Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
0657ORDINANCE NO. 657
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF THE USE AND
DEVELOPMENT OF LA/qD IN THE INCORPOP~ATED LIMITS OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; IMPOSING AN IMPACT FEE ON LAND
DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTHLAKE FOR PROVIDING WATER AND
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 T}IE
ASSESSMENT, PAYMENT AND TIME OF PAYMENT OF A ROADWAY
IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR REVIEW OF WATER AND WASTEWATER
FACILITIES IMPACT FEES AND THE FEE SCHEDULES; PROVIDING
FOR THE PLACEMENT OF REVENTJE COLLECTED FROM WATER AND
WASTEWATER FACILITIES IMPACT FEES AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEES
INTO WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS
~ ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS ESTABLISHED FOR THAT
PURPOSE; PROVIDING FOR EXEMPTIONS; PROVIDING FOR REFUND
OF U1N-EXPENDED FLrNDS; PROVIDING FOR USE OF FUNDS DERIVED
FROM WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES IMPACT FEES AND
PROVIDING IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING THAT WATER AND
WASTEWATER FACILITIES IMPACT FEES AND PROVIDING IMPACT
FEES MAY BE PLEDGED TOWARD PAYMENT OF BOND ISSUES A_ND
SIMILAR DEBT INSTRUMENTS; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE
SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR
PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AiN-D PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake is responsible for and
c©mmi~ted 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
s lake\~mpact fee.ord (03/19/96) -1-
capital improvements programming processes and relying upon the
f~nding sources indicated therein; and
WHEREAS, new residential and nonresidential development causes
and imposes increased demands upon City public facilities and
services, including water and wastewater facilities, and 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
W~EREAS, 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 of the impact fee to be imposed shall be
determined by the cost of the additional public facilities needed
to support such development, which public
identified in a capital improvements program,
WHEREAS, the City Council, after careful
matter, hereby finds and declares that impact fees imposed upon
s [ake\i~act fee.ord (03/19/96) -2-
facilities shall be
and
consideration of the
residential and nonresidential development to finance specified
ma]~ public facilities in designated service areas, the demand for
wh~rk is created by such development, are in the best interests of
the general welfare of the City and its residents, are equitable,
and doe~ not impose an unfair burden on such development;
W/~EREAS, in 1987 the Texas Legislature adopted Senate Bill
336, now codified as Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code,
providing guidelines and requirements for the adoption of impact
fees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that in all things the City
has complied with said statute in the notice, adoption,
promulgation and methodology necessary to adopt 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
Wastewater and Roadway Impact Fee Ordinance.
as the Water,
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
s% ake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -3-
AUTHORITY
The City is autherized to enact this Ordinance by Chapter 395
of li~e Texas Local Government Code, and its successors, which
aulh~Prize home-rule ci~ies, among others, to enact or impose impact
fees on land within their corporate boundaries or extraterritorial
jurisdictions, and to persons with whom they have a water or
wastewater service contract, as charges or assessments imposed
against new development in order to generate revenue for funding or
recouping the costs of capital improvements or facility expansions
necessitated by and attributable to such new development; and by
the Southlake City Charter. The provisions of this Ordinance shall
not be construed to limit the power of the City to adopt such
Ordinance pursuant to any other source of local 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 chapter.
sLake\impact fee.or_d (0~/19/96)
SECTION 4
DEFINITIONS
As applied in %his Ordinance, the foliowlng words and terms
shall be used:
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)
' ' rm' - Written permission issued by the City
for the construction, repair, alteration or addition to
a structure.
(3)
Capital Construction Cost of Servi¢~ 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), 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 of the 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 of the
real estate, development, or building industries which
are not employees of the City, and, if impact fees are to
be applied within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of
the City, including one member representing the
extraterritorial jurisdiction; or consisting of the
Planning and Zoning Commission, including one regular or
ad hoc member who is not an employee of the City and
which is representative of the real estate, development,
or building industry, and, if impact fees are to be
applied within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the
City, one representative of the extraterritorial
jurisdiction area; which committee is appointed to
regularly review and update the capital improvements
program in accordance with the requirements of Chapter
395 of the Local Government Code, and it successors.
st ake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -5-
Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) - Plan which identifies
water, wastewater, and roadway capital improvements or
faciii%y expansions pursuant to which impact fees may be
assessed.
(7) City Council (Council) - Governing body of the City of
Southlake.
(8) City Public Works Director {Direc%er)
Director of the City of Southlake.
Public Works
Commercial Development For the purposes of this
Ordinance, all development which is neither residential
nor industrial.
(lO)
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.
(11)
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.
{12)
Existing Development - Ail 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.
(13)
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.
(14)
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
slake\impact fee,ord (03/19/96) -6-
(16)
Zoning Commission or City Council and which is recorded
with the office of the County Clerk.
Grow~h-Rela~ed Costs Capital construction costs of
service rel~ted 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,
existing capital improvements to
service to existing development;
or replacing
provide better
(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
contained in the capital improvements program.
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
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 of the 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.
s t ake\im~act fee. ord (03/19/96) -7-
{17)
Industrial Development Development which will be
assigned to the industrial customer class of the water or
w~s~ewater ut~ilities; generally development in which
goods are manufactured, or development which is ancillary
t3 such maxuf~cturing activity.
Lend Use Assumptions Description of the 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.
(i9)
(20)
Livinc Unit Ecuivalent (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 of the 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.
New Development - Subdivision of land; 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. New development
includes the purchase of a new water or wastewater tap.
New development includes the sale of water taps resulting
from the conversion of an individual well to the City's
water utility and includes the sale of wastewater taps
resulting from the conversion of an individual septic or
other individual waste disposal system to the City's
wastewater utility.
(21)
Offset The amount of the 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.
st ake\i~act fee.ord (03/19/96) -8-
(22)
Residential Development A lot developed for use and
occupancy as a residence or residences, according to the
city's zoning ordinance.
i 3
Roadway Facility improvement for providing roadway
service inciuting, 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
Southlake and necessitated and attributable to the new
development.
(24)
Roadway Facility Expans{o~ - 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 Improvements 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 - Area within the corporate boundaries to be
served by the capital improvements or facility expansions
specified in the capital improvements plan applicable to
the service area.
(27)
v' nit - 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.
(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
st ake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -9-
the capital improvements plan, and for which the
developer or property owner is solely responsible under
sutdivision and other applicable regulations.
Syscom related Facility A capital improvement er
fari!ity expansion which is designated in the Capital
Improvements Plan and which is not a site-related
facility. A system-related facility may include a
capital improvement which is located offsite, within or
en the perimeter ef the development site.
30)
TaD 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.
3i)
Wastewater Facility Improvement for providing
wastewater service, including, but not limited to, land
or easements, treatment facilities, lift stations, or
interceptor mains. Wastewater facility excludes
wastewater 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 existing wastewater improvement 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 Improvements Plan - Portion of the CIP, 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.
$ [ ake\in%~act fee.ord (03/19/96) -10-
(34)
(35
(36
~ - Improvement for providing water service,
including, but not limited to, land or easements, water
supply facilities, treatmen~ facilities, pumping
lavllmtl_s, storage facilities, or transmission mains.
Wi~ter fauiiil'/ excludes water lines or mains which are
constructed b,/ 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 of the City and necessitated by and
attributable to the new development.
Water Facility Expansion - Expansion of the capacity of
any existing water improvement for the purpose of serving
new development, not including the repair, maintenance,
modernization or expansion of an existing water facility
to serve existing development.
Water Improvements Plan Portion of the CIP, as may be
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)
V hi le Mil -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
APPLICABILITY 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.
B. No new development shall be exempt
impact fees as defined in this Ordinance.
from the assessment of
SECTION 6
IMPACT FEES AS
CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
No application for new development shall be approved within
~e 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 AREAS AND ROADWAY SERVICE AREAS
A. The water and wastewater service area~ are established as
shown on the Water and Wastewater Service Area Map which is Exhibit
A-1 for this Ordinance. The roadway service areas are established
as shown on the Roadway Service Area Map, which is Exhibit A-2 for
this Ordinance.
B. The service areas shall be established consistent
any facility service area defined in the CIP {Exhibit C)
utility or facility. Additions to the
designated by the City Council consistent
forth in Chapter 395 of the Local
Successors.
SECTION 8
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
service area
with the procedure
Government Code and
fees
with
for each
may be
set
its
Land use assumptions used in the development of the impact
are contained in Exhibit B of this ordinance. These
slake\i~act fee.ord (03/19/96) -12-
assumptions may be
procedure set fforth
zhs successors.
revised by
in Chapter
the City Council according to the
395 of the Local Government Code and
SECTION 9
SERVICE UNITS
Service units are established in accordance with
generally accepted engineering and planning standards.
B. Service units for water and wastewater fees shall be
calculated based on living units equivalent as determined by the
size of the water meter(s} for the development, or alternatively,
as approved by City Council, based on the recommendation of the
Director as a result of an engineering report prepared by a
qualified professional engineer licensed to perform such
professional engineering services in the State of Texas, which
demonstrates that the number of LUE's of service for the new
development will be different than those indicated by the size of
the water meter.
C. If the 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 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.
s l ake\im~act f ee.ord (03/19/96) -13-
D. If a fire demand meter (tap) is purchased for a property,
the '~eter size utilized ~o calculate the number of LUE's shall be
~ke ~imension of uhe portion of the fire demand meter which
rerlecus uhe meter slze which would provide only domestic service
to the property. Said reduced meter size shall then be utilized to
calculate the number of LUE's.
1. The meter types used to calculate the number of
LUE's shall be either simple,compound or turbine meters.
2. 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
covenant shall acknowledge the right of the City to assess
such fees to subsequent owners of the property.
shall be executed prior to the
meter and shall be filed in the
Said covenant
purchase of the fire demand
deed records of the County.
E. Upon wastewater tap purchase for lots for which no water
meter has been purchased, service units shall be based on a 1"
water meter unless other data is submitted by a professional
engineer licensed in the State of Texas,
approved by the Director.
F. A single family residential
and shall be reviewed and
household will generate 2.85
vehicle miles of demand. Other developments will generate demand
based upon size and type of development. The demand factors will
S [ ake\ir~pact fee.ord (03/19/96) -14-
be found in the Table
m.<nibi~ D-2.
G. The demand
of Equivalencies for roadways, which is
~a .... ~ w~ be found in the Table of
Equzvaiencies for water and wastewater is included as Exhibits D-l,
for roadways Exhibit D-2.
H. The City Council may revise the service units designation
according to the procedure set forth in Chapter 395 of the Local
Government Code and its successors.
SECTION 10
IMPACT FEES PER SERVICE UNIT
A. 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 improvements plan for that category of capital
improvements, by the total number of projected 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.
unit for each service
capital improvements and shall be set forth in Exhibit E-1 to
Ordinance.
Maximum assessable impact fees per service
area shall be established by category of
this
Maximum assessable fees in Exhibit E-1 may be amended by
the City Council according to the procedure set forth in Chapter
395 of the Local Government Code and its successors.
slake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -15-
Exhibit
Counril
assessable fees.
Collected fees shall be set forth in Exhibit E-2 to this
and shall not exceed the maximum fees also set forth in
E ! Current collected fees may be amended by the City
from time to time, provided they do not exceed the maximum
SECTION 11
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT FEES
A. The approval of any subdivision of land or of any new
development shall include as a condition the assessment of the
impact fee applicable to such development.
B. Assessment of the impact fee for any new development
shall be made as follows:
1. For a development which is submitted for approval
pursuant to the City's subdivision regulations following the
effective date of this Ordinance, assessment shall be at the
time of final plat approval, and shall be the value of the
impact fee per service unit then in effect, as provided in
Exhibit E-1 as set forth in Section 10(A). The City may
provide the subdivide~ with a copy of Exhibit E-1 prior to
final plat approval, but such shall not constitute assessment
wi%bin the meaning of this Ordinance.
2. For a development which has received final plat
approval prior to the effective date of Ordinance 510 and for
which no replatting is necessary prior to water tap purchase,
s l ake\i~%Dact f ee.ord (03/19/96) -16-
assessment shall be upon water tap purchase,
value of the water and wastewater or roadway impact
service unit set forth in Exhibit E-1.
and shall be the
fee per
3. Because fire protection is of critical concern to
the community as a whole, water demand related solely to fire
protection is not subject to collection of an impact fee.
However, if the fire protection capacity of the fire demand
meter is routinely utilized for domestic purposes as evidenced
by the registration of 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 domestic
capacity by its routine usage as domestic capacity.
C. Following assessment
subsection liB, no additional
shall be assessed against that
service units increases, as set
of the impact fee pursuant to
impact fees or increases thereof
development unless the number of
forth under Section 9.
D. Following the lapse or expiration of approval for a plat,
a new assessment must be performed at the time a new final plat for
such development is approved.
SECTION 12
CALCULATION OF IMPACT FEES
stake\i.loact fee.ord (03/19/96) -17-
Section I1 of this Ordinance,
for the new developmen~ in
Following the request for new development as provided in
the City shall compute impact fees
the following manner:
i. Water and Wastewater Fees
a. The number of LUE's shall be determined by the
size of the water meter{s) or by evaluation of the Director
and determination of Council upon review of reports provided
by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Texas, as
determined according to Section 9 of this Ordinance.
b. LUE's shall be summed for all meters purchased
for the development.
c. The total service units shall be multiplied by
the appropriate per-unit fee value determined as set forth in
and
Fee credits and offsets shall be subtracted as
by the process set forth in Section 14 of this
Exhibit E-2;
d.
determined
Ordinance.
2.
service areas
fee has been
vehicle miles. Each service
fee per service unit.
Roadway Fees
a. The City has been divided into a series of
and for each service area a specific maximum roadway
calculated. The service unit measure is stated in
area has a different maximum impact
slake\i~act fee.ord (03/19/96) -18-
b. To calculate the roadway impact fee it is first
necessary to identify the service area in which the new development
is located. The fee per vehicle mile is then determined from the
table attached as Exhibit E-2 to this ordinance.
c. The final determination of the impact fee to be
charged each new development is calculated by identifying the total
number of development units located within a development and
multiplying that number by the service units (as identified on the
table) times the impact fee per service unit.
d. Fee credits and offsets shall be subtracted as
determined by the process set forth in Section 14 of this
ordinance.
3. 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 10 by the number
of service units generated by the development.
SECTION 13
COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES
A. No water or wastewater tap shall be issued until all
impact fees including roadway have been paid to the City except as
ordinance,
provided otherwise by contract.
B. within one (1) year of the effective date of this
impact fees shall be collected at the time of the
stake\impact fee.ord (0)/19/96)
-19-
issuance of the building
permkt ±s required, at the
C. Subsequent ~o ~ha~ one
cellected as follews:
1. For a development
permit for new development, or if no
time of tap purchase.
year period, impact fees shall be
which is submitted for approval
pursuant to the City's subdivision regulations subsequent to
the effective date of this Ordinance, impact fees shall be
collected at the time of building permit.
2. For a development which
approval prior to the effective date
has received final plat
of this Ordinance or for
which no replatting is necessary prior to provision of a water
or wastewater tap, roadway impact fees shall be collected at
the time of tap purchase.
D. 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 14
SUSPENSION OF FEE COLLECTION
A. For any new development which has received final plat
approval prior to the effective date of this Ordinance in
accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Ordinance 212, or
pursuant to the City's subdivision regulations, the City may
assess, but shall not collect any roadway impact fee as herein
defined,
on any service unit for which a valid building permit is
slake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -20-
issued within one (1)
Ordi }!ance. However,
ti:e ~ime cf final
slat approval will be collected
year subsequent to the effective date of this
water and wastewater impact fees in effect at
for the
applicable development.
B. If the building permit, which is obtained within the
period provided for in subsection 14A, subsequently expires, and no
new application is made and approved within such period, the new
development shall be subject to the payment of e~ impact fees, as
provided in Section 13.
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.
493, 494, 330, or other City ordinances prior to the effective date
of this Ordinance against the value of impact due for that category
of capital improvement, subject to guidelines established by the
City.
s [ ake\ir~act f ee.ord (03/19/96)
C. Ail offsets and credits against impact fees shall be
sub-'ect to ~he followinc 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 improvements plan for the category of facility
within the service area for which the impact fee is imposed.
3. If an 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. In no event will the City reimburse the
or
before the time of fee payment,
different time. The applicant shall
slake\i~pact fee.ord (03/19/96) -22-
property
fees
this
owner or developer for an offset or credit when no impact
for the new development can be collected pursuant to
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
credit against impact fees due for the development either at or
unless the City agrees to a
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
gu~'i=lines. 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 of
the offset or credit which may be applied against an impact fee,
which value
with the plat
E. The
and the date of the determination shall be associated
for the new development.
available offset or credit associated with the plat
shall be applied against
1.
among all
an impact fee in the following manner:
Such offset or credit shall be prorated equally
living unit equivalents, as calculated in Section 9,
and remain applicable to such LUE's, 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 LUE's used by the City in the
original offset or credit calculation described in (1) is
eventually exceeded by the number of total LUE's realized by
the actual development, the City may, at its sole discretion,
collect the full impact fee exclusive of any associated offset
or credits for the excess LUE's.
3. At its sole discretion, the City may authorize
alternative credit or offset agreements upon petition by the
owner in accordance with guidelines promulgated by the City.
stake\i.~oac t Fee. ord (03/19/96) -23-
SECTION 16
ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS
The City shall establish separate interest-bearing
in a bank a2thorized 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
the purposes specified for
account and shall be used solely 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
times as are reasonably necessary to
intent of this Ordinance; provided,
shall be expended within a
authorized by the City at such
carry out the purposes and
however, that any fee paid
reasonable period of time, but not to
exceed ten (10) years from the date the
account.
D. The City shall maintain and
fee is deposited into the
keep adequate financial
records for each such account, which shall show the source and
disbursement 0f 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 improvements program as
sl ake\i.~pact fee.ord (03/19/96) -24-
system-related capital projects. The City Finance Department shall
a!sc 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.
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;
slake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -25-
development;
Upgrading, expanding or replacing existing capital
to provide better service to existing
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
appeal
designate:
improvements generated by new development; or
5. Administrative and operating costs of the City.
SECTION 18
APPEALS
The property owner or applicant for new development may
the following decisions to the Director or his/her
1. The applicability
development;
2. The value of the impact fee due;
of an impact fee to the
availability or the value of an offset or
3. The
credit
4 The
application
impact fee due;
5.
if any.
The amount of
of an offset or credit against an
the refund (reference Section 19) due,
Ail appeals must be received in writing within thirty
notice of
(30)
the action for which the appeal is requested.
days of
slake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -26-
B. The burden of proof shall be on the appellant
demonstrate that the value of 5he fee or the value of the offset
credzt wes not calculated
schedule or the guidelines
credzts.
to
or
according to the applicable impact fee
established for determining offsets and
C. The appellant may appeal the decision of the Director to
the Council. A notice of appeal to the Council must be filed by
the applicant with the City Secretary within thirty (30) days
following the Director's decision. If the notice of appeal is
accompanied by a bond or other sufficient surety 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.
s ~ ake\in~act fee.ord (03/19/96) -27-
SECTION 19
REFUNDS
A. Any impact fee or portion thereof collected pursuant to
~his 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,
er, 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 Article
5069-1.03,
statute.
B.
1.03, Title 79, Revised Statutes (Article
Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes), or any successor
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 of the 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 [he 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
slake\in~act fee.ord (03/19/96) -28-
maximum impact
improvements or expansions.
unz~ based on actual cost is
fee per service unit using the actual costs for the
If the maximum impact fee per service
less Lhan 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 of
impact fee has been paid, the City shall
the property on which an
refund such fees if:
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 of time considering the type of capital
improvement or facility expansion to be constructed, but in
any event later than five years from the date of fee payment.
impact
si ake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96)
The City shall refund an appropriate proportion of water
fee payments in the event that a previously purchased water
meter is replaced with a smaller meter, based on the LUE
differential of the two meter sizes and the per-LUE fee at the time
of 'he original fee payment, less
forth in City guidelines.
F. Petition for refunds shall be
on a form provided by the City for such purpose.
of the date ef receipt of a petition for refund,
Director and
petitioner.
Council,
an administrative charge set
submitted to the Director
Within one month
the Director must
in writing, with a decision on the refund
provide the petitioner,
request, including the reasons for the decision. If a refund is
due to the petitioner, the Director shall notify the Finance
request that a refund payment be made to the
The petitioner may appeal the determination to the
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
improvements plan for water, wastewater and roadway facilities at
least every three years, the first three year period which shall
commence from the date of adoption of the capital improvements plan
referenced herein. The City Council shall accordingly then make a
determination of whether changes to the land use assumptions,
capital improvements plan or impact fees are needed and shall, in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 395 of the
s ~ ake\i,loact fee.ord (03/19/96)
Local
fees or make
A. The
forth in Chapter 395 of ~he Local Government Code,
statute, and shall include the following:
1. Advise and assist the City in adopting
Government Code, or any successor statute, either update the
a determination that no update is necessary.
SECTION 21
FUNCTIONS OF ADVISORY COM/~ITTEE
functions of the Advisory Committee are those set
or any successor
land use
assumptions;
2. Review the capital improvements plan regarding water
and wastewater capital improvements and file written comments
thereon;
3. Monitor and evaluate implementation of the capital
improvements program;
4. Advise the City of the need to update or revise the
land use assumptions, capital improvements program and impact
fees; and
5. File a semiannual report evaluating the progress of
the City in achieving the capital improvements plans and
identifying any
administering the
B. The City
any professional
implementation of the capital
problems in implementing the plans or
impact fees.
shall make available to the Advisory Committee
reports prepared in the development or
improvements plan.
slake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -31-
C. The Council shall adopt procedural rules for the
committee to follow in c~rrying out it duties.
SECTION 22
AGREEMENT FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
A. The City Council may authorize the owner of a new
development to construct or finance some of the public improvements
identified in the CIP. In the case of such approval, the property
owner must enter into an agreement with the City prior to fee
collection.
The agreement shall be on a form approved by the City,
and shall establish the estimated cost of improvement, the schedule
for initiation and completion of the improvement, a requirement
that the improvement shall be completed to City standards, and any
other terms and conditions the City deems necessary. The Director
shall review the improvement plan, verify costs and time schedules,
determine if the improvement is 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 improvements plan through the issuance of bonds, through
the formation of public improvement districts or other assessment
any other authorized mechanism, in such
districts, or through
st ake\~pact fee.ord (03/19/96) -32-
manner and subject to such limitations as may be provided by law,
~n addition to the use of impact fees.
B. Exsept 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 improvements 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
B. This
permissible
land.
Ordinance shall not affect, in any manner, the
use of property, 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
slake\~act fee.ord (03/19/96)
the zoning and subdivision regulations or other regulations of the
C~>', which shall be operative and remain in full force and effect
wi~kouC !imitation with respect to all such development.
SECTION 25
RELIEF PROCEDURES
A. Any person whc has paid an impact fee or an owner of land
upon which an impact fee has been paid may petition the 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
reques[. If the 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)
the request and to continue until completion.
B. The Council may grant a variance
days of the date of
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.
slake\i~pact fee.ord (03/19/96)
WATER FACILITIES FEES
SECTION 26
WATER SERVICE AREA
A. There is hereby established a water service area as
depicted on Exhibit A-l, attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference.
B. The boundaries of the
from time to time, and new water service
pursuant
as Exhibit
herein.
water service area may be amended
areas may be delineated,
to the procedures in Section 7.
SECTION 27
WATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The Water Improvement Plan for the City is hereby adopted
C-1 attached hereto and incorporated by reference
time,
Local Government
The collected impact fee values per service
facilities are
attached hereto
B.
B. The Water Improvement Plan may be amended from time to
pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 395 of the
Code and its successors.
SECTION 28
WATER IMPACT FEES
The maximum impact fee values per service unit for water
hereby adopted and incorporated in Exhibit E-1
and made a part hereof by reference.
unit for
water facilities are hereby adopted and incorporated in Exhibit E-2
attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference.
s[ake\in~act fee.ord (03/19/96) -35-
C. The impact fee values per service unit for water
faci!itzes may be amended from time to time, pursuant to the
procedures in Section 10.
WASTEWATER FACILITIES FEES
SECTION 29
WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA
A. There is hereby established a wastewater service area as
depicted on Exhibit A-i, attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference.
B. The boundaries of the wastewater service area may be
amended from time to time, and new wastewater service areas may be
delineated, pursuant to the procedures in Section 7.
SECTION 30
WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN
A. The Wastewater Improvement Plan for the City is hereby
adopted as Exhibit C-1 attached hereto and incorporated by
reference herein.
B. The Wastewater Improvement Plan may be amended from time
to time, pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 395 of the
Local Government Code and its successors.
SECTION 31
WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES
A. The maximum impact fee values per service unit for
wastewater facilities are hereby adopted and incorporated in
E-1 attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference.
Exhibit
s lake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -36-
B. The collected impact fee values per service unit for
was~ewater facilities are hereby adopted and incorporated in
Exhibit E-2 attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference.
C. The impact fee values per service unit for wastewater
facilities may be amended from time to time, pursuant to the
procedures in Section 10.
ROADWAY FACILITIES FEES
SECTION 32
ROADWAY SERVICE AREAS
A. There is hereby established roadway service areas as
depicted on Exhibit A-2, attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference.
B. The boundaries of the roadway service areas may be amended
from time to time, and new roadway service areas may be delineated,
pursuant to the procedures in Section 7~
SECTION 33
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN
k. The roadway improvement plan for the City is hereby
adopted as Exhibit C-2, hereto incorporated by reference herein.
slake\~mpact fee.ord (03/19/96) -37-
time puusuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter
Local Government Code and its successors.
facilities are
hereto
B.
The roadway improvement plan may be amended from time to
395 of the
facilities are hereby adopted and incorporated
hereto and made a part hereof by reference.
SECTION 34
ROADWAY IMPACT FEES
The maximum impact fees values per service unit for the
hereby adopted and incorporated as Exhibit E-i,
and made a part hereof by reference.
The collected impact fee values per service unit for the
as Exhibit E-2,
C. The impact fee values per service unit for wastewater
facilities may be amended from time to time, pursuant to the
procedures set forth in Section 10.
SECTION 35
This ordinance shall be cumulative
ordinances of
provisions of
provisions of
of all provisions of
the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the
this ordinance are in direct conflict with the
such ordinahces, in which event the conflicting
such ordinances are hereby repealed. Ordinance 330
provisions of
shall remain in force and effect as provided in Section 14c of this
SECTION 36
Ordinance.
$lake\i~pact fee. ord (03/19/96) -38-
that
th,s ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause,
paragraph or section of this ordinance shall
unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of
It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council
the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of
be declared
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 37
Ail rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly
saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance
330 or any other ordinances imposing impact or development fees
which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this
ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending
litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or
not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this
ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the
courts.
The
authorized to publish this
s[ake\i.~p~ct fee.ord (03/19/96)
SECTION 38
City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby
ordinance in book or pamphlet form for
-39-
general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions
of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence
in all courts without further proof than the production thereof.
s~ake\~mpact fee.ord (03/19/96) -40-
The City Secretary of
publish the proposed
SECTION 39
the City of Southlake is hereby directed
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 of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the
Charter of the City of Southlake.
SECTION 40
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect
after its passage and publication as required by law,
ordained.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST
from and
and it is so
READING ON THIS ~ DAY OF
CITY SECRETARY
s ~ ake\im~act fee.ord (03/19/96) -41-
PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING
1996.
ON THIS ~/ DAY OF
CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
City Attorney //
EFFECTIVE: ~
s lake\impact fee.ord (03/19/96) -42-
Exhibit A-1
Water & Wastewater
Service Area
Exhibit A-2
Roadway Service
Area
Exhibit B
Land Use Assumptions
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS .FOR IMPACT FEES
September 11, 1995
Prepared by:
J. T. Dunkin & Associates, Inc.
Urban Planners - Landscape Architects
Dallas, Texas
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
FOR
IMPACT FEES
PURPOSE
Chapler 395 (formerly S B 336) of the Texas Local Government Code prescribes the process by
which cities in Texas must formulaIe development impact fees. The initial process is the
establishment o! land use assumptions. These land use assumptions, which include population and
employment, will become the basis for the preparation of impact fee capital improvement plans for
water, wastewater, and roadway facilities.
To assist the City of Southiake in determining the need and timing of capital improvements to serve
future development, a reasonable estimation of future growth is required. The purpose of this report
is to formulate growth and development projections based on assumptions pertaining to the type,
location, quantity, and timing of various future land uses in the community, and to establish and
document the methodology used for preparing the growth and land use assumptions.
ELEMENTS OF THIS LAND USE ASSUMPTION REPORT
This report contains:
Methodology - Explanation of the general methodology used to prepare the land use
assumptions
II.
Service Area Maps (Plates 1, 2, and 3) - The impact fee service areas for water, wastewater,
and roadway facilities based on data collection zones and/or traffic survey zones
II1. Base Data - Information on population, employment, and land use for Southlake as of
January, 1995 for each data collection zone
Ten-Year Growth Assumptions -. Population and employment growth assumptions for 10
years by data collection zones or traffic survey zones (TSZ) and impact fee service areas
Ultimate Projections - Projections which reflect a completely developed condition based on
the City's Future Land Use Plan or ultimate 'built out" scenario
Vi. Summary - Brief synopsis of the land use assumptions report
I METHODOLOGY
Based on the growth assumplions and the capital improvements needed to support growth, it is
possibie to develop an ,:*::;ac[ fee s~ructure which fairly allocaIes improvement COSTS to growth
areas ~n re!3:;onsn,D to t'e;r ~mpac: On ~he enI~re inlrastructure system. The database and
project Cn~ ,ri :~,s 'epcot n],e seen [ormula~ed using reasonaoie and generally accepted planning
These Land Use Assumptions and future growth projections take into consideration several factors
influencing development patterns, including:
1. The character, type, density, and quantity of existing development
2. Existing zoning patterns
3. Future Land Use Plan
4. Availability of land for future expansion and the physical holding capacity of the City
5. Current growth trends in the City
6. Location and configuration of vacant land
7. Employment and population absorption rates
8. Known or anticipated development projects
9. Sewer availability
to. Comparison to historical growth rates of area cities
Following is the general methodology used for the preparation of this report:
Establish impact fee service areas for water, wastewater and roadway facilities based
on data collection zones and/or traffic survey zones (Section II - Service Area Maps)
Collect/determine benchmark data on population, employment and land use as of
January 1, 1995 (Section III - Base Year Data)
Project population and employment growth for ten years by impact fee service areas
and data collection zones (Section IV - Ten-Year Growth Assumptions)
Project the ultimate population and land use (by land use category) for a fully
developed city (Section V - Ultimate Projection)
Detailed methodology for each oi the above is contained in the respective sections.
2
SERVICE AREA MAPS
Pla[es 1, 2 and 3 show the proposed ser',,ice areas for roadway, water, and wastewater facilities
re3:-e,:h,,e~/ The Dour~d¥? for,',ater and ,,,,'3s~e'¢,ater facd~l~e$ is the exisling Cily Limits which was
Plate ent.t[ed 'Ser','ice Areas for Roadway Impact Fees." depicts the 8 proposed service areas for
roadway facilities The proposed roadway sen,ice area boundaries encompass anywhere from 1
to 8 traffic survey zones. A Traffic Survey Zone (TSZ) is a type of data collection zone, established
by NCTCOG for all areas within the NCTCOG region, including within the corporate City Limits of
Southlake. The Traffic Survey Zones in Southlake vaW in size from about 12 to 1400 acres. These
zones are based on the areas used for transportation computer modelling for Southlake and termed
traffic survey zones. The traffic survey zones were formulated on the basis of homogeneity and
traffic generation potential using major arterials, railroad lines and other physical boundaries for
delineation. Since the data needed for calculation of roadway impact fees is required to be
compiled by TSZs~, the land use assumptions are compiled by the same traffic survey zones or
combinations thereof. The Traffic Survey Zone Map is a standardized map available at the NCTCOG
and City of Southlake municipal offices. These traffic survey zones will be aggregated into different
areas to form service areas for roadway impact fees.
The roadway service areas were formulated based on three primary parameters; one, the
boundaries of each service area are consistent with the boundaries of the TSZs, two, each zone is
less than three miles in diameter (a size requirement specified in Subchapter A, Section 395.001 of
the Impact Fee Statute), and three, a conceptual roadway capital improvement plan was used for
a comparison of proposed projects as they related to the service zone boundaries. Although the
capital improvement plan and impact fees will be prepared as a separate document for roadway
facilities, the geographic boundaries of the roadway service areas will be the same as shown on
Plate 1.
~The original traffic survey boundary structure for Southlake was created in 1986 by NCTCOG.
The structure was updated after the 1990 census resutts were published. The TSZ boundaries are
consistent with census tract boundaries.
SERVICE AREAS FOR ROADWAY IMPACT FEES
CIT" OF SOUTHLA KE
PLATE1
SERVICE AREA FOR WATER IMPACT FEES
£Y OF SOUTHLAKE
PLATE 2
SERVICE AREA FOR WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES
FY OF SOUTHI~AKE
PLATE 3
III. 8ASE DATA
This section documents historical growth trends and base data for the City. This 'benchmark'
information provides a sta~[ng basis of 1995 data for [he lO year growth assumptions in the
fc[',o'¢, Jng section
One me[hod of predicting future gro,z4h is looking at past grow'th. The historical growth rate for
Southlake is shown below:
TABLE 1
Southlake
Annual
% Chanqe % Chanae
1960' 1,023 -- --
1970' 2,031 98.5 7.1
1980* 2,808 38.3 3.3
1990* 7,083 152.2 9.7
1995'* 12,750 80.0 (5 yr. 12.6
increment)
* Source: U.S. Census
"*Source: NCTCOG January 1, 1995
Another comparison and useful base data source for population growth is the past trends in
residential construction. Table 2 shows the trend in residential building permits over the last ten
years.
TABLE 2
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
Year Sinqle-Family
1985 212
1986 72
1987 33
1988 56
1989 51
1990 176
1991 197
1992 377
1993 517
1994 ,~77
Total 2,268
Average/Year = 226.8 (1985-1994
Average/Year = 368.8 (t990-1994)
7
For the purposes ol documenhng changes in population, land use. density, and intensity, the data
format to be used as a basis to formulate the land use assumptions will be principally population
and employment By taking a "snapshot" of existing land uses and considering the Master Plans
of individual cities /'~CTCOGhasestablishedpopulat~onandemplo'/mentesbmatesandproiections
for a[ ct:es in the Dalla~ ~'ort ~7o,~,'' me:ropier: These esbmales from NCTCOG were used as a
Population The c,fference between the total of the NCTCOG t990 population estimates by
TSZ and the overall NCTCOG 1995 populaIion estimate was allocated proportionally to
individual TSZ's based on Ihe proportional number ct building permits issued by TSZ since
t990. (Southlakes's Community Development department maintains a summary of residential
development indicating number of planned lots, platted lots, building permits issued and
available lots by subdivision.) The t995 population estimates by TSZ can be found in
Appendix A.
Employment - The values for the 1995 employment by TSZ were deduced by a two step
process. First, preliminary 1995 estimates by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code for
each TSZ were obtained by interpolating between the NCTCOG 1990 and 2010 employment
estimates. Second, these values were 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 - retail development, new and expanded public
schools, and the City of Southlake itself - and adjusted downward where development has not
occurred. The 1995 employment estimates by TSZ can be found in Appendix B. The
following table is a summary of the 1995 employment for the impact fee areas as a whole.
TABLE 3
EXISTING EMPLOYMENT o 1995
1995 Basic Employment* 2,928
1995 Retail Employment* 179
1995 Service Employment* 689
1995 Total Employment* 3,796
*Source: NCTCOG (adjusted to January 1995)
Prior to an evaluation and projection of future land use patterns, a thorough understanding of
existing conditions is essential. A documentation of existing land use patterns was made and used
as a base line for luture growth proiections. This also documents the present physical composition
and condition of the City.
To obtain accurate information on existing conditions, the existing land use inventory that was
included in the land use assumption report prepared in June, 1993, was updated by the city staff
to January. 1995, based on zoning changes during that period. In this inventory, the City was
ciass,f:ed accord[rig to the following land use categories:
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Commercial
Industrial
Public/Quasi-Public
Corps of Engineers Property
Vacant
Each of the above categories was counted and tabulated on a parcel-by-parcel basis and recorded
for ali areas of the City. Table 4 shows a summary of existing land uses for the area in Southlake's
Ci~ Limits.
TABLE 4
EXISTING LAND USE - 1995
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
Existinq Land Use
Percent of Acres Per
Acres Usedm Total Area 100 Pec~x3s*
Single-Family 4,324 31.0 33,9
Multi-Family, Duplex or Group
Quarters 13 0.1 0.1
Commercial 138 1.0 1.1
Public/Quasi-Public 368 2.6 2.9
Industrial 350 2.5 2.8
Corps of Engineers Property 759 5.5 6.0
Total Developed Area 5,952 42.7
Vacant Land 7,97(i ~7.~
Total Area~ 13,928 100.0%
Source: City of Southlake, Community E~evelopment Department
* Based on population of 12,750
(~)Gross acres, includes street and alley rights-of-way
r4Exdudes Lake Grapevine
46.8
IV TEN-YEAR GROWq'H ASSUMPTIONS
Growth is characterized in two forms: population (residential) and employment (nonresidential land
usei Sever31 assu,mpt,ons ,,'.'ere necessar',/ to arrive at reasonable growth rates for population and
er~F.i']',~',?r% The f©l'c,,,h'-g assumF.(cr:s ha¢e been made as a basis from which ten-year
Future land uses will occur as identified on the t993 Future Land Use Plan
2 The Cit'/will be able to finance the necessan/ improvements to water, sewer and roadways to
accommodate grow'th
3. School facilities will accommodate increases in population
4. Densities will be as projected based on anticipated zoning districts consistent with the 1993
Future Land Use Plan.
5. Known or anticipated development projects
6. Data received and used from the NCTCOG is generally accepted as the best available data.
The ten-year projections or land use assumptions are based upon the policies established in the
Future Land Use Plan and the establishment of a reasonable growth rate based on past trends.
Considering the historical issuance of residential building permits (Table 2) and the historical
development and subsequent absorption of lots within residential subdivisions, the anticipated
growth rate the next 10 years is that which results from 400 residential building permits per year.
For the last two years, the number of residential building permits issued has exceeded this amount.
Using this growth rate, a population of approximately 25,000 was projected for the ten-year growth
projection. This rate would generate a population of about 1,200 persons per year. The following
shows the formula for calculating the ten-year growth assumptions:
400 dwelling units X 0.934 occupancy rate = 374 occupied dwelling units/year
374 occupied dwelling units/year X 3.322 household size = 1,241 persons/year
1,241 per$ons/year X 10 years = 12,410 persons growth
12,750 exlst/ng populab'on 4- 12,410 growth = 25, 160 population in ten years
All projections and estimates are for January I of their respective years. This rate, which represents
an approximate 7 percent compounded average annual growth rate, was determined to be a
reasonable rate at which Southlake coutd be expected to grow. The annual growth rate from 1980
to 1990 was 9.7% and the rate for 1990-95 was higher at 12.6%, but 7 percent corresponds more
10
closely with NCTCOG projections. This rate, although slightly higher than the NCTCOG rate of 5.2
percent resulting in a population projection of 21,516 for the year 2005~, is a conservative growth
The 2005 population Cs"mat¢ of 25160 'was allocated b'/ ass[shins ~he increase ~n households to
TSZ's based on known Or ante:Dated resdental de'.,efopment Then the total households were
multiplied by the average household size to arrive at a population by TSZ.
Starting with the adjusted 1995 employment totals, the ten-year employment projections were
derived by prorating the NCTCOG 20-year (2010) projections equally for each year (approximately
307 employees per year)? Each 2005 employment estimate by TSZ was reviewed by the city staff
and revised, if necessaw, to reflect known or anticipated employment. Employment values were
adjusted upward to reflect the additional employment centers, such as schools and City Hall, not
accounted for by NCTCOG. and values were adjusted downward where residential development
since 1990 has reduced the land available for employment - generating land uses.
Appendices "A' and "B' show the ten-year growth projections for population and employment for
each TSZ. Tables 5A and 5B show a summary of the population and employment projections for
Southlake.
>the NCTCOG population projection for Southlake for 2010 is 26,333; if the increase is
distributed equally each year, the proiected growth in 2005 would be 21,516.
31990 NCTCOG employment, 3,473; 2010 NCTCOG employment, 9,613; 307 employees X 15
years = 4,605 + 3,473 = 8,078 rounded to 8,100 employees.
11
Roadway
Ser,~ce
TABLE 5A
TEN-YEAR POPULATION PROJECTIONS - SOUTHLAKE
1995 2005
Units Population Units Population
1 110 349 330 1,023
2 330 1,112 700 2,173
3 1,178 3,618 1.782 5,528
4 726 2,290 1,444 4,481
5 300 929 650 2,017
6 475 1,360 1,478 4,584
7 732 2,304 1,125 3,491
8 257 785 599
Total 4,108 12,747 4 8.108 25,157
TABLE 5B
TEN-YEAR EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS - SOUTHLAKE
1995 2005
Basic 2,928 6,240
Retail 179 743
Service 689 1,117
Total 3,796 8,100
Changes in population and employment affect the use of land. In the case of Southlake, increased
population and employment is due to the conversion of agricultural land into residentlaJ and other
land uses. These land use changes aid in the determination of demand for additionaJ water,
wastewater and roadway facilities.
Table 6 shows the projected land use requirements for a population of 25,000. Residential densities
were calculated based upon permitted densities in the City's Zoning Ordinance.
4These represent actual values. The differences between these values and those corresponding
values previously mentioned can be attributed to "rounding."
12
TABLE 6
PROJECTED TEN-YEAR FUTURE LAND USE REQUIREMENTS
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
Future Ac~es Acres Required
Per for
Single Family 29 3 7,075
Multi-Family 0.1 25
Commercial 1 1 275
Public/Quasi-Public 2 0 500
Industrial 20 500
Corps of Engineers Property N/A 759
Total
9,134
V. ULTIMATE PROJECTIONS
An ultimate or holding capacity land use and population projection was also established. First,
known densities of development were considered. Then, based on the remaining developable
vacant land in Southlake, densities as recommended in the Future Land Use Plan and densities of
anticipated development projects were applied. The ultimate population of the City of Southlake
is a function of residential land use area (acres), housing density (dwelling units per acre), and
population densit7 (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 following table shows the acres
required for a population of 45,660. The holding capacity of 45,680 persons and land use ls based
on the Future Land Use Plan and the following assumptions:
Mixed Use category was allocated among Single-Family (10%), Multi-Family (2%) and
Commercial Categories (88%).
Low Density and Medium Density Residential categories were allocated to the Single-Family
category.
13
3 Public Parks/Open Space and Public/Semi-Public categories were allocated to the
Public/Quasi-Public category.
TABLE 7
ULTIMATE FUTURE t_AND USE REQUIREMENTS
CI'FY OF SOUTHLAKE
VI. SUMMARY
Land Use Cateqor¥
Residemial (Low Density)
Residential (Medium Density)
Mixed Use (Residential)
Public and Semi-Public
Park and Open Space
Commercial
Industrial
Corps Prope~y
Acreage at
Build-Out
4,781
4,381
322
647
216
2,356
468
Total 13,928
The data used to compile these land use assumptions were from two sources - the Comprehensive
Plan (Future Land Use Plan) for the City of Southlake and the North Central Texas Council of
Governments (NCTCOG) data base used for traffic modeling purposes. 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 Future Land Use Plan. NCTCOG projections for population and
employment were used for comparison. The NCTCOG data was utilized principally to compile
employment projections by TSZ for roadway impact fees. Ultimate projections were based on the
holding capacity of vacant land using land use types as shown on the Future 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:
· Southlake presently contains approximately 21.5 square miles within the City limits of
which 42.7% is developed. It is not anticipated Southlake will be able to expand its
municipal boundaries beyond its present limits.
14
Existing population of Southlake in 1995 - 12.750
A compounded annual growth rate of approximately 7% was used to calculate the
Southlake lO-year (Jrowth projecIions.
The ten-'/ear Gro,z,'th project[on for Southlake is 25.157 or about 25.000.
The ultimate population of South[ake is approximately 45,660.
15
APPENDICES
DATA FORMAT
The LUA database (appendices A and B). as well as future proiections were formulated according
Io the following format and categories
Apper~dix A - Population
1995 Dwelling Units
Total number of all living units including single-family, duplex, multi-
family, and group quarters. The number of existing housing units
has been shown for the base year (January, 1995).
1995 Households -
The adjusted number of households (Section II - Base Data).
1995 Population -
The adjusted population (Section Ill).
2005 Dwelling Units
Projected housing units by service area for the year 2005 (ten-year
growth projections).
2005 Households -
The projected number of households (Section IV).
2005 Population -
The projected population obtained by adding the projected increase
to the 1995 population (Section IV).
Traffic Survey Zone/-f'SZ -
Traffic survey zones previously established by NCTCOG and the
Highway Department used for data collection purposes and termed
TSZs in this report.
Appendix B - Employment
Roadway Service Area -
1995 Basic
1995 Retail
1995 Sen/ice
Correlates to the roadway service areas identified on Plate 1.
Three classifications were used for employment and compiled for
each roadway service area:
BASIC (SiC Code # 1000 to 5199) - 1995 land use activities that
produce goods and services such as those exported outside the
local economy; manufacturing, construction, transportation,
wholesale trade, warehousing, and other industrial uses.
RETAIL (SiC Code # 5200 to 5999) - 1995 land use activities which
provide for the retail sale of goods that primarily serve households
and whose location choice is oriented to household sector such as
grocery stores, restaurants, etc.
SERVICE (SIC Code # 6000 to 9999) - 1995 land use activities
which provide personal and professional services such as financial,
insurance, government, and other professional administrative offices.
1995 Total Employment The 1995 total of the Basic, Retail and Sen'ice categories
2005 Basic
BASIC (SIC Code # 1000 to 5199) - 2005 land use activities that
produce goods and services such as those exported outside the
local economy: manufacturing, construction, transportation,
wholesale trade, warehousing, and other industrial uses.
2005 Retail
RETAIL (SIC Code # 5200 to 5999) - 2005 land use activities which
provide for [he retail sale of goods that primarily serve households
and ,chose location choice is oriented to household sector such as
grocery stores, restauran[s, e[c.
2005 Service
2005 Total Employment
Traffic Survey Zone/TSZ -
SERVICE (SIC Code # 6000 to 9999) - 2005 land use activities
which provide persona[ and professional services such as financial,
insurance, government, and other professional administrative offices.
The 2005 total of the Basic, Retail and Service categories
Traffic survey zones previously established by NCTCOG and the
Highway Department used for data collection purposes and termed
TSZs in this report.
APPENDIX A
10-YEAR POPULATION PROJECTIONS
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
Service Area
1995
I 108
1 2
t 0
Sub-total 1 tO
! 995
Households
995
Populalion
2005 2005
Owelling Households
2005
Population
Units Units
~03 345 327 305 ~.0~3 9200
2 4 3 3 10 9219
0 0 0 0 0 14036
105
349
330
308
1,023
Tragic Sur-
vey Zone
2 4 4 6 4 4 13 8330
2 72 68 215 134 125 415 8450
2 248 261 874 453 423 1,405 8451
2 2 2 5 18 17 57 8454
Sub-total
4
33O
339
5
12
91
1,112 II 700
85
654
283
2,173
8492
Sub-total
5
632
49O
11
4O
555
466
10
38
1,178 I 1,074
14
1,887
1,584
24
109
3,618
980
744
11
4O
915
695
10
37
1,782 I 1,664
3,040
2,309
33
8441
8456
8457
8493
123 19017
87
;ub-total
144
57
269
3O5
83
137 438
54 163
364 1,219
2 6
0 0
43
8 31
691
8324
8452
108
327
124
699
2
3
145
36
1,444
8453
101 336
1,013
116 385
2,169
2 7
3 10
135 448
113
4,481
~ 34
383 653 8464
2 8465
0 8466
45 144 8467
8 8468
2,290
726
1,349
Sub-total
Oweihng
Units
106
22
114
0
58
Households
101
108
300 [ 285
~995
Population
338
46
361
184
929
2C05
Dwelling
Units
236
15
0
218
650
2005
Households
22O
2CC'5
Population
169
204
607
731
14 47
678
2,017
Traffic Sur-
vey Zone
8323
8335
8469
6 187 177 593
Sub-total
8470
588 1,953. 8482
Sub-t,-' '
8
8
Sub-total
7
32
547
153
732
3O
520
145
695
77
1,742
485
2,304
73
834
779
218 204
1,125 J 1,051
226
2,588
677
3 491
846O
8461
19019
180 140 473 254
40 38 128 218
119
237
204
395 I
787
678
8458
8497
8500
t108 X 0.934 occupancy rate = 3,837 X 3.322 persons per household : 12,747
;,108 existing dwelling units plus 4,000 future dwelling units = 8,108 X 0.934 = 7,573 X 3.322 = 25,157
APPENDIX 8
10-YEAR EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
Roa(_
Service
Area(s)
~ub-total
1995
Basic
1995
Retail
22 0
o I °
o I o
1995
Service
1995
Total
Emp.
22
0
2005
Basic
25
0
2005 I 2005
Retail Service
2005
Total
Emp.
22
I
0 I 9 34
0 I 0 0
0 0 0
0
0
22
25
one
Zone
9200
9219
14036
2 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 4 833O
2 0 0 0 0 25 2 3 30 8450
2 20 15 82 117 97 18 91 206 8451
2 0 0 4 4 39 11 8 58 8454
2 2,202 2,219 2,685 ' 90 25 2,800 8492
~ub*total
2,222
17 0
32 I 86
2,340
2,849
122
127
3,098
363
3 0
3 0
3 0
3 0
.;ub-total 363
2
0
17
0
0
365
17
387
650
96
157
10
21
15
40 0 : i
6 178
o 4
0
19
:382
0
8441
8456
8457
8493
19017
0
0
5
0
0
41
22
0
'47
23
7
67
58
69
17
8324
8452
8453
8465
4 0 0 0 0 26 8466
4 55 20 65 140 355 40 8467
4 0 15 96 110 227 16 8468
0 40 40 100 8464
2
9 49
29
4
4 3
70
10O
4O
296
264
367
133
1 4 ::
125
130
33
q.65
342
143
1,332
42
81
ub-total
9O3
Roadway
Service
Area(s)
223
5
5 t7
Sub-total I 251
1995 1995
Basic Retad
3
0 25
0 0
~ 4
44
1995
Ser',,ice
f2
25
5O
33
120
1995
Total
Emp.
238
47
5O
54
2005 / 2005
Basic Retail
490
25
t4
2OO
100
45
415 Il 729 I 244
2O05
Service
20
225
17
75
41
378
2005
Total
600
350
76
75
250
1,351
Traffic
Survey
Zone
8320
8322
@323
8335
8469
6 0 2 4 [ 6 I 79 8 13
6 5 4 31I 40I 63 8 3
3ub-total
5 6 35 46 142 16 16
100
74
174
7 0
7 0
7 0
~ub-tot' 0
341°
0 60
0 30
34 I 90
60 130
30 8
150
6
157
25 I 200
$4 150
10
40 J 360
8470
8482
19019
8 0
8 0
8 4
ub-total 4
0
2
2
60
0
34
94
6O 18
0 49
40 68
100 JJ 135
20
23
156
5
32
193
175
56
120
35'I:
8458
8497
85OO
GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
2
3
10.
AC,wsor¢ Connive9 means the Capital ~mprovements advisor, committee established by
the City for purposes of reviewing and making recommendations to the City Council on
adoption and amendment of the City's impact fee program.
Area-relaled facility means a capital improvement or facility expansion which is designated
~n the impact fee capital improvements plan and which is not a site-related facility. Area-
related facility may include a capital ~mprovement which is located offsite, or within or on
the perimeter of the development site.
Assessment means the determination of the amount of the maximum impact fee per service
unit which can be imposed on new development.
Capital improvement means either a roadway facility, a water facility or a wastewater facility,
with a life expectancy of three or more years, to be owned and operated by or on behalf
of the City.
(~ity means the City of Southlake, Texas.
Credit means the amount of the reduction of an impact fee due, determined under this
ordinance or pursuant to administrative guidelines, that is equal to the value of area-related
facilities provided by a property owner pursuant to the City's subdivision or zoning
regulations or requirements, for the same type of facility.
Facility expansion means either a roadway facility expansion, a water facility expansion or
a sewer facility expansion.
Final plat aooroval means the point at which the applicant has complied with all conditions
of approval in accordance with the City's subdivision regulations and the plat has been
approved for filing with Tarrant or Denton County.
Impact fee means either a fee for roadway facilities, a fee for water facilities or a fee for
wastewater facilities imposed on new development by the City pursuant to Chapter 395 of
the Local Government Code in order to generate revenue to fund or recoup the costs of
capital improvements or facility expansion necessitated by and attributable to such new
development. Impact fee~ do not include the dedication of rights-of-way or easements for
such facilities, or the construction of such improvements, imposed pursuant to the City's
zoning or subdivision regulations,
Impact fee capital improvements plan means either a roadway capital improvements plan,
a water capital improvements plan or a wastewater capital improvements plan adopted or
revised pursuant to these impact fee regulations.
A-1
12
Land use assumphon5 means the projections ol population and employmen[ growth and
associaled changes in land uses, densities and inlensities, over at least a ten-year period,
adopted by the City. as may be amended from time Io time, upon which the capital
~mprovements plans are based
Land use equivalency labia means a table converting the demands for capital improvements
genera'~ed by various land uses to numbers of service units, as may be amended from time
to time
13¸
New development means the subdivision of land; the construction, reconstruction,
redevelopment, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure;
or any use cr extension of the use of land; any of which increases the number of service
units.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Plat has the meaning given the term in the City's subdivision regulations. Plat includes
replat.
Ph~ttinq has the meaning given the term in the City's subdivision regulations. Plattinq
includes replattinq.
Property owner has the meaning given the term in the City's subdivision regulations.
Property owner includes the developer for the new development.
Recoupment means the imposition of an impact fee to reimburse the City for capital
improvements which the City has previously oversized to serve new development.
Roadway means any freeway, expressway, principal or minor arterial or collector roadways
designated in the City's adopted Thoroughfare Plan, as may be amended from time to time.
Roadway does not include any roadway designated as a numbered highway on the official
federal or Texas highway system.
Roadway capital improvements plan means the adopted plan, as may be amended from
time to time, which identifies the roadway facilities or roadway expansions and their costs
for each road service area, which are necessitated by and which are attributable to new
development, for a period not to exceed 10 years.
Roadway expansion means the ~xpansion of the capacity of an existing roadway in the
City, but does not include the repair, maintenance, modernization, or expansion of an
existing roadway to better serve existing development.
Roadway facility means an improvement or appurtenance to a roadway which includes, but
iS not limited to, rights.of-way, whether conveyed by deed or easement; intersection
improvements; traffic signals; turn lanes; drainage facilities associated with the roadway;
A-2
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
Service area means e~ther a roadway service area, a water service area or wastewater
benefit area within the City. within which impact fees for capital improvemenls or facility
ex2ansioq wdl be collected for new development OCcurring within such area and within
,,',hich fees so collected will be expended for those types of improvemenls or expansions
identified ~n the type of capital improvements plan applicable to the service area.
Sen,ice unit means the applicable standard units of measure shown on the land use
equivalency table in the Impact Fees Capital Improvements Plan which can be converted
to vehicle miles in p.m. peak hour, for roadway facilities, or one inch (1') water meter
equivalents, for water or for wastewater facilities, which sen'es as the standard,ed measure
of consumption, use or generation attributable to the new unit of development.
Site-related facility means an 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 roadway, water or wastewater facilities to serve the new development, and
which is not included in the impact fees capital improvements plan and for which the
property owner is solely responsible under subdivision or other applicable development
regulations.
Utility connection means installation of a water meter for connecting a new development
to the City's water system, or connection to the C~ty' 's wastewater system.
Wastewater facility means a wastewater interceptor or main, lift station or other facility
included within and comprising an integral component of the City's collection system for
wastewater. Wastewater facility includes land, easements or structure associated with such
facilities. Wastewater facility excluded a site-related facility.
Wastewater facility expansion means the expansion of the capacity of any existing
wastewater improvement for the purpose of serving new development, but does not include
the repair, maintenance, modernization, or expansion of an existing sewer facility to serve
existing development.
Wastewater capital improvements plan means the adopted 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,
for a period not to exceed 10 yea'rs.
Water facility means a water interceptor or main, pump station, storage tank or other facility
included within the comprising an integral component of the City's water storage or
distribution system. Water [acility includes land, easements or structures associated with
such facilities. Water facility excludes site-related facilities.
A-3
30.
Water facility exo~n~ion means the expansion of the capacity of any existing water facility
for the purpose of serving new development, but does not include the repair, maintenance.
modernization, or expansion of an existing water improvement to serve existing develop-
ment.
31.
Water imDrovemem",; plan means the adopted plan, as may be 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, for a period not to exceed
t 0 years.
32.
W~t~r meter means a device for measuring the flow of water to a development, whether for
domestic or for irrigation purposes.
A-4
RE$OLL?rlON 95-45
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH:LAKE.
TEXAS. APPROVING THE LAND USE ASSUMIq~ONS TO BE USED TO
DEVELOP CAPITAL EMPROVEMENTS PLANS PURSUANT TO W'HlCH
WATER. WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY [b/fi'ACT FEES MAY BE IM:POSED.
WHEREAS, the governing body of the City of Southlake has appointed an Advisory Committee. as per the
provisions of Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. to guide the update of plUm',rog, land use. capital
~mprovemcnts plans, and impact fee information for the existing and future water and wastewater utilities, and the
development of pla-ming, land use. capital improvements plans, and impact fee information for tl, e existing and future
roadway facilities: and.
WHEREAS. this advisory information ultimately will be used by the City of Southlake in its evaluation and
consideration of impact fee ordinances; and.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake called for a public hearing at this regularly scheduled
session of November 7, 1995, to seek public comment on the proposed land use assumptions and the general nature of
the proposed capital improvements; and,
WHEREAS. the City of Southlake made requisite public notice of such public hearing for three consecutive
weeks in a general circulation local newspaper, the first such notice appearing at least thirty-ono (31) days in advance of
the proposed hearing date; and.
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake made publicly available on or before the date of the first publication of the
notice various information concerning the public hearing issues; and,
WHEREAS. the City Council of the City of Southlake has received public testimony on November 7. 1995.
from the general public, now.
REFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE hereby adopts the
attached land use assumptions which will be used to develop capital improvements plana, pursuant to which water.
wastewater, and roadway fees may be imposed under the provisions of Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government
Code
PASSED AND APPROVED tl~s the
day of~~,1995.
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
By: ~'---~
'~aryFicke{~l~ayor v
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City of Southlake, Texas
Exhibit C-1
Water & Wastewater
Capital Improvements Plan
.•i•i.i.I.i•ii.mi•ii.imiiiI.mmi•ii•m
•
0 M L 0 L' (...., x.
CD 1-
Lt , L1) CD I 4z1- ti N 1
C4 X i Pig
E-' d' N Q `'' U W
II lI
0
M
.11111. 1 MIFNMINIIIIIIMI , 0
N
00
N ►s;
O
cON
. cim N
ri
41?k ° O
O pilA Mil N` "
N
____ 4 N f
O
eg
V 411) ------2 ,
• O
_ N
tO rO
ii i
0 PIMI ' � MrN
C
a ----- N vs RI
NM
r
CA ° .------,..,-,..-.- -,-,-.. O
O N
O O
N co
o
C lime --------- 0
w
O
O
N .44.
Ila0
0
H-
._ Oil ' o
4 N O
. CI?
O O
aO
CO N
Q) ir
O
V)
X
O 0 o o
0 0 0 0 0 L l l
o
0
o 0o o .t
in 0 N
1
t
© ©
•
CCII 8 a N
Cn 0
524 C p p O
ii M
O O p O O
X ` 1
coi 1 z zP. ,
= t cmnz
,i up ito 1 m
N 33 l)
00 1 N
O
t lilt. L1
cit
0 1.%) I n .
O ......__.
1 •
N N - 1 Pill Oil.
N ,
O
O .��- t 1
N C's •
1O
......
1
03 N4b
;
O • 1
1 p III Cri ,
I r
yti P N N1 C NINOt
O
1 1 °
t
Cr)44
N 11
_. O 1
I
0,:„ .4
ot
' N
I /1111 MO
9 O O I O
pi
N 1 s •
io -----
N i en)
t. N O t
O 1
W
z• 0 0
flP. w —I W D O
rL N co (12 C fD W N oj
41 O� .� C) (J1
•� '<
Jl
II -
o. o. o. o o o o
Z
W~ow
~°
Z
o~o~=
Z
0
II
I
0 0 �' 0 0 o co o 0
IO 5 tis ° i� ° `0') 0" ° ti. °, W p
m 'd is °-
0
M-1 ::-.I. v1'b ad m O o0 A/ rt. ' n
Eft Eft O. �... L. p ti ? 0 O to0. {a r jI00CD rt
al X 03 r b CO o (1) Ca 'v ,-. O a ~
•
moo g. cD g. ti w ... ti o C O C .• -
I
�p ° Z wAo 'c ccD 0 o D O ti 01 Gd i ' a. 0. n rt 'v -
�'0 Ow CO 0. o " p041 ow crq op, a)cCn
° -
CD aty � � I
a' n rBaa ,�. q o 0 ' a.1 ' o a5P13
E.
Ci'o 0 tom. ... 0 •o EA .. CD C al o aco- .
p ►»� �. t0cD O O CA 0 cn' a"i Oy :p Cr CL 23 co o• m
1--.` •- CD rt- — cm n .- OD Zoi Catv � 01n °4 .4. 0. .
CO ., a �. °, 0 `Z cop e. O ►s ,CD r,. rr y ° 0
cn cD 0 b ►--, O 'O c., 0 0 cD (D . 0' �. ? cD <D I
G 0 ear CD co cC .pY �' O '1 rn 0. C cD cn cD ►p
G7 rr
er
a, � tro o D0 � o 'v w 0 �* aCnG nPi 0 -
M O CD G• O CD C" cn •d CCD cn ° O n x �� cD �!
I'� 1-. a. 0
I' O 'v cc o 0 ° C � • .1 ~' CD CD vi' � co n w ti A•
I
4.
I
0 0 0
0 0
I
1
-3 p 0 Cr 13 0 1-3 c' cn -� «.• 5• 5
E. ,-,4,
t7' cp0 r. cD 0- e• '� `J' '7' 0. - O0" t ,'3." w
pr• 'P cD �. a• cD 0" 0 cj' cD w cD w'L7 0 rr CD r—r 0 cD 0•
a. ,-L-. o ° pE. z p �' �• °'-�, o- re.
CD �. z 0 ' r! � � z a
1-4 tsD
M. p �• O G cD ~ cue rn 0-'°� a ¢O� °' 0 - cn co 01 i•
Cr. CD 0 01 0 O O •
0 a' ?� r* 0 CL c•* p p
ft, Cr
I
c � e* cp'c ° 1-' � ° et-o t .�°� r00c2• wR. ° . cr
� �*' a� .-• z0 Za' - p x � ocn c 0 p cps. ..
rf � 0 p � p• nw :-- ,-1 % pG' 0 � �,
�., cD Cr cn w w Oq CD CD .-.• CD cu .,
`�CD CC W 0 �, r* w v, c,, o a� 5 o C 5 ' EA ,
cD ... •0 �- cn o c w 0 00 o- :D' ao an cr a c,, CD
.1 cn &s ° .' W C o ° • © �' cD w :. t
• 0 W 0 cD O cD ND .._. cji •s cD C
I' cc " •° �' cin �' a Woci CD C 0 a'-1
CD tn• o g- n 3P- m ,fir' 0 y `. R °co c• ai.°• ooi° D
o Cl. °, c CD 11 0
�5. cp ° °- � ; o• p o Per ' cD
.•y CD CD 0 p co- Pi CD
i
I
' � CII
as vo-C +) _ 44 a) c..
L. g • a.I v � b •� C,b � Ey .aA0a). r- O � cy mr ' .
• •
CI) °camaoON0ya.
� O '" a �' + O° O C
4-4 - °:� o
_ � a, 00 � 0 :Cc., 0 U . � OOaL. 0 Go UGVXCG) m ) vi ;� C "" c0 0.
4-4
cn
OnO `' r- U '—iO 3 00 vU] ca •j U 0 p r r
14 0
— 10 '0 O i. .., CV -4 a) v .L+ 3 = EA Gd •-. 0 .: / c. >1 0,j O -°
I co +-� , cd u,in O s0. 0._ v coo k .,4 O cd cd u A -0
.0 -a .:ti as .,.. CNa) � ' C0A .43 '..
0 5 a. 3 � � � a 3 0 CO 0 0) a � � � .�
" eu
p o °gyp o f `t �° °' oa) Al a) 0o � o� o
4 a� A �, 'd .0 sn q U O A o G.
U) nc0 � o O ooa� -� � o er u a� + .0 m4.2 a� �p
j CV C O 0 o .. C'? d3 F .-4 ,4, q c. b , $.. ^d p �' s1? cd CD O .�
y ... v O .� O O p NODCi] [ 4., U CO rn C!) C1 4.3 th v 0 a)
0 c. 5 10 4) co •� •A 0 UUP a� a) o � +, b d a� a� a) •-• "�
-04)0. �, c ,0 4 'C � ,$ °' 0 .4 4 .020000 - 4 -0ccp ,4
E-4 s., o s•. E-1 3 E ca • r3 4 c.) E-4 E-4 rA .a • E� s~ :o E. 3 & a
I
0 0 0 0 0
N
14
�. .7. �' v v u W -d p 4 'a Q0
o c.)r-4a) t-4
z •
a) ca 0 a) • Cl N ocn
"dan a) as O
PQ .z a) 45 W cy vs' s� 4 m '� b a)
.� c.. 3 2 o .� c.
a' ao 0i- co e m _ o ° � 3 .0
d � �cd CO N a) .2O O =
I al 3 O 0 `«.' CO CO o N .ti 0 $, v, cy o a) x0.
U a; C a v U N 0 a ~ 8 E M C a) a�i .4 N
23 O o Cll �+ U 0 Z CT) ' E ca'-.4-, sn 0 o 0 .Q A a)a)
.4 s~ O U� :� a� • Q 0 0 'c'� c a - a) E
CI 44-4 be 0
at
a) ° 4 3 V A. 0 .o s'~ 'x U bli aii a) as a) a2i �i •2
a, 4 .0 0 bin
E ai .0 Cl) 0 y - c°5 A z 4. I,, c 4 o El o E� .a 'm cd CZ
U ,bD U
0 � O � E � 0 0
r. ,. 1,
I .0 0303
I
Mil.
G MICn C mato 00nd C
0
-ws � �3 �, o � � CD ID ax -• cti
� � b 4 a' c-,- Z cr. ... ci) m 1
0 ,w 0-,- 011
�
'000 p- •� w
-. cm N
q (1) 1 ° 't7 �$ 0 O
oft
�P N N 1. 0 g. w G g
D" � � .. .. � b N• 2-. el-
° .''7j O Cep v ! ig
1 • ea D e#
• oD � N f
� cp5Do at C ►s ° �cto eat-
°•'b re• tt �. Q'_ =� = n
CD c) w, alo et-� 0a' � U' OMI
pOoCD0w Ct" cn ° to
CDD o w a cm m CD C. 0 C. El
D
cn
Ut:L2
5 ,.5. 71; 0 - c � c c �
as � ,-s E g z 0- CDim 1
�. w
cII
g (i) c° .as � o � ° a'�e5
- g 0 Nil
CD CDt •-•0D cG 'L! 5. "y rpt-
&.,-, .'--. cn 0 r..).. c o a✓ w mr, (OD 'ti e+- c°+• G- c
0" "" . � � 2 . CD _ -`<< 1.... 0 ° .'g 5 Cg. � 2
►+s in ° ��'o ca
�Cr'p CO »; ° c`°, ►�s C CD R 02 ate - p III
c-r cn �, CD ° ,y .10 ° CD e+ cD m 1-1 A 0
�. 'oce bk �. a• "' o °' r' � atia. w � o �• cDcn0r. m
cD o O F1-° cn
�O ] cD o C. �i r a 0 G (D g C et. p
. — .., z •—• — 0, ...< .,- ,.,. Pis
CD r* (D CD to o ,I O O a) (5 .0 C, ti r+ n a cD ..: c.0 e-f ,
.0 g- 0 O g2) b m C �* fD fl) ... a cD �' o- r° (��j N «», fD OCrCc° NJ
Ft, fD cD �'. cD _CD CD 1-1 .-• O CD 0 g n 0 CD b E-• w `r ►e
O cn
g a' S ig. F 0 ? O a- "'' r r* ? 0 '"s .i a; 0 cr. D CD N eet-
1111 i
�' C p- o o e) 'ti . o. w cD .. as CO cD :� o w
0-
En C G. cn 0. .-s CD O cn• m �; CDD ccn G EOn �'�
r+ cn
4- O w ? O r' .O gg' CD cD cD cn
s `y .1 5 C '~ 0 0 cD Cr 0 C cn
O er a c•r < .. r► er w cD
C fD cam— `. «". a R O O .^.1-
n 1
0q CrQ• (D a '•' CD ,. . C•T' cn C ,.. —.
0 ,-% cc ° c-'- D7 a En' C cn :7 0
:r 06 r -I 0, .1 :r gr 2 Mil,..., 0- zr
CD w M Me+ CD CD CD $.i.vi e•r CD cD
IN
._ _.......__."_- .. `- ._-- '. -.ate
1111 g
al.
� oi0
o ap , 5..'70 0 o 0yo o ok 0 , 0
05 g vi woo " " G A D 0 04 •-: wG °
5 . o -69
q d GCa Uc"" pa. b Cr c o W ' a ° � c *Z' y0' a3 °o °' a ° y ' a moon)a pa (D � - a 0 °- c CD 2
Ini
= c..., 0, "3 5co' O 0 CD rl- "• • Cn a O . ,., o1-;1
i
pi,
cD p„ CD P. ewO i'inac � 'C QD w 0c cx acD „seon
-, n 0 -• c. o0rais S• n01 O'''1 ._ O C eT crq 0 I0 CD O f./..) CD Q., CD r,. O 10 cD 5R . Po m °C .... 4 < 0 :0CS' p (D Oeq" e..• C 0 ‘'C O a. (Da E. . ... D , CDct hD � 0 COme-9-
CD
et
rt. 10 1111
(D GcoO ' p
Z 0 no Cr d C., 01 e.• 0 0-, 4 w G fxj Cf w ef• O er
P.
2 ivy o, 2 --• w vii p, cn C by "" a - cD (D c' r°n o cD a0 Z. �<e
r, u, w w co b t✓ (D 0••h CY Cn e� ►.• 0 m (9 (9 1 (D e* C 69 0 Cn
5. oQ Q1 e=•► cD n O (D cc 0 CA b b et- (D 0 5t
cn
• rl- aDOD - C00 .9
cl"��
U (Db0. ,.< nD • O " CLDa
el-
f()
CD ' o(I) tri Fcrig: g5v '° ab � ` CI) p . . ►», (D la 1
Ccp a • 0 p co ... 0 0� p �o <
00
.".4 w CO `r ?c co ° — Crq o, Fir 'd ao0 aovo a, D c • 11111
, w c `1EGbv w °ve 0 ' w E. .•cn `° `° dv C ~ _ -Uco DyA co .•••tg (D C/20 .... eti' C0 h+ 0 MI (D a. r . Mfe. CD ▪ 1. CL '7 0
c, 4
1111
co = aq r•. er er 0 .-• 00. - -coo -co m fD .• n e' ?
r.• er
`9 »� C Cil 2 g cD q 5-`g - p� e+ cD - ►Cs ens e� C cD
.oy •- CA ►Os A) rt. b G k • G CD 0 (n (D co '1 p:. 11 fi ri 1
Ca o cD o � 0 �- w C cD c ° ..t o. o
cn
CIIf
i
`+ ill
= O �•• A 'b ,�. �', e•r C7' (9 eC Co ,,5��•• rip o e� 'p n c•* t
g n 0 n O CD �. o " CD CD 0 w M •.-• 0 A (D o 0 ° w
CCA (MD 5 Com, o '� ►s z •_ a) a. er c
co. CD
flu
Al)• c, G O 7 -1 A c. ''= c, .1 (n
. cn as O '< -. LD . � �. I' A, ° ^ h, �. G CO CO II i
R.• aZ c � CD �. 0 fD p.... 1-i rt. Po �;� • acs - � 4 �... 1' co
-I tg F..0 no
O co W 'd
(D '•1 "'t O• R (D cD O er cD
R fD no n fq Q' = � C* a-�Z• p C _ a0, 5- ,
Co oe� � cil � m0PC o � c'DCDb °�"• m0 ~• C
x P ec o 0 0� 'c ~' ° CD 0 �-'� 0. ° Cn Cr CD Cn`r f D Cr
r w 0 ," c0 P. c" n � .O is I
3
✓ "co w .� 4,4 = eA* _04 (CD (D cD P.. , 6, p C -
o cD O e�+ W fD cD r, C1. o 'O 'L7 n c.. cD w r Z ¢ E. ► •
-
cn
p-'L', CD �7 O' n A� O p es...04 fv er C eT .7 cnn
si
73. O O �, cD CO ,� c cD cfl Cs cam' C::1- .... a U, O CM'
, (:
f- J OC`.. CD .O N• C c- • n .� O „+ cact, - • o O -3• " (n
y " ~• 0 m � e, v°, CT) 0" x a � o yn o . � cs "
r- ?a n O O n co e,. (DD 0 p O CD• ,- t�' in 1.
c O n a. •'� Cr n 9 n �' b ►s n ►' €(
o ... �. z o w 0- o CD o Cs. o co moo, Cfq a, e* o.-
`' Aa ts. ear 6/i ear0 e+% CL ��,, a e�
C7" ... O.... p
re. (D E. m O o 0 '. O 'a (D Y O �t c`0 '� a 5• • E. g,' .-: cD
al
It;
C O.0 0-1 ° CD ,y cD 0 or 0 cc. cD
.t a b cD o R 0 c 0
0 0 Z ii Cr o '7 Cn ° q cD 0
cD �
til CD
It
cay ^ O O O D 0 D . er
�* D ►s Co
E. d 0'Co Z.' '41 ' ca ., 0., = ... g._.. a rt.
'V Cr cD a . ° � � a " .0
fa- cl"
CO CD a' ... m w oq o ma„ (9 'C �'t3 er (� fv c.* (0
o cn rr .o p O 4 w p 0 � 0 O O' g �111 ,-1 y 0 0 � y
cD •
tb Q7 0
C cD o p' n cD `< (5 cD 0 U1 D ... 0 " O
o CD CD e4 P-:
a, ° app =' a Der '"' O (D gtCT'm v, C 0
Grn "' 2.25 �, C . ( 0 •00 �rer • woo) eri• � CD et -• p,
0 w '0 0 0z 4 b e0r. e-* 01 O y 0. err 0 .. m v.
r
° n CD fD ~ fin ear "�" p• "`T•' "r cCAD 7' � O' O�y m TA CD
1'� ° `s w
I .. n cD Cr 0 'C C• . .m e0t• e.* CD 03
— b Ir c�. '"'�� cD `� gi
� a »� � ° cneroao �. � �• o ••• CD0g- 5w
.. cD n p C. . p e* ("� cD b
`1 n Fn 0-• 0 er cn• O ..• ...1 c"'" O 0 IM cmm
coCD �,
r•
Ca
A'
cD CD ,. er O w e* 0.,
acD � cD 0CD ' cD 000
61 a t
1
1 1
cn m 4 A 0 � � a ~ y 0 0 0
PI CO st,ppI� e 0 n cr. 5 C120 P
7 0 a c� 0 r '" er III i
0 ,
• . � �- � � � °� '"�Ufl
0 $ 'C'C � a � cp goy
p e. c . ° G e•+• -' C g 1n er.— er p- p: e. �- cD cD
crq o `� er reg
X571 asp E. cgs' 5 ,g. 2a0B R1 cDo 02' 5 I i
vs CD to D g � � er• a. o a, a2 o " �cr.
1 r G• p•', cD cD CD
eq, (n ear 0 O C
... f�. 0 b CD 112 o p (D N PD CD P p„ Z cn co ty 0 ,� o o cn
0cy 'b � tea ... 0" cDCD COv, = 0CD a:I III r
m cD cD 5 fn O cD cn C ,.
C. .0 ►! 0 y9 0 .�. G O fD cD v, er �,
��' 0 0 0 ►mss 0 E. .Y < �t cn 5n e,+ p ... rr 5 f�. a. 0 .._.
DI
'C "-' m 4 4 UT 0) P/ r' E4 `.t c � � e+• � co a rq DCl/er = `� Cn
0 < 0 ►0'h 0 t-r (�� o°. �' t. ..y Ccr
C .0 ti cn ° `.
cn o , . 0 cD R c' ercn a .o, ° e P ° f
� '"' ' cD � 00 •(-* p :- O pcD .1 � � u, E . m ti
• n � ~ o' CD � c- 0, a. ( ° oocn � co ,, 0
b c�
0 cD n www ccDOD ° �• 0 Z:2)`(-1
� '1 co
cPt ND ^...0x 0- CD -c-) w r' o U, a (.1)cn a. < Dp- .-1 cn oin-
CD ' et• CAD a Cn ticD CD 0-1 • .
0DO p b < CO , a,
Q
1
a' �� ° � RO � 0 � . & s= 00a4. � q i
I1
I
~ ...................... ~ ~ o
>-~
~ ~ ~ ~zo
;I
!
!
!
Exhibit C-2
Roadway
Capital Improvements Plan
Final
Report
Development of
Transportation Impact Fees
for
The City of Southlake
Submitted to
The City of Southlake, Texas
Submitted By
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
November 2, 1995
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introductk~n ...................................................
2. Transportation Impact Fee Service Areas ..................................... 3
3. Transportation Impact Fee Setwice Units ...................................... 5
4. Existing Conditions Analysis .............................................. 12
5. Projected Conditions Analysis ............................................ 15
6. Calculation of Transportation Impact Fees ................................... 23
7. Conclusion ............................................................ 26
Appendices .................................................................. 28
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Roadway Impact Fee Definitions .................................... Al
Land Use Definitions ............................................. B1
Vehicle-Miles of New Demand Calculation ........................... C1
Potential Capital Improvement Program Project Locations and Costs ....... D1
Existing Capital Improvements ..................................... E1
Roadway Improvements Plan Projects ............................... F1
Roadway Improvements Plan Cost Analysis ........................... G1
Service Area Analysis Summary .................................... HI
LIST OF TABLES
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
I1.
Page
[-rip Rudc:c:i[m ~{sti,matc~ tPM P,~ak [Iour} .............. 8
\',craga NCI-COG [:ip Lengths ....................................... 9
Land Use,Vehicle-Mile Equi'~alency Table ................................... 11
Road,.~,ay Facility Vehicle-Mile Capacities ................................... 12
Peak Hour Vehicle-Miles of Excess Capacity and Demand ...................... 14
Peak Hour Vehicle-Mi[es of Excess Capacity and Existing Deficiencies ............ 14
Vehicle-Miles of New Demand ............................................ i6
Roadway Improvements Plan Projects ...................................... 20
Vehicle-Miles of New Capacity Supplied .................................... 19
Summary of Roadway Improvements Plan Cost Analysis ....................... 21
Service Area Cost Per Service Unit Summary ................................ 24
LIST OF FIGURES
2.
3.
4.
Page
Service Areas for Roadway Impact Fees ...................................... 4
Potential Capital Improvement Project Locations .............................. 17
Recommended Capital Improvement Project Locations ......................... 18
Funding for Roadway Projects in Southlake .................................. 22
ii
Introduction
The funding of transportation improvements has often been a question of "x,k"ho pays for what.'?"; not
only in Southlake, but in a number of communities across the country. Shrinking funds available
for transportation improvements on city thoroughfares has prohibited many cities from upgrading
infrastructure to meet increasing travel demands resulting from new grow'th.
Many jurisdictions have looked to new development to help fund transportation improvements
resulting from the impact on the roadway system caused by traffic generated by the development.
As a result, many cities began to collect "impact fees" for transportation improvements necessitated
by new development. Texas authorized impact fees with the passage of Senate Bill 336 (SB 336)
during the 1987 legislature. SB 336 authorized cities to collect fees from new developments to
finance new' construction or expansion of capital improvements such as water treatment and
distribution facilities, storm and waste-water facilities, and transportation facilities. The bill
;tipulates that all fees collected from new developments after 1992 must not exceed the maximum
amount calculated by the methodology described in SB 336. SB 336 has now been codified in
Vemon's Texas Codes Annotated, Local Govermment Code, Chapter 395.
Recognizing the need to provide a safe, adequate roadway system and desiring to have equitable
funding of transportation improvements, the City of Southlake retained Barton-Aschman Associates,
Inc. to assist in the development of transportation related impact fees.
Purpose
This study was conducted to implement a transportation related impact fee system for the City of
Southlake. This system is based on a methodology developed by Barton-Aschman. This report
presents the procedures, findings and con61usions of the study.
Study Methodology
To develop the transportation related impact fees for the City of Southlake, a series of logical work
tasks were undertaken. These tasks are described below.
Meetings were held with the City of Southlake Staff and the Capital Improvement
Advisory. Committee to discuss the roadway methodology to be used in the study.
5outhlakoz Roadaay /rnpact Fee Study Page I
2. Appropriate data was collected to establish the basis for subsequent analysis.
3. Transportation impact fee service areas were established within the Southlake city
limits.
4. Vehicle-miles of travel in the PM peak hour was used as the appropriate service unit
for transportation impact fee calculations.
5. The conditions on the Southlake thoroughfare system were analyzed to determine the
existing vehicle-miles of supply and demand within each service area.
6. The existing roadway network was analyzed to determine if any roadway capacity
deficiencies existed within each impact fee service area.
7. New vehicle-miles of demand were calculated for each service area based on
expected growth rates, trip generation characteristics, and average trip length
information.
8. New vehicle-miles of supply were calculated for each service area based on the
recommended roadway capital improvements plan developed by the City Staff and
the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee.
9. Roadway costs for potential and recommended projects were developed by City Staff
and compiled for each service area.
10. The cost of new roadway improvements attributable to new development was
calculated.
11. The cost per transportation service unit was calculated for each service area.
12. This report was prepared to document the procedures, findings, and conclusions of
this study.
Organization of Report
This report describes the background information, analysis, and findings of the study in six parts,
with a chapter devoted to each:
• Transportation Impact Fee Service Areas (Chapter 2)
• Transportation Impact Fee Service Units (Chapter 3)
• Existing Conditions Analysis (Chapter 4)
• Projected Conditions Analysis (Chapter 5)
• Calculation of Transportation Impact Fee (Chapter 6)
• Conclusion (Chapter 7)
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 2
Transportation Impact Fee Service Areas
A new development in a particular service area can only be assessed an impact fee based on the cost
of capital improvements within that service area and necessitated by new development.
Transportation service areas are different from other impact fee service areas which can include the
entire city limits and Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ). Transportation service areas are limited
to a 3-mile maximum set by Chapter 395 to ensure that improvements are located in close proximity
to the area which is generating the need.
A service area structure was developed using criteria defined in Chapter 395. These service areas
were configured so that no point in the area is more than three miles from another, which ensures
that an improvement within the service area is located within the proximity requirements of state
law.
Several other considerations were used in the development of the service area structure. These
included conforming to the city's traffic survey zone (TSZ) boundaries, creating as large as possible
(v, ithin 3-mile limit), and use of potential roadway projects and natural features. The use of the TSZ
structure helps to t;acilitate calculations and future updates because this is the smallest area for which
land use information is compiled by the North Central Texas Council of Governments. Creation of
large service areas tend to promote fee uniformity because costs average out over several projects
and the use of potential roadway projects to form boundaries allow the cost of the projects to be
distributed over adjacent service areas.
Finally, efforts were also made to develop service areas so that supply of roadway service units
matched with the predicted demand from future development. In other words, if future demand was
predicted to be heavy within a particular: service area, efforts were made to include approximately
the same amount of service units of supply from roadway projects within that area. Figure 1
illustrates the transportation impact fee service areas for Southlake. Eight service areas were created
for this system.
Southlake Road~,ay Impact Fee Study Page 3
F~GURE 1
SERVICE AREAS FOR
ROADWAY IMPACT FEES
4
o
Transportation Impact Fee Service Units
An important aspect of de~eloping impact fees is the determination of the proper service unit to be
used to calculate and asses impact fees for new developments. As defined in Chapter 395, "Service
unit means a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation, or discharge attributable to an
individual unit of development in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning
standards for a particular category of capital improvements or facility expansions."
To determine the transportation impact fee for a particular development, the service unit must
accurately identify the impact that the development will have on the transportation system serving
the development. This impact is a combination of the number of new trips generated by the
development, the particular peaking characteristics of the land-use(s) within the development, and
the length of each new trip on the transportation system.
The correct service unit must also reflect the supply which is provided by the roadway system and
the impact on the system during the time in which peak, or design, conditions are present on the
system. Transportation facilities are designed and constructed to accommodate volumes expected
to occur during the peak hours (design hour). These volumes normally occur during the morning
(AM) and evening (PM) rush hours as motorists travel to and from work.
Vehicle-miles of travel is recommended as the service unit for calculating and assessing
transportation impact fees in Southlake. Vehicle-miles as a service unit establishes a way to relate
the intensity of land development to the demand on the system through the use of published trip
generation data and it recognizes state legislation requirements with regards to trip length.
The P.M. peak hour is recommended as the time period for assessing impacts because the greatest
demand for roadway capacity occurs during this hour, roadways are sized to meet this demand and
roadway capacity can more easily be defined on an hourly basis. The City of Southlake typically
experiences its peak traffic volumes during the PM peak hour and plans their roadway system to
accommodate this period. Traffic volume data collected in April and May 1995, confirmed the PM
peak (5-6pm) as the highest period of use.
7ol~th&lke Road~*~v Impact Fee octudy Page 5
Sere ice Units
Service units create a link between supply(roadway projects)and demand(development). Both can
be expressed as a combination off the number of vehicles traveling during the peak hour and the
distance traveled by these vehicles in miles
Serf ice Unit Supply
For roadway capital projects improvement, the number of service units provided is simply the
product of the capacity of the roadway in one hour and the length of the project. For example:
Given a four lane divided roadway project with a 700 vehicle per hour per lane capacity and
a length of two miles, the number of service units provided is:
700 vehicles per hour per lane x 4 lanes x 2 miles = 5,600 vehicle-miles per hour
Service Unit Demand
The demand placed on the system can be expressed in a similar manner. For example, a
development generating 100 vehicle trips in the PM peak hour with an average trip length of three
miles would generate:
100 vehicle-trips (PM peak hour) x 3 miles/trip = 300 vehicle-miles per PM peak hour
Service Units for New Development
An important objective in the development of the impact fee system is the development of a specific
service unit equivalency for individual developments. The vehicle-miles generated by a new
development are a function of the trip generation and average trip length characteristics of that
development. The following describes the process used to develop the vehicle-equivalency table
which relates land use types and sized to the resulting vehicle-miles of demand created by that
development.
The impact fee system recommended for Southlake is based on the weekday PM peak hour. As a
result, the number of service units need to be based on PM peak hour trip generation.
Trip Generation
Trip generation information for the PM peak hour was based on data published in the fourth and fifth
edition of Trip Generation, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation is a
reference publication that contains travel characteristics of over 100 land uses across the nation and
is based on empirical data gathered from over 3,200 studies that were reported to the Institute by
public agencies, developers and consulting firms. Data contained in this publication is universally
accepted for use in studies by transportation engineers throughout the nation. Data not available was
drawn from other published information. Rates were established for specific land use type within
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 6
the broader categories of residential, office, commercial, industrial and institutional land uses.
Within each of the land use categories, a rate was also established for any land uses not specifically
identified.
Trip Generation contains both rates and equations for estimating trip generation. In some cases the
rates and equations yield significantly different estimates. Barton-Aschman developed a procedure
based on information in Trip Generation to select between trip generation rates and equations for use
in estimating Southlake's impact fees. The selection process used by Barton-Aschman was as
follows:
• Select most easily projected and verifiable development units.
• Evaluate stability of rates and equations based on scattered diagrams shown in Trip
Generation and the standard deviation and R= statistics.
• Plot rate on scattered diagram and examine to determine whether rate line or equation better
reflects the majority of data observations.
• Check equation to see if it comes close to going through 0-0 (intersection of X and Y axes).
• Check standard deviation and R:statistics. An R2 above 0.9 is very good; R=below 0.7 is not
acceptable. Standard deviations above 60% of the mean are poor although the average for
all uses shown in the report is approximately 90% of the mean.
• A selection was made between rates and equations to use as a basis for developing service
unit rates.
Adjustments
The actual "traffic impact" of a site is based on the amount of traffic added to the street system. To
accurately estimate new trips generated by a new development, adjustments must be made to trip
generation rates and equations to account for pass-by and diverted trips. The added traffic is
adjusted so that each development is assigned only for a portion of trips associated with that
development and thus reducing the possibility of over-counting by counting only primary trips
generated. Trip generation rates were reduced by the percentages presented in Table 1 in an effort
to isolate the primary trip purpose. Because of limited data regarding diverted trips, adjustments
were limited to pass-by trips.
Pass-by trips are those trips that are already on a particular route for a different purpose and simply
stop at a particular development on that route. For example,a stop at a convenience store on the way
home from the office is a pass-by trip for the convenience store. A pass-by trip does not create an
additional burden on the street system and therefore should not be counted in the assessment of
impact fees.
A diverted trip is a similar situation, but a diversion is made from the regular route to make an
interim stop. For example, a trip from home to work along Southlake Blvd. would be a diverted trip
if the travel path was changed to White Chapel for the purpose of stopping at a cleaners. On a
system-wide basis, this trip places a slightly additional burden on the street system but in many
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 7
cases, this burden is insignificant and is difficult to account for the purposes of assessing impact fees.
Limited data is available to accurately estimate the reductions due to these trip types and was
therefore not used to adjust trip generation rates.
Table 1 contains the estimates of trip rate adjustments used in determining the appropriate rate to use
in the impact lee calculation process. Adjustments mere based on studies conducted by ITE and
other studies and mere therefore not presented to the Advisory Committee for comment.
Table 1
Trip Reduction Estimates(PM Peak Hour)
PERCENT OF
ITE CODE LAND-USE CATEGORY UNITS(x) PASS-BY TRIPS
110 GENERAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 1000 GFA 0
130 INDUSTRIAL PARK 1000 GFA 0
150 MANUFACTURING 1000 GFA 0
151 MINI-WAREHOUSING 1000 GFA 0
210 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOUSING DU 0
220 APARTMENT DU 0
250 RETIREMENT COMMUNITY DU 0
530 HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT 0
540 JUNIOR/COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENT 0
560 CHURCH/SYNAGOGUE 1000 GFA 0
565 DAY CARE CENTER 1000 GFA 76
610 HOSPITAL BEDS 0
710 GENERAL OFFICE BUILDING 1000 GFA 0
750 OFFICE PARK 1000 GFA 0
760 RESEARCH CENTER 1000 GFA 0
817 NURSERY(GARDEN CENTER) 1000 GFA 0
831 QUALITY RESTAURANT 1000 GFA 75
832 HIGH TURNOVER(SIT-DOWN)REST. 1000 GFA 90
834 FAST FOOD REST.W/DRIVE-THRU 1000 GFA 95
844 SERVICE STATION STATION 85
851 CONVENIENCE MARKET 1000 GFA 85
890 FURNITURE STORE 1000 GFA 10
912 BANK W/DRIVE THRU 1000 GFA 95
DU=DWELLING UNIT
GFA=GROSS FLOOR AREA
GLA=GROSS LEASABLE AREA
(1)Expressed as percent of total PM peak hour trips generated
The resulting recommended trip rates are illustrated as part of Land Use/Vehicle Mile Equivalency
Table illustrated later in this chapter. Rates were developed in lieu of equations to simplify the
assessment of impact fees by the City and likewise, the estimation of impact fees by persons who
may be required to pay an impact fee in conjunction with a development project.
A local study may also be conducted to confirm rates in Trip Generation or change rates to reflect
local conditions. In such cases, a minimum of three sites should be counted. The results should be
plotted on the scatter diagram of the selected land use contained in Trip Generation for comparison
purposes. It is recommended that no change be approved unless the results show a variation of at
least fifteen percent across the range of sample sizes surveyed. Trip Generation was used as the
primary source of information. No local studies were conducted in Southlake.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 8
Trip Lenuth
Trip lengths (in miles)are used in conjunction with site trip generation to estimate vehicle-miles of
travel. Trip length data was based on information gathered by the North Central Council of
Governments in a region-wide travel and workplace survey conducted in 1984. The survey results
were used to determine average trips lengths for common land-use types. Numerous land use types
were identified in the home interview surveys and were aggregated into fifteen land-use categories
Oyer 5.808,000 trips were recorded to these land uses. Using the trip length information from the
surveys trips, average trip lengths were calculated for each land-use category.
Table 2 summarizes the average trip lengths compiled from the survey. These trip lengths represent
the average distance that a vehicle will travel between an origin and destination of which either the
origin or destination contains the land-use category identified below. Data compiled by NCTCOG
represents the best available information on trip length in the region. Trip length data by specific
land use was not presented to the Advisory Committee, but information on trip length and how
NCTCOG determines them was presented.
Table 2
Average NCTCOG Trip Lengths
Land-Use Category Average Trip Length
(miles)
Warehousing 10.83
Drive-In Bank 3.39
General Office Building 10.92
Hospital 7.55
Convenience Store --•
Retail Mall 7.75
General Retail 6.43
Community Buildings 14.64
School 4.20
Jr./Community College 4.20
Light Industrial 10.02
Service Station 7.77
Restaurant 4 79
Residential 17.21
Other 13 74
Source: NCTCOG
*Data not available
Adjustments were made to the average trip lengths to account for travel on State roadways. Chapter
395 specifically states that State designated roadways cannot be included when calculating impact
fees for new developments. Data from NCTCOG revealed that 63%of total vehicle-miles occurred
on state facilities. Based on this data,each trip length was reduced to reflect only local,vehicle-miles
of travel within Southlake. -
To prevent double charging, and to fairly attribute the demand placed on the system to each trip end
location, the adjusted trip length then was divided by two to reflect half of the vehicle trip to and
from the development. This places the burden of travel during the peak hour equally between the
origin and destination of the trip.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 9
Service Unit Equivalency Table
The result of combining the trip generation and trip length information is an equivalency table which
establishes the service unit rate for various land uses. These service unit rates are based on an
appropriate development unit for each land use. For example, a dwelling unit is the basis for
residential uses, while 1,000 gross square feet of floor area is the basis for office, commercial, and
retail uses. Other less common land uses use appropriate independent variables.
Separate rates have been established for specific land uses within the broader categories of
residential, commercial, industrial and institutional to reflect the differences between land uses
within the categories. However,even with these specific land use types, information is not available
for every conceivable land use so limitations do exist. The recommended equivalency table is
illustrated in Table 3.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 10
Table 3
Land UseNehicle-Mile Equivalency Table
CATEEOCRY LAND USE DEVELOPMENT TRP RATE TRIP LENGTH TOTAL SERVICE UNITS:
UNITS(X) •(MI) (VEH-Mi t DEV UNIT)
1
RESIDENTIAL
' SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED 0 U 0 95(X) 3 0 2.85
I MULTI-FAMILY 0 U. 0 67(X) 3.0 2.02
RETIREMENT CCMMUNITY 0 U. 0.40(X) 3 0 1.20
OTHERS NOT SPECIFIED' 0 U 0.95(X) 3 0 2.85
'OFFICE
GENERAL OFFICE SLOG 1000 GFA 1 33(X) 2.0 2.66
BUSINESS PARK 1000 GFA 1.35(X) 2.0 2.70
OTHERS NOT SPECIFIED' 1000 GFA 1.33(X) 2.0 2.66
COMMERCIAL
GENERAL RETAIL 1000 GFA 1.50(X) 1.2 1.80
QUALITY RESTAURANT 1000 GFA 1.60(X) 0.9 1.44
FAST FOOD RESTAURANT 1000 GFA 1.66(X) 0.9 1 49
HIGH TURNOVER RESTAURANT 1000 GFA 1.60(X) 0.9 1.44
CONVENIENCE STORE;>2400 SQ FT 1000 GFA 8.57(X) 0.2 1 71
SERVICE STATION SITE 3.75(X) 0.2 0.86
GAS STATION W/CONY STR:<2400 SQ FT SITE 20.00(X) 0 2 4.60
BANK 1000 GFA 1.36(X) 0.6 0.82
FURNITURE STORE 1000 GFA 0.35(X) 1.2 0.42
OTHERS NOT SPECIFIED' 1000 GFA 1.50(X) 1.2 1.80
INDUSTRIAL
GENERAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 1000 GFA 0.35(X) 1.9 0.67
INDUSTRIAL PARK 1000 GFA 0.87(X) 1.9 1.66
WAREHOUSE 1000 GFA 0.74(X) 2.0 1 48
MINI-WAREHOUSE 1000 GFA 0.22(X) 2.0 0.45
OTHERS NOT SPECIFIED' 1000 GFA 0.87(X) 2.5 2.18
INSTITUTIONAL
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS 0.015(X) 0.8 0.01
HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS 0.04(X) 0.8 0.03
JUNIOR/COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS 0.12(X) 0.9 0.11
DAY CARE CENTER STUDENTS 0.15(X) 1.0 0.15
HOSPITAL BEDS 0.82(X) 14 115
NURSING HOME BEDS 0.17(X) 1 4 0.42
CHURCH/SYNAGOGUE 1000 GFA 0.29(X) 0.8 0.23
OTHERS NOT SPECIFIED* 1000 GFA 0.29(X) 0.8 0.23
•THIS REPRESENTS TOTAL SERVICE UNIT EQUIVALENCY FOR LAND USES DU=Dwelling Unit
NOT SPECIFIED IN THIS CATEGORY. ACTUAL EQUIVALENCY MAY VARY GFA=Gross Floor Area
AND MAY BE DEMONSTRATED BY PROPERTY OWNER TO BE DIFFERENT
PURSUANT TO CITY GUIDELINES.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page II
,
4.
Existing Conditions Analysis
Chapter 395 specifically outlines what is required in the capital improvements plan. The existing
conditions, including defining the existing roadway system, and analysis of the total capacity, the
level of current usage, and commitments for usage of the existing roadway, are required as part of
the capital improvements plan. This chapter discusses the existing conditions.
Existing Conditions
An inventory of the existing roadway facilities, as defined by Chapter 395, was conducted to
determine existing conditions throughout Southlake. This analysis determines the capacity provided
by the existing roadway system, the demand currently placed on the system and if any deficiencies
exist on the system. Data for the inventory was obtained from field reconnaissance, the City
Thoroughfare Plan and City Staff.
The roadways were divided into segments by the Consultant based on volume changes, major
intersections, service area boundaries, and capacity changes. These segments were assigned to their
respective service areas. Some of the segments bordered two service areas. For these segments, the
roadway capacity and demand was divided between the two service areas. In order to accomplish
this, each segment was assigned a service area percentage of either 50 percent or 100 percent.
For the majority of roadway segments,the length,number of lanes,cross-section,and PM peak hour
volume were obtained. Lane capacities were assigned to each segment based on the type of cross-
section and NCTCOG roadway capacities. Lane capacities as shown in Table 4.
Table 4
Roadway Facility Vehicle-Mile Lane Capacities
Hourly Vehicle-mile
Capacity per Lane
Roadway Facility Type Designation Mile of Roadway Facility
Divided Arterial DA 700
Divided Collector DC 550
Undivided Arterial UA 625
Undivided Collector UC 500
Source: "Multi-modal Transportation Analysis Process (MTAP): A Travel Demand Forecasting Model," North Central Texas Council of
Governments(NCTCOG),Transportation Department,January, 1990.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 12
Information from tiCTCOG does not include a lane capacity for arterials with a continuous dual left-
turn lane (segments identified in this study as "AS"). This type roadway is similar in nature to a
divided arterial roadway and thus an hourly capacity of 700 vehicles per lane per hour was assigned
to these segments.
Existing Volumes
Existing directional PM peak hour volumes were obtained from both existing counts and automated
traffic counts conducted during April and May, 1995. Existing counts were obtained from the City
from data collected in 1994. Automated traffic counts were collected on major segments throughout
Southlake. Traffic volume data was collected at 42 separate locations. In an effort to minimize the
total number of counts, data was collected at locations where traffic volumes would typify link
volumes on the major segments within the immediate area. For segments not counted, estimates were
developed based on data from adjoining roadway counts.
This data was compiled for each roadway segment and entered into the database for use in
calculations. A summary of volumes by roadway segment is included in Appendix E as part of the
existing capital improvements database.
Vehicle-Miles of Existing Capacity Supply
An analysis of the total capacity within each service area was performed. For each roadway segment,
the existing vehicle-miles of existing capacity supplied were calculated using the following equation:
Vehicle-Miles of Capacity = Link capacity per peak hour per lane x No.of Lanes x Length of segment(miles)
A summary of the existing vehicle-miles of capacity by service area is shown in Table 5. For a
detailed listing of vehicle-miles of capacity by roadway segment,refer to Appendix E. Each direction
of travel was calculated separately.
Vehicle-Miles of Existing Demand
The level of current usage in terms of vehicle-miles was calculated for each roadway segment. The
vehicle-miles of existing demand were calculated by the following equation:
Vehicle-Miles of Demand = PM peak hour volume x Length of segment(miles)
Table 5 lists total vehicle-miles of demand for each service area. Appendix E includes a detailed
listing of vehicle-miles of demand by roadway segment.
Vehicle-Miles of Existing Excess Capacity and Deficiencies
For each roadway segment, the existing vehicle-miles of excess capacity and deficiency were
calculated. Each direction was evaluated to determine if the demand exceeded the capacity. If
demand exceeded capacity in one or both directions,the vehicle-miles of deficiencies were calculated.
If no deficiencies were noted, the excess capacity was based on capacity in both directions of travel.
A summary of peak hour vehicle-miles of excess capacity and deficiencies by service area is shown
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 13
in Table 6. A detailed listing of the existing excess capacity and deficiencies by roadway segment is
located in Appendix E.
Table 5
Peak Hour Vehicle-Miles of Existing Capacity and Demand
Service Area Capacity Demand
1 3,703 109
2
6,382
864
3 11,929 2,373
4 10,585 2,721
5 5,044 880
6 4,121 1,328
7 4,406 1,128
8 5,839 1,118
TOTAL 52,282 10,521
Table 6
Peak Hour Vehicle-Miles of Excess Capacity and Existing Deficiencies
Zone Excess Capacity Existing Deficiencies
1 3,598 0
2 5,520 0
3 9,552 0
4 7,862 0
5 4,161 0
6 2,793 0
7 3,279 0
8 4,719 0
TOTAL 40,421 0
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 14
Projected Conditions
A description of all capital improvements or facility expansions and their costs necessitated by and
attributable to new development in the service areas is required by Chapter 395. This chapter
describes the projected growth, vehicle-miles of new demand, capital improvements program,
vehicle-miles of new capacity supplied, and costs of the roadway improvements.
Projected Growth
The projected growth for each transportation service area is represented by the increase in the
number of new vehicle-miles generated over the 10-year planning period. The basis for the
calculation of new demand is the population and employment projections that were prepared by
NCTCOG and used in the preparation of the Southlake Land Use Assumptions for Impact Fees
report. Estimates of population and employment by TSZ were prepared for the years 1995 and 2005.
Data of population was provided in terms of the number of dwelling units, households and persons.
Employment data was broken into three classes of employees; basic, service and retail. NCTCOG
aggregates this data to these components for use in their traffic forecasting model process. Each TSZ
is comprised of a variety of residential and non-residential land uses and are classified by Standard
Industry Classification (SIC) code.
Basic employment (SIC 1,000-5,199) generally encompasses the industrial and manufacturing uses,
service employment (SIC 6,000-9,799) encompasses government and office uses and retail
employment (SIC 5,200-5,999) generally include commercial and retail uses.
Projected Vehicle-Miles of New Demand
Projected vehicle-miles of demand was calculated based on the growth expected to occur in the 10-
year planning period and the service unit generation for each of the population and employment data
components (basic, service and retail). Separate calculations were performed for each data
component and then aggregated by service area. Vehicle-miles of demand for population growth
was based on dwelling units and demand for employment was based on the number of employees
and estimates of square footage per employee. Square footage estimates were obtained from
NCTCOG and based on data collected in the workplace survey conducted in 1984.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page
Table 7 lists the projected vehicle-miles of demand by service area. Appendix C contains the
projected demand calculation worksheet.
Table 7
Vehicle-Miles of New Demand
Projected Vehicle-Miles
Ser,ice Area of New Demand
1 638
1,728
3 2,569
4 2,887
5 1,912
6 2,966
7 1,382
8 1,203
TOTAL 15,285
Capital Improvements Program
The first step in the development of the roadway impact fee system is the determination of a Capital
Improvements Program (CIP). City staff in conjunction with the Capital Improvements Advisory
Committee developed a capital improvement program of roadway projects to be constructed over the
10-year planning period.
The CIP process began with the identification of all potential roadway projects that are eligible for
impact fee recovery. Chapter 395 defines eligible roadway facilities as collector or arterial streets
which have been designated on the officially adopted Thoroughfare Plan, excluding roadways
designated on the federal or Texas highway system. Roadways constructed by private development
are also excluded.
Figure 2 illustrates the location of potential capital improvement program projects in Southlake. The
cost associated with the potential projects list was determined to be about$55 million dollars based
on estimates provided by City Staff. Appendix D (pp. D2-3) contains a breakout of costs by project
for all potential projects.
The CIP list was then pared by City Staff and the Advisory Committee to reflect a more affordable
and achievable program. Considerations for project inclusion were: 1) need based on existing
conditions, 2) affordability and achievability, 3) financial considerations, 4)jurisdictional issues, 5)
Thoroughfare Plan and 6) Staff recommendation. The CIP was further refined in an attempt to match
future supply with projected demand. Figure 3 illustrates the recommended capital improvement
project locations.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 16
CITY - -
_ - - -
SOUTHLARE --- V
•
I���.4
--,„!-„,-.:,--1.--).17,7. ,N.c-- il I P 4 — 7.;..—,.. .' • . ...
1 .......,...-:_. 1 a -- Zr''':' "a'::,-..76_, .,..''. ., i:..i'-;.iiCil.t
: !
+r�.,_
te,,r: ;
,,,,, , ...... ri, , .
\ ./
iL
, /' $ it��• 11161161111r
: f
lr
;T.. •...... . Aingim....,it ......-:--.
•
r I I bHIfl . 4 tit_I ,.� •
I.
i li‘-., li ia B; -trs.2.
rPliAIM
:11, \I!
iiiiirrammumr. — i _›,r) ge I: ..1 4, s,
i Imo ir ip iiii 3 !I
li
_;�_ ,.tam fle _ 1' A .
XV !" 0 f ..r!'. i Cs — 1-- — 1 — —COI
6_ ,
- ^� ��
rIIP- : 7k
i ,
- Li!' 1 1 i
I.
I am ii ih mkt 1104,
/ IIIIIIIIIIINP /I
, ,....,....... hip
':�� 14
\L
Vis,., , ..,, .
�, i
I` �'_-�„�— i s ; - _
// I , h rel ,i .
Railroad Crossing Signal
i0 Traffic Signal Recoupment
0 Traffic Signal Improvement
0 Roadway Improvement Project
ORecoupment Project
- Projects Not Eligible for FIGURE 2
Impact Fee Recovery
POTENTIAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT LOCATIONS
17
CITY OF "�,
SOUTHLAKE -
.� -.. , ` f
-1 , �' �:, I '- put a •
1 .
I ?i. -__
I -_
- r
C..\::::..j .
- I\ ----;.....7,,
—^
if A� :fes .z _- ,.....j N =Er 1 itt i i 1 r
! I , i \ dark '` )1.. agia,."
`J 11
I in 141 LI-
�..,..., •111‘.. 11
mail......
S . '�,\._.,..,„.. „_ ,
,r"
k?..1.11P..
ill. ....
ilL. III iiil,,,Hvs,„
I: i
_.•,... _ • " _
4 Y _ . 4;17 111161 :\:. le .,--: -3r lovi
4. t .
‘..., _.‘ ,„1„,....1..... .
ELM
/Iti _ o ri
mil i
01
:. ; 1 .
( lea 10 1
0 . t,
-
abig 'U'-
, . 1,______r
1 I .,i
• 11 al
, , - um _ ,
8
—' ——— �• —� ... ..,wr�c .'w.s..4 a...... s.-• '
S tl to�icia wee-,+.. GSR,saw= 4 .91, 7' �.1r�.sarr+ .r
WM.War
loll
1 -�~" ' wi, 440.411111111 lllWI
I
CD Roadway improvement Project
QRecoupment Project
Q Traffic Signal Recoupment
Railroad Crossing Signal
• Traffic Signal
FIGURE 3
RECOMMENDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT LOCATIONS
18
Costs for roadway projects in the recommended CIP were developed for each segment based on data
of recent construction in the area. Project costs were developed by City Staff for construction,
engineering , right-of-way, bridge and traffic signals. Financial costs associated with each project
were developed by the financial Consultant. Project costs also include the cost impact fee update (3
three year updates at $50,000) and were allocated to each project based on the supply provided by the
impro'ement.
Table 8 lists the projects and associated costs for each of the recommended projects. The cost for the
recommended CIP program totals over $24 million. Of this total, over$386,000 is associated with
project recoupment. The ability to recoup cost for previously constructed facilities is specifically
authorized in State legislation. The only project scheduled for recoupment is a segment of North
Kimball Road (from SH 114 to Southlake Blvd.). Appendix F lists the proposed projects by service
area.
Projected Vehicle-Miles Capacity Available for New Growth
The vehicle-miles of new capacity supply were calculated similar to the vehicle-miles of existing
capacity supplied. The equation used was:
Vehicle-Miles of New Capacity Supplied= Link capacity per peak hour per lane
x Num. of lanes within Service Area x Length of
segment(miles)
A summary of the vehicle-miles of new supply by service area is listed in Table 9.
Table 9
Vehicle-Miles of New Capacity Supplied
Vehicle-Miles
of New
Service Area Capacity Supply
1 1,900
2 3,650
3 5,376
4 6,060
5 6,853
6 5,626
7 4,900
8 2.500
TOTAL - 36,865
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 19
o _ _o.
, R
^ 2 n ._ - � m ^ dr o ' .� .0 «.- .. A . n ,_, 9 5 ` 3 . ' o „
0.0 IN n . a q ryo a eeel
7, u
uOx 0 - w ^ qnO Q • 3• qqQ '''yQa81- ^ M = • , o” w
I NMM A M + w M M �M � rN
NN MH M M M M w M N »
I N
IN
� y �j y m 8
• I O ... N N a ^ ' I O
8 N - pp 3 w 2 : m N ' 2 mN T 2 0. q ., w n
U N .a. .. ^ 72 ... .v - -, a - 'd o .- n ri r N a Ci ai ' a
3 w .• w w w .n ..
.„ .: N ... N I w
N
n 0. O aO R i7nn Cl 41 n f. 0n 0 d
R Q
1I n : 3O n D a N L D 3 D ., w a A �. ry O r 3 p
75 w P. nT = -- Cvoyi o e n -. O Fa R. a ^ '� . N P
W
o M
Z U N � N .. .. N Mw .. .. N w
w .4 .. . N . w N w 40 w .. . N .. N n
I
N
aw0 A , w n o h n W, n r R
m
W V R1 . LDa0annO ' ^ AO - ti ryO : fN Q
V V' ca. ' V 2A nA ^ O PI f mV (1- nfV N m A. P n ^ d pn ... 4u. I .f q '1 < - N ppN P ._ n - N - N J _ 7. - MN . N M .
= m N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N N N N N .01 N N
_
tt i
M
I
�. P, § 8 :1 M.„ 8< I0 x8 § 8 § I $ . 88 § 8 8
2 N mbLs; fIoNm I
co N • _ No..a N N M N M m NN M
9 p o p a pe q 2 § 2222 §
oj� oo po 8 8 8 8N
O .9 w „ M .Q Q S N N M N ONI M `4 2S N N N ..r 8 N N I� .f N
"o 1 S _ _ •
(J ^ N N N O e A A
y M .d N N M N N t w
< W 60
N N N
xA q r4 N A w a N _ P. N N ' R. q A N O _ N _
a el : A .. a aXXAN eigmXa ! N Va .0 40. a el
l CO
1- Of h q1 en ri n el el oi A ri M ri ,a A
» N .1 N N N .nl N N »
p� yQ g� s a
a .N- .Nn 8 : Agi 8omo a gSoo133 ag � s ai73 3 1
a O A n ..fpp to o .i t0 q .f vi a' O 10�! .4 N r: ,: O c O «Nl ,.i ,.i 8
Q M M N N .4 N N M M N N M _ M N M S N N a S M N •N •
G O L
.yA
O 0
upAap0 . fryryqN � n ♦ ♦ E la
.0AON fv . atIt 9 • N
w ' O pw YI M m CA S W .p a O. 4.1. Oi A
WN N N MN N M M N N N N M N N N N t qui
MNNN N N S § t)3
» 444 N _
r r .
1 NFZ < Q
11 I
Zp p O 8 pp o p 8 p 2 8 $ 8 8 2 8 8 2 8 p p O p
F
H
j N V W
s N h O h W
V f h f Y) q / W1 O V Wl MI a a a . 1 W) V,
A O!
Q R n r n CO CO INO A Nal v 4- a h X 0. N 01
. g
N J C 0 0 5- 0 5 O O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 5- o
M
Up O
d Ir v m v)
J 111 W Ft N n n
S.
t-
0 (Q S m
CL W` p (3, J = J Lu C J J N a0 OV. P G O
m ~ M v ^ Z J re w
W G ; N N N N
? 8 W pW g 8 3 N § zQ~ N = V > Z<
0 U '4 z 3 z 8 5 5 3 Yl in N M N ul U U N A 4f•
vs us
a _
4.44
044.m JJ7
O. W W W ~ < Q MI N
S V u. W J g ! z 3 0 = z d SU Z S z
N $ ggz . S 9 bJ g�g g~g or m O
U pm z t7 .- .- ^ U n 2 U t3 3 a tS a. <
0 13m N 3 LL 2 W N N N cc
W m N N U W Ui Vl N (l O Z YvJ� y� y Z
Q! J ...1
�( Ill
w O h UO O
C� 3. t<< h
3' S SS y yy O ufl
22 z U
7I U 22 < 5 g Z Z oC' H 00 = J ~ �"W O = z OZ 0 E ao 1S 3c.41d m . O
C2 E z 3 z 3 3 z i w 3 W z z z 3 3 m W O z w ui 3 O W W 3 3 3 3 3 y w CC U m F= F-
() . /� A A 1. A A ►. A
(gyp d N <j N N n n n S W1 h A h Wl A S a ao I. A r- i 03 O
F' R� I N N N N h N N N H
20
Cost of Roadway Improvements by Service Area
The total cost for each service area to implement the roadway improvements plan projects was
calculated. The design, construction, right-of-way, bridge, signal, finance and study update costs
were all included in the calculation of total roadway within a particular service area.
A summary of the total in each service area is shown in Table 10. A detailed listing can be found in
Appendix G.
Table 10
Summary of Roadway Improvements Plan Cost Analysis
Service Area Total Project Cost(S)
1 996,070.00
2 2,902,140.00
3 4,089,559.00
4 3,341,770.00
5 4,408,870.00
6 3,477,147.00
7 3,537,889.00
8 1A93.269.00
TOTAL 24,216,714.00
Funding of Roadway Projects in Southlake
The City of Southlake is currently improving roadways throughout the City,using a variety of funding
sources. Figure 4 illustrates the roadway improvements recently or currently undertaken by the City
or planned for the future. Segments are identified by funding source.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 21
�_ ITY O I _�--
SOLTHL_�RE -,� s.
, — f ..
• Awtra��r
7 ..,
.... _________
_._._.___
_ . .
0 r a . s
,Cr-Lili 3--)I 7"77-7-:\t -_. g.,
...
______, , ..,-- ,,, . ,
, ,,,...,...,, ,.,
_ r-.___ Ig„,, -
I r,
liakk \WU ; F' *. I jimr._.
,-IL..81 ,,i Q .tet
' iir.
lr
...--4 ittqw, ,:zi
- ....
..,
s __-l'w uhft -
tiI
uot. 11-11-3-:rt,'
C
--- III MI int 10,6„IIJ*Lt! j
it
,.... ,,,-...
. , „..1 1,..11„..„. ‘,...ii „..... i.„,.... ;, ,...._, .
........
�'• . J ire lEr7 ..\ 1 ,
1
1
,oihmimi I LL-4./ii
ll
, 1 . , ge . i : 2...ap 1,1
A ,. _ i_
, ,
_ 0 ,,_.
„, ,
OM R+ wpo
til iiat _ ii� ,�1'
4r:ft
/1 --"111111111
1111..
111W! 0 *al i OP 11 II 1 di
44 --°. D . '
_ Ip1Ji_ ,,...A
1111•11141 6.II : ol .. ..,:Z: ',ER
r '
i --1 --114\'-'Ill a4 7-
g IV
iI • 1 ,c.,....j
..j
h /Ai �/
Railroad Crossing Signal
Q Traffic Signal Recoupment
• Traffic Signal Improvement
Q Roadway Improvement Project
0 Recoupment Project
_ Projects Not Eligible for FIGURE 4
Impact Fee Recovery
;, Bond Protect FUNDING FOR ROADWAY PROJECTS
IN SOUTHLAKE
Impact Fee Projects 22
6.
Calculation of Transportation Impact Fees
This chapter discusses the calculation of the maximum fee per service unit and the calculation of
transportation impact fees. The transportation impact fee will vary by the particular land use, service
area,and size of the development. Examples are also included to better illustrate the method by which
the transportation impact fees are calculated.
Maximum Cost Per Service Unit
The calculation of the maximum cost per service unit involves the calculation of the net capacity
supplied by the CIP after existing demand and deficiencies are removed, and the calculation of the
total cost of the net capacity supplied.
Where net capacity supplied is greater than the new demand, the maximum fee is simply the cost of
supplying the net capacity divided by the number of service units provided. For example, if only 60%
of the service units supplied by the CIP are needed in the next 10 years, only 60% of the cost may be
considered in calculation fees. If the net capacity supplied is less than projected new demand, then
the maximum cost per service unit is calculated by dividing the total cost of net supply by the portion
of new demand attributable and necessary by development. In other words, only the cost of what is
provided can be considered.
Calculations of the maximum fee were developed for each service area. Table 11 lists the maximum
fee per service unit in each service area. This represents the cost per service unit and is the maximum
fee which can be charged under the state statute. The weighted average is based on a city-wide
calculation and is not the average of the individual service area costs. Appendix H details the
maximum fee per service unit calculation for each service area.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 23
TABLE 1 I - MAXIMUM FEE COST SUMMARY
Service Maximum Fee Per
Area Service Unit
1 $508 00
2 $795 00
3 $760 00
4 $551.00
5 $643.00
6 $618.00
7 $722.00
8 $597.00
Weighted Average $656.00
Calculation of Roadway Impact Fees
The calculation of roadway impact fees for new development involves a two step process. Step one
is the calculation of the total number of service units that will be generated by the development. Step
two is the calculation of the impact fee due by the new development.
Step 1: Determine number of service units(vehicle-miles) generated by the development using the
equivalency table.
No. of Development x Vehicle-miles = Development's
Units per development unit Vehicle-miles
Step 2: Calculate the impact fee based on the fee per service unit for the service area where the
development is located.
Development's x Fee per = Impact Fee due
Vehicle-miles vehicle-mile from Development
Examples: For developments located in Service Area 4, which has a maximum fee per vehicle-
mile of$551.
Single-Family Dwelling
1 dwelling unit x 2.85 vehicle-miles/dwelling unit=2.85 vehicle-miles
2.85 vehicle-miles x $551/vehicle-miles = $1,570.35
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 24
50.000 square foot (s.f) Office Building
50 (1,000 s.f. units) x 2.66 vehicle-miles/1,000 s.f. units = 133 vehicle-miles
133 vehicle-miles x $551/vehicle-mile = $73,283.00
100.000 s.f. Retail Center
100 (1,000 s f. units) x 1.80 vehicle-miles/1,000 s.f. units = 180 vehicle-miles
180 vehicle-miles x $551/vehicle-mile = $99,180.00
300.000 s.f. Industrial Development
300 (1,000 s.f. units) x 0.67 vehicle-miles/1,000 s.f. units =201 vehicle-miles
201 vehicle-miles x $551/vehicle-mile =$110,751.00
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 2)
7.
Conclusions
Chapter 395 authorizes the assessment and collection of impact fees in Texas for transportation related
capital improvements which must be met in order to assess and collect impact fees. This study was
conducted to fulfill the requirements of Chapter 395 in developing a transportation-related impact fee
for the City of Southlake.
Eight service areas were developed for Southlake. This service area structure was configured so that
no point in each area is more than the 3-mile maximum set forth by law. The 3-mile limit ensures that
roadway improvements are in close proximity to the development paying the fees that it serves.
Vehicle-miles of travel in the PM peak hour is used as the service unit for calculating and assessing
impact fees. Vehicle-miles establishes a relationship of the intensity of land development to the
demand on the roadway system through the used of published trip generation data and average trip
length. The PM peak hour is used as the time period for assessment because the greatest demand for
roadway capacity occurs during this hour, roadways are sized to meet this demand and roadway
capacity can more easily be defined on an hourly basis.
The service units (vehicle-miles) for new development are a function of trip generation and the
average trip length for specific uses. Trip generation information was based on data published in Trip
Generation by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Where possible, trip generation rates were
adjusted to reflect the primary trip purpose. This would ensure that new development is assigned for
the portion of trips associated with that specific development. Because of limited data of diverted
trips,adjustments for only pass-by trips were made to trip generation rates. Average trip length data
was based on information compiled by NCTCOG based on the 1984 Travel and Workplace survey.
The average trip lengths were adjusted to remove travel on state roadways since the law does not
allow state designated roadways to be included in calculating impact fees.
The result of combining trip generation and trip length information is an equivalency table which
establishes a service unit rate for various land uses. Separate rates were established for specific land
uses within the broader categories of residential, community, industrial and institutional uses.
An analysis of existing conditions revealed that the current roadway system provides over 52,200
vehicle-miles of capacity. The existing demand placed on the system was determined to be over
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 16
10,500 vehicle-miles. There were no existing deficiencies detected on the system.
Projected growth, in terms of vehicle-miles over the 10-year planning period,was based on population
and employment data that was prepared in the Land Use Assumptions for Impact Fees report. Based
on this growth, the projected vehicle-miles of demand was calculated to be 15,283.
A Capital improvements program for the 10-year planning period, was developed by City Staff in
conjunction with the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee. The CIP process began by
identifying all potential projects which could be included in the calculation on impact fees. Projects
eligible for inclusion include arterial and collector streets that have been designated on the officially
adopted Thoroughfare Plan of the City. State roadways and developer funded roadways are not
eligible for inclusion in calculating impact fees. Forty-nine potential projects totaling over $55
million were identified. From that list, a recommended projects list was developed. Considerations
for project inclusion were: the need based on existing conditions, project affordability and
achievability, financial considerations, jurisdictional issues, the Thoroughfare Plan and Staff
recommendation. The recommended CIP program consists of 21 projects totaling over$24 million
and will provide 36,865 vehicle-miles of new capacity.
A maximum fee per service unit was calculated for each service area based on the total cost of net
capacity supplied by the CIP and the demand attributable to new development over the 10-year
planning period. The result represents the cost per service unit and is the maximum fee which can be
charged under Chapter 395.
Southlake Roadway Impact Fee Study Page 27
A. Roadway Impact Fee Definitions
ROADWAY ItiIPaCT FEE DEFINITIONS
Average Trip Length - the average actual travel distance between two points. The average trip length
for various land uses varies Data of a'erage trip length is based on information from the 1984
NCTCOG Workplace Surrey and Household Surnev for Metroplex.
Diverted Trip - similar to pass-by trip, but a di,ersion is made from the re`?ular route to make an
interim stop.
Impact Fee - a charge or assessment imposed by a city against new development to generate revenue
for funding or recouping roadway improvements necessitated and attributable to new development.
Maximum Fee Per Service Unit-the highest impact fee that may be collected by the City per vehicle-
mile of supply. Calculated by dividing the costs of the capital improvements by the total number of
vehicle-miles of demand expected in the 10-year planning period.
Pass-by Trip -a trip made as intermediate stop on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination,
for example a stop at a convenience store on the way to office from home.
PM Peak Hour - the hour when the highest volume of traffic typically occurs. Data collection
(April/May 1995) revealed peak hour of travel between 5:00 and 6:00 pm for Southlake.
PM Peak Hour Traffic Counts - the number of vehicles passing a certain point during the peak hours
of travel. PM traffic counts conducted because greatest demand for roadway capacity occurs during
this hour.
Primary Trip - a trip made for the specific purpose of visiting a destination, for example, from home
to office.
Roadway Demand - the demand placed on the roadway network as a result of development.
Determined by multiplying the trip generation of a specific land use by the average trip length.
Roadway Supply(or Capacity) -the number of service units provided by a segment of roadway over
a period of time. Determined by multiplying the lane capacity by the roadway length.
Service Area- the area within the city boundaries to be served by capital improvements. Criteria for
developing the service area structure include; 1) restricted to 3-mile limit by Chapter 395 (to ensure
proximity of roadway improvements to development), 2) conforms to Traffic Survey Zone (TSZ)
boundaries,3)as large as possible to 3-mile limit to promote fee uniformity,4)roadway projects on CEP
as boundaries, 5) effort to match roadway supply with projected demand.
Service Unit - a measure of use or generation attributable to new development for roadway
improvements. Also used to measure supply provided by existing and proposed roadway
improvements.
Al
Traffic Survey Zone (TSZ) - the smallest geographic area for which demographic (population and
employment) data is available. An industry standard used by the North Central Council of
Governments (NCTCOG) in the travel demand forecasting model process. Southlake is comprised of
34 TSZ's.
Trip - a single or one-direction vehicle movement with an origin and a destination.
Trip Generation - the total trip ends for a land use over a given period of time or the total of all trips
entering and exiting a site during that designated time. Used in development of 10-year traffic demand
projections and the equivalency table for Southlake.
Based primarily on data prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE). ITE publishes trip
generation for over 100 land uses (3000 studies) across the nation.
Vehicle - for impact fee purposes, any passenger or goods transportation typically on the roadway
during peak periods of travel.
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. Over other methods, vehicle-mile specifically meets criteria of
Chapter 395. For instance, trip lengths are different for a convenience store vs. a regional mall.
A2
B. Land Use Definitions
LAM) LSE DEFINITIONS
Residential
Single-Family Detached - Any single-family detached home on an individual lot is
included in this category A typical example of this land use is a home in a suburban
subdivision.
Multi-Family - This land use includes both low-rise ("walk-up" dwellings) and high-rise
multi-family apartments. An apartment is defined as a dwelling unit that is located within
the same building with at least three other dwelling units. Also included in this land use
are residential condominiums and townhomes. Residential condominiums and
townhomes are defined as single-family units that have at least one other single-family
unit within the same building structure.
Mobile Home - Mobile home parks generally consist of trailers shipped, sited, and
installed on permanent foundations, and typically have community facilities such as
recreation rooms, swimming pools, and laundry facilities.
Retirement Community - Retirement communities - restricted to adults or senior citizens
- contain residential units similar to apartments or condominiums, and are usually self-
contained villages. They may also contain special services such as medical facilities,
dining facilities, and some limited supporting retail facilities.
Office
General Office Building- A general office building houses one or more tenants and is the
location where affairs of a business, commercial or industrial organization, professional
person or firm are conducted. The building or buildings may be limited to one tenant,
either the owner or lessee, or contain a mixture of tenants including professional services,
insurance companies, investment brokers, company headquarters, and services for the
tenants such as a bank or savings and loan, a restaurant or cafeteria, and service retail
facilities.
Business Park- Business parks consist of a group of one or two story buildings served by
a common roadway system similar to an office or industrial park. The tenant space is
flexible to house a variety of uses. Tenants may be start-up companies or fully matured
relatively small companies that require a variety of space. Offices, retail and wholesale
sales, restaurants, and recreation, as well as warehousing, manufacturing, light industrial,
and scientific research uses are typical within this land use.
Commercial
Shopping Center- A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial
establishments which is planned, developed, owned, and managed as a unit. It is related
to its market area in terms of size, location, and type of store. Shopping centers provide
on-site parking facilities. Some centers may include non-merchandising uses: office
Bt
buildim_s, theaters. post offices, banks, health clubs, and recreational facilities such as ice
skating rinks.
Restaurant - This land use consists of sit-down eating establishments. Quality and high-
turnover(sit-down) restaurants are included in this category. Quality restaurants usually
have a turnover rate of at least one hour or longer. The turnover rate for a high-turnover
(sit-down) restaurant is usually less than one hour.
Fast Food Restaurant - This category includes fast food restaurants with or without drive-
through windows, such as McDonalds, Burger King, Dunkin Donuts, and Taco Bell.
Some establishments may include an indoor or outdoor playground.
High Turnover Restaurant - This land use consists of sit-down establishments with
turnover rates generally of less than one hour.
Convenience Store: > 2.400 sq. ft. - Any convenience market with greater than 2,400
square feet. These markets sell convenience foods, newspapers, magazines, and often,
beer and wine. The establishment may have gasoline pumps, but the main use at the
location is usually the convenience store.
Service Station - Service stations generally are located at intersections or freeway
interchanges and may include facilities for servicing, repairing, and fueling motor
vehicles. This land use includes service stations without convenience stores.
Gas Station with Convenience Stores: < 2.400 sq. ft. - Service stations generally are
located at intersections or freeway interchanges and may include facilities for servicing,
repairing, and fueling motor vehicles. This land use includes service stations with
convenience stores of less than 2,400 square feet.
Bank - This land use includes walk-in and drive-in banks. `Valk-in banks are generally
free-standing buildings with their own parking lots. These banks do not have drive-in
windows. Drive-in banks provide banking facilities for the motorist while in a vehicle;
many also serve patrons who walk into the building. Savings and loan companies should
also be included in this category.
New Car Sales -New car sales facilities are generally included are automobile services
and parts sales along with a sometimes substantial used car sales operation. Some
dealerships also include leasing activities and truck sales and servicing.
Furniture Store - A furniture store specializes in the sale of furniture, and often, carpeting.
Industrial
General Light Industrial - Light industrial facilities usually employ fewer than 500
persons and have an emphasis on activities other than manufacturing. Typical light
industrial activities include printing plants, material testing laboratories, assemblers of
data processing equipment, and power stations; most facilities are free-standing and
devoted to a single use.
B2
Industrial Park - Industrial parks are areas containing a number of industrial or related
facilities. They are characterized by a mix of manufacturing, service, and warehouse
facilities with a wide variation in the proportion of each type of use from one location to
another. Many industrial parks contain highly diversified facilities - some with a large
number of small businesses and others with one or tmeo dominant industries.
Warehousing - Warehouses are primarily devoted to the storage of materials and typically
include an office and maintenance area.
;Mini-warehouse - A mini-warehouse is a building in which a storage unit or vault is
rented for the storage of goods. Each unit is physically separated from other units and
access is usually provided through an overhead door or other common access point.
Institutional
elementary School - Elementary schools serve students between the kindergarten and
middle school or junior high school levels. Elementary schools are usually centrally
located in residential communities in order to facilitate student access and have no
student drivers.
High School- High schools are for students who have completed middle school or junior
high school. This land use typically includes grades nine (9) through twelve (12).
Junior/Community College -This land use includes two-year junior colleges or
community colleges. A number of two year institutions have sizable evening programs.
Dav Care Center-A day care center is a facility where care for pre-school age children is
provided, normally during the daytime hours. Day care facilities generally include
classrooms, offices, eating areas, and playgrounds. Some centers also provide after-
school care for older children.
Hospital - A hospital is any institution where medical or surgical care is given to non-
ambulatory and ambulatory patients, and overnight accommodations are provided.
Nursing Home -A nursing home is any facility whose primary purpose is to care for
persons who are unable to care for themselves. The term applies to rest homes, chronic
care, and convalescent homes. .
Church/Svnagogue - Churches and synagogues are buildings providing public worship
services, and generally houses an assembly hall or sanctuary, meeting rooms, classrooms,
and occasionally dining, catering, or party facilities.
B3
C. Calculation of Vehicle-Miles of New Demand
Vehicle-Mile Trip Generation by Service Area, Southlake
Pe.fsed 9/13/1995 cased on Sept 5 199.5 Lard '.:se a,sLrrptcrs Repert
Estimated Residential Growth Vehicle-Mile Tnp Generation
'Service Area ; Added IVehicle-Miles 1 Total '
Dwelling Units ! per DU Vehicle-Miles
1 ! 2201 2.85 ' 627,
2 370 2 85 1055'
3 604 2 85 1721 ,
4 718 2 85 2046
5 350 2 85 998
5 1003 2 85 2859
7, 393 2 85 1120
8! 3421 2.85 975;
Estimated Basic Employment Growth Vehicle-Mile Generation
Service Areal Added 1 Square Feet j Total 1 Vehicle-Miles 1 Total
1 Employees I per emp 1 Square Feet 1 Per 1000/SF Vehicle-Miles
I 11 3 i 1205 j 3,6151 0.67 2
1 2 627 j 12051 755,5350.67 506
3 931 12051 1,121,8551 0.67 752
41 8421 1205 1,014,6101 0.67 680
5 4781 1205 575,9901 0.67 386
6 1371 1205 165,085 0.67 111
7 163 1205 196,415 0.67 132
8' 131 1205 I 157,855 0.67 106
Estimated Service Employment Growth Vehicle-Mile Generation
Service Area' Added Square Feet I Total ' Vehicle-Miles Total
Employees per emp. Square Feet I Per 1000/SF Vehicle-Miles
1 1 91 3501 3,1501 2.66 8
21 411 3501 14,350 1 2.66 38
3 I 581 3501 20,300 j 2.66 54
4 I 32 1 350 11,200 2.66 30
5 258 350 90,300 2.66 240
6 -19 350 (6,650 2.66 (18)
7 -50 350 (17,500)] 2.661 (47)
8 j 99 3501 34,6501 2.66 1 92
Estimated Retail Employment Growth Vehicle-Mile Generation
Service Areal Added Square Feet ' Total 1 Vehicle-Miles Total
J Employees per emp. Square Feet 1 Per 1000/SF Vehicle-Miles
1 0 800 01 1.8 0
2 90 800 72,0001.8 130
3 29 800 23,2001 1.8 42
4 91 800 72,800 1.8 131
5 200 800 160,000 1.8 288
6 10 800 8,000 t8 14
7 123 800 j 98,400 1.8 177
8 21 - 8001 16,800 j 1.8 30
Vehicle-mile Generation Summary
Residential Basic Service Retail Total
Service Area Growth Growth Growth Growth Growth
Vehicle-Miles Vehicle-Miles Vehicle-Miles Vehicle-Miles Vehicle-Miles
1 627 2 8 0 638
2 1055 506 38 130 1728
3 1721 7521 54 42 2569
4 2046? 680! 301 131 2887
51 998i 38611 2401 288 1912
61 28591 1111 -18! 14 2966
71 11201 1321 -471 177 1382
81 975 i 106 ! 921 301 1203
Totals j 11,4001 2,6741 398; 812j 15,285
Cl
D. Potential Capital Improvement Program
Project Location and Costs
CITY OF
S0 L-T ��`= "
HLa�E - —
� _
-- 3Ut Q
' 14 _ �,11E11IF
a
i . .r.tilr'-.
\' ! , iVeil d�, N l MOW ___�. 44, i ',Mali. ' i*/----.-\! \\ 1 1 Or el ., .? _
i „rum,,\ ,
:1 ., 1 \ i I ip., , t• ....„ 1 1..... a.. , ,
... ...._„„,„„„____,.... ________ ..... ._ _...... , , .
„„. mg si:
if
IIIMI 11111m..1
\7 :
•
11,9S
,___1 f 'I.M%. .4 S4N t r.,ire/a/#7, c ,
liaggarma
t* -441°'
— �
N11iiI - H
...._ ... � ,
, wk., �� les` ! i '
.,,, ,:,. .
,,,, .
5 . .
, . �"
lie ,
j si s, I/ c.-- , i: . i.), L.... i
i ,e,"111E1 iiiiiibigi
INIM F il -.
Ili I
4--m
II r ‘,,,,, b t ._111a FIJI 0, e, /, it ,.. .
., ,_
...
g\ .
.11. A 74 11Mgi
i D . , ,\.,. .
. .
,.
,' 1 •. v,
. ..„ •
.-_.LI
�i ' !"iii b ... 1 ! 1 ',; I ',_ I
.Gnu.�� .--••.' ..1. swistr .v���tee• 11=1 ' a�
��! T -'-, 1 i I E Ii .
I 11 iih 161 Ai i ,
Railroad Crossing Signal
Q Traffic Signal Recoupment
O Traffic Signal Improvement
ORoadway Improvement Project
ORecoupment Project
_ Projects Not Eligible for
Impact Fee Recovery
POTENTIAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT LOCATIONS
D1
•n O. .n e „ o .n O O ^1 ^ 0 01 O1 O• 00 �Qp1 Nw f
O O1 1 O N 1 O rN�. r O 1'NI 47 - ry 4- p0 el el 4.4 et A R O OI m 01 M 0
Yt --- a o T. - -` n N 1 n n l a 1 - 0 0 - a 7 w
W p 9 3 . O = p A D O O N 1 N QI O -, T N '_ l a
t 1 N
U N J• N 1J - " t 41 nO O Cl 0 ..- .- = + 9 41 0 ^ n L
_ - rT :1 p - N •. O a - 1 7. .4 1 .
= N M. N N N N. N- N - - ' N 7 CI n n .. - .- CI H p
.. p
M N N M I O
LL
i M
IO
J
8
V! ' b Vi 40 IO w
IN
1
N N ~ N N N rtt N
M M M
M
N
y• W O C 0-
IN c0 C tnJ w In ^ d Z 1iO
`
ea
U 4-4 n M f N e N NNN - N N N N N N N N N N N
Am ,
<
d
40 fp3ooANON pfNN 11 y oNpOpI O O O 3 w N
N Nm „ ON p m • mM $ pN fS c1N.
N N 'n N • 1MMMNNN
N M ^ A2 M wN
MO » M N M N N r
()
N 2
N
1r
7
Qpp S p 3 SSpO NSp + 8 8EgOm O1 fiOO Gff f O N f G f 1 A. m O 1lO k s OC
G t tNG YN N NA p COM8N MMOVq 3 u N N lf:,•,i N Yw Pti1 f C
• fir1 lie VII N M M 4 0 0 Q
,» N a
N
W L
.n N O A m U) N to A t7 m A t7 Of w N m Y f m T O E
p� mm 1O� O m f �py� N M CO N 40 f ppb Vf m N Or N 01 M 1'1 A f N
OI O 01 1 f - O O� la.' S OS A f 1 f Of OI V. O A O A at Ot 10 r1 N
OI tp m Of at O; o 0) m Of N V.
.fl 01 til W N 0 Oi O O CO �.y h
N .n Y f M PI 1� N t� ^ 1'1 N N .A N Vf N /f T A A PI fCl N 1 . s
Z I N M Y4 Yr M M N N N N N n N N N N a N M N N N N YII N `
W w 1 1
Q
R
x .' 88888888 $ 88888 8822, 88 88888
N
< co N H N < < < < N t) < N N N < N N y CO N < < < U
w
a 0 < < < < > > > > < < 3 < < < 3 < < < < < 3333
1 N .n .n m f f f 1 N N 1 m N N 00000 N f VW N
J C
E n IN N 01 N f O1 ^1 8 .t 1 to n t'l N O 1 ro to e. f .- N ,41el
-4
S S S V S
J 000004100 O O — .- O r• O O O 4 .- O . — — O .-
N0
CO C (D If 14 10, N CO 0 o
N O) w (n n at c 111
pX. J < 7 Y u) ...c0 CU Ul co (C�p)) O (u1
Hyl typl W WW W a0 a0 O 01 `
V •
f O tWYytJ 0. 3W J h<. W x ''g vs S J p J c d M N (') N y Y)
g r Z Y 3 0 i W Y� r -a W g W . J Z .... _,
W N M
' OJ �. x X ooOC� F
rta.1 = oy y Z O V) Z O H Z 3 3 d O U) ?�
C x x O K 2 ¢ O O 0 0 < J �y
m N (/) N YJ u; W U U N co N W U N U N y N 0 (. 3
E
V a §, li 1- i •- W i -� " z i V
0 W Z ; J Z C Z J W W 1y. Z J Z UJ H Z Z > Z y = Z Z O
(• a z b A ' ^ z O z s — Z Z O Z z w li g p y F-
_ z o
E a s ) s x c0i COI c0i U > v Q 4 O C i < * 0. y O u7 h Z
W co N N N W O W W co N W U U V s U 0 N 0 0. Z 3 U 11 O
F
0 >,
.... 0 0 m 0 CO 2
N R 1.. J J J J I U V V ai M V V J
..(., s. W a � j OWj LIJ <p.. l.. V J 3� C C� (O W d
M + W J J J J J W W J x<U U Z �U U Z Z M G O W 'C i t 0 Z
(7 O I O H W Z C M� H W W O O W W H P. V ZQ N h = y 0 2 g u J
u z G z -, O O ce -F w P- ~ ~ O O O z E U Z L C
ca 0 U Z Y Y U Y Y v v v 3 0. 0. > n n o C O •0 O O
Q y m W U Z Z co •N N cc 0 m W W N N N • cn N N N 3 3 a 7 -) Z N u. a N CL Cr C.] @ H I- t-
mm i a a �ef a a
.0 V 1 1 N A A A A m m m m m a `R
H O. <I n m a vl n n ; a m m a , A co o I--
N co
D3
E. Existing Capital Improvements
EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Definitions
LANES The total number of lanes in both directions available for tral,el.
TYPE The type of roadway (used in determining capacity):
DA = divided arterial
UA = undivided arterial
DC = divided collector
UC = undivided collector
PK-HR VOLUME The existing volume of cars on the roadway segment travelling during
the afternoon (P.M.) peak hour of travel. A and B indicate the two
directions of travel. Direction A is a northbound or eastbound and
direction B is southbound or westbound. If only one half of the
roadway is located within a service area (see % in service area), one of
the directions will have no volume in this service area. The opposing
direction will be recorded in the other service area.
% IN SERVICE AREA If the roadway is located on the boundary between service areas, half of
the roadway is inventoried in one service area and the other half in the
other service area. This value is either 50% or 100%.
VEH-MI SUPPLY PK-HR The number of total service units (vehicle-miles) supplied within
the service area, based on the length and established capacity of the
roadway type.
VEH-MI TOTAL The total service unit (vehicle-mile) demand created by existing
DEMAND PK-HR traffic on the roadway segment in the afternoon peak hour.
EXCESS CAPACITY The number of service units supplied but unused by existing
PK-HR VEH-MI traffic in the afternoon peak hour.
EXISTING DEFICIENCIES The number of service units of demand in excess of the service
PK-HR VEH-MI units supplied.
NOTE: Excess capacity and existing deficiencies are calculated separately for each direction. It
is possible to have excess capacity in one direction and an existing deficiency in the other. When
both directions have excess capacity or deficiencies, the total for both directions are presented.
E1
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
t IN VEH-N: VEH-M: EXCESS EX:ST:NG
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR VOLDME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY DEF:C:ENC'_
(MI) A B TOTAL AREA PK-HR DEMAND PK-HOUR PK-HR VEH.V
TOTAL PK-HR VEH-M:
•• SERVICE AREA: 1
808 JONES T.W. KING N. WHITE CHAPEL 0.59 2 UC 12 8 20 100 590 12 578 0
80B JONES N. WHITE CHAPEL END 1.11 2 UA 9 12 21 100 1388 23 1365 0
N. WHITE CHAPEL B08 JONES GOOSE NECK 0.26 2 UA 21 24 45 100 325 12 315 0
N. WHITE CHAPEL GOOSE NECK COUNTY LINE 0.50 2 UA 35 30 65 100 625 33 593 0
T.W. KING COUNTY LINE BOB JONES 0.62 2 UA 31 16 47 100 775 29 747 0
•• Subtotal ••
3.00 3703 109 3598 0
r
E2
SOUTHLAKE IMPACT FEE
EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
t IN VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY DEFICI3N::_
(MI) A 8 TOTAL ARIA PK-HR DEMAND PK-HOUR PK-HR VE-_
TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI
' •• SERVICE AREA: 2
B. DOVE N. WHITE CHAPEL RIDGECREST 0.32 2 UA 0 130 130 50 200 42 158 0
B. DOVE RIDGECREST N. CARROLL 0.65 2 UA 0 124 124 50 406 81 325 0
E. DOVE N. CARROLL LONESOME DOVE 0.41 2 UA 0 160 160 50 256 66 190 0
' KIRKW00D BLVD. E. SH 114 T.W. KING 0.19 4 DA 31 16 47 100 532 9 523 0
' LONESOME DOVE EMERALD CIRCLE BURNEY 0.53 2 VC 75 40 115 100 530 61 469 0
LONESOME DOVE B. DOVE EMERALD CIRCLE 0.19 2 UC 100 50 150 100 190 29 161 0
N. CARROLL QUAIL RUN BURNEY 0.20 2 UC 210 110 320 100 200 64 136 0
N. CARROLL E. DOVE QUAIL RUN 0.43 2 UC 259 156 415 100 430 178 252 0
N. WHITE CHAPEL COUNTY LINE E. DOVE 1.22 2 UA 56 39 95 100 1525 116 1410 0
N. WHITE CHAPEL SH 114 E. DOVE 0.64 2 UA 0 59 59 50 400 38 362 0
RIDGECREST B. DOVE WOODLAND 0.70 2 UC 67 28 95 100 700 67 633 0
T.W. KING COUNTY LINE KIRKW00D BLVD. B 0.39 2 UA 31 16 47 100 488 18 470 0
W. DOVE SH 114 N. WHITE CHAPEL 0.42 2 UA 125 100 225 100 525 95 431 0
•• Subtotal ••
6.29 6382 864 5520 0
E3
SOL T H*LAKE IMPACT FEE
EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
t IN VEH-M: VEH-M: EXCESS EXISTING
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL. CAPACITY DEFIC:1YC:-
(MI) A B TOTAL AREA PK-HR DEMAMD PK-HOUR PK-HR VEr.
TOTAL PK-HR VEH-M:
•• SERVICE AREA 3
N. PEYTONVILLE W. SOUTHLAXE BLVD TEN BAR TRAIL 0.43 2 UC 94 97 191 100 430 82 348 0
N. PEYTONVILLE TEN BAR TRAIL SOUTHRIDGE PKWY. 0.61 2 UC 70 96 166 100 610 101 503 0
N. PEYTONVILLE SOUTHRIDGE PKWY WOODBROOK LN 0.16 2 UA 140 125 265 100 200 42 153 0
N. PEYTONVILLE WOODBROOK W. DOVE 1.03 2 VA 48 96 144 100 1288 148 1140 0
N. WHITE CHAPEL CHAPEL DOWNS W. HIGHLAND 0.46 2 VA 0 382 382 50 288 176 112 0
N. WHITE CHAPEL SOUTHLAXE BLVD. CHAPEL DOWNS 0.51 2 UA 0 350 350 50 319 179 140 0
RANDOLL MILL KINGSWOOD DR. MORGAN RD. 0.93 2 UA 100 125 225 100 1163 209 953 0
RANDOLL MILL W. SOUTHLAXE BLVD. JOHNSON RD. 0.25 2 UA 293 0 293 50 156 73 83 0
RANDOLL MILL JOHNSON RD. FLORENCE RD. 0.51 2 UA 200 0 200 50 319 102 217 0
RANDOLL MILL MORGAN DR. W. DOVE 0.48 2 UA 73 153 226 100 600 108 492 0
RANDOLL MILL FLORENCE RD. KINGSWOOD DR. 0.37 2 UA 124 112 236 100 463 87 375 0
S. WHITE CHAPEL W. HIGHLAND SH 114 0.33 2 UA 0 205 205 50 206 68 138 0
S. WHITE CHAPEL SOUTHLAKE BLVD. CHAPEL DOWNS 0.51 2 UA 0 350 350 50 319 179 140 0
S. WHITE CHAPEL CHAPEL DOWNS W. HIGHLAND 0.46 2 UA 0 382 382 50 288 176 112 0
SHADY OAKS LOVE-HENRY CT. W. HIGHLAND 0.61 2 UC 41 50 91 100 610 56 554 0
SHADY OAKS RAVENAUX W. DOVE 0.63 2 UC 29 12 41 100 630 26 604 0
SHADY OAKS W. HIGHLAND RAVENAUX 0.35 2 UC 29 12 41 100 350 14 336 0
SHADY OAKS W. SOUTHLAXE BLVD. LOVE-HENRY CT. 0.39 2 UC 41 50 91 100 390 35 354 0
SOUTHRIDGE PKWY W. SOUTHLAXE BLVD BRAZOS DR. 0.33 4 DA 230 166 396 100 924 131 793 0
SOUTHRIDGE PKWY. BRAZOS N. PEYTONVILLE • 0.46 2 UA 100 80 180 100 575 83 493 0
W. DOVE N. PEYTONVILLE CITY LIMITS 0.09 2 UA 100 110 210 100 113 19 93 0
W. DOVE SH 114 N. PEYTONVILLE 0.52 2 UA 158 206 364 100 650 189 461 0
W. HIGHLAND S. WHITE CHAPEL SHADY OAKS 0.50 2 UA 50 79 129 100 625 65 561 0
SAM SCHOOL RD W. DOVE CITY LIMITS 0.33 2 UA 25 50 75 100 413 25 387 0
•• Subtotal ••
11.25
11929 2373 9552 0
E4
SOUTHLAKE IMPACT FEE
EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
t IN .EH-M: VEH-M: EXCESS EX:ST:NG
:AGWAY PROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR VOLUME SERV S7PPLY •OTAL CAPACITY OE7:O:= _-_
(M:) A 3 TOTAL AREA PX-({R DEMAMO PK-HOUR P<-HR v=?+,-v
TOTAL P<-HR '/EH-M:
• SERv:CE AREA 4
-. DOVE N. CARROLL LONESOME DOVE 0.41 2 UA 180 0 180 50 256 74 132 0
0. DOVE SUNSHINE N X:MBALL 0.41 2 UA 200 257 450 100 513 185 327 0
-. DOVE RIDGECREST N. CARROLL 0.65 2 UA 174 0 174 50 406 113 293 0
I DOVE N. WHITE CHAPEL RIDGECREST 0.32 2 UA 180 0 180 50 200 58 142 0
2. DOVE LONESOME DOVE SUNSHINE 0.41 2 UA 192 199 391 100 513 160 351 0
3. HIGHLAND N. KIMBALL SUNSHINE 0.48 2 UA 115 125 240 100 600 115 485 0
HIGHLAND SUNSHINE N. CARROLL 0.52 2 UA 105 119 224 100 650 116 533 0
I. HIGHLAND N. CARROLL SH 114 0.32 2 OW 0 100 100 100 448 32 416 0
L CARROLL SH 114 E. HIGHLAND 0.26 2 UA 225 110 335 100 325 87 238 0
1- CARROLL E. HIGHLAND WHISPERING LN 0.49 2 UA 155 95 250 100 613 123 489 0
I. CARROLL E. SOUTHLAKE BLVD. SH 114 0.74 2 UA 139 259 398 100 925 295 631 0 '
1- CARROLL WHISPERING LN PRIMROSE LN 0.38 2 UA 145 87 232 100 475 88 388 0
L CARROLL PRIMROSE LN. E. DOVE 0.36 2 UA 145 87 232 100 450 84 367 0
L KIMBALL E. DOVE CITY LIMITS 0.61 2 UC 247 120 367 100 610 224 386 3
ii KIMBALL SH 114 SHADY LN. 0.73 2 UA 0 227 227 50 456 166 290 0
1. KIMBALL E. DOVE SHADY LANE 0.39 2 UA 275 210 485 100 488 189 299 0
i4. KIMBALL E. SOUTHLAKE BLVD. SH 114 0.19 2 UA 0 200 200 50 119 38 81 0
I. WHITE CHAPEL SH 114 E. DOVE 0.64 2 UA 123 0 123 50 400 79 321 0 ,
,;. WHITE CHAPEL SOUTHLAKE BLVD. CHAPEL DOWNS 0.51 2 UA 250 0 250 50 319 128 191 0
• WHITE CHAPEL CHAPEL DOWNS W. HIGHLAND 0.46 2 UA 231 0 231 50 288 106 182 0
3. WHITE CHAPEL W. HIGHLAND SH 114 0.33 2 UA 200 0 200 50 206 66 140 0
;UNSHINE E. HIGHLAND E. DOVE 0.70 2 UC 21 15 36 100 700 25 674 0
4. HIGHLAND SH 114 S. WHITE CHAPEL 0.50 2 UA 84 256 340 100 625 170 456 0
'• Subtotal e.
10.81 10585 2721 7862 0
E5
SOUTHLAKE IMPACT FEE
EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
t :N VEH-H: VIM-H: ExC3:3 3x:3-:N;
RCADaAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL CA?AC:- 0ce.....MC-_
CM:; A 3 TOTAL AREA PK-HR DEMA.`> PK-AO:t PK-;Z V3__
TOTAL PK-:AR 'r1-H:
•• SERVICE AREA 5
BRUMLOW AVE. SH 26 E CONTINENTAL 0.76 2 UA 198 0 198 50 475 150 325 0
CROOKED LN E. SCUTHLAKE BLVD S. KIMBALL 0 58 2 UC 57 58 115 100 580 67 5.3 0
E. CONTINENTAL BRUMLOW S. KIMBALL 0.58 2 UA 75 70 145 100 725 84 64: 0
N. KIMBALL SH 114 SHADY LN. 0.73 2 UA 372 0 372 50 456 272 104 0
r N. KIMBALL E. SOUTHLAKE BLVD. SH 114 0.19 2 UA 100 0 100 50 119 19 130 0
` S. CARROLL S. CONTINENTAL GREENWAY 0.70 2 UA 108 0 108 50 438 76 362 0
S. CARROLL GREENWAY B. SOUTHLAXE 0.30 2 UA 108 0 108 50 188 32 155 0
BLVD.
S. KIMBALL CROOKED LN. E. CONTINENTAL 0.40 2 UA 75 70 145 100 500 58 442 3
S. KIMBALL E. SOUTHLAXE BLVD. CROOKED LN. 0.57 2 UA 32 16 48 100 713 27 685 0
SHADY LANE RAINTREE N. KIMBALL 0.42 2 UC 75 25 100 100 420 42 377 0
SHADY LN. SH 114 RAINTREE 0.43 2 UC 92 32 124 100 430 53 376 0
•• Subtotal ••
5.66 5044 880 4161 0
E6
SOUTHLAKE IMPACT FEE
EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENNTS
t IN '/EH-M: VEH-M: EXCESS EX:ST:NO i
ROALwA'f FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR VOLUME SERI S�PPLY NOTAL CAPAZ:TY OEF:C'EE:
(M:) A a TOTAL AREA PK-HR OEM.AMO PK-HOUR PK-F1 7=',,
TOTAL PK-HR VEH-M:
•• SERVICE AREA 6
BRNJMLOW AVE SH 26 E CONTINENTAL 0.76 2 UA 0 206 206 50 475 157 313 0
E. CONTINENTAL S CARROLL BRUMLOW 0.34 2 UA 270 250 520 100 425 177 249 0 ,
E. CONTINENTAL HIGHLAND OAKS BYRON NELSON 0.53 2 UA 170 163 338 100 663 179 483 0
E. CONTINENTAL S. WHITS CHAPEL HIGHLAND OAKS 0.27 2 UA 180 175 355 100 338 96 242 0 '
B. CONTINENTAL BYRON NELSON S. CARROLL 0.49 2 UA 170 168 338 100 613 166 447 0
S. CARROLL E. CONTINENTAL GREENWAY 0.70 2 UA 0 102 102 50 438 71 367 0
S. CARROLL GREENWAY E. SOUTHLAKE 0.30 2 UA 0 102 102 SO 188 31 157 0
S. WHITE CHAPEL PRINCETON PARK SOUTHLAKE BLVD. 0.85 2 UA 287 0 287 50 531 244 287 0
S. WHITE CHAPEL CONTINENTAL PRINCETON PARK 0.25 2 UA 287 0 287 50 156 72 84 0
S. WHITE CHAPEL CITY LIMIT CONTINENTAL 0.47 2 UA 287 0 287 50 294 135 159 0
•• Subtotal ••
4.96 4121 1328 2793 0
ET ,
SOUTHLAKE IMPACT FEE
EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
t :N VEH-N: VEH-M: EXCESS EX:ST:NG
' ROA:WAY FRIM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL CAPAC:"': ...,.._-�NC._
(M:) A a TOTAL AREA PX-HR GEMAMC PK-HOUR PK-=i V'c
TOTAL PK--R VEH-M:
•• SERV:CE AREA 7
S PEYTONVILLE W CONTINENTAL W SCUTHLAXE 1 00 2 UA 102 84 186 100 1250 186 1364 0
BLVD.
S. WHITE CHAPEL CONTINENTAL PRINCETON PARK 0 25 2 UA 0 330 330 50 156 83 73
S. WHITE CHAPEL CITY LIMIT CONTINENTAL 0.47 2 UA 0 204 204 50 294 96 193 3
S. WHITE CHAPEL PRINCETON PARK SOUTHLAXE BLVD. 0.85 2 UA 0 330 330 50 531 281 250 0
W. CONTINENTAL SOtTCHLA103 HILLS LEXINGTON SQUARE 0.72 2 UA 100 190 290 100 900 209 691 0
W. CONTINENTAL S. PEYTONVILLE SOUTHLAXE HILLS 0.28 2 UA 90 180 270 100 350 76 275 0
W. CONTINENTAL DAVIS BLVD. S. PEYTONVILLE 0.52 2 UA 80 169 249 100 650 129 520 0
W. CONTINENTAL LEXINGTON SQUARE S. WHITE CHAPEL 0.22 2 UA 110 200 310 100 275 68 208 0
•• Subtotal ••
4.31 4406 1128 3279 0
E8
SOUTHLAKE IMPACT FEE
EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
V :N YEH-M: +EH-w: EXCESS EX:ST:NG
RCALWAY FRCM TO LENGTH .?.YES TYPE ?K-HR VOLUME SER/ SUPPLY TOTAL CA?AC..! YC:_
(M:) A 3 TCTAL AREA PK-HR 7EMA.".7 PK-HCt:R PK-HR YE
TCTA:. PK-HA VEH-M:
•• sERV:CE AREA 8
FLORENCE RD PEARSON LN. RANDOLL MILL 1.00 2 UC 44 88 132 100 1000 132 868 0
JOHNSON RD. PEARSON RANDOLL MILL 1 00 2 UA 115 115 230 100 1250 230 1020 0
N. PEARSON JOHNSON RD. FLORENCE RD. 0.51 2 UA 167 191 358 100 638 183 456 0
N. PEASON LN. W. SOUTHLAKE BLVD. JOHNSON RD. 0.49 2 UA 191 193 384 100 613 188 423 0
RANDOLL MILL W. SOUTHLAKE BLVD. JOHNSON RD. 0.25 2 UA 0 234 234 50 156 59 97 0
RANDOLL MILL JOHNSON RD. FLORENCE RD. 0.51 2 VA 0 150 150 50 319 77 242 0
S. PEARSON UNION CHURCH W. SOUTHLAXE 0.49 2 UA 80 72 152 100 613 74 538 0
BLVD.
UNION CHURCH PEARSON LN. DAVIS BLVD. 1.00 2 UA 85 90 175 100 1250 175 1075 0
•• Subtotal ••
5.25 5839 1118 4719 0
E9
F. Roadway Improvement Plan Projects
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS
Definitions
LANES The total number of lanes in both directions mailable for travel.
TYPE The type of roadway (used in determining capacity):
DA = divided arterial
AS = arterial with continuous left-turn lane
UA = undivided arterial
DC = divided collector
PK-HR VOLUME The existing volume of cars on the roadway segment travelling
during the afternoon(P.M.) peak hour of travel.
% IN SERVICE AREA If the roadway is located on the boundary between service areas,
half of the roadway is inventoried in one service area and the other
half in the other service area. This value is either 50%or 100%.
VEH-MI SUPPLY TOTAL The number of total service units (vehicle-miles) supplied within
the service area, based on the length and established capacity of the
roadway type.
VEH-MI TOTAL The total service unit (vehicle-mile) demand created by
DEMAND PK-HR existing traffic on the roadway segment in the afternoon peak hour.
EXCESS CAPACITY The number of service units supplied but unused by
PK-HR VEH-MI existing traffic in the afternoon peak hour.
F1
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS
ROADWAY FRCM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PX-HR t IN VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
(M:) VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY
TOTAL AREA PK-HR OEMAY.O PK-HOUR
TOTAL P(-HZ 'JEH-MI
•• SERVICE AREA 1
N. WHITE CHAPEL BOB JONES COUNTY LINE 0 76 4 UA 65 100 1900 49 1850
•• Subtotal ••
0.76 1900 49 1850
F2
SOLTHLAKE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR t IN VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
(M:) VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY
TOTAL AREA PK-HR DEMA.MD PK-HCUR
TOTAL PK-HR VEH-M:
•• SERVICE AREA 2
N WHITE CHAPEL COUNTY LINE E. DOVE 0.90 4 UA 95 100 2250 86 2155
W. DOVE SH 114 N. WHITE CHAPEL 0 50 5 AS 225 100 1400 113 1237
•• Subtotal ••
1.40 3650 199 3452
F3
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR I IN VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
(MI) VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY
TOTA:. AREA P<-HR CEMA.4D P<-HCUR
TOTAL ?<-Hit VEH-4:
•• SERV:OE AREA 3
N. PEYTONVILLE RAVENW00D W DOVE 1 22 4 UA 144 100 3050 176 2374
N PEYTONVILLE W. SOUTHLAXE BLVD .12mi N of 1709 0.12 5 AS 191 100 336 23 313
SHADY OAKS FM 1709 DOVE 1.99 2 UC 92 100 1990 183 1907
•• Subtotal ••
3.33 5376 382 4994
F4
SOUTHLAKE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR t IN VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
(M:) VOLU'YE SERV SUPPLY TCTAL CAPAC:TY
TOTAL AREA PK-HR OEMAMD PK-HCUR
TOTAL PK-HR VEH-M:
•• SERVICE AREA 4
E HIGHLAND N. CARROLL SH 114 0.32 4 UA 100 100 800 32 363
N. CARROLL E. SOUTHLAKE BLVD SH 114 0.74 5 AS 398 100 2072 295 1777
N. CARROLL SH 114 WHISPERING LANE 0.49 5 AS 205 100 1372 100 1271
N. KIMBALL SH 114 E. SOUTHLAKE BLVD. 0.19 5 AS 200 50 266 38 228
W. HIGHLAND SH 114 S. WHITE CHAPEL 0.62 4 UA 340 100 1550 211 1339
•• Subtotal ••
2.36 6060 676 4983
F5
SOUTHLAKE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR t IN VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
(M:) VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTA:. CAPACITY
TOTAL AREA PK-HR D MAN) PK-HOUR
TOTAL PK-HR VEX-M:
•• SERVICE AREA: 5
BRUMLOW E. CONTINENTAL SH 26 0.76 4 UA 199 50 950 150 900
E. CONTINENTAL BRUMLOW S KIMBALL (OLD) 0 57 5 AS 145 100 1596 83 1513
E CONTINENTAL S KIMBALL (OLD) SH 26 0 47 5 AS 0 100 1316 0 1316
EXT.
N. KIMBALL SH 114 E. SOUTHLAKE BLVD. 0.19 5 AS 100 50 266 19 247
S. KIMBALL B. SOUTHLAKE BLVD. CROOKED LN. 0.57 4 UA 48 100 1425 27 1399
S. KIMBALL CROOKED LN. S. CONTINENTAL 0.52 4 UA 0 100 1300 0 1300
EXT.
•• Subtotal •,,
3.08 6853 279 6575
F6
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR U IN VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
(M:) VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL CAPAC:TY
TOTAL AREA PK-HR DEMA.MD PK-HCUP
TOTAL PK-HR VEH-M:
•• SERVICE AREA 6
BRUMLOW E. CONTINENTAL SH 26 0.76 4 UA 206 50 950 157 793
E. CONTINET•T:AL S. WHITE CHAPEL S CARROLL 1 29 5 AS 355 100 3612 458 3154
E. CONTINENTAL S. CARROLL BRUMLOW 0.33 5 AS 520 100 1064 198 946
•• Subtotal ••
2.43 5626 813 4813
F7
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE PK-HR t IN VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
(MI, VOLUME SERI SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY
TOTAL AREA P<-HR D=MA.MO PE-HOUR
:TAL PX-HR V=H-M:
•• SERVICE AREA 7
W. CONTINENTAL DAVIS BLVD. S. PEYTONJILLE 0.52 S AS 249 100 1456 129 1326
W. CONTINENTAL S. PEYTONVILLE S WHITE CHAPEL 1.23 5 AS 310 100 3444 381 3063
•• Subtotal ••
1.15 4900 510 4339
F8
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS
RCADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LANES TYPE ?K-HR t IN VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
'MI) VOLUME SERV SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY
TOTAL AREA PK-HR DEEMA.MD PK-HOUR
TOTAL PK-HR VEH-M:
•• SERVICE AREA: 8
JOHNSON N. PEARSON RANCOLL MILL 1 00 4 UA 230 100 2500 230 2270
•• Subtotal ••
1.00 2500 230 2270
F9
G. Roadway Improvements Plan Cost Analysis
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PLAN COST ANALYSIS
Definitions
LANES The total number of lanes in both directions available for travel.
TYPE The type of roadway (used in determining capacity):
DA = divided arterial
AS = arterial with continuous left-turn lane
UA = undivided arterial
DC =divided collector
% IN SERVICE AREA If the roadway is located on the boundary between service areas,
half of the roadway is inventoried in one service area and the other
half in the other service area. This value is either 50% or 100%.
TOTAL SEGMENT COST The estimated cost (in dollars) of the entire segment of the
proposed improvement.
TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA The estimated cost(in dollars) of the portion of the
proposed roadway improvement within the service
area.
G1
SOL:HLAKE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN COST ANALYSIS
TOTAL COST
LENGTH TOTAL IN SERVICE
ROADWAY FROM TO (M:1 LANES TYPE RDWY COST AREA
•• SERVICE AREA 1
N WHITE CHAPEL BOB JENES COUNTY LINE 0 75 4 VA 953,339.:0 953,333 00
•• S:Scocal ••
0.75 958,339 00 953,333 00
TOTAL ROADWAY COST IN SERVICE AREA - 5 958339.00
TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE COST IN SERVICE AREA • S 0.00
TOTAL FUTURE CIP PREPARATION COST IN SERVICE AREA • S 7730.91
TOTAL IFRIP COST IN SERVICE AREA • 5 966069.91
G2
SOUTHLARE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN COST ANALYSIS
TOTAL COST
LENGTH TOTAL :N S=R'.:=E
RCADWAY FRCM TO (MI) LANES TYPE ROW? COST AREA
•• SER/ICE AREA. 2
N WHITE CHAPEL COUNTY L:N3 _ 0072 0 9: 4 UA 1,942,524 00 1,942,424 00
W COVE SH 114 N WHITE CHAPEL 0 50 5 AS 733,415 00 733,415 00
•• Subtotal ••
1 40 2,731,039 00 2,731,039 00
TOTAL ROADWAY COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 2731039.00
TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 156250.00
TOTAL FUTURE CIP PREPARATION COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 14651.49
TOTAL IFRIP COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 2902140.49
G3
SCUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN COST ANALYSIS
TOTAL COST
LENGTH TOTAL :N SERV:CE
ROADWAY FRCM TO (M:) LANES TYPE RDWY COST AREA
•• SERV:CE AREA 3
N PEYTCN':ILLE RA'i=NaC00 A CCVE 1 22 4 UA 1,539.335 00 1,538,385 00
N ?EY':OW/I..LE W SCU:HLAXE BLVD 12mi N of 1707 0 12 5 AS 183,227.00 183,220.03
SHADY OAKS FM 1709 DOVE 1.93 2 UC 2,183,830.00 2,193,830.00
•• Subtotal ••
3.33 3,911,435.00 3,911,435.00
TOTAL ROADWAY COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 3911435.00
TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 156250.00
TOTAL FUTURE CIP PREPARATION COST IN SERVICE AREA • $ 21874.41
TOTAL IFRIP COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 4089559.41
G4
SOVTHLAKE IMPACT PEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN COST ANALYSTS
TCTA. COST
LENGTH TOTAL ZN SERV:c_
RCAZWAY FRC.M TO (M:) USES TYPE RO:Y COST AREA
•• SERJ_CE AREA 4
E HIGHLAND N CARROLL SH 1:i 0 32 4 JA 373,5:1.00 43.511 03
N. CARROLL E. SCU':HLA.)E BLVD SH 114 0.74 5 AS 1,166,854.00 1,166,354 00
N. CARROLL SH 114 WHISPERING LANE 0.49 S AS 772,646.00 772,646.00
N. K:!HALL SH 114 E SOLTHLAKE BLVD. 0.19 5 AS 299,593.00 149,799.00
W. HIGHLAND SH 114 S. WHITE CHAPEL 0 62 4 UA 781,803.00 781,303.03
•• Subtotal ••
2.36 3,424,412.00 3,274,613.00
TOTAL ROADWAY COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 3274613.00
TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE COST IN SERVICE AREA • $ 42500.00
TOTAL FUTURE CSP PREPARATION COST IN SERVICE AREA • $ 24657.53
TOTAL IFRIP COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 3341770.53
G5
SOITCHLAXE IM?ACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN COST ANALYSIS
TCTA.. COST
..ZNGTH ...TA.. IN S14'I:Z..
�
W � FRCM TO (M:1 "...AYES TYPE
�
R3,+Y COST AMAa.,A.. A.
•• SERV:CE AREA 5
I. CONTINENTAL SH 26 0 75 4 VA 953.333 00 479,169 00
3a'.v•...CW '- 794 00 ^,13),794 00
5 KIM3ALL (OLD) 0.57 5 AS 1,133,
E CONTINENTAL BRL•MLOW 741,110.00 7i1,110.00
E. CONTINENTAL EXT. S. KIMBALL (OLD) SH 26
0.47 5 AS
N. KIMBALL SH 114 E. SOU MLAKE BLVD. 0.19 5 AS 299,598.00 149,799.00
S. KIMBALL E. SOUTMIAKE BLVD. CROOKED LN.
0.57 4 VA 718,754.00 713,754.00
S. KIMBALL CROOKED LN. E. CON':INENTAL EXT. 0.52 4 UA 655,705.00 655,705.00
•• Subtotal ••
3.08 4,557,299.00 3,929,331.00
TOTAL ROADWAY COST IN SERVICE AREA • S 3928331.00
TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE COST IN SERVICE AREA - S 452656.25
TOTAL FUTURE CIP PREPARATION COST IN SERVICE AREA . S 27884.17
TOTAL IFRIP COST IN SERVICE AREA - S 4408871.42
G6
SOUTHLARE IMPACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN COST ANALYSIS
TOTAL COST
LENGTH TOTAL IN SERVICE
ROADWAY FRCM TO (MI) LANES TYPE ROW? COST .AREA
•• S1RVICE AREA 6
3RCM'JW D CONT."NE TTL, SN 26 0 76 4 JA 958,313.00 473,163 00
E CCNT:NENTAL S WH:TE CHAPEL S CARROLL 1 29 5 AS 2,121,985 00 2,121,985 00
E. CONTINENTAL S CARROLL BRUMLOW 0.38 5 AS 599,195.00 599,195 00
•• Subtotal ••
2.43 3,679,518.00 3.200,349.00
TOTAL ROADWAY COST IN SERVICE AREA - S 3200349.00
TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 253906.25
TOTAL FUTURE CIP PREPARATION COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 22891.63
TOTAL IFRIP COST IN SERVICE AREA - S 3477146.88
G7
SOLTHLAx_ IM?ACT FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN COST ANALYSIS
TOTAL COST
LENGTH TOTAL IN SERVICE
ROADWAY FROM TO (MI) LANES TYPE P. WY COST AREA
•• 02x7001 AREA 7
a CONTINENTAL 0A7:3 9:.VD S ?EYTONV:LLE 0 52 5 AS 935,35: 00 995,95: 07
w CONTINENTAL S PEYTONVILLE S WHITE CHAPEL 1 23 5 AS 2,297,625 00 2,237,625 00
•• Subtotal ••
1.75 3,283,576.00 3,283,576.00
TOTAL ROADWAY COST IN SERVICE AREA - 5 3283576.00
TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE COST IN SERVICE AREA . 5 234375.00
TOTAL FUTURE CIP PREPARATION COST IN SERVICE AREA • 5 19937.61
TOTAL IFRIP COST IN SERVICE AREA • 5 3537888.61
G8
SCUTHLAKE IMPAC: FEE
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN COST ANALYSIS
TOTA:. COST
LENGTH TOTAL IN 3E V:CE
ROADWAY FROM TO (M:) LANES TYPE RDWY COST AREA
•• SERVICE AREA. a
JOHNSON N PIARSCN RANCOLL M:LL 1 CI 4 JA 1,433,035 00 1,433,196 00
•• Subtotal ••
1.00 1,483,096 00 1,483.096.00
TOTAL ROADWAY COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 1483096.00
TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 0.00
TOTAL FUTURE CIP PREPARATION COST IN SERVICE AREA . $ 10172 25
TOTAL IFRIP COST IN SERVICE AREA - $ 1493268.25
G9
H. Service Area Analysis Summary
Summary
Maximum Impact Fee Per Service Unit
Service Area Maximum Fee Per Service Unit
1 $508.00
2 $795.00
3 $760.00
4 $551.00
5 $643.00
6 $618.00
7 $722.00
8 $597.00
H1
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
SIIR7:CE AREA A.NALYS:S SUMMARY
SIIR'::CE AREA
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY SUPPLIED BY IFRIP (TVMCAP) • 1900
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (VMEXT) • 49
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICENCIES (VMDEF) • 0
NET AMOUNT OP ROADWAY CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NVMCAP) • 1851
NVMCAP • TVMCAP - VMEXT - VMDEF
TOTAL COST OF IFRIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA (TVMCOST1) • $966,069.91
COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NCVMCAP) • $941,155.48
NCVMCAP • (NVMCAP/TVMCAP)•TVMCOST1
COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE (EXCOST) • $24,914.43
TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS (TNEWDEM) • 638
PERCENT OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NPCNT) • 34.47
IF TNEWDEM > NVMCAP, NPCNT • 100.00
IF TNEWDEM c NVMCAP, NPCNT • (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP)•100
COST OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NCVMDEM) • $324,396.11
NCVMDEM • (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP) • NCVMCAP
MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE UNIT (VEH-MI) • $508.00
MAX FEE • NCVMDEM/TNEWDEM
H2
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
SERVICE ARIA ANALYSIS SUMMARY
SERVICE AREA 2
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY SUPPLIED SY IFRIP (TVMCAP) - 3650
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (VMEXT) - 199
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICENCIES (VMDEF) • 0
NET AMOUNT OF ROADWAY CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NVMCAP) • 3451
NVMCAP - TVMCAP - VMEXT - VMDEF
TOTAL COST OF IFRIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA (TVMCOST1) • $2,902,140.49
COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NCVMCAP) - $2,743,914.20
NCVMCAP - (NVMCAP/TVMCAP)•TUMCOST1
COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE (EXCOST) - $158,226.29
TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS (TNEWDEM) - 1728
PERCENT OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NPCNT) - 50.07
IF TNEWDEM > NVMCAP, NPCNT • 100.00
IF TNEWDEM < NVMCAP, NPCNT - (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP)•100
COST OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NCVMDEM) - $1,373,944.87
NCVMDEM • (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP) • NCVMCAP
MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE UNIT (VEH-MI) = $795.00
MAX FEE - NCVMDEM/TNEWDEM
H3
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
SERVICE AREA ANALYSTS SUMMARY
SERVICE AREA 3
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY SUPPLIED BY IFRIP (TVMCAP) • 5376
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (VMEXT) • 382
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICENCIES (VMDEF) • 0
NET AMOUNT OF ROADWAY CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NVMCAP) • 4994
NVMCAP - TVMCAP - VMEXT - VMDEF
TOTAL COST OF IFRIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA (TVMCOST1) - $4,089,559.41
COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NCVMCAP) • $3,798,969.44
NCVMCAP - (NVMCAP/2VMCAP)•TVMCOST1
COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE (EXCOST) - $290,589.97
TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS (TNEWDEM) - 2569
PERCENT OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NPCNT) - 51.44
IF TNEWDEM > NVMCAP, NPCNT • 100.00
IF TNEWDEM < NVMCAP, NPCNT - (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP)•100
:es
COST OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NCVMDEM) - $1,954,255.60
NCVMDEM - (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP) • NCVMCAP
MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE UNIT (VEH-MI) • $760.00
MAX FEE - NCVMDEM/TNEWDEM
H4
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
SERVICE AREA ANALYSIS SUMMARY
51a/:CE AREA 4
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY SUPPLIED BY IFRIP (TVMCAP) - 6060
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (VMEXT) ' 676
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICENCIES (VMDEF) ' 0
NET AMOUNT OF ROADWAY CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NVMCAP) - 5384
NVMCAP • TVMCAP - VMEXT - VMDEF
TOTAL COST OF IFRIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA (TVMCOST1) - 53,341,770.53
COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NCVMCAP) • 52.968,992.17
NCVMCAP = (NVMCAP/TVMCAP).TVMCOSTI
COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE (EXCOST) • 5372.778.36
TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS (TNEWDEM) ' 2887
PERCENT OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NPCNT) - 53.62
IF TNEWDEM s NVMCAP, NPCNT - 100.00
IF TNEWDEM < NVMCAP, NPCNT . (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP) 100
COST OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NCVMDEM) = 51,592,028.30
NCVMDEM • (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP) • NCVMCAP
MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE UNIT (VEH-MI) - 5551.00
MAX FEE - NCVMDEM/TNEWDEM
H5
SOUTHLIXE IMPACT FEE
SERVICE AREA ANALYSIS s2O'.AAY
SERVICE AREA 5
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY SUPPLIED BY URI? (TVMCAP) - 6853
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (VMEXT) - 279
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DE:ICENCIES (VMDEF) - 0
NET AMOUNT OF ROADWAY CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NVMCAP) - 6574
NVMCAP - TVMCAP - VMEXT - VMDEF
TOTAL COST OF IFRIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA (TVMCOST1) - $4,408,871.42
COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NCVMCAP) - 54,229,377.02
NCVMCAP - (NVMCAP/TVMCAP)•TVMCOST1
COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE (EXCOST) - $179,494.40
TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS (TNEWDEM) - 1912
PERCENT OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NPCNT) - 29.08
IF TNEWDEM > NVMCAP, NPCNT - 100.00
IF TNEWDEM < NVMCAP, NPCNT - (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP).100
COST OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NCVMDEM) - 51,230,083.49
NCVMDEM - (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP) • NCVMCAP
MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE UNIT (VEH-MI) - $643.00
MAX FEE - NCVMDEM/TNEWDEM
H6
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
SERVICE AREA ANALYSIS SUMMARY
SERVICE AREA: 6
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY SUPPLIED BY IFRIP (TVMCAP) - 5626
TOTAL VEX-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (VMEXT) - 813
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICENCIES (VMDEF) - 0
NET AMOUNT OF ROADWAY CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NVMCAP) - 4813
NVMCAP - TVMCAP - VMEXT - VMDEF
TOTAL COST OF IFRIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA (TVMCOST1) - $3,477,146.88
COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NCVMCAP) - $2,974,672.58
NCVMCAP - (NVMCAP/TVMCAP)•TVMCOST1
COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE (EXCOST) - $502,474.30
TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS (TNEWDEM) - 2966
PERCENT OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NPCNT) - 61.62
IF TNEWDEM NVMCAP, NPCNT - 100.00
IF TNEWDEM < NVMCAP, NPCNT - (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP)•100
COST OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NCVMDEM) - $1,833,135.02
NCVMDEM - (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP) • NCVMCAP
MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE UNIT (VEX-MI) . $618.00
MAX FEE - NCVMDEM/TNEWDEM
H7
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
SERVICE AREA ANALYSIS SUMMARY
SEER'/:CE AREA 7
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY SUPPLIED BY IFRIP (TVMCAP) . 4900
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (VMEXT) • 510
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICENCIES (VMDEF) • 0
NET AMOUNT OF ROADWAY CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NVMCAP) • 4390
NVMCAP . TVMCAP - VMEXT - VMDEF
a
TOTAL COST OP IFRIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA (TVMCOST1) • $3,537,888.61
COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NCVMCAP) • $3,169,659.39
NCVMCAP • (NVMCAP/TVMCAP)•TVMCOST1
COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE (EXCOST) • $368,229.22
TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS (TNEWDEM) • 1382
PERCENT OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NPCNT) • 31.48
IF TNEWDEM NVMCAP, NPCNT • 100.00
IF TNEWDEM c NVMCAP, NPCNT • (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP)•100
COST OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NCVMDEM) • $997,828.99
NCVMDEM . (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP) • NCVMCAP
MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE UNIT (VEH-MI) • 8722.00
MAX FEE • NCVMDEM/TNEWDEM
H8
SOUTHLAXE IMPACT FEE
SERVICE AREA ANALYSIS SUMMARY
SERVICE AREA: 8
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY SUPPLIED BY IFRIP (TVMCAP) - 2500
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (VMEXT) - 230
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICENCIES (VMDEF) - 0
NET AMOUNT OP ROADWAY CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NVMCAP) - 2270
NVMCAP • TVMCAP - VMEXT - VMDEP
TOTAL COST OP IPRIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA (TVMCOST1) - $1,493,268.25
COST OP NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED (NCVMCAP) - $1,355,887.57
NCVMCAP - (NVMCAP/TVMCAP)•TVMCOST1
COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE (EXCOST) - $137,380.68
TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS (TNEWDEM) - 1203
PERCENT OP IPRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NPCNT) - 53.00
IF TNEWDEM > NVMCAP, NPCNT - 100.00
IF TNEWDEM < NVMCAP, NPCNT • (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP)•100
COST OF IFRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT (NCVMDEM) - $718,560.68
NCVMDEM - (TNEWDEM/NVMCAP) • NCVMCAP
MAXIMUM FEB PER SERVICE UNIT (VEH-MI) - $597.00
MAX FEE - NCVMDEM/TNEWDEM
•
H9
C
ca ca 'C 1
> L
L. d ` +-�
1 c 0
CCI = iii
11)
a 'j 2 >'
V� .jA 114;
.03
!Q .y ca 4
W N d
Ja. .0
Vapt x O N
4
1crs _ co r
.1c ett000NNOd: tOOCp00000000
CI I
N OO � NMMetuO6Oa6606 c4niai6N
OIWI e- e- N M M CD et O M
O
r r
co a. J
.—
�. '— s
LL (2 x
taw W
•— `ig C 13 13 V 13 13 V
E 6- CCC CC C
� aaaCD p. QOCo ,Coo � oo22
� �
az =3
Min cr E E E E E E ti- E s- E L E �. E L E 1- s_
I— ininininin o 0,E 0gv ,' v � v ,_ ,_
W
y.-
O
Cl)
I a)
CC
.N � � � NNNMMeterCDCDCOOO
1
F" M
I
C
to
2to E
u
O7122 N
• 4
e u 5 A a U 0 w
u s w to
o a a • to co
« g to a > E « C m a
U) 7 o to Z d a 9
W N O N O E O C ` o a w
O1 T C A to
a 2 (5 w u a 0 0. (5 0 U w
t� ` 7 7 A 9 w
■� • w .0 y w C C :p 0.
2 u a to a w w to >_13 RI r0p
I- • r '7 4. 011 :2
. O. w 9 •7 C
w w E O 'a 7 LL W 2
A, m ° � w E c v to
W
C.) N C o O N (5 10 O t0 O O W R h 1h O N N O 1a 184' R 00 0 M ; 2 1,0 N F4 M
O_ •E NCN N N OV O C G . - - O N O O C
O G O G
oC
o >
CON . O O O O O O O N a) Q) W N N N ca. N N W W O O 10 co_. ao 0 0 < e 00 ao
■ - ` Q f+ M M 09 0 N N N a- 0 0 0 O 0 0 O ,- a- a- a- N N N 0 0 ,- •- •- O 0
s 3 I ._
� �0 � CI ~ J
O 0 4) = � tp pp�1
�/ww .'+-+ 001 tn0 < 01 coM M M 1 W W. W. Ino r O C0)M W 1O M 000 A N Ono O O N 0 OND n N N
_/ and
0000 e' OD M N O r ó0000 óóó00000
■tom
O X CO CO to t° w E CO CO t° t0 to to A to A A as f°
.. 7 7 aaa aaaaa aaa aaaaa a a
• V (1) ` ` ` g ` o ` `
0 0 0 0 O 0 0 ` g ` $ ` ` O ` g `
Iiima Qya. ►• ► a„, LL LL LL w1111 LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL11.
■— M. I_ YYYYa VYI Yo a VIVVI ANNYI Y
CCCG Oo On Oo Oo Oo 20 Oo aO YVI
IA N
V OM
0 7000OOOOO
O O
cccc
' O G G G O O $ pOp O O O O 8 pO O 8 -{311 .04 ,188
0
O w O O O O O 0 0 0 +w+ O O O O O O O O W
G G O u) u) N N u) u) m m '-
ttttttt�
> LL
■t 6
0
V
W
0
U. H
fhlUi
a 0 °'
O c °' _ V- 00)
MI n 0 P . C * ; N 'C * A •p p
U = o 9 o C A > y Til W V 01 W
42) ryE C t0 7 O �, w
w 8 a d Y u = �= C � 0 0 3 8 O. C Y 7 O. 7 C d r G
.0 80- u R to y Til LLw' p u '1 C h N :5, 12 w t N t. o ES p to
'E d 0 N O LL' ` y y 0 . 2 , Ti 7 C ist O ` x N Z
LL t° E z m 1" z to z w u « 0 A 2V0 0 C iU V m /3 C u
01 «� _ w C N w C t° u L C Z to C E r C 7 d •E o E L C N O 7 t
C 7 D t w 7 L w 7 t° 9' O w to o 7 y+ w O A w Ol 7
�n2rco 0olo OOLL •xov) 0mu. 5 OE . 2o WI— 01z0S
O m 3 11
C
C) " 'm_ o
C a)
w w w E
V g 5 o c
CO
d 0 N co 03 00000000
> � 0 0 00toD10raN0)
✓ ej 1` N U) 1%. ti U) co CO ti 10
CD N e- EA EA EA Ef!EA ER EA EA
EA EA
W .fl.
a
CD 0
0 O
M O
O co. Q'
0L aaaaaaaa
V a .0 ZZZZZZZZ
wCO _� V) `pa)
t 13 a) cn
e, oi-P vima 0 0
•-
COA+ G) C) N
W �; o U) aaaaaaaa
9 ZZZZZZZZ
++ W w
�, v — =
U w a
E E 2
CU -J d
2 Lu
a i
J d a .
a
a) u' d
a. ,�
0
a)cu C. CD 2e- NMgeU) CDN. a0
u.
E d a as co co co co co co al
S d d d d d d d
V L ` E.
L L L L L L Iii
L
L d L
o. alaaaaaaaa
3 V V V V V V V V
a . u) : cc a) a) mm@20) a) 0)
0)) O O O M C9 C) Cr! M M en M
I .aa , o O O 0 0 0 0 0 cen
qen
0
I t0!) O O e e— e— e— V" r
604 et et et et et et et et
U .0 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 EA 64
w O
01
' O 0 0I
Ch a) a) 0) 0) 0 0 0)
co 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 !
o)' is)� 1r) 117 1t) 1t) 11) inleO 10A M M M M M M M M
N.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
U XI
1 w o '
o
0 '
o 0 0 o 1c) 1Q to to 1A to to U)
0 0 0 co CD CD CO CD CD CD CD
o.
0 0 0 01 a) C) a) 0) 0) 0) a)
O O O 1 ) 16 U, 1A tri 16 14 1A
W.1"
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 0O
�+ M M M M M M M M
W ,= W N 6�4 U, 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
V I + L
V
co c M
cc umni ,� O N o 0 0
O O
� � ;~ W ; or. r
Q 6- a a a a a a a a
� '��— � � i4 zzzzzzzz
a) W E
a)
O LL V X w !
4-P LIU PA 0
>
cul
V 0- LL 0 0 o
0 0
tia1n O a Q Q a Q a Q a
C� � U, zzzzzzzz
Q. w
o
Ea g
m O
w ,, v
D
•E s !
W cu �i >
J a. °' 0 1
a) 72) o.
d LL C ^ w11
O
d v N d u i
� d a. O u_ 2 0 , N co Tr 1A co 1- CO 1
LL E Cw o N fl. co us co co co co co co 1
j ! 0 L G fa o E 0 0 0L. 0 0 0 0 0
E ; v cu > 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0
d 0 0 0 0 0 O 0
Fort Worth Star-Telegram i v ccc a r Joao
AD INVOICE NO 1615087
400 W. SEVENTH STREET•FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76102
ACCOUNT NO. CIT57
ipSTATE OF TEXAS
ty of Tarrant
Before me, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, this day
personally appeared TAMMIE BRYANT Billing Specialist for the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram, published by the Star-Telegram Inc. at Fort Worth, in Tarrant County, Texas; and
who, after being duly sworn, did depose and say that the following clipping of an advertisement was
published in the above named paper on the following dates:
DATE AD INVOICE NO. DESCRIPTION AD SIZE TOTAL RATE AMOUNT
NCH/LINE
4/13M 161508 notice of PUBLIC I358 1x 91L 91 . 66 • 60 . 06
PUBNLCHEARING 04/13-04/1,3
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN
to all interested persons that
the City Council of the City of
Southlake,Texas,will be ho-
dling a public hearing during I
the Regular City Council
Meeting to be held on April
23,1996 at 7:30 p.m.in the
City Council Chambers of
City Hall, 667 North Carroll
Avenue,Southlake,Texas.
Purpose of the hearing is to
consider the second reading
of the following ordinance:
ODANEEEAN ORDINANO.CE TO
•THE REGULATION OF THE
USE AND DVELOPMENT OF
LAND IN THE INCORPORAT-
ED LIMITS OF SOUTHLAKE,
TEXAS IMPOSING AN IM-
PACT FEE ON LAND DEVEL-
OPMENT IN SOUTHLAKE
SOR
PROVIDING WATER AND
WER FACILITIES NECES- SIGATED BY SUCH NEW DE-
ADWAYN IMPR• OVEOMENITS
Sl DEVEL-
OPMENT;SUPPORT THE WORN TO BEFORE ME, THIS THE 16 thDAY OF APRIL r 1996
THE OR INA ADOPTION OF 4,t,..-Lt.
THE ORDINANCE; PROVID- �!!•�.'d'�'r-'►'1>^.'•,- ^•-�•': '-
ING DEFINITIONS PROVID-
ING PI?NSNOF THE CIITYDCOUN- � 0.'.> `�4 RHONDA R. GOKE Notary Public
CIL' PROVIDING FOR THE 4
ASSESSMENT, PAYMENT P it ?' COMMISSION EXPIRES
A AND TIME ANDOF PAYMENT FA-F #'ram'•. ° SEPTEMBER 8 1999 TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
— CILI ESRIPCTSFEE;PRO- Irrh�F�p�y,�+ r
VIDING FOR THE ASSESS- �M�i` �4%,
MENT PAYMENT AND TIME
OF PAYMENT OF A ROAD-
WAY IMPACT FEE' PROVID-
ING FOR REVIEW OF WATER ORIGINAL INVOICE AND RECONCILE WITH MONTHLY STATEMENT. THANK YOU!
AND SEWER FACILITIES IM-
PACT FEES AND THE FEE
SCH
EDULES; PROVIDING �
TH TEAR ALONG THIS PERFORATION AND RETURN THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR PAYMENT k
MENT OF
REVENUE COLLECTED &tL1A
0`/
FROM WATER AND SEWER
FAANDLI ROADWAY TIES CT IMPACT
FEES INTO WATER AND
FEEUIROAD-
WAYACCONTSAND
IMPACT FEE AC- \
COUNTSpc U ESTABLISHED FOR . REMIT TO: 400 W. SEVENTH ST. • FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76102
THAT .•
PURPOSE'PROVIDING; PROD-• �� ��
FOR EXEMPTIONS; PROVID-
ING FOR REFUND OF UNEX-
PENDED FUNDS•PROVIDING ACCOUNT AMOUNT
FOR USE OF FUNDS DE- NUMBER C I T 5 7 60. 06
RIVED FROM WATER AND DUE
SEWER FACILITIES IMPACT
FPACT AND
ROPROVIIDIG NG IF ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL (817) 390-7501
THAT WATER AND SEWER PAGE 1 OF 1
FACILITIES IMPACT FEES
AND PROVIDING IMPACT
FEES MAY BE PLEDGED TO-
WARD PAYMENT OF BOND
ISSUES AND SIMILAR DEBT
INSTRUMENTS; PROVIDING
THAT THIS ORDINANCE
SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF
ALL ORDINANCES• PROVID-
ING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE PROVIDING A SAV-
INGS CLAUSE' PROVIDING
R PUBLICATION IN PAM- O F SOUTHLAKE
T FORM• PROVIDING
IALBNEWSPAPER;AND C A R R O L L A V E
(DING AN EFFECTIVE LAKE, TX 76092-9595 60 . 06
CityofSouthlake PLEASE PAY
ciySecretaryrand THIS AMOUNT ,
PLEASE WRITE IN AMOUNT ENCLOSED _______
FED. I.D. NO. 22-3148254
Fort Worth Star-Telegram 1684539
AD INVOICE NO.
400 W.SEVENTH STREET•FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76102 C I T 57
ACCOUNT NO.
iik
TATE OF TEXAS
of Tarrant
Before me, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, this day
personally appeared TAMMIE BRYANT Billing Specialist for the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram, published by the Star-Telegram Inc. at Fort Worth, in Tarrant County, Texas; and
who, after being duly sworn, did depose and say that the following clipping of an advertisement was
published in the above named paper on the following dates:
DATE AD INVOICE NO. DESCRIPTION AD SIZE TOTAL RATE AMOUNT
INCH/LINE
4/26ME 168453 ORDINANCE NO. 65 I358 1x 86L 86 .66 56.76
ORDINANCENO.657 O 4/2 6-0 4/2 6
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO _
THE REGULATION OF THE
USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF
' LAND IN THE INCORPORAT-
ED LIMITS OF SOUTHLAKE,
TEXAS IMPOSING AN IM-
PACTF'EE ON LAND DEVEL-
OPMENT IN SOUTHLAKE
FOR PROVIDING WATER AND
WASTEWATER FACILITIES -.... .,
NECESSITATED BY SUCH
NEW DEVELOPMENT- PRO-
VIDING ROADWAY IMPROVE-
MENTS TO SUPPORT NEW
DEVELOPMENT; STATING _..
THE AUTHORITY FOR ADOP-
TION OF THE ORDINANCE;
PROVIDING DEFINITIONS'
PROVIDING FINDINGS ANl
DECLARATIONS OF TNFIGE
CITY COUNCIL PROVIDI
FOR THE ASSESSMENT
PAYMENT AND TIME OF PA`I-
ENT OF A WATER AND
PACT FEE' ESSMIIIES SIGs ,�L1 R THE ASSESSMENT
PACYENT AND TIME OF PAY
T FEE,-OF P ROADWAY F R
REVIEW F WATER AND WORN TO BEFORE ME, THIS THE 29THpAY OF APRIL 1996
SI WASTEWATER FACILITIES �/�
SC ETHEESS AND PLACEMENT
OF J e �� ����'�1 v�
REOVENUE PLgCOLLECTEOD ;�4 rcni)VOH K. GOKE 1 Notary Public �c
FROM WATER AND WASTE- + ,,
WATER FACILITIES IMPACT ��* ' COMMISSION EXPIRES
FEES AND ROADWAY IM-
PACT FEES INTO WATER ,i'.,,,,,. +:s SEPTEMBER 8, 1999 TARRANT COUNTY,TEXAS
AND WASTEWATER FACILI- h r
TIES IMPACT FEE hti�.�Ir+t4=
COUNTS AND ROADWAY AM
PACT FEE ACCOUNTS ES-
TABLISHED FOR THAT
EXEMPTIONSROVPROVIDING! ORIGINAL INVOICE AND RECONCILE WITH MONTHLY STATEMENT. THANK YOU!
FOR REFUNb OF UNEX-
PENDED FUNDS•PROVIDING ROR USE OF kUNDS DE-L-TEAR ALONOJHIS PERFORATION AND RETURN THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR PAYMENT---j
WASTEWATER R M W FACILITIES IMPACT FEES AND PROVID-
ING IMPACT FEES PROVID00(T /11.1)
-
ING THAT WATER AND
IMPACTASFEES AND PROVED
P ING IMPACT FEES MAY BE tarU �T 1
PLEDGED TOWARD PAY- ram
AND MENT OF BOND ISSUES REMIT TO: 400 W.SEVENTH ST.•FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76102
MENTSMI PROVIDING N THAT
CUMULLIS ATIVE OF SHALL
ORDE C I T 5 7 56.76
NANCE• PROVIDIGN A SEV- ACCOUNT AMOUNT
ERABILITY CLAUSE;PROVID- NUMBER DUE
ING A SAVINGS CLAUSE;
PROVIDING IINNPAMPHLETUFORM; PAGE 1 DF1 IF ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL(817)390-7501
PROVIDING FOR PUBLICA-
TION IN OFFICIAL
NEWSPAPER,AND PROVIDSDAPP -
PASE AND R DATE.this
the 23rd day of April, 1996,
during the regular City Coun-
cil Meeting of the City of
-,Southlake Texas,
Gary Fickes,Mayor
EST:
andra L.LeGrand,
•ASTOFORM.
story OF SOUTHLAKE
I
aylor,Jr., N CARROLL AVE
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092-9595 PLEASE PAY 56.76
THIS AMOUNT,
PLEASE WRITE IN AMOUNT ENCLOSED