Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
10.23.2007 Town Council Packet
ISPER OWN OF 1. Call to Order / Roll Call. 2. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA Regular Meeting of the Prosper Town Council Prosper Middle School - Library 605 E. Seventh Street, Prosper, Texas Tuesday, October 23, 2007 at 6:00 p.m. 3. Announcements of dates and times of upcoming community events CONSENT AGENDA (Items placed on the Consent Agenda are considered routine in nature and are considered non -controversial. The Consent Agenda can be acted upon in one motion. A majority vote of the Council is required to remove any item for discussion and separate action. Council members may vote nay on any single item without comment and may submit written comments as part of the official record.) 4. Consent Agenda MINUTES a. Consider and act upon minutes from the following Council meetings. 6w) • October 9, 2007 — Regular Town Council Meeting ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS, AND, ,A„ GREEMENTS b. An update on the Town's sports fields and/or the construction of future sports fields. (WH) C. Consider and act upon an ordinance rezoning 83.6E acres located on the northeast corner of U.S. 380 and Coit Road from Planned Development-25-Commercial/Mixed Use (PD-25) to Planned Development- Retail(PD-R). (Z07-14). (CC) d. Consider and act Purchase of F-450 2007 work truck from Sam Pack's Five Star Ford for the amount of $29,824.00. (FT) PRESENTATIONS 5. Presentation by Capt. Gary McHone giving a commendation to Stg. Lightfoot. 6. Presentation of a proclamation recognizing the week of November 5-9, 2007, as Municipal Court Week. CITIZEN'S COMMENTS (The public is invited to address the Council on any topic. However, the Council is unable to discuss or take action on any topic not listed on this agenda. Please complete a "Public Comments Form" and present it to the Town Secretary prior to the meeting.) 7. Other Comments by the Public. REGULAR AGENDA (If you wish to address the Council during the regular agenda portion of the meeting, please fill out a "Speaker Request Form" and present it to the Town Secretary prior to the meeting. Citizens wishing to address the Council for items listed as public hearings will be recognized by the Mayor. Those wishing to speak on a non-public hearing related items will be recognized on a case -by -case basis, at the discretion of the Mayor and Town Council.) Page I of 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS S. A public hearing to consider a request to rezone 22.3=1: acres located on the southwest corner of Prosper Trail and Coleman Street from Agricultural (A) and Single Family-15 (SF-15) to Retail (R), 13.4E acres, and Commercial (C), 8.9± acres. (Z07-15). (CC) DEPARTMENT ITEMS 9. Consider and act upon a resolution supporting the November 6, 2007 Collin County Bond Election. (MD) 10. Consider and act upon a resolution supporting the November 6, 2007 Prosper Independent School District Bond Election. (MD) 11. Consider and act upon a resolution supporting Proposition 12 on the November 6, 2007 Election. (MD) 12. Discuss and give direction on the West Prosper Development Group Sanitary and Legacy Drive issues. (ML) EXECUTIVE SESSION 13. Recess into Closed Session in compliance with Section 551.001 et., seq. Texas Government Code, to wit; a. Section 551.071. Meeting with City Attorney regarding a matter in which the duty of the City Attorney under the Texas Disciplinary rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas conflicts with the Open Meetings Act and relating to legal issues and negotiations with Forest City in conjunction with the development of the Mahard property. b. Section 551.087 to deliberate on economic development negotiations regarding the Gates of Prosper project. C. Section 551.071 — Consultation with the Town's Attorney regarding a matter (s) in which the duty of the Town Attorney under the Texas Disciplinary rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas conflicts with the Open Meetings Act regarding the McCutcheon v. Town of Prosper lawsuit. 14, Reconvene into Regular Session and take any action necessary as a result of the Closed Session, including but not limited to: a. Consider and possibly act upon approval of the Preannexation Agreement by and between The Mahard 2003 Partnership, L.P., Mahard Egg Farm, Inc., FC Prosper Partner, Inc., Forest City Prosper Limited Partnership and the Town of Prosper and adoption of a Resolution authorizing the Town Manager to execute the same. 15. Possibly direct Town Staff to schedule topic(s) for discussion at a future meeting. 16. Adjourn. CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned authority, do that this Notice of place co nt and re eessible to th general public at 2 0 per. n d so posted at ast 72 hours befor+ Matthew D. Denton, TRMC Town Secretary 0111111110i Orr ng ed an tti'# 0 ait sard N tice wase�o a7eAn was c d e at the Town Hall of the Town of Prosper, Texas, a the following date and time: Friday, October 19, e � eeeeMeve i �'► �j As 1��1 Date Noticed Removed In addition to any specifically identified Executive Sessions, Council may convene into Executive Session under Section 551 of the Texas Govemment Code at any point during the open meeting to discuss any item posted on this agenda. The Open Meetings Act provides specific exceptions that require that a meeting be open. Should Council elect to convene into Executive Session, those exceptions will be specifically identified and announced. Any subsequent action, as a result of this Executive Session, will be taken and recorded in open session. NOTICE OF ASSISTANCE AT PUBLIC MEETINGS: The Prosper Town Council Meetings are wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need auxiliary aids or services such as Interpreters for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, readers, or large print, are requested to contact the Town Secretary's Office at (972) 346-2640 or by FAX (972) 347-2111. BRAILLE IS NOT AVAILABLE. Page 3 of 3 MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Prosper Town Council Prosper Middle School - Library 605 E. Seventh Street, Prosper, Texas Tuesday, October 9, 2007 at 6:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order / Roll Call. The meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. Roll call was taken by the Town Secretary. Council present included: Mayor Pro-Tem David Bristol, Deputy Kevin Drown, Mike Wadsworth, and Ray Smith. Staff present included: Mike Land, Town Manager; Hulon Copple, Senior Planner; Wade Harden, Senior Planner; D• :"'! Development Corporation; and Matthew Denton, Town Sec. ; 2. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. Commissioner Joe Jaynes led the Pledge of Allniance. �Ilbl `•Director of D olleson, Executive The invocation was given by Bill Borinstein, Prestici,aptist Church. 3. Announcements of dates and times of uDedihinLy eo' }tip tv ev f Turley, Kenneth Dugger, Services; Chris the Economic County Commissioner Joe Jay ised the counciV`#_� f the Comn ],Offioners Court had awarded the Town a $390,000 grant for Folsom':'`dtl`3sioner Jaynes alp discussed the November 6, 2007 Bond Election. Deputy Mayor Pro -Tent" ''Wannounce the Health and St�,rFair. '';Y'rfr: h:.'i'rih. i•({ii.}i::?��Synv+.'i+ 7i.{:. i;il.ar�;'"Goggan, Blair, &Sampson on HB 621. 6. Presentation by Tracy Mayor PronTn Bristol'•;.j-tem 6"c%,the agenda. gave council a' ntation'`M 621. 10. Discu'' d give directia�r�-egarding the Preston 48 Addition development located in the southwest quadra ` ''''y rosper Trai nd highway 289. (11W) Mayor Pro-TernBristdl;i ved i,6 10 up in the agenda. Hulon Webb, Director of Ielopment Services, gave council background information on this item. Bruce Carlin and Jeremy Fuller addressed the council regarding this issue. The Town Council directed staff to facilitate a meeting with the developers and HOA and then follow up on a future Town Council meeting. Page I of 4 EXECUTIVE SESSION 4. Recess into closed session in compliance with Section 551.001 et. Seq. Texas Government Code, to wit: a. Section 551.087 to deliberate on economic development negotiations regarding the Gates of Prosper project. b. Section 551.071 — Consultation with the Town's Attorney regarding a matter (s) in which the duty of the Town Attorney under the Texas Disciplinary rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas conflicts with the Open Meetings Act regarding�J a McCutcheon v. Town of Prosper lawsuit. c. Section 551.072 to discuss and give direction on the purchase <Vichange, lease or value of real property. Motioned by Deputy Mayor Pro -Tern Turley, seconded by Motion approved 6-0. Council recessed into closed session at 7:00 p.m. 5. Reconvene into regular session and take any aci Council reconvened into regular session at 8:37 p.m. 12. Consider and act upon 1) approval I'MiE%el T� {:37h5 Master Plan and 2) adopt a resolutio= Mayor Pro-Tem Bristol moved item 12 up in the age'. Wade Hardin, Senior Planner Richard Abernathy, Doug Mousel, LandPlan DeveX%ent, is worded. Scott Noma<`T and Advisy spoke's MotioY'r#;;r{Councilmember' savor i !. <Y following s ent be removed : the background questions the into closed session. of the of Prosper;#? ,,` ,ks, Recreation and Open Space g the Mayor" °r .p1he same. (WIT) ik\'tivnvkvr.' lion on i s item. ncil. garding several issues he had with the way the Plan concerns with the wording of the Plan. by Councilmember Smith to approve the Plan with the "Properties which have been zoned prior to the adoption of the Plan will not be subject to the requirements of the Plan." and replaced with the folla — Nothing in this document shall be implied to vest any rights to property owners_ In addition, this document shall not constitute a "permit" and nothing in this document shall he eonsidcmd to provide the Town with "fair notice'' of a "project", as said terms are used in or as defined by Chapter 245 ofthe Texas Local Government Cole. And section 8.1.1 include a variance provision for properties developed with private streets or a golf course and where properties are absent of desired habitat and protected trees. Motion approved 4-2 with Turley and Drown voting "no." Page 2 of 4 PRESENTATIONS 7. Presentation of a proclamation for support for the November 6, 2007 Collin County Bond Election. Richard Abernathy, Town Attorney, asked the council to allow him to review the proclamation before it is presented by Council. CONSENT AGENDA 8. Consent Agenda MINUTES a. Consider and act upon minutes from the following • September 25, 2007 —Regular Town Council D ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS, AND AGREEMENTS b. An update on the Town's sports fields of future sports c. Consider and act upon whether to direct staff to submit a written notice of appeal on behalf of the Town Council to the Development Services Department, pursuant to Chapter 4, Section 1.5(C)(7) and 1.6(B)(7) of the Town's Zoning Ordinance, regarding action taken by the Planning & Zoning Commission on any site plan or preliminary site plan.,,e(CC) d. Consider and act upon an ordinancY;rezol south side of Broadway Street, 200E #�t east to Downtown Office (D, TO). (Z07-12). (CC?) .; Doug Mousel, LandPlan ssed the Motioned by Mayor Pf'o-TetfIstol, seceded by to staff recommendations.3„` Motion avnroved:..6.,1�,,;;,,,... ��i::•;:>,•::•::�. �•�;<?:<Sr.;<;,Si 9. _ F Comments by tv blic. acre (104`�';ast Broadway), located on the VI tl, StFdt, from Single Family-15 (SF-15) regarding item 8a. Dugger to approve the consent agenda subject Doug Mousel.. "'_' dPlan Developiiht, asked the council to consider forming a Developer's Council to assist staff reation Opens Space Master Plan. with implements :Parks and 14§.' p p •'1i'tr� 'wfr'r REGULAR AGEND :r' '''>:.:. DEPARTMENT ITEMS:::` 11. Consider and act upon bid proposal for the Highland Meadows Drainage Project and take any action necessary. (HW) Hulon Webb, Director of Development Services, gave council background information on this item and recommended rejecting the bids and looking at other alternatives for the project. Motioned by Councilmember Drown, seconded by Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem Turley to reject the bid on October 2, 2007, for construction services for the Highland Meadows Drainage Project. Motion approved 6-0. Page 3 of 4 13. Consider and act upon a resolution adopting the FY 2007 certified appraisal roll. (RB) Mike Land, Town Manager, gave council background information on this item. Motioned by Mayor Pro-Tem Bristol, seconded by Councilmember Wadsworth to approve the resolution adopting the 2007 certified appraisal roll. 14. Discuss the proposed Preannexation Agreement with Forest City. (ML) Mike Land, Town Manager, gave council background information on this item. David Blum and Jim Mansky gave a presentation and answered questions Council discussed their concerns with the proposed agreement. 15. Discuss and give direction on moving Executive Matt Denton, Town Secretary, gave council background Mayor Fro-Tem Bristol read a statement from Doug session remain at the end of the meetings. the proposed agreement. ning on this item. 0 meetings. (MD) executive The council discussed the timing of Executive Sion and ultimately "d'd to keep it at the end of the meeting unless there are extenuating circumstances requit`hial>he moved to the top e agenda. 16. Possibly direct Town Staff to schedule to iu5=.dir�cuslon at a foie meeting. Councilmember Wadsworth asked ..that a Developer'.Cq,%i it dsc:s�r�<• itcr�A and having the Town Attorney available for the meetings be R,O future agenda.':;:>•:;:'^' ...:. .............. 17. Adjourn. Motioned by Councilmember Motion aporoved-&-.0 ...... The W Matthew D. Denton, Town Secretary 50 Pro-Tem Turley to adjourn. Charles Niswanger, Mayor Page 4 of 4 x, t �` �}_ rF , W , SPE, To: From: Cc: Re: Date: Agenda Item: PARKS AND RECREATION Mayor and Town Council Wade Harden, Senior Planner Mike Land, Town Manager Hulon T. Webb, Jr., P.E., Director of Development Services/Town Engineer Town Council Meeting — October 23, 2007 October 17, 2007 An update on the Town's sports fields and/or the construction of future sports fields. Description of Agenda Item: At the June 12, 2007 meeting, a request was made by Councilmember Wadsworth to have an update on the Town's sports fields and/or the construction of future sports fields on future agendas. Currently, the Parks and Recreation Board (PARBd) and Town staff are considering the following options at Folsom Park and on the 57 acre community park site. 1. Folsom Park (located next to Folsom Elementary in the La Cima „subdivision): The PARBd discussed future improvements to Folsom Park at their August 23, 2007 meeting. The development of Folsom Park would provide up to eight (8) youth soccer/multi-purpose permanent fields. Town staff has initiated contact with Brian Griffitt, Prosper Sports Association (PSA) President, Lloyd Mills, Prosper Area Soccer Organization (PASO) President, and Brenda Keener, Folsom Elementary School Principal to receive input concerning the fields and potential relocation of the existing playground equipment. The two grant applications, one to Collin County ($390,000) and one to Texas Park & Wildlife ($390,000) both matching grants, are still pending. Staff and Park Board Member Loren Moulder have met with the two sports organizations and received input concerning their respective needs. Staff has ceased negotiations with PBK for the design and construction documents for this project. Staff, as directed by the Park Board, is working towards securing a proposal from another design firm, with the intent of having a contract for approval late October or early November. This project is on schedule to meet the Fall 08' goal. Staff has contacted La Terra Studio and is reviewing a proposal submitted to Staff from La Terra for services. The PARBd will review the proposal with the goal of having a contract before Council early November. Staff has received word the $390,000 50% matching grant from Collin County was approved by the County Commission for use on the Folsom project. Staff is expecting official notification letter this month. Agenda Item No. 4b - Page 7 of 2 2. 57 acre community park site (adjacent to the future Prosper ISD athletic stadium, south side of Frontier Parkway, west of the BNSF Railroad): At the August 23, 2007 PARBd meeting Fred Montes, AIA of PBK presented conceptual master plans for the 57 acre community park site (see attached. The Parks Board directed Town staff to meet with Prosper ISD, Prosper Sports Association (PSA), and Prosper Area Soccer Organization (PASO) to discuss the proposed design. Staff initiated contact with PSA and PASO, and should be meeting with Prosper ISD in the near future. Town staff has requested a formal proposal for design services from PBK to present to PARBd and Town Council. Town Manager Mike Land has met with Prosper ISD to discuss the creation of a Master Plan for the entire site, including the Prosper ISD parcel. Attached Documents: No attachments. Town Staff Recommendation: No action needs to be taken on this item. Agenda Item No. 4b - Page 2 of 2 PLANNING To: Mayor and Town Council From: Chris Copple, Senior Planner Cc: Hulon T. Webb, Jr., P.E., Director of Development Services/Town Engineer Re: Town Council Meeting — October 23, 2007 Date: October 18, 2007 Agenda Item: Consider and act upon an ordinance rezoning 83.6± acres located on the northeast corner of U.S. 380 and Coit Road from Planned Development-25-Commercial/Mixed Use (PD-25) to Planned Development -Retail (PD-R). (Z07-14). Description of Agenda Item: At their September 25, 2007 meeting, the Town Council approved zoning case Z07-14 by a vote of 7-0 subject to the following conditions: 1. Change Exhibit F — Architectural Design Guidelines and Standards, Page 3, General Information. Step 1 should read "In addition to the Town of Prosper's approval process, the Prosper Crossing Architectural Control Committee shall approve the site plan, landscape plan, building exterior design, and materials." Also, delete Step 2. 2. Change Exhibit F — Section 4, Page 7. Delete the signage approval language. 3. Add the exhibit of a pad site elevation. 4. Revise Exhibit C, IV, B. 3 — Building Height. Revise the maximum height to a total maximum height of six stories, not to exceed 75 feet The conditions of approval have been met and are included in the attached ordinance. Budget Impact: There are no significant budget implications associated with the approval of this zoning request. Legal Obligations and Review: Zoning Ordinance 05-20 requires that the Town Council hold a public hearing before approving a zoning request and adopting an ordinance rezoning property. A public hearing has been held and the Town Council approved the zoning case. The ordinance has been prepared. Review of the ordinance by the Town Attorney is not required. Attached Documents: 1. The Ordinance rezoning the property is attached. Town Staff Recommendation: Town staff recommends the Town Council adopt the attached ordinance. Agenda Item No. 4c — Page 1 of 1 TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 07- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PROSPER'S ZONING ORDINANCE NO.05.20 AND ORDINANCE 06.73; REZONING A TRACT OF LAND CONSISTING OF 83.608 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, SITUATED IN THE I.C. WILLIAMSON SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 948, IN THE TOWN OF PROSPER, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS, HERETOFORE ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-25- COMMERCIAUMIXED USE (PD-25) IS HEREBY REZONED AND PLACED IN THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT -RETAIL (PD-R); DESCRIBING THE TRACT TO BE REZONED; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR REPEALING, SAVING AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSES; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLICATION OF THE CAPTION HEREOF. WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Prosper, Texas (the "Town Council") has investigated and determined that Zoning Ordinance No. 05-20 and Ordinance No. 06-73 should be amended; and WHEREAS, the Town of Prosper, Texas ("Prosper") has received a request from Alberta Development Partners LLC. ("Applicant") to rezone 83.608 acres of land, more or less, situated in the I.C. Williamson Survey, Abstract No. 948, in the Town of Prosper, Collin County, Texas; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has investigated into and determined that the facts contained in the request are true and correct; and WHEREAS, all legal notices required for rezoning have been given in the manner and form set forth by law, and public hearings have been held on the proposed rezoning and all other requirements of notice and completion of such zoning procedures have been fulfilled; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has further investigated into and determined that it will be advantageous and beneficial to Prosper and its inhabitants to rezone this property as set forth below. TEXAS: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, SECTION 1: Findings Incorporated. The findings set forth above are incorporated into the body of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2: Amendments to Zoning Ordinance No. 05-20 and Ordinance No. 06-73. Zoning Ordinance No. 05-20 and Ordinance No. 06-73 is amended as follows: The zoning designation of the below -described property containing 83.608 acres of land, more or less, situated in the I.C. Williamson Survey, Abstract No. 948, in the Town of Prosper, Collin County, Texas, (the "Property") and all streets, roads and alleyways contiguous and/or adjacent thereto is hereby rezoned as Planned Development -Retail (PD-R). The property as a whole and the boundaries for each zoning classification are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein for all purposes as if set forth verbatim. The development plans, standards, and uses for the Property in this Planned Development District shall conform to, and comply with 1) the statement of intent and purpose, attached hereto as Exhibit "B"; 2) the planned development standards, attached hereto as Exhibit "C"; 3) the conceptual development plan, attached hereto as Exhibit "D"; 4) the conceptual landscape plans, attached hereto as Exhibit "E"; 5) and the conceptual building elevations, attached hereto as Exhibit "F"; which are incorporated herein for all purposes as if set forth verbatim. Except as amended by this Ordinance, the development of the Property within this Planned Development District must comply with the requirements of all ordinances, rules, and regulations of Prosper, as they currently exist or may be amended. Three original, official and identical copies of the zoning exhibit map are hereby adopted and shall be filed and maintained as follows: a. Two (2) copies shall be filed with the Town Secretary and retained as original records and shall not be changed in any matter. b. One (1) copy shall be filed with the Building Official and shall be maintained up-to-date by posting thereon all changes and subsequent amendments for observation, issuing building permits, certificates of compliance and occupancy and enforcing the Zoning Ordinance. Reproduction for information purposes may from time -to -time be made of the official zoning district map. Written notice of any amendment to this Planned Development District shall be sent to all property owners within two hundred feet (200) of the specific area to be amended. SECTION 3: No Vested Interest/Repeal. No developer or property owner shall acquire any vested interest in this Ordinance or in any other specific regulations contained herein. Any portion of this Ordinance may be repealed by the Town Council in the manner provided for by law. SECTION 4: Unlawful Use of Premises. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to make use of said premises in some manner other than as authorized by this Ordinance, and shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to construct on said premises any building that is not in conformity with the permissible uses under this Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 5: Penal . Any person, firm, corporation or business entity violating this Ordinance or any provision of Prosper's Zoning Ordinance No. 05-20, or as amended, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined any sum not exceeding Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each continuing day's violation under this Ordinance shall constitute a separate offense. The penal provisions imposed under this Ordinance shall not preclude Prosper from filing suit to enjoin the violation. Prosper retains all legal rights and remedies available to it pursuant to local, state and federal law. SECTION 6: Severabili . Should any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance be declared unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction-, it is expressly provided that any and all remaining portions of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Prosper hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses and phrases be declared unconstitutional or invalid. SECTION 7: Savings/Repealing ,Clause. Prosper's Zoning Ordinance No. 05-20 shall remain in full force and effect, save and except as amended by this or any other Ordinance. All provisions of any ordinance in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent they are in conflict; but such repeal shall not abate any pending prosecution for violation of the repealed ordinance, nor shall the appeal prevent a prosecution from being commenced for any violation if occurring prior to the repealing of the ordinance. Any remaining portions of said ordinances shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 8: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective 'from and after its adoption and publications as required by law. DULY PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS ON THIS 23rd DAY OF OCTOBER, 2007. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Charles Niswanger, Mayor ATTESTED TO AND CORRECTLY RECORDED BY: Matthew Denton, TRMC Town Secretary DATE OF PUBLICATION: _; Dallas Morning News — Collin County Addition FIELD NOTE DESCRIPTION STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF COLLIN BEING a tract of land situated in the I.0 WILLIAMSON SURVEY, Abstract No. 948, Collin County, Texas and being a portion of a tract of land as described in a deed to W.H. Rasor, III et al as recorded in County Clerk's Number 97-0088102 of the Deed Records of Collin County, Texas ( DRCCT) and being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a point found at the intersection of the centerline of STATE HIGHWAY NO. 380 ( variable width Right -of -Way ) and the centerline of COIT ROAD (variable width Right -of -Way); THENCE departing said centerline of said STATE HIGHWAY NO. 380 and along the centerline of said COIT ROAD North 00 deg 12 min 56 sec West. a distance of 1096.99 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod with a red plastic cap stamped "W.A.L" set for corner; THENCE departing the centerlinc of said COIT ROAD and along the northerly line of said Rasor tract as follows; North 89 deg 30 min 41 sec East a distance of 460.65 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod with a red plastic cap stamped "W.A.L" set for the beginning of a curve to the left having a radius of 1100.00 feet, and having a chord bearing North 75 deg 03 min 44 sec East and a chord distance of 548.95 feet; Continuing along said curve to the left through a central angle of 28 deg 53 min 55 sec for an arc length of 554.81 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod with a red plastic cap stamped "W.A.I." set for the beginning of a curve to the right having a radius of 1100.00 feet, and having a chord bearing North 75 deg 03 min 44 sec East and a chord distance of 548.95 feet; Continuing along said curve to the right through a central angle of 28053'55" for an arc length of 554.81 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod with a red plastic cap stamped "W.A.I." set for corner; North 89 deg 30 min 41 sec East a distance of 250.25 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod with a red plastic cap stamped "W.A.I." set for the beginning of a curve to the left having a radius of 1100.00 feet, and having a chord bearing North 77 deg 19 min 12 sec East and a chord distance of 464.59 feet; Continuing along said curve to the left through a central angle of 24 deg 22 min 58 sec for an arc length of 468.12 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod with a red plastic cap stamped "W.A.L" set for corner; THENCE North 54 deg 09 min 42 sec East a distance of 625.18 feet to a 112 inch iron rod with a red plastic cap stamped "W.A.I." set for corner; THENCE departing said north line of 78.623 Acre tract South 00 deg 26 min 41 sec East a distance of 1831.83 feet to a point for corner, said point being in the centerline of said STATE HIGHWAY NO. 380; THENCE along said centerline of STATE HIGHWAY NO. 380 South 89 deg 33 min 19 sec West a distance of 2741.93 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Containing within these metes and bounds is 83.608 acres or 3,641,949 square feet of land more or less. This document was prepared under 22 TAC §663.21, does not reflect the results of an on the ground survey, and is not to be used to convey or establish interests in real property except those rights and interests implied or established by the creation or reconfiguration of the boundary of the political subdivision for which it was prepared. 45 ■iM*d*m Pq-i*e6#i7 R J. ELAM 4581 J- �) � a Public Works . }sSID El To: Mayor and Town Council From: Frank E. Jaromin, PE Director Public Works Cc: Mike Land, Town Administrator Re: Prosper Town Council Meeting — October 23, 2007 Date: October 16, 2007 Agenda Item: Consider and act Purchase of F-450 2007 work truck from Sam Pack's Five Star Ford for the amount of $29,824.00. Description of Agenda Item: Staff is using the Tarrant County pricing (Bid # 2007-066) for purchasing this truck which meets the Local Government Code for purchase exceeding $25,000 dollars, but still requires Council approval. In the 2007-2008 Street Budget Item 10-6160-40 Capital Expenditures -- Vehicles was budgeted $28,000 dollars for a 1 ton four wheel drive truck for hauling equipment and sanding roadways. Eliminating the four wheel drive provides the Public Works Department a heavier duty work truck and better year round versatility. During icy conditions chains will be used to insure mobility. The Town will not have to maintain a heavy duty four wheel drive vehicle which will lower yearly maintenance in the future. Staff will initiate a budget transfer from Capital Expenditures Equipment 10-6110-40 in the amount of $1,824.00 to offset the amount required. The current estimate for the Swenson 4 cubic yard spreader for this work truck is $7,000 dollars. Budget Impact: The funding for this purchase will be from 2007-2008 approved Street Budget Item 10-6160-40 Capital Expenditures - Vehicles in the amount of $28,000.00, and Capital Expenditures - Equipment 10-6110-40 in the amount of $1,824.00. Legal Obligations and Review: None Agenda Item No. 4d - Page 1 of 2 Attached Documents: Sam Pack's Five Star Ford Dealership Quotation Resolution Board, Committee and/or Staff Recommendation: Town staff recommends that the Town Council: Approve the Purchase of F-450 2007 work truck from Sam Pack's Five Star Ford for the amount of $29,824.00. Agenda Item No. 4d - Page 2 of 2 TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS, HEREBY AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS, TO EXECUTE A PUCHASE BETWEEN SAM PACK'S FIVE STAR FORD AND THE TOWN OF PROSPER. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS: SECTION 1: The Mayor of the Town of Prosper, Texas, is hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Town Council of the Town of Prosper, Texas, to execute a purchase between Sam Pack's Five Star Ford and the Town of Prosper, as hereto attached. SECTION 2: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. RESOLVED THIS THE 23 h day of October, 2007. Charles Niswanger, Mayor ATTEST TO: Matthew D. Denton, TRMC Town Secretary Baru Rack°s Five Star Ford Tawn, Cara of Business 888-8 FLEE'TZ 1635 Ili 35E Carrollton, "texas 75006 Phone (888) 835-3389 Local (972-466-5031 Fax 972-245-5278 Bill To: City of Prosper AIT: frank Jaromin Comments or special instructions: Bid using Tarrant County Pricing (Old # 2007466 DATE October 1, 2007 Quota#ion # 07-1809 customer ID Quo&6an valid until.- January 29, 2008 PhVawd by Alan J Rosner Description AMOUNT F-,460 crew cab - 2007 model - Automatic - AIC - Powersteering - Brakes ! $31,397.00 AMfFM Radio with clock - � Delete Crew Cab down to Regular Cab ADD: Gooseneck Flathed 9' Add: Gooseneck Ball - A plug Add: Brake Controller Add; Reinforced rear bumper with receiver tube Add: Whelen 9M strobe lightbar Add: Spare Tire and wheel Instock discount Floorplan - Co -Operative Fee f Insurance Fee Hidden Fee Fee If you have any questions concerning this quotation, contact Alan J Rosner - 888-835-3389 THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! (S,4.009;00� $1,660.00 $380.00 $275.00 $266.00 $961.00 $3'6.00 $0.00 $!0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Woo $29,82.4.00 TOWN OF PROSPER MUNICIPAL COURT MUNCICPAL COURT WEEK NOVEMBER 5-9, 2007 PROCLAMATION ft WHEREAS, the Municipal Court of Prosper, a time honored and vital part of local government. WHEREAS, more people, citizens mud non -citizens alike, come ill personal contact with municipal courts tnann all other Texas courts combined, and WHEREAS, public impression of die entire Texas judicial system is largely dependent upon the public's experience in Municipal Court, WHEREAS, J Municipal Judges and court support p ge personnel have pledged to be ever muhdfihl of their neutrality and impartiality, rendering equal service to Al, and conform to die standards set by the Carious of Judicial Conduct, WHEREAS, the Municipal Courts play a significant role in preserving the quality of life in Texas communities through dne adju- dication of trafl-ic offenses, ensuring a high level of traffic safety for our citizens, WHERE' AS, die Municipal Courts serve as the local justice center for the enforcement of local ordinances and fine-orhly state offenses that protect die peace mud dignity of our community, WHEREAS, die Municipal Judges and Clerks continually strive to improve die administration of justice through participation in judicial education programs, seminars, workshops and tine annual meetings of their state and local professional organizations. THEREFORE, it is most appropriate that we recognize die accomplishments of the Prosper Municipal Court, and salute its criti- cal role in preserving public safety, protecting the quality of life in our community, and deterring future criminal behavior, NOW, I Charles Niswannger, Mayor of die Town of Prosper, do recognize die week of November 5-9, 2007, as Municipal Court Week, and further extend appreciation to the Municipal Judge and court support personnel for the vital services they perform and their exemplary dedication to our community. I call upon all residents of Prosper to join with the Town Council in recognizing die vital service they perform and their exemplary dedication to the communrities they represent. ON this day 23 rd day of October, 2007 ,Mayor Attest PLANNING TO W N 0 R' R 16S P E 3 , To: Mayor and Town Council From: Chris Copple, Senior Planner Cc: Hulon T. Webb, Jr., P.E., Director of Development Services/Town Engineer Re: Town Council Meeting — October 23, 2007 Date: October 18, 2007 Agenda Item: A public hearing to consider a request to rezone 22.3t acres located on the southwest corner of Prosper Trail and Coleman Street from Agricultural (A) and Single Family-15 (SF-15) to Retail (R), 13.4t acres, and Commercial (C), 8.9t acres. (Z07-15). Description of Agenda Item: The applicant has requested the public hearing be tabled to the November 13, 2007 Town Council meeting. Town Staff Recommendation: Town staff recommends the Town Council open and continue the public hearing to the November 13, 2007 Town Council meeting. Agenda Item No. 8 - Page 1 of 7 �^wl - P, 1 rF IN I � 5 To: : Mayor and Town Council From: Matthew D. Denton, Town Secretary Cc: Mike Land, Town Manager ADMINISTRATION Regular Meeting Prosper Town Council October 23, 2007 - 6:00 p.m. Re: November 6, 2007 Collin County Bond Election Agenda Item: Consider and act upon a resolution supporting the November 6, 2007 Collin County Bond Election. Description of A eg_nda„Item: A proclamation supporting the Collin County Bond Election was on the October 9, 2007 Town Council Meeting agenda. Richard Abernathy, Town Attorney, asked the council not to act on the proposed proclamation in order to research the legality of the Town supporting the Bond Election. Abernathy's recommendation is for the Town to adopt a resolution supporting the 2007 Collin County Transportation Bond Committee's recommendation of a bond referendum on the November 2007 ballot. In the enclosed memo, Abernathy states "It is our opinion that a local governmental entity may consider and act upon such the Resolution (1) because it is not political advertising under Texas Election Code §251.001(16); and (2) even if the action is considered political advertising, public funds were not expended, as prohibited under Texas Election Code §255.003." Staff recommends the Council approve the proposed resolution due to the funds that will be used to build roads in Prosper and the impact the bond money will have on regional mobility. Budilet Impact• N/A Agenda Item Number 9 Legal Obligations and Review: See attached memo from Abernathy. Attached Documents: • Memo from Town Attorney • Resolution Board, Committee and/or Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution supporting the recommendation by the 2007 Collin County Transportation Bond Committee. Agenda Item Number 9 ABERNATHY ROEDER BOYD nAtfomey-Client Privilege JOPLINOP.Gj, MEMORANDUM To: Mike Land, Town Manager From: Richard Abernathy Re: Resolution Supporting 2007 Collin County Bond Election Date: October 10, 2007 This firm was asked to evaluate whether a local governmental entity at a properly called meeting under the Open Meetings Act may consider 'and act upon a resolution supporting the 2007 Collin County Bond Election. The following opinion is based on the information presently available and the 2007 Collin County Bond Election Resolution (the "Resolution") attached, and is subject to revision upon receipt of additional information. The Resolution supports the recommendation of the Collin County Transportation Subcommittee. It is our opinion that a local governmental entity may consider and act upon such the Resolution (1) because it is not political advertising under Texas Election Code §251.001(16); and (2) even if the action is considered political advertising, public funds were not expended, as prohibited under Texas Election Code §255.003. (1) Considering and Acting Upon the Resolution is not Political Advertising under §251.001(16) The Texas Election Code Section 255.001(16) defines political advertising as: "Political advertising" means a communication supporting or opposing a candidate for nomination or election to a public office or office of a political party, a political party, a public officer, or a measure that: (A) in return for consideration, is published in a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical or is broadcast by radio or television; or (B) appears in a pamphlet, circular, flier, billboard or other sign, bumper sticker, or similar form of written communication. If a local governmental entity chooses to consider and act upon a resolution in support of a measure, that action does not fall within the definition of "political advertising" as stated in §251.001(16) or the prohibition on the use of public funds in §255.003, as long as the local governmental entity does not distribute the resolution as a form of t communication. In an Advisory Opinion, the Texas Ethics Commission considered whether the use of a school district's internal mail system for the distribution of political advertising violated Election Code §251.001(16) and §255.003. Ethics Advisory Opinion No. 45 (1992). The Commission advised that, "Expenditures for distribution of a circular or other written materials are within that prohibition." The distinction between the facts in Opinion No. 45 and the current situation is that the firm suggests that the resolution not be distributed using city funds or city employees during work hours. Citizens may request a copy of the resolution, which the local governmental entity should treat as a request under the Texas Public Information Act. Further, the language of the particular Resolution, that we reviewed, which is attached hereto, does not "support or oppose the measure". The language of the Resolution supports the recommendation of the Collin County Transportation Subcommittee that the measure go to the voters. Therefore, a governmental entity who chooses to consider and act upon the Resolution is not endorsing the measure, it is supporting the recommendation of the Subcommittee that the referendum be presented to the voters. (2) Public Funds Were Not Expended as Prohibited in §255.005 f The Texas Election Code Section 255.003 governs the use of public funds for political advertising. It states: (a) An officer or employee of a political subdivision may not spend or authorize the spending of public funds for political advertising. (b) This section does not apply to a communication that factually describes the purposes of a measure if the communication does not advocate passage or defeat of the measure. (c) A person who violates this section commits an offense. An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor. In this instance, considering and acting upon a resolution to support presenting the Collin County Transportation Resolution does not violate §255.003. The Texas Ethics Commission has emphasized that local governmental officers have a right to discuss whether to place matters that are pending before the council or board in a previous opinion. Advisory Opinion No. 456 (2004). Specifically, the Commission stated, "...section 255.003 was not intended to inhibit discussion of matters pending before a governmental body. When a city council holds a meeting to discuss whether to place an issue before the voters, council members and members of the public are likely to voice opinions about the issue." In that opinion, the issue was whether city council members could openly discuss an issue before the voters at a meeting that was broadcast, because the broadcast was considered a potential use of public funds for political advertising. The Commission stated that it did not interpret §255.003 to prohibit council members from discussing an issue before the voters or prohibit the city from broadcasting such a meeting if the discussion and broadcast were part of the city's regular practice. The Commission went on to say that city resources would not be used "for" political advertising even if "an incidental effect of broadcasting the tape would be to broadcast statements supporting or opposing a ballot measure." 2 Therefore, should a local governmental entity decide to consider and act upon a resolution that supporting the 2007 Collin County Transportation Resolution, they would not be in violation of §255.003. It is the regular practice of the city council to express opinions on many issues, including a County bond issue. Finally, it also a regular practice to discuss and vote on resolutions and it would not be considered a use of city funds to discuss and vote on the current Resolution. In addition, as previously emphasized, the Resolution does not advocate the passage or defeat of the measure, as stipulated in §255.003(b). The Resolution "factually describes the purposes of the measure" and supports the Subcommittee recommendation that the referendum go to the voters. See 255.003(b). Recommendation It is our opinion that local governmental entities may consider and act upon the Resolution supporting the 2007 Collin County Transportation Resolution because it is not political advertising under §251.001(16) and public funds 'were not expended as prohibited under §255.003. In order to avoid violating either section of the Election Code, local governmental entities should not distribute or post the Resolution, except upon a Public Information Request from a member of the public. Further, it appears that many Collin County local governmental entities are using the same Resolution. Attached hereto is a copy of the Resolution. Should you have additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. 3 PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. (R) WHEREAS, Collin County, Texas is consistently ranked in the top-10 fastest growing Counties in the United States and is currently ranked seventh; and WHEREAS, Commissioners Court developed a Transportation Sub -committee to review transportation projects that will address the county and cities' thoroughfare plan needs and charged the citizen committee to select viable transportation projects for a Bond Referendum scheduled for November 2007; and WHEREAS, members of this Transportation Sub -committee attended multiple meetings to review presentations made by Collin County cities and rank the transportation needs for the County and individual cities; and WHEREAS, the Sub -committee's goal was to develop a list of projects that would provide for the initial $200,000,000 Transportation Bond Program; and WHEREAS, Collin County's portion of any project will not exceed 50% of the total project and, if passed, will not impact the County tax rate but will assist cities throughout Collin County with constructing thoroughfares that benefit the region; and ` WHEREAS, twenty (20) of twenty-nine (29) cities within Collin County submitted projects totaling $1,359,068,270, with $515,212,000 being allocated from the County and the remaining project cost being raised from City sources; and WHEREAS, the Sub -committee reviewed all projects submitted and recommended a referendum that would request $235,607,200 be approved by the voters of Collin County to address $484,715,862 in transportation needs throughout the County; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE TOWN COUNCIL OF PROSPER, TEXAS: Goes on record to support the recommendation by the 2007 Collin County Transportation Bond Committee and thanks the individual citizens who spent their time to assist in creating a better Collin County. RESOLVED THIS THE ATTEST TO: Matthew Denton, Town Secretary day of , 2007. Charles Niswanger, Mayor ADMINISTRATION Regular Meeting Prosper Town Council October 23, 2007 - 6:00 p.m. To: : Mayor and Town Council From: Matthew D. Denton, Town Secretary Cc: Mike Land, Town Manager Re: November 6, 2007 Prosper ISD Bond Election Agenda Item• Consider and act upon a resolution supporting the November 6, 2007 Prosper Independent School District Bond Election. Description of Agenda Item: Prosper ISD will have a Bond Election on November 7, 2007 to approve $710 million for the construction of new school facilities, expansion and renovation of current school facilities, land purchases, technology and buses. Staff recommends the Council approve the proposed resolution supporting the Bond Election due to the impact it will have on Prosper ISD and their ability to meet the demands of the growing community. Budget Impact: KI Legal Obligations and Review: See memo from Abernathy on item 9. Attached Documents: Resolution Agenda Item Number 10 Board, Committee and/or Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution supporting the 2007 Prosper Independent School District Bond issue. Agenda Item Number 10 RESOLUTION NO.07- xx A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS REGARDING PROSPER INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 2007 BOND ISSUE WHICH AFFECTS SCHOOLS IN THE PROSPER ISD; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on November 6, 2007 Prosper ISD will hold a Bond Election; WHEREAS, the PISD Bond Election will be for $710 million for the construction of new school facilities, expansion and renovation of current school facilities, land purchase, technology and buses; WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the Town to take action to show its support the PISD Bond Issue. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The recitals contained in the preamble of this Resolution are determined to be true and correct and are hereby adopted as a part of this Resolution. SECTION 2. The Town Council hereby supports the PISD Bond Issue to ensure that the Prosper Independent School District and the children of Prosper receive the funding for buildings and technology for future growth. SECTION 3. It is hereby declared that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, and phrases of this Resolution are severable and, if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, or section of this Resolution shall be declared unconstitutional or invalid by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality or invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, or sections of this Resolution, because the same would have been enacted by the Town Council without the incorporation of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, or section. SECTION 4. All resolutions and parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby expressly repealed insofar as they conflict herewith. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately after passage hereof. Signed this 23d day of October, 2007. CHARLES NISWANGER, Mayor ATTEST: MATTHEW DENTON, TRMC Town Secretary ADMINISTRATION Regular Meeting Prosper Town Council October 23, 2007 - 6:00 p.m. To: = Mayor and Town Council From: Matthew D. Denton, Town Secretary Cc: Mike Land, Town Manager Re: Proposition 12 on the November 6, 2007 Election $allot Agenda Item• Consider and act upon a resolution supporting Proposition 12 on the November 6, 2007 Election. Description of Agenda Item: The Regional Transportation Council is recommending cities approve a resolution supporting Proposition 12 on the upcoming November 6, 2007 Election. Proposition 12 is a constitutional amendment allowing the Texas Transportation Commission to issue up to $5 billion in general obligation bonds to provide funding for highway improvement projects. Due to the huge funding shortfall for highway improvements, staff recommends council approve the proposed resolution. Budget Impact: 0F1.11 Legal Obligations and Review: See memo from Abernathy on item 9. Attached Documents: • Memo from the Regional Transportation Council • Resolution Agenda Item Number 11 Board, Committee and/or Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution supporting Proposition 12. Agenda Item Number 11 r Regional Transportation CouncilCE -_ The Tr ansporta#ion Policy Body for the North Central Texas Council of Governments (Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Dallas -Fort Worth Region) TO: Mayors, County Judges, County Commissioners DATE: October 11, 2007 City Managers, County Administrators FROM: T. Oscar Trevino, Jr., P.E. Chair, Regional Transportation Council Mayor, City of North Richland Hills SUBJECT: Regional Transportation Council Position Statement on Proposition 12 As you are aware, the State of Texas is facing a transportation funding crisis. In the Dallas -Fort Worth region alone, there is a $58.6 billion shortfall for adding new improvements and rehabilitating existing facilities. No one funding source will be able ,to meet the needs of our region and our State. The 801h Texas Legislature began to address this problem by passing SJR 64. This legislation calls for a constitutional amendment election that will allow the Texas Department of Transportation to issue up to $5 billion in general obligation bonds in order to fund highway projects. This measure will be on the November 6, 2007, ballot as Proposition 12. The Regional Transportation Council (RTC) unanimously voted to support Proposition 12. A copy of the position statement is enclosed. On behalf of the RTC, please encourage -your City Council or Commissioners Court to pass a resolution supporting Proposition 12. In addition, please convey this message to your citizens to vote for this measure on November 6, 2007. On behalf of the RTC, thank you for being involved with this important transportation issue. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to call Michael Morris, P.E., Director of Transportation for the North Central Texas Council of Governments, at (817) 695-9241. Enclosure AW:lp T. Oscar Trevino, Jr., P.E. Chair, Regional Transportation Council Mayor; City of North Richland Hills P: ©: Box 5888 • Arlington, Texas 76005=5888 • (817) 69&9240 . FAX (817) 640-3028 httpi/Avww.nctcog.org 0 September 2007 Jq November 6, 2007 Constitutional Amendment Election Position Statement Statewide Proposition 12 The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of general obligation bonds by the Texas Transportation Commission in an amount not to exceed $5 billion to provide funding for highway improvement projects. The Regional Transportation Council supports Statewide Proposition 12. If approved, $5 billion of new funding will be available to expedite needed transportation improvements. The Dallas -Fort Worth region alone has a $59 billion funding shortfall over the next 25 years. RESOLUTION NO. 07- xx A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL .OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS REGARDING PROPSITION 12 WHICH AFFECTS TRANSPORTION IN THE NORTH TEXAS AREA; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, SJR 64 was filed in the 801h Texas Legislative Session; WHEREAS, SJR 64, calls for a constitutional amendment election that will allow the Texas Department of Transportation to issue up to $5 billion in general obligation bonds in order to fund highway projects. This measure will be on the November 6, 2007, ballot as Proposition 12; 12. WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the Town to take action to show its support of Proposition NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS: f SECTION 1. The recitals contained in the preamble of this Resolution are determined to be true and correct and are hereby adopted as a part of this Resolution. SECTION 2. The Town Council hereby supports Proposition 12 to ensure that the Town protects its interests regarding regional transportation. SECTION 3. It is hereby declared that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, and phrases of this Resolution are severable and, if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, or section of this Resolution shall be declared unconstitutional or invalid by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality or invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, or sections of this Resolution, because the same would have been enacted by the Town Council without the incorporation of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, or section. SECTION 4. All resolutions and parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby expressly repealed insofar as they conflict herewith. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately after passage hereof. Signed this 23`d day of October, 2007. CHARLES NISWANGER, Mayor ATTEST: MATTHEW DENTON, TRMC Town Secretary - ADMINISTRATION P S R " J 1, : P To: Mayor and Town Council From: Mike Land, Town Manager CC: Re: Town Council Meeting — October 23, 2007 Date: October 19, 2007 Agenda Item: Discuss and give direction regarding sanitary sewer and Legacy Drive issues as they relate to the development of Prosper generally west of the Dallas North Tollway. Description of Agenda Item: As you recall beginning in September and at the request of Mr. Goodman, a group of developers who own land generally west of the tollway extension and south of Prosper Trail met to discuss sanitary sewer service issues and the potential extension of Legacy Drive north of Hwy 380 to Fish Trap Rd. continuing on to Prosper Trail. Mr. Goodman's engineer John Bull, with input from all of the developers and Town Staff developed a preliminary design for the extension of the main sewer trunk line from the Upper Trinity connection point at Doe Branch Creek and its intersection with Fish Trap Road east. I have attached a copy of his report and supporting graphic. The major property owners involved with this project include Tomlin Investments, ForestCity, Goodman, Mooreland, Rudman, and Quorum Properties. Mr. Goodman had asked this group to come together to gain their support in participating in the funding of the sewer line extension to the Upper Trinity line because he has a vested interest in a sewer solution occurring before the end of this year. He has made certain commitments for his Legacy Lakes project that necessitate a solution. His option is to construct a lift station and force main to take the sewage east. Mooreland apparently is close to the same issue in that the commercial development planned for the east side of the tollway due to timing issues is contingent on a sewer solution where the alternate option is to construct a lift station also and pump the sewage north and east. To construct the sewer line at a size that accommodates not only these projects but the entire sub - basin the line with contingency should cost approximately $3.2 million. Of this amount the group of developers has expressed their willingness to consider financially committing to the project at the following levels (all numbers are approximate and for discussion purposes at this stage): Agenda Item No. 12 - Page 1 of 3 Tomlinson Investments $900,000 to $1,200,000 depending on final design criteria Goodman $375,000 ForestCity $157,000 Mooreland $397,000* Quorum $40,0000 Total $1, 869, 000 - $2,169, 999 The Rudman Group, responsible for approximately $757,000 of the cost has not committed as of this memo. With their amount added, that would bring the total committed dollars to $2.6 million - $2.9 million. Mooreland currently has an issue with the way the proportionate share has been calculated. According to the cost breakdown, their proportionate share as shown on Page 6 of the letter could be $668,410. This would be the difference between the cost of the project as projected and the estimated commitment from the development community. As I understand the information, the cost differential to build the line Wthout the additional flows in the basin being included equates to $2.5 million, an approximate $700,000 cost being picked up by the developers in this project to make sure that it is the right size for the basin. Approximately 25% of the flows from the properties included in a proposed development agreement would be attributable to commercial/office related projects. Twenty-five percent of the total cost of the project equals $800,000. Regarding Legacy Drive, there is still some discussion regarding the eventual alignment and a significant flood plain issue. At this time the Council is not being asked for any type of support of this project. At this point the Council is being asked to consider basically consider supporting one, two or both sanitary related issues. Council is being asked first, to consider entering into a developer(s) agreement that enables the funds expended on behalf of the project to be reimbursed to the participants. Issues that will be addressed in the agreement(s) will include but not be limited to how the reimbursements are made and funded, and what types of other incentives/carry cost might be considered for example. The second question deals with the potential financial participation in the project by the Town, either directly or through the PEDC. There could be a potential shortfall in commitments ranging from $300,000 to $600,000 to as high$1,300,000 (if Rudman doesn't commit). Mr. Goodman has expressed a willingness at some level to step up to the plate on the difference as long as his investment is repaid first in the process. This makes sense since his development is coming out of the ground first, this spring. Budget Impact: The project as currently being viewed will not have a direct Impact on the Town's budget. Where the impact could be measured is in the reimbursement to the participants. This is subject to change of course depending on the preference of the Council. Legal Obliaations and Review: Legal review occurring is dependent on which if any direction the Council recommends staff to follow. Agenda Item No. 12 - Page 2 of 3 Attached Documents: 1. Letter dated October 16, 2007 from Dowdey, Anderson and Associates detailing the sanitary sewer information. Town Staff Recommendation: Town staff recommends that the Town Council direct staff to develop the necessary development agreement(s) to move this project forward. This agreement or agreements would specify each participant's participation and reimbursement methodology. The agreement will require Town Council Approval. Agenda Item No. 12 - Page 3 of 3 A OWDEY, ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS October 16, 2007 Steve Goodman Goodman Land Advisors 5700 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 3000 Plano, Texas 75093 RE: Town of Prosper Offsite Sanitary Sewer Main DAA Job #05027C Dear Mr. Goodman: As you have requested, Dowdey Anderson has evaluated the cost of construction of the sewer main that will serve the south basin of the Town of, Prosper. Each pipe segment was sized using the Town of Prosper's ordinance for' calculating flows. The sewer main consists of a 33" gravity line from the proposed Upper Trinity connection point located near the intersection of Fish Trap and Gee Load to the end of segment 1A inside Area 11. The pipe then changes to a 30" for segment one, two and three, then to a 27" from segment four and to a 24" from segment six through the proposed Legacy Lakes subdivision, as shown on Exhibit 1. This sewer line will directly serve many properties in the Town of Prosper's southern drainage basin. The key properties that will benefit from this sewer line have been identified on Exhibit 1 as possible contributors to the construction of the sewer line. From the Town ordinance, a certain amount of sanitary sewer capacity (or flow) was calculated for each property identified on Exhibit 1. The requirements in the Town ordinance are as follows: For residential flows: 3.5 persons per lot 100 gallons per day per person 2.5 peak flow factor 650 gallons per acre infiltration (if lot count is unknown) assume 3.5 units/acre For commercial flows: 3150 gallons per acre per day no peak flow factor 650 gallons per acre infiltration The sanitary sewer line was separated into eight segments in order to calculate costs and the appropriate amount of participation required from each party for the construction of the sewer line. The flow from each property was added to the proposed sewer line and the amount of flow from each property compared to the total flow at each segment was calculated in Exhibit 2. This shows the percentage of flow in MGD (million gallons per day) that each property is contributing per segment when Page 1 of 6 5M Villaep rrPA nrive. Suitp W i Plann. Tpxas 71091 , 97)-911-n694 # 979.911.9518 Fax ot0 Mn Mprrantilp Playa Drive. SiAp 914 s Fnrl Work Texas 76117 1 617- A-1719 , B17-S46-1716 Fax ft OWDEY, ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS the basin is built out, The values in Exhibit 2 reflect the flow for each property at its peak. Frhihit 7 - P-nt- of Sawar Flaw Cnntrihi itinn Fmm r-h A - Se ment Total Flow Area 3 % Ares 4 % Ara. 5 % Area 7 % 1A-33Inch 12.9 M2 0.9 0,98 7.6 0.52 4.8 0.40 3.1 1-30Inch 11.6 0A2 1.0 0,98 0,5 0.62 5.3 Q40 3.4 2-3017ch 10.8 CIA 1,1 0,95 9,1 0.52 5.7 0.40 3.7 3-30 inch 10.3 OA2 1,2 0.98 9,5 0.52 e,0 0.40 3.5 4-27inch L7 OA2 1,5 9.OD 0,0 0.52 5.0 0.40 5.1 5-27inch 6.9 0.12 1.7 0.00 0,0 0.62 as 6.40 57 0-24 inch 6.5 0.12 1.8 0.00 010 0.62 9,6 000 0.0 7-24 inch 6.3 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.62 93 0.00 0.0 8-24Inch 5.7 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0,0 0.00 0.0 Fvhihil 9 -!`.nro Note that peaked values were used to calculate percentage of flow, and as expected, each property has no flow calculated for each segment upstream of that property's discharge point. The sanitary sewer pipe segments were sized by calculating the peaked residential flows and average commercial flows. Next, the cost of each segment of sanitary sewer line was estimated in Exhibit 3. These sizes reflect what is required when the basin is build out. EXHIBIT 3 - OPINION OF PROBABLE COST SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT Entire Basin Brr9tlo l Santa Sewer TrOnk Main UNIT COST QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL 33" Main LF. 3 135.00 800 3 108 000.00 0 0 30" Main LF, 110.00 D E T.200 352 000.00 1,600 S 176 000.00 7,200 792 000.00 27"Main LF. $ 96.00 0 $ 0 $ D 0 24" Main LF. $ 80.00 0$ 0 $ 0 $ 0$ 6' Ois. Mnahole EA. 6,600.00 3 10,600.00 5 32 500.00 3 $ 19 500.00 10 ea 000.00 TWI-osting LF. 1.50 800 1,200.00 3,200 $ 4,800.00 1,600 2,400.00 7,200 10 800.00 Trench Safet LF. 1.50 800K4.VW.W 00 3200 4800,00 1600 $ 2400.00 7200 $ 10800.00 Borin antl Casln LF. 350.00 5000 5D 17 500.00 50 17 506.00 100 $5 000.00 Encasement LS. $ 1.00 1,00000 4,000 $ 4,000,00 2,000 2,000.00 8,000 $ 8,000.00 Clewing & GfuDOin Lb. 1.00 4 000.00 13 000 $ 13 000.00 7 000 $ 7 000.00 29 000 $ 29 000.00 En .IStakln LS. 1.00 15 000.00 43 000 43 000.00 23 000 23 000.00 95 000 95 000.00 Easement Prc . LS. 3 1.00 3 OOD.DD 9 000 $ 9 000.00 5 000 S 5 000.00 19 000 $ 19 000.00 Material Testin LS. 1.00 4 000.W1 000 11 000.00 6000 E fi 000.00 24 000 24 000.00 Ins ectlon Fees L3. 1.00 5 000.00 13 000 S 13 000.00 7000 7 000.0029 DD0 28 ODO.00 Miscellaneous LS. .00 $ 43400.00 S 23 200.00 $ 9500 4.00 TOTAL $195.000.00 ; 546,000.00 $ 291,000.00 $ 1,213,000.00 SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL OTY. TOTAL OTY. TOTAL 0 0 0 0 a 800 108 000A0 0 0 0 0 0 12,000 1,320,00G.01) 1,250 18 750.00 1 00D 95,000.00 0 0 0 2,250 213 750.00 0 O 850 68 000.00 2,400 1 192 000.00 800 64 000XI) 4,050 324 000.00 3 S 19 500.00 3 19,500.00 2 13 000.00 4 26 000.00 2 13 000.00 35 227 500.00 1,260 1,875.00 7 000 1,500,00 850 1 275.00 2,400 1 3,600,00 800 € 00,00 19,100 28,650,00 1,250 1 875.00 1,000 1,500.00 850 1,275.00 2,400 3. 800.OD Sao 1,200.00 19,109 28 650.00 50 17 500.00 5D 17 500.00 50 17 500.00 0 0 400 S 140 000.00 2,000 2,000.00 1,000 1 000.00 1 000 1,000.00 3 000 3 000.00 1,000 7 000.00 23,000 23 OD0.00 5 CO0 5 D00.00 4 000 4.000.00 4.000 4,000.00 10.000 10 000.60 4,000 4.000.00 80.300 80 000.00 17 000 17 000.00 14 aD0 14 DO0.00 11,000 11 000.00 24.000 24 ODO.00 8.000 8.000.00 250,000 250 000.00 3 000 3 000.00 3 000 3 000.00 2,000 2,000.00 5.00) 5 OOOAO 2000 2 D00.00 61,000 51 000.00 4 000 4,000.00 4 a0D 4,000,00 3,000 31000.00 6,000 6 000.00 2000 2000.00 64,000 64 000.00 5 Oc0 5,000.00 4,000 J., 4 DOO.00 3.13130 3,000.00 7 000 7 OOOAO 3 COO 3 DO0.00 715,1300 78 000.00 17 500.00 14 000.00 10 S60.00 $ 24 800.00 $ 8600.00 253 450.00 $ 213,000.00 $ 179,000.00 ; 135,000.00 ; 30 000.00 $ 104,000.0) S 3,18a,000.00 Page 2 of 6 fill ii UIIIaup C.rPPk Drim SiiitP 160 a Plano. Taxas 7.B;1 a 911.931-0694 l 912.4319 3R Fax 46 Mn Marcantila N73 Driva. Soiia 234 l Fort Worth, Tpxas M 37 t 917446.1712 t 817- 46.171h Fax DOWDEY, ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS The total cost of the sanitary sewer line for the south basin of the Town of Prosper is approximately $12M. Next, the pipe sizes required for only the current proposed developments were calculated. The only flows used for this calculation were the flows coming from the ,current proposed developments. A table showing the required pipe sizes for build out of the basin versus the pipe sizes required for the current proposed developments is shown below in Exhibit 4. EXHIBIT A SEGMENT required Buildout Pipe Size (IN) Current Developments Pipe Size 1N 1A 33 27 1 30 27 2 30 27 3 30 24 4 27 21 5 27 21 6 24 18 7 24 18 8 24 18 The cost for the required pipe sizes for only the current proposed developments are below in Exhibit 5. The total cost of the sanitary sewer line required only to service the proposed development was approximately $2.5M. EXHIBITS -OPINION OF PROBABLE COST SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT nuc e Required for Currently Proposed Sewar Trunk Main UNIT COST QTY TOTAL QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL LF. S 95.00 800 S 7fi 000.00 3 200 304 000.00 1 600 $ 152 000.00 LF. 80.00 0 0 0 7 200 576 000.00 n LF. S 60,00 0 0 0 0n LF. $ 50.00 0 $ 0 0 0nahole PA 6 500.00 3 t9 500.00 5 $ 32 500,00 3 19 500,00 10 65 000.00 i LF. 1.50 800 1 200.00 3 200 4 800.00 1B00 S 2 400.00 7 200 $Safet LF. 1.50 800 $ 1,200.00 3,200 4 800.00 1,15500 $ 2,400.00 7 200 $ 10 800.00 6orno and Casing L.F. It 350.00 1 50 17 500.00 1 50 S 17 500.00 80 17 500.00 100 35 000.00 Encasement LS. $ 1.00 1 000 $ 1 000.00 4,000 4,000.00 2,000 $ 2,000.00 8.000 8,000.00 Grearin & bin LS. 1.00 4.000 4 000.00 13,000 $ 13 000.00 TWO 7,000,00 29.000 29 000.00 En ,lSlakin LS. 1.00 12,000 12 000.00 38,000 $ 38 000.00 20 000 $ 20 000.00 73,000 $ 73 000.00 Easement Prep. LS. 1.00 2,000 $ 2 000.00 8,000 S 11000.00 4 000 4,000.00 15 000 15 000.00 Material TestingLS. 1.00 3,000 3 000.00 10,000 10 000.00 5 000 $ 5,000.00 18.000 S 18,000.00 Inspection Fees LS. $ 1.00 4 00O S 4 000.00 11,000 $ 11 000.00 6 000 $ 6 OOO.OD 22 000 $ 22 000.00 Miscenaneous LS. S 12,600.00 $ 3B 400.00 .$ 21200.00 S 74,400,00 TOTAL 3 154,000.00 $ 488 000.00 $ 259,000.ao $ 937,000.00 SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT SEGMENT QTY. TOTAL. QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL OTY. TOTAL QTY. TOTAL 0 0 S 0 S 0 a 0 0 5,600 532 000.00 0 7,200 576 000.00 1,250 75,000.00 1 a00 60,000.00 0 S 0 0 2,250 S 135 000.00 0 6 350 42 500,00 2 A00 120 000.00 800 40 900.00 4,050 202 500.00 3 19 500.00 3 19 500.00 2 13 000.00 4 28 000.00 2 13 000.00 35 S 227 500.00 1,250 1 875.00 1,000 1,500.00 850 1,275.00 2,400 3. 800.00 800 1,200.00 19100 S 211650.00 1,250 1 875.00 1,000 1,500.00 $50 1,275.00 2 400 31600.00 800 1,200.00 19100 28 660.00 50 17 500.00 50 17 500.00 50 17 500.00 0 p 400 140 000.00 2 000 2 000.00 1000 1,000.00 1.000 1,000.00 3,000 3,000.00 1,00) 1 000.00 23 000 23 000.00 000 5 000.00 4 000 4,000.00 4 000 4 000.00 10.000 10 000.00 4.000 4 000.00 80 000 80 0 0,00 12 U0O 12 000.00 11 000 11 000.00 8 000 8 000.00 17 000 17 000.00 8 000 6,000.00 197,000 197 000.00 2 000 2 000.00 200 2,000.00 2 O00 2 000.00 3 000 3 000.00 1 000 1 000.00 39 000 39 000.00 3.00 3 000.00 3 000 3.500.00 2 000 2 000.00 4 000 4,000.00 2.000 2 000.00 SD 000 50 000.00 411011 4 000.00 3 000 3,000,00 2 000 2 000.00 5 000 5,000.00 2 000 2,000.00 59 000 59 000.00 S 13 250.00 S 11 000.06 $ 8 450.00 16 B00.00 $ 6 emoo S 202 700.00 $ 1$7,000.00 $ 135,000.00 $ 103,000.00 $ 212,000.00 $ 79000.00 $ 2,521000.00 Page 3 of b SM Village f rppk 06P. Sui1p W r Plann. Texas 74091 1 M-911.0694 1 47]-911.9.538 Fax t* 45nn MPrrartilp PlAn OrIYP. iiiilp M 1 Fort Wnrth. Texas 76117 1 817-W,1712 1 917.5*1716 Fax A OWDEY, ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS Next the Town participation for upsizing the trunk line was calculated by taking the difference in cost between the build out pipe sizes and the required pipe sizes for the current proposed developments as shown below in Exhibit 6. EXHI BIT 6 Segment Required Buildout Pipe Size fin) Cost Proposed Currently Pipe Size (in) Cost Difference 1A 33 $195 000 27 $154 000 $41 000 1 30 $548000 27 $486 000,00 $62 000 2 30 $291 000 27 $259 000.00 $32 000 3 30 $1 213 000 24 $937 000.00 $276 000 4 1 27 1 $213 000 1 21 $157,000.00 $56,000 5 27 $179,000 21 $135 000.00 $44 000 6 24 $136,000 18 $103 000.00 $33 000 7 24 $305 000 18 $212 000.00 $93 000 8 24 $108,000 18 ! $78,000.00 $30,000 Total Town Particlpation 1 $626,000 After the cost associated with each segment labeled "Proposed Current Pipe Size" (above) was calculated, the participation of each property was calculated in proportion to the amount of peaked flow each property will contribute to that segment of current required pipe size as shown in Exhibit 7. Exhibit 7 - Percentage of Sewer Flow Contribution From Each Area for only current proposed Developments ae ment I Total Flow Are. 3 % Area 4 % Area 5 % Area 7 % 1A-27 Inch 6.3 0.12 1.4 0.96 11.8 0,e2 7.4 0.40 4A 1-27 inch 7A 0.12 1.6 0.98 12.9 0,02 8.1 0.40 5.2 2-27 ineh 6,8 0.12 1.7 0.98 14A 0.02 9.0 0.40 BA3-24 inch 69 0.12 1,0 0.98 15.5 0.62 9.7 0.40 6,2 4-21 inch 3,9 0.12 3.0 0.00 0.0 0.62 15.7 0.40 10.1 5-21 inch 3,2 0.12 3.7 O.Oo 0.0 0,62 19.4 0.40 12.4 6-18 inch 2.7 0.12 4.4 0.00 0.0 0,62 22g 0.00 0,0 7-18 inch 2,6 0.00 0.0 0,co 0.6 0.62 23.9 0.00 0.0 8-16 inch 2,0 OLD 0.0 1 0,00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 10,0 Exhibit 7 - Cont Area 8 1 % Area 9 % Area 10 % Area 11 % Area 12 % Area 13 1 % 0.74 1 8.9 0.93 11.2 1A3 12.5 1.96 23.6 0.09 1.1 1.44 17.3 0.74 9.7 0.93 12.2 1.03 13.6 1.26 16.6 0.09 1.2 1.44 16.9 0.74 10.9 0.93 13.6 1,03 15.2 0.48 7.0 0.09 1.3 1.AA 21.1 0.74 11.7 0.93 14.6 1,03 16.3 0.00 0.0 0.09 1A 1.44 22.6 0.74 18.9 0.93 23.6 1.03 26.4 0.00 0.0 0.09 2.3 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.93 29.1 1.03 32.5 0.00 0.0 OM 2.9 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.93 34.4 1.03 38.3 0,00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0,93 36.0 t.03 40.1 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 a 0.00 0.0 0.93 47.3 1.03 1 52.7 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 Each Area is shown on Exhibit 1 and the cost participation of each Area is calculated in Exhibit 8 for the current proposed developments required pipe sizes. Exhibit 8- Total Cost Participation Calculation for Current Proposed Developments Segment Total Cost Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 7 1A- 27 inch $154 000 $2 207.42 $18197.30 $11 445.19 $7 327.15 1 - 27 inch 1446,000 $7 605.73 $62 699.37 $39 434,77 $25 245.92 2-27 inch $259 000 $4 518.55 $37,249.52 $23,428.09 $14,998.53 3 - 24 inch $937 000 $17 584.45 $144 960.89 $91,173.16 $56,368.55 4 - 21 inch 157 000 $4 761.21 $0.00 $24 686.29 $15 804.03 5-21 inch $135,000 $5 047.13 $0.00 $26 168.71 $16 753.06 6 - 18 inch $103 000 $4 544.68 D.00 $23 563.59 $0.00 7 - 18 inch $212 000 $0,00 $0.00 $50 738.56 $0,00 6-18 inch $78,000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total $2,521.000 $46.269.17 $263,107.08 1 $290.638.36 1 $138,497.25 Page 4 of 6 M1 VillaeP frPPk 06P. Suits 700 1 Plann. Texac Mq3 s UM31.0694 t 97M31-U19 Fax 45to 45HG MPrrantilP Playa Drive. Suite 234 , Fort Worth, Tpm 76117 e 817.546.1717 r 817446.1716 fax WWDEY, ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS Exhibit 8 - Total Cont. Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 Area 11 Area 12 Area 13 $13,745.36 $17,195.62 $19,180.44 $36,376.05 $1688.03 $26,637.44 $47,360.07 $59,248.03 $66,086.80 $80,723.04 $5816.15 $91,780.12 $28,136.49 $35,199.09 $39,261.99 $18,226.07 $3 455.36 $54,526.32 $109496.45 $136,981.39 $152,792.62 $0.00 $13446.93 $212,195.55 $29,647.55 $37,089.45 $41,370.54 $0.00 $3,640.93 $0.00 $0,00 $39,316.68 $43,854.85 $0.00 $3,859.57 $0.00 $0.00 $35,402.67 $39 489.06 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $76,231.19 $85 030.26 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $36,872.00 $41,128.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $228,385.93 $473,536.12 $528,194.55 $135,325.16 $31,906.96 1 $385,139.42 An alternative method of calculating participation from each development is below in Exhibit 9. This method uses the percent of the overall total flow that each area contributes at the end of the proposed sewer line to calculated cost participation. The percent of the overall total flow for each area was multiplied by the total price for the entire line of current required pipe sizes. EXHIBIT 9 - Cost Participation Calculation for Current Proposed Pipe Sizes Usina Percent of Total Flow Area Flow Contributed MGti % of Total Flow % of Total Cost Contributed Cost Contributed 3 0.12 1.43% 1.43% $36,135.75 4 0.98 11.82% 11.82% $297 892.19 5 0.62 7.43% 7.43% $187 359.31 7 0.40 4.76% 4.76% $119 946.40 8 0.74 8.93% 8.93% $225 013.37 9 0.93 11.17% 11,17% $281,494A6 10 1.03 12.45% 12.45% $313,986.27 11 1.96 23,62% 23.62% $595 480.73 12 0.09 1.10% 1.10% $27,633.22 13 1.44 17.30% 17.30% $436 058.30 Totals 1 8.3 1 100.00% 1 100.000/0 1 $2,521,000.00 Required Pipe Total Cost-- $2,521,000.00 Exhibit 10 shows the cost participation for each area without Town participation for the upsize of the pipe. The method splits up the participation by flow per segment as done previously. Exhibit 10- Total Cost Participation Calculation for Buildout of Basin without Town Participation Segment Total cost Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 7 1A - 33 inch $195 000 $2 795.11 $23 042.04 $14 492.29 $9 277.88 1 - 30 inch $A48,000 $8 576.01 $70 698.05 $44 465,54 $28,466.60 2 - 30 inch $291 000 $5,076.82 $41 851.78 $26 322.68 $16 851.63 3 - 30 inch $1 213 000 $22,764.08 $187 660,15 $118 028.86 $75 561.43 4 - 27inch $213 000 $6 459,48 $0.00 $33,491.59 $21,441.13 5 - 27 inch $179 000 $6 692.11 $0.00 $34.697.77 $22,213.32 6 - 24 inch $136000 $6,000.74 $0.00 $31 113.09 $0.00 7-24 -24 inch $305 000 $0.00 0.00 72 996.51 $0.00 8 - 24 inch $108,000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total $3,188.000 $58,364.35 $323,252.02 $375,608.33 1 $173.811.99 Page 5 of 6 10.1 Whip {.rpPk 06P. Suits 100 1 Plann. Texas MU s 911.911d0694 1 917.931.951R Fax e�� 45P(1 Merranlile Plara ]rive. Suite 214 � Fnrt Wnrth. Texas 76117 # 817.546.1711 1 817.546.97% Far DOWDEY, ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS Exhibit 10 - Total Cont. Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 Area 11 Area 12 Area 13 $17 404.84 $21,773.67 $24 286.92 $46 060,59 $2 137.44 $33 729.22 $53,401.89 $66,806.42 $74 517.62 $91 021.04 $6,558.13 $103 488.69 $31 612.81 $39,548.01 $44 112.89 $20 477.94 $3,882.28 $61 263.16 $141 749.41 $177,330.23 $197 798.77 $0.00 $17,407.82 $274 699.26 40 222.48 $50 318.81 $56 126.91 $0.00 $4 939.60 $0.00 $0.00 1 $52131.01 $68148.29 $0.00 $5117.50 $0.00 $0.00 $46 745.27 $52,140,90 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 $109 672.23 122 331.26 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0,00 $51,053.54 $56,946.46 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $284,391.43 $616,379.19 $686,410.01 $157,559.57 $40,042.76 $473,180.33 Exhibit 11 shows the participation for each area without the Town's participation for the upsize of the pipe by using the overall total flow method. EXHIBIT 11 - Cost Participation Calculation for Buildout Pipe Sizes Using Percent of Total Flow Area Flow Contributed MGD % of Total Flow % of Total Cost Contributed Cost Contributed 3 0.12 1.43% 1.43% $45 696.46 4 0.98 11.82% 11,82% $376,707.78 5 0.62 7.43% 7.43% $236 930.38 7 0.40 4.76% 4.76% $151,681.52 8 0.74 8.93% 8.93% $284,546.86 9 0.93 11.17% 11.17% $355,971.57 10 1.03 12.45% 12.45% $397059.99 11 1.96 23,62% 23.62% $753 031.56 12 0.09 1.10% 1.10% $34,944.35 13 1.44 17.30% 17.30% $551 429.54 Totals 1 8.3 1 100.00% 1 100.000/0 1 $3,188,000.00 Please review and let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information. Sincerely, John W. Bull, P.E. Cc - Scott Norris - Land Advisors Matt Robinson, P.E. - Land Resources Trey Sibley - Rudman Group Michael Beaty - Mooreland Page 6 of 6 SMi i Vlllaee Creek FIrivp. iiiitp 20C 1 Plann. Taxaa 711193 1 912.9114694 , 972.931-9539 Fax *!'* MO 6herranlile PIA73 Drive. Suite 214 1 Fort Worth. Texas 76117 v 817-546.1712 s SI MA-1716 Fax