HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council-Agenda Packets-5/2/2000X13
!~~R~''~~a~,9
~~ ~-
~~
G~tY of
Texas
~ ~~"`
1~'~~w
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
5400 BRANSFORD ROAD
MAY 2, 2000
6:45 P.M. -CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. EXECUTIVE SESSION - In accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter
551, Subchapter D
Sec. 551.071- Legal -Gammon lawsuit
Sec. 551.071- Legal -Murray Construction lawsuit
Sec. 551.072- Property Acquisition -John McCain Road
Sec. 551.072- Property Acquisition - Colleyville Boulevard
Sec. 551.072- Property Acquisition -Hall-Johnson Road
Sec. 551-074- Personnel -The City ,Council may consider the appointment,
employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline or
dismissal of pbblic officers rr employees, including the City
Manager, City Secretary, City Attorney, and City board and
commission members. A complete list of the City boards
and commissions is on file in the City Secretary's Office.
7:30 P.M. -RESUME REGULAR MEETING
INVOCATION:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Ross Foster City Attorney
P.O. BOX 185 COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS 76034 (81 r') 577-7575
2. CORRESPONDENCE, MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS OF MEETINGS
ATTENDED BY THE COUNCIL AND CITY OFFICIALS, AND
ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS, OR PRESENTATIONS.
Presentation -Proclamation -Trinity Waste
Presentation - ProGamation -Police Memorial Day
CONSENT:
3. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING -Resolution R-00-1652 -Consent Items:
a. Approval of minutes of the regular City Council meeting of April 18, 2000
b. Approval of renewing the grounds maintenance contract to Landscape
Resources in the amount of $273,895.51
c. Approval of an amendment to the agreement. between Metroport Meals on
Wheels (MMOW) and the City of Colleyville in the amount of $3,000.00
d. Approval of a bid award for water meter reading in the amount of
$44,001.60 to Bermex, Inc.
e. Approval of a final plat of Lots 2R, 7, 8, and 9, Block 2, Heritage High
School Addition, requested by W. Douglas Jennings on 2.4779 acres
located on the south side of Gateway Drive in the 4100 Block
f. Approval of a design contract with Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc., for
Colleyville 2000 Water Line Improvements in the amount of $80,000.00
g. Approval of authorizing the settlement of the Robert J. and Susan D.
Gammon lawsuit for the amount of $18,500
h. Approval of the purchase of approximately .459 acres of right-of-way for
the realignment of John McCain Road from Hastings Cove, Ltd., for the
amount of $219,950, and authorizing the Mayor to sign the necessary
documents.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
4. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - 0-00-1216 -Amending Chapter
11 -Parkland Dedication of the Land Development Code
5. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1643 - Approving a Technical
Service Contract in the amount of $30,670 with WHECO Controls of Fort Worth
for the installation of a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)
system for the remote monitoring and control of water tank levels .
6. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1644 -Approving the use of
Voluntary Park Fund monies in an amount not to exceed $48,000 for construction
of the Cottonbelt Trail
7. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1645 -Approval of a Professional
Services Contract with Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc., for the Colleyville
Boulevard (S. H. 26) Roadway Improvements -Phase I, in the amount of
$1,397,150.00
8. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1646 -Approval of a waiver of water
well depth requirements requested by Max Cannon for 7600 Windswept Trail
9. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1647 -Amending the days Counal
meetings are held in August and November
10. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1648 -Approving an appeal request
of R. D. Blackard to set a date for a public hearing on a rezoning request denied
by the Planning and Zoning Commission
11. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1649 - Authorizing the
reimbursement of construction costs to Centurion American Custom Homes, Inc.,
for work pertormed on the Gtade Road drainage structure
12. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1650 -Declaring expectation to
reimburse engineering expenditures for Colleyville Boulevard (State Highway 26)
improvements with proceeds of future debt
13. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1651 -Denying the application of
TXU Electric to Gose, modify, or delete certain tariffs
TABLED ITEMS:
14. CONSIDERATION OF CHAPTERS 9, 14 AND 15 OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE
REPORTS:
15. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES -APRIL 24, 2000
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES - SPECIAL
MEETING OF APRIL 19, 2000
CITIZEN COMMENTS:
16. CITIZEN COMMENTSIPRESENTATIONS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA
ACTION/RESOLUTION:
17. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION RATIFYING
COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FOR THE MEETING OF MAY 2, 2000 -Reading
and Public Hearing -Resolution R-00-1642
ADJOURNMENT:
18. ADJOURNMENT
I certify the above agenda was posted on the bulletin board at City Hall on April 28,
2000, at 4:30 p. m.
Je Harris, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
If you plan to attend this public meeting and have a disability that requires special
accommodations, please advise the City Secretary at least 48 hours in advance at 577-
7575, and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you.
CITY COUNCIL
City n!
~«:,:
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
1
Ordinance #
N/A
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Executive Session - In accordance with Texas
Government Code Chapter 551, Subchapter D
Sec. 551.071 - Legal -Gammon lawsuit
Sec. 551.071 - Legal -Murray Construction lawsuit
Sec. 551.072 - Property Acquisition -John McCain Road
Sec. 551.072 - Property Acquisition - Colleyville Boulevard
Sec. 551.072 - Property Acquisition -Hall-Johnson Road
Sec. 551.074 - Personnel -The City Council may consider the appointment,
employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline or
dismissal of public officers or employees, including the City
Manager, City Secretary, City Attorney, and City board and
commission members. A complete list of the City boards and
commissions is on file in the City Secretary's Office.
CITY NAGER
DEP TMENT H D
F=INANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY
CITY COUNCIL
Ci~•~ nl
~ l~i
YYY J TfSd3
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
2
Ordinance #
N/A
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT
CORRESPONDENCE, MISCELLANEOUS
REPORTS OF MEETINGS ATTENDED BY THE
COUNCIL AND CITY OFFICIALS AND
ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS, OR
PRESENTATIONS
PRESENTATION -PROCLAMATION -TRINITY WASTE
The citizens of Colleyville take great pride in the appearance of our City and Colleyville
Proud sponsors a Trash Off event each year in conjunction with Arbor Day. The
purpose of the Arbor DaylTrash Off event is to bring the community together to
recognize the importance of our environment and to provide assistance in cleaning the
public areas. Trinity Waste has consistently assisted in sponsoring this event by
providing food and beverages and providing trucks and staff to collect and dispose of
the trash.
PRESENTATION -PROCLAMATION -POLICE WEEK/POLICE MEMORIAL DAY
The Congress of the United States of America has designated the week of May 14 to be
dedicated as °National Police WeekA, and May 15~' of each year to be Police Memorial
Day".
(continued)
Agenda Briefing
Presentations
Page 2 of 2
May 15"' is National Police Officer Memorial Day and the City of Colleyville will honor
those Police Officers who sacrificed their lives in the line of duty and flags will be flown
at half staff on all City installations that day.
CI MANAGER
D ARTMEN HEAD
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY
F"
ocr~n~~tior~
CITY OF
Colleyville,
Texas
WHEREAS: the dozens of Colleyville take great pride in
the appearance of our City; and
WHEREAS, Colleyville Proud sponsors a Trash Off event each year in conjundaon
with Arbor Day; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Arbor Day/Trash Off event is to bring the
community together to recognize the importance of our environment
and to provide assistance in deaning the public areas; and
WHEREAS, Trinity Waste Services has consistently assisted in sponsoring this
event by providing food and_ beverages; and
WHEREAS, Trinity Waste Services-also provides~trudcs and staff to collect and
~-dispose of the trash:------- : ~ _ `=- -
NOW,THEREFORE, I, DONNA ARP. MAYOR OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE,
TEXAS, on behalf of the CoNeyville City Couna7 and the residents of
t our do hereb
~ Clty, y express our appredation to the management and
staff of Trinity Waste Services.
-_
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, 1 do~ hereby se't my hand. and seal of the City of
Colleyville affixed this 2nd day of May 2000.
~.. .-
i -~~
;: y ~,
..: - -
-. ' ,r/ r-
Mayor, City of Colleyville
19
6
E
~..
ocY~n~~tiot~
CPfY OF
Colleyville,
Texas
WHEREAS: the Congress of the United States of America
has designated the week of May 14 to be dedicated as "NATIONAL
POLICE WEEK", and May 15th of each year to be "POLICE MEMORIAL
DAY"; and
WHEREAS, the members of the Colleyville Police Department serve to safeguard the
lives and property of the citizens of Colleyville with valor and dedication; and
WHEREAS, May 15th is National Police Officer Memorial Day, the City of Colleyville will
honor those Police Officers who sacrificed their lives in the line of duty and
flags will be flown at half staff on all City installations on that day.
NOW THEREFORE, !, DONNA ARP, MAYOR OF THE CfTY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS,
on behalf of the City Council, do hereby proclaim the week of May 14
Zhnwgh 20, 2000 as:_ _ ~_ __ _ _ _
- .- POLICE WEEK
`•~ and May 15, 2000 as:'° -
POLICE MEMORIAL DAY _:
in Colleyville and call upon atl our cttizens to especially honor and show our
sincere appreciation for the police officers of this City, by deed, remark and
attitude.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I do hereby set my hand and seal of the City of Colleyville to be
affixed this 2nd day of May, 2000.
9
Mayor, City of Colleyville
-~ ~ .._ .. ~r~
RESOLUTION R-00-1652
A RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNCIL ACTION
UNDER CONSENT ITEMS AT THE REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 2, 2000
WHEREAS, Council has taken action on certain items on the agenda under Consent
Items.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1: THAT the agenda decisions approved by Council action under Consent Items
as follows are hereby adopted:
a. THAT the minutes of the regular City Council meeting of April 18, 2000, are
hereby approved.
b. THAT the renewal of the grounds maintenance contract to Landscape
Resources in the amount of $273,895.51, is hereby approved.
c. THAT the amendment to the agreement between Metroport Meals on Wheels
(MMOW) and the City of Colleyville in the amount of $3,000.00, is hereby
approved.
d. THAT the bid award for water meter reading in the amount of $44,001.60 to
Bennex, Inc., is hereby approved.
e. THAT the final plat of Lots 2R, 7, 8, and 9, Block 2, Heritage High School
Addition, requested by W. Douglas Jennings on 2.4779 acxes located on the
south side of Gateway Drive in the 4100 Block, is hereby approved.
f. THAT the design contract with Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc., for
Colleyville 2000 Water Line Improvements in the amount of $80,000.00, is
hereby approved.
Resolution R-00-1641
Page 2 of 2
g. THAT the authorization to settle the Robert J. and Susan D. Gammon lawsuit
for the amount of $18,500, is hereby approved
h. THAT the purchase of approximately .459 acres of right-of-way for the
realignment of John McCain Road from Hastings Cove, Ltd.,_ for the amount
of $219,950, and authorizing the Mayor to sign the necessary documents,
is hereby approved.
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
Passed by a vote of ayes, nays, and abstentions on the day
of , 2000.
ATTEST:
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC Donna Arp
City Secretary Mayor
AGENDA ITEM NO.
REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
COLLEYVILLE CITY COUNCIL
CONSENT:
READING AND PUBLIC HEARING -Resolution R-00-1652 -Consent Items:
a. Approval of minutes of the regular City Council meeting of April 1$, 2000
b. Approval of renewing the grounds maintenance contract to Landscape
Resources in the amount of $273,895.51
c. Approval of an amendment to the agreement between Metroport Meals on
Wheels (MMOW) and the City of Colleyville in the amount of $3,000.00
d. Approval of a bid award for water meter reading in the amount of
$44,001.60 to Bermex, Inc.
~~AT~/1~~ AAA Ate.
mV 1 IV1~ ~7ClrV1VU
i1>l.LR.I
HYt NAY At35 I AIN A65ENT
COUNCILMAN CARROLL
MAYOR PRO TEM THIBODEAUX
COUNCILMAN TIGUE
MAYOR ARP
e. Approval of a final plat of Lots 2R, 7, 8, and 9, Block 2, Heritage High
School Addition, requested by W. Douglas Jennings on 2.4779 acres
located on the south side of Gateway Drive in the 4100 Block
f. Approval of a design contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., for
Colleyville 2000 Water Line Improvements in the amount of $80,000.00
g. Approval of authorizing the settlement of the Robert J. and Susan D.
Gammon lawsuit for the amount of $18,500
h. Approval of the purchase of approximately .459 acres of right-of-way for
the realignment of John McCain Road from Hastings Cove, Ltd., for the
amount of $219,950, and authorizing the Mayor to sign the necessary
documents.
MINUTES OF THE
COLLEYVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 18, 2000
Interviews of Library Advisory Committee Applicants were held at 5:00 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Colleyville City Council was called to order by Mayor Donna
Arp on April 18, 2000, at 6:53 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Councilpersons Jody Short, Mike Taylor, Frank Carroll, Ginny
Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux were present. Mayor
Donna Arp, City Manager Bob Stripling, Assistant City Manager
Dianne McWethy, Financial Analyst Ken Kolsti, Director of Public
Services Bob Whitehead, Project Manager Keith Fisher, Engineer
Choyce Morrow, Development Coordinator Clayton Husband,
Public Works Manager Randy Brown, Fire Chief Mike Johnston,
City Attomey Ross Foster, and City Secretary Jean Harris were
also present.
1. EXECUTIVE SESSION - In acxordance with Texas Government Code Chapter
551, Subchapter D
Sec. 551.071- Legal -Gammon lawsuit
Sec. 551.071- Legal -Murray Construction lawsuit
Sec. 551.072- Property Acquisition -John McCain Road
Sec. 551.072- Property Acquisition - Colleyville Boulevard
Sec. 551.072- Property Acquisition -Hall-Johnson Road
Sec. 551.074 Personnel -The City Councl may consider the appointment,
employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline or
dismissal of public officers or employees, including the City
Manager, City Secretary, City Attomey, and City board and
commission members. A complete list of the City boards
and commissions is on file in the City Secxetary's Office.
Mayor Arp explained that the Executive Session had been called in accordance with
Texas Government Code 551, Subchapter D, Section 551.071 -Legal, Section 551.072
- Property Acquisition, and Section 551.074 -Personnel. She further explained that
there would be no decisions made or action taken during this time. The meeting was
recessed at 6:55 p.m., and reconvened at 7:33 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
APRIL 18, 2000
The invocation was given by Reverend Carter Foster, Metroplex Covenant Church, after
which Ross Foster led the Pledge of Allegiance.
2. CORRESPONDENCE, MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS OF MEETINGS
ATTENDED BY THE COUNCIL AND CITY OFFICIALS, AND
ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS, OR PRESENTATIONS.
Mayor Arp announced that Mr. George Dawson, age 102, had visited Glen Hope
Elementary, promoting children's literacy. Mr. Dawson teamed to read at the age of 98.
Mayor Arp presented a Prodamation to Pastors Carter Foster, David Rose, Sister
Eggering, Roal Farris, and Lee Johnson for National Day of Prayer. Reverend Foster
invited all Colleyville dtizens to partidpate in the National Day of Prayer on May 4, at
7:00 p.m., at the Colleyville Community Center.
Mayor Arp thanked former Mayor Richard Newton for his work and efforts on this
project.
CONSENT:
3. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING -Resolution R-00-1635 -Consent Items:
a. Approval of minutes of the regular City Council meeting of April 4, 2000
b. Approval of minutes of the City Council worksession held March 16, 2000
c. Approval of minutes of the City Council worksession held March 20, 2000
d. Approval of a professional services contract with Management Plus, Inc.,
for Computer Networking, Phase II, of the City Hall Complex in an amount
not to exceed $21,500
Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read Resolution R-00-1635 in its entirety.
There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed
the public hearing.
Councilman Tigue moved to approve Resolution R-00-1635.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux seconded the motion.
2
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
APRIL 18, 2000
Ayes: Counciipersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
4. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - 0-00-1214 -Amending the
Subdivision Ordinance, Impact Fee Ordinance, Tree Preservation Ordinance,
and Zoning Ordinance by adopting a Land Development Code
Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Orrlinanoe 0-00-1214.
Mr. David Bagwell, 8222 Douglas Avenue, #770, Dallas, spoke regarding the affect of
the proposed ordinance, technical issues, and wasting monies on some of the
proposed standards.
Ms. Dee Barker, 2200 Oak Knoll Drive, spoke regarding prior ordinances that
prohibited certain uses that this ordinance will allow.
Mr. Larry Cole, 6420 Remington Parkway, spoke negarding the consolidation of
ordinances, the sign ordinance, and Chapter 14 of the proposed Land Development
Code.
Mr. Richard Meyers, 300 Lloyd Circle, spoke in favor of consolidating the ordinances.
He also spoke regarding developer and citizen input and requested the counal table
the ordinance for at least two weeks.
There were no others wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the
public hearing.
Discussion ensued regarding the enactment of a portion of the proposed Land
Development Code, and tabling Chapters 14 and 15 allowing the developers time to
meet with City staff and express their concerns regarding these chapters.
Councilman Carroll moved to approve Ordinance 0-00-1214, tabling Chapters 14 and
15 and requiring special use permits for mobile homes and non-commercial swine
farming in all zoning districts.
Councilman Tigue seconded the motion with a request to include motorcycleret ski
repair shops and pawnshops in the category requiring special use permits.
3
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 18, 2000
Discussion ensued regarding the requests of the developers, swine farming, and
temporary signs.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux requested tabling Chapter 9 also.
Councilman Carroll accepted Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux's request.
Councilman Tigue accepted Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux's request.
Councilman Carroll moved to amend the motion to include pawnshops and banks in
ML zoning districts and pawnshops to be prohibited in all other zoning districts.
Councilman Carroll moved to suspend the rules to allow the citizens to speak.
Councilman Taylor seconded the motion.
Ayes: Counalpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
Ms. Linda Baker, 404 W. McDonwell School Road, advised that there are 4H projects
which inGudes some swine farming.
City Manager Bob Stripling, raised the issue of impact fees for churches, Chapter 13 of
the Land Development Code and advised the Council of some alternatives.
Discussion ensued regarding the waiving of fees, other cities that charge this fee,
invalidation of the entire fee schedule if there are no technical basis for the impact fee
on churches, and ways of calculating the impact fees.
Councilman Tigue requested amending the ordinance, changing to alternate #2 for
churches to 2596 of the maximum fee.
Councilman Taylor recommended an amendment to the ordinance that churches be
calculated as office space on Table 13D.
Councilman Carroll accepted the recommendation of Councilman Taylor.
Councilman Tigue did not accept the recommendation.
4
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
APRIL 18, 2000
Councilman Carroll called the question on the original motion.
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
5. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - 0-00-1215 - A zoning change
requested by W. Douglas Jennings, from CC2 to CPO (commercial professional
ofi:tce) on 2.4779 acres located on the south side of Gateway Drive in the 4100
block, Heritage High School Addition
Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1215.
There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed
the public hearing.
Discussion ensued regarding the use of this property.
Councilman Tigue moved to approve Ordinance 0-00-1215.
Councilman Carroll seconded the motion.
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
6. FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - 0-00-1216 -Amending Chapter 11
- Parkland Dedication of the Land Development Code
Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and n3ad the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1216.
Mr. Jim Moore, 1416 Glade Road, spoke regarding the inGusion of the private parks in
the total number of park acxeage.
Mr. Larry Cole, 6421 Remington Parkway, spoke regarding the Parkland Dedication
fees being excessive, and requested there be no increase at all.
5
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 18, 2000
Mr. David Bagwell, 8222 Douglas Avenue, #770, Dallas, spoke regarding a
comprehensive look at these increases.
There were no others wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the
public hearing.
Discussion ensued regarding the question of including private park land in the total
number of park acreage, justification for the proposed increase, ownership of private
parks, open space, and density.
7. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1637 -Approving the use of
Parkland Dedication Funds, in an amount not to exceed $35,000, to purchase
trail right-of~vay for the Cottonbelt Trail
Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read Resolution R-00-1637 in its entirety.
There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed
the public hearing.
Councilman Taylor moved to approve Resolution R-00-1637.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux seconded the motion.
Ayes: Councitpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeuax
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
8. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1638 -Approving McPherson Park
Master Plan
Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read Resolution R-00-1638 in its errtirety.
Ms. Jill VanOver, 2303 Ballantrae Drive, spoke regarding the cost of development,
annual operating costs, alternative funding, corporate sponsorship, and the Park being
a want of the City and not a need.
Mr. Ed Havran, 303 Oakcrest Hill Drive, spoke regarding the preservation of the
Colleyville heritage and the proposed natural landscaping.
~.~
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
APRIL 18, 2000
Ms. Linda Baker, 404 W. McDonwelt School Road, spoke regarding the commitment to
agriculture and the Park being along-term attraction to the City.
There were no others wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the
public hearing.
Discussion ensued regarding the work of the Committee, the park being a senior citizen
attraction, the Master Plan as a vision, providing picnic areas, walkways, generating
revenue, and phasing the project.
Councilman Carroll moved to approve Resolution R-00-1638.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux seconded the motion.
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
9. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1639 -Appointing members to the
Celebrate Colleyville Steering Committee
Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read Resolution R-00-1639 in its entirety.
There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed
the public hearing.
Councilman Taylor moved to approve Resolution R-00-1639.
Councilman Short seconded the motion.
Ayes: Counalpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp dedared the motion carried.
10. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1640 -Appointing members to the
Historical Preservation Committee and expanding membership
Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read Resolution R-00-1640 in its entirety.
7
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
APRIL 18, 2000
There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed
the public hearing.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux moved to approve Resolution R-00-1640.
Councilman Tigue seconded the motion.
Ayes: Coundlpersons Short, Taylor, Can'oll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
11. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - R-00-1641 -Opposing H.R. 2372, the
Private Property Rights Implementation Act of 2000
Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read Resolution R-00-1641 in its entirety.
There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed
the public hearing.
Discussion ensued regarding sponsorship of the bill, attempts to federalize local zoning,
and imposing threats and burdens on small cities.
Councilman Tigue moved to approve Resolution R-00-1641.
Councilman Carroll seconded the motion.
Ayes: Councitpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp dedared the motion carried.
TABLED ITEMS:
12. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 0-00-1210 - A zoning change requested
by David Whisenant, from R20 to PUD-C on 23.709 acres located on the north
side of Glade Road, east of Oak Timbers Court - Rivennralk at Colleyville
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux moved to remove this item from the table.
Councilman Tigue seconded the motion.
8
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
APRIL 18, 2000
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
Mr. Mark Howe, 3100 Carisbrook Court, representing the applicant, gave a brief review
of the history of this project, and spoke regarding his work with the neighbors to the
west, increased open space, increased drainage capacity, lot sizes, trail width, and
credit for park fees.
Discussion ensued regarding the home sizes, width of the proposed trail, and ordinance
requirements.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux moved to approve Ordinance 0-00-1210, amending the
sizes of the proposed homes.
Councilman Tigue seconded the motion.
Discussion ensued regarding garages and sidewalks, and preservation of commercial
property.
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: Councilpersons Taylor and Carroll
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
13. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 0-00-1211 - A zoning change requested
by Lanny Wilkinson, from ML, AG, and CC1 to PUD-C on 8.789 acxes located on
the west side of Colleyville Boulevard in the 6400-6500 block -Winding Creek
Addition
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux moved to remove this item from the table.
Councilman Short seconded the motion.
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp deGared the motion carried.
9
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
APRIL 18, 2000
Mr. Lanny Wilkinson, 1705 Altacrest Drive, applicant, spoke regarding the setbacks and
the screening fence.
Discussion ensued regarding overnight-parking, left turn lane, and the definition of
retail/restaurant.
Councilman Carroll moved to deny Ordinance 0-00-1211.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Councilman Short moved to approve Ordinance 0-00-1211, with the requirement that
the continuous left turn lane is complete at the time building permits are issued (cc's
contingent upon completion of the turn lane), no more than three vehicles are parked
overnight on the site, the site plan for Lot 4 is brought back for approval by council, and
the screening requirements comply as set forth in the letter dated 4/18100.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux seconded the motion.
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: Councilman Carroll
Mayor Arp deGared the motion carried.
14. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION R-00-1618 -Appointing members to the
Library Advisory Committee
Councilman Carroll moved to remove this item from the table.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux seconded the motion.
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
Councilman Short nominated John Stanford for position #1 on the Library Advisory
Committee.
There were no other nominations made.
10
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 18, 2000
Councilman Taylor nominated Jim Moore for position #2 on the Library Advisory
Committee.
There were no other nominations made.
Councilman Carroll nominated Karen Birkes for position #3 on the Library Advisory
Committee.
There were no other nominations made.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux nominated Richard Roxburgh for position #4 on the Library
Advisory Committee.
There were no other nominations made.
Councilman Tigue nominated Joy Donavan for position #5 on the Library Advisory
Committee.
Councilman Taylor nominated Steve McGee for position #5 on the Library Advisory
Committee.
McGee - Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Donavan -Councilman Tigue
Mayor Arp decaared Steve McGee appointed to position #5 on the Library Advisory
Committee.
Councilman Short nominated Nancy Eytcheson to position #6 of the Library Advisory
Committee.
Councilman Taylor nominated Linda Vincent to position #6 of the Library Advisory
Committee.
Vincent - Counalpersons Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Eytcheson - Councilperson Short
Mayor Arp declared Linda Vincent appointed to position #6 on the Library Advisory
Committee.
11
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 18, 2000
Councilman Taylor nominated Jane Nelson to position #7 of the Library Advisory
Committee.
There were no other nominations made.
Councilman Carroll nominated Ed Havran to position #8 of the Library Advisory
Committee.
There were no other nominations made.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux nominated Chris Faulkner to position #9 of the Library
Advisory Committee.
Councilman Tigue nominated Mary Ann Nicholson to position #9 of the Library Advisory
Committee.
Faulkner - Councllpersons Taylor, Carroll, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nicholson -Councilman Tigue, Short
Mayor Arp declared Chris Faulker appointed to position #9 on the Library Advisory
Committee.
Councilman Carroll moved to approve Resolution R-00-1619, appointing Karen Birkes,
Steve McGee, Jim Moore, Jane Nelson, and John Stanford to serve a two year term,
appointing Chris Faulkner, Ed Havran, Richard Roxburgh, and Linda Vncent to serve a
one year term and adding Section 6, appointing Steve McGee as Chair of the
Committee, and Ed Havran as vce Chair.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux seconded the motion.
Councilman Tigue moved to suspend the rules to allow the citizens to speak.
Councilman Carroll seconded the motion.
Ayes: Counalpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the motion carried.
Ms. Dana Feldman, 2204 Danbury, thanked the Council for making the appointments to
the Library Advisory Committee and thanked and commended the volunteers.
12
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 18, 2000
There were no others wishing to speak.
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux.
Nays: Counalman Tigue
Mayor Arp deGared the motion carried.
STAFF REPORTS:
15. MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
There was no action taken on this item.
16. REPORTS:
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES -APRIL 3, 2000
PARK LAND DEDICATION COMMITTEE MINUTES -MARCH 27, 2000
TRAFFIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE -APRIL 10, 2000
TREE BOARD MINUTES -APRIL 3, 2000
There was no action taken on this item.
CITIZEN COMMENTS:
17. CITIZEN COMMENTSIPRESENTATIONS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA
There was no one present wishing to speak.
ACTION/RESOLUTION:
18. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION RATIFYING
COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FOR THE MEETING OF APRIL 18, 2000 -
Reading and Public Hearing -Resolution R-00-1636
This Resolution was not needed.
13
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
ADJOURNMENT:
19. ADJOURNMENT
APRIL 18, 2000
There being no further business before the City Council, Councilman Carroll moved to
adjourn.
Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux seconded the motion.
Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Carroll, Tigue, and Mayor Pro Tem Thibodeaux
Nays: None
Mayor Arp declared the meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 2000, BY A VOTE OF
AYES, NAYS, AND ABSTENTIONS.
Minutes taken and prepared by:
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
14
CITY COUNCIL
stn of
~~ ~~l~i
7c<,;
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
3b
Resolution #
R-00-1652
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
PARKS AND RECREATION
SUBJECT:
Approval of renewing the grounds maintenance
contract to Landscape Resources in the amount of
$273,895.51- by Consent
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
On June 1, 1999, City Council approved award of a contract in the amount of
$239,053.82 to Landscape Resources, Inc. for the grounds maintenance contract. The
contract expires May 31, 2000 with an option to renew for five (5) additional one (1) year
periods at a five percent (5%) increase per year.
The contract includes chemical applications, landscaping and horticultural maintenance
and mowing. Landscape Resources, Inc. has pertormed well in all areas of service.
Within the last year, the City has added properties to be maintained by Landscape
Resources, tnc. including Fire Station #3, Westmont Trail, McPherson Park and
Cottonbelt Trail. A net change order in the amount of $22,889 is necessary to include
these areas in the contract. As a result of drought conditions, staff estimates cost
savings from the 1999-2000 contract will cover the additional cost.
CITY MANAG/ER /
G~
DEP RTMENT HEAD
FIN L REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
(continued)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1652
Page 2
Financial Impact
Funds are available in FY00 Park Maintenance Miscellaneous Contractual Services
account 001-32-6226 to provide services for the months of June through September
2000 in the estimated amount of $123,677.00. The estimated remaining balance of
$150,218.51 will be paid from FY01 Miscellaneous Contractual Services account 001-
32-6226 to provide services during the months of October 2000 through May 2001.
Recommendation
Approval of Resolution R-00-1652 renewing the grounds maintenance contract,
inclusive of the change order request to Landscape Resources, Inc. in the amount of
$273,895.51.
CITY COUNCIL
Cur or
~'~
~/
~~.<,>
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
3c
Resolution #
R-00-1652
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
SUBJECT
Approval of an amendment to the agreement
between Metroport Meals on Wheels (MMOW)
and the City of Colleyville in the amount of $3,000
- by Consent
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
For the FY99-00 budget, the City Council approved funding in the amount of $4,289, for
the Metroport Meals on Wheels (MMOW) program. MMOW provides for the delivery of
hot meals and a monthly luncheon and activity program for the seniors. The average
monthly attendance for the MMOW luncheon is 67, which exceeds the original projected
attendance of ten seniors.
As a follow-up to the April luncheon, the City received a request to consider expanding
the monthly luncheon program held at the Community Center. Staff met with MMOW
representatives to discuss this proposal.
(continued)
w
CITY MANAGER
PARTMENT HEAD
FI AL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1652
Page 2
As per the attached, MMOW has submitted a proposal that would expand the luncheon
program to the first and third Friday of each month.
Financial Impact
The expansion of the MMOW senior program would require additional funding in the
amount of $3,000. Monies are available in the City Secretary Budget, line item 001-14-
6298, City Council Discretionary.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council approve additional funding in the amount of $3,000
for the MMOW program.
Attachments
• Metroport Meals on Wheels Proposal (paper copy only)
• MMOW Monthly Senior Luncheon Attendance (paper copy only)
METROPORT MEALS ON WHEELS, INC.
,;~~~,~,R; "Celebrating 20 Years of Caring"
' ~1F al.i C~ l1TffF1.~
Apri120, 2000 t>:,•rr»t u>r~ l~t•,;,~,~ :>,~t,r,,,
Honnran~ Cl,utr/x•rsuns
Advtson' Board AanualGol/'Tirunw„re,rr
Tom Allen
Magwre Partners
Brad Bradley. Esy.
Bradlee. Lute X Bradley
hm Car[cr. Denwn
Dear Colleyville City Council Members,
County Commissioner
Larry Cale
;;`~ '
n°' E y mpa°` We respectfully request an additional $3
000
00 to help Metro
ort Meals
~
h ,
.
p
Gihhs a French On Wheels, Inc. complete and increase our mission at the Senior Center
Aelley Herring
StarvTelegram Program in Co1leyVllle for the remainder of this fiscal year
1999-2000
Galen McCune ,
.
M1orthwest Bank
lane Irelsnn
State Senator
Our budget for the new congregate luncheon and activity day for the
Boh Pelletier
Menedes Benr
seniors was based on ten people attending. As you know, this was a very
.Margaret otter conservative estimate and we are avera
in
67
eo
le
er month
L
t
IBM Gtr oration g
g
p
p
p
.
as
s
lim Smith
S
M
i
l year we asked for $2 278.00 for this exciting new program and you
~ +
arr
ott
o
ana
Vicki Truitt. State ~
graciously
rovided that amount
Representative p
.
Board of Directors
Officers As you will see from the attached statistics expenses by the end of this
~
I;e", Bradley
P
id year are projected to be $5,394.54, and if we add another day for the
res
ent
kichard Tucker
months June -September (at a total cost of $1,800.00 for four months),
loth Saitder~resident expenses would be $7,194.54. Of course, we do have income of
Srcr~iantltshireresident $3,601.00 to offset that, and if we add the extra day for the last four
~_ .~ ~d<ia. Jr months of this fiscal ear that income is
y projected to increase to
Treasurer $4,081.00 (participants paying).
Division Coordinarors
Cathc Hrawtreuer
Beck~c Spain
For the first six months of this fiscal year, MMOW has subsidized this
D•~crn Terzemn •
P b monthl luncheon b in $955.27 which is a roXlmatel $2 000.00
Y Y PaY g ~ PP Y
fenny :lntack ~
~eanne[te Leon per yeaz. Adding another day would cost $1,320.00 after collecting a
Ferri (.e°uskt•
Charlotte Duttun projected amount from participants who pay for their meals.
1t Laryle/Division Rem
)eh Baggett
MMOW celebrates our 20`~ Birthday this year
Because we are a
;catt Blattner
Perm Butler .
grassroots organization, independent of federal and state funding, we are
)ohnm Clark
lertalee Coleman always looking for opportunities to partner with cities to help the elderly
."i' Evan,
:Ihert F
ll in this azea. Alone it is very expensive for either one of uS to advocate
u
er
•~ac Groom
Lars Haas
for the seniors, but together, we are able to find many opportunities to
Uan Heath help
Please let uS know when we sh
ld
b
i
i
i
u[n Huffman
Sill Huffman .
ou
su
m
t our stat
st
cs and request
for fiscal year 2001.
George Kulh
Brenda Mathews
Barbara Mundll^
"dare Pa
i
k Sincerely
vn
c
iehra Perryman ,
'atti Smith
reggy Smuh
Rodney Smith Y
inn S~siravnski
Kelly Bradley, President
Board of Directors
Founding Committee. 1980
Aelh Bradley. Chatrperstm
Lunx Claa>n, deceased
Ozella Madewell. deceased
~ertatee Coleman
Shaun 1\ icker
Emile Ragsdale
Sue Hoke
(:arole Segal
Staff
!~anc} Earyt
E.crcuuve DinKUrr
[k•bbte Blake
Ikvrlapntent Uirecutr
Aasec Stansell
Fragrant Uirectar
Shirley Gaily}
Office Manal,'er
Brendr Budarf
Office Assistant
Senior Center Coordinators
Sandy Stickane, kiruitikr
Gmia Allen. Grothlake
Jeanne Robertsan, Justin
Sally EastwtKtd. Haslet
Ellen Cheshire, Colkvville
Resale Shoo
Teresa Anderson
Manager
Wanda Hollingsworth
Assistant Manager
Darlene Trrpening
Surpltu Swre
P. 0. Box 204 • 504 N. Oak, Suite.l • Roanoke, TX 76262 • (817) 491-1141 • FAX (817) 491-0661
Internet: www.metroportmow.org Email: mmow®metroportmow.org
MMOw Colleyville Congregate Meal and Activity Program (SR CENTER):
Based on figures since inception of congregate program, Oct'99:
(First actual event took place Nov. with set-up starting Oct)
Average total attendance = 67 people
*Average total expense per event = $450
**Average total that seniors pay per event = $120.
EXPENSES:
Actual Expenses for first 6 months:
Projected Expenses for last 6 months:
Add extra day each month, June-Sept.
*(Based on $450 cost per day
x 4 months = $1,800}
$ 2,697.27
2,697.27
$ 5,394.54
$ 1,800.00
Total Actual and Projected Expenses + extra day:
INCOME:
City paid for congregate: $ 2,278.00
**Seniors paid for first five months: 603.00
**Seniors projected to pay last 6 months: 720.00
(Based on $120/day average total srs pay)
x 6 months left in yr = $720
Add another day during June-Sept, 4 months
and Seniors would be projected to pay: $ 480.00
** (Based on $120/day average total srs pay)
x 4 = months = $480
Total Actual and Projected Income:
Money needed to take care of MMOW
***subsidized amount and to add another day:
$ 7,194.54
$4,081.00
$3,113.54
***When MMOW presented budget for fiscal year,
congregate meal was estimated for ten seniors,
and of course, we are averaging 67 per event.
O
O
y O
~ N
d
t
0 C
Q7 ~ ~ ~
d ~ _ ~
~_ ~ ~
~ ~ J r
V ~ ~ ~
wa-a-
Oo.L,c
w d O r+
c~~~0
~ ~ ~ N ~ O
N aD N N ~
_ ~ I'O N ~
0
F
a
,
i
m
e
A
d
fi
v
g
a
d
y
g
<
Q
Y
m
r
a
a
S
c
~
Q
Y
T
A
N t~ (D f0 CD OD
p 1~ ~ tf1 .-
0
Q
~ M ('7 N r 00 1~
~
~ O
~ C
~ to
r ~ N
(7
c
N
~ ~
8 1~ u~ ~n r
A
~ In ~
~ ll~ l(1
m
LL
Q' fh M m f'7 ~
Y
C
A
~ N ~ ~
y n (
O r
~ r r
a
d
N
R ~
QI (~ lA C7 CO
O
I~ r
n ~
M ~
!~ ~ n
O
z
~ Z Z z Z Z Z
O
dl m
V CI ~ ~ O N
o 0 m
~ ~$
' E
Y y
~ ~
m ~ o o ~ £
o o ° ~
°
m ~a anU Um bc~ zc~ v
i>
CITY COUNCIL
Rio.' of
7eaas
AGENDA BRIEFING
Form .: OS/OZ100 CMO Approval:
Item #
3d
Resolution #
R-00-9652
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
PUBLIC SERVICES
SUBJECT
Approving bid award for Water Meter Reading, in
the amount of $44,001.60 with Bermex, Inc. - by
Consent.
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
The City of Colleyville has been utilizing a private service contract for the monthly
reading of the current quantity of approximately 7,120 water meters since 1995.
At 2:00 P. M. on April 4, 2000, Public Works opened bids for the 1999/2000 Meter
Reading Services Contract. Only one bid was received and that bid was from Bermex
Contract Services of Southfield, Michigan in the amount of $0.515 per meter for an
estimated annual cost of $44,001.60.
(continued)
R
REVIEW (!F NECESSARI~
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1652
Page 2
Bermex has retained this contract since the first meter reading contract in 1995. The
1995 contract was in the amount of $0.45 per meter and last years contract was $0.50
per meter. Bemiex is the only known company performing this service in this area and
their performance has been at an acceptable level.
Financial Impact
Funds are available in the Utility Operations budget line item 6226, "Contractual
SeNICeS.°
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract
with Bermex Contract Services of Southfield, Michigan for water meter services at
$0.515 per meter for an estimated annual amount of $44,001.60.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Request for Bid
2. Proposal Form
3. Contract
27 March, 2000
. REQUEST FOR B!D
Sealed bid proposal responses will be received at the City of Colleyville Service Center
1601 Hall-Johnson Road, P.O. Box 185, Colleyville, Tx 76034. Bid responses received
after the opening time and date will be returned to the sender, unopened. All responses
will be publicly opened and read aloud at the opening time and date.
The envelope should be marked:
BID ~ 2000-UTILITY-03
METER READING SERVICES
OPENS 2:00 P.M. DATE: April 4, 2000
COLLEYVILLE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING
1601 HALL~IOHNSON ROAD
In subr;~i;;ing the attached bid, including terms, conditions, instructions to bidders arc
5~~~~~iiCa;iO^j. .. ~ V~ndOr agrees filet aCCeptanC~ G` anV Cr ail bid It~t715 ~~:^:::, c
ca5v''~~I~ p~r_ ~ ,_,i iirTl° COnstl;:..~S c CCr':raCt.
BID NU".1B=R ................................ 2000-UTILITY-03
BID TITL= ............................... METER READING SERVICES
OPENING Tlhl~:'DATE...........2:00 P.M./April 4, 2000
T~RP.1S 0= P„Y!VI~NT Net 30 Davs
(i -!S ! IN.'v'VlLL SE COI~1P~ ET.D 31'' THE BIDD=P)
BIDDER'S "~^~".lc Ber^~ex, inc.
BIDDER'S ,=,DDRESS 29500 Sou~hfield Rd. , Suite 1 00
Southfield. M 48076
61DDER'S -ELEPHONE NUMBER 248-557-7 234
BIDDER'S FAX NUMBER 2=~-=~~-1759
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE ~~~ , ~ ~
PRINTED SIGNATURE George D. Funds
A(I bid responses are required to be signed by an authorized representative of the bidding
entity. Bid responses received unsigned will not be considered.
Pdc7e ?VO. - D1C ~,_ _?r 2000-UTILITY-03 B1aCer$ :'_72`.-__ -_~~.
PART 3.
PROPOSAL FORM
In accordance with all terms, conditions, specifications and requirements, the bidder
offers the following costs for reading water meter in and fer ~^n City of Colleyville~
Estimated Unit Monthly Estimated
Item Monthly Price/Mo. cost X r monthsAnnual
No. Quantity X cost each
1. 7,120 X S .5t 5= S FF~ ~ 12 = ~~ .60
ii reC.,Uired, will y'~l: eXtend u`ie Smile prlCe, terTS and ~Ondltl0nS '.O G:. per Cam: ~; ii~;'~_';~,
agencies located ~rvi;'lirt Tarrant County during the Neriod covered by this ccrtrac:.
Yes~No_
..
=_~° No. 19 c Number 2000-UTILITY-03 ~ r _ ~,~
B_CCE_S ?'1_t_Z~ S
CONTRACT
STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF TARRANT §
CrTY OF COLLEYVILLE §
KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
THIS CONTRACT is made and entered into as of the day of , 2000_, [Date
of City Council Meeting] by and between the City of Colleyville, a municipal corporation of
Tarrant County, Texas (hereinafter referred to as "City", which term shall be construec' to
include any oricer, representative, commission or board o` the City having authon-;i t~
represert or act for it, in relaUOn tc any rar, of the su~iect of t..is Contract), and
[Name of Contractor.
Successful 6idderj, with ofi~ces located at [Addressl
hereinafter referred to as "Contractor".
RCITALS
`i''~ -_, .~.,5, tie City GieSir?S t0 J•lZ'/°_ ~Nater meter r
S eaC, a1d
~,~ ~~i ~~~..~. .~~ C~ri:-C I..Vr C~rC.:J ~'~ rCCI. ~~i G:ter i, iE:~r.7 filof'.~ IIV .~ - ~. -_
•Vr Iv . / , C ~~.
i'~'.Jt~'Y, THERErORE, in consideration of the promises, and the mutual cove^ants a:nc
acreements hereina`er set fork, the City and Contractor hereby acree as follow:
c°-c''on ~ ~ Scone of Ser;ice5
c. I he COr'traCtO~ 5"tc!I Reef :x;St)nC wa:3~ mEte~ --
• s r"~ont i;y as detailed
t.C~^:~.c~ SC°Cl`.~c:'CflS =C^,J1 Gc .5 CGri:'c~,r c• `~ ~ ~`• ~~ _--
_ ^c~~ c.
inccr~cra;zo rere!n dy re*'e~er'Ce a5 If SE: forh at length in `;,'•II. _
v. The Cont; act price is set fork and incorporated in Exhibit A attached hereto.
c. The Contractor hereby agrees to all the terms and conditions contained in paces
1 through 20 [last page of bid reeuest including addenda] of Exhib~: ~,
attached hereto.
IN WITNESS LVHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this contract t`is ~~~
of , 2000 [Date of City Council ti1eetingj.
CONTRACTOP,:
BY:
[Printed Name and Titiej
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
BY: BOB STRIPLING
CITY MANAGER
SIGNATURE
SIGNATURE
'zQ° No • ~'- Bic Number 2000-UTILITY-03 r ~ ~ ~~
. ~~T
Bidde_s n_t:_als
CITY COUNCIL
~~ry e~
\~J~
~«,;
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
3e
Resolution #
R-00-1652
Previous Acton: None
DEPT.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUBJECT
Approval of a final plat of Lots 2R, 7, 8 and 9,
Block 2, Heritage High School Addition, requested
by W. Douglas Jennings on 2.4779 acres located
on the south side of Gateway Drive in the 4100
block - by Consent
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
The developer is proposing to final plat all four lots to prepare them for office
construction around a newly created cul-de-sac street named Gateway Court. All four
lots were just rezoned from CC2 to CPO by the City Council on April 18th. The
preliminary plat for this block was approved in September of last year, and this final plat
closely follows that plat.
Many of the lots in this commercial subdivision to the west along Gateway Drive have
been rezoned and subsequently developed for small, one-story office buildings. The
required front yard setback for CPO zoning is 40 feet. However, because each of these
lots is odd-shaped and fronts on a cul-de-sac, the developer is requesting a (platted
line) variance from the normal 40 foot front setback to 25 feet for all lots fronting on the
cul-de-sac. The setbacks from Gateway Drive would remain at 40 feet.
(continued)
CITY MANAGER
.6. ,...
DE T NT HEAD
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1652
Page 2 of 2
The applicant has addressed all of the comments from Engineering and the
Development Review Committee (DRC). Except for the one waiver request as noted
above, the plat meets all of the technical zoning and platting requirements of the City.
The Planning & Zoning Commission approved this final plat at its April 24, 2000 meeting
by a unanimous vote, subject to a variance on the platted setback line.
Recommendation
Approval of the final plat.
Attachments
• Location Map
^ Plat
Attachment 1: Location Map
~T~G
I N~~
'
-
j ~ ~~~
~'dD' ~ suP j
a ~-~o28 ~
I
.« w..
~ J1 K 1~ K
f1
/
I1 C
w cart w «r ~
~ .M • ill X i
G•
3g4
I
',
•
I ww
j ww ILK
I •
0 ~ I
u ne , ~ I
• 1
r
~ TD
4° ~
r, ®, -PO j
E
i
X p~?.l- x.00
S ~
P~~~ Z
~ ww waw 1
~ ~ ~~ ~'
/
,.,«~ . I
1 .« .
-
1
.. •
..
w to
~ D - ------
w N/
na s ww
.h •
w KI
ttr s ~
1
IJ K
• s• I
Attachment 2: Plat
1 ~ 3
1 t ~ 3 ~
gg i~ l t~
~~'
-
~
,.
~t i
i 8,r,
c L +,
~~•~, + ~i~ i''
~,
~
'
i ~
a
a
y! I
I ~ ~ i~
r
~•~ y +~'
`
t
.
'~ •r'~l '~~ ~ . ~ 1
~
~ t
Z S N Ill _
~ ,~~
3 ~ i
I
~ I ~ ~ ~~\
~.
T
s:
'
s ~
i
~ ,~
; ~ ~~
~ ~ ~
~
~ ~ C i
. ~r ~ i i a
I
-
J '
\
~v '•'.
~; ` Y~ \
i ' k .-i
\
~
~ ~~ \
.~
~) ._
~~ ~ i i V /. i ~ J
. .w ..
a
~~
i
s.~. ~ C \ ~
z ~ \
i L~p•
~
~
. i
'a t ~
a ~
~
.i i;' ~ ~.~~ . i .
"
'
/~
" .
~ • ~
_
~ ~ ;
`~ ~! V I~ f 3~ ' 4\ .9
~~
" ~
~ .. r,
i ~i'
y{fit ~wr'J~• ~ ......
G
~ `. s•r M.a ' ........_.._.___..___._.._......_..__._-.___.._._~
7
- ~w - s' a ~ wY. •. • . .
i" .
S•
,( ~ .. •
fO
fl ~ i .c ~ --~ ._. ~. "mom Hi'
R: .. •{I
..:
t~ SY: ... .~ ... i ..
s >i~
i
q eke :;:
v
~ ;5l" 1° i trtl
li lit If IE 11 _tl ~ll,t lit I~ } ;r` i l' is
1 'i[ II it it '(~ i,ut ~
1'l
~
~
i1
•
t
3 {
i
~'
~ €
~
~~
~ ~
it
i_.jl
~ :~'; #
l{
!
11i'
~ t
iI ~ (~: i• r• t; r' ~ Est ;iii! t: ' ~
'' I~{tt '~ i'i
'I
;
li
tli Il I. E
?
•~ ip!
I ~ -
}
~ :
i
i
:
fll, `f i~ it I• f; i•iti }i if ~itiifl ~
i 3l ~ .ii II1r t~
E ~
~ `
~' I
~
l
' t
!~ i {l is tl it I~ E'lll ti{il t{I'itl !
`
1 t i
~
i
+ ~
!t'~ 1~;~ it i t tf tili! i1~1~ ~i~~;i. i
l
t i
l ~~ ~ . i ~ 1 'r~ li i z ~~
jEii 1•i llfltii
ilE~ ~i i i i l
_
i-~ ~ x O
~ ~ ~
~ i
ii=i .; s (l it if+l t;{5tj i
i i i
~;t; o f ~ }~ ...
-+~
! L}{+
? i~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ E., s tEi i=; ~ttt it Iii ~.~tt
a
ll~
t
'
1~(
t I i~~ ~
~~ is y. ~
r
t t~~ad rb ~
~ (4~ f
~t e' ~
Ili.s ~!1 ~-E Itl
i =- t
~, i~l! '~ I~F (f ! iI' i:j ~Il;2
S
~
~ '
-. ~ ~:
a" ~ ~ t ~ x 9 ~ ~
~
E :
, ~ 1 l~ Iri 11
tf i:e r'li3
(
(~
i
l
~
,
f~ p~
OyZ 0 y
~~ t4Z t0
~ i
i
tI~F~
it ;_i
i
+4j1 ,i
~.
~!(c i{{! 1:l -
~
t {
.. ~{~ ~ ~
~' E
t
i
ter` i!ii ~t ~~ ; t F-1;
;t -a~ ~
~
-~t
r ~ 1 t Ir
t'. llt it tl 1! (;;i
t
CITY COUNCIL
~i~~ o~
l ` ^ W
TC~13
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
3f
Resolution #
R-00-1652
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
ENGINEERING
SUBJECT
Approval of a design contract with Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc. for Colleyville 2000 Water
Line Improvements in the amount of $80,000.00 -
by Consent
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
The purpose of this project is to increase water pressure, upgrade fire protection and
reduce maintenance cost. The two-inch waterline replacements will take place in the
Plymouth Hills Subdivision and along Beverly and Leta Lanes. These lines will be
upgraded in size varying from 6 to 8 inches. Over the past few years an extended
amount of maintenance dollars have been spent repairing these lines just to have them
break in other locations around where the last repair was made. These replacements
will reduce the water departments' time spent repairing these lines so they may focus
their attention to larger problems that present themselves.
(continued)
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1652
Page 2
The existing 6" waterline on L.D. Lockett currently lies directly in the flowline of the
drainage ditch along the north side of the road. The shallowness of the waterline
reduces the capacity of the ditch and also impedes the flow during rain events. This
waterline replacement has been placed on the list to assist in the expansion of the water
system's °high-pressure-plane" and to alleviate the drainage problems that currently
exist. This line will be upgraded from 6" to 10°.
Financial Impact
The design services are proposed to cost $80,000.00. This fee may be paid from the
1998 water and sewer revenue bonds.
Recommendation
Approval of a design contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. in the amount of
$80, 000.00.
Attachments
#1 -Kimley-Horn Design Contract (See paper copy)
/ ~ Kimley-Horn
~ ~ and Associates, Inc,
April 18, 2000
Via Mail and Facsimile #(817) 577-7562
Mr. Chris Steubing
City of Colleyville
5400 Bransford Road
P.O. Box 185
Colleyville, TX 76034
Re: Professional Engineering Services
Colleyville 2000 Water Line Improvements
Deaz Chris:
Please find attached Individual Project Order (IPO) No. 2 for the referenced
project. This IPO is in accordance with the Standazd Master Agreement dated
February 21, 2000. KHA will perform the design, bidding and construction tasks
outlined in the IPO for a lump sum fee of $80,000.
Please sign the attached IPO No. 2 and return a copy to me. We look forward to
working with you and making this a successful project. Please call if you have
any questions.
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
/~/.
Charles M. Staples, P.E.
Vice President
LKL:11
Attachment
P:10 W 008.0241Co Ikyvi Ikl W v-InsUP6 2. doc
TEL 817 335 6511
MET 817 654 4266
FAX 817 335 5070
Jeff James, P.E.
Project Manager
^
Suite 1100
801 Cherry Street
Fort Worth. Texas
76102.6803
~ ~ ~ KimleyHorn
~ ~ _ and Associates, Inc.
INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER NUMBER 2
Describing a specific agreement between the City of Colleyville, Texas (the Client) and Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. (the Consultant) in accordance with the terms of the Master Agreement for Continuing
Professional Services dated February 21, 2000.
IDENTIFICATION OF PROJECT: Colleyville Water Line Improvements 2000
SPECIFIC SCOPE OF SERVICES
Basic Services:
Design Phase
Specific tasks that will be accomplished during this phase include the following:
1. Preparation of Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost for water line improvements:
a. on L.D. Lockett Road: from Lowrie to Quail's Path (approximately 1500 LF).
b. on Beverly Drive: from Bransford Road to Pleasant Run Road, and Leta Lane/Duane Street
from Beverly Drive to the fire hydrant approximately 600' west of Bransford Road
(approximately 2100 LF and 1200 LF, respectfully)
c. in the Plymouth Hill Subdivision: Durham Drive from Warwick Avenue to York Drive, York
Drive/Court from Durham Drive to the end of York Court, Devon Drive from York Drive to
Cheshire Drive and Cheshire Drive from Devon Drive to Oak Knoll Drive (approximately
3600 LF)
2. KHA will perform design survey for horizontal alignment along the project route from centerline
of roadway to apparent R.O.W:
a. on L.D. Lockett Road: from Lowrie to Quail's Path
b. on Beverly Drive: from Bransford Road to Pleasant Run Road, and Leta Lane/Duane Street
from Beverly Drive: to the fire hydrant approximately 600' west of Bransford Road
c. in the Plymouth Hill Subdivision: Durham Drive from Warwick Avenue to York Drive, York
Drive/Court from Durham Drive to the end of York Court, Devon Drive from York Drive to
Cheshire Drive and Cheshire Drive from Devon Drive to Oak Knoll Drive.
No property information will be obtained. No vertical information will be obtained.
3. KHA will prepare plans, specifications, and contract documents based upon the City of
Colleyville standard contract documents. Technical specifications shall be based upon standard
specifications previously used and accepted by the City of Colleyville such as standard
specifications for Public Works Construction by North Central Texas Council of Governments or
shall be written specifically for this project, as appropriate.
4. A complete set of plans will include:
a. cover sheet
b. 5 plan sheets for water line improvements (1"=50')
c. 2 detail sheets
IPO No. 2. Page ? of ?
/ ~ ~ Kimley-Horn
~ ~ and Associates, Inc.
5. KHA will design and provide plans, specifications and contract documents for:
a. 10" Water Line on L.D. Lockett Road from Lowrie to Quail's Path
b. 8" Water Line on Beverly Drive from Bransford Road to Pleasant Run Road
8" Water Line on Leta Lane/Duane Street from Beverly Drive to the fire hydrant
approximately
600' west of Bransford Road
c. 8" Water Line on Durham Drive from Warwick Avenue to York Drive
8" Water Line on York Drive and York Court from Durham Drive to the end of York Court
8" Water Line on Devon Drive from York Drive to Cheshire Drive
8" Water Line on Cheshire Drive from Devon Drive to Oak Knoll Drive
6. KHA will design the proposed water lines above, including service lines to the R.O.W. Any
additional design will be covered under the reimbursable portion of the contract.
7. KHA will submit two sets of preliminary plans, for City review and comment. Project documents
shall consist of 22" x 34" plan sheets drawn to a scale of 1"=50' and bound 8.5" x 11" contract
documents and technical specifications.
8. KHA will submit two final sets of plans, specifications and contract documents for City review
and comment.
9. KHA will address City comments and prepare final plans, specifications and contract documents
for bidding purposes.
10. KHA will prepare an Opinion of Probable Conswction Cost based upon the final plans and
present the opinion to the City prior to bidding the project.
Bidding Phase
Specific tasks that will be accomplished during this phase include the following:
1. KHA will provide thirty (30) sets of plans, specifications and contract documents for bidding and
six (6) sets of contract documents for contract execution.
2. KHA will prepare a Notice to Bidders and submit the Notice to Bidders to the newspaper. KHA
will distribute a copy of the Notice to Bidders to contractors who have previously expressed their
interest in these types of projects.
3. KHA will provide interpretations and clarifications to the bidding documents that may be
necessary and will issue any required addenda.
4. KHA will attend the bid opening, assist the City in opening bids, and upon review and tabulation,
KHA will issue its recommendation to the City for the award of the construction contract.
Construction Phase
Specific tasks that will be accomplished during this phase include the following:
KHA will provide one-time construction staking for the contractor based on the final plans. Staking
shall include: centerline of proposed water line, proposed fire hydrant locations and proposed valve
locations. Any additional staking will be considered Additional Services.
~ ~ ~ Kimley-Horn
~ ~ _ __ and Associates, Inc.
Additional Services:
1. Any additional water line design not identified in the Design Phase.
2. Any additional contract documents necessary to break the project into phases.
3. Any additional construction staking not identified in the Construction Phase.
4. Facilitation of construction meetings with contractor, City Staff and project inspector at
appropriate intervals to maintain open communication. Interim meetings to address special project
conditions and requirements.
5. KHA project site visits to observe and report on the progress of work to determine whether it is
being performed in general conformance with the contract documents.
6. KHA issuance of owner's instructions to the contractor, necessary clarifications, change orders
and recommendations.
7. KHA review of progress payments submitted by the contractor and recommendations to the City
regazding payments.
S. Final inspection and report on the completion of the project at the completion of construction and
recommendations concerning final payments to the contractor.
SCHEDULE: We anticipate the scope of services to be performed within a reasonable length of time.
DELIVERABLES: 30 bid sets of Plans and Specifications
6 executable sets of Contract Documents
METHOD OF COMPENSATION:
KHA will accomplish the work outlined as Basic Services, Design Phase Tasks 1-10 and Bidding Phase
Tasks 1-4, for a lump sum fee of $70,000 for all scope of services and direct expenses associated with the
same.
I{HA will accomplish the Construction Phase Task for a lump sum fee of $10,000 for all scope of services
and direct expenses associated with the same.
Any services which are requested by the Client but which aze not explicitly included in the Scope of
Services will be provided by KHA upon written authorization by the City based on the attached rate
schedule.
ACCEPTED:
CITY OF COLLEYVII,LE, TEXAS KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chazles M. Staples
TITI-E~ TTTLE: Vice President
P:~000Op8.0241COL1.EY V ILLEIW'IR-LP7s~[PO-2.DOC
CITY COUNCIL
~it~ of
I ;'~
tfclS
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05102/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
3g
Resolution #
R-00-1652
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
CITY MANAGERS OFFICE
SUBJECT
Approval of authorizing the settlement of the
Robert J. and Susan D. Gammon lawsuit for the
amount of $18,500-by Consent
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
In order to construct Pool Road, additional right-of-way, a drainage easement, and a
temporary construction easement were to be acquired from Robert J. and Susan D.
Gammon, 3650 Pool Road. The right-of-way and easements were acquired on October
21, 1996 through the condemnation procedure (Cause No: 67-165314-96).
During the construction of Pool Road it was decided not to use the drainage easement
on the Gammon property.
(continued)
CI MA AGER
DEPARTMENT HEAD
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1652
Page 2
Financial Impact
Funding for the settlement is available in legal funds 6216.
Recommendation
Approval of Resolution-00-1652 authorizing the settlement of the Robert J. and Susan
D. Gammon lawsuit for the amount of $18,500 and vacating the unused drainage
easement.
Attachments
#1 -Cause No: 67-165314-96 Notice of Deposit
CAUSE NO: 67-16531496
CITY OF COLLEYVII.LE, TEXAS
vs.
ROBERT J. GAMMON and wife,
SUSAN D. GAMMON
§ IN THE DISTRICT COURT
§ 67TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§ -.
§ TA.RRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
NOTICE OF DEPOSIT
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COMES, CITY OF COLLEYVII..LE, TEXAS, Plaintiff in the above styled
proceedings, and respectfully shows the Court:
1. The Special Commissioners appointed herein, by their written Award of
Special Commissioners, filed in the papers of this case have adjudged against Plaintiff
damages in the surn of $7,500.00.
2. The Plaintiff herewith has deposited the full amount of said Award into the
Registry of the Court subject to the Order of Defendant. Plaintiffs have further paid all costs
adjudged against them in this case.
3. By reason of such premises, Plaintiff is now entitled to enter upon and take
possession of said property
Notice of Deposit - Paee 1
~~~s.~m.meuoz i~
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that this Honorable Court
issue such Order as may be necessary and proper for the enforcement of Plaintiffs said right
to enter upon and take possession of said property.
Respectfully submitted,
FOSTER & BREWER
Ross T. Oster
9001 Airport Freeway, Suite 675
Fort Worth, Texas ?6180
(8I7) 485-2220
Fax: (817) 485-2836
State Bar No. 07295500
Attorney for Plaintiff
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument has been sent to
Robert J. Ganunon and wife, Susan D. Gammon, 3650 Pool Road, Grapevine, Texas 76051
and J. Christopher Bird, 4114 McMillan Avenue at Mockingbird Lane, Dallas, Texas 75206,
on this ~L day of ~ , 1996.
ROSS T. FOSTE
Notice of Devosit - Paee 2
~:~e~„~,,,,,,,.~ioz i~
CITY COUNCIL
iii. n/
l'` ^ ~ W
TC<ai
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
3h
Resolution #
.R-00-1652
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
CITY MANAGERS OFFICE
SUBJECT
Approval of the purchase of approximately .459
acres of right-of-way for the realignment of John
McCain Road from Hastings Cove, Ltd., for the
amount of $219,950, and authorizing the Mayor to
sign the necessary documents-by Consent
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
To accomplish the realignment of John McCain Road at Colleyville Blvd., right-of-way to
the south of the existing John McCain Road needs to be acquired ftom the property
owner Hastings Cove, Ltd. The right-of--way taking has been appraised and the owner is
accepting the appraised value of $219,950.
CITY MANA E R
DEPARTMENT HEAD
(continued)
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1652
Page 2
Financial Impact
Funding is available from the Roadway Impact Fees.
Recommendation
Approval of Resolution R-00-1652 to purchase approximately .459 acres of right-of-way
for the realignment of John McCain Road from Hastings Cove, Ltd., for the amount of
$219,950, and authorizing the Mayor to sign the necessary documents.
CITY COUNCIL
~~, ~~
icaas
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
4
Ordinance #
0-00.1216
Previous Action: 04!18/00
DEPT.
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
SUBJECT
Amending Chapter 11 -Parkland Dedication of
the Land Development Code
Second Reading and Public Hearing
First Reading and Public Hearing
Background
In October 1998, the City Council requested that the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board review the Parkland Dedication Ordinance, particularly within the established
criteria and fee credits for public and private land dedications and an amendment to
increase the dedication fees. As a result of this request, the ordinance was revised in
its entirety in December 1998.
In January 2000, the City Council adopted the new Comprehensive Parks, Recreation
and Open Space Master Plan, which provides the framework for orderly and consistent
planning and development of the City's park system. This Plan also provides direction
(continued)
CITY MANAGER
D PARTMEN EAD
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1216
Page 2 of 4
in the area of acquisition and development of park land to meet future needs, as per the
National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) standards.
As referenced in the Comprehensive Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan,
the City would need to acquire an additional 146 acres of parkland, based on its build-
out population of 25,540. On the basis of the adoption of the revised Master Plan, a
subcommittee of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board met with staff to review the
current provisions and fee structure of Ordinance 0-98-1129 to incorporate projected
park land needs. (See attached excerpts from the Comprehensive Parks, Recreation
and Open Space Master Plan).
Comparisons were made to the cities of Southlake, North Richland Hills and Keller.
(See attached). In reviewing the Parkland Dedication Ordinance, the subcommittee
considered the following three theories that may be used in the development of future
parkland dedication needs of the City.
Theory 1
Currently the City has 184 acres of parkland and a population of 19,250. The
Comprehensive Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan recommends 330
acres of parkland for abuild-out population of 25,540, which equates to 12.93 acres per
1006 people. To obtain the necessary 146 acres of new parkland to give a total of 330
build-out acres would require increasing the parkland dedication to 1/acre per 14
housing units, or 23.21 acres per 1000 new population and would require collection of
$3,248 per housing unit.
Assumption of Theory 1 is that the new population will provide acres or monies to make-
up current park acreage shortfall and provides for the additional parkland needed at
build-out.
Theory 2
The 12.93 acres per 1000 people recommended in the Parks Master Plan is the target
for future parkland dedication. This would require increasing the parkland dedication to
1 acre/per 25 housing units, which equals $1,802 per housing unit. This dedication rate
would only increase the total number of acres of parkland by 81 acres at build-out giving
a total of 265 acres or 10.38 acres per 1000 people, 2.55 acres per 1000 people short
of the desired level.
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1216
Page 3 of 4
Assumption of Theory 2 is that the new population will provide acres or monies to
provide for the current parkland deficit with no additional parkland to accommodate new
growth.
Theory 3
To remain consistent with other cities by implementing a rate comparable to the
Southlake $1,500 per housing unit would equate to 1 acre/ per 20 housing units, which
would equal $1,579 per housing unit. At build-out the total parkland would be increased
to 255 acres, which is 9.98 acres per 1000 population, which would be consistent with
the 1996 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan.
Assumption of Theory 3 is that the City of Colleyville would like to remain comparable
with the current City of Southlake Parkland Dedication Ordinance.
See attached comparisons.
On the basis of the above, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board recommended that
the City Council consider the following amendments to the Parkland Dedication
Ordinance: (Changes are denoted with boldface type or strike-through text).
o Adopt Theory 2
Residential Dwelling Unit Fees: Fees paid in lieu of dedication shall be based on the
determined cost of 1 acre of land divided by twenty-five (25), for a resulting
residential dwelling unit fee of $1,802.
This increases the residential dwelling unit fee from $1,260 to $1,802.
In comparison of the difference between Theory 2 and 3, the Board considered the
potential parkland monies that could be collected based on each scenario. Theory 2
would result in the collection of $3,645,466 and Theory 3 would result in the
collection of $3,194,317 for a difference of $451,129. With a projected increase of
2,023 new residents to reach the build-out population of 25,540, at an average of 3
persons per household, the total per person cost difference between Theory 2 and 3
of $74 was considered to be minimal.
o Non-residential developments: The fee payment alternative for non-residential
development shall be calculated by dividing the determined cost of one (1) acre of
land by fifty-six, for a resulting fee per non-residential acre of $800 per acre.
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1216
Page 4 of 4
This increases the non-residential (commercial) fee from $400 to $800.
^ Parkland Dedication fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid before the final plat is
recorded with the County Clerk's office. A plat containing two (2) or fewer lots may
pay parkland dedication fees at the time of issuance of any building permit for a
dwelling unit within the subdivision.
This change allows the City to collect parkland dedication fees earlier in the
development process.
^ Revise the formula for PUD-R credits to allow zero credit for public and private open
space over twenty (20) percent.
In consideration of the PUD-R credits for the donation of public open space over
twenty (20) percent, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board determined that this
donation does not alleviate the burden of the City to provide for the athletic and
recreational needs of the citizens. It was also determined that the City has no
control over private park land and only citizens, who are property owners of the
subdivision, will have legal access to this park land.
These changes allow for zero credit for public and private open space over twenty
(20) percent.
This Parks and Recreation Advisory Board unanimously adopted these revisions.
Recommendation
Approval of Ordinance 0-00-1216.
Attachments
• Excerpts of the Comprehensive Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan
(see paper copy)
• Parkland 2000 Equivalents
The City of Colleyville has the opportunity to adjust the formula to increase the amount of park land
dedication required. This change would result in park land dedications that are more consistent with
acreage ranges published by NRPA (see page 53).
The City of Colleyville should begin to acquire available park land tracts which are 10 acres or larger
in size. These larger tracts would meet the primary need of community parks, greenway condors and
natural open spaces. Additionally, the City should concentrate its efforts to provide more park land
and recreation opportunities to current residents in the eastern portion of the Ciry. Also, the
recommendations in the Colleyville Pathways Plan (see Appendix D) should be used as a guideline
when considering new acquisition and connections to existing parks, schools, neighborhoods and
shopping centers.
~_,,, ~,
December, 1999 93 ~ ~~
7..::
1999 Colleyville Comprohens,ve Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan ~ Cari'lr~~~ltu
IV. Standards and Guidelines
The adequacy of existing parks, recreation facilities and open spaces is determined by comparing the
needs of the present and forecasted populations of Colleyville to specific goals and standards. This
Master Plan includes the standards established by the National Recreation and Park Association
(NRPA) as included in the 1990 printing of Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and
Guidelines. "The NRPA standards have generally been the most widely accepted and used standards
of their type, espeaally by local government." (Recreation, Parks and Open Space Standards and
Guidelines, p. 7) This section includes a comparison of Colieyville to national standards based upon
park acreage per population and facilities per population and selected Peer Cities park acreages per
population and facilities per population.
The most common standards for park planning guidelines, as recognized by park and recreation
professionals, are the published standards by the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA).
As written in the introduction, the NRPA "recognizes the importance of establishing and using park and
recreation standards as:
1. A national expression of minimum acceptable facilities for the citizens of urban and
rural communities.
2. A guideline to determine land requirements for various kinds of park and recreation
areas and facilities.
3. A basis for relating recreation needs to spatial analysis within a community wide
system of parks and open space areas.
4. One of the major structuring elements that can be used to guide and assist regional
development.
5. A means to justify the need for parks and ooen space within the overall land use
pattern o-" a region or community.
The purpose of this document is to present park and recreation space standards that are applicable
for planning, acquisition, and development of parks, recreation, and open space lands, at the
community level. These standards should be viewed as a guide. They address minimum, not
maximum, goals to be achieved. The standards are to be coupled with conventional wisdom and
judgement relating to the particular situation to which they are applied and specific local needs"
(Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines, p. 11).
When evaluating existing or future parks in Colleyville, it is necessary to classify each ark b
size, service area, and acres per 1,000 population. The following six ctassifications for parks wil be
used in this Master Plan:
~~_.,
December, 1999 ~..~Y
51 ~~~~f ~
~~
r~:..
1999 Colleyville Comprehensive Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan ~ ~~~~'
dveyess
Theme ml~nrpark is used to address limited, isolated or unique recreational needs of concentrated
populations. Typically less than '/. mile apart in a residential setting, the size of a mini-park ranges
between 2,500 square feet to one acre in size. These parks may be either active or passive. but
speak to a specific recreational need rather than a particular population density.
~ghborheed Park
Neighborhood parks serve a variety of age groups within a limited area or `neighborhood." They
range in size from 1-5 acres and generally serve residents within a '/.- to 'rrmife radius. The
neighborhood park is an area for active recreation such as field games, court games, playgrounds,
picnicking, etc. Facilities are generally unlighted and there is limited parking, if any, on site. NRPA
standards for these parks are 1.0 - 2.0 acres per 1.000 population.
Community Park
Community parks are larger than neighborhood parks and serve several neighborhoods. They range
in size from 16-99 acres and serve the entire city. The community park may be a natural area or
developed area for a variety of outdoor recreation such as ballfields, playgrounds, boating, fishing,
swimming, camping, picnicking, and trail systems. NRPA standards for these parks are 5-8 acres per
1,000 population.
R~,~ional Park
Regional parks are very large multi-use parks that serve several communities within a particular
region. They range in size from 500 acres and above and serve those areas within acne-hour driving
distance. The regional park provides both active and passive recreation, with a wide selection of
facilities for all age groups. They may also include areas of nature preservation for activities such as
sight-seeing, nature study area, wildlife habitat, and conservation areas. NRPA standards for regional
parks vary due to the specific site and natural resources.
~oecial le Ar _aa
Special use areas and parks are for specialized or single purpose recreation activities. NRPA defines
these as areas such as historical areas, nature centers, marinas, zoos, conservatories, arboretums,
arenas, amphitheaters, plazas or community squares. There are no specific standaras for s¢e or
acreage since each community will vary.
Linear Par /Linkag,g~
Linkages and linear parks are built connections or natural corridors that link parks together. Typically,
the linear park is developed for one or more modes or recreational travel such as walking, jogging,
biking, in-line skating, hiking, horseback riding, or canoeing. NRPA does not have any specific
standards for linear parks other than they should be sufficient to protect the resource and provide
maximum usage.
~~..,
December, 1999 ~-~;
`.~:
7.:..
1999 Colleyville Comprehensive Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan ~ Gfrta~'dYryesf
NRPA PARK ACREAGE GUIDELINES
Type Size/Acres Service Area Acres per 1,000
Population
Mini-Park 2.500 S.F. - 1 Acre Less Than '/. Mile 0.25 - 0.5 ac11,000
Distance in Residential
Setting
Neighborhood Park 1 - 15 Acres One Neighborhood 1.0 - 2.0 aG1.000
'/. to '/z Mile Radius
Community Park 16 - 99 Acres Several Neighborhoods 5.0 - 8.0 ac/1,000
Metropolitan Park 100 - 499 Acres Several Communities 5.0 - 10.0 aG1,000
Under 1 Hour Driving
Regional Park 500 + Several Communities Variable
Within 1 Hour Driving
Special Use Areas Varies Depending on No Applicable Standard Variable
Desired Size
Linear Park/Linkages Sufficient Width to No Applicable Standard Variable
Protect the Resource
and Provide
Maximum Usage
TOTAL 11.25 - 20.5 Ac
/1,000 Population
Standards from Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines, p. Sfi-57 and p. 68-69,
4th Printing, 1990, a publication of the National Recreation and Park Association.
~~_~,
December, 1999 53 ~ ~ 1'I~
r.::,
1999 Colleyville Comprehensive Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan ~ CartO~~ dY~eu
Gomnarison of Park Land Acreaee and NRPA Guidelines
Based upon the NRPA standards for each of the previous park dassifications. the recommended park
acreage per 1,000 population ranges from 11.25 to 20.5 acres. The City of Colieyville includes a total
of 164.43 acres for a ratio of 9.58 acres per 1.000 poputation at its current population of 19.250.
When evaluating Colleyville's total park acreage as compared to NRPA Standards, it reflects that the
City is currently below recommended standards. The City currently has a total of 184.43 acres of park
land, and is below the recommended park acreage standard by 79.76 acres. 8y the year 2020, the
shortage of park acres will increase to 145.81 acres. More specifically, by the year 2020, with a
projected poputation of 25,540, the City of Colleyville will have a shortfall of 10.90 acres of mini-park
Land, a shortage of 20.22 acres of neighborhood park Land and a shortage of 114.fi9 acres of
community park land.
The tables on the following pages summarize the NRPA acreage standards and the standards applied
to the existing parks in Colleyville.
~s ..,
December, 1999 ~. ,lid
~ s•~R~ 1~
~..
::...
1999 Cotleyville Comprehensive Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan ~ ~O~l~~ sYtt JO>~
NRPA PARK ACREAGE GUIDELINES
APPLIED TO COLLEYVILLE
NRPA Guidelines for NRPA Guidelines for NRPA Guidelines for
1999 Population of 2005 Population of 2020 Population of
Park Factttty Extstin~ 19,250 " 22,245" 25,540 "
Acroape
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
Mini-Parks 1.87 4.81 9.62 5.56 11.12 6.39 12.77
Neighborhood 30.86 19.25 38.50 22.24 44.49 25.54 51.08
Community 89.63 96.25 154.00 111.23 177.96 127.70 204.32
Parks
Special Use 62.07 N/A N!A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Parks
Linear Parks N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
TOTALS 184.43 120.31 202.12 139.03 233.57 159.63 268.17
A. Population numbers provided by City of Colleyville Parks 8 Recreation Department.
Mini-Parks Bransford Park
McCain Park 1.77 acres
C 1
1.87 acres
Neighborhood Kimzey Park 20.45 acres
Sparger Park 8.47 acres
Woodbriar Park 1 94 arr c
30.86 acres
Community City Park
McPherson Park 40.13 acres
Pleasant Run Park 27.50 acres
22 0~ anr~
89
63 acres
Special Use Parks Colleyville Nature Center .
L.D. Lockett Park 46.00 acres
Pleasant Run Practice Site 4.60 acres
11.47 a r e
62.07 acres
TOTAL
184.43 acres
~~_,,,
December, 1999 55 ~~
~;G~
r,;::
1999 Colleyville Comprehensive Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Ptan ~ COffer•
dnrgess
NRPA PARK ACREAGE GUIDELINES COMPARED
TO 1999 POPULATION IN COLLEYVILLE
Zone
Existrn9
Acreage NRPA Guidelines for 1999
Population "
of 19.250
Minimum Maximum Difference Between NRPA
Guidelines and Existing
Colieyville Parks
Minimum Maximum
Mini-Parks 1.87 4.81 9.62 (2.94) (7.75)
Neighborhood Parks 30.86 1925 38.50 11.61 (7.64)
Community Parks 89.63 96.25 154.00 (6.62) (64.37)
Special Use Parks 62.07 N/A N/A N/A NIA
Linear Parks N/A N/A N/A N!A
TOTALS 184.43 120.31 202.12 2.05 (79.76)
A. Population numbers provided
(NCTCOG). by City of Colieyville Parks and Recreation Department
NRPA PARK ACREAGE GUIDELINES COMPARED
TO 2020 POPULATION IN COLLEYVILLE
NRPA Guidelines for 2020 Difference Between NRPA
Population " Guidelines and Existing
Zone Existing of 25,540 Colleyville Parks
Acreage
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
Mini-Parks 1.87 6.39 12.77 (4.52) 10.90
( )
Neighborhood Parks 30.86 25.54 51.08
5.32
(20.22)
Community Parks 89.63 127.70 204.32
(38.07)
(114.69)
Special Use Parks 62.07 N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
Linear Parks N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
TOTALS 184.43 159.63 268,17
(3727)
(145.81)
A. Population numbers
(NCTCOG). provided by City of Colieyville Parks and Recreation Department
tJ_a
December, 1999 ~ ^'`''•'
1~~~~~~*~ Gi,
r..:,
1999 Colleyvilie Comprehensive Parks, Recreation, and Open $~~ Master Plan ~ ~~~~' eY~ess
Parkland Dedication Equivalents
C
O
'i
~.
V
C
a
Q
N
1
O
^~
V
^~
i
a
.~
~~ V
L
Y
¢
t~
N ~
Ll~ +--i
~ N M
~
Z lC
N O
d'
{}} {f}
M
~ ,
-~
M Ct M
N ~
o Q o Q
M Z C Z
,--~ +"~
~ o ° ~ °
_ i
n o n ~ ~ ~ i
n
~-
~ _ N ~ ~ ~ ~
_
_ ~ ~ *'~ +--I iJ ~
~ O
(p fp
~ ~
Z
Y ~ ~
, 00 O N Q' O O
O 111 ~ L1') 00
~ ~
N M
ice- ~
°
~
n
~
~ a..+
a 'c 'c
c ~ ~ ~
c
~
~,
o ~ ~ o -v ~ •~ ~ •u
~ C O C L i
~ O O
O ~ o C 'y
~ f
a a ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ E
~
~' ~ ~ ~ ~ = V > 2 V
_
'
~ ~ ~ L i
~ Y O N N O
' fl D
~ ~ N f0 U
.
.
V
j
C.
G.
U m ~ a Q ~
C
O
ca
a
0
n
3
a~
C
O ~
O O
o
ca
N a
U Q
~,
~ o
~o
~o
O
N ~
~ ~
C U
~v
~ o
~ o
~ ~
~ O
d
N ~
~ ~
~ ~,
~ C
a ~
Y ~
Y
~ ~
C d
fp
~ N
z ~
Y _~
~ ~
cR v
p1
C C ~
fp fp
~ d ~ Q
"' O N ~ L ~
'Y ~..+ ~+ ~ ~ ~
=~ cn cn V ~ O ~--+
'~ cp ~
_ ~ ~ ~ M O ~
ca ~ ~ °o ^ Q U \ ~ ~
~ rn rn p rn ~~ X
O O •-~ •--i d' O O M l0 N 00
= N Ll~ M M O N O •--~ O N
y~ ~ N N ~ ~O N O M~
~ ~
1 (/~
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~_
N~ `~ ~_ ~~
V
~_ O
~~ _
~ ~,, = O U N i O z ~~
~ '~'~ ~ 01 O Q ~ (~ O 'O ~ a..+
~ O~~~ i~ O O~ Q~
Q~ a'd ~ m = ~" Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q
L L
L ~ L ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~' ~ W
t~ ~ V a~ a 2 U w Z Q Q ~-
aa
Q om U p u.i ti ~ j ~ r; Y _i
c
O
a
a
0
a
0
0
0
v
M
Q~
N
,--i
w
0
c
a~
Q
a~
a~
t
L
U
f0
O
M
M
.~
3
.~
0
a~
U
Y
i
f0
d
_ ~
~ C C
~ fp fd ~
~ ~ ~ 0 Q
~ L \ L'
~~
a ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~
00 ~ O ^ Q V
~ v
i
O p
i
~
a ~ '-' ~
nn
r
V ~
~/ ~
^ ~
~/
O
O
~ ~ N N
~ L ~' ~ O O O O d' O
N t1~
M
N O N O O 00
~ p1 Ln •
-~ tl') ~p N O •-~
~ .--r N ~ ~
~ -~
~
O v
Q O O
O ~ ~ ~ ~
~
N N ~ ~
o C~
O
~
c ~ ~
~ ~
o ~
^~
~~ = ~, ~; z ~
~ ~ ~ ~ o Q ~ V = ~ ~ ;~-'
V O ~ -O ~~ L '~ ~ O O ~ QJ ~
~ ~ O O ~ O M .
~ ~ i ~ L
a m = a °- `-' ~ a a ~ a
Q ~ ~ ~ ~
N ~
i cn
a..+ N
L O.
° V
= ~ ~
'~ O o ~ °- Q ~ Q a ~ ~ ~ ~
o ~
~
~
a~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ .~.J •
~
L
~
~ (~
~ .
~
~ O
~
~
~ I.i.
~
~
~
L
U
a
~
= L L W
!~ ~ a U w Z Q Q ~
a Q
Q om U p w ~i ~ ~.-+ ~ Y i
c
0
_~
Q
O
a
0
0
0
U
fp
00
M
O
w
0
c
a~
.~
Q
a~
L
O
U
N
N
.p
3
O
.~
.~
U
[O
Y
L
~.
0
L
.~
.~
Vf
^~
O
O
O
N
_ ,~
.O ~
,~:~ .~
~V ~
'~
~ ~
~ ~
L ~
aQ
C
_~
L
N
a..,
01
O
f~
d
L
N
O
O
0 Q
~ L
n ~
V }O.
~ M
O ^ Q
O ~ ~
~ .--~ m
~
° ~
o ~
O
V
~ '""~ X
~
u ~
~ n ~
O O ~--+ 117 01 O O M *-i Ll') 01
11) M ~ O N O O L1')
•~ N ~ {f}-
0
~.
a
N
L
V
O
m
a..+
0
cv
Q
a
O
.~ o
•~ a
°o
•~ L
~ ~
p. V
~ Q
c ~
a~ ~
~ ~
L
~ a
O
V
~ .-.
~ rn
~ `L° o
L ~ rrLnn
Q ~ V
'-~ >..o
~ `~ ~
~_
~ V ~
~ a
~~
.~
O V
O p ~
2 V w
O
C~
O
0
.~
Z
z
L
N
z
Q
c
~.
Q~
a..+
U
0
Q
L
Q.
N
.~
W
-~
Q om CV ~ u.i u. ,-~ .
~ V ~ Y .~
c
0
~.
0
a
0
0
0
rn
pi
vi
U
ca
N
a~.+
O
N
rn
0
m
c
ro
Y
a
ORDINANCE 0-00-1216
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE AMENDING CHAPTER 11
- PARKLAND DEDICATION OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE;
PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS CUMULATIVE OF ALL OTHER
ORDINANCES; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
PUBLICATION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville, Texas is a home rule city acting under its
charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5
of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government
Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville has heretofore adopted a Parkland Dedication
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Parkland Dedication Ordinance has been incorporated into the
Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville; and
WHEREAS, the City has zoning classifications which require open space; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that in order to provide for
adequate land for parks, recreation and open space, it is
appropriate and in the best interest of the City to amend the
Parkland dedication requirements.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS AS FOLLOWS:
Sec. 1. THAT Paragraph 2. Amount and Location, of Section 11.5.8 of
Chapter 11, of the Land Development Code is amended in its
entirety and replaced by the following text:
2. Amount and Location
a. Residential Developments
Based on the population projected to reside in the City of
Colleyville, as stated in the 1998 Master Plan adopted by the
City Council, the City desires to provide 12.93 8-~-acres of
parkland for every new 1,000 residents in an ultimate condition.
Parkland meeting the requirements contained within this section
shall be dedicated to the City at a ratio of one (1) acre of
Ordinance 0-00-1216
Page 2 of 5
parkland for every twenty-five (25) residential
dwelling units or a prorated portion thereof.
The subdivider shall dedicate to the City a minimum of 0.040
8~8A acres of parkland in fee simple for each DU (dwelling
unit) within the subdivision; provided, however, no tract of
parkland shall be less than seven (7) acres in total area unless
approved by the City Council.
b. Non-Residential Develooments
Although non-residential development does not generate
residential occupancies per se, it does create environmental
impacts, which may negatively affect the living environment of
the community. These impacts may be ameliorated or
eliminated by providing park or open space areas which buffer
adjoining land uses, prevent undue concentration of paved
areas, allow for the reasonable dissipation of automotive
exhaust fumes, provide natural buffers to the spread of fire or
explosion, and provide separation of lighting, waste disposal,
and noise by-products of non-residential operations and
activities from adjacent residential areas. The City has
therefore determined that non-residential developments must
provide dedicated parks and/or reserved open space at a ratio
of one (1) acre of parkland for every fifty-six (56) non-residential
gross acres of development or pro. ated portion thereof.
c. Off-site Dedications
A developer may dedicate the required parkland for a
development at another location owned by the same developer
within the City with the consent of the City, provided that the off-
site dedication is in accordance with this ordinance.
Sec. 2. THAT Paragraph 3. Calculation of Fees, of Section 11.5.C, of
Chapter 11, of the Land Development Code is amended in its
entirety and replaced by the following text:
3. Calculation of Fees
The City Council shall establish an acreage land value cost figure
to be used in calculating park fees.
a. Residential Dwelling Unit Fees: Fees paid in lieu of dedication
shall be based on the determined cost of 1 acre of land divided
Ordinance 0-00-1216
Page 3 of 5
by twenty-five (25) ##ir~~F~}, fora resulting fee per
residential dwelling unit of $1,802 ,~.
b. Non-Residential Development Fees: The fee payment
alternative for non-residential development shall be calculated
by dividing the determined cost of one (1) acre of land by fifty-
six, for a resulting fee per non-residential acre cost of $800
~4$G per acre.
Sec. 3. THAT Paragraph 4. Collection of Fees, of Section 11.5.C, of
Chapter 11, of the Land Development Code is amended in its
entirety and replaced by the following text:
4. Collection of Fees
a. Parkland dedication fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid
before the final plat is recorded with the County Clerk's
office. A plat containing two (2) or fewer lots may pay
Parkland dedication fees
at the time of
issuance of any building permit for a DU within the subdivision.
b. By agreement approved by the City Council, the City and the
subdivider may alter the time and method of payment and fees
in lieu of dedication.
Sec. 4. THAT Paragraph 6.b, Fee Payments in Lieu of Dedication &
Paragraph 6.c, PUD-R Zoning or Other Zoning Classifications
Requiring Dedication of Open Space, of Chapter 11, of the Land
Development Code are hereby deleted in their entirety as follows:
Ordinance 0-00-1216
Page 4 of 5
u n
t
w Ol
1
Ordinance 0-00-1216
Page 5 of 5
Sec. 5. THAT Chapter 11, Parkland Dedication, of the Land Development
Code shall remain in effect, except where amended by this
Ordinance.
Sec. 6. THAT if any section, paragraph, clause or provision of this
Ordinance shall for any reason be held to be invalid or
unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability of such section,
paragraph, clause or provision shall not affect any of the remaining
provisions of this Ordinance.
Sec. 7. The City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause
publication of the descriptive caption as an alternative method of
publication provided by law.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of April
2000.
The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of
May 2000.
ATTEST:
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Donna Arp
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
Ross T. Foster
City Attorney
CITY COUNCIL
DEPT.
PUBLIC SERVICES
SUBJECT
Approving Technical Services Contract, in the
amount of $30,670, with WHECO Controls of
Fort Worth, Texas, for the installation of a
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
(SCADA) system for the remote monitoring and
control of water tank levels.
Previous Action: None
~u.• or
~~
7esa>
AGENDA BRIEFING
Form 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
5
Resolution #
R-00-1643
Reading and Public Hearing
Back4round
For public water suppliers, the basic goal of drought contingency planning is to ensure
an uninterrupted supply of water in an amount sufficient to satisfy essential human
needs. Secondary objectives are to minimize, to the extent possible, adverse impacts
on quality of life, the economy, and the environment.
(continued)
KtVItW (If NtGt55ARY)
C
CITY MANAGER
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1643
Page 2
Recurring drought is a natural part of Texas' highly variable dimate and can lead to
water shortages. Short-term drought related water shortages are often the result of
both decreased water supply due to below normal rainfall and increased water
demands. During the drought of 1996, 343 public water systems reported to the Texas
Water Development Board (TWDB) that they had implemented some form of restrictions
on water use.
Prompted by the perceived vulnerability of public water systems to drought, the 75~'
Texas Legislature enacted Senate Bill 1 in 1997 requiring the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (TNRCC) to adopt rules requiring wholesale and retail public
water suppliers to develop drought contingency plans. On January 20, 1999, the
TNRCC adopted minimum requirements for drought contingency plans and specified a
September, 1999 submittal deadline.
Last September, the City of Colleyville approved a drought contingency plan in
conjunction with our wholesale supplier, the Trinity River Authority (TRA) and the
Tarrant Regional Water District (TRWD), whose reservoirs supply TRA with raw water.
According to the plan, various stages of water rationing are triggered based on the
available supply of water from the wholesale distributor. Voluntary water rationing,
reduang outdoor watering to once every five days, goes into effect when TRWD
reservoirs fall to 60 percent of their storage capacity or demand reaches 90 percent of
TRA's water supply capacity. When reservoirs drop to 50 percent of storage capacity
or demand rises to 95 percent of water supply capaaty, the voluntary restrictions
become mandatory. In more severe conditions, irrigation is limited to once every five
days only between the hours of 10 p.m. and 8 a.m. In emergency conditions, outdoor
watering is prohibited entirety.
The TNRCC Handbook for Drought Contingency Planning also stresses the importance
of evaluating the adequacy and reliability of water distribution facilities under drought
conditions. Such evaluations require continual automated monitoring of water system
demand versus water system supply. The impending drought of 2000 has been
forecast since the fall of 1999 and the City of Colleyville has been engaged in planning
for the monitoring and evaluation of its water distribution system.
On October 7, 1999, the City of Colteyville entered into a professional services contract
with Knowlton-English-Flowers, Inc. (KEF) for the design of a basic Supervisory Control
and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system for the remote monitoring and control of water
storage tank levels and other basic water functions within the City. The SCADA system
will provide the City with the ability to continually monitor and study both the supply and
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1643
Page 3
demand of water under drought and high usage situations and possibly provide
sufficient early warning to avert emergency water conditions. .
Early in the planning process, the City and KEF conducted meetings with TRA and
WHECO Controls, an area expert in SCADA system installation and maintenance, to
discuss the most cost-effective approach to the SCADA design. TRA agreed to provide
Colleyvitle with electronic access to TRA SCADA data provided assurances of quality
and technical competence were maintained. KEF was therefore utilized for the SCADA
system design due to their initial design and knowledge of the TRA SCADA system.
WHECO Controls was chosen to submit a Technical Services Proposal for the SCADA
system instrumentation installation and programming because of their involvement and
knowledge of the TRA SCADA system and their involvement and knowledge of existing
City of Colleyville water system instrumentation.
Attached is a proposal for an amount not to exceed $30,670 from WHECO Controls for
the installation and programming of a basic SCADA system. Enhanced water system
SCADA monitoring capabilities will be planned and budgeted under the 2000-2001
Fiscal Budget. Also attached is a letter of recommendation from Mr. G. R. Phillip Jr.,
P.E. of KEF, the SCADA system designer.
Finanaal Impact
Funds are available in the Utiii#y Operations budget under account number 002-61-
6645.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a technical
services contract with WHECO Controls of Fort Worth, Texas in an amount not to
exceed $30,670 for the installation of a basic Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
(SCADA) system for the City of Colleyville.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. KEF Letter Dated April 19, 2000
2. WHECO Controls Proposal dated April 19, 2000
3. WHECO Controls Proposal Continued dated April 19, 2000
4. Resolution R-00-1643
KNOWLTON-ENGLISH-FLOWERS, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS /Fort Worth-Dallas
April 19, 2000
Mr. Bob Whitehead
Director of Public Services
City of Colleyville
5400 Bransford Road, PO Box 185
Colleyville, Texas 76034
RE: 09-035. CITY OF COLLEYVILLE.
PHASE I. SCADA PROJECT;
SCADA SYSTEM INTEGRATION AWARD
At the request of Mr. Randy Brown, we have reviewed the quotations that were submitted to the City
of Colleyville by WHECO Controls, dated April 15, 2000 (Copy attached). These quotations were
furnished in response to a RFQ, which we prepared for the City, detailing the short-term work needed
to allow Colleyville to monitor various water functions relative to the City.
The work outlined by WHECO in their Quotation follows that which was requested for this project
and the pri; es Cuoted appear to be reasonable for the work proposed.
Due to Wheco's involvement in the existing Colleyville SCADA radio link and their previous
performance and demonstration of competence and professionalism, we would recommend that
Colleyville contract with Wheco, for the total amount of $30,670.00 to provide the SCADA
hardware, software and programming for your proposed system. This amount is made up of
$3,945.00 for work at the Overland Trail Booster Pump Station & McPhereson Elevated Storage
Tank and $26, 725.00 for work performed at the Hall-Johnson Elevated Tank & Service Center.
If we can be of further service, please feel free to call.
~~
G.R. Philipp Jr., P.E.
Attchmts.
Xc: Randell G. Brown, P.E., Public Works Manager
Kent Meyerhoeffer, WHECO Controls
1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 • BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021-5826 •817/283-6211 • METRO 817/267-3367 • FAX 817/354-4389
s-.pr-1Fj-00 10:4~H wnc~.iu
t3L i - OOV-0000 E' _ V~
~HECO COntTOl.4
o drrrsron of
WHF.CO Electric, Inc.
z
5200 Joyce tJr.
Fort Worttt, TX. 76116
(817) 244Ji660 -Metro (8171 429-2581
Far. (R17) 560-3263
Aprd 1 S. 2000
Randy Brown. P.E_. Public Works Manager
City of Colleyville
Via Fax
Reference: Request of Quotation -City of Collevvrlle
SCADA Installation -Overland Trail Booster Pump Station Rr McPhereson F.ST
Dear Randy:
We appreciate the opportunity to quote this project. Uur scope of work shall include furnishing the
equipment and technical services to perform the SCADA Installation and Modifications as provided
in the request for quotation and qualified below.
Equipment to be furnished
-Foxboro gauge pressure transmitter
-Conduit. wire and tubing to install transmitter
Tecb,nical services shall include the following:
-Installation of all WHECO furnished equipment
-Pro~rammin~ changes for RTUs.
-Reorientate antennas
-Startup and training
Not included in this proposal.
-Any equipment or service not specifically listed about
-Taxes or bonding cost if applicable.
Labor and Materials as outlined above $ 3,945.00
Equipment delivery is estimated at 3-4 weeks after receipt of order. Invoicing upon completion.
Terms 4496 10. Net 30 days. Please feel Eree to call me if you have any questions.
Sincere ,
Rent Meyerhoeffer
wplcolleyvdle scada2
G-. -..+U~.-~~,.- r .vim
T ~HECO COILtI'0~.4
a d~riri~ of
WHECO Electric, Fnc.
3200 joycr. Dr.
Fort Worth, TX. 76116
(817) 244-6660 -Metro (817) 429_2.it31
F:uc (ft171.ib0.32G3
Apn7 1 S, 2000
Randy Brown. P.E.. Public Works Manager
City of ColleyviJle
Via Fax
Reference: Request of Quotation -City of Colleyville
SCADA Installation -Service Center and Hall Johnson Elevated Tank
Dear Randy:
We appreciate the opportunity to quote this project. Our scope of work shall inchrdr, furnishing the
equipment and technical sersices to perform the SC:ADA Installation and Modifications as provided
in the request for quotation and qualified below.
Equipment to be furnished
-(2)Spread Spectrum Radios. Antennas (1 omni, 1 fagi). Coax. Connectors, ground kits.
and sure protection
-Antenna tower & base
-Motorola CPtJ for Hall Johnson TRA RTU
-Motorola FIU w/enclosure
-Wonderware 256 tag MMI software. SCADAIarm autodialer software
Tecbaical services shall include the following:
-Installation of all WHECO furnished equipment
-Programming for RTUs. MMI and autodialer software
-Startup and training
Not Included in this proposal.
-Any equipment or service not specifically listed above
-Taxes or bonding cost if applicable.
Labor and Materials as outlined above $ 26,725.00
F~,.;.,..,....~ .t.t:.._~.:~ o~.;mated at 3-4 -,•eek~ -r.,- -~........ ,.r ,._.T,_ .......... _ ..
T.. -t _-- -fit t~Nn-.
Terms tfi% 10. Net 30 days. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions.
Sincerel
Kent Meyerhoeffer
wp/colleyville scads
RESOLUTION R-00-1643
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF A TECHNICAL SERVICE
CONTRACT WITH WHECO CONTROLS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A
SUPERVISORY CONTROL AND DATA ACQUISRION (SCADA) SYSTEM FOR THE
REMOTE MONITORING AND CONTROL OF WATER TANK LEVELS
WHEREAS, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) adopted
rules requiring the submittal of a drought contingency plan by September of
1999; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a drought contingency plan in September of 1999;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville also recognizes the importance of evaluating the
adequacy and reliability of the Colleyvilie water distribution system during
drought conditions with continual automated monitoring; and
WHEREAS, on October 7, 1999, the City entered into a contract with Knowlton-English-
Flowers, Inc. (KEF) for the design of a basic Supervisory Control and Data
Acquisition (SCADA) system for the remote monitoring of water storage tank
levels; and
WHEREAS, the Trinity River Authority (TRA) has granted access to the TRA SCADA
system in order to reduce costs for the Colleyville SCADA system; and
WHEREAS, WHECO Controls is familiar with the TRA SCADA system and the necessary
City of Colleyville water tank instrumentation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the City of Colleyville appreaates the privilege of access to the Trinity
River Authority SCADA system and all procedures necessary to protect the
security and integrity of the TRA SCADA system shall be adhered to.
Sec. 2. THAT $30,670 for a technical service contract with WHECO Controls for the
installation and programming of a basic SCADA system is approved.
Resolution R-00-1643
Page 2 of
AND IT !S SO RESOLVED.
Passed by a vote of ayes, nays and abstentions on this the
day of , 2000.
ATTEST:
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE:
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC Donna Arp
City Secretary Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
~~tr ni
~, ~ ~ ~~
T~~„
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05!02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
6
Resolution #
R-00-1644
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
SUBJECT:
Approving the use of Voluntary Park Fund monies
in an amount not to exceed $48,000 for
construction of the Cottonbelt Trail
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
On January 6, 1998, the cities of Colleyville, Southlake and North Richland Hills entered
into an interlocal agreement forming the Tri-City Trail Committee (TCTC) for the
development and construction of the Cottonbelt Trail. Since 1998, the cities have
continued to work with Mesa Design Group, Texas Department of Transportation
(TxDOT) and Dallas Area Regional Transportation (DART) to complete the design of
the trail within monies allocated for Phase I. In May 1998, the Southlake City Council
authorized the release of extraterritorial jurisdiction and inclusion to the limits of the City
of Grapevine the land comprising the project area of the Cottonbelt Trail.
Each city has faced funding issues related to the design and construction of the
(continued)
_C
CITY MANAGER
D ARTMENT H
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1644
Page 2
Cottonbelt Trail. In March 1999, preliminary engineering and cost estimates for each of
the three (3) cities exceeded approved funding, with the Southlake/Grapevine portion
exceeding approved funding by $137,420. In October 1999, North Richland Hills and
Colleyville received approval to reduce their trail limits to attempt to address identified
funding shortfalls. Unfortunately, since Southlake did not receive approval to reduce
their trail limits, they continued to face a funding shortfall of $137,420.
Although the Colleyville trail limit was reduced, the City faced a funding shortfall of
$128,419.30. After reviewing the cost constraints associated with the design and
construction of three (3) railroad crossings (John McCain Road, Pleasant Run Road and
Bransford Road), it was determined that the entire length of the Cottonbelt Trail within
Colleyville would be built on the north side of the DART rights-of--way. On April 18, the
City Council also approved the use of $35,000 of Parkland Dedication Fund monies to
purchase trail right-of-way and construction of 1,100 linear feet of fencing along the
property of Joe Tirk to further reduce Phase I cost estimates. This approval would bring
the total project within the available budget allocation, with a contingency of only
$4,681.70.
In October 1999, the cities of Grapevine, Colleyville and Hurst submitted and received
Congestion, Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) grant monies for
the design and construction of the Cottonbelt Trail, Phase II, project.
The award of the CMAQ funding for the City of Grapevine relieved the City of Southlake
of all cost exceeding the Statewide Enhancement Program (STEP) funding. However,
with the announcement of awarded projects, TxDOT also approved the expansion of
State Highway 26, which would allow for the most cost efficient trail alignment across
Big Bear Creek with construction of a widened pedestrian/vehicular bridge. Since the
project milestones for the expansion of State Highway 26 exceeded the available
timeframe of the current STEP funding, the cities of Southlake and Colleyville initiated
efforts to approach TxDOT to determine if Southlake grant monies in the amount of
$240,000 could be transferred to the Colleyville project. This transfer would address
cost overruns on the Cottonbelt Trail, Phase I, project, meet the timing of the grant
funding cycle and provide Colleyville with additional contingency monies, if needed.
If construction bids for the Cottonbelt Trail, Phase I, project exceed the estimated
project cost of $1,055,318.50, the City would be required to provide total funding to
cover any shortfall. The transfer of the Southlake grant monies would provide
. _ _._
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1644
Page 3
Colleyville with additional contingency monies to address any potential funding shortfall
and/or provide for enhancements, such as parking and pedestrian staging areas for trail
accessibility.
Approval of the transfer of the City of Southlake grant monies in the amount of $240,000
would require a 20% local share match of $48,000. On April 19, the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board unanimously approved the use of Voluntary Park Fund
monies in the amount of $48,000 for this purpose. This funding request is contingent
upon approval of the Southlake City Council. If approved by the cities, this funding
transfer request will be submitted to the local and state TxDOT offices and the
Commission for consideration and approval.
Financial Impact
Funding is available in the Voluntary Park Fund. (See attached).
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of Resolution R-00-1644.
Attachments
Voluntary Park Fund Financial Status, as of February 29, 2000. (paper copy only).
FINANCIAL STATUS OF VOLUNTARY PARK FUND AT 3.31-2000
FUND BALANCE AT 9-30-99.
FY 2000 REVENUE
Donations PROJECTED ACTUAL
October 58.739 SB.739
November 59,313 59.313
December 58.843 58.843
January 59.408 59.408
February 59.488 59.488
March 58.640 58,640
Apnl 58.950 SO
May 59,000 SD
June 59,000 $0
July 59,050 50
August 59,050 SD
September 59.100 50
Total Donations 5108,581 554,431
Interest income Received 510,000 50
TOTAL $118.581 $54,431
FY 2000 EXPENDITURES
RECOMMENDED APPROVED
(BOARD) (COUNCIL)
PICNIC TABLES cS " 52.250 5':.250
b.,~i+NCE uF CViLLE MIDDLE SCHOOL LIGHTING ++ 58,100 88,100
BALANCE OF L.D. LOCKETT HOUSE RENOVATIONS - $2,534 52.534
BALANCE OF WOODBRIAR PARK IMPROVEMENTS "^ $143 $143
BALANCE OF OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN » $16,626 516,628
BALANCE OF CITY PARK SHADE STRUCTURES - 58.060 58,060
L.D. LOCKETT HOUSE IMPROVEMENTS « 522,000 522 000
PLEASANT RUN PRACTICE MASTER PLAN 88 513,500 513.500
COTTONBELT PHASE II GRANT APPLICATION 88 541,236 541,236
TOTAL $114.451 5114.451
5200.692
UNENCUMBERED FUND BALANCE AT 3.3t-2000 (COUNCIL APPROVED)
PROJECTED FUND BALANCE AT 9-30-2000
EXPENDITURE KEY:
" FY 2000 PROJECT/APPROVED AUG 93
*+ FY 2000 PROJECTlAPPROVED JULY 96
- FY 2000 PROJECT/APPROVED MARCH 97
"" FY 2000 PROJECTlAPPROVED JUNE 98
» FY 2000 PROJECT/APPROVED FEB 99
_= FY 2000 PROJECT/APPROVED MAR 99
« FY 2000 PROJECTlAPPROVED SEPT 99
88 FY 2000 PROJECT/APPROVED OCT 99
EXPENDED
$0
50
52,534
$0
516,628
50
51,446
50
50
520,608
5140,672
$204.822
RESOLUTION R-00-1644
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE USE OF VOLUNTARY PARK FUNDS FOR
THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE COTTONBELT TRAIL, PHASE I
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville desires to assist the region, through coordinated
efforts with adjacent cities, to provide cost effective, cost efficient and
safe intermodal access for bicycle and pedestrian traffic; and
WHEREAS, the planned Cottonbelt Trail will serve as the "spine" of the City of
Colleyville citywide trail system; and
WHEREAS, the cities of Colleyville, Grapevine and Hurst were awarded a
Congestion, Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ)
grant for the design and construction of the Cottonbelt Trail, Phase
II; and
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville received a Congestion, Mitigation and Air Quality
Improvement Program (CMAQ) grant for the design and construction
of State Highway 26, which would provide funding for the
construction of a widened pedestrian/vehicular bridge across Big Bear
Creek; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to continue to support the development of
Phase I of the Cottonbelt Trail for the City of Colleyville.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the City Council hereby approves the use of Voluntary Park
Funds, in an amount not to exceed $48,000, to serve as a local share
match for the transfer of the City of Southlake grant monies to the City
of Colleyville for the design and construction of the Cottonbelt Trail,
Phase I.
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
Passed by a vote of ayes, nays, and abstentions, on this
day of , 2000.
Resolution R-99-1644
Page 2 of 2
ATTEST:
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE:
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC Donna Arp
City Secretary Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
~i~r n/
I~ ' ~
Tf[.l5
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05!02!00 CMO Approval:
Item #
7
Resolution #
R-00-9645
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
ENGINEERING
SUBJECT
Approval of a Professional Services Contract with
Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc. for the Colleyville
Boulevard (S.H. 26) Roadway Improvements-
Phase I, in the amount of $1,397,150.00
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
In June 1999, the City Council instructed the City Manager to begin discussions with
Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and North Central Texas Council of
Governments (NCTCOG) on acquiring funding for the reconstruction of State Highway
26. Mr. Curtis Hawk was hired to aid in this effort. After many meetings with TxDOT
and NCTCOG by City Council members and staff, the Regional Transportation Council
on December 09, 1999 approved funding in the amount of $30.4 million dollars for this
project. The funding breakdown is $13.1 million in federal funds, $12.3 million in
state/county funds, and $5 million dollars in City matching funds.
(continued)
G «~,.~
CITY MANAGER
EPARTMENT HEAD
FI IAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1645
Page 2
Staff sent out Request for Proposal's to twelve Civil Engineering firms in early February
2000. Seven firms responded and after a thorough review of the proposals, four firms
were short-listed for reviews. Those fines were:
Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc.
Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc.
Freese and Nichols
HNTB
Staff consisting of Bob Stripling, Dianne McWethy, Bob Whitehead, Keith Fisher,
Choyce Morrow, and Chris Steubing conducted interviews on Wednesday, March 8,
2000 with each of the firms. After several hours of discussion and review of references
and qualifications, the staff chose Teague Nall and Perkins as the design consultant
due to their experience on similar urban design projects and their excellent working
relationship with TxDOT.
TNP's design team will consist of the Parson Transportation Group (transportation
systems engineering), Newman, Jackson, Bieberstein (landscape design), James W.
Daniels and Associates (ROW acquisition), Gorrondona & Associates (surveying), Rone
Engineers (geotechnical engineering), Wendy Lopez & Associates (environmental
engineering), and Dun'ell Palmer Group (public involvement).
~inartcial Impact
The total design fees for the project that includes an aggressive on-site public
involvement process is $3,578,835.00. This project is scheduled in four (4) phases as
outlined below:
Phase (Services -Schematic Design $1,397,150.00
Phase II Services -Preliminary Design $ 920,200.00
Phase III Services -Final Design $1,137,125.00
Phase IV Services -Construction Administration $ 124.360.00
Total Contract $3,578,835.00
Phase I design in the amount of $1,397,150.00 will be financed from the Tax Increment
Finance (TIF) Revenue Bonds proposed to be sold in the Fall 2000. Later in the
agenda is a resolution for the reimbursement from the bond sale of the expenditures for
Colleyville Boulevard (S.H. 26) contract with Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc.
The City of Colleyville will seek reimbursement from TxDOT for the design fees
associated with this project.
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1645
Page 3
In order to complete the reconstruction of Colleyville Boulevard (S.H. 26) two additional
contracts will need to be awarded. During the Phase II -Preliminary Design the City of
Colleyville's water and sewer lines in and adjacenf to Colleyville Boulevard will need to
be designed for relocation, the estimated cost of the Professional Services is
$330,000.00. During the Phase III -Final Design a contract for right-of-way acquisition
for an estimated cost of $878,000.00 will need to be awarded.
Attachments 1, 2 and 3 are not part of the contract, but are included for informational
purposes. Attachment 1 is a series of comparisons of the professional service fees for
the entire (Phase I - IV) engineering contract. The first comparison is TNP's basic
service fee ($1,348,547) vs. the Consulting Engineer Council's General Engineering
Services -Curves of Median Compensation. The "Curve" displays a "Basic Charge
Percent" for the construction cost. TNP's fee is 5.91 % compared to the uCurve" of
5.80%. The second and third comparisons are ones TxDOT uses to compare fees. FM
4 is a contract already approved by TxDOT. In both of these comparisons TNP's fee
"per sheet" and "man hours per sheet" are lower than TxDOT's negotiated fee for FM 4.
The fourth and fifth comparisons are for two of the special services. Both show that
TNP's fees are reasonable compared to TxDOT approved contract.
Recommendation
City staff recommends the approval of a professional services contract with Teague Nall
and Perkins, Inc. in the amount not to exceed $1,397,150.00 for Phase I design of the
project. Approval of Resolution R-00-1645.
Attachments
#1 -Comparison Data
#2 -Probable Project Cost
#3 -Summary of Consultant fees (See paper copy)
#4 -Teague Nall and Perkins Contrail, Attachments A-D1, and Exhibits A-C
ATTACHMENT #1
COMPARISON DATA FOR SH 26 FEE
04/25/00
COMPARE BASIC SERVICES FEE TO CURVE "A":
BASIC SERVICES (excl. Direct Costs):
Item 1 -Data Collection and Review $21,578
Item 2 -Project Mgmt. (excl. 2.1) $70,694
Item 7 -Preliminary Engineering $251,337
Item 8 - PS&E Development $904,528
Item 13 -Construction Administration $60,160
Item 14 -Duality Assurance Program $40,250
TOTAL S1,348,547
PERCENT OF CONSTRUCTION:
Basic Services $1,348,547
Construction Cost (excl. Landscape): $22,800,000
Percent g.g1 ~,~
CURVE "A" PERCENTAGE: 5.8096
COMPARE COST PER SHEET TO FM 4:
SH 26 BASIC SERVICES FEE (same as above): $1,348,547
SH 26 NUMBER OF SHEETS (excl. Landscape, W&SS): 404
SH 26 PER SHEET COST: 53,337.99
FM 4 BASIC SERVICES FEE (excl. survey and EA): $175,707
FM NUMBER OF SHEETS (excl. Landscape, W&SS): 46
FM 4 PER SHEET COST: 53,819.72
MANHOUR COMPARISON TO FM 4:
SH 26 MANHOURS (for items listed above as basic services): 16,979
SH 26 NUMBER OF SHEETS: 404
SH 26 MANHOURS PER SHEET: 42
FM 4 MANHOURS (excl survey and EA): 2,077
FM 4 NUMBER OF SHEETS: 46
FM 4 MANHOURS PER SHEET: 45
Page 1 of 2
MPARE FIELD SURVEYS AND SUPPLEMENTAL SURVEYS TO FM 2552:
SH 26 FIELD &SUPPL. SURVEY: $278,a
SH 26 PRICE PER MILE (4.2 MILES): 566,1
FM 2552 FIELD 8~ SUPPL. SURVEY: $66,0
FM 2552 PRICE PER MILE (1.19 MILES): S55,4
THE R.O.W. WIDTH OF FM 2552 IS ONLY 80 FEET COMPARED TO
120+ FOR SH 26.
COMPARE EA DOCUMENT COST TO FM 2552:
SH 26 EA: $88,329
SH 26 PRICE PER MILE (4.2 MILES): 521,031
FM 2552 FIELD 8~ SUPPL. SURVEY: $27,478
FM 2552 PRICE PER MILE (1.19 MILES): 523,091
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT #2
04-25-00
OPINION OF PROBABLE PROJECT COST
Colleyville Blvd. (S.H. 26)
(Cheek-Sparger Road to Pool Road)
City of Colleyville, Texas
Roadway Improvements
Paving, Drainage, Bridge Traffic Signals, Illumination,
Landscaping, Streetscape $26,100,000
Utility Relocations (Water ~ Sanitary Sewer) $4,x30,000
Construction and Design
Right-of-WaylEasement Acquisition $11,4so,ooo
Cost of Purchase, Closing Costs, Fees for Appraisal
Services, Fees for Acquisition Services
Relocation of Franchise Utilities Underground $7,000,000
Consultant Services -Roadway Design $3,5so,ooo
Engineering, Environmental Documentation,
Surveying, Public Information, Geotechnical, Project
Management, Landscape Architecture
Project Contingencies (approx. Z%) $1,000,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST x53,990,000
ATTACHMENT #3
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED CONSULTANT FEES
FOR COLLEYVILLE BLVD. PROJECT (ROADWAY DESIGN)
aarzsroo
)~v _• ~•
'r~~r:.;
?::'`~{•`':`:£i;:`.':"j
n
.i:~ri~: ,: •.4
:.
4~_~~yw;~:i=':-•
~::,i0,}..NG.,
1.1 " :~, • . w { tiLx.,,-.,..M1~,•.,,,., ,..j4>µ~{t~`.....i•.` t„a,.-,. \, ~4ti::44-C:\,:
x~, yt \•. ~•.',v : 't•:•xi}`,..~v: vvy:: n}i
::? '4~:~v'c,+. .., :>:w:Y' ::~. ,.. 'kj>A•,. '~:?2+ .:Cj\2i~a::'it~,',~','k`~:t"t4k' , ~S .,.ti`,\".^,.`.a~~:::::::.:
:3.~..j.,..; .•.` ..;2. .:.<„f~:t.,y~$;:y-~{.: 02 .~7t :,~:•,`+~?s:•:. w~?~:.. .r a t ~_.
`L
•t:,:iv .. ~.v ~•~+v j.S\•. ~~~'C~'. ..~•.,:\~•`.~i},::j`.'•.`:\i{.~%v.~, ,y,:.i}~v •`i,-:':~,~~'~ ;
v...~•.n: • M
v .: ,. ,,,•. 4
...•
..... -,\s.'tv::
> ,,~~qY:i,:tip°p,~• :.j..y,~:~{•ti~\ y;,ti:,'t \~:::k:';:2ti
<+~{{• .i?.~f.~Cra.:i4`a.V~~~~*ia. ,,`A` ,~v Yi-i`i,
.. .. .... , n,.n........ :. v.
Data Cdlection ` "•y~:y;.: .~,:'o-.`'ii::~;:.
i ,v\,:i,•\:'{'v'ii::i-.
~ >:,y::-:'.:`>:::::;
\)w}'l~h~~`ti`AJ,i:`i:,
,
`
':?~; tiny.......... }y:..
:::~\"1a::~.::"'`.,i
,>5':, -.-\V...'.
.,,,.. .n w.: ....a
515,430
1.2 Data Review 56,148
1.3 Direct Cost 5500
?i::, • v{,iY
nvUyv
.2.1 Subtotal - Tssk 1
•.i,t. `.4 ~Y 4 : \v Mt.'J :. • \v' ::i;.ti: J i •y:•{ :~:jj. ,v;4
^;,a.: ,,. atl.. u,~Q.2ZFh=.~`2t,~:\\i w,{2::2}2:Q{2, ii'i,.:,4~ ::'it: ii :.`
Pro Administration 522,078
.
.
.5256,570
2.2 Pr ress Meeti 544,454
2.3 Critical Path Schedule for Pro' 517,820
2.4 B 513,420
2.5 Direct Cost 55,000
, Subtotal -Task 2 5337,264
3.1 .. .,.
General Public Information
j ~ 5213,105
3.2 On-SRe Presence P Office 5223,300
3.3 Deli n Phase Public Information 571,260
3.4 Construction Phase Information 558,400
4.1 Subtotal -Task 3
t„?.::.:
Determine Pro rt Ownershi 5566,065
.~ ,•`5522,000
4.2 R' ht-of-En 59,000
4.3 R' ht-of-Wa Data 220 Parcels, 110 RMJ Parcels, 145 Esmts. 5570,000
4.4 Field Surve 5110,000
4.5 Su ntal Surve s 5168,000
-5.1-~~~ Subtotal -Task 4
Environmental Documentation 5879,000
573,120
5.2 Public Heart 512,380
5.3 Direct Cost 52,829
6.1 Subtotal -Task 5
Subsurface Ex locations 588,329
518,100
6.2 Laborato Services 513,400
6.3 En ineerin R rt 510,200
-
. Subtotal -Task 6
~. 541,700
>~:w?:
~
•~•~
7.1 n Schematic 5221
,565
7.2 Prelimina Draina draulics 525,651
7.3 Preser>tation of Schematic Desi 54,120
7.4 Direct Cost 514,939
u to -Task 7
>~:~:>:;
:..,.,,,..,.....,:..,.........,..r ... ,... 5266,275
.•:,.,......
5299,s73
8.2 H drol 8 H draulics 5132,219
8.3 Si nin 8 Pavement Markin 545,702
8.4 S uence of Work 526,765
8.5 Traffic Control Plans 5191,715
8.6 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Pfan & Erosion Control Plan 529,002
8.7 Permanent Traffic 5i nal S stem Anai sis and Desi n 596,758
8.8 Illumination ~ n 557,162
8.9 PSB~E Documerrts xDOT Format 525,632
8.10 Direct Cost 524,939
Subtotal -Task 8 5929,467
.2
9.3
9.4 ~:
~- Site Reconnaissance and Schematic Desi n ~- ~~~-
Prelimina D n
Final Desi n
Construction Phase
5129,845
569,387
580,880
~ 800
it>::>:> <::>:<<: •
1
..>.: Subtotal -Task 9
'.
:::.:.:.....::......::...... S284,912
......:::::..:..........
10.1 .
P re ications for CMAO Fundi .........................
Subtotal -Task f0 S5,2S0
~vu'..: p v+w
~~ ;A,iv\:j`3}wM1,Mi
v} ~~~ .~2.~v Z~~ ~~i~v ~'>~:~? h;
11.1 Pr rc Pariti M' ' ~ n Assessmerd 312,500
11.2 Pr rc and Plans for ARemative Parki 36.250
Subtotal-Task 11 518,750
ns~if i' :.
~.v ._r
.~i~iLvti<i u '•v.
~ } vk~~~ .a~„i • ~'tii~a~`itiw~v.~i~"i~v . ~'vti4v. ~ • ~ ~~ ~~ \i,{,~h\;.ii~<A~
12.1 Li bled, Below Grade Crossin at Little Bear Creek 313,170
12.2 'bled, Below Grade C at B' Bear Creels 513,170
12.3 Tra~7 Extension From John McCain Road to Pool RoadlBrumbw Avenue 510,620
12.4 Direct Cost 51,375
Subtotal - Tssk 1? 538,335
>;Y•`."`'.2-``C.A$`~A <:v`:•`. `yC~K.z`~+ ~~.~.+'av`}`.~~K~Ya`2.`.:: .-O: .. ??%2~.vi'zA`.= v:~j~.`:;ti`2 ~;*1:?`?~L::`•`.;``.=^2
13.1 Pre-Construction Meeti 51,680
13.2 Construction Meetin one r month 519,500
13.3 Review Sho Drawin 512,280
13.4 General Construction Su roblem Resolution 512,200
13.5 Cha Orders 38,400
13.6 Address Accesslssues 56,100
13.7 Direct Cost 51,000
Subtotal-Task i8 561,160
' . ~ .
14.1 Establish R wired Review Plan 5968
14.2 Define Review Schedule and Procedures 52,914
14.3 Present Pr ram to Task Leaders 57,452
14.4 Identif Review R nsibilities 52,904
14.5 Document DAP ram 32,914
14.6 Monitor QA Schedules 329,098
SubtoW - Tssk 14 540,250
v. ::v v.:..v:..:vv.
w.v:•nv:.w: ::...:.
>Yi 4'..iiii'vyn ::::
:...:..:..... ;.
i:v{
>}:;.i.;:;:ji{iiii:
....:: .: ..
..... ..
•v'v.•%' \4; xv~i \ ~' ;.i~y~W:iA;~..:4iiryiy:.,,iu4~~'>~Vti~i~k 1'+` ;x 1}4Wj;:~ 1{.}•~:
i=''
yeti-.~i•iAvuv'v A.. \kvii: v~+~•,hv
t... ~.. .. ::. 4ii•y}y}~vl+. ... .. Y.. .w[~ilih~C`4~.. QYh°i~'M'\m.•..:.:.....
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED CONSULTANT FEES FOR ROADWAY DESIGN
BY PHASE
Phase (Services -Schematic Design Plans 51,397,150
phase II Services -Preliminary PS8~E $620.200
Phase III Services -Final PS$E 31,137,125
Phase IV Services -Construction Administration 5124,360
ESTIMATED CONSULTANT FEES FOR
ROADWAY DESIGN 53,578,835
(Note: Fees for Water and Sanitary Sewer Relocation Design and Right-of-Way AppraisaUAcquisition
Services are not included in this summary.)
Date:
THE STATE OF TEXAS )
~ CONTRACT
COUNTY OF TARRANT )
THIS CONTRACT is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, a Texas municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", and
TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS, INC., a Texas professional corporation, whose local address
is 1100 Macon Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102, hereinafter referred to as "Engineer". The
terms of this Contract shall be administered on behalf of the City by its Director of Public
Services or his designated representative, hereinafter referred to as "Director".
WITNESSETH:
The City hereby contracts for the services of Engineer to complete Phase (Services -
Schematic Design Plans, as described in Attachment "B" for the COLLEYVILLE BLVD. (S.H.
26) PROJECT, from Cheek-Sparger Road to Pool Road in the Cities of Colleyville and
Grapevine, Tarrant County, Texas in accordance with the terms of this contract.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. Services of the Citv
1
1. The City will fumish items as listed in Attachment "A", "Services to be Provided
by the City", attached hereto and made a part of this engineering contract.
B. Services of the Engineer
1. The Engineer will furnish professional services for Phase I -Schematic Design
Plans, as set forth in Attachment "B", "Services to be Provided by the Engineer", and all
Attachments related thereto, attached hereto and made a part of this engineering contract.
Prior to the execution of this contract, the Engineer will furnish the City a detailed scope of
work for the entire project (Phases I - IV). This SCOPE OF WORK will accompany the
contract and be marked EXHIBIT "A", "Detailed Scope of Work for Project".
2. The services of the Engineer, as set forth in Attachment "B" and more
specifically detailed in EXHIBIT "A", will be approved by the City in several phases through a
series of contracts. This contract represents the "Phase I Services" and includes only the
tasks identified in EXHIBIT "B", "Phase I Services". An outline for subsequent phases of the
Engineer's services is reflected in EXHIBIT "C", "Outline of Subsequent Phases", however,
the scope of services for each phase is subject to being changed prior to approval of a
formal contract for same, and is, therefore, included herein for information purposes only.
TIME FOR COMPLETION
Engineer agrees to complete and submit the work outlined in Attachment "B" in
accordance with the schedule outlined in Attachment "D", "Project Schedule". This
time-frame may be extended or suspended, with the mutual written consent of both parties,
due to delays in:
1) the approval of contracts for subsequent phases of work;
2) the acquisition of right of-way;
3) reviews by the City, TxDOT, other agencies or franchised utilities; or
4) other such matters beyond the control of City or Engineer.
2
and/or, to allow additional time for such items as:
1) public input and review; or
2) identification of funding sources.
Phase I Services will be completed and submitted in accordance with Attachment "D-1 ",
"Project Schedule for Phase I Services", unless extended or suspended as stated above.
COMPENSATION: BASIC, SPECIAL, ADDITIONAL, AND TOTAL
ENGINEERING SERVICES FEE
The City shall pay and the Engineer agrees to accept in full compensation for the
engineering services to be performed under this contract, fees as outlined below. The basis
for the TOTAL ENGINEERING FEE is as indicated in Attachment "C", "Consultant Fee
Summary - Phase I Services".
A. Basic Engineering Services Fee - Phase I Services
I. The BASIC ENGINEERING SERVICES FEE, as described in Attachment "C",
shall provide compensation for Engineer's work for the Phase I Services of this project as
described in EXHIBIT "B", with the exception of that work described thereon, as SPECIAL
SERVICES or ADDITIONAL SERVICES.
2. The basis for compensation shall be Lump Sum. The total BASIC
ENGINEERING SERVICES FEE shall not exceed One Million Eighty-Eight Thousand Nine
Hundred Ninety-Five and No/100 Dollars ($ 1.088,995.00 ).
3. The BASIC ENGINEERING SERVICES FEE shall be paid as follows:
3
(a) Engineer shall submit monthly statements for services rendered, based
upon percentage of completion of the work. City shall make prompt monthly
payments in the amount shown by the Engineer's approved monthly statements
and other documentation submitted within thirty days of Engineer's invoice
date. Within thirty (30) days after final completion and acceptance by the
Director of all work under this Contract, final payment of the balance shall be
made.
(b) Nothing contained in this section shall require the City to pay for any
work which is unsatisfactory as determined by the Director, or which is not
submitted in compliance with the terms of this Contract. City shall not be
required to make any payments to the Engineer when the Engineer is in default
under this Contract, nor shall this paragraph constitute a waiver of any right, at
law or in equity, which the City may have if the Engineer is in default, including
the right to bring legal action for damages or for specific performance of this
Contract. Waiver of any default under this Contract shall not be deemed a
waiver of any subsequent default.
B. Special Services Fee - Phase I Services
1. The SPECIAL SERVICES FEE as described in Attachment "C" for the Phase I
Services shall provide compensation to Engineer for those items listed as SPECIAL
SERVICES in EXHIBIT "B". A budget has been established for each Special Service item for
the purposes of this contract based upon a number of assumptions that the Engineer and
City have reviewed. However, the actual circumstances and/or effort could be greater or
less than that anticipated due to events beyond the control of either the City of the Engineer.
In such case, the actual effort shall be monitored against the proposed budget and the City
shall be notified when 80% of the budget is expended. In no case shall the maximum fee for
SPECIAL SERVICES, as stated herein, be exceeded without specific written authorization
from the City.
2. The basis of compensation for SPECIAL SERVICES shall be on a reimbursable
fee basis as shown on the current Standard Hourly Rate Schedule attached to this contract.
4
All direct, non-labor costs and expenses shall be reimbursed at an invoice cost plus 10°~.
Direct non-labor costs shall include atl expenses related to establishing and maintaining a
Project Information Headquarters Office along the project site, such as setup, breakdown,
utilities, lease, phone, site preparation, etc. The maximum SPECIAL SERVICES FEE for
Phase I Services shall not exceed Three Hundred Eight Thousand One Hundred Fiftv-Five
and No/100 Dollars ($ 308.155.00) without prior written authorization by the City.
3. Payment for SPECIAL SERVICES shall be on the basis of actual progress
invoiced monthly to the City.
C. Additional Services Fee - Phase I Services
1. ADDITIONAL SERVICES are services not specifically described in Exhibit "B"
as Basic Services or Special Services and will be performed by the Engineer only as
specifically authorized in writing by the City. These services shall be added to the Contract
through a supplemental agreement that identifies the specific scope and compensation for
same, prior to being performed by the Engineer. If the Engineer is of the opinion that any
work he has been directed to perform is beyond the scope of this contract and constitutes
additional work, he shall promptly notify the City in writing.
D. Total Engineerinca Fee - Phase I Services
1. The TOTAL ENGINEERING FEE for Phase I Services shall be the sum of the
BASIC ENGINEERING SERVICES FEE and SPECIAL SERVICES FEE. The TOTAL
ENGINEERING FEE for this Contract shall not exceed One Million Three Hundred Ninety-
Seven Thousand One Hundred Fiftv and No/100 Dollars ($1.397,150.00), unless authorized
otherwise by the City.
IV.
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
5
Mylar record copies of original tracings, cross sections, preliminary plans, special
provisions, and field notes shall become the sole property of the City of Colleyville and shall
be delivered to City upon completion of the services to be rendered by Engineer and full
payment to Engineer of the sums to be paid to Engineer under this Contract, without
restriction on future use, however, Engineer shall not be liable or responsible for any use of
documents by City for any purpose other than for the project described in this Contract, and
City shall indemnify and hold harmless Engineer from Liability and claims, including
attorneys fees arising therefrom.
V.
ENGINEER'S LIABILITY
A. After acceptance of the final plans and special provisions by City, Engineer agrees,
prior to and during the construction of this project, to perform such engineering services as
may be required by City to correct errors or omissions on the original plans prepared by
Engineer and to change the original design as required by such errors or omissions.
B. Changes or redesign requested in writing by the City to previously satisfactorily
completed work or parts thereof, shall be at additional compensation for Engineer, and will
be paid for as "Additional Services".
C. Acceptance and release for construction of the final plans by the City shall not
constitute nor be deemed a release of this responsibility and liability of Engineer, its
employees, associates, agents, subcontractors and consultants for their Designs, Working
Drawings and Specifications, or other Documents and work; nor shall such release for
construction be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility by the City for any defect
in the Designs, Working Drawings and Specifications or other Documents prepared by
Engineer, its employees, associates, subcontractors, agents and consultants.
s
D. Engineer agrees to defend, indemnify and hold City, its officers, and employees,
harmless against claims, lawsuits, judgments, costs and expenses including attorney's fees
and collection costs for personal injury, death, property damage or other harm arising out of
or being caused by the negligent acts or omissions of Engineer, its officers, or employees, in
the performance of this Contract; except that the indemnity provided for in this paragraph
shall not apply to any liability resulting from the negligence of City, its officers, agents,
employees or separate contractors. City hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
Engineer harmless against claims, lawsuits, costs and expenses (including attorneys' fees
and collection costs) therefrom. In the event of joint and concurrent negligence of both the
Engineer and City, responsibility, if any, shall be apportioned comparatively in accordance
with the laws of the State of Texas, without, however, waiving any governmental immunity
available to the City under Texas law and without waiving any defenses of the parties under
Texas law. The provisions of this paragraph are solely for the benefit of the parties hereto
and not intended to create or grant any rights, contractual or otherwise, to any other person
or entity.
VI.
INSURANCE
Engineer, at Engineer's sole cost, shall purchase and maintain the following minimum
insurance during the term of this Contract:
A. Worker's Compensation as required by Texas law.
B. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance, including Contractual Liability, covering
but not limited to, the liability assumed under the indemnification provisions of this Contract,
fully insuring Engineer's liability for injury or death of City's employees and third parties;
extended to include personal injury coverage, and for damage to City's existing property and
property of third parties, with the minimum limits for each occurrence and aggregate of
$300,000.00. The City of Colleyville shall be named as additional insured.
7
C. Where Engineer intends to use motor vehicles at the project site, Comprehensive
Automobile and Truck Liability Insurance covering owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles,
with the minimum limits of $300,000.00 per occurrence and aggregate for bodily injury and
property damage.
D. Professional Liability coverage of not less than $1,000,000.00 single limit and
aggregate. The cost of all insurance required herein to be secured and maintained by
Engineer shall be borne solely by Engineer, with certificates evidencing such minimum
coverage in force to be filed with the City. Such cert~cates shall provide that City shall
receive 30 days prior written notice of any cancellation.
VII.
CONTRACT TERMINATION
In connection with the work outlined in this Contract, it is agreed that the Director may
cancel further work by written notice to Engineer with the understanding that immediately
upon receipt of said notice all work and labor being performed under this contract shall
cease. Before the end of a thirty (30) day period following such notice, Engineer shall invoice
the City for all work completed and shall be compensated in accordance with the terms of
this Contract for all work performed by Engineer prior to the receipt of said notice. No
payment shall be made by City to Engineer for lost or anticipated profits. All plans, field
surveys, maps, cross sections and other data related to the project shall become the
property of City upon termination of this Contract and payment to Engineer as provided
herein. Nothing herein shall deprive City of its right to terminate this Contract for breach of
same by Engineer, and City retains its right to any and all remedies it may have, at law or at
equity, to strictly enforce the terms of this Contract, including, but not limited to, its right to
seek specific performance of the terms hereof. In case of any default by Engineer, City shall
notify Engineer in writing of same. If Engineer does not remedy or commence to remedy the
default within ten (10) days of said notice, City may terminate this Contract for cause and/or
pursue any legal remedy it may have against Engineer.
8
vlll.
APPLICABLE LAW AND VENUE
This Contract is entered into subject to the Charter and Ordinances of the City of
Colleyville, as amended, and applicable Federal and Texas State laws. The provisions of
this Contract shall be construed in accordance with the laws and court decisions of Tarrant
County and the State of Texas; and exclusive venue for any litigation which may be filed by
either party hereto in connection with this Contract shall be in Tarrant County, Texas.
IX.
ASSIGNMENT
This Contract shall be deemed personal to Engineer and in no event shall be sublet or
assigned without written approval of City.
X.
RIGHT OF REVIEW; INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
Engineer agrees that City may review any and all work performed by Engineer on this
project. The relationship of Engineer to City is that of Independent Contractor.
XI.
NONDISCRIMINATION
As a condition of this Contract, Engineer agrees that, in connection with any work
under this Contract, Engineer will not discriminate in the employment of any individual or
9
groups on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, or handicap
unrelated to job performance, either directly, indirectly, or through contractual or other
arrangement. In this regard, Engineer shall keep, retain and safeguard all records relating to
this Contract or work performed hereunder for a minimum period of four (4) years from final
Contract completion, with full access allowed to authorized representatives of the City, upon
request, for purposes of evaluating compliance with this and other provisions of the Contract.
10
X11.
FINANCIAL INTEREST PROHIBITED
Engineer agrees and represents that Engineer, its officers, employees, agents,
consultants and subcontractors will have no known financial interest, direct or indirect, in the
purchase or sale of any product, materials or equipment that will be recommended or
required for the construction of the project.
XIII.
RIGHT OF AUDIT
The Engineer shall maintain, and the City shall have the right to examine books,
records, documents, and other evidence sufficient to reflect properly all direct and indirect
costs claimed to have been incurred and anticipated to be incurred in the performance of this
Contract. Such right of examination shall include inspection at all reasonable times of the
Engineer's offices or facilities, or such parts thereof, as may be engaged in the performance
of this Contract.
XIV.
DBE GOAL
The percentage goal for Disadvantaged Business Enterprise participation in the work to be
performed during Phases I, II, III 8~ IV is a minimum 15°~ of the total contract amount for all
four (4) phases. Although the percentage of DBE participation will vary for each individual
phase of services and for each individual contract, the Engineer has committed to making a
good faith effort to achieve a minimum 15°~ DBE participation in the total contract amount for
Phases I, II, III 8~ IV.
The selected DBE must be from the Texas Department of Transportation approved list.
11
XV.
FEDERAL REGULATION
Cost principals must be based on the provision of 48 CFR Chapter 1, Part 31 Federal
Acquisition Regulation lFAR31).
XVI.
ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
A. Engineer shall be entitled to rely upon the accuracy of data and information provided
by the City or others without independent review or evaluation.
B. Any Opinion of Probable Construction Cost prepared by Engineer represents his
judgment as a design professional and is supplied for the general guidance of the City.
Since Engineer has no control over the cost of labor and material, or over competitive
bidding or market conditions, Engineer does not guarantee the accuracy of such opinions as
compared to contractor bids or actual cost to the City.
C. The City agrees that in accordance with generally accepted construction practices,
the construction contractor will be required to assume sole and complete responsibility for
job site conditions during the course of construction of the project, including safety of all
persons and property, and that this requirement shall be made to apply continuously and not
be limited to normal working hours.
D. The City will require that any Contractor pertorming work in connection with the
project for which Engineer is providing professional services, hold harmless, indemnify and
defend City, Engineer, their consultants, and each of their directors, officers, agents and
employees from any and all liability, claims, losses, damage and costs, including attorneys'
fees, arising out of or alleged to arise from the Contractor's performance of the work
12
described in the construction contract documents, but not including liability that may be due
to the sole negligence of the City, Engineer, their consultants, or their directors, offices,
agents and employees.
The City will require the Contractor to provide workers' compensation and commercial
general liability insurance, including completed operations and contractual liability, with the
latter coverage sufficient to insure the Contractor's indemnity, as above required; and such
insurance shall include the City, Engineer, their consultants, and each of their directors,
officers, agents and employees as additional insureds.
The insurance afforded to these additional insureds shall be primary insurance. If the
additional insureds have other insurance which might be applicable to any loss, the amount
of the insurance provided under this article shall not be reduced or prorated by the existence
of such other insurance.
Within five (5) working days of City's receipt of the fully executed construction contract
documents, the City agrees to forward to Engineer a complete certified copy of the same.
The documents copied to Engineer will include, but not be limited to, the executed
agreement, bonds, and all required insurance certificates and endorsements.
E. In providing its services hereunder, Engineer shall not be responsible for handling,
containment, abatement, or in any other respect, for any asbestos or hazardous material if
such is present in connection with the project. In the event that City becomes aware of the
presence of asbestos or hazardous material at the job site, City shall be responsible for
complying with all applicable federal and state rules and regulations, and shall immediately
notify Engineer, who shall then be entitled to cease any of its services that may be affected
by such presence, without any liability to Engineer arising therefrom.
13
xvll.
NOTICES
All written notices and correspondence given to City by Engineer shall be mailed or
delivered to the City of Colleyville, Robert R. Whitehead, Director of Public Services, 5400
Bransford Road, P.O. Box 185 Colleyville, Texas 76034. All written notices and
correspondence from City to Engineer shall be mailed or delivered to the Engineer as
follows: Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc., Michael A. Jones, 1100 Macon Street, Fort Worth,
Texas 76102.
14
EXECUTED this the day of , 2000, the CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE signing by and through the Mayor, Donna Arp, adopted by City Council on
and Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc., signing by and through its Vice President, has caused
this instrument to be executed by its duly authorized officials.
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
ey:
Donna Arp
Mayor
Michael A. Jones, P.E.
Vice President -Secretary
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON
List of Attachments 8~ Exhibits
Attachment A -Services to be Provided by the City
Attachment B -Services to be Provided by the Engineer
Attachment C -Consultant Fee Summary, Phase I Services
Attachment D -Overall Project Schedule
Attachment D-1 -Project Schedule: Phase I Services
Exhibit A -Detailed Scope of Work for Project
Exhibit B - Phase I Services
Exhibit C -Outline of Subsequent Phases
TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS, INC.
By:
15
TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS, INC.
Standard Rate Schedule for Reimbursable/Multiplier Contracts
Effective January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000
(updated 3/7/00)
Engineering /Technical From
To
Principal $125 - $150 Per Hour
Senior Engineer $75 - $106 Per Hour
Engineer $65 - $95 Per Hour
Graduate Engineer $55 - $80 Per Hour
Senior Designer $65 - $95 Per Hour
Landscape Architect /Planner $65 - $80 Per Hour
CAD Operator $40 - $65 Per Hour
Draftsman $40 - $65 Per Hour
Clerical $35 - $55 Per Hour
Resident Project Representative $37.50 - $50 Per Hour
Surveying From To
R. P. L. S. $75 - $95 Per Hour
Senior Survey Technician $55 - $65 Per Hour
Junior Survey Technician $45 - $55 Per Nour
2-Person Field Crew w/Equipment $80 - $90 Per Hour
3-Person Field Crew w/Equipment $100 - $110 Per Hour
2-Person G.P.S. Crew w/Equipment $120 - $130 Per Hour
3-Person G.P.S. Crew w/Equipment $140 - $150 Per Hour
1-Person Robotic Crew w/Equipment $75 - $85 Per Hour
2-Person Robotic Crew w/Equipment $95 - $105 Per Hour
Direct Cost Reimbursables
Xerox Copies $0.10/page
Plots (Full Size) $10.00/each
Plots (11" x 17") $2.50/each
Blueline Prints $1.00/each
Mylar Sepias $4.00/each
Mileage $0.31 /mile
~s
ATTACHMENT "A"
SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY
Colleyville Boulevard (S.H. 26)
City of Colleyvilie, Texas
A. The City of Colleyville will provide to the Engineer:
Data that the City has on file concerning the project, if available. (i.e.,
environmental documents, utility information, public hearing transcripts, cost
estimates, etc. )
2. Full information regarding requirements for the Project, including a program, which
sets forth the City's objectives, schedules, budgets, constraints and criteria.
3. A designated representative authorized to act on the City's behalf with respect to
the Project.
4. Prompt written notice if the City becomes aware of any fault or defect in the Project
or non-conformance in the performance of the Engineer.
5. Available interface data for any projects adjacent to this project, including as-built
plans.
6. An example estimate, general notes master file, sample specification list, and
related hard copy documentation for the Engineer's use in preparing preliminary
estimate, general notes, and specifications.
7. Available and applicable paper prints of design standards, and a diskette with any
available design files containing a sample title sheet, plan-profile sheet, plan
sheet, quantity sheet, standard construction details and storm water pollution
prevention/erosion control details.
8. Record drawings of existing highway facilities, if available.
9. Existing right-of-way plans, plats and/or easements for Colleyville Blvd. and
adjacent properties.
10. Any geotechnical information that may be available for Colleyville Blvd. or
surrounding areas.
11. Available horizontal and vertical control points.
12. Copies of all franchise utility agreements.
Attachment A
Page 1 of 2
B. The City of Colleyville will assist the Engineer:
1. In obtaining required data and information from other local, regional, State and
Federal agencies.
2. By providing timely reviews and decisions necessary in order to permit the
Engineer to maintain an agreed upon project schedule.
3. In coordinationlnegotiation with franchise utility companies regarding relocation of
their facilities.
C. The City of Colleyville will provide for the following items separate ano apart from the
terms of this contract, but in support of the Engineer's work under this contract.
1. Clerical support for database entry of various types of information throughout the
design and construction phases.
2. Advertisement cost for public advertisements and notices.
3. Personnel support to collect comment/suggestion cards and messages from 24-
hour hot-line.
4. Construction management and community liaison for Roadway Improvement
project.
5. Construction inspection and management for Water and Sanitary Sewer
Relocation project.
6. Media Spokesperson.
Attachment A
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT "B"
SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE ENGINEER
Colleyville Boulevard (S.H. 26)
City of Colleyville, Texas
GENERAL
The City of Colleyville, in cooperation with TxDOT, is proposing to reconstruct Colleyville
Blvd. (S.H. 26) from Cheek-Sparger Road to Pool Road, a length of approximately 4.2 miles.
The proposed reconstructed facility will be a six-lane divided, urban arterial with a raised
landscaped median where possible. This project provides for the development of one (1) set
of construction plans for the reconstruction and improvement of Colleyville Blvd. A second
set of plans for the relocation and improvement of the City's existing water and sanitary
sewer utilities along S.H. 26 will also be necessary for the completion of this project, but will
be provided under a separate scope of work and contract.
In general, the work to be performed by the Engineer for this project will consist of providing
engineering services for the complete development of plans, specifications, and estimates
for the reconstruction of the above described roadway, along with other related services
such as Surveying, an Environmental Assessment, Geotechnical Investigations, Project
Management, and Landscape Architecture Design. The Engineer shall collect, review, and
evaluate the available material pertaining to the project and prepare the Plans, Specification
and Estimates (PS&E) in accordance with the policies, procedures and requirements of the
Texas Department of Transportation, under direction from the City of Colleyville.
A preliminary draft and final Environmental Assessment (EA) report documenting the social,
economic and environmental impacts of the project is required and will be prepared in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and TxDOT guidelines with a
Finding Of No Significant Impact (FONSI) anticipated.
The construction plans for this project will include plans and details pertaining to grading,
paving, structures, drainage, signing, pavement marking, traffic delineation, signalization,
landscaping, streetscaping, sequence of construction, traffic control, erosion control and
stormwater pollution prevention, as necessary for construction. The PS&E will be complete
and suitable for the bidding and award of a construction contract. It shall be prepared in
accordance with the applicable requirements of TxDOT Specifications, Standards and
Manuals. Whenever possible, TxDOT's standard drawings, standard specifications, or
previously approved special provisions and/or special specifications will be used. If a
special provision or special specification must be developed for this project, it shall be in
TxDOT format and, to the extent possible, incorporate references to approved TxDOT
procedures.
It is anticipated that a significant amount of additional right-of-way and certain easements will
be required in order to construct this project. The Engineer will conduct property surveys,
prepare right-of-way maps, furnish field notes and provide individual parcel exhibits for up to
110 right-of-way and 145 easement takings. Right-of-way appraisal and acquisition services
Attachment B
Page 1 of 3
will be provided for under a separate scope of work and contract, after completion of the
Schematic Design Plans (Phase I) and Preliminary PS&E (Phase II).
The scope of work under this contract is identified and described, according to each task to
be performed, in the following attachments:
• Exhibit A -Detailed Scope of Work for Project
• Exhibit B - Phase I Services
• Exhibit C -Outline of Subsequent Phases
The Engineer shall furnish equipment, materials, supplies, and incidentals to perform the
above-mentioned work, except as otherwise specified in Attachment "A", which precedes this
section.
PHASING OF SERVICES
Services by the Engineer will be provided in several phases. Each phase and associated
scope of work shall be identified and authorized through a separate contract with the City of
Colleyville.
Phase (Services -Schematic Design Plans
Services required to prepare Schematic Design Plans (approx. 30% completion),
including the initial phase of the Public Information Campaign and Environmental
Assessment, as well as Parking Mitigation Assessments, Field Surveys, Supplemental
Surveys, preparation of the Right-of-Way Map, CMAQ Funding Applications, and
preliminary design of the Hike and Bike Trail System. This phase includes the Pre-
Design Forum and concludes with a Public Meeting to present the Schematic Design.
Phase II Services -Preliminary PS&E
Services required to prepare Preliminary PS8~E (approx. 60% completion) based upon
the approved Schematic Plans. Included in this phase is the completion of the
Environmental Assessment, the preparation of parcel exhibits and field notes for right-
of-way and easement takings and Special Services related to the Hike 8~ Bike Trail
System Design and Parking Mitigation Assessments and the continuation of the
Public Information Campaign. This phase. concludes with the presentation of the
Preliminary Design at the Public Hearing, except for the preparation of responses to
comment from the Public Hearing, as required to complete the Environmental
Assessment.
Phase III Services -Final PS&E
Services required to complete final PS8~E (100%) and obtain TxDOT approval of
same. Included.in this phase is the continuation of the Public Information Campaign
and the completion of the Parking Mitigation Design, as necessary.
Attachment B
Page 2 of 3
Phase IV Services -Construction Administration
The City will be responsible for construction management and support. Only a
minimal amount of construction administration will be provided by the Engineer during
this phase of the project, unless additional services are requested.
SPECIAL SERVICES
Other Special Services are also included at the request of the City. These include preparing
applications for possible CMAQ Funding of Intersection and Signalization Improvements,
Parking Mitigation Assessments and Design and the Design of segments of the City's Hike
and Bike Trail System at interface points along Colleyville Blvd.
Also included is an intensive Public Information Campaign, which will be prepared and
conducted throughout the project design and construction. The campaign will be designed
to insure that information about the project is available and accessible to the public. Certain
elements of the campaign will also be designed to allow property owners, business owners
and others, access directly to members of the project design team for the purpose of
discussing specific project issues and/or concerns.
Attachment B
Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT "C"
CONSULTANT FEE SUMMARY
PHASE I (SCHEMATIC DESIGN PLANS)
Colleyville Boulevard (S.H. 26)
City of Colleyville, Texas
BASIC SERVICES -PHASE I
Task 1 Data Collection and Review
Task 1.1 Data Collection
Task 1.2 Data Review
Subtotal Task 1 $22,080
Task 2 Project Management
Task 2.1 Project Administration
Task 2.2 Progress Meetings & Reports
Task 2.3 Central Path Schedule for Project
Task 2.4 Budget
Subtotal Task 2 $67,450
Task 4 Surveying
Task 4.1 Property Ownership Determination
Task 4.2 Right of Entry
Task 4.3 Right-of-Way Data (4.3.1 8~ 4.3.2)
Task 4.4 Fieid Surveys
Task 4.5 Supplemental Surveys
Subtotal Task 4 ~ $553,750
Task 5 Environmental Documentation
Task 5.1 Environmental Documentation
Subtotal Task 5 $40,095
Task 7 Preliminary Engineering
Task 7.1 Design Schematic
Task 7.2 Preliminary DrainagelHydraulics
Task 7.3 Presentation of Schematic Design
Subtotal Task 7 $266,275
Task 9 Landscape Architecture Design
Task 9.1 Site Reconnaissance and Analysis
Task 9.2 Schematic Design
Subtotal Task 9 $129,845
Attachment C
Page 1 of 2
Task 14 Quality Assurance Program
Task 14.1 Plan Review Submittals
Task 14.2 Review Schedule and Procedures
Task 14.3 Present Program
Task 14.4 Identify Responsibilities
Task 14.5 Documentation
Task 14.6 Monitor
Subtotal Task 14
Subtotal (Basic Services -Phase 1)
SPECIAL SERVICES -PHASE I
Task 3 Public Information Campaign
Task 3.1 General Pubic Information
Task 3.2 Onsite Presence
Task 3.3 Design Phase Information
Subtotal Task 3
Task 10 CMAQ Funding
Task 10.1
Subtotal Task 10
Task 11 Parking Mitigation Assessments
Task 11.1
Subtotal Task 11
Task 12 Hike & Bike Trail System
Subtotal (Special Services -Phase I)
TOTAL SERVICES -PHASE 1
$9, 500
$1,088,995
$280, 405
$5,250
$12, 500
$10, 000
$308,155
$1,397,150
Attachment C
Page 2 of 2
D
O V OI N I a fJ N + O O O V A A ~ W N + ~ Q
~ ~ I ~
I
I I I
I I
f i ~ n =
nl
~ C
~ ~ ~
m ~; op
Ifi ~I T!
~ C
m~ T
L oo
T~ T
r D
JOI 4T
A' >
~ ~
A I ~ r ~/J fl1
-r .
l ~
n~ D4
C7
~ I
i rl
~ ~
2 I
i T
~
A~
n~
~ ~
rl
N
21
~
n
p I ~
~
_ ?
_ I
~ I ~ C y l yl T <
C ~ ; I ~ p
_ 1 I m
~ CI j
n D
T ~
~ =
V m
~ ~ i Z
~ Z
DI
' ~
~ f] p TI A. V'
~ 1
Z D.
'
~ _
I ~ m
~ I z ~ 1I
D S~ G
~ D
! H m
I =
< CI
; Z
~ 5
~ f7
~
~ m
~ i m
H ~ =
ml ~ ~' ~ ~ "' ~~ ~I N
~ Z m
p;
~~
H p
O ~ T
m' ~ ml
~ .
nl
I I i n
~ I
~ i
I
! I
~
I
I
i ~
S~
~~
n;
S
g~ ~ Q
2fl $g
X
S~
g
~
gl Q
X
~ ~+
?1
~
g N
l ~ c
~
° I
~I
~
S.
~~
8i
~i
8
~
8
~
8
,I
$~
a
~
~
8
~
$
e
o~
~
~
~
~
~I
$
~
$
~
$i
u
~ ~
$
~i
_~
~
rl
a.
rl
a I
la~i
~
~~
w`~
N
~I
~
~
~
~~ l
NI
~.
~i'
QC
~
13~
~
S `
N
~
I
~~ I
e
~~
~
~
~
g
g~
V~
~
~
~.
~
g
S
~
~
S
C
~I T
~ ~
M
~
. ~
A
O
r'
r
r
r
m
m
O
c
r
~~
x~
ao
~_
m v,
,x
N
Ql
~ I
mi
n
O
Z
y
-~
C
n
O
Z
0
c
R
v
Y
b
D
r
N
S
p
s
v
n
0
n
0
v
'o
W
9
,
tad N ~ ~ O b d V p O~ • W N .- p ~ O V w A • Y N '~ O
i i ~ _~ ~ S° I i ~~
m' XI T n' °~ C7I D Zr w n °~ TI °, mm. ~'~ Cl C, ~^ ~'j C VI mZ
~ m~ • z m < O D u ~ ml z ~' <: ~' N ~ m ~I °i A ~ ~ ~'
n ~ ~ ~ °i ~I C r ~ ° (!r r r I r m
Z ~ ~~ ~ > -. ° 1 D ~I o i : ~ ~ of ~ 5I =' „ •
f) -+ z x ~ o x A y o x f1 < A o
p, m. 2 [~ m O m a ° O~ mi N m ~ D ° $ m~ ~ m N~ °
o ii r, n p ~ m m, of 6-i m Dpl i < a ~ mi m ~ a
Z. n m o z s A~ z~ v I -~ n AI ~' ~ ° ~ n
~ <• < >
fC7 D nl ~i A ~ i x m m~ V m ~ r H = ~ ~ r 2i I ~ _
' ~ ~! p p T~ ~ rl 9 ~' b ;;T I to mi ~ ~ D ~'~ ~
i~ ~i = I ~I ~ y ~ ~~ ~I y Di m o ~ p m
~ ~ < ~ 41 i~ = T N i
' ~ m~ T w~ p ; q ~ ;1 Y
~: a ~'~' $j m x' ml
~ zl ~ I ~~ c 1 I °°rp 1I
~~ I ~ pi Z ~ I yl 2 ~ i Z~ p
N V ~i
i I I ' N i
I I ~ I I
~ I
~ ~ i ~ ! ~ I o
W' W W O1I W I A ~ N N c
N N ~ N N ~ mNm_ N ~4p 10 I + j ~ ~ ~ 1J I s ~
GI GI V~ Oli ~ ~ G~ m m~ 1D ~~ `yY4^p~' ~ _ N Q~'
WI Ni NI N; N'. N O C ~ ~ ~I O ~I a ~ ~ ~ a ~ O
r
NI N + JI r r ~ T
N N Cj' N N m ~ ~ N N ~ ~ ~P ~ ~, N N ~p g +~il
rn m ml ml m i a al m J 5 a 5 ~ nl wl nl A
°I u N s; al a~ a o s a o~ a° of °~ s ~I _° o $ ~~ g ~
~ N N. N. N
N ~
a
~~I
W
N
N
O
O
Y
<~
T Y
A
r
m
~~
`mom
n
n
m
Q
C
r
m
n
O
r
r
m
'>~
om
0
mo
to c
to r
m~
~~
ov
f=
D
n w
Cm
n
~ O
2 H
.~ ~
C
n
0
z
°
,T
r
8N
O
z n ~ -Zi ~' C~ ~~ ~ ~ (Zip m
O I m O ~ ~ '~` m y ° '~' ~ N
2 ~ m O a ° O~ m. N m
yi o y ~ s ~ ~ _m m° ~' F m D i
c~ ~ ~~ ~ m m -_+ $ m ml 1I m Z
~ ~~ Z, ~ s, ~ x <~ of < ~~
1 G I G') i ~ ,~ m ,~ T
ZI ~~ ~ ~ ~' D ... S O~ DI ~~ 1 f
< T
m T N N ~
j ~ ~ x SI
~~ Z: ml
EXHIBIT "A"
DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK
Colleyville Boulevard (S.H. 26)
City of Colleyville, Texas
DATA COLLECTION AND REVIEW
1.1. Data Collection
1.1.1. Pertinent data and information related to the improvement of Colleyville Blvd.
will be collected from the City of Colleyville, the City of Hurst, City of Southlake
and the City of Grapevine, including information on existing and future land use,
plans for existing and/or proposed improvements along or adjacent to
Colleyville Blvd., any studies, evaluations and/or reports, etc.
1.1.2. Pertinent data and information will be collected from other agencies and
authorities, such as the TRA, FEMA, NCTCOG, TxDOT, FHWA, COE, TNRCC,
EPA, etc.
1.1.3. Pertinent data and information will be collected from the railroad and petroleum
pipeline companies, regarding their existing and/or proposed facilities, including
their latest regulations concerning the construction of improvements across,
adjacent to, or along their right-of-way/easement.
1.1.4. Information related to the existing facility operations of Colleyville Blvd. (S.H.
26) will be collected from the appropriate cities, TxDOT or NCTCOG, including
existing plans, traffic volumes, vehicle occupancy, accident reports,
maintenance records, etc.
1.2. Data Review
1.2.1. Data and information will be reviewed, organized and cataloged for reference
throughout the design and construction of the project.
2. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
2.1. Project Administration
A dedicated project manager will be provided to facilitate overall project
direction, management and coordination throughout design and construction.
The project manager will be the primary contact for the City and TxDOT.
2.1.1. Meet with the City and the various Task Forces and/or Committees to
formalize a vision for the project and establish clear project goals.
2.1.2. Meet with the City and TxDOT to establish the design criteria, procedures and
process associated with the design of the project, and to affirm project goals.
2.1.3. Prepare project correspondence, progress reports, and routine project record
keeping.
2.1.4. Coordinate the work of all sub-consultants. Meetings for coordination and
planning will be scheduled with project team as needed.
2.1.5. Coordination w/Ongoing Construction and Development
Exhibit A
Page 1 of 25
2.1.5.1. Review and comment on new development plans, as requested by the
City that may potentially impact the design of Colleyville Blvd. or vice
versa.
2.1.5.2. Provide information to developers and engineers, as requested by the
City, to facilitate the coordination of design along Colleyville Blvd.
2.1.5.3. Attend meetings as requested by the City.
2.2. Progress Meetings & Reports
2.2.1. Schedule and attend monthly progress meetings with the City and TxDOT, as
required to conduct the development of the project.
2.2.2. Prepare monthly reports and distribute to the City, TxDOT, Task Force and
Committee members, etc.
2.3. Critical Path Schedule for Project
2.3.1. A critical path schedule will be used to monitor the progress of the project.
The schedule will be kept up-to-date, posted on the Web Page and presented
at each progress meeting. Deadlines and objectives will be established for
each element of the work.
2.4. Budget
2.4.1. Budgets will be established for each phase of the project and monitored
periodically. Budget reports will be presented at each progress meeting.
3
PUBLIC INFORMATION CAMPAIGN
.~.1. General Public Information
Provide a general public information campaign that will target key stakeholders in
the project's success and that will be focused on generating early support and
momentum for the project. Multiple communication tools and activities will be
developed and maintained throughout the duration of design and construction.
3.1.1. General Information Campaign
3.1.1.1. Mailing Lists and Contact Database
Develop a database that will track the mailing addresses, telephone
numbers, facsimile numbers, mobile numbers and email addresses of
each individual stakeholder, including people and organizations from the
following interest groups:
^ Project Team
^ Public Officials
• Property Owners/Business OwnerslTenants
• Schools
^ Civic Groups, including Neighborhood Associations and Chambers
of Commerce
^ Citizens at Large
^ Media Outlets
Exhibit A
Page 2 of 25
^ Design Intertace Groups, including TXDOT, City of Grapevine, City
of Southlake, City of Hurst, Tarrant County, DART, Public/Private
Utilities, Petroleum Pipelines, EPA, TNRCC, FEMA, FHWA,
NCTCOG, COE and others
The database will also be used to record contacts with individuals from
these groups and the responses that are made by the project team to
questions and/or complaints. Additionally, this database will be utilized
to generate mailing labels for public meeting notices and to generate
reports of issues collected from contacts.
3.1.1.2. Communication Tools
Provide multiple communication tools to inform stakeholders about
progress on the project, to advertise public forums, focus group
meetings, public meetings and/or public hearings and to solicit input from
stakeholders. Plan, design, and maintain the following tools throughout
the duration of the design and construction of the project.
^ Web Page on City's Web Site
^ Article for the City's Quarterly Newsletter
• Comment Cards and Suggestion Boxes (at City Hall, Chamber of
Commerce, local businesses, etc.)
^ 24-Hour Hot-Line
• Newspaper Releases
3.1.1.3. Speakers' Bureau
Identify and train speakers from the project team who can discuss the
project with civic groups and other parties that may request
presentations about the project. Produce materials to facilitate these
presentations.
3.1.2. Communications Task Force
Identify and organize a Communications Task Force, which will be asked to
meet routinely with the project team and discuss specific issues related to the
project. During the design phase this Task Force will meet monthly in the first
year and quarterly during the second year.
The Task Force's members will come from some or all of the groups identified
as stakeholders in Item 3.1.1.1 above and will be nominated by appropriate
governing bodies, such as the City Council, Planning and Zoning
Commission, School Board, Neighborhood Associations, Civic and Business
groups, etc. The Task Force will be appointed by the City Council and
authorized to communicate to various interest groups about progress on the
project.
One of the primary objectives of the Communication Task Force will be to
serve as liaisons to their individual interest groups in order to bring concerns
to the project design team and to provide information back to their interest
groups about progress on the project. The Communications Task Force will
assist City leaders in establishing a vision for the project and in
Exhibit A
Page 3 of 25
communicating that vision to the public so that support for the project is
manifested early and throughout a wide cross-section of the community.
3.1.3. Design Review Committee
Identify and organize a Design Review Committee, which will be asked to
meet routinely with the project team and provide technical input on major
design decisions facing the project team and the City. During the design
phase this Committee will meet monthly. Once construction starts, quarterly
meetings will be scheduled.
The Design Review Committee's members will come from the City's staff,
TNP's project team, TxDOT, Tarrant County, a representative from a
Franchise Utility (i.e. TXU) and a member from the construction industry. The
primary objective of the Design Review Committee will be to provide guidance
about specific design options or construction issues that may dramatically
affect the direction and/or scope of the project.
3.2. On-Site Presence
3.2.1. Open a project information "headquarters" office, within 30 days of Notice to
Proceed, along or near the project site, in order to facilitate public accessibility
to the latest information on project development and to provide an ongoing
opportunity for public input. Staff office on a part-time basis and maintain
office through the completion of the final PS&E.
3.2.2. Meet with property and business owners to discuss the project and to listen to
any concerns and comments that they have related to the project.
3.x.3. Provide identifiable project team apparel.
3.3. Design Phase Information
Provide opportunities for the public and interested parties to learn about
progress on the design of the project and to provide information to the project
team concerning issues of concern to businesses and citizens within the City
of Cotleyville.
3.3.1. Public Forums and Meetings
Plan, facilitate and hold several public forums, focus group meetings, public
meetings and a Public Hearing, as required, to gain input from the businesses
and citizens within Colleyville who may be interested in the progress of the
project design and construction. In addition to the public meetings that are
required by TxDOT, other forums and focus group meetings will be planned in
order to maximize input by stakeholders. These meetings will include:
^ Public Forum -Pre-Design
^ Public Meeting -Schematic Design (30% Plans)
^ Public Hearing -Preliminary Design (60°~ Plans)
Exhibit A
Page 4 of 25
Each public forum or meeting will be facilitated by the project design team,
including preparation of materials for reviewing progress on the project.
Team leaders with specific design assignments will attend meetings as
appropriate to answer questions and interact with attendees. For each
public forum, the project team will schedule up to two (2) opportunities for
interaction. One (1) session will be primarily targeted toward businesses
and the other session will primarily target the general public. The sessions
will be held at two (2) different times -one will span an afternoon andlor
evening on a weekday and another will be scheduled during the daytime on
a Saturday.
The contact database will be utilized to generate mailing labels for targeted
invitations to attend each meeting. Additionally, several of the general
communication tools will be utilized to advertise the meetings. Proposed
advertisement of the required public meetings andlor Public Hearing will be
provided as necessary and when appropriate. The cost of publishing will be
the responsibility of the City.
The Public Hearing will require that questions from the public be in written
form and responded to in written form as a part of the Environmental
Assessment process. The hearing will follow prescribed TxDOT protocols.
3.4. Construction Phase Information
Provide information about the progress of construction of the project with particular
emphasis on informing the public about how to successfully and safely continue
their daily commutes and trips with as little interruption and inconvenience as
possible during the various phases of the construction.
3.4.1. Construction Initiation Forum (100% Plans and Right-of-Way)
A public forum will be held prior to beginning construction. The forum will be
facilitated by the project design team, including preparation of materials for
reviewing progress on the project. Team leaders with specific design
assignments will attend meetings as appropriate to answer questions and
interact with attendees.
3.4.2. Construction Phase Information Campaign
Selected activities from the General Public Information Campaign will be
continued during the construction period. Periodic news releases will be
published in the newspapers and broadcast through various communications
media, to inform the public about specific construction activities, in particular
access changes during phased construction.
The Web Page will continue to be maintained and monitored. The 24-hour
telephone hot-line will continue to be monitored. Comments will be recorded
Exhibit A
Page 5 of 25
in the contact database by the City and forwarded to the project team for
response.
4
3.4.3. Grand Opening of Colleyville Boulevard
Assist the City in planning and executing a grand opening of the new Gateway
Corridor for the City of Colleyville. The grand opening will include a ribbon
cutting ceremony and other special events in order to celebrate the
completion of this important project.
SURVEYING
4.1. Property Ownership Determination
Provide research to determine the apparent property ownership for all parcels
along the proposed project along with the deeds. Obtain subdivision plats of
affected parcels. Also provide research of easements that may affect the project.
4.2. Right of Entry
Secure right-of-entry to
investigations, as needed.
properties for land surveying and geotechnical
4.3. Right-of--Way Data
4.3.1. Right-of-Way Map - Prepare a right-of-way map of the project showing atl
parcels of land adjoining the project (up to 220 parcels) and showing the
property owners along with the existing right-of--way and the proposed right-of-
way dimensioned using TxDOT standards. All procedure involving Right-of-
Way Maps, surveys or Field Notes shall be in conformance with the District's
guidelines tined, "Fort Worth District Right-of-Way Guidelines for Developing
Right-of--Way Maps, Survey Sketches and Legal Descriptions".
4.3.2. Revise Right-of--Way Map -Revise the Right-of-Way Map after the review by
TxDOT and make necessary changes as required.
4.3.3. Right-of--Way Parcel Taking Documents -Prepare up to 110 parcel exhibits
with legal descriptions for right-of-way acquisition along the project in
accordance with TxDOT standards. All parcels acquisition exhibits shall be
signed and sealed by a Registered Professional Land Surveyor.
4.3.4. Easement Parcel Taking Documents -Prepare up to 145 parcel exhibits with
legal descriptions for right-of-way acquisition along the project in accordance
with TxDOT or City standards. All parcels acquisition exhibits shall be signed
and sealed by a Registered Professional Land Surveyor.
4.3.5. Revise Parcel Taking Documents -Revise the Parcel Taking Documents after
the review by TxDOT and the City making all necessary changes as required.
4.3.6. Computation Sheets -Prepare closure computation and area sheets for each
parcel taking for submittal to TxDOT and the City.
4.3.7. Stake proposed Right-of-Way at 100 foot intervals including all PI's, PC's and
PT's along with all property comers of the new right-of-way lines of the parcels
of land affected by ROW and easement takings.
Exhibit A
Page 6 of 25
4.4. Field Surveys
4.4.1. Establish and densify horizontal control for the project from the existing
TxDOT aerial control monumentation. TxDOT to provide a design quality
aerial topographic survey along with the survey control data.
4.4.2. Establish a vertical control loop and set benchmarks at 500-foot intervals and
outside of the construction limits for future use.
4.4.3. Stake proposed centerline at 500-foot intervals (minimum) along with the
PC's, PT's and PI's.
4.4.4. Measure to TxDOT R.O.W. monuments or angle points in existing R.O.W.
line. Locate property corners of affected parcels of land for possible right-of-
way and easement acquisition.
4.4.5. Tie to existing underground and overhead utilities (location, elevation and
direction).
4.4.6. Stake location of up to fifty-five (55) soil bore holes in an X,Y 8~ Z format.
4.5. Supplemental Surveys
4.5.1. Horizontally and vertically, tie to exposed features of existing underground
and overhead utilities such as valve covers manholes, flowlines, inlet
gutterlines and flowlines, box culverts, drainage pipes, cleanouts, etc.
4.5.2. Locate existing features along the project to supplement the aerial topo.
Features to be located shall include: 1)Driveway/parking lot improvements up
to 50 feet beyond the proposed right-of--way, 2) Features in the existing right-
of-way of intersecting streets up to 500 feet beyond the proposed right-of-way,
3) Any features that do not appear on the aerial topo, 4) The existing
improvements/buildings on parcels that the right-of-way taking comes within
25 feet of the building along with the building finish floor elevation, 5) Provide
a centerline profile of Colleyville Blvd.
4.5.3. Verify cross-sections of the existing roadway with shots being taken at the
ROW line, curb line, gutter, centerline and any additional points necessary to
accurately depict the existing terrain.
4.5.4. Provide cross-sections and detail three creeks crossing Colleyville Blvd. The
cross-sections shall extend approximately 500 feet north and south of the
centerline of Colleyville Blvd. Detail the box culverts and bridges associated
with the creek crossings including low beam elevations and a detail of the
bridge opening.
4.5.5. Provide up to ten (10) crew days for miscellaneous field ties as needed for
new construction that is completed during the duration of the project.
4.5.6. Prepare a final design/topographic drawing in a Mircrostation or AutoCAD
digital format showing all features located in the field at a scale of 1"=40' or
1 "=50' along with a DTM and one foot interval contours, an ASCII coordinate
file of all points located in the field and a hard copy of the coordinates and a
copy of the survey field notes. The surveyor shall place his Surveyor's Seal
on documents furnished to the City and TxDOT when appropriate.
Exhibit A
Page 7 of 25
5. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
5.1. Environmental Documentation
5.1.1. Prepare a preliminary draft and final Environmental Assessment (EA) report
documenting the social, economic and environmental impacts of the above
referenced project. The EA will be prepared in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and TxDOT guidelines with a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) anticipated.
5.1.2. Collect readily available data and conduct site visits, as required to prepare
the EA. Attend up to four (4) coordination meetings with the City, TxDOT and
affected agencies.
5.1.3. The EA Report will inGude the following items:
5.1.3.1. Description of Proposed Action: This description will identify the
proposed project; define the project limits; identify the probable need of
right-of--way for construction and/or drainage easements; identify utility
adjustments and present the opinion of probable project cost.
5.1.3.2. Protect Justification: This section will discuss existing facilities, existing
land use, traffic projections, project need, other alternatives, and local
government support. It is assumed that the preferred altemative has
been selected and no evaluation will be required for environmental
impacts of previously considered altematives. ff available, previous
alternative general analyses (pros and cons) will be incorporated into the
EA report and the "no-build" scenario will be detailed. Information
regarding altematives analyses used to select the preferred altemative
will be provided by the City.
5.1.3.3. Potential Effects: This section will describe the social, economic, and
environmenta~ effects of the proposed project. This task consists of
reviewing existing data and presenting an assessment of the following
elements:
• Regional and Community Growth
^ Economic Impacts
^ Public Facilities and Services
^ Property Relocations
^ Community Cohesion
^ Impact on 4(f) Properties
^ Aesthetic Considerations
^ Lakes, Rivers and Streams
^ Jurisdictional Waters
^ Water Quality
• Threatened/Endangered Species
^ Hazardous Materials Impacts
^ Short-term Construction Impacts
^ Guttural Resources Assessment
^ Air Quality Assessment
^ Noise Assessment
Exhibit A
Page 8 of 25
Assumptions for each of the referenced assessment categories in
5.1.3.3. are as follows:
5.1.3.3.1. Socioeconomic Analysis -Collect readily available information to
assess the potential socioeconomic impacts of the proposed
project. This effort will inGude identification of population and
business dynamics (size and composition) within the project area,
social institutions impacted, and potential displacements to
businesses and residences. In addition, an Environmental Justice
Assessment will be conducted to evaluate disproportionate impacts
to low-income or minority populations. Data from this assessment
will be collected from the US Census, City of Colleyville, and the
North Central Council of Governments.
5.1.3.3.2. Section 4(f) -Preliminary investigations reveal that there are no
potential impacts to parklands; however, if necessary, a Section 4(f)
statement will be prepared for this project.
5.1.3.3.3. Ecological Investigations - In order to determine the extent of
jurisdictional waters/wetlands within the proposed right-of-way
(ROW), a wetland assessment is required by U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USAGE). This process typically proceeds any ground
disturbing activities and required permitting. Under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act, the USAGE has authority to regulate the
discharge of dredged and fill material into waters of the U.S.
Wetlands, which are special aquatic sites, are jurisdictional under
Section 404 as a subset of waters of the U.S. The intent of the
Clean Water Act is to maintain and restore the physical, chemical,
and biological integrity of the Nation's waters.
Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. can refer to a minor stream or
tributary system that demonstrates an ordinary high water mark and
can have either perennial or intermittent flow. in most cases, if a
conspicuous channel is apparent, the local USAGE District will
issue a Jurisdictional Determination based upon the report provided
by WLA. As part of the determination, the USAGE will also specify
required permitting, mitigation, or additional information that may be
required. This is usually based on anticipated adverse impacts of
the proposed activities on these natural resources.
The wetland assessment will utilize mandatory technical criteria,
field indicators, and other sources to assess the potential
occurrence of jurisdictional waters/wetlands and will delineate the
upper boundary of this area, if present. The methods to be used
will generally follow the 1987 Federal Manual for Identifying and
Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands.
Additionally, informal Section 7 consultation will be initiated with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Department to determine the potential
Exhibit A
Page 9 of 25
presence of endangered or threatened species in the project area.
The project area will be surveyed to document existing habitat and
wildlife, including threatened or endangered species.
5.1.3.3.4. Hazardous Materials Assessment - An assessment and records
search will be performed for the project study area to determine the
potential presence of hazardous materials that may impact
construction activities. The ESA will be based upon visual evidence
and existing secondary data. No original samples will be collected
or analyzed for this task. However, a search of LUST, NPL, and
RCRA/CERCLA sites in the vicinity of the project area will be
performed as part of the ESA. Limited field reconnaissance of
properties that appear to be of concern will be performed. The ESA
will not be conducted in accordance with ASTM E1527-93; therefore
no review of historical data is required.
5.1.3.3.5. Short-Term Construction Impacts - An assessment of the short-
term construction impacts of the project will be performed. This is a
particularly sensitive issue due to the number of business
establishments fronting Colleyville Boulevard. The assessment will
include an evaluation of the traffic control plan to ensure that access
to these businesses is maintained to the greatest extent possible.
Additional short-term construction impacts to be evaluated include
air quality and noise from construction.
5.1.3.3.6. Cultural Resource Investigations -Site visits will be performed to
gather information on and document existing cultural resources
within the proposed corridor/project area. The assessment of their
potential significance, according to Section 106 of 36 CFR 800 and
in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966,
as amended, will be conducted. This work will be conducted as a
Phase I survey, employing three main avenues of investigation:
Background Research/SHPO Coordination; Archaeological
Reconnaissance; and Geoarchaeological Reconnaissance as
required by the SHPO. Results of the investigations will be
submitted to the THC for review and comment. THC commentary
and concurrence on the conclusions of this study will be required for
successful completion of the cultural resources survey.
Upon completion of fieldwork, a draft report will be complied,
incorporating archaeological and historical information gathered
during the background search and survey. This report will include
the geoarchaeological information, if required, as well as analysis of
any artifacts recovered during the reconnaissance. Upon receipt of
comments from SHPO, a final report will be prepared and submitted
to the SHPO per their requirements.
If historical sites are found, the SHPO will require archival research,
which is an additional service, not included in this scope of work.
Exhibit A
Page 10 of 25
Furthermore, if significant historical structures are located during
this survey, the SHPO will require a historical architect to assess
the properties. The services of a historical architect are not
included in this scope of work.
5.1.3.3.7. Air Quality Analysis -The air quality analysis will be performed
using the CALINE3/MOBILESA computer program. CALINE3 is the
California Line Source Model which calculates the one-hour
concentrations of Carbon Monoxide (CO) at specific receiver
locations. MOBILESA is the most recent EPA Mobile Source
emissions model that provides CO emission rates for different years
and speeds.
5.1.3.3.8. Noise Analvsis -The purpose of a noise analysis for a TxDOT EA is
to determine if traffic sounds will result in a noise impact to nearby
outdoor areas where frequent human activity occurs. The noise
analysis will include identification of land use activity areas that may
be impacted by noise; modeling of existing exterior noise levels;
and prediction of future noise levels using the FHWA Traffic Noise
Projection Model, Stamina 2.0.
It is anticipated that as many as 80 noise sensitive receptors will be
modeled, depending on land use and proximity to the proposed
roadway improvements. The model considers the number, type,
and speed of vehicles; highway alignment and grade; cuts, fill, and
natural berms; and surrounding terrain features. No ambient
readings requirements are anticipated and, therefore, they are not
included in this scope of services. Computer models will be
developed for both existing and future conditions.
Noise abatement and mitigation improvements are not anticipated
on this project. Therefore, modeling and design of noise barrier
walls or other mitigation measures is not included in this scope.
5.1.3.4. Aaencv Coordination: Early coordination with all affected agencies will
be conducted to attempt to expedite the EA review process. it is
anticipated that, at a minimum, a USACE Nationwide Permit for roadway
crossings at Big Bear and Little Bear creeks will be required. This scope
of work includes necessary coordination and permit application
development efforts for this permit. Any other permits required as a
result of impacts from this project are outside this scope of services.
5.1.3.5. Determination of Assessment: The project's environmental impact will
be summarized, based on the data collected and presented. If
significant impacts are found, recommendations wilt be recommended for
further mitigation.
5.1.3.6. General Guidelines for Preparation of Environmental Documents The
Environmental Assessment will be prepared in accordance with the
content and format of FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A. Exhibits in
the EA will be 8-1/2"x11" or 11"x17". Air and noise input and output data
Exhibit A
Page 11 of 25
are to be submitted for TxDOT review but will not be included in the EA.
The following submittal process will be used in developing the EA:
• Two (2) copies of the Preliminary Draft EA will be submitted to
TxDOT- Fort Worth.
• TxDOT-Fort Worth will review and send comments to City.
^ The EA will be revised as necessary to respond to or incorporate
comments.
^ Two (2) copies of the Revised EA will be submitted to TxDOT-
Fort Worth for final review.
^ If acceptable, six (6) additional copies are submitted to TxDOT.
^ TxDOT-Fort Worth sends EA to TxDOT-Austin.
• TxDOT-Austin may request revisions. The EA will be revised by
page as required.
^ Following Public Hearing, additional revisions may be required.
Again the EA will be revised on a page by page basis.
^ After a FONSI has been issued a floppy disk with EA in Microsoft
Word or a compatible format will be provided to TxDOT and the
City.
5.2. Public Hearing
5.2.1. One (1) Public Hearing will be scheduled and held to present the draft EA.
5.2.2. Copies of the preliminary draft EA will not be provided to the public, until the
Public Hearing.
5.2.3. The Notice of Availability will be advertised in two (2) local newspapers. Up to
300 notices of the Public Hearing will be mailed.
5.2.4. Upon completion of the Public Hearing, the necessary written responses to
questions wiA be prepared, along with a summary and analysis.
6. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
6.1. Subsurface Explorations
6.1.1. Up to forty-five (45) borings to a depth of ten (10) feet will be drilled using truck-
mounted equipment for roadway, drainage and utility design. These will spaced
at approximately 500 foot centers.
6.1.2. Up to ten (10) borings to a depth of fifty (50) will be drilled using truck-mounted
equipment for bridge design.
6.1.3. Cohesive and non-cohesive soil samples will be obtained using 3-inch diameter
Shelby tube samplers and 2-inch diameter standard split-spoon samplers,
respectively. In addition rock encountered will be evaluated by use of TxDOT
cone penetration tests.
6.1.4. Bulk samples will be obtained from the adjacent right-of--way to perform
remolded tests requiring a large soil volume.
6.1.5. All soil samples will be extruded in the field by a soils logger, checked for
consistency with a hand penetrometer, carefully wrapped to preserve their
condition, and returned to the laboratory for testing.
6.1.6. A log of each boring wilt be prepared to document field activities and results.
Exhibit A
Page 12 of 25
6.1.7. All boreholes will be backfilled with drill cuttings and plugged with premix
concrete at the surface upon completion of the drilling operations.
6.2. Laboratory Services
6.2.1. Laboratory tests will be performed for classification purposes and to determine
strength characteristics. The specific types and quantities of tests will be
determined on geologic conditions encountered in the borings.
6.2.2. Moisture content and soil identification.
• Percent passing #200 sieve.
^ Liquid and plastic limit determinations.
^ Unconfined compression tests on soil.
^ California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests.
^ Moisture-density relationship tests.
^ pH, resistivity, and surface content tests for corrosivity potential.
^ Unit weight determinations.
^ Eades and Grim lime series tests.
^ Cement series tests.
6.3. Engineering Report
6.3.1. An engineering report will be prepared to present the results of the field and
laboratory data together with an analyses of the results and recommendations.
Four (4) copies of the report will be provided.
^ General soil and ground-water conditions.
^ Recommendations for bridge foundation type, depth and allowable loading.
^ Foundation construction requirements.
^ Pavement subgrade improvement recommendations.
^ Pavement thickness and design recommendations, using appropriate traffic
data.
• Pavement construction recommendations.
^ Earthwork recommendations.
7. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
7.1. Design Schematic
Preliminary Engineering will begin with the development of the Design Schematics
for improvements to Colleyville Blvd. based upon Part IV of TxDOT's guidelines for
urban streets. Any design exceptions will be identified and a "request for design
exception" will be prepared as early as possible.
7.1.1. Traffic Data and Traffic Projections
7.1.1.1. Collect directional 24-hour volumes at each end of project. Collect a.m.
and p.m. turning movement counts at all street intersections in the
section.
7.1.1.2. Develop design volumes to include through and fuming movement
volumes at intersection in design year. Develop design volumes for
pavement design.
Exhibit A
Page 13 of 25
7.1.2. Schematic Design and Access Management Plan
A detailed design schematic will be prepared depicting the proposed
improvements. The design elements to be shown will include but may not be
limited to the following:
Control data, horizontal alignment, curve data, super elevation data, proposed
pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, wheel chair ramps, landscaping, aesthetic
treatments, striping, signals, driveway construction limits, side road
construction limits, drainage areas, preliminary storm sewer inlets, manholes,
piping, out falls, easements, existing topography, existing night of way,
existing utilities, curb walls, pedestrian railing, metal beam guard fence,
existing ground profile and proposed vertical alignment.
7.1.2.1. Inventory existing access points and land-uses by field reconnaissance.
7.1.2.2. Identify potential problem access, circulation, and parking impacts on
aerial mapping, considering ROW width.
7.1.2.3. Review problem locations to include access, drainage, and special land
use issues.
7.1.2.4. Develop Access management plan to incorporate intersection
requirements, locate median openings, identify property access
requirements, and to recommend shared access locations. Prepare
access management document.
7.1.2.5. Analyze intersections to determine optimum geometrics.
7.1.2.6. Develop preliminary schematic design altematives, including typical
sections, landscaping, urban design features, phasing.
7.1.2.7. Present schematic alternatives at public meeting.
7.1.2.8. Incorporate various public inputs, evaluate schematic alternatives. and
recommend preferred alternative.
7.1.2.9. Prepare preferred alternative schematic for submission to TxDOT and for
use in environmental assessment.
7.1.3. Pavement Design
Existing typical sections, which represent existing conditions, will be prepared.
Proposed typical sections, which conform to the design schematic, will be
developed.
7.1.4. Preliminary Design Cross-Sections
In conjunction with the design schematic, preliminary design cross sections
wil- be developed on 100' station intervals. Each pavement layer and
undercut, if any, will be shown together with the right-of-way limits, side
slopes, pavement cross slopes, sidewalks, curbs and curb walls.
7.1.5. Bridge Layout Schematic
Schematic layouts and sections of the bridge improvements at Little Bear
Creek and the bridge widening at Big Bear Creek will be prepared.
7.1.6. Preliminary Right-of-Way Determination
Based on the schematic design and cross sections, a determination will be
made as to the adequacy of the existing right-of-way. If it becomes necessary
to acquire additional right-of-way beyond that which is included in this scope
of services, a request for additional services will be submitted prior to the
Exhibit A
Page 14 of 25
preparation of the proposed right-of-way documents. The preliminary
determination will to include an evaluation of retaining walls to negate the
need for additional right-of--way, where possible.
7.1.7. Research Existing Utilities
Each affected utility will be contacted to provide utility information in the form
of as built drawings or on site identification of their facilities. This effort will
serve the purpose of beginning a dialog with the utilities to keep them
informed of the project progress and how it will affect their facility.
7.1.8. Map Existing Utilities
Using the information gathered in task 7.1.6, and the subsurtace utility
engineering (SUE) information provided by TxDOT (if available), map all
existing utilities on the design schematic.
7.1.9. Coordination of Franchise Utility Relocations
7.1.9.1. Notify all utility owners about the proposed project and provide them with
the anticipated schedule for design and construction. Coordinate the
identification and resolution of conflicts.
7.1.9.2. Schedule and attend bi-monthly utility coordination meetings with
franchise utility companies during the design of the project.
7.1.9.3. Provide support and coordination to the utility companies' engineering
staff to facilitate their development of relocation plans and schedules for
relocating existing facilities.
7.1.9.4. Review relocation plans from franchise utilities for compliance with the
overall project design and schedule.
7.1.10. Pavement Enhancement Concepts
Identify various alternative concepts to enhance the appearance of the facility.
This will consist of various renderings showing alternative concrete
stamping/dyeing of sidewalks/wheelchair ramps and or inlaid brick pavers.
7.1.11. Preliminary Construction Sequencing
A conceptual construction sequence complete with typical sections and plan
view depiction of the traffic control plan will be developed and provided to the
State for approval. This will include traffic handling, roadway phasing, storm
sewer phasing, temporary barrier requirement, and pedestrian routing during
construction.
7.1.12. Preliminary Opinion of Construction Cost
Develop a construction cost estimate based on a quantity take-off of each
design schematic using current average unit bid prices and TxDOT bid items.
7.1.13. ADA Compliance
Coordinate with TxDOT, the City of Colleyville and officials of other agencies
to determine the need for pedestrian facilities, as they relate to the Americans
With Disabilities Act, and the extent of those facilities.
7.2. Preliminary Drainage/Hydraulics
7.2.1. Drainage Area Mapping
Prepare. a drainage area map of the watersheds contributing runoff to the
project. The City's Storm Water Master Plan Phase I will be used to evaluate
Exhibit A
Page 15 of 25
the drainage area and storm water discharges for Little Bear Creek and Big
Bear Creek.
7.2.2. Calculate Discharges
Determine conveyance paths, channel slopes, time of concentration, runoff
coefFcients/SCS curve numbers required to calculate design year flows, in
accordance with the City of Colleyville's drainage criteria.
7.2.3. Develop Hec-Ras Model of Channels
Develop dynamic models of downstream conveyance elements (channels,
culverts, slab bridges, encroachments etc.) using Hec-Ras. A model will be
developed for each highway discharge point.
7.2.4. Develop Alternative Drainage Schemes
Based on the results of the discharge calculations and dynamic model of
downstream channels, develop alternative schemes to alleviate potential
drainage issues associated with the highway construction.
7.2.5. Identify Easements Requirements
Identify drainage easements, if any, that may be needed to accommodate
highway runoff at discharge points along the route.
7.2.6. Prepare Drainage Report
Prepare a Drainage Report summarizing the findings and recommendations of
the drainage study. The report will document all relevant calculations, exhibits
and supporting documents.
7.3. Presentation of Schematic Design
Prepare exhibits in support of public meetings and/or presentations. Attend
meetings and presentations to provide technical information to public and
public officials.
8. PS8~E DEVELOPMENT
8.1. Roadway Design
8.1.1. Finalize Schematic
Refine the plan view and add the necessary detail to obtain an approved
schematic. Refine the profile to secure adequate ties to side streets and
driveways. Identify side street and driveway construction limits. Address
TxDOT comments and update the construction cost estimate.
8.1.2. Finalize Earthwork Cross Sections
Re-run the earthwork cross sections to reflect the revised design schematic
elements.
8.1.3. Plan Profile Sheets
Using the approved schematic as the base drawing, prepare plan profile
sheets at 1 "=50' or 1 "=100' scale.
8.1.4. Curb Wall Design/Summary
In locations where the elevation difference between the roadway and adjacent
property warrants, provide design details and quantity summary necessary to
construct a "parapet" curb wall at the back of sidewalk. This will include
Exhibit A
Page 16 of 25
pedestrian access from the sidewalk to the adjacent property via ramps, stairs
or routing to an accessible ramp.
8.1.5. Pavement Enhancement PIaNSummary
Based on the pavement enhancement concepts selected, develop the plan
details and quantity summary to incorporate the aesthetic improvements into
the plans.
8.1.6. Driveway Profiles/Details/Summary
Develop profiles for every driveway and analyze each for accessibility to the
types of vehicles needing access to that property. (For example, residential
driveways will be designed to accommodate passenger cars; commercial
driveways will be designed to accommodate trucks; school driveways should
accommodate busses). Delineate the limits of construction outside of the right
of way needed to secure an adequate driveway profile. Calculate and
summarize driveway quantities.
8.1.7. Side Road Profiles/Details/Summary
Develop profiles for every side street and analyze each for accessibility to
trucks and buses. Delineate the limits of construction necessary to secure a
suitable profile. For side street reconstruction exceeding 100', prepare a plan
sheet with the plan and profile and construction limits. Calculate and
summarize side street quantities.
8.1.8. Bridge Design
Refine the schematic design and prepare final bridge layouts, sections and
details for the bridge improvement at Little Bear Creek and the bridge
widening at Big Bear Creek.
8.1.9. ADA Design
If disability access is required, specific and particular details and plans will be
created which will define exactly and clearly how the facilities are to be
constructed.
8.1.10. Miscellaneous Roadway Details
Prepare any necessary roadway detail to Garify construction details.
8.1.11. Summary of Roadway Quantities
Compute and tabulate all roadway quantities using TxDOT bid items.
8.1.12. Assemble Applicable Standards
Acquire all applicable Statewide and District standards. Modify standards as
needed. Fill in the title block with project number, CSJ and page number etc.
Plot sheets and incorporate into the plans.
8.2. Hydrology & Hydraulics
8.2.1. Sub Area Mapping/Inlet Sizing
Subdivide the overall drainage areas into sub-areas and calculate the
discharge at each inlet. Analyze inlet capacities and adjust inlet locations and
sub-areas as needed to obtain desirable ponded widths (spread of water.)
8.2.2. Storm Sewer Sizing
Size a network of storm sewers to collect inlet flows and route the discharge
to the outfall locations selected in the alternative development stage. Prepare
Exhibit A
Page 17 of 25
hydraulic data sheets for inclusion in the plans. Evaluate bend and
appurtenant energy losses when calculating hydraulic grade (ine.
8.2.3. Culvert Sizing
Size each cross culvert to pass the design year storm without exceeding
allowable headwater requirements established by the City or TxDOT. Prepare
hydraulic data sheets for inclusion in the plans.
8.2.4. Storm Sewer Plan Profile
Prepare storm sewer plan profile sheets depicting storm sewer, inlets and
manholes necessary to drain the facility and convey the runoff to the
designated discharge points. The storm sewer plan profiles will be consistent
with the hydraulic computations developed in task 8.2.2 and the TxDOT
Hydraulic Manual. Inlets, manholes and junctions will be in accordance with
State or District standards drawings.
8.2.5. Culvert Layouts
Prepare culvert layouts sheets for each cross drainage structure in
accordance with TxDOT standard details, the TxDOT Hydraulic Manual and
the hydraulic computations developed in task 8.2.3.
8.2.6. Special Inlet Details/Handrail Details
Prepare custom details to clarify construction details of non-standard inlets.
Where special inlets create a drop off condition for pedestrians, provide
necessary handrail details.
8.2.7. Outfall Structure Details
Provide plan sheets and details to construct storm sewer outfalls in the
existing downstream channels.
8.2.8. Easement Grading
Determine outfall grading requirements and provide plans, details and
quantities to shape the outfall channel and stabilize the channel with slope
protection or vegetation.
8.2.9. Miscellaneous Drainage Details
Prepare any and all plan details necessary to clarify the construction
requirements of the drainage facilities.
8.2.10. Summary of Drainage Quantities
Compute quantities and summarize in the plans and prepare a bid item list
and estimated prices for all drainage facilities.
8.2.11. Assemble Applicable Standards
Acquire all applicable Statewide and District standards. Modify standards as
needed. Fill in the title block with project number, CSJ and page number etc.
Plot sheets and incorporate into the plans.
8.3. Signing & Pavement Marking
8.3.1. Inventory Existing Signing.
8.3.2. Signing 8~ Pavement Marking Layouts
Prepare signing and pavement marking layouts and plans consistent with
proposed cross-sections and intersection requirements, in accordance with
TxDOT design standards and the Texas Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (TMUTCD).
Exhibit A
Page 18 of 25
8.3.3. Guide Sign Sizing/Details
Use TxDOT sign sizing criteria to size and detail custom guide signs.
8.3.4. Pavement Marking Details
Prepare any and all plan details necessary to clarify the construction
requirements of the striping plan.
8.3.5. Summary of Pavement Markings
Compute quantities and summarize in the plans, prepare a bid item list and
estimated prices for each item.
8.3.6. Small Sign Summary
Determine the mounting requirements for each sign or sign cluster based on
TxDOT SMD standards. List all the signs on the TxDOT standard summary
sheets together with totals for each mount type.
8.3.7. Large/Guide Sign Summary
Summarize all large signs on TxDOTs standard large sign summary sheet.
8.3.8. Assemble Applicable Standards
Acquire all applicable Statewide and District standards. Modify standards as
needed. Fill in the title block with project number, CSJ and page number etc.
Plot sheets and incorporate into the plans.
8.4. Sequence of Work
8.4.1. Review schematic to define appropriate construction phasing.
8.4.2. Prepare layouts showing the travel lanes, and construction area for each
phase of construction, including a narrative of the sequence of work.
8.4.3. Refine construction sequence to accommodate cost-effective construction,
traffic flow requirements, and property access requirements.
8.4.4. Present proposed construction sequencing to Design Review Committee and
refine based upon their input.
8.5. Traffic Control Plans
8.5.1. Property Access Plan
Develop a property access plan for each phase of construction
8.5.2. Traffic Control Layouts/Plans
Prepare traffic control layout and plans showing travel lanes, construction
area and property access plan for each phase of construction, including
temporary signing and striping, channelization devices and barricades.
8.5.3. Temporary Signals
Prepare temporary signal installations and system timing plans for each phase
of construction.
8.5.4. Traffic Control Typical Sections
In conjunction with the traffic control layouts, develop typical cross sections
showing lane widths, edge conditions, channelization and proposed
construction area.
8.5.5. Staging, Pedestrian Routing, Etc.
Provide additional details and layouts as needed to handle special conditions.
This will include defining pedestrian routing from parking areas to adjacent
businesses, churches and schools.
Exhibit A
Page 19 of 25
8.5.6. Intersection Staging
Develop typical intersection staging plans for similar intersections. Develop
custom intersection staging layouts for special conditions.
8.5.7. Driveway Staging
Develop typical driveway staging plans for similar driveways. Develop custom
driveway staging layouts for special conditions.
8.5.8. Miscellaneous TCP Details
Prepare any and all plan details necessary to clarify the construction
requirements of the traffic control.
8.5.9. Assemble Applicable Standards
Acquire all applicable Statewide and District standards. Modify standards as
needed. Fill in the title block with project number, CSJ and page number etc.
Plot sheets and incorporate into the plans.
8.6. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW3P) & Erosion Control Plan
8.6.1. SW3P
Prepare SW3P on standard TxDOT SW3P plan sheet.
8.6.2. Erosion Control Plan
Prepare erosion control layout sheets showing all necessary erosion control
devices such as: sediment control fences, rock filter dams,
blankets, riprap slope protection and other devices as required.
8.6.3. Erosion Control Details
Prepare any and all plan details necessary to clarify the
requirements of the erosion control plans.
8.6.4. Assemble Applicable Standards
Acquire all applicable Statewide and District standards. Modify
needed. Fill in the title block with project num~er, CSJ and pagE
Plot sheets and incorporate into the plans.
8.7. Permanent Traffic Signal System Analysis and Design
8.7.1. System Requirements
soil retention
construction
standards as
numoer etc.
Evaluate system requirements in terms of subsystems and communications
requirements.
8.7.2. Signal Design Layouts
Prepare signal design layouts for signalized intersections and review with the
City and TxDOT.
8.7.3. Communications Interconnect Plan
Develop communications interconnect plan and coordinate with the City of
Grapevine and City of Hurst.
8.7.4. Traffic Signal Design
The Engineer shall design the traffic signals required for the project (up to ten
(10) signalized intersections). This work will include general notes and
specification data sheet, layout sheets, cable termination charts, quantity
summary tables, phasing diagrams, traffic and warrant study, construction
detail sheets and interconnect details. The work will also include traffic signal
Exhibit A
Page 20 of 25
foundation design, condition diagrams, signal timing, signal details and
summary.
8.7.5. Timing Plans
Develop signal system timing plans.
8.7.6. Assemble Applicable Standards
Acquire all applicable Statewide and District standards. Modify standards as
needed. Fill in the title block with project number, CSJ and page number etc.
Plot sheets and incorporate into the plans.
8.8. Illumination Design
8.8.1. Determine desired lighting concepts and intensity for the project and provide
recommended concept to the City 8~ TxDOT.
8.8.2. Develop illumination layout sheets.
8.8.3. Prepare illumination plans for the project, including general notes and
specification data sheet, electrical diagrams, quantity summary tables,
construction detail sheets and foundation design.
8.9. PS&E Documents (TxDOT Format)
8.9.1. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost, Basis of Estimate
Compute and tabulate all quantities using TxDOT bid items and descriptive
codes. Prepare an engineer's opinion of probable construction cost for the
30%, 60%, 90°~ and final submittals. Prepare a basis of estimate including
application rates and quantities for inclusion in the General Notes.
8.9.2. Construction Duration Estimate
Prepared a construction duration estimate using TxDOTs duration estimating
procedure and production rates applicable to the Fort Worth District.
8.9.3. General Notes & Specifications
Prepare general notes based on recently let projects in the Fort Worth District
and special conditions for the Colleyville Blvd. project. Provide a list of
standard and special specifications applicable to the project. Prepare any
custom specifications needed for the project.
9. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE DESIGN
9.1. Site Reconnaissance and Analysis
9.1.1. Meet with task force or sub-committee to affirm project goals related to
landscape architecture.
9.1.2. Photograph project.
9.1.3. Evaluate existing development.
9.1.4. Evaluate proposed development.
9.1.5. Develop an opportunities and constraints plan.
9.1.6. Meet with task force or sub-committee to review opportunities and constraints.
9.2. Schematic Design
9.2.1. Assist in the development of appropriate roadway cross-sections.
Exhibit A
Page 21 of 25
9.2.2. Review and modify existing concept for two (2) portals, as necessary to make
construction more economical.
9.2.3. Develop schemes for major intersection enhancements.
9.2.3.1. Pool RoadlBrumlow Avenue
9.2.3.2. Hall-Johnson Road
9.2.3.3. Glade Road
9.2.3.4. Cheek-Sparger Road/Mid-Cities Blvd.
9.2.4. Develop enhanced treatments for other hadscape features.
9.2.4.1. Crosswalks
9.2.4.2. Bridge rails and abutments
9.2.4.3. Culvert headwalls
9.2.4.4. Street lights, traffic signalization, banner graphics
9.2.4.5. Site furnishings (benches, pots, bollards)
9.2.5. Develop planting schemes for medians and R.O.W.'s
9.2.6. Develop schematic level opinion of construction cost.
9.2.7. Participate in public meetings (up to 4) and presentation of Schematic Design.
9.3. Preliminary Design
9.3.1. Refine schematics to include City, TxDOT and public comments.
9.3.2. Prepare preliminary plans for portals, major intersection enhancements,
crosswalk enhancements, landscape development (medians and parkways),
irrigation and bridge enhancements.
9.3.3. Develop preliminary level opinion of construction cost.
9.3.4. Prepare preliminary specifications.
9.3.5. Participate in public meetings (up to 2) and presentation of Preliminary
Design.
9.4. Final Design
9.4.1. Prepare final construction plans ~ for plantings, irrigation, crosswalk
enhancements, major intersection enhancements, portals and bridge
enhancements.
9.4.2. Prepare final opinion of construction cost.
9.4.3. Prepare final technical specifications.
9.4.4. Prepare proposal bid form for landscape architecture items of work.
9.4.5. Participate in public meetings (up to 2) and presentation of Final Design.
10. CMAQ FUNDING
10.1. Applications for Funding
Prepare up to three (3) applications for possible CMAQ funding for the intersection
and signal synchronization improvements proposed along Colleyville Blvd., as
directed by the City. Those improvements that result in improved operational
characteristics at intersections would be eligible for consideration. Each
application will include an opinion of probable construction costs and other exhibits
reflecting the proposed improvements. The applications would be presented to the
City for submittal to NCTCOG.
Exhibit A
Page 22 of 25
11. PARKING MITIGATION ASSESSMENTS
11.1. Mitigation Assessment
Prepare Parking Mitigation Assessments for up to twenty-five (25) existing
businesses along Colleyville Blvd., as directed by the City. This assessment will
address impacts of the proposed project on existing parking, alternative parking
options and an opinion of probable cost to meet the identified parking requirements
of the business.
11.2. Design
Prepare design and plans for alternative parking solutions for up to twenty-five (25)
existing businesses. These designs will either be incorporated into the project
plans or provided to the City for presentation to the business or property owner,
12. HIKE 8~ BIKE TRAIL SYSTEM
12.1. Lighted, Below Grade Crossing at Little Bear Creek
12.1.1. Design a trail crossing below the proposed Little Bear Creek bridge to connect
the future trail system link from Mill Creek Nature Center to Sparger Park.
12.2. Lighted, Below Grade Crossing at Big Bear Creek
12.2.1. Design a trail crossing below the Big Bear Creek bridge to connect the future
trail from Longwood Estates to the proposed Cottonbelt Trail along the
northwest side of Colleyville Blvd.
12.3. Trail Extension From John McCain Road to Pool Road/Brumlow Avenue
12.3.1. Design a hike ~ bike trail extension of the Cottonbelt Trail, from the proposed
Cottonbelt Trail terminus at John McCain Road, along the northwest side of
Colleyville Blvd. to the west side of Brumlow Avenue (including bridge
modifications, as necessary to facilitate the trail crossing at Big Bear Creek.
13. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
13.1. Pre-Construction Meeting
Attend pre-construction meeting. A summary of discussion items and minutes from
the meeting will be prepared by the City.
13.2. Construction Meetings
Attend construction meetings (maximum of once per month) to offer comments and
provide clarification on the intent of design and construction requirements.
Summaries of discussion items and minutes from meetings will be prepared by the
City.
13.3. Review Shop Drawings
Review shop drawings and submittals for compliance with plans, specifications and
general project requirements.
Exhibit A
Page 23 of 25
13.4. General Construction Support/Problem Resolution
13.4.1. Complaint Resolution During Construction
The Engineer will provide a very limited General Representation only as
necessary to Garify the intent of the design and construction requirements.
The City will be responsible for responding to specific issues, questions and/or
complaints from stakeholders and one-on-one interface meetings with
business and property owners during the construction phase. The City will
also be responsible for coordination efforts through TXDOT to resolve
complaints and other issues.
13.5. Change Orders
Assist the City in preparing change orders as required, for formal approval and
execution by the City, TxDOT and Contractor.
13.6. Access and Information Signage During Construction
The Engineer will provide a very limited General Representation only as necessary
to clarify the intent of the design and construction requirements. The City will be
responsible for monitoring the Contractor's compliance with business signage
requirements during construction. The contract spec cations for the project will
address signage for businesses during construction; however, experience on
similar projects in the area indicates that the City and/or construction manager will
need to continually monitor compliance and facilitate resolution of access problems
during construction.
14. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM
14.1. Pian Review Submittals
Establish required review plan submittals with City and TxDOT.
14.2. Review Schedule and Procedures
Review overall design scope for project and define checking and review schedule
and procedures.
14.3. Present Program
Present program to task leaders; incorporate input and refine program.
14.4. Identify Responsibilities
Identify specific review responsibilities among project team members.
14.5. Documentation
Document QA program and procedures.
14.6. Monitor
Monitor QA schedules and procedures.
Exhibit A
Page 24 of 25
Primary Tasks
• Conduct Public Information Campaign
• Design Paving, Drainage and Bridge Improvements for Colleyville Blvd
23, 000 L.F. )
• Conduct Environmental Assessment of Project Site
• Provide Field Design Surveys and Right-of-WaylParcel Surveys
• Design Landscape Architectural Enhancements for Streetscape
• Provide Overall Project Management/Coordination
Basic Services
• Task 1.
• Task 2.
• Task 4.
• Task 5.
• Task 6.
• Task 7.
• Task 8.
• Task 9.
• Task 13.
• Task 14.
Special Services
DATA COLLECTION AND REVIEW
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SURVEYING
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
PS&E DEVELOPMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM
• Task 3. PUBLIC INFORMATION CAMPAIGN
• Task 10. CMAQ FUNDING
• Task 11. PARKING MITIGATION ASSESSMENT
• Task 12. HIKE & BIKE TRAIL SYSTEM
Additional Services
(approx.
• Right-of--Way and Easement Appraisal/Acquisition
Water and Sanitary Sewer Utility Relocation Design
• Construction Support/Administration Beyond Minimum Provided in Basic Services
^ Re-Design (following acceptance of preliminary plans)
^ Phase I Environmental Site Assessments and Asbestos Assessments
^ Noise Mitigation Modeling and Design
• Court Reporter for Public Meetings and Public Hearings (if desired)
Exhibit A
Page 25 of 25
EXHIBIT "B"
PHASE (SERVICES -SCHEMATIC DESIGN PLANS
Colleyville Boulevard (S.H. 26)
City of Colleyville, Texas
Phase I Services are those services required to prepare Schematic Design Plans (approx.
30% completion), including the initial phase of the Public Information Campaign and
Environmental Assessment, as well as Parking Mitigation Assessments, Field Surveys,
Supplemental Surveys, preparation of the Right-of-Way Map, CMAQ Funding Applications,
and preliminary design of the Hike and Bike Trail System. This phase includes the Pre-
Design Forum and concludes with a Public Meeting to present the Schematic Design.
BASIC SERVICES - PHASE I (Schematic Design Plans)
The following tasks as described in Exhibit °A" will be provided by the Engineer as BASIC
SERVICES for Phase I.
Task I -DATA COLLECTION AND REVIEW
Task 1.1 Data Collection
Task 1.2 Data Review
Task 2 -PROJECT MANAGEMENT (Approximately 20%)
Task 2.1 Project Administration (20%)
Task 2.2 Progress Meetings 8~ Reports (20%)
Task 2.3 Central Path Schedule for Project (20%)
Task 2.4 Budget (20%)
Task 4 -SURVEYING (Approximately 60°~)
Task 4.1 Property Ownership Determination
Task 4.2 Right-of-Entry
Task 4.3 Right-of-Way Data
Sub Task 4.3.1 8 4.3.2 only
Task 4.4 Field Surveys
Task 4.5 Supplemental Surveys
Exhibit B
Page 1 of 3
Task 5 -ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION (Approximately 50°~ -Draft EA)
Task 5.1 Environmental Documentation
Task 7 -PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING (Thru Schematic Design)
Task 7.1 Design Schematic
Task 7.2 Preliminary Drainage/Hydraulics
Task 7.3 Presentation of Schematic Design
Task 9 -LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE DESIGN (Thru Schematic Design)
Task 9.1 Site Reconnaissance and Analysis
Task 9.2 Schematic Design
Task 14 -QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM (Approximately 20%)
Task 14.1 Plan Review submittals
Task 14.2 Review Schedule and Procedures
Task 14.3 Present Program
Task 14.4 Identify Responsibilities
Task 14.5 Documentation
Task 14.6 Monitor
Exhibit B
Page 2 of 3
SPECIAL SERVICES -PHASE 1 (Schematic Design)
The following tasks as described in Exhibit "A" will be provided by the Engineer as SPECIAL
SERVICES for Phase I.
Task 3 -PUBLIC INFORMATION CAMPAIGN (Thiru Public Meeting)
Task 3.1 General Public Information
Task 3.2 On Site Presence
Task 3.3 Design Phase Information
Task 10 - CMAQ FUNDING
Task 10.1 Applications
Task 11 -PARKING MITIGATION ASSESSMENTS
Task 11.1 Mitigation Assessments
Task 12 - HIKE ~ BIKE TRAIL SYSTME (Thru Schematic Design)
Task 12.1 Lighted Below Grade Crossing at Little Bear Creek
Task 12.2 Lighted Below Grade Crossing at Big Bear Creek
Task 12.3 Trail Extension From John McCain Rod to Pool Road
Exhibit B
Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT "C"
OUTLINE OF SUBSEQUENT PHASES
Colleyville Boulevard (S.H. 26)
City of Colleyville, Texas
Services by the Engineer will be provided in several phases. Each phase and associated
scope of work shall be identified and authorized through a separate contract with the City of
Colleyville. The following is a brief outline of the anticipated phasing for the remaining scope
of work required for the completion of this project.
Phase II Services -Preliminary PS~E
Services required to prepare Preliminary PS~E (approx. 60% completion) based upon
the approved Schematic Plans. Included in this phase is the completion of the
Environmental Assessment, the preparation of parcel exhibits and field notes for right-
of-way and easement takings and Special Services related to the Hike 8~ Bike Trail
System Design and Parking Mitigation Assessments and the continuation of the
Public Information Campaign. This phase concludes with the presentation of the
Preliminary Design at the Public Hearing, except for the preparation of responses to
comment from the Public Hearing, as required to complete the Environmental
Assessment.
Phase III Services -Final PS&E
Services required to complete final PS&E (100%) and obtain TxDOT approval of
same. Included in this phase is the continuation of the Public Information Campaign
and the completion of the Parking Mitigation Design, as necessary.
Phase IV Services -Construction Administration
The City will be responsible for construction management and support. Only a
minimal amount of construction administration will be provided by the Engineer during
this phase of the project, unless additional services are requested.
Exhibit C
Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION R-00-1645
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF THE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES CONTRACT WITH TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS, INC. FOR THE
COLLEYVILLE BOULEVARD (S.H. 26) ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, Colleyville Boulevard (S.H. 26) Reconstruction has been in negotiations
since June 1999 with Texas Department of Transportation and North
Central Texas Council of Governments; and
WHEREAS, funding of $30.4 million dollars was approved December 9, 1999 with the
Regional Transportation Council; and
WHEREAS, requests for proposals were received from twelve engineering firms; and
WHEREAS, City staff conducted interviews with four firms for professional services, on
March 8, 2000 in which Teague Nall and Perkins was selected; and
WHEREAS, City staff has conducted numerous meetings with Teague Nall and
Perkins to define the scope of work and negotiate a contract; and
WHEREAS, the project scope of services will be completed in four phases (Phase
Schematic Design; Phase II-Preliminary Design; Phase III-Final Design;
Phase IV-Construction Administration).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the Professional Services Contract - Phase I with Teague Nall and
Perkins, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $1,397,150.00 is approved.
Resolution R-00-1645
Page 2 of 2
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
PASSED BY A VOTE OF AYES, NAYS, AND ABSTENTIONS ON
THIS THE DAY OF , 2000.
ATTEST:
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Donna Arp
Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
~i1) AI
n '
TlS1>
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
8
Resolution #
R-00.1646
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
ENGINEERING
SUBJECT
Approving a waiver of the water well depth
requirements requested by Max Cannon for 7600
Windswept Trail
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
Max Cannon, agent for the Hazlewoods at 7600 Windswept Trail, met with staff and
subsequently sent the attached letter (See Exhibit A) requesting a waiver that a private
water well for irrigation purposes be allowed to be constructed at a depth of 800 feet
(Paluxy Aquifer). The property currently has one 800-foot irrigation well (See Exhibit B),
which does not produce enough water to irrigate the large estate lot.
The waiver is requested from the maximum depth condition of 300 feet. The proposed
new well is approximately 1,200 feet (See Exhibit C) from the City's Overland Trail well
and pump station, which meets the 1,000 foot rule of condition 2 (See Attachment #1).
(continued)
C
CITY MANAGER
.~ ~ ~-
DEPARTMENT HEAD
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1646
Page 2
Staff is not opposed to an irrigation well for the Hazelwoods; however, the new well
should conform to the City ordinance.
City staff is opposed to the drilling of a new well at this location into the Paluxy Aquifer
for the following reasons:
• Request does not meet condition 3 of the Colleyville Code of Ordinances (See
Attachment #1)
• The water table at the City well at 7400 Overland Trail has already dropped due
to high pumping in the area resulting in less water production from this well.
•A new well in the same aquifer will be an additional burden to the production of
the aquifer and impact other wells.
Recommendation
Denial of Resolution R-00-1646.
Attachments
Attachment #1 - Colleyville Code of Ordinances, Appendix A-Water and Sewer Policy
Exhibit A -Max Cannon Letter
Exhibit B -Proximity Map
Exhibit C -City Well Distance Map (See paper copy)
ATTACHMENT #1
The Colleyville Code of Ordinances, Appendix A-Water and Sewer Policy and
Procedure Manual, Section 2, Section P. Water Wells. states:
A water well drilling permit is required prior to any private well being
drilled. All water well drillers must be licensed as required by the
State of Texas.
Drilling permits will be issued only if the following conditions exist:
1. Well driller or property owner will provide the city with a plot plan
showing all buildings on the property and the purposed
[proposed) location of the water well.
2. No water well drilling permits will be issued to drill with in 1,000
feet of a city-owned well.
3. Maximum depth of any private well is 300 feet.
4. No well shall be drilled within ten feet of any lot line.
5. All state and federal regulations shall be complied with.
6. The well driller shall provide the city with an affidavit upon
completion of the well with the following information:
(a) Final depth of well.
(b) Type and size of casing.
(c) Was the well casing pressure grouted and what was the
quantity of grout used.
7. Private well can only be used for irrigation purposes.
EXHIBIT "A"
Hazlewood
7600 Windswept Trail
Colleyville, TX 76034
6 April, 2000
Robert Whitehead, P. D.
City of Colleyville
5400 Bransford Road
Post Office Box 185
Colleyville, TX 76034
Re: 7600 Windswept Trail, Colleyville, Texas
Waiver of300' on Water Well
Dear Mr. Whitehead,
Please accept this letter as our formal request for a waiver of 300' depth on a
private water well at referenced property.
Currently, an 800' well exists at this property and it is having trouble producing
enough water for irrigation purposes. The water table has dropped due to
excessive watering of a golf course in the immediate area and the owners would
tike to dig another well on the property to subsidize the existing well.
The locations of both wells is noted on the attached plat of the property. As you
know, this is a large piece of property and requires substantial watering in the
summer heat.
Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me at (817) 577-8668 to advise
your comments or if you require additional information.
Sincerely,
(Signature)
Max Cannon
Agent for Haziewoods
~~ .
~~.
f
m
T _~ y
_ ~
T.
T
T
0 0
~` ~
i-?;~
/:y .,-
'' I
T
~ I
~~
o~
T o~
_a ~
~~ o
T `°
~.
1
t
'~
.y
~D
n
rn
..~
".,~
w
w
V
V
r
~^ ~
o
i~ o
e~
~ - __~
- ---.
i
----
-------- a1 pu~~aa ;-
Windswept Trail
1~
0
~~
/ ~ O
f .
~ °f
_ ~ .
. ~ ~~ ~~~
O,
N~
r.~
..
..
r
_~
'~-~
~~
V
V
~ ..
J
1
~ ~ rn
I x
H~
rt
~_
i /~ ~ O
------ '~
O
O
. ~~ a
^
RESOLUTION R-00-1646
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF A WAIVER OF THE WATER
WELL DEPTH REQUIREMENTS
WHEREAS, a waiver of the depth requirements for a private well was requested on
April 6, 2000 for the homeowners at 7600 Windswept Lane; and
WHEREAS, homeowners would like to install an eight hundred foot (800') deep
well; and
WHEREAS, the Colleyville Code of Ordinances states a maximum depth of any private
well is 300 feet.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the Colleyville Code of Ordinances, Appendix A-Water and Sewer
Policy and Procedures Manual, Section 2, Section P. (3) a private well
maximum depth of 300 feet requirement be waived is hereby approved.
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
PASSED BY A VOTE OF AYES, NAYS, AND ABSTENTIONS ON
THIS THE DAY OF , 2000.
ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC Donna Arp
City Secretary Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
~i~y n/
~~
Texas
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05102/00 CMO Approval:
Item#
9
Resolution #
R-00-847
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT
A Resolution amending the days of the first
regular Council meetings in August and November
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
The annual National Night Out is held on the first Tuesday of each August. The City
Council has expressed a desire to participate in those events in their neighborhoods.
During the past several years, the County has requested to use the City Hatl to hold the
annual election on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. This day
normally falls on the same day as the City Council's first regular meeting of the month.
Historically, the Council has agreed to reschedule their first meeting in November to
accommodate the County's request.
This Resolution is for the purpose of permanently changing the days the first regular
Council meetings are held in August and November.
Recommendation
Approval of Resolution R-00-1647.
C~~Y'l~AANNAGER
D ARTMENT HEAD
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY
RESOLUTION R-00-1fi47
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE DAYS OF THE
FIRST REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS IN AUGUST
AND NOVEMBER
WHEREAS, regular City Council meetings are held on the first and third Tuesdays of
each month; and
WHEREAS, the annual National Night Out is held on the first Tuesday in August and the
Council desires to participate in this event; and
WHEREAS, elections are held annually in City Hall on the first Tuesday following the first
Monday of each November; and
WHEREAS, historically, the Council has changed their first regular meeting in November
to accommodate the use of City Hall for the annual elections.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEWILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1: THAT the change in the first regular City Council meeting in August to the
first Wednesday to accommodate the National Night Out events, is hereby
approved.
Sec. 2: THAT the change in the first regular City Council meeting in November to the
first Wednesday to accommodate the use of City Hall for annual elections,
is hereby approved.
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
Passed by a vote of ayes, nays, and abstentions on the day
of , 2000.
ATTEST:
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC Donna Arp
City Secretary Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
Cii. w
~ ~ ~W
~~<,;
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
10
Resolution #
R-00-1648
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUBJECT
Approving an appeal request of R. D. Blackard to
set a date for a public hearing on a rezoning
request denied by the Planning and Zoning
Commission
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
On March 27, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered the request of
Dick Blackard, Spicewood Design and Construction to rezone an 11.6075 acre tract on
the south side of the 1000 W. block of L. D. Lockett Road from R40 to R20 and R15
Single Family Residential. By unanimous vote, the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended denial of the request. However, Mr. Blackard submitted a written request
(copy attached) to have his rezoning case scheduled for public hearing by the City
Council. The Colleyville Zoning Ordinance states that upon the written request of the
applicant within thirty days of the date of denial by the Planning and Zoning
Commission, the City Council shall consider whether or not an ordinance should be
prepared for reading and vote.
Attached is Resolution R-00-1648 which, if approved, would order the preparation of an
ordinance for public hearing. The earliest date that the first reading of the ordinance
can be considered is June 6, 2000.
(continued)
~~ r1 n .-, , .,
CITY MANAGER - ~ ~
-- c - --~
off.-,`
DEPART NT HEAD
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1648
Page 2
Recommendation
Approval of Resolution R-00-1648 setting the first public hearing on the rezoning
request for June 6, 2000.
Attachment
Letter of Appeal from R. D. Blackard
~icewood
,>~esign and ~ns~ruc~ion
Apri124, 2000
Jan Levy
Planning & Zoning Assistant
City of Colleyville
P.O. Box 185
Colleyville, Texas 76034
RE: CASE 2'x00-019
We request that this matter be heard by the City Council.
We will seek a professional to present our case. Therefore, we would like to hold
scheduling of this case until the availability of professional assistance can be determined.
Respec lly,
R. D. lackard
RDB/cjp
cc: Stinson Development Corporation
,....,- :f ~ --
r
ir ` I~C~L~a~,'_
iE
,~
~s
I APR 2 4 2000
~ ~_ ~-
CITY OF COLLEYVIL! E
B COh1h1UNITY DE:'ELOP~a;ENT _p
y / Y~
0
soo /~'~oiea ~~ • cSna~ 344 • `7lr,+~ 9~m 76os4
(are) ~-a~r • g~ (er7) Qa~-r~s
K
^~
»•
T
~ ~.
IMCf A
21~
111 N
~ K
111 WI
1.~7i K
SOY ~
n•
~~
N K
711 Y
.Iii
~ ail
A!
7.71 IC
~x71~1 ~~
w ala
wli ~c
LOCATION MAP
ZONING CHANGE - CASE Z-00-019
r euxe~e
u
'_ ~S 1
1)
R~~~A
._
~K
w sy
_" ..~ s
~ ~ a ~ S Z
~ ` ~ ~' = ~ ~
~ a ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~~~ . ~~~
s ~~ ! ~ f
I ~. ~ •
~ - t~jt to ; ~~ ~~ji ~ ~ ~~~; ~;! ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~~- #rT ~~~ ~~ ~r~n ~Y~~~
~, f.~ ii~ • f ~ 1+-t~ i i i+•~ H~+ i i ~ ~~ ~f f f i~j f+~ f~~ if f+i~l i+i'~~:
~ ~ ~ .~~~~ ~~,~ r~~ ri~~~ ~ ~ r~, ~~ ~ ~ s r~~ hr ~ ~ t~~) ~i, ~.~ ~i ~L~, ~~;~~t
RESOLUTION R-00-1648
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPEAL REQUEST OF R. D. BLACKARD TO SET
A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REZONING REQUEST OF AN 11.6075 ACRE
TRACT OF LAND OUT OF THE I. CARADINE SURVEY, ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE
1000 W. BLOCK OF L. D. LOCKETT ROAD
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2000, the Colleyville Planning and Zoning Commission
conducted a public hearing on an application to rezone property from R40 to
R20 and R15 on 11.6075 acres out of the I. Caradine Survey, on the south
side of the 1000 W. Block of L. D. Lockett Road; and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1 of the Zoning Ordinance states that "In the event the Planning
and Zoning Commission recommends denial of fhe change, the matter shall
be brought before the City Council only upon written request of the
proponent fried with the City Secretary within thirty (30) days of the date of
the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation. Upon a timely
written request of the proponent, the council sha!! consider fhe change and
direct whether or not an ordinance should be prepared for reading and vote.';
and
WHEREAS, the applicant, Mr. R. D. Blackard, has requested by letter dated April 24, 2000
that the City Council place his application on the City Council agenda anc
conduct an appropriate public hearing on the rezoning of the property.
NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLcYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the first public hearing on this rezoning request shall be June 6, 2000.
Sec. 2. THAT staff is directed to re-notify and republish notice of the rezoning of the
11.6075 acre tract of land out of the I. Caradine Survey, on the south side of
the 1000 W. Block of L. D. Lockett Road.
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
PASSED BY A VOTE OF AYES AND NAYS AND ABSTENTIONS
ON THIS THE DAY OF , 2000.
ATTEST:
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE:
Donna Arp
Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
~~~. ni
~~ ~ ~l/
~~<,;
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
11
Resolution #
R-00-1649
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
SUBJECT
Authorizing the reimbursement of construction
costs to Centurion American Custom Homes, Inc.,
for work performed on the Glade Road drainage
structure
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
By the attached letter, Mehrdad Moayedi, President of Centurion American Custom
Homes, Inc., had requested that the City reimburse his corporation $25,000 as the
City's share of a drainage structure improvement that his company made to Glade Road
in connection with the construction of La Plaza Wellness Center.
In November 1998 Mr. Moayedi's company began construction of the storm drainage
structure under Glade Road. He claims that he had an agreement with the City that we
would contribute up to $25,000 toward the cost of this project because we were
requesting a larger culvert than needed by his development. Records indicate that we
CITY MANAGER
DEPARTMENT HEAD
(continued)
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Resolution R-00-1649
Page 2
did request a larger culvert (see Chris Steubing's memo of March 6, 2000, and Jim
Poster's memo of July 19, 2000). Our estimate of the City's share of this oversizing
requirement based on Mr. Moayedi's cost estimate is $18,612.
There is no written agreement and Mr. Moayedi did not comply with the provisions of
the state law covering City participation in private construction projects. The key
provision in the current state law that he did not comply with is the posting of a
performance bond (see attached excerpts). It appears that Mr. Jim Foster did indicate
to Mr. Moayedi that the City would participate in the project, but he did not have the
authority to enter into such a contract, verbal or written. I have met with Mr. Moayedi
and explained that since he did not comply with the state law, I could not reimburse him
any funds.
Financial Impact
Funds are available in the Drainage Fund.
Recommendation
~G,..,:;1 ..r '~ J.~V.~ ~fir1 _'1 rte. i1Q
Attachments:
Letter of Request From Mehrdad Moayedi (paper copy only)
March 6, 2000 Memo From Chris Stuebing (paper copy only)
July 19, 1999 Memo From Jim Foster (paper copy only)
Excerpts From The Local Government Code (paper copy only)
Centurion American Custom Homes, Inc.
1905 Industrial Blvd.
Colley~~lle, TX 76034
(817)421-3040
FAX (817) 421-2385
City of Collevville
Mrr Bob Stripling
City Manager
5400 Bransford Road
Collevville. TX 76034 .
Re: Reimbursement for improvements to Glade Road and associated utilities
Dear Sir;
Centurion American is requesting a reimbursement from the City of Colleyville in the amount of 525,000 for the
work Centurion American preformed in the construction of a culvert under Glad Road and the associated
construction. relocation and upgrading of utility lines (water and sewer) as directed by the City Engineering Staff.
A meeting was held at the City offices prior to start of construction. Attending the meeting was the Director of
Public Works -Jim Foster. City Engineer -Casey Sledge. General Manager for Centurion American -John Owens,
and myself - Mehrdad Moavedi.
Mr. Foster told us that the City would share in the cost of the constntction up to 525.000, since he could approve that
amount v-~thout the requirement of City Council approval. He said that Casey Sledge would write-up the necessan•
paperwork for the City and us to sign. After starting the project we made numerous inquires to Mr. Foster regarding
the paperwork, but were told they had been very busy and haven't had the time to complete it, but they would do it
as soon as possible. As the project proceeded, costs substantially increased over initial projections due to the
necessity of upgrading and relocating existing water and sewer lines.
The uroject was delayed awaiting the Cih• Staff to re-design and up~ade as necessary the existing utilit<~ lines. At
this time Cin• Engineer Carew Sledge and Cit<- Engtneer Chns ~tue~ing were put in charge of the protect. A further
delay of approximately 30 days was due to the necessity of Chris Stuebing to be made aware of what had been done
and then provide direction for the utility relocations, etc. It goes without saving that Mr. Stuebing was over-loaded
with the many construction projects within the City and wasn't able to give his full attention to the Glade Road
project. During this time we had provided the City with 3 cost estimates. To further complicate the situation the
Director of Public Works Jim Foster resigned and a new Director of Public Works was hired. With the New
Director, Bob Whitehead and City Engineer Chris Stuebing reviewing the project, we were told that they did not
have the authority for the reimbursement and it would require authorization by the City Council.
At this time we still have nothing in writing and have completed the project, provided the City with the project costs,
and now formally asking the City to authorize reimbursement. Attached to this letter is a report showing the cost of
the project to Centurion America. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincereh•,
~~ ,
Mehrdad Moavedi
President -Centurion American
MM/vj
Enclosure.
Centurion American Custom Homes, Inc.
1905 Industrial Blvd.
Colleyville, TX 76034
(817) 421-3040
FAX (817) 421-2385
Glade Road Imarovements
72 LF 9 X 9 Boa ra? $320 a LF
18LF 9X9Boa(a~39CY(a~$350aCY
20LF 16'X5' to 9'X9'
1 Wing Wall with Apron L/S
Remove & Replace Eais Aprons
1 18" X 18" Grate Inlet
130 LF 8" Sewer $18 per LF
1 10 MH with outside Drop L/S
109 LF 6" Water Line (a) $14
6" Water ~• aiues ia;; ~Jjl)
4 90 degree Bends na~. $250
TOTAL
$23,040.00
$13,650.00
$ 8,050.00
$ 2,300.00
$ 1,900.00
$ 800.00
$ 2,340.00
$ 2,500.00
$ 1,526.00
S 700.00
$• 1.000.00
$57,860.00
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bob Stripling, City Manager
CC: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Services
Keith Fisher, Engineering Manager
FROM: Chris Steubing, Engineering Gy
SUBJECT: Glade Road Box Culvert
DATE: March 6, 2000
As part of the public improvements associated with the t.a Plaza Wellness Center
(Village Park), a box culvert was to be constnx*ed under Glade Road. The existing
culverts were under sized and therefore a larger culvert was included within the project
scope. There was apparently a verbal agreement that was made prior to construction of
the project that the City of Colleyville would share in the cost of the culvert up to
$25,000. Mehrdad daims that the agreement was made between himself and Jim
Foster. I have attached a memo from Jirn to me dated July 19, 1999 regercling this
issue. The answers to the questions in that memo are as follows:
1. I have not had any conversation with the Developer regarding the cost issue.
2. The recommended amount would be $18, 6't 2.00.
3. I believe the loss of use of the road should have some impact on the total
amount paid to Mehrdad.
4. Testing was performed regarding the issue of early form board removal. The
structure was found to be secure structurally.
The construction started in November of 1996 and the estimated time for completion
was set at six (6) weeks. During construction many utilities were found to be in the
direct alignment of the box culvert and had tv be moved. Sanitary sewer was kx:eted on
the south side of Glade Road and water on the north. The sewer line was lowered and
a new manhole was placed on the west side of the culvert. The water line was in direct
conFlict with the upstream flow line of the culvert and also had to be lowered.
The construction process was delayed from this and was not completed until February
of 1999. Glade Road was impassible during this time of construction. A project that had
started out as a 6-week project ended up tasting 3'rr months. Letters wero sent in
December 1998 and January 1999 regarding the delays and no response was ever
received. The roadway was finally n3opened again in February of 1999.
The developer has generated a cost breakdown that I have attached. It includes work
well beyond the original scope and I do not believe this should be considered as part of
the reimbursable amount. 1 have generated a spreadsheet that is oDmpatibte with what I
believe is the proper amount of available reimbursement. I am also not aware of any
performance bond applied to this project from the developer.
Glade Road Box Cuh-ert City Co$t Breakdown
lterrts $JLF LF Total
9x9 Box Culvert $ 320.00 35 $ 11,200.00
Remove and Replace Aprons $ 1,900.00
Constn,d Wing Wall w/ Apron $ 2,300.00
Relocate Water Line $ 14.00 '108 $ 1,512.00
2 - 6" Valves $ 700.00
Fittings $ 1,000.00
Total for Culvert $ 18,612.00
half of the cuh-ert is the planned participation by the Cityy. This equals the 35 linear feet shown above.
Centurion American Custom Homes, Inc.
1905 Industrial Blvd.
,~(~ Colleyvillq TX 76034
0" (817) 421-3040
`~ FAX (817) 421-2385
3~ Glade Rosd Improvements
LF 9 X 9 Boz @ 5320 a LF
18 LF 9 X 9 Boz (a3 39CY ~ $350 a CY
20 LF 16' X 5' to 9' X 9'
1 Wing Wall with Apron IJS
Remove & Replace Ezis Aprons
1 18" X 18" Grate Inlet
130 LF 8" Sewer $18 per LF
1 10 MH with outside Drop L!S
109 LF 6" Water Line r?a $14
2 6" Water Values @$350
4 90 degree Bends ~ 5250
TOTAL
$23,040.00
513,650.00
$ 8,050.00- /
$ 2,300.00
$1,900.00
5 800.00
5--2;3i~9A~
53-,~A9-
$ 1,526.00
$ 700.00
$ 1.000.00
$57,860.00
To: Chris Steubinp
~~
From: Jim Foater
Subject: Culvert on Glade Rd. West of Thompson Terrace
Date: July 19, 1999
Mehrdad has requested reimbursement for the Cites partidpation in the cost of
the construdion of the culvert crossing Glade Rd t seem to recall some diabgue
oonceming the need for the developer to follow our bidding procedures. At least,
we would need to see a t~ntract for the project.
As i recall, the initial discussion with Mehrdad'a engineer did indicate a need for
competitive bids. City participation was based on the bgic that this upstream
improvement would benefit properties other than that being developed by
Mehniad. Inifially the project was estimated to cost over $100,000, and a City
participation figure not succeeding $25,000 was mentioned. What conversations
have you had with the developer oonceming City partidpation? ff the City does
partiapste, what would be the recommended amour-t? Glace Rd. was dosed for
many weeks, far moro than necessary. Should that impact the amount of any
City partiapetion? The concrete forms vuere pulled too soon. Should that impact
the amount?
LAND USE & RELATED ACTIVITIES
¢ 212.048. Effect of Approval on Dedication
The approval of a development plat is not consid-
ered an acceptance of any prnposed dedication for
public use or use by persons other than the owner of
the property rnvered by the plat and does not impose
on the municipality any duty regarding the mainte-
nance or improvement of any purportedly dedicated
parts until the municipality's governing body makes
an actual appropriation of the dedicated parts
formal acceptance, entry, use, or improvement.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, etL Sept. 1, 1987.
¢ 212.049. Building Permits in
Jurisdiction
This subchapter does not authorize the municipality
to require municipal building permits or otherwise
enforce the municipality's building code in its extrater-
ritorial jurisdiction.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149. § 1. eft. Sept. 1.1987.
212.Oa0. Enforcement; Penalty
(a) If it appears that a violation or threat of a
violation of this subchapter or a plan, rule, or ordi-
nance adopted under this subchapter or consistent
vith this subchapter exists, the municipality is entitled
to appropriate injunctive relief against the person who
the violation.
(b) A suit for injunctive relief may be brought in
the county in which the defendant resides, the county
in which the violation or threat of violation occurs, or
an}• county in which the muniopality is wholly or
partly located.
Ic) In a suit to enjoin a violation or threat of a
violation of this subchapter or a plan, rule, ordinance,
or other order adopted under this subchapter, the
court may grant the municipality any prohibitory or
mandatory injunction warranted by the facts including
a temporary restraining order, temporary injunction,
or permanent injunction.
(d) A person commits an offense if the person vio-
fates this subchapter or a plan, Wile, or ordinance
adopted under this subchapter or consistent with this
,ubchapter within the limits of the municipality. An
offense under this subsection is a Class C misdernean-
~~i'• Each day the violation continues constitutes a
,eparate offense.
(e) A suit under this section shall be given prece-
dence over all other cases of a different nature on the
~h,cket of the trial or appellate court.
§ 212.072
(f) It is no defense to a criminal or civil suit under
this section that an agency of government other than
the municipality issued a license or permit authorizing
the construction, repair, or alteration of am~ building,
structure. ar improvement. It also is no defense that
the defendant had no knowledge of this subchapter or
of an applicable plan, Wile, or ordinance.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg.. ch. 149, § 1, eQ Sept. 1, 1987.
SUBCHAPTER C. DEVELOPER PAR-
TICIPATION IN CONTRACT FOR
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
¢ 212071. Developer Participation Contract
Without complying with the competitive sealed bid-
ding prncedtu~e of Chapter 252, a municipality with
5,000 or more inhabitants may make a contract with a
developer of a subdivision or land in the municipality
to construct public improvements, not including a
building. related to the development. If the contract
does not meet the requirements of this subchapter,
Chapter 252 applies to the contract if the contract
mould otherwise be governed by that chapter.
Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1. § 47(b), eff: Aug. 28,
1989. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 1647, § 1, eff.
Sept 1, 1999. -
~ecvon ai~a1 0: the 1989 Act prov~oe:
"Phis section amends the Local Government Code W conform to
Sections l and 2, Chapter 782, Acts of the 70th l.egidature, Regular
Session, 1987."
~ 212.072. Duties of Parties Under Contract
(a) Under the contract, the developer shall con-
struct the improvements and the municipality shall
participate in their cost.
(b) The contract must establish the limit of partic-
ipation by the municipality at a level not to exceed 30
percent of the total contract price. In addition, the
contract may also allow participation by the municipal-
ity at a level not to exceed 100 percent of the total
cost for any oversizing of improvements required by
the municipality, including but not limited to increased
capacity of improvements to anticipate other future
development in the area. The muniapality is liable
only for the agreed payment of its share, which shall
be determined in advance either as a lump sum or as a
factor or percentage of the total actual cost as deter-
mined by municipal ordinance.
Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 47(b), eH Aug. 28,
1989. Amended by Arta 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 1526, § 1, eff.
Aug. 30, 1999.
375
a " ` ,
.. z ~ .~
~~
{
M.
§ 212.073
~ 212.073. Performance Bond
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
The developer must execute a performance bond for
the construction of the improvements to ensure com-
pletion of the project. The bond must be executed by
a corporate surety in accordance with Chapter 2263,
Government Cade.
Added by Acts 199.9, Tlst Leg., ch. 1. $ 47(b), e8 Aug. 28,
1999. Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 76, $ 5.95(17),
eff_ Carr i ~
~ 212.074. Additional Safeguards; Inspection of
Rernrda
(a) In the ordinance adopted by the municipality
under Section 212.072(b), the municipality may include
additional safeguards against undue loading of coat,
collusion, or fraud.
(b) All of the developer's books and other. rernrda
related to the Prnject shall be available for inspection
by the municipality.
Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, $ 47(b), eff. pug. 28,
1989.
SUBCHAPTER D. REGULATION OF PROP-
ERTY DEVELOPMENT PROHIBITED
IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES
$ 212.101. Application of Subchapter to Certain
Home-Rule Municipality
This subchapter applies only to a home-rule munici-
paiity that:
(1) has a charter provision allowing for limited-
P~e annexation; and
(2) has annexed territory for a limited purpose,
lAdl~ by Arta 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, $ 23.02(a), efI Sept,
~ 212.102. Definitions
In this subchapter:
(1) "Affected area° means an area that is:
(A) in a municipality ar a municipality's extra-
territorial jurisdiction;
(B) in a county other than the county in which
a mavjority of the territory of the rnuniapality is
located;
(C) within the boundaries of one or more
school districts other than the school district in
which a meljority of the territory of the mania
ity is located; and ~-
(D) within the area of or within 1.600 feet of
the boundary of an assessment road district in
which there are two state highways.
376
(2) "•~sment road district" means a road dig-
trio that has issued refunding bonds and that hay
imposed asaessment8 on each parcel of }and under
Section Z.O18, Article 726, Revised Statutes. I
(3) "State highway" means a highway that is put I
of the state highway system under Section 221.001.
~'anspotrtataon Code. }
Added by Arta 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, $ 23.02(a), elf. Sept
1, 1997.
f 212.103. Traffic or Traffic Operations
(a) A municipality may not deny, limit, delay, or
condition the use or development of land, any part of
which is within an affected area, because of:
(1) traffic or traf5c operations that would result
from the Proposed use or development of the land:
or
(2) the effect that the proposed use or develop•
meet of the land would have on traf5c or traffic
operations.
(b) In this section, an action to deny, limit, delay, or
condition the use or development of land includes ~
decision or other action by the governing body of the
municipality or by a commission, board, department.
agency, office, or employee of the municipality related
to zoning, subdivision, site planning, the rnnstructioa
or building Permit urocess. or any other municipal
process, approval, or permit.
(c) This subchapter does not prevent a muniapal-ty
from exercising its authority to require the dedication
of right-of-~vsy.
Added by Arta 1997, 7bth Leg., ch. 16b, $ 23.02(a), etY. Sept
1, 1997.
4 212.104. Provision Not Enforceable
A pr°viaion in a covenant ar agreement relating to
land m an affected area that would have the effect ~
denying, limiting, delaying, or rnnditiorring the use or
development of the land because of its effect on traff0c
°! tnf5c °Pce'ationa may not be enforred by a munict-
Patity
~d b3' Acts 1997, 7bth Leg., ch. 166, $23.02(x), efL S'epG
1.1997.
ll 212.105. Subchapter Controls
This subchapter rnntrols over any other law relat'
ing to muniapal regulation of land use or develop~at
based on traffic.
Added by Acts 1997, TSth kg., th, 166, $ 23.0¢(s), eff. Stet
1,1997.
RESOLUTIONR-00-1649 -~
AUTHORIZING THE REIMBURSEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS TO
CENTURION AMERICAN CUSTOM HOMES, INC. '
WHEREAS, Centurion American Custom Homes, Inc., constructed storm drainage '
improvements on Glade Road; and -
WHEREAS, the improvements included capacity over and above that required for
the private development related to the storm drainage improvement -
need; and
WHEREAS, Centurion American Custom Homes, Inc., has submitted a written cost -
estimate of $57,860 for the work performed and a request for
reimbursement by the City of $25,000; and
WHEREAS, no written agreement was made specifying the financial participation of
the City in the project; and
WHEREAS, a performance bond was not posted as required by Subchapter C of the
Local Government Code.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY O,
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Seg. ~ THAT the ~i'..- v4:i~vi~ wai~~es the perforrn2nce bond requirement.
Sec. 2 THAT the City Council authorizes the payment to Centurion American
Custom Homes, Inc. the amount of $25,000.
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
Passed by a vote of ayes, nays, and abstentions of this
day of , 2000.
ATTEST:
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
Donna Arp
Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
~~~.' w
~lV
Tcx83
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
12
Resolution #
R-00-1650
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
FINANCE
SUBJECT
Declaring Expectations to Reimburse Engineering
Expenditures for Colleyville Boulevard (State
Highway 26) Improvements with Proceeds of
Future Debt
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
A prior item on the May 2, 2000 City Council agenda was for the approval of an
engineering services contract with Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc., for the Colleyville
Boulevard (State Highway 26) roadway improvements in the amount of $1,397,150. In
the future, the City will be issuing TIF bonds to pay for the improvements. In order for
the City to be reimbursed for the expenditures related to the re-alignment from the
proceeds of the bonds when they are issued, the Attorney General of the State of Texas
requires the City to approve a reimbursement resolution. The attached Resolution R-00-
1650 allows the City to be reimbursed from the TIF bonds, when they are sold.
Recommendation
Approval of Resolution R-00-1650.
CITY MANAGER
/ ~
DEPART D
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
RESOLUTION R-00-1650
A RESOLUTION DECLARING EXPECTATION TO REIMBURSE EXPENDITURES
FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO COLLEYVILLE BOULEVARD (STATE HIGHWAY 26)
WITH PROCEEDS OF FUTURE DEBT
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville, Texas (the "Issuer") intends to issue debt for the
purpose of improving Colleyville Boulevard (State Highway 26),
including the acquisition of land, design, and construction and further
intends to make certain capital expenditures for the project and
currently desires and expects to reimburse such capital expenditures
with proceeds of such debt;
WHEREAS, under Treas. Reg. § 1.150-2 (the "Regulation"), to fund such
reimbursement with proceeds of tax-exempt obligations the Issuer
must declare its expectation to make such reimbursement; and
WHEREAS, the Issuer desires to preserve its ability to reimburse the expenditures
with proceeds of tax-exempt obligations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
.~;.. ~ T i. the issuer reasonably expe:,ts ro reimo~rse capital expenditures
with respect to the improvements of Colleyville Boulevard (State
Highway 26) with proceeds of debt hereafter to be issued by the
Issuer, and that this resolution shall constitute a declaration of official
intent under the Regulation.
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
Passed by a vote of ayes, nays and _ abstentions on this the day
of , 2000.
ATTEST:
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Donna Arp
Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
C~~>~ or
1~
T«~s
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05!02!00 CMO Approval:
Item #
13
Resolution #
R-00-1651
Previous Action: None
DEPT.
FINANCE
SUBJECT
Denying the Application of TXU Electric to Close,
Modify, or Delete Certain Tariffs
Reading and Public Hearing
Background
On January 25, 2000, TXU Electric Company filed a request to delete, close and modify
the terms of various rate classes provided to their customers, to facilitate TXU's
movement to a competitive retail market in January 2001 per state legislation. On
February 15, 2000, Council approved Resolution R-00-1612 suspending the request for
a period of ninety days to allow for further examination of the request. Colleyville is a
member of the Steering Committee of Cities Served by TXU Electric (the Committee),
and this group studies all rate and tariff requests. This group is recommending denial of
the request since the Administrative Law Judge of the PUC recommended the request
be dismissed. Attached is Resolution R-00-1651 denying the proposed tariff revisions.
Recommendation
Approval of Resolution R-00-1651.
Attachments
#1 -Memo from Geoffrey M. Gay (paper copy only)
~.'~C
CITY MANAGER
C.~
DEPART EAD
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
qtr. Gar's lhreet Lux: 1~ l3) : ~'-~47t
lzuil: ugtr¢IcJaaa{umcom
~~IE.~IORwDU~I
TO: TYU Cities That Took Action To Suspend TXU Electric's Application Revise
Retail Rates/Riders
FROhI: Geoffrey 1~L Gay
DATE: April 1', 2000
RE: Recommeflded Action
It is my recommendation that Cities' deny in all respecu the relief requested by T:XU
Eie:trc.
Your :.itv passed a resolution suspending the effective date of the implementation of
T~'LT Electric's reauest to close or delete certain tariffs and authorins intervention before the
°S_'C ~~ •~•ha* was desi~ated as PUC Docket No. ?20~ 1. The 90-day suspension period ends
tila~~ ~0, ?ODU and Cites must tale acuon oetore tr~-; sate or the ~ompan., ~ propo~~u cr.::n`=s
will become effective.
On April 10, ?000 the Administrative Law Judge in charge of Docket No. ?30~ 1 released
a proposal for decision recommending that the docket be dismissed. This recommendation vas
based upon the Commission's decision on March 2~, 2000 to severe competitive energy services
tariffs into YUI; Docket No. 21987 which is the Competitive Energy Services Issues Docket
severed from TXIJ's Business Separations Plan. The recommendation is also based upon the
Commission's determination in Docket No. 21987 on March ?4, 2000 that it did not have the
authority to close or delete tariffs even if such tariffs were not being used, because of the
Legislature's imposition of a rate freeze.
While the Proposal for Decision must be approved by the Commissioners, I see no point
in the Cities waitins any lonser to take action. I believe the matter should be rejected at your
earliest convenient time. The tariff matters raised by TXU Electric in this filing will be
addressed in Docket No. ? 1987 or the transmission and distribution rate case (Docket No. ??: ~0)
the Company filed on vlarch 3l, 2000. TXU Electric's request to modify or delete tariffs should
be re<~arded as premature.
i~~~oo~~os~t~axro.t t ; ~~
RESOLUTION R-00-1651
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS DENYING THE
APPLICATION OF TXU ELECTRIC TO CLOSE, MODIFY OR DELETE CERTAIN
TARIFFS
WHEREAS, on or about January 25, 2000 TXU Electric filed with the City of Colleyville
its request to close, modify or delete certain retail tariffs effective March 1,
2000; and
WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville passed a resolution suspending the effective date of
TXU Electric's application until May 30, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) has determined that it lacks
authority to close or delete tariffs during a statutorily imposed rate freeze;
and
WHEREAS, the PUC'S Administrative Law Judge in charge of Docket No. 22051, TXU
Electric's application to implement the proposed tariff changes in
unincorporated areas, has proposed that the PUC dismiss the Company's
application.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1 THAT the relief requested by TXU Electric be denied.
Sec. 2 THAT a copy of this resolution .be sent to the local representative of TXU
Electric.
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
Passed by a vote of ayes and nays and abstentions on this the day of
2000.
ATTEST:
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE:
Donna Arp
Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
f /~! ~i~.' 91
~ ^ 1~
v ~f~1i
AGENDA BRIEFING
For mt .: 05/02/00 CMO Approval:
Item #
14
Ordinance #
0-00-1214
Previous Action: Tabled 04/18/00
DEPT.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUBJECT
Consideration of Chapters 9, 14 and 15 of the
Land Development Code
Update
At the April 18th meeting, the City Council approved the Land Development Code except
for Chapters 9, 14, and 15 which relate to the engineering and design criteria for public
works improvements. The City Council tabled action on these three chapters to allow
staff to meet with area developers who may have an interest in these engineering
standards. A meeting has been scheduled for April 27, 2000 and staff will provide a
report to the City Council at the May 2"d meeting.
Second Reading and Public Hearing
Update (04/18/00)
At the April 4, 2000 meeting, Ms. Sheila Cross expressed her concerns about raising
the minimum building design score from 15 to 30 points in the ML -Light Manufacturing
district. She owns two lots zoned ML and wants to be exempt from the new standard.
Staff is opposed to an exemption to the proposed new standards.
(continued)
CITY MANAG R ~
L, ~ ~~
DEPART NT HEAD
FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY)
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page 2 of 10
Ms. Linda Baker offered several changes to the Permitted Land Use Table contained in
Chapter 3. The Permitted Land Use Table identifies uses allowed by right in the various
zoning districts and whether a particular use might additionally require a Special Use
Permit. Ms. Baker recommended that Farming and Livestock Breeding and Raising be
allowed by right in the R30 and R40 districts. Currently, these activities are only
allowed by right in the Agricultural and RE (Residential Estate) district. Staff feels that
it would be inappropriate to allow ranching and animal raising in the R30 and R40
zoning districts that are intended to be primarily single family residential areas.
Another recommendation of Ms. Baker was the inclusion of Commercial Equestrian
Boarding Stables and Schools in the R40 district by right and with a Special Use Permit
in the R20 and R30 districts. Staff feels that this type of commercial activity would be a
nuisance in these residential districts. There are such uses currently on F. M. 1171 in
Flower Mound and they would not be compatible in a residential neighborhood. Ms.
Baker also stated that Roadside Fruit, Vegetable and Produce Stands be allowed by
right in the Agricultural district instead of requiring a Special Use Permit. Staff agrees
with this recommendation. The proposed ordinance to adopt the Land Development
Code does not currently include any of Ms. Baker's recommendations.
One item that has been added to Chapter 13 -Impact Fees involves the Roadway
Impact Fee Schedule for Churches. It seems that when staff was incorporating the
Roadway Impact Fee Ordinance approved by the City Council at the April 4, 2000
meeting, it was discovered that the "churches" category was inadvertently omitted by
tn:. :,unsu~u~ og iirm tnat prerarea the ree scneawe. Tne prev~aus orainance requrrea
churches to pay a Roadway Impact Fee of $1,600 per 1,000 s.f. of floor area as a
condition to building permit approval. The new fee schedule requires a Roadway
Impact Fee of $1,867 per 1,000 s.f. of floor area in Service Area 1 (east of S. H. 26) and
a fee of $1,512 per 1,000 s.f. of floor area in Service Area 2 (west of S. H. 26).
Staff has deleted Section 1.18C which authorizes the Director of Public Services to
make modifications to the engineering design standards contained in Chapters 14 and
15. Staff is also aware of some citizen concerns regarding the lack of input from area
developers and engineers about the engineering design standards in Chapters 14 and
15.
There are three options for the City Council which are described as follows:
(1) Adopt the Land Development Code as presented, including Chapters 14 and 15 as
written.
(2) Adopt the Land Development Code, except for Chapters 14 and 15, which could be
brought back to the City Council at a later date, possibly in June.
(3) Adopt the Land Development Code, including Chapters 14 and 15, but amending the
portions of these chapters which are a concern to local developers.
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page 3 of 10
Recommendation
Approval of Ordinance 0-00-1214.
First Reading and Public Hearing
Background
A copy of the proposed Land Development Code is being provided to you as a separate
attachment to this agenda briefing. The Land Development Code represents the
consolidation of the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Tree Preservation
Ordinance, Landscaping Ordinance, Building Design Ordinance, Erosion Control
Ordinance, Park Land Dedication Fee Ordinance, Sign Ordinance, and Impact Fee
Ordinances into a single document. This project has been a high priority work element
during Fiscal Year 1999 and the copy you received represents the first phase, which is
now ready for approval. State taw requires a public hearing prior to adopting or
amending subdivision regulations and zoning ordinances with a recommendation from
the Planning and Zoning Commission to the City Council. The Planning and Zoning
Commission met on March 27, 2000 and has unanimously recommended approval of
the Land Development Code. Notices of the proposed ordinance amendments have
been advertised in the official newspaper. No comments have been received from any
citizen regarding the adoption of the Land Development Code or the proposed changes
included in the document.
This agenda briefing is divided into three major components, which are described as
follows: (1) a brief summary of each chapter of the Land Development Code which also
describes the features that are different from the current regulations, (2) a summary of
the comments from the combined P & Z and City Council workshop held at the
Community Center on March 16tH, and (3) a list of items discussed at the March 16tH
workshop that will be reviewed by staff later this year and brought back to the Planning
and Zoning Commission and the City Council for consideration. It was the direction of
the Council at the March 16tH workshop for staff to continue the process for adopting the
Land Development Code, as drafted, as soon as possible and to continue working on
the other revisions later this year.
1. Summary of the Proaosed Land Develoament Code
Chapter 1 -The first chapter primarily deals with administrative functions of the
code, such as listing the sources of authority for adopting the code, provisions for
waivers and appeals, creation of the Zoning Board of Adjustment and the Sign
Board of Appeals. This chapter also describes the authority given to each of these
appeal bodies. Chapter One includes procedures for amending the code,
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page 4 of 10
requirements for submitting a rezoning application and the citizen notification
requirements. This chapter contains the penalty provision.
The primary regulation change in this chapter involves the appeal procedure
associated with a rezoning denial. The proposed change would allow a rezoning
request that has been denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission to
automatically be placed on the next available City Council agenda if the applicant
submits a written request within ten days after denial by the Planning and Zoning
Commission. The next available agenda would be the next City Council meeting
that provides sufficient time to re-notify those property owners within the 200-foot
boundary prior to the City Council hearing. Currently, if the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends denial of a zoning change request, the applicant must
submit a written letter to the City Secretary asking for the City Council to consider
the appeal. The City Council must approve the appeal request and set the date for
the public hearing. Staff feels that this puts the City Council in the position of
possibly denying someone due process by voting to deny the appeal request and
preventing the public hearing.
Chapter 2 -The second chapter consolidates all the definitions that were originally
in each of the separate ordinances into a single location. There are very few
changes to individual definitions, but during the consolidation process, staff edited
several of the definitions to clarify their intent and, in a few cases, relocated
language that contained a regulation to the appropriate location within the Land
Development Code applicable to that particular regulation. Definitions should not
contain regulations because they tend to be overlooked and make enforcement
quasuonao~e wnen a possible violation aoesn't measure up to the letter of the
definition.
Chapter 3 -The third chapter deals with land use issues and is essentially the old
zoning ordinance. Virtually all of the land use regulations that were originally a part
of the zoning ordinance have been left in place. However, the landscaping
regulations and building design regulations have been removed and placed in their
own chapters and all of the definitions are contained in Chapter 2.
One change has been made to Section 24, the Permitted Use Table, regarding
convenience stores and gas stations in the ML -Light Manufacturing district.
Previously these were allowed by right in the Light Manufacturing district, but staff is
recommending that they only be allowed by requiring a Special Use Permit. Staff
feels that there are too many negative issues associated with these uses, such as
driveway curb-cut spacing and car wash locations, that suggest more restrictions are
needed than in the past.
Chapter 4 -This chapter contains the landscaping regulations that previously were
a part of the zoning regulations. No changes have been made to the landscaping
regulations. Landscaping regulations have become so important to the development
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page 5 of 10
process that staff felt they belonged in their own chapter. This should lend to better
understanding of the landscaping regulations and allow easier amendment in the
future.
Chapter 5 -This chapter contains the tree preservation regulations. There are no
changes to the tree preservation regulations. Previously, the tree preservation
regulations were in a separate "stand-alone" ordinance. The new Land
Development Code dedicates a special chapter for these regulations.
Chapter 6 -This chapter contains the building design regulations. The purpose of
these regulations is to produce commercial buildings with pleasing exterior
appearances. The building design regulations were originally "hidden" within the
Zoning Ordinance. Staff frequently receives questions about the building design
regulations and having them in a separate chapter will make for better
understanding by the general public. No changes have been made to the building
design regulations.
Chapter 7 -This chapter contains the sign regulations. The current sign regulations
are a separate "stand-alone" ordinance. They have been amended on two different
occasions, therefore, it is necessary to have copies of all three ordinances in order
to have a complete set of sign regulations. There were no changes to the sign
regulations, but the language of the three old ordinances has been amended to
incorporate the two prior revisions.
Chapter 8 -This chapter describes the procedures for obtaining approval of a
subdivision. The language provides for various subdivision classifications, such as,
preliminary plat, final plat, amended plat, etc., and describes the procedures for
approval of each plat class cation. A key feature added to the subdivision
regulations is a full description of the application submittal requirements for each
type of plat.
Chapter 9 -This chapter contains the criteria for designing a subdivision. These
criteria include minimum right-of-way widths, requirements for public facilities,
maximum cul-de-sac lengths and regulations pertaining to tot sizes, frontage
requirements, etc. There are a number of new features contained in this chapter
regarding subdivision design. The new features clarify the submittal requirements
for subdivision plats, such as the requirements for a preliminary drainage analysis,
coordination of sidewalks with the Colleyville Pathways Plan and requirements for
collector street improvements.
Chapter 10 -This chapter contains the private street and entrance gate regulations
currently found in the subdivision regulations. These regulations are used for
development of "private gated subdivisions". No changes are proposed for this
chapter at this time.
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page 6 of 10
Chapter 11 -This chapter contains the park land dedication regulations. The
purpose of park land dedication regulations is to require each new subdivision to
dedicate a small percentage of land for park purposes. The regulations provide for a
"cash payment in lieu of dedication" for small subdivisions where an actual land
dedication would be small for park use. No changes are proposed at this time for
this chapter. However, staff is working with the Parks Department on changes that
will effect the park land dedication regulations. These changes will be submitted
separately at a later date.
Chapter 12 -This chapter contains the erosion control regulations. These
regulations were amended during 1999 and are included in this chapter as approved
by the City Council. The purpose of the erosion control regulations is to require silt
screening around construction sites and around new subdivisions to reduce the
effects of erosion and siltation on public streets. In the past, these regulations were
included with the subdivision ordinance. The Land Development Code dedicates a
separate chapter for this topic. No additional changes are proposed at this time.
Chapter 13 -This chapter contains the language of all the impact fee ordinances.
Impact fees are charged to new development to help pay for water, sewer and
collector roadway system improvements required due to the new development. No
changes are proposed for this chapter. At the current time, staff is updating the
Roadway Impact Fee Ordinance and when approved by the City Council, the new
provisions will be incorporated into this chanter.
Chapter 14 -This chapter contains the written specifications for the engineering
design of public improvements such as water; sewer, street and other public
improvements. The requirements for drainage studies are also a part of this
chapter. The Director of Public Services is allowed to amend this chapter, but only
after publishing a notice in the newspaper, waiting ten days for written objection,
then putting the amendment in place after waiting an additional 30 day period. If
written objection is received, the amendment must be approved by the City Council
before the new regulation becomes effective. One of the key new features included
with this chapter is the regulation regarding sidewalks. Four foot sidewalks have
been a requirement in Colleyville for a number of years, but the new regulations
require a five foot sidewalk when the sidewalk is adjacent to a collector street or
larger as shown on the Master Thoroughfare Plan. Additional widths are required
when the sidewalk is also intended to comply with the Trails System Plan.
Chapter 15 -This chapter contains the Public Works Construction Details. This is a
series of drawings used to graphically illustrate the requirements for constructing
water, sewer, street and other public improvements. The drawings typically show
cross sections of streets, water and sewer line trenching requirements and other
construction details and are much more easily understood in graphic form than by
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page7of10
using written text. The drawings in this chapter may be changed by the Director of
Public Services after complying with the same public not cation process described
for Chapter 14.
2. Summary of March 16, 2000 Workshop Comments
This portion of the agenda briefing describes the additional changes that were
discussed at the March 16 workshop and which have been incorporated into the Land
Development Code.
Chapter 1 -General Provisions
Section 1.18.6.5 -Changed the word "continuance" to "appeal" regarding a rezoning
applicant's request to be heard by the City Council without having to have a
separate "appeal" hearing. No change to the fee is recommended because the
applicant has already paid a rezoning fee.
Section 1.18.C - Added a requirement that any administrative changes approved by
the Director of Public Services do not become effective until 30 days after notice in
the newspaper.
Chapter 2 -Definitions
No additional changes were suggested at the March 16th workshop regarding
definitions. However, later this year additional review of this chapter will be
undertaken as a part of updates to the sign regulations.
Chapter 3 -Land Use
There were a number of comments made at the March 16th workshop that
suggested that more regulatory control was needed in the ML district. Many of the
uses allowed in ML (light manufacturing district) tend to have features often
considered objectionable when located adjacent to a residential neighborhood.
Contractor yards and automobile repair related uses are only two examples of uses
that need additional site review during their development stage. Attached to this
agenda briefing are copies of the "Permitted Land Use Tables" (see Attachment #1)
with recommended changes circled for your review. The Land Use Tables contain
"dots" to indicate a use that is "permitted by right" whereas a use that is indicated
with an "S" is allowed only after approval of a Special Use Permit. Please note that
a number of uses have been changed from the permitted by right status to requiring
a Special Use Permit. Additionally, staff is recommending that parks and
government buildings be added as permitted by right in all zoning districts to reflect
the actual manner in which these facilities tend to be located. Parks, school
buildings, fire stations can locate in all zoning districts. These minor changes are
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page 8 of 10
included in your draft copy of the Land Development Code. This chapter is
scheduled for extensive review later this year and additional minor changes will be
considered at that time.
Chapter 4 -Landscaping and BufiFering
Section 4.3 -Staff had added a requirement that a commercial building that
undergoes an extensive remodeling to the point that the value of the renovation
exceeded 75% of the value of the structure would trigger bringing the lot into
compliance with the current landscaping regulations. At the March 16tH workshop it
was suggested that this percentage be changed from 75% to 50% of the value of the
building. Additionally, when a commercial building is expanding the size of the
building by 30% or more of the existing building footprint, staff had recommended
that the lot be brought up to the current landscaping standard. At the March 16tH
workshop, it was recommended that this percentage for expanding the footprint of
an existing building which will trigger compliance with the landscaping regulations be
changed from 30% to 20% of the existing square footage. Both of these changes
have been included in your draft copy of the Land Development Code. Language
was added to this section to insert the Tarrant Appraisal District as the source for
determining property values in making the dollar value calculations.
Chapter 5 -Tree Preservation
No additional chances were suaaested at the March 1Ftn wo~kshon. Hnwe~~Ar these
were several comments tnat suggest turtner review of this chapter is warranted later
this year.
Chapter 6 -Building Design
At the March 16tH workshop, there were comments made that the building design
point score needed review. The attached sheets (see Attachment #2) taken from
the "ML" district reflect an increase from 15 points to 30 points. Additional changes
suggested at the March 16tH workshop will be reviewed later this year and a staff
recommendation presented at that time.
Chapter 7 -Sign Regulations
No additional changes suggested at the March 16tH workshop. This is a chapter that
deserves considerable streamlining. The sign regulations are too complex for easy
understanding by staff and by those wanting to install new signage. This will
become a high priority for review for the second phase of the Land Development
Code project.
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page 9 of 10
Chapter 8 -Plat Review Procedures
No additional changes suggested at the March 16th workshop.
Chapter 9 -Subdivision Design 8 Public Facilities
No additional changes suggested at the March 16th workshop.
Chapter 70 -Private Streets and Entrance Gates
No additional changes suggested at the March 16th workshop.
Chapter 77 -Park Land Dedication
No additional changes suggested at the March 16th workshop.
Chapter 72 -Erosion Control Regulations
No additional changes suggested at the March 16th workshop.
Chapter 73 -Impact Fees
No additional changes suggested at the March 16th workshop.
Chapter 14 -Engineering Design Standards
Section 14.10.8 -Added reference to the various sidewalk types described in
Chapter 15.
Chapter 15 -Public Works Construction Details
No changes suggested at the March 16th workshop.
3. Summary of Proaosed Work Elements from March 16th Workshop
The following items were mentioned at the March 16th workshop for review and
consideration later this year as additional items that are proposed for inclusion in the
Land Development Code.
1. Review and propose a better definition of masonry construction. Possibly
consider various types of masonry construction, such as Type A is brick or stone,
Type B is concrete block, Type C is another masonry material.
Agenda Briefing
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page 10 of 10
2. Review landscaping regulations regarding the percentages of remodeling that
trigger upgrading a site to meet the current standards. Consider incorporating
incentives for incremental landscaping enhancements to existing businesses.
3. Review the tree preservation regulations for better coordination with the
landscaping regulations and for better understanding, especially about
maintenance of trees that are planted as tree-replacements.
4. Review of the building design regulations to require more points to improve
exterior building appearances.
5. Review the platting regulations to determine ability to attach conditions of
approval.
6. Review of the flag lot policy as it applies to large lots with old houses in front.
7. Review trail system plan regarding sites where the trail runs through a property
instead of along its perimeter.
8. Review traffic impact analysis criteria regarding number of lots and number of
trips.
9. Consider developing a "rural" street standard.
~. in~c .; a requirement ii~at any remaining R10 zones areas must comply with the
development requirements of the R20 district. This would keep the R10 from
being "unregulated".
Recommendation
Approval of the Land Development Code, 0-00-1214, incorporating the additional
changes referenced in Part 2 above.
Attachments to follow:
#1 - 3 pages of Section 24.C -Table of Permitted Uses
#2 - Section 3.22E -Supplementary Requirements
Attachment #1 (page 1)
8~clton 3~ : Ts~le ettp~enttlttett flees _
co at oaaioc
>r
Resid.ntltl z~c.~
..
Single famiy home (a) • • • • • • S
Two famiy dweNing •
Townhouse /duster / multifamiy dwellings •
Mobile home dwelling • S
Hotel /motel • •
Convalescent! rotiroment home S
Private soda) recreation dub (b) • • • • • • • • •
Servants or carotakers quarters • • S S S S
Bed 8 breakfast lodging (g) S S S S S S S S
Jlyeiauit;ursl ;,2~i:C3
Fanning & livestock breeding & raising • •
Non-commercial swine farming •
Commerdal equestrian boarding
stable & school •
Private horse stables for domestlc use • • • S S
Roadside fruR, veg. 3 prod. stands (year md) S S S S S S S S S
Educaflottal:~p~vaihy- Operabsd) ~1.C:3
Kindargsrten, primary ~ secondary school S S S S S S
Junior and senior colleges and universities S S S
Vocational, technical and trade schools ~ ~ S S S i •
Business & professional school S S •
Cammumgy PaalUtlp
G vemment building ~ r+/r • • • • • • •
goM wurses, b co uildin9s • • • • • • •
is maintenance ~ storage buildings •
Telecommunication tower (h) S S
Solid waste disposal sites S
Cemeteries 8 mausoleums S S S S S S S
Bus or train passenger terminals S S • •
Railroad or motor troight ternmab •
Automobile parking lots 3 garages S S • •
Trensportatlon vehicle storage yards or garages •
Airport, heliport, or heNstop S S S
~y
Attachment #1 (page 2)
>Sectton Z~.C - TabM crf ~i~rmttad ilsaa, {cow
__
t)la~lat
iRsbsN :l+t.C.a
Convenience store w/o gasdine sales • • ~
Convenience store w/gasoline sales S S S S
Supermarket /grocery • •
Bakery • •
Meat 3 fish market • •
Cate, cafeteria S rostauront • •
Restaurant with drive-in or drive-thru service • •
General rotail salsa • • •
Pharmacy • • •
Drug store • •
Retail plumbing, electrical 6 hardware w/o outside dis • • • •
Hardware w/outside display • • •
Book & stationary shop • • •
Jewelry, camera, music -sales and/or ropair • • •
Fbriat shop • • •
Commercial greenhouse •
Furniture atom • • •
Pet shop • •
Second hand goods shop S S S
Motorcycle 8 jet ski sales ~ repair • •
Vehicle sales w/outside disp. S •
Automobile sales S • •
Gasoline service atetion S S
Buliding materials wlo outside storage • •
Bldg. mall. w/outside stor.
a.r~~.aronia..uce
,
, S •
Barber, beauty sabna • • •
SeH service laundromat S S S S
Dry cbaners (station ony)
S
•
•
Apparol atterotiona • • •
HeaRlr studios (c) • •
Music b dance studios • •
Funeral home /mortuary S S S
ii
S
Attachment #1 (page 3)
aaafton ~C . TsbN of iP.rntiMtatlalaL.a lcortt'dj
za nt :nt.atat
<iLkardi#ae C~aNtoeMett „~ . ~ ~ ' ~ . ~ ~ ~ :: ~ ~ ~ ~ .
Vetennanan office wlltenneb (d) • • •
Interior decorator shop • • • •
Food catering • •
Medical & veterinary dimes (e) • •
Medical office w!o clinic • • •
Hospital •
General office • • • •
Banks, financial insfkutions • •
Contractor office w/ yard • •
Exterminator shop w/storage •
Day taro !day nursery S S S S S S
Pawn shop •
Gornmarritl /8arvke- 24:x:7 ;.
Motion picturo theater • •
Indoor amusement S S
Outdoor amusement S S S S S S
Archery 8 firearm ranges (f) S S
Automotive repalr 3 service w/o outside storage S • •
Automotive ropair b service w/outside storage •
Laundry / dry cleaning plant
•
Appliance reD81r shops i • i •
ing, cond. 8 electrical trades shops • ~
• ~•
tture repair
• •
Sek service storage • . l
~d ~ir~
Warohouse and distri e~~y
Printing and bookbinding • •
Food packaging and manufacturing
Research and development labs ~ •
all other manufacturing
Tabie_ L=end
8 Permitted Use
S Special Use Penrrk Required
Uses wkh -see Section 3.24.8
"~
~+1I
~~~ ~ ~
!. ,J
s''
F"ss
Attachment #2
is limited to those uses that aro not rotail in naturo or in some csses those that need outdoor space.
322.18 PERhIIIT>rD USES
1. Residsntlal ! Ag / Eduatbnal /Community FadUty Usea: vocational, technical 8 trade schools;
business l4 professional school; govsmmsnt buildings; parks, golf courses it, community
buildings; pubec maintenance S storage buildings; bus or train passenger terminal; railroad or
motor irelght terminals; auto parking lots It garages; transportation vehide storage yards or
garages.
2. Retail Uses: convenknce storo w/gasoline ales; vehicle aia w/outside dbplsy; automobile
sales; gasoline service station; building materials with outside storage.
3. Service b Office Uses: veterinarian office' wlkennsls; contractor office w/yard; exterminator shop
whborsgs.
4. Commeroiai Service 8 Industrial Uses: automotive repair 3 service with and without outside
storage; laundry-dry cleaning plant; appliance ropair shops; plumbing, heat, air condidoning b
electrical trades shop; welding shops; upholsbry, furniture ropair, ail service storage; warohouse
6 distributbn; Printing ~ bookbinding; food packaging b manufaduring; research iL dsvsbpment
labs; all other manufacturing.
3.22.C SPECIAL USES
1. Residential ! Ag J Educational J Community Facility Uaes: mobile home dwellings; ssrranta or
caretakers quarters; (privately operated) kindergarten, primary 3 secondary school;
telecommunication towers; solid waste dispoal sftes; cemeteries 3 mausoleums; airport, heNport
or helistop
2. Retail Uses: none
3. Service 8 Office Usss: none
4. Commeroial Service S Industrial Uses: outdoor amusement; an:hery 8 firearm ranges
3ZI.D
General Requl»msurb:
Minimum lot size: 10,000 s.t.
Maximum lot size: none
Minimum lot width st front
Setback !ine~ ~pQ
M a:mur.. ~ci aeatr 12u ti,
Maximum rot coverage t!D!6
Minimum setbadu:
trout: 40 R,
side abutting resWeMial: 25 ft.
Bide at;uttiep ~on.reaioe~tia: "f.
roar abutung rosr'oenual: 2S ft.
rear abutting non-rseidentlal 10 R.
Max. BuNdirp heipM in stories: 2 st.
Max. building height In feet: 35 tt.
Max. building height adj. To residentlal
district: sss Sec. 3.24 (A38)
Psrmilled per Sec. 3.24 b 3.2td
3.22.E SUPPLt+,MLrNT,~ng RrnrnigLrirrvw_r_r~s. f3EE SECTIONS 24 2S AND 2n
General: Landscaplnp PJana: OR-Street Parking:
- outdoor stomps f< psnnktsd • roquirod as per Chapter 4 - as required by Sec. 3.2g
- usa adjaoant to slipla hmgy usa Comnrenl:/a/ B/dp. Dea/Q-- Stlda: Sits Plans:
Must bs screened p per Sec. 3.24~~,l.~1,• erte must have a minimurn Of -plans must be submitted in
_ fTW r,. nn•rrf~el 7l Iw u.fA... /~LLr.- ~- ~~a__. ~.. ..~__.__ ~ _ _ _
30 p,ts.
ORDINANCE 0-00-1214
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 78
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, BY
ADOPTING AND ENACTING A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDING OF CERTAIN
ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF; PROVIDING
FOR THE MANNER OF AMENDING SUCH CODE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION.
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined the need to consolidate the Zoning
Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Tree Preservation Ordinance, and Impact
Fee Ordinance, by establishing a Land Development Code as Chapter 78 of
the Code of Ordinances for the purpose of coordinating development policies
of the City of Colleyville; and
WHEREAS, the Texas Local Government Code requires public hearing prior to the
adoption of subdivision, zoning and impact fee regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Colleyville City Charter requires a public hearing prior to adoption of any
ordinance; and
WHEREAS, notice of a hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission was
published in a newspaper of general circulation in Colleyville at least 15 days
before such hearing; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing before the City Council was published in a
newspaper of general circulation in Colleyville at least 15 days before such
hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has held a public hearing for the
purpose of adopting a Land Development Code and has forwarded its report
and recommendations to the City Council for consideration; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has received the report and recommendations of the
Planning and Zoning Commission and held the required public hearings to
receive citizen comment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT Chapter 78 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Colleyville, Texas, is
hereby amended to read as shown in the document entitled Land
Development Code of the City of Colleyville, Texas, a copy of which is
attached as Exhibit "A°.
Ordinance 0-00-121
Page 2 of 3
Sec. 2. THAT Ordinance 0-77-248, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyvi~'~~
Texas, as amended, is hereby amended and replaced by the adoption of ,
Land Development Code.
Sec. 3. THAT Ordinance 0-91-812, the Sign Code of the City of Colleyville, Texas,...
as amended, is hereby amended and replaced by the adoption of the Land
Development Code.
Sec. 4. THAT Ordinance 0-93-900, the Tree Preservation Ordinance of the City of
Colleyville, Texas, as amended, is hereby amended and replaced by the
adoption of the Land Development Code.
Sec. 5. THAT Ordinance 0-95-1004, the Water, Wastewater and Roadway Impact
Fee Ordinance of the City of Colleyville, Texas, as amended, is hereby
amended and replaced by the adoption of the Land Development Code.
Sec. fi. THAT the rules, regulations, and procedures contained in the document
entitled Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville, Texas, a copy of
which is attached as Exhibit °A" shall be applicable to all development within
the City from and after the date of approval of this ordinance.
Sec. 7. THAT it is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council of the City
of Colleyville, that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses and phrase
of this Land Development Code are severable, and if any phrase, clause,
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Land Development Code shall be
declared unconstitutional, such unconstitutionality or invalidity shall not affect
an~~ cf the remainirra phrases. clauses, s~ntenc°s, caragraphs or sactic^s
or tnis Land Development Code since the same would have been enacted
by the City Council without the incorporation in this Land Development Code
of any such unconstitutional or invalid phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph
or section.
Sec. 8. THAT any person, firm or corporation violating any fire safety, zoning or
public health and sanitation provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not to
exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). For violations of all other
provisions, the fine shall not exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500). Each day
that any violation of this ordinance shall continue shall constitute a separate
offense and shall be punishable as such.
Sec. 9. THAT this ordinance shall become effective upon passage.
Sec. 10. 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.
Ordinance 0-00-1214
Page 3 of 3
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of ,
2000.
The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the day of
2000.
ATTEST:
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC
City Secretary
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE:
Donna Arp
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
Ross T. Foster
City Attorney
Planning 8 Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 1 of 12 - vRAFT coPrlo4i26roo~
The regular meeting of the Planninc
Hart at 7:00 P.M. on April 24, 2000.
Roll Call: Present:
Absent:
Staff:
I and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman
Rob Rutherford, Luann Edwards, Mike Collins, Jim
Fletcher, Bryan Hill, Tom Hart
William Tyler
Barry LeBaron, Clayton Husband, Tom Niederauer, Jan
Levy
Invocation: Commissioner Rutherford
Approval of Minutes: March 27, 2000
Commissioner Edwards moved to approve the minutes of March 27th meeting submitted.
Commissioner Rutherford seconded the motion. The vote being:
Ayes: Rutherford, Edwards, Fletcher, Hill, Hart,
Noes: None
Abstentions: Collins
1. A Final Plat for 2R, 7, 8, and 9, Block 2, Heritage High School Addition requested by W.
Douglas Jennings on 2.4779 acres located on the south side of Gateway Drive in the 4100
block. Case P-00-017
Bryan Hi11 stepped down from the Commission and left the chambers due to a possible conflict
of interest.
Tom Niederauer presented the case to the Commission. Commissioner Edwards asked if the 25'
front yard set backs within the cul-de-sac would reduce the ability to meet the landscaping
requirements. Staff responded that parking could be moved to the rear of the buildings and the
landscaping requirements could be met.
Commissioner Rutherford moved to approve the final plat with the requested 25' front yard
setback on the lots within the cul-de-sac. Commissioner Collins seconded the motion.
The vote being:
Ayes: Rutherford, Edwards, Collins, Fletcher, Hart
Noes: None
Commissioner Hill rejoined the Commission.
2. A Combination Plat for Harden on Montclair Addition requested by Ernest Hedgcoth for
Tommy E. Harden on 1.0124 acres located at 5413 Montclair Drive. Case P-00-028
Planning 8 Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 2 of 12 -DRAFT COPY[04/26/DOJ
Tom Niederauer presented the case to the Commission. Commissioner Edwards inquired if this
was a parcel of property carved out of a larger parcel. Staff responded that the adjoining parcels
are in separate ownership.
Commissioner Fletcher moved to approve the combination plat subject to the right-of-way
dimension and a new 40' setback being established prior to filing the plat. Commissioner
Hill seconded the motion. The vote being:
Ayes: Rutherford, Edwards, Collins, Fletcher, Hill, Hart
Noes: None
3. A Combination Plat for Lot 3, Block 1, Heritage High School Addition requested by Doug
Henderson for P 8~ K Japanese Restaurant on 2.138 acres located at the northwest corner of
Gateway Drive and S. H. 121. Case P-00-029
Tom Niederauer presented the case to the Commission. Following discussion, Commissioner
Collins moved to approve the combination plat subject to the provision that appropriate
drawings are submitted for an off-site easement. Commissioner Rutherford seconded the
motion. The vote being:
Ayes: Rutherford, Edwards, Collins, Fletcher, Hill, Hart
Noes: None
4. A Final Plat for Tanalewood requested by James Koch for Mark Go+tfredsan !and
Geveiopmenz Li_C on 25.y55 acres iocatea on the norm siae of uonn McCain Road, west o
Pebble Hill Plantation Estates. Case P-00-024
Clayton Husband presented the case to the Commission. Discussion ensued regarding the DRC
comments. Mr. Husband said that the developer has responded to the comments. Chairman
Hart moved to approve the final plat. Commissioner Fletcher seconded the motion. The
vote being:
Ayes: Rutherford, Edwards, Collins, Fletcher, Hill, Hart
Noes: None
PUBLIC HEARING - A Zoning Change requested by Steve Free, from R40 to PUD-R on
11.286 acres located on the north side of the 800 W. block of Lavaca Trail -Lavaca Trails.
Case Z-00-025
Clayton Husband presented the case to the Commission. He said that the applicant has
requested that the case be tabled to allow them more time to deal with issues and concerns by
the DRC. Mr. Husband said that staff recommended the public hearing be held since it was
advertised and notification was sent, then table the case. Chairman Hart opened the public
hearing. Those present wishing to speak were:
Planning ~ Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 3 of 12 -DRAFT COP)' [04/26/OOJ
Steve Martin, 813 W. Lavaca Trail, stated that he is opposed to the zoning change because it
does not conform to the surrounding uses. He said that everyone in the area has large estate lots
and increased traffic is not desirable. Mr. Martin talked about the drainage problems associated
with the property and how when it rains, the water goes over the street onto his property.
Bob Monks, 901 W. Lavaca Trail, said that he is opposed as the proposed addition is not
cohesive with the current residences on Lavaca Trail. He said that 25 lots are too many and there
are already drainage problems with the property. He said that a dead end street is great for
raising his children
Nan Martin, 813 W. Lavaca Trail, opposed due to the fact that there are rural estates on Lavaca
Trail with only 12 houses on the street and there is nothing comparable with the density the
developer is proposing. She said that the neighborhood is what Colleyville used to be rather than
higher density subdivisions that are common now and the residents would like it to remain that
way. She said that a petition in opposition that has been circulated and signed by 10 out of the
12 families on Lavaca Trail and it will be presented to the Planning and Zoning office.
Stephanie Giacomini, 805 W. Lavaca Trail, said that her house is in construction and she is
opposed. She said that she has owned the property and is now building on it. Ms. Giacomini said
that she has had several offers from people wanting to buy her home, but would not sell because
she wants to live in a rural area. She said that this is one of the few spots in Fort Worth and it's
suburbs that are country within the city. She said that the road with the pot holes makes up the
character of the neighborhood.
Tamm~~ Nordiing, 715 W. Lavaca Trail. spoke in opoositior and said that she agrees with Steve
Martin and her neighbors and does not want additional traffic.
Chairman Hart asked if the applicant was present. He was not.
Commissioner Edwards said that the development is not compatible with the neighborhood and
there are no mitigating circumstances to prevent the developer from meeting all of the PUD-R
requirements. She said that she agrees with the residents and a PUD is not compatible with the
kind of neighborhood that is already there.
Commissioner Hill said that he would echo those comments.
Commissioner Rutherford said that he is concerned about the lack of open space. He said that
there is no reason for the developer to not meet the requirements.
Chairman Hart said that the Commission has valid concerns and the development is not
compatible with what surrounds it.
Commissioner Rutherford moved to table the rezoning case. Commissioner Edwards
seconded the motion.
Planning & Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 4 of 12 -DRAFT COPY j04/26/OOJ
Commissioner Edwards questioned the need to table the case. Commissioner Fletcher said that
he agreed and felt that the request was inappropriate for the area, and even if the developer
brought in another PUD, it would not be compatible with the surrounding properties.
Commissioner Edwards said that she is a little reluctant to take action without ever having talked
to the developer, so she would let her second to the motion stand. Commissioner Rutherford said
that it is difficult to vote against his own motion, but the point is well taken.
Commissioner Collins asked staff what the applicant's recourse would be if the case were denied.
Staff said that he could request an appeal hearing by the City Council. Staff said that if City
Council denied the rezoning request on a straight zoning case, the applicant would not be allowed
to re-file the case for one year for the same zoning category. Mr. LeBaron, said that it becomes
more difficult with aPUD-R, because the Commission would have to determine if the PUD is
significantly different in order for the request to be heard again within the one year period. If the
applicant complied with everything the Commission is wanting and the request was changed to
be a specialized, customized zoning, it would be unfair to the applicant to not be heard. Mr.
LeBaron said that he believed the reason the applicant is not present is because he heard the
DRC concerns which have been reflected by the Commission and did not have enough time to
reanalyze and redesign the subdivision to submit something somewhat different. He said that he
would be uncomfortable for the Commission to deny the case. Chairman Hart said that the
applicant was aware that this was a public hearing tonight and he needed to hear the concerns
of the citizens in the area.
The vote being:
.yes: =~vvards, " oliins,
Noes: Rutherford, Fletcher, Hill, Hart
Commissioner Fletcher said that the applicant has called all of the citizens in the neighborhood
together for the public hearing tonight and he should have given the Commission and the citizens
the courtesy of hearing their input. Commissioner Hill said that he agreed.
Commissioner Fletcher moved to deny the zoning change request. Commissioner
Rutherford seconded the Rutherford seconded the motion.
Commissioner Hill said that if the applicant presents another request for a PUD, it would need to
be drastically different from the original request in order for the Commission to reconsider it.
Commissioner Edwards asked staff if the case was denied and the applicant resubmitted another
request, would he have to pay the fees again? Staff responded that the applicant would have
to re-pay the application fee of $500.
The vote being:
Ayes: Rutherford, Edwards, Collins, Fletcher, Hill, Hart
Noes: None
Planning & Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 5 of 12 -DRAFT COPY j04/26/00]
6. PUBLIC HEARING - A Zoning Change requested by Larry Cole, from PUD-R & R40 to R20
on 48,831 s.f. located on the north side of Van Oaks Drive -Remington Park, Phase 3A.
Case Z-00-026
Clayton Husband presented the case to the Commission. Discussion ensued about the
connection of Van Oaks Drive and the need for a cul-de-sac and other options for turnarounds
and access, and the need to consider these issues at the time of zoning.
Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Those present wishing to speak were:
Larry Cole, 6420 Remington Parkway, representing the case. He spoke about the benefits of a
standard access with an emergency gate to the City rather than no additional access to Van Oaks
Drive. He said that Remington Park has enough exits to satisfy any emergencies, but the citizens
on Van Oaks would benefit in an emergency. Discussion ensued about the current street access
to the last residential lots on Van Oaks and options to access the lots. He said that it would be
cost prohibitive to construct a cul-de-sac for one lot since there is very little traffic on the street.
Mike Richart, 308 W. Van Oaks, owner, said that no one on Van Oaks want the street to be a
through street. He said that the developer is offering a compromise. He said that there are very
few lots on the street with very little traffic and if anyone goes to the end of the street, they use
his driveway to turn around. He said that there has never been a problem with that situation.
There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rutherford moved to recommend approval of the zoning change request.
Commissioner Collins seconded the motion. The vote being:
Ayes: Rutherford, Edwards, Collins, Fletcher, Hill, Hart
Noes: None
7. PUBLIC HEARING - A Zoning Change requested by Burk Collins, from CC3, PUD-C, CN &
R20 to PUD-C (planned unit development-commercial) with a SUP for alcoholic beverage
sales on 15.856 acres located between Cheek Sparger Rd., Felps Drive, Acuff Lane &
Colleyville Blvd. - Colleyville Commons. Case Z-00-027
Clayton Husband presented the case to the Commission. Chairman Hart opened the public
hearing.
Burk Collins, applicant, was present to represent the case. He said that he has a grocery anchor
store and a retail shopping center in the front portion of the property and office/showrooms on the
property along Felps Drive. He said that Wal-Mart is proposing to construct a grocery store that
is not a super center nor is a regular Wal-Mart store, but one of their new concept stores. Mr.
Collins said that it was their original plan to only develop the retail and grocery anchor store, but
due to the layout of streets around the larger parcel, the parcels behind the shopping center would
Planning & Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 6 of 12 -DRAFT COPY [04/26/OOJ
become land-locked. He said that the office/showroom concept was the answer to that problem
and they realize that the City will require a higher design standard. He said that he, the City
Manager, and Mike Soab went to two homeowners associations in the area to receive their input
and incorporated comments into the design. He said that he thought they were doing what was
right and are open for suggestions and believes that the project is better than what is there now
and will generate tax revenues for the City.
Neil Strassman, 134 Felps Court, said that he is in favor of economic development along
Colleyville Blvd., but wants to see quality development, not more tube, oil change shops or self
storage facilities. He said that the proposed development goes too deeply into the quiet
residential community and it should be scaled back to a more appropriate distance from the
boulevard. He said that a Whole Foods Market or an upscale H.E.B. Market would be more
desirable than Wal-Mart. He said that he imagines Wal-Mart is hoping to undercut prices of the
three major grocery stores within a mile of the site. Mr. Strassman said that this community is not
interested in bargain basement groceries and it is safe to say that the community is seeking high
quality foods, and let the markets that are there now compete among themselves to offer citizens
the best items. He said that there is currently significant empty retail space on the boulevard
between Precinct Line Road and Glade Road, with a large former furniture store at Mayfair Village
being empty for two years. He sited other empty retail spaces. He said that we are possibly
overbuilding small retail stores in the community. Mr. Strassman said that he wants wise
decisions being made for development along the boulevard with classy stuff not garbage and i~
opposed to windfalls for the developers that will not serve the community and that is what this
proposal appears to be. He said that a 15 acre development is too large and wilt lead to more
traffic in the neighborhood with large delivery trucks, storm water runoff from oily parking lots, the
c-~~ ~m~ .~ss~~:a~_~ ~~rrth mxin~ ::;ono! sales anc aoFilC. Ho said that he lives aDOUt 214' away
from the project and was not given notice and the proper thing was not done by not contacting
people who live closest to the area. Mr. Strassman said that office/showrooms sound like a weak
proposal and with all of the vacant retail already in the are, they could remain vacant.
Fred Skoog, 127 Cheek Sparger Road, said that he has a number of concerns and there is water
in the pond that will be paved over. He said that there are many trees in the area the could be
bull dozed flat and the trees along the south side of the property are the only buffer. He said that
he has concerns about the road transitions in the area to allow big trucks to enter the loading
docks. He said that he is concerned about light pollution with the use of security lights, alcoholic
beverages sales, economic hardships for residential lots to the south, added traffic, and the
amount of limited information being supplied by the developer. He said that the common driveway
he shares with his neighbor is used to prevent having to back out onto Cheek Sparger Road and
is often times used by the public and is concerned that it could be used by trucks missing the
turnoff into the project. He said that he is concerned for the safety of his grandchildren.
Rich Ulery, 123 Cheek Sparger, said that he moved into the area a year ago and would not have
moved his family with little children to the area if he had known that a project like this could be
developed.
Planning 8~ Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 7 of 12 - DRAfT COP)'[04/26/00]
Barry Whitmire, 3805 Oak Briar Lane, said that he is opposed to office/showrooms that translate
to office/warehouse that could be small businesses like lawn mowing companies, carpet cleaning,
etc. with a handful of service vehicles and labor type help hanging around the building.
Del Bartlet, 3805 Felps Court, said that he was attacked by a gang three years ago at the
intersection and is violently opposed to the development. He said that the developers do not live
in the area nor did they talk to the people who live closest to the development.
Curtis McKeown, 4105 Felps Drive, and has been in the wholesale grocery business since 1950.
He said that if for no other reason to be against the development, Wal-Mark closed down 860
independent grocery stores in the state if Texas by undercutting their prices. He said that exiting
Felps onto Cheek Sparger or Acuff onto Colleyville Blvd. in the moming is almost an impossibility.
He said that he is also concerned about drainage problems.
Brian Dunn, 3809 Felps Court, said that he is opposed because it is currently a quiet area and at
night they can hear the Tarantula train and that atmosphere will be disturbed. He said that he is
opposed to truck access off Cheek Sparger and alcoholic beverage sales. He said that rezoning
signs are difficult to find and he has concerns about declining property values.
Olivia Locker, 116 Cheek Sparger, spoke in favor. She said that in the last 10 years, she has had
three offers and Burk Collins has put more effort into the plans and has a good plan for Colleyville.
Peggy Dennie, 200 Cheek Sparger, spoke in favor. She said that people opposed to alcoholic
beverage sales probably drive down the road farthe- tc tn~ other grocery stores to purchase bier
and wine. She said that there are 15 acres that have promise of clean businesses being
established and she has put up with the filth of other area business and has cleaned up after
them. She said that Mr. Collins wants to develop the property correctly and do away with the
water problems and clean up the area. Mrs. Dennie said that there are currently snakes including
water moccasins and copperheads in the area and she appreciates Mr. Collins efforts to clean
up the area and do what is right for Colleyville.
Susie Dunn, 3805 Felps Court, said that she has concerns about alcoholic beverage sales so
close to Cheek Sparger which is a small dangerous road. She said she has concems about truck
access, office/showroom lighting onto neighborhood properties and lack of facade details for the
buildings facing onto Felps Drive.
Virginia Garrett, 128 Cheek Sparger Road, said that there has been meanness in the vicinity for
the 32 years they have lived there. She said that the talk of widening Cheek Sparger has
prevented the sale of her property and this is her opportunity to sell her 1 3/. acres. She said that
she is a widow and maintaining the property is a burden and she would tike to sell.
Wanda Knight, 3917 Felps Court, said that she is concerned with the possibility of obtrusive lights
and increased traffic. She said that Colleyville is growing much too fast as there are already 3
Planning b Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 8 of 12 -DRAFT COPY [04/26/OOJ
grocery stores in the area. She said that she would like to see a green belt, and a noise barrier
to be included in the project.
Jim French, said that he has the commercial development to the north and the City made him
comply with all of the PUD requirements and he had to describe all aspects of his development.
He said that he is challenging the Commission to ask the developer to present their project on
paper.
Steven Cox, 309 Cheek Sparger, said that there have been 7 accidents in front of his house since
he moved recently into the area and there would have been more if Cheek Sparger weren't closed
for construction. He said that he is in favor of the enhancements associated with the project,
however bringing the project to Felps and Wal-Mart is not what the area residents want.
Joe Massimo, 215 Cheek Sparger, where his daughter and her two small children live. He said
that Cheek Sparger is very dangerous and the development should be kept on Colleyville Blvd.
He said that he is concerned about the negative effect the project and additional traffic will have
of people's lives in the area.
Vonnie Patterson, 313 Cheek Sparger, said that he is concerned about the hazards of Cheek
Sparger. He said that it is a dumping ground and he has to pick up beer and coke bottles ever
day. He stated concerns that someone will get kilted someday in the culvert. Mr. Patterson saia
that he is in favor of developing the front part of the project along Colleyville Blvd., but not back
to Feips Drive.
Joe Moore, 133 Acuff, said that he is a part of the buy-out, but he is speaking as a municipal
employee. He said that 13 years ago he looked at the Future Land Use Map when he purchased
his house and the property was commercial. He told the Commission that they have the same
blue print to follow and this is an area of town that needs to be cleaned up. Mr. Moore said that
through regulations and the permitting process, traffic, drainage, and lighting can be correctly
installed and the area will be developed and it is better to look at the overall project rather than
piece-meal the area's development. He said that emotions are high, but the Commissioners
should weigh the emotions with their responsibility to move the city forward.
Trent Podsednick, 125 Felps Ct., stated concems about the traffic flow and said the entrance to
his subdivision is within 200'. He said that the curve in Cheek Sparger is dangerous and even
with a traffic light, cars would not be able to stop in time. He said that the project reaches too far
back into the residential area.
Rob McKowen, 4013 Felps, stated he has concerns about water runoff and increased traffic.
Everret Greer, 4001 Felps Drive, said that he wants a sound barrier and is only in favor of a 6'
high brick wall along the west side of Felps Drive and wants no exit onto Felps Drive. He said that
he is opposed to the project.
Planning 8 Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 9 of 12 -DRAFT COPE [04/26/00]
Sam Ogden, 606 Green Meadow N., stated concerns about the need for quality development in
the area and wants to ensure that Colleyville standards are met. He expressed concerns about
additional traffic.
Paul Dennie, 200 Cheek Sparger, said that he never drank in his life nor does he promote
alcoholic beverage sales. He said that others were not opposed when the other grocery stores
started selling alcoholic beverages. He said that the drainage problems are not Burk Collins'
problems, they are the City's problems, yet Mr. Collins will correct them, and the City needs to
address all traffic problems. He said that the development will enhance the city. He said that he
has driven in this area since 1965 and has driven without problems, so maybe the reports are
blown out of proportion. He supports the project.
Del Bartlet said that the only people who spoke in support of the project are those who are selling
their property and are going to make money off of it. He said that the ones left behind will be the
ones to suffer.
There being no one else present wishing to speak, Chairman Hart closed the public hearing
Burk Collins came forward to address the public comments. He apologized for having missed so
many people for advance notice of the project. He said that he was given the Homeowners
Associations names and held a meeting with 60 people at the Colleyville Community Center. He
said in response to the alcoholic beverage and crime issue that he lived in Bedford before moving
to Colleyville and was violently attacked in his home and there was no alcohol sold around his
house. He said that when he moved to Colleyville he could go to Northeast Mall in 15 minutes,
anc' now it takes him 20 minutes to get from his house on John McCain to Colleyville Bivd. He
said that he doesn't complain about it because traffic is a product of the world we live in. He said
that the service station on the corner of Cheek Sparger and Colleyville Blvd. is putting in a
convenience store that will sell alcoholic beverage and those sales will take place whether or not
he does this project.
Commissioner Edwards raised questions regarding the office design and wanted examples of CC-
1 building designs. She raised questions about traffic signals, wetlands problems, hours of
operation, and the Chevron. Mr. Collins said that he plans on building higher end buildings for
people with computer type or architectural type businesses. He said that he initially did not want
the back portion of the property, but when you look at the street layouts, nobody would every build
a house on Felps Drive. Mr. Collins said that heavy landscaping would be used to buffer the
residential properties. Mr. Collins said that the city sets the standards to deal with the wetlands
problem and they will meet the requirements. He said that the Wal-Mart is a 24 hour operation
and the Chevron station is not part of his project, but he understands that they will be selling
alcoholic beverages.
Commissioner Fletcher had questions about potential tenants. He said that there are already too
many oil change shops and wondered if Mr. Collins is proposing any of them for his project. Mr.
Collins said that economics would not allow that use with $18 to $20 rent space. The tenants that
Planning 8- Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 10 of 12 -DRAFT COPY [04/26/OOJ
would be more in line are Hollywood Video or Hallmark or higher end retail uses. Commissioner
Fletcher said that the mixed residential with commercial uses seem to be a problem with the
residents. He asked Mr. Collins if he world be opposed to increased setbacks along Felps Drive.
Mr. Collins responded that the architect would have to look at the project, but he thought they had
a good buffer with a lot of trees and berms in the area and he plans to heavily landscape the area.
Commissioner Fletcher encouraged an additional buffer along Cheek Sparger so that in the future
there is an option to have the space available. Mr. Collins said that he was told by staff that he
would have to provide an additional 10' wide bike trail in the area and a buffer with a bike trail
could possibly cut down on the size of available area to develop may hurt the cost of
development.
Commissioner Hill said that many of the people who spoke tonight were not included in the design
phase of the project. He encouraged Mr. Collins to meet with the neighbors and table the case
until after that meeting took place.
Commissioner Ruthertord had questions about the obtrusive lights associated with the project.
Mr. Collins said that grocery stores react to the public's demands and provide lights for when
women shop at night in order to feel safe. He said that he has visited other Wal-Mart grocery
stores and they are quality business that sells cheaper and he believes that the public would like
that. He said that the office/showroom buildings would have small lights that do not shine into the
neighbors properties.
Commissioner Edwards asked Mr. Collins if he intended the SUP for alcoholic beverage sales to
be for the entire project or just the grocery store. Mr. Collins said that he would only want the SUP
:: r, she re.aii uses.
Commissioner Collins questioned who were the Homeowner Associations that Mr. Collins met
with. Bill Stimmels, Burk Collins Development, responded that he held two meeting in early March
with Woodbriar Homeowners Association and Bridlewood Homeowners Association and they
were not aware that there were numerous other groups to include. They met with the large
groups and are not trying to hide anything, as it is sometimes impossible to contact every
homeowner in the area, so they went with the large groups.
Commissioner Fletcher asked questions about where Cheek Sparger narrows from a 4 lane road
to a 2 lane road. He said that the trucks servicing the project will be entering off a narrow road
where there are bar ditches along the south of the road. He said that it is a serious concern to
him and asked if Mr. Collins has ideas in restricting their entrance to the Colleyville Blvd. side or
improving the entrances. Mr. Collins said that the City staff would advise him of what
improvements he needs to make.
Commissioner Edwards asked Mike Soab, Economic Development Manager, if he had
demographics to support another grocery store in Colleyvitle. Mr. Soab responded that Wal-Mart
answers that question by wanting to be there and they are the experts in finding locations to build
on. Mr. Soab said he asked Mr. Collins to meet with the area residents in order to prevent similar
Planning 8 Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 11 of 12 - DRAfT COPT [04/26/00]
problems Wal-Mart has encountered building in other communities. He said that he developed
volumes of names and apologized to the developer and to the residents who were not notified
stating that the list was not extensive enough. Mr. Soab said that grocery stores can generate
from $300 to $800 per square foot in tax revenues and this is a fairly small store for a
neighborhood project. He said that this is a very difficult site to develop because of having 14 to
16 different property owners and the wetlands problem and he commends anyone trying to
develop the site.
Discussion ensued about the conditions of Cheek Sparger Road.
Commissioner Fletcher suggested that the developer break down the project into two zoning
cases with two different development standards.
Commissioner Collins moved to table the case. Commissioner Fletcher seconded the
motion. The vote being:
Ayes: Rutherford, Edwards, Collins, Fletcher, Hill, Hart
Noes: None
The Commission encouraged the developer to meet with the citizens in order to discuss solutions
to any problems prior to the next meeting. Chairman Hart said that he would be inclined to reopen
the public hearing at the next meeting.
8. TABLED ITEM - An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding the requirements for
accessory buildings on resioenual -ots. Case ~-GC-G~3
This item was not removed from the table for discussion
9. Citizens' comments: Donna Rightenour requested a definition of an accessory building
10. Staff comments, reports and discussion items: There were none.
11. Commissioners' comments and reports: There were none.
ADJOURNMENT:
Commissioner Rutherford moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Commissioner
Fletcher seconded the motion. The motion passed by acclamation.
Planning 8 Zoning Commission
Minutes -April 24, 2000
Page 12 of 12 -DRAFT COPY [04/26/OOJ
Respectfully Submitted,
Jan Levy
Planning & Zoning Assistant
Approved on:
NOTE: As a matter of public record, an audio recording of the above Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting is available upon request.
DRAFT
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
Monday, April 19, 2000
6:30 p.m.
Chairman Rich Hendler called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday,
April 19, 2000 at the Parks and Recreation office.
ROLL CALL: Members: Chairman Rich Hendler, Karen
Birkes, Ken Crooks, Joe Noorlag, Steve
Magee and Mayor Pro Tem Nelson
Thibodeaux
Absent: Roger Nelson, Dan Witte and Vince Rosen
Staff: Dianne McWethy, Assistant City Manager,
Monica Sue Walsh, Parks and Recreation
Manager
I. Discussion and Consideration of Use of Voluntary Park Fund Monies for
Construction of Cottonbelt Trail Phase I
Steve Magee motioned that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Park Board
approve the use of Voluntary Park Fund monies, not to exceed ;48,000, in order
to receive ;240,000 from the City of Southlake for the construction of the
Cottonbelt Trail Phase I. Ken Crooks seconded the motion and the vote was
unanimous.
RESOLUTION R-00-1 fi42
A RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNCIL ACTION
UNDER BUSINESS AT THE REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING OF
MAY 02, 2000
WHEREAS, Council has taken action on certain items on the agenda under Business.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS:
Sec. 1. THAT the agenda decisions approved by Council action under Business this
date and not otherwise adopted by Ordinance and/or separate Resolution,
as follows are hereby adopted:
a. THAT
AND IT IS SO RESOLVED.
APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 2000, BY A VOTE OF
AYES, NAYS, AND ABSTENTIONS.
ATTEST:
CITY OF COLLEYVILLE
Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC Donna Arp
City Secretary Mayor