HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinances (O-12-1846)-08/23/2012ORDINANCE 0-12-1846
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, ADOPTING
THE WATER, WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEE UPDATE
STUDY AND AMENDING CHAPTER 13 - IMPACT FEES, TO IMPOSE
WATER, WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEES ON NEW
DEVELOPMENT; PR~VIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND AU7HORIZING PUBLICATION
WHEREAS, Chapter 395, as amended, of the Texas Local Government
Code provides procedures for municipalities to enact and
amend impact fees; and
WHEREAS,
the City of Colleyville Capital Improvements Advisory
Committee has reviewed the Land Use Assumptions and Water, i,
Wastewater and Roadway Capital Improvements Plan study ~
dated May 2012, prepared for the City of Colleyville by the ~
engineering consulting firm of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. ~
of Fort Worth, Texas; and i
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Land Use Assumptions and
Water, Wastewater and Roadway Capital Improvements Plans
and adopted an order setting a public hearing date to discuss
adoption of said document and imposition of impact fees as
required by the Texas Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing before the City Council was published
in a newspaper of general circulation in Colleyville in
accordance with the publication requirements of Chapter 395,
Texas Local Government Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec 1. THAT the document attached as Exhibit "A" and titled Water,
Wastewater, and Roadway Impact Fee Update, dated May 2012,
and prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, is hereby adopted
as the study required by Chapter 395 of the Texas Local
Government Code for the imposition of impact fees.
Sec 2. THAT Chapter 13 - Impact Fees, of the Land Development Code,
is hereby amended in its entirety to read as shown in the attached
Exhibit "B",
Ordinance 0-12-1846
Page2of3
Sec. 3. THAT Ordinance 0-00-1214, the Land Development Code of the
City of Colleyville, as amended, shall remain in effect, except
where amended by this ordinance.
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 it is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council
that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, and sections of
this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence,
paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared
unconstitutional by the valid judgement or decree of any court of
competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect
any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs
and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been
enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this
ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence,
paragraph or section.
Sec. 6. THAT 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 this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after
its passage.
Sec. 8. THAT the City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to
cause publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clause
hereof as an alternate method of publication provided by law.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the 7t" day of
August 2012.
The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the 215t day of
August 2012.
Ordinance 0-12-1846
Page 3 of 3
PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Colleyville, Texas,
on this the 215t day of August 2012.
ATTE : _ ~ _ CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
', City Secretary
~
~
David Kelly
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
~~~ ~~ l~.
Matthew C. G. Boyle
City Attorney
Exhibit A
_ . . .~ R.I:~ i~
Y~}.' ~. ~y:
~ : ~ _ Q
.. ~, :~ ~; ~3 `s ~
~
- ~ _ ~': v s .~~,~ _ ;
.~ _ ~~-1~ .,i ~ ,~
..'li'~!: b_ -~, rr . . t~i
a. ~ . c~ ~ ~~.k~~~:.. ~ ,«r~,:.. - ~,,,~
s~ ~,~ r' f ~' z.~' ~,
~~P r F
j ~. 3 ~y _ 1 ' r ~ z t . . .
R~' ~'I~,l ~ _ s t . }' ~'~..~'~~ ~ ~ .
~",AYF q~ '~~"~ ~•,~' ~'- ~ f ~ d~~. ~ - . .
i~:.~f. '__~ ~ ~if~ ~ *' _
G i.~ ~ ~'' a: . ~
y. ' - It`~ ,J." ~ .,'~ j`'~ :~ i`.
~ . C:,, (~ ~~k' ~. ~ .w Y~ f
- " ...v ~.=~ir~is;ea.~._ "''b=.~ n,t.', r "'7~.
_ -m'''~'* ~~I~"'i ~- ^ ~ -~--~ ", ~~ ~r~_~~~ ~ ':~~ ~;
~~ ~~ ~~~ ,~, _ _
~~ . - ~-
~~` _ „: , _ -
s, _
~z~. ;,
~.~:;:,, ~ . _ _ ___ _
~
Exhibit A
2012 Roadway, Wate~; and Wastewate~
Inzpact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas
Prepared by:
~ Kimley-Horn
~ and Associates, Inc.
Texas Registration Number 928
801 Cherry Street, Unit 11, Suite 950
Fort Worth, TX 76102
817.335.6511
May 2012
OO Kimlcy-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2012
061063017
Exhibit A
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas
Prepared by:
~
~ Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
Texas Registration Number 928
801 Cherry Street, Unit 11, Suite 950
Fort Worth, TX 76102
817.335.6511
May 2012
~ y,~P ::.......... :-r,~~01
~: ~ :~
~' ~
..........................:.
. .JOi-1~4 R. ATK(NS
. .........................
a'- - 3537f~ :,a
~L~
~ s•3o•rz
OO Kinilcy-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2012
061063017
GZT Y ~F
~r1r-
_ _ _
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
^ ~ and Associates, Inc.
~~T 1' pF.
~k-
COLLEYVILLE
~=~€ , s -
TEXqg
Table of Contents
1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... l
A. Land Use Assumptions ....................................................................................................................................2
B. Evaluation of the Current Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plans and Development of the
Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan ...........................................................................................................3
C. Impact Fee Analysis and Report ......................................................................................................................3
1.2 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................4
1.3 Water ...............................................................................................................................................6
A. Design Criteria ................................................................................................................................................6
I. Water Transmission Lines (12-inch and Larger) ...................................................................................6
II. Storage Tanks ........................................................................................................................................ 6
III. Pump Stations ........................................................................................................................................ 7
B. Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan ...........................................................................................................7
I. Project Descriptions .............................................................................................................................10
C. Water Impact Fee Calculation ....................................................................................................................... l l
1.4 Wastewater ...................................................................................................................................14
A. Design Criteria ..............................................................................................................................................14
I. Sewer Trunk Lines (Interceptors) ........................................................................................................14
II. Lift Stations Pumping Capacity ...........................................................................................................14
III. Lift Station Wet Well Capacity ............................................................................................................14
IV. Force Mains ....................................................................................................................................14
B. Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan .........................................................................................................14
I. Project Descriptions .............................................................................................................................17
C. Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation ..............................................................................................................17
List of Figures
1.1 Water Impact Fee CIP ............................................................................................................................................ 8
1.2 Wastewater Impact Fee CIP .................................................................................................................................15
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update j May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associa6es, Inc.
G~T 1'' pF.
~~-
COLLEYVILLE
L~ ~,.
rE,~ ~s
List of Tables
1.1 Land Use Assumptions for Water and Wastewater Impact Fees ................................................
1.2 Maximum Assessable Water and Wastewater Impact Fee for Commonly Used Meters............
13 Water Impact Fee Capital Improvements Project Cost and 10-Year Recoverable Cost .............
1.4 Service Unit Consumption Calculation ......................................................................................
1.5 10-year Additional Service Units Calculation ............................................................................
1.6 10-year Recoverable Cost Breakdown ........................................................................................
1.7 Service Unit Equivalency Table for Commonly Used Meters (water) .......................................
1.8 Wastewater Impact Fee Capital Improvements Project Cost and 10-Year Recoverable Cost....
1.9 Service Unit Consumption Calculations .....................................................................................
1.10 10-year Additional Service Units Catculation ............................................................................
1.11 10-year Recoverable Cost Breakdown ........................................................................................
1.12 Service Unit Equivalency Table far Commonly Used Meters (wastewater) ..............................
Appendices
....................... 2
....................... 5
....................... 8
.....................11
.....................12
.....................12
.....................13
.....................15
.....................18
.....................18
.....................19
..................... 20
2012 Plan for Awarding the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Credit ......................................................................21
Net Interest Costs .........................................................................................................................................................25
Schedule of Projected Debt Issuance and Net Interest Cost for Water Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan ..........26
Schedule of Projected Debt Issuance and Net Interest Cost for Wastewater Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan .27
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update ji May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ ana Asso~iates, ~n~.
G~T }• UF
~-
COLLEYVILLE
TEaHS
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The City of Colleyville retained the services of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the purpose of
updating the impact fees for water and wastewater system improvements required to serve new
development. These fees were originally developed in 1999, and updated in 2006 in accordance with
Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code (impact fees).
The purpose of this report is to satisfy the requirements of the law and provide the City with an updated
impact fee capital improvements plan and associated impact fees.
For convenience and reference, the following is excerpted from Chapter 395.014 of the code:
The political subdivision shall use gualified professionals to prepare the capital improvements
plan and to calculate the impact fee. The capital improvements plan must contain specific
enumeration of the following items:
(1) a description of the existing capital improvements within the service area and the costs to
upgrade, update, improve, expand, or replace the improvements to meet existing needs
and usage and stricter safety, efftciency, environmental, or regulatory standards, which
shall be prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed to perform such
professional engineering services in this state;
(2) an analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of
capaciry of the existing capital improvements, which shall be prepared by a qualified
professional engineer licensed to perform such professional engineering services in this
state;
(3) a description of all or the parts of the capital improvements or facility expansions and
their costs necessitated by and attributable to new development in the service area based
on the approved land use assumptions, which shall be prepared by a qualified
professional engineer licensed to perform such professional engineering services in this
state;
(4) a definitive table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption,
generation, or discharge of a service unit for each category of capital improvements or
facility expansions and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a
service unit to various types of land uses, including but not limited to residential,
commercial, and industrial;
(S) the total number of projected service units necessitated by and attributable to new
development within the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and
calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning criteria;
(6) the projected demand for capital improvements or facility expansions required by new
service units projected over a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 10 years; and
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 1 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ ana Asso~iates, ~n~.
`~T1' U~.
~~
COLLEYVILLE
rEa ~s
(7) a plan for awarding:
(A) a credit for the portion of ad valorem taz and utility service revenues
generated by new service unit during the program period that is used for the
payment of improvements, including the payment of debt, that are included in
the capital improvements plan; or
(B) in the alternative, a credit equal to SO percent of the total project cost of
implementing the capital improvements plan.
The impact fee study includes information from the 2002 Water System Master Plan Update completed
by Dannenbaum Engineering Corp. in September 2002 and the Wastewater Collection Map Update
completed by Kimley-Horn in March of 2000. Because of the length of time since the last formal master
plan updates we also interviewed Colleyville Public Works staff. The impact fees are based on the
recommended capital improvements and the current population growth projections.
The study process was comprised of four tasks:
A. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
The land use assumptions used for this report were provided by the City of Colleyville. The
development of land use assumptions included the following:
• Establishing impact fee service areas for water and wastewater;
• Collection/determination of population and employment data; and
• Projection of the ten-year population and employment by service area.
A single service area boundary is defined for both water and wastewater facilities, because
the Trinity River Authority (TRA) is Colleyville's wholesale provider of water and
wastewater services. The boundary (city limits line) is illustrated on Figures L 1 and 1.2.
The population and employment growth projections for the next ten years is estimated as
follows:
Table 1.1 Land Use Assumptions for Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
Employment (Square Feet)
Year Population
Basic
Service
Retail
Total
2012 24,417 72,222 3,379,322 1,271,167
_..__-----. 4,722,711
2022 27,378 80,578 3,862,631 1,745,374 5,688,583
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
B. EVALUATION OF THE
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
IMPROVEMENTSPLAN
C~T Y UF.
~-s--
COLLEYVILLE
--~ i ~ . __u,:;
T E X A S
CURRENT WATER AND WASTEWATER CAPITAL
AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE IMPACT FEE CAPITAL
This task involved reviewing the City's capital projects shown in the 2006 impact fee report
with public warks staff and interviews with the capital projects managers with the Trinity
River Authority. Both parties provided information allowing us to develop the impact fee
capital improvements plan. The water demand projections and wastewater flow projections
were then used to determine the additional service units.
C. IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS AND REPORT
This task included calculating the additional service units, service unit equivalents, and credit
reduction. These values were then used to determine the impact fee per service unit and the
maximum assessable impact fee by meter size.
2012 Water and Wastewater [mpact Fee Update 3 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ ~,d a~o~~~s, i~~.
1.2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
`~T Y UF.
!r4
COLLEYVILLE
~:
TEX ~S
This study was performed to update the City of Colleyville's Water and Wastewater Impact Fees. Water
and Wastewater system analysis and there associated master plans are important tools for facilitating
orderly growth of the systems and for providing adequate facilities that promote economic development.
The implementation of an impact fee is a way to shift a portion of the burden of paying for new facilities
onto new development.
Water
Elements of the water system, including treatment facilities, starage facilities, pumping facilities, and the
distribution network itself, were evaluated against industry standards as outlined in the Design Criteria
section of this report. Information related to the growth of the City was provided by the Land Use
Assumptions.
Water system improvements necessary to serve 10-year (2022) needs were evaluated. Typically,
infrastructure improvements are sized beyond the 10-year requirements; however, Texas' impact fee law
(Chapter 395) only allows recovery of costs to serve the 10-year planning period. Because the land use
assumptions show Colleyville reaching buildout projections within the 10-year planning window the
improvements necessary to serve 10-year are also the improvements need for buildout. Therefore, the
projected cost to serve the ultimate system needs is the same as the eligible for recovery through impact
fees: $6,414,833.
Wastewater
Elements of the wastewater system, including treatment facilities, and the collection network itself, were
evaluated against industry standards as outlined in the Design Criteria section of this report. Information
related to the growth was the same as with water.
Wastewater system improvements necessary to serve 10-year (2022) needs were evaluated. Typically,
infrastructure improvements are sized beyond the 10-year requirements; however, Texas' impact fee law
(Chapter 395) only allows recovery of costs to serve the 10-year planning period. Because the land use
assumptions show Colleyville reaching buildout projections within the 10-year planning window the
improvements necessary to serve 10-year are also the improvements need for buildout. Therefore, the
projected cost to serve the ultimate system needs is the same as the eligible for recovery through impact
fees: $2,539,293.
Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
The impact fee law defines a service unit as follows, "Service Unit means a standardized measure of
consumption attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally
accepted engineering or planning standards and based on historical data and trends applicable to the
political subdivision in which the individual unit of development is located during the previous 10 years."
Therefore, the City of Colleyville defines a service unit as unit of development that consumes the amount
of water requiring a standard 5/8"x 3/4" water meter. For a development that requires a different size
meter, a service unit equivalent is established at a multiplier based on its capacity with respect to the
5/8"x 3/4" meter. The equivalency factor and associated impact fee by meter size is shown in Table 1.2.
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 4 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associabes, Inc.
~,~T Y~ OF.
~-
C~LLEYVILLE
~,
rEX As
Table 1.2 Maximum Assessable Water and Wastewater Impact Fee for Commonlv Used Meters
Meter Size*
Maximum
Continuous
Operating Capacity
GPM **
Service Unit
Equivalent Maximum
Assessable
Fee
Water
$ Maximum
Assessable
Fee
Wastewater
$
5/8"x 3/4" PD 10 1 6,100 2,521
3/4" PD 15 1.5 9,150 3,782
1" PD 25 2.5 15,250 6,303
1 1/2" PD 50 5 30,500 12,605
2" PD 80 8 48,800 20,168
2" Compound 80 8 48,800 20,168
2" Turbine 100 10 61,000 25,210
3" Compound 160 16 97,600 40,336
3" Turbine 240 24 146,400 60,504
4" Compound 250 25 152,500 63,025
4" Turbine 420 42 256,200 105,882
6" Compound 500 50 305,000 126,050
6" Turbine 920 92 561,200 231,932
8" Compound 800 80 488,000 201,680
S" Turbine 1,600 160 976,000 403,360
10" Turbine 2,500 250 1,525,000 630,250
* PD = Positive Displacement Meter (Typical residential meter)
**Operating capacities obtained from American Water Works Association (AWWA) C-700-02
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 5 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
1.3 WATER
A. DESIGN CRITERIA
I. Water Transmission Lines (12-inch and Larger)
C,~T Y~ UF.
~-
COLLEYVILLE
r , ~ .,
TE\AS
Water transmission lines shall be sized to maintain the following pressure requirements:
Peak hour demand with a minimum pressure of 35 psi;
Night-time tank filling with a maximum pressure of 100 psi; and
Peak day demand plus fire flow with a minimum pressure of 20 psi.
II. Storage Tanks
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the State Board of
Insurance (SBI) have established criteria for ground and elevated storage. These criteria
address volume and height requirements only. The layout of the distribution system,
location of the starage facilities, and the interaction with the high service and booster
pumps affect the amount of storage necessary for the most efficient and reliable operation
of the system.
a. Ground Storage
Ground storage serves two functions:
• Equalization for differing feed rates between the water supply and pumping to
the system; and
• Emergency capacity in the event of temporary loss of water supply.
Generally, ground starage facilities are located at water supply points or at each
pump station within the water distribution system. Suggested storage capacities are
established based on several criteria. There are specific requirements of the TCEQ.
These criteria are detailed later in this section. Although ground and elevated storage
facilities perform separate functions within the system, both are aimed at decreasing
the impact of demand fluctuations. Their capacities are established based on
knowledge of how demand varies seasonally and daily.
b. Elevated Storage
Elevated storage serves three purposes:
• Functionally, elevated storage equalizes the pumping rate to compensate for daily
variations in demand and to maintain a fairly constant pumping rate (usually
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 6 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
~,~ ~~ ~~.
~..,--
COLLEYVILLE
TE~ qS
referred to as operational storage), or a pumping rate that conforms to the
requirements of the electrical rate structure.
~ Provides pressure maintenance and protection against surges created by
instantaneous demand, such as fire flow and main breaks, and instantaneous
change in supply, such as pumps turning on and off.
~ Maintains a reserve capacity for fire protection and pressure maintenance in case
of power failure to one or more pump stations. Sufficient storage should be
maintained to provide four hours of fire flow demand during a loss of power to
the pump station.
Suggested storage capacities are established by the TCEQ. Adequate operational
storage is established by determining the required volume to equalize the daily
fluctuations in flow during the maximum day demand, plus the reserve volume
required for fire protection.
The minimum requirements for storage, accarding to Chapter 290 of the Texas
Administrative Code, are as follows:
• Total Storage - Equal to 200 gallons per connection.
• Elevated Storage - Equal to 100 gallons per connection; or
• Elevated Storage - Equal to 200 gallons per connection for a firm pumping
capacity reduction from 2.0 gallons per connection to 0.6 gallons per connection.
III. Pump Stations
Pumping capacities must provide the maximum demand or the peak hour demand
required by the water system or the suggested capacities established by the TCEQ.
Pumping capacity should supply the maximum demand with sufficient redundancy to
allow for the largest pump at the pump station to be out of service. This is known as firm
pumping capacity.
Each pump station or pressure plane must have two or more pumps that have a total
capacity of 2.0 gallons per minute per connection, or have a total capacity of at least
1,000 gallons per minute and the ability to meet peak hour demand with the largest pump
out of service, whichever is less. If the system provides elevated storage capacity of 200
gallons per connection, two service pumps with a minimum combined capacity of 0.6
gpm per connection are required.
B. IMPACT FEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
Due to the reduced growth rate since the 2006 impact fee study was approved no additional
water master plans have been warranted. Therefore, the water master plan developed by
Dannenbaum Engineering in 2002 is still applicable. The purpose of the plan was to provide
the City with a logical strategy for upgrading and expanding its water distribution system to
accommodate future growth and for addressing existing system deficiencies.
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 7 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ ana associates, ~nc.
G~T Y UF.
~~
COLLEYVILLE
rEX ~s
Ten (10) projects are determined eligible for recoverable cost through impact fee over the
next 10 years. The City of Colleyville's total cost of these projects is $6,414,833. With the
assumption that the City will reach buildout by 2022 projected total recoverable through
impact fees is equal to the total project cost. After debt service costs are added and the credit
reduction calculation is complete, $6,100,469 is recoverable through impact fees serving the
10-year system needs. These impact fee capital improvements are shown in Table 1.3 and
illustrated in Figure 1.1.
Table 1.3 Water Impact Fee Capital Improvements
Pro'ect Cost and 10-Year Recoverable Cost
Proj. #
Description 2012 Required
Capacity
(Percent Utilirefion) 2022 Required
Capacity
(Percen[ Utilization) 2012-2022 Required
Capacity
(Percent Utilization) 2~22
Projected
Recoverable Cost Total Project
Cost
I Hcritage Ave 12" Water Line 0°/ 100% 100% S 624,000 S 624,000
*2 SH 26 South 12" Water Lu~c 0°/ 100°/ 100% 5 387,000 S 387,000
"3 SH 26 Ccntral 12" Water Li~e 0°/ 100°/ 100% $ 299,000 S 299,000
*4 SH 26 North 12" Water Lu~c 0% 100% 100% S 45,000 ~ 45,000
5 Plcasant Run Rd 12" Water L'me 0% 100% 100°/ $ 450,000 S 45Q000
'•6 TRA - Raw Water Lmc Improvements 0% 100% 100°/ $ 4,581,500 S 4,581,500
7 Water I~act Fcc Updatc Study 0°/ 100% 100% $ 28,333 S 28,333
Total $ 6,414,833 $ 6,414,833
* SH 26 Watcr L'mc projects are for tq~sized Paci7ities only. Relocation ofexistmg water Imcs ofthe same size are not mipact fcc eligbk.
**"Total Project CosY' far [he TRA fic~ity (itcm 6) reflects Colleyvlle's prorated podion (approx 17%) of the TRA project cost accord'mg to
relative demand capacities among membcr cities. Collcyv~lle's IInpact fee can bc used to pay the portion of the TRA water rate that is identified
for projccts acconucwdatmg firture gowth
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 8 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
.~,_,,
;. ..'__„-
~ ~ ; `.
~ , i
~
~ • -----
~ ... . ~
~ `` . " ;•'- `.
~ , _ . ~'.
' l
~ Bandit Ttl ~
~
~ ~
~~
~ John M Cain Rd `f'
~---------- go.
~
~ ~
~ 5-' ` ~
Rd W
a
~
~
@
a
0
Shelfon Dr
~
~
C
;
~~
~
~
~ ~
"~~
~
~
~
'"""""~
K
e~~d.
8
a
Hall-Johnson Rd
~ ~ ' ' ~ ~
~
~ ~~~"~~
, -----------~ .
, ,
a
~g ~ ~ ~ ~ I U 1
~
a ~ ~ '
t = ~
~
i
~
a
t/
~ 4
~ ~
~ ~
~ o
~
' -----
'------ _ -
_~
-- ~
~ i ~
I
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •
Rd
~
i.
Legend
- - - - - Service Area Boundary
~ Proposed Water Line
, Impact Fee CIP Projects
i~ i Heritage Ave. 12" Water Line
~ SH 26 South 12" Water Line
' 0 SH 26 Central 12" Water Line
~ SH 26 North 12" Water Line
~% Pleasant Run Rd. 12" Water Line
Note: The TRA project listed in the CIP
is not shown on this exhibit.
Figure 1.1 ~
Water N
Impact Fee CIP
0 1,2502,500 5,000
Feet
May 2012 [~/~ ~,~,~
rnV
^
~
~
~
a
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
G~T Y pF,
~~-
COLLEYVILLE
; -~a t r
rEX q$
I. Project Descriptions
l. Heritage Ave 12" Water Line
Construct 12" water line along Heritage Ave. from Glade Rd. to Cheek-Sparger Rd.
Project Cost
Recoverable Cost
$624,000
$624,000
2. SH 26 South 12" Water Line
Construct 12" water line along SH 26 from Greenbriar Ln to Brown Trail.
Project Cost $387,000
Recoverable Cost $387,000
3. SH 26 Central 12" Water Line
Construct 12" water line along SH 26 from Bogart St. to Tinker Rd.
Project Cost $299,000
Recoverable Cost $299,000
4. SH 26 North 12" Water Line
Construct 12" water line along SH 26 from Tennison Pkwy to 474 feet south of
Tennison Pkwy.
Project Cost
Recoverable Cost
$45,000
$45,000
5. Pleasant Run Rd 12" Water Line
Construct 12" water line along Pleasant Run Rd from Tinker Rd to John McCain Rd.
Project Cost
Recoverable Cost
$450,000
$450,000
Note: Project Descriptions are not provided for the TRA projects listed in Table 1.3.
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 10 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
G~T Y pF.
~ Kimley-Hom '~`-~
^ ~ ^ and Associates, ~nc. COLLEYVILLE
~~: - -
rEX ~s
C. WATER IMPACT FEE CALCULATION
Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code defines a service unit as follows, "Service Unit
means a standardized measure of consumption attributable to an individual unit of
development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning
standards and based on historical data and trends applicable to the political subdivision in
which the individual unit of development is located during the previous 10 years." Therefore,
the City of Colleyville defines a service unit based on historical water usage over the past 10
years as compared to the estimated residential units. The residential unit is the development
type that predominately uses a 5/8" x 3/4" meter. The measure of consumption per service
unit is based on a 5/8" x 3/4" meter and the data shown in Table 1.4.
Table 1.4 Service Unit Consumption Calculation
Year
Po ulation Residential
Units
2.96 ersons/unit) Water Usage
Average Day
Demand (MGD Consumption
per Service
Unit (GPD)
2002 19,831 6,700 5.15 769
2003 20,494 6,924 5.72 826
2004 21,157 7,148 5.12 716
2005 21,974 7,424 8.23 1,109
2006 22,650 7,652 8.72 1,139
2007 23,127 7,813 5.50 704
2008 23,491 7,936 6.98 880
2009 23,800 8,041 5.96 741
2010 24,109 8,145 6.55 804
2011 24263 8,197 8.19 1,000
Average Consumption per Service Unit 866
Based on the City's 10-year growth projections and the resulting water demand projections,
water service will be required for an additional 1,000 service units. The calculation is as
follows:
• A service unit, which is a unit of development that consumes approximately 866 gallons
per day (GPD), is a typical residential connection that uses a 5/8"x 3/4" meter. Table 1.5
outlines the future water demand projections and its relationship to the additional service
units projected for the next 10-years.
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 11 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
~~T Y p~.
L~
C~LLEYVILLE
rE ~, ~s
Table 1.5 10-year Additional Service Units Calculation
Year Average Day
Demand
(MGD) Service Unit
Demand
(GPD)
Service Units
2012 7.14 866 8,249
2022 8.01 866 9,249
10-year Additional Service Units 1,000
Impact fee law allows for a credit calculation to credit back the development community
based on the utility revenues or ad valorem taxes that are allocated for paying a portion of
future capital improvements. The intent of this credit is to prevent the City from double
charging development for future capital improvements via impact fees and utility rates. If the
city chooses not the do a financial analysis to determine the credit value they are required by
law to reduce the recoverable cost by 50 percent. The city has chosen to calculate the credit
value. Therefore, the maximum recoverable cost for impact fee shown below is 77 percent of
the Pre Credit Recoverable Cost. Edward B. Peacock, CPA has detailed a credit calculation
in the appendix.
A breakdown of the 10-year recoverable costs and the associated impact fee per service unit
is as follows:
Table 1.6 10-year Recoverable Cost Breakdown
Recoverable Impact Fee CIP Costs $6,414,833
Debt Service $1,954,989
Pre Credit Recoverable Cost for Impact Fee $8,369,822
Credit for Utility Revenues ($2,269,353)
Maximum Recoverable Cost for Impact Fee $6,100,469
Impact fee per service unit =
10-vear recoverable costs
10-year additional service units
Impact fee per service unit =
Impact fee per service unit =
$6,100,469
1,000
$6,100
Therefare, the maximum assessable impact fee per service unit is $6,100.
For a development that requires a different size meter, a service unit equivalent is established
at a multiplier based on its capacity with respect to the 5/8"x 3/4" meter. The maximum
impact fee that could be assessed for other meter sizes is based on the value shown on Table
1.7, Service Unit Equivalency Table for Commonly Used Meters.
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 12 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ and associates, m~.
Gt~{ Y VI.
~--
C4LLEYVILLE
TEXAS
Table 1.7 Service Unit Eauivalencv Table for Commonlv Used Meters
Meter Size*
Maximum
Continuous
Operating Capacity
(GPM)**
Service Unit
Equivalent Maximum
Assessable
Fee
Water
($)
5/8"x 3/4" PD 10 1 6,100
3/4" PD 15 1.5 9,150
1" PD 25 2.5 15,250
1 1/2" PD 50 5 30,500
2" PD 80 8 48,800
2" Compound 80 8 48,800
2" Turbine 100 10 61,000
3" Compound 160 16 97,600
3" Turbine 240 24 146,400
4" Compound 250 25 152,500
4" Turbine 420 42 256,200
6" Compound 500 50 305,000
6" Turbine 920 92 561,200
8" Compound 800 80 488,000
8" Turbine 1,600 160 976,000
10" Turbine 2,500 250 1,525,000
* PD = Positive Displacement Meter (Typical residential meter)
**Operating capacities obtained from American Water Works Association (AW WA) C-700-02
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 13 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
1.4 WASTEWATER
A. DESIGN CRITERIA
Sewer Trunk Lines (Interceptors)
~~T Y p~,
~~
C4LLEYVILLE
T E a q S
The design criteria for sewer trunk lines or interceptors is based on the TCEQ
requirements that meet peak wet weather design flows with no overflows while
maintaining a minimum of 2 ft/sec cleaning velocity and a maximum of 8 ft/sec velocity.
IL Lift Stations Pumping Capacity
The design criteria for lift station pumping shall be to provide firm pumping capacity to
meet 125% of the peak wet weather design flows. The firm pumping capacity is defined
as the available total pumping capacity with the largest pump out of service.
IIL Lift Station Wet Well Capacity
The design criteria for lift station wet wells are to provide adequate volumes to limit pump
cycling to once every 10 minutes. Based on this criterion, the required operating volume
for each pump can be calculated as
V = tQ/4 where,
t= Maximum pump cycling time = 10 minutes
Q= Lead pump discharge rate in gallons per minute (gpm)
V= Required wet well volume between pump start and stop elevation
N. Force Mains
The design criteria recommended for force mains is to meet the required pumping capacity
of the lift station at a velocity less than 8 feet per second and a maximum discharge
pressure of 100 psi and to allow a minimum of 2 feet per second scouring velocity during
a single pump operation.
B. IMPACT FEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
Due to the reduced growth rate since the 2006 impact fee study was approved no additional
wastewater master plans have been warranted. Therefore, the wastewater master plan
developed by Kimley-Horn in 2000 is still applicable. The purpose of the plan was to
provide the City with a logical strategy for upgrading and expanding its wastewater
distribution system to accommodate future growth and for addressing existing system
deficiencies.
Ten (10) projects are determined eligible for recoverable cost through impact fee over the
next 10 years. The City of Colleyville's total cost of these projects is $2,539,293. With the
assumption that the City will reach buildout by 2022 projected total recoverable through
impact fees is equal to the total project cost. After debt service costs are added and the credit
reduction calculation is complete, $2,520,680 is recoverable through impact fees serving the
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 14 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ ana associai~s, ~nc.
G~T Y OF,
lr.--
COLLEYVILLE
~~ < <
T E X q S
10-year system needs. These impact fee capital improvements are shown in Table 1.8 and
illustrated in Figure 1.2.
Table 1.8 Wastewater Impact Fee Capital Improvements
Pro_ject Cost and 10-Year Recoverable Cost
2012 Required 2022 Required 2012-2022 Required 2022
Total Projec[
Proj. # Description Capacity Capacity Capaciry Projected
Cost
(Percent Otili~ation) (Percent Otilization) (Percen[ Utilization) Recovereble Cost
I R4 10" Sewer Lme 0% 100°/ 100°/ $ 22Q000 5 22Q000
2 V la 8" Sewer Lv~e 0% 100% 100% $ 67,000 S 67,000
3 V lb 8" Sewer L'me 0°/ 100% 100°/ S 134,(Kl0 S 134,000
4 I I 8" Sewer Line 0% 100% 100% S 205,000 S 205,000
*5 TRA Treadnent Plant Expansion (1 ]' Bond ~~ 100°/ 100°/ ~ 299,310 ^s 279,310
Program)
«6 TRA Treatment Plant Expansion Q2' Bond 0% 100°/ 100% $ 356,150 S 356,150
Program)
~~ TRA Treatment Plan Expansion Q3' Bond ~~ 100°/ 100% S 38$603 S 388,603
Program
~g TRA Treatment Plan Expansion Q4' Bond ~~ 100% 100% S 284,716 S 284,716
Program
~g I'RA Treatment Plan Expansion (15' Bond ~~~ ~~~ ~ppo~ $ 576,181 S 576,181
Program
10 Wastewater [mpact Fee Update Study 0°/ 100°/ 100°/ S 28,333 S 28,333
Total $ 2,539,293 $ 2,539,293
*'Total Project Cost" for the 7RA fac~7ities (iterrs 5-9) reflects Colleyville's prorated portion (approx 1.7%) of the TRA project cost accord'mg to
relative dcmand capacrtics among member cities. Colleyville's my~act fee can be used to pay the portion of the TRA wastewatcr ratc ttta[ is identified
for projects accommodatmg future gowth.
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 15 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
-~. ,
.-- _ - •
•..,. ,- -
; ~ ; ~.
, _ ~
,
~ ' . , _ -... `__' ------~.
~
~
~ '
~ i
~ Bendit TA
~
,
~,
~_~________~ JohnMCainRtl f'
~ gd '
0
!pJ r'
~
~ n `~
cDonwell Sc~ool Rd W
8
Tinker Rd
~i 3
a 3
d ~Q'a S~etton Or
~ a
~ ~µ \m
~~ v~ ~ Bogart Dr ~
a ~
~ m Churcry Sf
~
'a y2
----'-------' ~ °6
~ ~
, m
~,
_ -+ o`
~ 3 ~
~ m
~ Glede
J
i
~
~
~ Centeipy
~
~
~~""""'~
~~~ --- ;
z ' ~-
: ~ ~
~ ° ~-----
, p
~ m
~
~
' ----
'------ _ --
Ra ~I / _
Figure 2.1 ~
~
Wastewater
Impact Fee CIP N
0 1,2502,500 5,000
Feet
May 2012 ~~~~ ~~„~
~
Hal(Johnson Rd 8
Legend
- - - - - • Service Area Boundary
Li
d S
ewer
ne
Propose
Impact Fee CIP Projects
~J R4 10" Sewer Line
i?; V1a 8" Sewer Line
~3 ~ V1 b 8" Sewer Line
i4) 11 8" Sewer Line
Note: TRA projects listed in the CIP
are not shown on this exhibit.
-----;
, ~~~'~~
~ ~" ""~i ~
~ ¢ ~
a ,
~ ----~ W
g ~ ~ ~
n = ~
t
a ~
_ o ~
O
/
rn
X
~
~~
~
rt
a
Exhibit A
^ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
I. Project Descriptions
G~T Y pF.
~~--
COLLEYVILLE
t •-
T E X A S
1. R4 10" Sewer Line
Construct 10" sanitary sewer line between Creek Rd and Bandit Trail extending west
starting at Overland Trail.
Project Cost
Recoverable Cost
2. Vla 8" Sewer Line
$220,000
$220,000
Construct 8" sanitary sewer line along SH 26 from John McCain Rd to just north of
Tennison Parkway.
Project Cost
Recoverable Cost
$67,000
$67,000
3. Vlb 8" Sewer Line
Construct 8" sanitary sewer line along the Cotton Belt Rail Road Line from John
McCain Rd. south to near Caldwell Creek Dr.
Project Cost
Recoverable Cost
4. I1 8" Sewer Line
$134,000
$134,000
Construct 8" sanitary sewer line approximately 400' west of Heritage Parkway from
Little Bear Creek to Glade Rd.
Project Cost
Recoverable Cost
$205,000
$205,000
Note: Project Descriptions are not provided for the TRA projects listed in Table 1.8.
G WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE CALCULATION
Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code defines a service unit as follows, "Service Unit
means a standardized measure of consumption attributable to an individual unit of
development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering ar planning
standards and based on historical data and trends applicable to the political subdivision in
which the individual unit of development is located during the previous 10 years." Therefore,
the City of Colleyville defines a service unit based on historical wastewater discharge over
the past 10 years as compared to the estimated residential units. The residential unit is the
development type that predominately uses a 5/8" x 3/4" meter. The measure of discharge per
service unit is based a 5/8" x 3/4" meter the data shown in Table 1.9.
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 17 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
C~T l' pF.
~ Kimley-Hom '""~
^ ~ ^ and Associates, ~nc. C(JLLEYVILLE
rEX AS
Table 1.9 Service Unit Consumption Calculation
Year
Po ulation Residential
Units
2.96 ersons/unit Wastewater Flow
Average Day
Demand MGD) Flow
per Service
Unit GPD
2002 19,831 6,700 n/a n/a
2003 20,494 6,924 n/a n/a
2004 21,157 7,148 2.23 312
2005 21,974 7,424 2.15 289
2006 22,650 7,652 2.29 299
2007 23,127 7,813 2.46 315
2008 23,491 7,936 1.66 209
2009 23,800 8,041 2.04 254
2010 24,109 8,145 2.18 267
2011 24,263 8,197 2.15 262
Average Flow per Serv ice Unit 276
Based on the City's 10-year growth projections and the resulting wastewater flow projections,
wastewater service will be required for an additional 1,000 service units. The calculation is
as follows:
• A service unit, which is a unit of development that discharges approximately 276 gallons
per day (GPD), is a typical residential connection that uses a 5/8" x 3/4" meter. Table
1.10 outlines the future wastewater discharge projections and its relationship to the
additional service units projected for the next 10-years.
Table 1.10 10-_year Additional Service Unit Calculation
Year Average Day
Flow
MGD Service Unit
Demand
(GPD
Service Units
2012 2.28 276 8,249
2022 2.55 276 9,249
10-year Additional Service Units 1,000
Impact fee law allows for a credit calculation to credit back the development community
based on the utility revenues or ad valorem taxes that are allocated far paying a portion of
future capital improvements. The intent of this credit is to prevent the City from double
charging development for future capital improvements via impact fees and utility rates. If the
city chooses not the do a financial analysis to determine the credit value they are required by
law to reduce the recoverable cost by 50 percent. The city has chosen to calculate the credit
value. Therefare, the maximum recoverable cost for impact fee shown below is 77 percent of
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 18 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ ana Asso~iates, ~n~.
~ T Y' p
~-
~~
COLLEYVILLE
rExAs
the Pre Credit Recoverable Cost. Edward B. Peacock, CPA has detailed a credit calculation
in the appendix.
A breakdown of the 10-year recoverable costs and the associated impact fee per service unit
is as follows:
Tahlo 1 11 1(1_vPar RPrnvPrahle ('nct Rreakdnwn
Recoverable Impact Fee CIP Costs $2,539,293
Debt Service $773,877
Pre Credit Recoverable Cost for Impact Fee $3,313,170
Credit for Utility Revenues ($792,490)
Maximum Recoverable Cost for Impact Fee $2,520,680
Impact fee per service unit =
10-vear recoverable costs
10-year additional service units
Impact fee per service unit =
Impact fee per service unit =
$2,520,680
1,000
$2,521
Therefore, the maximum assessable impact fee per service unit is $2,521.
For a development that requires a different size meter, a service unit equivalent is established
at a multiplier based on its capacity with respect to the 5/8" x 3/4" meter. The maximum
impact fee that could be assessed for other meter sizes is based on the value shown on Table
1.12, Service Unit Equivalency Table for Commonly Used Meters.
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 19 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
~,T Y O~
~~
C4LLEYVILLE
T E X A S
Table 1.12 Service Unit Equivalencv Table for Commonlv Used Meters
Meter Size*
Maximum
Continuous
Operating Capacity
(GPM)**
Service Unit
Equivalent Maximum
Assessable
Fee
Wastewater
($)
5/8"x 3/4" PD 10 1 2,521
3/4" PD 15 1.5 3,782
1" PD 25 2.5 6,303
1 1/2" PD 50 5 12,605
2" PD 80 8 20,168
2" Compound 80 8 20,168
2" Turbine 100 10 25,210
3" Compound 160 16 40,336
3" Turbine 240 24 60,504
4" Compound 250 25 63,025
4" Turbine 420 42 105,882
6" Compound 500 50 126,050
6" Turbine 920 92 231,932
8" Compound 800 80 201,680
8" Turbine 1,600 160 403,360
10" Turbine 2,500 250 630,250
* PD = Positive Displacement Meter (Typical residential meter)
**Operating capacities obtained from American Water Works Association (AWWA) C-700-02
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 20 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ~ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associaties, Inc.
Appendix A- Plan for Awarding the Water and Wastewater
Impact Fee Credit
(as prepared by Eddie Peacock, CPA)
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ~ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
`~T 1 q~.
~-
COLLEYVILLE
r .~- °
~' !i X A :
CITY OF COLLEYVIL~E
2012 PLAN FOR AWARDING THE WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE CREDIT
Texas Local Government Code Section 395 "Financing Capital Improvements Required
by New Development in Municipalkies, Counties, and Certain Other Local Governmer~ts"
requires the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) to contain specific enumeraGon of a pian
for awarding the impact fee credit.
Section 395.014, Texas Locai Government Code states~
",.. (a) The politiql subdivision shall use qualified professionals to prepare the
qpital improvements plan and to calculate the impact fee. The ppital
improvements plan must ~ntain specific enumeration of the foliowing items:
(~ a plan for awarding:
(A) a credit for the portion of ad valorem tax and utiliry service
revenues generated by new service units during the program
period that is used for the payment of improvements, including the
payment of debt, that are included in the capital improvements
plan; or
(B) In the alternative, a c~edit equal to 50 percent of the total
projected cost of implementing the capital improvements plan."
The funding sources for the City of Colleyvilla growth-related water and sewer
improvements (CIP) include operating funds, long-term debt and impact fees. The
portion of utility service revenue generated by the new development during the ten (10)
year period used for the payment of growth-related improvemerits is estimated to equal
the portion of operating funds and Iong-term dabt payments related to the grovuth-related
water and sewer CIP projects. For purposes of this credit calculafion, payments for CIP
growth-related improvements also include the capital portion of the City of Colleyville's
participation in Trinity River Authority (TRA) water and sewer projects. Based on
historical data, payments for growth-related capital improvements are estimated as
follows:
COLLEYVILLE WATER AND SEWER FUND - DEBT REQUIREMENTS
WATER
AND
SEWER °k 2012
PAYMENTS CIP
GROVUTH
RELATED
o~ 2012 CAPITAL
PORTION
2012 Debt Service $833,012
2012 Capital
Outlay (Growth-CIP
Related $0
TOTAL $833,012
Water 71.64°~ ' $596,770 100°h ' $596,770
Sewer 28.36°~' $236,242 100°,6' $236,242
TOTAL $833,012
' Based on 2012 W&S Im act Fee Stud
Edward B. Peacock, CPA
2012 Water and Wastewater [mpact Fee Updare 21 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kirrdey-Hom
~ . and Associa~es, Inc.
`~T 1' O~.
~-d~
COLLEYVILLE
7~r.:~`
CITY OF COLLEWILLE
2012 PLAN FOR AWARDING THE WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE CREDIT
TRA DEBT PAYMENTS - COLLEYV ILLE PORTION
2012
PAYMENTS
WATER
PROJECTS 2012
PAYMENTS
SEWER
PROJECTS CIP
GROWTH
RELATED
°,6 2012 CAPITAL
PORTION
TarrantCounty
Regionai Water
Su I $2,806,847 100°~' $2,806,847
Total Water $2 806,847 100°k ' $2,806,847
Central Plant $952,349 100°,6' $952,349
Total Sewer 952 349 100°~ " $952,349
' Based on 2012 W&S Im act Fee Stud
TOTAL 2012 WATER REVENUE RELATED TO GROWTH CIP $3.403,617
TOTAL 2012 SEWER REVENUE RElATEO TO GROWTH CIP $1,188,591
The maximum impact fee credit is expressed in dollars per service unit. The current
demand is 8,249 water service units and 8.249 sew~er service units (per Kimley-Horn
W&S Impact fee Update, 2012). The monthly credit is $29.22 per water service unit and
$10.89 per sevver service unit (annual "capitaV debt related" revenue divided by annual
service units divided by 12 months):
WATER SEWER
Annual Ca itat/ Debt Related $3,403,617 $1,188,591
! Current Service Units 8 249 8 249
/ Months 12 12
Credit er Service Unit er Month $34.38 $12.01
The cumulative growth total of 66,000 water monthly service units and 66,000 sewer
monthly service units is derived from the 1,000 water service units of new demand and
1,000 sewer service units of new demand (per Kimley-Hom W&S Impact Fee Update,
2012) applied equally over the ten-year period:
GROWTH IN WATER AND SERVICE UNIT S - IMPACT FEE PERIOD
Year Annual Service Units Cumulative Service Units
1 100 100
2 100 200
3 100 300
4 100 400
5 100 500
6 100 600
7 100 700
8 100 800
9 100 900
10 100 1.000
Total 1,000 5,500
Months 12
Bills 66,000
Edward B. Peacock, CPA
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 22 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kirrdey-Hom
~ and Associabes, Inc.
`~T 1" UF.
COLLEYVILLE
~' t x :~ '
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
2012 PLAN FOR AWARDING THE WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE CREDIT
The monthly credit per service units is mukiplied times the ten year cumulative total of
monthly service units to equal the total CIP credit.
Credit per Service Cumula6ve Monthly Total CIP Credit
Unit Bills (Growth in
Service Units
Water $34.38 66,000 $2 269,353
Sewer $12.01 66,000 $792,490
The total CIP credit is subtracted from the CIP allocated to ten year growth (per Kimtey-
Hom W&S Impact Fee Update, 2006 report) to result in the amount to be paid from
v~rater and sewer impact fees:
CIP Allocated to Ten
Year Growth Total CIP Credit Amount to be Paid
from Im act Fees
Water $8,369,822 $2 269,353 $6,100,469
Sewer $3,313,170 $792,490 $2,520,680
The maximum impact fee after the credit is calculated by dividing tfie total amount to be
paid from impact fees by the service units of new demand:
Amount to be Paid Service Units of New Maximum Impact
from Impact Fees Demand over Ten Fee after Credit
Years
Water $6,100,469 1,000 $6,100
Sewer $2,520,680 1,000 $2,521
The resuft is an adjusted maximum water impact fee per service unit after the credit of
$6,441 or 72.89°,6 of the base maximum impact fee of $8,370, and an adjusted
maximum sewer impact fee per service unit aRer the credit of $2,521, or 76.08°h oF the
base maximum sewer impact fee per service unit of $3,313.
This credit is less than the 50°,6 alternative which results in an adjusted water impact fee
per service unit after the 50°~ credit of $4,185, and an adjusted sewer impact fee per
service unit after the 50°,6 credit of $1,656.
Base Maximum
Impad Fee Maximum
Assessable Impact
Fee aRer Credit Impact Fee 50°k
Alternative
Water $8,370 $6,100 ~4,185
% of maximum 72.89°~ 50%
Sewer $3,313 $2,521 $1,656
°~ of maximum 76.08°,6 50°~
Edward B. Peacock, CPA
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 23 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kirrdey-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
`~T 1 q~.
~
COLLEYVILLE
rL~:~~
CI?Y OF COLLEYVILLE
2012 PLAN FOR AWARDING THE WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE CREDIT
The following is a conversion of service units to maximum assessabie water impact fees
for various meter types and sizes:
eter Size
Service Unit
Equivalent
Base Maximum
waterimpact
Fee Maximum
Assassable
water Impact
Fee
50% oi Base
Maxlmum fee
. .1 4.1
5/8" X 3/4" PD 1.0 8.370 6.100 4,185
3l4" Pp 1.5 12.555 9.151 6.277
1" PD 2.5 20,925 15,251 10,462
1 1/2" PD 5.0 41,849 30,502 20,925
2" PD 8.0 66,959 48,804 33,479
2" Compound 8.0 66.959 48.804 33.4T9
7'Turbine 10.0 83.898 67,~5 41,845
3" Compound 16.0 133.917 97.608 86,959
3" Turbine 24.0 200.876 146.411 10D.438
4" Compound 25,0 209,246 152,512 104,623
A" Turbine 4?.0 35'1,533 256,220 175,766
6" Compound 50,0 418,491 305A23 209,246
8" Turbine 92.0 770,024 561,243 385,012
8" Compound 80.0 669.586 488,038 334,793
8"Turbine 160.0 1,339,172 976,075 669,586
10"Turbine 250.0 2,OP2,456 1,525,1~7 1,046,228
The following is a conversion of seroice units to maximum assessable sewer impad fees
for various meter types and sizes:
eter Size
Service Unit
Equivalent
Base Maximum
Sewer lmpaet
Fee Maximum
Asseasable
Sewer lmpact
Fee
SO%, of Base
Maximum Fee
5 3,31 , 1 1,6
518" X 3J4" PD t A 3,313 2,521 1,857
314" PD 1 5 4,970 3,781 2,485
1" PD 2 5 8,283 fi,302 4,141
1 1!2" PD 5 0 16.566 12.603 8.283
2" PD 8 0 26,505 20.165 13,253
2"Compound B-0 2B,505 20,165 13,253
7'Turbine 100 33,732 25,207 16,586
3" Compound 16 0 53,01 t 40,331 26,5~5
3"Turbine 24.0 79,516 80,498 39,758
4" Compound 25A 82,829 63,017 41,475
4"Turbine 42-0 139,153 105,889 89,577
6" Compaund 50.0 165,859 126,034 82,829
6"Turbme 92A 304,812 231,903 752,406
8"Compound 80.0 265,054 201,654 132,527
8"Turbine 1600 530,107 403,309 265,05G
70"Turbme 2500 828,293 630,170 414,146
Edward B. Peacock, CPA
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 24 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ~ Kirrtley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
NET INTEREST COSTS
~~T 1' O~.
COLLEYVILLE
~=~`' 4_
%'t ~ ~:
Per Section 395 of the Local Government fode, projected interest charges may be added in drterminfng
the total costs of the capital improvements if the impact fees are used for the payme~t of principal and
interest on bonds.
All of the costs included in the 2012 Roadway and Water and Wastewater Impact Fee capital
improvements plans are assumed to be financed by long te-m debt to be repaid from impact fees.
The bonds are assumed to be paid over a twenty year period. Only interest costs (net of projected
i~terest earnings) for the ten year period of the impact fee calculation are added to the costs of the
capital improvements.
Projected interest charges over the ten year period were added to the total costs of the growth related
capital improvements plans as follows:
Growth Related Total Impact Fee
CIP Net Interest Cost CIP ~osts
Roadway Impact Fee
Area 1 $ 11,798,400 5 3,563,243 5 15,361,643
Area 2 9,140,499 2,760,387 11,900,886
Water Impact fee 6,414,833 1,954,989 8,369,822
Wastewater Impact Fee 2,539.293 773,877 3,313,170
Edward B. Peacock, CPA
2012 Water and Wastewater [mpact ~ee Update 25 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ 1T 1 O~.
~~^ Kirr~ey-Hom COLL~E-Y~ILLE
~ and Associates, Inc.
,~
r~~:x:~~
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
SCHEDULE OF PROJECTED OEBT ISSUANCE AND NET INTEREST CQST (1 j
WATER IMPACT FEE CAPITAI IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
FOR THE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013 TO 2022
TOTAL CIP INTEREST EXPENSE GROWTH
YEAR YEAR DEBT ISSUE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013-2022 RELATEO
INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL 100 00%
SERIES ALL SERIES
2013
1 2013 6,414,833 238,510 238,510 238,510
2 2014 - 230,173 230,173 230,173
3 2015 • 221,520 221,520 221,520
4 2016 • 212,539 212.539 212,539
5 2017 - 203,21~J 203,219 203,219
6 2018 • 193,545 193.545 193,545
7 2019 • 183,506 183,506 183,506
8 2020 - 173,087 173,087 173,087
9 2021 - 162,272 162,272 162,272
10 2022 • 151,050 151,050 151,050
6, 414, 833 1, 969, 422 1, 969, 422 1, 969, 422
INTEREST REVENUE GROWTH
AVG BAL TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013-2D22 RELATED
~ 2013 5.~3,350 2,88i 2,887 2,887
2 2014 5,131,866 2,566 2,566 2,566
3 2015 4,4J0,383 2,245 2,245 2,245
4 2016 3,848,900 1,924 1,924 1,924
5 2017 3,207,417 1,604 1,604 1,604
6 2018 2,565,933 1,283 1,283 1,283
7 2019 1,924,450 962 962 962
8 2020 1,282,967 641 641 641
9 2021 641,483 321 321 321
10 2022 -
14,433 14,433 14,433
NET INTERE ST EXPENSE S 1,954,989 3 1,954,989
[1 J Assumptions 1) Total Water CIP cost is fi~anced try 1 bond senes, 2) mterest rate on
bond senes is 3 75%, 3) bond proceeds are fully expended equally over the 10 year penod
and 4) me irnestment rate of return is 05%
2012 Water and Wastewater lmpact Fee Update 26 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kirriley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
SCHEDULE OF PRpJECTED DEBT ISSUANCE ANO NET INTEREST CQST (1~
WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
FOR THE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013 TO 2022
TOTAL CIP INTEREST EXPENSE GROWTH
YEAR YEAR DEBT ISSUE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013•2022 RELATED
INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL 100 40%
SERIES ALL SERIES
2013
1 2013 2,539,293 94,414 94,414 94,414
2 2014 • 91,113 91,113 91,113
3 2015 - 87,688 87,688 Si,688
4 2016 ~ 84,133 84,133 84,133
5 2017 - 80,444 80,444 80,444
6 2018 • 76,615 i6,615 i6,615
7 2019 • 72,640 i2,640 72,640
8 2020 - 68,516 68,516 68,516
9 2021 - 64,236 64,236 64,236
10 2022 59,790 59,790 59,790
2,539,293 779,590 77~J,590 779,590
INTEREST REVENUE GROWTH
AVG BAL TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013-2022 RELATED
1 2013 2,285,364 1,143 1,143 1,143
2 2014 2,031,434 1,016 1,016 1,016
3 2015 1,777,505 889 889 889
4 2016 1,523,576 762 762 762
5 2017 1,269,647 635 635 635
6 2018 1,015,717 508 508 508
~ 2019 i61,788 381 381 381
8 2020 507,859 254 254 254
9 2021 253,929 125 125 125
10 2022 -
5,713 5,713 5,713
NET INTERE ST EXPENSE S 773.877 S 773.877
[1 ] Assumptions 1) Total Wastewater CIP cost is financed by 1 bond series, 2) interest rate
on bond series is 3 75%, 3) bond proceeds are fully expended equally over the 10 year penod
and 4) the investment rate of return fs OS%
`~T Y O~.
COLLEYVILLE
~~
Tt~:~~
2012 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 27 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas
G~T Y ~F
'l~,tr-
COLLEYVIL
Prepared by:
~ Kimley-Horn
~ and Associates, Inc.
Texas Registration Number 928
801 Cherry Street, Unit 11, Suite 950
Fort Worth, TX 76102
817.335.b511
May 2012
~O Kimlcy-I Iom and Associates, Inc., 2012
061063417
.~ ~'~ 0~~ i ~ `.
.:y~''~~ `''~+~ao
t: ~ •• **o~~
. ~
t :............................ ~
JEFFREY A. WHITACRE ~
.... ............... .y
~'. 102469 :~,~i
~ .p.
1 0,~. < c~u~ °•~~'
~641~~!rii~i' ~.. «.. , j ~~.
, ~~.< ; • ~~ U~ ~o ~ti
,
~, .~~
7
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
G~T 1'' pF
COLLEYVILLE
T~Xas
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................... i
2.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1
2.2 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 2
2.3 Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Inputs ................................................................................. 3
A. Land Use Assumptions ........................................................................................................................ 3
B. Capital Improvement Plan ................................................................................................................... 3
2.4 Methodology For Roadway Impact Fees .................................................................................. 7
A. Service Area ....................................................................................................................................... 7
B. Service Units ....................................................................................................................................... 7
C. Cost Per Service Unit .......................................................................................................................... 8
D. Cost of the CIP .................................................................................................................................... 8
E. Service Unit Calculation .................................................................................................................... 11
2.4 Impact Fee Calculation ...........................................................................................................15
A. Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit ............................................................................ 15
B. Plan For Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit ........................................................................... 17
C. Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development ................................................................................. 19
2.5 Sample Calculations ................................................................................................................ 21
2.6 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................22
APPENDICES
A. Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections .............................................................................................. 24
B. CIP Service Units of Supply .................................................................................................................... 51
C. Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory .................................................................................................... 54
D. Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit ................................................................................. 57
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 1 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc,
G~T Y O~.
COLLEYVILLE
TC X :~S
List of Exhibits
2.1 Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan ........................................................................... 6
List of Tables
2.1 Land Use Assumptions for Roadway Impact Fees .......................................................................... 3
2.2 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan for Service Area 1 .................................. 5
2.3 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan for Service Area 2 ................................ 5
2.4 Level of Use for Proposed Facilities ............................................................................................... 7
2.5 Level of Use for Existing Facilities ................................................................................................ 8
2.6 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections - Service Area 1....... 10
2.7 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections - Service Area 2....... 10
2.8 Transportation Demand Factor Calculations ................................................................................. 13
2.9 10-Year Growth Projections ......................................................................................................... 14
2.10 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee ................................................................................. 18
2.11 Land Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET) ............................................................... 20
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update Il May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associa~es, Inc.
2.1 INTRODUCTION
G~ T Y O F
~~
COLLEYVILLE
~xt~
rtx~4
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code describes the procedure Texas cities must
follow in order to create and implement impact fees. Senate Bill 243 (SB 243) amended Chapter
395 in September 2001, to define an impact fee as "a charge or assessment imposed by a political
subdivision against new development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the
costs of capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new
development."
Chapter 395 mandates that impact fees be reviewed and updated at least every five (5) years.
Accordingly, the City of Colleyville has developed its Land Use Assumptions and Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) with which to update the City's Roadway Impact Fees. The City has
retained Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide professional transportation engineering
services for the Roadway Impact Fee Update. This report includes details of the impact fee
calculation methodology in accordance with Chapter 395, the applicable Land Use Assumptions,
development of the CIP, and the refinement of the Land Use Equivalency Table.
This report introduces and references two of the basic inputs to the Roadway Impact Fee: the
Land Use Assumptions and the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Information from these two
components is used extensively in the remainder of the report. This report consists of a detailed
discussion of the methodology for the computation of impact fees. This discussion -
Methodology for Roadway Impact Fees and Impact Fee Calculation addresses each of the
components of the computation and modifications required for the study. The components
include:
~ Service Areas;
• Service Units;
• Cost Per Service Unit;
• Cost of the CIP;
• Service Unit Calculation;
• Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit; and
• Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development.
The report also includes a section concerning the Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee
Credit. In the case of Roadway Impact Fees, this involves the calculation of the credit for the use
of ad valarem taxes to fund the Impact Fee CIP. This plan, prepared by Eddie Peacock, CPA, and
upon which we relied, details the maximum assessable impact fee per service unit the City of
Colleyville may apply under Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update I May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
G t T Y O F
~ Kimley-Hom
^ ~ ^ and ,4ssociates, ~nc. COLLEYVILLE
,;~.~ ..,;_
T E X A 5
2.2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This study was performed to update the City of Colleyville's Roadway Impact Fees. Transportation
system analysis is an important tool for facilitating orderly growth of the transportation system and for
providing adequate facilities that promote economic development in the City of Colleyville. The
implementation of an impact fee is a way to shift a portion of the burden of paying for new facilities onto
new development.
Roadway improvements necessary to serve 10-year (2022) and ultimate system needs were evaluated.
Typically, infrastructure improvements are sized beyond the 10-year requirements; however, Texas'
impact fee law (Chapter 395) only allows recovery of costs to serve the 10-year planning period. For
example, the projected cost to construct the infrastructure needed through 2022 is $11,798,400 for Service
Area 1 and $9,140,499 for Service Area 2. After financing costs are added and a credit for ad valorem
taxes is applied, $14,356,280 for Service Area 1 and $11,318,597 for Service Area 2 are recoverable
through impact fees serving the 10-year system needs. A portion of the remainder can be assessed as the
planning window extends beyond 2022 and as the impact fees are updated in the future.
The impact fee law defines a service unit as follows, "Service Unit means a standardized measure of
consumption attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally
accepted engineering or planning standards and based on historical data and trends applicable to the
political subdivision in which the individual unit of development is located during the previous 10 years."
Therefore, the City of Colleyville defines a service unit as the number of vehicle-miles of travel during
the afternoon peak-hour. For each type of development the City utilizes the Land Use/Vehicle-Mile
Equivalency Table (LUVMET), presented in Table 2.11 to determine the number of service units.
Based on the City's 10-year growth projections and the associated demand (consumption) values, 6,083
and 4,627 additional vehicle-miles of capacity will be needed by year 2022 for Service Area 1 and
Service Area 2, respectively. Based on the additional service units and the recoverable capital
improvement plans, the City may assess a maximum of $2,360 per service unit in Service Area 1 and
$2,446 per service unit in Service Area 2.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 2 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
G~'C Y pF,
~~-
COLLEYVILLE
Tex~~
2.3 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CALCULATION INPUTS
A. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
The land use assumptions used for this report were provided by the City of Colleyville. For
purposes of roadway impact fees, the City of Colleyville was divided into two service areas
contained entirely within the current corporate limits. Colleyville Boulevard (SH 26) serves as
the dividing line between the two areas. Table 2.1 presents the land use assumptions utilized in
the roadway impact fee component.
The population and employment estimates and projections were all compiled in accordance with
the following categories:
Dwelling Units: Number of dwelling units, both single-and multi-family.
Employment.• Square feet of building area based on three (3) different classifications. Each
classification has unique trip making characteristics.
Retail: Land use activities which provide for the retail sale of goods that
primarily serve households and the location choice is oriented toward the
household sector, such as grocery stores and restaurants.
Service: Land use activities which provide personal and professional services
such as government and other professional administrative offices.
Basic: Land use activities that produce goods and services such as those that
export outside of the local economy, such as manufacturing, construction,
transportation, wholesale, trade, warehousing, and other industrial uses.
Table 2.1 Land Use Assumptions for Roadway Impact Fees
Dwelling Employment (Square Feet )
SA Year Units Basic Service Retail Total
SA 1 2012 4,836
_... _ _ 30,417
_... 2,288,308
_..._._. 1,004,025 3,322,750
_. _ . _ ............. ..
(E of SH 26) 2022 5,336 33,936 2,514,622 1,344,891 3,893,449
SA 2 2012 3,413 41,805
. 1,091,014
_... 267,142
_ . 1,399,961
(W of SH 26) 2022 3,913 46,642 1,348,009 400,483 1,795,134
B. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The City has identified the City-funded transportation projects needed to accommodate the
projected growth within the City. The CIP for Roadway Impact Fees is made up o£
Recently completed projects with excess capacity available to serve new growth;
Projects currently under construction; and
Remaining projects needed to complete the City's Master Thoroughfare Plan.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 3 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ ^ and Associates, Inc.
G~ T Y p F
L~.
COLLEYVILLE
p~Xas
The CIP includes arterial and collector facilities. All of the arterial and collector facilities are part
of the currently adopted Master Thoroughfare Plan.
The CIP for Roadway Impact Fees that is proposed for the Roadway Impact Fee Update is listed
in Tables 2.2 and 2.3, and mapped in Exhibit 2.1. The tables show the length of each project as
well as the facility's classification. The CIP was developed in conjunction with input from City
of Colleyville staff and represents those projects that will be needed to accommodate the growth
projected from the land use assumptions.
The various roadway classifications describe the purpose and function of each roadway. These
roadway classifications are based on the existing City of Colleyville Master Thoroughfare Plan.
There are seven classifications that were used in the 2012 Colleyville Roadway Impact Fee
Update. These classifications are:
• Major Arterial (SH 26 / Precinct Line) - 6 Lanes Divided (P6D);
• Minor Arterial - 4 Lanes Undivided (M4U);
• Minor Arterial - 2 Lanes Divided (M2D);
• Major Collector - 4 Lanes Undivided (MC4U);
• Major Collector - 2 Lanes Undivided (MC2U);
• Minor Collector - 3 Lanes Undivided/Two-Way, Left-Turn Lane (C3U); and
• Minor Collector - 2 Lanes Undivided (C2U).
Each of the classifications have different vehicular capacities assigned to them (see Table 2.4)
based on their roadway characteristics. Arterial thoroughfares are designed to move mare traffic
and provide a larger amount of capacity. Arterials provide for travel between neighborhoods and
commercial areas or serve as routes for thru-traffic from adjacent cities. A collector's primary
function is to bring traffic from local streets to arterial facilities. Collectors are intended to move
less traffic and are designed with lower vehicular capacity than arterial facilities.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 4 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc,
G~~ Y UF
!/r-
COLLEYVILLE
T~x~~s
Table 2.2 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan for Service Area 1
% In
Service proj. # Class Roadway Limits Length Service
Area (mi)
Area
1-A/2-A P6D Collc ~ Blvd S. Ci Limits to N. C' Limits 4.15 50%
.....1'B.... . ... . M4U. - - ... - - - Brown Tr ... . .................
- ..........°. Mountain Laurel Ln. [o S. CRy_Lunits.............
-° .............. ... 030
...--~~- ]00°/
---.....---~
1_ C
• .... MC4U
................. Heritape Ave.
.°-.._ Cheek-S~aryer Rd,_to 2,430: S. of Glade Rd. _____
~______________~- 0.67 100°/
-----°------
1-D C2U Bedford Rd. Littk Bear Creek [o Glade Rd 0.53 100%
~ _l _E_
____ M2D
_ _________°---- Gladc Rd 1
- -~°_--- _ --°--°-----_°~_~_.._.-°----- -- Bcdford Rd. to Mart¢~ Pkw
----- --- -------° -----~----------------- 2.23
----------- 100%
-- ---- -- -
"~
x 1-F C3U Thom son rerracc Glade Rd to Colle Blvd. 0.26 100%
^~ 1-G C2U Rober[s Rd Glade Rd. to N. Ci~ Limits 039 100%
'-
~° ----------------
I-H
--------m---- -----___-__-
M2D
-_•-•~ ...... -----°----------°-~--------°---°-------°------------
Jackson Rd_
................•-• --..-•-•--~--- ____________________
-.........---~_~- ______-_--°
_____Cheek_Spar_ger Rd..to 740 S. of Shenandoah PL __ ••••-•_~°
OJ2
_~____~- --------°-°
100%
--
~ I:I M2D Cheek:Spar~er Rd ~1) San Bar Ln to Delmar Ct. 0.40 100%
V
1 J
- --------
M2D _
-
__ Cheek _~~er Rd (2~ _
.... ........-°° .................... . . .
200' E. of Bedford Rd to_E,_Crtx_Lunits______._„
-- . ...
2.48
°~~ ..--°-oo-°
100/
-~------°--
1-1
__------°- In[ersectan Glade Rd & Riverwalk Dr
°___--_______-------____ -------- - - . _~ Intersection I~ovements
- ------- ---
---------- 100%
-°-----------
I-2 Intersection
.. Bedford Rd & Cheek_S_parper Rd_
......• - - __Intersection Improvements __ __ ~m____
°°-°----
~~~- ]00%
---°---------
I 3
........ Intersection
. ............ Jackson Rd & Cheek Spar~er Rd.
....°--...- --....... ..--° Intersechon Improvements
--- ~°----°---.
............. 100%
......... .- -
I-4 Intersec[ion Herita e Avc. & Cheek-S r cr Rd Interscction Im rovements 100%
Table 2.3 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan for Service Area 2
Service
Area
P~~ #
Class
Roadway
Limits
Length
~m~~ °/ I n
Service
Area
I-A/2-A P6D Colle ' k Blvd S. Ci Lim¢s to N. Ci Limits 4.15 50%
2-B MC4U Bransford Rd. I Glade Rd. to Timberlme St. N. 0.44 100°/
2-C MC2U Bransford Rd. 2 Tunberline St. N. to L.D. Lockett Rd. OJS 100%
2-D C2U White Dc L.D. Lcekett Rd. to Westcoat Dr. 035 100%
2-E C2U Wcstcoat Dr. L.D. Lockctt Rd. to John McCam Rd 1.20 ]00%
2-F M4U Glade Rd 2 Gladc Creek to 1 380' E. of Glade Creek 0.26 100%
;0 2-G M4U Glade Rd 3 ] 80' E. of Glade Creek to Bransford Rd 0.73 100%
`V
S 2-H C2U McDonwcll School Rd Hcrbert St. [o Westcoa[ Dr. 0.97 100°/
~~ 2-I MC2U John McCam Rd. Westcoat Dr, to Co~e ' c Blvd. 1.69 100°/
v, ° 2-J M2D Pleasant Rur~ Rd I Colle ' le Blvd to Bo rt Dr. 0.68 100%
d 2-K M2D Pleasant Run Rd. 2 200' S. of Shclton Rd. to N. Ci Lnnits 1.75 100°/
3 2-L C2U L.D. Lcekett Rd. Precmct L'me Rd. to Pleasant Run Rd 1.93 100°/
2-M C2U Lavaca Trail Precmct Linc Rd. to Mustan Trail 0.56 100%
2-N C2U Mu h Rd. Precinct Line Rd to 2 O10' E, of Precinc[ Line Rd. 0.45 100°/
1-5 In[ersection McDonwcll School Rd & Westcoat Dr. Intersection Im rovements 100%
I-6 Intersection John McCam Rd & Pleasant Run Rd. Intersection Im rovements 100%
I-7 Intersection L.D. Lockett Rd. & Precinct Lme Rd. Si al Installation 100°/
I-8 In[erscction John MeCain Rd & Westcoat Dr. Intersection Im rovements 100%
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 5 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
~ '
_,. .
earMir rn '^ !
~
d ~
' John McCain Rtl
~
Mue mhY R~
~ ~ ~
m ~
m
x
McDonwell School IMusfnal B/vtl.
~
Whi Tnke~ Rd
Lavaca TM ie
O`
•
~ ~ Shetton Dr ~
Rd ',~OIIEV ' ~art
Hall Johns<
LD Lackett
~ Church
o h ~
Q~ 0
Tmberline S7 ~
m ~ ~
.?Q ~
Norf1~ kichland Hdls ~--"~ ~ ~_- -- ~
. ~~ Cenfeipa~. ~ . ,,
~~~~ ~'
Hurst
Legend
Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Other Thoroughfare Facilities
~ Intersection Projects
Local Streets
Streams
Q Service Areas
--- Railroad
/ ~\ ~
~ ~ .r, l ~1
N
Exhibit 2.1: Roadway Impact Fee
Capital Improvement Plan
0 o.s ,
Miles
/ ~ KMP/~MOm
May 2012 ~~~1 g,,,~,~,~
rn
~
~
~^
~
~
/
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
G~T Y UF
'~~-
COLLEYVILLE
F
T F X A S
2.4 METHODOLOGY FOR ROADWAY IMPACT FEES
A. SERVICE AREA
The service areas used in the 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update are shown in the previously
referenced Exhibit 2.1. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code specifies that "the
service areas are limited to an area within the corporate boundaries of the political subdivision
and shall not exceed six (6) miles." Based on the guidance in Chapter 395 and examination of the
City of Colleyville, two roadway service areas were deemed appropriate. These service areas
cover the entire corporate boundary of the City of Colleyville. Service Area 1 is located east of
Colleyville Boulevard and Service Area 2 is located west of Colleyville Boulevard. Both service
areas are approximately four (4) miles in diameter.
B. SERVICE UNITS
The "service unit" is a measure of consumption or use of the roadway facilities by new
development. In other words, it is the measure of supply and demand for roads in the City. Far
transportation purposes, the service unit is defined as a vehicle-mile. On the supply side, this is a
lane-mile of an arterial street. On the demand side, this is a vehicle-trip of one-mile in length.
The application of this unit as an estimate of either supply or demand is based on travel during the
afternoon peak hour of traffic. This time period is commonly used as the basis for transportation
planning and the estimation of trips created by new development.
Another aspect of the service unit is the service volume that is provided (supplied) by a lane-mile
of roadway facility. This number, also referred to as capacity, is a function of the facility type,
facility configuration, number of lanes, and level of service.
The hourly service volumes used in the Roadway Impact Fee Update are based upon
Thoroughfare Capacity Criteria published by the North Central Texas Council of Governments
(NCTCOG), but have been adjusted to the City of Colleyville's Master Thoroughfare Plan.
Tables 2.4 and 2.5 show the service volumes utilized in this report.
Table 2.4 Level of Use for Proposed Facilities
(used in Appendix B- CIP Service Units of Supply)
Roadway Type Hourly Vehicle-Mile
(MTP Classifications) Median Configuration Capacity per Lane-Mile of
Roadway Facilit
Major Arterial (P6D) Divided 750
Minor Arterial - 4 lanes (M4U) Undivided 650
Minor Arterial - 2lanes (M2D) Divided 725
Collector (C3U) Undivided 575
(Two-Way, Left-Turn Lane)
Collector Undivided 525
(MC4U, MC2U, C2U)
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 7 May 2012
City of Golleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associa6es, Inc.
G~~ Y UF
~
COLLEYVILLE
T C X P 5
Table 2.5 Level of Use for Existing Facilities
(used in Appendix C- Eacisting Roadway Facilities Inventory)
Roadway
Type
Description Hourly Vehicle-Mile
Capacity per Lane-Mile of
Roadway Facility
C2U Two lane undivided 425
C3U Three lane undivided (TWLTL) 575
MC2U Major Collector - Two lane undivided 525
MC4U Major Collector - Four lane undivided 525
MC4D Major Collectar - Four lane divided 575
M2U Minor Arterial - Two lane undivided 650
M2D Minor Arterial - Two lane divided 725
M4U Minor Arterial - Four lane undivided 650
M4D Minor Arterial - Four lane divided 725
MSU Major Arterial - Five Lane divided (TWLTL) 725
C. COST PER SERVICE UNIT
A fundamental step in the impact fee process is to establish the cost for each service unit. In the
case of the roadway impact fee, this is the cost for each vehicle-mile of travel. This cost per
service unit is the cost to construct a roadway (lane-mile) needed to accommodate a vehicle-mile
of travel at a level of service corresponding to the City's standards. The cost per service unit is
calculated for each service area based on a specific list of projects within that service area.
The second component of the cost per service unit is the number of service units in each service
area. This number is the measure of the growth in transportation demand that is projected to
occur in the ten-year period Chapter 395 requires that Impact Fees be assessed only to pay for
growth projected to occur in the city limits within the next ten years, a concept that will be
covered in a later section of this report (see Section 2.3.E). As noted earlier, the units of demand
are vehicle-miles of travel.
D. COST OF THE CIP
The costs that may be included in the cost per service unit are all of the implementation costs for
the Roadway Impact Fee Update, as well as project costs for thoroughfare system elements within
the Capital Improvement Plan. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code specifies that
the allowable costs are "...including and limited to the:
1. Construction contract price;
2. Surveying and engineering fees;
3. Land acquisition costs, including land purchases, court awards and costs, attorney's fees, and
expert witness fees; and
4. Fees actually paid or contracted to be paid to an independent qualified engineer or financial
consultant preparing or updating the Capital Improvement Plan who is not an employee of the
political subdivision."
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 8 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ ^ and Associaies, Inc.
G~T 1' OF
~
COLLEYVILLE
r~xt~5
The engineer's opinion of the probable costs of the projects in the CIP is based, in part, on the
calculation of a unit cost of construction. This means that a cost per linear foot of roadway is
calculated based on an average price for the various components of roadway construction. This
allows the probable cost to be determined by the type of facility being constructed, the number of
lanes, and the length of the project. The costs for location-specific items such as bridges,
highway ramps, drainage structures, and any other special components are added to each project
as appropriate. In addition, based upon discussions with City of Colleyville staff, State, County,
and developer driven projects in which the City has contributed a portion of the total project cost
have been included in the CIP as lump sum costs.
A typical roadway project consists of a number of costs, including the following: construction,
design engineering, survey, and right-of way acquisition. While the construction cost component
of a project may actually consist of approximately 100 various pay items, a simplified approach
was used for developing the conceptual level project costs. Each new project's construction cost
was divided into two cost components: roadway construction cost and major construction
component allowances. The roadway construction components consist of the following pay
items: (1) street excavation, (2) lime stabilization, (3) concrete pavement, (4) topsoil, and (5)
concrete driveways.
Based on the paving construction cost subtotal, a percentage of this total is calculated to allot for
major construction component allowances. These allowances include preparation of ROW,
traffic control, pavement markings, roadway drainage, illumination, special drainage structures,
minor utility relocations, turf/erosion control, and basic landscaping. These allowance
percentages are also based on historical data. The paving and major construction component
allowance subtotal is given a fifteen percent (15%) contingency to determine the construction
cost totaL To determine the total Impact Fee Project Cost, a percentage of the construction cost
total is added for engineering, surveying, testing, and mobilization. ROW acquisition costs are
included in the cost on a percentage basis.
The construction costs are variable based on the proposed Master Thoroughfare Plan
classi~cation of the roadway.
Tables 2.6 and 2.7 list the CIP projects for the City of Colleyville with conceptual level project
cost projections. Detailed cost projections and the methodology used for each individual project
can be seen in Appendix A, Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections. It should be noted that
these tables reflect only conceptual-level opinions or assumptions regarding the portions of future
project costs that are potentially recoverable through impact fees. Actual costs of construction
are likely to change with time and are dependent on market and economic conditions that cannot
be precisely predicted at this time.
This CIP establishes the list of projects for which impact fees may be utilized. Essentially, it
establishes a list of projects far which an impact fee funding program can be established. This is
different from a City's construction CIP, which provides a broad list of capital projects for which
the Ciry is committed to building. The cost projections utilized in this study should not be
utilized for the City's building program or construction CIP. Included in the Roadway Impact
Fee CIP was the cost of the 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update which was $14,167 per Service
Area.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 9 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
C~T Y pF_
~
COLLEYVILLE
T F 7~ ~~ `~-'
Table 2.6
10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Proiections - Service Area 1
Scrvice
Pro} k
Class
Roadway
Limits
Length % In
Service
Tatel Project
Cost in Servicc
Area
~m~~
Cost
Area
Area
I-A/2-A P6D Colle ville Blvd. S. Ca Lvnils toN. Cil Litnits 4.15 50% $ 5,070000 5 2535000
1-B
-_'--"'- M4U
- -- -'----"--------Brown Tr.
--'---"-'--'-- Mountam Laurel Ln. to S Cay Limrts'-"-------
--------- - -----------°°° ---030 !00% 5""-1,352 (p0- S-----_- I 35~00(1
I-C MC4U
-~_ Herita e Ave.
_ e_$ ___
~ _ Cheek-Spac ec Rd. to 2,430' S. oC Glade Rd
_ ~_~~~m~~____e__~
____ 0.67 10(N/o
W S 5 983 000 S 5 983 000
~
_____
I-D C2U BedfordRd. m~
""--°-°° LittkBearCreektoGhdeRd
-°'- ------'-'---°°_~_ 0.53
-°"' 100%
"""'----- g 2589000
--._~~ S m_ 2__~5__~89000
.... I:E.... .. M2D
.... G6de Rd..Q)..........-'---
..."-'---." ----- -"......Bedford Rd to Manm PkwY :............... .. 2_23
... 100%
...........' $ 7,351,000
'-'-.......... ..-" S 7,351,000
.......-"-""-' -'-'-
6
1-F
C3U
Tho on Terrace
Glade Rd to Colle ville Blvd.
0.26
I00%
S 837000
S 8370(10
^'
S t-G
_- C2U
~"_"" Robens Rd.
_'__""""'____________ Glade Rd to N. Cd Limila
___-_-____ __X___.~"""""_'__._ Q39
____-___ 100%
_ g 1,317~000 S I 317,OIX1
""""___.,_____
^~ LH M2D Jackson Rd Cheek-S rger Rd. to 740 S. of Shenandoah PL OJ2 100% S 5 634 (M70 5 5 634 000
a ;
~
I
I
M2D
Ch
k
S
°
y -
""
"'"' ee
-
r er Rd 1
"""""?a g -~- ~....."" San Bar Ln to Delmaz Ct
""""__"' ~___~____________~ 0.40
..'"'.~"' 100
/
"""""' $ ~0p0
__"' 5 I 8000
______°
v I-1 M2D Cheek-S r er Rd (2) 200' E. of Bedford Rd. to B. City Limits 2.4R 100% $ 8,286,IX10 S 8,286,000
41
.._. Intecsection
.""""""' Ulade Rd & Riverwa~C Dr.
_......."""...""'.......... Intenectbn Improvements
. . . . .. .................'__...._.._
..__......' 100%
"""'.... $ I,000,(100
............"""' S I,W0,000
"'....................
I-2 Imersection Bedford Rd & Cheek-S r er Rd. Intersection Im rovements 100% g 1 000000 S I O(100(10
I_3 I~rtereection Jackson Rd & Cheek-Sparper Rd.
' -_'- - ' Intersecbon Ir~rovements
_-'-"'-' "'-" ' "' --
--- ----- 100"/
--- 5 I 060 (N)0 S ___ I,(K0000
I-4 Itriersection Herita e Ave. & Cheek-S r r Rd. Intersecuon I rovemen[s 100% S I000000 5 l OOOOW
Service Area Project Cos[ SuMotal $ 4I,202,000
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update Cost Per Service Area $ 14,167
Total Cost in SERVICE AREA 1$ 41,216,167
Notes:
a. The planning level cost projections have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future
Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
b. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for
a specific project.
c. Project I-A/2-A (Colleyville Boulevard) indudes only the City of Colleyville's cost for this project.
Table 2.7
10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Pro_jections - Service Area 2
Service
Area
~'0} #
Cless
Roadway
Limits Leng[h
(~~ /~~
Service
Area Total Projec[
Cost Cos[ in Service
Area
LA/2-A P6D Colle ville Blvd. S. Cit Limils [o N. Cil Limits 4J 5 50% 5 5,07Q000 S 2,535,000
2-B MC4U Bransford Rd (q Glade Rd to Timberlme St N. 0.44 10(P/o S 1,749,W0 S 1,749,OW
2-C MC2U Bransford Rd (2) Trtnberlme SL N. to L.D. Lockett Rd 0.75 10(P/o S 3,020,000 S 3,02Q000
2-D C2U While Dr. L.D. Lockett Rd. to Westcont Dr. 035 100% $ 1,169,000 5 1,169,000
2-E C2U Westcoat Dc. L.D. Lockett Rd to ]ohn McCam Rd. L20 100% $ 3,980,IX10 $ 3,98Q000
2-F M4U G6de Rd (2) Ghde Creek to 1,380' E. of Glade Creek 0.2fi 10(P/o S I,162,W0 S 1,162,OW
2-G M4U Ghde Rd (3) 1,3R0' E. of Glade Creek to Bransford Rd. 0.73 100°/n 5 3,167,000 5 3,167,000
2-H C2U McDonweO School Rd He`bert SL to Westcoat Dr. 0.97 100% S 2,6R7,000 5 2,687,00(1
~ 2d MC2U ]otm McCarti Rd Westcoat Dc. to Co~eyvJle Blvd 1.69 100% S 7,415,(100 S 7,415,000
"' '~ 2-J M2D Pleasant Run Rd. I Colle ville BWd to B art Dr. 0.6A 100% $ 2,258,000 S 2,258,OW
~ o
2-K
M2D
Pleasant Run Rd. 2)
200' S. of Sheiton Rd to N. Cd Limds
1.75
100'Y
S 6,551,000
S 6,551,000
,z 2-L C2U L.D. Lockett Rd Precmct L¢ie Rd. to Pleasant Run Rd. 1.93 IOOo/ S fi,l 17,000 S 6,1 U,OW
G
2-M
C2U
Lavaca Tra~
Precmct L'me Rd. to Musheng Trail
0.56
100'/o
S 1,839,000
S 1,839,000
2-N C2U Mia h Rd. Precuret Luie Rd. to 2,010' E. oCPrecinct Line Rd 0.45 10(P/o S 1,4RSd100 S 1,4N5,000
45 Intersection McDonwellSchool Rd. & Westcoat Dr. Interseclion Im rovemeots 100% S 1,000,000 S I,OOQ000
I-6 Intersection John McCain Rd. & Pleuart ftun Rd. Intersec[ion Im rovements 100% 5 1,312,1NN1 S 1,312,00(1
IJ Irtersection L.D. Lockett Rd & Precuict Line Rd Si I Installation 100% $ 265,000 5 265,OIX1
I-R fntecsection John McCam Rd & Westcoat Dr. Intersec0on I rovements 100°/ S l OW WO S I,000000
Service Area ProjeM Cos[ SuMotal $ 48,711,000
2012 Roadnay Impact Fee Update Cost Per Service Area $ 14,167
Total Cost in SERVICE AREA 2 $ 48,725,167
Notes:
a. The planning level cost projections have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any
future Capital Improvement Planning within the Ciry of Colleyville.
b. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City
Engineer for a specific project.
c. Project I-A/2-A (Colleyville Boulevard) includes only the Ciry of Colleyville's cost for this project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 10 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
G~T 1` OF
~ Kimley-Hom "''"
^ ~ ^ and associaties, ~nc. COLLEYVILLE
_r~
TEXr~~'
E. SERVICE UNIT CALCULATION
The basic service unit for the computation of the City of Colleyville's roadway impact fees is the
vehicle-mile of travel during the afternoon peak hour. To determine the cost per service unit, it is
necessary to project the growth in vehicle-miles of travel for the service area far the ten-year
study period.
The growth in vehicle-miles from 2012 to 2022 is based upon projected changes in residential
and non-residential growth for the period. In order to determine this growth, baseline estimates
of population, basic square feet, service square feet, and retail square feet for 2012 were made
along with projections for each of these demographic statistics through 2022. The Land Use
Assumptions (see Table 2.1) details the growth estimates used for the impact fee determination.
The residential and non-residential statistics in the Land Use Assumptions provide the
"independent variables" that are used to calculate the existing (2012) and projected (2022)
transportation service units used to establish the roadway impact fee maximum rates within each
service area. The roadway demand service units (vehicle-miles) for each service area are the sum
of the vehicle-miles "generated" by each category of land use in the service area.
For the purpose of impact fees, all developed and developable land is categorized as either
residential or non-residential. For residential land uses, the existing and projected population is
converted to dwelling units. The number of dwelling units in each service area is multiplied by a
transportation demand factor to compute the vehicle-miles of travel that occur during the
afternoon peak hour. This factor computes the average amount of demand caused by the
residential land uses in the service area. The transportation demand factor is discussed in more
detail below.
For non-residential land uses, the process is similar. The Land Use Assumptions provide the
existing and projected amount of building square footages for three (3) categories of non-
residential land uses - basic, service, and retail. These categories correspond to an aggregation of
other specific land use categaries based on the North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS).
Building square footage is the most common independent variable for the estimation of non-
residential trips in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, g`h
Edition. This independent variable is more appropriate than the number of employees because
building square footage is tied more closely to trip generation and is known at the time of
application for any development or development modification that would require the assessment
of an impact fee.
The existing and projected land use assumptions for the dwelling units and the square footage of
basic, service, and retail land uses provide the basis for the projected increase in vehicle-miles of
travel. As noted earlier, a transportation demand factor is applied to these values and then
summed to calculate the total peak-hour vehicle-miles of demand for each service area.
The transportation demand factors are aggregate rates derived from two sources - the ITE, Trip
Generation Manual, 8`" Edition, and the regional Origin-Destination Travel Survey performed by
the NCTCOG and the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS). The ITE, Trip Generation
Manual, 8`" Edition, provides the number of trips that are produced or attracted to the land use for
each dwelling unit, square foot of building, or other corresponding unit. For the retail category of
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 1 1 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ ^ antl Associates, Inc.
G~T Y p~,
~~
COLLEYVILLE
,_
TEXAS
land uses, the rate is adjusted to account for the fact that a percentage of retail trips are made by
people who would otherwise be traveling past that particular establishment anyway, such as a trip
between work and home. These trips are called pass-by trips, and since the travel demand is
accounted for in the land use calculations relative to the primary trip, it is necessary to discount
the retail rate to avoid double counting trips.
The next component of the transportation demand factor accounts for the length of each trip.
The average trip length for each category is based on the region-wide travel characteristics survey
conducted by the NCTCOG and the NHTS.
The computation of the transportation demand factor is detailed in the following equation:
T~F' =T'~~1-Pb~*Lmax
where... Lmax - m111~L * OD or SA~ )
Variables:
TDF = Transportation Demand Factor;
T = Trip Rate (peak hour trips / unit);
Pb = Pass-By Discount (% of trips);
L,,,aX = Maximum Trip Length (miles);
L = Average Trip Length (miles);
OD = Origin-Destination Reduction (50%); and
SA~ = Max Service Area Trip Length (see Table 2.8).
For land uses which are characterized by longer average trip lengths (primarily residential uses),
the maximum trip length has been limited to four (4) miles based on the maximum trip length
within each service area. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code allows for a service
area of six (6) miles; however the service area within the City of Colleyville is approximated to
be a four (4) mile distance.
The adjustment made to the average trip length (L) statistic in the computation of the maximum
trip length (Lmax) is the origin-destination reduction (OD). This adjustment is made because the
roadway impact fee is charged to both the origin and destination end of the trip. For example, the
impact fee methodology will account for a trip from home to wark within the City of Colleyville
to both residential and non-residential land uses. To avoid counting these trips as both residential
and non-residential trips, a 50% origin-destination (OD) reduction factor is applied. Therefore,
only half of the trip length is assessed to each land use.
Table 2.9 shows the derivation of the Transportation Demand Factor far the residential land uses
and the three (3) non-residential land uses. The values utilized for all variables shown in the
Transportation Demand Factor equation are also shown in the table.
2012 Roadway [mpact Fee Update 12 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ ^ and Associates, Inc.
~~T Y pF,
~..
COLLEYVILLE
~~ cS d
TE1iA5
Table 2.8 Transportation Demand Factor Calculations
Variable Residential Basic Service Retail
T 1.01 0.97 1.49 3.73
Pb 0% 0% 0% 34%
T with Pb 1.01 0.97 1.49 2.46
L
(miles) 17.21 10.02 10.92 6.43
SA~ 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
LO1eX *
(miles) 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.22
TDF 4.04 3.88 5.96 7.92
* Lmax is less than 4 miles for retail land uses; therefore this lower trip length is used for calculating the TDF for
retail land uses
The application of the demographic projections and the transportation demand factors are
presented in the 10-Year Growth Projections in Table 2.9. This table shows the total vehicle-
miles by service area for the years 2012 and 2022. These estimates and projections lead to the
Vehicle Miles of Travel for both 2012 and 2022.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 13 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
('~ N
~ O
N
`~'h ~
n ~
O p,
~D w
~ ~
~ ,~
-~ ~
~
x ,.n
~ ~
C
v
m
m
A
~
~
0
N
Table 2.9 10-Year Growth Projections
Year 2012
SERVICE RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES SQUARE FEET° TRANS. DEMAND FACTORS NON-RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES TOTAL
AREA DWELLING Trip Rate VEHICLE
6
'
B VEHICLE
UNITS' TDFZ MILES3 B'~IC SERVICE RETAIL B/~SIC SERVICE RETAIL BASIC ERVIC RETAIL TOTAL MILES10
1.01 0.97 1.49 2.46
1 4,836 19,537 30,417 2,288,308 1,004,025 118 13,638 7,952 21,708 41,245
2 3,413 4.04 13,789 41,805 1,091,014 267,142 3.88 5.96 7.92 162 6,502 2,116 8,780 22,569
Totals 8,249 33,326 72,222 3,379,322 1,271,167
Year2022
280 20,140 10,068 30,488 63,874
SERVICE RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES SQUARE FEET° TRANS. DEMAND FACTORS NON-RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES TOTAL
AREA DWELLING
' Trip Rate VEHICLE
BASIC
SERViCE
RETAIL
BASIC6
SERVICE~
RETAILB
B~~C
ERVIC
RETAIL
TOTAL VEHICLE
UNITS TDFZ MILES3 MILES10
1.01 0.97 1.49 2.46
1 5,336 2~,557 33,936 2,514,622 1,344,891 132 14,987 10,652 25,771 47,328
2 3,913 4.04 15,809 46,642 1,348,009 400,483 3 88 5~ ~ 92 181 8,034 3,172 11,387 27,196
Totals 9,249 37,366 80,578 3,862,631 7,745,374
VEHICLE-MILES OF INCREASE" (2011 -2021)
SERVICE
AREA ~H-MILES
1 6,083
2 4,627
373 23,021 13,824 37,758 74,524
Notes:
' From Land Use Assumptions (included in 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update Report)
z Transportation Demand Factor for each Service Area (from LWMET) using Single Family Detached Housing land use and trip generation rate
3 Calculated by multiplying TDF by the number of dwelling units
° From Land Use Assumptions included in 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update Report
5 Trip generation rate and Transportation Demand Factors from LUVMET for each land use
6'Basic' corresponds to General Light Industrial land use and trip generation rate
''Service' corresponds to General Office land use and trip generation rate
8'Retail' corresponds to Shopping Center land use and trip generation rate
9 Calculated by multiplying Transportation Demand Factor by the number of thousand square feet for each land use
10 Residential plus non-residential vehicie-mile totals for each Service Area
" Total Vehicle-Miles (2012) subtracted from Total Vehicle-Wiles (2022)
^
1 '
~
~
Q ~.
~~
S
n ~
~
~
5
c~
, O
y '`: r ~
r*r ~ f~~ ~ -1
~ ~
n
y ':~~~
,- ~
~
rn
~
~
~
~
rt
~
Exhibit A
G~T y OF
~ ~ ~ Kimley-Hom COLLEYVILLE
~ and Associates, Inc.
r~~~s
2.4 IMPACT FEE CALCULATION
A. MAXIMUM ASSESSABLE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE PER SERVICE UNIT
This section presents the maximum assessable roadway impact fee rate calculated for each service
area. The maximum assessable roadway impact fee is the sum of the eligible Impact Fee CIP costs
for the service area divided by the growth in travel attributable to new development projected to occur
within the 10-year period. A majority of the components of this calculation have been described and
presented in previous sections of this report. The purpose of this section is to document the
computation for each service area and to demonstrate that the guidelines provided by Chapter 395 of
the Texas Local Government Code have been addressed. Table 2.10 illustrates the computation of
the maximum assessable impact fee computed for each service area. Each row in the table is
numbered to simplify explanation of the calculation.
Line Title Descri tion
Total Vehicle-Miles of The total number of vehicle-miles added to the service area based on
1 Capacity Added by the the capacity, length, and number of lanes in each project. (from
CIP Appendix B- CIP Service Units of Supply)
Each project identified in the Roadway Impact Fee CIP will add a certain amount of capacity to the
City's roadway netwark based on its length and classification. This line displays the total amount added
within the service area.
Total Vehicle-Miles of A measure of the amount of traffic currently using the roadway
2 facilities upon which capacity is being added. (from Appeodix B-
Existing Demand CIP Service Units of Su 1
PP Y)
A number of facilities identified in the Roadway Impact Fee CIP have traffic currently utilizing a portion
of their existing capaciry. This line displays the total amount of capaciry along these facilities currently
being used by existing traffic.
Total Vehicle-Miles of Number of vehicle-miles of travel that are not accommodated by the
3 Existing Deficiencies existing roadway system. (from Appendix C- Existing Roadway
Facilities Inventory)
In order to ensure that existing deficiencies on the City's roadway network are not recoverable through
impact fees, this line is based on the entire roadway netwark within the service area. Any roadway
within the service area that is deficient - even those not identified on the Roadway Impact Fee CIP - will
have these additional trips removed from the calculation.
Net Amount of Vehicle- A measurement of the amount of vehicle-miles added by the CIP that
4 Miles of Capacity will not be utilized by existing demand. (Line 1- Line 2- Line 3)
Added
Total Cost of the CIP The total cost of the projects within the service area (from Table
5 2.6/Table 2.7 - 10-Year Roadway Capital Improvement Plan with
within the Service Area Conceptual Level Cost Projections)
This line simply identifies the total cost of all of the projects identified in the service area.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 15 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc,
C~'C Y OF.
COLLEYVILLE
TE ~i AS
Cost of Net Capaciry The total CIP cost (Line 5) prorated by the ratio of Net Capaciry
6 Supplied Added (Line 4) to Total Capacity Added (Line 1). [(Line 4/ Line 1)
(Line 5)]
Using the ratio of vehicle-miles added by the Roadway Impact Fee CIP available to serve future growth
to the total vehicle-miles added, the total cost of the Impact Fee CIP is reduced to the amount available
for future gowth (i.e., excluding existing usage and deficiencies).
~ Cost to Meet Ezisting ~ The difference between the Total Cost of the CIP (Line 5) and the
Needs and UsaQe Cost of the Net Capacity supplied (Line 61. (Line 5- Line 61
This line is provided for information purposes only - it is to present the portion of the total cost of the
Roadway Impact Fee CIP that is required to meet existing demand.
Total Yehicle-Miles of Based upon the growth projection provided in the Lcmd Use
8 New Demand over Ten Assumptions (see Section 2.3.A), an estimate of the number of new
Years vehicle-miles within the service area over the next ten years. (from
Table 2.9)
This line presents the amount of growth (in vehide-miles) projected to occur within each service area
over the next ten years.
Percent of Capacity The result of dividing Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand (Line 8)
9 Added Attributable to by the Net Amount of Capacity Added (Line 4), limited to 100%
New Growth (Line 10). This calculation is required by Chapter 395 to ensure
10 Chapter 395 Check capaciry added is attributable to new growth.
In order to ensure that the vehicle-miles added by the Roadway Impact Fee CIP do not exceed the
amount needed to accommodate growth beyond the ten-year window, a comparison of the two values is
performed. If the amount of vehicle-miles added by the Roadway Impact Fee CIP exceeds the growth
projected to occur in the next ten years, the Roadway Impact Fee CIP cost is reduced accordingly.
Cost of Capaciry Added The result of multiplying the Cost of Net Capacity Added (Line 6) by
11 Attributable to New the Percent of Capacity Added Attributable to New Growth, limited to
Growth 100% (Line 10).
The value of the total Roadway Impact Fee CIP project costs (excluding fmancial costs) that may be
recovered through impact fees. This line is determined considering the limitations to impact fees
required by the Texas legislature.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 16 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
G~T 1` pF,
COLLEYVILLE
~-_
TkxAs
B. PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires the Capital Improvement Plan for
Roadway Impact Fees to contain specific enumeration of a plan for awarding the impact fee
credit. Section 395.014 of the Code states:
"(7) A plan for awarding:
(A) a credit for the portion of ad valorem tax and utility service revenues
generated by new service units during the program period that is used for the
payment of improvements, including the payment of debt, that are included
in the capital improvements plan; or
(B) In the alternative, a credit equal to 50 percent of the total projected cost of
implementing the capital improvements plan..."
Eddie Peacock, CPA, has prepared the plan for awarding the roadway impact fee credit. The plan
is suimllarized, as prepared by Eddie Peacock, CPA, in Appendix D, Plan for Awarding the
Roadway Impact Fee Credit. The following table summarizes the portions of Table 2.10 that
utilize this credit calculation.
Line Title Descri tion
12 Financing Costs (from Appendix D- Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee
Credit)
13 Interest Earnings ~from Appendix D- Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee
Credit)
Cost of the CIP and The sum of the Cost of Capaciry Added Attributable to New Growth,
14 FinancingAttributable Financing Costs, and Interest Earnings. (Line 11 + Line 12+ Line
to New Growth 13)
Pre-Credit Maximum Found by dividing the Cost of the CIP and Financing Attributable to
15 Fee Per Service Unit New Growth (Line 14) by the Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand
Over Ten Years (Line 8). (Line 14 / Line 8)
A credit for the portion of ad valorem taxes projected to be generated
16 Credit for Ad Valorem by the new service units, as per Section 395A14 of the Local
Taxes Government Code. (from Appendix D- Plan for Awarding the
Roadwa Im act Fee Credit
Recoverable Cost of The difference between the Cost of the CIP and Financing
17 CIP and Financing Attributable to New Growth (Lioe 14) and the Credit for Ad Valorem
Taxes (Line 16). (Line 14 + Line 16)
Maximum Assessable Found by dividing the Recoverable Cost of the CIP and Financing
ig Fee Per Service Unit ~Line 17) by the Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand Over Ten
Years (Line 8). (Line 17 / Line 8)
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 17 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hnm
~ and Associa6es, Inc.
C~T Y pF,
COLLEYVILLE
x:~
T E ~ A S
Table 2.10 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee
SERVICE AREA
1 2
LINE TITLE: (E. of SH 26) (W. of SH 26)
1 TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITYADDED BYTHECIP 21,243 24
654
(FROM CIP SERVICE UMTS OF SUPPLY, APPINDIX B) ,
2 TOTAL VEH-M[ OF EXISTING DEMAND 14,040 14
285
(FROM CIP SERV[CE UNITS OF SUPPLY, APPINDIX B) ,
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEF[C[ENC[ES
3 (FROM IXISTINGROADWAYFACILITIES 953 813
[NVENTORY, APPINDIX C)
4 NET AMOUNT OF VEH-MI OF CAPACITYADDED 6,250 9,556
(LINE 1- LINE 2- L[NE 3)
5 TOTAL coST OF T~--E C[r W rrHw SEav[CE AREa, $ 41,216,167 $ 48,725,167
(FROM TABLE2.6/TABLE2.7)
6 COST OF NET CA PACITY SUPPLIED $ l 2,125,797 $ 1 g,gg5,329
(LINE 4 / LINE 1) * (LINE 5)
~ COSTTOMEETEXISTINGNEEDSANDUSAGE $ 29,09~,37~ $ 29,839,83g
(LINE 5 - LINE 6)
g TOTAL VEFI-MI OF NEW DIMAND OVER TEN YEARS 6,~g3 4
627
(FROM TABGE2.9 and LandUse Assumptions) ,
9 PERCINT OF CAPACITY ADDED ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH 97.3% 48.4%
(LINE 8 / LINE 4)
10 IF LINE 8> LINE 4, RIDUCE LINE 9 TO 100%, 97.3 °/a 48.4%
OTHERWISE NO CHANC~
11 COSTOFCAPACITYADDEDATTRIBUTABLETOGROWTH $ 11,798,400 $ 9,140,499
(L.INE 6 * L[NE 10)
12 F[rrnrrc[rr~cosrs $ 3,622,235 $ 2
806
089
(FROM APPINDIX D) ,
,
13 ~TER~T ~~~cs $ (58,992) $ (45,702)
(FROM APPINDIX D)
14 COSTOFCIPANDFINANCINGATTRIBUTABLETOGROWTH $ 15,361,643 $ 11,900,886
(LINE 11 + L[NE 12 - LINE 13)
15 PRE-CRED[T MAX FEE PER SERV[CE UNIT ($ PER VEH-M~
$
2,525
$
2,572
(LINE 14/ L[NE8)
16 CREDIT FOR AD VALOREM TAXES $ 1,OOS,363
~ ~ $
(SH2,ZH9)
(FROM APPINDIX D)
17 ~covE~aBr~ COST OF CIP AND FtNANC[rrG $ 14,356,280 $ 11,318,597
(LINE 14 + LINE 16)
j g MAX ASSESSABLE FEE PER SERVICE LJNIT ($ PER VEH-MI) $ 2 360 $ 2,446
(L[NE 17 / LINE 8)
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update l8 May 20 ] 2
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
G~T Y UF
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom COLLEYVILLE
~ antl Associa~es, Inc,
,_~.
rrxAS
C. SERVICE UNIT DEMAND PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT
The roadway impact fee is determined by multiplying the impact fee rate by the number of
service units projected for the proposed development. For this purpose, the City utilizes the Land
UseNehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET), presented in Table 2.11. This table lists the
predominant land uses that may occur within the City of Colleyville. For each land use, the
development unit that defines the development's magnitude with respect to transportation
demand is shown. Although every possible use cannot be anticipated, the majority of uses are
found in this table. If the exact use is not listed, one similar in trip-making characteristics can
serve as a reasonable proxy. The individual land uses are grouped into categories, such as
residential, office, commercial, industrial, and institutional.
The trip rates presented for each land use is a fundamental component of the LUVMET. The trip
rate is the average number of trips generated during the afternoon peak hour by each land use per
development unit. The next column, if applicable to the land use, presents the number of trips to
and from certain land uses reduced by pass-by trips, as previously discussed.
The source of the trip generation and pass-by statistics is the ITE Trip Generation Manual, g'"
Edition, the latest edition for trip generation data. This manual utilizes trip generation studies for
a variety of land uses throughout the United States, and is the standard used by traffic engineers
and transportation planners for traffic impact analysis, site design, and transportation planning.
To convert vehicle trips to vehicle-miles, it is necessary to multiply trips by trip length. The
adjusted trip length values are based on the Regional Origin-Destination Travel Survey performed
by the NCTCOG and the NHTS. The other adjustment to trip length is the 50% origin-
destination reduction to avoid double counting of trips. At this stage, another important aspect of
the state law is applied - the limit on transportation service unit demand. If the adjusted trip
length is above the maximum trip length allowed within the service area, the maximum trip
length used for calculation is reduced to the corresponding value. This reduction, as discussed
previously, limits the maximum trip length to the approximate size of the service areas.
The remaining column in the LUVMET shows the vehicle-miles per development unit. This
number is the product of the trip rate and the maximum trip length. This number, previously
referred to as the Ti-ansportation Demand Factor, is used in the impact fee estimate to compute
the number of service units consumed by each land use application. The number of service units
is multiplied by the impact fee rate (established by City ordinance) in order to determine the
impact fee for a development.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 19 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
G~T Y pF.
~..
COLLEYVILLE
TE )i As
Table 2.11 Land Use / Vehicle-Mile Equivalencv Table (LUVMET)
ncrcoc m,xr~~P ven-iw
8°d
~~ TripGen Pass-
Pass-b
Tri
Tri Adj. Adj.Trip
length
Per Dev-
Land I;se Ca~e
g~~ ' Ue`elop~pntUnit Rete b1' y p p N'or LengM
lseCode
~P~
~e Source Hete Length
~-~
(~~ (~) Uett
(mi)
POR'f AND'IFRMIM1AL
Tnlcki'e~mmal (130 Acre 6.55 5.55 100? 50% 5.01 4.00 2620
WDIS7'RIAI.
Genenl Light lndustrial
....."' ........................................ I10
........... I,OOO SF Q~A
........"""..."""..... 0.97
......"'
......
......... 0.97
......... 10.0?
........... 5(P/o
....... 5.01
....."""" 4.00
'......... 3.88
.........
Generalllcavylndustnal
""""""""'
' 120 I,OOOSF(FA
"_"""~ QfiN
"
""""
""'" OfiR
" 10.02
_ 50°0
"" 5.01
_"" 400
"""_'"" 2.T1
__
______'_______"_'_______-__
tr~dustnalPark 130 -____-___
I,OOOSFa-A 0.86 _" "_'_'_'
OBG "___
_'
10.0? __
_
50°0 '___
5.01 4.00 3.44
Warehousi~g
~'"""""'"""""_""'_'__"_ I50
_"__'_"' I,OOOSF(FA
""""""~______-' 032
__ OJ2
_~T' 10.83
~_ 50%
_ 5.4? 4.00 118
Miui-Warehuuse I51 I,OOOSF~A 0.?fi 026 10.83 50°/ S42 4.00 1.04
RNSmN1V'11A1.
Single-Family Uetached Housing
.~"~"'""
""........."'""'"'"'"'"""'"' 210
"""_ _'""' Dwellmg Unit
'"""...""" I01
_ 101
~.__~__ 17.21
"""._ 50'/ 8.61 400 4.P1
'
Apanmen~Muiti-ferzrily ~0 UwcilmgUnic Rfi2 06? 17.21 50°/ 8.61 4(N1 2.48
_______- -_-_-'___
ResidentelCondoinmiuMTownhome --
230 __-___'_g'"""""""
Dwelln Unii ____
0.52 """"" """""' _'"""-'"
O5~ """"""""
I"7.21 '"""'
50% "~~""
8.61
4.00
2.06
MobileHomePark/ManuEacturedflousing
..........................""""'_"""""" 240
""..."" DwellmgUnrt
"""...""'........... 0.59
......"'
"....
......... U59
...'""... 17.21
........... SO%
....... 851
......... 4.00
.......... 2.36
.........
SeniueAdultllousi~g-Uetachcd SI DwellmgU~'v 017 0.27 1721 50°~ Sbl 4.00 1.06
SeniorAdultHousing-Anached S2 DwellmgUnu 0.16 O.Iti 1721 50°0 861 400 0.60
""""""""""""' ..........................
AssiatedLiving ..........'
S4 "'_""_"""""""'
Beds "'...."
0.22 """' '_""" """"'
Q2? ""'_""
1'].?I "'....
50°a ""'""..
8.61 ......."'
4.00 """....
0.86
IADl~G 0.00
Hotel 310 Room 059 0.59 5.43 50°0 31? 322 1.90
Motel/(hherlnd in Facifites 320 Room 0.47 0.47 643 50°0 312 322 I.51
RECRFATIONAL
"
"""""
"'"_"
_______'""""'"""""'_""'""""""
ColfDrivingRenge ""'"'""""
432 ""'"'__________-__"_'
Tee __"__
125 __'___ _"_'__ "'___'__
125 _'___"""
6.43 "
_'
50% _
J.?? 322
"~~' 0.03
T~""""'"'...."'"..."""'""'"'"
GolfCourse '...'""""
430 """' _~~""
Acre "'"'"~""
030 "'""" """"'"'" '" '""'""
030 """'"'"'"
6.0.3 "'..._
50% ..."""'"
322 ~
3.23 0.97
RecreatiuualCommunityCcntc~ 495 I,(1(M)SF(~A
"""""'_ 1.45
______
""""""
'~."" IAS
._'"__ 643
T~_ 50°/ J2: 323 4.67
_ -'__--__
Ice Skatmg Rink _-_
4fi5 '_____'___"
I,OW SF(~A 2J6 :36 6.43 50°/ 322 322 ~.60
.........................."'....................
MiniaturcCulfCbune ...........
431 ...""""""""""'
Hole """"'
0.73 ""'_' _"'_"' """"_
033 """""
6.43 "..._.
50°/ ..........
322 .........
322 ........"
1.06
MultiplexMavie7~hea[er 445 Screens 13.64 13.64 6.43 50% 322
..
. 3~2
......... 4392
.........
""""' ....................."""'"'....'_"'
Racquzt/TennisCNb """""'
491 ""'......."".........
Coun .........
335 .'"'.. ......"' .........
335 ......_....
6.43 ."""
50°/ ""
_.
3.22 .
322 10.79
~'STII'LTphAL
v
Church 560 I,IX105F(PA 0.55 O55 420 50% ?.10 ?.10 1.16
"" Day Care Center"""'-'-""'--"-"--"--- """"'"'
565 "'""' ____'_
OfNISFQ~'A
I. _""""
1246 '_"_'
44% __"___'
B """"'
6,96 "'"'""'"""
420 '~'
50%
2.10
2-10
14.66
""'_______'~"'~~'""~"
Renary/Middle School(I-8)
5~2 '~'~'"'__"'"""'"
S[udwcs '
0.16 "~ ""'~" "_____"'
0.16
4.?0
50%
2.10
'"
2.10
""______"
0.34
"____""~""_'_'_""_""___""_"'_"""'
Iligh &hool "'_"""
530 ""_'"~~~_."'_
S[uden~s
""'"'" ""_"'
0.13
_~' ""'_"
""~ _""""'
'""'"" '_
0.13 _"""'_'
4.?0 "____'
50°/ '_'__
'
2.10 2.10 0.27
'~
~~"'~"""'~'"'""~
]unior/Cortmun&yCollege "~_____
54(I Students OI~ 01~ 4.2~ SCPo 2.10 2.10 0.75
_-______ _""_'W_'_'_"~'
University/Cbllege ""_"'_"
550 _""'_"_-_~
St~dents '~~'
Q21 ~' "__. _ "
Q2I "_"'__"
420 "__'
SfPo ""'__
?.10 _-
2.10
0.44
hffDICAL
.....
.........
...."
'........
.........
...........
.......
.........
..........
.........
.....""" .....................""...............
CI'vic ...........
630 ....................
I,OQ15Y~~A 5.18
. 5.18 755 50°/
"" 3.78
""""" 3.78
_ 1956
_--______'__-_____________'_-_'___"_
Hospiral __'_____'_
610 '_""'""'~~"'~'___
F3eds ___-__
131 -_' _______ _'___'__
131 '_______'__
7.55 '_
50°/ "
3.78 3.7A 4.95
'""'""'"""" .............'"""""'"'"""""""'
~u~singHome "......."'
520 ""._"___.____~".~"'"
F3eds ""'"...'"
022 '""""' """'"""" ""'.....
0.22 .....'"'""
755 "'.~.
50°0 "
3.78
3.78
0.83
Ani~relHos itaVVeterin Clinic HN7 I,OODSFaA 4.72 3~o B 330 7.55 50"io 3.78 3.78 12.47
OFFICE ..... .......... ......... ...."""
""""....""""_"".......'""""
CurpuratelleadqunrtenduilJing "_""""
714 ' .......................
I,OOOSF(FA .........
1.40 ....... ........ .....""
140 ""'_""
10.9? "
50°/ 5.46 400 5.60
~
GenenlOfTceBuilding 710 I,WOSF(FA 1.49 1.49 10.9?
'.......... 50'0
....... 5.46
....."" 400
""_""' 5.96
..........
....."" ..............................""'...'
Medical-Ue~talOffxoBuiNing '".........
720 ..........."""""""
I,OOOSFC~A """"'
3.46 """ _"""" """"'
J.4fi
' 10.9?
"""" .'" 50°/
"~ 5.46
' 4.00
- 17.84
_'"'_______""'"_____""'"'"""'""""""""""'""
SingleTenentOffice~uildi~g "'"'_'"'
715 ""'"" ___"'
I,OOOSFCkA '_'_"_'_
1.73 __'__' '_"'___ _"_
_'_'
1.73 '
10.9? 50°i 5.46 4.00
..
. 6.92
.
.
..
""'"'""""'"""""" ..........................
OtTce Pedc ...........
750 ........""""........
I,OOO SF GFA .........
I AA ....... ........ ........'
I Ad '"........
1092 .......
50% ....."""
5.46 ""'
_
4.00 ....
.
.
5.92
('OhN7EItC1AL
""
____~""
"
.._'_'""'"_""'"_"'
"""_'_
"_'__
'_"'_"
""'_'_'
""'_"'"
"""'
"".~
~""~'
""
""_'_"""_'_"
Aubmotile Relahd '_""" _
"'"""
"""_""
""""
"""""
.""_"""""
"'_""'-
__-_
.__'__'
_'___"'_
"~"""~"~'~"".~
AutomobileCareCente~ "_______
952 I,OOOSF(kc-GLA 338 4d'~ B 2.03 6.43 50°/ 312 322 6.54
...
.................'""...........................
Automobile Pans Saks ...........
&1J .........................
1,0(10 SF CfrA .........
59R ......
43°~ .........
A .........
3.41 ...........
5.43 .......
50'/0 .....""'
3.22 """""
32? ......
10.98
('asulme/ServiceSiatiov 954 VehicleFuelmgPosition 13.87 42°/, A
. 8.04
"
""' 120
"~ __" 50'/ 0.60
~ U.60
~"~'" 4.ffi
'..~.
"_____~~~~
Gesolme/Service Station w/Conv Market _
945 """'""""""'"
Vehicle Fuelmg Yu~itiun ""~""'
13.38 ".....
56% ...""'""
B '
.."
5.89 120 50°/u O.fiO 0.60 3.53
('asolme/Service5rationw/ConvMarke~end 94fi VehicleEuelmgPositio~ 1394 56°o A 6.1J IZO 50'o Ob0 0.6U 3.68
NewCarSaks (i41 I,(IO~SFffA
...... 2.59
.."'.... ?0°o
....... B
........ ?07
......... 6.43
.......... 50'0
....... 3.22
.......... 32?
......... 6.67
..........
.....""'" ...................""'..............
QuickWbr'racbnVehicleShup ...........
941 ..............."'
ServicmgPosi[ions 5-19 4(Po f3 3.11 6.43 50°0
"' 3.?2
'"
'"~"' 3.2?
"~~" 10.01
.."____'""""""'"""'"""""'_"___'___"'__"'
Seif-Serv~ce Ca~ W avh _"'___"'
947 _""""'"~"""""~-_
Stall ___-
S54 40°o __-"_
B '_____"_
332 '__"___'__
I.ZO "
_
50% _
Ob0 0.60
'
" 1.99
""'
'""""""'_'_""_"""'"_'"_"_"'"_"'"_"""'""_'"
TireSrore """'""_'"
848 "_""""_'_'_'_'"""'""'
I,O(pSh-~A "'""~"
4.15 """"
2!S% """"""
A "'"'_"
?.99 """"'"'"".'
647 ""'""".
50°0 ""'"~'_"
312 _'_
_
_'_
322 '""~
9.Gi
Dinin
Fast Food Restaunv[ wi[h Uive-Thn, W i~dn 934 I,INp SF (~A 33.84 SO% A 169? 4.79 50% 240 2.40 40.61
Fast Food Res~aurent wichuut Urivc-fhN W in 933 I,O(10 SF ffA 25.15 SO°/ B 13.08 4.79 5(1°0 240 2.40 3139
______ ~""~""'"'""'" .........
HighTumove~(Sit-Dnwn)Restaurant ......."'
93~ ".._....._.._._~~' ~'
I,OQ~SF(~A '______
11.15 ~""""
43°o '""""'""
A "'"""'""'
fi3fi "'"'"""'"'
4.79 .......
5(Pa ....._""
2.40 ~~~~
2.40
1526
QuelrtyRestau~an[ 931 I.(qOSF(~'A
. 7.49 44% A 4_I9 4.79
" 50°a
"""' 2A0
""'"~'" 2A0
~____" 10.06
_ """"'"""""""""""'"'
Coffee/DonutSho w~thDnve-ThniWindow '""'"""'
937 ......""""'""
I,(IQ~Sh-(~A _'_
42.93 ___'
70°o ___'____
A "_"'_'_
12-86 "_"""'
4.79 SfPe 240 2.411 3091
Other Re[sil
'
"'"
"
"
""""'
""'""'""
___-",
'--
_-
-
__
_
__
__-___~_'__-_-___'______'______-__
Y7ee-Standin Discount5to~e ___-'_
XIS -____--~___
I,ODUSF(}A _'___'__
5.00 _
_
30°o C 350 6.43 50'Y 3.2? -
3.» 1127
"""""""'" .................."'............
~ursery(C~rdenCenteq '""........
817 .........................
I,OOOSFQ-A ........"
3.80 "'""".
3(P/ .........
B .........
2.56 ...........
643 .......
5(I°/ .........
3.2? """""...
32? .........
8.57
HomelmpmvertentSupcrstore 86? I,OOOSF(?A 237 4R°o A 123 643
"""
"' 50°/
"~ 322
""~ 322
W_
~_ 3.96
'_'_'_"Y ""gti~_""'~"~_'""'_~'
Phamwc /Dru to`cw/oDrivFlhru Window 'W'.v'
880 '_~_~___-__~_'__"
I,OODSEQ~-A "W-_'
8.4~ '___
53% "'__"'
A _'__'_"_
3.96 __
643 50% .
32~ _
32~ 12.75
Phamecy/lhugstomw/Dme-ThruWindow SNI I,(NIOSF(~A 1035 49°o A 52% 5.43 50% 3.2? 32? 17.00
ShoppmgCencer 820 I,OOOSt'QA 3.73 34°/ A 2Afi 643 50%
"" 3.??
""" 31?
"'"'.... 7.92
...
""""
.................................."'"'..........
Supemarket ...........
850 ........................
I,OQ1 SY (FA .........
10.50 .......
3b o ........
A ..'_""'
6.72 """""
6.43 "
'
5(1°0 ""
3.?2 322 .
21.64
"
'_~""'""""""""___'___"""__'_"_______
Toy/Chddren's5uperstnre _'_____
Bfi4 __'_________"____"'_'
I,fN705FQ~-A "'_"'"
4.99 ""'""
3fPo '~
l3 3.49 643 50°/
"' 31?
""' 312
"
"'"
." 'T
1124
"
""""~_Y"""""""____~"""""""""_""'""""
Depart~re~t5mre ""'""'""
875 """"""'""""""'""'"'""
I,fM()SF(FA "_____'
1.7R '_"".
JO°~~ '_'_'_"
d ""'_'_'
125
" _""'_'_'_
6.4}
" "'_
SfPe
"
"'"' ""
312
"
__'" '
`
3'~?
"'""'
'"' 4.03
__"'
VidmRe~[alSrore '_'__'_'_
N95 ""'"~_~_"_--__
I,(10()SFCd~~A _-_'
13h0 ______
SIPo ___'_'__
l3 _
__"'_
6.80 _"'___
'
64} _
SfP/ '_
'
3.?2 -
32~ 21.90
SFRVIC6
"""~
~"""~""""""""'"""""'
W alk-In Bank ""'"""'
91 I '"._...."'_""_"'"'""
1,0(p SF (~A "~~
12.13 "__
40° ~ _-____
B ___'` __'
7~% '______-_
3 39 ____
50' ~ ___"____
1.70 "_"'_'_
1.70 1238
"'........
"""""' .............."""".................
Drivc-In6ank ...."'.'"..
91? ........................
Dnvo-mLvee' .........
2741 "'""'
4Ao """"
A """"'
1453 """""
339 """'
50°/ """""
1.70 "_"""
1.70 ?A.70
f1aU 5ulu~ 918 I,OOf) SY CdA 1.45 3U°/ d I.OZ 339 50°/ 1.7~ I-70 1.73
Ker ~o Sources o( Pess-bv Rele s:
A~. ITF Tnp ('rne~viion HontlMOk 3n~ Ftl~t~v I~w~ ~~04)
B'. Lv~imatetl hy Kimley-Hom Imsetlun I~I t eaiec lorsvnilarcategoner
C~. IT Y ruie udj~.eted ~xard Iry KHA M~ed o~i lupcal relatio~vhi~ «~ other cutey riea~
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 20 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ~ Kimley-Hom
~ and Associa~6es, Inc,
C~T Y pF,
!~
COLLEYVILLE
T E X A S
2.5 SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
The following section details two (2) examples of maximum assessable roadway impact fee calculations.
Example 1:
• Development Type - One (1) Unit of Single-Family Housing
Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps - Example 1
Determine Development Unit and Vehicle-Miles Per Development Unit
Step From Table 2.11 [Land Use - itehicle Mile Equivalency TableJ
1 Development Type: 1 Dwelling Unit of Single-Family Detached Housing
Number of Development Units: 1 Dwelling Unit
Veh-Mi Per Development Unit: 4.04
S Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit
tep
2 From Table 2.10, Line 18 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service UnitJ
Maximum Fee for Ci of Colle ville Service Area 1): $2,360 / vehicle-mile
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee
Impact Fee =# of Development Units * Veh-Mi Per Dev Unit * Max. Fee Per Service Unit
Step
3 Impact Fee = 1* 4.04 *$2,360
Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $9,534.40
Example Z:
• Development Type -125,000 square foot Home Improvement Superstore
Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps - Example 2
Determine Development Unit and Vehicle-Miles Per Development Unit
Step From Table 211 [Land Use - Yehicle Mile Equivalency Table]
1 Development Type: 125,000 square feet of Home Improvement Superstore
Development Unit: 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area
Veh-Mi Per Development Unit: 3.97
St Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit
ep
2 From Table 2.10, Line 18 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service UnitJ
Maximum Fee for Ciry of Colleyville (Service Area 2): $2,446 / vehicle-mile
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee
Impact Fee =# of Development Units * Veh-Mi Per Dev Unit * Max. Fee Per Service Unit
Step
3 Impact Fee = 125 * 3.96 *$2,446
Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $1.210,770
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 21 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ ^ and Associates, Inc.
G~T Y p~,
~~
COLLEYVILLE
T ~ X A S
2.6 CONCLUSION
The City of Colleyville has established a process to implement the assessment and collection of roadway
impact fees through the adoption of an impact fee ardinance that is consistent with Chapter 395 of the
Texas Local Government Code.
This report establishes the maximum allowable roadway impact fee that could be assessed by the City of
Colleyville. The maximum assessable roadway impact fee calculated in this report is $2,360 for Service
Area 1 and $2,446 for Service Area 2(from Table 2.10):
This document serves as a guide to the assessment of roadway impact fees pertaining to future
development and the City's need for roadway improvements to accommodate that growth. Following the
public hearing process, the City Council may establish an amount to be assessed (if any) up to the
maximum established within this report and update the Roadway Impact Fee Ordinance accordingly.
In conclusion, it is our opinion that the data and methodology used in this update are appropriate and
consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. Furthermore, the Land Use
Assumptions and the proposed Capital Improvement Plan are appropriately incorporated into the process.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update 22 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ Kimley-Hom
~ ^ and Associates, Inc.
APPENDICES
A. CONCEPTUAL LEVEL PROJECT COST PROJECTIONS
B. CIP SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY
C. EXISTING ROADWAY FACILITIES INVENTORY
L~7 Y pF,
~.
COLLEYVILLE
T~a~s
D. PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT
2012 Roadway [mpact Fee Update 23 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ~ K~ey-Hom
~ _ and Associa~s, Inc.
c~~
~-.,--
COLLEYVILLE
u~
~~E~A$
Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Updatc 24 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
City of Colleyville - 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Capital Improvements Plan for Roadway Impact Fees
Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Roadway Improvements - Service Area 1
#
Cl
P
t
i % in Service Total Proiect Cost in Service
ass ro
ec Limits Proiect Cost Area Cost Area
1-A/2-A P6D Colle ille Blvd. S. Cit Limits to N. Cit Limits $ 5,070,000 50% $ 5,070,000 $ 2,535,000
1-B M4U Brown Tr. Mountain Laurel Ln. to S. Cit Limits $ 1,352,000 100% $ 1,352,000 $ 1,352,000
1-C MC4U Herita e Ave. Cheek-S ar er Rd. to 2,430' S. of Glade Rd. $ 5,983,000 100% $ 5,983,000 $ 5,983,000
1-D C2U Bedford Rd. Littie Bear Creek to Glade Rd. $ 2,589,000 100% $ 2,589,000 $ 2,589,000
1-E M2D Glade Rd. 1 Bedford Rd. to Martin Pkw . $ 7,351,000 100% $ 7,351,000 $ 7,351,000
1-F C3U Thom son Terrace Glade Rd. to Colle ville Blvd. $ 837,000 100% $ 837,000 $ 837,000
1-G C2U Roberts Rd. Glade Rd. to N. Cit Limits $ 1,317,000 100% $ 1,317,000 $ 1,317,000
1-H M2D Jackson Rd. Cheek-S ar er Rd. to 740 S. of Shenandoah PI. $ 5,634,000 100% $ 5,634,000 $ 5,634,000
1-I M2D Cheek-S ar er Rd. 1 San Bar Ln. to Delmar Ct. $ 1,258,000 100% $ 1,258,000 $ 1,258,000
1-J M2D Cheek-Sparger Rd. (2) 200' E. of Bedford Rd. to E. City Limits $ 8,286,000 100% $ 8,286,000 $ 8,286,000
Intersection Improvements
I-1 Intersection Glade Rd. 8 Riverwalk Dr. Intersection Im rovements $ 1,000,000 100°/a $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
I-2 Intersection Bedford Rd. & Cheek-S ar er Rd. Intersection Im rovements $ 1,000,000 100°/a $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
I-3 Intersection Jackson Rd. & Cheek-S ar er Rd. Intersection Im rovements $ 1,060,000 100% $ 1,060,000 $ 1,060,000
I-4 Intersection Heritage Ave. & Cheek-Sparger Rd. Intersection Improvements $ 1,000,000 100% $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
TOTAL S 43,737,000 $ 43,737,000 S 41,202,000
rn
~
~
~
P'F
~
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards orthe determination of the City Engineerfor a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Updale
City of Colleyville, Texas 25 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Projecl Cos[ Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-HornandAssociates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . ._ , . .
Name: Colleyville Blvd. This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: S. City Limits to N. City Limits existing five-lane undivided facility to a six-lane
Impact Fee Class: P6D divided facility. The boundary between Service Area
Ultimate Class: Major Arterial 1 and Service Area 2 is on the centerline of
Length (I~: 21,900 Colleyville Boulevard. This represents onlythe City
Service Area(s): 1(Half), 2(Half) of Colleyville's contribution to SH 26.
.. . - .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 5,070,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing:
Mobilization
Perimeter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac uisition:
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 5,070,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colfeyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 26 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . ~-
Name: Brown Tr. This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Mountain Laurel Ln. to S. City Limits existing two-lane undivided facility to a four-lane
Impact Fee Class: M4U undivided facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Arterial - 4 lanes
Length (I~: 1,595
Service Area(s): 1
'•.• • . . . - .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
106 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,962 cy $ 9.00 $ 44,660
206 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 9,747 sy $ 3.50 $ 34,115
306 8" Concrete Pavement 9,393 sy $ 38.00 $ 356,926
406 4" Topsoil 7,621 sy $ 5.00 $ 38,103
506 Concrete Drivewa A roach 2 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 8,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 481,804
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 28,908
~l Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 24,090
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 14,454
~ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 120,451
J Illumination 6% $ 28,908
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 28,908
J Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 19,272
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 14,454
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 14,454
~l Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Ecc. 12% $ 57,816
Other: $0 $ -
'*Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 351,717
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 833,520
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 125,028
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 959,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 959,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20°/a $ 191,800
Mobilization 6% $ 57,540
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Ac ulSltlOn: Existing Alignment 15% $ 143,850
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 1,352,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 27 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . ,. . ,.
Name: Heritage Ave. This project consists of the
Limits: Cheek-Sparger Rd. to 2,430' S. of Glade Rd. reconstruction of an existing two-lane
Impact Fee Class: MC4U rural facility to a four-lane undivided
Ultimate Class: Major Collector - 4 lanes facility.
Length (Ifl: 3,550
Service Area(s): 1
'•.• . . . . - .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 10,256 cy $ 9.00 $ 92,300
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#lsy) 20,117 sy $ 3.50 $ 70,408
304 8" Concrete Pavement 19,328 sy $ 38.00 $ 734,456
404 4" Topsoil 12,622 sy $ 5.00 $ 63,111
504 Concrete Drivewa A roach 4 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 16,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 976,275
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 58,577
~I Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 48,814
~l Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 29,288
~l Roadway Drainage Standard Interna~ System 25% $ 244,069
~ Illumination 6% $ 58,577
~ Special Drainage Structures Crossing Little Bear Creek $2 million $ 2,000,000
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 58,577
~ Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 39,051
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 29,288
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 29,288
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 117,153
Other: $0 $ -
`*Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 2,712,681
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 3,688,956
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 553,343
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 4,243,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 4,243,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 848,600
Mobilization 6% $ 254,580
Permiter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISItIOfI: Existing Alignment 15% $ 636,450
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 5,983,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 28 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . .- . ~
Name: Bedford Rd. This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Little Bear Creek to Glade Rd. existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: C2U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Collector
Length (Ifl: 2,810
Service Area(s): 1
'... . . . . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 7,181 cy $ 9.00 $ 64,630
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 14,050 sy $ 3.50 $ 49,175
301 6" Concrete Pavement 13,426 sy $ 34.00 $ 456,469
401 4" Topsoil 10,303 sy $ 5.00 $ 51,517
501 Concrete Drivewa A roach 3 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 12,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 633,791
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 38,027
~ Tr2ffiC Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 31,690
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 19,014
~ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 158,448
~l Illumination 6% $ 38,027
~l Special Drainage Structures Crossing Little Bear Creek $500K $ 500,000
~l Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 38,027
~ Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 25,352
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 19,014
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 19,014
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 76,055
Other: $0 $ -
*'Al~owances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 962,667
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 7,596,458
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 239,469
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 1,836,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 1,836,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 367,200
Mobilization 6% $ 110,160
Perimeter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISItl011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 275,400
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 2,589,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 29 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptua/ Leve/ Project Cost Projection
. . . ~• . .
Name: Glade Rd. (1) This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Bedford Rd. to Martin Pkwy. existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: M2D divided facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Arterial - 2 lanes
Length (I~: 11,760
Service Area(s): 1
'.. . . . . . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
105 Unclassified Street Excavation 30,053 cy $ 9.00 $ 270,480
205 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 58,800 sy $ 3.50 $ 205,800
305 8" Concrete Pavement 56,187 sy $ 34.00 $ 1,910,347
405 4" Topsoil 43,120 sy $ 5.00 $ 215,600
505 Concrete Drivewa A roach 12 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 48,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 2,650,227
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 159,014
~ Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 132,511
~l Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 79,507
~ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 662,557
~l Illumination 6% $ 159,014
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
J Water Minor Adjustments 6% $ 159,014
J Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 106,009
~ Establish TurF / Erosion Control 3% $ 79,507
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 79,507
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 318,027
Other: $0 $ -
'*Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 1,934,665
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 4,584,892
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 687,734
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 5,273,000
.. . .
Item Description Notes: Allowance Item Cost
Construction: - $ 5,273,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 1,054,600
Mobilization 6% $ 316,380
Perimeter Street Fee 1313 Glade Rd. -$2,z~ ~.s3
Beldon Hollow - $16,319.88
Ashmore 3 - $65,191.34 $ (83,729.15)
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existin9 aii9nmenc 15% $ 790,950
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 7,351,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 30 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . •-
Name: Thompson Terrace This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Glade Rd. to Colleyville Blvd. existing two-fane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: C3U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Collector
Length (If~: 1,365
Service Area(s): 1
'.. . . . . . - .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
102 Unclassified Street Excavation 3,488 cy $ 9.00 $ 31,395
202 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 6,825 sy $ 3.50 $ 23,888
302 6" Concrete Pavement 6,522 sy $ 34.00 $ 221,737
402 4" Topsoil 5,005 sy $ 5.00 $ 25,025
502 Concrete Drivewa A roach 1 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 306,044
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 18,363
~ Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 15,302
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 9,181
~1 Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 76,511
~ Illumination 6% $ 18,363
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~l Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 18,363
~l Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 12,242
~l Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 9,181
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 9,181
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 36,725
Other: $0 $ -
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 223,412
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 529,456
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 79,418
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 609,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance Item Cost
Construction: - $ 609,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 121,800
Mobilization 6% $ 36,540
Perimeter Street Fee 5009 Thompson Terrace -$21,295.50 $ (21,295.50)
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISIt1011: Existing Alignment 15°/a $ 91,350
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 837,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for tmpact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning Ievel cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 31 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . ~-
Name: Roberts Rd. This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Glade Rd. to N. City Limits existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: C2U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Collector
Length (Ifl: 2,085
Service Area(s): 1
'... . . . . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 5,328 cy $ 9.00 $ 47,955
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#lsy) 10,425 sy $ 3.50 $ 36,488
301 6" Concrete Pavement 9,962 sy $ 34.00 $ 338,697
401 4" Topsoil 7,645 sy $ 5.00 $ 38,225
501 Concrete Drivewa A roach 2 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 8,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 469,364
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 28,162
~ Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 23,468
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 14,081
~l Roadway Drainage Standard Intemal System 25% $ 117,341
~1 Illumination 6°/a $ 28,162
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~l Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 28,162
J Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 18,775
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 14,081
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 14,081
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 56,324
Other: $0 $ -
*`Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 342,636
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 812,000
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 121,800
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 934,000
.. ~ . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 934,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 186,800
Mobilization 6% $ 56,040
Perimeter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISItl011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 140,100
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 1,317,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Citys design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 32 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, lnc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . .• . .
Name: Jackson Rd. This project consists of the
Limits: Cheek-Sparger Rd. to 740 S. of Shenandoah PI. reconstruction of an existing two-lane
Impact Fee Class: M2D undivided facility to a two-lane divided
Ultimate Class: Minor Arterial - 2 lanes facility.
Length (Ifl: 3,780
Service Area(s): 1
'... . . . • . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
105 Unclassified Street Excavation 9,660 cy $ 9.00 $ 86,940
205 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 18,900 sy $ 3.50 $ 66,150
305 8" Concrete Pavement 18,060 sy $ 34.00 $ 614,040
405 4" Topsoil 13,860 sy $ 5.00 $ 69,300
505 Concrete Drivewa A roach 4 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 16,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 852,430
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 51,146
1~ TfBTfIC COCltf01 Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 42,622
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 25,573
~l Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 213,108
~ Illumination 6% $ 51,146
~l Special Drainage Structures Crossing Little Bear Creek $2 million $ 2,000,000
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 51,146
~ Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 34,097
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 25,573
~l Basic Landscaping 3% $ 25,573
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 102,292
Other: $0 $ -
"Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 2,622,274
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 3,474,704
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 521,206
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 3,996,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 3,996,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 799,200
Mobilization 6% $ 239,760
Perimeter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISIt1011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 599,400
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 5,634,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 33 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . .- . .
Name: Cheek-Sparger Rd. (1) This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: San Bar Ln. to Delmar Ct. existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: M2D divided facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Arterial - 2 lanes
Length (I~: 2,120
Service Area(s): 1
'..• . . . . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
105 Unclassified Street Excavation 5,418 cy $ 9.00 $ 48,760
205 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 10,600 sy $ 3.50 $ 37,100
305 8" Concrete Pavement 10,129 sy $ 34.00 $ 344,382
405 4" Topsoil 7,773 sy $ 5.00 $ 38,867
505 Concrete Drivewa A roach 2 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 8,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 477,109
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6°/a $ 28,627
~ T~affiC COntr01 Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 23,855
~I Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 14,313
~I Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 119,277
~ Illumination 6% $ 28,627
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
J Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 28,627
J Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 19,084
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 14,313
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 14,313
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 57,253
Other: $0 $ -
"Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 348,289
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 825,398
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 123,810
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 950,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 950,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 190,000
Mobilization 6% $ 57,000
Perimeter Street Fee 212 Cheek Sparger Rd. -$20,~ss.s3
Villas Del Mar - $60,214.49 $ (81 ,000.12)
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existin9 nii9nment 15% $ 142,500
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 1,258,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 34 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Conceptua/ Level Project Cost Projection
Name:
Limits:
Impact Fee Class:
Ultimate Class:
Length (I~:
Service Area(s):
Cheek-Sparger Rd. (2)
200' E. of Bedford Rd. to E
M2D
Minor Arterial - 2 lanes
13,120
1
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
updated: 5/30/2012
This project consists of the
City Limits reconstruction of an existing two-lane
undivided facility to a two-lane divided
facility.
'•.. . • . • .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
105 Unclassified Street Excavation 33,529 cy $ 9.00 $ 301,760
205 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 65,600 sy $ 3.50 $ 229,600
305 8" Concrete Pavement 62,684 sy $ 34.00 $ 2,131,271
405 4" Topsoil 48,107 sy $ 5.00 $ 240,533
505 Concrete Drivewa A roach 13 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 52,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 2,955,164
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 177,310
1~ TfBffIC COntf01 Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 147,758
~l Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 88,655
~ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 738,791
~ Illumination 6% $ 177,310
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 177,310
~ Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 118,207
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 88,655
~l Basic Landscaping 3% $ 88,655
~l Pedestrian Enhancements sidewaiks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 354,620
Other: $0 $ -
"Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 2,157,270
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 5,112,434
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 766,865
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 5,880,000
.. . .
Item Description Notes: Allowance Item Cost
Construction: - $ 5,880,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 1,176,000
Mobilization 6% $ 352,800
Perimeter Street Fee 1109 Cheek Sparger Rd. -$4,868.33 $ (4,868.33)
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition: Exiscing aiignmenc 15°/a $ 882,000
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 8,286,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 35 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
City of Colleyville - 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Capital Improvements Plan for Roadway Impact Fees
Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Roadway Improvements - Service Area 2
# l % in Service Total Proiect Cost in Service
C
ass Proiect Limits Proiect Cost Area Cost Area
1-A/2-A P6D Colle ille Blvd. S. Cit Limits to N. Cit Limits $ 5,070,000 50% $ 5,070,000 $ 2,535,000
2-B MC4U Bransford Rd. 1 Glade Rd. to Timberline St. N. $ 1,749,000 100% $ 1,749,000 $ 1,749,000
2-C MC2U Bransford Rd. 2 Timberline St. N. to L.D. Lockett Rd. $ 3,020,000 100% $ 3,020,000 $ 3,020,000
2-D C2U White Dr. L.D. Lockett Rd. to Westcoat Dr. $ 1,169,000 100% $ 1,169,000 $ 1,169,000
2-E C2U Westcoat Dr. L.D. Lockett Rd. to John McCain Rd. $ 3,980,000 100% $ 3,980,000 $ 3,980,000
2-F M4U Glade Rd. 2 Glade Creek to 1,380' E. of Glade Creek $ 1,162,000 100% $ 1,162,000 $ 1,162,000
2-G M4U Glade Rd. 3 1,380' E. of Glade Creek to Bransford Rd. $ 3,167,000 100% $ 3,167,000 $ 3,167,000
2-H C2U McDonwell School Rd. Herbert St. to Westcoat Dr. $ 2,687,000 100% $ 2,687,000 $ 2,687,000
2-I MC2U John McCain Rd. Westcoat Dr. to Colle ille Blvd. $ 7,415,000 100°/a $ 7,415,000 $ 7,415,000
2-J M2D Pleasant Run Rd. 1 Colle ille Blvd. to Bo art Dr. $ 2,258,000 100°/a $ 2,258,000 $ 2,258,000
2-K M2D Pleasant Run Rd. 2 200' S. of Shelton Rd. to N. Cit Limits $ 6,551,000 100°/a $ 6,551,000 $ 6,551,000
2-L C2U L.D. Lockett Rd. Precinct Line Rd. to Pleasant Run Rd. $ 6,117,000 100°/a $ 6,117,000 $ 6,117,000
2-M C2U Lavaca Trail Precinct Line Rd. to Mustan Trail $ 1,839,000 100°/a $ 1,839,000 $ 1,839,000
2-N C2U Murphy Rd. Precinct Line Rd. to 2,010' E. of Precinct Line Rd. $ 1,485,000 100% $ 1,485,000 $ 1,485,000
n ersec ion mprovemen s
~-5 Intersection McDonwell School Rd. & Westcoat Intersection Im rovements $ 1,000,000 100% $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
I-6 Intersection John McCain Rd. & Pleasant Run R Intersection Im rovements $ 1,312,000 100% $ 1,312,000 $ 1,312,000
I-7 Intersection L.D. Lockett Rd. & Precinct Line Rd. Si nal Installation $ 265,000 100% $ 265,000 $ 265,000
I-8 Intersection John McCain Rd. & Westcoat Dr. Intersection Improvements $ 1,000,000 100% $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
TOTAL $ 51,246,000 $ 51,246,000 $ 48,711,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any tuture Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the Ciry Engineer for a specific projed.
rn
~
~
~
~'h
~
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City ot Colleyville, Texas 36 Appendix A- Concep[ual Level Project Cos[ Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Name:
Limits:
Impact Fee Class
Ultimate Class:
Length (Ifl:
Service Area(s):
Colleyville Blvd.
S. City Limits to N
P6D
Major Arterial
21,900
1 (Half), 2 (Half)
Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc.
updated: 5/30/2012
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
City Limits existing five-lane undivided facility to a six-lane
divided facility. The boundary between Service Area
1 and Service Area 2 is on the centerline of
Colleyville Boulevard. This represents only the City
of Colleyville's contribution to SH 26.
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 5,070,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing:
Mobilization
Perimeter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac uisition:
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 5,070,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 37 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Conceptual Leve/ Project Cost Projection
Name:
Limits:
Impact Fee Class:
Ultimate Class:
Length (If~:
Service Area(s):
Bransford Rd. (1)
Glade Rd. to Timberline St. N
MC4U
Major Collector - 4 Lanes
2,310
2
Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc.
updated: 5/30/2012
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane undivided facility to a four-lane
undivided facility.
'•.• . . . . - .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 6,673 cy $ 9.00 $ 60,060
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 13,090 sy $ 3.50 $ 45,815
304 8" Concrete Pavement 12,577 sy $ 38.00 $ 477,913
404 4" Topsoil 8,213 sy $ 5.00 $ 41,067
504 Concrete Drivewa A roach 2 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 8,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 632,855
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 37,971
~ Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 31,643
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 18,986
J Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 158,214
~ Illumination 6% $ 37,971
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
J Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 37,971
~ Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 25,314
~l Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 18,986
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 18,986
~l Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 75,943
Other: $0 $ -
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal AllowanCe SubtOt81: $ 461,984
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 1,094,839
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 164,226
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 1,260,000
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 38 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kimley-Hom andAssociates, Inc
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptua/ Leve/ Project Cost Projection
. . . .• . .
Name: Bransford Rd. (2) This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Timberline St. N. to L.D. Lockett Rd. existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: MC2U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Major Collector
Length (If~: 3,960
Service Area(s): 2
'... . . . . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
103 Unclassified Street Excavation 11,440 cy $ 9.00 $ 102,960
203 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 22,440 sy $ 3.50 $ 78,540
303 8" Concrete Pavement 21,560 sy $ 38.00 $ 819,280
403 4" Topsoil 11,880 sy $ 5.00 $ 59,400
503 Concrete Drivewa A roach 4 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 16,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 1,076,180
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 64,571
~ T~affIC Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 53,809
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 32,285
~ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 269,045
~ Illumination 6% $ 64,571
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
J Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 64,571
J Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 43,047
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 32,285
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 32,285
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Ecc. 12°/a $ 129,142
Other: $0 $ -
"Atlowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 785,611
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 1,861,791
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 279,269
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 2,142,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 2,142,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20°/a $ 428,400
Mobilization 6% $ 128,520
Perimeter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac uiSlti011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 321,300
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 3,020,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 39 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-Horn andAssociates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Projecf Cost Projection
• . • .• . •.• ~
Name: White Dr. This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: L.D. Lockett Rd. to Westcoat Dr. existing two-lane undivided facilityto a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: C2U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Collector
Length (I~: 1,845
Service Area(s): 2
'•. • . . . . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,715 cy $ 9.00 $ 42,435
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 9,225 sy $ 3.50 $ 32,288
301 6" Concrete Pavement
-- 8,815 sy $ 34.00 $ 299,710
401 4" Topsoil 6,765 sy $ 5.00 $ 33,825
501 Concrete Drivewa A roach 2 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 8,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 416,258
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 24,975
~I Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 20,813
~l Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 12,488
~ Roadway Drainage Standard Interna~ System 25% $ 104,064
~ Illumination 6% $ 24,975
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 24,975
~ Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 16,650
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 12,488
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 12,488
~1 Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 49,951
Other: $0 $ -
'*Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 303,868
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 720,125
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 108,019
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 829,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 829,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 165,800
Mobilization 6% $ 49,740
Perimeter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISItIOfI: Existing Alignment 15% $ 124,350
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 1,169,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 40 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-HornandAssociates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . ..
Name: Westcoat Dr. This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: L.D. Lockett Rd. to John McCain Rd. existing two-lane undivided facilityto a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: C2U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Collector
Length (Ifl: 6,315
Service Area(s): 2
'... . . . ' . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 16,138 cy $ 9.00 $ 145,245
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 31,575 sy $ 3.50 $ 110,513
301 6" Concrete Pavement 30,172 sy $ 34.00 $ 1,025,837
401 4" Topsoil 23,155 sy $ 5.00 $ 115,775
501 Concrete Drivewa A roach 6 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 24,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 1,421,369
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 85,282
~ Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 71,068
~I Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 42,641
~ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 355,342
~ Illumination 6% $ 85,282
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 85,282
J Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 56,855
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 42,641
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 42,641
~l Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 170,564
Other: $0 $ -
`*Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 1,037,599
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 2,458,969
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 368,845
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 2,828,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance Item Cost
Construction: - $ 2,828,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 565,600
Mobilization 6% $ 169,680
Perimeter Street Fee Westcoat Place -$7,587.71 $ (7,587.71)
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISIti011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 424,200
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 3,980,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City ot Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 41 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Name:
Limits:
Impact Fee Class:
Ultimate Class:
Length (Ifl:
Service Area(s):
Glade Rd. (2)
Glade Creek to 1,380' E. of Glade Creek
M4U
Minor Arterial - 4 lanes
1, 380
2
Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc.
updated: 5/30/2012
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
undivided facility to a four-lane divided
facility.
'..• . • . . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
106 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,293 cy $ 9.00 $ 38,640
206 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 8,433 sy $ 3.50 $ 29,517
306 8" Concrete Pavement 8,127 sy $ 38.00 $ 308,813
406 4" Topsoil 6,593 sy $ 5.00 $ 32,967
506 Concrete Drivewa A roach 1 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 413,937
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 24,836
~ TraffiC Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 20,697
~l Pavement Markings/Markers 3°/a $ 12,418
J Roadway Drainage Standard Interna~ System 25% $ 103,484
~l Illumination 6% $ 24,836
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~l Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 24,836
~l Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 16,557
~l Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 12,418
~l Basic Landscaping 3% $ 12,418
~l Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 49,672
Other: $0 $ -
'"Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 302,174
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 716,110
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 107,417
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 824,000
.. . - .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 824,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 164,800
Mobilization 6% $ 49,440
Perimeter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISIti011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 123,600
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 1,162,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 42 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville
2012 Roadway lmpact Fee Update
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Name:
Limits:
Impact Fee Class:
Ultimate Class:
Length (Ifl:
Service Area(s):
Glade Rd. (3)
1,380' E. of Glade Creek to Bransford Rd
M4U
Minor Arterial - 4 lanes
3, 850
2
Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc.
updated: 5/30/2012
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
undivided facility to a four-lane divided
facility.
'•.• . • • . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
106 Unclassified Street Excavation 11,978 cy $ 9.00 $ 107,800
206 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 23,528 sy $ 3.50 $ 82,347
306 8" Concrete Pavement 22,672 sy $ 38.00 $ 861,544
406 4" Topsoil 18,394 sy $ 5.00 $ 91,972
506 Concrete Drivewa A roach 4 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 16,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 1,159,664
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 69,580
~ TfBffiC COnt~01 Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 57,983
~1 Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 34,790
~I Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 289,916
~l Illumination 6% $ 69,580
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
J Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 69,580
J Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 46,387
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 34,790
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 34,790
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Ecc. 12% $ 139,160
Other: $0 $ -
"Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 846,555
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 2,006,219
Construction Contingency: 15°/a $ 300,933
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 2,308,000
.. . .
Item Description Notes: Allowance Item Cost
Construction: - $ 2,308,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 461,600
Mobilization 6% $ 138,480
Perimeter Street Fee Kamego Addition -$12,aa~.so
412 Glade Road - $10,038.14
Rockrimmon - $65,098.92 $ (87,584.56)
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISIt1011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 346,200
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 3,167,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Ciry of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 43 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kimley-HornandAssociates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptua/ Level Project Cost Projection
. . . ..
Name: McDonwell School Rd. This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Herbert St. to Westcoat Dr. existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: C2U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Collector
Length (I~: 5,120
Service Area(s): 2
'.. • . • . . - .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 13,084 cy $ 9.00 $ 117,760
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 25,600 sy $ 3.50 $ 89,600
301 6" Concrete Pavement 24,462 sy $ 34.00 $ 831,716
401 4" Topsoil 18,773 sy $ 5.00 $ 93,867
501 Concrete Drivewa Approach 5 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 20,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 1,152,942
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 69,177
~l Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 57,647
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 34,588
~l Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 288,236
~l Illumination 6% $ 69,177
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~1 Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 69,177
~1 Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 46,118
~l Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 34,588
~l Basic Landscaping 3% $ 34,588
~l Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, ecc. 12% $ 138,353
Other: $0 $ -
"'Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 841,648
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 1,994,590
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 299,189
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 2,294,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 2,294,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 458,800
Mobilization 6% $ 137,640
Perimeter Street Fee
Remington Park Phase I-$150,2as
Remington Park Phase II - $69,230
LDS Church - $38,525
Clairemont Phase I - $101,445
Clariemont Phase II - $135,212
Villas of Colleyville - $52,810.69 $ (547,468.69)
Other
ROWIEasement Ac UISItl011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 344,100
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 2,687,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 44 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kimley-HornandAssociates, Inc.
2012 Roadway /mpact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptua/ Level Project Cost Projection
. . . ._
Name: John McCain Rd. This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Westcoat Dr. to Colleyville Blvd. existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: MC2U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Major Collector - 2 lanes
Length (I~: 8,940
Service Area(s): 2
'.. • . . . . - .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
103 Unclassified Street Excavation 25,827 cy $ 9.00 $ 232,440
203 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 50,660 sy $ 3.50 $ 177,310
303 8" Concrete Pavement 48,673 sy $ 38.00 $ 1,849,587
403 4" Topsoil 26,820 sy $ 5.00 $ 134,100
503 Concrete Drivewa Approach 9 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 36,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 2,429,437
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 145,766
~ TreffiC Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 121,472
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 72,883
J Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 607,359
~ Illumination 6% $ 145,766
~ Special Drainage Structures Two Minor Creek Crossings $500K $ 500,000
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 145,766
J Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 97,177
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 72,883
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 72,883
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Ecc. 12% $ 291,532
Other: $0 $ -
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 2,273,489
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 4,702,925
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 705,439
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 5,409,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 5,409,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 1,081,800
Mobilization 6% $ 324,540
Perimeter Street Fee Shalimar Addition -$69,564.39
Tanglewood Addition - $26,063.73
Warwick Parc Addition - $89,191.68
1116 John McCain - $ 14,165.88
1112 John McCain - $12,289 $ (211,274.68)
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existin9 a,ii9nment 15°/a $ 811,350
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 7,415,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a speciflc project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 45 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Projecf Cost Projection
. . . .. , . . ..
Name: Pleasant Run Rd. (1) This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Colleyville Blvd. to Bogart Dr. existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: M2D divided facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Arterial - 2 lanes
Length (Ifl: 3,590
Service Area(s): 2
'... . . . • • .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
105 Unclassified Street Excavation 9,174 cy $ 9.00 $ 82,570
205 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 17,950 sy $ 3.50 $ 62,825
305 8" Concrete Pavement 17,152 sy $ 34.00 $ 583,176
405 4" Topsoil 13,163 sy $ 5.00 $ 65,817
505 Concrete Drivewa A roach 4 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 16,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 810,387
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 48,623
~ Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 40,519
~l Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 24,312
~l Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 202,597
~ Illumination 6% $ 48,623
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 48,623
~ Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 32,415
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 24,312
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 24,312
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Ecc. 12% $ 97,246
Other: $0 $ -
*"Allowances based on %of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 591,583
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 1,401,970
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 210,295
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 1,613,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance Item Cost
Construction: - $ 1,613,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 322,600
Mobilization 6°/a $ 96,780
Perimeter Street Fee Colleyville Heights -$16,675.77 $ (16,675.77)
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISItIOfI: Existing Alignment 15% $ 241,950
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 2,258,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 46 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-HornandAssociates, Inc
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . .• . . •.-
Name: Pleasant Run Rd. (2) This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: 200' S. of Shelton Rd. to N. City Limits existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: M2D divided facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Arterial - 2 lanes
Length (Ifl: 9,225
Service Area(s): 2
'... . . . . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
105 Unclassified Street Excavation 23,575 cy $ 9.00 $ 212,175
205 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 46,125 sy $ 3.50 $ 161,438
305 8" Concrete Pavement 44,075 sy $ 34.00 $ 1,498,550
405 4" Topsoil 33,825 sy $ 5.00 $ 169,125
505 Concrete Drivewa A roach 9 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 36,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 2,077,288
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 124,637
~l Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 103,864
~l Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 62,319
~l Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 519,322
~l Illumination 6% $ 124,637
~ Special Drainage Structures Two Minor Creek Crossings 0% $ 500,000
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 124,637
~ Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 83,092
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 62,319
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 62,319
~l Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 249,275
Other: $0 $ -
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 2,U16,420
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 4,093,707
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 614,056
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 4,708,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 4,708,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 941,600
Mobili2ation 6% $ 282,480
Perimeter Street Fee Castleton Manor -$81,050.53
McKinney Addition - $6,635.38 $ ($7,685.91)
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISIt1011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 706,200
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 6,551,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 47 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kimley-HornandAssociates, Inc.
2012 Roadway /mpact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
. . . ..
Name: L.D. Lockett Rd. This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Precinct Line Rd. to Pleasant Run Rd. existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: C2U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Collector
Length (I~: 10,195
Service Area(s): 2
'.. . . . • . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 26,054 cy $ 9.00 $ 234,485
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 50,975 sy $ 3.50 $ 178,413
301 6" Concrete Pavement 48,709 sy $ 34.00 $ 1,656,121
401 4" Topsoil 37,382 sy $ 5.00 $ 186,908
501 Concrete Drivewa Approach 10 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 40,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 2,295,927
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 137,756
~ Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 114,796
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 68,878
~ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 573,982
~ Illumination 6% $ 137,756
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0% $ -
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 137,756
~ Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 91,837
~l Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 68,878
~1 Basic Landscaping 3% $ 68,878
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 275,511
Other: $0 $ -
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 1,676,027
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 3,971,954
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 595,793
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 4,568,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 4,568,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 913,600
Mobilization 6°/a $ 274,080
Perimeter Street Fee Reatta Place -$98,283.01
Citgo Sta/LD Lockett - $56,705.80
Luxmont Estate - $1,589
Covington Addition - $37,989.01
Lavaca Trail Estate - $50909.46
Remington Park Phase III - $78,625.44
$ (324,101.72)
Other
ROWIEasement Acquisition: Existing aii9nment 15% $ 685,200
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 6,117,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 48 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptual Level Projecf Cost Projection
. . . ..
Name: Lavaca Trail This project consists of the reconstruction of an
Limits: Precinct Line Rd. to Mustang Trail existing two-lane undivided facility to a two-lane
Impact Fee Class: C2U undivided collector facility.
Ultimate Class: Minor Collector
Length (Ifl: 2,965
Service Area(s): 2
' .. . . . . . .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 7,577 cy $ 9.00 $ 68,195
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 14,825 sy $ 3.50 $ 51,888
301 6" Concrete Pavement 14,166 sy $ 34.00 $ 481,648
401 4" Topsoil 10,872 sy $ 5.00 $ 54,358
501 Concrete Drivewa A roach 3 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 12,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 668,089
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 40,085
~ TrBffiC Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 33,404
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 20,043
J Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 167,022
~ Illumination 6% $ 40,085
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 40,085
~I Sewer MinorAdjustments 4% $ 26,724
~l Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 20,043
~l Basic Landscaping 3% $ 20,043
~l Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Etc. 12% $ 80,171
Other: $0 $ -
"Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 487,705
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 1,155,793
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 173,369
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 1,330,000
.. . .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance Item Cost
Construction: - $ 1,330,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 266,000
Mobilization 6% $ 79,800
Perimeter Street Fee Lavaca Parc -$36,643.31 $ (36,643.31)
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISIt1011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 199,500
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 1,839,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 49 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
City of Colleyville Kim/ey-HornandAssociates, Inc.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated: 5/30/2012
Conceptua/ Level Project Cost Projection
. . . ..
Name: Murphy Rd. This project consists of the
Limits: Precinct Line Rd. to 2,010' E. of Precinct Line Rd. reconstruction of an existing two-lane
Impact Fee Class: C2U undivided facility to a two-lane
Ultimate Class: Minor Collector undivided collector facility.
Length (Ifl: 2,355
Service Area(s): 2
'... . . . . • .
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 6,018 cy $ 9.00 $ 54,165
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy) 11,775 sy $ 3.50 $ 41,213
301 6" Concrete Pavement 11,252 sy $ 34.00 $ 382,557
401 4" Topsoil 8,635 sy $ 5.00 $ 43,175
501 Concrete Drivewa A roach 2 ea $ 4,000.00 $ 8,000
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 529,109
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Prep ROW 6% $ 31,747
~ TfBffIC COfltf0l Construction Phase Traffic Control 5% $ 26,455
~ Pavement Markings/Markers 3% $ 15,873
~ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% $ 132,277
~ Illumination 6% $ 31,747
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0°/a
~ Water MinorAdjustments 6% $ 31,747
~ Sewer Minor Adjustments 4% $ 21,164
~ Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3% $ 15,873
~ Basic Landscaping 3% $ 15,873
~ Pedestrian Enhancements Sidewalks, Ramps, Ecc. 12% $ 63,493
Other: $0 $ -
*'Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 386,250
Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 915,359
Construction Contingency: 15% $ 137,304
Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 1,053,000
.. . - .
Item Description
Notes:
Allowance
Item Cost
Construction: - $ 1,053,000
Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 210,600
Mobilization 6% $ 63,180
Perimeter Street Fee
Other
ROW/Easement Ac UISItl011: Existing Alignment 15% $ 157,950
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 1,485,000
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Colleyville.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 50 Appendix A- Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Exhibit A
~ ~ ~ Kirrdey-Hom
~ and Associaties, Inc.
G, T~
!t-
COLLEYVILLE
T E X A 5
Appendix B- CIP Service Units of Supply
2012 Roadway Impact Fec Updatc 51 May 2012
City of Colleyvillc, Texas
City of Colleyville - 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Service Area 1
CIP Service Units of Supply
PEAK % IN VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
Project ID
ROADWAY
LIMITS LENGTH
LANES IMPACT FEE
HOUR
SERVICE CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY TOTAL PROJECT TOTAL PROJECT
#
(MI)
CLASSIFICATION
VOLUME
AREA
PK-HR
PK-HR
DEMAND
PK-HR
COST COST IN SERVICE
PERLN
TOTA~
PK-HR
VEH-MI AREA
1-A/2-A Colleyville Blvd. S. City Limits to N. City Limits 4.15 6 P6D 3,232 50 % 750 9,338 6,706 2,632 5,070,000 $ 2,535,000
1-B Brown Tr. Mountain Laurel Ln. to S. City Limits
' 0.30 4 M4U 1,091 100% 650 780 327 453 $ 1,352,000 $ 1,352,000
7-C Herita e Ave. Cheek-Sparger Rd. to 2,430
S. of Glade Rd. 0.67 4 MC4U 43 100 % 525 1,407 29 1,378 $ 5,983,000 $ 5,983,000
1-D Bedford Rd. Little Bear Creek to Glade Rd. 0.53 2 C2U 496 100 % 525 557 263 294 $ 2,589,000 $ 2,589,000
bE Glade Rd. (1) Bediord Rd. to Martin Pkwy. 223 2 M2D 1,101 100 % 725 3,234 2,455 779 $ 7,351,000 $ 7,351,000
1-F Thompson Terrace Glade Rd. to Colle ille Bivd. 026 2 C3U 157 100 % 575 299 41 258 $ 837,000 $ 837,000
1-G Roberts Rd. Glade Rd. to N. City Limits 0.39 2 C2U 242 100 % 525 410 94 316 $ 1,317,000 $ 1,317,000
1-H Jackson Rd. Cheek-Sparger Rd. to 740 S. ot Shenandoah PI. 072 2 M2D 698 100 % 725 1,044 502 542 $ 5,634,000 $ 5,634,000
1-I Cheek-SpargerRd.(1) SanBarLn.toDelmarCt 0.40 2 M2D 7,184 100% 725 580 473 107 $ 1,258,000 $ 1,258,000
1-J Cheek-Sparger Rd. (2) 200' E. of Bedford Rd. to E. Ciry Limits 2.48 2 M2D 1,270 100 % 725 3,596 3,150 446 $ 8,286,000 $ 8,286,000
I-1 Glade Rd. & Riverwalk Dr. Intersecfion Improvements 100 % $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
I-2 Bedford Rd. $ Cheek-Sparger Rd. Intersection Improvements 100 % $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
I-3 Jackson Rd. & Cheek-Sparger Rd. Intersection Improvements 100 % $ 1,060,000 $ 1,060,000
I-4 Herita e Ave. & Cheek-S ar er Rd. Intersection lm rovements Su I 100 % $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
SUBTOTA L 21,243 14,040 7,203 S 43,737,000 S 41,202,000
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update Cost Per Service Area S 14,167
TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA 1 5 4t,z~6,~s~
rn
~
~
~
~
a
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City of Colleyville, Texas 52 Appendix B- CIP Service Units of Supply
City of Colleyville - 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Service Area 2
CIP Service Units of Supply
vannm~
Project ID
ROADWAY
LIMITS
LENGTH
IMPACT FEE PEAK % IN VEH-MI
CAPACITY VEH-MI
SUPPLY VEH-MI
TOTAL EXCESS
CAPACITY
TOTAL PROJECT
TOTAL PROJECT
# (M~) LANES CLASSIFICATION HOUR
VOLUME SERVICE
AREA pK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR COST COST IN SERVICE
PER LN
TOTAL
PK-HR
VEH-MI AREA
1-A/2-A Colleyville Blvd. S. City Limits [o N. City Limits 4.15 6 P6D 3,232 50 % 750 9,338 6,706 2,632 5,070,000 $ 2,535,000
2-B BransfordRd.(i) GladeRd.toTimbedineSt.N. 0.44 4 MC4U 348 100% 525 924 153 771 $ 1,749,000 $ 1,749,000
2-C Bransford Rd. (2) Timberline St. N. to L.D. Lockett Rd. 0.75 2 MC2U 348 100 % 525 788 261 527 $ 3,020,000 $ 3,020,000
2-D WhiteDc L.D.LockettRd.toWes[coatDr. 0.35 2 C2U 263 100% 525 368 92 276 $ 1,169,000 $ 1,169,000
2-E Westcoat Dr. L.D. Lockett Rd. to John McCain Rd. 120 2 C2U 616 100 % 525 1,260 740 520 $ 3,980,000 $ 3,980,000
2-F Glade Rd. (2) Glade Creek to 1,380' E. of Glade Creek 0.26 4 M4U 730 100 % 650 6~6 190 486 $ 1,162,000 $ 1,162,000
2-G Glade Rd. (3) 1,380' E. of Glade Creek to Bransford Rd. 0.73 4 M4U 730 100 % 650 1,898 533 1,365 $ 3,167,000 $ 3,167,000
2-H McDonwell School Rd. Herbert St. to Westcoat Dr. 0.97 2 C2U 756 100 % 525 1,019 733 286 $ 2,687,000 $ 2,687,000
2-I John McCain Rd. Westcoat Dr. to Colleyville Blvd. 1.69 2 MC2U 1,086 700% 525 1,775 7,836 -62 $ 7,415,000 $ 7,415,000
2-J Pleasant Run Rd. (1) Colleyville Blvd. to Bogart Dr. 0.68 2 M2D 783 100 % 725 986 532 454 $ 2,258,000 $ 2,258,000
2-K Pleasant Run Rd. (2) 200' S. oi Shelton Rd. [o N. City Limits 175 2 M2D 801 100 % 725 2,536 1,402 1,136 $ 6,551,000 $ 6,551,000
2-L L.D. Lockett Rd. Precinct Line Rd. to Pleasant Run Rd. 1.93 2 C2U 548 100 % 525 2,027 1,057 970 $ 6,117,000 $ 6,117,000
2-M Lavaca Trail Precinct Line Rd. to Mustang Trail 0.56 2 C2U 49 100 % 525 588 27 Sfii $ 1,839,000 $ 1,639,000
2-N Murphy Rd. Precinct Line Rd. to 2,010' E. of Precinct Line Rd. 0.45 2 C2U 51 100% 525 473 23 450 $ 1,485,000 $ 1,485,000
I-5 McDonwell School Rd. 8 Westcoat Or. Intersection lmprovements 100% $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
I-6 John McCain Rd. & Pleasant Run Rd. Intersection Improvements 100% $ 1,312,000 $ 1,312,000
I-7 L.D. Lockett Rd. 8 Precinct Line Rd. Signal Installation 100% $ 265,000 $ 265,000
I-8 John McCain Rd. 8 Westcoat Dr. Intersection Im rovements 100 % $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000
SUBTOTA L 24,654 14,285 10,369 S 51,246,000 S 48,711,000
zuiz Koaaway impact ree upaate Gost Per Service Area 5 14,167
TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA 2 t ae,725,tw
m
~
z
-
~
rt
a
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas 53
Appendix B- CIP Service Units of Supply
Exhibit A
~ ~ ~ Kirrdey-Hom
~ and Associabes, Inc.
~~T~
~-s~-
COLLEYVILLE
~~EXAS
Appendix C- Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Updatc 54 May 2012
Ciry of Collcyvillc, Texas
City of Colleyville - 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
Service Area 1
5/30/2012
ROADWAY
FROM
TO
LENGTH
(ft)
LENGTH
(mi)
EXIST
SECT
TYPE PM
PEAK
HOUR
VOL % IN
SERVICE
AREA VEH-MI
CAPACITY
PK-HR
PER LN VEH-MI
SUPPLY
PK-HR
TOTAL VEH-MI
DEMAND
PK-HR
TOTAL EXCESS
CAPACITY
PK-HR
VEHaYII EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES
PK-HR
VEHaVII
Colleyville Blvd. South City Limits Cheek-Sparger 460 0.09 M5U P6D 2,653 50 % 725 126 116 11
Colleyville Blvd. Cheek-Sparger Brown Trail 3,710 0.70 MSU P6D 2,653 50% 725 1,019 932 87
Colleyville Bivd. Brown Trail Old Glade 3,410 0.65 MSU P6D 3,063 50 % 725 936 989 -53 53
Colleyville Blvd. Old Glade Church 3,200 0.61 M5U P6D 2,918 50 % 725 879 884 -5 5
Colleyville Blvd. Church Tinker 4,650 0.88 MSU P6D 2,829 50% 725 1,277 1,246 31
Colleyville Blvd. Tinker John McCain 4,500 0.85 MSU P6D 3,232 50% 725 1,236 1,377 -141 141
Colleyville Blvd. John McCain North City Limits 2,200 0.42 MSU P6D 3,160 100% 725 1,208 1,317 -108 108
Cheek-Sparger Colleyville Steeplechase 2,250 0.43 MC2U MC2U 1,184 100% 525 447 504 -57 57
Cheek-Sparger Steeplechase BrownTrail 1,150 0.22 C3U Existing 1,184 100% 575 250 258 -7 7
Cheek-Sparger BrownTrail Bedford 2,500 0.47 C3U C3U 1,270 100% 575 545 601 -57 57
Cheek-Sparger Bedford Jackson 6,400 121 MC2U MC2U 1,270 100% 525 1,273 1,540 -267 267
Cheek-Sparger Jackson Martin 4,400 0.83 MC2U MC2U 1,270 100% 525 875 1,058 -183 183
Heritage Cheek-Sparger Glade 7,200 1.36 C2U MC4U 43 100% 425 1,159 59 1,101
Heritage Glade North City Limits 3,000 0.57 M4D M4D 613 100% 725 1,648 349 1,299
Roberts Glade North City Limits 2,200 0.42 C2U C2U 242 100 % 425 354 101 253
Martin Cheek-Sparger Glade 5,800 1.10 C2U C2U 127 100 % 425 934 140 794
Jackson Cheek-Sparger Oak Knoll 800 0.15 M2U M4D 698 100 % 650 197 106 91
Jackson Oak Knoll Glade 5,900 1.12 M2U M4D 698 100 % 650 1,453 780 673
Pool Glade Hall-Johnson 4,000 0.76 M4U M4U 695 100% 650 1,970 527 1,443
Pool
~ Hall-Johnson NorthCityLimits 6,100 1.16 M4D M4U 1,333 100% 725 3,350 1,540 1,811
Montclair Glade Hall-Johnson 4,100 OJS C2U C2U 150 100% 425 660 116 544
Glade EastCRyLimits Hentage 1,750 0.33 M2D M2D 1,221 100% 725 481 405 76
Glade Herdage Roberts 1,400 0.27 M2D M2D 1,221 100% 725 384 324 61
Glade Roberts StraithmoreTerrace 1,560 0.30 M2D M2D 1,221 100% 725 428 361 68
Glade StraithmoreTertace Pool 3,140 0.59 M2U M2D 1,221 100% 650 773 726 47
Glade Pool Montclair 3,000 0.57 M2U M2D 1,101 100% 650 739 625 113
Glade Montclair Rivenvalk 4,150 0.79 M2U M2D t,101 100% 650 1,022 865 157
Glade Riverwalk Bedford 1,025 0.19 M2U M2D 1,034 100% 650 252 201 52
Glade Bedford Colleyville 1,425 027 M4D M4D 671 100% 725 783 181 602
Bedford Cheek-Sparger Centerpark 3,000 0.57 C2U C2U 496 100% 425 483 282 201
Bedford Centerpark Glade 1,800 0.34 C2U C2U 496 100% 425 290 169 121
Centerpark Bedford Colleyville 2,350 0.45 MC2U MC2U 51 100% 525 467 23 445
BrownTrail Colleyville Cheek-Sparger 2,800 0.53 M5U M4U 669 100% 725 1,538 355 1,183
Brown Trail Cheek-Sparger Mountain Laurel 1,225 023 M4U M4U 869 100% 650 603 202 402
Brown Trail Mountain Laurel Southem City Limits 1,625 0.31 C2U M4U 1,091 100% 425 262 336 -74 74
Behrens Glade Tyler 2,000 0.38 C2U C2U 100 100% 425 322 38 284
Tyler Behrens Bowman 1,500 028 C2U C2U 100 100% 425 241 28 213
Bowman Tyler OakKnoll 1,000 0.19 C2U C2U 100 100% 425 161 19 142
Oak Knoll Bowman Jackson 3,000 0.57 C2U C2U 100 100% 425 483 57 426
Hall-Johnson Colleyville Gatehouse 1,530 0.29 M4D M4D 1,273 100% 725 840 369 471
Hall-Johnson Gatehouse Montclair 2,370 0.45 M4U M4U 1,273 100% 650 1,167 571 596
Hall-Johnson Montclair Sycamore 700 0.13 M4U M4U 1,273 100% 650 345 169 176
Hall-Johnson Sycamore Pool 2,300 0.44 M4D M4D 1,863 100% 725 1,263 812 452
Longwood Colleyville Broadoak 1,400 027 C2U C2U 200 100% 425 225 53 172
Sanders
~ --~ ~ Colleyville
~ Dead End 1,300 0.25 C2U C2U 150 100% 425 209 37 172
Industrial Colleyville Wyatt 1,200 023 C2U C2U 150 100% 425 193 34 159
Wyatt Industrial Dead End 800 0.15 C2U C2U 100 100% 425 129 15 114
Riverwalk Hall-Johnson Kingswood 1,000 0.19 MC4D MC4D 437 100% 575 436 83 353
Riverwalk
~ Kingswood Glade 3,215 0.61 MC4D MC4D 437 100% 575 1,400 266 1,134
Church
~ Colleyville
-~ Rivenvalk 1,090 021 MC4D MC4D 200 100% 575 475 41 434
Thompson Tenace olleyville lade 1,275 024 2U 157 100 0 425 5 38 167
SUBTOTAL 133,860 25 35,349 21,706 13,643 953
rn
~
~
~
~
rt
~
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Ciry o( Colleyville, Texas 55 Appendix C- Existing Facilities Imentory
City of Colleyville - 2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
Service Area 2
5/30/2012
ROADWAY
FROM
TO
LENGTH
(ft)
LENGTH
(mi)
EXIST
SECT
TYPE PM
PEAK
HOUR
VOL % IN
SERVICE
AREA VEH-MI
CAPACITY
PK-HR
PER LN VEH-MI
SUPPLY
PK-HR
TOTAL VEH-MI
DEMAND
PK-HR
TOTAL EXCESS
CAPACITY
PK-HR
VEH~YII EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES
PK-HR
VEH-MI
Colleyville Blvd. South City Limits Cheek-Sparger 460 0.09 M5U P6D 2,653 50 % 725 126 116 11
Colleyville Blvd. Cheek-Sparger Brown Trail 3,710 0.70 M5U P6D 2,653 50 % 725 1,019 932 87
Colleyville Blvd. Brown Trail Old Glade 3,410 0.65 M5U P6D 3,063 50 % 725 936 989 -53 53
Colleyville Blvd. Old Glade Church 3,200 0.61 M5U P6D 2,918 50 % 725 879 884 -5 5
ColleyvilleBlvd. Church Tinker 4,650 0.88 M5U P6D 2,829 50% 725 1,277 1,246 31
Colleyville Blvd. Tinker John McCain 4,500 0.85 M5U P6D 3,232 50 % 725 1,236 1,377 -141 141
Colleyville Blvd. John McCain North City Limits 2,200 0.42 M5U P6D 3,160 100 % 725 1,208 1,317 -108 108
Tinker Colleyville PleasantRun 3,600 0.68 C2U C2U 500 100% 425 580 341 239
John McCain Colleyville Pleasant Run 7,300 1.38 C2U Existing 1,086 100% 425 1,175 1,502 -327 327
John McCain Pleasant Run Westcoat 1,700 0.32 C2U MC2U 1,086 100% 425 274 350 -76 76
JohnMcCain Westcoat BanditTrail 2,300 0.44 C2U MC2U 1,086 100% 425 370 473 -103 103
Bandit Trail John McCain West City Limits 3,350 0.63 C2U C2U 100 100 % 425 539 63 476
Westcoat John McCain McDonwell 2,735 0.52 C2U C2U 616 100 % 425 440 319 121
Westcoat McDonwell L D Lockett 3,575 0.68 C2U C2U 616 100 % 425 576 417 158
McDonwell Westcoat LorrainePark 3,825 072 C2U C2U 756 100% 425 616 547 68
McDonwell Lorraine Park West City Limits 2,090 0.40 C4D C4D 756 100 % 575 910 299 611
L D Lockett West City Limits Westcoat 6,315 120 C2U C2U 548 100 % 425 1,017 655 362
L D Lockett Westcoat Pleasant Run 3,850 0.73 C2U C2U 548 100 % 425 620 399 221
White L D Lockett Westcoat 1,845 0.35 C2U C2U 263 100% 425 297 92 205
Brans(ord
~ Timberline North L D Lockett 3,350 0.63 C2U MC2U 348 100 % 425 539 221 319
Shelton Bransford Pleasant Run
~ 2,240 0.42 C2U C2U 120 100 % 425 361 51 310
Brans/ord TimberlineNorth Glade 2,310 0.44 C2U MC4U 500 100% 425 372 219 153
Bogart
~ PleasantRun Hall-Johnson 1,650 0.31 C3U C3U 13 100% 575 359 4 355
Church Pleasant Run Colleyville 1,425 0.27 MC4U MC4U 500 100% 525 567 135 432
Brensford
~ Glade Colleyville 1,360 026 MC4U MC4U 500 100% 525 541 129 412
Pleasan[ Run North City Limits John McCain 3,050 0.58 M2U M2U 801 100 % 650 751 463 288
Pleasant Run John McCain L D Lockett 3,610 0.68 M2U M2U 783 100% 650 889 535 354
Pleasant Run L D Lockett Tinker 925 0.18 M2U M2U 783 100 % 650 228 137 91
Pleasant Run Tinker Colleyville 6,180 1.17 M2U M2U 783 100% 650 1,522 916 605
Glade Colleyville Blvd. Bransford 1,525 0.29 M4U M4U 685 100 % 650 751 255 495
Glade Bransford West City Limits 5,230 0.99 M2U M4U 730 100 % 650 1,288 723 565
Murphy Rd. Precinct Line Dead End 2,465 0.47 MC2U MC2U 51 100 % 525 490 24 466
Lavaca Trl. Precinct Line Mustang Trl. 2,960 0.56 MC2U MC2U 49 100% 525 589 27 561
Precinct Line Murphy West ity Limits 6,800 1.29 U M4D 1,891 100 0 725 3,735 ,436 1,299
SUBTOTAL 84,535 16 18,701 14,272 4,489 813
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Update
City oi Colleyville, Texas
Appendix C- Existing Facilities Inventory
urn
^
~
~
rt
a
Exhibit A
~ ~ ~ Kur~ey-Hom
~ and Associates, Inc.
`~?~
~~
COLLEYVILLE
7~EtA~'
Appendix D- Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit
2012 Roadway Impact Fcc Update 57 May 2012
City of Colleyvillc, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ K~niey-Hom
~ and Associa~es, inc.
G~T~
~t-
COLLEYVILLE
7~EXA~
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT
Intr~oduction
Texas Locai Government Code Section 395 "Financing Capital Improvements Required by
New Development in Municipalities, Counties, and Certain Other Local Governments"
requires the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) to contain specific enumeration of a plan for
awarding the impact fee credit.
Section 395.014, Texas Local Government Code states:
... (a) The political subdivision shall use qualified professionals to prepare the capital
improveme~ts plan and to calculate the impact fee. The capital improvements plan
must contain specific enumeration of the foltowing items:
(7) A plan for awarding:
(A) a credit for the portion of ad valorem tax and utility service
revenues generated by new service units during the program period
that is used for the payment of improvements, including the payment
of debt, that are included in the capital improvements plan; or
(B) In the altemative, a credit equal to 50 percent of the total
projected cost of implementing the capital improvements plan... ."
Ad Vabrem Tax Generated by New Devebpment
The plan for awarding the credit assumes the future growth related street CIP projects are
funded from long-term bonds. The portion of ad valorem tax generated by the new
development during the program period is estimated to equal the portion oF the long term
bond debt service payments related to the growth related street C~P projects.
Debt Service Re uirement Area 1 Area 2
2~13 annual I&S requirement (impact fee street
CIP ro ects ~421,900 $326,856
Impact Fee Credit per Vehicle Mile
The maximum impact fee is expressed in dollars per vehicle-mile. The annual per vehicle-
mile credit is calculated by dividing the annual portion of estimated property tax by the current
total vehicle miles oF demand (per column 2, Existing Utilization, Service Area Analysis
Summary):
Annual amount of ad valorem tax Current Vehicle-Miles Credit Per
applied to growth related CIP for the of Demand Vehicle Mile
ten ear riod
A~ea ~421,900 14,040 $30.05
1
Area 5326,856 14,285 522.88
2
Edward B. Peacock, CPA
2012 Roadway Impact Fcc Updatc 58 May 2012
City of Colleyvillc, Tcxas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ^ Kerdey-Hom
~ and Associa~es, Inc.
c1T~
~s.-
COLLEYVILLE
?~E X AS
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT
Growth in Service Units (Vehicle Miles)
The cumulative totals of 33,457 vehicle-miles in Service Area 1, and 25,449 vehicle-miles in
Service Area 2, are derived from the 6,o83 projected ten year demand in Service Area 1, and
4,627 projected ten year demand in Service Area 2. The growth in vehicle miles is applied
equally over the ten-year period:
SERVICE AREA 1- NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES IMPACT FEE PE R10D
YR ANNUAL CUMULAl1VE
1 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608.3 608
2 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608_3 1,217
3 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608.3 1,825
4 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608.3 2,433
5 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608.3 3,042
6 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608.3 3,650
7 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608.3 4,258
B NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608.3 4,866
9 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608.3 5,475
10 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 608.3 6,083
TOTAL 6 083 33 457
SERVICE AREA TWO - NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES IMPACT FEE PERIOD
YR ANNUAL CUMULATIVE
1 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 462.7 463
2 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 462.7 925
3 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 462.7 1 388
4 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 462.7 1,851
5 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 4627 2,314
6 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 462-7 2,776
7 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 462 7 3,239
8 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 462.7 3,702
9 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 462,7 4,164
10 NEW ROADWAY VEH-MILES 462J 4,627
TOTAL 4 627 25,449
CIP Credit by Service Area
The credit per vehicie mile is multiplied times the ten year cumulative total of vehicle miles of
demand by service area to equal the CIP credit by service area
Colleyville 2012 Roedway Impact Fee Study Update
New Roedwav Vehlcle-Mlles and Credit oer Service Area -10 Year Imoect Fee Perlod
ProJected 10yr Annual 10 YR Cumulative S PER CIP Credtt
3ervlce Damantl Demantl Demand VEH-MI by
Area veh-mlles veh-rNles Total CREDIT Service Area
7 6,083 608 33.457 $30.05 51,005,363
2 4.6<^7 463 25.449 572.88 $582.289
Edward B. Peacock, CPA
2012 Roadway Impact Fcc Updatc 59 May 2012
Ciry of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kunley-Hom
~ and Associa~es, Inc.
`~T~
!1.-
COLLEYVILLE
~~E X A~
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
PLAN FOR AWARDING THE R~ADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT
Maximum Impact Fee After the Credit
Calculation of the maximum impact fee after the credit by service area (column H) is
illustrated in the following table
Cky 0/ Cell~yvlll~ $Ot? Impael FH 5 Wtly UpdaN
IculatlonolMelA~imumlm ~ctPwMrUiaQstlit
UI Ili~ IC1 @I iEl
C Xp pl IOl
~F' - MI
~Glr i
Pre~•a•aiq. Annwl tOMC~mulatlv~ 3rW! C1-CnCtt CeR CeuPmibutaW~ M~um~n
s..ne• o.mYw wmna wnona ve+a.u ey .eanwmeu ~oorown ~mpx~s••
M~n v~MMl~s v~RmNS Twl cISOrt lwrviHlWa moravh uncr~tln ~ftucnm
t o0~ ~ ~J~S' f'qJ5 S+.~YJ`_3Gl "~i~.~.11 S+a.:~5,?9~ i'.::~
4 -b.') a;,:: lS.WU 5.=~ L`A:.:39 ~t~4~.~.gfic S?1.?~0.`4' S:.i::
The CIP credit by service area (column E) is subtracted from the cost attributable to growth
by service area (column F) to result in the cost attributabte to growth less credit by service
area (column G).
The maximum impact fee per vehicle-mile after the credit per service area (column H) is
calculated by dividing the cost attributable to growth less credit (column G) the projected 10
year demand (Column A).
Impact Fee per Single Family Unit
Compa~isons of the $ase Impact Tee, 50% Alte~native, and thc A~Iasimum
Impact Fce After thc Cmdit
A comparison to the base maximum impact fee and 50% reduction Follows
c~H orcon.~vfn. zo~z ~rtqmi F.. s~~aY uPaate
Compul~on otth~ Bafa Modmum Ynp~cl FM M lh~ 60% M~ximum Ynp~et Fw ~nd Mocimum Ynp~t fw dtr fh•
Cr~dkb S~Me~Nw
a~ ~e~ w~ ro~ ~ ~~
SOX Atlematlve AflertNe CrcdK
Base Fee per MaxlmimFee Maxlmm Y, of Base MaximrmFee
Servlee Ma~Mum Servlee UNt per Single FaMly Impact Fee after Maxinvm per Slrgie Femly
AreA 1 act Fee 50°/. Distount Dxrel UMt MB Credlt I ct Fee Dwelli Untt
t 52,626 51.263 55.101 52,360 93.i696 59.635
2 52572 51.286 55,1% 52446 %.11% 59.883
Edward B. Peacock, CPA
2012 Roadway Impact Fee Updatc 60 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit A
~ ~ ^ Kimey-Hom
~ and Associaties, Inc.
C~T 1' p f
~~
COLLEYVILLE
TE\AS
NET INTEREST COSTS
Per Section 395 of the Local Government Code, projected interest charges may be added in determining
the total costs of the capital improvements if the impact fees are used Por the payment of principal and
interest on bonds.
All of the costs included in the 2012 Roadway and Water and Wastewater Impact Fee capital
improvements plans are assumed to be financed by long term debt to be repaid from impact fees.
The bonds are assumed to be paid over a twenty year period. Only interest costs (net of projected
interest earnings) for the ten year period of the impact fee calculation are added to the costs of the
capital improvements.
Projected interest charges over the ten year period were added to the total costs of the growth related
capital improvements plans as follows:
Growth Related Total Impact Fee
CIP Net Interest Cost CIP Costs
Roadway Impact Fee
Area 1 $ 11,798,400
Area 2 9,140,499
Water Impact Fee 6,414,833
Wastewater Impact Fee 2,539,293
5 3,563,243 5 15,361,643
2,760,387 11,900,886
1,954,989 8,369,822
773,877 3,313,170
Edward B. Peacock, CPA
2012 Roadway Impact Fec Updatc 61
City of Collcyville, Texas
May 2012
Exhibit A
^ ~ ~ Kirnley-Hom
~ and Associahes, Inc.
c~T S °r•
~-
COLLEYVILLE
7~E~ AS
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
SCHEDULE OF PROJECTED DEBT ISSUANCE AND NEf INTEREST COST [1]
ROADWAY AREA 1 IMPACT FEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
FOR THE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013 TO 2022
TOTAL CIP ~NTEREST EXPENSE GROWTH
YEAR YEAR OEBT ISSUE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013-2022 RELATED
INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL 100.OD%
SERIES ALL SERIES
2013
1 2013 11,798,400 438,677 438,677 438,677
2 2014 - 423,343 423,343 423,343
3 2015 - 407,427 407,427 407,427
4 2016 - 390,910 390,910 39a,910
5 2017 - 373,768 373,768 373,768
6 2018 - 355,977 355,977 355,977
7 2019 - 337,511 337,511 337,511
8 2020 - 318,347 318,347 318,347
9 2021 - 298,458 298,458 298,458
10 2022 - 277,816 277,816 277,816
11,798,440 3,622,235 3,622,235 3,622,235
INTEREST REVENUE GROWfH
AVG BAL TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013-2022 RELATED
1 2013 11, 2D8,480 11, 208 11, 208 11,208
2 2014 10,028,640 10,029 10,029 10,029
3 2015 8,848,800 8,849 8,849 8,849
4 2016 7,668,960 i,669 7,669 7,669
5 2017 6,489,120 6,489 6,489 6,489
6 2018 5,3D9,280 5,309 5,309 5,3D9
7 2019 4,129,440 4,129 4,129 4,129
8 2020 2,949,600 2,950 2,950 2,950
9 2021 1,769,760 1,770 1,770 1,770
10 2022 589,920 590 590 590
58,992 58,992 58,992
NEf INTERE ST EXPENSE $ 3,563,243 S 3,563,243
(1] Assumptions: 1 ~ Total Area 1 CIP cost is financed by 1 bond series, 2} interest rate on
bond series is 3.75°~, 3) bond proceeds are fully expended equaily over the 10 year period,
and 4) the irnestment rate of return is .10%.
2012 Roadway Impact Fcc Updatc 52 May 2012
City of Collcyville, Texas
Exhibit A
^ ~ ~ Kirnley-Hom
~ and Associahes, Inc.
G~T~
7-t-
COLLEYVILLE
~~EXAS
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
SCHEDULE OF PROJECTED DEBT ISSUANCE AND NET INTEREST COST [1 ~
ROADWAY IMPACT FEE AftEA 2 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
FOR THE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013 TO 2022
TOTAL CIP INTEREST EXPENSE GROWTH
YEAR YEAR DEBT ISSUE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013-2022 RELATED
INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL 100.00%
SERIES ALL SERIES
2013
1 2013 9,140,499 339,853 339,853 339,853
2 2014 - 327,924 327,924 327,924
3 2015 - 315,644 315,644 315,644
4 2016 - 302,847 302,847 302,847
5 2017 - 289,566 289,566 289,566
6 2018 - 275,783 275,783 275,783
7 2019 - 261,477 261,477 261,477
8 2020 - 246,631 246,631 246,631
9 2021 - 231,222 231,222 231,222
10 2022 - 215,141 215,141 215,141
9,140,499 2,806,089 2,806,089 2,806,089
INTEREST REVENUE GROWTH
AVG BA~ TEN YEAR PERIOD 2013-2022 RELATED
1 2013 8,683,474 8,683 8,683 8,683
2 2014 7,769,424 7,769 7,769 7,769
3 2015 6,855,374 6,855 6,855 6,855
4 2016 5,941,324 5,941 5,941 5,941
5 2017 5,027,274 5,027 5,027 5,027
6 2018 4,113,225 4,1'13 4,113 4,'113
7 2019 3,199,175 3,199 3,199 3,199
8 2020 2,285,125 2,285 2,285 2,285
9 2021 1,371,075 1,371 1,371 1,371
1~ 2022 457,025 457 457 457
45,702 45,702 45,702
NET INTEREST EXPENSE $ 2,760,387 ~ 2,760,387
s
[1 ] Assumptions: 1) Total Area 2 CIP cost is financed by 1 bond series, 2) interest rate on
bond series is 3.75°/a, 3) bond proceeds are fully expended equally over the 10 year period,
and 4) the irnestment rate of retum is 10%.
2012 Roadway Impact Fec Updatc 63 May 2012
City of Colleyville, Texas
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
_ _ __ _ _
~ Chapter 13
~ Impact Fees
. _ __ __ _
_ __ _ _
Rev. 08/21/2012
• 11 •• • .•
The purpose of this Chapter is to establish regulations for the collection of impact fees to pay for the costs for
new development.
. ~ ~ . . . ~... . . ..
The regulations contained in this Chapter are adopted under the authorization of Chapter 395 - Local
Government Code and Article VI of the Charter of the City of Colleyville.
. i . ~.•-
An applicant requesting a waiver of a requirement contained in this Chapter may seek relief from the City
Council by using the procedure described in Section 190 of this Chapter this Land Development Code.
. ~- .
The definitions unique to this Chapter are found in Chapter 2- Definitions of this Land Development Code.
A. Master Plan - The City of Colleyville, Texas Master Plan, approved by Ordinance 0-04-1483 on October
19, 2004, be and the same is hereby adopted and designated as the Master Plan for the City of
Colleyville for impact fees.
B. Land Use Assumptions - The land use assumptions used in the development of the impact fees are
contained in the document titled Water, Wastewater, and Roadway Impact Fee Update, dated May 2012,
prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, are adopted for the purpose of compliance with Chapter 395 of
the Texas Local Government Code regarding impact fees and referenced in Exhibit - 13.A - Table of
Land Use Assumptions.
C. Water and Wastewater Capital Improvements Plans - The document titled Water, Wastewater, and
Roadway Impact Fee Update, dated May 2012, prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, is adopted as
the Water and Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan for the City of Colleyville for the purpose of
compliance with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code regarding impact fees.
D. Roadwav Capital Improvements Plan - The document titled Water, Wastewater, and Roadway Impact
Fee Update, dated May 2012, and prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates is adopted as the Roadway
Capital Improvements Plan for the City of Colleyville for the purpose of compliance with Chapter 395 of
the Texas Local Government Code regarding impact fees.
. ~.. .. . ..
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 1 of 22
Exhibit 6
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
A. This Chapter shall be uniformly applicable to new development which occurs within the water, wastewater
and roadway service areas.
B. No new development shall be exempt from the assessment of impact fees as defined in this Chapter.
No final plat for new development shall be approved within the service area without assessment of impact
fees pursuant to this Chapter, and no water and wastewater tap shall be issued and no building permit shall
be issued unless the applicant has paid the impact fees imposed by and calculated as provided herein.
. .. . ~
A. The water, wastewater and roadway service areas are established as shown on the Service Area Map,
attached as Exhibit -13-B - Service Area Map. The service areas shall be established consistent with
any facility service area established in the CIP for each utility.
B. The boundaries of the water, wastewater and roadway service areas may be amended from time to time,
and new service areas may be delineated, pursuant to the procedures in Chapter 395 of the Texas Local
Govemment Code.
A. Service units are established in accordance with generally accepted engineering and planning standards.
B. For water and wastewater impact fees, service units shall be calculated in accordance with the attached
Exhibit -13-C - Table of Water and Wastewater Service Unit Equivalencies, as determined by the size of
the water meter(s) for the development, or alternatively, as approved the City Engineer as a result of an
engineering report prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed to perform such professional
engineering services in the State of Texas, which demonstrates that the number of service unit
equivalents (SUE's) for the new development will be different than those indicated by the size of the water
meter.
C. If the Director of Public Services determines that the water pressure in the City's transmission main is
significantly higher or lower than standard pressure such that the size of the water meter is not indicative
of actual service demand, the Director may adjust the number of (SUE's) based on a smaller or larger
sized meter which more accurately reflects the flow rate and the system pressure conditions.
D. If a fire demand meter (tap) is purchased for a property, the meter size utilized to calculate the number of
(SUE's) shall be the dimension of the portion of the fire demand meter which reflects the meter size which
would provide only domestic service to the property. Said reduced meter size shall then be utilized to
calculate the number of (SUE's).
1. The meter types used to calculate the number of (SUE's) shall be either simple or compound meters.
2. If the fire protection capacity of the fire demand meter is routinely utilized for domestic purposes as
evidenced by the registration of consumption recorded on the City's meter-reading and billing
systems, the then-owner of the property shall be assessed the then current fee for the fire protection
capacity which has been converted to domestic capacity by its routine usage as domestic capacity.
3. To avoid the use of fire flow volumes for domestic usage, the owner of any property for which a fire
demand meter is purchased shall be required to execute a restrictive covenant on a form approved by
the City Attorney, which covenant shall acknowledge the right of the City to assess such fees to
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 2 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
subsequent owners of the property. Said covenant shall be executed prior to the purchase of the fire
demand meter and shall be filed in the deed records of the County.
No fees shall be collected for the purchase of taps which shall be utilized to provide only fire
protection capacity.
E. Upon wastewater tap purchase for lots for which no water meter has been purchased, service units shall
be established by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Texas, shall be reviewed by the
Engineer and shall be presented to Council, which shall designate the appropriate number of service
units.
F. For roadways, service units shall be calculated in accordance with Exhibit - 13.D - Table of Vehicle-Mile
Equivalencies.
G. The City Council may revise the service unit equivalency tables according to the procedure set forth in
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code and its successors.
A. Calculation Method - The maximum assessable impact fee per service unit for each service area shall be
computed by dividing the growth-related capital construction cost of service in the service area identified
in the capital improvements plan for that category of capital improvements, by the total number of
projected service units anticipated within the service area which are necessitated by and attributable to
new development, based on the land use assumptions for that service area.
B. Utility or Ad Valorem Tax Credits - The maximum assessable impact fee is determined by applying a
credit back to the development community based on the utility revenues or ad valorem taxes that are
allocated for paying a portion for future capital improvements. The maximum assessable water impact is
72.9 percent of the Pre-Credit Recoverable Costs. The maximum assessable wastewater impact fee is
76.1 percent of the Pre-Credit Recoverable Costs. The maximum roadway impact fee is 93.5 percent for
Service Area One and 95.1 percent for Service Area Two of the Pre-Credit Recoverable Costs.
C. Maximum Assessable Water and Wastewater Impact Fees - The maximum assessable impact fees per
service unit for water and wastewater facilities after applying the utility or ad valorem tax credits is
contained in Exhibit -13-E - Table of Maximum Assessable Water and Wastewater Impact Fees.
D. Maximum Assessable Roadwav Impact Fees - The maximum assessable impact fees per service unit for
roadway facilities after applying the utility or ad valorem tax credits is contained in Exhibit -13-F - Table of
Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fees.
A. The assessment of an impact fee for any new development shall be made in accordance with the
provisions of this Section.
B. Assessment of the impact fee for any new development shall be made on occurrence of the following
events:
1. For new development which is submitted for approval pursuant to the City's subdivision regulations
after June 20, 1987, or for which replatting results in an increase in the number of service units after
such date, assessment shall be at the time of final subdivision plat approval, and shall be the amount
of the impact fee per service unit, as provided in the Schedule of Impact Fees to be Collected that is
in effect at the time of subdivision plat approval.
2. For new development which has received final plat approval prior to June 20, 1987, and for which
no replatting is necessary prior to the issuance of a building permit, assessment shall be upon the
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 3 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
issuance of a building permit, and shall be the amount of the impact fee per service unit set forth
in the Schedule of Impact Fees to be Collected that is in effect at the time of building permit
application.
3. For new development which occurs or is proposed to occur without platting, assessment shall be
upon the issuance of a building permit or water or sewer tap purchase (whichever occurs first),
and shall be the amount of the impact fee per service unit set forth in the Schedule of Impact
Fees to be Collected that is in effect at the time of building permit application.
4. For water and wastewater facilities, fees shall not be assessed to a development for which taps
previously were purchased and which development does not result in an increase in the number
of living unit equivalents as determined by the service unit equivalency table. If the exchange of
said taps will result in an increase in the number of (SUE's), impact fees for the increase in the
number of (SUE's) shall be assessed in accordance with the Schedule of Impact Fees to be
Collected that is in effect at the time of subdivision plat approval.
Because fire protection is of critical concern to the community as a whole, water demand related
solely to fire protection is not subject to assessment or collection of a water or wastewater impact
fee. However, if the fire protection capacity of the fire demand meter is routinely utilized for
domestic purposes as evidenced by the registration of consumption recorded on the City's meter-
reading and billing systems, the current owner of the property shall be assessed the impact fees
currently in effect at the time such conversion is established by the City for the fire protection
capacity which has been converted to domestic capacity by its routine usage as domestic
capacity.
C. Following assessment of the impact fee above, no additional impact fees or increases thereof shall be
assessed against that development unless the number of service units increases.
D. Following the lapse or expiration of approval for a plat, a new assessment must be performed at the
time a new application for such development is filed.
A. Water Impact Fee Schedule - The actual water impact fee collection rate which is to be paid by each new
development shall be 40.8% of the maximum allowed. This rate is incorporated into Exhibit 13-G -
Schedule of Actual Water and Wastewater Impact Fees to be Collected, which shall become effective on
August 22, 2012.
B. Residential Irripation Meter Exemption - The payment of the water impact fee shall not be required by an
existing residential customer for the installation of a meter to serve a separate lawn irrigation system
provided all of the following requirements are met:
1. The lawn irrigation meter does not exceed the 3/" x 5/8" standard basic meter size,
2. The lawn irrigation shall be Iocated on the same property as the residential meter,
3. the residential property must be owner-occupied and be in possession of a valid certificate of
occupancy,and
4. The lawn irrigation meter only serves the lawn irrigation system.
5. The upgrade of a 3/4" x 5/e" lawn irrigation meter to a 1" meter shall require payment of a water impact
fee based on the difference between the base meter size and the water impact fee for a 1" meter
applicable at the time of upgrade.
6. No exemption or pro-rata credit shall apply for any meter size exceeding 1" for a lawn irrigation meter.
C. Wastewater Impact Fee Schedule - The actual wastewater impact fee collection rate which is to paid by
each new development shall be 25.5% of the maximum allowed by this Chapter. This rate is incorporated
into Exhibit 13-G - Schedule of Actual Water and Wastewater Impact Fees to be Collected, which shall
become effective on August 22, 2012.
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 4 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
D. Roadwav Impact Fee Schedule - The actual impact fees per service unit equivalent for roadway facilities
is shown in Exhibit 13-H - Schedule of Actual Roadway Impact Fees to be Collected, which incorporates
the following collection rate percentages.
1. Service Area 1: The actual Roadway Impact Fee collection rate shall be 51.8% of the maximum
assessable impact fee allowed for all uses, except retail and office uses, which shall include a 65%
credit of the actual fee collected, which shall become effective on August 22, 2012.
2. Service Area 2: The actual Roadway Impact Fee collection rate shall be 50.0% of the maximum
allowed by this Chapter for all uses, except retail and office uses, which shall include a credit of 65%
of the actual fee collected, which shall become effective on August 22, 2012.
3. For land uses not specifically listed, refer to Trip Generation, published by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers.
A. Tap or Buildinq Permit - No water or wastewater tap or building permit shall be issued until all impact fees
have been paid to the City, except as provided otherwise by contract.
B. Pavment with Buildina Permit - Water, wastewater and roadway impact fees shall be paid at the time of
the issuance of a building permit, unless a provision in this Chapter provides for another time for
collection of impact fee.
C. Conversion from Existinq Private Facilities - For new development converting to the City water utility from
a water well or to the City wastewater utility from a septic tank or individual waste disposal system, the
City may allow the fee-payer to pay impact fees in the form of a monthly assessment in the same manner
as monthly assessments for related tap fees, if such an extended payment program for tap fees is
currently in effect.
D. Contract Specifvinq Time and Method of Payment - The City may, at its sole discretion, enter into a
contract with the owner of a tract of land for which the plat has been recorded to establish a different time
and method of payment of impact fees than those provided in this Section.
E. Notification Due to Increased Service Units - Whenever a property owner proposes to increase the
number of service units for a development previously assessed, the additional impact fees to be collected
on such service units shall be determined in accordance with the Schedule of Impact Fees to be
Collected that is in effect at the time of building permit application_.
F. Roadwav Impact Fees for Exemqt Non-Residential Uses - For roadway impact fees, in circumstances
where non-residential uses may be exempt from payment of fees based upon prospective generation of
sales tax revenues, such fees may be paid as provided in Section 13-173, subject to rebate pursuant to
this Chapter, upon demonstration that more than 50% of the floor area of the structure for which a
building permit is issued will be utilized by a business generating city sales tax revenues.
A. Svstem Related Facilities - The City shall offset the reasonable value of any system-related facilities,
pursuant to rules established in this Section, which have been dedicated to and have been received by
the City, including the value of rights-of-way or capital improvements constructed pursuant to an
agreement with the City, against the amount of the impact fee due for that category of capital
improvement, subject to administrative guidelines established by the City.
B. Credit for Impact, Pro-Rata, Acreaqe of Lot Fees - The City shall credit impact, pro rata, acreage or lot
fees which have been paid pursuant to the subdivision regulations contained in this Land Development
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 5 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Code prior to the effective date of this amendatory ordinance against the amount of an impact due for that
category of capital improvement, subject to administrative guidelines established by the City.
C. Limitations for Offsets and Credits - All offsets and credits against impact fees shall be subject to the
following limitations and shall be granted based on this Chapter and additional standards promulgated by
the City, which may be adopted as administrative guidelines.
1. No offset or credit shall be given for the dedication or construction of site-related facilities, except
where credit is provided in this Chapter, or for any capital improvement which is not identified within
the applicable capital improvements plan, unless the City agrees that such improvement supplies
capacity to new developments other than the development paying the impact fee and provisions for
offsets are incorporated into an agreement for capital improvements.
2. Any construction of, contributions to, or dedications of off-site roadway facilities agreed to or required
by the City as a condition of development approval shall be credited against roadway impact fees
otherwise due from the development.
3. The unit costs used to calculate the offsets shall not exceed those assumed for the capital
improvements included in the capital improvements plan for the category of facility within the service
area for which the impact fee is imposed.
4. An offset or credit created pursuant to prior impact fee ordinances shall expire no later than ten (10)
years after the effective date of this amendatory ordinance, unless a different expiration date has
been agreed to by the City by contract or certificate. Offsets or credits created after the effective date
of this amendatory ordinance shall expire within ten (10) years from the date the offset or credit was
created, unless otherwise prescribed by contract.
5. In no event will the City reimburse the property owner or developer for an offset or credit when no
impact fees for the new development can be collected pursuant to this Chapter or for any value
exceeding the total impact fees due for the development for that category of capital improvement,
unless otherwise agreed to by the City.
6. Offsets or credits created after the effective date of this amendatory ordinance for a development
which has received final plat approval prior to the effective date hereof shall be discounted to take
into account the number of service units in the development which will utilize the facility for which the
offset or credit was given.
D. Aqplication for Offset or Credit - An applicant for new development must apply for an offset or credit
against impact fees due for the development either at or before the time of plat recordation, unless the
City agrees to a different time. The applicant shall file a petition for offsets or credits with the City on a
form provided for such purpose. The contents of the petition shall be established by administrative
guidelines. The City must provide the applicant, in writing, with a decision on the offset or credit request,
including the reasons for the decision. The decision shall specify the maximum value of the offset or
credit which may be applied against an impact fee, which value and the date of the determination shall be
associated with the plat for the new development.
E. Manner of Offset or Credit Application - The available offset or credit associated with the plat shall be
applied against an impact fee in the following manner:
1. Such offset or credit shall be prorated proportionally among all service units, or for roadway facilities,
among all units of trip generation, as calculated from the applicable service unit equivalency table,
and shall remain applicable to such service units, to be applied at time of filing and acceptance of an
application for a building permit, against impact fees due.
2. If the total number of service units used by the City in the original offset or credit calculation described
in subsection (1) is eventually exceeded by the number of total service units realized by the actual
development, the City may, at its sole discretion, collect the full impact fee exclusive of any
associated offset or credits for the excess service units.
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 6 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
3. At its sole discretion, the City may authorize alternative credit or offset agreements upon petition by
the owner in accordance with guidelines promulgated by the City.
. . .. . ~ . . . .
A. The City shall establish separate interest-bearing accounts, in a bank authorized to receive deposits of
City funds, for each major category of capital facility for which an impact fee is imposed pursuant to this
Chapter.
B. Interest earned by each account shall be credited to that account and shall be used solely for the
purposes specified for funds authorized in the Capital Improvements Plan.
C. The City shall establish adequate financial and accounting controls to ensure that impact fees disbursed
from the account are utilized solely for the purposes authorized in the CIP. Disbursement of funds shall
be authorized by the City at such times as are reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes and intent
of this Chapter; provided, however, that any fee paid shall be expended within a reasonable period of
time, but not to exceed ten (10) years from the date the fee is deposited into the account.
D. The City shall maintain and keep adequate financial records for each such account, which shall show the
source and disbursement of all revenues, which shall account for all monies received, and which shall
ensure that the disbursement of funds from each account shall be used solely and exclusively for the
provision of uses specified in the capital improvements program as system-related capital projects. The
City Finance Department shall also maintain such records as are necessary to ensure that refunds are
appropriately made under the provisions of this Chapter, and such other information as may be necessary
for the proper implementation of this Chapter.
A. Permitted Uses of Fees - The impact fees collected pursuant to this Chapter may be used to finance or to
recoup capital construction costs of service. Impact fees may also be used to pay the principal sum and
interest and other finance costs on bonds, notes or other obligations issued by or on behalf of the City to
finance such capital improvements or facilities expansions.
B. Prohibited Uses of Fees - Impact fees collected pursuant to this Chapter shall not be used to pay for any
of the following expenses:
1. Construction, acquisition or expansion of capital improvements or assets other than those identified in
the associated capital improvements plans;
2. Repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements or facilities expansions;
3. Upgrading, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development in
order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards;
4. Upgrading, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing
development; provided however, that impact fees may be used to pay the costs of upgrading,
expanding or replacing existing capital improvements in order to meet the need for new capital
improvements generated by new development: or
5. Administrative and operating costs of the City.
. i ~..-
A. The property owner or applicant for new development may appeal the following decisions to the City
Manager or designee:
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 7 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
1. The applicability of an impact fee to the development;
2. The value of the impact fee due;
3. The availability or the value of an offset or credit;
4. The application of an offset or credit against an impact fee due,
5. The amount of the refund due, if any; or
6. The alternative determination by the City Engineer concerning the size of the water meter which is to
be converted to service units.
B. The burden of proof shall be on the appellant to demonstrate that the value of the fee or the value of the
offset or credit was not calculated according to the applicable impact fee schedule or the ordinance
provisions and guidelines established for determining offsets and credits.
C. The appellant may appeal the decision of the City Manager to the City Council. A notice of appeal to the
Council must be filed by the applicant with the City Secretary within thirty (30) days following the City
Manager's decision. If the notice of appeal is accompanied by a bond or other sufficient surety
satisfactory to the City Attorney in an amount equal to the original determination of the impact fee due,
the development application or tap purchase or building permit issuance may be processed while the
appeal is pending.
A. Time Limit Prior to Refund - Any impact fee or portion thereof collected pursuant to this Chapter which
has not been expended within ten (10) years from the date of payment, shall be refunded, upon
application, to the record owner of the property at the time the refund is paid, or, if the impact fee was
paid by another governmental entity, to such governmental entity, together with interest calculated from
the date of collection to the date of refund at the statutory rate as set forth in Article 1.03, Title 79,
Revised Statutes (Article 5069-1.03, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes), or any successor statute.
B. Pro-Rated Refund - If a refund is due, the City shall pro-rate the same by dividing the difference between
the amount of expenditures and the amount of the fees collected by the total number of service units
assumed within the service area for the period to determine the refund due per service unit. The refund
to the record owner or governmental entity shall be calculated by multiplying the refund due per service
unit by the number of service units for the development for which the fee was paid, and interest due shall
be calculated upon that amount.
C. Determination of Excess Fees Upon Completion of Improvements - Upon completion of all the capital
improvements or facilities expansions identified in the capital improvements plan upon which the fee was
based, the City shall recalculate the maximum impact fee per service unit using the actual costs for the
improvements or expansions. If the maximum impact fee per service unit based on actual cost is less
than the impact fee per service unit paid, the City shall refund the difference, if such difference exceeds
the impact fee paid by more than ten percent (10%). The refund to the record owner or governmental
entity shall be calculated by multiplying such difference by the number of service units for the
development for which the fee was paid, and interest due shall be calculated upon that amount.
D. Request of Refund Fees - Upon the request of an owner of the property on which an impact fee has been
paid, the City shall refund such fees if:
1. Existing service is available and service is denied; or
2. Service was not available when the fee was collected and the City has failed to commence
construction of facilities to provide service within two years of fee payment; or
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 8 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
3. Service was not available when the fee was collected and has not subsequently been made available
within a reasonable period of time considering the type of capital improvement or facility expansion to
be constructed, but in any event later than five years from the date of fee payment.
E. Proportional Refund Due to Downsizinq Meter - The City shall refund an appropriate proportion of impact
fee payments in the event that a previously purchased unused water meter is replaced with a smaller
meter, based on the SUE differential of the two meter sizes and the per-SUE fee at the time of the original
fee payment, less an administrative charge of $50.
F. Procedure for Petitioninq of Refund - Petition for refunds shall be submitted to the Director of Public
Services on a form provided by the City for such purpose. Within one month of the date of receipt of a
petition for refund, the Director must provide the petitioner, in writing, with a decision on the refund
request, including the reasons for the decision. If a refund is due to the petitioner, the Director shall notify
the Finance Director and request that a refund payment be made to the petitioner. The petitioner may
appeal the determination to the City Manager and Council, as set forth in this Land Development Code.
G. Rebate of Roadwav Impact Fees for Expired Permit - The City shall rebate the roadway impact fees to
the owner on which a building permit has been issued, for which such permit has expired without
construction.
H. Rebate of Roadwav Impact Fees for Sales Tax Businesses - The City may rebate sixty-five percent
(65%) of the roadway impact fees collected for a new commercial or industrial structure upon request of
the property owner within one year after a certificate of occupancy has been issued, and provided that
more than fifty percent (50%) of the gross floor area of the structure for which the certificate of occupancy
has been issued will be utilized by a commercial or industrial business that generates city sales tax
revenues.
. ... . . . .
The City shall review the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan for water, wastewater and
roadway facilities at least every five years, the first five year period which shall commence from the date of
adoption of the capital improvements plan referenced herein. The City Council shall accordingly then make a
determination of whether changes to the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan or impact fees are
needed and shall, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government
Code, or any successor statute, either update the fees or make a determination that no update is necessary.
A. The functions of the Advisory Committee are those set forth in Chapter 395 of the Texas Local
Government Code, or any successor statute, and shall include the following:
1. Advise and assist the City in adopting land use assumptions;
2. Review the capital improvements plan regarding water, wastewater and roadway capital
improvements and file written comments thereon;
3. Monitor and evaluate implementation of the capital improvements program;
4 Advise the City of the need to update or revise the land use assumptions, capital improvements
program and impact fees; and
5. File a semiannual report evaluating the progress of the City in achieving the capital improvements
plans and identifying any problems in implementing the plans or administering the impact fees.
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 9 of 22
Exhibit 6
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
B. The City shall make available to the Advisory Committee any professional reports prepared in the
development or implementation of the capital improvements plan.
C. The City Council shall adopt procedural rules for the committee to follow in carrying out its duties.
A. The City Council may approve the owner of a new development to construct or finance some of the public
improvements identified in the CIP. In the case of such approval, the property owner must enter into an
agreement with the City prior to fee collection. The agreement shall be on a form approved by the City,
and shall establish the estimated cost of improvement, the schedule for initiation and completion of the
improvement, a requirement that the improvement shall be completed to City standards, and any other
terms and conditions the City deems necessary. The Engineer shall review the improvement plan, verify
costs and time schedules, determine if the improvement is contained in the CIP, and determine the
amount of the applicable credit for such improvement to be applied to the otherwise applicable impact fee
before submitting the proposed agreement to the Council for approval.
B. The City and such owner either may agree that the costs incurred or funds advanced will be credited
against the impact fees otherwise due from the new development, or they may agree that the City shall
reimburse the owner for such costs from impact fees paid from other new developments which will use
such capital improvements or facility expansions.
A. The City may finance water, wastewater and roadway capital improvements or facilities expansions
designated in the capital improvements plan through the issuance of bonds, through the formation of
public improvement districts or other assessment districts, or through any other authorized mechanism, in
such manner and subject to such limitations as may be provided by law, in addition to the use of impact
fees.
B. Except as herein otherwise provided, the assessment and collection of an impact fee shall be additional
and supplemental to, and not in substitution of, any other tax, fee, charge or assessment which is lawfully
imposed on and due against the property.
. :: .. ~.. . . .. -. .
A. Impact fees established by this Chapter are additional and supplemental to, and not in substitution of, any
other requirements imposed by the City on the development of land or the issuance of building permits or
the sale of water or wastewater taps. Such fees are intended to be consistent with and to further the
policies of City's Comprehensive Plan, capital improvements plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision
regulations and other City policies, ordinances and resolutions by which the City seeks to ensure the
provision of adequate public facilities in conjunction with the development of land.
B. This Chapter shall not affect, in any manner, the permissible use of property, density of development,
design, and improvement standards and requirements, or any other aspect of the development of land or
provision of public improvements subject to the zoning and subdivision regulations or other regulations of
the City, which shall be operative and remain in full force and effect without limitation with respect to all
such development.
A. Any person who has paid an impact fee or an owner of land upon which an impact fee has been paid may
petition the Council to determine whether any duty required by this ordinance has not been performed
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 10 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
within the time so prescribed. The petition shall be in writing and shall state the nature of the
unperformed duty and request that the act be performed within sixty (60) days of the request. If the
Council determines that the duty is required pursuant to the ordinance and is late in being performed, it
shall cause the duty to commence within sixty (60) days of the date of the request and to continue until
completion.
B. The Council may grant a variance or waiver from any requirement of this ordinance, upon written request
by a developer or owner of property subject to the ordinance, following a public hearing, upon finding that
a strict application of such requirement would, when regarded as a whole, result in confiscation of the
property.
. • ~ . . ..
Reserved for listing of amendments to this Chapter.
Ord. Number Date Sub'ect
0-00-1218 O6/20/00 Established 35% collection rate on church, office and retail uses
0-00-1261 12/19/00 Ex anded roadwa im act fee schedule
0-02-1367 10/01/02 Revised im act fee schedules er S.B 243
0-04-1453 04/16/04 Residential irri ation meter exem tion
0-06-1581 08/02/06 Com rehensive revision and ado tion of new fee schedules
0-09-1711 03/03/09 Im act Fee U date - Roadwa Ca ital Im rovements Plan
0-12-1846 08/21/12 Five ear u date and ado tion of new fee schedules
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 11 of 22
Exhibit 6
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit - 13-A
Table of Land Use Assumptions
Population and Non-Residential Facilities bv Service Area
Service Dwelling Square Feet
Area Year Population Units
Basic
Service
Retail
Total
2012 14,315 4,836 30,417 2,288,308 1,004,025 3,322,750
1 2022 15,795 5,336 33,936 2,514,622 1,344,891 3,893,449
Build Out 15,795 5,336 33,936 2,514,622 1,344,891 3,893,449
2012 10,102 3,413 41,805 1,091,014 267,142 1,399,961
2 2022 11,583 3,913 46,642 1,348,009 400,483 1,795,134
Build Out 11,583 3,913 46,642 1,348,009 400,483 1,795,134
Tota12012 24,417 8,249 72,222 3,379,322 1,271,167 4,722,711
Tota12022 27,378 9,249 80,578 3,862,631 1,745,374 5,688,583
Total Build Out 27,378 9,249 80,578 3,862,631 1,745,374 5,688,583
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 12 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit - 13-B
Service Area Map
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 13 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit 13 - C
Table of Water and Wastewater
Service Unit Equivalencies
Meter Size" Maximum Continuous
Operating Capacity
(GPM)
Service Unit
Equivalent
5/8" x'/e" PD 10 1
'/4" PD 15 1.5
1" PD 25 2.5
1 '/Z" PD 50 5
2" PD 80 8
2" Compound 80 8
2" Turbine 100 10
3" Compound 160 16
3" Turbine 240 24
4" Compound 250 25
4" Turbine 420 42
6" Compound 500 50
6" Turbine 920 92
8" Compound 800 80
8" Turbine 1,600 160
10" Turbine 2,500 250
*PD = Positive Displacement Meter (Typical residential meter)
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 14 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit 13-D - Table of Vehicle Mile Equivalencies
Land Use Category ITE
Land
Use
Code
Development
Unit Vehicle-
Mile Per
Dev Unit
PORT AND TERMINAL
Truck Terminal 030 Acre 26.20
INDUSTRIAL
General Li ht Industrial 110 1,000 SF GFA 3.88
General Hea Industrial 120 1,000 SF GFA 2.72
Industrial Park 130 1,000 SF GFA 3.44
Warehousin 150 1,000 SF GFA 1.28
Mini-Warehouse 151 1,000 SF GFA 1.04
RESIDENTIAL
Sin le-Famil Detached Housin 210 Dwellin Unit 4.04
A artment/Multi-famil 220 Dwellin Unit 2.48
Residential Condominium/Townhome 230 Dwellin Unit 2.08
Mobile Home Park / Manufactured
Housin
240
Dwellin Unit
2.36
Senior Adult Housin -Detached 251 Dwellin Unit 1.08
Senior Adult Housin -Attached 252 Dwellin Unit 0.64
Assisted Livin 254 Beds 0.88
LODGING
Hotel 310 Room 1.90
Motel / Other Lod in Facilities 320 Room 1.51
RECREATIONAL
Golf Drivin Ran e 432 Tee 4.03
Golf Course 430 Acre 0.97
Recreational Communit Center 495 1,000 SF GFA 4.67
Ice Skatin Rink 465 1,000 SF GFA 7.60
Miniature Golf Course 431 Hole 1.06
Multi lex Movie Theater 445 Screens 43.92
Rac uet / Tennis Club 491 Court 10.79
INSTITUTIONAL
Church 560 1,000 SF GFA 1.16
Da Care Center 565 1,000 SF GFA 14.66
Prima /Middle School 1-8 522 Students 0.34
Hi h School 530 Students 0.27
Junior / Communit Colle e 540 Students 0.25
Universit / Colle e 550 Students 0.44
(Continued on next page)
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 15 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit 13-D - Table of Vehicle Mile Equivatencies - Continued
Land Use Category ITE
Use
Code
Development Unit Veh-M i
Dev-
Unit
MEDICAL
Clinic 630 1,000 SF GFA 19.58
Hos ital 610 Beds 4.95
Nursin Home 620 Beds 0.83
Animal Hos ital/Veterina Clinic 640 1,000 SF GFA 12.47
OFFICE
Cor orate Head uarters Buildin 714 1,000 SF GFA 5.60
General Office Buildin 710 1,000 SF GFA 5.96
Medical-Dental Office Buildin 720 1,000 SF GFA 13.84
Sin le Tenant Office Buildin 715 1,000 SF GFA 6.92
Office Park 750 1,000 SF GFA 5.92
COMMERCIAL
Automobile Related
Automobile Care Center 942 1,000 SF Occ. GLA 6.54
Automobile Parts Sales 843 1,000 SF GFA 10.98
Gasoline/Service Station
944 Vehicle Fueling
Position
4.82
Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market
945 Vehicle Fueling
Position
3.53
Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market and Car
Wash
946 Vehicle Fueling
Position
3.68
New Car Sales 841 1,000 SF GFA 6.67
Quick Lubrication Vehicle Sho 941 Servicin Positions 10.01
Self-Service Car Wash 947 Stall 1.99
Tire Store 848 1,000 SF GFA 9.63
Dinin
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru Window 934 1,000 SF GFA 40.61
Fast Food Restaurant without Drive-Thru Window 933 1,000 SF GFA 31.39
Hi h Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant 932 1,000 SF GFA 15.26
Qualit Restaurant 931 1,000 SF GFA 10.06
Coffee/Donut Sho with Drive-Thru Window 937 1,000 SF GFA 30.91
Other Retail
Free-Standin Discount Store 815 1,000 SF GFA 11.27
Nurse Garden Center 817 1,000 SF GFA 8.57
Home Im rovement Su erstore 862 1,000 SF GFA 3.96
Pharmac /Dru store w/o Drive-Thru Window 880 1,000 SF GFA 12.75
Pharmac /Dru store w/ Drive-Thru Window 881 1,000 SF GFA 17.00
Sho in Center 820 1,000 SF GLA 7.93
Su ermarket 850 1,000 SF GFA 21.64
To /Children's Su erstore 864 1,000 SF GFA 11.24
De artment Store 875 1,000 SF GFA 4.03
Video Rental Store 896 1,000 SF GFA 21.90
SERVICES
Walk-In Bank 911 1,000 SF GFA 12.38
Drive-In Bank 912 Drive-in Lanes 24.70
Hair Salon 918 1,000 SF GLA 1.73
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 16 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit 13 - E
Table of Maximum Assessable
Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
Meter Size*
Service Unit
Equivalent Maximum
Assessable
Water Impact Fee Maximum
Assessable
Wastewater Impact Fee
5/8" x'/4" PD 1 $6,100 $2,521
3/4" PD 1.5 $9,150 $3,782
1" PD 2.5 $15,250 $6,303
1 '/Z" PD 5 $30,500 $12,605
2°° pp 8 $48,800 $20,168
2" Compound 8 $48,800 $20,168
2" Turbine 10 $61,000 $25,210
3" Compound 16 $97,600 $40,336
3" Turbine 24 $146,400 $60,504
4" Compound 25 $152,500 $63,025
4" Turbine 42 $256,200 $105,882
6" Compound 50 $305,000 $126,050
6" Turbine 92 $561,200 $231,932
8" Compound 80 $488,000 $201,680
8" Turbine 160 $976,000 $403,360
10" Turbine 250 $1,525,000 $630,250
"PD = Positive Displacement Meter (Typical residential meter)
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 17 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit 13-F
Table of Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fees
and Use Description
evelopment
Unit
Veh-Mi
Per
Dev- Maximum
Impact Fee Per
Development
Unit
Ulllt Service
Area 1 Service
Area 2
PORT AND TERMINAL
TruckTerminal Acre 26.20 $61,832 $64,085
INDUSTRIAL
General Li ht Industrial 1,000 SF GFA 3.88 $9,157 $9,490
General Heav Industrial 1,000 SF GFA 2.72 $6,419 $6,653
Industrial Park 1,000 SF GFA 3.44 $8,118 $8,414
Warehousin 1,000 SF GFA 1.28 $3,021 $3,131
Mini-Warehouse 1,000 SF GFA 1.04 $2,454 $2,544
RESIDENTIAL
Sin le-Famil Detached Housin Dwellin Unit 4.04 $9,534 $9,882
ApartmenUMulti-famil Dwellin Unit 2.48 $5,853 $6,066
Residential Condominium/Townhome Dwellin Unit 2.08 $4,909 $5,088
Mobile Home Park / Manufactured Housin Dwellin Unit 2.36 $5,570 $5,773
Senior Adult Housin -Detached Dwellin Unit 1.08 $2,549 $2,642
SeniorAdultHousin -Attached Dwellin Unit 0.64 $1,510 $1,565
Assisted Livin Beds 0.88 $2,077 $2,152
LODGING
Hotel Room 1.90 $4,484 $4,647
Motel / Other Lod in Facilities Room 1.51 $3,564 $3,693
RECREATIONAL
Golf Drivin Ran e Tee 4.03 $9,511 $9,857
Golf Course Acre 0.97 $2,289 $2,373
Recreational Communit Center 1,000 SF GFA 4.67 $11,021 $11,423
Ice Skatin Rink 1,000 SF GFA 7.60 $17,936 $18,590
Miniature Golf Course Hole 1.06 $2,502 $2,593
Multiplex Movie Theater Screens 43.92 $103,651 $107,428
Rac uet / Tennis Club Court 10.79 $25,464 $26,392
INSTITUTIONAL
Church 1,000 SF GFA 1.16 $2,738 $2,837
Da Care Center 1,000 SF GFA 14.66 $34,598 $35,858
Prima /Middle School 1-8 Students 0.34 $802 $832
Hi h School Students 0.27 $637 $660
Junior / Communit Colle e Students 0.25 $590 $612
Universit /Colle e Students 0.44 $1,038 $1,076
MEDICAL
Clinic 1,000 SF GFA 19.58 $46,209 $47,893
Hos ital Beds 4.95 $11,682 $12,108
Nursin Home Beds 0.83 $1,959 $2,030
Animal HospitalNeterina Clinic 1,000 SF GFA 12.47 $29,429 $30,502
(Continued on next page)
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 18 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit 13-F
Table of Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fees - Continued
and Use Description
evelopment
it
U
Veh-Mi
Per
Dev Maximum
Impact Fee Per
Development
Unit
n -
Unit
Service
Area 1
Service
Area 2
OFFICE
Co orate Head uarters Buildin 1,000 SF GFA 5.60 $13,216 $13,698
General Office Buildin 1,000 SF GFA 5.96 $14,066 $14,578
Medical-Dental O~ce Buildin 1,000 SF GFA 13.84 $32,662 $33,853
Sin le Tenant Office Buildin 1,000 SF GFA 6.92 $16,331 $16,926
Office Park 1,000 SF GFA 5.92 $13,971 $14,480
COMMERCIAL
Automobile Related
Automobile Care Center 1,000 SF Occ. GLA 6.54 $15,434 $15,997
Automobile Parts Sales 1,000 SF GFA 10.98 $25,913 $26,857
Gasoline/Service Station Vehicle Fueling
Position
4.82
$11,375
$11,790
Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market Vehicle Fueling
Position
3.53
$8,331
$8,634
Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market and Car Wash Vehicle Fueling
Position
3.68
$8,685
$9,001
New Car Sales 1,000 SF GFA 6.67 $15,741 $16,315
Quick Lubrication Vehicle Sho Servicin Positions 10.01 $23,624 $24,484
Self-Service Car Wash Stall 1.99 $4,696 $4,868
Tire Store 1,000 SF GFA 9.63 $22,727 $23,555
Dinin
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 40.61 $95,840 $99,332
Fast Food Restaurant without Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 31.39 $74,080 $76,780
Hi h Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant 1,000 SF GFA 15.26 $36,014 $37,326
Qualit Restaurant 1,000 SF GFA 10.06 $23,742 $24,607
Coffee/Donut Sho with Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 30.91 $72,948 $75,606
Other Retail
Free-Standin Discount Store 1,000 SF GFA 11.27 $26,597 $27,566
Nurse Garden Center 1,000 SF GFA 8.57 $20,225 $20,962
Home Im rovement Superstore 1,000 SF GFA 3.96 $9,346 $9,686
Pharmac /Dru store w/o Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 12.75 $30,090 $31,187
Pharmac /Dru store w/ Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 17.00 $40,120 $41,582
Sho in Center 1,000 SF GLA 7.93 $18,715 $19,397
Supermarket 1,000 SF GFA 21.64 $51,070 $52,931
To /Children's Su erstore 1,000 SF GFA 11.24 $26,526 $27,493
Department Store 1,000 SF GFA 4.03 $9,511 $9,857
Video Rental Store 1,000 SF GFA 21.90 $51,684 $53,567
SERVICES
Walk-In Bank 1,000 SF GFA 12.38 $29,217 $30,281
Drive-In Bank Drive-in Lanes 24.70 $58,292 $60,416
Hair Salon 1,000 SF GLA 1.73 $4,083 $4,232
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 19 of 22
Exhibit 6
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit 13 - G
Schedule of Actuai Water and Wastewater Impact Fees to be Collected
Meter Size* Service Unit
E uivalent
p Water Im act Fee
o p
40.8 /o of Max Wastewater Im act Fee
o p
25.5 /o of Max
5/8" x'/<" PD 1 $2,491 $643
'/4" PD 1.5 $3,736 $965
1" PD 2.5 $6,227 $1,608
1 '/z" PD 5 $12,455 $3,215
2" PD 8 $19,928 $5,144
2" Compound 8 $19,928 $5,144
2" Turbine 10 $24,910 $6,430
3" Compound 16 $39,856 $10,288
3" Turbine 24 $59,784 $15,432
4" Compound 25 $62,275 $16,075
4" Turbine 42 $104,622 $27,006
6" Compound 50 $124,550 $32,150
6" Turbine 92 $229,172 $59,156
8" Compound 80 $199,280 $51,440
8" Turbine 160 $398,560 $102,880
10" Turbine 250 $622,750 $160,750
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 20 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit 13 - H
Schedule of Actual Roadway Impact Fees to be Collected
Development
Veh-Mi
Per Impact Fee Per
Development Unit
Land Use Descri tion
p Unit Dev-
Unit
Service Area
1
(51.8% of
MAX)
Service Area
2
(50.0% of
MAX)
PORT AND TERMINAL
Truck Terminal Acre 26.20 $14,181 $14,181
INDUSTRIAL
General Li ht Industrial 1,000 SF GFA 3.88 $2,122 $2,122
General Heav Industrial 1,000 SF GFA 2.72 $1,472 $1,472
Industrial Park 1,000 SF GFA 3.44 $1,862 $1,862
Warehousin 1,000 SF GFA 1.28 $1,277 $1,277
Mini-Warehouse 1,000 SF GFA 1.04 $563 $563
RESIDENTIAL
Sin le-Famil Detached Housin Dwellin Unit 4.04 $4,941 $4,941
A artmenUMulti-famil Dwellin Unit 2.48 $3,033 $3,033
Residential Condominium/Townhome Dwellin Unit 2.08 $2,544 $2,544
Mobile Home Park / Manufactured Housin Dwellin Unit 2.36 $2,886 $2,886
SeniorAdult Housin -Detached Dwellin Unit 1.08 $1,321 $1,321
Senior Adult Housin -Attached Dwellin Unit 0.64 $783 $783
Assisted Livin Beds 0.88 $1,076 $1,076
LODGING
Hotel Room 1.90 $1,028 $1,028
Motel / Other Lod in Facilities Room 1.51 $817 $817
RECREATIONAL
Golf Drivin Ran e Tee 4.03 $2,176 $2,176
Golf Course Acre 0.97 $520 $520
Recreational Communit Center 1,000 SF GFA 4.67 $2,852 $2,852
Ice Skatin Rink 1,000 SF GFA 7.60 $4,108 $4,108
Miniature Golf Course Hole 1.06 $574 $574
Multi lex Movie Theater Screens 43.92 $23,734 $23,734
Rac uet / Tennis Club Court 10.79 $5,829 $5,829
INSTITUTIONAL
Church 1,000 SF GFA 1.16 $752 $752
Da Care Center 1,000 SF GFA 14.66 $14,982 $14,982
Prima /Middle School 1-8 Students 0.34 $173 $173
Hi h School Students 0.27 $157 $157
Junior / Communit Colle e Students 0.25 $135 $135
Universit / Colle e Students 0.44 $238 $238
MEDICAL
Clinic 1,000 SF GFA 19.58 $10,581 $10,581
Hospital Beds 4.95 $2,658 $2,658
Nursin Home Beds 0.83 $449 $449
Animal Hos italNeterina Clinic 1,000 SF GFA 12.47 $7,357 $7,357
(Continued on next page)
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 21 of 22
Exhibit B
Colleyville, Texas, Land Development Code
Exhibit 13 - H
Schedule of Actual Roadway Impact Fees to be Collected - Continued
Development
Veh-Mi
Per Impact Fee Per
Development Unit
Land Use Description Ulllt Dev-
Unit Service Area
~
(51.8°/a of
MAX) Service Area
2
(50.0% of
MAX)
OFFICE
Cor orate Head uarters Buildin 1,000 SF GFA 5.60 $1,061 $1,061
General Office Buildin 1,000 SF GFA 5.96 $779 $779
Medical-Dental Office Buildin 1,000 SF GFA 13.84 $2,819 $2,819
Sin le Tenant Office Buildin 1,000 SF GFA 6.92 $1,311 $1,311
Office Park 1,000 SF GFA 5.92 $1,137 $1,137
COMMERCIAL
Automobile Related
Automobile Care Center 1,000 SF Occ. GLA 6.54 $3,529 $3,529
Automobile Parts Sales 1,000 SF GFA 10.98 $5,932 $5,932
Gasoline/Service Station Vehicle Fueling
Position
4.82
$2,609
$2,609
Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market Vehicle Fueling
Position
3.53
$1,911
$1,911
Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market and Car
Wash Vehicle Fueling
Position
3.68
$1,905
$1,905
New Car Sales 1,000 SF GFA 6.67 $3,675 $3,675
Quick Lubrication Vehicle Sho Servicin Positions 10.01 $5,418 $5,418
Self-ServiceCarWash Stall 1.99 $1,077 $1,077
Tire Store 1,000 SF GFA 9.63 $6,300 $6,300
Dinin
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 40.61 $7,858 $7,858
Fast Food Restaurant without Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 31.39 $5,931 $5,931
Hi h Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant 1,000 SF GFA 15.26 $2,825 $2,825
Qualit Restaurant 1,000 SF GFA 10.06 $1,904 $1,904
Coffee/Donut Sho with Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 30.91 $7,514 $7,514
Other Retail
Free-Standin Discount Store 1,000 SF GFA 11.27 $2,158 $2,158
Nurse Garden Center 1,000 SF GFA 8.57 $1,620 $1,620
Home Im rovement Su erstore 1,000 SF GFA 3.96 $1,044 $1,044
Pharmac /Dru store w/o Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 12.75 $3,099 $3,099
Pharmac /Dru store w/ Drive-Thru Window 1,000 SF GFA 17.00 $2,677 $2,677
Sho in Center 1,000 SF GLA 7.93 $1,508 $1,508
Su ermarket 1,000 SF GFA 21.64 $4,073 $4,073
To /Children's Su erstore 1,000 SF GFA 11.24 $2,127 $2,127
Department Store 1,000 SF GFA 4.03 $980 $980
Video Rental Store 1,000 SF GFA 21.90 $4,141 $4,141
SERVICES
Walk-In Bank 1,000 SF GFA 12.38 $6,386 $6,386
Drive-In Bank Drive-in Lanes 24.70 $6,004 $6,004
Hair Salon 1,000 SF GLA 1.73 $421 $421
Chapter 13 - Impact Fees Page 22 of 22