Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-01-08 Work Session & Regular Meeting PacketTHE CITY OF Anna AGENDA City Council Work Session Tuesday, January 8, 2019 @ 6:30 PM Anna City Hall, Council Chambers 111 N. Powell Parkway, Anna, Texas 75409 The City Council of the City of Anna will meet in Work Session at 6:30 PM, on January 8, 2019, at the Anna City Hall, Located at 111 North Powell Parkway (Hwy 5), to consider the following items. 1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Establishment of Quorum 2. CLOSED SESSION (EXCEPTIONS) Under Tex. Gov't Code Chapter 551, the City Council may enter into closed session to discuss any items listed or referenced on this agenda under the following exceptions: a. Consult with legal counsel regarding pending or contemplated litigation and/or on matters in which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with Chapter 551 of the Government Code (Tex. Gov't Code §551.071). b. Discuss or deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property (Tex. Gov't Code §551.072); city facilities; acquisition of easements c. Discuss or deliberate personnel matters (Tex. Gov't Code §551.074); City Manager d. Discuss or deliberate Economic Development Negotiations: (1) To discuss or deliberate regarding commercial or financial information that the City has received from a business prospect that the City seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory of the City of Anna and with which the City is conducting economic development negotiations; or (2) To deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect described by subdivision (1). (Tex. Gov't Code §551.087); possible incentive agreements with property developers; pending negotiations on development agreements. The Council further reserves the right to enter into executive session at any time throughout any duly noticed meeting under any applicable exception to the Open Meetings Act. 3. Consider/Discuss/Action on any items listed on any agenda —work session, regular meeting, or closed session —that is duly posted by the City of Anna for any City Council meeting occurring on the same date as the meeting noticed in this agenda. (If there is no need to address any other such agenda item, the Mayor shall adjourn this meeting). 4. Adjourn. There being no further business before the Council, we will consider this meeting adjourned at p.m. This is to certify that I, Carrie L. Smith, City Secretary, posted this agenda at a place readily accessible to the public at the Anna City Hall and on the City Hall bulletin board at or before 5:00 p.m. on . Carrie L. Smith, City Secretary 1. The Council may vote and/or act upon each of the items listed in this agenda. 2. The Council reserves the right to retire into executive session concerning any of the items listed on this agenda, whenever it is considered necessary and legally justified under the Open Meeting Act. 3. Persons with a disability who want to attend this meeting who may need assistance should contact the City Secretary at 972 924-3325 two working days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. AGENDA THE CITY OF Regular City Council Meeting AAAa Tuesday, January 8, 2019 @ 7:00 PM Anna City Hall, Council Chambers 111 N. Powell Parkway, Anna, Texas 75409 The City Council of the City of Anna will meet in Regular Session at 7:00 PM, on January 8, 2019, at the Anna City Hall, Located at 111 North Powell Parkway (Hwy 5), to consider the following items. Welcome to the City Council Meeting. Please sign the Sign -In -Sheet as a record of attendance. If you wish to speak on an open -session agenda item, please fill out the Opinion/Speaker Registration Form and turn it in to the City Secretary before the meeting starts. 1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Establishment of Quorum. 2. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Citizen Comments. Citizens are allowed three minutes to speak. The Council is unable to respond to or discuss any issues that are brought up during this section that are not on the agenda, other than to make statements of specific factual information in response to a citizen's inquiry or to recite existing policy in response to the inquiry. 4. Receive reports from Staff or the City Council about items of community interest. Items of community interest include: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen (but not including a change in status of a person's public office or public employment); a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality; and announcements involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda. a. Proclamation School Choice Week b. Department Reports — An update from the Fire Department to the City Council and Community. (Interim Chief Isom) 5. Consent Items. These items consist of non -controversial or "housekeeping" items required by law. Items may be considered individually by any Council member making such request prior to a motion and vote on the Consent Items. a. Approve Council Meeting Minutes for November 27 and December 11. (City Secretary) b. Review the minutes of the December 3, 2018 Planning and Zoning Meeting. c. Approve a Resolution approving the Calvert Addition Development Plat. d. Approve a Resolution approving the Durfee Addition Development Plat. e. Approve a Resolution approving a site and landscape plan for Creekside Office Building Phase 1 located on White Street and Victoria Falls as Block D, Lot 20-R-2A of the Falls Ph 1 A Replat. f. Approve a Resolution approving the Pecan Grove Phase 4 Final Plat. g. Approve a Resolution approving the Lakeview Estates Phase 3 Preliminary Plat. h. Approve a Resolution approving a site and landscape plan for Freedom Flex Car Wash located near the northwest corner of White St and Ferguson Pkwy, to the west of 7-Eleven (1510 W White St). 6. Conduct a Public Hearing for the purpose of receiving public comment on proposed amendments to the City's Roadway Capital Improvements Plan, Land Use Assumptions, and Impact Fees. (Joseph Johnson) 7. Conduct a Public Hearing for the purpose of receiving public comment on proposed amendments to the City's Water & Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan, Land Use Assumptions, and Impact Fees. (Joseph Johnson) 8. Consider/Discuss/Action regarding approval of an Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the City's Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Roadway Impact Fees. (Joseph Johnson) 9. Consider/Discuss/Action regarding approval of an Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the City's Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Water & Wastewater Impact Fees. (Joseph Johnson) 10. CLOSED SESSION (EXCEPTIONS) Under Tex. Gov't Code Chapter 551, the City Council may enter into closed session to discuss any items listed or referenced on this agenda under the following exceptions: a. Consult with legal counsel regarding pending or contemplated litigation and/or on matters in which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with Chapter 551 of the Government Code (Tex. Gov't Code §551.071). b. Discuss or deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property (Tex. Gov't Code §551.072); city facilities; acquisition of easements C. Discuss or deliberate personnel matters (Tex. Gov't Code §551.074); City Manager d. Discuss or deliberate Economic Development Negotiations: (1) To discuss or deliberate regarding commercial or financial information that the City has received from a business prospect that the City seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory of the City of Anna and with which the City is conducting economic development negotiations; or (2) To deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect described by subdivision (1). (Tex. Gov't Code §551.087); possible incentive agreements with property developers; pending negotiations on development agreements. The Council further reserves the right to enter into executive session at any time throughout any duly noticed meeting under any applicable exception to the Open Meetings Act. 11. Consider/Discuss/Action on any items listed on any agenda —work session, regular meeting, or closed session —that is duly posted by the City of Anna for any City Council meeting occurring on the same date as the meeting noticed in this agenda. (If there is no need to address any other such agenda item, the Mayor shall adjourn this meeting). 12. Adjourn. There being no further business before the Council, we will consider this meeting adjourned at p.m. This is to certify that I, Carrie L. Smith, City Secretary, posted this agenda at a place readily accessible to the public at the Anna City Hall and on the City Hall bulletin board at or before 5:00 p.m. on January 4, 2019 Carrie L. Smith, City Secretary 1. The Council may vote and/or act upon each of the items listed in this agenda. 2. The Council reserves the right to retire into executive session concerning any of the items listed on this agenda, whenever it is considered necessary and legally justified under the Open Meeting Act. 3. Persons with a disability who want to attend this meeting who may need assistance should contact the City Secretary at 972 924-3325 two working days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. THE CITY OF Atitia AGENDA ITEM: Proclamation School Choice Week SUMMARY: Item No. 4.a. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1 /8/2019 HELD EVERY JANUARY, NATIONAL SCHOOL CHOICE WEEK (NSCW) SHINES A SPOTLIGHT ON EFFECTIVE EDUCATION OPTIONS FOR CHILDREN. During NSCW, schools, homeschool groups, organizations and individuals plan tens of thousands of independent events. These celebratory events raise public awareness of the different K-12 education options available to children and families while also spotlighting the benefits of school choice. NSCW recognizes all K-12 options, including traditional public schools, public charter schools, public magnet schools, private schools, online academies, and homeschooling. Started in 2011, NSCW is now the world's largest annual celebration of opportunity in education. Over the past seven years, more than 58,000 NSCW events have been planned across the country and around the world. NSCW is a nonpartisan, nonpolitical, independent public awareness effort. Therefore we are not associated with any legislative lobbying or advocacy. DISCOVER MORE https:Hschoolchoiceweek.com/ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Upload Date Type Proclamation 1/2/2019 Presentation Citp of Anna, Texas Proclamation A Proclamation Commemorating the city of Anna School Choice Week WHEREAS all children in the city of Anna should have access to the highest -quality education possible; and, WHEREAS the city of Anna recognizes the important role that an effective education plays in preparing all students in the city of Anna to be successful adults; and, WHEREAS quality education is critically important to the economic vitality of the city of Anna; and, WHEREAS the city of Anna is home to a multitude of excellent education options from which parents can choose for their children; and, WHEREAS, educational variety not only helps to diversify our economy, but also enhances the vibrancy of our community; and, WHEREAS our area has many high -quality teaching professionals who are committed to educating our children; and, WHEREAS, School Choice Week is celebrated across the country by millions of students, parents, educators, schools and organizations to raise awareness of the need for effective educational options; NOW, THEREFORE, I, Nate Pike do hereby recognize January 20-26, 2019 as THE CITY OF ANNA SCHOOL CHOICE WEEK, and I call this observance to the attention of all of our citizens. c7n witness where f c7ha ve hereunto set mr hand this Sth dark f &anuarp 2019 and called thu seal to hr a�ed Mayor Nate Pike THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 4.b. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1/8/2019 Department Reports —An update from the Fire Department to the City Council and Community. (Interim Chief Isom) SUMMARY: As a part of the efforts to keep the City Council and community informed the City Manager has directed department heads to provide a state of the department presentation. Once a month throughout the year, a featured department will provide a brief presentation to update the Council, discussing the department vision, mission, purpose, accomplishments, current projects, milestones, plans, and goals, as well as answer any questions. [3 IF_122::19161�A I ITi I4';117-"% 9 150-LI A Presentation of Fire Department update, for information only. THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 5.a. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1 /8/2019 Approve Council Meeting Minutes for November 27 and December 11. (City Secretary) SUMMARY: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Worksession Regular Session Upload Date Type 1/3/2019 Exhibit 1/3/2019 Exhibit ANNACITYCOUNCIL MINUTES WORK SESSION December 11, 2018 The City Council of the City of Anna met in Work Session on the above date at Anna City Hall, located at 111 North Powell Parkway (Hwy 5), to consider the following items. 1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Establishment of Quorum Mayor Pike called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Council Member Toten was absent. 2. CLOSED SESSION (EXCEPTIONS) Under Tex. Gov't Code Chapter 551, the City Council may enter into closed session to discuss any items listed or referenced on this agenda under the following exceptions: a. Consult with legal counsel regarding pending or contemplated litigation and/or on matters in which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with Chapter 551 of the Government Code (Tex. Gov't Code §551.071). b. Discuss or deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property (Tex. Gov't Code §551.072); city facilities; acquisition of easements C. Discuss or deliberate personnel matters (Tex. Gov't Code §551.074); City Secretary Annual Review d. Discuss or deliberate Economic Development Negotiations: (1) To discuss or deliberate regarding commercial or financial information that the City has received from a business prospect that the City seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory of the City of Anna and with which the City is conducting economic development negotiations; or (2) To deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect described by subdivision (1). (Tex. Gov't Code §551.087); possible incentive agreements with property developers; pending negotiations on development agreements. MOTION: Council Member Beazley moved to enter closed session. Council Member Tutson seconded. Motion carried 6-0 Mayor Pike recessed the meeting at 6:33 p.m. Mayor Pike reconvened the meeting at 7:55 p.m. The Council further reserves the right to enter into executive session at any time throughout any duly noticed meeting under any applicable exception to the Open Meetings Act. 3. Consider/Discuss/Action on any items listed on any agenda —work session, regular meeting, or closed session —that is duly posted by the City of Anna for any City Council meeting occurring on the same date as the meeting noticed in this agenda. None 4. Adjourn. There being no further business before the Council, we will consider this meeting adjourned at p.m. Mayor Pike adjourned the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Approved on the January 8, 2019. Mayor Nate Pike ATTEST: City Secretary Carrie L. Smith ANNA CITY COUNCI L MINUTES REGULAR SESSION December 11, 2018 1. Call to Order/Roll Call and Establishment of Quorum Mayor Pike called the meeting to order at 7:56 p.m. Council Member Toten was absent. 2. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Pike led the pledge and invocation. 3. Citizen Comments. Citizens are allowed three minutes to speak. The Council is unable to respond to or discuss any issues that are brought up during this section that are not on the agenda, other than to make statements of specific factual information in response to a citizen's inquiry or to recite existing policy in response to the inquiry. Marietta Schell, 2115 Taylor Blvd - spoke in opposition to the locomotive. Kristen Harkless, 11628 W ildrose Lane - spoke in favor of the locomotive. Mark Mahar, 2414 Parkview Dr - spoke regarding the construction at the entrance of Creekside development. Elden Baker, 305 Eastbrook Dr - spoke in favor of the locomotive. The following provided in writing their support to the locomotive: Sherry White Hendrider Becky Greer Janet Smith Katherine Simpson Brenda Hammad Relda Beall Dana Rattan Adams Margaret Milan Diann Jones Becky Morriss James Morriss 4. Receive reports from Staff or the City Council about items of community interest. Items of community interest include: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen (but not including a change in status of a person's public office or public employment); a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality; and announcements involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda. Chief Caponera recognized Officer's Thomas and McDaniel for their handling a domestic disturbance on Thanksgiving Day. 5. Consent Items. These items consist of non -controversial or "housekeeping" items required by law. Items may be considered individually by any Council member making such request prior to a motion and vote on the Consent Items. a. Approve City Council Minutes for November 13, 2018 and November 27, 2018. b. Review the minutes of the November 5, 2018 Planning and Zoning meeting. (Maurice Schwanke) c. Approve a Resolution approving the Anna 455 Addition Blk. A, Lot 2 Final Plat. (Maurice Schwanke) The Anna 455 Addition Blk A, Lot 2 Final Plat is located in the F. Daffau Survey, Abstract No. 288. The plat contains approximately 1.722 acres covering a section of land to the East of the Victoria Falls Center, just north of FM 455. The plat contains one lot that will be the future site of the Deep Roots Montessori School. A drainage letter from the engineer is attached which states that no downstream drainage impacts exists. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A FINAL PLAT OF ANNA 455 ADDITI ON BLOCK A, LOT 2. d. Approve a Resolution approving the Anna Crossing Villas Preliminary Plat. (Maurice Schwanke) The Anna Crossing Villas preliminary plat contains 22.641 acres and is located in the Granderson Stark Survey, Abstract No. 798. This tract is located on the East Side of Finley Blvd, North of Sharp Street in the Anna Crossing subdivision. The preliminary plat is for 129 lots. The area is currently zoned with a PD for mixed use zoning allowing specifically for the smaller lot size. The remaining Development Review Comments about easements will be addressed with the civil plans and approved with the final plat. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF ANNA CROSSING VILLAS. e. Approve a Resolution approving a site and landscape plan for the Anna Medical Office Building located on the West side of Highway 75, North of FM 455 (White St). (Maurice Schwanke) Jim Riley has submitted a site and landscape plan for the Anna Medical Office Building located on property on the West side of Highway 75, North of West White St. The site is currently zoned with a Planned Development with C-1 Commercial uses. They are proposing several medical offices including a surgery center. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A SITE PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN OF ANNA MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING. f. Approve a Resolution approving the Anna Town Center Addition Block A, Lots 5-8 Final Plat. (Maurice Schwanke) The Anna Town Center Addition Block A, Lots 5-8 Final Plat is located in the Thomas Ratton Survey, Abstract No. 782, the W.S. Ratton Survey, Abstract No. 752, and the F.T. Duffau Survey, Abstract No. 288. The plat contains approximately 76.290 acres covering a section of land to the North of Walmart, on the East side of Highway 75. The plat contains four lots for future development. A drainage letter from the engineer is attached that no additional downstream impact are being created by this development. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A FINAL PLAT OF ANNA TOWN CENTER ADDITION BLOCK A, LOTS 5- 8. g. Approve a Resolution approving the Hopewell Homeplace Development Plat. ( Maurice Schwanke) The development plat for your review is located within Anna's extra territorial jurisdiction and generally known as 1616 County Road 1036. The tract is in the R.C. Ingraham Survey, Abstract No. 464 and contains 2.332 acres of land. The owner is proposing to put a new building, driveway, and party barn on the property. The submittal meets the City of Anna development plat requirements. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING THE HOPEWELL HOMEPLACE DEVELOPMENT PLAT h. Approve a Resolution approving a Waiver Suspension of certain Subdivision Regulations. (Maurice Schwanke) Lou Gigliotti the owner of LG Motorsports Park has submitted a petition to subdivide a 5 acre parcel that contains two existing buildings with two separate septic system that he owns so that he can sell one building. Our Subdivision Rules and Regulations do not allow such a division of property without a waiver. In the end the physical appearance of the site will not change if the waiver is approved or not approved. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A WAIVER/SUSPENSION OF CERTAIN SUBDIVISIONS REGULATIONS UNDER PART III -A, ART. I, SECTION 10 OF THE ANNA CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES Approve a Resolution approving the LG Motorsports Park Addition Minor Plat. (Maurice Schwanke) The owner of the property, Lou Gigliotti, has submitted a Minor Plat for 5.079 acres to create two lots out of the tract. Lot 1 will be 2.637 acres and Lot 2 will be 2.442 acres. The minor plat for your review is located within Anna's extra territorial jurisdiction and generally known as 704 E. Houston St. The tract is in the J. Chalmers Survey, Abstract No. 233. The approval of plat requires a waiver of a 5 acre minimum when considering subdivision of property when septic systems are used. A waiver of this requirement has been submitted by the owner and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the waiver and the plat. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING THE LG MOTORSPORTS PARK ADDITION MINOR PLAT Approve a Resolution regarding the One Anna Two Addition Preliminary Plat. (Maurice Schwanke) The One Anna Two Addition preliminary plat contains 23.914 acres and is located in the W. S. Rattan Survey, Abstract No. 752 and the Thomas Rattan Survey, No. 782. This tract is located on the Northwest corner of Highway 75 and FM 455 (White St). The preliminary plat is for three lots within Block A. The area is currently zoned with a PD for C-1 commercial zoning. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF ONE ANNA TWO ADDITION. k. Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to solicit competitive sealed proposals for the East-West Collector Roadway Project. (Joseph Johnson) The East-West Collector Roadway Project is generally located near the northwest corner of US 75 and FM 455. The proposed project will construct a 37' concrete roadway in 60' of right-of-way. The alignment extends from the US 75 southbound service road through a large future commercial center with the project's terminus at a large future residential development. Council previously approved design of the project at the April 10, 2018 Council Meeting. The project construction cost is estimated at $529,136 with the total project costs being approximately $630,479. Funds will be available for the project through collected roadway impact fees. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS AUTHORIZI NG THE CITY MANAGER TO SOLICIT COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE EAST -WEST COLLECTOR ROADWAY PROJECT. Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to solicit competitive sealed proposals for the East-West Collector Water Line Project. (Joseph Johnson) The East-West Collector Water Line Project is generally located near the northwest corner of US 75 and FM 455. If constructed, the proposed 12" water line will connect to an existing water line on the east side of US 75 and will generally align with the proposed East-West Collector Roadway Project on the west side of US 75. The project will extend a 12" water line through a future commercial center with the west terminus of the project at a future large residential development. The water line adds capacity and is part of a critical loop that is needed for the water distribution system west of US 75. Council previously approved design of the project at the April 10, 2018 Council Meeting. The project construction cost is estimated at $369,618 with the total project costs being approximately $433,488. Funds will be available for the project through collected water impact fees. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS AUTHORIZI NG THE CITY MANAGER TO SOLICIT COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE EAST -WEST COLLECTOR WATER LINE PROJECT. MOTI ON: Council Member Miller moved to approve the consent agenda. Council Member Bryan seconded. Motion carried 6-0. 6. A ) Conduct a public hearing to consider public comments regarding a request by Clint Richardson, the representative for Craig Curry, the owner of the property. The property is currently zoned Agriculture (AG). The owner requests to replace the existing zoning to a proposed Planned Development for mixed use. The property is located at the Northwest corner of Highway 5 and Rosamond Pkwy. B) Consider/Discuss/Action on an Ordinance approving the request by the applicant and owner of the property to replace the existing zoning with a new Planned Development zoning. (Maurice Schwanke) The proposed zoning allows for 480 of units with a mixture of three different lots sizes. The allowed lot mix can contain a maximum of 208 6,000 sq. ft. lots, a maximum of 234 7,200 sq. ft. lots and the remainder are 8,400 sq. ft. or larger. A retail component is also present at the intersection of Powell Parkway with Rosamond Pkwy. and at the intersection of West Crossing Blvd with Rosamond Pkwy. The applicant is committing significant elements that conform to the Neighborhood Design Committee work to date such as divided landscape entrances, an amenity center as an interior subdivision focal point and landscape strips adjacent to thoroughfares. Additional building articulations have also been added to the standards. The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Zoning Change on December 3, 2018 (Rosamond Pkwy & Highway 5 Zoning Change from Agriculture (AG) to a mixed use Planned Development located at the Northwest corner of Highway 5 and Rosamond Pkwy.) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS AMENDING THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ZONING MAP, AND ZONING ORDINANCE, AND CHANGING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR SAVINGS, REPEALING AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSES; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY CLAUSE NOT TO EXCEED $2000 OR THE HIGHEST PENALTY AMOUNT ALLOWED BY LAW, WHICHEVER IS LESS; AND, PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLICATION OF THE CAPTION HEREOF. Mayor Pike opened the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. Clint Richardson spoke in favor and requested approval. Mayor Pike closed the public hearing at 8:19 p.m. MOTION: Council Member Reeves moved to approve. Council Member Beazley seconded. Motion carried 6-0. 7. Consider/Discuss/Action on a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to advertise for Bids for a 1906 Alco 201 steam locomotive. Provide brief discussion on City park project/funding. (Maurice Schwanke) This item was previously tabled for further discussion. Staff has provided additional information for Council consideration herein. Staff seeks Council direction with regard to the elements of this proposal and is prepared to answer any questions. The acquisition and restoration of a historical locomotive will help bring to fruition a concept for Sherley Heritage Park where Anna's historical train depot is located. The Parks Board has developed a concept plan for the park which is attached. The Plan includes the Depot, a replica of the Collin McKinney House, a picnic pavilion, trails, memory benches (added at the request of Councilman Toten), a statue of Collin McKinney, rail track, and a steam locomotive that is era sensitive. The possibility of acquiring a locomotive of this caliber are rare if you can even find one. This is possibly the only chance the City has to accomplish this project. The tentative schedule for all of the park improvements are as follows: Depot rehabilitation (volunteer/contracted and parks department labor) a. Roof - Completed labor by Bloomfield homes/materials by Collin County b. Exterior stabilization and planking - finished within two weeks - Labor by Windsor Homes/materials by Historical Society/City c. Painting of Exterior - By January 11 weather permitting. Contract Labor d. Electrical work - Plugs and lighting by January 18. Contract Labor f. Deck surrounding Depot - Completed by February 1. By Parks Department/Builder Labor g. Interior Floor - Completed by January February 1. Builder Labor h. Walls and Ceiling Completed by February 15. Builder Labor 2.) Phase 1 of walkways a. Completed by January 25th. Contract Labor ($65,000) 3.) Fencing on South Side of Park a. Completed - By Parks Department ($2,500) 4.) Landscape a. Planting of trees along south fence. By January 11. By Parks Department ($3,000) 5.) Lay Track a. April -May (We have rail already -will acquire ties) By Others or Parks Department ($20,000) 6.) Locomotive work $348,360 a. Approval to go to Bid December 11, 2018 b. Advertise twice and open Bids January 11, 2019 c. Locomotive and tender prep and loadout from Eureka Springs — January 23, 2019 d. Transport to Reader Arkansas (rehab facility) to unload morning of January 25, 2019 e. Locomotive and tender components in shop February 1, 2019 f. Shop work starts February 4, 2019 g. Projected inspection at Reader shop, July 19, 2019 h. Reader Loadout July 22, 2019 i. Transport to deliver July 23, 2019 j. Unloading at display site July 25 & 26, 2019 k. Final assembly complete July 1, 2019 7.) Pavilion a. To be installed October of 2019 ($100,000) 8.) Phase 2 of walkways and all other landscaping (to be accomplished after installation of Pavilion and Locomotive so that it will not be compromised.) ($95,000) a. October - November of 2019 9.) Construction of Collin McKinney House Replica a. Architectural Plans are currently being prepared. (No cost) b. Break Ground Spring of 2020. (Use volunteer local builder talent) Work on the site has begun with the depot being re -roofed with scalloped trim (By Bloomfield Homes), the backstops, batting cage, dugouts, and concession stand being removed (Parks Department). The next step in the remodel is the outside appearance. Windsor Homes will be providing the labor which will include weatherproofing, building the bump out, exterior cladding and trim. This will occur in the next several weeks. Two other local builders have also been contacted concerning other work. The addition of the steam Locomotive is an integral part of the park and will provide a regional draw to Anna for visitors, students, photo opportunities, and a local identity of why Anna is here. The locomotive that has been found is a 1906 Alco No. 201 that was one of three locomotives built to work on the Panama Canal. It was originally, fired by coal but was converted to oil burning during W.W.1. The locomotive has also been used in the movie industry. The estimated cost for the locomotive and tender is $348,360 refurbished, delivered, and setup. Funding for this project will come from the Park Trust Fund which currently has a balance of $702,816.76. Conservative estimated FY19 Revenues will be $483,300. Estimated FY19 Expenses will be $505,800 including the locomotive and other park improvements that are part of the adopted FY19 Budget. Staff is prepared to review those items for the discussion. Estimated FY19 Ending Fund Balance - $680,316.76 The development of Sherley Heritage Park addresses an adopted Strategic Goal of the City by Promoting a "park and play" atmosphere in the downtown district. As part of the Comprehensive Plan development process the Parks Board has taken an in depth review of future parks needs, locations, and timing compared to developed local standards and NRPA stands. The timing based on population and established standards have also been attached for your review. This information has been incorporated into the development of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff seeks Council direction with regard to the elements of this proposal and is prepared to answer any questions. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SOLICIT BIDS FOR A 1906 ALCO LOCOMOTIVE WITH TENDER FOR SHERLEY HERITAGE PARK MOTION: Mayor Pike moved to approve. Council Member Miller seconded. Motion carried 5-1 Council Member Bryan opposed. 8. Consider/Discuss/Action on amendments to the Tree Preservation Ordinance. (Maurice Schwanke) This ordinance amends the tree preservation ordinance for compliance with new state law provisions under Tex. Loc. Gov't Code Sec 212.905. The amendments relate primarily to certain credits that must be applied to offset tree removal fees when a person plants trees to mitigate the removal of protected trees. Protected trees are generally trees with a trunk six inches or greater in caliper at four feet six inches above the ground. To qualify for a credit planted trees must be at least 2 inches in diameter at a point on the trunk 4 feet and six inches above ground and be planted on the property where trees are being removed or another location approved by the City and the applicant. In addition, credits are only available for the planting of approved species of trees listed in Appendix A to the ordinance. State law now requires that the amount of the credit be determined based on the type of property involved (full credit for an existing one or two family dwelling inhabited by the applicant; half credit for a residential property not inhabited by the applicant; and 40% credit if the property is nonresidential). The ordinance also amends the fee schedule to specify the amount/calculation of Tree Permit Fees (fees for removal of protected trees). The adoption of this ordinance will ensure that the City's regulations mitigating tree removal will comply with the new limitations on municipal authority imposed by state law. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, AMENDING THE CITY OF ANNA CODE OF ORDINANCES BYAMENDING PART III-F, AND PART IV, SCHEDULE OF FEES, ARTICLE 2, SECTION 4; AMENDING TREE PERMIT FEES; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR ANY VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE NOT TO EXCEED $500; PROVIDING FOR SAVINGS, SEVERABILITY, AND REPEALING CLAUSES; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLICATION OF THE CAPTION HEREOF. MOTION: Council Member Reeves moved to approve. Council Member Bryan seconded. Motion carried 6-0. 9. Consider/Discuss/Act on a Resolution to purchase nine (9) new in -car video systems for Police Department patrol vehicles. (Chief Caponera) The Police Department is currently operating two different types of in -car video systems, both have proven unreliability and have placed a heavy burden on staff to acquire lost videos, justify inadequate video/audio quality, and have caused several vehicles to be out of service for extended periods. Staff has been unsuccessful through multiple attempts with the two vendors to reach a satisfactory resolution. The amount of time our staff is dedicating to tend to the issues associated with the cameras is creating inefficiencies in other areas. It is crucial that the police department have systems that are dependable. There are instances where complaints against officers have been received and the quality of the audio is spotty at best. Texas requires police departments, through their regular course of duty make traffic stops, have in -car video cameras to comply with biased based policing laws and the more recent Sandra Bland Act of 2018. These new cameras will eliminate the inefficiencies we are currently experiencing with the mixed systems we use now. There are funds available for this equipment in the 2019 Fiscal Year budget from savings derived from unfilled vacancies and suspension of purchases previously allocated by and approved by the City Council. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE IN -CAR VIDEO SYSTEMS AND BODY WORN CAMERAS AND ACCESSORY ITEMS FROM WATCH GUARD VIDEO, INCORPORATED THROUGH THE TEXAS DIR COOPERATIVE PURCHASING SYSTEM. MOTION: Council Member Reeves moved to approve. Council Member Bryan seconded. Motion carried 6-0. 10. Consider/Discuss/Action on a Resolution Setting Public Hearing Date for PID creation on a 325 acre tract of land owned by the Sherley Family. This Resolution sets a public hearing for the establishment of a PI D on property owned by the Sherley family north of the Villages of Hurricane Creek A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING UNDER SEC. 372.009 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE ON THE ADVISABILITY OF THE CREATION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS; AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE BY THE CITY SECRETARY OF ANNA, TEXAS REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARI NG. Mayor Pike moved to set a public hearing date to 3/12/19. Council Member Tutson seconded. Motion carried 6-0. 11. CLOSED SESSION (EXCEPTIONS) Under Tex. Gov't Code Chapter 551, the City Council may enter into closed session to discuss any items listed or referenced on this agenda under the following exceptions: a. Consult with legal counsel regarding pending or contemplated litigation and/or on matters in which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with Chapter 551 of the Government Code (Tex. Gov't Code §551.071). b. Discuss or deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property (Tex. Gov't Code §551.072); city facilities; acquisition of easements C. Discuss or deliberate personnel matters (Tex. Gov't Code §551.074); d. Discuss or deliberate Economic Development Negotiations: (1) To discuss or deliberate regarding commercial or financial information that the City has received from a business prospect that the City seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory of the City of Anna and with which the City is conducting economic development negotiations; or (2) To deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect described by subdivision (1). (Tex. Gov't Code §551.087); possible incentive agreements with property developers; pending negotiations on development agreements. MOTION:Council Member Miller moved to enter closed session. Council Member Tutson seconded. Motion carried 6-0. Mayor Pike recessed the meeting at 9:18 p.m. Mayor Pike reconvened the meeting at 10:57 p.m. 12. Consider/Discuss/Action on any items listed on the posted agenda or any closed session occurring during this meeting, as necessary None. 13. Adjourn. Mayor Pike adjourn the meeting. Approved on the January 8, 2019. Mayor Nate Pike ATTEST: City Secretary Carrie L. Smith THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 5.b. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1 /8/2019 Review the minutes of the December 3, 2018 Planning and Zoning Meeting. SUMMARY: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Upload Date Type December 3, 2018 Minutes 12/6/2018 Exhibit MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 3, 2018 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Anna held a meeting at 7:00 p.m. on December 3, 2018, at the Anna City Hall Administration Building located, 111 North Powell Parkway, to consider the following items. Call to Order and Establishment of Quorum The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm. Members present were Sandy Setliff, Don Callaham, Wayne Barton, Janine Johnson, Donald Henke, Leslie Voss, and Danny Ussery. Staff present was Maurice Schwanke, Alexis Vanderslice, and Clark McCoy. 2. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance Mr. Schwanke gave the invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the Hopewell Homeplace Development Plat. Mr. Schwanke gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. The Hopewell Homeplace development plat is located within Anna's extra territorial jurisdiction and generally known as 1616 County Road 1036. The tract is in the R.C. Ingraham Survey, Abstract No. 464 and contains 2.332 acres of land. The owner is proposing to put a new building, driveway, and party barn on the property. A motion was made by Commissioner Setliff, seconded by Commissioner Ussery to recommend approval of the development plat. The vote was unanimous. 4. Consider/Discuss/Action on a Petition for Waiver Suspension of certain Subdivision Regulations. Mr. Schwanke gave a brief presentation on the location that this waiver applies to and the intentions of the applicant of the waiver. This waiver specifically applied to the applicant's need for having a septic system on less than five acres of land within our extraterritorial jurisdiction in order to create two separate tracts for existing buildings for future sale of the properties. A motion was made by Commissioner Henke, seconded by Commissioner Callaham, to recommend approval of the waiver. The vote was unanimous. 5. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the LG Motorsports Park Addition Minor Plat. Mr. Schwanke gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. The owner of the property, Lou Gigliotti, has submitted a minor plat for 5.079 acres to create two lots out of the tract. Lot 1 will be 2.637 acres and Lot 2 will be 2.442 acres. The minor plat for your review is located within Anna's extra territorial jurisdiction and generally known as 704 E. Houston St. The tract is in the J. Chalmers Survey, Abstract No. 233. A motion was made by Commissioner Voss, seconded by Commissioner Ussery to recommend approval of the minor plat. The vote was unanimous. 6. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the Anna Crossing Villas Preliminary Plat. PZ Minutes 11-05-18 Page 1 of 3 11-05-18 Mr. Schwanke gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. The preliminary plat contains 22.641 acres and is located in the Granderson Stark Survey, Abstract No. 798. This tract is located on the East Side of Finley Blvd, North of Sharp Street in the Anna Crossing subdivision. The preliminary plat is for 129 lots. The area is currently zoned with a PD for mixed use zoning allowing specifically for the smaller lot size. A motion was made by Commissioner Callaham, seconded by Commissioner Setliff, to recommend approval of the preliminary plat. The vote was unanimous. 7. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the One Anna Two Addition Preliminary Plat. Mr. Schwanke gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. The preliminary plat contains 23.914 acres and is located in the W. S. Rattan Survey, Abstract No. 752 and the Thomas Rattan Survey, No. 782. This tract is located on the Northwest corner of Highway 75 and FM 455 (White St). The preliminary plat is for three lots within Block A. The area is currently zoned with a PD for C-1 commercial zoning. A motion was made by Commissioner Henke, seconded by Commissioner Setliff, to recommend approval of the preliminary plat. The vote was unanimous. 8. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding a site and landscape plan for the Anna Medical Office Building located on the West side of Highway 75, North of FM 455 (White St). Mr. Schwanke gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. The proposed site and landscape plan is located on property on the West side of Highway 75, North of West White St. The site is currently zoned with a Planned Development with C-1 Commercial uses. They are proposing several medical offices including a surgery center. Jim Riley, the applicant answered a question by Commissioner Barton about the detention pond. A motion was made by Commissioner Callaham, seconded by Commissioner Voss, to recommend approval of the site and landscape plan. The vote was unanimous. 9. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the Anna 455 Addition Blk A, Lot 2 Final Plat. Mr. Schwanke gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. The final plat is located in the F. Duffau Survey, Abstract No. 288. The plat contains approximately 1.722 acres covering a section of land to the East of the Victoria Falls Center, just north of FM 455. The plat contains one lot that will be the future site of the Deep Roots Montessori School. A motion was made by Commissioner Setliff, seconded by Commissioner Ussery, to recommend approval of the final plat. The vote was unanimous. 10. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the Anna Town Center Addition Block A, Lots 5-8 Final Plat. Mr. Schwanke gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. The final plat is located in the Thomas Ratton Survey, Abstract No. 782, the W.S. Ratton Survey, Abstract No. 752, and the F.T. Duffau Survey, Abstract No. 288. The plat contains approximately 76.290 acres covering a section of land to the North of Walmart, on the East side of Highway 75. The plat contains four lots for future development. A motion was made by Commissioner Henke, seconded by Commissioner Callaham, to recommend approval of the final plat. The vote was unanimous. PZ Minutes 11-05-18 Page 2 of 3 11-05-18 11. A) Conduct a public hearing to consider public comments regarding a request by Clint Richardson, the representative for Craig Curry, the owner of the property. The property is currently zoned Agriculture (AG). The owner requests to replace the existing zoning to a proposed Planned Development for mixed use. The property is located at the Northwest corner of Highway 5 and Rosamond Pkwy. The public hearing opened at 7:32 pm. Mr. Schwanke gave a brief presentation of the history of this zoning case, the proposed plans for the property, and why the staff recommends approval of the zoning request. Clint Richardson, the applicant, spoke briefly about their general plan for the property and was available for questions. Brian Mitchell- 137 Meadow Ridge Dr- Asked if the new property would come up directly next to their current fences and if there were any plans for apartments in the commercial areas. -Clint replied that yes it will back up to their current neighborhood and there are no apartments allowed. Jeffrey Sykes- 2205 Meadow Dr- Asked what commercial uses would be allowed and if any had been planned yet. -Clint replied that there are no set vendors yet but C-1 commercial uses will be allowed. Lisa Liles- 204 Meadow Ridge Dr- Just wanted to make sure no mobile homes or apartments were allowed. -The staff assured her that they are not allowed. The public hearing was closed at 7:41 pm. B) Consider/Discuss/Action on a recommendation regarding the request by the applicant and owner of the property to replace the existing zoning with a new Planned Development zoning. A motion was made by Commissioner Callaham to approve the zoning request, seconded by Commissioner Ussery. The vote was unanimous. 9. Consider action to approve minutes of the November 5, 2018 Planning and Zoning meeting. A motion was made by Commissioner Setliff, seconded by Commissioner Callaham to approve the November meeting minutes. The vote was unanimous. 10. Adjourn A motion was made by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Setliff to adjourn the meeting. The vote was unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 7:49 pm. Maurice Schwanke Director of Planning and Development ATTEST: PZ Minutes 11-05-18 Page 3 of 3 11-05-18 THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 5.c. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1 /8/2019 Approve a Resolution approving the Calvert Addition Development Plat. SUMMARY: The development plat for your review is located within Anna's extra territorial jurisdiction and generally known as 13363 County Road 477. The tract is in the James Fisher Survey, Abstract No. 305 and contains 5.993 acres of land. The owner is proposing to put a new home, pool, pond, and several barns on the property. The submittal meets the City of Anna development plat requirements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a Resolution approving the Calvert Addition Development Plat. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution Development Plat Location Map Upload Date Type 1 /3/2019 Resolution 1/3/2019 Exhibit 12/13/2018 Exhibit CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING THE CALVERT ADDITION DEVELOPMENT PLAT WHEREAS, in order to provide for the orderly development of land within the Anna city limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction, the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas (the "City Council") has adopted Part III -A of the Anna City Code of Ordinances ("Subdivision Regulations"); and WHEREAS, Mike Calvert has submitted an application for approval of the Calvert Addition development plat; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. Recitals Incorporated The recitals above are incorporated herein as if set forth in full for all purposes. Section 2. Approval of Development Plat. The City Council hereby approves the Calvert Addition development plat attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas on this 8t" day of January 2019. ATTEST: APPROVED: City Secretary, Carrie L. Smith Mayor, Nate Pike jc li 9 SIT CALVERT ADDITIDNa- SITE 4 THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 5.d. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1/8/2019 Approve a Resolution approving the Durfee Addition Development Plat. SUMMARY: The development plat for your review is located within Anna's extra territorial jurisdiction and is located on Taylor Blvd. The tract is in the R. A. Johnson Survey, Abstract No. 479 and contains 1.027 acres of land. The owner is proposing to put a home, garage/storage area and multiple parking spaces. The submittal meets the City of Anna development plat requirements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the Durfee Addition Development Plat. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution Development Plat Location Map Applicant Response about Parking Upload Date Type 1 /3/2019 Resolution 12/18/2018 Exhibit 12/13/2018 Exhibit 1 /3/2019 Exhibit CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING THE DURFEE ADDITION DEVELOPMENT PLAT WHEREAS, in order to provide for the orderly development of land within the Anna city limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction, the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas (the "City Council") has adopted Part III -A of the Anna City Code of Ordinances ("Subdivision Regulations"); and WHEREAS, Howard Durfee has submitted an application for approval of the Durfee Addition development plat; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. Recitals Incorporated The recitals above are incorporated herein as if set forth in full for all purposes. Section 2. Approval of Development Plat. The City Council hereby approves the Durfee Addition development plat attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas on this 8t" day of January 2019. ATTEST: APPROVED: City Secretary, Carrie L. Smith Mayor, Nate Pike BEGINNING 1/2—INCH IRON PIN FOUND MJLA ADAMS, LTD. CONTROLLING MONUMENT CLERK'S FILE NO. NORTHWEST CORNER 20110505000462590 1,029 ACRE TRACT TAYL❑R BOULEVARD _ VOLUME 978, PAGE 510 — — — — — — 15.14' N 89725'54' E 262,78' N 69°00'28' E 255.89' 11.49 1,027 ACRE RUSSELL WARREN CLERK'S FILE NO. 20070928001343980 rA KOR BL V. OAO 367 ROA 284 SITE "o Zg 9L �o R�qo iE) 9js 3 Z 2 2 ` r m y C) m �V �s VICINITY MAP V = 500' ♦ m \ � N m y 12' CONC. \ 20 �NCR � ° DRIVE 2/L N \ '0 6' IRON PIN FOUND 5/8—INCH IRON PIN FOUND A,Q 5 O Jy� Q�ZO WIDTHv�� ti R.O.W. ' RESERVATION o i0 PARKING m SPACE N 3/4—INCH PIPE FOUND CONTROLLING MONUMENT 80' R.O.W. RESERVATION CENTER OF EXISTING ORTH PROPERTY LINE --OVERLAP OF ASPHALT PAVEMENT 130,138 ACRE TRACT PROPERTY LINES. — — —VOLUME 978, PAGE 510 — — — SOUTH PROPERTY LINE 67.53 ACRE TRACT CLERK'S FILE NO, 20110505000462590 JASON AND ALICIA JONES CLERK'S FILE NO. 20100526000529700 I I I I I \ O. W. CONWAY, JR, & MARIE CONWAY VOLUME 1127, PAGE 885 JEREMIAH WOODS \ \ CLERK'S FILE NO. \ \ 20170223000237620 \�— � 17.72' PROPOSED GARAGE/ 3/4—INCH STORAGE PIPE FOUND 77' --- o ti N 87°04'45" _ W 154. 7, S 28°32'36" E 33.68' 5/8—INCH IRON PIN FOUND 50 0 50 100 Scale, 1' = 50' FIRM: BRUCE GEER, SURVEYOR FIRM REGISTRATION # 10150700 OWNER: HOWARD & DIANE DURFEE P.O. BOX 787 ANNA, TEXAS 75409 SURVEYOR: BRUCE GEER, R.P.L.S. NO. 4117 1101 W. UNIVERSITY DRIVE MCKINNEY, TEXAS 75069 PHONE 972-562-3959 FAX 972-542-5751 DESCRIPTION 1.027 ACRE SITUATED in Collin County, Texas, in the R. A. Johnson survey, abstract no. 479, being a survey of the 1.029 acre tract described in a deed from Theresa Marie Boyd Gilson and husband, Robert Ralph Gilson to Howard Wilson Durfee and wife Diane Durfee, recorded in volume 5210, page 1933 of the Collin County deed records, being described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a 1/2—inch iron pin found at the northwest corner of said 1.029 acre tract, in the south line of Taylor Boulevard; some being in the east right—of—way line of Conway Road; THENCE North 89'25'54" East, with the north line of said 1.029 acre tract and the south line of said Taylor Boulevard, 262.78 feet to a 3/4—inch pipe found at the northeast corner of said 1.029 acre tract and the northwest corner of the 1.00 acre tract recorded as clerk's file no. 20100526000529700; THENCE South 07'30'03" East, with the east line of said 1.029 acre tract and the west line of said 1.00 acre tract, passing at 179.04 feet a 3/4—inch pipe found at the southwest corner of said 1.00 acre tract and an inside corner of the 1.500 acre tract recorded in volume 1127, page 885, and continuing with the east line of said 1.029 acre tract, in all, 220.49 feet to a 5/8—inch iron pin found at the southeast corner of said 1.029 acre tract; THENCE North 87'04'45" West, with the south line of said 1.029 acre tract, 154.97 feet to a 5/8—iron pin found at the southwest corner of said 1.029 acre tract and in the east right—of—way line of said Conway Road; THENCE North 28'27'27" West, with the west line of said 1.029 acre tract and the east right—of—way line of said Conway Road, 238.77 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING and containing 1.027 acre. The above described tract was surveyed on the ground and under my supervision. Office work completed ,^September 15, 2018 Bruce Geer ` Registered Professional Land Surveyor, No. 4117 1101 W. University Drive(U.S. Highway 380) McKinney, Texas 75069 972-562-3959 972-542-5751 fax BEARING BASE: NORTH LINE OF 1.029 ACRE TRACT RECORDED IN VOLUME 5210, PAGE 1933 CONTROLLING MONUMENTS: 1/2—INCH IRON PIN FOUND AT NORTHWEST CORNER AND 3/4—INCH PIPE FOUND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 1.029 ACRE TRACT. ACCORDING TO FEMA MAP NO. 48085CO155J, DATED 6-2-2009, THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND IS NOT IN THE 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN. DEVELOPMENT PLAT D V FEE ADDITION CITY OF ANNA 1.027 ACRE OF LAND LOCATED IN THE R. A. JOHNSON SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 479 COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS SHEET 1 OF 1 Q � VVFIITE STREET (F.M. 455) Howard W Durfee 406 West 4th Street PO BOX 787 Anna, Texas 75409 December 31, 2018 To: Maurice Schwanke Fr: Howard and Diane Durfee Re: Response to your question regarding Taylor Blvd Maurice, as you remember when I brought you the first plat for our land on Taylor Blvd (a plat which contained only a house), you mentioned to me that I should modify the plat to show everything that we plan to build now or in the future. Hence we have produced a revised plat showing the house we plan to build now, plus the garage, storage area and circular driveway in front. Our plans are to build the house with a driveway immediately, and to later build the garage and storage, as finances permit. We will live in this house as a personal residence. There will be at a minimum, a basic driveway from Conway Road to the front of our house, with the possibility of a circular driveway in front to accommodate our three vehicles. Under no circumstances will there be a parking lot on this property. est Regards 2 cz Howard and Diane Durfee THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 5.e. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1 /8/2019 Approve a Resolution approving a site and landscape plan for Creekside Office Building Phase 1 located on White Street and Victoria Falls as Block D, Lot 20-R-2A of the Falls Ph 1 A Replat. SUMMARY: Mcright-Smith Construction, representative for the owner of the property, has submitted a site and landscape plan for Creekside Office Building Phase 1 located on the Northwest corner of White Street and Victoria Falls. Also known as Lot 20-R-2A, Block D, on The Falls Ph 1 A Replat. The site contains approximately 1.16 acres of land that are zoned PD for commercial uses. Planned for the site is the Creekside Office Building. The second phase of this project will be built to the North of this building at a later date. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a Resolution approving the Creekside Office Building Phase 1 site and landscape plan. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution Site Plan Landscape Plan Location Map Letter for Document Commitments Upload Date Type 1 /3/2019 Resolution 12/21 /2018 Exhibit 12/18/2018 Exhibit 10/16/2018 Exhibit 12/18/2018 Exhibit CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A SITE PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN OF CREEKSIDE OFFICE BUILDING PHASE 1. WHEREAS, In order to provide for the orderly development of land within the Anna city limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction, the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas (the "City Council") has adopted Part III-C of the Anna City Code of Ordinances ("Zoning Ordinance"); and WHEREAS, McRight-Smith Construction, LLC. has submitted an application for approval of a site plan and landscape plan of the Creekside Office Building Phase 1; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. Recitals Incorporated. The recitals above are incorporated herein as if set forth in full for all purposes. Section 2. Approval of Site and Landscape Plan The City Council hereby approves the site and landscape plan of Creekside Office Building Phase 1 attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas, on this 8th day of January, 2019. ATTEST: APPROVED: City Secretary, Carrie L Smith Mayor, Nate Pike LOT 20R-3A, BLOCK D THE FALLS, PHASE IA CABINET 2018, PAGE 31 PR CC. I. (le �-) S0977'08 E s"y � / Qqy 50' DRAINACE EASEMENT CABINET O, PACE 615_ PARTIALL Y ABANDONED I 'ABINET 2009, PAGE 440 O.PR C C.T 58923"55 E 263.61' 6- Ib" ______________________ _ _ _------- 1_____-_____-______-______-____ 1 PROPOSED 75' DRAINAGE LOT 201?-2A, BLOCK D PROP ESMNT THE FALLS, PHASE 7A HEAawAL / (A I' sEP �CABINET 2018, PAGE 31 6' HgCKBERRY r1 INSTRUMENT) P. R. CC. T PROPOSED ,S � TRANSFORMER 6' C7 5' CURB \_ OUDMPSTER INLET h LOT 20R-2A, BLOCK D THE FALLS, PHASE 1A CABINET 2018, PAGE 31 P. R. C.CT FF=709.15 e EXIST HEADWALL ISETBACK 10, ]AET 7 PAGE 31jP.CL IIGRATE INLET J..5' 7.29' 8 ELM i GRA IF IRCF MEP) INLET % rCC' -- 1 9' ELM GRA /E INLET LOT 20R-3A, BLOCK D THE FALLS, PHASE 1A 15' WA 7R? E SEMENCABINET 201S, PAGE 31 CABINET 20 ,PAGE 37 9' �� P. R.0 C. T / � P. .C, T � 6" DEDA ^ ' 8" CEDAR w SS J l BRA TE SS GLEANGUT CLEANOUT yN 24' CROSS ACCESS & INLET i FIRE LANE EASEMENT CAB/NET 2018, PAGE 31 ;7 �� a CC.T PROP FIT 6' cEDA P.R Al / lboa LOT 27 ' (TYP '� BLOCK D LANDSCAPE & PUBLIC ACCESS ESMT WATER EASEMENT u` 0 CAB/NET 2078, PAGE 31 o a 1 / OE9 P.R.O E, ''' FH rxr EM C. T _ 1 _____ h / % COLUMN ____________________________________, 0 UTILITY AND LANDSCAPE EASEMENT / O (rmlcgL) CAB/NET 0 --- __ `� , PAGE 675 i -- ------ PR.CCT / FL - -- / ______________________ ///'''ANLITY EPH NgR/ELECTRICAL--------- _ / AND RYEPHpV£ RISERS -L - A / a V S89*01'45�0E 122.38' - F. M. HIGHWAY NO. 455 (VARIABLE WIDTH RIGHT—OF—WAY) 1.8' LAr D COR85 HEADWALL 7095JFOP 70451f W 1.8, EXIST FH MCRIGHT—SMITH CONSTRUCTION, LLC (MCRIGHT—SMITH) IS THE DESIGN BUILDER AND GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR THIS PROJECT DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER (RLG) ARE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE FOR USE SOLELY WITH RESPECT TO THIS PRO✓ECT SY MCRIGHT—SMITH. THIS INCLUDES DOCUMENTS IN ELECTRONIC FORM MCRIGHT—SMITH SHALL BE DEEMED THE OWNERS OF THEIR RESPECTIVE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE AND SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW, STATUTORY, AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHTS THE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE SHALL NOT BE USED BY ANY OTHER ENTITIES, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN AGREEMENT OF MCRIGHT—SMITH. 0 10 20 40 (FEET) 1 inch — 20 ft. LEGEND FUTURE PHASE PROPOSED CURB FL EXIST FIRELANE (D 2' OVERHANG SHEET NO. C0.01 CREEKSIDE OFFICES RAYMOND L. GOODSON JR., INC. MCRIGHT-SMITH CONSTRUCTION CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS DESIGN DRAWN DATE SCALL XREF ILL I d. RLG RLG 12/21/18 1"-20' 1813.009 1813 009 JOB NO. 1813.009 SUBMITTAL: PERMIT SET ISSUES PROPERTY OFF NOT TO BE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MEEKS DESIGN GROUP 1755 N. COLLINS BLVD., SUITE 300 RICHARDSON, TEXAS 75080 (972)690-7474 BRANDON BOOHER LEGEND 23 EXISTING TREE TO BE PRESERVED PER �-- TREE PROTECTION DETAIL AND CITY STDS. 23 A EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED REF. TREE LEGEND _ TREE PROTECTION FENCE EXISTING CONTOUR (PER CIVIL) 6M PROPOSED CONTOUR PROTECTED TREES REMOVED SIZE TREE TYPE MITIGATION 6" ELM 1 TREE 12" CEDAR 3 TREES ENGINEER RLG CONSULTING ENGINEERS 12001 N. CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, SUITE 300 DALLAS, TEXAS 75243 (214)739-8100 STEPHEN D. SCHWIND, P.E. NOTE: REPLACEMENT FOR THE 6" ELM TREE WILL BE LOCATED ON FUTURE PHASE II PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. SEE SHEET LP0.04 FOR EXACT LOCATION. GENERAL NOTES FOR TREE PROTECTION/PRESERVATION: ALL TREES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN TO BE PRESERVED SHALL BE PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION WITH TEMPORARY FENCING. TREE PROTECTION FENCES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY SITE PREPARATION WORK (CLEARING, GRUBBING OR GRADING). FENCES SHALL COMPLETELY SURROUND THE TREE OR CLUSTERS OF TREES. THE FENCE SHALL BE LOCATED AT THE OUTERMOST LIMITS OF THE TREE BRANCHES OR DRIPLINE. THE FENCE WILL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IN ORDER TO PREVENT THE FOLLOWING. A. SOIL COMPACTION IN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE RESULTING FROM VEHICULAR TRAFFIC OR STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT OR MATERIALS. B. CRITICAL ROOT ZONE DISTURBANCES DUE TO GRADE CHANGES GREATER THAN TWO INCHES (2") CUT OR FILL OR BORING WHICH WAS NOT AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY. C. WOUNDS TO THE TRUNK, LIMBS OR EXPOSED ROOTS BY MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT. D. OTHER ACTIVITIES DETRIMENTAL TO TREES SUCH AS CHEMICAL STORAGE, CEMENT TRUNK CLEANING, AND FIRES. 3. IN CASES OF AREA CONSTRAINTS WHERE THE PROTECTIVE FENCE IS CLOSER TO THE TRUNK THAN FOUR FEET (4'), THE TRUNK MUST BE PROTECTED WITH STRAPPED -ON PLANKING TO A HEIGHT OF EIGHT FEET (8') OR TO THE LIMITS OF THE LOWER BRANCHING. 4. ALL GRADING WITHIN CRITICAL ROOT ZONES OF SPECIMEN TREES SHALL BE PERFORMED BY HAND OR SMALL EQUIPMENT TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE. PRIOR TO GRADING, RELOCATE THE PROTECTIVE FENCING TO TWO FEET (2') BEHIND THE GRADE CHANGE AREA. 5. TREES MOST HEAVILY IMPACTED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHOULD BE WATERED DEEPLY ONCE A WEEK DURING PERIODS OF HOT AND DRY WEATHER. TREE CROWNS SHOULD BE SPRAYED WITH WATER PERIODICALLY TO REDUCE DUST ACCUMULATION ON THE LEAVES. 6. TRENCHING FOR LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION SHALL BE LOCATED AS FAR FROM THE EXISTING TRUNKS AS POSSIBLE. 7. PRUNING TO PROVIDE CLEARANCE FOR STRUCTURES, VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AND EQUIPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. FIGURE 1 - PRIMARY TREE PROTECTION DRIPLINE - PROTECTION FENCE SHALL BE PLACED AT DRIPLINE _ 6'-0' METAL T POST @ 8'-0' O.C. AND EACH CORNER -v io fO FINISHED GRADE STOCK FENCE 11Y2 GAUGE OR ORANGE SNOW PLOW FENCE NOTE: A PROTECTIVE BARRIER, BEGINNING AT THE OUTSIDE OF THE DRIPLINE OF THE TREE TO PROTECT THE ROOT ZONE SHALL BE ERECTED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED TREEPROTECT/ON/REMOVAL PLAN 0 20 40 I SCALE.,1'_20=0" GRAPHIC SCALEINFEET 4� (D 11-20-18 ISSUE FOR PERMIT O O 0 REVISIONS: 0 IL IL CLIENT: MCRIGHT-SMITH TWO LEGACY TOWN CENTER 6900 NORTH DALLAS PARKWAY SUITE 770. PLANO, TEXAS 75024 Fr: J landscape architects MEEKS DESIGN GROUP, INC. 1755 N. COLLINS BLVD., SUITE 300 RICHARDSON, TX 75080 PH (972) 690-7474 F (972)690-787n8u��A^ c TqT 2485 +Py For�O 11-20-18 ISSUE FOR PERMIT ANNA M.O.B. (PHASE 1) ANNA,TEXAS JOB NUMBER: MCR-1801 TREE PROTECTION - REMOVAL PLAN LP0.0> LANDSCAPE PLAN NOTES: 1. All turf areas are to be hydromulched with common bermuda grass or solid sod. Hydromulch may not be applied during Stage 3 drought conditions. 2. Annual color plantings are to be determined at the time of planting. 3. All lawn and landscape areas are to be seperated by Ryerson Steel Edging or a trench edge. 4. All trees and planting beds are to be laid out in the field by the landscape contractor for review by the owner's representative prior to excavation or preparation of planting areas. Contractor assumes full responsibility for failure to obtain owner's review of the layout including modifications required. 5. Landscape contractor is responsible for location all underground utilities and structures wether or not shown on the plans. And shall be responsible for damage to said utilities or structures caused by his forces. Ref. Civil plans for proposed utility line locations. 6. Planting area preparation to include minimum 1.5" to 3" approved organic matter (Back to earth or living earth) tilled into the top 8" of planting area soil unless otherwise specified. Remove all rocks, clods and debris. Leave planting areas smooth and assure positive drainage away from building as shown. NOTE: ALL REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH AN AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION SYSTEM WITH RAIN AND FREEZE SENSORS AND EVAPOTRANSPIRATION (ET) WEATHER BASED CONTROLLERS AND SAID IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE DESIGNED BY A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL AND INSTALLED BY A LICENSED IRRIGATOR. V L-. n PLANTING BED DETAIL XX COLOR BEDS rvoT To scALE n ISOLATED TREE PLANTING NOT TO SCPLE ISOLATED SHRUB PLANTING \/ NOT TO SCALE c"ouxGmvER s"eues LTO E.E/1AVING E 6 ALL STEEL EDGE GENERAL NOTES- 1. ADD OR REMOVE TOPSOIL AS NECESSARY TO ACCOUNT FOR THE INCLUSION OF SOIL AMENDMENTS. 501L MIXTURE. REEF SPEG5. 2. TRIANGULARLY SPACE ALL GROUNDGOVER5 AT SPACING SHOWN ON PLANS. 3. SAVE MULCHING OF PLANTING BED UNTIL NEAR FINAL ACCEPTANCE. 4. PERENNIALS AND ANNUALS SHALL HAVE SOIL AMENDED TO A MIN. OF 12'. CONSTRUCTION NOTES A. SHRUB - PER PLAN REMOVE ALL LABELS B. GROUND COVER - PER PLAN C. 2' MIN. BARK MULCH AS SPEC.. SLOPE FROM HARDSCAPE TO 1' ABOVE HARDSGAPE D. PLANTING MIX AS SPECIFIED E. REMOVE CONTAINER PRUNE ANY GIRCLING ROOT GENERAL NOTES, 1. STABILIZE SOIL BELOW ROOT BALL PRIOR TO PLANTING TO PREVENT TREE FROM 5ETTLING. 2. TOP OF ROOT15ALL SHALL BE 1' TO 2' ABOVE FIN15H GRADE 3. ALL WIRE ROPE AND SYNTHETIC MATERIALS SHALL BE REMOVED COMPLETELY FROM ROOTBALL AND REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP. CONSTRUCTION NOTES: A. TREE. B. LOOSEN NATIVE BAGKFILL C. WATER RETENTION BASIN. D. 2' DEPTH OF BARK MULCH. E. FINISH GRADE. F. 2 STRAND TWISTED 12 GAUGE GAL. WIRE ENCASE IN 1' DIA. RUBBER HOSE. G. G'—D' METAL TEE F05T5. INSTALL 24' BELOW GRADE. MULTI TRUNKS 2 STAKES, SINGLE TRUNK 3 STAKES. ALIGN IN MEDIANS PARALLEL TO CURB. INSTALL IN FIRM GROUND. SEE STANDARD MEDIAN DETAILS SD-3G. GENERAL NOTES, 1. THE OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF THE WATER RETENTION BASIN SHALL BE TWICE THE DIAMETER OF THE SHRUB PLANTING PIT. CONSTRUCTION NOTES: A. SHRUB. B. PLANTING SOIL MIXTURE CREF SPECIFICATIONS) C. WATER RETENTION BA51N. D. 2' DEPTH OF BARK MULCH. E. FINISH GRADE. iUK UL .. KIE"S TG SPAn"G "NLE s GTHERWSE NmEG. PLANT SPACING DIAGRAM NOT TO .1 GENERAL MAINTENANCE: REQUIRED PLANTS MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A HEALTHY CONDITION AT ALL TIMES. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REGULAR WEEDING, MOWING OF GRASS, IRRIGATING, FERTILIZING, PRUNING, AND OTHER MAINTENANCE OF ALL PLANTINGS AS NEEDED. ANY PLANT THAT DIES MUST BE REPLACED WITH ANOTHER LIVING PLANT THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE APPROVED LANDSCAPE PLAN WITHIN (90) NINETY DAYS AFTER NOTIFICATION FROM THE CITY. THE BUILDING OFFICIAL MAY EXTEND THE TIME PERIOD UP TO AN ADDITIONAL (90) DAYS DUE TO WEATHER CONSIDERATIONS. IF THE PLANTS HAVE NOT BEEN REPLACED AFTER APPROPRIATE NOTIFICATION AND/OR EXTENSION, THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL BE IN VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE. ANY DAMAGE TO UTILITY LINES RESULTING FROM THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE PROPERTY OWNER OR HIS AGENTS OR EMPLOYEES IN THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF REQUIRED LANDSCAPING IN A UTILITY EASEMENT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. IF A PUBLIC UTILITY DISTURBS PLANTS WITHIN AN EASEMENT, IT SHALL MAKE EVERY REASONABLE EFFORT TO PRESERVE THE PLANTS AND RETURN THEM TO THEIR PRIOR LOCATIONS AFTER THE UTILITY WORK. IF NONETHELESS, SOME PLANTS DIE, IT IS THE OBLIGATION OF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO REPLACE THEM. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MEEKS DESIGN GROUP 1755 N. COLLINS BLVD., SUITE 300 RICHARDSON, TEXAS 75080 (972)690-7474 BRANDON BOOHER TOTAL SITE AREA 50,661.80 S.F. = 1.16 ACRES TOTAL SITE LANDSCAPE REQUIRED: 10% OF TOTAL SITE = 5,066 S.F. PROVIDED: 24% (21,556.2 SF) STREET YARD LANDSCAPING REQUIRED: 15% SHALL BE PERMANENT LANDSCAPE AREA STREET YARD (VICTORIA FALLS DRIVE) = STREETYARD IS 100% LANDSCAPE MINUS DRIVEWAY ENTRIES. STREET YARD (F.M. HWY 455) = STREET YARD IS 100% LANDSCAPE MINUS DRIVEWAY ENTRIES. PROVIDED (VICTORIA FALLS DRIVE): 100% (3,004 S.F.) PROVIDED (F.M. HWY 455): 100% (1,393 S.F.) PERIMETER TREES REQUIRED: SINGLE ROW OF TREES SPACED 40' ON CENTER EAST (VICTORIA FALLS DRIVE): 256.33 LF/40 = 7 TREES SOUTH (F.M. HWY 455): 122 LF/40 = 3 TREES PROVIDED (VICTORIA FALLS DRIVE): 6 EXISTING TREES / 3 NEW TREES PROVIDED (F.M. HWY 455): 3 TREES PARKING LOT TREES REQUIRED: 1 TREE PER 10 PARKING SPACES & A LANDSCAPE AREA WITH AT LEAST 1 TREE WITHIN 65' OF EVERY PARKING SPACE. (45 PARKING SPACES / 10 = 5 TREES) PROVIDED: 5 (3" CAL) TREES ENGINEER RLG CONSULTING ENGINEERS 12001 N. CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, SUITE 300 DALLAS, TX 75243 (214)739-8100 STEPHEN D. SCHWIND, P.E. MITIGATION SUMMARY 18 TOTAL INCHES OF PROTECTED TREES TO BE REMOVED. (1) 6" CAL. CEDAR ELM TREE BEING PLANTED ON PHASE II PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. (3) 3" CAL. REPLACEMENT TREES REQUIRED REF. SHEET LPO.03 AND LPO.04 FOR REPLACEMENTS. NOTE: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY WATER RESTRICTIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF McKINNEY AT TIME OF PLANTING. SHOULD WATER RESTRICTIONS NOT ALLOW HYDROMULCH, HYDROSEEDING, OR SPRIGGING (STAGE 3 AND STAGE 4 WATER RESTRICTIONS), AN APPROVED ALTERNATIVE FOR GRASSING SHALL BE INSTALLED. CALCULATIONS & DETAILS ISSUES: 11-20-18 ISSUE FOR PERMIT O O O REVISIONS: Z\ 0 0 CLIENT. MCRIGHT-SMITH TWO LEGACY TOWN CENTER 6900 NORTH DALLAS PARKWAY SUITE 770. PLANO, TEXAS 75024 IT" J landscape architects MEEKS DESIGN GROUP, INC. 1755 N. COLLINS BLVD., SUITE 300 RICHARDSON, TX 75080 PH (972)690-7474 F (972)690-7878 OF�49 20pN H. [SA Q 2485 p� 9TP OF t�1 11-20-18 /SSUEFORPERM/T ANNA M.O.B. (PHASE 1) ANNA,TEXAS JOB NUMBER: MCR-1801 CITYSUBM17TAL - LANDSCAPEPLAN LPO. 02 PROPERTY 6" C£ OFFSITE TREES NOT TO BE DISTURBED PROPERTY LINE SOLID SOD BERMUDA GRASS(T1P) FUTURE PHA SE //DEVELOPMENT rrs �_r_r_ .e_,.cy,. Au+> . . . �x bfLLQW )O" N9LLOW . . . .. .. . + LL .. . + . + r . . + r + + + . I Q C PROPERTY LINE 1 r� SOLID SOD BERMUDA + I+ + + r + e GRASS (TYP) + r F.M. H/GHWA YNO, 455 EXI SE' TREE PROTECTION FENCING (TYP) LEGEND SIZE 3" CAL. QTY. 4 SYM. TREE TYPE SHUMARD RED OAK OLIVE OAK 3" CAL. 7 CEDAR ELM 3" CAL. 3 M MITIGATION TREE 3" CAL. 3 0 NELLIE R. STEVENS 5 GAL. 11 O LOROPETALUM 5 GAL. 41 i11 MEXICAN FEATHER GRASS 91 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ENGINEER MEEKS DESIGN GROUP RLG CONSULTING ENGINEERS O 20 40 1755 N. COLLINS BLVD., 12001 N. CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, SUITE 300 SUITE 300 rmm� RICHARDSON, TEXAS 75080 DALLAS, TEXAS 75243 � LANDSCAPE PLAN (972) 690-7474 (214) 739-8100 BRANDON BOOHER STEPHEN D. SCHWIND, P.E. SCALE,' 1':10=0" GRAPHIC SCALE/NFEET 4� ISSUES: Qt 11-20-18 ISSUE FOR PERMIT O O O REVISIONS: 0 IL IL CLIENT. MCRIGHT-SMITH TWO LEGACY TOWN CENTER 6900 NORTH DALLAS PARKWAY SUITE 770. PLANO, TEXAS 75024 Fr: J landscape architects MEEKS DESIGN GROUP, INC. 1755 N. COLLINS BLVD., SUITE 300 RICHARDSON, TX 75080 PH (972) 690-7474 F (972) 690-7878 Q�,o�ar+�scA�Qr T I lqT 2485 +Qy or "'I' 11-20-18 ISSUE FOR PERMIT ANNA M.O.B. (PHASE 1) ANNA,TEXAS JOB NUMBER: MCR-1801 LANDSCAPE PLAN LPO. 03 8' eas 21' B05 10" B01S D'ARCO 8" HA CKB 8 22" A 15' �s e� o. n11A; 6* 9 06"HACKBERRY eas DARC 8` HACKBERRY a 6" rP O 0� U i 8 mQ i w 4 C, I 8" HACKBERRY 1 2P"oOAK �1 m 2 R1 20QAK _ Pc�BEft B" EL� I j0 N 6'NACKBERR HACKBERRY p i B' HACKBERRY m � e^ Hacrcecaar f I b 14' HAC 8B W 0 I i 15' EL r e• REF, 16 SE//DEVE LP0.03 - PHA SE/(SITE A) 10" mLPW POND SIDEWALK PROPRTY LINE 1 1 I a w ,so LEGEND SYM. TREE TYPE SIZE QTY. CEDAR ELM 6" CAL. 1 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ENGINEER MEEKS DESIGN GROUP RLG CONSULTING ENGINEERS O 20 40 1755 N. COLLINS BLVD., 12001 N. CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, SUITE 300 SUITE 300 RICHARDSON, TEXAS 75080 DALLAS, TEXAS 75243 � LANDSCAPE PLAN (972) 690-7474 (214) 739-8100 BRANDON BOOHER STEPHEN D. SCHWIND, P.E. SCALE,' 1':10=0" GRAPHIC SCALE/NFEET4� ISSUES: (D 11-20-18 ISSUE FOR PERMIT O O O REVISIONS: 0 IL CLIENT: , MCRIGHT-SMITH TWO LEGACY TOWN CENTER 6900 NORTH DALLAS PARKWAY SUITE 770. PLANO, TEXAS 75024 M Fr: landscape architects MEEKS DESIGN GROUP, INC. 1755 N. COLLINS BLVD., SUITE 300 RICHARDSON, TX 75080 PH (972) 690-7474 F (972)690-787n8u��A^ c TqT 2485 +Py F GF �O 11-20-18 ISSUE FOR PERMIT ANNA M.O.B. ANNA,TEXAS JOB NUMBER: MCR-1801 LANDSCAPE PLAN LP0.04 December 17, 2018 City Planning and Engineering Departments for the City of Anna 3223 North Powell Parkway Anna, Texas 75409 RE: Creekside Offices Phase 1 Site Plan and Development Permit Approval Required Easement and Document Commitment To whom it may concern: As part of the site plan and engineering review process, it has been requested that a few easements and other necessary documents be provided as part of the development permit process. ORL 1, LLC, through its Construction Manager and designated representative, McRight-Smith Construction, as agreed to furnish these documents. The underlying work for these easements and documents is presently underway, with a goal of submitting them in advance of the upcoming P&Z and Council meetings; however, in the event that these are delayed, we wanted to provide a commitment letter to serve as confirmation of our intent to provide these documents. The list of documents is as follows: 1. Letter from Creekside HOA providing written approval of the removal of one of their elm trees located in line with the proposed drive approach. We will be planting two new 6" elm trees on their property to the North of our site to compensate. 2. Hold Harmless Agreement between ORL 1, LLC and the City of Anna for permission to pave over a small portion of the existing 15' water easement 3. Mutual Access Easement between ORL 1, LLC and the Creekside HOA, providing access for the drive approach on the East side of the property 4. 15' Drainage Easement for the outfall of our drainage system to the existing 30' Drainage Easement It is our request that in lieu of these documents being filed, our site plan and civil permit is approved with a contingency for the receipt of these documents. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to reach out to Chris Montasser with McRight-Smith Construction at 972.608.8988. Best regards, ORL 1, LLC Dr. Chad McDuffie Managing Member THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Approve a Resolution approving the Pecan Grove Phase 4 Final Plat. SUMMARY: Item No. 5.f. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1 /8/2019 The Pecan Grove Phase 4 Final Plat is located in the R. Ingraham Survey, Abstract No. 464 and the J. Slater Survey, Abstract No. 868. The plat contains approximately 57.725 acres covering a section of land West of Highway 5 and to the East of Phase 2 and 3 of Pecan Grove that will consist of 232 lots. A letter from the Engineer of Record for this development has been submitted concerning no downstream impact from storm drainage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a Resolution approving the Pecan Grove Phase 4 Final Plat. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution Final Plat Location Map Drainage Letter Upload Date Type 1 /3/2019 Resolution 12/26/2018 Exhibit 12/26/2018 Exhibit 12/26/2018 Exhibit CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A FINAL PLAT OF PECAN GROVE PHASE 4. WHEREAS, In order to provide for the orderly development of land within the Anna city limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction, the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas (the "City Council") has adopted Part III -A of the Anna City Code of Ordinances ("Subdivision Regulations"); and WHEREAS, Spiars Engineering has submitted an application for approval of a Final Plat of the Pecan Grove Phase 4 Subdivision; WHEREAS, The Final Plat of Pecan Grove Phase 4 generally conforms to the Preliminary Plat of Pecan Grove Phase 2-4; WHEREAS, The Final Plat of Pecan Grove Phase 4 conforms to the existing zoning; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. Recitals Incorporated The recitals above are incorporated herein as if set forth in full for all purposes. Section 2. Approval of Final Plat The City Council hereby approves the final plat of Pecan Grove Phase 4 attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas, on this 8th day of January 2019. ATTEST: APPROVED: City Secretary, Carrie L. Smith Mayor, Nate Pike Boundary Line Table Line P Length Dlreatlon BL1 66.40' S 8932'31" W BL2 216.73' N 00'43'52" E BL3 212.44' S 89'53'28" W BL4 178.92' N 02'25'37" W BL5 68.74' N 08*12'27" E BL5 20.91' S 79'03'39" E BL7 170.00' N 10'56'21" E BL8 52.99' N 79'03'39" W BL9 120.00' N 07'l4'50" E BL10 208.28' N 07'09'48" E BL11 534.57' S 8954'16" W BLI2 112.52' N 00'46'28" W BL13 44.48' S 88'41'26" W BLI4 59.01' N 00*13'10" W BL15 63.50' N 19'29'15" E BL16 199.84' S 8938'00" E 8 Lot 2, Block X (HOA Lot) v2 IRF 0 W. FOSTER CROSSING ROAD P.O.W. 14,061 SF., 0.32i Aa Deal in Fee SNnple to the City of Anna ia 40' r aJ RO$ Z y � w ! N o 31 ox-I U ° U) In � t1J L2 N e O a N y 40' 1/2^IRS- m Lot 1, / 0.40 Block (HOA Lot) II 1/2-IRF I' 20' bpd'ng & D.E. r• Boundary Curve Table Cunve • Length FGnI Chord Chord eedring Dell BC1 522.10' 2540.00' 521.18' N 84'56'58" W 11'46' BC2 402.20' 2830.00' 401.87' S 86'49'27" E 8'08' BC3 4.31' 2950.00' 4.31' N 82'4T41" W 0'05' BC4 170.07' 3410.00' 170.05' N 84*15'55" W 2'51'', BC5 153.06' 445.00' 152.31' N 09'38'02" E 19'42' --t - - - - - - - - - I II 1 1 12 3 © z F 6 3 zit 9 20 18 17 16 5 4 "'Iw Pecan°LIw 'etas Grove Phase II, Ltd. I Doc. No.2017122 1695410DACCT dp� Doc. No. 201 ,10104001395460 ORCOCT 4 I 13 SIN 5 4 Q110 I F AZALEAS RUN DRIVE I 0 11 18-- - ---BLI4 $I2\ I to p I 15 Yw IA 2 17 3 BLI2 m \ / 4( 1 2 1 "'���CCC I/P° IRF (� 20.0 8 9 I 13 Qc 16 14 15 I 13 16 I 14 15 I 13 14 6 15 I I1 Lot 1, Block M 14 I 13 4 rDCO - P 1 _ZELKOVABOULEVARD _�_-___-_---� YR Lot 2, �P ----i ------- N OI"24'O_?"_W 290.01' Block M I W Lot 1, 0) A, 120.01__ F;___120.01___- o'uE 1s Block Q �FP 1 10 �YR 31 Lot 1, 12 Z� Lot 10, I Block x 1 mao J �`I Lot 12, Block Elo Blook �C) U I (HOA Lot) F SO'4328W m (HOA Lot) - IM 2 < LU �I 9 2 ,© 30 �I " 1 11 D� 6 -t 2 Lu F ,z0oo' szro1.z IN al i L 120. I "2n'"29 E 1 IW r 3 Pecan Grove Phase III, Ltd. U1 Lot 9, 3 it Pecan Groove Phase II, Ltd. wI 3 - 29 1 •X If I 83'12 ✓ I 22 N 000 18 N3}044E 2 IN o Doc. No. AP11227001 695420 DRCCT 7 Block X HOA Lot IN AS LOCATION MAP I _ �00 PROJECT LOCATION W. FOSTER CROSSING RD Ho �o 3 OOLLIN COUNTY OUTER LOOP _ William L. Haynes & Marcia Navarre Doc. No. 20150922001204170 DRCCT W Doc. No. 20170111000048510 DRCCT 01 I I 21 - I� 4 O I 9 w 4 7 4 Lot t3, 4 N w 'eo 8 Oa 4 U �I ��ry Block x I o f Nazo oa°E I 0I 3 IA „ �UjI II (HOA Lot) ,_ 1 y I 20 - IBlock X m 5 m= I 1/Y IRF If i Lot 15, 5 6 I 5 I� ' I Iz6.00' 1 f<IS� 8 9 58� BLIO V2^11W 15'OE I (HOA Lot) Troy Christopher Reed 5 I ' to.Op' 1 oI N52915E 4 I `Ism I '�8 5528 i i I� Doc. No. 20091020001284830 DRCCT I 1 S6zoWw m l 19 0 'm ssze' 55.zg' I n 6 �< � N 6s.W' TEAKWOOD 5 6 � l e o.w' .< 7 1 a N 3© Is:aa' i 12S41' - - - - -TREE _ -I 1 28 I �I I N6'78'3t E 1/2" wF B03 1 I 10 °YI`= 11 �'8 o.ao' I 51/2"IRs MF �E = 13 4 $=g Rn I 1 1 s]senw ' `3� 18 BL9 I/z^I STfC PALM��-,-� _= 14 0� i6 17 Seo�' 1/z'Ires I 7 I� tzo.00 N -+5 ET - -_---- - - 0' BL 6 27 �I, aI�"ra]asE �� I; OT°V'48 p q'6 0 _�/=RF M��..IE touE-Isoo'-= J� _ 1>'i��13Bs 120.W___ I O,Q I ' S85a1' i si 1 Try 17 - 6 I � Cw - to uE -1207o _ - ?TIC PAL ]] . 18 7 8 9 10 w of I L 400 „sa' -M SrREEr ,}Y 7 v4r n 8 i^ 26 1� of N83�02E S81J12W 1 70 1.-yE -_ -- IzoW _-- $ W zI8B4' _ 3- -i 20' WE � / 26 I 15' 95.0]' O I/2' IR6 O I ?,! NI N8}922 E r BL ., 10' UE v° N1'235s"E 1r BL4 Yes BL$1 Rs oia°po l i I 16 7 fe i r C R 421 100 0 50 100 200 1 inch = 100ft. LEGEND (Not all items may be applicable) O 1/2" IRON ROD WITH PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "SPIARSENG" SET, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED IRF IRON ROD FOUND CIRF CAPPED IRON ROD FOUND IPF IRON PIPE FOUND Esmi. EASEMENT Util. UTILITY DE DRAINAGE EASEMENT DUE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT UE UTILITY EASEMENT WE WATER EASEMENT SSE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT SE SIDEWALK EASEMENT STE STREET EASEMENT VE 25'x25'VISIBILITY, SIDEWALK, ACCESS& MAINTENANCE EASEMENT WIV WASTE WATER EASEMENT WUE WALL MAINTENANCE EASEMENT HBE HIKE& BIKE TRAIL EASEMENT HOA HOME OWNER'S ASSOCIATION (6TP) BY THIS PLAT R.O.W. RIGHT-OF-WAY aL BUILDING LINE -4110- STREET NAME CHANGE BLOCK DESIGNATION Cab. CABINET Vol. VOLUME P9 PAGE No. NUMBER NTS NOT TO SCALE Ord. No ORDINANCE NUMBER Inst Doc. INSTRUMENT OR DOCUMENT (DRCCT) DEED RECORDS, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS (PRCCT) I PLAT RECORDS, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS (OPRCCT) OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS __6883__ BL6 12W " I 2 58.26'1p W I 120.W' '_5' µyE 27 I IT BL SS05-- 55.OY-67.I8- l i W NB}y17E 11p.00'-_ �f'I IL28' 7s6' I/Y S " 1 NIp77617E S9J935 W , 11o.W' j� ! eo I I 1 N s xNE W 9 25 a I saT, o3 I 1o'uE I I r 12a ao' a TO & of 1 I J , ,� 11 I Nszl I 25 - _ w TO HOA j~ - I SL7 I/2'IRF Q�,o IOW' ' 15 I 59E I --10 .W'.5 _VME N3ro8'16°E II m " I � 120. SI036'21W 1524' I5.18' N 369' 6 � W Jackie & N 14 o m 13 12 ; I I W N I 21 ' Nr 1q 1 nl I © s9'?1s1 w I" I N9rs3�s - -, 40°'--_ I� I ' I 2 ��-- 20 5 o i I J = z.zo' P 11 , � 1 0' _ s1 I rT - 10' ffi n 5621 031 NIO 1W' _ ^+ I E ^ S9n1 t___105. LS' N3ro816°E� P 1DOJoyce Thornhill e\ z18 n' j yl i 1 10 24 1 sI h $tw 5E n 4 1 ow m I o I 0 i H I 1 0. 14 3.84'IS 25 - I ,vw N8365 I Ii I I I � ., � s 1s' eL h ' "' Sloss' i i I Q h� 9 � 2To2' 4 2aso' - � 1 0.'' I, I 3 ^� s µWE 1` �� s E I 21 a s w William K. Lewis & Doc. No. 96-0052603 1 NIo3 w (.) DRCCT �,6 30 '- 10•UEl _, SI 621E 3 II 0CI NIO.pp 5_MbE�� I715'3732W S NI07900L6_WIE wl i+ 3].08' �I o�--1000=5'MIE" ChrlstlneJ. Lewls L �Ir �11•=s 3' w joy 23 S1 E I 8I036'11W ' Mass 59E I I o1 _5 0l NSro816E RSp• C5- Rw II 11 a Ip. 1 �M 13 $' , RW S1 21E Ms'v_ 2 24 Vol. 5700, Pg. 816 DRCCT I I CEB p�. 1 �) s1 00' 1 LL_ S� h I � '� I 5 I ' oW�_ $ • 1s0o 1492 --"-"r 1. o I I � 22 10' DE ' I q' NIoz1 g o3621 w I �� rv�0 ° _s µWE •n I 10 I L---I o s pyE $S. s10s6z1 {Y R w I 'I 400_5 eR s10a1--�-i lo,. 4 ^3 FI'�`y I o00' S NMf'R S' �� h U72T LS W m1O.Op' , NIO'S621 22I I. S I NI034,5 $ 1492 W 1 1346.5_tWE _ �I N3n816E Chrieto her Foster 70 S E 1 . 4 40' 1/2° U6 x - 65 o y, I 1 - 1 12 - I 3$11 W ' 1 _ -- 23 54 N1032 W a p I I BL2 w�'9L?y ag55r 12 I o.00' w _ $ I `? 6 2. RWE I � 5 , w 25E a I 23 � RDW VOL 5470, Pg, 1674 DRCCT zoss' 61 s10 I I- 1, I srossll -,z4 s '-J I I 9fi 89 59.83-10 UE NE I M 1TOW' 3611 µ - 10 bE "'`-IS 11 I 1400' 'S W I W NI05 00__NME 'fig 5103621 W R'W 5I �-__I 0.00'-S-S IN 20,00' 10 �' I ' I N703g 21 E $ I 1 I - - BL I r I �' I NI°s6z1 E " s q 21 I ' ZI oS. I 41$ E 22 I ! I I rv1o's�65 • " Lot 11, N o' N3•oB Is E FINLEY ItL�' .w Dav(d J. Fowler &Jody L. Fowler W 14.ao' 21 - 3 I $ _ I 6 � s' 8 g 11 E Doc. No. 20060208000167110 DRCCT Im 1 1 e Dp - --_ __ A L Ded Fee to 16 „^• 17 I< IjL 'l� 13 1 s1os°2�W II 2spov ORDS-'rram+� `q� _ 81p `_ IM 1 P $o st ° I� Q' � I $ weEr 0 1 1 _ Block X I p( 0 1 24 Dedicated m Fa Simple 05611 �I N1 ° 0 5 µWE o � Sr0362� � � 'R I 6 m (HOA Lot' I � 120.00' City of M $' 03915E S IOI6 '-5_WE I I I N3'o816E I y1 7 120.pa_ I NIO = µWE II ' I m I N na ; 3s'21 W S 7 _5 21 0 5611E I N I - Lot 8, ✓_ ° w w' N,osslrE _ s la ° "-- 1 pUZ L g R "Iza o o� ZI 25 Block x - 66 __ N1034'IS'E mO of 0 1 , 2D n 5 IS'B� --_110. SI036 F ' Po' 1 m M. 22 a m 21 - 6d15' '6300' I S �J 1 16 � 10• UE- �°�-S 21 W I - 000 _S W[E": SI°3611 J 0 L 7 I/Y IRS I/2' IRF 14 a', SIO 0.00' J`I R.W L - A L w it ^� ' S521W I 'W NIO O.WLS'NNE I 19w ',0 .WLS'y_NE_o h5 pWF z - � - � � $5.00 a,•I II I N10341 E S W 1 1 .0°' / (HO Lot) 19 5 l I N oa.80' S' 1WE�� I �I I N3'OB'I6 E / N 00"53'49" W ^• '790.93' r I - �I 1 �-� 8- _ �r 20-I I �--t4s61I R a �I J ^'I NIO'S60p mS w, So 3621E , WI[120 _ , N1036'21E SI _'I 000'_- S E 1°4'42 ^� s49Y 56.32 s6.32' 12322 55.00` 5500' 55.00 $5.00' Ss.00' 55.00' 55.00 YE oo e, 3 N'I 1190,� 9 _ I N7034.00' hoo SIO'$621µ J JlJI '9i I 16 _N 53n818W I - Is „i-1 26 20.05' K _ 20m $-'i "1 p 15E I s' - _5'µ1AE_"' 3 K s 3O s �II li I 15 _ s1 .00 �I 1 I: I -1 0° 11 L�e"'s 16 S I I. OC I NI4 Lo� 21 `✓x -120.� 3 O 3 3 Lot 14, 3 3 3 3 3 I _ _ 2 o p _ _ - (__ - 20'BL i 19 oq 16 I 1 ' 110 - 36'21W ,S 8 NI036.21E - _6 2D I IN ' N16'°'p0 _5_qp, I10.0 '_ •o�, 1 g _ I 19 I �' a I 3611E _5 eYE11011'__� �I"' N3n8'tfi{ e S= - ob Block X - o- - o S oQ ga f n _ - z W' e 6 1 o IS 14W'__ S 56.21E 51036 --'' , S �. -20W'__ •rz 9 •' I 4� HUA Lot e •� o ra 2601' _ ,p' l i� ' I N,osays E �O 18 I 16 $) sloss2l w I� I S 21 w 120 � S sros6n W '' I I s H s3roa is w I n 27 I 1 2 3 ^' P( ) 4_ 5 6_ 7_ 2 9 10 11 i_ ca uE---vE,l I ' i I� O 10 oo' - 1q nl I _� m 1 �� t 9`- - �' s 1 r o. 1 o.W' � I A W � �_ ^ s_ 17 ' I Nms .06' 20 " L s nuE n _ zo' BL m 2001' _ - g - VE 16 SIO °p I I I NI036' I O 21 1 ' 11p.pa' 6' - "-' 1 ry�� .,, 41$°E 15 I •. t..1 I NI05621 I --Izo 00'- -- -1 IM. 20 BL - - -- --- "'z - 282f' p� , ;p 36'21W I S 17E 1 II NIO -_IIyE , I00p'-- "'I^' SP '`_� I ,w S f ''S MUE 11580'__ ; I N3Y1816E ...I �f -_ _ -- .10'UE---- _- _ _ _-10'UE_ 5'_ _5,.99_ _P Ag , _ S I 15 „�, SI0 0'W' I, .,5 S �62IE S S1o621µ ,- 1D i S1020. __ IJo 1 ml 53ro816W M I _fi __ __ 3- _____ .2 ._____ - $.0- -�910_lo'UE_�e 15'BL 17 I,' s621W NIOL_ S 3621W `41 10 oen.,I^ _ 16 I -1 _5•µME `°.S SI L n 19 'S 20.0$' y E - ioue _pW. 3915E _ =1- _ ' MI` rv10 22 I ° 'y N1osal - - sRWE 17 ' d NI z syy��sxW _ NOBLE FIR DRIVE_ p$3'44'L__-gip --- ss.0o' loon n NN W - SOW- _50 - p 00, 3621E " 1 Q o NI0362 510 ° 71. Os621 E - 121.50'__ �J N3ro81fi E r- 0.05 - _ 648:78' n a 27 - .00_ I x �29.8Y S 1 7 E S 35 I 1 1 ..I 1 W es - _s - s1 o z, w 'R 11 I sr° ---r r s3ros is w S< W-so.00_ 1 z1w , Q I - Z Z_6z.6s'---slao'-- ------------------- h '�'r R I I w r I 29 _a9.a4'_---------------- ,L(`- 120.00---- 2 I S15 I 1 ' r & sszl 1 11 m 1 I I -- - Y0 uE9 -- ~ 3 g e w - _ - -Soso_ s sr 23 1 ✓ W' I i 6 m I - 11 _sa' s' 18 a I I10' uE m uE h: to ap w NI 1 20. NIO ° s _M_rc IL s ITGE_ _ 4 S 5 w 'SO.W. _ 50. °562 110. ' 03621 �' SIO .W' I I g l 5415 - -r 0. S NIO E oa IE 1 N1 ZJ 17.19' < 0' B z 20.40' hO op $,"d 6 S,e ,� -Ip'U WvS I E I 6 10.00 e _ E - - v63 S1 I� 1 E '� W 1 1 12 O56' °p�--� -I I I m N3b816"E W _ ✓' 1n � 038'2 1 27 � S1 2I n 12 _ .:, 83n8'16 W �I I I � Lot 7, 120.00' w I I= vE 13 1 1 w _ - _ 1 NIna33°w : Naomi R. Copeland Parchman 9 g e \`Ez - ' 'R 24 ffiI (i_ - 10, -,. 7BB 14 w I e I N' N103a 15 15 1 I NIo11a72.3_Ipy� may+ y 17 o 30 O Block X o 20' SSE 4 - I- IN Vol. 2070, P 177 DRCCT a op 1D g�32'.' 12OW' $1 1 __UE �h 1$ BL-- �j L - 1 E I0.0°' I S I 3611 1 13. 'I I 10 (HOA Lot) �I {V e 6 W 9 I .('Q.W� _ ' 13 S10'S6'2I ' 9•.'� w,�((--NE 13 _ S10'S62/ 'R 13 '16W N3V8 i6E = of Z "Z 0.49 I'ry 15281, I ' 1 55376 I o NI s 5 NWE J .. 34 12000 1-- POINT OF 5' YAAE BY Sepomle 10' o$O b _ S I 1 9 E C8 C9 - 15' BL ot0' N ITS ho =16250' q ss. 25 I rvlosso 14 1 I 6' 31 x� Nlnals"w I_ Goa E a^ 12 'T'1" 120. _e- _ �- _ 4.98' _ UE_ - YE I43611 E --138.58'___ I I ""i 1 N fi1.25' BEGINNING Sloss I' 'Ir�a1_ll-_ -� 3 I =1 n, saro6lsw ' Izoo°' Nasals"E I !n sQp'_ 144_00' ,VE 14 = N3n816 E �I Lot 4, •' I 7 O m d� 20' Permanent Water Esmt. Do, No, 2016-708700 OPRCCT Easement Line Table Llne n LengBi Dlroctlon L23 85.71' N 89'34'01" E L24 20.00' S 00°25'59" E L25 89.72' S 89-34'02" W NOTES: 1. Selling a portion of this addition by metes and bounds is a violation of City ordinance and state law and is subject to fines and withholding of utilities and building permits. 2. 0 All corners are 1/2 inch iron rods with red plastic caps stamped "SPIARS ENG RPLS 5252" unless otherwise noted. 3. All development will comply with City of Anna PD-2002-27A Requirements. 4. All open space areas, Lots 1-15, Block X, to be owned and maintained by the H.O.A. 5. Lots 1-15, Block X, to be used for sidewalks, trails and landscaping. Easements for these uses are granted by this plat. J. Kevin Kennedy & Lisa L. Kennedy Doc. No. 94-0026232 DRCCT Rear Prop erty Une 1U Ren Bl ((R-5. R-6) S Ren BL (R-72) 2C Ren BL (R-84) Inv I`tW wm F l WI WO w H- o� S ZW o Ioxo1� 10x IN __J 1m •mt I tol rmm I C0.7 I 1s' se, I FrmtBL SA.k L-- 1o_aL--------J ---I- Front Property Line STANDARD LOT CETAIL FOR LOT TYPE R- 5. R- 6. R- 72, R- 84 l ^1 Ilm of h - 4a 3osa_ __Ipl soW_ �-�_ =11j _lo'uE"� lots' 15 vE�__ <s Block x _� - L _ 15' BL '�1c 192$ _- 15' UE HOA Lot , �/ NIO'345$E ',�I Z 26 iI 1 si 2 s/2' zo 7o 9.os --_°p spW_ Ma1sa lsl aa.= o -t,_ m uE R W 2 3 ( ) 1 �') - -',nM I o . '°�.'� 10 -WLIE.- op T 207 68.25 // r w P 3 '� ••nw & UE - Sapp SILI,IE� 19 m 6 4 P 5 6 ^ 7 -s°ao_ so W_ RLEAFI -�e�n2 sm zz 33' 3 20.00 5' NIIE BY Separ"1e .$'.W " „^, 0 5 �'Lh 9 ! W W - - -'SO W. 50 �NE '" C13 - 11181 I20.00 _ �` e , z J / �' / N? p0• 0 Da. Na. S 10 "J4'15 © �,p 10 o"' y W .W_ -5000 N'09I6°E 103,2fi " W •�. 182 S �, e 11 n -12 S P W - - r5O-00. _�33.21 '- 20.00 20.00 \ h4 �Vi r P 2.9%' �^ P13 xp 14 a a_ 5218 I 6' 5 ^0. �' PO, �3Sz° °e 4 o '$ -� 2o.m'Izo.oT `� 3 � Lot 3, �F mom• ,�{ ]' 5LLT _ 20, yO ',�-________ Block X a 1/2'es y^0 __377s ._ (HOA Lot) CoJ�� Ymlahle Lot 6, W `-z O5°O r3.2 yg_a.o3�-42195' P�. 73q wBlock x 20' Wearn DE (HOA Lot) \ 1/2-IRS James E. Hager Block'x James E. Hage & Jeanne Hager (HOA Lot) & Jeanne Hage (Release of Lien filed (Release of Lien filed Q' in Vol. 1544, Pg. 28 DRCCT) in Vol. 1544, Pg. 26 DRC FINAL PLAT OWNER/APPLICANT ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Starlight Homes of Texas, LLC Spiars Engineering, Inc. 1800 Valley View Lane, Suite 100 765 Custer Road, Suite 100 Farmers Branch, Texas 75234 Plano, TX 75075 Telephone (214) 616-6887 Telephone: (972) 422-0077 Contact: Daniel Satsky TBPE No. F-2121 Contact: Matt Dorsett Scale: 1" = 100' December, 2018 SET Job No. 18-055 PECAN GROVE PHASE IV 57.725 ACRES OUT OF THE R. IINGRAHAM SURVEY ABST. NO.4-64 J. SLATER SURVEY ABST. NO. 868 CITY OF ANNA COLLIIN COUNTY, TEXAS 1/2" WF Sheet 1 of 2 STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF COLLIN § OWNER'S CERTIFICATE BEING a tract of land situated in the R. Ingraham Survey, Abstract No. 4,64, and the J. Slater Survey, Abstract No. 868, City of Anna, Collin County, Texas, being a part of a tract conveyed to ATC No. 9/SHRP Commercial, Ltd., recorded in Document No. 20151021001332960 of the Deed Records, Collin County, Texas (DRCCT), a part of a tract conveyed to Foster Crossing, Ltd., recorded in Document No. 20140731000808030 DRCCT, and a part of a tract conveyed to Pecan Grove Phase III, Ltd., recorded in Document No. 20171227001695410 DRCCT and Document No. 20171227001695420 DRCCT, with the subject tract being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a 1/2" iron rod found on the north line of West Foster Crossing Road, a public right-of-way (also known as County Road 366) for the southwest corner of a tract conveyed to J. Kevin Kennedy and Lisa L. Kennedy, recorded in Document No. 94-0026232 DRCCT; THENCE S 89-32'31" W, 66.40 feet along the north line of said road; THENCE S 89-33'59" W, 281.41 feet continuing along the north line of said road to a 1/2" iron rod found for the southeast corner of a tract conveyed to Jackie and Joyce Thornhill, recorded in Document No. 96-0052603 DRCCT; THENCE N 00'43'52" E, 216.73 feet along the common line thereof; THENCE S 89-53'28" W, 212.44 feet continuing along the common line thereof to a 1/2" iron rod with plastic cap found for an easterly corner of a tract conveyed to Pecan Grove Phase 11, Ltd., recorded in Document No. 20170111000048510 DRCCT; THENCE along the common line thereof, the following: N 02'25'37" W, 178.92 feet; N 0812'27" E, 68.74 feet; S 79'03'39" E, 20.91 feet; N 10'56'21" E, 170.00 feet to a 1/2" iron rod with plastic cap found; N 79-03'39" W, 52.99 feet; A tangent curve to the left having a central angle of 11'46'38", a radius of 2540.00 feet, a chord of N 84'56'58" W - 521.18 feet, an arc length of 522.10 feet; And N 01'24'07" W, 290.01 feet to a southwesterly comer of a tract conveyed to Pecan Grove Phase III, Ltd., recorded in Document Nos. 20171227001695420 and 20171227001695410, DRCCT; THENCE along the common line thereof, the following: A non -tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 08'08'35", a radius of 2830.00 feet, a chord of S 86'49'27" E - 401.87 feet, an arc length of 402.20 feet to a 1/2" iron rod with plastic cap found; N 0714'50" E, 120.00 feet; A non -tangent curve to the left having a central angle of 00'05'01", a radius of 2950.00 feet, a chord of N 8247'41" W - 4.31 feet, an arc length of 4.31 feet; N 07-09'48" E, 460.00 feet to a 1/2" iron rod with plastic cap found; A non -tangent curve to the left having a central angle of 02'51'27", a radius of 3410.00 feet, a chord of N 8415'55" W - 170.05 feet, an arc length of 170.07 feet; N 07'09'48" E, 208.28 feet; S 89'54'16" W. 534.57 feet; N 00-46'28" W, 112.52 feet; S 88441'26" W, 44.48 feet; N 0013'10" W, 59.01 feet; A tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 19'42'26 a radius of 445.00 feet, a chord of N 09'38'02" E - 152.31 feet, an arc length of 153.06 feet; And N 19'29'15" E, 63.50 feet to the south line of a tract conveyed to William L. Haynes & Marcia Navarre, recorded in Document No. 20150922001204170 DRCCT; THENCE S 86'09'23" E, 434.28 feet along the south line of said Haynes tract to the southeast corner thereof, being the southwest corner of a tract conveyed to Troy Christopher Reed, recorded in Document No. 20091020001284830 DRCCT; THENCE S 89'38'00" E, 199.84 feet along the south line of said Reed tract to the southeast corner thereof, being the southwest corner of a tract conveyed to William K. Lewis and Christine J. Lewis, recorded in Volume 5700, Page 816 DRCCT; THENCE S 86'51'44" E, 445.85 feet along the south line of said Lewis tract to the southeast corner thereof; THENCE N 00-53'49" W, along the east line of said Lewis tract, and of a tract conveyed to Christopher Foster, recorded in Volume 5470, Page 1674 DRCCT, and of a tract conveyed to David J. Fowler and Jody L. Fowler, recorded in Document No. 20060208000167110 DRCCT, a total distance of 790.93 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found for the southwest corner of a tract conveyed to Naomi R. Copeland Parchman, recorded in Volume 2070, Page 177 DRCCT; THENCE N 88'51'27" E, 571.33 feet along the south line of said Porchman tract to a 1/2" iron rod found for the northwest corner of a tract described in a Release of Lien to James E. Hager and Jeanne Hager, recorded in Volume 1544, Pages 26 and 28, DRCCT; THENCE S 07'37'35" E, 421.95 feet along the west line thereof; THENCE S 05'07'39" W, 668.10 feet continuing along the west line of said Hager tract to the northwest corner of said Kennedy tract; THENCE S 10-54'15" W, 1822.97 feet along the west line thereof to the POINT OF BEGINNING with the subject tract containing 2,514,500 square feet or 57.725 acres of land. NOW, THEREFORE, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS That WE, STARLIGHT HOMES OF TEXAS, LLC, acting herein by and through its duly authorized officers, does hereby certify and adopt this final plot designating the herein above described property as PECAN GROVE PHASE IV, an addition to the City Of Anna, and does hereby dedicate to the public use forever, the streets and alleys shown thereon. STARLIGHT HOMES OF TEXAS, LLC, does herein certify the following: 1. The streets are dedicated for street purposes. 2. All public improvements and dedications shall be free and clear of all debt, liens, and/or encumbrances. 3. The easements and public use areas, as shown, are dedicated for the public use forever for the purposes indicated on this plat. 4. No buildings, fences, trees, shrubs or other improvements or growths shall be constructed or placed upon, over or across the easements as shown, except that landscape improvements may be placed in landscape easements if approved by the City Of Anna. 5. The City Of Anna is not responsible for replacing any improvements in, under, or over any easements caused by maintenance or repair. 6. Utility easements may also be used for the mutual use and accommodation of all public utilities desiring to use or using the some unless the easement limits the use to particular utilities, said use by public utilities being subordinate to the public's and City Of Anna's use thereof. 7. The City Of Anna and public utilities shall have the right to remove and keep removed all or parts of any buildings, fences, trees, shrubs or other improvements or growths which may in any way endanger or interfere with the construction, maintenance, or efficiency of their respective systems in the easements. 8. The City Of Anna and public utilities shall at all times have the full right of ingress and egress to or from their respective easements for the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, inspecting, patrolling, maintaining, reading meters, and adding to or removing all or parts of their respective systems without the necessity of any time procuring permission from anyone. 9. All modifications to this document shall be by means of plat and approved by the City Of Anna. 10. Open Space designations may include areas reserved for use only by Home Owners Association members and residents. This plat approved subject to all platting ordinances, rules, regulations and resolutions of the City Of Anna, Texas. WITNESS MY HAND, this Starlight Homes of Texas, LLC. A Texas Limited Liability Company Daniel Sotsky Vice President STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF COLLIN § day of 2018 BEFORE ME, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for The State of Texas, on this day personally appeared Daniel Satsky, known to me to be the person and officer whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the some for the purposes and considerations therein expressed and in the capacity therein stated. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this the day of 2018 Notary Public, State of Texas SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE Know All Men By These Presents That I, Darren K. Brown, do hereby certify that I prepared this plat and the field notes made a part thereof from an actual and accurate survey of the land and that the corner monuments shown thereon were properly placed under my personal supervision, in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations of the City of Anna, Texas. Dated this the day of 2018 mil- r% YJ DARREN K. BROWN, R.P.L.S. NO. 5252 oARREN K. BROWN 775252 � T STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF COLLIN § BEFORE ME, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for The State of Texas, on this day personally appeared Darren K. Brown, known to me to be the person and officer whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes and considerations therein expressed and in the capacity therein stated. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this the day of 2018 Notary Public, State of Texas Approved this day of 2018 by the city council of the City of Anna, Texas. Mayor City Secretary Lot Area Table Lo:= sioc. « 5gvare Feet Acreage 1 A 2 A 9,502 6,000 0.218 0.138 3 A 6,000 0.138 4 A 6,000 0.138 5 A 6,000 0.138 6 A 6,000 0.138 7 A 6,000 0.138 8 A 6,000 0.138 9 A 6,000 0.138 10 A 6,000 0.138 11 A 7,579 0.174 12 A 11,130 0.256 13 A 11,625 0.267 14 A 5,740 0.132 15 A 6,000 0.138 16 A 6,000 0.138 17 A 6,000 0.138 18 A 7,333 0.168 19 A 7,333 0.168 20 A 6,000 0.138 21 A 6,000 0.138 22 A 6,000 0.138 23 A 6,000 0.138 24 A 6,000 0.138 25 A 6,000 0.138 26 A 7,994 0.184 Lot Area Table Lot # Block # 5gvare Feet Acreage 1 B 6,206 0.142 2 B 5,075 0.117 3 5 5,102 0.117 4 B 5,469 0.126 5 B 5,855 0.134 6 B 5,878 0.135 7 B 5,878 0.135 8 B 5,878 0.135 9 B 5,878 0.135 10 B 5,878 0.135 11 B 5,878 0.135 12 B 5,878 0.135 13 B 5,878 0.135 14 B 5,878 0.135 15 B 5,878 0.135 16 B 5,878 0.135 B 6,386 0.147 18 B 6,309 0.145 L17 19 B 6,251 0.143 20 B 6,118 0.140 Lot Curve Table G. # Length RodNs. Chord Chord Booring Delta C1 91.27' 50.00' 79.12' N 41'44'46" E 104'35'30" C2 56.32' 50.00' 53,39' N 01'48'37" W 64'32'10" C3 41.32' 50.00' 40.16' S 2242'16" W 47'21'07" Lot Area Table Lot # 51ock # 5gvare Feet Acreage 1 C, 7,430 0.171 2 C 6,687 0.154 3 C: 6.687 0.154 4 C: 6.644 0.153 5 1 G 6,000 0.138 6 C. 6,000 0.138 7 6 7,200 0.165 8 C 7,200 0.165 9 0 6,508 0.149 10 C 6,000 0.138 11 G 6,000 0.138 12 C, 6,000 0.138 13 G 7,337 0.168 14 6 8,611 0.198 15 C, 6,000 0.138 16 a 6,000 0.138 17 C 6,000 0.138 18 a 6,000 0.138 19 G 6,000 0.138 20 G 6,000 0.138 21 C, 6,000 0.138 22 C, 6,000 0.138 23 C: 6,026 0.138 24 G ?11 G 7.292 0.167 7,292 0.167 26 G 8,475 0.195 Lot Area Table Lot # Block # 5gvare Feet Acroogo 11 D 8,914 0.205 12 D 8,623 0.198 13 D 6,315 0.145 14 D 7,115 0.163 15 D 8,450 0.194 16 D 8,749 0.201 17 D 9,425 0.216 18 D 8,400 0.193 19 D 7,593 0.174 20 D 7,590 0.174 21 D 12,955 0.297 22 1 D 15,037 0.345 Lot Line Table Line # Length Dlrectlon L1 16.04' 1 N 04-02'31" E Centerline Line Table Line # Length Dlrocdon L2 37.78' S 00'26'18" E L3 21.21' N 5555'18" E L4 20.51' N 39'50'58" W L5 104.82' N 10'54'15" E Centerline Curve Table Curve # Length Radius Chord Chord Bearing Delta C4 79.18' 400.00' 79.06' S 051359" W 11'20'32" C5 69.92' 200.00' 69.56' S 00'53'20" W 20'01'50" C6 553.33' 2685.00' 552.35' N 84'57'53" W 11'48'27" C7 196.12' 2975.00' 196.08' N 80'56'53" W 3'46'37" C8 56.87' 200.00' 56.68' N 02'45'30" E 1617'30" C9 56.87' 200.00' 56.68' S 02'45'30" W 16'17'30" CIO 215.24' 3265.00' 215.20' N 80'56'53" W 3'46'37" C11 259.35' 3555.00' 259.30' N 81'08'58" W 410'48" C12 83.74' 425.00' 83.61' N 0515'33" E 1117'23" C13 26.01' 362.50' 26.00' S 01*40'11" W 4'06'37" C14 175.38' 300.00' 172.89' S 19'53'08" W 33'29'42" C15 557.53' 250.00' 448.97" N 271517" W 1 127-46'32" Lot Area Table Lot # Block # Sgvnre Feet Acreage 1 E 7,422 0.170 2 E 7,287 0.167 3 E 7.530 0.173 4 E 6,057 0.139 5 E 6,000 0.138 6 E 6,000 0.138 7 E 6,000 0.138 8 E 6,009 0.138 9 E 7,200 0.165 10 E 7,200 0.165 11 E 6,000 0.138 12 E 6,000 0.138 13 E 7,335 0.168 14 E 7,330 0,168 15 E 6,000 0.138 16 E 6.000 0.138 17 E 6.000 0.138 18 E 6,000 0.138 19 E 6,000 0.138 20 E 6,000 0.138 21 E 6,000 0.138 22 E 6,000 0.138 23 E 6,021 0.138 24 E 6.070 0.139 25 E 6,070 0.139 26 E 6,070 0.139 27 E 7,419 0.170 Lot Area Table Lot # 51ock # 5gvare Feet Acroaga i F 6,558 0.151 2 F 5,326 0.122 3 F 5.297 0.122 4 F 5,306 0.122 5 F 5,322 0.122 6 F 5,355 0.123 7 F 5,412 0.124 8 F 5,469 0.126 9 F 5.525 0.127 10 F 6,706 0.154 11 F 5.651 0.130 12 F 5,708 0.131 13 F 5,765 0.132 14 F 7,125 0.164 15 F 9,047 0.208 16 F 6,787 0.156 17 F 6,502 0.149 18 F 6,217 0.143 19 F 5,933 0.136 20 F 5,648 0.130 21 F 5,363 0.123 Lot Area Table Lot # Block # 5goare Feet Acreage 10 6 7,427 0.171 11 6 7,427 0.171 12 6 7,427 0.171 13 6 7,427 0.171 14 6 1 7,427 0.171 15 6 7,424 0.170 16 6 8,400 0.193 17 6 7,338 0.168 18 6 6,965 0.160 19 6 6,965 0.160 20 6 6,965 0.160 21 6 6,965 0.160 22 6 6,965 0.160 23 6 6,965 0.160 24 6 6,965 0.160 25 6 7,031 0.161 26 6 7,087 0.163 27 (5 7,087 0.163 28 6 7,087 0.163 29 6 7,312 0.168 30 6 7,312 0.168 31 6 8,592 0.197 Lot Area Table Lot # Block # 5goore Feet Acreage 1 H 6,668 0.153 2 H 6,644 0.153 3 H 9,589 0.220 4 H 8,176 0.188 5 H 8,176 0.188 6 H 8,176 0.188 7 H 8,176 0.188 8 H 7,206 0.165 9 H 7,346 0.169 Lot Area Table Lot # Block # 5goare Feet Acreage 6 1 7,301 0.168 7 1 7,301 0.168 8 1 7,301 0.168 9 1 7,206 0.165 10 1 7,200 0.165 11 1 8,400 0.193 12 1 7,333 0.168 13 1 6,600 0.152 14 1 6,600 0.152 15 1 6,670 0.153 16 1 6,697 0.154 17 1 6,697 0.154 18 1 6,697 0.154 19 1 6,697 0.154 20 1 6,697 0.154 21 1 6,697 0.154 22 1 6.697 0.154 FINAL PLAT PECAN GROVE PHASE IV 57.725 ACRES OUT OF THE R. INGRAHAMI SURVEY ABST. NO.464 J. SLATER SURVEY AEST. NO. 868 CITY OF ANNA COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS OWNER/APPLICANT ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Starlight Homes of Texas, LLC Spiars Engineering, Inc. 1800 Valley View Lane, Suite 100 765 Custer Road, Suite 100 Farmers Branch, Texas 75234 Plano, TX 75075 Telephone (214) 616-6887 Telephone: (972) 422-0077 Contact: Daniel Satsky TBPE No. F-2121 Contact: Matt Dorsett December, 2018 SEI Job No. 18-055 Lot Area Table Lot # Block # Sou -re Feet Ac-eage 1 J 7,381 0.169 2 J 7,247 0.166 3 J 7,365 0.169 4 J 7,501 0.172 Lot Area Table Lot # Block.# 5gvare Feet Acreage 1 K 7,097 0.163 2 K 6,759 0.155 3 K 6,759 0.155 4 K 6,600 0.152 5 K 6,600 0.152 6 K 6,600 0.152 7 K 6,600 0.152 8 K 6,600 0.152 9 K 6,600 0.152 10 K 6,600 0.152 11 K 6,631 0.152 Lot Area Table Lot # Block # 5guoreFeet Acreage 11 a 6,781 0.156 12 a 6,634 0.152 13 a 6,634 0.152 14 a 6,634 0.152 15 a 6,634 0.152 16 Q 7,328 0.168 17 a 8,397 0.193 18 a 9,625 0.221 19 a 6,063 0.139 20 a 6,000 0.138 21 a 6,000 0.138 22 a 6,000 0.138 23 a 6,000 0.138 24 a 6,000 0.138 25 a 6,639 0.152 26 a 6,639 0.152 27 a 6,639 0.152 28 a 1 6,639 0.152 29 a 6,639 0.152 30 a 6,639 0.152 31 a 6,639 0.152 32 a 7,553 0.173 Open Space Area Table Lot # 51ock # Acres 1 X 0.054 2 X 0.087 3 X 1.023 4 X 3.136 5 X 0.061 6 X 0.053 7 X 0.106 8 X 0.055 9 X 0.678 10 X 4.056 11 X 0.714 12 X 0.387 13 X 0.366 14 X 0.339 15 X 0.041 Sheet 2 of 2 ,SPIRRS September 14, 2018 Mr. Joseph Johnson City of Anna - Public Works 3223 N. Powell Pkwy. Anna, Texas 75409 Re: Downstream Property Certification Pecan Grove Phase IV Anna,Texas SEI Project No.18-055 Dear Mr. Johnson: 765 CUSTER ROAD, SUITE 100 1 PLANO, TEXAS 75075 972.422,0077 1 FAX 972.422.0075 TBPE NO. F-2121 I TBPLS NO. F-10043100 Please allow this letter to serve as certification that Pecan Grove Phase IV has been designed in accordance with the drainage study done with Pecan Grove Phase II by Corwin Engineering and dated March 1, 2017, The study encompasses the Phase IV drainage area and proves that this development will not damage downstream property due to the development's impact on off -site drainage. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Spiars Engineering, Inc. Ian Graham, P.E. CC: Mr. Daniel Satsky Starlight Homes of Texas, LLC 1800 Valley View Lane, Suite 100 Farmers Branch, TX 75234 THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 5.g. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1 /8/2019 Approve a Resolution approving the Lakeview Estates Phase 3 Preliminary Plat. SUMMARY: The Lakeview Estates Phase 3 preliminary plat contains 16.828 acres located in the Joseph Sluter Survey, Abstract No. 856. This tract is located North of Lakeview Estates subdivision off Ferguson Rd and South of Rattan Elementary. The preliminary plat is for 56 residential lots, an open space lot, and one commercial lot. The tract was recently rezoned for a new Planned Development for the area for residential use and another for the commercial use of a Daycare. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a Resolution approving the Lakeview Estates Phase 3 Preliminary Plat. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution Preliminary Plat Location Map Upload Date Type 1 /3/2019 Resolution 1/3/2019 Exhibit 9/27/2018 Exhibit CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LAKEVIEW ESTATES PHASE 3. WHEREAS, In order to provide for the orderly development of land within the Anna city limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction, the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas (the "City Council") has adopted Part III -A of the Anna City Code of Ordinances ("Subdivision Regulations"); and WHEREAS, Douglas Properties, INC. has submitted an application for approval for the preliminary plat of the Lakeview Estates Phase 3; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. Recitals Incorporated. The recitals above are incorporated herein as if set forth in full for all purposes. Section 2. Approval of Preliminary Plat The City Council hereby approves the preliminary plat of Lakeview Estates Phase 3 attached hereto as Exhibit 1 with the following variances. 1. All knuckles will have a radius of 50' as shown on the plat. 2. Park Vista Drive is to have a parkway slope not to exceed 3:1 max; Park Vista shall not have a sidewalk within the north parkway. 3. Lot -to -Lot drainage to be allowed along rear yards of Block G. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas, on this 8t" day of January, 2019. ATTEST: APPROVED: City Secretary, Carrie L. Smith Mayor, Nate Pike uzute weszw000 rroressronor �ervrces, inc. IL e= G E= Ire O 5/8"IRON ROD WITH YELLOW CAP • STAMPED "WESTWOOD PS" SET FOUND MONUMENT POINT OF CURVATURE/ POINT OF TANGENCY U.E. UTILITY EASEMENT D.E. DRAINAGE EASEMENT R.O.W. RIGHT-OF-WAY VOL PG. VOLUME PAGE DATA TABLE SITE # OF SITES AREA RESIDENTIAL LOTS 56 10.222AC DAY CARE LOT 1 2.029AC COMMON AREA LOT 1 1.333AC RIGHT-OF-WAY 3.244AC TOTAL 16.828AC D.R.CCT DEED RECORDS, COLON COUNTY, TEXAS ' I PR.CCT. PLAT RECORDS, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS O.P.R.CCT. OFFICIAL PUBLICRECORDS• COLLIN 43 l / COUNTY, TEXAS SQ. SQUAREFEET �- / STREET NAME CHANGE LR.F. IRON ROD FOUND 44 / / VALE WSIBILITYAND ACCESS EASEMENT / / I POE PRIVA TE DRAINAGE EASEMENT I I ' I 1 45 17.42 ACRES I I LOT 1, BLOCK 1 SF VOL. 2006, PG.364 NE Line Table Line # Length Direction L16 16.85 NO2°04'58"E L17 35.36 S47°04'58"W L18 T102 N86°27'57"W L19 65.00 1,188°0445"W L20 60.22 S87°09'30"W L21 65.00 N88°0445"W L22 60.19 N83°18'50"W L23 6S.00 N88°04'45"W L24 64.97 N88°04'45"W L25 60.19 S87°09'29"W 126 65.21 N83°19'52"W L27 56.93 S89°32'36"W L28 58.20 N88°07'14"W L29 35.36 N42°55'02"W Curve Table Curve* Length Radius Delta Chord Bearing Chord Length C1 66.66 200.00 019°05'50' S 78°22'07' E 66.35 C2 78.40 50.00. 089°50'17" S47°00'06" W 70.61 C3 7868 50.00 090°09'43" N 42°59'54" W 70.81 C4 96.15 200.00 027°32'40" N 15°51'19" E 95.23 C5 101,75 200.00 029°08'54° S 15°03'12^ W 100.65 C6 39.20 25.00 089°50'17' N 47'00'06" E 35.31 C7 39.34 25.00 090°09'43" S42°59'S4"E 35.41 C8 254A6 2000.00 007"17'24" N 87'55'02" W 254.29 C9 19015 300TOO 003°38'42" S 86°05'41" E 190.92 CIO 190.85 3000.00 003°38'42" S 89°442Y E 190.82 CIL 1180 20DDO 003°40'05" N 0°34'55" E 12.80 C12 78.54 50.00 090°00'00" N 47°04'58" E 70.71 C13 3917 25.DO 090°00.00" I S 47°04.58" W 35.36 X \ \ SCALE 1" = 60' � � \ 0' 60' 120' P.RCCT. I I I 20- WATER LINE SSE 0 \ - - ANNA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL #2 ADDITION 'I,O r d 56 �-\\//� \ PERMANENT I IL VOL. 2006, PG. 364 10'UE VOL 2006, PG, 364 EASEMENT CHI'(NO %� \ \ 46 2U UTIUIYO& LANDSCA E E EMENT 30 U E VOL. P.R.C�6, PG. 364 P R.C.0 T P.R.0 CT. I � VOLP.RC.0 TG. 364 )OSEPP 55�C NS NO.O.BR�CC. �Z248710, \ \ APPROMMATE LOCA ON I 2006, CT P. CGL - - \ (L OF DETENTION STORAGE POOL EASEMENT ,. - a U7G3�, 15 6 � VOL 554, PG 425, _ / � v0V, 200, I SANRARYSEWERLI D.R.C.CT. / / PR«T 47 20�UEVOL 2006/PG 307.58'/ - zB9.7S880445E I I I / I6I9.66� - 1 OR. Q. o'� ��� � 9,953 .l. 1���'xzs vaE - - i - 112 1R.F. FOR EFERENCE 907 48 / i� o � � 4507' _6500' cD BS°o4as'w 77D RK 0,R.0. W. D0RlVE i / 93z1 y Q / j ^ 60.00' 6500' _Op,� Nr5EE 25X25VAE65.00' 44 Ie o u /. h / / OP N89°23'03"W 115.04' y �V� - $ g I 6500_ 10' U.E �.� _ - 6500' - + - _ - 54.2T 60.00' 44.93' �� ry W w r /11 9 I. b _ 6073' 91772 s.f, n ¢ e I 04 49 a v I 5 WME / I o o / o O b _ - / N / \ ti "i ZS' B.C. I u / 0 8,587s.f. v o L-285,,'W Z18.05' br h DS \ b h - - I Q > 14 I m o 8,1 a6f 78200�.f 3 24 ,m 73 \22 S 2I 3 3 �3 / N �I I zs zs Q¢rya \i q o�ro / G N ., ro- 3� w � � i N87°55'02 � o ' / BLOCKB N o o $ 20 $ ig 618 f goo :.f a 6,636.E m 7aso .f. e l W 11 m b m m / 7,050 s.f. 7,475 s.f. m 50 0I C 16 NI w / W $ $ $ $ iosas.f �BOOs.f. h 7,800s.f. 000 O LL _ I 88,366s.f. N o ry N I\ o $ 7,050/.$ / $ i$ s.f. m I ! s. h _ \ I O / 3 W 1 14 v 43 z 0 vo ti 8,I45 ; b 7670 f ,( Q� �� ° BLOCKS $ I N87°ss0z"w 11500 o 12 I ,I No �eW $ ry N wm'r � �E {/i - 2 L :F.= ^ _ - Z o--� -j m N M L18 / L19 0 L20 L21 zi L22 L26 /� Lz7 = i L18 I' I� Z I r rn N87°55'O2"W EVARWNCf 8.00'I O T tatww - _ 1 W a 44 s I v �3 N z4 zs o (l 51 y- n� �8,I42&f. -r.�6o O6 _ _ b9 E� LINE L13 L14 W Ul �p CCU - 9E- _ _ BL CKI / 1421NorE9 o aAW W` I wsnN� I N8755'OZ"W 115. I' I Zolg e N ti ry o,69 N bb ry /� /o N `/- N v ��ro'N IN N N Mt N ry -^t m _ __ 41 b o 7,670 s.f. - - �... h/ I or N 7� m / r. �✓ - - - _� `\J O $ �,v 'v br ... LOT IX, BLOCKG O .-, •�' ti 9 b -0 -p / �'.. ti TO BE OWNED AND H RESIDENCE O 0 3 3 i -� �n p om / O I Q 0.., y {MAINTAINED BV THE HOA o n ti N N87°55'02"W 118.00' W 52 {� TO BE REMOVED I ti `^ N m 2 7 m i ro i 3 7 Cacti ✓� ry IM Q m w 3 In 8,9398,148 s.f. h 7,sl4 s.f. `-n 8,094 s.f.:`-n 7,222 s.f. h G w 7 3 ,ems ��680=",�. IX v r U I. / o 12 - $I: I $ °°o $ g i 7,680 s.f. `^ ro R ro �\ o �3 3 ,3 m ll - vaHi z- O 15'B_L. �n ,k \ 8,625s.f h z5' 2s I // / N $ 7,832s.f. =� 7,597s.f V+ 8,398s.f. m N _ Z1' 3 13 0 2 HOA w rya �/ 15,8L J 10'UE.-- 19 ^ Y-- '� -� h o 9A 25'eL. o \ry -:$ / 3s./. ^ 7,3s2 s.f. `^ ro 9,263 s.f. 4.1 % o w ( ) 12.9ANDREACRES \ 15'B.L� - i / - H �b - _� _ o ry N .$ 826s.f. 7,670s.f. / e � 58,O58s.f. WILLWM R. &ANDREA M. HENRY V1 S88°56'17"W 116.8z' L=72.2 '. - INST. NO. 20100528000541220 3 !f �J % 1 x 53 0 ¢ m - - - 05 979s - us.00'- 9 L - - ' o - 1D'uE. =340' - 9 L-70.01' L=6504' L=54.21' L=65.0T L=6 .01 L_6501' _ - \ - 616 N8755'O2"W 118.00' LOCK G O.P.R.CCT. a l7 .. "1 ry 11 / P - \_ -\ O o- i m ^, / n zsxzs vAe ;!sxzs vAE \ -'V J 2329s' 25.00' ---�_ 4NPCY O.y C 60.74' T4 - - \E, r ti D \ 002 d 0 m Q 1 N87°Ss'02"W 25795, -" -\ 13 C10 ' / / O y'(9 2 $ �C8 BRE s0'R D, _. 54.14• s990' z776 L 487r I� �N m, -- '4� L 6503 v 1 0 I 0 z • wME t„=` 25'x25' VAE �, -� � 93 - _ NTFIE g I z cs RIVE'. ry 7,494 `� 588°56'17"W 11268'. / Cti 49.00' 6Z91' 1 �O W -A 587°5502T 131,9T.:-' 2sx s v b�q „/.9 0 54 n� - - - - 68.7z' S9.75_/ m - } z AI I / ' a L=19.48' - V6 - - - ,.C= 6.30'� _ L-64.67' _ L=63.78' L=4 - L=69 _ L=70- - C m. m e CI / V N87°55'02"W 12670' ¢ `^ o b m 2.93' 99' 10'U.f. %- - L=1770' .58' L=6279' `° I a N e i vl e I e N + L=1.5 L=629T _: (=573' q 4 Tl 1 W 2 0 V m 6,7865.). I ^i H / 16.85' O O i., I255' _ G-64.79' - ro o /Y5'H.Z�sryry .' -N - / - C 6317' 6985 C=14.40', ry ti ro 'S ^+ $ so Q .y 58.83' C=3076' -'lr b 67oy 669 m u ti W ry mry ro p .y ,� r. ZO' 3.24' N -'P M N ' - - 1, - ,-_ -- '-� �� •-, � �-ry ,- b, 25'B.L. ry, ti b� tia> I9,523 s/. S N �� 12�od I ELM .. N87%T208"W 118.27, o / .�1 30 :=3 a"F. IY a -3 2J 3 =" 3 3 ry m / °j / m'. y b nR/ �'� IIII Ib ( W Q O 8,634 s.(. 7,933 s.f. ro ."`n 8.190 Ev 2� '� m \ m +.aT m 7,183 s.1. b .6,741 s.f. `-^ N 'aa yN '.ry r y2wq'g - b '�' h' 6,500 s.f. o �� e m: ,h b 7,667s.f. !7,977sf. 23 / m ti N87°55'Oz"W 154.4T - - ti STREET P.O.B o �m $ 4r / 22 21 20 3 3 o a ., o ° O i ti ,a.I. 7,379s.f.:� 8,879s.f. ;ti M a.. 19 'ij° .,..yam Q 8,985 s.f. .<� 7IOO s.f. `x' v 16 �i /M M 2 o ry 7,760 s.f. � c 17 / I lr � m $. .-CY'+ o j' 7s61 s.f. 8,357 s.f. $ .j / Z1818' 7280' - 6200' ��,� / y, a 8,899 s.f. (p� 1�7'L .. -� _ --, 70.08'; E7.60' ,;! ��"� @@ i,- _ I,o ! `^ / �I el Ilsf ORNNAGE EASEMENT l0'U. /' OL �. - - �� - s5.30' ��^� s760N875 7060 ----'i 73:60' -� 6 s $ -8.7r _-.N _._ _ �66�� o, ,NST. No. S�Oe!�� - 6410' - _ - h O 20ll1004001331200 '' n VC, .2016 P I� VOL. 2016 PG.440 6830 `� - 0P RCCT P10 U-1 p.RCCT. 5'U.E -/ �,� 55� 65.00'> TO BE ABANDONED _ - 502 W I564.60 - 71:80' ��71.60'J 1071bo BY THIS PLAT - 8 zs. 1s / { BLOC w000EDARA z99a' I � .� 5' W&WME Q-7 '+VOL 2016, PG. 440 W I s <�_ 2 1 w I P.RC.C.T. ?� 1 III 2 III III II - _ va - ��I 01 s PDE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 mve I;'D.E. r CULVERT .. a r 5' PDE A 6.31 ACRES p BLOCK 3 VOL 2016, PG. 44p 1 10 SEE VOTES E VOL, 2016, P.R.CCL 5' PDE J 11 12 1.3 w iD V VOL. 2016, 14 ZS I NOTES - GRArETNL£r DUSTIN . &60727000 BONE c ° PG.. 440 CieI I PG 4Io 0 16 1o'.uE I INST. N0. 20160727000969820 �pp'y L P.R.C. - - - P.R.CCT. m pp'y O.P.R.C.C.T. '-Anna City Limits 4 _ _ o�" o _ _ - - - - - % - () IT zsxzs' VAE REM. 50.6597 ACRES 0 _ _ _ _ BLOOMFIELD HOMES LP Q� I /9.633 ACRES O 1ON�eo H 1 BRIDGEPORT DRIVE N INST. N0.20121002001246520 - - �p- - _ - - CITY OF ANNA -� Y\PS�G 50'R:O.W. - O.P.R.C.C.T. -� I / \ INST. NO. 20160627000809900 O SP O N O.P.RCCT. `e^ 6 S1PZ0QPV0 - - - ry I FUTURE LAKEVIEW ESTATES PHASE 2 / I A, O m m I F�N�.I,G16L'C (RECORDING PENDING) /// / / 44 � _ _ �h QO L' Off~ Qy� QyU � O I I 17 18 _ APPROAMATE LOCAnON of Q. O �w OOQ 1Z 1Z J I I VOL. 2016, I TIME-- - - �PERl EMA LOMR YEAR PD06�-31 36P, ryLD �y Z ,Yy4` ' In C vim. 5 PG. 440 I I Q 3 f - - / / DATED 04/16/18 I P.R.S.CT. L 100 ry�1D'Q W W O I I r r - -- O° I L/O O O' , , I �Q-1: Do o' I I 16 I 19 4 �I II I I I�--- � - 25' I I = W I 15 I 20 Symbol Legend Symbol Denotes O VARIANCES REQUESTED: SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE 25 LY STORM SEWER CULVERT 1. ALL KNUCKLES WILL HAV£A RADIUS OF STORM SEWER MANHOLE WW 50'ASSHOWNABOVE. ® TREE -DECIDUOUS L5 2 PARK VISTA DRIV£IS TOHAVEA TREE - CONIFEROUS PARKWAYSLOPE NOT TO EXCEED 3:1 STREET ROW 25' x 25' VISIBILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT (TYPICAL) VICINITY MAP co D.370 NOT TO SCALE Q ANNA N h F. M. 45; Subject @ Tract E tl ¢4 2 D. 367 V CO. + 5 CO. RD. 422 rt O O N CO. RD. 366 C . RD. 411 Line Table Line# Length Direction L1 275.82 NOl°39'56"W L2 136.91 NOl°27'42"W L3 S1.68 NO2°45'20"E L4 19.22 S13°16'50"W IS 110.00 S17°48'30"W L6 35.36 S47°W'5811W L7 29.63 S28°17'08"E L8 35.03 S55°47'13"W L9 35,36 S43°04'45"E L10 35.31 S47100TO611W 111 18.09 N40°40'20"W L12 9.41 N00°28'45"E L13 59.65 N88°04'58"W L14 70.35 N88°04'36"W L15 63A8 NOl°35.08"W MAX PARK VISTA SHALL NOT HAVEA SIDEWALK WITHIN THE NORTH PARKWAY. 3. LOT-TO-LOTDRAINAGETOBEALLOW£D ALONG REAR YARDS OF BLOCK G. GENERAL NOTES: I THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREONARE ORIENTED TO GRID NORTH, TEXAS STATE PLANE COORDINA TESYSTEM, NA083 TEXAS NORTH CENTRAL ZONE (4202) (2011). 2 ALL PERIMETER PLAT CORNERSARE MARKED WITH 518"IRON RODS WITH YELLOW PLAS77C CAP STAMPED "WESTWOOD PS" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ALL INTERIOR LOT CORN£RSARE MARKED WITH 1/2"IRON RODS WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "WESTWOOD PS". BLOCK CORNERS ARE MARKED WITH A 2"ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED "BLOCK #, TR MAR PHZ WESTWOOD PS,"(# REPRESENTS APPLICABLE BLOCK). 3. COORDINATES SHOWN ARE TEXAS STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH CENTRAL ZONE, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF1983 ON GRID COORDINATE VALUES, NO SCALEAND NO PROJECT70N. 4. SELLING A PORTION OFANYLOT/N TH15ADDMON BY METES AND BOUNDSISA VIOLATION OFSTATE LAWAND IS SUBJECT TO PENALTIES IMPOSED BY LAW. 5 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FLOOD ZONE LABELED"ZONEA"100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN ACCORDING TO FEMA FLOOD RATE MAP 48085CO155J EFFEC7IVEJUNE2, 2009 6 ANYAND ALL MAINTENCANCEOF HOA COMMONAREAS HOA LOTS, PRIVATE EASEMENTS, SCREEN WALL EASEMENTSAND WALL MAINTENANCE EASEMENT515 THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, ITS SUCCESSORS, AND ASSIGNS. THIS PLAT FILEO IN DOCUMENT Nc OWNER ANNA REALTY LLC, & P&R ANNA REALTY LLC 2328 HARRISBURG LANE PLANO, TEXAS 75025 PRELIMINARY PLAT DEVELOPER OF D ASPROPERTIES LAKEVIEW ESTATES, PHASE 3 2309309 KAVENUE SUITE 100 PLANO, TEXAS 75074 LOTS 9-1 6, BLOCK B, LOTS 17.32, BLOCK C; ENGINEER/SURVEYOR LOTS 1 X, 38-44,. BLOCK G; LOTS 1-26, BLOCK I; 56 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, 1 COMMON AREA LOT Westwood & 1 DAYCARE LOT Phone (214) 473-4MO 2740 Dallas Parkway, Suite 280 16.828 ACRES To1Free (888)937-5150 Plano, TX 75093 JOSEPH SCHLUTER SURVEY, ABSTRACT No. 856 vinswoodipLoam Westwood Profesda l Servlce; Im IN THE ------------ TREEFirmFirm Reg. N . 1007 CITY OF ANNA, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS TBPLS Firm Reg. No. 30074301 O. P. R. C. C. T. 16.828 ACRES JANUARY 03. 2019 Joe No. 006408.01 LAKEVIEW ESTATES, PHASE 3 2 Nr\0006408.01\dwg\Survey\0006408.01 Plot.d8 OWNER'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF TEXAS)( COUNTY OF COLUN )( OWNER'S DEDICATION STATE OF TEXAS)( COUNTY OF COLON)( kill :lr/ilillL0sli A IIfCarl l: STATE OF TEXAS)( COUNTY OF COLON )( WHEREAS, P Be R Anna Realty, LLC and Anna Realty, U.C. are the sole owners of a 16.828 acre tract of land situated in Collin County, Texas, being a part of the Joseph Schluter Survey, Abstract No. 856 and being all of the 9.736 acre tract of land conveyed to P & R Anna Realty, LLC by deed of record in Instrument No. 20170120000085920 of the Official Public Records of Collin County, Texas and all of the 7.076 acre tract of land conveyed to Anna Realty, LLC by deed of record in Instrument No. 20160801000991780 of the said Official Public Records; said 16.828 acre tract being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING, at a 112 inch iron rod found for corner in the east right-of-way line of South Ferguson Parkway (a 120' right-of-way); said point also being the southwest corner of said 9.736 acre tract, said point also being the northwest corner of Lot 8, Block B, Lakeview Estates Phase 1, an addition to the City of Anna according to the plat recorded in Volume 2016, Page 440, Plat Records of Collin County, Texas; THENCE, in a northerly direction, with the said east line of South Ferguson Parkway, the west line of said 9.736 acre tract and the west line of said 7.076 acre tract, the following calls: North 01 degree, 39 minutes, 56 seconds West, a distance of 275.82 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found at an angle point; said point also being the northwest corner of said 9.736 acre tract and the southwest corner of said 7.076 acre tract; North 01 degree, 27 minutes, 42 seconds West, a distance of 136.91 feet to a 5/8-inch iron rod with "WESTWOOD PS" cap set at an angle point; North 02 degrees, 45 minutes, 20 seconds East, a distance of 51.68 feet to a "+" cut in concrete found for corner; said point also being the northwest corner of said 7.076 acre tract and the southwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1, Anna Elementary School *2 Addition, an addition to the City of Anna, Texas according to the plat recorded in Volume 2006, Page 364 of the Plat Records of Collin County, Texas; THENCE, South 88 degrees, 04 minutes, 45 seconds East, departing the said east line of South Ferguson Parkway and with the common line between said 7.076 acre tract and said Lot 1, Block 1, at a distance of 1528.60 feet passing a 1/2 inch iron rod found, continuing in all a total distance of 1,619.66 feet to a point for corner in the west line of a 12.988 acre tract of land conveyed to William R. and Andrea M. Henry by deed of record in Instrument No. 201000528000541220 of said Official Public Records and in the approximate centerline of a creek said point also being the northeast corner of said 7.076 acre tract; THENCE, departing the said common line between a 7.076 acre tract and Lot 1, Block 1 and along the said west line of a 12.988 acre tract and said centerline of a creek, the following calls: South 11 degrees, 35 minutes, 13 seconds West, a distance of 199.56 feet to an angle point; said point also being the southeast corner of said 7.076 acre tract and the northeast corner of said 9.736 acre tract; South 13 degrees, 16 minutes, 50 seconds West, a distance of 19.22 feet to an angle point; South 17 degrees, 48 minutes, 30 seconds West, a distance of 110.00 feet to an angle point; South 12 degrees, 12 minutes, 17 seconds East, a distance of 151.25 feet to a point for corner; said point also being the northeast corner of a 9.633 acre tract of land conveyed to the City of Anna by deed of record in Instrument No. 20160627000809900 of said Official Public Records; THENCE, North 87 degrees, 55 minutes, 02 seconds West with the north line of said 9.633 acre tract of land, at a distance of 144.90 feet passing the northwest corner of said 9.633 acre tract and continuing with the north line of a 50.6597 acre tract of land conveyed to Bloomfield Homes LP by deed of record in Instrument No. 20121002001246520 of said Official Public Records, at a distance of 1,124.89 feet passing the northeast corner of Lot 4, Block C of said Lakeview Estates Phase 1 Addition, continuing with the north line of said Lakeview Estates Phase 1 Addition, a total distance of 1,564.60 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING containing 733,011 square feet or 16.828 acres of land. NOW, THEREFORE, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT, ANNA REALTY LLC, AND P & R ANNA REALTY LLC, THROUGH THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED OFFICER DOES HEREBY ADOPT THIS PLAT DESIGNATING THE HEREINABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY AS LAKEVIEW ESTATES, PHASE 3, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, AND DOES HEREBY DEDICATE TO THE PUBLIC USE FOREVER THE STREETS AND ALLEYS SHOWN THEREON; AND DOES HEREBY DEDICATE THE EASEMENT STRIPS SHOWN ON THE PLAT FOR MUTUAL USE AND ACCOMMODATION OF ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES DESIRING TO USE, OR USING SAME, NO BUILDINGS, FENCES, TREES, SHRUBS, OR OTHER IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OR PLACED UPON, OVER OR ACROSS THE EASEMENT STRIPS ON SAID PLAT. ANY PUBLIC UTILITY SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMOVE AND KEEP REMOVED ALL OR PART OF ANY BUILDINGS, FENCES, TREES, SHRUBS OR OTHER IMPROVEMENTS, OR GROWTHS, WHICH IN ANY WAY ENDANGER OR INTERFERE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OR EFFICIENCY OF ITS RESPECTIVE SYSTEM ON ANY OF THESE EASEMENT STRIPS, AND ANY PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANY SHALL AT ALL TIMES HAVE THE RIGHT OF INGRESS OR EGRESS TO AND FROM AND UPON ANY SAID EASEMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING, RECONSTRUCTING, INSPECTING, PATROLLING, MAINTAINING, AND ADDING TO OR REMOVING ALL OR PART OF ITS RESPECTIVE SYSTEM WITHOUT THE NECESSITY AT ANY TIME OF PROCURING THE PERMISSION OF ANYONE. WITNESS MY HAND THIS DAY OF 2019. BY: ANNA REALTY LLC BY: NAME TITLE BY. P & R ANNA REALTY LLC BY: NAME TITLE BEFORE ME, THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, ON THIS DAY PERSONALLY APPEARED KNOWN TO ME TO BE THE PERSON WHOSE NAME IS SUBSCRIBED TO THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING INSTRUMENT, AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE EXECUTED THE SAME FOR THE PURPOSES AND CONSIDERATION EXPRESSED AND IN THE CAPACITY THEREIN STATED. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE THIS —DAY OF 2019. NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS BEFORE ME, THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, ON THIS DAY PERSONALLY APPEARED KNOWN TO ME TO BE THE PERSON WHOSE NAME IS SUBSCRIBED TO THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING INSTRUMENT, AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE EXECUTED THE SAME FOR THE PURPOSES AND CONSIDERATION EXPRESSED AND IN THE CAPACITY THEREIN STATED. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE THIS —DAY OF 2019. NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT L JASON B. ARMSTRONG, A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, HAVE PLATTED THE ABOVE SUBDMSION FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY ON THE GROUND; AND THAT ALL LOT CORNERS, ANGLE POINTS, AND POINTS OF CURVE SHALL BE PROPERLY MARKED ON THE GROUND, AND THAT THIS PLAT CORRECTLY REPRESENTS THAT SURVEY MADE BY ME. THIS DAY OF , 2019. JASON B. ARMSTRONG REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR NO. 5557 BEFORE ME, THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, ON THIS DAY PERSONALLY APPEARED JASON B. ARMSTRONG KNOWN TO ME TO BE THE PERSON WHOSE NAME IS SUBSCRIBED TO THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING INSTRUMENT, AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE EXECUTED THE SAME FOR THE PURPOSES AND CONSIDERATION EXPRESSED AND IN THE CAPACITY THEREIN STATED. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE THIS _, DAY OF , 2019. NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS OWNER ANNA REALTY LLC, & P&R ANNA REALTY LLC 2328 HARRISBURG LANE PLANO, TEXAS 75025 DEVELOPER DOUGLAS PROPERTIES 2309 K AVENUE SUITE 100 PLANO, TEXAS 75074 ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Westwood Phone (214) 473-4640 2740 Dallas Parkway, Suite 280 Tdl Free (888)937-5150 Plano, TX 75093 waslwoodps m Wahxood Profee loml Services, Inc TBPE Firm Reg. No. 11756 TBPLS Firm Reg, No. 10074301 APPROVED THIS THE DAY OF , 2019. BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OFANNA, TEXAS MAYOR CTTYSECRETARY PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LAKEVIEW ESTATES, PHASE 3 LOTS 9-1 6, BLOCK B, LOTS 17-32, BLOCK C; LOTS 1 X, 38.44, BLOCK G; LOTS 1.26, BLOCK I; 56 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, 1 COMMON AREA LOT & 1 DAYCARE LOT 16.828 ACRES JOSEPH SCHLUTER SURVEY, ABSTRACT No. 856 IN THE CITY OF ANNA, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS THIS PLAT FILED IN DOCUMENT No. O.P.R. C. C.L 16.826 ACRES JANUARY 03, 2019 JOB No. 006408.01 LAKEVIEW ESTATES, PHASE N \0006408.01\dwg\Survey\0006408.01 P1at.dwg <i iiiiii IIIIIIIIIIII LL WYATT EARP BAMBOO DRRR m Y tl O J J 3 WHITE STREET (F.M. 455) SIT E PINE 0 TRAM 11 THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 5.h. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1 /8/2019 Approve a Resolution approving a site and landscape plan for Freedom Flex Car Wash located near the northwest corner of White St and Ferguson Pkwy, to the west of 7-Eleven (1510 W White St). SUMMARY: Christian Centeno has submitted a site and landscape for Freedom Flex Car Wash located to the West of the current 7-Eleven on the Northwest corner of White St and Ferguson Pkwy. The site is currently zoned with a Planned Development that allows all C-2 uses for the commercial tract. They are proposing a tunnel car wash with free vacuum stations and a full service/detailing options. Any additional utility and drainage comments will be addressed during the civil plan review. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a Resolution approving the Freedom Flex Car Wash site and landscape plan. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution Site Plan Landscape Plan Location Map Letter of I ntent Upload Date Type 1/3/2019 Resolution 1/3/2019 Exhibit 1/3/2019 Exhibit 10/16/2018 Exhibit 10/16/2018 Exhibit CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS APPROVING A SITE PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN OF FREEDOM FLEX CAR WASH. WHEREAS, In order to provide for the orderly development of land within the Anna city limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction, the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas (the "City Council") has adopted Part III-C of the Anna City Code of Ordinances ("Zoning Ordinance"); and WHEREAS, Christian Centeno has submitted an application for approval of a site plan and landscape plan of the Freedom Flex Car Wash; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. Recitals Incorporated. The recitals above are incorporated herein as if set forth in full for all purposes. Section 2. Approval of Site and Landscape Plan The City Council hereby approves the site and landscape plan of Freedom Flex Car Wash attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas, on this 8th day of January, 2019. ATTEST: APPROVED: City Secretary, Carrie L Smith Mayor, Nate Pike / \ HOUSES (ZONED: SF-1{ SINGLE FAM. RESIDENTIAL)LENNAR HOMES LAND AND CONSTRUC'TIOXALTD 11 624 ACRES 7 201e0614000766e90 S89003'2O"E 71 ' MA SSA _- ' rJ �LSS AREA �718 / — --25`W VVW ESMT. 0 0 - LS / I 12.5' _ c US AREA '(1) o I j- -- ------ ----- °p - 501 YAl I � II 15.2' �I 1 0 c I ( \ I I al vv F ( 200 30.0' I / AM1JA 4 COMMER A1. IACR J' ( �� ( EMAIND l o / I zoo lzofiooasz 100 I ED I 1.2y + �1 VACANT Im (ZONED: C-2; GENERAL COMME24.0 RCIAL) co pI -VACUUM SPC CD (TYP-) 5.0 A� 5.4 1 a / I 37.3¢ I I I I /2 / L — Rs0 20.0' R3 �5c Elm PROP. -114-1 r PH US AREA 1-, 5.0, kH IMS = .02• I EXISLI B" SSy s \ \ _ss�_a_ AREA i v EXIST. 8" WL ,...,-)708 // I C. -PAY STATIONS I / l / ANNA 455 ADDITION N- LOT 1, BLOCK A ( 126'ACRES Y07 I 2016/452 \ I � 0. I e1' 7-11 STORE/GAS STATION F !!! O (ZONED: C-2; GENERAL COMMERCIAL) 1 I I o ri I I I I I I II to F I w Irk �, Iw I� I I I I IQII 11 I El GRATE GRATE 1 yl I . I OLP --r \ EX _ - - PH 'I I - -EXIST. 12" WL DSCAPE B 1 I Fti- I _ _ 1/2 „ IR (OPR C ROP. 2" WM (DOM./CARWASH) O - o E- EXIST. 5 SW / / TBMI CONTROL LINE EXIST. 5' SW POB �- '$" CUT 131,670 L.F. TO VICTORIA FALLS DR. \ �\ INTERSECTION. � W. WHITE S+EET v CONC. \ \ \ t160 LF. TO S. FERGUSON PKWY— INTERSECTION. NOTE TO CONTRACTOR US AREA 9 7 a / A SS AND UTILITY ESMT'\ 2016-01060000161E 0 \ a (OPRCCT) / 9.0' A 11 \ / / 3 c 06 �- -25' FRON YA - -4.0' PROP. 1" WM (IRRI.) 713 / / 1 HOUSES (ZONED: SF-1; SINGLE FAM. RESIDENTIAL) CALL 811 AND ANY OTHER APPLICABLE UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. LOBSINGER & POTTS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, INC IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR KNOWING THE LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES OR DEPICTING EXACT LOCATIONS ON ALL DRAWINGS. THE LOCATION OF EXIST. UTILITIES ARE SHOWN AS APPROXIMATE ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES AS A RESULT OF FAILURE TO LOCATE AND PRESERVE EXIST. UTILITIES. REFERENCE NUMBER NOTES OPROP. HC PARKING AREA PER GRADING PLAN AND DETAILS THIS SET. O2 PROP. FIRE LANE STRIPING. (TYP.) O3 PROP. DUMPSTER W/ 7' TALL SCREENING PER ARCH. O4 PROP. MONUMENT SIGN BY OTHERS. OREMOVE EXIST. AREA DRAIN. CONSTR. PROP. 4'x4' GRATE INLET. O6 CONSTR. PROP. 5'x5' AREA DRAIN. 7 6' HIGH MASONRY SCREEN WALL PER CITY DETAILS & REQUIREMENTS. O8 PROP. MODULAR PET WASHING FACILITY PER ARCH. O9 PROP. 5' CURB INLET. SITE DATA TABLE: EXISTING ZONING: PD 709-2015 PROPOSED ZONING: NO CHANGE PROPOSED USE: BUILDING AREA: FLEX CARWASH WASH BUILDING NET = (4827 S.F.) WASH BUILDING UNDER ROOF = 5928 S.F. AFTER CARE CANOPY = 2105 S.F. P.O.S CANOPY = 831 S.F. TOTAL BUILDING COVERAGE = 8,864 S.F. LOT AREA: 56,400 S.F. COVERAGE: 15.7% FAR: 15.7% IMPERMOUS AREA: 40,608 S.F. 72.0% SITE LANDSCAPE 15.792 S.F. 28.0% 100 YEAR FLOODPWN/FLOODWAY N/A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF BLDG. = 35' EXTERIOR MASONRY CONTENT = 100% PARKING REQUIRED: 1:150 CARWASH MACHINE ( 4827s.1J 4.83 SPACES QUEUING REQUIRED 3 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED QUEUING 3 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED EMPLOYEE 5 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED VACUUM 24 SPACES ACCESSIBLE SPACES REQUIRED 1 SPACES ACCESSIBLE SPACES PROVIDED 1 SPACES OPERATIONAL PLAN FOR THE BUSINESS: HOURS OF OPERATION - WINTER DAILY - 7:ROAM- 7:OOPM HOURS OF OPERATION - SUMMER - DAILY 7:00AM-9:001`11 NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES - h6 EMPLOYEES NO LOUD MUSIC WILL BE ALLOWED DRAWING LEGEND - - PROPERTY LINE ADJOINING PROPERTY LINE PROP. EDGE OF PAVEMENT CURB LINE PROP. STRIPING - - - - - - - - - - EASEMENT/SETBACK LINES - - - - - - - - - - PROP. FIRE LANE - - - - 100 - - - - EXIST. CONTOUR LINE Mo PROP. CONTOUR LINE PROP. WATER LINE - - - - - - - - - - PROP. SS LINE f DIRECTIONAL FLOW ARROW (10) PARKING COUNT LABEL EXIST. EXISTING PROP. PROPOSED BFR PROP. BARRIER FREE RAMP RW RETAINING WALL TYP. TYPICAL HC HANDICAP T.A.S. TEXAS ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS MFR MANUFACTURER NORTH SITE PLAN EXHIBIT FOR: BENCHMARK 1 = ELEVATION = 712.23' "X" CUT AT THE MOST NORTHEASTERN CORNER OF AN STORM DRAIN INLET FREEDOM FLEX CARWASH ON THE NORTH SIDE ON W. WHITE STREET 44' +/— EAST OF THE GRAPHIC SCALE 1"=20' 1.29 ACRES SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THIS TRACT llxn SCALE N.T.S. A-288 OWNER/DEVELOPER: BENCHMARK 2= ELEVATION = 716.02' 0' 20' 30' 40' WARNER CHRISTIAN CENTENO F.T. DUFFAU SURVEY SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE RIM 15'+/— NORTH AND 40'+/— WEST OF THE 2169 FAIR HILL DR. THE CITY OF ANNA NORTHEAST CORNER OF THIS TRACT ALLEN, TX 75013 (469) 767-2396 COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS (VERIFY ALL BM'S WITH PROJECT SURVEYOR) 8.5x11 SCALE N.T.S. REVISION NUMBER REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION � N a �o W o r I N U] ;? � v � O � a-' toz V/ X a a Z w ULu H J U) w H m LLJ L0 W � a W w /rr-TT'-1z F� PROJECT M MANAGER LPSE DRAWN BY LPSE ISSUED FOR DATE 12/20/2018 PRELIMINARY THIS DOCUMENT IS FOR REVIEW ONLY AND MAY NOT BE USED FOR PERMIT, BIDDING OR CONSTRUCTION. JUSTIN S. BRAMMER, P.E. LICENSE NO.103431 DATE: DECEMBER20,2018 SHEET SP-1 I i I 5 _ I/2 z r, 1 I �^ l LENNAR HOMES OF TEXAS LAND AND CONSTRUCTION LTD 11.824 ACRES I i II I I L \ F1 �fff I _ J ( RIMS .ftH .02, �I 8&00' EE FER 30— _25`W WW ESMT. BER �A SOLID SOD, TYP. — _------ BBL QII1 so 715 50' REAR YARET I i I I 4- I1T BBL I I I I LP O ' OI O O tlD I / Q � w W ❑ O � 0 /2 I y�rS61Y61 r ETE PC 708 a � I4� �C. / I / / ANNA 455 ADDITTON LOT 1, BLOCK A 1.261 ACRES 787 2016/452 �O la'o O DO El GRATE I I / � I I I' I V INLET I l I ,I 1 I II BERMUDA SOLID .r� MI+_ CUT W. WHITE STREET GOING. GENERAL LAWN NOTES EROSION CONTROL AND SOIL PREPARATION: THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING TOP SOIL AT THE CORRECT GRADES. CONTRACTOR TO FINE GRADE AREAS TO REACH FINAL CONTOURS AS SPECIFIED PER CIVIL PLANS. ALL CONTOURS SHOULD ACHIEVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES. WATER SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO POOL IN ANY AREAS UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. EROSION FABRIC SUCH AS JUTE MATTING OR OPEN WEAVE TO BE USED WHERE NECESSARY TO PREVENT SOIL EROSION. ANY LOSS OF TOPSOIL OR GRASS DUE TO EROSION IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNTIL IT IS 100% ESTABLISHED. CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE ANY ROCKS 3W AND LARGER, STICKS AND DEBRIS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF TOPSOIL AND $OD. FOUR (4'1 OF TOPSOIL SHALL BE APPLIED TO AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION RECEIVING SOD. IF TOPSOIL IS NOT AVAILABLE ON SITE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TOPSOIL AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE. TOPSOIL SHALL BE FRIABLE, NATURAL LOAM, FREE OF ROCKS, WEEDS, BRUSH, CLAY LUMPS ROOTS TWIGS LITTER AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINANTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SOD UNTIL ACCEPTANCE. THIS SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO: MOWING, WATERING, WEEDING, CULTIVATING, CLEANING AND REPLACING DEAD OR BARE AREAS TO KEEP PLANTS IN A VIGOROUS. HEALTHY CONDITION, SOD SHALL BE REPLACED IF NECESSARY. SOLID SOD: SOLID SOD SHALL BE PLACED ALONG ALL IMPERVIOUS EDGES, AT A MINIMUM. THIS SHALL INCLUDE CURBS, WALKS, INLETS, MANHOLES AND PLANTING BED AREAS. SOD SHALL COVER OTHER AREAS COMPLETELY AS INDICATED BY PLAN. SOD SHALL BE STRONGLY ROOTED DROUGHT RESISTANT SOD, NOT LESS THAN 2 YEARS OLD, FREE OF WEEDS AND UNDESIRABLE NATIVE GRASS AND MACHINE CUT TO PAD THICKNESS OF 3/4" (+1/4"), EXCLUDING TOP GROWTH AND THATCH. PROVIDE ONLY SOD CAPABLE OF VIGOROUS GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT WHEN PLANTED. DO NOT INSTALL SOD IF IT IS DORMANT OR GROUND IS FROZEN. LAY $00 WITH TIGHTLY FITTING JOINTS, NO OVERLAPS WITH STAGGERED STRIPS TO OFFSET JOINTS. SOD SHALL BE ROLLED TO CREATE A SMOOTH EVEN SURFACE. SOD SHOULD BE WATERED THOROUGHLY DURING INSTALLATION PROCESS. SHOULD INSTALLATION OCCUR BETWEEN OCTOBER 1ST AND MARCH 1ST, SOD SHALL INCLUDE AN OVER -SEED OF ANNUAL RYE OR WINTER RYEGRASS AT A RATE OF FOUR POUNDS PER ONE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET FOR A GROWN -IN APPEARANCE. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE CONFORMANCE TO 4115.1) OF TITLE 7. PART XXIX. HORTICULTURE COMMISSION CHAPTER 1. M.T.T011VII 8:' SCARIFY SURFACE TO A MINIMUM OF 2" DEPTH PRIOR TO THE IMPORT TOPSOIL APPLICATION. TOP SOIL SHALL BE PLACED 2" IN DEPTH IN ALL AREAS TO BE SEEDED. CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY HIGH QUALITY IMPORTED TOPSOIL HIGH IN HUMAS AND ORGANIC CONTENT FROM A LOCAL SUPPLY. IMPORTED TOPSOIL SHALL BE REASONABLY FREE OF CLAY LUMPS, COARSE SANDS, STONES, ROOTS AND OTHER FOREIGN DEBRIS. IF INADEQUATE MOISTURE IS PRESENT IN SOIL, APPLY WATER AS NECESSARY FOR OPTIMUM MOISTURE FOR SEED APPLICATION. ALL SEED SHALL BE HIGH QUALITY, TREATED LAWN TYPE SEED AND IS FREE OF NOXIOUS GRASS SEEDS. THE SEED APPLICATION SHALL BE UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED ON THE AREAS INDICATED ON PLANS. HYDROMULCH WITH BERMUDA GRASS SEED AT RATE OF TWO POUNDS PER ONE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. IF INSTALLATION OCCURS BETWEEN OCTOBER 1ST AND APRIL 1ST, ALL HYDRRMULCH AREAS SHALL BE OVER -SEEDED WITH ANNUAL RYE GRASS AT A RATE OF FOUR POUNDS PER ONE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. CONTRACTOR TO RE-HYDROMULCH WITH BERMUDA GRASS AT THE END OF THE ANNUAL RYE GROWING SEASON. AFTER APPLICATION, NO EQUIPMENT SHALL OPERATE OVER APPLIED AREAS. WATER SEEDED AREAS IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION TO SATURATION. ALL LAWN AREAS TO BE HYDROMULCHED SHALL ACHIEVE 100% COVERAGE PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. CITY LABEL COMMON NAME SHADE TREES CE Cedar Elm SO Shumard Oak SHRUBS DBH Dwarf Burford Holly DY Dwarf Yaupon Holly NRS Nellie R Stevens Holly TS Texas Sage 'Thundercloud' SCIENTIFIC NAME Ulmus crassifolia Quemus shumam'if LANDSCAPE NOTES REFERENCE SITEWORK AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR INFORMATION NEEDED FOR LANDSCAPE WORK. COMPACTOR TO VERIFY AND LOCATE ALL PROPOSED AND EXISTING STRUCTURES. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE FOR ANY LAYOUT DISCREPANCIES OR ANY CONDITION THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THE INSTALLATION AS SHOWN. CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL 811 TO VERIFY AND LOCATE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES ON SITE PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHOULD BE NOTIFIED OF ANY CONFLICTS. F.11,6IINIM111719-1SW 51419Y1:GIp:1i9:PPIU19DIATINAtl:L.L1L111b9C1r1Nto] :15: LANDSCAPE ISLANDS SHALL BE CROWNED, AND UNIFORM THROUGHOUT THE SITE. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE GRADED SMOOTH TO ACHIEVE FINAL CONTOURS AS INDICATED ON PLAN WITH 3" OF TOPSOIL AND 3" OF COMPOST AND CONSISTENTLY BLENDED TO A DEPTH OF 0". ALL BEDS SHALL BE CROWNED TO ANTICIPATE SETTLEMENT AND ENSURE PROPER DRAINAGE. PLANTING AREAS AND SOD TO BE SEPARATED BY STEEL EDGING. EDGING TO BE GREEN IN COLOR AND A MINIMUM OF 3/16" THICK. EDGING SHALL BE STAKED FROM THE INSIDE OF BED. EDGING NOT TO BE MORE THAN 1/2" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. MULCH SHALL BE INSTALLED AT 1/2" BELOW THE TOPS OF SIDEWALKS AND CURBING. QUANTITIES ON THESE PLANS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY. THE SPACING OF PLANTS SHOULD BE AS INDICATED ON PLANS OR OTHERWISE NOTED. ALL TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL BE PLANTED PER DETAILS. CONTAINER GROWN PLANT MATERIAL IS PREFERRED HOWEVER BALL AND BURLAP PLANT MATERIAL CAN BE SUBSTITUTED IF NEED BE AND IS APPROPRIATE TO THE SIZE AND QUALITY INDICATED ON THE PLANT MATERIAL LIST. TREES SHALL BE PLANTED AT A MINIMUM OF 6' FROM ANY UTILITY LINE, SIDEWALK OR CURB. TREES SHALL ALSO BE 10 CLEAR FROM FIRE HYDRANTS. 4" OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH (2" SETTLED THICKNESS) SHALL BE PLACED OVER 4.1 OZ WOVEN, WEED BARRIER FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUAL WEED BARRIER FABRIC SHALL BE USED IN PLANT BEDS AND AROUND ALL TREES AND SHALL BE DE WITT'WEED BARRIER OR APPROVED EQUAL MULCH SHALL BE SHREDDED BARK OR RUBBER LANDSCAPE MULCH, PINE STRAW MULCH IS PROHIBITED. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE UNIT PRICING OF LANDSCAPE MATERIALS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PERMITS. IRRIGATION: IN THE ABSENCE OF AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM OR AREAS BEYOND THE COVERAGE LIMITS OF A PERMANENT IRRIGATION SYSTEM, CONTRACTOR SHALL WATER SOD TEMPORARILY BY ANY MEANS AVAILABLE TO DEVELOP ADEQUATE GROWTH. TURF SHALL BE IN 100% ESTABLISHMENT AT THE TIME OF ACCEPTANCE. ALL PLANTING BEDS SHALL HAVE AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM WITH A FREEZERAIN SENSOR. SYSTEM SHALL ALSO HAVE AN Er WEATHER BASED CONTROLLER AND BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED BY A LICENSED IRRIGATOR. MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS: VEGETATION SHOULD BE INSPECTED REGULARLY TO ENSURE THAT PLANT MATERIAL IS ESTABLISHING PROPERLY AND REMAINS IN A HEALTHY GROWING CONDITION APPROPRIATE FOR THE SEASON. IF DAMAGED OR REMOVED, PLANTS MUST BE REPLACED BY A SIMILAR VARIETY AND SIZE. MOWING, TRIMMING, EDGING AND SUPERVISION OF WATER APPLICATIONS SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNTIL THE OWNER OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE ACCEPTS AND ASSUMES REGULAR MAINTENANCE ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHOULD BE CLEANED AND KEPT FREE OF TRASH, DEBRIS. WEEDS AND OTHER MATERIAL. 11GYN4I1Wa0 1S111PyW/T!940T.0%: STEEL EDGING SHALL BE 3/16" X4 X 16' DARK GREEN DURAEDGE STEEL LANDSCAPE EDGING. Ilex comuta 'Burford Nana' Ilex vomitorfa 'Nana' lllex x Nellie R. Stevens' Leucophyllum fmtescens 'Thundercloud' SIZE NOTES 3" cal. 12' ht., 4'spread, matching 3" cal. 12' ht., 5' spread 36" ht full, 20" spread, 36" o.c. 5 gal. full, 24" sprd, 24" o.c. 7 gal. full, 40" B.G. 5 gal. full, 24" sprd, 30" o.c. BBL Big Blue Lidope Lidope muscad 'Big Blue' 1 gal. full, 1a" O.C. Bermuda Solid Sod Cynodon dacty/on Plant list is an aid to bidders only. Contractor shall verify all quantities on plan. All heights and spreads are minimums. Trees shall have a strong central leader and be of matching specimens. All plant material shall meet or exceed remarks as indicated. 1. At least 15% of the street yard shall be permanent landscape area. 2. 10% of the entire site shall be devoted to living landscape which shal include grass, groundcover, plants, shrubs or trees. 3. One large tree, 3 inch caliper, shall be provided per 40 linear feet of street frontage. 4. Al least 75% of the frontage of parking lots adjacent to the public ROW shall be screened from public streets with evergreen shrubs attaining a height of 3'. 5. Evergreen shrubs (acceptable for 6' screening) shall be provided around dumpster screening wall. Site area: 1.29 acres (56,192 s.f.) N. White Street: 188 I.f. REQUIRED PROVIDED 2,323 s.f. (15%) 5,877 s.f. 5,619 s.f. (10%) 19,787 s.f. (35%) 5 trees, 3" cal 5 trees, 3" cal. screen screen dumpster screen dumpster screen 1. 8 square feet of landscape shall be provided per parking space. 2. One tree shall be within 65' of every parking space. 3. One tree shall be planted for every 10 parking spaces with parking lots more than 20 spaces. parking spaces: 33 REQUIRED PROVIDED 264 s.f. 1,524 s.f. 3 shade trees, 3" cal. 3 shade trees, 3" cal. GRAPHIC SCALE 0 20 40 FEET N Scale 1"=20' - 0" REVISION NUMBER REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION N rn I --I ip O ,n N r k Eo- cb v N ai W� x S~ � � W W n Cd l� V M O Obi O Y N � Go Go V Y � O o N dA � VI M y.y Cn O N x �x z z a f--' U W nW Cl) L w LU Q L ra UF+I 5 7� OO QUr) z Z W PROJECT R MANAGER AWR DRAWN BY AWR ISSUED FOR DATE 12/3/18 Q�O\,W� R/��Cy+ .IJ. ¢ m rn On N,X 275A P� SHEET L1.01 SECTION 32 9300. LANDSCAPE PART 1-GENERAL 1.1 QUALIFICATIONS OF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. A. ALL LANDSCAPE WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A SINGLE FIRM SPECIAUZING IN LANDSCAPE PLANTING 1.2 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS A. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS, NOTES, AND DETAILS FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS 1.3 SCOPE OF WORK / DESCRIPTION OF WORK A. WORK COVERED BY THESE SECTIONS INCLUDES THE FURNISHING AND PAYMENT OF ALL MATERIALS, LABOR, SERVICES, EQUIPMENT, LICENSES. TAXES AND ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR THE EXECUTION, INSTALLATION AND COMPLETION OF ALL WORK, SPECIFIED HEREIN AND / OR SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS, NOTES, AND DETAILS. B. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, CODES AND REGULATIONS REQUIRED BY AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH WORK, INCLUDING ALL INSPECTIONS AND PERMITS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN SUPPLY, TRANSPORTATION AND INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. C. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES (WATER, SEWER, ELECTRICAL, TELEPHONE, GAS, CABLE, TELEVISION, ETC.) PRIOR TO THE START OFANYWORK D. FURNISH ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, AND SERVICES NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ALL WORK, COMPLETE IN PLACE AS SHOWN AND SPECIFIED. WORK SHOULD INCLUDE: E. PLANTING OF TREES, SHRUBS AND GRASSES A. SEEDING B. BED PREPARATION AND FERTILIZATION C. WATER AND MAINTENANCE UNTIL FINAL ACCEPTANCE D. WORK GUARANTEE 1.4 REFERENCES A. AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (ANSI) Z60.1 - NURSERY STOCK B. TEXAS STATE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE C. TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN, GRADES AND STANDARDS 1.5 SUBMITTALS A. PROVIDE REPRESENTATIVE QUANTITIES OF EACH SOIL, MULCH, BED MIX, GRAVEL AND STONE BEFORE INSTALLATION. SAMPLES TO BE APPROVED BY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE BEFORE USE. B. SOIL AMENDMENTS AND FERTILIZERS SHOULD BE RESEARCHED AND BASED ON THE SOILS IN THE AREA. C. BEFORE INSTALLATION, SUBMIT DOCUMENTATION THAT PLANT MATERIALS ARE AVAILABLE AND HAVE BEEN RESERVED. FOR ANY PLANT MATERIAL NOT AVAILABLE, SUBMIT REQUEST FOR SUBSTITUTION. 1.6 JOB CONDITIONS, DELIVERY, STORAGE AND HANDLING A. GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE WORK BEFORE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO COMMENCE. ALL PLANTING BED AREAS SHALL BE LEFT THREE INCHES BELOW FINAL GRADE OF SIDEWALKS, DRIVES AND CURBS. ALL AREAS TO RECEIVE SOLD SOD SHALL BE LEFT ONE INCH BELOW THE FINAL GRADE OF WALKS, DRIVES AND CURBS. CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED PRIOR TO LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR BEGINNING WORK. B. ALL PACKAGED MATERIALS SHALL BE SEALED IN CONTAINERS SHOWING WEIGHT, ANALYSIS AND NAME OF MANUFACTURER. ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM DETERIORATION IN TRANSIT AND WHILE STORED ON SITE. C. DELIVER PLANT MATERIALS IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. PLANT MATERIALS SHOULD BE INSTALLED ON THE SAME DAY AS DELIVERED. IF PLANTING CANNOT BE INSTALLED ON THE SAME DAY, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PROTECTION TO MAINTAIN PLANTS IN A NOTE: TREE STAKE SOLUTIONS OR SIMILAR PRODUCTS SHOULD BE USED. INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. TREE STAKE SOLUTIONS CONTACT: JEFF TULEY AT 903S76.6143 HEALTHY, VIGOROUS CONDITION. D. STORE PLANT MATERIALS IN SHADE, PROTECT FROM FREEZING AND DRYING. E. KEEP PLANT MATERIALS MOIST AND PROTECT FROM DAMAGE TO ROOT BALLS, TRUNKS AND BRANCHES. F. PROTECT ROOT BALLS BY HEELING WITH SAWDUST OR OTHER MOISTURE RETAINING MATERIAL IF NOT PLANTED WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DELIVERY. G. NOTIFY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OF DELIVERY SCHEDULE 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE. H. FOR BALLED AND BURLAPPED PLANTS - DIG AND PREPARE SHIPMENT IN A MANNER THAT WILL NOT DAMAGE ROOTS, BRANCHES, SHAPE, AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. L CONTAINER GROWN PLANTS - DELIVER PLANTS IN CONTAINER TO HOLD BALL SHAPE AND PROTECT ROOT MASS. J. STORAGE OF ALL MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT WILL BE AT THE RISK OF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. OWNER WILL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THEFT OR DAMAGE. 1.7 SEQUENCING A. INSTALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND LINER STOCK PLANT MATERIALS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF LAWN/SOLID SOD. B. WHERE EXISTING TURF AREAS ARE BEING CONVERTED TO PLANTING BEDS, THE TURF SHALL BE CHEMICALLY ERADICATED TO MINIMIZE RE -GROWTH IN THE FUTURE. AREAS SHALL BE PROPERLY PREPARED WITH AMENDED ORGANIC MATTER. 1.8 WARRANTIES PERIOD, PLANT GUARANTEE, REPLACEMENTS A. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF (2) COPIES OF RECORD DRAWINGS TO THE OWNER UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. A RECORD DRAWING IS A RECORD OF ALL CHANGES THAT OCCURRED IN THE FIELD AND THAT ARE DOCUMENTED THROUGH CHANGE ORDERS ADDENDA OR CONTRACTOR/CONSULTANT DRAWING MARKUPS. B. FURNISH WRITTEN WARRANTY THAT PLANT MATERIALS WILL BE IN A HEALTHY, VIGOROUS GROWING CONDITION FOR ONE YEAR (TWELVE MONTHS) AFTER FINAL ACCEPTANCE. DAMAGE DUE TO ACTS OF GOD, VANDALISM, OR NEGLIGENCE BY OWNER IS EXCLUDED. C. REPLACE DEAD, UNHEALTHY, AND UNSIGHTLY PLANT MATERIAL WITHIN WARRANTY PERIOD UPON NOTIFICATION BY OWNER OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. PLANTS USED FOR REPLACEMENT SHALL BE OF THE SAME SIZE AND KIND AS THOSE ORIGINALLY PLANTED OR SPECIFIED. D. THE OWNER AGREES THAT FOR THE ONE YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD TO BE EFFECTIVE, HE WILL WATER PLANTS AT LEAST TWICE A WEEK DURING DRY PERIODS. E. NOTIFY OWNER OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THE WARRANTY PERIOD. A. REMOVE DEAD, UNHEALTHY AND UNSIGHTLY PLANTS B. REMOVE GUYING AND STAKING MATERIALS. 1.9 MAINTENANCE A. MAINTAIN PLANT LIFE AND PLANTING BEDS IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLACEMENT AND FOR MINIMUM 30 DAYS AFTER FINAL ACCEPTANCE. B. ALL LANDSCAPE MUST BE MAINTAINED AND GRASS MOWED/EDGED ON A WEEKLY SCHEDULE UNTIL ACCEPTANCE BY OWNER. C. REPLACE DEAD OR DYING PLANTS WITH PLANTS OF SAME SIZE AND SPECIES AS SPECIFIED, D. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS, AND LITTER. WATER, PRUNE, RESTAKE TREES, FERTILIZE, WEED AND APPLY HERBICIDES AND FUNGICIDES AS REQUIRED. E. REMOVE CLIPPINGS AND DEBRIS FROM SITE PROMPTLY. F. COORDINATE WITH OPERATION OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO ENSURE THAT PLANTS ARE ADEQUATELY WATERED. HAND WATER AREAS NOT RECEIVING ADEQUATE WATER FROM AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM. G. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MAINTENANCE SERVICE TO ENSURE THE SYSTEM IS IN PROPER WORKING ORDER WITH SCHEDULING ADJUSTMENTS BY SEASON TO MAXIMIZE WATER CONSERVATION. H. RESET SETTLED PLANTS HOLE TREE U-BRACKET ON SAFETY STAKE SAFETY STAKE TREE TRUNK; PLACE RING CENTERED WITH THE TRUNK OFTHETREE NAILSTAKES ROOTBALL TREE SHALL CONFORM TO AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERYSTOCK �SAFETY STAKE U-BRACKET ON SAFETY STAKE I. REAPPLY MULCH TO BARE AND THIN AREAS. J. SHOULD SEEDED AND/OR SODDED AREAS NOT BE COVERED BY AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WATERING THESE AREAS AND OBTAINING A FULL, HEALTHY STAND OF GRASS AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. K. TO ACHIEVE FINAL ACCEPTANCE AT THE END OF THE MAINTENANCE PERIOD, ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST OCCUR: a. THE LANDSCAPE SHALL SHOW ACTIVE, HEALTHY GROWTH (WITH EXCEPTIONS MADE FOR SEASONAL DORMANCY). ALL PLANTS NOT MEETING THIS CONDITION SHALL BE REJECTED AND REPLACED BY HEALTHY PLANT MATERIAL PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. b. ALL HARDSCAPE SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. c. SODDED AREAS MUST BE ACTIVELY GROWING AND MUST REACH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 1 1/2 INCHES BEFORE FIRST MOWING. HYDROMULCHED AREAS SHALL SHOW ACTIVE, HEALTHY GROWTH. BARE AREAS LARGER THAN TWELVE SQUARE INCHES MUST BE RESODDED OR RESEEDED (AS APPROPRIATE) PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. ALL SODDED TURF SHALL BE NEATLY MOWED. 1.10 QUAUTY ASSURANCE A. COMPLY WITH ALL FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY AND LOCAL REGULATIONS GOVERNING LANDSCAPE MATERIALS AND WORK. B. EMPLOY PERSONNEL EXPERIENCED AND FAMILIAR WITH THE REQUIRED WORK AND SUPERVISION BY A FOREMAN. C. DO NOT MAKE PLANT MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS. IF THE LANDSCAPE MATERIAL SPECIFIED IS NOT READILY AVAILABLE, SUBMIT PROOF TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ALONG WITH THE PROPOSED MATERIAL TO BE USED IN LIEU OF THE SPECIFIED PLANT. D. OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE SHALL INSPECT ALL PLANT MATERIAL AND RETAINS THE RIGHT TO INSPECT MATERIALS UPON ARRIVAL TO THE SITE AND DURING INSTALLATION. THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE MAY ALSO REJECT ANY MATERIALS HE/SHE FEELS TO BE UNSATISFACTORY OR DEFECTIVE DURING THE WORK PROCESS. ALL PLANTS DAMAGED IN TRANSIT OR AT THE JOB SITE SHALL BE REJECTED. PART2-PRODUCTS 2.1 PLANT MATERIALS A. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE CERTIFIED IN ACCORDANCE THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK. B. ALL TREES SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM SOURCES WITHIN 200 MILES OF THE PROJECT SITE, AND WITH SIMILAR CLIMACTIC CONDITIONS. C. PLANTS SHALL CONFORM TO THE MEASUREMENTS SPECIFIED, EXCEPT THE PLANTS LARGER THAN THOSE SPECIFIED MAY BE USED. USE OF LARGER PLANTS SHALL NOT INCREASE THE CONTRACT PRICE. D. WHERE MATERIALS ARE PLANTED IN MASSES, PROVIDE PLANTS OF UNIFORM SIZE. E. PLANT SCHEDULE ON DRAWING IS FOR CONTRACTOR'S INFORMATION ONLY AND NO GUARANTEE IS EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED THAT QUANTITIES THEREIN ARE CORRECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE INCLUDED IN HIS OR HER BID. F. SHALL BE FREE OF DISEASE, INSECT INFESTATION, DEFECTS INCLUDING WEAK OR BROKEN LIMBS, CROTCHES, AND DAMAGED TRUNKS, ROOTS OR LEAVES, SUN SCALD, FRESH BARK ABRASIONS, EXCESSIVE ABRASIONS, OBJECTIONABLE DISFIGUREMENT, INSECT EGGS AND LARVAE. G. ALL PLANTS SHALL EXHIBIT NORMAL GROWTH HABITS, VIGOROUS, HEALTHY, FULL, WELL BRANCHES, WELL ROOTED, PROPORTIONATE AND SYMMETRICAL. H. ROOT SYSTEMS SHALL BE HEALTHY, DENSELY BRANCHED, FIBROUS ROOT SYSTEMS, NON -POT-BOUND, FREE FROM ENCIRCLING AND/OR GIRDLING ROOTS, AND FREE FROM ANY OTHER ROOT DEFECTS (SUCH AS J-SHAPED ROOTS). I. ANY PLANT DEEMED UNACCEPTABLE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND SHALL BE REPLACED WITH AN ACCEPTABLE PLANT OF LIKE TYPE AND SIZE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S OWN EXPENSE. ANY PLANTS APPEARING TO BE UNHEALTHY, EVEN IF DETERMINED TO STILL BE ALIVE, SHALL NOT BE ACCEPTED. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE SHALL BE THE SOLE JUDGES AS TO THE ACCEPTABILITY OF PLANT MATERIAL. J. ALL TREES SHALL BE STANDARD IN FORM, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. TREES WITH CENTRAL LEADERS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF LEADER IS DAMAGED OR REMOVED. PRUNE ALL DAMAGED TWIGS AFTER PLANTING K. TREE TRUNKS TO BE STURDY, EXHIBIT HARDENED SYSTEMS AND VIGOROUS AND FIBROUS ROOT SYSTEMS, NOT ROOT OR POT BOUND. L. TREES WITH DAMAGED OR CROOKED LEADERS, BARK ABRASIONS, SUNSCALD, DISFIGURING KNOTS, OR\INSECT DAMAGE WILL BE REJECTED. M. CALIPER MEASUREMENTS FOR STANDARD (SINGLE TRUNK) TREES SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: SIX INCHES ABOVE THE ROOT FLARE FOR TREES UP TO AND INCLUDING FOUR INCHES IN CALIPER, AND TWELVE INCHES ABOVE THE ROOT FLARE FOR TREES EXCEEDING FOUR INCHES IN CALIPER N. MULTI -TRUNK TREES SHALL BE MEASURED BY THEIR OVERALL HEIGHT, MEASURED FROM THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL. O. ANY TREE OR SHRUB SHOWN TO HAVE EXCESS SOIL PLACED ON TOP OF THE ROOT BALL SO THAT THE ROOT FLARE HAS BEEN COMPLETELY COVERED, SHALL BE REJECTED. P. SOD: PROVIDE WELL -ROOTED SOD OF THE VARIETY NOTED ON THE PLANS. SOD SHALL BE CUT FROM HEALTHY, MATURE TURF WITH SOIL THICKNESS OF 3/4' TO 1". EACH PALLET OF SOD SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY A CERTIFICATE FROM SUPPLIER STATING THE COMPOSITION OF THE SOD. 2.2 ACCESSORIES/MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS A. MULCH - DOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH, PARTIALLY DECOMPOSED BY LIVING EARTH TECHNOLOGIES OR APPROVED SUBSTITUTE. MULCH SHOULD BE FREE OF STICKS, STONES, CLAY, GROWTH AND GERMINATION INHIBITING INGREDIENTS. B. FERTILIZER - COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER CONTAINING 10-20-10 OR SIMILAR ANALYSIS. C. SOIL PREPARATION - SHALL BE FERTILE, LOAMY SOIL. ORGANIC MATTER SHALL ENCOMPASS BETWEEN 3% AND 10% OF THE TOTAL DRY WEIGHT, SOIL SHALL BE FREE FROM SUBSOIL, REFUSE, ROOTS, HEAVY OR STIFF CLAY, STONES LARGER THAN 1', NOXIOUS WEEDS, STICKS, BRUSH, LITTER AND OTHER SUBSTANCES. IT SHOULD BE SUITABLE FOR THE GERMINATION OF SEEDS AND THE SUPPORT OF VEGETATIVE GROWTH. THE PH VALUE SHOULD BE BETWEEN 4 AND 7. CLAY BETWEEN I5%AND 25% SILT BETWEEN I5%AND 25% SAND LESS THAN 50% GRAVEL LESS THAN 10% D. EXISTING TOPSOIL- MAY BE USED IF IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE IMPORTED TOPSOIL OR IF APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. TOPSOIL SHALL NOT BE STRIPPED, TRANSPORTED OR GRADED IF MOISTURE CONTENT EXCEEDS FIELD CAPACITY. TOPSOIL STOCKPILES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM EROSION OR CONTAMINATION. E. ALL NEW TURF AREAS LOCATED ON THE FRONT, SIDES, REAR, AND INSIDE THE FIRE LANE SHALL BE SODDED AND SHALL BE AMENDED WITH QUALITY TOPSOIL AT A MINIMUM DEPTH OF FOUR INCHES. F. STEEL EDGING - SHALL BE 3/16" X 4" X 16" DARK GREEN LANDSCAPE EDGING. G. TREE STAKING - TREE STAKING SOLUTIONS OR APPROVED SUBSTITUTE; REFER TO DETAILS. H. FILTER FABRIC - MIRAFI 1405 BY MIRAFI INC. OR APPROVED SUBSTITUTE I. SAND- UNIFORMLY GRADED, WASHED, CLEAN, BANK RUN SAND. SHRUBS OR GROUNDCOVER AS SPECIFIED ON PLAN TOP OF MULCH SHOULD BE, , AT MINIMUM, 1/2' BELOW,C7. 77 ; 7 LAYER OF MULCH. WALK OR CURBING NN°° _r1 G R G nn 1 SETTLED THICKNESS CURB OR SIDEWALK, a -J-Jm g • ' ; (,TI4,L ' ,, LR4 SHOULD BE T MIN. NO STEEL EDGING % P Y. - -'ice �' L ^' V 70 G ��% ROOT BALL, DO NOT ALONG . _OQ"L L,D `J �� NF�''UC W /JJJ-�- L • 4/ h WEED BARRIER FABRIC SP� � s �" ill"MPXIMM SHRUB PLANTING r4" MULCH OVER WEED BLOCK / CREATING A4"DEEP SAUCER nr. cenr,ur. NAIL STAKE INSTALLED FIRMLY INTO GROUND FLUSH WITH'U" BRACKET, DO NOT INSTALL INTO ROOTBALL (FINISH GRADE PIT TO BE AT LEAST 2 TIMES THE DIA OF ROOT BALL. TREE TO BE CENTERED IN HOLE AND REST ON NATIVE SOIL BACK FILL / PLANTING SOIL MIX. TILL IN FOOTBALL: REMOVE BURLAP AND SOP FROM TOP} OF THE BALL. PLACE TOP OF ROOT BALL MIN. V - MAX. 2' ABOVE GRADE MIX. TILL IN WITH PARTS EXCLUDING LARGE CLODS AND ROCKS. REF. LANDSCAPE UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE / NATIVE SOIL BACK OF CURB ER 2V MIN. SETBACK FOR SHRUBS 8 GROUNDCOVERS ALONG BACK OF CURB TO ALLOW FOR CAR OVERHANG J. DECOMPOSED GRANITE - BASE MATERIAL OF NATURAL MATERIAL MIX OF GRANITE AGGREGATE NOT TO EXCEED 1/8" IN DIAMETER. K. RIVER ROCK - LOCALLY ARIZONA RIVER ROCK BETWEEN 2"4" IN DIAMETER. L. PRE -EMERGENT HERBICIDES: ANY GRANULAR, NON -STAINING PRE -EMERGENT HERBICIDE THAT IS LABELED FOR THE SPECIFIC ORNAMENTALS OR TURF ON WHICH IT WILL BE UTILIZED. PRE -EMERGENT HERBICIDES SHALL BE APPLIED PER THE MANUFACTURER'S LABELED RATES. PART 3-EXECUTION 3.1 PREPARATION A. BEFORE STARTING WORK THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT THE GRADE OF ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS ARE WITHIN +/-O.1' OF FINISH GRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER IMMEDIATELY SHOULD ANY DISCREPANCIES EXIST. B. SOIL TESTING: A. AFTER FINISH GRADES HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED, CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE SOIL SAMPLES TESTED BY AN ESTABLISHED SOIL TESTING LABORATORY FOR THE FOLLOWING: SOIL TEXTURAL CLASS, GENERAL SOIL FERTILITY, PH, ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT, SALT (CEC), LIME, SODIUM ADSORPTION RATIO (BAR) AND BORON CONTENT. EACH SAMPLE SUBMITTED SHALL CONTAIN NO LESS THAN ONE QUART OF SOIL. B. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO SUBMIT THE PROJECTS PLANT LIST TO THE LABORATORY ALONG WITH THE SOIL SAMPLES. C. THE SOIL REPORT PRODUCED BY THE LABORATORY SHALL CONTAIN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING (AS APPROPRIATE): GENERAL SOIL PREPARATION AND SACKFUL MIXES, PRE -PLANT FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS, AND ANY OTHER SOIL RELATED ISSUES. THE REPORT SHALL ALSO PROVIDE A FERTILIZER PROGRAM FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD AND FOR LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE. C. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL SOIL AMENDMENTS AND FERTILIZERS PER THE SOILS REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS. ANY CHANGE IN COST DUE TO THE SOIL REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS, EITHER INCREASE OR DECREASE, SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER WITH THE REPORT D. IF WEEDS ARE GROWING IN PLANTING AREAS, APPLY HERBICIDE RECOMMENDED BY MANUFACTURER AND APPLIED BY AN APPROVED LICENSED APPLICATOR. ALLOW WEEDS TO DIE, AND THEN GRUB OUT ROOTS TO A MINIMUM OF 1/2 INCH DEPTH. E. PREPARE NEW PLANTING BEDS BY TILLING EXISTING SOIL TO A DEPTH OF SIX INCHES PRIOR TO PLACING COMPOST AND FERTILIZER. ADD SIX INCHES OF COMPOSE AND TILL INTO A DEPTH OF SIX INCHES OF THE TOPSOIL. F. POSITION TREES AND SHRUBS AS DESIGNED ON PLAN. OBTAIN OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE'S APPROVAL PRIOR TO PROCEEDING. G. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF 2 INCH LAYER OF MULCH (SETTLED THICKNESS). 3.2 EXCAVATING A. EXCAVATE PITS FOR PLANTING. TREE PITS SHALL BE LARGE ENOUGH TO PERMIT THE HANDLING OF THE ROOT BALL WITHOUT DAMAGE TO THE ROOTS. TREES SHALL BE PLANTED AT A DEPTH THAT WHEN SETTLED, THE CROWN OF THE PLANT SHALL BEAR THE SAME RELATIONSHIP TO THE FINISH GRADE AS IT DID TO THE SOIL SURFACE IN ORIGINAL PLACE OF GROWTH. B. TREE PITS PERCOLATION TEST: FILL PIT WITH WATER AND ALLOW TO STAND FOR 24 HOURS. IF PIT DOES NOT DRAIN, THE TREE NEEDS TO BE MOVED TO ANOTHER LOCATION OR HAVE DRAINAGE ADDED. C. SHRUB AND TREE PITS SHALL BE NO LESS THAN 24' WIDER THAN THE ROOT BALL AND 6" DEEPER THAN ITS VERTICAL DIMENSION. HOLES SHOULD BE ROUGH, NOT SMOOTH OR GLAZED. 3.3 PLANTING A. REMOVE NURSERY TAGS AND STAKES FROM ALL PLANTS B. REMOVE CONTAINERS WITHOUT DAMAGE TO ROOTS. C. REMOVE BOTTOM OF PLANT BOXES PRIOR TO PLACING PLANTS. REMOVE SIDES AFTER PLACEMENT AND PARTIAL BACKFILLING. D. REMOVE UPPER THIRD OF BURLAP FROM BALLED AND BURLAPPED TREES AFTER PLACEMENT. r.s. L EDGING DETAIL E. PLACE PLANT UPRIGHT AND PLUMB IN CENTER OF HOLE. ORIENT PLANTS FOR BEST APPEARANCE. F. SET PLANTS WITH TOP OF ROOT BALLS FLUSH WITH ADJACENT GRADE AFTER COMPACTION. ADJUST PLANT HEIGHT IF SETTLEMENT OCCURS AFTER BACKFILLING. G. BACKFLLL HOLES IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLANT IS PLACED USING BACKFILL MIX. BACKFILL TO ONE HALF DEPTH, FILL HOLE WITH WATER AND LIGHTLY TAMP SOIL TO REMOVE VOIDS AND AIR POCKETS. H. TRIM PLANTS TO REMOVE DEAD AND INJURED BRANCHES ONLY. BRACE PLANTS OVER 65 GALLONS IN SIZE. I. MULCH TO THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL. DO NOT PLANT GRASS ALL THE WAY TO TRUNK OF THE TREE. MULCH WITH AT LEAST 2" OF SPECIFIED MULCH. J. DO NOT WRAP TREES. K. DO NOT OVER PRUNE. L. BLOCKS OF SOD SHOULD BE LAID JOINT TO JOINT AFTER FERTILIZING THE GROUND FIRST. ROLL GRASS AREAS TO ACHIEVE A SMOOTH, EVEN SURFACE. THE JOINTS BETWEEN BLOCKS SHOULD BE FILLED WITH TOPSOIL AND THEN WATERED THOROUGHLY. 3.4 STEEL EDGING A. STEEL EDGING SHALL BE INSTALLED AND ALIGNED AS INDICATED ON PLANS. OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE TO APPROVE THE STAKED OR PAINTED LOCATION OF STEEL EDGE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION B. ALL STEEL EDGING SHALL BE FREE OF BENDS OR KINKS. C. TOP OF EDGING SHALL BE 1/2" MAXIMUM HEIGHT ABOVE FINAL FINISHED GRADE. D. STAKES ARE TO BE INSTALLED ON THE PLANTING BED SIDE OF THE EDGING, NOT THE GRASS SIDE. E. STEEL EDGING SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED ALONG SIDEWALKS OR CURBS. F. EDGING SHOULD BE CUT AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE WHERE IT MEETS SIDEWALKS OR CURBS. 3.5 CLEANUP A. REMOVE CONTAINERS, TRASH, RUBBISH AND EXCESS SOILS FROM SITE AS WORK PROGRESSES. B. REPAIR RUTS, HOLES AND SCARES IN GROUND SURFACES. C. PREMISES SHALL BE KEPT NEAT AT ALL TIMES AND ORGANIZED. D. ALL PAVED AREAS SHOULD BE CLEANED AT THE END OF EACH WORK DAY. 3.6 ACCEPTANCE A. ENSURE THAT WORK IS COMPLETE AND PLANT MATERIALS ARE IN VIGOROUS AND HEALTHY GROWING CONDITION. B. UPON COMPLETION OF THE WORK, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE SITE CLEAN, FREE OF DEBRIS AND TRASH, AND SUITABLE FOR USE AS INTENDED. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL THEN REQUEST AN INSPECTION BY THE OWNER TO DETERMINE FINAL ACCEPTABILITY. C. WHEN/IF THE INSPECTED PLANTING WORK DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE AND/OR REPAIR THE REJECTED WORK TO THE OWNER'S SATISFACTION WITHIN 24 HOURS. D. THE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PERIOD WILL NOT COMMENCE UNTIL THE LANDSCAPE WORK HAS BEEN RE -INSPECTED BY THE OWNER AND FOUND TO BE ACCEPTABLE. AT THAT TIME, A WRITTEN NOTICE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE WILL BE ISSUED BY THE OWNER, AND THE MAINTENANCE AND GUARANTEE PERIODS WILL COMMENCE. END OF SECTION SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVER REFER TO PLANS FOR PLANT TYPES PREPARED SOIL MIX PER SPECIFICATIONS MULCH PER SPECIFICATIONS 311VX4'X 16' STEEL EDGING WITH NOTE: NO STEEL EDGING TO BE INSTALLED ALONG SIDEWALKS REVISION NUMBER REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION rn u N I --I ,n N r k N E 4N ai W LL W � C.J M OILO L.1 N '6 Y V Y � p O iw dA � ray � ..y W rn M 0� � N V / Q x'^ � V) x II I � � a z Uw r V l �W U \x�, I \ 'L/L1 V/ I I W Lu 1�1 = 5 O C) Q w < a U W W z Q PROJECT R MANAGER AWR DRAWN BY AWR ISSUED FOR DATE 12/3/18 ����11 Q�Q\'rv,D RA 14 Q m NCH Nj9 275A P� SHEET L1.02 I Fli. /k-RHYMERS GLEN DR. F-2- PIN Rml oll OAK �f ELI 0 z AVERY P DO, R x T MASTERSON DOC HOLLIDAY "WYATT EARP WHITE STREET (F.M. 455) qlk� FREEDOM FLEX CARWASH StarSpanglerl Nenturn LLC 2169 Fair Hill Dr Allen, TX 75002 (469)767-2396 freedomflexcarwash@gmall.com To Whom It Allay Concern.• This letter expresses the desire and intent of Star Spangled Ventures LLC to provide the City ofAnna and its residents the services of Treedom Flex Car Wash. The ownership, comprised of veterans andfirst responders (including an Anna resident), widdempdoy theiryears of experience in community service and attention to detail to build this 6usiness. Currently, residents, visitors, and organizations (to include the poCue department) must travel to 9lIcVnney for the opportunity to receive a quality full -service car wash. Treedom EkCar Wash can change that. By employing the latest in carwash equipment technology, Freedom Tkwilloffer a tunnefcar wash service with free vacuums andful%service/detailing options 6uidt arounda military/first responder theme. The business wifl6e open seven days a week 8am-7pm (Mon -Sat) and 9am-6pm (Sun) For patrons wishing to receive full -service or detaiCng, indoor and outdoor waiting areas wild 6e availa6de. &strooms andvending for snacks/6everages wiaalso 6e availa6le. Not only does Star Spangled'Ventures wish to provide a solution to a growing need 6ut we desire to 6e a tong -term partner. Freedom EkCar Wash will open the door to numerous fundraising partnerships. Through ourfundraising program, Anna ISO, church groups, and leadership organizations wild receive the 6enefit of a day designated to their cause. Additionally, Freedom gYexwidl partnerwith guns and7foses Toundation of North Texas andifomeless'Veterans Services of (Dallas to help their causes as well Attachedare the site plans we willutilize fordevedopment. We are excitedandgratefulfor this opportunity to =4,4nna the home of Freedom EFlexCarWash! Wsspec�ay, Christian Centeno Managing Member— Star Spangled'Ventures LLC THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 6. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1/8/2019 Conduct a Public Hearing for the purpose of receiving public comment on proposed amendments to the City's Roadway Capital Improvements Plan, Land Use Assumptions, and Impact Fees. (Joseph Johnson) SUMMARY: Impact fees are authorized under Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code and may be imposed upon new developments to fund both existing and proposed infrastructure that is necessary to provide service to a development. The last roadway impact fee update was completed in 2014. By statute, the City is required to review the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvement Plan (C I P) at least once every 5 years but may update them sooner as growth patterns, land use and infrastructure needs change. Over the past several months, staff has worked with our engineering consultant to identify street infrastructure projects that should be added to our CI P. Subsequently, land use assumptions, population projections, and calculated maximum fees were evaluated with new recommendations for the population projections and calculated maximum fees. On September 10, 2018, the updated Roadway Impact Fee Report was presented to the Impact Fee Advisory Committee which subsequently took action approving a letter addressed to the Council concurring with the findings of the report and finding that the report is in general compliance with Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395. At the Council Meeting held on November 13, 2018, Council approved a Resolution setting a Public Hearing for January 8, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of receiving public comment. Additionally, the report was made available to the public. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conducting a Public Hearing for the purpose of receiving public comment on proposed amendments to the City's Roadway Capital Improvements Plan, Land Use Assumptions, and Impact Fees. ATTACHMENTS: Description Impact Fee Advisory Committee Letter 2018-2028 Roadway Impact Fee Update Report Upload Date Type 12/17/2018 Exhibit 12/17/2018 Exhibit City of Anna, Texas Impact Fee Advisory Committee 111 N. Powell Parkway Anna, Texas 75409 September 10, 2018 Re: Roadway, Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Impact Fee Advisory Committee Recommendation Honorable Mayor Pike and the City of Anna City Council: The City of Anna Impact Fee Advisory Committee, established in accordance with Section 395.058 of the Texas Local Government Code, met on this date for reviewing the 2018 Roadway, Water and Wastewater impact fee update. Q 0 The Impact Fee Advisory Committee reviewed dw both the 2018 updated Roadway and the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Land Use Assumptions prepared by the City of Anna Planning and Development Staff; and the 2018 updated Roadway, Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plans, and the calculated Maximum Roadway, Water and Wastewater Impact Fees prepared by Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. Professional Engineers. On behalf of the Advisory Committee, we find the updated Impact Fee Land Use Plan to be consistent with the City's current Comprehensive Plan, and the updated Roadway, Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plans to be consistent with the land use plan. Further, the updated maximum Roadway, Water and Wastewater Impact Fees presented in the 2018 Roadway Impact Fee Update Report and the 2018 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Report prepared by Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, LLP are in general conformance with the requirements of Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395. The Impact Fee Advisory Committee offers no objections. Sincerely Chairman, Impact Fee Advisory Committee ROADWAY IMPACT FEE UPDATE 2018 - 2028 Prepared For: THE CITY OF manna BIRKHOFF, HENDRICKS & CARTER, L.L.P. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS - TBPE Firm No. 526 DALLAS, TEXAS September 2018 ..04-1 GARY C. hfENQRICKS � ;........................... ........ ft.-0 65226 p CITY OF ANNA 2018-2028 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE UPDATE TABLE OF CONTENTS Pate No. I. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 1 II. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS (Provided by City of Anna) ....................................................... 1 Y Table No. 1 — Summary of Land Use Data.................................................................................. 1 III. ROADWAY SERVICE AREAS.................................................................................................. 2 IV. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN............................................................................................ 2 Y Figure No. 1 — Capital Improvement Plan Project Map .......................................................... 4 Y Table No. 2 — Capital Improvement Plan Project List............................................................ 4 V. IMPACT FEE CALCULATION.................................................................................................. 6 Y Table No. 3 — Service Unit Calculation by Land Use Type .................................................... 7 Y Table No. 4a — Vehicle Mile Calculation by Land Use and Service Area .............................. 8 Y Table No. 4b — Summary of Vehicle Miles by Service Area and Development Period ......... 8 Y Table No. 5 — Summary of Capital Improvement Cost by Service Area ................................ 9 Y Table No. 6 — Land Use Equivalency..................................................................................... 9 Y Table No. 7 — Impact Fee Calculation by Service Area ........................................................ 10 VI. SUMMARY OF IMPACT FEE CALCULATION METHODOLOGY ..................................... 10 Y Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Service Area 1.......................................................... 11 Y Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Service Area 2.......................................................... 11 VIL IMPACT FEE CALCULATION EXAMPLES........................................................................ 11 Y Table No. 8 — Common Roadway Land Use Equivalencies ................................................ 12 Y Service Area 1 and Service Area 2 Example Impact Fee Calculation .................................. 13 j:\clerical\anna\2018-137 roadway impact fec\reports\03-index.docx - Z - CITY OF ANNA THOROUGHFARE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN ROADWAY IMPACT FEES I. INTRODUCTION Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code allows for the financing of capital improvements by municipalities through the implementation of impact fees. The land use assumptions and capital improvement plans utilized to develop the roadway impact fees must be reviewed and updated every five (5) years. The update of the impact fees is performed following these basic steps: 1. Development of land use assumptions to identify types and intensities of land use within the City. 2. Development of a Capital Improvement Plan to include improvements planned for the next 10-year period to accommodate growth in the City. 3. Development of the calculated and the maximum impact fee. II. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS One of the initial steps in developing roadway impact fees includes the identification of data related to the planned land uses for land within the City of Anna city limits. The land use data provided by the City of Anna included projected growth by land use type and the locations they are expected to occur over the next 10 years (2018-2028) and at build -out. A summary of the land use data provided for the land within the city limits of Anna is provided in Table 1. Table 1- Summary of Land Use Data Non- Residential Uses Land Use Residential Industrial Retail Office Unit Dwelling Units Acres Acres Acres Service Service Service Service Service Service Service Service Service Total Total Total Total Area I Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 2 2018 3,667 1,347 5,014 23 15 38 85 25 110 25 10 35 2028 6,164 3,200 1 9,364 45 65 110 140 40 180 115 1 45 160 Ultimate 1 1 15,938 7,638 23,576 84 125 209 550 250 800 250 130 380 Notes: 1) Utli mate Residential and Non -Residential Development Capacity is limited to Build -Out in the current 201S City Limits 2) 20% of non-residential area is assumed developable for the Vehicle -Mile Calculation j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 1 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 III. ROADWAY IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREAS For the purpose of roadway impact fees, the roadway service area is limited to the now current City Limits. Additionally, the roadway service areas can not extend in any direction more than 6-miles. The City's' original roadway impact fee calculation and report identified and defined two (2) roadway services. These service areas are generally divided by State Highway 5 (Powell Parkway) and are shown in Figure 1. IV. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN After the land use assumptions within the City have been identified, and with the help of the City's Thoroughfare Plan, a 10-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is developed. This capital improvement plan includes projects intended for construction by the City of Anna in the next 10 years to serve both existing and future development. In order to be funded by roadway impact fees, a roadway project must be included in the 10-year CIP. Existing Facilities The City of Anna major roadway and collector street system is partially developed at this time. Several roadways in developed areas are partially built to current thoroughfare plan standards. Many existing streets are two-lane (20' - 40' width) asphalt roadways with open surface drainage. Many of the proposed roadway segments on the thoroughfare plan do not currently exist. The existing major roadways within the City include US Highway 75 (US 75), State Highway 5 (SH 5)/Powell Street, FM 455/White Street, and SH 121. Existing major collectors include segments of Rosamond Parkway and Ferguson Parkway. The major roadways identified above (US 75, SH 5, FM 455, and SH 121) are under the operation and maintenance jurisdiction of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). Proposed Facilities The City of Anna adopted a Comprehensive Plan in 2010, including a thoroughfare plan that is the basis for development of the future street system. The thoroughfare system is a conventional network conforming to a hierarchical, functional classification system developed to support the forecast traffic demands of future land use. The highest classification of roadway is the Major Roadway type facility. These roadways are generally multiple lanes (4 or 6) with medians that serve the function of controlling access, separating opposing traffic movements and providing an area for the storage of left turning vehicles. The lower classifications are the collector facilities that are developed to serve the adjoining developments. The character of the developments served should determine the sizes and alignments of collector roadways. j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 2 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees The thoroughfare facilities determined for inclusion in the Capital Improvement Plan of this study are tabulated in Table 2 and graphically illustrated in Figure 1. Each listed project includes a description of the planned improvements, the approximate project length, and an engineer's opinion of probable cost to the City. In addition, under existing State Statute, a municipalities' cost associated with TxDOT facilities can be financed with impact fees. All roadways included in the 2018 CIP are identified in the City of Anna Thoroughfare Plan. j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 3 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 'r • TABLE 2 2018 -2028 Roadway Impact Fee Update Capital Improvements by Roadwav Impact Service Area Project A Road Name From To Segment Length(ft) Planned Configuration Existing Condition Notes Capital Cost Debt Service (1) Total Project Cost 1-1 Rosamond Western City Limit US 75 2250 6 Lane Divided 1000' of ravel road US 75 Overpass b TxDOT $2,925,000 $ 1,769,191 $4,694,191 1-2 FM455 Western CityLimit US 75 14400 6 Lane Divided 2lane unimproved, 4700' new alignment $18,720,000 $ 11,322,825 $30,042,825 1-3 FM 368/286 Rosamond FM455/White 6650 6 Lane Divided 2350' of ravel road $8,645,000 $ 5,228,943 $13 873,943 1-4 FM 368/286 FM455/White Southern City Limit 1250 6 Lane Divided 21ane unimproved $1,625,000 $ 982,884 $2,607,884 1-5 FM 368/286 Northen CityLimit Southern Cit Limit 2050 6 Lane Divided 800' of 21ane unimproved $2,665,000 $ 1,611,930 $4 276,930 1-6 Taylor Western CityLimit US 75 2100 4 Lane Divided Gravel road $2,310,000 $ 1,397,208 $3,707,208 1-7 US 75 FM 455/White Southern Cit Limit 9750 Urban Freeway 4 Lane Divided with 2-way frontage roads ROW/Utilities $1,OD0,0D0 $ 604,852 $1,604,852 1-8 Rosamond US 75 Powell/SH 5 10500 4 Lane Divided 4800' of 21ane improved, rail bridge not existing Bridge over railroad, split with Zone 2 $11,550,000 $ 6,986,038 $18,536,038 1-9 Hackberry US 75 Ferguson 2673 4Lane Divided Not existing Excludes 1,800 LF not annexed $2,940,300 $ 1,778,446 $4,718,746 1-10 Hackberry Ferguson Powell/SH 5 5250 4 Lane Divided 2100' of 4lane divided, 800' of 2lane improved, 1000' of 2lane unimproved $5,775,000 $ 3,493,019 $9,268,019 1-11 "StreetC" Rosamond FM455/White 6450 4Lane Divided 1050'of ravel road $7,095,000 $ 4,291,423 $11,386,423 1-12 Ferguson Rosamond FM455/White 7400 6Lane Divided Not existing $9,620,000 $ 5,818,674 $15,438,67 1-13 a over Dart Railroad & SH 5 1000 4-lane divided Not existing 1/2 of Project in Service Area 2 $3,750,000 $ 2,268,194 $6,018,194 1-14 Taylor US 75 Ferguson 5723 4 Lane Divided 4000' of 2lane unimproved $6,295,300 $ 3,807,723 $10103,023 1-15 Taylor Ferguson Powell/SH 5 8844 4 Lane Divided Not existing $9,728,400 $ 5,884,240 $15,612 640 1-16 W. Foster CrossingFerguson City Limit 600 6Lane Divided Not existing $780,000 $ 471,784 $1,251,784 1-17 W. Foster Crossing Southern City Limit Powell/SH 5 3750 6 Lane Divided 1500' of 2lane unimproved $4,875,000 $ 2,948,652 $7,823,652 1-18 Ferguson FM 455/White City Limit 3650 6 Lane Divided 1780' 2lane improved, rest 2lane unimproved with 4-lane bridge at SlayterCr $7,245,0001 $ 4,382,151 $11,627,151 1-19 Ferguson City Limit City Limit 2350 6Lane Divided Not existing $3,055,000 $ 1,847,822 $4,902,822 1-20 E-W Collector FM 368/286 US 75 3200 Mi nor Collector Non existing $2,400,000 $ 1,451,1 $3,851,644 1-TS osed Traffic Si nals in Service Area 1: 8 Each $2,400,000 $ 1,451,644 $3,851,644 Roadway Service Area I Subtotal: $115,399,000 $ 69,799,286 $185,198,286 2-1 FM 376/427 Powell/SH 5 Eastern City Limit 3550 6 Lane Divided 950' 2lane improved, 1650' 2lane unimproved $4,615,000 $ 2,791,391 $7,406,391 2-2 Rosamond Powell/SH 5 City Limit 850 6 Lane Divided 21ane improved, rail bridge not existing Bridge over railroad, split with Service Area 1 $1,105,000 $ 668,361 $1,773,361 2-3 Hackber Powell/SH 5 FM 2862 1150 6 Lane Divided 650' of 2lane unimproved $1,495,000 $ 904,253 $2,399,253 2-4 FM425/422 City Limit Rosamond 1700 6 Lane Divided 2lane unimproved $2,210,000 $ 1,336,722 $3,546,722 2-5 FM425/422 Rosamond Houston 1700 6 Lane Divided 2lane unimproved $2,210,000 $ 1,336,722 $3,546,722 2-6 a over Dart Railroad & SH 5 4-lane divided 1/2 of Project in Service Area 1 $3,750,000 $ 2,268,194 $6,018,194 2-7 Hackberry FM 2862 City Limit 2000 6 Lane Divided Not existing $2,600,0001 $ 1,572 615 $4,172,615 2-8 FM425/422 Houston Southern City Limit 600 6Lane Divided Not existing $780,000 $ 471,794 $1,251,784 2-9 FM425/422 Northern City Limit Houston 600 6 Lane Divided Not existing $780,000 $ 471,784 $1,251,784 2-10 Taylor Powell/SH 5 Eastern City Limit 8500 4 Lane Divided Not existing $9,350,000 $ 5,655,364 $15,005,36 2-11 Highland Rd. Powell/SH 5 Eastern City Limit 6450 6 Lane Divided 5000' of gravel road $8,385,000 $ 5,071,682 $13,456,682 Z-12 FM425/422 FM455/White Collin Co. Outer Loop 10735 6Lane Divided 2650'of ravel road $13,955,500 $ 8,441,009 $22,396,509 2-TS Number of Proposed Traffic Signals in Service Area 2: 6 Each $1,800,000 $ 1,088,733 $2,898,733 Roadway Service Area 2 Subtotal: $53,035,5001 $ 32,078,615 $95,114,115 Grand Total (Roadway Service Area 1 + Service Area 2) $168,434,500 $101,877,901 $270,312,401 Notes: i (1) Debt Service Cost calculated with a 20 year term at a 5% annual interest rate The engineer's opinions of probable construction cost were prepared without the benefit of a detailed preliminary engineering study for each project. The project costs are based on data provided by the City of Anna and on roadway project construction bids. Costs of these projects included only those costs that will be paid for by the City of Anna. Financing costs for the projects in the CIP were also included in the total estimated cost and the interest rate of S% was provided by the City of Anna. V: IMPACT FEE CALCULATION After the land use assumptions and CIP have been finalized, this information is used to determination the maximum fee per service unit (impact fee) that can be charged by the City for new developments. The fee is calculated by dividing the costs of the capital improvements identified as necessary to serve growth forecast to occur during the 10-year planning period (CIP) by the number of service units of growth forecast to occur (using the land use assumptions). The specific steps, as described in following paragraphs of this section include: 1. Determination of a standard service unit; 2. Identification of service areas for the City; 3. Analysis of the total capacity, level of current usage, and commitment for usage of capacity of existing improvements; 4. Identification of that portion of the total capital improvements necessary to serve the projected growth over the next 10-year period; 5. Determination of the "standard service unit" and equivalency tables establishing the ratio of a service unit to the types of land use forecast for growth; 6. Calculating the resulting eligible costs per service unit (impact fee) for new developments in each service area. Service Unit To determine the impact fee rate applied to thoroughfare facilities the standard service unit selected was "PM Peak Hour Vehicle -Miles." This service unit can be obtained by multiplying the number of trips generated by a specific land use type during the PM peak hour (vehicles) by the average trip length (miles) for that land use. The PM peak hour was chosen because it is usually considered the critical time for roadway analyses. The trip generation data were directly obtained or derived for each defined land use type from "Trip Generation Manual, 91h Edition" of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, which is the standard data reference to determine vehicle trip generation characteristics of particular land use types and densities. Trip length information for each land use specified was based on data developed for the Dallas -Fort Worth area by the North Central j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 6 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). The trip length was set at a maximum of three (3) miles for any land use, as this trip length was assumed to be the maximum average distance a trip would travel on roadways within each service area in the City of Anna. Table 3 shows the typical service units for each land use type used in developing the roadway impact fees. Table 3 - Service Unit Calculation by Land Use Type PM Peak Trips Trip Length PM Peak Hour Variable (vehicles) (miles) Vehicle -Miles (1) (2) Residential Dwelling Unit 1 3.00 3.00 Industrial 1,000 Sq. Ft. 0.97 3.00 2.91 Commercial / Retail 1,000 Sq. Ft. 3.71 2.40 8.90 Office 1,000 Sq. Ft. 1.49 3.00 4.47 (1) Based on ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition (2) Based on NCTCOG data Service Areas The State Statute governing the imposition of development impact fees require that collection and expenditure of fees imposed for street facilities "...is limited to an area within the corporate boundaries of the political subdivision and shall not exceed six miles. " To comply with this State Law, two service areas (Service Area 1 and Service Area 2) were established for the City of Anna to ensure that funds are spent within six miles of where they are collected. The two service areas were shown in Figure 1, with SH 5/Powell Avenue serving as the breakpoint between the two service areas. The service areas include most of the developable land within the existing city limits of Anna. Analysis of 10-Year and Ultimate Growth The land use assumption data provided by the City of Anna was converted to the standard service unit (vehicle -miles) by applying the trip generation and trip length data provided in Table 3. These results were used to provide an estimate of the existing service units (vehicle -miles) within each service area, as well as to forecast the growth in service units for both the next 10-year period (2018- 2028) and the ultimate development of the City of Anna. Table 4a shows the vehicle -mile calculation for each category of land use. Table 4b shows the portion of ultimate build -out service units that will be attributable to growth within the next 10 years. j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 7 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Table 4a Vehicle -Mile Calculation By Land Use and Service Area Vehical Mile Variables 2018 2028 Ultimate Service Land Use PM Peak Total Total Total Area FAR Unit Unit Variable Units Vehicle Units Vehicle Units Vehicle Vehicle Miles Miles Miles Miles Residential N/A 3.00 per Dwelling Unit 3,667 Dwellings 11,001 6,164 Dwellings 18,492 15,938 Dwellings 47,813 Industrial 20% 2.91 per 1,000 Sq. Ft 23 Acres 583 45 Acres 1,141 84 Acres 2,130 1 Commercial 20% 8.90 per 1,000 Sq. Ft 85 Acres 6,591 140 Acres 10,855 550 Acres 42,645 Office 20% 4.47 pre 1,000 Sq. Ft 25 Acres 974 115 Acres 4,478 250 Acres 9,736 Totaill 11 19,14911 34,9661 102,323 Residential N/A 3.00 per Dwelling Unit 1,347 Dwellings 4,041 3,200 Dwellings 9,600 7,638 Dwellings 22,915 Industrial 20% 2.91 per 1,000 Sq. Ft 15 Acres 380 65 Acres 1,648 125 Acres 3,169 2 Commercial 20% 8.90 per 1,000 Sq. Ft 25 Acres 1,938 40 Acres 3,101 250 Acres 19,384 Office 20% 4.47 pre 1,000 Sq. Ft 10 Acres 389 45 Acres 1,752 130 Acres 5,063 Totaill 11 6,74811 16,1011 50,531 Table 4b-Summary of Vehicle -Miles by Service Area and Development Period Existing Year 2018- 2028 Year 2028 - Ultimate Service Area Portion of Vehicle - Miles Portion of Vehicle - Miles Vehicle - Miles Ultimate 2028 Total Added 2018- Ultimate Ultimate Added 2028- 2018 Vehicle Miles Vehicle -Miles Vehicle - Miles 2028 Vehicle - Miles Ultimate 1 19,149 18.71% 34,966 15,817 15.46% 102,323 67,357 2 6,748 13.35% 16,101 9,353 18.51% 50,531 34,430 Total 25,897 16.94% 51,067 25,170 152,854 101,787 Note: 20% of non-residential area is assumed developable for the Vehicle -Mile Calculation Capital Improvements Costs Necessary to Serve 10-Year Growth The total costs for implementing the roadway CIP were identified previously in Table 2. The street facility improvements identified in the CIP will logically serve all existing and future growth by improved safety and drainage characteristics. Therefore, the 10-year eligible costs have been proportioned as the ratio of the 10-year growth to the total number of service units determined for j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 8 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 build -out, as provided in Table 4. Table 5 presents a summary of the roadway capital improvement costs for the two service areas. Table 5 - Summary of Capital Improvement Cost by Service Area Portion of Capacity of Cost of Thoroughfare Service Area Service Area CIP ThoroughfareAttributed to Growth Attributed to Growth (2018-2028) (2018-2028) 1 $185,198,286 15.46% $28,627,660 2 $85,114,115 18.51 % $15, 754, 221 Totals $270,312,401 $44,381,881 In order to maintain the equity of impact fee assessment, the cost for streets included in the 10-year Capital Improvement Plan will include the total cost of the street facilities, not reduced by any expected participation. Rather, construction by a developer of an arterial facility within or off -site should be treated as a credit to the impact fee assessment. Determination of Standard Service Unit Equivalency Table 6 presents the derivation of service unit equivalents for each of the four defined land use types. The service unit equivalents are referenced to and based on the residential land use. Table 6 -Land Use Equivalency Land Use Development Unit Veh-Miles/ Development Unit (1) SU Equivalency (2) Residential Dwelling Unit 3.00 1.00 Office 1,000 per Sq. Ft 4.47 1.49 Commercial / Retail 1,000 per Sq. Ft 8.90 2.97 Industrial 1,000 per Sq. Ft 2.91 0.97 Notes: 1) Based on ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition and N CTCOG 2) Ratio of non-residential use to service unit of Residential j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 9 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Cost Per Service Unit (Impact Fee) Calculation Table 7 presents a summary of the calculations and resulting capital improvement costs attributable to growth per service unit, which represents the maximum calculated impact fee. This fee is calculated by taking the cost of the CIP attributable to growth in the next 10 years (Table 5) and dividing it by the estimated growth, or the number of new service units (Table 4), in the next 10 years. Table 7 - Impact Fee Calculation by Service Area Cost of Thoroughfare Number of New Roadway Service Cost Per Service Cost Per Service Attributed to Service Units Area Unit Unit (Rounded) Growth (2018- 2028) (2018-2028) 1 $28,627,660 15,817 $1,809.93 $1,810 2 $15,754,221 9,353 $1,684.40 $1,684 Under current State law, municipalities are required to administer a detailed financial analysis to support the use of an impact fee higher than 50 percent of the eligible costs. As an alternative to performing the financial analysis, the impact fee can be set at or below 50 percent of the total eligible costs, which are shown in Table 7. The City has chosen to use 50 percent of these calculated impact fee. VI. SUMMARY OF IMPACT FEE CALCULATION METHODOLOGY The methodology for calculating the maximum allowable impact fee for roadway facilities can be summarized in the following three steps and is summarized for both Service Areas 1 and 2 on the following pages. First, the cost of the roadway facilities (existing roadways eligible for recuperation of construction cost and proposed roadways) that can be attributed to new growth over the 10-year period is determined. j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 10 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Service Area 1 Cost of Roadway Facilities (Table 2 - Service Area 1) _ $185,198,286 Proportion of Capacity Attributable to New Growth x 15.46% (Table 4- Service Area 1) Roadway Facilities Attributable to Growth (2018- 2028) _ $28,627,660 The second step is to determine the calculated impact fee. The maximum calculated impact fee is the ratio of the total cost for roadway facilities attributable to growth in the next ten years (2018-2028) divided by the total growth in equivalent service units (ESU). Finally, the maximum impact fee is determined by multiplying the calculated fee by 50%. Calcualted Roadway Impact Fee = Maximum Roadway Impact Fee Allowed: Service Area 1 Eligible Thoroughfare Cost Attributed Growth (Table 5) Total Growth in Equivalent Service Units (Table 4) $28, 627, 660.29 15,817 $1,809.93 Use: $1,810 $1,810 x 50% _ FF7$9�05.0( Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Service Area 2 Cost of Roadway Facilities (Table 2 - Service Area 2) _ $85,114,115 Proportion of Capacity Attributable to New Growth x 18.51% (Table 4- Service Area 2) Roadway Facilities Attributable to Growth (2018 - 2028) _ $15,754,221 Service Area 2 Calculated Roadway Impact Fee = Eligible Thoroughfare Cost Attributed Growth (Table 5) Total Growth in Equivalent Service Units (Table 4) $15, 754, 220.59 9,353 $1,684.40 Use: $1,684 Maximum Roadway Impact Fee Allowed: $1,684 x 50% _ $842.00 j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 11 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 VII. IMPACT FEE CALCULATION EXAMPLE A land use equivalency table is provided in Table 8 and represents an expansion of the basic land uses used for calculating the impact fee. This table identifies the total service units generated by specific uses within each land use category and includes land uses which may develop over the next 10-year period. To obtain the impact fee to be charged for a particular land use, the impact fee per service unit adopted by the City and the service units per development unit generated for that particular land use from Table 8 are used. Examples for calculating the impact fee for both a single family dwelling unit and a 50,000 ft2 shopping center (commercial / retail facility) assuming maximum allowable impact fees of $905.00 per service unit (Service Area 1) and $842.00 per service unit (Service Area 2) are shown on page 12 Table 8 - Common Roadway Land Use Equivalencies CATEGORY LAND USE DEVELOPMENT UNITS(1) ITE TRIP RATE(2) TRIP LENGTH(3) PASS -BY TRAFFIC(4) SERVICE UNITS(5) RESIDENTIAL Single- Family Detached Dwelling Unit 1.00 3.0 0 3.00 Apartment Dwelling Unit 0.62 3.0 0 1.86 OFFICE Office Building 1,000ftGFA 1.49 3.0 0 4.47 COMMERICAL Convenience Stores/Gas Pumps 1,000ft GFA 50.92 0.4 0.66 6.93 Drive-in Bank 1,000ftGFA 24.30 1.7 0.47 21.89 Home Improvement Store 1,000ft GFA 2.33 3.0 0.48 3.36 Hotel Rooms 0.60 3.0 0 1.80 Restaurant 1,000ftGFA 9.85 2.4 0.43 13.47 Shopping Center 1,000ftGFA 3.71 3.0 0.34 7.35 INDUSTRIAL Industrial 1,000ftGFA 0.97 3.0 0 2.91 INSTITUTIONAL School Students 0.15 2.1 0 0.32 Day Care Center Students 0.81 2.7 0.9 0.22 House of Worship 1,000ft GFA 0.55 2.1 0 1.16 GFA = Gross Floor Area 2 (Vehicles); Based on ITE Trip Generation, 9th Edition (Miles); Based on NCTCOG Data Percentage of traffic already passing by site - land use is an intermediate destination (Vehicle -Miles) * The land uses and trip generation characteristics listed in this chart are intended as examples. The complete table of land uses and trip generation characteristics is contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers "Trip Generation, Ninth Edition," which is incorporated herein by reference. j:lclericollanna12018-137Roodwayimpoctfee lreports103-report Page 12 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Service Area I - Example Impact Fee Calculations SERVICE AREA 1 Vehicle -Miles per Single- Family Dwelling Unit (1 Dwelling Unit) x (3.00 Vehicle-Miles/Dwelling Unit) _ Maximum Calculated Roadway Impact Fee $ 905.00 per service unit x 3 Service Units = $2,715.00 SHOPPING CENTER (Service Area hicle-miles per Development Unit for Shopping Center (50,000 Sq. Ft) x (7.35 Vehicle -Miles/ 1,000 Sq.Ft.) = 367.5 Service Units Maximum Calculated Roadway Impact Fee $ 905.00 per service unit) 368 Service Units = $ 332,587.50 Service Area 2 - Example Impact Fee Calculations SERVICE AREA 2 hicle-Miles per Single- Family Dwelling Unit (1 Dwelling Unit) x (3.00 Vehicle-Miles/Dwelling Unit) _ Maximum Calculated Roadway Impact Fee $ 842.00 per service unit x 3 Service Units = $2,526.00 Vehicle -miles per Development Unit for Shopping Center (50,000 Sq. Ft) x (7.35 Vehicle -Miles/ 1,000 Sq.Ft.) = 367.5 Service Units Maximum Calculated Roadway Impact Fee $ 842.00 per service unit) 368 Service Units = $ 309,435.00 3.00 Service Units I 3.00 Service Units I j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 13 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 2018-2028 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE UPDATE THE CITY OF manna BIRKHOFF, HENDRICKS & CARTER, L.L.P. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS - TBPE Firm No. 526 11910 Greenville Ave., Suite 600, Dallas, Texas 75243 Phone (214) 361-7900 September 2018 1 THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 7. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1/8/2019 Conduct a Public Hearing for the purpose of receiving public comment on proposed amendments to the City's Water & Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan, Land Use Assumptions, and Impact Fees. (Joseph Johnson) SUMMARY: Impact fees are authorized under Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code and may be imposed upon new developments to fund both existing and proposed infrastructure that is necessary to provide service to a development. The last water and wastewater impact fee update was completed in March 2017 and adopted in April 2017. By statute, the City is required to review the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) at least once every 5 years but may update them sooner as growth patterns, land use, and infrastructure needs change. Over the past several months, staff has worked with our engineering consultant to identify water and wastewater infrastructure projects that should be added to our CIP. Subsequently, land use assumptions, population projections, and calculated maximum impact fees were evaluated with new recommendations for the population projections and calculated maximum fees. On September 10, 2018, the updated Water & Wastewater Impact Fee Report was presented to the I mpact Fee Advisory Committee which subsequently took action approving a letter addressed to the Council concurring with the findings of the report and finding that the report is in general compliance with Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395. At the Council Meeting held on November 13, 2018, Council approved a Resolution setting a Public Hearing for January 8, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of receiving public comment. Additionally, the report was made available to the public. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conducting a Public Hearing for the purpose of receiving public comment on proposed amendments to the City's Water & Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan, Land Use Assumptions, and Impact Fees. ATTACHMENTS: Description Upload Date Type I mpact Fee Advisory Committee Letter 12/17/2018 Exhibit Water & Wastewater Impact Fee Report 12/17/2018 Exhibit City of Anna, Texas Impact Fee Advisory Committee 111 N. Powell Parkway Anna, Texas 75409 September 10, 2018 Re: Roadway, Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Impact Fee Advisory Committee Recommendation Honorable Mayor Pike and the City of Anna City Council: The City of Anna Impact Fee Advisory Committee, established in accordance with Section 395.058 of the Texas Local Government Code, met on this date for reviewing the 2018 Roadway, Water and Wastewater impact fee update. Q 0 The Impact Fee Advisory Committee reviewed dw both the 2018 updated Roadway and the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Land Use Assumptions prepared by the City of Anna Planning and Development Staff; and the 2018 updated Roadway, Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plans, and the calculated Maximum Roadway, Water and Wastewater Impact Fees prepared by Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. Professional Engineers. On behalf of the Advisory Committee, we find the updated Impact Fee Land Use Plan to be consistent with the City's current Comprehensive Plan, and the updated Roadway, Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plans to be consistent with the land use plan. Further, the updated maximum Roadway, Water and Wastewater Impact Fees presented in the 2018 Roadway Impact Fee Update Report and the 2018 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Report prepared by Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, LLP are in general conformance with the requirements of Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395. The Impact Fee Advisory Committee offers no objections. Sincerely Chairman, Impact Fee Advisory Committee WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE 2018 - 2028 Prepared For THE CITY OF manna Prepared By BIRKHOFF, HENDRICKS & CARTER, L.L.P. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS — TBPE Firm No. 526 DALLAS, TEXAS September 2018op GARY C. HENDRICKS 65226 '¢ j, S i E!'. Imo CITY OF ANNA WATER AND WASTEWATER 2018-2028 IMPACT FEE UPDATE TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. I. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 1 Y Table No. 1 — Historic Water and Wastewater Impact Fees II. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS (Provided by City of Anna) ....................................................... 3 Y Table No. 2 — 2018 -2028 Population Projections III. DEFINITION OF A SERVICE UNIT — WATER AND WASTEWATER ............................... 3 Y Table No. 3 — LUE for Various Types & Sizes of Water Meter IV. CALCULATION OF WATER & WASTEWATER — LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS ............ 4 Y Table No. 4 — 2018-2028 Water Living Unit Equivalents by Meter Size Y Table No. 5 — 2018-2028 Wastewater Living Unit Equivalents by Meter Size V. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM......................................................................................... 6 A. Existing Facilities................................................................................................................. 6 B. Water Distribution System Capital Improvement Projects .................................................. 6 Y Figure No. 1 — Water Distribution System: Existing Facility Recovery Y Figure No. 2 — Water Distribution System: Capital Improvement Plan Y Table No. 6 — 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan C. Utilized Capacity................................................................................................................ 11 Y Table No. 7 — Summary of Eligible Capital Cost & Utilized Capacity Cost Y Table No. 8 — Existing Facility Recovery — Water Lines & Water Facilities Y Table No. 9 — Proposed Capital Improvement Plan - Water Lines Y Table No. 10 — Proposed Capital Improvement Plan - Water Distribution Facilities jAclerical\anna\2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 2018\reports\03-index.docx - Z - Page No. VI. WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM A. General............................................................................................................................... 16 B. Existing Wastewater System.............................................................................................. 16 C. Proposed Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan.............................................................. 17 Y Figure No. 3 — Wastewater Collection System: Existing Facility Recovery Y Figure No. 4 — Wastewater Collection System: Capital Improvement Plan Y Table No. 10 — 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan D. Utilized Capacity................................................................................................................ 20 Y Table No. 11 — Summary of Eligible Capital Cost & Utilized Capacity Cost Y Table No. 12 — Existing Facility Recovery — Wastewater Lines & Facilities Y Table No. 13 — Proposed Capital Improvement Plan - Wastewater Lines Y Table No. 14 — Proposed Capital Improvement Plan - Wastewater Facilities VII. CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES — WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM............................................................................. 26 Y Table No. 15 — Allowable Maximum Fee Per LUE and Per Meter Size & Type jAclerical\anna\2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 2018\reports\03-index.docx - ii - Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. CITY OF ANNA 2018-2028 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE I. INTRODUCTION The City of Anna retained the services of Birkhoff, Hendricks and Carter, L.L.P for the purpose of updating the impact fees for the water distribution system and the wastewater collection system. These impact fees are required for funding the construction of specific capital improvement projects to serve new development. The Table 1 below shows previous maximum impact fees calculated and the impact fees imposed by the City: Table 1 Historic Water and Wastewater Impact Fees 2008 2014 2017 2018 Calculated Maximum Fee Fees Imposed Calculated Maximum Fee Fees Imposed Calculated Maximum Fee Fees Imposed Calculated Maximum Fee Fees Imposed Water $2,712.50 $2,000 $4,674.00 $2,000 $3,984.89 $3,200 $4,510.14 TBD Wastewater $2,643.50 $2,000 $4,610.00 $2,000 $3,999.05 $3,200 $4,078.50 TBD Since the 2014 and 2017 updates of the Impact Fee, the City of Anna has expanded its water and sewer service. The Water Distribution System Master Plan and Wastewater Collection Master Plan were refined in 2017 by Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P., and are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. In accordance with the requirements of Chapter 395.052 of the Local Government Code, this impact fee update report reflects the City of Anna's Land Use Assumptions, Water Capital Improvement Plan and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan. Chapter 395, of the Local Government Code is an act that provides guidelines for financing capital improvements required for new development in municipalities, counties, and certain other local governments. Based on the most current Master Plan documents for the Water Distribution and Wastewater Collection Systems; 10-year Capital Improvement Plans were developed to reflect projected infrastructure needs. The City's Future Land Use Plan was unchanged from the j: Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reports104-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 1 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. previous evaluation, and population growth assumption, provided by the City Planning Department, was the basis for the maximum impact fees calculated. The Act allows the maximum impact fee to be charged if revenues from future ad valorem taxes, and water and sewer bills are included as a credit in the analysis. If not, the Act allows the maximum fee to be set at 50% of the calculated maximum fee. Calculations herein provide for the 50% reduction. The following items were included in the impact fee calculation: A. The cost of the new infrastructure that is to be paid by the City, including engineering, property acquisition and construction cost. B. Existing excess capacity in lines and facilities that will serve future growth and which were paid for in whole or part by the City. C. Engineering and quality control fees for construction projects. D. Interest and other finance charges on bonds issued by the City to cover its portion of the cost. E. Planning Cost. The engineering analysis portion of the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee evaluation determines utilized capacity cost of the major water distribution and wastewater collection facilities between the year 2018 and the year 2028. Facilities in this analysis include, water pump stations, water storage tanks, water disinfection systems, water transmission lines, water distribution lines, wastewater lift stations, wastewater collection lines, the Slayter Creek wastewater treatment plant and the regional water and wastewater systems. The study period is a ten-year period with 2018 as the base year. Impact fee calculations for the water and wastewater systems account for a portion, or entirety, of costs of new projects required to serve new developments as well as a portion of the cost of existing infrastructure that is to be utilized to serve new developments. Growth and usage rates are standardized in calculations by applying living unit equivalency factors, which in this analysis conform to the latest American Water Works Association Standards (C700 - C703). j: Ictertcahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 2 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. II. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS (BY THE CITY OFANNA) The City of Anna Planning Department prepared the Land Use Assumptions used for the 2018 impact fee update, and they were not modified since the past evaluation. A revised 10-year population growth projection was provided by the City for this update as shown in Table 2 Table 2 2018-2028 Population Projections. 2018 2028 Buildout Population 13,240 26,045 250,000 % of Buildout 5.3% 10.4% 100.0% 2018 to 2028 Population Growth: 96.7% J1 Note: Population Projections provided by the City of Anna Planning Department III. DEFINITION OF A SERVICE UNIT — WATER AND WASTEWATER Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code requires that impact fees be based on a defined service unit. A "service unit" means a standardized measure of consumption, use generation, or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards. This update defines a water and wastewater service unit to be a 3/4-inch water meter and has referred to this service unit as a Single Family Living Unit Equivalent (SFLUE). The SFLUE is based on the continuous duty capacity of a 3/4-inch water meter. This is the typical meter used for a single family detached dwelling, and therefore is considered to be equivalent to one "living unit". Other meter sizes can be compared to the 3/4-inch meter through a ratio of water flows as published by the American Water Works Association as shown in Table No. 3 below. This same ratio is then used to determine the proportional water and wastewater impact fee amount for each water meter size. j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 3 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 3 LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENCIES FOR VARIOUS TYPES AND SIZES OF WATER METERS Continuous Duty Meter Type Meter Size Maximum Rate ( m) ca> Ratio to 3/" Meter Simple 3/4" 15 1.0 Simple 1" 25 1.7 Simple 1'/2" 50 3.3 Simple 2" 80 5.3 Compound 2" 80 5.3 Turbine 2" 100 6.7 Compound 3" 160 10.7 Turbine 3" 240 16.0 Compound 4" 250 16.7 Turbine 4" 420 28.0 Compound 6" 500 33.3 Turbine 6" 920 61.3 Compound 8" 800 53.3 Turbine 8" 1,600 106.7 Compound 10" 2,300 153.3 Turbine 10" 2,500 166.7 Turbine 12" 3,300 220.0 (a) Source: AWWA Standard C700 (1995) - C703 (1996) IV. CALCULATION OF WATER & WASTEWATER - LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS The City of Anna provided the existing water meter count by size category as of July 2018. In total, there were 5,032 water meters serving the existing population of 13,240 residents and businesses. Table No. 4 shows the number of existing water meters and Single Family Living Unit Equivalents (SFLUE) conversions. The table also shows the projected meter counts and SFLUEs for 2028 which were based on the population growth assumption. Similarly, the City provided meter counts by size of the 4,428 water service accounts that also utilize the wastewater collection system. Table No. 5 illustrates the existing wastewater account and SFLUE's. Using the growth rate provided by the City, water meters and wastewater accounts were extrapolated to the year 2028. The City's Planning Department projects the population of the City of Anna to nearly double over the next ten years; anticipating a residential population of 26,045 in 2028. j: Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reports104-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 4 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. Living unit equivalents were then applied to the water meters and wastewater accounts for 2018 and 2028 resulting in a total number of living units for the beginning and end of this fee period. The difference in the total number of 2018 and 2028 SFLUE's results in the new living unit equivalents during the impact fee period. TABLE NO. 4 2018 — 2028 WATER LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS BY METER SIZE 2018 2028 New Meter Size Number of Water Meters Living Unit Equivalent Ratio for 3/4" Used a, Total Number of Living Units Number of Water Meters Living Unit Equivalent Ratio for 3/4" Used�al Total Number of Living Units Living Units During Impact Fee Period %" 4,868 1.0 4,868 9,576 1.0 9,576 4,708 1" 69 1.7 115 136 1.7 226 111 1%" 11 3.3 37 22 3.3 72 35 2" 56 6.7 373 110 6.7 734 361 3" 23 16.0 368 25 16.0 400 32 4" 4 28.0 112 4 28.0 112 0 6" 1 61.3 61 1 61.3 61 0 Totals 5,032 5,934 1E 9,874 11,182 5,248 (a) Source: AWWA Standard C700 (1995) - C703 (1996) N II_\:11-01[alm 2018 — 2028 WASTEWATER LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS BY WATER METER SIZE 2018 2028 New Meter Size Number of Water Meters Living Unit Equivalent Ratio for 3/4" (a) Total Number of Living Units Number of Water Meters Living Unit Equivalent Ratio for 3/4" Used(a' Total Number of Living Units Living Units During Impact Fee Period a/" 4,284 1.0 4,284 8,427 1.0 8,427 4,143 1" 61 1.7 101 119 1.7 199 98 1%" 10 1 3.3 32 19 3.3 63 31 2" 49 6.7 329 97 6.7 646 318 3" 20 16.0 324 25 16.0 400 76 4" 4 1 28.0 99 4 1 28.0 112 13 6" 1 61.3 54 1 61.3 61 7 Totals 4,428 5,222 8,692 9,909 4,687 j:Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impactfee update 20J&reportsW4-report.docs - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 5 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. V. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM This update includes additional capital improvement plan (CIP) projects that will tentatively serve new developments, and modifies previous CIP projects that have since been constructed. The proposed CIP projects are shown schematically in Figure No. 2, and are summarized in Table No. 6. Existing facilities, applicable for reimbursement under Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code are shown in Figure No. 1. Eligible facilities include major distribution lines, pump stations, treatment facilities, ground and elevated storage reservoirs as well as regional systems participation. Utilized capacities were based on ten-year growth system demands. A. Existing Facilities As of 2018, the City of Anna has participated financially in the construction of the facilities shown on Figure No. 1, the Existing Facility Recovery Map. These distribution lines and facilities have capacity to serve new developments, and the portion of capacity expected to be absorbed by the new developments has been included, as a percentage of the total 20-year project cost, in the value of the maximum impact fee calculation. Actual capital costs, including construction, engineering and easements of the various elements of the existing water distribution system, were utilized where the information was known. The existing costs of facilities were determined from records provided by the City of Anna. Where actual costs were not known, an average cost in 2018 dollars was calculated. B. Water Distribution System Capital Improvement Projects In order to meet the demands of the anticipated growth over the next 10-years to 2028, certain water distribution system improvements are required. Figure No. 2 shows the recommended system improvements and Table No. 6 itemizes each project and the project cost. These recommended improvements, along with certain existing facilities, form the basis for the Water System Impact Fee Calculation. Costs for CIP projects were estimated using average unit costs from projects which have been bid recently, plus an estimated cost for engineering and easements, and were amortized to include the additional cost of issuing 20-year bonds at 5% annual interest rate. Projects determined to involve developer financing were estimated with a lesser unit value. In these j: Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reports104-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 6 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. cases, the developer will be responsible for the cost of the first 8-inches and the City will be responsible for the additional cost associated to construct the larger -diameter line to the size shown on the CIP exhibit. j: Ictertcahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 7 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. FI(i1ITRF 1 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM: EXISTING FACILITY RECOVERY THE CITY OF Anna WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 2018-2028 IMPACT FEE UPDATE EXISTING FACILITY RECOVERY RMIM0", HMgDMCEM & C-4xnm, r j P. FROIBBSE)NALENGD968 T-", Finn F•26 1191(I Greenrl le :1.-e.. Sidle f(IC' 17p11fl5.. Tans?.,?4? pJdj 3�1-7900 D: 6/15/18 — RK Cad W&A Impact Fa Upw. 2016'1Fd6M'laW16 W.RMN So gaa,)Ny 0M 6/15/2018 j: Wericallann&2o18-133 w&ww impactfee update 20MreportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 8 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. FIGURE 2 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN j IL C-A ILI L 'o - `, l �, r _i__T _5 r - r Co -T Ve) ILI z z j:lclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportSW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 9 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 6 10-YEAR WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Water Lines Project Size Developer Participation Total Capital Cost (1) Debt Service Total Project Cost Water Line #1 12" $2,344,650 $1,418,166 $3,762,816 Water Line #2 12" X $1,403,400 $848,849 $2,252,249 Water Line #3 12" X $421,700 $255,066 $676,766 Water Line #4 12" X $632,750 $382,720 $1,015,470 Water Line #5 12" $1,618,950 $979,225 $2,598,175 Water Line #6 24" $1,880,800 $1,137,605 $3,018,405 Water Line #7 12" X $422,950 $255,822 $678,772 Water Line#8 12" X $82,100 $49,658 $131,758 Water Line #9 12" X $694,900 $420,311 $1,115,211 Water Line #10 12" X $172,950 $104,609 $277,559 Water Line #12 12" X $60,100 $36,352 $96,452 Water Line #13 12" X $807,650 $488,509 $1,296,159 Water Line #14 8",12",16" $2,149,100 $1,299,887 $3,448,987 Water Line #15 12",16" $2,105,080 $1,273,261 $3,378,341 Water Line #17 12" X $165,700 $100,224 $265,924 Water Line #19 12" X $255,000 $154,237 $409,237 Water Line #20 12" $2,623,200 $1,586,647 $4,209,847 Water Line#21 12" X $1,017,500 $615,437 $1,632,937 Water Line #22 12" $996,000 $602,432 $1,598,432 Water Line #23 12" X $1,403,150 $848,698 $2,251,848 Water Line #24 24" $1,282,800 $775,904 $2,058,704 Water Line #25 12" X $6335800 $383,355 $1,017,155 Water Line #26 16" X $117,950 $71,342 $189,292 Water Line#27 18" X $1,776,330 $1,074,416 $2,850,746 Water Line #28 18" $1,424,685 $861,723 $2,286,408 Water Line #29 18" $1,718,465 $1,039,417 $2,757,882 Water Line #30 12" X $162,450 $98,258 $260,708 Water Line #31 18" $1,146,260 $693,317 $1,839,577 Water Line #32 12" $895,350 $541,554 $1,436,904 Water Line #33 12" $226,500 $136,999 $363,499 Water Line #34 12" X $65,200 $39,436 $104,636 Water Line #35 12" $585,000 $353,838 $938,838 Water Line #36 12" X $380,100 $229,904 $610,004 Water Line #37 12" X $217,400 $131,495 $348,895 Water Line #38 12" X $228,250 $138,057 $366,307 Water Line #39 16" X $192,990 $116,730 $309,720 Water Line #40 16" $690,030 $417,366 $1,107,396 Water Line #41 12" $1545950 $93,722 $248,672 Water Line #42 16" X $407,120 $246,247 $653,367 Water Line #43 18" X $482,460 $291,817 $774,277 Subtotal: Water Lines $34,045,720 $20,592,613 $54,638,333 j: Ictericahannal2o18-133 w&ww impacrfee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 10 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. Utilized Capacity The portion of City -funded project costs that may be reimbursed by impact fee revenue is relative to the portion of facility capacity that is anticipated to be absorbed by new developments during the fee period. This portion, or utilized capacity, was determined for existing facilities and for proposed CIP projects. For existing facilities, available capacities were found under current, 2018, demands, and were compared to the available capacity remaining under the predicted 2028 demand scenario. The difference in available capacities, by percentage, was applied to the 20-year total project cost to determine the allowable recovery dollar amount. The same procedure was utilized to determine utilized capacity during fee period for proposed CIP projects, however, in this case, the 2018 demand is null. Table No. 7 below summarizes project costs and utilized costs over the impact fee period, 2018 — 2028, for each element of the Water Distribution System. The utilized capacity for each water distribution facility, both existing and proposed, is presented in detail in Impact Fee Capacity Calculation Table No. 8 through Table No. 10. TABLE NO. 7 SUMMARY OF ELIGIBLE CAPITAL COST & UTILIZED CAPACITY COST Water System Total 20-Year Project Cost M Utilized Capacity During Fee Period M Existing Water Facilities $35,380,857 $17,519,298 Planning Expenses $94,000 $94,000 Existing Water System Subtotal: $35,474,857 $17,613,298 Proposed Water Lines $54,638,333 $21,378,225 Proposed Water Facilities $15,567,062 $8,345,229 Proposed Water System Subtotal: 1 $70,205,395 $29,723,454 TOTAL: $105,680,252 $47,336,752 Notes: ■ (1) Opinion of Cost includes: a) Engineer's Opinion of Construction Cost b) Professional Services Fees (Survey, Engineering, Testing, Legal) c) Cost of Easement or Land Acquisitions ■ (2) Debt Service based on 20-year simple interest bonds at 5% ■ (3) Planning Expense includes current and all past impact fee evaluations. j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 11 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 8 EXISTING FACILITY RECOVERY - WATER LINES & WATER FACILITIES 4 rcra�c i )w -, ,,, lased in 2014 ind ared and in, /udc, 20",, 1, and easenients_ Pipe Number Total Capacity (MG/MGD) Date ofConst Existing Waterline Total Capital Cost ($) Faeflity 20 Year Debt Service @ 5 % Simple Interest IA & 1B Total 20 Year Project Cost ($) MGD or M Utilized Capacity % Utilized Capacity $ UtilizedCapacity 2018 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 2028 3.25 3.25 2.20 0.80 2.25 During Fee Period 2.75 2.75 2.20 0.80 2.25 2018 15% 1591 0% 0% 0% 2028 100% 100% 5% 5 53% 50% During Fee Period 85% 85% 55% 53% 50% 2018 $172,830 $172,830 $187,644 $187,644 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 2028 $1,123,396 $1,123,396 $1,219,687 $1,219,687 $1,500536 $1:500:536 $1,283,881 $1,283,881 $497,504 $497,504 During Fee Period $950,566 $950,566 $1,032,043 $1,032,043 $1,500,536 $1,500,536 $1,283,881 $1,283,881 $497,504 $497,504 CGMA Treated Surface Water System - Bloomdale PS and GS R 3.11 1 2005 $700,00111423396 $1,123,396 Subtotal: 3.25 2005 11 $700,000 $423:396 $1,123,396 Existing Waterline Facility I CGMA Treated Surface Water System- Treated Water Supply line 3,25 1 2115 $760,000 $4591687 $1,219,687 Subtotal: 3.25 2005 $760,000 $459,687 $1,219,687 Exis ft Waterline Facility 2A South Take Paint - PS 4,00 2005 $1,700,000 $1,028,248 $2,728,248 Subtotal: 4.00 2005 $1,700,000 $1,028,248 $2,728,248 Existing Waterline Facility 213 South Take Point - GSR I50 2005 $11,500,000 $907,278 $2,407,278 Subtotal: 1.50 2005 $1,500,000 $907,278 $2,407,278 Existing Waterline Facie 3 18" WL From S outh Take Point to FM 455 Subtotal: 4,50 2005 4.50 2005 $620,000 1 S620,000 $375,008 S375,008 S995,008 $995,008 Existing Waterline Facility 4 0.30 0.30 0.00 100°�h 100% 0% $962,911 $962,911 $962,911 $962,911 $0 s0 West Well & GSR Subtotal: 0.30 0.30 2uos 2005 $600,000 S600,11011 $362,911 $362,911 $962,911 $962,911 Existing Waterline Facility 5 0.35 0.50 0.15 7094� 100", 30% S561,698 S561,698 $802,426 $802,426 $240,728 $240,728 West Well EST Subtotal: 0.50 0.50 2005 2005 $500,000 $500,000 S302,426 S302,426 S802,426 $802,426 Existing Waterline Facility 6A 0.91 0.91 0.00 100"1, 100% 0% $1,604,852 $1,604,852 $1,604,852 $1,604,852 $0 $0 South Grayson System - Water Wells Subtotal: 0.91 2005 0.91 2005 $1,000,000 $1,OOQ000 $604,852 $604,852 $1,604,852 $1,604,857 Existing Waterline Facility 613 0.25 0.35 0.11 70"/0 100% 30% $589,783 $589,783 $842547 $842:547 $252,764 $252,764 South Grayson System -.35 MG EST Subtotal: 0.35 0.35 1 2005 2005 $525,000 $525,000 $317,547 $317,547 S842,547 $842,547 Existing Waterline Facility 6C - - - 5% 40% 35% S8,024 S8,024 S64,194 S64,194 S56,170 S56,170 South Grayson System - CCN Area Subtotal: 1.00 2005 1.00 2005 $100,000 s100,11011 $60,485 $60,485 $160,485 S160,485 Existing Waterline Facility 7 0.00 0.50 0,50 0% 100% 100% $0 $0 $320,970 $320,970 $320,970 $320,970 South Well Surface Water Subtotal: 050 0.50 2013 2013 $200,000 S2000000 $120970 $120:970 $320,970 $320,970 Existing Waterline Facility 8 0.00 1.25 1.25 Oda 100�a 100% $0 SO 51,364,124 S1,364,124 $1,364,124 $1,364,124 North & West Wit Surface Water Subtotal: I.25 2014 1.25 2014 $850,000 S8511,00o $514,124 S514,124 $1,364,124 $I,364,124 Existing Waterline Facility 9 0.21 0.42 0.20 10% 5% $25,778 $25,778 $50,710 $50,710 $24,931 $24,931 C.R. 1106 Waterliae Subtotal: 4.00 4.00 2016 11 2016 $303,300 $303,300 1 $183,452 $183,452 S486,752 S486,752 Existing Waterline Facility 10 0.70 1.00 0.30 70% 100% 30% $2,929,713 $2,929,713 $4,185,304 $4,185,304 $1,255,591 $1,255,591 Hackberry EST -1.0 MG Subtotal: 1.00 1.00 2016 21116 $2,607,907 $2,607,907 $1,577,397 $1,577,397 $4,185,304 $4,185,304 Existing Waterline Facility 11 - 0.00 0.00 - 1.00 1.25 - 1.00 1.'_5 0% 09% 011,11 10% 100% 501111 I0"/o 100% 50% $0 $0 $0 Sll $0 $0 580,243 S80,243 $1,203,639 $1,203,639 $933,352 $933,352 $SQ243 $80,243 $1,203,639 $1,203,639 $933,352 $933,352 Disinfection N/A 2016 $SOQ,000 $302,426 $802,426 Subtotal: N/A 2016 5500,000 S302,426 $802,426 Existing Waterline Facility 12 Initial South Pump Station 1,00 2016 $750,000 S453,639 $1,203,639 Subtotal 1.00 2016 S750,000 S453,639 $1,203,639 Existing Waterline Facility 13 South Distribution line From West Well EST (w/DEV) Subtotal: 2.50 1 206 2.50 20 6 11 $1,163,163 $1,163,163 S703,541 $703,541 $1,866,704 $1,866,704 Existing Waterline Facility 14 0.00 1.13 1.1', 0"-„ 45% 45% $0 $0 $855,513 $855,513 $855,513 $855,513 East-West Waterline along future Rackberry tat. West Subtotal: 2.50 2.50 1 2016 2016 $1,184,620 $1,184,621) $716,519 $716,519 $1,901,139 $1,9111,139 Existing Waterline Facility 15 0.00 1.10 1.10 0"i� .55% 55% $0 $0 $290,221 $290,221 $290,221 $290,221 U.S: 75 Parallel Water line North of F.M. 455 (w/DEV) Subtotal: 2.00 2.00 1 2016 2016 $328,800 $328,800 $198,875 $198,875 S527,675 $527,675 Existing Waterline Facility 16 0.00 1.10 1.10 0"�, 55% 55% $0 $11 $1,677,070 S1,677,070 $1,677,070 $1,671,070 U.S: 75 Parallel Water Line South of F.M. 455 Su1total: 2.00 2.011 2616 2016 $1,900,000 $I,91111,0011 $1,149,218 $1,149,218 $3,049,218 $3,049.218 Existing Waterline Facility 17 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1,10 1.10 1.10 0% 01, 01141 55% 55°0 55% 55% 55% 55% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,297,253 $1,297,253 S1,116,796 S1,116,796 $796,123 $796,123 $1,297,253 $1,297,253 $1,116,796 $1,116,796 $796,123 $796,123 East-West Water line along West Foster (w/DEV) 2,00 1 2016 $1,469,694 S888,947 $2,358,641 Subtotal: 2.00 2016 11 $1,469,694 S888,947 $7,358,641 Existing Waterline Facility 18 Water line for C.R.422 (w/DEV) 2.00 1 2016 $1,265,250 $765,289 $2,030,539 Subtotal: 2.00 2016 $1,265,250 $765,289 $2,030.539 Existing Waterline Facility 19 Water Lane C.R.371 to Rosamond Pkwy. (w/DEV) Subtotal: 2.00 2.00 2016 2016 $901,950 $901,950 $545,546 $545,546 $1,447,496 $1,447,496 Existing Waterline Facility 20 0.00 1.10 1.10 0% 45% 45% $0 $0 $246,987 $246,987 $246,987 $246,987 Subtotal: 2.00 2.00 2016 20 6 $342,000 S342,000 1206859 $206:859 S548,859 $548,859 Existing Waterline Facility 21 0.00 1.10 1.10 0% 55% 55% $0 $0 $242,292 $242,292 $242,292 $242,292 Subtotal: 2.00 2.00 2016 2016 $274,500 $274,500 1 $166,032 $166,032 $440,532 $440,532 Water Facilities - Project CIP Total $22,046 184 $13 334,673 $35,380,857F $7,043 234 1$24,562,532 $17,519 298 j: lclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20lslreports 04-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 12 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 9 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WATER LINES *A ­­g, Unit, ­ts are based in 2018 dollars unless other"°ise indicated and includes 20% for engineering and easements. Line Identification Length (Ft.) Diameter (Inches) Developer participation ANg. Unit Cost ($/Ft.) Total Capital Cost ($) 20 Year Debt Service (d 5 % Simple Interest Total 20 Year Project Cost ($) (%) Utilized Capacity ($) Utilized Capacity 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period Water Line #1 0% 15 % 15"� $0 $0 $564,422 $564,422 $564,422 $564,422 12" waterline along Collin Outer Loop and F.M.455 to South Plant 15,631 12 $150.00 $2,344,650 $1,418,166 $3,762,816 Subtotal: 1 5,63 1$2,344,650 $1,418,1661 $3,762,816 Water Line #2 12" water line - F.M. 455 southern offset wrapping back to SH 5, west of CR419 9,153 12 $150.00 $1,372,950 $830,431 $2,203,381 609 12 X $50.00 $30,450 $18,418 $48,868 Subtotal: 9,762 $1,403,400 $848,849 $2,252,249 Water Line #3 0% 00/1) I I ?f, I I % II% $0 $0 $0 $242.372 S5,375 $247,747 $242,372 $5,375 $247,747 12" water line north of the Outer Loop, along CR 422 2,678 12 $150.00 $401,700 $242,969 $644,669 400 12 X $50.00 $20,000 $12,097 $32,097 Subtotal: 3,078 $421,700 $255,066 $676,766 Water Line #4 0% 0% 0% 0% 15% 15% 23% 23% 15% 15% 23% 23% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $96,700 $4,815 $101,515 $159,901 $73,657 $233,558 $96,700 $4,815 $101,515 $159,901 $73,657 $233,558 12" Water tine north of the Outer Loop, towards Anna Crossing Subdivision Subtotal: 2,888 3,991 6,879 12 12 X $150.00 $50.00 $433,200 $199,550 $632,750 $262,022 $120,698 $382,720 $695,222 $320,248 $1,015,470 Water Line #5 0";, 13% 1 LYt $0 $0 $337,763 $337,7631 $337,763 $337,763 12" water line following F.M. 455, east of S.P.RR Subtotal: 10793 10,793 12 $150.00 $1,618,950 $1,618950 $979,225 $979,2251 $2,598,175 $2,598,175 Water Line #6 0% 100% _ 001�11 $0 $0 $3.018.405 $3,018,405 $3.018,405 $3,018,405 24", north -south water line along CR 369, from S outh Grayson's North Plant towards West Well Subtotal: 9,404 1 24 9,404 $200.00 $1,880,800 $1,880,800 $1,137,605 $1,137,605 $3,018,405 $3,018,405 Water Line #7 0% 63% 63% $0 $0 $427,626 $427,626 $427,626 $427,626 12" north -south water line from Taylor Blvd. to Outer Loop Subtotal: 8,459 12 8,459 X $50.00 $422,950 $255,822 $422,950 $255,822 $678,772 S678,772 Water Line #8 0% 0°% 0% 09�1 96% 93°% 93% 96% 9M,, 9 3 %) 23% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $126,620 $126,620 $907,037 $125,649 $1,032,686 $63,839 $63,839 $126,620 $126,620 $907,037 $125,649 $1,032,686 $63,839 $63,839 12" water line running south from Taylor Blvd. and South Ferguson Pkwy. to Outer Loop 1,642 1 12 X $50.00 $82,100 $49,658 $131,758 Subtotal: 1,642 $82,100 $49,658 $131,758 Water Line #9 12", east -west water line from S.P.R.R. to Slayter Creek, south of Taylor Blvd. 4,069 12 $150.00 $610,350 $369,171 $979,521 1,691 12 X $50.00 $84,550 $51,140 $135,690 Subtotal: 5,760 $694,900 $420,311 $1,115,211 Water Line #10 23"l 12" water line along Taylor Blvd. between U.S. 75 and S. Ferguson Pkwy. Subtotal: 3,459 3,459 1 12 1 X $50.00 $172,950 $172,950 $104,609 $104,609 $277,559 $277,559 Water Line # 11 _ Not used Water Line #12 095, 0% 0% 0% 0°% 0% 21% 52% 52% 62% 26% 29% 1 _ 21% 52'% 52% 62% 26 / 29% 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 So $0 $0 $0 1 $0 $20,255 $20,255 $652.180 S21.823 S674,003 $147,759 $127,557 $788,818 $1,064,1341 $20,255 $20,255 $652,180 $21.823 $674,003 $147,759 $127,557 $788,818 $1,064,134 12" water line along CR 1106 between Dumas Dr. and CR 426 1,202 12 X S50.00 $60,100 $36,352 $96,452 Subtotal: 1,202 S60,100 $36,3521 $96,452 Water Line #13 12" waterline along CR426, South from CR 1106 to near Camden Park Subdivision 5,210 12 $150.00 $781,500 $472,692 $1,254,192 523 12 X $50.00 $26,150 $15,817 $41,967 Subtotal: 5,733 $807,650 $488,509 $1,296,159 Water Line #14 8", 12" & 16" waterlines along SH 5, south from CR 1106 and continuing onto Fern St. near High school Subtotal: 1,485 2,038 9,970 13,493 8 12 16 $100.00 $150.00 $170.00 $148,500 $305,700 $1,694,900 $2,149,100 $89,820 $238,320 $490,603 $2,720,063 $3,448,9871 $184,903 $1,025,163 $1,299,887 Water Line # 15 011 0% 44% 44% 44% 44% $0 $0 $0 $1,000,416 $1,000,416 12" & 16" water lines along Rosamond, west of S H 5, and turning south to CR 370 9,445 4,049 Subtotal: 13,494 12 16 $150.00 $170.00 $1,416,750 $688,330 $2,105,080 $856,924 $2,273,674 $1,104,668 $3,378,341 $416,338 $1,273,261 $486,054 $1,486,470 $486,054 $1,486,470 Water Line #16 Not used Water Line #17 0° _ 83% 83% SO so $220,717 $220,717 $220,717 $220,717 12" water line along U.S. 75, south of CR 370 Subtotal: 3,314 3,314 1 12 X $50.00 $165,700 $165,700 $100,224 $100 224 $265,924 $265,924 Water Line #18 Not used Water Line #19 0°ti 25",6 25% $0 $0 $102,309 $102,309 $102,309 $102,309 12", north -south water line between west Rosamond Pkwy. and CR 371, west of West Well Subtotal: 5,100 5,100 12 X $50.00 $255,000 $154,237 $255,000 $154,237 $409,237 $409,237 Water Line #20 011. 0% 0% 63 % 42% 42% 63% 42% 42% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,652,204 $29652,204 $466,704 $219,130 $685,834 $2,652,204 $2,652,204 $466,704 $219,130 $685,834 12" water ►ine traversing between intersections CR 290 and CR 288 to CR 284 and U.S. 75 17,411 1 12 1 $150.00 $2,623,200 $1,586,647 $4,209,847 Subtotal: 17,488 $2,623,200 $1,586,647 S4,209,847 Water Line #21 12" water line parallel to CR 368 and CR 286, west of U.S. 75, from CR 370 to CR 284 - Subtotal: 4,616 6,502 11,118 12 12 X $150.00 $50.00 $692,400 $325,100 $1,017,500 $418,799 $1,111,199 $521,737 $1,632,937 $196,637 $615,437 j: lclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 13 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 9 (Continued) *A ve-g, Unit costs are based in 2018 dollars unless olhenvis, indicated and includes 20% for engineering cmd easements. Line Length Identification(Inches) Diameter Developer Participation Avg. Unit Cost $/Ft Total Capital Cost $ 20 Year Debt Total 20 Year Service @ 5% Project Simple Interest Cost ($) (%) Utilized Capacity ($) UtilizedCapacity 2018 0";, 2028 45% During Fee Period 45% 2018 SO S0 2028 5719,295 S719,295 During Fee Period $719,295 $719,295 Water Line #22 12", east -west water line between CR368 and CR 370 to CR 290 and CR 288 S ubhltal: 6,640 12 6,640 $150.00 $996,000 $602,433 $996,000 $602,432 $1,598,432 SL598,432 Water Line #23 0% 14% 14% 0 $0 $315.2,9 S315,259 S315.259 $315,259 12" Hater lines crossing south ofproposed western T-02 EST Subtotal: 28,063 1 12 28,063 X 550.00 $1,403,150 $1,403,150 $848,698 $848,6981 $2,251,848 $2,251,848 Water Line #24 011 _ 81yo 811s, $0 SO 5164.696 S164,696 $164,696 $164.696 24" waterline running west from South Grayson's North Plant to near U.S.75 6,414 24 Subtotal: 6,414 S200.00 $1,282,800 $775,904 $1,282,800 $775,9041 $2,058,704 $2,058,704 Water Line #25 0% 55% 55% $0 $0 $559.435 $559,435 $559,435 $559,435 12", north -south water line, generally parallel to and east of U.S.75 between CR 371 and F,M. 455 Subtotal: 12,676 12,676 12 X $50.00 $633,800 $383,355 $633,800 $383,3551 $1,017,155 $1,017,155 Water Line #26 0 8% 8% $0 $0 $15,143 $15,143 $15,143 $15,143 16" water line crossing U.S. 75 at CR 371 Subtotal: 1,615 1,685 1 16 1 X S70.00 $117,950 $71,342 $117950 $71,342 $189,292 $189,292 Water Line #27 0114, 25% _ 25% $0 $0 $712,687 $712,687 $712,687 $712,687 18" water line along future western Collin County Outer Loop and north to CR 285 Subtotal: 20,898 20,898 18 X $85.00 $1,776,330 $1,776,330 $1,074,416 $1,074,4161 $2,850,746 $2,850,746 Water Line #28 0% 45% _ 45% $0 $0 $1,028,884 $1,028,884 $1,028,884 $1,028,884 18" waterline continuation along future western Collin County Outer Loop, west of S.H. 5 Subtotal: 7,701 7,701 1 18 $185.00 $1,424,685 $1,424,685 $861,723 $861,7231 $2,286,408 $2,286,408 Water Line #29 0% 45% 45% $0 SO $1,241,047 $1,241,047 S1,241,047 $1,241,047 18" water line along F.M. 455 between the creek near CK 419 to near S.H.121 1,289 Subtotal: 9,289 18 $185.00 $1,718,465 $1,039,417 $1,718,465 S1,039417 $2,757,882 $2,757,882 Water Line #30 0% 80% 80911 $0 SO $208567 $208,567 S208,567 S2081567 12" water line along S.H. 5 and CR 423, south of F.M. 455 Subtotal: 3,249 1 12 3,249 1 X S50.00 $162,450 $98,258 $162,450 S98,25R $260,708 S260,708 Water Line #31 0% 40°,, 409i, $0 SO $735.831 S735,831 $735,831 $735,831 18-inch P-758 Subtotal: 6,196 6,196 18 S185.00 $1,146,260 $11146,260 $693,317 $693,317 $1,839,577 $1,839,577 Water Line #32 04-,, 45" ,, 45°,, $0 $0 $646,607 $646,607 $646,607 $646,607 12-inch P-610, P-611, P-847 5,969 12-7 Subtotal: 5,969 S150.00 $895,350 $541,554 $895,350 $541,554 $1,436,904 $1,436,904 Water Line #33 0% 1001;4, 10094, $0 $0 $363,499 $363,499 $363,499 12-inch P-931 Subtotal• 1,510 12 1,510 1 $150.00 $226,500 $136,999 $226,500 $136,999 $363.499 $363,499 $363,499 Water Line #34 0% 100°11, 10011 $0 $0 $104,636 $104,636 $104,636 $104,636 12-inch P-528 Subtotal: 1,304 1,304 12 X S50.00 $65,200 $65200 $39,436 $39,436 $104,636 $104,636 Water Line #35 0% 75";, 75% $0 $0 $704,129 $704,129 $704,129 $704,129 12-inch P-742 Subtotal: 3,9011 3,900 12 $150.00 $585,000 $585000 $353,838 $353,838 $938,838 $938,838 Water Line #36 0°4, 15% 15% $0 S0 $91,501 S91,501 $91,501 591,5U1 12-inch P-524, P-790, P-803 7,602 Subtotal: 7602 12 X $50.00 $380,100 $229,904 $380,100 $229,9114 $610,004 S610,004 Water Line #37 0% 15% 15% $0 $0 $52,334 $52,334 $52,334 $52,334 12-inch P-809 Subtotal: 4,348 12 4,348 1 X $50.00 $217,400 $131,495 $217,400 $131,495 $348,895 $348,895 Water Line #38 0"/0 15% 15% $0 $0 $54,946 $54,946 $54,946 $54,946 12-inch J-725,J-727 4,565 Subtotal: 4565 12 X S50.00 $228,250 $228,2511 $138,057 1$138,057 $366,307 S366,307 Water Line #39 0% 15% 15% $0 $0 $46,458 $46,458 $46,458 $46,458 16-inch P-563 Subtotal: 2,757 2,757 16 X S70.00 5192990 $192,9911 $116,730 $116,730 $309,720 $309,720 Water Line #40 0`4, 25% 25% $0 $0 $276,849 $276,849 $276,849 $276,849 164nch P-588 4,059 16 Subtotal: 4,059 S170.00 S690,030 $690,030 $417,366 $417,366 $1,107,396 $1,107,396 Water Line #41 0i; 25% 25% $0 S0 $62,168 $62,168 $62,168 $62,168 12-inch P-935 Subtotal: 3,099 3,099 12 S50.00 $154,950 $93,722 $154,950 $93,722 $248,672 $248,672 Water Line #42 0"i, 15% 15% $0 S0 $98,005 $98,005 $98,005 $98,005 16-inch P-769 Subtotal: 5,816 5,816 16 X S70.00 $407,120 $407,120 $246,247 $246,247 $653,367 $653,367 Water Line #43 0% 15% 15' , $0 SO $116J42 S116,142 $116,142 $116,142 18-inch P-828, P-760 Subtotal: 5,676 51676 18 X $85.00 $482,460 S482,460 $291,817 $291,817 $774,277 $774,277 Water Lines - CIP Total TOTAL 1 299,225 7 1$34,045,720 1 $20,592,613 $54,638,333 S21,378,2251 $21,378,225 P-### : Reference to Water SystemMater Plan Map -Water Line Number J-### :Reference to Water System Master Plan Map -Node Number "X" :Developer Participation j: lclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsl04-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 14 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 10 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WATER FACILITIES x A, —aa e Uni[ costs are haled in ?0I S dollars unless othenrise indicate,/ and incl�,des 20% Jm en,gineerino acid ensen, en ts. Pipc Number Total Capacity (MG NIGD) 'Total Capital Cost ($) 1 MG EST 20 Year Debt Service @ 5% 1 Simple Interest Total 20 Year Project I Cost (MCD or MG) Capacity Utilized (%) Utilized Capacitti (S) UtilizedCa )•city 1 2018 0.00 0.00 2028 0.75 1.00 During Fee Period 0.75 1.0 2018 04S 0% 2028 80"1, 20% During Fee Period 80% 20% 2018 SO $0 SO $0 2028 $3,851,644 $3,851,644 $481,456 S481,456 During Fee Period $3,851,644 $3,851,644 $481,456 S481,456 L00 $3,000,000 1 $1,814,555 $4,814,555 Subtotal: 1.00 $3,000,000 $1,814,555 $4,814,555 South Plant Pump Station Expansion Subtotal: 5.00 5.00 $1,500,000 1 $1,500,000 1 $907,278 $907,278 $2,407,278 S2,407,278 CGMA Sherman Connection 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 1.50 0.50 2.0 2.0 1.5 0.5 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 10% 100% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100°/ SO $0 SO $0 SO $0 SO SO $160,485 $160,485 $320,970 S320,970 $2,407,278 $2,407,278 $1,123,396 $1,123,396 $160,485 $160,485 $320,970 $320,970 $2,407,278 $2,407,278 $1,123,396 $1,123,396 NIA 51,000,000 $604,852 $1,604,852 Subtotal• N/A $1,000,000 $604,852 $1,604,852 CGMA Bloomdale Pump Station NiA S2,000,000 $1,209,703 $3,209,703 S ubtota1: N/A S2,000.000 $1,209,703 S3,209,703 South Grayson Take Point - 1.5 MGD Pump 1.50 $1,500,000 $907,278 $2,407,278 Subtotal: 1.50 $1,500,000 $907,278 $2,407,278 South Grayson Take Point - 0.5 GSR Subtotal: 0.50 0.50 $700,000 S700.000 $423,396 $423,396 $1,123,396 $1,123,396 Water Facilities - CIP Total $9,700,0011 $5,867,062 $15,567,062 $0 $8,345,229 $8,345,229 j: Ictericahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 15 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. VI. WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM %V nnnr al At this time, based on projections provided by the City, the City of Anna will approximately double in population over the ten-year period. The most significant growth, that affects the wastewater collection needs of the City, will occur in the Slayter Creek Basin, along the US 75 corridor, east of SH 5 and along Hurricane Creek west of US 75. The wastewater collection system is partially in place to serve the new development. The existing Slayter Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), as well as the Point Of Entry (POE) to the NTWMD system, provide treatment for the sewage. Conveyance from the new developments to these existing facilities will be required. The City of Anna's flow is metered at the WWTP and at two Points of Entry into the regional NTMWD lines. New developments in certain areas of the City will require wastewater lift stations and force mains to convey sewage towards the existing collection system A. Existing Wastewater System Figure No. 3, the Existing Wastewater Facility Recovery Map, shows projects that have been constructed in part by the City, and are eligible for some financial recovery. Summaries of major project undertakings for the City are listed below. Y Throckmorton Creek 21-inch Collection: In approximately 2003, the City staff entered into a contract to construct approximately 4,500 linear feet of 21-inch PVC collection line. This facilitated the construction of single family homes adjacent to FM 455. It also picked up flow from the commercial development located at the intersection of US 75 and FM 455. Y Slayter Creek 24-inch Collection Line: In approximately 2005, the City staff entered into a contract to construct approximately 7,000 linear feet of 24-inch PVC collection line. This facilitated the construction of single family homes in the Slayter Creek basin north of FM 455. Y Clemmons Creek Point of Entry: In approximately 2005, the City staff entered into a joint contract with the City of Melissa to construct a 15-inch regional sanitary sewer collector line. The existing line terminated approximately one-half mile south of the j: Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reports104-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 16 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. City of Anna City Limit lines. Around 2016, this line was extended into the City of Anna to facilitate growth east of SH 5. Y Throckmorton Creek Point of Entry: In approximately 2009, the City staff entered into a joint contract with the City of Melissa to construct a 21-inch regional sanitary sewer collector line. A large percentage of the projected growth will be conveyed to the Throckmorton Creek POE. B. Proposed Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan Figure No. 4 illustrates the proposed wastewater system improvements based on meeting the 10-year, future demands of new developments for the City of Anna. The expectation is that each line will be engineered based on the demands associated with the current land use plan and any special circumstances particular to a business or operation that might potentially overload the system due to specific demand issues. j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 17 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 10 10-YEAR WASTEWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Project Size Developer Participation Total Capital Cost(t) Debt Service(2) Total Project Cost($) Throckmorton Creek Parallel Line #1 VARIES (27)"" $3,788,325 $2,291,375 $6,079,700 Sanitary Sewer Line 42 36"" X $7,895,360 $4,775,522 $12,670,882 Sanitary Sewer Line #3 18" X $2,399,265 $1,451,200 $3,850,465 Sanitary Sewer Line #4A $3,087,500 $1,867,480 $4,954,980 Sanitary Sewer Line #413 12"" X $3,935,000 $2,380,092 $6,315,092 Sanitary Sewer Line #5 12"" X $684,900 $414,263 $1,099,163 Sanitary Sewer Line #6 12"" X $490,950 $296,952 $787,902 Sanitary Sewer Line #7 15"" X $1,445,000 $874,011 $2,319,011 Sanitary Sewer Line 48 811" X $326,700 $197,605 $524,305 Sanitary Sewer Line #9 18"" $241,425 $146,026 $387,451 Sanitary Sewer Line #10 12"" $639,450 $386,772 $1,026,222 Sanitary Sewer Line # I I (Camden Park Offsite Gravity) 8",12"" X $304,780 $184,347 $489,127 Sanitary Sewer Line # 12 (Sweetwater F.M.) 10"" X $504,000 $304,845 $808,845 Sanitary Sewer Line #14 (F.M.) 12"" X $1,479,850 $895,090 $2,374,940 Sanitary Sewer Line #15 (F.M.) 20"" X $2,544,000 $1,538,743 $4,082,743 Sanitary Sewer Line #16 12" $1,150,000 $695,580 $1,845,580 Sanitary Sewer Line #17 12" $700,000 $423,396 $1,123,396 Subtotal: Wastewater Collection Lines $31,616,505 $19,123,298 $50,739,803 $50,739,803 Wastewater Svstem Facilities Project Size (MG/MGD) Developer Participation Total Capital Cost (r) Debt Service (2) Total Project Cost ($) Sweetwater Lift Station (#18) 1.30 X $498,200 $301,337 $799,537 Jacobs Lift Station (#19) 1.60 $750,000 $453,639 $1,203,639 W S2 Lift Station (#20) 9.01 X $2,250,000 $1,360,916 $3,610,916 NTMWD Meter Station (#22) N/A $350,000 $211,698 $561,698 Trinity Meter Station (#23) N/A 1 1 $500,000 1 $302,426 1 $802,426 Subtotal: Wastewater Collection Facilities 1 1 $4,348,200 1 $2,630,016 1 $6,978,216 Wastewater Master Plan Wastewater CIP Grand Total C. Utilized Capacity $50,000 $0 $50,000 $36,014,705 $21,753,315 $57,768,020 Utilized capacity for the wastewater collection system was calculated based on land absorption from population growth projections provided by the City. The population and employment growth in each wastewater drainage basin was determined utilizing the City's growth projections. These growth rates were utilized to calculate 2018 and 2028 design flows. j: Ictertcahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsl04-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 20 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. The following summarizes each design flow component utilized to calculate the wastewater design flows. 1) Population Based Flow: For the purpose of this wastewater impact fee study an average per capita flow of 100 gallons per day (gpcd) is a reasonable basis for the design of the wastewater collection and treatment facilities. 2) Non -Population Based Flow: Non-residential average flows are estimated based on an average flow per acre for each non-residential land use category. Commercial base unit flows were estimated to be 1,500 gallons per acre per day (gpad) to simulate dry weather conditions. The City also has a public component to consider. The unit for public components was estimated to be 1,000 gpad. 3) Infiltration and Inflow: Groundwater can infiltrate into the sanitary sewer system through faulty sewer pipe joints, breaks in sewer pipes and manholes and faulty service lines. This infiltration creates an average day flow related burden on the wastewater collection system and the wastewater treatment plant. Infiltration is a constant that is not necessarily based on temporary storm based environmental conditions. Normal plant capacity must be designed to handle these infiltration related conditions. The City can embark on programs to rehabilitate lines that contribute significant infiltration volumes when economically and environmentally feasible, and/or desirable. Inflow is generally related to storm based events that increase groundwater and surface water flow into the sanitary system. The additional flow is generally recognized to enter through manholes, service lines, roof drains and storm drains. Inflow related surges could cause surcharged sewers, overflows at manholes and peak flows that surpass the capacity of the treatment plant. It is estimated, for wastewater collection system planning purposes, that the combined infiltration and inflow is 800 gallons per acre per day (gpad) for the existing wastewater collection system and 600 gpad for the new lines proposed in the build -out wastewater collection system. j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 21 of 2 7 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. 4) The calculation of peak flows requires the development of a unit hydrograph (Diurnal Curve). At the time of this report, a sufficient amount of wastewater flow data was not available to allow for a feasible approach for the development of a diurnal curve specific to the City of Anna. However, unit hydrographs from other cities monitored in the past were evaluated and compiled into a diurnal curve that reasonably represents the peak flow in the City of Anna. Diurnal curves are applied to the hydraulic model to simulate a 24-hour temporal cycle in a wastewater system. The diurnal curve was applied system wide to the base flows. The base flow calculated for inflow and infiltration is an independent variable that is not affected by the Diurnal Pattern. The percent utilized capacity was calculated for the design flow of each study year based on the build -out capacity. The utilized capacity for each facility during the Impact Fee period is the difference between the year 2028 available capacity and the year 2018 available capacity. Table No. 11 below summarizes the project cost and utilized cost over the impact fee period of 2018 - 2028 for each element of the wastewater system (impact fee eligible). The utilized capacity for each existing and proposed wastewater collection line is presented in detail in Impact Fee Capacity Calculation Tables No. 13, No. 14, and No. 15. TABLE NO. 11 SUMMARY OF ELIGIBLE CAPITAL COST & UTILIZED CAPACITY COST Wastewater System Total 20-Year Project Cost M Utilized Capacity During Fee Period M Existing Wastewater Facilities $24,945,474 $8,167,784 Existing Wastewater System Subtotal: $24,945,474 $8,167,784 Proposed Wastewater Collection Sewer Lines $50,739,803 $24,292,009 Proposed Wastewater Facilities $6,978,216 $5,723,222 Wastewater System Master Plan $50,000 $50,000 Proposed Water System Subtotal: $57,768,020 $30,065,231 TOTAL: $82,713,493 $38,233,015 j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 22 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 12 EXISTING FACILITY RECOVERY - WASTEWATER LINES & FACILITIES * Average Unit costs are Aased in 2014 dollars unless otherwise indicated and includes 20% (or engineering and Pipe Number Total Capacity MCD Dale of ConsL Total Capital cost $ 20 Year Debt S...ice@5% Sim eInterest Total 20 Year Project Cost S GD Utili.edCapacity a acity Utilized Capacity 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #1 0.13 1.40 127 1% 15% 13'Y, $46,051 $46,051 $479,784 $479,784 $433,711 $433,733 Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Lower) [lo-ek-lon Subtotal: 9.60 9.60 2005 2005 $2,050,000 $2,050,000 $1,239,946 $1,239,946 $3,289, - $3,289,946 Existing Sanitary Sewer FacHity #2 0.23 140 1,17 4% 25% 21% $71:957 $71,957 $437,322 $437,322 $365,365 $365,365 Throckmorton Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Upper) Subtotal: 5.60 5.60 2008 2008 $1,090,000 $1,090,000 $659,288 $659,288 $1,749,288 $1,749,288 Exis Ling S ardtary SewerFacility #3 0.00 SO $583,021 S583,021 $583,021 $583,1121 Throckmorton I.S. Relief Trunk Sewer Subtotal: 6,07 6.07 2016 11 2016 $1,453,145 11,453,145 1 $878:937 $878937 $2,332,082 $2,332,082 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #4 0.00 4.80 4.80 0% 100% IUII% $0 So $1,444,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 Slayter Creek Trunk Sewer Subtotal: 4.80 4.80 2015 2015 $900,000 $900,000 $544,367 $544,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 Existing Sanitary Sewer Faeffity #5 0.84 0.91 207 84% 91 % 7% $1,486,980 S1,486,980 $1,615,484 $1,615,484 $128,504 $128,504 Upper Slayter Creek Trunk Sewer Subtotal: I.00 1.00 2005 2005 $1,105,000 $1,105,000 $668,361 $668,361 $1,773,361 $1,773,361 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #6 0.00 0.70 0.70 119.6 23% 23% $0 SII $642,211 $642,208 $&12,208 $642,208 Clemmons Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Lower) Subtotal: 3,00 3.00 1 2008 2008 $1,715,000 $1,715,000 $1,037,321 $1,037,321 $2,752,321 $2,752,321 Existing Sanitary Semer FacHity #7 0.06 0.04 0.90 0.60 0.84 056 2 2 30% 30% 28% 28% $44,172 544,172 $21,826 521,826 $662,584 1662,1M $327,390 5327,390 $618,412 $618,412 $305,564 $305,564 Cl,mmons Creek Regional Trunk S ewer (Upper) 3.00 2016 $1,376,210 $832,403 $2,208,613 Subtotal: 3.00 2016 S1,376,210 S832,403 $2.208,613 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #8 Anna Crossing L.S. Force Main Subtotal: 2,00 2.00 2015 2015 $680,000 $680,000 $411,299 S411,299 $1,091,299 $1,091,299 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facflity #9 0.04 0.35 0.60 0.50 0.56 0.15 2% 70% 30% 100% 28%, 11 3VI $10,271 $10,271 $2,207,474 $2,207,474 $154,066 5154,066 $3,153,534 $3,153,534 1143795 $143:795 $946,060 $946,060 Anna Crossing lift Station 2.00 2015 $320,000 $193,553 $513,553 Subtotal: 2.00 2015 $320,000 $193,553 $513,553 11 Exisft Sanitary SewerFacility #10 Slayter Creek W WTP Subtotal: 0.50 0.50 2005 2005 $1,965,000 $1,9650000 $1,188,534 $1,188,534 $3,153,53 $3,153,534 ExistingSanitary Sewer Facility #11 0.35 0.50 0.50 3.00 0.15 2.50 70% 8% 100°�b 50% 30':6 42' $73? 266 S732,266 S202.545 S202,545 $1,046,094 $1,046,094 $1,265,907 $1,265,907 $313,828 $313,828 $1,063,362 $1,063,362 Slayter Creek W W rP Headworks lift Station 0.50 2014 $651;832 $394,262 $1,046,094 Subtotal: 0.50 2014 $fi51,R32 $394,262 $1,114fi,1194 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facifity #12 16 inch Force Main Subtotal: 6.00 6.00 1 2018 2018 $1,577,600 S1,577,600 $954,214 $954,214 $2,531,814 $2,531,814 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #13 0.50 3.00 2.50 8% 50% 42% $224,679.24 $224,679 $1,404,245 $1,404,245 $1,179,566 $1,179,566 WAS 1 lift Station Subtotal: 6.00 6.00 1 2018 2018 $1,750,000 $1,750,000 $1,058,491 $1,058,491 $2,808,491 $2,808,491 Wastewater Facilities - Project Recovery Total $4,976,263 $13,216,005 $8,167,784 $ 6,633,7871 $10,060,9751 $24,945,474 j: Ictericahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 23 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 13 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WASTEWATER LINES *A verave Unit costs are based in 2014 dollars unless otherwise indicated and includes 20% for eneineerine and easements Pipe \mnber Total Capacity N1110)),Date of Cons Total Capital Cost $ 20 Year Debt Service @ 5 % simple Interest Total 20 Year Project Cost $ (MGD) Utilized Capacity %) UfilizedCa •city $ Utilized Capacity 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #1 0.13 1.40 1.27 1 % 15% 13% $46,051 $46,051 S479,784 S479,784 _ $433,733 $433,733 'f hrocluuortou Creel: Regional Trunk Sewer (Lower) Subtotal: 9.60 1 2005 11 9.60 2005 $2,050,000 $2,050,000 $1,2391,946 S1,239,946 S3.289,946 53,28Q946 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #2 0.23 0.00 1.40 1.52 1.17 1.52 4% 0% 25% 25% 21% 25% $71,957 $71,957 $0 $0 $437,322 $437,3221 $583,021 $583,021 $365,365 $365,365 $583,021 $583,021 Throckmorton Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Upper) 5,60 1 2008 11 $1,090,000 $659,288 S1.749,288 Subtotal: 5.60 2008 $1,090,000 $659,288 S1,749,288 Existing Sanitaty Sewer Facility #3 Throckmorton L.S. Relief Trunk Sewer Subtotal• 6.07 1 2016 6.07 2016 $1,453,145 $978,937 $1,453,145 $878,937 $2,332,082 $2,332,082 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #4 0.00 4.80 4.80 0% 100% 100% $0 $0 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 Slayter Creek Trunk Sewer Subtotal: 4.80 4.80 2015 11 2015 $900,000 $900,000 $544,367 $544,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #5 0.84 0.91 0.07 841/. 91% 7% $1,486,980 $1,486,980 $1,615,484 S1,615,484 $128,504 $128,504 Upper Slayter Creek Trunk Sewer Subtotal: 1.00 1 2005 11 1.00 2005 $1,105,000 $111051000 $668.361 S668,361 S1.773361 $1,773,361 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #6 0.00 0.06 _ 0.04 0.04 0.70 0.90 0.60 0.60 070 0.84 OS6 056 0% 2% 2"0 2% 23% 30% 30% 30% 23% 28% 28% 28% $0 $0 $44,172 $44,172 $21,826 $21,826 $10,271 $10,271 $642,208 $642,208 $662.584 $662,584 $327,390 $327,390 $154,066 S154,066 $642,208 $642,208 $618,412 $618,412 $305,564 $305,564 $143,795 $143,795 Clemmons Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Lower) 3.00 1 2008 $1,715,000 $1,037,321 $2,752,321 Subtotal: 3.00 2008 $1,715,000 $1,037,321 $2,752,321 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #7 ek Regional Trunk Sewer (Upper) 3.00 2016 $1,376,210 $832,403 $2,208,6G fS---tot:l-Cr3.00 2016 $1,376,210 $832,403 $2,209-611 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #8 Anna Crossing L.S. Force Main 2.00 2015 $680,000 $411,299 $1991,299 Subtotal: 2.00 2015 $680,000 $411,299 $1,091,299 Existing SaWtary Sewer Facility 99 Anna Crossing lift Station Subtotal: 2.011 2115 2.00 2015 $320,000 $193,553 $32Q,000 $193,553 $513,553 $513,553 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #10 0.35 0.500.15 70% 100% 30'/6 $2,207,474 $2,207,474 $3,153,534 $3,153,534 $946,060 $946,060 Slayter Creek WWTP Subtotal: 0.50 0.50 1 2005 11 2005 $1,965,000 $1,965,000 $1,188,534 $1,188,534 $3,153,534 $3,153.534 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #11 0.35 0.50 0.50 0.50 3.00 0.15 2.50 2.50 70% 8% 8% 100'% ALL 5V,, 30% 42% 42%P$47'6 S732.266 S732,266 $202,545 $202,545 4 9 $1,046,094 $1,046,094 S1,265,907 $1,261,907 $1,404,245 $1,404,245 $313,828 $313,828 $1,063,362 $1,063,362 $1,179,566 $1,179,566 Slayter Creek W WTP Headworks lift Station 0,50 1 2014 $651,832 $394,262 $1,046,094 Subtotal: 0.50 2014 $651,832 $394,262 $1,046,094 ExisfiW Sanitary Sewer Facility #12 16 inch Force Main 6.00 1 2018 11 $1,577,600 S954,214 $2,531,814 Subtotal: 6.00 2018 $1,577,600 $954,214 $2,531,814 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #13 WAS 1 liR Station 3.00 subtotal: 6.00 2018 6.00 2018 $1,75Q,000 $1,058,491 $1,750,000 $1,058,491 $2,R08,491 $2,808,491 Wastewater Facilities - Project Recovery Total J$13,216,005 $8,167,784 $16,633,787 $10,060,975 $24,945,474 j: Ictericahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 24 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 14 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WASTEWATER FACILITIES * Average Unit costs are based in 2014 dallars unless otherwise indicated and includes 20% far engineering and easements. Pipe Number Total Capacity Total Capital Cost ($) 20 Year Debt Service @ 5% Simplelnterest Total 20 Year Project Cost ($) (M®) Utilized Capacity (%) Utilized Capacity ($) Utilized Capacity 2018 0.00 0.00 0.00 2028 30 160 9.01 During Fee Period 1.30 1,60 9.01 2018 0% 0% 0% 2028 100% 100% 100% During Fee Period 100% 100% 100°)�, 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 2028 S799,537 S799,537 $1,203,639 $1,203,639 $3,610,916 S3,610,916 During Fee Period $799,537 5799,.537 $1,203,639 $1,203,639 S3,610,916 $3,610,916 Sweetwater Lift Station (#18) �p $498,200 $301,337 5799,537 Subtotal: 1.30 $498,200 $301,337 S799,537 Jacobs Lift Station (#19) 1,60 $750,000 $453,639 $1,203,639 Subtotal: 1.60 $750,000 $453,639 $1,203,639 WS2 Lift Station (#20) Subtotal: 9.01 9.01 $2,250,000 $2,250,000 $1,360,916 $1,360,916 $3,610,916 $3,610,916 NTMWD Meter Station (#22) NiA N-A N/A 0% 8% 8'% $0 $0 $44,936 $44,936 $44,936 $44,936 S ubhrtal: N/A N/A $350,000 $350,000 $211,698 $211,698 S561,698 S561,698 Trinity Meter Station (#23) N;A N/A N/A 0% 8"/o M., $0 $0 $64,194 $64,194 $64,194 $64,194 Subtotal: N/A I N/A $500,000 1 $500,C $302,426 S802,426 $302,426 $802,426 Wastewater Facilities - Project CIP Total $4,348,2001 $2,630,0161 $6,978,216 $0 $5,723,222 $5,723,222 j: Ictericahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 25 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. VII. CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES - WATER & WASTEWATER SYSTEM The maximum impact fees for the water and wastewater systems are calculated separately by dividing the cost of the capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated and attributable to new development in the service area within the ten year period by the number of living units anticipated to be added to City within the ten year period as shown on the following tables. To simplify collection, we recommend the fee remain fixed throughout the 5-year period, unless changed by Council. -alculated Water Impact Fee = Eligible Existing Utilized Cost + Eligible Proposed Utilized Cost umber of New LUE's over the Next 10 Yea _ $17,613,298 + $29,723,454 = $47,336,752 5,248 5, 248 1 _ $9,020.28 Use: $9,020 Maximum Water Impact Fee Allowable: $9,020 x 50% _ $4,510 Calc. Wastewater Impact FeE Eligible Existing Utilized Cost + Eligible Proposed Utilized Cost umber of New LUE's over the Next 10 Yea _ $8,167,784 + $30,065,231 = $38,233,015 4,687 4,687 _ $8,157.46 Use: $8,157 1 aximum Wastewater Impact Fee Allowed $8,157 x 50% Based on the Allowable Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Water and Wastewater, Table No. 15 calculates the maximum water and wastewater (sewer) impact fee for the various sizes of water meters. j:Iclericahann&2018-133 w&ww impactfee update 20J&reportsW4-report.docz - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 26 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 15 ALLOWABLE MAXIMUM FEE PER LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENT AND PER METER SIZE AND TYPE Maximum Water Impact fee per LUE $4,510 Maximum Wastewater Impact fee per Ll $4,079 Land Use Meter Type Meter Size Maximum Impact Fee Total LUE Water Wastewater Single Family Residential Simple 3/4" 1 $4,510 $4,079 $8,589 Single Family Residential Simple 1" 1.7 $7,667 $6,933 $14,601 Single Family Residential Simple 1-1/2" 3.3 $14,883 $13,459 $28,343 Single Family Residential Simple 2" 5.3 $23,904 $21,616 $45,520 Commercial/Retail Compound 2" 5.3 $23,904 $21,616 $45,520 Commercial/Retail Turbine 2" 6.7 $30,218 $27,326 $57,544 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fan Compound 3" 10.7 $48,259 $43,640 $91,898 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fa Turbine 3" 16 $72,162 $65,256 $137,418 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fan Compound 4" 16.7 $75,319 $68,111 $143,430 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fan Turbine 4" 28 $126,284 $114,198 $240,482 Industrial Compound 6" 33.3 $150,188 $135,814 $286,002 Industrial Turbine 6" 61.3 $276,472 $250,012 $526,484 Industrial Compound 8" 53.3 $240,391 $217,384 $457,775 Industrial Turbine 8" 106.7 $481,232 $435,176 $916,408 Industrial Compound 10" 153.3 $691,405 $625,234 $1,316,639 Industrial Turbine 10"1 166.7 1 $751,840 1 $679,886 1 $1,431,726 Industrial jTurbine 12" 1 220 1 $992,231 1 $897,270 1 $1,889,501 Note: Selection of the meter size and type shall be dependent on application, and with the input of both the applicant and City staff. j:Iclericahann&2018-133 w&ww impactfee update 20J&reportsW4-report.docz - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 27 of 27 2018-2028 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE THE CITY OF manna BIRKHOFF, HENDRICKS & CARTER, L.L.P. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS - TBPE Firm No. 526 11910 Greenville Ave., Suite 600, Dallas, Texas 75243 Phone (214) 361-7900 September 2018 THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 8. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1/8/2019 Consider/Discuss/Action regarding approval of an Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the City's Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Roadway Impact Fees. (Joseph Johnson) SUMMARY: Impact fees are authorized under Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code and may be imposed upon new developments to fund both existing and proposed infrastructure that is necessary to provide service to a development. The last roadway impact fee update was completed in 2014. By statute, the City is required to review the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvement Plan (C I P) at least once every 5 years but may update them sooner as growth patterns, land use and infrastructure needs change. Over the past several months, staff has worked with our engineering consultant to identify street infrastructure projects that should be added to our CI P. Subsequently, land use assumptions, population projections, and calculated maximum fees were evaluated with new recommendations for the population projections and calculated maximum fees. On September 10, 2018, the updated Roadway Impact Fee Report was presented to the Impact Fee Advisory Committee which subsequently took action approving a letter addressed to the Council concurring with the findings of the report and finding that the report is in general compliance with Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395. At the Council Meeting held on November 13, 2018, Council approved a Resolution setting a Public Hearing for January 8, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of receiving public comment. Additionally, the report was made available to the public. Having held the Public Hearing, the Council may now choose to take action on the adoption of proposed amendments to the City's Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Roadway Impact Fees. [+AIF_1Sy:7xels]iyiIIT, I4ZIT`1 III [s]i;A Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the City's Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Roadway Impact Fees. /_Aif_Ta:IM1:4kik& 1 Description Ordinance Roadway Impact Fee Report Upload Date Type 12/17/2018 Ordinance 12/17/2018 Exhibit CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, ADOPTING UPDATED LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS, AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEES; AMENDING THE ANNA CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES PART IV, ARTICLE 7, ADDING A NEW SECTION 14 (ROADWAY IMPACT FEES); PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR ANY VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE NOT TO EXCEED $2,000; PROVIDING FOR SAVINGS, SEVERABILITY, AND REPEALING CLAUSES; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLICATION OF THE CAPTION HEREOF. WHEREAS, the City of Anna, Texas ("the City") has previously adopted provisions relating to the imposition of roadway impact fees on developments within the City; and WHEREAS, the costs borne by current taxpaying residents of the City of Anna associated with new roadway improvements that primarily benefit and are necessitated by new development would be reduced if the City increased its roadway impact fees; and WHEREAS, the City of Anna, Texas City Council ("the City Council") has investigated and determined that it would be advantageous and beneficial to the City and its citizens to adopt a new assessment rate for roadway impact fees and amend Part IV, Article 7 by adding a new Section 14 (Roadway Impact Fees) to The Anna City Code of Ordinances ("Anna Code"); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. Recitals Incorporated. The above -referenced recitals are incorporated herein as if set forth in full for all purposes. Section 2. Adoption of Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan. As relates to roadway facilities, the City Council hereby adopts updates to the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan as set forth in the Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The adoption of said land use assumptions and capital improvements plan is cumulative of any land use assumptions and capital improvements plan regarding water and wastewater facilities and this ordinance does not amend or otherwise modify the City's existing water or wastewater impact fees. CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. Page 1 of 3 Section 3. Amendment to Assessment Rate of Roadway Impact Fees. The City hereby adopts the following assessment rates per service unit for the service areas listed below, to be rounded to the nearest dollar after calculating the total number of service units subject to the assessment, which shall replace the previously adopted assessment rates: Service Area 1 (maximum $905.00) = Service Area 2 (maximum $842.00) = These assessment rates shall be effective on new development in the City in accordance with Anna Code and state law. Section 4. Anna Code Amendments. In accordance with Part Il, Article 1, Section amendments are made to the Anna Code, (Roadway Impact Fees), as shown below, underlined text (example) and any deleted (fie): Section 14. Roadway Impact Fees 9 of the Anna Code, the following Part IV, Article 7, by adding a new Section with any added language shown in language shown in strikethrough text Facility Cateeory Service Area Maximum Impact Fee Per Adopted Impact Fee Per Equivalent Service Unit Equivalent Service Unit Roadway Facilities 1 905 $ Roadway Facilities 2 842 $ (Ord. No. adopted 1111312018; Cross Reference: Part ll, Article 49, Section 8.05 Section 5. Penalty. 14 Any violation of any of the terms of this ordinance, whether denominated in this ordinance as unlawful or not, shall be deemed a misdemeanor. Any person convicted of any such violation shall be fined in an amount not to exceed $2,000 for each incidence of violation. Each violation is considered a separate offense and will be punished separately. CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. Page 2 of 3 Section 6. Savings, Severability and Repealing Clauses. All ordinances of the City in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are repealed to the extent of that conflict. If any provision of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of such ordinance shall continue in full force and effect the same as if such invalid or unconstitutional provision had never been a part hereof. The City declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase be declared unconstitutional or invalid. Section 7. Publication of the Caption Hereof and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effective from and after its passage and upon the posting and/or publication, if required by law, of its caption and the City Secretary is hereby directed to implement such posting and/or publication. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas, this 8th day of January 2019. ATTESTED: Carrie Smith City Secretary APPROVED: Nate Pike, Mayor CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. Page 3 of 3 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE UPDATE 2018 - 2028 Prepared For: THE CITY OF manna BIRKHOFF, HENDRICKS & CARTER, L.L.P. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS - TBPE Firm No. 526 DALLAS, TEXAS September 2018 ..04-1 GARY C. hfENQRICKS � ;........................... ........ ft.-0 65226 p CITY OF ANNA 2018-2028 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE UPDATE TABLE OF CONTENTS Pate No. I. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 1 II. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS (Provided by City of Anna) ....................................................... 1 Y Table No. 1 — Summary of Land Use Data.................................................................................. 1 III. ROADWAY SERVICE AREAS.................................................................................................. 2 IV. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN............................................................................................ 2 Y Figure No. 1 — Capital Improvement Plan Project Map .......................................................... 4 Y Table No. 2 — Capital Improvement Plan Project List............................................................ 4 V. IMPACT FEE CALCULATION.................................................................................................. 6 Y Table No. 3 — Service Unit Calculation by Land Use Type .................................................... 7 Y Table No. 4a — Vehicle Mile Calculation by Land Use and Service Area .............................. 8 Y Table No. 4b — Summary of Vehicle Miles by Service Area and Development Period ......... 8 Y Table No. 5 — Summary of Capital Improvement Cost by Service Area ................................ 9 Y Table No. 6 — Land Use Equivalency..................................................................................... 9 Y Table No. 7 — Impact Fee Calculation by Service Area ........................................................ 10 VI. SUMMARY OF IMPACT FEE CALCULATION METHODOLOGY ..................................... 10 Y Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Service Area 1.......................................................... 11 Y Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Service Area 2.......................................................... 11 VIL IMPACT FEE CALCULATION EXAMPLES........................................................................ 11 Y Table No. 8 — Common Roadway Land Use Equivalencies ................................................ 12 Y Service Area 1 and Service Area 2 Example Impact Fee Calculation .................................. 13 j:\clerical\anna\2018-137 roadway impact fec\reports\03-index.docx - Z - CITY OF ANNA THOROUGHFARE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN ROADWAY IMPACT FEES I. INTRODUCTION Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code allows for the financing of capital improvements by municipalities through the implementation of impact fees. The land use assumptions and capital improvement plans utilized to develop the roadway impact fees must be reviewed and updated every five (5) years. The update of the impact fees is performed following these basic steps: 1. Development of land use assumptions to identify types and intensities of land use within the City. 2. Development of a Capital Improvement Plan to include improvements planned for the next 10-year period to accommodate growth in the City. 3. Development of the calculated and the maximum impact fee. II. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS One of the initial steps in developing roadway impact fees includes the identification of data related to the planned land uses for land within the City of Anna city limits. The land use data provided by the City of Anna included projected growth by land use type and the locations they are expected to occur over the next 10 years (2018-2028) and at build -out. A summary of the land use data provided for the land within the city limits of Anna is provided in Table 1. Table 1- Summary of Land Use Data Non- Residential Uses Land Use Residential Industrial Retail Office Unit Dwelling Units Acres Acres Acres Service Service Service Service Service Service Service Service Service Total Total Total Total Area I Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 2 2018 3,667 1,347 5,014 23 15 38 85 25 110 25 10 35 2028 6,164 3,200 1 9,364 45 65 110 140 40 180 115 1 45 160 Ultimate 1 1 15,938 7,638 23,576 84 125 209 550 250 800 250 130 380 Notes: 1) Utli mate Residential and Non -Residential Development Capacity is limited to Build -Out in the current 201S City Limits 2) 20% of non-residential area is assumed developable for the Vehicle -Mile Calculation j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 1 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 III. ROADWAY IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREAS For the purpose of roadway impact fees, the roadway service area is limited to the now current City Limits. Additionally, the roadway service areas can not extend in any direction more than 6-miles. The City's' original roadway impact fee calculation and report identified and defined two (2) roadway services. These service areas are generally divided by State Highway 5 (Powell Parkway) and are shown in Figure 1. IV. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN After the land use assumptions within the City have been identified, and with the help of the City's Thoroughfare Plan, a 10-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is developed. This capital improvement plan includes projects intended for construction by the City of Anna in the next 10 years to serve both existing and future development. In order to be funded by roadway impact fees, a roadway project must be included in the 10-year CIP. Existing Facilities The City of Anna major roadway and collector street system is partially developed at this time. Several roadways in developed areas are partially built to current thoroughfare plan standards. Many existing streets are two-lane (20' - 40' width) asphalt roadways with open surface drainage. Many of the proposed roadway segments on the thoroughfare plan do not currently exist. The existing major roadways within the City include US Highway 75 (US 75), State Highway 5 (SH 5)/Powell Street, FM 455/White Street, and SH 121. Existing major collectors include segments of Rosamond Parkway and Ferguson Parkway. The major roadways identified above (US 75, SH 5, FM 455, and SH 121) are under the operation and maintenance jurisdiction of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). Proposed Facilities The City of Anna adopted a Comprehensive Plan in 2010, including a thoroughfare plan that is the basis for development of the future street system. The thoroughfare system is a conventional network conforming to a hierarchical, functional classification system developed to support the forecast traffic demands of future land use. The highest classification of roadway is the Major Roadway type facility. These roadways are generally multiple lanes (4 or 6) with medians that serve the function of controlling access, separating opposing traffic movements and providing an area for the storage of left turning vehicles. The lower classifications are the collector facilities that are developed to serve the adjoining developments. The character of the developments served should determine the sizes and alignments of collector roadways. j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 2 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees The thoroughfare facilities determined for inclusion in the Capital Improvement Plan of this study are tabulated in Table 2 and graphically illustrated in Figure 1. Each listed project includes a description of the planned improvements, the approximate project length, and an engineer's opinion of probable cost to the City. In addition, under existing State Statute, a municipalities' cost associated with TxDOT facilities can be financed with impact fees. All roadways included in the 2018 CIP are identified in the City of Anna Thoroughfare Plan. j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 3 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 'r • TABLE 2 2018 -2028 Roadway Impact Fee Update Capital Improvements by Roadwav Impact Service Area Project A Road Name From To Segment Length(ft) Planned Configuration Existing Condition Notes Capital Cost Debt Service (1) Total Project Cost 1-1 Rosamond Western City Limit US 75 2250 6 Lane Divided 1000' of ravel road US 75 Overpass b TxDOT $2,925,000 $ 1,769,191 $4,694,191 1-2 FM455 Western CityLimit US 75 14400 6 Lane Divided 2lane unimproved, 4700' new alignment $18,720,000 $ 11,322,825 $30,042,825 1-3 FM 368/286 Rosamond FM455/White 6650 6 Lane Divided 2350' of ravel road $8,645,000 $ 5,228,943 $13 873,943 1-4 FM 368/286 FM455/White Southern City Limit 1250 6 Lane Divided 21ane unimproved $1,625,000 $ 982,884 $2,607,884 1-5 FM 368/286 Northen CityLimit Southern Cit Limit 2050 6 Lane Divided 800' of 21ane unimproved $2,665,000 $ 1,611,930 $4 276,930 1-6 Taylor Western CityLimit US 75 2100 4 Lane Divided Gravel road $2,310,000 $ 1,397,208 $3,707,208 1-7 US 75 FM 455/White Southern Cit Limit 9750 Urban Freeway 4 Lane Divided with 2-way frontage roads ROW/Utilities $1,OD0,0D0 $ 604,852 $1,604,852 1-8 Rosamond US 75 Powell/SH 5 10500 4 Lane Divided 4800' of 21ane improved, rail bridge not existing Bridge over railroad, split with Zone 2 $11,550,000 $ 6,986,038 $18,536,038 1-9 Hackberry US 75 Ferguson 2673 4Lane Divided Not existing Excludes 1,800 LF not annexed $2,940,300 $ 1,778,446 $4,718,746 1-10 Hackberry Ferguson Powell/SH 5 5250 4 Lane Divided 2100' of 4lane divided, 800' of 2lane improved, 1000' of 2lane unimproved $5,775,000 $ 3,493,019 $9,268,019 1-11 "StreetC" Rosamond FM455/White 6450 4Lane Divided 1050'of ravel road $7,095,000 $ 4,291,423 $11,386,423 1-12 Ferguson Rosamond FM455/White 7400 6Lane Divided Not existing $9,620,000 $ 5,818,674 $15,438,67 1-13 a over Dart Railroad & SH 5 1000 4-lane divided Not existing 1/2 of Project in Service Area 2 $3,750,000 $ 2,268,194 $6,018,194 1-14 Taylor US 75 Ferguson 5723 4 Lane Divided 4000' of 2lane unimproved $6,295,300 $ 3,807,723 $10103,023 1-15 Taylor Ferguson Powell/SH 5 8844 4 Lane Divided Not existing $9,728,400 $ 5,884,240 $15,612 640 1-16 W. Foster CrossingFerguson City Limit 600 6Lane Divided Not existing $780,000 $ 471,784 $1,251,784 1-17 W. Foster Crossing Southern City Limit Powell/SH 5 3750 6 Lane Divided 1500' of 2lane unimproved $4,875,000 $ 2,948,652 $7,823,652 1-18 Ferguson FM 455/White City Limit 3650 6 Lane Divided 1780' 2lane improved, rest 2lane unimproved with 4-lane bridge at SlayterCr $7,245,0001 $ 4,382,151 $11,627,151 1-19 Ferguson City Limit City Limit 2350 6Lane Divided Not existing $3,055,000 $ 1,847,822 $4,902,822 1-20 E-W Collector FM 368/286 US 75 3200 Mi nor Collector Non existing $2,400,000 $ 1,451,1 $3,851,644 1-TS osed Traffic Si nals in Service Area 1: 8 Each $2,400,000 $ 1,451,644 $3,851,644 Roadway Service Area I Subtotal: $115,399,000 $ 69,799,286 $185,198,286 2-1 FM 376/427 Powell/SH 5 Eastern City Limit 3550 6 Lane Divided 950' 2lane improved, 1650' 2lane unimproved $4,615,000 $ 2,791,391 $7,406,391 2-2 Rosamond Powell/SH 5 City Limit 850 6 Lane Divided 21ane improved, rail bridge not existing Bridge over railroad, split with Service Area 1 $1,105,000 $ 668,361 $1,773,361 2-3 Hackber Powell/SH 5 FM 2862 1150 6 Lane Divided 650' of 2lane unimproved $1,495,000 $ 904,253 $2,399,253 2-4 FM425/422 City Limit Rosamond 1700 6 Lane Divided 2lane unimproved $2,210,000 $ 1,336,722 $3,546,722 2-5 FM425/422 Rosamond Houston 1700 6 Lane Divided 2lane unimproved $2,210,000 $ 1,336,722 $3,546,722 2-6 a over Dart Railroad & SH 5 4-lane divided 1/2 of Project in Service Area 1 $3,750,000 $ 2,268,194 $6,018,194 2-7 Hackberry FM 2862 City Limit 2000 6 Lane Divided Not existing $2,600,0001 $ 1,572 615 $4,172,615 2-8 FM425/422 Houston Southern City Limit 600 6Lane Divided Not existing $780,000 $ 471,794 $1,251,784 2-9 FM425/422 Northern City Limit Houston 600 6 Lane Divided Not existing $780,000 $ 471,784 $1,251,784 2-10 Taylor Powell/SH 5 Eastern City Limit 8500 4 Lane Divided Not existing $9,350,000 $ 5,655,364 $15,005,36 2-11 Highland Rd. Powell/SH 5 Eastern City Limit 6450 6 Lane Divided 5000' of gravel road $8,385,000 $ 5,071,682 $13,456,682 Z-12 FM425/422 FM455/White Collin Co. Outer Loop 10735 6Lane Divided 2650'of ravel road $13,955,500 $ 8,441,009 $22,396,509 2-TS Number of Proposed Traffic Signals in Service Area 2: 6 Each $1,800,000 $ 1,088,733 $2,898,733 Roadway Service Area 2 Subtotal: $53,035,5001 $ 32,078,615 $95,114,115 Grand Total (Roadway Service Area 1 + Service Area 2) $168,434,500 $101,877,901 $270,312,401 Notes: i (1) Debt Service Cost calculated with a 20 year term at a 5% annual interest rate The engineer's opinions of probable construction cost were prepared without the benefit of a detailed preliminary engineering study for each project. The project costs are based on data provided by the City of Anna and on roadway project construction bids. Costs of these projects included only those costs that will be paid for by the City of Anna. Financing costs for the projects in the CIP were also included in the total estimated cost and the interest rate of S% was provided by the City of Anna. V: IMPACT FEE CALCULATION After the land use assumptions and CIP have been finalized, this information is used to determination the maximum fee per service unit (impact fee) that can be charged by the City for new developments. The fee is calculated by dividing the costs of the capital improvements identified as necessary to serve growth forecast to occur during the 10-year planning period (CIP) by the number of service units of growth forecast to occur (using the land use assumptions). The specific steps, as described in following paragraphs of this section include: 1. Determination of a standard service unit; 2. Identification of service areas for the City; 3. Analysis of the total capacity, level of current usage, and commitment for usage of capacity of existing improvements; 4. Identification of that portion of the total capital improvements necessary to serve the projected growth over the next 10-year period; 5. Determination of the "standard service unit" and equivalency tables establishing the ratio of a service unit to the types of land use forecast for growth; 6. Calculating the resulting eligible costs per service unit (impact fee) for new developments in each service area. Service Unit To determine the impact fee rate applied to thoroughfare facilities the standard service unit selected was "PM Peak Hour Vehicle -Miles." This service unit can be obtained by multiplying the number of trips generated by a specific land use type during the PM peak hour (vehicles) by the average trip length (miles) for that land use. The PM peak hour was chosen because it is usually considered the critical time for roadway analyses. The trip generation data were directly obtained or derived for each defined land use type from "Trip Generation Manual, 91h Edition" of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, which is the standard data reference to determine vehicle trip generation characteristics of particular land use types and densities. Trip length information for each land use specified was based on data developed for the Dallas -Fort Worth area by the North Central j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 6 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). The trip length was set at a maximum of three (3) miles for any land use, as this trip length was assumed to be the maximum average distance a trip would travel on roadways within each service area in the City of Anna. Table 3 shows the typical service units for each land use type used in developing the roadway impact fees. Table 3 - Service Unit Calculation by Land Use Type PM Peak Trips Trip Length PM Peak Hour Variable (vehicles) (miles) Vehicle -Miles (1) (2) Residential Dwelling Unit 1 3.00 3.00 Industrial 1,000 Sq. Ft. 0.97 3.00 2.91 Commercial / Retail 1,000 Sq. Ft. 3.71 2.40 8.90 Office 1,000 Sq. Ft. 1.49 3.00 4.47 (1) Based on ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition (2) Based on NCTCOG data Service Areas The State Statute governing the imposition of development impact fees require that collection and expenditure of fees imposed for street facilities "...is limited to an area within the corporate boundaries of the political subdivision and shall not exceed six miles. " To comply with this State Law, two service areas (Service Area 1 and Service Area 2) were established for the City of Anna to ensure that funds are spent within six miles of where they are collected. The two service areas were shown in Figure 1, with SH 5/Powell Avenue serving as the breakpoint between the two service areas. The service areas include most of the developable land within the existing city limits of Anna. Analysis of 10-Year and Ultimate Growth The land use assumption data provided by the City of Anna was converted to the standard service unit (vehicle -miles) by applying the trip generation and trip length data provided in Table 3. These results were used to provide an estimate of the existing service units (vehicle -miles) within each service area, as well as to forecast the growth in service units for both the next 10-year period (2018- 2028) and the ultimate development of the City of Anna. Table 4a shows the vehicle -mile calculation for each category of land use. Table 4b shows the portion of ultimate build -out service units that will be attributable to growth within the next 10 years. j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 7 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Table 4a Vehicle -Mile Calculation By Land Use and Service Area Vehical Mile Variables 2018 2028 Ultimate Service Land Use PM Peak Total Total Total Area FAR Unit Unit Variable Units Vehicle Units Vehicle Units Vehicle Vehicle Miles Miles Miles Miles Residential N/A 3.00 per Dwelling Unit 3,667 Dwellings 11,001 6,164 Dwellings 18,492 15,938 Dwellings 47,813 Industrial 20% 2.91 per 1,000 Sq. Ft 23 Acres 583 45 Acres 1,141 84 Acres 2,130 1 Commercial 20% 8.90 per 1,000 Sq. Ft 85 Acres 6,591 140 Acres 10,855 550 Acres 42,645 Office 20% 4.47 pre 1,000 Sq. Ft 25 Acres 974 115 Acres 4,478 250 Acres 9,736 Totaill 11 19,14911 34,9661 102,323 Residential N/A 3.00 per Dwelling Unit 1,347 Dwellings 4,041 3,200 Dwellings 9,600 7,638 Dwellings 22,915 Industrial 20% 2.91 per 1,000 Sq. Ft 15 Acres 380 65 Acres 1,648 125 Acres 3,169 2 Commercial 20% 8.90 per 1,000 Sq. Ft 25 Acres 1,938 40 Acres 3,101 250 Acres 19,384 Office 20% 4.47 pre 1,000 Sq. Ft 10 Acres 389 45 Acres 1,752 130 Acres 5,063 Totaill 11 6,74811 16,1011 50,531 Table 4b-Summary of Vehicle -Miles by Service Area and Development Period Existing Year 2018- 2028 Year 2028 - Ultimate Service Area Portion of Vehicle - Miles Portion of Vehicle - Miles Vehicle - Miles Ultimate 2028 Total Added 2018- Ultimate Ultimate Added 2028- 2018 Vehicle Miles Vehicle -Miles Vehicle - Miles 2028 Vehicle - Miles Ultimate 1 19,149 18.71% 34,966 15,817 15.46% 102,323 67,357 2 6,748 13.35% 16,101 9,353 18.51% 50,531 34,430 Total 25,897 16.94% 51,067 25,170 152,854 101,787 Note: 20% of non-residential area is assumed developable for the Vehicle -Mile Calculation Capital Improvements Costs Necessary to Serve 10-Year Growth The total costs for implementing the roadway CIP were identified previously in Table 2. The street facility improvements identified in the CIP will logically serve all existing and future growth by improved safety and drainage characteristics. Therefore, the 10-year eligible costs have been proportioned as the ratio of the 10-year growth to the total number of service units determined for j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 8 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 build -out, as provided in Table 4. Table 5 presents a summary of the roadway capital improvement costs for the two service areas. Table 5 - Summary of Capital Improvement Cost by Service Area Portion of Capacity of Cost of Thoroughfare Service Area Service Area CIP ThoroughfareAttributed to Growth Attributed to Growth (2018-2028) (2018-2028) 1 $185,198,286 15.46% $28,627,660 2 $85,114,115 18.51 % $15, 754, 221 Totals $270,312,401 $44,381,881 In order to maintain the equity of impact fee assessment, the cost for streets included in the 10-year Capital Improvement Plan will include the total cost of the street facilities, not reduced by any expected participation. Rather, construction by a developer of an arterial facility within or off -site should be treated as a credit to the impact fee assessment. Determination of Standard Service Unit Equivalency Table 6 presents the derivation of service unit equivalents for each of the four defined land use types. The service unit equivalents are referenced to and based on the residential land use. Table 6 -Land Use Equivalency Land Use Development Unit Veh-Miles/ Development Unit (1) SU Equivalency (2) Residential Dwelling Unit 3.00 1.00 Office 1,000 per Sq. Ft 4.47 1.49 Commercial / Retail 1,000 per Sq. Ft 8.90 2.97 Industrial 1,000 per Sq. Ft 2.91 0.97 Notes: 1) Based on ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition and N CTCOG 2) Ratio of non-residential use to service unit of Residential j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 9 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Cost Per Service Unit (Impact Fee) Calculation Table 7 presents a summary of the calculations and resulting capital improvement costs attributable to growth per service unit, which represents the maximum calculated impact fee. This fee is calculated by taking the cost of the CIP attributable to growth in the next 10 years (Table 5) and dividing it by the estimated growth, or the number of new service units (Table 4), in the next 10 years. Table 7 - Impact Fee Calculation by Service Area Cost of Thoroughfare Number of New Roadway Service Cost Per Service Cost Per Service Attributed to Service Units Area Unit Unit (Rounded) Growth (2018- 2028) (2018-2028) 1 $28,627,660 15,817 $1,809.93 $1,810 2 $15,754,221 9,353 $1,684.40 $1,684 Under current State law, municipalities are required to administer a detailed financial analysis to support the use of an impact fee higher than 50 percent of the eligible costs. As an alternative to performing the financial analysis, the impact fee can be set at or below 50 percent of the total eligible costs, which are shown in Table 7. The City has chosen to use 50 percent of these calculated impact fee. VI. SUMMARY OF IMPACT FEE CALCULATION METHODOLOGY The methodology for calculating the maximum allowable impact fee for roadway facilities can be summarized in the following three steps and is summarized for both Service Areas 1 and 2 on the following pages. First, the cost of the roadway facilities (existing roadways eligible for recuperation of construction cost and proposed roadways) that can be attributed to new growth over the 10-year period is determined. j:�clerical�anna�2018-137 Roadway impactfee�reports�03-report Page 10 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Service Area 1 Cost of Roadway Facilities (Table 2 - Service Area 1) _ $185,198,286 Proportion of Capacity Attributable to New Growth x 15.46% (Table 4- Service Area 1) Roadway Facilities Attributable to Growth (2018- 2028) _ $28,627,660 The second step is to determine the calculated impact fee. The maximum calculated impact fee is the ratio of the total cost for roadway facilities attributable to growth in the next ten years (2018-2028) divided by the total growth in equivalent service units (ESU). Finally, the maximum impact fee is determined by multiplying the calculated fee by 50%. Calcualted Roadway Impact Fee = Maximum Roadway Impact Fee Allowed: Service Area 1 Eligible Thoroughfare Cost Attributed Growth (Table 5) Total Growth in Equivalent Service Units (Table 4) $28, 627, 660.29 15,817 $1,809.93 Use: $1,810 $1,810 x 50% _ FF7$9�05.0( Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Service Area 2 Cost of Roadway Facilities (Table 2 - Service Area 2) _ $85,114,115 Proportion of Capacity Attributable to New Growth x 18.51% (Table 4- Service Area 2) Roadway Facilities Attributable to Growth (2018 - 2028) _ $15,754,221 Service Area 2 Calculated Roadway Impact Fee = Eligible Thoroughfare Cost Attributed Growth (Table 5) Total Growth in Equivalent Service Units (Table 4) $15, 754, 220.59 9,353 $1,684.40 Use: $1,684 Maximum Roadway Impact Fee Allowed: $1,684 x 50% _ $842.00 j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 11 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 VII. IMPACT FEE CALCULATION EXAMPLE A land use equivalency table is provided in Table 8 and represents an expansion of the basic land uses used for calculating the impact fee. This table identifies the total service units generated by specific uses within each land use category and includes land uses which may develop over the next 10-year period. To obtain the impact fee to be charged for a particular land use, the impact fee per service unit adopted by the City and the service units per development unit generated for that particular land use from Table 8 are used. Examples for calculating the impact fee for both a single family dwelling unit and a 50,000 ft2 shopping center (commercial / retail facility) assuming maximum allowable impact fees of $905.00 per service unit (Service Area 1) and $842.00 per service unit (Service Area 2) are shown on page 12 Table 8 - Common Roadway Land Use Equivalencies CATEGORY LAND USE DEVELOPMENT UNITS(1) ITE TRIP RATE(2) TRIP LENGTH(3) PASS -BY TRAFFIC(4) SERVICE UNITS(5) RESIDENTIAL Single- Family Detached Dwelling Unit 1.00 3.0 0 3.00 Apartment Dwelling Unit 0.62 3.0 0 1.86 OFFICE Office Building 1,000ftGFA 1.49 3.0 0 4.47 COMMERICAL Convenience Stores/Gas Pumps 1,000ft GFA 50.92 0.4 0.66 6.93 Drive-in Bank 1,000ftGFA 24.30 1.7 0.47 21.89 Home Improvement Store 1,000ft GFA 2.33 3.0 0.48 3.36 Hotel Rooms 0.60 3.0 0 1.80 Restaurant 1,000ftGFA 9.85 2.4 0.43 13.47 Shopping Center 1,000ftGFA 3.71 3.0 0.34 7.35 INDUSTRIAL Industrial 1,000ftGFA 0.97 3.0 0 2.91 INSTITUTIONAL School Students 0.15 2.1 0 0.32 Day Care Center Students 0.81 2.7 0.9 0.22 House of Worship 1,000ft GFA 0.55 2.1 0 1.16 GFA = Gross Floor Area 2 (Vehicles); Based on ITE Trip Generation, 9th Edition (Miles); Based on NCTCOG Data Percentage of traffic already passing by site - land use is an intermediate destination (Vehicle -Miles) * The land uses and trip generation characteristics listed in this chart are intended as examples. The complete table of land uses and trip generation characteristics is contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers "Trip Generation, Ninth Edition," which is incorporated herein by reference. j:lclericollanna12018-137Roodwayimpoctfee lreports103-report Page 12 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Service Area I - Example Impact Fee Calculations SERVICE AREA 1 Vehicle -Miles per Single- Family Dwelling Unit (1 Dwelling Unit) x (3.00 Vehicle-Miles/Dwelling Unit) _ Maximum Calculated Roadway Impact Fee $ 905.00 per service unit x 3 Service Units = $2,715.00 SHOPPING CENTER (Service Area hicle-miles per Development Unit for Shopping Center (50,000 Sq. Ft) x (7.35 Vehicle -Miles/ 1,000 Sq.Ft.) = 367.5 Service Units Maximum Calculated Roadway Impact Fee $ 905.00 per service unit) 368 Service Units = $ 332,587.50 Service Area 2 - Example Impact Fee Calculations SERVICE AREA 2 hicle-Miles per Single- Family Dwelling Unit (1 Dwelling Unit) x (3.00 Vehicle-Miles/Dwelling Unit) _ Maximum Calculated Roadway Impact Fee $ 842.00 per service unit x 3 Service Units = $2,526.00 Vehicle -miles per Development Unit for Shopping Center (50,000 Sq. Ft) x (7.35 Vehicle -Miles/ 1,000 Sq.Ft.) = 367.5 Service Units Maximum Calculated Roadway Impact Fee $ 842.00 per service unit) 368 Service Units = $ 309,435.00 3.00 Service Units I 3.00 Service Units I j:�clericol�onno�2018-137 Roodway impoct fee �reports�03-report Page 13 of 13- Roadway Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 2018-2028 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE UPDATE THE CITY OF manna BIRKHOFF, HENDRICKS & CARTER, L.L.P. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS - TBPE Firm No. 526 11910 Greenville Ave., Suite 600, Dallas, Texas 75243 Phone (214) 361-7900 September 2018 1 THE CITY OF AiAtia AGENDA ITEM: Item No. 9. City Council Agenda Staff Report Meeting Date: 1/8/2019 Consider/Discuss/Action regarding approval of an Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the City's Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Water & Wastewater Impact Fees. (Joseph Johnson) SUMMARY: Impact fees are authorized under Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code and may be imposed upon new developments to fund both existing and proposed infrastructure that is necessary to provide service to a development. The last water and wastewater impact fee update was completed in March 2017 and adopted in April 2017. By statute, the City is required to review the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) at least once every 5 years but may update them sooner as growth patterns, land use, and infrastructure needs change. Over the past several months, staff has worked with our engineering consultant to identify water and wastewater infrastructure projects that should be added to our CIP. Subsequently, land use assumptions, population projections, and calculated maximum impact fees were evaluated with new recommendations for the population projections and calculated maximum fees. On September 10, 2018, the updated Water & Wastewater Impact Fee Report was presented to the I mpact Fee Advisory Committee which subsequently took action approving a letter addressed to the Council concurring with the findings of the report and finding that the report is in general compliance with Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395. At the Council Meeting held on November 13, 2018, Council approved a Resolution setting a Public Hearing for January 8, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of receiving public comment. Additionally, the report was made available to the public. Having held the Public Hearing, the Council may now choose to take action on the adoption of proposed amendments to the City's Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Water & Wastewater I mpact Fees. [+AIF_1Sy:7xels]iyiIIT, I4ZIT`1 III [sP►A Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the City's Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Water & Wastewater Impact Fees. ATTACHMENTS: Description Upload Date Type Ordinance 12/17/2018 Ordinance Water & Wastewater Impact Fee Report 12/17/2018 Exhibit CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, ADOPTING UPDATED LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS, AND WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES; AMENDING THE ANNA CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES PART IV, ARTICLE 7, SECTION 13 (WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES); PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR ANY VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE NOT TO EXCEED $2,000; PROVIDING FOR SAVINGS, SEVERABILITY, AND REPEALING CLAUSES; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLICATION OF THE CAPTION HEREOF. WHEREAS, the City of Anna, Texas ("the City") has previously adopted ordinances, rules and regulations governing water, sewer and other utility billing rates, payments, and related procedures, including provisions related to impact fees as authorized under Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City of Anna, Texas City Council ("the City Council") has held a public hearing and determined that it would be advantageous and beneficial to the City and its citizens to adopt updated land use assumptions and water and wastewater capital improvement plans, and to impose amended impact fees; and WHEREAS, the City Council has further determined that it would be advantageous and beneficial to the City and its citizens to amend Part IV, Article 7, Section 13 (Water and Sewer Impact Fees) of the Anna Code to specify new water and wastewater impact fee rates; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. Recitals Incorporated. The above -referenced recitals are incorporated herein as if set forth in full for all purposes. Section 2. Adoption of Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan. As relates to water and wastewater facilities, the City Council hereby adopts updates to the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan as set forth in the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The adoption of said land use assumptions and capital improvements plan is cumulative of any land use assumptions and capital improvements plan regarding roadway facilities and this ordinance does not amend or otherwise modify the City's existing roadway service area(s) or roadway impact fees. CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS ORD. NO. Page 1 of 4 Section 3. Amendments to Part IV of the Anna Code. In accordance with Part II, Article 1, Section 9 of the Anna Code, Part IV, Article 7, Section 13 is deleted and replaced with the following: Schedule A WATER/WASTEWATER LAND USE EQUIVALENCY TABLE Land Use Meter Type Meter Size Maximum Impact Fee Total LU'E Water Wastewater Single Family Residential Simple 3/4" 1 $4,510 $4,079 $8,589 Single Family Residential Simple 1" 1.7 $7,667 $6,933 $14,601 Single Family Residential Simple 1-1/2" 3.3 $14,883 $13,459 $28,343 Single Family Residential Simple 2" 5.3 $23,904 $21,616 $45,520 Commercial/Retail Compound 2" 5.3 $23,904 $21,616 $45,520 Commercial/Retail Turbine 2" 6.7 $30,218 $27,326 $57,544 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fan Compound 3" 10.7 $48,259 $43,640 $91,898 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fa Turbine 3" 16 $72,162 $65,256 $137,418 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fan Compound 4" 16.7 $75,319 $68,111 $143,430 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fa Turbine 4" 28 $126,284 $114,198 $240,482 Industrial Compound 6" 33.3 $150,188 $135,814 $286,002 Industrial Turbine 6" 61.3 $276,472 $250,012 $526,484 Industrial Compound 8" 53.3 $240,391 $217,384 $457,775 Industrial Turbine 8" 106.7 $481,232 $435,176 $916,408 Industrial Compound 10" 153.3 $691,405 $625,234 $1,316,639 Industrial Turbine 10" 166.7 $751,840 $679,886 $1,431,726 Industrial Turbine 12" 220 $992,231 $897,270 $1,889,501 Schedule B WATER/WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RATES Facility Category Service Area Maximum Impact Fee Adopted Impact Fee Per Living Unit Per Living Unit Equivalent Equivalent Water All $4,510 $ Facilities Wastewater All $4,079 $ Facilities CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS ORD. NO. Page 2 of 4 Section 4. In accordance with Part II, Article 1, Section 9 of the Anna Code, the following amendments are made to the Anna Code, Part Il, Article 49, Section 8.05, subsection (a) as shown below, with any added language shown in underlined text (example) and any deleted language shown in strikethrough text (example): 8.05 Calculation and Assessment of Impact Fees (a) Impact Fees for water and sanitary sewer wastewater shall be determined by multiplying the number of Service Unit equivalents in the proposed development by the amount per Service Unit equivalent due by referring to Schedules A — WaterMastewater Equivalency Table and Schedule B- Impact Fee Rates, as set forth in Anna Code, Part IV, Schedule of Fees, Article 7, Se^+�-4Section 13. (Ord. No. 671-2014, adopted 0912112014; Ord. No. 690-2015 (adopted 0610912015); see also Ord. No. 756-2018, adopted 0611212018; Ord. No. -2018, adopted 1111312018) Section 5. Penalty. Any violation of any of the terms of this ordinance, whether denominated in this ordinance as unlawful or not, shall be deemed a misdemeanor. Any person convicted of any such violation shall be fined in an amount not to exceed $2,000 for each incidence of violation. Each violation is considered a separate offense and will be punished separately. Section 6. Savings, Severability and Repealing Clauses. All ordinances of the City in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are repealed to the extent of that conflict. If any provision of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of such ordinance shall continue in full force and effect the same as if such invalid or unconstitutional provision had never been a part hereof. The City declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase be declared unconstitutional or invalid. Section 7. Publication of the Caption Hereof and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effective from and after its passage and upon the posting and/or publication, if required by law, of its caption and the City Secretary is hereby directed to implement such posting and/or publication. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Anna, Texas, this 81h day of January 2019. CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS ORD. NO. Page 3 of 4 ATTESTED: Carrie L. Smith, City Secretary APPROVED: Nate Pike, Mayor CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS ORD. NO. Page 4 of 4 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE 2018 - 2028 Prepared For THE CITY OF manna Prepared By BIRKHOFF, HENDRICKS & CARTER, L.L.P. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS — TBPE Firm No. 526 DALLAS, TEXAS September 2018op GARY C. HENDRICKS 65226 '¢ j, S i E!'. Imo CITY OF ANNA WATER AND WASTEWATER 2018-2028 IMPACT FEE UPDATE TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. I. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 1 Y Table No. 1 — Historic Water and Wastewater Impact Fees II. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS (Provided by City of Anna) ....................................................... 3 Y Table No. 2 — 2018 -2028 Population Projections III. DEFINITION OF A SERVICE UNIT — WATER AND WASTEWATER ............................... 3 Y Table No. 3 — LUE for Various Types & Sizes of Water Meter IV. CALCULATION OF WATER & WASTEWATER — LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS ............ 4 Y Table No. 4 — 2018-2028 Water Living Unit Equivalents by Meter Size Y Table No. 5 — 2018-2028 Wastewater Living Unit Equivalents by Meter Size V. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM......................................................................................... 6 A. Existing Facilities................................................................................................................. 6 B. Water Distribution System Capital Improvement Projects .................................................. 6 Y Figure No. 1 — Water Distribution System: Existing Facility Recovery Y Figure No. 2 — Water Distribution System: Capital Improvement Plan Y Table No. 6 — 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan C. Utilized Capacity................................................................................................................ 11 Y Table No. 7 — Summary of Eligible Capital Cost & Utilized Capacity Cost Y Table No. 8 — Existing Facility Recovery — Water Lines & Water Facilities Y Table No. 9 — Proposed Capital Improvement Plan - Water Lines Y Table No. 10 — Proposed Capital Improvement Plan - Water Distribution Facilities jAclerical\anna\2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 2018\reports\03-index.docx - Z - Page No. VI. WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM A. General............................................................................................................................... 16 B. Existing Wastewater System.............................................................................................. 16 C. Proposed Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan.............................................................. 17 Y Figure No. 3 — Wastewater Collection System: Existing Facility Recovery Y Figure No. 4 — Wastewater Collection System: Capital Improvement Plan Y Table No. 10 — 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan D. Utilized Capacity................................................................................................................ 20 Y Table No. 11 — Summary of Eligible Capital Cost & Utilized Capacity Cost Y Table No. 12 — Existing Facility Recovery — Wastewater Lines & Facilities Y Table No. 13 — Proposed Capital Improvement Plan - Wastewater Lines Y Table No. 14 — Proposed Capital Improvement Plan - Wastewater Facilities VII. CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES — WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM............................................................................. 26 Y Table No. 15 — Allowable Maximum Fee Per LUE and Per Meter Size & Type jAclerical\anna\2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 2018\reports\03-index.docx - ii - Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. CITY OF ANNA 2018-2028 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE I. INTRODUCTION The City of Anna retained the services of Birkhoff, Hendricks and Carter, L.L.P for the purpose of updating the impact fees for the water distribution system and the wastewater collection system. These impact fees are required for funding the construction of specific capital improvement projects to serve new development. The Table 1 below shows previous maximum impact fees calculated and the impact fees imposed by the City: Table 1 Historic Water and Wastewater Impact Fees 2008 2014 2017 2018 Calculated Maximum Fee Fees Imposed Calculated Maximum Fee Fees Imposed Calculated Maximum Fee Fees Imposed Calculated Maximum Fee Fees Imposed Water $2,712.50 $2,000 $4,674.00 $2,000 $3,984.89 $3,200 $4,510.14 TBD Wastewater $2,643.50 $2,000 $4,610.00 $2,000 $3,999.05 $3,200 $4,078.50 TBD Since the 2014 and 2017 updates of the Impact Fee, the City of Anna has expanded its water and sewer service. The Water Distribution System Master Plan and Wastewater Collection Master Plan were refined in 2017 by Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P., and are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. In accordance with the requirements of Chapter 395.052 of the Local Government Code, this impact fee update report reflects the City of Anna's Land Use Assumptions, Water Capital Improvement Plan and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan. Chapter 395, of the Local Government Code is an act that provides guidelines for financing capital improvements required for new development in municipalities, counties, and certain other local governments. Based on the most current Master Plan documents for the Water Distribution and Wastewater Collection Systems; 10-year Capital Improvement Plans were developed to reflect projected infrastructure needs. The City's Future Land Use Plan was unchanged from the j: Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reports104-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 1 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. previous evaluation, and population growth assumption, provided by the City Planning Department, was the basis for the maximum impact fees calculated. The Act allows the maximum impact fee to be charged if revenues from future ad valorem taxes, and water and sewer bills are included as a credit in the analysis. If not, the Act allows the maximum fee to be set at 50% of the calculated maximum fee. Calculations herein provide for the 50% reduction. The following items were included in the impact fee calculation: A. The cost of the new infrastructure that is to be paid by the City, including engineering, property acquisition and construction cost. B. Existing excess capacity in lines and facilities that will serve future growth and which were paid for in whole or part by the City. C. Engineering and quality control fees for construction projects. D. Interest and other finance charges on bonds issued by the City to cover its portion of the cost. E. Planning Cost. The engineering analysis portion of the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee evaluation determines utilized capacity cost of the major water distribution and wastewater collection facilities between the year 2018 and the year 2028. Facilities in this analysis include, water pump stations, water storage tanks, water disinfection systems, water transmission lines, water distribution lines, wastewater lift stations, wastewater collection lines, the Slayter Creek wastewater treatment plant and the regional water and wastewater systems. The study period is a ten-year period with 2018 as the base year. Impact fee calculations for the water and wastewater systems account for a portion, or entirety, of costs of new projects required to serve new developments as well as a portion of the cost of existing infrastructure that is to be utilized to serve new developments. Growth and usage rates are standardized in calculations by applying living unit equivalency factors, which in this analysis conform to the latest American Water Works Association Standards (C700 - C703). j: Ictertcahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 2 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. II. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS (BY THE CITY OFANNA) The City of Anna Planning Department prepared the Land Use Assumptions used for the 2018 impact fee update, and they were not modified since the past evaluation. A revised 10-year population growth projection was provided by the City for this update as shown in Table 2 Table 2 2018-2028 Population Projections. 2018 2028 Buildout Population 13,240 26,045 250,000 % of Buildout 5.3% 10.4% 100.0% 2018 to 2028 Population Growth: 96.7% J1 Note: Population Projections provided by the City of Anna Planning Department III. DEFINITION OF A SERVICE UNIT — WATER AND WASTEWATER Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code requires that impact fees be based on a defined service unit. A "service unit" means a standardized measure of consumption, use generation, or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards. This update defines a water and wastewater service unit to be a 3/4-inch water meter and has referred to this service unit as a Single Family Living Unit Equivalent (SFLUE). The SFLUE is based on the continuous duty capacity of a 3/4-inch water meter. This is the typical meter used for a single family detached dwelling, and therefore is considered to be equivalent to one "living unit". Other meter sizes can be compared to the 3/4-inch meter through a ratio of water flows as published by the American Water Works Association as shown in Table No. 3 below. This same ratio is then used to determine the proportional water and wastewater impact fee amount for each water meter size. j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 3 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 3 LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENCIES FOR VARIOUS TYPES AND SIZES OF WATER METERS Continuous Duty Meter Type Meter Size Maximum Rate ( m) ca> Ratio to 3/" Meter Simple 3/4" 15 1.0 Simple 1" 25 1.7 Simple 1'/2" 50 3.3 Simple 2" 80 5.3 Compound 2" 80 5.3 Turbine 2" 100 6.7 Compound 3" 160 10.7 Turbine 3" 240 16.0 Compound 4" 250 16.7 Turbine 4" 420 28.0 Compound 6" 500 33.3 Turbine 6" 920 61.3 Compound 8" 800 53.3 Turbine 8" 1,600 106.7 Compound 10" 2,300 153.3 Turbine 10" 2,500 166.7 Turbine 12" 3,300 220.0 (a) Source: AWWA Standard C700 (1995) - C703 (1996) IV. CALCULATION OF WATER & WASTEWATER - LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS The City of Anna provided the existing water meter count by size category as of July 2018. In total, there were 5,032 water meters serving the existing population of 13,240 residents and businesses. Table No. 4 shows the number of existing water meters and Single Family Living Unit Equivalents (SFLUE) conversions. The table also shows the projected meter counts and SFLUEs for 2028 which were based on the population growth assumption. Similarly, the City provided meter counts by size of the 4,428 water service accounts that also utilize the wastewater collection system. Table No. 5 illustrates the existing wastewater account and SFLUE's. Using the growth rate provided by the City, water meters and wastewater accounts were extrapolated to the year 2028. The City's Planning Department projects the population of the City of Anna to nearly double over the next ten years; anticipating a residential population of 26,045 in 2028. j: Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reports104-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 4 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. Living unit equivalents were then applied to the water meters and wastewater accounts for 2018 and 2028 resulting in a total number of living units for the beginning and end of this fee period. The difference in the total number of 2018 and 2028 SFLUE's results in the new living unit equivalents during the impact fee period. TABLE NO. 4 2018 — 2028 WATER LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS BY METER SIZE 2018 2028 New Meter Size Number of Water Meters Living Unit Equivalent Ratio for 3/4" Used a, Total Number of Living Units Number of Water Meters Living Unit Equivalent Ratio for 3/4" Used�al Total Number of Living Units Living Units During Impact Fee Period %" 4,868 1.0 4,868 9,576 1.0 9,576 4,708 1" 69 1.7 115 136 1.7 226 111 1%" 11 3.3 37 22 3.3 72 35 2" 56 6.7 373 110 6.7 734 361 3" 23 16.0 368 25 16.0 400 32 4" 4 28.0 112 4 28.0 112 0 6" 1 61.3 61 1 61.3 61 0 Totals 5,032 5,934 1E 9,874 11,182 5,248 (a) Source: AWWA Standard C700 (1995) - C703 (1996) N II_\:11-01[alm 2018 — 2028 WASTEWATER LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS BY WATER METER SIZE 2018 2028 New Meter Size Number of Water Meters Living Unit Equivalent Ratio for 3/4" (a) Total Number of Living Units Number of Water Meters Living Unit Equivalent Ratio for 3/4" Used(a' Total Number of Living Units Living Units During Impact Fee Period a/" 4,284 1.0 4,284 8,427 1.0 8,427 4,143 1" 61 1.7 101 119 1.7 199 98 1%" 10 1 3.3 32 19 3.3 63 31 2" 49 6.7 329 97 6.7 646 318 3" 20 16.0 324 25 16.0 400 76 4" 4 1 28.0 99 4 1 28.0 112 13 6" 1 61.3 54 1 61.3 61 7 Totals 4,428 5,222 8,692 9,909 4,687 j:Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impactfee update 20J&reportsW4-report.docs - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 5 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. V. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM This update includes additional capital improvement plan (CIP) projects that will tentatively serve new developments, and modifies previous CIP projects that have since been constructed. The proposed CIP projects are shown schematically in Figure No. 2, and are summarized in Table No. 6. Existing facilities, applicable for reimbursement under Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code are shown in Figure No. 1. Eligible facilities include major distribution lines, pump stations, treatment facilities, ground and elevated storage reservoirs as well as regional systems participation. Utilized capacities were based on ten-year growth system demands. A. Existing Facilities As of 2018, the City of Anna has participated financially in the construction of the facilities shown on Figure No. 1, the Existing Facility Recovery Map. These distribution lines and facilities have capacity to serve new developments, and the portion of capacity expected to be absorbed by the new developments has been included, as a percentage of the total 20-year project cost, in the value of the maximum impact fee calculation. Actual capital costs, including construction, engineering and easements of the various elements of the existing water distribution system, were utilized where the information was known. The existing costs of facilities were determined from records provided by the City of Anna. Where actual costs were not known, an average cost in 2018 dollars was calculated. B. Water Distribution System Capital Improvement Projects In order to meet the demands of the anticipated growth over the next 10-years to 2028, certain water distribution system improvements are required. Figure No. 2 shows the recommended system improvements and Table No. 6 itemizes each project and the project cost. These recommended improvements, along with certain existing facilities, form the basis for the Water System Impact Fee Calculation. Costs for CIP projects were estimated using average unit costs from projects which have been bid recently, plus an estimated cost for engineering and easements, and were amortized to include the additional cost of issuing 20-year bonds at 5% annual interest rate. Projects determined to involve developer financing were estimated with a lesser unit value. In these j: Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reports104-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 6 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. cases, the developer will be responsible for the cost of the first 8-inches and the City will be responsible for the additional cost associated to construct the larger -diameter line to the size shown on the CIP exhibit. j: Ictertcahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 7 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. FI(i1ITRF 1 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM: EXISTING FACILITY RECOVERY THE CITY OF Anna WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 2018-2028 IMPACT FEE UPDATE EXISTING FACILITY RECOVERY RMIM0", HMgDMCEM & C-4xnm, r j P. FROIBBSE)NALENGD968 T-", Finn F•26 1191(I Greenrl le :1.-e.. Sidle f(IC' 17p11fl5.. Tans?.,?4? pJdj 3�1-7900 D: 6/15/18 — RK Cad W&A Impact Fa Upw. 2016'1Fd6M'laW16 W.RMN So gaa,)Ny 0M 6/15/2018 j: Wericallann&2o18-133 w&ww impactfee update 20MreportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 8 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. FIGURE 2 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN j IL C-A ILI L 'o - `, l �, r _i__T _5 r - r Co -T Ve) ILI z z j:lclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportSW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 9 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 6 10-YEAR WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Water Lines Project Size Developer Participation Total Capital Cost (1) Debt Service Total Project Cost Water Line #1 12" $2,344,650 $1,418,166 $3,762,816 Water Line #2 12" X $1,403,400 $848,849 $2,252,249 Water Line #3 12" X $421,700 $255,066 $676,766 Water Line #4 12" X $632,750 $382,720 $1,015,470 Water Line #5 12" $1,618,950 $979,225 $2,598,175 Water Line #6 24" $1,880,800 $1,137,605 $3,018,405 Water Line #7 12" X $422,950 $255,822 $678,772 Water Line#8 12" X $82,100 $49,658 $131,758 Water Line #9 12" X $694,900 $420,311 $1,115,211 Water Line #10 12" X $172,950 $104,609 $277,559 Water Line #12 12" X $60,100 $36,352 $96,452 Water Line #13 12" X $807,650 $488,509 $1,296,159 Water Line #14 8",12",16" $2,149,100 $1,299,887 $3,448,987 Water Line #15 12",16" $2,105,080 $1,273,261 $3,378,341 Water Line #17 12" X $165,700 $100,224 $265,924 Water Line #19 12" X $255,000 $154,237 $409,237 Water Line #20 12" $2,623,200 $1,586,647 $4,209,847 Water Line#21 12" X $1,017,500 $615,437 $1,632,937 Water Line #22 12" $996,000 $602,432 $1,598,432 Water Line #23 12" X $1,403,150 $848,698 $2,251,848 Water Line #24 24" $1,282,800 $775,904 $2,058,704 Water Line #25 12" X $6335800 $383,355 $1,017,155 Water Line #26 16" X $117,950 $71,342 $189,292 Water Line#27 18" X $1,776,330 $1,074,416 $2,850,746 Water Line #28 18" $1,424,685 $861,723 $2,286,408 Water Line #29 18" $1,718,465 $1,039,417 $2,757,882 Water Line #30 12" X $162,450 $98,258 $260,708 Water Line #31 18" $1,146,260 $693,317 $1,839,577 Water Line #32 12" $895,350 $541,554 $1,436,904 Water Line #33 12" $226,500 $136,999 $363,499 Water Line #34 12" X $65,200 $39,436 $104,636 Water Line #35 12" $585,000 $353,838 $938,838 Water Line #36 12" X $380,100 $229,904 $610,004 Water Line #37 12" X $217,400 $131,495 $348,895 Water Line #38 12" X $228,250 $138,057 $366,307 Water Line #39 16" X $192,990 $116,730 $309,720 Water Line #40 16" $690,030 $417,366 $1,107,396 Water Line #41 12" $1545950 $93,722 $248,672 Water Line #42 16" X $407,120 $246,247 $653,367 Water Line #43 18" X $482,460 $291,817 $774,277 Subtotal: Water Lines $34,045,720 $20,592,613 $54,638,333 j: Ictericahannal2o18-133 w&ww impacrfee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 10 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. Utilized Capacity The portion of City -funded project costs that may be reimbursed by impact fee revenue is relative to the portion of facility capacity that is anticipated to be absorbed by new developments during the fee period. This portion, or utilized capacity, was determined for existing facilities and for proposed CIP projects. For existing facilities, available capacities were found under current, 2018, demands, and were compared to the available capacity remaining under the predicted 2028 demand scenario. The difference in available capacities, by percentage, was applied to the 20-year total project cost to determine the allowable recovery dollar amount. The same procedure was utilized to determine utilized capacity during fee period for proposed CIP projects, however, in this case, the 2018 demand is null. Table No. 7 below summarizes project costs and utilized costs over the impact fee period, 2018 — 2028, for each element of the Water Distribution System. The utilized capacity for each water distribution facility, both existing and proposed, is presented in detail in Impact Fee Capacity Calculation Table No. 8 through Table No. 10. TABLE NO. 7 SUMMARY OF ELIGIBLE CAPITAL COST & UTILIZED CAPACITY COST Water System Total 20-Year Project Cost M Utilized Capacity During Fee Period M Existing Water Facilities $35,380,857 $17,519,298 Planning Expenses $94,000 $94,000 Existing Water System Subtotal: $35,474,857 $17,613,298 Proposed Water Lines $54,638,333 $21,378,225 Proposed Water Facilities $15,567,062 $8,345,229 Proposed Water System Subtotal: 1 $70,205,395 $29,723,454 TOTAL: $105,680,252 $47,336,752 Notes: ■ (1) Opinion of Cost includes: a) Engineer's Opinion of Construction Cost b) Professional Services Fees (Survey, Engineering, Testing, Legal) c) Cost of Easement or Land Acquisitions ■ (2) Debt Service based on 20-year simple interest bonds at 5% ■ (3) Planning Expense includes current and all past impact fee evaluations. j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 11 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 8 EXISTING FACILITY RECOVERY - WATER LINES & WATER FACILITIES 4 rcra�c i )w -, ,,, lased in 2014 ind ared and in, /udc, 20",, 1, and easenients_ Pipe Number Total Capacity (MG/MGD) Date ofConst Existing Waterline Total Capital Cost ($) Faeflity 20 Year Debt Service @ 5 % Simple Interest IA & 1B Total 20 Year Project Cost ($) MGD or M Utilized Capacity % Utilized Capacity $ UtilizedCapacity 2018 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 2028 3.25 3.25 2.20 0.80 2.25 During Fee Period 2.75 2.75 2.20 0.80 2.25 2018 15% 1591 0% 0% 0% 2028 100% 100% 5% 5 53% 50% During Fee Period 85% 85% 55% 53% 50% 2018 $172,830 $172,830 $187,644 $187,644 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 2028 $1,123,396 $1,123,396 $1,219,687 $1,219,687 $1,500536 $1:500:536 $1,283,881 $1,283,881 $497,504 $497,504 During Fee Period $950,566 $950,566 $1,032,043 $1,032,043 $1,500,536 $1,500,536 $1,283,881 $1,283,881 $497,504 $497,504 CGMA Treated Surface Water System - Bloomdale PS and GS R 3.11 1 2005 $700,00111423396 $1,123,396 Subtotal: 3.25 2005 11 $700,000 $423:396 $1,123,396 Existing Waterline Facility I CGMA Treated Surface Water System- Treated Water Supply line 3,25 1 2115 $760,000 $4591687 $1,219,687 Subtotal: 3.25 2005 $760,000 $459,687 $1,219,687 Exis ft Waterline Facility 2A South Take Paint - PS 4,00 2005 $1,700,000 $1,028,248 $2,728,248 Subtotal: 4.00 2005 $1,700,000 $1,028,248 $2,728,248 Existing Waterline Facility 213 South Take Point - GSR I50 2005 $11,500,000 $907,278 $2,407,278 Subtotal: 1.50 2005 $1,500,000 $907,278 $2,407,278 Existing Waterline Facie 3 18" WL From S outh Take Point to FM 455 Subtotal: 4,50 2005 4.50 2005 $620,000 1 S620,000 $375,008 S375,008 S995,008 $995,008 Existing Waterline Facility 4 0.30 0.30 0.00 100°�h 100% 0% $962,911 $962,911 $962,911 $962,911 $0 s0 West Well & GSR Subtotal: 0.30 0.30 2uos 2005 $600,000 S600,11011 $362,911 $362,911 $962,911 $962,911 Existing Waterline Facility 5 0.35 0.50 0.15 7094� 100", 30% S561,698 S561,698 $802,426 $802,426 $240,728 $240,728 West Well EST Subtotal: 0.50 0.50 2005 2005 $500,000 $500,000 S302,426 S302,426 S802,426 $802,426 Existing Waterline Facility 6A 0.91 0.91 0.00 100"1, 100% 0% $1,604,852 $1,604,852 $1,604,852 $1,604,852 $0 $0 South Grayson System - Water Wells Subtotal: 0.91 2005 0.91 2005 $1,000,000 $1,OOQ000 $604,852 $604,852 $1,604,852 $1,604,857 Existing Waterline Facility 613 0.25 0.35 0.11 70"/0 100% 30% $589,783 $589,783 $842547 $842:547 $252,764 $252,764 South Grayson System -.35 MG EST Subtotal: 0.35 0.35 1 2005 2005 $525,000 $525,000 $317,547 $317,547 S842,547 $842,547 Existing Waterline Facility 6C - - - 5% 40% 35% S8,024 S8,024 S64,194 S64,194 S56,170 S56,170 South Grayson System - CCN Area Subtotal: 1.00 2005 1.00 2005 $100,000 s100,11011 $60,485 $60,485 $160,485 S160,485 Existing Waterline Facility 7 0.00 0.50 0,50 0% 100% 100% $0 $0 $320,970 $320,970 $320,970 $320,970 South Well Surface Water Subtotal: 050 0.50 2013 2013 $200,000 S2000000 $120970 $120:970 $320,970 $320,970 Existing Waterline Facility 8 0.00 1.25 1.25 Oda 100�a 100% $0 SO 51,364,124 S1,364,124 $1,364,124 $1,364,124 North & West Wit Surface Water Subtotal: I.25 2014 1.25 2014 $850,000 S8511,00o $514,124 S514,124 $1,364,124 $I,364,124 Existing Waterline Facility 9 0.21 0.42 0.20 10% 5% $25,778 $25,778 $50,710 $50,710 $24,931 $24,931 C.R. 1106 Waterliae Subtotal: 4.00 4.00 2016 11 2016 $303,300 $303,300 1 $183,452 $183,452 S486,752 S486,752 Existing Waterline Facility 10 0.70 1.00 0.30 70% 100% 30% $2,929,713 $2,929,713 $4,185,304 $4,185,304 $1,255,591 $1,255,591 Hackberry EST -1.0 MG Subtotal: 1.00 1.00 2016 21116 $2,607,907 $2,607,907 $1,577,397 $1,577,397 $4,185,304 $4,185,304 Existing Waterline Facility 11 - 0.00 0.00 - 1.00 1.25 - 1.00 1.'_5 0% 09% 011,11 10% 100% 501111 I0"/o 100% 50% $0 $0 $0 Sll $0 $0 580,243 S80,243 $1,203,639 $1,203,639 $933,352 $933,352 $SQ243 $80,243 $1,203,639 $1,203,639 $933,352 $933,352 Disinfection N/A 2016 $SOQ,000 $302,426 $802,426 Subtotal: N/A 2016 5500,000 S302,426 $802,426 Existing Waterline Facility 12 Initial South Pump Station 1,00 2016 $750,000 S453,639 $1,203,639 Subtotal 1.00 2016 S750,000 S453,639 $1,203,639 Existing Waterline Facility 13 South Distribution line From West Well EST (w/DEV) Subtotal: 2.50 1 206 2.50 20 6 11 $1,163,163 $1,163,163 S703,541 $703,541 $1,866,704 $1,866,704 Existing Waterline Facility 14 0.00 1.13 1.1', 0"-„ 45% 45% $0 $0 $855,513 $855,513 $855,513 $855,513 East-West Waterline along future Rackberry tat. West Subtotal: 2.50 2.50 1 2016 2016 $1,184,620 $1,184,621) $716,519 $716,519 $1,901,139 $1,9111,139 Existing Waterline Facility 15 0.00 1.10 1.10 0"i� .55% 55% $0 $0 $290,221 $290,221 $290,221 $290,221 U.S: 75 Parallel Water line North of F.M. 455 (w/DEV) Subtotal: 2.00 2.00 1 2016 2016 $328,800 $328,800 $198,875 $198,875 S527,675 $527,675 Existing Waterline Facility 16 0.00 1.10 1.10 0"�, 55% 55% $0 $11 $1,677,070 S1,677,070 $1,677,070 $1,671,070 U.S: 75 Parallel Water Line South of F.M. 455 Su1total: 2.00 2.011 2616 2016 $1,900,000 $I,91111,0011 $1,149,218 $1,149,218 $3,049,218 $3,049.218 Existing Waterline Facility 17 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1,10 1.10 1.10 0% 01, 01141 55% 55°0 55% 55% 55% 55% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,297,253 $1,297,253 S1,116,796 S1,116,796 $796,123 $796,123 $1,297,253 $1,297,253 $1,116,796 $1,116,796 $796,123 $796,123 East-West Water line along West Foster (w/DEV) 2,00 1 2016 $1,469,694 S888,947 $2,358,641 Subtotal: 2.00 2016 11 $1,469,694 S888,947 $7,358,641 Existing Waterline Facility 18 Water line for C.R.422 (w/DEV) 2.00 1 2016 $1,265,250 $765,289 $2,030,539 Subtotal: 2.00 2016 $1,265,250 $765,289 $2,030.539 Existing Waterline Facility 19 Water Lane C.R.371 to Rosamond Pkwy. (w/DEV) Subtotal: 2.00 2.00 2016 2016 $901,950 $901,950 $545,546 $545,546 $1,447,496 $1,447,496 Existing Waterline Facility 20 0.00 1.10 1.10 0% 45% 45% $0 $0 $246,987 $246,987 $246,987 $246,987 Subtotal: 2.00 2.00 2016 20 6 $342,000 S342,000 1206859 $206:859 S548,859 $548,859 Existing Waterline Facility 21 0.00 1.10 1.10 0% 55% 55% $0 $0 $242,292 $242,292 $242,292 $242,292 Subtotal: 2.00 2.00 2016 2016 $274,500 $274,500 1 $166,032 $166,032 $440,532 $440,532 Water Facilities - Project CIP Total $22,046 184 $13 334,673 $35,380,857F $7,043 234 1$24,562,532 $17,519 298 j: lclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20lslreports 04-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 12 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 9 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WATER LINES *A ­­g, Unit, ­ts are based in 2018 dollars unless other"°ise indicated and includes 20% for engineering and easements. Line Identification Length (Ft.) Diameter (Inches) Developer participation ANg. Unit Cost ($/Ft.) Total Capital Cost ($) 20 Year Debt Service (d 5 % Simple Interest Total 20 Year Project Cost ($) (%) Utilized Capacity ($) Utilized Capacity 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period Water Line #1 0% 15 % 15"� $0 $0 $564,422 $564,422 $564,422 $564,422 12" waterline along Collin Outer Loop and F.M.455 to South Plant 15,631 12 $150.00 $2,344,650 $1,418,166 $3,762,816 Subtotal: 1 5,63 1$2,344,650 $1,418,1661 $3,762,816 Water Line #2 12" water line - F.M. 455 southern offset wrapping back to SH 5, west of CR419 9,153 12 $150.00 $1,372,950 $830,431 $2,203,381 609 12 X $50.00 $30,450 $18,418 $48,868 Subtotal: 9,762 $1,403,400 $848,849 $2,252,249 Water Line #3 0% 00/1) I I ?f, I I % II% $0 $0 $0 $242.372 S5,375 $247,747 $242,372 $5,375 $247,747 12" water line north of the Outer Loop, along CR 422 2,678 12 $150.00 $401,700 $242,969 $644,669 400 12 X $50.00 $20,000 $12,097 $32,097 Subtotal: 3,078 $421,700 $255,066 $676,766 Water Line #4 0% 0% 0% 0% 15% 15% 23% 23% 15% 15% 23% 23% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $96,700 $4,815 $101,515 $159,901 $73,657 $233,558 $96,700 $4,815 $101,515 $159,901 $73,657 $233,558 12" Water tine north of the Outer Loop, towards Anna Crossing Subdivision Subtotal: 2,888 3,991 6,879 12 12 X $150.00 $50.00 $433,200 $199,550 $632,750 $262,022 $120,698 $382,720 $695,222 $320,248 $1,015,470 Water Line #5 0";, 13% 1 LYt $0 $0 $337,763 $337,7631 $337,763 $337,763 12" water line following F.M. 455, east of S.P.RR Subtotal: 10793 10,793 12 $150.00 $1,618,950 $1,618950 $979,225 $979,2251 $2,598,175 $2,598,175 Water Line #6 0% 100% _ 001�11 $0 $0 $3.018.405 $3,018,405 $3.018,405 $3,018,405 24", north -south water line along CR 369, from S outh Grayson's North Plant towards West Well Subtotal: 9,404 1 24 9,404 $200.00 $1,880,800 $1,880,800 $1,137,605 $1,137,605 $3,018,405 $3,018,405 Water Line #7 0% 63% 63% $0 $0 $427,626 $427,626 $427,626 $427,626 12" north -south water line from Taylor Blvd. to Outer Loop Subtotal: 8,459 12 8,459 X $50.00 $422,950 $255,822 $422,950 $255,822 $678,772 S678,772 Water Line #8 0% 0°% 0% 09�1 96% 93°% 93% 96% 9M,, 9 3 %) 23% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $126,620 $126,620 $907,037 $125,649 $1,032,686 $63,839 $63,839 $126,620 $126,620 $907,037 $125,649 $1,032,686 $63,839 $63,839 12" water line running south from Taylor Blvd. and South Ferguson Pkwy. to Outer Loop 1,642 1 12 X $50.00 $82,100 $49,658 $131,758 Subtotal: 1,642 $82,100 $49,658 $131,758 Water Line #9 12", east -west water line from S.P.R.R. to Slayter Creek, south of Taylor Blvd. 4,069 12 $150.00 $610,350 $369,171 $979,521 1,691 12 X $50.00 $84,550 $51,140 $135,690 Subtotal: 5,760 $694,900 $420,311 $1,115,211 Water Line #10 23"l 12" water line along Taylor Blvd. between U.S. 75 and S. Ferguson Pkwy. Subtotal: 3,459 3,459 1 12 1 X $50.00 $172,950 $172,950 $104,609 $104,609 $277,559 $277,559 Water Line # 11 _ Not used Water Line #12 095, 0% 0% 0% 0°% 0% 21% 52% 52% 62% 26% 29% 1 _ 21% 52'% 52% 62% 26 / 29% 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 So $0 $0 $0 1 $0 $20,255 $20,255 $652.180 S21.823 S674,003 $147,759 $127,557 $788,818 $1,064,1341 $20,255 $20,255 $652,180 $21.823 $674,003 $147,759 $127,557 $788,818 $1,064,134 12" water line along CR 1106 between Dumas Dr. and CR 426 1,202 12 X S50.00 $60,100 $36,352 $96,452 Subtotal: 1,202 S60,100 $36,3521 $96,452 Water Line #13 12" waterline along CR426, South from CR 1106 to near Camden Park Subdivision 5,210 12 $150.00 $781,500 $472,692 $1,254,192 523 12 X $50.00 $26,150 $15,817 $41,967 Subtotal: 5,733 $807,650 $488,509 $1,296,159 Water Line #14 8", 12" & 16" waterlines along SH 5, south from CR 1106 and continuing onto Fern St. near High school Subtotal: 1,485 2,038 9,970 13,493 8 12 16 $100.00 $150.00 $170.00 $148,500 $305,700 $1,694,900 $2,149,100 $89,820 $238,320 $490,603 $2,720,063 $3,448,9871 $184,903 $1,025,163 $1,299,887 Water Line # 15 011 0% 44% 44% 44% 44% $0 $0 $0 $1,000,416 $1,000,416 12" & 16" water lines along Rosamond, west of S H 5, and turning south to CR 370 9,445 4,049 Subtotal: 13,494 12 16 $150.00 $170.00 $1,416,750 $688,330 $2,105,080 $856,924 $2,273,674 $1,104,668 $3,378,341 $416,338 $1,273,261 $486,054 $1,486,470 $486,054 $1,486,470 Water Line #16 Not used Water Line #17 0° _ 83% 83% SO so $220,717 $220,717 $220,717 $220,717 12" water line along U.S. 75, south of CR 370 Subtotal: 3,314 3,314 1 12 X $50.00 $165,700 $165,700 $100,224 $100 224 $265,924 $265,924 Water Line #18 Not used Water Line #19 0°ti 25",6 25% $0 $0 $102,309 $102,309 $102,309 $102,309 12", north -south water line between west Rosamond Pkwy. and CR 371, west of West Well Subtotal: 5,100 5,100 12 X $50.00 $255,000 $154,237 $255,000 $154,237 $409,237 $409,237 Water Line #20 011. 0% 0% 63 % 42% 42% 63% 42% 42% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,652,204 $29652,204 $466,704 $219,130 $685,834 $2,652,204 $2,652,204 $466,704 $219,130 $685,834 12" water ►ine traversing between intersections CR 290 and CR 288 to CR 284 and U.S. 75 17,411 1 12 1 $150.00 $2,623,200 $1,586,647 $4,209,847 Subtotal: 17,488 $2,623,200 $1,586,647 S4,209,847 Water Line #21 12" water line parallel to CR 368 and CR 286, west of U.S. 75, from CR 370 to CR 284 - Subtotal: 4,616 6,502 11,118 12 12 X $150.00 $50.00 $692,400 $325,100 $1,017,500 $418,799 $1,111,199 $521,737 $1,632,937 $196,637 $615,437 j: lclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 13 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 9 (Continued) *A ve-g, Unit costs are based in 2018 dollars unless olhenvis, indicated and includes 20% for engineering cmd easements. Line Length Identification(Inches) Diameter Developer Participation Avg. Unit Cost $/Ft Total Capital Cost $ 20 Year Debt Total 20 Year Service @ 5% Project Simple Interest Cost ($) (%) Utilized Capacity ($) UtilizedCapacity 2018 0";, 2028 45% During Fee Period 45% 2018 SO S0 2028 5719,295 S719,295 During Fee Period $719,295 $719,295 Water Line #22 12", east -west water line between CR368 and CR 370 to CR 290 and CR 288 S ubhltal: 6,640 12 6,640 $150.00 $996,000 $602,433 $996,000 $602,432 $1,598,432 SL598,432 Water Line #23 0% 14% 14% 0 $0 $315.2,9 S315,259 S315.259 $315,259 12" Hater lines crossing south ofproposed western T-02 EST Subtotal: 28,063 1 12 28,063 X 550.00 $1,403,150 $1,403,150 $848,698 $848,6981 $2,251,848 $2,251,848 Water Line #24 011 _ 81yo 811s, $0 SO 5164.696 S164,696 $164,696 $164.696 24" waterline running west from South Grayson's North Plant to near U.S.75 6,414 24 Subtotal: 6,414 S200.00 $1,282,800 $775,904 $1,282,800 $775,9041 $2,058,704 $2,058,704 Water Line #25 0% 55% 55% $0 $0 $559.435 $559,435 $559,435 $559,435 12", north -south water line, generally parallel to and east of U.S.75 between CR 371 and F,M. 455 Subtotal: 12,676 12,676 12 X $50.00 $633,800 $383,355 $633,800 $383,3551 $1,017,155 $1,017,155 Water Line #26 0 8% 8% $0 $0 $15,143 $15,143 $15,143 $15,143 16" water line crossing U.S. 75 at CR 371 Subtotal: 1,615 1,685 1 16 1 X S70.00 $117,950 $71,342 $117950 $71,342 $189,292 $189,292 Water Line #27 0114, 25% _ 25% $0 $0 $712,687 $712,687 $712,687 $712,687 18" water line along future western Collin County Outer Loop and north to CR 285 Subtotal: 20,898 20,898 18 X $85.00 $1,776,330 $1,776,330 $1,074,416 $1,074,4161 $2,850,746 $2,850,746 Water Line #28 0% 45% _ 45% $0 $0 $1,028,884 $1,028,884 $1,028,884 $1,028,884 18" waterline continuation along future western Collin County Outer Loop, west of S.H. 5 Subtotal: 7,701 7,701 1 18 $185.00 $1,424,685 $1,424,685 $861,723 $861,7231 $2,286,408 $2,286,408 Water Line #29 0% 45% 45% $0 SO $1,241,047 $1,241,047 S1,241,047 $1,241,047 18" water line along F.M. 455 between the creek near CK 419 to near S.H.121 1,289 Subtotal: 9,289 18 $185.00 $1,718,465 $1,039,417 $1,718,465 S1,039417 $2,757,882 $2,757,882 Water Line #30 0% 80% 80911 $0 SO $208567 $208,567 S208,567 S2081567 12" water line along S.H. 5 and CR 423, south of F.M. 455 Subtotal: 3,249 1 12 3,249 1 X S50.00 $162,450 $98,258 $162,450 S98,25R $260,708 S260,708 Water Line #31 0% 40°,, 409i, $0 SO $735.831 S735,831 $735,831 $735,831 18-inch P-758 Subtotal: 6,196 6,196 18 S185.00 $1,146,260 $11146,260 $693,317 $693,317 $1,839,577 $1,839,577 Water Line #32 04-,, 45" ,, 45°,, $0 $0 $646,607 $646,607 $646,607 $646,607 12-inch P-610, P-611, P-847 5,969 12-7 Subtotal: 5,969 S150.00 $895,350 $541,554 $895,350 $541,554 $1,436,904 $1,436,904 Water Line #33 0% 1001;4, 10094, $0 $0 $363,499 $363,499 $363,499 12-inch P-931 Subtotal• 1,510 12 1,510 1 $150.00 $226,500 $136,999 $226,500 $136,999 $363.499 $363,499 $363,499 Water Line #34 0% 100°11, 10011 $0 $0 $104,636 $104,636 $104,636 $104,636 12-inch P-528 Subtotal: 1,304 1,304 12 X S50.00 $65,200 $65200 $39,436 $39,436 $104,636 $104,636 Water Line #35 0% 75";, 75% $0 $0 $704,129 $704,129 $704,129 $704,129 12-inch P-742 Subtotal: 3,9011 3,900 12 $150.00 $585,000 $585000 $353,838 $353,838 $938,838 $938,838 Water Line #36 0°4, 15% 15% $0 S0 $91,501 S91,501 $91,501 591,5U1 12-inch P-524, P-790, P-803 7,602 Subtotal: 7602 12 X $50.00 $380,100 $229,904 $380,100 $229,9114 $610,004 S610,004 Water Line #37 0% 15% 15% $0 $0 $52,334 $52,334 $52,334 $52,334 12-inch P-809 Subtotal: 4,348 12 4,348 1 X $50.00 $217,400 $131,495 $217,400 $131,495 $348,895 $348,895 Water Line #38 0"/0 15% 15% $0 $0 $54,946 $54,946 $54,946 $54,946 12-inch J-725,J-727 4,565 Subtotal: 4565 12 X S50.00 $228,250 $228,2511 $138,057 1$138,057 $366,307 S366,307 Water Line #39 0% 15% 15% $0 $0 $46,458 $46,458 $46,458 $46,458 16-inch P-563 Subtotal: 2,757 2,757 16 X S70.00 5192990 $192,9911 $116,730 $116,730 $309,720 $309,720 Water Line #40 0`4, 25% 25% $0 $0 $276,849 $276,849 $276,849 $276,849 164nch P-588 4,059 16 Subtotal: 4,059 S170.00 S690,030 $690,030 $417,366 $417,366 $1,107,396 $1,107,396 Water Line #41 0i; 25% 25% $0 S0 $62,168 $62,168 $62,168 $62,168 12-inch P-935 Subtotal: 3,099 3,099 12 S50.00 $154,950 $93,722 $154,950 $93,722 $248,672 $248,672 Water Line #42 0"i, 15% 15% $0 S0 $98,005 $98,005 $98,005 $98,005 16-inch P-769 Subtotal: 5,816 5,816 16 X S70.00 $407,120 $407,120 $246,247 $246,247 $653,367 $653,367 Water Line #43 0% 15% 15' , $0 SO $116J42 S116,142 $116,142 $116,142 18-inch P-828, P-760 Subtotal: 5,676 51676 18 X $85.00 $482,460 S482,460 $291,817 $291,817 $774,277 $774,277 Water Lines - CIP Total TOTAL 1 299,225 7 1$34,045,720 1 $20,592,613 $54,638,333 S21,378,2251 $21,378,225 P-### : Reference to Water SystemMater Plan Map -Water Line Number J-### :Reference to Water System Master Plan Map -Node Number "X" :Developer Participation j: lclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsl04-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 14 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 10 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WATER FACILITIES x A, —aa e Uni[ costs are haled in ?0I S dollars unless othenrise indicate,/ and incl�,des 20% Jm en,gineerino acid ensen, en ts. Pipc Number Total Capacity (MG NIGD) 'Total Capital Cost ($) 1 MG EST 20 Year Debt Service @ 5% 1 Simple Interest Total 20 Year Project I Cost (MCD or MG) Capacity Utilized (%) Utilized Capacitti (S) UtilizedCa )•city 1 2018 0.00 0.00 2028 0.75 1.00 During Fee Period 0.75 1.0 2018 04S 0% 2028 80"1, 20% During Fee Period 80% 20% 2018 SO $0 SO $0 2028 $3,851,644 $3,851,644 $481,456 S481,456 During Fee Period $3,851,644 $3,851,644 $481,456 S481,456 L00 $3,000,000 1 $1,814,555 $4,814,555 Subtotal: 1.00 $3,000,000 $1,814,555 $4,814,555 South Plant Pump Station Expansion Subtotal: 5.00 5.00 $1,500,000 1 $1,500,000 1 $907,278 $907,278 $2,407,278 S2,407,278 CGMA Sherman Connection 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 1.50 0.50 2.0 2.0 1.5 0.5 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 10% 100% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100°/ SO $0 SO $0 SO $0 SO SO $160,485 $160,485 $320,970 S320,970 $2,407,278 $2,407,278 $1,123,396 $1,123,396 $160,485 $160,485 $320,970 $320,970 $2,407,278 $2,407,278 $1,123,396 $1,123,396 NIA 51,000,000 $604,852 $1,604,852 Subtotal• N/A $1,000,000 $604,852 $1,604,852 CGMA Bloomdale Pump Station NiA S2,000,000 $1,209,703 $3,209,703 S ubtota1: N/A S2,000.000 $1,209,703 S3,209,703 South Grayson Take Point - 1.5 MGD Pump 1.50 $1,500,000 $907,278 $2,407,278 Subtotal: 1.50 $1,500,000 $907,278 $2,407,278 South Grayson Take Point - 0.5 GSR Subtotal: 0.50 0.50 $700,000 S700.000 $423,396 $423,396 $1,123,396 $1,123,396 Water Facilities - CIP Total $9,700,0011 $5,867,062 $15,567,062 $0 $8,345,229 $8,345,229 j: Ictericahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 15 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. VI. WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM %V nnnr al At this time, based on projections provided by the City, the City of Anna will approximately double in population over the ten-year period. The most significant growth, that affects the wastewater collection needs of the City, will occur in the Slayter Creek Basin, along the US 75 corridor, east of SH 5 and along Hurricane Creek west of US 75. The wastewater collection system is partially in place to serve the new development. The existing Slayter Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), as well as the Point Of Entry (POE) to the NTWMD system, provide treatment for the sewage. Conveyance from the new developments to these existing facilities will be required. The City of Anna's flow is metered at the WWTP and at two Points of Entry into the regional NTMWD lines. New developments in certain areas of the City will require wastewater lift stations and force mains to convey sewage towards the existing collection system A. Existing Wastewater System Figure No. 3, the Existing Wastewater Facility Recovery Map, shows projects that have been constructed in part by the City, and are eligible for some financial recovery. Summaries of major project undertakings for the City are listed below. Y Throckmorton Creek 21-inch Collection: In approximately 2003, the City staff entered into a contract to construct approximately 4,500 linear feet of 21-inch PVC collection line. This facilitated the construction of single family homes adjacent to FM 455. It also picked up flow from the commercial development located at the intersection of US 75 and FM 455. Y Slayter Creek 24-inch Collection Line: In approximately 2005, the City staff entered into a contract to construct approximately 7,000 linear feet of 24-inch PVC collection line. This facilitated the construction of single family homes in the Slayter Creek basin north of FM 455. Y Clemmons Creek Point of Entry: In approximately 2005, the City staff entered into a joint contract with the City of Melissa to construct a 15-inch regional sanitary sewer collector line. The existing line terminated approximately one-half mile south of the j: Iclericahanna12018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reports104-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 16 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. City of Anna City Limit lines. Around 2016, this line was extended into the City of Anna to facilitate growth east of SH 5. Y Throckmorton Creek Point of Entry: In approximately 2009, the City staff entered into a joint contract with the City of Melissa to construct a 21-inch regional sanitary sewer collector line. A large percentage of the projected growth will be conveyed to the Throckmorton Creek POE. B. Proposed Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan Figure No. 4 illustrates the proposed wastewater system improvements based on meeting the 10-year, future demands of new developments for the City of Anna. The expectation is that each line will be engineered based on the demands associated with the current land use plan and any special circumstances particular to a business or operation that might potentially overload the system due to specific demand issues. j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 17 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 10 10-YEAR WASTEWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Project Size Developer Participation Total Capital Cost(t) Debt Service(2) Total Project Cost($) Throckmorton Creek Parallel Line #1 VARIES (27)"" $3,788,325 $2,291,375 $6,079,700 Sanitary Sewer Line 42 36"" X $7,895,360 $4,775,522 $12,670,882 Sanitary Sewer Line #3 18" X $2,399,265 $1,451,200 $3,850,465 Sanitary Sewer Line #4A $3,087,500 $1,867,480 $4,954,980 Sanitary Sewer Line #413 12"" X $3,935,000 $2,380,092 $6,315,092 Sanitary Sewer Line #5 12"" X $684,900 $414,263 $1,099,163 Sanitary Sewer Line #6 12"" X $490,950 $296,952 $787,902 Sanitary Sewer Line #7 15"" X $1,445,000 $874,011 $2,319,011 Sanitary Sewer Line 48 811" X $326,700 $197,605 $524,305 Sanitary Sewer Line #9 18"" $241,425 $146,026 $387,451 Sanitary Sewer Line #10 12"" $639,450 $386,772 $1,026,222 Sanitary Sewer Line # I I (Camden Park Offsite Gravity) 8",12"" X $304,780 $184,347 $489,127 Sanitary Sewer Line # 12 (Sweetwater F.M.) 10"" X $504,000 $304,845 $808,845 Sanitary Sewer Line #14 (F.M.) 12"" X $1,479,850 $895,090 $2,374,940 Sanitary Sewer Line #15 (F.M.) 20"" X $2,544,000 $1,538,743 $4,082,743 Sanitary Sewer Line #16 12" $1,150,000 $695,580 $1,845,580 Sanitary Sewer Line #17 12" $700,000 $423,396 $1,123,396 Subtotal: Wastewater Collection Lines $31,616,505 $19,123,298 $50,739,803 $50,739,803 Wastewater Svstem Facilities Project Size (MG/MGD) Developer Participation Total Capital Cost (r) Debt Service (2) Total Project Cost ($) Sweetwater Lift Station (#18) 1.30 X $498,200 $301,337 $799,537 Jacobs Lift Station (#19) 1.60 $750,000 $453,639 $1,203,639 W S2 Lift Station (#20) 9.01 X $2,250,000 $1,360,916 $3,610,916 NTMWD Meter Station (#22) N/A $350,000 $211,698 $561,698 Trinity Meter Station (#23) N/A 1 1 $500,000 1 $302,426 1 $802,426 Subtotal: Wastewater Collection Facilities 1 1 $4,348,200 1 $2,630,016 1 $6,978,216 Wastewater Master Plan Wastewater CIP Grand Total C. Utilized Capacity $50,000 $0 $50,000 $36,014,705 $21,753,315 $57,768,020 Utilized capacity for the wastewater collection system was calculated based on land absorption from population growth projections provided by the City. The population and employment growth in each wastewater drainage basin was determined utilizing the City's growth projections. These growth rates were utilized to calculate 2018 and 2028 design flows. j: Ictertcahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsl04-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 20 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. The following summarizes each design flow component utilized to calculate the wastewater design flows. 1) Population Based Flow: For the purpose of this wastewater impact fee study an average per capita flow of 100 gallons per day (gpcd) is a reasonable basis for the design of the wastewater collection and treatment facilities. 2) Non -Population Based Flow: Non-residential average flows are estimated based on an average flow per acre for each non-residential land use category. Commercial base unit flows were estimated to be 1,500 gallons per acre per day (gpad) to simulate dry weather conditions. The City also has a public component to consider. The unit for public components was estimated to be 1,000 gpad. 3) Infiltration and Inflow: Groundwater can infiltrate into the sanitary sewer system through faulty sewer pipe joints, breaks in sewer pipes and manholes and faulty service lines. This infiltration creates an average day flow related burden on the wastewater collection system and the wastewater treatment plant. Infiltration is a constant that is not necessarily based on temporary storm based environmental conditions. Normal plant capacity must be designed to handle these infiltration related conditions. The City can embark on programs to rehabilitate lines that contribute significant infiltration volumes when economically and environmentally feasible, and/or desirable. Inflow is generally related to storm based events that increase groundwater and surface water flow into the sanitary system. The additional flow is generally recognized to enter through manholes, service lines, roof drains and storm drains. Inflow related surges could cause surcharged sewers, overflows at manholes and peak flows that surpass the capacity of the treatment plant. It is estimated, for wastewater collection system planning purposes, that the combined infiltration and inflow is 800 gallons per acre per day (gpad) for the existing wastewater collection system and 600 gpad for the new lines proposed in the build -out wastewater collection system. j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 21 of 2 7 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. 4) The calculation of peak flows requires the development of a unit hydrograph (Diurnal Curve). At the time of this report, a sufficient amount of wastewater flow data was not available to allow for a feasible approach for the development of a diurnal curve specific to the City of Anna. However, unit hydrographs from other cities monitored in the past were evaluated and compiled into a diurnal curve that reasonably represents the peak flow in the City of Anna. Diurnal curves are applied to the hydraulic model to simulate a 24-hour temporal cycle in a wastewater system. The diurnal curve was applied system wide to the base flows. The base flow calculated for inflow and infiltration is an independent variable that is not affected by the Diurnal Pattern. The percent utilized capacity was calculated for the design flow of each study year based on the build -out capacity. The utilized capacity for each facility during the Impact Fee period is the difference between the year 2028 available capacity and the year 2018 available capacity. Table No. 11 below summarizes the project cost and utilized cost over the impact fee period of 2018 - 2028 for each element of the wastewater system (impact fee eligible). The utilized capacity for each existing and proposed wastewater collection line is presented in detail in Impact Fee Capacity Calculation Tables No. 13, No. 14, and No. 15. TABLE NO. 11 SUMMARY OF ELIGIBLE CAPITAL COST & UTILIZED CAPACITY COST Wastewater System Total 20-Year Project Cost M Utilized Capacity During Fee Period M Existing Wastewater Facilities $24,945,474 $8,167,784 Existing Wastewater System Subtotal: $24,945,474 $8,167,784 Proposed Wastewater Collection Sewer Lines $50,739,803 $24,292,009 Proposed Wastewater Facilities $6,978,216 $5,723,222 Wastewater System Master Plan $50,000 $50,000 Proposed Water System Subtotal: $57,768,020 $30,065,231 TOTAL: $82,713,493 $38,233,015 j: Ictertcahannal2o18-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 22 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 12 EXISTING FACILITY RECOVERY - WASTEWATER LINES & FACILITIES * Average Unit costs are Aased in 2014 dollars unless otherwise indicated and includes 20% (or engineering and Pipe Number Total Capacity MCD Dale of ConsL Total Capital cost $ 20 Year Debt S...ice@5% Sim eInterest Total 20 Year Project Cost S GD Utili.edCapacity a acity Utilized Capacity 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #1 0.13 1.40 127 1% 15% 13'Y, $46,051 $46,051 $479,784 $479,784 $433,711 $433,733 Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Lower) [lo-ek-lon Subtotal: 9.60 9.60 2005 2005 $2,050,000 $2,050,000 $1,239,946 $1,239,946 $3,289, - $3,289,946 Existing Sanitary Sewer FacHity #2 0.23 140 1,17 4% 25% 21% $71:957 $71,957 $437,322 $437,322 $365,365 $365,365 Throckmorton Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Upper) Subtotal: 5.60 5.60 2008 2008 $1,090,000 $1,090,000 $659,288 $659,288 $1,749,288 $1,749,288 Exis Ling S ardtary SewerFacility #3 0.00 SO $583,021 S583,021 $583,021 $583,1121 Throckmorton I.S. Relief Trunk Sewer Subtotal: 6,07 6.07 2016 11 2016 $1,453,145 11,453,145 1 $878:937 $878937 $2,332,082 $2,332,082 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #4 0.00 4.80 4.80 0% 100% IUII% $0 So $1,444,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 Slayter Creek Trunk Sewer Subtotal: 4.80 4.80 2015 2015 $900,000 $900,000 $544,367 $544,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 Existing Sanitary Sewer Faeffity #5 0.84 0.91 207 84% 91 % 7% $1,486,980 S1,486,980 $1,615,484 $1,615,484 $128,504 $128,504 Upper Slayter Creek Trunk Sewer Subtotal: I.00 1.00 2005 2005 $1,105,000 $1,105,000 $668,361 $668,361 $1,773,361 $1,773,361 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #6 0.00 0.70 0.70 119.6 23% 23% $0 SII $642,211 $642,208 $&12,208 $642,208 Clemmons Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Lower) Subtotal: 3,00 3.00 1 2008 2008 $1,715,000 $1,715,000 $1,037,321 $1,037,321 $2,752,321 $2,752,321 Existing Sanitary Semer FacHity #7 0.06 0.04 0.90 0.60 0.84 056 2 2 30% 30% 28% 28% $44,172 544,172 $21,826 521,826 $662,584 1662,1M $327,390 5327,390 $618,412 $618,412 $305,564 $305,564 Cl,mmons Creek Regional Trunk S ewer (Upper) 3.00 2016 $1,376,210 $832,403 $2,208,613 Subtotal: 3.00 2016 S1,376,210 S832,403 $2.208,613 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #8 Anna Crossing L.S. Force Main Subtotal: 2,00 2.00 2015 2015 $680,000 $680,000 $411,299 S411,299 $1,091,299 $1,091,299 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facflity #9 0.04 0.35 0.60 0.50 0.56 0.15 2% 70% 30% 100% 28%, 11 3VI $10,271 $10,271 $2,207,474 $2,207,474 $154,066 5154,066 $3,153,534 $3,153,534 1143795 $143:795 $946,060 $946,060 Anna Crossing lift Station 2.00 2015 $320,000 $193,553 $513,553 Subtotal: 2.00 2015 $320,000 $193,553 $513,553 11 Exisft Sanitary SewerFacility #10 Slayter Creek W WTP Subtotal: 0.50 0.50 2005 2005 $1,965,000 $1,9650000 $1,188,534 $1,188,534 $3,153,53 $3,153,534 ExistingSanitary Sewer Facility #11 0.35 0.50 0.50 3.00 0.15 2.50 70% 8% 100°�b 50% 30':6 42' $73? 266 S732,266 S202.545 S202,545 $1,046,094 $1,046,094 $1,265,907 $1,265,907 $313,828 $313,828 $1,063,362 $1,063,362 Slayter Creek W W rP Headworks lift Station 0.50 2014 $651;832 $394,262 $1,046,094 Subtotal: 0.50 2014 $fi51,R32 $394,262 $1,114fi,1194 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facifity #12 16 inch Force Main Subtotal: 6.00 6.00 1 2018 2018 $1,577,600 S1,577,600 $954,214 $954,214 $2,531,814 $2,531,814 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #13 0.50 3.00 2.50 8% 50% 42% $224,679.24 $224,679 $1,404,245 $1,404,245 $1,179,566 $1,179,566 WAS 1 lift Station Subtotal: 6.00 6.00 1 2018 2018 $1,750,000 $1,750,000 $1,058,491 $1,058,491 $2,808,491 $2,808,491 Wastewater Facilities - Project Recovery Total $4,976,263 $13,216,005 $8,167,784 $ 6,633,7871 $10,060,9751 $24,945,474 j: Ictericahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 23 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 13 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WASTEWATER LINES *A verave Unit costs are based in 2014 dollars unless otherwise indicated and includes 20% for eneineerine and easements Pipe \mnber Total Capacity N1110)),Date of Cons Total Capital Cost $ 20 Year Debt Service @ 5 % simple Interest Total 20 Year Project Cost $ (MGD) Utilized Capacity %) UfilizedCa •city $ Utilized Capacity 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period 2018 2028 During Fee Period Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #1 0.13 1.40 1.27 1 % 15% 13% $46,051 $46,051 S479,784 S479,784 _ $433,733 $433,733 'f hrocluuortou Creel: Regional Trunk Sewer (Lower) Subtotal: 9.60 1 2005 11 9.60 2005 $2,050,000 $2,050,000 $1,2391,946 S1,239,946 S3.289,946 53,28Q946 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #2 0.23 0.00 1.40 1.52 1.17 1.52 4% 0% 25% 25% 21% 25% $71,957 $71,957 $0 $0 $437,322 $437,3221 $583,021 $583,021 $365,365 $365,365 $583,021 $583,021 Throckmorton Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Upper) 5,60 1 2008 11 $1,090,000 $659,288 S1.749,288 Subtotal: 5.60 2008 $1,090,000 $659,288 S1,749,288 Existing Sanitaty Sewer Facility #3 Throckmorton L.S. Relief Trunk Sewer Subtotal• 6.07 1 2016 6.07 2016 $1,453,145 $978,937 $1,453,145 $878,937 $2,332,082 $2,332,082 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #4 0.00 4.80 4.80 0% 100% 100% $0 $0 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 Slayter Creek Trunk Sewer Subtotal: 4.80 4.80 2015 11 2015 $900,000 $900,000 $544,367 $544,367 $1,444,367 $1,444,367 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #5 0.84 0.91 0.07 841/. 91% 7% $1,486,980 $1,486,980 $1,615,484 S1,615,484 $128,504 $128,504 Upper Slayter Creek Trunk Sewer Subtotal: 1.00 1 2005 11 1.00 2005 $1,105,000 $111051000 $668.361 S668,361 S1.773361 $1,773,361 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #6 0.00 0.06 _ 0.04 0.04 0.70 0.90 0.60 0.60 070 0.84 OS6 056 0% 2% 2"0 2% 23% 30% 30% 30% 23% 28% 28% 28% $0 $0 $44,172 $44,172 $21,826 $21,826 $10,271 $10,271 $642,208 $642,208 $662.584 $662,584 $327,390 $327,390 $154,066 S154,066 $642,208 $642,208 $618,412 $618,412 $305,564 $305,564 $143,795 $143,795 Clemmons Creek Regional Trunk Sewer (Lower) 3.00 1 2008 $1,715,000 $1,037,321 $2,752,321 Subtotal: 3.00 2008 $1,715,000 $1,037,321 $2,752,321 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #7 ek Regional Trunk Sewer (Upper) 3.00 2016 $1,376,210 $832,403 $2,208,6G fS---tot:l-Cr3.00 2016 $1,376,210 $832,403 $2,209-611 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #8 Anna Crossing L.S. Force Main 2.00 2015 $680,000 $411,299 $1991,299 Subtotal: 2.00 2015 $680,000 $411,299 $1,091,299 Existing SaWtary Sewer Facility 99 Anna Crossing lift Station Subtotal: 2.011 2115 2.00 2015 $320,000 $193,553 $32Q,000 $193,553 $513,553 $513,553 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #10 0.35 0.500.15 70% 100% 30'/6 $2,207,474 $2,207,474 $3,153,534 $3,153,534 $946,060 $946,060 Slayter Creek WWTP Subtotal: 0.50 0.50 1 2005 11 2005 $1,965,000 $1,965,000 $1,188,534 $1,188,534 $3,153,534 $3,153.534 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #11 0.35 0.50 0.50 0.50 3.00 0.15 2.50 2.50 70% 8% 8% 100'% ALL 5V,, 30% 42% 42%P$47'6 S732.266 S732,266 $202,545 $202,545 4 9 $1,046,094 $1,046,094 S1,265,907 $1,261,907 $1,404,245 $1,404,245 $313,828 $313,828 $1,063,362 $1,063,362 $1,179,566 $1,179,566 Slayter Creek W WTP Headworks lift Station 0,50 1 2014 $651,832 $394,262 $1,046,094 Subtotal: 0.50 2014 $651,832 $394,262 $1,046,094 ExisfiW Sanitary Sewer Facility #12 16 inch Force Main 6.00 1 2018 11 $1,577,600 S954,214 $2,531,814 Subtotal: 6.00 2018 $1,577,600 $954,214 $2,531,814 Existing Sanitary Sewer Facility #13 WAS 1 liR Station 3.00 subtotal: 6.00 2018 6.00 2018 $1,75Q,000 $1,058,491 $1,750,000 $1,058,491 $2,R08,491 $2,808,491 Wastewater Facilities - Project Recovery Total J$13,216,005 $8,167,784 $16,633,787 $10,060,975 $24,945,474 j: Ictericahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 24 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 14 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WASTEWATER FACILITIES * Average Unit costs are based in 2014 dallars unless otherwise indicated and includes 20% far engineering and easements. Pipe Number Total Capacity Total Capital Cost ($) 20 Year Debt Service @ 5% Simplelnterest Total 20 Year Project Cost ($) (M®) Utilized Capacity (%) Utilized Capacity ($) Utilized Capacity 2018 0.00 0.00 0.00 2028 30 160 9.01 During Fee Period 1.30 1,60 9.01 2018 0% 0% 0% 2028 100% 100% 100% During Fee Period 100% 100% 100°)�, 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 2028 S799,537 S799,537 $1,203,639 $1,203,639 $3,610,916 S3,610,916 During Fee Period $799,537 5799,.537 $1,203,639 $1,203,639 S3,610,916 $3,610,916 Sweetwater Lift Station (#18) �p $498,200 $301,337 5799,537 Subtotal: 1.30 $498,200 $301,337 S799,537 Jacobs Lift Station (#19) 1,60 $750,000 $453,639 $1,203,639 Subtotal: 1.60 $750,000 $453,639 $1,203,639 WS2 Lift Station (#20) Subtotal: 9.01 9.01 $2,250,000 $2,250,000 $1,360,916 $1,360,916 $3,610,916 $3,610,916 NTMWD Meter Station (#22) NiA N-A N/A 0% 8% 8'% $0 $0 $44,936 $44,936 $44,936 $44,936 S ubhrtal: N/A N/A $350,000 $350,000 $211,698 $211,698 S561,698 S561,698 Trinity Meter Station (#23) N;A N/A N/A 0% 8"/o M., $0 $0 $64,194 $64,194 $64,194 $64,194 Subtotal: N/A I N/A $500,000 1 $500,C $302,426 S802,426 $302,426 $802,426 Wastewater Facilities - Project CIP Total $4,348,2001 $2,630,0161 $6,978,216 $0 $5,723,222 $5,723,222 j: Ictericahannal2018-133 w&ww impact fee update 20181reportsW4-report.docx - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 25 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. VII. CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES - WATER & WASTEWATER SYSTEM The maximum impact fees for the water and wastewater systems are calculated separately by dividing the cost of the capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated and attributable to new development in the service area within the ten year period by the number of living units anticipated to be added to City within the ten year period as shown on the following tables. To simplify collection, we recommend the fee remain fixed throughout the 5-year period, unless changed by Council. -alculated Water Impact Fee = Eligible Existing Utilized Cost + Eligible Proposed Utilized Cost umber of New LUE's over the Next 10 Yea _ $17,613,298 + $29,723,454 = $47,336,752 5,248 5, 248 1 _ $9,020.28 Use: $9,020 Maximum Water Impact Fee Allowable: $9,020 x 50% _ $4,510 Calc. Wastewater Impact FeE Eligible Existing Utilized Cost + Eligible Proposed Utilized Cost umber of New LUE's over the Next 10 Yea _ $8,167,784 + $30,065,231 = $38,233,015 4,687 4,687 _ $8,157.46 Use: $8,157 1 aximum Wastewater Impact Fee Allowed $8,157 x 50% Based on the Allowable Maximum Impact Fee Calculation for Water and Wastewater, Table No. 15 calculates the maximum water and wastewater (sewer) impact fee for the various sizes of water meters. j:Iclericahann&2018-133 w&ww impactfee update 20J&reportsW4-report.docz - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 26 of 27 Birkhoff, Hendricks & Carter, L.L.P. TABLE NO. 15 ALLOWABLE MAXIMUM FEE PER LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENT AND PER METER SIZE AND TYPE Maximum Water Impact fee per LUE $4,510 Maximum Wastewater Impact fee per Ll $4,079 Land Use Meter Type Meter Size Maximum Impact Fee Total LUE Water Wastewater Single Family Residential Simple 3/4" 1 $4,510 $4,079 $8,589 Single Family Residential Simple 1" 1.7 $7,667 $6,933 $14,601 Single Family Residential Simple 1-1/2" 3.3 $14,883 $13,459 $28,343 Single Family Residential Simple 2" 5.3 $23,904 $21,616 $45,520 Commercial/Retail Compound 2" 5.3 $23,904 $21,616 $45,520 Commercial/Retail Turbine 2" 6.7 $30,218 $27,326 $57,544 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fan Compound 3" 10.7 $48,259 $43,640 $91,898 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fa Turbine 3" 16 $72,162 $65,256 $137,418 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fan Compound 4" 16.7 $75,319 $68,111 $143,430 Commercial/Retail/Multi Fan Turbine 4" 28 $126,284 $114,198 $240,482 Industrial Compound 6" 33.3 $150,188 $135,814 $286,002 Industrial Turbine 6" 61.3 $276,472 $250,012 $526,484 Industrial Compound 8" 53.3 $240,391 $217,384 $457,775 Industrial Turbine 8" 106.7 $481,232 $435,176 $916,408 Industrial Compound 10" 153.3 $691,405 $625,234 $1,316,639 Industrial Turbine 10"1 166.7 1 $751,840 1 $679,886 1 $1,431,726 Industrial jTurbine 12" 1 220 1 $992,231 1 $897,270 1 $1,889,501 Note: Selection of the meter size and type shall be dependent on application, and with the input of both the applicant and City staff. j:Iclericahann&2018-133 w&ww impactfee update 20J&reportsW4-report.docz - Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 2018-2028 Page 27 of 27 2018-2028 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE THE CITY OF manna BIRKHOFF, HENDRICKS & CARTER, L.L.P. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS - TBPE Firm No. 526 11910 Greenville Ave., Suite 600, Dallas, Texas 75243 Phone (214) 361-7900 September 2018