The URL can be used to link to this page

08/01/2016-CC-Agenda Packet-RegularS*(I TEXAS AGENDA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, AUGUST 1, 2016 7:00 PM 502 ELM STREET 1. Call Meeting to Order, Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Citizens Input: (Citizens are allowed 3 minutes to speak. The City Council is unable to respond or to discuss any issues bought up during this section). COVSENT AGENDA 3. a) Approval of Minutes: July 18, 2016 -Work Session July 18, 2016 - Council Meeting b) Disbursements 4. Consider any Items Removed From Consent Agenda. REGULAR AGENDA 5. Consider, Discuss and Possibly Approve Resolution #1108-05-16 - Determining the Necessity for the Acquisition for Public Purposes to Acquire Property Described in Exhibit "A" and Authorizing the City Attorney to File Proceedings in Eminent Domain. 6. Consider, Discuss and Possibly Approve Amending the Contract With Alan Plummer Associates, Inc. for Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion and Improvements. 7. Discuss Tax Rate, Take Record Vote on Tax Rate and Schedule Two Public Hearings on Tax Rate and Approve Resolution #R08-06-16 - Establishing Date, Time, and Place for Public Hearings on Budget and Tax Rate. 8. Consider, Discuss and Possibly Approve Ordinance #08-15-16 - Setting the Amount for Road Impact Fees. 9. INFORMATION ITEMS: None. 10. Adjourn I, the undersigned authority, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted on the bulletin board, at the City Hall of the City of Sanger, Texas, a place convenient and readily accessible to 4unt' al public at all times, and said notice was posted on the following date and time: at `7:00 m. and shall remain posteee ing is adjourned. uI1,,J,'','� Tami Taber, City Secretary _ - City of Sanger, Texas '�/�IIIIJ11111111\\ This facility is wheelchair accessible and accessible parking spaces are available. Requests for accommodations or interpretive services must be made 48 hours prior to this meeting. Please contact the City Secretary's office at (940) 458-7930 for further information. MINUTES: CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION July 18, 2016 PRESENT: Mayor Thomas Muir, Councilman Bill Boutwell, Councilman Lee Allison, Councilman David Clark and Councilman Allen Chick ABSENT: Councilman Gary Bilyeu OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Brice City Manager and Tami Taber City Secretary, Joe Iliff Planner and Peter Eberle 1. Call Meeting to Order. Mayor Muir called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Budget Workshop. City Manager continued the discussion on the budget and advised that property valorem is down $50,000,000 since the last meeting with approximately $181,000,000 still being protested. Technology: -A technology committee was formed a few months ago to work on a new website and launch a more interactive one -Launch software for Public Works to better track work orders -Launch software for Development Services which will allow permit applications and tracking online for customers Reserves: -There is currently over 1,000,000 in both the General and Enterprise Fund -The new budget will include reserving 2% of electric revenue for storm recovery Proposed Utility Rates: -Increase sewer rates by 10% (bond payment for sewer plant rehab and other improvements) -Increase water rates by 6% (cover wholesale water rates and increased cost of service) -Add $2.00 per month to cover increased electric transmission costs New Equipment: -Three patrol vehicles, a new pumper and replace two defibrillators Distant Future: - Additional staff to maintain current levels of service - Additional vehicles and equipment - Utility relocation for FM455 - New ladder/pumper combination and a third ambulance - New fire station - New library 3. Overview of Items on Regular Agenda. 4. Adjourn. Mayor Muir adjourned the meeting at 6:53 p.m. MINUTES: CITY COUNCIL MEETING July 18, 2016 PRESENT: Mayor Thomas Muir, Councilman Bill Boutwell, Councilman Lee Allison, Councilman David Clark and Councilman Allen Chick ABSENT: Councilman Gary Bilyeu OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Brice City Manager, Tami Taber City Secretary, Joe Iliff Planner, Alina Ciocan Economic Development Director, Debra Reaves and James Frank Jones 1. Call Meeting to Order, Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Muir called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. Councilman Boutwell led the Invocation followed by Councilman Chick leading the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Citizens Input: (Citizens are allowed 3 minutes to speak. The City Council is unable to respond or to discuss any issues brought up during this section). James Frank Jones, 3087 Belz Road, inquired about the land by Jack in the Box and wanted to know if there were any plans of building houses there. City Manager advised that this is commercial property and no one is interested in developing it at this time. CONSENT AGENDA 3. a) Approval of Minutes: July 5, 2016 - Work Session July 5, 2016 - Council Meeting b) Disbursements c) Approve Appointing the Following to Open Board Positions: Library - Janet Askins, Place 4 LeJuan Byford — Alternate 4. Consider any Items Removed From Consent Agenda. REGULAR AGENDA 5. Consider, Discuss and Possibly Approve Resolution #R07-04-16 - Appointing one Member to the Board of Managers of the Denco 9-1-1 District. Councilman Allison made a motion to appoint Jim Carter. Seconded by Councilman Boutwell. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Consider, Discuss and Possibly Approve an Agreement Between the City of Sanger and the Sanger Chamber of Commerce for Hotel Occupancy Tax Funds. Councilman Boutwell made a motion to approve. Seconded by Councilman Allison. Motion carried unanimously. 7. Consider, Discuss and Possibly Approve Ordinance 907-14-16 — Amending the Zoning Ordinance Creating new Residential Districts. Councilman Clark made a motion to approve. Seconded by Councilman Chick. Motion carried unanimously. 8. Consider, Discuss and Possibly Approve the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Study. Councilman Chick made a motion to approve. Seconded by Councilman Clark. Motion carried unanimously. 9. INFORMATION ITEMS: a) All American Dogs Report — June 2016 10. Adjourn Mayor Muir adjourned the meeting at 7:58 p.m. 7/13/2016 3:10 PM A / P CHECK REGISTER PACKET: 08239 Regular Payments VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT PAGE: 1 CHECK CHECK 'R NA14E / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE 30360 PROSPERITY B.ANI< I-1 GOVT CAPITAL LOAN PAYMENT D 7/13/2016 25070 ALL AMERIC.AN DOGS INC I-2719 JUNE SHELTER SERVICE R 7/13/2016 01550 ATMOS I-6/2/16-7/l/16 6/2/16-7/l/16 R 7/13/2016 00390 BILL UTTER FORD, INC. I-163162 1106 CLAMP R 7/13/2016 22300 CARD SERVICE CENTER I-000004 DONUTS FOR MEETING R 7/13/2016 I-000008A DONUTS FOR MEETING R 7/13/2016 I-0033818 CARPET CORD COVER R 7/13/2016 I-052 PRINT MATERIALS -GRAPHIC NOVELS R 7/13/2016 1-112-2096894-94041 DVDS R 7/13/2016 I-1144326 PLATES FOR NEW PATROL UNITS R 7/13/2016 I-20-25874354 CS SEMINAR R 7/13/2016 I-20-25874409 AP SEMINAR R 7/13/2016 I-20-25874420 PAYROLL LAG] SEMINAR R 7/13/2016 I-214532 NCTCOG CLASSES R 7/13/2016 I-3213042 BOOKS ORDERED FROM AMAZON R 7/13/2016 I-393811 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL R 7/13/2016 I-394319 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL R 7/13/2016 I-57989436 FILINGS R 7/13/2016 I-6007443 DYMO LABELS R 7/13/2016 I-9671689 VEHICLE REGISTRATION R 7/13/2016 *VOID* VOID CHECK V 7/13/2016 CLEARWATER CONTROLS, INC. I-61161 EASTECH MODEL FB-5 R 7/13/2016 I-61162 REPLACE FAULTY TRANSDUCER R 7/13/2016 17640 DOLLAR GENERAL - CHARGED SALES I-1000531654 COFFEE & SUGAR FOR STATION R 7/13/2016 28070 EPP, CINDY I-JUNE 2016 JUNE-YOGA INSTRUCTION R 7/13/2016 CHECK CHECK DISCOUNT A14OUNT NO# AMOUNT 134,278.98CR 000000 134,278.98 3,400.000R 063686 3,400.00 381.01CR 063687 381.01 10.84CR 063688 10.84 10.59CR 063689 12.68CR 063689 25.19CR 063689 49.000R 063689 90.38CR 063689 33.50CR 063689 358.00r_R 063689 149.000R 063689 149.000R 063689 960.000R 063689 304.04CR 063689 90.000R 063689 80.000R 063689 240.000R 063689 23.98CR 063689 8.50CR 063689 2,583.86 063690 **VOID** 895.000R 063691 747.40CR 063691 1,642.40 94.50CR 063692 94.50 360.000R 063693 360.00 7/13/2016 3:10 P14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PACKET: 08239 Regular Payments VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT PAGE: 2 CHECK CHECK " 'R NP14E / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE 18i`i0 FUELMAN I-NP47907526 7/4/16-7/10/16 R 7/13/2016 17380 THE GLOVE GUY I-40517 WORK GLOVES R 7/13/2016 16860 GRAINGER I-9147847116 AIRPLANE CHOCK R 7/13/2016 08760 GT DISTRIBUTORS INC I-0578539 3PAIR UNIFORM LIMITS FOR 781 R 7/13/2016 22350 HARTWELL ENVIRONMENTAL CORP I-D16-205 EJECTOR R 7/13/2016 21220 IRBY TOOL & SAFETY I-S009627105.001 1500 W MH LAMP R 7/13/2016 27800 KELLEY SAND & EXCAVATION I-8113 FLOWABLE FILL R 7/13/2016 25110 KEYSTONE FLEX ADMINISTRATORS, LLC I-JULY, 2016 DEBIT CARD AD14IN FEES JULY 16 R 7/13/2016 01570 LOWE'S COMPANIES, INC. I-34059591 MATERIALS FOR REMODEL R 7/13/2016 10730 MABAK DIRECTIONAL DRILLING,CORP. I-6154 INSTALL SEWER LINE R 7/13/2016 02970 OFFICE DEPOT I-846780385001 LABELER R 7/13/2016 I-847008422001 PLASTIC SILVERWARE, LABEL TAPE R 7/13/2016 I-847009123001 METAL 3 DRAWER CABINET FOR 780 R 7/13/2016 05050 THE PENWORTHy COMPANY I-0517817-IN CHILDREN'S BOOKS R 7/13/2016 29830 PERKINS ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC. I-3477 ASSISTANCE R 7/13/2016 I-3481 NITRICATION ACTION PLAN R 7/13/2016 CHECK CHECK DISCOUNT A14OUNT NO4 AMOUNT 1,916.16CR 063694 1,916.16 185.00OR 063695 185.00 89.80CR 063696 89.80 176.85CR 063697 176.85 1,144.00OR 063698 1,144.00 1,812.78CR 063699 1,812.78 891.00OR 063700 891.00 278.50CR 063701 278.50 570.98CR 063702 570.98 15,431.45CR 063703 15,431.45 89.99CR 063704 228.42CR 063704 74.99CR 063704 393.40 191.84C_R 063705 191.84 2,750.00CR 063706 1,524.70CR 063706 4,274.70 7/13/2016 3:10 PI4 A / P CHECK REGISTER PACKET: 08239 Regular Payments VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT PAGE: 3 CHECK CHECK '2 NA14E / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE 18380 R & T I4ECHANICAL I-31976 NEW RHEEM AC/HEAT SYS R 7/13/2016 02170 REINERT PAPER & CHEMICAL, INC. I-347371 CLEANING SUPPLIES, PAPER TOWEL R 7/13/2016 16240 SCHAD & PULTE I-8223230 C014PRESSED OXYGEN R 7/13/2016 02690 TECHLINE, INC. I-1470039-00 WR159 CONNECTORS #2AL TRIPLEX R 7/13/2016 I-1470048-00 WR159 CONNECTORS R 7/13/2016 27080 TRAVIS MONTGOMERY I-848139 CARPET CLEANING AFTER FLOODING R 7/13/2016 I-848140 WATER EXTRACTION R 7/13/2016 23760 VAULTLOGIX I-2729118 INTERNET VAULT-JUNE 16 R 7/13/2016 I T01_ RORS: 0 ** T O T A L S REGULAR CHECKS: HANDWRITTEN CHECKS: PRE -WRITE CHECKS: DRAFTS: VOID CHECKS: NON CHECKS: CORRECTIONS: REGISTER TOTALS: TOTAL WARNINGS: 0 CHECK CHECK DISCOUNT AI4OUNT NO# AMOUNT 4,260.000R 063707 4,260.00 154.000R 063708 154.00 120.65CR 063709 120.65 664.000R 063710 44.000R 063710 708.00 160.000R 063711 90.000R 063711 250.00 1,129.20CR 063712 1,129.20 NO# DISCOUNTS CHECK AMT TOTAL APPLIED 26 0.00 42,450.92 42,450.92 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 134,278.98 134,278.98 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 28 0.00 176,729.90 176,729.90 7/18/2016 10:03 A14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 1 PACKET: 08245 Regular Payments 4 Y VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK U' I NA14E / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE DISCOUNT A14OUNT NO# AMOUNT 24820 EDDIE PIERCY - G 6 E GENERAL CONTRACTORS I-634620 RENOV PUB WRKS BLDG R 7/18/2016 6,115.95CR 063713 6,115.95 * * T 0 T A L S * * NO# DISCOUNTS CHECK AMT TOTAL APPLIED REGULAR CHECKS: 1 0.00 6,115.95 6,115.95 HANDWRITTEN CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRE -WRITE CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 DRAFTS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 VOID CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 NON CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 CORRECTIONS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 REGISTER TOTALS: 1 0.00 6,115.95 6,115.95 TOTAL ERRORS: 0 TOTAL WARNINGS: 0 7/20/2016 4:13 P14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PACKET: 08262 Regular Payments VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT CHECK CHECK "'.........,R NA14E / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE 30400 AIR EVAC LIFETEAM I-07112016A BLS CLASS FOR 14. WILLIAMS R 7/20/2016 02610 ANIXTER INC. I-3253330-00 RED MARKING PAINT R 7/20/2016 22620 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICE I-1156350412 FLEET UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 j I-1156350413 STREETS UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 I-1156350414 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 I-1156350415 WATER UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 I-1156350416 PARKS UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 i I-1156361194 FLEET UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 I-1156361195 STREETS UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 E E I-1156361196 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 I-1156361197 WATER UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 i I-1156361198 PARK UNIFORMS R 7/20/2016 25610 AUSTIN LANE TECHNOLOGIES, INC I I-160296 JULY 16 MAINTENANCE R 7/20/2016 31190 BARRON AND ADLER TRUST ACCOUNT I-S19 EASE14ENT R 7/20/2016 28400 BLANCHAT MFG, INC I-14997 PUMP R 7/20/2016 00420 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC I-82193849 EMS 14EDICAL SUPPLIES R 7/20/2016 j I-82193850 EMS 14EDICAL SUPPLIES R 7/20/2016 I-82195397 E14S MEDICAL SUPPLIES R 7/20/2016 I-82198256 EMS 14EDICAL SUPPLIES R 7/20/2016 t BUREAU VERITAS NORTH AMERICA, INC I-1327453 11 INSPECTIONS R 7/20/2016 26350 C & G ELECTRIC, INC I r I-29851 REP TRANSDUCER R 7/20/2016 22300 CARD SERVICE CENTER I-02905G SAM'S-FOOD FRED014 FEST R 7/20/2016 I-02955G PARTY CITY -RIBBON FREEDOM FEST R 7/20/2016 (. I-02989G PARTY CITY -DECORATIONS FREED014 R 7/20/2016 I-05529 WALM.ART-FUN POPS FREEDOM FEST R 7/20/2016 I-228014 IEDC ORDER R 7/20/2016 PAGE: 1 CHECK CHECK DISCOUNT AMOUNT NO# AMOUNT S.00CR 063742 5.00 140.64CR 063743 140.64 31.17CR 063744 39.04CR O63744 8.46CR 063744 59.92CR 063744 30.06CR 063744 31.17CR 063744 34.66CR 063744 8.46CR 063744 78.71CR 063744 29.26CR 063744 350.91 4,760.25CR 063745 4,760.25 10,000.00CR 063746 10,000.00 202.29CR 063747 202.29 673.93CR 063748 150.78CR 063748 35.40CR 063748 8.78CR 063748 868.89 846.12CR 063749 846.12 1,159.28CR 063750 1,159.28 191.26CR 063751 9.71CR 063751 118.28CR O63751 42.95CR 063751 405.00OR 063751 767.20 7/20/2016 4:13 P14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 2 PACKET: 08262 Regular Payments VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK 1' NAME / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE DISCOUNT A14OUNT NO4 AMOUNT 21100 COLEMAN LAW FIRM I-201607186206 DULY-IfUNICIPAL PROSECUTOR R 7/20/2016 600.00OR 063752 600.00 00050 CONLEY SAND & GRAVEL I-10914 FLEX BASE R 7/20/2016 900.00OR 063753 900.00 28180 D&D COMMERICAL LANDSCAPE 12ANAGEMENT I-12909 CONTRACT MOWING R 7/20/2016 2,371.58CR 063754 2,371.58 08460 DELL COMPUTERS, LLP I-XJXWD6751 PRO TABLETS R 7/20/2016 6,509.52CR 063755 I-XJXWPRTC9 1.15510 LAPTOP R 7/20/2016 288.09CR 063755 6,797.61 22740 DENTON COUNTY AUDITOR I-7/1/16-7/31/16 FY 15 DISPATCH R 7/20/2016 3,893.00OR 063756 3,893.00 26920 DISCOUNT TROPHIES I-201607196209 2X3-3" COLUMN-EBM HOLDER R 7/20/2016 16.50CR 063757 I-201607196210 2X3-4" COLUMN-EBM HOLDER R 7/20/2016 16.50CR 063757 33.00 20980 EXPRESS SERVICES, INC. I-17492317-7 MACK, ELDRED, WILLIAMS R 7/20/2016 1,216.06CR 063758 I-17516657-8 14ACK R 7/20/2016 748.95CR 063758 1,965.01 08400 FRANKLIN LEGAL PUBLISHING I-2004574 HOSTING & MAINTENANCE OF CODE R 7/20/2016 375.00OR 063759 375.00 18790 FUELMAN I-NP47944046 7/11/16-7/17/16 R 7/20/2016 2,225.28CR 063760 2,225.28 01070 GALLS INC. I-005642228 COMBAT GAUZE/TOURNIQUET R 7/20/2016 190.34CR 063761 190.34 1 THE GLOVE GUY I-40518 NE14ESIS SMOKE 14IRROR LENS/BLK R 7/20/2016 72.00OR 063762 72.00 26790 THE GREEN CHE14ICAL STORE INC I-12762 COCO.ABSORB R 7/20/2016 176.00CR 063763 176.00 20300 GREEN EAGLE OVERHEAD DOORS I-8298 DOOR REVISING R 7/20/2016 125.00OR 063764 125.00 7/20/2016 4:13 P14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 3 PACKET: 08262 Regular Payments VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK °..R NAI4E / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE DISCOUNT AMOUNT NO# AMOUNT 28700 GROD I-160628A CONCRETE WORK R 7/20/2016 1,512.000R 063765 1,512.00 01300 JAGOE-PUBLIC CO., INC. I-1484114B ASPHALT R 7/20/2016 1,414.56CR 063766 1,414.56 1 JOSE FUENTES I-201607196208 CC DEPOSIT REFUND R 7/20/2016 100.000R 063767 100.00 28640 JUSTIN'S FARM & RANCH SERVICES I-R57269 R57269 600 S STEtR40NS R 7/20/2016 600.000R 063768 I-R58121A R58121 610 S 5TH R 7/20/2016 200.000R 063768 I-R59756 R59756 NE CORNER 1ST&WILLOW R 7/20/2016 300.000R 063768 I-R60113A R60133 NE CORNER RAILROADOKIRK R 7/20/2016 200.000R 063768 I-R60183A R60183 209 RAILROAD AVE R 7/20/2016 200.000R 063768 1,500.00 27800 KELLEY SAND & EXCAVATION I-8117 FLOW.ABLE FILL R 7/20/2016 624.000R 063769 624.00 1 KRISTIN PRICE I-201607196211 CC DEPOSIT REFU R 7/20/2016 100.000R 063770 100.00 08210 HI9IK KAR I-51891 STATE INSPECTION VID 1184414 R 7/20/2016 7.000R 063771 I-51893 STATE INSPECTION 2015 TAHOE R 7/20/2016 7.000R 063771 14.00 26900 THE LANE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION I-1716564 68259,68259 R 7/20/2016 942.43CR 063372 I-1717520 68494,68455 R 7/20/2016 607.55CR 063372 I-1718385 68556,68556 R 7/20/2016 820.90CR 063772 I-1718971 68714,968714 ASPHALT R 7/20/2016 831.78CR 063772 3,202.66 LAG] ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS I-194493 3PART CRIMINAL, TRESPASS WARNIN R 7/20/2016 141.000R 063773 141.00 28050 LIONS CLUB I-7/l/16 MEMBERSHIP 2016 R 7/20/2016 75.000R 063774 75.00 29030 MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN, PC I-128613 JUNE WARRANT COLLECTION R 7/20/2016 286.20CR 063775 286.20 08690 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 1-1959-29425 LIT R 7/20/2016 0.17CR 8.32CR 063776 I-1959-294746 FLOOR MATS R 7/20/2016 3.02CR 148.10CR 063776 156.42 7/20/2016 4:13 P14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PACKET: 08262 Regular Payments VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT PAGE: 4 CHECK CHECK t........2 NA14E / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE 02970 OFFICE DEPOT I-846778368001 OFFICE SUPPLIES R 7/20/2016 I-846952529001 CLEANER, COFFEMATE, SUGAR,PLAT R 7/20/2016 I-847459585001 CLEANER R 7/20/2016 I-848292163001 ENVELOPES, PAPER TOWELS R 7/20/2016 I-848502109001 AIR DUSTER/AIR WICK/CD REFILLS R 7/20/2016 I-848502193001 PLUG INS R 7/20/2016 27600 OMNIBASE SERVICES OF TEXAS LP I-OBS162001366 APR-JUNE QTR OIINI FEES R 7/20/2016 29830 PERKINS ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC. I-3483 CAPITAL IMP PLAN R 7/20/2016 25490 PLASTICPLACE I-117177 BLACK TRASH BAGS R 7/20/2016 05510 PROGRESSIVE WASTE SOLUTIONS OF TX, INC I-1202491597 JUNE SLUDGE ROLL OFF R 7/20/2016 05510 PROGRESSIVE WASTE SOLUTIONS OF TX, INC I-JUN-16 SOLID WASTE JUN-16 R 7/20/2016 27450 RICOH USA I-28847408 JULY LEASE R 7/20/20166 12820 RICOH USA, INC I-5043150400 COPIER JULY 2016 R 7/20/2016 27750 SAMANTHA SPRINGS BOTTLING I-346477 JUNE WATER BOTTLE SERVICE R 7/20/2016 SANGER CHAMBER OF C014MERC I-QTR 6/30/16 CHAMBER PAYMENT FOR HOTEL TAX R 7/20/2016 25020 SANGER HARDWARE I-A92525 BATTERY R 7/20/2016 I-B43602 BATTERY, TERMINAL KIT, BRUSH S R 7/20/2016 I-B43972 PVC & NIPPLE R 7/20/2016 16240 SCHAD & PULTE I-199297 C014PRESSED OXYGEN R 7/20/2016 CHECK CHECK DISCOUNT P14OUNT NO4 AMOUNT 152.29CR 063777 56.86CR 063777 9.67r_R 063777 62.19CR 063777 51.34CR 063777 8.39CR 063777 340.74 36.000R 063778 36.00 1,050.000R 063779 1,050.00 302.60CR 063780 302.60 1,216.24CR 063781 1,216.24 54,692.21CR 063782 54,692.21 709.97CR 063783 709.97 316.24CR 063784 316.24 7.90CR 063785 7.90 3,000.00CR 063786 3,000.00 13.99CR 063787 29.96CR 063787 2.08CR 063787 46.03 19.000R 063788 19.00 7/20/2016 4:13 P14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PACKET: 08262 Regular Payments VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT PAGE: 5 CHECK CHECK ..-R NP14E / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE 2S ,0 SCHNEIDER ENGINEERING I-000000033281 ENG/CONSULT FEE R 7/20/2016 02510 STATE C014PTROLLER I-APRIL-JUNE2016 APRIL-JUNE2016 R 7/20/2016 18620 STERICYCLE I-4006394521 E14S SUPPLIES R 7/20/2016 16340 SUN BELT RENTALS, INC. I-61465250-002 GENERATOR RENTAL FOR 7/2/16 EV R 7/20/2016 02690 TECHLINE, INC. I-1470124-00 POWER ANCHOR AND ROD R 7/20/2016 1 TERRY PEREZ I-201607196207 CC DEPOSIT REFUND R 7/20/2016 05350 TEXAS EXCAVATION SAFETY SYST I-16-09691 JUNE 14ESSAGE FEES R 7/20/2016 02670 TML - INTERGOVERNMENTAL RISK POOL I-7/1/16 DEDUCTIBLE REIMBURSEMENT R 7/20/2016 19260 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES I-025-160135 JULY MAINTENANCE R 7/20/2016 I-025-160136 JULY COURT WEB SUPPORT R 7/20/2016 26300 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA I-8/l/16-8/31/16 LTD 8/l/16-8/31/16 R 7/20/2016 02920 US POSTAL SERVICE I-201607186205 P.O. BOX 578 R 7/20/2016 25- 0 WELLSPRING HUMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC I-1242 CONSULTING SERVICES R 7/20/2016 02580 TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION I-2ND QTR 2016 2ND QUARTER UNE14PLOYIIENT D 7/25/2016 TOTAL ERRORS: 0 ** T 0 T A L S REGULAR CHECKS: HANDWRITTEN CHECKS: PRE -WRITE CHECKS: DRAFTS: VOID CHECKS: NON CHECKS: CORRECTIONS: REGISTER TOTALS: TOTAL WARNINGS: 0 CHECK CHECK DISCOUNT A14OUNT NO# AMOUNT 2,272.50CR 063789 2,272.50 12,066.48CR 063790 12,066.48 199.76CR 063791 199.76 153.64CR 063792 153.64 890.24CR 063793 890.24 100.000R 063794 100.00 97.85CR 063795 97.85 2,737.07CR 063796 2,737.07 110.000R 063797 125.000R 063797 235.00 711.53CR 063798 711.53 130.000R 063799 130.00 2,000.00CR 063800 2,000.00 2,015.26CR 000000 2,015.2E NO# DISCOUNTS CHECK ANT TOTAL APPLIED 59 3.19 131,281.24 131,284.43 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 2,015.26 2,015.26 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 60 3.19 133,296.50 133,299.69 7/27/2016 2:21 P14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PACKET: 08277 Regular PaymentsA VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT PAGE: 1 CHECK CHECK V1--1)R NA14E / I.U. DESC TYPE DATE *�__.�* VOID CHECK V 7/27/2016 07860 ACT PIPE SUPPLY, INC I-206989 FORD GRIP JOINT R 7/27/2016 09600 AFLAC C-157463 AFLAC 7/1-7/31/16 R 7/27/2016 I-AFLPY7.22.16 INSURANCE R 7/27/2016 I-AFLPY7.8.16 INSURANCE R 7/27/2016 25940 ALAN PLUMMER ASSOCIATES, INC I-000000039240 PROH1416-002-01 INVB35975 R 7/27/2016 I-000000039262 CONTRACT R 7/27/2016 ALTEC ALTEC INDUSTRIES, INC I-50015390 UNIT 432-58 DIGGER OVER HEATIN R 7/27/2016 22620 ARP14ARK UNIFOP14 SERVICE I-1156372438 FLEET UNIFORMS R 7/27/2016 I-1156372439 STREETS UNIFOP14S R 7/27/2016 I-1156372440 DEVELOP14ENT SERVICES UNIFORMS R 7/27/2016 I-1156372442 PARKS UNIFORMS R 7/27/2016 I-115672441 WATER UNIFORMS R 7/27/2016 26820 BANK OF P14ERICA NA I-1610039900 2007 C.O. D 7/27/2016 21930 BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON I-252-190753 PAYING AGENT CO 2006 D 7/27/2016 26810 BANK OF TEXAS I-07.15.2016 SANG412GOR INTERES, PRINCIPAL, D 7/27/2016 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC I-82200985 E14S MEDICAL SUPPLIES R 7/27/2016 I-82205612 E14S MEDICAL SUPPLIES R 7/27/2016 I-82205613 E14S 14EDICAL SUPPLIES R 7/27/2016 I-82205614 E14S MEDICAL SUPPLIES R 7/27/2016 26350 C & G ELECTRIC, INC I-29976 TROUBLESHOOT CONTROL PANELS R 7/27/2016 CHECK CHECK DISCOUNT A14OUNT NOH AMOUNT 063831 **VOID** 990.76CR 063801 990.76 0.01 063802 485.49CR 063802 485.49CR 063802 970.97 1,720.5SCR 063803 2,973.27CR 063803 4,693.82 B91.41CR 063804 891.41 31.17CR 063805 30.28CR 063805 8.46CR 063805 29.26CR 063805 57.13CR 063805 156.30 107,060.000R 000000 107,060.00 750.00CR 000000 750.00 243,725.00CR 000000 243,725.00 179.79CR 063806 8.55CR 063806 650.45CR 063806 7.20CR 063806 845.99 100.000R 063807 100.00 7/27/2016 2:21 P14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 2 PACKET: 08277 Regular PaymentsA VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VF""")R NP14E / I.D. DESC TYPE DATE DISCOUNT M4OUNT NO{f AMOUNT lv.._., C & G WHOLESALE I-29836 WASTE WATER PUMP R 7/27/2016 1,495.37CR 063808 1,495.37 02660 THE CAR CARE CENTER I-000015941 EXHAUST 14ANIFOLD R 7/27/2016 786.60CR 063809 786.60 02490 CENTURYLINK I-7/10/16-8/9/16 7/10/16-8/9/16 R 7/27/2016 1,556.36CR 063810 1,556.36 00590 CITY OF DENTON I-6/12-7/10/16 TESTING R 7/27/2016 160.000R 063811 160.00 07850 CLEAT I-CLTPY7.22.16 ASSOCIATION DUES E14PLOYEE R 7/27/2016 60.000R 063812 I-CLTPY7.8.16 ASSOCIATION DUES E14PLOYEE R 7/27/2016 60.000R 063812 120.00 23620 COTE'S MECHANICAL I-CM2016761 ICE MACHINE RENTAL JULY-16 R 7/27/2016 354.00CR 063813 354.00 00710 DATA BUSINESS FORMS INC. I-108477 BUSINESS CARDS FOR A. CIOCAN R 7/27/2016 56.60CR 063814 I I-108582 1,500 LOGO ENVELOPES R 7/27/2016 146.84CR 063814 203.44 i 08460 DELL COMPUTERS, LLP I C-201607216212 CREDIT FOR AMOUNT ON PO16-0187 R 7/27/2016 23.76 063815 I-XJXWD6751 PRO TABLETS R 7/27/2016 6,509.52CR 063815 I-XJXWPRTC9 145510 LAPTOP R 7/27/2016 288.09CR 063815 6,773.85 20980 EXPRESS SERVICES, INC. j I-17563672-9 14ACK R 7/27/2016 533.88CR 063816 533.88 E 23820 FERGUSON G]ATER41ORKS I-0799329 14ISC PARTS R 7/27/2016 818.OBCR 063817 818.08 `•. 23„_1' FIVE STAR SUPPLY CO INC. { I-8006 BLEACH R 7/27/2016 31.58CR 063818 E t I-8007 14OP OF SENIOR CENTER R 7/27/2016 23.34CR 063818 54.92 18790 FUELMAN I-NP47986663 7/18/16-7/24/16 R 7/27/2016 1,939.88CR 063819 1,939.88 07750 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES I-68400000180307 DOORLOCK R 7/27/2016 119.000R 063820 9' I-68400000265676 14ISC SUPPLIES R 7/27/2016 160.79CR 063820 279.79 7/27/2016 2:21 P14 PACKET: 08277 Regular PaymentsA VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT A / P CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 3 VF""'R NA24E / I.D. DESC 2b__✓ HRM LAND ACQUISTION SOLUTIONS, LLC I-1088 SANITARY SEWER LINE EASE14 I-1089 SANITARY SEWER LINE EASE14 I-1090 SANITARY SEWER LINE EASE14 27B00 KELLEY SAND & EXCAVATION I-8123 FLOWABLE FILL 26900 THE LANE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION I-1719846 68904 ASPHALT 05400 LEGALSHIELD I-PPLPY7.22.16 PREPAID LEGAL SERVICES I-PPLPY7.8.16 PREPAID LEGAL SERVICES 01570 LOWE'S COMPANIES, INC. I-56337 14ATERIALS FOR RE140DEL i 08690 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS I-1959-296589 ABSORBENT I-1959-296706 6]IPER BLADE 1-1959-297622 HALHANDCLEAN, SOT MOTOROIL j I-1959-297643 WHEEL I-1959-297674 TP14S SENSOR j I-1959-297721 TP14S SENSOR I-1959-297845 BATTERY I-1959-299760 MISC. SUPPLIES I-1959-299764 ACCUMULATOR, TUBE 24430 PIERCE PUMP COMPANY L.P. I-3900700 REHAB ON LIFT STATION 21 "n R & T ELECTRIC, LLC i I-6023 ELECTRIC WORK 19290 RENTAL ONE I-603517-0001 TRACKHOE RENTAL 25020 SANGER HARDWARE I-A92677 14ISC 14DSE I-A92919 FASTENERS I-A92944 LADDER 20' EXT ALUM (' I-A93450 FLEX HOSE €'. I-A93497 ELBOW GLV 2" 90 DEG EQL I-A93911 1/2"4XB PLYWOOD I-A93977 PPH DRILL SCR 8-18 X 1/2 I-B44573 MISC. SUPPLIES . I-B44647 FOA14ING WASP AND HORN I-B44956 FASTENERS (.. I-B45058 SHARKBITE ELBOW I-B45163 POST STUDDED T .. I-B45172 14ISC MUSE CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK TYPE DATE DISCOUNT A14OUNT NOR AMOUNT R 7/27/2016 3,605.43CR 063821 R 7/27/2016 1,719.20CR 063821 R 7/27/2016 4,817.77CR 063821 10,142.40 R 7/27/2016 885.00CR 063822 885.00 R 7/27/2016 363.29CR 063823 363.29 R 7/27/2016 39.85CR 063824 R 7/27/2016 39.85CR 063824 79.70 R 7/27/2016 244.95CR 063825 244.95 R 7/27/2016 0.60CR 29.36CR 063826 R 7/27/2016 0.30CR 14.73CR 063826 R 7/27/2016 7.48CR 366.46CR 063826 R 7/27/2016 0.60CR 29.39CR 063826 R 7/27/2016 1.01CR 49.63CR 063826 R 7/27/2016 1.79CR 87.79CR 063826 R 7/27/2016 2.91CR 142.73CR 063826 R 7/27/2016 0.48CR 23.67CR 063826 R 7/27/2016 3.65CR 17B.83CR 063826 922.59 R 7/27/2016 1,649.92CR 063827 1,649.92 R 7/27/2016 1,300.000R 063828 1,300.00 R 7/27/2016 1,082.60CR 063829 1,082.60 R 7/27/2016 40.22CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 0.64CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 153.11CR 063B30 R 7/27/2016 74.32CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 19.98CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 19.99CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 16.78CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 11.71CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 25.41CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 17.20CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 7.99CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 89.90CR 063830 R 7/27/2016 12.99CR 063830 7/27/2016 2:21 P14 A / P CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 4 PACKET: 08277 Regular PaymentsA VENDOR SET: 99 BANK POOL POOLED CASH ACCOUNT CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR NA14E / I.U. DESC TYPE DATE DISCOUNT A14OUNT NO11 AMOUNT I-B45182 COUPL HOSE BARB R 7/27/2016 0.40CR 063830 I-1345304 BG 56 C-E BLOWER R 7/27/2016 179.99CR 063830 I-B45B81 PAINT ROLLERS AND BRUSHES R 7/27/2016 28.33CR 063830 698.96 25310 SANGER PLUMBING I-006878 RUN GAS LINE TO 14ETER OUTSIDE R 7/27/2016 99B.00CR 063832 998.00 16240 SCHAD G PULTE 1-199338 C014PRESSED OXYGEN R 7/27/2016 64.000R 063833 64.00 02690 TECHLINE, INC. I-1470220-00 2" PVC CONDUIT R 7/27/2016 1,765.44CR 063834 I-1470222-00 GLOBES, SMALL DEADEND SHOES R 7/27/2016 287.70CR 063834 I-1470232-00 S14ALL DEADEND WEDGE SHOES R 7/27/2016 256.80CR 063834 2,309.94 I 26300 UNU14 LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA C-7/4/16-8/4/16 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE C014PANY OF R 7/27/2016 0.02 063835 I-UATPY6.10.16 UNUM INSURANCE R 7/27/2016 2B6.55CR 063835 € I-UATPY6.24.16 UNUM INSURANCE R 7/27/2016 286.55CR 063835 573.08 * * T 0 T A L S * * N04 DISCOUNTS CHECK MIT TOTAL APPLIED REGULAR CHECKS: 34 18.82 45,039.85 45,058.67 HANDWRITTEN CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 t PRE -WRITE CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 DRAFTS: 3 0.00 351,535.00 351,535.00 VOID CHECKS: 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 NON CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 CORRECTIONS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 t REGISTER TOTALS: 3B 18.82 396,574.85 396,593.67 TO'.. 4'RORS: 0 TOTAL WARNINGS: 0 7-27-2016 1:49 P14 PACKET: 08275 EFT Payments VENDOR SET: 99 VENDOR ITE14 NO# DESCRIPTION ---'....._......I--------------------------- 99-u— 4 BRAZOS ELECTRIC I 34687-RI-1 JUNE 2016 99-02910 UPPER TRINITY I 1^7271607 JUNE 2016 A/P PAY14ENT REGISTER PAGE: 1 VENDOR SEQUENCE BANK CHECK STAT DUE DT GROSS PAYMENT OUTSTANDING DISC DT BALANCE DISCOUNT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ POOL 7/27/2016 E 7/22/2016 13,440.32 13,440.32CR 999999 13,440.32 EFT 1 13,440.32 13,440.32CR 0.00 13,440.32 0.00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ POOL 7/27/2016 E 8/04/2016 21,390.23 21,390.23CR 999999 21,390.23 EFT 1 21,390.23 21,390.23CR 0.00 21,390.23 0.00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RESOLUTION : #R.O8-O r5-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER, TEXAS, DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION, FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO, WITHIN THE CITY OF SANGER, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO FILE PROCEEDINGS IN EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER, TEXAS; SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Sanger, Texas, hereby finds and determines that a public necessity exists for the welfare of the City and its citizens, and it is in the public interest, to acquire the property described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes. The acquisition of the property described in Exhibit "A" is for the public purpose of the expansion, maintenance and operation of a wastewater treatment plant, situated in and serving the citizens of the City of Sanger, Denton County, Texas, in accordance with the Texas Constitution and the laws of the State of Texas. SECTION 2. That the City Council of the City of Sanger, Texas, hereby finds and determines that an appraisal has been conducted of the subject property and that the fair market value has been determined by that appraisal. The City Council further finds that the City Manager or his representative has heretofore attempted to agree on damages and compensation to be paid to the owners of the properties and has otherwise attempted to negotiate a purchase price for the property required with the owners and that such efforts were not successful in acquiring the property. The City Council hereby resolves and authorizes the City Manager and City Attorney to file or cause to be filed against the owners and interested parties of the property proceedings in eminent domain to acquire the property described in Exhibit "A". SECTION 3. That if it is later determined that there are any errors in the descriptions contained herein or if later surveys contain more accurate revised descriptions, the City Attorney or his designee is authorized to have such errors corrected or revisions made without the necessity of obtaining additional City Council approval authorizing the condemnation of the corrected or revised property interests. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage. DULY PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Sanger, Texas, on this the day of 2016. APPROVED: Mayor ATTEST: City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney (TM77904) EXHIBIT "A" EXHIBIT "A" TRACT I: All that certain tract of land situated in the H. Tierwester Survey, Abstract Number 1241, City of Sanger, Denton County, Texas, being a part of a called 410.356 acre tract of land described in a deed to Joe R. Falls and Patty J. Falls, as recorded in Instrument Number 2005-51411, Real Property Records, Denton County, Texas, the subject tract being more particularly described as follows; COMMENCING at a cross -tie fence corner post found on the East side of Railroad Avenue for the most Westerly Northwest corner of said 410.356 acre tract; THENCE North 87 degrees 29 minutes 44 seconds East with a North line thereof, departing the East side of said Avenue, along or near a fence, a distance of 408.30 feet to a metal fence corner post for an inner ell corner of said 410.356 acre tract; THENCE North 02 degrees 41 minutes 53 seconds West with a West line thereof, along or near a fence, a distance of 381.28 feet to a fence corner post for a Northwest corner of said 410.356 acre tract; THENCE South 88 degrees 40 minutes 24 seconds East with a North line thereof, along or near a fence, a distance of 418.48 feet to a point; THENCE South 29 degrees 44 minutes 15 seconds East, departing the North line of said 410.356 acre tract, a distance of 478.77 feet to a capped iron rod set for the most Northerly corner and POINT OF BEGINNING of the herein described tract; THENCE South 29 degrees 44 minutes 15 seconds East, a distance of 130.97 feet to a metal fence corner post found for an angle point on a Northeast line of the herein described tract and the most Westerly corner of a tract of land described in a deed to the City of Sanger, as recorded in Volume 639, Page 267, Deed Records of said County; THENCE South 31 degrees 02 minutes 54 seconds East with the Southwest line thereof, along or near a fence, a distance of 359.82 feet to a metal fence corner post found for an inner ell corner of the herein described tract and the most Southerly corner of said City of Sanger tract; THENCE North 58 degrees 57 minutes 37 seconds East with the Southeast line thereof, along or near a fence part of the way, a distance of 411.87 feet to a capped iron rod set in the Southeast line of said City of Sanger tract and being a Northeast corner of the herein described tract; THENCE South 31 degrees 03 minutes 01 seconds East, departing the Southeast line of said City of Sanger tract, a distance of 145.21 feet to a capped iron rod set for the most Easterly corner of the herein described tract, from which a capped iron rod found stamped "Alliance" for the Southwest corner of Lot 10 in Block B of Ranger Creek Estates, Phase 2, an addition to the City of Sanger, according to the plat thereof recorded in Cabinet W, Page 17, Plat Records of Denton County, Texas, bears North 09 degrees 40 minutes 56 seconds East, a distance of 1000.78 feet and a capped iron rod found stamped "Alliance" for the Southeast corner of Lot 16 in Block F of said Addition bears North 52 degrees 37 minutes 48 seconds East, a distance of 1523.59 feet; EXHIBIT "A" THENCE South 59 degrees 23 minutes 32 seconds West, a distance of 752.84 feet to a capped iron rod set for the most Southerly corner of the herein described tract; THENCE North 30 degrees 48 minutes 45 seconds West, a distance of 631.57 feet to a capped iron rod set for the most Westerly corner of the herein described tract; THENCE North 59 degrees 10 minutes 21 seconds East, a distance of 341.35 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and enclosing 6.292 acres of land more or less. Tract II: All that certain tract of land situated in the H. Tierwester Survey, Abstract Number 1241, City of Sanger, Denton County, Texas, being a part of a called 410.356 acre tract of land described in a deed to Joe R. Falls and Patty J. Falls, as recorded in Instrument Number 2005-51411, Real Property Records, Denton County, Texas, the subject tract being more particularly described as follows; COMMENCING at a cross -tie fence corner post found on the East side of Railroad Avenue for the most Westerly Northwest corner of said 410.356 acre tract; THENCE North 87 degrees 29 minutes 44 seconds East with a North line thereof, departing the East side of said Avenue, along or near a fence, a distance of 408.30 feet to a metal fence corner post for an inner ell corner of said 410,356 acre tract; THENCE North 02 degrees 41 minutes 53 seconds West with a West line thereof, along or near a fence, a distance of 381.28 feet to a fence corner post for a Northwest corner of said 410.356 acre tract; THENCE South 88 degrees 40 minutes 24 seconds East with a North line thereof, along or near a fence, a distance of 476.85 feet to a point; THENCE South 29 degrees 44 minutes 15 seconds East, departing the North line of said 410.356 acre tract, a distance of 447.70 feet to a capped iron rod set for the most Westerly corner and POINT OF BEGINNING of the herein described tract; THENCE North 59 degrees 10 minutes 21 seconds East, a distance of 358.85 feet to a capped iron rod set for the most Northerly corner of the herein described tract, from which a capped iron rod found stamped "Alliance" for the Southwest corner of Lot 10 in Block B of Ranger Creek Estates, Phase 2, an addition to the City of Sanger, according to the plat thereof recorded in Cabinet W, Page 17, Plat Records of Denton County, Texas, bears North 19 degrees 44 minutes 15 seconds East, a distance of 470.62 feet and a capped iron rod found stamped "Alliance" for the Southeast corner of Lot 16 in Block F of said Addition bears North 76 degrees 04 minutes 43 seconds East, a distance of 1584.76 feet; EXHIBIT "A" THENCE South 31 degrees 03 minutes 01 seconds East, a distance of 464.69 feet to a capped iron rod set for the Southeast corner of the herein described tract and being in the Southeast line of a tract of land described in a deed to the City of Sanger, as recorded in Volume 639, Page 267, Deed Records of said County; THENCE Northwesterly, with a Southwest line of the herein described tract and the Northeast line of said City of Sanger tract, the following 5 courses and distances: 1) North 79 degrees 55 minutes 05 seconds West, a distance of 24.25 feet to a capped iron rod set; 2) North 52 degrees 59 minutes 29 seconds West, a distance of 100.05 feet to a capped iron rod set; 3) North 31 degrees 20 minutes 04 seconds West, a distance of 108.31 feet to a capped iron rod set; 4) North 25 degrees 12 minutes 50 seconds West, a distance of 66.85 feet to a capped iron rod set; 5) North 00 degrees 28 minutes 35 seconds West, a distance of 58.06 feet to a capped iron rod set for an inner corner of the herein described tract and the most Northerly corner of said City of Sanger tract; THENCE South 59 degrees 12 minutes 36 seconds West with the Northwest line thereof, along or near a fence part of the way, a distance of 342.00 feet to a capped iron rod set for the most Westerly Southwest corner of the herein described tract; THENCE North 29 degrees 44 minutes 15 seconds West, departing the Northwest line of said City of Sanger tract, a distance of 131.01 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and enclosing 1.426 acres of land more or less. TOGETHER WITH that 50' Road and Utility Easement granted to The City of Sanger, Texas, as described in instrument recorded in Volume 639, Page 267, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas. Note: The Company is prohibited from insuring the area or quantity of the land described herein. Any statement in the above legal description of the area or quantity of land is not a representation that such area or quantity is correct, but is made only for informational and/or identification purposes and does not override Item 2 of Schedule B hereof. '120 SOUTH UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 300 FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76107 PHONE 817.806.1700 FAX 817.870,2S36 w ..apai—xom TSPE Firm No. 13 e • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS June 29, 2016 Mr. Mike Brice City Manager City of Sanger P.O. Box 1729 Sanger, TX 76266 Re: Sanger Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements and Expansion Project Request for Additional Funds — Contract Amendment Documents Dear Mr, Brice: Attached are two signed copies of the contract amendment for the Sanger Treatment Plant Improvements and Expansion project as described in our phone conversation and the letter sent to you on May 11, 2016. Please sign both copies. Retain one for your records and return the second copy to us. Thank you again for your approval of this amendment. If you have any questions, please contact me at (817) 806-1723 (direct line) or (817) 343-0962 (mobile). Sincerely, Y� Jeffrey E. Caffey, PE Project Manager Cc: Mr. Neal Welch, Director of Public Works, City of Sanger Ms. Betty Jordan, Principal, APAI Page 1 of 1 Agreement for Professional Services APAI Project No. ALAN PLUMMER ASSOCIATES, INC. AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Project No. 1416-002-00 AMENDMENT NO. 1 THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the day of June 2016, by and between the CITY OF SANGER, Texas, (hereinafter called "Owner") and the firm of ALAN PLUMMER ASSOCIATES, INC., a Texas Corporation with its corporate office at 1320 South University, Suite 300, Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas, (hereinafter called "Engineer") OWNER INFORMATION Name: City of Sanger, TX Contact: Mr. Mike Brice Billing Address: P.O. Box 1729 Title: City Manager Sanger, TX 76266 Telephone: (940) 458-7930 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants contained herein, Owner and Engineer agree as follows: SCOPE OF SERVICE: Owner requests and authorizes Engineer to perform BASIC ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES to and as further described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Services and Budget," and hereinafter called the Project as set forth in this Agreement. 1-5 Alan Plummer Associates, Inc. Agreement for Professional Services APAI Project No GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS: 1. Authorization to Proceed Execution of this Agreement by the Owner will be authorization for ALAN PLUMMER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ("Engineer') to proceed with the work, unless otherwise provided for in this Agreement. 2. Salary Costs Engineer's Salary Costs, when the basis of compensation, are the amount of wages or salaries paid Engineer's employees for work directly performed on Owner's Project plus a percentage applied to all such wages or salaries to cover all payroll -related taxes, payments, premiums, and benefits. 3. Per Diem Rates Engineer's Per Diem Rates, when the basis of compensation, are those hourly or daily rates charged for work performed on Owner's Project by Engineer's employees of the indicated classifications. These rates are subject to annual calendar year adjustments and include all allowances for salary, overheads, and fee, but do not include allowances for Direct Expenses. 4. Direct Expenses Engineer's Direct Expenses, when part of the basis of compensation, are those costs incurred on or directly for the Owner's Project, including, but not limited to, necessary transportation costs, including Engineer's current rates for Engineer's vehicles; meals and lodging; laboratory tests and analyses; computer services; word processing services, telephone, printing, binding, and reproduction charges; all costs associated with outside consultants, subconsultants, subcontractors, and other outside services and facilities; and other similar costs. Reimbursement for Direct Expenses will be on the basis of actual charges when furnished by commercial sources and on the basis of current rates when furnished by Engineer. 5. Cost Opinions Any cost opinions or Project economic evaluations provided by Engineer will be on a basis of experience and judgment; but, since it has no control over market conditions or bidding procedures, Engineer cannot warrant that bids, ultimate construction cost, or Project economics will not vary from these opinions. 6. Termination This Agreement may be terminated for convenience upon 30 days' written notice by either party with or without cause. On termination, Engineer will be paid for all work performed up to the date of notification. If no notice of termination is given and termination is not for cause, relationships and obligations created by this Agreement, except Articles 8 through 15, will be terminated upon completion of all applicable requirements of this Agreement. 7. Compensation Owner shall pay Engineer for Basic Services and Additional Services rendered in accordance with the provisions of Exhibit A. Monthly invoices will be issued by Engineer for all work performed under this Agreement. Invoices are due and payable on receipt. Interest at the rate of 1-1/2 percent per month, or that permitted by law if lesser, will be charged on all past -due amounts starting 30 days after date of invoice. Payments will first be credited to interest and then to principal. In the event of a disputed or contested billing, only that portion so contested will be withheld from payment, and the undisputed portion will be paid. 2-s Alai: Plummer Associates, Inc. Agreement for Professional Services APAI Proiect No The Owner will exercise reasonableness in contesting any bill or portion thereof. No interest will accrue on any contested portion of the billing until mutually resolved. 8. Insurance Engineer, as a minimum, shall maintain insurance of a form and in amounts as required by state law and as set forth in the attachment Exhibit B, "Insurance". Engineer shall provide proof of said insurance requirements by attaching a Certificate of Insurance with the executed Agreement. 9. Independent Consultant Engineer agrees to perform all services as an independent consultant and not as a subcontractor, agent or employee of the Owner. 10. Engineer's Personnel at the Project Site The presence or duties of the Engineer's personnel at the Project site, whether as on -site representatives or otherwise, do not make the Engineer or its personnel in any way responsible for those duties that belong to Owner and/or to other contractors, subcontractors, or other entities, and do not relieve the other contractors, subcontractors, or other entities of their obligations, duties, and responsibilities, including, but not limited to, all methods, means, techniques, sequences, and procedures necessary for coordinating and completing all portions of the work of those parties in accordance with their contract requirements and any health or safety precautions required by such work. The Engineer and its personnel have no authority to exercise any control over any contractor, subcontractor, or other entity or their employees in connection with their work or any health or safety precautions and have no duty for inspecting, noting, observing, correcting, or reporting on health or safety deficiencies of any contractor, subcontractor, or other entity or any other persons at the Project site except Engineer's own personnel. Engineer neither guarantees the performance of any contractors, subcontractors or other entities nor assumes responsibility for their failure to perform their work in accordance with their contractual responsibilities. 11. Litigation Assistance Unless specifically set forth in the Scope of Services, the Scope of Services does not include costs of the Engineer for required or requested assistance to support, prepare, document, bring, defend, or assist in litigation or administrative proceedings taken or defended by the Owner. 12. Venue In the event that any legal proceeding is brought to enforce this Agreement or any provision hereof, the same shall be brought in Denton County, Texas, and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. 13. Severability and Survival If any of the provisions contained in this Agreement are held illegal, invalid or unenforceable, the enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be impaired thereby. Limitations of liability and indemnities shall survive termination of this Agreement for any cause. 14. Interpretation The limitations of liability and indemnities will apply whether Engineer's liability arises under breach of contract or warranty; tort, including negligence; strict liability; statutory liability; or any other cause of action, except for willful misconduct or gross negligence for limitations of liability and sole negligence for indemnification, and shall apply to Engineer's officers, affiliated corporation, employees and subcontractors. The law of the state of Texas shall 3-5 Alan Plummer Associates, Inc. Agreement for Professional Services APAI Project No govern the validity of this Agreement, its interpretation and performance, and any other claims related to it. 15. No Third Party Beneficiaries This Agreement gives no rights or benefits to anyone other than the Owner and Engineer and has no third party beneficiaries. The Owner will include a provision in each agreement which Owner enters into with any other entity or person that such entity or person shall have no third -party beneficiary rights under this Agreement. Engineer's services are defined solely by this Agreement, and not by any other contract or Agreement that may be associated with the Project. 16. Indemnity and Liability To the fullest extent permitted by law, Engineer shall indemnify and hold harmless Owner and their officers, directors, members, partners, agents, consultants, and employees from reasonable claims, costs, losses, and damages arising out of Engineer's negligent act or omission of Engineer, its consultants, or their officers, directors, members, partners, agents, or employees on services performed under this Agreement provided that any such claim, cost, loss, or damage is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death, or to injury to or destruction of tangible property (other than the Work itself), including the loss of use resulting therefrom. It is specifically understood and agreed that in no case shall the Engineer be required to pay an amount disproportional to Engineer's culpability, or any share of any amount levied to recognize more than actual economic damages Engineer will strive to perform services under this Agreement in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing similar work in the same locality under similar conditions during the same time. Engineer makes no warranties, express or implied, under this Agreement or otherwise, in connection with any services performed or furnished by Engineer. Engineer's services shall be governed by the negligence standard for professional services, measured as of the time those services are performed. The Owner's review, approval, or acceptance of, or payment for, any of these services shall not be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights under this Agreement or of any cause of action arising out of the performances of this Agreement, and the Engineer shall be and remain liable in accordance with applicable law for all damages to the Owner caused by Engineer's omissions or negligent performance of any of the services furnished under this Agreement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Engineer's liability for Owner damages for any cause or combination of causes will, in the aggregate, not exceed the limits of the Engineer's professional liability insurance coverage. As used herein, Engineer includes the corporation, subcontractors, and any of its or their officers, or employees. As between the Owner and the Engineer, any contract claim must be brought within two years from the day following the act or omission giving rise to the breach of contract claim. 17. Documents and Notices Contract documents, reports, plans, specifications, memorandums, or other delivered documents (furthermore known as Documents), in printed paper format (also known as hard copies) prepared or furnished by Engineer, pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of service but shall become the property of the Owner subject to Engineer's receipt of full payment for all services relating to preparation of the Documents. Engineer shall have the right to retain copies of Documents for information and reference. Signed and sealed printed form documents and plans shall be deemed superior and shall govern over same electronic format documents. Contracted notices required by this Agreement shall be made in writing and shall be delivered by: 4-5 Alan Plummer Associates, Inc. Agreement for Professional Services APAI Project No a. Person; b. Overnight courier with written verification of receipt; c. Electronic communication; or d. Certified mail, return receipt requested. 18. Assignment Neither Party will assign all or any part of this Agreement without prior written consent to the other party. Exhibit A — Scope of Services and Budget (Letter submitted to Mr. Mike Brice, May 11, 2016. Exhibit B -- Insurance By execution of this Agreement, Owner authorizes Engineer to provide Basic Services for the Project in accordance with Exhibit A, "Scope of Services and Budget." Services covered by this Agreement will be performed in accordance with the Provisions attached to this form and any other attachments or schedules. This Agreement amends the prior Agreements dated and understandings and may only be changed by written amendment executed by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above. Owner: Alan Plummer Associates, Inc.: By By� Title Title Date Date 6Z- Z 5-5 Alan Plummer Associates, Inc. EXHIBIT A May 11, 2016 Mr. Mike Brice City Manager City of Sanger P.O. Box 1729 Sanger, TX 76266 Re: Sanger Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements and Expansion Project Request for Additional Funds Dear Mr. Brice: In May 2014, the City authorized Alan Plummer Associates, Inc., to proceed with the design and permitting of Improvements and expansion of your wastewater treatment plant for a fee not to exceed $945,340, As you are aware, since the initiation of the project there have been a number of changes in both the direction of the design and the permitting process. Most of the design changes we have been able to absorb into our initial budget, but we need some additional funds to complete the project. Given the most recent turn of events — the identification of the possibility of re-routing Ranger Creek and/or the Un-named Tributary, we need to request some additional funds to cover our services associated with the change in permit direction from an amendment to a straight renewal and our investigation of issues associated with the potential re-routing and/or mitigation banking project. The requests and the explanation of the requests are shown below. PLANT DESIGN We are requesting additional fees for completing the detailed design of the plant. We attempted to accommodate all the changes to the design without requesting additional fees, but we have exhausted our design budget and request consideration of an additional amount. The changes that we have incorporated include: Designing a new influent lift station in lieu of modifying the existing one. Changing the size of the peak flow storage basin and designing a more complicated flow control with the ability to flow by gravity and to pump into the basin. Eliminating the spiitter box and providing ground level flow splitting area. - Designing a means of lifting flow from the UV structure to the existing reuse pipeline. This lift is due to leaving in hydraulic capacity for potential filters. - Relocating solids dewatering to the abandoned animal control building. - Designing a separate small drain pump station to keep from flooding the animal control building. We are not requesting fees for all these changes, but if you could compensate us for the additional work on the influent lift station and peak flow basin, that would be appreciated. This amount is for $38,300. 1320 SOUTH UNIVERSRY ORIVE SUITE 300 FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76107 PHONE 817.006,1700 FAX 017.970.2536 Page 1 of 3 TOPE Rm No. 13 Zro PERMIT — CHANGE IN DISCHARGE POINT LOCATION AND FROM PERMITAMENDMENT TO STRAIGHT RENEWAL PERMIT We are requesting additional fees for work associated with the change in the discharge location and the change from the permit amendment application to a straight renewal application. The work included: - Modifying the application from amendment to renewal, - Identifying potential alternative discharge sites. - Evaluating site conditions at the alternative sites. - Developing the opinion of probable construction costs for the pipeline options. - Participating in several conference calls. The cost for these services is $7,427,44. We can absorb these costs into our current permit budget and, then, if we need additional funds to finish out the renewal, we will request them at that time. POTENTIAL STREAM RESTORATION MITIGATION BANK We have incurred some costs for the preliminary work investigating the potential development of a stream restoration project in lieu of the long discharge pipeline_ The tasks associated with this task have included: - Participating in Initial discussions/conference calls with Sanger. - Developing initial options for mitigation. Identifying USCOE permit requirements and issues associated with each of the options. - Determining water rights for Riley's pumping water from the rerouted stream to an excavated pond on his property. - Developing timelines for the coordination of the permitting, mitigation bank project, and completion of design and construction of treatment plant improvements. - Contacting Wilson Sands and discussing potential stream restoration mitigation bank. - Conducting several conference calls internally to discuss issues associated with the potential stream mitigation bank project. - Conducting two conference calls with Sanger to discuss potential stream restoration mitigation bank project. - Participating in meeting between Sanger, Sands, Riley, Harris, and APAI to discuss the potential stream restoration mitigation bank. The cost for these services has been approximately $20,314,78. Future costs should not be more than about $5,000 because most of the cost will be borne by either Wilson Sands' firm or Mr. Riley and Mr. Harris for Loretta Mokry's USCOE permitting efforts and input into the Page 2 of 3 development of the stream re-routing. The $5,000 would cover Janet Sims' coordination of the mitigation project with the TPDES permit renewal processing. SUMMARY The total sum being requested is: $63,615. Thank you for your generosity in providing these additional funds. We are really enjoying working with you and others at the City of Sanger and think that this latest turn of events regarding rerouting the stream has great potential for saving you a significant amount of money and providing a valuable mitigation resource for development in the community. Sincerely, ::2: Betty L. dan" P Principal Cc: Mr. Neal Welch, Director of Public Works, City of Sanger Mr. Jeff Caffey, Principal, Project Manager, APAI Page 3 of 3 r r IwIlooll s r CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MM/DD,YYYY) 06/29/2016 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER McLaughlin Brunson Insurance Agency, LLP 12801 North Central Expressway Suite 1710 Dallas TX 75243 CONTACT NAME: Joe A Bryant PNONtJ (214) 503-1212 nr�c No:(21-4) 503-8899 EMAIL ADDRESS: INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSURERA: Travelers Indemnity Company 25658 INSURED Alan Plummer Associates, Inc. INSURERS: Charter Oak Fire Insurance Co. 25615 INSURERC:XL Specialty Insurance Company 37885 INSURER D: Travelers Indemnity Cc of Am. 25666 1320 S. University Drive, #300 INSURERE: 'Fort Worth TX 76107 INSURER F : COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: Cert ID 32667 REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. ILTR TYPE OF INSURANCE INSR WVD SUER POLICY NUMBER MM/DDY EFF MMLDD EXP LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 D COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY Y Y PACP1996L981 06/15/2016 06 15 2017 AMAIETRENTED PREMISESOEa occurrence 5 1, 000, 000 MED EXP (Any one person) $ 10,000 CLAIMS -MADE FOOCCUR PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ 11000,000 X ValPapers-$1,000,000 X Contractual Liab, GENERAL AGGREGATE 5 2,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS - COMP/OPAGG $ 2,000,000 JECT POLICY X PRO- LOC $ AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT Ea accident 1,000,000 BODILY INJURY (Per person) $ B X ANY AUTO Y Y BA2003L924 06/15/2016 06/15/2011 ALL OWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS AUTOS No Owned Autos BODILY INJURY Per accident ( ) S X NON -OWNED HIRED AUTOS Ix AUTOS PROPERTY DAMAGE Per accident $ S A X UMBRELLA LIAB X I OCCUR Y Y CUP6428Y427 06/15/2016 06/15/201 EACH OCCURRENCE $ 4,000,000 AGGREGATE S 4,000,000 EXCESS LIAR CLAIMS -MADE DED RETENTION S $ WORKERS COMPENSATION WC STATU- OTH- TORYANY AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY Y / N PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? ❑ N/A $ E.L. EACH ACCIDENT E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYE S (Mandatory in NH) 11 yes, describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT S C Professional Liability Y DPR9804732 05/09/2016 05/09/2017 Per Claim $ 2,000,000 Annual Aggregate $ 2,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS I VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, it more space Is required) The claims made professional liability coverage is the total aggregate limit for all claims presented within the policy period and is subject to a deductible. Thirty(30)day notice of cancellation in favor of certificate holder on all policies.RE: Sanger WWTP Permitting and Improvements - APAI # 1416-002-01 City of Sanger PO Box 1729 ) Sanger TX 76266 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ([� ff lOccGr7N` ©1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25 (2010/05) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD Page 1 of 1 ACbR6' CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MMIDDIYYYY) 06/29/2016 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed, if SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CONTACT NAME: Marsh Sponsored Programs a division of Marsh USA, Inc. PO Box 19904 PHONE FAX AIc No Ext:800-338-1391 AIC No: 88B-621-3173 EMAIL ADDS,s:acecclientrequest@marsh.com INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIL# Des Moines IA 50306 INSURERA:Twin City Fire Insurance Company 29459 INSURED Alan Plummer Assoc., Inc. INSURER B : INSURER C: 1320 South University Drive Fort Worth, TX 76107 INSURERD: INSURER E: INSURER F : COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. ILTR TYPE OF INSURANCE IDS SUBS D POLICY NUMBER MWI)DIYYYF N DD1YYYYP LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS -MADE DOCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ DAMAGE TO RENTED PREMISES Ea occurrence S MED EXP (Any one person) _ 5 PERSONAL & ADV INJURY S GENERAL AGGREGATE S GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: POLICY PRO- LOC PRODUCTS- COMPIOP AGG S S 1] AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY ANY AUTO ALLOWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS AUTOS HIRED AUTOS NON -OWNED AUTOS COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT Eaaecident $ BODILY INJURY (Per person) $ BODILY INJURY (Per accident) S PRPerOPERTYDAMAGE a Eden I _ $ S UMBRELLA LIAR EXCESSLIAB HCLAIMS-MADE OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE_ S AGGREGATE_ S___ DED I I RETENTIONS S A WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY YIN N ANY PROPRIETORIPARTNER/EXECUTIVE ❑ OFFICERIMEMBER EXCLUDED? (Mandatory in NH) If yes, describe under DESCRIPTIONOFOPERATIONS below NIA 84WBGCB6868 01/01/2016 01/01/2017 X TWOCSTATU- OTR- E.L. EACH ACCIDENT —"—' S1,000,000 E.L. DISEASE - EAEMPLOYE $1,000,000 E.L. DISEASE -POLICY LIMIT 1 $1,000,0()0 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 1011, Additional Remarks Schedule, if more space is required) RE: Sanger W;ITP Permitting and Improvements APAI N 1416-002-01 (City of Sanger 20 Box 1729 iSanger, Texas 76266 CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ._.. ©1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25 (2010/05) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD RESOLUTION #R08-06-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANGER, TEXAS, ESTABLISHING THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE PROPOSED FY 2016-2017 BUDGET AND TAX RATE; DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO POST AND PUBLISH SAID HEARING AS REQUIRED BY LAW; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS APPROVED COMPLIED WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND DELCARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed budget and tax rate prior to its adoption is required by Section 102.006 of the Texas Local Government Code and Section 9.04 of the City of Sanger Charter; and WHEREAS, any taxpayer of the City of Sanger may attend and participate in all such hearings; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Sanger; Section 1. That the findings set forth are hereby approved and adopted. Section 2. That a public hearing on the proposed budget for FY 2016-2017 and tax rate is hereby set to be held on August 15, 2016 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers located at 502 Elm Street, Sanger, Texas, 76266. The second public hearing for the tax rate will be held on September 6, 2016 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers. Section 3. That the City Secretary is directed to post and publish notice of the public hearing on the budget as required by law. Section 4. That the meeting at which this resolution was passed, was in compliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 551. Section 5. That this resolution shall become effective after its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of August 2016. Mayor Thomas Muir ATTEST: Tami Taber, City Secretary CITY OF SANGER COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM AGENDA TYPE ® Regular ❑ special ❑ Consent Reviewed by Finance ❑ Yes ® Not Applicable ❑ Workshop ❑ Executive ❑ Public Hearing Reviewed by Legal Yes Not Applicable Council Meeting Date: Submitted By: August 1, 2016 Joseph D. Iliff, AICP City Manager Reviewed/Approval Initials Date 7—. 7 /,61 ACTION REQUESTED: ®ORDINANCE 08-XX-16 ❑ RESOLUTION # ❑ APPROVAL ❑ CHANGE ORDER ❑ AGREEMENT ❑ APPROVAL OF BID ❑ AWARD OF CONTRACT ❑ CONSENSUS ❑ OTHER AGENDA CAPTION Consider, Discuss, and Possibly Approve Ordinance 08-XX-16 Assessing Roadway Impact Fees and Setting a Collection Rate. FINANCIAL SUMMARY ®N/A ❑GRANT FUNDS ❑OPERATING EXPENSE [:]REVENUE ❑CIP ❑BUDGETED ❑NON -BUDGETED BACKGROUND/SUMMARY OF ITEM Roadway impact fees are fees collected by cities on new development for the funding of roadway facilities attributable to the increased traffic demanded by their construction. For a city to adopt roadway impact fees, a study must be prepared projecting the amount of increased traffic demand generated by future development, and identifying the cost of future roadway facilities. The City has prepared such a study, and submitted it to the review of the Planning & Zoning Commission serving as the Capital Improvement Advisory Committee (CIAC). The P&Z conducted a public hearing on September 14th, and recommended approval of the study's findings. Council conducted two public hearings on this topic. The first was on May 2 concerning the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan. The second on June 20 concerning the assessment of the fee amount. Based on input from Council, Staff had EIKON engineers revise the CIP, removing segments of roads that were outside the city limits. The revised study is attached to this report. If adopted, the roadway impact fees would begin being collected w building permits issued beginning one year after going into effect on October 1, 2016, per state law (§395.016 (c)). Collections would begin October 1, 2017. STAFF OPTIONS & RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending adoption of the ordinance setting a Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate of $247.53 per service unit for residential land uses. This is 18.9% of the Maximum Roadway Impact Fee Per Service Unit of the Roadway Impact Fee Study. This would assess a new single-family detached dwelling a fee of $1,500. Staff is recommending a Collection Rate of $185.65 for all non-residential land uses. This is 75% of the residential rate. The City has budgeted $350,000 from the general fund for street reconstruction in the current budget year. (This does not include funds for street and sidewalk maintenance.) With a $1,500 fee for each new single- family detached dwelling, the City would collect $350,000 in Roadway Impact Fees for every 234 of such permits issued. If the City issues 88 permits per year (the average 2012-2015), this takes 2.65 years. (This projection excludes that other uses will be paying roadway impact fees also during the collection period.) List of Supporting Documents/Exhibits Attached: Prior Action/Review by Council, Boards, Commissions or Other • 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Study Agencies: • Proposed Impact Fee Ordinance On September 14, 2015, the P&Z Commission conducted • Examples of fees per development unit a public hearing (there were no public comments) and unanimously recommended approval of the study and its ORDINANCE 908-15-16 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANGER, TEXAS, ADOPTING ROADWAY IMPACT FEES PER SERVICE UNIT; ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR THE ASSESSMENT, COLLECTION, COMPUTATION, EXPENDITURE, REFUND AND GENERAL ADMINISTRATION OF ROADWAY IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNTS FOR ROADWAY IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING CONSTRUCTION, SEVERABILITY, AND CONFLICT CLAUSES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Chapter 395, Tex. Loc. Gov't Code (the "Statute") provides the requirements and procedures for the adoption of Land Use Assumptions, Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan, and Roadway Impact Fees; and WHEREAS, the City retained EIKON to prepare a Roadway Impact Fee Study that contains Land Use Assumptions ("LUA"), a Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan ("CIP") to identify Capital Improvements or Roadway Facility expansions for which Roadway Impact Fees may be assessed, and a calculation of the Roadway Impact Fee. The Roadway Impact Fee Study is attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated by reference herein; and WHEREAS, after notice of public hearing was published as required by the Statute, the City Council held a public hearing on May 2, 2016; and WHEREAS, the Capital Improvement Advisory Committee of the City of Sanger ("CIAC"), created pursuant to Sec. 395.058, Tex. Loc. Gov't Code, filed its written comments on the proposed Roadway Impact Fees, and WHEREAS, as required by Section 395.054, Tex. Loc. Gov't Code, the City Council conducted a public hearing on June 20, 2016 on the adoption of Roadway Impact Fees in which any member of the public had the right to appear at the hearing and present evidence for or against the plan and proposed fee; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt the Roadway Impact Fees and related administrative process as herein described and finds that it is in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Sanger; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANGER HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Short Title. This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "Sanger Roadway Impact Fee Regulations". SECTION 2. Findings Incorporated. The findings set forth above are incorporated into the body of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein and are hereby found to be true and correct factual and legislative determinations of the City of Sanger, Texas. SECTION 3. Purpose. This Ordinance is intended to assure the provision of adequate roadway facilities to serve new development in the City by requiring each development to pay a share of the costs of such capital improvements or roadway facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to such new development. SECTION 4. Authority. This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Texas Local Government Code (TLGC) Chapter 395 and the Sanger City Charter. Chapter 395 supplements this Ordinance to the extent that its provisions may be applicable hereto and, to such extent, its provisions are incorporated herein by reference. The provisions of this Ordinance shall not be construed to limit the power of the City to utilize other methods authorized under State law or pursuant to other City powers to accomplish the purposes set forth herein, either in substitution or in conjunction with this Ordinance. Guidelines may be developed by ordinance, resolution, or otherwise to implement and administer this Ordinance. SECTION 5. Applicability. The provisions of this Ordinance apply to all new, non-exempt development within the corporate boundaries of the City. SECTION 6. Incorporation of Land Use Assumptions and Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan. The Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan and Land Use Assumptions, as considered and adopted by the City Council with the Roadway Impact Fee Study as Exhibit A hereto is incorporated herein by reference for all purposes, including any future amendments thereto. SECTION 7. Definitions. In this Ordinance: A. Assessment means the determination of the amount of the maximum assessable roadway impact fee per service unit which can be imposed on new development pursuant to this ordinance. B. Capital Improvement means a roadway facility with a life expectancy of three or more years, to be owned and operated by or on behalf of the City. C. City means the City of Sanger, Texas. D. Credit means a reduction in the amount of a roadway impact fee(s), payments, or charges for approved construction or provision of the same type of capital improvement for which a fee has been assessed for a new development. this is done by either by a proven decrease in the number of service units attributable to such development or a decrease in the amount of roadway impact fees otherwise due, that results from contributions of land, improvements or funds to construct system improvements in accordance with the City's subdivision and development regulations, policies or requirements, as determined by the City. E. Final plat approval means authorization by the Planning & Zoning Commission that the final map of a proposed subdivision meets all City standards and conditions in accordance with the City's subdivision regulations and that the plat may be recorded in the office of the county clerk of Denton County. The term applies both to original plats and replats. F. Impact Fee, or "Roadway Impact Fee", means a fee, charge, or assessment for roadway facilities imposed on new development by the City pursuant to this Ordinance in order to generate revenue to fund or recoup all or part of the costs of capital improvements or facility expansion necessitated by and attributable to such new development. The term includes amortized charges, lump -sum charges, capital recovery fees, contributions in aid of construction and any other fee that functions as described by this Ordinance or the statute. The term is inclusive of both the maximum assessable roadway impact fee and the roadway impact fee collection rate as herein described. G. Land Use Assumptions means the description of the service area and the projections of population and employment growth and associated changes in land uses, densities and intensities adopted by the City, as may be amended from time to time, upon which the Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan is based. H. Land Use Equivalency Table means a table converting the demands for capital improvements generated by various land uses to numbers of service units, as may be amended from time to time. The land use equivalency table may be incorporated in a schedule of impact fee rates, attached as Appendix D of Exhibit A hereto and incorporated by reference herein. I. Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee means the impact fee that is established for each service area computed by calculating the total projected costs of capital improvements necessitated by and attributable to new development and subtracting a portion of ad valorem tax revenues to be generated by new service units, including the payment of debt, associated with the roadway CIP, and then dividing that amount by the total number of service units anticipated within the Service Area based upon the land use assumptions. The Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee shall be established and reflected in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. The City may adopt a roadway impact fee collection rate that is less than this amount, but in no instance shall the roadway impact fee exceed the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee except by amendment of this Ordinance. J. New Development means a project involving the construction, reconstruction, redevelopment, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure, or any use or extension of land, which has the effect of increasing the requirements for Capital Improvements or facility expansions, measured by the number of service units to be generated by such activity. K. Recoupment means the imposition of an impact fee to reimburse the City for capital improvements which the city has previously oversized to serve new development. L. Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate means the current amount of roadway impact fee adopted by Sanger City Council to be paid by the property owner, as may from time to time be amended, which is the result of a percentage reduction of the adopted Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee. The adopted Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate shall be established and reflected in Exhibit B= attached hereto and incorporated herein. The adopted Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate may be further reduced with Credits, designed to fairly reflect the value of roadway facilities provided by a developer in accordance with the City's development regulations or requirements. M. Roadway means any primary and secondary arterial or collector designated in the City's adopted Thoroughfare Plan, as may be amended from time to time. N. Roadway Facility means an improvement or appurtenance to a roadway which includes, but is not limited to, rights -of -way, whether conveyed by deed or easement; intersection improvements; traffic signals; turn lanes; drainage facilities associated with the Roadway Facility; street lighting or curbs, and water and wastewater improvements affected by the Roadway Facility. Roadway Facility also includes any improvement or appurtenance to an intersection with a roadway officially enumerated in the federal or Texas highway system, and to any improvements or appurtenances to such federal or Texas highway, to the extent that the City has incurred capital costs for such facilities, including without limitation local matching funds and costs related to utility line relocation and the establishment of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, drainage appurtenances and rights -of -way. Roadway Facility excludes those improvements or appurtenances to any Roadway which is a site- related facility. 0. Roadway Facility expansion means the expansion of the capacity of an existing roadway in the City, but does not include the repair, maintenance, modernization, or expansion of an existing roadway to better serve existing development. P. Roadwaypact Fee Capital Improvements Plan, or "Capital Improvements Plan" (CIP) means the adopted plan included in Exhibit A, as may be amended from time to time, which identifies the roadway facilities or roadway facility expansions and their costs for the service area, which are necessitated by and which are attributable to new development, for a period not to exceed 10 years, which are to be financed in whole or in part through the imposition of roadway impact fees pursuant to this Ordinance. Q. Service Area means the roadway service area within the City's corporate boundary, within which impact fees for roadway capital improvements or roadway facility expansions may be collected for new development occurring within such area and within which fees so collected will be expended for those types of improvements or expansions identified in the Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan applicable to the service area. R. Service Unit means a vehicle -mile. A vehicle -mile shall be defined as one (1) vehicle traveling a distance of one (1) mile during the afternoon peak hour as calculated herein. S. Site -related Facility means an improvement or facility which is for the primary use or benefit of one or more new developments and/or which is for the primary purpose of safe and adequate provision of roadway facilities to serve the new development, including access to the development, which is not included in the Roadway Capital Improvements Plan, and for which the developer (s) or property owner(s) is solely responsible under subdivision or other applicable development regulations. Site- related Facility may include a roadway improvement which is located offsite, or within or on the perimeter of the development site. T. System Facility means a roadway improvement or facility expansion which is designated in the Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan and which is not a Site -related Facility. System Facility may include a roadway improvement which is located offsite, or within or on the perimeter of the development site. SECTION 8. Roadway Service Area. The City hereby establishes one (1) Roadway Service Areas, constituting all land within the City's corporate boundaries, as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION 9. Roadway Impact Fees Adopted. The City hereby adopts the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee attached and incorporated as Exhibit A. and the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate attached and incorporated as Exhibit B. Each non-exempt new development shall be assessed the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee and shall pay the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate, minus any applicable credits, as described herein. Except as herein otherwise provided, the assessment and collection of a roadway impact fee shall be additional and supplemental to, and not in substitution of, any other tax, fee, charge or assessment which is lawfully imposed on and due against the property. SECTION 10. Roadway Impact Fee Required. No final plat for new development shall be released for filing with Denton County without Assessment of an Impact Fee pursuant to this Ordinance; or, if no plat is required, then no building permit shall be issued until such assessment is made and paid in accordance with the assessment and collection procedures indicated herein. SECTION 1 1 . Assessment of Impact Fees. Assessment of the Impact Fee for any new development shall be made as follows: A. For a new development which has received final plat approval before the effective date of this Ordinance, assessment of impact fees shall occur on the effective date of this Ordinance, and shall be the amount of the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee per Service Unit as set forth in Exhibit A. However, the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate shall not be collected on any Service Unit which has received final plat approval before the effective date of this Ordinance and for which a valid building permit is issued within one year after the date of adoption of this Ordinance. B. For land which is not required to be platted at the time of application for a building permit pursuant to the City's subdivision regulations prior to development, Assessment of Roadway Impact Fees shall occur at the time application is made for the building permit, and shall be the amount of the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee per Service Unit as set forth in Exhibit A then in effect. C. For New Development which is submitted for approval pursuant to the City's subdivision regulations or which is proposed for replatting on or after the effective date of this Ordinance, assessment of impact fees shall be at the time of final plat or replat approval, and shall be the amount of the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee per Service Unit as set forth in Exhibit A then in effect. D. Following assessment of the impact fee pursuant to this Section, the amount of the impact fee assessment per service unit for that development cannot be increased, unless the owner proposes to change the approved development by the submission of a new application for final plat approval or other development application that results in approval of additional service units, in which case a new assessment shall occur at the Exhibit A rate then in effect for such additional Service Units. E. The City Manager or his or her designee shall compute the roadway impact fees for new development by first determining whether the new development is eligible for credits calculated in accordance with this Ordinance, which would further reduce Impact Fees otherwise due in whole or in part. The total amount of impact fees for the new development shall be attached to the development application as a condition of approval. F. Approval of an amending plat pursuant to Tex. Loc. Gov't Code, Section 212.016 and the City's subdivision regulations is not subject to reassessment for an Impact Fee. SECTION 12. Exemptions to Impact Fees. The following are exempt from the applicability of this Ordinance: A. Pursuant to Tex. Loc. Gov't Code Section 395.022, as amended, a public school district is not required to pay roadway impact fees imposed under this Ordinance unless the board of trustees of the district consents to the payment of the fees by entering a contract with the City imposing the fees. B. A change in use that generates less than 10 times the number of Service Units attributable to the immediately preceding use is exempt from the payment of impact fees. SECTION 13. Collection of Impact Fees. Roadway Impact Fees shall be collected in the following manner; however, the City has the ability to require construction greater than the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate for amounts up to the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee: A. The Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate shall be paid at the time the City issues a building permit for a new development. B. For properties requiring a plat, the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate to be paid and collected per service unit for new development shall be the amount listed in Exhibit B in effect at the time of final plat approval for up to a one-year period following such final plat approval. After the one-year period has expired, the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate shall be paid according to the current amount listed in Exhibit B then in effect. C. For properties that do not require the fling of a plat, the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate shall be paid and collected per service unit for new development in the amount listed in Exhibit B in effect at the time that the building permit is fled. D. If the building permit for which an impact fee has been paid has expired, and a new application is thereafter fled, the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate shall be computed using Exhibit B in effect at the time of the new application, with credits for previous payment of impact fees being applied against the new impact fees due. E. Whenever the property owner proposes to increase the number of service units for a development, the additional impact fees collected for such new service units shall be determined by using Exhibit B in effect at the time of the request, and such additional fee shall be collected at the times prescribed by this section. F. The Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee per Service Unit for Roadway Facilities, as may be amended from time to time, hereby is declared to be an approximate and appropriate measure of the impacts generated by a new unit of development on the City's roadway system. To the extent that the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate charged against a new development, as may be amended from time to time, is less than the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee per Service Unit assessed, such difference hereby is declared to be founded on policies unelated to measurement of the impacts of the new development on the City's roadway system. The Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee may be used in evaluating any claim by a property owner that the dedication or construction of a capital improvement within a service area imposed as a condition of development approval pursuant to the City's subdivision or development regulations is disproportionate to the impacts created by the development on the City's Roadway System. SECTION 14. Credits against Impact Fees. The City may credit the contribution of land, improvements or funding for construction of any system facility that is required or agreed to by the City, pursuant to rules established in this section or pursuant to administrative guidelines promulgated by the City with the following limitations: A. The Credit shall be associated with the plat or other detailed plan of development for the property that is to be served by the roadway facility. B. Master Planned Community projects, including subdivisions containing multiple phases, and whether approved before or after the effective date of these impact fee regulations, may apply for credits against roadway impact fees for the entire project based upon contributions of land, improvements or funds toward construction of system facilities, or other roadway capital improvements supplying excess capacity. Credits shall be determined by comparing costs of roadway capital improvements supplied by the project with the costs of roadway capital improvements to be utilized by development within the project, utilizing a methodology approved by the City. The credit determination shall be incorporated within an agreement for credits, in accordance with this Ordinance. The roadway requirements of an agreement for credits shall not be less than what is required by the Sanger Subdivision Ordinance. C. The City's current policies and regulations shall apply to determine a new development's obligations to construct adjacent system facilities. The obligation to construct, however, shall not exceed the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee assessed against the new development under Exhibit A. Construction required under such policies and regulations shall be a credit against the amount of impact fees otherwise due. If the costs of constructing a system facility in accordance with the current City policies and regulations are greater than the amount of the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate due, the amount of the credit due shall be deemed to be 100% of the assessed impact fees and no impact fee shall be collected thereafter for the development, unless the number of service units is subsequently increased. D. All credits against roadway impact fees shall be based upon standards promulgated by the City, which may be adopted as administrative guidelines, including the following standards: (1) No credit shall be given for the dedication or construction of site -related facilities. (2) No credit shall be given for a roadway facility which is not identified within the Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan, unless the facility is on or qualifies for inclusion on the Thoroughfare Plan and the City agrees that such improvement supplies capacity to new developments other than the development paying the roadway impact fee and provisions for credits are incorporated in an agreement for credits pursuant to this Ordinance. (3) In no event will the City grant a credit when no roadway impact fees can be collected pursuant to this Ordinance or for any amount exceeding the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate due for the development, unless expressly agreed to by the City in writing. (4) The City may participate in the costs of a system facility to be dedicated to the City, including costs that exceed the amount of the Impact Fees due for the development, in accordance with policies and rules established by the City. The amount of any credit for construction of a system facility shall be reduced by the amount of any participation funds received from the City. (5) Where funds for roadway facilities have been escrowed under an agreement that was executed with the City prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, the following rules apply: (a) Funds expended under the agreement for roadway facilities shall first be credited against the amount of roadway impact fees that would have been due under Exhibit B for those units of development for which building permits already have been issued; (b) Any remaining funds shall be credited against Impact Fees due for the development under Exhibit B at the time building permits are issued. E. Credits for construction of capital improvements shall be deemed created when the capital improvements are completed and the City has accepted the facility, or in the case of capital improvements constructed and accepted prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, on such effective date. Credits created after the effective date of this Ordinance shall expire ten (10) years from the date the credit was created. Credits arising prior to such effective date shall expire ten (10) years from such effective date. Upon application by the prope 1 iy owner, the City may agree to extend the expiration date for the credit on mutually agreeable terms. F. Unless an agreement for credits, as described herein, is executed providing for a different manner of applying credits against roadway impact fees due, a credit associated with a plat shall be applied at the time of application for the first building permit and, at each building permit application thereafter, to reduce impact fees due until the credit is exhausted. G. An owner of a new development who has constructed or financed a roadway capital improvement or roadway facility expansion designated in the Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plans, or other roadway capital improvement that supplies excess capacity, as required or authorized by the City, shall enter into an agreement with the City to provide for credits against roadway impact fees due for the development in accordance with this paragraph. The agreement shall identify the basis for and the method for computing and the amount of the credit due and any reduction in credits attributable to consumption of road capacity by developed lots or tracts served by the roadway capital improvements. For multi -phased projects, the City may require that total credits be proportionally allocated among the phases. If authorized by the City, the agreement also may provide for allocation of credits among new developments within the project, and provisions for the timing and collection of impact fees. SECTION 15. Use of Proceeds of Impact Fee Accounts. The roadway impact fees pursuant to these regulations may be used to finance or to recoup the costs of any roadway improvements or facility expansions identified in the Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan for the service area, including but not limited to the construction contract price, surveying and engineering fees, and land acquisition costs (including land purchases, court awards and costs, attorney's fees, and expert witness fees). Roadway impact fees may also be used to pay the principal sum and interest and other finance costs on bonds, notes or other obligations issued by or on behalf of the City to finance such roadway improvements or facility expansions. Roadway impact fees also may be used to pay fees actually contracted to be paid to an independent qualified engineer or financial consultant for preparation of or updating the Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan. Impact fees collected may not be used to pay for the expenses prohibited by Statute. SECTION 16. Establishment of Accounts. The City's Finance Department shall establish an account to which interest is allocated for each service area for which a roadway impact fee is imposed pursuant to this Ordinance. Each impact fee collected within the service area shall be deposited in such account with the following regulations: A. Interest earned on the account into which the impact fees are deposited shall be considered funds of the account and shall be used solely for the purposes authorized in this Ordinance and the Statute. B. The City's Finance Department shall establish adequate financial and accounting controls to ensure that roadway impact fees disbursed from the account are utilized solely for the purposes authorized in this Ordinance and the Statute. Disbursement of funds shall be authorized by the City at such times as are reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes and intent of this Ordinance; provided, however, that any roadway impact fee paid shall be expended within a reasonable period of time, but not to exceed ten (10) years from the date the fee is deposited into the account. C. The City's Finance Department shall maintain and keep financial records for roadway impact fees, which shall show the source and disbursement of all fees collected in or expended from each service area. The records of the account into which impact fees are deposited shall be open for public inspection and copying during ordinary business hours. The City may establish a fee for copying services. SECTION 17. Impact Fee as Additional and Supplemental Regulation. Roadway impact fees established by these regulations are additional and supplemental to, and not in substitution of, any other requirements imposed by the City on the development of land or the issuance of building permits or certificates of occupancy. Such impact fees are intended to be consistent with and to further the policies of the City's land use regulations, the Capital Improvements Plan, the zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations and other City policies, ordinances and resolutions by which the City seeks to ensure the provision of adequate public facilities in conjunction with the development of land. This Ordinance shall not affect, in any manner, the permissible use of property, density of development, design, and improvement standards and requirements, or any other aspect of the development of land or provision of public improvements subject to the zoning and subdivision regulations or other regulations and policies of the City, which shall be operative and remain in full force and effect without limitation with respect to all such development. SECTION 18. Updates to Plans and Revision of Fees. The City shall update its Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan and make any revision of fees as indicated below: A. The City shall update its Land Use Assumptions and Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plans and shall recalculate the Roadway Impact Fees based thereon in accordance with the procedures set forth in Texas Local Gov't Code, Ch. 395, or in any successor statute. However, this does not preclude the City from reviewing its Land Use Assumptions, Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plans, Roadway Impact Fees, and other factors such as market conditions more frequently than provided for herein to determine whether the Land Use Assumptions and Roadway Capital Improvements Plans should be updated and the Roadway Impact Fees recalculated accordingly, utilizing statutory update procedures. B. Exhibit B may be amended without revising the Land Use Assumptions and Roadway Capital Improvements Plans at any time prior to the update provided for in this Section, provided that the Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate to be collected under Exhibit B do not exceed the Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fees assessed under Exhibit A. C. If, at the time an update is required as indicated herein and the City Council determines that no change to the Land Use Assumptions, Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan or Roadway Impact Fees are needed, it may dispense with such update by following the procedures in Texas Local Gov't Code, Section 395.0575 or its successor statute. D. The City may amend any other provisions of this Ordinance in accordance with procedures for ordinance amendments contained in the City's Charter or State law. SECTION 19. Refunds A. Upon application, any roadway impact fee or portion thereof collected pursuant to this Ordinance, which has not been expended within the service area within ten (10) years from the date of payment, shall be refunded to the record owner of the property for which the impact fee was paid or, if the impact fee was paid by another governmental entity, to such governmental entity, together with interest calculated from the date of collection to the date of refund at the statutory rate as set forth in Sec. 302.002, Tex. Fin. Code, or its successor statute. The application for refund pursuant to this section shall be submitted within sixty (60) days after the expiration of the ten-year period for expenditure of the impact fee. An impact fee shall be considered expended on a first -in, first out basis. B. An Impact Fee collected pursuant to this Ordinance shall also be considered expended if the total expenditures for Capital Improvements or Roadway Facility expansions authorized within the service area within ten (10) years following the date of payment exceeds the total fees collected within the service area for such improvements or expansions during such period. C. If a refund is due pursuant to Subsections A or B, the City shall divide the difference between the amount of expenditures and the amount of the impact fees collected by the total number of service units assumed within the service area for the period to determine the refund due per service unit. The refund to the record owner shall be calculated by multiplying the refund due per service unit by the number of service units for the development for which the fee was paid, and interest due shall be calculated upon that amount. SECTION 20. Rebates. If the building permit for a new development for which a roadway impact fee has been paid has expired, and a modified or new application has not been filed within six (6) months of such expiration, the City shall, upon written application, rebate the amount of the impact fee to the record owner of the property for which the impact fee was paid. If no application for rebate pursuant to this subsection has been filed within this period, no rebate shall become due. SECTION 21. Appeals. The property owner or applicant for new development may appeal the applicability or amount of the roadway impact fee or the availability or amount of credits or refunds to the City Council using the following procedure: A. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to demonstrate that relief should be granted by the City. B. The applicant must file a written notice of appeal with the City Manager or his/her designee within thirty (30) days following the decision being appealed. Along with the notice of appeal, an applicant may request an alternative service unit computation for land uses not contained with the latest edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual by submitting a trip generation study demonstrating the appropriateness of the trip generation rates for the proposed development. An applicant may also include an alternative service unit calculation. C. The City Manager or his/her designee ("Manager") may (1) resolve the appeal, if the applicant agrees with the Manager's decision, or (2) if the applicant does not agree, refer the matter to the City Council for decision, along with the Manager's recommendation and any trip generation study provided, if any. D. If City Council review is requested by the applicant after receiving the Manager's decision, the City Secretary shall schedule a public hearing at which the applicant may present testimony and evidence before the City Council. The City Council shall act on the appeal within sixty (60) days of receipt of the notice of appeal by the City, unless otherwise agreed by the Applicant. E. If the notice of appeal is accompanied by a payment or other security satisfactory to the City Attorney in an amount equal to the original determination of the roadway impact fee due, the City shall process and may issue a building permit if other requirements are met while the appeal is pending. F. If the City Council allows for a different amount of the roadway impact fee due for a new development under this section to be paid, it may cause to be appropriated from other City funds the amount of the reduction in the Impact Fee to the account for the service area. SECTION 22. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are, to the extent of such conflict, hereby repealed. SECTION 23. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases and words of this Ordinance are severable and, if any word, phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this Ordinance of any such unconstitutional word, phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, or section. SECTION 24. Any person, firm, or corporation who shall violate any of the provisions of this article shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined in an amount not to exceed the sum of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense, and each and every day such offense shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense. SECTION 25. This ordinance will take effect October 1, 2016, as the law and Charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Sanger, Texas, on this 1 St day of August 2016. APPROVED: Mayor Thomas Muir ATTEST: City Secretary Tami Taber fw:i:ltA,, 1 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE STUDY 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of Sanger, Texas Prepared by: E '10 'K ON ARCHITECTURE - ENGINEERING • PLANNING Texas Registration No. F-12759 1405 W. Chapman Drive Sanger, Texas 76266 940.458.7503 J U LY 2016 d KATHYRIYA H. KENNEDY ....................... 07/05/2016 Table of Contents I. Executive Summary 2 II. Introduction 3 III. Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Inputs 4 A. Land Use Assumptions 4 B. Impact Fee Service Area 6 C. Future Roadway Improvements 6 IV. Methodology for Roadway Impact Fees 7 A. Service Areas 7 B. Service Units 7 C. Cost Per Service Unit 7 D. Cost of the Improvements 8 E. Service Unit Calculation 9 V. Impact Fee Calculations 12 A. Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit 12 B. Plan For Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit 12 C. Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development 13 VI. Sample Calculations 14 VII. Conclusion 15 APPENDICES A. Roadway Impact Fee Opinion of Probable Construction Costs B. Roadway Impact Fee Service Units of Supply C. Maximum Allowable Roadway Impact Fee Per Service Unit Calculations D. Land Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table List of Exhibits 1 Service Area Map List of Tables 1A 2010 Demographics 1B 2011 Estimated Employment in Persons 2A Projected Population, Housing Units, and Employment in Person 2B Projected Population, Housing Units, and Employment in Square Feet 3 Roadway Improvements Plan for the Service Area 4 Level of Use for Proposed and Existing Facilities 5 Transportation Demand Factor Calculations (TDF) 6 Ten Year Growth Projections 7 Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit/Vehicle-Mile Page i1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study was performed to initiate the City of Sanger Roadway Impact Fees. Roadway improvements necessary to serve the 10-year (2025) system needs were evaluated based on information available from the City of Sanger 2015 Thoroughfare Plan, the 2007 Comprehensive Land Use Plan and the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). Texas' impact fee law (Chapter 395) allows the recovery of costs for a 10-year planning period. We reviewed the service area (Service Area) created based on the Thoroughfare Plan by site observations along the widening of existing roadways and aerial images of future alignments. The projected cost to construct the infrastructure needed through 2025 is $45,918,339 for the Service Area. Based on the City's 10-year growth projections and the associated demand (consumption) values, 3,295 additional vehicle -miles of capacity will be needed by year 2025 for the Service Area. Based on the additional service units and the recoverable capital improvements plans, the City may assess a maximum of $1,304.22 per service unit in the Service Area. Pa g e 12 II. INTRODUCTION Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code describes the procedure Texas cities must follow in order to create and implement impact fees. Senate Bill 243 (SB 243) amended Chapter 395 in September 2001 to define an Impact Fee as "a charge or assessment imposed by a political subdivision against new development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of roadway improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development." The City of Sanger has determined based on their 2015 Thoroughfare Plan that assessing impact fees for the continued expansion of the City is valuable and necessary. The City has retained EIKON Consultant Group to provide professional transportation engineering services for the initiation of their Roadway Impact Fees. This report includes the impact fee calculation in accordance with Chapter 395 and the adopted Land Use Assumptions and the Roadway Improvements Plan. This report consists of the methodology for the computation of impact fees. The components of the computation, as outlined by Chapter 395 "must contain specific enumeration" of the following items: A description of the existing capital improvements within the service area and the cost to upgrade, update, improve, expand or replace the improvements to meet existing needs and usage 2. An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity of the existing capital improvements 3. A description of all or the parts of the capital improvements and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new development in the service area based on approved land use assumptions 4. A definitive table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation, or discharge of service unit for each category of capital improvements and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial 5. The total number of projected service units necessitated by and attributable to new development within the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning criteria 6. The projected demand for capital improvements or facility expansions required by new service units projected over a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 10 years 7. A plan for awarding a credit for the portion of the ad valorem tax generated by new service units during the program period that is used for the payment of improvements or a credit equal to 50 percent of the total projected cost of implementing the capital improvements plan Page I3 III. ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CALCULATION INPUTS A. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS Per Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, Land Use Assumptions include changes in land uses, densities, and population in the service area. The Land Use Assumptions used in this report were developed by using employment data, population data, and trends developed by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). This information has been approved by the City of Sanger staff to be a reasonable representation of the building growth seen in the recent years and what may be expected in the following ten years. The following population and employment estimates and projections are defined by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and utilized by NCTCOG: Housing Units: Number of houses including single and multi -family homes Population: Number of people reported in the City. Employment: Square feet of building area based on retail, service, and basic land uses. Each classification has unique trip making characteristics. Basic/Goods: Land use activities that produce goods and services such as those that are exported outside of the local economy, such as manufacturing, construction, transportation, wholesale, trade, warehousing, and other industrial uses. (NAICS #210000 to #422999) Service: Land use activities which provide personal and professional services such as government and other professional administrative offices. (NAICS #520000 to #928199) Retail: Land use activities which provide for the retail sale of goods that primarily serve households and whose location choice is oriented toward the household sector, such as grocery stores and restaurants. (NAICS #440000 to #454390) To establish the population and employment characteristics for this report, demographic data provided by North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) and the 2010 US Census was used: Pa g e 14 Table 1A. 2010 Demographics US Census Population 6,916 Housing Units 2,427 Table 113. 2011 Estimated Employment in Persons 2011 Data from NCTCOG Employment Type Number of Persons Good Producing Industries (Basic) 645 Service Producing Industries (Service) 2,178 Retail Industries (Retail) 394 Total 3,217 NCTCOG published population estimates in 2015, which shows on average 1.9% growth in Sanger from 2010 to their estimates for 2014. The percent change for the population estimates for 2014 to 2015 is 1.3%. The population growth anticipated from the City's adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan (October 2007) predicted an annual growth rate of 3.75% based on historical growth since 1960. In reviewing the recent trend for building permit applications, City Staff anticipates a slower growth than identified in the Comprehensive Plan, which is more congruent with the growth estimated by NCTCOG. For the purposes of this report, a population growth rate of 1.3% was used to project the growth in Sanger up to 2025. In addition, we have assumed that the housing units and employment characteristics will grow at the same rate as the population. The following table summarizes the anticipated population and employment characteristics based on these assumptions: Table 2A. Projected Population, Housing Units, and Employment in Persons 2011 Data from NCTCOG Year Population Housing Units Basic Employees Service Employees Retail Employees 2010 6,916 2,427 - - - 2011 - - 645 2,178 394 2015 7,366 2,585 679 2,291 415 2025 8,265 2,900 762 2,574 466 For the purposes of this report, employment population data is converted to square feet of building area required to create the non-residential square footage within the City. The following conversions rates were used to create Table 2B: Basic/Goods:1,000 square feet Service: 350 square feet Retail: 500 square feet P a g e 15 Table 213. Projected Population, Housing Units, and Employment in Square Feet 2011 Data from NCTCOG Year Population Housing Units Basic (Square Footage) Service (Square Footage) Retail (Square Footage) 2010 6,916 2,427 - - - 2011 - - 645,000 762,300 197,000 2015 7,366 2,585 679,000 801,940 207,244 2025 1 8,265 2,900 762,000 901,039 232,854 B. IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREA Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code defines the service area for roadway facility analysis as an area within the corporate boundaries of the political subdivision that shall not exceed 6 miles. City Staff has determined that one (1) roadway facility service area based upon a six (6) mile limit is adequate and coincides with the capital improvement plans for roadway expansion over the next 10 years. The geographic boundary of the impact fee service area for roadway facilities is shown in Exhibit 1. C. FUTURE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS The City has identified the City -funded roadway projects needed for the projected growth within the City. These facilities are part of the currently adopted Thoroughfare Plan. The table below shows the length of each project as well as the Thoroughfare Plan classification. The future roadway improvements were developed by the City of Sanger staff and represent those projects that will be needed to accommodate the growth projected in this report. Table 3. Roadway Improvement Plan for the Service Area Street Name Class Limits Length (mi) Willow St./ Minor 4 Lanes 5th Street to City Limits 2.11 McReynolds Rd. Willow St./McReynolds Rd. Indian Ln. Minor 4 Lanes to FM 455 0.88 Marion Rd. Minor 4 Lanes FM 455 to Huling Rd. 0.76 Lois Rd. Minor 4 Lanes E. of Melton Rd. to 1-35 0.83 Belz Rd. Minor 4 Lanes 1-35 SBFR to Metz Rd. 0.97 Metz Rd. Minor 4 Lanes Belz Rd. to FM 455 0.67 Utility Rd. Collector 2 Lanes RR Tracks to Marion Rd. 0.77 Keaton Rd. Collector 2 Lanes Belz Rd. to FM 455 0.67 Future Belz Rd - Indian Minor 4 Lanes 1-35 NBFR to FM 455 1.02 Connector Future East-West Minor 4 Lanes Cowling Rd. to BNSF RR 0.53 Thoroughfare Tracks Exhibit 1 maps the roadway alignments described above. IV. ROADWAY IMPACT FEE METHODOLOGY A. SERVICE AREAS 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." One (1) service area was used in this report and is shown in Exhibit 1 and incorporates the anticipated roadway improvement projects within the corporate boundary of the City of Sanger. B. SERVICE UNITS The "service unit" is a measure of consumption or use of the roadway facilities by new development and is defined as a vehicle -mile for transportation purposes. In regards to supply and demand, it is a lane -mile and a vehicle -trip of one -mile in length, respectively. The afternoon peak hour of traffic is the time period used for transportation planning and the estimation of trips from new development. The service volume that is supplied by a lane -mile of roadway facility is another component of the service unit. This volume is a function of the facility type, configuration, number of lanes, and level of service. The hourly service volumes used in this report are based on the hourly capacity for level of service D obtained from the DFW Regional Travel Model Criteria published by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) and the Highway Capacity Manual. Level of service D roadways represents the minimal acceptable capacity limit for urban roadways. In the absence of providing a traffic study to generate the number of cars currently using the roads within the service area, we have assumed that the hourly capacity of the roads is equal to the number of cars currently using the roads in the peak am hour. Table 4 shows the service volumes as a function of the facility type for the types of roads within the service area. Table 4. Vehicle -Mile Capacities Hourly Vehicle -Mile Capacity Class Median Configuration per Lane -Mile of Roadway Facility Minor 4 Undivided 525 Lanes Collector 2 Undivided 450 Lanes Principal 4 Undivided 650 Lanes C. COST PER SERVICE UNIT The cost for each service unit is the cost for each vehicle -mile traveled or the cost to build a lane -mile for a vehicle -mile of travel at a level of service provided by the City's standards. The cost per service unit is calculated for each project within the service area. The number of service units in the service are is the measure of the presumed growth in the transportation demand projected over a ten-year period. Chapter 395 requires that Impact Fees be assessed only to pay for growth projected to occur within the next ten - years. P a g e 17 K ON D. COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS Per Chapter 395, costs that may be included in the cost per service unit are "...including and limited to the: 1. Construction contract price; 2. Surveying and engineering fees; 3. Land acquisition costs, including land purchases, court awards and costs, attorney's fees, and expert witness fees; and 4. Fees actually paid or contracted to be paid to an independent qualified engineer or financial consultant preparing or updating the Roadway improvements plan who is not an employee of the political subdivision." The engineer's opinion of the probable costs of the projects in the service area are based on the typical costs of construction. The roadway alignments identified as part of the roadway improvement projects were visual surveyed. Components required to accommodate the expansions or extensions were noted, such as the number of required lanes and the length of the project. In addition we made note of any other incidental construction items that would be necessary such as bridges or culvert crossings, traffic signals, highway ramps, and drainage structures. These costs were combined into an overall cost. Costs associated with State, Denton County, and developer driven projects in which the City has contributed a portion of the total project cost may be included in the calculations. At the time of this report, the City does not intend to contribute funds to any of these types of roadway projects. To simplify the calculations, we have separated the probable costs into two (2) categories; construction costs and construction allowances, and made several assumptions about the types of roads to be constructed. The roadway construction costs consist of the following items: (1) unclassified street excavation, (2) lime stabilization, (3) concrete pavement, (4) topsoil, (5) curb and gutter, and (6) allotment for turn lanes and median openings. The unit prices for these items are based on recently completed construction projects located in neighboring municipalities. Using the construction cost subtotal, a percentage of this total is calculated to account for major construction component allowances. These allowances include preparation of right-of-way, traffic control, pavement markings/markers, roadway drainage, special drainage structures, water and sewer relocations, turf reestablishment and erosion control, and street lighting. The allowance percentages are also based on values from PS Means and the amount of these types of construction estimated for each individual project. The paving and allowance subtotal is given a six percent (6%) allotment for mobilization and a twenty percent (20%) contingency to determine the construction cost total. To determine the total Impact Fee Project Cost, a percentage of the construction cost total is added to account for engineering, surveying, testing, and contractor mobilization. For alignments that will require right -of way acquisitions, we have assumed the allotment for the acquisitions should be $3 per square foot. Table 4 is a summary of the road improvement project list for the service area with the probable project cost projections. Detailed cost projections for each alignment are provided in Appendix A, Opinion of Probable Costs. Actual costs of construction will vary with time and are dependent on market conditions. Therefore, the cost projections reported in this study should not be utilized for the City's building program or construction CIP. Page IS Table 4. Ten Year Roadway Improvements Plan Opinion of Probable Costs Length Total Project Street Name Class Limits (mI) Cost Willow St./ Minor 4 5th Street to City Limits 2.11 $ 11,320,127 McReynolds Rd. Lanes Minor 4 Willow St./McReynolds Rd. 0.88 $1,130,328 Indian Ln. Lanes to FM 455 Marion Rd. Minor 4 FM 455 to Huling Rd. 0.76 $3,880,244 Lanes Lois Rd. Minor 4 E. of Melton Rd. to 1-35 0.83 $4,434,456 Lanes Belz Rd. Minor 4 1-35 SBFR to Metz Rd. 0.97 $5,130,524 Lanes Metz Rd. Minor 4 Belz Rd. to FM 455 0.67 $3,681,822 Lanes Utility Rd. Collector 2 RR Tracks to Marion Rd. 0.77 $3,180,747 Lanes Keaton Rd. Collector 2 Belz Rd. to FM 455 0.67 $2,831,252 Lanes Future Belz Rd - Minor 4 1-35 NBFR to FM 455 1.02 $6,877,083 Indian Connector Lanes Future East-West Minor 4 Cowling Rd. to BNSF RR 0.53 $3,451,757 Thoroughfare Lanes Tracks E. SERVICE UNIT CALCULATION The service unit for the computation of roadway impact fees is the vehicle -mile of travel during the afternoon peak -hour. 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. All developed and developable land is categorized as either residential or non-residential. For residential land uses, the number of housing 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 or the average amount of demand caused by the residential land uses in the service area. The square footages calculated using the employment data and conversion units described in Section III.A were used to calculate the vehicle -miles for non- residential land uses. To determine the cost per service unit, the growth in vehicle -miles of travel for the service area is required. The growth in vehicle -miles from 2015 to 2025 is based upon the changes in residential and non-residential growth for the period. This growth has been estimated in Table 2B of this report. The existing and projected Land Use Assumptions for the dwelling units and the square footage of basic, service, and retail land uses provide the basis for the projected increase Page (9 KO then summed to calculate the total peak hour vehicle -miles of demand for each service area. The transportation demand factors are derived from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9rh Edition and the Regional Origin -Destination Travel Survey performed by NCTCOG. The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition provides variables for the number of trips that are produced or attracted to the land use. The transportation demand factoralso includes the length of each trip (Q. The average trip length for each category is based on the travel characteristics survey conducted by NCTCOG and the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS). The maximum trip length (Lmax), for land uses which are characterized by longer average trip lengths (primarily residential uses), has been limited to a length based on the nature of the roadway network within the service area, along with consideration of the existing City boundaries. For the purposes of this report, the maximum trip length available is the boundary of the service area, which is six (6) miles. The adjustment made to the average trip length statistic in the computation of the maximum trip length is the origin -destination reduction. This adjustment is made because the roadway impact fee is charged to both the origin and destination end of the trip. For the retail category of land uses, the rate is adjusted because a percentage of retail trips are made by people visiting these locations as part of an existing trip between work and home and are therefore called pass -by trips. The retail trips are then reduced to avoid counting these trips twice. Per the ITE, retail shopping centers have an average pass -by trip percentage of 34%. For the purposes of this report, we have used this value for 8to calculate the demand factor for retail areas. The computation of the transportation demand factor is detailed in the following equation: TDF = T * (1- 8) * Lmax where Lmax = min(L * OD or SAL ) Variables: TDF = Transportation Demand Factor T = Trip Rate (peak hour trips / unit) a= Pass -By Discount (% of trips) Lmax= Maximum Trip Length (miles) L = Average Trip Length (miles) SAL = Max Service Area Trip Length (see Table 5) OD = Origin -Destination Reduction (50%) Table 5 shows the derivation of the Transportation Demand Factorfor the residential land uses and the three (3) non-residential land use categories. The values utilized for all variables shown in the transportation demand factorequation are also shown in the table. Page 110 Table 5. Transportation Demand Factor Calculations (TDF) Variable Residential Basic Service Retail T 1.00 0.97 1.49 3.71 Pb 0% 0% 0% 34% L 17.21 10.02 10.92 6.43 Lmax 6.00 5.01 5.46 3.22 TDF 6.00 4.86 8.14 7.89 50% of L is less than Lmax for non-residential land uses; therefore this lower trip length is used for calculating the TDF for non-residential land uses Table 6 shows the vehicle -mile calculations for 2015 and 2025 using the above TDF values. Table 6. Ten Year Growth Projections 2015 Residential Vehicle -Miles Housing Units TDF Vehicle -Miles 2,585 6 15,510 Non -Residential Vehicle -Miles Square -Feet TDF Vehicle -Miles (in 1,000 SQFT) Basic Service I Retail Basic Service Retail Basic I Service Retail 679,000 1 801,940 1 207,244 4.8 8.14 7.8 3,259 6,528 1,617 2015 Total Vehicle Miles = 26,913 2025 Residential Vehicle -Miles Housing Units TDF Vehicle -Miles 2,900 6 17,4 10 Non -Residential Vehicle -Miles Square -Feet TDF Vehicle -Miles (in 1,000 SQFT) Basic Service I Retail Basic Service I Retail Basic Service Retail 762,000 1 901,039 1 232,854 4.8 8.14 7.8 3,658 7,334 1,816 2015 Total Vehicle Miles = 30,208 Projected Increase in Vehicle -Miles = 30,208 - 26,913 = 3,295 vehicle -miles Page 111 V. IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS A. MAXIMUM ASSESSABLE IMPACT FEE PER SERVICE UNIT The maximum assessable impact fee is the sum of the eligible Impact Fee Roadway Improvement Project costs for the service area divided by the growth in travel attributable to new development projected to occur within the 10-year period. The documentation for this calculation has been provided in Appendix C. B. PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT Per Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, the Roadway Impact Fees Program must contain specific enumeration of a plan for awarding the impact fee credit. This is provided in Section 395.014 of the Code and 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 max assessable fee has been based on the option of the 50% credit. Table 7 illustrates the computation of the maximum assessable impact fee computed for the service area. The description of how each line has been calculated is provided in Appendix C. Table 7. Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit/Vehicle-Mile Line Description Value 1 Total Vehicle -Miles of Capacity Added by the Roadway Improvement Projects 17,604 2 Total Vehicle -Miles of Existing Demand From the Roadway Improvement Projects 4,274 3 Total Vehicle -Miles of Existing Deficiencies From the Existing Roadway Facilities 141 4 Net Amount of Vehicle -Miles of Capacity Added 13,021 5 Total Cost of the Roadway Improvement Projects $45,918,339 6 j Cost of the Net Capacity Supplied $33,963,766 7 Cost to Meet the Existing Needs and Usage $11,954,573 8 Total Vehicle -Miles of New Demand over 10-Years 3,295 9 Percent of Capacity Added Attributable to Growth (Must be Less than or Equal to 100%) 25% 10 Cost of Capacity Added Attributable to Growth $8,594,812 11 1 50% Credit $4,297,409 12 1 Max Assessable Fee Per Service Unit/Vehicle Mile $1,304.22 Page 112 K C. SERVICE UNIT DEMAND PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT The maximum allowable roadway impact fee for development is calculated by multiplying the impact fee rate by the number of service units projected for the proposed development. The Land Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET) provided in Appendix D provides the service unit multipliers for typical land uses that should be used to calculate the maximum impact assessment. This table lists the most common land uses that may occur within the City. All possible categories of development may not be represented. However, in these situations, we suggest using a similar use which will generate similar trip characteristics. 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 is the pass -by rate the lTE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. To convert vehicle trips to vehicle -miles, it is necessary to multiply trips by trip length. The NCTCOG trip length values are based on the Regional Origin -Destination Travel Survey performed by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). The other adjustment to trip length is the 50% origin - destination reduction to avoid double counting of trips. Based on the State Law, there is a limit on transportation service unit demand. If the adjusted trip length is above the maximum trip length within the service area (for this study, 6 miles is the maximum trip length), the maximum trip length used for calculation is reduced to the corresponding value. The last column in the LUVMET shows the vehicle -miles per development unit calculated by multiplying the trip rate by the maximum trip length. This is the Transportation Demand Factorand should be used to calculate the maximum assessable impact fee. The number of service units is multiplied by the impact fee rate (established by City ordinance) in order to determine the impact fee for a development. Page 113 KON VI. SAMPLE CALCULATIONS The following section details two (2) examples of maximum assessable roadway impact fee calculations. Example 1: Development Type - One (1) Unit of Single -Family Housing Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps - Example 1 Determine Development Unit and Vehicle -Miles Per Development Unit Step 1 From APX D [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 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit Step 2 $1,304.22 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Impact Fee = # of Development Units x Veh-Mi Per Dev Unit x Max. Fee Per Service Unit Step 3 Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = 1 x 6.06 x $1,304.22 $7,903.57 Example 2: Development Tvge - 25.000 sauare foot Home Improvement Superstore Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps - Example 2 Determine Development Unit and Vehicle -Miles Per Development Unit Step 1 From APX D [Land Use - Vehicle -mile Equivalency Table] Development Type:25, 000 square feet of Home Improvement Superstore Development Unit.- 1, 000 square feet of Gross Floor Area Veh-Mi Per Development Unit:3.96 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit Step 2 $7 304.22 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Impact Fee = # of Development Units x Veh-Mi Per Dev Unit x Max. Fee Per Service Unit Step 3 Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = (25,000/1,000) x 3.96 x $1,304.22 $129,117.78 Page 114 r K VII. CONCLUSION The City of Sanger 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 City of Sanger within the service area boundary. The maximum assessable roadway impact fees calculated is $1,304.22. This is a guide to the assessment of roadway impact fees pertaining to future development and the City's need for roadway improvements to accommodate that growth. Following the public hearing process, the City Council may establish an amount to be assessed (if any) up to the maximum established within this report and update the Roadway Impact Fee Ordinance accordingly. It is our opinion that the data and methodology used in this report are appropriate and consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, and the Land Use Assumptions and the proposed Roadway Improvements Plan are appropriately incorporated into the process. Page 115 I4 01-4 Roadway Impact Fee Opinion of Probable Costs CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Willow St/McReynolds Rd Limits: Sth St to City Limits Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): 11,141 Existing two lane concrete roadway from Sth St to Jones; two lane asphalt from Jones to City Limits. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 14,854.40 CY $ 15.00 $ 222,816.00 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 63,131.20 SY $ 4.00 $ 252,524.80 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 58,179.73 SY $ 46.00 $ 2,676,267.73 4" Topsoil 12,378.67 SY $ 5.00 $ 61,893.33 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 89,126 SF $ 4.00 $ 356,505.60 Turn Lanes and Median Openings SY I $ 50.00 $ - Signalized Intersection (at Indian Rd) 1 EA $ 200,000.00 $ 200,000.00 $ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal 3,770,007.47 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 226,200.45 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 188,500.37 Pavment Markings 3% $ 113,100.22 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 1,131,002.24 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 226,200.45 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 8 crossings 6% $ 226,200.45 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 226,200.45 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 150,800.30 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 113,100.22 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 113,100.22 Franchised Utility Facilities OH -Electric, UG Fiber Optic, Telephone 3% $ 113,100.22 Railroad Crossing ISingle track between 1st and Railroad 1 3% $ 113,100.22 Tree Mitigation 1 3% $ 113,100.22 Other Bridge west of Ranger Creek Rd 1 0% $ - Allowance Subtotal 3,053,706.05 Paving and Allowance Subtotal $ 6,823,713.51 Construction Contingency @ 20% $ 1,364,742.70 Total Construction Cost 8,188,456.22 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 8,188,456.22 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 1,637,691,24 Mobilization 6% $ 491,307.37 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ - R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition For Area from Sth to the RR I $3/SF 1 $ 1,002,672.00 Total Impact Fee Project Cost 1 $ 11,320,126.83 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Indian Ln Limits: Willow St/McReynolds Rd to FM 455 Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): 4,641 Existing concrete roadway to remain. Roadway is approx. 37 ft wide for approx. 3472 LF and approx. 25 ft wide for approx. 1169 LF. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 1,054.93 CY $ 15.00 $ 15,823.89 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 7,360.89 SY $ 4.00 $ 29,443.56 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 6,329.56 SY $ 46.00 $ 291,159.56 4" Topsoil 4,641.00 SY $ 5.00 $ 23,205.00 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 7,432 SF $ 4.00 $ 29,728.00 Turn Lanes and Median Openings SY $ 50.00 $ - Signalized Intersection EA $ 200,000.00 $ $ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal $ 389,360.00 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 23,361.60 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 19,468.00 Pavment Markings 3% $ 11,680.80 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 116,808.00 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 23,361.60 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 2 culverts 6% $ 23,361.60 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 23,361.60 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 15,574.40 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 11,680.80 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 11,680.80 Franchised Utility Facilities OH utils on east; switchgear in r.o.w. east side 10% $ 38,936.00 Railroad Crossing 5% $ 19,468.00 Tree Mitigation 3% $ 11,680.80 Other move fence around water tower 2% $ 7,787.20 Allowance Subtotal $ 358,211.20 Paving and Allowance Subtotal $ 747,571.20 Construction Contingency @ 20% $ 149,514.24 Total Construction Cost $ 897,085.44 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 897,085.44 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 179,417.09 Mobilization 6% $ 53,825.13 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition None $3/SF $ Total Impact Fee Project Cost 1 $ 1,130,327.65 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Marion Rd Existing two lane asphalt roadway. Limits: FM 455 to Huling Rd. Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): 4,013 Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 5,350.40 CY $ 15.00 $ 80,256.00 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 22,739.20 SY $ 4.00 $ 90,956.80 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 20,955.73 SY $ 46.00 $ 963,963.73 4" Topsoil 4,458,67 SY $ 5.00 $ 22,293.33 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 32,102 SF $ 4.00 $ 128,409.60 Turn Lanes and Median Openings I SY 1$ 50.00 $ - Signalized Intersection EA $ 200,000.00 $ $ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal 1,285,879.47 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 77,152.77 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 64,293.97 Pavment Markings 3% $ 38,576.38 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 385,763.84 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 77,152.77 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 2 culverts 6% $ 77,152.77 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 77,152.77 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 51,435.18 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 38,576.38 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 38,576.38 Franchised Utility Facilities OH-E on e. side; UG-Fiber/Tel both sides 3% $ 38,576.38 Railroad Crossing 3% $ 38,576.38 Tree Mitigation 3% $ 38,576.38 Other 0% $ - Allowance Subtotal 1,041,562.37 Paving and Allowance Subtotal $ 2,327,441.83 Construction Contingency @ 20% $ 465,488.37 Total Construction Cost 2,792,930.20 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 2,792,930.20 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 558,586.04 Mobilization 6% $ 167,575.81 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ - R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition jEntire Length at 72 Feet Wide I $3/SF 1 $ 361,152.00 Total Impact Fee Project Cost 1 $ 3,880,244.05 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Lois Rd Existing two lane asphalt roadway. Limits: E. of Melton Rd. to I-35 Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): 4,382 Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 5,843.20 CY $ 15.00 $ 87,648.00 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 24,833.60 SY $ 4.00 $ 99,334.40 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 22,885.87 SY $ 46.00 $ 1,052,749.87 4" Topsoil 4,869.33 SY $ 5,00 $ 24,346.67 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 35,059 SF $ 4.00 $ 140,236.80 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 8001 SY 500 $ 40,000.00 Signalized Intersection EA L$20EO,030io�o $ - $ - Paving Construction Cost Subtotal 1,444,315.73 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 86,658.94 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 72,215.79 Pavment Markings 3% $ 43,329.47 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 433,294.72 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 86,658.94 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 1 culvert (major) at Walmart 6% $ 86,658.94 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 86,658.94 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 57,772.63 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 43,329.47 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 43,329.47 Franchised Utility Facilities OH-E s. side; UG-Fiber both sides 5% $ 72,215.79 Railroad Crossing single track east of Walmart 5% $ 72,215.79 Tree Mitigation 3% $ 43,329.47 Other 0% $ - Allowance Subtotal 1,227,668.37 Paving and Allowance Subtotal $ 2,671,984.11 Construction Contingency @ 20% $ 534,396.82 Total Construction Cost 3,206,380.93 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 3,206,380.93 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 641,276.19 Mobilization 6% $ 192,382.86 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ - R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition Entire Length at 72 Feet Wide $3/SF 1 $ 394,416.00 Total Impact Fee Project Cost 4,434,455.97 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): Belz Rd 1-35 SBFR to Metz Rd 5,126 Existing two lane asphalt roadway. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 6,834.67 CY $ 15.00 $ 102,520.00 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 29,047.33 SY $ 4.00 $ 116,189.33 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 26,769.11 SY $ 46.00 $ 1,231,379.11 4" Topsoil 5,695.56 SY $ 5.00 $ 28,477.78 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 41,008 SF $ 4.00 $ 164,032.00 Turn Lanes and Median Openings SY 1 $ 50.00 L$ - Signalized Intersection EA $ 200,000.00 $ - $ - Paving Construction Cost Subtotal 1,642,598.22 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 98,555.89 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 82,129,91 Pavment Markings 3% $ 49,277.95 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 492,779.47 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 98,555.89 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 2 culverts (one major) 10% $ 164,259.82 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 98,555.89 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 65,703.93 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 49,277.95 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 49,277.95 Franchised Utility Facilities OH-E on metal poles n. side; OH-E conc 6% $ 98,555.89 Railroad Crossing 3% 1 $ 49,277.95 Tree Mitigation 3% $ 49,277.95 Other 0% $ - Allowance Subtotal 1,445,486.44 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 3,705,701.59 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 741,140.32 Mobilization 6% $ 222,342.10 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ - R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition Entire Length at 72 Feet Wide $3/SF $ 461,340.00 Total Impact Fee Project Cost $ 5,130,524.00 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): Metz Rd Belz Rd to FM 455 3,525 Existing two lane asphalt roadway. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 4,700.00 CY $ 15.00 $ 70,500.00 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 19,975.00 SY $ 4.00 $ 79,900.00 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 18,408.33 SY $ 46.00 $ 846,783.33 4" Topsoil 3,916.67 SY $ 5.00 $ 19,583.33 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 28,200 SF $ 4.00 $ 112,800.00 Turn Lanes and Median Openings SY I $- Signalized Intersection EA $ 200,000.00 $ $ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal 1,129,566.67 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 67,774.00 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 56,478.33 Pavment Markings 3% $ 33,887.00 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 338,870.00 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 67,774.00 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 3 culverts 10% $ 112,956.67 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 67,774.00 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 45,182.67 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 33,887.00 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 33,887.00 Franchised Utility Facilities OH-E both sides 10% $ 112,956.67 Railroad Crossing 1 8% $ 90,365.33 Tree Mitigation 1 3% $ 33,887.00 Other Site distance issue at FM 455 1 0% $ - Allowance Subtotal 1,095,679.67 Paving and Allowance Subtotal 7777772,225,246.33 Construction Contingency @ 20% $ 445,049.27 Total Construction Cost 2,670,295.60 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 2,670,295.60 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 534,059.12 Mobilization 6% $ 160,217.74 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ - R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition I Entire Length at 72 Feet Wide $3/SF $ 317,250.00 Total Impact Fee Project Cost 1 $ 3,681,822.46 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Extension of Utility Rd Limits: RR tracks to Marion Rd (at Huling Rd) Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): 4,055 New roadway adjacent to farm and open fields. Roadway to go between two houses at Marion. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 3,754.63 CY $ 15.00 $ 56,319.44 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 13,967.22 SY $ 4.00 $ 55,868.89 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 12,165.00 SY $ 46.00 $ 559,590.00 4" Topsoil 3,604.44 SY $ 5.00 $ 18,022.22 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 32,440 SF $ 4.00 $ 129,760.00 Turn Lanes and Median Openings SY $ 50.00 $ - Signalized Intersection EA $ 200,000.00 $ - $ - Paving Construction Cost Subtotal 819,560.56 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 49,173.63 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 40,978.03 Pavment Markings 3% $ 24,586.82 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 245,868.17 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 49,173.63 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 6% $ 49,173.63 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 49,173.63 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 32,782.42 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 24,586.82 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 24,586.82 Franchised Utility Facilities 3% $ 24,586.82 Railroad Crossing Isingle track 8% $ 65,564.84 Tree Mitigation 3% $ 24,586.82 Other 0°� $ - Allowance Subtotal r 7-04,822.08 Paving and Allowance Subtotal $ 1,524,382.63 Construction Contingency @ 20% $ 304,876.53 Total Construction Cost 1,829,259.16 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 1,829,259.16 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 365,851.83 Mobilization 6% $ 109,755.55 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ - R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition Entire Length at 72 Feet Wide $3/SF 1 $ 875,880,00 Total Impact Fee Project Cost 1 $ 3,180,746.54 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Extension of Keaton Rd New roadway adjacent to farm field and signal tower site. Limits: Belz Rd to FM 455 Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): 3,527 Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 3,265.74 CY $ 15,00 $ 48,986.11 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 12,148.56 SY $ 4.00 $ 48,594.22 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 10,581.00 SY $ 46.00 $ 486,726.00 4" Topsoil 3,135.11 SY $ 5.00 $ 15,675.56 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 28,216 SF $ 4.00 $ 112,864.00 Turn Lanes and Median Openings SY $ 50.00 $ - Signalized Intersection EA $ 200,000.00 $ $ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal $ 712,845.89 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 42,770.75 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 35,642.29 Pavment Markings 3% $ 21,385.38 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 213,853.77 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 42,770.75 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 10% $ 71,284.59 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 42,770.75 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 28,513.84 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 21,385.38 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 21,385.38 Franchised Utility Facilities OH-E on concrete poles e, side; OH-E on west sid 10% $ 71.284.59 Railroad Crossing 3% $ 21,385.38 Tree Mitigation 3% $ 21,385.38 Other 0% $ - Allowance Subtotal $ 655,818.22 Paving and Allowance Subtotal $ 1,368,664.11 Construction Contingency @ 20% $ 273,732.82 Total Construction Cost $ 1,642,396.93 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 1,642,396.93 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 328,479.39 Mobilization 6% $ 98,543.82 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ - R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition Entire Length at 72 Feet Wide $3/SF $ 761,832.00 Total Impact Fee Project Cost 1 $ 2,831,252.13 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Future Belz Rd - Indian Rd Connector Future roadway through open fields. Limits: I-35 NBFR to FM 455 Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): 5,385 Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 7,180.00 CY $ 15.00 $ 107,700.00 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 30,515.00 SY $ 4.00 $ 122,060.00 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 28,121.67 SY $ 46.00 $ 1,293,596.67 4" Topsoil 5,983.33 SY $ 5.00 $ 29,916.67 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 43,080 SF $ 4.00 $ 172,320.00 Turn Lanes and Median Openings SY I $ 50.00 $ - Signalized Intersection EA $ 200,000.00 $ - $ - Paving Construction Cost Subtotal 1,725,593.33 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 103,535.60 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 86,279.67 Pavment Markings 3% $ 51,767.80 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 517,678.00 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 103,535.60 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 6 stream crossings 30% $ 517,678.00 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 103,535.60 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 69,023.73 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 51,767.80 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 51,767.80 Franchised Utility Facilities OH-E along n. side of FM 455 10% $ 172,559.33 Railroad Crossing single track 10% $ 172,559.33 Tree Mitigation 3% $ 51,767.80 Other 0% $ - Allowance Subtotal 2,053,456.07 Paving and Allowance Subtotal $ 3,779,049.40 Construction Contingency @ 20% $ 755,809.88 Total Construction Cost 4,534,859.28 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 4,534,859.28 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 906,971.86 Mobilization 6% $ 272,091.56 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ - R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition Entire Length at 72 Feet Wide $3/SF $ 1,163,160.00 Total Impact Fee Project Cost $ 6,877,082.69 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 CITY OF SANGER IMPACT FEE STUDY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS JULY 2016 Street Name: Future East-West Thoroughfare Future roadway through open fields. Limits: Cowling Rd to BNSF RR Tracks Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (LF): 2,798 Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Unclassified Street Excavation 3,731.20 CY $ 15.00 $ 55,968.00 6" Lime or Cement Subgrade Treatment (27 Ibs/sf) 15,857.60 SY $ 4.00 $ 63,430.40 8" Reinf. Concrete Pvmt with 6" Integral Curb 14,613.87 SY $ 46.00 $ 672,237.87 4" Topsoil 3,109.33 SY $ 5.00 $ 15,546.67 4' Wide Concrete Sidewalk 22,387 SF $ 4.00 $ 89,548.80 Turn Lanes and Median Openings SY $ 50.00 $ Signalized Intersection EA $ 200,000.00 $ $ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal $ 896,731.73 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost R.O.W. Preparation 6% $ 53,803.90 Traffic Control During Construction 5% $ 44,836.59 Pavment Markings 3% $ 26,901.95 Roadway Drainage 30% $ 269,019.52 Roadway Lighting 6% $ 53,803.90 Special Drainage Structures (bridges and culverts) 1 stream crossing 35% $ 313,856.11 Minor Water Line Adjustments 6% $ 53,803.90 Minor Wastewater Line Adjustments 4% $ 35,869.27 Erosion Control/Establish Turf 3% $ 26,901.95 Basic Landscaping/Irrigation 3% $ 26,901.95 Franchised Utility Facilities OH-E n. side from Cowling to railroad 3% $ 26,901.95 Railroad Crossing single track 3% $ 26,901.95 Tree Mitigation i 3% $ 26,901.95 Other Improvements to intersection with Railr 0% $ - Allowance Subtotal $ 986,404.91 Paving and Allowance Subtotal $ 1,883,136.64 Construction Contingency @ 20% $ 376,627.33 Total Construction Cost $ 2,259,763.97 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Construction $ 2,259,763,97 Engineering/Survey/Testing 20% $ 451,952.79 Mobilization 6% $ 135,585.84 Previous City Contribution $ - Other $ - R.O.W. and Easement Acquisition Entire Length at 72 Feet Wide $3/SF $ 604,454.40 Total Impact Fee Project Cost $ 3,451,757.00 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 Roadway Impact Fee Service Units of Supply >. 2 N O 'c 2 1 N N LL 7U E T 3 v N 0 In O N N N NN V N N N V mW m 0) Um �+ V N MM- M O N O m 'I"I V M O N t0 n O W N p t` V M U/ a` N V u) NI Nl N cq � M N m t» w e» en vs w bq a d N N ^ O N O V O M O M W N U W M M M M_ N M O c W W C J f N W p U = "O O O m M O V p m ro d' V w m 2 o a 7� QYF N o- ;° V m T O o m m V M O U W T O H L '- n ry N n > 2 N m LL U N N N N N N N Oo ON N N N LL' z � m 2 J to �n u1 to in in a } to �n F j U Y a U IO o o o o o o 0 0 0 o u) Q c O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a°. Y w a E LD 2 N N N N N N N N l(1 lfl In N lf1 l0 V V N t0 U � z= N U1 C f0 J V V V V V V N N V V L _ c y v J " N of O h O U7 O Ol O lq O h O lq O NO N O yt N J N J t0 J N J t0 J N J C -� N C J N t0 J t6 J U o c o c o c o c o c O c u v u m o c o c f F F F F o o E E U U d O c o u C c U N m L O O N T J o: ti a "OAo z 20 N O N N 3 fD a � LL lll v LL c m n Yx % N a W u d t 0 Y a m N Ol O r V c0 O_ W O N_ O) m CO c0 �_ l0 d' 01 0 O) co N t0 L0 V N l0 h co ut Q' d to S U UI O N M m N r - N M t0 M r M O V N u N wM Y d jp N O O1 O I� M N O_ 'C' M W O N_ O O1 co m [O O W V dl t0 d' l0 W p r" t0 co Mro - F' N i N2 0 �J W d1 0 00 W,N t0 0 N W 1� l0 M N OJ N M N 01 m Ol m N N co CO 'C n N N O- s0+ O Ol d' O1 t0 W f\ n M CO - O Nj r CO c0 M O N O7 N h N f CL V i 7S N N Z N N N n N o t0 0 m 0 t0 0 N 0 N 0 M m N o m n N o m 0 t0 0 t0 to N a 1p L O. S -� N vl N M N t0 N tf1 mV V 't V d' t0 w mV q 7 to O 0 a u Z m 0 o v v w¢ c_ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y w a E 0 N Lo N N O to O O O mN O O ,0 o U1 N N o N N O t0 O t0 O t0 N 0 j U N ul N N N Lo N u/ t0 V N L0 N N Lo N W U = Z C l0 J N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N L t0 W N CO n M l0 V O) r Ol O M M O O] 0� N 00 <} N 7 O l0 4) r n t0 Oq t n r l0 M M O) pt C N J M O N O O M tV O N N W O N O H N � N C N J c C J O G J O O J OJ C J N N N tp c J O C N J O c J O c J O c J c J O N C J — N C ,p W G J N W C J N N C J N N J U O O O O u O O u u u u u V O O' O u u U O f E F O F O O O O O O C E O O O E U U U U U U U a U U U d O O C O: J O: a, ,L N N W C N O -O �! N C _ J J Q'1 f Y s U o U u Q E LL LL ? .� = .a I-- c 'C o i N O u :D — 3 LL Maximum Allowable Roadway Impact Fee Per Service Unit Calculations Line Title Description Total Vehicle -Miles of Based on the capacity, length, and number of lanes for each 1 Capacity Added by the project - Vehicle -Mile Supply Peak -Hour Total from Appendix Roadway Improvement B Service Units of Supply Projects Total Vehicle -Miles of The amount of traffic currently on the roads that are planned 2 Existing Demand From the for expansion - Vehicle -Mile Total Demand Peak -Hour Total Roadway Improvement from Appendix B Service Units of Supply Projects Total Vehicle -Miles of Vehicle -Miles of travel that are not accommodated by the 3 Existing Deficiencies From existing roads - Existing Deficiencies Peak -Hour Vehicle -Mile the Existing Roadway from Appendix B Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory Facilities Net Amount of Vehicle -Miles Amount of Vehicle -Miles added by the thoroughfare plan that 4 of Capacity Added will not be utilized by the existing demand = Line 1 - Line 2 - Line 3 , Total Cost of the Roadway Total of the Opinion of Probable Construction Costs for the 5 Improvement Projects 10-Year Roadway Impact Study Total of the Opinion of Probable Construction Costs for the 6 Cost of the Net Capacity 10-Year Roadway Impact Study prorated by the ratio capacity Supplied added to the total capacity added _ (Line 4/Line 1) x Line 5 Cost to Meet the Existing The Total Cost of the Roadway Improvements minus the Cost 7 Needs and Usage of the Capacity Supplied = Line 5 - Line 6 Total Vehicle -Miles of New The Estimate of the Number of Vehicle -Miles growth within 8 Demand over 10-Years the Service Area - based on the TDF Percent of Capacity Added The Total Vehicle -Miles of New Demand over 10-Years divided Attributable to Growth by the Net Amount of Vehicle -Miles of Capacity Added up to 9 (Must be Less than or Equal 100%. Required by Chapter 395 to verify the to 100%) capacity added is from new growth. = Line 8 / Line 4 <= 100% Cost of Capacity Added The Cost of the Net Capacity Supplied multiplied by the 10 Attributable to Growth Percent of Capacity Added Attributable to Growth = Line 6 x Line 9 Per Chapter 395 and the option selected in the report, multiply the Cost of Capacity Added Attributable to Growth 11 SO% Credit by 50%, which is the recoverable cost of the projected improvements based on the projected growth = Line 10 x 50% Max Assessable Fee Per The 50% Credit divided by Total Vehicle -Miles of New Demand 12 Service Unit/Vehicle Mile over 10-Years = Line 11 / Line 8 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 Land Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table ITE Trip Pass- NCTCOG Adj. Adj. Trip Max Veh-Mi Land Use Land Development Gen By Trip Trip For 0- Length Trip Per Dev- Category Use; Unit Rate Rate Rate Length D (mi) Length Unit Code (PM) (mi) (mi) PORT AND TERMINAL Truck Terminal 30 Acres 6.5S 6.55 10.02 SO% 5.01 S.01 32.82 INDUSTRIAL General Light 110 1,000 SF GFA 0.97 0.97 10.02 50% 5.01 5.01 4.86 Industrial General Heavy 120 1,000 SF GFA 0.68 0.68 10.02 50% 5.01 5.01 3.41 Industrial Industrial Park 130 1,000 SF GFA 0.85 0.86 10.02 SO% 5.01 5.01 4.31 Warehousing 1SO 1,000 SF GFA 0,32 0.32 10.83 50% 5A2 S.42 1.73 Mini -Warehouse 151 1,000 SF GFA 0.26 0.26 10.83 50% 5.42 5.42 1.41 RESIDENTIAL Single -Family Detached 210 Dwelling Unit 1.01 1.01 17.21 50% 8,61 6 6.06 Housing Apartment/Multi- 220 Dwelling Unit 0.62 0.62 17.21 50% 8.61 6 3.72 family Residential Condominium/ 230 Dwelling Unit 0.52 0.52 17.21 50% 8.61 6 3.12 Townhome Mobile Home Park/ 240 Dwelling Unit 0.59 0.59 17.21 50% 8.61 6 3.54 Manufactured Housing Senior Adult 252 Dwelling Unit 0.27 0.27 17.21 50% 8.61 6 1.62 Housing Congregate Care 253 Dwelling Unit 0.16 0.16 17.21 50% 8.61 6 0.96 Facility Assisted Living 2S4 Beds 0.22 0.22 17.21 50% 8.61 6 1.32 LODGING Hotel 310 Rooms 0.59 0.59 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 1.90 Motel / Other Lodging 320 Rooms 0.47 0.47 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 1.51 Facilities RECREATIONAL Driving Range 432 Tees 1.25 1.25 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 4.02 Golf Course 430 Acres 0.3 0.3 6,43 50% 3.22 3.22 0.96 Health/Rec. Clubs and 495 1,000 SF GFA 2.74 2.74 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 8.81 Facilities Ice Rink 465 1,000 SF GFA 2.36 2.36 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 7.59 Miniature Golf 431 Holes 0.33 0.33 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 1.06 Multiplex Movie 445 Screens 13.64 13.64 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 43.85 Theater Racquet / 491 Courts 3.35 3.35 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 10.77 Tennis Club PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 ITE Trip Pass- NCTCOG Adj. Adj. Trip Max Veh-MI Land Use Land Development Gen By Trip Trip For'O- `Length Trip Per Dev- Category Use Unit Rate Rate Rate Length D (mi) Length Unit Code (PM) (mp (mi) INSTITUTIONAL' Church 560 1,000 SF GFA 0.55 0.55 4.2 50% 2.10 2.10 1.16 Day Care Center 565 1,000 SF GFA 12.34 44% 6.91 4.2 50% 2.10 2.10 14.51 Primary/Middle 522 Students 0.16 0.16 4.2 50% 2.10 2.10 0.34 School (1-8) High School (9- 530 Students 0.13 0.13 4.2 50% 2.10 2.10 0.27 12) Jr/Community 540 Students 0.12 0.12 4.2 50% 2.10 2.10 0.25 College University / 550 Students 0.17 0.21 4.2 50% 2.10 2.10 0.44 College MEDICAL Clinic 630 1,000 SF GFA 5.18 5.18 7.55 50% 3.78 3.78 19.55 Hospital 610 Beds 1.42 1.31 7.55 50% 3.78 3.78 4.95 Nursing Home 620 Beds 0.22 0.22 7.55 50% 3.78 3.78 0.83 Animal Hospital/ 640 1,000 SF GFA 4.72 30% 3.30 7,55 SO% 3.78 3.78 12.47 Veterinary Clinic OFFICE Corporate Headquarters 714 1,000 SF GFA 1.41 1.41 10.02 50% 5.01 5.01 7.06 Building General Office 710 1,000 SF GFA 1.49 1.49 10.02 50% 5.01 5.01 7.46 Building Medical/Dental 720 1,000 SF GFA 3.57 3.57 10.02 50% 5.01 5.01 17.89 Office Single Tenant 715 1,000 SF GFA 1.74 1.74 10.02 50% 5.01 5.01 8.72 Office Building Office Park 750 1,000 SF GFA 1.48 1.48 10.02 50% 5.01 5.01 7.41 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 ITE Trip Pass- NCTCOG Adj. Adj. Trip Max Veh-Mi Land Use Land Development Gen Trip Trip For Trip PeuD{v- Category Use Unit Rate Rate Rate Length DO- L<mg'h Length Code (PM) (ml) (mq COMMERCIAL Automobile Related Automobile Care 942 1,000 SF GLA 3.11 40% 1.87 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 6.00 Center Automobile Parts 843 1,000 SF GFA 5.98 43% 3.41 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 10.96 Sales Gasoline/Service Vehicle Station w/ Conv. 945 Fueling 13.51 20% 10.81 1.2 50% 0.60 0.60 6.48 Market Positions New and Used 841 1,000 SF GFA 2.62 40% 1.57 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 5.05 Car Sales Quick Lubrication 941 Servicing 5.19 40% 3.11 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 10.01 Vehicle Shop Positions Self -Service Car 947 Stalls 5.54 40% 3.32 1.2 50% 0.60 0.60 1.99 Wash Tire Store 848 1,000 SF GFA 4.15 28% 2.99 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 9.61 Dining Fast Food Restaurant with 934 1,000 SF GFA 33.84 50% 16.92 4.79 50% 2.40 2.40 40.52 Drive-Thru High Turnover (Sit -Down) 932 1,000 SF GFA 11.15 43% 6.36 4.79 50% 2.40 2.40 15,22 Restaurant Quality 931 1,000 SF GFA 7.49 44% 4.19 4.79 50% 2.40 2.40 10.05 Restaurant Other Retail 0.00 Free -Standing 815 1,000 SF GFA 5 44% 2.80 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 9.00 Retail Store Garden Center 817 1,000 SF GFA 3.8 30% 2.66 6,43 50% 3.22 3.22 8.55 (Nursery) Home Improvement 862 1,000 SF GFA 2.37 48% 1.23 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 3.96 Superstore Pharmacy/Drugs tore With Drive- 881 1,000 SF GFA 10.35 53% 4.86 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 15.64 Thru Window Shopping Center 820 1,000 SF GLA 3.73 34% 2.46 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 7.91 Supermarket 850 1,000 SF GFA 10.5 36% 6.72 6.43 50% 3.22 3.22 21.60 Toy/Children's 864 1,000 SF GFA 4.99 30% 3.49 6.43 50% 3,22 3.22 11.23 Supers tore SERVICES Bank (Walk -In) 911 1,000 SF GFA 12.13 40% 7.28 3.39 50% 1.70 1.70 12.34 Bank (Drive In) 912 Drive-in 27.41 47% 14.53 3.39 50% 1.70 1.70 24.62 Lanes Hair Salon 918 1,000 SF GLA 1.45 30% 1.02 3.39 50% 1.70 1.70 1.72 PREPARED BY EIKON JULY 2016 Service Area Map w " w o Q Q Iyl 0 X I b s �'• m Q N >— W avaN608 V3W 30N213S ry 1 ` W � U '96 f3 O N ' M g 1 . P21 ON unitiP7 E ? G m PU Gullp+1 m m a '08 NOW tl� NI NVIONI � NI NtllO 13afllfu'•. W ' J Z u1 5 �? as 1S HL4 LL:'i, ■ to t f - 021 JNII% 0 +�� i NOMA 5� m N113N /NO1V3N ■ �� ..........��ro�l,'H' Cil!'ti� Il 5 Ln *. J.21V0Nf108 V3W 3DA83S ^ N, a f?U A46� Llleg = kt i PO plan iN L tt Q V c_ S �hieurn Oil t i ;n .:dali A411� R3 r Roadway Impact Fee Collection Rate Residential Fee Per Service Unit $ 247.53 Nonresidential Fee Per Service Unit $ 185.65 Proposed City of Sanger Roadway Impact Fees Residential Fee Per Service Unit $ 247.53 Nonresidential Fee Per Service Unit $ 185.65 Selected Residential Land Unit VM/DU Fee per Uses Dwelling Unit SFD Dwelling Dwelling 6.06 $ 1,500 Apartment Dwelling 3.72 $ 921 Townhome Dwelling 3.12 $ 772 Selected Non -Residential Fee per Land Uses Unit VM/DU Development Unit General Office 1,000 sqft 7.46 $ 1,385 Medical Office 1,000 sqft 17.89 $ 3,321 Fast Food 1,000 sqft 40.52 $ 7,522 Sit Down Restaurant 1,000 sqft 15.22 $ 2,826 Quality Restaurant 1,000 sqft 10.05 $ 1,866 Light Industrial 1,000 sqft 4.86 $ 902 Heavy Industrial 1,000 sqft 3.41 $ 633 Warehouse 1,000 sqft 1.73 $ 321 Church 1,000 sqft 1.16 $ 215 Day Care Center 1,000 sqft 14.51 $ 2,694 Medical Clinic 1,000 sqft 19.55 $ 3,629 Corporate Headquarters 1,000 sqft 8.46 $ 1,571 New Car Sales 1,000 sqft 5.05 $ 938 Supermarket 1,000 sqft 21.60 $ 4,010 Discount Store 1,000 sqft 9.00 $ 1,671 Walk -In Bank 1,000 sqft 12.34 $ 2,291 Hotel Room 1.90 $ 353 Motel Room 1.51 $ 280 Note: These are selected examples of land uses from the Roadway Impact Fee Study. For a comprehensive list, consult the study.