hole
--- -------
Seal
Court
.--.----. ----..-
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
----------- --- . - --- -. -...
__.. _.___ _._________. _' __.____ __ 1,000 SF GFA
.----- .._-----~_..._-
Bed
--
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
Fueling Position
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
1,000 SF GFA
TRIP
RATE
6.55
0.98
0.68
0.92
0.61
0.29
1.01
0.67
0.58
0.34
S.A.
1
19.65
2.94
2.04
2.76
1.83
0.87
3.03 3.03
2.01 2.01
1.74 1.74
1.02 1.02
0.61
0.47
1.83
1.41
TOTAL (1999) SERVICE UNITS (VEH-MII DEV. UNIT)
SA S.A. S.A. S.A. S.A. S.A.
2 3 4 5 6 7
6.~_~
0.98 0.98
..
0.68 0.68
0.92 0.92
_~ ..0.66
0.31 0.31
0.39
0.30
33.33 99.99 21.43
1.25 3.75 0.80
0.39 1.17 0.25
1.75 5.25 1.13
----. -----
2.36 7.08 1.52
0.02 0.06 0.01
0.33 0.99 0.21
0.14 0.42 0.09
3.88 11.64 2.49
0.30
0.66
5.18
1.22
0.20
0.63
1.39
15.54
3.66
0.60
0.13
0.28
3.91
0.92
0.15
6.56
0.98
0.68
0.92
0.66
0.31
3.03
2.01
1.74
1.02
0.39 0.39
0.30 0.30
21.43
0.80
0.25
1.13
1.52
0.01
0.21
0.09
2.49
21.43
0.80
0.25
1.13
1.52
0.01
0.21
0.09
2.49
PORT AND TERMINAL
Truck Tenninal
INDUSTRIAL
General Ughtlndustrial
General Heavy IndustriallManuflicturing
Industrial Park ..---.- -- -- .. .
------...--
Warehousing
Mini-Warehouse
RESIDENTIAL
._ __ Single-Family Detached Housing ____.__ ___'__'
Apartment/Multi-family
Mobile Home Park
Retirement Community
lODGING
__ Hotel
Other Lodging Facilities
RECREATIONAL
Arena
Driving Range
Golf Course
Health/Recreational Clubs and Facilities
f-. ------- ...-
Ice Rink
Live Theater
Miniature Golf
Movie Theater
Tennis Courts
INSTITUTIONAL
f'-- Church
Day Care
MEDICAL
Clinic
-. . - Hospital
Nursing Home
OFFICE
___ Corporate Headquarters Building - - '-- . .... i ,000 SF GFA
__ General Office Building_ -- ----.- ~'_: ==---_ _ 1,000 SF GFA
Medicat/Dental Office . __ ......___ _.._. _ _ 1,000 SF GFA
Single Tenant Ollice Building _ ___ ... _ __ _____ 1,000 SF GFA
OHice/Business Park 1,000 SF GFA
COMMERCIAL
Automobile-related
__ _.!"-utomobileCareCenter ..'---- .__. _____ '-:OOOSFGF~ ..- 2.03-___
Automobile Parts Sales 1,000 SF GFA 3.41
___Gasoline/Service Station Fueling Position 8.44
__ Convenience Market with 12 or More FuelingP~sitions ---. -- Fueling Position 5.89
Convenience Market with-less than 12 Fue!i~\!.f>.,?~i_li..~s. _"1,000 SF GFA -- 20.61
__ New Car Sales .__.....____ __:~_,-,OOOSFGFA __ 2.24
Quick Lubrication Vehicle Center Service Position 3.11
..-...--------
_. Self-Service Car Wash _______________. _ Stall 3.47
_ Tire Store _____ __.. _.__ 1,000 SF GFA 2.97
Dining
Fast Food Restaurant With Drive- Thru
Fast Food Restaurant without DriveAThru --. -
High Turnover (S~-Down) Reslaurant
_ Qual~ Restaurant
Grocery Stores and Convenience Markets
Convenience Market with 12 or More Fueling Positions
Convenience Market ~h Less than 12 Fueling Positions
Supennarket
Other Retail
f-- Free-Standing Retail Store
Furniture Store
_ Pharmacy/Drugstore
Shopping Center
Video Arcade
Video Rental Store
Wholesale
Wholesale Market
SERVICES
Bank (Walk-In) ______
Bank /Drive-In\
0.13
0.28
3.91
0.92
0.15
1.39
1.49
3.66
1.72
1.50
~ ....--...~ ...._---
1.52 1.52 1.52
1.63 1.63 1.63
4.00 4.00 4.00
uo_____
1.88 1.88 1.88
1.64 1.64 1.64
16.74
13.08
6.19
4.19
5.89
20.61
7.37
2.53
0.21
5.30
2.47
5.32
6.80
0.21
19.89
29.03
4.17
4.47
10.98
5.16
4.50
6.08
10.23
5.07
3.53
12.37
6.72
9.34
2.08
8.90
40.09
31.31
14.83
10.05
3.53
12.37
22.10
7.59
0.63
15.91
7.41
15.96
20.40
0.63
33.71
49.20
~-_.
6.56
0.98
0.68
0.92
0.66
0.31
19.65
2.94 _2.94 ___
2.04 2.04
-
2.76 2.76
1.83 1.83
0.87 0.87
_19.65 =-.!..~.!i_.
S.A.
8
2.94
2.04
2.76
1.83
0.87
3.03
2.01
1.74
1.02
3.03 3.03 3.03
-~,Q~ _.~~ -~Q.!.....
1.74 1.74 1.74
.- 1.02 . --1-1)"2--' 1.02
0.13
0.28
3.91
0.92
0.15
3.03
2.01
1.74
1.02
0.39
0.30
1.77
1.36
80.37
. ~'~3."ri1--
0.94
4.22
5.69
0.05
0.80
0.34
9.36
0.57
1.25
15.54
3.66
0.60
1.47
1.13
1.47
1.13
21.43
0.80
0.25
1.13
1.52
0.01
0.21
0.09
2.49
96.44
3.62
1.13
5.06
6.83
0.06
0.95
0.41
11.23
80.37
3.01
0.94
4.22
5.69
0.05
~~
0.34
9.36
0.47
1.04
0.47
1.04
0.13
0.28
3.91
0.92
0.15
14.67 14.67
3.45 ~__
0.57 0.57
----:::-
1.52 4.17 f-~!~ 4.17
1.63 4.47 _~ 4.47
4.00 10.98 10.98 10.98
1.88 5.16 5.16.~
1.64 4.50 4.50 4.50
1.30 1.30 -'1.30 5.87 4.89 4.89
2.19 2.19 ~ 9.86 8.22 8.22
1.01 1.01 1.01__~ 3.80 3.80
0.71 0.71 0.71 3.18___ 2.65 2.65
2.47 2.47 2.47 11.13 927 9.27
1.44 1.44 1.44 6.48 5.40 5.40
2.00 2.00 2.00 9.01 7.51 7.51
0.42 0.42 0.42 .~.~ 1.56 1.56
1.91 _~!.... 1.91 ....a~ 7.15 7.1_~
.--. --.---- .- .--- --.----
8.02 36.08 30.07 ~~_
6.26 28.18 23.49 23.49
2.97 13.34 11.12 11.12
2.01 9.04 7.53 7.53
1.30
2.19
1.01
0.71
2.47
1.44
2.00
0.42
1.91
8.02
626
2.97
2.01
0.71 0.71
-'
2.47 2.47
4.74 4.74
1.63
0.14
3.41
1.59
3.42
4.37
0.14
6.74
9.84
8.02
6.26
2.97
2.01
1.63 1.63
0.14 0.14
3.41 3.41
..----- -
1.59 1.59
3.42 3.42
4.37 4.37
0.14
6.74
9.84
8.02
6.26
2.97
2.01
0.71
2.47
4.74
0.14
0.71
2.47
4.74
1.63
0.14
3.41
1.59
3.42
4.37
0.14
3.18
11.13
21.31
7.32
0.61
15.35
7.14
15.39
19.68
0.61
2.65
9.27
17.76
2.65
9.27
17.76
6.10
0.51
12.79
5.95
12.83
16.40
6.10
0.51
12.79
5.95
12.83
16.40
0.51
0.51
6.74
9.84
..-30.34 25.29 -_~~
44.28 36.90 36.90
6.74
9.84
The remaining colurrms ofthe Land UseNehicle~mile Equivalency Table show, by
service area, the Total Service Units per Unit of Development (vehicle-
miles/development unit). This number is the product of the trip rate for each land use
and the trip length in that service area. That number is used in the impact fee
estimate to compute the number of service units consumed by each land use
application. The number of service units is then multiplied by the impact fee rate
established by city ordinance.
Conclusions
The 1995 Transportation Impact Fee Report for the City of Southlake established a
process which the city has utilized to collect impact fees to [mance or recoup the
costs of capital improvements for transportation. ill the intervening years changes
have occurred which cause the mechanism to require a significant update. Among
these changes are the development of new land use assumptions and a Capital
Improvements Plan, which are consistent with the ten-year horizon allowed by state
law. In summary, all parameters that are sensitive to the ten-year horizon need to be
adjusted to reflect a 1999 to 2009 implementation and growth horizon.
ill addition to these fundamental components of the process, certain technical
revisions are also in order. These include:
. calculations ofthe cost to implement the CIP
. computation of the growth in trips and vehicle miles of travel from 1999 to 2009
. computation of the maximum impact fee that can be collected per service unit
. development of a new Land U seN ehicle-mile Equivalency Table using new land
uses and the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, Sixth
Edition.
Another finding of this technical evaluation is that the methodology and data used in
the application of the impact fee ordinance are appropriate and consistent with the
transportation aspects of Chapter 395 ofthe Texas Local Government Code. Kimley-
Horn has also compared the Capital Improvements Plan to the ten-year projection in
traffic demand related to growth. Our finding is that the CIP proposes the
development ofa level of transportation supply that is consistent with the projected
demand. We also find and recommend that the list of land uses in the Land
U seN ehic1e-mile equivalency table is appropriate for the City of Southlake and that
its trip generation rates and pass-by trip reduction percentages are consistent with the
Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, Sixth Edition.
ill conclusion, it is our opinion that the data and methodology are appropriate and
consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. Further, the Land
Use Assumptions for Impact Fees and the proposed Capital Improvements Plan are
appropriately incorporated into the process. The changes that are incorporated into
this report are our recommendation to the City of Southlake and the Capital
Improvements Advisory Committee.
H:\TPTO\! project\06346400\doc\Draftl.rtf
20
eIP Service Units of Supply
Existing Units of Supply
APPENDIX
AI-A8
BI-B8
UJ
UJ>
LL -1
1-&
\J::)
<\I)
Q..LL
~O
UJ\I)
':!.l.1-
:S~
I::)
I-UJ
::)U
OH
\I)>
LLCi.
O~
~~
HU
U
I- UJ N N N
II) '-> 10 10 10
0 ~ < 10, In 10,
'-> ...i
....l Ci UJ -;;. V -;;.
UJ Ci
< II) < v v, ::'
I- -' ...
0 Z <\A- <\A-
I- H
l- N N II
II) 10 In <
0 10 10.. UJ
....l '-> -' -;;. Ci
< I- !' <
I- '-> V,
0 UJ ...
I- r,
0
Ci <\A- <\A-
...
:2~0:~
UJtl:I:. lY) lY)
..., < I :I: l"- I"-
XCLl>tUJ .0 -0
UJ<CL>
'->
H....l~Ci
~<<:I: I'- I'-
:I:I-~,.l CO lICl
UJ~UJ'"
> Q
H>-o:....l
~.r:I:~ 0 0
:I:'" . .0 .0
UJ:Jl>tO l"- I'-
>lI)CLI-
UJ
Z"" < ~
H~ UJ 0
,.eO: 0: 8
. w <
lI)
W....l
~~ :;
:Jo
61-
>
~<11 lY)
10
0
:I:
,.l < ...
CL .0
UJ S
... C
~ :J
N
...,
II)
UJ
Z N
<
....l
:I:
1---- -0 -0
<.!:IH I'- I'-
z~ ci ci
UJ~
....l
W
0 Z
I-<
I- ....l
~
Z
:J
0
...,
~ II)
0 W
0: Z
LL 0
r,
ell
..... 0
ell
<
UJ
Ci. ....l
< >- w
< ...
UJ ~ <
:I:
\J Q ..., ....l
H < UJ <
> 0 l- I-
0: I-< ~
Cl :I:
UJ ~ <11
V) i :J
lI)
I
-<
N
'"
"'.
~
::.
<\A- ....
II
<
UJ
0:
<
~~
~~
ffiffi
lI)lI)
ZZ
HI-<
1-1-
lI)lIl
00
...,""
>-....l
<<
~ 1-0
Q
<I-
o
0:
....l
<
I-
o
I-
ill
ill>
LL -1
1-&
\J::J
<I( lI)
0...
~ LLO
H
ill\/)
~I-
<l(H
-12
I::J
I-w
:::>\J
OH
\/)>
LLcL.
O~
?::~
H\.)
\J
f-w OOO\OlCllOLt'l "" ""
1fl\J O""Noo......oo 0, ""
o~ '\OlDO\(T')P)OO ""
'<C 00' v' N' .i 10- -0' "" 0
\JlX W 0\010..,............. 10
.....Iw lX N"""V""" "" 0.
~Ifl '<C rYi' ...... -0
oZ
f-H ~~~~~<\A- <\A-
f- 000\ co I
IfJ 0"" ~-
0 ..0 CO
.....I \J oo"v' ""
'<C :>- 0\0 0
f- '<C (\I...... 0.
0 ~ Cfl" ....-1.. Lt'l
f- 0
'<C
0 ~<\A- VI-
lX
1fJ~ lXH
IflH :x:=F ...co N
W\J CON v 00
\J'<C ':X: 0... ...... N
x 0.. :.tW ... ... N
w< 0..>
\J
H.....I 0
:::E< ZlX O\N ......
If- <:t "" "" ..0 ......
:to :::E~ ... ... N
~f- Wo..
0
H:>- lX.....I 0
:::E.....I :t< 00
,0.. N..o 0 ..0
:x: 0.. ,f- N N CO Lt'l
w:::l :.to ... ... N
>Ifl o..f-
W
Z\J < ~~0--2~ ~~
H~ w
lX OOOID Lt'lO
;,.!!lX < _~lON ......Lt'l
o W
IfJ
W ...J
:::E < VV ..0
f- ...0\ 0
:::l g "'N N
.....I
0
>
lX en ""...... N
:::l IO! :::
0
:t .........
I V
:.t < ..o! 0\
0..
O~ ~
W ......0\ ~
0.. '-' ~
~ :::l :::l :::l
N 10 Lt'l
\J < <
IfJ
W
Z N V V
<
...J
~ ..... NIO ..0 ""
\!) H NV 0 ......
Z ~ .......0 0 ....
W
...J
.....I
W
0..
<(
I
0 \J
f- W~
>H :t
OI I-
D~ lX
0
uiZ Z
ZZZ
\!)\!)\!)
!:1!:1!:1
w '<C < <
:::E z www
0 !:1 lXlXlX
lX I I ,
u.. ~ f-f-f-
Z..,.ZZZ"<t
::J:::WWW:::
N 0:t:::E:E:E:t
\..l1fJ~~~1fJ
<I( 000
ill lXlXlX
0.. 0.. 0..
cL. ..J :E:E:E...J
<I( :>- w HHHW
< 0.. ZZZo..
ill ~ < 000<
I ~~~G
\J 0 \..l .....I
H < ~W:n::rl:n~ <
> 0 f-
lX H>IfJVlIfJH ~
cL. IOlXlXlX:t
ill ~O~~~~ en
\/) z~~~~:i :::l
IfJ
N
<l:
""
O.
""
co 10
",,0.
10" ..0
~~
I II
<<
WW
lXlX
<<
WW
\J\..l
H~
>lX
lXW
~1fJ
zZ
HH
f-f-
IfJIfJ
00
\J\J
:>-...J
< <
~f-
00
<f-
o
lX
...J
<
f-
o
f-
w
W
LL
l-
\..)
~
Q..
:E
H
W
~
~
-1
I
I-
::>
o
lI)
LL
o
~
H
\..)
I-w
\Il1.J
8 ~ <t
a.w
-lwa.
~\Il<t
OZ
I-H
I-
\Il
o
-l1.J
<t>-
I- <t
o~
1-0
<t
o
et
\Il~ H
IDIj~~o~
1.J<t~I~~
~~o..~
I.J
H-l
:E<t
'I-
IO
~I-
H>-
:E-l
,0..
I 0..
w::>
>\Il
W
ZI.J<t
H~W
~ffi~
\Il
>-
-1
Q..
Q..
::>
V)
LL
o
V)
I-
H
Z
::>
w
\..)
H
>
Cl
W
V)
Q..
H
\..)
w-l
:E<t
::>1-
-l0
01-
>
gm
o
:t
:.l <t
0..
W
0..
~
\Il
W
Z
<t
-l
I
~R
~~
-l
(Y)
~
W
Cl
~
W
\..)
H
>
Cl
W
V)
~r-.OOIOOOOIOr-.IONIOIXlIO
O"~g~~\C~~g:~O"~~~"~
v 10" 0" N" V r-.' 0" 0" r-: ... 00 10" -0' -0 ....
;;:;_~"'~~:::~~~~~_~t;;~~_
N .. ..........
v ...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~r-.OOOOOOOVIOIOOIXlO\
o.~g~;tig~g:g~O"~j::::~.~
.q- to'" 0'" 10" r-: v" ~ ,-4'" ..-4'" N'" co ci tvi..o Cf1"
;;;.2 -0 ~ ro ~;g ~.~"g ~.~ ~iO ~
Noci ..-4..-4...... 1O
...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
('t)00,o1Ol;;
~~~\()~R}
o
za.
<tI
:E~
Wo..
o
etJ
I<tOO
,I-NO\
~~~~
000
,or-.
('t) 00
o
O\ION~VO
rt)v~ ~
NVNoO\l;;
t:;~~co~~
~a-!~~~~~~a..e~~~~~
0000100001000000
S99LONlOlOtONtn9lOlO9
~:;
NV
VVIONr-.
~~~~-o
100\
~s
CD 0\"" CON
~~~~IO
ON
O('t)
... ('t)
;g :g :; I:;' 10
",....NN......
S~
~~
::>::>
N N
I.JI.J
~~~~~
0\00000\0\
................'-'.......,........
::>::>::>::>::>
1010101010
<t<t<t<t<t
N N
VVVVV
NO\
NO\
.....i.....i
~~~8cg
clclclc:ic:i;;)
,.,;
g
w
>
Ow
0>
.0
~o
IIIII-
1-1-1-1-
a. a. et::>\Il
0000\1;
ZZZ\Il>
:E
o
et
LL
o
o
o
~O\
m~
>
<t:E
etLL
~~:EII
LLLL\LIIl\ll
0\0\0\
ggg:!;:!;
...... .... .... ..........
>-
<t
5
o
<t
o
a.
ZZ
\!I \!I
~~
<t<t
ww
eta.
III ' , III III III
1-1-1-1-1-1-1-
ZZZZZZZ
wwwwwww
:E:E:E~:E~~
wwwwwww
>>>>>>>
0000000
a. a. etetetet a.
Q.Q.A.Q..Q"Q.,a..
~~~~~~~ -l-l
~ ZZZZZZZ ~~~
-l OOOOOOO-l-l<t<t
~~I=I=I=r:r:r:I=i=l~~~
z<tI.JI.JI.JI.JI.JI.JI.J:EZww
OOWWWWWWWJOI-I-W
1->-1Il1ll III III III III III Ol-HH>
>-oa.a.eta.eta.a.o>-IIO
~<t~~~~~~~z~~~o
z~3333333~:i:i:i~
1010
0\0\
,0-0
" ...-t-
010
..,v
~::i
("<')
~
~~
11 11
~~
a. a.
<t <t
~~
~~
ffiffi
III III
zZ
HH
1-1-
III III
00
I.JU
>--l
<t <t
~b
01-
<t
o
a.
J
~
o
I-
w
W
LL
I-
'->
'"
0..
:E
H
W
~
'C(
-l
I
I-
::>
o
V)
LL
o
~
H
'->
I-w
Vl\J
o~ <(
\JC!L W
....lw C!L
<(Vl <(
I-z
~....
l-
ll)
Q
....l \J
~ >-
<(
0 3=
I- 0
<(
Q
Ci.
Vl ~ Ci. ....
:3tJ:I:~
\J<~......
~~"-~
\J
H....l
::E<(
'I-
:I: 0
~I-
~~~g~gg~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~N~oo~~vv~m~
N~O~O~~~~~~~~~~~N
~~~~~~~=N~~N~~~~9
- N-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~82~888gg~~~~~~
...~ .. In (Y) -. If) 10 ICl 10 10 N -.. co IX) r-... f'-o.. 0\
~~o~~~m~o~m2Nom~~
~~~~~~g~S~~N~~~~~
.. - N "" :2
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
B:2N
"""::2C'I"J
01000 lXl
~~~~t!~~
o
~~
::ESt
w"-
o
Q~~
~~N
(3!;:;CON..o~~
~ 1'-.0 ~
H>- ....l
::E....l~<(ONO
I a.. '"t I-- a ('l') 1.0
m:S~OO\~~
>Vl"-I-
w
z\J<(
H~W
~ffi~
Vl
>-
-l
0..
0..
::>
V)
LL
o
\I)
f-
H
Z
::>
w
'->
H
>
Ci.
W
V)
0..
H
'->
w-,
::E <(
::>1-
....lQ
01-
>
C!L
::l CD
o
=f
"" <(
"-
w
~
Vl
w
Z
<(
....l
:I:
tiiH'
~~
....l
""'"
'C(
W
Cf..
-(
W
'->
H
>
Ci.
W
\I)
.o2_~UJNOO~
n O\O\CQaJU')
NtflN ..0
~~~;-e~~..-e;-!~~~~~~::-!::-!!
oooOInOOolOLnooobbb
999LONlnglONNlOgLnlnLOlO
o~?dooaooao;:!:~2~<3~
("I').q-M f"-..NcQLnN...s-
'<t'1O_
2NN
~~~;;;~~
NnVfI') N
ClJf"I')r"1"11ltN"""
~9~~:::~
I'-l'-110
Q\~!!!
~o~
cSc
::l';;::l
'<t''<t''<t'
<( <( <(
~~
~O\o
~:;~
1010<(
<(<(
~~~
e~~
::l::l::l
101010
<( <( <(
0000000
'<t''<t''<t'OOOOOOO'<t''<t'.o'<t''<t''<t'
N
~~~oooaooo~~~N~~~
000 oooooog
..;
o
I-
....l
W
"-
<(
~~G
:I:i~
IIlll)H
:I:
3:
c
o
Z
<(
~~::!:~~:I:
<.!lZ-Ci./X~
!:[3:i}iQQQ
1-0 ZZIll
Vl
<(
W
::E
o
C!L
u..
....l
-'
Q~::!:
gr--_
<(:';:I:
1..lli:1Il
Z
~~~~~~
--......,......--
:I::I:ii:I::I:
IIlIllu..LLVlll)
>-
<(
3:
o
<(
o
C!L
Z Z
<.!l <.!l
!:l :1
<( <(
w W
/X Ci.
\1)\1) IU')U') I
1-1-1-1-1-1-1-
ZZZZZZZ
wwwwwww
::E::E::E::E::E::E::E
wwwwwww
>>>>>>>
QQOQQQQ
0/XCi.Ci.Ci.Ci./XCi.
~:J:Z~~~~~~~
<(Q<(....H....HHHH....l....l ululul
....lCi.~ZZZZZZZ....l....l Q.."-Q..
a;~<.!lOQOQQQQ~~ ~~~
HI..l!:[~~~~~~~::EC!L \J\J\J....l
:I:z' \J\J\JI..l\J\J\JH<( www<(
W ~wwwwwww....\J....l1-1-1-1-
~~~~~~~:I::I:<i....HHO
wwwwwwwl-l-m:I::I::I:1-
1-I-I-I-I-I-I-gjgj::E3:3:3:m
~~~33~3zz~zzz~
'<::t
<l:
NN
\0.. ~..
- N
~S
~:::
~~
"
~~
Ci.C!L
<( <(
~~
~~
IDID
VlVl
3~
~~
88
>-....l
<( <(
3:1-
00
<(I-
o
Ci.
....l
<(
I-
Q
I-
LU
LU
LL
I-
u
'<C
Q..
~
H
LU
~
'<C
--1
I
I-
:)
o
lI)
LL
o
~
I-l
U
I-w
II)I.J
O~<(
I.J W
~ el el
<( wlI) _
I- ...
oZ
1-14
l-
II)
o
~I.J
<(>
I- <(
O~
1-0
<(
o
el
lI)~elH
I3t1I~
I.J<('I
Xa..~W
W~a..>
H~
:E<(
'I-
IO
~I-
H>
:E....!
I a..
Ia..
W::>
>11)
>-
--1
Q..
Q..
:)
lI)
LL
o
lI)
I-
H
Z
:)
LU
U
H
>
CL
LU
lI)
Q..
H
U
w
~~~
o-!!ffi~
II)
w....!
:E<(
::>1-
~o
o I-
>
el
::>dl
o
I
I
:>.!<(
a..
W
a..
~
II)
W
Z
<(
....!
I
I-~
~!;;i
Z<
w"""
....!
o
I-
10
'<C
ill
ct
'<C
ill
U
H
>
ct.
ill
lI)
,o"NlOlXl'<tOOOOON'<t"1O
~ lQ!;; ~ ;;;_~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ N_~~ ~
cO ....- 10- ....- 0 N- ,,- ,,- N- 6 .....- '<t '<t ....- Of;
~ lQ_~ in ~ 10,0 ~ l;i ~ ~ ~_g_~ ~
~".....- ...... N.... ::f
-IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl--IIl-~
......"NlOlXllXlOOOOOIO"'<tlXl
101O"IO-lXlOONN,oN,oo\N
lXl..,,o,o ..",0 0'" -" 0 '<t t'tl lXl '<t
,0- -- 10' -' 0 '<t- '<to 10- t'tl 0' t'tl- lXl' lXl N' ,0-
:g lQ, ~ in ~, ~ ~ ~ :S, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;g
N'" .-I....;.... 'il"""4 ~.. N" CIJ"
....
o\A--IIl-~o\A-o\A-o\A-~o\A-~o\A-o\A-o\A-~o\A-o\A-
,ot'tlO\N,ooooooo'<too
;:::~~:g~ lQg~o
.-4 .-4 "1""4 N
0\
,0
o
Zel
<(I
::E~
w a..
o
~~~OOOOOOOO..,..ooo
('t)NT"""'O ~~......Q)
lXl
~
el~~~:S~;g
:t~~"~IO::!;
~O
a.. I-
lXl..ooo
t'tl00\"
~:::P)2
co
~~~~~~~a-.e~~~~~;.e
0'0'0'000001000000
100000101010"1010101010
................. ......
,olXlOOOOOOOOOlXl'<tO
o:~~ ~l:::~
OONO\OO
"..,......
l'I')N-
N-or-.
...... lXl N
-N'<t
~:S:::OO
ION....
,0 00 ..,
,0000\
....'<t......
tO~-;;~~
co 0\0\0\0\
................,........, .......,.........
::>::>000
10""" '<t'<t '<t
<(<(<(<(<(
'<tN'<t'<t'<t
S~
~e
::>::>0
'<tIO-o
<(<(<(
'<t'<t-o
,o""O\N
"1O'<t~1Cl
00000
..,0\0\
~d;;~
q:
::E
o
el
u..
~
W <(
Z !z
~<( W
....!~ Z
~~ ~
,0 ::E :.to ,0 Zo
NH N
I~~I~
II) II)I.J II)W
....! ....!
<( ~W
!z ZZ 11)11)11)
w W<( 1-1-1-1-1-
Z~ Z....! ZZZZZ
H HO wwwww
z3~z~ ::E::E::E::E::E~'<t~
O::E~OO...J~~~~~~:::~
~~::E~~~OOOOO::EI:E
WlXlu..WI.J~R:R:R:g:g:u..II)u..
~ li1~~~~~
<( ~ZZZZZ
Z ~OOOOO
"O>~::J::J::J~GGGGG~::l ~
>0 H < <( <OWWWWWO<...J<(
I-lXllXllXlelll)lI)lI)lI)lI)ellXl....!1-
~Z::E::E::EUelelelelelel::E<(O
::> 8 ~ ~;n1 i=l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
g;wlJiujlJi~~~~~~lJii~~
o
~Z
<(<(
!z~
w\!)
Z~
~I-::!;
ZII)-
O<(I
I.JWII)
>
<
~
o
<(
o
el
V)
~
.... 10
"0\
N_'<t
" -
-olXl
lXl.....
_lXl
O\;i
-IIl-o\A-
II II
<(<(
WW
elel
<(<(
W~
UH
H>
>el
elw
\Mil)
ZZ
HH
1-1-
11)11)
00
ul.J
>~
<(<(
~b
01-
<(
o
el
....!
<(
I-
o
I-
w
W
LL
I-
u
"'C
a...
:E
H
W
~
"'C
...-3
I
I-
::>
o
If)
LL
o
~
H
U
f-w
\fl\J
8 ~ <
~crw
<Wcl
f-\fl<:
OZ
f-H
f-
\fl
o
~IJ
<>-
f- <
o 3:
f- 0
<
o
cl
\fl~
\flH
w\J
IJ<:
XO-
w<:
\J
H~
::E<
'f-
IO
~f-
H>
::E~
, 0-
IO-
w::::>
>\fl
>-
-l
a...
a...
::>
V)
u..
o
V)
I-
H
Z
::>
w
\.)
H
:>
CL.
w
V)
a...
H
\.)
w
Z l::l <:
H> w
o-!'ffi~
\fl
w ~
::E <:
::::> f-
~ 0
0 I-
>
cl ell
::::>
0
I
I <
~
0-
W
0-
~
\fl
W
Z
<:
~
I
f-~
I.!l H
Z::E
w.......
~
o
f-
'"
"'C
w
CI..
-<
W
\.)
H
:>
CL.
W
V)
~i\l~~gg~g~~~o
o;t (T),o;t (T) 0 0 "" 10 No to I'- "',
'0\ ' , , 0 , Oo;t "\10
a:l-oIONI'-I'-O~o;tl'-~o
~, -0 g 10 -0 -0 ~ o;t N.. ~ (T) ;.
_ "" N
*~*~~**~~*~~
:rii\l~~gg2~~g~~
a:l "", o;t -0 0 0 I'- 0 o;t 10 o;t, -0
.0 0\ 10' ..t ..t ..t 0' ",,' cs:i ... 0\ r--:-
1O-o00(T)""a:la:la:l0\a:l""
a:l-oo....._--oa:lo;tl'--oo;t
N (y) ..t ....... ~
*~********~~
H
~~
~it
0->
o;t
10
(T)
-
-o~
~r;;
~o~
,- N -0
o
Zcl
<:I
::E~
WO-
O
""
~
I'-
N (T)
100
N
a:l_N
o;t(T)N
M(Y)::::
cr~
=t~~~~
~oglO~
O-f-
a:l
""
10
....
~~~o--ea-e~~~;-.2o-e;-.e
2gg222222~2
-000
-1'-1'-
O\a:la:l
a:l
0\
N
a:l00
1'--1010
""1010
N
~
a:l00
"" N N
10...,""
-0
-0
....
CX)~~
a:l a:l a:l
~~.......
s
e
::::>
o;t
<
::::>::::>::::>
lO (T) ""
< < <:
o;tNN
o;t
-oa:lO\
I'-...,N
00"'<
...,
N
....
:::i~
~~~
IcrN
\fl~lli
vig
~
<:
f-
Z
w
Z
H
f-
Z
o
\J
::E
o
cr
u..
~ ~
~>~
Z<:<:
w3:C5
Zww
~Nf-
ZWH
O~I
\JeIl3:
W vi
>-
<:
3:
o
<:
o
cl
0\ 0\
\fl 0 0
f- f-f-I'-f-I'-
Z ZZ....Z....
w ww::Ew::E
:t :t:tu..:tu..
w ww w
~> >> >
o 00 0
~crt-crcrl-a:--
'U a.. Q.. Q... CL.
~~\il~ ~~ ~~
<<:I.!lZ ZZ Z~
f-f-ZO 00 0<
ZZ~H HH HI
w w v, f- f- f- f- IJ
3:ZZ0\fl\J \JIJ~IJW
HH W WWow
gl-f-crU)~U)U)a:U)~
::EZZ\Ja:<:a:crcrcrI
::>88~~~~~~~3:
a: . .<:ZHZZ .Z .
COWWcrHU)HHU)HU)
N 0
(::; ,...,
N rs:i
0\0
-0 .....0
1'-' 0\
'-0
I
<J::
~~
O\a:l
""t;
NIO
II 11
< <
WW
crCl
<: <:
wW
\JIJ
~~
crcr
WW
\flU)
ZZ
HH
f-f-
\flU)
00
\J\J
>~
<: <
~b
<f-
o
cr
~
<:
f-
o
f-
~
-0
N
N _
""
""
0\
N
~
~
::::>
10
<
o;t
1'-""
.... a:l
0"';
I
f-
::::>
o
U)
LU
LU;>-.
ll..-l
I-&:
u::>
~V)
Q..ll..
~O
LUV)
~1-
~H
-lZ
I::>
I-LU
::>u
OH
V)>
ll..Ci.
O~
~~
H'->
U
I-w
lI)u
8~<(
-,aw
<(wa
I- lI) <(
OZ
1-1-<
o:'<t 0 1010 00\10 0
0\_~8t;;~~~;:!:N.
1'1 a;j ".: .....- ,,- 0" r--: '<t- ~
Sl:::-o'<t~~~;;I")_
NO,...... \0
~~<Ift-<lft-<lft-<lft-<lft-<lft-~
l-
ll)
o
-,U
<( >-
I- <(
03:
1-0
<(
o
a
.....'<t00000\.....-o
O\'<tOOlX)-oNO\O\
0\_ 1'1 0 10 10 '<t t-- '<t_ 0\
1'1 lX)- '<t- t--' ...... .....- t--- 0\ 1'1-
0..... 1")-0 O\-oI")lX) 0
'\0.. -'.. ..... ...... ........ LO <q- '\Q lO
N ..... ..... ","
<Ift-~<Ift-~~<Ift-<lft-<lft-~
lI)~
lI)l-<
wU
U<(
x 0..
W<(
U
~~
:I:b
~I-
1-<>-
~-'
. 0..
I 0..
w::>
>lI)
w
Z~~
1-<> a
~ffi<
lI)
w -'
~ <(
::> I-
-' 0
0 I-
>
a ell
::>
0
I
~ <(
0..
W
0..
~
lI)
W
Z
<(
-'
I
I- ,.....
~ I-<
Z ~
W
-'
o
I-
"-
~
LU
Ci.
~
LU
U
H
>
Ci.
LU
V)
H
~~
~ili
0..>
NN
ot--
O\'<t
o
za
<(I
~~
wo..
o
0-0
1'1 10
lION
a-'
I<(Nao
. I- 1'1 N
:>LO!::;"
0..1-
'<t-o'<t
1")1XI0\
('I').....~
-0
~~~
.....0\0
t--I")>O
I")N~
~~oJ!o--e~~;-::OQ~
00010100 0
SSIONNIOSIO
"1'1
>0 0\
-o'<t
-0'"
~~
..... -0
100
I'll")
~~
ee
::>::>
I") I")
<(<(
NN
I")N
NIO
-to
~
o
a
u..
uJw
0.......1
<(.....I
I~
Uz
~~
~~
~o..
vi vi
w
::1.0
H>
>.....1
Zm
Oll)
I-H
>->
w<(
0..0
vi
>-
<(
~
o
<(
o
a
....J.....I
<( <(
1-1-
ZZ
w w
ZZ
~~.....I
ZZ<(
OOZ
I,,)U~
33~
1'110
ao ...
1'1>0
ION
~~
t--I")
'<to\
.....1'1
~~
~e
::>::>
1010
<(<(
vv
~!::8
ciciN
II
1-1-
::>::>
00
lI)lI)
lI)
1-1-0\0\
zzgg
ww..........
~~~~
~~u..u..
00
aa
<:Lo..
~~ -'
zz~~
00-'<(
~l=!~ti
uuzw
WWOI-
~lI)lI)l-H
ffi~~~~
HZ Z . .
lI)HHlI)lI)
r---
-<
00
~N
rrl .........
o'<t
101")
'<t- 10
~~
II II
<(<(
WW
aa
<(<(
wW
UU
I-<~
>a
aw
'iMlI)
ZZ
HI-<
1-1-
lI)lI)
00
UU
>--'
<(<(
~b
01-
<(
o
a
-'
<(
I-
o
I-
UJ
UJ>
(L ...J
1-&
~::>
<:(1/)
o...(L
~o
WI/)
~I-
<:(H
...JZ
I::>
I-UJ
::>u
OH
1/)>
(Lei.
O~
~~
HU
U
I-w OIOOOOlXl<t"t-..<t"
Nt-..NIOOlXl-ort'l1O
U')'-I 10 co 10 10 ONN<t<t"
Of-< <( ,," ~.. 0 ........ ...0 an" to ......" 0\
'-I> :!:!_<t"1;;:;~~:g~~
..J~ w
<(w ~ N <t"-
I-U') <(
oZ
I-f-< ~~~~~~~~iA-
{ij ooooo-oco<tco
0 NO<tOOt-..Nt-..rt'l
10100-..OIOIOCXl....
..J '-I r-: t-..- ....- rt'l N- 0' 0' N- 10-
<( >- -o-olXlNt-..IOt-..Ort'l
I- <( ........N"OON......t--..V
0 3: N" ...; ......... ...... ,,"
I- 0
<(
0 ~~~~~~~~ iA-
~
\1)(:': f-<
\l)f-< ~::E 0 <tlXlrt'l1O
w'-l I,
'-1<( 'I <t o\rt)~g
X.... :.lw co
w<( ....>
'-I
f-<..J 0
::E<( Zct. 0 rt'l
'I- <(I 10 0\0\
::E~ :!:! N rt'l
IO rt'l N
~I- w....
0
f-<> ct...J
::E..J I<( 0 CXl t-..N co
, .... 0 rt'l
:I:.... ,l- s:! ::: <tt-.. ~
W:::l :.l0 ....
>\1) ....1-
w
~~~
~ffi~
U')
w..J
:E~
::> 0
61-
>
IX
5 al
=f
~ <(
W
a..
(:':
U')
w
Z
<(
..J
I
l;H
Z~
w
..J
o
I-
::E
o
~
u..
to
<:(
UJ
ei.
<:(
UJ
~
H
>
ei.
UJ
II)
""'Oa~~~~~~~
010000000
....NIOIOIOIOIOIO
o
,0
-
O<t"<t
N 0\ rt'l
10-,0
o
lXl
100lXl
g: 0\ ~
1O<t,o
NOlO
N .... ..,
oS:;;
t-..t-..O\
~~~
o -
lXl
o
C
::>
N
'-I
:J:J:::l
<tNIO
<(\J<(
N
<tN<t
o
o
...;
O\O\N.....
OO-rt'l
odd"';
..J
..J
H
::E
..J
o
o
Z
<(
ct.
III
1-1-1-
~:J~
000
ZIIlZ
Z
o
III
ct.
<(
W
a..
>-
<(
3:
o
<(
o
~
0\0\0\
\l)1Il000
I-I-I-!::;!::;!::;
ZZZ::E::E::E
~~~u..1L1L
www
>>>
000
~ct.ct.
....a......
::E::E::E
HHH
ZZZ
000 ..J
Z GG855~
0..J\X'i\:l'i\:l~~..J
:2<(~ct.ct.<(<(g
I~~~~~~Z
g~~~~zz~
z
O\<t
010
1O<t"
~~
NIO
Nt-..
..,- <t-
co
.d:
~~
II II
<(<(
WW
~~
<(<(
wW
'-I\J
~~
~ct.
WW
III III
zZ
HH
1-1-
III \I)
00
'-1'-1
>..J
<(<(
3: 1-0
o
<(I-
o
~
..J
<(
I-
o
I-
w
W
LL
I-
U
'<
0..
~
H
W
~
'<
...l
X
I-
:::J
o
V)
V)
c.!l~
Z"
HZ
I-w
V)H
HU
XH
WLL
W
o
1-1
~~
~ili
0..>
V)~
V)H
WU
U'<
rs~
U
H...lO
~,<ZCl
'I-'<XI'- 1'-0
XO~~lXl(\,)N~~
~I-Wo..
o
1-1
Cl~
X.
'X
~W
0..>
I'I")l'-lXll'I")lO
I'-lXlNION
'OIOV....N
~::iCl...l
XW.~q:~~~U~9:g
..J~OI'-IOVlYlV
>V)0..1-
w
Z~'<
H>W
~fD~
V)
>-
Cl
o
I-
Z
W
>
Z
H
>-
'<
3:
o
'<
o
Cl
V)
W
H
I-
H
...l
H
U
'<
LL
c.!l
Z
H
l-
V)
H
X
W
--.J
'<
wI-
~O
:::J I-
...l
o
>
Cl <Xl
:::J
o
X
1
~
0.. '<
W
0..
~
V)
W
Z
'<
...l
X
tnH'
Z~
W
...l
o
I-
~
o
Cl
LL
...-.t
~
W
CJ..
~
W
\J
H
>
CJ..
W
V")
~~~~~
00000
S99Lnln
~101OC3C3
.... 1010
l"tlNN;::;::
10 NN
.... 1010
~('t)C'I')~~
UUUU"
:::J:::J:::J:::J:::J
NNNNN
NNNNN
~O\('f')N-'
I'-IOV.oCl\
aaaaa
--.J
W
0.. 0
~ Cl~
" V)~
W Wj
I- Z
~ g~
D3:Dcnlj
m:im~:i
...l
W
W ~WO
ts Qts~
...l c.!l w...l Wz
~Z~~O
z~Xz~
:::J~3::::Jcn
8'-::i8~
>-
'<
3:
o
'<
o
Cl
...l
W
0..
'<
X
UIf)V)
WWWc.!lc.!l
I-ZZZZ
I-IOOHH
X~~:>l~
3:cncn33
:i~~'-:'-:
........
dl
o
-0
-0
o
N
0\
I"-
"'t
10
"'t
10
N
....
~
(Y)
.....I
'l{
I-
o
I-
en
::>
V)
w
w
u..
I-
U
<(
ll.
:E
H
W
:..l.
<(
-I
I
I-
:J
o
II)
II)
I.!ll:/
ZU
HZ
I-w
II)H
HU
XH
wu..
W
D
II)~ H
II)Hex:E
wuI.
u <( , I
Xe...~w
W<e...>
U
H-I
:E<(
'I-
IO
~I-
H:>-
:E-I
, e...
Ie...
w:J
>11)
w
~~~
~ffi~
II)
:>-
ex
o
I-
Z
w
>
Z
H
:>-
<(
?:
D
<(
o
ct.
II)
W
H
I-
H
-I
H
U
<(
u..
I.!l
Z
~
II)
H
X
W
-I
<
wI-
:EO
:J I-
-I
o
>
ex en
:J
o
I
~
e... <(
W
e...
~
II)
w
Z
<
-I
I
~H
Z~
w
-I
o
I-
:E
o
ex
u..
N
~
ill
CI.
~
ill
\..)
H
>
CI.
ill
IJ)
H
~~
~ili
e...>
.....0 ('t)CO('t)'<t..o
00l"'l ('t) 0 1'-0\..0..0
S'<tN('t)'<t.....'<t1O
D
zex
<(IO\N 0'<1"1'-..0..0
:E~~~"O"OI02:~~
we...
D
ex-;t.o
=tI-N~CO~~g~~
:..l.O~ION('t)IO('t)"OCO
0..1-
~o-!!~~~;-.eo-e~
00000000
981010988\0
_'<t..o..o..o..o'<tO\
............~ 0\- 0 0 CD 0 ~ N
NNNNION'<t
P1"~~"""~~~
LO:!..................N........N
.....1'-'<1"'<1"0\1010.....
..o~0\0\2~~N
u<(u<(<(uu<(
:J::>:J:JD:J:J:J
NNNN'<I"NNN
NNNN'<I"NNN
~~C3~~~~~
-,dddddd~
-I
W
e...
<(
I
U
w
W~I
~II-W
D?:ex>
.00
u.iZZD
I.!lD
zO
~~
3~
t-=~
w
>
o
D
W
:E
:>-0
wv)
ZW
exZ
:JO
CIl-l
-I
W
e...
W W ~
~ :! ~WU
~ ~ -I~~
I-__II)_~DH
Z;:!,;:!,u..;:!,ZI-I
:J..........O...:JV)?:
OII .XO<( .
UV)II)ZV)uwZ
>-
<(
?:
D
<(
o
ex
-I -1-1
W WW -I
e... o..e... -I
< <<( 0
X X:t ex
U UUD exw
~ W~O~~~
H~l:;HOHXD
XOXX?:~f-1-
?:D?:?:~~exll)
z3:iz~t-=~~
N
en
o
t--
(Y)
10
(Y)
....
10
o
....
00
00
10
oq-
o
0\
o:i
-1
~
I-
a
I-
m
::>
V')
UJ
UJ
u..
I-
'-'
<
"-
~
H
UJ
>.L
<
....I
I
I-
::>
o
V)
V)
I.!l~
Z'-'O(H
~~I~
V) H ' I
H'-'>.LUJ
XH"->
UJIt
o
Vl~
VlH
UJ'-'
'-' <
X"-
UJ<
'-'
H....I
::E<
'I-
IO
~I-
O(H
I~
'I
>.LUJ
"->
ON "0 COO'lCO-oO'l'<tO'l'<tl"l
~:::~S~~to~~s~~~~~~
l"'"1
I
t:Q
o
CXl
.....
CXl
LO
CXl
l\"l
CXl
N
H>- ....I
::E....IO(<OO LO
~~~I-NO'I,,~~-o~g~E~~~~~g LO
~ >.LO~~"....Nl"l'-CO'<t-l"l~,,'<t"'~ ~
~~"-I- CXl
UJ
Z'-'<
H ~ ~
~fD'C(
Vl
>-
0(
o
I-
Z
UJ
>
Z
H
>-
<
$
o
<
o
0(
V)
UJ
H
I-
H
....I
H
'-'
<
u..
I.!l
Z
H
l-
V)
H
X
UJ
....I
<
UJI-
~O
::> I-
....I
o
>
O(Cll
::>
o
I
~
"- <
UJ
"-
~
V)
UJ
Z
<
....I
I
1-,.....
I.!lH
Zs
UJ
....I
o
I-
~
o
0(
u..
(V')
<C(
UJ
Cl
<C(
UJ
U
H
>
Cl
UJ
IJ)
>-
<
$
o
<
o
0(
o
ZO(
<I
~~
UJ"-
o
OCO N" N"N.... co
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '<t ~ ~ ~ 2 ~'~ s l;; ~
~~2~22~~2222~~~~
~ ~ ;; cU~;: ~ " ~ ~ ~ ;; ;; g 2 to ~
N'<t-oN~'<t-oN~'<t-o-o'<tN N
10000COO\....CONO'I....COCOCOOON"
~g~~~~In~~~~~~gLn~
ON-oIO'<t'<t 1O'<t'<t"'-o00 co
9~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'-''-'<'-'<<<'-'<<<<'-''-'<'-'
::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>:::>::>::>::>0::>::>::>
NNNN~NNNNNNN'<tNNN
NNNN'<tNNNNNNN'<tNNN
~~~~N~cg~re~~Uj~~~g
-i-icicicicicicicicicicicicicici
UJ
>0 IIIII-
O~~~~~\I)
3i2~~~g~
>-
$
:>l
"-
UJ
I.!l
00 UJ
HZ '-'
~:S~Z
~ai~~
g~vjU:
UJ
....I
....I
H V)
>I->.L
ZH<
V)O::EO
o~j>-
ONUJ>-O
Z<"-I-<
~ ~Lz tl ai
o
o
o O'IO\~O'I~
~~~~~ '<tgg:sgffi~
~~!::t:;t:;~:::::;::E:Cl!::;
<~~~~II o. ~~ ~g~
a.u..u..u..u..V)V)ZZIZu..u..
....I
UJ
"-
<
I
'-'
V)~~
O_H
N'4-I
< 0 $
~~vj
....I ....I ....I ....I
UJ UJUJUJ UJUJUJ
....l ....1"-"- ....l"-"-
~V):j;::l~~ ;::l~~....l....lUJUJ 0
>:>lH>"" > ;::li=ll.!ll.!l Z
Z<~Z~~ Z'-''-'::E~OO <
OO....lOI-I-UJO~~....I....I~~UJ:f
I->-OI-HH>I-HHOOII>1.!l
~oo>-IIO>-IIOOI-I-OH
,,-<Z~$$O~$$ZZ::>::>OI
zi}i~zzz3izzz;i;igg~3i
N
o
0\
...J
~
I-
a
I-
ell
:::l
\I)
w
W
LL
f-
U
<(
0..
::E
H
W
~
<(
.J
I
f-
~
o
lI)
lI)
<..!lW
ztictH
~~I~
~ti~m
XHo..>
Wit
o
lI)~
lI)H
WU
u<(
X 0..
w<(
U
H.J
::E<(
'f-
IO
~f-
ctH
I~
'I
~W
0..>
~~*~....~~....gMN8~~~ro~~....*~~
NIDID ~ NNNMID~m~~~ N~
o
Zct
<(I
::E~
wo..
o
mN~~ O~ro""NMmMv
8~~g~~~~~~~~~v~~~~~
~~ct.J
IW,~~~~~~~~~~m~~~~gg~~oo~E
~~OMm~v~NNNMMm88N~NMV
>lI)o..f-
W
ZU<(
HW
H>t:X
o..effi<
Vl
>-
t:X
o
f-
Z
W
>
Z
H
>-
<(
~
o
<(
o
t:X
Vl
W
H
f-
H
.J
H
U
<(
LL
<..!l
Z
H
f-
Vl
H
X
W
.J
<(
wf-
::EO
~f-
.J
o
>
t:X al
~
o
I
,
~
0.. <(
W
0..
~
Vl
W
Z
<(
.J
I
t;H'
Z~
w
.J
o
f-
~
~
UJ
CL
~
UJ
\J
H
>
CL
UJ
IJ)
~~~g~gggggg~~~~gg22
....N~VOO~~N~~M....OOV~IDN
g~~~~~~2*2*g~~~~~~*
g~~~~~~~~~~~~99~~~~
NNNN~V~~N~N~~~~NN~N
~~mroMMvVvV~~~~~mrovv
~~~~9~~~~~N~~~~~~~~
:J <( <( <( <( <( <( U <( <( <( <( U <( <( <( <( <( <(
u~~~~O~:J~~~~~~:J~~:J~
NNNNNVIDNNNNNNNNNNNN
NNNNNVVNNNNNNNNNNNN
~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~
dddddddddd~d~d~oodo
mo W
o..Z >
<(<( 0
:r:.J 0
uI W
w<..!l ::E
V ~!:t:;... III ~
~;If-~::!;f-f-f-WW
II~~~i335Ei~
Vlll)VlWOVlZZVlO-1
o
Z
<(
.J
I
.J.J<..!l
.J.JH
<(OI
alt:Xf-
::Et:XVl
H<(<(
~UW
wwf-o
EiEi~zv
OD:J:S~
f-f-:;...I.....
VlVlf-1..!l 0
15l5ti!:tvi
::E
o
t:X
LL
-1
Ww 00
W ~> ZZ
~ vIO <(<(
-1<( ....uo ;~~W 0
-1-1 ....ww <..!l<..!l>~z
O~ ~~ If-::EjIHHOO
~~vvvOOvvVlHO<(VlIIO~S
<(o............~~--LLIVlalLLf-f-f- I
UVl....................._....O~Z::EOVlVlVlb<..!l
zw~~~~~~~zzg~z151515z!:t
>-
<(
~
o
<(
o
t:X
-1-1-1-1 -1.J
-1.J WWWW 0 .J-1WW
o~5 ~~~~ z ~~~~
o zalt:X IIII S alalII
Zj<(::Et:X UUUUWWIjj::E::EuU
SO~~~-1~~~~EiEi~oo~~~~
~~<..!lII~HHHHOOI~~IIHH
H<(!:tf-f-alIIIIf-f-f-<(<(f-f-II
IU 33::E~~~~VlVlVluu33~~
wz3zz~zzzz151515zzzzzz
"'"
I
CO
o
In
OJ
In
-0
0\
OJ
OJ
N
q-
"-
q-
0\
N
o
.....
-'
<C
I-
a
I-
en
::>
\I)
w
W
lL.
I--
U
-<
0..
:E
H
W
::.;:
<
.....I
I
I--
::>
o
If)
If)
\!)~
ZUa:H
~ffiI~
~tl~m
XH"->
Wit
o
If)~
\f)H
wU
U<
X"-
W<
U
H.....I
:E<
'I--
IO
~I--
a:H
I~t--t--mlnlnlXllXl
,.....NlnlCllCllXllXllXl
~W.......V(1")....-4IO.....-I......
0..>
o
Za:lXllCllXllClm-olXl
~~;;\:e::=~~~t--
w"-
o
H>- .....I
~~~<lnmOOO\Vln
m~~bt:t~t:t~te*~
> If) 0..1--
w
~~~
~ffi~
If)
>-
a:
o
I--
Z
W
>
Z
H
>-
<
~
o
<
o
a:
If)
W
~
H
.....I
H
U
<
lL.
\!)
Z
~
If)
H
X
W
.....I
<
wI--
:EO
::> I--
.....I
o
>
a: CO
::>
o
I
,
:.o!
"-<
W
"-
~
If)
W
Z
<
.....I
I
~H
Z~
W
.....I
o
I--
LO
'<(
ill
cY.
'<(
ill
\.)
H
>
cY.
ill
V)
~~a-e~~~~
'0000'000
109~SlnlOln
-olXlOmlXlVO
...-4Vl!'lT-lO\,....,N
O\VN-oNt--lXl
lXlNO\~N-ot--
~~~fY)~~~
CO\O.-to~COft1
~N:::(t"):2~~
<<UU<<<
::>::>::>::>::>::>0
NNNNNNV
NNNNNNV
telrit:t~~~~
cicicici...cici
o
W.....I.....IZ
Z<<<
.....I5~~:f
;ioww~
alWZZI
-oN~~~~I--~
:.o!OZZIf)
m iii ei 8 8~ m
::E
o
C1.
lL.
....I
<
t- W
ffi ~
Z~....I
~o~:JO\ 0\
Z....I::><Ovg
o:Eocot:;::=...
~~~~:EI:E
WalW::';:l1.If)l1.
>-
'(
~
o
<
o
a:
....I
< W
~ Z
W....I< .....I
~Z.....I.....I.....I....I
>OH<OO<.....I
I-coWa:al.....l
....IZ;:E:.o!a:;:E<
;:EOHO<Hal
::>U:.o!Ou:.o!;:E
gu.jllieilliz\;1
o.n
I
C:Q
o
N
10
o
N
(Y')
(Y')
10
....
10
(X)
10
(Y')
....
~
..t
-I
<(
I-
~
al
:J
V)
W
W
LL
~
'-.l
<(
"-
:E
....
W
:>l
<(
-l
I
~
::>
o
lJ)
II)
<.!)w
zlj
~~
11)....
....'-.l
XH
WLL
W
o
II)~ClH
~ Ij I :EI,
'-.l <( ,
XO-~W
W<( >
\,)
~~~
:I:b~
~~~
H>-
:E-l
I 0-
IO-
W::>
>11)
W
Z~~
H>Cl
o.efD'c(
II)
>-
Cl
o
~
z
W
>
Z
H
>-
<(
3:
o
<(
o
Cl
lJ)
W
H
~
H
....l
H
'-.l
<(
LL
<.!)
Z
H
~
II)
H
X
W
-l
<(
W~
:EO
::> ~
-l
o
>
Clal
::>
o
I
,
:>l
"-<(
W
0-
~
II)
W
Z
<(
-l
I
1:;;:<-
Z~
W
-l
o
~
'"
'<(
W
Cl
'<(
W
\.)
1-4
>
Cl
W
V)
H
~:E
~:l:
"-~
!'-vOlO vlO
NVO\COVV-o
..........VlOlOv~
~CO.....N""NO~
~;;!;~~~lO~lO
"-
Cl-l
I<(
,~
:>l0
O-~
~~~~8~~
~oJ!o.!!~~~~
0000000
109SlOlOlO9
:2R12~lO~~
O\COCON~-oV
COOONNNN
l;;:g:g~~~;e
COOO-o""""-o
l"INN-oO\O\O
LncYlrr')......NNN
<<(<(<<(<(<
::>::>::>::>::>::>0
NNNNNNV
NNNNNNV
re~g)~r'::;~9
o 0..-4....... d............
....l
<(
....l>-~
-l<Z
o3:W
-og~~~
N~lliz::>
=Ji vil~ 8 ~
~....l
H<(
:E~
HZ
-lW
~Z
H~
\,)Z
.0
lJ)'-.l
:E
o
Cl
LL
-l -l
< W
~ ~
Z>-I
W<('-.l
~3:W
~W~O\O\
ZNI12R
8lli3:..........
ud~vj~~
0\
00\
r'::;12
.... -
o
vj~
>-
<(
3:
o
<
o
Cl
-l ....l
<(<(
~ ~
ZZ
W W
3:ZZ-l
O~~O
-lzzg
:EOO<
1i~~~
alWwlJ)
....l....l
~~Z
<<(0
II II)
\')'-.l-l
wwW
~~z
H....Z
~~ji
vjvi~
\0
~
o
....
....
V
V
N
<X)
0'\
N
(\')
0'\
(\')
"
(\')
(\')
-ri
...J
<e(
I-
a
I-
co
:J
lI)
w
w
u.
l-
I.)
<:(
0..
:E
H
W
~
<:(
....l
X
I-
;)
o
V)
>-
ct.
o
I-
Z
W
>
Z
H
>-
<:(
3
D
<:(
o
ct.
V)
W
H
I-
H
....l
H
\.l
<:(
u.
<.!l
Z
H
l-
V)
H
X
W
V)
<.!l~
Zl.) H
HZ ct. :E
I-w X :i: 0
V)H ::.l
HI.) 0.. W
XH >
wu.
W
D
It)~ H
II)H ct.:E I"- ~ <Xl ..... ~ M I"-
W\.l X, '"
\.l<:( 'X r;: 0\ N -0 ~ N In
~W M N ..... ~ -0
X 0.. N
W<:( 0..>
I.)
H D
:E....lZct. 0 ....
,<:(<:(X -0 l"- N 0 an ..q-
XI-:E' N an M an M ~ <Xl
woW~ <Xl N ~ N ....
>1-0
H >- ct.....l
:E ....l X<:( <Xl 0 an an r-. <Xl
, 0.. M M 0
X 0.. ,I- ~ an -0 N r-. -0 ..q-
W ;) ~o -0 N <Xl <Xl
> V) 0..1- ..q-
w
Z I.) <:( ~ ~~ ~~
H ~
H > W 0 00 0 . 0
~ ct. ct. 9 82 an 00
W <:( an.....
V)
....l
<:( r-. N N an ~ N
W I- -0 0\ <Xl ..... <Xl
:E 0 -0 ~ N -0 -0 N
;) I-
....l
0
> -0 -0 an N N an
ct. al ~ <Xl ~ N N ~
;) ..... M M
0
X
::.l ..... -0 r-. M M r-.
0..
<:( an 0 ~ 0\ 0\ ::!;
N M ..... N N
W <:( <:( \.l <:( <:( I.)
0.. ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ::)
~ N N N N N N
V)
W
Z NN~~NN
<:(
....l
X
I- H' M N ~ t::; 0 r-. N
<.!l ~ N an ::; <Xl ('t')
Z ,...; c:i c:i c:i c:i ..q-
W
....l
....l
W W
0.. ....l
<:( ....l I- a..
X ~ H
0 \.l :E r-.
Z .....
I- w H V)
0 ....l
I- :E
H I- xx ~
X >- 'I- I- u.
3 w ::);) H ....
0.. 00 I.) 0
vi vi V) V) vi vi
W
....l ....l
....l <:(
:E H D I-
>
0 Z > Z
ct. 0 ....l 0\ W
U. al 0\ 0\ 0 Z
l- V) 00 r-. H
>- H r-.r-. ..... I-
w > ..... ..... .... Z
0.. 0
vi <:( :E:E vi 0
D U. U. \.l
....l....l ....l ....l
>- <:( <:( WW W W
<:( 1-1- ....lo.. 0.. ....l
3 ZZ....l <:( <( ....l
WWH X X H ....J
0 Zz> I.) I.) > '<
<:( HHZ W W Z I-
0 1-1-01-1-0 0
ct. ZZI-HHI-
oo>-XX>- I-
\.l1.)~33~ co
~~ vi vi vi vi ::>
V)
r-
~
"
~
w
a.
~
w
'->
H
>
a.
w
V)
w
w
u.
I-
U
<(
~
::E
H
W
:.l
<(
...J
I
I-
:J
o
V)
V)
I.!l~
ZU
HZ
I-w
v)H
HU
XH
Wit
o
v)~O!H
~tjI~Ooq-ooooO.o.oOC1\
U<( I I~C1\MM~*~~~
(;S~~~
H...J
::E<(
'I-
IO
~I-
H>-
::E...J
I ~
I 0..
w:J
>V)
w
ZU<(
H~W
~ffi~
V)
?i
o
I-
Z
W
>
Z
H
>-
<(
5
D
<(
o
O!
V)
W
H
I-
H
...J
H
U
<(
u.
I.!l
Z
H
l-
V)
H
X
W
...J
<(
w I-
::Eo
:J I-
...J
o
>
O! <D
:J
o
I
~
0.. <(
w
~
~
V)
W
Z
<(
...J
I
~H
z~
w
...J
o
I-
::E
o
a.
u.
ex:>
.;(
ill
Cl.
.;(
ill
\..)
H
>
Cl.
ill
\I)
H
~~
~m
0..>
D
Za.
<(IOIO C1\0 NlOoo
::E~:2NC1\MlXloq-2~M
wo..
D
0!:ct.0
fI-0~p"'''88~~~
:.lOg....oq-"tnIOMIO....
0..1-
~~~~~o--eo..e~o-J!
ggggggggg
OOoq-oq-O oq-ooq-
:2~~~:2OO~~~
0100000 a:l100
ooR1C1\~oooq-~R1O\
OlOoq-.oO .olOoq-
oo~g~oo'<t~~g
U<(U<(UU<(<(U
:J:J:J:J:J:J:J:J:J
NNNNNNNNN
N'<tNNNNNNN
OC1\C1\NOO'<t....O
ooo....oo'OC1\oq-
"";000"";"";000
...J ...J
...J ...J
H H
::E ::E
...J ...J
OIIIOV)
DI-I-1-0H
Za.:Ja.Z>
<(000<(<(
O!ZV)Za.O
w w
uu
ZZI
wwu
a. a. a.
gg~
u.U.U
ZZC1\O\C1\
Z ...J...J~~~
~ ZZ............
a.C1\C1\~00::E::E::E
<(~~"V)V)u.u.u.
w.-t........-t<<.C1.'+-'+-'4-
"':::E::E::E~~~~~
Zu.u.u.~~ZZV)
>-
<(
5
D
<(
o
a.
...J ...J
zz;::l ;::lzz
ZOO::Ew ::EOO
o V) V)...J uI...J V) V)
V)O!a.ozuoO!O!
Z<(<(Owa.D<(<(
I~~Z~:JZ~~
g:i:i~itG~:ivi
00
d:l
o
N
.....
-0
N
N
0\
"
'o:t
o
'o:t
M
10
I'\.!
10
....I
<(
r-
o
r-
ea
:)
V')
s-
Q)
~
co
~
Q)
~
en
co
3:
Q)~
o
Q) c: S-
~ CO Q)
coc:1U
~:C:>
~S->
::J 0 I
o en
,en ~ .~
'Ou.g
~ ~ Q)
~o_
.- CO CO
U c. >
E .:i
-c-
w
'+-
o
en
Q)
-
.c
CO
....
I
~
I
C
~
.-
.c
.-
.c:
>< of(
tn
W W
~
..I
..
-
c
(1) ...
m cu .-
> c
.- 0 ~
~--
C" cu
'" ... .-
-(1)-
__c
.- (1) (1)
5E:E
C) : I/)
C - E
.- "C >-
>...-
:: ca .-
cu "C E
I/) C cu
._ cu "i
w1i).!!
::>cuC)
..J ... .5
oj( 0 I/)
~~OONNO~~O~O~OOOOO
OO~NMM~~~O~O~N~~ON
__NMM~~OM
- -
"C "C "C "C "C "C
CI) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) 5 (1) 5 (1) 5 (1) 5 (1) 5 (1) 5 (1) (1)
______c_c_c_c_c_Cc
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 .- 0 .- 0 .- 0 .- 0 .- 0 .- .-
~ E E E E E ~-e ~-e ~-e ~-e ~-e ~-e-e
I- .- .- .- .- .- E ~ E ~ E ~ E ~ E ~ E ~ ~
~~~~~o~o~o~o~o~o~~
o 0 0 0 0 0
'-
.s ~ Co ~ - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - : : :
CI) .- - - :;... - N N N M M ~ ~ (0 (0 Co Co 0 0 N
:ECI)It)M ~ ---
Exhibit D-2: Land UseNehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (Roadways)
TOTAL (1999) SERVICE UNITS (VEH-MI/ DEV. UNIT)
LAND USE CATEGORY DEVELOPMENT TRIP SA S.A. SA SA SA SA S.A. SA
UNIT RATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
PORT AND TERMINAL -"'- -
Truck Terminal Acre 6.55 19.65 11.49 6.56 11.49 11.49 19.65 19.65 19.65
INDUSTRIAL .
-- General Light Industrial 1,000 SF GFA 0.98 2.94 1.72 0.98 1.72 1.72 2.94 2.94 2.94
General Heavy IndustriallManufacturing 1,000 SF GFA 0.68 2.04 1.19 0.68 1.19 1.19 2.04 2.04 ,..2.~
Industrial Park 1,000 SF GFA 0.92 2.76 1.61 0.92 1.61 1.61 -~ _~~6_ 2.76
Warehousing 1,000 SF GFA 0.61 1.83 1.16 0.66 1.16 1.16 1.83 1.83 1.83
Mini-Warehouse 1,000 SF GFA 0.29 0.87 0.55 0.31 0.55 0.55 0.87 0.87 0.87
RESIDENTIAL -- 1--------
Single-Family Detached Housing Dwelling Unit 1.01 3.03 3.03 3.03 3.03 3.03 3.03 3.03 3.03
Apartment/Multi-family Dwelling Unit 0.67 2.01 2.01 2.01 2.01 2.01 2.01 2.01._ 2.01
Mobile Home Park Dwelling Unit 0.58 1.74 1.74 1.74 1.74 1.74 1.74 1.74 1.74
Dwelling Unit 0.34 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 --
Retirement Community 1,02 1.02 1.02
LODGING --
Hotel Room 0.61 1.83 0.69 0.39 0.69 0.69 1.77 1.47 1.47
-- Other Lodging Facilities Room 0.47 0.53 0.30 0.53 0.53 1.36 1.13
1.41 1.13
RECREATIONAL -- .
-~-_. -----. "------.-- Acre
Arena . 33.33 99:~_ ~.50 21.43 37.50 ~7.50 96.44 80}7_ _. 80.37
-.. .----- -----
_i::lri~l12.~ange_____,_ Tee 1.25 3.75 1.41 0.80 1.41 1.41 3.62 3.01 3.01
Golf Course Acre 0.39 1.17 0.44 0.25 0.44 0.44 1.13 0.94 0.94
___ Health/Recreational Clubs and Facilities 1,000 SF GFA .
1.75 5.25 1.97 1.13 1.97._ 1,97 5.06 4.22 4.22
Ice Rink 1,000 SF GFA 2.36 7.08 2.66 1.52 2.66 2.66 6.83 _5~_ 5.69
Live Theater Seat 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.05 0.05
Miniature Go~ Hole 0.33 0.99 0.37 0.21 0.37 0.37 0.95 0.80 0.80
Seat ------ -~.-
Movie Theater 0.14 0.42 0.16 0.09 0.16 0.16 0.41 0.34 0.34
Court 3.88 4.37 4.37 ._- --- 9.36
Tennis Courts 11.64 2.49 4.37 11.23 9.36
~NST!.T.!l!IONAL ___ ---. 1--,.- 0.47 -
Church 1.000 SF GFA 0.30 0.63 0.22 0.13 0.22 e---O"~2_ 0.57 0.47
- _.---- -------- ___m
Day Care 1,000 SF GFA 0.66 1.39 0.49 0.28 0.49 0.49 1.25 1.04 1.04
MEDICAL .----..-
----.-- - ---. ---.--- 1,000 SF GFA
Clinic 5.18 15.54 6.64 3,91 6.84 6.84 15.54 14.67 14.67
Hospital Bed 1.22 3.66 1.61 0.92 1.61 1.61 3.66 3.45 3.45
Nursing Home Bed 0.20 0,60 0.26 0.15 0.26 0.26 0.60 0.57 0.57
OFFICE
Corporate Headquarters Building 1,000 SF GFA 1.39 4.17 2.66 1.52 2.66 2.66 4.17 4.17 _4..1~
General Office Building 1,000 SF GFA 1,49 4.47 2.85 1.63 2.85 2.85 4.47 4.47 4,4.Z_
MedicaVDental Office 1,000 SF GFA 3.66 10.98 6.99 4.00 6.99 6.99 10.98 10.98 10.98
Single Tenant Office Building 1,000 SF GFA 1.72 5.16 3.29 1.88 3.29 3.29 5.16 ~6 5.16
OfficelBusiness Park 1,000 SF GFA 1.50 4.50 2.87 1.64 2.87 2.87 4.50 4.50 4.50
COMMERCIAL .-- __H _
Automobile-related ---- -----. -- - ----
Automobile Care Center 1,000 SF GFA 2.03 6.08 2.28 1.30 2.28 2.28 5.87 4.89 4.89
Automobile Parts Sales 1,000 SF GFA 3.41 10.23 3.84 2.19 3.84 3.84 9.86 8.22 8.22
.--- 1.71 1.77 3.80 -- 3.80
Gasoline/Service Station Fueling Position 8.44 5.07 1.77 1.01 4.56 .-
Convenience Market with 12 or More Fueling Positions Fueling Position 5.89 3.53 1.24 0.71 1.24 1.24 3.18 2.65 2.65
Convenience Market with Less than 12 Fueling Positions 1,000 SF GFA 20.61 12.37 4.33 2.47 4.33 4.33 11.13 9.27__ __~c2.Z .
New Car Sales 1,000 SF GFA 2.24 6.72 2.52 1.44 2.52 2.52 6.48 5.40 5.40
Quick Lubrication Vehicle Center Service Position 3.11 9.34 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 9.01 7.51 7.51
Se~-Service Car Wash Stall 3.47 2.08 0.73 0.42 0.73 ~~ 1.88 1.56 1.56
u
Tire Store 1,000 SF GFA 2.97 8.90 3.34 1.91 3.34 3.34 8.58 7.15 7.15
.. ------ ___no -----..
Dining ------- --- ----. -30.07
___ Fast Food Restaurant with Drive- Thru 1,000 SF GFA 16.74 40.09 14.03 8.02 14.03 14.03 36.08 _ 30.07
Fast Food Restaurant without Drive-Thru 1,000 SF GFA 13.08 31.31 10.96 6.26 10.96 10.96 28.18 23.49 23.49
------ 1,000 SF GFA 5.19 5.19 13.34 11.12 11c!3....
High Tumover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 6.19 14.83 5.19 2.97
Quality Restaurant 1,000 SF GFA 4.19 10.05 3.52 2.01 3.52 3.52 9.04 7.53 7:5~
Grocery Stores and Convenience Markets -----
Convenience Market with 12 or More Fueling Positions Fueling Position 5.89 3,53 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 3.18 2.65 2.65
Convenience Market with Less than 12 Fueling Positions 1,000 SF GFA 20.61 12.37 2.47 2.47 2.47 2.47 11.13 9.27 9.27
Supermarket 1,000 SF GFA 7.37 22.10 4.74 4.74 4.74 4.74 21.31 17.76 ,17.Z?..
Other Retail -- . . ----
Free-Standing Retail Store 1,000 SF GFA 2.53 7.59 2.85 1.63 2.85 2.85 7.32 6.10_ 6.10
Fumiture Store 1,000 SF GFA 0.21 0.63 0.24 0.14 0.24 0.24 0.61 0.51 0.51
PharmacylDrugstore 1,000 SF GFA 5.30 15.91 5.97 3.41 5.97 5.97 15.35 12.79 12.79
Shopping Center 1,000 SF GFA 2.47 7.41 2.78 1.59 2.78 2.78 7.14 5.95 5.95
Video Arcade 1,000 SF GFA 5.32 15.96 5.99 3.42 5.99 5.99 15.39 12.83 12.83
_..-- Video Rental Store 1,000 SF GFA 7.65 7.65 19.68 16.40 16.40
6.80 20.40 7.65 4.37 --
Wholesale
Wholesale Market 1,000 SF GFA 0.21 0.63 0,24 0,14 0.24 0.24 0.61 0.51 0.51
SERVICES ... -'
Bank (Walk-In) 1,000 SF GFA 19.89 33.71 11.80 6.74 11.80 11.80 30.34 25.29 25.29
--, Bank (Drive-In)
1,000 SF GFA 29.03 49.20 17.22 9.84 17.22 17.22 44.28 36.90 36.90
Cl)o 0 0 00000 OOOCO
0 0 00000 OOOCO
.~ 0 . . . . . . . . . . .
+"'- en en CO Lt)"f"'""f"'"N Lt) 0...... en
OLt) 0 ~ en~~co~ ......NLt)CD
CI):!: CD N CO O~ CD~ "f"'"~ ~~ q, Lt)~ Lt)~ CD~
~ ~
=:N M N "f"'"N"f"'""f"'""f"'""f"'"M"f"'"
WO ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~
CI) N CO 0 0 000 000 Lt)
CD M CD 0 0 000 000 N
> en . . . . . . . .
+:i - CO Lt) CO Lt) O"f"'"M CON...... en
0 M en CD 0 en CDLt)~ "f"'"Nen ~
Q) CI) N ...... N Lt) ...... ......Lt)CD CD......Lt) CD
=: - ~ ~
~ "f"'" "f"'"
- W 0
::s ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~
-c 0 0
Q) Q) Cl)M 0 0
.~ en . .
(J ..c: +"'- Lt) C"') <(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(
(J 00 M 0 --------
Q) c: CI):!: CD en ZZZZZZZZ
=:en ~ ~
~ fa en "f"'" "f"'"
WO
fa c: ~ ~
- .- Q) ~
..c: -c Q) I Cl)0 0 0
W 0 0
..... s.. LL .~ en . .
::s +'" - Lt) N <(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(
0 ..... ..... oen C"') CD --------
0 Cl)e 0 Lt) ZZZZZZZZ
(J .- ~ ~
en Q) ..c =:co "f"'" "f"'"
fa wo
Q) .- ~ ~
~ c...c:
0 LL E ><
>...... - w CI)
..... (J -
E .-
.- fa :E
0 C. J
::s W CI)
E -
E :J 0
.-
..J .c
- CI)
.- ...
>< w CI) >
:J D. ... w
fa ..J Q) .CI) (!)
:E CI) D. ~
...
Q) LL CI)
D. +'" CI) W
Q) 0 LL >
C'IS'i:' +'"
CI) o.CI) O"f"'" NM ~Lt) CD ......CO<(
LL
+'" Ed) C'IS C'IS C'IS C'IS C'IS C'IS C'IS C'lSC'IS...J
0 -::E o.Q) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) Q)CI)<(
cu- E ... ... ... ...............u
0.... CI) ... -<( <(<(<(<(<(<(<(-
eS +'" CI) ~ Q) CI) CI) CI) CI) Q) CI) CI) ffi
C'IS+",
_ CI) 3: C'IS o 000 0 000
...:E S;: ~ .- .- .- .- .- .- .- .- :E
CI) _ "O~~~~~~~~:J
+'" - en : cuQ)CI)CI)CI)CI)CI)CI)CI)z
CUor- C'Clor-
;:- ;:- ~cncncncncncncncn
>.
co
3:
-0
co
o
eO:::
N
~ E
Cl ::J
~ E
~ .x
a.. co
~~
UJ
~-o
UJ 2
t3 co
:i: ::J
~ 0
a:: co
~o
UJ
f-
~
N
I
5w
i=
u
UJ
...J
...J
o
U
co
Q)
...
<(
Q)
()
2:
Q)
CI)
06
2:-
o
0)
Q)
......
co
o
Q)
CJ)
::>
-0
c
co
.....J
>.
..0
Q)
::J
-0
Q)
...c
()
CI)
<co
ui
i='
z
::>
:>
W
c
<,...
ui
<co
-ui
:!:
I
J:
W
~<Il)
enui
t:::
z
::>
Wo < v
ui
~
W
en
en ~ l'?
en en
en
"C"'"
-
......
c
Q)
E
CJ)
CJ)
Q)
CJ)
CJ)
<(
Q)
Q)
LL
...J
<(
I-<N
Oui
I-
~.....
en
......
o
co
a.
E
I-
Z
w
~t::
oz
..J::J
W
>
W
o
>
0::
o
C)
W
I-
<
o
w
en
::J
o
Z
<
..J
::::
..0
...c
x
W
~I
ail
(0
lco <oIl'- O)LO
LO 101...... 0 Ol
1 '<to N. IX). 10. 0.
i~ f'- CJ) co ('l')
'E.9t1;tlE.9 E.9itl;t
en!......~ILOIN NI
~!~~fe~i
..tIMI..tIN.~1
: I I i
iE.9!tI;tiE.9!tI;ttA-l
I~I~I~I%~I
! i I i I
lE.9:tI;t tA- tI;t tA-
l IX) 0> l.D ,... M
,.........N<OOl
'<tl'-M~I'-
N T""-N" T"""
tI;t
,
COI
(0 I
co .
ai
N
E.9
v
~I
E.91
IN
1(0
LO
<D
..-
E.9
E.9t1;ttA-~tA-
'<t
(0
LO
ri
..-
encoLOIOOl
NOO(O"<t
OvOlI">.l.D
N- T"'"- ~ ,.-
E.9
E.9 tI;t tA- ~ tA-
~I
1">1
.1
r- ,
..- I
i
(,,)O>LOIIOOl
enO>MvN
I 1C'l I'- '<t r- co
:N~N~
, I I
E.9 ~ tA- ~ tA-
E.9
N
o
o
N
..-
l.D<Ol.DCO"<t
en v IX) 01'-
r-. N. l.D. "!. LO
,.- T""" ~ or-
E.9
E.9 ~ tA- ~ tA-
COI
;'g:
.1
r-,
"-1
,~ ~!~!~ a;
ICO CO'<tICO I'-
N~C'\I-i~
E.9
i
'E.9 ~ tA- ~ tA-
l!!
tJ
<(
~~i1~it
t9C>t9C>0
u..u..u..u..u..
Cf)C/)Cf)C/)CJ)
00000
00000
00.0.0.0.
T""" T""" "Il""'" T""" .....
Ol
e::
'e::
::J
t5
.l!!
::J
e::
III
~
Cii
(ii 'I::
-I 'C Cii
< Ui ::J
Z ::J "C
~ "OE
0:: (ii 1: >-
we:: :E>~
I- ..J Ol :g l'll
o '~ < :::i J: c..
zmii:-_~
<I-I-~~"
I- 15 C/) Q) W UJ
0::2::Jlii~-6
OI-Oc!)C>1:
a. Z
co O~ 10> [IX) I
I'- LO CO. N !I
f'.,"-.T'""tO
~ 1'-.: <O'iM,
ii'
itA-E.9!tI;t:tA-!
l.D 1C'l!lOloi
o 1C'l.iV ILO'I'..
l.D. 0.1 <0. LO. I
"'Ot (V') C\I 'C""" i
. I
i . !
tA-E.9lt1;tltA-1
f'.,.-,-.......
LOCOI'-Ol
N......COO
MN~-r-~
tA- E.9 tI;t tA-
0l1X)0>......
WOlOl'-
MIX)IO'<t
~NN"~
tA- E.9 tI;t tA-
CO'<tIOLO
1'-r-100
LO(")ON
MNN"~
tA- E.9 ~ tA-
C\l1X)1O'<t
18 ~ ~~.l
lcO l.O 'lit" C\II
tA- tA- ~ tA-
WOCOW
<Oo..-w
..... or- <0_ q
C"fNT"""'C"""
~ E.9 ~ tA-
......LOI">W
C\l 0 (0......
I'- IX) 10. Ol
(,r,.- or-
tA- Efl ~ tA-
+-' ...... ...... o+J
'c '2 '2 'c
::J:::l::J:::l
Ol 0) Ol Ol
~:E:E~
~.~ II
o ICl 0 0
CD
UJ
0)5
e::.s::.
'en ~
is III
~~
III 'c
s:~
Ol
c::
'iij
::l
o
J:
]~ ~
'fi 'E 'c
~JJ!~E
O:E8?g
..J~~ W()
c(E~E~
j:: III c:: 0 c::
zu..Q)J:~Cl
wjQ-€~~z_
Cg'1'll.c+>t;2
~U5~~~g~
a:: ..J
C\l-r......i1
MI(")
<'I..!o.1
LOI'<t
I i
tA-1E.9!
~I~~I
C\I ! .......
C\il"':
I .
tA-1E.9.
I'- N i
Ol co
co. '<to
...... ......
tA- E.9
0(")
OlCO
Olr-
tA- E.9
...... LO
...... N
coco
tA- Efl
WCO
MOl
O. r-
tA- E.9
I'- (")
......LO
I'- LO
~ Efl
MCO
"<tCO
<0. N..
...... ......
tI;t Efl
E E
o 0
o 0
0::0::
il I . I I ' ,
ILO ...... LO!OlI..-,NIOI......ilX)
1(0 N "<t Olvll'-l")IO,r-
'~~I~,o.<'l..i""" ~'I<'I..,N..
jLOOM!1C'l!O' N......i(")
IX)"-I I......IN! 1(")
N ! i I ~ I i
Efl ~itA-;E.9I~iEfll~ItA-IE.9
IIX) "-10l '<t1.O!Mim!.MI......
ILO co N ......!IOII'-.O...... N
."- 10 "<t '<ti<OINLO.N
IN ~~~I~i :~i i~
'N I. ,....-
.- I !,
Efl ~:tA-E.9I~ItA- ~tA-E.9
, I 'I
I~.
M
o
......
co M (") ..- NlcolLO Ol
l8 C\i ~ ~ wl~;; ~
ri~~jr--: -r-- N
......
Efl~tA-Efl~tA-~tA-Efl
NCOMOO>NIOI'-CO
IX)NM'<tNMl")C\lOl
OOWIX)CO IONN
..tN NM <!5
LO
Efl~tA-Efl~tA-E.9tA-Efl
M..-COCO<OI'-m<oco
Ol(o......NI">NI">COLO
~~LO;:Jri v......:6
oo:r
EflE.9tA-Efl~tA-~tA-Efl
OI">C\lNCO"<t
ONWI'-OM
to..-WClO
iltOl N. IN"-<f
LO' . I
I I I
tA- E.9 tA- Efl ~ tA-
OCOOl
<OMIX)
1OC\lLO
<D
E.9 tA- Efl
N 0 0l'1X) 10 '<t co 10 N
Olr-LOLOI'-NCO<OCO
......v."<tOI'-. l")......LO
ci..- NN -.:i
M
tA-~tI;tEfl~tA-E.9tA-Efl
I...... co'...... LO co "<t en 1'-1(")
1~1~~5 ~ LO l8 ~I~
OJ <0' i~.
tA-E.9tA-EflE.9tA-E.9t1;tEfl
e W ~
o W 0
<(1-<
~~
t9C>
u..u..
Cf)C/)
00
00
00
!~ -r-"
i
Ul
m
~
'(3
11l
u....J
01<
,!: z
010
"0-
o~
...Jc(
.... W
Ql 0::
=0
Ow
0::
Ul
~
"(3
l'll
u..
"0
C
l'll
Ul
..0
:J
C3
(ii
C
,2
(;j
~ '-
o CD
Q) ro
a: -"<:: CD
-e::.s::.
:E~~
(ii Cll
~~:3
m
01
I:: CD
~ ~
l'll g' 8
~ :~ :g
<(oC>
~ W
l'll-
Q) 0
CJ)J:
I
I
i
rot
Cll :J
CJ)8
~ Qi
t9~
l!!.t::.
:JI-
1ii CD
e:: 'S:
,_ 0
::!::!
..- IX)
co Cl
WeD
-r-- ri
tA- E.9
co 0
...... co
I'- LO.
..-
tA- E.9
0......
......'<t
W (").
tA- Efl
IX) 0
......0
M r-
tA- E.9
0(")
W r-
N1C'l
tA- Efl
M N
M (")
M,r-
tA-IEfl
01'-
M 0
N1C'l
tA- Efl
WLO
w'<t
LO N
tA- Efl
<(<(
Ll.. u..
C>t9
u..u..
CJ)Cf)
00
00
o. o.
...... ......
..J
~c(
:JZ
00
Uj::
UJ'::J .s::.
'c ~ e
Cj::.E
~lf)U
Z
I'-'CO v
(O.tO:~
-r-INIO
C\i:N1N"
Lt):""'-I
tA-1E.91~
I I
Nloi......
~I~[~
C'\IIlt')~
N
tA- E.9 ~
to'LO,1O
o,("),v
1'-.1 Cl.I.CO
WI(")I
......! i
, I
tA-[EflI~
~ II~ ;;;
co (") I">
Ol!N
i '
tA-IEflI~
M '<tIN
co 01"-
o 0l'1">
as -r':
~Efl~
0l(,,)0>
C\l(")0>
M'<tl">
ci N,
......1 I
tA-iEfl\~
C\ll'<t:co
~i18l~
"":1...:1
tA-EflI~
I
LOr-m
LOIIX) l")
Ol 'N 10
~IM
tA- Efl ~
<(
u..
C!)
Ll.."O"C
CJ)mw
0C:C1O
o
0_
......
~ ..J
l'll c(
Uo
:>. -
l'll 0
ClW
:e
m
E
o
J:
-
l'll 0)
o 'E.. ,!: w
:~ UJ !!! 0
O:JU:
o:r:zu..
o
C"lO<O'<t1'-
C"lOIOLOO
co 0>0 C"l 0
-.:i'lfi,oir:t5<O'
~~("l")~.-
Efl ~,tA- Efl ~
CO'VIO M 0
C"l0>0l'<t'<t
C"lI'-COOOCO
<0'<0'<0''''':<0'
......
E.9 ~ (f) Efl EI7
l")IOVr-CO
COOO'<tl")
'<t co' co 1C'l co
-.:i,-<f:~..o v
; ~'
I ,
tl;t1~itl;tIEflE17
o!<o!wlo'l")1
~.I~j~J~..~.
C"liv:~:'<tv
E.9i~itA-Efl E.9
~:glg&j :2
"-11">:C\loo l")
cri i ri ai cri cri
, ,
E.91~.(f)iE.9'Efl
Olll'-iLO 0:(0
o O>ilOjl.D N
O,NiIOOl l")
..t' -<f' ci ...t '<to
......
EflI~;tA-Efl ~
~I~g ~ ~
r-:m M '<t en
N'NI'-. M N
I
,
E.9 ~!tI;t Efl tI;t
LO V 0 '<t...-
'<t..-<OMV
1'-. 0 co co 0
C"l-<foi-.:i'<t
I
Efl ~ i tI;t tA- EI7
<(<(<(<(<(
u..u..Ll..u..u..
c.9C>0t9C>
u..u..Ll..u..u..
CfJC/)CJ)Cf)CfJ
00000
00000
O. O. O. O. O.
-c- T""" T"" ~ T"""
Ol
c::
:Q OJ
'5 c::
c:c :Q
f!! C) "5
Q) ,!: Cll c:c
~BOQ)~
6- '5 li:: .g ~
"0100011)
~~~cID
:r:iEC::l'llC::
CD 0 ~ c:: 'iii
..... _ _ W :::l
~roCiiI-CD
o W .~ ~ ~
E-e::"COJ<;::
OQlCll=_
Ut9::!enO
>-
ctl
;:
"'0
ctl
o
eO::
N
~ E
Cl :J
~ E
~ 'x
(L ctl
~~
w
~-o
w2
d ctl
J: :J
~ ()
a:: ctl
~()
w
I-
C2
C\/
I
6W
~
()
W
...J
...J
o
()
ctl
Q)
L...
<C
Q)
()
2:
Q)
CI)
~
~
o
0)
Q)
......
ctl
()
Q)
(/)
:J
"'0
C
ctl
-l
>-
.0
Q)
:J
"'0
Q)
.c
()
CI)
......
c
Q)
E
(/)
(/)
Q)
(/)
(/)
<C
Q)
Q)
u..
......
()
ctl
0-
E
......
:.a
.c
><
W
j::' 'e(
Zui
:J
::>
W
~~
-(/)
~
I
J:
W
~e(
fJ)ui
!:::
Z
:J
We(
Oui
>
~
W
fJ)
o;~
en(/)
en
~
-
...J
~e(
Qui
I-
lJ
GI
2 i!:
.r:: III
21-;-c :E
.r:: QI ~ ell
I-;- 'E: ~ u
~o-m ii
'1:: :; 'c
00& ell
.r::.r::-.. >
j j ~ g
........0 (,)
laco 'CQjQj
....~.,!.cc~~
iiliilwco III coco
iiiiii';:'5m~~
&&~.l9.s~~Qj
"'C "'C 0 13 (/) C I:: ~ J!i
l!! 0 0 E a:: ~ ,!!! .!!! co ell
ag'.f.f~~eII:ii:iiE~
QI .- ....a) .... .r:: ~ U E: E: QI ell
....c a)0l~0 o...c
i=a~~Ioc!i88~o
e(
ui
~!~~!ro'miNlro ~ N
m ~ ~,NI~i~lo ID ~
~~I~,~~!~~~ ~
~ m C"l'lmINlm <0 .o~-
::,:,~i:I:: N
, , fl' I
C"l C"lt'<O m'~ 0
C"l m ~ N m......
~ ~.I~.o_q~
r-:N~~~ro
~ ~
~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~
~~
~Ire ~
~.I ,M ro
;:IN~
~I~~
ro NINlm
g gi~!~
cD cil~IC"l-
~! I
~~'~~
~ro<o~~
<0<0 ro...... N
mm<OON
"":1 cD ai N- ai
~I
~~~~~
......~~~~~C"lNC"l
mC"l~ro~C"l~~"""
N~~~N<OOOro
ri.oN"":cDC"l..o"":~
~~~~~~~~~
~O~......~~roNN
mC"lm<O......~C"l<O~
<o~o~_~m=-rom
N-~N......~.N... C";
~~~~~~~~~
~ro<O~N~ro......~
~ro~<OC"loroOC"l
~~<oro.~roN......O
ri'ON......cDri.o....:.o
~~~~~~~~~
~roC"lC"lC"l~NNro
roo~mNC"l<O<Oro
C"lOro.N.~<O<O~~
N~""""""~Nri ri
I
~ ~ ~t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
e(
ui
C"lC"lO~~~mN~
<oro~~OC"lro~m
-.;;t--LO~~O("')<X)O')
.0 m- ~ ri ...... cD a;j ......- r-:
~
~~~~~~~~~
I-
Z
W
:E
D..
o
...J
W
>
W
o
C c
goLtLt
'ijj ~ C!> C!>
o ou.u.
a..a..(/)C/)
g>g>oo
~~88_
~ ~ .
T"""'"""'u..u.'r"'""T'""
C
2 Lt
'~ t9
a..liiU.
~en~
'~ 8.
QI
C/)
LtLt
t9t9
u...u.
C/)C/)
00
00
o. o.
>-
a::
o
t9
W
I-
<(
(,)
W
(/)
:J
o
Z
<(
...J
Ul
C
~~
g'iij
'~ ~
a.. OJ
Ol ,!:
~~
~u.
U.N
~~
o co
~=
o ~
N QI
...... ...J
L.. r:::.r=.c.
.sl 13 ,Q j j
'C~liiiiiQjQj
$()C/)en~~
1lIl!!~~coco
2! co co .- ~ ~
ci.!!()D..~~~
;:;.-.!!1.!!1(/)CC
...., .Q :c :c Q; .!!! ,!!!
a::oooccc
WEEE-QlQJ
:E oS 0 0 ~ 1; E:
:!:j'S'Scooo
o <(<(<(t9()()
(,)
....
.sl
c
QI
()
QI
'0
:c~
~~
c ....
a) 0 co
~B()
.w 'C ~
~ .g .~
co ...J QI
().J<:C/)
~ CJ ~
QI ':; Qj
Zo(/)
<0 0...... m
~~~m
m~~~
cD C"l. ai cD
OroC"lN
......
~~~~
~ m ......IN
omo~
~<om~
.o.ocD"":
"'lO;f"('W')T'""T'""
~~~~
m~~m
rom~......
~NC"l~
a;jci~ai
C"l C"l ......
~~~~
~VNO
C"loro~
Nro~O
ci.or-:.o
N~
~~~~
NvroN
~VN~
LO m '""'" T"""
<0- N cD ~.
...... ......
~~~~
~O......<O
~~C"l0
......~roC"l
......cDr-:.o
N ......
~~~~
~C"lN~
<O~N~
<O~~<O
~"":.ori
...... ~
~~~~
("'),.-('I")T"""
ON......N
0.....C"l0
<0. a;j ri m-
C"lN......
~~~~
LtLtitit
t9C!>t9t9
u...u.u.u.
C/)C/)C/)C/)
0000
0000
o_qo_q
,.... T""" ,... ......
romo
Nroro
~m......
m.Nri
C"l<O
~~I~
m~m
N m m
00 m
~- ~. <0-
...... N
~~I~
m-.rC"l
......<0......
~mm
ri~N
......N
~~~
m<oo
......<OC"l
~~:6
~~~
~......~
(") N m
rom~
N-.o
~~~
~Nm
<OC"lO
ro_~~
~cDN
......
~~~
m-.ro
C"lro~
~~m
N ~-
~~~
~~~
~o~
~......ro
ri......ai
...... ......
~~~
5<(<(
~~~
Ou...u.
D..C/)(/)
g> 0 0
=00
~ 0_ 0_
u...........
a)
c
~~
~ 'en
'ijj 0
oD..
a.. Ol
Cl ,!:
i~
U.N
QI......
.... C
o co
~=
.... Ul
o Ul
N QI
..... ...J
.r:: .r::
jj
C>>..q-,....,-mN
m~m~NN
~~~~:: ~-~
N' ~ N ~ ~
I
~!~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i
C"l1~10 ~ ro C"l
~~~~mN
N~~o~m
m. m- ai ai ~-
~ .....N
~,~ ~ ~ ~ ~
oiro ro ro ro......
~~m~~~
ro<o~<o~......
~- cD r-: <0- ......
...... ..... N
~~~~~~
~C"l<O~N~
0~00C"lC"l
......C"l<OO<OO.
~ a;j ~- a;j ~
~
~~~~~~
N.....moo~
<oro~ro~C"l
C"lNONOO
ri r-: C"l- r-: ai
~~~~~~
<om~N~ro
m~omC"l~
NC"lO~:O~.
~ ai ~!ai ;:
: i i
~~'~I~i~~
~m~(")<o<o
~~C"lo~m
mNNmNm
N cD NO <0- r-:
~~~~~~
<oomONm
,-r---COLt')('f')..-
ro~N<OC"lC"l
cD ~. cD ~ a;j
...... ..... ~
~~~~~~ ~
itititititit it
t9t9t9t9t9t9 t9
u.u.u.u.u.u. u.
C/)(J)C/)(J)C/)(J) C/)
000000 0
000000 0
o.o.o_o.qo. q
T""" or- 'r"" T'"" T'"" T'"" T"""
l!!
o
en
'iij
Qj
a::
Cl
c
:0
c
co
en
I
C1l
l!!
u.
l!!
o ~ Q)
~2 .8 ~
l!!2c (J) co
OoQl~1ii ~
en>.()~C.s!C1l
l!!UOl....C1llllliiC/)
:3 co ,!: <( a:: a) a) W
- ~ 0.0 o.s!.!!1U
'E- t: 0. QI C1l 0 0 ->
coO"O"'C..c.r::
~a:V55>::~ffi
(/)
~
o
roo
~
m 0
C"l<O
~ ~-
ro C"l
~
~~
o
~
~
MiT"""
C"l m
~,O
a;jcD
C"l:~
~
~~
C"l
~
<0
ro~
~o
<0: <0
N-: 1"--
:[:
~
~
~
C"l
~ C"l
c;~
~- ~
~ N
~
~~
m
~
N
~ ro
C"l C"l
mC"l
rici
~ N
~
~~
~
~
C"l
~ m
o ro
rom
r-:.o
......N
~
~~
~
~
N
--!co
C"llm
C"l,m
., -
~'I'~
~~
~
<0
<0
~
~J~
~ ro
N ~
cil~-
C"l~
I
~~
<(<(
u.u.
t9t9
u...u.
C/)(/)
00
00
0_ o.
~ .....
'2"2
II
.J<: QI
Iii ,~
~Ci
.J<: .J<:
C C
co co
COCO
';fl.';ft .... .... 0 0 N NNNNNNN
~N C7lN N CO "'= 0 CD IOCDIOCDIOCDc.o
CO CO M &ei .... cD M riMriMriMri
.- 0 ~cci ,... en CIO en C7) CJlC7)CJlC7)CJlC7)C7l
- -
C.lN vN It) CO. .... ~ V vvvvvvv
~~ ~ .... .... ....
fA WN
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~
CU ';fl.~
3: ,... "It V 0 NNNNNNNN
cP VI") CO c.o N 0 CDIOCDc.oCDc.oCDc.o
"C >.... C"l"" N cci a:i cD MriMriMriMM
,- 0 ~N .... It) It) C7) C7)CJlC7)CJlC7)C7lC7lC7l
CU UN VI") II) CC!. "": "It. "ltv"ltvvvv'"
0 ~~ ~ .... .... ....
0:: wN
6It ~ ~ 6It ~~~~~~~~
~ ';fl.';!. 0 0 0 0 N NNNNNNN
~o C"lC7l 0 It) It) 0 CD 10 CD 10 CD 10 CD 10
~ It) 0 &ei ~ .,f cD M riMriMriMM
Q) .- 0 o~ N 0 N en C7) CJlC7)CJlC7lC7lC7lC7l
.... UN vI") .., CC!. .... "It. .., v"'v"'v"''''
CU ~N ~ .... .... ....
3: wN
~ ~ ~ ~ ~..,.6It~~~~~
Q) ';ft~
.... 0 0 0 0 IDI/)ID 1t)1D1t)1t) It)
fA ~,... v.... 0 0 0 0 ClC!Cl C!ClClCl Cl
CU ('01'" c:i c:i 0 c:i .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ....
.- C7l N~ II) II) 0 0 NNC"l NC"lNC"l N
--
3: C.l.... I' II) "It. en N.. "'v'" v'" v'" ..,
cP- f"i
:=0 .... ....
~- w....
6It ~ ~ 6It ~~~~~~~6It
Q) ';fl.~
.... 0 0 0 0 .... ~....~....~.... ~
CU ~c.o CIOI") 0 0 0 0 ID I/)ID I/)ID 1/)11) It)
3: ....0 c:i c:i 0 c:i M riMriMMMM
.- C7l aiM 0 II) 0 II) 0 0000000
Q) --
C.l.... CD .., N.. C!- or: .., v"''''''' v"''''
cP- f"i
0 ~ :=0 .... .... ....
Q) c: 0 w....
~ CO 11. 6It 6It ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~
CU c: .... '#.~ 0 0 0 0 CD IOCDIOCDIOCDc.o
- .- .- """ ~c.o It) 0 0 0 0 0 C7) CJlC7)CJlC7)CJlC7)C7l
J: "'C c: I ....0 c:i c:i 0 c:i LI'i Il'iLl'iIl'iLl'iIl'iLl'ian
.... ~ :J LL. ;:2! r.:&ei 0 0 0 0 CXl ooCXlooCXlooCXloo
~ 0 C.ll") coc.o I") .... .... .... C"l 1'?C"l1'?C"l1'?C"l1")
0 ..... ~~ M .... .... ....
Q) .- w"lt
..c
en Q) (.) .- ~ ~ ~ 6It ~~~~~~~~
~ Q) .~ ..c
0 LL. >< ';ft~ 0 0 0 ~:$~~~:$~~
~I") C"ll") 0 0 0
~..... Q) W It) I") c:i c:i 0 zzzzzzzz
.- C7l u)M
....Oen -- 0 0 0
C.lo It) I") 0 ,... C"l_
.- CO ~:!::: N' ....
U a. ~ WC7l
Em 6It 6It ~
- Q) ~ ~:$~:$~:$~:$
- 0 0 0 0
~o co 0 0 0
~ I' c:i c:i 0 zzzzzzzz
.- C7l r.:
"C -- 0 0 0
C.lC7l It) It!. II) C!-
Q) cP-
:=.... .... ....
J: w....
(.) 6It ~ ~
en
c:
0
+:i -
(.) 0:: 'c
Q) 0 :J .!!
0: -
- 'c ~ i
- CL. 'E
0 :J I
0:: w cu
U ~ cu U
W :J u..
::E> 'E ..J .!!! :c
Q) :JO cu ... cu
u.. W cu Cl >
Q) ::EW l1.. C ...
11. -en ell :J en Q)
~~ 'EI ...J II) l1..
.!: ... II) a-
.... ::EO:: ell II.. 0 Q)
(.) en CL. - u.. Q)
II..U a- U ell II..
cu o~ 0 ell llS"i:' ell -
Q. u.. ell Q.eIl u.. ~.... NC"l"'lI)c.ol'CIO
ww u.. EGi
ell - >- Q.lUl'lIlUl'lIlUlllllll'll
E C)C) ell CJ ::::E cu E ~ e ~ e ~ e ~ ~
<< u.. CU"i:' II) ... ~
- ~~ Cl Coli) -ell 'tl ;:.<<<<<<<<
zz E- llS_ cu I'll cP Q) cP Q) cP G) cP G)
ww ~ _ II) ~~ 0 ~.~ .~.~,~,~.~.~.~
ou ~ ~::E S 0:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0:::0:: - : 1/)- Cl ~ cP Q) cP Q) cP G) cP G)
ww 0 cu.... ~~ ~ o:::t/lcnt/lcnt/lcnUlrn
l1..CL. ~ 3:-
c:
:;::l
0
OJ
Ii:
OJ
n::
(II Q.
e <(~
<t u::,
OJ ....N
0 8 +
.~ N
OJ Q.
(f) <(;k
~ U ~
t:'o N
o .~+
f').
rn
U w
OJ w
rn LL
::J
"'C to
c:
nl Ol
N ...J ....::1
<D >. Ul
M al a..
Ol .!!! 0::
..,. I-
:J
"'C
OJ
II) .c: ~\.
C! 0
..... (f) E...
N c:
..,. c. .-
0 o c:
:;::l Qj::l
0 >
OJ '"
0
0
U
OJ
OJ
LL
>.
nl
::
"'C
rn >-
0
n:: 0::
0
UJ Cl
W
...J N I-
:;; U. <(
UJ ..... U
...J
U :a w
:r Ul
UJ .c: ::I -I
> >< 0 <(
~ W Z
w Z ~
a. 5
UJ 0::
I- W
~ I-
z 0
0 z
f= <(
u
UJ I-
...J 0::
...J 0
0
u a..
lD
N ~cv)
ro en ('oj
N en co ill
EI} Y}- Y}- (I} Y}
o
o
o
('oj
""""'\:fLO,.....,.....,.....,.....,.....,.....t---t---t-r--
~ Ef) {A- ,.....- .,...: ~ ,.....~ .,-- ~ {A- Y} EI} EI}
W vt (fl vt fA- vt f:fl
I"-
M
r-:
('oj
<ococ.o<o
EI} W W EI}
000000
000000
~~<X)~~~
NON 0
orooo
00')00
l!)enl!)O
comlX!~
('oj ('oj
00
00
00
ro ro
o
o
o
ro
000
000
M M l!)
"'N
000
0000000000000
00000000000000
COl!)ocococococoenoooo
<D,...."!CDCD<O(DC'O<OCX)~co~
N NNNNNN
00
00
00
o ro
-.i
o
o
o
~
0000
0000
"'en..,...,.
"":"":"":"":
o
o
o
ro
000000
000000
ONCODe
~6COCOCO~
o
o
o
ro
00
00
NN
ro co
cici
Q;
rn
.>< '"
c.c
,- I-
0:: aJ
aJ >
U ,-
_-I
c;;-
lIO
r..:
II)
I"-
.,.
II
"tl
Gl
;;:
'u c: :S :5
~ Q; In .Q '~ ~
~U)"O~~~1Vw
ro",Q)UCfJUJ~
o..~:ffiQ)~~ro~
~-"'ro<1l'-::'!:::'!:
~~~';"On.~Q)aJ
c: '00 U ~ ~ ~ Ul g g
Q) ~ ~ n ~ D m .~ .~
~~WEEE~aiai
ClU~OOOg~~
0~8~~~<388
ce: e:
;=t:;=t:,g,g;=t:;=t:,g ;=t:
<.? <.? 'iij '00 <.? <.? '00 <.?
o 0 0
~~n.n.~~n."iij~
g 00 ,~ ,~ 00 00 ~ Ci5 0
ooCiQiool.. g
- -:J :J Q)
,.....,.....l.LL1..cn,.....(/)
U) e:
e: 0
2~
'00 a
on.
n. Cl
Ole:
~Q)
Q) ::J
::JLL
LL",
~.....
o e:
E <1l
;;
o U)
~~
<(<(<(<(
LLLLLLLL
<.?<.?<.?<.?
u..u..u..u..
en en en en
0000
DODO
o~ 0_ 0_ 0_
<(<(
u.. u..
<.?<.?
u..u..
en en
00
00
00
<(<(<(<(<(<(
u..u..u..u..u..u..
<.?<.?<.?<.?<.?<.?
u..u..u..u..u..u..
en en en en en en
000000
000000
C!.o_~o_o~~
or- ,..... ,..... ,..... ,..... ,.....
<(
u..
<.?
u..
en
o
o
o
<(<(
u.. u..
<.?<.?
u..u..
en en
00
00
00
~
U
<(
<(<(<(<(<(
u..u..u..u..u..
<.?<.?<.?<.?<.?
u..u..u..LLu..
en en en en en
00000
00000
o_o_~o_o_
,..... ,..... ,..... ,..... ,.....
-
'c 'c 'c 'c
::J::J::J::J
0>0>0)0)
.~ ~ .~ ~
Qi Qi Q) Qi
3 333
0000
E E
o 0
o 0
0::0::
<(<(
u..u..
<.?<.?
Q) Q) Q)1.Lu.ro~rot::
U OJ GU)U) Q) 0 Q) ~
<(1-<(ooenIenU
00
00
<(<(
u..u..
<.?<.?
u..u..
en en
00
00
o_~
<(
u..
<.?
u.."O"O
en Q) Q)
ororo
o
o
<(<(<(<(<(
u..u..u..u..u..
<.?<.?<.?<.?<.?
u..u..u..u..u..
en en en en en
00000
00000
c: 0_ 0_ c: c:
,..... ,.....,..... ,..... ,.....
.... .... U)
"0 Q) t::
t9~5
Q).cU
~ ~ .!Q
~.- c
.~ ~ a5
::'!::21-
~
110
.0
~ 0
II d g>
"tl N'C
~ "': ~ g>
.~ ; ro 32
a. n~01'S
Ul "tl Q) ,,, Q) CO
(; .! ~ "'C U (])
z ~::J'Sli:~
:r :5..gcoOO
<( Q)~~[1J"iij
~ ~...Ili:]3
i= ~-I I~20e
::I.c<1l<( ~gw~~ro
1-1-_ ~U~!,! Q."ooU 8.aJ06
E~O~~:;U:o~Q)
~OO~')IZ130<.?:2
.B
2 ~
2 .= (ij
.c I c: ~
I- Q) <1l Gl
Q; ~8:; g
c > ~ .~
c3 ~~& ~
Q.J .~:Ec 0
:!d.c 333 U
J::rJ) ----0
~~ ~~~c~~~ ~
am 2~~~U)rnm 0:::
~~u ~~Q;~e!2~ c:n~
rn~~ rrO:::>1;j.s~~~S:6Ci5
en ::J 'S; Q) -g -g E & l/) ~ ai ro Gl e: Q)
ro -I l.. 0 :J 1:' 'c "c E a:: <1l ....
U c?5 ~~~'-~GJW(l) ....'12
t5 ,.!.. U5 .- en Vi .c m g E; > ~ Q) OJ 'E
~ '5 (j) ~ .S: co co .2> ::J ~ 0 5 ::J :5 C1) :J
zOenJ=ou..u..IOClUUenOU:u..
U)
U) e:
e: 0
g~
'w 0
on.
n. Cl
Ole:
~ID
Q) ::J
::JLL
u..",
Q) .....
o e:
~~
C'\I~
:5:5
'~ '~
Q)
o
i7i
m ~
~ .~
..... t5
Ol ~
.,. ::J
II e:
"0 <1l
Q) ~
~ m
'0 "C
~.~ t)
(f)<n-6
... ::J e:
0"0
"iij ~~ ~~
.~ ~ .c ro ro
~~3'~~
t-t-rnroE
~(I)mQ;UJ
26aiai~
I-Zt9t9e:
Q)
U)
Cl5
e: .c
'(j) OJ
5 Co
-ai~
ro 'c
3~
0>
e:
'00
::J
o
I
~~ Z'
-DE .~
*~_~~E
o;n..15
-I~:2Q)U
~ '~ :g ~ c Cl
~u,~_,~_~z
o~t::.o~a
u;g'[o~c
~U5<(::'!:o::g
U)
Q)
~
Ti
<1l
u..-I
g';2
'0, 0
-gi=
-1<(
w
Qii!f3
~o~
U)
~
Ti
<1l
u..
"0
e:
<1l
U)
.0
::J
U
"iij
e:
o
Q) :g
g'Q)b
m ~ tU
a::::J0::
ro~8~
a3 :~ ~ m
~O<.?I
Q)
o Q)
~2 ~
~a5~(ij
-.l)co'E
~g'~Q.J
<1l ,_ <( 0::
Efigg
~23232
n.en>>
iii
.><
ro
:2
Q) Q)
CU"iij
CIl U)
~ Q)
00
~~
2c
~&;
en "iij ,:::
~~g
~
W
l/)
.>< .><
e: c
<1l <1l
roro
INVOICE
Star-Telegram Customer ID: CIT57
400 W.7th Street Invoice Number: 166203151
FORT WORTH,TX 76102
(817)390-7761 Invoice Date: 2/4/00
Federal Tax ID 22-3148254 Terms: Net due in 21 days
Due Date: 2/29/00
Bill To:
PO Number:
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
667 N CARROLL AVE Order Number: 16620315
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092-6412 Sales Rep: 073
Description: NOTICE OF PUBLI
Publication Date: 2/4/00
Attn:
Description Location Col Depth Linage MU Rate Amount
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTII Notice is hereby given by the ZING Notic 1358 I 80 80 LINE $5.79 $463.20
City Council of me City of
Southlake,Texas that a pub-
lic heann will be held on
Sales] February,la c t00 Council ($398.40)
Meeting to be held in the
City Council Chambers of
City Hall 667 North Carroll
Avenue,Southlake,Texas.
Purpose of the public hearing
is to consider the second
reading of the following ordi-
nance: Net Amount: $64.80
ORDINANCE NO.657-A
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO
THE REGULATION OF THE
USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF
LAND IN THE INCORPORAT-
' ED LIMITS OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE TEXAS•IMPOS-
ING AN IMPACT FEE ON
NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT
IN SOUTHLAKE FOR PROVID-
ING WATER AND WASTEWA-
TER FACILITIES NECESSI-
TATED BY SUCH NEW DE-
G
ROADWAYVIMPROVOEMENTS
TO SUPPORT NEW DEVELOP-
MENT; STATING THE AU-
THORITY FOR ADOPTION OF
THE ORDINANCE; PROVID-
ING DEFINITIONS; PROVID-
ING FINDINGS AND DECLA-
RATIONS OF THE CITY
COUNCIL; PROVIDING FOR
THE ASSESSMENT, PAY-
TH MENT AND TIME OF PAY-
MENT OF A WATER AND
COI WASTEWATER FACILITIES IM-
PACT FEES AND THE FEE
SCHEDULES; PROVIDING
Bef FOR THE PLACEMENT OF n and for said County and State,this day personally appeared TAMMIE BRYANT, Bid and Legal Coordinator, for the Star-
REVENUE COLLECTED ,
Te' FROM WATER AND
S IMPACT Itar-Telegram, Inc.at Fort Worth, in Tarrant County,Texas;and who,after being duly sworn,did depose and say that the
WATEatt FEES AND ROADWAY IM tisement was published in t - •bove named paper on the listed dates:
PACT FEES INTO WATER
ANDDWASTEWATER FACILI-
TIES IMPACT FEE AC-: ed _�� \� _
COUNTS AND ROADWAY IM-I • _ -
PACT FEES ACCOUNTS ES-
TABLISHED FOR THAT
St PURPOSE; PROVIDING FOR 1 TO BEFORE ME,THIS Thursday,March 0 2000.
EXEMPTIONS; PROVIDING
FOR REFUND OF UNEXPEND-
ED FU IDIDDERIVEED
USE
OF FUPRONDS FROM WATER AND WASTE-
WATER Notary Public
FACILITIES IMPACT
FEES; PROVIDING THAT IM-
PACT FEES MAY BE ri;
PLEDGED TOWARD PAY-
MENT OL BOND ISSUES DAWN M. KUYKENDALL
AND SIMILAR DEBT tNSTRU- `�MENTS' PROVIDING THAT ��ICOMMISSION EXPIRES
THIS OI DINANCE SHALL BEThalCUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDI- y—'_SEPTEMBER 19,2009NAN -
ERAB LITY CLAUSE;PROVIDING
tr Payment
ING FOR PUBLICATION IN
——- THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER
AND PROVIDING AN EFFEC-
TIVE DATE.
City of Southlake
Sandra L.LeGrand
City Secretary
Remit To: Star-Telegram Customer ID: CIT57
P.O. Box 901051 Customer Name: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
FORT WORTH, TX 76101-2051 Invoice Number: 166203151
Invoice Amount: $64.80
PO Number:
Amount Enclosed: $
INVOICE
Star-Telegram Customer ID: CIT57
400 W.7th Street Invoice Number: 167471541
FORT WORTH,Tx 76102 Invoice Date: 2/25/00
(817)390-7761
Federal Tax ID 22-3148254 Terms: Net due in 21 days
Due Date: 2/29/00
Bill To: PO Number:
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
667 N CARROLL AVE Order Number: 16747154
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092-6412 Sales Rep: 073
Description: CITY OF SOUTHLA
Publication Date: 2/25/00
-t.,. �"-'"4.._MA a '^r•:.._.
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE ORDINANCE NO I358 1 81 81 LINE $5.79 $468.99
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
ORDINANCE NO.657-A
Sales DtscoulANHEORDINANCE
REGULATION TINTHTOTE ($403.38)
USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF
LANCORPORAT
END IN THE LIMITS OF I
DTHE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE TEXAS,IMPOS-
ING AN IMPACT FEE ON
NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT $65.61
IN SOUTHLAKE FOR PROVID- Net Amount:
ING WATER AND WASTEWA-
TER FACILITIES NECESSI-
TATED BY SUCH NEW DE-
G
ROADWAY IMPROVEEMEN S
TO SUPPORT NEW DEVELOP-
MENT STATING THE AU-
THORITY FOR ADOPTION OF
PROVID-
ING DEFINITIONS,, PROVID-
ING FINDINGS AND DECLA-
RATIONS OF THE CITY
COUNT CIL; PROVIDINGF PFOR
THE ASSESSMENT, PAY-
MENT OFOATIWATEERAY
AND
WASTEWAERIM
PACT FEET PR VOIDING FOR
THE ASSESSMENT, PAYMEN -
MENT OF A AND TIME
IIM-'
PACT FEE' PROVIDING FOR
REVIEW OF WATER AND
PTEEEIE
PACT A FACILITIES
THE STATE FORETHEE PLACEMEON?OF
County of Ta FROM WATER Af OVD WASTED-
WATER FACILITIES IMPACT
FEES AND ROADWAY IM-
Before me,a PACT FEES INTO WATER id County and State,this day WASTEWATER FACILE personally appeared TAMMIE BRYANT, Bid and Legal Coordinator, for the Star
Telegram,pu TIES IMPACT FEE Ac- r Inc.at Fort Worth,in T rant S.4ll[ILY. Texas;and who,after beingdulysworn,did depose and saythat the
COUNTS AND ROADWAY IM- P
attached clip, PACT FEE ACCOUNTS ES-Is published in t e above named page n t e listed dates:
TABLISHED FOR THAT
PURPOSE,' PROVIDING FOR
EXEMPTIONS, PROVIDING
FOR REFUND OF UNEXPEND- -S. ned
ED FUNDS' PROVIDING FOR
USE OF FUNDS DERIVED
SUBSCRIBED FROM WATER
IMPACT E ME,THIS Thursday,March 0 000.
FEES; PROVIDING THAT IM-
PACT FEES MAY BE
PLEDGED TOWARD AENT •
OF BOND ISSS
SIMILAR DEBT INSTRU- Notary Public
MENTS' PROVIDING THATTH
CUIS MU ATTINANCE SHALL IVE OF ALL ORDE DAWN M. KUYKENDALL
NANCES'PROVIDING A SEV- ,��� COMMISSION EXPIRES
ERABILI'Y CLAUSE,PROVID- /=,
ING HE OFFICI PUBLICATION PA Iro SEPTEMBER 13,2009
Thank You AND PROVIDING AN EFynent 1"
TIVE DATE
. 9' _--
PASSED AND APPROg;
THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SOUTH,.°P
AS,ON THIS THrgd d
MAYORBRICKRY,� �4
ATTEST: ,mrz
L
Remit To: CITYSAN SE R
CITY SECRE ,�' �1 Customer ID: CIT57
APPROVED ASS°r'
CITYATTORIN€„Y J1051 Customer Name: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
FORT WORTH, TX 76101-2051 Invoice Number: 167471541
Invoice Amount: $65.61
PO Number:
Amount Enclosed: $