10.25.2011 Town Council PacketPage 1 of 3
]
1. Call to Order / Roll Call
2. Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, and Pledge to the Texas Flag
3. Announcements of dates and times of upcoming community events
4. 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.)
MINUTES, RESOLUTIONS AND OTHER ITEMS
4a. Consider and act upon minutes from the following Council meeting (AP)
• October 11, 2011 – Regular Town Council Meeting
4b. Consider and act upon Resolution No. 11-62 supporting the reconstruction of US 380 from
the Denton County Line east to Custer Road, including the addition of frontage roads
between the Dallas North Tollway and SH 289 (Preston Road). (HW)
4c. Consider and act upon Resolution No. 11-63 Second Amendment – Development and
Financing Agreement between the Town of Prosper and Blue Star Land LP, 183 Land Corp.
and Blue Star Allen Land LP. (ML)
4d. Consider and act upon Resolution No. 11-64 First Amendment - Water and Sewer
Improvement Development Agreement between the Town of Prosper, Forest City Prosper
Limited Partnership and Prosper Partners LP. (ML)
4e. Consider and act upon the September 2011 monthly financial statements. (MG)
5. 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.)
Other Comments by the Public
AGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Prosper Town Council
Prosper Municipal Chambers
108 W. Broadway, Prosper, Texas
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 6:00 p.m.
Page 2 of 3
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 item will be recognized on a case-by-case
basis, at the discretion of the Mayor and Town Council.)
PUBLIC HEARING & DEPARTMENT RELATED ITEMS
6. Consider and act upon a public hearing to consider and act upon Ordinance No. 11-70 to tax tangible
personal property in transit which would otherwise be exempt pursuant to Texas Tax Code, Section
11.253. (MG)
7. A public hearing to receive public comment concerning the amendment of the land use assumptions
and capital improvements plan, and the imposition of an impact fee for water, wastewater and
roadway utilities. (CC)
8. Discuss a Development Agreement between the Town of Prosper and Athlos Prosper Fund I, LP for
the development 188 acres in the northwest quadrant of Hwy 380 and the Dallas North Tollway.
(ML)
9. Discuss an Agreement between the Town of Prosper and 166 Bryan Road Partners, LP for the
Reduction of the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction of the Town of Prosper including a Strategic Partnership
Agreement between the Town of Prosper and Denton County Fresh Water District No. 10. (ML)
10. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Recess into Closed Session in compliance with Section 551.001 et. seq. Texas Government Code, to
wit; and Section 551.071 Meeting with City Attorney regarding a matter(s) 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 regarding:
10a. Section 551.071. Consultation with Town Attorney regarding agreement between the Town
of Prosper and 166 Bryan Road Partners, LP for the Reduction of the Extraterritorial
Jurisdiction of the Town of Prosper including a Strategic Partnership Agreement between
the Town of Prosper and Denton County Fresh Water District No. 10.
10b. Section 551.071. Consultation with Town Attorney regarding Legal issues relating to the
First Street/Coit Road Improvements project.
10c. Section 551.072. To deliberate regarding Real Property located south of Prosper Trail, West
of Custer, east of Dallas North Tollway and north of Highway 380.
10d. Section 551.087. To deliberate the purchase exchange, lease, or value of real property located
south of Fishtrap, North of Hwy. 380, East of FM 1385, and West of Burlington Northern
Railroad.
10e. To reconvene in Regular Session and take any action necessary as a result of the Closed
Session.
Page 3 of 3
11. Possibly direct Town Staff to schedule topic(s) for discussion at a future meeting.
12. Adjourn
CERTIFICATION
I, the undersigned authority, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted on the inside window at the Town Hall of the Town of Prosper, Texas, a place
convenient and readily accessible to the general public at all times, and said notice was posted at least 72 hours before said meeting was convened.
_________________________________ ________________ ____________________
Amy Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary Date Notice Posted Date Noticed Removed
In addition to any specifically identified Executive Sessions, Council may convene into Executive Session under Section 551 of the Texas Government 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) 569-1013. BRAILLE IS NOT AVAILABLE.
Page 1 of 4
]
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
1. Call to Order / Roll Call.
Mayor Smith called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Council present included: Mayor Ray Smith, Mayor Pro-Tem Kenneth Dugger, Danny Wilson, Curry
Vogelsang Jr., Dave Benefield, and Jason Dixon.
Council Member(s) absent: Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem Meigs Miller
Staff present included: Mike Land, Town Manager; Amy Piukana, Town Secretary; Hulon Webb,
Director of Development Services; Chris Copple, Planning & Zoning Manager; Matthew Garrett,
Finance Director; Frank Jaromin, Director of Public Works.
2. Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, and Pledge to the Texas Flag.
The invocation was given by Pastor Chris Schoolcraft with Prosper United Methodist Church. The
pledge of allegiance and pledge to the Texas Flag was given.
3. Announcements of dates and times of upcoming community events. Town Manager Mike Land
announced the second annual Cory Ausenbaugh 5K and Fun Run is scheduled for Saturday, October
15, 2011 at Frontier Parking beginning at 8 a.m. He also noted that City of Celina’s Centennial
Celebration for the Historical Downtown Square is set for October 15, 2011 at 2 p.m.
4. The Mayor presented a Proclamation recognizing the Dixie League World Series Baseball
Champions.
5. 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.)
MINUTES, RESOLUTIONS AND OTHER ITEMS
5a. Consider and act upon minutes from the following Council meeting (AP)
• September 27, 2011 – Work Session and Regular Town Council Meeting(s)
5b. Consider and act upon Resolution No. 11-61, accepting and approving the 2011 Tax
Roll. (MG)
MINUTES
Regular Meeting of the Prosper Town Council
Town of Prosper Municipal Chambers
108 W. Broadway, Prosper, Texas
Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 6:00 p.m.
Page 2 of 4
5c. Consider and act upon 1) an Engineering Design Services Agreement with RLK
Engineering Inc., for the design of the SH 289 Utility Relocations and 2) Resolution
No. 11-62 authorizing the Town Manager to execute the same. (MB)
Mayor ProTem Dugger made a motion to approve Consent Items 5a.-5c., as presented. Motion
seconded by Council Member Dixon. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
6. 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.)
Other Comments by the Public - Mr. Bill Hayes spoke on behalf of the Prosper Historical Society.
He asked Council to consider donating funds to help the Historical Society provide storage and space
for historical items donated. He expressed concerns regarding the demolition of the structure located
at 109 South Main Street and asked that in the future that the Town work with the Historical Society
to preserve history. Mr. Hayes invited Council to attend a Veteran’s Day reception which is set for
November 10, 2011 and asked for consideration of a future park to be dedicated as a Veteran’s Day
Memorial park.
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 item will be recognized on a case-by-case
basis, at the discretion of the Mayor and Town Council.)
DEPARTMENT ITEMS
7. Consider and discuss cancelling the November 22, 2011 and December 27, 2011 regular Town
Council Meetings. (ML) Town Manager Mike Land briefed Council regarding notification
requirements for city publications and asked Council to review their calendars for the upcoming
meetings so that quorum requirements are met for the November 22, 2011 and December 27, 2011
regular Town Council Meetings.
After discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to approve cancelling the November 22,
2011 and December 27, 2011 regular Town Council Meetings. Motion seconded by Council
Member Dixon. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
8. Consider and act upon initiating Stage 3 Drought Contingency and Water Emergency Response
Measures. (FJ) Director of Public Works Frank Jaromin briefed Council regarding the North
Texas Municipal Water Districts goal to reduce water usage by 10 percent. Mr. Jaromin explained
that landscape watering with sprinklers or irrigation systems would be reduced to once every two
weeks between November 1, 2011 and March 31, 2012. He noted that information would be sent out
to citizens through the Town’s website, newsletters, and signage to inform the citizens of the new
guidelines.
Page 3 of 4
Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to approve Stage 3 Drought Contingency and Water
Emergency Response Measures and instruct staff to start implementation on November 1, 2011.
Motion seconded by Council Member Wilson. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
9. Discuss the request of an All-Way Stop at the intersection of Ridgewood and Hayes Road. (KM)
Police Chief Kirk McFarlin briefed Council regarding the eight warrant conditions to determine
placing a traffic control device at an intersection. He showed pictures of the intersection and noted
that according to the warrant condition information; this intersection does not warrant an All-Way
Stop. Staff recommended that the new speed limit be put into place and given an opportunity to
slow the traffic down by means of enforcement to raise voluntary compliance and that an All-Way
Stop not be placed at the intersection of Ridgewood Drive and Hayes Road.
Forrest Bentley, 1707 Colonial Court, spoke in support of adding a stop sign and expressed his
concerns regarding narrow street widths, increased traffic, speeding and safety concerns at this
intersection. Mr. Bentley requested Council approve a stop sign and presented a petition indicating
a list of residence who support an All-Way Stop at the intersection at Ridgewood and Hayes
Road.
Sally Holbert, 1506 River Hill, spoke in favor of a stop sign at this location but had concerns
regarding traffic, speeding and visibility triangle issues.
Carol Bentley, 1707 Colonial Court, spoke in favor of a stop sign and explained her granddaughter
was involved in a serious auto accident at this location. She added that her concerns are mainly
speeding, increased traffic and narrow roads. She asked Council to add a stop sign and include
flashing lights at this intersection.
Council discussed reducing the speed limit, increasing police presence at the intersection, visibility
clean up at the intersection, road width issues and a possible speed study at the intersection. This
item was discussed and no action was taken.
10. Consider an act upon Ordinance No. 11-69, establishing speed limits for Hays Road and E. First
(specifically between Coit and Custer Roads). (GM) Assistant Police Chief Gary McHone
provided a brief overview to Council regarding the speed limit studies done at Hays Road and
First Street. Assistant Chief McHone indicated First Street speed limit be set at 45 mph and that due
to the unimproved shoulder and steep drop between the surface of the roadway, that Hays Road
speed limit be set at 35 mph.
Mayor ProTem Dugger made a motion to approve the establishment of the recommended maximum
speed limits along Hays Road at 35 mph and E. First Street, between Coit Road and Custer Road at
45 mph. Motion seconded by Council Member Vogelsang. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
11. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Pro Tem Dugger moved to recess into Executive Session at 7:13 p.m. Motion seconded by
Council Member Wilson. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
Recess into Closed Session in compliance with Section 551.001 et. seq. Texas Government Code, to
wit; and Section 551.071 Meeting with City Attorney regarding a matter(s) 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 regarding:
Page 4 of 4
11a. Section 551.074. To deliberate the annual evaluation of Town Manager Mike Land.
11b. Section 551.071. Consultation with Town Attorney regarding Legal issues relating to the
First Street/Coit Road Improvements project.
11c. Section 551.087. To deliberate regarding Economic Development Incentive for properties
located south of Prosper Trail, West of Custer, east of Dallas North Tollway and north of
Highway 380.
11d. To reconvene in Regular Session and take any action necessary as a result of the Closed
Session.
Council Member Vogelsang made a motion to reconvene into Regular Session at 8:32 p.m. Motion
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dugger. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to amend the Town Manager’s contract in accordance
with the completed annual evaluation. Motion seconded by Council Member Benefield. Motion
approved by vote of 6-0.
12. Possible direct Town Staff to schedule topic(s) for discussion at a future meeting. No action taken.
13. Adjourn – Council Member Benefield made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by
Council Member Vogelsang. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
The meeting adjourned at 8:33 p.m.
___________________________________
Ray Smith, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Amy M. Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. 11-62
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER,
TEXAS, HEREBY SUPPORTING THE RECONSTRUCTION OF US 380 FROM
THE DENTON COUNTY LINE EAST TO CUSTER ROAD, INCLUDING THE
ADDITION OF FRONTAGE ROADS BETWEEN THE DALLAS NORTH
TOLLWAY AND SH 289 (PRESTON ROAD).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF PROSPER, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: Whereas, the Texas Department of Transportation (“TxDOT”) plans to
widen US 380 east through Collin County, Texas, and;
SECTION 2: Whereas, the US 380 Road Widening Project shall be from Collin
County Line east to Custer Road, and;
SECTION 3: Whereas, improved traffic mobility will compliment economic
development, improve air quality, advance traffic safety, and generally enhance the quality of
life for all residents; and;
SECTION 4: Whereas, frontage roads provide essential access to adjacent
properties; and;
SECTION 5: Whereas, the Regional Transportation Council (RTC) allocated
Regional Toll Revenue (RTR) funds for design and construction of US 380 from the Denton
County Line to Coit Road; and;
SECTION 6: Whereas, TxDOT and Collin County, through a cooperative process
with community leaders in Prosper, Frisco and McKinney have conducted a series of
stakeholder outreach initiatives to receive feedback from the affected communities.
SECTION 7: Whereas, the Texas Department of Transportation, the City of Frisco,
the Town of Prosper and Collin County are proceeding through the schematic design and
environmental approval process and desire the construction of US 380 from the Denton
County Line to Custer Road, including the addition of frontage roads between the Dallas
North Tollway and SH 289 (Preston Road) so to enhance mobility in the region and achieve
the resulting economic and social benefits; and;
SECTION 8: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
RESOLVED THIS THE 25th day of October, 2011.
_________________________
Ray Smith, Mayor
ATTEST TO:
_________________________
Amy Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary
Page 1 of 2
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – Tuesday October 25, 2011
Date: October 21, 2011
Agenda Item:
Consider and act on a Resolution approving the Second Amendment to the Development and
Financing Agreement between the Town of Prosper and Blue Star Land, LP, 183 Land Corp.
and Blue Star Allen Land LP.
Description of Agenda Item:
On March 25, 2008 the Town entered into a Development and Financing Agreement with the
above stated parties in advance of the development of the “Gates of Prosper” project. Since
that time the Town Council has approved one amendment on April 28, 2011 extending the
agreement six (6) months. The Town is in continual contact with representatives of Blue Star on
a variety of development related issues including more recently for example the pending 6 lane
construction of Preston Rd and the extension of the water line west to service the Prosper
Partners and Forest City developments west of the Dallas North Tollway.
As a result of these ongoing discussions it was deemed important that the two groups continue
the Development and Financing Agreement through July 1, 2012. This time frame will allow
enough time for Blue Star to market the Gates of Prosper project at the May 2012 International
Shopping Center Association meeting. Their success at that meeting will determine if the
agreement should be allowed to come to an end or should be renegotiated to meet current
market demands.
The agreement has been signed by Blue Star’s representative in advance of the Council
meeting.
Budget Impact:
There is no impact on the budget with the approval of this First Amendment. There will be legal
fees though incurred by the Town in finalizing an amended agreement.
Legal Obligations and Review:
The Town’s Attorney Pete Smith drafted the document.
Attached Documents:
1. The Second Amendment to the Development and Financing Agreement
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
ADMINISTRATION
Page 2 of 2
2. Resolution approving the Second Amendment to Development and Financing
Agreement between the Town of Prosper and Blue Star Land, LP, 183 Land Corp. and
Blue Star Allen Land LP.
Town Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends that the Town Council approve the resolution approving the
Second Amendment to Development and Financing Agreement between the Town of
Prosper and Blue Star Land, LP, 183 Land Corp. and Blue Star Allen Land LP.
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. 11-63
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
PROSPER, TEXAS, HEREBY APPROVING THE SECOND
AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS
AND BLUE STAR LAND, LP, 183 LAND CORPORATION AND
BLUE STAR ALLEN LAND CORPORATION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF PROSPER, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: The Town Council of the Town of Prosper, Texas, hereby approved
the Second Amendment to the Development and Financing Agreement between the
Town of Prosper and Blue Star Land, LP, 183 Land Corporation and Blue Star Allen
Land LP.
SECTION 2: Resolved by the affirmative vote of the Town Council on the 25th
day of October, 2011.
______________________________
Ray Smith, Mayor
ATTEST TO:
_________________________
Amy Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary
Page 1 of 1
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – October 25, 2011
Date: October 21, 2011
Agenda Item:
Consider and act on the First Amendment to Water and Sewer Improvement Development
Agreement between the Town of Prosper and Forest City Prosper Limited Partnership and
Prosper Partners L.P.
Description of Agenda Item:
On September 15, 2011 the parties listed above entered into a Water and Sewer Improvement
Development Agreement regarding the construction of water and sewer infrastructure related to
934 acres generally located west of the Dallas North Tollway to Doe Branch Creek. The original
agreement provided for certain reimbursements to the Developers for costs related to the
construction of said improvements.
Within the agreement the graphic depicting the service and reimbursement area for the sewer
line incorrectly identified the reimbursement area. The reimbursement area originally shown
included property due east of the BNSF railroad.
This amendment provides clarifying language for the reimbursement of sewer costs from
specific Off-Property Service Area replacing Exhibit A-2, eliminating the area east of the BNSF
railroad.
Budget Impact:
There is no budgetary impact as a result of this amendment.
Legal Obligations and Review:
The Town’s Attorney Julie Fort developed the attached First Amendment.
Attached Documents:
1. First Amendment to Water And Sewer Improvement Development Agreement.
2. Resolution approving the First Amendment to Water and Sewer Improvement
Development Agreement between the Town of Prosper and Forest City Prosper Limited
Partnership and Prosper Partners L.P.
Town Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends that the Town Council approve the resolution approving the First
Amendment to Water and Sewer Improvement Development Agreement between the Town of
Prosper and Forest City Prosper Limited Partnership and Prosper Partners L.P.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
ADMINISTRATION
First Amendment to Water and Sewer
Improvement Agreement -- Page 1 of 8
STATE OF TEXAS § After Recording Return to:
§ Town Manager
COUNTIES OF COLLIN § Town of Prosper
AND DENTON § P.O. Box 307
Prosper, Texas 75078
FIRST AMENDMENT TO WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENT DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENT
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made and entered into to be effective
as of this 25th day of October, 2011, (the "Effective Date") by and among FOREST CITY
PROSPER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ("Forest City") and PROSPER PARTNERS L.P.
("Prosper Partners", collectively with Forest City and Prosper Partners are sometimes hereinafter
individually referred to as a "Developer" and jointly as the "Developers"), and the TOWN OF
PROSPER, TEXAS ("Town")(collectively the "Parties" and individually a "Party"), on the
terms and conditions hereinafter set forth.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, the Parties entered into the Water and Sewer Improvement Agreement
dated September 15, 2011 (the “Original Agreement”), attached hereto as Exhibit A-1, regarding
the construction of water and sewer infrastructure related to approximately 934.412 acres of
property, being more particularly depicted in the Original Agreement (the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Original Agreement provided Developers with certain reimbursements
of costs related to construction of the water and sewer infrastructure as detailed therein; and
WHEREAS, the sewer infrastructure to be constructed on the Property pursuant to the
Original Agreement will result in neighboring and/or nearby property owners being able to
extend the sewer lines on the Town’s Capital Improvement Plan built by Developers, however
Town must give some Sewer Impact Fee credit or reimbursement based upon cost to the property
owners that construct and dedicate sewer lines on the Capital Improvement Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Original Agreement, in Section 4(c)(iv), provides that Developers’
reimbursement shall also come from Sewer Impact Fees collected within the Sewer Service
Areas that include property other than the Property (the “Off-Property Service Area”); and
WHEREAS, Developers and Town desire to amend the Original Agreement to recognize
that when the Town is required to provide Sewer Impact Fee credit or reimbursement to a
property owner that extends sewer lines on the Capital Improvement Plan in the Off-Property
Service Area, then Town may use to Sewer Impact Fees collected in the Off-Property Service
Area to provide such credit or reimbursement before any such Sewer Impact Fees are used to
reimburse Developers.
First Amendment to Water and Sewer
Improvement Agreement -- Page 2 of 8
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants of the Parties
set forth in this Agreement, and for other good and valuable consideration the receipt and
adequacy of which are acknowledged and agreed by the Parties, the Parties agree as follows:
1. Land Subject to Agreement. The land that is subject to this Agreement is the Property,
which is the exact same Property subject to the Original Agreement.
2. Amendment to Section 4(c)(iv) and Exhibit A-2 of Original Agreement. (a) Exhibit
A-2 of the Original Agreement is replaced in its entirety by Exhibit A-2 attached hereto. The
amended Exhibit A-2 is incorporated into this Agreement and the Original Agreement as if fully
set forth herein and therein.
(b) Section 4(c)(iv) of the Original Agreement is replaced in its entirety with the following
paragraph:
4(c)(iv) All Sewer Impact Fees collected, within the reimbursement
area defined on Exhibit A-2 attached, by the Town related to service from the
Sewer Improvements, including fees collected with respect to service to property
other than the Property shall be paid to Developer in an amount equal to such
Developer’s proportionate share until all amounts due to Developers hereunder
have been paid in full, provided, in the event a Developer is paid in full prior to
the other Developer, such other developer shall receive all such Sewer Impact
Fees until such Developer is paid in full. A depiction of the service areas for the
Sewer Improvements for each Tract is attached hereto as Exhibit A-2 and made a
part hereof (collectively, the "Sewer Service Areas"). All impact fees for sewer
service collected in the Sewer Service Areas shall be applied by Town to the
Sewer Costs Reimbursement. The Sewer Service Areas may be expanded from
time to time and upon on such expansion, Exhibit A-2 shall be amended
accordingly.
If a property other than the Property within reimbursement area defined on
Exhibit A-2 extends the Sewer Improvements from Legacy Drive, then Town may
use Sewer Impact Fees from said property to reimburse the owner at a 1:1 cost
ratio first, until said owner(s) is fully reimbursed. Thereafter, the remaining
Sewer Impact Fees collected will reimburse the Developers.
If a property other than the Property within the reimbursement area defined on
Exhibit A-2 constructs a sewer improvement, other than an extension of the
Sewer Improvements or a sewer improvement on Town’s Capital Improvement
Plan, the Developers will receive the Sewer Impact Fees generated from the
property first, until they are fully reimbursed.
The double-underline reflects the newly added language. All capitalized terms in the amended
paragraph and recitals shall have the same definition set forth in the Original Agreement, unless
a definition is set forth in this Agreement. All references to exhibits in the amended paragraph
shall refer to the exhibit as attached to the Original Agreement.
First Amendment to Water and Sewer
Improvement Agreement -- Page 3 of 8
3. Entire Agreement/First Amendment. This Agreement together with the Original
Agreement embodies the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matters
contained herein and therein. This Agreement shall be considered part of the Original
Agreement and the provisions of the Original Agreement shall apply hereto, except as amended
by Paragraph 2 above.
4. Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
Texas and shall be performable in Collin County, Texas.
5. Consideration. This Agreement is executed by the Parties hereto without coercion or
duress and for substantial consideration, the sufficiency of which is forever confessed.
6. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in a number of identical counterparts.
Each of such counterparts shall be deemed an original for all purposes and collectively constitute
one Agreement. A facsimile signature will also be deemed to constitute an original if properly
executed.
7. Authority to Execute. The individuals executing this Agreement on behalf of the
respective Parties below represent to each other and to others that all appropriate and necessary
action has been taken to authorize the individual who is executing this Agreement to do so for
and on behalf of the Party for which his or her signature appears, that there are no other parties or
entities required to execute this Agreement in order for the same to be an authorized and binding
agreement on the Party for whom the individual is signing this Agreement and that each
individual affixing his or her signature hereto is authorized to do so, and such authorization is
valid and effective on the date hereof.
8. Savings/Severability. In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this
Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect,
such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this
Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never
been contained herein.
9. Representations. Each signatory represents this Agreement has been read by the Party
for which this Agreement is executed and that such Party has had an opportunity to confer with
its counsel.
10. Sovereign Immunity. The Parties agree that Town has not waived its sovereign
immunity by entering into and performing ANY obligations under this Agreement.
11. No Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create
any right in any third party not a signatory to this Agreement, and the Parties do not intend to
create any third party beneficiaries by entering into this Agreement.
12. Miscellaneous Drafting Provisions. This Agreement shall be deemed drafted equally
by all Parties hereto. The language of all parts of this Agreement shall be construed as a whole
according to its fair meaning, and any presumption or principle that the language herein is to be
First Amendment to Water and Sewer
Improvement Agreement -- Page 4 of 8
construed against any Party shall not apply. Headings in this Agreement are for the convenience
of the Parties and are not intended to be used in construing this document.
13. Attorneys’ Fees. In any legal proceeding brought to enforce the terms of this
Agreement, the prevailing party may recover its reasonable and necessary attorney's fees from
the non-prevailing party as permitted by Section 271.159 of the Texas Local Government Code,
as it exists or may be amended.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement and caused this
Agreement to be effective on the latest date as reflected by the signatures below.
TOWN:
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS
By:
Mike Land, Town Manager
Date:
STATE OF TEXAS §
§
COUNTY OF COLLIN §
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared Mike Land,
known to me to be one of the persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing instrument;
he acknowledged to me he is the duly authorized representative for the TOWN OF PROSPER,
TEXAS, and he executed said instrument for the purposes and consideration therein expressed.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, this _____ day of
___________________, 2011.
[ S E A L ] Notary Public in and for the State of Texas
First Amendment to Water and Sewer
Improvement Agreement -- Page 5 of 8
DEVELOPER:
FOREST CITY PROSPER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
a ____________ limited partnership
By: FC Prosper Partner, Inc.,
a Texas corporation
General Partner
By: ,
Name: Robert F. Monchein
Title: President
Date:
STATE OF OHIO §
§
COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA §
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public, on this day personally
appeared Robert F. Monchein, known to me to be the person and officer whose name is
subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and who acknowledged to me that he/she executed the
same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed and in the capacity therein stated on
behalf of said partnership.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, this _____ day of
________________________, 2011.
[ S E A L ] Notary Public in and for the State of Ohio
First Amendment to Water and Sewer
Improvement Agreement -- Page 6 of 8
DEVELOPER:
PROSPER PARTNERS, L.P.,
a Texas limited partnership
By: Prosper Partners GP, LLC,
a Texas limited liability company,
General Partner
By: ,
Craig Curry, Manager
Date:
STATE OF TEXAS §
§
COUNTY OF _____________ §
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public, on this day personally
appeared Craig Curry, known to me to be the person and officer whose name is subscribed to the
foregoing instrument, and who acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same for the
purposes and consideration therein expressed and in the capacity therein stated on behalf of said
partnership.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, this _____ day of
________________________, 2011.
[ S E A L ] Notary Public in and for the State of Texas
First Amendment to Water and Sewer
Improvement Agreement -- Page 1 of 8
EXHIBIT A-1
ORIGINAL AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT A-2
AMENDED EXHIBIT
PAGE 1
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. 11-64
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE
TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED
DEVELOPER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH
FOREST CITY PROSPER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND
PROSPER PARTNERS, L.P., TO CONSTRUCT WATER
LINES, SEWER LINES AND RELATED
INFRASTRUCTURE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, Forest City Prosper Limited Partnership and Prosper Partners, L.P. (together
“Developer”) owns all of certain large tracts of undeveloped land in the Town of Prosper which
need infrastructure to be developed (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, it is prudent and in the public interest to construct the water and sewer
infrastructure in conjunction with the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Town and Developer find it to be to their mutual advantage to enter into
a First Amendment to the Developer Participation Agreement (“Agreement”) regarding the
construction of certain public improvements related to the development of the Project on the
property identified in the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has carefully reviewed and considered the proposed
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that participating in the First Amendment
to the Agreement is in the best interest of the citizens of Prosper.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF PROSPER, TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Approval of Agreement. That the Town Manager is hereby authorized to
execute the First Amendment to the Developer Participation Agreement with Forest City Prosper
Limited Partnership and Prosper Partners, L.P. In compliance with Texas Local Government
Code §212.072(d).
SECTION 2. Effective Date. That this Resolution shall take effect immediately upon
its passage.
DULY PASSED AND APPROVED by the Town Council of the Town of Prosper,
Texas, on the 25th day of October, 2011.
___________________________________
Ray Smith
Mayor
PAGE 2
ATTEST:
________________________________
Amy Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary
Page 1 of 1
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Matthew B. Garrett, Finance Director
CC: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – October 25, 2011
Date: October 20, 2011
Agenda Item:
A public hearing to consider and act upon an ordinance to tax tangible personal property in
transit which would otherwise be exempt pursuant to Texas Tax Code, Section 11.253.
Description of Agenda Item:
In 2007, the Texas Legislature passed Tax Code Section 11.253 or the “Goods-in-
Transit” exemption. In December of 2007, the Prosper Town Council passed Ordinance
07-104, excluding Prosper from the Goods-in-Transit exemption and continuing to tax
such goods. During the 2011 special session, the legislature significantly limit ed the
applicability of section 11.253. This exemption now applies only to goods that are stored
in a public warehouse owned by someone other than the owner of the goods. The new
law allows a Town to act after October 1, 2011 but before December 31, 2011, to
continue to tax such goods in 2012.
Budget Impact:
No additional tax levy is anticipated due to this action. Instead, this maintains the current level
and would prevent future exemptions in Prosper even if the revised provisions of Tax Code
Section 11.253 were met.
Legal Obligations and Review:
N/A
Attached Documents:
Letter from Bo Daffin, Chief Appraiser for Collin County Central Appraisal District
Ordinance
Board/Committee Recommendation:
N/A
Town Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends that the Town Council open the public hearing to receive citizen
input. Following the public hearing, Town staff recommends that the Town Council,
“Move to approve an ordinance to tax tangible personal property in transit which
would otherwise be exempt pursuant to Texas Tax Code, Section 11.253.”
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
Administration
Ord 11-70 Goods In Transit Ordinance Page 1 of 1
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 11-70
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER TO TAX
TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY IN TRANSIT WHICH
WOULD OTHERWISE BE EXEMPT PURSUANT TO TEXAS
TAX CODE, SECTION 11.253.
WHEREAS, the 82nd Texas Legislature in Special Session, enacted Senate Bill 1, to take
effect on September 1, 2011, which would require a taxing unit to take action, in the required
manner, after October 1, 2011, to provide for the taxation of goods-in-transit; and
WHEREAS, Tex. Tax Code §11.253(j-1) as amended allows the governing body of a
taxing unit, after conducting a public hearing, to provide for the continued taxation of such
goods-in-transit; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Prosper, having conducted a public
hearing as required by Section 1-n (d), Article VIII, Texas Constitution, and Tex. Tax Code
§11.253(j-1) is of the opinion that it is in the best interests of the Town to continue to tax such
goods in-transit;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF PROSPER THAT:
The goods-in-transit, as defined Texas Tax Code Section 11.253(a)(2), as amended by
Senate Bill 1, enacted by the 82th Texas Legislature in Special Session, shall remain subject to
taxation by the Town of Prosper, Texas.
DULY PASSED AND APPROVED BY A VOTE OF __ - __ BY THE TOWN
COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER ON THIS 25th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2011.
_________________________
Ray Smith
Mayor
ATTESTED TO AND
CORRECTLY RECORDED BY:
______________________________________
Amy Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary
250 W
McKin
www.
W Eldorado Pkwy
nney, Texas 7506
.collincad.org
TO: All T
FROM: B
RE: New
Dear Tax
During th
exemptio
changes
in-transit
The prim
1. T
ta
of
ti
2. W
ta
3. T
th
co
it
4. T
yo
I hope th
letter and
Please c
me at 46
informat
Best Reg
Bo Daffi
Chief Ap
Attachm
y
69
Taxing Entitie
Bo Daffin, Ch
w Exemption
xing Entity,
he 2011 spe
on under 11.
in the law m
exemption a
mary purpose
To advise all
ax after Octo
fficial action
meframe the
Whatever you
ax year), has
To advise all
he question o
ounsel, the l
may be held
To provide yo
ou with this
e enclosed
d enclosed p
contact eith
69.742.922
tion.
gards,
n
ppraiser
ments
es
hief Appraise
of “Goods-I
cial session
253 of the P
might affect C
application f
e of this lette
entities wish
ober 1, 2011
to tax to CC
e goods will
u selected, t
s zero effect
entities wish
of whether t
legislature h
d at a meetin
ou with the le
process.
packet from
packet will be
er Robert W
23 bo.daffin
Metro
Toll-Fre
er
n-Transit” –
, the legislat
Property Tax
Collin county
filed from the
er is fourfold:
hing to tax th
and before
CAD. If an e
be subject t
to tax or exe
t on what an
hing to tax th
o tax them f
has prescribe
ng of your g
etter and sam
our legal co
e posted to o
Waldrop at
@cadcollin
469-742-9200
ee 866-467-1110
Note: origin
Local Optio
ture revised
x Code. It is
y taxing entit
e original 20
:
hese goods
December 3
entity takes n
o exemption
mption durin
entity can/m
hese goods
for 2012 or le
ed no specia
overning bo
mple forms
ounsel assist
our entity po
469.742.93
.org; if you
0
nal letter mai
on to Tax for
and narrowe
virtually imp
ties, since w
008 impleme
for 2012 tha
31, 2011, an
no action to
n for 2012.
ng the first ro
must do for 2
that you mu
et them beco
al procedure
ody called for
provided by
ts you in the
ortal, at https
323 robert.w
u have ques
Sep
iled via first
2012
ed the good
possible to k
we have neve
entation of th
at they must
nd furnish a
tax during th
ound back in
2012.
ust hold a pu
ome exempt
es for this he
r other purpo
our legal co
e process. A
s://entity.coll
waldrop@c
stions or ne
Admin Fax
Appraisal F
ptember 16,
class mail
s-in-transit
know how th
er had a goo
he exemption
take action
copy of the
he prescribe
n 2007 (for 2
blic hearing
t. Per our le
earing, theref
oses.
ounsel, to as
A copy of this
lincad.org
cadcollin.org
eed addition
x 469-742-92
Fax 469-742-92
2011
e
ods-
n.
to
ed
2008
on
egal
fore
ssist
s
g; or
nal
09
05
D'Layne Peeples Carter
Howard Perdue Hiram A. Gutierrez
(1933-2005) 1235 North Loop West Michael J. Siwierka
Larry Brandon Suite 600 Thelma Banduch
James O. Collins Houston, Texas 77009 Christopher S. Jackson
Terry Ann White Telephone: 713-862-1860 Eboney Cobb
R. Bruce Medley Facsimile: 713-896-0030 Charles E. Brady
Robert Mott www.pbfcm.com Adam J. Walker
Kevin Brennen Alesha L. Williams
Harold Lerew August 23, 2011 Leslie M. Schkade
Jeanmarie Baer Carol Barton
David A. Ellison D’Arwyn Daniels
Laura J. Monroe Galen Gatten, Jr.
Tab Beall Pamela Gleason
B. Lynn Stavinoha E. Derick Mendoza
Michael J. Darlow W. Tracy Crites. Jr.
Joseph T. Longoria Michael W. Balcezak
David S. Crawford Veronica Leal Vasquez
Donald B. Roseman Guy A. “Tony” Fidelie, Jr.
Carl O. Sandin Jonathan Garza
Jason Bailey Otilia R. Gonzales
Owen M. Sonik Elizabeth A. Wiehle
David Hudson George Dowlen*
R. Gregory East Terry G. Wiseman*
Elizabeth Banda Calvo C. David Fielder *
Yolanda M. Humphrey Gregg M. McLaughlin*
John T. Banks *Retired
Sandra Griffin
Sergio E. Garcia
E. Stephen Lee
AMARILLO ARLINGTON AUSTIN HOUSTON LUBBOCK
M C ALLEN MIDLAND SAN ANTONIO TYLER WICHITA FALLS
Clients of the Firm
RE: New Exemption of “Goods-in-Transit” — Local Option to Tax
Dear Client:
In the 2007 session, the Texas Legislature passed Tax Code Section 11.253 or the “Goods-in-
Transit” exemption as it is more commonly known. This legislation implemented a constitutional
amendment that was passed several years before. This legislation was very similar to the “Freeport
exemption” passed many years ago, but it had a potentially larger impact as time passed. At that time, we
wrote you and advised you of your option to tax “goods-in-transit” and most of you did.
During the 2011 special session, the legislature acted to significantly limit the applicability of
section 11.253. This exemption now applies only to goods that are stored in a public warehouse owned
by someone other than the owner of the goods. The law no longer exempts goods that are in a location
for assembly, manufacturing, fabrication or processing, as was the case under the law passed in 2007.
The legislature revised and narrowed the law to address the author’s issue: competition between Texas
and New Mexico warehouse facilities. New Mexico does not tax such goods at all, so New Mexico
warehouse owners had a competitive advantage.
This update to the law requires that you act within a narrow window of time if you want to
continue to tax these goods for 2012. The update provides that you must take action after October 1,
2011 but before December 31, 2011, if you want to continue to tax such goods in 2012. You may later
elect to tax such goods for subsequent years if you fail to act this year.
What is Exempted?
This law exempts goods, principally inventory, that are stored under a contract of bailment by a
public warehouse operator at a public warehouse facility, that is in no way owned or controlled by the
owner of the goods, provided such property is moved to another location in this state or out of state within
175 days after the goods were acquired in Texas or imported into Texas. The movement requirement
could be satisfied by simply moving the goods to another warehouse across the street.
Certain specific types of goods are presently excluded from this exemption: oil, natural gas,
petroleum products, aircraft, dealer's motor vehicle inventory, dealer's vessel and outboard motor
inventory, dealer's heavy equipment inventory, or retail manufactured housing inventory. Petroleum
products are defined to be only the immediate derivatives of oil and natural gas, so some goods that you
might think of as petroleum products may actually be exempted from taxation by this new law.
What is the Impact on Your Tax Base?
At present, this new law will probably have a limited impact because most goods are kept in
facilities owned by the owners of the goods. However, this may change. Some owners of goods that
presently store them may move their goods into a public warehouse in order to obtain the tax exemption.
It should be noted, however, that this pared down exemption has much less potential to reduce your tax
base than the original statute.
What Can You Do?
The governing body of each taxing unit in the state may act to tax these goods in the year
following the year in which the governing body takes action. These goods will first become exempt in
2012. So if you wish to continue to tax these types of goods in 2012, you must act to tax the goods after
October 1, 2011 and before December 31, 2011. You must inform all the appraisal districts in which your
local government is located that you have acted to tax these goods. A copy of a resolution, order, or
ordinance is the best way to document your decision to your appraisal district.
Before you act to tax these goods, you must hold a public hearing on the question of whether to
tax them or whether to let them become exempt. The legislature has prescribed no special procedures for
this hearing, so it may be held at a meeting of the governing body called for other purposes. The item
must be listed on the agenda for that meeting as an action item in compliance with the Open Meetings
Act, but there is no additional public notice required.
The legislature required that each taxing unit act in the manner required for official action by the
governing body of the taxing unit. For counties, this means that action should be taken by an order of the
commissioner’s court. For cities, this means that action should be taken by an ordinance. For school
districts and other taxing units, this means that action should be taken by resolution. A sample order,
ordinance and resolution form is attached to this letter.
Special Note for School Districts
The wealth lost to this exemption will be deducted from the taxable wealth of the school district as
determined by the Comptroller for purposes of calculating state aid. Until the hold harmless provisions of
House Bill 1 are removed, this will have little impact on the amount of state aid your school district
receives. At present, the Comptroller’s wealth estimate affects only the additional four cents that a school
district may impose and the amount of certain types of facilities aid the district receives from the state
(existing debt allotment and instructional facilities allotment).
We hope that this letter and the attached forms will help you make an informed decision on behalf
of the taxpayers that you represent. If you should have any questions concerning this matter, please feel
free to call your attorney at your local office or call me in Houston.
Sincerely,
Robert Mott
Forms
CLICK HERE for the Word Document of the Resolution Form
CLICK HERE for the Word Document of the Order Form
CLICK HERE for the Word Document of the Ordinance Form
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE ____________ [name of taxing unit] TO TAX
TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY IN TRANSIT WHICH WOULD
OTHERWISE BE EXEMPT PURSUANT TO TEXAS TAX CODE, SECTION
11.253
WHEREAS, the 82nd Texas Legislature in Special Session, enacted Senate Bill 1, to take effect
on September 1, 2011, which would require a taxing unit to take action, in the required manner, after
October 1, 2011, to provide for the taxation of goods-in-transit; and
WHEREAS, Tex. Tax Code §11.253(j-1) as amended allows the governing body of a taxing unit,
after conducting a public hearing, to provide for the continued taxation of such goods-in-transit; and
WHEREAS, the ____________ [name of governing body] of the ______________ [name of
taxing unit], having conducted a public hearing as required by Section 1-n (d), Article VIII, Texas
Constitution, and Tex. Tax Code §11.253(j-1) is of the opinion that it is in the best interests of the District
to continue to tax such goods-in-transit;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY ____________ [name of governing body] FOR
THE ______________ [name of taxing unit] THAT: The goods-in-transit, as defined Texas Tax Code
Section 11.253(a)(2), as amended by Senate Bill 1, enacted by the 82th Texas Legislature in Special
Session, shall remain subject to taxation by the _____________________ [name of taxing unit].
Dated this ___ day of ___________________, 2011.
_________________________
(title of presiding officer)
Attested:
________________________
Secretary
ORDER NO. _______
AN ORDER OF _________COUNTY TO TAX TANGIBLE PERSONAL
PROPERTY IN TRANSIT WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE EXEMPT
PURSUANT TO TEXAS TAX CODE, SECTION 11.253
WHEREAS, the 82nd Texas Legislature in Special Session, enacted Senate Bill 1, to take effect
on September 1, 2011, which would require a taxing unit to take action, in the required manner, after
October 1, 2011, to provide for the taxation of goods-in-transit; and
WHEREAS, Tex. Tax Code §11.253(j-1) as amended allows the governing body of a taxing unit,
after conducting a public hearing, to provide for the continued taxation of such goods-in-transit; and
WHEREAS, the ____________ [name of governing body] of the ______________ [name of
taxing unit], having conducted a public hearing as required by Section 1-n (d), Article VIII, Texas
Constitution, and Tex. Tax Code §11.253(j-1) is of the opinion that it is in the best interests of the County
to continue to tax such goods-in-transit;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR
______________ COUNTY THAT: The goods-in-transit, as defined Texas Tax Code Section
11.253(a)(2), as amended by Senate Bill 1, enacted by the 82th Texas Legislature in Special Session, shall
remain subject to taxation by ______________________ County, Texas.
Dated this ___ day of ___________________, 2011.
_________________________
County Judge
Attested:
________________________
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF _____________ TO TAX TANGIBLE
PERSONAL PROPERTY IN TRANSIT WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE
EXEMPT PURSUANT TO TEXAS TAX CODE, SECTION 11.253
WHEREAS, the 82nd Texas Legislature in Special Session, enacted Senate Bill 1, to take effect
on September 1, 2011, which would require a taxing unit to take action, in the required manner, after
October 1, 2011, to provide for the taxation of goods-in-transit; and
WHEREAS, Tex. Tax Code §11.253(j-1) as amended allows the governing body of a taxing unit,
after conducting a public hearing, to provide for the continued taxation of such goods-in-transit; and
WHEREAS, the City Council (or Commission) of the City of ______________, having
conducted a public hearing as required by Section 1-n (d), Article VIII, Texas Constitution, and Tex. Tax
Code §11.253(j-1) is of the opinion that it is in the best interests of the City to continue to tax such goods-
in-transit;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL (OR COMMISSION)
OF THE CITY OF ______________ THAT: The goods-in-transit, as defined Texas Tax Code Section
11.253(a)(2), as amended by Senate Bill 1, enacted by the 82th Texas Legislature in Special Session, shall
remain subject to taxation by the City of _______________, Texas.
Dated this ___ day of ___________________, 2011.
_________________________
Mayor
Attested:
______________________________________
City Secretary
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Chris Copple, AICP, Planning & Zoning Manager
Cc: Mike Land, Town Manager
Hulon T. Webb, Jr., P.E., Director of Development Services/Town Engineer
Re: Town Council Meeting – October 25, 2011
Date: October 19, 2011
Agenda Item:
A public hearing to receive public comment concerning the amendment of the land use
assumptions and capital improvements plan, and the imposition of an impact fee for water,
wastewater and roadway utilities.
Description of Agenda Item:
On August 22, 2006 the Town Council adopted an ordinance updating the Town’s land use
assumptions (LUA), capital improvement plan (CIP), and water, wastewater and roadway impact
fees. Section 395 of the Texas Local Government Code (TxLGC) requires any political subdivision
imposing an impact fee to update the land use assumptions and the capital improvement plan at
least every five years. The TxLGC sets forth a number of requirements regarding the adoption of
LUA, CIP, and impact fees. The CIP must be based on a set of adopted LUA, which include a
description of the service area and projections of changes in land use densities, intensities and
population in the service area over at least a ten-year period. The four basic components of the
LUA include a description of the existing conditions, service area determination, ten-year growth
projections, and ultimate growth projections at build-out. Once the LUA has been completed, the
CIP is then prepared by a registered professional engineer in accordance with Section 395.014 of
the TxLGC and includes:
an assessment of existing capital facilities;
total capacity and current levels of usage;
a description of each type facility and associated costs for improvements necessitated by
and attributable to new development based on the LUA;
determination of a service unit and consumption, discharge, or use of facility by service unit;
total number of projected service units based on the LUA;
the projected demand for capital improvement over the next ten years;
an equivalency table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses;
and
a plan for awarding a credit per one of the options listed in Section 395.014 of the TxLGC.
Once the LUA and CIP are complete, a registered professional engineer must perform an impact
fee analysis in accordance to Section 395 of the TxLGC and determine a maximum impact fee per
service unit.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
On January 25, 2011, the Town Council approved a professional services agreement between the
Town of Prosper and Freese & Nichols, Inc. regarding the update of the Town’s Water, Wastewater
and Roadway Impact Fees. Section 395 of the TxLGC requires the Town Council to appoint a
Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC) to serve in an advisory capacity to the Council.
The Town Council appointed the following members to the CIAC:
1. Kenneth Dugger – Town Council Member
2. Mark DeMattia – Planning & Zoning Commission Member
3. Mike McClung – Planning & Zoning Commission Member
4. Joey Womble – Chamber of Commerce President
5. Kevin Drown – Economic Development Corporation Board Member
6. Jordan Simms – Economic Development Corporation Board Member
7. Bruce Carlin – Resident of Preston Lakes
Freese & Nichols, Inc. has completed an update to the Town’s LUA and CIP, has performed an
impact fee analysis, and has determined the maximum impact fee per service unit for water,
wastewater, and roadways. The impact fee analysis performed by Freese & Nichols, Inc. is
attached. The CIAC has reviewed the LUA, CIP, and impact fees for water, wastewater, and
roadways and prepared a recommendation to the Town Council. The CIAC’s report is attached.
In summary, the maximum allowable impact fees per the draft impact fee analysis are:
Single Family
Water: $3,900 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
Wastewater: $683 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
Roadway (Service Area 1 – West of BNSF RR): $856 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
$856 per SUE x 6.06 vehicle miles per SUE = $5,187 per Single Family dwelling unit
Roadway (Service Area 2 – East of BNSF RR): $615 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
$615 per SUE x 6.06 vehicle miles per SUE = $3,727 per Single Family dwelling unit
Non-Residential:
Water: $3,900 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
Wastewater: $683 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
Roadway (Service Area 1 – West of BNSF RR): $856 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
Roadway (Service Area 2 – East of BNSF RR): $615 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
In comparison, the Town’s current impact fees are (note in 2006 the Council elected to give
additional credit on roadway impact fees):
Single Family
Water: $2,595 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
Wastewater: $1,977 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
Roadway (Service Area 1 – West of BNSF RR): $639 per Service Unit Equivalent (60% credit)
$639 per SUE x 4.04 vehicle miles per SUE = $2,581 per Single Family dwelling unit
Roadway (Service Area 2 – East of BNSF RR): $669 per Service Unit Equivalent (60% credit)
$669 per SUE x 6.06 vehicle miles per SUE = $4,058 per Single Family dwelling unit
Non-Residential:
Water: $2,595 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
Wastewater: $1,977 per Service Unit Equivalent (50% credit)
Roadway (Service Area 1 – West of BNSF RR): $399 per Service Unit Equivalent (75% credit)
Roadway (Service Area 2 – East of BNSF RR): $422 per Service Unit Equivalent (75% credit)
The Town Council is required hold a public hearing to receive public comment concerning the
amendment of the LUA and CIP, and the imposition of an impact fee for water, wastewater and
roadway utilities. The public hearing has been noticed in accordance with Section 395 of the
TxLGC. Once the Council has held the public hearing, the Council must determine whether to
adopt or reject ordinances approving the updated LUA and CIP, and imposing impact fees. Such
action must occur within 30 days after the date of the public hearing.
Budget Impact:
The amount of impact fees assessed and collected directly impacts the amount of funds the Town
is able to use to offset the cost of capital improvements.
Legal Obligations and Review:
The impact fee update process has been performed in accordance with Section 395 of the TxLGC.
Attached Documents:
1. Impact Fee Study performed by Freese & Nichols, Inc.
2. CIAC recommendation letter.
3. Impact Fee Update PowerPoint presentation by Freese & Nichols, Inc.
Town Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends the Town Council hold a public hearing to receive public comment
concerning the amendment of the LUA and CIP, and the imposition of an impact fee for water,
wastewater and roadway utilities. Town staff also recommends the Town Council provide direction
to Town staff regarding the amount of the impact fee per service unit for water, wastewater, and
roadways. In the next 30 days, Town staff recommends the Town Council approve an amendment
to the Town’s impact fee ordinance, including the updated LUA and CIP.
DRAFT
Water, Wastewater & Roadway
Impact Fee Report
October 2011
Prepared for:
Town of Prosper
Prepared by:
FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC.
4055 International Plaza, Suite 200
Fort Worth, Texas 76109
(817) 735‐7300
&
KIMLEY‐HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
801 Cherry St. Suite 950
Fort Worth, TX 76102
817‐339‐2254
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
October 2011
DRAFT
THIS DOCUMENT IS RELEASED
FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERIM
REVIEW UNDER THE AUTHORI-
TY OF SCOTT COLE, P.E., TEX-
AS NO. 98813 ON OCTOBER 11,
2011. IT IS NOT TO BE USED
FOR CONSTRUCTION, BIDDING
OR PERMIT PURPOSES.
FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC.
TEXAS REGISTERED ENGI-
NEERING FIRM F- 2144
DRAFT
THIS DOCUMENT IS RELEASED
FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERIM
REVIEW UNDER THE AUTHORI-
TY OF MELISSA BRUNGER, P.E.,
TEXAS NO. 106372 ON OCTOBER
11, 2011. IT IS NOT TO BE USED
FOR CONSTRUCTION, BIDDING
OR PERMIT PURPOSES.
FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC.
TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEER-
ING FIRM F- 2144
Town of Prosper
121 W. Broadway
Prosper, TX 75078
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
4055 International Plaza, Suite 200
Fort Worth, Texas 76109
(817) 735-7300
&
Kimley– Horn and Associates, Inc.
801 Cherry St. Suite 950
Fort Worth, Tx 76102
817-339-2254
DRAFT
THIS DOCUMENT IS RELEASED
FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERIM
REVIEW UNDER THE AUTHORITY
OF JEFFREY WHITACRE, P.E.,
TEXAS NO. 102469 ON OCTOBER
11, 2011. IT IS NOT TO BE USED
FOR CONSTRUCTION, BIDDING
OR PERMIT PURPOSES.
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCI-
ATES, INC.
TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEER-
ING FIRM F– 928
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... ES‐1
1.0 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 1‐1
2.0 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS.................................................................................................... 2‐1
2.1 Service Area ............................................................................................................... 2‐1
2.2 Historical Population ................................................................................................. 2‐1
2.3 Projected Population ................................................................................................. 2‐2
2.4 Land Use .................................................................................................................... 2‐5
3.0 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS ................................................ 3‐1
3.1 Water and Wastewater Load Projections ................................................................. 3‐1
3.2 Design Criteria ........................................................................................................... 3‐3
3.2.1 Water Design Criteria ......................................................................................... 3‐3
3.2.2 Wastewater Design Criteria ............................................................................... 3‐7
3.3 Water and Wastewater System Improvements ........................................................ 3‐7
3.4 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Analysis .......................................................... 3‐11
3.4.1 Eligible CIP Costs............................................................................................... 3‐11
3.4.2 Service Units ..................................................................................................... 3‐16
3.4.3 Maximum Impact Fee Calculations .................................................................. 3‐19
4.0 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS .................................................................................. 4‐1
4.1 Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Inputs ................................................................... 4‐3
4.1.1 Land Use Assumptions ....................................................................................... 4‐3
4.1.2 Capital Improvements Plan ................................................................................ 4‐4
4.2 Methodology For Roadway Impact Fees ................................................................... 4‐8
4.2.1 Service Area ........................................................................................................ 4‐8
4.2.2 Service Units ....................................................................................................... 4‐8
4.2.3 Cost Per Service Unit ........................................................................................ 4‐10
4.2.4 Cost of the CIP .................................................................................................. 4‐10
4.2.5 Service Unit Calculation ................................................................................... 4‐14
4.3 Impact Fee Calculation ............................................................................................ 4‐20
4.3.1 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee Per Service Unit .......................... 4‐20
4.3.2 Plan For Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit ........................................ 4‐22
4.3.3 Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development .............................................. 4‐24
4.4 Sample Calculations ................................................................................................. 4‐27
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
ii
4.5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 4‐29
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1‐1 Abbreviations ......................................................................................................... 1‐2
Table 2‐1 Historical Population .............................................................................................. 2‐2
Table 2‐2 Water Service Population Projections ................................................................... 2‐3
Table 2‐3 Wastewater Service Population Projections ......................................................... 2‐3
Table 2‐4 Developed Non‐residential Acreage with Water Service ...................................... 2‐5
Table 2‐5 Developed Non‐residential Acreage with Wastewater Service ............................ 2‐5
Table 3‐1 Historical Water Demands ..................................................................................... 3‐2
Table 3‐2 Projected Water Demands ..................................................................................... 3‐2
Table 3‐3 Projected Wastewater Flows ................................................................................. 3‐3
Table 3‐4 Short‐Term Water Project Schedule ...................................................................... 3‐8
Table 3‐5 Water System Impact Fee Eligible Project Summary .......................................... 3‐12
Table 3‐6 Wastewater System Impact Fee Eligible Project Summary ................................. 3‐13
Table 3‐7 Service Unit Equivalencies ................................................................................... 3‐17
Table 3‐8 Water Service Units ............................................................................................. 3‐17
Table 3‐9 Wastewater Service Units .................................................................................... 3‐18
Table 3‐10 Maximum Allowable Impact Fees by Meter Size ................................................. 3‐21
Table 4‐1 Land Use Assumptions for Roadway Impact Fees ................................................. 4‐3
Table 4‐2 10‐Year Capital Improvements Plan for Roadway Impact Fees – Service Area 1 . 4‐5
Table 4‐3 10‐Year Capital Improvements Plan for Roadway Impact Fees – Service Area 2 . 4‐6
Table 4‐4 Level of Use for Proposed Facilities (used in Appendix D – CIP Service Units of
Supply) ................................................................................................................... 4‐9
Table 4‐5 Level of Use for Existing Facilities (used in Appendix E – Existing Roadway Facilities
Inventory) .............................................................................................................. 4‐9
Table 4‐6 10‐Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual
Level Cost Projections – Service Area 1 ............................................................... 4‐13
Table 4‐7 10‐Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual
Level Cost Opinions – Service Area 2 .................................................................. 4‐14
Table 4‐8 Transportation Demand Factor Calculations ....................................................... 4‐18
Table 4‐9 10 Year Growth Projections ................................................................................. 4‐19
Table 4‐10 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee ........................................................ 4‐23
Table 4‐11 Land Use / Vehicle‐Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET) ........................................ 4‐26
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2‐1 Population by Planning Area .................................................................................. 2‐4
Figure 2‐2 Non‐residential Acreage by Planning Area ............................................................ 2‐6
Figure 3‐1 Recommended Ground Storage Capacity .............................................................. 3‐4
Figure 3‐2 Recommended UPP Firm Pumping Capacity ......................................................... 3‐5
Figure 3‐3 Recommended LPP Firm Pumping Capacity .......................................................... 3‐5
Figure 3‐4 Recommended UPP Elevated Storage Capacity .................................................... 3‐6
Figure 3‐5 Recommended LPP Elevated Storage Capacity ..................................................... 3‐6
Figure 3‐6 Buildout Water System Capital Improvement Projects ......................................... 3‐9
Figure 3‐7 Buildout Wastewater System Capital Improvement Projects ............................. 3‐10
Figure 3‐8 Water System Impact Fee Capital Improvements ............................................... 3‐14
Figure 3‐9 Wastewater System Impact Fee Capital Improvements ..................................... 3‐15
Figure 3‐10 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee per Service Unit Comparison ..................... 3‐22
Figure 3‐11 Water, Wastewater, and Roadway Impact Fee per Single Family Home
Comparison ......................................................................................................... 3‐23
Figure 4‐1 CIP for Roadway Impact Fees ................................................................................ 4‐7
Figure 4‐2 Roadway Impact Fee per Single Family Home Comparison ................................ 4‐30
APPENDICES
Appendix A Water System Project Cost Estimates
Appendix B Wastewater System Project Cost Estimates
Appendix C Roadway Project Cost Estimates
Appendix D CIP Service Units of Supply
Appendix E Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
ES-1
ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to address the methodology used in the development
and calculation of water, wastewater, and roadway impact fees for the Town of
Prosper. The methodology used herein satisfies the requirements of the Texas Local
Government Code Section 395 for the establishment of impact fees. Texas Local
Government Code Section 395 requires an impact fee analysis before impact fees
are set. Section 395 requires that land use assumptions and capital improvement
plans be updated at least every five years, and the Town of Prosper last performed
an impact fee analysis in 2006.
Maximum Allowable Water Impact Fee
The cost of water capital improvements to serve development projected to occur
between 2011 and 2021 is $36,628,920. A 4.0% interest rate was used to calculate
financing costs. The increase in the number of service units due to growth over the
next ten years is projected as 6,258 service units. The maximum allowable water
impact fee with the credit is $3,900 per service unit. The maximum allowable water
impact fee calculation is summarized as follows:
Total Capital Improvement Costs $36,628,995
Financing Costs $12,183,954
Total Eligible Costs $48,812,949
Growth in Service Units 6,258
Maximum Water Impact Fee = Total Eligible Costs/Growth in Service Units
= $48,812,949/6,258
= $7,800 per Service Unit
Maximum Allowable Water Impact Fee = Maximum Impact Fee – Credit (50%)
= $7,800 ‐ $3,900
= $3,900 per Service Unit
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
ES-2
Maximum Allowable Wastewater Impact Fee
The cost of wastewater system capital improvements to serve development
projected to occur between 2011 and 2021 is $6,414,802. A 4.0% interest rate was
used to calculate financing costs. The increase in the number of service units due to
growth over the next ten years is projected as 6,258 service units. The maximum
allowable wastewater impact fee with the credit is $683 per service unit. The
maximum allowable wastewater impact fee calculation is summarized as follows:
Total Capital Improvement Costs $6,414,802
Financing Costs $2,133,764
Total Eligible Costs $8,548,566
Growth in Service Units 6,258
Maximum Wastewater Impact Fee = Total Eligible Costs/Growth in Service Units
= $8,548,566/6,258
= $1,366 per Service Unit
Maximum Allowable Wastewater Impact Fee = Maximum Impact Fee – Credit (50%)
= $1,366 ‐ $683
= $683 per Service Unit
Maximum Allowable Roadway Impact Fee
The total cost of roadway capital improvements to serve the development projected
to occur between 2011 and 2021 is $45,204,369 in Service Area 1 and $42,981,638
in Service Area 2. The increase in the number of service units due to growth over
the next ten year period is 35,143 vehicle‐miles in Service Area 1 and 43,610 vehicle‐
miles in Service Area 2. The maximum allowable roadway impact fee with the credit
is $856 per service unit in Service Area 1 and $615 per service unit in Service Area 2.
The maximum allowable roadway impact fee calculation for each service area is
summarized as follows:
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
ES-3
Service Area 1: West of Railroad Tracks
Total Capital Improvement Costs $45,204,369
Financing Costs $15,034,973
Total Capital Improvement and Financing Costs $60,239,342
Existing Impact Fee Account Balance $52,000
Total Eligible Costs $60,187,342
Growth in Service Units 35,143
(veh‐mil)
Maximum Roadway Impact Fee = Total Eligible Costs/Growth in Service Units
= $60,187,342/35,143
= $1,713 per Service Unit
Maximum Allowable Roadway Impact Fee = Maximum Impact Fee – Credit (50%)
= $1,713 ‐ $856
= $856 per Service Unit
Service Area 2: East of Railroad Tracks
Total Capital Improvement Costs $42,981,638
Financing Costs $14,295,693
Total Capital Improvement and Financing Costs $60,239,342
Existing Impact Fee Account Balance $3,618,000
Total Eligible Costs $57,277,331
Growth in Service Units 43,610
(veh‐mil)
Maximum Roadway Impact Fee = Total Eligible Costs/Growth in Service Units
= $57,277,331/43,610
= $1,230 per Service Unit
Maximum Allowable Roadway Impact Fee = Maximum Impact Fee – Credit (50%)
= $1,230 ‐ $615
= $615 per Service Unit
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
1-1
1.0 BACKGROUND
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires an impact fee analysis
before impact fees can be created and assessed. Chapter 395 defines an impact fee
as “a charge or assessment imposed by a political subdivision against new
development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of
capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the
new development.” In September 2001, Senate Bill 243 amended Chapter 395 thus
creating the current procedure for implementing impact fees. Chapter 395 identifies
the following items as impact fee eligible costs:
Construction contract price
Surveying and engineering fees
Land acquisition costs
Fees paid to the consultant preparing or updating the capital improvements plan
(CIP)
Projected interest charges and other finance costs for projects identified in the
CIP
Chapter 395 also identifies items that impact fees cannot used to pay for, such as:
Construction, acquisition, or expansion of public facilities or assets other than
those identified on the capital improvements plan
Repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements
Upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to
serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency,
environmental, or regulatory standards
Upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to
provide better service to existing development
Administrative and operating costs of the political subdivision
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
1-2
Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other
indebtedness, except as allowed above
In January 2011, the Town of Prosper authorized Freese and Nichols, Inc. (FNI) to
perform an impact fee analysis on the City’s water and wastewater systems and
Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) to perform a roadway system impact fee
analysis. The purpose of this report is to address the methodology used in the
development and calculation of water, wastewater, and roadway impact fees for the
Town of Prosper. The methodology used herein satisfies the requirements of the
Texas Local Government Code Section 395 for the establishment of water and
wastewater impact fees.
The following table provides a list of abbreviations used in this report.
Table 1‐1 Abbreviations
Abbreviation Full Nomenclature
CIP Capital Improvements Plan
ETJ Extra‐territorial Jurisdiction
gpcd Gallons Per Capita Day
FNI Freese and Nichols, Inc.
KHA Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc.
MGD Million Gallons per Day
NCTCOG North Central Texas Council of Government
UTRWD Upper Trinity Regional Water District
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
2‐1
2.0 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
Population and land use are important elements in the analysis of water and
wastewater systems. Water demands and wastewater flows depend on the residential
population and commercial development served by the systems and determines the
sizing and location of system infrastructure. Residential population and commercial
development projections are also required to size roadway facilities in terms of number
of dwelling units and employment. Land use assumptions for the purpose of roadway
impact fees can be found in Section 4.1.1. A thorough analysis of historical and
projected populations, along with land use, provides the basis for projecting future
water demands and wastewater flows.
2.1 Service Area
The service area for Town of Prosper’s water and wastewater systems is defined as the
Town limits and the existing extra‐territorial jurisdiction (ETJ). The current boundary of
the service area encompasses the entire Town limits. The area within the Town limits
and west of the BNSF railroad is largely undeveloped at this time. Figures 2‐1 and 2‐2
illustrate the water and wastewater service area. For the purpose of calculating
roadway impact fees, the Town of Prosper was divided into two service areas with the
BNSF railroad being the divider. Figure 4‐1 illustrates the two roadway service areas.
2.2 Historical Population
The Town of Prosper provided yearly population data from 2000 through 2010. The data
indicated an average growth rate of 16.5% annual growth over the last 10 years. Table
2‐1 presents the historical populations for the Town of Prosper.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
2‐2
Table 2‐1 Historical Population
Year Population Population Growth Growth Rate
2000 2,100 ‐ ‐
2001 2,250 150 7.1%
2002 2,400 150 6.7%
2003 2,700 300 12.5%
2004 3,100 400 14.8%
2005 4,100 1,000 32.3%
2006 5,250 1,150 28.0%
2007 6,050 800 15.2%
2008 6,350 300 5.0%
2009 7,100 750 11.8%
2010 9,350 2,250 31.7%
Average ‐ 725 16.5%
2.3 Projected Population
Population projections were developed based on data provided by the Town of
Prosper’s Development Services Department. Information on several planned
developments obtained from the Town Development Services Department was
reviewed. Known developments include Three Stones, Legacy Pointe, and Lakes of
Prosper. A large portion of the projected growth is expected to take place in the largely
undeveloped area west of the BNSF railroad. Several large developments such as the
Three Stones development have been planned west of the BNSF railroad. The Town’s
Development Services Department expects this area to begin developing rapidly within
the next 5 to 10 years. The area east of the BNSF railroad within the Town limits will
continue to experience steady population growth as it is currently not completely built
out. Table 2‐2 and Table 2‐3 present the population projections for the Town of
Prosper water and wastewater service areas, respectively. Since a portion of the
population is currently served by septic systems, the wastewater population served is
smaller in 2011 and 2021. There is a CIP project after 2021 to convert the existing
services on septic to the Prosper wastewater system. Figure 2‐1 shows the population
projections by planning area.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
2‐3
Table 2‐2 Water Service Population Projections
Year Population
Average Annual
Population
Growth
Average Annual
Growth Rate
2011 10,700 ‐ ‐
2021 28,835 1,814 10.4%
Buildout 89,000 2,735 5.3%
Table 2‐3 Wastewater Service Population Projections
Year Population
Average Annual
Population
Growth
Average Annual
Growth Rate
2011 8,560 ‐ ‐
2021 26,695 1,814 12.1%
Buildout 89,000 2,832 5.6%
D e n t o n C o u n t y
D e n t o n C o u n t y
09009000
63000
64000
27000
08000
4912025006000
70504700700
3438112002500
30006500
16000
6069612001400
557820004000
7203003900
58004000
747815004350
59153923002800
65000
7103003200
6635110001000
7553715722800
28040504050
6730310002000
13000
7697512001200
2903002000
062852850
10246300382
5378915001700
213403400
36000
61001500 68171400600
25000
3104201500
113400800
37000
07000
15000
35000
52564700700
17000
19001500
05000
02000
56402500500
036250500
4600600044000
04000
41000
260001200300
62003500
39000
48001500
01000
47000
73001200
51001200
42000
50000
22372560560
33000
1417621860186045001600
32000
18000
57000
43000
69000
40000
38000
24909090
23108108108
54000
16000
Doe BranchPanther Cre
e
kWil
s
o
n Cre
ekG
entle Creek
Parvin B ranch
Rutherford BranchS tream
Pond
Rowl
e
tt Cr
e
e
kStreamRutherfo rd Bran c h
Parvin Branch Stream
D o e BranchStreamParvin Branch
Gentle
C
r
e
e
k
Stream
StreamParv in BranchStreamStreamLEGEND
Road
Railroad
Stream
Lake
Parcel
Planning Area Boundary
Water/Wastewater Service Area
Town Limits
ETJ Boundary
County Boundary
DRAFT FIGURE 2-1TOWN OF PROSPERLAND USE ASSUMPTIONSPOPULATION BY PLANNING AREAS
Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Job No.: PRP11118
Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\DELIVERABLES\02_Future_LandUse_Population_Projections\(Figure_2-1)_Population_by_Planning_Areas.mxd
Updated: Monday, August 22, 2011
0 1,500 3,000
SCALE IN FEET
I
AREA ID2011 Population2021 PopulationBuildout Population
FUTURE LAND USE
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mixed Use
Commercial
Public
Industrial
Green Space/Flood Zones
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
2‐5
2.4 Land Use
The Town provided land use shapefiles, which included the current zoning and future
land use type. In order to capture growth related to commercial, retail, office,
institutional, and industrial development, a non‐residential acreage for each planning
period was developed. The existing zoning data was used to calculate the 2011 non‐
residential acreage and the future land use data was used to calculate the Buildout non‐
residential acreage. The non‐residential acreage for 2021 was developed based on the
assumption that non‐residential development would occur in a manner that is
proportional to growth in population. Table 2‐4 shows the developed non‐residential
acreage with water service, and Table 2‐5 displays the developed non‐residential
acreage with wastewater service. Figure 2‐2 presents the developed non‐residential
acreage by planning year.
Table 2‐4 Developed Non‐residential Acreage with Water Service
Year Acres
Growth in
Acres
2011 514 ‐
2021 1,330 816
Buildout 4,726 3,396
Table 2‐5 Developed Non‐residential Acreage with Wastewater Service
Year Acres
Growth in
Acres
2011 411 ‐
2021 1,227 816
Buildout 4,726 3,499
D e n t o n C o u n t y
D e n t o n C o u n t y
090 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
490 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
340 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
300 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
600 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
550 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
720 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
580 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
700 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
740 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
590 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
710 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
630 Ac.120 Ac.592 Ac.
660 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
6460 Ac.110 Ac.565 Ac.
750 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
270 Ac.60 Ac.495 Ac.
280 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.080 Ac.80 Ac.470 Ac.
670 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
160 Ac.70 Ac.407 Ac.
760 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
290 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
655 Ac.45 Ac.305 Ac.
530 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
610 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
100 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
310 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.0630 Ac.70 Ac.184 Ac.
1310 Ac.50 Ac.195 Ac.
680 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
110 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
2130 Ac.50 Ac.157 Ac.
190 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
520 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
360 Ac.30 Ac.129 Ac.
2530 Ac.50 Ac.113 Ac.
070 Ac.40 Ac.98 Ac.37103 Ac.103 Ac.103 Ac.
150 Ac.35 Ac.87 Ac.
3540 Ac.50 Ac.85 Ac.
460 Ac.15 Ac.41 Ac.
030 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
1750 Ac.60 Ac.75 Ac.
050 Ac.30 Ac.71 Ac.
020 Ac.0 Ac.69 Ac.
440 Ac.12 Ac.56 Ac.
620 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
480 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
120 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
0425 Ac.30 Ac.45 Ac.
4143 Ac.43 Ac.43 Ac.
260 Ac.20 Ac.36 Ac.
730 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
510 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
3915 Ac.20 Ac.29 Ac.
010 Ac.0 Ac.27 Ac.
470 Ac.0 Ac.25 Ac.Doe BranchPanther Cre
e
kWil
s
o
n Cre
ekG
entle Creek
Parvin B r anch
Rutherford BranchS tream
Pond
Rowl
e
tt Cr
e
e
kStreamRutherfo rd Branc h
Parvin Branch Stream
D o e BranchStreamParvin Branch
Gentle
C
r
e
e
k
Stream
StreamParv in BranchStreamStream220 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
560 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
140 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.450 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
330 Ac.0 Ac.43 Ac.
320 Ac.0 Ac.26 Ac.
1820 Ac.26 Ac.26 Ac.
5722 Ac.22 Ac.22 Ac.
436 Ac.21 Ac.21 Ac.
699 Ac.12 Ac.18 Ac.
400 Ac.17 Ac.17 Ac.
240 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
230 Ac.0 Ac.0 Ac.
3810 Ac.16 Ac.16 Ac.
426 Ac.10 Ac.16 Ac.
500 Ac.5 Ac.12 Ac.
540 Ac.8 Ac.8 Ac.
160 Ac.70 Ac.407 Ac.
LEGEND
Road
Railroad
Stream
Lake
Parcel
Planning Area Boundary
Water/Wastewater Service Area
Town Limits
ETJ Boundary
County Boundary
DRAFT FIGURE 2-2TOWN OF PROSPERLAND USE ASSUMPTIONSNON-RESIDENTIAL ACREAGEBY PLANNING AREAS
Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Job No.: PRP11118
Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\DELIVERABLES\02_Future_LandUse_Population_Projections\(Figure_2-2)_Non-Residential_Ac_by_Planning_Areas.mxd
Updated: Monday, August 22, 2011
0 1,500 3,000
SCALE IN FEET
I
AREA ID2011 Non-Residential Acres2021 Non-Residential AcresBuildout Non-Residential Acres
FUTURE LAND USE
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mixed Use
Commercial
Public
Industrial
Green Space/Flood Zones
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐1
3.0 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
A capital improvements plan (CIP) was developed for the Town of Prosper to ensure
quality water and wastewater service that supports residential and commercial
development. The recommended improvements will provide the required capacity and
reliability to meet projected water demands and wastewater flows through Buildout.
The water and wastewater projects required to meet growth in the 10‐year period were
used in the impact fee analysis.
3.1 Water and Wastewater Load Projections
The population and land use data was used to develop future water demands and
wastewater flows based on a projected average day per capita use and peaking factors.
The design criteria used to project water demands and wastewater flows was developed
based on recent historical data and the Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement
Plan performed by FNI in 2006. In the future, it is anticipated that per capita and non‐
residential per acre usage will increase based on the large number of irrigation systems
being installed with new development and the type of commercial and industrial
developments being proposed, but the large increase in residential irrigation systems is
expected to offset conservation measures in place for the future. Therefore, for
planning purposes, the residential per capita used for projections is assumed to be
constant in the future.
Historical water demands from 2008 through 2010 were provided to FNI by the Town
for the development of projected water usage rates and peaking factors. Table 3‐1
illustrates the average and maximum day water demands for these years. The projected
residential per capita usage rate is 210 gpcd, and the projected non‐residential usage
rates are 500 gallons per acre per day (gpad) for 2011, 550 gpad for 2021, and 600 gpad
for Buildout conditions. The residential maximum day to average day peaking factor is
3.5 for 2011, 3.0 for 2021, and 2.5 for Buildout conditions, and residential peak hour to
maximum day peaking factor is 2.0 for all planning scenarios. Based on the type of non‐
residential development planned within the Town, a maximum day to average day
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐2
peaking factor of 2.0 and a peak hour to maximum day peaking factor of 1.5 were used.
Table 3‐2 presents the projected water demands.
Table 3‐1 Historical Water Demands
Year Population
Average Day
Demand
(mgd)
Average Day
Overall Per
Capita (gpcd)
Maximum
Day Demand
(mgd)
Maximum
Day/Average Day
Peaking Factor
2008 6,350 1.6 252 5.8 3.6
2009 7,100 1.7* 239 5.3 3.1
2010 9,350 1.9* 203 6.4 3.4
*Estimated
Table 3‐2 Projected Water Demands
Year
Average Day
Demand (mgd)
Maximum Day
Demand (mgd)
Peak Hour
Demand (mgd)
2011 2.50 8.38 16.50
2021 6.79 19.63 38.53
Buildout 21.53 52.40 101.96
The projected wastewater residential per capita usage rate is 105 gpcd for all planning
periods. The projected wastewater non‐residential usage rates are 325 gpad for 2011,
358 gpad for 2021, and 390 gpad for Buildout conditions. These wastewater usage rates
represent a percentage of the water demand that is captured by the wastewater
collection system for each planning period. The wastewater usage rate is 50% of the
water usage rate for the residential per capita and 65% of the usage rate for non‐
residential usage. Historical wastewater flow data was used in the development of the
wastewater residential and non‐residential usage rates. The peak wet weather peaking
factor for all planning periods is 4.0. The average day flows for all the planning scenarios
was multiplied by this factor to calculate the peak wet weather flows. Table 3‐3
presents the projected wastewater flows for the Town of Prosper.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐3
Table 3‐3 Projected Wastewater Flows
Year
Average Dry
Weather Flow
(mgd)
Peak Wet
Weather Flow
(mgd)
2011 1.03 4.13
2021 3.24 12.97
Buildout 11.19 44.75
3.2 Design Criteria
Freese and Nichols, Inc. worked with the Town of Prosper to establish design criteria for
future water and wastewater facilities. Criteria were developed for sizing water
transmission lines, elevated storage tanks, ground storage tanks and pump stations for
the water system and for sizing sewer trunk lines for the wastewater system.
3.2.1 Water Design Criteria
Hydraulic analysis was performed for the existing and future systems for four operating
conditions: average day, maximum day, peak hour, and maximum day with fire flow.
The water system model developed for the Water and Wastewater Capital
Improvement Plan in 2006 was updated to include recently constructed water lines,
facilities, and changes in system operations. The TCEQ required minimum pressure
within a distribution system is 35 psi under normal operating conditions. Headloss and
velocity in the pipelines are additional criteria used to analyze the water system.
Typically, headlosses in water lines should not exceed 4 feet/1000 feet, and velocities
should not exceed 7 feet/second.
Freese and Nichols, Inc. developed criteria for sizing of storage and pumping capacity for
the Town. These criteria are typically more stringent than TCEQ requirements and take
into consideration many additional factors including operational flexibility, fire
protection, and energy efficiency. The design criteria recommended to size ground
storage tank capacity is to provide adequate storage volume to meet 8 hours of
maximum day demand. Figure 3‐1 summarizes the recommended ground storage
capacity and associated improvements based on the design criteria.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐4
The design criteria recommended for pump station capacity is providing a firm pumping
capacity to meet 65% of the peak hour demand. The firm pumping capacity is defined as
the total available pumping capacity with the largest pump out of service to each
pressure plane. Figures 3‐2 and 3‐3 display the recommended firm pumping capacity to
the Upper and Lower Pressure Planes, respectively. The design criteria recommended
for elevated storage capacity is twice the required volume needed to meet 35% of the
peak hour demand for a duration of 3 hours. Figures 3‐4 and 3‐5 display the
recommended elevated storage capacity and related improvements based on the design
criteria.
Figure 3‐1 Recommended Ground Storage Capacity
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐5
Figure 3‐2 Recommended UPP Firm Pumping Capacity
Figure 3‐3 Recommended LPP Firm Pumping Capacity
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐6
Figure 3‐4 Recommended UPP Elevated Storage Capacity
Figure 3‐5 Recommended LPP Elevated Storage Capacity
*Assume excess capacity in the Upper Pressure Plane can be used in the Lower Pressure Plane
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐7
3.2.2 Wastewater Design Criteria
The design criteria for sewer trunk lines or interceptors is based on the TCEQ
requirements that meet peak wet weather design flows with no surcharging while
maintaining a minimum of 2 feet/second cleaning velocity and a maximum of 8
feet/second velocity.
3.3 Water and Wastewater System Improvements
Proposed water and wastewater system projects to serve the system through Buildout
were developed as part of this project based on load projections and design criteria.
The proposed water system improvements recommended to serve the Town through
Buildout water system are shown on Figure 3‐6. Proposed wastewater system
improvements to serve the Town through Buildout are shown on Figure 3‐7. Detailed
cost estimates for the proposed water and wastewater system projects are included in
Appendix A and Appendix B, respectively. Table 3‐4 displays a more detailed schedule
for short‐term water projects that are not dependent on development in the Lower
Pressure Plane. This table includes month to begin design, construction and project in‐
service month for the Upper Pressure Plane PS expansion to 20 MGD, additional 5 MG
GST, Prosper Trail EST, and 30”/24” water line to provide system redundancy and fill the
proposed Prosper Trail EST.
The water capital improvements plan was developed based on the assumption that the
Town of Prosper will receive all water in the future from North Texas Municipal Water
District at the existing delivery point. Upper Trinity Regional Water District (UTRWD) is
another regional water provider that could potentially serve water to the Town. If
Prosper receives water from UTRWD on the west side of the Town, the 42” Lower
Pressure Plane water line will not be needed and sizing of water lines in the Lower
Pressure Plane may change. It is recommended that the proposed water improvements
be evaluated if the Town of Prosper contracts with UTRWD to receive treated water.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐8
Table 3‐4 Short‐Term Water Project Schedule
Project Description
Begin
Design
Begin
Construction
Project In‐
Service
Expand UPP PS to 20
MGD and Add 5 MG GST
October
2011 June 2012 May 2013
30”/24” Water Line from
UPP PS
October
2011
September
2012 May 2013
Prosper Trail EST June 2013 March 2014 May 2015
C o l l i n C o u n t y
C o l l i n C o u n t y
(
((#
##U
U UT
T T
(#UT
[ÚUT
!A!A!AProposed 2.5 MGFM 1385 EST (2030)Overflow Elev.: 785 ft
Proposed 2.5 MGCounty Line EST (2021)Overflow Elev.: 785 ft
NTMWDDelivery Point
2.0 MGPreston Rd. EST
Overflow Elev.: 926 ft
Proposed 2.0 MGProsper Trail EST (2015)
Overflow Elev.: 926 ft
(3(4
(4
(3(3
(5
(5
(19
(12
(11
(7
(7
(2
(2
(9
(9
(1B
(1B
(1B
(LPP)
(LPP)
(LPP)(LPP)(LPP)(10(10(10
(10
(6
(6
(17
(18
(16 (8
(18
(18
(14 (13
(13
(15
(15
(16
(16
(25
(28
(38
(29
(32
(26
(33
(33
(33
(23
(36
(30
(30
(34
(37 (22
(22
(27(34
(31
(17
(21
(20
12"
20"
42''16''30
'
'
20''
24''12''16''20''30''
42''16''42''
16''
20''42''20''20''16''42''
24''20''20''
20''16''16''
16''20''42''20''24''42''24''20''
30''12''24''20''12''
20''
24''
12''16''16''24''16''16''12''24''
42''
16''
16''20''16''20''16''20''
30''
20''
24''
16''16''20''20''16''
20''30''20''16''20''
24''8''30''
20''16''12''
30''
20''20''16''12''12''12''16''
30''
12''
20''16''20''16''20''30''
20''
30''
12''
30''20''20''
12''12''20''
12''
20''
16''16''30''
16''12''
30''30''
16''12''20''
12''20''30''30''
30''
36''16''12''
20''24''24''36''
12''12''16''
16''20''36''16''16''20''16''
12''16''12''16''20'
'12''12''16''16''16''20''
16''
12''16''20''
16''20''16''12''12''
16''16''24''12''12''12''1
2
'
'12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''
12''
12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12'
'12''12''12''12''12''12''12''8''
6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
6''8''
8''
8''8'
'
6''
8''8''8''8'
'6''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''
8''8'
'
8''
8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''6'
'
8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''6''
8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''6''6''8''
6''
8''
8'
'
8''
6''
8''8''
8''6''8''
6''
8''
8''
8''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''
8
'
'
8''
8''8''8'
'8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8'
'
8''
8''
6''
8''8''8''
8'
'8''8''8''8
'
'
8''
8''
8''6'
'
6''6''8''8''8''
8''6''8''6''
8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''6'
'6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''6''8''6''8''8''6''
6''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''
8''
8''8''6''
8''8'
'
8''8''8''8''6''6''8''8''8'
'
8''
6
'
'8''8''
6'
'
8''8''8''6''8''
6''8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8''
8''
8''8''6''8''
8''
8''
6''6''6''
8''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8''
8''
2''
6''4''1.5''4''
6''6''6''
2''6''6''6''6''6''1.5''2''CR 25FM 1385E FIR ST S TCR 6W UNIVERSITY DR
FISHTRAP RD
PARVIN RD CR 51CR 83
E UNIVERSITY DR N CUSTER RDCR 84
W FIRST STSMILEY RDFM 2478CR 26
E FRONTIER PKWY
FM 423SH 289CAREY RD
PROSPER RD
COIT RDN DALLAS PKWYCR 933
DOE CREEK RDDALLAS PKWYGOOD HOPE RDFM 428 WCR 50CR 124FM 1461S PRESTON RDCUSTER RDCR 123
HAWKINS LNBONAR RD
BYRAN RD CR 86E US 380
EUREKA LN
S COLEMAN STCR 970
BRISTOL DR
CR 857
CR 858ARTESIA BLVDCR 7
CR 85
6P RE S TO N H ILLS CIRPR 5155
GIBBS RD CR 854FALCON RDVIRGINIA PKWYCR 855M
AGNOLIA BLVD
E BROADWAY ST
CR 852
FIELDS RDCRUTCHFIELD DR
CR 853
BRINKMANN RANCH RD
TWIN LAKES DRRED BUD DRHARPE R RD PR 5156HER I T A G E TRL
BENBROOK BLVD
PANTHER CREEK RD
BE D FORD LNPR 5405
DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAYHIGHPOINT DR
V E RO NA DR
VIRGINIA HILLS DRCROSSLAKE CT
E SEVENTH ST
SEA PINES DROAK BEND TRLWH I T E R O C K B L V D
SHASTA DR
JULIETTE DR
PRESTONVIEW DR
Q U A IL HOLLO W
WARREN DR
NOLES RD
TWIN MALLETS LN
WENK CT
P R 5436W ATCH HILL LN
BRADFORD DR
EQUESTRIAN WAYCOUNTRY VIEW DR
NEWPORT LN
COASTAL DR
BROWNWOOD BLVDCR
8
6
0
OLD D AIRY FARM RD
PHANTOM LNLONG LEAF DRCARRIAGE LN SHARED DRIVEWAYS REDWOOD CIRHAVENBROOK LNPIEDMONT PL
YAK DR
ASCOT PL
GARDENIA BLVDCOVENTRY DR
FALCON CT
DOOLITTLE DRDERICK LNGOOD HOPE RDDALLAS PKWYCR 26 CR 50W UNIVERSITY DR6''8''
2''6''6''8''
8''
8''6''6''
8''
6''
6''6''6''6''2''6''
8''
6''6''6''8''
6''
2''2''
8''6''8''6''8''6''8'
'
6''6''6''6''6''8''6''
6''6''6''6''6''
6''6''8''
12''12''12''12''12''
12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''1
2
'
'
Doe Branch
Wi
l
son Cr
e
e
k
Panther Cree
kGentle Creek
Parvin BranchRutherford BranchLittle Elm Creek
StreamRo
wlett Cree
kMustang CreekParv in BranchGentle
C
r
e
e
k
Parvin B ranch
R u t h e rford B ra n c h
StreamParvin Branch Stream
LEGEND
!APressure Reducing Valve
(#UT 2011 - 2021
Elevated Storage Tank
(#UT 2022 - Buildout
Elevated Storage Tank
(#UT Existing
Elevated Storage Tank
UT
Existing
Ground Storage Tank
[Ú Existing Pump Station
2011 - 2021
Water Line Improvement
2022 - Buildout
Water Line Improvement
8" and Smaller Water Lines
10" and Larger Water Lines
Road
Railroad
Stream
Lake
Parcel
Town Limit
ETJ Boundary
County Boundary
Lower Pressure Plane
Upper Pressure Plane
DRAFT FIGURE 3-6TOWN OF PROSPERBUILDOUT WATER SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
September 14, 2011
0 1,750 3,500
SCALE IN FEET
I
Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Job No.: PRP11118
Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\DELIVERABLES\04_W_WW_Capital_Improvements_Revisions\(Figure_3-6)_Water_CIP_(2021_and_Buildout).mxd
Updated: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:12:49 AM
Expand UPP PS to 20 MGD and Add 5.0 MG GST
(2013)
Construct 10 MGD LPP Pump Station
(2018)
Expand UPP PS to 30 MGD, Add 5.0 MG GST
and Expand LPP to 25 MGD (2024)
Expand LPP PS to 40 MGD and Add 5.0 MG GST
(2034)
NTMWD Delivery Point Improvements
(10
(24
(35
(1A
V
V
V
V
V
V V
V
V
V
ä
ä
ä
ä
ä
ä ä
ä
ä
ä
UUPTWW)"C`
10''10''
10''
(27
(2
12''
WastewaterTreatment Plant(Abandoned)
La CimaLift StationCapacity: 3.0 MGD
La Cima # 2Decommission LS and FM
Steeple ChaseLift Station(Abandoned)
GreenspointDecommission LS and FM
Whispering FarmsDecommission LS and FM
Gentle CreekLift Station(Abandoned)
Decommission LS and FM
15"(3
(3
(4
(4(5
(5
(1(1
(1
(13
(1 (1
(12
(27(27
(27
(27
(27
(27
(1
(1
(9
(9
(11
(8(8
(22
(21
(21(21(21
(23
(18
(18
(17
(17
(16
(16
(26
(25
(24
(20
(19
(6 (10
(14
(7
(7(7
(8
(6
(15
(8
(15
(9
(9
(10
(14
(8
12
'
'
30''
15''10''18''24''27''21''18''10''10''18''10''
10''24''15
'
'21''10''
10''10''12''10''
24''
10''10''10''24''10''
18''
21''
10''
12''15'
'
24''10''10''10''
21''
10'
'15''27''10''10''21''
15''21''10'
'15''10''21''18''10''10''
18''10''10''24''10''10''
21''
10''
24''
1
0
'
'12''10''10''27''10''24''21''
18''
1
2
'
'
1
2
'
'10''24''
15''
24''21''21''24''
21''
10''
24''21''15''1
0
'
'
15''27''
15''
10''
10''
24''12''24''
10''
24''
24''
10''21''24''12''
18''27''15''12''
12''15''
1
2
'
'27''10''1
5
'
'27''1
0
'
'
18''18''
10''
15''
1
0
'
'
10''
1
0
'
'
10''
12''
24''
1
2
'
'10''1
0
'
'
10''
10''
10''10''15''10''10'
'27''12''
10''10'
'24''27''10''10
'
'
1
0
'
'
10''
21''
15''10''10
'
'
1
0
'
'24''10''10
'
'
24''24''27''24''27''10''12''
10''
10'' F.M27''30''24''21''12''12''12''21''21''24'
'24''21''12'' F.M.10'' F.M.6'
'
F
.
M
.12'' F.M.8'' F.M.10'' F.M.
4'' F.M.12'' F.M.10'' F.M.12''15''
10''21''12''10''12''12''15''12''10''10''12''10
'
'
10''12''10''10''15''10''
1
5
'
'
6''
8''4''
8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8'
'8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
6''
8''
8''8''8''8'
'
8''
8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''
8
'
'4''6''
8''
8''8''8''6''6''8''
8''
8''8''
8''8''8''8'
'
8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''
8''8''8''
8'
'6''8''8''8''
8''
6''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''
8'
'
4''
8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''
6''8''6''
8''8''8''
8''
8''
6''8''6''6''
8''8''8''6''8'
'
8''8''8''8''6''
8''
8''
8''8''8''
8'
'
8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''
6''
8''
8''8''8'
'
8''
8''
8''
6''
6''8''6''8''6''8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''
8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''8'
'8''8''
8''8''6''8''8''8
'
'
6''
8'
'
8''
8''
6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
6''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''
8''8'
'8''8''
8''
8''8''8
'
'
6''
6''8''8''8''8''
8'
'8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''8''
8''8''6''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''6''
8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''
S U B B A S I N 3
S U B B A S I N 3
S U B B A S I N 6
S U B B A S I N 6
S U B B A S I N 2
S U B B A S I N 2
S U B B A S I N 4
S U B B A S I N 4
S U B B A S I N 1
S U B B A S I N 1
S U B B A S I N 5
S U B B A S I N 58''6''
6''8''6''6''8''8''
8''
8''
6''
8''
8''8''6''6''
6''15''12''15''15''
15''
15''
Wilson Creek
Panther Cree
kDoe BranchGentle Creek
P arvin Branch
Rutherford BranchStreamLittle Elm Creek
Ro
wle
t
t
Cree
k
Pond
StreamParv in BranchP arvin Branch
StreamParvin Branch
Doe Branch
LEGEND
UUPTWW)Wastewater Treatment Plant
Vä Existing Lift Station
"C`NTMWD Meter
Existing 10" and Larger
Wastewater Line
Existing 8" and Smaller
Wastewater Line
Existing Force Main
2011- 2021 Wastewater Line
2022- Buildout Wastewater Line
UTRWD Wastewater Line
NTMWD Wastewater Line
Road
Railroad
Stream
Lake
Parcel
Town Limit
ETJ Boundary
County Boundary
DRAFT FIGURE 3-7TOWN OF PROSPERBUILDOUT WASTEWATER SYSTEMCAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
August 22, 2011
0 1,750 3,500
SCALE IN FEET
I MAJOR BASINS
Subbasin 1
Subbasin 2
Subbasin 3
Subbasin 4
Subbasin 5
Subbasin 6
Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Job No.: PRP11118
Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\DELIVERABLES\04_W_WW_Capital_Improvements_Revisions\(Figure_3-7)_Wastewater_CIP_(2021_and_Buildout).mxd
Updated: Friday, September 02, 2011 1:43:07 PM
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐11
3.4 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Analysis
The impact fee analysis involves determining the utilization of existing and proposed
projects required as defined by the capital improvement plan to serve new
development over the next 10‐year time period. For existing or proposed projects, the
impact fee is calculated as a percentage of the project cost, based upon the percentage
of the project’s capacity required to serve development projected to occur between
2011 and 2021. Capacity serving existing development and development projected for
more than 10 years in the future cannot be charged to impact fees.
3.4.1 Eligible CIP Costs
A summary of the costs for each of the projects required for the 10‐year growth period
used in the impact fee analysis for both the water and wastewater systems is shown in
Table 3‐5 and Table 3‐6. Costs listed for the existing projects are based on actual design
and construction costs provided by the Town. Table 3‐5 and Table 3‐6 show 2011
percent utilization as the portion of a project’s capacity required to serve existing
development. It is not included in the impact fee analysis. The 2021 percent utilization
is the portion of the project’s capacity that will be required to serve the Town of Prosper
in 2021. The 2011‐2021 percent utilization is the portion of the project’s capacity
required to serve development from 2011 to 2021. The water and wastewater hydraulic
models were used to assist in the calculation of project utilization percentages. The
portion of a project’s total cost that is used to serve development projected to occur
from 2011 through 2021 is calculated as the total actual cost multiplied by the 2011‐
2021 percent utilization. Only this portion of the cost is used in the impact fee analysis.
The proposed 10‐year water system impact fee CIP is shown on Figure 3‐8. Proposed
10‐year wastewater impact fee CIP is shown on Figure 3‐9.
Table 3-5Town of ProsperWater System Impact Fee Eligilble Project SummaryNo.Description of Project2011* 2021 2011‐2021Current Development10‐Year (2011‐2021)Beyond 2021A 7.35 MG Upper Pressure Plane Pump Station and 3 MG Ground Storage Tank at NTMWD Delivery Point 80% 100% 20%$5,600,241$4,480,193$1,120,048$0B20 ‐inch Waterline along Prosper Trail between Coit Rd and Custer Rd.36% 46% 10%$633,100$227,916$63,310$341,874C12 ‐inch Waterline along Custer Rd and Frontier Pkwy in the Upper Pressure Plane.87% 100% 13%$384,750$334,733$50,018$0D16 ‐inch Waterline along Coleman St and Frontier Pkwy to complete waterline loop.68% 89% 21%$639,010$434,527$134,192$70,291E20 ‐inch Waterline along First St from the Peston Rd EST to Coit Rd.75% 100% 25%$1,734,230$1,300,673$433,558$0F 2.0 MG Preston Rd Elevated Storage Tank at Preston Rd and First St.75% 100% 25%$3,030,125$2,272,594$757,531$0G20 ‐inch Waterline along Prosper Trail and Coit Rd in the Upper Pressure Plane.40% 90% 50%$242,085$96,834$121,042$24,208H30 ‐inch Waterline along University Dr from NTMWD Delivery Point to Preston Rd.45% 70% 25%$2,721,054$1,224,474$680,264$816,316IImpact Fee Study0% 100%100%$52,200$0$52,200$0$15,036,795 $10,371,943$3,412,162$1,252,6901A Expansion of Upper Pressure Plane Pump Station to 20 MGD and addition of 5 MG Ground Storage Tank.0% 100% 100%$6,249,600$0$6,249,600$01B 30‐inch Waterline along First Street from NTMWD Delivery Point and 24‐inch Waterline along Coit Road south of Prosper Trail.0% 63% 63%$4,333,700$0$2,730,231 $1,603,4692This project consists of two Pressure Reducing Valves and a segment of 12‐inch waterline to provide addition transfer points to the Lower Pressure Plane.65% 100% 35%$814,500$529,425$285,075.00$03 Transfer valve and 24‐inch and 20‐inch Waterline along University Drive from Preston Road west to Teel Parkway in the Lower Pressure Plane. 0% 95% 95%$5,165,700$0$4,907,415$258,285430‐inch and 20‐inch Waterline along Teel Parkway between University Drive and Fishtrap Road and a 16‐inch Waterline along University Drive between Fields Road and FM 423.0% 16% 16%$1,561,300$0$249,808 $1,311,492524‐inch Waterline along Fishtrap Road between Teel Parkway and Gee Road and a 16‐inch Waterline along Gee Road between Fishtrap Road and University Drive.0%30% 30%$1,696,700$0$509,010 $1,187,690624‐inch and 20‐inch Waterline along the Dallas Parkway between University Drive and First Street to complete water loop.0% 75% 75%$958,100$0$718,575$239,525720‐inch Waterline along First Street between the Dallas Parkway and Teel Parkway in the Lower Pressure Plane.0% 90% 90%$2,208,200$0$1,987,380$220,820816‐inch Waterline along First Street from proposed 30‐inch waterline (project 1B) to Whitley Place Drive.0% 25% 25%$1,177,400$0$294,350$883,050920‐inch Waterline along Prosper Trail from Preston Road to propsed 2.0 MG Prosper Trail Elevated Storage Tank.0% 62% 62%$4,671,800$0$2,896,516 $1,775,28410 10 MGD Pump Station and 42 ‐inch Waterline from NTMWD Delivery Point to the Dallas Parkway to serve Lower Pressure Plane.0% 29% 29%$17,087,700$0$4,955,433$12,132,2671120‐inch Waterline along the Dallas Parkway between First Street and Prosper Trail to serve Lower Pressure Plane.0% 65% 65%$838,700$0$545,155$293,54512 20‐inch Waterline along Prosper Trail from the Dallas Parkway and Legacy Drive to serve Lower Pressure Plane.0% 90% 90%$935,500$0$841,950$93,55013 20‐inch and 16‐inch Waterline along Legacy Drive between University Drive and Prosper Trail.0% 58% 58%$1,609,300$0$933,394$675,90614 24‐inch Waterline extension along Fishtrap Road between Gee Road and FM 1385 to meet future growth.0% 5% 5%$1,091,200$0$54,560 $1,036,64015 20‐inch Waterline along Preston Road between University Drive and First Street.0% 54% 54%$1,370,900$0$740,286$630,61416 16‐inch Waterline from the Preston Road Elevated Storage Tank along First Street and south to University Drive.0% 76% 76%$1,553,400$0$1,180,584$372,81617 16‐inch Waterline along McKinley Street from First Street to Prosper Trail in the Upper Pressure Plane.0% 75% 75%$1,343,400$0$1,007,550$335,8501812‐inch Waterline along Frontier Parkway and Dallas Parkway to complete looping in the Lower Pressure Plane.0% 30% 30%$1,325,200$0$397,560$927,640192.5 MG County Line Elevated Storage Tank near Prosper Trail and Legacy Drive to serve Lower Pressure Plane.0% 33%33%$5,249,700$0$1,732,401 $3,517,299$61,242,000 $529,425$33,216,833$27,495,742Total Capital Improvements Cost$76,278,795 $10,901,368 $36,628,995 $28,748,432* Utilization in 2011 on Proposed Projects indicates a portion of the project that will be used to address deficiencies within the existing system, and therefore are not eligible for impact fee cost recovery for future growth.Percent UtilizationPROPOSEDEXISTINGCosts Based on 2011 DollarsExisting Project Sub‐totalProposed Project Sub‐totalCapital Cost
Table 3-6Town of Prosper Wastewater System Impact Fee Eligible Project SummaryNo.Description of Project2011* 2021 2011‐2021Current Development10‐Year (2011‐2021) Beyond 2021A30‐inch, 27‐ inch, 24‐inch, 21‐inch, 12‐inch, and 10‐inch Interceptor along the BNSF railroad and north along Coleman Street to Victory Way in Sub Basin 4.16% 50% 34% $1,874,300$299,888 $637,262 $937,150B24‐inch and 12‐inch Interceptor in southeast Sub Basin 6 along Custer Road conveying flow to NTMWD Interceptor.1% 50% 49%$1,138,683$11,387$557,955 $569,341CImpact Fee Study0% 100% 100%$52,200$0$52,200$0$3,065,183 $311,275 $1,247,417 $1,506,491124‐inch, 21‐inch, and 15‐inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 6 to decommission Whispering Farms and La Cima #2 Lift Stations then convey flows to NTMWD Interceptor.16% 65% 49% $2,429,000$388,640 $1,190,210 $850,150210‐inch Force Main and 12‐inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 6 to convey flow from La Cima L.S. to Sub Basin 6 and decommision Greenspoint lift Station.33% 57% 24%$997,900$329,307 $239,496$429,097315‐inch, 12‐inch, and 10‐inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 4 north of Prosper Trail connecting to existing 21‐inch at Victory Way and Frontier Parkway.0% 25% 25%$943,100$0 $235,775 $707,325415‐inch and 10‐inch Interceptor in southeastern portion of Sub Basin 6 along Rutherford Branch Creek near CR 933.0% 30% 30%$646,500$0$193,950$452,550510‐inch Interceptor in southeastern portion of Sub Basin 6 along Rutherford Branch Creek west of CR 933.0% 37% 37%$697,600$0 $258,112 $439,488627‐inch and 24‐inch Interceptor north of University Drive in Sub Basin 3 from UTRWD Interceptor east to Teel Parkway.0% 21% 21%$2,121,600$0$445,536 $1,676,064742‐inch, 30‐inch, 27‐inch, 24‐inch, and 10‐inch Interceptor along Doe Branch Creek and Fishtrap Road to Teel Parkway in Sub Basin 3 to convey flow to UTRWD Interceptor.6% 20% 14% $2,156,900$129,414 $301,966 $1,725,520824‐inch, 21‐inch, and 10‐inch Interceptor along Doe Branch Creek near Fishtrap Road and Legacy Drive in Sub Basin 3 to convey flow to UTRWD.14% 40% 26% $2,809,900$393,386$730,574$1,685,940921‐inch, 18‐inch, 12‐inch, and 10‐inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 3 north of First Street to decommission WWTP and Private Lift Station then convey flows to UTRWD.17% 46% 29% $2,248,300$382,211 $652,007 $1,214,0821021‐inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 3 north of University Drive and west of Teel Parkway to convey flow UTRMWD.0% 10% 10%$1,705,600$0$170,560 $1,535,0401110‐inch Interceptor northwest of First Street and Legacy Drive in the eastern portion of Sub Basin 3.0% 10% 10%$203,000$0$20,300 $182,7001210‐inch Interceptor north of First Street in Sub Basin 6 to convey flow due to growth.0% 73% 73%$329,300$0 $240,389$88,9111310‐inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 6 from First Street to proposed 21‐inch Interceptor (project 1) . 0%65% 65%$235,200$0 $152,880$82,3201418‐inch and 15‐inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 3 from BNSF railroad to University Drive west of Dallas Parkway.0% 15% 15% $1,392,200$0 $208,830 $1,183,3701512‐inch and 10‐inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 4 north of University Drive between the BNSF railroad and Preston Road.0%10%10%$1,268,000$0 $126,800 $1,141,200$20,184,100$1,622,958$5,167,385 $13,393,757Total Capital Improvements Cost$23,249,283 $1,934,233 $6,414,802 $14,900,248* Utilization in 2011 on Proposed Projects indicates a portion of the project that will be used to address deficiencies within the existing system, and therefore are not eligible for impact fee cost recovery for future growth.Costs Based on 2011 DollarsPROPOSEDEXISTINGExisting Project Sub‐totalProposed Project Sub‐totalCapital CostPercent Utilization
C o l l i n C o u n t y
C o l l i n C o u n t y
((##U UTT
(#UT
[ÚUT
!A!A!AProposed 2.5 MGCounty Line EST (2021)Overflow Elev.: 785 ft
NTMWDDelivery Point
2.0 MGPreston Rd. EST
Overflow Elev.: 926 ft
Proposed 2.0 MGProsper Trail EST (2015)
Overflow Elev.: 926 ft
(3(4
(4
(3(3
(5
(5
(19
(12
(11
(7
(7
(2
(2
(9
(9
(1B
(1B
(1B
(LPP)
(LPP)
(LPP)(LPP)(LPP)(10(10(10
(10
(6
(6
(17
(18
(16 (8
(18
(18
(14 (13
(13
(15
(15
(16
(16
(17 (B
(C
(C(D
(D
(E(F
(E
(G
(H(H(H
12"
20"
30''
20''16''12''12''12''12'
'20''30''
12''20''20''16''16''30''
20''12''16''
30''
12''
30''
12''
20''
30''
16''20''30''30''
20''20''16''16''30''
16''
30''30''20''16''
20''20''20''20''20''20''
42''16''30
'
'
20''
24''12''24''
20''20''
20''
16''24''42''
24''
30''
30''16''12''
16''
42''20''20''16''16''20''16''24''20''12''
20''
20''
42''
20''
12''
20''20''20''20''16''24''12''42''16''16''
42''
16''30''20''
24''16''24''16''20''20''16''20''30''24''
42''
30''12''20''16''16''16''24''
20''
42''
16''16''16''12''12''12''
12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12
'
'
12''12''12'
'12''12''12''
12''12''12''12''12''
12''12''12''12
'
'
12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''
12''12''12''
8''
6''8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''
8''8''6''
8''8''8''
8''
8'
'
8''8''8''
8''8'
'8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8
'
'
8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''6''8''
8''8''8''8''
8''
6''
8''
8''6''8''
8''8''
8''8''8''8''6''
8''
8''
8''
6
'
'
8''8''8''8''6''6''
8''
8''
8''8''8''
6''
8''
8
'
'6''8'
'8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8'
'
8''
8''
6''
8''8''8''
8''8''8'
'8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''
8''8''6''8''8''
8''
8''
8''6'
'8''8''6''8''8''8''
8''
8''6'
'8''
8''
6''8''6''6''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''6''8''8'
'8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''6''8''8''8
'
'
8''
8''
8''
8''
8''
6''8'
'8''8''8''8''6''
8''6''8''8''8''8''8''6''
8''
8''
8''
8''
8''6''8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''
8''
8''
8''6''8''8''8''8'
'8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''6''
8''
8'
'8''6''6''8''8''8''6'
'8''8''8''8''6''6''8''6''
8''6''
8''8''6''8''8''8''6''8''8''8'
'8''8''8''8''
8''6''8
'
'8''6''
8''
8''
8''8''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''6'
'
8''
8''
2''
6''4''1.5''6''2''
6''
1.
5
'
'6''6''6''2''6''
4''6''CR 25FM 1385CR 6W UNIVERSITY DR
FISHTRAP RD
PARVIN RD CR 51CR 83
N CUSTER RDCR 84
W FIRST STSMILEY RDFM 2478CR 26
W FRONTIER PKWY E FRONTIER PKWY
FM 423SH 289CAREY RD
PROSPER RD N LEGACY DRCOIT RDN PRESTON RDN DALLAS PKWYCR 933
DOE CREEK RDDALLAS PKWYGOOD HOPE RDFM 428 WCR 50CR 124FM 1461
S TEEL PKWYS PRESTON RDCUSTER RDCR 123
HAWKINS LNBONAR RD
BYRAN RD CR 86E US 380
EUREKA LN
S COLEMAN STCR 970
BRISTOL DR
CR 857
CR 858ARTESIA BLVDCR 7
CR 85
6N TEEL PKWYP RE S TO N H ILLS CIRPR 5155
GIBBS RD CR 854FALCON RDVIRGINIA PKWYCR 855M
AGNOLIA BLVD PR 7801E BROADWAY ST
CR 852
FIELDS RDCRUTCHFIELD DR
CR 853
BRINKMANN RANCH RD
TWIN LAKES DRRED BUD DRHARPE R RD PR 5156HER I T A G E TRL
BENBROOK BLVD
PANTHER CREEK RD
BE D FORD LNPR 5405
DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAYHIGHPOINT DR
V E RO NA DR
VIRGINIA HILLS DRCROSSLAKE CT
E SEVENTH ST
SEA PINES DROAK BEND TRLWH I T E R O C K B L V D
SHASTA DR
JULIETTE DR
PRESTONVIEW DR
Q U A IL HOLLO W
WARREN DR
NOLES RD
TWIN MALLETS LN
WENK CT
P R 5436W ATCH HILL LN
BRADFORD D R
EQUESTRIAN WAYCOUNTRY VIEW DR
PASEWARK CIR
NEWPORT LN
COASTAL DR
BROWNWOOD BLVDCR
8
6
0
OLD D AIRY FARM RD
CEDAR TRL
PHANTOM LNLONG LEAF DRCARRIAGE LN SHARED DRIVEWAYDOVE CR EE K C
IRS REDWOOD CIR
STOCKPORT DR
PIEDMONT PL
YAK DR
ASCOT PL
GARDENIA BLVDEVENING SUN DR
LIVE OAK LNW RED OAK CIRFALCON CT
DOOLITTLE DRDERICK LNCR 26
W UNIVERSITY DRGOOD HOPE RDDALLAS PKWYCR 506''8''
2''8''6''6''
6''6''6''6''6''6''8''8''6''
6''
6''
6''
6''8''2''6''6''6''6''
6''
8''6'' 6''8'
'6''6''6''
6''
6''6''8''6''8''6''6''8''6''6''6''6''6''2''12''12''12''12''
12''12''1
2
'
'12''12''
12''
12''
12''12''12''12''12''Doe Branch
Wi
l
son Cr
e
e
k
Panther Cree
kGentle Creek
Parv in BranchRutherford BranchLittle Elm Creek
StreamRo
wlett Cree
kMustang CreekR u t h e rford B ra n c h
Gentle
C
r
e
e
k
Parvin Branch
StreamParvin B ranch
LEGEND
!APressure Reducing Valve
(#UT 2011 - 2021
Elevated Storage Tank
(#UT Existing Impact Fee Eligible
Elevated Storage Tank
UT
Existing Impact Fee Eligible
Ground Storage Tank
[Ú Existing Impact Fee Eligible
Pump Station
Existing Impact Fee Eligible
2011 - 2021
Water Line Improvement
8" and Smaller Water Lines
10" and Larger Water Lines
Road
Railroad
Stream
Lake
Parcel
Town Limit
ETJ Boundary
County Boundary
Lower Pressure Plane
Upper Pressure Plane
DRAFT FIGURE 3-8TOWN OF PROSPERWATER SYSTEM IMPACT FEECAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
September 14, 2011
0 1,750 3,500
SCALE IN FEET
I
Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Job No.: PRP11118
Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\DELIVERABLES\04_W_WW_Capital_Improvements_Revisions\(Figure_3-8)_Water_CIP_(Impact_Fee_Eligible_and_2021).mxd
Updated: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:21:01 AM
7.35 MGD UPP PS and 3.0 MG GST
Expand UPP PS to 20 MGD and Add 5.0 MG GST
(2013)
Construct 10 MGD LPP Pump Station
(2018)
NTMWD Delivery Point Improvements
(A
(10
(1A
V
V
V
V
V
V V
V
V
V
ä
ä
ä
ä
ä
ä ä
ä
ä
ä
UUPTWW)"C`
10''10''
10''
(2
12''
WastewaterTreatment Plant(Abandoned)
La CimaLift StationCapacity: 3.0 MGD
La Cima # 2Decommission LS and FM
Steeple ChaseLift Station(Abandoned)
GreenspointDecommission LS and FM
Whispering FarmsDecommission LS and FM
Gentle CreekLift Station(Abandoned)
(3
(3
(4
(4(5
(5
(1(1
(1
(13
(1 (1
(12
(1
(1
(9
(9
(11
(8(8
(6 (10
(14
(7
(7(7
(8
(6
(15
(8
(15
(9
(9
(10
(14
(8
(A
(A
(A
(B
(B
(B
12
'
'
30''
15''10''18''24''27''21''18''10''10''18''10''
10''24''15
'
'21''10''
10''10''12''10''
24''
10''10''10''24''10''
18''
21''
10''
12''15'
'
24''10''10''10''
21''
10'
'
27''10''10''21''
15''21''10'
'15''10''21''18''10''10''
18''10''10''24''10''10''
21''
10''
24''
1
0
'
'12''10''10''27''10''24''10''21''
18''
1
2
'
'
1
2
'
'10''24''
15''
24''21''21''24''
21''
10''
24''21''15''1
0
'
'
15''27''
15''
10''
10''
24''
24''12''24''
10''
24''
24''10'' F.M27''30''24''21''12''24''21''12''21''
12'' F.M.10'' F.M.6'
'
F
.
M
.12'' F.M.8'' F.M.10'' F.M.
4'' F.M.12'' F.M.10'' F.M.12''15''
10''21''10''12''10''
15''
1
5
'
'12''10''12''10''
12''
15''12''10''
12''
10''
15''10''6''
8''4''
8''
8''8''8''8''4''6''8''
8'
'
8''
8''
8''8''6''
8''
8''4''8''8''
6''6''8''8''8''
6''
6''8''8''8''
8''
8''
8
'
'8''8''8''6''8''8''8''6''
8''8''6''
8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''6''8''8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''
8'
'
8''
6''8''8''8''8'
'8''
8''8''8''8'
'
8''8''8''8''
6''
8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8'
'
8''8'
'
8''
8''6''8''8''6''6''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8'
'8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''6''8''
8''8''8''
8''8''8''
8''8''
8''6''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''6''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''
8''
8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''8''4''8
'
'4''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''
8''
8''
8''8''6''
8''
8''8''8''8''
8''
6''8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8'
'8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''6''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''8''8''
8''8''8''
8''8''6''
8''
8''
8''8''8''
8''
8''8''8''8''8''
6''8''8
'
'6''8''8''
8''
6''8''8''
8''8''6''6''8''8''8''8''
8''
8''8''6''6''
8''8''S U B B A S I N 3
S U B B A S I N 3
S U B B A S I N 6
S U B B A S I N 6
S U B B A S I N 2
S U B B A S I N 2 S U B B A S I N 4
S U B B A S I N 4
S U B B A S I N 1
S U B B A S I N 1
S U B B A S I N 5
S U B B A S I N 58''6''6''6''
8''
8''
6''
8''
8''
6''8''6''
6''15''12''15''15''
15''
15''
Doe B ranchPanther Cree
kWilson C
r
eekGentle Creek
P arvin Branch
Rutherford BranchStreamRo
wle
t
t
Cree
k
Pond
P arvin BranchStream
Parv in BranchParvin BranchDoe BranchStreamLEGEND
UUPTWW)Wastewater Treatment Plant
Vä Existing Lift Station
"C`NTMWD Meter
Existing 10" and Larger
Wastewater Line
Existing 8" and Smaller
Wastewater Line
Existing Force Main
Existing Impact Fee Eligible
Wastewater Line
2011- 2021 Wastewater Line
UTRWD Wastewater Line
NTMWD Wastewater Line
Road
Railroad
Stream
Lake
Parcel
Town Limit
ETJ Boundary
County Boundary
DRAFT FIGURE 3-9TOWN OF PROSPERWASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPACT FEECAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
August 22, 2011
0 1,750 3,500
SCALE IN FEET
I MAJOR BASINS
Subbasin 1
Subbasin 2
Subbasin 3
Subbasin 4
Subbasin 5
Subbasin 6
Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Job No.: PRP11118
Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\DELIVERABLES\04_W_WW_Capital_Improvements_Revisions\(Figure_3-9)_Wastewater_CIP_(Impact_Fee_Eligible_and_2021).mxd
Updated: Monday, August 22, 2011 1:56:09 PM
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐16
3.4.2 Service Units
The maximum impact fee may not exceed the amount determined by dividing the cost
of capital improvements required by the total number of service units attributed to new
development during the impact fee eligibility period. A water service unit is defined as
the service equivalent to a water connection for a single‐family residence. The Town of
Prosper does not directly meter wastewater flows and bills for wastewater services
based on the customer’s water consumption. Therefore, a wastewater service unit is
defined as the wastewater service provided to a customer with a water connection for a
single‐family residence.
The service associated with public, commercial, and industrial connections is converted
into service units based upon the capacity of the meter used to provide service. The
number of service units required to represent each meter size is based on the safe
maximum operating capacity of the appropriate meter type. The Town primarily uses
displacement meters size 2‐inch and smaller for domestic service. Turbine meters are
reserved for high flow service like irrigation. Compound meters are typically used for
sizes greater than 2 inches. Compound meters are typically used for customers that
have a large range of flows like a school, car wash or restaurant. The Town of Prosper
provided the safe maximum operating capacity for each meter size based on guidance
from Neptune meters. The service unit equivalent for each meter size used by the Town
is listed in Table 3‐7.
Typically, in Prosper, single‐family residences are served with 1‐inch positive
displacement water meters. Larger meters represent multi‐family, public, commercial,
and industrial water use. The Town provided data that included the meter size of each
active water meter as of July 2011. Table 3‐8 shows the water service units for 2011
and the projected service units for 2021, Table 3‐9 shows the wastewater service units
for 2011 and the projected service units for 2021.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐17
Table 3‐7 Service Unit Equivalencies
Meter
Size Meter Type
Safe Maximum Operating
Capacity (gpm)(1)
Service Unit
Equivalent
5/8” Displacement 20 0.4
1” Displacement 50 1.0
1‐1/2” Displacement 100 2.0
1‐1/2” Turbine 160 3.2
2” Displacement 160 3.2
2” Turbine 200 4.0
3” Compound 450 9.0
3” Turbine 450 9.0
4” Compound 1,000 20.0
4” Turbine I 1,200 24.0
6” Compound 2,000 40.0
6” Turbine 2,500 50.0
8” Turbine 4,000 80.0
10” Turbine 6,500 130.0
(1) Safe maximum operating capacity is based on Neptune Technology Meter capacities provided by
the Town of Prosper.
Table 3‐8 Water Service Units
Meter
Size
Type of
Meter
2011
Connections
2011
Service
Units
2021
Connections
2021
Service
Units
Growth in
Service
Units
5/8” Displacement 1,750(1) 700 1,750 700 0
1” Displacement 1,293 1,293 6,466 6,466 5,173
1‐1/2” Displacement 60 120 156 312 192
1‐1/2” Turbine 5 16 13 42 26
2” Displacement 100 320 260 832 512
2” Turbine 14 56 36 144 88
3” Compound 2 18 5 45 27
4” Compound 5 100 13 260 160
6” Compound 1 40 3 120 80
Total 3,230 2,663 8,702 8,921 6,258
(1) Meters smaller than 1‐inch have been grandfathered into the system. All future water meters will be 1‐
inch or larger.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐18
Table 3‐9 Wastewater Service Units
Meter
Size
Type of
Meter
2011
Connections
2011
Service
Units
2021
Connections
2021
Service
Units
Growth in
Service
Units
5/8” Displacement 1,295 518 1,295 518 0
1” Displacement 970 970 6,143 6,143 5,173
1‐1/2” Displacement 53 106 149 298 192
1‐1/2” Turbine 5 16 13 42 26
2” Displacement 73 234 233 746 512
2” Turbine 14 56 36 144 88
3” Compound 2 18 5 45 27
4” Compound 5 100 13 260 160
6” Compound 1 40 3 120 80
Total 2,418 2,058 7,890 8,316 6,258
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐19
3.4.3 Maximum Impact Fee Calculations
Texas Government Code Section 395 outlines the procedures and requirements for
calculating maximum allowable impact fees to recover costs associated with capital
improvement projects needed due to growth over a 10‐year period. Section 395 also
requires a plan that addresses possible duplication of payments for capital
improvements. This plan can either provide a credit for the portion of revenues
generated by new development that is used for the payment of eligible improvements,
including payment of debt, or reduce the total eligible project costs by 50 percent. The
Town of Prosper has selected to utilize the reduction of the total eligible project costs by
50 percent to determine the maximum allowable impact fees.
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code states that the maximum impact fee
may not exceed the amount determined by dividing the cost of capital improvements
required by the total number of service units attributed to new development during the
impact fee eligibility period less the credit to account for water and wastewater
revenues used to finance capital improvement plans.
The total projected costs include the projected capital improvement costs to serve 10‐
year development, the projected finance cost for the capital improvements, and the
consultant cost for preparing and updating the Capital Improvements Plan. A 4.0%
interest rate was used to calculate financing costs. Table 3‐10 displays the maximum
allowable impact fee for water and wastewater by meter size. Comparison graphs
showing impact fees in other cities throughout the Metroplex are presented on Figure
3‐10 and Figure 3‐11.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐20
Water Impact Fee:
Total Capital Improvement Costs $36,628,995
Financing Costs $12,183,954
Total Eligible Costs $48,812,949
Growth in Service Units 6,258
Maximum Water Impact Fee = Total Eligible Costs/Growth in Service Units
= $48,812,949/6,258
= $7,800 per Service Unit
Maximum Allowable Water Impact Fee = Maximum Impact Fee – Credit (50%)
= $7,800 ‐ $3,900
= $3,900 per Service Unit
Wastewater Impact Fee:
Total Capital Improvement Costs $6,414,802
Financing Costs $2,133,764
Total Eligible Costs $8,548,566
Growth in Service Units 6,258
Maximum Wastewater Impact Fee = Total Eligible Costs/Growth in Service Units
= $8,548,566/6,258
= $1,366 per Service Unit
Maximum Allowable Wastewater Impact Fee = Maximum Impact Fee – Credit (50%)
= $1,366 ‐ $683
= $683 per Service Unit
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
3‐21
Table 3‐10 Maximum Allowable Impact Fees by Meter Size
Meter
Size Meter Type
Service
Unit
Equivalent
Water
Impact
Fee(1)
Wastewater
Impact
Fee(1)
Total
Impact
Fee(1)
5/8” Displacement 0.4 $1,560 $273 $1,833
1” Displacement 1.0 $3,900 $683 $4,583
1‐1/2” Displacement 2.0 $7,800 $1,366 $9,166
1‐1/2” Turbine 3.2 $12,480 $2,186 $14,666
2” Displacement 3.2 $12,480 $2,186 $14,666
2” Turbine 4.0 $15,600 $2,732 $18,332
3” Compound 9.0 $35,100 $6,147 $41,247
3” Turbine 9.0 $35,100 $6,147 $41,247
4” Compound 20.0 $78,000 $13,660 $91,660
4” Turbine I 24.0 $93,600 $16,392 $109,992
6” Compound 40.0 $156,000 $27,320 $183,320
6” Turbine 50.0 $195,000 $34,150 $229,150
8” Turbine 80.0 $312,000 $54,640 $366,640
10” Turbine 130.0 $507,000 $88,790 $595,790
(1) Based on maximum allowable water and wastewater impact fees.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report Town of Prosper 3-22 Figure 3‐10 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee per Service Unit Comparison
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report Town of Prosper 3-23 Figure 3‐11 Water, Wastewater, and Roadway Impact Fee per Single Family Home Comparison
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-1
4.0 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code describes the procedure Texas
municipalities must follow in order to create and implement impact fees. Senate Bill
243 (SB 243) amended Chapter 395 in September 2001, to define an impact fee as “a
charge or assessment imposed by a political subdivision against new development in
order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of capital improvements
or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development.”
Chapter 395 mandates that impact fees be reviewed and updated at least every five (5)
years. Accordingly, the Town of Prosper has developed its Land Use Assumptions and
Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) with which to update the Town’s Roadway Impact Fees.
The Town has retained Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide professional
transportation engineering services for the Roadway Impact Fee Update. This report
includes details of the impact fee calculation methodology in accordance with Chapter
395, the applicable Land Use Assumptions, development of the CIP, and the refinement
of the Land Use Equivalency Table.
This report introduces and references two of the basic inputs to the Roadway Impact
Fee: the Land Use Assumptions and the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). Information
from these two components is used extensively in the remainder of the report. This
report consists of a detailed discussion of the methodology for the computation of
impact fees. This discussion ‐ Methodology for Roadway Impact Fees and Impact Fee
Calculation addresses each of the components of the computation and modifications
required for the study. The components include:
Service Areas;
Service Units;
Cost Per Service Unit;
Cost of the CIP;
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-2
Service Unit Calculation;
Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit; and
Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development.
The report also includes a section concerning the Plan for Awarding the Roadway
Impact Fee Credit. In the case of the Town of Prosper, the credit calculation was based
on awarding a 50 percent credit.
The final section of the report is the Conclusion, which presents the findings of the
update analysis.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-3
4.1 Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Inputs
4.1.1 Land Use Assumptions
The land use assumptions used are presented in detail in Section 2 of this report. For
purposes of roadway impact fees, the Town of Prosper was divided into two service
areas contained entirely within the current corporate limits. The BNSF railroad serves as
the dividing line between the two areas. Table 4‐1 presents the land use assumptions
utilized in the roadway impact fee component.
The population and employment estimates and projections were all compiled in
accordance with the following categories:
1. Dwelling Units: Number of dwelling units, both single and multi‐family.
2. Employment: Square feet of building area based on three (3) different classifications
listed below. Each classification has unique trip making characteristics.
Retail: Land use activities which provide for the retail sale of goods that primarily
serve households and whose locations choice is oriented toward the household
sector, such as grocery stores and restaurants.
Service: Land use activities which provide personal and professional services such as
government and other professional administrative offices.
Basic: Land use activities that produce goods and services such as those that export
outside of the local economy, such as manufacturing, construction, transportation,
wholesale, trade, warehousing, and other industrial uses.
Table 4‐1 Land Use Assumptions for Roadway Impact Fees
SA Year Dwelling
Units
Employment (Square Feet)
Basic Service Retail Total
SA 1
(W of RR)
2011 179 261,360 408,375 277,695 947,430
2021 2,281 326,700 1,306,800 2,144,430 3,777,930
SA 2
(E of RR)
2011 3,389 0 1,849,122 561,924 2,411,046
2021 7,305 0 2,277,287 2,144,430 4,910,489
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-4
4.1.2 Capital Improvements Plan
The Town has identified the Town‐funded transportation projects needed to
accommodate the projected growth within the Town. The CIP for Roadway Impact Fees
is made up of:
Recently completed projects with excess capacity available to serve new growth;
Projects currently under construction; and
Remaining projects needed to complete the Town’s Master Thoroughfare Plan
(MTP).
The CIP includes arterial and collector facilities. All of the arterial and collector facilities
are part of the currently adopted MTP.
The CIP for Roadway Impact Fees that is proposed for the Roadway Impact Fee Update
is listed in Table 4‐2 and Table 4‐3, and mapped in Figure 4‐1. The table shows the
length of each project as well as the facility’s classification. The CIP was developed in
conjunction with input from Town of Prosper staff and represents those projects that
will be needed to accommodate the growth projected in the Land Use Assumptions (see
Section 4.1.1).
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-5
Table 4‐2 10‐Year Capital Improvements Plan for Roadway Impact Fees – Service Area 1
Service
Area Proj. # Class Roadway Limits Length
(mi)
% In
Service
Area
1-A 6LD FM 1385 US 380 to Gee Rd. (Existing Fish Trap Rd.) 0.94 50%
1-B 6LD FM 423 (FM 1385)Gee Rd. to Parvin Rd. 1.39 50%
1-C 6LD Gee Rd.US 380 to FM 1385 1.49 100%
1-D 6LD Teel Pkwy. (1)US 380 to Fish Tra p Rd. 0.73 100%
1-E 6LD Teel Pkwy. (2)Fish Trap Rd. to 1,705' S. of Prosper Trl. 0.93 50%
1-F 6LD Teel Pkwy. (3)1,705' S. of Prosper Trl. to Prosper Trl. 0.32 100%
1-G 6LD Teel Pkwy. (4)Prosper Trl. to Parvin Rd. 0.54 100%
1-H 6LD Legacy Dr. (1)US 380 to Fish Tra p Rd. 0.99 100%
1-I 6LD Legacy Dr. (2)Fish Tra p Rd. to Existing Parvin Rd. 1.68 100%
1-J 6LD Legacy Dr. (3)Existing Parvin Rd. to Frontier Pkwy. 0.46 50%
1-K 2LC DNT E. Collector (1)US 380 to 1,320' S. of Fish Tra p Rd. 0.77 100%
1-L 2LC DNT E. Collector (2)1,320' S. of Fish Tra p Rd. to Fish Trap Rd. 0.25 100%
1-M 2LC DNT E. Collector (3)Fish Trap Rd. to Frontier Pkwy. 2.00 100%
1-N 6LD Parvin Rd.FM 423 (FM 1385) to 3,680' E. of Teel Pkwy. 2.44 50%
1-O 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (1) / FM 1461 Legacy Dr. to DNT 1.08 50%
1-P 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (2) / FM 1461 DNT to BNSF RR 1.09 50%
1-Q 4LD Prosper Trl. (1)Teel Pkwy. to 1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy. 0.35 100%
1-R 4LD Prosper Trl. (2)1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy to 3,660' E. of Teel Pkwy. 0.34 50%
1-S 4LD Prosper Trl. (3)2,110' W. of Le gacy Dr. to 1,600' W. of Legacy Dr. 0.10 50%
1-T 4LD Prosper Trl. (4)1,600' W. of Le gacy Dr. to DNT 1.39 100%
1-U 4LD Prosper Trl. (5)DNT to BNSF RR 0.84 100%
1-V 4LD Fish Trap Rd. (1)Gee Rd. to Teel Pkwy. 1.22 100%
1-W 4LD(1/2) Fish Trap Rd. (2)Teel Pkwy. To 2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy. 0.48 100%
1-X 4LD Fish Trap Rd. (3)2,530' E. of Teel Pkw y. to BNSF RR 2.64 100%
1-Y 4LD E-W Collector Teel Pkwy. to Fish Trap Rd. 2.65 100%
1-Z 4LD DNT W. Collector Fish Tra p Rd. to Parvin Rd. 2.05 100%
1-AA 4LD Lovers Ln.US 380 to BNSF RR 1.84 100%
1-BB 2LC DNT Frontage Road US 380 to Frontier Pkwy. 3.03 100%
I-1 Signal Installation DNT & Frontier Parkway 100%
I-2 Signal Installation DNT & Prosper Trl. 100%
I-3 Signal Installation DNT & First St. 100%SA 1(West of Railroad)
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-6
Table 4‐3 10‐Year Capital Improvements Plan for Roadway Impact Fees – Service Area 2
Service
Area Proj. # Class Roadway Limits Length
(mi)
% In
Service
Area
2-A 6LD Preston Rd. US 380 to Frontier Pkw y. 3.25 100%
2-B 6LD(1/3) Coit Rd. (1)US 380 to First St. 1.01 100%
2-C 6LD Coit Rd. (2)First St. to 2,665' N. of First St. 0.50 100%
2-D 6LD Coit Rd. (3)2,665' N. of First St. to 1,350' S. of Pros per Trl. 0.25 50%
2-E 6LD Coit Rd. (4) 1,350' S. of Prosper Trl. to Frontier Pkwy. 1.26 100%
2-F 6LD Custer Rd. (1)US 380 to First St. 1.24 50%
2-G 6LD Custer Rd. (2)First St. to Prosper Trl. 0.76 50%
2-H 6LD Custer Rd. (3)Prosper Trl. to 2,605' N. of Pros per Trl. 0.49 50%
2-I 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (3) / FM 1461 BNSF RR to Preston Rd. 0.93 50%
2-J 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (4) / FM 1461 Preston Rd. to Coit Rd. 0.98 50%
2-K 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (5) / FM 1461 Coit Rd. to 1,405' W. of Custer Rd. 1.99 50%
2-L 4LD Prosper Trl. (6)BNSF RR to Preston Rd. 1.11 100%
2-M 4LD Prosper Trl. (7)Preston Rd. to Coit Rd. 1.02 100%
2-N 4LD Prosper Trl. (8)Coit Rd. to 3,995' W. of Custer Rd. 1.26 100%
2-O 4LD Prosper Trl. (9)3,995' W. of Custer Rd. to 2,645' W. of Custer Rd. 0.26 50%
2-P 4LD Prosper Trl. (10)2,190' W. of Custer Rd. to 1,915' W. of Custer Rd. 0.05 50%
2-Q 4LD Prosper Trl. (11)1,915' W. of Custer Rd. to Custer Rd. 0.36 50%
2-R 4LD First St. (1)BNSF RR to N. Coleman St. 0.37 100%
2-S 3L First St. (2)N. Coleman St. to Craig St. 0.46 100%
2-T 4LD First St. (3)Craig St. to Coit Rd. 1.51 100%
2-U 4LD First St. (4)Coit Rd. to Custer Rd. 2.05 100%
2-V 4LD Lovers Ln. (2)BNSF RR to Preston Rd. 0.84 100%
2-W 4LD Lovers Ln. (3)Preston Rd. to US 380 0.64 100%
2-X 4LD Richland Blvd.N. Coleman St. to Prosper Commons 1.67 100%
2-Y 3L N/S. Coleman Couplet Coleman Couplet 3.28 100%
2-Z 4LD Coleman St. (1)Coleman Couplet to Prosper Trl. 0.36 100%
2-AA 4LD Coleman St. (2)Prosper Trl. To 2,405' N. of Prosper Trl. 0.46 100%
2-BB 4LD(1/2) Coleman St. (3)2,405' N. of Pros per Trl. to Victory Ln. 0.64 100%
2-CC 4LD Coleman St. (4)Victory Ln. to Preston Rd. 0.50 100%
2-DD 4LD Victory Ln.Coleman St. to Frontier Pkw y. 0.36 100%
I-4 Signal Installation Coleman Rd. & Prosper Trl. 100%
I-5 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & Richland Blvd. 100%
I-6 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & Prosper Trl. 100%
I-7 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & First St. 100%
I-8 Signal Installation Victory Ln. & Frontier Pkwy. 100%SA 2(East of Railroad)
èéìëí
èéìëí
èéìëí
èéìëí
èéìëí
èéìëí
èéìëí
èéìëíDNTFM 423COLEMAN
US 380
LOVERS LN.
FIRST ST.
E-W Collector COIT RD.CUSTER RD.S. COLEMANFM 1385DNT E. CollectorN. COLEMANRichland
FISH TRAP RD.TEEL PKWY.PROSPER TRL.Victory Ln.GEE RD.PRESTON RD.LEGACY DR.FRONTIER PKWY.
PROSPER TRL.
US 380 !(1-BB!(2-AA!(2-DD!(2-CC
!(1-AA
!(2-BB!(1-AA!(1-BB!(2-E!(2-Q
!(2-F!(1-O
!(2-A!(1-N
!(2-K
!(2-P
!(1-C!(1-P
!(1-I!(1-D!(2-J
!(1-B!(2-G!(2-T
!(2-L
!(2-C!(2-N!(1-Z!(1-W
!(1-U
!(1-V !(1-M!(2-I
!(2-U
!(1-K!(1-L!(1-E!(1-X !(1-J!(1-Y!(1-F!(1-T!(1-R !(2-H!(2-R
!(1-A!(2-M
!(2-Z!(2-X
!(2-S
!(2-B!(1-H!(1-G!(2-Y
!(2-O
!(2-W!(2-V
!(1-Q !(1-S
!(2-D!(1-I!(1-Y!(1-N
!(1-Z!(1-X !(2-T
PARVIN RD.LA CIMA BLVD.PROSPER TRL.
FISH TRAP RD.
FRONTIER PKWY.
Legend
Impact Fee Eligible Completed Projects
Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Non Impact Fee Eligible Thoroughfare Facilities
Project Limits
èéìëí Intersection Improvements
Rail
Local Roads
Service Areas
Service Area 1
Service Area 2
ETJ
Figure 4-1CIP for RoadwayImpact Fees
August 2011
´4,000 0 4,0002,000
Feet
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-8
4.2 Methodology For Roadway Impact Fees
4.2.1 Service Area
The service areas used in the 2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update are shown in the
previously referenced Figure 4‐1. These service areas cover the entire corporate
boundary of the Town of Prosper. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code
specifies that “the service area is limited to an area within the corporate boundaries of
the political subdivision and shall not exceed six (6) miles.”
4.2.2 Service Units
The “service unit” is a measure of consumption or use of the capital facilities by new
development. In other words, it is the measure of supply and demand for roads in the
Town. For transportation purposes, the service unit is defined as a vehicle‐mile. On the
supply side, this is a lane‐mile of an arterial street. On the demand side, this is a vehicle‐
trip of one‐mile in length. The application of this unit as an estimate of either supply or
demand is based on travel during the afternoon peak hour of traffic. This time period is
commonly used as the basis for transportation planning and the estimation of trips
created by new development.
Another aspect of the service unit is the service volume that is provided (supplied) by a
lane‐mile of roadway facility. This number, also referred to as capacity, is a function of
the facility type, facility configuration, number of lanes, and level of service.
The hourly service volumes used in the Roadway Impact Fee Update are based upon
Thoroughfare Capacity Criteria published by the North Central Texas Council of
Governments (NCTCOG). Table 4‐4 and Table 4‐5 show the service volumes utilized in
this report.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-9
Table 4‐4 Level of Use for Proposed Facilities
(used in Appendix D – CIP Service Units of Supply)
Roadway Type
(Classification) Median Configuration
Hourly Vehicle‐Mile
Capacity per Lane‐Mile of
Roadway Facility
Collector Street
(2LC) Undivided 450
Commercial Couplet
(3L) Undivided 500
Minor Thoroughfare
(4LD) Divided 650
Ultimate Major Thoroughfare
(6LD) Divided 700
Table 4‐5 Level of Use for Existing Facilities
(used in Appendix E – Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory)
Roadway
Type
Description
Hourly Vehicle‐Mile
Capacity per Lane‐Mile of
Roadway Facility
2U‐R Rural Cross‐Section
(i.e., gravel, dirt, etc.) 150
2U‐H Two lane undivided – Arterial Type 700
2U Two lane undivided – Collector Type 450
3U Three lane undivided (TWLTL) 500
3U‐H Three lane undivided (TWLTL) – Arterial Type 700
4U Four lane undivided (TWLTL) 525
4D Four lane divided 650
5U Five lane undivided (TWLTL) 700
6D Six lane divided 700
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-10
4.2.3 Cost Per Service Unit
A fundamental step in the impact fee process is to establish the cost for each service
unit. In the case of the roadway impact fee, this is the cost for each vehicle‐mile of
travel. This cost per service unit is the cost to construct a roadway (lane‐mile) needed
to accommodate a vehicle‐mile of travel at a level of service corresponding to the
Town’s standards. The cost per service unit is calculated for each service area based on
a specific list of projects within that service area.
The second component of the cost per service unit is the number of service units in each
service area. This number is the measure of the growth in transportation demand that
is projected to occur in the ten‐year period. Chapter 395 requires that Impact Fees be
assessed only to pay for growth projected to occur in the town limits within the next
ten‐years, a concept that will be covered in a later section of this report (see Section
4.2.5). As noted earlier, the units of demand are vehicle‐miles of travel.
4.2.4 Cost of the CIP
The costs that may be included in the cost per service unit are all of the implementation
costs for the Roadway Impact Fee Update, as well as project costs for thoroughfare
system elements within the Capital Improvements Plan. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local
Government Code specifies that the allowable costs are “…including and limited to the:
Construction contract price;
Surveying and engineering fees;
Land acquisition costs, including land purchases, court awards and costs, attorney’s
fees, and expert witness fees; and
Fees actually paid or contracted to be paid to an independent qualified engineer or
financial consultant preparing or updating the Capital Improvement Plan who is not
an employee of the political subdivision.”
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-11
The engineer’s opinion of the probable costs of the projects in the CIP is based, in part,
on the calculation of a unit cost of construction. This means that a cost per linear foot
of roadway is calculated based on an average price for the various components of
roadway construction. This allows the probable cost to be determined by the type of
facility being constructed, the number of lanes, and the length of the project. The costs
for location‐specific items such as bridges, highway ramps, drainage structures, and any
other special components are added to each project as appropriate. In addition, based
upon discussions with Town of Prosper staff, State, County, and developer driven
projects in which the Town has contributed a portion of the total project cost have been
included in the CIP as lump sum costs.
A typical roadway project consists of a number of costs, including the following:
construction, design engineering, survey, and right‐of way acquisition. While the
construction cost component of a project may actually consist of approximately 100
various pay items, a simplified approach was used for developing the conceptual level
project costs. Each new project’s construction cost was divided into two cost
components: roadway construction cost and major construction component allowances.
The roadway construction components consist of the following pay items: (1) street
excavation, (2) lime stabilization, (3) concrete pavement, (4) topsoil, and (5) concrete
driveways.
Based on the paving construction cost subtotal, a percentage of this total is calculated
to allot for major construction component allowances. These allowances include
preparation of ROW, traffic control, pavement markings, roadway drainage,
illumination, special drainage structures, minor utility relocations, turf/erosion control,
and basic landscaping. These allowance percentages are also based on historical data.
The paving and major construction component allowance subtotal is given a fifteen
percent (15%) contingency to determine the construction cost total. To determine the
total Impact Fee Project Cost, a percentage of the construction cost total is added for
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-12
engineering, surveying, testing, and mobilization. ROW acquisition costs are included in
the cost on a percentage basis.
The construction costs are variable based on the proposed MTP classification of the
roadway. Additional classifications are utilized in cases where a portion of the facility
currently exists. The following indications are used in the Town of Prosper’s CIP: (1/2)
for facilities where half the facility still needs to be constructed and (1/3) for facilities
where median lanes will be constructed.
Table 4‐6 and Table 4‐7 are the list of CIP projects for the Town of Prosper with
conceptual level project cost projections. Detailed cost projections and the
methodology used for each individual project can be seen in Appendix C ‐ Conceptual
Level Project Cost Projections. It should be noted that these tables reflect only
conceptual‐level opinions or assumptions regarding the portions of future project costs
that are potentially recoverable through impact fees. Actual costs of construction are
likely to change with time and are dependent on market and economic conditions that
cannot be precisely predicted at this time.
This CIP establishes the list of projects for which impact fees may be utilized.
Essentially, it establishes a list of projects for which an impact fee funding program can
be established. This is different from a Town’s construction CIP, which provides a broad
list of capital projects for which the Town is committed to building. The cost projections
utilized in this study should not be utilized for the Town’s building program or
construction CIP.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-13
Table 4‐6 10‐Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees
with Conceptual Level Cost Projections – Service Area 1
Notes:
a. The planning level cost projections have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any
future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
b. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision
Ordinance or the determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
c. The project cost total within each Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets provided in
Appendix C to the Town due to some projects that are split between multiple jurisdictions.
Service
Area Proj. # Class Roadway Limits
Length
(mi)
% In
Service
Area
Total Project
Cost
Cost in Service
Area
1-A 6LD FM 1385 US 380 to Gee Rd. (Existing Fish Trap Rd.) 0.94 50%1,015,200$ 507,600$
1-B 6LD FM 423 (FM 1385)Gee Rd. to Parvin Rd.1.39 50%1,496,000$ 748,000$
1-C 6LD Gee Rd.US 380 to FM 1385 1.49 100%7,429,000$ 7,429,000$
1-D 6LD Teel Pkwy. (1)US 380 to Fish Trap Rd.0.73 100%3,941,000$ 3,941,000$
1-E 6LD Teel Pkwy. (2)Fish Trap Rd. to 1,705' S. of Prosper Trl. 0.93 50%5,385,000$ 2,692,500$
1-F 6LD Teel Pkwy. (3)1,705' S. of Prosper Trl. to Prosper Trl. 0.32 100%1,739,000$ 1,739,000$
1-G 6LD Teel Pkwy. (4)Prosper Trl. to Parvin Rd.0.54 100%3,555,000$ 3,555,000$
1-H 6LD Legacy Dr. (1)US 380 to Fish Trap Rd.0.99 100%6,167,000$ 6,167,000$
1-I 6LD Legacy Dr. (2)Fish Trap Rd. to Existing Parvin Rd.1.68 100%9,025,000$ 9,025,000$
1-J 6LD Legacy Dr. (3)Existing Parvin Rd. to Frontier Pkwy.0.46 50%2,497,000$ 1,248,500$
1-K 2LC DNT E. Collector (1)US 380 to 1,320' S. of Fish Trap Rd.0.77 100%2,101,000$ 2,101,000$
1-L 2LC DNT E. Collector (2) 1,320' S. of Fish Trap Rd. to Fish Trap Rd. 0.25 100%639,000$ 639,000$
1-M 2LC DNT E. Collector (3)Fish Trap Rd. to Frontier Pkwy.2.00 100%5,487,000$ 5,487,000$
1-N 6LD Parvin Rd.FM 423 (FM 1385) to 3,680' E. of Teel Pkwy. 2.44 50%2,702,600$ 1,351,300$
1-O 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (1) / FM 1461 Legacy Dr. to DNT 1.08 50%1,244,200$ 622,100$
1-P 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (2) / FM 1461 DNT to BNSF RR 1.09 50%1,890,000$ 945,000$
1-Q 4LD Prosper Trl. (1)Teel Pkwy. to 1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy.0.35 100%1,296,000$ 1,296,000$
1-R 4LD Prosper Trl. (2) 1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy to 3,660' E. of Teel Pkwy. 0.34 50%1,282,000$ 641,000$
1-S 4LD Prosper Trl. (3) 2,110' W. of Legacy Dr. to 1,600' W. of Legacy Dr. 0.10 50%362,000$ 181,000$
1-T 4LD Prosper Trl. (4)1,600' W. of Legacy Dr. to DNT 1.39 100%5,176,000$ 5,176,000$
1-U 4LD Prosper Trl. (5)DNT to BNSF RR 0.84 100%851,126$ 851,126$
1-V 4LD Fish Trap Rd. (1)Gee Rd. to Teel Pkwy.1.22 100%3,196,000$ 3,196,000$
1-W 4LD(1/2) Fish Trap Rd. (2)Teel Pkwy. To 2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy. 0.48 100%186,400$ 186,400$
1-X 4LD Fish Trap Rd. (3)2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy. to BNSF RR 2.64 100%10,607,000$ 10,607,000$
1-Y 4LD E-W Collector Teel Pkwy. to Fish Trap Rd.2.65 100%10,536,000$ 10,536,000$
1-Z 4LD DNT W. Collector Fish Trap Rd. to Parvin Rd.2.05 100%8,627,000$ 8,627,000$
1-AA 4LD Lovers Ln.US 380 to BNSF RR 1.84 100%7,332,000$ 7,332,000$
1-BB 2LC DNT Frontage Road US 380 to Frontier Pkwy.3.00 100%8,227,000$ 8,227,000$
I-1 0 Signal Installation DNT & Frontier Parkway 0.00 100%140,000$ 140,000$
I-2 0 Signal Installation DNT & Prosper Trl.0.00 100%140,000$ 140,000$
I-3 0 Signal Installation DNT & First St.0.00 100% 140,000$ 140,000$
105,474,526$
23,000$
105,497,526$
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update Cost Per Service Area
Total Cost in SERVICE AREA 1SA 1(West of Railroad)
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-14
Table 4‐7 10‐Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees
with Conceptual Level Cost Opinions – Service Area 2
Notes:
a. The planning level cost projections have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any
future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
b. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision
Ordinance or the determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
c. The project cost total within each Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets provided in
Appendix C to the Town due to some projects that are split between multiple jurisdictions.
4.2.5 Service Unit Calculation
The basic service unit for the computation of Prosper’s roadway impact fees is the
vehicle‐mile of travel during the afternoon peak‐hour. To determine the cost per
service unit, it is necessary to project the growth in vehicle‐miles of travel for the service
area for the ten‐year study period.
Service
Area Proj. # Class Roadway Limits
Length
(mi)
% In
Service
Area
Total Project
Cost
Cost in Service
Area
2-A 6LD Preston Rd. US 380 to Frontier Pkwy.3.25 100% 800,000$ 800,000$
2-B 6LD(1/3) Coit Rd. (1)US 380 to First St.1.01 100% 2,870,000$ 2,870,000$
2-C 6LD Coit Rd. (2)First St. to 2,665' N. of First St.0.5 100% 2,716,000$ 2,716,000$
2-D 6LD Coit Rd. (3)2,665' N. of First St. to 1,350' S. of Prosper Trl. 0.25 50% 1,342,000$ 671,000$
2-E 6LD Coit Rd. (4)1,350' S. of Prosper Trl. to Frontier Pkwy. 1.26 100% 6,762,000$ 6,762,000$
2-F 6LD Custer Rd. (1)US 380 to First St.1.24 50% 1,417,400$ 708,700$
2-G 6LD Custer Rd. (2)First St. to Prosper Trl.0.76 50%897,600$ 448,800$
2-H 6LD Custer Rd. (3)Prosper Trl. to 2,605' N. of Prosper Trl. 0.49 50%531,000$ 265,500$
2-I 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (3) / FM 1461 BNSF RR to Preston Rd.0.93 50% 1,610,000$ 805,000$
2-J 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (4) / FM 1461 Preston Rd. to Coit Rd.0.98 50% 1,053,600$ 526,800$
2-K 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (5) / FM 1461 Coit Rd. to 1,405' W. of Custer Rd.1.99 50% 2,304,800$ 1,152,400$
2-L 4LD Prosper Trl. (6)BNSF RR to Preston Rd.1.11 100% 999,000$ 999,000$
2-M 4LD Prosper Trl. (7)Preston Rd. to Coit Rd.1.02 100% 3,794,000$ 3,794,000$
2-N 4LD Prosper Trl. (8)Coit Rd. to 3,995' W. of Custer Rd.1.26 100% 5,080,000$ 5,080,000$
2-O 4LD Prosper Trl. (9) 3,995' W. of Custer Rd. to 2,645' W. of Custer Rd. 0.26 50%948,000$ 474,000$
2-P 4LD Prosper Trl. (10) 2,190' W. of Custer Rd. to 1,915' W. of Custer Rd. 0.05 50%192,000$ 96,000$
2-Q 4LD Prosper Trl. (11)1,915' W. of Custer Rd. to Custer Rd.0.36 50% 1,348,000$ 674,000$
2-R 4LD First St. (1)BNSF RR to N. Coleman St.0.37 100% 1,375,000$ 1,375,000$
2-S 3L First St. (2)N. Coleman St. to Craig St.0.46 100% 1,630,000$ 1,630,000$
2-T 4LD First St. (3)Craig St. to Coit Rd.1.51 100% 2,590,000$ 2,590,000$
2-U 4LD First St. (4)Coit Rd. to Custer Rd.2.05 100% 8,020,000$ 8,020,000$
2-V 4LD Lovers Ln. (2)BNSF RR to Preston Rd.0.84 100% 3,348,000$ 3,348,000$
2-W 4LD Lovers Ln. (3)Preston Rd. to US 380 0.64 100% 2,370,000$ 2,370,000$
2-X 4LD Richland Blvd.N. Coleman St. to Prosper Commons 1.67 100% 7,090,000$ 7,090,000$
2-Y 3L N/S. Coleman Couplet Coleman Couplet 3.28 100% 11,596,000$ 11,596,000$
2-Z 4LD Coleman St. (1)Coleman Couplet to Prosper Trl.0.36 100% 1,323,000$ 1,323,000$
2-AA 4LD Coleman St. (2)Prosper Trl. To 2,405' N. of Prosper Trl. 0.46 100% 1,689,000$ 1,689,000$
2-BB 4LD(1/2) Coleman St. (3)2,405' N. of Prosper Trl. to Victory Ln. 0.64 100% 1,239,000$ 1,239,000$
2-CC 4LD Coleman St. (4)Victory Ln. to Preston Rd.0.5 100% 2,008,000$ 2,008,000$
2-DD 4LD Victory Ln.Coleman St. to Frontier Pkwy.0.36 100% 1,418,000$ 1,418,000$
I-4 0 Signal Installation Coleman Rd. & Prosper Trl.0 100% 140,000$ 140,000$
I-5 0 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & Richland Blvd.0 100% 140,000$ 140,000$
I-6 0 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & Prosper Trl.0 100% 140,000$ 140,000$
I-7 0 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & First St.0 100% 140,000$ 140,000$
I-8 0 Signal Installation Victory Ln. & Frontier Pkwy.0 100% 140,000$ 140,000$
75,239,200$
23,000$
75,262,200$
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update Cost Per Service Area
Total Cost in SERVICE AREA 2SA 2(East of Railroad)
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-15
The growth in vehicle‐miles from 2011 to 2021 is based upon projected changes in
residential and non‐residential growth for the period. In order to determine this
growth, baseline estimates of population, basic square feet, service square feet, and
retail square feet for 2011 were made along with projections for each of these
demographic statistics through 2021. The Land Use Assumptions (see Section 4.1.1)
details the growth estimates used for the impact fee determination.
The residential and non‐residential statistics in the Land Use Assumptions (see Section
4.1.1) provide the “independent variables” that are used to calculate the existing (2011)
and projected (2021) transportation service units used to establish the roadway impact
fee maximum rates within each service area. The roadway demand service units
(vehicle‐miles) for each service area are the sum of the vehicle‐miles “generated” by
each category of land use in the service area.
For the purpose of impact fees, all developed and developable land is categorized as
either residential or non‐residential. For residential land uses, the existing and
projected population is converted to dwelling units. The number of dwelling units in
each service area is multiplied by a transportation demand factor to compute the
vehicle‐miles of travel that occur during the afternoon peak hour. This factor computes
the average amount of demand caused by the residential land uses in the service area.
The transportation demand factor is discussed in more detail below.
For non‐residential land uses, the process is similar. The Land Use Assumptions (see
Section 4.1.1) provide the existing and projected amount of building square footages for
three (3) categories of non‐residential land uses – basic, service, and retail. These
categories correspond to an aggregation of other specific land use categories based on
the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS).
Building square footage is the most common independent variable for the estimation of
non‐residential trips in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE), Trip Generation
Manual, 8th Edition. This independent variable is more appropriate than the number of
employees because building square footage is tied more closely to trip generation and is
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-16
known at the time of application for any development or development modification that
would require the assessment of an impact fee.
The existing and projected land use assumptions for the dwelling units and the square
footage of basic, service, and retail land uses provided the basis for the projected
increase in vehicle‐miles of travel. As noted earlier, a transportation demand factor is
applied to these values and then summed to calculate the total peak‐hour vehicle‐miles
of demand for each service area.
The transportation demand factors are aggregate rates derived from two sources – the
ITE, Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition, and the regional Origin‐Destination Travel
Survey performed by NCTCOG and the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS). The
ITE, Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition, provides the number of trips that are produced
or attracted to the land use for each dwelling unit, square foot of building, or other
corresponding unit. For the retail category of land uses, the rate is adjusted to account
for the fact that a percentage of retail trips are made by people who would otherwise
be traveling past that particular establishment anyway, such as a trip between work and
home. These trips are called pass‐by trips, and since the travel demand is accounted for
in the land use calculations relative to the primary trip, it is necessary to discount the
retail rate to avoid double counting trips.
The next component of the transportation demand factor accounts for the length of
each trip. The average trip length for each category is based on the region‐wide travel
characteristics survey conducted by the NCTCOG and the NHTS.
The computation of the transportation demand factor is detailed in the following
equation:
Variables:
TDF = Transportation Demand Factor;
T = Trip Rate (peak hour trips / unit);
)SAor *(min
*)1(*
Lmax
max
where...ODLL
LPTTDFb
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-17
Pb = Pass‐By Discount (% of trips);
Lmax = Maximum Trip Length (miles);
L = Average Trip Length (miles);
OD = Origin‐Destination Reduction (50%); and
SAL = Max Service Area Trip Length (see Table 4‐8).
For land uses which are characterized by longer average trip lengths (primarily
residential uses), the maximum trip length has been limited to six (6) miles based on the
maximum trip length within each service area per Chapter 395 of the Texas Local
Government Code.
The adjustment made to the average trip length (L) statistic in the computation of the
maximum trip length is the origin‐destination reduction (OD). This adjustment is made
because the roadway impact fee is charged to both the origin and destination end of the
trip. For example, the impact fee methodology will account for a trip from home to
work within Prosper to both residential and non‐residential land uses. To avoid
counting these trips as both residential and non‐residential trips, a 50% origin‐
destination (OD) reduction factor is applied. Therefore, only half of the trip length is
assessed to each land use.
Table 4‐8 shows the derivation of the Transportation Demand Factor for the residential
land uses and the three (3) non‐residential land use categories. The values utilized for
all variables shown in the transportation demand factor equation are also shown in the
table.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-18
Table 4‐8 Transportation Demand Factor Calculations
Variable Residential Basic Service Retail
T 1.01 0.97 1.49 2.46
Pb 0% 0% 0% 34%
L 17.21 10.02 10.92 6.43
Lmax * 6.00 5.01 5.46 3.22
TDF 6.06 4.86 8.14 7.91
* Lmax is less than 6 miles for non‐residential land uses; therefore this lower trip length is used for calculating the
TDF for non‐residential land uses
The application of the demographic projections and the transportation demand factors
are presented in the 10‐Year Growth Projections in Table 4‐9. This table shows the total
vehicle miles by service area for the years 2011 and 2021. These estimates and
projections lead to the Vehicle Miles of Travel for both 2011 and 2021.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-19 Year 2011TOTALTrip RateTDF2VEHICLE MILES3BASIC SERVICE RETAILBASIC6SERVICE7RETAIL8BASIC SERVICE RETAIL TOTALVEHICLE MILES101.010.97 1.49 2.4611,085 261,360 408,375 277,6951,270 3,324 2,198 6,792 7,877220,537 0 1,849,122 561,9240 15,052 4,447 19,499 40,036Totals21,622 261,360 2,257,497 839,6191,270 18,376 6,645 26,291 47,913Year 2021TOTALTrip RateTDF2VEHICLE MILES3BASIC SERVICE RETAILBASIC6SERVICE7RETAIL8BASIC SERVICE RETAIL TOTALVEHICLE MILES101.010.97 1.49 2.46113,823 326,700 1,306,800 2,144,4301,588 10,637 16,972 29,197 43,020244,268 0 2,277,287 2,633,2020 18,537 20,841 39,378 83,646Totals58,091 326,700 3,584,087 4,777,6321,588 29,174 37,813 68,575 126,666VEHICLE-MILES OF INCREASE11 (2011 - 2021)Notes:135,1431 From Land Use Assumptions (included in 2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update Report)243,6102 Transportation Demand Factor for each Service Area (from LUVMET) using Single Family Detached Housing land use and trip generation rate3 Calculated by multiplying TDF by the number of dwelling units4 From Land Use Assumptions included in 2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update Report5 Trip generation rate and Transportation Demand Factors from LUVMET for each land use6 'Basic' corresponds to General Light Industrial land use and trip generation rate7 'Service' corresponds to General Office land use and trip generation rate8 'Retail' corresponds to Shopping Center land use and trip generation rate9 Calculated by multiplying Transportation Demand Factor by the number of thousand square feet for each land use10 Residential plus non-residential vehicle-mile totals for each Service Area11 Total Vehicle-Miles (2011) subtracted from Total Vehicle-Miles (2021)3,568SERVICE AREARESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILESSQUARE FEET4TRANS. DEMAND FACTOR5NON-RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES9DWELLING UNITS11793,3896.064.86 8.14 7.91SERVICE AREARESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILESSQUARE FEET4TRANS. DEMAND FACTOR5NON-RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES9DWELLING UNITS12,2817,3059,5864.86 8.14 7.916.06SERVICE AREAVEH-MILESTable 4‐9 10 Year Growth Projections
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-20
4.3 Impact Fee Calculation
4.3.1 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee Per Service Unit
This section presents the maximum assessable roadway impact fee rate calculated for
each service area. The maximum assessable roadway impact fee is the sum of the
eligible Impact Fee CIP costs for the service area divided by the growth in travel
attributable to new development projected to occur within the 10‐year period. A
majority of the components of this calculation have been described and presented in
previous sections of this report. The purpose of this section is to document the
computation for each service area and to demonstrate that the guidelines provided by
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code have been addressed. Table 4‐10
illustrates the computation of the maximum assessable impact fee computed for each
service area. Each row in the table is numbered to simplify explanation of the
calculation.
Line Title Description
1
Total Vehicle‐Miles of
Capacity Added by the
CIP
The total number of vehicle‐miles added to the service area based on
the capacity, length, and number of lanes in each project. (from
Appendix D – CIP Service Units of Supply)
Each project identified in the Roadway Impact Fee CIP will add a certain amount of capacity to the
Town’s roadway network based on its length and classification. This line displays the total amount
added within the service area.
2 Total Vehicle‐Miles of
Existing Demand
A measure of the amount of traffic currently using the roadway
facilities upon which capacity is being added. (from Appendix D –
CIP Service Units of Supply)
A number of facilities identified in the Roadway Impact Fee CIP have traffic currently utilizing a portion
of their existing capacity. This line displays the total amount of capacity along these facilities currently
being used by existing traffic.
3 Total Vehicle‐Miles of
Existing Deficiencies
Number of vehicle‐miles of travel that are not accommodated by the
existing roadway system. (from Appendix E – Existing Roadway
Facilities Inventory)
In order to ensure that existing deficiencies on the Town’s roadway network are not recoverable
through impact fees, this line is based on the entire roadway network within the service area. Any
roadway within the service area that is deficient – even those not identified on the Roadway Impact
Fee CIP – will have these additional trips removed from the calculation.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-21
4
Net Amount of Vehicle‐
Miles of Capacity
Added
A measurement of the amount of vehicle‐miles added by the CIP that
will not be utilized by existing demand. (Line 1 – Line 2 – Line 3)
5 Total Cost of the CIP
within the Service Area
The total cost of the projects within the service area (from Table 4‐
6/Table 4‐7 ‐ 10‐Year Roadway Capital Improvements Plan with
Conceptual Level Cost Projections)
This line simply identifies the total cost of all of the projects identified in the service area.
6 Cost of Net Capacity
Supplied
The total CIP cost (Line 5) prorated by the ratio of Net Capacity
Added (Line 4) to Total Capacity Added (Line 1). [(Line 4 / Line 1) *
(Line 5)]
Using the ratio of vehicle‐miles added by the Roadway Impact Fee CIP available to serve future growth
to the total vehicle‐miles added, the total cost of the Impact Fee CIP is reduced to the amount available
for future growth (i.e., excluding existing usage and deficiencies).
7 Cost to Meet Existing
Needs and Usage
The difference between the Total Cost of the CIP (Line 5) and the
Cost of the Net Capacity supplied (Line 6). (Line 5 – Line 6)
This line is provided for information purposes only – it is to present the portion of the total cost of the
Roadway Impact Fee CIP that is required to meet existing demand.
8
Total Vehicle‐Miles of
New Demand over Ten
Years
Based upon the growth projection provided in the Land Use
Assumptions (see Section 4.1.1), an estimate of the number of new
vehicle‐miles within the service area over the next ten years. (from
Table 4‐9)
This line presents the amount of growth (in vehicle‐miles) projected to occur within each service area
over the next ten years.
9
Percent of Capacity
Added Attributable to
New Growth
The result of dividing Total Vehicle‐Miles of New Demand (Line 8) by
the Net Amount of Capacity Added (Line 4), limited to 100% (Line
10). This calculation is required by Chapter 395 to ensure capacity
added is attributable to new growth. 10 Chapter 395 Check
In order to ensure that the vehicle‐miles added by the Roadway Impact Fee CIP do not exceed the
amount needed to accommodate growth beyond the ten‐year window, a comparison of the two values
is performed. If the amount of vehicle‐miles added by the Roadway Impact Fee CIP exceeds the growth
projected to occur in the next ten years, the Roadway Impact Fee CIP cost is reduced accordingly.
11
Cost of Capacity Added
Attributable to New
Growth
The result of multiplying the Cost of Net Capacity Added (Line 6) by
the Percent of Capacity Added Attributable to New Growth, limited
to 100% (Line 10).
The value of the total Roadway Impact Fee CIP project costs (excluding financial costs) that may be
recovered through impact fees. This line is determined considering the limitations to impact fees
required by the Texas legislature.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-22
4.3.2 Plan For Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires the Capital Improvements
Plan for Roadway Impact Fees to contain specific enumeration of a plan for awarding
the impact fee credit. Section 395.014 of the Code states:
“(7) A plan for awarding:
(A) a credit for the portion of ad valorem tax and utility service revenues
generated by new service units during the program period that is used for
the payment of improvements, including the payment of debt, that are
included in the capital improvements plan; or
(B) In the alternative, a credit equal to 50 percent of the total projected cost of
implementing the capital improvements plan…”
The following table summarizes the portions of Table 4‐10 that utilize this credit
calculation, based on awarding a 50 percent credit.
Line Title Description
12 Financing Costs Using 4.0% Interest Rate for Bond Debt Service.
13 Existing Impact Fee
Fund Balance
Existing Roadway Impact Fees in fund balance as of August 2011
14
Cost of the CIP and
Financing Attributable
to New Growth
The sum of the Cost of Capacity Added Attributable to New Growth,
Financing Costs, and Interest Earnings. (Line 11 + Line 12 ‐ Line 13)
15 Pre‐Credit Maximum
Fee Per Service Unit
Found by dividing the Cost of the CIP and Financing Attributable to
New Growth (Line 14) by the Total Vehicle‐Miles of New Demand
Over Ten Years (Line 8). (Line 14 / Line 8)
16 Credit A credit equal to 50% of the total projected cost, as per section
395.014 of the Texas Local Government Code.
17 Recoverable Cost of CIP
and Financing
The difference between the Cost of the CIP and Financing
Attributable to New Growth (Line 14) and the Credit for Ad Valorem
Taxes (Line 16). (Line 14 ‐ Line 16)
18 Maximum Assessable
Fee Per Service Unit
Found by dividing the Recoverable Cost of the CIP and Financing
(Line 17) by the Total Vehicle‐Miles of New Demand Over Ten Years
(Line 8). (Line 17 / Line 8)
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-23
Table 4‐10 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee
LINE TITLE:
1
(W. of RR)
2
(E. of RR)
1 TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED BY THE CIP
(FROM CIP SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY, APPENDIX D)82,005 76,261
2 TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND
(FROM CIP SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY, APPENDIX D)1,410 12,217
3
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICIENCIES
(FROM EXISTING ROADWAY FACILITIES
INVENTORY, APPENDIX E)
1,097 1,559
4 NET AMOUNT OF VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED
(LINE 1 - LINE 2 - LINE 3)79,498 62,485
5 TOTAL COST OF THE CIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA
(FROM TABLE 4.6/Table 4.7) $ 105,497,526 $ 75,262,200
6 COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED
(LINE 4 / LINE 1) * (LINE 5) $ 102,272,329 $ 61,666,626
7 COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE
(LINE 5 - LINE 6) $ 3,225,197 $ 13,595,574
8 TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS
(FROM TABLE 4.9 and Land Use Assumptions)35,143 43,610
9 PERCENT OF CAPACITY ADDED ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH
(LINE 8 / LINE 4)44.2%69.7%
10 IF LINE 8 > LINE 4, REDUCE LINE 9 TO 100%,
OTHERWISE NO CHANGE 44.2%69.7%
11 COST OF CAPACITY ADDED ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH
(LINE 6 * LINE 10) $ 45,204,369 $ 42,981,638
12 FINANCING COSTS $ 15,034,973 $ 14,295,693
13 EXISTING IMPACT FEE FUND BALANCE $ 52,000 $ 3,618,000
14 COST OF CIP AND FINANCING ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH
(LINE 11 + LINE 12 - LINE 13) $ 60,187,342 $ 53,659,331
15 PRE-CREDIT MAX FEE PER SERVICE UNIT ($ PER VEH-MI)
(LINE 14 / LINE 8) $ 1,713 $ 1,230
16 CREDIT (50% OF LINE 14) $ 30,093,671 $ 26,829,665
17 RECOVERABLE COST OF CIP AND FINANCING
(LINE 14 - LINE 16) $ 30,093,671 $ 26,829,665
18 MAX ASSESSABLE FEE PER SERVICE UNIT ($ PER VEH-MI)
(LINE 17 / LINE 8) $ 856 $ 615
SERVICE AREA
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-24
4.3.3 Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development
The roadway impact fee is determined by multiplying the impact fee rate by the number
of service units projected for the proposed development. For this purpose, the Town
utilizes the Land Use/Vehicle‐Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET), presented in Table 4‐
11. This table lists the predominant land uses that may occur within the Town of
Prosper. For each land use, the development unit that defines the development’s
magnitude with respect to transportation demand is shown. Although every possible
use cannot be anticipated, the majority of uses are found in this table. If the exact use is
not listed, one similar in trip‐making characteristics can serve as a reasonable proxy.
The individual land uses are grouped into categories, such as residential, office,
commercial, industrial, and institutional.
The trip rates presented for each land use is a fundamental component of the LUVMET.
The trip rate is the average number of trips generated during the afternoon peak hour
by each land use per development unit. The next column, if applicable to the land use,
presents the number of trips to and from certain land uses reduced by pass‐by trips, as
previously discussed.
The source of the trip generation and pass‐by statistics is the ITE Trip Generation
Manual, 8th Edition, the latest edition for trip generation data. This manual utilizes trip
generation studies for a variety of land uses throughout the United States, and is the
standard used by traffic engineers and transportation planners for traffic impact
analysis, site design, and transportation planning.
To convert vehicle trips to vehicle‐miles, it is necessary to multiply trips by trip length.
The adjusted trip length values are based on the Regional Origin‐Destination Travel
Survey performed by the NCTCOG and the NHTS. The other adjustment to trip length is
the 50% origin‐destination reduction to avoid double counting of trips. At this stage,
another important aspect of the state law is applied – the limit on transportation service
unit demand. If the adjusted trip length is above the maximum trip length allowed
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-25
within the service area, the maximum trip length used for calculation is reduced to the
corresponding value. This reduction, as discussed previously, limits the maximum trip
length to the approximate size of the service areas.
The remaining column in the LUVMET shows the vehicle‐miles per development unit.
This number is the product of the trip rate and the maximum trip length. This number,
previously referred to as the Transportation Demand Factor, is used in the impact fee
estimate to compute the number of service units consumed by each land use
application. The number of service units is multiplied by the impact fee rate
(established by Town ordinance) in order to determine the impact fee for a
development.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-26
Table 4‐11 Land Use / Vehicle‐Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET)
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-27
4.4 Sample Calculations
The following section details two (2) examples of maximum assessable roadway impact
fee calculations.
Example 1:
Development Type ‐ One (1) Unit of Single‐Family Housing in Service Area 1
Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps – Example 1
Step
1
Determine Development Unit and Vehicle‐Miles Per Development Unit
From Table 4.11 [Land Use – Vehicle Mile Equivalency Table]
Development Type: 1 Dwelling Unit of Single‐Family Detached Housing
Number of Development Units: 1 Dwelling Unit
Veh‐Mi Per Development Unit: 6.06
Step
2
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit
From Table 4.10, Line 18 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit]
Service Area 1: $856
Step
3
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee
Impact Fee = # of Development Units * Veh‐Mi Per Dev Unit * Max. Fee Per Service
Unit
Impact Fee = 1 * 6.06 * $856
Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $5,187.36
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-28
Example 2:
Development Type – 125,000 square foot Home Improvement Superstore in Service
Area 2
Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps – Example 2
Step
1
Determine Development Unit and Vehicle‐Miles Per Development Unit
From Table 4.11 [Land Use – Vehicle Mile Equivalency Table]
Development Type: 125,000 square feet of Home Improvement Superstore
Development Unit: 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area
Veh‐Mi Per Development Unit: 3.96
Step
2
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit
From Table 4.10, Line 18 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit]
Service Area 2: $615
Step
3
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee
Impact Fee = # of Development Units * Veh‐Mi Per Dev Unit * Max. Fee Per Service
Unit
Impact Fee = 125 * 3.96 * $615
Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $304,425
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
4-29
4.5 Conclusion
The Town of Prosper has established a process to implement the assessment and
collection of roadway impact fees through the adoption of an impact fee ordinance that
is consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code.
This report establishes the maximum allowable roadway impact fee that could be
assessed by the Town of Prosper within each Service Area. The maximum assessable
calculated in this report are as follows (from Table 4‐10):
This document serves as a guide to the assessment of roadway impact fees pertaining to
future development and the Town’s need for roadway improvements to accommodate
that growth. Following the public hearing process, the Town Council may establish an
amount to be assessed (if any) up to the maximum established within this report and
update the Roadway Impact Fee Ordinance accordingly. A comparison graph showing
single family home roadway impact fees in other cities throughout the Metroplex is
presented on Figure 4‐2.
In conclusion, it is our opinion that the data and methodology used in this update are
appropriate and consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code.
Furthermore, the Land Use Assumptions and the proposed Capital Improvements Plan
are appropriately incorporated into the process.
LINE TITLE:
1
(W. of RR)
2
(E. of RR)
18 MAX ASSESSABLE FEE PER SERVICE UNIT ($ PER VEH-MI)
(LINE 17 / LINE 8) $ 856 $ 615
SERVICE AREA
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report Town of Prosper 4-30 Figure 4‐2 Roadway Impact Fee per Single Family Home Comparison
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
Appendix A
Water System Project Cost Estimates
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
Construction Project Number 1A
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 5.0 MG Ground Storage Tank 1 LS $3,000,000 $3,000,000
2 Pump Station - Expans 13 MGD 1 LS $800,000 $800,000
3 Generator 1 LS $800,000 $800,000
4 Upgrade Meter 1 LS $50,000 $50,000
SUBTOTAL:$4,650,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$930,000
SUBTOTAL:$5,580,000
ENG/SURVEY 12%$669,600
SUBTOTAL:$6,249,600
PROJECT TOTAL $6,249,600
Construction Project Number 1B
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 30" WL & Appurtenances 12,200 LF $180 $2,196,000
2 24" WL & Appurtenances 4,100 LF $144 $590,400
3 36" Boring and Casing 100 LF $630 $63,000
4 Pavement Repair 7,500 LF $50 $375,000
SUBTOTAL:$3,224,400
CONTINGENCY 20%$644,880
SUBTOTAL:$3,869,280
ENG/SURVEY 12%$464,400
SUBTOTAL:$4,333,700
PROJECT TOTAL $4,333,700
August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Project Description
30-inch Waterline along First Street from NTMWD Delivery Point and 24-inch Waterline along
Coit Road south of Prosper Trail.
Project Description
Expansion of Upper Pressure Plane Pump Station to 20 MGD and addition of 5 MG Ground
Storage Tank.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 2
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 Pressure Reducing Valve Station 2 LS $100,000 $200,000
2 12" WL & Appurtenances 800 LF $120 $96,000
3 20" Boring and Casing 400 LF $700 $280,000
4 Pavement Repair 600 LF $50 $30,000
SUBTOTAL:$606,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$121,200
SUBTOTAL:$727,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$87,300
SUBTOTAL:$814,500
PROJECT TOTAL $814,500
Construction Project Number 3
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 24" WL & Appurtenances 6,000 LF $144 $864,000
2 20" WL & Appurtenances 12,300 LF $120 $1,476,000
3 36" Boring and Casing 200 LF $630 $126,000
4 34" Boring and Casing 500 LF $595 $297,500
5 Transfer Valve Station 1 LS $200,000 $200,000
6 Pavement Repair 17,600 LF $50 $880,000
SUBTOTAL:$3,843,500
CONTINGENCY 20%$768,700
SUBTOTAL:$4,612,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$553,500
SUBTOTAL:$5,165,700
PROJECT TOTAL $5,165,700
This project consists of two Pressure Reducing Valves and a segment of 12-inch waterline to
provide addition transfer points to the Lower Pressure Plane.
Project Description
Project Description
Transfer valve and 24-inch and 20-inch Waterline along University Drive from Preston Road
west to Teel Parkway in the Lower Pressure Plane.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 4
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 30" WL & Appurtenances 2,000 LF $180 $360,000
2 20" WL & Appurtenances 1,800 LF $120 $216,000
3 16" WL & Appurtenances 6,100 LF $96 $585,600
SUBTOTAL:$1,161,600
CONTINGENCY 20%$232,400
SUBTOTAL:$1,394,000
ENG/SURVEY 12%$167,300
SUBTOTAL:$1,561,300
PROJECT TOTAL $1,561,300
Construction Project Number 5
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 24" WL & Appurtenances 6,100 LF $144 $878,400
2 16" WL & Appurtenances 4,000 LF $96 $384,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,262,400
CONTINGENCY 20%$252,500
SUBTOTAL:$1,514,900
ENG/SURVEY 12%$181,800
SUBTOTAL:$1,696,700
PROJECT TOTAL $1,696,700
Project Description
30-inch and 20-inch Waterline along Teel Parkway between University Drive and Fishtrap
Road and a 16-inch Waterline along University Drive between Fields Road and FM 423.
24-inch Waterline along Fishtrap Road between Teel Parkway and Gee Road and a 16-inch
Waterline along Gee Road between Fishtrap Road and University Drive.
Project Description
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 6
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 24" WL & Appurtenances 2,200 LF $144 $316,800
2 20" WL & Appurtenances 3,300 LF $120 $396,000
SUBTOTAL:$712,800
CONTINGENCY 20%$142,600
SUBTOTAL:$855,400
ENG/SURVEY 12%$102,700
SUBTOTAL:$958,100
PROJECT TOTAL $958,100
Construction Project Number 7
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 20" WL & Appurtenances 12,700 LF $120 $1,524,000
2 34" Boring and Casing 200 LF $595 $119,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,643,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$328,600
SUBTOTAL:$1,971,600
ENG/SURVEY 12%$236,600
SUBTOTAL:$2,208,200
PROJECT TOTAL $2,208,200
Project Description
20-inch Waterline along First Street between the Dallas Parkway and Teel Parkway in the
Lower Pressure Plane.
Project Description
24-inch and 20-inch Waterline along the Dallas Parkway between University Drive and First
Street to complete water loop.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 8
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 16" WL & Appurtenances 6,000 LF $96 $576,000
2 Pavement Repair 6,000 LF $50 $300,000
SUBTOTAL:$876,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$175,200
SUBTOTAL:$1,051,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$126,200
SUBTOTAL:$1,177,400
PROJECT TOTAL $1,177,400
Construction Project Number 9
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 2.0 MG Elevated Storage Tank 1 EA $3,000,000 $3,000,000
2 20" WL & Appurtenances 2,800 LF $120 $336,000
3 Pavement Repair 2,800 LF $50 $140,000
SUBTOTAL:$3,476,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$695,200
SUBTOTAL:$4,171,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$500,600
SUBTOTAL:$4,671,800
PROJECT TOTAL $4,671,800
16-inch Waterline along First Street from proposed 30-inch waterline (project 1B) to Whitley
Place Drive.
Project Description
Project Description
20-inch Waterline along Prosper Trail from Preston Road to propsed 2.0 MG Prosper Trail
Elevated Storage Tank.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 10
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 42" WL & Appurtenances 29,000 LF $252 $7,308,000
2 Pump Station - New 10.0 MGD 1 LS $5,000,000 $5,000,000
3 54" Boring and Casing 400 LF $1,015 $406,000
SUBTOTAL:$12,714,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$2,542,800
SUBTOTAL:$15,256,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$1,830,900
SUBTOTAL:$17,087,700
PROJECT TOTAL $17,087,700
Construction Project Number 11
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 20" WL & Appurtenances 5,200 LF $120 $624,000
SUBTOTAL:$624,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$124,800
SUBTOTAL:$748,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$89,900
SUBTOTAL:$838,700
PROJECT TOTAL $838,700
Project Description
10 MGD Pump Station and 42-inch Waterline from NTMWD Delivery Point to the Dallas
Parkway to serve Lower Pressure Plane.
20-inch Waterline along the Dallas Parkway between First Street and Prosper Trail to serve
Lower Pressure Plane.
Project Description
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 12
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 20" WL & Appurtenances 5,800 LF $120 $696,000
SUBTOTAL:$696,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$139,200
SUBTOTAL:$835,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$100,300
SUBTOTAL:$935,500
PROJECT TOTAL $935,500
Construction Project Number 13
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 20" WL & Appurtenances 3,300 LF $120 $396,000
2 16" WL & Appurtenances 7,800 LF $96 $748,800
3 30" Boring and Casing 100 LF $525 $52,500
SUBTOTAL:$1,197,300
CONTINGENCY 20%$239,500
SUBTOTAL:$1,436,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$172,500
SUBTOTAL:$1,609,300
PROJECT TOTAL $1,609,300
Project Description
20-inch and 16-inch Waterline along Legacy Drive between University Drive and Prosper Trail.
Project Description
20-inch Waterline along Prosper Trail from the Dallas Parkway and Legacy Drive to serve
Lower Pressure Plane.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 14
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 24" WL & Appurtenances 5,200 LF $144 $748,800
2 36" Boring and Casing 100 LF $630 $63,000
SUBTOTAL:$811,800
CONTINGENCY 20%$162,400
SUBTOTAL:$974,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$117,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,091,200
PROJECT TOTAL $1,091,200
Construction Project Number 15
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 20" WL & Appurtenances 6,000 LF $120 $720,000
2 Pavement Repair 6,000 LF $50 $300,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,020,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$204,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,224,000
ENG/SURVEY 12%$146,900
SUBTOTAL:$1,370,900
PROJECT TOTAL $1,370,900
24-inch Waterline extension along Fishtrap Road between Gee Road and FM 1385 to meet
future growth.
Project Description
Project Description
20-inch Waterline along Preston Road between University Drive and First Street.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 16
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 16" WL & Appurtenances 9,800 LF $96 $940,800
2 Pavement Repair 4,300 LF $50 $215,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,155,800
CONTINGENCY 20%$231,160
SUBTOTAL:$1,386,960
ENG/SURVEY 12%$166,440
SUBTOTAL:$1,553,400
PROJECT TOTAL $1,553,400
Construction Project Number 17
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 16" WL & Appurtenances 7,000 LF $96 $672,000
2 30" Boring and Casing 100 LF $525 $52,500
3 Pavement Repair 5,500 LF $50 $275,000
SUBTOTAL:$999,500
CONTINGENCY 20%$199,900
SUBTOTAL:$1,199,400
ENG/SURVEY 12%$144,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,343,400
PROJECT TOTAL $1,343,400
Project Description
16-inch Waterline from the Preston Road Elevated Storage Tank along First Street and south
to University Drive.
16-inch Waterline along McKinley Street from First Street to Prosper Trail in the Upper
Pressure Plane.
Project Description
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 18
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 12" WL & Appurtenances 10,500 LF $72 $756,000
2 Pavement Repair 4,600 LF $50 $230,000
SUBTOTAL:$986,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$197,200
SUBTOTAL:$1,183,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$142,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,325,200
PROJECT TOTAL $1,325,200
Construction Project Number 19
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 2.5 MG Elevated Storage Tank 1 EA $3,750,000 $3,750,000
2 20" WL & Appurtenances 1,300 LF $120 $156,000
SUBTOTAL:$3,906,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$781,200
SUBTOTAL:$4,687,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$562,500
SUBTOTAL:$5,249,700
PROJECT TOTAL $5,249,700
10-YEAR TOTAL $61,242,000
Project Description
2.5 MG County Line Elevated Storage Tank near Prosper Trail and Legacy Drive to serve
Lower Pressure Plane.
Project Description
12-inch Waterline along Frontier Parkway and Dallas Parkway to complete looping in the
Lower Pressure Plane.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
Construction Project Number 20
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 16" WL & Appurtenances 6,900 LF $96 $662,400
SUBTOTAL:$662,400
CONTINGENCY 20%$132,500
SUBTOTAL:$794,900
ENG/SURVEY 12%$95,400
SUBTOTAL:$890,300
PROJECT TOTAL $890,300
Construction Project Number 21
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 20" WL & Appurtenances 6,700 LF $120 $804,000
SUBTOTAL:$804,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$160,800
SUBTOTAL:$964,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$115,800
SUBTOTAL:$1,080,600
PROJECT TOTAL $1,080,600
August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Project Description
20-inch Waterline along Teel Parkway between Fishtrap Road and Prosper Trail.
Project Description
16-inch Waterline along Prosper Trail between Legacy Drive and Teel Parkway to serve Lower
Pressure Plane.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Construction Project Number 22
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 36" WL & Appurtenances 8,200 LF $216 $1,771,200
SUBTOTAL:$1,771,200
CONTINGENCY 20%$354,300
SUBTOTAL:$2,125,500
ENG/SURVEY 12%$255,100
SUBTOTAL:$2,380,600
PROJECT TOTAL $2,380,600
Construction Project Number 23
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 30" WL & Appurtenances 5,400 LF $180 $972,000
SUBTOTAL:$972,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$194,400
SUBTOTAL:$1,166,400
ENG/SURVEY 12%$140,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,306,400
PROJECT TOTAL $1,306,400
36-inch Waterline to complete looping between Fishtrap Road and University Drive west of
Dallas Parkway.
Project Description
Project Description
30-inch Waterline to complete looping between Fishtrap Road and University Drive west of
Dallas Parkway.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Construction Project Number 24
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 Pump Station - Expans 10 MGD 1 LS $600,000 $600,000
2 5.0 MG Ground Storage Tank 1 LS $3,000,000 $3,000,000
3 Pump Station - Expans 15 MGD 1 LS $900,000 $900,000
4 Generator 1 LS $800,000 $800,000
5 Upgrade Meter 1 LS $50,000 $50,000
SUBTOTAL:$5,350,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$1,070,000
SUBTOTAL:$6,420,000
ENG/SURVEY 12%$770,400
SUBTOTAL:$7,190,400
PROJECT TOTAL $7,190,400
Construction Project Number 25
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 12" WL & Appurtenances 5,400 LF $72 $388,800
SUBTOTAL:$388,800
CONTINGENCY 20%$77,800
SUBTOTAL:$466,600
ENG/SURVEY 12%$56,000
SUBTOTAL:$522,600
PROJECT TOTAL $522,600
Project Description
Expand Upper Pressure Plane Pump Station to 30 MGD, expand Lower Pressure Plane Pump
Station to 25 MGD, and construct 5 MG Ground Storage Tank.
Project Description
12-inch Waterline along University Drive between FM 1385 and FM 423 in southwest Lower
Pressure Plane.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Construction Project Number 26
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 16" WL & Appurtenances 5,600 LF $96 $537,600
2 Pavement Repair 5,600 LF $50 $280,000
SUBTOTAL:$817,600
CONTINGENCY 20%$163,600
SUBTOTAL:$981,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$117,800
SUBTOTAL:$1,099,000
PROJECT TOTAL $1,099,000
Construction Project Number 27
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 20" WL & Appurtenances 5,400 LF $120 $648,000
SUBTOTAL:$648,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$129,600
SUBTOTAL:$777,600
ENG/SURVEY 12%$93,400
SUBTOTAL:$871,000
PROJECT TOTAL $871,000
Project Description
16-inch Waterline along Preston Road between First Street and Prosper Trail.
Project Description
20-inch Waterline north of Prosper Road and Teel Parkway to Parvin Road in the Lower
Pressure Plane.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Construction Project Number 28
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 20" WL & Appurtenances 6,400 LF $120 $768,000
2 Pavement Repair 6,400 LF $50 $320,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,088,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$217,600
SUBTOTAL:$1,305,600
ENG/SURVEY 12%$156,700
SUBTOTAL:$1,462,300
PROJECT TOTAL $1,462,300
Construction Project Number 29
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 16" WL & Appurtenances 5,500 LF $96 $528,000
SUBTOTAL:$528,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$105,600
SUBTOTAL:$633,600
ENG/SURVEY 12%$76,100
SUBTOTAL:$709,700
PROJECT TOTAL $709,700
Project Description
Project Description
16-inch Waterline along the westside of the BNSF railroad between First Street and University
Drive in the Lower Pressure Plane.
20-inch Waterline from existing 20-inch waterline on Prosper Trail west to Coit Road.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Construction Project Number 30
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 24" WL & Appurtenances 7,900 LF $144 $1,137,600
SUBTOTAL:$1,137,600
CONTINGENCY 20%$227,600
SUBTOTAL:$1,365,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$163,900
SUBTOTAL:$1,529,100
PROJECT TOTAL $1,529,100
Construction Project Number 31
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 2.5 MG Elevated Storage Tank 1 LS $3,750,000 $3,750,000
SUBTOTAL:$3,750,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$750,000
SUBTOTAL:$4,500,000
ENG/SURVEY 12%$540,000
SUBTOTAL:$5,040,000
PROJECT TOTAL $5,040,000
Project Description
Project Description
24-inch Waterline extension along FM 1385 between Fishtrap Road and Parvin Road to meet
future growth.
2.5 MG FM 1385 Elevated Storage Tank near FM1385 and Parvin Road to meet future
growth.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Construction Project Number 32
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 16" WL & Appurtenances 5,400 LF $96 $518,400
SUBTOTAL:$518,400
CONTINGENCY 20%$103,700
SUBTOTAL:$622,100
ENG/SURVEY 12%$74,700
SUBTOTAL:$696,800
PROJECT TOTAL $696,800
Construction Project Number 33
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 12" WL & Appurtenances 11,100 LF $72 $799,200
2 20" Boring and Casing 150 LF $350 $52,500
SUBTOTAL:$851,700
CONTINGENCY 20%$170,400
SUBTOTAL:$1,022,100
ENG/SURVEY 12%$122,700
SUBTOTAL:$1,144,800
PROJECT TOTAL $1,144,800
Project Description
12-inch Waterline along Legacy Drive and Frontier Parkway to complete waterline loop.
Project Description
16-inch Waterline along the westside of the BNSF railroad between First Street and Prosper
Trail in the Lower Pressure Plane.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Construction Project Number 34
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 16" WL & Appurtenances 11,000 LF $96 $1,056,000
2 30" Boring and Casing 200 LF $525 $105,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,161,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$232,200
SUBTOTAL:$1,393,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$167,200
SUBTOTAL:$1,560,400
PROJECT TOTAL $1,560,400
Construction Project Number 35
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 Pump Station - Expans 10 MGD 1 LS $600,000 $600,000
2 5.0 MG Ground Storage Tank 1 LS $3,000,000 $3,000,000
SUBTOTAL:$3,600,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$720,000
SUBTOTAL:$4,320,000
ENG/SURVEY 12%$518,400
SUBTOTAL:$4,838,400
PROJECT TOTAL $4,838,400
16-inch Waterline along Parvin Road between FM1385 and Legacy Drive to complete
waterline looping.
Project Description
Project Description
Expand Lower Pressure Plane Pump Station to 40 MGD and construct 5 MG Ground Storage
Tank.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Construction Project Number 36
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 12" WL & Appurtenances 7,400 LF $72 $532,800
SUBTOTAL:$532,800
CONTINGENCY 20%$106,600
SUBTOTAL:$639,400
ENG/SURVEY 12%$76,800
SUBTOTAL:$716,200
PROJECT TOTAL $716,200
Construction Project Number 37
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 12" WL & Appurtenances 4,200 LF $72 $302,400
SUBTOTAL:$302,400
CONTINGENCY 20%$60,500
SUBTOTAL:$362,900
ENG/SURVEY 12%$43,600
SUBTOTAL:$406,500
PROJECT TOTAL $406,500
Project Description
12-inch Waterline along Parvin Road between Smiley Road and Legacy Drive to complete
waterline looping.
12-inch Waterline along FM 1385 between University Drive and Fishtrap Road to complete
waterline loop in southwest Lower Pressure Plane.
Project Description
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Water CIP 2022-Buildout Projects
Construction Project Number 38
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 16" WL & Appurtenances 5,200 LF $96 $499,200
2 Pavement Repair 5,200 LF $50 $260,000
SUBTOTAL:$759,200
CONTINGENCY 20%$151,900
SUBTOTAL:$911,100
ENG/SURVEY 12%$109,400
SUBTOTAL:$1,020,500
PROJECT TOTAL $1,020,500
TOTAL $34,465,600
Project Description
16-inch Waterline along Preston Road between Frontier Parkway and Prosper Trail.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
Appendix B
Wastewater System Project Cost Estimates
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
Construction Project Number 1
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 24" Pipe 4,500 LF $144 $648,000
2 21" Pipe 4,700 LF $126 $592,200
3 15" Pipe 3,300 LF $90 $297,000
4 60" Diameter Manhole 19 EA $6,000 $114,000
5 32" Boring and Casing 100 LF $495 $49,500
6 Decommission Lift Station 2 LS $50,000 $100,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,800,700
CONTINGENCY 20%$360,200
SUBTOTAL:$2,160,900
ENG/SURVEY 12%$259,400
SUBTOTAL:$2,420,300
PROJECT TOTAL $2,420,300
Construction Project Number 2
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Force Main 3,700 LF $90 $333,000
2 12" Pipe 2,700 LF $72 $194,400
3 48" Diameter Manhole 6 EA $5,000 $30,000
4 Decommission Lift Station 1 LS $50,000 $50,000
5 Pavement Repair 2,700 LF $50 $135,000
SUBTOTAL:$742,400
CONTINGENCY 20%$148,500
SUBTOTAL:$890,900
ENG/SURVEY 12%$107,000
SUBTOTAL:$997,900
PROJECT TOTAL $997,900
Project Description
10-inch Force Main and 12-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 6 to convey flow from La Cima L.S.
to Sub Basin 6 and decommision Greenspoint lift Station.
Project Description
24-inch, 21-inch, and 15-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 6 to decommission Whispering Farms
and La Cima #2 Lift Stations then convey flows to NTMWD Interceptor.
August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Wastewater CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
1
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Wastewater CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 3
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 15" Pipe 3,300 LF $90 $297,000
2 12" Pipe 1,300 LF $72 $93,600
3 10" Pipe 2,300 LF $60 $138,000
4 60" Diameter Manhole 7 EA $6,000 $42,000
5 48" Diameter Manhole 8 EA $5,000 $40,000
6 26" Boring and Casing 200 LF $400 $80,000
SUBTOTAL:$690,600
CONTINGENCY 20%$138,200
SUBTOTAL:$828,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$99,500
SUBTOTAL:$928,300
PROJECT TOTAL $928,300
Construction Project Number 4
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 15" Pipe 3,000 LF $90 $270,000
2 10" Pipe 2,000 LF $60 $120,000
3 60" Diameter Manhole 6 EA $6,000 $36,000
4 48" Diameter Manhole 4 EA $5,000 $20,000
5 20" Boring and Casing 100 LF $300 $30,000
SUBTOTAL:$476,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$95,200
SUBTOTAL:$571,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$68,600
SUBTOTAL:$639,800
PROJECT TOTAL $639,800
Project Description
15-inch and 10-inch Interceptor in southeastern portion of Sub Basin 6 along Rutherford
Branch Creek near CR 933.
15-inch, 12-inch, and 10-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 4 north of Prosper Trail connecting to
existing 21-inch at Victory Way and Frontier Parkway.
Project Description
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Wastewater CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 5
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Pipe 7,400 LF $60 $444,000
2 48" Diameter Manhole 15 EA $5,000 $75,000
SUBTOTAL:$519,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$103,800
SUBTOTAL:$622,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$74,800
SUBTOTAL:$697,600
PROJECT TOTAL $697,600
Construction Project Number 6
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 27" Pipe 3,200 LF $162 $518,400
2 24" Pipe 6,400 LF $144 $921,600
3 60" Diameter Manhole 12 EA $6,000 $72,000
4 38" Boring and Casing 100 LF $600 $60,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,572,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$314,400
SUBTOTAL:$1,886,400
ENG/SURVEY 12%$226,400
SUBTOTAL:$2,112,800
PROJECT TOTAL $2,112,800
27-inch and 24-inch Interceptor north of University Drive in Sub Basin 3 from UTRWD
Interceptor east to Teel Parkway.
Project Description
Project Description
10-inch Interceptor in southeastern portion of Sub Basin 6 along Rutherford Branch Creek
west of CR 933.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Wastewater CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 7
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 42" Pipe 400 LF $252 $100,800
2 30" Pipe 1,100 LF $180 $198,000
3 27" Pipe 1,300 LF $162 $210,600
4 24" Pipe 4,600 LF $144 $662,400
5 10" Pipe 5,300 LF $60 $318,000
6 72" Diameter Manhole 4 EA $6,000 $24,000
7 60" Diameter Manhole 6 EA $6,000 $36,000
8 48" Diameter Manhole 11 EA $5,000 $55,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,604,800
CONTINGENCY 20%$321,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,925,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$231,100
SUBTOTAL:$2,156,900
PROJECT TOTAL $2,156,900
Construction Project Number 8
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 24" Pipe 4,700 LF $144 $676,800
2 21" Pipe 6,300 LF $126 $793,800
3 10" Pipe 7,600 LF $60 $456,000
4 60" Diameter Manhole 14 EA $6,000 $84,000
5 48" Diameter Manhole 16 EA $5,000 $80,000
SUBTOTAL:$2,090,600
CONTINGENCY 20%$418,200
SUBTOTAL:$2,508,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$301,100
SUBTOTAL:$2,809,900
PROJECT TOTAL $2,809,900
Project Description
24-inch, 21-inch, and 10-inch Interceptor along Doe Branch Creek near Fishtrap Road and
Legacy Drive in Sub Basin 3 to convey flow to UTRWD.
Project Description
42-inch, 30-inch, 27-inch, 24-inch, and 10-inch Interceptor along Doe Branch Creek and
Fishtrap Road to Teel Parkway in Sub Basin 3 to convey flow to UTRWD Interceptor.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Wastewater CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 9
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 21" Pipe 2,400 LF $126 $302,400
2 18" Pipe 5,900 LF $108 $637,200
3 12" Pipe 5,100 LF $72 $367,200
4 10" Pipe 3,500 LF $60 $210,000
5 60" Diameter Manhole 11 EA $6,000 $66,000
6 48" Diameter Manhole 18 EA $5,000 $90,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,672,800
CONTINGENCY 20%$334,600
SUBTOTAL:$2,007,400
ENG/SURVEY 12%$240,900
SUBTOTAL:$2,248,300
PROJECT TOTAL $2,248,300
Construction Project Number 10
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 21" Pipe 9,500 LF $126 $1,197,000
2 60" Diameter Manhole 12 EA $6,000 $72,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,269,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$253,800
SUBTOTAL:$1,522,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$182,800
SUBTOTAL:$1,705,600
PROJECT TOTAL $1,705,600
Project Description
21-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 3 north of University Drive and west of Teel Parkway to
convey flow UTRMWD.
21-inch, 18-inch, 12-inch, and 10-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 3 north of First Street to
decommission WWTP and Private Lift Station then convey flows to UTRWD.
Project Description
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Wastewater CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 11
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Pipe 2,100 LF $60 $126,000
2 48" Diameter Manhole 5 EA $5,000 $25,000
SUBTOTAL:$151,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$30,200
SUBTOTAL:$181,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$21,800
SUBTOTAL:$203,000
PROJECT TOTAL $203,000
Construction Project Number 12
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Pipe 3,500 LF $60 $210,000
2 48" Diameter Manhole 7 EA $5,000 $35,000
SUBTOTAL:$245,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$49,000
SUBTOTAL:$294,000
ENG/SURVEY 12%$35,300
SUBTOTAL:$329,300
PROJECT TOTAL $329,300
10-inch Interceptor north of First Street in Sub Basin 6 to convey flow due to growth.
Project Description
Project Description
10-inch Interceptor northwest of First Street and Legacy Drive in the eastern portion of Sub
Basin 3.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Wastewater CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 13
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Pipe 2,000 LF $60 $120,000
2 48" Diameter Manhole 4 EA $5,000 $20,000
3 20" Boring and Casing 100 LF $300 $30,000
SUBTOTAL:$170,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$34,000
SUBTOTAL:$204,000
ENG/SURVEY 12%$24,500
SUBTOTAL:$228,500
PROJECT TOTAL $228,500
Construction Project Number 14
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 18" Pipe 4,600 LF $108 $496,800
2 15" Pipe 3,100 LF $90 $279,000
3 60" Diameter Manhole 13 EA $6,000 $78,000
4 26" Boring and Casing 400 LF $400 $160,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,013,800
CONTINGENCY 20%$202,800
SUBTOTAL:$1,216,600
ENG/SURVEY 12%$146,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,362,600
PROJECT TOTAL $1,362,600
Project Description
18-inch and 15-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 3 from BNSF railroad to University Drive west of
Dallas Parkway.
Project Description
10-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 6 from First Street to proposed 21-inch Interceptor (project 1)
.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
Wastewater CIP Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Construction Project Number 15
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 12" Pipe 5,700 LF $72 $410,400
2 10" Pipe 6,300 LF $60 $378,000
3 48" Diameter Manhole 24 EA $5,000 $120,000
4 20" Boring and Casing 100 LF $300 $30,000
SUBTOTAL:$938,400
CONTINGENCY 20%$187,700
SUBTOTAL:$1,126,100
ENG/SURVEY 12%$135,200
SUBTOTAL:$1,261,300
PROJECT TOTAL $1,261,300
TOTAL $20,102,100
Project Description
12-inch and 10-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 4 north of University Drive between the BNSF
railroad and Preston Road.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
Construction Project Number 16
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 27" Pipe 7,600 LF $162 $1,231,200
2 72" Diameter Manhole 10 EA $6,000 $60,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,291,200
CONTINGENCY 20%$258,300
SUBTOTAL:$1,549,500
ENG/SURVEY 12%$186,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,735,500
PROJECT TOTAL $1,735,500
Construction Project Number 17
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 15" Pipe 3,200 LF $90 $288,000
2 12" Pipe 3,100 LF $72 $223,200
3 10" Pipe 3,500 LF $60 $210,000
4 60" Diameter Manhole 7 EA $6,000 $42,000
5 48" Diameter Manhole 14 EA $5,000 70,000
SUBTOTAL:$833,200
CONTINGENCY 20%$166,700
SUBTOTAL:$999,900
ENG/SURVEY 12%$120,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,119,900
PROJECT TOTAL $1,119,900
Project Description
15-inch, 12-inch, and 10-inch Interceptor south of Prosper Road and east of Teel Parkway.
Project Description
27-inch Interceptor along Doe Branch Creek in Sub Basin 2 north of Fishtrap Road and west
of Teel Parkway.
August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
2022 - Buildout
16
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
2022 - Buildout
Construction Project Number 18
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 24" Pipe 7,400 LF $144 $1,065,600
2 21" Pipe 2,200 LF $126 $277,200
3 60" Diameter Manhole 12 EA $6,000 $72,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,414,800
CONTINGENCY 20%$282,960
SUBTOTAL:$1,697,760
ENG/SURVEY 12%$203,740
SUBTOTAL:$1,901,500
PROJECT TOTAL $1,901,500
Construction Project Number 19
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Pipe 4,600 LF $60 $276,000
2 48" Diameter Manhole 10 EA $5,000 $50,000
SUBTOTAL:$326,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$65,200
SUBTOTAL:$391,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$47,000
SUBTOTAL:$438,200
PROJECT TOTAL $438,200
Project Description
10-inch Interceptor south of Fishtrap Road in sub Basin 1 to convey flow to UTRWD.
24-inch and 21-inch Interceptor along Doe Branch Creek north of Prosper Road in Sub Basin
2.
Project Description
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
2022 - Buildout
Construction Project Number 20
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 12" Pipe 1,600 LF $72 $115,200
2 10" Pipe 2,100 LF $60 $126,000
3 48" Diameter Manhole 8 EA $5,000 $40,000
4 20" Boring and Casing 100 LF $300 $30,000
SUBTOTAL:$311,200
CONTINGENCY 20%$62,300
SUBTOTAL:$373,500
ENG/SURVEY 12%$44,900
SUBTOTAL:$418,400
PROJECT TOTAL $418,400
Construction Project Number 21
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 18" Pipe 4,300 LF $108 $464,400
2 15" Pipe 5,600 LF $90 $504,000
3 60" Diameter Manhole 18 EA $6,000 $108,000
4 Decommission Lift Station 1 LS $50,000 $50,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,126,400
CONTINGENCY 20%$225,300
SUBTOTAL:$1,351,700
ENG/SURVEY 12%$162,300
SUBTOTAL:$1,514,000
PROJECT TOTAL $1,514,000
18-inch and 15-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 2 north of Prosper Trail to Decommission Lift
Station and convey flow to UTRWD.
Project Description
Project Description
12-inch and 10-inch Interceptor west of Noles Road in Sub Basin 1 to convey flow to UTRWD.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
2022 - Buildout
Construction Project Number 22
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Pipe 3,400 LF $60 $204,000
2 48" Diameter Manhole 7 EA $5,000 $35,000
SUBTOTAL:$239,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$47,800
SUBTOTAL:$286,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$34,500
SUBTOTAL:$321,300
PROJECT TOTAL $321,300
Construction Project Number 23
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 12" Pipe 1,100 LF $72 $79,200
2 10" Pipe 3,000 LF $60 $180,000
3 48" Diameter Manhole 9 EA $5,000 $45,000
SUBTOTAL:$304,200
CONTINGENCY 20%$60,900
SUBTOTAL:$365,100
ENG/SURVEY 12%$43,900
SUBTOTAL:$409,000
PROJECT TOTAL $409,000
Project Description
12-inch and 10-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 2 along Doe Branch Creek near Parvin Road
and Legacy Drive.
Project Description
10-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 2 near Prosper Trail west of Dallas Parkway to convey flow
due to growth.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
2022 - Buildout
Construction Project Number 24
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Pipe 2,900 LF $60 $174,000
2 48" Diameter Manhole 6 EA $5,000 $30,000
3 20" Boring and Casing 100 LF $300 $30,000
SUBTOTAL:$234,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$46,800
SUBTOTAL:$280,800
ENG/SURVEY 12%$33,700
SUBTOTAL:$314,500
PROJECT TOTAL $314,500
Construction Project Number 25
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Pipe 3,100 LF $60 $186,000
2 48" Diameter Manhole 7 EA $5,000 $35,000
3 20" Boring and Casing 100 LF $300 $30,000
SUBTOTAL:$251,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$50,200
SUBTOTAL:$301,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$36,200
SUBTOTAL:$337,400
PROJECT TOTAL $337,400
Project Description
10-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 1 south of Parvin Road to convey flow due to growth to
UTRWD.
10-inch Interceptor in Sub Basin 1 east of FM 1385 to convey flow due to growth to UTRWD.
Project Description
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST August 22, 2011
Town of Prosper
2022 - Buildout
Construction Project Number 26
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 10" Pipe 3,100 LF $60 $186,000
2 48" Diameter Manhole 7 EA $5,000 $35,000
3 20" Boring and Casing 100 LF $300 $30,000
SUBTOTAL:$251,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$50,200
SUBTOTAL:$301,200
ENG/SURVEY 12%$36,200
SUBTOTAL:$337,400
PROJECT TOTAL $337,400
Construction Project Number 27
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 15" Pipe 2,200 LF $90 $198,000
2 12" Pipe 2,000 LF $72 $144,000
3 10" Pipe 12,000 LF $60 $720,000
4 60" Diameter Manhole 5 EA $6,000 $30,000
5 48" Diameter Manhole 28 EA $5,000 $140,000
6 Pavement Repair 3,000 LF $50 $150,000
SUBTOTAL:$1,382,000
CONTINGENCY 20%$276,400
SUBTOTAL:$1,658,400
ENG/SURVEY 12%$199,100
SUBTOTAL:$1,857,500
PROJECT TOTAL $1,857,500
TOTAL $10,704,600
15-inch, 12-inch, and 10-inch Interceptors in Sub Basin 6 to convert various sub divisions from
septic service to city wastewater service.
Project Description
Project Description
10-inch Interceptor in west of Good Hope Road and Parvin Road in Sub Basin 1 to convey
flow to UTRWD.
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
Appendix C
Roadway Project Cost Estimates
Roadway Improvements - Service Area 1
#Class Project Limits Project Cost
1-A 6LD FM 1385 US 380 to Gee Rd. (Existing Fish Trap Rd.)1,015,200$
1-B 6LD FM 423 (FM 1385)Gee Rd. to Parvin Rd.1,496,000$
1-C 6LD Gee Rd.US 380 to FM 1385 7,429,000$
1-D 6LD Teel Pkwy. (1)US 380 to Fish Trap Rd.3,941,000$
1-E 6LD Teel Pkwy. (2)Fish Trap Rd. to 1,705' S. of Prosper Trl.5,385,000$
1-F 6LD Teel Pkwy. (3)1,705' S. of Prosper Trl. to Prosper Trl.1,739,000$
1-G 6LD Teel Pkwy. (4)Prosper Trl. to Parvin Rd.3,555,000$
1-H 6LD Legacy Dr. (1)US 380 to Fish Trap Rd.6,167,000$
1-I 6LD Legacy Dr. (2)Fish Trap Rd. to Existing Parvin Rd.9,025,000$
1-J 6LD Legacy Dr. (3)Existing Parvin Rd. to Frontier Pkwy.2,497,000$
1-K 2LC DNT E. Collector (1)US 380 to 1,320' S. of Fish Trap Rd.2,101,000$
1-L 2LC DNT E. Collector (2)1,320' S. of Fish Trap Rd. to Fish Trap Rd.639,000$
1-M 2LC DNT E. Collector (3)Fish Trap Rd. to Frontier Pkwy.5,487,000$
1-N 6LD Parvin Rd.FM 423 (FM 1385) to 3,680' E. of Teel Pkwy.2,702,600$
1-O 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (1) / FM 1461 Legacy Dr. to DNT 1,244,200$
1-P 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (2) / FM 1461 DNT to BNSF RR 1,890,000$
1-Q 4LD Prosper Trl. (1)Teel Pkwy. to 1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy.1,296,000$
1-R 4LD Prosper Trl. (2)1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy to 3,660' E. of Teel Pkwy.1,282,000$
1-S 4LD Prosper Trl. (3)2,110' W. of Legacy Dr. to 1,600' W. of Legacy Dr.362,000$
1-T 4LD Prosper Trl. (4)1,600' W. of Legacy Dr. to DNT 5,176,000$
1-U 4LD Prosper Trl. (5)DNT to BNSF RR 851,126$
1-V 4LD Fish Trap Rd. (1)Gee Rd. to Teel Pkwy.3,196,000$
1-W 4LD(1/2) Fish Trap Rd. (2)Teel Pkwy. To 2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy.186,400$
1-X 4LD Fish Trap Rd. (3)2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy. to BNSF RR 10,607,000$
1-Y 4LD E-W Collector Teel Pkwy. to Fish Trap Rd.10,536,000$
1-Z 4LD DNT W. Collector Fish Trap Rd. to Parvin Rd.8,627,000$
1-AA 4LD Lovers Ln.US 380 to BNSF RR 7,332,000$
1-BB 2LC DNT Frontage Road US 380 to Frontier Pkwy.8,227,000$
I-1 Signal Installation DNT & Frontier Parkway 140,000$
I-2 Signal Installation DNT & Prosper Trl.140,000$
SUM1 Signal Installation DNT & First St.140,000$
TOTAL 114,411,526$
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the
Town Engineer for a specific project.
Town of Prosper - 2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Capital Improvements Plan for Roadway Impact Fees
Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
*Total may be higher than presented in Table 4.6 (10-Year Capital
Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Cost
Opinions - Service Area 1) because the cost of some projects are shared
between multiple jurisdictions.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any
future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
Signal Installation
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-A
Name:FM 1385
Limits:US 380 to Gee Rd. (Existing Fish Trap Rd.)
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):4,985
Service Area(s):1 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 22,156 cy 9.00$199,400$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)43,203 sy 3.50$151,212$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 40,988 sy 36.00$1,475,560$
409 4" Topsoil 21,048 sy 5.00$105,239$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 5 ea 2,500.00$12,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,943,911$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%116,635$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%97,196$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%58,317$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%485,978$
¥Illumination 6%116,635$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%116,635$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%77,756$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%58,317$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%58,317$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,185,785$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,129,696$
Construction Contingency:15%469,454$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,600,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,600,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%720,000$
Mobilization 6%216,000$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%540,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)1,015,200$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of TxDOT's
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
asphalt facility into a six-lane divided
facility. The boundary between Prosper
and Little Elm is on the centerline of FM
1385. It is anticipated that the Town of
Prosper will contribute 20% of the total
project cost.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-B
Name:FM 423 (FM 1385)
Limits:Gee Rd. to Parvin Rd.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):7,350
Service Area(s):1 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 32,667 cy 9.00$294,000$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)63,700 sy 3.50$222,950$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 60,433 sy 36.00$2,175,600$
409 4" Topsoil 31,033 sy 5.00$155,167$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 7 ea 2,500.00$17,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,865,217$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%171,913$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%143,261$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%85,957$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%716,304$
¥Illumination 6%171,913$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%171,913$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%114,609$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%85,957$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%85,957$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,747,782$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,612,999$
Construction Contingency:15%691,950$
Construction Cost TOTAL:5,305,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-5,305,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%1,061,000$
Mobilization 6%318,300$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%795,750$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)1,496,000$
This project consists of TxDOT's reconstruction of
an existing two-lane asphalt facility into a six-lane
divided facility. The boundary between Prosper and
Little Elm is on the centerline of FM 1385. It is
anticipated that the Town of Prosper will contribute
20% of the total project cost.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-C
Name:Gee Rd.
Limits:US 380 to FM 1385
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):7,880
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 35,022 cy 9.00$315,200$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)68,293 sy 3.50$239,027$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 64,791 sy 36.00$2,332,480$
409 4" Topsoil 33,271 sy 5.00$166,356$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 8 ea 2,500.00$20,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:3,073,062$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%184,384$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%153,653$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%92,192$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%768,266$
¥Illumination 6%184,384$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%184,384$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%122,922$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%92,192$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%92,192$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:2,124,568$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:5,197,630$
Construction Contingency:15%779,645$
Construction Cost TOTAL:5,978,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-5,978,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%1,195,600$
Mobilization 6%358,680$
Previous Town contribution
Other Denton County Contribution (1,000,000)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%896,700$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:7,429,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a six-lane
divided facility. Denton County is anticipated to
contribute $1,000,000 to the widening of the rural
roadway to a two-lane urban roadway. This County
contribution has been removed from the cost.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-D
Name:Teel Pkwy. (1)
Limits:US 380 to Fish Trap Rd.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):3,870
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 17,200 cy 9.00$154,800$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)33,540 sy 3.50$117,390$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 31,820 sy 36.00$1,145,520$
409 4" Topsoil 16,340 sy 5.00$81,700$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 4 ea 2,500.00$10,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,509,410$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%90,565$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%75,471$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%45,282$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%377,353$
¥Illumination 6%90,565$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%90,565$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%60,376$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%45,282$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%45,282$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:920,740$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:2,430,150$
Construction Contingency:15%364,523$
Construction Cost TOTAL:2,795,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-2,795,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%559,000$
Mobilization 6%167,700$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%419,250$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,941,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a six-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-E
Name:Teel Pkwy. (2)
Limits:Fish Trap Rd. to 1,705' S. of Prosper Trl.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):4,890
Service Area(s):1 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 21,733 cy 9.00$195,600$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)42,380 sy 3.50$148,330$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 40,207 sy 36.00$1,447,440$
409 4" Topsoil 20,647 sy 5.00$103,233$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 5 ea 2,500.00$12,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,907,103$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%114,426$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%95,355$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%57,213$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%476,776$
¥Illumination 6%114,426$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%114,426$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%76,284$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%57,213$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%57,213$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,413,333$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,320,436$
Construction Contingency:15%498,065$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,819,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,819,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%763,800$
Mobilization 6%229,140$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%572,850$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,385,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
gravel facility into a six-lane divided
facility. The boundary between Prosper
and Artesia is on the centerline of Teel
Pkwy.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-F
Name:Teel Pkwy. (3)
Limits:1,705' S. of Prosper Trl. to Prosper Trl.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):1,705
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 7,578 cy 9.00$68,200$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)14,777 sy 3.50$51,718$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 14,019 sy 36.00$504,680$
409 4" Topsoil 7,199 sy 5.00$35,994$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:665,593$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%39,936$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%33,280$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%19,968$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%166,398$
¥Illumination 6%39,936$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%39,936$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%26,624$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%19,968$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%19,968$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:406,012$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,071,604$
Construction Contingency:15%160,741$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,233,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,233,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%246,600$
Mobilization 6%73,980$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%184,950$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,739,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
gravel facility into a six-lane divided
facility.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-G
Name:Teel Pkwy. (4)
Limits:Prosper Trl. to Parvin Rd.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):2,845
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 12,644 cy 9.00$113,800$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)24,657 sy 3.50$86,298$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 23,392 sy 36.00$842,120$
409 4" Topsoil 12,012 sy 5.00$60,061$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 3 ea 2,500.00$7,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,109,779$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%66,587$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%33,293$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%277,445$
¥Illumination 6%66,587$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%66,587$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%44,391$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%33,293$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%33,293$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:871,476$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,981,256$
Construction Contingency:15%297,188$
Construction Cost TOTAL:2,279,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-2,279,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%455,800$
Mobilization 6%136,740$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30%683,700$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,555,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
six-lane divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-H
Name:Legacy Dr. (1)
Limits:US 380 to Fish Trap Rd.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):5,240
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 23,289 cy 9.00$209,600$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)45,413 sy 3.50$158,947$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 43,084 sy 36.00$1,551,040$
409 4" Topsoil 22,124 sy 5.00$110,622$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 5 ea 2,500.00$12,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,042,709$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%122,563$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%61,281$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%510,677$
¥Illumination 6%122,563$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%122,563$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%81,708$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%61,281$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%61,281$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,393,917$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,436,626$
Construction Contingency:15%515,494$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,953,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,953,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%790,600$
Mobilization 6%237,180$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30%1,185,900$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:6,167,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
six-lane divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-I
Name:Legacy Dr. (2)
Limits:Fish Trap Rd. to Existing Parvin Rd.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):8,865
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 39,400 cy 9.00$354,600$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)76,830 sy 3.50$268,905$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 72,890 sy 36.00$2,624,040$
409 4" Topsoil 37,430 sy 5.00$187,150$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 9 ea 2,500.00$22,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:3,457,195$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%207,432$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%172,860$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%103,716$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%864,299$
¥Illumination 6%207,432$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%207,432$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%138,288$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%103,716$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%103,716$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:2,108,889$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:5,566,084$
Construction Contingency:15%834,913$
Construction Cost TOTAL:6,401,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-6,401,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%1,280,200$
Mobilization 6%384,060$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%960,150$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:9,025,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane gravel facility into a six-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-J
Name:Legacy Dr. (3)
Limits:Existing Parvin Rd. to Frontier Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):2,455
Service Area(s):1 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 10,911 cy 9.00$98,200$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)21,277 sy 3.50$74,468$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 20,186 sy 36.00$726,680$
409 4" Topsoil 10,366 sy 5.00$51,828$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:956,176$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%57,371$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%47,809$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%28,685$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%239,044$
¥Illumination 6%57,371$
Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing - Existing Bridge -$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%57,371$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%38,247$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%28,685$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%28,685$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:583,267$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,539,444$
Construction Contingency:15%230,917$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,771,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,771,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%354,200$
Mobilization 6%106,260$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%265,650$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,497,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane gravel facility into a six-lane
divided facility. The boundary between Prosper and
Celina is on the centerline of Legacy Dr.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-K
Name:DNT E. Collector (1)
Limits:US 380 to 1,320' S. of Fish Trap Rd.
Impact Fee Class:2LC
Ultimate Class:2LC
Length (lf):4,040
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
102 Unclassified Street Excavation 8,978 cy 9.00$80,800$
202 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)17,507 sy 3.50$61,273$
302 7" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 16,609 sy 34.00$564,702$
402 4" Topsoil 6,733 sy 5.00$33,667$
502 Concrete Driveway Approach 4 ea 2,500.00$10,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:750,442$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%45,027$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%22,513$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%187,611$
¥Illumination 6%45,027$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%45,027$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%30,018$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%22,513$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%22,513$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:420,248$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,170,690$
Construction Contingency:15%175,603$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,347,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,347,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%269,400$
Mobilization 6%80,820$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30%404,100$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,101,000$
This project consists of the construction of a two-
lane collector facility parallel to the future DNT.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-L
Name:DNT E. Collector (2)
Limits:1,320' S. of Fish Trap Rd. to Fish Trap Rd.
Impact Fee Class:2LC
Ultimate Class:2LC
Length (lf):1,320
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
102 Unclassified Street Excavation 2,933 cy 9.00$26,400$
202 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)5,720 sy 3.50$20,020$
302 7" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 5,427 sy 34.00$184,507$
402 4" Topsoil 2,200 sy 5.00$11,000$
502 Concrete Driveway Approach 1 ea 2,500.00$2,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:244,427$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%14,666$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%12,221$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%7,333$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%61,107$
¥Illumination 6%14,666$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%14,666$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%9,777$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%7,333$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%7,333$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:149,100$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:393,527$
Construction Contingency:15%59,029$
Construction Cost TOTAL:453,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-453,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%90,600$
Mobilization 6%27,180$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%67,950$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:639,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
gravel facility into a new two-lane
collector facility parallel to the future
DNT.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-M
Name:DNT E. Collector (3)
Limits:Fish Trap Rd. to Frontier Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:2LC
Ultimate Class:2LC
Length (lf):10,545
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
102 Unclassified Street Excavation 23,433 cy 9.00$210,900$
202 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)45,695 sy 3.50$159,933$
302 7" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 43,352 sy 34.00$1,473,957$
402 4" Topsoil 17,575 sy 5.00$87,875$
502 Concrete Driveway Approach 11 ea 2,500.00$27,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,960,164$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%117,610$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%58,805$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%490,041$
¥Illumination 6%117,610$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%117,610$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%78,407$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%58,805$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%58,805$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,097,692$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,057,856$
Construction Contingency:15%458,678$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,517,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,517,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%703,400$
Mobilization 6%211,020$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30% 1,055,100$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,487,000$
This project consists of the construction of a two-
lane collector facility parallel to the future DNT.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-N
Name:Parvin Rd.
Limits:FM 423 (FM 1385) to 3,680' E. of Teel Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):12,875
Service Area(s):1 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 57,222 cy 9.00$515,000$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)111,583 sy 3.50$390,542$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 105,861 sy 36.00$3,811,000$
409 4" Topsoil 54,361 sy 5.00$271,806$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 13 ea 2,500.00$32,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:5,020,847$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%301,251$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%251,042$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%150,625$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%1,255,212$
¥Illumination 6%301,251$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%301,251$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%200,834$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%150,625$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%150,625$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:3,312,717$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:8,333,564$
Construction Contingency:15%1,250,035$
Construction Cost TOTAL:9,584,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-9,584,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%1,916,800$
Mobilization 6%575,040$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%1,437,600$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)2,702,600$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
asphalt facility into a six-lane divided
facility. The boundary between Prosper
and Celina is on the centerline of Parvin
Road. This project excludes the
portions of the proposed facility that are
not in the Town Limits (1,125')
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-O
Name:Frontier Pkwy. (1) / FM 1461
Limits:Legacy Dr. to DNT
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):5,710
Service Area(s):1 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 25,378 cy 9.00$228,400$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)49,487 sy 3.50$173,203$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 46,949 sy 36.00$1,690,160$
409 4" Topsoil 24,109 sy 5.00$120,544$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 6 ea 2,500.00$15,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,227,308$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%133,638$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%111,365$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%66,819$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%556,827$
¥Illumination 6%133,638$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%133,638$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%89,092$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%66,819$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%66,819$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,608,658$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,835,966$
Construction Contingency:15%575,395$
Construction Cost TOTAL:4,412,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-4,412,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%882,400$
Mobilization 6%264,720$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%661,800$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)1,244,200$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane gravel facility into a six-lane
divided facility. The boundary between Prosper and
Celina is on the centerline of Frontier Parkway.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-P
Name:Frontier Pkwy. (2) / FM 1461
Limits:DNT to BNSF RR
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):5,750
Service Area(s):1 (Half)
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:Anticipated Town Contribution 54%1,890,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:
Mobilization
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,890,000$
The widening of Frontier Pkwy. (Collin County Road
No. 5/BUS 289) to a six-lane divided facility from the
DNT to Preston Road is part of the 2007 Collin
County Bond Program. The estimated cost of this
project is $14 million dollars which includes a $3.5
million dollar overpass. Collin County is anticipated
to pay $7 million, Celina $3.5 million, and Prosper
$3.5 million. $1,890,000 (54%) of this cost has been
included to cover the portion of the project in
Service Area 1 from the DNT to the BNSF RR.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-Q
Name:Prosper Trl. (1)
Limits:Teel Pkwy. to 1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):1,840
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 5,724 cy 9.00$51,520$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)11,040 sy 3.50$38,640$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 10,222 sy 36.00$368,000$
404 4" Topsoil 6,542 sy 5.00$32,711$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:495,871$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%29,752$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%24,794$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%14,876$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%123,968$
¥Illumination 6%29,752$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%29,752$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%19,835$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%14,876$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%14,876$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:302,481$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:798,352$
Construction Contingency:15%119,753$
Construction Cost TOTAL:919,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-919,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%183,800$
Mobilization 6%55,140$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%137,850$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,296,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane gravel facility into a four-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-R
Name:Prosper Trl. (2)
Limits:1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy to 3,660' E. of Teel Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):1,820
Service Area(s):1 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 5,662 cy 9.00$50,960$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)10,920 sy 3.50$38,220$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 10,111 sy 36.00$364,000$
404 4" Topsoil 6,471 sy 5.00$32,356$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:490,536$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%29,432$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%24,527$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%14,716$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%122,634$
¥Illumination 6%29,432$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%29,432$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%19,621$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%14,716$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%14,716$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:299,227$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:789,762$
Construction Contingency:15%118,464$
Construction Cost TOTAL:909,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-909,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%181,800$
Mobilization 6%54,540$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%136,350$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,282,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
gravel facility into a four-lane divided
facility. The boundary between Prosper
and Artesia is on the centerline of
Prosper Trl.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-S
Name:Prosper Trl. (3)
Limits:2,110' W. of Legacy Dr. to 1,600' W. of Legacy Dr.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):510
Service Area(s):1 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 1,587 cy 9.00$14,280$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)3,060 sy 3.50$10,710$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 2,833 sy 36.00$102,000$
404 4" Topsoil 1,813 sy 5.00$9,067$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 1 ea 2,500.00$2,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:138,557$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%8,313$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%6,928$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%4,157$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%34,639$
¥Illumination 6%8,313$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%8,313$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%5,542$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%4,157$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%4,157$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:84,520$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:223,076$
Construction Contingency:15%33,461$
Construction Cost TOTAL:257,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-257,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%51,400$
Mobilization 6%15,420$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%38,550$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:362,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
gravel facility into a four-lane divided
facility. The boundary between Prosper
and Artesia is on the centerline of
Prosper Trl.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-T
Name:Prosper Trl. (4)
Limits:1,600' W. of Legacy Dr. to DNT
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):7,365
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 22,913 cy 9.00$206,220$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)44,190 sy 3.50$154,665$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 40,917 sy 36.00$1,473,000$
404 4" Topsoil 26,187 sy 5.00$130,933$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 7 ea 2,500.00$17,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,982,318$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%118,939$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%99,116$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%59,470$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%495,580$
¥Illumination 6%118,939$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%118,939$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%79,293$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%59,470$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%59,470$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,209,214$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,191,533$
Construction Contingency:15%478,730$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,671,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,671,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%734,200$
Mobilization 6%220,260$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%550,650$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,176,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-U
Name:Prosper Trl. (5)
Limits:DNT to BNSF RR
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):4,410
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:Based on Actual Bid Tabs 46%1,871,274$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:
Mobilization
Previous Town contribution
Other Collin County Contribution 46% (1,020,148)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:851,126$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
The widening of Prosper Trl. to a four lane divided section was part
of the 2007 Collin County Bond Program. The cost of the widening
from two to four lanes from the DNT to Preston Rd. was $4,067,986.
$1,871,274 (46%) of this cost has been included to cover the portion
of the project in Service Area 1 from the DNT to the BNSF RR.
Collin County's contribution was $2,217,713 from the DNT to
Preston Rd. 1,020,148 (46%) of this contribution has been removed
from the cost of this project to cover the portion of the project
within these limits.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-V
Name:Fish Trap Rd. (1)
Limits:Gee Rd. to Teel Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):6,420
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 19,973 cy 9.00$179,760$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)38,520 sy 3.50$134,820$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 35,667 sy 36.00$1,284,000$
404 4" Topsoil 22,827 sy 5.00$114,133$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 6 ea 2,500.00$15,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,727,713$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%103,663$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%86,386$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%51,831$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%431,928$
¥Illumination 6%103,663$
¥Special Drainage Structures Two Minor Stream Crossings 0%500,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%103,663$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%69,109$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%51,831$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%51,831$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,553,905$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,281,618$
Construction Contingency:15%492,243$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,774,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,774,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%754,800$
Mobilization 6%226,440$
Previous Town contribution
Other Denton County Contribution (2,125,000)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%566,100$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,196,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided facility. Denton County is anticipated to
contribute $2,125,000 to the widening of the rural
roadway to a two-lane roadway. This County
contribution has been removed from the cost.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-W
Name:Fish Trap Rd. (2)
Limits:Teel Pkwy. To 2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:4LD(1/2)
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):2,530
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
105 Unclassified Street Excavation 3,936 cy 9.00$35,420$
205 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)7,590 sy 3.50$26,565$
305 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 7,028 sy 36.00$253,000$
405 4" Topsoil 6,887 sy 5.00$34,436$
505 Concrete Driveway Approach 3 ea 2,500.00$7,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:356,921$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%21,415$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%17,846$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%10,708$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%89,230$
¥Illumination 6%21,415$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%21,415$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%14,277$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%10,708$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%10,708$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:217,722$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:574,643$
Construction Contingency:15%86,196$
Construction Cost TOTAL:661,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-661,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%132,200$
Mobilization 6%39,660$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%99,150$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)186,400$
This project consists of the widening of an existing
two-lane concrete facility into a four-lane divided
facility. The existing two-lanes were constructed by
Artesia and not included in the cost.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-X
Name:Fish Trap Rd. (3)
Limits:2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy. to BNSF RR
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):13,935
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 43,353 cy 9.00$390,180$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)83,610 sy 3.50$292,635$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 77,417 sy 36.00$2,787,000$
404 4" Topsoil 49,547 sy 5.00$247,733$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 14 ea 2,500.00$35,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:3,752,548$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%225,153$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%187,627$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%112,576$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%938,137$
¥Illumination 6%225,153$
¥Special Drainage Structures Two (2) Minor Stream Crossings 0%500,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%225,153$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%150,102$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%112,576$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%112,576$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:2,789,054$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:6,541,603$
Construction Contingency:15%981,240$
Construction Cost TOTAL:7,523,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-7,523,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20% 1,504,600$
Mobilization 6%451,380$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15% 1,128,450$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:10,607,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-Y
Name:E-W Collector
Limits:Teel Pkwy. to Fish Trap Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):13,980
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 43,493 cy 9.00$391,440$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)83,880 sy 3.50$293,580$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 77,667 sy 36.00$2,796,000$
404 4" Topsoil 49,707 sy 5.00$248,533$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 14 ea 2,500.00$35,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:3,764,553$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%225,873$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%112,937$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%941,138$
¥Illumination 6%225,873$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%225,873$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%150,582$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%112,937$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%112,937$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:2,108,150$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:5,872,703$
Construction Contingency:15%880,905$
Construction Cost TOTAL:6,754,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-6,754,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20% 1,350,800$
Mobilization 6%405,240$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30% 2,026,200$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:10,536,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
four-lane divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-Z
Name:DNT W. Collector
Limits:Fish Trap Rd. to Parvin Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):10,850
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 33,756 cy 9.00$303,800$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)65,100 sy 3.50$227,850$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 60,278 sy 36.00$2,170,000$
404 4" Topsoil 38,578 sy 5.00$192,889$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 11 ea 2,500.00$27,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,922,039$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%175,322$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%87,661$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%730,510$
¥Illumination 6%175,322$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%$250,000
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%175,322$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%116,882$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%87,661$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%87,661$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,886,342$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,808,381$
Construction Contingency:15%721,257$
Construction Cost TOTAL:5,530,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-5,530,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20% 1,106,000$
Mobilization 6%331,800$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30% 1,659,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:8,627,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
four-lane divided facility parallel to the future DNT.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-AA
Name:Lovers Ln.
Limits:US 380 to BNSF RR
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):9,725
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 30,256 cy 9.00$272,300$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)58,350 sy 3.50$204,225$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 54,028 sy 36.00$1,945,000$
404 4" Topsoil 34,578 sy 5.00$172,889$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 10 ea 2,500.00$25,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,619,414$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%157,165$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%78,582$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%654,853$
¥Illumination 6%157,165$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%157,165$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%104,777$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%78,582$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%78,582$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,466,872$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,086,286$
Construction Contingency:15%612,943$
Construction Cost TOTAL:4,700,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-4,700,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%940,000$
Mobilization 6%282,000$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30% 1,410,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:7,332,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
four-lane divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.1-BB
Name:DNT Frontage Road
Limits:US 380 to Frontier Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:2LC
Ultimate Class:Frontage Road
Length (lf):15,820
Service Area(s):1
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
102 Unclassified Street Excavation 35,156 cy 9.00$316,400$
202 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)68,553 sy 3.50$239,937$
302 7" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 65,038 sy 34.00$2,211,284$
402 4" Topsoil 26,367 sy 5.00$131,833$
502 Concrete Driveway Approach 16 ea 2,500.00$40,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,939,454$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%176,367$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%88,184$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%734,864$
¥Illumination 6%176,367$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%176,367$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%117,578$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%88,184$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%88,184$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,646,094$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,585,549$
Construction Contingency:15%687,832$
Construction Cost TOTAL:5,274,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-5,274,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20% 1,054,800$
Mobilization 6%316,440$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30% 1,582,200$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:8,227,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
DNT Frontage Road.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Roadway Improvements - Service Area 2
#Class Project Limits Project Cost
2-A 6LD Preston Rd.US 380 to Frontier Pkwy.800,000$
2-B 6LD(1/3) Coit Rd. (1)US 380 to First St.2,870,000$
2-C 6LD Coit Rd. (2)First St. to 2,665' N. of First St.2,716,000$
2-D 6LD Coit Rd. (3)2,665' N. of First St. to 1,350' S. of Prosper Trl.1,342,000$
2-E 6LD Coit Rd. (4)1,350' S. of Prosper Trl. to Frontier Pkwy.6,762,000$
2-F 6LD Custer Rd. (1)US 380 to First St.1,417,400$
2-G 6LD Custer Rd. (2)First St. to Prosper Trl.897,600$
2-H 6LD Custer Rd. (3)Prosper Trl. to 2,605' N. of Prosper Trl.531,000$
2-I 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (3) / FM 1461 BNSF RR to Preston Rd.1,610,000$
2-J 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (4) / FM 1461 Preston Rd. to Coit Rd.1,053,600$
2-K 6LD Frontier Pkwy. (5) / FM 1461 Coit Rd. to 1,405' W. of Custer Rd.2,304,800$
2-L 4LD Prosper Trl. (6)BNSF RR to Preston Rd.999,000$
2-M 4LD Prosper Trl. (7)Preston Rd. to Coit Rd.3,794,000$
2-N 4LD Prosper Trl. (8)Coit Rd. to 3,995' W. of Custer Rd.5,080,000$
2-O 4LD Prosper Trl. (9)3,995' W. of Custer Rd. to 2,645' W. of Custer Rd.948,000$
2-P 4LD Prosper Trl. (10)2,190' W. of Custer Rd. to 1,915' W. of Custer Rd.192,000$
2-Q 4LD Prosper Trl. (11)1,915' W. of Custer Rd. to Custer Rd.1,348,000$
2-R 4LD First St. (1)BNSF RR to N. Coleman St.1,375,000$
2-S 3L First St. (2)N. Coleman St. to Craig St.1,630,000$
2-T 4LD First St. (3)Craig St. to Coit Rd.2,590,000$
2-U 4LD First St. (4)Coit Rd. to Custer Rd.8,020,000$
2-V 4LD Lovers Ln. (2)BNSF RR to Preston Rd.3,348,000$
2-W 4LD Lovers Ln. (3)Preston Rd. to US 380 2,370,000$
2-X 4LD Richland Blvd.N. Coleman St. to Prosper Commons 7,090,000$
2-Y 3L N/S. Coleman Couplet Coleman Couplet 11,596,000$
2-Z 4LD Coleman St. (1)Coleman Couplet to Prosper Trl.1,323,000$
2-AA 4LD Coleman St. (2)Prosper Trl. To 2,405' N. of Prosper Trl.1,689,000$
2-BB 4LD(1/2) Coleman St. (3)2,405' N. of Prosper Trl. to Victory Ln.1,239,000$
2-CC 4LD Coleman St. (4)Victory Ln. to Preston Rd.2,008,000$
2-DD 4LD Victory Ln.Coleman St. to Frontier Pkwy.1,418,000$
I-4 Signal Installation Coleman Rd. & Prosper Trl.140,000$
I-5 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & Richland Blvd.140,000$
I-6 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & Prosper Trl.140,000$
I-7 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & First St.140,000$
I-8 Signal Installation Victory Ln. & Frontier Pkwy.140,000$
TOTAL 81,061,400$
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede theTown’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the
Town Engineer for a specific project.
Town of Prosper - 2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees
Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Signal Installation
*Total may be higher than presented in Table 4.7 (10-Year Capital
Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Cost
Opinions - Service Area 1) because the cost of some projects are shared
between multiple jurisdictions.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any
future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-A
Name:Preston Rd.
Limits:US 380 to Frontier Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):17,160
Service Area(s):2
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-500,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:-$
Mobilization -$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 300,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:800,000$
Preston Road (SH 289) is currently under
construction to widen this state facility from a two-
lane facility to a six-lane divided facility. The Town
of Prosper contributed $300,000 towards right-of-
way and $500,000 towards construction.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-B
Name:Coit Rd. (1)
Limits:US 380 to First St.
Impact Fee Class:6LD(1/3)
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):5,320
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
106 Unclassified Street Excavation 8,276 cy 9.00$74,480$
206 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)15,960 sy 3.50$55,860$
306 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 14,778 sy 36.00$532,000$
406 4" Topsoil 14,187 sy 5.00$70,933$
506 Concrete Driveway Approach 5 ea -$-$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:733,273$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%43,996$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%36,664$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%21,998$
Roadway Drainage None Anticipated 0%-$
Illumination None Anticipated 0%-$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
Water None Anticipated 0%-$
Sewer None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%21,998$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%21,998$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:146,655$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:879,928$
Construction Contingency:15%131,989$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,012,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,012,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%202,400$
Mobilization 6%60,720$
Previous Town contribution Cost Based on Bid Tab for Four-Lanes 40%2,737,688$
Other Collin County Contribution (1,142,903)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:No ROW Acquisition Costs included 0%-$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,870,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the construction of the median lanes to complete
the six-lane divided facility. The widening of Coit Rd. to a four lane
divided section was part of the 2007 Collin County Bond Program. The
cost of the widening from two to four lanes for both Coit Rd. and First St.
(2-U) was $6,844,221. $2,737,688 (40%) of this cost has been included to
cover the portion of the project on Coit Rd. from US 380 to First St. Collin
County's contribution was $1,142,903 and has been removed from the cost
of this project to cover the portion of within these limits.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-C
Name:Coit Rd. (2)
Limits:First St. to 2,665' N. of First St.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):2,665
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 11,844 cy 9.00$106,600$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)23,097 sy 3.50$80,838$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 21,912 sy 36.00$788,840$
409 4" Topsoil 11,252 sy 5.00$56,261$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 3 ea 2,500.00$7,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,040,039$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%62,402$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%52,002$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%31,201$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%260,010$
¥Illumination 6%62,402$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%62,402$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%41,602$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%31,201$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%31,201$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:634,424$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,674,464$
Construction Contingency:15%251,170$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,926,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,926,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%385,200$
Mobilization 6%115,560$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%288,900$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,716,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a six-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-D
Name:Coit Rd. (3)
Limits:2,665' N. of First St. to 1,350' S. of Prosper Trl.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):1,320
Service Area(s):2 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 5,867 cy 9.00$52,800$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)11,440 sy 3.50$40,040$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 10,853 sy 36.00$390,720$
409 4" Topsoil 5,573 sy 5.00$27,867$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 1 ea 2,500.00$2,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:513,927$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%30,836$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%25,696$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%15,418$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%128,482$
¥Illumination 6%30,836$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%30,836$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%20,557$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%15,418$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%15,418$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:313,495$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:827,422$
Construction Contingency:15%124,113$
Construction Cost TOTAL:952,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-952,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%190,400$
Mobilization 6%57,120$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%142,800$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,342,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
asphalt facility into a six-lane divided
facility. The boundary between Prosper
and Prosper's ETJ is on the centerline of
Coit Rd.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-E
Name:Coit Rd. (4)
Limits:1,350' S. of Prosper Trl. to Frontier Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):6,640
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 29,511 cy 9.00$265,600$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)57,547 sy 3.50$201,413$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 54,596 sy 36.00$1,965,440$
409 4" Topsoil 28,036 sy 5.00$140,178$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 7 ea 2,500.00$17,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,590,131$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%155,408$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%129,507$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%77,704$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%647,533$
¥Illumination 6%155,408$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%155,408$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%103,605$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%77,704$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%77,704$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,579,980$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,170,111$
Construction Contingency:15%625,517$
Construction Cost TOTAL:4,796,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-4,796,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%959,200$
Mobilization 6%287,760$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%719,400$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:6,762,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
asphalt facility into a six-lane divided
facility.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-F
Name:Custer Rd. (1)
Limits:US 380 to First St.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):6,560
Service Area(s):2 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 29,156 cy 9.00$262,400$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)56,853 sy 3.50$198,987$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 53,938 sy 36.00$1,941,760$
409 4" Topsoil 27,698 sy 5.00$138,489$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 7 ea 2,500.00$17,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,559,136$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%153,548$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%127,957$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%76,774$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%639,784$
¥Illumination 6%153,548$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%153,548$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%102,365$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%76,774$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%76,774$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,811,073$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,370,208$
Construction Contingency:15%655,531$
Construction Cost TOTAL:5,026,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-5,026,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20% 1,005,200$
Mobilization 6%301,560$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%753,900$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)1,417,400$
This project consists of TxDOT's reconstruction of
an existing two-lane highway facility into a six-lane
divided facility. The boundary between Prosper and
McKinney's ETJ is on the centerline of Custer Rd. It
is anticipated that the Town of Prosper will
contribute 20% of the total project cost.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-G
Name:Custer Rd. (2)
Limits:First St. to Prosper Trl.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):4,010
Service Area(s):2 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 17,822 cy 9.00$160,400$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)34,753 sy 3.50$121,637$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 32,971 sy 36.00$1,186,960$
409 4" Topsoil 16,931 sy 5.00$84,656$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 4 ea 2,500.00$10,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,563,652$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%93,819$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%78,183$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%46,910$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%390,913$
¥Illumination 6%93,819$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%93,819$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%62,546$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%46,910$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%46,910$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,203,828$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:2,767,480$
Construction Contingency:15%415,122$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,183,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,183,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%636,600$
Mobilization 6%190,980$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%477,450$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)897,600$
This project consists of TxDOT's reconstruction of
an existing two-lane highway facility into a six-lane
divided facility. The boundary between Prosper and
McKinney's ETJ is on the centerline of Custer Rd. It
is anticipated that the Town of Prosper will
contribute 20% of the total project cost.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-H
Name:Custer Rd. (3)
Limits:Prosper Trl. to 2,605' N. of Prosper Trl.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):2,605
Service Area(s):2 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 11,578 cy 9.00$104,200$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)22,577 sy 3.50$79,018$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 21,419 sy 36.00$771,080$
409 4" Topsoil 10,999 sy 5.00$54,994$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 3 ea 2,500.00$7,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,016,793$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%61,008$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%50,840$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%30,504$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%254,198$
¥Illumination 6%61,008$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%61,008$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%40,672$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%30,504$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%30,504$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:620,244$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,637,036$
Construction Contingency:15%245,555$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,883,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,883,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%376,600$
Mobilization 6%112,980$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%282,450$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)531,000$
This project consists of TxDOT's reconstruction of
an existing two-lane highway facility into a six-lane
divided facility. The boundary between Prosper and
McKinney's ETJ is on the centerline of Custer Rd. It
is anticipated that the Town of Prosper will
contribute 20% of the total project cost.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-I
Name:Frontier Pkwy. (3) / FM 1461
Limits:BNSF RR to Preston Rd.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):4,915
Service Area(s):2 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:Anticipated Town Contribution 46%1,610,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:
Mobilization
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,610,000$
The widening of Frontier Pkwy. (FM 1461) to a six-
lane divided facility from the DNT to Preston Road is
part of the 2007 Collin County Bond Program. The
estimated cost of this project is $14 million dollars
which includes a $3.5 million dollar overpass.
Collin County is anticipated to pay $7 million, Celina
$3.5 million, and Prosper $3.5 million. $1,610,000
(46%) of this cost has been included to cover the
portion of the project in Service Area 2 from the
BNSF to Preston Rd.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-J
Name:Frontier Pkwy. (4) / FM 1461
Limits:Preston Rd. to Coit Rd.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):5,175
Service Area(s):2 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 23,000 cy 9.00$207,000$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)44,850 sy 3.50$156,975$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 42,550 sy 36.00$1,531,800$
409 4" Topsoil 21,850 sy 5.00$109,250$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 5 ea 2,500.00$12,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,017,525$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%121,052$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%100,876$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%60,526$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%504,381$
¥Illumination 6%121,052$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%121,052$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%80,701$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%60,526$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%60,526$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,230,690$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,248,215$
Construction Contingency:15%487,232$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,736,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,736,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%747,200$
Mobilization 6%224,160$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%560,400$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)1,053,600$
This project consists of TxDOT's reconstruction of
an existing two-lane asphalt facility into a six-lane
divided facility. The boundary between Prosper and
Celina is on the centerline of Frontier Pkwy. It is
anticipated that the Town of Prosper will contribute
20% of the total project cost.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-K
Name:Frontier Pkwy. (5) / FM 1461
Limits:Coit Rd. to 1,405' W. of Custer Rd.
Impact Fee Class:6LD
Ultimate Class:6LD
Length (lf):10,520
Service Area(s):2 (Half)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 46,756 cy 9.00$420,800$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)91,173 sy 3.50$319,107$
309 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 86,498 sy 36.00$3,113,920$
409 4" Topsoil 44,418 sy 5.00$222,089$
509 Concrete Driveway Approach 11 ea 2,500.00$27,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:4,103,416$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%246,205$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%205,171$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%123,102$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% 1,025,854$
¥Illumination 6%246,205$
¥Special Drainage Structures Two Minor Stream Crossings 0%500,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%246,205$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%164,137$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%123,102$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%123,102$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:3,003,083$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:7,106,499$
Construction Contingency:15% 1,065,975$
Construction Cost TOTAL:8,173,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-8,173,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20% 1,634,600$
Mobilization 6%490,380$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15% 1,225,950$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% Town Contribution)2,304,800$
This project consists of TxDOT's reconstruction of
an existing two-lane asphalt facility into a six-lane
divided facility. The boundary between Prosper and
Celina is on the centerline of Frontier Pkwy. It is
anticipated that the Town of Prosper will contribute
20% of the total project cost.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-L
Name:Prosper Trl. (6)
Limits:BNSF RR to Preston Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):5,860
Service Area(s):2
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:Based on Actual Bid Tabs 54%2,196,712$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:
Mobilization
Previous Town contribution
Other Collin County Contribution 54% (1,197,565)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:-$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:999,000$
The widening of Prosper Trl. to a four lane divided
section was part of the 2007 Collin County Bond
Program. The cost of the widening from two to four
lanes from the DNT to Preston Rd. was $4,067,986.
$2,196,712 (54%) of this cost has been included to
cover the portion of the project in Service Area 1
from the DNT to the BNSF RR. Collin County's
contribution was $2,217,713 from the DNT to
Preston Rd. 1,197,565 (54%) of the contribution has
been removed from the cost of this project to cover
the portion of the project within these limits.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-M
Name:Prosper Trl. (7)
Limits:Preston Rd. to Coit Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):5,400
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 16,800 cy 9.00$151,200$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)32,400 sy 3.50$113,400$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 30,000 sy 36.00$1,080,000$
404 4" Topsoil 19,200 sy 5.00$96,000$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 5 ea 2,500.00$12,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,453,100$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%87,186$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%72,655$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%43,593$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%363,275$
¥Illumination 6%87,186$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%87,186$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%58,124$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%43,593$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%43,593$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:886,391$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:2,339,491$
Construction Contingency:15%350,924$
Construction Cost TOTAL:2,691,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-2,691,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%538,200$
Mobilization 6%161,460$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%403,650$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,794,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-N
Name:Prosper Trl. (8)
Limits:Coit Rd. to 3,995' W. of Custer Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):6,645
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 20,673 cy 9.00$186,060$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)39,870 sy 3.50$139,545$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 36,917 sy 36.00$1,329,000$
404 4" Topsoil 23,627 sy 5.00$118,133$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 7 ea 2,500.00$17,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,790,238$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%107,414$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%89,512$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%53,707$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%447,560$
¥Illumination 6%107,414$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%107,414$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%71,610$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%53,707$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%53,707$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,342,045$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,132,284$
Construction Contingency:15%469,843$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,603,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,603,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%720,600$
Mobilization 6%216,180$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%540,450$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,080,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-O
Name:Prosper Trl. (9)
Limits:3,995' W. of Custer Rd. to 2,645' W. of Custer Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):1,350
Service Area(s):2 (HALF)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,200 cy 9.00$37,800$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)8,100 sy 3.50$28,350$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 7,500 sy 36.00$270,000$
404 4" Topsoil 4,800 sy 5.00$24,000$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 1 ea 2,500.00$2,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:362,650$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%21,759$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%18,133$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%10,880$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%90,663$
¥Illumination 6%21,759$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%21,759$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%14,506$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%10,880$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%10,880$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:221,217$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:583,867$
Construction Contingency:15%87,580$
Construction Cost TOTAL:672,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-672,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%134,400$
Mobilization 6%40,320$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%100,800$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:948,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
asphalt facility into a four-lane divided
facility. The boundary between Prosper
and Prosper's ETJ is on the centerline of
Prosper Trl.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-P
Name:Prosper Trl. (10)
Limits:2,190' W. of Custer Rd. to 1,915' W. of Custer Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):275
Service Area(s):2 (HALF)
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 856 cy 9.00$7,700$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)1,650 sy 3.50$5,775$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 1,528 sy 36.00$55,000$
404 4" Topsoil 978 sy 5.00$4,889$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 0 ea 2,500.00$-$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:73,364$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%4,402$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%3,668$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%2,201$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%18,341$
¥Illumination 6%4,402$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%4,402$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%2,935$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%2,201$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%2,201$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:44,752$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:118,116$
Construction Contingency:15%17,717$
Construction Cost TOTAL:136,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-136,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%27,200$
Mobilization 6%8,160$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%20,400$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:192,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
asphalt facility into a four-lane divided
facility. The boundary between Prosper
and Prosper's ETJ is on the centerline of
Prosper Trl.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-Q
Name:Prosper Trl. (11)
Limits:1,915' W. of Custer Rd. to Custer Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):1,915
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 5,958 cy 9.00$53,620$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)11,490 sy 3.50$40,215$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 10,639 sy 36.00$383,000$
404 4" Topsoil 6,809 sy 5.00$34,044$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:515,879$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%30,953$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%25,794$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%15,476$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%128,970$
¥Illumination 6%30,953$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%30,953$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%20,635$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%15,476$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%15,476$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:314,686$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:830,566$
Construction Contingency:15%124,585$
Construction Cost TOTAL:956,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-956,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%191,200$
Mobilization 6%57,360$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%143,400$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,348,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-R
Name:First St. (1)
Limits:BNSF RR to N. Coleman St.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):1,955
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 6,082 cy 9.00$54,740$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)11,730 sy 3.50$41,055$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 10,861 sy 36.00$391,000$
404 4" Topsoil 6,951 sy 5.00$34,756$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:526,551$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%31,593$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%26,328$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%15,797$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%131,638$
¥Illumination 6%31,593$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%31,593$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%21,062$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%15,797$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%15,797$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:321,196$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:847,746$
Construction Contingency:15%127,162$
Construction Cost TOTAL:975,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-975,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%195,000$
Mobilization 6%58,500$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%146,250$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,375,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-S
Name:First St. (2)
Limits:N. Coleman St. to Craig St.
Impact Fee Class:3L
Ultimate Class:3L
Length (lf):2,435
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
103 Unclassified Street Excavation 7,711 cy 9.00$69,398$
203 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)15,151 sy 3.50$53,029$
303 7" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 14,610 sy 34.00$496,740$
403 4" Topsoil 0 sy 5.00$-$
503 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:624,166$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%37,450$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%31,208$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%18,725$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%156,042$
¥Illumination 6%37,450$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%37,450$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%24,967$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%18,725$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%18,725$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:380,741$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,004,908$
Construction Contingency:15%150,736$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,156,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,156,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%231,200$
Mobilization 6%69,360$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%173,400$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,630,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a three-lane
undivided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-T
Name:First St. (3)
Limits:Craig St. to Coit Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):7,965
Service Area(s):2
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-4,106,533$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:-$
Mobilization -$
Previous Town contribution
Other Collin County Contribution (1,516,672)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:-$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,590,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
The widening of Coit Rd. to a four lane divided section was part of
the 2007 Collin County Bond Program. The cost of the widening
from two to four lanes for both Coit Rd. (2-B) and First St. was
$6,844,221. $4,106,533 (60%) of this cost has been included to
cover the portion of the project on Coit Rd. from US 380 to First St.
Collin County's contribution was $1,516,672 and has been removed
from the cost of this project to cover the portion of the project
within these limits.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-U
Name:First St. (4)
Limits:Coit Rd. to Custer Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):10,830
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 33,693 cy 9.00$303,240$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)64,980 sy 3.50$227,430$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 60,167 sy 36.00$2,166,000$
404 4" Topsoil 38,507 sy 5.00$192,533$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 11 ea 2,500.00$27,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,916,703$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%175,002$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%145,835$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%87,501$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%729,176$
¥Illumination 6%175,002$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%175,002$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%116,668$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%87,501$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%87,501$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:2,029,189$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,945,892$
Construction Contingency:15%741,884$
Construction Cost TOTAL:5,688,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-5,688,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20% 1,137,600$
Mobilization 6%341,280$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%853,200$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:8,020,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-V
Name:Lovers Ln. (2)
Limits:BNSF RR to Preston Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):4445
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 13,829 cy 9.00$124,460$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)26,670 sy 3.50$93,345$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 24,694 sy 36.00$889,000$
404 4" Topsoil 15,804 sy 5.00$79,022$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 4 ea 2,500.00$10,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,195,827$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%71,750$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%35,875$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%298,957$
¥Illumination 6%71,750$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%71,750$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%47,833$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%35,875$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%35,875$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:669,663$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,865,490$
Construction Contingency:15%279,824$
Construction Cost TOTAL:2,146,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-2,146,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%429,200$
Mobilization 6%128,760$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30%643,800$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,348,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
four-lane divided facility located between Preston
Rd. and the BNSF RR.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-W
Name:Lovers Ln. (3)
Limits:Preston Rd. to US 380
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):3375
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 10,500 cy 9.00$94,500$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)20,250 sy 3.50$70,875$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 18,750 sy 36.00$675,000$
404 4" Topsoil 12,000 sy 5.00$60,000$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 3 ea 2,500.00$7,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:907,875$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%54,473$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%45,394$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%27,236$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%226,969$
¥Illumination 6%54,473$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%54,473$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%36,315$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%27,236$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%27,236$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:553,804$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,461,679$
Construction Contingency:15%219,252$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,681,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,681,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%336,200$
Mobilization 6%100,860$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%252,150$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,370,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane gravel facility into a new four-lane
divided facility located between Preston Rd. and the
US 380.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-X
Name:Richland Blvd.
Limits:N. Coleman St. to Prosper Commons
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):8,810
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 27,409 cy 9.00$246,680$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)52,860 sy 3.50$185,010$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 48,944 sy 36.00$1,762,000$
404 4" Topsoil 31,324 sy 5.00$156,622$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 9 ea 2,500.00$22,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,372,812$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%142,369$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%71,184$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%593,203$
¥Illumination 6%142,369$
¥Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%142,369$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%94,912$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%71,184$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%71,184$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,578,775$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,951,587$
Construction Contingency:15%592,738$
Construction Cost TOTAL:4,545,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-4,545,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%909,000$
Mobilization 6%272,700$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30% 1,363,500$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:7,090,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
four-lane divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-Y
Name:N/S. Coleman Couplet
Limits:Coleman Couplet
Impact Fee Class:3L
Ultimate Class:3L
Length (lf):17,300
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
103 Unclassified Street Excavation 54,783 cy 9.00$493,050$
203 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)107,644 sy 3.50$376,756$
303 7" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 103,800 sy 34.00$3,529,200$
403 4" Topsoil 0 sy 5.00$-$
503 Concrete Driveway Approach 17 ea 2,500.00$42,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:4,441,506$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%266,490$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%222,075$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%133,245$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25% 1,110,376$
¥Illumination 6%266,490$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%266,490$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%177,660$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%133,245$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%133,245$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:2,709,318$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:7,150,824$
Construction Contingency:15% 1,072,624$
Construction Cost TOTAL:8,224,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-8,224,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20% 1,644,800$
Mobilization 6%493,440$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15% 1,233,600$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:11,596,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a three-lane
facility. Portions of this facility will be new
construction.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-Z
Name:Coleman St. (1)
Limits:Coleman Couplet to Prosper Trl.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):1,880
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 5,849 cy 9.00$52,640$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)11,280 sy 3.50$39,480$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 10,444 sy 36.00$376,000$
404 4" Topsoil 6,684 sy 5.00$33,422$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:506,542$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%30,393$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%25,327$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%15,196$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%126,636$
¥Illumination 6%30,393$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%30,393$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%20,262$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%15,196$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%15,196$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:308,991$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:815,533$
Construction Contingency:15%122,330$
Construction Cost TOTAL:938,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-938,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%187,600$
Mobilization 6%56,280$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%140,700$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,323,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-AA
Name:Coleman St. (2)
Limits:Prosper Trl. To 2,405' N. of Prosper Trl.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):2,405
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 7,482 cy 9.00$67,340$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)14,430 sy 3.50$50,505$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 13,361 sy 36.00$481,000$
404 4" Topsoil 8,551 sy 5.00$42,756$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:646,601$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%38,796$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%32,330$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%19,398$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%161,650$
¥Illumination 6%38,796$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%38,796$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%25,864$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%19,398$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%19,398$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:394,426$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,041,027$
Construction Contingency:15%156,154$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,198,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,198,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%239,600$
Mobilization 6%71,880$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%179,700$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,689,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing two-lane
asphalt facility into a four-lane divided
facility.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-BB
Name:Coleman St. (3)
Limits:2,405' N. of Prosper Trl. to Victory Ln.
Impact Fee Class:4LD(1/2)
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):3,380
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
105 Unclassified Street Excavation 5,258 cy 9.00$47,320$
205 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)10,140 sy 3.50$35,490$
305 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 9,389 sy 36.00$338,000$
405 4" Topsoil 9,201 sy 5.00$46,006$
505 Concrete Driveway Approach 3 ea 2,500.00$7,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:474,316$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%28,459$
¥Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%23,716$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%14,229$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%118,579$
¥Illumination 6%28,459$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%28,459$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%18,973$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%14,229$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%14,229$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:289,332$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:763,648$
Construction Contingency:15%114,547$
Construction Cost TOTAL:879,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-879,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%175,800$
Mobilization 6%52,740$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 15%131,850$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,239,000$
This project consists of the widening of an existing
two-lane concrete facility into a four-lane divided
facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-CC
Name:Coleman St. (4)
Limits:Victory Ln. to Preston Rd.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):2,660
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 8,276 cy 9.00$74,480$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)15,960 sy 3.50$55,860$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 14,778 sy 36.00$532,000$
404 4" Topsoil 9,458 sy 5.00$47,289$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 3 ea 2,500.00$7,500$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:717,129$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%43,028$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%21,514$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%179,282$
¥Illumination 6%43,028$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%43,028$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%28,685$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%21,514$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%21,514$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:401,592$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,118,721$
Construction Contingency:15%167,808$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,287,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,287,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%257,400$
Mobilization 6%77,220$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30%386,100$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,008,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
four-lane divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Town of Prosper Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:8/18/2011
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.2-DD
Name:Victory Ln.
Limits:Coleman St. to Frontier Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:4LD
Ultimate Class:4LD
Length (lf):1,880
Service Area(s):2
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 5,849 cy 9.00$52,640$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)11,280 sy 3.50$39,480$
304 8" Concrete Pavement w/ 6" Curb 10,444 sy 36.00$376,000$
404 4" Topsoil 6,684 sy 5.00$33,422$
504 Concrete Driveway Approach 2 ea 2,500.00$5,000$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:506,542$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
¥Prep ROW 6%30,393$
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Pavement Markings/Markers 3%15,196$
¥Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%126,636$
¥Illumination 6%30,393$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$
¥Water Minor Adjustments 6%30,393$
¥Sewer Minor Adjustments 4%20,262$
¥Establish Turf / Erosion Control 3%15,196$
¥Basic Landscaping 3%15,196$
Other:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:283,664$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:790,206$
Construction Contingency:15%118,531$
Construction Cost TOTAL:909,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-909,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%181,800$
Mobilization 6%54,540$
Previous Town contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 30%272,700$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,418,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
four-lane divided facility.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the Town of Prosper.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the Town’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the
determination of the Town Engineer for a specific project.
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix C - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
Appendix D
CIP Service Units of Supply
Service Area 1 8/18/2011
VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
LENGTH CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY
(MI)PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR
PER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI
1-A FM 1385 US 380 to Gee Rd. (Existing Fish Trap Rd.)0.94 6 6LD 455 50% 700 1,974 214 1,760 1,015,200$507,600$
1-B FM 423 (FM 1385)Gee Rd. to Parvin Rd.1.39 6 6LD 398 50% 700 2,919 277 2,642 1,496,000$748,000$
1-C Gee Rd.US 380 to FM 1385 1.49 6 6LD 50 100% 700 6,258 75 6,183 7,429,000$7,429,000$
1-D Teel Pkwy. (1)US 380 to Fish Trap Rd.0.73 6 6LD 70 100% 700 3,066 51 3,015 3,941,000$3,941,000$
1-E Teel Pkwy. (2)Fish Trap Rd. to 1,705' S. of Prosper Trl.0.93 6 6LD 20 50% 700 1,953 9 1,944 5,385,000$2,692,500$
1-F Teel Pkwy. (3)1,705' S. of Prosper Trl. to Prosper Trl.0.32 6 6LD 20 100% 700 1,344 6 1,338 1,739,000$1,739,000$
1-G Teel Pkwy. (4)Prosper Trl. to Parvin Rd.0.54 6 6LD 0 100% 700 2,268 0 2,268 3,555,000$3,555,000$
1-H Legacy Dr. (1)US 380 to Fish Trap Rd.0.99 6 6LD 0 100% 700 4,158 0 4,158 6,167,000$6,167,000$
1-I Legacy Dr. (2)Fish Trap Rd. to Existing Parvin Rd.1.68 6 6LD 20 100% 700 7,056 34 7,022 9,025,000$9,025,000$
1-J Legacy Dr. (3)Existing Parvin Rd. to Frontier Pkwy.0.46 6 6LD 20 50% 700 966 5 961 2,497,000$1,248,500$
1-K DNT E. Collector (1)US 380 to 1,320' S. of Fish Trap Rd.0.77 2 2LC 0 100% 450 693 0 693 2,101,000$2,101,000$
1-L DNT E. Collector (2)1,320' S. of Fish Trap Rd. to Fish Trap Rd.0.25 2 2LC 0 100% 450 225 0 225 639,000$639,000$
1-M DNT E. Collector (3)Fish Trap Rd. to Frontier Pkwy.2.00 2 2LC 0 100% 450 1,800 0 1,800 5,487,000$5,487,000$
1-N Parvin Rd.FM 423 (FM 1385) to 3,680' E. of Teel Pkwy.2.44 6 6LD 50 50% 700 5,124 61 5,063 2,702,600$1,351,300$
1-O Frontier Pkwy. (1) / FM 1461 Legacy Dr. to DNT 1.08 6 6LD 20 50% 700 2,268 11 2,257 1,244,200$622,100$
1-P Frontier Pkwy. (2) / FM 1461 DNT to BNSF RR 1.09 6 6LD 230 50% 700 2,289 125 2,164 1,890,000$945,000$
1-Q Prosper Trl. (1)Teel Pkwy. to 1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy.0.35 4 4LD 20 100% 650 910 7 903 1,296,000$1,296,000$
1-R Prosper Trl. (2)1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy to 3,660' E. of Teel Pkwy.0.34 4 4LD 20 50% 650 442 3 439 1,282,000$641,000$
1-S Prosper Trl. (3)2,110' W. of Legacy Dr. to 1,600' W. of Legacy Dr.0.10 4 4LD 20 50% 650 130 1 129 362,000$181,000$
1-T Prosper Trl. (4)1,600' W. of Legacy Dr. to DNT 1.39 4 4LD 42 100% 650 3,614 58 3,556 5,176,000$5,176,000$
1-U Prosper Trl. (5)DNT to BNSF RR 0.84 4 4LD 244 100% 650 2,184 205 1,979 851,126$851,126$
1-V Fish Trap Rd. (1)Gee Rd. to Teel Pkwy.1.22 4 4LD 40 100% 650 3,172 49 3,123 3,196,000$3,196,000$
1-W Fish Trap Rd. (2)Teel Pkwy. To 2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy.0.48 2 4LD(1/2)70 100% 650 624 34 590 186,400$186,400$
1-X Fish Trap Rd. (3)2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy. to BNSF RR 2.64 4 4LD 70 100% 650 6,864 185 6,679 10,607,000$10,607,000$
1-Y E-W Collector Teel Pkwy. to Fish Trap Rd.2.65 4 4LD 0 100% 650 6,890 0 6,890 10,536,000$10,536,000$
1-Z DNT W. Collector Fish Trap Rd. to Parvin Rd.2.05 4 4LD 0 100% 650 5,330 0 5,330 8,627,000$8,627,000$
1-AA Lovers Ln.US 380 to BNSF RR 1.84 4 4LD 0 100% 650 4,784 0 4,784 7,332,000$7,332,000$
1-BB DNT Frontage Road US 380 to Frontier Pkwy.3.00 2 2LC 0 100% 450 2,700 0 2,700 8,227,000$8,227,000$
I-1 Signal Installation DNT & Frontier Parkway 100%140,000$140,000$
I-2 Signal Installation DNT & Prosper Trl.100%140,000$140,000$
SUM1 Signal Installation DNT & First St.100%140,000$140,000$
82,005 1,410 80,595 114,411,526$105,474,526$
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update Cost Per Service Area 23,000$
TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA 1 105,497,526$
ROADWAY IMPACT FEE
CLASSIFICATION
SUBTOTAL
PEAK
HOUR
VOLUME
Town of Prosper - 2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
CIP Service Units of Supply
% IN
SERVICE
AREA
TOTAL PROJECT
COST
TOTAL PROJECT
COST IN SERVICE
AREA
Project ID
#LIMITS LANES
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix D - CIP Service Units of Supply
Service Area 2 8/18/2011
VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
LENGTH CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY
(MI)PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR
PER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI
2-A Preston Rd.US 380 to Frontier Pkwy.3.25 6 6LD 1,560 100% 700 13,650 5,070 8,580 800,000$800,000$
2-B Coit Rd. (1)US 380 to First St.1.01 6 6LD(1/3)810 100% 700 4,242 818 3,424 2,870,000$2,870,000$
2-C Coit Rd. (2)First St. to 2,665' N. of First St.0.50 6 6LD 240 100% 700 2,100 120 1,980 2,716,000$2,716,000$
2-D Coit Rd. (3)2,665' N. of First St. to 1,350' S. of Prosper Trl.0.25 6 6LD 240 50% 700 525 30 495 1,342,000$671,000$
2-E Coit Rd. (4)1,350' S. of Prosper Trl. to Frontier Pkwy.1.26 6 6LD 316 100% 700 5,292 398 4,894 6,762,000$6,762,000$
2-F Custer Rd. (1)US 380 to First St.1.24 6 6LD 810 50% 700 2,604 502 2,102 1,417,400$708,700$
2-G Custer Rd. (2)First St. to Prosper Trl.0.76 6 6LD 570 50% 700 1,596 217 1,379 897,600$448,800$
2-H Custer Rd. (3)Prosper Trl. to 2,605' N. of Prosper Trl.0.49 6 6LD 410 50% 700 1,029 100 929 531,000$265,500$
2-I Frontier Pkwy. (3) / FM 1461 BNSF RR to Preston Rd.0.93 6 6LD 520 50% 700 1,953 242 1,711 1,610,000$805,000$
2-J Frontier Pkwy. (4) / FM 1461 Preston Rd. to Coit Rd.0.98 6 6LD 520 50% 700 2,058 255 1,803 1,053,600$526,800$
2-K Frontier Pkwy. (5) / FM 1461 Coit Rd. to 1,405' W. of Custer Rd.1.99 6 6LD 280 50% 700 4,179 279 3,900 2,304,800$1,152,400$
2-L Prosper Trl. (6)BNSF RR to Preston Rd.1.11 4 4LD 381 100% 650 2,886 423 2,463 999,000$999,000$
2-M Prosper Trl. (7)Preston Rd. to Coit Rd.1.02 4 4LD 549 100% 650 2,652 560 2,092 3,794,000$3,794,000$
2-N Prosper Trl. (8)Coit Rd. to 3,995' W. of Custer Rd.1.26 4 4LD 341 100% 650 3,276 430 2,846 5,080,000$5,080,000$
2-O Prosper Trl. (9)3,995' W. of Custer Rd. to 2,645' W. of Custer Rd.0.26 4 4LD 341 50% 650 338 44 294 948,000$474,000$
2-P Prosper Trl. (10)2,190' W. of Custer Rd. to 1,915' W. of Custer Rd.0.05 4 4LD 341 50% 650 65 9 56 192,000$96,000$
2-Q Prosper Trl. (11)1,915' W. of Custer Rd. to Custer Rd.0.36 4 4LD 341 50% 650 468 61 407 1,348,000$674,000$
2-R First St. (1)BNSF RR to N. Coleman St.0.37 4 4LD 320 100% 650 962 118 844 1,375,000$1,375,000$
2-S First St. (2)N. Coleman St. to Craig St.0.46 2 3L 320 100% 500 460 147 313 1,630,000$1,630,000$
2-T First St. (3)Craig St. to Coit Rd.1.51 4 4LD 320 100% 650 3,926 483 3,443 2,590,000$2,590,000$
2-U First St. (4)Coit Rd. to Custer Rd.2.05 4 4LD 320 100% 650 5,330 656 4,674 8,020,000$8,020,000$
2-V Lovers Ln. (2)BNSF RR to Preston Rd.0.84 4 4LD 0 100% 650 2,184 0 2,184 3,348,000$3,348,000$
2-W Lovers Ln. (3)Preston Rd. to US 380 0.64 4 4LD 20 100% 650 1,664 13 1,651 2,370,000$2,370,000$
2-X Richland Blvd.N. Coleman St. to Prosper Commons 1.67 4 4LD 100 100% 650 4,342 167 4,175 7,090,000$7,090,000$
2-Y N/S. Coleman Couplet Coleman Couplet 3.28 2 3L 250 100% 500 3,280 820 2,460 11,596,000$11,596,000$
2-Z Coleman St. (1)Coleman Couplet to Prosper Trl.0.36 4 4LD 250 100% 650 936 90 846 1,323,000$1,323,000$
2-AA Coleman St. (2)Prosper Trl. To 2,405' N. of Prosper Trl.0.46 4 4LD 150 100% 650 1,196 69 1,127 1,689,000$1,689,000$
2-BB Coleman St. (3)2,405' N. of Prosper Trl. to Victory Ln.0.64 2 4LD(1/2)150 100% 650 832 96 736 1,239,000$1,239,000$
2-CC Coleman St. (4)Victory Ln. to Preston Rd.0.50 4 4LD 0 100% 650 1,300 0 1,300 2,008,000$2,008,000$
2-DD Victory Ln.Coleman St. to Frontier Pkwy.0.36 4 4LD 0 100% 650 936 0 936 1,418,000$1,418,000$
I-4 Signal Installation Coleman Rd. & Prosper Trl.0.00 0 100%140,000$140,000$
I-5 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & Richland Blvd.0.00 0 100%140,000$140,000$
I-6 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & Prosper Trl.0.00 0 100%140,000$140,000$
I-7 Signal Installation Coit Rd. & First St.0.00 0 100%140,000$140,000$
I-8 Signal Installation Victory Ln. & Frontier Pkwy.0.00 0 100%140,000$140,000$
76,261 12,217 64,044 81,061,400$75,239,200$
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update Cost Per Service Area 23,000$
TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA 2 75,262,200$
TOTAL PROJECT
COST IN SERVICE
AREA
SUBTOTAL
Town of Prosper - 2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
CIP Service Units of Supply
Project ID
#ROADWAY LIMITS LANES IMPACT FEE
CLASSIFICATION
PEAK
HOUR
VOLUME
% IN
SERVICE
AREA
TOTAL PROJECT
COST
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix D - CIP Service Units of Supply
Water, Wastewater & Roadway Impact Fee Report
Town of Prosper
Appendix E
Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
Service Area 1 8/18/2011
% IN
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LENGTH EXIST TYPE PEAK SERVICE CAPACITY
(ft)(mi)SECT AREA
NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB
US 380 FM 1385 Teel Pkwy 11,410 2.16 2 2 5UH HWY 1,950 1,050 50% 700 700 1,513 1,513 2,107 1,135 -594 378 594
US 380 Teel Pkwy BNSF Railroad 14,965 2.83 2 2 5UH HWY 1,755 945 50% 700 700 1,984 1,984 2,487 1,339 -503 645 503
FM 1385 US 380 Fish Trap Rd 4,195 0.79 1 1 2U P6D 285 170 50% 450 450 179 179 113 68 66 111
FM 1385 Fish Trap Rd Parvin Rd 7,870 1.49 1 1 2U P6D 254 144 50% 450 450 335 335 189 107 146 228
Parvin Rd FM 1385 Good Hope 7,570 1.43 1 1 2U P6D 25 25 50% 450 450 323 323 18 18 305 305
Parvin Rd Good Hope Rd 3,705' E. of Teel Pkwy 6,430 1.22 1 1 2U-G P6D 10 10 50% 75 75 46 46 6 6 40 40
Frontier Pkwy Legacy Dr DNT 5,710 1.08 1 1 2U-G P6D 10 10 50% 75 75 41 41 5 5 35 35
Frontier Pkwy DNT BNSF Railroad 5,750 1.09 1 1 2U P6D 115 115 50% 450 450 245 245 63 63 182 182
Legacy Dr Fish Trap Rd Prosper Tr 5,840 1.11 1 1 2U-G P6D 10 10 100% 75 75 83 83 11 11 72 72
Legacy Dr Prosper Tr Parvin Rd 3,025 0.57 1 1 2U-G P6D 10 10 100% 75 75 43 43 6 6 37 37
Legacy Dr Parvin Rd Frontier Pkwy 2,455 0.46 1 1 2U-G P6D 10 10 100% 75 75 35 35 5 5 30 30
Fish Trap Rd FM 1385 Gee Rd 5,180 0.98 1 1 2U-R M4D 13 27 100% 150 150 147 147 13 26 134 121
Fish Trap Rd Gee Teel Pkwy.5,990 1.13 1 1 2U M4D 35 35 100% 450 450 511 511 40 40 471 471
Fish Trap Rd Teel Pkwy 2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy 2,530 0.48 1 1 2U M4D 35 35 100% 450 450 216 216 17 17 199 199
Fish Trap Rd 2,530' E. of Teel Pkwy 4,710' E. of Teel Pkwy 2,180 0.41 1 1 2U M4D 35 35 100% 450 450 186 186 14 14 171 171
Fish Trap Rd 4,710' E. of Teel Pkwy 3,435' E. of Legacy Dr 5,550 1.05 1 1 2U M4D 35 35 100% 450 450 473 473 37 37 436 436
First St 3,435' E. of Legacy Dr BNSF Railroad 6,210 1.18 1 1 2U M4D 25 25 100% 450 450 529 529 29 29 500 500
Prosper Tr Teel Pkwy 1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy 1,840 0.35 1 1 2U-G M4D 10 10 100% 75 75 26 26 3 3 23 23
Prosper Tr 1,840' E. of Teel Pkwy 3,660' E. of Teel Pkwy 1,820 0.34 1 1 2U-G M4D 10 10 50% 75 75 13 13 2 2 11 11
Prosper Tr 2,110' W. of Legacy Dr 1,600' W. of Legacy Dr 510 0.10 1 1 2U-G M4D 10 10 50% 75 75 4 4 0 0 3 3
Prosper Tr 1,600' W. of Legacy Dr Legacy Dr 1,600 0.30 1 1 2U-G M4D 10 10 100% 75 75 23 23 3 3 20 20
Prosper Tr Legacy Dr DNT 5,765 1.09 1 1 2U M4D 21 21 100% 450 450 491 491 23 23 468 468
Prosper Tr DNT 250' E. of DNT 250 0.05 1 1 2U M4D 25 25 100% 450 450 21 21 1 1 20 20
Prosper Tr 250' E. of DNT BNSF Railroad 4,440 0.84 1 1 4D M4D 131 113 100% 650 650 547 547 110 95 436 452
Gee Rd US 380 Fish Trap Rd 4,025 0.76 1 1 2U M4D 25 25 100% 450 450 343 343 19 19 324 324
Teel Pkwy US 380 Fish Trap Rd 3,870 0.73 1 1 2U M4D 35 35 100% 450 450 330 330 26 26 304 304
Teel Pkwy Fish Trap Rd 1,705' S. of Prosper Tr 6,595 1.25 1 1 2U-G M4D 10 10 50% 75 75 47 47 6 6 41 41
Teel Pkwy 1,705' S. of Prosper Tr Prosper Tr 1,705 0.32 1 1 2U-G M4D 10 10 100%75 75 24 24 3 3 21 21
SUBTOTAL 135,280 25.62 8,755 8,755 5,357 3,108 3,398 5,648 1,097 0
Town of Prosper - 2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
PM VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING
EXIST
LANES HOUR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR
SUPPLY DEMAND CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES
VOL PER LN TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI
17,511 8,465 9,046 1,097
PK-HR PK-HR
VEH-MI
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix E - Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
Service Area 2 8/18/2011
% IN
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LENGTH EXIST TYPE PEAK SERVICE CAPACITY
(ft)(mi)SECT AREA
NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB
US 380 BNSF Railroad Coit Rd 13,530 2.56 2 2 5UH HWY 1,773 1,336 50% 700 700 1,794 1,794 2,272 1,712 -478 82 478
US 380 Coit Rd Custer Rd 10,630 2.01 2 2 5UH HWY 1,668 1,412 50% 700 700 1,409 1,409 1,679 1,421 -270 -12 270 12
First St BNSF Railroad N. Coleman St 1,955 0.37 1 1 2U-R M4D 135 185 100% 150 150 56 56 50 68 6 -13 13
First St N. Coleman St Craig Rd 2,435 0.46 1 1 2U-R 3L 135 185 100% 150 150 69 69 62 85 7 -16 16
First St Craig Rd Coit Rd 7,965 1.51 1 1 2U-R M4D 135 185 100% 150 150 226 226 204 279 23 -53 53
First St Coit Rd Custer Rd 10,830 2.05 1 1 2U-R M4D 135 185 100% 150 150 308 308 277 379 31 -72 72
Prosper Trl BNSF Railroad Preston Rd 5,860 1.11 2 2 4D M4D 249 132 100% 650 650 1,443 1,443 276 147 1,166 1,296
Prosper Trl Preston Rd Coit Rd 5,400 1.02 1 1 2U M4D 337 212 100% 450 450 460 460 345 217 116 243
Prosper Trl Coit Rd 4,000' W. of Custer Rd 6,645 1.26 1 1 2U M4D 202 139 100% 450 450 566 566 254 175 312 391
Prosper Trl 4,000' W. of Custer Rd 2,650' W. of Custer Rd 6,645 1.26 1 1 2U M4D 202 139 50% 450 450 283 283 127 87 156 196
Prosper Trl 2,190' W. of Custer Rd 1,915' W. of Custer Rd 6,645 1.26 1 1 2U M4D 202 139 50% 450 450 283 283 127 87 156 196
Prosper Trl 1,915' W. of Custer Rd Custer Rd 1,915 0.36 1 1 2U M4D 202 139 100% 450 450 163 163 73 50 90 113
Frontier Pkwy (FM 1461) BNSF Railroad Coit Rd 10,090 1.91 1 1 2U 6D 260 260 50% 450 450 430 430 248 248 182 182
Frontier Pkwy (FM 1461) Coit Rd 6,495' E. of Coit Rd 6,495 1.23 1 1 2U 6D 140 140 50% 450 450 277 277 86 86 191 191
Frontier Pkwy (FM 1461) 4,170' W. of Custer Rd 1,405' W. of Custer Rd 2,765 0.52 1 1 2U 6D 140 140 50% 450 450 118 118 37 37 81 81
Preston Rd (SH 289)US 380 First St 6,295 1.19 1 1 2U-H 6D 863 697 100% 700 700 835 835 1,029 831 -194 4 194
Preston Rd (SH 289)First St Prosper Trl 5,590 1.06 1 1 2U-H 6D 863 672 100% 700 700 741 741 914 711 -173 30 173
Preston Rd (SH 289)Prosper Trl Frontier Pkwy (FM 1461)5,275 1.00 1 1 2U-H 6D 863 672 100% 700 700 699 699 862 671 -163 28 163
Coleman St 1,845' S. of First St First St 1,845 0.35 1 1 2U 3L 90 60 100% 450 450 157 157 31 21 126 136
Coleman St First St 1,880' S. of Prosper Trl 3,425 0.65 1 1 2U 3L 150 100 100% 450 450 292 292 97 65 195 227
Coleman St (McKinley St) First St Fifth St 1,355 0.26 1 1 2U 3L 150 100 100% 450 450 115 115 38 26 77 90
Coleman St 1,880' S. of Prosper Trl Prosper Trl 1,880 0.36 1 1 2U M4D 150 100 100% 450 450 160 160 53 36 107 125
Coleman St Prosper Trl 2,660' W. of Preston Rd 5,785 1.10 1 1 2U M4D 90 60 100% 450 450 493 493 99 66 394 427
Lovers Ln US 380 1,310' N. of US 380 1,310 0.25 1 1 2U-G M4D 10 10 100% 75 75 19 19 2 2 16 16
La Cima Blvd US 380 Livingston Dr 4,850 0.92 2 2 4D 6D 50 50 100% 650 650 1,194 1,194 46 46 1,148 1,148
La Cima Blvd Livingston Dr First St 2,090 0.40 1 1 2U 6D 50 50 100% 450 450 178 178 20 20 158 158
Richland 1,710' W. of Custer Rd Custer Rd 1,710 0.32 2 2 4D M4D 50 50 100% 650 650 421 421 16 16 405 405
Coit Rd.US 380 2,445' N. of US 380 2,445 0.46 1 1 3U 6D 577 233 100% 500 500 232 232 267 108 -36 124 36
Coit Rd.2,445' N. of US 380 First St 2,875 0.54 1 1 2U 6D 577 233
Coit Rd.First St Prosper Trl 5,325 1.01 1 1 2U 6D 136 104 100% 450 450 454 454 137 105 317 349
Coit Rd.Prosper Trl Frontier Pkwy (FM 1461)5,295 1.00 1 1 2U 6D 185 131 100% 450 450 451 451 186 131 266 320
Custer Rd US 380 First St 6,560 1.24 1 1 2U 6D 577 233 50% 450 450 280 280 358 145 -79 135 79
Custer Rd First St Prosper Trl 4,010 0.76 1 1 2U 6D 342 228 50% 450 450 171 171 130 87 41 84
Custer Rd Prosper Trl 2,710' S. of Frontier Pkwy 2,605 0.49 1 1 2U 6D 246 164 50%450 450 111 111 61 40 50 71
SUBTOTAL 131,255 24.86 14,888 14,888 10,465 8,207 4,423 6,681 1,393 166
Town of Prosper - 2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
PM VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING
EXIST
LANES HOUR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR
SUPPLY DEMAND CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES
VOL PER LN TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI
29,776 18,672 11,104 1,559
PK-HR PK-HR
VEH-MI
2011 Roadway Impact Fee Update
Town of Prosper, Texas Appendix E - Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
Land Use Assumptions, CIP and Impact Fee Analysis1WATER, WASTEWATER& ROADWAYIMPACTFEEUPDATEOctober 25, 2011
Agenda•Impact Fee Basics•Land Use Assumptions•Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Analysis•Roadway Impact Fee Analysis•Impact Fee and Development Cost Comparison with Other Cities•CIAC Involvement and Recommendation2
Impact Fee Basics•Governed by Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code•Previous Impact Fee Study Completed in 2006•Why do Impact Fees?–Allows cities to recoup costs associated with infrastructure needed to serve future development–Alleviates burden of new facilities on existing customers(lower increase in water and wastewater rates)–Makes “growth pay for growth”3
What is Eligible for Impact Fees?•Recently constructed improvements with excess capacity to accommodate growth•Proposed projects that will accommodate growth within the next 10 years–Construction Cost, ROW Acquisition, Engineering and Surveying Fees, etc. •Financing Costs•Cost of Impact Fee Study –Split between Water, Wastewater, and Roadway Impact Fees4
Impact Fee Process5Develop Land Use AssumptionsDevelop Capital Improvements PlanConduct Impact Fee CalculationsCIAC PresentationsPublic Hearing and Council ApprovalUpdate Impact Fee Ordinance
Land Use Assumptions6
Population by Planning Area7YearTotal PopulationAverage Annual Population Growth201110,700‐202128,8351,814Buildout89,0002,735
Non‐Residential Acreage by Planning Area8YearTotal AcresAverage Annual Growth in Acres2011514‐20211,33010%Buildout4,7266%
Land Use Assumptions for Roadway9SAYearDwelling UnitsEmployment (Square Feet)BasicServiceRetailTotalSA 1(W of RR)2011179261,360408,375277,695947,43020212,281326,7001,306,8002,144,4303,777,930SA 2(E of RR)20113,38901,849,122561,9242,411,04620217,30502,277,2872,144,4304,910,489
Projected Water Demands10Served PopulationAverage Day Demand (mgd)Maximum Day Demand (mgd)Peak Hour Demand (mgd)201110,7002.508.3816.50202128,8356.7919.6338.53Buildout89,00021.5352.40101.96
Projected Wastewater Flows11Served PopulationAverage Dry Weather Flow (mgd)Peak Wet Weather Flow (mgd)20118,5601.034.13202126,6953.2412.97Buildout89,00011.1944.75
Projected Service Units122011 Existing Service Units2021 Proposed Service Units2011 – 2021 Projected Growth in Service UnitsWater2,6638,9216,258Wastewater2,0588,3166,258•Utilize Land Use Assumptions to Calculate Growth in New Service Units
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Calculations•Utilized Models to Determine Portion of Needed Water and Wastewater CIP Eligible for Impact Fees•Chapter 395 requires “a plan for awarding: –(A) a credit for the portion of ad valorem tax and utility service revenues generated by new service units during the program period that is used for the payment of improvements, including the payment of debt, that are included in the capital improvements plan; or –(B) in the alternative, a credit equal to 50 percent of the total projected cost of implementing the capital improvements plan.”13
Water Impact Fee CIP14
Wastewater Impact Fee CIP15TO UTRWDTO NTMWD
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Calculations16WaterWastewater10‐Year Capital Improvement Costs$36,628,995$6,414,802Financing Costs$12,183,954$2,133,764Total Eligible Costs$48,812,949$8,548,56610‐year Projected Growth in Service Units6,2586,258Maximum Impact Fee per Service Unit without Credit$7,800$1,366Impact Fee Credit per Service Unit$3,900$683Maximum Allowable Impact Fee per Service Unit with Credit$3,900$683Current Impact Fee$2,595$1,977•Current Impact Fee = $4,572•Maximum Allowable Impact Fee = $4,583
Roadway Impact Fee CIP17
Roadway Impact Fee Calculations18Service Area 1(West of RR)Service Area 2(East of RR)10‐Year Capital Improvement Costs$45,204,369$42,981,638Financing Costs$15,034,973$14,295,693Total Eligible Costs$60,187,342$53,659,331Total Veh‐Mi of New Demand over 10‐years35,14343,610Maximum Impact Fee per Service Unit without Credit$1,713$1,230Impact Fee Credit per Service Unit$856$615Maximum Allowable Impact Fee per Service Unit with Credit$856$615Maximum Allowable Impact Fee for Single Family Dwelling Unit (50%)$5,187$3,727Current Impact Fee for Single Family Dwelling Unit (40%)$2,581$4,058
Changes Since Previous Impact Fee Study•Wastewater–Signed contracts to convey flow to UTRWD and NTMWD instead of only NTMWD–No longer need lift stations and force mains to convey all system flow to NTMWD•Water–Significant water projects moved from 15‐year CIP to 10‐year CIP1.Lower Pressure Plane: 42” line and Pump Station (10 MGD)2.Upper Pressure Plane: 2.0 MG elevated storage tank (Prosper Trl)•Roadway–SA 1 –Significant Increase in Service Area Size and Impact Fee Eligible Projects–SA 2 – Contribution from Collin County to offset some Town costs19
Impact Fee Comparison‐Single Family Residential20
Impact Fee Comparison‐Single Family Residential21
Impact Fee Comparison‐Single Family Residential22
Total Development Cost Comparison‐Big Box (136,000 square feet)23Roadway Impact FeeWater Impact FeeWastewaterImpact Fee TotalImpact FeeTotal Development CostImpact Fee Percentage of Total DevelopmentProsper‐SA 1 Current (25%)$617,848 $22,243 $11,297 $651,388 $8,630,473 7.5%Prosper‐SA 2 Current (25%)$647,768 $22,243 $11,297 $681,308 $8,660,393 7.9%Prosper‐SA 1 Max Allowable (50%)$1,309,680 $90,480 $13,660 $1,413,820 $9,392,905 15.1%Prosper‐SA 2 Max Allowable (50%)$940,950 $90,480 $13,660 $1,045,090 $9,024,175 11.6%Frisco ‐A ‐NW$920,774 $63,063 $38,835 $1,022,672 $9,377,047 10.9%Frisco ‐B ‐NE$1,022,693 $63,063 $38,835 $1,124,591 $9,478,966 11.9%McKinney$409,349 $35,809 $3,432 $448,590 $8,901,969 5.0%Celina $0 $28,600$25,050 $53,650 $7,909,145 0.7%•Service Area 1 impact fee increase of 7.6% of total development cost•Service Area 2 impact fee increase of 3.7% of total development cost
Total Development Cost Comparison‐Industrial (150,000 square feet)24Roadway Impact FeeWater Impact FeeWastewaterImpact Fee TotalImpact FeeTotal Development CostImpact Fee Percentage of Total DevelopmentProsper ‐SA 1 Current$162,900 $22,243 $11,297 $196,440 $5,798,639 3.4%Prosper ‐SA 2 Current$214,050 $22,243 $11,297 $247,590 $5,849,789 4.2%Prosper ‐SA 1 Max Allowable (50%)$437,844 $90,480 $13,660 $541,984 $6,144,183 8.8%Prosper ‐SA 2 Max Allowable (50%)$314,572 $90,480$13,660 $418,712 $6,020,911 7.0%Frisco ‐A ‐NW$304,020 $63,063 $38,835 $405,918 $5,744,146 7.1%Frisco ‐B ‐NE$337,680 $63,063 $38,835 $439,578 $5,777,806 7.6%McKinney$177,682$35,809 $3,432 $216,923$4,899,083 4.4%Celina $0 $28,600$25,050 $53,650 $5,120,8341.0%•Service Area 1 impact fee increase of 5.4% of total development cost•Service Area 2 impact fee increase of 2.8% of total development cost
Total Development Cost Comparison‐Office (10,150 square feet)25Roadway Impact FeeWater Impact FeeWastewaterImpact Fee TotalImpact FeeTotal Development CostImpact Fee Percentage of Total DevelopmentProsper ‐SA 1 Current$24,157 $10,009 $5,649 $39,815 $1,003,233 4.0%Prosper ‐SA 2 Current$34,581 $10,009 $5,649 $50,239 $1,013,657 5.0%Prosper ‐SA 1 Max Allowable (50%)$70,724 $16,380 $2,186 $89,290 $1,052,708 8.5%Prosper ‐SA 2 Max Allowable (50%)$50,812 $16,380 $2,186 $69,378$1,032,796 6.7%Frisco ‐A ‐NW$49,110 $20,066 $12,427 $81,603 $1,065,775 7.7%Frisco ‐B ‐NE$54,548 $20,066 $12,427 $87,041 $1,071,213 8.1%McKinney$26,492 $11,394 $1,089 $38,975 $1,138,532 3.4%Celina $0 $9,100 $7,950 $17,050 $914,437 1.9%•Service Area 1 impact fee increase of 4.5% of total development cost•Service Area 2 impact fee increase of 1.7% of total development cost
Total Development Cost Comparison‐Strip Mall (30,000 square feet)26Roadway Impact FeeWater Impact FeeWastewaterImpact Fee TotalImpact FeeTotal Development CostImpact Fee Percentage of Total DevelopmentProsper ‐SA 1 Current$95,460 $18,535 $8,473$122,468 $2,610,377 4.7%Prosper ‐SA 2 Current$100,050 $18,535 $8,473$127,058 $2,614,967 4.9%Prosper ‐SA 1 Max Allowable (50%)$203,128 $47,580 $6,147 $256,855 $2,744,764 9.4%Prosper ‐SA 2 Max Allowable (50%)$145,940 $47,580 $6,147 $199,667 $2,687,576 7.4%Frisco ‐A ‐NW$141,948 $45,864 $24,854$212,666 $2,841,350 7.5%Frisco ‐B ‐NE$157,662 $45,864 $24,854$228,380 $2,857,064 8.0%McKinney$107,752 $26,043 $2,199 $135,994 $2,997,137 4.5%Celina $0 $20,800$16,050$36,850 $2,464,540 1.5%•Service Area 1 impact fee increase of 4.7% of total development cost•Service Area 2 impact fee increase of 2.5% of total development cost
CIAC Involvement•Council Appointed Advisory Committee–Kenneth Dugger‐Town Council Member–Mark DeMattia‐Planning & Zoning Commission Member–Mike McClung‐Planning & Zoning Commission Member–Joey Womble‐Chamber of Commerce President–Kevin Drown‐Economic Development Corporation Board Member–Jordan Simms‐Economic Development Corporation Board Member–Bruce Carlin‐Resident of Preston Lakes•Met with Consultants and Town Staff on April 18th, July 18th, and September 19thto discuss Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvement Plans and Impact Fee Calculations27
CIAC Recommendation•September 19th, by a majority vote, the CIAC made the following actions:–Accepted the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, and impact fee calculations as outlined in the draft impact fee study–Recommended the Town Council set the water, wastewater, and roadway impact fees at the maximum allowable fee per the impact fee study28
Page 1 of 2
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – Tuesday October 25, 2011
Date: October 21, 2011
Agenda Item:
Discuss a Development Agreement between the Town of Prosper and Athlos Prosper Fund I, LP
for the development of 188 acres in the northwest quadrant of Hwy 380 and the Dallas North
Tollway.
Description of Agenda Item:
The Development Agreement being discussed is for a 188 acre project located as described above. The
project is a proposed mixed-use development of approximately 2.2 million gross square feet of
non-residential space consisting of approximately 765,000 square feet of retail and hotel space,
restaurant, and other commercial space, 1.5 million square feet of office space, and 2,400 multi-
family units, and other ancillary facilities needed to support said development. The anticipated
taxable value for the development upon completion is approximately $590,000,000 with
projected annual taxable sales of approximately $244,000,000.
The project referred to as “Prosper West” is currently zoned PD allowing for all of the above
listed uses. Within the PD (PD-41) -
http://prospertx.gov/portals/Prosper/skins/prosper/development/planning/08-055%20-
%20Ordinance%20-%20Z07-16%20Prosper%20West%20Ordinance.pdf there is a
corresponding site plan depicting the overall development schematic for the project.
The Agreement will require the financing and construction of the first mile of the southbound
DNT frontage road between Hwy 380 and Fishtrap/First St. and Public Infrastructure including
roads, water and sewer lines and other enhancements up to a maximum cost of approximately
$41 million plus interest. The Developer and staff are currently evaluating the inclusion of the
additional costs for the two (2) miles of frontage road between Fishtrap/First St. and
Parvin/Frontier Parkway. The reimbursements for these expenditures are funded through the
incremental increases within the project generated by the proposed private improvements and
sales taxes received. The Town’s financial reimbursement for public infrastructure is capped at
the approximate $41 million level plus interest. Any cost over and above these amounts will be
the responsibility of the Developer without any reimbursement from the Town.
The agreement contemplates that within six (6) months of the effective date of the Agreement,
the Town intends to create a Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone and Public Improvement District
to facilitate the potential issuance of bonds.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
ADMINISTRATION
Page 2 of 2
All of the costs of the Private Improvements will be the financial responsibility of the Developer.
Developer infrastructure costs total approximately $77 million not including parking garages.
The Term for this Development Agreement is fifteen (15) years through December 31, 2027.
During the term of this agreement, the Developer will only be reimbursed for the
investment/bonds for CIP Public Infrastructure that is issued during the fifteen years of this
agreement. In other words, if the project does not progress to completion within the fifteen year
time period and certain public infrastructure is not contracted for and with no debt issued for the
public infrastructure, the agreement states that after December 31, 2027, the terms of the
agreement are no longer in effect. For those CIP Public Infrastructure projects in which the
TIRZ and Chapter 380 agreements have been implemented and are ongoing, those specific
agreements will still be in force until the bonds or retail incentive have been retired.
The Developer and Town will also work together to recruit a Hotel and Conference Center to the
project that may involve the use of the Hotel Occupancy Tax as an incentive tool to construct the
Conference Center portion of the project.
Budget Impact:
The Development Agreement is a performance based agreement meaning any
reimbursement/incentive is generated through the value and sales resulting from the construction
and occupancy of the project.
Legal Obligations and Review:
The agreement is being reviewed by the Town’s Attorney Pete Smith.
Attached Documents:
The documents are being reviewed by the Town’s Attorney.
Town Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends that the Town Council discuss the project with the Developer Tuesday
evening during the Town Council meeting and provide direction to staff as a result of said
discussions.
Page 1 of 2
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – Tuesday October 25, 2011
Date: October 21, 2011
Agenda Item:
Discuss an Agreement between the Town of Prosper and 166 Bryan Road Partners, LP for the
Reduction of the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction of the Town of Prosper including a Strategic
Partnership Agreement between the Town of Prosper and Denton County Fresh Water District
No. 10.
Description of Agenda Item:
The property described above is located west of FM 1385 west of the Comanche Ridge project
(not constructed) and north of Savannah. The 166 project like Savannah is proposed to be
developed as state approved utility district actually joining District No. 10. The property lies
within the Town’s extra territorial jurisdiction (ETJ). Therefore the property is not required to
develop in accordance with the Town’s zoning and development standards, it is though required
to meet the Town’s Subdivision requirements.
The Developer in this case as stated above desires to join this property with the existing District
10 Utility District. The Town’s policy is to not allow utility districts to form within the Town’s limits
which this property is not within. The District has the authority to construct the utility facilities
and road improvements.
The Town is authorized to enter into this agreement per the Local Government Code and the
Texas Water Code. The Town entered into a similar agreement with the then developer of
Comanche Ridge in 2002. In exchange for the release the Town received a transaction fee in
the amount of $200,000. The Developer is not proposing to pay a transaction fee as part of this
release. At that time the Town did not enter into a limited purpose annexation/Strategic
Partnership Agreement for the commercial portion of that project located in the southwest
quadrant of the Bryan Rd./FM 1385 intersection releasing its rights to potentially collect any
sales and use tax or impose any design standards on the property.
The Developer in exchange for releasing the 166 acre tract is offering the Town a Strategic
Partnership Agreement and full annexation option of the commercial tract within the previously
released Comanche Ridge project. This option allows for the Town to do a couple of things
during the initial and later years of the project. During the initial term of the project, the first 15
years, and including the optional two terms of 15 years each, the Town may impose its sales tax
on any commercial development occurring on the commercial tract. The Developer is also
requesting that the Town share a portion of its sales tax collection. Secondly, the Developer is
agreeable without objection to the Town performing a full annexation of the commercial tract
after the first term of the agreement has concluded thus allowing the Town to collect the sales
tax and ad valorem property tax. Additionally the Developer is offering for the Town’s
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
ADMINISTRATION
Page 2 of 2
consideration to enter into additional Strategic Partnership Agreements for two other areas for
the purposes of collecting and sharing sales and use tax.
Regarding other specifics of the agreement, the Developer is agreeable to designing the
projects infrastructure to meet the North Texas Council of Government’s standards among
others and design its drainage system for those areas that may flow east to Doe Branch in
accordance with the Town’s drainage requirements. There is specific language in the
agreement regarding the alignment of Parvin Road/Bryan Road expansion that should be
examined. Building restrictions proposed by the Developer are as follows:
1. The average density of the Development shall not exceed 4.25 single family dwelling
units per gross acre.
2. Multifamily residential dwelling units shall not be permitted within the Development.
3. Within the Development, the exterior facades of a main building or structure, excluding
glass windows and doors, shall be constructed of ninety percent (90%) Masonry (as
defined below). For purposes of this Paragraph 3, “Masonry” shall mean clay fired brick,
natural and manufactured stone, granite, marble, stucco, and architectural concrete
block. Masonry shall also include cementatious fiber board, but cementatious fiber
board may only constitute fifty percent (50%) of stories other than the first story.
However, cementatious fiber board may not be used as a façade cladding material for
portions of upper stories that are in the same vertical plane as the first story.
Cementatious fiber board may also be used for architectural features, including window
box-outs, bay windows, roof dormers, garage door headers, columns, chimneys not part
of an exterior wall, or other architectural features. The remaining ten percent (10%) of
the exterior facades of a main building or structure, excluding glass windows and doors,
shall not be wood, vinyl or EFIS.
According to staff’s research regarding density in the area, Glenbrooke and Savannah both
have densities in the 4.0 units per acre range. Artesia for example is at 4.8 units per acre.
Comanche Ridge did not include any design standards, maximum density or unit count in its
release from the Town.
Budget Impact:
The Agreement includes provisions to collect sales tax from a property previously released by
the Town that it currently has no ability to collect due to the previous agreement. Regarding
legal fees the Agreement requires the Developer to reimburse the Town for its legal fees for
reviewing this agreement in the amount of $5,000.
Legal Obligations and Review:
The Town Attorney Courtney Kuykendall with Abernathy’s office is reviewing the document.
Attached Documents:
The Town Attorney is reviewing the agreement document.
1. Exhibit showing the location of the 166 Acre tract
Board, Committee and/or Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends the Town Council discuss this draft agreement and provide direction to
staff on finalizing the agreement’s terms.