HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council-Agenda Packets-10/18/2011~,'~'~£~~~~ :~~~~~
~;._,_.`. ~~
City of Colleyville
Agenda
Clt)/ COUI1C11
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PRE COUNCIL MEETING
EXECUTIVE SESSION
5:30 P.M.
EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ROOM
THIRD FLOOR
PC-1 Presentation on the Vision North Texas Initiative, North Texas 2050
Attachments: PC-1.pdf
North Texas 2050
PC-2 Discussion of proposed Cheek-Sparger Road and Jackson Road
Intersection Improvements
Attachments: PC-2.pdf
Cheek-Sparger and Jackson Road Intersection Public Meeting
Comments Synopsis
PC-3 Discussion of the coordination of the SH26 and Cotton Belt Trail Phase
III Projects
Attachments: PC-3.pdf
PC-4 Discussion of setting a date for a City Council worksession to discuss
the City's Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) and infrastructure
management
Attachments: PC-4.pdf
PC-5 Discussion of the terms of the Architectural Review Commission
Attachments: PC-5.pdf
Architectural Review Commission roster
PC-6 Presentation of the Monthly Financial Report - September 2011
Attachments: PC-6.pdf
September 2011 Monthly Financial Report.pdf
PC-7 Discussion of the October 18, 2011 City Council meeting regular agenda
items
Attachments: PC-7.pdf
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
City Council Agenda October 18, 2011
1.
EXECUTIVE SESSION - In accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter
551, Subchapter D
Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney on legal issues
raised by public hearing or action items on the agenda
Section 551.071 - Legal - Discussion of pending litigation - Rahman
Dzemail v. City of Colleyville, Texas, and Gwen Parker, Ronald
McFadden, Todd Hildebrandt, Scotty Graves and David Mertz
Section 551.072 - Real Estate - Deliberate the purchase, exchange,
lease or value of real property for City facilities
Section 551.087 - Economic Development - Discuss and deliberate
commercial and financial information received from business prospects
the City seeks to have locate, stay or expand
Attachments: 1- Executive Session - Legal.pdf
RESUME REGULAR MEETING
7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
2.
INVOCATION: Pastor David R. Jung, Crown of Life Lutheran Church
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: City Attorney Matthew Boyle
EXECUTIVE SESSION: CONSIDER AND TAKE ANY ACTION(S) NECESSARY
RELATIVE TO ITEMS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION - Resolution
R-11-3415
Attachments: Resolution R-11-3415
3.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
Announcements of civic and charitable events
Presentation of calendar events and updates
Announcements of awards and recognition
In recognition of service on the Zoning Board of Adjustment and Sign
Board of Appeals - L. Ed Moore
City of Colleyville Page 2 Printed on 10/13/2011
City Council Agenda October 18, 2011
In recognition of the featured Colleyville business - Milwaukee Joe's
Gourmet Ice Cream - 33 Main Street, Suite 100, Village at Colleyville -
Jennifer and John Hay, owners
Attachments: 3- Announcements, Presentations, and Proclamations.pdf
4. CONSENT: READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-11-3416
4a Approval of the minutes of the regular City Council meeting of October
5, 2011
Attachments: Resolution R-11-3416
City Council Minutes - October 5, 2011
4b Approval of the use of the Voluntary Library Fund in Fiscal Year 2012
(FY 2012), for the purchase of library materials, collection processing
supplies, and library programs, in an amount not to exceed $145,000
Attachments: 4b Briefing.pdf
Financial Status of Voluntary Library Fund Report - September
30, 2011
4c Approval of the disposal of surplus, damaged, worn and outdated library
books, audiovisual items, DVDs and CDs, and non-book materials,
learning games, and puzzles
Attachments: 4c Briefing.pdf
4d Approval to purchase a 3M Intelligent Internal Return and Sorter System
from the Alpha Data Corporation through the State of Texas Joint
(Cooperative) Purchasing program, in an amount not to exceed $55,677,
and authorize the city manager to execute the documents
Attachments: 4d Briefing.pdf
Alpha Data Corporation price quote for 3M Intelligent Return
Sorter with one-year service agreement dated October 4, 2011
3M Intelligent Return and Sorter System
City of Colleyville Page 3 Printed on 10/13/2011
City Council Agenda October 18, 2011
5. ORDINANCE(S):
SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING
5a 0-11-1810 Approval of a request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to
R40-Single Family Residential on 1.0 acres on Lot 4, Block 1, of the
Mrs. Eva Paul Subdivision located at 1005 Tinker Road, Case ZC11-018
Attachments: 5a Briefing.pdf
Location and Zoning Map
Notification List
Buffer Map
Aerial
Statement of Planning Objectives
Survey Exhibit
Ordinance 0-11-1810
6. ORDINANCE(S):
FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING
6a 0-11-1811 Approval of a request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to
CC1-Village Retail on 0.6 acres on Tract 3A, Abstract 206 of the B.B.B.
and C. RR. Co. Survey located at 5300 Pleasant Run Road, Case
ZC11-017
Attachments: 6a Briefing.pdf
Location and Zoning Map
Notification List
Buffer Map
Aerial
ApplicanYs Request
Zoning Exhibit
Ordinance 0-11-1811
6b 0-11-1812 Approval of request for a Special Use Permit for off-premise beer and
wine sales on Lot 1, Block 3, of the Heritage High School Addition,
located at 5100 State Highway 121, Suite A, Case ZC11-016
Attachments: 6b Briefing.pdf
Location and Zoning Map
Notification List
Letters of Opposition
Buffer Map
Aerial
Statement of Planning Objectives
Business Information
Floor Plan
Site Plan
Ordinance 0-11-1812
City of Colleyville Page 4 Printed on 10/13/2011
City Council Agenda October 18, 2011
7. RESOLUTION(S):
READING AND PUBLIC HEARING
7a R-11-3417 Consideration of appointment to the Tax Increment Finance District
Board
Attachments: 7a Briefing.pdf
TIF Bylaws.pdf
Tax Increment Finance District Board roster.pdf
Resolution R-11-3417.pdf
8. CITIZEN COMMENTS/PRESENTATIONS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA
9. REPORTS:
Senior Center Advisory Committee Minutes - July 21, 2011
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - September 26, 2011
Attachments: 9 - Reports.pdf
Senior Center Advisory Committee Minutes - July 21, 2011
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - September 26, 2011
10. ACTION/RESOLUTION: DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION
RATIFYING COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 18,
2011 - Reading and Public Hearing - Resolution R-11-3418
Attachments: Resolution R-11-3418
11. ADJOURNMENT:
I hereby certify the above agenda was posted on the bulletin boards at City Hall on Friday ,
October 14, 2011, by 5:00 p.m.
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
Any matter on this agenda may, at the discretion of the governing body, be opened for public
comment and discussion.
If you plan to attend this public meeting and have a disability that requires special
accommodations, please advise the City Secretary at least 48 hours in advance at
817.503.1133, and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you.
City of Colleyville Page 5 Printed on 10/13/2011
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Pre Council Status: Pre Council
Version: 1
Requester: Community
Development
Department
Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Controlling Body: City Council
Final Action:
Agenda No.: PC-1
File Name: Presentation on the Vision North Texas Initiative. North Texas 2050
Attachments: North Texas 2050
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Presentation on the Vision North Texas Initiative, North Texas 2050
Explanation
The purpose of this item is to update the City Council on the results of the Vision North
Texas (VNT) initiative, North Texas 2050. North Texas 2050 is a major new 'gamebook' for
the Dallas/Fort Worth region that was released at the Regional Summit 2010. In addition,
North Texas 2050 has been shaped by research and the experience of experts in
transportation, land use and development, housing, the environment, health and all the
other issues that will determine how livable and successful North Texas will be in the
coming decades.
North Texas 2050 has received national and Texas awards and recognition. Efforts are
underway now to carry out its recommendations. It is envisioned that the recommendations
will become reality as cities, counties, private sector decision-makers and stakeholder
groups consider its principles and use its recommendations when they make their own
choices and investments. To put these ideas into practice, Vision North Texas is reaching
out to the cities and counties that have supported the Vision North Texas partnership in its
work.
As part of this outreach effort, Vision North Texas has formed a speakers bureau of
volunteers who have been active participants with Vision North Texas and who are prepared
to make presentations to leadership groups including area city councils.
Lou Brewer will be presenting North Texas 2050 to the Colleyville City Council. Lou is the
Health Director for Tarrant County Public Health. She received her BS in Nursing and her
Masters in Public Health from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She has over
30 years of experience in public health including state and local experience as well as
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
Aaenda Briefinp Continued
academia and practice. Lou is completing six years on the Board of the National
Association of County and City Health Officials and is the past president of the Texas
Association of Local Health Officials and the Healthy Tarrant County Collaboration. She is
currently on the Board of the YMCA of Greater Fort Worth and the External Coach for their
Pioneering Healthier Communities project. Lou is the chair of the Vision North Texas Health
Research Team and a member of the VNT Advisory Board. She is completing her
dissertation for her doctorate in Urban Planning and Policy at the University of Texas at
Arlington.
About Vision North Texas. During the past several years, the Vision North Texas
partnership has been instrumental in working to create a shared vision for the future of the
North Texas region. Vision North Texas is a private-public partnership, whose three Charter
Sponsors are the Ur ban Land Institute, the North Central Texas Council of Governments,
and the University of Texas at Arlington. Vision North Texas is supported by the
contributions of numero us private and public-secto r sponsors.
The goal of Vision North Texas includes making an important contribution to the future
quality of life, economic desirability and long-term sustainability of the 16-county North
Central Texas region and increasing public awareness about important regional land use
issues that affect air quality, water supply, mobility, and other economic and environmental
resources. In addition, it serves as a forum for discussion, education, research, and
decision about public and private sector actions to address these concerns through a
partnership of the private, public, non-profit and academic sectors.
City of Colleyville Page 2 Printed on 10/13/2011
s~xa ~o
~~nna.~~ ~o~. ~~a~~~i ~~0 6~n~~~n~~~~ap~n~
s~xa ' ao u~~s~
1 u~ N . .n
~
.
~
~
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
02010 by Vision North Tex~s
381 Casa Linda Plaza # 147, Dallas, TX 75218
All rights reserved. Reproduction or use of the whole or any part
of the contents without written permission of the copyright holder is prohibited.
The information and analysis contained in this report is the result of a collaboration
by many individuals and organizations. Any errors or omissions are solely the respon-
sibility
of Vision North Texas.
The paper used for printing this report is SFI Certified.
Sustainable Forestry Initiative: A program based on the principle
of balancing environmental responsibility with sound business decisions.
SFI ensures best practices for the sustainability and protection of millions
of acres of forests.
The inl<s used for the printing of this report are soy-based and the paper
contains a percentage of recycled materials, based on SFI certification.
orth Tex~s 2050 Production Te~m
Vision North Texas Research Team Members (see listing in
Appendix)
North Centr~l Tex~s Council of Governments
Scott Miller
Rob Seeds
TJ Idowu
John Mwangeka
Jack Tidwell
John Promise
Str~tegic Community Solutions
Karen Walz FAICP
Ale~s Massaro AICP
Sallye West
On-Q Design, Inc.
Susan Scott Teachey
Alph~gr~phics
. North Tex~s 2050
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Acl~nowledgments
M~n~gement Committee
Chair
City of Fort Worth, Assistant City Manager
Major Employers Representative
Hillwood Properties, Director of Planning
and Development
Fort Worth Representative
City of Fort Worth, Fort Worth Council
Member
Other Cities' Representative
City of Argyle, Town Administrator
North Central Texas Council of Governments
Representative
North Central Texas Council of
Governments, Executive Director
Environmental Representative
The National Recreation and Park
Association, Chair
on Nort~
University of Texas at Arlington
Representative
University of Texas at Arlington, School of
Architecture, Dean
Design/Consulting Representative
Half£Associates, Director of Business
Development
Dallas Representative
City of Dallas, Dallas Council Member
Urban Land Institute Representative
TIG Real Estate Services, Inc., ULI
North Texas, Immediate Past President
* Vision North Texas is able to carry out this initiative because of the support of its sponsors. The 2009 and 2010 sponsors are listed below.
~I ~~ ~~
~~ ~ ^
~~ ~„~,~ ~~~~~~~~~~
1J T A l~ L~ l~l C T C] N TM
~~f~~ ~~~~5
~
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wyourapt~ows fDYC~YDWkM
Contents
Executive Summary ................................................. Page 1
Overview ................................................................... Page 2
People of North Texas ............................................. Page 7
Trends and Projections ...................................... Page 12
Conclusions ........................................................ Page 14
A Vision for North Texas ........................................ Page 15
Guiding Principles for North Texas 2050......... Page 15
A Preferred Future for North Texas ................. Page 16
Preferred Future - Physical Development
Pattern .................................................................. Page 18
Preferred Future - Investment Framework...... Page 26
Action Package ........................................................ Page 46
Contents of the Action Package ........................ Page 46
Priority Action Tools .......................................... Page 47
Action Tools Online .......................................... Page 52
Appendix 1: VNT Contributors ............................. Page 53
Vision North Texas Advisors ............................ Page 53
Vision North Texas Sponsors ........................... Page 54
Vision North Texas Research Team ................. Page 58
Appendix 2: List of Potential Action Tools .......... Page 61
Appendix 3: Glossary ............................................. Page 64
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wy our apt~ows for c~rowtM
List of Exhiaits
Exhibit 2.1: Business As Usual (Scenario 1) ............................................................... Page 4
Exhibit 2.2: Connected Centers (Scenario 2) ............................................................. Page 4
Exhibit 2.3: Return On Investment (Scenario 3) ....................................................... Page 5
Exhibit 2.4: Diverse, Distinct Communities (Scenario 4) ........................................ Page 5
Exhibit 2.5: Green Region (Scenario 5) ...................................................................... Page 6
Exhibit 3.1: North Texas Population, 1900 to 2000 ................................................... Page 8
Exhibit 3.2: Population Density by County, 2000 and 2009 ..................................... Page 8
Exhibit 3.3: Share of Population by Race/Ethnicity, 2008 ........................................ Page 9
Exhibit 3.4: North Texas Population by Age & Sex, 2006 ........................................ Page 10
Exhinit 3.5: Selected Household Characteristics, 2007 ............................................ Page 10
Exhibit 3.6: Household and Market Characteristics, 2007 ....................................... Page 10
Exhibit 3.7: North Texas Growth Projections ............................................................ Page 12
Exhibit 3.8: North Texas Population By Age and Sex, 2030 ..................................... Page 13
Exhibit 4.1: Transect ..................................................................................................... Page 18
Exhibit 4.2: Preferred Future Diagram ........................................................................ Page 20
Exhibit 4.3: Mixed Use Center Criteria ....................................................................... Page 23
Exhibit 4.4: Population Capacity of Preferred Future Diagram ................................ Page 25
~
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wyourapt~ows fDYC~YDWkM
Executive
Summary
North Texas - the sixteen county region surrounding Dallas and Fort
Worth - is the fourth largest region in the nation. Its population is
expected to reach almost 12 million by the year 2050. How can North
Texas accommodate that growth? What quality of life will residents
experience ten, twenty or forty years from now? The decisions made
today by investors, homeowners, businesses and other stakeholders
will determine the answers to these questions.
Vision North Texas is a private, public and academic partnership
created to serve as a forum for dialogue and action on these
important issues. Beginning with a regional visioning workshop in
2005, the partnership has involved people from all parts of the region
in the consideration of choices for the region's future. After five years
of workshops, presentations, research and debate, seven conclusions
are clear:
* The North Texas region will face a significant amount of growth in
the next several decades.
* Current infrastructure is not adequate to meets the needs of this
growth.
* A continuation of the development patterns of the past leads to
significant impacts on the region's air, water, land and natural
resources.
* The market of the future is more likely to want a dif~'erent type of
community - one that is more compact, walkable and with natural
assets and urban amenities nearby.
* The past patterns cannot be changed by the actions of one or a few
decision-makers. Choices made by many stakeholders will af~'ect
the result.
* A shared vision and more complete information for these
stakeholders of~'ers the region a better chance to achieve a
desirable future.
* North Texans want a future that is better than the one forecast by
a continuation of `business as usual' trends.
~ North Tex~s 2050
This North Texas 2050 document describes the preferred future
envisioned by Vision North Texas participants. It is the result
of collaboration of experts in many professional fields, input of
interested residents and direction from regional leaders. The
document contains two major sections that present a 2050 vision and
the actions to achieve it.
The first major section, ~~ ~ ~ ;, proposes a Vision
Statement and a set of twelve Guiding Principles for the region's
growth and development. It describes a preferred future for North
Texas by identifying five policy areas (natural, rural, separate
community, outer tier and inner tier), each with its own challenges
and opportunities, and two types of important centers (employment
centers and mixed use centers) that are focal points for the region
and its communities. This physical development pattern is served by
an investment framework that integrates eight areas of investment
- regional ecosystem, community character and form, economy,
housing, mobility, climate resilience, education and health. A set
of policy recommendations addresses the role of this investment
framework throughout the region and in each policy area and type of
center.
The second major section, ~~ ~.~~ ~__~~, identifies the tools and
techniques needed for action to achieve this vision. The action
package includes incentives, best practices, model ordinances and
templates, technical assistance, benchmarks & indicators, new
institutions/entities, regional coordination & collaboration, and
communication. It concludes with a set of priority actions for 2010
- a list of the `top 20' items that should receive the greatest amount
of attention and action, and a list of the `next 10' items that address
individual issues and innovative research. This proposed action
agenda should be the focus of next steps to achieve the North Texas
2050 preferred future.
Executive Summary ~
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wy our apt~ows for c~rowtM
Ove rvi ew
R~ ~cir~ecc ~c 1 Ic~ ul - f~l~t the 17referrorl C~ ~t~ ~i
If current trends continue, the 16-county North Texas region will
have over 75% more people in 2030 than in 2000, and the population
will more than double by 2050. These trends create a`business as
usual' future for North Texas that is very dif~'erent from the quality of
life people find in the region today.
New neighborhoods built by 2030 will be developed at substantially
lower densities than those in existing urban areas. Such low density
neighborhoods mean that almost all trips must be by car, adding to
traffic congestion and air pollution. Health research has documented
higher levels of obesity and related problems for residents of these
neighborhoods, leading to increased pressures on the region's health
care system.
Due to this development pattern, the region is expected to lose
900,000 acres of agricultural land, as well as substantial areas of
natural habitat. The amount of impervious surface in the region
(buildings and pavement) will double, increasing runof£and af£ecting
water quality in streams, severity of floods and the temperatures
experienced by people in the region's urban areas. More than half
of the new households will live in the watersheds of the region's
water supply lakes, af~'ecting the water quality of these lakes and the
drinking water they provide.
Over 1/3 of the region's households will live outside today's urban
areas. In addition to these ef~'ects noted above, this shift also makes it
less likely that the existing neighborhoods and communities closer to
the region's core will remain vital and desirable because infrastructure
investments and tax base will be focused on the newer, outlying urban
areas.
`Business as usual' means additional infrastructure but, with
current resources, investments cannot keep pace with demand. For
transportation facilities, the anticipated investment of almost $71
billion from 2007 to 2030 does not improve conditions. Instead,
it results in 66% more hours lost to travel delay in 2030 and a
congestion cost of $6.6 billion (compared to $4.2 billion in 2007).
In 2050, existing water supplies are not sufficient to meet the needs
of this urban area and North Texans will need 21% more electricity
production capacity than is currently available.
Finally, this development pattern may not even of~'er the housing
choices that the market of the future will demand. Stakeholder
preferences, changing demographics and lifestyle choices, new
technologies for work and communication, and economic options
for businesses and employees all suggest that the market of the future
will not be met by the housing options of the past. Instead, market
demand is expected to favor more compact neighborhoods where
walking and biking are feasible options for many trips and where a
resident can enjoy both the advantages of an urban location as well as
the assets of a natural setting.
North Texas has grown successfully and dramatically over the past 40
years. But more of the same will not be successful or sustainable for
the next 40 years. This conclusion - and the desire for a future that
is better than this `business as usual' scenario - has been supported
consistently in discussions with North Texans during the past five
years. Through the work of Vision North Texas, a new vision for the
future has emerged that accommodates anticipated growth and of~'ers
a higher quality of life and a better future. This North Texas 2050
document presents this preferred future and proposes action to make
it a reality.
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Vision North 7
The f'~rtnersN
Vision North Texas is a partnership of private, public, and academic
organizations working to increase awareness about the growth
expected in North Texas and to involve people and organizations in
initiatives that accommodate that growth successfully and sustainably,
The partnerships' three Charter Sponsors are the Urban Land
Institute's North Texas District Council (ULINT), the North Central
Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) and the University of
Texas at Arlington (UTA); many other organizations participate as
partners and sponsors. Vision North Texas' activities are directed
by a 10-member Management Committee representing the Charter
Sponsors and other leaders in the private, public and academic
sectors, and are guided by more than 75 Advisors representing key
private and public sector entities.
Vision North Texas brings together people from diverse backgrounds
and perspectives to discuss common interests, understand dif~'erences,
and find solutions. It educates people about the change and growth
our region is facing, and about the options we have to successfully
accommodate this growth. It is the region's forum to debate and agree
on a shared vision for our region and a practical action program to
create that future. It provides North Texas decision-makers with the
tools they need to make better choices that will make this vision a
reality.
The Vision North Texas partnership began its work by hosting a
regional visioning workshop, held in Apri12005 at the University
of Texas at Arlington. This workshop brought together a diverse
group of nearly 200 stakeholders from across the region to discuss
alternatives to the pattern of urban growth currently projected for
the area. During the visioning workshop, participants defined 15
alternative development scenarios that could provide increased
quality of life, sustainability and economic vitality for the people who
will live and work here in the future. Evaluation of these scenarios
showed they could provide North Texas with significant economic
and environmental benefits-more than $15 billion in transportation
cost savings, in one case.
Following the 2005 workshop, leaders from across the region
urged Vision North Texas to continue this important work. Vision
North Texas has now completed more than 150 workshops and
presentations and conducted research on issues such as creation of
a regional greenprint and support for development best practices.
A Leadership Summit in 2006 engaged the elected and appointed
leaders of the regions' cities and counties. In 2007 and 2008, four
subregional workshops involved diverse stakeholders throughout the
region in a more detailed discussion of the best ways to accommodate
anticipated growth. Since 2005, Vision North Texas has involved
and heard from hundreds of stakeholders who share a vision for a
sustainable North Texas and who overwhelmingly urged our region
to take action.
In September 2007, the Vision North Texas leadership began an
ambitious ef£ort to create North Texas 2050. The process to develop
this `gamebook' has included three phases of work, extensive
research and participation by a wide range of stakeholders, leaders
and decision-makers. Each phase has produced a major report
and has concluded with a stakeholder event. These results are
summarized below and are documented in reports available at www.
visionnorthtexas. org.
This report contains information and research on the range of issues
af~'ecting the lives of the people who live and work in North Texas
now and in the future. It was developed through a collaborative
research ef£ort including experts in fields from housing to forestry to
urban design. The report establishes a baseline of information about
the current characteristics of the North Texas region. It summarizes
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
the region's current plans for its future and projections of growth
trends, both of which generally describe the expected future under
`business as usual: It also describes ef~'orts that are already underway
that are changing those trends. Lastly, it suggests four possible
alternatives to the `business as usual' future.
This report was presented and discussed at a Regional Summit held
in December 2008. Expert panelists and participants reviewed
the report and discussed its implications for specific issues such as
water and energy. Summit participants strongly supported the need
for a future that was better than `business as usual: They provided
feedback on the set of potential alternatives to that future.
In early 2009, the Vision North Texas Research Team used this
stakeholder input to finalize a set of five alternative futures for the
region. In all cases, the region was expected to have about 9.5 million
residents and 5.6 million jobs in 2030 and almost 12 million residents
and over 7 million jobs in 2050.
Scen~rio 1: Business ~s Usu~l
This scenario represents the region as it will exist in 2030 if private
and public decision-makers continue in the direction the region
is headed today. It is based on the North Central Texas Council
of Governments 2030 Forecast and distribution of growth, with
additional assumptions regarding development patterns in the
region's outlying counties. Exhibit 2.1 shows the concept for this
scenario.
Scen~rio 2: Connected Centers
This scenario envisions a region where people have more choices
about how they connect to the places where they live, work and play.
Exhibit 2.2 indicates the general concept applied to the region.
With this scenario, many human-scale mixed use centers would be
located throughout North Texas. These centers might be similar
to the development projects created in recent years near DART
Exhibit 2.1: Business As Usual (Scenario 1 ~
Exhibit 2.2: Connected Centers (Scenario 2~
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
light rail stations. The investment framework associated with this
scenario emphasizes mobility choices within and between the centers,
including trails/paths, public transportation (bus, streetcar, light
rail and commuter rail) and routes for travel by car. In Exhibit 2.2,
important roadway connections are shown in brown and important
rail connections are shown in green.
Scen~rio 3: Return on Investment
This scenario envisions a region that maximizes the benefit received
from the extensive investment t~payers and property owners have
made in the region's existing infrastructure and development pattern.
Exhibit 2.3 shows the scenario diagram for this alternative, with
blue shading in the area that is currently included in transportation
planning. The green shading shows areas that are generally urban
(they have existing development or existing infrastructure). In this
scenario, the growth through 2030 would be mostly contained in
these green areas, where urban-scale infrastructure already exists.
Development would emphasize infill, revitalization and maintenance
of existing communities.
Scen~rio 4: Diverse, Distinct Communities
This scenario creates a region with dif£erent sorts of communities and
centers, built on the traditional character of regional communities but
designed to meet the needs of the region's future markets. Instead of
focusing on quantities (of new population or of facility capacity), it
focuses on qualities - the features, places and experiences that make
one community stand out from another and that encourage residents
to develop strong and lasting ties to their own community. Exhibit
2.4 shows the scenario diagram for this alternative. It supports
reinvestment and development in downtown Dallas, downtown
Fort Worth and in the downtowns of other communities around
the region, providing regional support for the ef~'orts many of these
communities have underway.
Exhibit 2.4: Diverse, Distinct Communities (Scenario 4~
Exhibit 2.3: Return On Investment (Scenario 3~
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Scen~rio 5: Green Region
This alternative emphasizes green development or natural assets
as the foundation for future regional growth. Exhibit 2.5 shows
the scenario diagram of this concept. It is based on an initial
identification of natural assets and open spaces that create a
`green infrastructure' for the region and that should be protected
or enhanced. It also emphasizes support for green jobs, the use
of alternative energy sources and LEED building standards, and
sustainable community design.
Exhibit 2.5: Green Region (Scenario 5~
A research team of experts evaluated these alternative futures for the
region. The results were striking. All four alternatives did a better
job of addressing transportation concerns compared to the Business
As Usual scenario. The Health Research Team concluded that the
Diverse, Distinct Communities and Green Region scenarios were
most likely to support healthy people and communities. Housing
indicators suggest that the Connected Centers scenario would do
the most to achieve objectives for housing intensity and af~'ordability.
The Return on Investment and Green Region scenarios were most
successful in addressing water and natural asset objectives.
A stakeholder session in September 2009 provided the opportunity
for North Texans to discuss these results and add their own
perspectives. Participants provided input on the advantages and
drawbacks of the four alternative scenarios. They strongly supported
a preferred future that was better than business as usual.
This North Texas 2050 document is the culmination of the Vision
North Texas initiative. Based on stakeholder input, expert research
and the guidance of regional leaders, its Vision for North Texas
(Chapter 4) describes a future that current residents would like
to achieve and its Action Package (Chapter 5) proposes tools and
techniques that can be used by many dif~'erent private and public
decision-makers to help achieve this regional vision.
Following the release of North Texas 2050 at the Regional Summit in
March 2010, the Vision North Texas Charter Sponsors, partners and
other public and private organizations will be asked to consider these
recommendations, endorse this vision and use their own investments
and decisions to help achieve this preferred future.
~
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wyourapt~ows fDYC~YDWkM
The People of North Texas
Tha I~annla nf Alnrth Taxac Fxictinn C'nnrlitinnc ~
People live in North Texas for many reasons - some were born here
and others moved here for school or a job opportunity. One of the
main goals of Vision North Texas is to gain a better understanding of
the people who live and work here today and those who are expected
to be here in the future. "What kind of place do North Texans want
for living and working?" was asked continually throughout the
process.
Current research shows that North Texas is growing, aging and
becoming more ethnically diverse. Where people live and work today
will not be the same in 2050 due to the changes in demographics,
as well as changing technology, lifestyle choices, job markets,
transportation choices and other factors. For example, baby boomers
are retiring and moving into a dif£erent phase of their lives. Their
housing preference is likely to change as a result.
In order for the North Texas region to be as successful and sustainable
as possible in the future, the changing needs and preferences of the
people who live and work here must be understood. The area needs
to be ready for this expanding and changing market demand. In this
chapter of the report, the current and future demographics of North
Texas residents are examined.
Region~l f'opul~tion
The sixteen county region that is the focus of Vision North Texas
had slightly more than a half million people when the 20th century
began (E~ibit 3.1). By the beginning of the 21st century, the region's
population had increased nearly ten-fold, to 5.3 million. Most of that
growth occurred after World War II, as this region saw the dramatic
expansion of jobs and growth of suburban neighborhoods that
characterized much of the Sunbelt.
Today, the sixteen-county North Central Texas region is home to
over 6.5 million people. It is more populous than many countries
including Jordan, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and New Zealand. The
region is the 4th largest nationwide after only New York, Los Angeles
and Chicago. Nearly eighty-six percent of the region's population
is concentrated in four core counties: Collin, Dallas, Denton and
Tarrant.
E~ibit 3.2 reflects the sixteen-county population totals for the latest
Census (2000) and the NCTCOG population totals (2008). The
population of each county has increased by an average of thirty-one
1 Much of the information in this chapter is drawn from more detailed
analysis in earlier Vision North Texas reports. Please review "Regional
Choices for North Texas" and "North Texas Alternative Futures" for more
information.
~ North Tex~s 2050
percent over the last eight years. Rockwall County experienced the
highest growth rate at seventy-six percent and Dallas County was
among the lowest at ten percent. Despite the low population increase,
Dallas County still holds the largest share, thirty-seven percent, of the
6.5 million people who reside in the North Texas region.
f'opul~tion Density
The 6.5 million people living in North Texas are not evenly distributed
across the 16-county region. The most densely populated county is
Dallas with more than four people for each acre of land. The least
populated county is Palo Pinto. Located on the western edge of the
region, Palo Pinto has twenty-one acres of land for every person living
in the county. Over the last eight years, all of the core counties and
many of the outer counties experienced an increase in population
density. Rockwall and Collin counties showed the greatest percentage
change in density. For some counties, the change was insignificant. No
county experienced a decline in density.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Exhibit 3.1: North Texas Population, 1900 to 2000
sooo
5000
_ 4000
€ 3000
~
~ zooo
,ooo
^ Rest of Region ~ Dallas 0 Fort Worth
Exhibit 3.2: Population Density by County, 2000 and 2009
ounty
Census 2000
Population
NCTCOG 2008
Population
Percent Change
2000-2008
Area (in
acres)
2000 Population
Density (persons
per acre)
2008 Population
Density (persons
per acre) Percent
Change in
Density (2000-
2008)
Collin 491,675 748,050 52% 566,851 0.9 1.3 52%
Dallas 2,218,899 2,451,800 10% 581,279 3.8 4.2 10%
Denton 432,976 614,650 42% 610,108 0.7 1 42%
Ellis 111,360 147,850 33% 608,915 0.2 0.2 33%
Erath 33,001 38,550 17% 697,446 0 0.1 17%
Hood 41,100 54,900 34% 279,519 0.1 0.2 34%
Hunt 76,596 91,600 20% 564,381 0.1 0.2 20%
Johnson 126,811 159,750 26% 469,982 0.3 0.3 26%
Kaufman 71,313 102,550 44% 516,425 0.1 0.2 44%
Navarro 45,124 49,500 10% 695,131 0.1 0.1 10%
Palo Pinto 27,026 29,600 10% 630,583 0 0 10%
Parker 88,495 120,300 36% 582,327 0.2 0.2 36%
Rockwall 43,080 76,000 76% 95,211 0.5 0.8 76%
Somervell 6,809 9,100 34% 122,805 0.1 0.1 34%
Tarrant 1,446,219 1,780,150 23% 577,162 2.5 3.1 23%
Wise 48,793 64,500 32% 590,386 0.1 0.1 32%
Region 5,309,277 6,538,850 Avg. Change = 31% 8,188,511 0.6 0.8 23%
0
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Overall, the North Texas Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)'s
population density was 1.01 persons per acre in 2005. By
comparison, the New York and Los Angeles MSA's had population
densities over 4 persons per acre. When just the areas in urban
development are considered population density of the developed
parts of the 16-county North Texas region was 4.3 persons per acre in
2001.
Leading health issues for North Texans today include obesity,
cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. Obesity, which stems primarily
from poor nutrition and lack of physical activity, continues to
increase. According to the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention
the percentage of overweight and obese population increased from
61.8 percent in 2004 to 63.6 percent in 2008 in the Fort Worth-
Arlington MMSA. The Dallas-Plano-Irving MMSA increased from
61.9 percent to 65.4 percent.
In 2008, approximately fifty-four percent of North Central Texans
were white, twenty-seven percent were Hispanic, fourteen percent
were black, and the remaining five percent were Asian or of another
race (E~ibit 33). Dallas County is by far the largest and most racially
and ethnically diverse county in the North Central Texas region. The
dominant group in Dallas County is the Hispanic population, which is
larger both in terms of absolute number and percentages than in any
other North Central Texas county. Collin County has a relatively large
share of the region's Asian population. This is reflected in their greater
than ten percent showing in the "other" category. With the exception
of Navarro, the rural counties tend to be much less diverse than their
urban neighbors.
Exhibit 3.3: Share of Population by Race/Ethnicity,
2008
~ aoUio
soU/~
so ro
7opi~
soni~
soUr~
4onro
3o7i~
20%
~ Q4f0
onio
The population pyramid displayed in E~ibit 3.4, is a breakdown of
the North Texas region's population by age and gender as of the year
2006. The median age for all people in the area is about 33.5 years.
Sixty-one percent of the population is located within the workforce
category (ages 20-64) and twenty-two percent of the population is
school aged children (ages 5-19), with the remaining nine percent of
the population located in the seniors category (ages 65-85+) and nine
percent in the under five category (0-4).
~ c •
C°~ Q~ y ,p°'~~ ~i~ ,cv~ ,t°~b ~JC ~°~~o ~ro~~~~? m~o4`t' Q~~` ~co`'~~~i°F~~' ~~~°~ ~~"~
Exhibit 3.4: North Texas Population byAge & Sex,
200G
GJanF7 Cerotral Texas 2UU6 Fopulat3dn
Rs<
sD • ~uu
~~- ~s
7J- 7A
65 - 59
so - sa
55 - 59
~, ~~a- ~
y ~75-49
~,
~ .~~~- ~w
¢ 35 • 39
3[~- 34
25 _ 29
a[~ - 2J
15-'i8
117- 14
~•~
a-a
A household includes all the people who occupy a housing unit as
their usual place of residents. A family is a group of two or more
people who reside together and who are related by birth, marriage, or
adoption.
Ten North Central Texas counties have a population of at least 65,000.
Exhibit 3.5 shows of these top ten counties, Kaufman has the highest
average number of persons per household (336); Tarrant has the
lowest (2.77). The average number of people in each household is 2.65.
In most of the counties, forty to forty-five percent of the households
have children.
Fifty-six percent of all housing units in Dallas County are occupied
by the unit's owner. This figure is twelve percentage points lower than
any other county except for Tarrant, where there is a seven point
difference. At nearly eighty-four percent, Rockwall has the highest
percentage of owner-occupied housing units.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Exhibit 3.5: Selected Household Characteristics, 2007
ounty
umber of
Households
Average
Household
Size
ouseholds
with children
Households
with seniors
(60+) ousing
units
which are
owner
occupied
Collin 256,954 2.82 42.6% 20.0% 72.5%
Dallas 829,143 2.82 39.3% 24.2% 56.3%
Denton 201,202 2.98 41.9% 17.7% 67.8%
Ellis 45,924 3.08 45.2% 26.6% 75.6%
Hunt 28,925 2.79 34.5% 35.9% 69.3%
Johnson 47,546 3.10 40.5% 29.2% 74.7%
Kaufman 28,442 3.36 42.5% 27.5% 77.0%
Parker 35,895 2.95 42.7% 28.9% 81.5%
Rockwall 23,905 3.04 45.6% 23.6% 83.5%
Tarrant 610,185 2.77 40.3% 23.7% 63.4%
Seventy percent of Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) area residents live in
families (E~ibit 3.6). Twenty-five percent live alone and five percent
live in households with at least one other, non-related person.
Exhibit 3.G: Household and Marlcet Characteristics,
2007
Dallas - Fort percent US Percent
Worth - Arlington
Family Households with ~g6,656 37% 34,999,584 31 %
Children
Other Family 695
723 33% 40
119
676 36%
Households , ,
,
Single Person 122,890 6% 10,264,914 9%
Households w/ Seniors
Other Single Person
Households 411,543 19% 20,380,226 18%
Other Non-Family 111,836 5% 6,613,577 6%
Households
Totals 2,128,648 100% 112,377,977 100%
~ r~ _ ; i~ i .. 3 4 .
Perter~tagp of Pepufatian
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Exhibit 3.6 shows that North Texas has a larger proportion of
households with children than does the U.S. as a whole. Some notable
characteristics of these families are:
* Of the region's families with children, sixty-five percent have
school-aged children, between the ages of six and seventeen.
About seventeen percent have very young children (aged three
years and under). For these families, the quality of schools is often
an important determinant in housing selection. These are the
households that typify the `traditionaP composition of a household
in the region and the nation.
* More than eighty percent of North Central Texas families live in
detached, single-family structures. Of all families, three percent
live in a mobile home, trailer, RV or some other place.
* Only twelve percent of North Central Texas families currently live
in apartment buildings.
* Approximately twenty-five percent of families with seven or more
members live in apartments or other multi-unit buildings.
* Even though households with children are a larger share of
households in North Texas than in the U.S., they still account for
only thirty-seven percent of the region's households.
Fully a quarter of all households in North Texas today include only
one person. Some notable characteristics of these households are:
More of these households live in apartments than in single-family
homes. Approximately the same proportions of these households
live in single family detached homes as in large apartment
buildings (those with 5 or more units in the structure). 7% live
in apartments in buildings with 2 to 4 units and 4% live in single
family units, such as townhomes.
Of the region's single householders, about 23 percent are young,
between the ages of 15 and 34.
Seniors between the ages of 65 and 74 account for 2.6% of these
households. These households
may fit the image of `empty
nesters' or retirees interested in
living close to cultural activities
and less interested in maintaining
a large house and yard.
* Seniors older than 74 account for
3.2% of these households. These
households may have special
concerns about accessibility and proximity to medical care and
other services. They may be particularly disadvantaged if their
neighborhoods lack public transportation and they can no longer
drive a car themselves.
Households with two or more non-related people comprise more than
5% of North Texas households. They may be interested in the space
afforded by a single family detached home, but may also be interested
in pro~mity to services and amenities; they are less likely to be
concerned about school quality when selecting a home.
In 2007, half of area households had an income of at least $54,730,
which is higher than both the state median of $47,548, and the
national median of $50,740. The estimated median income for the
DFW area is just below the figure for the Austin MSA. However, the
Austin metro area has less than one-third as many households as does
the DFW metro. DFW's median income is higher than the median
incomes of the Houston and San Antonio MSA's.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Trends ~nd Projections
Over~ll Growth f'rojectior
The North Central Texas Council of Governments prepares long-
range demographic forecasts for the ten counties surrounding and
including the Dallas-Fort-Worth area. The forecasts are developed to
provide a uniform base for regional planning and resource allocation.
The 2030 projections produced by NCTCOG use the year 2000 as
a base year and project population and employment in five-year
increments to 2030. Separate from its 2030 forecasts, NCTCOG also
developed projections for the 16-county region through 2050. These
projections are solely for use in this Vision North Texas project, not
for other modeling purposes. As E~ibit 3.7 shows, this sixteen
county area is expected to have over 9.4 million total population and
over 5.5 million non-construction jobs by the year 2030. In addition,
by 2050, the region is expected to have almost 12 million people and
over 7 million jobs. This represents an average annual population
growth rate of 2.4% for the time frame from 2000. NCTCOG
forecasts reflect only one set of growth assumptions. If circumstances
change, real growth outcomes might be considerably different. The
recent economic downturn is not e~pected to significantly change
these long term projections.
Exhibit 3.7: North Texas Growth Projections
2000 2030 2050
Population
(millions)
Total Po ulation 5.31 9.49 11.66
Total Em lo ment 3.22 5.58 7.17
Total Households 1.94 3.48 4.38
Two factors will dominate North Central Texas demographic trends
over the ne~t twenty years. These are increasing diversity and the
aging of the region's population. The growth in non-white groups will
be driven by migration and natural increase (births and deaths in the
region). The region's strong job market and international connectivity
attract workers of all skill levels from all over the world. As long as the
region's economy remains moderately strong, internal and external
migration to the area is expected to continue. While fertility rates
for non-white groups have been declining, they are still considerably
higher than rates for whites. Even with mortality rates factored in, the
rates of growth for most non-white groups, particularly Hispanics,
outpace that of whites.
Age group numbers are becoming more evenly distributed; equal
numbers of children, parents, young professionals and seniors.
In 2006 the population distribution was shaped very much like a
pyramid hence the name `population pyramid: By 2030 and 2050,
the shape of the region's population will bear less resemblance to a
pyramid and more like a rectangle (Exhibit 3.8). This is primarily
due to the aging of the large baby boom generation. The other factor
affecting the shape of the distribution will be migration, since people
moving to this region tend to be those in the labor force - young and
middle-aged adults.
As for the diversity of the region, there will be a higher percentage
of Hispanic and Asian residents in the future. By 2050 the Hispanic
population is projected to be 4.1 million and the Asian population is
projected to be 1.1 million, which combined is higher than the total
White population and considerably higher than the Black population.
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Exhibit 3.8: North Texas Population By Age and Sex,
2030
T! orth Central Texas 2030 Pnpulation
s~.
so s~
75 - 79
70- 74
GS - 69
60 - fi4
s5- ~~
._ 50 - 5a
R Qs- a~
~ a0- 44
a 3~- 3~
30 - 34
2S- 29
zo- 24
,~-,~
10- ,a
5-s
o-a
Despite the impact of the aging baby boomers, natural increase and
migration will keep the median age relatively close to the current
figure. In 2030, the median age of the total population is projected to
be about 34.7 years.
The share of some key age groups will be different than in the past,
however. In 2006, people in the age group that provides most of
the labor force (ages 20 through 64) comprised 61% of the region's
population. In 2030, this age group will comprise only 57% of the
population. On the other hand, seniors aged 65 to 84 were only 7% of
the population in 2006 and will be 13% of the population in 2030. In
fact, the age groups with the highest percentage increase from 2006 to
2030 are those from 70 to 74 and 75 to 79.
Demand for housing reflects the character of the people who live in
North Texas. Choices for housing -- and neighborhoods -- often vary
with a person's family composition and stage of life. Also, increasing
costs (in time and money) of commuting and a growing interest in a
`green' lifestyle are making housing close to jobs more desirable. The
mix of housing available in North Texas in the future should meet the
needs of North Texas' changing households.
By 2030, the region is expected to have over 3.5 million people living
in households in the 16-county Vision North Texas region and
4.4 million by 2050. Household sizes, which have been generally
declining for decades, are expected to continue to decline. However,
the decline is not expected to be as dramatic as in the past. In fact, the
average household size for the forecast area in 2030 is likely to be very
close to the current household size as populations increase for those
racial/ethnic groups that have historically had larger households.
These demographic changes will result in changes to the housing
demand in the region. The sheer number of older and non-white
residents will impact both the quantity and type of housing demanded
in North Central Texas as well as the location of that housing.
Aging homeowners looking to downsize and trade in home mainte-
nance for community living will certainly contribute to changes in
housing demand. There is also likely to be an increase in demand for
housing near transit. Also, expansion of the region's transit systems
will locate stations closer to more neighborhoods, businesses and
other destinations, making this a more convenient choice for more
people.
Funding for expansion of the region's transit system must be secured
so the needs of this growing market can be met and the neighbor-
S d _, _ ~I U 1 2 3 4 ._
Percentage of Populatian
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
hoods, businesses and major
destinations in the region can
be served with convenient
transit.
The Center for Transit-
Oriented Development has
calculated the market for
transit-oriented develop-
ment, now and in the future,
for the 42 metropolitan areas that have fixed rail transit systems that
e~st now or are planned to be in place in 2030. The Dallas region is
expected to see a very large increase in the demand for housing within
one-half mile of transit stations. This market segment was estimated
at 46,429 households in 2007; the study projects that there will be
270,676 households in this transit-oriented housing market in 2030.
To accommodate this anticipated demand, development around tran-
sit stations should include a variety of housing types and price levels.
Living alone has become an increasingly common choice. Single
person households have increased over recent years and are forecasted
to rise steadily. Today twenty-six percent of the households in the
sixteen county area are single-person households. By 2013 single
person households will make up an average of twenty-seven percent
of all total households. Economics and shifting social norms are
some of the reasons for the rise. The single person housing choice is
a lot smaller and closer to urban areas than the typical3-bedroom
house that families want. Single person households are also a major
component of homeowners. In 2005, the `Dallas Morning News'
reported that 47% of the mortgagees in the region were singles.
Throughout the five-year Vision North Texas process, the
demographics of the region were closely considered. In order
to plan for the future of North Texas, an understanding of the
characteristics of the people who live here is necessary. Housing
types and locational choice are changing as the population
becomes more diverse. The needs and choices of smaller
families and families without children are redefining how cities
and communities are planned and which housing types are
demanded in the marketplace.
There are opportunities as a result of the changing demographics
for cities and first ring suburbs to attract baby boomers,
households without children and young professionals.
Thoughtful planning for the future based on these local
demographic changes and preferences is one of the principles of
Vision North Texas. The recommendations in this North Texas
2050 document should help this region respond to these changes
and better meet the needs of our communities, businesses and
current and future residents.
Throughout the five-year Vision North Texas process, the
demographics, business climate, transportation network,
sustainability and other factors affecting the Region were closely
considered. In order to plan for the future of North Texas, an
understanding of the people who live, work and travel to and
through here is necessary. Housing types and locational choice
are changing as the population becomes more diverse, the needs
of businesses evolve, transportation networks and options change
and the region, nation and world become more connected.
The needs and choices of smaller families and families without
children, changing populations are redefining how cities
and communities are planned and which housing types are
demanded in the marketplace.
~
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wyourapt~ows fDYC~YDWkM
A Vision for North Texas
The people of North Texas do not view `business as usual' as a
desirable future. They want a future that is better than that. This
message was expressed throughout the Vision North Texas process.
It was heard at stakeholder workshops throughout the region, at
meetings ranging from regional realtor conferences and individual
City Council sessions to Rotary Clubs and sustainability events, as
well as in written and electronic comments. This chapter of North
Texas 2050 describes a future that balances concerns about the
economy, the environment and the people. It creates a future that is
desired by a broad range of North Texas stakeholders.
This chapter presents this vision in three increasingly specific
sections. First, a broad Vision Statement is presented. This vision
reflects the most important themes for North Texans. Second, a set
of twelve Guiding Principles add more detail to this vision. Third, a
Preferred Future for North Texas recommends a pattern for physical
development and a framework for investment that enable decision-
makers throughout the region to apply these principles to their own
properties, businesses and communities.
Vision St~temen
North Texas is recognized worldwide as a region that sustains its
economic success and vitality because it contains many distinctive
and highly desirable communities, supports innovative people and
businesses and nurtures its varied natural assets.
* It contains diverse neighborhoods, mixed use centers and
communities that appeal to people of all income levels and at all
stages of their lives.
* It is a preferred location for the employees and businesses that
comprise the broad-based and innovative local economy.
* It of~'ers residents and businesses access to resources and
opportunities that lead to their long-term success.
* It protects, manages and enhances critical natural areas and uses
energy and natural resources responsibly.
* It supports resilient and efFective responses to change through
collaboration and cooperation within the region.
,~idii
Guiding Principles supplement the Vision Statement by providing
a more precise description of the region's preferred future. These
Guiding Principles update the Principles of Development Excellence
adopted for North Texas in 2001. They are based on the input of
stakeholders at Vision North Texas workshops and events. The
principles listed below are all important; they are not listed in order
of priority.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
- Meet the needs of changing markets
by providing a mix of development options and land use types in
communities throughout the region.
- Promote reinvestment and redevelopment
in areas with e~sting infrastructure, ensure that new
infrastructure supports orderly and sustainable growth, and
provide coordinated regional systems of natural and built
infrastructure.
- Create and connect pedestrian-(and
bicyclist) oriented neighborhoods, centers and places throughout
the region.
- Sustain and facilitate a range of housing
opportunities and choices that meet the needs of residents of all
economic levels and at all stages of life.
- Create mixed use developments that are
centers of neighborhoods and community activities and serve as
hubs of non-automobile transportation systems.
- Protect, retain or enhance the
region's important natural assets (including its air, water, land and
forests) and integrate these natural features and systems into the
character of the region's communities and the experiences of its
residents.
- Strengthen the identities of the region's
diverse communities through preservation of significant historic
structures and natural assets, creation of new landmarks and
gathering spaces, use of compatible architectural and landscape
design, and support for the activities and institutions that make
each community unique.
- Invest in transportation systems,
facilities and operations that provide multi-modal choices for
the efficient and sustainable movement of people, goods, and
services.
- Design buildings, sites, communities
and regional systems to use water, energy, and renewable
resources responsibly, ef~'ectively and efficiently, and to retain
non-renewable resources for the use of future generations.
- Provide opportunities for
all North Texans to have access to the schools, people and
technology they need for success in learning throughout their
lives.
- Identify and support functional,
sustainable infrastructure and institutions that of£er North Texans
access to afFordable, nutritious foods, opportunities for physical
activity, and access to wellness and primary care services.
- Achieve the region's vision by adoption of
compatible comprehensive plans and ordinances for cities and
consistent investment plans for regional systems; involve citizens
and stakeholders in all aspects of these planning processes.
Achieving this North Texas 2050 Vision requires change from
business as usual. More of the same will not create the region that
stakeholders have said they want. The twelve Guiding Principles
give decision-makers additional insight into the future envisioned
through this process, but they provide a very broad description
of this direction. The clearer picture of this preferred future is
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
found in the following sections, which describe both a
preferred pattern for the region's physical development
and a preferred approach to the region's investment
framework. The policy recommendations found in
these sections are directed at public, private, academic
and civic decision-makers. Some recommendations
are also provided for action by individuals, households,
businesses and local neighborhood and business
organizations.
The choices made by all these decision-makers will
combine to determine the North Texas that will actually
exist in the year 2050. These decision-makers must consider the
economics of their choices; for long-term success and sustainability,
they must also consider the implications of their choices for the
region's environment and communities. By communicating,
collaborating and making decisions that support a shared vision, the
many individual choices and investments made by these regional
decision-makers will be most likely to produce a region that is similar
to the one described by the stakeholders who have participated in
Vision North Texas.
During 2009, Vision North Texas used stakeholder input to define
four alternatives to the `business as usual' future represented by the
North Central Texas Council of Governments' 2030 Forecast. Those
four alternatives were:
This scenario envisions a region where
people have more choices about how they connect to the places where
they live, work and play.
This scenario envisions a region that
maximizes the benefit received from the extensive investment
t~payers and property owners have made in the region's existing
infrastructure and development pattern.
This scenario creates a region
with dif£erent sorts of communities and centers, built on the
traditional character of regional communities but designed to meet
the needs of the region's future markets.
This scenario reflects the concept of greenprinting'
- using technology and stakeholder dialogue to decide what natural
assets are valuable or important in a particular region and then
identifying those areas so they can be retained to provide greater
benefit as the region grows.
A large team of researchers from diverse professional backgrounds
evaluated these scenarios. Their results were presented at a regional
event in September 2009. The feedback from stakeholders did not
favor one alternative scenario over all others; instead, North Texans
identified some desirable features in each of the four alternatives. The
North Texas 2050 Preferred Future blends these best features into a
hybrid concept that illustrates the future these residents and leaders
want to see.
* Begin with the identification of important natural assets and an
investment framework using alternative energy sources, LEED
building standards and conversation to make more ef~'ective use of
natural resources, as suggested in the Green Region scenario.
* Reflect areas with existing urban services (such as those identified
in green on the Return on Investment scenario).
* Recognize the investments in the region's many communities
and the role they play in of~'ering residents the ability to choose
among communities with many types of character (such as those
shown in the Diverse, Distinct Communities scenario).
* Identify centers of varying sizes throughout the region. These are
both mixed use centers and employment centers. They include
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
the transit-oriented centers found in the Connected Centers
scenario.
The preferred future in 2050 is described by a physical development
pattern and an investment framework. Policy recommendations are
presented that relate to particular parts of this development pattern
and investment framework, as well as to the region as a whole.
Together, the physical development pattern and the investment
framework illustrate a future that is based on the North Texas 2050
Guiding Principles and achieves the Vision Statement presented
above.
One part of the preferred future plan is a general description of the
way development and redevelopment would occur in the region
through the year 2050 if the region is to achieve its desired future.
This physical development pattern illustrates the form and function
of neighborhoods, business areas, communities and natural areas that
together shape the place North Texans will experience in the future.
Exhibit 4.1: Transect
Five "Policy Areas" describe the desirable characteristics of various
types of development in the North Texas region. Each policy area
includes development that meets anticipated market demands in ways
that should be sustainable over time. These policy areas and centers
are explained in this section, with photos and diagrams that illustrate
them. Exhibit 4.2 is a preliminary depiction of these policy areas in
North Texas.
The policy area descriptions also include information that allows
them to be related to the `Transect' The Transect is an urban planning
model created by the New Urbanism movement as a way to organize
and identif}~ different landscapes found within the environment,
ranging from completely undeveloped natural areas to very dense
downtown environments. The Transect is divided into six zones. These
six zones vary by the level and intensity of their physical and social
character. And form the basis for the use of urban design approaches
recommended by New Urbanists. For example, the Transect includes a
"Suburban Zone" (T3) which primarily includes single-family homes
at the edge of a city.
In the sections that follow, the North Texas 2050 policy areas are
related to the most comparable Transect Zones. Exhibit 4.1 displays
the Transect diagram.
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
N~tur~l Are~s
The natural areas found in North Texas in 2050 are places
where the natural and environmental features should be
the focus. The purpose of this policy area is to preserve
~~. `. - and protect open spaces, public parks, greenways, lake
shores, significant views, stands of trees, and floodplains.
The development that occurs near these natural features is
~ planned with these important environmental features in
'~-~ mind. Retaining and managing the natural assets that are
. s° ~ at the heart of these areas is the goal. This policy area would
`'~ focus ef~'orts to rovide financial o ortunities to owners
::~;~ P PP
and managers of natural areas that properly reflect the
economic benefit these areas provide regionally and globally. Also,
new growth and development that takes advantage of the amenities
(parks, trails, and lakes) provided by the natural areas will be
encouraged in this policy area through `best practices' and incentives.
The natural areas shown on the Exhibit 4.2 generally reflect
floodplains, major public parks & open spaces, shores along major
lakes and potential connections between these natural assets. This
policy area corresponds to the Transect Zone, T1, or "Natural Zone':
The region's preferred future envisions these areas
in 2050 as places where people can choose a rural
or country lifestyle and where businesses based in
agriculture can prosper. These areas have large lots,
ranches, farms - all with low population and density.
The infrastructure (like roads, water supply and
sewage treatment) in rural areas is sized to serve
small numbers of homes or businesses. Economic activity is largely
related to agricultural and farming activities. Most areas are not part
of incorporated communities.
To make the most of the investments and assets found in these areas,
policies focus on support for continuing the economic life of existing
businesses and uses. This preferred scenario of~'ers North Texans of
the future the opportunity for a rural lifestyle. The creation of new
businesses (such as alternative energy production) that are based on
the renewable resources that exist in these areas or that provide local
goods and produce to meet the needs of people in the other parts of
North Texas are highly encouraged.
The rural areas shown on the Exhibit 4.2 generally reflect the areas
that are not in urban scale service areas, incorporated cities or natural
areas. This policy area corresponds to the Transect Zone, T2 or "Rural
Zone':
Sep~r~te Community Are~s
The region's preferred future envisions these areas in 2050 as a
collection of diverse communities, each with its own center and
distinct character. They are generally separated from the central
urban areas of the region by rural or natural areas. Their traditional
core areas (often historic downtowns) of~'er unique features and
support community pride. Although residents may need to commute
to jobs in the central urban part of the region, they mainly identify
with the character and the traditions of these separate community
areas.
To make the most of the investments and community assets found
in these areas, action focuses on economic growth that makes
the traditional core areas sustainable over time and on steps to
distinguish one community from another - through community
design practices, emphasis on heritage, action to pursue new
opportunities that dif£erentiate individual communities, or retention
of the rural and natural areas around and between them.
The separate community areas shown on the Exhibit 4.2 generally
reflect the incorporated communities beyond the outer tier. This
policy area corresponds to the Transect Zone, T3 or "Suburban Zone':
Rur~l Are~s
Exhibit 4.2: Preferred Future Diagram
(Illustration of a Preferred Physical Development Pattern for the Year 2050~
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Outer Tier Are~s
The region's preferred future imagines these areas in
2050 as a major part of the region's more urban area.
The outer tier areas frame the inner tier and provide
dif£erent options for living and working, though still
in an urban setting. There is still opportunity for
new greenfield development in the outer tier areas.
While there may be places with older development,
most of the neighborhoods and business areas were developed after
1980. Rehabilitation and reinvestment are generally not concerns in
the outer tier today, though they will become more important over
time.
To make the most of the community assets found in these areas,
the policies for the outer tier areas focus on steps to ensure
that greenfield development follows the principles of the
North Texas 2050 document, actions to maintain and support
existing neighborhoods, and emphasis on the establishment
of distinct identities when new neighborhoods and
communities are created.
The outer tier areas illustrated on the Exhibit 4.2 generally
reflect the areas within regional waste-water service areas and/or
locations where lakes and rivers create a logical edge to urban-scale
development. This policy area corresponds to the Transect Zone, T3
and T4 or "Suburban" and "General Urban':
Inner Tier Are~s
The region's preferred future envisions these areas
in 2050 as the core of the North Texas region. These
are areas that today are largely developed and have
little land left for new (greenfield) development.
Their neighborhoods and business areas were
mostly built before 1980. Many of the major
regional institutions (museums, universities, etc.) are located here, as
are many places with regional historic significance. They are facing
challenges of infrastructure repair. While some neighborhoods are
desirable and thriving, others are suf£ering from neglect. The inner
tier areas include both major employment locations and major
shopping destinations, as well as a wide variety of neighborhoods.
To make the most of the investments and community assets found
in these areas, action focuses on steps to keep these neighborhoods
prospering, reuse of older buildings, and selection of locations for
infill development.
The inner tier areas shown on the Exhibit 4.2 generally reflect areas
where 15% or less of the land area is still vacant. This policy area
corresponds to the Transect Zone, T5 and T6 or "Urban Center" and
"Urban Core':
North Texas' preferred future includes many types of centers. These
centers are special places that draw residents of North Texas to them,
for many reasons, including shopping and entertainment. These
centers are intended to be places that people can easily park their cars
once, then shop, eat, mail a letter - all without having to ever move
their cars. They are active and inviting places, due to their thoughtful
design, which tends to be centered on the pedestrian. The streets
are designed not just for cars, but for pedestrians and bicycles. Their
appeal is wide so that many people visit them each day for work
or shopping, and they are desirable places to call "home" for many
future North Texans. The vision of the preferred future for North
Texas includes many centers with opportunities for connections
between centers.
The mixed use centers shown on the Exhibit 4.2 are those that
have been identified to date. After release of this North Texas 2050
document, the VNT partners encourage municipalities, land owners
and interested parties to share information on other centers that
meet these definitions. These will be added to later versions of the
diagram. The most significant centers are shown in the Exhibit 4.2.
Other local-serving centers will be shown online but not in this
exhibit. Additionally, it is recognized that some of the centers shown
as `Community Centers' now may play a larger role in the region
over time. Further discussion may change their designation from
`Community' to `Metropolitan: The dif~'erent centers are described
in detail below and are based on information collected from VNT
research, NCTCOG records and UTA data.
Employment Centers
The North Texas region has a large,
~~ ~' diverse business community and is home
r ~,~ ~ ~ _. ; ~Ai~i
~,~;~,,~~e •~_~~ iw~~ to many corporate headquarters. Some
~ ° ~:~ -..--
~~~__r ~; ~~ ~~ regional locations of~'er higher employment
~~'- - concentrations than other areas. These
3, . ,, -~ ~,~ :'~
~~ Employment Centers are important to the
' North Texas region because they are the
~ location of significant numbers of jobs and
of the major corporate citizens of the region. Employment centers
may include single-use office parks or campuses, large manufacturing
or distribution centers and similar areas with a concentration of
jobs. While downtowns and mixed-use, high density areas also have
significant numbers of jobs, they include a mix of residential and
non-residential uses. For North Texas 2050, these areas are included
among the Mixed Use Centers described below. By analyzing these
concentrations of employment, the region may be better able to
anticipate the amount of job growth expected, the types of jobs that
will be in highest demand, and which industry sector is expected
to contribute the largest share of jobs. The region can also use
this information to better provide the services and infrastructure
needed to support these businesses and the people who work in
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
these locations, including transit for people who work in these areas.
Employment centers will be generalized from previous Vision North
Texas research and preliminary center locations will be presented in
the Regional Choices Diagram.
Mixed Use Centers
The mixed use centers are: Regional, Metropolitan,
Community and Neighborhood. The four centers reflect ~~
areas with a variety of uses (including both employment ;~
and housing), at least a moderate intensity of development ^
and, for some, their roles as distinct or traditional centers ~~1??!
of communities. The mixed use centers dif£er in terms ~~~~
of size, scale, and specific function. For the most part,
Regional and Metropolitan centers are similar in that they
provide a strong employment base for the North Texas region, have
a mix of land uses, and are highly developed. In turn, Community
and Neighborhood centers are also similar. They are mixed use but
do not provide as many job opportunities as the larger Mixed Use
Centers. Also these two centers may have a single family residential
component compared to the Regional and Metropolitan centers,
where most residential uses are at higher densities. All of the centers
are envisioned to be mixed use and pedestrian friendly, with more
intense development than their surroundings. Characteristics
common to all four are the presence of transportation connections
and rapid transit lines. Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)
is expected around transit stations in all four types of Mixed Use
Centers.
Specific criteria have been established to distinguish the four centers
and to identify where they are located in the region. The table in
Exhibit 4.3 summarizes key criteria defining Mixed Use Centers. A
more detailed description of each mixed use center follows.
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Regional Centers are the densest of the four mixed use centers, with
a wide variety of uses. A Regional Center has a balance of office,
retail, entertainment, light industrial and multi-family residential
uses. Regional Centers are envisioned as pedestrian-oriented, urban
areas, in a central location. All modes of transportation serve the
Regional Centers. The North Texas region has two Regional Centers,
Downtown Dallas and Downtown Fort Worth.
Exhibit 4.3: Mixed Use Center Criteria
Employment Residential
Typologies/Districts Mix of Uses Intensity Density Scale Height Transit System Function
Office, retail, MF
residential, light
industrial and
entertainment; All modes of transportation; regional
includes mixed-use. public transit, parking restrictions,
Emphasis on 50 - 100 600 - 1,000 and served by multiple major
Regional Center employment uses. 100 - 200 jobs/acre units/acre acres 5 to 50 stories highways.
Served by one or more corridor/
Office, retail, MF regional lines and local services.
residential and Freeways with multiple access
entertainment; 15 - 50 100 - 500 points. In some cases served by
Metropolitan Center includes mixed-use. 50 - 80 jobs/acre units/acre acres 2 to10 stories public transit.
Served by at least several local
transit and located on an arterial
network. Served by a transit route
providing connections to at least
SF and MF one Metropolitan Center.
residential and Commuter parking is located in this
retail; includes center. In some cases served by
Community Center mixed-use. 30 - 50 jobs/acre 5- 10 units/acre 20 - 100 acres 1 to 5 stories public transit.
Served by local roads and local
transit to nearest larger center.
Commuter parking in located in this
Mix of uses at a 10 - 15 center. In some cases served by
Neighborhood Center neighborhood scale. 20 - 30 jobs/acre units/acre 20 - 100 acres 1 to 5 stories public transit.
Note: Transit-0riented Development (TOD) projects may occur within any of these centers.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Metropolitan Centers of£er the same
variety of uses, just on a somewhat
smaller scale. Their development is less
intense than Regional Centers. They
tend to be populated urban areas that are
primarily mixed-use, accommodating
business and multi-family residential
land uses. They meet a wide variety of
business and employment needs and are large enough to serve several
surrounding cities. Metropolitan Centers also include the larger
historic downtowns of cities in the North Texas area. Metropolitan
centers are served by one or more corridor/regional transit lines and
local bus services. Twenty Metropolitan Centers have been identified
so far and examples of these centers are below:
* Addison (includes Addison Circle and Vitruvian Park)
* Downtown Denton
* Las Colinas
* La Villita
* Legacy Town Center
Community Centers have a mix of uses and are distinguished by their
smaller size and scale. Community Centers of~'er development that
provides retail and residential within the same building or in close,
walkable proximity to one another. They attract visitors and people
from across the region because of their uniqueness, historic nature
and design character. They provide access to shops, restaurants and
community-oriented services. Community Centers are traditionally
located on a major arterial network and served by a transit route
providing direct transit to at least one Metropolitan Center. Thirty-
nine Community Centers have been identified so far and a few
examples of these centers are as follows:
* Berry/University
* Bishop Arts District
* Brick Row
* Downtown Arlington
* Downtown Garland
* Park Lane Place
This is the smallest of the four Mixed Use center
types. Neighborhood Centers serve the shopping,
service or entertainment needs of one or more
existing or planned residential neighborhoods.
They contain a diverse mix of land uses, at a
neighborhood scale, including those schools,
shopping, personal services and restaurants. These
centers may of~'er quality amenities, like parks, that
attract people from the adjacent neighborhoods. Good pedestrian,
bicycle and bus transportation links are found in Neighborhood
Centers; some may also include transit stations and adjacent Transit-
Oriented Development. Neighborhood Centers are served by local
roads and local transit to the nearest larger mixed use center. Over 25
Neighborhood Centers have already been identified to date. Examples
of Neighborhood Centers include:
* Rockwall Commons in Rockwall
* Desoto Town Center
* Downtown Mansfield
* Bluebonnet Circle
Metropolit~n Center~
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Exhibit 4.4: Population Capacity of Preferred Future Diagram
Area
Size (Acres) Density
(persons per
acre)
Population
Capacity
Assumptions
Existing Developed Area 1,273,216 4.3 5,429,366 Amount of developed area in the region in 2001, based on NCTCOG land use analysis.
North Texas 2050 Policy Areas
Natural
1,653,000
1.29
2,132,370 Density is 30% of that of N TX urban area in 2001, balancing areas for no development with those for
resort/sustainable urbanism uses.
Rural 4,657,000 0.27 1,234,105 Density assumes 2.65 persons per household, average 1 household per 10 acres.
Separate Communities 366,000 4.70 1,720,200 Density is that from'Green Region' scenario.
Outer Tier 1,140,000 4.70 5,358,000 Density is that from 'Green Region' scenario.
Inner Tier 373,000 5.60 2,088,800 Density is 30% higher than in existing developed area.
Total Capacity 8,189,000 12,533,475
Anticipated Population 11,660,000 Population estimate for 2050
% Capacity Needed 93.0% Share of capacity occupied by the estimated population in 2050
N otes :
1. The density factors used here are the number of persons divided by the number of acres in all urban land uses (notjust residential).
2. These densities for Se arate Communities, Outer Tier & Inner Tier include the more intensel develo ed centers avera ed with the less intense surroundin develo ments.
directed - cities or counties, developers, property owners, universities
or non-profit organizations. The leaders of Vision North Texas
propose these actions because they change the `business as usual'
trend and shift the region toward its preferred future.
North Texas is one of the fastest-growing regions in the nation, and
this growth is expected to continue. By 2030, this sixteen county area
is expected to have 9.5 million residents and by 2050, there could be
11.7 million people living here. Can this preferred future handle all
this growth? Exhibit 4.4 shows that this preferred future illustrated in
Exhibit 4.2 can accommodate the growth expected through the year
2050.
Exhibit 4.4 assumes that future development in Separate Communities
and the Outer Tier areas would occur at approximately the average
intensity of the Green Region alternative scenario. Natural and rural
areas are expected to be less densely developed because of the character
of those areas. The Inner Tier Areas - those that are largely developed
but that would see intensification as revitalization occurs and mixed
use centers are created - would have an intensity of development that
reflects these more compact patterns and the concepts in the VNT
alternative scenarios. For this estimate, the average intensity in the
Inner Tier Areas is assumed to be 30% higher than the average for the
developed parts of North Texas in 2001.
Under these assumptions, the development pattern illustrated in Exhibit
4.2 could accommodate over 12.5 million people. The anticipated 2050
population of the region would require about 93% of this capacity.
Clearly, this preferred future does not constrain or limit the region's
ability to house the people who are expected to live here in the next
40 years. It provides enough capacity to meet needs and provide
opportunities for development choice and market competition.
National research shows that the demand for large-lot residential
development through 2030 can be met by the supply of lots that
existed in 2007. By providing more opportunities for other types of
residential development, Exhibit 4.2 should better meet the needs
of the expected market. It is also less likely to contribute to an
oversupply of large lots compared to market demand.
This development pattern is adequate for growth over the next 40
years, but it anticipates a significant amount of development in areas
that are not currently urban. As a result, it is reasonable to consider
the most efficient ways to stage or phase growth into these new
urban areas. If the region is to develop with the sustainable, compact
and walkable communities people want, it will be important to
ensure that the development of these areas occurs at urban densities
(retaining most of the land in rural uses in the short term), rather
than developing large parts of this area at lower, more sprawling
densities that will require costly extensions of services and will
repeat the `business as usual' pattern of the past. Property owners,
developers, regional leaders and service providers will need to create
new approaches to infrastructure timing and phasing if investors are
to receive a reasonable return on their investments as growth occurs
over the next 40 years and if the region is to achieve the stakeholders'
preferred future for North Texas.
The physical pattern of development in North Texas is both
shaped by and served by the areas investments and infrastructure.
For North Texas 2050 , this framework includes eight areas of
investment. Each of these is introduced below, with an explanation
of the role they play in the region's ef~'ort to achieve its Preferred
Future. Policy recommendations follow this introduction. Many
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
of the policy recommendations apply throughout the North Texas
region; these recommendations are presented first. They are followed by
recommendations that relate to a particular part of the region's preferred
physical development plan - the policy areas and centers - described above.
Each recommendation indicates the decision-makers(s) to whom it is
The areas discussed below are the focus of important
investments by public, private and other decision-
makers in North Texas. Each of these areas plays an
important role in the region's future, so action in each
area is important to achieve this preferred future.
These investment areas also interact with one another.
Coordination and integration of investments and
decisions across these areas is also essential - these
choices must be aligned to create synergy and support a
sustainable region.
Region~l Ecosystem
As the population of our region continues its rapid growth, `business
as usuaP means new development that expands into the undeveloped
rural or natural areas of our region. This expansion poses a threat to
natural assets - such as watersheds, open space, wetlands, forests and
water resources - that are important to our quality of life. If this pattern
of growth continues, the damage to the environment will be wide-
ranging, from drought, floods, poor air quality and the disappearance
of the diverse habitat and wildlife in our region. To prevent these
impacts, it is important to understand the value and importance of
the region's undeveloped rural and natural areas and to consider these
when development and investment decisions are made. A Regional
Ecosystem Framework is a central recommendation of North Texas 2050.
It will provide communities with necessary information on the benefits
of the natural assets that may be af~'ected by future development. It
should enable property owners, service providers and local governments
to make more informed decisions. The result of this approach to
development is an investment framework that protects the vitality of the
environment and the
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
health of the region's residents because the ecosystems are themselves
an essential part of the region's investments and infrastructure.
Community Ch~r~cter ~nd Form
When an individual or a family chooses a place to
live, they seldom focus on statistics such as regional
growth rates. Instead, they are concerned with the
quality of life and the opportunities available in
a particular neighborhood, city or metropolitan
area. From 2000 to 2008, almost 52% of the region's
growth was from people moving into the area, and
over half of the people moving to the region came from another
country. In the future, North Texas is expected to continue adding
residents and jobs, but the region's success at attracting and retaining
people depends on maintaining or enhancing its appeal to newcomers
and to long-term residents.
North Texas 2050 envisions a future with many neighborhoods and
communities, all thriving but each dif£erent. In this way, the region
as a whole will of~'er choices that are attractive to all the diverse
households that are expected to live here. The North Texas 2050
physical development pattern describes the general character and
location of development in the region. The policies recommended
here provide guidance for successful and sustainable action in
communities throughout the region.
Economy
The North Texas 2050 Vision is based on a sustainable, thriving
economy. This economic focus for the region:
Is based on the strengths of many distinctive and highly desirable
communities, each of which may have a dif~'erent economic focus
or emphasis.
Relies on the talents of innovative people for its continuing
success.
* Nurtures the region's natural assets, and using them as a basis
for the future economy, helps to make this a sustainable
economy.
* Meets the needs of many dif~'erent market segments, so there
is not a`one size fits all' pattern of development throughout
the region.
* Investments - public and private - are made where they are
most efficient and ef~'ective in their use of resources.
* The region's economy is globally competitive and attractive
as a place to visit, work and live.
* Public-private partnerships are used at the regional and
local level, and resources like model ordinances and
incentives facilitate economic vitality throughout the region.
Policy recommendations support increased collaboration at
the regional level, as well as support for action that retains
the distinctive economic role of individual communities and
employment centers within the region.
Housing
With millions of additional residents expected in North
Texas in the coming decades, there is little
doubt that housing will be important. More
important than providing basic shelter,
though, the housing choices we make as a
region today will impact almost every aspect
of our future. Having a mix of housing types
and styles - from single family homes on
large lots to smaller units close to transit to
housing for seniors who want to `age in place'
- will better match the region's expected market demands.
Every city should strive for a variety of housing types and sizes.
Successfully aligning these housing choices with job locations
will decrease commutes, increase productivity and reduce air
pollution. Infill of today's employment-rich areas with housing
choices will create mixed use areas that also achieve these
objectives. Support for strong, diverse neighborhoods will
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
restore many communities to economic vibrancy while retaining the
individual character that makes them special.
North Texas 2050 recognizes that housing is an essential part
of a community and a region. One of the twelve Guiding
Principles (found on page #) addresses Housing Choice and other
guiding principles support the fundamental role of housing and
neighborhoods in the region's long term success. These policy
recommendations support investment in housing so housing options
are available to meet the needs of future North Texans. They result
from the work of the North Texas Housing Coalition (NTHC), which
has led Vision North Texas ef~'orts related to housing.
Mobility
Every day, North Texans travel around the region in the course of
their daily lives. They commute from home to work or school. They
make trips to retail stores, business offices,
libraries, public buildings or hospitals.
They may visit a church, synagogue or
mosque. They take part in events at arenas
and stadiums or go to parks and open
spaces to enjoy sports, recreation and
fitness activities.
Since travel is so important to North
Texans' daily lives, the ability to move from place to place - mobility
- is an essential part of a livable, sustainable and successful region.
Many ef£orts to provide mobility over the past 50 years have focused
on building more and larger roads for automobile travel and this
mode of travel will continue to be an important part of the region's
mobility in the future. But the region, and the nation as a whole,
should not continue putting all its mobility `eggs' in this single
`basket: Instead, the region's preferred future is based on a Guiding
Principle that stresses a variety of efficient mobility options. These
options are intended to meet North Texans' travel needs, gain
the greatest benefit from investments in mobility and make the
region more sustainable. They build on - and further - recent
transportation investment priorities.
Clim~te Resilience
International research has led some (but not all) scientists to conclude
that increasing levels of carbon (and other greenhouse gases) in the
atmosphere contribute to global climate change. Publications by the
Urban Land Institute and others show that the transportation and
building sectors are key contributors to greenhouse gas emission
and must be a major focus of strategies to reduce a region's `carbon
footprint' and to make communities more resilient in their responses
to changes in the climate. Local action on climate change is already
underway in North Texas cities. As of early 2008, over 60% of the
people in the North Texas region lived in cities whose mayors had
signed the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement,
committing them to strive to meet or beat the Kyoto Protocol targets
in their own communities; urge state and federal governments to
meet or beat these targets; and urge Congress to pass bipartisan
greenhouse gas emission legislation.
In December 2009, the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) found that greenhouse gas concentrations
threaten the public health and welfare of current and future
generations (endangerment) and that emissions of these gases from
new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines contribute to the
greenhouse gas pollution (cause or contribute). These findings were
based on technical analysis and public comment, and will be the basis
for regulations under the Clean Air Act.
The North Texas 2050 preferred future should help reduce the carbon
footprint that would have resulted from `business as usual' because it
is comparable to the four alternative scenarios studied in 2009, which
reduced carbon dioxide emissions 7 to 10% below
the 2030 projection. These policy recommendations
reduce vehicle miles traveled and lower energy
consumption in building construction and operation,
so they help the region grow in a way that is
environmentally responsible.
Educ~tion
North Texas 2050 has been created so the people
who will live in North Texas for decades to come will enjoy better
opportunities, choices and quality of life than those that seem likely
under current trends. This vision of a better future includes support
for innovative people. It stresses that all North Texans should have
access to the resources and opportunities that lead to long-term
success. This concept is emphasized in the Education Guiding
Principle: provide opportunities for all North Texans to have access to
the schools, people and technology they need for success in learning
throughout their lives. Investment in educational institutions, at all
levels, is essential to provide this access.
Currently in North Texas, the state and the nation, we have a
tremendous achievement gap that we must close if we are to continue
to be an educated, democratic society and if we are to successfully
compete at the state, national, and international levels. These policy
recommendations provide a framework for action to narrow this
achievement gap.
He~lth
Health is more than the absence of illness or the quality of inedical
care. Health includes issues of aging, air and water quality, economics
and environmental concerns. People are healthiest when they live
in nurturing environments, have living wage jobs, access to good
educational opportunities, are safe and are involved in the life of their
community - in other words, when they live in healthy communities.
North Texas 2050 goes beyond the traditional focus on `sick care' and
advocates the creation of a living environment that promotes health.
The policy recommendations include results of the work of the
Health Research Team (HRT) convened for Vision North Texas - a
group of local, regional and state representatives of organizations
involved in all aspects of health.
These recommendations apply throughout the entire North Texas
region and relate to issues that are best addressed by action region-
wide.
Region~l Ecosystem
1. The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG)
should lead an ef~'ort to involve cities, towns and counties in
development and utilization of a watershed-based Regional
Ecosystem Framework for the development of future
infrastructure plans including Mobility Plans, water/wastewater
plans, open space or trail system plans, the use of natural assets as
`green infrastructure' and similar ecosystem-related initiatives.
2. Cities, towns and counties should:
a. Adopt integrated Storm Water Management (iSWM)
or similar strategies to address water quality needs and
impending state and federal regulations.
b. Adopt Floodplain Management ordinances that address
needs beyond basic administration of the National Flood
Insurance Program and include management of dynamic
waters resources that changes over time.
c. Participate in basin or watershed-wide ef£orts for
"Greenprinting" to assist in the implementation of
comprehensive and strategic plans outlining the preservation,
maintenance and/or acquisition of important natural
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
d.
Cities and towns should:
a. Incorporate Environmentally
Sensitive Area Plan components in their
Comprehensive Plans.
b. Investigate the use of watershed-based
planning and zoning strategies.
c. Adopt tree management/preservation ordinances and sound
forest management practices to help manage a healthy
population of trees, thus providing the clean air, clean water
and energy benefits of trees into the future.
4.
5.
resource areas.
NCTCOG, with other partners, should develop an urban forest
vision and management plan for the region.
Local governments should pursue a Section 404 permit for
Regional and General Conditions to maximize the protection of
important water resources while ensuring flexibility to address
low, medium and high value water resources.
6. NCTCOG should set regional policy to assist the state in
identifying entities that are formally designated to provide
wastewater collection/treatment services for the region
7. NCTCOG, with other partners, should explore the use of
Transfers/Purchases of Development Rights (TDR) systems
at the regional level and for communities within the region.
TDR involves the exchange of zoning or other land use control
Participate in regional water planning ef£orts so these plans
support this preferred future and incorporate the NT2050
Guiding Principles.
privileges from areas with low population needs, such as
farmland, to areas of high population needs, such as downtowns,
urban cores and mixed use centers. These Transfers/Purchases
allow for the preservation of open spaces and historic landmarks
in less developed areas, while giving urban areas a chance to
expand and experience continued growth.
8. NCTCOG and regional communities should investigate the
use of impact fee strategies to compensate for the impacts on
drainage, groundwater recharge and other natural infrastructure
functions due to greenfield development.
9. NCTCOG should facilitate discussions o£
a. The potential expansion of County authority for land use
planning and subdivision regulation in rapidly growing non-
incorporated parts of the region, including planning that
supports continuing agricultural uses.
b. Improving the annexation abilities of local governments,
especially within rapidly growing counties.
10. Regional entities in existing water resource partnerships with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should continue and expand these
initiatives.
11. Local governments, property owners and developers should
include measures for clean air quality in revitalization,
redevelopment and new development projects, and should
encourage compact development patterns to improve air quality.
Community Ch~r~cter ~nd Form
12. Regional stakeholders should help North Texas achieve its
preferred future by making their own policy and investment
decisions in ways that are compatible with the recommendations
- A Vision for North Texas North Tex~s 2050 ~+
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
of North Texas 2050, including its Vision Statement, Guiding
Principles and Preferred Future (physical development pattern
and investment framework).
a. Cities, towns and counties should adopt NT2050-compatible
comprehensive plans, zoning and other policies and
regulations.
b. Infrastructure providers should adopt NT2050-compatible
capital improvement programs and should fund, construct,
operate and maintain facilities accordingly.
c. Property owners and developers should design and
construct NT2050-compatible projects, whether these are
new developments, renovations of existing buildings or
revitalizations of previously-developed areas.
d. Neighborhood, development, civic and other non-profit
organizations should provide public support for NT2050-
compatible projects and initiatives, and should educate
residents about the benefits of this preferred future.
13. The North Texas 2050 Action Team should establish a set of
indicators to measure how actual development compares to the
North Texas 2050 Preferred Future, should determine existing
benchmark levels and should report on these indicators at least
every five years, and should advocate additional actions that may
be needed to achieve the North Texas 2050 Preferred Future.
a. North Texas should encourage the use of new technologies to
achieve these objectives, as these are developed over time.
14. A North Texas Sustainability Center should be established,
through the collaboration of regional stakeholders, which will
provide information, training and other assistance to individuals
and organizations in North Texas who seek to achieve the North
Texas 2050 Preferred Future through sustainable development
and operation of their own buildings and properties.
15. The North Texas 2050 Action Team should work with the
regional representatives of federal agencies to implement
federal sustainability programs in North Texas and to
align investments by all federal agencies to support the
region's sustainability and the
recommendations of North Texas ~
2050.
Economy , ~ . ' ~ . i ~ ; ~ ,
16. The North Texas Commission, in ? .- : ~ ~ '~' ~~-~ ~
collaboration with the region's economic ~-~' '` .
development departments and ~:~ , g-..~~ ...~
corporations and the region's chambers
of commerce, should:
a. Develop, fund, adopt and implement a coordinated branding
program to market the region nationally and globally.
b. Play a leadership role in the educational efForts that
implement North Texas 2050.
c. Recognize the diverse roles the region's distinctive
communities play in the region's economic future, and
consider agreements to reduce the negative regional
impacts of competition for businesses among North Texas
communities.
17. The North Texas Commission should initiate an updated
assessment of existing and potential new targeted industries
for North Texas that identifies target industries for the current
and future economic vitality of the region as a whole and for
specific North Texas 2050 policy areas. This assessment should
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
be conducted in collaboration with the region's economic
development departments and corporations and the region's
chambers of commerce.
Housing
18. The North Texas Housing Coalition (NTHC) should
create a North Texas 2050 Housing Vision to provide more
focused direction for implementing North Texas 2050 in the
area of housing. The NTHC should produce a package of
recommendations for consideration by North Texas counties,
cities and towns, housing organizations, neighborhood
associations, developers, real estate councils, builders
associations, and property owners. These recommendations
should provide practical steps (including education programs,
criteria for funding by HUD and TDHCA, incentives and/or
changes in land use and development practices) that improve the
region's ability to of~'er housing that meets the demands of the
future market in terms of housing availability, sustainability and
value.
19. The NTHC and the North Central Texas Council of Governments
should work together to coordinate North Texas 2050
implementation for housing with action on other issues including
environment, transportation and overall economic impact.
Implementation should provide af~'ordable, energy-efficient and
location-efficient housing choices for people of all demographics
(ages, incomes, races, and ethnicities) and should make the
combined cost of housing and transportation more af~'ordable to
North Texans.
toward these goals as part of North
Texas 2050 implementation. Indicators
and potential targets are:
a. Housing Development Intensity
to meet an overall regional target
measured in persons per acre of
developed land.
b. Housing Variety - in terms of the range of housing styles,
densities and diversity available to regional consumers.
c. Housing-Transportation Af~'ordability for people at all
income levels. Af~'ordability indicators include the share of
a household's income spent on housing (no more than 30%)
and the share spent on housing and transportation combined
(no more than 48%).
d. Alignment of Supply and Demand - how well the region's
supply of housing meets the demands of this region's mix of
households.
e. Housing Neighborhood Condition - the physical condition of
the region's homes and neighborhoods.
21. Housing developers and service providers (private, public and
non-profit) should collaborate with local governments, civic and
environmental organizations and property owners to implement
housing initiatives in conjunction with initiatives that achieve
other aspects of North Texas 2050.
20. The NTHC should establish a set of targets for five critical Mobility
housing indicators. These targets should establish specific goals 22• The Regional Transportation Council should develop and adopt a
to be achieved by key years (2020, 2030 and 2050) for the North "Mobility Plan" for the region that supports this preferred future
Texas region as a whole. The NTHC should monitor progress and incorporates the North Texas 2050 Guiding Principles.
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
23. The entities that plan, fund, build, operate and maintain mobility
systems should:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g•
Provide systems that enable North Texans to choose the
way they wish to travel. North Texans should have multiple
modes of travel available to them so they can decide whether
to walk, ride a bike, take a bus, trolley or rail vehicle, carpool,
drive a car or truck, or use some other mode of travel.
Support statewide and local alternative funding mechanisms,
including appropriate reliance on public-private partnerships
in reinvestment areas.
Consider the life-cycle costs of mobility projects
(construction, operation, maintenance and rehabilitation)
when making investment decisions.
Emphasize ef~'ectiveness in moving people when they
make their investment decisions. The cost-ef~'ectiveness of
investments should consider the cost per person-trip, rather
than the costs per vehicle-trip.
Use criteria for the allocation of transportation funding
that consider social, environmental and economic impacts
(related to employment and real property investment) as well
as transportation criteria.
Provide systems that support and enhance the character of
the areas around them, whether that context is a dense urban
center, a natural open space or a residential neighborhood.
Provide systems that help people choose modes that are
efficient and environmentally-friendly. These choices should
improve the region's air quality, reduce the region's carbon
footprint and minimize the impacts of transportation on the
region's natural assets.
h. Provide `complete streets' in public
rights-of-way serving neighborhood,
community or sub regional travel
needs.
i. Invest to encourage travel by bike or
on foot (instead of by car) in areas
with a high percentage of short trips.
24.
North "1'exans should choose modes ot
travel that are healthy and environmentally friendly and promote
efficient use of limited transportation resources.
25. North Texans should support initiatives to provide sufficient
funding to build, operate and maintain this mobility system.
Funding sources could include fees, tolls, taxes or other revenue
sources.
Clim~te Resilience
26. The North Texas 2050 Action Team should convene working
sessions to prepare a set of North Texas indicators to measure
the region's environmental (or carbon) footprint and monitor its
change over time.
27. The North Texas 2050 Action Team should convene stakeholders
to develop strategies for evolving regional strength in energy
production to include alternative energy markets.
28. The North Texas 2050 Action Team should convene stakeholders
to develop a detailed package of recommendations for action
to reduce North Texas' environmental carbon footprint and to
enable this region to adapt ef~'ectively to the impacts of climate
change.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
29. Universities in North Texas should pursue initiatives to study
changes in the North Texas climate and strategies to reduce the
region's environmental carbon footprint.
30. The North Texas Sustainability Forum should provide
recommended action packages to cities, towns and counties so
they can mitigate and adapt to impacts of climate change.
31. Civic, environmental and other non-profit organizations in the
region should design, fund and implement educational programs
to inform North Texas residents and businesses about choices
that will reduce the region's environmental carbon footprint.
Educ~tion
32. A broad coalition of North Texas education leaders should be
formed, with the involvement of the private and public sectors
and of institutions that provide education and training from pre-
kindergarten to formal education (K-12 and college/university)
and through lifelong learning. The region's five existing P-K16
Councils should form the core of this coalition.
33. The North Texas Education Coalition (NTEC) should create
a North Texas 2050 Education Vision to provide more focused
direction for implementing North Texas 2050 in the area of
education. This Education Vision should include standards for
college and workforce readiness for North Texas students.
34. The leaders of North Texas cities, towns, civic organizations and
businesses should use these standards as targets for regional
accomplishment and as indicators of North Texas 2050 progress.
35. Educational institutions at all levels (P-K Lifetime) should recruit,
retain, and reward teachers, faculty and administrators. The
NTEC should lead ef~'orts to develop an ef~'ective approach to
these issues and should help implement this approach.
36. The NTEC should lead region-wide
collaborations across all educational
levels in order to be successful in the
above endeavors.
37
The NTEC should advocate programs
and initiatives, such as creation of
a Tier One-status university, that
makes North Texas a global leader
in teaching innovation, research and development and training
people who become leaders in innovative business and civic
enterprises.
38. The North I'exas 2050 Action Team should implement programs
that educate all North Texans about sustainability and actions
needed to achieve the North Texas 2050 Vision.
He~lth
39. The Health Research Team (HRT) should produce a package
of `healthy community' recommendations for consideration by
North Texas counties, cities and towns. These recommendations
should provide practical steps (including education programs,
employee wellness initiatives, incentives and/or changes in land
use and development practices) that improve residents' access
to af~'ordable, nutritious foods, physical activity and wellness
services.
40. North Texas counties, cities and towns should create a regional
network of healthy community action plans to implement these
recommendations.
41. Farmers markets, local growers, community garden sponsors,
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
grocery stores, North Texas business and economic development
organizations should collaborate to create a set of initiatives to
support the economic vitality of businesses that provide locally-
grown food to North Texans.
42. The Health Research Team, NCTCOG and other relevant
organizations should collaborate with local businesses to
encourage access to primary health care via convenient
transportation to facilities and/or using other means for
communication between physicians and patients.
43. The North Central Texas Council of Governments should use
its regional planning initiatives to support creation of a regional
trail network and other regional systems that support healthy
lifestyles.
44. Hospital and health care systems should contribute support to
incentives and investments that provide North Texans with access
to healthy, afFordable foods and physical activity.
45. Civic, environmental and neighborhood organizations should
create and support community gardens throughout the region.
46. The Health Research Team and the North Texas Education
Coalition should develop strategies that increase youth
involvement in growing, preparing and marketing nutritious
food.
47. Independent school districts and communities should implement
the Active Transport to and from school initiative to promote
walking or biking to and from school.
Coordin~tion of Investments
48. The North Texas 2050 Action Team should work with regional
partners to align public, private, academic and civic investments
to achieve the recommendations of North
Texas 2050.
49. The North Texas 2050 Action Team should
conduct outreach and engage regional
partners to develop a coordinated
`playbook' for action in the next 3 to 5
years to implement North Texas 2050.
These recommendations are appropriate for the parts of North
Texas described as `Natural Areas' in the region's preferred physical
development pattern.
1. The North Central Texas Council of Governments should develop
and maintain mapped information that identifies important
natural assets and areas within the region, and should contribute
this knowledge to regional ef~'orts that provide an economic basis
to retain or enhance these assets and areas.
Property owners, developers, local governments and the Texas
Parks and Wildlife Department should retain, preserve and
enhance identified regional natural assets through the use of
their resources for planning, design, construction and operation.
Development in `Natural Areas' should be designed so it takes
advantage of the unique features of nearby natural assets.
The North Texas 2050 should develop model ordinances, guidelines
and incentives for development in or adjacent to natural assets
that provide financial support for retaining and enhancing these
assets and areas.
3. Local governments along the Trinity River should continue
initiatives that enhance and restore the river that support
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
compatible development along its banks, and that result in
infrastructure retrofits that improve water quality in the Trinity.
4.
5.
6.
Universities, property owners, environmental organizations
and other interested stakeholders should conduct research and
establish systems to enable North Texas natural assets (such as
forests and grasslands) to be included in carbon sequestration
programs or other environmental initiatives.
Environmental and educational organizations (including
Audubon Texas, River Legacy Foundation and others) should
provide opportunities for all North Texans to learn about the
region's ecosystems and natural assets, participate in research
about their role in the region, contribute to their preservation and
include them in the experiences of daily life.
Property owners, developers, local governments and land
conservancies should collaborate to acquire land and improve
trails and facilities in Natural Areas that are part of the region's
healthy lifestyle systems.
7. Communities that include Natural Areas should work with
county and state agencies to set up a system to identify ef£ective
and appropriate areas and technology for on-site wastewater-
treatment in less urban areas of the region.
These recommendations are appropriate for the parts of North
Texas described as `Rural Areas' in the region's preferred physical
development pattern.
1. Property owners, developers and local governments should use
their resources for planning, design, construction and operation
to continue rural activities and land uses in `Rural Areas' of North
Texas.
2. The North Texas 2050 Action Team should convene regional
stakeholders to develop an implementation strategy to support
the continuation of rural activities in these `Rural Areas:
3. Local governments, in partnership with the Texas Department of
Agriculture's Rural Economic Development Funding Program,
should develop and implement a strategy that supports North
Texas businesses based in agriculture, renewable energy
production and the management of natural assets.
4. Agricultural organizations, landowners and land conservancies
should collaborate on economic initiatives that link the
economic sustainability of the region's agriculture with healthy
communities, eco-tourism and development for outdoor
recreation.
5. Cities, in coordination with NCTCOG and local conservation
and preservation organizations, should categorize and manage
streams in this area of the region in a manner that maintains
their natural values and functions while the community has the
space and density characteristics to do so. New and revised plats
should not include platting to center line of creeks.
6. NCTCOG, in collaboration with cities, should work with county
and state agencies to coordinate the development of regional
guidelines to identify ef£ective and appropriate areas and
technology for on-site wastewater-treatment in less urban areas
of the region.
7. Agricultural organizations, landowners and land conservancies
should support the restoration, protection and connection
between natural and urban areas by preserving the region's
working green landscapes of croplands and forests.
8. School districts in rural areas should collaborate with other
~
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowth
North Texas educational providers to make education and
learning opportunities accessible to residents of these areas.
School districts, economic development organizations and civic
organizations should provide education, training and
research to support a workforce capable of filling `clean/
green jobs' related to local agriculture, alternative energy
production and other renewable resource businesses.
10. Local governments and land conservancies should
collaborate with property owners and developers in
the development and maintenance of walking, hiking,
jogging and biking trails in the region's natural areas.
Sep~r~te Communitv Are~
These recommendations are appropriate for the parts of North Texas
described as `Separate Community Areas' in the region's preferred
physical development pattern.
1. Property owners, developers and local governments should use
their resources for planning, design, construction and operation
to enhance the distinctive character of Separate Community
Areas in North Texas.
2. The cities, towns, historic and downtown associations in Separate
Community Areas should convene a working group to identify
technical assistance, funding or other resources needed so they
can achieve their role in the North Texas 2050 Preferred Future.
Participants should determine how (or whether) this working
group should continue as an on-going partnership or coalition.
3. NCTCOG, design organizations and the development
community should provide needed assistance and resources to
the cities, towns, historic and downtown associations in Separate
Community Areas.
4. Cities and towns in Separate Community Areas should use their
decisions and investments to achieve their role in the North Texas
2050 Preferred Future:
a. Planning, zoning, subdivision, infrastructure investment,
incentives and other tools should be used to maintain or
create compact, walkable mixed use areas in central locations
within these communities.
b. A compact style of development should be promoted that
encourage a better balance of development over time.
c. Parking requirements should be reassessed for actual
economics and impacts to the physical environment.
Strategies using a maximum limit for parking should replace
the traditional minimum limits.
d. Downtown enhancement or revitalization initiatives and
historic preservation ef~'orts should be encouraged to retain
and build upon communities' unique character and heritage
and to make more sustainable use of these existing assets.
5. Cities, towns, counties and NCTCOG should identify areas for
rural or natural uses that will buf£er Separate Community Areas
from one another and from other urban development, and should
consider such `community buf£ers' in preparing regional plans for
natural assets and systems.
6. Property owners, cities and towns in Separate Community Areas
should use natural features as a`green infrastructure' to meet
community needs:
a. Where possible, streams that have been converted into
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
artificial drainage ways should be returned to their more
natural condition while still meeting the community's
drainage needs.
b. Land use planning should include vegetated stream and lake
buf~'ers to maximize the benefit of these natural functions
to the surrounding areas. When possible, residential and
commercial subdivisions should not be platted with lots
extending to the center line of creek. This will result in more
buf~'ered stream area to accommodate the dynamic nature of
watershed and stream conditions.
and demand, and housing/neighborhood condition.
10. Property owners, developers, local governments and civic/
neighborhood organizations should implement programs that
provide resources to keep existing neighborhoods (and the
housing in them) vital and desirable.
11. School districts (ISD and college level) in Separate Community
Areas should collaborate with other North Texas educational
providers to make education and learning opportunities
accessible to residents of these areas.
c. Vegetated stream and lake buf~'er areas should be identified
and managed to maximize their multipurpose benefits like
water quality, flood management, trails, recreation, etc.
12.
7. NCTCOG should coordinate the development of regional
guidelines to identify ef£ective and appropriate areas and
technology for onsite wastewater treatment in less urban areas of
the region. 13
8. The North Texas Commission, the region's economic
development departments and corporations, and the region's
chambers of commerce should collaborate to create a suggested
package of economic development incentives/tools that support
appropriate investment in Separate Community Areas of the
region, and should work together to seek legislative approval
to make these incentives/tools available to property owners,
businesses and local governments in these parts of the North
Texas region.
9. Private, public and non-profit housing developers and service
providers should provide a mix of housing options in these
separate communities that contributes to the regional targets for
development intensity, variety, af£ordability, alignment of supply
14.
School districts (ISD and college level) in Separate Community
Areas should identify educational specializations for which
they have particular expertise or resources and should establish
focused programs in these areas that attract students or form
the basis for distance-based learning programs
provided from these areas.
Cities, towns and local business organizations
should incorporate healthy community
recommendations in initiatives that support
vital downtowns and town centers.
The cities, towns, historic and downtown
associations in Separate Community Areas
should collaborate with regional organizations
to identify, fund and implement programs to market the unique
characteristics of these communities as part of initiatives to
market this region to the nation and the world.
These recommendations are appropriate for the parts of North Texas
described as `Outer Tier Areas' in the region's preferred physical
development pattern.
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
1. Cities and towns that contain Outer Tier Areas should use their
decisions and investments to achieve their role in the North Texas
2050 Preferred Future:
a. Planning, zoning, subdivision, infrastructure investment,
incentives and other tools should be used to designate
compact, walkable mixed use areas in central locations
within these communities. These mixed use areas may reflect
existing downtowns or centers, or may indicate appropriate
places to create new centers.
b. A compact pattern of growth, emphasizing infill and
brownfield developments, should be promoted that
encourages a better balance of development over time.
c. Buildings, sites and neighborhoods should incorporate
sustainable design standards (such as those reflected in the
LEED certification system) and people-oriented design
concepts (such as the principles of New Urbanism).
d. Design and land use standards and guidelines should
facilitate the design of buildings and sites that reduce energy
requirements and use of local systems to generate energy
from alternative sources and distribute it for use locally.
e. Single family neighborhoods and other places dominated
by a single land use should be designed to maximize non-
automobile trips and to encourage walking, cycling and
other healthy activities. Planning, zoning, subdivision,
infrastructure investment, incentives and other tools should
be used to support these objectives.
£ Parking requirements should be reassessed for actual
economics and impacts to the physical environment.
Strategies using a maximum limit for parking should replace
the traditional minimum limits.
2. Cities, towns, counties and property owners
should work together to prepare general plans
for natural areas, urban forests, development and
infrastructure on a watershed-by-watershed basis
in Outer Tier Areas of the region.
3. Property owners, cities and towns in Outer Tier
Areas should use natural features as a`green
infrastructure' to meet community needs:
a. W here possible, streams that have been
converted into artificial drainage ways
should be returned to their more natural condition while still
meeting the community's drainage needs.
b. Land use planning should include vegetated stream and lake
buf~'ers to maximize the benefit of these natural functions
to the surrounding areas. When possible, residential and
commercial subdivisions should not be platted with lots
extending to the center line of creek. This will result in more
buf~'ered stream area to accommodate the dynamic nature of
watershed and stream conditions.
c. Vegetated stream and lake buf~'er areas should be identified
and managed to maximize their multipurpose benefits like
water quality, flood management, recreation, etc.
d. The urban forest should be conserved and managed to
provide benefits, such as energy reduction, to the homes and
businesses in the Outer Tier Areas.
4. The North Texas Commission, the region's economic
development departments and corporations, and the region's
chambers of commerce should collaborate to create a suggested
package of economic development incentives/tools that support
appropriate investment in Outer Tier Areas of the region, and
should work together to seek legislative approval to make these
incentives/tools available to property owners, businesses and
local governments in these parts of the North Texas region.
5. Cities, property owners and developers should encourage
redevelopment of Outer Tier Area brownfield sites through the
use of economic development incentives and other tools.
6. Cities, towns, counties, improvement districts and other entities
that build or operate public facilities and systems should
m~imize the return on investment to t~payers, customers and
bond-holders over the life of the facilities.
a. Existing capital infrastructure should be maintained and
managed to serve the people and businesses anticipated in
existing services areas over time.
b. Renovation or rehabilitation of infrastructure should be
designed to support the North Texas 2050 Preferred Future.
c. Investments in facility expansions or extensions should be
compared to or exceed existing systems in cost-ef£ectiveness
per household (or acres served).
d. Facility expansions and extensions should be staged or
phased based on the most ef~'ective return on public and
private investment, and considering social, environmental
and economic impacts.
e. Cost- and resource-ef~'ectiveness should be based on life cycle
costs - the costs to build, operate and maintain infrastructure
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
reasonably expected to use the infrastructure through 2050.
7. Private, public and non-profit housing developers and service
providers should provide a mix of housing options in Outer Tier
Areas that contributes to the regional targets for development
intensity, variety, af£ordability, alignment of supply and demand,
and housing/neighborhood condition.
Cities and towns should review and update land use plans,
housing initiatives, incentives and regulations to encourage new
housing that is af~'ordable, energy-efficient, location-efficient and
that makes more choices available to meet the market demands of
the region's future households.
School districts (ISD and college level) should use
the principles of `green design' when constructing
new buildings and campuses. Districts are
encouraged to use design comparable to LEED
Silver certification (or higher) in all new
construction.
10. School districts in Outer Tier Areas should share
resources (of expertise, facilities and funding)
with those in Inner Tier Areas to make the
most efficient and ef~'ective use of community
investments in education.
11. Cities and towns should review and update land use plans and
regulations to provide convenient access to community gardens,
farmers markets, full scale grocery stores and places for physical
activity for residents in neighborhoods throughout North Texas.
through the year 2050 - to serve people and businesses These recommendations are appropriate for the parts of North Texas
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
described as `Inner Tier Areas' in the region's preferred physical
development pattern.
1. Cities and towns that contain Inner Tier Areas should use their
decisions and investments to achieve their role in the North Texas
2050 Preferred Future: 2.
a. Planning, zoning, subdivision, infrastructure investment,
incentives and other tools should be used to designate
compact, walkable mixed use areas in central locations
within these communities. These mixed use areas may reflect
existing downtowns or centers, or may indicate appropriate
places to create new centers.
b. A compact pattern of growth, emphasizing infill and
brownfield developments, should be promoted that
encourages a better balance of development over time.
c. Downtown enhancement or revitalization initiatives and
historic preservation ef~'orts should be encouraged to retain
the unique character and heritage of neighborhoods and
communities and to make more sustainable use of these
existing assets.
d. Design and land use standards and guidelines should
facilitate the use of local systems to generate energy from
alternative sources and distribute it for use locally.
e. Single family neighborhoods and other places dominated
by a single land use should be designed to maximize non-
automobile trips and to encourage walking and other healthy
activities. Planning, zoning, subdivision, infrastructure
investment, incentives and other tools should be used to
support these objectives.
£ Parking requirements should be reassessed for actual
economics and impacts to the physical environment.
Strategies using a maximum limit for parking should replace
the traditional minimum limits.
Cities, towns, counties and property owners should work together
to prepare general plans for natural areas, development and
infrastructure on a watershed-by-watershed basis in Inner Tier
Areas of the region.
Property owners, cities and towns in Inner Tier Areas should use
natural features as a`green infrastructure' to meet community
needs:
a. Where possible, streams that have been converted into
artificial drainage ways should be returned to their more
natural condition while still meeting the community's
drainage needs.
b. Land use planning should include vegetated stream and lake
buf~'ers to maximize the benefit of these natural functions
to the surrounding areas. When possible, residential and
commercial subdivisions should not be platted with lots
extending to the center line of creek. This will result in more
buf~'ered stream area to accommodate the dynamic nature of
watershed and stream conditions.
c. Vegetated stream and lake buf~'er areas should be identified
and managed to maximize their multipurpose benefits like
water quality, flood management, recreation, etc.
4. The urban forest should be conserved and managed to provide
benefits, such as energy reduction, to the homes and businesses
in the Inner Tier Areas. Inner Tier Areas should receive regional
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
5.
6.
7
priority in urban forest investment in order to reduce the `urban
heat island ef~'ect' in the most developed parts of the region and
the impacts of this ef~'ect on the people of these communities.
The North Texas Commission, the region's economic
development departments and corporations, and the region's
chambers of commerce should collaborate to create a suggested
package of economic development incentives/tools that support
appropriate investment in Inner Tier Areas of the region, and
should work together to seek legislative approval to make these
incentives/tools available to property owners, businesses and
local governments in these parts of the North Texas region.
Cities, property owners and developers should use planning,
zoning, economic development incentives and other tools to
encourage infill, redevelopment and revitalization in Inner Tier
Areas locations including:
a. Brownfields
b. Commercial corridors, centers or properties that have
exceeded their useful lives or abilities to meet market
demands
c. Underutilized non-residential properties
Cities, towns, counties, improvement districts and other entities
that build or operate public facilities and systems should
m~imize the return on investment to t~payers, customers and
bond-holders over the life of the facilities.
a. Existing capital infrastructure should be maintained and
managed to serve the people and businesses anticipated in
existing services areas through the year 2050.
b. Renovation or rehabilitation of
infrastructure should be designed to
support the North Texas 2050 Preferred
Future.
Cost- and resource-efFectiveness should
be based on life cycle costs - the costs to
build, operate and maintain infrastructure
through the year 2050 - to serve people
and businesses reasonably expected to use
the infrastructure through 2050.
8. Private, public and non-profit housing developers and service
providers should provide a mix of housing options in Inner Tier
Areas that contributes to the regional targets for development
intensity, variety, af£ordability, alignment of supply and demand,
and housing/neighborhood condition.
9. Cities and towns should review and update land use plans,
housing initiatives, incentives and regulations to encourage new
housing that is af~'ordable, energy-efficient, location-efficient and
that makes more choices available to meet the market demands of
the region's future households.
10. Property owners, developers, local governments and civic/
neighborhood organizations should implement initiatives that
provide resources to keep existing neighborhoods (and the
housing in them) vital and desirable.
11. Cities and towns should review and update land use plans,
housing programs, incentives and regulations to encourage the
inclusion of housing in initiatives that redevelop or reuse existing
structures and vacant/underutilized properties. These efForts
should place special emphasis on housing that is appropriate for
people who live in or near these properties (for example, residents
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
of single family neighborhoods seeking to downsize,
neighborhood seniors needing assistance or families with
limited ability to pay increased housing and transportation
costs).
physical activity. In general, these resources should be available
to most residents within approximately 15 minutes of travel.
12. The North Texas education coalition should recommend
changes to institutional and financial structures that will
improve Inner Tier Area public schools so families with
rnese recommendations are appropriate for
children can reasonably choose to live in these areas. Employment Centers in North Texas.
13. School districts (ISD and college level) should evaluate 1. Cities and towns that contain Employment
ways to reuse existing buildings in Inner Tier Areas to bring Centers should use their decisions and
'
educational opportunities to the people who already live investments to achieve the centers
role in
and work in these areas. the North Texas 2050 Preferred Future:
14. School districts (ISD and college level) should use the a. Planning, zoning, subdivision,
principles of `green design' when constructing or renovating infrastructure investment, incentives
buildings and campuses. Districts are encouraged to use and other tools should be used to
design comparable to LEED Silver certification (or higher) continue these area's role in the
regional economy.
in all new construction.
15. Cities and towns should review and update land use
plans and regulations to enable vacant and underutilized
properties to be used as community gardens and farmers
markets.
16. Property owners, developers and local governments should
ensure that revitalization, reuse and redevelopment projects
include places where future residents can be physically
active. Other wellness facilities and programs should be
encouraged as well.
17. Cities and towns should review and update land use plans
and regulations to provide access to community gardens,
farmers markets, full scale grocery stores and places for
b. Buildings, sites and centers should incorporate sustainable
design standards (such as those reflected in the LEED
certification system) and people-oriented design concepts
(such as the principles of New Urbanism).
2. Cities, towns, counties, NCTCOG and regional organizations
should develop and implement a strategy to support the
continuing vitality of existing major regional employment
centers.
3. The North Texas Commission, the region's economic
development departments and corporations, and the region's
chambers of commerce should collaborate to create a suggested
package of incentives/tools that support investment in the region's
Employment Centers.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
4. Private, public and non-profit housing providers should invest in
location-efficient, appropriate types of housing for people who
work in these employment areas. Location-efficient housing
enables this workforce to reduce their household costs for
housing and transportation while also reducing vehicle trips and
related environmental impacts on the region.
5. Major employers based in the region's employment centers should
provide education and job training at locations in these centers.
6. Property owners and major employers based in the region's
employment centers should of~'er multiple mobility choices for
trips to, from and within the employment centers. Existing and
new employment centers should be served by transit as well
as roadways. Property owners and major employers should
collaborate with NCTCOG and local transit authorities and
municipalities to design, prioritize, and seek incentives and
funding for these mobility choices.
7. Property owners and major employers based in the region's
employment centers should locate and manage parking so lots
and garages can be shared by multiple uses and so people will be
encouraged to park once when visiting multiple destinations.
8. Major employers based in the region's employment centers should
emphasize healthy lifestyles and a greater well being for people
who work or do business in these employment areas by providing 3
wellness programs, access to walking/jogging trails and af~'ordable
nutritious foods.
'Vlixed Use Centers f'olicy
These recommendations are appropriate for Mixed
Use Centers in North Texas.
1. Cities and towns that contain Mixed Use
Centers should use their decisions and
investments to achieve their role in the North
Texas 2050 Preferred Future:
a. Planning, zoning, subdivision, infrastructure investment,
incentives and other tools should be used to support compact,
walkable mixed use areas. Minimum development intensities
should be established for these centers.
b. Buildings, sites and centers should incorporate sustainable
design standards (such as those reflected in the LEED
certification system) and people-oriented design concepts
(such as the principles of New Urbanism).
The North Texas Implementation Team, in collaboration with
local governments and property owners, should develop model
ordinances, guidelines and incentives for regional economic
support to encourage development of regional and urban/
metropolitan mixed use centers.
The region's economic development departments and
corporations should develop model ordinances, guidelines and
incentives for regional economic support of community and
neighborhood/TOD mixed use centers.
4. Private and public entities developing projects in mixed use
centers should include housing for a mix of income levels in their
projects.
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
5. Community colleges, universities and other educational
providers should of~'er courses, online education and other
learning opportunities at places in mixed use centers where these
programs can be included in students' daily lives and where the
institutions can be integral parts of their communities.
6. Educational institutions in mixed use centers should partner
with other organizations to provide convenient nearby child care
and similar resources for the people who work or study at these
institutions.
7. Property owners in mixed use centers should of£er multiple
mobility choices for trips to and within the mixed use centers.
8. Property owners in mixed use centers should locate and manage
parking so lots and garages can be shared by multiple uses and
so people will be encouraged to park once when visiting multiple
destinations.
9. Developers and communities should ensure that new and existing
mixed use centers retain or enhance the unique character and
heritage of the centers and their surrounding communities.
10. Public, private and non-profit organizations should provide the
transit facilities and services to take people the `last mile' from a
destination to the transit stations found at the core of some Mixed
Use Centers.
11. The public health departments and Health Research Team
should collaborate with urban planners and developers to design
North Texas mixed use centers that include trails and green
space around businesses, schools and residential areas, as well as
grocery stores with af~'ordable healthy foods for all residents and
access to wellness and primary care centers.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Action Pacl~age
A vision for the future does not af~'ect change unless there are actions
taken to make it a reality. The previous chapter, "A Vision for North
Texas ; describes the preferred future expressed by the region's
stakeholders and recommends policies that support this vision. If
this vision is to be realized, the many regional stakeholders who make
decisions about investments and programs must act in ways that help
achieve the vision. This chapter, the "Action Package'; is a toolbox
which provides the set of tools stakeholders can use to make the
Vision a reality.
The Action Package consists of resources for implementation such as
model ordinances, best practices, incentives, research results, maps
and diagrams, as well as many other items. These tools are organized
into six groups:
Incentives make it easier for a decision-maker to choose to take the
action that supports the vision. They may improve the economics of
this choice or make it more likely that approvals and resources will be
provided. A tax abatement is one example; another is fast-tracking of
a project's development review and approval process.
Practices
These examples of projects or programs give decision-makers a better
understanding of how to do something they haven't done before.
They allow each person or organization to learn from the experiences
of others and reduce the need to `reinvent the wheel: A set of
development `best practice' case studies were developed for Vision
North Texas by the Urban Land Institute and the University of Texas
at Arlington. They are available online and provide an illustration of
this sort of action tool.
I Ordin~nces & TemF
Models and templates allow a decision-maker to implement a new
action tool quickly because they provide a standard approach the
decision-maker can simply customize. The iSWM manual for cities'
action on storm water management is an example of this action tool
group.
It is often difficult to change operations because an organization may
not have the expertise or resources to put a new program in place.
Technical assistance from another organization may make action
more feasible. The Urban Land Institute's Technical Advisory Panel
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
(TAP) services illustrate this action tool group.
Benchm~rlcs & Indic~~~
It's hard to tell if progress is being made if there is no way to
measure or monitor activities over time. Benchmarks measure
conditions at the beginning of a program and provide a basis for
comparison. Relative benchmarks provide a set of comparable cities
or organizations and measure progress against the conditions in
those places. Indicators are the factors that are measured in setting
benchmarks. For example, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and VMT
per person are indicators used to measure the amount of auto travel
in a community. The benchmark could be VMT in the region in the
year 2000. Relative benchmarks could be the VMT/person for the
largest 50 U.S. metropolitan regions.
Changes to the region's institutional structure might be necessary to
produce results that are better than `business as usual: One example
is a research collaborative that would engage the region's colleges and
universities in coordinated research on issues important to achieve
the North Texas 2050 Vision. Tools that require legislation, such as
new economic development tools, are also included in this group.
The success of Vision North Texas is one illustration of the benefits
to be realized through regional coordination. Continuing such
collaboration -- among jurisdictions, across areas of expertise,
and among diverse stakeholders -- will help implement these
recommendations.
Texas. Communication will be necessary to share this vision with all
North Texans and to educate decision-makers about the choices that
lead to a future that is `better than business as usual:
eni~c~i r+c~~vn ~
In the course of Vision North Texas work, over 200 potential action
tools have been identified. The most important action tools are
discussed in detail below. All these potential action tools are listed
in Appendix 2, which also provides more information about the
potential action tools. It indicates where each tool is most relevant (in
the five policy areas, Employment and Mixed Use Centers) and how
each tool relates to the components of the investment framework.
This toolbox contains local and regional examples of tools, such
as ordinances and best practices, which can be tailored to meet
the unique needs of individual communities. Topics addressed
by these tools include: preservation of natural resources, meeting
housing needs, conserving water resources, enhancing urban
forests in our communities, promoting transit-oriented and mixed-
use development, creating pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods,
establishing public-private partnerships, and many more helpful tools
to assist communities through the various stages of development.
Action is essential to move away from a`business as usual' future. But
it is not realistic to expect that a list of over 200 action items can all be
carried out soon or simultaneously. From that large list of potential
action tools, Vision North Texas leaders have recommended a smaller
number that are most important to begin immediately. These top
priority action tools are listed below. They propose a`top 20' - those
that should receive the greatest amount of attention and action in
2010 - and the `next 10' -additions to the priority list that focus on
Education has been among the primary activities of Vision North
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
individual issues or innovative research. Together, the `top 20' and
the `next 10' create an agenda for action in North Texas in 2010.
Structure for North Tex~s 2050 Implement~tion
1. Create an action team for North Texas 2050. The Vision
North Texas Management Committee should determine the
most ef~'ective structure for a group that will continue these
collaborations, monitor progress and lead ef~'orts where
appropriate. This team might be a continuing private-public-
academic partnership, a new non-profit organization or some
other structure.
2. Secure funding for North Texas 2050 implementation. Some
recommendations of North Texas 2050 can be carried out by
aligning existing programs and resources to achieve this vision.
But without an adequate commitment of resources, organizations
will find it challenging to revamp programs, educate leadership
and staf~', change communications approaches and take the other
steps to realign ef£orts. New initiatives and projects will require
additional resources. An important focus during 2010 must be
on securing resource commitments to begin implementing North
Texas 2050 in the next few years.
Engage state and federal agencies. Federal agencies are embarking
on unprecedented ef£orts to support metropolitan regions and
integrate programs across agencies. This ef~'ort must be carried
out at the regional level, in North Texas. It should be focused on
alignment of state and federal programs and resources to help
achieve this preferred future for North Texas.
4. Define targets to use in measuring progress. When Vision
North Texas examined alternative futures in 2009, an extensive
set of indicators was used to compare four alternatives to the
`business as usual' future. These indicators should be reviewed
and updated so they can be used to measure actual progress in
implementing North Texas 2050. Benchmarks should be defined
for each indicator, to establish a baseline for existing North Texas
conditions. Targets for 2015, 2020, 2030 and 2050 should be
developed through discussion among North Texas leaders and
review of the goals set by comparable regions.
Alignment of Existing Region~l f'I~ns ~nd f'olicies
5. Achieve the North Texas 2050 preferred future through this year's
update of the regional Mobility Plan. In 2010, the Regional
Transportation Council is updating the plan that guides the
region's investments in a wide range of transportation facilities
and programs. This update of the Mobility Plan should help
achieve the North Texas 2050 preferred future and should
implement the recommendations of North Texas 2050.
6. Achieve the North Texas 2050 preferred future through this year's
updates of Regional Water Plans. In 2010, the long-range plans for
water are also being updated. The plans for Regions C, D and G
should help achieve the North Texas 2050 preferred future and
should implement the recommendations of North Texas 2050.
7. Achieve the North Texas 2050 preferred future through this year's
update of the region's Trinity Common Vision. This year will
be the 20th anniversary of the initial region-wide plan for the
Trinity River and the natural areas that surround it. An update
of the Trinity Common Vision should align this regional plan
with North Texas 2050, achieving this preferred future and
implementing recommendations regarding natural assets, open
spaces, trails, urban forests, community gardens and other topics.
Cre~tion or Exp~nsion of Specific Region~l Co~litions
8. Create a North Texas Municipal Sustainability Forum. This forum
should provide a way for local cities and counties to share
information and reach agreement on shared strategies to achieve
the North Texas 2050 preferred future and make the region's
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
communities more sustainable.
9. Expand the region's economic development collaborations. The
North Texas Commission should convene economic interests in
the region and expand existing collaborations, so this region can
compete successfully with regions worldwide.
10. Form a Healthy Communities Municipal Coalition. This
coalition would bring together local municipalities, public
health organizations and health/wellness interests. It would
develop the programs to carry out North Texas 2050's health
recommendations at both the regional and the community level.
The Health Research Team should take the lead on convening this
coalition.
11. Include housing initiatives with regional sustainability efforts.
The North Texas Housing Coalition has a track record of
regional collaboration on housing issues. It has been an active
partner in creating North Texas 2050. It should take the lead on
implementing recommendations related to housing, and should
play an active role in the partnership that integrates action to
achieve the preferred future.
12. Bring together existing education councils to create a forum for
regional education visioning and action. Education is an essential
part of many North Texas 2050 recommendations. There are
councils for educators in individual counties, however there is
not a regional forum for this dialogue. These councils should
join together to create a vision for education at all ages that will
support the North Texas 2050 preferred future. The University of
Texas at Arlington should convene this forum.
Refinement of the f'referred Future
13. Refine the preferred physical development pattern through
stakeholder discussions. This document describes a set of policy
areas and centers that together create a depiction of a preferred
way to accommodate North Texas' expected growth. The North
Texas 2050 Action Team should meet with stakeholders to
discuss and refine the recommendations found in this document.
Meetings should be held with cities, counties, development
community organizations and similar groups.
14. Complete the Regional Ecosystem Framework. This framework
creates the refined vision of natural areas and their role in the
region's future. It is an important next step in refining the region's
preferred future.
15. Begin region-wide action for the urban forest. The urban forest
brings together elements of the natural environment with the
form of urban development and the use of energy and other
resources. Individual cities are working on research and
planning for their parts of the urban forest, but a regional vision
is needed to bring these together at the scale of the entire region.
A vision for the urban forest should be created and, depending on
available funding, an inventory should be started.
16. Establish phasing priorities for public investments in outer tier
areas. Many areas identified as the outer tier are undeveloped
today. As the analysis in this report shows, only 25% of this area
will be developed by the year 2050 if growth is accommodated at
intensities similar to those that exist in the region today. In order
to make the most ef~'ective use of limited public infrastructure
funds, these investments should be coordinated to create
sustainable communities in the outer tier. The North Texas
2050 Action Team should lead an ef~'ort to develop the phasing
approaches that will ma~mize the region's return on these public
infrastructure investments.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
17. Secure funding for needed mobility investments. New resources
are essential to fund the full range of mobility investments needed
for North Texas - the sidewalks and trails, bike routes, transit
modes and roadways that combine to of~'er the mobility choices
that residents and businesses want. Regional leaders must work
with state and federal representatives to create appropriate
funding sources and secure needed resources. Without this
funding, the preferred physical development pattern may not be
feasible.
18. Focus on integrated action in Mixed Use Centers. These areas are
important parts of the future region stakeholders want. Their
success requires coordinated capital investment by private and
public stakeholders that can both meet market demands now
and sustain their appeal for decades to come. Coordinated
packages of economic incentives, design guidelines and center
management or programming strategies will help all scales
of mixed use centers succeed. These packages should be
developed at the regional level so individual communities and
property owners can benefit from the region's best thinking and
recommendations on the sustainable creation of Mixed Use
Centers.
21. Prepare model codes for North Texas communities. Creating
and sustaining the compact, walkable communities that North
Texans desire will require changes in development regulations for
some cities within the region. Model regulations that apply the
concepts of form-based codes, green design and New Urbanism
to North Texas conditions should be prepared and shared online.
22. Raise venture capital funding for sustainability research and
businesses. Innovation requires the support of initial investors.
Through the Texas Sustainability Institute, North Texas should
begin to raise venture capital that will support businesses of the
future that can locate and grow here.
23. Begin work on new tools to implement regional natural asset
initiatives. The role of natural assets in the region's preferred
future will require the use of new analytical tools and regional
collaborations. Concepts such as the regional transfer of
development rights, use of a regional conservancy to operate and
manage conservation easements region-wide and incentives for
production of food close to the region all involve dialogue and
research. These activities should begin this year.
19. Communications about North Texas 2050. Though many North
Texans have participated in Vision North Texas, there are still
thousands who have not yet been engaged. A communications
plan that uses a wide mix of traditional and interactive
approaches must be developed, funded and initiated.
20. Release a progress report at the 2011 Regional Summit. The
region's stakeholders and decision-makers should convene in
early 2011 to review progress in implementing North Texas 2050
and to decide on priorities for following years.
24. Define entities and service areas for urban-scale wastewater service
provision. Efficient expansion of development within the outer
tier areas will be supported by clearer criteria for the provision of
the infrastructure for urban densities of development. NCTCOG
should develop regional policies that support these practices and
thus create subdivisions and communities that are sustainable
(environmentally and financially) over the long term.
25. Engage financial decision-makers to remove barriers to sustainable
investment. Financial institutions are not always familiar with
- Action Paclcage North Tex~s 2050 ~+
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
the economics of mixed use, compact development. Some
aspects of sustainable development have lower life-cycle costs
but require higher initial investments. The leaders of the North
Texas financial community should work with the North Texas
2050 Action Team to identify and remove barriers to funding
sustainable growth in this region.
26. Initiate a new regional marketing effort. The economic
development stakeholders who participated in Vision North
Texas agreed that the region needs to update and re-launch
ef~'orts to market the entire North Texas region to businesses and
investors around the globe. This marketing ef£ort should begin
this year.
27. Continue (and expand if possible) the Sustainable Development
funding programs for planning and infrastructure. NCTCOG has
been successful in supporting sustainable development projects
through this funding program in past years. It should continue
this important program, and the criteria for future rounds of
funding should be reviewed to align them with the North Texas
2050 recommendations.
28. Begin efforts to support locally-grown food and local agriculture in
North Texas. Support of local agriculture and provision of locally-
grown food to North Texans, have not been a focus of activity in
past years. However, the work of Vision North Texas researchers
and other national organizations demonstrates the importance
of these ef~'orts in terms of the region's physical development
pattern and the health of its residents and communities. Initial
discussions of action in this area should occur in 2010.
29. Develop North Texas sustainability recognition programs. Two
types of recognition programs have been suggested by Vision
North Texas stakeholders - a program to recognize development
proposals that meet specific sustainability criteria and a program
to of~'er certification to public officials (elected or appointed) who
have completed training programs focused on sustainable design.
The North Texas 2050 Action Team should evaluate these ideas
and seek to find a neutral organization (possibly the Urban Land
Institute North Texas District Council) willing to carry them out.
30. Determine North Texas industry targets for the economy of the
future. Businesses of the future are likely to be clean, green
and innovative. The region's economic organizations should
initiate ef~'orts this year to update past regional economic studies
to define industry targets for the future. This first step will
begin ef~'orts to ensure that this region is globally competitive
as a business location for decades to come, and that the North
Texas 2050 preferred future will help direct and focus regional
economic development activity.
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
The Vision North Texas website (www.visionnorthtexas.org) contains
detailed information about some of the action tools. The action tool
summary sheets answer questions such as:
* How does this tool work?
* How important is this tool to achieving the vision?
* What are the costs and benefits, and who will they af~'ect?
* What are the biggest potential stumbling blocks to the use of this
tool, and how can they be addressed?
* Who would be responsible for using this tool?
* How would it be funded?
* What are the next steps to put this tool in place?
* What examples of this tool are available in North Texas or
elsewhere?
Online tool summaries may be updated and new summaries may be
added to the website in the future. In addition, Vision North Texas
has the benefit of `toolkits' developed by national organizations and
regional planning ef£orts in other regions. The Vision North Texas
website contains links to those toolkits so stakeholders in this region
can benefit from the experience in other communities.
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Appendix ~: VNT Contributors
th Tex~s Advisa
* Terri Adkisson, Adkisson Consulting
* Bill Bancroft, Conbrio
* Brian Berry, School of Economic,
Political and Policy Sciences, UTD
* Gyna Bivens, North Texas LEAD
* Frank Bliss, Cooper & Stebbins
* Bonnie Bowman, Tarrant Coalition for
Environmental Awareness
* George Campbell, City of Denton
* Rene Castilla, Northlake College, Dallas
County Community College District
* Steve Cavender, River Legacy
Foundation
* Robert Cluck, City of Arlington
* Fernando Costa, City of Fort Worth
* Peter Coughlin, Matthews Southwest/
The Coughlin Company
* William Dahlstrom, Connemara
Conservancy
* Bob Day, Broadway Eye Center
* Jyl DeHaven, Prism 3 Solutions, LLC
* Betsy del Monte, The Beck Group
* Lyle Dresher, Town of Argyle
* Mike Eastland, North Central Texas
Council of Governments
* Ruben Esquivel, The University of Texas
Southwestern Medical Center
* Lois Finkelman, The National Recreation
and Park Association
* Robert Folzenlogen, Hillwood
Development
* Jim Foster, Dallas County
* Jerry Frank
* Robert Galecke, University of Dallas
* Don Gatzke, UT Arlington
* Mike Guyton, Oncor Electric Delivery
* Jeff Hanson, Texas Instruments
* Nancy Hardie, Industrial Electric
Equipment, Inc.
* Don Herzog, North Texas Developer
Council
* Steve Houser, Arborilogical Services, The
Tree Care Experts
* Jill Jordan, City of Dallas
* Margaret Keliher, Texas Business for Clean
Air
* Karl Komatsu, Komatsu Architecture
* Linda Koop, City of Dallas
* Ann Kovich, Halff Associates
* Rick Lambert, Greater Dallas Planning
Council
* Paul Lehner
* Lorenzo Littles, Enterprise Community
Partners, Inc.
* G. K. Maenius, Tarrant County
* Albert Martin, North Texas Housing
Coalition
* Gary Martin, BGO Architects
* Maher Maso, City of Frisco
* Diana Miller, Johnson County
Economic Development Corporation
* Bill Miller, Allegiant Integrated
Solutions
* Bijan Mohraz, Southern Methodist
University
* Ron Natinsky, City of Dallas
* Alfreda Norman, Federal Reserve Bank of
Dallas
* Theresa O'Donnell, City of Dallas
* Jim Oliver, Tarrant Regional Water
District
* Dan Petty, North Texas Commission
* Phillip Poole, Townsite Company LLC
* John Promise, NCTCOG
* David Rodriguez, Ware Architecture
* Jack Romigh, AIA Fort Worth
* Paris Rutherford, Catalyst Urban
Development, LLC
* Danny Scarth, City of Fort Worth
* Mike Simpson, Arts of Collin County
* Michael Sorrell, Paul Quinn College
* Alan Stewart, Odyssey Investments & ULI
North Texas
* Carol Strain-Burk, City of Lancaster
* Andy Taft, Downtown Fort Worth, Inc.
* Nat Tate, Nathan Lawrence Group
* John Terrell, DFW International Airport
* Allison Thompson, City of Cedar Hill
* Frank Turner, City of Plano
* Peter Vargas, City of Allen
* John Walsh, Urban Land Institute North
Texas
* Libby Watson, Strategic Collaboration
* Joe Wells, Dallas County
* Ron Whitehead, Town of Addison
* Libby Willis, Oakhurst Neighborhood
Assn.
* Jerry Wimpee, Rockwall County
* Matthew Young, ULI Young Leaders
m North Tex~s 2050
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Vision North Texas is able to carry out this initiative because of the support of its sponsors. The 2009 and 2010 sponsors are listed below.
Ch~rter Sponsors
UT A~L1TJ G~'(]N TM
Tit~nium Sponsors
~~
UT ARL11'~J GTOIV TM
~r~a~~~~n~
~ II1~~ItUt~
~~rtn r~~~~
f~orth Texas
~~nurrry T~r~~~~ ~vu~t
~~ ,' ~~~ ~
~ fi ~
r ~~~,y, ~ .
~ i h~'i
~. ~ , ~ P~b~l ic H~~Ith
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
'
1 I~ I ~L~'~~I~
A PERUT C~MPANY~
Deedie & Rusty Rose
LC~CA ~~~*-~~~
,~~„~~, T~ ~~ ~ ~AL
acc~s
Ur~b~~r~ ~~nd
In~tif~t~
,
~~ ~[~7~RU ~~F1~7~
Gold Sponsors
Arborx.Iogical ~ ~ ~ ~
5ervi~es, Inc.
-_-,-
---___- ~. , c h i fi e c 1 u r e
~
The T'ree Cnre Exj~ert5
wwvrr.arborllag I cal_cvm
Silver Sponsors ~'~ ' ~ ~' ~ t
~
D/!~T
~
~
~o ~
NN E'~'~
~ALSH
R.P~,1`~,T C H
^
~~ ~' ~~
CQLLEGE o.f
~D~iJC~.TION
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXfh~
m
Bronze Sponsors
~I~{~~1~ ~~~ .~ ~~]'t, I~f . H A L L 1 O AY
~ ~ REALTGR~~
~EBBY.CGM
~
+~~~~ ~
.:.~.: ~ p
~~.,•.`.-~~~ Fo~~o~h al na ra ~ic~
.~-~~'
.,~~i;:~~
"~•_` AIA D~€Ila~
tit,ureir_~K~ - -
T+~'v1~N SC~UARE
as
~:, y~
ApE'JELG~0AEi1'T Ev C~7C?P~R 6 51~931N5. L.P
~
r~
t,
~ DBU
llALL?.S BAPTIST UNIV~ItSITY
ERb3 ~I'QhA.dH`S UN IV# RSITY
aar~,uK ~~<<~i :,~u~~c~
~4~~~1~~~
~~+~T'1 ~711~r'I I~.I ~S
~~~~~f~n~~
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
CATALYST
Urban Development
a'` .~~, ~~~.
,~~.~-~'`~ c'~~~ fhe , ,. , ~
r ~ I
~~
~~~~~ *~`~~~~ ~~ ..~ ~ ^
Gre~ter Dallas Planning Cauncil
Iron Sponsors
Cintron Lehner Barrett, Inc.
w~ ~•
•~• •~•
~~ ~~ ~•i' • ~•
~ • ~`~ ~
~eormc-at~e oev~~arM~M-r • . •
F~e+~se ~nd Nichols ~~ NaR~rM TEx.~s Cor~r~issaorv
~ vu~~-w~-y ;~; Halff A~sa~ia.tes
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
f'ublic Sponsors
* City of Allen * Dallas County
* City of Arlington * Ellis County
* City of Benbrook * Tarrant County
* City of Burleson * Town of Addison
* City of Carrollton * Town of Fairview
* City of Colleyville * Town of Trophy Club
* City of Coppell
* City of Decatur
* City of Denton
* City of DeSoto
* City of Farmers Branch
* City of Fate
* City of Ferris
* City of Fort Worth
* City of Frisco
* City of Garland
* City of Haltom City
* City of Haslet
* City of Hurst
* City of Irving
* City of Kerens
* City of Lancaster
* City of McKinney
* City of Melissa
* City of Mesquite
* City of Midlothian
* City of North Richland Hills
* City of Richardson
* City of Seagoville
* City of Weatherford
~ North Tex~s 2050 Appendix 1: VNT Contributors -
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
This important discussion about the best futures for North Texas would not be possible without the expertise and involvement of the
individuals who serve on the Alternatives Research Team and of the organizations they represent. Many of these individuals, and
other local experts, also provided important assistance to many Vision North Texas events and workshops. These contributors are
listed below.
* Petrine Abrahams, UT
Arlington
* Terri Adkisson, Adkisson
Consulting
* Hadi Akhtar, Communities
Foundation of Texas
* Alero Akporiaye, UT Dallas
* Jessica Alderson,
Texas Parks & Wildlife
Department
* Wick Allison, D Magazine
* Ard Anjomani, UT
Arlington
* Mark Armentrout, Ercot
* Autumn Atta-Fynn,
NCTCOG
* Mohammed Awad, UT
Dallas
* Behruz Paschai Awwal,
NCTCOG
* Jennifer Backover, Urban
Land Institute
* John Baen, University of
North Texas
* Bill Bancroft, Conbrio
* Myung-Ji Bang, UT
Arlington
* Berrien Barks, NCTCOG
* Gil W. Barnett, Chiang, Patel
& Yerby, Inc.
* Elizabeth Beck-Johnson,
NCTCOG
* Barbara Becker, UT Arlington
* Natalie Bettger, NCTCOG
* Stephen Bivins, Dallas
Christian College
* Erin Blackman, NCTCOG
* Frank Bliss, Cooper &
Stebbins
* John Bonnot, Greater Irving-
Las Colinas Chamber of
Commerce
* Ruth Boward, NCTCOG
* Timothy M. Bray, UT Dallas
* Lou K. Brewer, Tarrant
County Public Health
* Tom Brink, RTKL Associates
* John Brookby, DFW
Commercial Development
* Lesley Brooks, Freese and
Nichols, Inc.
* Jim Brown, U.S. EPA Region 6
* Linda S. Brown, Brown &
Company
* Debora Browning, US EPA,
Region 6
* Samuel Brush, NCTCOG
* Jack Buchanan, UT Arlington
* Ignacio F. Bunster-Ossa,
Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC
* Michael Burbank, NCTCOG
* Dana Burghdoff, City of
Fort Worth
* Linda Burns, Burns
Development Group
* Eliana Calzada, UT Dallas
* Judith Carrier, Tarrant
County College District
* Jim Chadwell, Grapevine-
Colleyville ISD
* Ann Chancellor, TWU
* Jay Chapa, City of Fort
Worth
* David Chard, Southern
Methodist University
* Jim Chlup, Jacobs
* Patti Clapp, Dallas Regional
Chamber
* Donna Coggeshall,
NCTCOG
* Charles C. Cole, Carrollton-
Farmers Branch ISD
* Steve Cone, Wakeland High
School - FISD
* Diane R. Cooper, UT
Arlington
* Nicole Cooper, City of
Dallas
* Cameron Curtis, Turner
Construction
* William S. Dahlstrom,
Jackson Walker LLP
* Duane Dankesreiter,
NCTCOG (former)
* Chuck Dart, NCTCOG
* Emma Dawson, North
Texas Housing Coalition
* Francois J. de Kock, Halff
Associates Inc.
* Josue De La Vega, UT
Arlington
* Betsy Del Monte, The
Beck Group
* Kristen Diehl, NCTCOG
* Lisbeth Dixon-Krauss,
University of North Texas
* Erich Dohrer, RTKL
Associates
* Zachery P. Drennan, UDR
* Mike Eastland, NCTCOG
* Chad Edwards, NCTCOG
* Douglas Fabio, Tarrant
County Public Health
* George Fair, University of
Texas at Dallas
* Robert Folzenlogen,
Hillwood Development
* James Fisher, City of
Murphy
* Eric Fladager, City of Fort
Worth
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Koy Floyd, Tarleton State
University
Cecilia Garcia, UT Arlington
David A. Gaspers, City of Fort
Worth
David R. Gattis, City of
Benbrook
Don Gatzke, UT Arlington
Brian Geck, NCTCOG
Jeanne Gerlach, UT Arlington
Frank E. Gilstrap, AgriLife
Urban Solutions Center
Carl Grodach, UT Arlington
Jonathan Gruber,
Communities Foundation of
Texas
Kathryn Guerra, City of
Irving
Farzine Hakimi, HOK
Ebby Halliday, Ebby Halliday,
REALTORS
Onaje S. Harper, GISD
Shawn S. Heiser, USI
Southwest
Tim D. Herfel, USEPA Region
6
Rebekah Maria Hernandez,
UT Arlington
Charles Hoffman, Fort Worth
ISD
Sue Hounsel, City of Dallas
Steve B. Houser, Arborilogical
Services
Jeff Howard, UT Arlington
Deborah Humphreys,
NCTCOG
Kent L. Hurst, UT Arlington
* Adentuji Idowu, NCTCOG
* Sonya Jackson, NCTCOG
* Dennis Jerke, Dennis Jerke
Consulting
* Brett Johnson, Texas Parks &
Wildlife
* Scherry Johnson, UT Dallas
* Erma C. Johnson Hadley,
Tarrant County College
District
* Tam Jones, Dallas Baptist
University
* Amy Kaarlela, Freese and
Nichols, Inc.
* Keith Kennedy, NCTCOG
* Dan Kessler, NCTCOG
* Michael S. King, NCTCOG
* Alan Klein, UT Arlington
* Ann E. Kovich, Halff
Associates
* Martin Krueger, HNTB
Corporation
* Richard Kurz, UNT Health
Science Center
* Jennifer Kuykendall, UNT
Health Science Center
* Dan Lamers, NCTCOG
* Patrick Landis, NCTCOG
* Rob Lawrence, U.S. EPA
Region 6
* Paul M. Lehner, Cintron
Lehner Barrett, Inc.
* Rick Leisner, Jacobs
* Barbara Lerner, TWU
* Bill Lewis, Region C Water
Planning Group
* Jianling Li, UT Arlington
* Jing Li, UT Dallas
* Lorenzo S. Littles, Enterprise
Community Partners, Inc.
* Patrick Mandapaka,
NCTCOG
* Martha Marshall, Ebby
Halliday, REALTORS
* Albert F. Martin, North Texas
Housing Coalition
* Brett McClung, TX Health
Resources, Harris Southwest
Hospital
* Brenda N. McDonald, City of
Irving
* Chad McKeown, NCTCOG
* Dawn McMullen, D Magazine
* Alexis Massaro, Strategic
Community Solutions
* Annie Melton, Bowman-
Melton Associates Inc.
* Warren J. Melton, Bowman-
Melton Associates, Inc.
* Camille Miller, Texas Health
Institute
* R. Scott Miller, NCTCOG
* Mike Moncrief, City of Fort
Worth
* Tara Montelbano
* David Morgan, Halff
Associates, Inc.
* Jeffrey Moshier, UT Dallas
* Steve Mundt, The Land Group
* Mark Murtagh, Workforce
Solutions
* John Mwangeka, NCTCOG
* Zem Neill, Camp Fire USA
First Texas Council
* Nick Nelson, Nall & Perkins
* Patricia Newcomb, UT
Arlington
* Alfreda B. Norman, Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas
* Taner R. Ozdil, UT Arlington
* Micah D. Pace, Texas Forest
Service
* Jan Parker, Tarrant County
Public Health
* David Patton, Ebby Halliday,
REALTORS
* Minna Peracha, The Nirvana
Group
* Sue Pickens, Parkland Health
& Hospital System
* Becky Pils, City of Fort Worth
* Amanda Popken, City of
Dallas
* Jana Prew, UT Arlington
* John Promise, NCTCOG
* Brandi Reaves, HNTB
* Debbie Reynolds Hazen, EPA
* Jeff Rice, NCTCOG
* Jim Richards, Townscape, Inc.
* Ron Rife, Dallas Christian
College
* David Rodriguez, Ware
Architecture
* Felipe Rodriguez, UT Dallas
* Tim Rogers, D Magazine
* Robert Rummel-Hudson, UT
Arlington
* Hans-Michael B. Ruthe, UT
Arlington
* Paris Rutherford, Catalyst
Urban Development, LLC
m
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Eduardo Sanchez, Blue Cross *
Blue Shield of Texas
Mary M. Saunders, Tarrant *
County Public Health
Richard Schell, City of *
Southlake *
Janet Scott-Harris, Scott-
Harris Associates
Rob Seeds, NCTCOG *
James E. Sellards, City of *
Farmers Branch
Richard Shaffer, CP&Y *
Julie Smith, City of McKinney *
Nakeischea Loi Smith, City of *
Garland
Clovis Steib, U.S. EPA Region *
6
Janet Stephens, NCTCOG *
Alan G. Stewart, Odyssey *
Investments
Robert Sturns, City of *
Arlington *
Pat D. Taylor, UT Arlington
John Terrell, DFW Airport
Allison J.H. Thompson, City *
of Cedar Hill
Cody Thornton, Cody *
Thornton Consulting
Jack Tidwell, NCTCOG
Jerry Tikalsky, DART
Jeff N. Turner, Coppell ISD
Madhusudhan Venugopal,
NCTCOG
Kimberly Walton, North
Texas Commission
Karen Walz, Strategic
Community Solutions
Mitzi Ward, NCTCOG
Libby Watson, Strategic
Collaboration, LLC
Monty Watson, The Watson
Firm
Karla Weaver, NCTCOG
Bernard L. Weinstein,
Southern Methodist
University
Joe Wells, Dallas County
Sallye West, Strategic
Community Solutions
Amanda Westphal, UT Dallas
Robert K. Whelan, UT Dallas
Elizabeth Whitaker,
NCTCOG
Mikel Wilkins, Freese &
Nichols, Inc.
David Williamson, Omniplan
Dennis Wilson, Townscape,
Inc.
Arne Winguth, UT Arlington
Clint D. Wolfe, Texas AgriLife
Research and Extension
Center
Jim Yarbrough, U.S. EPA
Region 6
Elizabeth L. Zecckine,
NCTCOG
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowth
Appendix Z: List of Potential Action
Tools
~ ~
otentia! Action To~
In the course of Vision North Texas work, over 200 potential action tools have been identified. The most important action tools are discussed
previously. Below is a more detailed listing of the potential action tools.
Incentives
* Alternative Financing for
Transportation, Option I
* Appr Value Limitation and T~ Credit
* Asst to support decentralized power
generation
* Brownfield Program
* Carbon credits for ranching
* Carbon Sequestration Credits
* Community Dev Block Grants
* Change local zoning code to provide
additional housing choices
* Conservation Easements
* Controlled-access facilities
* Decrease dev fees in areas targeted for
revitalization or infill
* Designations that give targeted areas
stronger incentives and inducements
* Developer up-front funding on `multi-
generational' projects
* Development Incentives
* Dif£erential Assessment Programs
* Disincentivize Greenfield Development
* Employer assisted housing
* Enterprise Zones
* Farmland and Sensitive Habitat,
Preservation Credits and Incentives
* Fast-tracking of projects that meet
criteria for sustainability
* Financial incentives for infill
* First Time Homeowners Program
* Foreign Trade Zones
* Freeport T~ Exemptions
* Funding for Universities Conducting
Training
* Green Space Conservation and
Brownfield Revitalization
* High Efficiency Particle Air - Vacuum
lending program
* Housing Choice Voucher Program
* Housing Rehabilitation Program
* Immigration & Investment Program
* Impact Fees & Infrastructure Funding
* Incentivize Brownfield Development
* Increase Impact Fees for the Removal of
Natural Assets
* Industrial Development Bonds
* Linked Road-Rail Funding
* Neighborhood improvement grants
* Neighborhood Matching Grants
* Purchase of Development Rights (PDR)
* Residency Waiver for In-State Tuition
Rates
* Rural Logistics Center
* Sales Tax for Economic Development
* Shared facility initiatives
* Tax Abatement
* Tax Abatement
* Texas Enterprise Fund
* TIF District
* Transit Use Incentives
Best Practices
* Capital Improvements Plan
* Complete Streets
* Farmers Market Programs
* Green campus design
* Harvest Rainwater
* Integrated Storm Water Management
* Location- and energy-efficient housing
choice
* Management of `green' or cool roofs
* Park-and-Ride
* Pervious paving materials
* PolicyLink's Af~'ordable Housing Tools
* Purple pipe (water reuse) initiatives
* Redev for afFordable/public housing
* Residential and Commercial Water
Conservation
* Restoration and enhancement of selected
artificial drainage ways
* Sect 404 Permits for the Protection of
High-Quality Watersheds
m North Tex~s 2050
Model Ordinances/Templates
* Active Transport to and from School
* Agricultural Zoning Designations
* Bicycle Pedestrian Access
* Compact Development
* Creating Diverse Communities
* Density, Height and Parking Codes
* Discourage Platting to Center of Streams
* Drought Contingency Plans
* Empty-nester' housing initiatives
* Environmentally Sensitive Area Plans
* Estab of vegetated stream and lake buf~'ers
* Floodplain and stream management
* Floodplain Protection Ordinance
* Form-Based Codes
* Green Development Code
* Tree Preservation & Climate Change
Mitigation
* Implementation of Water-Efficient Practices
by Governments Entities
* Inner Tier Area neighborhoods design
initiative
* Inspection of rental houses on routine basis
* Min Parking Req as Opposed to Max
* Mixed use `operational' manuals
* Mixed use centers design initiative
* Mixed use code
* Model Ordinances for Emergency and
Public Safety Response
* Natural Area uses and activities
* New landscape designs/parameters
* Open Space Master Plan
* Outer Tier Area neighborhoods design
* Parks & Trails Element as Part of City
Comprehensive Plans
* Best practices for shuttles and other
transp systems within mixed use centers
* Prohibit Platting to Center of Streams
* Proper Planning
* Proper usage of underutilized space
* Rural Area uses and activities
* Sensitive Area Zoning
* Separate Communities design initiatives
* Shopping Cart Retrieval Program
* Sustainable development ordinances and
building codes
* Sustainable Neighborhood Plans
~ Sustainable `starter community' initiatives
* Tree Preservation Ordinances
* Urban Heat Island reduction strategies
* Water Recycling/Reuse Techniques
* Water supply lake watersheds
development guidelines
* Water-efficient Landscape Requirements
Technical Assistance
* Drought scenario evaluations
* Green MLS
* Maintain/enhance groundwater aquifers
* Neighborhood Rev Mobile Data Access
* Stream Classification and Management
Benchmarks & Indicators
* College and workforce readiness
* Demographic and market research
* Economic models to measure greenhouse
gas emission
* Establish & use NT livability benchmark
measures
* Five-year performance targets
* Greenprinting
* Indicators for value of natural resources
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
* M~imum Gallons per Day per Capita
Standards for Water Consumption/Use
* North Texas Sustainability Index
* Rating of Best Suburbs
* Redefine housing afFordability
* Regional carbon footprint target
* Regional economic benchmarking
* Update regional greenhouse gas assessment
* Use of Predictive Models and Ambient
Monitoring Programs
* Value & density analysis
* Wetland/U.S. Waters Regional
Mapping
New Institution/Entities
* Alternative Financing for Transportation,
Option II
* Appropriate/Inappropriate Areas for Onsite
Wastewater System
* Bike Zone Investments
* Building Equitable Communities Initiative
* Cleantech/green job training
* Close the gap achievement initiatives
~ Comm Housing Dev Org Program
* County Land Use Authority Enabling
Legislation
* Creating Dev & Job Creations Programs
* Economic programs for locally-grown food
* Education opportunities
* Educational collaboratives
* Educational financing
* Enhanced regional governance
* Fle~ble education provision
* Free Home Maintenance Training classes
* Graffiti Busters Program
* HOA Awareness Program
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
* Tools for control of land uses in ETJ &
unincorporated areas
* Innovative learning centers
* Leadership class initiatives
* Legislation for annexation in urban
regions
* Neighborhood services collaboration
* Neighborhood stabilization from
foreclosures
* New Healthcare institutions for better care
* North Texas Sustainability Center
* NSD Weatherization Program
* Online systems for sharing information and
best practices
* Partnering with nonprofit
organizations
* Partnership with TDHCA
* Passenger Rail
* Promotion of historic assets
* Public Land Banking for Conservation
Ef£orts
* Recruitment/retention initiatives
* Regional economic development entity
* Regional economic marketing
* Regional Grading Ordinance and Permitting
* Regional open space district
* Regional or Statewide Outdoor Recreation
Plan
* Regional revenue sharing
* Regional urban growth boundary
* Regional Water & Wastewater Systems
* Regional Water Quality Protection Program
* Remove barriers that hamper economic
vitality
Revamp Water Pricing Structure
Skills Development Fund
m North Tex~s 2050
* State Legislation to mandate City and
County Comprehensive Plans
* Storefront education
* Street Maintenance Sales T~
* Strengthen Eminent Domain Powers
to help with the Establishment of
Conservation Easements
* Structure for redevelopment area
economic development corporation
* Sustainability research collaborative
* Sustainability venture capital
* Sustainable Development Funding
Program - Infrastructure
* Sustainable Development Funding
Program - Planning
* Sustainable economic incentives
* Target industry reassessment
* Transportation Investment Act
* Transportation Management Associations
* US Department of Housing & Urban
Development (HUD) Grant Funds
* Value Capture
* Value Pricing
* Wastewater Management Designation
Recommendations
* Water Quality Protection Program
* Regional Collaboration & Coordination
* Adaptation policies
* Alternative energy priority areas
* Annual report on progress toward
preferred future
* Cities to Expand/Establish New
Community Water/Wastewater Systems
* Clean/Green prosperity initiative
* Coordinate and leverage federal
investments in NT
* Education Vision 2050
* Explore opportunities for regional efForts to
acquire and manage open space
* Focus regional infrastructure funding to
encourage development consistent with the
scenario(s)
* Healthy communities local municipalities
network
* Housing Vision 2050
* Implementation of the Regional Ecosystem
Framework
* Implementation org or structure for VNT
* Inter Agency Partner - Office of Livability
* Limits to the areas served by urban-scale
water and wastewater systems
* Mitigation for removal of natural assets
* Mobility Plan Updates
* N Texas Municipal Sustainability Forum
* Require Water Quality Plan Updates
* Requirement that more water and
associated corridors meet State and
Regional water quality standards
* Transportation Investment Boundary
* Travel Demand Management
* Tree Canopy Surveying/Mapping
* Vision for the Regional Urban Forest
* Watershed-Based Zoning/Planning
Communication
* NT2050 Communicator Program
* NT2050 Training `credential'
Outreach strategy
Youth volunteer organization initiatives
Vision North Texas
~twderstawd~wg~uropt~ows f~rGrowtl~
Appendix 3: G lossa ry
Annexation - the act or process of adding land to a governmental
unit, usually an incorporated place, by an ordinance, a court order,
or other legal action. (A Planners Dictionary)
Arterial - is a moderate or high-capacity road which is immediately
below a highway level of service. (Webster's Dictionary)
Baby Boomer - is a term which portrays the age group born during
the middle part of the 20th Century. (Wikipedia)
Brownfield - abandoned, idled, or under used industrial and
commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is
complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination. (A
Planners Dictionary)
Carbon (or `environmental') Footprint - the total set of greenhouse
gas emissions caused by an organization, event or product.
(Wikipedia)
Complete Streets - Complete streets are designed and operated to
enable safe access for all users. Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and
transit riders of all ages and abilities must be able to safely move
along and across a complete street. (www.completestreets.org)
Comprehensive Plan - the adopted official statement of a legislative
body of a local government that sets forth (in words, maps,
illustrations, and/or tables) goals, policies, and guidelines intended
to direct the present and future physical, social, and economic
development that occurs within its planning jurisdiction. (A
Planners Dictionary)
First Ring Suburbs - are the older, more populous communities of a
metropolitan area with histories that significantly predate those of
their suburban or exurban counterparts. (Wikipedia)
Floodplain - the land area susceptible to inundation by water as a
result of flood. (A Planners Dictionary)
Greenfield Development - development on undeveloped parcels not
surrounded by existing development, or on large parcels surrounding
partially developed areas or undeveloped areas. (A Planners
Dictionary)
Impact Fee - a fee charged by local governments to developers as a
total or partial reimbursement for the cost of providing additional
facilities or services needed as a result of new developments. (A
Planners Dictionary)
Infrastructure - facilities and services needed to sustain industry,
residential, commercial, and all other land-use activities, including
water, sewer lines, and other utilities, streets, roads, communications,
and public facilities such as fire stations, parks, schools, etc. (A
Planners Dictionary)
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) - Green
Building Rating System, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council
(USGBC), provides standards for the environmentally sustainable
design, construction and operation of buildings and neighborhoods.
(Wikipedia)
Vision North Texas
uwd¢rstawd~wy our ~pt~ows fov ~rowtM
Kyoto Protocol - is a protocol to the United Nations Framework Sunbelt - is a region of the United States generally considered to
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC or FCCC), aimed at stretch across the South and Southwest (the geographic southern
addressing climate change. (Wikipedia) United States). (Wikipedia)
Metropolitan Statistical Area - a county with a central city or Tax Abatement - the full or partial exemption from ad valorem
adjoining central cities totaling 50,000 or more in population, and the taxes of certain real and/or personal property in a reinvestment
surrounding suburbs or counties that are strongly linked economically zone designated for economic development purposes. (A Planners
and socially. (A Planners Dictionary) Dictionary)
Mixed Use - a development of a tract of land or building or structure Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) - moderate and high-density
with two or more different uses such as but not limited to residential, housing concentrated in mixed-use developments located in close
ofFice, retail, public, or entertainment, in a compact form. (A Planners proximity to transit stations or stops that encourages the use of public
Dictionary) transportation. (A Planners Dictionary)
NCTCOG - North Central Texas Council of Governments
New Urbanism - The process of reintegrating the components of
modern life - housing, workplace, shopping, and recreation - into
compact, pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use neighborhoods linked by
transit and set in a large regional open space framework. (A Planners
Dictionary)
NTC - North Texas Commission
NTHC - North Texas Housing Coalition
ULI - Urban Land Institute
ULINT - Urban Land Institute North Texas District Council
Urban Forest - is a forest or a collection of trees that grow within a city,
town or a suburb. (Wikipedia)
Urban Heat Island - is a metropolitan area which is significantly
warmer than its surrounding rural areas. (Wikipedia)
UTA - the University of Texas at Arlington
Public Private Partnership - describes a government service or private
business venture which is funded and operated through a partnership
of government and one or more private sector companies. (Wikipedia)
Sustainable - In ecology the word describes how biological systems
remain diverse and productive over time. (Wikipedia)
Watershed - the total area above a given point on a watercourse that
contributes water to its flow; the entire region drained by a waterway
or watercourse that drains into a lake or reservoir. (A Planners
Dictionary)
Sustainable Development - development which meets the needs of
the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs. (U.N. Brundtland Report)
~isi~n Nart~ Tex~s
u.w~l~rs~c~w~~wg bu~ ~pt~~ws ~ar ~rowtY~
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Pre Council Status: Pre Council
Version: 1
Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Engineering
Department
Agenda No.: PC-2
Final Action:
File Name: Discussion of proposed Cheek-Sparger Road and Jackson Road Intersection Improvements
Attachments: Cheek-Sparger and Jackson Road Intersection Public Meeting Comments Synopsis
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body:
Action Text:
10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Discussion of proposed Cheek-Sparger Road and Jackson Road Intersection Improvements
Explanation
Staff engaged the services of Burgess and Niple to perform a preliminary study to evaluate
the appropriate type of roadway improvements in this intersection, in terms of geometrics
and enhanced traffic movement. This study was completed and presented to City Council
on August 2, 2011. The results of the study revealed that two viable design alternatives
exist for the project, including a signalized intersection and a single lane roundabout with
one or more free right turn lanes. It was determined by the engineer that a single lane
roundabout would be the desirable alternative, because it provides better long-term vehicle
movement efficiency and the ability to be expanded in size and scope in the future.
Staff also scheduled a public informational meeting for September 15, 2011, in order to
receive comments and concerns from citizens. The attached comment form was distributed
to approximately 25 citizens in attendance. The form consists of several questions regarding
the proposed intersection improvements and allows for comments that may be very useful
for the engineer and staff to consider during the design and construction process. In
addition, citizens were afforded the opportunity to state which design alternative they
preferred. Finally, a small number of emails and phone calls were received by staff before
and after the public meeting. The comments provided by all participating citizens
overwhelmingly support the design and construction of a single lane roundabout. Staff
received 10 responses and the majority of the responses support the roundabout concept.
The comments that were received are summarized in the attached synopsis. The submitted
comment cards are available for review at the public works office.
Based on the results of the comments received, staff recommends the Cheek-Sparger
Road and Jackson Road Intersection Improvement Project be designed as a single lane
roundabout with the inclusion of a single free right turn lane. This recommendation follows
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
Aaenda Briefinp Continued
the recommendation of the consulting engineering firm as well as the general consensus of
the public. The next step in this process involves the selection of a design consultant, and
staff will bring forward a professional services agreement for City Council consideration at a
future meeting, in order to perform final design and right-of-way acquisition.
The engineer's estimated cost for a single land roundabout is $1,000,000. This is a
preliminary estimate and will be refined during the design process. Funding in the amount
of $1,060,000 is available for the project through the following funding sources;
• Tarrant County Bond Funds ($535,415)
• RTR (CDA) NCTCOG Funds ($349,320)
• City of Colleyville service are Number 1 Street and Utility Impact Fees ($175,265)
Staff requests direction from City Council at this time regarding the recommended design for
the project.
City of Colleyville Page 2 Printed on 10/13/2011
Cheek-Sparger Road and 7ackson Road Intersection
Public Meeting Comment Synopsis
September 15, 2011
1. Current and Projected Conditions
In addition to the information that has been presented as part of the engineering
study, what other information do you believe is important to consider?
Resaonse
• Impact on the adjacent properties
• A free right needs a merge lane-similar to Glade Road
• Increase of traffic flow
• Over time traffic will be back to normal
• The number of vehicles traveling east and west, opposed to north and south
• The number of east and west vehicles in the short high traffic period
• Who will pay for the portion outside of Colleyville?
• Important to consider future growth and expansion
2. Feasible Options
A.) Would you support the improvements of the intersection to a signalized
intersection with left turn lanes? If no, then what changes could be made to
allow you to support it? If ~~es, what enhancements would you recommend?
Resnonse
Citizens comments of suaaorted for this option
• Only with blinking lights in all off peak hours
• Preferable to a roundabout
• Only if Cheek-Sparger is widened to 4-lanes from Hwy 121 to SH 26
• East-west has flashing yellows on off-peak hours; Jackson with flashing reds
Comments of non-suaaort
• Pedestrian crossover
• Long term maintenance
• Will not improve over current stop signs
• This neighborhood does not want that much traffic flow next to their children
• Potential for this neighborhood to be used for a detour
• Endangering pedestrians
• Intersection does not need to be changed
• It is preferable to stop for a sign rather than a light
• Stop light would be cheap and inappropriate for our desired rural feel
B.) Would you support the improvements of the intersection to a single lane
roundabout with right turn lanes? If no, then what changes could be made to
allow you to support it? If ~~es, what enhancements would you recommend?
Citizens comments of suaaorted for this option
• Pedestrian crossover
• Would upgrade and improve the area
1
• Add eastbound merge lane after roundabout
• Glade Road roundabout too tight; needs to be looser
• Free right-turn to Bedford
• Plan looks good
• Only if Cheek-Sparger is widened to 4-lanes; Jackson needs a right-turn lane
• Roundabouts only work when traffic is balanced in all directions
• Roundabouts have worked well in Southlake
Comments of non-suanort
• Add eastbound right-turn lane
• Too costly
• Glade Road has proven to be a poor system
• No one knows what the other driver is going to do
• Will be catch between two roundabouts
• Roundabout looks out of place; not a visual enhancement
C.) If you could not support either option, what other improvement options (if any)
would you like to see the City investigate and/or implement at this intersection.
Comments
• Police patrol
• Leave intersection as is; do nothing
3.) Additional Comments
Comments
• Addition of brick pavers or stamped concrete crosswalk on Central for walking
trail.
• Remove unnecessary pavement on Central; add green space and reduce
litter-clutter that accumulates on unused pavement.
• Concerned about the redo of the culverts on Cheek-Sparger; nothing has
been done downstream to properly handle storm flow. Will increase flooding
to residents in the area. The current culverts help restrict the flow.
• Expect problems and general disapproval. People of Colleyville want to be
right and for you to be wrong.
• Move ahead ASAP; use 2030 projections, so we don't have to spend more
money in the future.
2
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number:
Version: 1
Requester: Engineering
Department
File Name: Discussion c
Attachments:
History of Legislative File
File Type: Pre Council Status: Pre Council
Agenda Date: 10/18/2011 Controlling Body: City Council
Agenda No.: PC-3 Final Action:
~f the coordination of the SH26 and Cotton Belt Trail Phase III Projects
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Discussion of the coordination of the SH26 and Cotton Belt Trail Phase III Projects
Explanation
This item provides for the discussion of the coordination of the SH26 and Cotton Belt Trail
Phase III Projects.
A detailed presentation will be given to the City Council at the October 18, 2011 Pre Council
meeting.
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
, ,
,~; ~
~~~n
,~,a
~,
~~.F~
~
j~~+v
4
.anK'tf:,....
` ~
^l~
wS ~u
ase an o on
.
e ra ~ ase
.
ro e c s
Pre Council Meeting
October 18, 2011
t ~
~ a~- ~-~~~~h~~"~w~r'~'~aN~ao-,w~.~ $~°~,,~a.'~'.~`„Ct.~]? ~ c..i f4 ,.`..h .~, ~ . ~ .e. . ~ ,. . v, , . ~., H.~a~: .~. ~ s .. _,_.. ~ . .. ~ , , ~ . . . _ . . _ i ~ . , ~, ,. ' -
Current Desi n
g
3~
~. ~ ~ ~ µ ~ .. ~&k'~i
, ' ~
~ I,
, G~~q~' ~"'~',.. j ,~,a, ~ I..
~ ,:r",- . ~: .
' . ,_ ,a? ~3._'~ '.
, w
,'~'~~ , n_ ~` .
~~ ~~'~ ~ ~ ~~' ,~~ R
,s,. ., . _
„~ ~Z
~~,.,,~ ~~ w
- ~/
COTTON BELT l~,q~L
~ ENTRY WAY
O
~O,~,y MaRxeR
~^~
~ti~
•' ' i~
~
~
ROW
~ A~
.
0
Q
~
O
°v
~
~~ ~ ~ . ~
T „'~, ,
4 ,~
aw91:
n+~ :~' x ~~~ s' .
~' t, ~?~ :
;~ ~ L
. ~~' #'.!f'~~%~A<E ~~..
~,~ .` ~ ~~ ~ ;
k~ ;~ , ~ ~~ ~~ ,,,
~ ~ ~ PROPOSED CROSS SECTION
~ <:. .
t ~
COTfoW BELT TIRAIL SH 20
~,33 ~
I ~m~ '
~ . ~. °
~ ~~ V n. t~f' I ^~ ,~ ` ~~ , ~;W ~ m"~ •e my, a:: ~.te,.,; ~~ t j,.
.~+. , ~ _ .. ,~ . , _ ._ .. ~ I ~, a
COLLEYVILLE BOULEVARD
STATE HIGHWAY Z6 IMPROVEMENT
~;;d;;
cp~~
~
~
, ,
Current Desi n
g
~4` TEXTURED STAINED SURFACE
O' HIKE & BIKE TRAIL
~t~~~' o~.
/ ~\
COLLEYVILLE
..., ;F ~, ,y.6<.
!E ~:~b
Cu rrent Desi n
g
• No vertical
sepa ration
• 4' offset from
back of curb to
trail
• Landsca~ing can
be added at a
later date or
during
construction
~~~
~- 1 U' 4'
~ -~:;~- .. ~~_. ~~.~ _
~~~~
N BELT TRAIL
~ruN~N+~ wwr.,t.
PI~~P~S~D GR~~S " ~CTI~I~i
CoTroN B~~T'T'~[. SH ~6
Alternate Desi n
g
~~; :, r~i = ~~"~ ;~`~ ~«~`~"
;~ ~ ,~, ,'~ ~~~,~~ ';:
r~ z ~'" ~ u~, ,~~: G,Na~.~
~ R~p~N~N s
.~
~ ~ .:: .~~ ~ "~ ~" ~~ ~ ,• ~, . ,
"~} N M ~
~~,;i:s ~. . . ~:~ ..~ ,~.' ,~-~.~~5'~'i~ . _ . / ~ .
~ ~rrrc caoz ~ *
coMSU~unoN Rwu. `~r. ~•';~
COTTON BELT TRqIL
~,~ 6~
G~
O
1'
W
~
O
G
~
~
,.
"s;
~ r.
COLLEYVILLE BOULEVARD
STATE HIGHWAY 26 IMPROVEMENT
~v~
O.~'~j,
~~~+
'~i
ErITRY WAY
MARKER~
ti~ } ,,
, ~.,
r t
r r
~ • ~~ ~~~~~ ~;
s,~~
~ _ ~+ +.~..(~~ ...
, C,~ nC r :.!
~~~ ~ ~ .
~ 2 ~ ;~. 1=~ ~ V'
,;~~:~ v."'~. .. a ~ ~~,~
~ ~
ALTERNATIVE DESIGN
CROSS SECTION
co„oN ea.rTYewa_ari zs
,. ~ . ,ur , ~ w ~ _n~ ..~~rii~r v m ~:~ ~ i ~~..~, :: . ;a ~
t~ CY' ~~'~ ~`~` ~t~~~';5@+'N~~~s~!+~°. ~s.,~.~, ,~~: ~ :, . . , ~:F c,» r. . . ~ ... , 1..,. ~ .Yr ~e!~r: ~."..,4~ _: ry~r~ ...... . .... .. ... . . _ .. .. . . . .. . . _ . . . . -
Alternate Desi n
g
• Relocation of the R°W
proposed crash ,_,_ ~o, 4.
PEDESTRIAN RAIL
rail
i ~ URB
.• Addition of a - -
,~t.~w -v~`+~`
pedestrian rail
re U I 1~~ OTCON BELT TRAIL
q ETAINING WALL
ALTERI~AT'IYE D~SIC ltii
CROSS SECTIOItii
.,; ..: ~, . ,,: .. : ::..., ...r .: . _ .~:,, COTTON BELT TRAIL. SH 26
az~a~'~o`•...~,,.r,'-S'9~`.t5'rip{, X,a,~ :.~ .vF i,b~.':~r ~^ "i a7 }jz.1:_p".s V ..;.r.,~ s n,:A ~Ay,. ,.S-~- ~ya1...{:/.,ST j ~ ! ,Y~';.,.
~~eM'~' : ?~'G ~ ~ vr. ~ '... ~ .. i'..`^° . ~eri'i~F'G'~5'~auN..''" ~ ~, ~5 k :. '. ,..; .. .. ... ,
~;~~ ~,.. r~1 »,w~w_4 ~ 'r .! y, k~ ~ ` ` ^ 1 '~! ~ . ~~. .,., , .. ~ ., ~ ._.x ~
Ke.~.~~,u~.{NJ,urr„ti~i.~ i~~«~~.`~'~.~+F~nli:~v.. ,d~s. ~~,.~.~..~. r 3,..,~, t>.~-:~%)c . '!. ' ,i . ::. ` :: _ , ~ , ~.~...
o,u:x~m~~e..r~~ ~* r.. ~r, .,.. ...., ..s t
Lon wood Drive Access
g
• Access to the Cotton Belt Trail from Longwood
Drive would require an opening in the crash rail
~o~
~~~
~a~-
G
, ~
. ~1
~~
~~
~ ~
i ~ ~~
~
COLL~ E
rE~:~`
and a crash attenuator.
J~ ~ , ~ ~~,
°,:~ _ `~`~~.~ ~':~.%~~'~~t~~d~w.,.;~.~~r.._,.~.,_k~~.e.:;~' ,. _~..._ . .. , ~ . ,. „ . _.~; ,,,, ..~?~ ~+i . .,..~. . .. . . . . _ v~~a, .' , ,. .u .c.s"'~5;~,!p,"("l~~a`;.~.+~~~. ,~ ~
COStS
• The cost for the preferred option is approximately
$280,000 for the relocation of the crash railing
a nd the associated costs.
.• The pedestria n ra i I wi I I be i ncorporated with the
Cotton Belt Trail Phase III design. The cost for the
rail is approximately $300,000.
• The City is also responsible for the costs of the
previously discussed add alternates, including the
brick pavers, signal poles, and illuminated LED
street signs, at a n a pproxi mate cost of $95,000.
,m~sW -. ..~ .~ > ~ . -~ n ~ .. ~xca,i:a ae~~ 'a:dd~y 1~ ,y _ , L~,.n .:: ~ ~- .~~y1 . ~ . q.~ ' ~~ g~ ~+,f~~,~.; - -:;~ . ~.i~ ;z ~. 1
36._,~ '~ "~~'41`87~kP1tileL~HE~.'M9L+/'#~~ti`~~<.~~aieh,~T~36~+P.l~~ta,.:4Y.._~..'Y~.....;~,"C{ivr+rCflCxtV.fi'U~~~+f~Y'~IA.~n.~i7k~~ ~r~h.. , .._. , ,.. _. ~" .,o. ." _ . . .. ~ ':3 ~~,.~,,._.r ._, .. . . .
D i rect i o n N eed ed
• Does the City wish to pu rsue the option of
relocati ng the crash ra i I to the edge of
pave m e nt?
+• Does the Cit wish to have an opening for
v
Cotton Belt Trail access at Longwood Drive?
, _ . . _. , :.._ .. ,..M.:
~'~44~ ~.._ *..: /;7<yc~tr x ~ ~'.~, ~r F V .a:~{ ,~!rv
93&~~S§'~ r.n'uu~.~ ,st ir'u ~ r . .. . _ , ., ,i~ ~~seo ~ 3~. _ . li ~.«e ... , . . .. . , . . . . . . . ,. . ... . , . , ~ . .. . -.
uestions and Comments
Q
~~
~~..~
~.
, ~~
~~~,.~
~~~~s:
.
_---_
....__~:xa.--... _ ~ ~
.-- ~---_..___ ~...N,.._----~-- ~ ~
_- _-«,._-. . .,.._..._-.==_ ----..; ,
_ _ . , ~..
COLLEYVILLE BOULEVARD
STATE H IGHWAY Z C I M PROVEM ENT
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Pre Council Status: Pre Council
Version: 1 Agenda Date: 10/18/2011 Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Engineering Agenda No.: PC-4 Final Action:
Department
File Name: Discussion of setting a date for a City Council worksession to discuss the City's Capital
Improvements Plan (CIP) and infrastructure management
Attachments:
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Discussion of setting a date for a City Council worksession to discuss the City's Capital
Improvements Plan (CIP) and infrastructure management
Explanation
This item seeks to establish a date for a City Council worksession to discuss the City's CIP
and infrastructure management strategy. Staff recommends considering one of the following
dates:
• November 19, 2011
• November 22, 2011
• December 8, 2011
• December 13, 2011
• December 15, 2011
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Pre Council Status: Pre Council
Version: 1
Requester: Office of the City
Secretary
Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Controlling Body: City Council
Final Action:
Agenda No.: PC-5
File Name: Discussion of the terms of the Architectural Review Commission
Attachments: Architectural Review Commission roster
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Discussion of the terms of the Architectural Review Commission
Explanation
The City Council established the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) on January 18,
2011, to serve in an advisory role to the City Council regarding the City's design standards,
matching grant program applications, and other architectural and design related studies. On
February 15, 2011, City Council appointed seven citizens to the ARC with staggered terms.
Three members serve a one-year term expiring February 2012 and four members serve a
two-year term expiring February 2013.
In 2007, the City Council consolidated the board, commission and committee terms to
expire in September and December to provide for a concentrated advertising period, an
opportunity for the City Council to present options to the applicants for service based upon
need the citizen's interests, skills, background and education, and for a more efficient
appointment process. Staff is proposing that the ARC terms ending in February 2012 be
changed to expire December 2011 and the terms ending in February 2013 be changed to
expire December 2012.
The positions whose terms expire February 2012 are being advertised along with other
board, commission and committee openings whose terms expire December 2011. The City
Council may consider the following options for appointments to the ARC:
1. Maintain the current terms of the ARC, which expire each February.
2. Modify the terms of ARC members to expire in December of each year. In this case, a
resolution would be placed on the December 13, 2011 City Council agenda for changing the
terms of ARC members to December and appointing members whose terms expire
February 2012.
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
Architectural Review Commission
CHAIRMAN VICE-CHAIRMAN
Alan Greer Christina Keilson
2304 Mulberry Court 1113 Garry Lynne Drive
Colleyville, TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034
W: (214) 217-2220 W: (214) 871-7900
H: (214) 507-0654 H: (214) 679-7109
adq(a~freese.com keilson.christina(a~qmail.com
TERM:Feb 2011 - Feb 2013 TERM:Feb 2011 - Feb 2013
Jeffrey Ground Jim Makens
4108 Dundee Court 1312 Somerset Court
Colleyville, TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034
W: (817) 320-5330 W: (214) 957-8284
H: (817) 354-5640 ImCa~makens.com
IaCa~aqqienetwork.com TERM:Feb 2011 - Feb 2013
TERM:Feb 2011 - Feb 2012
Kevin Procaccino Gerald Ward
6409 Meade Drive 4301 Briar Ridge Drive
Colleyville, TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034
W: (817) 442-8572 W: (817) 522-8752
H: (817) 442-8572 H: (817) 656-7939
KevinCa~kenandom.com wardarchitectureCa~sbcqlobal.net
TERM:Feb 2011 - Feb 2012 TERM:Feb 2011 - Feb 2012
Curtis W. Young
8003 Jefferson Circle
Colleyville, TX 76034
W: (817) 424-2626
H: (817) 498-2011
cvou nala~saae-dfw. com
TERM:Feb 2011 - Feb 2013
"~ ~*~~-~ City of Colleyville CityHall
~~ ~00~.~~ 100 Main Street
~~~ Colleyville, Texas 76034
~ ~ Agenda Briefing 817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Pre Council Status: Pre Council
Version: 1 Agenda Date: 10/18/2011 Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Finance Department Agenda No.: PC-6 Final Action:
File Name: Presentation of the Monthly Financial Report - September 2011
Attachments: September 2011 Monthly Financial Report.pdf
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Presentation of the Monthly Financial Report - September 2011
Explanation
General Fund
The Monthly Financial Report for September reflects year to date revenues and expenses
through the end of September, however the financial statements will not be final until all
year end entries and adjustments have been made and reviewed by the auditors.
The percentage of current year taxes collected for Fiscal Year 2011 was 99.08% or a 0.52%
increase over last fiscal year's collection rate of 98.57%. Sales tax revenue received in
September 2011 was down 36.09% or $113,123 from the revenues reported for the same
time period last year. This is due to the inclusion of an audit collection in the September
2010 allocation for sales tax on electricity that should have been collected and remitted from
May 2006 through October 2009. If the General Fund portion of the audit collection is
excluded for comparison purposes, September 2011 sales tax revenue is up 5.22% over
September 2010 revenues. Per governmental accounting rules, sales tax revenue received
in October 2011 and November 2011 is recorded as FY 2011 revenue, and the October and
November numbers are not reflected in the attached report. Twelve new residential building
permits were issued in September along with two new commercial building permits.
Ambulance collections exceeded the budget by over $70,000. Colleyville Center also
finished the fiscal year ahead of budget by $45,749. The average amount expended by the
General Fund departments at the end of September 2011 is 95.57% of the total
appropriation, versus 97.73% which was projected to be spent.
Utility Fund
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
Aaenda Briefinp Continued
Water usage increased as compared to the amount sold through September 2010 due to
lack of rainfall. The average amount expended by the Utility Fund departments at the end of
September 2011 is 103.52% of the total appropriation, versus 99.90% which was projected
to be spent due to TRA purchases of treated water and wastewater.
City of Colleyville Page 2 Printed on 10/13/2011
MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2011
GENERALFUND RECEIVED PROJECTED RECEIVED
FY 2011 AS OF AS OF AS OF
REVENUE SOURCE BUDGET 9/30/2011 9/30/2011 9/30/2010
Current Taxes
Delinquent Taxes
Penalty & Interest
$10,155,472 $10,180,947 $10,217,864 $10,288,850
63, 000 130, 059 62, 000 77, 316
57, 000 103, 537 57, 000 93, 571
Oncor Electric $815,000 $864,130 $815,000 $818,484
Tri-County Electric 110,000 120,249 110,000 108,334
Atmos Gas 345,000 381,513 345,000 341,528
AT&T 118, 000 99, 534 118, 000 116,151
Verizon/Others 44, 000 51,167 44, 000 43, 822
Refuse/Recyd i ng 126, 000 124, 649 126, 000 126, 550
Ca ble TV 265, 000 390, 025 265, 000 320, 950
TOTAL FRANCHISE TAXES $1,823,000 I $2,031,268 I $1,823,000 I $1,875,819
Sales Tax
Mixed Beverage Tax
TOTAL SALES TAX
Building
Plumbing
Mechanical
Electrical
City License
Building Plan Review Fee
New Business
Animal
Sign Permit
Fence Permit
Fire Permits
Irrigation Permit
Gas & Oil Well Permit Fee
Fines
Alarm Fees
Library Fines
TS
$2, 356, 976
73, 000
$348, 924
43, 257
28, 868
37, 568
37, 372
59, 753
3, 372
900
5, 463
4, 920
8, 000
10,214
0
$825, 000
47, 000
23,124
$2,146, 960
80,731
$536, 534
60,124
37,811
48, 721
40, 472
90, 790
4, 935
677
7, 486
3, 700
7, 250
15, 090
70, 000
$860,707
60, 425
25, 850
$2,168, 241
73, 000
$348, 924
43, 257
28, 868
37, 568
37, 372
59, 753
3, 372
900
5, 463
4, 920
8, 000
10,214
0
$588,611
$825, 000
47, 000
23,124
$2, 356, 273
75, 365
$348,471
42,123
35, 803
38, 537
40, 755
66, 555
3, 995
769
5,140
4, 350
8, 650
11,705
0
$1,087,154
59, 200
27, 474
PERCENT
CHANGE
-1.05%
68.22%
10.65%
-0.43%
5.58%
11.00%
11.71%
-14.31%
16.76%
-1.50%
21.52%
8.29%
-8.88%
7.12%
-8.39%
53.97%
42.74%
5.61 %
26.43%
-0.69%
36.41 %
23.53%
-11.95%
45.65%
-14.94%
-16.18%
28.92%
100.00%
52.19%
-20.83%
2.07%
-5.91 %
MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2011
REVENUE SOURCE
Re-zoning
Plat Fee/Site Plan
Board of Adjustment
Sale of Material
Weed Mowing
Animal Impoundment
Ambulance
Recreation Program
Non-Resident Fee Parks
Field Use Charge
Engineering & Inspection
Chgs & Reimbursements
Colleyville Center Rental
Lot Drainage Insp Fee
TOTAL CHARGES FOR SERVICE
Sale of Surplus Property
Interest Income
Miscellaneous
Use of Available Cash
Proceeds from Lease
Antenna Lease
FY 2011
BUDGET
$6, 765
4, 988
1, 250
400
14,770
2, 825
240, 000
157, 525
26, 000
20, 500
5, 000
0
200, 000
10, 250
$89,792
$3, 000
75, 000
55, 000
0
0
65, 000
RECEIVED PROJECTED
AS O F AS O F
9/30/2011 9/30/2011
$7,892 $6,765
5,123 4, 988
2, 000 1, 250
343 400
7, 900 14, 770
2, 632 2, 825
310,645 240,000
189, 891 157, 525
31,470 26,000
23, 860 20, 500
0 5, 000
0 0
245,749 200,000
14, 875 10, 250
$842,379 $690,273
S
$89,793
$1
$7, 098
30, 766
75, 057
0
0
67, 400
Transfer from Utility Fd $816,297 ~ $858,879
$89,792 ~
$3, 000
25, 000
55, 000
0
0
65, 000
$148,000
$816,297
RECEIVED
AS O F
9/30/2010
$13, 200
5, 265
1, 250
432
13, 353
3, 508
236, 067
208, 997
21,440
21,485
17, 697
150
189, 530
10, 375
$742,747
$89,793
$20, 209
57, 722
82, 272
0
981, 238
89, 782
$857,541
PERCENT
CHANGE
-40.21 %
-2.71 %
60.00%
-20.70%
-40.84%
-24.96%
31.59%
-9.14%
46.78%
11.05%
-100.00%
0.00%
29.66%
43.37%
13.41 %
0.00%
0.00%
-64.88%
-46.70%
-8.77%
0.00%
-100.00%
-24.93%
85.35%
0.16%
$17,806,545 $18,515,447 $17,629,202
MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2011
TOTAL PERCENT
FY 2011 THROUGH THROUGH INCREASE INCREASE
BUDGET 9/30/2011 9/30/2010 (DECREASE) (DECREASE)
% OF CURRENT TAX ROLL COLLECTED 98.0% 99.08% 98.57% 0.51% 0.52%
RESIDENTIAL BLDG PERMITS 73 104 77 27 35.06%
COMMERCIAL BLDG PERMITS 10 7 8 (1) -12.50%
CITATIONS ISSUED 12,500 11,678 13,822 (2,144) -15.51%
CITATIONS APPEALED 3 0 415 (415) -100.00%
GENERAL FUND EXPENSES
EXPENDED YEAR-TO-DATE
FY 2011 THROUGH PROJECTED % OF BUDGET BUDGET
BUDGET 9/30/2011 EXPENDITURES EXPENDED REMAINING
City Council $220,002 $189,946 $209,002 86.34% $30,056
City Manager 614,427 594,234 602,138 96.71% 20,193
City Secretary 312, 356 302, 397 306,109 96.81 % 9, 959
Finance 439,646 421,783 426,456 95.94% 17,863
Legal 125,460 94,389 100,368 75.23% 31,071
Engineering 332,845 327,292 327,852 98.33% 5,553
Economic Development 332,551 323,334 325,900 97.23% 9,217
Building Inspection 339,533 271,013 288,603 79.82% 68,520
Community Development 228,845 212,518 224,268 92.87% 16,328
Fire 3,870,839 3,845,073 3,851,484 99.33% 25,765
Police 4,369,822 4,134,781 4,282,425 94.62% 235,040
Parks 1,467,570 1,326,436 1,394,191 90.38% 141,134
Recreation 326,796 326,190 326,469 99.81% 606
Street Maintenance 2,222,173 2,182,071 2,199,951 98.20% 40,102
Li brary 692, 955 649, 577 679, 096 93.74% 43, 378
Communications 152,299 147,837 149,253 97.07% 4,462
Colleyville Center 379,648 318,906 341,683 84.00% 60,742
Human Resources 237,627 224,837 232,874 94.62% 12,790
Municipal Court 261,487 254,635 256,257 97.38% 6,852
Fleet Maintenance 214,586 207,455 210,294 96.68% 7,131
Building Services 216,089 198,381 211,767 91.81% 17,708
Information Services 402,471 397,246 398,446 98.70% 5,225
Capital Equipment Reserve 450,000 450,000 450,000 100.00% 0
Strategic Initiatives Fund Transfer 80,000 80,000 80,000 100.00% 0
TOTAL EXPENSES $18,290,025 $17,480,332 $17,874,889 95.57% $809,693
MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2011
UTILITY FUND
REVENUE SOURCE
Water Sales
Sewer Sales
Sewer Installation
Water Installation
Sewer Tie-on Charges
Engineering Charges
Penalties
Miscellaneous
RECEIVED PROJECTED RECEIVED
FY 2011 AS OF AS OF AS OF PERCENT
BUDGET 9/30/2011 9/30/2011 9/30/2010 CHANGE
$8, 552, 558 $10, 532, 058 $8, 488, 846 $7, 936, 814 32.70%
2,718,634 2,755,458 2,718,634 2,619,113 5.21%
7, 000 10, 800 7, 000 7, 300 47.95%
21, 000 27, 630 21, 000 19,181 44. 05%
5, 000 3, 000 5, 000 4, 500 -33.33%
5, 000 8, 418 5, 000 7, 351 14. 52%
173, 024 229, 830 173, 024 200, 079 14.87%
13, 000 17,101 13, 000 30,193 -43.36%
25.50%
Interest Income
TOTAL NON-OPERATING INCOME
TOTAL INCOME
$50, 000 $17, 900 $28, 500 $22, 322 -19.81 %
$50, 000 $17, 900 $28, 500 $22, 322 -19.81 %
$11,545,216 $13,602,196 $11,460,004 $10,846,851 25.40%
THROUGH THROUGH
9/30/2011 9/30/2010
NS OF WATER SOLD 2,893,725,300 2,198,364,700
INUMBER OF WATER CUSTOMERS
9,103 9, 014
TOTAL
I NCREASE
(DECREASE)
695, 360, 600
89
PERCENT
I NCREASE
(DECREASE)
31.
0.
UTILITY FUND EXPENSES
EXPENDED YEAR-TO-DATE
FY 2011 THROUGH PROJECTED % OF BUDGET BUDGET
BUDGET 9/30/2011 EXPENSES EXPENDED REMAINING
Administration $204,092 $180,910 $200,010 88.64% $23,182
Billing 372,114 335,563 364,672 90.18% 36,551
Operations 9,142,149 9,604,659 8,959,306 105.06% (462,510)
Debt Service 835,577 790,207 835,577 94.57% 45,370
Transfer to General Fund
TOTAL EXPENSES 816,297
$11,370,229 858,879
$11,770,217 816,297
$11,175,862 105.22%
103.52% (42,582)
($399,988)
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Pre Council Status: Pre Council
Version: 1 Agenda Date: 10/18/2011 Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Office of the City Agenda No.: PC-7 Final Action:
Secretary
File Name: Discussion of the October 18, 2011 City Council meeting regular agenda items
Attach ments:
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Discussion of the October 18, 2011 City Council meeting regular agenda items
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Executive Session
Version: 1 Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Requester: Office of the City Agenda No.: 1
Secretary
File Name: Executive Session - Legal - October 18, 2011
Attach ments:
History of Legislative File
Status: Executive Session
Controlling Body: City Council
Final Action:
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney on legal issues raised by public hearing
or action items on the agenda
Section 551.071 - Legal - Discussion of pending litigation - Rahman Dzemail v. City of
Colleyville, Texas, and Gwen Parker, Ronald McFadden, Todd Hildebrandt, Scotty Graves
and David Mertz
Section 551.072 - Real Estate - Deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real
property for City facilities
Section 551.087 - Economic Development - Discuss and deliberate commercial and
financial information received from business prospects the City seeks to have locate, stay or
expand
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
RESOLUTION R-11-3415
A RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNCIL ACTION
REGARDING EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS AT THE REGULAR
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
WHEREAS, following discussion in Executive Session, and in full accordance with the
requirements of the Open Meetings Act, the City Council determines that the
following action is in the best interests of the health, safety and welfare of the
public.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the following actions of the City Council are hereby adopted and
approved:
a. THAT
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
APPROVED BY A VOTE OF AYES, NAYS AND ABSTENTIONS
ON THIS THE DAY OF 2011.
ATTEST:
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
David Kelly
Mayor
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Announcements,
Proclamations and
Presentations
Version: 1 Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Requester: Office of the City Agenda No.: 3
Secretary
File Name: Announcements, Proclamations and Presentations
Attachments:
History of Legislative File
Status: Announcements,
Proclamations and
Presentations
Controlling Body: City Council
Final Action:
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Announcements of civic and charitable events
Presentation of calendar events and updates
Announcements of awards and recognition
In recognition of service on the Zoning Board of Adjustment and Sign Board of Appeals - L.
Ed Moore
In recognition of the featured Colleyville business - Milwaukee Joe's Gourmet Ice Cream -
33 Main Street, Suite 100, Village at Colleyville - Jennifer and John Hay, owners
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
RESOLUTION R-11-3416
A RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNCIL ACTION
UNDER CONSENT ITEMS AT THE REGULAR CITY
COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
WHEREAS, Council has taken action on certain items on the agenda under Consent
Items.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the agenda decisions approved by Council action under Consent
Items as follows are hereby adopted:
a. Approval of the minutes of the regular City Council meeting of October 5,
2011
b. Approval of the use of the Voluntary Library Fund, for the purchase of
library materials, collection processing supplies, and library programs, in
an amount not to exceed $145,000 in Fiscal Year 2012
c. Approval of the disposal of surplus, damaged, worn and outdated library
books, audiovisual items, DVDs and CDs, and non-book materials,
learning games, and puzzles
d. Approval to purchase a 3M Intelligent Internal Return and Sorter System
from the Alpha Data Corporation through the State of Texas Joint
(Cooperative) Purchasing program, in an amount not to exceed $55,677,
and authorize the city manager to execute the documents
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
APPROVED BY A VOTE OF AYES, NAYS AND ABSTENTIONS
ON THIS THE DAY OF 2011.
ATTEST:
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
David Kelly
Mayor
City of Colleyville
M i n utes - D raft
CI~/ COUIICII
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The Pre Council meeting of the Colleyville City Council was called to
order by Mayor David Kelly on October 5, 2011, at 5:04 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Carol Wollin, Michael Muhm, Stan
Hall, Jody Short, Mike Taylor and Mayor Pro Tem Tom Hart were
present. Mayor David Kelly, City Manager Jennifer Fadden,
Assistant City Manager and Chief Financial Officer Terry Leake,
Interim Police Chief David James, Public Works Director Bob
Lowry, City Engineer Jeremy Hutt, Community Development
Director Ron Ruthven, Library Director Mary Rodne, Human
Resources Manager Elise Welborn, Colleyville Center Manager Lin
Przybyl, Parks and Recreation Director Monica Walsh, Economic
Development Director Marty Wieder, Finance Manager Karen Hines,
Strategic Services Manager Eric Ellwanger, Information Services
Manager Chris Pena, City Attorney Matthew Boyle, Attorney
Matthew Butler, and City Secretary Cynthia Singleton were also
present.
PC-1 Presentation and update by the Trinity River Authority
Ms. Fiona Allen, P.E. Northern Region Manager, of the Trinity River
Authority (TRA) provided information regarding TRA, the sole supplier of
treated water and wastewater treatment for the City. Ms. Allen spoke
regarding TRA facilities, projects and expansion plans, TRA funds, the
wastewater systems, outlined the functions of TRA and answered
questions of the City Council.
Discussion ensued regarding water capacity and restrictions and the
projected increase in the cost of water.
PC-2 Discussion of traffic congestion on Glade Road near the intersection of
Bluebonnet Drive
City Engineer Jeremy Hutt provided information regarding traffic
congestion on Glade Road near the intersection of Bluebonnet Drive.
Mr. Hutt presented a history of the intersection traffic pattern and
information related to sight distance design standards. Mr. Hutt
presented the following proposed options to improve the intersection
operation: removal of the stop signs along Glade Road; construct
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/12/2011
City Council Minutes - Draft October 5, 2011
cul-de-sacs at the south end of Bluebonnet Drive and the north end of
Stafford Drive, eliminating the connections to Glade Road; construct a
round-about at Bluebonnet Drive and Glade Road; construct a
cul-de-sac at the south end of Bluebonnet Drive and a round-about at
Glade Road and Riverwalk Drive; and station a police officer to direct
traffic at Glade Road and Bluebonnet Drive during morning and evening
rush hours.
Discussion ensued regarding sight distance issues, traffic volume during
peak hours, options to alleviate congestion, and traffic capacity.
City Council requested staff provide cost estimates for proposed options
to alleviate traffic congestion at the intersection of Glade Road and
Bluebonnet Drive.
PC-3 Discussion of the October 5, 2011 City Council meeting regular agenda
items
Mayor Kelly adjourned the Pre Council meeting at 6:24 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Colleyville City Council was called to order by
Mayor David Kelly on October 5, 2011, at 6:25 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Carol Wollin, Michael Muhm, Stan
Hall, Jody Short, Mike Taylor and Mayor Pro Tem Tom Hart were
present. Mayor David Kelly, City Manager Jennifer Fadden,
Assistant City Manager and Chief Financial Officer Terry Leake,
Interim Police Chief David James, Police Lieutenant Rodney
Cunningham, Police Officer Raymon Cannon, Public Works Director
Bob Lowry, Community Development Director Ron Ruthven, Parks
and Recreation Director Monica Walsh, Economic Development
Director Marty Wieder, Finance Manager Karen Hines, Information
Services Manager Chris Pena, City Attorney Matthew Boyle,
Attorney Matthew Butler, and City Secretary Cynthia Singleton were
also present.
1. EXECUTIVE SESSION - In accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter
551, Subchapter D
Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney on legal issues
raised by public hearing or action items on the agenda
Section 551.071 - Legal - Discussion of pending litigation - Rahman
Dzemail v. City of Colleyville, Texas, and Gwen Parker, Ronald
McFadden, Todd Hildebrandt, Scotty Graves and David Mertz
City of Colleyville Page 2 Printed on 10/12/2011
City Council
Minutes - Draft October 5, 2011
Section 551.072 - Real Estate - Deliberate the purchase, exchange,
lease or value of real property for City facilities
Section 551.074 - Personnel/Officers - Discussion of the appointment
and duties of the Planning and Zoning Commission and Zoning Board of
Adjustment
Section 551.087 - Economic Development - Discuss and deliberate
commercial and financial information received from business prospects
the City seeks to have locate, stay or expand
Mayor Kelly explained that the Executive Session had been called in
accordance with the Texas Government Code Chapter 551, Subchapter
D, Section 551.071, Legal, Section 551.072, Real Estate, Section
551.74, Personnel/Officers, and Section 551.087, Economic
Development. He further explained that there would be no decisions
made or action taken during this time. The meeting was recessed at
6:25 p.m. and reconvened at 7:52 p.m.
INVOCATION: Councilmember Stan Hall
2.
3.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: City Attorney Matthew Boyle
EXECUTIVE SESSION: CONSIDER AND TAKE ANY ACTION(S) NECESSARY
RELATIVE TO ITEMS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION - Resolution
R-11-3408
This resolution was not needed.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
Announcements of civic and charitable events
Presentation of calendar events and updates
Announcements of awards and recognition
Mayor Kelly invited citizens to the Colleyville Fire Department versus
Colleyville Police Department softball game on Sunday, October 9, 2011,
at City Park at 4:00 p.m. and stated all proceeds will be donated to the
Colleyville Citizen's Fire Academy and the Colleyville Citizen's Police
Academy alumni organizations.
Mayor Kelly presented a Colleyville Then and Now history book to Greg
Appel, in recognition of service on the Colleyville Economic Development
Corporation.
City of Colleyville Page 3 Printed on 10/12/2011
City Council Minutes - Draft October 5, 2011
Mayor Kelly presented a Colleyville Then and Now history book to Sue
Kijowski in recognition of service on the Colleyville Economic
Development Corporation.
Mayor Kelly recognized Mona Coulter for serving on the Historical
Preservation Committee.
Mayor Kelly presented a plaque to Ed Havran in recognition of service
on the Historical Preservation Committee.
Mayor Kelly presented a plaque to Nelda Thompson in recognition of
service on the Historical Preservation Committee.
Mayor Kelly presented a plaque to Wanda Johnson in recognition of
service on the Senior Center Advisory Committee.
Ms. Johnson stated she enjoyed serving on the committee and spoke
regarding the growth of the community and the importance of serving the
community.
Mayor Kelly presented a Colleyville Then and Now history book to Linda
Bond in recognition of service on the Library Board.
Ms. Bond spoke regarding the opportunity to work with a wonderful
group of people on the board.
Mayor Kelly presented a plaque to Pat Jones in recognition of many
years of service on the Colleyville Library Board.
Ms. Jones spoke regarding the history and development of the
Colleyville Public Library, the pleasure of serving on the Library Task
Force and the Library Board for the past ten years, and the fund raising
efforts on behalf of the library.
Councilmember Taylor spoke regarding Dulce and Jim Moore, Pat
Jones, Mary Alice Rippe and Ginny Tigue's leadership, support, and
dedication to the Colleyville Public Library.
Mayor Kelly expressed appreciation to Pat Jones and the community
volunteers who contributed to the development and growth of the library.
4. CONSENT: READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-11-3409
4a Approval of the minutes of the regular City Council meeting of
September 20, 2011
4b Approval of the minutes of the Joint City Council, Planning and Zoning
City of Colleyville Page 4 Printed on 10/12/2011
City Council Minutes - Draft October 5, 2011
Commission and Architectural Review Commission worksession of
September 14, 2011
4c Approval to reject bids for real property owned by the City of Colleyville
on Lot 1, Block 1, League Addition located at 315 W. L.D. Lockett Road
Mayor Kelly read Resolution R-11-3409 in its entirety.
Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing.
There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the
public hearing.
City Attorney Matthew Boyle stated the property referenced in Consent
agenda item 4c, Approval to reject bids for real property owned by the
City of Colleyville on Lot 1, Block 1, League Addition located at 315 W.
L.D. Lockett Road, is a piece of property that was purchased years ago
with the original intent the property would be held for future resale. After
multiple unsuccessful efforts to conduct such a resale, due to the
economic conditions at the time, the property was later designated by
the City Council as a City park. That designation now requires, based on
the Local Government Code, that an election be held in order to
complete that conveyance, and based on that election requirement,
staff's recommendation is that all bids be rejected at this point.
Councilmember Wollin moved to approve Resolution R-11-3409
Mayor Pro Tem Hart seconded the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 7- David Kelly, Carol Wollin, Michael Muhm, Stan Hall, Jody
Short, Tom Hart, Mike Taylor
5. ORDINANCE(S):
FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING
5a 0-11-1810 Approval of a request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to
R40-Single Family Residential on 1.0 acres on Lot 4, Block 1, of the Mrs.
Eva Paul Subdivision located at 1005 Tinker Road, Case ZC11-018
Mayor Kelly read the caption of Ordinance 0-11-1810.
Community Development Director Ron Ruthven provided an overview of
the request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to R40-Single
Family Residential and stated the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval and staff recommends approval.
City of Colleyville Page 5 Printed on 10/12/2011
City Council Minutes - Draft
Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing.
October 5, 2011
There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the
public hearing.
6. RESOLUTION(S):
READING AND PUBLIC HEARING
6a R-11-3410 Consideration of appointment to the Colleyville Economic Development
Corporation Board
Mayor Kelly read Resolution R-11-3410 in its entirety.
Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing.
There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the
public hearing.
Mayor Kelly opened the floor for nominations.
Councilmember Wollin nominated Timothy Mark Kelso to the Colleyville
Economic Development Corporation.
There were no other nominations.
Councilmember Wollin moved to approve Resolution R-11-3410,
appointing Timothy Mark Kelso to the Colleyville Economic Development
Corporation.
Councilmember Hall seconded the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 7- David Kelly, Carol Wollin, Michael Muhm, Stan Hall, Jody
Short, Tom Hart, Mike Taylor
6b R-11-3411 Consideration of appointments to the Planning and Zoning Commission
Mayor Kelly read Resolution R-11-3411 in its entirety.
Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing.
There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the
public hearing.
Mayor Kelly opened the floor for nominations.
City of Colleyville Page 6 Printed on 10/12/2011
City Council Minutes - Draft October 5, 2011
Councilmember Hall nominated David Dudziak, Place 5; Don Davis,
Place 6; and Larry Knox, Place 7 to the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
There were no other nominations.
Councilmember Hall moved to approve Resolution R-11-3411,
appointing David Dudziak, Place 5; Don Davis, Place 6; and Larry Knox,
Place 7 to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mayor Pro Tem Hart seconded the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 7- David Kelly, Carol Wollin, Michael Muhm, Stan Hall, Jody
Short, Tom Hart, Mike Taylor
6c R-11-3412 Consideration of appointments to the Zoning Board of Adjustment
Mayor Kelly read Resolution R-11-3412 in its entirety.
Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing.
There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the
public hearing.
Mayor Kelly opened the floor for nominations.
Mayor Kelly nominated Dee McNosky, Place 4; John Okray, Place 5; and
Michael Dunham, Alternate 2, to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
There were no other nominations.
Mayor Kelly moved to approve Resolution R-11-3412, appointing Dee
McNosky, Place 4; John Okray, Place 5; and Michael Dunham, Alternate
2, to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Councilmember Wollin seconded the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 7- David Kelly, Carol Wollin, Michael Muhm, Stan Hall, Jody
Short, Tom Hart, Mike Taylor
6d R-11-3413 Consideration of a Boundary Adjustment Agreement between the City of
Grapevine and the City of Colleyville
City of Colleyville Page 7 Printed on 10/12/2011
City Council Minutes - Draft October 5, 2011
Mayor Kelly read Resolution R-11-3413 in its entirety.
Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing.
Community Development Director Ron Ruthven stated on September 6,
2011, Grapevine City Council voted to approve the Boundary Adjustment
Agreement. Upon a boundary audit by staff, it was discovered there is a
slight overlap of a northern boundary that the City shares with
Grapevine. The original Colleyville annexation ordinance was approved
in 1957 and Grapevine came in later with an annexation ordinance. The
effect of the agreement clarifies the common boundary of Grapevine and
Colleyville between SH26 and moving southeast to Pool Road. The
common boundary would be the flow line of Big Bear Creek whereas
currently, there is 50 foot overlap from Grapevine over the Colleyville
boundary just to the south and along Bear Creek. Staff recommends
approval.
There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the
public hearing.
Mayor Kelly moved to approve Resolution R-11-3413.
Councilmember Short seconded the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 7- David Kelly, Carol Wollin, Michael Muhm, Stan Hall, Jody
Short, Tom Hart, Mike Taylor
7. CITIZEN COMMENTS/PRESENTATIONS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA
There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item.
8. REPORTS:
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - September 12, 2011
There was no discussion of this item.
9. ACTION/RESOLUTION: DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION
RATIFYING COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 5,
2011 - Reading and Public Hearing - Resolution R-11-3414
This resolution was not needed.
City of Colleyville Page 8 Printed on 10/12/2011
City Council Minutes - Draft
10. ADJOURNMENT:
October 5, 2011
There being no further business before the City Council, Councilmember
Short moved to adjourn and Mayor Pro Tem Hart seconded the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 7- David Kelly, Carol Wollin, Michael Muhm, Stan Hall, Jody
Short, Tom Hart, Mike Taylor
Mayor Kelly adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:23 p.m.
APPROVED BY A VOTE OF AYES, NAYS AND
ABSTENTIONS ON THIS THE DAY OF 2011.
Minutes taken and prepared by:
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
City of Colleyville Page 9 Printed on 10/12/2011
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Resolution Status: Consent Agenda
Version: 1 Agenda Date: 10/18/2011 Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Library Agenda No.: 4b Final Action:
File Name: Approval of the use of the Voluntary Library Fund in Fiscal Year 2012 (FY 2012), for the
purchase of library materials, collection processing supplies, and library programs, in an amount
not to exceed $145,000
Attachments: Financial Status of Voluntary Library Fund Report - September 30, 2011
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Approval of the use of the Voluntary Library Fund in Fiscal Year 2012 (FY 2012), for the
purchase of library materials, collection processing supplies, and library programs, in an
amount not to exceed $145,000
Explanation
Reading and Public Hearing
Resolution R-03-2237 provides for the Voluntary Library Fund to be used for the purpose of
the development and improvement of library programs and services and for approved library
programs and capital items, including collection development (books, DVDs, CDs, digital
and other materials). The Fiscal Year 2012 (FY 2012) Colleyville Public Library budget
includes use of the Voluntary Library Fund for the purchase of collection materials,
collection processing supplies and library programs. On October 10, 2011, the Colleyville
Public Library Board unanimously approved the use of the Voluntary Library Fund for the
purchase of library collection materials, collection processing supplies and library programs ,
in an amount not to exceed $145,000.
Financial Impact
Funds are available in the Voluntary Library Fund, in the amount of $254,806, as of
September 30, 2011.
Recommendation
Approval
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
FINANCIAL STATUS OF VOLUNTARY LIBRARY FUND AT 9-30-2011
FUND BALANCE AT 9-30-2010
FY 2011 REVENUE
Donations: PROJECTED ACTUAL
October $12,439 $12,439
November $13,287 $13,287
December $11,495 $11,495
January $13,099 $13,099
February $12,136 $12,136
March $12,618 $12,618
April $11,335 $11,335
May $11,368 $11,368
June $13,270 $13,270
J uly $10,184 $10,184
August $13,579 $13,579
September $11,799 $11,799
Total Donations $146,610 $146,610
Interest income Received $1,000 $0
TOTAL $147,610 $146,610
$379,502
FY 2011 EXPEND/TURES
RECOMMENDED APPROVED EXPENDED
(BOARD) (COUNCIL) YEAR-TO-DATE
BOOKS AND PROCESSING MATERIALS
FY 2010 BALANCE OF AUTHORIZATION $77,306
FY 2011 AUTHORIZATION $145,000
FY 2011 2ND FLOOR A/V EQUIPMENT $50,000
$77,306 $77,306
$145,000 $34,913
$50,000 $50,000
TOTAL $272,306
AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE AT 930-2011 (COUNCIL APPROVED)
$272,306 $162,219
$253,806
PROJECTED AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE AT 9-30-2011 (COUNCIL APPROVED) $254,806
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Resolution Status: Consent Agenda
Version: 1
Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Library
Agenda No.: 4c
Final Action:
File Name: Approval of the disposal of surplus, damaged, worn and outdated library books, audiovisual
items, DVDs and CDs, and non-book materials, learning games, and puzzles
Attach ments:
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Approval of the disposal of surplus, damaged, worn and outdated library books, audiovisual
items, DVDs and CDs, and non-book materials, learning games, and puzzles
Explanation
Reading and Public Hearing
The City of Colleyville Purchasing Manual requires the City Council to designate surplus
property and salvage items before said property can be removed from inventory and
disposed of by public auction or other approved means. The Colleyville Public Library has
approximately 547 books, audiovisual items, DVDs and CDs, and non-book materials,
learning games and puzzles, from the library's collection that are surplus, damaged, worn
and outdated, and recommended for disposal. The withdrawn books, audiovisual items, and
non-book materials will be donated to the Friends of the Colleyville Public Library. Saleable
items will be sold in a used book sale scheduled in the library on November 5, 2011.
Proceeds from the used book sale will be donated to the Colleyville Public Library.
Since 2003, the Friends of the Colleyvillle Public Library have donated approximately
$176,830, to the Colleyville Public Library through their book sale and other fundraising
efforts.
Financial Impact
The sale of items will provide revenue for the Colleyville Public Library through donations by
the Friends of the Library.
Recommendation
Approval
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Resolution Status: Consent Agenda
Version: 1
Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Library
Agenda No.: 4d
Final Action:
File Name: Approval to purchase a 3M Intelligent Internal Return and Sorter System from the Alpha Data
Corporation through the State of Texas Joint (Cooperative) Purchasing program, in an amount
not to exceed $55,677, and authorize the city manager to execute the do
Attachments: Alpha Data Corporation price quote for 3M Intelligent Return Sorter with one-year service
agreement dated October 4, 2011 • 3M Intelligent Return and Sorter System
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Approval to purchase a 3M Intelligent Internal Return and Sorter System from the Alpha
Data Corporation through the State of Texas Joint (Cooperative) Purchasing program, in an
amount not to exceed $55,677, and authorize the city manager to execute the documents
Explanation
Reading and Public Hearing
On September 20, 2011, the City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2012 (FY 2012) budget
proposed in Ordinance 0-11-1805. This budget included $65,000 for the purchase and
installation of a 3M Intelligent Internal Return and Sorter System.
The 3M Intelligent Internal Return and Sorter System will replace the Colleyville Public
Library's circulation desk book return, and will automate the check-in and sorting process of
all library materials. This equipment is the same technology that recently replaced the drive
through manual book drop and library patrons will be able to self return items with real time
check-in. This will eliminate approximately 20 hours a week of staff time spent accepting
and checking in items at the front desk and clearing patrons' records, which will allow
circulation staff to devote more time to serving patrons. Items self returned by patrons will
be sent to a sorter where they will be placed into the appropriate bin. This technology will
enhance service to patrons, improve staff productivity and increase efficiency in the library's
circulation functions as follows:
Patrons are able to return and self check-in their items.
• Real time self check-in, upon deposit in the return, the items are immediately
removed from the patrons record, allowing the customer to quickly check out
additional items that may have limits
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
Aaenda Briefinp Continued
• Patrons can choose to print a receipt for items returned, providing proof items have
been returned
Items that are checked-in are automatically sorted into different bins.
• Items on hold and other exceptions are easily identified and sorted reducing the time
it takes to handle these items
• Items will be returned to the shelf and into circulation more quickly
• Staff will handle items fewer times through automatic check-in and sorting
• Library can handle increasing circulation with the same staff levels
• Frees up staff time for high value customer service activities
• Reduces repetitive stress of materials check-in
• Improves accuracy of materials check-in
Production time for the 3M Intelligent Internal Return and Sorter System is estimated to be
12 to 14 weeks. The system will be installed through an existing window in the wall
separating the patron-accessible area and the staff area behind the circulation desk, with
modifications being made to the wall and the existing window opening.
Financial Impact
Funding was approved for the purchase and installation of a 3M Intelligent Internal Return
and Sorter System in the City's FY 2012 budget, in the amount of $65,000. The cost of the
system is $55,677, and remaining funding can be used for wall modifications where the
equipment will be installed.
Recommendation
Approval
City of Colleyville Page 2 Printed on 10/13/2011
Quote# CP
Date: 10/
Terms: Nei
Zone 4
Pricing Valid Thru Dec 30, 2011
FOB
ie Salesperson CF
153 Phone (
;olleyville.com Fax
'roduct No. Description Unit Price E
'ELL-RSS 3M Intelligent Return Plus Model Indoor $ 47,140.00 $
0-IND-INST Model 2800 Induction Installation $ 2,000.00 $
)-IND-SERV Model 2800 Indoor Return Annual Service Agreement $ 3,790.00 $
-SORT-INST Model 2800 Sorter Installation $ 800.00 $
•SORT-SERV Model 2800 Sorter Annual Service Agreement $ 1,000.00 $
Svstem Includes the items below
3M Intelligent Return Plus Indoor Model 2820
Model 2800 Indoor Return New Annual Service Agreement (1 Year)
Model 2800 Induction Installation
AMH Pre Site Visit
Barcode Package Plus -
EM Package
3M Sorter System SL Model 2840
Model 2800 Sorter New Annual Service Agreement (1 Year)
Model 2800 Sorter Installation
*Sorter does not include Book Return Bins, Library will use existing Bins
Subtotal
Shipping
TOTAL
TXMAS Contract Number: TXMAS-6-70030
Questions regarding quotation can be emailed to sales@alphadata.com
Alpha Data Corporation GSA Schedule #GS-35F-0617N
Expires 05/18/2012
The customer is responsible for paying all taxes applicable to this order.
If customer is a Federal, State, or Local Government Agency, then no documentation showing tax exemption status is
If customer is tax exempt, but not a Federal, State, or Local government Agency, customer will need to supply a copy
exemption certificate or other documentation showing exemption status
3MTM Intelli ent Return
g
and Sorter S stem
y
An affordable, efficient, automated material handling system
T}~e 3M'°' lntelligent Retuin and Sorter System is desi~ned for libr~uies interested in
automatin~ theu~ check-in and sortin~ process. Your custoiners can quickly self return
items witl~ "real-time check-in". With this feature, they can be assured items are instantly
checked in upon return. This allows them to check out items without exceeding loan-
limits in the same visit. Designed specifically for libraries, the system can be interior
wall or exterior wall mounted, walk-up or drive-up. For libraries with limited space,
the system can be used for retuln only or can accommodate up to three bins with a sort
matrix confi~ured to best ineet your libr~uy's needs. The sweep technolo~y utilized by
the sorter for du~ecting items into the bins helps ensure items are sorted properly while
reducin~ damage to items. The 3M lntelligent Return ~u~d Sorter System also offers an
intuitive user intertace which inakes it easy for your customers and stafF to use, includin~
administrative tasks such as configurin~ receipts, ~eneratin~ statistics and system
dia~nostics. T}~e lntelligent Keturn and Sorter System helps decrease the time it takes
for an item to ~et back to the shelf, helpin~ to increase staff productiviry while enhancin~
customer satisfaction.
Reliable Check-in
• Items are instantly checketl in and removed
from the customer's record.
• Interior or exterior wall mounted, walk-up or
drive-up
• Optional paper receipt
• Helps speed the return of items to the stacks
Configurable Sorting
• Up to 3 bin system
• Customize sort matrix for your library
• Helps improve staff protluctivity
Easy-To-Uselnterface
• Helps give staff and customers confidence
to use the system
• Fast check-in and items immediately taken
off customer's record
~
3M Library Systems
3M Center, Bldg. 225-4N-14
St. Paul, MN 55144-1000
USA
1-800-328-0067
www.3M.com/us/library
Please recycle. Printed in USA.
OO 3M 2009. All rights reservetl.
3M, SelfCheck and Tattle-Tape
are trademarks of 3M.
Flexible Options
• RFID item identification and/or bar cotle option
• EM or RFID security
• Choice of 4 languages from a list of 40
• Staff exception receipts
3M Tag Data Manager
• Freedom to move to ISO Tag Data
Standard in the future
• Empowers the 3M""RFID System to read
country specific data formats (Danish, Dutch,
Finnish and French)
~~1~i~~'~~I:,~1~i ~(_',:~
'picture shawn represents
the 3M Intelliaent Return Plus
~
Dimensions
• Intelligent Return Classic
42" x 20" x 36"
(1066.8 mm x 508 mm x 914.4 mm)
Facia: 31.25" x 31.75"
• Intelligent Return Plus
42" x 20" x 36"
(1066.8mmx508mmx914.4mm)
Facia: 21.25" x 31.75'
• Sorter - SL
47" x 20" x 29"
(1193.8 mm x 508 mm x 736.6 mm)
Energy Profile
100-120 or 200-240 VAC
60 or 50 Hz
Shipping Weight (Approximate)
• Intelligent Return Classic
275 Ibs (124.7 kg)
• Intelligent Return Plus
308 Ibs (139.7 kg)
• Sorter - SL
130 Ibs (58.9 kg)
- 3M" Intelligent Return Classic
Push button user interface
- 3M" Intelligent Return Plus
Graphical user interface
- 3M' Sorter System SL
Sweep technology
Up to 3 bins
~
` ~*~~-~ City of Colleyville CityHall
~~ ~00~.~~ 100 Main Street
~~~ Colleyville, Texas 76034
~ ~ Agenda Briefing 817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: 0-11-1810
File Number: 0-11-1810 File Type: Ordinance Status: Second Reading
Version: 1 Agenda Date: 10/18/2011 Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Community Agenda No.: 5a Final Action:
Development
Department
File Name: Approval of a request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to R40-Single Family
Residential on 1.0 acres on Lot 4, Block 1, of the Mrs. Eva Paul Subdivision located at 1005
Tinker Road, Case ZC11-018
Attachments: Location and Zoning Map • Notification List • Buffer Map • Aerial • Statement of Planning
Objectives • Survey Exhibit • Ordinance 0-11-1810
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 09/26/2011 Planning and Zoning
Commission
1 10/05/2011 City Council
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Approval of a request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to R40-Single Family
Residential on 1.0 acres on Lot 4, Block 1, of the Mrs. Eva Paul Subdivision located at 1005
Tinker Road, Case ZC11-018
Explanation
Second Reading and Public Hearing
There were no speakers regarding this request at the October 5, 2011 meeting.
First Reading and Public Hearing
William Stromberg submitted a request to rezone 1.0 acres of land located at 1005 Tinker
Road from AG-Agricultural to R40-Single Family Residential (40,000 square feet minimum).
The applicant is seeking the zoning change in order to obtain relief from the setback
requirements of the AG zoning district given the size of the subject property.
Lot Sizes. The property is zoned AG-Agricultural district. The AG zoning district requires a
minimum lot area of three acres, lot width of 200 feet and lot depth of 300 feet. The lot
consists of 1.0 acres with a lot width of 150 feet and lot depth of 298 feet.
The R40-Single Family Residential zoning district requires a minimum lot area of 40,000
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
Aaenda Briefinp Continued (0-11-18101
square feet, lot width of 150 feet and lot depth of 150 feet. The existing lot meets the
minimum lot requirements for an R40-Single Family Residential lot and the Land
Development Code.
Setback Requirements. The AG zoning district requires a 40 foot front setback, 25 foot
side setback and a 40 foot rear setback. The R40 zoning district requires a 40 foot front
setback, a 15 foot side setback and a 25 foot rear setback. The applicant wishes to
construct a Tuscan style residential structure, which will expand further into the side setback
than what is allowed by the AG zoning district.
Existing Conditions. The subject property is currently platted as one vacant lot. The
applicant submitted a request for a building permit for a single family residence.
Master Plan. The Colleyville Master P/an designates the future use of this area for single
family residential type land uses. The proposed rezoning request is in conformance with the
land use portion of the Master P/an.
Surrounding Development Trends. The properties to the east and west are zoned
AG-Agricultural and contain single family homes. The property to the north is zoned
R40-Single Family Residential and is developed as a church. The property to the south is
zoned R20-Single Family Residential and contains a single family home.
Public Notification. Staff mailed notices to 14 adjacent property owners regarding this
request. Notice was published in the Fort Worth Star-Te/egram as required by state law and
the Land Development Code. Staff has received no letters regarding the request.
Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation. The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval of this request at the September 26, 2011 meeting by
a vote of 5-0.
Summary. The proposed zoning request is compliant with the Master P/an. The proposed
lot meets the requirements of the Land Development Code.
Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City.
Recommendation
Approval
City of Colleyville Page 2 Printed on 10/13/2011
Location and Zoning Map
e~ox -
baci
11~6 6~f~~'
,(~
~~V4
V~G1
R40
'~°'
saoo ~~o~ saao
ria3
~a~n
~
63(D4 630 t
7
;311 12fi4 t Z1
00 S1tC
~o 14D$ 101~ 11L1~ 11~4
in
5~a5
'~C4 I
'9t1 1~i?5 1009 '
1~11 A i
11fl5
11+?~ ~
1~€71 1~av
w,~~-
~ ~
~~1
fi~13 ,
li
~°`G ~ ~~,
~~~ - ,~~,~ ~
90Q ~2 51]4 94~r 90~f} 1t7~2 ifl0~9 l~~C~: 1tD0 1142 1t4d f1p6 12C1~
R 0
~
,zc~~ ~~o
„~a~
Ga9 943 9~f35 jQ~~ ~
9~7 o1i_v`
104 F~rQ~
11+~3
~`Sf~4
~1 ~:
B2D4 ei1~ b117 9ry09 Sf;
11n1 G ~$~~
r`~ 1;~~1
~ ~
aQ~4 `
'~~ ~ r.'113
~ fir,13
Notification List
OWNER NAME
OWNER ADDR
OWNER CITY OWNER
STATE OWNER
ZIP
SITUS ADDR
Good Shepherd Catholic Ch 800 W Loop 820 S Fort Worth TX 76108 001000 Tinker Rd
Flowers, Keith 1012 Tinker Rd Colleyville TX 76034 001012 Tinker Rd
Usrey, Gerald L 1008 Tinker Rd Colleyville TX 76034 001008 Tinker Rd
Vigil, Stephen L Etux Theresa 1011 Tinker Rd Colleyville TX 76034 001011 Tinker Rd
Agler, Wesley & Teresa 1009 Tinker Rd Colleyville TX 76034 001009 Tinker Rd
Stromberg, William M, applicant 223 NE Loop 820 Ste 101 Hurst TX 76053 001005 Tinker Rd
Decavitte, Dean Etux Michelle PO Box 92446 Southlake TX 76092 000911 Tinker Rd
Gorena, Sandi J Etux Carlos Jr 909 Tinker Rd Colleyville TX 76034 000909 Tinker Rd
Wright, Gary Etux Melinda 1006 Hardage Ln Colleyville TX 76034 001006 Hardage Ln
Rosenjack, Richard & Stephanie 1004 Hardage Ln Colleyville TX 76034 001004 Hardage Ln
Laurence, Joshua 1002 Hardage Ln Colleyville TX 76034 001002 Hardage Ln
Eastham, David W Etux Janet L 1000 Hardage Ln Colleyville TX 76034 001000 Hardage Ln
Collins, Thomas S Etux Martha 906 Hardage Ln Colleyville TX 76034 000906 Hardage Ln
Keeling, James Jr Etux Susie 904 Hardage Ln Colleyville TX 76034 000904 Hardage Ln
Public hearing notices were mailed on Friday, Sept. 9th, 2011 by Amy Shelley.
Buffer Map
~~~t
~
13
~ ~
e~~•
~' _~~
aac5
~~ir
:31
8~13
e~~~
~~1~ g~-~s
o2CS
~ eG4
~
:.- _~
~~C~
~ I
~ 5v~C~3
ByG3
~a~ C~
g~~1 95~G ~5r~1
3v,pC
t'~ ~3
1i7~ 11~~ '1CW
~-~ ~4
!~4C 1 4
11C9 ~
e-~G2 ~
~
~
ea~~a i1~" 11~5 ~
., ~'
1 i1[~ ~~ ~
[
e'~,~Q 83C1 e
r
~ ~ 1D12. 11~C+ 1164
~~9~ ~' ~_ `~ "~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ t
e~rv
~-~ ~11 1~~~Q5 1~~C~F :1.. 1ia` 1175 "G5 -2Ct
e?ta
6sC~~ ~~`~ !s ~ :~GB °[~p~~ 16C~ 7:i~u: ~'LC3 11~i~. 11:1~ "L"3 11~6 ..=71
~ ~ ~
~ `Y~j
~
..C71 e118 58C~C
9d1 5~~3 8~5 b~?"r 1ai~~ .,~,~ ~~ ~;_
~..~ 53~~~ 'c~~:~
3'~ ` 1~=~r~ ,..C1
Aerial
Amy Shelfey Statement of Planning Objectives
Subjec#: FW: 10U5 Tinker
From: WIL~IAM STRC3MBERG
Sent: Thursday, September 2~, 2Q11 4:56 PM
T~: Amy Shelley
Subj+ect: 1005 Tink~r
I wc~uld like to rezane my prc~perly at 1Q05 Tinker Rd from Ag-kgricultural zar~ing district to the R4(?-Single Farr~iiy
Residential zoning district. I recently applied for a building perrriit ta contruct a new home and realized that the setbaelcs
far AG zoning district would nc~t allow for rny design. My lot only contains 1 acre, not 3 acres like the AG zt~ning district
requires therefore the property is c~nsidered a lot of record. T~e R4Q zoning district will allaw for the fl~acibility with the
canstruction of my new hc~me.
Bill Stromberg
V
o.~
~
0
0
0
~
m
z
C)
m
t
3.6
m
~" Z
~ O
~~
~
r~ Z
0
~ N
~--I
.'Ll [O
O ~p
r ,
r Q
z O
m
LOT 3 `+
MRS. EVA PAUL~S
SUBDNISION
VOL. 38$--0, PG. 35 7
P_R.T.C.T. ~
~
~
i
r
z
~
~
m
z
r~
m
30' B.L.
~~~ ~
1.026 ACRES
FENCE
LOT 5
MRS. EVA PAUL'S
SUB~IVIS[dN
VOL. 3$8~-0, PG. 357
P. R.T. C.T.
~
O
O
v
~
m
z
r~
m
-- F~tD.58"iP --------5' U.E.-~..._.~.--- --- ---.~...~.
o WpQR FENCE ~ N s~r (L~p~ a ~P
WEST 150.00 °~
LOT 5, BLOCK A LOT 6, BLOCK A
HARDAGE ESTATE HARDAGE ESTATE
VOL. 388-0, PG. 357 VOL. 38$-0, PG 357
CAB. A, SLI~E 470 CAB. A. SLiO~ 470
AGCOROING TD FEMA AwP N0. 48439C0095K, ZONE X, aA7E0 9-25-D9
THE AB05IE LOT DOES NOT LIE 4YITHIN 7HE 100 YEAR FLOOU PWN, A7 THIS TIME.
LOT 4, MRS. EVA PAUL'S SUBDIVIS[ON, AN ADDITION TO THE C[TY OF COLLEYVILLE, TARRANT
COUN7Y, TEXAS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED ]N VOLUME 388-0, PAGE 357, PLAT
RECORDS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
LEGEND: TF
• IROk P[N ,~~ oF TF L0~ ~RAIVSOM SIdR'V~ORS fNC.
O IRON PIPE ~P 6~ s' FR 'F'q CHARLES B. HOOKS, JR.
A eois ~•wec sra-c~ .,, ., ,,. . G' ~`' ~°`~' REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
ORDINANCE 0-11-1810
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS,
AS HERETOFORE AMENDED; BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AND
CHANGING THE ZONING ON 1.0 ACRES ON LOT 4, BLOCK 1, OF THE MRS. EVA
PAULS SUBDIVISION FROM THE AG-AGRICULTURAL TO R40-SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A
PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS
($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville has received an application for rezoning under Case
ZC11-018; and
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville deems it necessary, for the purpose of promoting the
health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the City to enact a new zoning
ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has appointed a Planning and Zoning Commission to
recommend the boundaries of the various original zoning districts and
appropriate regulations be enforced therein and to recommend a new
zoning ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has divided the City into districts
and has prepared regulations pertaining to such districts in accordance
with a comprehensive plan designed to lessen congestion in the streets;
and to secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers; to promote
health, general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the
overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to
facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage,
schools, parks, and other public requirements; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, has given reasonable consideration
to, among other things, the character of the districts and their peculiar
suitability for particular uses, with a view to conserving the value of
buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout
the City; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Colleyville and the City
of Colleyville City Council, in compliance with the Charter of the City of
Colleyville, and State Law with reference to changes to zoning
classifications under the Zoning Ordinance Regulations and Zoning Map,
having given the requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after
holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all the
property owners generally, and to the persons interested and situated in
Ordinance 0-11-1810
Page 2 of 3
the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, the governing body of the City
of Colleyville is of the opinion that said change in zoning should be made.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT all the foregoing premises and findings are found to be true and
correct and are incorporated into the body of this ordinance as if copied in
their entirety.
Sec.2. THAT the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyville,
Texas, be, and the same is hereby amended by changing the zoning of 1.0
acres portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Mrs. Eva Pauls Subdivision from the AG-
Agricultural zoning district to the R40-Single Family Residential zoning
district, as depicted in the attached Exhibit "A" and described in the
attached Exhibit "B".
Sec. 3. THAT the above described tract of land shall be used only in the manner
and for the purposes provided by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of
the City of Colleyville as heretofore amended, and as amended herein.
Sec. 4. THAT any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or
terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for
in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyville, and upon
conviction shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed the sum of Two
Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense.
Sec. 5. THAT if any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or provision of
this ordinance shall be judged invalid or unconstitutional, the same shall not
affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or any portion thereof other
than that portion so decided to be invalid or unconstitutional.
Sec. 6. THAT in addition to and accumulative of all other penalties, the City shall
have the right to seek injunctive relief for any and all violations of this
ordinance.
Sec. 7. THAT it has been found that there has been a change in conditions in the
above described property, it is now necessary that it be given the above
zoning classification in order to permit its proper development and in order
to protect the public interest, comfort and general welfare, and requires that
this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage.
Ordinance 0-11-1810
Page3of3
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of
2011.
The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of
2011.
ATTEST:
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC, CMC David Kelly
City Secretary Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
Matthew C. G. Boyle
City Attorney
EXHIBIT "A"- Location and Zoning Map
J~
fae. y , ,. -
ti
h
_ _."..r`.1
1135 ~i4~U
E.:C'= ~~t
_ _%~
,3a;.i ~~~ ~,~~7 R4
7~~t7 11~75 faI7L1
jy~]s
t+~~7
~
t
~ s,:~: ~s `'~ ~ I '
i
~ ~ e 125~
~' f 91iP ~ ~G~9 1ar~ i`~~ 11~ ~
~~ r;~rsr
~Qy 41t 1~95 IGGRa 1a1; i Ir': I wCdF i~~rS~ i~p1 i?~4
=«E J~
fi ~
r:~~ ~
~V
Y'~ I~~a 1
G]p 'H;? ~04 ~ 17~~i 7[T3~ ivftl is,:~,•, ~11~~ 11~~ 11CU ~1_,3 !:;]li
i ~ ~
~ ~_-
+
1°~~U"3 ~~~J
h:0o i
~a~l 4~= ~~ ~~7' 7fsf.i j,~ ,'~i17
7~~~r 1]G it~: -`tDG ~Y! _*s},
b9+~v
~~ad
311.~. ,i, 1,
~~~.;~ . -_~~~,
~, ~~,
~5rs~03
~ Cf~~i7
~
'-_ . ir~;~ ' ~5_~ . ~ ~_11'c:
~ ~"i_ 9?.
Exhibit "B"- Survey Exhibit
~~f~~ ~"~1~~1~ .R'~~
~~p ~a~.~o .~ ~~~~,~~ ~~~~~~
.,~. , ° ~~r ~ ~~.€~~ ~a, ~ ~• ~
~
N
~.
,~o' ~.~..
~
~
a
~
-
-~
~ -
s~
m
~
~ ,.~
~:~
~
m
~
~l7i~ ~
'~` -
~
~ O r.~a,zs .~~c~r~s ~.~
IR.lN F~NCt.
~+ -~I 41i
~ ~
~ h.3
SL? ~
~ ~
r ~
Z ~ Ri
~
m 4~
-.
F
I.[7T ~
~A1~5~ ;=IJA ?AL~L°S ~
~ ~~T ~
SfJ~C7R+15:CN ~1~5, ~k,+A ~AUL'S
4'{~L_ 3~~~..~y. RG_ 357 Sl,!~~f+#1~3C~:h~
~.R:T.C.T. ~x ~. 388-L}, .F"G_ 3~7
~
~ ~?.~_~,~.T.
~
M ,
~
~
~ ~
~ ~
~
[s.~
~~ Fta7.5S.~ ----.w,.,^,.__6' UeEe-~-- ------- -~ ^,.`~_
q N+C~O~ €EF$LE ~ ~ 9E~ ~~P~) N>
't~EST 1~~1.p0 ~'
~.[D~ ~, 8~t~-~ ~ E ~.Ci ~. Bk.~7C~ A
~A;~[?AGE ESTAT'~ ~ ~1A~QA~E ~'S~AT~
VC7~, ~~B-0. PG. ~57 ~ V;~~, ,388-?~, ~G_ 3~7
~~.F3_ A. SiJ[]~ ~4~~ CAB~ ,4, ~LI~F ~7p
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
File Number: 0-11-1811
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: 0-11-1811
Version: 1
Requester: Community
Development
Department
File Type: Ordinance
Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Agenda No.: 6a
Status: First Reading
Controlling Body: City Council
Final Action:
File Name: Approval of a request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to CC1-Village Retail on 0.6
acres on Tract 3A, Abstract 206 of the B.B.B. and C. RR. Co. Survey located at 5300 Pleasant
Run Road, Case ZC11-017
Attachments: Location and Zoning Map • Notification List • Buffer Map • Aerial • Applicant's Request
• Zoning Exhibit • Ordinance 0-11-1811
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 09/26/2011 Planning and Zoning
Commission
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Approval of a request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to CC1-Village Retail on 0.6
acres on Tract 3A, Abstract 206 of the B.B.B. and C. RR. Co. Survey located at 5300
Pleasant Run Road, Case ZC11-017
Explanation
First Reading and Public Hearing
John Horobec submitted a request to change the zoning from the AG-Agriculture zoning
district to the CC1-Village Retail zoning district on 0.6 acres located at 5300 Pleasant Run
Road. The subject property is vacant, unplatted and zoned AG. The applicant is seeking a
zoning change in order to increase the marketability of the subject property.
Lot Sizes and Widths. The CC1 zoning district requires a minimum lot width of 150 square
feet and a minimum lot depth of 120 feet. The subject property contains a lot width of 87
feet and lot depth of 320 feet. Although the lot width does not meet the minimum width
required under the CC1 zoning provisions, the area and dimensions of the subject property
are considered legal non-conforming under the Land Development Code.
The property is required to be platted prior to the issuance of building permits.
Surrounding Properties. The surrounding properties are a mixture of office and single
family uses. The property to the north is zoned CN-Neighborhood Commercial and
developed as a general office use. The property to the south is zoned AG-Agricultural and is
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
Aaenda Briefinp Continued (0-11-18111
developed as a private storage facility. The properties to the west are zoned R20-Single
Family Residential and contain single family homes. The property to the east is zoned
AG-Agricultural and contains a single family home.
Development Trends. The development trends in this area primarily focus on office and
single family uses.
Master Plan. The Master P/an designates this property for future retail use. The proposed
zoning designation would be in compliance with the Future Land Use Plan.
Public Notification. Staff mailed notices to 25 adjacent property owners regarding this
request. Notice was published in the Fort Worth Star-Te/egram as required by state law and
the Land Development Code. Staff has received no correspondence with regards to this
request.
Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation. The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval of this request at the September 26, 2011 meeting by
a vote of 4-1.
Summary. The proposed zoning change is in compliance with the Future Land Use Plan,
which designates the subject property as a future retail development area and is consistent
with the surrounding zoning designations.
Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City.
Recommendation
Approval
City of Colleyville Page 2 Printed on 10/13/2011
Location and Zoning Map
Notification List
OWNER NAME
OWNER ADDR
OWNER CITY OWNER
STATE OWNER
ZIP
SITUS ADDR
Davis, Bobby Joe 8304 Old Springfield Pil<e Goodlettsville TN 37072 005313 Pleasant Run Rd
Ethridge, Edgar 3324 Dustin Trl Hurst TX 76054 005309 Pleasant Run Rd
Hart, Kay Lynn Foster 5301 Pleasant Run Rd Colleyville TX 76034 005301 Pleasant Run Rd
Brothers, Lloyd PO Box 45 Colleyville TX 76034 005310 Pleasant Run Rd
Figueroa, Robert & Beverley 817 Central Dr Colleyville TX 76034 000817 Central Dr
Groffman, Steven Etux Beth 815 Central Dr Colleyville TX 76034 000815 Central Dr
Gable, Michael & M A Smith 813 Central Dr Colleyville TX 76034 000813 Central Dr
Young, Catherine Sue Est 811 Central Dr Colleyville TX 76034 000811 Central Dr
Horobec, John, applicant 1404 W Irving Blvd Irving TX 75061 005300 Pleasant Run Rd
Hart, Kay Lynn Foster 5301 Pleasant Run Rd Colleyville TX 76034 005301 Pleasant Run Rd
Liberty Banl< 860 Airport Fwy Ste 100 Hurst TX 76054 005217 Pleasant Run Rd
D&V Wall<er Famly Ltd # 2 5501 Normandy Dr Colleyville TX 76034 005226 Pleasant Run Rd
Liberty Banl< 860 Airport Fwy Ste 100 Hurst TX 76054 005201 Pleasant Run Rd
Village Management Ltd 8333 Douglas Ave Ste 110 Dallas TX 75225 000038 Veranda Ln
Silveroak Land Company Lp 6308 Westcoat Dr Colleyville TX 76034 000034 Veranda Ln # 210
Winchester, Natalie 10300 Morado Cv Apt 701 Austin TX 78759 000032 Veranda Ln # 110
Silveroak Land Company Lp 6308 Westcoat Dr Colleyville TX 76034 000042 Veranda Ln # 110
Silveroak Land Company Lp 6308 Westcoat Dr Colleyville TX 76034 000044 Veranda Ln
Village Management Ltd 8333 Douglas Ave Ste 110 Dallas TX 75225 000048 Veranda Ln
Village Management Ltd 8333 Douglas Ave Ste 110 Dallas TX 75225 000070 Casa Ln
Silveroak Land Company Lp 6308 Westcoat Dr Colleyville TX 76034 000068 Veranda Ln # 610
Pitts, Rex A Etux Melanie A 66 Veranda Ln Colleyville TX 76034 000066 Veranda Ln # 510
Turner, Lori Etvir Joseph 62 Veranda Ln Colleyville TX 76034 000062 Veranda Ln # 310
Bell, William M III 60 Veranda Ln # 210 Colleyville TX 76034 000060 Veranda Ln # 210
Federal Home Loan Mortg 5000 Plano Pkwy Carrollton TX 75010 000064 Veranda Ln # 410
Public hearing notices were mailed on Friday, Sept. 9, 2011 by Amy Shelley
Buffer Map
~ ~ao ~~~
~4C~8 824 82C! 81~ €~1~ ~Q~ ~(~~ 8[]+~ ~i7~~
~~8
~ 13 ~41 ~:~ ~
~~ ~2 ~,€~ 17 ~ 13 09 €~}5 p ~
5~12
712 71~ iiG 8I2 ~~1~ ~~'~ 82Q
~;ss 13 4
~~~ ~ s ~ ' 1
~ ~17 5~1 [J ' ~
711 i 13 I~15 811 813 815
5'iQt] ' ~
~ 5~2~ ~22
,~
°1~~~ ~''~~~~ ° °~ ~~~,~tm
~~~1
~23~
~~oa
~~2~i~
52f~ 1
~~30C~
~~00
Aerial
~~~
' ~i~~5 e.~'~~1~ "~~~
13 ~ . ~.
:`~ ~. -
. :- ~,.
~_ ~
~ y ~~ ~. ~ ~
~ ~.
~. ~ ~~
~ ~ ~• _ ~
.I ~ ` .
f
~ ~~~~
, , ~ , a
I 1 _ ~ ~ ~ ,~
G ~f ~'5 ~ ~
Applicant's Request
'~VHITF`XELD T[ALL SUR~tE'S~OR,~
3SS9 WILLIAMS Ftt~AD, StJITE 1(}7 F{~RT 1tVORTH, TEXAS 76t 16-7~}~]
TEL: 8~ 7-560-29 t 6 FAX: 560-2996
To: Arny Shelley - Community r}eve~opment Cac~r~iinator
1 QO ilffain Streefi
Calleyville, T`exas 76fl34
Re: Zoning request 530C~ Pleas~nt Run Road
iVlr. 3ohn Hart~bec is r~questin~ the grogerty be r~zoned fram AG tc~ CC-~. Ivlr. Horobec is
requesting the ~hange in t~rder ~t~ increa~e th~ marketabilit~ c~f the prt~gerty. IVSr. Horcrb~c has had
inquiries on the prc~perty fc~r use as an o~ce in the past. Wl~en th~ property is rezoned, Mr. Hc~robee
wi]Z ~roc~eed with ~I~~ting on the property.
t
Thanks for your a~sistance in this matter.
, ~!'.~~~t..r`
y U. L. Wil~iams
F.~gistered Professic~na~ Land Surveyor
v ,
arrrnnLnu. ~ y ~
~ 4 ~
rnu.ern~s _ ~
crrr euu: ~ I
S~ ~ ~~y ~
e ~
~' 40' li[TII,~ING LINET
~ GLAAE ~
GLADE " ~
~~ ~~
~
__VIC[~ITTY MAP - NO'I` TO 5CALE }I
~
I I
I
~
F
~
a~
~oT3, s~ocKi ~I
RATLg'F ADDITIOPI I
VOL. 388-1fi2, PG 57
~ P.R.T.GT. ~
~ za~veo a-zo ~
51NGLE FAhiII,Y RE5fDF1V77AL ~
~
~
~
~
~
I ~
f ~
'
'
12^C1
I
ILITY ESMT ~
• - - -
_ _ ^ ~.
F-
~
~ F~
~ UaTZ,n~ocKi ~I
f C Rnrr.~ annrrroH ~
~~ caB. ~., s~n. saa ~
~ ~ e.aT.c.T.
I
2UNEU R-20
SINGL ~
~
~ £ FAhiILY RE5I-EN17AL
~3 f
~~ ~
L- iz~ ~rru,rrY Esnrir
-,.~._.~----- --J
95.00'
i - -
~
'
~
~ ~-,,._..~~_ 1
----._..~._..~.___.-----,~.~..~~-
~ ~ ZS' B[TII,DING LINE ~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~
~
~~ ~1 ~
~ ~~ LOT 1, BLOCi(1 z~ o~
~ ~r ZONE6 CN QI o ~
NEIGF[BOHIl00fl Cp51hSERCIAL .a
H
I~ a
~~ ~I
~~ ~ NI
I
~ RAfTLII'F AD ITION
~ V(pL. 388-132 G, 82
1 I ~ E
il [ E
~ 12' U'fILI'PY ESM'I' ~
~---------o ~ it ------ i ---- .~_...-~
N 89 49 00 E 200.00 ^~ ~ ~ ~c nn
3za.oo~
POINT ~F
BEGINNIlv
p ~~B. & C ltAILROAD Ca. SURYEY
4 A IQ6
~
00
0.639 ACRES
JOHN HOROBEC
INST. NO. DZ06357773
D.RT.C.T.
aoNEn nc
AGRIC[II,TtlRAL
W
_°o °o
0 00
O
O
C/~
S 89°49'00" W
320.00'
n& v w.~i.~x Fnn~.Y ~.r. N o. z
QH5T. N0. A244220b91
D.R.T.C.T.
xarr~o nc
AGRICULTURAL
ARE BASED OI~I THE BEARINGS A5
~206357773, DEED R~CORDS,
ovv~R
EPICTED IN THI5 SURV~Y LIES
A5 SHOWN ON THE FLOOD
T COUNTY, TEXAS AND
34C0095K MAP REVISED
JOHN HOROBEC
14D4 VV~ST IRVIlVG ~LYD.
IRVIlVG, TrXAS 75061
DALI~AS COUNTY
suRVEYOR:
WATTFIELD - HALL SURVEYORS
REGI5TERED PROFESSIOHAL LA~D 5URVEYORS
J559 WILGLLM5 ROAD, 5[1T['E t07
FORT WpRTII,TEXA5 7G11S
~~
REGIST'ERE]
3559
FI
IL„!f /// /
C~~at ifi^ plet
a er are no ~i~il
ORDINANCE 0-11-1811
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS,
AS HERETOFORE AMENDED; BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AND
CHANGING THE ZONING ON TRACT 3A, ABSTRACT 206 OF THE B.B.B. AND C.
RR CO. SURVEY, FROM THE AG-AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT TO THE
CC1-VILLAGE RETAIL ZONING DISTRICT; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville has received an application for rezoning under Case
No. ZC 11-017; and
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville deems it necessary, for the purpose of promoting the
health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the City to enact a new zoning
ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has appointed a Planning and Zoning Commission to
recommend the boundaries of the various original zoning districts and
appropriate regulations be enforced therein and to recommend a new
zoning ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has divided the City into districts
and has prepared regulations pertaining to such districts in accordance
with a comprehensive plan and designed to lessen congestion in the
streets; to secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers; to promote
health, general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the
overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to
facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage,
schools, parks, and other public requirements; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, has given reasonable
consideration, among other things, to the character of the districts and
their peculiar suitability for particular uses, with a view to conserving the
value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land
throughout the City; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Colleyville and the City
of Colleyville City Council, in compliance with the Charter of the City of
Colleyville, and State Law with reference to changes to zoning
classifications under the Zoning Ordinance Regulations and Zoning Map,
having given the requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after
holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all the
property owners generally, and to the persons interested and situated in
Ordinance 0-11-1811
Page 2 of 3
the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, the governing body of the City
of Colleyville is of the opinion that said change in zoning should be made.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT all the foregoing premises and findings are found to be true and
correct and are incorporated into the body of this ordinance as if copied in
their entirety.
Sec.2. THAT the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyville,
Texas, be, and the same is hereby amended by changing the zoning on
Tract 3A, Abstract 206 of the B. B. B. and C. RR Co. Survey, from the AG-
Agricultural zoning district to the CC1-Village Retail zoning district, as
depicted in the attached Exhibit "A" and is described in the attached Exhibit
<<B„
Sec. 3. THAT the above described tract of land shall be used only in the manner
and for the purposes provided by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of
the City of Colleyville as heretofore amended, and as amended herein.
Sec. 4. THAT any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or
terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for
in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyville, and upon
conviction shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed the sum of Two
Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense.
Sec. 5. THAT if any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or provision of
this ordinance shall be judged invalid or unconstitutional, the same shall not
affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or any portion thereof other
than that portion so decided to be invalid or unconstitutional.
Sec. 6. THAT in addition to and accumulative of all other penalties, the City shall
have the right to seek injunctive relief for any and all violations of this
ordinance.
Sec. 7. THAT it has been found that there has been a change in conditions in the
above described property, it is now necessary that it be given the above
zoning classification in order to permit its proper development and in order
to protect the public interest, comfort and general welfare, and requires that
this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage.
Ordinance 0-11-1811
Page3of3
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of
2011.
The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of
2011.
ATTEST:
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC, CMC David Kelly
City Secretary Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
Matthew C. G. Boyle
City Attorney
EXHIBIT "A"- Location and Zoning Map
~79
1 _ ; '1G4 1r~Q
C~3
~ F?_:' ;,
~~
54, 5232
E217
1' ~F
~ 'f - _' _
c-,el ~ ~/
~ r' "~ __' Af
°.'1~- i1C3 ~.
-'CI `1p4
~~ ~ 11G7
- ~ ~ ,`~'t:l =1L"9 51J9 ' ~
it~J~ ~ ~'
51_-
:*1 i ~i~? ~p~ /~
/ i'~~ PL7 ~ 7'S . r1
,y ~ _ '
a'~ i~
~~ ?413
:=L'9
/~~ 1
~-~1+~~~r~'~
~`C~ __~, i
;~ ~
~~ ~ J~~F ~
V~
~J;~'
"~- I IL'i
S I C~3 h~~
EXHIBIT "B"- Legal Description
~3~I~ifi ~(~.6a9 a~re irac~ ~f lar~d in ~e B.B.P,. ~d ~. ~.a~lr~a~ Co. Sr~r~fey, A.b~ts~ct N~inber
~0~, ~~°t~uat~d in T~rr~t ~~unt~r~ '~°~x~~, arid ~~ir~~ ~1 c~~ tha~ ~~r#:~ir~ tra~t af land d~~crib~d i~
dee~d ta~ J~~ ~~r~i~~c, r~~~rc~ed ir~ ~r~s~t-ument ~-~. T]~~4535~7?a, ]~~~d R~~~rcis, T~rr~t
+~c~r4u~t~, ~"~x~~. T~~ b~.aruags ~'or this d~scripti+~n are b~ssec~ v~ the b~~rings as they ~.pp~~r ia~
~~. I7r[~~~57773, ~~ed R~eord~, Tara~nt Ct~~ty, ~'~x~~. ~a~~i d.5~'~ ~~t~~ tra~t c~f l~nd 1~~ir~~
€~e~crab~~ ~~ r~~t~~ ~nd b~urlcls ~ fc~ll~r~~:
L~EGIh~Ni~~r at ~. .~18" ~c~a~ ~~~ f~u€~d at ~h~ €~~~'t~i~.~st c~a~~~- ~f s~~~1 3ohn 1-l~r~ab~~ tr~~t, ar~l
t~eirag ~n the ~~~~s~ ri~ht ~~ a~ra;~ 1Fr~e ~af Pl~~~a~~ R.ur~ ~~~d, ~ SD' ~ublic ri~h~ ~~' ~~ay, and b~~n~
~Icrr~:Y~ ~9~4~'~~'g E~~~~ ~. ~i~~~~e~ c~f 2~,S~t~ ~~~t fr~rra-~ t~~~ sc~~sth~~~ cs~r~~r ~F L~~~ 1, Bl~ck 1,
~t.at~~ff~ddii.~~na ~-~~~r~1~d in ~~al~tr~~ 3~~a1~2, T~a~~ 82, Pl~t ~e~~+rds, T~rr~~~ ~~a~r~t~, Tea~ast
TI~~~~ ~~~~h ~0°~~' ~(3" ~~st, ~~~~~ t~ie s~id ~v~t ~~~it. vf w~~ lin~, ~ di~~~ac~ c~~ ~i.~~3 ~'~e~
ta th~; ~tauth~~~. cc~rr~e~ ~f s~id Jaha~ ~Ic~rcab~c gr~c~, az~d b~ir~~ tla~ r~c~rt~~~t c~rra~~r r,f ~hat ~~r~a~~~
t.r~ct of l~n~ c~e~~r~~ed in €~e~ ~~ l~ ~'~"~~d~~r ~~.~~~y I~.F. l~o. ~, ~e~=c~~~d ir~ l~as~r~rn~r~t ~T~.
~~~~~~~~~1, ~~~c~ Tt~~+~~d~, ~'~rartt ~~a~ni~d ~'~x~~;
`~'H~NC~ ~~~tF~ ~4~49'~]~D'" 1~~st, aZ~n~ th~ c~-t~~m~n lin~ ~f s~~d J~}~ H~r~~~~ ~~~, ar~~d s~a~ -~
8~ ~ i~~'~d~c~.r F~il~ L.P. ~Ica. ~ tr~et, a ~li~t~ce ~rf ~?[~.#~[~ l ~~t t€~ fi~ie ~~a~t~i~as~ ~~rn~r ~f` ~~t ~,
~1ac~ l, ~,~tl~ff'~,d~liti~n~ reeord~d in ~V~luni~ 3~~-I~~.~ T'~g~ 57, Pla~ T~,~c~ords, ~°~~t C~w~ty~,
~`ex~~~
'I`I-IENCE I~1~rth ~~~~~}'~[~" ~~st, d~p~rting the nc~rth jin~ c~f said I7 ~. ~ti,~'' ~al~;~r Farri~ily L,.P,
1'~0, 21-r~~~, a.~d ~~r~tinuin~ ~llt~n~ the ~~rnmvn la~~ ~a~ sai~ ,~ahn I-~orc~b~~ t~~ct~ ~nd ~a~d ~t 3, a
dist~r~c~ ~f ~~E~~} Fe~t t~ tl~~ n~rthwest cr~rn~r ~f s~ ~d ,~s~hi~ ~c~~~a~ae~ tr°~ct, ~d ~i~ir~g at th~
~~~~~~r~~t ~amer ~f T..~cat ~, ~l~ck 1, R~tl~~ ,Acldi~:i~~, re~~rded ~~ ~~binet F3, 5iide ~~~-, ~I~t
~e~~ar~s; 'I`~rr~n~ ~c~~a~tty, 7~~as;
T"~T~T~IC~ ~T~~h ~~°~~"I~~'" ~~str ~ep~°~ir~~ tl~~ ~~~t l~r~~ ~rf` said Lat 3, ~.nd ~~nti~uin~ alc~n~ the
n~rt~ liz~+~ ~f s~id J~~n I~~rrc~~~ ~r~ct, p~.s~ir~g the sc~~athe~~ii ~:~rr~~r c~f ~aid ~,c~t ~, sa~e ~in~ tl~~
s~~tlav~~~st co~m~° ~af ~~~1 ~.~~ 1 at a distan~~ ~~ ~~.~}Q ~~~t~ ~n~ y~s~i~g ~~~ sotatfl-i~ast cc~rn~r ~f
s~ad La~t ~ at ~ ai~t~ra~~ a~f ~.~~.~~ Fe~t, ~z~d ~~~inuiai~ ~car ~ tvt~l d2s~aaice a~ ~,~~.6~ Feet tQ ~he
~'C)I1~T ~~ ~~~IF~'t~`I~i~~ a~.d c~antair~~r~~ a~:~a~pa~~~~d ar~~ ~f~.~39 ~c~°es, n~.t~re o~• Ie:~s.
-~~--~ ~~~
r ~.~.,'~fg~.~]c~11115 ~~'~ s~z~~~=~(Y;~~
~. ' ~r~d ~'~~f+~s~ic~~al Land '~uiv~y~r ~• ~ -~~~' ~ ~~~'~~
t~
~'~~~~ ~~~1S~I'~~1q13 ~{]. ~~ ~ ~ aaH~ir+y p c.. tivis'.i.i .RS~,
~ ~`~ dR~B
~~'[; S S i~ .~~'~
gpEAKER CARD
Date: ~U ~l ~ ~ ~ ~
~ Wi~~ Speak In Suppo~ of this item.
-- ~ W~~~ speak In Opposition to this item. ~SUppo~
i do not wish to speak, but please record my:
~
~opposition I ! ~/ ~i 11
C~-- OrdinancelResolution Number:v~.-
Agenda Item Number: ~
~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ l~ ~ \ U C-j'.
Name: ~
Address: _ ~ ~ 1.~~~,'~°~-'~(~ (~-~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~
~ Zip Code: 4
~ ~ ~ ~ ~e State: ~ - ~~.
City: ~~~ O ~ Representing: ~ nlse-f)
~ ~'~ ~~~' (organiz
Telephone Number:
1 understand I am limited to speaking for five minutes.
a enda as a Public Nearing, ~-tY ~~uncil wil~ not respond in
business not listed on the ngMeetings Law, Chapter 551 of the Texas Local Government
For
accordance with the Texas pe
Code• i /I:C~~~-
~'~~~ ~~ a Public Record.
$igned: ` T ~ ~nformation _
SPEAKER CARD
Date:
I will speak In Suppart of this item.
~ I will speak In Opposition to this item.
I do not wish to speak~ but please record my: ~SUPP°~
~ t opposition
~ ~
enda Item Number: ~ ~ OrdinancelResolution Number: ~-
~ Ag ,~•• ~ _ .,. .. :^ L t i :~~ .~
Name:
Addresst a ~ ` /
~) r ~-~
~ State: ~ Z~p Code:
t~
City. p
, -'~ . ~CJ -- ~ ~~tepresenting:
Telephone Nu er: (orga ization/self)
I understand ! am limited to speaking for five minutes.
t res ond in
For business not listed on the agenda as
tin
accordance with the ~gXas Open 9'
'`~.
Code. ~
~ ~ ~, n
Signed: ~.~ ~`'~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ; ;
a Public Hearing, City Counc~l will no p
Law, Chapter 551 of the Texas Local Government
on is a Public Record.
~~ !
Date: /~ - ! ~ ' 1
SPEAKER CARD
I will speak In Suppo~ of this item. I
_~/ I will speak In Opposition to this item.
I do not wish to speak, but please record my: ^SUPP°~
^opposition
a Item Number: OrdinancelResolution Number: -d 1-~~g~~
Agend
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; l ~ U U-
Name:
Address: ` r ~•~_K- ~,_ ~ ~ '(
Code: ~ ~ O 3 L/
` I ( State: ~_ Z~p
City: ~~_ ~
Telephone Number:~ I~ 7~~ ~~~~ Ll`~ Representing: ~orga ationlselfl
1 understand I am limited to speaking for five minutes.
For b~ance w thtthetTex s OpengMeetings Lawb'Ch pter 551
accor
Code. /1 ~ , . ~____-...
Signed:
City Council will not respond in
of the Texas Local Government
v
This infor tion is a Public Record.
Date:
~ ~ lr s/i i
SPEAKER CARD
I will speak In Support of this item.
~/ I will speak In Opposition to this item.
I do not wish to speak, but please record my: ^support
^opposition
o -~ - -1~~~
Agenda Item Number: t' `' Ordinance/Resolution Number:
~' ~ ~ ~ L „~ ~. ,2 ,, ~c F .~ ~n ..~
Name:
Address: ~ ~
~- ~ 5 c~_fi _ , p.-, ~
(' ~ //P ,., / ~t State: ~ ~ Zip Code: ~ 6 8~ ~
City:
~l7 S~~ G 7y~ Re resentin ~~ r~
Telephone Number: P g~
(organization/self)
1 understand I am limited to speaking for five minutes.
For business not listed on fhe agenda as a Public Hearing, City Council will not respond in
accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551 of the Texas Local Government
Code.
Signed: ~
This inf rmation is a Public Record.
File Number: 0-11-1812
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: 0-11-1812
File Type: Ordinance
Status: First Reading
Version: 1
Requester: Community
Development
Department
Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Agenda No.: 6b
Controlling Body: City Council
Final Action:
File Name: Approval of request for a Special Use Permit for off-premise beer and wine sales on Lot 1,
Block 3, of the Heritage High School Addition, located at 5100 State Highway 121, Suite A, Case
ZC11-016
Attachments: Location and Zoning Map • Notification List • Letters of Opposition • Buffer Map • Aerial
• Statement of Planning Objectives • Business Information • Floor Plan • Site Plan •
Ordinance 0-11-1812
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 09/26/2011 Planning and Zoning
Commission
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Approval of request for a Special Use Permit for off-premise beer and wine sales on Lot 1,
Block 3, of the Heritage High School Addition, located at 5100 State Highway 121, Suite A,
Case ZC11-016
Explanation
First Reading and Public Hearing
Tania Crawford, on behalf of the Sunflower Shoppe, submitted a Special Use Permit (SUP)
application to allow beer and wine sales for off-premise consumption in the Sunflower
Shoppe facility located at 5100 State Highway 121, Suite A.
Zoning. The property is zoned CC2-Shopping Center, and the sale of beer and wine for
off-premise consumption is allowed in this zoning district with the approval of an SUP.
Off-Premise Consumption. The applicant is requesting to sell alcoholic beverages that
include beer and wine. Liquor sales would not be permitted. The Sunflower Shoppe is a
retail store that sells mostly grocery items including natural foods, beverages, vitamins and
pet foods. It currently occupies 11,648 square feet in Suite A of the larger 16,848 square
foot multi-tenant retail building.
The German Deli was approved for the same request by Ordinance 0-10-1751 by City
Council on June 6, 2010. The German Deli is located adjacent to the Sunflower Shoppe in
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
Aaenda Briefinp Continued (0-11-18121
Suite C and occupies the remaining 5,200 square feet of the building. The German Deli
sells mostly German foods, beverages and gifts.
Business Information. The store hours of operation are Monday through Saturday, 9 a.m.
to 9 p. m.
The owner has submitted a site plan and floor plan for the existing lease space.
Staff has not added the hours of operation or the floor plan to the proposed ordinance.
On-Premise Consumption. On-premise consumption of beer and wine would not be
permitted on the property and is prohibited by state law.
Distance Requirements from Churches, Schools and Public Hospitals. The Colleyville
Code of Ordinances requires that businesses that sell alcohol be located at least 300 feet
away from churches, public and private schools and public hospitals. The property satisfies
this requirement.
Master Plan. The Colleyville Master P/an designates this property for future retail use. The
proposed zoning designation would be in compliance with the future land use plan.
Surrounding Properties. The property to the north is zoned CC2-Shopping Center and is
developed as a restaurant. The properties to the south are also zoned CC2-Shopping
Center and are developed as a grocery store and retail center. The properties to the west
are zoned CPO-Professional Office and are developed as offices.
Public Notification. Staff mailed notices to 24 property owners within 500 feet of the
subject property regarding this request. Notice was published in the Fort Worth
Star-Te/egram as required by state law and the Land Development Code. Staff received two
letters of opposition to this request from property owners within the 500 foot notification.
Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation. The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval of the request at the September 26, 2011 meeting by
a vote of 5-0.
Summary. The proposed SUP would authorize the sale of beer and wine for off-premise
consumption, but would not permit sales of beer and wine for on-premise consumption. The
property satisfies the distance requirements from churches, public and private schools, and
public hospitals.
Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City.
Recommendation
Approval subject to the conditions in the proposed ordinance.
City of Colleyville Page 2 Printed on 10/13/2011
Location and Zoning Map
' s~~~a
~
~
~ CC2 .s ~ ;
N
.`f
5i _
~21= ~1='1?
~
a
. .~ = 'S ^^ _ _ a.Q~b~C [
i
~ '
- ~
J [
~ jGV~J .5~..~I
. } .
}
.
'
r . ~,~~.'~ ~S~u~J
4~ ;.5
~~ 4
~ ~
~ ,~ z~s Site
;
v,,,; =~ ~y, -
..
~*,.' ~?~ '.3G
4
~
'3~
4.' " 3
~
~ PUDR
7 5
52!~~ `~~~ a~~~ ~~d ~~a
S, . -~ 511= ~ '~ ~0
;~ ~~u~q ~1`~]
; T_, s1C~:] ~~^'C
~~^,' ;jrt ~11C~ CP 4'i0~
cN
~
,~
~ -
~u5. ~.7'~ 1 4+7~~ diJ~J~ -',.15
1 ~?:,
E-1 L~0
.~ '
~i
J ~
~~"~~~ Si~F.'~ SC~~]?
4G
~7~J9
~~'S1
~ `~U~~ i
~11
~;, '-- 50~4 ~,~~f~0
"
~ SCa.f j~]G~
' V q
Cl-.: ",
s ~ so~2 (1~ ~
*,'
- ~ C
.c~tea _~a.7 su2.
~il~'~ ~q'; ~ ~
~
•` 'kJ . 3~3~ C
2
~„~~4
;iL57 ~~~~~ ~~L~'17 \.r
~al:~~
:;C~~~]
~~ I
C
C
~
~[1'~~
SO~C
~n:5~ ~,~~~; = i i
f
SC~n~7 _:,.E~ ~03'
~
SCIl71 ~L~13
:~54 :,r^?
Ogn
353~7 i
_ 3~y~ ~
# .S~i.~,A, J~7~^, ~L~~L
J ~
9
~'d1~~~
.70~v ^
~
~~
{"~.-.• • • ~~ ~
~._~-ru ~ ~~
-~. ~
Notification List
OWNER NAME OWNER ADDR OWNER CITY OWNER STATE OWNER ZIP SITUS ADDR
Grapevine-Colleyville ISD 3501 Ira E Woods Ave Grapevine TX 76051 005401 Heritage Ave
Old Badger Ltd 4214 Gateway Dr Ste 100 Colleyville TX 76034 004214 Gateway Dr
Jr's Steakhouse II Llc 5220 State Highway 121 Colleyville TX 76034 004204 Gateway Dr
Sekin Family Holdings Ltd 634 Regency Xing Southlake TX 76092 004215 Gateway Dr
Dfw Wnm Ltd 7321 Commercial Blvd E Arlington TX 76001 005100 State Hwy 121
Ayers & Ayers Plaza Ltd 4205 Gateway Dr Ste 100 Colleyville TX 76034 004205 Gateway Dr
Tal< Enterprises Inc PO Box 171676 Arlington TX 76003 004012 Gateway Dr
Mills, Gary W 305 Augusta Ct Southlake TX 76092 004201 Gateway Dr
Empowering Life Ch Interna Inc 2909 Hwy 121 Bedford TX 76021 004113 Gateway Ct
Gateway West Group Lp 1452 Hughes Rd Ste 200 Grapevine TX 76051 004209 Gateway Dr
McMahan Real Estate Llc 6105 Tiffany Oal<s Ln Arlington TX 76016 005120 State Hwy 121
Insight Capital Realty Co Ltd 4101 Gateway Dr Colleyville TX 76034 004101 Gateway Ct
Smile Masters Ltd 4013 Gateway Dr Colleyville TX 76034 004013 Gateway Dr
Ronald Walker Associates II 4009 Gateway Dr Colleyville TX 76034 004009 Gateway Dr
Klmm Ltd 4109 Gateway Ct Colleyville TX 76034 004109 Gateway Ct
Margmatt Ltd 1513 Michael Dr Bedford TX 76022 004105 Gateway Ct
Bradford Commercial Properties 3209 Walker PI Grapevine TX 76051 005100 State Hwy 121
Abs Tx Investor Lp 250 Parl<center Blvd Boise ID 83726 004000 Glade Rd
G Points Sc Ltd, 101 1St St Ste 476 Los Altos CA 94022 003930 Glade Rd
G Points Sc Ltd 101 1St St Ste 476 Los Altos CA 94022 003930 Glade Rd
Tsai Global Llc 28620 Matadero Creek Ct Los Altos Hills CA 94022 005000 State Hwy 121
Rcc Heritage Glade Ltd 8333 Douglas Ave Ste 110 Dallas TX 75225 005025 Heritage Ave
Rcc Heritage Glade Ltd 8333 Douglas Ave Ste 110 Dallas TX 75225 005017 Heritage Ave
Hall, Charlie W Etux Helen F 4200 Glade Rd Colleyville TX 76034 002100 Glade Rd
Tania Crawford, applicant 5100 SH121, Ste. A Colleyville TX 76034 applicant
Public hearing notices were mailed on Friday, Sept. 9, 2011 by Amy Shelley
Letters of Opposition
AYERS 8~ A1~ER~
Attor»eys ~rr-d Cc~unselors
Ayers Plaza
4205 6ateway Drive, Suite 1t10
Ccalleyville, Texas 76C134
{~1?}267-9~9
{817}318-p663 ~facsimileJ
September 1fi, 2~011
Cammunity Development Department
City of Colleyville
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
Re: Zc~ning Case NumberZC11-0'Ifi
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am writinc~ as a busines~ owner and owner of real properCy within 500 feet of
510{] SH121, Suite A. 1 am oppc~sed to the application by Tania CrawFord for a change
in zoning to allaw a Special use Permit for off-premise alcohal sales. There already are
several establishments in #he immediate area who sell al~ohal for both on-pr~mise and
off-premise sale. Based nn #he prc~ximity flf M~, CrawFord's property ta my business, the
already alcc~hc~l-saturated retail area, and Cc~lleyvill~ Heritage High S~hool, i~ is my
befief that Ms. Grawford's app~ication should be deni~d.
Yours_~uly' ~~''
~ f ~`
,~ -
r~,i~~iathan P. Ayers
FtECEIVc t~
~EP ? (~ ~Q11
Per .............
~ec~~~~zer~ for ~~ee~~~,
~~~~~~~
~~~ ~~~~~
~ ~~
~~
Ind~epend~ent ,Sc~iovl ~~istrict
3051 Ira ~. Waods Avenue
Grapevirte, TX ~605 I
8 t71=~s8-9588
~tsTxa ~ 17tas ~ -ss~s
September 19, 2011
To whom it may cc~ncern:
Calleyville Heritage High Schvol and Grapevine-Cvlieyville Independent Schc~al District
submit this letter of protest to the applicatic~n by Tartia Crawford to change zoning for the
CC2-Shc~pping Center at 5100 State Highway 121 to include a Speeial Use Permit for
off-premise aleohal sales. The zaning case number is ,ZC 1 l-016.
Colleyville Heritage High School serves appraximately 2,200 students ages 14 to 19 in
grades nine through 12. The shopping eenter in qu~stian is not only within 500 feet c~f
our school property line, it is directly in the path t~f students fram the southeast portit~n of
c~ur schaol a#tendance zane whc~ must pass by the business to get to and from school. The
marketldeli se11s foad, snacks, and refreshments that our students may purchase.
Research has shown that yaung adults are 50 percent more fikely to drink alcc~hvlic
beverages when exposed ta high levels of alcohol advertising including in-store displays
(Marin Institute). ~dditionally, the Natianal Research Council confizms that alcohol is
the No. l substance abused by youth in the United States and that advertising, including
in-store displays, plays a key factor in underage drinking.
GCISD has a comprehensive substance abuse awareness and prevention program, and we
partrier with our local pc~lice and community to equip aur students with the tools to make
gaod ehoices for their safety and well-being. The district formed the Cc~mmunity
Awareness and Ris~C Education Coalitian (CARE Coa~ition) to involve the broader
~ommunity in planning and implementing preventic~n strategies to safeguard GCISI~
yauth. The Cc~alition includes representatives of all sectors ofthe community, in~luding
busin~ss, who wc~rk to educate students and parents about the prevalence of yc~uth
substance abuse and prevent abuse and its related consequences. We do not believe it is
in the best interest af our students or aur scht~nl community for a store in such close
proximity to our schc~ol ta be allowed tt~ seli beer and wine fQr off-premise cansumption,
Thank yau for your cc~nsideratian.
Sincerely,
~`" ~
1'~"~
Becky Prentice
Principal
Colleyville ~-Ieritage High Schc~ol
Patti Davis
Executive Director of Administration
Grapevine-Coll~yviile ISD
Buffer Map
~ ~~~
~ ~,
~
~
,
°
~
~ 4214 ~21f3
~
5207 ~~~ ~~~ Y
~ .r}2~J ~
~~ ~ 1 $215 Q
~l 42f15 `~'
~
~ ~201 "'
'A~ ff ?
~ .~3
~2C11 400i] 4~!D4 4~08 ~ ~~
1 ~"`4~~~ "~
~ f '~ d2{3J
y^
r 5120
~ 410~
~30f11 4405 py~~p 4013
a ~ a~ ~~i o0
1
~
502'I 51~25 ~
3~ 3!~
5017 ~
~0~0 50Oa
5C~ a 3
90d
~
3948 3~20 --~~~~'
.., ~ , i~ y • ~ ~ - - ..{
~ ~ ~~~~ , , '
.
~
. ~ v
'~
~
~~
~
-_~ ~~
~~ ~~ ~~ ~
~
. 4 ~, -
~
~
~
~+ ~__ '~~~
. ~
.~~ ~
~ ~ ^
~
~ ~
~r ~ "~~
~ ~
~ ~
+~ i' ~~
~'
~
- ~ ~i G
~' ~, ~
.' -; ~ ~..,- - -
i: ~ - _ _, ~~,
~
~ V
~?
'~ }
" 'I +
. ~ '" ~ .
~ ~
~ ~ ,~
~ . ~~' ,. ,Y
~,
~~ . ~ i .
D
c~
~
~'
Statement of Planning Objectives
~1{a{} State Huvy 121, Suite A•Colleyville, Te~s 7fi054
817-i3~9-91 f10
Fax $l~~u~J-990~
~Vebsite: suuflow~rshoppe.co~
Statement af Furp~a~se
~unflower ShQp~~, locall~ c~wned and c~~~rated b~ the third generatic~n c~f the Bradfc~rd family,
is Tarrant County's premier natural foods and ~it~min stc~r~s since its inc~ptian in 1~70. ~s a
fixture in th~ Tarrant ~c~unty ~~ea, Sunflc~u~er ~h~ppe has two ~~catic~n~, one in Fc~rt t~u'orth and
anc~ther in Ct~lley~ille. It has ~Tc~n countless accolades in the highly ct~mpetitive natur~l foods
industry as a leading independent retailer. t~e are passionate about our fami~y legacy and
equally passic~n~te abc~ut helping c~ur p~trons lea~ a healthi~r life, ~s ~~ell as fulfilling their in-
dividu~l requests. A.s mc~re c~f c~ur customers u~~ Sunflc~u~er Shc~ppe as t~~ir primary~ grc~cery
stc~r~, many have asked that we sell cc~nventi~~al ~rines as well as local} organicx andlor sulfite
-fr~~ wines. It is our inten~ic~rt to meet this ne~ed by prc~viding a~ variety af wines in ~pproxi-
mately 35~ square feet of floc~r sp~ce within c~ur 11,85t~ s~u~re faot ~tare. ~t'e estimate sales of
packa~ed wine at our facility to b~ about ~C~,0~0~1.
Business Information
51~t} State Hwy 12I, Suite A~Ccalleyville, Texas 7IX~1~554
8i 7~35~9-~2 OQ
Fax 817-3~9-~~~
Website; sunflo~~rshogpe.com
Sunfl~ower Shvpge
FACI' SHEET
History HealthY ,A~Prc~ach Market w~ found~ed ~ctober 18, 19~3 by Rick and LaVonne Sradford.
They maved the thriving stare fram G1ade Road ta its ciurent 14catian ~n J~Iy 5, 2000, Healthy
Ap~rQach Market was renamed Sunflower Shoppe in 2008 so that it would be a~1.i~ted by cc~nst~ner6
v~rith Sunflower Shogpe in ~'art Worth, also owned by the Bradford family.
Employees S~#lower Shoppe employs about 18 fiull-tarne and 6~~rt-time peaple ye~r-round.
Sixe of Store Appraximately 11,850 square feet and over 1~,5Q0 products
Basfness In 2~1~ the store had over 141,U0{~ tr~nsa~ctians vv~ith appro~mately ~5,4~t~,~Gi~ in sales.
Tra~ttsackions
What we Vitamins, natural foc~ds, gluten-free f~ds, refrigerated foods, frozen fo~, ~airy pra~ucts, meats, bulk
Offer foc~ds, pet faod, ethnic food, baking items, sn~ks, beverage~„ persanal and beauty care (HBA) ~nd
mare.
~t~~t~nmers Appro~nately 30°~o c~f aur patrans are f~om Colleyvi~l~ and Grapevine. A.bout '70°~0 of onr custamers
from ~~j~ent cities ~HEB, K.eller, Sout~zlake, etc... ) and ~aunties (Dallas, I~enton, etc... ~. Gener~]ly,
our custQmers ar~e ~ga 4~+ -w~ith 65% af` them beitl~, female. The S~nflawe~ Shoppe shapper is inte~e~ted
in natural an~ organic gra~ceries and supplements, includisig vitarruns, frozen and refriger~te~ foods, trulk
foc~s, dairy prc~ucts, health and beauty products and gluten-free prc~cbacts.
~4?h~ doe~ ~uitflow~er ~hoppe want to s~ll wlne?
In short, th~r~e reasans - c~~amer demand, convenience and cornpetition. The demand and re-
+~uests from ~sur custamers for camrentionai an~ specialty w°ines has iti~r~eased si~;ni~icantly and
cc~ntinues tc~ grow stead5ly. Additionally, as Sunflower ~happe is becom.ing the prirnary, one-stap
graceiy stc~re for many af our customers, a wiste cate,gory would row~td aut ovr selection to reflect
what rr~ny grocery stores offer. We strive siso to be competiti~e with our c~rntemporaries. There
is a grow~ng t~end in the natural f~ds in~ustry ~,nd with our competitors to offer wine. We strive
ta ~re competitive with our fellnw nattu~al foad retailers in all product categories and offering w~irfe
give us a competitive e~ge.
, . ._ ~.. . . : . . . .. '~~ . . ' . _ . ; ~. ~ .~.; ..: .. ., .: . . ~, . .
,
I I
- - ~ - ~~ , ' _ . 4 "- ~ ' , t ~. . Entranea
"". ~ ." ' ' ' ~ . . _ _ . . ,. . ~, _ _ .-.~ i .. . . . .. . . . ,. . ~ . . ~. i , '. . . ~ .. ~ . - ~
~ , .p ~ ,, . " . , . ' t , ._ " ~ . . : ; . , , , -
. . . . , . . ; + ;.,~ _,. . , . ... . . . . ~ . ~ . . . . _ .- . ~ . .
,<~ . ' . ~ __ . . . . . . . _
~ ~ _ . . . _ _. ~ ~ , r : . . , ,. .. . ; . ; ~.. , .
NaukR~wrn .,:~~,. ,4LSWma ~:-~ . . .. . . . . . . . . .
I I
: - .. ' Sr+Ar.e ` '~ .' ~ ' ,' _~...
~~ ~ ' ~ _. . . ~ _. _.. . i a. -~~ .
; .
. •'i., . _ ' ~ . ~ ' . .... _ i . . .
. , .. ~" ., . . .. .. _ µ _. _ . . i ~ . .: . : ~ .. . . . . ~ ~ , .
' . .. _ ~ . . : : . '
1 "' i
. . ... . ... .. _
. . , , . . . «. ~ . . . . i , . > 1 e _ . . ~ , i ___' . ~ .i . r ~.._. _ .. . a " _
, '',, . . . I -
. ~ ' ~ i . . ~ I . _.. ..... ._. ~ _ ..Q . ..
.:. . . _ . . ....'_ ..._... . . , . . . .___.. 'i . .. . .... . i . . ,._ i ~ ~ . L .i. ~ . .~.. . , . . _.. , . {.. , . ~ _
. . ..... . . . ' .r._.. ..: .1. _.: ~ . . .._._..-.-.+._. i , . ~ i .~, ~ } __..I a _..I,. :. ~ i , ~~ . . ~... . +~ ...: .... ,
.. ~ ~ I ~. . ..
. . . ( 1 . J. , ;a :Abe 'e ~
, a
_ . ~ , ~ ._
~ . ~
~ " ~~~ ~ i ~ - ~ ! ~-~ ~_-r s . ,.;
._,: . . ' ~ . . ~ ,.:. ', .. r ~~ ~"*!~~r ,~ ~ i ~ T ~ _ T - ~.. ~- . . . '~ I ~
i
, . F _ , , . i ~ ~ t i.~,F'~ .
_ ~ ia. .~ ; : . . j. t ~.._ ~ . ~ _ .. _ . . " . i ~.
. ~i ~~ .u ~. .~ , ~ c.ur S~ - i . i '. ~ ~ ~me I + ~ ~ ~ __
~ ~ r , ~ . r ~ , t- ,. ,
. ,. ~.. ~ t ~ ~_ ~ . F _., +_- I ' ~ :- ~ _ ~ ~ ~~ ~ T
~-
~' ~ 1 j ~ ±i l +E' { i ~ 1_ _~ -~.-1 : . ~ ~.I I -
.
~
_
a
. . . ~, - ~ i . ... . . i ..,
F ..I I +-i- ~ i ~ I~ I ~ j i a. __ .~ .. f oera _ i '
, ~
, . . ; ~ -- ~ . _ i i -- ~ - F .,. I 4 .;._. , . ~__ i - I -' ~ ~ - i~" ~Jwrvt ~3_ .
,
. _, ! . ... i. : _ j . ~ 1-.. ~_!_ . . . {-1_. ~ .~ ~: l : _.. ~ i , _.i. +.._ #._. I ~~ ~~ , ' ~.._+ , ~~ ~ T i rt ry(~~I... -I_ __ ~ __1 _ ~ _ ' ..
w : 1 ~. r I ~ . ( _I ~ ~ ~ i.__,_', . , ~~ i ~ i ~?"~ ~ `~ , .in.e , ' i . I
~ j a ~ t
_ . . 'I. ._.I .. . ; . , ~ . a { i~---- '_.~- 7 , . , . ._ , . , . ..r_. ~..t ~ '-' ~ ~ ~ Fwa +."__t. ~
i 4
.. eaih~«~~n ~. . ~ . . , ' , _, , . ...:._ 7...~. ''. , . _ _~ '. ~I . __.T _. . . ~ ' - i . , ~ .
~ : , ., ~ ' ~ ~a _ I 1 "4 { I a ~ a rHl ~ ~ ~ _
, ~, /
PI }
~ _
i t
: ; , ~ ~-r r i ~.... , ` }..__ ~ : t + aa a~ r -' t ~ ~
i i
, . . - _ .., , _ ~'i _'_ ~•-., n~ Gallc.~.. (
, , . ' ~ ' t ~ ~ I _t . ..
a ' r
~ i . t . ' . , r ~- i ~ , ' , t... y t
~Nat
% ~ . i . ,
. _ 1 ._ - ' , E , . I ~_i
i - I ' ,_ ~~ ~ a~ ~ ..
.. . . . , ~ i , i , ~ 4 ~ -- -.'_.~ ~ ,~ _ {~ -, t .
- ~ ,- -
-- . , . .. -- --
. ~ ' ~-1 kTD' ~ ~1
. , Pi Ytb°^' . _. . . . . ~ .. ~ I ~ . . ... ,.s I 3 - RI efl n
. , • ~ ~ GTsKOm ~ li ~ I.
' ~ i ~ . n . . : ._ . . ~ '~ . t~. t i . } . . i , ~ -_._ . .i , a . ..! ,,. . ~~ , _ _ ,... ~ I {
.. _ ;, . ~. . ; ~ . . ;_.~__ _ . » _ I a_..... , _ p i_ ..(^ :' 1~~ I ~ ~
. . . i ~ y~ Givtm~ F , ;:., . ' Ca a~ i I .. ~.. ;:.. e ns " .a°u' `..r Mood ~.
tm ~ . . ' . . ~...I I ' i y~ -{ i
_ . ~ . . I , . f ,
~ ~
~ : .4 . ; ~_' _._ '~~ ^~„~ p o L I ..~"Lh~~ . . . . . E_ _'i ' _ . . . .
i
- : ~ ._ I ~ ~ . . . . ~_ . .
~
~ f
~ .
. F
~ ~ i i a...-k.~^ .-~ - i -M ~ P ' f„~ p.~ip, ai ee . ~
~
. . i^T"T°"''~---+--, ' . ~ ~. . ' . . . , . . , .
r_ ~
; ~, ~. : ., . . . . ._. _ . _~ ~
~, ,
... .:_ , . : _ ». ; . ._~,~ . i ~ . . f.~ _~~ ',, ' . .. i ~..~. ~.~
F ~ ~ ~ ~ i
'~ , _, , - . . . . ~ i ._ , +. 4 . . ,. q~ t cn.r~ . ~ - -`- { i
~ ~ m , -~ ~ ~ r 7 ~t .. ' +
~ , . .,.... . . . ~ . . .:
r i i ' ._- ~ ~ - . . ~ Y ~ t . ~ y ~ ,£ eri 4 t ' * ( , t T
a i I
1
T w 1
I i' 1 : . . . -_~ .!.~, "' I i . _ ,.k~ t~ ~ ' ' ~J ~ ~' i I E _ oxd.n~r ~ ~ eo 4 ~ ' ~ ' : _ I . i _ '
.§',,~ ` ~ ~ ;. ~ r . . ~~ j , .-.;• ' ~- ,-- Pr n Sa4aeay'.. -( . I .
~ . . ~. _. . . . , .. "" CF t_..~ . i .. I I "r Y
~ ~. ~. . t . . . : -V ~., . ~ .„~ ..~, '~ -... . ~ ~ .~.~ . + .y 0 M ~ ~iM ~ IK i ~ _" t ' _ ' .}
I « ~ , ~. _ .y ~ ~CI.__
Nt
.:.~
I _
j ~ aadvw~ ~ :..1 -l..i . j._ a1 ~~Nuerc~ ~ ' t{ife'-r +' . ~
~ 7 r/ At { -. . ~~pL ~. ,,~R ', . ~ i . -~ 1 . . ~ 1
~i~ ; ,r t ..__... ' ,!'~, V i . _ .i. ;."~w 'If_._
. , .¢ ,h 4 . '•~' , 'Wr ~ . ~. ~ . i ' , I t
I ' I I
,,- .. 1{' . , ' ~~ ~ _" ' ~~(._~ '
,` _..~~ t ' I
~
.: .- ,
x I
! a r~
~ ~.,. ~ ~
. . . . V .' k r .. . .i "
, ~ ~ . . i ~. . " ~ tis
ti } ... _ _ .
...i. . . . ' ___ . ; . y , r i .
, . ; .u. i. . _
i _ l _ . ~ { ... E
PN
i ~ _ ~
t Wt
.. ~ ~~ I ~ + ~ ~) Btlttlm
~ ~_[ ,
Wn[ tro[tfr, ~'~ . ~ ~ + • ~q,p~~ ~ I ~ ~, I~...1 Mactn
PaQe `'xi ~ , Y'j + 1 .
~ ,~ .. 1 G0ndM5 ~~ ' ~~ ~ ..' - ~ I ~ ~~*~p~ f` '~
' ' -~ ~ Rtd Spo .
. , , . . ~ . . . , ~1C ler _ .""
FaPx ~ . ,. . : ., • . . "' I _ ' ~
_ I t i_
'~ ~ 8a W Fwd ~ P onw ~ t t~~ R P amo y "--i ~~'
. ,
. _ , ~ . . _ n . . . . }
. . . ., . . . . . .. . .
,
,,.
,: ,~ L
t.
~ ~ ' AImOn6 '. • ... Ga Y •. ; N R8 d . -~ ' I t
~ J , .~~: ,.- ' . . . .._
_ ~~~
bt ' ~
~ . i '- ~ .~. ClMii B r ut eulten . ~eck~~ . I . ~ 1} ~.. ~ ~
. ~' _
"~~ , $py,~liice ~Saipi i ~cra ke~ ' ~ ~&~It " ~ ~"
. ,. . : ~ _ . '_ .. ..._a T~.".
_~ H C
_ . .e I ,,,.. ,,,, 1 ~ ^ iCeck~es _ _ ~._-. 1 I ~ E ~
. : ~
_ ~ ~+
V e .. ,~ ~
" ~ ~~ 4 ...~ ~:_. C d ,,,R "~'~ . i
NwxW ~ ~ I . -t T `__
~ ~. .~~ C ~` f{~~ k B1 1 ` _
?Y syuP g ~p " { :.CM1P?I ~ 8uk ' I ~
• ~ . • . ~ . _' t ~' Sc I 15aPRk,es ~ .
Ce k, Co d( 'tz« ~de~_ I ~- '~ I -.- +
; 3 { i I
r I ~ l.- ~ G ~ ~-
~ b k' y P P t i•~ Chua B~ Y
~ E BaBS I ~~ i ~. ~ ~_ 1
_.. ~~ ' ~..,. s iec~re,t ~ , .,,. ~ i~& .. • ~ ~w ~n~ '-. ~. ,. ~ t j . { +$p . H_r.
, I ,, f ~ ' . ' G. cn ~eu~e ! - + ~. _ ~;
.
• }B ~ry V p . f
G ~~« ~ _~ , r _, . .,
rmwed -~ ,
~ .,. a~cl eaar. . -. h . ; - ,_
w
., ...
e a
Bakinq
Pe'riood
t -. i .
. . ~.._ : ~ aups •'
6ulkG '
F
_ . ~ , .. r F[~ee ~ Arre ~.. • i
. _ . _ ~ __
~ E
~
r
_
_ ~ . ; „ rh ~ 'w,mr ~dwn~t
i
- ... , .. ~ : j ."'"_ T` ( .
,
. _ +f i
(
~
,
~
~
~
C Mdk Ca e
t
.
~
SP PackS h
i ~ { I ' ~ e kf s~ ~ . . ~ ', ( Vtat a ~ . ~.i
'__"~~ . ~
~ l-
~
~ I ~
~ ~~
...
~
~
M tjph
Ch
~ Waftk9 Me t M4fk
E~
butte
k
.
F S , Ch
I
P~If - 1YOy rt
KB~C tid
{ ~~ ~.
V
fi~t
~
-
i
, . ~ ,. . ._ i
.
.
. ~
.....
. ,
.
_ . 7_; . ,_ . ~
',.. i I I 4. '
{.._ ~
-
~
_,_ i a
~~.'E~a ~ ~~ t ~ C~ j~-, C kryi t f i ~ ,i ..
_• 1 r'i~a~i -~ bf j ~~- ...
r f rt t i _-I
w C ~_t~ ~ . r .~ -t
~ t CMdremom ~Mh 1 y ~ 1 _.I f
' q+a MI . . 7 ~ t
_._ , __~*~turei . . , _. '. . . ~
++nr~ a r
~ M1 ro~on+er .. onf ..IWaY:. i _ . . ~
~
i . .,. . € .. ~. ; _ ~... . I. .',-
. . .r . - . ~ . - t " S Iab~ I I
_ .
I ` ` N
~ . _ 7 .~ ~_ _ . .~_
. _ . . ..: i._ ~ I ..
I
! } . F nlab~~~ , , ~. . .r_
._ _. . . .... . . .. .,'
~ ~ ' IN ~ . . , .
~. ~ 1 ~~f Ernpty . ~ ` ~ , ~... I ,, ',
~ C Oiui¢x ~ ~ y ~~ ~. _ ~ 'I .
. . ~ . : ; ~ f e .
. t~: ; ' . , { .,. ; . L . . _,. . r . ~ ---t-
~~ . . , ; _ , t __r _ ,
~.__ ~_._;< <.._..~ ~,;. ._ _,:, T
t .... . I . .. ~
~ _ i • f
_~ _ .i . ~, f ~ . ; t I C-.
! .
E ' FO}p , ~¢ r ~ ~ ~ - _
~.
~ . _ , ~ ,.. . ~ . ~- y
I. ._ N~'~, . . _ ; .~_ < < ,.~ ~ ~ . ~. 1 ~ - i
~Y. 1 i
.. . : ~ .. , . i I ~
I~~+~~~Oid f ap .+ I i } I I
~ _ {
I t ` { ~_ . .~ { ~" } _
r«( N ~. b~ t ( i I I.. 1 .~ _ I ±.
~ i.
i
+ ~ . i '~ } :. i~-i e i
, ~ ._ i . _ _. . . ~ . _ . ' ~ , - t ~ "
` r. ~ . _' i ' -I ~
~ Old !
NeW ~~ ( i -~ i I _' i t i T t i
. ~ . '.AUr ~~ ,
Y
~ °" L ~ ' ~ - - ~ ~ ~ "
+~. ? 1 ~
~~. ~' P eosed Wi eSeamn ~ -I~ + ~,- +.-~-4 { ~.. ± _:.
..~~ ~ . _~ f, ..~~
: ,
i
. - . ~~.~ ~.~ , ~
~ , ' ? ~~ r ~ ~~ ~`j
~,
~ . . . . . ,~ ~+ .i
. . _i. . . ; ._. ; . .-.-.. ,. - ' -' ? ' ' ~ ;
, ~ I
, _ , ~ .... ~ . ~ . ~ .. , . ' .'_ _ . ~ . -
. , : . ~~ _ ~ . __ ~ i. .
~ .,.. ~ . _ ,.. . , ;. { , i ~-~-_ i 1 j
. , .._ . ._.. . , . r : , ~
} .
n . . ... ; . .. r ~, . i . ~... _ '. _ : .. ' . ' '. ~ . _
!
. . ~ t 3 . . I . . ; . . ~ ..~ . , i 4._.
~ i
i
i . __. . . , . : , . i . . , . i . . ~ r .. ,,.. ~ . ,
~ ~ .
.. ~ . ~~. ~ .. ~ . , . .. . . ._ . .. t _ : .
_ . , ~ , . . . . . i + ~ '.
. ~ ~ . . ~ . . , f ~ . . .
,1
~
~
~
~
p1
~
Si fE ~ATA iABLE
oRq F26 u3C WEf+L~
ty~qy: CC-2
/ p«yaaMCr 7-k
/-\Y f' j' ~'~I 4~Mi1R~AU~ rinE PiAt ~- t tla[
Wlf.. ~~r~f'~ SomNrt FwFO: 1tS
IA,~pt,E~ ~ _" ~f a ~~ 01 WEA 3.PY] A4n[S - C/.MG M 31
~~~~~ Bu+LCwLVi[~4i~~ 36'-6-I[~+RH SP'-~0°
LOf'1F U LC~ UintRaG 5•IE ~a..sai w ~r
~~~~~,T VMw~NGAEPi~xgO ~Sf
p~Ilxini: PNB.HU€U 52~
vac«r ea
pEFa t3
i1M~dC~p AARNI%G flLWNEO '+
nu~(,~N PaP ~nG YFO~'CCO ]
+'~ RerRrainclar o# TracE I, Vplume 8962, Poge 10fl , n guao~c co-,rn a~ Y
Z ~ Z,Q 3 C! PAHU4 CC~ER c~, P ~-y ~
ry 1 1I0.Y0]~ ~ !{! La{M So~aCE I zo: nn ran`t+• L~
G' ,q 4fi.3 ~_ 107.8 __Y . .~U.Q I! 1 71,4 1i(7.8 ry 4i7.0 - ~~"
~ ~ N 8S"55'17"E 568.86' ~:;~ ~c + r''
J ~- 9. ~ c~ ro~ ~
'24,tl~. ~~ a . ~ ~~.~ ~LL'
~ ~ 1~~~ a . _~ _-_ z,s~.-~ ._._.~. ~. ~
00 .~~. twrtneu eww~c s' e/ r m 7~P. dc TEamt, +~~r ~ t ~ 9i
W ~ - ~n swcex !'42pf~~: ~ i; ~^ - rxc u.+e rs a ie osrw^ 4. BB24~P. 2t~ ~~ ~
~ m ~.3 , G~ w l~ K 2i 0 dr Y. 27 7, P. ~L -'i~ L3
.c 2 ,0 ~ = ~ Tn~~ ~~I
3 ~ t/! i~ ~' ~+ 'o fP~ ~ •~
~ iV 3 'rw~w+. - -~ ~ ~ r I'74I1 ~ e.n ~. '~IV ~ 4lN~
~~_ zs ~ - r:«=_F ~; - -~~f~ d
,v'1 ~ .. ~ ~ ~.Q ~~ K 9 iY r i1~ ~• °~
~ ~- ' ~-?- f~ f~ ~, ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ i > > .. Z ~
~ ~~ f ~~ ~ F F :~~,~~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ _, ~ a~~~_ ~ ,~ ~
~ 6~ ?4"q 24.U ~~ . o~ i sr r~~
~ 6..ANUSCAf'4MG y ~1~1 l~' ~~ ~g.~ ~ ~ ~ ° "~°XP'c :c«w,~ ~ ~
a n ~ r.~c w~c ~ - -- ~ ~ i~ f 1 B.[~ ~ - ~~ - ~ ~--°° V ~ i^~ g~ ~ ~ o ..}_~,,. ~
il' ~6 a
~ - _~ ~ 4~ ~ ~ ~aQ•o 1~ ' , ,~ ~ az e E~ ~E T a~ _ ~ i ~ ~ ~ n~~. ~ v ~ ..
a
I
•~^ : :~'tiCi , 1 I ~ ~
. _ _ ; ,a.. Y~3 _ 1f WK[5 ~
~ _
~ 8 ~"w"~'~"~`''cx,~~c ~~~L.~ ti8 _ .. [ I _3~.~ a .`~ f{ ~w~sP '- ~~39•4-= .~~ _ _ 36 - :al~~ ~ x~ ~~ ~ ,~.
__ a
- °~, r a s agys i. N" o o ~_ ~. i.~- E°~ . E~, ~~, ,wf. ,
- co,a3---.,,,'--~-~" ; . ': •.', , Pna. q~aln
-..: '~". '._ . . . . . ~ "`~c`r~.~r. , . . ~ . . .- ~~ ~ rAocatJ
....T ., i: ~. .. . Con~r cuib . ~~.. ,` -. ... .. ~: : . ~ ~~ ~ran
$° SewBr Lirle " W . pRani 561. 13 3S ~roin. & Ukilily Esmg" 5~~;yr Lone ~~ Faund~ r EXi57. 2d R.G.P.
581 B•1 ina 58d.2b Non-Barrier Accis Ea ertsent~ Val. 8}93~ Pg. 1895 nmended-VoF-83~r'..r, .~~7-- ~.
~ KKf +-iA
Int 7. Block ti, Glgde,Po+nts - Phdse 1 R~^` ~@~ ~
F, L. ~ 57 ~~. 86 Nt~mE [.:~u w on-enu
ORDINANCE 0-11-1812
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, AMENDING THE
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AND CHANGING THE ZONING OF LOT 1, BLOCK 3 OF
THE HERITAGE HIGH SCHOOL ADDITION LOCATED AT 5100 STATE HIGHWAY
121, SUITE A, BY AUTHORIZING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR BEER AND WINE
SALES FOR OFF-PREMISE CONSUMPTION; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville has received an application for rezoning under Case
No. ZC11-016; and
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville deems it necessary, for the purpose of promoting the
health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the City to enact a new zoning
ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has appointed a Planning and Zoning Commission to
recommend the boundaries of the various original zoning districts and
appropriate regulations be enforced therein and to recommend a new
zoning ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has divided the City into districts
and has prepared regulations pertaining to such districts in accordance
with a comprehensive plan and designed to lessen congestion in the
streets; to secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers; to promote
health, general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the
overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to
facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage,
schools, parks, and other public requirements; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, has given reasonable consideration
to, among other things, the character of the districts and their peculiar
suitability for particular uses, with a view to conserving the value of
buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout
the City; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Colleyville and the City
of Colleyville City Council, in compliance with the Charter of the City of
Colleyville, and State Law with reference to changes to zoning
classifications under the Zoning Ordinance Regulations and Zoning Map,
having given the requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after
holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all the
property owners generally, and to the persons interested and situated in
Ordinance 0-11-1812
Page 2 of 3
the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, the governing body of the City
of Colleyville is of the opinion that said change in zoning should be made.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT all the foregoing premises and findings are found to be true and
correct and are incorporated into the body of this ordinance as if copied in
their entirety.
Sec.2. THAT the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyville,
Texas, be, and the same is hereby amended by amending the official
zoning map by authorizing a Special Use Permit for the sale of beer and
wine for off-premise consumption on Lot 1, Block 3, of the Heritage High
School Addition located at 5100 State Highway 121, Suite A, as depicted on
Exhibit "A", Exhibit "B" and Exhibit "C'.
Sec. 3. THAT the above described tract of land shall be used only in the manner
and for the purposes provided by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of
the City of Colleyville as heretofore amended, and as amended herein.
Sec. 4. THAT the above described tract of land shall be subject to the following
conditions:
1 ~FniFRni
a. This Special Use Permit shall only apply to the use of beer and wine
sales for the purpose of off-premise consumption as described in
Exhibit "B" and depicted in Exhibit "C" of the existing 11,850 square foot
area, Suite A, on the subject property.
b. This Special Use Permit shall automatically expire upon the
abandonment of the business, change in the use, a change in
ownership or upon the expiration or termination of the Certificate of
Occupancy.
c. All requirements of the Land Development Code shall be met, except
where amended herein.
Sec. 5. THAT any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or
terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for
in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyville, and upon
conviction shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed the sum of Two
Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense.
Ordinance 0-11-1812
Page3of3
Sec. 6. THAT if any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or provision of
this ordinance shall be judged invalid or unconstitutional, the same shall not
affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or any portion thereof other
than that portion so decided to be invalid or unconstitutional.
Sec. 7. THAT in addition to and accumulative of all other penalties, the City shall
have the right to seek injunctive relief for any and all violations of this
ordinance.
Sec. 8. THAT it has been found that there has been a change in conditions in the
above described property, it is now necessary that it be given the above
zoning classification in order to permit its proper development and in order
to protect the public interest, comfort and general welfare, and requires that
this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of
2011.
The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of
2011.
ATTEST:
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
David Kelly
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
Matthew C. G. Boyle
City Attorney
Exhibit "A" - Location and Zoning Map
• 5:'0
I I ~ I ~ ~~~ ~
~,. ~ ~,
~~ =21-4 d'.,k _
i
I '
.,Iu= '
~ ~ ~
=, c.e x rx :~ ~~ ... i;=~1 __. ~ ~~ .
. [ - J~H ~7 ~. ~~ J{i'fl'a~ ~1L'G.S ~ ~~. j = L ~M
`~'~ , i : ~g ~, ~-~~'- ~ ~'1 ~~ _.. .~` ~ ~ ~
~ ~ s--
,.. ~ -
~ ~
$~+i L.~ ` ~~ '~`' ' "[]~ -_-._ ~~c7 ~~~a ~o-~a~~~:5 ~ ,~ ~ ~~'~~_j ~~
-r.~' .
i
~ I F:
' ~ 11~ y ~ ~,~ ~ ~~~ ~_-~y
~ iCJ~ I l - ~ ,'~~o
5 ~ .. I ~ ~ r'. { ~,,..
:... l.c . ~-. .
. ~I~ .'~',"~ l .~ ~~, J1~~ ~P ~ '~~~3F ~ .
~~ J i -. _i . .l~_`. .S~~7y Gu~v f ~ f ~
'y`~-~ ~1h ~iio} I f~ TI'~-, ~,~}]
`....,~+;~ s i ==a- ~
~.r _ ~ ~~'.~iJ ~ .. ,~,941
. {~;y ~~il .`I ..: ry.it;~
r
'~ ..: ~ a4~F~4 ~ ff~C' ~ =~'`~ . ~°~ ry ~ ~„
~ c .- ~ 4
-}4 ~~ . (~ .Ci{r3 54:" =~+_'c ~
,i~] ; r~d - ~ , :~ ~ ~ ~ . . . . r~+
~' i' Lr ~ s^~1'
~a_, ,~,r :aa ~"C6 ISUir
.~a 5} ~. +ll~l: ~J'::3
li-4 f ~ 5r t; III~ ~
Cen_ ~S ~J. Ir ~~UI _~a~~
.~.uC'~'J J~hv ~~ ~_~_
I -A
J
"` :'-~: ;4~ 42C~i
- i . ~_ _ .
~ ~
app4 -
i _ :ir3~:i ~ ~ -~~~ . - ~~ ~
Exhibit "B" - Statement of Planning Objectives
51CXf $ta~te ~~sry 121, Suite A {:alleyville~'I'ex~ "5Q74
81 r~99-91470
~'ax 817: 99-99~9
ti~Y'P.~JSJE~C: 61F71~4PFGfS~79Fi#7C.COII]
Statement mfPurpo~:~e
~uriflo~~er Shc~p~, l~ca~i~' nu~ned an~ o~erated b~,° the tt~ir~i generat~nn nf the Bradfor€i farnily,
is ~'arrant Cdunty~"s prernier nat~ral foo~is and vi€~nin stores since its in~:ep~io~ in 197~. As a
fixtur~ in tk~e'I'arrant ~nunt~f area, Sunt7nwer ShQp~e h~ tw~ l~cations, an~ in P~rf l~~~at-kh an€~
an~ther in Colley~'ille. It ~as t~°c~n ~nus~ttes~ tscc~olades ir~ the highly c~smpetitive natura~ f€~ods
industry as a leadiz~g indep~ndent retailer. '~+~ are p~sic~r~a#e ah4u~ q~r familv le~acy ans~
~yt~ally p~ssic~nate about. hel~ing aur ~atrans le:ad a healthier life, as u-e11 as ful#it~in~, theix in-
e~s`~idual requests. As mare ~f aur crasto~ners use Sun~flal~er Shappe as their p~imary ~roc~ry
store, many &~~r~~c as~e~i tha~t +~~c s+~Ii cos~~fenti~n~l rx.~ines as w~ll a~s lt~eal, argar~ie, ~ndl~sr suliit~
-free w•~t~zs. Il is vur inter~~ion ~c~ ~z~t this need i~y pro~,rtdi~g a va~ie~y~ o#'r,~Tines itt appxv~si-
rnatel~~ 35~J square feet offl~or sp~ce within aur 11,85C~ squ3re fnot sta~e. ~~le ~estimate sales c~f'
packa~ed wine ai our facility° tn ne abo~t $~~>~~0,
L~.!'~ ~
" ~~. ~ ~~1 P~1 f
,
- ~ C~~
~ .,~- ~~ ~ ~0~1~,1
~
~
a
a~
~
~
i
U
~
~
~
~
W
~
~
~
~wtir~,~~:''
~~ _~ _;`~.'~~_~;~
~7[ ~ikTF. fFmE
~aa ~
u`
w_
R..~;K
~-- .,.,.
,....~...,a.. - ,~-~
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
File Number: R-11-3417
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: R-11-3417
Version: 1
File Type: Resolution
Agenda Date: 10/18/2011
Status: Resolution
Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Office of the City Agenda No.: 7a Final Action:
Secretary
File Name: Consideration of appointment to the Tax Increment Finance District Board
Attachments: TIF Bylaws.pdf • Tax Increment Finance District Board roster.pdf • Resolution R-11-3417.pdf
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Consideration of appointment to the Tax Increment Finance District Board
Explanation
Reading and Public Hearing
As per the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Board Resolution R-98-1, the TIF Board of
Directors shall consist of nine (9) directors, five of whom shall be appointed by the City
Council. The governing bodies of the Grapevine-Colleyville Independent School District
(GCISD), Tarrant County, Tarrant County College, and the Tarrant County Hospital District,
shall appoint one (1) member each to the District. As per the TIF Bylaws, directors shall be
appointed by the governing body and shall serve for two-year terms beginning on January 1,
or until their successors are appointed by the respective governing bodies.
Tarrant County College Board of Trustees appointed Mr. Truitt Leake to serve as the
Tarrant County College representative on the TIF Board and City Council ratified the
appointment on February 9, 2011, with a term of December 2012. The Board notifed the
City on September 27, 2011, that Mr. Mark McClendon, Vice Chancellor for Finance, would
serve as the entity representative on the TIF.
This item provides for City Council to consider the appointment of Mr. Mark McClendon to
the Tax Increment Financing District Board of Directors to an unexpired term of December
2012.
Financial Impact
There is no financial impact.
Recommendation
Approval
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
BYLAWS OF EXCERPT
REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER ONE
THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE~ TEXAS
STATE HIGHWAY 26 AREA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
ARTICLE I
POWERS AND PURPOSE
Section 1. Fina~cins~ Develoomant or Redevelocment in the Zone~ In order to
implement the purposes for which Tax Increment Financing Reinvestment Zone
Number One, City of Colieyville, Texas (the "Zone") was formed, as set forth in
Ordinance No. 0-08-1124, dated November 4, 1998, creating the zone, the City of
Colleyville, Texas (the "City") may issue obligations to finance ail or part of the cost of
implementing the "project plan" for the Zone as defined in the Tax Increment Financing
Act of the Tax Code, Chapter 311, Vemon's Texas Codes Annotated (the "AcY').
Section 2, Books and Records: Aoaroval ot Proarams and Ffnancial
Statements. The Board of Directors shall keep correct and complete books and
rscords ~' ac~ount and shall also keec minutes of its ~roceedinas and the proceedings
o` ~ornmittees havin6 any of the autnority of the Boara of Directors. All books and
records of the Zone may be inspected by any director of his agent or attomey for any
proper purpose at any reasonable time; and at all times the City Council and the
Finance Director will have access to the books and records of the Zone. The City
Council must approve all programs and expenditures for the Zone and annually review
any flnancial statements of the Zone,
ARTICLE II
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Section 1. Powers. Number and Term of Office The property and affairs of the
Zone shall be managed and contro~led by the City Council based on the
recommendations of the Board of Directors of the Zone ("Board of Directors" or
"Board"), subject to the restrictions imposed by law, the ordinance creating the Zone,
and these Bylaws. It is the intention of the City Council that the Board of Directors shall
function only in an advisory or study capacity with respect to the Zone and shall
exercise only those powers, advisory in nature, which are either granted to the Board
pursuant to the Act or delegated to the Board by the City Council.
The Board of Directors shall consist of nine (9) directors: five (5) of whom shall be
appointed by the City Council of the City; one (1) of whom shal) be appointed by the
goveming body of the Grapevine-Colleyville Independent School District (GC1SD); one
(1) appointed by the goveming body of Tarrant County (County); one (1) appointed by
the Tarrant County Hospital District; and (1) appointed by the Tarrant County Junior
College District (Junior College District); provided however, that if a taxing unit (other
EXHIBIT A
R-~a-1
EXCERPT
than the City) waives its right to appoint a member to the Bcard, as evidenced by written
resoluticn duly adopted by the goveming body of such taxing unit, the City may appoint
such Boardmember in its stead.
The first Bo~rd of Directors shall serve for an initial term ending December 31, 2000, or
until his or her successor is appointed. Subsequent directors shall be appointed by the
governing bodies of the City, GCISD, County, Hospital District, and Junior College
District and shall serve for two (2) year terms beginning January 1, 2001 or until their
successors are appointed by the respective goveming bodies.
Any director may be removed from offlce by the City Council; for cause deemed by the
City Council as sufficient for their removal in the interest of the public, but only aiter a
public hearing before the City Council on charges publicly made, if demanded by such •
Boardmember within 10 days of notification by the City Council that he or she is to be
removed.
In the event of a vacancy caused by the resignation, death, or removal for any reason,
of a director, the governing body of the respective taxing unit (i.e. City, County, Hospital
District, GCISD, Junior College District) which made such Board appointment shall be
responsible fcr filling the vacancy.
Sectlon 2. Meetlnas ot Di~ectors. The directors may hold their meetings within a
public building in tha City as the Board of Directors may from time to time determine.
Section 3. Renular Meetinas. Reguiar Meetmgs of tne Board of Directors shall be
held at such times and places as shall be designated, from time to time, by resolution of
the Board of Directors. All meetings of the board shall be of a public nature unless
pertaining to mattera of land purchase, security, personnel, cr strictly legal matters.
Notice of all regular and special meetings of the Board and any committees thereof shall
be posted in accordence with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Article
6252-17, Vemon's Texas Civil Statutes. There shall be at least one Regular Meeting
held each year in the month of July.
Section 4. Saecial Meetlnas. Special Meetings of the Board of Directors shell be
held whenever called by the chairman, by the secretary, by a majority of the directors
then in office or upon advice of or request by the City Council.
The secretary shall give notice to each director of each Special Meeting in person, or by
mail, courier, facsimile, telephone, or e-mail, at least twenty-four (24) hours before the
meeting. Notice of all Special Meetings shall state the purpose, which shall be the only
business, conducted.
Section 5. uoru A majority of the directors holding current appointments shall
constitute a quorum for the consideration of matters pertaining to the purposes of the
Zone. The act of a majority of the directors present at a meeting at which a quorum is in
attendance shall constitute the act of the 8oerd of Directors, unless the act of a greater
number is required by law.
EXHIBIT A
R-9a-1
Tax Increment Finance District Board
CHAIRMAN
David Kelly
905 Inwood Lane
Colleyville, TX 76034
H: (817) 656-1862
dkelly(a~colleyville.com
TERM:Dec 2010 - Dec 2012
VICE-CHAIRMAN
Mike Taylor
5209 Coventry Place
Colleyville, TX 76034
H: (817) 267-5407
mtaylor(a~col leyvil le. com
TERM:Dec 2010 - Dec 2012
DIRECTOR
Tom Hart
1717 Avondale
Colleyville, TX 76034
H: (817) 540-1171
thart(a~collevville.com
TERM:Dec 2010 - Dec 2012
DIRECTOR
Carol Wollin
4600 Dartmoore Lane
Colleyville, TX 76034
H: (817) 281-3058
cwollin(a~colleyville.com
TERM:Dec 2010 - Dec 2012
Tarrant County College
Truitt G. Leake
828 W. Harwood Road
H u rst, TX 76054
W: (817) 515-6651
truitt.leake aC~tccd.edu
TERM:Jan 2011 - Dec 2012
Tarrant County
Carolyn Sims
645 Grapevine Highway, Suite 6
H u rst, TX 76054
W: (817) 581-3600
cssims(a~tarrantcountv. com
TERM:Dec 2010 - Dec 2012
DIRECTOR
Michael Muhm
6607 Connie Lane
Colleyville, TX 76034
H: (817) 329-3202
mmuhmCc~collevville.com
TERM:Dec 2010 - Dec 2012
Grapevine Colleyville ISD
John Eubanks
7009 Lismore Court
Colleyville, TX 76034
H: (817) 481-3009
lohnteubanks(a)verizon.net
TERM:Dec 2010 - Dec 2012
Tarrant County Hospital
Drenda Witt
1500 South Main Street
Fort Worth, TX 76104
H: (817) 927-1106
TERM:Dec 2010 - Dec 2012
RESOLUTION R-11-3417
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING A MEMBER TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO FILL AN UNEXPIRED TERM
WHEREAS, the Tax Increment Financing District (TIF) Board of Directors shall consist of
nine (9) directors, five of whom shall be appointed by the City Council and
four representing the governing bodies of the Grapevine-Colleyville
Independent School District (GCISD), Tarrant County, Tarrant County
College and Tarrant County Hospital District; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Tax Increment Financing District Bylaws, the members
shall serve two (2) year terms or until their successors are appointed by the
respective governing bodies; and
WHEREAS, the governing body of Tarrant County College appointed Mark McClendon to
the TIF Board of Directors.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the City Council hereby appoints Mark McClendon, representing
Tarrant County College, to the TIF Board of Directors to fill an unexpired term
of December 2012.
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
APPROVED BY A VOTE OF AYES, NAYS AND
ABSTENTIONS THIS THE DAY OF 2011.
ATTEST:
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
David Kelly
Mayor
Date: //~'/~-// -
SPEAKER CARD
/I wiii speak In Suppo~ of this item.
I will speak In Opposition to this item.
I do not wish to speak, but please record my: ^support
^opposition
Agenda Item Number: _~ _____ OrdinancelResolution Number: _
-- 17~9
Name: e
Address:
80,$ .S e~ o
State: ~____ Z~p Code: lo~
City: /~ i/ ,~~,~~
Representing:
Telephone Number: ~~7 4~ organization/self)
I understand 1 am limited to speaking for five minutes.
For business not listed on the agenda as a Public Hearing,
accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Law, /C,haPter 551
Code. /~ _ Y I
City Council will not respond in
of the Texas Local Government
Signed:
~ This informa on is a P ic Record.
City of Colleyville
Agenda Briefing
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
File Number: File Type: Report Status: Reports
Version: 1 Agenda Date: 10/18/2011 Controlling Body: City Council
Requester: Office of the City Agenda No.: 9 Final Action:
Secretary
File Name: Reports - October 18, 2011
Attachments: Senior Center Advisory Committee Minutes - July 21, 2011 • Planning and Zoning
Commission Minutes - September 26, 2011
History of Legislative File
Version: Date: Acting Body: Action Text:
1 10/18/2011 City Council
Title
Senior Center Advisory Committee Minutes - July 21, 2011
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - September 26, 2011
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/13/2011
G ,~ T Y (3 ~
'~-
~~7LLE~'VILLE
~~~~.~
SENIOR CENTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MINUTES
Thursday, July 21, 2011
1:30 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Colleyville Senior Center Advisory Committee was called to order
at 1:32 p.m. on Thursday, July 21, 2011 by Debra Minea, Chair of the Committee.
ROLL CALL: Debra Minea, Dorothy Parker, Anne Gifford and Melanie
Damron
ABSENT: Wanda Johnson, Molly Skinner and Heath Dowell
STAFF: Monica Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation and Renee
Garrett, Senior Center Supervisor
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Approval of the May 19, 2011 Senior Center Advisory Committee Minutes
Dorothy Parker made a motion to approve the minutes. Anne Gifford seconded. The
motion carried with a unanimous vote.
3. Discussion and Consideration of Senior Center Wish List
The Committee discussed the window sheer that has been installed; they will give it
a trial period to see if the problem with glare on the puzzle table is resolved. In
addition, it was announced that frames have been purchased for the plaque to
recognizing their 90/older members. The Committee discussed updates to the
°Senior Center Wish List". Anne Gifford made a motion to remove the stove from
the list, and Melanie Damron seconded the motion. The motion carried with a
unanimous vote.
4. Discussion of Items of Interest for Potential Future Action
There was discussion concerning the need for a transport chair at the Senior Center.
Anne Gifford will donate a transport chair to the Colleyville Senior Center.
5. Reports - Staff and Committees
Renee Garrett, Senior Center Supervisor gave an overview of the center activities
and upcoming special events.
Monica Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation spoke with the Committee about the
possibility of using the Annex in the future, for after-hour Adult and Youth Recreation
Programs.
Debra Minea stated that Metroport Meals on Wheels (MMOW) continues to be down a
bit.
6. Citizen comments/presentation regarding items not on the agenda
None
7. Adjournment
Melanie Damron moved to adjourn at 2:05 p.m. Anne Gifford seconded the motion.
The motion carried with a unanimous vote.
Respectfully submitted:
.~~a.tPu~ E. JVlaane
Kathy E. Moore, Administrative Assistant
~"'-~~ City of Colleyville
~~~~ ~ ~~`~ Minutes - Final
,~ :,.,.;
Planning and Zoning Commission
Monday, September 26, 2011
6:15 PM
City Hall
100 Main Street
Colleyville, Texas 76034
817. 503.1000
www.colleyville.com
City Council Chambers
LEGAL BRIEFING BY CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING PLANNING, ZONING,
PLATTING, AND LAND USE
REVIEW OF REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS AND DISCUSSION OF PREVIOUS
MEETING MINUTES
DISCUSSION OF ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS AND UPDATES
ON DEVELOPMENT TRENDS, PROGRESS AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS ON
PAST AGENDA ITEMS
EXECUTIVE SESSION - In accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter
551, Subchapter D, Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney on legal
issues raised by public hearing or action items on the agenda
7:00 P.M. - REGULAR MEETING
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of the City of Colleyville
was called to order by Chairman Byerly on September 26, 2011 at 7:00
p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Larry Knox,
Wheelwright„ David Phelps and Jeff Byerly
Dave Dudziak, David
Absent: Commissioners Don Davis and Ron Rotthaus
Staff Present: Ron Ruthven, Marty Wieder, Rob McKeown and Amy
Shelley
3. INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Commissioner Byerly.
4.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Phelps moved to approve the meeting minutes with
grammar corrections. Commissioner Dudziak seconded.
City of Colleyville Page 1 Printed on 10/11/2011
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - Final September 26, 2011
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 5- Knox, Dudziak, Wheelwright, Phelps, Byerly
Absent: 2 - Davis, Rotthaus
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
7. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS
7a Approval of request for a Special Use Permit for off-premise beer and
wine sales on Lot 1, Block 3 of the Heritage High School Addition located
at 5100 State Highway 121, Suite A, Case ZC11-016
Ron Ruthven presented the case and briefed the Commissioners.
Commissioner Dudziak questioned staff regarding if there have been any
complaints or any arrests received by the German Deli. Ron Ruthven
replied none known, but that he could check with the police department.
Commissioner Byerly opened the public hearing at 7:06 p.m.
Chad Bradford, Vice President of the Sunflower Shoppe, came forward
to present the case and brief the Commissioners.
There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at
7:08 p.m.
Commissioner Dudziak moved to approve case ZC11-016.
Commissioner Knox seconded.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 5- Knox, Dudziak, Wheelwright, Phelps, Byerly
Absent: 2 - Davis, Rotthaus
City of Colleyville paye 2 Printed on 10/11/2011
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - Final September 26, 2011
7b Approval of a request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to
CC1-Village Retail on 0.6 acres on Tract 3A, Abstract 206 of the B.B.B.
and C. RR. Co. Survey located at 5300 Pleasant Run Road, Case
ZC11-017
Ron Ruthven presented the case and briefed the Commissioners.
Commissioner Byerly opened the public hearing at 7:11 p.m.
John Horobec, the applicant and property owner, came forward to
present the case and brief the Commissioners.
Commissioner Phelps questioned Mr. Horobec regarding what
prospective buyers have been interested in the property. Mr. Horobec
replied that there have been several requests for office uses.
Commissioner Phelps questioned Mr. Horobec regarding if the traffic will
be relatively low and parking as well? Mr. Horobec replied not much
traffic.
Commissioner Dudziak questioned Mr. Horobec regarding if a Planned
Unit Development had been considered. Mr. Horobec replied not really
knowing what that is, however, he stated he had talked with staff about a
commercial use.
Robert Figueroa, 817 Central Drive, spoke in opposition to this request
with concerns for the additional commercial use diminishing his property
values. He stated he has had to call the police with problems with
loitering in the old post office building parking lot. He further stated that
this use will encroach on his privacy. He had hoped for a residential use
on this property.
Shannon West, speaking on behalf of 812 Central Drive, mother and
deceased father, spoke in opposition to this request with concerns for
traffic and speeding vehicles.
Beth Groffman, 815 Central Drive, spoke in opposition to this request
with concerns for the commercial use.
There were two other persons who registered their opposition to this
request however did not wish to speak.
There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at
7:25 p.m.
Mr. Horobec came forward and stated there is no access from this
property to Central Drive. He further stated there is a buffer zone
City of Colleyville Page 3 Printed on 10/11/2011
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - Final September 26, 2011
requirement from commercial and residential. He stated the appraisal
district already taxes him as it were a commercial property.
Commissioner Dudziak questioned staff regarding the requirements for
buffering between the residential and commercial properties. Ron
Ruthven replied a 25 foot buffer would be required between the
residential and commercial properties. He stated there would be a 20
foot landscape buffer required as well.
Commissioner Dudziak questioned staff regarding if the buffer would be
required between the commercial properties. Ron Ruthven replied no,
not to the commercial property to the north.
Commissioner Dudziak questioned staff regarding if the property to the
south is left agricultural, would they be able to build right up to the
property line? Ron Ruthven replied a single family use would require a
25 foot side setback, which would leave the prop erty limited to
construction. However, an accessory building can be as close as 5 feet
to a property line.
Commissioner Byerly questioned staff regarding if an accessory building
in the AG zoning district could be built on the property line. Ron Ruthven
stated an accessory building could be built as close as 5 feet to a
property line.
Commissioner Dudziak questioned staff regarding if there would be a
limit on the size of the accessory building. Ron Ruthven replied they
would be limited to 750 square feet.
Commissioner Dudziak stated the buffering is actually being enhanced
between the residential and commercial properties because of the
landscape buffering requirement.
Commissioner Byerly questioned staff regarding mutual access
easements being required with the property to the north. Ron Ruthven
stated the applicant would be required to provide mutual access between
the two properties, however, the post office building would not be
required to connect to it.
Commissioner Phelps questioned staff regarding if the property is zoned
CC1, there is a 25 foot building line but would there be a landscaping
buffer? Ron Ruthven replied yes, adjacent to any residential properties
and within the buffer there are landscaping requirements.
Commissioner Phelps questioned staff regarding what type of
restrictions are on the south side of the subject property. Ron Ruthven
replied a 25 foot setback with a 20 foot landscape buffer would be
City of Colleyville Page 4 Printed on 10/11/2011
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - Final September 26, 2011
required.
Discussion occurred between Commissioner Phelps and staff regarding
the particular land use on the lot adjacent to the south and the setback
requirements with the subject property as it relates to a building area.
Commissioner Wheelwright questioned staff regarding commercial
lighting on the rear of the building. Ron Ruthven stated direct
illumination would not be permitted.
Commissioner Byerly questioned staff regarding when was the property
master planned for retail? Ron Ruthven replied he would have to check
to know for sure, however, he stated it was at least in 2004.
Commissioner Wheelwright stated the building to the south could
connect to that parking lot, however it would not be required? Ron
Ruthven replied that they could however there would have to be
agreements between the two with shared access.
Commissioner Dudziak stated having a concern for the CC 1 zoning
district request. He stated this should really be a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) because of the unique characteristics with this
property.
Commissioner Byerly respectively disagreed with Commissioner Dudziak
and stated that the neighbors have had plenty of time to know that the
master plan calls for commercial. He further sated that it would be better
if the applicant had a specific plan in mind. He stated a PUD, in the
future, may make sense, however, the rezoning will allow for the
applicant to make the property more marketable. He further stated not
seeing any reason that this property would need access onto Central
Drive.
Commissioner Byerly moved to approve case ZC11-017. Commissioner
Phelps seconded.
Commissioner Phelps stated not seeing this as a residential property.
He stated it would be nice to have a buyer to know the specific use for
the property. He further stated that this will probably be a PUD
development.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 4- Knox, Wheelwright, Phelps, Byerly
Nay: 1 - Dudziak
Absent: 2 - Davis, Rotthaus
City of Colleyville Page 5 Printed on 10/11/2011
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - Final September 26, 2011
7c Approval of a request for a zoning change from AG-Agricultural to
R40-Single Family Residential on 1.0 acres on Lot 4, Block 1, of the Mrs.
Eva Paul Subdivision located at 1005 Tinker Road, Case ZC11-018
Ron Ruthven presented the case and briefed the Commissioners.
Commissioner Byerly opened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m.
There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at
7:45 p.m.
Commissioner Phelps moved to approve case ZC11-018.
Commissioner Dudziak seconded.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 5- Knox, Dudziak, Wheelwright, Phelps, Byerly
Absent: 2 - Davis, Rotthaus
8. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjouned at 7:46 p.m.
I hereby certify the above agenda was posted on the bulletin boards at City Hall
on Friday, September 23, 2011 by 5:00 p.m.
Amy Shelley, Community Development Coordinator
The meeting minutes were approved on October 10, 2011.
City of Colleyville Page 6 Printed on 10/11/2011
RESOLUTION R-11-3418
A RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNCIL ACTION
UNDER BUSINESS AT THE REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING OF
OCTOBER 18, 2011
WHEREAS, Council has taken action on certain items on the agenda under Business.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the agenda decisions approved by Council action under Business this
date and not otherwise adopted by Ordinance and/or separate Resolution as
follows are hereby adopted:
a. THAT
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
APPROVED BY A VOTE OF AYES, NAYS AND ABSTENTIONS
ON THIS THE DAY OF 2011.
ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC, CMC David Kelly
City Secretary Mayor