Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 19044-02-2010ORDINANCE NO 19044-02-2010 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY OF FORT WORTH 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ANALYZING POPULATION, ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL TRENDS, DESCRIBING MUNICIPAL SERVICES AND FACILITIES, DESCRIBING ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL ISSUES AFFECTING DEVELOPMENT, DESCRIBING IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS, DIVIDING THE CITY INTO 16 PLANNING SECTORS, PROVIDING MAPS DESCRIBING PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USES AND RECOMMENDED LAND USE POLICIES FOR EACH SECTOR, ESTABLISHING GOALS AND RECOMMENDED POLICIES, PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE, PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS the City Council approved Ordinance No 18492 adopting the Fort Worth 2009 Comprehensive Plan on February 24 2009• and WHEREAS, the 2009 Comprehensive Plan is the City of Fort Worth s general guide for making decisions about growth and development; and WHEREAS the 2009 Comprehensive Plan includes, without limitation, provisions on land use, housing, parks and community services, libraries, human services, neighborhood capacity building, economic development, transportation, education, historic preservation, urban design, arts and culture, police services, fire and emergency services, environmental quality public health, and municipal facilities, and WHEREAS it is the City Council s intent to update the Comprehensive Plan annually and WHEREAS after conducting work sessions with the Zoning Commission on August 12, 2009 and the City Plan Commission on August 26 2009 and briefing the City Council on September 1 2009 the Planning and Development Department issued a public review draft of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan, and WHEREAS the Planning and Development Department conducted a series of more than eight community meetings to receive comments on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan, and WHEREAS on January 27 2010 the City Plan Commission conducted a public hearing on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan and recommended that the City Council adopt the plan, and WHEREAS the City Council conducted a public hearing on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan on February 9 2010 at which the public was given the opportunity to give testimony and present written evidence; and WHEREAS the 2010 Comprehensive Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit A, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS SECTION 1 The 2010 Comprehensive Plan of the City of Fort Worth is adopted as set out in Exhibit A attached and incorporated as if contained herein, specifically including existing plans and studies described in Appendix A to the Plan, which are incorporated by reference. SECTION 2. The City of Fort Worth 2010 Comprehensive Plan supersedes and replaces the 2009 Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances and of the Code of the City of Fort Worth, Texas (1986), as amended, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances and such Code, in which event conflicting provisions of such ordinances and such Code are hereby repealed. 2 SECTION 4. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses and phrases of this ordinance are severable, and, if any 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 phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect upon adoption. OVED AS T RM ND LEGALITY Assistant Cit ,Attorney 1 ADOPTED AND EFFECTIVE February 23.2010 3 City of Fort Worth, Texas Mayor and Council Communication COUNCIL ACTION: Approved on 2/23/2010 - Ord. No. 19044-02-2010 DATE Tuesday February 23 2010 LOG NAME 062010CPADOPT SUBJECT Approve Ordinance Adopting the City of Fort Worth 2010 Comprehensive Plan REFERENCE NO G-16851 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached ordinance adopting the City of Fort Worth 2010 Comprehensive Plan DISCUSSION The 2010 Comprehensive Plan reflects the following substantive revisions to the 2009 Comprehensive Plan Policy and Data Updates Incorporates the most current data available Refines various goals objectives policies and strategies based on comments from the City Council City departments and cooperating agencies Adds a section in the Summary on the new Comprehensive Plan Progress Report; Adds a goal to the Land Use Chapter to improve land use efficiency mobility and air quality by developing a network of interconnected local streets and trails that facilitate more direct vehicle and pedestrian access between adjacent neighborhoods and other land uses Adds a strategy to the Housing Chapter to conduct an assessment of housing conditions and treat houses with presence of lead specifically in households with children under age of six; Adds a goal to the Parks and Community Services Chapter to provide a comprehensive golf program through the municipal enterprise fund that is self-supporting from user fees Adds a map for each urban village in the Economic Development Chapter Adds a section to the Urban Design Chapter about Sustainable Urbanism Adds an objective to the Environmental Quality Chapter to complete and adopt the Lake Worth Vision Plan 2010 Adds a policy to the Environmental Quality Chapter to support innovative development projects that showcase low -impact development practices conserve riparian buffers and extend greenway networks with hike/bike trails Logname 062010CPADOPT Page 1 of 2 Adds a strategy to the Development Regulations Chapter to implement a Sustainability Action Plan Adds the Texas Motor Speedway Area Master Plan to Appendix A, Updates future land use maps in Appendix C in response to land use changes zoning and platting decisions and other factors Removes completed or cancelled capital improvement projects from Appendix D and adds new projects to Appendices D and E and Updates the annexation program in Appendix F The City Plan Commission held a public hearing on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan on January 27 2010 After receiving input, the City Plan Commission voted to recommend adoption of the plan with the following two revisions. Include the Bike Fort Worth Plan by reference in Appendix A. Existing Plans and Studies, and Include the Evans & Rosedale Area Design Standards and Guidelines Plan and Housing Market Demand Report by reference in Appendix A. Existing Plans and Studies The City Plan Commission requested that staff provide the City Council with a summary of comments received at the public hearing regarding the City's annexation program The City Council received an Informal Report that included the annexation comments on February 9 2010 The City Council held a public hearing on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan as recommended by the City Plan Commission on February 9 2010 FISCAL INFORMATION / CERTIFICATION The Financial Management Services Director certifies that this action will have no material effect on City funds FUND CENTERS TO Fund/Account/Centers FROM Fund/Account/Centers CERTIFICATIONS Submitted for City Manaaer's Office by. Oriainatina Department Head. Additional Information Contact: Fernando Costa (6122) Susan Alanis (8180) Becky Pils (7645) Logname: 062010CPADOPT Page 2 of 2 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• FORT WORTH %1100.7"---", To the citizens of Fort Worth. On behalf of the City Council and the City Plan Commission, we are pleased to release the 2010 Comprehensive Plan as adopted by the City Council on February 23 2010 The Comprehensive Plan is the City's official guide for making decisions about growth and development. It sets forth the City's vision for the future and describes the basic policies, programs, and projects by which we seek to realize that vision. The Comprehensive Plan thus helps the City in fulfilling its mission of focusing on the future and working together to build strong neighborhoods, develop a sound economy and provide a clean, safe community This annual update of the plan is the product of a rigorous planning process involving many community meetings, extensive research by various City departments, and numerous work sessions by the City Council and the City Plan Commission. Throughout this process, our goal has been to produce a practical document that will be concise, readable, accessible, usable, and easy to update. If you have any questions about the City's planning process, please call our Planning and Development Department at (817) 392-8000. Sincerely Mike Moncrief Mayor Charles Edmonds Chair, City Plan Commission ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ORDINANCE NO.19044-02..2010 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY OF FORT WORTH 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; ANALYZING POPULATION, ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL TRENDS; DESCRIBING MUNICIPAL SERVICES AND FACILITIES; DESCRIBING ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL ISSUES AFFI~.CTING DEVELOPMENT; DESCRIBING IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS; DIVIDING THE CITY INTO 16 PLANNING SECTORS; PROVIDING MAPS DESCRIBING PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USES AND RECOMMENDED LAND USE POLICIES FOR EACH SECTOR; ESTABLISHING GOALS AND RECOMMENDED POLICIES; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 18492 adopting the Fort Worth 2009 Comprehensive Plan on February 24, 2009; and WHEREAS, the 2009 Comprehensive Plan is the City of Fort Worth's general guide far making decisions about growth and development; and WHEREAS, the 2009 Comprehensive Plan includes, without limitation, provisions on land use, housing, parks and community services, libraries, human services, neighborhood capacity building, economic development, transportation, education, historic preservation, urban design, arts and culture, police services, fire and emergency services, environmental quality, public health, and municipal facilities; and WHEREAS, it is the City Council's intent to update the Comprehensive Plan annually; and WHEREAS, after conducting work sessions with the Zoning Commission on August 12, 2009 and the City Plan Commission on August 26, 2009, and briefing the City Council on September 1. 2009, the Planning and Development Department issued a public review draft of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Development Department conducted a series of more than eight community meetings to receive comments on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on January 27 2010, the City Plan Commission conducted a public hearing on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan and recommended that the City Council adopt the plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan on February 9, 2010, at which the public was given the opportunity to give testimony and present written evidence; and WHEREAS, the 2010 Comprehensive Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit A, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The 2010 Comprehensive Plan of the City of Fort Worth is adopted as set out in Exhibit A attached and incorporated as if contained herein, specifically including existing plans and studies described in Appendix A to the Plan, which are incorporated by reference. SECTION 2. The City of Fort Worth 2010 Comprehensive Plan supersedes and replaces the 2009 Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances and of the Code of the City of Fort Worth, Texas (1986), as amended, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances and such Code, in which event conflicting provisions of such ordinances and such Code are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses and phrases of this ordinance are severable, and, if any 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 phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutionalphrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect upon adoption. VED AS TD LEGALITY. sistant CitYttomey ADOPTED AND EFFECTIVE: February 23.2010 3 4 4 4 4 4 I 4 4 4 i I 4 4 4 4 4 •••i•••••••••••••••••••••••••••r• 2010 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Fort Worth, Texas Prepared for the Fort Worth City Council and the Fort Worth City Plan Commission By the Planning and Development Department February 23, 2010 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Michael J Moncnef, Mayor City Council Carter Burdette Joel Burns Sal Espino Kathleen Hicks Jungus Jordan Frank Moss Danny Scarth Zim Zimmerman City Plan Commission Charles Edmonds, Chair Don Boren Jacq Duncan Namon Hollis Kim Martin Charles Rand Robert Rouse Jim Tidwell Jim Wietholter Robert Kelly Alternate Zoning Commission Nef Ortiz, Chair Maurice Barnes Nick Genua Jerre Miller Ramon Romero Gaye Reed Stephanie Spann Jackson Wilson Ann Zadeh CITY OFFICIALS ii Dale Fisseler City Manager Assistant City Managers Fernando Costa Charles Daniels Tom Higgms Karen Montgomery Denarlinent Heads Susan Alms Darlene Allen Pete Anderson Brandon Bennett Bnan Boerner Vanessa Boling Jay Chapa Wayne Corum Frank Crumb Lena Ellis Jeff Halstead Randle Harwood Martha Hendrix Rudy Jackson Karen Marshall Kent Penney Glemece Robinson Kirk Slaughter William Verkest David Yett Richard Zavala ..r.•r•.•rrr•i••.r,..r•••.•ri.r Cooperating Agencies Arts Council of Fort Worth and Tarrant County Camp Bowie District, Inc. Crowley Independent School District Cultural District Development Initiatives, Inc. Dallas -Fort Worth International Airport Downtown Fort Worth, Inc. Eagle Mountain -Saginaw Independent School District Fort Worth Business Press Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce Fort Worth Convention and Visitors Bureau Fort Worth Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Fort Worth Housing Authority Fort Worth Independent School Distnct Fort Worth League of Neighborhood Associations, Inc. Fort Worth Metropolitan Black Chamber of Commerce Fort Worth South, Inc Fort Worth Transportation Authonty Greater Fort Worth Association of Realtors Hams Methodist Health System Historic Fort Worth, Inc. Keller Independent School District North Central Texas Council of Governments Northwest Independent School District Southeast Fort Worth, Inc. Streams & Valleys, Inc. Tarrant County Texas Christian University Texas Department of Health, Bureau of Vital Statistics Texas Health and Human Services Commission Texas Wesleyan University Texas Workforce Commission University of North Texas Health Science Center United Way of Metropolitan Tarrant County Workforce Solutions of Tarrant County ni Planning and Development Department Susan Alams, Director Dana Burghdoff, Deputy Director David Hall, Assistant Director Rick Trice, Assistant Director Karen Gilmore, Senior Administrative Assistant Planning Division Contributing Staff Eric Fladager Comprehensive Planning Manager Research Team Becky Pils, Senior Planner Noah Heath, Planner Economic and Community Development Team Scott Bellen, Senior Planner Patnna Newton, Senior Planner Arty Wheaton -Rodriguez, Senior Planner Urban Design Team David Gaspers, Senior Planner Havan Surat, Planner Randy Hutcheson, Preservation and Design Planning Manager Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission Larry Abngg, Senior Planner Urban Design Commission Laura Voltmann, Planner Allison Gray Platting Planning Manager Annexation, Platting, and Municipal Utility Districts Teresa Burk, Senior Planner Beth Knight, Senior Planner Jocelyn Murphy Land Use and Zoning Planning Manager Lynn Jordan, Planner Stephen Murray Planner Susan White, GIS Senior Planner • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ier • TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY INTRODUCTION Vision and Values PART I. FOCUSING ON THE FUTURE 1 Population Trends 2. Economic Trends 3 Financial Trends PART II. BUILDING STRONG NEIGHBORHOODS 4 Land Use 5 Housing 6 Parks and Community Services 7 Libraries 8 Human Services 9 Neighborhood Capacity Building PART III. DEVELOPING A SOUND ECONOMY 10 Economic Development 11 Transportation 12. Education 13 Historic Preservation 14 Urban Design • 15 Arts and Culture PART IV PROVIDING A SAFE COMMUNITY • 16 Police Services 17 Fire and Emergency Services • 18 Environmental Quality 19 Public Health • 20 Municipal Facilities • • • • vi 22 Development Regulations 23 Financial Incentives 1 24 Annexation Policy 5 25 Intergovernmental Cooperation APPENDICES 9 A. Existing Plans and Studies 15 B Population Estimate and Projection Methodology 23 C Future Land Use By Sector D Capital Improvements Funded and Partially Funded Housing 29 Parks and Community Services 41 Libranes 53 Transportation 63 Education 67 Urban Design 75 Arts and Culture 81 103 123 131 139 149 163 171 177 197 205 PART V TOOLS FOR IMPLEMENTATION 21 Capital Improvements 213 iv Police Services Fire and Emergency Services Environmental Quality Municipal Facilities Continued on Next Page 219 227 235 243 Al B-1 Cl D-1 D-3 D-4 D-7 D-8 D-18 D-20 D-22 D-23 D-24 D-25 D-30 TABLE OF CONTENTS, CONTINUED APPENDICES, CONTINUED E. Capital Improvements Unfunded E 1 Housing E 3 Parks and Community Services E-4 Libraries E-8 Economic Development E-9 Transportation E 10 Education E 17 Arts and Culture E 18 Police Services E 19 Fire and Emergency Services E 20 Environmental Quality E 21 Public Health E 31 Municipal Facilities E 32 F Annexation Plan, Policy and Program F 1 G Policy Concerning Creation of Conservation G 1 and Reclamation Districts H. Tax Abatement Policy Statement H 1 GLOSSARY V I 1 I 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 I 4 I ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• SUMMARY The Comprehensive Plan is the City of Fort Worth s official guide for making decisions about growth and development. The Plan is a summary of the recommended policies, strategies, programs, and projects that will enable the City to achieve its mission of focusing on the future and working together to build strong neighborhoods, develop a sound economy, and provide a safe community The Texas Local Government Code establishes the legal basis for the comprehensive plan. The Code states that a municipality may adopt a comprehensive plan for long- range development. If a city adopts a comprehensive plan, it must be used as the basis of subsequent zoning amendments. The comprehensive plan is described as a plan for the orderly growth and development of the city and its environs. The plan should "facilitate the movement of people and goods, and the health, safety and general welfare for the citizens of the city According to the most recent U.S. Census Bureau data, Fort Worth has been the fastest growing large city of more than 500,000 population in the nation since April 1 2000 Fort Worth s total population increased from 447,619 m 1990 to 534,694 in 2000 an annual average growth rate of approximately 2 percent. Since the 2000 Census, the population has increased at a faster rate than it did during the 1990s. The population of Fort Worth as of January 1 2009 is estimated to be 720,250 persons. From 2000 to 2009 Fort Worth s total population increased by 185,556 persons. This represents an average annual increase of approximately 20,600 persons since the 2000 Census, a growth rate of approximately 3.9 percent per year Population growth has been greatest in the Far North, Far Northwest, Eastside, Far South, and Far Southwest sectors. By 2030 Fort Worth s population is projected to approach one million Once dependent on agriculture, oil, and defense, Fort Worth is developing into a major center for industry technology distribution, and transportation. All sectors of the economy are expected to continue to add jobs, with services capturing over 40 percent of the jobs by 2030 According to the Texas Workforce Commission employment estimates, the total employment for the City of Fort Worth grew by 1 7 percent annually from 267 174 in 2000 to 303,593 in 2009 This job growth is expected to continue through 2030 CREATING A COMMON VISION The vision statement for the Comprehensive Plan was shaped by citizens comments and expressed values, and more sharply focused by the Mayor and City Council. The vision and values defined within the Comprehensive Plan represent the creative efforts of the community to lay a successful foundation for the future of Fort Worth. The vision of Fort Worth reads as follows. "By the year 2020, Fort Worth will be commonly recognized as the most livable city in Texas. Residents will be able to enjoy Fort Worth's friendly atmosphere and the opportunities that are associated with a growing economy and diverse community. vi Fort Worth's public schools will produce well-rounded citizens and a skilled workforce to fill high paying jobs in local businesses. Fort Worth's environmental quality will also be superior meeting the highest national standards. During the 2000 Comprehensive Plan sector workshops held throughout Fort Worth in 1998, several values were identified that refine the City's vision. These values are preserved as part of the 2009 Plan. Preservation of western heritage, a friendly small town atmosphere, quality and ethnic diversity of cultural life, the arts, neighborhood vitality preservation of historic buildings and districts, efficiency and equity in delivery of quality public services, educational and economic opportunity aviation history and technology, can -do attitude, promotion of free enterprise, protection of property rights, mobility children and youth, conservation of natural resources, and inclusiveness and cooperation. "The Fort Worth Way In developing the Plan to reflect these common values and to help the City realize its vision, five major themes emerged. promoting economic growth, meeting the needs of an expanding population, revitalizing the central city developing multiple growth centers, and celebrating the Trinity River These five themes, which influence various elements of the Plan, can guide the City in its decisions about the future. PROMOTING ECONOMIC GROWTH Economic growth and diversification are dependent on the overall economic health of the community The City has developed several policies and strategies to assist in fostering economic growth. Examples include the following: Policy • Strengthen the effectiveness of economic development incentives by including appropriate capital improvement funding in an overall incentive package that encourages central city redevelopment (p. 93). Strategies • Establish potential incentives to promote development of vacant land and redevelopment or reuse of deteriorated properties within designated commercial districts (p. 94). • Encourage the utilization of federal brownfields programs to assist in central city revitalization (p. 94). • Continue the close partnership between the City and the local chambers of commerce in marketing Fort Worth to business prospects (p. 93). Nearly $6.5 billion in public and private funds have been invested in infrastructure and development in the 17,000-acre Alliance Airport and Alliance Corridor industrial area. Alliance is the first industrial airport in this region, and is a concept that has proven effective for economic development elsewhere. Nearly 28,000 jobs have been created within the Alliance Corridor. Summary The Evans & Rosedale Business and Cultural District, an urban village, is being developed in Near Southeast Fort Worth as a heritage center that celebrates the area's African -American history The conceptual plan includes a major commercial anchor other businesses, and a plaza to celebrate the heritage of the area within a pedestrian - friendly mixed -use setting. The Ella Mae Shamblee Branch Library opened in the urban village in June 2008. The City is working to stimulate additional investment by constructing a neighborhood services center that will open in 2009 The City is working with the North Texas Tollway Authority and the Texas Department of Transportation on designs for SH-121T The environmental impact statement was approved in June 2005 Also known as the Southwest Parkway this 8.4-mile toll road will connect Downtown with the rapidly growing neighborhoods and commercial centers of southwest Fort Worth. Construction on the $1.075 billion roadway is scheduled to begin in 2010 and should be completed in 2013 Business leaders in Fort Worth are working closely with the Independent School Districts (ISDs) that serve Fort Worth to create and promote programs that will provide internships, mentoring, and training, such as the Fort Worth Project C3 (Community Corporations, and Classrooms) and Adopt -A -School programs. MEETING THE NEEDS OF AN EXPANDING POPULATION Nearly every element of the Plan addresses the additional demand placed on City services and facilities by an expanding population. As infill development occurs in the central city greater demand is placed on the existing facilities. In the last 10 years, growth has been greatest in the Far North, Far Northwest, Far Southwest, Eastside, and Far South sectors, partially because of the availability of large tracts of developable land in these areas. The majority of growth m these sectors has been outside Loop 820 Expanding population produces additional traffic and solid waste, and places a greater demand on natural resources (such as land and water supply), existing facilities, and fiscal resources. Because population increases affect most public service providers, encouraging cooperation among providers and developing opportunities for shared facilities and coordinated services is important. The City has developed a number of policies and strategies to provide services and facilities efficiently and effectively to Fort Worth s growing population. Examples include the following: Policies • Encourage development that reduces daily vehicle miles traveled for commuters through the creation of growth centers (p. 189). • Encourage new development adjacent to developed or platted areas so as to utilize existing infrastructure and services (p. 37). Strategy • When possible, school and City facilities will be shared to provide efficient access to services (p. 128). Other services, such as police, fire, library health, recreation, environmental, code compliance, and human services, are to be expanded or improved to better serve all citizens. The 19 community centers owned by the City offer a mix of recreational, health, education, and youth services. Fort Worth s public health programs focus on education and prevention by working directly with neighborhood residents to identify important health issues and provide referrals to appropriate agencies. It is the City's goal to provide one -stop services at sites served by public transportation. Over $22 million has been budgeted for park improvements over the next five years, ranging from an addition to the zoo to the provision of additional recreational facilities. In order to maintain standards for meeting park and recreation needs, 5 773 acres of parkland will need to be acquired by 2025 to meet the 21.25 acres of parkland per 1,000 population standard, based on projected population. During the next four years, over $100 million will be spent on construction of the Westside Water Treatment Plant and expansion of the North Holly South Holly and Rolling Hills Water Treatment Plants, as well as the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant, aiding in the City's goal to improve water quality and water supply REVITALIZING THE CENTRAL CITY The City of Fort Worth is committed to revitalizing its central city — the area consisting of low and moderate income neighborhoods within Loop 820 — through a comprehensive and coordinated strategy that includes economic development, housing, historic preservation, infrastructure, parks, cultural programs, human services, and safety initiatives. The City's principal strategies for central city revitalization are to: • Develop compact, pedestrian -oriented mixed -use growth centers (p. 86). • Revitalize distressed commercial corridors by developing mixed -use urban villages along those corridors (p. 86). • Develop a rail transit system that connects the growth centers and urban villages and promotes transit -oriented development (TOD) in appropriate transit station locations. (p. 86). The City has developed other related policies and strategies to promote revitalization of the central city including the following: Policies • Promote neighborhood stability through a comprehensive and coordinated strategy that addresses housing, neighborhood economic development, infra- structure, parks, cultural programs, safety improvements, and human services. (p. 48). • Use the Neighborhood Empowerment Zone program to promote the development of designated urban villages, Model Blocks, and other targeted redevelopment areas (p 93). Strateg es • Enhance the City's existing preservation incentives and develop new ones (p. 137). 4 4 4 a a 4 4 a a a • • • a 4 4 4 4 4 Summary vii • • • • 0 i i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 40 • • • Support redevelopment, community development, and nonprofit organizations efforts to spur the revitalization of central city business districts where investment is not occurring but that have redevelopment potential (p. 94). Projects such as the redesign of Lancaster Avenue, Berry Street, and North Main Street will act as catalysts for central city redevelopment. Lancaster Avenue from I 35W to Henderson Street is being redeveloped into an attractive, pedestrian -oriented street with residential, retail, and office uses. The I 30 and I 35W interchange was relocated to the south of the Union Pacific railroad lines, enabling the Lancaster improvements. The Lancaster Avenue construction began in 2005 and was completed in June 2008. Public art was installed in the median in 2009 The Berry Street corridor has been redesigned from Evans Avenue west to University Drive to help revitalize the corridor stimulate new economic development, and promote pedestrian activity As part of its urban village program, the City has secured approximately $4.2 million in federal and local funds for pedestrian and streetscape improvements on Berry street. Construction of phase one began in November 2005 and was completed in the spring of 2007 The North Main corridor project will create an attractive, safe, and pedestrian - oriented environment that will improve tourism and stimulate economic activity along the corridor, from the Tarrant County Courthouse to the Historic Stockyards. Two districts have been selected for improvements: the Stockyards district, between 23rd and 28th Street; and the Historic Marine retail and restaurant district, between the railroad and 23rd Street. Pedestrian and streetscape improvements in the Historic Marine district were completed in September 2006 In 2002 the City created conceptual redevelopment plans for urban villages along prionty commercial corridors targeted for reinvestment. Since that time the City designated additional urban villages for a total of sixteen. The City allocated $4.5 million for planning in twelve of these villages, and for design and construction in five villages. In addition, the 2004 bond package designated $2 million in local match funding to secure federal funding as it becomes available. The City Council adopted twelve urban village master plans in December 2007 Construction of streetscape improvements in five of those urban villages is expected to begin in 2010 DEVELOPING MULTIPLE GROWTH CENTERS A multiple growth center development pattern will accommodate citywide growth with fewer environmental impacts, less land consumption, less traffic generation, and less pollutant production than a dispersed development pattern. Providing a variety of transportation modes within and between growth centers will lessen residents current dependence on automobiles, thus helping to improve Fort Worth s air quality by reducing automobile emissions. The Comprehensive Plan has designated 32 growth centers (24 mixed -use and 8 industrial) to serve as the primary development pattern for future public and private development. Mixed -use growth centers have a concentration of jobs, housing units, entertainment, public spaces, and public transportation hubs. They are characterized viii by mixed -use development and a pedestrian-onented environment. Industrial growth centers consist of industrial and commercial uses, with a high concentration of jobs. Both will concentrate more intense land uses away from low -density residential areas. Examples of designated mixed -use growth centers include Downtown, Near Southside, Hulen/Cityview Alliance Town Center and CentrePort. Examples of industrial growth centers include the Alliance Corridor Riverbend, Carter Industrial Park, and Lockheed -Martin. The City has developed several policies and strategies related to promoting a multiple growth center development pattern, including the following: Policies • Promote location of multifamily units within walking distance of public transportation, employment, and/or shopping to increase accessibility and decrease vehicular traffic generation (p. 37). • Link growth centers with major thoroughfares, public transportation, trails and linear parks (p. 37). • Accommodate higher density residential and mixed uses in areas designated as commercial on the City's future land use maps (p. 37). • Locate large industrial uses along rail lines, highways, or airports within industrial growth centers and other appropnate locations (p. 38). Strategy • Promote transit -oriented development, which encourages compact urban development adjacent to transit stops and interchanges. Mixed uses in a single building, minimal setbacks, and taller structures help achieve the higher densities necessary to support transit. Parking facilities, retail businesses, and services for commuters should be located close to transit stops (p. 38). Completed in January 2002, the Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC), located downtown at Ninth and Jones Streets, links neighborhood residents and visitors to employment centers, as well as to locations of cultural and recreational interest. The ITC serves as the hub for several transportation modes including Amtrak, Greyhound, and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority's (The T) local buses and commuter rail service between Fort Worth and Dallas. The Trinity Railway Express (TRE) provides for commuter rail service from Dallas to the ITC and the T&P Terminal on Lancaster Avenue. TRE offers an important transportation link to other areas in the region. It was completed in 2001 through a partnership with Dallas Area Rapid Transit and is now operated by the T with funding assistance from the Federal Transit Administration, TxDOT and Tarrant County Concentrated development will support more efficient delivery of public transportation, promote restoration and reuse of historic buildings within the growth centers, and present opportunities for shared facilities housing a variety of service providers. Residents living in mixed -use growth centers, as well as non-resident employees, will benefit from their proximity to a range of compatible businesses, Summary health and human services, and information and educational resources. CELEBRATING THE TRINITY RIVER The Trinity River and its tributaries are important resources that provide a natural means of linking the City's recreation sites and open space, as well as providing trail linkages between neighborhoods and activity centers. Promoting compatible development along the riverfront is essential to preserving the Trinity River as Fort Worth s greatest natural asset. Preserving the floodplain as open space allows for natural filtration of surface runoff before it reaches waterways and also protects structures from flooding. The river and its tributaries are also an important economic asset to Fort Worth, attracting high profile development projects that complement and benefit from these important water features. Examples include the former Pier 1 and RadioShack headquarters along the Downtown segment of the river The Trinity Uptown Plan envisions mixed -use development along an expanded waterfront near Downtown. The Trinity Uptown Plan is an outgrowth of the Tnnity River Vision Master Plan and includes bold recommendations to ensure long-term flood protection and to transform Fort Worth s urban waterfront. Examples of current policies and strategies that protect the Trinity River as a natural and economic resource include the following: Policies • Pursue implementation of the Tnnity River Vision Master Plan in cooperation with Streams and Valleys, Inc.. the Tarrant Regional Water District, and the U.S Army Corps of Engineers (p. 59). • Encourage redevelopment and infill in order to reduce the amount of new impervious surfaces (p. 190). Strategies • When feasible, develop linear parks with walking and biking trails along drainage ways as an effective means of filtering out water pollutants and connecting neighborhoods (p. 190). • Develop and implement an ecotounsm plan that is focused on the natural attractions of Fort Worth (p. 191). Watershed studies are being performed to identify developing areas and to develop flood mitigation strategies. The City is working with the Federal Emergency Management Agency the Tarrant Regional Water District, the U S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the North Central Texas Council of Governments on this project. The trails that line the Trmity River corridor provide important opportunities for recreation and fitness in addition to stimulating the use of alternative transportation between neighborhoods, growth centers, and Downtown. While these trails are not yet linked throughout Fort Worth, there are more than 25 miles of existing trails along the Clear Fork, West Fork, and Marine Creek. Trails along Sycamore Creek and to the east of Downtown extend an additional 14 miles. In 1999 Streams and Valleys, Inc. completed an update to the Trinity River Master Summary ix Plan, called the Tilley Plan, that addressed the river comdor from Trinity Park to Gateway Park. A far-sighted update of this plan, the Trinity River Vision Master Plan, was completed in 2003 The master plan has an enlarged scope that encompasses approximately 88 miles of river and creek corridors. The plan identifies opportunities for conservation, linkages, and open space. The primary goals of the plan include ensuring flood protection, identifying and improving adjoining land uses, and enhancing environmental quality USING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The 2010 Comprehensive Plan is the ninth update of the 2000 Comprehensive Plan, a dynamic and evolving working document that will be updated each year to assure its usefulness and relevance to the community Changes to the Plan reflect shifts in demographic and economic trends that occur over time, as well as changes in policies, strategies, programs, and project status. The Plan also serves to document the implementation of new projects. As City departments complete anticipated master plans and strategic plans, these plans are incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan in Appendix A. As always, citizen input is solicited as a major part of the planning process. This input serves to guide the City's vision, and will continue to shape the values expressed through the Comprehensive Plan in the years to come. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROGRESS REPORT The Comprehensive Plan Progress Report shows accomplishments each year in implementing the Plan. The Progress Report is organized by the City Council Strategic Goals, highlights outcome measures, and describes the City's progress in accomplishing the Strategic Goals. The report is based on calendar year progress and is presented to the City Council every February along with plan adoption. The inaugural report will show progress achieved in 2009 • • • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • s S • • S • •••••0••••••+••••••••••••••••••• MOII3IIQONINI ••••••••••••••,•`••••••••(10•••`••• INTRODUCTION Fort Worth is the nation s 17th largest city with 720,250 residents, more than many other well-known cities across the country including Charlotte, El Paso, Seattle, Boston, Denver Washington, Las Vegas, Portland, New Orleans, Cleveland, and Atlanta. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, between April 1 2000 and July 1 2008, Fort Worth s population increased by 168,379 persons, or 31 percent, making it the fastest growing large city (500,000 or more population). Fort Worth s physical and economic climates are ideal for residents and employers. Once dependent on defense, oil and agriculture, Fort Worth s economy has become more diversified with high-tech jobs. The cost of living is low keeping labor costs down and homeownership within reach of many Fort Worth offers excellent opportunities for unique cultural experiences, quality education, recreation, and a safe environment, creating a high quality of life. The population growth that Fort Worth is experiencing can result in many different patterns of development — some more desirable than others. A current, updated comprehensive plan is essential to improving our community and making successful decisions about Fort Worth s growth and development. Fort Worth s 2010 Comprehensive Plan extends and enhances the vision of Fort Worth s future that was onginally expressed in the 2000 Comprehensive Plan. The 2010 Comprehensive Plan provides an updated policy framework to guide the decisions that will shape the city for years to come. History of Plannine in Fort Worth Fort Worth has a rich history of planning. The City has taken hold of its future since its inception, from the commissionmg of the outpost and the original town plan, to the creation of some of the first city plans in the country The Kessler Plan of 1909 laid out some of the first city parks, lakes, and boulevards. In 1923 the first City Plan Board was created, and two years later the City Plan Commission was established by ordinance. Among the Commission s first tasks was retaining Harland Bartholomew and Associates of St. Louis to create the 1927 Major Thoroughfare Plan, beginning with a boulevard and parkway system. In 1956, Victor Gruen and Associates produced a world-renowned plan for a walkable downtown. For the first time, a comprehensive plan was produced by City staff in 1965 This planning effort incorporated substantial citizen participation over a seven-year period and resulted in specific area plans for sectors and districts. These sector and distnct plans were updated in the early 1980s, again with significant input from the citizens of Fort Worth. Leval Basis The Texas Local Government Code, Section 213 005 states that municipalities may have comprehensive plans. Section 211 provides that zoning regulations must be adopted in accordance with the comprehensive plan. As a home rule city Fort Worth 1 Fort Worth Planning Sectors s a?Z 10 0 10 Miles 1 Far North 5. Northeast 9 Western Hills/Ridglea 13. Far Southwest 2. Far Northwest 6. Eastside 10 Southside 14 Wedgwood 3. Far West 7 Arlington Heights 11 TCU/Westcliff 15 Sycamore 4 Northside 8. Downtown 12. Southeast 16. Far South The City and its extraterritorial jurisdiction have been divided into 16 sec tors for planning purposes. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009) Introduction has chosen to appoint a City Plan Commission. Among the duties of the Commission is maintaining a comprehensive plan for the City Section 25-55(2) of the City Code directs the City Plan Commission to formulate a comprehensive plan and recommend it to the City Council. The Commission is also responsible for reviewing the plan and recommending changes. The comprehensive plan is described as a plan for the orderly growth and development of the city and its environs. The plan should "facilitate the movement of people and goods, and the health, safety and general welfare for the citizens of the city Section 25-55(7) requires that the City Plan Commission advise the Zoning Commission on the location of uses, height, bulk of buildings, and the division of the city into zones to carry out the goals of the comprehensive plan. A current and realistic comprehensive plan based on existing conditions and trends, as well as goals and objectives of the City is essential to the effective growth and development of Fort Worth. Plannine Process The first major update of Fort Worth s Comprehensive Plan began October 15 1998, with a citywide forum attended by over 200 interested citizens. Following the forum, approximately 700 citizens attended 16 sector meetings held over a four -week period. Additionally nine focus group meetings drew 160 citizens to provide input on specific issues, and presentations were made to civic organizations throughout the planning process. City Council and City Plan Commission members were a significant part of this process, moderating public meetings and informing citizens. This intense effort resulted in the receipt of over 1,000 comment cards from citizens wishing to express their concerns and suggestions. City staff incorporated comments and released the plan to the public in libraries, community centers, and on the Internet. Sixteen sector workshops and several focus group meetings were held again. After incorporating public comments, the plan was revised for public hearings held by the City Plan Commission and the City Council in early 2000 The Plan was adopted by the City Council on August 1 2000, as a guide for Fort Worth s growth and development. In October 2000 the City Council authonzed staff to update the plan annually so that it continues to be a useful guide. The annual public review process starts in the fall when City staff conduct a series of community meetings to receive comments on the Plan. This process culminates with the adoption and release of a revised document the following spring. The City's annual planning and budgeting processes are interwoven. The two processes are coordinated so as to enable City departments, the City Manager's Office, and the City Council to make budgeting decisions that are consistent with the Council s pnorities as reflected in the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan is also intended to help City officials in formulating capital improvement budgets and bond packages. In 2008 the Mayor and City Council thoroughly reviewed the goals found in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan and revised the goals: • Make Fort Worth the nation s safest major city • Improve mobility and air quality Planning Process Plan Implementation by City and Other Agencies City Council Adopts Plan 4 Public Hearing Process: Review by City Council and City Plan Commission Planning and Development Department Revises Plan City Departments Prepare Draft Plan Community Meetings The planning process is a continuous sequence of activities taking approximately one year to complete There are opportunities for input into the process at all stages. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Introduction 2 ••••••••••••••••••i••••i•,•••`••• • Create and maintain a clean, attractive city Strengthen the economic base, develop the future workforce, and create quality job opportunities. • Promote orderly and sustainable development. These strategic goals, along with the vision statement in the Comprehensive Plan and financial policies, help guide the City Manager in formulating an annual Consolidated Business Plan, which in turn provides the framework for department business plans and individual performance plans. Each City department prepares an annual business plan describing their mission and vision, organization, budget, major initiatives, and performance measures. The business plan relates the department's activities to the City Council s strategic goals and to the City's organizational prionties: communication, customer service, and diversity The business plan also relates the department's activities to the goals, objectives, policies, programs and projects contained in the Comprehensive Plan. This strategic alignment of the planning and budgeting processes, combined with continuous public input, helps to ensure that the City of Fort Worth provides the best possible service to its citizens. Scone of Comprehensive Plan The 2010 Comprehensive Plan is organized according to elements of the City's mission statement: "Fort Worth, Texas is a city focusing on its future. Together we are building strong neighborhoods, developing a sound economy and providing a safe community The mission statement's elements form four major sections in the plan. • Focusing on the Future — A summary of major trends that serves as a basis for the Plan. Building Strong Neighborhoods — Initiatives to enhance quality of life by promoting compatible land uses and improving community services. • Developing a Sound Economy — Components that enhance economic opportunity and keep our economy growing. • Providing a Safe Community — Services that make Fort Worth a safe place in which to live, work, and recreate. A statement of vision and values guides the elements of the plan, emphasizing the values that are important to the residents of Fort Worth throughout each subject area. The plan is also guided by future population, economic, and financial trends. Eighteen subject areas are addressed by identifying goals, objectives, policies, programs, and projects. The final section of the Comprehensive Plan concentrates on tools for the implementation of the Plan. This section identifies sources of funding, rules and regulations, financial incentives, and cooperative efforts with other governmental bodies. The appendices include other plans incorporated by reference, sector land use maps and policies, and capital improvements for the 16 planning sectors, as well as supporting materials. A glossary is also included. 3 Strategic Planning Pyramid Vision/ Comprehensive Plan Council Strategic Goals organizalonal Priorities Budget Departmental Business Plans Departmental objectives & Performance Measures Service Standards/Guarantees individual Performance Plans The Comprehensive Plan guides the City's strategic business planning process. (Source: City Manager's Office, 2009.) Introduction Alb ar• ••••••••••o••••••••••••i••••••••• VISION AND VALUES Fort Worth residents have expressed what they most value about Fort Worth, and have identified issues that should be addressed over the next 20 years. The vision statement for the Comprehensive Plan has been shaped by citizens comments and the City's mission to create strong neighborhoods, a sound economy and a safe community The vision and values defined within the Comprehensive Plan represent the creative efforts of the community to lay a successful foundation for the future of Fort Worth. OUR VISION "By the year 2020, Fort Worth will be commonly recognized as the most livable city in Texas. Residents will be able to enjoy Fort Worth's friendly atmosphere and the opportunities that are associated with a growing economy and diverse community. Fort Worth's public schools will produce well-rounded citizens and a skilled workforce to fill high paying jobs in local businesses. Fort Worth's environmental quality will also be superior meeting the highest national standards. OUR VALUES During Comprehensive Plan meetings held throughout Fort Worth, 13 values were identified to define and guide the city's future. Those values are: preservation of western hentage, a friendly small town atmosphere, quality and ethnic diversity of cultural life, the arts, neighborhood vitality preservation of historic buildings and districts, efficiency and equity in delivery of quality public services, educational and economic opportunity promotion of free enterprise, protection of property nghts, mobility children and youth, and conservation of natural resources. At their June 2003 retreat, the City Council enlarged the list by adding the values of aviation history and technology and a can -do -attitude. At the June 2005 retreat, the City Council added the value of inclusiveness and cooperation. "The Fort Worth Way Preservation of Western Heritaee Fort Worth s western heritage is deeply rooted in the city's history as the gateway to the West and as a busy outpost along the famous Chisholm Trail. We value this heritage by preserving and celebrating it m our Historic Stockyards District, our brick paved streets, and the development of world class livestock and rodeo exhibit space. Our western heritage can also be experienced through the residents, friendly and unpretentious, as they speak with pride of their modern, easy paced city still alive with legends of cowboys and cattle, larger than life wildcatters, ranching families, and business icons. Friendly. Small Town Atmosphere Although Fort Worth has reached a population of 720,250, the distinctive atmosphere remains one of friendly helpful residents who are committed to the well-being of their city Visitors to Fort Worth are welcomed by citizens who are eager to share the 5 Western Heritage Fort Worth s strong western heritage is celebrated with a daily cattle drive in the Historic Fort Worth Stockyards north of Downtown (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Vision and Values unique character of their city Residents take pride in their neighborhoods and are willing to spend countless volunteer hours to ensure a safe and viable place to live, work, and play Oualitv and Ethnic Diversity of Cultural Life Fort Worth is blessed with a rich and diverse cultural life. We celebrate our western heritage while enjoying local and international artistic and scientific contributions. We are also blessed with a diverse population, representing many ethnic groups that offer unique means of expression, traditions, and skills that should be celebrated to ensure continued diversity in our cultural life. The Arts We value the fine arts, including performing arts and public art. We want all citizens of Fort Worth to be able to enjoy art, music, theater and dance, both in our cultural centers and in our neighborhoods. We want our public buildings and facilities to incorporate art that reflects the values of the community Neighborhood Vitality We believe a neighborhood has a chance at vitality when provided with quality community facilities and services, such as schools, parks, sidewalks, libraries, and fire and police protection. Neighborhoods should also be secure and should enjoy convenient access to shops, businesses, and other destinations throughout the city and region. Residents who have pride and a sense of ownership in their neighborhood actively work to preserve and improve Fort Worth. We want citizens to have a sense of community and belonging, to gain access to needed services, and to have the opportunity to connect with other people. We want our children to have safe and supportive communities in which to grow Preservation of Historic Buildings and Districts We value and respect our historic buildings and neighborhoods as reminders and teachers of our history We want to preserve our historic structures as a means of tying our western heritage to the future so that younger generations and visitors will have an authentic experience of our great history Efficiency and Eauity in Delivery of Oualitv Public Services The City of Fort Worth will provide public services in the most efficient manner so that citizens can enjoy the best possible services at the lowest cost. We want to have equal access to quality public services that meet the needs of our community We want quality infrastructure and services throughout the city to support economic viability and a high quality of life. We want all of our neighborhoods to have safe homes, parks, and streets. The Blackstone Hotel The Blackstone Hotel was vacant for many years until it was re- stored as a Courtyard Marriott by Historic Restoration, Inc. and Marriott Hotels. The restored hotel is one of many historic struc tures in Fort Worth that have been preserved for future genera- tions (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Vision and Values 6 00.000004106.0000060110.0000000.000 Educational and Economic Opportunity We value equal access to educational and economic opportunity We want high qual- ity education and training offered to citizens of all ages in all parts of Fort Worth. We want schools and training programs that produce a talented workforce capable of filling high paying jobs in our diversified economy Aviation History and Technology We value our rich aviation history and contributions to aviation technology from the first air show organized by Amon G Carter in 1911 to the manufacture of Joint Strike Fighters at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company We value our aviation role in national defense, as home to the U.S. Army's aviation training camp at Camp Bowie during World War I, to Carswell Air Force Base during the Cold War, to to- day's Naval Air Station/Joint Reserve Base. We want our municipal airports to con- tinue to contribute to the region s economy As the headquarters location for Amen - can Airlines and Bell Helicopter Textron, the world s largest manufacturer of heli- copters, we value our partnership with the aviation industry Can -Do Attitude Fort Worth s western heritage and pioneer spirit are reflected in our can -do attitude. Whether recovering from a tornado or an economic recession, we value our ability to create opportunities from challenges. We want to continue to foster collaboration among all facets of our community and to build on our diverse strengths. We are proud of our remarkable accomplishments and dedicated to realizing our vision for the future. Promotion of Free Enterprise Fort Worth was founded by pioneering individuals who were willing to take risks and act on new ideas. That same entrepreneurial spint still exists in Fort Worth today Our environment has fostered innovation and development for over a century We want to continue promoting new ideas and business, and to encourage new develop- ments that will enhance Fort Worth s role as the diverse economic center of the re- gion. We want the benefit of a healthy economy so that all residents have an oppor tunity to improve their quality of life. Protection of Property Rights The plentiful supply of land and the mdependence it symbolized attracted pioneers to settle Fort Worth. Our economy thrived, first on agnculture and then on oil. Land and its ownership were seen as wealth or a means to wealth. A strong connection was perceived between economic independence and the ownership of land. Though our economy has diversified, the traditions and attitudes shaped by our history are strong. We want to choose how we use our land, as long as it does not negatively impact a neighbor's use of property 7 Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company's headquarters (home of the F 16 Fighting Falcon and Joint Strike Fighter) is located seven miles west of Downtown Fort Worth The production facility was established in 1942 in response to the U.S War Department's need to produce additional B-24 Liberator bombers for World War II (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009. ) Tornado Recovery On the evening of March 28, 2000 two tornadoes struck Fort Worth, Arling- ton and Grand Prairie, Texas. The Fort Worth tornado touched down on the city's west side and moved right through the Downtown area Within hours, City crews, public utility workers and volunteer crews were working together on the recovery efforts (Source: www.fortwortharchitecture.com, 2000). Vision and Values Mobility We value being able to safely move about the city with ease and convenience. We want streets and public transportation systems that allow us to travel conveniently throughout the city and region. We want sidewalks that allow safe movement within our neighborhoods and commercial districts, and greenways that connect our parks and provide access to Fort Worth s natural resources. Children and Youth We value the youth of Fort Worth as important contributors to the city's success. Youth demonstrate their interest in community life by taking advantage of opportuni- ties to be involved in civic activities. We are committed to offering a nurturmg and safe environment for Fort Worth s children by providing strong neighborhoods in which to live and play quality child care, quality education, and diverse job opportu- nities. Conservation of Natural Resources We value our natural features — the Trinity River, lakes, rolling prairie lands, trees, vegetation, and wildlife — as resources. We want to protect, preserve, and enhance these resources for future generations. Where our stewardship has lapsed, we want to renew resources by planting trees, cleaning up and replenishing degraded areas, and setting aside reserves for native vegetation and wildlife that once roamed the prairies. We want to reduce air and water pollutants so that we may have clean air and water for future generations. Inclusiveness and Cooperation. "The Fort Worth Way" Before our community makes important decisions, we seek to involve all citizens who might be affected by those decisions. We strive to communicate effectively with all our citizens, and to include them early and meaningfully in our decision -making process through town hall meetings, citizen surveys, workshops and informal discus- sions. When conflicts arise, we bring interested parties together to work out practical solutions. We use inclusiveness and cooperation to make Fort Worth a livable city for all —it's the Fort Worth way Working from the city's existing conditions, the chapters that follow make recom- mendations for the future that will preserve and enhance the values identified by the citizens of Fort Worth. Vision and Values The Intermodal Transportation Center The Intermodal Transportation Center at the intersection of 9th Street and Jones Street in Downtown Fort Worth, exemplifies the value that Fort Worth assigns to mobility This facility which opened in January 2002, serves as a terminal for several transportation modes, including commuter rail service between Fort Worth and Dallas. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 8 •••r•i••••••••••••••••••••••••••• PART I FOCUSING ON THE FUTURE ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 1 POPULATION TRENDS Since 2000 Fort Worth has been the fastest growing large city of more than 500,000 population in the nation. The city's population continues to grow and change. Growth today is due to immigration, an increased birth rate, longer average life expectancy and domestic migration. It is important that the City of Fort Worth consider population trends in order to plan for the impacts of a larger population and increasing demands for public services. This chapter discusses ways in which population changes affect City services, followed by a general analysis of Fort Worth s population trends. There are four basic reasons for studying population trends. First, the City must be able to predict the costs involved in providing services in the future. The demand for many services, such as water and wastewater can be predicted by applying a formula to future population estimates. Other City services apply only to certain segments of the population, making it important to know the population s composition. For example, knowing a population s age distribution is helpful in determining demand for particular housing types. Second, the City must be able to forecast revenues from various sources to meet future public service costs. Fort Worth derives revenues from several sources, including property tax and sales tax. Future tax revenues can be estimated but are susceptible to economic fluctuations. Per capita sales tax is often used as a predictor Conclusions can also be drawn about property tax based on development activity which is directly related to population increases. Third, knowing the spatial distribution of population within the City is important for determining the location of new community facilities and the strain that might be placed on existing facilities. Land uses are also determined by the population s spatial distribution. As population increases and shifts to different parts of the City demand for certain types of land uses will also shift. Lastly population forecasts assist the City in determining the future land uses needed to support the predicted population. As the city's population grows, additional land is needed to accommodate new residences, retail and service businesses, and other types of land uses. Each person will require a certain amount of space for certain uses. For example, the Parks and Community Services Department adopted the national standard of 21.25 acres of parkland per 1,000 persons to plan for future neighborhood parks. Similar predictions can also be made for other land uses. Factors Affectini Population Chanee The increase in Fort Worth s population is generally the result of four key factors: 1) People are livmg longer 2) Immigration has been steady for many years, particularly from Mexico and other Latin American countnes, according to the Texas State Data Center 3) Fort Worth and Texas as a whole are expenencing high birth rates, and 4) Domestic migration is also continuing, though at reduced rates from the 1980s. A robust economy relative to other states, particularly in the high technology sector, 9 900,000 800,000 700,000 H 600,000 g 500,000 m 400 000 a. 300,000it, 200,000 100,000 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Fort Worth Population, 1950-2030 (2009) 720,250 a Year In 2003, the North Central Texas Council of Governments projected that Fort Worth s population would reach 784,300 by 2025 However Fort Worth's population increased at a faster rate between 2000 and 2009 than NCTCOG's projections anticipated If growth continues at the current accel- erated rate, Fort Worth s population will surpass the NCTCOG projection, ex ceeding one million by 2030 The Council of Governments will adjust their projections based on recent trends in 2009 (sources: u.s. Census Bureau, 1950- 2000, North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009; Planning and Development Depart- ment, 2009.) Chapter 1 Population Trends continues to prompt corporate relocations to Fort Worth. Of course, actual population growth may be higher or lower than expected. Factors that could cause slower population growth might include a prolonged economic downturn that slows business expansion or necessitates an increase in local tax rates. Conversely factors that could cause a more rapid population increase might include build -out of neighboring suburban cities that shifts growth to Fort Worth, or aggressive annexation in response to developments in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). Total Population Fort Worth and its ETJ are home to over 775 000 people. The ETJ is land located a certain distance beyond the city limit line that a city has a right to annex. Chapter 43 of the Local Government Code, State of Texas, defines the size of a city's ETJ based on population. Cities that have a population of 100 000 or more have a five -mile ETJ Because of rules governing the minimum lot size for individual septic sewers, residential growth in the ETJ will likely be limited to less than one unit per acre, except where municipal utility districts are established to fund sewer collection systems and supporting main extensions. According to the most recent U.S. Census Bureau data, Fort Worth has been the fastest growing large city of more than 500,000 population in the nation since April 1 2000 Fort Worth s total population increased from 447,619 in 1990 to 534,694 in 2000 an annual average growth rate of approximately 2 percent. Since the 2000 Census, the population has increased at a faster rate than it did during the 1990s. The North Central Texas Council of Governments estimated Fort Worth s population at 720,250 persons as of January 1 2009 From 2000 to 2009 Fort Worth s total population increased by 185,556 persons. This represents an average annual increase of approximately 20,600 persons since the 2000 Census, a growth rate of 3 9 percent a year Fort Worth has already grown 34 percent this decade, with an increase of 17 400 just in the past year If Fort Worth continues to grow at the same rate it has since 2000, the city's population could exceed one million people by the year 2030 The North Central Texas region has continued to experience population growth. The region increased by 92,480 persons in 2008 for a total estimated population of 6,631,330 as of January 1 2009 Last year was the first time in thirteen years that the region s estimated growth has been less than 100,000 persons. A third of the region s growth in 2008 occurred in the five cities of Fort Worth, McKinney Dallas, Fnsco, and Plano. Fort Worth led the region by adding 17 400 new residents. Without careful consideration of how and where such growth will be accommodated, the negative effects of rapid population growth (traffic congestion, pollution, costly and inefficient services, etc.) will likely be exacerbated. Chapter 4 Land Use introduces the idea of mixed -use growth centers in these areas. Growth centers will have a high concentration of not only housing but jobs, services, and public facilities. Projected Population Growth, 2005-2010 1 Far North 2. Far Northwest 3 Far West 4 Northside 10 5 0 1:0 Legend Percent Growth 30 59% 15 29% 2 14% 10 Miles 5 Northeast 6. Eastside 7 Arlington Heights 8. Downtown 9 Western Hills/Ridglea 10 Southside 11 TCU/Westcliff 12. Southeast 13. Far Southwest 14 Wedgwood 15 Sycamore 16 Far South The City and its extraterritorial jurisdiction are divided into 16 sectors for planning purposes. Growth has occurred at a faster rate in outlying areas of the city Updated growth numbers should be available in 2010 (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2005.) Chapter 1 Population Trends 10 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Chapter 10• Economic Development, discusses urban villages, which will increase density in the central city and encourage mixed -use, pedestrian -oriented environments. Similarly the Comprehensive Plan promotes infill development, or use of vacant or underdeveloped sites for housing or commercial activity rather than "leapfrogging over the central city to the outskirts of town. Such efforts will guide rapid population growth to areas where population can be accommodated with less harmful effects. Race and Ethnicity According to the 2008 American Community Survey Hispanics accounted for 35 percent of Fort Worth s total population. This ethnic group is the fastest growing population group in Fort Worth and Texas. Races categorized as other primarily Asian and Pacific Islander are also gaining, while white and black percentages are declining in share. Currently minorities collectively make up the majority of Fort Worth s population. By the year 2028, Hispanics are expected to make up 38 percent of Fort Worth s population, if current trends continue. Fort Worth s racial and ethnic minorities are concentrated in certain areas of the city (see map on page 13). African Americans are concentrated inside Loop 820 to the east of Interstate 35 and mostly to the south of Interstate 30 These areas contain many neighborhood associations such as West Meadowbrook and Stop Six. Hispanics are more concentrated on the north side, in the Diamond Hill -Jarvis and Far Greater Northside historical neighborhoods, as well as in south central Fort Worth. For more information on neighborhoods, see Chapter 9• Neighborhood Capacity Building. The Fort Worth City Council has proposed several ways to deconcentrate poverty which will also have an effect on racial segregation. In April 2006, the Council passed Resolution 256, which serves "to Affirm and Promote That the Dispersion of Quality Affordable Housing into Neighborhoods throughout the City of Fort Worth is Essential to a Well -Balanced Community The Housing and Economic Development Department is working to increase the quality of life in inner city minority neighborhoods through home ownership assistance and other programs. For more information, see Chapter 5 Housing. Age While the aging baby boom generation (those born between 1946 and 1964) is expected to increase demand on social services, Fort Worth is a relatively young city compared to national and state demographics. The 2008 American Community Survey reported a median age of 31 6 in Fort Worth, 33.2 for the State of Texas, and 36.9 for the United States. There were 57 679 persons over 65 in the city in 2008 According to City of Fort Worth projections, this figure will decline in the next few years, but will increase again between 2010 and 2020 as the first members of the baby boom generation reach the age of 65 in 2011 According to the Texas State Data Center, the elderly (65+) will make up about 15 percent of the county s population by 2028. This age group will continue to grow beyond 2028 as the remaining portion of the baby boom generation reaches 65 11 Fort Worth Race and Ethnicity 2008 Other Race (Non - Hispanic), Black (Non- 5% Hispanic), 18% White (Non - Hispanic) 42% Hispanic (All Races), 35% Minorities collectively made up the majority of Fort Worth s population in 2008 (Source. U.S. Census Bureau, 2009) Tarrant County Race and Ethnicity, 2028 Black (Non - Hispanic) 14% l iispanic (All Races) 38% Other Races (Non - Hispanic) 8% White (Non- F Espanic) 40% The Hispanic population is projected to be the fastest growing segment of Tarrant County's population, comprising 38 percent in 2028 This increase in the proportion of Hispanics is likely to be even greater for the City of Fort Worth. (Source. Texas State Date Center 2009.) Chapter 1 Population Trends • • There were 148,420 children between 5 and 19 years old in 2008, making up 22 percent of the population, a slightly higher percentage of children than the U.S. as a whole, which was 20 percent. In Texas, children make up 22 percent of the popula- tion. The adult population between the ages of 20 and 64 was 404 137 making up almost 60 percent of the population. This is the same as in the U S.. and shghtly more than Texas, with 59 percent. Between now and 2028, the greatest growth will occur in the general working -age adult population, which will help to offset the increases in young and elderly popu- lations. If current trends continue, there will be more working adults per dependent population in 2028 than in 2008. Increases in various segments of the population will create needs for various types of services. An increase in school -age children necessitates new classroom space and more teachers. Changes in age groups also will change new development. Young families often choose to live further out in the suburbs, while many young people in their 20s and retirees are choosing to live downtown. Responding to this changing housing market, new housing units continue to be added in the central city It is also important to consider the elderly in long-range planning. This group will create a demand for housing near hospitals and on public transportation routes, as well as supportive housing such as retirement communities and nursing homes. Services for the elderly are discussed in this plan in Chapter 8 Human Services. Population by Sector Sector populations are estimated based upon the most closely matching census ge- ography Five of the 16 planning sectors include areas outside the city limits in the ETJ (see map on page 13). 700 000 - Between 2005 and 2010 population is projected to grow greatest in the Far South- 600 000 west, Far Northwest, and Downtown sectors. This growth is attributed to the avail- 500 000 ability of large tracts of developable land in these outer sectors, and the increasing en availability of housing options downtown. c 400 000 — m The projections for the Far North and Far West sectors exhibited the largest volume a 300 000 of growth due to residential developments. The greatest percentage of growth be 200 000 — tween 2005 and 2010 is projected to occur in the Far Southwest sector 100 000 This trend is expected to continue in the Far North sector as large residential devel- 0 opments expand beyond North Tarrant Parkway The Far West, and Far Southwest sectors will also continue to experience a high percentage of growth as new subdivi- sions expand. Since 2000, an estimated 2,000 people have been added in Downtown Fort Worth. A 2006 study by Downtown Fort Worth, Inc. and M/PF Research concluded that the market can absorb an additional 7,300 housing units downtown m the next 11 to 15 years. Other central city sectors have exhibited much slower growth rates than the Downtown sector, primarily due to their older housing stock, lack of large tracts of 75-79 60-64 45-49 30-34 Fort Worth Age Groups, 2008 Female 15-19 0-4 — 40000 20000 Male 0 20000 40000 Persons The number of persons 65 and older was 57 679 in 2008 while the number of school -age persons (ages 5-19) was 148,420 (Source. U.S. Census Bureau, 2009.) Chapter 1 Population Trends 12 Tarrant County Age Groups, 2008- 2028 Under 18 18-24 24-44 45-64 65 and older 0 2008 • 2028 The elderly will make up a greater proportion of our population in 2025 than in 2008 (Sources: Texas State Data Center 2009, U.S. Census Bureau, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • i • I S • a •••♦•••••••••••00•0400410004100010•0 developable land, and overall restrictions on development density Many central city sectors experienced a population decline in the 1980s, but are now gaining population. Race by Sector The Southeast sector has the largest percentage of minority residents, with 87 per cent of its total population comprised of black, Hispanic, and other Northside, Southside, and Northeast sectors follow with 82, 80, and 74 percent minority popu- lations, respectively All five of the outlying sectors are less than 20 percent minor ity The TCU/Westcliff sector has the lowest percentage of minorities of any sector inside Interstate 820 Loop, with 22 percent. Data from the Fort Worth Independent School District (FWISD) indicate that the percentage of Hispanic students has increased in almost every elementary school m the FWISD since 1990 The highest percentage of Hispanic student population growth has been in schools located in the Northeast and TCU/Westcliff sectors. All elementary schools in these sectors have shown substantial increases in the Hispanic student population since 1990 Age by Sector In 2000, the Downtown sector had the highest percentage of persons aged 65 and older at 36 percent. The Arlington Heights and TCU/Westcliff sectors both had 14 percent. The Far North sector had the smallest percentage of persons 65 and over at only three percent. Downtown saw an increase in younger adults from 1990 to 2000 This could be due to the completion of a number of residential developments that appeal to young professionals. Since the baby -boom generation is projected to begin turning 65 years old in the year 2011 it is likely that the percentage of seniors in all sectors will increase proportionately Challenges and Opportunities The total population of Fort Worth will continue to grow each year In 2009 the city's population was 720,250 with the potential to exceed one million by 2030 Increased population will place additional demands on existing community facilities and infrastructure, and will result in the need for additional and expanded facilities. Shifting populations within the city will result in changing land use patterns and will help determine the location of new facilities. Accommodating population growth in a more sustainable way is an important chal- lenge facing communities across the country and Fort Worth is working to meet the challenge. This Comprehensive Plan contains many goals, objectives, policies, and strategies that will help the City of Fort Worth attain a more sustainable future. While Fort Worth s total population grows, there will also be changes in the compo- sition of the population. Minonties, collectively have become the majority The percentage of the population over the age of 65 will increase between 2010 and 2020 Changes in age composition will result in a need for different types of hous- ing and services. 13 • 10 Minority Population, 2000 by Census Tract 5 0 > 50% Black > 50% Hispanic > 50% Minority 10 Miles The Northside Southside and Southeast sectors of the City have the high- est concentrations of minority population. (Source. U.S. Census Bureau, 2000) Chapter 1 Population Trends ••••••••••••••••••••••••••r•••••• CHAPTER 2 ECONOMIC TRENDS The prospenty of Fort Worth is linked to domestic and international changes. During the 1970s and 1980s, the local economy was driven primarily by a large and successful aerospace and defense industry Substantial cutbacks in defense contracts prompted the City to begin working towards diversifying its economy in the 1990s, largely through small business development. The result is an economy that is today diversified in many industry sectors such as services, trade, manufacturing, transportation, communication, and construction. This diverse workforce has helped Fort Worth during this economic downturn, as we continue to fare better than other cities. The City is not immune to national trends which have shown a significant amount of job loss and shrinking economic growth indicators. The Fort Worth area continues to see an increase in the total number of natural gas wells throughout the city and surrounding counties. This increase in natural gas wells is attributed to the large natural gas reserve under Tarrant, Wise, Denton, Johnson, and Parker counties, known as the Barnett Shale. Rising production of natural gas in Tarrant County has helped make Fort Worth a leader in Texas energy production. Tarrant County is now ranked #2 up from #8 just two years ago, in top gas producing counties by the Texas Railroad Commission. As natural gas exploration and production continues to increase within Fort Worth, the associated jobs and lease revenue from natural gas wells will contribute to the local economy This chapter discusses some of the major economic indicators for the region, details some of the major economic attributes of the City of Fort Worth, and correlates national and international events to regional trends. Assessing these factors provides the basis for making reasoned assumptions about future economic growth and land development needs. There are three reasons for attempting to assess and predict changes in the economy First, the costs of providing certain City services are related to the level of economic activity Industrial and commercial enterpnses require water, wastewater, police, fire, environmental, and other services. The costs of providing certain water and wastewater services are partially offset by impact fees, but many other municipal services have no corresponding revenue source. Estimates for quantity and type of streets, public transportation facilities, schools, water and sewer facilities, and other community facilities are all based on the amount and spatial distribution of population and economic activity in the city Second, just as it costs money to provide services to businesses, these same businesses provide tax dollars that pay for the services. The City must be able to predict whether a public mvestment will ultimately pay for itself. The rate at which the economy expands drives growth not only in population, but also in sales taxes, property taxes, hotel taxes, impact fees, and other revenue sources. Lastly knowledge about the economy is useful in predicting land use needs and in 15 1400,000 1,200,000 1000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 1990 Employment by Place of Work, 1990-2030 rJ� 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Fort Worth -Arlington MD — Fort Worth Employment in Fort Worth is forecasted to continue growing by 1.5 percent annually in Fort Worth through 2030 The employment growth in the Fort Worth -Arlington MD is forecast grow on average 1 8 percent annually through 2030 (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments and The Penyman Group, Inc.. 2009.) $70,000 $60,000 $50 000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 Median Family Income, 1994-2009 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 Median family income for the Fort Worth -Arlington HUD Metro FMR Area in- creased from $44 800 to $66 000 between 1994 and 2009 an average an- nual increase of 3.2% over the 15-year period. (Source. u s. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2009.) Chapter 2: Economic Trends creating policy An expanding economy and population generally means more land is being developed. Every sector of the economy uses land in a specific way By analyzing the growth trends in the various sectors, the amounts of land that will be needed for commercial and industrial uses m the future can be predicted. Policies can be developed to encourage growth in appropriate areas with adequate infrastructure and community facilities while allowing for the efficient provision of additional facilities and services as needed. Total Employment and Job Growth According to the North Central Texas Council of Governments' employment forecast, employment in the City of Fort Worth will continue to rise at a rate of 1.5 percent annually to approximately 701,524 jobs within the city limits in 2030 The Perryman Group, Inc.. an economic research and consulting firm, forecasts job growth in the Fort Worth -Arlington MD to continue, though at a slightly slower rate than that of the late 1990s. Between 1990 and 2000, the Fort Worth -Arlington MD gained jobs at a rate of 3.2 percent per year according to the Perryman Group. Total job growth is expected to slow to 1.8 percent annually through the year 2030 (2008- 2030). The Perryman Group forecasts a total of 1,279,000 jobs in 2030 for the Fort Worth -Arlington MD The State Comptroller projects that job growth in the State of Texas is expected to slow as well, from 2.1 percent annually from 1990 through 2004 to 1.5 percent annually from 2007 through the year 2030 These projections take into account the slowmg of the national economy in the face of increasing global competition, geopolitical conflicts, and tightening labor markets. Rising energy costs may play a further role in limitmg job growth as gasoline prices continue to rise. Future job growth will likely be due to Fort Worth s large percentage of undeveloped or underutilized land and a vast ETJ of approximately 307 square miles that is mostly vacant. Moreover many other cities in the Fort Worth -Arlington MD are landlocked and are rapidly developing the remainder of their vacant land. Emnlovment by Industry The Fort Worth -Arlington MD has a highly diversified economy The area is an important manufacturing, commercial, transportation and financial hub and provides a large number of cultural and recreational opportunities. It has also recently become a major area for natural gas exploration and development. According to the Perryman Group, the metro division currently generates some 8% of Texas' real gross product (output). Over the long term, Fort Worth -Arlington MD is predicted to achieve notable growth across a variety of industries. The following estimates and forecasts of employment by industry are only available for working residents of the Fort Worth -Arlington MD the primary area from which Fort Worth draws its workforce. According to the Perryman Group, through the next twenty-three years, all industries in the Fort Worth-Arlmgton metro area are anticipated to see an expansion m the number of workers. Chapter 2: Economic Trends 16 Fort Worth Employment Forecast, 2000-2030 10 5 0 �� fwol J Loss or No Gain `w. 1 % to 49% 50% to 99% a. >100% 10 Miles Strong employment growth is forecast for Fort Worth s Far North sector as a result of Alliance Airport's growth and related development. (Source: North Cen- tral Texas Council of Governments, 2030 Demographic Forecast, 2009.) a a • a a S • • • • • • • • • • • • • a I a • a • • • • • • • • • • • ta • • • • • • • • • • 46 • • • • Historically the service sector has grown rapidly nationwide. With new efficient communications, businesses are increasingly able to sell services m distant markets, making services an export commodity In Texas and nationwide, the service sector experienced slight growth in 2003 and resumed historical growth patterns in 2005 The services sector in the Fort Worth - Arlington MD increased by 49,500 new jobs over the past five years (2003 to 2008), representing the largest employment sector growth, and it is forecast to grow by an additional 182,100 jobs between 2008 and 2030 representing a 1.97 percent compound annual growth rate. The service sector currently accounts for approximately 36 78% of the Fort Worth -Arlington MD's total wage and salary employment. By 2030 services is projected to be responsible for 40 7% of the workforce in the metro area. The services sector is forecast to account for the largest amount of real gross product gam from 2008 to 2030 for the Fort Worth - Arlington MD The increase will be approximately $20 01 billion. • Trade has experienced a increase in total jobs in the past five years (2003 to 2008). Trade increased by 18,200 jobs between 2003 and 2008 m the Fort Worth -Arlington MD The trade sector is forecast to grow by 56,200 new jobs between 2008 and 2030 representing a 1 44 percent compound annual growth rate. Manufacturing increased by nine percent between 1992 and 1998, largely due to aircraft manufacturing. However the market experienced a downturn between 2001 and 2006. The manufacturing sector decreased by 7,200 jobs between 2001 and 2006. Prior to 2008, the industry has remained fairly stable. In 2008, the industry saw a loss of approximately 4 600 jobs. Much of this loss can be attributed to the decrease in auto manufacturing in Arlington s GM plant. Overall, the total manufacturmg jobs in 2008 accounted for 10 49% of the Fort Worth -Arlington MD's total wage and salary employment. The industry overall is forecast to increase by 36,800 jobs between 2008 and 2030 representmg a less than 1% percent compound annual growth rate. Government grew by 8,800 jobs between 2003 and 2008 This job increase is reflective of the need for government to maintain its level of services and the service area continues to grow The government sector is forecast to grow by 40 400 jobs between 2008 and 2030 representing a 1.2 percent compound annual growth rate. • Transportation, warehousing, and utilities (TWU) increased by 6,100 jobs between 2003 and 2008, and is forecasted to grow by 28,200 jobs between 2008 and 2030 representing a 1.66 percent compound annual growth rate. According to the Perryman Group, transportation received a large boost in Texas with the implementation of the 1994 North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA), reducing barriers to trade with Mexico. According to the Texas Governor's Office, Texas exports to Mexico increased from $50 1 billion in 2005 to $56.0 billion in 2007 Since the passing of NAFTA, exports from Texas to Mexico have increased 150 percent ($22 billion in 1995). The overall exports from Texas grew to $168.2 billion in 2007 Transportation is likely to increase due to Fort Worth s central distribution location. Almost 90 percent of the nation s markets can be reached by truck or rail from Fort Worth within 48 hours. The warehousing industry 17 Employment by Industry 2008 Agriculture 0.14% Government 13.43% Services 3719% 5.75% Mning Construction 1 14% 6.22% Information 1.84% Manufacturing 10.48% Trade 16.69% TVVUA 710% Services and trade were the largest employment sectors in the Fort Worth - Arlington MD in 2008 *FIRE -Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate ATWU- Transportation, Warehousing, & Utilities (Source. The Perryman Group, Inc.. 2009.) Employment Forecast by Industry 2030 Agriculture 0.10% Government 12.44% Services 40.70% FIRE* 5.91% Mining 0.85% Construction 5.52% Manufacturing 9.16% Trade 16.28°A) TWU^ 7 17% Information 1.84% Services and trade are forecast to be the largest employment sectors in the Fort Worth -Arlington Metropolitan Division in 2030 *FIRE -Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate; ATWU-Transportation, Warehousing, & Utilities. (Source: The Perryman Group, Inc.. 2009.) Chapter 2: Economic Trends experienced a downturn but is forecast to revive again, as trade begins to increase. The utilities industry continues to consolidate as a result of deregulation and competition. • Construction in the Fort Worth -Arlington MD increase by nearly 10,500 jobs between 2003 and 2008 Employment m construction is forecast to grow by 14,000 jobs between 2008 and 2030 representing a 1 01 percent compound annual growth rate. In 2002 and 2003 construction jobs decreased in the Fort Worth -Arlington MD before growmg again in 2004 through 2006, according to the Perryman Group The near -term outlook is for construction to grow moderately in Texas in 2008, as nonresidential building picks up, even though higher mortgage default rates have recently suppressed the rapid growth seen since 2001 in the residential sector • Finance, insurance, and real estate (FIRE) in the Fort Worth -Arlington MD grew by 6,500 jobs between 2003 and 2008, and is forecast to grow by 22,400 jobs between 2007 and 2030, representing a 1.63 percent compound annual growth rate. • Mining in Texas is dominated by oil and gas production, and this sector suffered in the years when crude oil prices were low The number of operating Texas oil and gas rigs fell to 306 in April 2002, but the strength in oil and gas prices over the past few years caused renewed exploration, and the rig count rose to 607 in 2005 The Texas Railroad Commission reported in September 2009 that Texas average rig count was 366, representing about 33 percent of all active land ngs in the United States. This is significantly lower than 2008, in which Texas experienced record numbers of active rigs (890). Mining employment growth has seen about an 13.59 percent compound annual growth rate in the past five years (2003-2008), by a total of 4,900 jobs. In 2009 the Perryman Group forecasts a loss of about 1,000 mining related jobs m the Fort Worth -Arlington MD to reflect the overall drilling slowdown in Texas. This number is expected to level off an in 2030 the Fort Worth -Arlington MD mining industry will grow by less than 500 jobs at a .21 percent compound annual growth rate. • Agriculture has remained consistently at around 1,300 jobs in the Fort Worth - Arlington MD for the past five years and will continue to maintain the same amount of jobs in the area. The industry is forecast to not expenence any significant growth between 2008 and 2030 Statewide, approximately 67 percent of wage and salary workers are currently in the services, government, and trade industries. Over the long-term forecast horizon, those three sectors will continue to account for almost 70% of employment in the Fort Worth -Arlington metro area.. In the mid to late 1990s, the Fort Worth -Arlington MD experienced robust job growth. Job growth began to decline in 2000 through 2003 in the Fort Worth - Arlington MD In 2008, the total workforce from the Fort Worth -Arlington MD was 1,038,231 which represents an increase from the 2000 figure and representative of the 2004-2006 economic turnaround. Accordmg to the Perryman Group, the long-term jobs outlook for the Fort Worth -Arlington MD is expected to improve due in large Chapter 2. Economic Trends 18 a) L a) a- 10 8 6 4 2 0 1993 Unemployment Rates 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 — City of Fort Worth -- Texas --.— Nation Fort Worth s unemployment rate experienced a spike between 2001 and 2003 before realigning with the State s average rate in 2005 through 2007 With the current state of the economy unemployment rates in 2009 saw a steep rise This trend will continue until the nation s economic climate stabilizes. (Source. Texas Workforce Commission, 2010.) d a Average Unemployment Rates, 2009 (Major Texas Cities and State) ,t O 0 LL c N U) t$ iC O N c0 a w O U) O N O d r Statewide, unemployment rates have been rising. Texas in general has witnessed lower overall rates that the nation as a whole Fort Worth s 2009 unemployment rate of 7 7 percent is over two points higher than last year (Source: Texas Workforce Commission, 2010.) S • • • i • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • S • • ••••••••`••••••••!•••°••••••••••••• part to substantial growth at Alliance Airport and this region s distribution activities. Unemployment In 2009 the Fort Worth unemployment rate was 7 7 percent. Also in 2009 the Fort Worth -Arlington MD unemployment rate was 7 6 percent, and the State of Texas had an unemployment rate of 7.5 percent. Nationwide, the unemployment rate was 9.9 percent in 2009 In comparison, the Fort Worth unemployment rate in 2009 ranked third among six major cities in Texas, as shown by the chart on page 18. As the nation continues to experience economic uncertainty unemployment rates will continue to rise. Real Gross Area Product Real gross area product is the final value of all goods and services produced during a given time period, adjusted for inflation. The Perryman Group is the sole source of estimates for regional figures. Statewide, the Perryman Group projects the real gross state product to continue to grow at 3.9 percent compounded annually between 2008 and 2030, rising from approximately $77.57 billion to $180 4 billion. The U S. real gross domestic product is predicted to continue increasing at approximately 3.83 percent compounded annually according to the Perryman Group. Retail Sales According to the State Comptroller total retail sales in Fort Worth increased approximately 7 6 percent compounded annually from $6.34 billion in 2003 to $9 15 billion in 2008. During the same time period, retail sales in the Fort Worth -Arlington MD grew by 6.2 percent compounded annually ($22.4 billion to $30.31 billion), while the Dallas -Plano -Irving MD averaged a 1.86 percent compounded annually ($60 16 billion to $65.97 billion). In 2008 per capita retail sales in Fort Worth were 13,019 per person, below the Fort Worth -Arlington MD retail sales of $14,266 and lagging behind the Dallas -Plano -Irving MD which had a per capita retail sales figure of $15,828. Currently national trends indicate that energy costs are driving inflation. If this trend continues, retail sales may begin to witness the negative effects of inflation due to rising energy costs. For the Fort Worth -Arlington MD the Perryman Group predicts the overall retail sales to grow at a 6.88 percent compounded annual growth rate between 2008 and 2030 According to their projections, retail sales in the Fort Worth Arlington MD will be approximately $140.56 billion in 2030• which is only $68.58 billion when you factor in inflation. Personal Income Per capita personal income for the Fort Worth -Arlington MD was estimated to be $37 428 in 2007 which was slightly higher than the state average of $36,829 and slightly lower than the national average of $39 430, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. The Fort Worth -Arlington MD figure increased by 3.6 percent annually between 2002 and 2007 slightly below the rate of inflation (2.3% annually during the same period). Personal per capita income for the State shows a larger increase of 5 4 percent per year, similar to the annual national growth rate of 5 percent. Cost of Living The 2009 annual cost of living m the Dallas -Fort Worth MSA continues to be lower than 19 200.00 0 H 50.00 00 0.00 R 150.00 0 100.00 Real Gross Area Product, 2000-2030 • • 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Year Real Gross Area Product for the Fort Worth -Arlington Metropolitan Division is forecast to continue growing by 3 9 percent compound annually between 2008 and 2030 (Source. The Perryman Group, Inc.. 2009.) '?S 530 2333 Per Capita Retail Sales, 2003-2008 2704 2005 216 2UU/ 2033 Yea - Per capita retail sales for the City of Fort Worth grew 3.5 percent com- pounded annually between 2003 and 2008 (Sources: Texas Comptroller of Pub- lic Accounts and North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009.) Chapter 2: Economic Trends most other large metropolitan areas in the country according to the U S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Pnce Index (CPI). In 2009 the Dallas -Fort Worth annual CPI was 200.5 compared to Atlanta at 200.9 Los Angeles at 223.2, and Boston at 233 7 Although CPI figures are not available for the city evidence indicates that Fort Worth s cost of living is lower than that of many other cities in the Metroplex. Housing represents 42 percent of all items used to calculate the CPI. The median sale price of a home in Fort Worth was $117,000 in 2008, compared to $156,00 in Dallas, according to the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University Inflation is the change in the CPI, or the percentage rise in the prices of common consumer items. From January 2009 to January 2010, the nation as a whole witnessed a 2.6 percent mflation rate from the previous year During that same period the Dallas -Fort Worth MSA saw a higher inflation rate of 1 7 percent. By comparison the inflation rate between January 2007 and January 2008 nationwide was inflation rate of 4.2 percent while the Dallas -Fort Worth MSA an inflation rate of 4.3 percent. This The Texas Comptroller predicts that the CPI will rise by an average of 2.9 percent per year through 2025 Employment by Sector The Far North sector exhibited the most significant employment growth in the city between 1990 and 2000, adding almost 47,251 jobs at an average annual growth rate of 16.9 percent. The Far North sector's job growth can be attributed primarily to new jobs in the Alliance Airport area, including Alliance Gateway and the Intermodal facility Jobs were also added in Fossil Creek, Mercantile Center and Mark IV industrial parks. The Northeast sector added 15 132 new jobs, at an average annual growth rate of 3.3 percent. The Downtown sector ranked third in number of new jobs, with approximately 15,070 new jobs, at an annual growth rate of 2.4 percent. Other growth areas included the TCU/Westcliff sector with a large new shopping center the Western Hills/Ridglea sector which benefited from the recommissioning of the Naval Joint Reserve Base; the Eastside sector which includes CentrePort and several new retail establishments; and the Northside sector, where the Stockyards have been redeveloped into an entertainment district. Only the Far West sector has performed poorly in job growth, as there has been primarily residential development west of Loop 820 Unemployment by Sector Many parts of the City of Fort Worth have experienced long term high unemployment rates. 2004 estimates of the civilian labor force and unemployed persons from the Texas Workforce Commission by census tract reveal that the Northside, Southeast, and Southside had unemployment rates above nine percent. More recent data will not be available by census tract from the Texas Workforce Commission due to methodology changes in geographic areas below the state level. However, the unemployment rates in these sectors are likely to continue to be high in comparison to the city as a whole. Chapter 2. Economic Trends 20 Unemployment Rate by Census Tract, 2004 10 5 0 Percent Unemployed Less than 5% 5%to7% 7%to 9% • More than 9% 10 Miles Unemployment is highest in census tracts located in the Northside South- east, and Southside sectors of Fort Worth Census tract level data is no longer available from the Texas Workforce Commission beyond 2004 (Source: Texas Workforce Commission, 2004.) • • •• • • • • • • • • • • S • • • S • • i S I • • • • •••••-•'•••••°•••••••••••••••••••r••• Median Household Income by Sector According to the 2000 U.S Census, the Downtown sector had the lowest median household income at $21 111 Nevertheless, in the last 20 years, and more rapidly since 2000 Downtown has seen increased residential development of upscale housing. The Northeast, Northside, Southeast, Southside, and Sycamore sectors all had median incomes below the citywide median of $37 074 in 2000 The Far Southwest sector had the highest median income of $65,591 The Far Northwest sector also had a relatively high median income of $55,625 The Wedgwood and TCU/ Westcliff sectors had the highest median incomes of all central city sectors, both more than $55,000 per year Challenges and Opportunities The changmg economy provides Fort Worth with several challenges and many opportunities. The national, state, and local economies began emerging from a slowdown after September 11 2001 Fort Worth fared well during this time due its diverse economy and its close proximity to Alliance and D/FW airports and the NAFTA Interstate 35 corridor In addition, the community's pro -business stance has helped diversify the Fort Worth economy Between 2002 and 2007 Fort Worth and the entire Metroplex experienced strong economic growth. However throughout the national recession in 2008 began to impact Fort Worth in 2009 with local unemployment rising from 4 6 percent in 2007 to 8.3 percent by June 2009 (compared to 9 7 percent for the nation). The current recession was slow to affect Fort Worth and its negative impacts have not been as severe in Fort Worth as has been the case in many other parts of the country These factors provide Fort Worth with a firm foundation for growth in future years. However the policies and programs of the City must be continuously examined to ensure that they help mitigate the impacts of a slowing economy and rising energy costs, while promoting Fort Worth s economic strengths. 21 Median Household Income by Census Tract, 2000 10 5 0 > $40 000 $20 000 $40 000 < $20 000 10 Miles Incomes are highest in the Far North, Far Northwest, Far Southwest, TCU/ Westcliff and Wedgwood sectors. (source: u s. Census Bureau, 2000.) Chapter 2: Economic Trends N N ••••••••••••••••••••-+•••=•••••••••• CHAPTER 3 FINANCIAL TRENDS Population growth and economic trends greatly affect the financial planning process of the City of Fort Worth. City officials must consider this information, as well as local revenue trends, debt capacity and the cost of new facilities when responding to the needs of citizens. During periods of economic contraction, the City of Fort Worth is fiscally prudent and pays particular budgeting consideration to the continuation of providing services to citizens. Economic expansion and population growth call for detailed fiscal planning to provide new infrastructure and public services. This chapter presents information on financial planning as it applies to a local governmental entity and summarizes past, present, and future financial trends of the City of Fort Worth. Monies received by the city are accounted for with a City Operating Budget and a Capital Budget. In the operating budget, accounts are grouped under the categories of Enterprise Funds, General Fund, Special Funds, and Internal Service Funds. The flow chart shown on the right lists specific departments funded through each. Enterprise funds account for city services that are financed and operated much like private businesses, where the costs of providing services (both operating and capital costs) are financed through user charges. The city seeks to eliminate all forms of subsidization to enterprise funds. The General Fund receives the largest amount of revenue in the overall City budget. Internal Service Funds are established to account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department of the city for another Special Fund accounts are set up to track revenue and expenses incurred for the various items listed. Funds received from grants are handled through a separate budget. The adopted budget Grants Consolidated Action Plan for June 1 2009 through May 31st 2010 shows a total allocation of $11 417 713 from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to the City of Fort Worth. The HUD funding consists of four entitlement grants. Community Development Block Grant, Emergency Shelter Grant, Housing Opportunities for Persons with Aids and the HOME program. Funds are allocated for administration, community facilities, housing programs, public service programs, economic development, emergency shelter, and unprogrammed funds. Fort Worth has an abundance of resources and a diverse economy that has made it successful in attracting new businesses, investment, and jobs. According to the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), the total employment for the City of Fort Worth grew by 20 6 percent, from 449 793 in 2000 to 542,452 in 2010 The city has ample land for growth, excellent job -training facilities, a growing population, and adequate infrastructure. These positive factors are an indication of economic prospenty which typically leads to an expansion of the economic base and increased revenue for the City Revenues The largest source of General Fund revenue for the City of Fort Worth is property (ad valorem) and sales taxes. Fort Worth relies heavily on property tax revenues, with 55.34 percent of General Fund revenue collected from this source. Ad valorem taxes 23 Total City Operating Fund Structure 1 Enterprise Funds I Operating Departments I Debt Service —Two Accounts Municipal Airports Municipal Golf Courses Municipal Parking Solid Waste Storm Water Utility Water and Sewer 1 General Fund Operating Departments Internal Service Funds Operating Departments City Manager's Office City Secretary Code Compliance Community Relations Environmental Management Financial Management Services Fire Housing and Economic Development Human Resources Internal Audit Law Library Municipal Court Non -Departmental Parks & Community Services Planning & Development Police Transportation & Public Works Special Funds Accounts Capital Projects Service Equipment Services Information Technology Solutions Awarded Assets Cable Communications Crime Control and Prevention District Culture and Tourism Environmental Protection Fund Grants Insurance Group Health Risk Management Unemployment Compensation Worker's Compensation Lake Worth Trust The City's operating budget is composed of four funds that support operat- ing departments and City accounts. Information in this chapter looks at the financial trends that impact these funds. (Source: FY2010Adopted Budget.) Chapter 3: Financial Trends are paid on real property (real estate) and personal property according to the assessed value. Texas law states that all property is assessed on the basis of 100 percent of its appraised value, and real property must be reappraised every three years. Certain exemptions are allowed that lesson the tax burden for homestead property owners, persons 65 or older and disabled persons. As a result, some properties are totally exempt from taxes. Local jurisdictions set their own tax rates. Over the past fourteen years, the City's property tax rate has changed several times. The rate was reduced for seven consecutive years beginning in FY1994-95 starting at 97.35 cents and reduced to 86.5 cents per $100 value in FY2001-02. The tax rate remained unchanged for five years. In FY2006-07 and in FY2007-08 the tax rate decreased by half -cent each year The current rate is .8550 per $100 value. This rate is the lowest since 1985 Reductions in the tax rate have been possible due to the increase in total assessed value of real property from 1995 to 2007 Several factors contributed to this increase: 1) total value of all new construction increased from $524 million to $1,591 million, 2) the number of new single family homes built per year increased from 3,265 in FY1998-99 to 8,078 in FY2006-07 with (the average value of new homes ($122,963) being higher than existing homes ($114,026); and 3) vigorous reassessment of real property by the Tarrant Appraisal District has helped to increase revenue by reflecting the current value of real estate. This also keeps citizens from having large tax increases every three years when their homes are reassessed. In FY2006-07 Fort Worth s tax rate was 24.5 cents above the average tax rate of six other major Texas cities. Arlington, Austin, Dallas, El Paso, Houston, and San Antonio tax rates averaged 61 4 cents per $100 value for the 2007 tax year, with Austin having the lowest rate at 41.2 cents per $100 value. One reason for this is the relatively low value of existing housing stock in Fort Worth. In FY2006-07 the appraised value of Fort Worth residential real estate was 24 percent below the average value in the six aforementioned major Texas cities. The relatively lower value is desirable for affordability but necessitates a higher tax rate for property owners. Building activity started to level off during FY2006-07 As noted above, the average value of new homes built in FY2008-09 was $138,243 while the average value of existing homes was $120,461 The higher average value of new homes will help balance the comparatively low value of housing stock found in central city locations. Sales tax, the second major source of tax revenue, comprises 19 percent of the General Fund revenue budget in FY2009-10. This proportion is expected to remain relatively stable over the next five-year period. Relying on one major source of income for the city is not prudent; therefore, increasing sales tax collections is desirable. This increase can only be accomplished by increasing retail sales, on which the tax is based. The base tax rate of 6.25 percent is set by the State and becomes state revenue. Local jurisdictions are permitted to collect an additional 2.00 percent maximum for city revenue. The City of Fort Worth collects the maximum, and the money is allocated as follows: 1 0 percent to the General Fund; 0.5 percent to Chapter 3: Financial Trends General Fund Revenue Budget: FY2009-10 $528,401,543 Transfers 7.63% Other Revenue 0.21% Service Charges 4 49% From Other Agencies 0.24% Use of Money & Property 1.08% Fines/ Forfeit 2.49% Property tax 55.34% Sales tax 18 71% Other local taxes 1.72% Licenses and Permits 8 09% Property tax and sales tax revenues account for the majority of money in the General Fund Budget percentages of revenue for FY2009-10 are shown in this chart. (Source: FY2010 Adopted Budget.) In Millions $350 $300 — $250 -- $200 — $150 — $100 — $50 — $0 Property Tax Trends FY2000 FY2010 N () d Lf) U) t� CO O) O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL $0 8900 — $0 8800 — $0 8700 — $0 8600 — $0 8500 $0 8400 Tax Rate ($ per $100 Value) The property tax rate has decreased from $ 8850 per $100 of value in FY2000 to its current rate of $ 855 Due to increases in property valuation revenue collections have increased in each of these years. In prior years, both the debt service and operating portions of the property tax levy have been budgeted in the General Fund As of FY2009 the operating portion is budgeted in General Fund while the debt service portion is deposited in the General Debt Service Fund This change in protocol gives the appearance that budgeted revenues have fallen in FY2009 though they have increased Property tax revenues are budgeted at $292 0 million 24 in FY2009-10 (Source. FY2010 Adopted Budget.) 4 4 4 4 I I • • • • a • a • • I I • • • • • the Fort Worth Transportation Authority Fund, and, 0.5 percent to a special Crime Control and Prevention District Fund. Sales tax collections are affected by national and local economic trends, including availability of discretionary income, shopping facilities, and tourism revenues. Expenditures i• It is anticipated that approximately 47 percent of all revenue will be spent for General • Fund items, 31 percent for water and waste water services, and approximately 22 percent on the Crime District, Solid Waste and other miscellaneous expenditures. • • The City stnves to balance anticipated revenues with expenses and to maintain adequate reserves to cover emergencies. Future deficits are covered by the • accumulating reserve. If expenditures exceed revenues frequently or on a recurnng • basis, the tax base is not sufficient to support city services and could result in a reduction of city expenditures and related city services. To avoid this, the city has • established certain policies, such as the one for General Fund reserves. • The City of Fort Worth has an established Financial Management Policy to maintain ,• General Fund reserves at 10 percent of the adopted budget (net transfers to the General Debt Service Fund). For most of the past 17 years, the city has kept its fund 4111 balance level at or above the 10 percent goal. Over the past few budget cycles, n0 implementation of extensive restraints on expenditures has helped maintain the City's reserves close to the 10 percent goal. • • Long -Term Debt Budget Growth Areas FY2000-2010 The City monitors several debt ratios. The city strives to maintain its long-term debt FY2000 FY2010 • at less than five percent of the taxable assessed valuation. Staying at or below this (Millions of $) (Millions of $) Change benchmark ensures that the City's debt remains manageable. During the past five • years, the city has maintained a debt to assessed value ratio below 2.0 percent. Library $10,905,903 $17,435,414 59 87% • Long-term debt per capita measures the debt burden on citizens. Outstanding long- o • term debt per capita is approximately $625 It is projected to increase somewhat over T/PW $29,852,946 $51 475,246 72.43 /o the next several years due to the infrastructure needs of the city associated with •• growth. Police $88,195,577 $178,049,079 101.88% • Debt Service ` Debt service is the amount paid as principal and interest on all bonds and other debt Fire $55,023,217 $105,131,539 91 07% • instruments. A ratio of 10 to 20 percent debt of total General Fund expenditures is • considered acceptable. Over the past five years, Fort Worth s debt service ratio has remained at the lower end of the acceptable range and is projected to remain well Parks $16,541,911 $33,786,418 104.25% • below the target maximum for the foreseeable future. In addition, the city continues to maintam an aggressive repayment schedule with over 60% of its general obligation Police expenditures exclude Crime Control and Prevention District. • debt repaid within 10 years. The Departments shown have seen the largest budget growth in the ten • In 2004 voters approved the sale of $273.5 million in general obligation bonds for 6 years between FY2000 and FY2010 (Source: FY2010 Adopted Budget.) • propositions for capital improvements throughout the city to include streets, parks, a library fire stations, and technology improvements. Also in 2006, $153.6 million in i Sales Tax Collections FY2000 FY2010 In Millions $120 $100 $80 $72.2 $73.1 $72.7 $72.5 • $60 $40 $20 $0 $92.1 $83.1 $75.8 $98.2 $105.499.4$98.9 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09*FY10** Sales tax revenues increased $33.2 million from FY 2000 to FY 2008 It is projected that sales tax collections will decrease to $99 4 million for FY 2009* (estimated) and $98 9 million for FY 2010** (adopted). (Source. FY2010 Adopted Budget.) 25 Chapter 3: Financial Trends Certificates of Obligation were authorized by Council for the 2007 Critical Capital Needs Program, and the debt is to be sold over a 6 year period to meet critical capital needs through 2013 To date, $133 745 700 has actually been sold but over the next 4 years, the remaining $19,908,000 is planned to be sold. Voters also approved another bond sale in May 2008 for a single proposition for streets and related improvements, authorizing the City to sell an additional $150 million in general obligation bonds for needed street improvements. All three capital programs included a 2% set aside for public art funding to support the incorporation of art components in selected projects. Challenees and Onnortunities Higher valued new homes and businesses will increase property tax revenues, but more property owners will require city services. A healthy balance of commercial and residential uses is desirable to maximize sales tax collections in addition to property taxes. It is important for the city to continue growing in a contiguous pattern, thereby reducing leapfrog development and avoiding unnecessary infrastructure costs. Generally developers pay for on -site improvements, such as new local streets, storm water control, and water and sewer lines in subdivisions. However the cost of upgrading or connecting collector and arterial thoroughfares, as well as building or upgrading public facilities, is borne by the City Successful implementation of the growth center concept will aid Fort Worth in accommodating anticipated growth, while more efficiently allocating funds needed to construct capital improvements. Fort Worth has demonstrated fiscal prudence during recent years by reducing debt load and reducing the tax burden on citizens whenever possible. The next few years will challenge City leaders as they provide for continued population growth while maintaining an acceptable level of quality services for citizens. Chapter 3. Financial Trends 26 r • • S • • • • i • • •••••••••••••••••••••••••r••••i4• PART II BUILDING STRONG NEIGHBORHOODS • CHAPTER 4 LAND USE • Land use refers to how land is currently used and how it should be used in the future. Population and economic trends help predict future needs for various land uses. The City of Fort Worth guides land use to ensure that land resources appropriately encourage economic development, promote a variety of housing choices, preserve natural and historic resources, and accommodate transportation routes and public facilities, in order to protect and improve Fort Worth s quality of life. • =y: EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Current Land Use An understanding of Fort Worth s land use and zoning helps to put into perspective the City's development history and how Fort Worth may continue to develop Land use data for Fort Worth became available in 1960 when the City's size was 145 square miles, less than half its current size. At that time, 37 percent of Fort Worth s land was vacant. Today Fort Worth encompasses 350 square miles, 27 percent of which is vacant. One-third of the City's undeveloped land contains steep slopes, floodplains, or other development constraints limiting its development potential. Included in the City's 350 square miles are 14 square miles of limited purpose annexation areas, where City zoning and development regulations apply but City taxes are not assessed. The approximate land area located outside the city limits but within its extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) is 307 square miles. Most of the land within Fort Worth s ETJ is undeveloped. • • • • • • • • • Single-family Low Density Residential (including duplexes and townhouses), and Manufactured Housing utilize the greatest amount of developed land area in the City of Fort Worth, together totaling 24 percent. This compares to 53 percent in Arlington, 42 percent in Dallas, and 33 percent in Austin. Multifamily uses represent just 2.2 percent of the developed land area (or 1 6 percent of the total land area). This compares to 5.8 percent of developed land uses in Dallas, 5.9 percent in Arlington, and 5.2 percent in Austin. Fort Worth has a strong industrial base. Industrial land uses occupy 9 6 percent of the developed land in Fort Worth, which compares closely to nine percent in Dallas, but is higher than Arlington and Austin, at five percent each. Fort Worth has a smaller percentage of its developed land area in commercial use, at 7 6 percent, compared to Arlington (11 percent), Dallas (eight percent), and Austin (eight percent). The pie chart on page 31 depicts the breakdown of `existing land uses in 2005 Current Zoning The land within the city limits of Fort Worth is divided into different zones that permit certain land uses and prohibit others. Zoning regulations also include development standards such as building height and setbacks. Although 44 separate zoning districts exist, seven are inactive, and four are overlay distncts. The remaining districts can be grouped into eight major categones. The largest zoning district category is Single family and Low Density Residential, representing Developed Land in Fort Worth and Its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, 2005 4i of we, is / r \ ? , OE City Limits �c D Extraterritorial Jurisdiction • Developed land 10 5 0 10 Miles In 2005 approximately 27 percent, or 70 842 acres, of the land in Fort Worth s city limits was undeveloped The development pattern is irregular and not contiguous. NCTCOG expects to provide updated existing land use data in 2010 (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2006.) 29 Chapter 4 Land Use Wise Co. Johnson Co. 10 Existing Land Use City of Fort Worth and ETJ 2005 0 ...Single Family •Airport ...Multi -Family •Runway •Mobile Homes •Stadium °Group Quarters •Parks & Recreation °Office •Landfill •Retail ...Under Construction { ...Institutional ...Flood Control ...Hotel Motel Vacant •Ndustnal •Parking (CBD) ...Transportation ...Expanded Parking ...Roadway ...Water •Utilities 10 Miles 1111111.1111 INNEN The most prevalent existing land use is single-family Much of the city and its ETJ is currently undeveloped (Source. North Central Texas Council of Govern- ments, 2006.) Chapter 4 Land Use 30 Wise Co. to C) O Future Land Use City of Fort Worth and ETJ 2030 " 1 10 5 0 t v cant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential C:k Suburban Residential Q Sngle Family Residential Manufactured Housing C? low Density Residential IP Medium Density Residential • High Density Residential d Institutional O Neighborhood Commercial CO General Commercial i9 Light Industrial ® Heavy Industrial Ci Mixed -Use Growth Center • Industrial Growth Center O Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain O Public Park, Recreation. Open Space Private Park, Recreation Open Space 10 Miles INNEN t111 A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries. Land uses are planned for all land within the current city limits and for land in the ETJ that is recommended for development over the next 20 years. See Appendix C for individual sector maps at a larger scale. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • • • • • e • • •' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t• • • a • • • • • • • 0 • f• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • approximately 52 percent of the total land within the city limits. This zoning category includes most of the 21 percent of developed land containing single-family and low - density residential uses. The next largest zoning category Industrial, makes up approximately 20 percent of the total land area in the city However only six percent of the developed land within the City is used for industrial purposes. Similarly 10 percent of the City is zoned Commercial, while only five percent of developed land is used for commercial purposes. The pie chart to the lower right depicts the breakdown of land area by zoning category Projected Land Use Existing land use trends and population and employment projections are used to project the demand for new land uses. Based on land annexation trends over the last 15 years, it is expected that the city limits will expand from 350 square miles in 2008 to 372 square miles by 2028, or approximately 1.2 square miles per year Between 2000 and 2028, the population is expected to grow 50 percent, and the amount of developed land can be expected to increase by approximately the same percentage, from 163 square miles to 245 square miles. Applying a straight line projection, 69 percent of the City's total land area should be developed in the year 2028, compared to only 46 percent in 2000 This straight line projection assumes a more efficient development pattern than is currently noted. Over the past several decades, the increase in developed land has outpaced population growth. Appendix C contains a future land use map for each of the 16 planning sectors within the city as well as land use policies specific to each sector The land use policies and related maps of the Comprehensive Plan guide future land use decisions. Zoning, annexations, special exceptions, design review and other land use decisions are made after consulting the adopted map and policies. Factors That Influence Land Use A number of factors influence land use needs and decisions. Some of the most important factors are discussed below Population Growth and Housing Demand — As the population grows, the demand for residential land is expected to increase by an average rate of one acre for every ten new residents. The current average density is approximately four dwelling units per acre for all types of residential uses. This average residential density may increase as new higher -density housing types gain in popularity as is occurring in and near downtown, along W 7th Street, and in the Near Southside. Land uses that support new residential development, such as neighborhood commercial, institutional, infrastructure, and parks/open space can be expected to grow proportionately Economic Growth — Due to continued population and employment growth, Fort Worth can expect a significant amount of land to be developed for new businesses and industry Assuming current land use proportions remain consistent over time, approximately 2,000 new acres of commercial and industrial land use could be developed by 2028. Existing Land Uses in Fort Worth, 2005 'Vacant Undevetopabte• 8% Vacant Developable 41% Single-family/ Duplex 21% Manufactured Housing <1% Multifamily 2% Institutional 4% Commercial 5% Industrial 6% \ansportat Infrastructurere 4%. Recreation! Open Space 10% Single-family and duplex land uses constitute 21 percent of Fort Worth s total land area. (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2006.) Current Zoning in Fort Worth, 2009 Agriculture Industrial 19% Commercial 10% Con munity Facilities a1s Multifamily Residential 6% Mind -Use 1.5% Floodptain -1% Single-family and Low Density Residential 53% Approximately 29 percent of the city is zoned for commercial or industrial uses, yet only 11 percent of developed land is currently used for these purposes. Over ten percent of the city is zoned "PD" Planned Development. Each "PD" has a base zoning or use which falls into one of the categories shown in the pie chart above. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 31 Chapter 4 Land Use Market Demand — Depending on several related variables, including but not restricted to demographics and socio-economic characteristics of the local population, local and regional economictrends, area land prices, and fuel and construction costs, market demand will impact the amount and location of various land uses. The future supply in acres of any given land use, such as high -density downtown housing or commercial uses in sparsely populated areas of the city should not exceed the anticipated demand for a particular land use in the proposed area. However forecasted land use designations can be modified in annual updates to more realistically match the needs reflected by the existing market demand. Excessive reliance on current market demand can hamper creativity and restrict options. For example, the multifamily market in Downtown was an untapped resource until it was introduced and found successful. Transportation Access — Land use decisions are often based on available access to various modes of transportation. Freeways and arterial streets will attract high density residential, commercial, and warehouse/distribution uses. Passenger railroads, including light rail and streetcar lines, attract high density residential, commercial, and office space adjacent to stations. Freight railroads and rail yards attract industrial uses. Airports discourage residential use, yet encourage hotels, conference facilities, light industry and distribution uses. On the other hand, transportation facilities sometimes follow land use decisions, particularly where rapid development occurs. For example, passenger rail lines are often built after dense development has occurred, and sufficient ridership warrants the expense. Environmental Constraints — The existing environmental conditions greatly impact the type of land uses developed. Near floodplains, buildings must be constructed above the 100-year flood level, unless used for recreational purposes. Soils, slope, and depth to rock can have a significant impact on development costs and viable land use options for any particular site. Odors from wastewater treatment plants and landfills tend to discourage residential development, especially downwind of these facilities. Truck traffic from batch plants or noise from railroads, rail yards, freeways, and airports also discourages residential land uses. By City ordinance, gas wells may be located in any zoning district or future land use category Adjacent development may be impacted by drilling, truck traffic, and the perception of hazards associated with gas wells. Airport noise, in particular can be incompatible with residential uses. The 2007 Joint Land Use Study (JLUS), funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, encourages compatible land uses within 65 dbl noise contours and discourages residential uses. While the JLUS is focused on the Fort Worth Naval Air Station / Joint Reserve Base, its recommendation to discourage residential uses near high noise level airports may be applied to other airports in Fort Worth. The adjacent maps show the 65 dbl contour lines around four Fort Worth airports. The 65 dbl noise contour for Alliance Airport will be modified when its Part 150 Noise Study is adopted by City Council in 2010 In accordance with the Part 150 Noise Study an Airport Overlay Zone will be created to regulate land use within the 65 dbl noise contour Airport Noise Level and Land Use Compatibility Meacham Airport Joint Reserve Base 0 Rural Residential D Single Family Residential (n Low Density Residential - High Density Residential © Suburban Residential Q Manufactured Housing . Medium Density Residential Mixed -Use Growth Center Q Airport Footprint Q Adjacent City Limits ® Noise ContourArea: 65 Decibels and Above el Existing Parkland These maps depict residential areas adversely affected by airport noise. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 4 Land Use 32 ••••••••••••••••••i.••••••••••••• Infrastructure Availability — The availability and cost of water and sewer services, stormwater systems, and roads are critical to the timing and density of new land uses. The Master Thoroughfare Plan determines the location, classification, and desired capacity of roadways, directly impacting the land uses they serve. Development Regulations — A property's location within or outside the city limits can influence how the land is used. Outside the city limits, land is not subject to land use or building regulations, but subdivision and street standards apply Within the city limits, development is regulated by zoning and building codes, as well as subdivision and street standards. Multiple Growth Center Development Pattern For the last 50 years, development practices have emphasized auto -oriented commercial corridors, isolated business parks, and single -use subdivisions. Metroplex residents generally work in one district, live in another, shop in yet another and travel among the three on major traffic arterials. This pattern increases commuting times and exacerbates both traffic congestion and air quality problems. During the planning process for the 2000 Comprehensive Plan, participants expressed a strong preference for a multiple growth center development pattern, as depicted in the lower portion of the diagram to the right. The multiple growth centers concept promotes compact urban land use within designated areas and lower intensities of land use elsewhere in the city As an alternative to the typical urban/ suburban pattern and in accordance with community preference, the Comprehensive Plan promotes the development of multiple growth centers. Growth centers are located along highway or rail corridors to facilitate transportation linkages to other growth centers. A network of growth centers can accommodate citywide growth with fewer environmental impacts, less land consumption and traffic generation, and less pollution than a dispersed development pattern. The North Central Texas Council of Governments is also promoting this growth strategy in response to traffic and pollution concerns. The Comprehensive Plan identifies two types of growth centers, industrial and mixed -use. The following general criteria have been developed for each. Industrial Growth Centers Intense industrial uses should be located within industrial growth centers that incorporate other compatible uses and are well integrated into the transportation network. An industrial growth center will primarily consist of industrial and commercial uses, with a high concentration of jobs, mostly industrial in nature. Other related and supporting uses include office space and services. Residential uses are generally discouraged within industrial growth centers. Criteria for designation include: • A high concentration of employees — 10,000+ employees per square mile, and The location of one or more major transportation facilities, such as an airport, railroad, highway public transit station, and/or arterial roadway Based on these critena, eight industrial growth centers have been designated. (See next page.) Sample Urban Development Patterns Dispersed Multiple growth centers Compact urban core The multiple growth center development pattern promotes a relatively high intensity of land use within growth centers and relatively low intensity land use between growth centers. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 33 Chapter 4 Land Use Mixed -Use Growth Centers and Urban Villages A mixed -use growth center is a highly urbanized place containing many characteristics of a downtown. a concentration of jobs, housing units, schools, parks, and other public facilities, public transportation hubs, pedestnan activity and a sense of place. Its predominant land uses are residential and commercial. Within a relatively small geographic area, different land uses are found side by side or within the same building. These places tend to be bustling, diverse, and festive. Mixed -use growth centers differ from commercial corridors in that they are compact (vs. linear), are favorable to pedestrians and public transit (vs. automobiles), have integrated land uses, and have buildings oriented to the street (vs. parking lots). Growth centers support the concept of sustainable development, seeking to balance access, mobility affordability community cohesion, and environmental quality The potential benefits of mixed -use growth centers include. • Economic development. • Protection of single-family neighborhoods. • Development of multifamily housing at appropriate locations. • Convenience for residents and workers. • Reduced reliance upon single -occupancy vehicles. • Efficiency in the provision of public facilities and services. • Protection of the environment. • A healthier walkable community • Sense of place. Criteria for designating new mixed -use growth centers are listed below with centers often having (or planned to have) three or more of the following characteristics: • A high concentration of employees — 10,000+ employees per square mile. • A high concentration of residents — 10,000+ residents per square mile. • One or more major transportation facilities — an airport, railroad, highway public transit, or arterial roadway • An existing or planned transit -oriented development (TOD). • Major institution(s) — a university government facility or hospital. • Major tourist destination(s) — 100,000+ visitors per year Some mixed -use growth centers serve a large region, while others serve local residents. Of the 24 mixed -use growth centers, 11 are identified as regional growth centers. For example, Downtown and the Cultural District draw visitors that may drive an hour or more to enjoy the special entertainment and cultural activities found there. The 13 community growth centers serve approximately 25,000 to 75,000 people and have a service area radius less than two miles. The functions and characteristics of the two different growth centers will generally be the same, with variations in the size of their service areas and in the intensity of development. The intensity of development in the various growth centers corresponds to the activity and character of the surrounding area. For example, Downtown is a more intense mixed -use growth center than the Stockyards, yet each has an appropriate mixture of desirable uses. Specific economic development and urban design Chapter 4 Land Use 34 10 Multiple Growth Centers 5 0 V 64, Community Mixed -Use Regional Mixed -Use Industrial 10 Miles There are 32 designated growth centers-24 mixed -use and eight industrial. Mixed -use growth centers have a high concentration of jobs and housing, access to public transit and public facilities, pedestrian activity and a sense of place Industrial growth centers are similar but do not have a concentration of housing. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) a a • a a a • a • • • • • • • • • a • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• strategies can be integrated to promote and guide appropriate development within each growth center With proper guidelines established, each growth center should achieve the critical mass of employment necessary to support various additional uses. Zoning for Growth Centers The table opposite lists zoning classifications that tend to be appropriate for property within regional and community mixed -use growth centers. Mixed -use, multifamily and commercial zoning classifications are the most desirable, while townhouse, duplex, and similar residential zoning classifications are usually acceptable in appropriate locations. Most single family zoning districts, however are not appropriate within mixed -use growth centers. While mixed -use growth centers may contain some single-family dwellings, this low -density land use should not predominate where the City seeks to generate a high level of economic activity Single family residential (less than four units per acre), low density residential (less than nine units per acre), and neighborhood commercial uses are encouraged in the areas located between growth centers. Industrial zoning distncts are also inappropriate within mixed -use growth centers because of the land uses that are incompatible with a multifamily residential environment. Similarly agricultural zoning is generally inappropnate as a permanent classification for property within mixed -use growth centers, but may be acceptable as an interim classification for newly annexed property Compact mixed -use development is also encouraged in certain areas targeted for redevelopment along commercial corridors. These areas are known as urban villages and are described in Chapter 10• Economic Development. Urban villages outside of growth centers are depicted as Neighborhood Commercial on the future land use maps in Appendix C. The urban village development program promotes mixed -use zoning in designated villages. Transit -oriented development (TOD) is similar to an urban village, but designed to surround, incorporate, and support a rail transit station. Mixed -use zoning or an appropriate form -based zoning classification would be most advantageous in a TOD particularly within one -quarter mile of the rail station or along a modem streetcar line. Land Use and Zonine Conformance The future land use plan, illustrated by planning sector in Appendix C, is used to guide the location of appropriate places to live, conduct business, and play The City of Fort Worth and private service providers use the land use plan to determine future infrastructure and service needs. Elected and appointed officials, such as the City Council or Zoning Commission, use the land use plan and refer to pertinent policies when making decisions regarding zoning, annexation, budgeting, and major public facilities expenditures. Definitions of land use categories are included in the Glossary at the end of the Comprehensive Plan. Current zoning of developed and vacant land in Fort Worth does not consistently conform to the proposed land uses in Appendix C. Some areas of the city were first zoned almost 70 years ago, with few major changes since. Many areas were annexed during periods of rapid growth, and subsequently required new zoning other than Agricultural. The zoning districts for many annexed areas have changed over the ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS Appropriate Zoning Classifications for Mixed -Use Growth Centers in Fort Worth USUALLY MOST DESIRABLE ACCEPTABLE COMMUNITY REGIONAL AG CF PD ✓ A-5, A-7.5, A-10, A-21 A-43, A-2.5A AR, B, R1 R2 ✓ CR, C, D ✓ ✓ ER, E ✓ ✓ MU-1 MU-1G ✓ ✓ FR, F G, H* NS* ✓ MU-2, MU-2G, TU* ✓ I, J, K *H, NS, and TU are allowed only in Downtown, Near Southside, and Trinity Uptown, respec tively Mixed -use multifamily and commercial zoning classifications are most de- sirable in mixed -use growth centers Agricultural, single-family light indus- trial, and heavy industrial zoning classifications are generally inappropriate (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 35 Chapter 4. Land Use years, often to allow more intensive land uses. However these rezonings did not always stimulate new development. As a result, many neighborhoods have zoning classifications that do not conform to current land uses. To have zoning conform strictly to the proposed land uses in Appendix C, approximately 18 percent of the land within the city limits would have to be rezoned. About half of this area is currently undeveloped. The other half largely represents districts in which the current zoning does not conform to the existing low -intensity land uses. The map on this page shows, by planning sector, the extent to which zoning does not conform to the desired land uses. The percentage of the area within a sector that does not conform to the future land use plan ranges from seven percent in the Far North sector to 48 percent in the Northside sector To guide growth and development effectively and efficiently the City's zoning districts should generally be used to achieve conformance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Because a large number of zoning districts and existing uses do not currently conform to the future land use designation in the plan, the City Council has established two voluntary processes for initiating changes that promote neighborhood consensus for rezoning. More information may be found in Chapter 22 Development Regulations. The following sections include goals outlining Fort Worth s preferred development patterns and planning policies to guide development patterns and the location of specific land uses. GOALS • Achieve a multiple growth center development pattern by encouraging higher intensity residential and commercial uses within mixed -use growth centers, and higher intensity industrial and commercial uses within industrial growth centers. • Ensure that the City's zoning regulations and districts generally conform to the adopted Comprehensive Plan. • Promote orderly and sustainable development in growing areas. • Improve land use efficiency mobility and air quality by developing a network of interconnected local streets and trails that facilitate more direct vehicle and pedestrian access between adjacent uses. POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The following policies and strategies are prescribed for development and redevelopment of the City They should be used as a guide for evaluating proposed land development projects. Policies • To promote orderly growth in developing areas, the City should generally support single-family residential development with lot sizes compatible with surrounding single family lot sizes. Furthermore, the City should generally support small -lot single family zoning districts (i.e. AR and A 5) near mixed -use Percentage of Incorporated Land Area within Each Sector for which Zoning is Inconsistent with the Future Land Use Plan, 2009 10 5 0 Percent Inconsistent 0 14% 15 29% . 30 45% 10 Miles Currently 16 5 percent of land area is zoned inconsistently with the City's Future Land Use maps. This has decreased since 2000 when 21 percent of land area was inconsistent. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) I a I a a a • • • a • • • • • • i • • • • Chapter 4 Land Use 36 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• growth centers, where the City seeks to concentrate employment and public services. The City should support larger -lot single family residential zoning districts (i.e. A 7.5 through A 2.5A) in more remote locations. • Encourage new development adjacent to developed or platted areas in order to utilize existing infrastructure and services, thereby discouraging leapfrog development. • Preserve the character of rural and suburban residential neighborhoods. • Locate single family homes adjacent to local or collector streets. • Encourage clustering of development sites within new subdivisions to avoid steep slopes (greater than 15%) and to conserve existing tree cover, wildlife habitat, natural waterways or storm water detention areas, 100-year floodplains, and archeologically significant sites. • Encourage Low Density Residential as a transitional use between Single family Residential and high density uses. • Separate manufactured housing into single parks or subdivisions buffered and separated from traditional single family residential development. • Locate multifamily units adjacent to collector streets, arterial streets, or rail transit stations. Promote location of multifamily units within walking distance of public transportation, employment, recreation, and/or shopping to increase accessibility and decrease vehicular traffic generation. • Support zoning changes that reduce the amount of vacant land zoned for multifamily residential development outside of designated growth centers, urban villages, and transit -oriented developments (TOD). • Protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses, disinvestments, encroachment, speculation, demolition, neglect, and other negative forces. • Do not locate residential uses or schools in areas adjacent to airports having a noise level of 65 or more decibels DNL (average Day or Night Level). • Encourage the provision of open space within new developments, with the goal of linking open spaces within adjoining subdivisions. Locate public neighborhood parks within easy access of residents (less than one- half mile). • Encourage parks, bike trails, and open space along floodplains and water bodies. • Link growth centers with major thoroughfares, public transportation, trails, and linear parks. • Accommodate higher density residential and mixed uses in areas designated as a mixed -use growth center on the City's future land use maps. • Shelters for indigent, needy homeless, or transient persons may generally be appropriate in general commercial and light industrial areas and in regional mixed -use growth centers. Shelters are not appropriate in industrial growth centers and heavy industrial areas. • Include projects that support the growth center concept, transit -oriented development, and urban villages in future Capital Improvement Programs. Encourage mixed -use projects in mixed -use growth centers, transit -oriented developments, and urban villages. • Locate large commercial and institutional uses adjacent to artenal streets, 37 Regional Alliance Gateway West Centreport Clear Fork Cultural District Downtown Eastchase Hulen / Cityview Nance Ranch* Near Southside Ridgmar Walsh Ranch* Community Alliance Town Center* Fossil Creek La Gran Plaza Loop 820 East / Lake Arlington Marine Creek* Miller / Berry* Near Southeast* Polytechnic / Texas Wesleyan SH 121 / FM 1187* Spinks / Huguley Stockyards Summer Creek TOD* Texas Christian University Alliance Airport Alliance Gateway East Carter Industrial Park Centre port Meacham Airport Loop 820 East / Lake Arlington NAS-JRB / Lockheed -Martin Riverbend Of the 24 mixed -use growth centers, 11 are designated as regional and primarily contain uses that serve both Fort Worth and the surrounding region The 13 community mixed -use growth centers primarily serve the immediate neighborhoods within Fort Worth The eight industrial growth centers are considered regional, and two are located in the Alliance Airport area. Indicates growth centers that do not currently meet the criteria, but have the potential to do so. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 4 Land Use preferably at the intersections of other arterials and highways. • Locate large industnal uses along rail lines, highways, or airports within industrial growth centers and other appropriate locations. • Discourage the location of industrial uses adjacent to residential districts. • Encourage appropriate development and redevelopment within central city commercial districts and neighborhoods. • Promote appropriate infill development of vacant lots and contaminated sites (brownfields) within developed areas, particularly in the central city • Encourage development type and intensity appropriate to existing or planned street infrastructure. • Provide for and maintain interconnectivity of streets and trails to reduce vehicle trips on arterial streets, increase efficiency reduce air pollution, distribute traffic, improve access to public places, improve efficiency in providing services and deliveries, and ensure access for emergency services. • Separate incompatible land uses with buffers or transitional uses. Some land uses have attributes such as height, proportion, scale, operational characteristics, traffic generated, or appearance that may not be compatible with the attributes of other uses. • Proposed uses that may be detrimental to health, safety and welfare (such as hazardous materials, airports, mining, landfills, gun ranges, and manufacturing of certain matenals) should continue to be evaluated on a case by case basis before approval. • Adopt a sustainable development policy that promotes the following: 1) Land use and transportation practices that promote economic development while using limited resources in an efficient manner 2) Transportation decision -making based on land use, traffic congestion concerns, vehicle miles traveled, and the viability of alternative transportation modes; and 3) Balance among accessibility affordability mobility community cohesion, and environmental quality (For more information, see Chapter 11 Transportation and Chapter 18 Environmental Quality ) Strategies • Promote traditional neighborhood and other pedestrian -oriented developments, which encourage human interaction, walking, bicycling, mixed uses, slower traffic, public places, and attractive streetscapes. Traditional neighborhood developments adopt many of the same characteristics of older neighborhoods and towns, such as a grid street pattern, mixed land uses, inconspicuous parking facilities, neighborhood parks, public buildings, and multifamily homes, all within walking distance of most residents. • Promote transit -oriented development, which encourages compact urban development adjacent to transit stations. Mixed uses in a single building, minimal setbacks, and taller structures help achieve the higher densities necessary to support transit. Parking facilities, retail businesses, and services for commuters should be located close to transit stops. • Plan for and facilitate appropriate transit -oriented developments (TOD) at existing and future transit station locations. Chapter 4 Land Use 38 Land Use and Zoning Classifications LAND USE„ ':........:.:.....F SPECIAL Vacant, Agricultural Rivers, Lakes, Streams, 100 Year - Flood Plain Infrastructure Parks, Recreation, Open Space RESIDENTIAL Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single-family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential INSTITUTIONAL Institutional COMMERCIAL Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Mixed -Use Growth Center INDUSTRIAL Light Industrial DEFINITION,., .......... Vacant, agriculture Water features, 100-year flood plain Roads, railroads, airports, utilities Public or private recreation, or passive land 1+ acre single-family 1/2+ acre single-family 3500+ sq. ft. lot single-family Manufactured single-family parks 2500+ sq. ft. lot single-family two family patio homes, townhouses, cluster housing Up to 24 units/acre multifamily >24 units/acre multifamily mixed -use multifamily in growth centers Schools, churches, government, human services, utilities, community centers, day care Retail, services, offices and mixed uses serving daily needs Retail, services, offices, entertainment, mixed uses serving occasional needs Retail, services, offices, entertainment, mixed uses, and multifamily residential; Community Growth Centers are less intensive, and Regional Growth Centers are more intensive Warehousing, transportation, light assembly outside storage Heavy manufacturing, outside storage Industrial and commercial uses serving a large region ZONING, AG Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable A-2.5A, A-43 A-21 A-10, A-7.5, A-5, AR MH B, R1 R2 CR, C, D MU-1 MU-1G, PD UR CF PD All Residential, ER, E, MU-1 MU-1G, PD All Residential, FR, F G, MU-1 MU-1G, MU-2, MU-2G PD AR, B, R1 R2, CR, C, D all Commercial, MU-1 MU-1G, MU-2, MU- 2G, H*, NS*, TU* All Commercial, MU- 2, MU-2G, I, PD All Commercial & Industrial All Commercial & Industrial Bed & breakfast, aviation, recycling centers, Special Exception, refining, cell towers, batch plant PD Land uses are defined and categorized with the appropriate zoning classification Fort Worth has 30 zoning districts, which separate incompatible land uses. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) *H, NS, and TU are allowed only in Downtown, Near Southside, and Trinity Uptown, respectively Heavy Industrial Industrial Growth Center OTHER Special and Hazardous Uses • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Encourage single family and low -density residential development and open space beyond growth centers. • Promote measures to ensure that residential developments, whether single-family or multifamily large lot or small lot, are compatible in scale to abutting residential developments. A significant increase in units per acre or reduction in lot size should be discouraged for new development immediately adjacent to existing development or platted and zoned property • Promote estate type developments and agricultural uses on land designated as agricultural. • Encourage infill development of compatible, single-family homes in existing neighborhoods to preserve and protect residential neighborhoods. Encourage locating multiple -unit residential structures on corner lots. • Encourage the location and design of schools that are accessible and compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. • Locate elementary and middle schools on collector streets. • Locate high schools on arterial streets. Identify institutional uses (schools, churches, etc.) of five acres or more on the future land use maps. • To the extent possible, locate elementary schools, parks, and neighborhood commercial uses within walking distance of most homes. • Maximize area of permeable surfaces in developments to reduce stormwater run- off. • Encourage the use of floodplains as a boundary between incompatible land uses. • Promote use of ground cover in developments to reduce erosion and sedimentation of rivers, lakes, and streams. Leave floodplains in their natural state (with bike trails encouraged) to improve water quality and minimize flooding. Improve the design, function, and appearance of commercial corridors by addressing traffic safety issues, excess parking, lighting, landscaping, outdoor storage, refuse containers, the amount and size of advertising, and related issues. • Encourage shared driveways and parking with reciprocal access easements among adjacent businesses to reduce traffic impacts and improve traffic and pedestrian safety • Encourage screening, reduction, and/or redirection of objectionable characteristics of commercial uses adjacent to residential areas. These attributes may be noise, glare, signs, parking areas, loading docks, and refuse collection. • Encourage new development in character with the neighborhood scale, architecture, and platting pattern of the surrounding neighborhood. • Utilize traffic impact analysis to determine the transportation system s ability to serve proposed land uses. Acquire adequate rights -of way for future improvements to various modes of transportation (sidewalks, trails, bicycle routes, private vehicles, emergency vehicles, and public transportation, including rail) through dedication and donation. Mixed -Use Growth Centers and Urban Villages Single Family Mixed Multifamily Office/Retail Public Transit Public Buildings This diagram depicts a hypothetical mixed -use growth center which is oriented to public transit, has mixed uses or higher density development, public spaces, and is surrounded by sin- gle-family development. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) An artist's rendering of an urban village, emphasizing multiple - story structures, public spaces, wide sidewalks, and narrow tree -lined streets (Source. Urban Land Institute, 1999.) 39 Chapter 4 Land Use 0 r•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 5: HOUSING Provision of adequate and appropriate housing for all residents is essential to building strong neighborhoods. The City of Fort Worth's key housing goals are increasing the supply of quality affordable accessible housing, expanding homeownership opportunities, revitalizing neighborhoods, and creating mixed - income communities. A broad -based housing policy adopted by the City Council in 1999 guides the City in achieving its housing goals and objectives. Housing policy is also strongly influenced by Annual and Five -Year Consolidated Plans, which the City Council adopts for submission to the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD), as local housing activities have traditionally been funded only through CDBG, HOME, and ESG grants from that federal agency These HUD - required plans focus primarily on the housing needs of low- and moderate -income residents and special needs or homeless populations. More recently, housing policy has also been influenced by Council -appointed advisory commissions, including the Mayor's Task Force on Quality Affordable Housing and the Mayor's Advisory Commission on Homelessness. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS In recent years, the Fort Worth housing market has been characterized by rapid growth, decreasing affordability for new housing, and increased central city redevelopment. In response to these trends, the Mayor's Task Force on Quality Affordable Housing was created in fall 2006 to develop recommendations on three key issues. a) use of a dedicated $2,000,000 in general fund dollars placed in a Housing Trust Fund for affordable housing, b) dispersion of publicly assisted housing units, and c) provision of incentives to promote mixed -income housing development. In September 2007, in response to these recommendations, City Council approved implementation of the Housing Trust Fund. Number of Housing Units In 2000, Fort Worth had 211,035 housing units, of which 32 percent were multifamily units. In 2009, the total number of housing units had grown 36 42 percent to 287,896 and the multifamily percentage had fallen to 29 percent. From 2008 to 2009 the growth rate for single-family and duplex housing was 1.88 percent (with the addition of 5,112 units) compared to 2.91 percent (2,867 new units) in 2008 Fort Worth now has a ratio of 2.37 single-family units to each multifamily unit, compared to 2.05 in 2000 and 2.39 in 2008. While some of this growth can be attributed to annexations, much of it is from new construction. The northeast and northwest quadrants have seen the most recent growth in single- family units, while Downtown and the south and southwest regions have experienced the most growth in multifamily development. Downtown housing will play a critical role in the success of the City's broad vision for central city revitalization. In March 2010, there were an estimated 11,817 people living Downtown, in approximately 4,964 housing units. A goal of the Downtown Fort Worth Strategic Action Plan 2003 (updated every 10 years) is to develop over 10,000 new residential units by 2013 41 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% — 5.00% 0.00% Single -Family Housing Growth Rates Tarrant Dallas Arlington Irving Co. Fort Urban Worth Tarrant From 2000 to 2009, Fort Worth's rate of growth in single-family housing exceeded that of other cities in the region. Urban Tarrant represents all of Tarrant County outside Arlington and Fort Worth, and includes such cities as Bedford, Grapevine, and Southlake. (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments Annual Housing Estimates, 2009.) Percentages of Single -Family and Multifamily Housing 80.00% 70 00% - 60.00% — 50.00% — 40.00% — 30.00% - - 20 00% — 10.00% — 0.00% -- O. ? 1/4°� `moo,°fir �`��� oaf 0 Single -Family ® Multifamily Fort Worth has a higher proportion of single family housing than Dal- las, Arlington, and Irving (Source: North Central Texas Council of Govern- ments Annual Housing Estimates, 2009.) Chapter 5. Housing Areas outside of Downtown are also attracting urban housing development. In 2001, the City adopted a mixed -use zoning ordinance that encourages higher density, pedestrian -oriented housing development in mixed -use growth centers and designated urban villages. The urban village initiative and its housing elements are discussed further in Chapter 10• Economic Development. In addition, the City Council recently adopted new development standards and guidelines that support high density residential development in the Trinity Uptown and Near Southside districts adjacent to Downtown. The development standards and guidelines for Trinity Uptown and Near Southside are discussed in Chapter 14 Urban Design. Vacancy History Of the total 211,035 housing units in Fort Worth in 2000, 15,957 (7 6 percent) were vacant. Only 1.9 percent of owner -occupied units were vacant, though there was a 9 percent vacancy rate among rental units. Vacancy rates were especially high (13 8 percent) for units affordable to poor households with incomes under 30 percent of median, most likely because two-thirds of these units were constructed before 1970 and are therefore likely to be in poorer condition and in need of repair In 2008 the Census Bureau's American Community Survey estimated Fort Worth housing vacancy rates at 10 7 percent overall, with 3.2 percent vacant in owner -occupied housing and 14.8 percent vacant in rental housing. Housing Conditions In general, housing condition is related directly to housing age. Without adequate maintenance, older housmg stock deteriorates. Most structures begin to need significant repairs 30 years after construction. According to 2000 Census data, 50.3 percent of the city's housing was built prior to 1970, with units built before 1960 making up 36 4 percent. This older housing is naturally concentrated in the central city Units with the greatest repair needs are generally in lower -income neighborhoods, where households have had fewer resources to perform maintenance. As of October 2009, the Code Compliance Department found nearly 226 housing units in danger of collapse and about 2,730 dwelling units in need of repair, out of a total of 3,192 outstanding structures with code violations. Based on a review of data from HUD, it is estimated that $1.8 billion is needed to address local housing needs, including $1 1 billion for rehabilitation of single-family and $200 million for rehabilitation of multifamily housing. Oualitv Affordable Housing The Mayor's Task Force on Quality Affordable Housing, comprised of private sector experts in various areas of affordable housing, was given three initial charges: a) to make recommendations on the formation of a Housing Trust Fund that would provide loans to homeowners and developer builders; to provide direction on structure of the trust fund and recommend sources and uses of the loan fund, b) to provide Council with recommendations on geographic dispersion of publicly -assisted housing in order to avoid concentrations of low-income multifamily properties in communities; and c) to recommend what the City should require of projects that receive public incentives. Chapter 5. Housing 42 Age of Housing Stock as an Indicator of Housing Condition Housing Needs Universe REHABILITATION Owner Rehab Major> 120%® Major <80% Minor 0. AcqlRehab Rental Rehab (MF) TOTALS • Unite (%) 100% 5% 51% 3% 41% NEW CONSTRUCTION 100% SF Infill Construction® 70% MF New Construction 30% TOTALS: HOMELESS HOUSING® Permanent Supportive Transitional TOTALS: # Units 20,400 7,600 9,700 3,100 4,000 9,500 29,900 # Units 1,600 11,000 12,600 Per Unit Cost Cost to Address $50,850 $41,607 $7,500 $80,000 $20,000 o'er unit Cost $57,250 $34,518 $386,460,000 $403,587,900 $23,250,000 $320, 000, 000 $190,000,000 $1,323,297,900 Cost to Address $91, 600, 000 $379,698,000 $471,298,000 Per Unit # Units Cost Cost to Address 567 $32,500 $18,427,500 955 $32,500 $31,037,500 1,522 $49,465,000 44.022__ $1.844.060.900 The Mayor's Advisory Task Force on Quality Affordable Housing needs as- sessment found that 20,400 owner -occupied and 9,500 rental units need major repair/upgrade in order to remain quality and affordable (Mayor's Advi- sory Task Force on Quality Affordable Housing, July 2008.) Housing Trust Fund Recommended Allocation Administration 7% Perm Su pp/Trans ition 13% Multifamily New/Rehab 23% SF Inf ill/New Construction 18% Owner Rehab 39% The Housing Trust Fund includes $4 million in General Fund dollars as well as $2 7 million in federal housing grant funds. 39% will be allocated to single- family homeowners for rehabilitation loans, 23% to encourage mixed -income multifamily housing, 18% to support affordable single-family housing develop- ment, and 13% for homeless housing. Assistance will be available to house- holds up to 120% of area median income ($77,520) for a family of four (Source: Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009 ) • 41 r • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I i ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• i•••• In September 2007, in response to these recommendations, City Council approved the Housing Trust Fund and earmarked $4 4 million for loans and an additional $4 0 million to establish a permanent corpus for the fund. The Trust Fund, administered by the Fort Worth Housing Finance Corporation, provides home improvement loans to low income Fort Worth homeowners and interim gap fmancing to builders and developers of affordable housing. The Task Force assessment of affordable housing estimates that approximately 11,000 new rental units are needed for low income households, an additional 22,500 owner units built before 1970 need major repairs and upgrades to remain quality and affordable. In addressing the City Council's priority for mixed income housing and dispersion of assisted housing, the Mayor's Housing Task Force will make recommendations for amendments to the City's Consolidated Plan for 2010 Proposed changes would require a project to meet the following: 1) Promotes dispersion of publicly assisted housing (PAH) units; or 2) Promotes mixed -income objectives by including market rate housing units and PAH units within the project; and 3) Project location is consistent with the City's "future land use" policies, and must be: a) within two miles of a major employment center; or b) within 1/4 mile of existing/proposed rail and transit stations or bus route; or c) in an urban village, growth center, neighborhood empowerment zone, or special district. Homeownership Costs Relative to most cities in Texas and elsewhere in the nation, Fort Worth is considered to have excellent housing affordability In the second quarter of 2008, the Texas A&M Real Estate Center estimated that the local median household income was 2.30 times the amount necessary for purchasing the city's median -priced home. This compares favorably with the statewide affordability index of 1.55 and the national index of 1.27 However, newly -constructed homes are generally more expensive than the April 2009 median price of $111,100 This is a decrease in median price of 4.9 percent from July 2008. As of June 2009, the median annual income for a family of four in Fort Worth was $66,000 according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Housing affordability is affected by many factors, such as construction costs, land values, interest rates, and regional market demand. Low mortgage interest rates in recent years have helped make homeownership possible for many low-income and moderate -income families. According to the American Housing Survey of 2002, Fort Worth's homeownership rate was 87.9 percent in 2006, up from 55.9 percent at the 2000 Census. In 2009, the median sale price for a Fort Worth home was $111,100 Fort Worth homes are still more affordable than in neighboring cities such as Dallas and Arlmgton, where median prices were $150,000 and $125,700 respectively Though sales of homes priced under $80,000 represented fully 55 percent of all homes sold in 1998, by 2008 this proportion had shrunk to 19.8 percent. During the same time period, the proportion of homes selling for over $160,000 increased from 11 7 percent of the market to 25.9 percent of all homes sold in 2008 43 Percent of High Income Households Relative to Percent of High Value Homes 16% 14% 12% 10% — 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% — oa\a5 °*•r <<° O Nrcent of Households wtlh incomes over $100K ■ Percent of fio rrs over $300K c� ,1/490 '1/49 PJ It appears common for Texas cities to have a smaller proportion of ex- pensive homes than they have of households who could potentially afford to purchase such homes. Given the large number of two -income households in the modern economy, some families may prefer not to buy more expensive properties if they cannot be supported by a single income (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000.) Median Housing Prices in Selected Cities, 1990 to 2009 200 180 w 160 0 140 v, 100 c 80 60 40 20 — 0 ,o ion o� gay ® 1990 ■ 2000 0 2009 While housing prices have risen substantially statewide and Fort Worth housing has remained relatively affordable, this affordability gap is shrink- ing In 2009, the median price of a house in Fort Worth was $111,100, a 32.4 percent increase from the 2000 median of $83,900 (Source. Real Estate Center at Texas A&M, 2009.) Chapter 5. Housing At the higher end of the affordability scale, Fort Worth has both a limited supply of high -end housing for upper income households, and a limited number of very -high - income buyers seeking such housing. Over one-third of homes sold in 2008 were pnced over $140,000, according to the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M. At the time of the 2000 Census, households with incomes over $100,000 (the market for "executive" housing) represented 8.8 percent of Fort Worth households, with homes valued at $300,000 or more representing only 3 1 percent of single-family owner - occupied dwellings. It appears that some higher income households may choose not to purchase residences commensurate with their incomes, as the ratio of highly priced housing to high incomes vanes throughout Texas cities. Also, area suburbs with more vaned and plentiful high -end newer housing with updated amenities effectively compete with Fort Worth in attracting newly arriving high -income families. Mixed-Income/Mixed-Use Develonments Promotion of mixed -income and mixed -use developments has been a trend in Fort Worth in recent years, particularly for the Downtown area and in designated urban villages and neighborhood empowerment zones (NEZs). The Mayor's Task Force on Quality Affordable Housing seeks to continue this trend by dedicating City resources to provide incentives to developers and property owners that encourage dispersion of publicly assisted units and de -concentration of affordable housing for low-income populations. One tool to promote mixed -income development is NEZ tax abatements. NEZ incentives also encourage repairs and improvements to existing housing stock. NEZ areas represent 20 7 square miles within the central city From 2001 to mid-2008, the NEZ program provided $2.3 million in basic incentives (permit or development fee waivers and lien forgiveness), as well as $5 6 million in tax abatements, and approximately 1,920 projects supporting nearly $960 million in investments at the end of 2008. The greatest volume of activity has been seen in the West 7th and Ridglea/Como NEZ areas. Other areas with strong NEZ activity are Magnolia Village, Berry/University, Tnnity Park, and Stop Six. Rental Housing Costs The local rental market since 2000 has been relatively affordable due to two key factors: slow formation of new households in a fluctuating economy, and low interest rates which have given many renters the opportunity to become homebuyers. Though rental prices increased over the past year according to ALN Systems, the overall occupancy rate in Fort Worth apartments in 2009 was still low at 87 percent, with the average rent only $673 In comparison Dallas had an average rent of $749, and an occupancy rate of 88.7 percent. The Fair Market Rent (FMR) set by HUD in the Fort Worth/Arlington area is presently $689 for a 1-bedroom, $838 for a 2- bedroom, and $1,120 for a 3-bedroom. MPF Research reported the citywide average rents for early 2008 were $588, $761, and $972 for these unit sizes, indicating an affordable rental market. Though apartment rental is less expensive in Fort Worth than in many other areas, analysis of special tabulations of Census data provided by HUD indicate that there is a significant mismatch between affordable housing and low-income households. Chapter 5. Housing 44 $900 $800 $700 $600 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 Average Apartment Rents, 2009 Fort Worth Austin Dallas Houston San Antonio In June 2009, Fort Worth's average apartment rent of $711 was less than average rents in Austin, Dallas, and Houston (Source. www.ALNsystems.com, 2009.) Samaritan Housing for Special Needs New affordable housing in Fort Worth South, which opened in 2006, was developed by Samaritan Housing Inc. through Low Income Hous- ing Tax Credits from the Texas Department of Housing and Commu- nity Affairs (Source. Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009.) •••••••••••••••••••••••••w••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• That is, many of the affordable units in the Fort Worth rental market are occupied by higher income households. According to this data, though there were 18,586 households with incomes less than 30 percent of the area median in 2000, there were only 11,811 rental units affordable to them, and 46 percent of these rental units are occupied by higher mcome households, thereby forcing the lower income households to live in higher priced housing. Furthermore, two-thirds of these affordable units were constructed prior to 1970, which means that they are more likely to be in poor condition and in need of repair This need for affordable rental housing for lower income families is reflected in the number of applicants on the waiting list for the Fort Worth Housing Authority's Housing Choice Voucher Program. As of June 1, 2009 there were 7,123 applicants on the waiting list. Analysis of the HUD data also indicates that there are particular household types that are likely to have significant housing problems such as excessive cost (relative to the family's income), overcrowding, and substandard physical conditions. These household types include large families, particularly those with low incomes; renters with incomes under 50 percent of the area median (over 70 percent reporting housing problems); and very low income owners (69 percent in this category reported housmg problems). Minority and disabled populations are particularly likely to have difficulty finding quality affordable housmg to rent. Assisted Housing= Assisted housing in Fort Worth includes those units managed by the Fort Worth Housing Authority (FWHA), and other units subsidized by federal and state programs such as the state's Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) and bond programs, or HUD's multifamily loan and insurance programs. A recent analysis identified a total of 16,863 such assisted units (not including FWHA rental assistance vouchers) When 5,367 Housing Choice Vouchers and Shelter Plus Care rental assistance vouchers are included, these approximately 22,160 assisted housing units represent only 7 6 percent of Fort Worth's 2009 total of 287,896 housing units, and approximately 26 percent of all multifamily housmg. The FWHA provides subsidies for, or manages 4,793 Housing Choice Voucher Program (formerly Section 8) vouchers, 1320 public housing units, 454 Shelter + Care slots, 70 Single Room Occupancy units, and 200 FEMA or HUD funded Disaster Housing Assistance Program and Disaster Voucher Program vouchers. Like most larger older cities, Fort Worth is faced with the challenges of integrating residents into the larger community and physically improving traditional, older developments. The FWHA is pursuing de -concentration of publicly assisted housing through redevelopment of older public housing sites, creation of mixed -income communities, and acquisition/rehabilitation of existing multi -family properties to preserve existing affordable housing while improving its quality and sustainability Funds obtained from the sale of the Ripley Arnold development m Downtown were used for the Overton Park and Stonegate Villa projects, and Low Income Housing Tax Credits were used for the Candletree, Cambndge Court, and Samuels Avenue projects. Project -based rental assistance helped 1,800 eligible families at specific multifamily 45 Households in Need of Affordable Rental Housing "Workforce Housing" Annual Income Level (Median Income = $60,600) Extremely Low In- come 30% of Median Very Low Income: 50% of Median Household Size Single Person Family of Two (1 dependent) Family of Three (2 dependents) Single Person Family of Two (1 dependent) Family of Three (2 dependents) Maximum Dollar Earn- ings Common Employment Types and Yearly Income Averages Retiree on Social Secu- rity Disabled Per- son on SSI $13,300 00 (federal Sup- plemental Security In- come) Fast Food Worker Cafeteria At- tendant Machine Packer Retail Sales Warehouse Assembler/ worker Janitor Teacher As- sistant Telemarketer Administrative Assistant, Entry level Construction laborer Painter, New construction Correctional Officer/ Jailer $15,200.00 $17,100 00 $22,200.00 $25,350 00 $28,550 00 $11,160.00 $10,608.00 $12,979.20 $12,313.60 $13,561.60 $15,641.60 $16,265 60 $19,198.40 $17,821.00 $22,131.20 $18,574 40 $19,902.00 $21,575.00 $27,648.00 Fort Worth's largest housing availability gap is for rental units with price levels afford- able to households in the income categories above. According to a HUD analysis of 2000 Census Data, there are 1.6 times as many households at 30% or less of me- dian income as there are rental units affordable to them. Though lower rents in past years have eased this burden, the extent of the gap indicates that additional units in this price level are needed for low-income workers in Fort Worth, as well as for retir- ees and disabled persons on fixed incomes. (Sources: HUD CHAS Data for 2000, U S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Data for Tarrant Workforce Development Area, Fourth Quarter 2006.) Chapter 5. Housing complexes in Fort Worth m 2006 The FWHA manages 344 such units at six complexes in the city, as well as 384 units in two Affordable Housing Disposition Program (AHDP) properties. AHDP tenants pay a fixed rental amount, regardless of income, without rental subsidy In addition, the FWHA owns two mixed -income properties: Overton Park Townhomes with 54 public housing units and Stonegate Villas with 58 public housing units. FWHA also has an agreement with the owner/ developer of Sycamore Center Villas for 47 units that will be maintained as public housing units for 50 years. Homelessness On January 29, 2009, the Tarrant County Homeless Coalition, with Tarrant County Community Development and the cities of Fort Worth and Arlington, counted 2,181 homeless persons in Tarrant County This number includes persons who are unsheltered —including, for example, persons living on the streets, under bridges, or in structures not intended for human habitation —as well as those living in emergency shelters (e.g., the Presbytenan Night Shelter), Transitional Housing programs, and Safe Haven at the Presbyterian Night Shelter More than 85 percent of Tarrant County's homeless reside in Fort Worth. Over 80 percent of the transitional and permanent supportive housing units for the homeless are in Fort Worth as well. Disconcertingly, 24.5 percent of the homeless in our community are children. Chronic homelessness —a HUD definition that includes disabled, unaccompanied individuals who have either been homeless for more than a year or homeless more than four times in three years —is on the rise in Fort Worth and Tarrant County The 2007 Street Count and Homeless Survey estimated that, at minimum, 24.5 percent of the homeless in Tarrant County are chronic. This is a high priority population for both HUD grant funding and the City of Fort Worth because they are the most likely to have a significant impact on neighborhood quality of life and local government emergency response systems, including police, fire, public health, and hospital emergency rooms. Services for homeless persons in Fort Worth are generally provided by non-profit or faith -based organizations, with significant assistance from federal grant funding administered by Fort Worth and Tarrant County The operation of local homeless shelters and small homelessness prevention programs are supported with HUD Emergency Shelter Grants. Tarrant County provides staffing support to the Homeless Coalition for the annual Continuum of Care grant proposal —the Continuum received over $9.5 million for 2008. These funds pay for transitional or permanent housing for formerly homeless persons, and accompanying support services. The Continuum of Care grant includes "Shelter Plus Care" assistance administered by the Fort Worth Housing Authority on behalf of over 500 disabled individuals and families, as well as two non-profit Single Room Occupancy (SRO) facilities for homeless persons with special needs. the 52-unit Samaritan House and the 18-unit New Life Center On June 17, 2008 the Fort Worth City Council adopted a 10-year Homelessness Plan, Directions Home: Making Homelessness Rare, Short -Term and Non -Recurring in Chapter 5. Housing 46 2000 1800 — 1600 1400 — 1200 — 1000 — 800 — 600 — 400 — 200 — 0-- Homeless Population Trends in Fort Worth 2004 2006 2007 2009 0 Unsheltered Homeless ■ Sheltered Homeless 0 In Transitional Housing Availability of permanent and supportive housing in Fort Worth has increased significantly in the past five years. Estimates of the number of unsheltered homeless fluctuate based on adoption of new counting methodologies re- quired by HUD (Source: Tarrant County Homeless Coalition, 2004 through 2009.) Homeless Population Characteristics Unsheltered Emergency Shelter !Safe Haven (Transitional Housing [TOTALS 2009 2008 A % 195 203 -3 94% A# -8 1,128 1,245 -9 40% -117 20 20 0 0 838 953 -12.07% -115 2,181 2,421 -9 9% -166 I 2007 Men Women Children Totals 'Unsheltered 171 32 0 203 (Emergency Shelter 631 270 148 1049 [Transitional Housing 368 534 724 1626 Permanent Supportive 401 471 292 1164 Housing (TOTALS 1,571 1,307 1,164 4,042 There was a decrease in the overall homeless population in Tarrant County in 2009 (Source. Tarrant County Homeless Coalition, 2009.) S S • • • • • • • • • S • • • • • • S • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••)••••• Fort Worth, Texas Within Ten Years. The seven key strategies to the Plan. • Increase the Supply of Permanent Supportive Housing • Expand Opportunities and Services Lmked with Accountability • Develop and Operate a Central Resource Facility • Coordinate and Expand Homelessness Prevention Initiatives • Support and Strengthen Existing Public, Private and Faith -based efforts • Mitigate the Negative Community Impacts of Homelessness • Lead Educate and Advocate for Change. Fair Housing In 1992, the City of Fort Worth adopted a Fair Housing Ordinance with an enforcement mechanism "substantially equivalent" to that of HUD The City of Fort Worth's Community Relations Department (CRD), a HUD certified Fair Housing Assistance Program, is responsible for processing housing discrimination complaints filed in the city of Fort Worth. The CRD has identified the following impediments to fair housing: housing affordability, economic development (lack of job opportunities and transportation to job centers), housing discrimination, and predatory financing practices. The CRD's education and outreach programs serve as a centralized housing information center, providing fair housing counseling, and education to promote greater awareness of the fair housing laws and to improve accessibility to housing resources. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Preserve and improve existing, affordable owner -occupied housing units. • Rehabilitate 35 units in 2010 through the grant -funded Home Improvement Program and the newly created Housing Trust Fund. • Provide weatherization repairs to 125 existing owner -occupied housing units in 2010 • Construct approximately 15 houses through partner nonprofits. • Provide emergency repair assistance to 100 low- and very low-income homeowners. • Through the Cowtown Brush -Up program, paint 150 existing owner -occupied housing units in 2010 • Provide lead controls to 75 owner -occupied homes. Increase homeownership in Fort Worth. • Provide homebuyer assistance including closing cost assistance for 75 low- and very low-income homebuyers. • Provide homeownership information, budget, and credit counseling to 1,200 families throughout Tarrant County Increase the number of quality affordable rental units for low-mcome renters. • Encourage development of 150 units of affordable rental housing through gap financing through the Housing Trust Fund. Provide a range of housing options for populations with special needs, including the Sierra Vista Central City Redevelopment Promotion of central city redevelopment by increasing total housing units is a key goal for the Housing and Economic De- velopment Department. Sierra Vista will result in the creation of 232 new affordable housing units. (Source: Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009.) 47 Chapter 5. Housing elderly, persons with disabilities, and homeless. • Support at least one project application per year from non-profit or for -profit developers for new special needs housing for elderly, disabled, or the homeless. • In 2010, provide assistance to the Fort Worth Housing Authority for 200 permanent supportive housing vouchers for chronic homeless and long-term homeless individuals as identified in the City's Homelessness Plan, Directions Home. • By year 2014 assist in the development of 544 permanent supportive housing units and 1,088 units by year 2018 as identified in Directions Home. • Assist non-profit service providers in removing architectural barriers for 18 housing units in 2010, with a long-term objective of 500 by 2020 Ensure equal housing opportunity in Fort Worth for all citizens. • Provide housing counseling programs for homeowners and renters, serving 1,200 clients annually • Provide landlord and lender education on fair housing, serving 400 each year The 2003 Downtown Fort Worth Strategic Action Plan, sponsored by the City of Fort Worth, Downtown Fort Worth, Inc., and the Fort Worth Housing Authority, has the following goals and objectives: • Significantly increase the amount of housing available in the Downtown core, core edge, and adjoining neighborhoods such as Trinity Uptown and the Near Southside. • Create strong neighborhoods close to Downtown where family housing already exists, offermg a mixture of income levels and housing types, while enhancing access to parks and river amenities. • Create a Downtown Community Development Corporation to coordinate public funds and leverage private sector funds, encouraging central city housing. • Continue to promote specific public incentives to encourage Downtown and central city housing development. POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The existing and recommended policies and strategies listed below will be instrumental in achieving the above goals. Policies • Ensure equal housing opportunity in Fort Worth for all citizens. • Promote the development of high -quality market -rate and affordable housing using appropriate design standards to ensure lasting value. • Promote the rehabilitation of older housing stock to increase housing values within the central city • Promote neighborhood stability through a comprehensive and coordinated strategy that includes housing, neighborhood economic development, infrastructure, parks, safety, and human services. • Enhance capacity to address affordable housing needs by partnering with the private sector and neighborhoods. Chapter 5. Housing 48 Multifamily Rehabilitation Hanratty Place One of the key goals of the Mayor's Advisory Commission on Quality Afford- able Housing is to encourage rehabilitation of older multi -family housing Hanratty Place, owned by a local non-profit, will be fully reconstructed with Low Income Housing Tax Credits leveraged by HOME grant funds from the City (Source. Housing and Economic Development Department 2009) •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • Foster the preservation, improvement, and development of affordable rental and ownership housing in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. • Fund and implement strategies outlined in the City's Homelessness Plan, Directions Home. • Provide a range of housing options for the elderly, with special focus on low- income households. • Provide a continuum of housing options and support services for persons with disabilities. • Encourage and provide support for higher density, mixed -use, mixed -income developments in Transit -Oriented Developments, mixed -use growth centers, and urban villages. • Integrate and disperse affordable housing and low income housing into neighborhoods throughout the City • Use Neighborhood Empowerment Zones to promote development of designated urban villages and revitalization of surrounding lower -income neighborhoods. • Support neighborhood initiatives to regulate the design of industrialized and site - built housing so as to preserve neighborhood character StrateEies • Support Fort Worth Housing Authority efforts to improve public housing, including mixed -income and mixed -use developments. • Encourage infill and mixed -income housing development, both single-family and multifamily, within the central city; in particular, support Southeast Fort Worth Inc. in efforts to encourage single-family residential development in southeast quadrant areas such as the 700-acre shoreline of Lake Arlington. • Evaluate incentives and ordinances affecting the availability of all price levels of housmg; work with developers and community leaders to identify and address impediments to creation of middle and upper mcome housing in the central city • Work with lenders to provide low -interest loans for rehabilitation of owner - occupied housing units. • Develop strategies to accelerate the foreclosure of tax delinquent properties. • Aggressively expand land assembly for infill housing, particularly in designated Neighborhood Empowerment Zones, urban villages, mixed -use growth centers, and rail station areas that support Transit -Oriented Development. • Expand rehabilitation of older housing by providing gap financing for both single-family and multifamily housing. • Strengthen and expand CDC capacity through structured training and technical assistance and increased funding. • Implement strategies and action items in the City's Homelessness Plan, Directions Home, to facilitate the homeless population's transition into housing. • Help coordinate the City's development process for pnority housing development projects. • Where concentrations of low-income housing are high, support rehabilitation and stabilization of existing units and replacement of substandard housing with a mix of affordable and market -rate units, and undertake a demonstration mixed- 49 Fort Worth Housing Finance Corporation The infill Dream Home program of the Fort Worth Housing Finance Corpora- tion constructs high -quality infill housing in the central city to revitalize neighborhoods and encourage increased property values in those areas (Source. Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 5. Housing income housmg project. In other areas of the City, support development of new affordable housing. • Develop a management system to hold and dispose of tax -foreclosed properties. • Conduct an assessment of housing conditions and treat houses with the presence of lead, specifically in households with children under the age of six. • Provide support for small, local, minority, and women -owned businesses to participate in implementing housing and related programs. PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS The housing programs listed below are offered by the City's Housing and Economic Development Department, often in partnership with entities such as the Fort Worth Housing Authority, neighborhoods, non-profit organizations, developers, and lending institutions. • Home Improvement Loans to make repairs on existing owner -occupied housing units. • Closing Cost and Soft Second Mortgage Assistance Program provides subsidies to low-mcome first time homebuyers. The maximum amount of the subsidy is determined by location of the home within or outside a target area. • Infill Housing Program of the Fort Worth Housing Finance Corporation (FWHFC) works with non-profit partners and private developers or builders to offer newly constructed affordable homes to moderate income families, revitalizing central city neighborhoods. • Emergency Repair Program removes immediate threats to homeowner health and safety, such as severe roof damage, urgent plumbing deficiencies, and heating/ cooling emergencies. • Housing Counseling Program provides homeownership training, foreclosure prevention counseling, and counseling on fair housing/fair lending issues. • Cowtown Brush -Up helps qualified elderly, disabled, and low-income residents. Pre -selected homes are painted by teams of volunteers, using donated paint and supplies, in a one -day blitz. • Weatherization Assistance Program assists very low-income households throughout Tarrant County by providing insulation, energy -efficient windows and appliances, caulking, and installation of other energy saving devices. • Acquisition -Rehabilitation -Resale Program provides affordable homes for low- income first-time buyers in large families. Nonprofit entities purchase and rehabilitate properties for sale to income -eligible buyers. • Conveyance of Tax Foreclosure Properties to non-profit housing groups for affordable housing development has been in place since 1998. Properties may be conveyed to qualified non -profits at below market values, encouraging new housing development in central city target areas. • Land Banking Program is a tool to assemble properties for future housing development opportunities, funded through interest revenue on FWHFC trust funds. Land Bank properties may be acquired by the City or privately by the FWHFC. The land bank encourages central city redevelopment by making transfer of title to private builders or nonprofits quicker and less complicated Chapter 5. Housing 50 Neighborhood Empowerment Zone Tax Abatement Incentives This construction project within the Berry/University Neighborhood Empowerment Zone is an example of the type of high quality new development that is encouraged by the NEZ program As authorized by NEZ guidelines, 10 percent of the rental units in this project are affordable to households whose incomes are 80 percent of the area median income or below (Source. Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009.) a a I a a a a a a a a a • I a • • • a i a a a a a a a a • a ••••••••••••••••••••r•••••••••••• than post -foreclosure conveyance. • Neighborhood Empowerment Zone (NEZ) Program is a City Council initiative encouraging central city revitalization. Development incentives such as tax abatements and fee waivers, authorized by state law, have been approved by City Council for the following areas. Stop Six; Ridglea/Como, Berry/Hemphill, Polytechnic/Wesleyan, Evans & Rosedale, Rolling Hills, Magnolia Village, Handley, Woodhaven, Riverside, Lake Arlmgton, Berry/University, West 7th, Trinity Park, Wedgwood, and Berryhill/Masonic Heights (approved 2007). • Annual Homebuyers Conference is held each spring, providing information to an average of 1,500 persons per year Partners for the conference include the Star - Telegram, La Estrella, the City's Community Relations Department, the Housing Consortium of Fort Worth and Tarrant County, and the Texas A&M Real Estate Center • Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) program offers certified eligible housing non -profits financial support from City HOME funds for operating costs, predevelopment loans, or affordable housing project funding on a loan or a grant basis based on project feasibility • The Housing Trust Fund provides project financing from General Fund sources and federal grants to non-profit and for -profit housing developers, as well as low and moderate income families, for affordable housmg development targeted to low- and moderate -income households, primarily in the form of low interest loans. • The Fort Worth Partnership Initiative is a collaborative effort by the Housing and Economic Development Department, local foundations, and non-profit housing organizations developed to increase the capacity of these non -profits to produce affordable housing and revitalize neighborhoods. • Housing Finance Corporation has authority to issue single-family or multifamily mortgage revenue bonds to support housing development as appropriate projects are identified. The Fort Worth Housing Authority (FWHA) is engaged in the following activities. • FWHA administers the Housing Choice Voucher Program and maintains Conventional Public Housing rental properties through its Capital Fund. • FWHA supports resident initiatives and offers support services such as child care, job training, and self-sufficiency programs. (See Chapter 8 Human Services) • FWHA administers several rental assistance programs for the homeless, including the Shelter Plus Care program and Single Room Occupancy permanent supportive housing for disabled homeless persons. • FWHA contracts with the City Housing and Economic Development Department to implement the Housing Choice Voucher Homeownership Program. • FWHA administers Special Housing Programs resulting from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. • FWHA develops and owns quality mixed -income and affordable properties. The Fort Worth Community Relations Department is responsible for fair housing education and outreach, complaint mvestigahon, and training programs, including: 51 4- Neighborhood Empowerment Zones 1 Riverside 2. Woodhaven 3 West 7th 4 Trinity Park 5 Magnolia 6 Evans/Rosedale 7 Historic Handley 8 Ridglea/Como 9 Polytechnic/TWU 10 Stop Six 11 Lake Arlington 12. Berry/University 13 Berry/Hemphill 14 Rolling Hills 15 Wedgwood 16 Berryhill/Masonic Heights 17 Oakland Corners Since the inception of the Neighborhood Empowerment Zone (NEZ) pro- gram in 2001, the City has designated seventeen NEZs. NEZs encourage central city revitalization through development incentives The most re- cently created NEZ is Oakland Corners in southeast Fort Worth (Source: Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 5. Housing • Education for non-profit and for -profit entities regarding predatory lending. • Housing counseling programs for homeowners and renters. • Fair housing education to landlords, lenders, realtors, developers, and other housing -related businesses and services. • Housing resource handbooks for citizens and housing providers. • A multilingual, multimedia fair housing educational campaign and centralized fair housing information center Capital Improvement Proiects Capital improvements are listed in Appendices D and E, along with potential fundmg sources. The listed projects are ongoing housing projects undertaken by the Housmg and Economic Development Department that involve multiple projects and partners throughout the City Chapter 5. Housing 52 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 6: PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Parks, open space, and recreational opportunities are important, not only to enhance quality of life and neighborhood vitality, but also to preserve natural resources and provide alternative transportation links between our neighborhoods and growth centers. Over the years, the City of Fort Worth has recognized these benefits and has strived to increase these opportunities, earning the State Gold Medal in 1992, 1994, 2001, and 2005 from the Texas Recreation and Park Society for having the best managed large park system in the state, as well as earning the National Gold Medal in 1996 for having the best managed large park system in the United States. The City of Fort Worth provides park and recreational opportunities through the Parks and Community Services Department (PACS), whose mission is "to enrich the lives of our citizens through the stewardship of our resources and the responsive provision of quality recreational opportunities and community services." To meet the needs and desires of Fort Worth citizens, the department completed a Park, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan which was adopted by the City Council in June 2004 The major issues identified in the Master Plan are outlined in this Chapter EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Fort Worth has 243 parks, which make up 4.9 percent of the total land area within the city limits, The park sites totaling 10,949 acres include 151 playgrounds, 105 practice fields, 46 competition baseball/softball fields, 33 competition soccer fields, 109 basketball courts, 98 tennis courts, 7 pools, 5 golf courses (108 holes), approximately 58 miles of trails (with over 30 miles of Trinity River Trail), and 105 picnic shelters. Park Classifications Fort Worth's park and recreational sites are grouped into four classifications, based on the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) standards that use size, service area, and uses as distinguishing charactenstics. The four park classifications are Neighborhood, Community, Large Recreation, and Special Use Park. These classifications and standards assist the City m evaluating the current park system and in planning for future sites and facilities. In 2009, there were 177 neighborhood parks, 31 community parks, 7 large recreation parks, and 28 special use parks. The four park classifications are grouped into two types of parkland. Large recreation and the larger special use parks (such as golf courses and the Nature Center) are considered Regional parkland. Smaller special use parks (such as urban parks! plazas), neighborhood parks and community parks are considered Close -to -Home parkland. The City standard for parkland as adopted in the Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan is 21.25 acres per 1,000 persons, which is based on NRPA standards for parkland. The greatest deficiency is in Regional parkland, though there is also a need for additional Close -to -Home parkland. Based on projected population, 5,773 acres of parkland will need to be acquired by 2025 to meet the 21.25 acres of parkland per 1,000 population standard. 10 Existing Park Sites 5 0 10 Miles Fort Worth has 243 parks with 10,949 acres of parkland (Source. Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) 53 Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services Recreational Facilities Recreational facilities provided at park sites offer an important service to the surrounding areas. Neighborhood parks are typically within walking distance of residential areas. Generally, they include playgrounds and picnic areas, non - structured open space, and provisions for informal field and court games, such as softball or soccer Community parks include similar facilities, though more formal fields for organized sports are generally provided. Some also have athletic field lighting, depending on site characteristics and surrounding land uses. Large recreation parks often have space set aside for natural areas. They also include facilities similar to those in community parks, along with more intense uses such as tennis centers, swimming pools, and community centers to serve the larger regional population. Special use parks are oriented towards a particular use and are intended to serve the entire city Many have a regional draw The Fort Worth Nature Center and Refuge, Botanic Garden, golf courses, Log Cabin Village, and the Fort Worth Zoo are examples. The NRPA standards for park and recreational facilities use population size to determine the number of recreation facilities needed to serve a community Based on these standards, in 2008, Fort Worth was in need of an additional 29 playgrounds, 14 miles of hike/bike trails, and 14 competition softball/baseball fields. Community Centers The City operates a total of 19 community centers that serve multiple functions for the community within a 1 1/2 to 3-mile radius service area. Regional facilities include the Haws Athletic Center, located near Downtown adjacent to the Police and Fire Training Center, Bertha Collins Sports Center, Botanic Garden, Fort Worth Nature Center and Refuge, and the Log Cabin Village. The services administered by PACS are divided into two categories: Recreation programs and Unique programs. Recreation programs include sports programs and leagues, individual recreation opportunities such as weight lifting and aquatics, life skills programs, and cultural and social programs such as senior lunches and dancmg. Unique programs include a variety of crime prevention programs, social and neighborhood services programs, homework assistance, and health and child care services. Many of the community centers are also used for meeting space by homeowners associations, neighborhood advisory councils, organized youth activities, and some serve as emergency shelters and Safe Havens for children. Social services are provided through the countywide Community Action Partners (CAP) sites at seven Fort Worth community centers, and two neighborhood offices located outside the city limits. Direct and referral services (food, clothing, utility, shelter, transportation assistance, etc.) are provided to individuals and families with incomes at or below 125 percent of the Federal Poverty Guidelines. Trinity River Vision The Tnnity River Master Plan was initiated by Streams and Valleys, Inc., in 1990 and updated under the name of the Tilley Plan in 1999 The Master Plan recommended improvement of 43 miles of the Trinity River Corridor along the Clear Fork and the West Fork. The plan emphasized the importance of using the river Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services 54 Fort Worth's Recreation Facility Needs, Based on Local and National Recreation and Park Association Standards ;.Standard Facility 'per1,000 population Required . Existing Needed Facilities : , Facilities Facilities Playgrounds 1 4 180 151 29 Hike/Bike 110 72 58 14 Trails Competition 110 72 33 39 Soccer Fields Competition 112 60 46 14 Softball/ Baseball Fields Fort Worth uses the National Recreation and Park Association standards for recreational facilities as a basis for determining the City's facility needs A five-year plan has been developed to address deficiencies. (Source. Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) Classification Neighborhood 'Community Large Recreation Special Use National Recreation and Park Association Standards for Park Classifications Service Area Service (Radius Miles);. Population 5 to 20 '/ to 1/2 3,000 to 6,000 30 to 75 1 to 1 1/2 18,000 to 36,000 > 75 2 to 4 80,000 to 100,000 Acres Depends on Use City City Fort Worth uses the park classification and standards listed above to determine size and location of parks and to evaluate the park system Fort Worth has 177 neighborhood parks, 31 community parks, 7 large recreation parks, and 28 special use parks (Source. Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) a a • a • 41 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• corridors to connect parks and lakes, activity centers, and neighborhoods. The plan recognized the importance of connecting the river system and the urban landscape by providing well marked and convenient entrances to the system from many points in the City Recreational activity is an important part of the plan. Recommendations were made for canoe runs, access points, and trails for walking, bicycling, and horseback riding. An agreement between the City and Tarrant Regional Water District provides for shared responsibility for maintenance and expansion of the greenway network. The City Council adopted a far-sighted update of this plan, the Trinity River Vision Master Plan, in 2003 It has an enlarged scope that encompasses approximately 88 miles of river and creek corndor Along with expanding on the existing Master Plan recommendations, it contains recommendations to improve the river's accessibility to the public, attract more people to its banks, to develop an urbanized Downtown waterfront while maintaining the natural character of the more remote areas, and to increase awareness of its presence and beauty by citizens and visitors. The plan identifies opportunities for conservation, linkages, and open space. The primary goals include identifying and improving adjoining land uses and enhancing environmental quality and flood control. The proposed Downtown waterfront, known as Trinity Uptown, is also discussed m Chapter 14 Urban Design. Trinity River Trails Nearly 40 miles of surfaced trails exist along the Trinity River and Marine Creek. The trails are within the floodplam of the Trinity River and its tributaries. Surfaces are provided for biking, walking, in -line skating, and horseback riding. These green belts are important, not only for protecting the Trinity River and its floodplams and providing accessible recreation and open space opportunities, but also for providmg alternative transportation routes between neighborhoods and activity and employment centers. Work was recently completed to expand the trail system along the Trinity's West Fork and Sycamore Creek to connect with the existing trails. The Clear Fork of the Trinity River connects south and southwest neighborhoods to Downtown, and also links major parks, such as Pecan Valley Park and Golf Course, Oakmont Park, Forest Park, Trinity Park, and Heritage Park. Expansion of the greenway system along the Clear Fork to Lake Benbrook was completed in November 1999 The West Fork of the Trinity River provides an opportunity for linking Lake Worth to Downtown, and for connecting many west and northwest neighborhoods to the City park system. The draft Lake Worth Vision Plan calls for the Trinity River Trail system to be extended to Lake Worth and to connect to a new bike and pedestrian trail around much of the lake. East of I-35W, the West Fork will also provide linkages from Downtown to neighborhoods in east Fort Worth and eventually to Arlington and the eastern portion of the regional trail system. Nature Center and Refuge In June 2003, the City Council adopted a master plan to improve and enhance facilities at the Fort Worth Nature Center and Refuge. The mission of the plan is to promote a signature heritage that reflects not only the regional character of Fort Worth and North Central Texas, but communicates Fort Worth's community values of preserving natural open space for future generations. The Nature Center and Trails ®' Paved Trinity River Trails ICrushed Limestone Trails Trails Under Construction Equestrian Trails Connections to adjacent neighborhoods and parks are very important to revitalizing the Trinity River The Trinity River Vision Master Plan proposes many strategically placed linkages to allow easy access to the river from almost anywhere in the City (Source. Trinity River Vision Master Plan, 2003.) A Master P1ari for the 'Tririity River and Major Tribtataries .in Greater F`ort Worth 55 Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services Refuge Master Plan includes a clear analysis of the local and regional market for visitors, compares the Nature Center to other similar facilities that may be used as benchmarks for improving the Nature Center, and includes recommendations for resource management practices, land use management, operations, governance, and economic growth. The Master Plan also includes recommendations for new facilities, the update of existing facilities, interpretive exhibits, and needed supporting infrastructure. The Master Plan also identifies needed capital improvements in the amount of $64 6 million over a forty -year period with a majority of this funding to be raised from private and community sources. In November 2005, the City Council approved the establishment of user fees for the nature center that went into effect on April 1, 2006. Trends Fort Worth is growing and will continue to grow well into the 21st century, with a 2025 population of 784,263, based on North Central Texas Council of Governments projections. This growth will consume large areas of currently undeveloped land. As population increases, additional demand will be placed on existing parks and recreational facilities. New facilities and open spaces will be needed to serve the additional population. Much of the growth is expected to occur in the Far North, Far Northwest, Far South, Far Southwest and Far West sectors. Fort Worth is committed to central city revitalization. The Downtown area is experiencing high density residential development and commercial redevelopment, which has placed a strain on existing urban parkland and created a demand for more urban park space and links to river comdor recreational opportunities. Growth centers and urban villages, with their increased density, will require recreation and open space opportunities, as well as links to rivers, lakes, and other activity centers. Urban parks and public plazas will play an important role in these urbanized areas, similar to the role that Heritage Park, Burnett Park, Hyde Park, and the Water Gardens play in Downtown. Tourism Fort Worth's parks are attractions for both residents and visitors alike. Many of the City's premier park attractions, such as the Zoo, Botanic Garden, Nature Center and Refuge, and Log Cabin Village are important to the Fort Worth economy For example, the Zoo alone attracts approximately one million visitors annually In the 2007 Needs Assessment Survey, the majority of park users responded that they had taken out-of-town visitors to the Fort Worth Zoo, Botanic Garden, and Trinity Park. One of the most popular attractions of the Fort Worth park system is the Fort Worth Herd. Daily cattle drives conducted in the Historic Fort Worth Stockyards are a re- creation of the great cattle drives of the late 1800s. Six cowhands ride with the 15 longhorn steers down Exchange Street through the heart of the Historic Stockyards. Proclaimed as the "Last Great Cattle Drive of the Century" at its 1999 kickoff, it was publicized worldwide and generated an estimated $1 3 million in free publicity for Fort Worth. Each year since its inception, one quarter of a million people view the daily drives. The Herd has received four prestigious awards: the Advertising Club of Fort Worth Dateline Award, the Texas Recreation and Park Society Lone Star Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services 56 Parks Visited Fort Worth Zoo Botanic Garden Trinity Park Water Gardens Other Fort Worth Parks Fort Worth Nature Center and Refuge The Fort Worth Nature Center and Refuge comprises over one- third of all the park system in Fort Worth, and at over 3,600 acres, it is the largest city -owned nature center in the United States (Source. Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) Percentage of Park Users that Take Out -of -Town Visitors to Park Attractions Percentage of Park Users 77 74 56 54 43 Of the 600 park users who were surveyed for the Master Plan Update, 77 percent reported taking out-of-town visitors to the Fort Worth Zoo (Source: Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Programming Award, the City/County Communication and Marketing Association Award of Excellence, and the Texas Recreation and Park Society Promotional Award. As the Fort Worth economy continues to diversify and surrounding markets remain highly competitive, the value of the City's premier park facilities may be an important factor in business relocation decisions. Parkland Acauisition In April 2000 the City Council responded to concerns over population growth outpacing and overburdening the City's park resources by adopting a revised Neighborhood and Community Park Dedication Policy Based on the national standard, the policy requires dedication of parkland at a rate of 2.5 acres per 1,000 population for neighborhood parks (or fee in -lieu -of dedication), and dedication of land for community parks at a rate of 3 75 acres per 1,000 population (or fee in -lieu - of dedication). The policy also requires that developers construct or provide the funding for construction of first phase improvements for neighborhood parks as a project cost, with the City committing to appropriate maintenance funds once the improvements are completed and accepted by the City A revision of this policy in December 2000 allows credit for private recreational facilities that will meet the recreational needs of the population served by the private development. In 2004, the Neighborhood and Community Park Dedication Policy was revised to address the increasing density within the central city Designated by the City Council, the central city is generally defined as the area inside Loop 820 All new residential development withm this area will be assessed a flat fee of $500 per residential unit. This action strengthens the City's park grant applications for the central city and Trinity River Corridor by providing a dedicated source of local match dollars. In 2009, the Neighborhood and Community Park Dedication Policy was amended to redefine Park Planning District 4 as a fixed boundary to include all areas encompassed by Loop 820 with a flat fee of $500 per residential unit to be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. The amendment also authorized the use of community park fees collected within a community park unit to be expended within the park planning district where the community park unit is located or adjacent to the park planning district based on a percentage of service area. Land dedication (typically through the subdivision process) is the City's principal tool for obtaining parkland. Dedications accounted for more than two-thirds of total parkland acquisition in the past eight years. Private donations and joint use agreements are another means of obtaining parkland. The City is exploring more joint use agreements with the ISDs that serve Fort Worth. In addition, PACS reviews City -owned surplus property before it is auctioned to the public. In the past two years, 33 6 acres of surplus property have been identified as suitable for additional parkland. Many of these parcels are located in built -out central city areas where land acquisition at fair market value is difficult and costly A proactive acquisition strategy of purchase and set aside, coupled with park dedication requirements for residential developers, serves both to protect our natural resources and to provide land for recreation activities for future generations. Fort Worth Herd min 0.........LL an Since June 1999, the Fort Worth Herd has won four prestigious awards and logged 6,457 cattle drives. Each year, over 2.5 million people view the daily drives. To date, 82,067 students have participated in the Herd Education Program. (Source: Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) Methods of Parkland Acquisition, 2000-2009 Dedication, 73% Purchase, 24% Donation, 3% Dedication Donation Purchase Total Acres 402.16 13.90 130.69 546.80 The 2000 Neighborhood and Community Park Dedication Policy has provided for the acquisition of a considerable amount of parkland through dedication, donation and purchase over the past nine years. (Source. Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) 57 Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Restore and maintain the viability of the park, recreation, and open space system by renovating existing facilities. • Renovate existing playgrounds to bring them into compliance with Consumer Product Safety Guidelines, and continue a program to replace or renovate playgrounds on a 20-year cycle. • Renovate or replace existing trails on an annual basis to ensure the safety of our customers who use these facilities. • Provide first -phase development of reserve parks acquired through the Neighborhood and Community Park Dedication Policy when neighborhood units reach 50 percent build -out or a population of 2,000 or greater and when funds are appropriated to develop and maintain the improvements. Provide new parkland and facilities to meet park, recreation, and open space needs in developing areas of the City • Increase neighborhood and community park acreage from 5 11 acres per 1,000 persons to 6.25 acres per 1,000 by 2025, concentrating on under -served areas throughout the city • Review the effectiveness of, and seek amendments to, policies and procedures in the acquisition, development, and management of parkland and community facilities in 2010 Improve the variety of park, recreation, and open space opportunities available to the community • Provide new park facilities where service levels fall below standards, including playgrounds, trails, and competition fields by the end of 2025 • Reinvest in and update infrastructure to ensure adequate resources are in place to meet service levels. Provide a comprehensive golf program through a municipal enterprise fund that is self-supporting from user fees. • Obtain fmancial stability through the Golf Enterprise Fund. • Enhance the game of golf by effectively promoting a variety of instructional programs targeted to new and existing golfers. • Provide competitive events and leagues for all golfers. Expand recreational opportunities in the floodplains of the Trinity River and its tributaries. • Continue cooperative efforts with Streams and Valleys, Inc., the Tarrant Regional Water District, the North Central Texas Council of Governments, and partner municipalities. • Complete Trinity Trail segment east to Loop 820 by the end of 2020 • Expand trail system to include southern sections of Sycamore Creek to the southern end of Carter Park and Lincolnshire Park by 2020 • Build Trinity Trail connection between Loop 820 and Arlington by 2020 Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services 58 Sectors Deficient in Parkland a //J j o$ao++ C�J .r. 10 5 0 Regional Both OosmsaHane and Re$onel Nona 10 Miles Sectors Deficient Close -to -Home Parkland Only Arlington Heights Downtown in Sectors Deficient in _` Regional Parkland Only T. Far North Far Northwest Northeast Sectors Deficient in Both Close -to -Home and Regional Parkland Eastside Far South Far Southwest Southeast Southside TCU/Wescliff Western Hills/Ridglea The map and table depict sectors deficient in parkland according to City and national standards. (Source. Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) Northside Sycamore Wedgwood • s • • • 4' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 0 • •.•.•. . • Work with bordering municipalities and Tarrant County to connect Arcadia Trail to Trinity Trail in the White's Branch and Fossil Creek Comdor by 2020 • Extend the Trinity Trail System to Lake Worth in accordance with the 2009 Lake Worth Vision Plan, and develop trail connections to the Fort Worth Nature Center and other destinations around Lake Worth. Build and enhance community partnerships to deliver quality services and facilities. • Each year, build partnerships with willing Independent School Districts (ISDs), other governmental entities, and non-profit agencies serving the City of Fort Worth to pursue cooperative use of facilities in the delivery of recreation and community programs and services. Preserve and enhance the City's natural, historical, and developed resources. • Develop a plan that identifies, conserves, and recognizes historical, archeological, and cultural resources within the existing park system by the end of 2025 POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The City of Fort Worth will use the policies outlined in the Park, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan and the Trinity River Vision Master Plan to provide park, open space, and recreational opportunities to its citizens. Policies • Work with local, state, and federal organizations to provide coordinated community services and a City park system that is effectively managed and conserves and protects City resources. • Develop attractive and secure park, recreation, open space, and community service facilities that are accessible to all citizens, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, age, income, sexual orientation, or physical ability • Actively promote citizen involvement in determining park, recreation, and open space needs and desires of the community • Provide parkland in areas of the City that are currently deficient. • Seek the means to develop and support a system of urban parks and open space that link neighborhoods to growth centers as well as other park, recreation, and community facilities. • Pursue implementation of the Trinity River Vision Master Plan in cooperation with Streams and Valleys, Inc., the Tarrant Regional Water District, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. • Support implementation of the park, trail, and open space recommendations of the Lake Worth Vision Plan, once adopted. Strateeies • Seek grants and other non -City funding resources for park development and other projects. • Review annually those services which may be handled by other agencies or groups without adversely affecting service levels. • Improve and enhance tourism and educational opportunities. City of Fort Worth Community Centers 10 5 0 • Regional Center ♦ Community Center 10 Miles The City of Fort Worth has a total of 19 community centers that have a 1 1/2 to 3 mile radius service area. The Botanic Garden, Fort Worth Nature Center & Wild- life Refuge, Haws Athletic Center, Bertha Collins Sports Center, and the Log Cabin Village are regional facilities that serve the entire city (Source: Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) 59 Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Neighborhood Park Development Grant Program Programs Fort Worth has a number of programs that provide park and recreational opportunities to the community They include the following: • PACS works with the Independent School Districts to avoid duplication of park and recreational facilities. The City has shared facility agreements for many park sites, athletic facilities, educational facilities and services, and transportation. • Many recreational programs are offered at the City's community centers, including martial arts, dance, gymnastics, weight training, and Senior Education programs provided by Tarrant County College; life skills programs such as photography, junior golf, arts and crafts, and wood carving; youth sports programs and athletic leagues; cultural programs; and social programs including dancing and senior lunches. Volunteer opportunities for community service workers and employment opportunities for summer leaders and contract instructors are also available. • PACS also offers a number of programs referred to as "Crime Prevention Programs." These programs include the Afterschool Evening/Late Night Program, Comin' Up Gang Intervention Program, Youth Sports Program, and Homework Assistance Center Social and neighborhood services are also offered. • Formal and informal educational opportunities are available at the Nature Center and Refuge, Log Cabin Village, Fort Worth Zoo, Botanic Garden, and through the Fort Worth Herd. Neighborhood Park Develonment Grant The Neighborhood Park Development Grant Program provides neighborhoods and communities with an opportunity to leverage private resources with City funds for park improvements. The goal of this program is to instill a sense of neighborhood involvement and ownership in the development or replacement of neighborhood park facilities. When valued improvements are made to neighborhood parks, a higher quality of life results. The FY2002-03 Budget provided $100,000 for a Neighborhood Park Development Grant Program that funded improvements at 10 sites. Based on the success of this program, funding was provided in the FY2005-06 Budget for improvements at 8 sites totaling $114,037 from gas royalty payments made to the Parks and Community Services Department. Any organized neighborhood or community -based group, private business or non-profit group is eligible to receive grant funds to develop local neighborhood parks within the City of Fort Worth. Tree Preservation On October 3, 2006, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 17228 amending the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Fort Worth to add new language related to tree coverage, preservation, planting, and maintenance. Homeowners with Neighborhood Picnic Shelter Neighborhood Basketball Court The Neighborhood Park Development Grant Program provides neighbor- hoods and communities with an opportunity to leverage private resources with City funds for park improvements. The grant program is funded by gas royalty payments made to the Parks and Community Services Department. (Source. Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) a • • • • S • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services 60 i••••••••••••••••••••••i••••••••• less than an acre of land are exempt, but residential developments containing more than three units, and all other development, will be required to apply for an Urban Forestry Permit and must adhere to existing tree canopy as well as tree planting provisions. The new tree ordinance limits the removal of tree canopy and protected trees. It promotes multi -aged forest cover, supports orderly and sustainable development of the City of Fort Worth, and protects healthy and significant trees while providing for the replacement and replanting of trees that are necessarily removed during construction, development, or redevelopment. Additional amendments to the ordinance include. • The 21-day waiting period for the urban forestry plan only applies to sites that require removal of trees. • Gas well sites are exempted from the Urban Forestry Plan/Permit process. However, they will be required to submit a site plan with their gas well permits to reflect the specific landscape requirements on those sites. Gas compressor sites will be treated as industrial sites and will require an Urban Forestry Plan. • The ordinance states that a permit is required to remove trees of 6-inch or greater diameter However, it also states that disruptive activity including clearing and grading are prohibited prior to approval of the Urban Forestry Plan. The definition of disruptive activity in the procedure clarifies that disruptive activity will not include normal mowing and removal of trees/underbrush less than 6- inches in diameter In order to maintain a positive neighborhood image and ensure a livable city, it is important to promote site planning that preserves mature trees and protects them during construction. Capital Improvement Projects The City of Fort Worth has a number of projects that will provide park, open space, and recreational opportunities for its citizens. Those needed in the next five years are included in the Park, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan. Additional projects will be necessary over the next 20 years to serve the needs of the growing population in developmg areas and to rebuild an agmg central city parks infrastructure. Many of the special use parks have developed individual master plans or strategic plans that the City has adopted. These include the Trinity River Vision Master Plan, the Botanic Garden Master Plan, the Nature Center and Refuge Master Plan, and the Gateway Park Master Plan. Through the use of the Museum and Conservation Assessment Programs, the Log Cabin Village finalized its Master Plan, which includes the addition of an Education Center Community and City resources will be required to implement these plans. The capital improvement projects identified for the next 20 years are listed in Appendices D and E, along with estimated costs, completion dates, and potential funding sources, which are subject to change. Parkland and Facilities Meeting Needs Jelga Park, located northeast of Downtown at 1400 Nixon Street, repre- sents a typical neighborhood park. With nearly five acres, it contains a pic- nic shelter, playground area, softball/baseball practice fields, and basketball courts. (Source: Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) Rolling Hills Park, located in southeast Fort Worth, is 197 acres. It is considered a large recreation park, with 11 competition soccer fields, 4 soccer practice fields, 6 tennis courts, 1 competition softball/baseball field, and 1 practice field. A number of sports tournaments make use of the facilities throughout the year (Source. Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) 61 Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services rn N • • • • The Fort Worth Library is in its second century of service to its communities. The 2003 Long Range Services Plan, along with the service priorities identified, shapes • the nature, scope, and depth of library collections and services. The Library's • mission is "to welcome and support all people in their enjoyment of reading and recreational materials, and their pursuit of learning and information." • This chapter provides information on current library facilities, material collections, • technology, programming, and general user services. It also highlights services supported by the Department's three support groups. Library Advisory Board, • Friends of the Fort Worth Public Library, Inc. (Friends), and The Fort Worth Public • Library Foundation (Library Foundation). CHAPTER 7: LIBRARIES • EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Facilities: Libraries as Community Builders and Destination Places Library facilities are designed specifically as community anchors serving as the heart of the neighborhood; to be a focal point, a gathenng place, a destination or "commons" to its users. As such, the buildings are warm, inviting, and attractive, with lots of light and color, comfortable seating, and with several material access points so that customers easily find available resources. As funding becomes available, the Department continues to redesign branch libraries, most of which were built in the 1960s. To date, four of the ten branch libraries have undergone cosmetic renovations with support from the City and the private sector, through the Friends and the Library Foundation. Responding to its role as a community builder, the Library is changing its image as it incorporates integrative, holistic concepts that bring people together, using ideas from retail, and partnering with the private sector Funded by the Library Foundation, enhancements to the Gallery and meeting rooms at the Central Library were completed in 2009, creating a warm and inviting "living room for the City " As the neighborhood branch system grows, the Library is exercising foresight and planning for non-traditional service offenngs and delivery options. The Ella Mae Gratts Shamblee Branch Library, located in the Evans and Rosedale Urban Village, is one example. By incorporating a historic landmark —the Tommy Tucker building adjoined to the new portion of the Branch —the Library's role as a destination place is enhanced. As a result of its community -minded focus, The Texas Library Association recognized the branch with the Libraries Change Communities award in 2009 The Library system currently consists of 15 community facilities that include one central library, two regional libraries, ten neighborhood branch libraries, and two library stations in public housing communities. Approved by voters in the 2004 bond election, the Northwest Branch Library is set to open in 2010 • Most areas in the Far West, Far Northwest, Far North, Far South, and Far Southwest • Sectors are not served by a neighborhood library Additional neighborhood facilities 63 Fort Worth Libra: A Service of the City of Fort Worth INorthwes Branch Library April 30, 2009 City leaders and library supporters came together to celebrate the groundbreaking for the new Northwest Branch Library in District 7 in April 2009 (Fort Worth Library, 2009.) Chapter 7 Libraries • and delivery options are necessary to better respond to the needs of under/unserved communities. The Library's Comprehensive Master Plan, scheduled for completion in 2010, will aid in determining the level and type of services required to meet the needs of the existing and projected populations. Mixed -Use Growth Centers, with dense residential development and commercial activity, are ideal locations for libraries. Technology Computers with high speed Internet access are fundamental components of today's public library services. New and emerging as well as existing standard technologies are under review as service delivery alternatives. The Library will begin to improve its response and services to Generation X and the Millennial Generation through better and increased use of technology At all locations, the Library provides WiFi (wireless internet), self -check machines, and a children's online catalog, as well as downloadable audio books. Patron registration information, circulation records, holdings inventory and maintenance are computerized. Enhanced online library card registration and the capability to accept credit cards are technology enhancements that have improved service to the public. Collections The Library's collection enables Fort Worth residents to enrich their personal lives, educate themselves in areas of personal interest; develop informed opinions about issues of the day; gather, use, and evaluate information successfully; and gain an appreciation and understanding of other people, cultures, and viewpoints. For the first time, customers borrowed over four million items during FY 2008/2009 The collections emphasize current, popular, up-to-date materials for all age levels in a variety of formats, including books, CDs, videos, DVDs, and books on tape and CD, as well as electronic and internet resources. The Library will continue to increase its Spanish and Vietnamese language holdings in order to better serve these populations. Collections are another aspect of the Library's role as "destination place" Customers come to research special collections and to see parts of collections on display Through their ability to attract visitors, the Art Study Area and the Genealogy/Local History Unit also reinforce the Library's role as a community destination. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Library's overarching goal is to provide a welcoming environment and respond to the reading and leaming/informational needs of its customers. To fulfill this purpose, the Library set the following goals and objectives for FY 2009-2010• Provide materials and collections that are timely and accurate and that best respond to user needs. • Increase in -person visits to 2.1 million. • Increase items checked out to 4.3 million. Continue to improve services via technology • Increase public computer use to 466,000 Chapter 7 Libraries 64 Measures Visits Circulation Remote Transactions Fort Worth Library 5-Year Statistical Trends FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 2.46M 2.44M 2.47M 2.24M 2.09M 3.62M 3.73M 3.84M 4.05M 4.09M Not Available 2.77 M 3.66M Onsite Not Computer Available 400K 472K Use Customer Satisfaction 73% 73% 80% Ratings Trends reflect a steady increase in use of library collections and electronic resources. Visits decreased in FY2009 due to service hours reductions Com- puter use in FY2009 includes access via WiFi (Source. Fort Worth Lbrary 2009.) 4.97M 8.30M 454K 448K 76% 80% Comparison of Benchmark Texas Cities, 2009 Fort San Measures Arlington El Paso Worth Austin Dallas Antonio Houston Circulation per Capita 5.68 3.99 5.82 5.48 6.8 4.08 3.06 Visits per Capita 4.27 3.63 2.90 4.81 6.7 2.27 2.36 Annual Budget FY 2009 per Capita $17.90 $14.21 $24.49 $31.69 $26.84 $18.45 17.52 Materials Budget per Capita $1.86 $1 13 $3.40 $2.90 $1.67 $2.18 $3.31 Total Square Feet per Capita 0.34 0.42 0.44, 0.54 0.77 0.29 0.38 Total Facilities 7 12 15 24 26 25 41 2009 Population 374,417 613,190 720,250 765,957 1,306,350 1,622,899 2,245,108 When compared with other large cities in Texas, the Fort Worth Library ranked second -highest in circulation per capita in Fiscal Year 2009 (Source. Public Library Data Service Statistical Report 2010.) S r • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • a • a ••••••••••4 ••••••••••••••••••••• • Implement digitization system in support of local history Provide facilities that are conducive to the delivery of quality library and information services. • Open the new Northwest Branch Library in 2010 Focus on strategic and operational issues in the Library Department. • Complete Library's Comprehensive Plan. • Maintain customer satisfaction rating of 80%. • Increase workforce development (job search, resume writing, computer use, English conversation club) classes offered to 100 • Support the City of Fort Worth's sustainability efforts. Increase Library's visibility and presence in the community • Improve quality of public program offerings through centralization. • Open "Chapters," Friends children's bookstore at the Central Library POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The Fort Worth Library's services will be guided by the following policy and strategies. Policy • Provide services that are responsive to the needs and desires of the community Strategies • Assure Library's role as "community builder" and "destination place" by promoting integrative, holistic concepts for facility planning and service delivery options. • Provide services in conveniently located, easily accessible areas of the city • Pursue all possible funding sources to augment program planning, facility maintenance, and collection management. • Seek cooperative relationships in service delivery and expand resource sharing partnerships among area libraries. • Make available diverse materials and resources, including electronic and online services. • Provide diverse programming to mirror the populations served. • Provide and enable staff to serve diverse populations effectively PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Community Proerams and Partnerships The Library offers system -wide programs through community partnerships and private sector support. These program opportunities recognize the Library's collaborative role and suggest new ways of building communities by combining 65 Location of Existing Library Facilities 10 s tti 0 Type of Library • Central ■ Regional A Neighborhhood Branch * Satellite * Under Construction 10 Mlles The map above shows the location of the fifteen (15) existing library facili- ties. General areas of the city that are not served by existing facilities are mostly outside Loop 820 The 2004 bond program included a neighbor- hood branch library to be located in the Far Northwest sector (Sources: Fort Worth Library and Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 7 neighborhood assets to create a new synergy benefiting the customers. In addition to its traditional programming partners, the Library works with museums, arts institutions and organizations, as well as health and faith based organizations. Examples include Jazz on the Boulevard, a partnership with Historic Camp Bowie Inc., the Owsley Author series, a partnership with the Library Foundation, FWISD, and local private schools; and the Texas Literary Hall of Fame, a partnership with the Friends. Programs responding to the Library's priorities such as genealogy and local history, cultural awareness, lifelong learning, information literacy, and general information are provided citywide. The Central Library's teen center, called Our Place, attracts teens/young adults 14-19 years of age. The Teen Advisory Council provides input to support programming for the center as well as teen programming, materials, and services system wide. The individual branch libraries offer programs that change based on the needs of the community Also, the Cities of Fort Worth, Benbrook, Burleson, Haltom City, Keller, Richland Hills, and Watauga have an agreement (Metropac) by which residents of the seven cities may use their library cards at each respective library Fort Worth provides automation services to these libraries for a fee. The grant -funded TexShare card and Interlibrary Loan programs are additional avenues for reciprocal borrowing and resource sharing as a benefit to our customers. Capital Improvement Projects Capital improvements are listed in Appendices D and E, along with estimated costs and potential funding sources. The list includes the Northwest Branch Library project, which is scheduled for completion in 2010 Other small scale capital projects include expanding and updating the Genealogy/Local History Unit, adding a classroom at the Riverside Branch, and a partial finish -out of the basement at Northside. "Chapters," a children's bookstore sponsored by the Friends, is expected to open early 2010 The Capital Improvement Projects may change as a result of recommendations from the Library's new Comprehensive Plan which is scheduled for completion in 2010 Central Library Renovations to the Central Library Gallery make it a warm and welcoming destination for programs and events downtown (Fort Worth Library, 2009.) Among the many events held at the Central Library was the induction ceremony of the 2008 Texas Literary Hall of Fame (Fort Worth Library, 2009.) Chapter 7 Libraries 66 ..........I,...................... CHAPTER 8: HUMAN SERVICES Human services are vital to the health of every community Timely delivery of an array of human services is an important component of the City of Fort Worth's vision of a future with strong neighborhoods, a sound economy, and a safe community The City, Tarrant County, the State of Texas, secular nonprofits, faith -based nonprofits, and for -profit providers have a strong history of community initiatives and collaborations in the delivery of human services in Fort Worth. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Over 425 nonprofit and governmental agencies provide more than 2,700 human service programs for Tarrant County residents. City departments along with umbrella organizations such as United Way, Area Agency on Aging, Catholic Charities, Tarrant County Youth Collaboration, and Mental Health/Mental Retardation of Tarrant County ensure efficient delivery of services by providing mformation and referral, and soliciting and leveraging funds. The City's commitment to ensuring delivery of services to all residents is evidenced by the work of the City's Community Relations Depai tnient (CRD). The CRD is the link between Fort Worth's diverse community and City services, ensuring equitable service delivery to all. The department provides information, referrals, and problem resolution for residents; builds neighborhood capacity; fosters programs that support school readiness for children and engage youth, encourages diverse dialogue; and enforces anti-discrimmation laws. The CRD sponsors community events to promote tolerance and to support and celebrate diversity The CRD also provides staff support for the Human Relations Commission, the Mayor's Committee on Persons With Disabilities, and the Youth Advisory Board. In 2009, the United Way of Tarrant County completed a countywide community assessment of health and human service needs. Using an approach that combined secondary data, community discussion groups and interviews with key informants, the findings of the assessment were organized in three main topic areas. education, income and health. Prionty issues for the community include early care and education, school drop -outs, economic self sufficiency, chronic and disabling conditions particularly for older adults, and violent and abusive behavior particularly of children and the elderly United Way in conjunction with many partners will be working to improve community conditions in these areas in the coming years. The human service issues discussed in this chapter fall into the categories of children and youth, families, communities, seniors, health, and crisis relief. Many human service agencies and organizations provide services in more than one of these categones. The following list of agencies is only a sample of those providing human services in Fort Worth. Children and Youth Youth services are targeted toward youth at risk for behaviors such as school dropout, teen pregnancy, substance abuse, etc. Tutoring, pregnancy prevention, sports and recreation, and self esteem programs are a sample of the range of youth services available. Some agencies providing these services are Big Brothers Big Sisters, Boys 67 Volunteer Opportunities in Fort Worth The City of Fort Worth encourages volunteers to im- prove our communities and help our neighbors. The Cowtown Brush Up program, shown above, is a City - initiated neighborhood revitalization program where volunteers add a fresh coat of paint to deteriorating houses. (Source. Housing and Economic Development Depart- ment, 2009.) Chapter 8: Human Services and Girls Club, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Child Care Associates, Communities in Schools, United Community Centers, YMCA, YWCA, Fort Worth After School, and the City's Parks and Community Services Department. Families Family support can include child care, programs on parenting skills, self-support training, personal and family counseling, adoption, support for neighborhood associations (please see Chapter 9• Neighborhood Capacity Building for more information) and initiatives to help build communities, immigration assistance, and job training and placement. Two Early Learning Resource Centers have been established to help families prepare their young children for success in kindergarten. Some agencies providing these services are the American Red Cross, Catholic Charities, Jewish Federation, Lena Pope Home, Northside Inter -Church Agency, The Parenting Center, The Women's Center of Tarrant County, the Fort Worth Housmg Authority, the Parks and Community Services Department, Tarrant County Department of Human Services, and many area churches. Communities The Community Relations Department (CRD) has a strong community focus. Community housing and employment rights forums, and neighborhood training workshops are examples of CRD-sponsored informational events held to inform the community of their rights and responsibilities under the City of Fort Worth's anti- discrimination ordinance. In an effort to meet the needs of the community, the CRD is compnsed of three divisions. The Enforcement Division is charged with enforcing laws regarding fair housing, equal employment opportunity, and equal access in public accommodation. The CRD is a certified Fair Employment Practices Agency by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and a U S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) certified Fair Housing Assistance Program. These designations ensure that complaints filed with the CRD are also filed with the federal agencies. The CRD's School and Youth Outreach Division (SYO) facilitates programs, such as youth engagement and after -school programs, to encourage youth to be involved in the community The Neighborhood and Community Outreach Division (NCO) oversees community events that celebrate diversity, and encourages and assists neighborhoods with organizing neighborhood associations. The NCO division also supports existing neighborhood associations, facilitates communication between residents and City departments, provides information about City services to neighborhoods, and develops educational opportunities for neighborhood associations. Directions Home, the City's Homelessness Plan designates CRD to be responsible for developing Good Neighbor Agreements for neighborhoods and operators of emergency shelters, transitional housing, and permanent supportive housing. Seniors Senior services are designed to serve those over 60 years of age. Such services can include delivery of daily meals, transportation, social programs, guardianship services, advocacy for nursing home residents, and respite care for Alzheimer's care - Chapter 8. Human Services 68 Empowering people with disabilities, disadvantages, and other barriers to employment so they may achieve maximum independence. Goodwill empowers people with disabilities, disadvantages, and other bar- riers to employment so that they can achieve maximum independence (Source: United Way of Metropolitan Tarrant County, 2009.) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •• i i ®• s s• o••• e 0 0•• r* 0 e•*• r e• e o i givers. Major providers of these services include the American Red Cross, Area Agency on Aging of Tarrant County, Guardianship Services, Mental Health/Mental Retardation of Tarrant County, Senior Citizen Services of Greater Tarrant County, Meals on Wheels, Texas Department of Aging and Disabled Services, Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services, Visiting Nurse Association of Tarrant County, and the Parks and Community Services Department. The Area Agency on Aging of Tarrant County, the United Way, and the City of Fort Worth are working together to identify neighborhoods where socially isolated seniors live in order to improve their access to needed services. Identifying these neighborhoods will enable community partners to more effectively provide opportunities for social interactions, enhanced transportation services, in -home health and housekeeping services, home repairs, shopping assistance, wheelchair ramps, help with Medicare questions, yard clean-up, and links to other vital community services. Health Health -related human services assist people who are mentally or physically ill, have disabilities, or are caregivers. Services range from immunizations to long-term case management. Agencies providing these services include the AIDS Outreach Center, the Arc of Greater Tarrant County, Cancer Care Services, Child Study Center, Day Resource Center, Mental Health/Mental Retardation of Tarrant County, National Multiple Sclerosis Society, Sickle Cell Disease of America, Recovery Resource Council, AA, AlAnon, Tarrant County Challenge, EasterSeals of Greater NW Texas, Urban Inter -Tribal Center of Texas, the City's Public Health Department, and Tarrant County Public Health Department. In addition, United Way's "FitFuture" coalition strives to address the obesity epidemic; in the Dallas -Fort Worth area, nearly 66 percent of residents are considered overweight or obese. Please see Chapter 19• Public Health for more information. Crisis Relief A crisis can be triggered by a family emergency, health cnsis, job loss, loss of a home, or natural disaster Crisis relief can include temporary financial and material assistance including food, rent/mortgage payments, utilities, and clothing. Relief can also include job traming, transportation, and shelter Agencies that provide such services include the American Red Cross, Catholic Charities, Salvation Army, United Community Centers, SafeHaven of Tarrant County, YWCA, various homeless shelters, the Parks and Community Services Department, the Fort Worth Housing Authority, Tarrant County Department of Human Services, and many area churches. Information and Referral Information and referral for human services is available from a variety of sources. City, county and state offices are listed in the blue pages of the Fort Worth telephone book. 2-1-1 Texas is the number to dial for health and human services both in Tarrant County and across Texas. When dialing 2-1-1, callers can talk to an information and referral specialist who will assess their needs and refer them to services ranging from child care to transportation. The 2-1-1 information and referral service m Tarrant County is nationally accredited and is operated by United Way of Tarrant County in partnership with the Texas Health and Human Services 69 Areas High in Poverty by Census Tract, 2000 10 5 0 LJ less than 15% 15%-29% • 30% or more 10 Miles In 2000, 15.9 percent of Fort Worth residents had incomes below the poverty level, with the greatest concentration in the central city Poverty can present a barrier to accessing human services. (Source: U S. Census Bureau, 2000.) Chapter 8: Human Services Commission. The 2-1-1 information and referral service at United Way publishes the Blue Book, a directory of Tarrant County health and human services. The 2-1-1 community resource database is available on-line at United Way's Web site (www. unitedwaytarrant. org). Barriers Citizens can experience barriers in trying to access services due to a variety of reasons: lack of information, cultural differences, lack of transportation, illness, disability, language disparity, and lack of income. While the need for human services spans income, age and racial lines, the needs of those below the poverty level are often most pressing. The 2000 Department of Health and Human Services Poverty Income Guidelmes for the U.S placed the poverty income level for a typical family of two adults and two children at $17,050 The 2008 figure is $21,200 Low-income individuals and heads of households can face the additional challenges of finding affordable transportation and dependent care while attending job training and during employment. Service providers can also experience barriers to delivery of services during a weak economy when funding and donations shrink and the demand for services expands. Staffing levels, which affect delivery, are also affected by economically challenged times. GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Promote unbiased and efficient access to needed human services, thereby providing equitable support to all citizens of our diverse community • Promote fair housing through partnerships, landlord/tenant counseling, and education to housing providers as a means of furthering the public interest. The FWHA provides training and orientation for landlords on a monthly basis. • Provide fair housing and fair employment outreach and education to other City departments, industry professionals, and residents. • Develop, coordinate, or participate in educational programs, outreach events, community meetings, and collaborations that celebrate our city's diversity, promote cooperative efforts, increase communication with the community, reduce disparities, encourage prejudice reduction, and promote tolerance. POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The following policies and strategies will help to achieve the City's human service goal and objectives: Policies • Work to improve neighborhood, community, and local government relations through the Community Relations Department. • Work with the Fort Worth Housing Authority to provide services that enable individuals to become self-sufficient. • Use the "Asset Building" approach to provide youth programs through City departments (see Appendix F Youth Asset Model). • Ensure that the citizens of the City of Fort Worth have equal enjoyment of all Southside Community Center The Southside Community Center at 959 East Rosedale is an example of a "one -stop" facility This community center houses the Fort Worth ISD Adult Learning Center and Child Care Associates The Center also features a neighborhood police storefront, and a Community Action Partners site, as well as providing social, cultural and recreational activities for youth, adults, and seniors (Source. Parks and Community Development, 2009.) • • • • • • i • • • • 0 0 • • • Chapter 8: Human Services 70 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• rights, privileges and freedoms; without regard to race, sex, religion, color, national origin, age, disability, housing and familial status, and sexual orientation. • Work with the county and the state to establish "one -stop" services in communities in locations served by public transportation. • Establish shared facility agreements with independent school districts and other agencies for the provision of community services for seniors and children. • Support the provision of quality, affordable child care and early education opportunities. • Provide leadership to increase and improve after -school programs that keep children safe, provide academic enrichment, and help working families. • Support efforts to provide child development training to help families ensure children have social, emotional, and cognitive skills needed in kindergarten. Stratesies • Assist the Texas Health and Human Services Commission in efforts to monitor the impacts of reduced federal funding on services to low income residents. • During City Council incentive contract negotiations, such as those related to tax abatements, incorporate the best possible employee and human services benefits (e.g. health care, livable wage, job training, child care, mass transit options, etc.) to accommodate special groups that are in need of and would not otherwise have accessibility to such benefits. • Provide for the communication needs of special groups, such as the economically disadvantaged, non-English speakers, minorities, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities. • Assist school districts and their employees in accessing community services. • Work with nonprofit organizations and agencies, such as Corporate Champions for Children, to provide child care that is available year-round, 24 hours a day • Provide leadership by convening parties to look for funding to increase the quality of early care and educational opportunities for children age five and under • Through the Early Childhood Resource Centers, assist FWISD and non -profits with parents and caregivers to help young children under age five to prepare for success in kindergarten. PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Fort Worth Community Action Partners • The Community Action Partners (CAP) (formerly the Neighborhood Resources Development) Centers operated by the Parks and Community Services Department provide case management, direct services (food, shelter, clothing, rental/mortgage, utilities, transportation, childcare, and other essential needs) to persons with incomes at or below 125 percent of the poverty level. Staff also provides referrals to local agencies for additional services. The Texas Departments of Housing and Community Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, with assistance from gas and electnc utility providers, fund these programs. AMAKA Child Care Center The AMAKA Child Care Center at 1501 Stephenson Street is located within Butler Place. It has the capacity to provide child care for 100 children (Source: Fort Worth Housing Authority, 2009.) 71 Chapter 8: Human Services • The following seven City community centers provide community services. Andrew "Doc" Session, Como, Martin Luther King, Northside, North Tn- Ethnic, Southside, and Worth Heights. The Far Southeast and Far Northwest CAP offices, located outside the city limits, also provide community services. Many of the City's community centers also serve as emergency shelters and safe havens for the children of the community • The City has initiated an effort to adopt an "Asset Building" approach to providing youth programs through City departments. The goal of this approach is to assist youth in developing assets that will help them succeed in life. These assets are grouped into eight categories: support, empowerment, boundaries and expectations, constructive use of time, commitment to learning, positive values, social competencies, and positive identities. A list of the 40 desired developmental assets is provided in Appendix F • The City has opened two Early Childhood Resource Centers, serving families with children birth to five years old in northside and southeast communities. These centers opened in 2006 and are a component of the Early Childhood Matters Community Action Plan endorsed in 2004 • The City collaborates with corporate and private donors m the Cowboy Santas Program to provide holiday assistance to low income households. Fort Worth Housing Authority • The Family Investment Center is a one -stop center assisting public and assisted housing residents to attain self-sufficiency Services are provided through collaborative partnerships with area service agencies. Some of the services offered or proposed include: adult and remedial education and GED preparation, case management, cnsis intervention and self -empowerment skills, vocational education and training activities, information and referral services, small business development, and transportation services. • The AMAKA Child Care Center provides affordable childcare on a sliding tuition scale and accommodates up to 100 children. The Center is operated in collaboration with the YMCA. • The Family Self -Sufficiency Program, for Housmg Choice Voucher (Section 8) clients and public housing residents, is designed to help unemployed or underemployed residents achieve economic self-sufficiency FWHA encourages participants to attain additional education and job training, counseling, volunteer expenence, budgeting assistance and to learn healthy lifestyle behaviors. These services are provided through agencies such as Tarrant County College (TCC), Fort Worth ISD, United Way, Consumer Credit Counseling Services, Childcare Management System, etc. • FWHA, in collaboration with the Fort Worth Public Library, administers COOL and BOLD (satellite libraries of the Fort Worth Public Library located in the Cavile and Butler public housing communities) through which GED preparation, literacy classes, tutoring, children's story times and resource information from other libraries are offered. • FWHA provides for a Service Coordinator to conduct comprehensive needs assessments and perform individual case management of the elderly and disabled residents of the Hunter Plaza and Fair Oaks housing communities. Chapter 8: Human Services 72 Satellite Library The Butler community has an on -site satellite library that opened in 1997 and is open five days a week. (Source. Fort Worth Housing Authority, 2009.) • • • I • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • The University of North Texas Health Science Genatric Clinic, located at Hunter Plaza, provides geriatric health care services to residents 62 years and older • Senior Citizen Services provides social activities and serves lunches to elderly community residents at Cavile Place and Hunter Plaza. • The "I Have A Dream" Foundation is an organization located in the Butler community that provides a comprehensive daily academic mentonng and tutoring program for youth in the 2nd - 5th grades. • The Boys and Girls Club, located in the Butler and Cavile communities, provides educational, recreational, cultural and leadership programs. • In collaboration with Tarrant County College, FWHA provides on -site computer, medical and clerical training for public housing residents and Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) clients. • FWHA purchases monthly bus passes for public housing residents who are employed, enrolled in training/school, or actively searching for a job Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) Programs • Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) furnishes temporary financial assistance to families with needy children who are deprived of parental support. • Through Medicaid, HHSC facilitates access to Medicaid programs for recipients of TANF, the elderly, and the disabled. • Texas Works helps people identify barriers to employment and find resources that will help them along the road to economic and social self-sufficiency • The Food Stamp Program helps low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled to buy nutritionally adequate food to supplement their diets. • Nutrition programs include the Child and Adult Care Food Program, National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs, Special Milk Program, and the Summer Food Service Program. • Food distribution programs provide USDA -donated commodities to low-income individuals and families, public and private schools, summer food -service programs, food banks, and soup kitchens. • TexCare offers two separate children's health insurance programs, CHIP and Children's Medicaid. Both programs provide health insurance for children at flexible rates, based on the number of people in the family and the family's income and expenses. Community Initiatives • Mental Health Connection is a county -wide collaboration to improve the delivery of mental health services to those in need. • Fort Worth ISD established three Family Resource Centers on middle school campuses to improve families' access to mental health services. • Infant Mortality Initiative, headed by Catholic Charities, addresses the infant mortality rate, especially in African -American communities. • The Early Childhood Matters Initiative is focused on ensuring every child will enter kindergarten ready to succeed. • Planned Parenthood of North Texas, Inc. is dedicated to the achievement of parenthood by choice by ensuring the provision of voluntary reproductive health care and sexuality education and by advocating the right of every person to receive these services. 73 United Way of Tarrant County Working with 43 community partners and other local organiza- tions, United Way helps seniors and kids, strengthens families, provides crisis relief, and promotes health A comprehensive list of agencies serving the Fort Worth area and United Way's impact initiatives can be found at the United Way website www unitedwaytarrant.org (Source. United Way of Metropolitan Tar- rant County, 2009.) Chapter 8: Human Services • The Tarrant County Family Violence Council coordinates law enforcement, corporations, and social service providers in addressing domestic violence. • The Healthy Marriage Initiative, organized by The Parenting Center, coordinates grants and local initiatives aimed at promoting healthy mamage and strengthening families. United Way and Community Partners Nonprofit organizations and their volunteers have played an important part in addressing human service needs in Fort Worth. United Way of Tarrant County addresses the needs of kids, families, seniors, health, and crisis relief. United Way has also focused on five important community issues. early learning and development, child abuse and neglect prevention, isolation among older adults, childhood obesity, and adult literacy Beginning in 2009, the United Way will serve as a conduit for City funds to provide services to formerly homeless residents of permanent supportive housing units. The following related agencies provide services to the City. • The Area Agency on Aging (AAA) of Tarrant County plans, coordinates, funds, and provides human care services for older adults and their caregivers. AAA distributes over $3.5 million in federal and state funds annually for such services as home -delivered meals, congregate meals in senior centers, transportation to medical services, respite to caregivers, legal assistance/benefits counseling, information and referral, and long-term care ombudsman. AAA also operates the Aging & Disabilities Resource Center at The Resource Connection, that connects people with services that enable them to remain independent as long as possible. • Corporate Champions for Children is a Tarrant County collaboration of 17 organizations, including the City of Fort Worth, committed to providing quality care for all children. The program is coordinated through the First Texas Council of Camp Fire. • Tarrant County Child Care Management Service subsidizes child care costs and provides child care through a network of contracted providers for children of parents who are active in the workforce or preparing for employment. Child Care Associates of Fort Worth and Tarrant County operates the Service under a contract with the Tarrant County Workforce Board. • Head Start is a national program which provides comprehensive developmental services to low-income, pre-school children, and social services to their families. • The Boys and Girls Clubs of Greater Fort Worth operate programs within two public housing communities and in stand-alone facilities. Tutoring, mentonng, and educational, social and recreational activities are offered. • The YWCA sponsors teenage pregnancy prevention programs in collaboration with area schools and two public housing communities. Chapter 8: Human Services 74 AIDS AIDS Outreach Center, a community partner of United Way, works in Tarrant and surrounding counties to serve persons with HIV, educate the public about HIV prevention, and advocate for sound HIV public policy More information on community partners can be found at the United Way website (Source. AIDS Outreach Center 2009 ) ••••••••••••••••••0•••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 9: NEIGHBORHOOD CAPACITY BUILDING Neighborhoods are the building blocks of strong communities. Strengthening the capacity of neighborhoods to achieve their goals will have a positive impact on Fort Worth's future. This chapter focuses on the programs that have been developed to respond to the needs and issues facing Fort Worth neighborhoods. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Neighborhood capacity is most developed when there is a sense of community among area residents. With a sense of community comes pride in the neighborhood, a strong neighborhood image, and resident involvement in neighborhood improve- ments. Neighborhood organizations, such as associations, non -profits, Citizens On Patrol, and neighborhood alliances, are a means to build neighborhood capacity The number of neighborhood organizations in Fort Worth is growing. Since August 1997, the number of registered associations has increased from 114 to 292. The City has 16 registered neighborhood alliances, a variety of neighborhood redevelopment organizations, and community development corporations. New neighborhood asso- ciations are regularly forming and registering with the City However, there are existing neighborhood organizations that are not registered with the City, and there are many areas in Fort Worth that remain unrepresented by any type of neighborhood association. The City's goal is to have an active neighborhood association in every residential part of Fort Worth. Neighborhood associations are involved in a wide vanety of activities, such as plant- ing trees, organizing clean-ups, funding special neighborhood street signage, and community policing. Neighborhoods monitor zoning and building proposals in their areas through a City program that provides courtesy notification to residents about local zoning and development cases that are going before the Zoning Commission, City Plan Commission, and Board of Adjustment. The City is better able to serve neighborhoods where established neighborhood organizations foster close links to residents. Through neighborhood organizations, residents can discuss issues and concur on a clear set of priorities and course of action to reach their goals. Neiihborhood-Based Nonprofit Organizations In addition to neighborhood associations, there are also community -based nonprofit development corporations. These nonprofit entities can operate in the market just as for -profit developers, meaning the neighborhoods themselves can redevelop their communities or serve as catalysts for redevelopment. New development corporations have been created in several central city neighbor- hoods. The City provides funding for neighborhood improvements and neighborhood plan implementation by community development corporations (CDCs) Community -based nonprofit development corporations include groups such as the Near Southeast Community Development Corporation, the Near 75 Areas Covered by Existing Neighborhood Associations, 2009 .f� 10 5 0 10 Miles There are 292 registered neighborhood associations in Fort Worth The service areas of neighborhood associations are depicted above It is the City's goal to have all neighborhoods represented by formal neighborhood associations. (Sources: Community Relations Department and Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 9• Neighborhood Capacity Building Northside Partners Council, and the Lake Como Area Council. These organizations have been formed by the residents themselves, which is why they are termed community -based. Many of them have also been certified by the Housing and Economic Development Department as Community Housing Develop- ment Organizations (CHDOs) to receive operating and project funding for housing activities through federal HOME funds. Often a prerequisite for funding is that a significant portion of their board members be residents of the low- and moderate - income communities they serve. This has meant new responsibilities for neighbor- hood leaders and the need for building the capacity of these new organizations. Par- ticularly when federal grant monies are a source of funding, the development corpo- ration must satisfy complex reporting and administrative requirements. However, such community -based organizations represent new energy and commitment to spe- cific areas of the city Other Tvoes of Neighborhood Organizations Community policing groups have been an effective force in helping to reduce crime. In Fort Worth, these groups are important neighborhood resources. Fort Worth's award -winning community policing program has trained over 5,200 members, of which more than 1,100 are organized in 207 Citizens on Patrol groups. The community policing structure also includes citizen advisory committees that provide support. Community Outreach Teams from the Community Relations Department work with residents to identify concerns and implement solutions, aiming to anticipate issues rather than respond to crisis situations. Outreach staff conduct assessments and pro- vide intervention and referral services. Churches, synagogues, and other faith -based organizations are also important community -based organizations. Another type of neighborhood organization is the neighborhood alliance or coalition. The Fort Worth League of Neighborhood Associations is the largest of these alliances. It has a membership of more than 85 neighborhood associations that meet quarterly to discuss issues and concerns, take positions on local legislative matters, and sponsor neighborhood framing. Other alliances have formed in geographic regions of the city The Riverside Alliance, for example, has a formal organizational structure linking seven neighborhoods in the larger Riverside area. Neighborhood Planning Needs The City's ability to plan for individual neighborhoods is limited, and the number of neighborhood associations that want to plan for their area is growing. Some neighborhoods have taken the initiative in developing plans for their neighborhoods with technical assistance from City planning staff. Highland Hills, Carter Riverside, Stop Six, Polytechnic Heights/Wesleyan, and Woodhaven are among the neighborhoods that have completed such plans. Chapter 9• Neighborhood Capacity Building 76 Established in 1985, the primary purpose of the Fort Worth League of Neighborhood Associations is to protect and enhance the neighborhood concept within the civic structure and to encourage, communicate, educate, share information and exchange ideas to promote a better quality of life for those who reside within the City Fort Worth, Texas (Source. Fort Worth League of Neighborhood Associations, 2009.) a • • • • • • • • • •' • • • • a • • a I a a a • • a a a ••••••••••••••••••!•i•••••••••••• GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Assist neighborhoods in forming associations, increasing their capacity, and preparing and implementing neighborhood plans. • Help 10 neighborhoods form associations in 2010 • Respond to over 500 requests each year from neighborhoods and residents regardmg accessing City services and provide referrals as needed. • In 2010, prepare and implement additional organizational development and neighborhood training opportunities. PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Existing neighborhood capacity building programs are discussed below Community Relations Department The City's Neighborhood Office, part of the Neighborhood & Community Outreach Division of the Community Relations Department, was created in 1997 Its purpose is to help neighborhoods organize and develop the skills necessary to create and maintain successful neighborhood associations. The office is responsible for registering new neighborhood organizations with the City The Neighborhood Office also offers organizational development and leadership training opportunities to organizations or individuals working toward maintaining or improving their neighborhood. In addition, the Office serves as a resource for neighborhoods when they have questions or need information about City government. The Neighborhood Office maintains a neighborhood web site (www.fwlinc.org) to provide important information to neighborhoods, improve communication between neighborhoods, foster alliances among neighborhoods, and link individual neighborhood web sites. Courtesy Notification System Neighborhood associations that are registered with the City are included in the Courtesy Notification System. Through this system, neighborhoods receive information on cases scheduled to go before the Zoning Commission, City Plan Commission, or Board of Adjustment if those cases are located within the boundaries of an association or within one -quarter mile of a neighborhood's boundaries. Neighborhood Planning Programs The Planning and Development Department and the Housing and Economic Development Department plan for individual neighborhoods as available staffing and resources allow Recent neighborhood planning efforts include the Oakland Corners Neighborhood Empowerment Zone Plan, Miller Avenue Corridor Study, the Lake Worth Vision Plan, and Texas Motor Speedway Area Master Plan. The Housing and Economic Development Department also provides neighborhood planning assistance, 77 Fort Worth Neighborhood Office Web Site FORT WORTH;, Divisions Boards & Commissions Contact us vitivmsinqmikk., Housing Discrimination Employment Discrimination Cray Services (Aide Nei borhood E-News Neighborhood Database Government 1 Business 1Residentsl Visitors Online Services Lest Yawed. Economic end Camen+dy Dew ltiEig;balood O11ic* Nome r C3raa41 Ur I Jots I Dcpsrtmrras I Melt: dl(wr8 sEE n ih@ CEO at ton Worth. Torus The Neighborhood Education Office is partofthe Community Relations Department : . (CRD). The Neighborhood office serves the residents of Tort Worth toy encouraging , Resa V- and assisting neighborhoods with the organization ofneighborhood associations, ,.,,... helping and supporting existing neighborhood associations. facilitating i j9eiahgorhoatl communication between residents and city departments, providing useful ' pfdebi+,i,@g, information to neighborhoods. and developing educational opportunities for , neighborhood associations to continue to grow and be successful. • WHAM A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION A neighborhood association is an organization o1 individuats who live near one another in a defined geographic area and have the primary purpose ofvrortong to maintain or improve the overall quality of life for ail individuals within those boundaries. TheNeighborhood Office Web Site (http://www fwlinc org) is a project of the City's Neighborhood Office It was created to improve communications be- tween neighborhoods. On the web site, users can search the Neighborhood Database, which is maintained by the Neighborhood Office, view a neighbor- hood calendar of meetings, access archived neighborhood press releases, and view web pages created by individual neighborhood organizations (Source: Community Relations Department, 2009.) Chapter 9• Neighborhood Capacity Building capacity building, and funding to selected neighborhoods located in special target areas and neighborhood empowerment zones, such as Polytechnic Heights Educa- tional Corridor, Polytechnic Heights/Wesleyan Comdor, and Stop Six. The Transportation and Public Works Department also conducts special transportation planning studies in selected neighborhoods. Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) Program The Housing and Economic Development Department provides traming, technical assistance, and funding for operation and projects to certified CHDOs in Fort Worth. Many CHDOs are neighborhood based and managed by neighborhood leaders. The Housing and Economic Development Department convenes CHDOs and other com- munity development corporations (CDCs) at a bi-monthly meeting with resource speakers. It provides one-on-one financial management assistance, conducts training workshops, and provides technical assistance, work write-up, and inspections for housing non -profits. Through the CHDO Program, CHDOs and CDCs also have ac- cess to framing and technical assistance provided by other organizations such as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Enterprise Foundation, Texas C-Bar, etc. Neighborhood Empowerment Zone Plan AKLAND CORNER EIGHBO' RHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE STRIA=TEGIC PLAN Rebuilding neighborhoods with compatible quality inlill housing end appropriate mixed - use development in commercial areas. Adopted by Fort Worth City Council January 6, 2009 FORTWom The Oakland Corners Neighborhood Empowerment Zone Strategic Plan was adopted by the City Council in January 2009 (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Chapter 9. Neighborhood Capacity Building 78 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• PART III DEVELOPING A SOUND ECONOMY •-•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 10: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Economic development is a process that influences the growth and restructuring of an economy to enhance the well-being of a community Through economic development activities, existing busmesses are nurtured and expanded, new businesses are attracted to an area, entrepreneurship is fostered, and new enterprises are created. Each of these activities leads to job creation, an increase in the tax base, and improvement of the overall quality of life within a community A community's economic health generally depends on its ability to attract and hold business establishments and industrial plants. The principal local economic factors that affect business location decisions include proximity to markets, availability of a suitable labor force, land prices, prevailing wage scales, cost of living, transportation costs, utility rates, and tax levels. Businesses are also influenced by the character of the community, especially features which enhance its livability• good housing supply, quality of schools, public safety and other services, viable transportation options, and availability of cultural and recreational amenities. There has been a shift over the years in policy and philosophy regarding the relationship between local government and the economy Increasingly, cities are looking for ways to stimulate their local economy to generate more jobs for their urban residents, as well as to increase the tax base and per capita income. However, increasing the tax base and per capita income is most challenging in central city areas, where cities are faced with issues such as high unemployment and disinvestment. This chapter discusses existing conditions and trends in Fort Worth, and the City's economic development goals and objectives, policies and strategies, and programs. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS The Fort Worth economy has evolved from dependence on the cattle, cotton, oil, and defense industries to its current emphasis on services, transportation, and high tech manufacturing. These conditions are a significant improvement from the beginning of the 1990s, when Fort Worth was experiencing a high unemployment rate. A Peat Marwick study identified Tarrant County as the second most defense -dependent area in the United States in the early 1990s. At that time, the local economy lost over 44,000 jobs as a result of defense downsizing and its impact on Carswell Air Force Base. Since then, community leaders have worked diligently to diversify the economy and to help stimulate small business development and growth. The City, in conjunction with local business leaders, initiated a number of economic diversification projects, including the Fort Worth Business Assistance Center (BAC), and Tech Fort Worth. 81 Tarrant County College Trinity River Campus The new Tarrant County College Trinity River Campus is housed in the renovated former RadioShack Downtown headquarters located on the south bank of the Trinity River (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Chapter 10• Economic Development 4 Major Employers Fort Worth is developing into a major center for industry, technology, transportation, and government. The table on the right shows selected major employers located in Fort Worth. The diversity of the city's economy should continue to expand in various economic sectors, such as electronics, manufacturing, corporate headquarters and offices, finance, health care, transportation, education, and hospitality Employment Centers Employment centers are areas with large concentrations of employees, including business parks, business clusters, and industrial parks. These centers are generally located in areas with access to major highways. Fort Worth has five significant employment centers: Downtown, Medical District, CentrePort Business Park, Alliance, and Carter Industrial Park. The largest employment center is the Downtown Central Business District (CBD), with an employment base of nearly 39,000 persons. This urban center has eleven million square feet of office space, first-class hotels, restaurants, shops, arts and entertainment facilities, and historic structures. Employment in this area is expected to continue to grow The Barnett Shale natural gas boom has contributed to the growing Downtown employment base, as companies such as XTO Energy, Devon, Range Resources, and Chesapeake demand more office space. Downtown is expenencmg a residential renaissance as individuals and families embrace an urban lifestyle. Several Downtown hotels have rebranded and invested in upgrades which, combined with the Omni Hotel opening m January 2009 and recently renovated Convention Center, will further stimulate convention and visitor business. Higher education is becoming a mainstay of the Downtown, with the University of Texas at Arlington Fort Worth Center joining Texas Wesleyan Law School and the new Tarrant County College Trinity River Campus housed in the former RadioShack corporate campus. In addition, redevelopment of the southern part of the CBD, including the Lancaster Avenue, Intermodal Transportation Center, and Convention Center areas, will create significant opportunities for new jobs, businesses, and services. The second largest employment center is the Medical District, with over 30,000 employees. About 10,000 are employed at the five large medical centers. Another 8,000 work in medically related businesses such as doctor's offices, imaging centers, outpatient surgery centers, treatment facilities, and support services. The remaining 12,000 employees work m an array of non -medical businesses. A Tax Increment Finance (TIF) District helps fund enhanced infrastructure investments that support redevelopment and job growth in the Medical District. The leadership of Fort Worth South, Inc., a nonprofit corporation, will be instrumental in this redevelopment. The CentrePort Business Park, located just south of the DFW airport, also has over 30,000 employees. Under development since 1982, this employment center is composed of 8 5 million square feet of office, retail, and industrial space, with a total projected build -out of 14.2 million square feet. In addition, 2,000 multifamily units are located m the area. The area also houses a 300-room Mamott Hotel. Many of the businesses at this location are related to the airport, such as the American Airlines Chapter 10: Economic Development 82 2008 Selected Major Employers in Fort Worth (Number of Employees) Company American Airlines Lockheed Martin Carswell NAS Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth ISO City of Fort Worth Harris Methodist Hospital Tarrant County Cook Children s Medical Center BNSF Railway Company Radio Shack 2008 2000 Percent Growth/Decline 25,457 14,710 14,332 11,390 10,984 10,225 10,041 9,117 6,144 5,416 4,500 4,000 4,173 4,107 3,900 2,200 2,907 3,500 73.1% 25.8% 74% 101% 13.4% 12.5% 1.6% 77.3% -16.9% 2,523 4,600-45.2°l° In 2008, American Airlines was the largest employer in Fort Worth. Over the course of the 1990s, Fort Worth's economic base became less defense -dependent and more diverse (Source: Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce and Carswell NAS Joint Reserve Base, 2009.) a a a a a a a a a I a I a a a a a a a 1 1 4 1 ••••••••••1•••••••••••••••••••••• world headquarters. Its central location within the Metroplex, along with good access to highways, developable land, a commuter rail station for the Trinity Railway Express, and proximity to the airport, will contribute to its continued growth. Another area that will grow due to its location and access to roadways, rail, and an airport is the 17,000-acre AlhanceTexas development. The success of AlhanceTexas demonstrates that public and private sector partnerships can stimulate local and regional growth. Combined public and private investment at Alliance allowed key infrastructure to be developed, including a large general aviation airport, water and wastewater facilities, and highway improvements. Of nearly $6.5 billion invested in the area, $347 million in local, state, and federal funds were used to augment nearly $6.2 billion in private investment. Between 1990 and 2008 the Alliance area generated over $730 million in property taxes for the cities of Fort Worth, Haslet, and Roanoke, the counties of Denton and Tarrant, and the Keller and Northwest Independent School Districts. The total share collected by the City of Fort Worth was approximately $140.9 million, with $21.2 million received in 2008. For the North Texas region, the AllianceTexas development has generated a $36.4 billion economic impact. Based on the 68th and 69th Annual Report of the Foreign -Trade Zone Board to the U.S Congress, Alliance Foreign -Trade Zone #196 ranks No. 1 for two consecutive years among U.S. general purpose Foreign -Trade Zones in foreign merchandise admitted to the zone. In FY 2006, the latest year that data was available, Foreign -Trade Zone #196 admitted more than $4 billion in foreign products. The amount nearly doubled to $7 45 billion in foreign product admitted in 2007, the latest year that data is available. Major users of Foreign -Trade Zone #196 at AllianceTexas include Hyundai, Trans -Trade, KFS, LEGO, M&M Aerospace Hardware, and Motorola. The 17,000-acre AllianceTexas development includes the Alliance Global Logistics Hub, Alliance Town Center, the Monterra Village apartment home community, the corporate campuses of Circle T Ranch, the Vaquero estate golf community, and the Heritage and Saratoga residential communities. AllianceTexas now houses 7,100 single-family homes and 220 companies that occupy 31 million square feet. Sixty- five of the companies at AllianceTexas are ranked on the Fortune 500, Global 500 or Forbes List of Top Private Firms. As of July 2009, 28,000 jobs have been created. Only 5,500 of Alliance's 17,000 total acres have been developed. At full build out, the development is projected to house 88 million square feet of commercial space and employ 92,000 workers. Carter Industrial Park is the fourth largest industrial park in Tarrant County with over nine million square feet of light industrial space, twice as much square footage as the next largest industrial park. Mereken Land & Production Company manages this fast growing employment center, which enjoys a 96.5 percent occupancy rate. Thirty-two companies employ over 9,000 people in the industrial park, having a concentration of national and regional food and beverage related processors and distributors. The largest employer is Alcon Laboratories, occupying two million square feet, with over 2,500 employees. The significance of Carter Industrial Park to the tax and employment base of Southeast Fort Worth makes the future growth of this 83 -1911 P 10 Major Employment Centers - �� Alliance /Downtown' 5 Medical District •Carter Industrial 'Park {.1 ;.3 0 CentrePort Business Park • 10 Miles Downtown is Fort Worth's largest employment center, with nearly 39,000 jobs, followed by the Medical District and CentrePort with approximately 30,000 jobs each. Alliance, with over 20,000 jobs, and Carter Industrial Park, with over 9,000, are also recognized as major employment centers. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 10- Economic Development employment center a key element of the Southeast Fort Worth Action Plan, the strategic plan guiding redevelopment in southeast Fort Worth. Labor Force The Fort Worth economy hosts a diverse array of businesses in all industry sectors, including high technology A highly skilled labor force is essential to Fort Worth maintaining its competitiveness in business relocations and expansions. According to Texas Workforce Commission, in 2009 the Fort Worth labor force was approximately 329,040 civilian individuals, with about 92 percent employed, and 8 percent or 25,447 unemployed. Of those city residents that are unemployed and underemployed, many lack the necessary skills for today's job market. As a result these residents remain in a cycle of chronic unemployment and underemployment. According to the 2000 Census, approximately 27 percent of persons 25 years and over did not have a high school diploma or college degree in Fort Worth. Lack of adequate funds, transportation, and childcare services are often cited as reasons for not pursuing educational and job training programs. The lack of education and workforce skills translates into low wages and an inadequate labor force to meet the workforce needs of the business community In order to address local workforce needs, vanous organizations have established job training programs designed to meet the current and long-term needs of the labor market (see section on job training organizations in this chapter). Tourism Tourism continues to be a significant contributor to Fort Worth's economy The Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB), founded in 1965, under contract with the City of Fort Worth, is the official marketing organization for the City of Fort Worth. The Bureau's mission is to market the city as a premier business and leisure destination, enriching Fort Worth's hospitality industry and the community's overall quality of life. The CVB estimates that 5.5 million people visited Fort Worth in 2008 and stayed 10.2 million days, spending $1.3 billion. In 2008, visitors spent $260 million on restaurants and other eating and drinking establishments, $257 million on accommodations, $224 million on retail goods (excluding gasoline), and $199 million on arts, entertainment and recreation. Tourism also generated 12,300 jobs with earnings of $348 million, and local tax revenue of $30.9 million which accounts for more than one -fifth of all local tax receipts, not including property taxes. Approximately 80 percent of visitors (7 7 million people) came from Texas cities outside the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex area. Many of Fort Worth's major attractions and events are located within three areas of the city- the Historic Stockyards, Sundance Square in Downtown, and the Cultural District. In an effort to create a common vision and goals for the corridors that link these historically significant and heavily visited areas, the City of Fort Worth and North Central Texas Council of Governments sponsored the Fort Worth Linkages Study The 1996 Linkages Study recognized the importance of linking the three districts to encourage visitors of one district to remain m Fort Worth and visit the other entertainment districts. The Linkages Study called for the following: enhanced Chapter 10• Economic Development 84 r • 10 5 Visitor Districts 0 Texas Motor Speedway / 10 Miles Fort Worth residents and visitors enjoy the events and attractions in the city's five main visitor districts. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009) •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.a signage with distinctive icons and colors to direct visitors to each district; information systems, redevelopment of the corridors with mixed uses; and fun and frequent transportation, such as a light rail streetcar Partly in response to the linkages study, updated signage is expected to be installed in 2010 to create a comprehensive wayfinding system. In addition, a Modem Streetcar Study is underway The spring 2002 opening of LaGrave Field along North Main Street is one example of redevelopment that supports tourism. A part of the vision for North Main Street, LaGrave Field is expected to serve as one component of a comprehensive revitalization strategy for the North Main Street corridor, in addition to being a part of the city's tourism infrastructure. LaGrave Field serves as the ballpark for the Fort Worth Cats, a professional minor league team in the Central Baseball League, and for local college teams. The 5,000-seat ballpark could also be used for other playoff games and tournaments. In 2005, LaGrave Field attracted an estimated 225,000 people to minor league games and other events. Although the Historic Stockyards, Downtown, and the Cultural District are the three most heavily visited areas of Fort Worth, attractions and events in other areas of the city also draw significant numbers of tourists each year For example, the Texas Motor Speedway, located in north Fort Worth, brings approximately 1.25 million visitors to the area annually It is the largest sports facility in the Metroplex, the second-largest in the country, and the third -largest in the world. Currently providing for an estimated 6,200 jobs per year, the facility serves as a catalyst for additional restaurant, hotel, and retail development in the Alliance area. Another tourist attraction in the Alliance area is the Cabela's retail store that opened in May of 2005 Cabela's, a popular hunting -and -fishing retailer, built a 230,000- square foot store, the company's second-largest, in north Fort Worth. Cabela's stores are known as educational and entertainment attractions, mixing a decor of museum - quality animal displays with colorful dioramas. Cabela's Fort Worth store employs approximately 350 workers and is expected to draw more than 4 million visitors annually from northern Texas, Louisiana, and southern Oklahoma. In addition to attractions and special events, a significant number of people visit Fort Worth each year to attend expositions, sporting events, meetings, and conventions. For example, in FY 2008-2009, the 491 events held at the Fort Worth Convention Center attracted approximately 1 million people. The Convention Center completed a $75 million renovation and expansion in 2003 The improvements include 255,000 square feet of exhibit space, over 60,000 square feet of meeting space, and a 28,000+ square foot ballroom. The Omni Fort Worth Hotel, a 614-room first class convention headquarters hotel opened in January 2009, along with a 1,050 space convention center garage. The two developments, along with other improvements to the hotel inventory in downtown, will help position Fort Worth as a preferred destination in the meetings and convention market. Central City Revitalization The City has developed a comprehensive strategy to promote central city revitalization. The central city includes 30 percent of Fort Worth's land area, and 85 Fort Worth's Central City Fort Worth is committed to revitalizing its central city through a comprehensive and coordinated strategy that addresses economic development, housing, historic preservation, infrastructure, parks, cultural programs, human services, and safety initiatives. The central city is defined to include certain low and moderate income areas within Loop 820 (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009) Chapter 10• Economic Development over 54 percent of the population. It also has a high concentration of poverty and unemployment compared to Fort Worth as a whole. In 2000, the City Council adopted a definition of the central city for revitalization purposes as the area within Interstate 820 that consists of the following: • CDBG eligible block groups. • State designated enterprise zones. • Census block groups that are contiguous by 75 percent or more of their perimeter to CDBG eligible block groups or state designated enterprise zones. Revitalization of commercial districts in the central city is an important component of the City's economic development efforts. Many of Fort Worth's older commercial areas developed along commercial comdors. Linear in shape and located along designated arterial streets, these corridors tend to be characterized by segregated land uses, a large number of curb cuts, large amounts of signage and impervious surfaces, and parking lots located in front of commercial structures. As higher -income residents moved out of the central city and development activity moved well beyond Loop 820, the linear commercial corridors and commercial districts became less economically viable. The City seeks to revitalize these commercial districts by promoting their redevelopment as mixed -use growth centers and urban villages — districts which are more compact, contain a greater mix of land uses, and give greater emphasis to pedestrian and transit access. The City's principal strategies for central city revitalization are: • Develop compact, pedestrian -oriented mixed -use growth centers. • Revitalize distressed commercial corridors by developing mixed -use urban villages along those corridors. • Develop a rail transit system that connects the growth centers and urban villages, and promotes transit -oriented development (TOD) in appropriate transit station locations. Mixed -use growth centers and urban villages are urban distncts having a concentration ofiobs, housing, schools, parks, and public facilities. Growth centers and villages also provide access to public transportation m a walkable, compact area with a unique sense of place. Integrating transit in growth centers and villages will facilitate economic vibrancy and sustainability in these districts. Cnteria for designating urban villages mclude: • Presence of a market opportunity in the near- or long-term. • Upward trend in local investment. • Ability to create mixed -use activity centers, emphasizing live/work/play opportunities with multi -modal access. • Demonstrated community need, both perceived and quantified, and presence of unified, energetic stakeholders. • Compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan. Chapter 10 Economic Development 86 Designated Urban Villages 25 1 Historic Marine 2 Six Points 3 West Seventh 4 South Main 5 Near East Side 6 Oakland Corners 7 Ridglea 8 Magnolia '1; IN Urban Village 5 WI¢ 9 Evans & Rosedale 10 Polytechnic/Wesleyan 11 Historic Handley 12 Berry/University 13 Bluebonnet Circle 14 Hemphill/Berry 15 Berry/Riverside 16 Berry/Stalcup In 2002, the City adopted conceptual redevelopment plans for urban vil- lages along priority commercial corridors targeted for reinvestment. Since that time the City added new urban villages for a total of 16 A map of each designated urban village is provided on the following pages The City has secured $4 4 million for planning, design and construction in selected urban villages. Urban village plans for 12 of the 16 villages were adopted by the City Council in December 2007 Streetscape improvements for five urban villages will be designed in 2009 and constructed in 2010 In addition, the 2004 bond program designated $2 million in local match funding for urban village projects and to secure other funding as it becomes available a • • a • a • • • s • • • • • • • a • a a •••••••••••••••r••••••••••••••-, 1 Historic Marine i, 3 West Seventh ®BRIS�TO_ ��t►HLTO HAMIL-TON• �,AVE w 5T '-4 Pt j Wpm ®I liii I �z T 9/`' ?St* UMW linSikaICI �G L•ANCASTERAVE !. k lq- T�J �,1,ERRIMACST 5 SSTsMCQi HUH tlufw UMW aR NM* Urban Village Boundaries 87 977 DELL—ST EMBREY PL 0 LEMORE�A' VE' RACECST Q• _,1.E RS-AVER MARSHA MON GILLIS— .47 4- I: 1. 2. Six Points Ems_ I 'DE Si rill VIRGINIACT_4Z�RPY�Z-; `,—'mI2 EEHUHN M�LMOREAA ----AVE.! NOBLE=AVE. Mkt • Zy Q • ZQ CON- w� Q P_HY STffiw `.L O z 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 2 'Miles 4 South Main U RD RQ RAGE=ST FI lI 0 2 1 tit-hs a 40 11�--7� DAGGETT= AVE r � .C�i��rni l4��kri.gq@Iwp�� .4 CROADWAY -AVE ww . Nod����g ELLP�ST ¢ird••matli for I1 i <135WI 1I BESSIE�ST1: 11m * }Vdat ��.u��u� wtrir, NN (_> Y/i"1"1uTLI� CKER-ST...N1 x�Q (�AI:ilIN1��.ga�d.iN.at e� Sz41 FANN1ElE sfITi -� ZIINIIN HAT-TdE/lssT a �'1 u-—.wl®unk**A.vltli.bilBum II. O1 "CANNON" Z""" Q_ � �fl.�.«..... m7fi. ;O I � III'Iti'iIIII� f1 1 O.75I a _? lira-<-,-i-t��iril 1 1 :LEHLurcgliillwahm,::::::::-,zw..,..MIIINl1�711 Qjj_ i��tNn 1@E�I.]�Nrl.l� ,.. louv.... w, r:.p�'1 !IRMA`sSS,1 z— it Subject Urban Village Other Urban Village Chapter 10: Economic Development tun 0 i LOCKE.-AV.E O 0.125 5 Near East Side 7 Ridglea w P 1.11.1.' 1111 emom L LmAVE IP Urban Village Boundaries .11.I.11...!.1 I I ralll!i hIil<l Timm ' r CURZON AVE -"imp" u! ....:. DONNELLY-AVE avant tuna aitllm ! 7. EDDES=AVE giu cC win wnQInIH�, ILf i4Fih V E 1� z M e6'i1fMv~iIU ?' 717,{wuUc !I1111dLu li!1112 T1 INMOINffilhani B " 111"l1 t'T n■ x p mUINIMI-'. ME M BOO R. = AVE um" ii��NNELL AVH Z}ME 'll .._ BO nun maim i s Pullman ammo : -I r Ill KIEPATRICK=A E DUI [Ili it TITIT ! I! 111111 H Jill (1:I:II:II11] 0.5 .� Panes 1 GOODMANA L•IBBEYYAVG 1NI1 HIM I! i€ lilt : 1!111 IT [TIT rifff t_.lT1I iIi!71 -4111111 II'IIL I:: lilt €!1 IIt4I€li' FIT iIL ill I %Yl • Al HAZEUE RD IImiasII 11111M I r.._I. r I..?rrrr I I I WI I I 1'. 0 0.125 =�.. 6 Oakland Corners .t.tt-L4i J -. 11 - Qom-.. ignE7 I 146 t;-4 On IN i tinCtatii IS Il W p SHr ;odd w_011>zoo co MIN 0.25 H'• PSHIRE BL-Vb ....i LA11MBETH;:'LN; NCASTEli AVE 0 Mu =7 VIRGINIA=LN tm� l�l rQ1 —AVER w- �,1II��Y 2111 iii 11 I'� D• l ORRIS CT 0.5 Nles 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 r 8 Magnolia Dili. Subject Urban Village Ca m ■ W NORMA STD. a ! *i W of 0 0 W 111 R ri INSO ST-Q 0 0 u Other Urban Village Chapter 10: Economic Development 88 J -. ,__...1�� ter •AN!NOit STEE L uiRR< O. DA.SHWOOD `S d tBU S,287 9 Evans & Rosedale N 0i 1 y� DASH O fi !/I I•J 0.125 0.25 Urban Village Boundaries ,. HAT-S• L..11 i i 11 CANNON .. SPui°' UM':......... Lu Mu) LEUDA_S,-AU W ERRE E .MAGNOLIA� AVE U) ur " LEANDER ST 5W L I : Urn ��l Y iJ]i_fl_ ,0, waxH WMBObTTpST OM! INOWNIAilli >11 0.5 tiles 11 Historic Handley U V -_-, L_ 1 10 Polytechnic/Wesleyan mitiq A -AVE I " l OSEDALEE=SST 41111587,140156110i ritiJ11I 1 11 F B9 0.125 0.25 BELL-AIR�E: , DiR.. o � ,w� zH• 1 l�Ylm aCill� rw r�m_,asujok_� °�gym�cl•6C 10_,„ . �o sza� mii `BENBROOK' BL'VD- — f� oui °�I,�}� \'ONS7—/ cvY 0.5 roles 12 Berry/University UR;30 ttoce{ate SRa ienIlnwr Il+ilH1I44-11f'fl l!,II`;f�1"lill.ill ... �.`_ C El�riV_r GREY—ST Amatezt LT0,IVDEN_STcO�q r�' 21 Ca O z1 tzi� 0.125 0.25 Subject Urban Village Other Urban Village 89 Chapter 10• Economic Development Urban Village Boundaries 13 Bluebonnet Circle 15 Berry/Riverside Chapter 10• Economic Development 90 14 Hemphill/Berry ORAr Edsr„AMw101h,I WOODLAND=AVE ai r i -a T. IIFFik ..R141,11FP rll 0 0.125 0.25 0 5 Miles I'llI I 3 0 0.125 0.25 %v 16 Berry/Stalcup Subject Urban Village Other Urban Village ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••`••••••••••••••••• • Physical environment including parks and open space, public improvements, historic building stock, etc. • Potential for creating key entryways or gateways into development areas. Central City Redevelopment Plans A number of focused economic development studies and plans have been prepared in recent years to encourage redevelopment within the central city, particularly in Southeast and East Fort Worth. One significant economic development study, the 1999 Southeast Fort Worth Economic Development Action Plan, addressed the following issues. • Attracting capital for major investment. • Attracting flex and technology space for enhancing business parks. • Balancing the housing stock (includmg an initiative on Lake Arlington). • Establishing tax or other incentives in the area. • Conducting an updated and detailed retail trade study Six target zones for revitalization are identified in the Action Plan and are shown on the map on page 88. The Plan also identified the need for a stronger public -private partnership to facilitate the revitalization effort. In 2000, the nonprofit redevelopment organization Southeast Fort Worth, Inc. was established to implement the Action Plan. Within zone one, the Evans & Rosedale Business and Cultural District is being developed in Near Southeast Fort Worth between I-35W and Evans Avenue in accordance with the community's 2000 Vision Plan. In October 2004, the City Council adopted a master plan for the district, which outlines implementation strategies for the community's Vision Plan. It is intended to celebrate the African -American heritage of Near Southeast Fort Worth through the development of an attractive, economically vibrant, pedestrian -scaled neighborhood center The District concept includes new residences, retail and other commercial businesses, and a recently constructed plaza that celebrates the rich heritage of the area. Spearheaded by the Near Southeast Community Development Corporation, historic preservation is a major element of the Vision Plan. The City has leveraged approximately $14 7 million in federal funds to make the community's vision a reality These funds were used for property acquisition, environmental cleanup, demolition of non -historic and structurally unsound buildings, the reconstruction and streetscaping of Evans Avenue, business development activities, and other efforts. The Shamblee Branch Library, which incorporates the renovated Tommy Tucker Building, opened in 2008. The City is also working to help stimulate investment by relocating components of several City departments to the newly constructed Hazel Harvey Peace Center for Neighborhoods in the Evans and Rosedale Urban Village. A similar economic development study has been prepared by Woodhaven Community Development, Inc., a nonprofit community development corporation, and the Woodhaven Neighborhood Association. Woodhaven is located in the Eastside sector, northwest of the 1-30 and Loop 820 interchange. The goals of the Woodhaven neighborhood redevelopment plan follow. • Develop vacant, commercially -zoned property and create job opportunities. • Attract neighborhood -oriented commercial uses. • Provide a diverse housing stock with an increased percentage of owner -occupied units. 91 5 Southeast Fort Worth Areas Targeted for Redevelopment 25 0 Site ID Name 1 Near Southeast 2 Polytechnic/Texas Wesleyan Berry Street/Miller Street 3 Community Retail Area Berry Street/Riverside Drive Intl Neighborhood & 4 Community Support Loop 820 Corridor Stop Six to 1-20 1-35 South, Seminary Drive & Loop 820 Area 5MYIes The 1999 Southeast Fort Worth Economic Development Plan identifies six target zones for revitalization. (Source: Southeast Fort Worth Economic Development Plan, 2009.) Chapter 10 Economic Development • Increase the amount of open space and number of recreation areas. • Create a mixed -use district with the characteristics of an urban village, including a concentration of housing and commercial uses, public spaces, pedestrian activity, and access to public transportation. This mix of uses, including a variety of owner- and renter -occupied multifamily units, would be located in buildings with minimal setbacks from the street and reduced parking requirements, achieving the densities necessary to attract private investment and create a strong sense of place. Incentives The City of Fort Worth encourages and participates in economic development efforts that expand Fort Worth's economy and tax base and increase local employment. The City seeks to provide a positive business environment that allows businesses to grow and prosper while making Fort Worth an attractive place for new businesses to locate. Incentives are focused in targeted redevelopment areas within the central city such as urban villages and neighborhood empowerment zones (NEZs). The City of Fort Worth analyzes economic development projects on a case -by -case basis and designs incentives to serve as gap financing in order to expand the City's tax base, and retain and create jobs. When the City partners with a private enterprise by providing public incentives, the private entity employs Fort Worth residents and makes significant investments in developing or redeveloping specific sites. In 2000, the City created the South and Southeast Enterprise Zones, and in 2001 established the State's first pilot Neighborhood Empowerment Zone in the Stop Six neighborhood. The creation of these zones, particularly around mixed -use urban villages, allows the City to offer tax incentives and/or waive fees to promote economic development. Fort Worth has been successful in using incentives and partnership programs with pnvate businesses to help ensure the growth and diversification of the local economy In Magnolia Village, the City used $1 million in federal funds to leverage the $35 million Magnolia Green mixed -use project. To date, $961,212 in federal Economic Development Initiative (EDI) funds have been appropnated to leverage private investment for use in the Polytechnic/Wesleyan Urban Village. Because redeveloping central city property can be more expensive than building in suburban "greenfield" areas, the City seeks to facilitate central city revitalization by offering multiple choices of incentives that can be used in combmation. For example, a project in the Evans & Rosedale Business and Cultural District may take advantage of incentives from the Medical District Tax Increment Finance District and the Evans & Rosedale NEZ. This layering of diverse economic development tools lowers the relative cost of a development project in the central city versus other areas. Please refer to Chapter 23 Financial Incentives for more detailed information on incentives that promote economic development. 3-- Neighborhood Empowerment Zones 1 Riverside 2. Woodhaven 3 West 7th 4 Trinity Park 5 Magnolia 6 Evans/Rosedale 7 Historic Handley 8. Ridglea/Como 9 Polytechnic/TWU 10 Stop Six 11 Lake Arlington 12. Berry/University 13 Berry/Hemphill 14 Rolling Hills 15 Wedgwood 16 Berryhill/Masonic Heights 17 Oakland Corners Since the inception of the Neighborhood Empowerment Zone (NEZ) pro- gram in 2001, the City has designated seventeen NEZs NEZs encourage central city revitalization through development incentives. The most re- cently created NEZ is Oakland Corners in southeast Fort Worth. (Source. Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009) Chapter 10• Economic Development 92 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The following are the pnmary economic development goals and objectives of the City of Fort Worth. • Diversify the economic base and create job opportunities. • Attract businesses that provide employment opportunities for the unemployed and underemployed, diversify the economy, and offer salaries that will increase Fort Worth's median income. • Assist existing businesses with issues impacting their growth and development. • Support international trade and investment opportunities for local businesses. • Support small business start-up and development through the provision of information and technical assistance. • Increase the number of clients served each year at the Business Assistance Center • Increase the number of loans to central city residents for business start-ups and expansions through the services offered by the Fort Worth Economic Development Corporation and the William Mann Jr Community Development Corporation. • Offer technical and counseling services to existing central city businesses in order to ensure business survival through the Business Assistance Center and local chambers of commerce. • Revitalize central city neighborhoods and commercial districts. • Support the expansion of rail transit and associated transit -oriented developments (TOD) as a means to efficiently connect workers and employers. • Market central city locations to business prospects. • Encourage new development and redevelopment in the priority commercial corridors by coordinating efforts of redevelopment organizations and committees, incentives, and funding streams. • Assist Southeast Fort Worth, Inc. and its partners in reaching their goal of creating new jobs in the six economic development zones in Fort Worth's southeast quadrant over the next ten years. POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The following policies and strategies will aid economic development in Fort Worth. Policies • Use the Neighborhood Empowerment Zone program to promote the development of designated urban villages and other targeted redevelopment areas. • Attract redevelopment and new development in the corridors linking the major districts of Downtown, the Historic Stockyards, and the Cultural Distnct. • Use the City's interim land banking policy to expedite redevelopment and reuse of underutilized property and to support the creation of successful transit - oriented developments (TOD). 93 Renovated and Expanded Fort Worth Convention Center The renovation and expansion of the Convention Center has spurred addi- tional development nearby, including the renovation of the Texas and Pacific Terminal, which dates back to 1931, and the new Omni Hotel adjacent to the Center (Source. Public Events Department, 2009.) Chapter 10- Economic Development • Use the sitmg and co -location of City facilities as a catalyst for redevelopment. • Strengthen the effectiveness of economic development incentives by including appropriate capital improvement funding in an overall incentive package that would encourage central city redevelopment. Strategies Business Development • Continue the close partnership between the City and the local chambers of commerce in marketing Fort Worth to business prospects. • Support the growth of small minority- and women -owned businesses by continuing to fund agencies that provide counseling and technical assistance to these businesses. • Market available low interest loan programs for busmess start-ups and expansion in the central city • Enhance collaboration between the Business Assistance Center (BAC) and local chambers of commerce in offering technical and mentorship services to central city businesses. • Recognize the importance of tounsm to Fort Worth's economic development, and support programs such as Linkages. Capital Improvements and Real Estate • Include capital improvement funding in enhanced incentive packages under Neighborhood Empowerment Zone and State Enterprise Zone programs to further central city redevelopment goals. • Encourage rehabilitation and reuse of existing commercial structures throughout commercial districts, where feasible. • Develop and implement targeted revitalization strategies for the City's commercial districts in order to create environments that will attract private investment. • Establish potential incentives to promote appropriate development of vacant land and redevelopment or reuse of deteriorated properties within designated commercial districts. • Encourage the use of federal brownfields programs to assist in central city revitalization. • Support redevelopment, community development, and nonprofit organizations' efforts to spur the revitalization of central city business districts where investment is not occurring but that have redevelopment potential. Workforce Development • Encourage local businesses to create paid training programs that provide unemployed residents with skills for high technology jobs and building trades. • Encourage partnerships between the business community and local chambers of commerce that are designed to strengthen and expand employer coalition groups; increase linkages between business and education to ensure necessary skills are achieved for the future labor force; expand and coordinate customized employer EDA Grant Funded Projects Economic Development Administration (EDA) funds are federal funds tied to job creation and business expansion. EDA funds have supported infra- structure improvements in the Stockyards and the Mercado de Fort Worth, the renovation of the Guinn School as the permanent location for the Busi- ness Assistance Center and related programs, and street reconstruction for Evans Avenue within the Evans & Rosedale Urban Village (Sources: Housing and Economic Development Department and Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Mercado Building The urban village development program seeks to create a mix of uses within a pedestrian -friendly environment. For the Historic Marine Urban Village, the vision is to create a Mexican-themed marketplace with restau- rants and shops that complement each other (Source. Housing and Economic Development Department and Planning and Development Department, 2009.) • i • I • • • • • Chapter 10. Economic Development 94 ••••••••••o•••••••••••••••••••••• services, provide job fairs; offer assessment and screening for new hires; and help employers identify skill sets. INCENTIVES AND PROGRAMS The Housing and Economic Development Department administers the following programs. • Tax Abatement — A reduction of taxes collected on the increase in value above the value in the year the abatement contract is executed. State law limits abatements to a maximum of 10 years. Abatement is tied to conditions outlined in the abatement agreement, which are based on the criteria in the City's abatement policy, such as amount of capital investment and the number of jobs created. To review the City's incentive policy, please refer to Appendix H. • Enterprise Zones — This designation is reserved for areas of high unemployment and poverty that are targeted for business redevelopment, creation of jobs, and economic revitalization. State policy from the 2003 legislative session declared that any census block group that has a poverty rate of at least 20 percent, as determined by the U S. Census Bureau dunng each decennial census, is a state enterprise zone. The census block group will remain an enterprise zone until it no longer qualifies, as a result of a subsequent decennial census. Pnor to the new policy, the City of Fort Worth had designated three enterprise zones. the South and Southeast, which expired September 2007, and the North Enterprise Zone that expired in 2004 The state provides direct development incentives for a limited number of qualified businesses nominated as an enterprise zone project. Major financial incentives include refund of state sales and use taxes paid on machinery and equipment, building materials, labor for the rehabilitation of existing buildings, and electricity and natural gas purchased for use at the qualified business site. The refund is based on the level of capital investment and jobs created at the qualified business site. Only six businesses per biennium may be designated as an enterprise project. Refunds are calculated at $2,500 for each new permanent job created or retained up to $1,250,000 per year Enterprise zone incentives provided by the City are vaned and based on the needs of individual projects. Incentives for the enterprise zones include reduced development fees and investment requirements for tax abatement. • Tax Increment Financing (TIF) — A TIF is an identified area designated as a reinvestment zone for a limited number of years in which tax revenues exceeding the base year amount are used primarily for public improvements but can also include services within the zone. The TIF revenues are spent according to an approved project and financial plan for development of the designated reinvestment zone. Currently, eleven TIF distncts exist in Fort Worth. • TIF # 2 — Texas Motor Speedway. A 489-acre zone created to provide a mechanism for the purchase of the Texas Motor Speedway as a public improvement by the FW Sports Authonty, Inc., which is a 4B economic development corporation, and to provide for the development of future public improvements within the District. The TIF became effective January 1, 1996, and is scheduled to terminate on December 31, 2025, or earlier if all funding obligations associated with the purchase of the Speedway are met. The TIF 95 Enterprise Zones 44 Enterprise Zones Based on state policy enacted in 2003, census tract block groups with 20 per- cent or more poverty are considered state enterprise zones. To determine if a property is located in one of the City's Enterprise Zones, please refer to the following website http.//maps.fortworthgov.org/Incentives_Map/ (Sources: Housing and Economic Development Department and Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 10: Economic Development devotes $20 million to the purchase of the Speedway The City of Fort Worth, Denton County, and the Northwest ISD participate. • TIF # 3 — North Downtown. Replacing TIF #1, this district was created in 1995, and is scheduled to terminate in 30 years or when the goal of the $50 million of tax increment is met, whichever comes first. The 1993 Downtown Strategic Action Plan called for a TIF to finance such projects as free public parking, a central plaza, parking garages, and special pedestrian and streetscape systems. • TIF # 4 — Southside District: The district was established November 1997, and is scheduled to terminate m 25 years or when tax increment revenues reach $60 million. The project plan calls for public improvements within the boundaries of Fort Worth South to implement the Southside District Plan. • TIF # 6 — Riverfront: Established in December 2002 to help provide public infrastructure, including a public plaza at the former RadioShack campus. It is scheduled to terminate in 2036. • TIF # 7 — North Tarrant Parkway. Established in December 2003 to provide infrastructure improvements associated with the construction of North Tarrant Parkway, including interchange ramps, frontage roads, and a connecting road from Interstate Highway 35W east to Rainey Lake Road. It is scheduled to terminate in 2019 • TIF # 8 — Lancaster Established in December 2003 to help with redevelopment of the Lancaster Corridor m southern downtown and specifically with the redevelopment of the T&P Terminal building into a multifamily residential complex. It is scheduled to terminate in 2024 • TIF # 9 — Trinity River Vision. Established in December 2003 to help encourage development and redevelopment along the Trinity River It is scheduled to terminate in 2028. • TIF # 10 — Lone Star Established in June 2004 for the development of public space and infrastructure on and near the site of the Cabela's facility in north Fort Worth. It is scheduled to terminate in 2025 • TIF # 11 — Southwest Parkway. Established in December 2004 for the construction of public infrastructure in the vicinity of Southwest Parkway New and improved infrastructure will help spur private development adjacent to Southwest Parkway It is scheduled to terminate in 2025 • TIF # 12 — East Berry Renaissance: Established in July 2006 to fund public infrastructure improvements along the East Berry Street Corridor New and improved infrastructure will help spur private development along the corridor It is scheduled to terminate in 2027 • TIF # 13 — Woodhaven. Established in November 2007 to fund public infrastructure improvements associated with new development and redevelopment projects. New and improved infrastructure will help spur private development in Woodhaven. It is scheduled to terminate in 2028. • Enhanced Community Facility Agreements — Administered in concert with the Planning and Development Department, the City pays a portion of the public infrastructure costs that would otherwise be the developer's expense in order to assist in gap financing resulting from the disproportionately higher cost of Chapter 10. Economic Development 96 5 Tax Increment Finance Districts 2.5 0 5 Miles TIF# Name 2 Texas Motor Speedway North Downtown 4 Southoide 6 Rivertont 7 North Tarrant Parkway 8 Lancaster 9 Trinity River Vision 10 Lone Star 11 Southwest Parkway 12 East Berry Renaissance t3 Woodhaven .xr TIF districts pay for public improvements within their respective boundaries using tax revenues from increases in property values. Currently, the City has eleven TIF districts. (Sources: Housing and Economic Development Department, and Plan- ning and Development Department, 2009.) •►•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • i S • • providing oversized infrastructure capacity to meet future needs to replace inadequate and aged infrastructure. • Business Assistance Center (BAC) — Under the City's Economic Diversification Division, the BAC is a one -stop shop of 12 independent service providers in one convenient location to support the growth and development of small businesses. Located in the renovated historic James E. Guinn School, the Center is a public - private partnership funded by the City of Fort Worth, corporate sponsors and individual donors. Between May 2001 and June 2009, the BAC has helped to create 945 new businesses, 9,794 new jobs and retain 1,362 jobs, over $180 million in small business loans and nearly $255 million in contracts for clients. The BAC provides a variety of programs through its service providers: 1) Specialized Support: • Fort Worth Metropolitan Black Chamber of Commerce — Formed in 1979 and located at the BAC, the Metropolitan Black Chamber of Commerce primarily serves the interests of the African -American business and professional community and communicates those interests to business, civic and industrial leaders. Member services include business counseling, MJWBE and Historically Underutilized Business certification assistance, contracting opportunities, financial management, target marketing, tax appraisal, networking opportunities, workshops and seminars. • ACORN Project — The objective of the ACORN (Able & Confident Owners Rebuilding Neighborhoods) project is to provide an alternative way to reach the goal of self-reliance through business ownership. The ACORN project is an initiative of the Business Assistance Center (BAC) and the BAC Education Foundation. 2) Access to Capital. • Fort Worth Economic Development Corporation (FWEDC) also known as Alliance Lending Corporation — Located at the BAC, the FWEDC provides financial assistance to small businesses. Its SBA 504 loan program is designed to assist healthy, expending businesses in the acquisition of capital assets such as land, buildings and equipment that has a useful life of 10 years or more. In addition, the FWEDC administers the existing portfolios of three former small loan programs (Mercado, Revolving Loan Fund, and Micro Loan) that were not recapitalized. • William Mann Jr Community Development Corporation (WMCDC) — This multi -bank Community Development Financial Institution was created in 1994 by a consortium of banks and the City of Fort Worth. It provides debt and equity financing for small, minority, and women - owned businesses located in Tarrant County Loans of up to $250,000 are available for working capital, inventory, equipment, real estate and business acquisition. The WMCDC is a participating lender m the Texas Capital Access Program and the Texas Mezzanine Fund. 97 Fort Worth Business Assistance Center The Fort Worth Business Assistance Center, located at I-35W and Rose- dale in the James E. Guinn Complex, is home to 12 independent busi- ness service providers (Source: Fort Worth Business Assistance Center, 2009.) Chapter 10: Economic Development 3) Technology and Manufacturmg Assistance: • Tech Fort Worth — This nonprofit business incubator is a collaborative effort of the City of Fort Worth, University of North Texas Health Science Center, Texas Christian University and the business community, founded in February 1998 it provides office space and industry -specific business assistance to technology start-up companies. The incubator invests time and expertise in emerging companies and entrepreneurs that demonstrate the potential for economic and commercial success. This economic development effort provides a mechanism that facilities the growth and development of emerging technology companies in Fort Worth. Tech Fort Worth occupies the former gymnasium on the James E. Guinn School campus, which was renovated as a 22,000 square foot office building, providing space for companies participating m the incubator program. • Business Information Center — Clients have free access to the intemet, desktop publishing, business magazines, videotapes, and over 200 Entrepreneur Guides. • Texas Manufacturing Assistance Center (TMAC) — It's mission is to increase the global competitiveness of small to mid -size manufacturers by providing support in the appropriate use of technologies and techniques. It works with manufacturers across the Metroplex to assess their operations, identify opportunities for improvement, and develop and implement appropriate solutions. 4) Business Support and Counseling: • Small Business Development Center — Funded by the U S. Small Business Administration (SBA) and Tarrant County College and located at the BAC, it provides professional, confidential business counseling to business owners on topics such as management, marketing, and accounting. In addition, counselors explain business planning and SBA loan application preparation. • Service Corps of Retired Executives (SCORE) — Sponsored by the SBA, the Service Corps of Retired Executives provides professional one-on-one counseling for people considering a business start-up. SCORE volunteers counsel with an emphasis on creating a busmess plan that can be utilized in day-to-day operations as well as for obtaining financing. A "How to Start a Business" workshop is held monthly • Small Contractor Development Program — The Small Contractor Development Program provides technically qualified construction companies with the technical, bonding and working capital support to compete successfully in the open market. 5) International Trade and Foreign Investment Attraction Services: • Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce, Office of International Business Development — The Office promotes international trade and investment, recruits direct foreign investment to Fort Worth, assists in international Chapter 10 Economic Development 98 ACORN Project Recent graduates of the ACORN (Able & Confident Owners Rebuilding Neighborhoods) project committed to an eight -week course that is designed to re-educate, motivate, and empower individuals to start their own busi- ness. (Source: Fort Worth Business Assistance Center, 2009.) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • . • . • . • • • i. • • • • . 4r . • i • • . • transactions, and organizes business trade missions. • Tarrant County College (TCC) International Small Business Development Center (ISBDC) — The TCC ISBDC is funded by the SBA and TCC It offers free one-on-one counseling and seminars to businesses interested in importing and exporting. In addition, the ISBDC helps develop international business plans, identify foreign markets, conduct market research, and apply for government financing. • U.S Department of Commerce Export Assistance Center — Provides export counseling and market research to help North Texas companies expand export opportunities. The office accomplishes its mission using American Embassies and Consulates. 6) Cultural Exchanges and Social Relationships Services. • Sister Cities International — Cultivates successful relationships and international understanding among the youth, adults and organizations of Fort Worth and its seven sister cities through educational, leadership, and exchange programs. • World Affairs Council of Greater Fort Worth — Conducts lectures and seminars on foreign policy and world affairs. Serves as the official host for the State Department's International Visitor's Program for the Fort Worth area. The City's Finance Department collects revenues, and by contract, administers the following: • Hotel/motel sales tax revenue — The City receives nine percent per room per night from those who stay at Fort Worth hotels and motels. This fund is used primarily to support the Convention and Visitors Bureau and the Fort Worth Herd, but it is also used for maintenance and operations of City facilities managed by the Public Events Department. This source of revenue also supports various cultural institutions and programs. The City has also used this revenue for such projects as the rebate of school district property taxes for the redevelopment and conversion of the Blackstone, a historically significant building, into a modern hotel. Two percent is used solely for the Convention Center • Public Improvement District (PID) — Based on a petition from property owners, fees are assessed on property in the district, in addition to property taxes, to pay for services and improvements over and above regular City services. Currently, seven PIDs exist in Fort Worth. • PID 1 — Downtown. Established in 1986 as the first PID in Texas. Created to provide enhanced landscaping and maintenance, enhanced security, public events, and marketing for the downtown business owners. • PID 6 — Park Glen. Established in 1998 Created to provide enhanced landscaping, fencing, public events, holiday hghtmg, security, and park improvements for this predominately residential community • PID 7 — Heritage: Established in 2000 by Hillwood Development. This residential/commercial mix district is currently in the development stage. 99 M1 Public Improvement Districts 2 1 0 2 Miles PID ID Name 1 Downtown 6 Park Glen 7 Heritage 8 Camp Bowie 11 Stockyards 12 Chapel Hill 14 Trinity Bluff Public Improvement Districts (PIDs) are created based on a petition from property owners. A PID fee is assessed on properties in the district, in addition to property taxes, to pay for services and improvements over and above regular City services Currently, the City has seven PIDs. (Source: Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009) Chapter 10: Economic Development Created to provide enhanced landscaping, street signs, entry -ways, security, holiday lighting, and park improvements. • PID 8 — Camp Bowie: Established in 2000 This commercial district was created to provide marketing, public events, landscaping, street banners, and historic street signage. • PID 11 — Stockyards. Established in 2003 This commercial tourist district was created to provide signage, website marketing, and enhanced maintenance to this Fort Worth attraction. • PID 12 — Chapel Hill. Established m 2004 by Chapel Hill Venture, L.L.P This residential district is currently in the development stage. Created to provide enhanced landscaping, street signs, entryways, security, holiday lighting and decorations, and park improvements. • PID 14 — Trinity Bluff: Established in 2009 Created to provide enhanced maintenance, enhanced security, transportation and planning, research and marketing to promote the area's residential, office, mixed -use, hospitality and retail uses to various target groups. The following economic development programs are also administered by the City• • Brownfields Economic Redevelopment Program — the City's Environmental Management Department administers this EPA -funded program directed at the remediation of brownfields, which are idle or abandoned industrial and commercial sites where redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination. If a private developer is redeveloping a brownfields site, the City can potentially assist in securing site -specific assessment funding or a cleanup loan. Please see Chapter 18 Environmental Quality for further information. • Local Development Corporation — An economic development corporation created by City Council and comprised of City Council members and the Mayor The Corporation acquires tax delinquent property and either leases the land or holds the land until there is an appropriate development proposal. • Local Government Corporation — The City Council is authorized to create a local government corporation pursuant to Chapter 431 of the Transportation Code to undertake any governmental purpose. The City Council created the Lone Star Local Government Corporation to issue tax increment bonds to pay for public improvements in support of the Cabela's development. • Minority/Women Business Enterprise (M/WBE) — A City program created to ensure that minority- and women -owned businesses are afforded maximum opportunities to participate m the City's procurement activities, directly and indirectly The M/WBE Office identifies M/WBEs that can provide a service or product that the City purchases, encourages their participation in City procurement activities, and monitors ongoing contracts to ensure targeted M/WBE participation is advanced. • Neighborhood Empowerment Zone Program — A Neighborhood Empowerment Zone (NEZ) is an area within a municipality created to promote the development and rehabilitation of affordable housing, increase economic development, and increase the quality of social services, education, or public safety provided to Chapter 10• Economic Development Fort Worth Sports Authority Texas Motor Speedway The FW Sports Authority was created in 1997 to oversee the administration and development of the Texas Motor Speedway With two major NASCAR races, an IRL race and ongoing events throughout the year, Texas Motor Speedway brings 1.25 million visitors to the area annually The facility gen- erates approximately $162 million in business for the Fort Worth -Dallas area and currently provides an estimated 6,200 jobs per year (Sources: Housing and Economic Development Department and Texas Motor Speedway, 2009.) 100 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••••••••••i•••••••••••♦•••••••• residents of the zone. The City may waive fees related to the construction of buildings within the zone, release City liens, enter into agreements abating municipal property taxes on property in the zone (for a period of not more than 10 years), and set baseline performance standards to encourage the use of alternative building materials that address concerns relating to the environment or to building costs, maintenance, or energy consumption. Mixed -use zoning is a prerequisite to the application of NEZ incentives in urban villages. A map in Chapter 23 Financial Incentives depicts the City's current NEZs. The following are a selection of the major business advocacy and support organizations operating in Fort Worth. • Chambers of Commerce — Seven chambers (Fort Worth, Fort Worth Metropolitan Black, Hispanic, Asian -American, U.S.-Argentina, American Indian, and North Texas GLBT) exist in Fort Worth and support the business community through the provision of programs and services. In addition to their regular programs and activities, the Fort Worth Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the Fort Worth Metropolitan Black Chamber of Commerce, Tarrant County Asian -American Chamber of Commerce, and the American Indian Chamber of Commerce, under contract with the City of Fort Worth, provide outreach and technical assistance to their communities. The Fort Worth Chamber also provides an outreach program, Job Link, which brings all of the work force development service provider organizations together with the business community to match people with jobs. The U.S -Argentina Chamber of Commerce promotes international trade and develops business opportunities between North Texas and Argentina. The following are a selection of the major non -City sponsored job training organizations operating in Fort Worth. • Fort Worth Opportunity Center — Located in Southeast Fort Worth, the center opened in year 2000 as a privately funded, nonprofit training and employment center Currently, Tarrant County College operates the facility under its Corporate Services Division, which offers customized service to companies in workforce training and to individuals seeking office training. • Workforce Solutions for Tarrant County — A number of workforce development services have been combined at eight one -stop workforce centers throughout Fort Worth and Tarrant County The centers provide a full range of employment services to all job seekers and employers. These centers also provide job recruitment, eligibility determination, assessment, and case management, job training, and placement services for program clients. Canital Improvement Proiects A list of the projects, estimated costs, completion dates, and potential funding sources are included in Appendix D and Appendix E. 101 Fort Worth Workforce Centers and Opportunity Centers 2$ 0 • Workforce Center ■ Opportunity Center LAvs A number of workforce development services have been combined at eight one -stop workforce centers throughout Fort Worth and Tarrant County These centers provide job recruitment, eligibility determination, assessment, and case management for program clients. The Alliance Opportunity Center in Far North Fort Worth offers job training and place- ment services for Alliance The partners of the center include Tarrant County Workforce Development Board, Hillwood Development Corpora- tion, Tarrant County College, and the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce In April 2000, the Fort Worth Opportunity Center opened in Southeast Fort Worth to offer workforce training. (Source. City of Fort Worth, Workforce Solutions of Tarrant County, and Tan -ant County College, 2009.) Chapter 10: Economic Development 0•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 11: TRANSPORTATION The transportation system is the framework upon which the city is built. A healthy transportation system can improve the economic, social, and cultural conditions of the city and its citizens by providing efficient goods movement and options for people to get to and from work, home, school, shopping and leisure activities. Conversely, an inefficient, congested transportation system can be a deterrent to economic growth, resulting in inconvenience and stress for drivers, traffic accidents, increased travel time, loss of work time, and air pollution (more information on air pollution and air quality can be found in Chapter 18 Environmental Quality). This chapter presents a multi -modal transportation approach that includes all forms of surface transportation (auto, bus, rail, bicycle, pedestrian, etc ), as well as aviation activities, to support the City's mobility goals. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) estimates that the population within the Metropolitan Planning Area will grow to 8.5 million persons by the year 2030 This projection represents an increase of 3.5 million in population from the year 2000 Employment will grow to 5.3 million persons by the year 2030, an increase of 2.1 million from 2000 The transportation demand generated by this growth will significantly impact air quality, congestion, land use, and mfrastructure capacity NCTCOG estimates that the annual cost of congestion in 2007 was $4.2 billion to residents and employers in the Metroplex. This figure could grow to $6 7 billion annually by 2030 if transportation improvements are not made, an increase of 60 percent from 2007 In order to help address the potential impact of growth, NCTCOG has completed a multimodal transportation plan for the region. The plan, Mobility 2030, provides a regional strategy for reducing congestion and improving air quality through policies aimed at improving travel demand management and transportation system management, expanding alternative transportation modes, and promoting sustainable development. The plan undergoes periodic review in order to meet the changing needs of the region and federal planning requirements. The Mobility 2030 plan is currently in the amendment process to incorporate ongoing regional planning and project development efforts to implement policies, programs, and projects. The amended plan was locally approved in April 2009 and is pending approval by the United States Department of Transportation. The current plan contains over $71 billion of planned improvements that are recommended by the year 2030 Fort Worth Mobility and Air Quality Plan While the region's population is estimated to grow by 3.5 million persons by 2030, Fort Worth and the surrounding area is estimated to nearly double by 2030 Fort Worth has led the region in population growth from 2000 through 2009 with 185,556 additional residents. With this in mind, the City Council identified improved mobility and air quality as one of its strategic goals, and in September 2003 approved the development of a Mobility and Air Quality (MAQ) Plan. 103 Components of a Balanced Transportation System The City of Fort Worth can provide mobility choices for residents by integrat- ing all modes of transportation into a balanced system. (Source: Transportation and Public Works, 2009.) Chapter 11 Transportation The MAQ Plan was developed in partnership with the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T) and in coordination with NCTCOG The MAQ Plan was conducted in two phases. The City finalized Phase I of the plan m June 2004 Information was collected and analyzed concerning land use, travel demand, and transportation infrastructure and services in the city and the region. The major findings include: • Most of the projected population growth is expected to be outside of Loop 820 in the form of low -density residential development. • The majority of employment growth will occur withm existing activity centers and along major highway corridors. • The combination of the above two factors create increasingly complex travel patterns for the area. • Growth patterns create longer commutes and additional burden on our future transportation system and air quality • The majority of "choice" transit riders —who are not dependent on transit for their travel needs —are outside of The T's existing service area. • Mobility needs of the area will not be met even if the planned roadway improvements of the Mobility 2030 plan are funded and constructed. The MAQ Plan examined the current performance conditions of the roadway system and estimated the percent of hours of congestion per weekday at 13 percent for freeways and 14 percent for arterials in the study area. The study projected that this congestion will increase to 54 percent for freeways and 37 percent for arterials by the year 2030 if no projects are implemented after the year 2015 Traffic congestion can have several causes: accidents, disabled vehicles, construction, exceeded roadway capacity, mcomplete road system, bottlenecks, linear or sprawling land use patterns, segregated land uses, lack of alternative modes of transportation, availability of parking, and low vehicle occupancy In January 2009, the City Council adopted Phase II of the MAQ Plan, which identifies, analyzes, and recommends projects, programs, and policies that will reduce congestion and air pollution. The MAQ Plan also provides a strategic implementation plan, including a financial element. The final product is a comprehensive and multimodal transportation system plan and a programmed effort to improve mobility and air quality For more information on the MAQ Plan, visit the City's Website at: www.fortworthgov org/tpw/ (click on Mobility/Air Quality Plan under "Quick Links"). Roadway System The City of Fort Worth maintains approximately 7,200 lane miles of street surface, which is equivalent to driving from Fort Worth to New York and back twice. Development throughout the city is generating greater demand for street improvements to move traffic efficiently on the north -south and east -west major corndors. Citizens desire increased mobility, while maintaining pedestnan-onented neighborhoods. Neighborhoods and commercial areas in the city are also requesting street improvements that include landscaping and sidewalks, as well as traffic mitigation measures to assist inner city areas with redevelopment. For a description Chapter 11 Transportation 104 RoadwayCongestion Levels With Full Funding �tiilda ,The Metropolitan Areas with No Congestion K i Transportation Plan Areas won Light Congestion System Performance Levels of Congestion 2007 Annual Cost of Congestion $4.2 &Ikon -, Areas with Madonna Congestion Ea Areas with Severe Congeshan - Roadways 2030 Annual Cost of Congestion Sea Billion Roadway Congestion Levels Without Funding The Metropolitan I. Transportation Plan System Performance NO Build Levels of Congostien" Legend Areas with No Congestion Meas with Light Congestion 1,f2 Areas with Moderato Congestion Areas with Severe Congestion - Roadways Fort1h'ef In Cet) Duns Cab Demographic Achvlly 2030 Transportation System; 2007 -Congeshcn Levels el 2030 If no new bannponahon protects were built aner 2007 Annual Cost of Congestion $11.0 Billion According to the North Central Texas Council of Governments, congestion levels in the region will continue to increase through 2030 even if all identi- fied projects are built. (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009.) • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • of efforts aimed at addressing neighborhood transportation issues, see the Programs and Projects section of this chapter Maintenance of the city's existing street infrastructure is critical for the roadway system to function efficiently and at its intended capacity An aging infrastructure, increasing number of traffic miles, and annexation of sometimes substandard streets require additional resources to ensure adequate maintenance. In the central city, maintenance of public alleys is particularly challenging. A recently completed pavement inventory and collection assessment rated 31 percent of the city's roads in `excellent' condition, 40 percent in `good' condition, 21 percent in `fair' condition, and 8 percent in `poor' condition. In 2004, the citizens of Fort Worth approved a bond package allocating $65 million for the rehabilitation of 206 neighborhood streets and $57 million for 12 artenal street projects. The 2004 Bond Program is in the fifth year of a six year program. In the 2007 Critical Capital Needs Program, the City Council funded the design and reconstruction of 110 neighborhood streets. Work is currently underway to design and initiate construction on these streets over the next two years. In 2008, citizens approved another bond program allocating $150 million to pay for transportation improvements and public art across the City, without a tax increase. In addition to maintaining existing streets, new roadways are needed to improve the transportation system due to urban sprawl. The lack of network completion is most notable in far north and southwest Fort Worth. The rural roadway systems in these areas are being replaced with urban arterials as development occurs and new schools are built. This practice often results in arterial system gaps and bottlenecks. The intensity of existing land uses and new development in these corridors is creating pressure for the completion of road improvements to eliminate arterial gaps. Deficiencies in the roadway system are subjecting some areas of the city to increased congestion because streets do not adequately support existing or changing land uses. The lack of street connectivity within and between subdivisions exacerbates the problem by forcing all traffic onto a small number of arterials that are quickly pushed beyond their capacity to efficiently carry the growing traffic. In order to help address many of these issues, the City maintains a Master Thoroughfare Plan (MTP) and associated Street Development Standards, which were adopted in 2002 and updated in 2004 The standards were revised and a new MTP map was adopted in 2009 Together, these documents provide comprehensive transportation standards for the street system within the city and its extraterritonal jurisdiction. The standards also recommend specific pavement cross sections for each street classification and provide the framework for a hierarchical system of freeways, arterials, collectors, and local streets. For the first time, the 2009 standards include specific measures that support travel by walking, bicycling, and transit rather than focusing solely on vehicle travel. The MTP guides the ultimate development of the City's thoroughfare system. In May 2008, City Council approved the use of transportation impact fees. Transportation impact fees are charges assessed by local governments on new development projects. These charges are intended to recover the cost incurred by the government for the expansion of the arterial street network necessary to MAQ Plan Roadway Priority Listing ' "-or DENT•.,N"..,i��z BONDS RANG 4rk;a! AtWPtaii I RI6INGER r t f , CPHERSON ---4 -, ENDON CROWLEY c. rl 1121iO1AMCA Legend Priority A Roadway .--Priority B Roadway Priority C Roadway Priority D Roadway 2015 Committed Projects Freeways Fort Worth City limits MAQ Study Area Lakes Parks The proposed roadways are preliminary and a re subject to change as they have been identified for planning purposes only. 0 1.5_.3 6, lies The City used a regional perspective to determine the roadway priority listing in the MAQ Plan (Source. Transportation and Public Works Department, 2009.) 105 Chapter 11 Transportation accommodate traffic generated by new development. Impact fees may not be used to remedy existing transportation deficiencies. The transportation impact fee ordinance was drafted by city staff with input from local developers and a citizen advisory committee. In accordance with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, transportation impact fees can be collected in, and used for improvements within, discrete geographical "service areas." Service areas come with their own maximum impact fee rate based on projected growth and needed arterial street improvements. The City Council has approved 27 total service areas in Fort Worth, limited to six miles across. In accordance with the transportation impact fee ordinance, fees are collected in 19 of the 27 service areas. The fee took effect on July 1, 2008. Public Transportation Service The Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T) has provided public transportation services since 1983, and its services have expanded steadily over the years. In addition to Fort Worth, The T provides service to Richland Hills and Blue Mound. Ridership increased from 5 1 million in 1997 to 8 6 million in fiscal year 2009 This includes ridership from the Trinity Railway Express, Mobility Impaired Transportation Services, and Vanpool programs. Thirty-eight bus routes cover the city and extend to the suburban city of Richland Hills. The current bus service plan focuses on incremental expansion to serve a larger regional area. In late 2008, The T began operating a traffic signal priority system on the East Lancaster corridor Six transfer centers are strategically located in destination areas. The Historic Stockyards (NW 25th and Houston), East Fort Worth (E. Lancaster and Sargent), La Gran Plaza (formerly Town Center Mall), Ridgmar Mall, and two Downtown locations (Intermodal Transportation Center and T&P Vickery Boulevard park -and -ride lot). The transfer centers are integral parts of the transportation system. They provide central points for transfers between the various transportation modes. Ninety-eight percent of The T's bus fleet is equipped with Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fuel system, which burns cleaner and reduces bus emissions. The T offers a number of additional services, including: • Six Express Routes, which provide limited stop service to Downtown. • Four routes that utilize The T's replica (rubber -tire) trolleys. These routes include service to the Fort Worth Zoo, the Stockyards, Pier 1, and Radio Shack. Molly the Trolley provides free service in Downtown and to the Stockyards. • Free Downtown service within a zone bounded by Henderson on the west, Jones on the east, Belknap to the north, and Vickery to the south. • Rider Request Service (Route 41) within the City of Richland Hills provides curb -to -curb bus transportation within Richland Hills city limits. Riders may also use this route to access Downtown Fort Worth at specified times. • The T's Employer Services Department (formerly Rideshare) provides information and assistance with carpools, vanpools, employer -subsidized transit (E-Pass), and other similar services. • Guaranteed Ride Home Service is provided for all monthly or E-Pass holders. • Bicycle racks on the front of all fixed -route buses. Chapter 11 Transportation Mobility and Air Quality Plan Commuter Rail Priorities ( DENTOJ r t To Dallas 1'— (Union Station fw`w•rovoatta Dallas° (UnionTo Stationi s.r ARLINGTO Alt;_ sr I IDL `T ` IAN Legend '£Priority 8 Canunute Rail •Prwrdy C Commuter Rail •Priority o Commuter Rag Q! . 2015 pasting Commuter Rail —iulsting Freeways lad' MAQ Study Area Fort Worth CityLirnits Urban Villages Lakes • Parks The proposed alignments are prelininary and are sutrjea to changes tneiteye been !dental for planning purposes The Fort Worth Mobility and Air Quality (MAQ) Plan identified priority com- muter rail corridors based on projected travel demand and the availability of rail corridors. (Sources: Transportation and Public Works Department, North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009.) 106 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••••••o•s•••o••••rr•••••••S••••• The T also provides Mobility Impaired Transportation Service (MITS) for residents who have disabilities that restrict them from using the regular fixed bus routes. MITS is door-to-door service that allows participants to schedule trips up to 14 days in advance. Riders who qualify for MITS will receive a MITS+1 card that allows them to use fixed -bus service for free. Balancing public transportation costs, routes, and schedules with the needs of transit passengers is an ongoing challenge. The T provides public transportation to major areas of employment, including Downtown, the Medical District, CentrePort, and area malls such as Hulen, Ridgmar and La Gran Plaza. As the city continues to expand, especially in the north and west, The T continues to study possible enhancements and additions to its service to allow all Fort Worth residents access to important employment growth centers. Continued cooperation and partnerships with the City, employers, and public agencies are critical to this effort. There are over 1,800 bus stops in The T's service area. The T provides benches and passenger shelters at a number of these bus stops for the comfort and convenience of its passengers. The goal is to place benches at frequently used stops distributed equally throughout the service area. Currently, there are over 350 benches in place. Passenger shelters provide seating and protection from bad weather and are particularly important to senior citizens, parents with small children, and persons with disabilities. Although shelters are a popular amenity option at bus stops, only a limited number of shelters are feasible throughout the service area. To identify the most appropriate locations, The T uses a point system to prioritize and rank bus stops using factors such as daily hoardings, existing land use, and the presence of a public facility or employment center among other criteria. There are currently over 120 shelters located throughout The T's member city area. In 2005, The T began working with a Task Force of Downtown business and civic leaders and City of Fort Worth staff to redesign the twelve passenger shelters along Houston and Throckmorton Streets. The Task Force's mission is to lead the effort to design, produce and install Downtown shelters that are both functional and aesthetically appealing. The shelters are currently being installed. The T is currently working to implement a bus rapid transit (BRT) corridor along East Lancaster Street. Enhancements along the corridor include new 60-foot articulated buses for greater capacity and faster loading and unloading, improved passenger waiting areas, and signage at all stops in the corridor, a unique branding throughout the corridor, and transit signal priority (TSP) to decrease travel time. Expansion of the BRT concept could be expanded to other parts of the city as demand warrants should this project prove successful. In 2009, The T completed a Strategic Parking Plan. The plan purpose was to forecast parking demand at transit facilities in the future and identify future parking needs for the transit system. The T currently operates a number of parking facilities in Tarrant County and shares use of other lots. As demand continues to grow for park and ride services, more facilities will be needed along with expansion of current parking areas. The T anticipates the need to more than double the available spaces it operates in the next ten years. 107 Passenger Shelter The T replaced 12 shelters along Houston and Throckmorton streets with a new aesthetically pleasing style shown above in 2009 (Source: Fort Worth Transportation Authority, 2009.) Intermodal Transportation Center The Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC) in Downtown Fort Worth is home to the THE commuter rail, a major bus transfer center, Amtrak, and Enterprise Rent-A-Car The Greyhound bus terminal moved into the facility in June 2006 (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 11 Transportation T Strategic Plan In October 2005, The T Board adopted a new Strategic Plan. The 12-month planning process resulted in a long-range strategy for public transportation in the region over the next 25 years. The T invited staff from the City of Fort Worth and NCTCOG to serve on the Planning Committee and guide the plan. An intensive public involvement process was developed to assure that the plan represented the region's future vision of public transportation in the western half of the Metroplex. In all, over 1,000 comments were generated from focus group interviews, a Tarrant County- wide household survey, stakeholder interviews, comment cards and public meetings. The Strategic Plan presents the following six goals for The T 1 Enhance public transit. 2. Expand transit options for regional travelers. 3 Create a more seamless regional transit system. 4 Provide rapid travel options. 5 Support the sustainable development of the region. 6. Improve the perception of public transportation. Several key action items have been initiated or completed as a result of the Strategic Plan: • Commuter rail line Environmental Study • New bus service to far north Fort Worth and Alliance area • Park and ride facility expansion study • TRE strategic planning effort in coordination with DART • TRE double tracking to allow for faster service • Bus transit signal priority coordination with the City • Sierra Vista Transit Plaza project • New passenger shelter design Rail Transit The Trinity Railway Express (TRE) commuter rail connects Downtown Dallas to Downtown Fort Worth. Downtown Fort Worth has two stations. the Intermodal Transportation Center at 9th and Jones Streets, and the T&P Terminal on Lancaster Avenue. Both terminals opened in January 2002. During 2008, the TRE had more than 1 1 million riders (T side only). The T, the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), and NCTCOG are collaborating on the development of a Strategic Plan for the TRE. When finalized, this plan may result in changes to the TRE's governance and/or operational goals. Mobility 2030 identifies potential rail corridors that could serve to expand commuter rail service throughout the region, including Fort Worth. To study regional passenger rail options, NCTCOG conducted a Regional Rail Corridor Study (RRCS) and Regional Transit Initiative (RTI). Completed in fall 2004, the purpose of the RRCS and RTI respectively is to assess the feasibility of implementing passenger rail service along existing Metroplex rail corridors, and to develop a framework for how best to deliver these services financially, institutionally, and legislatively The RTI began in January 2004 and was completed in fall 2004 The RRCS was completed in December 2004 Regional Rail Corridor Study 1YIE, Sfauons ase i.e.,' al V,Zfnitny� Locxbaf, tqt t$4410nO �'uWSets 411y Laud Rcgidnal Rail Corridor Study ptopocce Report: Rag.tlpnmanu _,v,“.,. The City of Fort Worth participated with The T in the North Central Texas Council of Governments' Regional Rail Corridor Study Completed in 2004, the study evaluated the feasibility of implementing passenger rail service along existing rail corridors in the Dallas -Fort Worth Metroplex. (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009.) Chapter 11 Transportation 108 The Trinity Railway Express commuter rail connects Downtown Dallas to Downtown Fort Worth. (Source: The T, 2009.) a S S S • 41 • • • • • •' • • • • • • • • • • • • i i •••••••®•••••••••••••••••004000000 The City of Fort Worth is part of the RRCS western subregion and participated m evaluating the following rail corndors. W-1 or the Union Pacific (UP), W-2 which includes Fort Worth & Western and Cotton Belt, W-3, which is the existing Trinity Railway Express, and W-4 the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF). The RRCS recommended regional rail as the appropriate mode for these corridors as well as the double -tracking of the existing THE line. The W-2 line stretches from Southwest Fort Worth through northeast Tarrant County and connects to the north end of DFW International Airport. The Cotton Belt on the W-2 line is a publicly -owned line (by DART), aside from a 2.5 mile portion just north of Downtown Fort Worth. The T is currently in negotiations with Union Pacific, the owner of the 2.5 mile portion, to purchase it. The Fort Worth & Western, also on W-2, connects Downtown to southwest Fort Worth. The W-1 UP line connects Downtown Fort Worth eastward to Downtown Dallas, passing through the cities of Arlington and Grand Prairie. The W- 4 BNSF line connects Downtown Fort Worth south to Cleburne. As a follow-up to the RRCS and as authorized by The T's 2005 Strategic Plan, The T recently completed an Alternative Analysis study called the Southwest -to -Northeast Transportation Corridor Study (TCS), which identified major transit improvements that would best serve southwest and northeast Tarrant County The final recommended improvement is identified as the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). The TCS is the first step toward obtaining federal funding for major capital investment in transit improvements. The area studied covered approximately 40 miles from southwest of Downtown Fort Worth to north of Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, and into the airport. The TCS investigated options involving both commuter and light rail, and bus rapid transit. The study also looked at ways transit improvements could enhance movement of privately -owned vehicle traffic, such as by implementing High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes, promoting carpooling, or other transportation management options. The T's Board of Directors formally endorsed the preliminary LPA in November 2006 A series of public meetings were held to get input from the community in October 2006 The regional rail line recommended as the preliminary LPA will use existing tracks of the Fort Worth and Western and Union Pacific railroads, and the Cotton Belt route. The LPA would provide direct access to all activity centers and would connect with other transportation modes in Downtown Fort Worth. To move forward with implementing the LPA, The T will need to complete appropriate federal documents and fulfill environmental review requirements. This phase of the Southwest -to -Northeast Rail Corridor project, known as the Draft Environmental Impact Study and Preliminary Engineering phase, began in April 2007 and consists of the following tasks. • Completing engineering tasks to a level sufficient for developing more detailed cost estimates and identifying more precise locations for stations; and, • Conducting an environmental review and submitting an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) document to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) that will document any environmental issues and allow The T to request federal funding assistance to build the project. Public meetings were held throughout 2007 and 2008 to share information and get public input on the project scope and schedule, proposed station locations and 109 Southwest -to -Northeast Rail Corridor Study • s,e a LEGEND The T Service Area Study Area Boundary Existing THE Alignment Commuter Rail Alternative l4444# Western Bypass Design Option Choctaw Design Option 0 Initial Station Area* 1 Potential Future Station' Station locations are preliminary for modeling purposes only and will be defined further in subsequent stages. This regional rail line from southwest Fort Worth to DFW Airport was identified as the preliminary Locally Preferred Alternative and the best transportation investment The T could make in the Southwest -to -Northeast corridor It was endorsed by The T's Board of Directors in November 2006 The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the corridor study and an application for federal funding will be submitted to the Federal Transit Ad- ministration in 2009 (Source. The T, 2009.) Chapter 11 Transportation configurations, and opportunities for transit -oriented development (TOD) at key stations. A TOD design charrette was conducted for the Summer Creek/Sycamore School Road station in July 2008. The TOD charrette resulted in broad consensus that the Summer Creek station presented a unique opportunity to apply transit - oriented development principles to this largely undeveloped site. TOD charrettes were subsequently held for the proposed I-20/Granbury, TCUBerry, and Beach Street station sites. See Chapter 4 Land Use for more on transit -oriented development. The T held public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) m December 2008. The T is currently finalizing the EIS and anticipates receiving a Record of Decision (ROD) from the Federal Transit Administration m the first half of 2010 The T is also nearing completion of a New Starts application for federal funding, which includes a detailed cost/benefit analysis of the project. Following the upcoming completion of these tasks, The T will complete final design of the project in 2010 On May 17, 2007, The T Board of Directors passed a resolution to acknowledge and affirm that building and operating passenger rail service in southeast Fort Worth is its next top priority Passenger rail service in southeast Fort Worth would provide economic development benefits, serve public transportation needs, and further sustainable development in southeast Fort Worth. Funding for regional rail transit improvements throughout the Metroplex remains a significant challenge. The Texas Legislature did not pass proposed legislation during the 2007 session that would have authorized an increase in the sales tax for transit. The issue was raised again at the 2009 legislative session, following an intensive effort by North Texas leaders to build support for and develop creative solutions to authorize a local funding option based on County -by -County elections. Unfortunately, broadly -supported legislation authorizing such solutions failed to pass in the 2009 legislative session. North Texas leaders are expected to take this important issue back to the 2011 session of the Texas Legislature. Other Rail Existing passenger rail service in Fort Worth includes Amtrak, which provides mterstate passenger service from Fort Worth to Houston, Oklahoma City, and San Antonio. The Intermodal Transportation Center at Ninth and Jones Streets includes the Amtrak station. The Tower 55 freight rail intersection in downtown Fort Worth serves as the east - west and north -south intersection for the BNSF and UP railroads and is one of the most congested rail intersections in the nation causing train delays. These delays have a negative impact on economic and business activities, vehicular and pedestrian access, air quality, and plans for passenger rail expansion. A congressional earmark of $1.6 million was included m the last federal transportation bill (SAFETEA-LU) for the purpose of conducting a study of Tower 55 in order to identify a solution to this freight bottleneck. The City is participating with The T, BNSF, UP, City of Arlington, and Tarrant County to provide a local fundmg match of $400,000 for the Tower 55 Study Tower 55 at -grade railroad intersection east of Downtown Fort Worth Tower 55 is one of the busiest at -grade railroad intersections in the country (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Railroad trench example in the Los Angeles area. This concept is being con- sidered as a mid-term solution to railroad congestion at Tower 55 (Source. Plan- ning and Development Department, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • • • • S S • • • • • • • i i • • Chapter 11 Transportation 110 . . .•. . . e . . e e . . . . ,•. . • r . . • . r $2 million study The City's portion of the local match is $66,600 The Tower 55 study began in early 2007 The Tower 55 study has identified several alternative approaches to providing a grade -separated railroad intersection at Tower 55, including a north -south railroad trench option that would place the BNSF tracks under Union Pacific's east -west tracks at Tower 55 Public meetings were held in Fort Worth in February and August 2009 The study has narrowed potential solutions down to two, and a locally preferred alternative could be selected m 2010 The study will also assess potential environmental impacts of the project. Modern Streetcars The City is currently evaluating the potential for developing a modern streetcar system in Fort Worth. Historically, streetcars were popular in most U S. cities before World War II. Fort Worth had an extensive streetcar system at the beginning of the 2061Century, but it was discontinued by the late 1930s. Streetcar systems are making a comeback in a number of cities because of their demonstrated ability to provide an attractive transit option for locals and visitors, while serving as a catalyst for pedestrian friendly transit -oriented development (TOD). Modern streetcars, sometimes known as ultra -light rail, are particularly well suited for providing urban circulation within downtowns and redeveloping central city neighborhoods. Streetcars operate within existing city streets in shared lanes with automobiles, have frequent stops, and complement regional rail transit facilities such as the Trinity Railway Express. Streetcars have recently been reintroduced in the Pacific Northwest cities of Portland, Seattle, and Tacoma with great success. The City has explored the feasibility of streetcars twice in the last decade. In 1998, the Fixed -Rail Trolley Line Feasibility Study found that implementing a trolley line linking Downtown, the Historic Stockyards, and the Cultural District is technically and economically feasible. In 2001-2002, the City and The T conducted a transit alternatives analysis, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulations, to determine if light -rail or another type of mass transit is warranted in Fort Worth. The analysis identified a light -rail streetcar starter alignment that used modem streetcars as the transit mode of choice. The project was withdrawn after it was determined that the application for federal funds would not be approved by the FTA at that time. The Fort Worth Central City Redevelopment Committee reintroduced the need to examine the feasibility of modern streetcars with its report, Modern Streetcars for Fort Worth. An Update on Transit Planning and Proposed Implementation Strategy, which was presented to the City Council in January 2008. In response, the Mayor and Council appointed an 18-member committee in July 2008 to determine if a streetcar system is worth pursuing. Based on a series of analytical steps and numerous public meetings, the study committee determined that a streetcar system is desirable for Fort Worth. The committee's additional tasks included the identification of a starter corridor, potential funding sources, a preliminary funding strategy, and the next steps needed for implementation. The study committee presented their recommendations to Council in December 2008, and received • .ttancaster.A Modern Streetcar Study ° Downtown ro • • rogN 4 Lancaster AVIt.di...,. s4a Potential Streetcar Routes Downtown Loop Options srrmosa Potential Streetcar Route agreo0a,0.veEastAcese.daleIN ez? 1 0.5 0 1 Miles In December 2008, the Modern Streetcar Study Committee recommended implementing streetcars in Downtown, the Near Southside, and West 7th Street with future extensions along East Rosedale, North Main and Samuels Avenue The City Council supported the committee moving forward towards implementation. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 111 Chapter 11 Transportation direction to continue moving forward towards implementation. The City is working with NCTCOG and The T to implement a more detailed Modem Streetcar Study that will further evaluate proposed alignments and assess the economic and financial impacts of developing a modem streetcar system. Grade Crossines and Ouiet Zones Fort Worth has more railroad crossings per capita than any other large city m Texas. Because of significant historical railroad developments dating back to the first railroad, the Texas and Pacific in 1876, today there are nearly 200 grade crossings in the city With the high amount of train activity and large number of at -grade crossings in Fort Worth, the City is committed to improving railroad crossing safety and developing new quiet zones. Quiet zones are improved railroad grade crossings where locomotives are not required to sound their horn. A quiet zone can therefore significantly improve the environmental quality of a neighborhood. A crossing or a group of railroad crossings can qualify for a quiet zone if, in addition to modem crossing flashers and gates, additional specific crossing devices are used to increase the safety of each crossing. City projects underway include quiet zone projects, new railroad crossing signal upgrades, crossing surface projects, grade separations (badges and underpasses), and other rail projects. Sustainable Development Sustainable development, as it relates to transportation, can be defined as. • Land use and transportation practices that promote economic development while using limited resources in an efficient manner • Transportation decision -making that seeks to reduce the adverse impacts of congestion and vehicle miles traveled, while maximizing compatibility with adjacent land uses and the viability of alternative transportation modes. • Planning efforts that effectively balance access, finance, mobility, affordability, community cohesion, and environmental quality Sustainable development leverages the land use and transportation relationship to improve mobility, enhance air quality, support economic growth, and ensure the financial stability of the transportation system. A successful multi -modal transportation system will support and encourage sustainable development. Transit -oriented development (TOD) is an important component of sustainable development. TOD refers to a compact urban village that is centered around and coordinated with a transit station in its use and design. The purpose of TOD is to establish land uses and to design structures and public spaces that will encourage residents, workers, and shoppers to drive their cars less while walking and nding mass transit more. In 2006, the City of Fort Worth, The T, and NCTCOG began work on a study to develop TOD guidelines for future capital -intensive transit projects in Fort Worth. In order to encourage mixed -use and transit -oriented development, the City of Fort Worth adopted two new mixed -use zoning classifications in March 2001 These new categones encourage mixed -use and higher -density developments, especially in designated mixed -use growth centers and urban villages (see Chapter 4 Land Use). Transit -Oriented Development Pasadena, CA Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) is an important component of sustainable development. TOD refers to a compact urban village that is centered around and coordinated with a rail transit station in its use and design (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) s • • • s • • • • • • • • • S • • •• • • • • • Chapter 11 Transportation 112 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••i• Mixed -use zoning significantly reduces parking requirements and provides design standards that are transit- and pedestnan-friendly Encouraging mixed -use and transit -oriented development leverages the strong relationship between land use and transportation to support sustainable development. Historically, Fort Worth's transportation system has been based on a system of roadways that primarily serve automobiles. Federal, state, and local governments have recognized the need to use resources more effectively and to improve air quality by planning for alternative transportation choices within an interconnected transportation system. Congress has directed state and local governments to consider "Complete Streets" policies designed to accommodate all users when constructing new roadways or rehabilitating existing facilities, addressing the needs of motorists, pedestrians, cyclists, transit riders, and people of all ages and abilities. Context Sensitive Street Design (CSS) is a philosophy whereby safe transportation solutions are designed in harmony with the community These solutions use innovative and inclusive approaches that integrate and balance community, aesthetic, historic, and environmental values with transportation safety, maintenance, and performance goals. The Transportation and Public Works Department (TPW) created a CSS program and developed design guidelines for use in designated urban villages and mixed -use growth centers. Some of the issues that TPW addresses when considering CSS implementation at specific locations include funding feasibility, maintenance feasibility, traffic demand, impact on alternate routes and safety, and ensuring adherence to relevant laws, rules, and regulations. In 2007, TPW collaborated with local residents, businesses, developers, City departments, and other stakeholders to develop a comprehensive CSS design policy included in the update of the Master Thoroughfare Plan and its Street Development Standards. Adopted by the City Council in 2009, this policy provides stakeholders with additional flexibility for achieving community goals. Intelligent Transportation System Part of the solution to congestion is to efficiently use existing street facilities. This can be accomplished through the implementation of an intelligent transportation system (ITS). ITS uses technology and effective management strategies to manage real-time traffic information with the rapid adjustment of traffic signal timing and the coordination of response activities with local or regional transportation and emergency services. ITS uses technology to manage traffic and ultimately provide a regional seamless transportation system. The City has developed an Intelligent Transportation System Plan for Fort Worth. The plan has several elements, including an incident management system to provide timely information to responding agencies such as fire, police, and emergency medical, a coordinated traffic signal system to manage the timing of signals to improve traffic flow; methods to alert motorists of congested areas and offer alternative routes or modes of travel, and a traffic monitoring system to monitor system flow Fort Worth's ITS plan was developed in coordination with TxDOT's regional ITS plan and in cooperation with NCTCOG An important step in implementing the ITS Plan was the development of a 113 ro Bike Fort Worth Plan • "7 DRAFT • -c I'. g Bike Fort Worth .. Proposed Downtown Bikeway Network —En B • i • c p r , ; BERRY n9 7 3ike Fort Worth, the City's updated bicycle transportation plan currently under development, calls for expanding the bike route network to an ultimate sys- tem of over 750 miles. (Source: Transportation and Public Works Department, 2009) Chapter 11 Transportation Communication Master Plan that identifies how all of the City's ITS devices (traffic signals, traffic cameras, etc.) can be connected to the City's Traffic Management Center The City completed a Communication Master Plan in 2003 In 2009, the City began a project to plan and upgrade the communication network to include traffic signals and traffic cameras citywide. In this first project phase, 300 traffic signals are to receive updated communication links. The City has also worked with The T on an ITS Transit Signal Priority (TSP) test project to allow The T's buses to have signal priority along selected bus routes that historically have had difficulties maintaining the route schedule. Future deployment of TSP may take place along specific corridors with high levels of transit usage or may be used to help speed transit vehicles to outlying service areas, thereby decreasing travel time. This TSP project was conducted in 2005 and 2006. In early 2006, The T began the development of an ITS plan consisting of cameras on all buses to increase passenger security; Automatic Passenger Counters on select vehicles to improve data collection and analysis efforts, and Global Positioning System units on buses to pave the way for future real time information. Bicycle Transoortation Riding a bicycle provides benefits for the cyclist and the community- a cyclist benefits from improved health and inexpensive transportation while reducing automobile congestion and improving air quality The Trinity Trail network includes more than 40 miles of multi -use trails that follow Marine Creek and the Clear Fork and West Fork of the Trinity River The trails can be used for biking and enjoy high levels of recreational and utilitarian cycling. However, the trail system requires improved connections to the existing neighborhoods and street system to enhance its viability as an alternative transportation mode. Crossing freeways and the Trinity River pose particular problems for bicyclists, as do discontinuous street systems. NCTCOG's Mobility Plan 2030 2009 Amendment designates Downtown, the Stockyards, and parts of south and east Fort Worth as Bicycle/Pedestrian Transportation Districts. This designation has helped create more interest within the Fort Worth community in improving cycling conditions citywide. Fort Worth's urban villages, mixed -use growth centers, and future transit -oriented developments are also ideal locations to create a bicycle -friendly environment with high -quality bikeway facilities, convenient access to destinations, and secure bicycle parking. City representatives worked with NCTCOG on the 1999 Fort Worth Bicycle Blueprint, which recommends over 300 miles of signed, on -street bicycle routes throughout the city, as well as the Regional Veloweb bike/pedestrian system. Installation of the first 40 miles of the Blueprint was completed in March 2007 The City began expanding on the Bicycle Blueprint in 2008 with the initiation of a comprehensive bicycle transportation planning effort called Bike Fort Worth. The plan re-evaluates the routes identified m the 1999 Blueprint, proposes a new bicycle route network plan, and recommends new or modified policies and programs aimed at increasing the level and safety of bicycling in Fort Worth. To provide bicycle riders with greater transportation options, The T provides bicycle racks on all of its fixed -route buses. A survey conducted by The T found that over Chapter 11 Transportation Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Legend Pedestrian Transportation Districts f k - 2025 Veloweb Routes = Mobility 2025 Update Rail Lines • Transit Station Pedestrian Transportation Districts The North Central Texas Council of Governments has adopted strategies for providing effective, cost-efficient, and safe intermodal access for bicyclists and pedestrians. These strategies include integrating future rail corridors with pedestrian districts and bicycle networks (Source: North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009.) 114 • a a a • • • • • • • • s • • • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••r• 2,300 cyclists use The T's bus bike racks each month, and the City has provided bicycle racks throughout Downtown and in the Medical District. Bicycles are also allowed on the front cars of Trinity Railway Express commuter trains. Additionally, when the City revised its street development standards m February 2002, the street cross sections were modified to provide wide outside curb lanes on all arterial roads, facilitating their use as an on -street bicycle facility Through the Bike Fort Worth Plan, the City will look to provide a higher level of bicycling accommodation, including the provision of dedicated bicycle lanes on arterial streets designated as bike routes; better connections between the on -street and off-street bicycling networks and between facilities in Fort Worth and those in neighboring communities; additional bicycle parking and end -of -trip facilities for bicyclists, and work with partner agencies to provide public safety, education, and promotional programs. Pedestrian Transportation Many Fort Worth neighborhoods have incomplete sidewalk networks, sometimes characterized by segments that are broken or overgrown with weeds. Incomplete pedestrian networks can prevent residents from walking to nearby destinations and public transportation, discouraging residents from leading active, healthy lifestyles. Complete and accessible sidewalk networks increase the accessibility and attractiveness of alternative modes of transportation like bus and rail transit. Properly -designed pedestrian accommodations are particularly important for persons with disabilities, the elderly, and children who walk to school. Strategies and policies to improve the City's pedestrian transportation network have been outlined in the City's Mobility and Air Quality Plan. In 2007, with guidance from the Access Subcommittee of the Mayor's Committee on Persons with Disabilities, the City initiated a pedestrian curb ramp improvement program. The objective of this program is to retrofit deficient intersections with pedestrian curb ramps that are compliant with the accessibility guidelines of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The City hired an engineermg consultant to develop the program's methodology for evaluating curb ramp deficiencies and developing cost estimates. The Transportation and Public Works Department has used that methodology to evaluate and implement curb ramp improvements. Improvements are ranked based on the importance of the location for attracting pedestrians as well as the severity of the deficiency Improvements are made in priority order as funding becomes available. The engineering consultant hired for the curb ramp program was also contracted to develop a citywide survey and assessment of sidewalks. The results of the sidewalk survey are being used to identify future sidewalk investment needs and prionties, with special emphasis on accessibility to schools, transit stations, commercial districts, and other major pedestrian attractors. The City is also working with local Independent School Districts and individual schools to identify projects to be implemented under the Texas Department of Transportation's Safe Routes to Schools program. This federally -funded program aims to construct infrastructure and implement programs that encourage more children to walk to school and that provide them with safe facilities for walking and bicycling. 115 Trinity Trails Network The Trinity Trails network provides opportunities for hiking, biking, and in -line skating These trails enjoy high levels of recreational use, and are also included in NCTCOG's regional veloweb, a bicycle commuting and pedestrian network encompassing the Fort Worth/Dallas area (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009.) Chapter 11 Transportation The City is undertaking a number of initiatives in urban villages along commercial corridors that will improve pedestnan circulation and comfort within the villages and connections to adjacent neighborhoods. Specific projects are discussed in Chapter 10• Economic Development and Chapter 14 Urban Design. The initiatives discussed in these chapters, such as mixed -use zoning, streetscape projects, crosswalks, and wider sidewalks will encourage increased pedestrian activity within these project areas. Many neighborhoods and commercial areas can be connected to the Trinity Trails network, thereby improving livability and recreational opportunities, as well as enhancing economic vitality The City's Parks and Community Services Department has received more than $1 6 million in grant funding from the Federal Highway Administration for the Trinity River Neighborhood Trails Program. A study to assess and prioritize possible trail connection routes was completed in 2006 Neighborhood trail connections are currently being designed with this fundmg. Aviation Air transportation is an important component of the overall transportation system. Four publicly owned airports serve the City of Fort Worth. Three of these airports are owned by the City of Fort Worth, those being Alliance, Meacham, and Spanks airports. The fourth is DFW International airport, which is jointly owned by the cities of Fort Worth and Dallas. The City of Fort Worth Aviation Department oversees three airports: Alliance Airport, Meacham International Airport, and Spinks Airport, which are categonzed as general aviation relievers by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). These airports are important to the metroplex airport system because they handle general aviation aircraft, thus relieving Dallas -Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) of this traffic. All three airports are located adjacent to interstate highways and major arterials, which connects them with other major modes of transportation. Additionally, rail transportation is located near Alliance and Meacham Airports. Alliance Airport serves the needs of industrial, business, and general aviation users rather than commercial airlines. It is owned by the City of Fort Worth and operated by privately held Alliance Air Services. In the spring of 2001, Alliance Airport began a runway extension project. Completion of the runway extension requires the relocation of the BNSF railroad, FM 156, and Eagle Parkway The relocation of FM 156 commenced in April 2008 and is scheduled for completion in January 2010 The design and engineering of the relocation of the BNSF railroad mainline was completed in 2009 Eagle Parkway will be relocated following the relocation of the BNSF railroad mainline. The Alliance runway extension will provide a platform for cargo -laden aircraft to conduct mternational flight operations from Alliance Airport to destinations around the world. Cargo operators based at Alliance will be able to serve a global market, enhancing potential revenue for the City of Fort Worth and promoting the future development of the Fort Worth Airport System. To accommodate anticipated airline cargo activity, Alliance Airport, working with the City and Hillwood Development, constructed a cargo apron and connecting taxiways on the southwest corner of the Chapter 11 Transportation 116 Existing Airports Alliance "?J 10 Airport Type + Passenger General Aviation 10 Miles Dallas -Fort Worth International Airport (DFW), jointly owned by the cities of Fort Worth and Dallas, is a large hub airport serving the North Texas re- gion, and providing nonstop services to over 160 cities worldwide Three other airports, Alliance, Meacham, and Spinks, handle smaller aircraft, re- lieving DFW of this traffic. (Sources: Transportation and Public Works Department, Planning and Development Department, 2009.) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • i • airport. Hillwood also constructed a 99,000 square -foot cargo facility adjacent to the apron. Other projects currently underway at Alliance include a noise compatibility study scheduled for adoption in February 2010; rehabilitation of runway and taxiway shoulders, relocation and replacement of the airport beacon, replacement of airfield guidance signs; and replacement of the airfield lighting control panel. Meacham Airport was constructed in 1925 and has undergone many changes since its opening. Meacham Airport is currently in the final phases of a noise mitigation project funded by the FAA, which resulted m 124 parcels of land being purchased by the City TxDOT is funding upgrades to the runway at Meacham Airport with an anticipated completion date of summer 2009 Due to the age and deterioration of infrastructure at Meacham, and the need to make the highest and best use of limited land available, an effort has begun to plan for the best use of space m all areas of the airport. The plannmg will focus on specific zones of the airport and be completed in phases. Redevelopment planning will involve tenants within these zones to examine existing and potential land uses, and to generate a plan to make the best use of available space from bothanairside and landside perspective. Spinks Airport was developed m 1988 in the southern part of Fort Worth. Spinks Airport has become increasingly important for economic development in the southern part of the city Since 2005, the airport has added over $16 million and 220,000 square feet in private development. Construction of a permanent control tower at Spinks Airport was completed in November 2006. The airport is now eligible to receive FAA funding for staff costs through the Contract Tower Program. A TxDOT- funded project including a 75,000 square -foot apron extension, taxiway rehabilitation, and road repair is currently underway Dallas Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) is a large hub, jointly owned by the cities of Fort Worth and Dallas. The airport encompasses 18,092 acres, with 6,681 acres developed for aviation purposes. DFW's 2007 land use plan has identified approximately 6,600 acres available for future development. An additional 1,292 acres have been designed for open space/greenbelt areas. DFW is served by 15 cargo air carriers, with more than 250 weekly cargo flights. The airport's strategic location and state-of-the-art facilities available have proven advantageous in the development of global networks. There are 35 non-stop international routes from DFW Airport serving Mexico, South America, Canada, Central America, Europe, Asia, and the Caribbean. As DFW completes its 33rd year of operation, its economic impact on the North Texas region has grown from $14 billion to $16.6 billion in just the past four years. Currently DFW Airport is engaged in a collaborative effort to update its Airport Development Plan (ADP). The ADP provides critical guidance on how to deal with aging infrastructure, dynamic airline business models, evolving security requirements, and the expectations of today's traveling public. This intensive planning effort, called VFR 2030• Vision of the Future Realized, will address access and travel reliability with tools to translate vision into action. Alliance Airport (AFW) • Located 15 miles north of Downtown Fort Worth • One 9,600' x 150' runway Alliance Airport The Alliance Airport is the newest addition (1989) to the City of Fort Worth aviation system. It is the first industrial airport in this region, a concept that has proven effective for economic development. Industries are attracted by the convenience of easy access to air transportation, and new subdivisions are being developed to house the large number of employees working in the Alliance area. (Source. Aviation Department, 2009) Meacham Airport Spinks Airport The City has adopted master plans for Meacham and Spinks Airports. (Source: Aviation Department, 2009.) 117 Chapter 11 Transportation • One 8,200' x 150' Visual Flight Rule (VFR) runway • Owned by the City of Fort Worth, operated by Alliance Airport Services • Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting Index C • 24-hour FAA Air Traffic Control Tower • Aircraft operation. 220/day Based Aircraft: 124 • Category III Instrument Landing System Meacham Airport (FTW) • Located 5 miles north of Downtown Fort Worth • One 7,501' x 150' runway • One 4,006' x 75' runway • One 3,677' x 100' runway • Owned and operated by the City of Fort Worth • Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting Index B • FAA Air Traffic Control Tower • Aircraft operation. 271/day Based Aircraft: 195 • Category I Instrument landing system Spinks Airport (FWS) • Located 15 miles south of Downtown Fort Worth • One 6,002' x 100' runway • One 4,000' x 60' turf runway • Owned and operated by the City of Fort Worth • FAA Contracted Air Traffic Control Tower • Aircraft operation. 160/day Based Aircraft: 209 • Category I Instrument landing system Heliports The helicopter can provide a wide variety of important services to any community that integrates this aircraft into its local transportation system. The State of Texas has a total of 445 heliports in use, with 327 sites in non -hospital use, and 118 sites used by emergency medical facilities. Fort Worth has 16 heliports in use, with public heliport sites located at Alliance Airport, Meacham International Airport, and Spinks Airport. Hospitals with existing heliports in Fort Worth include All Saints Episcopal/ Cityview, Columbia Plaza Medical Center, and Harris Methodist Hospital. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Improve mobility and air quality by providing a multimodal transportation system. • Implement projects identified in the pedestnan curb ramp improvement program study • Implement the Context Sensitive Street Design policy adopted into the Master Thoroughfare Plan's Street Development Standards. • Work with The T to plan for transit -oriented development (TOD) in 2010 as part of the Southwest -to -Northeast Rail Corridor Environmental Impact Statement and Preliminary Engineering. • Implement bicycle transportation improvements identified in the Bike Fort Worth Plan. Construction Site Safety One of the City's primary goals is to develop a safe, efficient, and eco- nomically sound transportation system Construction site safety and effi- ciency are critical in achieving this goal (Source: Transportation and Public Works Department, 2009.) Chapter 11 Transportation 118 • r. • • • • • • • • • • • • M • • • • • • • • • Develop a safe, efficient, and economically sound transportation system. • Periodically review safety, operation, and construction activities that impact the efficient movement of all modes of transportation. • Evaluate traffic, cyclist, and pedestrian safety near shopping, schools, and other pedestrian -oriented areas on a continuous basis. • Identify capital improvement projects and possible construction funding sources on an annual basis for inclusion in future capital improvement programs. Improve and expand transportation options for low-income residents. • Continue to collaborate with The T to identify areas with concentrations of low-income persons and high unemployment rates where car and vanpools would be feasible in 2010 • Provide new and enhanced access to existing bicycling and walking facilities. Lessen the transportation system's negative impacts on air quality, the environment, and neighborhood quality of life. • Continue to implement transportation control measures that reduce vehicle use, improve traffic flow, and reduce congestion conditions. • Continue to conduct corridor studies to evaluate pedestrian and vehicle movements and their impacts on retail, residential, and historic areas. Improve transportation coordination with area transportation agencies. • Coordinate with TxDOT on State projects within the city's boundary • Coordinate with the NCTCOG's Metropolitan Planning Organization. • Coordinate with other City departments on transportation projects. • Coordinate with Independent School Districts on new school locations and needs. POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The City of Fort Worth uses the following policies and strategies to provide a multimodal transportation system that supports economic growth and improved air quality Policies • Evaluate the impacts of land use and platting decisions on the overall transportation system, and the impacts of transportation decisions on land use. • Use the existing Community Facilities Agreement (CFA) program to develop transportation facilities in conjunction with new private development. The CFA may include streets, streetlights, street name signs, storm drains, water, sewer, and park facilities. • Support and encourage appropriate mixed -use zoning and mixed -use development in designated growth centers, urban villages, and transit -oriented developments. 119 Bridge and Roadway Improvements Improvements to the roadway system are just one part of the City's efforts to enhance its transportation infrastructure The improvements to the Park Hill Bridge in southwest Fort Worth are an example of how historical details such as decorative light fixtures and railings can add to the aesthetic quality of the City's infrastructure and surrounding neighborhoods. (Source: Transportation and Public Works Department, 2009) Chapter 11 Transportation • Promote street system patterns that provide greater connectivity between streets and between developments to reduce traffic demands on arterial streets, im- prove emergency access, and make bicycling and walking more attractive transportation options. • Preserve and maintain the existing street infrastructure. • Promote sustainable development patterns that include greater density at appro- priate locations, mixed -use development, public transit, park -and -ride facilities, and access management (e.g. encouraging shared driveways and limiting the number of curb cuts) to reduce vehicle trips. • Protect residential and historic areas from the impacts of excessive traffic. • Encourage appropriate development through the planning and implementation of a multimodal transportation system. • Incorporate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and persons of all ages and abilities when planning and designing transportation projects. • Emphasize public transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian improvements in des- ignated growth centers, urban villages, and transit -oriented developments. • Integrate the City's airport system as part of the overall transportation system. Strategies • Identify and promote potential locations for the expansion of rail transit. • Identify and promote potential locations for transit -oriented development, espe- cially in designated growth centers and urban villages. • Facilitate travel between growth centers and urban villages through thorough- fare improvements and public transportation opportunities. • Participate with The T and NCTCOG on passenger rail and bicycle route studies. • Continue to work with The T to expand and integrate public transit, including rail transit, into the City's transportation system. • Ensure collaboration among City departments, The T, and the community to address issues concerning coordination among the various transportation modes. • Promote park -and -ride facilities to encourage the use of public transit. • Incorporate the various modes of transportation into corridor studies to deter- mine possible alternatives. Studies are to focus on congestion, safety issues, and level of service analysis. • Seek input from other entities, including schools, cities, counties, The T, NCTCOG, and TxDOT when making land use and transportation decisions. • Continue to coordinate with NCTCOG to use the travel forecasting model. • Implement the Intelligent Transportation System Plan for Fort Worth, m coor- dination with TxDOT, NCTCOG, The T, and other Metroplex cities. • Establish links for pedestrians and bicyclists to cross natural barriers, such as rivers and creeks, and man-made obstacles, such as railroads and highways. • Encourage linkages between neighborhoods and integrate land uses to decrease vehicle miles traveled. Pedestrians at Sundance Square Facilities that encourage pedestrian movement include continuous sidewalks with crosswalks, landscaping, and lighting Sundance Square in Downtown Fort Worth has created an environment that encourages walking (Source. Transportation and Public Works Department, 2009.) Chapter 11 Transportation 120 •••••••••••s••••••••••••••••••••• • Provide access for pedestrians from residential areas to shopping, parks, public buildings, and neighboring subdivisions. • Promote and participate in local and regional activities that encourage bicycling and walking as a means of transportation. • Foster roadway designs that decrease noise and improve air quality along major arterials. Modify existing guidelines for traffic impact and assessment studies to allow more flexibility for the different sizes of new developments. • Include landscaping plans in comdor projects. • Develop an appropriate strategy to address the maintenance of public alleys. • Develop a Complete Streets policy that requires streets to be designed to ac- commodate all likely users. PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS The following programs and projects assist the City in developing and maintaining a safe, efficient, and multimodal transportation system. Programs • The Sidewalk Program addresses needs for new or repaired sidewalks. Poten- tial sidewalk projects are prioritized based on technical criteria and imple- mented as funding becomes available. • The ISD Coordination/Outreach Program works to ensure proper vehicular and pedestrian circulation at and near existing and planned schools. City staff works with ISD officials to obtain information on future school sites to ensure implementation of proper infrastructure (i.e. roadway, signals, sidewalks, school zone flashers, pavement markings, crosswalks, crossing guards, etc.) prior to opening day • The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) provides traffic calming devices on residential streets that experience high traffic speeds and volumes. An individual or neighborhood association may participate in this program. The NTMP looks at traffic issues m the entire neighborhood and not just particular streets and intersections. City staff work with residents to iden- tify and resolve traffic issues within the neighborhood. A variety of traffic calming and traffic control devices, including speed humps, may be considered. • The Annual Street Maintenance Program assists in the maintenance of all City streets, including asphalt, concrete, and brick surfaces. Streets that are main- tained through the program are selected each year based on citizen's requests and staff evaluation of conditions. Some streets outside the city limits are also maintained through jointly funded interlocal agreements between the City and • The Street Management Program coordinates and manages all aspects of street construction, closures, and uses that affect vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic flow This includes review of traffic control plans for street and sidewalk clo- sures due to special events, construction, and utility work. The program aims to keep city streets and sidewalks open for public use to the extent possible. Neighborhood Traffic Management Program The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program provides assis- tance for residents living on residential streets experiencing high traffic speeds and volumes. (Source. Transportation and Public Works De- partment, 2009.) SH 121T Conceptual Toll Plaza This conceptual illustration of the preferred walls and railing on proposed SH 121 T, Southwest Parkway tollway, reflects the commitment to create a road in a "park -like" environment. The road is planned to traverse the southwest part of Fort Worth (Source: Transportation and Public Works Department, 2009.) 121 Chapter 11 Transportation Projects • The City is currently a partner with the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA) and the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) in the devel- opment of SH 121T, the Southwest Parkway This tollway will eventually traverse from I-30 at Forest Park Boulevard through the southwest part of Fort Worth to U.S. Highway 67 in Cleburne. Major improvements to interchanges at 1-30 and at I-20/SH 183 will be a part of this project as well. The parkway is scheduled to be completed in 2013 • As part of the Communication Master Plan the City will install cable modems and radio systems into several hundred ITS devices citywide. This will allow the ITS devices to be managed from the City's Traffic Management Center downtown. This effort should be complete in 2011 • A number of Major Transportation Corridor Studies (MTCS) are underway in the region. A MTCS must identify all reasonable alternative strategies for addressing transportation demand, congestion, or other issues in a corridor Active studies in the Fort Worth area include: the 1-30 MTCS from Oakland Blvd to the Dallas County Line, the 1-820 Southeast MTCS from Meadow - brook Drive to I-20 and on US 287 from I-820 to Reed Street, the I-820 East MTCS from SH 121 to Randol Mill Road, the I-35W MTCS from Northside Drive to 1-820, SH 121/ SH 183 MTCS from IH 820 to SH 161, the SH 121 (Johnson County) MTCS from FM 1187 to US 67, and the I-820 Northeast MTCS from I-35W to SH 26. The TxDOT-Fort Worth District is the lead agency for these studies. • The City of Fort Worth initiated a Texas Motor Speedway (TMS) Area Mas- ter Plan to assess economic and environmental impacts of proposed develop- ments in the area, and to recommend compatible land uses and infrastructure improvements to support future development surrounding TMS The City Council adopted the TMS Area Master Plan in September 2009 Capital Improvement Projects Capital improvement projects identified for the next 20 years are listed in Appen- dix D and Appendix E, along with estimated costs, completion dates, and potential funding sources. The City and Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce jointly com- missioned a study in 2008 to determine the total cost of transportation infrastruc- ture needs over the next ten years and to identify potential funding opportuni- ties. The study was completed in June 2009, and recommended consideration of several planning and funding strategies in order to meet the City's transportation needs. Staff is scheduled to formally present the various alternatives to the Fort Worth City Council in 2010 Chapter 11 Transportation 122 Major Transportation Corridors Major Transportation Corridor Studies are currently underway for several areas of the city, including along I-35W (above) The studies will address transportation demand, congestion, and other issues. (Sources: Transportation and Public Works Department, Planning and Development Department, 2009.) a • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • 1 I a a 1 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 12: EDUCATION Fort Worth's schools are striving to provide quality education for all students, and to produce a skilled workforce capable of filling high -paying jobs in local businesses. In response to the demand for an educated workforce, Fort Worth is offering an increasingly wider variety of opportunities for education, both in the public and private realm. The City of Fort Worth is served primarily by the Fort Worth Independent School District. Due to the geographic layout of Fort Worth, 15 additional independent school districts (ISDs) provide educational facilities and services to portions of the city Private schools have also become a major provider of education for Fort Worth residents. In addition to primary and secondary schools, Fort Worth offers residents many opportunities for higher education, including Tarrant County College, with four campuses and a Downtown facility; Texas Wesleyan University; Texas Christian University; Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary; and the University of North Texas Health Science Center EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS One of the most important issues facmg school districts in Fort Worth is growth in student enrollment. Unlike private schools that have the option of limiting their enrollment, public schools must accommodate growth while continuing to nurture academic achievement for all students. In an effort to keep pace with enrollment growth, the Fort Worth ISD completed a $435 million bond program, which was overwhelmingly supported by 88 percent of Fort Worth voters in 1999 New schools were built and improvements were made to all existing schools. In November 2007, voters approved a $593.6 bond program for new schools, additions, and renovations to existing schools and athletic facilities. The Fort Worth ISD serves slightly more than half (47 percent) of the city's land area and, based on Planning and Development Department estimates, 68 percent of the city's school -aged population. The remainder of the city's land area falls within 15 additional ISDs, which are discussed on the following page and mapped at right. All of these ISDs seek to provide a physical environment that supports high levels of student achievement, promotes positive human relations and open communication, and celebrates the diverse multi -cultural nature of Fort Worth. The Fort Worth ISD completed a five-year strategic planning process that produced a vision, a mission statement, and three strategic goals: 1) student achievement, 2) operational efficiency and effectiveness, and 3) family involvement and community partnerships. Each strategic goal has performance standards. The district used the strategic plan, called Vision 2010, to prepare its annual budget. Fort Worth ISD Enrollment In 2008-2009, more than 79,000 students were served by the Fort Worth ISD Although the district's growth is less dramatic than that of its suburban counterparts, the Fort Worth ISD has been challenged in handling changes in student population. In addition, a highly mobile student population is challenging for facilities planners. 123 Azle ISD White Settler ent ISO` Aledo -ISO ( ,s• School District Boundaries \Northwest $ D rowle ISD Builespn ISD 10 5 0 1 Lake Worth ISD 2. Castleberry ISO 3 Kennedale ISD Keller ISO Birdville ISD Hurst Euless Bedford ISO Arlington ISD 1 Mansfield (SD `\' 1 ttv 10 Miles 1111111.11110 The Fort Worth Independent School District serves 52 percent of the city's land area and 68 percent of the city's school -aged population The re- mainder of the city's land area is within the jurisdictions of 15 other inde- pendent school districts. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 12: Education Fort Worth ISD's biggest enrollment jumps in recent years have been driven by the growing Hispanic population in the City's Northside and the urbanization of the City's southwest region. According to the Texas Education Agency, in the academic year 2008-2009, the district's Hispanic enrollment constituted 60 percent, while the percentage of African American students (25 percent) and white students (13 percent) continues to decline. In 2008-2009, Fort Worth ISD had over 22,377 students (28% of the total student population) with limited proficiency in English, just over 21,217 of these were enrolled in bilingual and English as a Second Language (ESL) programs. These students are expected to transition into English within three to four years. Other ISDs Although the Fort Worth Independent School District serves the majority of residents in the City, 15 additional independent school districts serve students on the penphery of the city limits: Aledo, Arlington, Azle, Birdville, Burleson, Castleberry, Crowley, Eagle Mountain -Saginaw, Everman, Hurst -Euless -Bedford, Keller, Kennedale, Lake Worth, Northwest, and White Settlement. The portion of Fort Worth that is in the Arlington ISD contains a wastewater treatment plant and no residential uses. Many school districts in suburban communities are facing issues of student population growth. In the past five years, Keller ISD has increased by over 8,496 students, and Eagle Mountain -Saginaw ISD has grown by 80 percent. Growth in southwest Fort Worth has created a challenge for Crowley ISD as well. Crowley ISD, the second largest school district in terms of land area in Fort Worth, has experienced growth related to the development occurring in southwest Fort Worth. Student population in Crowley schools has increased by approximately 27 percent in the last five years. To help meet the demand for new classrooms, voters approved a $416 million bond package in May 2007 Most students that attend Crowley schools live in southwest Fort Worth. Student population at the eight elementary schools, two middle school, one intermediate school, one ninth -grade campus and one high school located within Fort Worth's city limits is 10,099, which represents 67 percent of Crowley ISD's total student population. Two new intermediate schools, located in Fort Worth, are under construction and scheduled to open in 2010 Eagle Mountain -Saginaw ISD, located in northwest Fort Worth, had about 15,292 students in 2008-2009 Because of the location of its schools in Fort Worth's extraterritorial jurisdiction, it is anticipated that an increasing percentage of Eagle Mountain -Saginaw ISD students will be Fort Worth residents as these areas are annexed. Capital improvements projected over the next five years include seven new elementary schools and one new middle school. Keller ISD serves approximately 30,300 students in far north Fort Worth and eight other nearby cities. In 2009, Keller ISD had thirteen elementary schools, three intermediate, three middle schools and three high schools within Fort Worth city limits. As part of the 2005 bond program, Keller ISD opened three elementary schools, one middle school and one intermediate school. Chapter 12. Education 124 5i Enrollment Growth in Selected Independent School Districts 0 1.25 2.5 % Enrollment Growth 2003-08 7) Negative Growth 0•25% 26.50% 11111 Above 50% Fort Worth City limit School districts serving outlying areas of Fort Worth are growing rapidly While Fort Worth ISD had a net loss of 1,050 students from the 2003-04 school year to the 2008-09 school year, suburban districts grew at a rapid pace Keller ISD added 8,496 students, Crowley ISD added 3,212 students, Northwest ISD added 8,184 students, and Eagle Mountain - Saginaw ISD added 6,775 students in the last 5 years. (Source. Texas Edu- cation Agency, 2009.) a a a a a I S • • • • • • a a • • • I 00••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• School Facilities The Fort Worth ISD's 1999 $435 million school improvement bond package addressed fundamental and critical needs related to overcrowding, safety, and structural repairs. The bond package included $121 million to fund construction of new elementary schools and sixth -grade centers to relieve overcrowding and to limit the size of elementary schools to 900 students or less. With funds from the bond package, 7 new schools have been built and improvements made to every campus in the district. Dolores Huerta and Seminary Hills Park elementary schools opened m August 2004 Many schools have new classroom wings that include libraries, science labs and/or music rooms. Renovations include improved cafeterias, kitchens and libraries at many sites. The Fort Worth ISD's 2007 $593 6 million school bond package includes funding for two new middle schools and four elementary schools, improved classroom technology, science labs, new classrooms, and the reduction of portable classrooms. The City and the Fort Worth ISD work cooperatively to address issues such as the building of new schools and expansion of existing schools. In addition, the City distributes large multifamily development proposals and subdivision plats for residential development to the appropriate ISDs for comment and to assist in planning for future growth. In May 2008, residents in the Eagle Mountain-Sagmaw Independent School District voted to approve a $394 million bond package. Prompted by record growth, the package includes 2 elementary campuses, one middle school, a new high school campus, purchase of land for future expansion, and renovations and additions at several existing facilities. Also in May of 2008, Northwest ISD approved a new bond measure authorizing the district to spend $260 million for seven new elementary schools, one additional middle school, technology infrastructure, and building renovations. Community Partners For 23 years, the partnership effort in the FWISD has provided support and recognition to teachers and students. Today, more than 400 businesses, organizations, and churches are partnering with schools through the Adopt -A -School and Vital Link student internships programs. Business volunteers mentor, tutor, provide incentives for academic improvement, serve as career day speakers, assist teachers and administrators, and put student interns to work in their businesses. The business community has sponsored the Outstanding Teacher Recognition Dinner since 1984, and corporate sponsors recognize other teachers for exemplary work in their content areas. TEAM FWISD, a mentonng program which was launched in the spring of 2003 with a grant from the U.S. Department of Education, is currently serving 18 schools in the FWISD The program has mentors from all parts of the community mcludmg businesses, college students, police officers and firemen, and other City employees. In 2005-2006, over 340,000 hours were recorded by active parent volunteers who devoted time to help their children's schools by assisting teachers and staff, joining booster clubs, sponsoring proms, chaperoning field trips, 125 Fort Worth ISO New School Construction Dolores Huerta Elementary School, pictured above, is one of 10 new elementary schools whose construction was facilitated by the 1999 bond program to alleviate overcrowding Portable classrooms, however, are still used at many schools. (Sources: Fort Worth ISD, Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Allocation of Fort Worth Independent School District 2007 Bond Program Other Consideration- 70% Athletic Facilities 1.5% School Renovations 62.4% New Schools 236% aassroom Additions 5.5% The Fort Worth ISD's 2007 bond program provided $593.6 million, primarily for school renovations. (Source: Fort Worth ISD, 2009.) Chapter 12: Education and raising funds for supplies and equipment to enhance instruction. Student Performance Texas' accountability system for public schools is one of the nations most rigorous. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) uses the Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) to rate schools based on a number of factors, including Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) scores, attendance rates, percentage of students completing an advanced course, and dropout rates. In the spring of 2003, Texas public school students took the state's newest accountability test, TAKS, for the first time. The test's objective is to see how well students are learning the state's curriculum. Each year, schools must increase scores on the TAKS to meet AEIS criteria for acceptable, recognized, and exemplary status. In 2008-2009, 75 percent of all students in a school had to pass all sections of the test to earn a rating of recognized, and 90 percent had to pass to earn exemplary status. In the 2008-2009 school year, 55 out of 144 rated schools in Fort Worth ISD earned an exemplary or recognized status. The percentage of Fort Worth ISD students taking Advanced Placement classes increased from 14.9 percent in 2003 to 16.4 percent in 2004, the latest year for which data is available. Dropout Rates For the class of 2008, the Texas Education Agency reported that in FWISD the four- year dropout rate (grades 9 through 12) was 15 1 percent. Within the four-year period, 21.6 percent of African Americans, 15 1 percent of Hispanics, and 7.2 percent of Whites left school without obtaining a diploma. Several initiatives undertaken by the district show promise for reducing the dropout rate. A comprehensive truancy prevention program, in collaboration with the district attorney's office, provides assistance and support to parents and students who have a high number of absences. Consequences for failure to cooperate include a mandated visit to truancy court. Success High School offers students an opportunity to attend classes at night so they can work and still keep up with their studies. New Lives School provides special services for pregnant and parenting teens. Various programs such as Communities in Schools, Vital Link, Fort Worth After -School, 21st Century Grant Schools, and campus -based mentoring programs also encourage students to stay in school. The Fort Worth Chamber, the Fort Worth Hispanic Chamber, and the Metropolitan Black Chamber of Commerce have joined forces in an annual stay -in -school effort to address the drop out problem. A Stay -In -School summit focused on grassroots efforts to keep students in school, and other strategies are being developed and implemented. They mclude a focused mentoring initiative for high schools, campus/ community liaisons, a community awareness campaign, a community scholarship program, and professional development for teachers. Private Schools Many private schools are available to Fort Worth residents. Tarrant County has 70 private schools, including 38 in Fort Worth. Approximately 11,500 students are Chapter 12. Education 126 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Fort Worth Independent School District Enrollment 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Overall student enrollment in Fort Worth has increased over the last twenty years, but enrollment has declined slightly since 2007-2008. (Source: Texas Education Agency 2009.) Fort Worth Independent School District Dropouts 2007-08 24% 20% 16% 12% • • • • • • • • • • • • • •' •' •' • • • • • • 8% • 4% • 0% • • • Total African Hispanic White American In the class of 2008, 21 6 percent of African American students dropped out, along with 15 1 percent of Hispanic students and 7.2 percent of White stu- • dents. (Source. Texas Education Agency, 2009) • ••••••,•••••••••••••••••••••••••• enrolled in private schools in Fort Worth. Fort Worth Country Day School in southwest Fort Worth has an enrollment of 1,115 students in kindergarten through twelfth grade Nolan Catholic High School, located in East Fort Worth, has 1,090 students from grades eight to twelve. Trinity Valley School and Temple Christian School, both offering all grade levels, have 964 and 657 students, respectively Universities and Calle2es Fort Worth offers many higher education opportunities. Texas Christian University, a private university located in southwest Fort Worth, has an enrollment of 8,696 students. Texas Wesleyan University (TWU), located in southeast Fort Worth, has over 2,000 students at its main campus, and 812 students attend the TWU Law School m Downtown Fort Worth. Tarrant County College (TCC) has a facility in Downtown and two other campuses in Fort Worth. Northwest Campus and South Campus. Two additional campuses are located in Hurst (Northeast) and Arlington (Southeast) In addition to their standard Associates Programs, TCC offers a Continuing Education Program that provides opportunities for individuals to stay current on new developments in their present occupations or in new fields. Many Fort Worth residents also attend the University of Texas at Arlington (UTA) and the University of North Texas in Denton, both state universities. UTA opened a satellite campus, the UTA/Fort Worth Riverbend Campus in Fort Worth, in 1999 The new campus offers graduate courses in engineering and business at the UTA Automation and Robotics Research Institute in east Fort Worth. In addition, UTA has begun holding classes in the renovated Santa Fe train depot building adjacent to the Intermodal Transportation Center in Downtown Fort Worth. The University of North Texas Health Science Center in west Fort Worth has 1,153 students. It is comprised of the Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine, the Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, the School of Public Health and the School of Health Professions. The Center's Institutes for Discovery conduct leading -edge research on select health issues, including vision, aging, cancer, heart disease, physical medicine, and public health. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, located on a 200-acre campus in south Fort Worth, has more than 3,000 students from across the nation and plans to double the enrollment. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The following goals and objectives have been identified by the Fort Worth Independent School District to help improve educational quality, opportunities, and student achievement in Fort Worth. All students will learn at high levels of academic expectations, and the achievement gap will be eliminated. • Recruit, develop, support, and retain effective teachers, principals, and other instructional staff. 127 Universities in Fort Worth Texas Wesleyan University, located in southeast Fort Worth, has almost 2,000 students at the main campus An additional 785 students attend the Texas Wesleyan University Law School, which relocated from Irving to Downtown Fort Worth. (Sources: Texas Wesleyan University Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Texas Christian University, a private university located in southwest Fort Worth, offers quality higher education to almost 9,000 students. (Sources: Texas Christian University, Planning and Devel- opment Department, 2009.) Chapter 12: Education • Provide individualized support for student development and academic achievement. • Ensure consistent use and implementation of district curriculum frameworks. • Provide opportunities for student voice, leadership, and engagement in the learning process. • Provide a safe, positive, and secure learning environment for students and staff. All operations in the District will be efficient and effective. • Promote a service -oriented culture throughout the district. • Use data to inform decisions. • Communicate with all stakeholders m a timely and relevant manner • Be responsible stewards of public funds. • Nurture and build capacity of all employees to best support academic achievement. Family Involvement & Community Engagement. • Build community support and engage them to support district goals. • Engage and expect parents to be active participants m student learning. POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The following policy and strategies will enable the City and the ISDs to implement the education goals and objectives. Policy • The City of Fort Worth and Fort Worth area school districts will maintain a working relationship to cooperatively address issues that affect both, such as land use and historic buildings. Stratesies • When possible, school and City facilities will be shared to provide efficient access to services. • Expand opportunities for continuing higher education. • Ensure that the design of schools reflects their importance as community facilities and provides a creative, safe environment for students, taking into consideration the natural topography of sites, traffic flow, and needs of surrounding neighborhoods. Like their historic precedents, tomorrow's schools should be designed as civic landmarks. • Educate realtors and the public on the achievements of the Fort Worth Independent School District. Chapter 12: Education 128 Polytechnic High School One of the goals of the Fort Worth ISD is to improve and update older school facilities, such as Polytechnic High School in southeast Fort Worth. (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) • S • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a i ••••••*••••••••••a••••••••••••••• PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS • Fort Worth After School, a joint collaboration of the FWISD and the City of Fort Worth, began in the fall of 2000 and has grew steadily to serve more than 12,500 students. Goals of the program include promoting educational competence, physical and social development, and eventually reducing juvenile crime. One constant in the delivery of this program is that each campus must provide a daily homework help component. • Vital Link combines the efforts of Fort Worth schools and the business community to motivate students between the sixth and seventh grades. Internships help demonstrate how skills learned in school are used in a workplace, and how success in school can lead to success beyond the classroom. • Adopt -A -School provides an opportunity for busmess leaders and other organizations to give financial and volunteer support to individual schools. • The Bilingual Initiative is designed to transition students from Spanish to English by the end of three years and reach non-LEP status within five years, as assessed through TAKS. Nearly half of the elementary schools that participate in this program are rated as Recognized. • Head Start is a national program which provides comprehensive developmental services to low-income, pre-school children, and social services to their families. Specific services for children focus on education, socio-emotional development, physical and mental health, and nutrition. The cornerstone of the program is parent and community involvement. • Texas Wesleyan University (TWU) has undertaken a seven-year $33.5 million capital campaign. Proposed improvements include the renovation of existing buildings, the development of a university soccer field at the corner of Lancaster and South Collard, the addition of faculty and staff offices, student housing, classroom facilities, and a student center TWU is an important anchor for the Polytechnic/Wesleyan Urban Village and mixed use growth enter The City is cooperating with TWU by upgrading surrounding infrastructure that helps support campus improvements. • The GrandMarc development, on West Berry between University and Waits Avenue opened to house TCU students in the Fall of 2006. Adjacent streetscape enhancements encourage pedestrian activity, safety, comfort, and connectivity • The University of North Texas Health Science Center has undertaken a master planning process for its campus. In May 2007, the planning team of Carter & Burgess/Polshek Partnership completed a 15-year campus master plan which addresses the future growth of the campus and the needs of the Center's four schools. Capital Improvement Proiects Capital improvement projects identified for the next 20 years are listed in Appendices D and E, with estimated costs, completion dates, and potential funding sources. 129 Adopt -A -School Program A Code Compliance officer speaks to a group of students dur- ing Adopt -A -School. The program enhances education for Fort Worth youth by providing an opportunity for mentoring and other community support activities. (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Chapter 12: Education w 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 13: HISTORIC PRESERVATION Fort Worth's historic preservation program seeks to balance sustainable growth, protect historic resources, invest m compatible new development, and provide incentives for the rehabilitation of historic properties. This chapter defines the resources of the City's historic preservation program, identifies the tools and methods of protecting and growing those resources, and describes the existing policies and goals for future historic preservation efforts in Fort Worth. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Historic preservation has been at the heart of City policy throughout much of Fort Worth's history From the careful preservation of the Nineteenth Century Van Zandt Cottage for the Texas Centennial in 1936, through the redevelopment of Sundance Square beginning in 1978, and on to the adoption of the Citywide Historic Preservation Plan by the City Council in 2003, the City has been focused on preserving its heritage. The first attempts to catalog historic resources m the city came in the 1960s, when the Junior League asked noted architect Blake Alexander to identify the most significant historic buildings. In 1976, the North Fort Worth Historical Society was formed, and it completed a survey of resources that would culminate in the nomination of the Fort Worth Stockyards to the National Register of Historic Places. Local efforts began m earnest in 1980 with the first local historic district, Elizabeth Boulevard, whose guidelines were updated in 2007 However, the most significant changes occurred in the 1990s, when the Preservation Ordinance was rewritten following the demolition of the historic Quality Hill neighborhood. The new ordinance created a stronger, more effective preservation program and more recent proposed updates will continue to improve historic preservation. Basic Resources for Historic Preservation A solid historic preservation program leverages available resources. Those resources need to provide information and incentives that result in preservation of and increased investment in historic properties. The City of Fort Worth benefits from a wealth of historic preservation resources that include local, state, and national support for preservation. The federal government provides a mechanism for appropriate historic rehabilitation in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, which acts as a guide to regulation, but it is the Certified Local Government Program (CLG), that provides technical and financial assistance to local programs. The CLG program provides a top -down resource structure for communities by providing funding, training, and technical assistance via the State Historic Preservation Office. Local communities that participate in the program receive the highest priority for funding from historic preservation grants. To be a CLG, the City has adopted a preservation ordinance and design guidelines, engaged a professional staff to monitor its program, and reports annually to the State Historic Preservation Office on preservation activities. Fort Worth has been in the CLG Program since 1986 131 Fort Worth Historic Districts 25 � l Local historic districts and National * National Register & Local District 4. National Register * Local Historic District 5'Mos Register historic districts are depicted above, indicating the highest concentration of historic properties is located within the central city (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 13: Historic Preservation The National Park Service (NPS) lists buildings and sites of local, state, and national significance on the National Register of Histonc Places. It is an honorary designation that does not require public access to a property, nor an obligation to restore a property according to any restrictive guidelines. Benefits of the designation include federal recognition, eligibility for financial incentives such as tax credits, technical assistance from the Texas Histoncal Commission, promotional advantages to draw customers, and protection from the impacts of federally funded projects. In Fort Worth, historic areas listed on the Register include properties representing most neighborhoods in the central city including nine National Register Districts and 65 individual National Register properties. The National Histonc Landmark (NHL) Program is used to designate buildings and sites that are of national importance, such as the San Jacinto Battlefield and the Alamo. Only three percent of properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places are designated as National Historic Landmarks. In addition to the prestige gained by the designation, other benefits include the availability of grants through the Historic Preservation Fund and technical preservation assistance provided by the National Park Service. There are no NHL designations in Fort Worth, however, places such as the Stockyards may be eligible. The State of Texas recognizes historically significant buildings with Recorded Texas Historic Landmark (RTHL) and State Archeological Landmark (SAL) designations. In addition, the State Marker Program has placed about 13,000 Official Texas Historical Markers across the State to provide educational links to the state's history Architectural surveys are an exceptional source of information for historic preservation efforts. In Fort Worth, large scale surveys were done in the 1980s, which ultimately surveyed more than 50,000 buildings in the county From these documents more than 1,700 historically or architecturally significant structures were identified to be eligible for local, state, or national designation. In addition, neighborhood specific surveys have been completed to document local and national historic districts. In 2007, a pnmary goal of the Citywide Histonc Preservation Plan was realized when the City Council allocated $200,000 to complete the first phase of a citywide histonc resources survey Phase one included intensive surveys of four local historic districts and one urban village, as well as windshield surveys of one other local historic district and two more urban villages. In 2008, the consulting firm of LopezGarcia Group finished intensive histonc resource surveys for five areas and windshield surveys for three areas. The five areas included Carver Heights, Mistletoe Heights, Morningside, Berry -Riverside Urban Village, and Garden of Eden. The windshield surveys included Stop Six, Six Points Urban Village, and Polytechnic/Wesleyan. Eventually this data will be available to the public via the internet and may result in possible National Register nominations. At the local level, numerous community organizations engage in aspects of historic preservation ranging from public education to adaptive reuse. Smce the early twentieth century, community organizations like the Junior League and Girls Service Chapter 13: Historic Preservation National Register Districts There are currently nine National Register Districts in Fort Worth The Near Southeast Historic District (top left), listed in 2002, was first platted around 1880 and flourished under the streetcar system. By 1910, it was a predominantly African -American working class neighborhood It is a locally designated historic district known as Terrell Heights. The Grand Avenue National Register District (top right) was listed in 1990, and most of the houses were built between 1906-1919 The district is designated Demolition Delay by the City (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1976, the Fort Worth Stockyards District exemplifies the City's Western heritage It contains 42 buildings, most of which have some level of local designation. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 132 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••0000000 ••••••••••••••••••i•••••••r•i••• League have sponsored preservation efforts as part of their service to the community Other organizations were created specifically to promote history and preservation, including the Tarrant County Historical Commission, Historic Preservation Council for Tarrant County, Tarrant County Black Historical and Genealogical Society, North Fort Worth Historical Society, Historic Fort Worth, Inc., Southside Preservation Association, and Historic Landmarks, Inc. Fort Worth is also home to the offices of two important national partners in preservation. the National Trust for Historic Preservation's Southwest Regional Office and the Texas Regional Office of Partners for Sacred Places. In 1999, the City of Fort Worth participated in a statewide initiative to document the economic impacts of historic preservation throughout Texas. The study examined property values, historic museums, building rehabilitation, and heritage tourism and came to the conclusion that historic preservation makes sound economic sense. According to the study, an estimated $193 million is spent annually on historic rehabilitation in Texas. Nationwide, heritage travelers spend nearly $1.25 billion each year The study also suggests that, on average, property located within locally designated historic districts appreciates in value at higher rates than property not located within local historic districts. In Fort Worth, this effect is demonstrated in the Elizabeth Boulevard Historic District, where property values are 22 percent higher than houses of comparable size that are not located in a local historic district. Another example is the Fairmount-Southside Historic District, where property values are 6.8 percent higher than non -district houses. Cultural tourism in the United States in 2005 generated about 650 billion dollars to the US economy Tools for Historic Preservation Cities must engage the right tools to manage a historic preservation program. In 2002, Mayor Kenneth Barr appointed a volunteer steering committee to oversee the preparation of a citywide preservation plan. The plan was produced, as required by the Zoning Ordinance, to provide direction to the long-term efforts of historic preservation in Fort Worth. The steering committee was given the task of ensuring that the plan 1) addressed the current status of historic preservation, 2) defined the weaknesses of the program, and 3) identified goals for histonc preservation. The resulting product, the Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, is used by the City and community to promote the role of historic preservation m Fort Worth, and to address the needs of the City's historic resources though project planning, resource allocation, and organizational needs. In February 2009 the Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission (HCLC) reviewed all 65 strategies from the 2003 preservation plan, and only 12 were identified as needing further implementation. The Zoning Ordinance set out the powers of the Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission to administer the preservation program. Chapter 4, Article 5, otherwise known as the Preservation Ordinance and updated in July 2007, contains the basic building blocks for local histonc preservation, including the designation process for three types of designation. Highly Significant Endangered (HSE), Historic and Cultural Landmark (HC) and Demolition Delay (DD). The ordmance also contains the processes for receiving the Historic Site Tax Exemption and for acquiring a National Register Districts Central Handley (above) was designated as a Fort Worth historic district in 2001 and a National Register District in 2002 It is a commercial district built between 1910-1930 that was home to the easternmost stop in the City of the Dallas -Fort Worth Interurban rail line (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) 133 The Marine Commercial District along North Main Street (center, left) was a pivotal commercial area of North Fort Worth It was listed on the National Register in 2001 The Eighth Avenue District (center, right) is comprised of one block of residential structures from the area once known as Quality Hill. It was listed on the National Register in 2006 The Leuda-May District (bottom) was listed in 2005 and is a collection of early 20th century apartment buildings (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 13: Historic Preservation a Certificate of Appropriateness for exterior changes to property Currently there are 12 potential ordinance changes that have been reviewed by the HCLC, the Zoning Commission, and the City Council. It is anticipated these changes will be approved by the City Council in 2010 Properties designated as HSE are recognized as some of the most important historic structures and sites in Fort Worth. They have also been deemed as some of the most endangered due to prolonged vacancy or deterioration. They must embody at least five of the ten criteria for designation and have documented evidence of endangerment. Often HSE buildings are large structures that have proven difficult to redevelop For this reason, the City offers special economic incentives for stabilization and rehabilitation of HSE structures. Properties designated as HSE include the T&P Terminal on West Lancaster Avenue and the Farmers & Mechanics Building on Main Street. Examples of successful rehabilitations of HSE buildings mclude the Lockheart Gables Bed &Breakfast on Locke Avenue and the Blackstone Hotel in Downtown. The Historic and Cultural Landmark designation has been applied to Individual properties and districts. HC properties and districts are important to the history, architecture, and culture of Fort Worth. To be designated HC, a property must meet three of the ten designation criteria. For a district nomination, at least two properties within the district must meet three of the ten criteria. In 2007, the City designated the Stop Six Sunrise Edition Historic District, the Terrell Heights Historic District and the Hillcrest Tremont Historic District. In 2010 there are three potential districts being considered by property owners. Demolition Delay properties have been identified as resources that meet at least two of the ten designation criteria. Under the Demolition Delay designation, the City may delay the structure's demolition for up to 180 days in order to pursue alternatives. This time frame may be shortened or waived at the discretion of the City In total, the City has designated more than 7,000 historic properties using all three designations, and the HCLC has the responsibility of monitoring each property The HCLC consists of nine citizens appointed by the Mayor and the City Council. It is their responsibility to recommend eligible properties for historic designation based on documented significance and the designation criteria. They are also responsible for granting Certificates of Appropriateness for exterior changes to historic property based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and, where applicable, historic distnct design guidelines. They also verify projects for the historic site tax exemption. The historic site tax exemption is used as a tool to promote owner investment in a historic property Both HSE and HC designated properties are eligible to receive tax incentives on the City portion of the ad valorem taxes based on pre -renovation assessed values. This incentive encourages a substantial investment in designated Chapter 13: Historic Preservation Fort Worth Historic & Cultural Landmark Districts There are eleven local historic districts in Fort Worth Elizabeth Boulevard (top), named after the wife of its developer John Ryan, was the City's first historic district and is also listed on the National Register Fairmount- Southside (middle) was locally and nationally designated in 1990 and remains one of the largest residential historic districts in the country Mistletoe Heights (bottom) was designated by the City in 2002 and is an excellent example of a middle to upper class early 20th century neighborhood (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 134 41 a 41 a a • • • a • • ••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••• properties, while ensuring that projects are consistent with appropriate historic preservation practices. Current Trends in Historic Preservation Continuing the useful life of historic buildings is a creative process that requires a joint effort by the City, nonprofit organizations, and private developers. The most challenging adaptive reuse projects involve large, often vacant buildings originally designed for specific uses like warehouses, historic railroad terminals, and theaters. In Fort Worth, the Texas & Pacific Terminal, the Swift & Co. building and the Montgomery Ward building are examples of historic buildings for which adaptive reuse projects have been completed. Challenges faced in adapting histonc buildings to new uses include bringing the buildings into compliance with current code requirements, removing hazardous materials such as lead paint and asbestos, and installing the cutting edge technology required for telecommunications and computer networks. These barriers create the need for a proactive and innovative approach by developers and architects, in partnership with City officials who administer fire and life safety codes. The City adopted Chapter 34 of the International Building Code, which relates specifically to historic buildings and allows some leniency in the code requirements for historic buildings. Financial incentives at the local, state, and federal levels can be used to offset these often -costly rehabilitation projects. The Homes of Parker Commons is an adaptive reuse project where the Fort Worth High School building on Jennings Avenue and the Alexander Hogg School building on West Terrell Avenue have been rehabilitated and converted into apartments that provide much -needed housing near the Medical District in Fort Worth's Southside. On occasion, historic buildings are removed instead of reused. The demolition of historic buildings happens throughout the country for many reasons, and what is built in replacement often becomes the target of intense scrutiny Efforts to have sensitive and compatible infill development within historic neighborhoods are sometimes seen as overly obtrusive, but are often necessary in order to maintain the historic character of an area that will draw business, residents, and tourists. Locally, regulatory mechanisms are used to ensure quality infill within histonc neighborhoods. Within designated histonc districts, the Landmarks Commission has the authority to require new construction to adhere to the district's design guidelines. For individually designated properties, the Landmarks Commission relies upon the guidance of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. The designation of individual properties and districts is an on going effort. Most of Fort Worth's districts will need to be re -surveyed. As a part of on -going preservation education and stewardship, City staff will need to train volunteers to help with future survey updates. Preservation programs routinely use Conservation Districts to facilitate the preservation of neighborhood character The districts focus on the appropnate scale 135 Fort Worth Historic & Cultural Landmark Districts Kenwood Court was designated as a Historic and Cultural Landmark District in 1991 The 15 houses within the district were constructed during the 1920-1940s (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) The Garden of Eden District was designated by the City Council in 2005 and is the first African -American cultural district in Fort Worth The district celebrates the history and culture of the Cheney family, members of which have lived on this land for more than 150 years. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 13: Historic Preservation and mass of infill development relative to the neighborhood environment. Conservation Districts are not intended to prescribe design guidelines for specific architecture, nor are they used to protect individual buildings. However, this type of distnct can successfully preserve the streetscape and physical character of a neighborhood. In Fort Worth, Conservation Districts are not widely used, but the promotion of this alternative to a historic district may foster interest from neighborhoods with greater opportunities for infill development. The Conservation District Overlay is in the process of being updated. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Citywide Historic Preservation Plan identifies goals and implementation strategies in five areas: historic resources survey, the preservation ordinance, economic incentives for historic preservation, histonc preservation within City policies and decisions, and public education. Throughout 2005 and 2006, and more recently in 2009, initiatives were undertaken to address each area for implementation. Substantial action has been taken to address the following designation of historic schools, changes to the preservation ordinance and economic incentives, passage of an internal City policy to address historic sites and structures, and the creation of printed materials for public awareness of the preservation program. However, further implementation is necessary to achieve some of the Preservation Plan's goals as listed below Maintain a historic resources survey that is comprehensive, current, accurate, cost- effective, and readily accessible to potential users. • Partner with preservation organizations to conduct on -going training for neighborhood leaders and citizen volunteers to identify historic elements and document structures, sites, and streetscapes. Enforce the preservation ordinance in a manner that is effective and fair • Provide on -going training for relevant City staff and commissions who deal with the enforcement of the preservation ordinance and design guidelines. POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The Citywide Historic Preservation Plan and the Preservation Ordinance identify policies and strategies to enable the City to effectively administer a historic preservation program that will achieve the above goals and objectives. Policies • Protect, enhance and perpetuate landmarks and districts of historical, cultural, architectural, or archaeological importance to Fort Worth. • Maintain a generally harmonious outward appearance of both historic and modem structures that are compatible and complementary in scale, form, color, proportion, texture, and material. • Foster civic pride by recognizing accomplishments of the past. • Educate the public on technical issues, the benefits of preservation, and the diversity of Fort Worth's history Chapter 13: Historic Preservation Fort Worth Historic & Cultural Landmark Districts The City Council initiated two historic district designations in 2006 Historic Morningside, an early John C Ryan neighborhood nearly identical in patterns to Ryan Place, and Historic Carver Heights, a mid-century modern ranch style neighborhood developed in the 1950s as the first auto -oriented `suburb' in Fort Worth for black professionals. (Sources: Planning and Development Department, and Bunche-Ellington Club, 2009.) 136 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••00041 ••••••••••••••••r••r••••••••••••• Strategies • Facilitate the designation of significant districts, sites, and structures with an overlay for Demolition Delay, Historic and Cultural Landmark, or Highly Sigmficant Endangered. • Educate the public about the importance of designating historic resources. • In cooperation with Fort Worth's preservation organizations, develop and participate in and educational programming, such as technical workshops and seminars. • Conduct on -going training for neighborhood leaders and citizen volunteers to identify historic elements and document structures, sites, and streetscapes. • Enhance the City's existing preservation incentives and develop new ones. • Adjust policies and programs in conflict with preservation goals. • Explore the creation of a facade rehab loan program to be administered by the City or other entity • Establish a local revolving loan or grant fund for historic properties. PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Historic preservation programs and projects rely heavily on volunteers from the community Much of the work accomplished by these programs results in the identification of historic resources, new designations, increased protection of existing resources and better documentation of the historic structures within the City of Fort Worth. Incentives Program The City of Fort Worth offers a program of economic incentives for properties designated as Highly Significant Endangered (HSE) and Historic and Cultural Landmarks (HC). The incentives offer relief to a property owner against the City's ad valorem taxes. Proposed rehabilitation projects are reviewed and approved by the Landmarks Commission. The City Council also approves the application for the historic site tax exemption. In 2005, the City Council adopted revised incentives for properties designated as HSE. Under the revisions, when a HSE property is stabilized, the property owner is afforded a 100 percent abatement on the City portion of the property taxes on the improvements for ten years and a 50 percent tax freeze on the land for up to five years. Once a substantial rehabilitation of the property has been completed, the incentive is increased to allow the abatement on the improvements to continue for ten years with a five-year bonus available for timely completion of the project and a tax freeze on 100 percent of the increase in the value of the land for the same period of time. This incentive is transferable and remains with the land upon sale. Properties designated as HC, either individually or as part of a district, are eligible for a ten-year City tax freeze at the pre -renovation assessed value of the land and improvements with the completion of a substantial rehabilitation project. This is defined as an investment in the property equal to or greater than 30 percent of the assessed value of the improvements. In cases where the 30 percent value equals less than $3,000, the property owner will be required to spend a minimum of $3,000. 137 Fort Worth Historic & Cultural Landmark Districts In 2007, Hillcrest, top, was designated after a petition of the residents. Historic Stop Six Sunrise Edition, middle, and Terrell Heights, bottom, were also designated, increasing the number of local historic districts to eleven (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 13: Historic Preservation Designation Advisory Committee The Designation Advisory Committee consists of nine citizen volunteers with an interest or professional expertise in historic preservation appointed by the Chair of the Landmarks Commission. The purpose of this committee is to identify and nominate eligible properties to the local inventory of historic designations. In 2006, the committee worked in cooperation with Fort Worth South, Inc. to identify and document historic structures within the Medical District Tax Increment Financing District for Demolition Delay designations. The project resulted in the survey of nearly 100 historic structures for Demolition Delay designation in 2007 In 2008, the committee continued to review properties for designation, with six properties and one district approved. In 2009, the designation of the American Airlines Terminal at Meacham Airport was approved by the City Council. The final designations on certain structures at the Fort Worth Zoo, the consideration of designation for approximately 63 properties in TIF #4 (Medical District), and historic parks are being considered. Focus Groun on Preservation Incentives In response to the Citywide Historic Preservation Plan's recommendation that the economic incentives for historic preservation be strengthened, the City Council's Central City Revitalization and Economic Development Committee appointed a focus group charged with the review of current incentives and the recommendation of appropriate changes. The focus group consists of representatives of historic preservation and development interests in Fort Worth. The focus group made six major recommendations to strengthen economic incentives including the pursuit of changes to the state sales tax on labor and the state receivership statute; changes to the HSE economic incentive; additional staffing to review and monitor central city and historic preservation projects; revisions to Code Compliance policies; and the prioritization of historic neighborhoods within the capital improvements program. During the 2007 state legislative session, members of the group testified before legislative committees regarding proposed House and Senate bills related to receivership and the sales tax. Due to 2007 changes in state law involving receivership of property, non -profits may receive certain neglected properties and improve them. These incentives have strengthened historic preservation as a planning tool for the betterment of Fort Worth. Historic Fort Worth Schools In 2005, the City and Fort Worth ISD identified 42 historic schools for designation, including the historic Hubbard Heights Elementary and Polytechnic High Schools. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Examples of National Register Buildings in Downtown XTO Energy requested National Register designation on these buildings in 2009 (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 13. Historic Preservation 138 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 14: URBAN DESIGN By determining the physical form and organization of a city, urban design visually represents the heritage, identity, and character of the city's inhabitants. Effective urban design practices help to create special places and attractive neighborhoods that are worthy of civic pride and efficient in municipal function. Urban design strategies and techniques often focus on improving the public realm — the spaces within a city that are not private property Although these spaces are not privately owned, the private structures and landscapes that form their edges often define them. The City's development regulations help to shape these privately owned edges. The public realm includes a wide variety of spaces that Fort Worth residents encounter constantly throughout the city, perhaps without notice or recognition that these spaces are the products of professional designers. These designers may be architects, planners, civil engineers, or landscape architects, but all help shape the experience of Fort Worth's physical environment. A fundamental premise of this urban design chapter is that there is a mutual relationship between quality of life and a city's built environment. Urban form influences social and economic opportunity and contributes to civic identity After a discussion of general community aspirations and trends, this chapter focuses on several components of Fort Worth's built environment: streets and streetscapes, public buildings, public spaces, trees, the Trinity River and waterfront spaces, gateways, and scenic corridors. The chapter also describes the characteristic urban design elements of mixed -use growth centers and urban villages. Finally, policies and programs are prescribed to further enhance Fort Worth's quality of life. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Fort Worth citizens have repeatedly stated their desire to reinforce the city's small town atmosphere and friendly character in planning for our future. In public plannmg meetings, citizens requested well-defined, mixed -use, walkable, and safe neighborhoods with tree -lined streets, gathering places for social interaction, and neighborhood parks. They also emphasized the importance of improving the Trinity River corridor, beautifying transportation corridors, improving signage, and preserving valuable views, vistas, historic resources, and neighborhood character Fort Worth citizens also support the concept of growth centers, which will increase interaction among people and reinforce residents' sense of community Similar to most American cities, the urban form of Fort Worth has changed as growth has expanded outward. Narrow streets, wide sidewalks, and buildings built to the property line once defined Fort Worth. Downtown Fort Worth maintains this pedestrian -scaled, urban character, and remnants of similar urban design can be seen in older areas such as the 1400 block of North Main and the Historic Handley section of East Lancaster, as well as in recent redevelopment projects in the Medical District. In contrast to this traditional urbanism, the majonty of the city has developed in a suburban form, where the scale and layout of new development is onented to the automobile, with parking lots between sidewalks and storefronts, and single use districts that isolate residential, commercial, and industrial uses. One urban design 139 Downtown Fort Worth This photograph illustrates the physical relationships among buildings, streets, sidewalks, and open space in Downtown Fort Worth. (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Chapter 14 Urban Design goal is to return to a more pedestrian -oriented development pattern. Streets and Streetscanes The width of a roadway contributes significantly to the experience of walking or driving along that street. Many streets m Fort Worth have expanded to accommodate more vehicular traffic, and have become less appealing to pedestrians in the process. Along these streets, building fronts whose walls once defined the walking space are now placed far away from the sidewalk and right of way; narrow sidewalks are placed at the edge of the roadway without any buffer between pedestrians and traffic; and street crossings are often dangerous and unmarked. Good urban design creates a physical environment that makes pedestrians feel secure, while successfully accommodating existing and projected traffic volumes. For example, when building facades are built close to the street, pedestrians experience the sense of being in an outdoor room. On -street parking can provide a comforting buffer between pedestrians and car traffic while reducing the need for surface parking lots. Finally, amenities such as street lamps, landscapmg, and benches, can be added to sidewalks to enhance the streetscape and create a more inviting space. These fixtures and amenities are important elements of the overall character of a city The absence or poor condition of sidewalks in both older and new districts makes many areas of Fort Worth unfriendly to pedestrians. The provision of sidewalks on all streets, as well as the addition of streetscape amenities, enhances the pedestrian experience, promotes walking, and improves the image of our city The City approved a new sidewalk policy in July 2000, which requires the installation of sidewalks on all publicly maintained streets, except local industrial streets within an industrial park. In newly developing areas, the location and design of sidewalks is determined during the subdivision process. When redevelopment occurs, sidewalks must be installed when improvements are made that exceed 50 percent of the assessed value of the existing building. Like sidewalks, trees are an important element of the public realm. There are many reasons for conserving and planting trees within urban areas. Communities often plant trees for beautification or to maintain greenery in urban environments. Additionally, communities are recognizing the environmental and public health benefits of trees, as well as the economic benefits of tree -lined streets and parks. Effective planning and management should include the use of native and drought resistant vegetation, which will thrive in the local climate. Strategically placed street trees perform several functions. They provide shade from the harsh summer sun, reduce storm water runoff, and produce variations in lighting that enhance the sidewalk environment. Similar to on -street parkmg, trees provide a buffer that separates the pedestrian realm from the roadway Trees planted along sidewalks in parkways and those located within roadway medians also enhance the experience of car passengers by adding rhythm and beauty to the local scenery It has also been found that closely -spaced trees along a street can slow traffic, enhancing pedestrian safety All the trees in the city constitute a 24 percent canopy cover, but Fort Worth lacks sufficient shade trees along its roadways. A 1995 inventory Chapter 14 Urban Design Streetscapes in Downtown Fort Worth Downtown Fort Worth, Inc. and others have created a pedestrian -scaled environment on Main Street. Street lamps and trees line the brick side- walks, framing an attractive public space for strolling and window shop- ping (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Ir Attractive Streetscapes 1! 4r SIREM'AIN r.1RI N 4E.t41: PARAI.\G StUEHALti This cross-section of an urban street includes wide sidewalks, on -street parking, and street trees. The building facades act as walls that frame the pedestrian space (Source. Gideon Toal, 2005.) 140 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••4•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• concluded that there are about 85,000 street trees planted in street parkways, representing only a 13 percent canopy cover along the streets. Arcades and canopies perform many of the same functions as street trees, extending from building facades to improve the environment for those walking and driving. Pedestrian -scaled street lamps and signs add variety and safety to the sidewalk environment. Street furniture such as benches, trash receptacles, and water fountains can also contribute to an attractive streetscape that welcomes pedestrians. Finally, special pavement treatments for sidewalks — brick, granite, or even tiled mosaics — can dignify a streetscape once thought of as purely functional. Many streets in Fort Worth lack streetscape fixtures and are visually cluttered by the unplanned, disorganized arrangements of signs, utility poles, and street furniture. Visual clutter makes a streetscape unattractive, and often unsafe. Greater attention to urban design will help transform our streets and sidewalks into more attractive and comfortable places. Public Buildings The location and design of public buildings often affect perceptions about the significance of our public institutions. Virtually all of Fort Worth's older neighborhoods possess a historic school building. These buildings are among the most prized architectural resources within the city Other significant public buildings include courthouses, municipal office buildings, transportation facilities, convention centers, public auditoriums, fire and police stations, and county jails. These public structures reflect the character of Fort Worth more than any other category of buildings. Because of their symbolic and functional significance, public buildings are a principal component of urban design plans. New public buildings, such as schools, should be strategically located to strengthen our neighborhoods and mixed -use growth centers. They should also reflect today's highest design standards. Public participation in the planning and design of all public structures is critical to the location and construction of public buildings that reflect the tastes and aspirations of the citizens of Fort Worth. Public Spaces The influence of pedestrian environments and public spaces is far greater than simple aesthetic appeal. Eating at an outdoor table, browsing the windows of a bustling shopping street, and passing time watching crowds walk by are more than just pleasant diversions, they are components of urban social life that attract residents, businesses, and visitors. The thoughtful design of public spaces can provide these experiences and improve the vitality of the urban environment throughout Fort Worth. A public space should be: • Located where it is visible and easily accessible to potential users. • Available for public use and inviting to all. • Appealing from both the outside and the inside. • Secure and safe. • Accessible to children and disabled people. 141 Storefronts in Handley Historic District Historic Handley is one of several older districts that use storefront canopies and arcades to create an attractive streetscape for pedes- trians and motorists (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009) Fort Worth Water Gardens The Water Gardens is a treasured Downtown park and visitor attraction that is enjoying more activity as a result of the Lancas- ter Corridor Redevelopment Project. (Source. Planning and Develop- ment Department, 2009.) Chapter 14 Urban Design • Engaging to users (e.g., through interactive sculpture and fountains). • Designed to support special events or gatherings. • Easily and economically maintained. The most prevalent public spaces in Fort Worth are parks and plazas. A neighborhood or community park is often the heart of a community — its outdoor meeting place. A neighborhood park or square may be a place where people go to picnic, relax, talk to friends, play with children, or watch the activity going on around them. The design of these spaces has a profound influence on their use, safety, and utility A plaza is a mostly hard -surfaced, outdoor public space. Its main function is to provide a place for sitting, eating, public events, and people -watching. A public plaza usually includes vanous landscape elements, such as trees, flowers, fountains, sculptures, and public art. Pedestrian malls, or former streets converted for exclusive pedestrian use, are similar to plazas in design and function. Urban parks and plazas, like their suburban counterparts, enhance the value of adjacent properties and neighborhoods. With the exception of a few plazas and urban parks in Downtown, however, Fort Worth has a shortage of urban public spaces. Recent amendments to the park dedication policy, discussed in detail in Chapter 6 Parks and Community Services, are intended to promote the development of urban parks and plazas. Trinity River and Waterfront Snaces The Trinity River is one of Fort Worth's most distinctive features and a focal point of cultural and recreational activities. The river has places to boat and fish, sites for picnics, miles of trails for running, walking, biking and horseback riding; spaces for civic events and performing arts, a botanic garden, natural settings; and peaceful hideaways. Some stretches of the river, however, are still underutilized. Accessibility is often poor in these locations, resulting from weak linkages between the river and adjacent neighborhoods or commercial districts. The Trinity River Vision, also discussed in Chapter 6: Parks and Community Services, is an ambitious and farsighted master planning effort undertaken by the Tarrant Regional Water District, Streams and Valleys, Inc., and the U S. Army Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with the City of Fort Worth. The plan contains recommendations to improve the river's accessibility to the public, preserve its natural beauty, attract more people to its banks, and increase its prominence within the city Appropriate urban design strategies will be required to implement the plan's recommendations. In particular, the recommendation to create an urban waterfront at the northern edge of Downtown, as depicted in the concept plan to the right, would dramatically reshape Fort Worth's urban core. Appropriate design standards for this new waterfront area, called Tnnity Uptown, have been adopted to ensure that new development positively contributes to the public realm experience along the water Gateways/Entrvways The visual identity of Fort Worth is formed by a collection of images, most often Chapter 14 Urban Design 142 Trinity Uptown Plan This concept plan depicts Trinity Uptown, the ambitious vision for a new urban waterfront along the Trinity River The Trinity River Vision Master Plan includes other recommendations to enhance the river cor- ridors so that they remain essential greenways for open space, trails, neighborhood focal points, wildlife, and special recreation areas. (Source: GideonToal, 2005.) I • • • i I S • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I I I •..••••••••.••••••••••••11••.••••• seen from a moving vehicle. An opportunity exists to strengthen the image of Fort Worth by using the major vehicular entry points, including bridges, as gateways to the city Today, the majonty of these entry points lack any expression of their unique place. A gateway serves as the symbolic entry to a district and provides an introduction to what exists within the area. An effective gateway design establishes an immediate image or impression and is visually harmonious with the surroundings. These entry points need special treatment and visual enhancement to give those entenng the city a positive experience. Improving the appearance and prominence of gateways can be accomplished through the symbolic use of urban design elements, including public art, landscaping, building corner treatments, special lighting, and signs. Primary gateways into Fort Worth and into Downtown include entrance pomts from the city's highways and major streets, such as Interstates 35 and 30, North Main Street, and Lancaster Avenue. Scenic Corridors Scenic corridors are areas that have been recognized as scenic, cultural, architectural, or historic assets. The Zoning Ordinance outlines the criteria for designation. A scenic corridor must include or reflect one or more of the following: • Character of Fort Worth • Architectural significance • Historic event or person • Character of neighborhood • Designated historical area • Views and vistas • Gateways • Connecting routes (e.g., connect scenic areas) • Parks and natural features Regulations in addition to base zoning standards apply to scenic corridor overlay districts. In 2002, the City Council adopted an amendment to the Zoning Ordmance to help minimize the visual impact of telecommunications towers citywide by encouraging the installation of stealth towers and co -location of new antennas on existing towers. Stealth towers are integrated with existing structures or designed so as not to be recognizable as telecommunications towers. The 2002 amendment also prohibits standard telecommunications towers in scenic or historic areas, but allows stealth telecommunications towers in these areas upon approval of the design by the Urban Design Commission. Examples of existing scenic corridors include the following: • North Main Street from the Stockyards to Downtown. • Lancaster Avenue from Camp Bowie Boulevard to South Beach Street. • I-35W from 28th Street exit south to the centerline of the Trinity River • I-30 from Downtown east to Loop 820 East. • US 287 (Martin Luther King Freeway) from Downtown southeast to Village Creek Road. North Main Street: Gateway to Downtown The historic Tarrant County Courthouse marks the entrance into Down- town for residents and visitors traveling south on North Main Street. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Trinity Uptown Bridges The Trinity Uptown Plan calls for new bridges to span the flood bypass channel at North Main Street, Henderson Street, and White Settlement Road Conceptual designs for these bridges have been developed by Bing Thom Architects, Inc. Bridge construction is expected to begin in 2011 (Source: Bing Thom Architects, 2008.) 143 Chapter 14 Urban Design Mixed -Use Growth Centers and Urban Villanes Chapter 4 Land Use introduces the concept of mixed -use growth centers and urban villages. Nearly all of the urban design principles that have been identified in this chapter (e.g., pedestrian -oriented development, strategically located and well - designed public spaces and buildings, accessible open spaces, etc.) are essential elements of successful mixed -use growth centers and urban villages. These places have a concentration of jobs, housing, entertainment, public spaces, civic buildings, public transportation stops, and pedestrian activity This variety of land uses withm a walkable, human -scaled environment will create great urban places and will also help reduce automobile dependency The character of these places will be heavily influenced by the urban design approaches used to guide their development. Developmg growth centers and urban villages that provide housing, employment, and recreational options withm walking distance of transit stations is one component of a strategy to improve regional air quality (This strategy is more thoroughly discussed in Chapter 18 Environmental Quality) The design and location of transportation facilities will influence the effectiveness of transit improvements. Mass transit hubs serving Fort Worth residents, as well as those living in surrounding areas, should connect to other areas of concentrated jobs, such as existing office parks and other mixed -use growth centers. Roads, transit, and bicycle routes should interconnect all growth centers. Within mixed -use growth centers, urban design elements should be incorporated that promote cycling and walking as alternatives to driving. A legible, pedestrian -scaled street grid is critical to promoting walking and cyclmg. Such a network offers the possibility of various routes to destinations, and is typically more efficient than contemporary cul-de-sac subdivisions. Growth center streets should be an inviting pedestrian environment enhanced by the streetscape amenities discussed earlier A network of bicycle routes can provide another safe, non- polluting, transportation option within the growth centers. Mixed -use growth centers should also include a diversity of housing types and densities. Buildings with different footprints, heights, and scales will generate housing options for households of varying size and income within the same neighborhood. The development of mixed -income communities is a goal of the City's housing policy, and urban design can play a role in ensunng that the initiatives listed in Chapter 5 Housing achieve this goal. Within mixed -use growth centers, the highest density developments should be located near the commercial core. Lower density developments, including single- family homes, should be located on the growth center's periphery Within the higher -density core, building fronts should form consistent edges, outlining the street space and defming a public realm in which sidewalks and stoops contribute to social interaction and neighborhood safety On March 20, 2001, the City Council adopted an ordinance establishing low intensity (MU-1) and high intensity (MU-2) mixed -use districts. Although the ordinance incorporates many of the urban design principles discussed above, district -specific urban design guidelines or standards can help assure quality design. The City Chapter 14 Urban Design 144 Mixed -Use Development Compact development is encouraged in the mixed -use growth centers. An active, pedestrian -scaled public realm will charac- terize these urban environments Residential and office spaces on the upper floors can support a variety of retail establishments at the street level. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) The mixed -use zoning ordinance encourages the adaptive reuse of older buildings This mixed -use building on Magnolia Avenue contains a ground level restaurant and second -floor apartments. (Source, Planning and Development Department, 2009.) I I • a I i • • • • • •' • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••••••••i•-•••••••••••••••••••••• Council adopted an ordinance establishing the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines as an overlay zoning district in 2001 Since then, two district -specific form -based code amendments have been adopted. the Trinity Uptown Development Standards and Guidelines and the Near Southside Development Standards and Guidelines. Sustainable Urbanism The City of Fort Worth has numerous policies, goals, and objectives that, if viewed cohesively, promote a concept known as sustainable urbanism. Sustainable urbanism is defined as "walkable and transit -served urbanism integrated with high performance buildings and high performance infrastructure." These basic concepts of sustainable urbanism — places that are walkable and served by transit, and buildings and infrastructure that meet improved efficiency standards — are apparent in many of the City's efforts. Several are outlined below Walkable urbanism requires a wide range of housing types within comfortable walking distance of many daily activities, all connected by pedestrian -friendly streets. The City directs growth towards mixed -use growth centers and urban villages, areas that are intended to have a variety of land uses within a walkable and human -scaled environment. Chapter 4 Land Use discusses the concept of mixed - use growth centers and urban villages in more detail. Transit -oriented development (TOD) is a key component of the City's effort to improve mobility for citizens. TOD refers to a compact urban village that is centered around and coordinated with a transit station in its use and design. Other projects such as the modem streetcar study, bus -rapid transit (BRT) planning, and the Southwest -to -Northeast commuter rail environmental impact study have focused on providing seamless transit service integrated with other transportation modes and surrounding land uses. Chapter 11 Transportation describes the City's efforts to develop multi -modal transportation options within the city The City encourages new buildings to meet Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification or comparable green -building standards. The development standards for both Trinity Uptown and the Near Southside distnct accept LEED certification in lieu of required building facade elements. NEZ design guidelines incorporate LEED design elements that encourage new mfill buildings to be energy efficient by utilizing natural lighting and ventilation. Public infrastructure that maximizes storm water infiltration, greywater recycling, and solar reflectivity are a prionty for the City of Fort Worth. The draft Lake Worth Vision Plan advocates for the creation of landscapes for both people and wildlife while emphasizing mixed -use neighborhood cores and best management practices to minimize erosion and environmental damage while accommodating anticipated growth in population and employment. Chapter 18 Environmental Quality discusses the topics of storm water management, resource conservation, air quality, and sustainable development. Alliance Town Center — LEED-ND Neighborhood Alliance Town Center, in Far North Fort Worth, is part of the LEED Neighborhood Design pilot program, which promotes sustainable urbanism through a certification process for walkable, transit -friendly, energy efficient neighborhoods. (Hillwood, 2009.) 1-1-5 Chapter 14 Urban Design GOAL AND OBJECTIVE Create an attractive, well -designed city that promotes pedestnan activity, encourages the full enjoyment of the city's public realm, enhances community image, and attracts the private investment necessary to create vibrant growth centers, thriving entertainment districts, and safe neighborhoods. • Employ appropriate urban design principles in all development projects and area plans to create memorable places throughout Fort Worth. POLICY AND STRATEGIES Policy • Promote mixed -use, pedestrian -friendly, and transit -oriented development (TOD) as described above, in Chapter 4 Land Use, and in the Planning Sector Policies contained in Appendix C. Strateeies • Involve affected property owners, residents, and other interested parties in the development of urban design approaches and the selection of appropriate urban design elements. • Use urban design as a tool to revitalize central city neighborhoods and commercial districts. • Integrate policies aimed at improving environmental quality with innovative urban design approaches. An example of this integration is using pervious or semi - pervious surfaces that absorb stormwater within surface parking lots. • Locate telecommunications facilities in a manner that is compatible with adjacent and nearby uses. When feasible, require the placement of antennas on existing structures. • Promote the development of quality, mixed -income housing within Trinity Uptown that is inclusive of all Fort Worth residents. • Utilize minority- and women -owned businesses in the design and construction of public improvements and private development withm Trinity Uptown. • Coordinate with redevelopment organizations to prepare development standards and guidelines for central city growth centers, urban villages, and TOD areas. PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Programs and projects that will help to achieve the urban design goal and objective are listed below Urban Village Develonment Program The urban village program seeks to revitalize 16 designated urban villages by providing capital improvements and development incentives that leverage private investment and enhance pedestrian and transit access. In the FY 2004 and FY 2005 federal appropriations bills, the City of Fort Worth received earmarks totaling $4.5 million in transportation funds ("Urban Village Urban Village Development Projects The urban village development program has been successful in encouraging desirable mixed -use development. Exciting new projects, such as the So7 (top) and Museum Place (bottom) developments, are now open in the West Seventh Village (Source: Planning and Development Department, Kevin Buchanan, 2009.) S S S S • • S S S • S S S S S S S S S I S • • • • a i Chapter 14 Urban Design 146 • • • • • • • • • i• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Funds") from the Federal Highway Administration. These funds are allocated for planning and capital improvement projects within urban villages designated by the City Council. City Council adopted urban village master plans for 12 villages in December 2007 Villages receiving capital improvement funds include Hemphill/ Berry, Six Points, Near Eastside, Berry/Riverside, and South Main. Design and engmeenng of capital improvements in these villages began in 2009, with construction anticipated in 2010 Lancaster Corridor Redevelopment Proiect A comprehensive urban design plan is being implemented for the Lancaster corridor, an area bounded on the north by 9th Street, on the south by Vickery, on the west by Henderson, and on the east by I-35W The corridor plan is intended to transform the southern part of Downtown into a great urban space with a lively mix of pedestrian - oriented activities. The major initiatives of the Lancaster Corridor Redevelopment Project include: • Redesign of Lancaster Avenue. Design and construct a new pedestrian -oriented street from I-35W to Henderson. Construction was completed in 2008. • Hemphill/Lamar/Taylor connector Design and construct a street extension connecting Lamar and Taylor on the north side of I-30 with Hemphill on the south side. The project is in the design and engineering phase. • Convention Center Expansion. Determine funding sources and timing of Phase III of the Convention Center expansion. • Water Gardens: Implement improvements to the park's southern section and improve the overall safety and security in the park. Water Gardens reopened in March 2007 after completion of a $2.7 million renovation. • Sheraton Hotel and Spa. Assist the private sector in renovation of the Plaza Hotel as a Sheraton Grande. The $46 million renovation was completed in 2008 • Omni Convention Center Hotel and Condominiums. Facilitate development of a headquarters hotel adjacent to the Convention Center in partnership with the Omni Hotels development group. The hotel portion of the project opened in January 2009 and the first condominiums were completed in late 2009 • Hyde Park and Ninth Street: Continue working with The T, the U S. General Services Administration, and Downtown Fort Worth, Inc. to design and construct a transit plaza on the former site of Fort Worth's first public library and complete streetscape improvements for the Ninth Street comdor between the ITC and Hyde Park. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2010 • Acquisition of Surplus Property Determine process for acquinng excess right-of- way from TxDOT to convey to qualified developers for redevelopment. • TCC Relocation/Expansion. Facilitate relocation of Tarrant County College (TCC) to the new facilities on the northern edge of Downtown. • T&P Warehouse Project: Work with a private partner to advance the adaptive reuse of the T&P Warehouse as apartments and street level retail. • Municipal Parking Garage: Facilitate development of a multi-user parking garage. The garage opened in February 2009 147 Reconstruction of Lancaster Avenue Ott 114 111 ftl 10 19l nr1a1 414 laa 10Y f11 999 119 1R pia 91 Lancaster Avenue was reconstructed to emphasize pedestrian activity and the use of public transportation The City will convey the excess right-of-way to qualified developers for redevelopment in accordance with prescribed guidelines (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Hyde Park Transit Plaza 11' The City of Fort Worth, the U S General Services Administration, the Fort Worth Transportation Authority, and Downtown Fort Worth, Inc. are working collaboratively to design and construct a transit plaza at Hyde Park, the historic site of a 19th century pub- lic square The proposed Hyde Park transit plaza would integrate existing public spaces and would reintroduce a public space onto a site that has historically been used for public purposes. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 14 Urban Design North Main Street Corridor Proiect The urban design plan for North Main Street between the Tarrant County Courthouse and the Historic Stockyards is intended to promote tourism and stimulate economic development throughout the North Main corridor by creating an attractive, pedestrian -oriented environment. The followmg pilot projects have been completed: • Northside Drive to 20th Street — Historic Marine Area • 25th Street to 27th Street — Stockyards Gateway Berry Street Corridor Proiect An urban design plan has been developed for Berry Street from Evans Avenue to University Drive. The plan will stimulate new economic development throughout the corridor by using urban design and other development strategies to successfully integrate pedestrian -oriented uses along Berry Street, without disrupting adjacent neighborhoods and historic resources. Improvements designed for the following four segments of the corridor have been implemented or are currently underway. • University Drive to Waits Avenue — University District Central • Waits Avenue to Forest Park Boulevard — University District East • College Avenue to Travis Avenue — Residential District • Jennings Avenue to Grove Street — Parks District • Grove Street to Evans Avenue — Gateway District Sidewalk Program To address the need for better pedestrian access, the City implemented the Safe Pathways Program in 1998, which provides funding for the construction of new sidewalks and replacement of deteriorated sidewalks m older districts. Priontization of sidewalk projects is based on need and pedestrian demand. Replacement sidewalks are funded 75 percent by the City and 25 percent by the adjacent property owner Since the implementation of the Safe Pathways Program, a sizeable number of linear feet of sidewalks has been installed, mostly in the central city Wavfindine Proiect A coordinated signage and information system will direct visitors to destinations in Downtown, the Cultural District, and the Historic Stockyards. The project has two components. • Design and implement a signage system to direct vehicular and pedestrian traffic within the three visitor districts. This signage system will provide information about attractions, parking facilities, and transit. Installation of these signs will be completed in 2010 • Maintain an interactive website with information about parking, transit, and points of interest in Downtown, the Cultural District, and the Historic Stockyards. Capital Imurovement Proiects Urban design projects were included in the 1998 and 2004 capital improvement bond program. Capital improvement projects that have been identified are listed in Appendix D with the estimated costs, completion dates, and potential funding sources. North Main Street Corridor / r Streetscape improvements enhance the connection between Downtown and the Historic Stockyards. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009) The Plaza at Evans & Rosedale Village Evans & Rosedale, an urban village along the East Rosedale com- mercial corridor, will become a vibrant business and cultural district centered around this public plaza. (Sources: Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) I • • • I • • • • • I • • • • • • • • Chapter 14 Urban Design 148 . . CHAPTER 15: ARTS AND CULTURE . . • . . • • • • . . . . . • • . . • Fort Worth residents and visitors enjoy the arts through a variety of local organizations, special events, and programs that provide a distinctive blend of Western heritage and high culture. Within just a few miles, one is able to experience bull riding and equestrian events, as well as a night at the opera or a major museum exhibition. Many of these cultural experiences are offered in Downtown, the Cultural District, and the Historic Stockyards. In addition, unique art and cultural experiences are available within Fort Worth neighborhoods. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS The Cultural District, Downtown, and the Historic Stockyards are Fort Worth's three unique arts and entertainment distncts. Together, these destinations draw a total of seven million visitors each year Neighborhood art facilities, performing arts organizations, and public art also add to the character and culture of Fort Worth. Fort Worth's artistic and cultural activities are promoted by the festivals held throughout the city each year, in addition to the activities undertaken by the Arts Council of Fort Worth and Tarrant County Cultural District No single place captures the diversity of Fort Worth more than the Cultural District, where culture is presented in its broadest sense: from the art, music, theater, and dance typically associated with cultural facilities, to agriculture, equestrian activities, horticulture, and sports. This area, the nation's third largest cultural district, is located just west of Downtown above the banks of the Trinity River In the late 1890s, the City of Fort Worth purchased the land south of 7th Street on both sides of the Clear Fork. In 1936, the City purchased 138 acres of the Van Zandt tract along Lancaster Avenue for Fort Worth Frontier Centennial, part of the Texas Centennial Birthday Celebration. Much of the land in the Cultural District is owned by the City of Fort Worth, including Trinity Park and Fort Worth Botanic Garden. Many of the museums in the District lease land from the City The Cultural District is home to several world -class art museums, including the Kimbell Art Museum, Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth, and the Amon Carter Museum. The Kimbell Art Museum was designed by Louis Kahn and opened in 1972. The 22,000 square -foot gallery space houses a variety of well-known artwork. The Kimbell recently announced plans for an addition on the west lawn to be designed by the world-renowned architect Renzo Piano. The Fort Worth Museum of Science and History, the second most popular museum in Texas, attracts more than 1 15 million visitors each year and was the first museum in Texas to top the million mark for visitors. The Museum of Science and History is also constructing a new facility designed by the internationally recognized Mexican architecture firm Legoretta-Legoretta. Museums in Fort Worth, 2009 2 2 Miles 1 Vintage Flying Museum 2. Stockyards Museum 3. Texas Cowboy Hall of Fame 4 Leonard's Dept. Store Museum 5. Sid Richardson Collection of Westem Art 6. Fire Station No. 1 7 Cattle Raisers Museum 8. Kimbell Art Museum 9 Modem Art Museum 10. Amon Carter Museum 11 Fort Worth Community Arts Center 12. Ball-Eddleman-McFarland House 13. National Archives and Records —proposed 14 FW Museum of Science and History 15. National Cowgirl Museum and Hall of Fame 16. Thistle Hill 17 National Cowboys of Color Museum 18. Log Cabin Village 19 Monnig Meteorite Gallery 20. American Airline CR Smith Museum 149 Chapter 15. Arts and Culture The success enjoyed by museums in the Cultural District has led to several new and expanding facilities that are completed, under construction, on the drawing board, or being seriously discussed. One example is the $39 million addition to the original Amon Carter Museum, designed by Philip Johnson/Alan Ritchie Architects, which tripled the exhibition space showcasing the Museum's renowned collection of American Western art. The addition also includes an expanded research library, a beautifully -designed reading room, expanded educational facilities, and spacious new gallenes for the display of traveling exhibitions. The Fort Worth Community Arts Center has been open since November 2002. The facility is owned by the City and is under the management of the Arts Council of Fort Worth & Tarrant County (www.artsfortworth.com). The 77,000 square foot building includes the 500-seat Scott Theater and nine art galleries, and it is now home to 13 arts organizations. In its first year, over 50,000 visitors enjoyed exhibitions of contemporary art by regional artists, as well as a host of theater and other cultural events and meetings. In 2004, the Arts Council converted a former solarium space into a 120-seat flexible theatre space or "black box theater" in keeping with the adaptive reuse plan for the building. Named the Hardy and Betty Sanders Theatre, it has been used for all types of "grass roots" cultural activities. A partnership between the Council, Samaritan House, and Z's Catering resulted in the opening of a cafe in 2009 Casa Mariana Theatre, also located in the Cultural District, is the city's only theater - in -the -round. The theatre produces live entertainment year-round, including plays, musicals, concerts, and children's theater Casa Mariana also presents Broadway national tours at Bass Performance Hall in Downtown. After a decade of careful planning and fundraising, a thoughtful renovation of Casa Mariana Theatre was completed that increased the number of seats to 1,200 and created a proscenium stage. Other recent district projects include the David Schwarz -designed Western Heritage Plaza and the National Cowgirl Museum and Hall of Fame, which opened in June 2002, and the $60 million Modern Art Museum designed by Tadao Ando on an 11- acre site located just east of the Kimbell Art Museum. Simultaneously, the City completed reconstruction of the intersection at University Drive, West Seventh Street, Bailey Avenue, and Camp Bowie Boulevard. A new parking garage is under construction adjacent to the Museum of Science and History, with a projected completion date of January 2010 Potential future expansions include a new National Archives and Records Administration Building and Museum, and a 12,000-seat Will Rogers arena for hosting events ranging from rodeos to ice hockey The Fort Worth Botanic Garden is the oldest botanic garden in Texas, covering over 118 acres and exhibiting 2,500 exotic and native plants and a number of specialty gardens, such as the Japanese Garden. In 2008, the Botanic Garden was normnated for the National Register of Historic Places. A master plan is currently being developed that will guide its future. Kimbell Art Museum The Kimbell Art Museum, designed by Louis Kahn, has 22,000 square feet of gallery space that houses world re- nowned art work. (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009) Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth The new Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth, designed by acclaimed Japanese architect Tadao Ando, opened in De- cember of 2002 in the Cultural District. It embodies the prin- ciples of classical Japanese architecture while employing modern Western techniques. The museum features 53,000 square feet of gallery space, a 1 5-acre pond, a cafe over- looking the water, and a 250-seat auditorium (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Chapter 15. Arts and Culture 150 •• • • • • • • ,® • ,• • • • • • • • • • i • S • The Fort Worth Zoo has been ranked one of the top five zoos m the nation. The Zoo attracts more than 1.2 million visitors each year The Zoo is in the midst of a significant expansion, with construction of a new Reptile House, which is expected to be completed in February 2010 The Will Rogers Memorial Center is a multi -purpose entertainment complex with 45 acres under roof. Located in the heart of the Cultural District on a little over 85 acres of land, this City -owned center generates more than $200 million from an estimated 2.5 million visitors each year Livestock and equestrian activities, among other events, are held at the 5,900-seat Will Rogers Coliseum, home of the world's oldest indoor rodeo and the annual Southwestern Exposition & Livestock Show This unique three-week long event attracts over 900,000 people annually The "Stock Show" has been a Fort Worth tradition for over a century Completed in 1990, the Fort Worth Cultural District Master Plan provides a comprehensive look at the Cultural District. While many of the plan's recommendations have been implemented, others will need to be reviewed or revised, and specific implementation plans may be necessary Major redevelopment projects are underway in the West 7th/University and Trinity Park urban villages, including the Museum Place, West Seventh, and South of Seventh developments. Downtown Downtown is a multicultural, progressive, active urban center that capitalizes on its cultural resources. It serves as a major entertainment center with a variety of museums, historical exhibits, live entertainment venues, movie theaters, a world -class performing arts hall, ongoing cultural activities, and colorful festivals. In 1995, Downtown Fort Worth was awarded the prestigious James C. Howland Award for Urban Enrichment by the National League of Cities. Sundance Square, a 16-block collection of graciously restored and replicated turn -of - the -century storefronts, has preserved the architecture and rich heritage of its colorful past. With the support of Fort Worth's Bass family, the area was renovated in the 1980s and has since turned Downtown into a vibrant destination with office, retail, and entertainment establishments. Today, Sundance Square encompasses a variety of retail uses, restaurants, live theaters, museums, movie theaters, and new and converted housing. The Nancy Lee and Perry R. Bass Performance Hall serves as an important symbol of one of the most successful downtown revitalization efforts m the country Built entirely with private funds, the $67 million, 2,056-seat facility is the first -ever permanent home of the Fort Worth Symphony Orchestra, Texas Ballet Theatre (formerly the Fort Worth -Dallas Ballet), Fort Worth Opera, and the Van Clibum International Piano Competition. In 2007, Bass Hall held the first ever Fort Worth Opera Festival. The festival was such a success that in 2008 it included three new operas at Bass Hall, and a fourth opera at the Scott Theatre. In another demonstration of commitment to the community, the Bass family developed an education program that provides an opportunity for every Tarrant County student to visit Bass Hall each Special Events in Sundance Square Sundance Square is a vibrant area with residential, entertainment, and retail elements. This engaging urban center is the location of many festivals and cultural activities. (Source: DFWI, 2009.) Bass Performance Hall The Nancy Lee and Perry R. Bass Performance Hall in Downtown enhances Fort Worth's culture through its promotion of art and architecture It has been selected as one of the ten best opera houses in the world, and was ranked third in the United States by Travel and Leisure Magazine, March 1999 (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) 151 Chapter 15. Arts and Culture year The Bass Hall has received the honor of being selected as one of the top ten opera halls in the world, and number three in the United States, behind only those in New York and San Francisco. The Caravan of Dreams building, formerly a popular music venue, has been renovated to accommodate a western-themed restaurant. The building also includes a roof top Grotto bar, a 212-seat theater, conference facilities, and Etta's Place, a bed and breakfast facility The Jubilee Theatre, on Main Street, is a 100-seat house that produces year-round plays and musicals reflecting the African -American experience. The Sid Richardson Collection of Western Art provides an array of exhibits, attracting both residents and tourists. In addition, Circle Theatre, located in the Sanger Building basement in Sundance Square, adds to the live entertainment Downtown. The Fort Worth Convention Center completed a $75 million, two-phase expansion and renovation in May 2003 In 2009, the City of Fort Worth completed construction of an eleven -story parking garage across the street from the Convention Center, featuring a collaborative design by Jacobs Facilities, Inc., and artist/jazz musician Christopher Janney, who was selected through the Fort Worth Public Art program. Visitors hear the sounds of Fort Worth as they ride in glass elevators overlooking Houston Street. Lancaster Avenue became an "Avenue of Light" in 2009, with the installation of a series of 35-foot tall glowing stainless steel sculptures in the median of Lancaster Avenue. Inspired by the rich Art Deco detailing of the Texas & Pacific Railroad Terminal lobby, the lighted sculptures created by Cliff Garten Studios, will help reinvigorate the south side of Fort Worth's already impressive Downtown. Historic Stockyards Showcasing Fort Worth's western heritage, the Historic Stockyards is one of the most unique and colorful arts and entertainment areas in the state. A century after the establishment of this stopping point along the legendary Chisholm Trail, Fort Worth's Historic Stockyards still embody the history and western heritage of the city The entire stockyards area is on the National Register of Historic Places. Western shopping, restaurants, and saloons characterize the area, including the legendary White Elephant Saloon, Cowtown Coliseum, and the Stockyards Hotel. Stockyards Station is a festival marketplace and depot for the Tarantula Steam Train, an 1896 locomotive that retraces a portion of the Chisholm Trail through a one -hour narrated nde. The 165,000 square -foot space offers a selection of merchandise rangmg from art works and antiques to clothing, gourmet items, and music. The Stockyards is also home to the Spanish -style Livestock Exchange Building and Billy Bob's Texas, known internationally as the "World's Largest Honky-Tonk", which attracts more than 700,000 visitors each year The Fort Worth Herd Program began in June 1999, coinciding with the City's 150th Fort Worth's Historic Stockyards Fort Worth's Historic Stockyards offers a unique experience of Old West history (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Chisholm Trail Mural Art in public places, such as the Chisholm Trail Mural by Richard Hass, add to the visual character in Fort Worth (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Chapter 15. Arts and Culture 152 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• anniversary celebration. Fifteen longhorns have a home in the Stockyards, and they are tended by real cowboys and cowgirls. The Herd is driven daily down Exchange Street, and to the Trinity River once a month. The purpose of the Fort Worth Herd Program is to entertain and educate visitors, as well as provide an authentic interpretation of the history of the cattle industry and its impact on the growth and prosperity of Fort Worth. Rodeo Plaza (a portion of North Commerce Street between Exchange Avenue and Stockyards Boulevard) underwent a pedestrian -friendly transformation in 2009 Artist Steve Teeters created hand -forged steel street lights, "spur" benches, "belt" sculptures, a "tooled leather" gate and archway, and other design enhancements to complement the streetscape improvements designed by Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Through the years, many studies and plans have been developed for the Historic Stockyards, although the latest plan is about 20 years old. An urban design plan has recently been developed for North Main Street that will create a more attractive and economically viable corridor from the Stockyards to Downtown. More details on this plan are provided in Chapter 14 Urban Design. Neiehborhood Arts Facilities In addition to the three primary arts and entertainment districts located in Fort Worth, neighborhood arts facilities are also available to residents and visitors, further enhancing and reflecting the city's character and culture. The City -owned Rose Marine Theatre and the adjacent Galleria de las Rosas on North Main Street are currently managed by the Artes de la Rosas, (formerly called the Latin Arts Association) a nonprofit organization. The complex includes a 150- seat theatre, office space, rehearsal and dressing rooms, and exhibition space for arts groups. The Hip Pocket Theatre, located in northwest Fort Worth, has staged more than 150 plays, including 80 world premieres. Located in south Fort Worth in the eclectic, historic Fairmont neighborhood, is Arts Fifth Avenue, a grass roots arts center that provides all types of visual arts classes, tap dance and drumming classes as well as arts events attended by the community at large. Further south is the Victory Arts Center, a former convent that recently was developed into market rate housing for the "creative community and arts patrons." Potential exists at this location for an outdoor sculpture garden that would be available to both tenants and the public. Neighborhood schools, colleges and universities, churches, library branches, Boys and Girls Clubs, United Community Centers, shopping centers, and other facilities host performing and visual arts activities, as well as arts education programs. To 153 10 Public Art Locations a Proposed Public Art General Locations —. Proposed Public Art General Street Locations 0 10 Miles Following the passage of the 2004 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the Fort Worth Art Commission developed a Long Range Public Art Plan for the 2004 CIP that identifies those projects that provide the best opportunities for artist involvement and allow for the greatest public visibility and geographic distribution throughout Fort Worth. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 15. Arts and Culture sustain these activities, additional public and private support is needed. Performing Arts Oreanizations Major performing arts organizations providing artistic and cultural resources to citizens and tourists of Fort Worth include. Texas Ballet Theatre (formerly the Fort Worth -Dallas Ballet), Casa Mariana, Fort Worth Opera Association, Fort Worth Symphony Orchestra Association, Van Cliburn Foundation, Circle Theatre, Kids Who Care, Imagination Celebration, Jubilee Theatre, Stage West, Texas Boys Choir, Texas Girls Choir and Youth Orchestra of Greater Fort Worth, Ballet Concerto, Ballet Folklorico Azteca de Fort Worth, Contemporary Dance/Fort Worth, Cowtown Opry, Fort Worth Civic Orchestra, and Texas Wind Symphony There are over 65 performing arts groups in Fort Worth. Public Art Fort Worth enjoys a legacy of collecting art for the public benefit that began in the 19`h century with the Fort Worth Public Library In 2001, the City Council established the Fort Worth Public Art program to create an enhanced visual environment for Fort Worth residents, to commemorate the city's rich cultural and ethnic diversity, to integrate the design work of artists into the development of the City's capital improvements, and to promote tourism and economic vitality in the city through the artistic design of public spaces. Funding is provided by a 2 percent line item in City general obligation bond program propositions, as well as an annual allocation of 2 percent of cash -funded capital projects in the operating budget of the Water and Sewer Fund. The Fort Worth Art Commission oversees the program, and the Arts Council of Fort Worth and Tarrant County, Inc. provides professional management services and maintains the Fort Worth Public Art Collection, including works of public art which pre -date the program. The City Council's adoption of the Fort Worth Public Art Master Plan in September 2003 marked the first step toward the successful implementation of the program. Subsequently, the City Council has adopted fund -specific plans, including the Long Range Public Art Plan for the 2004 CIP in May 2005 (see Appendix A), which identifies capital improvement projects that provide the best opportunities for artist involvement and allow for the greatest public art visibility and geographic distribution throughout Fort Worth. The Long Range Public Art Plan for the Water Fund, adopted m May 2006 (see Appendix A), creates an interest -bearing Conservation Fund and an annual process for recommending new public art projects throughout Fort Worth. On April 24, 2006, Fort Worth Public Art (FWPA) celebrated the completion of its first commissioned artworks at the Fort Worth Convention Center Vernon Fisher's Early Texas / Modern Texas and Donald Lipski's Intimate Apparel & Pearl Earrings, composed of over 400 cowboy hats donated by the community FWPA's first work of the 2004 CIP was Eric McGehearty's United We Stand, dedicated in April 2007 at the new Fire Station #8 on West Rosedale. Chapter 15. Arts and Culture 154 Early Texas / Modern Texas Vernon Fisher's Early Texas / Modern Texas was Fort Worth Pub- lic Art's first commissioned work to be completed It was installed at the Fort Worth Convention Center in March 2005 (Source. Arts Council of Fort Worth, 2009.) Fire Station 8 Sculpture United We Stand at Fire Station #8 by Eric McGehearty was the first public art project of the 2004 CIP to be completed (Source: Arts Council of Fort Worth, 2009.) • • • i 0 • • • 0 • • • • • • • S I ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Many exciting public art projects are currently underway (see also Downtown and Stockyards sections above), including design enhancements for neighborhood parks by the artist team of Benito Huerta, Billy Hassell, and Etty Horowitz; innovative integral designs for the Southwest Parkway (SH 121) proposed by artists Loma Jordan and Norie Sato, a light sculpture for the Rolling Hills Radio Tower by artists Connie Ansmendi and Laura Guaranzuay; a glass "quilt" window installation featuring historic and contemporary photographs of the Evans & Rosedale community for the Shamblee Branch Library; and a variety of public art enhancements designed for Urban Village streetscape improvement projects. For complete program information and list of current and upcoming projects by Council District, visit www.fwvublicart.oru. Festivals The numerous festivals and events that occur year-round in Fort Worth add to the vibrancy of cultural experiences. The Main Street Arts Festival is a marketplace of food, arts, crafts, and live entertainment along Downtown Fort Worth's historic Main Street that attracts an average of 500,000 visitors each year In 2008, the Main Street Art Festival was expanded to include OFF MAIN!, which featured films, lectures, seminars, and performances in several performance halls throughout Downtown. Mayfest, a family festival on the banks of the Trinity River, is now a Fort Worth tradition, drawing as many as 390,000 visitors per year In September of each year, Pioneer Days attracts an average of 75,000 people to the Stockyards National Historic District to celebrate the early days of the cattle industry and the pioneers who settled on the banks of the Trinity River In 1998, the first annual Fort Worth Film Festival was held in Downtown Fort Worth. The first annual Magnolia Street Festival was also held in 1998 and a Hispanic Festival was held in 2000 in Downtown. Other annual festivals include Chisholm Trail Round -Up, Shakespeare in the Park, Fort Worth Fourth, Parade of Lights, Juneteenth, Cinco de Mayo, and Concerts in the Garden. In the fall of 2003, an extremely successful Jazz Festival in the Cultural District. Historic Camp Bowie, Inc. sponsored the Jazz Festival and it has now become an annual event. Arts Council of Fort Worth and Tarrant County The agency responsible for funding and leading arts programs and events for the citizens of Fort Worth is the Arts Council of Fort Worth and Tarrant County The Arts Council receives financial support from 1,500 individuals, 170 corporations, 20 foundations, and state, county, and city governments, including the City of Fort Worth. The Council provides annual operating grants totaling more than $950,000 to 35 arts organizations; administers Fort Worth's Neighborhood Arts Program, which sends the arts out into underserved neighborhoods; and provides managerial assistance to constituents county -wide. The Council also manages the City's Public Art Program and the City -owned Fort Worth Community Arts Center The Council's primary goal is to facilitate access to a broad range of arts and cultural activities. The Neighborhood Arts Program currently serves Northside, Southside, Polytechnic, Stop Six, Como, and other underserved areas. 155 Longhorns and Mural Longhorns and Mural 6/12/1999 by Luther Smith is one of 50 images in the Herd Photography Collection, donated to the City of Fort Worth in 2004 (Source: Arts Council of Fort Worth, 2009.) Chapter 15. Arts and Culture To make arts and cultural activities more accessible to the citizens of Fort Worth, a community -driven Arts and Cultural Plan for Greater Fort Worth, commissioned by the Arts Council of Fort Worth & Tarrant County, was completed in May 2002. The Arts Council worked with the Wolf, Keens & Company, Inc. consulting group from Cambridge, Massachusetts, and a 50-member planning committee on this plan. To develop the plan, more than 225 community leaders were interviewed. The effort resulted in a detailed, action-onented plan providing specific pnorities and recommended actions in key areas, such as sustaining cultural organizations, facilities, neighborhood cultural development, arts in education, and funding. The plan includes a priontized list of goals and objectives. The following are among many findings identified in the Arts and Cultural Plan for Greater Fort Worth. • Despite the extraordinary reputation of Fort Worth's cultural organizations, many of them are significantly undercapitalized. • The pnvate sector's support of arts and culture is extensive. However, local government support is only 2.3 percent of cultural organizations' total income. • The plan recommended an additional $2 million per year in public sector funds for the arts. • Fort Worth cultural institutions have enjoyed strong support from the private sector over the years, although corporate support is not as high as in comparable cities, at 4.3 percent of total income. • Building organizational capacity is important to all of Fort Worth's cultural organizations, but especially to small and mid -sized groups. • Increasing the number of art facilities of different sizes is essential. • Providing opportunities to encounter the city's cultural diversity is necessary for creating common understanding. • It is essential that non -arts organizations, such as local faith -based and human services organizations, sponsor arts and cultural events, venues, and programs. • Establishing neighborhood arts centers as permanent homes for local organizations is important. • Establishing a training program on how to start, operate, and maintain community arts programs and space is necessary • Cultural organizations often have a difficult time establishing connections with ethnic communities to establish broader, more diverse participation in the arts. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The City should collaborate with private and non-profit organizations to achieve the followmg goals and objectives. Retain, preserve, and enhance the best of Fort Worth's cultural past and present. Support public art as a valuable asset to the community • Increase public sector support of the arts by a minimum of $2 million per year • Commission public art of the highest quality throughout the city according to the Fort Worth Public Art Master Plan, the Long Range Public Art Plan for the 2004 Chapter 15. Arts and Culture 156 Fort Worth Community Arts Center The former Museum of Modern Art building is now home to the Fort Worth Community Arts Center under the management of the Arts Council of Fort Worth & Tarrant County (Source. Arts Council of Fort Worth & Tarrant County, 2009.) Amon Carter Museum The design of the expansion of the Amon Carter Museum complements the original shellstone building, built in 1961 The original building, designed by Philip Johnson, remains intact. (Source. Philip Johnson/Alan Ritchie Architects, 2009.) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••S• S*•.•*•S••oo ••••••••S• CIP, and the Long Range Public Art Plan for the Water Fund. • Involve artists in the design of major infrastructure. • Encourage public entities and private developers to commission public art. • Provide artist training and public educational programming. • Conserve the City's collection to museum level standards. Improve and update cultural resources in the Cultural Distnct. • Update the Cultural District Master Plan. • Renovate the Will Rogers Auditorium and Coliseum in phases. • Determine the feasibility of raising private funds to construct a band shell/ amphitheater within or near the Cultural District, as described in the 1990 Cultural District Master Plan. Another possible location, recommended by the Arts and Cultural Plan for Greater Fort Worth and addressed in both the Trinity River Master Plan and the Downtown Master Plan, is on the nver in the Downtown area. • Explore the feasibility of building a new arena with 10,000 to 12,000 seats. A potential location is the City -owned site on Harley Avenue adjacent to the Will Rogers complex. Improve and ensure the continued success of the Historic Stockyards. • Cooperate with property owners to prepare an updated Master Plan for the Stockyards National Register District. The Arts Council of Fort Worth and Tarrant County has the following goals. • Increase both public and pnvate sector funding for the arts. • Continue to develop the Fort Worth Community Arts Center building into a multipurpose cultural center, affordable and accessible to the entire community The Arts Council of Fort Worth and Tarrant County and the Fort Worth Independent School District should work together to establish cultural programs for increasingly diverse audiences. • Determine the feasibility of a high school for performing and visual arts by 2010 Options could include designating an existing high school for performing and visual arts, utilizing an existing facility to establish a performing and visual arts high school, or building a new facility Consider the feasibility of expanding the performing and visual arts program at Arlington Heights High School. POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The following policies and strategies are either in progress or suggested as a means of implementing the arts goals of private and nonprofit organizations and the City Policies • Encourage the development of Fort Worth's unique art and cultural experiences. • Encourage coordinated arts opportunities for children throughout the city 157 Intimate Apparel & Pearl Earrings Donald Lipski's Intimate Apparel & Pearl Earrings, composed of over 400 donated hats on steel armature, is located in the Fort Worth Convention Center (Source. Arts Council of Fort Worth, 2009.) Shamblee Branch Library Artwork Illustration for photographic window at Shamblee Branch Library by Letitia Huckaby (Source. Arts Council of Fort Worth, 2009) Chapter 15. Arts and Culture • Provide an effective and inclusive tourism strategy that recogmzes the full range of cultural assets and uses them to the best advantage of the entire community • Provide opportunities for Fort Worth residents to engage in arts and cultural activities, events, and organizations regardless of their ethnicity, economic status, or location. Strategies • Encourage public -private partnerships in arts philanthropy • Encourage increased public and private sector support for the arts. • Encourage countywide coordination of promotion/resource sharing for festivals. • Encourage reuse of vacant storefronts for arts and performing exhibition spaces. • Match performing groups with new and existing spaces. • Encourage non-profit and private arts organizations to work closely with historic preservation organizations to reuse historical buildings for cultural centers, assisting m neighborhood revitalization. • Support the Arts Council's objective to provide arts organizations with managerial and technical assistance through the establishment of an arts incubator in the Fort Worth Community Arts Center • Support the Arts Council's objective to encourage cost-effective programming and advertising collaborations among arts groups. • Recognize and utilize the improved Fort Worth Water Gardens as a valuable asset for cultural experiences. • Enter into discussions with existing artist groups to more fully determine the needs of these groups. • Include arts and culture as integral components of land use planning and long- range revitalization strategies. • Encourage non -arts organizations, such as community development corporations and faith -based, human services, and economic development organizations, to sponsor arts and cultural venues, programs, and events. PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Pro erams • The Arts Council of Fort Worth and Tarrant County awards a variety of grants to nonprofit arts groups based in the City of Fort Worth. Approximately $950,000 is distributed in grants to nonprofit arts groups by the Arts Council on an annual basis. • General operating grants support an organization's overall operations. • Neighborhood Arts Program grants fund performances in underserved, low- income neighborhoods. • Arts Participation Grants are aimed at expanding arts audiences, and give priority to projects that address multi -ethnic populations or individuals under 32. • Mini Grants focus on professional development for arts groups with budgets of under $750,000 • The Fort Worth Public Art Program promotes public exposure to a broad range of visual art. This type of program enhances public spaces with art that is Chapter 15. Arts and Culture 158 Avenue of Light Lancaster Avenue became an "Avenue of Light" in 2009, with a series of 35- foot tall glowing stainless steel sculptures by Cliff Garten Studio (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Rodeo Plaza Streetscape Enhancements Streetscape enhancements at Rodeo Plaza in the Stockyards by Steve Teeters. (Source: Arts Council of Fort Worth, 2009.) • • integrated into the built environment. Two percent of capital improvement project funds is allocated for public art. The City Council initiated this • program through an ordinance approved in October 2001 • The Fort Worth Community Arts Center, a City -owned building managed by • the Arts Council, provides a wide array of visual and performing arts opportunities for artist and arts organizations as well as the general public. The buildmg can also be rented for a myriad of public events including weddings • and parties. • Projects • • The Wayfindmg project will help provide a continuity of quality, image, and lb defmition along the corridors connecting the Cultural District, Downtown, and Historic Stockyards. • • The Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Museum will be opening a new • location in the Cultural District in the future. Efforts are currently underway to raise the funds to build the new museum. • The Museum of Science and History is expanding its exhibit space from 30,000 to 50,000 square feet. • • A new sports arena or coliseum is proposed for the Will Rogers Memonal • Center Funding and location are not yet determined. A potential location is the south side of Harley Avenue, across from the Will Rogers livestock barns. • • Visit www.fwpublicart.org for a complete list of public art projects. Capital Improvement Proiects Capital improvement projects that have been identified for the next 20 years are listed in Appendix D and Appendix E with estimated costs, completion dates, and ` • potential funding sources. • • • I. • • • • • • • • 159 National Cowgirl Museum and Hall of Fame The National Cowgirl Museum and Hall of Fame opened in June 2002 in the Cultural District. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Casa Mariana Originally built in 1958, Casa Mariana is a professional theater landmark in Fort Worth, providing live productions for adults and children A $4 7 million renovation in 2003 transformed the structure into a 21st-century theater, creating a new 11,400 square foot steel -and -glass lobby to accommodate capacity crowds, and a stage and audience chamber featuring a modified thrust/proscenium stage configuration The notable geodesic dome roof, designed by architect Buckminster Fuller, remains intact. (Source. Gideon Toal, 2003.) Chapter 15. Arts and Culture •••••••••••••••••••••AhAft ••••••••••.•••.••.•••••.••••••••• AIIKf1J MOa RANTS V ON IQIA02Id •••••♦•••i•1•••••••••••••••r••••• CHAPTER 16: POLICE SERVICES Reasonable assurance of safety is vital to the development of a vibrant and growmg city Effective delivery of police services affects economic development, population growth, and ultimately, the fiscal well being of a city Nationwide, the fear of crime is cited as a primary factor in the quality of life withm communities. As a result, employers and individuals frequently consider crime in relocation decisions. The City of Fort Worth provides police protection to residents within the city limits. Persons living in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) or Limited Purpose Annexation Areas rely on county sheriff departments for this service. All of the statistical material found in this chapter relates to law enforcement and crimes occurring within the city limits. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Historical Crime Comparison Fort Worth, like many other cities in our nation, has experienced cyclical patterns in crime, with large increases followed by steep declines. The last significant up -swing occurred in the 1980s and culminated in 1991 When compared to 40 other large U.S. cities during that time, Fort Worth had the third highest level of crime. The negative impact of crime and the adverse publicity it generated had a significant impact on the local economy In response to the high crime rates of the late 1980s and early 1990s, local business leaders encouraged the Mayor and City Council to develop a plan to address the situation. This plan, called Code. Blue, with its emphasis on community involvement and proactive crime prevention, has been very effective in reducing crime. Since the inception of Code. Blue, the crime rate has fallen consistently Code. Blue is seen as a vital piece of success that has transformed our city This change has occurred in part due to city leadership and local business involvement, but more significantly, it has occurred due to the commitment of residents. Communities have taken an interest in making their neighborhoods safe, and they have become the eyes and ears of the Police Department. During 2009, the crime rate reached its lowest point in more than 25 years. A comparison of crime between 2007 and 2009 indicates a 2.3 percent decrease in the number of Part I crimes. Violent crime decreased 4.3 percent, while property crime decreased 2 percent. When comparing Fort Worth to 39 major cities in the United States, Fort Worth ranks as the 6th safest city in terms of violent crime per capita. Public Perception of Safety While measurmg the number of Part I crimes is an important indicator of public safety, it is not the only indicator The Police Department also uses the community survey administered by a consultant on a biannual basis. This survey provides responses directly from citizens relating to important public safety questions such as "Do you feel safe in your neighborhood?" and it also asks citizens to prioritize public safety concerns. The results of the survey are examined thoroughly to ensure that the Police Department understands the community, which remains its most valuable asset. Part I Crimes, per 100,000 Population, 1991-2009 20,000 -- m 15,000 ca • 10,000 E C) • 5,000 -- 0 --±-+-' •— N CO eF 6) 6) 6) 6) 6) 6) 6) 6) -+--+--+- — ' I cn co N. co rn O 6) O) 6) 0) 0) O O 6) 6) 6) 6) 0) O O CV CV CV O O N Cf) O O N O O N LC) O O N CO O N I- O O CV CO O C) N CS) O O N From 1991 through 2009, Fort Worth experienced a decrease in the Part I crime rate per 100,000 population. Fort Worth uses Part I offenses as a measure of crime in the community The following offenses are considered Part I offenses murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny -theft and auto theft. (Source. Police Department, 2010.) 225 200 175 150 125 100 75 50 25 0 202 Murder in Fort Worth, 1985-2009 195 CC) CO CO C) C) c- N CO Cr) CO ti CO 0) O CO CO CO CO CO C) 0) 0) Cr) 0) 0) 6) 6) 0) 6) O 0) 0) C) 0) CA 6) 0) 0) C) 6) 6) 0) 0) 6) 0) O N O 0 N N O O N M O 0 N C) O 0 N Cn O O N CO O 0 N CD O O N 40 CO C) O O N N Since reaching its highest point in 1986, the number of murders occurring in Fort Worth has declined by 80% The 40 murders that occurred in 2009 represent the lowest total since 1963 (Source: Police Department, 2010.) 163 Chapter 16. Police Services a Guiding Philosophies The Department is guided by two major philosophies that support its efforts to reduce crime. These philosophies are community policing and data driven decision making. Since 1986, the Police Department has embraced and supported community policing. This philosophy focuses on crime and social disorder through the delivery of police services that include aspects of traditional law enforcement as well as prevention, problem solving, community engagement, and partnerships. The Department maintains a variety of programs which support this philosophy These include Citizen on Patrol, Neighborhood Police Officers (NPOs), Clergy and Police Partnerships, and a variety of other community -oriented crime prevention programs. The second philosophy guiding the Department is data -driven decision making. In 2005, a formalized dynamic management process (Compstat) was implemented. In 2008, Compstat was re-evaluated and evolved into the CIDAT (Communication, Information, Data, Analysis, and Tactics) process. CIDAT emphasizes data -driven analysis of problems to support innovative problem -solving tactics. The CIDAT process brings together the Police Department's Command Staff to review current crime trends on a weekly basis, which allows the organization to shift resources quickly into areas where crime is occurring. These sessions also provide an opportunity to brainstorm ideas regarding the Department's most significant problems. Staffing Trends As of December 2009, the Police Department employed 1,904 personnel. This number includes 1,491 sworn personnel and 413 civilian personnel. Sworn personnel are governed by state civil service regulations (Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 143), and are responsible for many traditional police functions, such as patrol, gang enforcement, narcotics investigation, and vice enforcement. However, sworn personnel, such as the Neighborhood Police Officers (NPOs), also lead prevention efforts. Sworn personnel has increased m the past five years by 220 positions. However, due to the significant population increase in Fort Worth since 2000, the ratio of sworn personnel per 1,000 population has actually declined from 2.35 officers per 1,000 population to 2.11 in 2008. Civilian personnel provide key administrative support to the Department and are responsible for the financial management, research, planning, cnme analysis, victim's assistance, dispatching, crime laboratory operations, property control, and a variety of other important functions. Similar to sworn staffing, the ratio of civilian personnel per 1,000 population has declined over the past decade. In 1997, there were 68 civilians per 1,000 population and the current ratio is .54 per 1,000 Each year the Department requests additional personnel through the City's budgeting process. The Department uses a complex statistical program called the Patrol Allocation Module (PAM) to estimate its future sworn personnel needs. Additionally, the Department is studying possible improvements to ensure sworn and civilian staffing increase at a similar pace to population growth. 164 90% 80% —z 70% 60% 50% — 40% — 30% — 20% — 10% 0% -- E 0 0 Chart of Community Survey Results Overall Satisfaction with Public Safety - 2008 ca 0 U 0 m a) Des Moines 0 0 lL a) c 0 Kansas City (Mo) 0 m C in San Antonio 0 0 0 a a) C m =o C To 0 Every year, the City commissions a community survey to measure citizen satisfaction with city services. The Police Department reviews the findings of the survey, and uses it to understand how citizens feel about a variety of public safety issues (Source. ETC Institute DirectionFinder, 2009.) Sworn Personnel per 1,000 Population 1397 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 .....—Personnel per 1,000 The Police Department has increased staff over the past decade, however, staffing in sworn personnel has not kept pace with the rapid population growth occurring in Fort Worth. (Source. Police Department, 2010.) 3.00 2.75 2.50 2.25 2.00 175 150 125 100 a I a i S • S • • • a i 41 • 41 41 i 1 Chapter 16. Police Services ••••••••♦•••••••••••••••••••••••• Police Department Budget The Police Department operates using three primary sources of funding. The first and most significant is the general fund, which has an annual police budget of $167 million. Additionally, the Department receives approximately $4 5 million in state and federal grant funds. The third source of funding for the Department is the Crime Control and Prevention District (CCPD). The CCPD is a specialized government district funded by a 1/2 cent sales tax levied on all applicable purchases within the City of Fort Worth. The CCPD adopted budget for FY 2009 is $51 million. Crime Control and Prevention District (CCPD) The Crime Control and Prevention District (CCPD) was created in 1995 in response to high crime, which had significantly impacted private investment and created a negative public view of Fort Worth. The District was originally formed to break past cycles of public safety resource reductions. The District was approved by 59% of voters in 1995 Since that time, the CCPD has been renewed twice by the voters of Fort Worth, most recently in 2005 when 91% of voters approved the District for five additional years. The District provides a substantial amount of crime prevention and cnme control funding to the Police Department. More than $50 million is spent annually from the CCPD with the goal of making Fort Worth the safest major city in the United States. Currently, CCPD funds support a variety of key initiatives, including but not limited to the Gang Section, Citizens on Patrol, School Security Initiative (SSI), Neighborhood Police Officers (NPO), Zero Tolerance Teams, Graffiti Abatement, a variety of technology improvements, and police equipment such as the helicopter lease and the purchase of police vehicles. Since the District was first approved in 1995, crime in Fort Worth has declined significantly This is especially true of the violent crime rate per 100,000 population, which decreased by 44% since 1995 The District has successfully funded community policing initiatives and aided the development of key partnerships to prevent and reduce serious crimes. The CCPD has played a vital part in decreasing Fort Worth's crime rate and enhancing the City's image as a safe place to live and work. 5th Patrol Division and Beyond In 2008, the City of Fort Worth was divided into five geographical areas to serve as patrol divisions. These divisions provide patrol, investigative and neighborhood policing initiatives, and other special services to the citizens that live within that patrol division. This decentralized approach has allowed the Police Department to provide a higher level of service to the community that it serves. The realignment of divisions was designed to meet the demands for service in high growth areas of the City, such as the Alliance Corridor, southwest Fort Worth, and the revitalized central city area. The 5th patrol division serves the central city, where many of the City's special events occurs such as performances at Bass Hall, Mayfest, Main Street Arts Festival, events in the Cultural District, the Stockyards, and a variety of other events. This allows the efficient use of limited police resources throughout the City, while providing an improved policing structure that can grow with the City 165 Funding Summary, FY2009 Grants 2% $4.5 Million General Fund 75% $167 Million CCPD 23% $51 Million The Police Department has three primary funding sources. These are the General Fund, the Crime Control and Prevention District (CCPD), and vari- ous state and federal grants. (Source. Police Department, 2009.) Major Texas Cities' Police -Related Spending, FY2009 $400 $350 $300 U $250 rn $200 c c $150 cn $100 $50 $0 Fort Worth Austin Dallas Houston San Arlington 8 Paso Antonio Police -related spending per capita in Fort Worth is consistent with other large cities in Texas. The department benchmarks against other large cities to en- sure the City remains a leader in providing police services. (Source: Police Depart- ment, 2009.) Chapter 16. Police Services I In 2009, the initial planning for a sixth patrol division began. Such planning is vital in order to keep pace with city growth and to provide the highest level of service possible. To that end, the Police Department must continuously plan for the future and evaluate improved methods to meet the service demands that the community deserves. Technology The Police Department has spent the past five years making significant advancements in the use of technology The advancements culminated in 2005 with the implementation of the Department's new records management system (RMS). The RMS works with the City's new Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system to ensure officers are effective and efficient in using technology in their vehicles. This decreases the amount of time required for officers to be in a police facility and maximizes the amount of time spent on patrol. A new CAD system was implemented in October 2008. The new system provides automatic vehicle locator (AVL) technology on each patrol car to improve dispatching accuracy and efficiency, as well as increase officer safety The implementation of these two systems will aid the Department in having access to timely and accurate data, which supports the efficient delivery of public safety services. The Police Department also uses a Geographic Information System (GIS) to leverage the data gathered by the new RMS and CAD GIS enables the Department to analyze crime patterns and respond to emerging trends. Currently, GIS is used by Crime Analysts, Planners, Neighborhood Police Officers (NPO), and Deputy Chiefs to view crimes and police incidents on a day-to-day basis. The timely data enables the Department to respond to emerging trends quickly, rather than waiting for monthly crime bulletins, which often are pnnted after a crime trend has occurred. The crime trends are discussed at weekly CIDAT meetings to determine effective tactics for prevention, intervention, and enforcement. During 2008, the Department launched a public internet crime mapping website. Fort Worth citizens can now view crime in their neighborhoods by visiting www crimemapping.com. An improved crime website is also currently under construction. Updating Police Facilities The Department operates a number of facilities throughout the city The Police Department's primary administrative building is the Thomas R. Windham Building located downtown at 350 W Belknap. The Department also operates a total of five division headquarters and ten neighborhood patrol district (NPD) headquarters. In 2009, work began on a 20-year facilities plan for replacing and improvmg the Department's facilities. This plan will address existing buildings and their needs, as well as future buildings that are necessary to maintain the Police Department's availability to the community Training Facility The Police and Fire Department Training Facility is located north of downtown at 1000 Calvert. The facility was built in 1967 and modified in 1985 Although the facility meets most needs of the Police Department, it does not include a driving course or rifle Chapter 16. Police Services 166 10 New Patrol Division Alignment, 2009 5 aia Legend invited Purpose Annexations Central Division NPD 1 & 2 North Division NPD 3 & 4 East Division NPD 5 & 6 South Division NPD 7&8 West Division NPD9&10 10 Miles III1111wlw The Police Department added a new patrol division in 2008 The city is now di- vided into five field operation divisions. North, South, East, West, and Central Each division is further divided into Neighborhood Policing Districts (NPDs), which are further divided into police beats. The city has a total of 10 NPDs and 81 police beats. (Source: Police Department, 2009.) a I a a • • • • • • • • • • a a • i •••••••••••••••i••••••••••••••••• range. The training center has been identified as a property that will be impacted by the Trinity River Vision in the coming years. The Police and Fire Departments are interested in building a new shared training facility that meets the needs of both departments. The replacement of the current training facility is not currently funded and remains a significant issue. Crime Laboratory and Property Room The current Crime Laboratory on the 4th floor of the Police Administration building, occupying approximately 7,500 square feet, is inadequate for existing operations and precludes facility growth. After reviewing several locations over the past 5 years, police staff identified the old Stripling Cox store location on E. Lancaster for purchase and construction of the new Crime Laboratory facility The Crime Control and Prevention District Board approved the funding. Design work and pre -planning is underway with completion expected in late 2010 Heliport Constructed on a landfill in 1972, the existing Police Heliport was designed for the smaller piston helicopters. The land surrounding the heliport has settled more than three feet over the years. Staff from the Police Department, Aviation, and Architect's office identified a potential location at Meacham Airport to build a new police heliport. The Aviation Department will use gas well revenue, since this is an aviation use, to fund the improvements. A ground lease to the Police Department will recoup the estimated $2.6 million in total costs ($1.9 million in construction costs). GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Make Fort Worth the safest major city in the United States. • Reduce the crime rate to 5,500 Part I crimes per 100,000 population. • Attain a crime rate that ranks Fort Worth as one of the top ten safest among 40 major U S cities. • Increase overall citizen satisfaction with police services and feeling of safety in neighborhoods by 2% as measured by the City's biannual citizen survey POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The following policies and strategies will enable the City to implement its police service goal and objectives. Policies • Support community partnerships to improve safety in neighborhoods, schools, and businesses. • Effectively utilize CCPD resources to reduce crime throughout the City • Fully utilize technology enhancements to support the department's community policing. • Create and support plans for the expansion of public safety services into developing areas. 167 Central Division Headquarters The Fort Worth Police Department opened the Central Divi- sion headquarters at 501 Jones St in January 2008 About 140 employees, including patrol officers, supervisors and de- tectives, work out of the 10,000 square foot, leased facility (Source. Police Department, 2009.) Mounted Patrol AP The Fort Worth Police Department Mounted Patrol began in the late 1970's in response to transient problems occurring in the Stockyards area. The teams are highly visible, very effective, and go wherever they are needed Their special maneuverability enables them to be effective at area malls, hospital parking lots, Downtown, and in residential areas (Source. Police Department, 2009.) Chapter 16. Police Services Strateties • Support the CIDAT process using technology improvements and professional development. CIDAT supports the department by addressing key crime and safety problems through the efficient use of police resources. • Deploy Neighborhood Police Officers (NPOs) as community problem solvers. NPOs will continue to form relationships with the community to encourage involvement in Citizens on Patrol (COP), crime prevention, and problem solving. • Hold community forums where citizens can communicate with the Police Department about specific issues and concerns they may have. The forums additionally allow for two-way communication between the citizens and the Police Department. This process helps form better relationships between the community and its police department. • Continue to build faith -based partnerships by recruiting additional faith -based leadership to participate in the Minister's Police Academy as well as the Clergy and Police Alliance (CAPA) and Ministers Against Crime (MAC). These partnerships create valuable two-way communication between the community and the Police Department. • Impact the City's young population by providing alternatives to gangs and drugs. • Participate in City -led planning committees and initiatives to ensure new development is not detrimental to public safety Such coordination with other departments will help ensure that the City of Fort Worth remains focused on the safety of its current and future citizens as it grows. PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Programs • Neighborhood Police Officers (NPOs) proactively work with the community on problem -solving and crime prevention techniques. They are assigned to Field Operations Divisions. They are not responsible for routine police calls. NPOs perform many of the department's community policing functions. Each NPO is assigned to a specific police beat, which allows them to form relation- ships in the community • Citizens on Patrol (COP) is a crime prevention program that began in 1991 It encourages citizens to take an active role in their neighborhoods by providing them with crime prevention training, as well as training to patrol their neighborhoods. • School Security Initiative, funded by the Crime Control and Prevention Dis- trict and area school districts, assigns police officers to middle schools and high schools to resolve conflicts and help school personnel manage behav- ioral problems. • Gang Intervention and Prevention is supported by the 33 sworn personnel of the Gang Section. While the Gang Section often is investigating gang -related and gang -involved crimes, they also spend time trying to prevent people from associating with gangs. During 2005, more than 250 gang prevention presen- Chapter 16. Police Services 168 Citizens On Patrol (COP) Citizens On Patrol has been a successful program of the Fort Worth Police Department. The program has grown significantly since its inception in 1991 The City currently has more than 175 active COP groups. Since 1991, more than 6,993 people have completed COP training (Source: Police Department, 2009.) New Crime Lab/Property Room Location in East Fort Worth The Crime Control and Prevention District (CCPD) has approved fund- ing to design and build a new Crime Lab and Property Room in east Fort Worth. The facility will replace aging, inadequate facilities located at 350 W Belknap Construction at the facility on East Lancaster will be completed in late 2010 (Source: Police Department, 2009.) • • • • • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• tations were given throughout the City • The Homeland Security program is funded by the Crime Control and Prevention District. The Intelligence Section, which is responsible for supporting the Police Department's Homeland Security program, works to collect, evaluate, analyze, and disseminate intelligence data regarding cnminal activity in Fort Worth and any criminal activity in other jurisdictions that may adversely affect the City • Zero Tolerance Teams, which are also funded by the Crime Control and Prevention District, target specific crime problems within a defined area using short-term satu- ration operations. Primarily, the teams are used to immediately address identified crime patterns or trends. • The depaitinent and the CCPD Board have partnered to fund four community -based programs throughout the city These programs aim to serve one of three CCPD goals. These programs are credited with providing crime prevention training and character development to youth, increasing Citizen -on -Patrol (COP) membership, and supporting the adoption of a preven- tion focus by the community at large. Neighborhood Outreach The Fort Worth Police Department has won numerous awards for com- munity policing and is extremely active within all neighborhoods. Here, officers prepare to lead the way for a children's bicycle race and a neighborhood event. (Source. Police Department, 2009.) Bicycle Patrol The Bike Patrol, which is made up of 18 full-time bike officers working three shifts, is used downtown primarily for their versatility, which allows the officers to easily navigate congested streets. These officers are help- ful in providing a sense of security, a source of information, and a visible presence (Source: Police Department, 2009.) 169 Chapter 16. Police Services ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 17: FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES The mission of the City's Fire Department is to serve and protect our community through education, prevention, preparedness and response. The service area covers 350 square miles and over 700,000 residents. The Fire Department's five-year vision is to become a nationally accredited fire service organization. A separate entity under the City Manager's Office, the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) was established to develop plans and procedures to preserve life and property during natural and man-made disasters. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS The Fire Department provides fire suppression and rescue, first -responder emergency medical services, hazardous materials emergency mitigation, fire code enforcement, fire safety education, and explosive containment and disposal as detailed in the Fire Department business plan. OEM strives to keep Fort Worth and Tarrant County prepared for all types of disasters, both technical and natural. Partial funding for this office is provided by a matching grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Fire Services The City has a Public Protection Classification (PPC) rating of two (2) as assigned by the Insurance Services Office (ISO). This rating from the ISO is based on a number of factors including training, staffing, number of fire stations, equipment dispatched to fires, equipment on trucks, fire prevention, investigation, fire safety education, construction code enforcement, hydrant maintenance, water supply, and the ability of the 911 center to answer and dispatch calls. The PPC determines the fire insurance rates for property owners, the lower the rating for the area the higher the potential for savings. The City was last reviewed by the ISO in 2007, resulting in an improvement over the previous rating of three (3) given in 2000 The Fire Department monitors new residential and commercial development since growth typically creates the need for new fire stations to be strategically located within these growing areas. Managing the expansion of fire services is currently the department's greatest challenge. Two new stations opened in January 2009 Station 11 is in Council Distnct 2 and is located on the western edge of the Northwest Independent School District central campus near the intersection of Highway 114 and Harriet Creek Drive. Station 41 is in Council District 7 and is located on Willow Springs Road, north of West Bonds Ranch Road and south of Highway 287 The strategic deployment of fire fighting equipment and trucks with the appropriate number of firefighters will continue to be a demanding and expensive undertaking, particularly as the City continues to grow geographically Future annexations will challenge the Fire Department to provide fire, rescue, and emergency medical services as stated m the department's business plan. To that end, the Fire Department has proposed eventually staffing each of the new northern stations with two fire companies. 171 Insurance Service Organization (ISO) Rating of the Ten Largest Cities in Texas, 2007 City Houston Dallas San Antonio 'Austin 'Fort Worth 'El Paso 'Arlington Corpus Christi Plano Garland The Fort Worth Fire from 3 to 2 in 2007 2007 ISO Rating Population Estimate 2,198,883 1 1,335,599 2 1,306,900 3 718,912 2 686,850 2 624,364 1 363,050 3 293,122 4 258,071 1 222,558 2 Department's ISO rating improved (Source. Fire Department Survey, 2008.) Chapter 17 Fire and Emergency Services Although the addition of these personnel is an important accomplishment, it is also important to support the expanding fire fighting force and our growing city with technical and logistical personnel and resources. There will be a need for additional staff, including instructors, public educators, inspectors, fire investigators, mechanics, battalion technicians, and data analysts. The continuing expansion of the department's coverage area and the resulting workforce will also require additional supervision in the form of an additional battalion, which would raise the total to seven. Additionally, as the Operations Division continues to grow there will be a need to adjust the span of control of management. This will necessitate the addition of "shift commanders" to assist in the planning, organization, and direction of the activities and programs of company officers and personnel on each of the three work shifts. The Fire Department plays a major role in the City's overall Emergency Medical Services (EMS) system working under the medical direction of the Area Metropolitan Ambulance Authority to provide first -responder emergency medical response services. All firefighters are trained, at minimum, as State -certified emergency medical technicians (EMT's). All fire trucks carry automatic external defibrillators (AED's) and other state of the art EMS equipment and supplies to help stabilize patients until advanced life support (ALS) personnel and equipment arnves. Under this system the Fire Department does not transport patients, a service which is provided by a third party Other emergency services provided by the Fire Department include a Water Emergency Response Team that is equipped and trained to handle surface rescues, swift water rescues, and underwater search and recovery; Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (AARF) responsibilities for the City's three municipal airports, a Hazardous Materials (HazMat) Team that is trained and equipped to respond to the spill or leak of dangerous chemical, radiological, or biological products, and a Technical Rescue Team (TRT) that is trained and equipped to deal with large transportation accidents (train, bus, aircraft), structurally collapsed buildings, rope rescue for aboveground emergencies, confined space rescues, and cave-in or trench rescues. The total response time to an incident, from the call being received at the Fire Alarm Office to the first unit arriving at the scene, is an important measure for fire departments. For internal purposes, this response time is broken out into three sections, call processing time, turn -out time, and drive time. Call processing time is defined by the time it takes dispatch to get the information, enter it into the computer system, and notify the appropriate fire station(s). Turn -out time is the time from when the station receives the dispatch until the fire apparatus is en -route. Drive time is the time the apparatus spends traveling to the scene. The Fire Department goal for emergency call response is one minute (60 seconds) for call processing time, one minute (60 seconds) for turn -out time, and four minutes (240 seconds) for drive time, for a total of six minutes. Additionally, since the city is so large, the department's secondary goal is to achieve this six minute response time 90% of the time. As the bottom chart on page 170 shows, the Fire Department typically struggles to reach this goal across the entire city Typically, this goal is met in the core of the city, but Chapter 17 Fire and Emergency Services 172 r Fort Worth Existing and Proposed Fire Stations 10 5 0 I Proposed Fire Stations 10 Miles The City of Fort Worth has 39 fire stations within its city limits This map shows all current stations, as well as proposed station sites. Stations 5, 27, 34, and 42 are proposed to be relocated to new sites. (Source: Fire Department, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • a •••••l•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• numerous factors impair the department's ability to achieve this goal m the outskirts of the city limits. FIRE SERVICES GOALS Operations. • Respond to and mitigate emergency and service calls in a timely and competent manner with adequate resources. • Provide for a highly trained workforce that is adequately furnished with well - maintained equipment and facilities. Educational and Support Services. • Recruit a qualified workforce that reflects the diversity of the city • Develop a competent workforce through education and training. • Provide effective medical training to the public and fire personnel. • Dispatch appropriate resources and respond to needs of on -scene personnel in a timely manner • Efficiently procure leading -edge communication equipment and keep it well maintained and well -organized. Executive Services: • Provide professional, timely, and thorough inspections and plans review • Thoroughly investigate the cause of all fires of unknown origin and accurately identify incendiary fires and their perpetrators. • Completely, accurately, and impartially investigate complaints involving Fort Worth Fire Department members. • Prevent or mitigate the destructive effects of explosives and explosive devices. • Effectively educate the public in fire and life safety strategy and skills. FIRE SERVICES STRATEGIES • Increase the number of minority and female applicants through an aggressive recruiting program. • Increase public participation in education programs such as Learn Not to Burn, Youth Fire Academy, and Citizens Fire Academy • Educate the public on appropriate reactions to bombs and bomb threats through lectures and presentations. • Apply for FEMA and other grants in order to expand and improve the department's Public Safety programs and supplement other department initiatives. • Improve internal and external communication through focus groups, meetings, replacing paper -based processes with electronic ones, etc. • Strengthen spnnkler and fire alarm requirements m the Fire Code for new and existing construction. • Implement National Incident Management System (NIMS). • Coordinate the expenditure of Homeland Secunty grant funds with the Emergency Management Office. 173 Fort Worth Fire Department Total Runs by Type, 2003-2009 60,000 40,000 - — 20,000 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 ® FIRE ■ EMS o OTHER In 2009, the Fire Department responded to 5,233 fires and 53,173 Emergency Medical Service (EMS) calls. The Fire Department also responded to 25,092 other emergencies (Source. Fire Department, 2010.) Chapter 17 Fire and Emergency Services FIRE SERVICES PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Below are just a few examples of the many programs and projects the Fire Department administers. • Learn Not to Burnt? is a program designed to provide instruction in fire safety behavior to elementary school students. This program has proven to be one of the most effective ever used by the community and Fort Worth schools. It is a structured curriculum taught by firefighters and reinforced by other resources, such as clowns, puppets, the Fire Safety House, and fire truck visits. This program is designed for children pre -kindergarten through the fifth grade. • Youth Fire Academy is a new program used to reach youth grades 8-12 with informative information concerning the services offered by the Fire Department. This is a one -week version of the Citizen's Fire Academy that is designed to recruit new volunteers and expose youth to a possible career as a Fort Worth firefighter • The Citizen's Fire Academy program teaches up to 60 citizens annually about Department activities, fire safety, CPR, and first aid techniques. This education also enables graduates to assist the department with fire safety training and other special projects. • The Juvenile Fire Setter Intervention Program is designed to help families with children who are involved in fire play or fire setting. Approximately 50-100 children are referred to the program each year More than 90% of program graduates never relapse into fire setting behavior. The FWFD JFS program is part of the Tarrant County Juvenile Fire setter Coalition, which is comprised of all the municipal and county entities that have JFS programs and all their referral sources. In addition, the department partners with several private charitable entities to make sure that juveniles in the program receive counseling and other services. • High School CPR Training is provided by the Fort Worth Fire Department in partnership with the Area Metropolitan Ambulance Authority, the Fort Worth Independent School District (FWISD), and the American Heart Association. The objective is to provide CPR training to every high school sophomore in the FWISD Five thousand high school students are trained every year by high school teachers, nurses, and Fort Worth firefighters through this collaboration. • Fire Safety Inspections of the nearly 15,000 commercial businesses and approximately 900 target hazards are completed by fire company inspectors. • Underground Gasoline Storage Tank Inspections ensure compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) laws and regulations that provide for public safety and environmental protection. • Inspection and Review of Construction Plans and New Structures involves several functions, mcluding review for fire code compliance, inspection of fire protection systems such as sprinklers and alarms, and addressing. Ensuring compliance with all codes and regulations has a tremendous impact in reducing the number and severity of future fires. • Standpipe System Inspection is provided by an inspector who examines and tests fire department emergency delivery systems. The dependability of these systems is crucial to both public and firefighter safety Chapter 17 Fire and Emergency Services 174 Fire Loss as Percentage of Total City Property Value, 2003-2009 0.12% 010% 0.08% 0.06% 0.04% 0.02% 0.00% 0.09% 2003 2004 a-10% 2005 2006 2007 2008 0.09% 2009 Property losses due to fires had decreased in recent years, but increased in 2009 (Constant 2000 dollars). (Source: Fire Department, 2010.) Fort Worth Fire Department Average Response Time, 2005-2009 (in minutes) 7 5 3 1 4.5 2(l05 5.5 2006 4.5 2007 4.5 3.7 2008 2009 The Department's total response time definition changed in 2007 to reflect a more accurate and true response time. Total Response time equals the time when the Fire Dispatch office receives the call to the time the first Fire apparatus arrives on -scene (Source. Fire Department, 2010.) a a • • • • • • • • i • a a i a a ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••-• Fire Services Capital Improvement Proiects The approval of the 2004 bond program has resulted in the Fire Department obtaining money to construct two new fire stations, buy land for one more, relocate or replace two others, and provide enhancements to existing stations. Placement of these stations is determined based on response time studies that tie into legal requirements for the provision of public safety services to newly annexed areas. Details of all currently funded and unfunded CIP projects can be found in Appendices D and E. Ememencv Manasement Emergency Management focuses on increasing the capacity of organizations to plan for, respond to, and coordinate emergency activities. Emergency Management is tasked with maintaining the community -wide emergency operations plan, monitoring of emergency conditions, establishing relations with partner agencies, fostering disaster preparedness efforts, and disseminating warning information through different systems. This warning system includes an aggressive public education campaign, testing of the outdoor siren system, and operation of the telephone ring - down system. Additionally, the OEM activates the Emergency Operations Center and/or the Emergency Management Plan as deemed necessary Several other City departments take an active role in the Emergency Preparedness Program, offering expertise and -facilities as needed. - In January 2009, the City Council adopted the Fort Worth Hazard Mitigation Action Plan. The Plan was coordinated by the Fort Worth -Tarrant County Office of Emergency Management. The jurisdictions participating in the plan represent unincorporated portions of Tarrant County as well as nineteen of the forty-one cities in the county The Tarrant County Hazard Mitigation Team consisting of staff from all participating jurisdictions and external agencies contributed to creating the Fort Worth Hazard Mitigation Action Plan. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT GOALS • Reduce the adverse impacts of emergencies and disasters through all -hazard preparedness programs and initiatives. • Facilitate educational activities that produce a greater understanding of emergency preparedness amongst governmental agencies and the public. • Coordinate an integrated emergency management system with internal and external agents in a timely manner • Strengthen our ability to plan for and provide assistance to special needs citizens. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES • Enhance the Office's relationship with the National Weather Service Office in Fort Worth to coordinate severe weather monitonng and response activities. • Recertify the City and Tarrant County as a Storm Ready Community • Provide weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive (CBRNE) training and exercises to prepare local organizations for emergency and disaster situation response and recovery • Implement National Incident Management System (NIMS). 175 Fort Worth Fire Fighters in Action Firefighters keep hand lines engaged during a commercial building fire (Source. Fire Department, 2009.) Warehouse fire seen from above at the Tarrant County College Fire Training Center (Source. Fire Department, 2009.) Chapter 17 Fire and Emergency Services • Participate in the Tarrant County Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) to enhance plannmg for chemical emergencies. • Encourage qualified citizens to register in the Special Needs Assistance Program (SNAP) in order to improve our planning ability in the event of a community disaster • Coordinate the expenditure of Homeland Security grant funds for the training and equipment necessary to combat and respond to CBRNE and WMD terrorism events. • Improve community warning systems by expanding the outdoor warning system and accessing telephone ring -down systems, which automatically send pre-recorded alerts to citizens and businesses via land -line telephones within an area of heightened risk. • Strengthen requirements for NOAA weather radio in the Fire Code for commercial and rental properties. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS • Early Warning Alert for all types of disasters is provided through OEM, Weather Spotters Net, and the Medical Operation Center during mass -casualty incidents through outdoor warning sirens, email notifications, and telephone ring -down systems. • Association Networks are continuously built by the Office of Emergency Management with groups, organizations, agencies, and individuals at the local, state, and federal levels. These associations help to establish the resources needed in times of disaster • Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) is a federal innitiative to coordinate several different local grants aimed at improving our ability to prepare for and respond to a terrorist incident. The HSGP funds the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI), Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS), and other local programs. This is a program directly supporting local capabilities to manage all -hazards, mass -casualty incidents and terrorist strikes until significant external resources arrive by systematically enhancing and integrating first -responders, medical providers, emergency management, business, and volunteers. • Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) is a federal requirement to prepare first responders, develop emergency plans, and educate the community on the threats of hazardous matenals via transportation routes or fixed facilities. The LEPC is also required to maintain records of hazardous material accidents and storage of reportable quantities of hazardous chemicals. Chapter 17 Fire and Emergency Services 176 Emergency Operations Center The Emergency Operation Center renovations are scheduled for completion in 2010 (Source: Emergency Operation Center, 2009.) • • • • • • • • I I • • • • • • • S • • • • • • ••.•s•.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••-• CHAPTER 18: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Protecting and enhancing environmental quality is a critical livability issue. How the City chooses to grow could have significant impacts on the quality and sustainability of our environment. This chapter is intended to consolidate the many environmental concerns facing the City, and to identify the management practices that will most effectively address these issues. The topics covered in this chapter include solid waste; air quality; energy conservation, water quality and water supply; wastewater; storm water quality and quantity (drainage), endangered species; sustainable development; and natural habitats. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS To effectively plan for the future, the City must know its current status. By assessing current environmental conditions, a baseline can be established against which the importance and impact of future decisions can be measured. Solid Waste In FY2009, the City of Fort Worth collected over 289,700 tons of residential garbage, recycling, brush and bulky waste from an average of 193,400 households. The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) projects that the total municipal waste stream for Fort Worth (which includes single family residential, multi -family residential, and commercial waste projections) will be 1 1 million tons by the year 2020 NCTCOG also estimates that approximately 33 percent of the city's waste is generated by single family residences while the remaining 67 percent is produced by a combination of multifamily residential and commercial and industrial uses. Waste Management, a private collection company under contract with the City, collects the residential waste from Fort Worth single-family households. Several private collection firms under a grant of privilege agreement issued by the City collect waste produced by multifamily complexes and commercial and industrial activities. Once collected, the waste is transported to a landfill for disposal, through a transfer station and then to a landfill, or to a matenal recovery facility to be processed for recycling. Significant changes to the City's residential solid waste program took effect in the spring and summer of 2003 The program provided to residential customers combines weekly variable -rate garbage collection in carts, weekly smgle-stream recycling collection in carts, weekly yard waste collection in paper yard waste bags and carts, and monthly bulky waste collection. The City's goals for the new solid waste contracts are to make the city cleaner and more attractive, provide residents with efficient, cost-effective service, and increase Fort Worth's recycling/diversion rate. r IESI-Co ion er Weatherford'Landfill `Tarrant Hood Erath' Municipal Landfills Waste Mangement, kyli a Landtill�( — Ellis Johns. IESI Corporation `rkey Creek Landfill Allied Waste Services! Hill ! Rasta Landfill IESI Corporation Fort Worth C,& D N Six landfills were used for the disposal of solid waste generated within Fort Worth during 2009 These were the City's Southeast Landfill, the IESI Cor- poration Fort Worth C&D Landfill, the City of Arlington's Arlington Landfill, the Waste Management Skyline Landfill in Dallas County, the Allied Waste Services Itasca Landfill in Hill County and the IESI Weatherford Landfill in Parker County Waste going to these last three landfills was transloaded at the transfer stations indicated on the map above (Source: Environmental Man- agement Department, 2009.) 177 Chapter 18: Environmental Quality Prior to the start of the residential solid waste collection program, the residential recycle diversion rate varied from 5 percent to 8 percent of the waste stream. Currently, approximately 23 percent of residential solid waste is diverted from landfill disposal by the Fort Worth program. This includes both matenal collected as single -stream recycling and yard waste. Most of the waste produced in Fort Worth is delivered to landfills. Seven landfills currently handle the bulk of the city's waste. The Southeast Landfill, which is owned by the City but operated by a private contractor, receives the residential waste. Yard waste and non-putrescible bulk wastes collected through the residential program are either processed for mulch or disposed at the privately owned Fort Worth Construction and Demolition (C&D) Landfill. Finally the remaining wastes from multifamily complexes as well as commercial and industrial activities are disposed of in the Arlington Landfill or in privately -owned Skyline, Turkey Creek, Itasca Gardens, and Weatherford Landfills. Fort Worth operates three free Citizens Convenience Stations. Known as drop-off stations, these facilities offer a free alternative to residents of Fort Worth for the disposal of additional garbage, recycling, brush and yard trimmings, bulky items, and electronics. These three sites are located at 2400 Brennan Avenue, 5-150 Martin Luther King Jr Freeway and, since January 2008, at 6260 Old Hemphill Rd. During fiscal year 2008, these facilities received over 21,550 tons of waste materials which was subsequently transported to a landfill for disposal or diverted to recycling facilities. Since December 1997, the Environmental Management Department has operated a year-round regional household hazardous waste collection facility, the Environmental Collection Center, in support of its Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit. The facility provides service to 36 municipalities, as well as unincorporated areas of Tarrant County, the Tarrant Regional Water District, and the Upper Trinity Regional Water District. Mobile collection units travel to collect household hazardous waste at neighborhood locations in Fort Worth, as well as in some serviced cities. In FY2009, the Environmental Collection Center (ECC) collected and disposed of or recycled over 2,522,272 pounds of household hazardous waste from over 25,000 households. This is waste that otherwise might have ended up in the City's landfills or polluted its waterways. Air Quality Air pollution is a problem facing most major areas. In the Metroplex, the primary form of air pollution is ground level ozone. The American Lung Association (ALA) State of the Air 2008 Report ranked Dallas/Fort Worth as the 7th most ozone - polluted metropolitan area in the country, and Tarrant County as the 10th most ozone - polluted county It was the seventh consecutive year that the ALA gave the region a grade of "F" for ozone air quality Ozone is a colorless, odorless gas that is present both in the upper atmosphere and at ground level. The ozone that is present in the upper atmosphere protects the earth Chapter 18: Environmental Quality 178 Sources of Solid Waste Single Family Residences, 33% Comercial, Industrial, and Multifamily, 67% Commercial and industrial uses create a higher percentage of waste than single family uses (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009.) DFW NONATTAINMENT AREA 2009 Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) Emission Inventory Total Mobile Sources 73% Source Category Estimates Non -road Mobile 107 tpd (27%) Total NOx = 396 Tons Per Day (tpd) Soma: Texas Commission on Envfronmenta7 Quality Ground level ozone is formed when pollutants react chemically with sunlight. In the Dallas -Fort Worth area, the largest contributors of the pollutants are cars and trucks. (Source. North Central Texas Council of Gov- ernments, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • • • • •' • •'. • •' • • • • • • • • • I ••••••••••••••••`••••••••••••••6-• from harmful ultraviolet radiation. Ozone that is present at ground level is the chief component of smog. Ground level ozone is formed when pollutants react chemically in the presence of sunlight. Ground level ozone can affect health in a number of ways, including irritation of the respiratory system, reduction of lung function, aggravation of asthma, and inflammation or damage to the lining of the lungs. In addition to causing health problems by damaging lungs, ground -level ozone is responsible for one to two billion dollars in reduced crop production in the United States each year, and hastens the deterioration of electronic devices and materials such as rubber, plastics, outdoor paints, photographic papers, and fabrics. There are two major pollutants that cause the formation of ground level ozone: volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). Estimates projected from implementation of federal, state and local emission reduction initiatives show that in North Central Texas in 2009, eleven percent of these pollutants came from area sources (including landfills, wild fires, unpaved roads, solvent use, and product storage), fifteen percent of these pollutants came from point sources (industrial and non -industrial stationary equipment or processes); 27 percent from non -road mobile sources (including aircraft, trains, lawn and garden equipment, and construction equipment); and 46 percent from on -road sources (vehicles). In 1998, the U S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classified the counties of Collin, Dallas, Denton and Tarrant as an area of serious non -attainment under the federal one -hour ozone standard. As part of that designation, pollution levels in the area were not to exceed the federal one -hour ozone standard more than three days during any three-year monitoring period. EPA also required the four -county area to prepare and implement a State Implementation Plan (SIP), which included initiatives to help reduce ozone -forming emissions in the future. In the monitoring period from 1997 to 1999, the region exceeded the federal one -hour standard 26 times, which could have caused the EPA to downgrade the region to severe non -attainment. However, on April 15, 2004, EPA made its final designation for an eight -hour ozone non -attainment area comprising Collin, Dallas, Denton, Tarrant, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall counties. The nine -county designation became effective on June 15, 2004 EPA created the eight -hour ozone standard in July 1997, based on mformation demonstrating that the one -hour standard was inadequate for protecting public health. Ozone can affect human health at lower levels, and over longer exposure times than one hour The eight -hour standard is much more difficult to attain. Under the one -hour standard, any hourly average of 125 ppb or higher of ozone at any regional air monitor is an exceedance. Under the eight -hour standard, any eight -hour average of 85 ppb or higher of ozone is an exceedance. In 2006, the nine -county region exceeded the eight -hour standard 31 times compared to 44 times in 2005 With the eight -hour designation, the Dallas -Fort Worth (DFW) region's classification level changed from serious to moderate. The Clean Air Act specifies that the maximum period for attainment for a moderate area is six years from the effective date of designation, which gives the DFW region an attainment date of June 15, 2010 The region's classification had been high because of the failure to meet the one -hour standard in the past. The DFW region is now classified at a lower level DFW NONATTAINMENT AREA Historical Trend for 8-Hour Ozone Standard 105 100 - 95 • 90 Current Standard' < 85 ppb 85 102 75 -'7/7 /, 70 0 _ 100 100 EPA Proposed Standard (between 70 $. 75 ppb) 65 1998- 1999- 2000- 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007" Consecutivee 3-Yeer Periods According to the US EPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards, attain- ment is reached when, at each monitor, the three-year average of the an- nual fourth -highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than 85 ppb (Source. NCTCOG, 2009.) Care for Cowtown Air Care for Cowtown Air is a program administered by the City of Fort Worth Environmental Management Department. The program helps to improve air quality by offering incentives to City employees who participate in ozone reducing activities during the ozone season, May through October Ozone reducing activities include bringing a lunch to work, walking to lunch, riding a bus, a bike, or carpooling to work, telecommuting, or using flex -time (Source: Environmental Management Department, 2009.) 179 Chapter 18. Environmental Quality a based on the difference between the one -hour and eight -hour standard definitions and also on eight -hour ozone design values. In 2007, the North Central Texas Council of Governments' (NCTCOG) Regional Transportation Council adopted Mobility 2030, the Metropolitan Transportation Plan. This plan focuses on improving transportation conditions through sustainable initiatives. Further, it is committed to ensuring that the region's transportation efforts are consistent with its air quality objectives by supporting local initiatives for town centers, mixed use growth centers, transit -oriented development, infill/brownfield development, and pedestnan-oriented streetscape projects. It has objectives to complement rail investments with investments in park -and -ride, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and to reduce the growth m vehicle miles traveled per person. Implementation of Mobility 2030 could significantly reduce VOC and NOx emissions in the region. More information on traffic congestion and transportation improvements can be found in Chapter 11 Transportation. The development of pedestrian and transit -oriented mixed -use growth centers described in Chapter 4 Land Use is consistent with Mobility 2030 Resource Conservation Since 1970, Texas has nearly doubled both its population and its annual energy consumption. Texas ranks second in population, behind California, but according to the U S Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, in 2001 Texas ranked first among states m energy consumption. Texans used 12.029 quadrillion Btu (Quads) or 12.5 percent of all U.S energy consumption; more energy than number 2 consumer California and number 3 consumer Florida combined. Texas ranked first in consumption of electricity, petroleum, and natural gas, and second in consumption of coal. Although Texas' total annual energy consumption per capita has dropped from its 1980 peak of 636.6 million British thermal units (M-Btu) to 579 01M-Btu in 2000, residential consumption has shown a steady rise. In 1960, each Texan was using 38.32M-Btu m their homes annually, but by 2000 that usage had nearly doubled to 74.59M-Btu annually By contrast, California's per capita residential energy usage in 2000 was 43.02M-Btu. Most electricity is still generated using fossil fuels (coal and natural gas), and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has identified the electric industry as a major stationary source of air pollution m the state, particularly of nitrogen oxides (NOx). NOx contributes to the formation of ground -level ozone (smog). As described in the section above on Air Quality, the EPA classifies the Dallas -Fort Worth region as a moderate ozone non -attainment area. Ground -level ozone causes health problems by damaging lungs, is responsible for one- to two - billion dollars in reduced crop production in the United States each year, and hastens the deterioration of electronic devices and materials such as rubber, plastic, paints, paper, and fabrics. A phenomenon called the "urban heat island effect" is another contributing factor to the formation of ground -level ozone and the high level of electricity consumption. In the summer, urbanized areas can be up to 10° F warmer than the surrounding Chapter 18: Environmental Quality 180 0 0 • a f e*. AirCheck So we can breathe it. Not see it. An important component of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) is AirCheck Texas, the Motor Vehicle Emission Inspection and Maintenance Program that went into effect on May 1, 2002, in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant counties. (Source: Environmental Management Department, 2009.) An "Air Pollution Watch" will be issued for a day predicted to be a public health risk. TCEQ issues an "Air Pollution Warning" if air pollution actually reaches unhealthy levels based on monitor readings. Ozone levels are represented by various colors in the warnings to easily convey the severity of air pollution For example, purple indicates a very unhealthy level of ozone, while orange indicates that levels are unhealthy for sensitive groups. (Source: Environmental Management Department, 2009 ) a a I a • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• countryside. The displacement of trees and shrubs by roadways, parking lots, and buildings eliminates the cooling effects of shade and evapotranspiration. Evapotranspiration occurs when plants secrete or transpire water through their leaves. The water draws heat as it evaporates, cooling the air in the process. According to the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, a single, mature, and properly watered tree with a crown of 30 feet can evapotranspire up to 40 gallons of water in a day, removing a heat equivalent to that produced in four hours by a small electric space heater Although plants cool the air, buildings and roads often increase ambient air temperature. Typical building and paving materials are quite efficient at absorbing solar radiation rather than reflecting it back into the atmosphere, causing both surface and ambient temperature to rise, leading to increased ozone formation. The darker the material is, the greater these increases in temperature. In the sun, black surfaces can become up to 70°F hotter than the most reflective white surfaces. If the surface is a roof, the absorbed heat also increases the structure's indoor temperature, increasing the demand for electricity to cool the structure to a comfortable level. The resulting trend increases demand on power plants, increasing emissions of NOx and leading to increased ozone levels. Ultimately, heat islands reduce a city's livability by decreasing urban ventilation and mcreasmg the risk of heat -related illness. Urban heat islands have some far-reaching effects as well. NASA scientists at the Goddard Space Flight Center have recently confirmed that urban heat islands cause destabilization of the atmosphere, leading to greatly increased rainfall in areas downwind of large cities. The City's conservation initiatives work to reduce these urban heat island effects and improve our overall environmental quality In 2001, the Texas Legislature adopted energy efficiency performance standards to encourage the construction of more energy efficient buildings. The Legislature stated that an effective building energy code is essential to "reducing the air pollutant emissions that are affecting the health of residents of this state; moderating future peak electric power demand, assuring the reliability of the electrical power grid; and controlling energy costs for residents and businesses in this state." To achieve energy efficiency in the residential, commercial and industrial construction sectors, the pertinent chapters of the International Residential Code and the International Energy Conservation Code, as they existed m May 2001, were adopted by the Legislature. Municipalities are mandated to administer and enforce these codes within their jurisdictions. The City adopted these codes, with amendments, in December 2001, as the Fort Worth Energy Code, and charged the City's Building Official with their enforcement. Another initiative adopted by the Legislature is known as Texas Senate Bill 5 (SB5), a.k.a. the Texas Emission Reduction Plan (TERP). SB5 was enacted to assist the State in complying with the Federal Clean Air Act. The bill contains new energy efficiency measures that are designed to decrease energy consumption. These energy efficiency measures are intended to assist in reducing air emissions from electncity generation plants. SB5 adds Chapter 388 to the Texas Health and Safety Code. Urban Heat Island Strategies Green roof on Omni Hotel in Fort Worth. Green roof on Atlanta City Hall Green roof on Hamilton Apartments, owned by the Housing Authority of Portland, Oregon. In Downtown Fort Worth, the recently -constructed Omni Hotel has a green roof in three areas totaling more than one acre Drainage runs under all the planting beds. There is a drain mat that all the soils drain into, which then runs to area drains hidden under the soil and pavers. The City of Atlanta installed a green roof on its City Hall building in December 2003. The 3,000 square foot project has approximately 2,000 square feet of vegetated area and 1,000 square feet of pavers. From 1988 to 1998 the city lost 190,000 acres of tree cover due to development, and downtown Atlanta is now often 10 degrees warmer than outlying areas. The city is studying the use of green roofs as a way to counteract the urban heat island effect. The City of Portland, Oregon, officially recognizes the use of green roofs to reduce the effect of storm water runoff on local waterways. City grants have helped fund 14 green roofs in Portland, including office buildings and apartments. The City of Fort Worth will explore similar strategies to reduce energy consumption at municipal facilities. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009) 181 Chapter 18: Environmental Quality These provisions include, but are not limited to the following: • Efficiency Measures — That political subdivisions in non -attainment areas implement energy efficiency measures that are deemed cost-effective. • Electricity Consumption Goal — That political subdivisions in non -attainment areas establish a goal to reduce their electncity consumption by five -percent each year for a five-year period beginning in January 2002, as measured against the baseline year of 2001 • Annual Reporting — That political subdivisions in non -attainment areas annually report to the State their efforts and progress at meeting the requirements under Section 388.005 The City currently implements cost-effective energy efficiency measures and annually reports its progress to the State Energy Conservation Office (SECO), as required, in support of the City's commitment to the stated electricity consumption goal. To that end, the City has made significant progress towards TERP goals. The City's Conservation Specialist works from within the Department of Transportation & Public Works' (TPW's) Facilities Management Group with all City Departments to develop, implement, track, and report on the effectiveness of resource conservation initiatives. The City of Fort Worth's population grew by approximately 3.9 percent annually from 534,694 in 2000 to 720,250 in 2009 If recent growth trends continue, Fort Worth's population could approach one million by 2030 Continuing population and economic growth in the Dallas -Fort Worth region will place increasing demands on environmental resources, in turn impacting City air quality Strong economic growth typically acts to compromise environmental quality To mitigate the effects of this trend, all sectors — residential, commercial, and industrial — need to find ways to reduce energy and water consumption. Water Oualitv and Sunnly The Water Department provides retail water service to the citizens and businesses of Fort Worth. In 2008, there were 215,746 retail water accounts. The City also provides wholesale water service to 29 customers, which are generally neighboring municipalities or water supply entities located adjacent to Fort Worth. Water usage by wholesale customers generally accounts for approximately 30% of total water usage. In 2005, the City completed the Water Master Plan, which developed a plan to meet retail and wholesale supply and distribution needs through 2025 Fort Worth's raw water supply is provided by the Tarrant Regional Water District (TRWD) under a long-term contract, subject to availability and capacity of the TRWD system. Water sources include the West Fork of the Trinity River (Lake Worth, Eagle Mountain Lake and Lake Bridgeport), the Clear Fork of the Trinity River (through releases from Lake Benbrook), Richland Chambers Reservoir, and Cedar Creek Reservoir Presently, TRWD has an adequate raw water supply for Fort Worth beyond the horizon of 2020, assuming identified capital projects, such as the Cedar Creek wetlands project, are constructed. The total current water treatment capability of the Fort Worth water system is approximately 485 million gallons per Chapter 18. Environmental Quality 182 Water Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities 4 0 Mb Denton Creek Regional`-- ,r r-i , 14, • Existing Wastewater Treatment Plant A Existing Water Treatment Plant I Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant t3 Proposed Water Treatment Plant 10 Miles The City of Fort Worth uses four plants to treat raw water to meet federal and state drinking water standards before it is delivered into the distribu- tion system. The majority of wastewater generated within Fort Worth is treated at the Village Creek wastewater treatment plant, with the remain- der treated at Denton Creek and Central Regional Wastewater Treatment Plants. (Source: Environmental Management Department, 2009.) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• day (MGD). The historical peak day demand, which occurred in 2006, was 350 MGD The projected average -day demand for the year 2020 is 310 MGD, with the maximum -day demand for the year 2020 presently projected to be 629 MGD There are currently four Fort Worth potable water treatment facilities: North Holly, South Holly, Rolling Hills, and Eagle Mountain Water Treatment Plants. In 2003, the City completed upgrades to the North and South Holly and Rolling Hills water treatment plants, which provided additional capacity and improved water quality In addition, the City has recently completed the expansion of the Eagle Mountain Water Treatment Plant, which mcreased the total capacity from 70 MGD to 105 MGD Construction of a fifth plant, known as the Westside water treatment plant, is scheduled for completion in 2010 The Water Department has invested significant capital to incorporate ozone at Eagle Mountain and Rolling Hills Water treatment Plants, with North and South Holly being the only plants not using ozone for primary disinfection and taste and odor control. To address taste and odor control at North and South Holly, it is anticipated that a project to install ozone at the Holly Water Treatment Plants will be initiated, with design expected in the near future. The City has also taken steps to help ensure the security of Fort Worth's water supply by completing a vulnerability assessment study in 2003 and constructing numerous security related projects identified within the vulnerability assessment. In addition to providing potable water to citizens and businesses, the City provides a system for wastewater collection and treatment. In 1999, the City completed a Wastewater Master Plan to identify the needs of the city as it continues to grow The City is in the process of updating the 1999 Wastewater System Master Plan. The updated Wastewater Master Plan is expected to be completed in 2011 Currently, the City provides service to 208,385 wastewater accounts generally within the city limits. The City also provides wholesale service to 23 wastewater customers outside city limits. Fort Worth uses three major wastewater treatment plants, which provide 98 percent of the wastewater service: • Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant, owned by the City of Fort Worth. • Denton Creek Regional Wastewater System, operated by the Trinity River Authority, TRA. • Central Regional Wastewater System, operated by the TRA. Wastewater is treated by these plants to meet stringent water quality standards contained in federal and state permits, and then discharged to the Trinity River and its tributanes. In 2003, the City completed rehabilitation and capacity improvement projects in the wastewater collection system to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows and backups. In addition, the feasibility of a satellite wastewater treatment plant on the west side of Fort Worth is being evaluated This plant would treat future flows from Walsh Ranch and other Westside developments, as well as provide a source of reclaimed water for irrigation. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has taken a stronger stance on Watershed Boundaries '30 I 10 5 0 10 Miles 1 Grapevine Lake Dam 2. Unnamed 3. East of Eagle Mountain Lake 4 Big Fossil Creek 5. Upper Big Bear 6. Lake Worth Dam 7 Marine Creek 8. Upper Little Fossil Creek 9. Walker Branch 10. West Fork Above Mountain Creek 11 Lower Big Bear 12. Mary's Creek 13. King's Branch 14 West Fork Above Clear Fork 15. West Fork Above Sycamore Creek 16. Dry Branch 17 Lower Little Fossil Creek 18. West Fork Above Fossil Creek 19. Clear Fork Above Trinity River 20. Sycamore Tributary 21 Lower Sycamore Creek 22. Lake Arlington Dam 23. Lower Village Creek 24 Unnamed 25. Unnamed 26. Upper Sycamore Creek 27 Middle Village Creek 28. Unnamed 30. Upper Village Creek 31 Walnut Creek 39. Deer Creek It is important to consider watershed boundaries when examining runoff patterns and issues because water does not flow according to political boundaries; what happens in one part of the region can affect other areas downstream. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 183 Chapter 18. Environmental Quality sanitary sewer overflows and will be fining utilities that, in its determination, are not responding to the infrastructure needs of their collection system. To promote better water quality for our environment, the City plans to aggressively reduce existing sanitary sewer overflows by committing in excess of $200 million over ten years. The City is implementing more sustainable practices at the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant, including generating electnc power on -site for plant operations, using methane gas byproducts as fuel, updating building systems and processes to be more energy efficient, and reclaiming treated wastewater for reuse. The Water Department has developed an $85 million capital plan to be implemented over the next 15 years to develop a water reuse program for the area. Water reuse, developed in response to depleting water resources, uses wastewater that has been treated to an acceptable standard for non -domestic use, such as irrigation of golf courses, cemeteries, playing fields, parks, and nonresidential landscaped areas. Storm Water Manaeement A problem facing many urbanized areas is the effect of storm water runoff in transporting nonpoint source pollution. Nonpoint source pollution is created when water runs over land and picks up sediment, debris, and other pollutants along the way, eventually depositing this material into lakes, rivers, and streams. Because urbanized areas have a high percentage of impervious surfaces, water has fewer places to infiltrate and it is quickly channeled into water bodies, along with the pollutants it picks up. In December 1996, the City was issued a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit by the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to discharge from the City's municipal separate storm water sewer system into waters of the United States. This permit was renewed in 2006 by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as a Texas Pollution Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) permit. A major provision of this permit was the minimization of nonpoint source pollution in areas of new development and significant redevelopment, and the City developed planning procedures to address these issues. In addition to preventing pollutants from entering storm water runoff, the City is concerned with improving existing drainage and preventing future flooding and erosion associated with development. Storm water runoff is not subject to man-made boundaries like neighborhoods, council districts, or sectors. What happens in one part of the city can affect other areas downstream. For this reason, issues pertaimng to storm water and drainage must be addressed on a watershed basis. This is particularly important since Fort Worth has grown substantially within the last 20 years and continued growth is expected over the next 20 years. In November 2002, 55 local governments kicked off a regional effort to more effectively manage storm water impacts through the integrated Storm Water Management (iSWM) program. The iSWM initiative, coordinated by NCTCOG, will help the region achieve environmental goals, foster partnerships with state & federal agencies, and provide guidelmes for comprehensive storm water management. The iSWM design manual was released by NCTCOG m January 2006 In March 2006, the City of Fort Worth adopted the iSWM manual, together with a Local Critena Chapter 18: Environmental Quality 184 Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant The City is implementing more sustainable practices at the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant, including reclaiming treated wastewater for reuse, generating electric power on -site for plant operations using meth- ane gas byproducts as fuel, and updating building systems and proc- esses to be more energy efficient. (Source. Water Department, 2009.) ••.0••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• i • i i r . • . • . e . . , + . . . . • . . . r . • . . e .. • section, as the 2006 Fort Worth Storm Water Management Design Manual. This manual provides the most current storm water management techniques that are applicable to site planning and construction. Extensive future capital improvement projects, however, will be required to bring the numerous existing undersized storm drain systems and open channels up to current standards. To upgrade these deficient drainage systems, the Fort Worth City Council adopted a Storm Water Utility in 2006 This utility collects and manages funds to reconstruct and upgrade the City's drainage systems, and to provide for operation and maintenance of the storm water system, including storm drains and drainage channels Major flooding in Tarrant County generally occurs as a result of heavy rainfall from frontal type storms, which are most frequent in the spring and summer months. Man- made reservoirs and levees have significantly altered flood flows. The City of Fort Worth participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and regulates development in floodplain areas in the city and other areas under its jurisdiction and control. The City has amended its Floodplain Ordmance to comply with the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) new maps, standards, procedures, policies, and guidelines. However, most structure flooding in Fort Worth occurs along storm drain lines and minor streams which are not regulated by FEMA or the NFIP Endangered Species and Natural Habitat In Tarrant County, there are three endangered or threatened species of animals. the Interior Least Tern, the Bald Eagle, and the Whooping Crane. The Least Tern can be found in habitats along the Trinity River, which has broad sandbars and barren shoreline. The Least Tern has declined in population due to the construction of reservoirs and channelization projects that exacerbate habitat flooding problems, water pollution, and increased vegetative growth in habitat areas. The Bald Eagle has been documented in recent years at Lake Worth, and has reportedly been seen near Lake Benbrook. The eagles like areas near river systems or large water bodies. They use tall trees located close to marshes or lakes to nest. In 1995, due to an increase in population, their classification was reduced from endangered to threatened. They are currently considered neither endangered or threatened due to a further increase in population. The Whooping Crane has historically used the Dallas -Fort Worth area as part of its regular migratory route. Recently, there has only been one sighting in Tarrant County These large birds frequent marsh areas, river bottoms, and prairie and croplands —areas away from development that have plenty of vegetation and water According to the U S. Fish and Wildlife Service, they are currently threatened by the destruction of wintering and breeding habitats, entanglement in human structures like power lines and fences, and poaching. In addition to the three bird species, two plants warrant mentioning. These are the False Auriculate Foxglove and the Comanche Peak Prairie -Clover The False Auriculate Foxglove is listed on the State historical list of plants for this area, but has not been seen since the turn of the last century in Tarrant County It is listed because the proper habitat exists here and is found in some contiguous states. The Comanche 185 Storm Water Management The iSWM (Integrated Storm Water Management) program is coordinated by the North Central Texas Council of Governments. The program is de- signed to help the region achieve environmental goals, foster partnerships with state and federal agencies, and provide guidelines for comprehensive storm water management. (Source. North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009.) Keep Fort Worth Beautiful Program i%s�%orth Boo er I 00,1100. The Keep Fort Worth Beautiful Program educates citizens on methods to reduce the amount of solid waste disposal (Source: Environmental Management Department, 2009.) Chapter 18: Environmental Quality Peak Prairie Clover is found in Parker and Wise counties. The proper habitat is found in Tarrant County, but only 6-20 populations are estimated statewide. Within the greater Fort Worth area, there are four primary north central Texas ecosystems. the Grand Prairie, Western Crosstimbers, Eastern Crosstimbers, and the Trinity River Bottomland. The Grand Prairie typically consists of clay -based limestone soils. The soil cover can range from very thin, rocky, and dry on hilltops, to thicker covers on slope and bottom areas. The majority of the vegetation in this area is typically tall and mid grasses, with dispersed populations of wildflowers. Eastern and Western Crosstimbers are distinguished by their sandy or clay soil structures. The soil layer in these ecosystems is usually deeper and has more water - bearing potential than that of the Grand Prairie. Vegetation in these areas includes post oak, blackjack oak, tall and mid grasses, with small amounts of wildflowers. The Trinity River Bottomland is characterized by deep clay soils. Vegetation includes tall and mid grasses and a variety of flood plain trees, such as pecan, American elm, sugar hackberry, green ash, and cottonwood. Brownfields The Brownfields Economic Redevelopment Program is a component of the City's broader sustainable development initiatives. Brownfields are "real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant." Such contaminants typically are remnants of previous industrial uses of otherwise redevelopable land. The mission of the program is to encourage the redevelopment of economically distressed areas in Fort Worth through the integration of environmental assessment, remediation, and education. The program encompasses the entire city, but targets City Council Districts 2, 5, and 8. These districts have the highest minority populations in the city and are also the most economically disadvantaged. An inventory of Fort Worth's potential brownfield sites now tops 340 properties. Approximately 72 percent of the identified sites are located in the targeted council districts. The vast majority of the sites in the inventory are a fraction of an acre in size, further complicating their redevelopment potential. The objectives of the Brownfields redevelopment program include reducing perceived and actual environmental problems associated with living and working in proximity to contaminated properties, reducing crime associated with abandoned buildings, increasing public awareness of issues associated with brownfields, and securing community involvement in remediation and redevelopment. The Fort Worth Brownfields program began as a pilot in 1999 with a $200,000 U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assessment grant. A supplemental grant of $200,000 was received two years later In June 2004, the City of Fort Worth was selected by EPA to receive a new $400,000 brownfields assessment grant. The 2004 grant is being used to perform Phase I and II site assessments, and to prepare cleanup plans for hazardous substances and petroleum contamination. Fort Worth also has a $1 million brownfields cleanup revolving loan fund from the EPA, to be used to provide low interest loans for brownfields cleanup Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilot The Evans and Rosedale neighborhood is a brownfields success in the making. The intersection of Evans and Pulaski is now home to a beautiful public plaza celebrat- ing African -American heritage in Fort Worth Lead - contaminated soil was removed from the site, making it available for redevelopment. (Source: Environmental Manage- ment Department, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • • • • S 110) • • I • • a • • Chapter 18. Environmental Quality 186 • • • ® • • • • • • • ••• • • • ••• • ••••• • 0 0 0 0 Sustainable Development In recent years, a new approach to environmental planning has emerged — sustainable development. Sustainable development meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This approach promotes development characterized by more efficient resource and energy consumption, and reduced negative environmental impacts. As population increases and land and resources become more scarce and expensive, it becomes ever more important to consider the long-term ramifications of growth. Cities like Chicago, Austin, Baltimore, and Portland, Oregon have programs in place to address these issues. Some include incentives to use natural vegetation to reduce water consumption, using more energy -efficient building materials to lower the demand on power sources, and using construction materials that are reusable or created from recycled material. In 2007, the Sustainability and Green Building Task Force was formed to identify ways to promote sustainable and green development practices to improve quality of life for future generations. The task force was reconstituted in 2009 as the Sustainable Development Task Force to assist in preparing a sustainable development action plan for Fort Worth with goals and objectives that will be included in the Comprehensive Plan when approved by the City Council. The final report is expected to be complete in 2010 In November 2008, a Lake Worth Vision Workshop was organized by the City as an opportunity for stakeholders to express their ideas and suggestions for the future of Lake Worth and its surrounding area. The workshop was conducted by a five - member consultant panel with expertise in master planning, waterfront development, sustainable design, watershed management, and conservation planning. The panel's recommendations promote sustainable development practices throughout the Lake Worth watershed, including conservation of riparian buffers, protection of floodplains and open space, and development of mixed -use neighborhoods and town centers. The Lake Worth Vision Plan is expected to be complete in 2010 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Mayor and City Council adopted the following strategic goals related to environmental quality. 1) create and maintain a clean, attractive city, 2) improve mobility and air quality, and 3) promote orderly and sustainable development. The following goals and objectives help achieve the City Council's broader strategic goals while addressing current and future needs. Solid Waste Make Fort Worth cleaner and more attractive by enhancing solid waste services through a new collection program and provider contract implemented in spring 2003 • Through curbside recycling, divert at least 21 percent of waste from landfills in 2010 Air Oualitv Improve Fort Worth's and the region's air quality through reduction of pollutants. • Work in cooperation with TCEQ, NCTCOG, and other cities in the Dallas -Fort Lake Worth Vision Plan � LAKE WORTH VISION PLAN 2010 Prepared by the City of Fort Worth Planning and Development Department The City is preparing a Lake Worth Vision Plan The Plan will promote sus- tainable development practices throughout the Lake Worth watershed, includ- ing conservation of riparian buffers, protection of floodplains and open space, and development of mixed -use neighborhoods and town centers. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 187 Chapter 18: Environmental Quality Worth Metroplex to bring the region into attainment for ozone by June 15, 2010 • Comply with EPA mandates for the next monitoring period. • Implement components of the Mobility and Air Quality Plan in 2010 Resource Conservation Reduce electricity consumption. • Reduce electricity consumption at City facilities by five percent per year through 2012. Municipal Water Quality. Water Supply. and Wastewater Maintain a high level of water quality for current usage, and accommodate future development. • Create new reservoirs along the Sulfur River to accommodate future growth. Storm Water Management Maintain or improve current water quality by reducing the nonpoint source pollutant load entering creeks, reservoirs, and rivers from new development and redevelopment. • Regularly update policies and procedures to control water pollution caused by storm water runoff in order to comply with Fort Worth's Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) storm water permit. • Reduce flooding through storm water system maintenance activities and.'n dramage infrastructure capital improvements. The use of alternative fuels, such as propane, is one way the • By 2012, complete a detailed mventory of existing drainage structures in Fort City of Fort Worth is helping to reduce air pollution in the Dallas - Worth. Fort Worth Metroplex. (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Use of Alternative Fuels Brownfields Redevelop abandoned industrial and commercial sites, or brownfields, to help reuse land in the central city • Continue identification of potential brownfields redevelopment candidates, focusing on the central city • By the end of 2010, perform environmental site assessments of selected project sites as grant funding is available, and encourage redevelopment of those sites. • Continue developing Fort Worth's program — the demolition of regulated structures — to create a more economical way for local governments to demolish substandard nuisance structures contaming asbestos, while protecting the environment and the public health. Maintain contact with the EPA and continue monitoring EPA's progress with testing their own alternative methods. Sustainable Development Improve sustainability of public and pnvate development activities within Fort Worth and the Metroplex. • Prepare a Sustainabihty Action Plan in 2010 • Complete and adopt the Lake Worth Vision Plan 2010 POLICIES AND STRATEGIES The following policies and strategies will enable the City to achieve its environmental quality goals and objectives. Chapter 18. Environmental Quality 188 Curbside Recycling Program Fort Worth's curbside recycling program prevented 22 percent of waste from going to landfills during 2009 (Source. Environmental Management Department, 2009.) 116•00011••••••••4110000400000004,••••• • • • • • • • • i • Ci • • • • • • • • • • • Solid Waste Policy • Pursue methods to minimize wastes, reduce recycling contaminates, re -use or recycle wastes, and assure long term disposal capacity Solid Waste Strategies • Allow a broad range of approved materials for recycling. • Promote such programs as "Don't Bag It" and backyard composting. • Provide effective educational opportunities to inform citizens on how to better manage waste. • Foster programs that facilitate recycling at commercial entities and multifamily complexes. Air Oualitv Policies • Encourage regional public transportation by working with other cities in the Metroplex to create efficient commuter rail, modem streetcar, light rail, bus service, and other types of mass transit. • Encourage development that reduces daily vehicle miles traveled for commuters through the creation of mixed -use growth centers. • Encourage the development of industries with minimal air emissions, which will allow continued economic growth while the Metroplex is under strict federal emissions standards. • Encourage development practices that help reduce the higher temperatures in urban areas that speed ozone formation (the urban heat island effect), such as planting shade trees and using appropriate highly reflective (high albedo) paving surfaces and roofing materials. Consider using City projects to demonstrate the effectiveness of these development practices. Air Oualitv Strategies • Reduce automobile emissions by using alternative -fueled and hybrid City vehicles, where appropriate. • Encourage citizens, City employees, and contractors to follow ozone reduction steps throughout the year, and more so during the ozone season (May 1st through October 31st), particularly on Air Pollution Watch Days. • Where appropriate, preserve mature trees and plant additional trees to help the air filtenng process and to reduce the ambient outdoor temperature. • Determine the feasibility of an idling restnction ordinance for all vehicles. Resource Conservation Policies • Pursue methods to reduce energy and water consumption at City facilities. • Pursue methods to reduce the impact of the urban heat island effect on Fort Worth. • Promote energy efficiency and use of renewable energy • Promote water efficiency and water reuse. Resource Conservation Strategies • Reduce the amount of energy and water consumed throughout the City through administration, enforcement, and amendment of the Fort Worth Energy Code to require use of EnergyStar appliances at City facilities. EnergyStar appliances 189 Energy Conservation Through Choice of Materials Reflectivity of Urban Environment Materials Hlghly Reflective Roof 0.60- 0.70 :orrugated Roof 0.10-0.15 Colored Paint 0.15.0.35 0` Tar it Gravel � White Paint 0.03.0,18 0.50-0.90 3 Reflective (or high albedo) and emissive roofs bounce incoming solar radiation back into the atmosphere, reducing heat transfer through the building envelope This effectively cools building interiors, reducing electricity demand for air conditioning Light colored paving materials also reflect solar radiation and reduce surface and ambient air temperatures. (Source. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009.) Chapter 18: Environmental Quality use less electricity and less water than conventional appliances. • Reduce the reliance on electricity produced by fossil fuel by encouraging the use of renewable energy sources in new development and redevelopment. • Reduce the reliance on potable water use by encouraging the appropriate reuse and reclamation of water in new development and redevelopment. • Assess energy and water use in City facilities to identify opportunities for conservation and to implement appropriate measures. • Educate employees on energy conservation in daily activities both at work and at home. • Monitor energy and water consumption at City facilities to track conservation plan progress, and communicate results to City administrators, employees, and elected officials to maintain awareness. • Research options to increase the reflectivity of City roofs and paved surfaces to reflect more solar radiation, thereby reducing air conditioning loads and urban heat island effects. • Encourage planting and maintenance of native vegetation near buildings and along paved surfaces to directly shield them from the sun's rays, reducing urban heat island effects. Municipal Water Quality. Water Supply. and Wastewater Policies • Provide for handling wet weather flows in the sewer system in a cost-effective manner • Provide potable water in the service area as required by projected growth. • Assure adequate raw water resources to meet projected demand. • Provide water service in an effective manner while meeting all federal and state water quality standards. Storm Water Oualitv and Ouantitv (Drainage) Policies • Minimize impervious land cover in areas of new development and significant redevelopment. • Encourage redevelopment and infill in order to reduce the amount of new impervious surfaces outside Loop 820 • Use natural areas to retain and filter storm water runoff. Storm Water Oualitv and Ouantitv (Drainage) Strategies • When feasible, develop linear parks with walking and biking trails along drainage ways as an effective means of filtering out water pollutants and connecting neighborhoods. • Reduce erosion and improve ground cover along drainage channels through effective design, construction, and maintenance. • Support innovative efforts that are cost- and environmentally -effective in addressing water quality issues associated with new development and extensive redevelopment. • Identify and address potential concerns regarding nonpoint source pollution prevention requirements by providing information to developers and builders. • Develop a detailed mitigation plan for increasing capacity and eliminating Chapter 18. Environmental Quality Storm Water Management Due to undersized drainage systems built many years ago, a number of Fort Worth neighborhoods and roadways are subject to severe flooding in heavy rains Over $650 million in drainage needs have been identified In response to this need, the City Council implemented a storm water utility in 2006 The storm water utility collects a monthly user fee that pays for maintenance, improvements to the storm water drainage system, and other storm water program activities This fee is similar to other utility fees for water, sewer, and garbage (Source: Transportation and Public Works Department, 2009.) • • • • S • • • • • i Ei • • • • • 0 • • • a 190 bottleneck conditions in areas presently subject to flooding. Endangered Species and Natural Habitat Policies • Protect riparian corridors as natural buffers to filter pollutants and conserve natural habitats. Endangered Species and Natural Habitat Strategies • Seek opportunities and encourage developers to use natural landscapes. • Develop and implement a plan for the designation and protection of Wildwood Bottoms at Lake Worth as a nature sanctuary for American Bald Eagles and other species. • Develop and implement an ecotourism plan that is focused on the natural attractions of Fort Worth. Sustainable Development Policies • Increase the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of providing City services by promoting development in mixed -use growth centers, urban villages, and transit - oriented developments. • Support innovative development projects that showcase low -impact development practices, conserve riparian buffers, and extend greenway networks with hike/bike trails. • Promote sustainable development practices within the public and private sectors. • Where possible, the City should set an example by developing facilities that are environmentally responsible. • Promote and facilitate the redevelopment of brownfields. • Encourage development and building practices that reduce environmental impacts. Sustainable Development Strategies • Implement a sustainable development online forum — an educational and networking resource that will inform the public about local opportunities and the benefits of sustainable development while increasing builder and developer participation. • Promote the use of vegetation adapted to the local climate on City property and in parks. (There are areas where this is not an appropriate or desirable goal, such as in historically significant parks like Capps, or in special venues such as the Water Gardens and the Zoo.) PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Solid Waste Programs • Garbage Collection — The City provides a variable -rate based system for weekly garbage collection m carts. Customers pay for service based on the size of cart selected among 96-gallon, 64-gallon and 32-gallon cart options. • Curbside Recycling — The City provides single stream recycling collection once per week in 64-gallon carts. Cost of recycling collection and processing is included in the cost of residential sanitation service. • Yard Waste Pick-up — The City provides weekly yard waste (grass clippings and small brush) collection in paper yard bags, bundled limbs, up to 10 cubic yards of loose brush, and optional (for purchase) 96-gallon yard carts. Material is kept Resource Conservation with Green Building Public buildings can also be green Austin (since 2000), Dallas (2003) and Houston (2005) now require new and replacement facilities to follow Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards (Above) Austin City Hall is a LEED Gold Building (Source. City of Austin, Texas 2006.) (Below) Homewood Middle School in Homewood, Alabama is the country's first LEED Silver middle school. (Source: American Institute of Architects Alabama Chapter 2009.) 191 Chapter 18. Environmental Quality separate from other waste and is mulched for compost or other reuse. • Bulky Item Waste Pick-up — The City provides a monthly, scheduled bulky item waste collection of up to 10 cubic yards of collected material at no extra charge. • Drop -Off Stations — The City currently operates two permanent and one temporary drop-off station (pending construction of a third permanent site) for resident use as an alternate means to dispose of bulky items and brush. The sites accept excess garbage and recycling as well. The City is also studying adding additional sites for drop-off stations. • "Don't Bag It" — The Environmental Management Department provides information on how to take care of lawns and yards without disposing of yard waste in the municipal waste stream. • Education — The educators of the Community Relations Department support the Environmental Management Department by providing many options for education opportunities, such as recycling, backyard composting, garbology for children, litter reduction, and "Don't Bag It." • Dead Animal Pick-up — The City removes dead animals from public city - controlled rights -of -way and from residential units on a request basis. • Illegal Dump Cleanup — The Solid Waste Division of the Environmental Management Department created an illegal dump clean-up program in 1993 to help mitigate the effects of illegal dumping in Fort Worth. In FY 2008, the illegal dump cleanup section removed over 5,250 tons of illegally dumped material. • Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program — Collects hazardous household wastes year-round and disposes of them properly for Fort Worth residents and many surrounding communities. Along with a fixed facility, mobile collection units are in operation throughout the year Air Quality Programs • Air Monitoring Program — The Air Quality program of the Environmental Management Department assists the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and TCEQ with air monitoring. The program is also involved with creating an air quality plan for the Metroplex. • Inspection Program — The Environmental Management Department is resmnsible for enforcing the Clean Air Act within Fort Worth. Along with the EPA and TCEQ, this department helps with permitting, compliance inspections, complaint investigations, and enforcement. • Public Education Program — The Environmental Management Department has several positions dedicated to providing outreach to schools, PTAs, faith -based groups, neighborhood associations, City staff, and other organizations. • Care for Cowtown Air — During ozone season (May — October), the Environmental Management Department offers incentives, in the form of prizes, to City employees who participate in ozone reducing activities. Because of this effort, the City of Fort Worth was named by the U S. EPA as one of the "Best Workplaces for Commuters." • Clean Air Fair and Bike Rally — The Environmental Management Department holds an annual air fair downtown to coincide with the start of the ozone season, as a means to educate the public on air pollution issues. To conclude the region's Chapter 18: Environmental Quality 192 United States Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design The U S Green Building Council (USGBC) is the nation's foremost coalition of leaders from every sector of the building industry working to promote buildings that are environmentally responsible, profitable, and healthy places to live and work. The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System TM is the nationally accepted benchmark for the design, construction, and operation of high performance green buildings Texas has 145 total LEED-registered buildings (8 existing and 137 new construction). The Tarrant County College Downtown Campus and former RadioShack Headquar- ters Campus (above right) is one of two LEED-registered projects in Fort Worth. (Source. USGBC, 2009.) a a a a a a a a a a a a • • a • • a a a a a a a a a I a I a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ozone season, the City hosts the Clean Air Bike Rally in October to promote alternative modes of transportation. • Ozone -Forming Pollution Reduction programs — The City has committed to. 1 Establish an Employee Transit Pass Program (E-Pass) and vehicle -miles traveled reduction study; 2. Provide City employees with free parking at LaGrave Field, and 3 Expand the Clean Vehicle Fleet Program, as the City Council deems appropnate. • Conservation Specialist — This Transportation and Public Works Department staff member works as the Facilities Management Group Manager to develop, implement and track the effectiveness of energy- and water -efficiency programs and projects for the City of Fort Worth. As part of this work, the specialist provides reporting to the State Energy Conservation Office (SECO) m order to comply with Texas Senate Bill 51Texas Emission Reduction Plan (SB5/TERP) amendments to the Texas Health and Safety Code. The TERP has been extended by SB 12, extendmg the City's goal of a 5 percent per year reduction in electricity consumption through 2012, using 2006 as the baseline year Resource Conservation Programs • Facility Condition Assessment Reports (CARs) — The City's Facilities Maintenance Division performs annual assessments of City facilities to identify building envelope, lighting, HVAC, and plumbing system improvements, implementing many that positively impact the conservation of energy and water resources. • Design Guidelines for New & Existing Facilities — The City's Architectural Services Division has recently published major guideline revisions to more accurately communicate City efficiency and sustainability concerns to City project architects, engineers and contractors. In addition, specific sustamability guidelines referencing the United States Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (USGBC/LEED) program are being considered. • Municipal Energy Management (MEM) Plan — The City's draft plan uses a performance scorecard system to identify Energy Data Management, Energy Supply Management, Facility Energy Use, System & Equipment Efficiency, and Organizational Integrity Process. Plan adoption is anticipated in 2011 Resource Conservation Proiects • Municipal Building Performance Benchmarking — The City participates in a pilot project using federal Energy Star® resources available through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy • Traffic Signal Lamp Conversion — The proposed project involves conversion of the remaining incandescent lamp signals to light -emitting diode (LED) lamp inserts. Pending final approval, construction completion is estimated in 2009 with projected electricity usage savings of 5 8 MkWh/yr or 89 percent of their operating budget. • Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC) — The multi -phase ESPC involves implementation of several projects including lighting, HVAC, control, and water system improvements. For the first four ESPC phases, projected electricity usage savings is 21 MkWh/yr ESPC Phase V is under development for the City's 193 Prototypical Fire Station The City's Architectural Services Division developed this project to include thorough assessments of energy impacts of various building envelope, lighting, HVAC, control, and water system options to ensure resource use efficiency Fire station 38, above, was built using the prototype (Source. Fire Department, 2009.) Chapter 18: Environmental Quality wastewater plant facilities. Potential conservation measures include both traditional building system improvements and improvements to wastewater processing systems. The Preliminary Report was completed in 2007 Energy and water savings have not yet been estimated. A detailed study was completed in 2009 with implementation anticipated to begin in 2010 • Prototypical Fire Station — The City's Architectural Services Division developed this project to include thorough assessments of energy impacts of various building envelope, lighting, HVAC, control, and water system options to ensure resource use efficiency Similar conservation impact assessments are pursued in the development of all projects, including the newly constructed Ella Mae Gratts Shamblee Branch Library and the Hazel Harvey Peace Center for Neighborhoods. • Future Projects — After 5-years of projects resulting in City cost avoidance upwards of 30MkWh/yr, City staff is drafting a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to pursue other ESPC opportunities. In addition to the previous projects, future projects may include street lighting, water metering, and water reuse system facilities and processes. Municipal Water Oualitv. Water Supply. and Wastewater Programs, • Integrated Wet Weather Management Program — To assess the condition of the Fort Worth wastewater collection system and implement rehabilitation projects in order to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows and backups. Under this program, additional wet weather wastewater treatment capacity has been installed at the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. Endangered Species and Natural Habitat Programs • Outreach Program — Coordinated by the Parks and Community Services Department, this program provides an opportunity for neighborhoods, schools, and businesses to act in an advisory capacity for natural landscape enhancements. Endangered Species and Natural Habitat Proiects • Landscape Restoration — The Parks and Community Services Department is coordinating landscape restorations of the Fort Worth Nature Center and Tandy Hills. Brownfields Programs • Brownfields Program — Funded through a grant from the U S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Environmental Management Department is investigating potential Brownfield sites and actively facilitating their redevelopment by providing environmental site assessments and cleanup loans. Examples include Evans and Rosedale, LaGrave Field, Ellis Pecan, and 4th and Elm. • Municipal Setting Designation — The state law establishing municipal setting designations (MSDs) creates a means by which the scope of investigations and response actions addressing groundwater contamination may be limited by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, if the groundwater is prohibited Chapter 18: Environmental Quality 194 Captain Crud "Captain Crud" is a service mascot for the City of Fort Worth, created to help inform citizens about the household hazardous waste collection program and the benefits of recycling (Source. Environmental Management Department, 2009.) a • a a • IP • • • • • • • I • • • i • 41 • I •••ie•••••••••••••••••••••••i•••r for use as a potable water source by municipal ordinance or restrictive covenant. An MSD for a given site must be approved by the municipality in which the property is located. MSDs facilitate the redevelopment of brownfields sites by reducing the remediation time and costs. The City's MSD program is administered by the Environment Management Department's Brownfields Program. Water Quality. Water Sunoly. and Drainage Proiects • The Tarrant Regional Water District supplies raw water for Fort Worth and is developing projects to divert water from the Trinity River to supplement the yield of Richland -Chambers Reservoir and Cedar Creek Lake in east Texas. Coupled with existing sources, the Trinity diversion projects will give the District adequate supplies to meet projected needs to the year 2020 and beyond. The City, in cooperation with the District, is studying other potential sources of water supply for the future, including Toledo Bend Lake, the proposed Marvin Nichols Reservoir, Brazos River Basin, and other possibilities. • Watershed Studies — The City, in cooperation with NCTCOG, has begun identifying developing areas and determining strategies to avoid downstream flooding in areas already developed. Strategies will be suggested on a watershed basis because drainage and water movement are based on these natural boundaries. • The City has recently implemented modified design standards to reduce erosion and loss of vegetation along open channels. Storm Water Oualitv and Ouantitv (Drainage) Programs • Education — The Water Department and the Environmental Management Department have a variety of programs to educate the public on water resources and pollution prevention. • Bioassessment Program — Evaluates the diversity and sensitivity of aquatic life found in selected city streams. • Construction Inspection Program — Obtains compliance from construction sites that are regulated by TCEQ • The City's program to develop an approved method for local governments to demolish substandard nuisance structures containing asbestos more economically, while at the same time protecting the environment and the public health, is on hold while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency tests its own version of Fort Worth's method. • Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program — Collects hazardous household wastes year-round and disposes of them properly for Fort Worth residents and many surrounding communities. Along with a fixed facility, a mobile collection unit is in operation. • Industrial Inspection Program — Obtains compliance from industrial facilities that are regulated by the EPA and TCEQ • Power Washers Program — Limits detergents and other pollutants from being discharged into the City's storm dram system. • Spill Response Program — Involves the Environmental Management and Fire Departments. Its purpose is to respond to spills that are discharging or 195 Proposed Marvin Nichols Reservoir Area water districts are considejtrg,drawlrg directly from the Unlb River, and building reservoirs on the Sulphur River for future water supplies "or JOHNS9,N FAN Ni N• Mott, SuWh South Sulphur River NUJ, KAUFA9AN og ambers Reservoir nd AV4RRO Ite Oak 6ey0L i C3P KIN St Creek Reservoir Toady River Wetlands Project RED RIVE Proposed Marvin . � Wright; Pa, 5* ter River -Is t Lubbock Fort Waal Area Credit: Ft. Wo R4a. T:r.,.m», The City is evaluating the feasibility of the Marvin Nichols Reservoir in northeast Texas and the Toledo Bend Reservoir in east Texas as future water sources for its citizens. (Sources: Fort Worth Star -Telegram, Water Department, 2009.) Proposed Toledo Bend Reservoir Chapter 18: Environmental Quality threatening to discharge into the City's municipal storm sewer system. • Storm Drain Marking Program — Curb inlet markers containing a pollution prevention message advise citizens of the location of storm drams through markers. The program targets heavily trafficked locations with high visibility, areas with a past history of dumping or reported illicit discharge problems, and locations requested by citizens. • Storm Sewer Outfall Screening — Conducts dry and wet weather field screening of water in storm sewer outfalls to monitor pollutants entering water bodies in the city Capital Improvement Proiects The capital improvement projects that have been identified for the next 20 years are listed in Appendix D and Appendix E with estimated costs, completion dates, and potential funding sources. Projects are divided into three categories including drainage, water, and wastewater Chapter 18: Environmental Quality 196 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 19: PUBLIC HEALTH • The public health system contributing to the protection and promotion of the health 11, and safety of Fort Worth residents consists of a network of numerous agencies as diverse as the population they serve. These agencies include city and county 11 government and non-profit agencies, hospitals and educational institutions, and • others. • i • • i • • • S • i • I • S • In 2008, the City of Fort Worth consolidated departments, which resulted in the elimination of the City's Public Health Department. Most divisions within the former Public Health Department were transferred to other departments. Animal Care and Control and the Consumer Health Division were transferred to the Code Compliance Department; the Outreach Division was transferred to the Community Relations Department; and Public Health Emergency Preparedness staff were transferred to the Office of Emergency Management. The Epidemiology Division was eliminated and the vital records function was transferred to the Tarrant County Public Health Department. Public Health was reduced to one position within the City to monitor the health of the community and advise the City Manager on health - related issues. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS The former Fort Worth Public Health Department administered a comprehensive Community Needs Assessment (CNA) every five years. This unique assessment provides a statistically reliable profile of self -reported health problems and social issues at the neighborhood level. The most recent survey was completed in 2008 and another will be administered in 2013 Additionally, other diseases and conditions of public health importance are tracked and analyzed from mortality and morbidity data available internally or through partnerships with other federal, state, and local agencies in order to construct a reliable profile of the city's overall health, and to identify community health issues and priorities. Based on this data, the City has established the following prionties for targeting City and other community resources, and for developing intervention and/or preparedness strategies. Obesity and Related Health Conditions According to the Texas Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, over 37 percent of Texans 18 years of age or older are overweight and almost 27 percent obese. Similarly, recent figures revealed by the Strategic Plan for the Prevention of Obesity in Texas indicated that 35 percent of school aged children are considered to be overweight or obese. Based on population projections from the Texas State Data Center, the number of obese adults m Texas is projected to increase from 3.5 million in 2000 to over 9 million in 2040, with the greatest increase occurring among Hispanics. Former Fort Worth Public Health Center The former Fort Worth Public Health Center shown above was demolished and is being replaced with a new BRIT (Botanical Research Institute of Texas) facility The building below is the new Hazel Harvey Peace Center for Neighborhoods facility that opened in the Evans and Rosedale Urban Village in 2009 The facility includes Code Compliance and Community Re- lations Department resources for residents. (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009) • 197 Chapter 19• Public Health A recent local study, performed by the Tarrant County Public Health Department, revealed that 64 percent of Tarrant County residents are either obese (26 percent) or overweight (38 percent). In 2003, the University of North Texas Health Science Center conducted an obesity study among elementary school aged children in Fort Worth that indicated thirty percent of the children were either overweight or obese. The prevalence of obesity is a senous public health concern because obesity is associated with the development of several chronic diseases. The economic consequences of obesity -related illnesses include a significant increase in healthcare costs and lost population productivity days at the local, state, and national level. Development Patterns and Public Health The pattern of land development shapes travel choices and impacts public health. hi 2003, a study published in the American Journal of Health Promotion concluded that there is a significant correlation between development patterns and public health. People who live in isolated, automobile -dependent neighborhoods walk less and are more likely to suffer from obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes, and other diseases. Conversely, people who live m more connected communities, walk more and are less likely to suffer these health problems. To support healthier communities, the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development of mixed -use growth centers and urban villages. These areas, described in detail in Chapter 4 Land Use, should help reduce the risk of health problems related to conventional suburban development. Public Health Emereencv Preparedness The 2003 Community Needs Assessment data indicated that 41 percent of Fort Worth residents do not feel adequately prepared for emergencies. Protecting the health and safety of our diverse community from a variety of potential threats, including acts of terrorism, bioterronsm, pandemic flu, and others requires careful planning to ensure organizational and community readiness. As part of a nationwide network of public health agencies and professionals, City staff have worked diligently to develop public health emergency preparedness and response plans utilizing an all -hazards approach. Because the public's health could be at risk during any emergency scenario, integration of public health resources and expertise as part of the larger local emergency management infrastructure continues to be a priority _ Infant Mortality Infant mortality rates are generally considered to be an important index of the overall health of a community For the past several years, Fort Worth has consistently experienced a higher infant mortality rate (IMR) than other major Texas cities. Fort Worth's IMR also exceeds state and national benchmarks. The infant mortality rate is defined as the number of deaths among children less than 12 months of age per 1,000 live births in a given year In Fort Worth, the 2003 Chapter 19. Public Health 198 Obesity and Related Health Problems Tarrant County, 2004 Individual Self - Reported Health Problems Overweight Obese Myocardial Infarction/ Coronary Heart Dis- ease/Heart Disease All Males (%) All Females (%) 46 7 28 6 27 0 25 6 Tarrant County Overall (%) 37.8 26.2 108 96 103 Diabetes 6.3 5 5 5 9 High Blood Pressure 23.2 23 0 23 1 The above percentages were computed from 2,565 telephone dial -in inter views. Overweight people have a body mass index (BMI) of 25 to 29.9, while obese people have a BMI of 30 or above. (Source. Tan -ant County Behav- ioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Tarrant County Public Health Department, 2005.) 41 a s 41 I a • a S I • • I • • • • • I I i a • • • • • • • • • • I. • • • • I• • • • • a • • • • infant mortality rate was 8.7 deaths per 1,000 live births, an increase of 16 percent from the 2002 rate of 7.5 deaths per 1,000 live births. This upward trend was also experienced countywide, statewide, and nationally Fort Worth recorded 11,635 births and 101 infant deaths in 2003 Infant mortality rates differ among racial/ethnic groups. Blacks have consistently had higher IMRs than both Whites and Hispanics for each of the years 1993 through 2003 As is the case in Texas and Tarrant County as a whole, Fort Worth's IMR for Blacks each year were twice as high as those for Whites and Hispanics. Infant mortality rates are affected by factors such as prenatal care utilization, smoking rates among mothers, birthweight, and prematunty of infants. High infant mortality may indicate problems in a community, including poor matemal health, infant malnutrition, teenage pregnancy, and/or limited access to adequate health care facilities. Compliance with Public Health Laws, Reeulations, and Ordinances Whether ensuring safe restaurants or minimizing the threat of pet and human exposure to rabies, the City enforces public health laws, regulations, and ordinances designed to prevent disease, injury, and illness through its Code Compliance Department. Priorities for the upcoming planning period include reducing the number of stray, aggressive dogs that impact public safety; preventing the transmission of zoonotic disease; preventing injuries to humans from stray animal populations, preventing food, water and vector -borne illness, improving low levels of compliance with animal licensing and vaccination requirements; expanding quality assurance efforts associated with all regulatory functions, and preventing accidents and illnesses resulting from unsafe or unhealthy public venues, including public swimming pools. The following establishments or facilities are routinely inspected to ensure compliance with all appropriate state and local laws and regulations: food establishments (including restaurants), day care centers, hotels and motels, and public and/or semi-public swimming pools. GOALS • Reduce obesity, overweight rates, and incidence of related health conditions. • Expand and refine public health emergency preparedness plans for businesses and residents. • Reduce infant mortality rate within targeted areas. • Improve compliance with public health laws, regulations, and ordinances. STRATEGIES The City has identified three key impact strategies that represent a neighborhood - oriented approach to population -based public health. • Mobilize partners and other community stakeholders to engage internal and external resources to address identified public health priorities. 199 a 8 2 8 7 Infant Mortality Rates I .♦ U.S —a—Texa s —A--Tarrant County *—FortWorth 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Year Fort Worth has consistently experienced a higher infant mortality rate (IMR) than state and national rates. (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009) 2003 Infant Mortality Rates in Tarrant County by ZIP Code 76023 FORT WO PUBtUC HEALTH 1.2D.1101D4w Infant Mortality Rates OMR) were calculated using 2003 data and represent the number of infant deaths per 1 600 live births cc Epidemiology end Ansessmet eistsien, ay of Fort VVVaIh Pubic Meson Depenmert .1,10,11 �. atty of Fort Wog. Pr00c Heel. Depulment Epldembbgv end Aneeeanert DMtlon. filores 713262 r.eral:n rent 76026 .,D..neDn ` Infant Mortality Rate El ODO 3.30 LA 331 5.55 LA 556 9.13 Ing 9.14 11 49 - 11.50 25.21 75022 75062 75061 1 �505D 7510. D. Mlsaes o6.7w6 • Chapter 19• Public Health • Enforce consumer health, animal control, and other public health laws and ordinances aimed at preventing disease, injury, and illness. • Facilitate an all -hazards approach to ensure community and organizational readiness for emergencies, including bioterrorism. Specific to the priority public health issues noted above, the following intervention strategies are being implemented. Strategies to Reduce Obesity and Related Health Conditions FitFuture is a community mobilization effort to encourage physical fitness and better nutrition in the Tarrant County community The effort is co -sponsored by the Fort Worth Public Health Director, the Tarrant County Public Health Department, the United Way of Tarrant County, and the YMCA. The vision of FitFuture is to unite individuals, schools, health care professionals, local governments, community organizations, faith communities, and employers to improve health and reduce the prevalence of obesity in five key areas. • Local school districts help students and staff establish and maintain healthy eating and physical exercise via the School Health Advisory Committee. • Local companies provide comprehensive workplace wellness programs. • Local government becomes involved as a leader in policy changes. • Health professionals will have a significant positive influence on their patients. • Community organizations support, educate, and mobilize the community (and become members of the FitFuture network). The Community Relations Outreach Division offers dozens of educational programs including "Salud Para Su Corazon," a grassroots effort to bring Hispanic adults and children information they need to improve heart health and reduce risk of obesity, and "On the Trail to Healthy Eating" a new collaborative program with Minyard's Food Stores and the Texas A&M Extension Service aimed at helpmg shoppers make healthy choices when buying food. Strategies to Expand Public Health Emergency Preparedness With an emphasis on assisting Fort Worth's business community and hard -to -reach populations, the City will further develop citizen preparedness and business continuity planning guides for a variety of emergency scenarios. These special projects will supplement the continuous updating of public health "all -hazards" emergency plans and the coordination of community resources and confirmation of collaborations with other emergency response agencies. Various emerging pathogens and the threat of biological terrorism may affect the population of Fort Worth. By taking an "All Hazards" approach, the City plays a vital role in ensuring community and organizational readiness to detect, respond, and recover from various health emergencies, including: • Deployment of the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS)—A catastrophic natural or intentional biological event, such as a tornado or anthrax release, may result in local resources becommg overwhelmed. The City collaborates with other emergency preparedness partners for the coordination of the federally managed SNS, including its receipt within the Fort Worth area, dissemination to all Chapter 19. Public Health 200 F TARRANT COUNTY The City of Fort Worth sponsors numerous initiatives aimed at promoting physical activity including FitFuture Fort Worth (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • a .• • • • • I • I • • a ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• affected areas, and proper maintenance of the asset while in use. • Sheltering —The City plays an integral role in the sheltenng of individuals from other parts of the country or within the jurisdiction during an emergency The Bioterronsm and Health Emergency Preparedness (BHEP) team works to develop medical resources that will be utilized to aid those in City sponsored shelters. Initial tnage and medical needs are led by the BHEP team, through adaptation of response plans for other health emergencies. Strategies to Reduce Infant Mortality The Community Relations Department created a dedicated "Infant Mortality Outreach Team" as part of its Outreach Division. This team will be assigned to perform targeted outreach activities in the areas of the city with the highest incidence of infant mortality, focusing on pre -conception health. The importance of pre -conception health is well documented in research and has been identified as a primary factor contributing to Fort Worth's relatively high infant mortality rate. In addition to physical assessment, there will be an educational component focusing on factors that will improve overall health. Using models created by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), key conception messages include: increasing public awareness of the importance of preconception health, improving access to preconception care for low income women, and encouraging women and couples to have a reproductive life plan. Additionally, the creation of a Fort Worth infant Mortality Task Force made up of grass roots community stakeholders and health and human services specialists is also planned. This task force will allow for coordination between numerous agencies committed to improving Fort Worth's infant mortality rate and ensure the most efficient utilization of community resources. Strategies to Improve Compliance with Public Health Laws. Regulations. and Ordinances One of the primary objectives identified as part of this initiative is to reduce stray dog populations and associated risks of injury Between FY2004 and FY2008 the number of pit bull and pit bull mixes impounded increased from 2,154 to 4,631 (an increase of 115%). Of the 22,178 animals impounded in FY2008, less than 2% had any form of identification which is required by Fort Worth ordinance. Proactive outreach and educational campaigns have been developed and are being implemented to educate residents on ordinance requirements and to encourage compliance. Additionally, animal ordinances are being studied to investigate the feasibility of providing greater incentives for ordinance compliance and greater restrictions for aggressive dogs. Also being studied are the use of more innovative "catch" technologies. A second primary objective is to protect consumers from unhealthy restaurant, day care, swimming pool, and hotel/motel environments. Principal strategies used to accomplish these objectives include 1) the enforcement of laws, regulations, and ordinances related to the establishments listed above, and 2) the provision of education and training for food and day care establishment owners, managers, and employees as well as swimming pool operators. Annual mspection schedules are created based upon a risk assessment tool that identifies facilities engaging in activities that pose the greatest potential health threats to the public. These facilities are inspected most frequently Factors Influencing Health Environment, 5% Medical Care, 10% Genetics, 30% Social Circumstances, 15% Lifestyle, 40% Lifestyle and social circumstances account for 55% of early deaths. (Source. McGinnis, et al., Health Affairs, 21(2), p. 83, 2002.) Protecting Consumers A registered sanitarian confirms appropriate food temperatures during a routine restaurant inspection. (Source: Code Compliance De- partment, 2009) 201 Chapter 19 Public Health PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Protecting Residents from Dangers Posed by Stray Animals Animal Care and Control - The City's Animal Care and Control program is charged with the enforcement of City ordinances pertaining to animals and with protecting citizens from stray, homeless, aggressive, or nuisance animals. In addition to contributing to safer neighborhoods, a pnmary purpose of this activity is to address the public health issue of rabies control by safeguarding people and pets in Fort Worth from the threat of rabies and other zoonotic diseases. Demand for service has increased dramatically during the past five years. Two of the best indicators of this trend is the number of service requests and the percent of service requests responded to within 24 hours. In FY2005, the program received 48,308 requests for service. By FY2008 the number of requests had increased to 57,639 (a 19% increase). Due to this significant increase in service demand, the percent of requests responded to within 24 hours dunng this same timeframe fell from 91% to 83%. Consumer Health - The Code Compliance Department's Consumer Health Division performs inspection, complaint investigation, and educational services to ensure healthy and safe environments for Fort Worth consumers. Protecting the public from food -borne and water -borne diseases and other health risks associated with food establishments, day care centers, hotels and motels, and swimming pools is the division's primary objective. Principal strategies used to accomplish this mission are Animal Control Officers make sure that residents are protected from the outlined in the above sections. threats posed by stray and homeless animals and the diseases that they may carry, including rabies (Source. Code Compliance Department, 2009.) Outreach - The Outreach Division is structured to assign teams of public health outreach workers to geographic areas consistent with the City's ten Neighborhood Police Districts (NPD's). There are six teams, comprised of a team leader, who is a public health nurse or other public health professional, and two community health workers. Their focus is to use epidemiologic data and extensive community involvement to identify priority health issues within each community and then facilitate the mobilization of resources to make positive changes. The structure of the Outreach teams is intended to complement the Community Policing model, helping to create "community wellness" throughout the City The Outreach staff provide the residents of Fort Worth with quality of life assessments, advocacy through the broad health care and social service system, and assurance that needs are being addressed appropriately and in a culturally competent manner Public Health Emergency Preparedness - The Fort Worth Bioterronsm and Health Emergency Preparedness (BHEP) Program was formed in 2002. It is funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control through a sub -contract with Tarrant County Public Health Department. The City's ability to prepare its more than 720,250 residents to respond to and recover from natural, accidental, and intentional disaster and emergency events. The program's mission is to prepare the general public, businesses, food retailers, health care providers, animal care and control agencies, and other community and professional organizations for the threat of bioterronsm and other public health emergencies. Outreach Community health nurses assist with childhood health assessments as part of a healthy heart initiative. (Source. Community Relations Department, 2009.) a a a a a i a S • • • • • • • • • a a Chapter 19 Public Health 202 ••••°••••••••••••••••••••••••••••-• New or Exaandine Facility Proiects Public Health • Spay and Neuter Clinic - In 2009, the City of Fort Worth completed construction of an animal spay and neuter clinic as an expansion of its current Animal Care and Control Center located at 4900 Martin Street in southeast Fort Worth. This clinic allows for a more efficient adoption process and ensures compliance with state laws requiring that all animals adopted from an animal shelter be spayed or neutered. • Hazel Harvey Peace Center for Neighborhoods - The City of Fort Worth completed a new facility in 2009 located east of I-35 in the Evans and Rosedale Urban Village. The center includes neighborhood services provided by the Community Relations Department and the Code Compliance Department. • Central Resource Facility - The City of Fort Worth will work with non-profit agencies in the development and operations of a Central Resource Facility to be used by the unsheltered and emergency sheltered homeless in Fort Worth. The location of the facility has not been determined but will be in proximity to the existing local emergency shelters. It is estimated that the facility will treat 4,000 clients annually who will be able to utilize physical, dental, and behavioral health service options. Securing a site for the facility is currently underway The City of Fort Worth encourages residents to get involved in their community Many resources are available for residents to become educated about the variety of services the City pro- vides. Visit www.fortworthgov.org for more information. (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009.) 203 Chapter 19• Public Health •••••••••••S•••••-••••••••=•..••••. CHAPTER 20: MUNICIPAL FACILITIES Municipal facilities are City -owned structures and grounds, not covered in other chapters of the plan, that provide a variety of uses includmg: office, storage, maintenance, court, and gathering space for carrying out community and government functions. This chapter addresses physical facilities for street services, facilities maintenance, City equipment and vehicles, Code Compliance, Environmental Management, municipal buildings, and Municipal Court. Other facilities such as parks, police, fire, water treatment, and libraries are addressed in separate chapters. In addition, this chapter covers the overall provision of public buildings. As population mcreases and undeveloped areas of the city begin to develop, new public facilities will be needed. It is important to coordinate the planning and development of these new facilities to create the opportunity for shared use among City departments. Shared facilities will allow the City to provide services in the most efficient manner possible by avoiding duplication. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS City facilities are designed, constructed, and maintained by the Facilities Management Group of the Transportation and Public Works Department (T/PW). Facilities are constructed after the sponsoring department has secured the site and funding for the project. Street Eauioment. Vehicle Service. and Telecommunication Facilities Street services such as signs, signals, and street markings are provided by the Street and Traffic Services Division of T/PW These facilities are industrial in nature, generating heavy truck traffic and requiring large outside storage areas and storage warehouses. Facilities supporting these services are the James Avenue Service Center located on James Avenue, the Southside Service Center located on Columbus Trail, and Brennan Service Center located on Brennan Avenue. The Equipment Services Department maintains and repairs 4,303 pieces of City - owned equipment, including 3,615 pieces of rolling stock vehicles at five locations. Southside Service Center , James Avenue Service Center, Brennan Avenue Service Center, Tire Service Center, and the Water Service Center Four of these locations provide gasoline, propane, and diesel fuel for City vehicles. In order to maximize efficiency, maintenance, repair, and fueling services are generally provided at locations where equipment and crews are based. The IT Solutions department supports and mamtains telecommunications infrastructure, providing two Public Safety Trunked Voice Radio Systems, a Digital Microwave System, a Mobile Data Communications Systems, as well as paging and mobile communications capabilities. The radio system is used by 17 different external agencies as well as the City of Fort Worth. Additionally, the City offers many of its facilities for antenna co -location opportunities. It supports more than 9,000 radios. The system operates on seven City -owned towers as well as 2 leased locations. Four of the City -owned towers were approved in the 2004 Bond Program Municipal Buildings and Service Centers 5 25 0 5 Mike 1 Brennan Service Center 2. Environmental Collection Center 3. City Hall, City Hall Annex, Public Safety 4 Water Service Center 5. Tire Service Center 6. Southeast Service Center 7 James Avenue Service Center 8. Southside Service Center The map above shows the existing service centers throughout the city and the location of municipal buildings. (Sources: Transportation and Public Works Depart- ment, Equipment Services Department, 2009.) 205 Chapter 20: Municipal Facilities for upgrade which is anticipated to be complete in 2010. The 2006 Cntical Capital Needs Program includes an additional tower in far west Fort Worth to provide communications to this rapidly growing area. Gas Wells The Barnett Shale formation is a large natural gas reserve that stretches underground across a 17-county area. It contains an estimated 30 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and is located approximately 1.5 miles below the surface. In recent years, advances in drilling technology have made it possible for energy companies to extract large amounts of natural gas from the Barnett Shale. More than 1,600 gas wells are currently permitted within the Fort Worth city limits. The drilling and production of gas wells within Fort Worth is regulated primarily by the Texas Railroad Commission and the City's Gas Drilling Ordinance (#18449-02- 2009). The state and City regulations are intended to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. These regulations minimize the potential impact to surface property and mineral rights owners, protect the quality of the environment, and encourage the orderly production of available mineral resources. Additionally, the City's regulations govern notice requirements, well setbacks, noise levels, delivery hours, truck traffic, fencing, landscaping, and technical regulations in conformance with the Railroad Commission rules. The City's gas drilling ordinance allows gas wells to be located in any zoning district in the city through a permitting process. The regulations require that all gas wells be located greater than 600 feet from any protected use, including churches, schools, residences, public buildings, hospitals, and public parks. A waiver of these regulations can be granted by the City Council or by all protected use property owners within 600 feet of the well. Gas well sites may be located on City -owned property, including public parks, only with the consent of the City Council. Code Compliance Facilities The Code Compliance Department enforces the City's environmental, solid waste, land use, nuisance, building standards, multifamily inspection, illegal dumping, public health, and animal -related codes. Field operations consisting of seven Neighborhood District Units, a Special Enforcement Division, and Building Standards Division operate out of eight branch offices. Since Code Compliance officers work in the field, and work closely with the Police Department and other public safety agencies, branch offices are mainly housed in police storefronts and community centers. The City's recently re -named Chuck Silcox Animal Care and Control Center, with a new spay/neuter clinic facility expansion that opened in 2009, is located at 4900 Martin Street. The opening of the new Hazel Harvey Peace Center for Neighborhoods at 818 Missouri Avenue in 2009 allows for the relocation of the department's administration division and two neighborhood code districts into this new facility Chapter 20. Municipal Facilities 206 City Hall City Hall provides offices for many of the City's departments. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Municipal Court Municipal Court is located Downtown in the Public Safety and Courts Build- ing Two satellite locations have been established in southeast and north Fort Worth to improve access to basic Court services. (Source. Municipal Court, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••-••••••• City Hall and Related Municinal Building City Hall, City Hall Annex, Public Safety and Courts, Zipper Building, and 13th Street Annex are Fort Worth's five municipal buildings. They are centrally located in Downtown, grouped around the intersection of Throckmorton and West 10th Street. City Hall provides offices for the City Manager, Mayor and City Council, Law, Finance, Internal Audit, Water, Transportation and Public Works, Planning and Development, Human Resources, and Information Technology Solutions. Meeting space is provided for public hearings and workshops. The complex provides convenient access for developers and the public to departments that are often needed simultaneously City Hall Annex is located across the street in the historic Lone Star Gas building. The annex provides space for Housing and Economic Development, Water, Human Resources, Environmental Management, and the Community Relations Departments. The historic Public Safety and Courts Building provides space for Municipal Courts, the Fire Department, and Traffic Engineering. Neither City Hall nor the Public Safety Building has surplus office space. As the population increases and staff increases to meet the needs of the public, additional office, meeting, and public space will be needed for the departments and services currently housed in those buildings. In 2005, the City purchased the two-story, 70,000 square -foot building at the southeast corner of Monroe and 13th Street, commonly known as the Zipper Building. Verizon leases the first floor The second floor has been renovated to provide office space for much of the staff of the ITS and Finance Departments previously housed in City Hall. The office space vacated in City Hall by this move was used to address critical space needs of other City Hall departments. Most notably, the Planning & Development Department has expanded and established a consolidated Building Permit Center to better serve citizens and local businesses/developers. In 2008, the City renovated an abandoned building at the southwest corner of 13th Street and Taylor to become the City's 13th Street City Hall Annex. This 6,000 square foot building currently contains offices for TPW and the State of Texas Railroad Commission. A municipal parking garage is located on 10th Street Downtown, with 338 employee spaces and 12,000 square feet of office space. An additional 170 spaces are provided Downtown at City -owned and leased parking lots. However, there were not enough spaces available to meet current employee parking needs, and the additional parking spaces required as staff expands. To address this parking deficit, construction of a new 1,150-space garage across from the Convention Center on Houston Street was completed in 2009 Construction was completed on a new municipal building in the Evans & Rosedale Urban Village in 2009 The Hazel Harvey Peace Center for Neighborhoods includes the City's Code Compliance and Community Relations Departments, as well as a Neighborhood Policing District storefront and two Community Prosecutors. Southside Service Center Facilities Service Center (Garage #1 (Garage #2 Fuel station & truck wash (Storage Communications Total Building Total Site DEM/Solid Waste/Code Compliance Equipment Services Admin. TPW/Street Services and Stormwater DEM/Solid Waste TPW/Street Services Equipment Services DEM and TPW Information Technology Solutions 13,248 28,560 13,248 1,600 6,000 1,774 6,018 480 70,928 19 6 acres The Southside Service Center, located at 4100 Columbus Trail, houses the Solid Waste Division of the Department of Environmental Management (DEM); the Equipment Services Department administrative offices and a ve- hicle maintenance and repair shop, and the Street Services Division of the Transportation and Public Works Department (TPW), which schedules street maintenance operations. There is also an Information Technology Solutions communications tower building (Sources: Department of Environmental Management, Transportation and Public Works Department, 2009.) Southeast Service Center Facilities Office building Spill response shop (Storage building (Total Building (Total Site DEM/Air Quality and Water Quality DEM/Water Quality DEM 5,418 9,300 5,520 20,238 18.4 acres The Southeast Service Center, located at 5000 Martin Luther King Freeway, has facilities originally designated for various Department of Environmental Management (DEM) operations. (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009.) 207 Chapter 20: Municipal Facilities Municipal Court Fort Worth Municipal Court is located Downtown at 1000 Throckmorton in the Public Safety and Courts Building. Municipal Court is a court of record that provides the City with control over the adjudication of misdemeanor violations occurring within the city limits. On average, between 350,000 to 400,000 new citations are filed annually These include traffic, general complaint (City ordinance and penal code violations), and parking citations. The volume of citations filed constantly challenges the department to manage its case flow Case flow is defined as the various steps or processes a citation undergoes from its initial filing to final disposition. Municipal Court relies heavily upon automated systems to support manual processes to ensure every case is docketed or reviewed for action. A new case management and electronic document management system was implemented in December 2005 The new system is the Municipal Court Integrated Management System (MCIMS), which provides enhanced case management functionality MCIMS has the functionality to image and scan documents, thereby reducing paper and storage requirements, and to streamline business processes with automated workflows and reminders. The system also has a web module to enhance the way customers and attorneys conduct business with Municipal Court. Phase II of MCIMS will allow public access for customers to view citation information, pay fines, and electronically file documents. Municipal Court is divided mto four divisions. (1) Administration, (2) Judicial, (3) Court Clerk, and (4) City Marshal. The Administration Division has responsibility for management of overall departmental operations and acts as the liaison with other agencies. Additionally, the Division includes the Ground Transportation Office located at 909 Taylor Street, which monitors and regulates ground transportation activities and service providers. An additional responsibility includes conducting truancy/failure to attend heanngs at the Fort Worth School Attendance Court. The Judicial Division is comprised of eleven judges, including a Chief Judge and a Deputy Chief Judge. Primary responsibilities include adjudication of cases scheduled on the various dockets for five courtrooms and the School Attendance Court, and reviewing and signing warrants. In addition, judges serving in the capacity of magistrate conduct arraignment hearings at the Tarrant County Jail facility This Division includes the Teen Court program, which is designed to provide alternatives for youths who have received citations. The Court Clerk Division has responsibility for activities related to the case flow process, the collection and posting of fines, management of the City's jury system, community service operations, and warrant issuance. The City Marshal Division has responsibility for warrant service, prisoner bonding, prisoner transfer, courtroom security, and building security The division is also responsible for oversight of the Lake Patrol Office, located at 7500 Surfside Drive. Staffing for Lake Patrol operations is comprised of five Deputy City Marshals and one Senior Deputy City Marshal who have responsibility for patrolling approximately 3,560 acres of the Lake Worth recreational area, which includes Lake Worth, the Fort Worth Nature Center and Refuge, and 14 surrounding City -owned parks. Zipper Building In May 2005, the City purchased the 70,000 square -foot "Zipper Building", located just south of City Hall, to provide additional office space for City staff previously located in City Hall The completion of building renovations and move -in occurred in July 2006 The newly available space in City Hall al- lowed a Building Permit Center to be opened on the lower level. (source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Chapter 20: Municipal Facilities 208 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Municipal Court is improving the effectiveness of court operations through continued development of technology and satellite facilities. The Court is seeking to expand the options available to citizens through the utilization of an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system. This system would enable residents to obtain information and make payments via phone, which would alleviate the need to make a trip Downtown. Through a joint venture with the Fort Worth Water Department, two satellite locations were established in Southeast and North Fort Worth in 2001 to facilitate access to basic Court services. Additionally, Internet access is available on-line through the City's web page, which provides general information regarding court activities and fine schedules. Finally, on May 5, 2008, the Municipal Court began operating new longer hours to better serve the city's residents. Municipal Court also operates an off -site School Attendance Court located at 2215 Weiler Boulevard. The School Attendance Court was established in April 2001 through an interlocal agreement with the Fort Worth Independent School District. This Court handles school attendance -related cases filed by the District. The City of Fort Worth and the FWISD have a collaborative venture in hearing truancy cases. These cases involve students who fail to attend school and parents who contribute to non-attendance behavior The Texas Education Code allows truancy cases to be heard by Municipal Courts. The Fort Worth School Attendance Court was established in collaboration with the FWISD as part of a Comprehensive Truancy Intervention Program. The program's initiative is to aggressively address truancy problems and encourage school attendance. Future Facilities The City's capital improvement bond program provides funding for the facilities that house the services discussed above. However, these services must compete with other City services for funding. Many facilities, such as parks and recreation, libraries, and fire have local and national standards, which help to determine when new facilities are needed. The operational and municipal facilities do not. Standards are useful for ensuring adequate provision of services and for determining the need for additional facilities. As the city grows, decentralization of some municipal services may serve the population better These decentralized municipal complexes could be developed in different forms, depending on the most efficient and effective means of service delivery These complexes could include one large facility or building that houses compatible services, or the co -location of multiple facilities on one site with separation of incompatible uses. Careful planning and review will encourage the development and use of shared facilities, resulting in cost savings and increased service to the public. Mixed -Use Growth centers will be ideal locations for some facilities that provide City services. It is important for most City services to be located near the population that is to be served. Just as many City services are centralized in Downtown, growth centers will provide an opportunity for appropnate services to be grouped in main activity centers and areas easily accessible to major portions of the population. The City should plan ahead and, when appropriate, purchase properties m growth center areas before these areas experience further development. This will help to ensure the James Avenue Service Center In January 2006, the City opened the 180,000 square -foot James Avenue Service Center to replace the obsolete Harley Avenue and Downtown Ser- vice Centers. (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009.) 209 The James Avenue Service Center is located at 5001 and 5021 James Ave- nue The Transportation and Public Works Department occupies the 5001 James Avenue building and the Equipment Services Department occupies the 5021 James Avenue building (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Chapter 20: Municipal Facilities best placement for these services and facilities. Chapter 14 Urban Design emphasizes the importance of the design and location of public buildings and public spaces to the character and vitality of the community Careful planning will ensure that future public buildings and facilities are compatible with surrounding structures and neighborhoods, and that future decentralized public services are sited to best serve the public. GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Provide municipal facilities to effectively and efficiently meet the needs of service providers and the public. • Complete a facilities master plan high level evaluation process in 2010 • Develop, implement, and monitor ground transportation ordinances. Implement recommendations resulting from ground transportation study as appropnate. • Implement security measures throughout municipal complex. • By 2010, implement a technology plan for Municipal Court comprised of a document management system, and a new case management system for quicker accessibility in retrieving records and streamlining processes for enhanced efficiency • In 2010, continue to review the feasibility of expanded services to include additional locations and expansion of service options for accessibility and flexibility to customers. • In 2010, continue to evaluate customer service training and practices, building on customer service philosophy to provide a user-friendly environment. STRATEGIES The following strategies will enable the City to efficiently provide municipal facilities that best meet the needs of the community. Strategies • Provide facilities that are aesthetically pleasing, sustainable, and environmentally sound. • Encourage shared facilities by City departments for the provision of services by implementing a review program for all proposed facilities that includes all City service providers. • When feasible, locate public facilities, schools, parks, libraries, and police and fire stations in designated growth centers. • Anticipate future needs of the community by identifying and purchasing sites in developing areas that will serve multiple departments in the efficient provision of services. PROJECTS Capital Improvement Proiects A list of projects, with estimated costs, completion dates, and proposed funding sources can be found in Appendices D and E. Chapter 20. Municipal Facilities 210 Municipal Parking Garage Construction was completed on a new downtown municipal parking garage in 2009 The garage includes plans for approximately 28,000 square feet of retail space at ground level (Source: Planning and Develop- ment Department, 2009.) • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • •• • •• • • • • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• PART V TOOLS FOR IMPLEMENTATION • CHAPTER 21: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Capital improvements are an important means of implementing the Comprehensive Plan. Major thoroughfares and public facilities are instrumental in defining the physical, social, and economic character of the city Such projects, along with new • water, sewer, and storm drainage facilities, play a critical role in implementing the City's plans for future land use and development. • The tables in Appendices D and E serve as a proposed multi -year schedule of capital • improvements identified by City departments and cooperating agencies as desirable in the timeframe specified. These serve as a starting point for prioritization of needs and eventual allocation of financial resources. The tables do not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects, but they do represent a systematic • identification of projected capital needs. This type of schedule is commonly referred to as a capital improvements program (CIP). Unlike the annual operating City i Budget, the CIP is not legally adopted and does not require the expenditure of any monies itemized. It is simply a guide for City officials and others to use in estimating 11 future expenditures for needed capital improvements and identifying possible sources of revenue for capital projects. • For the purpose of the Comprehensive Plan, a capital improvement is defined as "a physical improvement or asset constructed or purchased that has a minimum 15-year life expectancy and costs over $100,000 " Appendices D and E list capital • improvements that may either be publicly funded or be accessible to the general public. It is the City's intent to financially constrain the list of unfunded City • projects so as not to exceed the City's bonding capacity The cost of capital improvements is generally non -recurring and may require multi- (, year financing. Although some new projects and the maintenance of completed projects are funded through the current operating budget, construction of most capital projects that are the responsibility of City government are paid for by issuing • municipal bonds. Using this financing mechanism permits the City to pursue large- scale projects while simultaneously providing services on a consistent basis through • the operating budget. The benefits from capital improvements last for many years; • thus, issuing bonds spreads the tax burden over all residents, present and future, who will benefit from the projects. • In some cases, funds from private sources or other governmental entities can be used • to supplement City funds or to finance capital improvements. Public -private joint • ventures have become common, especially after federal funding cuts and Tax Reform bills in the 1980s adversely affected many federal programs. Federal and state grants • are another source of CIP funding. • It is important for the City to remain disciplined in assuming debt. Before financing capital improvements, City officials must consider many factors, including the following: • • Economic trends affecting Texas and Fort Worth in the short term. 4,000 3,600 3,200 2,800 a 2,400 E 2,000 1,600 1,200 800 400 0 Capital Improvement Projects Identified for the Next Five Years 0, c V) 0 Parks and Community Services w a> J Transportation Arts & Culture • Funded 0 Unfunded Police Services Fire and Emergency Services Environmental Quality Public Health Municipal Facilities The graph above depicts the total estimated costs of capital improvement projects identified for the next five years in Appendices D and E (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009) • • 213 Chapter 21 Capital Improvements • Long term regional and national economic cycles and trends. • Revenue trends for the City of Fort Worth. • Current and projected total debt service and debt service per capita. • Population growth trends and projections. • Fiscal impact (continuing operating and maintenance costs imposed by capital projects). • Leveraging and efficiency (seek opportunities to secure supplemental funding in light of budgetary constraints, economic downturns, and spending cuts). • Timing feasibility (interruption of services and urgency of need). Although construction costs of capital facilities are financed by bonds, debt -service and on -going operating maintenance must be considered in future budgets. Typical costs involved in maintaining certain capital facilities are shown to the right. As population increases, City officials must consider the implications of building additional facilities in concert with upgrading the service level at existing facilities. BACKGROUND Nine bond elections have been held by the City of Fort Worth since 1978. To a certain extent, each reflected the economy of its period. Increased capacity for funding public facilities is needed in times of population increases and is most easily afforded during economic expansion. Additional information about debt ratio trends can be found in Chapter 3 Financial Trends. • 2008 $150 million for roadway infrastructure improvements. This approved bond program will construct and reconstruct neighborhood and arterial streets, improve intersections, and construct bridges. (4-year implementation) • 2004 $273.5 million for streets, parks, library, fire services, telecommunication towers, and an animal spay/neuter clinic. The City was able to afford the bond package without increasing the property tax rate. (6-year implementation) • 1998 $120 million for enhancement projects in the areas of streets, parks, fire services, libraries service, and public event facilities. The City was able to afford a $120 million bond package (1998-2003) without increasing the property tax rate. • 1993 $60 million for streets. • 1990• $20 million for streets ($20 million for a Will Rogers Auditorium did not pass). This approved bond program primarily addressed reconstructing streets. • 1986: $160 million for streets, parks, library, public safety, and Will Rogers Memorial Coliseum Equestrian Center (the Heritage Trail Development for $4.9 million did not pass). • 1982 $130 million for streets, public safety, municipal service improvements, City landfill improvements, library, public events, and parks. • 1980• $47.8 million for streets. This bond dealt pnmarily with reconstructing streets. • 1978 $92.5 million for streets, parks, fire, transportation improvements, aviation, public events, and police. Average Annual O&M Costs for Typical City Facilities 6,000,000 5,000,000 0" 4,000,000 0 c 3,000,000 0 5 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 Neighborhood Are Station Police District* 5,488,806 1,059,952 �Q5,O71 247,200 m Branch Community Library Center 14,345 Neighborhood Park The annual recurring expense of operations and maintenance (O&M) must be considered in future budgets when new capital projects are considered *The estimated cost, including salaries, of operating a Neighborhood Policing District combines resources provided by the General Fund with those provided by the Crime Control and Prevention District. (Source: Budget Office, 2009.) Chapter 21 Capital Improvements 214 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• STRATEGIES The City should continue to remain disciplined m assuming debt as the City's financial policy dictates. The following conditions should be favorable before proposing major bond programs or other debt instruments: • Local, regional, and national short and long term economic trends. • Debt service less than 20 percent of net operating revenues (currently 12.37 percent). • Long-term debt less than five percent of the City's total assessed values (currently 3.8 percent). • General fund reserves at least 10 percent of the adopted budget. • Match funds with other sources of funding to stretch dollars. These sources may include, but are not limited to current revenue, grant funds, and contributions. • Accumulate retained earnings until the capital improvement can be paid for Possible sources may include capital projects reserve fund, enterprise funds, public improvement distnct funds, and tax increment financing district funds. Bonds and Other Debt Instruments Debt instruments available to a municipality include the following: general obligation bonds, certificates of -obligation, revenue bonds, industrial bonds, and commercial paper Public property fmance contractual obligations, contract revenue bonds, and anticipation notes are also available to municipalities, though Fort Worth seldom, if ever, uses these debt instruments. • General Purpose Bonds (General Obligation Bonds) —Authorized by an election and backed by ad valorem taxes, they are used to pay for specifically approved projects. Future revenues are used to pay interest on the bonds and the principal amount when due. Interest income earned by the purchaser is tax free, which allows the purchaser to accept a lower interest rate. Capital improvements in Fort Worth are traditionally financed in this manner • Certificates of Obligation (COs)—Secured by ad valorem taxes and issued for limited purposes, such as land acquisition or funding a legal judgment. When combined with a limited ($1,000 or more total) pledge of surplus revenue from an operating system (such as water, sewer, drainage, or sanitation), they can be issued for any lawful purpose authorized by City Council without citizen vote. • Revenue Bonds —Used for and payable by operations such as water, sewer, stormwater, and solid waste. Fort Worth has utilized these bonds for City water and wastewater treatment plants, distribution facilities, and landfill projects. • Commercial Paper Program —A short-term note program used for appropriation authority for construction and occasionally used to fund continual capital improvement efforts on an interim basis, such as the City's sewer improvement projects. Notes have matunties as short as one day or as long as one year The City has authorized the issuance of up to $125 million in Commercial Paper for both general purpose and water and sewer projects. The program is also used for eligible bond projects. • Industrial Revenue Bonds —The Texas Development Corporation Act allows cities, counties, and conservation and reclamation districts to form non-profit industrial development corporations or authorities on their behalf. This is for the purpose of issuing taxable and tax-exempt bonds for eligible projects. An 215 Will Rogers Memorial Coliseum The Will Rogers Memorial Coliseum, constructed in 1936 with gen- eral obligation bond funds, stands as a symbol of culture and pride for Fort Worth citizens. The facility was upgraded with 1998 general obligation bond funds. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Will Rogers Equestrian Center The Will Rogers Equestrian Center was built as a result of the 1986 Bond program. The facility is used for numerous events during the year (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 21 Capital Improvements industrial development corporation acts as a conduit through which all monies are channeled. Generally, debt service on the bonds is paid by the business under the terms of a lease, sale, or loan agreement. As such, it does not constitute a debt or obligation of the governmental unit, the industrial development corporation, or the State of Texas. The Fort Worth Alliance Airport Authority, Inc., and Sunbelt Industrial Development Corporation are examples of this type of development corporation. • State Revolving Loan —A low interest loan administered through the Texas Water Development Board used to finance improvements to water and wastewater collection systems, including plant facilities. • Section 108—Loans guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and providing communities with a source of financing for economic development, housing rehabilitation, public facilities, and large scale physical development projects. Future Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement funds are pledged to secure funding should these loans default. • Equipment Tax Notes —Equipment notes secured by ad valorem taxes and issued by the City, initially for the purpose of implementing an apparatus replacement plan for the Fire Department, but recently expanded to include technological purchases. Current Revenues Using current revenue from taxation, fees, service charges, or special assessments is a pay-as-you-go method used by the City to pay for improvements. Typically, revenue from certain sources is designated in advance to pay for specific projects. • Tax Revenues —Ad valorem, sales, or other taxes can be designated for capital improvement projects. For example, monies received from a sales tax of .5 percent are placed into a special Crime Control and Prevention Distnct Fund. In most cases, the City borrows money first and uses future tax revenues to retire that debt. For example, a recent two percent increase in hotel/motel occupancy taxes will retire bond money borrowed to upgrade the Fort Worth Convention Center Fees from car rentals at DFW Airport can also be used to retire bond money to be borrowed to upgrade public events buildings. Grant Funds Grants are classified as either categorical or block, depending upon the amount of discretion allowed to the grantee. Generally, grants require in -kind contributions or matching funds. Some types of grants are targeted to provide basic services in lower income areas and are disbursed to non-profit organizations. Transportation grants are project -based, and Fort Worth projects must compete with other transportation projects in the region, state, or country depending on the source of funds. Proposed projects go through a rigorous ranking process by the City Transportation and Public Works Department, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) staff, and the Texas Department of Transportation. • Commumty Development Block Grant (CDBG)—Funds are disbursed from HUD Funds used must benefit low and moderate income persons, aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight, or be used for activities designed to meet urgent community development needs. Chapter 21 Capital Improvements 216 Rolling Hills Water Treatment Plant and Central Laboratory Aerial view of the Rolling Hills Water Treatment Plant and Central Laboratory The plant was constructed in 1985 and the laboratory was constructed in 1998 Both facilities were funded by revenue from water sales and service charges. (Source. Water Department, 2009) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• homes. This program mandates the participation of Community Housing Devel- opment Organizations (CHDOs) in developing affordable housing. • Section 202 Program —Provides capital advances to finance the construction and rehabilitation of housing for low-income elderly persons and is administered by HUD The capital advance does not have to be repaid as long as the project serves low income elderly persons for 40 years. It also provides rental assis- tance for Section 202 projects to help make them affordable. • Economic Development Initiative (EDI) funds —Originate from HUD and are used to create jobs and encourage economic revitalization. Grant money can be used in tandem with Section 108 guaranteed loans. • Defense Economic Adjustment Assistance Grant Program (DEAAGP)—Funds are used to help adversely impacted defense -dependent communities recover economically from realignments, closure of defense installations, or reductions or termination of defense contracts. The Texas Department of Commerce adminis- ters the grant money • Economic Development Administration (EDA) grants —Funds are used to help create immediate jobs for the unemployed by constructing or renovating public works and development facilities, including public buildings, historic structures, transportation-facihties, water -and -sewer systems, and community facilities. Grants are administered by the U.S. Commerce Department. • Texas Parks and Wildlife Department —Uses funds from sales tax levied on sporting goods to fund Parks and Recreational projects. Funds from this source are used by the Fort Worth Parks and Community Services Department. • SAFETEA-LU (Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users) —Five-year federal transportation funding bill, from 2005 to 2009, that provides funding for specific transportation categones such as improving safety, reducing traffic congestion, improving efficiency in freight movement, increasing intermodal connectivity, and protecting the environment, as well as laying the groundwork for addressing future challenges. Funding pro- grams include: Highway Safety Improvement (HSIP), Surface Transportation Program -Metropolitan Mobility (STP-MM), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement program (CMAQ), and Highway Bndge Replacement and Rehabilitation program. • Urban Street Program —Funds are used on city streets classified as collector or higher in urbanized areas. The MPO for the region, North Central Texas Council of Governments receives allocations from the federal government based on the urbanized area population. Projects are then chosen based on traffic volume. • Super Notice of Fund Availability (NOFA)—An annual consolidated national competition for funds coordinating nearly 50 programs that cut across traditional program lines. The Super NOFA released in 2004 covered several programs including housing, community development, economic development, empower- ment programs, and homeless assistance programs. Nonprofits, public housing agencies, local and state governments, faith -based organizations, and others are each eligible for certain programs. 217 CDBG-Eligible Areas Based on 2000 Census CDBG Eligible Area 0 2.5 5 7.5 10 Miles HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds must be used in areas that consist of at least 51 percent low to moderate income house- holds. Areas are designated as eligible based on the federal census. The City received more than $6 744 million during FY2008-09 (Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Planning and Development Department, Housing Department, 2009.) Chapter 21 Capital Improvements Contributions from Private and Non -Profit Sources Many capital improvement projects that benefit the general public are financed en- tirely or in part with funds from pnvate or quasi -public sources such as non-profit organizations or for -profit business ventures. The blending of private and public funds for the betterment of the community and in anticipation of future profits is desirable. Examples of organizations that have contributed funds to capital im- provements in the Fort Worth area are cited below. • Friends of the Fort Worth Nature Center and Refuge —A nonprofit, 501(c)(3) organization that provides funding to support the Nature Center programs and projects. • Streams and Valleys, Inc.— A non-profit formed in 1969 for the purpose of planning and coordinating the beautification and recreational development of the Trinity River and its tributaries in Tarrant County Funds originate from community organizations, foundations, and individual contributors. • Developers participate in new development cost of roads and infrastructure based on the City of Fort Worth Policy for Installation of Community Facilities. Retained Earnines • The Capital Projects Reserve Fund —Used to accumulate surplus money from various funds and money from the sale of real assets. Money from the fund can be used to pay for land and building purchases, construction and maintenance projects, capital equipment and vehicles, and technology improvements. • Enterprise Funds —Generated from fees paid for services and accumulated as retained earnings, if revenues exceed operations expenses. Examples of Enter- prise Funds are golf, water and sewer, parking facilities, and airports. • Public Improvement Districts —A defined area within a city or its extraterrito- rial jurisdiction created by City Council action where additional services or infrastructure are needed. Special assessments are levied on affected property owners and prorated according to the level of benefit received. Fort Worth has five PIDs, two commercial (Downtown and Camp Bowie) and three residential (Park Glen, Heritage, and Parkwood). • Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts —Denoted by specific boundaries and created by City Council to provide for infrastructure improvements within that area. The current assessed value of property located within the boundaries is used as the baseline figure. Future property tax revenues in excess of the base- line amount pay for improvements. • Storm Water Utility— Approved by City Council on March 7, 2006, the utility collects and manages funds to reconstruct and upgrade storm drain systems and to provide operation and maintenance of the storm water system. The utility collects fees from all developed property within the city limits, including sin- gle-family residential, multifamily, and nonresidential property Fees are deter- mined by how much impervious area is on the property (impervious area is a hard surface such as a building, parking lot, or dnveway). These hard surfaces cause rainwater to run off properties, rather than being absorbed into the soil. The utility went into effect in July 2006. Downtown Public Improvement District Conditions prior to public improvements and the establishment of the Public Improvement District in Downtown Fort Worth (Source: Sundance Square Management, 1998.) Federal Economic Development Administration funds were used to make improvements to Main Street. Funds from the Public Im- provement District in Downtown Fort Worth pay for supplemental street and sidewalk cleaning and maintenance of the planter boxes (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) Chapter 21 Capital Improvements 218 • • • • • • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CHAPTER 22: DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Many of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan can be achieved through the implementation of local development regulations allowed by State enabling legislation. Chapters 211 and 212 of the Texas Local Government Code contain zonmg and subdivision enabling language for Texas municipalities. The primary purpose of these regulations is to promote "the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the municipality " Fort Worth uses a Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance to guide the development pattern and use of private land in order to maximize the City's full economic potential without compromising the quality of life for residents. The City's development regulations are used to implement the policies and strategies discussed in Chapter 4 Land Use. BACKGROUND The following sections discuss existing development regulations and processes used by the City of Fort Worth. Zoning Ordinance Fort Worth's first Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1940 to help shape the city's overall land use pattern. The Zoning Ordinance has undergone numerous amendments since its inception to adequately address prevailing issues. The standard zoning districts of residential, commercial, and industrial have been followed with sections addressing parking, signs, historic preservation, non -conforming uses, variances, landscaping, and mixed -use districts. Land within the city limits is designated into one of 43 zoning districts that permit certain land uses and prohibit others. The Zoning Ordinance also requires buffering to separate incompatible uses, such as residential and heavy industrial. The Zoning Ordinance controls six attributes of property. • Land use • Minimum size of lots and parcels, mcludmg the width and depth, in residential districts • Minimum or maximum size of front, side and rear yards • Maximum building coverage of sites in one -family, two-family, and multifamily districts • Maximum height of structures • Development standards for certain uses The Zoning Ordinance, which applies only to property withm Fort Worth's incorporated boundaries (areas annexed for full and limited purposes), is composed of written regulations and an official Zoning Map The Zoning Map divides the city into zoning districts, and the text lays out detailed requirements for each of those districts. Chapter 211, Section 211 004, of the Texas Local Government Code states that: "Zoning regulations must be adopted m accordance with a comprehensive plan...." Changes to the map or text are ultimately decided by the City Council, with the Zonmg Commission actmg as a recommending body 219 Zoning Map Section CR The Zoning Ordinance consists of both the official Zoning Map and written regulations. Rezonings are requests to change property on the map from one zoning classification to another (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 22: Development Regulations The Board of Adjustment (Board) is a quasi-judicial body that hears zoning appeals from property owners regarding administrative decisions. The Board also considers variances from the technical requirements of the Zoning Ordinance if unique characteristics of the property make strict compliance with the Zoning Ordinance an undue hardship Finally, the Board rules on requests for special exception uses. Special exception uses are those uses authorized under the Zoning Ordinance subject to the approval of the Board of Adjustment. The Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission makes recommendations to the Zoning Commission on owner- and City -initiated historic overlay zoning designations. These designations consist of Demolition Delay, Historic and Cultural Landmark and Distnct, and Highly Significant Endangered. The Historical and Cultural Landmarks Commission also enforces historic district guidelines for exterior renovations and new construction by hearing and deciding on applications for Certificates of Appropriateness. The Downtown Design Review Board, established in December 2001, enforces the Downtown Urban Design Standards for new construction and renovations by hearing and deciding on applications for Certificates of Appropnateness. These standards apply within the boundaries of the Downtown Urban Design District. The Scenic Preservation and Design Review Commission was renamed the Urban Design Commission in 2007 The purposes of the Commission are to 1) recommend designation of conservation districts and urban design districts, 2) review stealth communication towers, 3) review projects for compliance with adopted design standards or guidelines in conservation districts and urban design districts where a separate design review board is not appointed, 4) review and recommend approval or modification of proposed design standards or guidelines for conservation districts and urban design districts, 5) review and approve design standards or guidelines for other projects as directed by the City Council, and 6) hear appeals to the Urban Forestry ordinance. The Urban Design Commission enforces the Trinity Uptown Development Standards and Guidelines and the Near Southside Design Standards and Guidelines for new construction and renovations by hearing and deciding on applications for Certificates of Appropriateness. These standards apply within the boundaries of the Trinity Uptown Zoning Districts and the Near Southside Zoning Districts. City -Initiated Rezoning Approximately 17 1 percent of the City's land area is zoned in ways that are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In August 2000, the City Council established a City -initiated rezonmg procedure based on petitions from interested property owners. The Planning and Development Department notifies registered neighborhood organizations about properties that are not zoned in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and conducts informational meetings in each sector to explain the petition process. Petitions must include the signatures of property owners representing at least 50 percent of the affected parcels and 50 percent of the affected land area for each zoning district. City staff prepares an appropriate rezoning Chapter 22: Development Regulations 220 Rezoning Process Applicant submits zone change request to Planning and Development Department. Planning and Development, Transportation/Public Works, Water, and Parks and Community Services staff review request. I Staff report written. Agenda posted for Zoning Commission public hearing. I Public hearing dockets transmitted to Zoning Commission. Staff briefs Zoning Commission prior to public hearing. Zoning Commission holds public hearing on second Wednesday of month and recommends approval or denial of request to City Council. City Council has public hear- ing on first Tuesday of month and votes on request. Early notification sent to registered neighborhood associations within 1/4 mile radius of property Notices mailed to property owners within 300-foot radius of property I Signs posted on property Quick Turn" cases can be heard by City Council at the first regular Tuesday meeting, following a 15- day public hearing notice The rezoning process depicted above typically lasts two months. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) i a a a I a • • I • i • • • • • • • I • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• application and schedules the case for the next available Zoning Commission public hearing. Since 2000, there have been approximately 74 petition -based rezonings covering approximately 1,400 acres. In November 2000, the City Council approved a procedure to initiate zoning changes without petitions from affected property owners. Any interested Council member may request specific zoning changes. The Planning and Development staff verifies that the proposed changes are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, accompanies the City Council member at an informational meeting held in or near the area to be considered for rezoning, and briefs the full City Council on the proposed zoning changes at an appropriate pre -Council meeting. If the City Council indicates that it wishes to initiate the proposed zoning changes, staff prepares an appropriate rezoning application and schedules the case for the next available Zoning Commission public hearing. Since 2000, there have been 89 Council -initiated rezonmgs covering approximately 15,000 acres. Subdivision Ordinance The City of Fort Worth Subdivision Ordinance governs streets, alleys, driveways, easements, drainage facilities, street lighting, lots -and -blocks, and park dedication. The Ordinance applies to the subdivision of land within the city limits and the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ), which consists of the unincorporated land within five miles of the city limits. The Subdivision Ordinance also provides for the recording of land subdivision plats with the county in which the subdivision lies, as required by state law The City of Fort Worth has ETJ in Parker, Johnson, Tarrant, Denton, and Wise counties. The Subdivision Ordinance guides the land development process and protects the public from inferior and undesirable development practices. The current Subdivision Ordinance was adopted in September 2006 by City Council "to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements, to make the community as attractive and habitable as possible; to conserve the value of property and encourage the most appropriate use of land, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan. " The City Plan Commission (Commission) has the final authority to approve subdivision plats and make recommendations to the City Council on requests for annexation, street or alley vacations or closures, and Master Thoroughfare Plan amendments. Applications are submitted to the Planning and Development Depaitinent. During the review process, proposals are sent to the corresponding school district, county, the Fort Worth Transportation Authority, and appropriate City departments and utility companies. The Development Review Committee (DRC), composed of City staff, makes recommendations on the proposals to the City Plan Commission. The DRC determines whether a plat is in conformance with the Subdivision Ordinance and makes recommendations on any waivers of the Subdivision Ordinance requirements that are requested by an applicant. The Commission also makes recommendations to the City Council on Comprehensive Plan Updates. In 2004, the City Council adopted a revised neighborhood and community park Applicant requests optional pre -submittal conference. Applicant revises plat according to pre - submittal conference Platting Process DRC meets with applicant. Applicant submits Revisions. Staff reports prepared. Public Notices sent. Agenda posted. Applicant submits plat I -- application-to Planning - and Development Department. City Plan Commission holds public hearing on fourth Wednesday for approval or denial of Plats distributed to City plats and waivers and departments and to make recommenda- agencies for review tions to City Council on other requests. DRC staff discussion of preliminary issues. Staff comments available for applicant review City Council considers Plan Commission recommendations. The platting process depicted above typically lasts two months. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) 221 Chapter 22: Development Re-ruI fr r c dedication policy, which is applied during the subdivision platting process. The revised policy continues to require the following: dedication of parkland at a rate of 2.5 acres per 1,000 population generated by the subdivision for neighborhood parks or fee in lieu of dedication, and dedication of land for community parks at a rate of 3 75 acres per 1,000 population or fee in lieu of dedication. Large recreational parks located outside of the central city may now count toward neighborhood and community park requirements. In the central city, a flat $500 fee per new housing unit is substituted. New criteria for pocket parks (less than five acres) were established. Credit against the central city flat fee for privately developed, publicly accessible plazas and parks up to 100 percent may be allowed. The revised park dedication policy is applicable within the city limits. Please see Chapter 6. Parks and Community Services for more information. ISSUES The City's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances should further the City's goal of establishing an efficient multiple growth center development pattern, while ensuring that growth does not outpace the City's ability to provide adequate public facilities and services. The following issues will need to be addressed to support the growth center concept and remove barriers to its development. Zoning Ordinance Issues As previously mentioned, many areas are zoned differently than the land uses identified in the Comprehensive Plan. For example, several commercial areas, includmg portions of Downtown and the Historic Stockyards, are currently zoned industrial. These two areas are designated as Mixed -Use Growth Centers in the Comprehensive Plan, but residential uses are not permitted in the industrially -zoned areas. A future zoning change is expected to make the zoning district more consistent. The Zoning Ordinance has undergone numerous revisions since its initial inception in 1940 An internal departmental review team is closely reviewing the Zoning Ordinance for possible revisions to more closely reflect modern land use regulations and practices. The City Council has adopted four mixed -use zoning classifications, MU-1, MU-1G, MU-2, and MU-2G to promote desirable development in designated mixed -use growth centers and urban villages, but property owners must still seek a zonmg change to utilize them. In addition, certain areas of the city are zoned multifamily, but the predominant land use is single-family Thus, the current zoning patterns can impede or threaten the desired development patterns. In addition to mixed -use zoning classifications, the City Council adopted two form - based zoning districts; Trinity Uptown in 2006 and Near Southside in 2007 Form - based zoning districts regulate the relationship of private development to the public realm by prescribing building location and envelope. Design standards and guidelines regulate public space improvements, private development, and use through base zoning. Typically, a form -based zoning district is divided into sub -districts in order to Chapter 22. Development Regulations 222 Urban Villages The area along West Seventh Street, primarily between the Trinity River and University Drive, is known as the West Seventh Urban Village. It is one of the areas rezoned to Mixed -Use that has subsequently experienced reinvestment and redevelopment. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Example of a Mixed -Use Development Projects that combine different but compatible uses such as the medical offices and loft apartments located in these buildings on West Oleander Street in the Medical District are being constructed by right in MU-1 and MU-2 mixed -use zoning districts (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) ••••••••••••••••••••••••r•••••••• respond to differing contextual conditions. In addition to form -based codes, design overlays are also used. The Downtown Urban Design District is an overlay, which places additional development standards on property beyond what is provided through base zoning. Land use cannot be regulated through overlay districts. Several business organizations, including Associated Businesses of the Cultural District, Southeast Fort Worth, Inc., I-35W Coalition, and Camp Bowie District, Inc., have developed, or are in the process of developing, design guidelines to ensure desired development within their areas. These organizations have expressed interest in having the City consider establishing adopting form based zoning or urban design overlay districts. These districts would include a development review process similar to that used in the Downtown Urban Design District, Near Southside, and Trinity Uptown. The I-35W and Camp Bowie districts will be drafted by the end of 2010 The City uses the Zoning Ordinance to guide land development inside the city limits, but neither the City nor the pertinent counties have land use regulation authonty in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). Consequently, vacant lands within the City's ETJ are being developed as urban neighborhoods withoutthebenefit of municipal land use control and infrastructure planning. This growing development trend results in suburban sprawl far from existing City infrastructure and services. STRATEGIES Five strategies will help to implement the City's development goals and respond to current issues. The first strategy is for City staff to continue reviewing the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance, in consultation with the City Council, City Plan Commission, Zoning Commission, developers, and community leaders, to identify regulatory impediments to appropriate development, address the impacts of development on traffic and the natural environment, and address technical and administrative issues. In January 2003, the City Manager appointed a broadly representative Development Standards Task Force (DSTF) to assess the extent to which current development standards and procedures effectively implement the City Council's development policies as reflected in the Comprehensive Plan. Based on that assessment, the Task Force recommended appropriate amendments for consideration by the City Plan Commission and Zoning Commission, as well as procedural changes to improve the development review process. These procedural changes supplemented related recommendations made in 2002 by the Focus Group on Development Review Procedures. In January 2004, the City Council adopted approximately 16 amendments to the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances as recommended by the DSTF The City Manager then formed the Development Advisory Committee (DAC) to provide monthly guidance on development regulations. The DAC continues to explore ways to eliminate any remaining impediments to desirable development, as well as potential improvements to the development review process. The second strategy is for the City to continue initiating zoning changes in order to 223 Downtown Urban Design Standards The Downtown Urban Design Standards are intended to encourage comfortable, human -scale pedestrian environments such as that found along Houston Street in Sundance Square. The design standards are enforced through an overlay zoning district. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 22. Development Regulations make the City's zoning districts consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As part of this effort, City staff should work proactively with interested community groups and property owners to identify appropriate areas for rezoning to mixed -use districts within designated mixed -use growth centers and urban villages. The City Council is encouraging these mixed -use zoning changes by linking MU zoning to economic incentives available through the Neighborhood Empowerment Zone program. The City Council requires that the urban village be zoned mixed -use before establishing a neighborhood empowerment zone that includes the urban village and its surrounding neighborhoods. The third strategy is for City staff to refine a procedure by which design guidelines and/or standards can be reviewed and endorsed m consultation with affected property owners, developers, the Zoning Commission, and Council members; adopted by the City Council, and incorporated into the development review process. The Downtown Urban Design District and its oversight board, the Downtown Design Review Board (Board), set the precedent for this process in December 2001 The Urban Design Commission (Commission) was created in 2007 to oversee additional design districts adopted by City Council such as Trinity Uptown and the new Near Southside District. The Board and Commission are authorized to apply subjective guidelines that encourage high -quality, pedestrian-onented-development throughout Downtown, Trinity Uptown, and the Near Southside. The Urban Design Commission is responsible for applying subjective guidelines to proposed developments, and certifying whether the developments are consistent with the guidelines. City staff is responsible for applying objective standards to the proposed developments and subsequently issuing or denying building permits for projects that clearly conform to all standards. The general goal of these urban design districts is to promote sustainable development, which encourages efficient use of public resources, a balanced transportation system, environmental quality, and a strong sense of place. These concepts are discussed further in chapters 4 Land Use, 11 Transportation, 14 Urban Design, and 18 Environmental Quality The fourth strategy is to pursue greater statutory authority to effectively manage growth and discourage suburban sprawl. In the fall of 2006, the City Council adopted resolutions to request that the Texas Legislature consider three new development -related amendments to state law Each resolution directly supports the strategic goal of promoting orderly and sustamable development. The City will. • Seek authority to enact an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO): APFOs require that public facilities —such as roadways, water and sewer lines, fire stations, schools, and parks —be available concurrently with new development to more efficiently accommodate growth. • Seek greater municipal control over special infrastructure districts in the ETJ These districts (municipal utility distncts, water control and improvement districts, and fresh water supply districts) may be used to promote high quality development, but they may also facilitate development that bypasses undeveloped areas more economically served by public facilities and services. • Seek greater municipal land use authority in the ETJ Successful long-range land Chapter 22: Development Regulations 224 On -Site Improvements Developers are required to provide certain on -site improvements, such as water and sewer lines, underground stormwater lines, sidewalks, curbs, paved streets, street lighting, and street signs in new developments Subdivision regulations require that all improvements be built to certain standards. (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) I • I I I I I i I S • • i • • • • • • • • 41 • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• use and infrastructure planning relies heavily on a municipality's ability to control the location, type, and ultimate density of development in the ETJ The City expects to pursue and support these and similar legislative initiatives in the 2011 legislative session. The fifth strategy is to develop and implement a Sustainability Action Plan for the City including action items that affect private development, City operations, and individual efforts. In January 2009, the City Council formed a Sustainable Development Task Force to focus on the first phase of private development at the citywide, neighborhood, and site (building) levels and to recommend to the City Council a Sustainability Action Plan that is specific, measurable, and achievable in a three to five year time frame. In the first phase, the Task Force considered 51 initiatives and prioritized 17 items into an Action Plan that City staff will work on implementing in the next three years. Action Plan items are vaned in scope and will impact conservation efforts, air and water quality, and energy efficiency of new commercial construction. For example, the City will allow greater net density of residential uses in subdivisions that preserve riparian buffers, require certification of the availability of groundwater for subdivisions; and encourage the use of stormwater for onsite irrigation. The second phase of the plan will consider initiatives that impact City Operations including the fleet, facilities, infrastructure and open space, and matenals and equipment. The third phase of the Sustainability Plan will consider Individual Efforts including education and outreach for residents and businesses, conservation efforts, and retrofitting existing structures. 225 Connrehensive Plan Transportation s Monility and Air Quality ✓ Modem Streetcars • Transrrortethi,l kneact • Bike Teas lotion Preservation Reviiatlzation 'r' NidriSrrigetvotin • QesionDistricts Sustainability Plan • Home > Projects > Sustainability Sustainable Development As one of the nation's fastest growing large cities, Fort Worth faces the challenge of providing adequate infrastructure and resources for that growing population — all while maintaining or improving quality of life for current and future residents. Mist rendering of a nixed -use developmerd s Denver. Cob. Some:.Steve Pike. Urban Advantage. News & Events 3 • Public Meeting Slated To Discuss Sustainability Presentations • Aoril 15. 2009 Public Meeting • March 26_ 2009 Public Meeting • March 4. 2009 Public Sustainability Plan information can be found at www fortworthgov org/ sustainability (Source: City of Fort Worth, 2009) Chapter 22: Development Regulations ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CHAPTER 23: FINANCIAL INCENTIVES Fort Worth offers a variety of incentives to help stimulate development and redevelopment. Many have been discussed in previous chapters, especially in the programs listed in the Economic Development, Housing, and Historic Preservation chapters. BACKGROUND Many economic development experts believe that public incentives help encourage and leverage private investment, enhance the local business environment, strengthen the economy, and increase local employment. The City of Fort Worth uses incentive strategies as an integral part of its economic development program in an attempt to influence decision makers considering relocating, starting, or improving an existing commercial, industrial and/or residential asset and to encourage the growth of Fort Worth in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. Financial incentives are also available to certain property owners and/or nonprofit organizations to promote restoration, rehabilitation, or repair of existing housing structures. These incentives promote the creation of new jobs and -lead -to -positive economic -growth -and - stabilization. Incentives are evaluated on a case -by -case basis and are based on the merits of individual projects. The City of Fort Worth monitors incentives to ensure that commitments are met and are proportionate to the economic benefit to the City GUIDING PRINCIPLES The City uses the following guiding principles in assessing projects seeking financial assistance: • Promote development that conforms to the community's vision as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan and other widely accepted community plans. • Significantly advance City Council goals such as job creation, retention of Fort Worth residents, utilization of Fort Worth -based companies (including certified Fort Worth M/WBE companies), the provision of affordable housing, historic preservation, and balanced and fiscally responsible growth. • Provide preference for projects in targeted areas (e.g., growth centers, urban villages, neighborhood empowerment zones, Transit -Oriented Developments, and Community Development Block Grant eligible areas, etc.). • Avoid negative financial impacts to the funding of general government operations and effectively leverage private dollars. • Provide assistance for eligible projects that have verifiable financing gaps at a level not to exceed incremental dollars generated by the planned investment. • Create opportunities for the utilization of minority -owned businesses and woman -owned businesses. • Capitalize on near or mid-term market opportunities. 2004-2009 Active Tax Abatements >..roject....:, Allied Electronics Cinram Wireless, LLC Cott Beverages, Inc. CUNA Mutual Kimco Montgomery Plaza Lancaster Avenue Ltd (Oakland Shopping Center) OBIM Holding Company LLC Omni Fort Worth Partnership Phoenix Property Inc. Stockyards Station Hotel Trinity Bluff Development, Ltd. Development. = .".... Type:" """' Corporate Headquarters! Distribution Facility Cell Phone Manufacturer Bottling & Distribution Center `Creationf Retention 300 new 275 retained 1,225 new 200 new $18 million $30.5 million $10 million Customer Care 500 new $12 million Facility - - - Retail & Commercial 265 new $42.5 million Commercial & Retail 20 new $2.5 million Shopping Center Fruit Processing 150 new $3.1 million Facility 246 retained Hotel 250 new $100 million Residential, Retail, & 6 new $47 million Parking Hotel 35 new $7.2 million Residential To Be Determined $25 million The above active tax abatement agreements were entered into between 2004 and 2009 Abatements begin January 1 following the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and are limited to 10 years. (Source: Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009.) 227 Chapter 23• Financial Incentives a • • Provide fmancial assistance for the minimum possible length of time. PROJECT PREFERENCE AREAS The City acknowledges that different geographic areas face varying degrees of challenges in attracting private sector capital for quality business and housing development. Fort Worth's central city, in particular, has demonstrated a range of challenges related to retrofitting the existing urban fabric which may not exist in "greenfield" development outside the city's built environment. Therefore, while projects outside these areas might prove worthy, the City has specifically targeted its incentives to provide greater assistance to catalyst projects in areas of Fort Worth where market support has lagged behind community needs and goals. The following are the City's project preference areas. Additional information about the following geographical areas is provided in Chapter 10• Economic Development. • Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Eligible Areas — CDBG eligible areas have twenty percent or more poverty and may also be blighted. The program is intended to benefit low -and moderate -income persons. CDBG funds are used to benefit low-income persons and revitalize lower -income neighborhoods by expanding affordable housing, generating economic opportunities, and improving community facilities and services. • Central City — The City Council designated the area located within Interstate Highway Loop 820 that contains all CDBG eligible census block groups, all state designated enterprise zones, and all census block groups that are contiguous by 75 percent or more of their perimeter to CDBG eligible block groups or enterprise zones as the central city The central city has a high concentration of poverty and unemployment compared to Fort Worth as a whole. • Enterprise Zones — This designation is reserved for areas of high poverty and unemployment targeted for business redevelopment, including creation of jobs and economic revitalization. Amendments to the state enterprise zone program allow for census block groups with a poverty rate of at least 20 percent to automatically become enterprise zones. • Neighborhood Empowerment Zones — A Neighborhood Empowerment Zone (NEZ) is an area created to promote 1) the development and rehabilitation of affordable housing within the zone; 2) an increase in economic development within the zone; and 3) an increase in the quality of social services, education, or public safety provided to residents of the zone. • Commercial Corridors — Revitalization of older commercial districts in the central city is an important component of the City's economic development efforts. The City has identified 31 commercial corridors in need of revitalization. The followmg seven corridors are high priority- Berry Street, North Main Street, East Rosedale Street, Downtown and East Lancaster Avenue, Hemphill Street, Camp Bowie Boulevard, and West 7th Street. • Urban Villages — The City promotes the development of urban villages, which are strategic commercial districts designated along commercial corridors within the central city The premise behind the selection of villages is that Chapter 23: Financial Incentives 228 Neighborhood Empowerment Zones 1 Riverside 2 Woodhaven 3 West 7th/University 4 Trinity Park 5 Magnolia 6 Evans & Rosedale 7 Handley 8 Ridglea/Como 9 Polytechnic/Wesleyan 10 Stop Six expanded 11 Lake Arlington 12 Berry/University 13 Hemphill/Berry 14 Rolling Hills 15 Wedgwood Square 16 Berryhill Mason Heights 17 Oakland Corners Seventeen NEZs have been designated by the City Council. (Sources: Hous- ing and Economic Development, Planning and Development Department, 2009.) a a a • a a S S • I • • • • • • • • a I a ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• concentrating resources in these prime areas will have a positive economic ripple effect along the corridors where they are located, as well as in the surrounding residential neighborhoods. • Transit -Oriented Development (TODs)—TODs are dense urban development areas located within 1/4 to 1/2 mile of commuter rail stations, modem streetcar stops, and similar fixed -route transit stations. Successful TODs contain a mix of uses, including higher density residential, and are carefully designed to be pedestrian -friendly and specifically oriented to the transit station or stop. TODs accommodate growth more efficiently than low -density subdivisions, while supporting increased use of transit and its associated traffic congestion and air quality benefits. INCENTIVES Tax Incentives • Tax Abatement — Texas law permits a city to grant property tax abatements to projects located within a reinvestment zone for up to 10 years if the project meets the economic goals and objectives as outlined in the City's Tax Abatement Policy (refer to Appendix H). As of June 2009, the City has 23 tax abatement projects that represent a combined investment amount of $943 6 million with projected new and retained jobs at 3,904 and 3,449, respectively • Tax Increment Financing (TIF) — TIF is a financing tool that uses revenues from tax increments to pay for improvements that stimulate future development or redevelopment in designated reinvestment zones. The total value of taxable real property located within the zone is calculated for the year the zone is created to obtain the tax increment base. The amount by which future total value exceeds the tax increment base is the captured appraised value, from which tax increment revenues are generated for improvement projects. • Historic Site Tax Exemption — The City freezes the assessed value of Historic and Cultural Landmark designated property for 10 years for owners who spend an amount equal to 30 percent or more of the pre -renovation assessed value of the improvement on rehabilitation. Owners of Highly Significant Endangered designated property who similarly rehabilitate their property qualify for exemption from City taxes on the improvement and a freeze of the land value for 10 to 15 years. Financine Incentives • Public Improvement Districts (PIDs) — PIDs are special distncts and special- purpose units of local government created to provide a service or services to a specific group of constituents. Authorized by Chapter 372 of the Local Government Code, public improvement districts allow a City to levy and collect special assessments on property to fund a variety of enhanced services in the PID • Private Activity Bonds — The State of Texas Pnvate Activity Bond Program is designed to provide taxable and tax-exempt low -interest and long-term bond financing for eligible projects that include multifamily or economic development 229 Tax Abatement Agreements 1 IplNeme 47 JCPennev 'mooing Sotnhw4M Properties, 7 Inc (Firestone Apts ? 3 Historit Restoration, Inc Manta Courtvar.J Hotel i a ,va as 6ylha lake 15 Bon E Hortn 6 Mother Porkers Tee & Cotfin _ Inc 7 64s Hobcopter Textron & metro Rao 191 8 metl hic Cotton Dopot Loll tQ Mcachom Rail 191 8 ConAgra roods, Mc. 11 5txe; One. N A Coca-Cola Ersterpnses (C''..EI 113 Stockv_o'ds Station Hotel 113 Trinity Bull Dcne;aomenl Ltd Downtown: 2, 3, 9,17&18 10evelopment Type ( tratunon Center RBSrelen14ll Hpiel Seroa, ctzon lnarnments !Food Distnbt[ion Cantor Roasvng and Dsi<Ibu1Ktn Cs7[or ,e Mtn eavottnno, Cutlenle, Service, Dnlsrery rvice Distribution Center Oloce & PesideNtat D:trituhon Center C neon Prove -style Fealty Itlatli19 & Distnoutton Center IHctel Rro+,tdonhal 1 ID Nerve 15 fine FieYerane.S. Phoo4rY. Properly, Int, ?� (GrandMarc Aoartrr:ents? 17 ORM Holdn9 Canwoly. I I C. 18 Omnl Fort Wain Partnership 19 AaredElotvoIOCI NA Mutual coax Ave Ltd. am Weeress. t t C 23 "-Nitre Cross l3tue Shred i // Development Type t3oECmn 5 D9rmmhun Center hlnedllse Ross:lento!, Retail and Parionst Frq.t.', DUISSrt10 Fnahly Corporate HeutWarters & Q?snlOunon Centre Customer Care rna1ro Retail Shopping Cantor Cell Phone Mmnit3Cr urer Customer Care Pattie, t� G 5 2.5 0 SMiles As of June 2009, the City of Fort Worth has 23 active agreements repre- senting a combined private investment amount of $943 6 million with pro- jected new and retained jobs at 3,904 and 3,449, respectively (Source: Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 23: Financial Incentives projects. Private activity bonds are administered by the Texas Bond Review Board. • Industrial Revenue Bonds — The State of Texas Industrial Revenue Bond Program is designed to provide taxable and tax-exempt bond financing for land and depreciable property for industrial or manufacturing projects. Industnal revenue bonds are administered by the Economic Development and Tourism division of the Governor's Office. Grants and Loan Incentives • Federal and State Grants — If awarded, the City will provide this type of support to projects to close a demonstrable funding gap, or to leverage private investment. Grant funding can generally be used for infrastructure improvements, environmental remediation, pedestrian and streetscape enhancements in the public right-of-way, and other costs as appropriate to the funding source. The City or private sector may provide any required local matching funds. • Low Interest Loans — The purpose of this incentive is to provide development funds to developers at a lower interest rate compared to conventional loans. Loans can be used to support commercial, residential or mixed -use real estate development projects, forbothrehabilitation-and-new-construction related expenses. The types of loans available include predevelopment, interim financing and bridge. • Local Grants — Chapter 380 Economic Development Program grants are made in accordance with Texas Local Government Code 380 and the City's policy as outlined in Resolution 3716-03-2009 The purpose of Chapter 380 grants is to reimburse private developers for the range of expenses which may contribute to a financing gap yielding otherwise desirable projects financially infeasible. Real Estate. Regulatory. and Infrastructure Incentives • Land Transactions — The land transactions incentive is intended to assist developers with land acquisition and assemblage for meritorious projects in targeted infill areas. The City maintains an inventory of properties that fall within two distinct categories: tax -foreclosed properties and surplus properties. The City continues to review how to better utilize these properties to promote strategic housing and economic development goals. • Fee and Lien Waivers — The purpose of this incentive is to encourage investment through the regulatory framework by waiving development fees or delaying development fees until the developer sees a positive cash flow The City will waive or delay development impact fees on a case -by -case basis. • Mixed -Use Zoning Assistance — The purpose of this incentive is to assist individual property owners and interested community groups in rezoning to mixed -use in designated mixed -use growth centers and urban villages. In using a petition process or Council -initiated process, the City initiates the rezoning at no cost to the property owners. • Enhanced Community Facility Agreement (ECFA) — The City will consider paying for a greater percentage of project -related public infrastructure costs than Pier 1 Imports Headquarters The Pier 1 Imports headquarters building, which was sold to Chesapeake Energy in 2009, is a major catalyst project for future development along the Trinity River This project received a Chapter 380 Economic Development Program grant. (Sources: Housing and Economic Development Department and www.FortWorthArchitecture.com, 2009.) Chapter 23: Financial Incentives 230 • S • • • • I • • •• • • • • • • I • • • • a •S•I•S••r•••••••SSS••••••,••SSS•S what is currently called for in the existing CFA Policy • Development Approval Assistance — The service provides a single staff contact to work with other departments as necessary, in order to facilitate a streamlined process for projects in pre -development on issues related to construction, platting, zoning, and permitting. This service is for projects currently receiving economic or housing development incentives. Residential Incentives • Dispersed Housing Assistance — The City offers assistance to developers of residential communities that help to disperse affordable housing units throughout the City The emphasis in impacted areas is on the rehabilitation, stabilization, and replacement of existing affordable housing units with a mix of affordable and market rate units. In non -impacted areas, the emphasis is on construction of new and conversion of existing affordable housing. Relocation Incentives Policy • On December 16, 2008, (M&C G-16404) the City Council adopted a Relocation Incentives Policy to provide greater assistance to businesses that are required to relocate as a result of a Major Public Infrastructure Project. As outlined in the Policy, the City Council must specifically designate all projects that are deemed Major Public Infrastructure Projects in order for displaced businesses to qualify for incentives. All tax abatements to be provided to impacted businesses will require approval of the City Council. Maior Programs of Federal and State Aeencies In conjunction with local incentives, the City employs an array of federal and state programs to supplement funding for various economic development, housing, and historic preservation projects. The following federal and state programs are ones most frequently used by the City • Economic Development Administration (EDA) funds — These federal funds are administered by the Department of Commerce and are tied to job creation and business expansion. The City has used EDA funds for several projects including the Guinn School renovation, wherein an abandoned school was converted to office space, including a business incubator (Tech Fort Worth); infrastructure improvements in the Stockyards, streetscape enhancements in the Evans & Rosedale Business and Cultural District; and a small business revolving loan fund program. • Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA) — OEA funds fall under the Department of Defense and are used for communities adversely impacted by significant Defense program changes, such as base closures or realignments. The City received OEA funds to address the local defense downsizing including the closure of Carswell Air Force Base that occurred in the early 1990s. The grant funds assisted the City in developing an economic diversification strategy that led to the creation of the Fort Worth Business Assistance Center, which is located at the renovated James E. Guinn School Complex. • Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) — The City of Fort Worth has used the following HUD programs: 231 Reuse of City Surplus Property The City uses its surplus property as an incentive to rebuild commu- nities in the central city The conveyance of surplus property is a key tool for encouraging the development of affordable housing. Once vacant lots, the properties above were acquired by a local developer in 2007 from the City's Housing Finance Corporation to build quality affordable housing in the Terrell Heights historic neighborhood. (Source: Housing and Economic Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 23: Financial Incentives o Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG) — Federal block grant funds may be used for economic development activities in eligible areas. These activities include the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of commercial or industrial buildings, structures, and other real property and equipment. The City has used CDBG funds for several projects, including a small business micro -loan program that is managed by the Fort Worth Economic Development Corporation. 0 HOME funds — A portion of these funds is used locally to provide gap financing for eligible single-family or multifamily development projects. The City offers such incentives through various programs, including the Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) Program Fund, the Affordable Housing Development Fund, and the Predevelopment Loan Fund for CHDOs. Funds can be used for closing costs, down payments, and deferred payment loans for qualified households. o Section 108 Loan Guarantees — Section 108 is the loan guarantee provision of the CDBG program. The City borrows loan funds directly from HUD, backed by its current and future CDBG allocations. The City then uses that money to support projects that benefit low- and moderate -income communities. Loan proceeds can be used for site acquisition, site improvements, and construction, or it may -capitalize -an economic development loan fund. The development of Minyard Food Store (currently Fiesta) in southeast Fort Worth and supporting business development activity for the Mercado revitalization project along North Main Street are two examples of projects utilizing Section 108 loan guarantees. o Economic Development Initiative (EDI) funds — A grant program created by HUD, EDI is an extra incentive for cities to use Section 108 loan funds. It is for infrastructure and other costs that cannot be covered under the Section 108 loan program. The City has received EDI grants for the Minyard's grocery store, the Mercado, and the Evans & Rosedale Business and Cultural District. o Brownfield Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) funds — Similar in purpose to the EDI grant, this HUD grant provides funds and loan guarantees to clean up and redevelop environmentally contaminated industrial and commercial sites, commonly known as brownfields. Grantees must use at least 70 percent of funds for projects that benefit low- or moderate -income mdividuals or neighborhoods. As with EDI grants, projects using BEDI grants must leverage private investment and be used in conjunction with Section 108 loan guarantees. • Small Business Administration (SBA) — The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) aids, assists, and counsels small businesses. One of the agency's primary roles is to act as a loan guarantor to qualified small businesses that cannot obtain financing from traditional lenders. The following SBA programs are the major ones offered m Fort Worth. 0 7(a) Small Business Loan reduces risks to lenders by guaranteeing major portions of loans made to small and medium-sized busmesses. This enables a lender to provide financing when funding would otherwise be unavailable. Chapter 23: Financial Incentives 232 Tech Fort Worth The Tech Fort Worth business and technology incubator, located at I-35W and Rosedale in the James E Guinn School Complex, facili- tates the growth and development of emerging technology companies in Fort Worth This redevelopment project was funded in part by EDA funds. (Source. Tech Fort Worth, 2009.) I • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • S • • • I • • • • • ••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Loans can be used for expanding or renovating facilities, equipment purchases, leasehold improvements, refinancing existing debt, financing lines of credit and more. One variation of the 7(a) loans is the LowDoc loans with minimal paperwork. 0 7(m) Microloan Program offers small businesses short-term loans of up to $25,000 for the purchase of machinery and equipment, working capital, and other expenses. In addition to financing services, this program offers technical assistance 0 Certified Development Company (Section 504) Program provides long- term, fixed rate financing through certified development companies (CDCs) to small businesses to acquire real estate, machinery, and equipment for expansion of business or facility modernization. Most CDCs are private, nonprofit corporations designed to support economic development activities in the area they serve. The Fort Worth Economic Development Corporation (FWEDC) (also known as Alliance Lending Corporation) serves the entire state of Texas. The FWEDC's headquarters is located at the James E. Guinn School Complex. In addition, the corporation has a satellite office in Dallas. 0 Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs) offer one -stop assistance to small businesses by providing a wide variety of information and guidance. The program is a cooperative effort of the private sector, the educational community and federal, state and local governments. SBDCs enhance economic development by providing small businesses with management and technical assistance. The Fort Worth SBDC is overseen by Tarrant County College and is located at the James E. Guinn School Complex. o HUBZone Empowerment Contracting Program stimulates economic development and creates jobs in urban and rural communities by providing Federal contracting preferences to small businesses. These preferences go to small businesses that obtain HUBZone (Histoncally Underutilized Busmess Zone) certification in part by employing staff who live in a HUBZone. The company must also maintain a "principal office" in one of these specially designated areas. Fort Worth has several HUBZone qualified census tracks. • Texas Mezzanine Fund (TMF) — Introduced to Tarrant County in October 1999, the Texas Mezzanine Fund serves as an interim lender that supplements bank loans by providing terms rarely offered by banks. TMF's target market is growing companies that are located in low -and moderate -income communities or that provide jobs for low -to moderate -income persons. The TMF provides financing from $50,000 to $500,000 for business development, affordable housing, and community facilities. • Freeport Tax Exemption (FTE) — Freeport exemption became a part of the Texas Constitution in November 1989 The governing body of each taxing entity must pass an ordinance electing to offer FTE in its jurisdiction. After the ordinance is passed, the exemption is applied to all properties which meet the requirements. FTE helps reduce costs associated with inventory taxes. The exemption allows products and goods to be moved through the state without incurring inventory taxes, if those products are held for less than 175 days. The City of Fort Worth, Tarrant County, and most Fort Worth area independent school districts offer FTE. 233 Fiesta Grocery Store The Fiesta Grocery Store (formerly Minyard grocery store ) at 4245 E. Berry Street serves as the anchor in this retail center that is a source of employment in Southeast Fort Worth The project was a collaboration with Minyard Food Stores It was the first full -service grocery store con- structed in southeast Fort Worth in 30 years. Additional neighborhood serving retail shops are located in the center The project was funded in part by HUD Section 108 and EDI funds. (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 23: Financial Incentives • Foreign Trade Zones (FTZs) — FTZs provide special customs procedures to U.S. plants engaged in international trade -related activities. Duty-free treatment is accorded items that are processed in a FTZ and then reexported, and duty payment is deferred on items until they are brought out of the FTZ for sale in the U.S. market. This helps to offset customs advantages available to overseas producers who compete with domestic industry FTZs are administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Fort Worth has one FTZ located in the Alliance Corridor • New Markets Tax Credits (NMTC) — Established by Congress in 2000, the NMTC program permits individual and corporate taxpayers to receive a credit against federal income taxes for making qualified equity investments that go toward financing community development projects, stimulate economic opportunity, and create jobs in low-income areas. The investor's credit totals 39 percent of the value of the investment and is claimed over a seven-year credit allowance. • Federal Tax Credits for Historic Property — Federal income tax credits for 20 percent of the rehabilitation costs of a certified historic structure are available if proper procedure is followed. This credit can be applied only to commercial, industrial, agricultural, or rental residential properties. Certified historic structures are buildings that -are -either listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places, or are located in a registered historic district and certified by the National Park Service as contributing to the historic significance of that district. For a non -historic building built before 1936, a 10 percent income tax credit is available for rehabilitation. • Low Income Housmg Tax Credit — Administered by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, this federal income tax credit is an incentive available to persons who build or rehabilitate rental units and rent a certain percentage to low- and moderate -income households. • Secondary Mortgage Lenders — In January 2004, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) pledged to help six million families become first-time homeowners over the next decade. Fannie Mae works with lenders, nonprofits, mortgage insurers, community groups, state and local housing finance agencies, and others, including employers, to share information and create funding opportunities. The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), and the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) have similar housing programs. Villas by the Lake Financial incentives, such as low income housing tax credits and tax abate- ments, have stimulated development such as the Villas by the Lake in southeast Fort Worth near Lake Arlington (Sources: Housing and Economic Devel- opment Department, Humphreys & Partners Architects, 2009.) . . • . . . • . . . . Chapter 23: Financial Incentives 234 ••••••.••••4••••`••,.••••••••••.•'• CHAPTER 24: ANNEXATION POLICY Annexation is the legal process which adds land to the corporate limits of a city Annexation allows formerly unincorporated properties to receive municipal services, such as police and fire protection, garbage collection, water service, and sewer service. Controlled annexation can yield a more logical land development pattern that responds to population growth and economic development opportunities, while mimmizmg urban sprawl and ensuring effective delivery of services. BACKGROUND The extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) is a legally designated area of land located a specific distance beyond a city's corporate boundaries that the city has authority to annex. Chapter 42 of the Texas Local Government Code establishes provisions that define the size of the extraterritorial boundaries according to a city's population. The statutes allow a five -mile ETJ for cities in excess of 100,000 in population. Fort Worth's population exceeds 100,000 persons, therefore it has a five -mile ETJ Cities with smaller populations have smaller ETJs. The majority of Texas cities, including Fort Worth, are presently permitted to regulate the subdivision of land within the ETJ House Bill (HB) 1445, which was approved by the Texas Legislature in 2001, requires that subdivisions meet the requirements of one jurisdiction rather than both the city and county Therefore, the City has entered into agreements with Denton , Johnson, Tarrant, and Wise counties that allow the City to act on plats within Fort Worth's ETJ Only Parker County has not agreed to give the City authorization to act on plats within its unincorporated area inside the ETJ Impact of Annexation Only after land is annexed to the City can zoning be applied to the property • Annexation provides for the orderly provision of physical infrastructure and other services necessary to develop raw land and consequently the tax base for the city, the region, and the state. • Through the subsequent application of City zoning controls, annexation prevents the establishment of incompatible development patterns, protecting existing and future land uses. Annexation therefore can be used as a growth management tool by promoting orderly development patterns and enforcing more efficient provision of public services and infrastructure. In some cases, however, the City of Fort Worth has approved "limited purpose" annexations for which full city services are not extended. Implementation To be annexed, the land must be contiguous to the city limits, unless the land is owned by the city As a Home Rule city, Fort Worth may, subject to the requirements of Chapter 43 of the Texas Local Government Code, implement annexations in one of two ways: 235 VASE PARKER aogo , / Jawsaa Fort Worth City Limits and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, 2009 10 s 0 Annexation 'Type within City Limits Full Purpose is Limited Purpose Extraterritorial Jurisdiction 10 MdeS The light gray shading on the map above shows Fort Worth's city limits, with the dark gray shading identifying limited -purpose annexation areas. The area shaded with dots is Fort Worth's ETJ, which can extend as far as five miles out. The current ETJ contains approximately 307 square miles of land (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009 ) Chapter 24 Annexation Policy • Property Owner -Initiated. A process by which private property owners initiate annexation by petitioning the City to annex their property into its corporate limits. This is the most common form of annexation undertaken by the City of Fort Worth. • City -Initiated. A process by which the City initiates annexation without a petition. This type of annexation occurs where the affected property owners may not desire to initiate a petition. The City may initiate annexation to fix boundary irregularities, encourage desired economic development, or to regulate development that could be detrimental to orderly growth or have adverse impacts on the city History of Annexation Until 1986 Fort Worth has grown from an original town site of 4.2 square miles and a population of approximately 3,000 persons, to the present size of 350 square miles (December 2009) and a population of 720,250 (2009 estimate). The map to the right shows how Fort Worth has expanded since 1873 Between 1930 and 1962, Fort Worth's growth was generated by the development of key defense -related employment centers such as General Dynamics (which later began operating as Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems), Carswell Air Force Base, and Fort Worth Quartermaster Depot. These facilities created a need for new housing and associated infrastructure supplied by the City of Fort Worth. From 1963 through 1986, Fort Worth expanded primarily along transportation corridors such as I-30, I-35W, Loop 820, US 287, and SH 121/SH 10 Major employment centers developed during the earlier years of this period, including the former Great Southwest International Airport, located south of SH 183 and east of US 360, and the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Annexation Activity Since 1986 Since 1986, major expansion has occurred northward along I-35W, which was sparked by the development of Fort Worth Alliance Airport and its associated industrial park. Major activity centers located within this region include Fort Worth Alliance Airport, the Alliance industrial park, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Intermodal facility and rail yard, and Texas Motor Speedway In February 2002, the City Council began considering the annexation of developing areas that comply with criteria in the City's annexation policy The City Council approved the annexation of approximately 9,000 acres in the Eagle Mountain Lake and U.S Highway 287 areas for limited purposes m December 2002 and January 2003, respectively The 287 zone was subsequently annexed for full purposes. Under limited -purpose annexation, Fort Worth can enforce planning, zoning, and health and safety ordinances, but property owners do not have to pay City property taxes. The City does not provide police or fire protection, roadway maintenance, or other municipal services in areas annexed for limited purposes. Residents of limited - purpose annexed areas can vote in City Council and charter elections, but not bond elections, and cannot run for office. The City must annex an area for full purposes Chapter 24 Annexation Policy 236 History of Annexation, 1874-2009 10 5 0 Annexation Years 1873, Ottppnal Town 1874.1930 Na Annexations 1931-1940 1941-1962 1963-1986 1987-1990 1991 2009 Limited Purpose Annexation ,1 (2002 2004, and 2007) 10 Miles The map above shows land annexed since 1873 Fort Worth has grown from 4.2 square miles in 1873 to 350 square miles (336 square miles from full -purpose annexations and 14 square miles from limited -purpose annexations) as of December 2009 The original population was 3,000 persons. Fort Worth's estimated 2009 population is 720,250 (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009 ) a a a i • • • • • • • S S • • • • • • • I ••••••••••S•••••••••••••••••••••• within three years after limited -purpose annexation, unless a majority of the affected landowners and the City agree to extend the deadline. In October 2003, the City Council approved the limited purpose annexation of over 7,000 acres located west of the current city limits, known as Walsh Ranch. The City and property owners entered into an economic development agreement, which indicates that the property will be developed over a 40- to 50-year period. In addition, the City and property owners agreed to extend the three-year deadline for full -purpose annexation pending the development of the property From January 2000 through December 2009, there have been 108 annexations, consisting of 103 full -purpose and five limited -purpose annexations. In most cases, annexed property is designated as "AG" Agricultural until the property is rezoned in accordance with the current land use or the future land use, as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. Sixty-five of the annexations were owner-mitiated, and 43 were City -initiated. Fort Worth's boundaries will continue to expand as new development unfolds along the city's periphery Such expansion will be fostered by the intensification of development within key growth centers such as Fort Worth Alliance Airport, Alliance Gateway industrial park, and Texas Motor Speedway The area adjacent to Hulen/Cityview to the southwest is likely to expand as new land uses develop near this growth center It is anticipated that more of Fort Worth's ETJ will be considered for annexation in accordance with the City's annexation policy and state law The provision of water service often plays a critical role in annexation decisions. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, formerly known as the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission issues Certificates of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) for water services to a pubhc or private organization that will provide exclusive water service to a defined area. The boundary of the CCN held by the City of Fort Worth includes the majority of the land area within the city limits of Fort Worth, approximately 40 percent of its ETJ, and small areas beyond the ETJ If a potential customer is located within an area for which the City of Fort Worth holds the CCN, the City must either provide water service if requested or decertify the area requesting service. Annexation Plan. Annexation Policy. and Annexation Program State law requires cities to identify areas with 100 or more separate lots or tracts of land with residential dwellings that the city intends to annex for full purposes in the City's annexation plan. The City may annex the area for full purposes beginning on the third anniversary of including the area in the annexation plan. On December 14, 1999, the City Council adopted an Annexation Plan, which stated, "at this time the City does not intend to annex any temtory that is required to be in the annexation plan. " The annexation plan currently includes one area with more than 100 residential dwelling units that the City may annex in 2010, two areas in 2013, and one area in 2014 The resolution adoptmg the Annexation Plan and a summary of amendment activity can be found in Appendix F Boundary of Certificate of Convenience and Necessity Area, 2009 10 5 0 10 Mies ■111■w1111 11111111111 The City of Fort Worth holds the Certificate of Convenience and Necessity for the majority of the land area within its city limits and about 40 percent of the ETJ (Source: Water Department, 2009.) 237 Chapter 24 Annexation Policy In response to a request by the City Council, an interdepartmental working group and a Mayor -appointed advisory committee assessed the extent to which the annexation policy adopted in 1999 effectively furthered the strategic goals in the Comprehensive Plan and made recommendations for amending the policy and formulating a multi- year annexation program. The advisory committee and City staff presented drafts of the annexation policy to the City Council, its committees and appointed commissions, held bnefmgs with various community organizations, solicited comments from pertinent county governments; and held a public forum to seek additional public comments. The City Plan Commission held a public hearing and voted to endorse the recommended policy The City Council also conducted public hearings to receive citizen comments, and adopted the annexation policy on September 7, 2004 This policy replaced the 1999 annexation policy and can be found in Appendix F The annexation policy includes sections on: annexation criteria and procedures, disannexation, preparation of fiscal impact analysis, five-year annexation program, three-year annexation plan, and external communication. The policy. • Provides specific and objective criteria to the City Council for making annexation decisions; • Provides for preparation of a five-year annexation program that identifies areas the City wishes to consider for annexation, • Provides the City and affected property owners, through the annexation program, with an appropriate transition period by delaying certain City -initiated annexations for three or more years; and • Improves external communication by holding additional public information meetings and soliciting comments from affected property owners, existing city residents and pertinent local government agencies prior to initiating formal annexation hearings. • Gives protesting property owners the opportunity to participate in negotiations related to the provision of municipal services. The Planning and Development Department, in cooperation with other pertinent departments, and with guidance from the advisory committee, prepared a five-year annexation program that identifies areas to be considered for annexation dunng the succeeding five years. It is not a legally binding document. Inclusion of an area in the program does not obligate the City to annex that area, nor does omission of an area from the program prevent the City from annexing the area. The annexation program is incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan and updated annually Areas are placed in the annexation program based upon criteria defined in the annexation policy and the feasibility of providing city services. The 2010-2014 Annexation Program identifies 31 areas totaling about 14 7 square miles to be considered for City -initiated annexation. These areas include: 21 enclaves, one limited -purpose annexation area to be considered for full -purpose annexation, five areas with anticipated urban development, four areas posing Chapter 24 Annexation Policy 238 Number of Annexation and Disannexation Cases By Type, 1999-2009 Interjurisdictional Boundary Adjustment 14% Owner -Initiated 52% City -Initiated 34% Since 1999, the City has processed 151 annexation and disan- nexation cases The majority of these cases have been initi- ated by the property owners. (Source. Planning and Development De- partment, 2009) Land Area Associated with Annexations and Disannexations by Type, 1999-2009 40 - 35 30 25 20 15- 10 5 0 35.0 -0.5 -5 - Owner -Initiated City -Initiated Interjurisdictional Boundary Adjustment Land Area = 65.1 square miles. Since 1999, the City has annexed approximately 65 1 square miles Of the land area included in the calculations, 26 square miles were annexed for limited purposes. These areas may be subject to fu- ture full -purpose annexation, and should not be cumulatively com- bined (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) a • a I • I S S S • • • I S • • • • • i • • S • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • an adverse environmental impact, and four mixed -use growth centers. There are also two possible owner initiated annexations. City staff review the five-year program annually to determine if other properties should be included. The City involved property owners and community organizations from the ETJ and within the city itself in the formulation of the five-year program. City staff conducted numerous information meetings with interested local governments and affected property owners to answer questions and receive comments. The City Plan Commission and the City Council will also hold public hearings before adopting the annexation program as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The 2010-2014 annexation program can be found in Appendix F STRATEGIES Fort Worth demonstrates how the annexation process can be administered as a positive tool for guiding development in its ETJ Fort Worth typically annexes properties that are within three years of bemg developed. The strategies listed below should help the City achieve its strategic goal of promoting orderly and sustamable growth. Promote Economic Growth Fort Worth should use annexation, where appropriate, as a tool to facilitate public - private partnerships intended to stimulate local and regional economic growth and implement sound capital improvement programming. • The City should use its ETJ as a marketing and planning resource by anticipating candidate areas for annexation. Such areas would primarily consist of raw land, be accessible to public utilities provided by Fort Worth, and be within three years of being developed. • Prior to annexation, the City should coordinate with the property owners in developing a service plan for the logical extension of infrastructure and services to the proposed development. Once service plan commitments have been established, the City should verify funding sources (both public and private) for implementation of the plan. Sources may include, but not be limited to, the following: special taxation districts, water and sewer impact fees, transportation impact fees, community facilities agreements, capital improvement program budgets, and other sources deemed appropriate for the specific project. • Owner -initiated annexation of the project, along with the institution of zoning and platting requirements in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan's development principles, should commence and be completed within the time frame prescribed by Chapter 43 of the Texas Local Government Code. Facilitate Long Range Planning Fort Worth should use annexation to manage and regulate development on the fringe of the city m accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. • Some annexations can be approved without being included m the annexation plan, includmg sparsely developed unincorporated areas with less than 100 residential tracts, industrial areas, vacant properties, and owner -initiated annexations. 239 30 25 20 -5 75.63 3.38 Land Area Associated with Annexations and Disannexations by Year and Type, 1999-2009 8.13 6.53 1.86 ® '% 2.16 0.24 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 0.68 0 Ow ner Initiated ■ City -Initiated 0 Boundary Adjustment Since 1999, the City has annexed approximately 65 1 square miles, for both full and limited purposes. The majority of this land area was annexed in 2003 Of the land area included in the calculations, 26 0 square miles were annexed for limited purposes. This area may be subject to future full - purpose annexation, and should not be cumulatively combined. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 24 Annexation Policy • As unincorporated areas become more densely developed, the Comprehensive Plan should identify additional growth centers in the ETJ, which should be considered for annexation. • The Comprehensive Plan should address linkages to future growth centers in the ETJ Consideration should be given to the study of key thoroughfares in terms of their impact on new development patterns as they extend into the ETJ Such thoroughfares would include, but not be limited to, the proposed alignment of SH 121T as it extends into southwest Tarrant County, the westward alignment of I-30 as it extends into Parker County, the westward alignment of SH 114 as it extends into Wise County, the proposed development of the Outer Loop as it extends from SH 170 in the north to FM 1187 or an alignment further to the south, and the U.S. Highway 287 corridor in the northwest portion of Tarrant County • As requests for water are received from persons located within the water service areas authorized by CCNs, the City will make the requested service available under terms and conditions as set forth in applicable City utility service ordinances or as otherwise ordered by the State. Protect Future Development Fort Worth should use annexation as a means of extending the City's land use regulations and building codes to protect future development from inadequate design and construction standards that may proliferate in unincorporated areas. • In an effort to establish and sustain development standards for future annexation sites, the City Plan Commission should review the effectiveness of the subdivision rules and regulations in accomplishing the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan as applied to the ETJ • When the City Plan Commission finds that development proposals for an area appear to be contrary to or inconsistent with the planning objectives for that area, or that the frequency of requests indicates a need for modifications, the commission should advise the City Council of its conclusions and may file a proposal to amend the regulations applied to future development. • Upon annexation of territory into the City of Fort Worth, the City Plan Commission should prepare a report recommending the locations and types of zoning districts to be established in the annexed area based on the Comprehensive Plan, and file a copy of the report with the City Council and the Zoning Commission for their evaluation at public hearings. • Planning, zoning, building inspection, code compliance, and other enforcement jurisdictions of the City of Fort Worth may extend to annexed territories on the effective date of the annexation ordinance. Developed land uses that existed prior to annexation are grandfathered in accordance with the provisions prescribed by State statute. However, all new construction projects must conform to applicable development standards of the City Policy Concerning Creation of Conservation and Reclamation Districts Conservation and Reclamation Districts are political subdivisions created under the Texas Constitution - Article III, Section 52 and/or Article XVI, Section 59 The districts' purpose is to provide infrastructure and other services that vary based on the Chapter 24 Annexation Policy 240 Existing Enclaves, 2009 Enclaves are areas within the City's ETJ that are surrounded by the corpo- rate limits of the City of Fort Worth and/or the corporate limits or ETJ of other municipalities or otherwise approved by Fort Worth City Council (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) a a a a a a a a a a • • S to • • • • • • • a a a ••••••••••••••••••i0••••••••••••• Water Control and Improvement District [WCID]). The Districts may issue debt and assess taxes to finance the corresponding development's infrastructure. The City of Fort Worth is able to negotiate certain regulatory powers over these distncts that form in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. Historically, the only MUD in Fort Worth's ETJ was formed in 1974 and was known as Lake Country This development was annexed by the City of Fort Worth in 2000 Beginning in 2004, a renewed developer interest in this fmancing mechanism occurred, and the City began receiving petitions to form districts. Staff approached these projects as long-term annexation plans and sought to exercise development standards, ensuring the quality of the development until a future point when the debt - load is reduced sufficiently for annexation to be practical. The City of Fort Worth has authorized the formation of two MUDs (Live Oak Creek and Tradition) and has given conditional consent to two additional MUDs and three WCIDs. Although the existing Conservation and Reclamation District Policy and the Annexation Policy indicates annexation should be considered since dense development in the near term is anticipated, the City evaluates annexations based on the proximity to the city limits, the possession or ability to acquire the certificate of convenience and necessity, and the housing gap filled by the project. Staff will be updating the Policy Concerning Creation of Conservation and Reclamation Districts as a result of negotiations with these developments, the potential benefits of these districts, and the legal limitations to the City's ability to regulate them. The full Policy Concerning Creation of Conservation and Reclamation Districts can be found in Appendix H. Foster Intereovernmental Cooperation Fort Worth should use annexation as an approach for alleviating jurisdictional conflicts with abutting municipal and county governments, and for coordinating service delivery arrangements with school districts, municipal utility districts, and emergency response providers. The City should consider requests for boundary adjustments from adjacent municipalities where an exchange of territories of equivalent value, or an exchange for other consideration of an equivalent value, could occur between cities. The requesting municipality should have adequate land use controls to maintain development standards equivalent to those of the City of Fort Worth. It can be anticipated that such adjustments will not be adopted if the area to be released would result in a reduction to the City of Fort Worth's revenue stream or if the area contams environmental and economic resources vital to Fort Worth's mterests. The City should assist school districts in planning for new educational and support facilities in annexed areas. To coordinate future school construction with land developers and school districts, the City should continue to circulate plat filings and zonmg applications associated with annexation petitions. Alliance*Texas Annexation can be important for the establishment of public -private sector partnerships, such as with Alliance*Texas Annexation is intended to stimulate local and regional economic growth and implement sound capital improvement programming. (Source. Alliance *Texas, 2009.) 241 Chapter 24 Annexation Policy ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••asa ••••••••••i••••••••'•••••••••••••• CHAPTER 25: INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION The City of Fort Worth interacts on a formal and informal basis with various entities and agencies to provide quality services to citizens, to reduce costs, and to comply with state and federal regulations. This chapter identifies and describes existing agreements and presents opportunities for additional interaction and coordination. BACKGROUND The City of Fort Worth interacts with other agencies in a formal manner through interlocal agreements, membership and participation in coordinating organizations, participation in regular meetings of governing bodies, joint meetings, workshops, working groups, and special task forces. The City also relates on an informal basis through personal contact by staff and elected officials. The City Council sets intergovernmental policies and executes formal agreements. Partnerships with Surrounding Cities The City of Fort Worth shares its corporate limits with 28 cities. There are interlocal agreements with many of these cities,_ including agreements for shared facilities -and - coordinated provision of services, participation in household hazardous waste collections, and regulations of the Rabies Control Act. Coordinated policies and programs for particular services such as public health, libraries, parks, fire, and police are described in the corresponding chapters. Water and wastewater agreements are listed in Chapter 18 Environmental Quality The City of Fort Worth and the City of Dallas are joint owners of the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. An 11-member board operates the Airport; the board consists of the Mayor of each city, three members appointed by Fort Worth City Council, and six members appointed by Dallas City Council. The board prepares a budget each year that must be approved by the governing bodies of both cities. Individually, the two cities have executed covenants whereby they can levy a maintenance tax to assure the airport is efficiently operated and maintained. However, neither has implemented the maintenance tax to date. The Board makes agreements with air carriers and other parties that use the airport and sets rental rates and fees to produce adequate revenues. The Trinity Railway Express commuter rail project was originally a joint venture of the City of Fort Worth and the City of Dallas. Each city owned a 50 percent interest in right of way formerly owned by Chicago, Rock Island, and Pacific Railroad that joins the two cities. The property was acquired to preserve the freight service until such time that mass transit could be re -introduced in the corridor The Federal Transit Administration and the Texas Department of Transportation contributed $31 6 million toward acquisition, and the cities jointly contributed $2.4 million. A joint project by the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T) and Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) has been implemented to provide commuter rail on the existing track between Dallas and Fort Worth, from which the service will connect to 243 Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Adjacent and Surrounding Cities Name. Justin Blue Mound Watauga Lakeside Lake Worth Sansom Park River Oaks Westworth Village White Settlement Westover Hills Richland Hills Aledo Edgecliff Village Everman 0 2.5 5 7.5 10 Miles Fort Worth shares boundaries with 28 cities The City has various service and facility agreements with these cities and other nearby municipalities. (Source: Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Direct commuter rail service between Dallas and Fort Worth began in December 2001, with the opening of two commuter rail stations in Downtown Fort Worth. The cities of Fort Worth and Dallas have both transferred ownership of the rail corridor property to their respective public transportation providers, The T and DART, who are responsible for implementing the Trinity Railway Express plan of services. The Area Metropolitan Ambulance Authority (AMAA) is a coalition of 14 municipalities within Tarrant County (including Burleson, which is also in Johnson County) that participate in the service by contract or interlocal agreement. AMAA oversees the administrative aspect of the emergency medical service system. The Authority assures residents within its service area an equal level of medical care by establishing uniform ambulance ordinances and operating procedures. The City registered a trade name, MedStar, for the system so that service contractors can be granted licenses to operate under the same name. MedStar provides emergency and non -emergency services, and is the only ambulance provider within the Authority's jurisdiction. The City's contract with AMAA stipulates that the Fort Worth Fire Department will provide the first response to emergencies within Fort Worth city limits. Each participating jurisdiction has the responsibility of providing first response services within its boundaries. The AMAA Board has_policy_authority over MedStar The Board consists of six members, four of whom are appointed by the Fort Worth City Council. Governmental Entities with Taxing Authority The Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T) oversees public transportation services in its service area, which includes the cities of Fort Worth, Richland Hills, and Blue Mound. The City of Fort Worth and The T have a contract whereby The T provides transportation services to the City based on a service plan adopted by The T's Executive Committee. The City Council appoints eight of the Executive Committee members, and the County Commissioners Court appoints one. The Authority is funded by a one-half percent sales tax. The Tarrant County Hospital District, through the operation of the JPS Health Network, provides health services for county residents and is a primary provider of indigent health care services. JPS consists of John Peter Smith Hospital, Trinity Springs Pavilion for Psychiatric Care, and a network of community -based health centers located throughout the county The Hospital District Board of Managers, appointed by the Tarrant County Commissioners Court, is responsible for appointing the district administrator and overseeing operations of the district. The Commissioners Court sets and approves the ad valorem tax rate that provides partial funding of the Hospital District's operations. The City of Fort Worth transfers associated grant funding and a General Fund subsidy to help support health initiatives previously operated by the City that are now part of the JPS Health Network. The 2008 Tarrant County Hospital District property tax rate was 0.230 per $100 The Tarrant Regional Water District is a political subdivision of the State of Texas providing raw water resources to more than 30 different customers in the North Central Texas area, including the cities of Fort Worth, Arlington, and Mansfield as Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport The official groundbreaking ceremony, held December 11, Dallas/Fort Worth Airport, marked the beginning of construction for the "world's biggest airport." This project is one of the most successful joint ventures in which the City of Fort Worth has engaged. The airport is currently one of the nation's top three domestic hubs. (Source. Dallas/Fort worm Airport, 2009.) 244 1968, for the i • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4' • • •• '. s I • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• well as the Trinity River Authority of Texas. In addition to supplying quality water to its customers, the Water District also provides vital flood control along the banks of the Trinity River, preserves and protects the environment, and enhances recreational opportunities for the public. The Water District maintains four reservoirs (Eagle Mountain, Bridgeport, Cedar Creek, and Richland -Chambers), 150 miles of water -transport pipelines, 27 miles of floodway levees, and the Trinity River Trails. All Water District revenue from the sale of water is used for water supply projects. Water District property taxes are used for flood control projects. The 2008 Water District tax rate was 0 020 per $100 Fort Worth Independent School District serves 52 percent of the land area in the City of Fort Worth. Fourteen adjoining independent school districts cover the remainder of the city The independent school districts levy an ad valorem pioperty tax for public education within each district that is collected by the county in which the property lies. Each district is governed by an elected board that has the authority to change the tax rate within the district and sell bonds to finance new facilities. A joint resolution was adopted in March of 1997 by the Fort Worth City Council and the Fort Worth Independent School District that supports the establishment of policy by both entities to promote city/school cooperation. The 2008 FWISD property tax rate was 1.257 per $100 Tarrant County levies an ad valorem property tax on property within the county boundaries. The tax is used to fund county services and facilities. The tax rate is adjusted annually based on appraised property values. The 2008 Tarrant County property tax rate was approximately 0.264 per $100 Denton, Johnson, Parker, and Wise counties also levy an ad valorem property tax on property within their boundaries. The 2008 Denton County property tax rate was 0.236 per $100, Johnson County was 0.306, Parker was 0.337, and Wise County was 0.361 per $100 The Tarrant County College District (TCCD) levies an ad valorem tax on property within the county boundaries. There are two taxes levied by TCCD; one is used for maintenance operations and one is used to retire bond debt. The fiscal year 2008 TCCD rate is 138 per $100 value. Counties Fort Worth's taxable city limits includes portions of three counties: Tarrant, Denton, and Wise counties. The State of Texas establishes one agency within each county as the appraiser of property values within that county The Tarrant Appraisal District (TAD), the Denton Central Appraisal District (DCAD), and the Wise County Appraisal District (WiseCAD) provide these services in the respective counties. The appraisal districts maintain records of ownership, applicable taxing entities, and their exemptions. TAD, DCAD, and WiseCAD forward tax roll changes to the City each month for updating. In July of each year, they provide the City with a final roll of taxable property within the City's taxing jurisdiction. City Council sets the tax rate for the fiscal year, beginning October 1, based on this information. City Council can establish ad valorem tax exemption policies within its statutory authority Tarrant County Health Department provides certain health care services to city 245 Tarrant County College Trinity River Campus Nearly 80,000 people live and/or work in downtown Fort Worth, the near North Side, and the Medical District. All are within a three-mile radius of the new Tarrant County College Trinity River campus at the former RadioShack complex above, making it accessible and convenient for those wishing to make their dream of higher education a reality Classes were held at the new location in September 2009 (Source: Tarrant County College, 2009.) Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation residents, such as vaccinations, immunizations, and WIC programs that issue food stamps and nutritional information. In case of an endemic disease outbreak, the City, County, and State would work together The City works with the Tarrant County Community Development Division on grants and participates in the Fort Worth and Tarrant County Housing Consortium to address affordable housing on a county level. Fort Worth resident housing needs are also addressed through Tarrant County Access to Homeless, Tarrant County Homeless Coalition, Tarrant County Disability Housing Coalition, Tarrant County Mental Health/Mental Retardation, and Consumer Credit Community Services. The City of Fort Worth Housing Department works with most of these agencies in addressing housing needs of city residents. Tarrant County has an agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to provide fair housing and tenant/landlord services to all residents of Tarrant County On June 30, 1999, U S. Secretary of Labor Alexis Herman authorized Texas to begin implementing the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998. WIA requires states to streamline and consolidate their job training systems by creating a "one stop" approach for delivery of services. The Tarrant County Workforce Development Board administers the WIA, which provides grant money for skills training and job placement services. The City's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) includes portions of five counties: Denton, Johnson, Parker, Tarrant, and Wise. State law defines the responsibilities and jurisdictions allowed by cities within the ETJ — for example, the review of new subdivision plats. Chapter 22 Development Regulations provides a more detailed description of this relationship. Regional Agencies The Trinity River Authority provides planning for the Trinity River Basin, constructs dams, and supplies wastewater treatment through contracts with other agencies. The Trinity River serves as a primary water supply to more than half a million people in the upper basin centered around the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area, and an additional 4 8 million people on the upper Gulf Coast of Texas centered around the greater Houston metropolitan area. Twenty counties fall within its boundaries, which extend from the mouth of the Tnnity River near Galveston Bay, up to Dallas and Tarrant Counties. Each project undertaken by the Authonty has an individual advisory committee. The City of Fort Worth appoints one member to the advisory committee for each pertinent project. Coordinating Agencies The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) is a voluntary association of government entities in a 16-county metropolitan region centered around Fort Worth and Dallas. There are currently 234 governments that are members of NCTCOG, including 16 counties, 166 cities, 23 school districts, and 29 special districts. Its purpose is to assist local governments in planning for common needs, cooperating for mutual benefits, and coordinating regional development. The Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation Area Metropolitan Ambulance Authority The Area Metropolitan Ambulance Authority (AMAA) oversees the admin- istrative aspect of the emergency medical service system The Authority is a coalition of 13 municipalities within Tarrant County, including Burleson, which is also in Johnson County, that participate by contract or interlocal agreement. Medstar, the registered trade name for the system, provides emergency and non -emergency services, and is the only ambulance pro- vider within the Authority's jurisdiction The City's contract with AMAA stipulates that the Fort Worth Fire Department will provide the first re- sponse to emergencies within Fort Worth city limits (Source. City of Fort Worth, 2009.) 246 a I i i • i • • • • S •' S • • I • • • • • • • i ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• City of Fort Worth is a member and pays dues based on population. The City has a permanent seat on the 11-member Executive Board. NCTCOG serves as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for transportation and air quality in the Fort Worth -Dallas metropolitan area in accordance with federal law NCTCOG is responsible for maintaining a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process for all modes of travel for the region, as well as regional air quality programs. The City is an active participant in the Vision North Texas initiative. Vision North Texas is making an important contribution to the future quality of life, economic desirability, and long-term sustainability of the Dallas -Fort Worth Metroplex. It is increasing public awareness about important regional land use issues that affect mobility, air quality, water supply and other economic and environmental resources. In addition, it serves as a forum for discussion, education, research, and decisions about public and private sector actions to address these concerns. Importantly, it is addressing these concerns through a partnership of the private, public, nonprofit, and academic sectors. The City is a member of a number of different agencies that coordinate with cities and city leaders in an attempt to addresscommonissues. • The City of Fort Worth is a member of the North Texas Commission, a regional, independent, nonprofit economic development consortium made up of municipalities, chambers of commerce, and corporations established to develop regional programs to market the North Texas Region on the national and international level. The City pays membership dues and has a position on the Board of Directors. • The Texas Municipal League consists of all cities in the State of Texas. It provides services, such as lobbying the state legislature, that individual cities do not have the financial resources or political strength to do alone. Professional organizations also participate in committees to provide and share information. • Collaborative Leadership Council consists of members and representatives of City Council, Fort Worth Independent School District, chambers of commerce, Tarrant County Commissioners, United Way of Tarrant County, The T, Fort Worth Housing Authority, the Crime Prevention Resource Center (CPRC), JPS Health Network, Intel Corporation, Thos S. Byrne, Inc., TXU, and the Burnett Foundation. Topics of mutual interest are discussed, and dialogues are opened among the various entities. State The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is involved in nearly every aspect of transportation within the state. It administers state and federal funds for transportation projects selected at the regional, state, and federal levels. The majority of the City of Fort Worth is within TxDOT's Fort Worth District. However, the portion of the city that is within Denton County is within TxDOT's Dallas District. The districts are responsible for selecting projects for various funding categories in their local areas. The Texas Historical Commission (THC) was created to administer a comprehensive preservation program under state law The agency also administers the National 247 North Central Texas Council of Governments WISE" DENTON PALO PINTO PARKER TARRANT COLLIN DALLAS HUNT RJCKWA,LL North Central Texas Council Of Governments The NCTCOG's purpose is to assist local governments in planning for common needs, cooperating for mutual benefits, and coordinating regional development. It serves as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for transportation and air quality in the Fort Worth -Dallas Metropolitan area in accordance with Federal law (Source: North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009.) Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation Historic Preservation Act of 1966. It has an 18-member council, which plays an important role in selecting recipients of state grants for preservation projects. Projects in Fort Worth that are federally funded are subject to a historic review process administered by THC under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. THC also consults with citizens and organizations to preserve architectural, archeological, and cultural landmarks, and it sponsors educational conferences. The City of Fort Worth is a Certified Local Government with a Historic Preservation Officer and a Historic and Cultural Landmark Commission, making it eligible for grants from the THC. The Texas Department of Human Services (DHS) provides financial, medical, and social services to eligible families, children, elderly people, and people with disabilities. Texas Works and the Aged and Disabled Programs serve Fort Worth residents through Tarrant County The Texas Department of Health records all births, deaths, marriages, and divorces in Texas through its Bureau of Vital Statistics. The Bureau of Vital Statistics also develops, analyzes, and disseminates information used to plan and evaluate public health programs and to identify specific problem areas, such as infant mortality, teen pregnancy, and tobacco use. The Department of Health is also charged by the U.S. Environmental Protection -Agency (EPA) -to-enforce asbestos -and lead paint removal programs. The City of Fort Worth contracts with it for the removal of asbestos and lead paint identified at sites. In case of an endemic outbreak, the Texas Department of Health would assist. It also inspects summer and institutional programs within the Fort Worth city limits that are not sponsored by the City The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is the state's air quality regulatory agency It is responsible for developing the emission reduction plan for the region. The City of Fort Worth assists the TCEQ with air monitoring and inspects and reports violations. Notices of violation are sent to the violator and to the TCEQ, who decides the type of enforcement that is applicable and what measures should be taken to address the situation. TCEQ and NCTCOG have developed a State Implementation Plan for North Texas to improve air quality in conformance with EPA standards described in the Clean Air Act. Texas Parks and Wildlife operates more than 123 state parks and historic sites across Texas. It provides technical and funding assistance to local park programs. There are 27 parks operated by Texas Parks and Wildlife within 100 miles of the Fort Worth -Dallas Metroplex. The Texas Department of Economic Development administers economic development programs, including enterprise zones and projects, tourism, and funds for certain job training programs. The City's Economic and Community Development Department works closely with the state on business development and reports annually on the status of enterpnse zones and projects; tax abatements in the zone; and local Tax Increment Financing Districts (TIFs). The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs is Texas' lead agency responsible for affordable housing, community development, and community Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation 248 Trinity River Trails The Trinity River trails are a good example of coordination among various agencies. Federal transportation funds and City funds pay for the construction of the trails The City and Tarrant Regional Water District have an agreement that provides for shared responsibility of maintenance and expansion of the greenway system Source. Streams and Valleys, 2009.) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• assistance programs, as well as the regulation of the state's manufactured housing industry The Department is the source agency for several local programs, such as the Weatherization Assistance Program, which serve the low-income residents of Tarrant County The Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services is charged with protecting the rights of children and the rights of adults who are elderly or disabled. The department also licenses group day-care homes, day-care centers, and registered family homes. The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts is one of the largest agencies in state government. It collects state revenue, tracks state expenditures, and monitors the state's financial condition. It serves as the state's chief fiscal officer, bookkeeper, and economic forecaster It collects 26 state taxes, including sales tax. The Research Division studies and reports on all sectors and geographic regions of the Texas economy The Economic Development Division provides information about federal and state grant opportunities, distributes data about local economies; and helps businesses find purchasing and training opportunities. Federal The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implements major federal environmental legislation. The Clean Air Act (1970 and 1990) established emission standards for both motor vehicles and point source emitters of airborne pollutants, and set pollution control standards that require communities and industries to meet air quality standards. The City of Fort Worth Environmental Management Department assists the EPA with air monitoring, permitting, and enforcement. The Clean Water Act of 1987 established a permitting program and criteria for the discharge of pollutants into the country's waters, including minimum water quality standards. The City has a federal permit to discharge storm water into local water bodies. The City is responsible for inspecting and enforcing the Clean Water Act based on terms of the permit. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) attempts to protect people, property, and infrastructure from all types of hazards through comprehensive emergency management programs of mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery It administers the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, which established the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In order for property owners to purchase federally guaranteed flood insurance, a community must adopt and enforce flood plain management ordinances that meet NFIP requirements. FEMA rewards local governments that make efforts to reduce flood losses through its Community Rating System. If a community receives a good CRS rating, flood insurance rates are lowered for property owners within the community The City is a NFIP participant. The U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) administers the Community Development Block Grant program, HOPE VI public housing redevelopment funding, HOME, Empowerment Zone, and other federal programs to assist municipalities with housing and community development. The Fort Worth Housing Authority and the City of Fort Worth receive funding through HUD programs. 249 Evans and Rosedale Improvements The City has been awarded federal grants from the Economic Develop- ment Administration (EDA) and the U S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for improvements to the Evans and Rosedale area in Near Southeast Fort Worth. The City also conducted environ- mental site assessments on property in the area using a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Sources: Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Planning and Development Department, 2009.) Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation The Army Corps of Engineers is the primary enforcement agency for the Rivers and Harbors Act, which regulates all activities affecting the navigable waters of the United States, including activities in wetlands and the construction of bridges, roads, and docks. Perrmts are required from the Corps of Engineers before dredging and filling in wetlands around the Trinity River in Fort Worth and Dallas. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service administers the Endangered Species Act. It establishes the criteria for listing plants and animals as threatened or endangered, issues permits for development sites that are five acres or greater to ensure listed species' habitats are not destroyed during development; and prepares Habitat Conservation Plans for endangered and threatened species. The agency keeps information on a county level. STRATEGIES Each chapter in Parts II, III, and IV of this plan provides goals, objectives, and policies for addressing the existing and future needs of the City of Fort Worth. Many of these require cooperation among the government agencies that provide services and facilities for Fort Worth residents and businesses. Opportunities for cooperation among government agencies are identified below for those chapters. Land Use • Plan for and facilitate appropriate transit -oriented developments (TOD) at existing and future transit station locations. • Encourage new development in character with the existing neighborhood scale, architecture, and platting pattern, while working to improve pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle access between adjacent neighborhoods and nearby destinations. • Encourage the location and design of schools that are accessible and compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. Housing • Implement strategies and action items in the City's Homelessness Plan, Directions Home, to facilitate the homeless population's transition into housing. • Support Fort Worth Housing Authority efforts to improve public housing, including mixed -income and mixed -use developments. Parks and Community Services • Pursue implementation of the Trinity River Vision Master Plan in cooperation with Streams and Valleys, Inc., the Tarrant Regional Water District, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. • Seek grants and other non -City funding resources for park development and other projects. • Support implementation of the park, trail, and open space recommendations of the Lake Worth Vision Plan. Libraries • Assure Library's role as "community builder" and "destination place" by Public Outreach Libraries The facilities for Butler Outreach Library (BOLD) and Cavile Outreach Opportunity Library (COOL) are provided by the Fort Worth Housing Authority, while the Fort Worth Public Library provides the materials, programs, and staff (Source: Public Library, Zoos ) Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation 250 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••0••••• promoting integrative, holistic concepts for facility planning and service delivery options. Economic Development • Encourage the use of federal brownfields programs to assist in central city revitalization. • Establish potential incentives to promote appropriate development of vacant land and redevelopment or reuse of deteriorated properties within designated commercial districts. • Continue the close partnership between the City and the local chambers of commerce in marketing Fort Worth to business prospects. • Enhance collaboration between the Business Assistance Center (BAC) and local chambers of commerce in offering technical and mentorship services to central city businesses. Transportation • Continue to work with The T to expand and integrate public transit, including rail transit, into the City's transportation system. • Identify and promote potential locations for transit -oriented development, especially in designated growth centers and urban villages. • Ensure collaboration among City departments, The T, and the community to address issues concerning coordination among the various transportation modes. • Seek input from other entities, including schools, cities, counties, The T, NCTCOG, and TxDOT when making land use and transportation decisions. • Continue to coordinate with NCTCOG to use the travel forecasting model. Education • When possible, share school and City facilities to provide efficient access to services. • Ensure that the design of schools represents important community facilities for education and provides a creative, safe environment for students, taking into consideration the natural topography of sites, traffic flow, and needs of surrounding neighborhoods. Urban Design • Involve affected property owners, residents, and other interested parties in the development of urban design approaches and the selection of appropriate urban design elements. • Promote the development of quality, mixed -income housing within Trinity Uptown that is inclusive of all Fort Worth residents. • Locate telecommunications facilities in a manner that is compatible with adjacent and nearby uses. When feasible, require the placement of antennas on existing structures. Arts and Culture • Encourage increased public and private sector support for the arts. • Encourage nonprofit and pnvate arts organizations to work closely with historic preservation organizations to reuse historical buildings for cultural centers, assisting in neighborhood revitalization. Southwest -to -Northeast Rail Corridor Study The City of Fort Worth participated with The T in the North Central Texas Council of Governments' Regional Rail Corridor Study Completed in 2004, the study evaluated the feasibility of implementing passenger rail service along existing rail corridors in the Dallas -Fort Worth Metroplex, including the Southwest -to -Northeast rail corridor currently under study (Source: North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009) 251 Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation Police Services • Support the CIDAT process using technology improvements and professional development. CIDAT supports the department by addressing key crime and safety problems through the efficient use of police resources. • Deploy Neighborhood Police Officers (NPOs) as community problem solvers. NPOs will continue to form relationships with the community to encourage involvement in Citizens on Patrol (COP), cnme prevention, and problem solving. Fire and Emergencv Services • Increase public participation in education programs such as Learn Not to Burn, Youth Fire Academy, and Citizens Fire Academy • Coordinate the expenditure of Homeland Security grant funds with the Emergency Management Office. Environmental Oualitv • Encourage regional public transportation by working with other cities in the Metroplex to create efficient commuter rail, modern streetcar, light rail, bus service, and other types of mass transit. • Support innovative efforts that are cost- and environmentally -effective in addressing water quality issues associated with new development and extensive redevelopment. • Encourage the development of industries with minimal air emissions, which will allow continued economic growth while the Metroplex is under strict federal emissions standards. • Implement a sustainable development online forum an educational and networking resource that will inform the public about local opportunities and the benefits of sustainable development while increasing developer and builder participation. Chapter 25. Intergovernmental Cooperation 252 City and ISD Shared Facilities Daggett Park Diamond Hill High School Eastern Hills High School Morningside Middle School Ridglea Hills 0 D Wyatt School Southwest Park and Community Center Atwood McDonald Elementary School Thomas Place Van Zandt-Guinn Westwind Parks Seminary Hills Park Summerfield Northwest Park Includes a play field that City leases from FWISD and parking lot built by the City City built 4 tennis courts on land leased from FWISD City built 4 tennis courts and a play area on land leased from FWISD City built and maintains park facilities on land leased from FWISD City built and maintains a tennis court on land leased from FWISD City built 6 tennis courts which are maintained by FWISD Portion of park facilities and parking areas on land leased from FWISD Parks Department installed and maintains play equipment donated by the school's Par- ent Teacher Organization Site is adjacent to Sunset Hills Park. City leases land and a building from FWISD for a small community center Portion of park facilities built on land leased from FWISD Portion of park facilities built on land leased from FWISD FWISD leases land from City for use as elementary school/park site, and provides for joint use of site as school and neighborhood park. Joint development agreement with the Keller ISD The 13 agreements listed above are examples of cooperation between the City and the Independent School Districts (ISDs), including Fort Worth ISD and Keller ISD The agreements provide for shared facilities and mainte- nance and allow for the efficient provision of services and facilities. (Source: Parks and Community Services Department, 2009.) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••••••i•••.•••••••••••.•••••••• SEDIQM.1ddV • • t • .• • :• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • i • • • • • APPENDIX A: EXISTING PLANS AND STUDIES The plans listed below are incorporated into the Fort Worth Comprehensive Plan by reference. The plans address significant policy issues for targeted districts or the city as a whole. The major goals and policies of these individual plans are included in the corresponding chapters. Aquatic Master Plan. 2008 A comprehensive facilities master plan was completed by the Parks and Community Services Department to provide a quality aquatic facility experience for the citizens of Fort Worth. Current trends in municipal aquatic facility development indicate that traditional pools are being replaced with a combination of interactive water features with a swimming component. The plan proposes $66.3 million in potential capital improvements over a 14-year period (2008-2022). Bike Fort Worth Plan, 2010 Bike Fort Worth is the City's comprehensive bicycle transportation plan for developing a friendlier bicycle environment. Recommendations for supportive policies, programs and facilities are included to increase bicycle transportation within the City of Fort Worth. Implementation of this plan will provide a safe and attractive alternative mode of transportation. The Bike Fort Worth plan identifies existing and proposed on- and off-street facilities, and describes policies and programs to improve bicycling conditions for people who use their bicycle instead of a vehicle to get to destinations as well as for recreation. The bikeway network identified in this plan primarily describes on -street facilities, but off-street multi -purpose trails can provide connections as well. Existing and future off-street trails are included as well, with special focus on those that provide connectivity to the on -street system and the regional bicycle transportation network. Central City Commercial Corridors Revitalization Strategy. 2002 The Commercial Corridors Revitalization Strategy is the result of a two-year study undertaken by the City of Fort Worth under the direction of the mayor -appointed Commercial Corridors Task Force. The mission of the Task Force was to create economic development opportunities in high -priority central city commercial corridors that can be measured by increases in employment, tax base, business growth and quality -of -life improvements, particularly in low and moderate income areas. The study includes detailed plans for the revitalization of 10 mixed -use areas, or urban villages, along these five corridors, as well as revitalization strategies that can be applied to other urban villages and commercial districts. City of Fort Worth Street Development Standards: Roadway Standards and Master Thoroughfare Plan. 2009 The Fort Worth Master Thoroughfare Plan provides a network of public streets that offers access to private and public properties on one hand and mobility on the other The Plan is made up of the following elements: freeways, principal arterials, major arterials, and minor arterials. Principal arterials carry significant intra- and inter- urban travel between urban and suburban centers of activity, while major and minor arterials interconnect with and augment the principal arterial system. The location of each MTP element is based on existing roadways, approved plans and programs for realignment and extension, approved concept plans, preliminary plats, and final A-1 plats. Roadway locations also are developed with attention to topography, lakes, waterways, flood -prone areas, and other natural features. Existing manmade features such as railroads, roadways, major utility lines and facilities, existing developments, and property lines are considered as well. The City Council adopted an update to the MTP and street development standards in March 2009 The updated standards include the City's first policy on Context Sensitive Street Design (CSS) that incorporates the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit riders into the design of streets, and provides a set of guidelines for the submittal of traffic impact studies. Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, 2003 In July 2003, the City adopted the Citywide Historic Preservation Plan. The plan identifies a series of goals and strategies for future action relating to five major topics: • Historic resources survey • Historic preservation ordinance • Historic preservation incentives • Historic preservation in City policies and decisions • Public education Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, 2003 The City of Fort Worth Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) describes current demographic and economic trends in the City, the vision statement and goals for future economic growth, and the programs and projects that will assist the City in achieving those goals. The CEDS is required to apply for funding assistance under programs administered by the U S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration. Consolidated Plan, 2005-2010 and Annual Consolidated Action Plan The City of Fort Worth Consolidated Plan identifies housing and community development strategies and programs that will help achieve the goals of providing decent housing, promoting a suitable living environment, and expanding economic opportunities. The Consolidated Plan combines the planning, application, and reporting documents for four U S. Department of Housing and Urban Development programs. Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnership Program, Emergency Shelter Grant Program, and Housing Opportunities for People With AIDS. Cultural District Master Plan. 1990 Fifty years of growth resulted in a need for a Master Plan for the Cultural District to provide unity and definition in this area of unique cultural resources. In 1987, the boundaries of the Cultural District were defined and the Cultural District Committee was formally established by the Fort Worth City Council, spearheading an effort to create a visionary document that would guide growth within the Cultural District. The Master Plan, created by a team of consultants led by EDAW, Inc., addressed issues regarding facilities, land use, parking, traffic circulation, open space, lighting, landscaping and signage. Current and proposed projects within and around the Appendix A. Existing Plans and Studies district may warrant an update to the Cultural District Master Plan. Directions Home. 2008 Directions Home• Making Homelessness Rare, Short -Term and Non -Recurring in Fort Worth, Texas within Ten Years was adopted by the Fort Worth City Council in June 2008 as a strategic plan to reduce homelessness. The Plan is based on seven strategies that mirror national best practices to eliminate homelessness. The purpose of the plan is to move unsheltered and emergency sheltered residents out of homelessness and mto permanent housing with support services aimed at fostering independence. Downtown Fort Worth Strategic Action Plan. 1993. 2003 The 1993 Downtown Strategic Action Plan was sponsored by the City of Fort Worth, Downtown Fort Worth, Inc., and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority The purpose of the plan was to capitalize on the momentum of Downtown's success by creating a strong action plan, coupled with full commitment from government, business, and citizens. An update of the 1993 Downtown Strategic Action Plan was completed in December 2003 The 2003 Downtown Fort Worth Strategic Action Plan study area was extended beyond the Trinity River to Northside Drive on the north and Foch Street on the west. The report outlines recommendations for land use, housmg, transportation, urban design, open space, public art, business development, retail, entertainment, and education. Evans & Rosedale Urban Village Master Plan. 2004 In 2004, the City of Fort Worth hired a consultant team led by the Stanley Love Stanley architectural firm in Atlanta to develop a master plan for the Evans & Rosedale Urban Village. The master plan includes a conceptual redevelopment plan and design guidelines to create a mixed -use, pedestrian -oriented urban village. In addition, recommendations to redevelop the broader Near Southeast neighborhood are presented along with strategies to capitalize on the rich culture and heritage of the Near Southeast community as a tool for revitalization. The City Council adopted the master plan in 2004 Fort Worth Hazard Mitigation Action Plan. 2009 In January 2009, the City Council adopted the Fort Worth Hazard Mitigation Action Plan. The Plan was coordinated by the Fort Worth -Tarrant County Office of Emergency Management. The jurisdictions participating in the plan represent unincorporated portions of Tarrant County as well as nineteen of the forty-one cities in the county The Tarrant County Hazard Mitigation Team consisting of staff from all participating jurisdictions and external agencies contributed to creating the Fort Worth Hazard Mitigation Action Plan. Specific hazards and risks in each jurisdiction have been identified and are addressed in each jurisdiction's section of this plan. The Fort Worth Hazard Mitigation Action Plan identifies natural hazards that pose a risk to our area. Vulnerabilities to those risks are identified and quantified as appropriate. Goals, strategies, and projects to mitigate those risks are identified and analyzed. Fort Worth Linkages. 1997 The Linkages Study was a community planning effort to develop a common vision and goals for the corridors that link Fort Worth's most historically significant and heavily visited areas: Downtown, the Stockyards, and the Cultural District/Zoo The study was funded by the North Central Texas Council of Governments' 1995-96 Unified Work Program, and development of the plan was led by a Linkages Steering Committee. Issues addressed included signage, streetscape improvements, and new development. Gateway Park Master Plan, 1998. 2002 Gateway Park, a 504-acre recreation park intended to serve 80,000 to 100,000 people, is located in east Fort Worth on the west fork of the Trmity River The master plan for this park, originally adopted in 1988, was updated in 2002. The update was developed and evolved at the same time as the Trinity River Vision Master Plan, and it was coordmated with the joint efforts of the Tarrant Regional Water District, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Streams and Valleys, Inc. and the community The update includes plans for entry road realignment and observation towers; ecosystem restoration at the oxbow; development of an amphitheater complex, a skate park, playgrounds, athletic fields, additional trails and pavilions, a junior golf teaching facility; and an equestrian facility With the 2008 expansion of the Tnnity Uptown flood control project to include the Gateway Park area, an additional refinement of the 2002 Gateway Park Master Plan is expected. Housing Policy. 1999 The City of Fort Worth Housing Policy establishes a set of policy goals to provide guidance to the City Council, staff, and community for the development of programs, services, and projects related to affordable housing. The Housing Policy focuses on the importance of public -private partnerships in addressing affordable housing needs. NAS JRB Joint Land Use Study. 2007 The Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) is an initiative of Benbrook, Fort Worth, Lake Worth, River Oaks, Westworth Village, White Settlement and Tarrant County The U.S. Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment is the project manager and the North Central Council of Governments is the study sponsor The purpose of this Joint Land Use Study is to evaluate the current status of the implementation of recommendations issued in the 2002 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study and to make recommendations for additional actions by local governments designed to improve land use decisions that may affect the mission of the base. The City Council adopted a resolution supporting the JLUS in October 2007 Lake Worth Capital Improvement and Implementation Plan. 2007 The Lake Worth Capital Improvement and Implementation Plan includes a comprehensive list of capital improvements around Lake Worth. The plan mcludes dredging, watershed management, drainage improvements, water facilities, stump and navigation obstacle removal, and access control to vacant land. The plan is funded with gas well revenues. Appendix A. Existing Plans and Studies A-2 •••••••••••••.••.••••••••••.•'•••.• Lake Worth Development and Management Plan, 1995 The Lake Worth Development and Management Plan was completed by the City of Fort Worth Engineering, Parks and Community Services, Planning, Transportation and Public Works, and Water Departments. The purpose of the Plan was to make recommendations for policies that address the needs of the citizens around Lake Worth. The Plan also serves to facilitate the most efficient and viable development of the Lake Worth area while maintaining water quahty that will be suitable for consumption and recreation. The primary goal of this plan was to establish and maximize Lake Worth's potential as a multi -function natural resource. Long Range Public Art Plan for the 2004 CIP, 2005 The Long Range Public Art Plan, which was developed by the Fort Worth Art Commission, identifies capital improvement projects that provide the best opportunities for artist involvement and allow for the greatest public visibility and geographic distribution throughout Fort Worth. The City Council adopted the Long Range Plan in May 2005 Long Range Public Art Plan for the Water Fund. 2006 The Long Range Public Art Plan for the Water Fund, which was developed by the Fort Worth Art Commission, creates -an -interest-bearing Conservation Fund and an annual process for recommending new public art projects throughout Fort Worth. The City Council adopted the Long Range Public Art Plan for the Water Fund in May 2006. Mobility and Air Duality Plan. 2009 In January 2009, the City Council adopted the Mobility and Air Quality Plan (MAQ), which identifies, analyzes, and recommends transit and roadway projects that will reduce congestion and air pollution. The MAQ Plan also provides a strategic implementation plan, including a financial element. The final product is a comprehensive and multimodal transportation system plan and a programmed effort to improve mobility and air quality Model Block Plans Since 1993, model block plans have been prepared for neighborhoods to identify needed housing improvements and revitalization initiatives. They include the following; • Eastwood, 1993 • Near Southeast, 1994 • Jennings, May, St. Louis, 1995 • Near Northside, 1995 • Lake Como, 1995 • Fairmount, 1996 • Mitchell Boulevard, 1997 • Poly, 1997 • Riverside, 1998 • Far Greater Northside, 1999 • Greenway, 2000 • Worth Heights, 2001 • Handley, 2002 • Carver Heights, 2003 • North Greenbriar, 2004 • Stop Six Sunrise Edition, 2005 • South Hemphill Heights, 2005 • Historic Carver Heights, 2006 Nature Center and Refuge Master Plan. 2003 The City completed a master plan to improve and enhance facilities at the Fort Worth Nature Center and Refuge. The mission of the plan is to promote a signature heritage that reflects not only the regional character of Fort Worth and North Central Texas, but communicates Fort Worth's community values of preserving natural open space for future generations. The Master Plan includes recommendations for new facilities, the update of existing facilities, interpretive exhibits, and needed supporting infrastructure. The Master Plan identifies opportunities for capital improvements in the amount of $64.6 million over a 40-year period with a majority of this funding to be raised from private and community sources. Neighborhood Empowerment Zone Plans A Neighborhood Empowerment Zone (NEZ) is an area created to promote 1) the development and rehabilitation of affordable housing within the zone; 2) an increase in economic development within the zone; and 3) an increase in the quality of social services, education, or public safety provided to residents of the zone. Seventeen NEZs have been designated by the City Council. The primary purpose of NEZ plans is to provide guidance to neighborhoods and development project proponents seeking NEZ incentives. The plans describe neighborhood conditions and aspirations, and typically include design guidelines for residential and commercial projects. The following NEZ Plans are complete: • Berryhill-Mason Heights, 2007 • Oakland Corners, 2009 A-3 Parks. Recreation and Oven Space Master Plan. 2004 In June 2004, the City Council adopted the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. The planning effort was guided by the Parks and Community Services Advisory Board. The Plan evaluates existing facilities and programs to ensure that the City is meeting the needs and desires of its citizens. In addition, the plan identifies opportunities to increase awareness of the programs and services provided by the Parks and Community Services Department. Public Art Master Plan. 2003 In October 2001, the City of Fort Worth adopted an ordinance to set aside two percent of capital construction costs for the creation of public art. The ordinance also established the Fort Worth Art Commission to advise the City Council on matters of public art and on the development of the Fort Worth Public Art Program. The program is managed by the Arts Council of Fort Worth and Tarrant County In September 2003, the City Council adopted the Fort Worth Public Art Master Plan, which was the result of an inclusive, community -based process. Appendix A. Existing Plans and Studies Southeast Fort Worth Action Plan for Economic Development. 2000 The 2000 Southeast Fort Worth Action Plan for Economic Development was spon- sored by several organizations including the Fort Worth Metropolitan Black Cham- ber of Commerce and the City of Fort Worth. The Action Plan identifies and out- lines a series of action steps for six areas determined to have the capacity and poten- tial to fulfill the economic development goals for the Southeast quadrant of Fort Worth. The economic development goals span ten years and include: • $150,000,000 new business investment; • 8,000 new jobs created, • 25 new significant stores and restaurants; and • 6,000 residents from new single-family residential developments. The economic development actions outlined in the plan are designed to complement existing neighborhood development initiatives and the City's Comprehensive Plan. Southside Medical District Strateeic Plan. 1995 The Strategic Plan for the Southside Medical District was completed by a team of consultants led by Sasaki Associates, Inc., in order to present overall guiding devel- opment principles on which to base decision -making within the District. The Plan addressed issues such as land use, redevelopment opportunities, housing, urban de- sign and open space, transportation, and parking. In October 2003, an interdiscipli- nary panel of experts conducted a public planning workshop to update the 1995 plan for Fort Worth South, Inc. The consultants issued a final report that serves as a sup- plement to the 1995 plan. This report, Assessment of Opportunities and Recom- mendations for Future Direction, recommends certain policy and urban design strategies to encourage continued revitalization throughout Fort Worth South. Tareet Area Plans Since 1987, eight target area plans have been developed for specific areas of the City These plans include the following: • Fairmount, 1987 • Glenwood Triangle, 1990 • Historic Northside, 1991 • East Libby Avenue, 1991 • Highland Hills, 1992 • River Trails, 1992 • Evans Avenue, 1993 • Harlem Hills, 1995 Texas Motor Sneedwav Area Master Plan. 2009 The Texas Motor Speedway (TMS) Area Master Plan is a sub -regional public planning effort which provides recommendations concemmg economic develop- ment, land use, transportation, water and sewer infrastructure, environmental im- pacts, and regional cooperation for the multijurisdictional study area. The plan ac- knowledges that due to rapid growth, development pressure in the TMS area will increase and the ability to properly accommodate that growth needs to be balanced with maintaining the considerable economic impact of the race track. To achieve this balance, key stakeholders were engaged throughout the study area, including major employers, property owners, neighborhood leaders, adjacent communities' Appendix A. Existing Plans and Studies A-4 planning staff, and elected officials. The plan reviews development opportunities and plans, identifies potential compatibility concerns, and describes transportation facility needs and plans to serve the area. The plan acknowledges the multiplicity of planning efforts by the many jurisdictions within the TMS plan study area, and melds elements of these plans into a more understandable long-range view of the TMS study area. Based on stakeholders' desires to more sustainably accommodate the strong growth projected for the area, the plan introduces alternative — and po- tentially more sustainable — development patterns for the subregion within which TMS is located. Transit Alternatives Analysis. 2002 The City of Fort Worth and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the T) jointly conducted a transit alternatives analysis to identify potential transit corridors con- necting central city growth centers and urban villages. The study resulted in the City's and the T's endorsement of three transit plan elements: the Year 2030 Fort Worth Long -Term Transit Vision Plan, the Alternatives Analysis Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA), and the Light Rail Streetcar Starter Project with an accompany- ing Financial Plan. The proposed light rail streetcar starter project extends from Texas Wesleyan University in southeast Fort Worth, through the Medical District, north to Downtown —with a connection to the Intermodal Transportation Center — and west to the Cultural Distnct. Trinity River Vision Master Plan. 2003 The Trinity River Master Plan, completed in 1990, was initiated by Streams and Valleys, Inc. and was funded by a grant from the Amon G Carter Foundation. This master plan was developed for the improvement of 43 miles of the Trinity River Corridor over 20 years. The planning corridor consists of the Trinity River Main Branch and the West Fork, which are divided into nine distinct zones. The Plan provides recommendations based on the distinct character of each zone. An update of the Trinity River Plan from Trinity Park to Gateway Park was completed in 1999 The updated plan is known as the Tilley Plan. The Tilley Plan was for- mally accepted by Streams and Valleys, Inc. and the Parks and Community Services Advisory Board. A far-sighted update of this plan, the Tnnity River Vision Master Plan, was com- pleted in 2003 It has an enlarged scope that encompasses approximately 88 miles of river and creek corridor Along with expanding on the existing Master Plan recommendations, it contains recommendations to improve the river's accessibility to the public, attract more people to its banks, develop an urbanized downtown waterfront while maintaining the natural qualities of more remote areas, and in- crease awareness of its presence and beauty by citizens and visitors. The Plan iden- tifies opportunities for conservation, linkages, and open space. The primary objec- tives of the Plan include identifying and improving adjoining land uses, enhancing environmental quality, and flood control. a • • • • • • • • •, • 410 • •• • • • • • • • • • I • i • • i • • • • • • Trinity Uptown Plan. 2004 The Trinity Uptown Plan is a bold vision for urban waterfront development. The plan represents a partnership between the Tarrant Regional Water District, the City of Fort Worth, and Tarrant County, with support from Streams and Valleys, Inc. and Tarrant County College. The plan aims to redevelop an 800-acre area north of Downtown Fort Worth with a combination of public improvements and private development. Its goal is to provide a vibrant environment m which residents can live, work, shop, play, and learn. Trinity Uptown promises to become a richly diverse urban neighborhood linking Downtown to the Historic Stockyards and the Cultural District. The area is bounded on the north by Northside Drive and the Oakwood Cemetery to the west by the Fort Worth & Western Railroad and Henderson Street corridors, to the east by Samuels Avenue, and to the south by Belknap Street. The primary benefits of the Trinity Uptown project include flood protection, urban revitalization, environmental restoration, and recreation. Trinity River Vision Neighborhood Recreational Enhancement Plan (NREP). 2009 The purpose of the Trinity River Vision (TRV) Neighborhood and Recreational Enhancement Plan (NREP) is to identify and prioritize recreational and environmental enhancements to the Trinity River greenbelt within a 10 year timeframe. It is a joint effort by Trinity River Vision partners Tarrant Regional Water District, Streams & • Valleys, Trinity River Vision Authority and the City of Fort Worth. The Neighborhood and Recreational Enhancement Program is an update to the 2003 0 Trinity River Vision Master Plan. Recommendations from the Plan include, but are not limited to the following: neighborhood trail links, increasing open space, 4111 wildflower plantings, new trailheads, improved trailhead amenities, directional and • safety signage, better equestrian facilities, portage facilities at low water dams, and trail extensions along the river and its tributaries. Funding availability for the proposed • projects will be reviewed each year by the partner agencies. • Urban Village Master Plans. 2007 • In January 2006, the City Council authorized funding for planning in twelve urban villages, with additional funding for design and construction in five of those villages. • In accordance with this authorization, the City Manager appointed a Citywide IDScreening Panel and Cluster Interview Panels to assist the Planning and Development Department in selecting qualified planning and design consultants for the twelve urban • villages that are divided into the following three geographic clusters: central, • southeast, and southwest. Each of these panels reflected a balance of interests, including neighborhood groups, economic development organizations, historic 0 preservation groups, appointed boards and commissions, and City departments. • The 12 urban village master plans were the result of a 10-month effort designed to seek input and ideas from all stakeholders who may have an interest in the urban village's future. The planning process included three public work sessions and input • from various City departments, stakeholders, neighborhood residents, and potential developers. While each of the master plans reflects the unique identity of the urban village, all of the master plans contain common elements including a conceptual • redevelopment plan and recommendations for implementation. The following urban A-5 village master plans were adopted in December 2007 Central Cluster • Historic Handley • Six Points • South Mam Southeast Cluster • Berry/Stalcup • Berry/Riverside • Near East Side • Oakland Corners • Polytechnic/ Wesleyan Southwest Cluster • Berry/Hemphill • Berry/University • Bluebonnet Circle • Ridglea Woodhaven Redevelopment Plan. 2006 In 2004, the City of Fort Worth hired the Gideon Toal, Inc. consultant firm to develop a master plan for Woodhaven. The master plan addresses the challenges and opportunities currently present m Woodhaven along with background data and market information related to the area's potential for development and redevelopment. The recommendations provide the outline of an action plan that encourages the private and public sectors to partner in order to make the plan a reality The City Council endorsed the master plan m 2006 and directed City staff to negotiate a public -private partnership to implement the plan's goals and objectives. • Appendix A. Existing Plans and Studies •w ••••...••.•.• ..••• •••.•••••• • • • • • • • lb • • • • • • • • • • • • • • r.• • • • • APPENDIX B: POPULATION ESTIMATE AND PROJECTION METHODOLOGY We have relied on several data sources for population estimates and projections in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. For our 2009 population, we use the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG's) estimate. NCTCOG's population estimates are based on current housing inventories for each city in the NCTCOG region with a population of 1,000 or more. The figures are reviewed at the regional level for consistency with other indicators of regional population such as labor force estimates and vital statistics. Cities complete a building permit survey that provides NCTCOG with information on building completions, demolitions, annexations and other changes in housing stock that occurred throughout the prior year The reported housing units by type (single family, multi -family, other) are aggregated and added to the 2000 Census housing stock figures to develop estimates of current year housing stock. Current estimates use 2000 Census persons per household figures. Occupancy rates are derived through purchased secondary data in order to reflect existing market conditions. These rates were used in conjunction with building permit data to produce city level population estimates. Final population for January 1, 2009 also includes estimates of persons living in group quarters (nursing homes, dormitories, prisons etc.) All figures are reviewed by each city prior to publication. County level estimates are adjusted for cities that are in more than one county Remainder of county totals are estimated based upon secondary resources and have been adjusted to reflect annexations. To measure population growth and substantiate our claim that we are the fastest - growing large city, we rely on Census data. The U S Census Bureau produces subcounty (including city) population estimates by a housing unit method that uses housing unit change to distribute county population to subcounty areas. County population estimates are produced with a component of change population method, which updates the latest census population using data on births, deaths, and internal and international migration. The Census Bureau develops subcounty population estimates using the Distributive Housing Unit Method, which uses housing unit estimates to distribute the county population to subcounty areas within the county Housing unit estimates use building permits, mobile home shipments, and estimates of housing unit loss to update housing unit change since the last census. Census counts of housing units are geographically updated each year to reflect legal changes reported in the Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS), Census corrections, and other administrative revisions. The residential building permits that result in the construction of new units for the penod April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2008 include permits issued in calendar years 2000-2007 (accounting for a six-month lag time between permit issuance and completed construction). The Census Bureau does not collect updated data at the subcounty level on mobile home placements. They derive estimates for mobile homes by allocating state mobile home shipment data to subcounty areas based on the subcounty area's share of state mobile homes in Census 2000 The Census Bureau develops a household population estimate by applying the occupancy rate and average persons per household (PPH) from the latest census at the subcounty level to an estimate of housing units. The estimate obtained from this method is then controlled to the final county population estimate. The non -household population is measured by the change in the group quarters population. They produce the final estimate by adding the population in group quarters to the household population.. To produce the future population pyramid in Chapter 1, the cohort component model was used. Two general equations are used. The first calculates the future population of children ages zero to nine and the second calculates the future population of persons age ten and over The first equation takes the form Pro = Po + (B — D) + (IM— OM) where Pio is the population ten years into the future, Po is the initial population, B is births, D is deaths, IM is in -migration and OM is out - migration. For the youngest age groups — 0 to 9, Po is always equal to zero and births during the ten-year period are added. The second equation takes the form Pio = Po — D + (IM— OM) Births are not a factor for age groups that are 10 or older Births are calculated using a fertility estimation technique called the child -woman ratio It is a simple ratio of the number of children ages zero to nine to women in their reproductive years 10 to 49 Deaths are calculated by applying to each cohort a survival ratio; this is the probability that a member of one age group will survive to become a member of the next age group. Survival rates for the United States are published annually by the U.S. Bureau of Vital Statistics. Age specific survival rates for local areas are not available, however, data from the Fort Worth Health Department indicate that the annual death rate, the number of deaths per 1,000 citizens, is 0.3 percent greater in Fort Worth (5.3%) than for the U.S. as a whole (5 0%). Thus, the only adjustment necessary was to reduce the U.S. survival rates slightly for Fort Worth to calibrate the model. Net migration is inferred from the model by applying the balancing equation in reverse. The model assumes that the child -woman ratios, survival rates, and migration will contmue unaltered from the base year into the future. It is virtually impossible to account for unforeseen changes in the economy, changes in family values, medical advancements or fertility enhancements that might influence population growth. It is also impossible to account for large fluctuations from the growth trends in any given year For these reasons, projections must be used with caution and should be reevaluated frequently, as new data becomes available. Appendix B: Population Projection Methodology B-1 didiem••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••e••••••••••••••••••• APPENDIX C: FUTURE LAND USE BY SECTOR PLANNING SECTORS Fort Worth is divided into 16 planning sectors, as shown on the map to the right. The planning sectors are listed below with their corresponding City Council districts. Sector 1) Far North 2) Far Northwest 3) Far West 4) Northside 5) Northeast 6) Eastside 7) Arlington Heights 8) Downtown 9) Western HillsiRidglea 10) Southside 11) TCU/Westcliff 12) Southeast 13) Far Southwest 14) Wedgwood 15) Sycamore 16) Far South Council Districts 2,4,7 2, 7 3, 7 2,7,9 2,4,8,9 4,5,8 2,3,7,9 2, 9 3, 7 8, 9 3, 9 5, 8 3, 6 3, 6 6, 8, 9 6, 8 Future land uses and land use policies for each sector are included on the followmg pages in alphabetical order by sector C-1 10 5 0 10 Miles Appendix C: Future Land Use By Sector _.. Aft a•• .• • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • . • • Arlington Heights Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Downtown mixed -use growth center 2. Promote transit -oriented development (TOD) around the Intermodal Transportation Center and the T&P Terminal commuter rail stations and future modern streetcar corridors. 3 Promote the development of a fixed rail transit system linking Downtown to other growth centers and urban villages. 4 Encourage mid -rise or high-rise development for the central core area bounded by Henderson Street, Lancaster Avenue, BNSF railroad, and Belknap Street. 5 Encourage specialty retail between Throckmorton Street and Commerce Street, from 2nd Street to 8th Street. 6. Encourage 1m d rise, up to 8 stories, mixed -use development along West 7th Street and West Lancaster Avenue. 7 Encourage low-rise office, mixed -use, and residential development throughout the remainder of Downtown. 8. Increase the number and quality of public spaces (i.e. plazns, parks, enhanced streetscapes). 9 Implement the recommendations of the Lancaster Redevelopment Plan and the Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC) Study 10 Encourage installation of sidewalks and street trees between new residential districts and the central core. 11 Promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between Downtown, Trinity Uptown, and the Trinity Trails. 12. Attract and expand educational institutions. 13 Promote preservation of the historic residential character of the Sunset Terrace neighborhood. O Existing and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219.005 Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads ■ TOLLWAY / FREEWAY . PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL — MAJOR ARTERIAL — MINOR ARTERIAL Far West Sector 11 Western Hills, Ridglea Sector Imi TOLLWAY I FREEWAY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL MAJOR ARTERIAL A — MINOR ARTERIAL .4,�01 Ah11....v 1=., ' o Eli amaaeE-- - L�WI®L►�ooQarlai' _ 2w=c1M®fu" _ Ili -IU I===1�1.,0 alb r - 1=1=1=OC �='. Fr'�®=� ®==Q=L�=Qr M1y7CI®L rR'+IAIL!® 2aCs===== :11=11f�=I-mraa s=S-.===mc as ======== _ 731=1i======= c==::mac- Iiip 2010 Comprehensive Plan C-3 ICI BM TCW Westcliff Sector Northside Sector Ce Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential CO Suburban Residential 0 Single Family Residential 0 Manufactured Housing Q Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential alp High Density Residential Q Institutional iCp Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial I. Heavy Industrial Q Mixed -Use Growth Center 410 Industrial Growth Center ® Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain ® Lakes and Ponds O Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 0 025 05 1Mues C) • • • • • • • • • • • IP • • • • • • • • • • • • Downtown Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Downtown mixed -use growth center 2. Promote transit -oriented development around the Intermodal Transportation Center and the T&P Terminal commuter rail stations 3 Promote the development of a fixed rail transit system, linking Downtown to other growth centers. 4 Encourage mid -rise or high-rise development for the central core, bounded by Henderson Street, Lancaster Avenue, BNSF railroad and Belknap Street. 5 Encourage specialty retail between Throckmorton Street and Commerce Street, from 2" Street to 8th Street.. 6. Encourage mid -rise, up to 8 stories, mixed -use development along West 7rh Street and West Lancaster Avenue. 7 Encourage low-rise office, mixed -use and residential development throughout the remainder of Downtown. 8. Increase the number of public spaces (e.g., playas, parks, enhanced streetscapes). 9 Implement the recommendations of the Lancaster Redevelopment Plan and the Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC) Study 10. Encourage installation of sidewalks and street trees between new residential districts and the central core. 11 Promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between Downtown, Trinity Uptown, and the Trinity Trails. 12. Attract and expand educational institutions. 13 Promote preservation of the historic residential character of the Sunset Terrace neighborhood. Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads i= ■ TOLLWAY/FREEWAY-PROPOSED TOLLWAY/FREEWAY - • PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL - — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL Existing and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219.005 Q CD O CD 4110 CD 411, C) C) 0 C) Q Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space CASTE 2010 Comprehensive Plan Northside Sector TCU/Wtcltff Secto C-5 7TH 3ENNSYLVANI = z C O cc w Southside z Sector MAGNOLIA 0.5 x ROSEDALE 0.25 0 Nor thea Sector 0.5 Miles 287 n o, •••••••••••••••••_•••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • i• • I• • {• • • • • • • • • • Policies 1 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the CentrePort and Eastchase mixed -use growth centers. 2. Promote industrial development within the Riverbend and CentrePort industrial growth centers. 3. Provide public access to and continuation of the public trail along the Trinity River. 4. Promote a desirable combination of compatible residential, office, retail, and commercial uses in a mixed -use zoning district in the Oakland Corners Urban Village and the Historic Handley Urban Village. 5 Encourage redevelopment of the Oakland Corners Urban Village consistent with its urban village plan. 6. Promote the restoration of historic homes and buildings. 7 Reduce the amount of undeveloped multifamily zoning. 8. Encourage the use of flood plains for agricultural or recreational uses, including bike paths. 9 Encourage the reuse of vacant buildings. 10. Encourage demolition of buildings that cannot be economically rehabilitated. 11. Stimulate the redevelopment of the East Lancaster Avenue and Brentwood Stair commercial districts. 12. Encourage the installation of sidewalks in residential and commercial development. Y� t/ AhlitEd �.�nnsu�ei'uUr 7�.d�l(ll �'-�e�1�ki �� ta.:.o6ID0u�C °�• n. ���w�� `qL*' 2010 Comprehensive Plan a Southeast Sector Eastside Sector Future Land Use C-7 2 1 Master Thouroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads as ■ TOLLWAY/FREEWAY-PROPOSED 1=11M TOLLWAY/FREEWAY - PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL — — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219.005 0 Midway 360 k. sland Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 2 Miles ^N U • n 00 •••••••••••••••••-•_••••••••••••••• • r• • • • • • • • • • • l• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Far North Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote development of rail transit serving the Texas Motor Speedway 2. Promote appropriate commercial and multifamily development within the Alliance Gateway West, Alliance Town Center, Fossil Creek, and Nance Ranch mixed -use growth centers. Discourage single-family residential development within these growth centers. 3 Promote industrial development within the Meacham, Alliance, and Alliance Gateway East industrial growth centers. 4 Encourage locating schools adjacent to public parks to promote shared use of facilities and reduce maintenance costs. 5 Encourage orderly and sustainable growth in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. Any existing agricultural uses are subject to change when city utilities are available based on the City's expectations for rapid urban development. 6. Promote commercial and industrial development near Alliance Airport, BNSF rail yards, and Texas Motor Speedway that would not be adversely affected by noise. 7 Discourage residential development within areas with noise levels greater than 65 decibels. 8. Work with the appropriate school districts to identify suitable sites for future school development. 9 Encourage the closure of at -grade railroad crossings or create grade separations for purposes of safety and control of noise. 10. Promote the free flow of traffic on North Tarrant Parkway by restricting access points. 11 Encourage the preservation and enhancement of the natural landscape by retaining trees, natural drainage ways, and unique vistas. 12. Create a bike path network in growing areas by promoting a connected system of pathways within flood plains and other open space corridors. U Existing and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 ma in NO CD CD 0 0 111110 C> 4110 41110 4110 411. Far Ntnlitwest Sectoi, ALLIANCE GA FW..AY I Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 2010 Comprehensive Plan C-9 7 ♦ 1Sec e 3 Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads ▪ TOLLWAY/FREEWAY-PROPOSED INITOLLWAY/FREEWAY - PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED 1.5 D PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL MAJOR ARTERIAL MINOR ARTERIAL 3 Miles •••••••••••••••••••••••e-•-•-••••••• ••••••`•••••••••••••••••••••••••• Far Northwest Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Marine Creek mixed -use growth center. 2. Support innovative development projects that showcase low -impact development practices, conserve riparian buffers, and extend greenway networks with hike/bike trails. 3 Encourage large lot residential or agricultural uses in the far northern portion of the Far Northwest sector. 4 Encourage orderly and sustainable growth in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. Any existing agricultural uses are subject to change when city utilities are available based on the City's expectations for rapid urban development. 5 Encourage land uses and development practices that will reduce the amount of sediment and pollution entering Eagle Mountain Lake and Lake Worth. 6. Promote land development that is sensitive to historic resources and the natural environment, particularly topography, lakes, flood plains, significant trees and vegetation, and scenic vistas. 7 Encourage low density single-family residential development adjacent to the Fort Worth Nature Center. 8. Create a bike path network in growing areas by promoting a connected system of pathways within flood plains and other open space corridors. Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads ▪ ■ TOLLWAY / FREEWAY -PROPOSED imaa TOLLWAY / FREEWAY - PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL — — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL Existing and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning distnct boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219.005 We <NOB MAI 7 N FM18f 7nity m - m m mm ver Far West I • Sector I , r t 2010 Comprehensive Plan Eagle oultain Lake C-11 ♦ ii C) II C> O ■ O it 0 411, I / El. 41, — — • FarrNort1 O Sgctor .I _ - 41, 410 CZO Tarrant Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 0 l f 1 Vo thea S ctor 2 Mules • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • i• • . . . • Far South Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Spinks/Huguley mixed -use growth center. 2. Encourage orderly and sustainable growth in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. Any existing agricultural uses are subject to change when city utilities are available based on the City's expectations for rapid urban development. 3 Preserve the suburban residential character of the Garden Acres community 4 Encourage large lot residential or agricultural uses in the far southern (Johnson County) portion of the Far South sector. 5 Encourage single-family development between growth centers. 6. Discourage expansion of mining operations within the sector 7 Encourage protection of the Village Creek watershed from further siltation and erosion. 8. Create a bike path network in growing areas by promoting a connected system of pathways within flood plains and other open space corridors. 9 Discourage the concentration of sexually oriented businesses along the South Freeway (I-35W). Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads se I TOLLWAY/FREEWAY-PROPOSED TOLLWAY/FREEWAY - • PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL — — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 / , vvesiclirr U/Westcli Sector ALTAMES Wedgwoo ,ector 0 4111. 41110 4110 410 41110 4110 South id Sect' 35W •- Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residentiaj Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Spa 2010 Comprehensive Plan C-13 714 it 2 0 2 Miles CS e • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Far Southwest Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote transit -oriented development (TOD) around the Summer Creek commuter rail station at Sycamore School Road. 2. Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Summer Creek TOD and SH 121/FM 1187 mixed -use growth centers. 3 Encourage orderly and sustainable growth in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. Any existing agricultural uses are subject to change when city utilities are available based on the City's expectations for rapid urban development. 4 Promote only those uses near Benbrook Reservoir that will be sensitive to the environment. 5 Create a bike path network in growing areas by promoting a connected system of pathways within flood plains and other open space corridors. 6. Support the extension of commuter rail to the Far Southwest sector 7 Encourage major employers, retail, and high -density residential to locate at or near proposed transit stops and entryways to the Southwest Parkway 8. Encourage low -density development between entryways to the Southwest Parkway N • O Existing and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning C regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." .\ Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads ■ TOLLWAY / FREEWAY -PROPOSED imsTOLLWAY / FREEWAY • PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL — — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MAJOR ARTERIAL — — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MINOR ARTERIAL \F Q Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Q Rural Residential ® Suburban Residential Q Single Family Residential Q Manufactured Housing Co Low Density Residential 40 Medium Density Residential al High Density Residential 11111, Institutional ® Neighborhood Commercial 4. General Commercial ® Light Industrial ao Heavy Industrial ell Mixed -Use Growth Center 4111111 Industrial Growth Center 411. Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Q Lakes and Ponds al Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Q Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 2010 Comprehensive Plan C-15 JOHN 2 V sue, • ••••••••••••••••••••i•••••••••••• Far West Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Support innovative development projects that showcase low -impact development practices, conserve riparian buffers, and extend greenway networks with hike/bike trails. 2. Discourage residential development within the NAS-JRB runway clear zone and within areas with noise levels greater than 65 decibels. 3 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Walsh Ranch mixed -use growth center 4 Promote industrial development within the NAS-JRB/Lockheed- Martin industrial growth center 5 Encourage orderly and sustainable growth in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. Any existing agricultural uses are subject to change when city utilities are available based on the City's expectations for rapid urban development. 6. Encourage land uses and development practices that will reduce the amount of sediment and pollution entering Lake Worth. 7 Encourage cluster development (grouping of structures on large sites with the balance as open space) to minimize impervious surface areas, reduce localized flooding, and retain/enhance natural amenities. 8. Encourage recreational uses such as golf courses, trails, natural vegetation, and wildlife preserves in the far western portion of the sector 9 Create a bike path network in growing areas by promoting a connected system of pathways within flood plains and other open space corridors. 10. Phase out mining operations and landfills that may silt or pollute Lake Worth and generate undesired truck traffic. 11 Encourage the reclamation of mined lands and landfills for appropriate uses. 12. Encourage industrial uses on sites with access to freeways and railroads. 13 Attract new high -revenue commercial and industrial uses for Camp Bowie West, west of West Loop 820. 14 Protect Linda Vista Estates and other older neighborhoods from encroachment by incompatible uses. 15 Consider use of a land trust for surplus City -owned land near Lake Worth. 16. Consider locating a community park, fire station, and branch library within the sector OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 N • r ^ WO r. 2010 Comprehensive Plan C-17 Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads ITOLLWAY/FREEWAY-PROPOSED TOLLWAY/FREEWAY Eagle am r PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED r_ PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL MOUntall — - MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED r_ MAJOR ARTERIAL Lake — - MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL Fai Sou 1 est .4.SiCtOr, 2 Far Northwest •Sector 01001101110111000000 0 — —e ILeg Vacant, Undeveloped, Agncultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industnal Heavy Industrial Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 2 Miles ••I•• s•s• I e Northeast Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote transit -oriented development (TOD) around the Beach Street commuter rail station. 2. Encourage redevelopment of the Six Points Urban Village consistent with its urban village plan. 3 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Downtown mixed -use growth center 4 Promote industrial development in the Meacham industrial growth center. 5 Promote extension of the public trail system along the Trinity River, and convenient trail connections to neighborhoods. 6. Encourage the revitalization of commercial districts with neighborhood- oriented retail, services, and office space. 7 Encourage compatible development along the Trinity River, particularly within the Rock Island Bottoms and Butler Place sites. 8. Protect neighborhoods from commercial and industrial encroachment from Belknap Street, 28th Street, Sylvania Avenue and Riverside Drive. 9 Stimulate the redevelopment of the East Belknap Street, Sylvania Avenue, and NE 28th Street commercial districts. Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads ■ TOLLWAY/FREEWAY-PROPOSED TOLLWAY / FREEWAY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL — — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED —MINOR ARTERIAL OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 • Northside Sector 2010 Comprehensive Plan JO'Gil .uimuuram ■gDneeoc tf- IIUIImU®aUc .�rlHelflF0flfl 11,111411 C-19 OSSIL C', FK orth 9r Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Q Rural Residential Q Suburban Residential Q Single Family Residential Q Manufactured Housing Q Low Density Residential 41110 Medium Density Residential dap High Density Residential Q Institutional Neighborhood Commercial ® General Commercial Q Light Industrial 41111 Heavy Industrial Q Mixed -Use Growth Center 4.11 Industrial Growth Center ® Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Q Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space il at m ...t3ra s 'Vc0571""Ang riff min rpr— � pA ;ate re[ tom''' i 0.5 • 1 Miles 0411••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Northside Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Support the development of a fixed -rail transit system that links the Historic Stockyards with Downtown. 2. Promote transit -oriented development (TOD) along North Main Street where it could be served by the western bypass alignment of the Southwest -to -Northeast commuter rail corridor and/or future modern streetcar service on North Main Street. 3 Encourage redevelopment of the Historic Marine Urban Village consistent with its urban village plan. 4 Promote a desirable combination of compatible residential, office, retail, and commercial uses in a mixed -use zoning district in the Historic Marine Urban Village. 5 Promote a desirable combination of compatible residential, office, retail, commercial, and selected light industrial uses in Trinity Uptown. 6. Implement the recommendations of the Part 150 Noise Study for Meacham Airport. 7 Discourage residential development within the Meacham Airport clear zone and within areas with noise levels greater than 65 decibels. 8. Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Downtown, Historic Stockyards, and Marine Creek mixed -use growth centers. 9 Promote industrial development within the Meacham industrial growth center 10. Encourage land uses which are compatible with tourism and nearby residences along North Main Street. 11 Promote the maintenance of residential uses in neighborhoods adjacent to North Main Street, 25th Street, Azle Avenue, and Jacksboro Highway 12. Stimulate the redevelopment of the North Main Street, Northside Drive, 28th Street, NW 25th Street, and Jacksboro Highway commercial districts. OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219.005 Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads TOLLWAY I FREEWAY -PROPOSED ilITOLLWAY / FREEWAY PRINCIPALARTERIAL-PROPOSED r_ PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL Far North Sector Far West Sector 1Z- 2010 Comprehensive Plan Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial Heavy tndustnal Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space c '0 ® `� AN11lll<< IIMIII' I 40®`� ��®�®®p®';� ,4111nullli +�� IiIIMV1�r11� 411110 C�,��j0s0'* �QICI ILItt IIut IHh t" . -S: � •' 41it100000000000D1111 1 Jo ' 4011011011MUUNUMPAP IIDDDnDDIIDIIDDIIIIDOiIi me lfOODIIDIMMIIIIIhllE n ,,G° �DufDu011ui�IIUIIUIUIlnittl� de��QDODI1nn1 °NnuUt nF b i 10410400 Agt C-21 Arlington Heights Sector 0.5 0.25 0 0.5 Mies • s I • ••• • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Southeast Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Polytechnic/Texas Wesleyan, Loop 820 East/Lake Arlington, and Miller/Berry mixed -use growth centers. 2. Promote industrial development within the Loop 820 East/Lake Arlington industrial growth center. 3 Encourage redevelopment of the Polytechnic/Wesleyan and Berry/Stalcup Urban Villages consistent with their urban village plans. 4 Encourage quality, low -impact residential development along the west side of Lake Arlington, that takes advantage of the scenic and recreational qualities of the lake, while maximizing public access to the lakeshore. 5 Protect the environmental quality of Lake Arlington and the surrounding area. - 6. Encourage attractive freeway commercial uses along East Loop 820. — 7 Protect residential areas from commercial encroachment adjacent to Mansfield Highway, Wilbarger Street, East Berry Street, and East Rosedale Street. 8. Promote a balance of residential, commercial, and industrial uses in the Southeast sector 9 Promote the expansion of the Polytechnic/Texas Wesleyan educational complex. 10. Encourage marketable infill houses, particularly in the Polytechnic and Stop Six neighborhoods. 11 Stimulate the redevelopment of the East Rosedale, East Berry Street, Miller Avenue, and Mansfield Highway commercial districts. Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads TOLLWAY / FREEWAY -PROPOSED 4milm,TOLLWAY / FREEWAY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL - - MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL - - MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED - MINOR ARTERIAL OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219.005 heast ector jl •r F IIiIl �Ea s 30 18. Eastside Sector 20 A�9 1i:f r.7e=2 tL ,iltti iiirt,LJIn y y v Slide jeerer railed® -21-1— Da U nn 4o,, ✓ === �roeriol:r=®o = �❑ Io N c i 'E11iliaad `� 6:1 �rreefdeoeCf9 ( oeil!l�r� ® t _+'`,--ar0000eaeo 1.. 4 N,t�'raocamcflm DO �_� �d�'��s,W� � • Va afa�love�p a �. i� �v mov®off ■■ ,!Pi `' _���y v ia on o it �oeesmC� jj7®� ���ir (` c itimi �®:\� ' 111 IN191: �iitili 4 �'�EJ' ®© y 821:01=1:412241146iF � a �DEA10 �L ❑llaOC =MO sec'to l,+ai=u=i= ®�BQo�E �ae�if • I � E B RUSHING • U - 2010 Comprehensive Plan 42, ice' 1 C-23 1d lilt I�1aC ]®€ _'=EI0l O.. 4.a ��-964di �/11 v vt L t txr i NMI 820 C-I. L H ar Sout Sector • j ID 0 ImosI lll 05 BRENTW00D STIR Lake Arlington >- o) z 0 Vacant. Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 1ows ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Southside Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Encourage redevelopment of the South Main, Hemphill/Berry, Evans & Rosedale, Berry/Riverside, and Near East Side Urban Villages consistent with their urban village plans. 2. Promote transit -oriented development (TOD) around the Medical Center/Midtown commuter rail station. 3 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Near Southside, Near Southeast, La Gran Plaza, and Downtown mixed -use growth centers. 4 Promote a desirable combination of compatible residential, office, retail, and commercial uses in a mixed -use zoning district in Magnolia Village, Evans and Rosedale Village, Hemphill/Berry Village, Near East Side Village, and South Main Village. 5 Seek to expand West Berry Street urban design initiatives to other commercial districts within the sector. 6. Encourage infill of compatible housing. 7 Attract high quality freeway commercial development along the interstate highways. 8. Promote a Business/Technology Park in the proposed South Main Street district. 9 Promote the renovation of existing multifamily units. 10. Encourage the enhancement of the educational training complex at Morningside and Briscoe schools. 11 Reinforce medical institutions by providing opportunities for expansion. 12. Encourage office and high density residential uses which will support area commercial uses. 13 Stimulate the redevelopment of the Hemphill Street, Berry Street, Evans Avenue, 8th Avenue/Cleburne Road/McCart Avenue, Pennsylvania Avenue, Magnolia Avenue, Rosedale Street, Seminary Drive, and South Riverside Drive commercial districts. N OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 0 ArlingtonHeight Sector C Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Q Rural Residential ® Suburban Residential Q Single Family Residential Q Manufactured Housing Q Low Density Residential ell Medium Density Residential 411110 High Density Residential ® Institutional Q Neighborhood Commercial Q General Commercial ® Light Industrial ® Heavy Industrial Q Mixed -Use Growth Center 1111 Industrial Growth Center ® Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain C) Lakes and Ponds Q Public Park, Recreation, Open Space ® Private Park, Recreation, Open Space TCU/Westcli Sector 20 2010 Comprehensive Plan • 30 i I.. . I �,� ii imam 35W I stm- o 6L1 Falrcn, F ! eat ou41 I e' !: �,nIko1UiiI1:L'''rr11111lll 7ap8Nhl®®I'6LAIY A©t�ul�Pdoa�-�1 f �©©06llfil"D0� ]�ulflif3l a==oAuosi i ingi, 9JE]Ii'Lhegon"OFJuoul , MILL EEullffl gur� -ocuuo�[ 1C�1.; i©nn[ i Hr 1niumo F1 -: pia- I��mlllr" idl I[Il ll fIL]' JOl70L or,JE] . 70U Alli]W:1�i0L!. JI][ lfffifllo' Inn t 1 it f IIiuiur` I 11 / f ,-n,; t U. �- r► i 1- I' 11 rP le INI 4,11 lI r ' IP CIF l r ou Mil r.� • Vlf Iil I��FT hiI theas Se AK; I) Or ®®alll_JJrr*ur . Eft F—wr ,0� - dYlkr.t�i.�.® JIIUIlIL ,_ M�®�tt� ifurm, ]I == ems • NEW 'aC:7�1�6 Eas de r GY: Cdk�i: trams=1=4 i'.-3=® a® Q®v ars;� 14." �=r= jQ ,MaMOT -- r� LI' imemmir'; iFIn rf llnuuiuu uallllllealArAR= 31 �LjL��IfBu IV'NI!lla®f� ��= w ► Iluu f�©o tll 4 111IOIIIIIluliIf. ,.. 1 :1B ImnnallEll0E10000001K lI MMO ;mnuolr,r jpppouoli l lhI la I mliullull0 31 1 r =0=:==: p .I,p g®on©r umihmzezdRE summlli �Q n©©P _oca�=`.f ���� luu �11 UDEEP ©awn - IaE35 Will euuuu=g t JJ fiffflffflE! Olt Southeast Sector ;I 'Zit i/ ~-•! _1 lrL:ruu air ��®� �•1419 l ===== =€ Eai�®®=�i ill' ====== =c l� M pan '=©owe= = out �I!®I C-25 a Sycamore Sector Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads r• ■ TOLLWAY / FREEWAY -PROPOSED iipTOLLWAY / FREEWAY i• PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL MAJOR ARTERIAL — — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL 05 025 0 05 Miles n lJ O, ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Sycamore Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote industrial development within the Carter Industrial Park industrial growth center 2. Protect residential areas from encroachment by commercial and industrial uses. 3 Incorporate the land use recommendations of the Highland Hills Revitalization Plan. 4 Attract freeway commercial uses that portray a positive image and lasting investment. 5 Stimulate the redevelopment of the Seminary Drive commercial district. 6. Discourage the concentration of sexually oriented businesses along the South Freeway (I-35W). Master Thoroughfare Plans Proposed Roads Existing Roads ▪ TOLLWAY/FREEWAY-PROPOSED SENMTOLLWAY/FREEWAY - • PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL - — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL — — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 p Sector Far South Sector 2010 Comprehensive Plan C-27 1 1 god I i C) a • • 0 ci Co • • 0 Southeast Sector Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industnal Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 0.5 0.25 0 0.5 Miles •••••••••••••••••••••••••4••••••.• TCU/Westcliff Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote transit -oriented development (TOD) around the TCU/Berry commuter rail station. 2. Encourage redevelopment of the Berry/University and Bluebonnet Circle Urban Villages consistent with their urban village plan. 3 Promote a desirable combination of compatible residential, office, retail, and commercial uses in a mixed -use zoning district in the Berry/University Urban Village. 4 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Hulen/Cityview and TCU mixed -use growth centers. 5 Preserve the residential character of University Drive north and south of the TCU campus. Encourage mixed -use development in the growth center portion of University Drive. 6. Encourage redevelopment along West Berry Street while preserving the adjacent single-family neighborhoods. 7 Orient businesses to Berry Street to encourage pedestrian shopping and reduce traffic on residential side streets. 8. Encourage the revitalization of the Westcliff shopping district with retail uses and improvements that are compatible with adjacent neighborhoods. 9 Encourage compatible development along the Southwest Parkway corridor between the Trinity River and Arborlawn Drive. 10. Promote single-family and low -density residential development on the east side of the tollway, adjacent to the Overton Woods neighborhood. 11 Promote low -density and medium -density residential, institutional, and neighborhood commercial development on the west side of the tollway The neighborhood commercial development should be limited to neighborhood commercial and compatible general commercial land uses, and it should conform to general commercial development standards. 12. Stimulate redevelopment of the Berry Street, University Drive, and 8th Avenue/Cleburne Road/McCart Avenue commercial districts. 13 Encourage recreational development along the Trinity River corridor OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 N CD Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural C:lo Rural Residential C> Suburban Residential C) Single Family Residential 0 Manufactured Housing C> Low Density Residential I. Medium Density Residential ISO High Density Residential C7 Institutional O Neighborhood Commercial ell General Commercial 0 Light Industrial Ea Heavy Industrial CD Mixed -Use Growth Center flit Industrial Growth Center 40 Infrastructure r 100 Year Flood Plain ® Lakes and Ponds 'a. • Public Park, Recreation, Open Space ® Private Park, Recreation, Open Space / Arlington Heights Sector Ridgle Sec 2010 Comprehensive Plan • C- 29 I tikw'REEIRI7.1 i� G ��QI3c��il� Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads ■ TOLLWAY/FREEWAY-PROPOSED=IM•TOLLWAY/FREEWAY • PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED 0.9 0.45 0 MAJOR ARTERIAL MINOR ARTERIAL 0.9 Miles '''''"hdia••••••••••••••••4111000000 ••••••••••i••••••••••••••••••`•i• Wedgwood Sector Future Land Use Policies 1 Promote transit -oriented development (TOD) around the Summer Creek and I-20/Granbury commuter rail stations. 2. Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Hulen/Cityview mixed -use growth center 3 Encourage major employers, retail, and high density residential to locate at proposed transit stops and entryways to the Southwest Parkway toll road. 4 Encourage single-family residential uses between entry points to the Southwest Parkway 5 Pursue commuter rail along the South Orient line to the Hulen/Cityview mixed -use growth center 6. Encourage quality park and recreational developments such as those found around French Lake. Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads ▪ ■TOLLWAY/ FREEWAY -PROPOSED ImmmTOLLWAY/FREEWAY — — PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL — — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL — — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED — MINOR ARTERIAL N OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 estern Hills/ Ridg Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Rural Residential Suburban Residential Single Family Residential Manufactured Housing Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mixed -Use Growth Center Industrial Growth Center Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Lakes and Ponds Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 2010 Comprehensive Plan C-31 1 --t I 1 1 15CLLHUKt TCU/Westcliff Sector Sou hside Stor M:114\417A110 rl!:: otcs4u:"rrre 4ainikantrzatnAdiltil /.14,44 rlwo inTf:triti gni rag 111. mum f�Iti��t1iiCE r_ _1fi 11111111/4/41 ritiittrufrell r� " n aH- t ;Far Southwest / Sector 'I I I _adiar.,41,11 orzooftm— Emi )1 Tei 'allllti it I Far South Sector I 0.5 0.25 0 0.5 Mies O_ • • Western Hills/Ridglea Sector • Future Land Use • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • (• • • • • • • • • Policies I Encourage redevelopment of the Ridglea Urban Village consistent with its urban village plan. 2. Promote a desirable combination of compatible residential, office, retail, and commercial uses in a mixed -use zoning district in the Ridglea Village. 3 Promote commercial and multifamily development within the Ridgmar mixed -use growth center 4 Discourage new residential development within NAS-JRB clear zones and within areas with noise levels greater than 65 decibels. 5 Protect residential neighborhoods from encroachment by commercial uses. 6. Stimulate redevelopment of the Camp Bowie Boulevard, Camp Bowie West, Altamere Drive/US 377, and Lackland Road/Green Oaks Road commercial districts. 7 Reduce the density of multifamily units outside of the mixed -use growth centers. 8. Promote compatibility of infill housing with existing residential uses. 9 Encourage recreational development along the Clear Fork of the Trinity River corridor 10. Promote buffers and other compatible uses between multifamily and single-family residential. Master Thoroughfare Plan Proposed Roads Existing Roads ■ TOLLWAY / FREEWAY -PROPOSED xxImmMTOLLWAY / FREEWAY — PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL -PROPOSED omm+ PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL — — MAJOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED MAJOR ARTERIAL — — MINOR ARTERIAL -PROPOSED --- MINORARTERIAL OExisting and Potential Transit Stations "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Texas Local Government Code, Section 219 005 Far West Sector CO Vacant, Undeveloped, Agricultural Q Rural Residential C) Suburban Residential Q Single Family Residential © Manufactured Housing Q Low Density Residential OP Medium Density Residential 4111 High Density Residential • Institutional Q Neighborhood Commercial al General Commercial ® Light Industrial 01, Heavy Industrial Q Mixed -Use Growth Center 411111 Industrial Growth Center N • Infrastructure 100 Year Flood Plain Q Lakes and Ponds 411111 Public Park, Recreation, Open Space Private Park, Recreation, Open Space 2010 Comprehensive Plan C-33 0.5 0.25 0.5 2o1aag spATaH uogui 1.5 Mites •••••••000004100441060000•••••••••• APPENDIX D: PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED The capital improvement project tables on the following pages provide a list of on- going and/or proposed capital improvement projects submitted for consideration by the City's vanous departments. The tables are under category headings that match the chapter headings of the Comprehensive Plan, and they indicate projects by City Planning Sector (see Appendix C). Funded or partially funded projects are shown in bold typeface. However, whether or not a project appears to be funded does not necessarily reflect the City of Fort Worth's commitment to the project. Funds are often grant -based, or based on phased completion. This means that a project may be anticipated, but until State or Federal funds arrive at the City, the project will be considered "unfunded." Funding of a phase -based project may be dependent on the completion of each preceding phase, whereby Phase II of the same project may appear "unfunded" until the com- pletion of Phase I. The capital improvement project tables are intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. They do not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. It is the City's intent to financially constrain the list of unfunded City projects so as not to exceed the City's bonding capacity Further information on project status can be obtained by contacting the responsible department or agency Appendix D includes funded and partially funded projects. Unfunded projects are listed in Appendix E. Proposed Capital Improvements - Unfunded. D-1 Appendix D Proposed Capital Improvements ACRONYMS FOUND IN THE PROPOSED CAPITAL, IMPROVEMENTS TABLES ACRONYM DEFINITION CDBG Community Development Block Grant CMAQ Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Improvement Program D/FW Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport EDA Economic Development Administration HED Housing and Economic Development Department HFC Housing Finance Corporation HOME Housing Investment Partnership Program ITS Information Technology Solutions Department ISD Independent School District NCTCOG North Central Texas Council of Governments NTTA North Texas Tollway Authority STEP Statewide Transportation Enhancement Program T/PW Transportation/Public Works Department TDHCA Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century TIF Tax Increment Financing TxDOT Texas Department of Transportation UPARR Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program USGSA United States General Services Administration D-2 •••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••e••• • • ro'ect # PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED- HOUSING 1 Plattigtin Project Name Sector Council District Estimated Responsible Fundina Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30 ($1.000) Dent/Aeencv I Source . — LN-100234 Affordable Housing Units Citywide 1 - Citywide $5,200 $2,200 $3,000 Housing and Economic CDBG, City Housing Single Family Development Department Trust Fund, HOME Funds, Private and Nonprofit Developers LN-100237 Rental Housing Citywide 1 - Citywide $20,000 $7,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $4,000 Private Developers City Housing Trust Development Fund, HOME Funds, Low Income Housing Tax Credits, TDHCA • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • ift(TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. Willis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the •roposed projects. Appendix D. HOUSING • D- 3 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Project # PLN-100466 PLN-100467 PLN-100698 PRK 100046 iProject Name New Walks and Trails For Trinity River Vision Planning Council Estimated Sector District I Cost ($1.000 1 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endive Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Responsible Dept/Agency Funding Source • $925 $350 . • $200 $200 $1,463 $100 $500 $863 S Walk and Trail Downtown, 1 - Citywide, 2 $1,415 $48 $337 $433 $597 Parks and Community 2004 General • Replacement Eastside, Far Espino, 3 - Services Obligation Bond West, Zimmerman, 8 Northside, Hicks, 9 Burns Southeast, Southside, TCU/Westclf. PRK-100047 Playground Replacement Arlington 1 - Citywide, 2 $3,179 $869 $648 $1,227 $435 Heights, Espino, 3 - Citywide, Zimmerman, 4 Eastside, Far Scarth, 5 - Moss, North, Far 6 - Jordan, 7 West, Burdette, 8 Northeast, Hicks, 9 - Burns Northside, Southeast, Southside, Sycamore, TCU/Westclf. Wedgwood, Western Hills/Ridglea PRK 100051 Reserve Park Site Downtown, 1 Citywide, 2 - $1,810 $429 $573 $48 $347 $413 Parks and Community 2004 General Development Eastside, Far Espino, 3 Services Obligation Bond North, Far Zimmerman, 4 - Northwest, Far Scarth, 5 Moss, South, Far 6 - Jordan, 7 - Southwest, Far Burdette West, Northside, Sycamore, Wedgwood PRK 100059 Trail Bridges or Structural Citywide, 1 Citywide, 2 - $327 $17 $95 $16 $199 Parks and Community 2004 General • Renovation Needed Northside, Espino, 3 Services Obligation Bond TCU/Westclf. Zimmerman .111 11110 (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the • proposed projects. $435 $140 2013 % ::::? 2814:...;,;;;, ..4015-2019 .2020 2029 • Citywide General Park Development TBD Trinity River Trails Citywide Neighborhood Linkage I Citywide TBD 1 - Citywide Parks and Community 2004 General Services Obligation Bond Parks and Community 2004 General Services Obligation Bond Parks and Community City Funds, FHWA, Services TCSP Parks and Community Services 2004 General Obligation Bond • • • S • • • • • • • • • D- 4 Appendix a PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES 4140 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES • 1Proiect Name RK-100068 Park Road and Parking Lot Replacement RK 100074 Replace Existing Deteriorated Ball Field Lighting Systems RK-100078 Replace Existing Competition Athletic Fields PRK 100081 RK-100083 • • Updates/Improvements to Service or Support Facilities General Park Development Unspecified by Council District Planning Council Sector District Arlington Heights, Downtown, Eastside, Far West, Northeast, Northside, Southeast, Southside, Sycamore, TCU/Westclf., Wedgwood, Western Hills/Ridglea Arlington Heights, Eastside, Northeast, Northside, Southeast, Southside Arlington Heights, Eastside, Northside, Southeast, Sycamore Arlington Heights, Downtown, Northeast, Sycamore Citywide 1 Citywide, 2 Espino, 3 - Zimmerman, 4 - Scarth, 5 - Moss, 6 Jordan, 7 Burdette, 8 Hicks, 9 Burns I - Citywide, 2 Espino, 4 Scarth, 5 Moss, 7 - Burdette, 8 Hicks 1 Citywide, 2 - Espino, 7 Burdette, 8 Hicks 1 Citywide, 2 Espino, 7 Burdette, 8 Hicks, 9 Burns 1 Citywide, 2 Espino, 3 Zimmerman, 4 Scarth, 5 Moss, 6 - Jordan, 7 - Burdette, 8 Hicks, 9 Burns Estimated Responsible Funding Cost ($1,000) Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30 ($1.0003 Dept/Agencv Source ; , . ' : , 2011 2012 2013 7- LOJA , 2035-2019 : ! 20204029 y', ir,,,, """:- : E ! $5,050 $1,248 $950 $950 $950 $950 Parks and Community General Obligation Services Bond $1,306 $254 $218 $216 $223 $1,949 $8 $143 $149 $989 $395 $660 Parks and Community Services Parks and Community Services 2004 General Obligation Bond 2004 General Obligation Bond $500 $200 $100 $100 $100 Parks and Community General Obligation Services Bond $438 $438 Parks and Community 2004 General Services Obligation Bond (TB D ) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. Willis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the ilkoroposed projects. • D- 5 Appendix D. PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS — FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES • • Planning Council Project # (Project Name Sector District PRK-100086 PRK 100097 PRK 100314 Botanic Garden PRK-100319 Park Erosion and Drainage Control Arlington Heights, Citywide, Eastside, Far North, Far Northwest, Far West, Northeast, Northside, Southeast, Southside, TCU/Westclf.. Wedgwood, Western Hills/Ridglea 1 Citywide, 2 - Espino, 3 Zimmerman, 4 Scarth, 5 - Moss, 6 - Jordan, 7 - Burdette, 8 Hicks New Community Centers Citywide, 1 Citywide, 2 - Eastside, Far Espino, 4 North, Scarth, 6 Southside, Jordan, 9 - Bums Wedgwood Arlington 7 - Burdette Greenhouses Relocation Heights Southwest Community Far Southwest Park and Athletic Complex 6 - Jordan Estimated Cost ($1,0001 Responsible Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Seat. 30 ($1,000) Dept/Agencv 2012..;, 2013 2014 „,,„„,2015-2019....:......2020-2029,.:. $1,000 $358 $214 $214 $214 Parks and Community Services Fung din Source 2004 General Obligation Bond $7,500 $100 $475 $2,400 $2,400 $2,125 Parks and Community 2004 General Services Obligation Bond $830 $830 $750 $750 Parks and Community 2004 General Services Obligation Bond Parks and Community 1998 General Services Obligation Bond, Texas Parks And Wildlife (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. D- 6 Appendix D- PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • roiect # Proiect Name • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED. LIBRARIES Planning Council Sector District IB-100132 Northwest Branch Library Far Northwest 7 Burdette Estimated Responsible Funding Cost (S1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 (S1.000) Dent/Agency Source '4010 „ don ,"! 2012:, ', 2013 , 2014 i'2015.2019' , 2020-2029 $5,292 $5,292 Library Dept. (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. is table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the Oproposed projects. i I : 1998 General Obligation Bond, 2004 General Obligation Bond , 2007 Critical Capital Needs, Fort Worth Public Library Foundation, Park Improvement Fund • D- 7 Appendix D. LIBRARIES PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED. TRANSPORTATION Project # Project Name Arterial Projects PLN-100423 Henderson Street (3rd St. to Northside Dr.) Plannine Sector Downtown PLN-100700 Keller Hicks (N. Beach to Far North Park Vista) PLN-100701 Dirks/Altamesa (SH 121-Cranbury) PLN-100718 N. Beach Street (Vista Meadows -near Shiver) PLN-100722 Harmon Road (US 287 to N. Tarrant) PLN-100725 Thompson Road (Flower Tree to Riverside Drive) PLN-100738 Chapel Creek Bridge (IH-30 to Camp Bowie) PLN-1 00740 Riverside Dr. Bridge over Fossil Creek PLN-100742 Garden Acres Bridge over IH 35 PLN-100743 McAlister Rd. (South Fwy to Burleson City Limit) PLN-100745 Silver Creek (820 to C.F Far West Brewer High School) PLN-100749 N. Tarrant Parkway (US 287 to Hannon) PLN-100755 Old Decatur Rd. (McLeroy to Longhorn) PLN-100756 Old Decatur Rd. (Boaz to McLeroy) PLN-100758 Robertson Rd. (Boat Club to Lake Country) Far Southwest, Wedgwood Far North Far North Far North Far West Far North Far South Far South Far North Far Northwest Far Northwest Far Northwest ICouncil District 9 Bums 2 - Espino 3 - Zimmerman 2 - Espino 2 Espino 2 Espino 3 - Zimmerman 4 Scarth 6 - Jordan 6 - Jordan 7 Burdette 7 Burdette 7 Burdette 7 - Burdette 7 Burdette Estimated Cost ($1.0001 $66,950 $4,110 $8,000 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.000) 1II =2111 . - ___2U12 2013 ,' 2015-20192020-2029 $2,500 $3,603 $507 $4,590 $3,410 $7,200 $1,500 $1,500 $2,408 $2,408 $3,108 $700 $2,408 $7,500 $6,000 $1,905 $1,905 $2,000 $400 $1,600 $2,700 $5,500 $1,000 $4,500 $1,000 $3,500 $7,200 $7,000 $5,200 $16,700 $17,500 $18,050 $292 $6,908 $2,391 $5,109 $949 $5,051 $2,700 $751 $6,329 $120 $4,500 Responsible JI Dent/Aeencv Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. D- 8 2004 General Obligation Bond Federal Funds City Funds, Community Facilities Agreement Certificates of Obligation, CMAQ, Federal Funds, NCTCOG, TxDOT General Obligation Bond Developer Funds Gas Well Bonus/Royalty Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond, NCTCOG General Obligation Bond Burleson ISD Bond, Community Facilities Agreement, General Obligation Bond Developer Funds, General Obligation Bond, White Settlement ISD Bond Developer Funds General Obligation Bond Gas Well Bonus/Royalty General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond Appendix D • TRANSPORTATION • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • it • • • • • • • • • • • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED. TRANSPORTATION Planning Council Estimated Sector District Cost ($1.000 roiect # Project Name ) I Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endine Sent. 30 ($1.0001 7- 20i2 2013 . Z014 '2015-2019 ' 2020-2029 • .. PLN-100759 Riverside Dr. Bridge over Far North 4 Scarth $8,100 IH-820 5 LN-100769 Summercreek Wedgwood 6 - Jordan (Dirks/Altamesa to Sierra Ride) LN-100771 Risinger Rd. (IH 35 to Sycamore 6 - Jordan Crowley FM 731) $2,654 $2,654 $14,000 $1,241 $5,859 $1,000 $2,000 LN-100776 Pennsylvania Ave (10th Arlington 9 Bums $2,500 $213 $315 $1,972 Ave-l2th Ave) Heights PW 100004 Precinct Line Road Eastside 4 Scarth, 5 $4,858 $220 $4,638 excluding bridge Moss (SH1O-Concho Trail) iTfPW 100006 PW 100020 PW 100023 TPW-100028 PW 100029 TPW 100030 dPW 100101 TPW-100214 • Randol Mill Road (IH-820 Eastside 4 Scarth $1,500 $1,500 to proposed Precinct Line Rd -Design Only) $12,000 Responsible Deut/Aeencv Transportation/Public Works Funding Source General Obligation Bond Transportation/Public City Funds, Developer Works Funds Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond , Federal Funds, Tarrant County General Obligation Bond(' 999) Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond Dutch Branch Road Wedgwood 3 Zimmerman $1,200 $1,200 Transportation/Public Developer Funds, (Oakmont Trail-FWWRR) Works General Obligation Bond Beach Street (Golden Far North 2 - Espino $10,500 $1,500 $9,000 Transportation/Public Certificates of Triangle Boulevard to Works Obligation, General Keller Hicks Road) Obligation Bond Golden Triangle Drive Far North 2 Espino $26,000 $7,800 $18,200 Transportation/Public 2004 General (IH-35W to US 377) Works Obligation Bond, Community Facilities Agreement, Federal Funds, Tarrant County General Obligation Bond(1999) Ray White Rd/Park Vista Far North 2 Espino $300 $300 Transportation/Public General Obligation Boulevard (1,000' south of Works Bond Kroger Dr to Wall Price Rd)(Design Only) Old Decatur Road Far Northwest 7 - Burdette $5,300 $576 $521 $4,203 Transportation/Public General Obligation (Bailey -Boswell to Boaz) Works Bond HemphiltLamar Underpass Downtown, 8 - Hicks, 9 $9,705 $1,705 $8,000 Transportation/Public 2004 General (Vickery - 13th Street) Southside Bums Works Obligation Bond Henderson Underpass at Downtown 9 - Bums $2,000 $300 $1,700 Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond, TEA-21 UPRR (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. his table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the "proposed projects. ;• D- 9 Appendix D. TRANSPORTATION PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED. TRANSPORTATION • • Project # I Protect Name TPW 100218 East Rosedale Street (US 287 to IH-820) TPW 100436 East 1st Street (Beach Street to Oakland Avenue) TPW 100437 TPW-100876 TPW-100877 Precinct Line Road (1000' N of Trinity Blvd to 1000' S of Trinity Blvd) Avondale Haslet (US 287 East of BNSF RR) Keller Hicks (Trinity Springs Middle School -Alta Vista) Planning Sector Southeast, Southside Eastside Eastside Far Northwest Far North TPW 100878 East Rosedale OH 35W-US Southeast, 287) Southside TPW 100879 Lakeshore Drive (Wilbarger-Berry) TPW 100880 TPW-100881 TPW-100883 Litsey Road (Independence Pkwy-Henrietta Creek) McPherson (Summer Creek-McCart) N Beach (Keller Hicks -Timberland) TPW 100885 Parker Henderson (Mansfield Hwy -Martin) Southeast Far North Far Southwest Far North Southeast Council District 5 Moss, 8 - Hicks 4 Scarth 4 Scarth, 5 - Moss 7 Burdette 2 - Espino 8 Hicks 5 Moss 2 Espino 6 - Jordan 2 Espino 5 Moss Estimated Cost ($1,000) $28,000 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30 ($1,0001 2010 :t.,.,, 24 2012...; 2013 . ,, ::; 2014 , 2015-2019° ` "2020-2029 $2,000 $6,000 $1,240 $18,760 $5,377 $890 $4,487 $1,700 $340 $1,360 $4,500 $496 $3,894 $110 $2,410 $2,410 $17,464 $17,464 $6,900 $575 $1,078 $5,147 $100 $11,150 $3,171 $3,990 $3,990 $7,300 $322 $8,600 $1,500 $7,100 $4,700 $295 $411 $625 $3,369 $6,978 Responsible Dept/Aeencv, Transportation/Public Works, TxDOT Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. D-10 Funding Source 2004 General Obligation Bond , Certificates of Obligation, Federal Funds, Tarrant County General Obligation Bond(1999) 2004 General Obligation Bond Federal Funds, Tarrant County General Obligation Bond(1999) General Obligation Bond, NCTCOG Developer Funds, General Obligation Bond Certificates of Obligation, Community Facilities Agreement, Tarrant County General Obligation Bond(1999) Certificates of Obligation, General Obligation Bond, Tarrant County General Obligation Bond(1999), TxDOT General Obligation Bond City Funds, Developer Funds, Federal Funds, NCTCOG Community Facilities Agreement Community Facilities Agreement, General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond Appendix D. TRANSPORTATION • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • # I Project Name PW 100888 PW-100890 PW 100891 PW 100893 PW 100896 PW-100908 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED. TRANSPORTATION Planning I Council Sector District Estimated Cost ($1.000) Proposed Exnenditures by Fiscal Year Endine Sent. 30 ($1.0001 2010 v: .;2015-2019 .2020.4429 Ray White/Park Vista (N Far North 2 - Espino $3,300 $300 $3,000 Tarrant Pkwy-Shiver) (Design Only) US287 FR/Berry/Vaughn Southeast 5 - Moss $1,400 $280 $1,120 Interchange Dirks/Altamesa (Bryant Wedgwood 3 Zimmerman $8,009 $6,009 $2,000 Irvin-SH121T) Summercreek Far Southwest 6 Jordan $3,000 $1,500 $1,500 (Ardenwood-McPherson) Alta Vista (N Beach -Curve Far North 2 Espino $924 $924 to North) $1,214 PW 100917 Arterial Projects Citywide 1 Citywide $4,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 Shiver Rd (Trace Far North 2 - Espino $1,300 $86 Ridge -Meridian Ln) Aviation Projects Responsible Dent/Aeencv Transportation/Public Works Fundg in Source Gas Well Bonus/Royalty, General Obligation Bond Transportation/Public Developer Funds, Works NCTCOG Transportation/Public Certificates of Works Obligation, NCTCOG, Tanant County General Obligation Bond(1999) Transportation/Public City Funds Works Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond , Developer Funds Transportation/Public Community Facilities Works Agreement Transportation/Public Gas Well Works Bonus/Royalty LN-100464 Meacham Runway Repair Northside 2 - Espino $13,000 $13,000 Aviation VI-100190 Spinks Airport Apron Far South 8 Hicks $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 Aviation Construction LN-100391 Alliance Electrical Upgrade Far North 2 Espino $1,533 $599 $934 Aviation and Vault Expansion LN-100459 Alliance Taxiway Far North 2 Espino $1,804 $75 $1,729 Aviation i PLN-100460 Meacham Apron Northside 2 - Espino $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 Aviation Construction P LN-100461 Spinks Airport East Road, Far South 8 - Hicks $2,400 $2,400 Aviation Taxiway Rehab and West Apron LN-100462 Spinks Maintenance Far South 8 Hicks $500 $500 Aviation Building LN-100463 Meacham Airport Rescue Northside 2 Espino $700 $700 Aviation Fire Fighting Apparatus Vehicle Replacement • TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. is table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the lroposed projects. Federal Aviation Administration TxDOT Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT TxDOT/PASS Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT . D-11 Appendix D TRANSPORTATION PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED TRANSPORTATION Planning Project # Project Name Sector PLN-I00687 PLN-100688 PLN-100690 PLN-100928 PLN-100929 PLN-100930 PLN-100931 PLN-100932 PLN-100933 PLN-100934 PLN-100935 PLN-100936 PLN-100937 PLN-100938 PLN-100939 PLN-100940 PLN-100941 Alliance Airport Rescue Far North Fire Fighting Apparatus Vehicle #3 Alliance Runway Extension Far North Alliance Pavement Rehab Far North and Joint Seal Meacham Fire Station Northside Meacham Tower Northside Replacement Meacham Tower Road Northside Meacham Land Acquisition Northside Spinks Fire Station Far South Meacham Maintenance Northside Building Meacham Parallel Taxiway Northside Meacham Site Preparation Northside Meacham Terminal Northside Renovation and Expansion Spinks Apparatus Far South Replacement Spinks Radar Display and Far South Communication Upgrade Spinks Runway Extension Far South Spinks Stone/Alsbury Far South Road and utilities Spinks Taxiway Far South Reconstruction Council Estimated District I Cost ($1.0001 2 - Espino 2 - Espino 2 -Espino $741 $741 2 - Espino $3,000 $3,000 2 Espino $3,000 2 Espino $1,000 $1,000 2 Espino $700 $700 8 Hicks $3,000 $3,000 2 Espino $800 $800 2 - Espino $4,000 2 - Espino $3,000 $1,000 2 - Espino $6,000 $6,000 8 - Hicks $700 8 - Hicks $300 8 - Hicks $4,000 8 - Hicks $3,000 $3,000 8 - Hicks $2,000 $300 Responsible Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Dent/Aeencv 2010; "•<....'2011---; 4-2012€-- 2015.2019....,2020-2029;... $610 $234 $376 Aviation $64,737 $10,526 $16,842 $14,737 $22,632 $3,000 $2,000 $2,000 $1,000 $1,000 $700 $1,000 $4,000 Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation Aviation $1,000 Aviation (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. D- 12 Funding Source Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation Administration City Funds Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT City Funds City Funds City Funds Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT City Funds Federal Aviation Administration, TxDOT • • • s Appendix D. TRANSPORTATION • • • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: TRANSPORTATION roiect # I Project Name ridge Reconstruction Projects PW-100125 LN-100381 LN-100400 LN-100401 LN-100402 LN-100403 1PLN-100404 LN-100406 LN-100407 1PLN-100408 LN-100410 LN-100702 LN-100988 :PW 100010 Cravens Road Bridge Reconstruction at Wildcat Branch Litsey Rd./Henrietta Creek SH I83/Crosslands Road I-35W/Pharr Street Overpass I-35W/Nixon Street Overpass 1-820/SH 183 I-820/Spur 303 SH I83/Bryant Irvin 1-820/Ramey Avenue Overpass SP 347 (Eastbound Weatherford at BNSF and UP RR) Trinity Railway Express Centreport Expansion and Double Tracking Bryant Irvin Bridge at 1 H-20 Main and Henderson Street Bridges (Trinity River Vision) E. 1st Street -bridge and approaches (Oakland to Beach) Plannine Sector Southeast Far North TCU/Westclf. Northeast Northeast TCU/Westclf. Southeast TCU/Westclf.. Wedgwood Southeast Downtown, Northeast Eastside Wedgwood Downtown Eastside, Northeast Council District 5 Moss 2 Espino 3 - Zimmerman 8 Hicks 8 - Hicks 3 - Zimmerman 5 Moss 3 - Zimmerman 8 Hicks 9 - Burns 5 - Moss 3 - Zimmerman 2 Espino 4 - Scarth IEstimated Cost ($1.0001 $721 $721 $3,600 $4,500 $5,600 $6,900 $2,900 $2,800 $1,000 $3,700 $1,700 $21,000 $10,500 $10,500 $2,400 $63,606 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endine Sept. 30 ($1,0001 2010: 7012 202 2013 I `2014-2018•" 2019-2028 $11,373 $2,840 $760 $1,450 $950 $50,920 $2,811 $9,875 $123 $11,250 $4,500 $5,600 $6,900 $2,900 $2,800 $1,000 $3,700 $1,700 Responsible Dent/Aaencv Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works TxDOT TxDOT TxDOT TxDOT TxDOT TxDOT TxDOT TxDOT The T Transportation/Public Works, TxDOT Tarrant Regional Water District, Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works, TxDOT 4110 (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. 'This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the *proposed projects. IFundine Source 2004 General Obligation Bond City Funds, Federal Funds, State Funds, Unknown Federal Funds, State Funds Federal Funds, State Funds Federal Funds, State Funds Federal Funds, State Funds Federal Funds, State Funds Federal Funds, State Funds Federal Funds, State Funds Federal Funds, State Funds Federal Funds, T Funds Certificates of Obligation, Federal Funds City Funds, Federal Funds, State Funds Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds Appendix D. TRANSPORTATION • D-13 TPW-100120 TPW 100123 TPW 100124 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: TRANSPORTATION Planning Project Name Sector Precinct Line Road Bridge Reconstruction & Approaches at Walkers Branch West Seventh Street Bridge at Clear Fork Trinity River South Pipeline Road Bridge Reconstruction at Post Oak Channel Chapin Road Bridge Reconstruction at Santa Clara Channel Eastside Downtown Eastside Far West TPW 100127 Undesignated Minor Citywide Bridge Reconstruction Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Projects PLN-100370 DFW Airfield Projects N/A PLN-100371 PLN-100373 PLN-100374 DFW Roadways, Rail, & N/A Transit DFW Support N/A Infrastructure/ Other DFW Parking N/A Intersection Improvement Projects PLN-100424 Hulen Street (IH-20) ICouncil District ' • ',': 4 Scarth, 5 - Moss 9 Bums 5 Moss 3 Zimmerman I Citywide N/A N/A N/A N/A Wedgwood 3- Zimmerman TPW 100864 Intersection Improvements TBD 'Neighborhood Street Projects 1 - Citywide Estimated Responsible Cost ($1.000) Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Dent/Ayency $3,350 $23,622 $4,724 $11,811 $7,087 $682 $682 $1,004 $1,004 $325 $30 $50 $245 $200,405 $180,889 $7,130 $9,215 $3,171 $31,410 $10,882 $4,290 $5,544 $10,694 $228,602 $79,202 $31,222 $40,350 $77,828 $31,408 $10,881 $4,289 $5,543 $10,695 $1,300 $983 $983 $1,300 2010- 2011: . • -2012 2013 " 2014 201542019.2022029s4 $4,534 $1,184 Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works D/FW Airport D/FW Airport D/FW Airport D/FW Airport Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. D-14 Funding Source 2004 General Obligation Bond Federal Funds 2004 General Obligation Bond Federal Funds, State Funds 2004 General Obligation Bond , General Obligation Bond 2004 General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond 2004 General Obligation Bond Joint Revenue Bond, Passenger Facility Charge Joint Revenue Bond, Passenger Facility Charge Joint Revenue Bond, Passenger Facility Charge Joint Revenue Bond, Passenger Facility Charge 2004 General Obligation Bond, CMAQ 2004 General Obligation Bond , City Funds • • • • • • • • • • • 4 Appendix D. TRANSPORTATION 4: • • • PW 100044 Project Name Residential Streets ew Development Projects TPW 100106 Development Participation Citywide I Citywide TPW 100365 Urban Redevelopment Citywide 1 - Citywide Wail Projects LN-100409 Acquisition of UP Line Downtown, 8 Hicks, 9 - from Tower 60 to Fort Northeast I Bums Worth ITC ailroad Crossing Projects LN-100670 Sycamore School Road Wedgwood 6 - Jordan LN-100671 Hemphill Southside 9 Burns PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED. TRANSPORTATION Planning Sector Council District Estimated Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 I Responsible Funding Deot/Aaencv Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015.2019 2020-2029 Arlington 2 - Espino, 3 $23,000 $15,000 Heights, Zimmerman, 4 Eastside, Far Scarth, 5 Moss, North, Far 6 - Jordan, 7 - Northwest, Burdette, 8 - Northeast, Hicks, 9 - Bums Northside, Southeast, Southside, Sycamore, TCU/Westclf. Wedgwood, Western Hills/Ridglea PLN-100672 Magnolia Avenue Southside 8 - Hicks LN-100673 Peach Street Northeast 9 - Bums LN-100675 NCTCOG THE Partnership Eastside, 4 - Scarth, 5 - 2 Southeast, Moss, 8 - Hicks Southside • $5,300 $3,000 $6,000 $3,000 $2,000 $2,000 $150 $150 $827 $377 $408 $408 $2,806 $200 $900 $50 $200 $8,000 Transportation/Public Works $1,800 $500 $1,500 $1,500 $400 $50 $1,000 $1,000 $400 $206 $50 $200 $200 $200 2004 General Obligation Bond , Certificates of Obligation Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond , Certificates of Obligation Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond The T I Federal Funds, T Funds Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond , Federal Funds Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond Federal Funds Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond , Federal Funds Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond , Federal Funds Transportation/Public Federal Funds Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. WThis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the •roposed projects. • D- 15 Appendix D. TRANSPORTATION PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED- TRANSPORTATION II Project # Project Name Plannin¢Sector TPW 100311 I SH 183 at BNSF RR Regional Pro ects INorthside PLN-100693 SH 114 Improvements (.22 Far North Mile East of I-35W to 45 Mile West of SH 156) TPW 100210 North Tarrant Far North Parkway/IH-35W Interchange TPW-100213 Southwest Parkway (SHI21T) (IH-30 to Alta Mesa) TPW 100295 IH-30 additional lanes (Oakland - SH 161) Arlington Heights, Far Southwest, TCU/Westclf., Wedgwood Eastside TPW-100296 SH-121T Alta Mesa to FM Far Southwest, 1187 Wedgwood TPW 100297 IH-820 N Additional Thru Far North Lanes (IH-35W to Southwestern Railroad) StreetLighting Projects Council Estimated District Cost ($1,0001 2 - Espino 2 - Espino 2 - Espino Responsible Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endine Sent. 30 ($1,0001 Dent/Aeencv 2012 2013 t,.,,....._ 20t4.,...;--20154019:.......:.:, 2020;2429 a., — $2,668 I I I $2,6681 I I I I TxDOT I Federal Funds, State Funds Fundine Source $121,200 $1,193 $1,193 $40,400 $40,400 $40,400 3 Zimmerman, 6 $1,075,000 $268,750 $268,750 $268,750 $268,750 Jordan, 9 - Bums 4 - Scarth, 5 Moss, 8 - Hicks 6 - Jordan 4 Scarth $450,000 $30,840 $206,988 $30,840 $206,988 $270,000 $180,000 TxDOT Federal Funds, TxDOT TxDOT Certificates of Obligation, TEA-21, TIF District #5 NTTA, Federal Funds, General Transportation/Public Obligation Bond, Multi Works, TxDOT Funding Sources, NCTCOG, TxDOT TxDOT TEA-21, TxDOT TxDOT TEA-21, TxDOT TxDOT TEA-21 TxDOT PLN-100990 Terrell Heights Streetlights Southside 8 - Hicks $2,200 $720 Housing and Economic CDBG Development Department, Transportation/Public Works TPW-100130 Street Lights Citywide 1 Citywide $400 $400 Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond Traffic Signal and Intelligent Transportation System Projects PLN-100664 Traffic Signal Expansion, Citywide 1 - Citywide $625 ITS Project 7 PLN-100665 Traveler Citywide 1 Citywide $190 InformationSystem (ITS Project 8) $1,480 $300 $325 Transportation/Public Works City Funds, TEA-21 • • • 110 $190 Transportation/Public City Funds, TEA-21 . Works • I •;. (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the • proposed projects. Appendix D TRANSPORTATION • D-16 • • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED. TRANSPORTATION Project Name PW-100031 Traffic Signal Program Plannine Sector Citywide Council Estimated District Cost ($1.0001, 1 Citywide Responsible Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($I.0001 Deot/Aeencv 2010 :'.' 2011' '% 3012 <: 2013 2014:.•€201$-2019 20204029 • $36,800 $4,000 $4,000 $1,800 Transportation/Public $1,800 $1,800 $8,400 $15,000 Works PW-100223 Traffic Signal System Citywide 1 Citywide $846 $280 $280 $286 Communication Project (ITS Projects) ransit Projects PLN-100692 Sierra Vista Transit Plaza Southside 8 Hicks $1,288 $1,288 LN-100986 Modem Streetcar Project Citywide 1 - Citywide $2,000 $2,000 Design i :LN-100987 Southwest -to -Northeast Citywide (- Citywide $471,000 $48,400 $119,300 $173,300 $130,000 Rail Corridor • • • • • • • • • • • • Fundine Source Certificates of Obligation, City Funds, CMAQ, Community Facilities Agreement, Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond , TEA-21 The T Federal Funds, NCTCOG, T Funds Planning and City Funds, CMAQ, Development, Fort Worth Transportation/Public Transporation Authority Works The T Federal Funds, Local Sales Tax, T Funds, Tarrant County (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. is table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the •roposed projects. • D-17 Appendix D. TRANSPORTATION PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED- EDUCATION Project # Project Name Sector Planning Council Estimated Responsible District Cost ($1,000) Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30 ($1,0001 Dept/Agency Source Mit 2015:2019 2020-2029 ,:,, ..... PLN-100268 Fort Worth ISD 4 Citywide elementary and 2 middle schools PLN-100272 Lake Worth ISD Renovations and Miscellaneous PLN-100277 Fort Worth ISD-Additions and Renovations I - Citywide Far Northwest 7 Burdette Citywide 1 Citywide PLN-100284 Eagle Mountain -Saginaw Far North, Far 2 Espino, 7 ISD-6 elementary schools, Northwest Burdette 1 middle school PLN-100285 Eagle Mountain -Saginaw Far Northwest 7 - Burdette ISD-Development Center/Maintenance PLN-100289 Crowley ISD-1 high school, Far South 6 Jordan 8 elementary schools PLN-100290 Crowley ISD-Agriculture Far South 6 - Jordan Center PLN-100292 Northwest ISD Far North 2 - Espino, 7 Miscellaneous and Burdette Additions PLN-100293 Keller ISD-2 elementaries, Far North 2 Espino 1 middle school PLN-100683 Everman ISD-New Junior Sycamore 8- Hicks High PLN-100703 Everman Sycamore 8 Hicks ISD-Miscellaneous Additions and Renovations PLN- 100704 Burleson ISD-1 elementary Far South 8 Hicks school PLN-100705 Lake Worth ISD-1 Far Northwest 7 - Burdette elementary, 1 high school PLN-100707 Keller ISD-Miscellaneous Far North 2 Espino, 4 - Additions Scarth PLN-100708 Northwest ISD-6 Far North 2- Espino, 7 elementary schools, 1 Burdette middle school $140,325 $5,750 $96,115 $38,255 $204 $34,400 $14,400 $14,000 $6,000 $411,565 $29,218 $250,957 $125,831 $5,558 $131,250 $54,800 $31,950 $22,250 $22,250 $17,500 $9,000 $8,500 Fort Worth ISD Fort Worth ISD Bond Lake Worth ISD Lake Worth ISD Bond Fort Worth ISD Fort Worth ISD Bond Eagle Mountain -Saginaw Eagle Mm. Saginaw ISD ISD Bond Eagle Mountain -Saginaw Eagle Mtn:Saginaw ISD ISD Bond $289,000 $32,000 $17,000 $67,000 $84,000 $17,000 $72,000 Crowley ISD Crowley ISD Bond $1,000 $1,000 Crowley ISD Crowley ISD Bond $9,895 $715 $1,520 $2,899 $4,761 Northwest ISD Northwest ISD Bond $84,000 $59,000 $21,000 $4,000 Keller ISD Keller ISD Bond $24,000 $12,000 $12,000 Everman ISD Everman ISD Bond $7,200 $4,400 Everman ISD Everman ISD Bond $2,800 $10,000 $10,000 Burleson ISD Burleson ISD Bond $45,000 $1,000 $24,000 $20,000 Lake Worth ISD Lake Worth ISD Bond $15,000 $15,000 Keller ISD Keller ISD Bond $173,105 $20,155 $21,768 $105,792 $25,390 Northwest ISD Northwest ISD Bond (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. D- 18 Appendix D EDUCATION • • • • • • • • • • • • S • • • • • • • • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: EDUCATION PlanningCouncil roiect # Project Name Sector District LN-100712 White Settlement ISD-1 Far West high school LN-100713 White Settlement Far West ISO -Elementary additions and renovations • I • • • • • • • • I • • • 7 Burdette Estimated Cost ($1.0001 Responsible Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Dept/Agency -.1014 2015-201Y."':'', 202040297: $40,500 $24,000 $13,000 $3,500 White Settlement ISD 7- Burdette $10,300 $8,200 $2,100 Funding Source White Settlement ISD Bond White Settlement ISD White Settlement ISD Bond • difTBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. .1-his table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the •roposed projects. • D- 19 Protect Project Name ECD-100329 So7 Streetscape Improvements PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: URBAN DESIGN Planning Coimcil Sector District Estimated Cost (S1,000) Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001. Responsible I Funding Dent/Auencv Source Parks and Community CMAQ, STP-MM Heights Services, Planning and Development ECD-100330 Historic Handley Village & Eastside 5 Moss $395 $395 Planning and TCSP Development, Transportation/Public Works PLN-100248 Hyde Park Transit Downtown 9 - Bums $3,500 $1,000 $2,500 Parks and Community City Funds, CMAQ, Plaza/Ninth Street Services, Planning and Federal Transit Streetscape Development, Administration, STEP Transportation/Public STP-MM, T Funds, Works USGSA PLN-100256 Coordinated Wayfinding Arlington 2- Espino, 7 $743 $743 Planning and City Funds, Federal Project Downtown, the Heights, Burdette, 8 Development, Funds Cultural District, and the Downtown, Hicks, 9 - Bums Transportation/Public Historic Stockyards Northside Works signage and information system PLN-100333 Ridglea Village Arlington 3 Zinunerman, 7 $464 $70 $394 Planning and CMAQ Infrastructure Heights, - Burdette Development, Improvements Western Transportation/Public Hills/Ridglea Works PLN-100634 Magnolia/Hemphill Southside 9 - Bums $1,417 $36 $1,381 Engineering, Planning CMAQ Streetscape Improvements and Development Streetscape Arlington 9 - Bums $3,500 $1,100 $1,200 $1,200 PLN-100677 Trinity Bluff Sustainable Downtown, 9 - Bums $1,314 $1,314 Development Northeast PLN-100678 W Rosedale Street Retrofit Southside, 8 Hicks, 9- $11,060 $375 $520 (Forest Park-IH35W) TCU/Westclf. Bums $10,165 PLN-100679 Six Points/McAdams - Northeast 2- Espino $400 $400 Sustainable Development PLN-100680 West Berry TCU/Westclf. 9 Bums $2,758 $144 $1,307 $1,307 Street/GrandMarc Sustainable Development PLN-100981 South Main Urban Village Southside 8- Hicks $740 $240 $250 $250 Streetscape PLN-100982 Six Points Urban Village Northeast 2 - Espino, 4 $740 $110 $315 $315 Streetscape Scarth PLN-100983 HemphillfBerry Urban Southside 9 - Bums $643 $643 Village Streetscape Engineering, Planning NCTCOG, Private and Development Engineering, Planning and Development Engineering, Planning and Development 2004 General Obligation Bond NCTCOG NCTCOG, Private Engineering, Planning 2004 General and Development Obligation Bond NCTCOG, Private Planning and City Funds, Federal Development Funds Planning and City Funds, Federal Development Funds Planning and City Funds, Federal Development Funds • • • I • • • (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the • proposed projects. D- 20 Appendix D- URBAN DESIGN •40 • • • roiect # LN-100984 PLN-100985 "PW 100217 • • • • • • • • i• :• • • •' • • • • I. PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: URBAN DESIGN Project Name Berry/Riverside Urban Village Streetscape Near East Side Urban Village Streetscape East Rosedale Street (IH-35W to US 287-Retrofit) Planning Council Estimated Sector District Cost ($1.0001 Southside Southside Southside 8 Hicks 8 - Hicks 8 - Hicks Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1,0001 2010' $621 $153 $468 $649 $161 $488 $5,000 20122013 s ` 2014 % ; : 2015-2019/ : 2020-2029 $5,000 Responsible I Funding JI Dent/Aoencv JI Source Planning and City Funds, Federal Development Funds Planning and City Funds, Federal Development Funds Transportation/Public 2004 General Works Obligation Bond Certificates of Obligation, NCTCOG, Tarrant County General Obligation Bond(1999) •(TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does riot imply any obligation to expend funds for the !proposed projects. Appendix D. URBAN DESIGN • D- 21 • Project # PLN-100245 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: ARTS & CULTURE 1 Planning Council Project Name Sector District Estimated Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endine Sept 30 ($1.0001 Texas and Southwestern Arlington 7 - Burdette _ Cattle Raisers Museum Heights • • Responsible Funding Dent/Avency Source p 111/11.,,,..4' 2014 .4-20154019 ',4.-'2040-2029.1' -7„,- 1 $20,000 $10,000 1 $10,000 Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Foundation (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. • Appendix D ARTS & CULTURE Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Foundation • • • • • • Ili • • • 111 • • • • • • • • • • D-22 • • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: POLICE SERVICES Plannin Council Estimated ro'ect # IProlect Name Sector District Cost ($1.000) Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endine Sept. 30 ($1,000) 2022 '-'-' 2013 ':. 2014 .; :2015-2024:: ..">;2020-2029''.' . t;,-, 1.T. ' ,,, , ...!.......;............. • OL 100108 New Traffic - Southeast 8 Hicks $11,960 $11,960 Police Dept. Certificates of Division/Neighborhood Obligation IFutlijiLg.i Source Policing District 6 Facility Nashville POL 100660 Crime Lab Eastside 8- Hicks $8,000 $8,000 • • • • • • • • • • • Responsible Dent/Aeency Police Dept. dek(TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the •roposed projects. Crime Control and Prevention District , General Obligation Bond • Appendix D. POLICE SERVICES PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED- FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Planning Council Pro ject# Proiect Name Sector District FIR 100091 FIR-100096 FIR 100340 Relocate Fire Station 5 FIR-100647 Addition of Female Restroom Facilities to Fire Stations Replace Fire Station 27 Sendera Fire Station #34 Downtown 1 - Citywide Eastside 5 - Moss Southside 8 Hicks Far North 2 Espino Estimated `Responsible Cost ($1,0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept 30 ($1.0001 1 Dent(Aeencv, 111 -.,,. - ... ,.. , 2011.;::::: '%=2-0I2_ - .:.::. 2013 2014:,;. ,.,,: 2835-2014- 2020-2029 $735 $350 $3,660 $595 $3,065 $3,600 $600 $3,000 $3,250 $150 $3,100 $385 Fire Dept. Fire Dept. Fire Dept. Fire Dept. (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. D-24 Funding Source 2004 General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond City Funds • •� • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Appendix D FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Planning Council Estimated Responsible Cost ($1.0001. Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30 ($1.000) Dept/Agency Funding Project Name Sector District Source 'i: ',, , ' ' ' ' ' 2011 --, , 2012 ' - , - 2013 ' 2014 ,2015-2019 , ' • 2020-20290, Storm Water Projects ' ; • : : - . - ! : , , , , LN-100989 Trinity River Bypass Arlington 2 Espino, 4 - $758,728 $168,671 $60,966 $59,743 $52,665 $71,147 $345,536 Tarrant Regional Water City Funds, Federal Channel Heights, Scarth, 8 - Hicks District, TPW Funds, TIF Downtown, Northeast, Northside 1 TPW 100066 Milam-Robinhood Eastside 4 Scarth, 5 $1,120 $1,120 TPW Storm Water Utility Drainage Improvements Moss roiect # PW-100071 Fossil Drive Drainage Northeast 4 - Scarth $1,190 $1,190 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements T PW 100072 Mercado Channel Northside 2 Espino $1,175 $1,175 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements PW 100082 Eastern Hills Drainage Eastside 4- Scarth $5,500 $700 $1,200 $3,600 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements Phase 1 TPW-1 Oakridge Terrace Drainage Sycamore 8 - Hicks $340 $340 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements TPW 100157 Randol Mill Road Culvert Eastside 4 Scarth $1,000 $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements IPW 100160 Dry Branch Creek Phase 2 Northeast 2 - Espino $4,400 $1,000 $1,700 $1,700 TPW Storm Water Utility Detention Improvements ( PW-100163 Loving Channel Northside 2 Espino $1,600 $1,600 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements TPW 100164 Burchill Channel Southeast 5 - Moss $1,450 $175 $1,275 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements i hpw-too181 8100 Trinity Blvd. Culvert Eastside 4 Scarth, 5 $400 $400 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements Moss TPW 100182 Forest Park -Berry Drainage Southside, 9 - Bums $32,000 $2,000 $30,000 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements Phase 1 TCU/Westclf. Ir TPW-100183 Academy Boulevard Far West 7 Burdette $1,000 $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility Culvert Improvements PW 100185 Westcreek-Kellis Park TCUJWestclf. 3 Zimmerman $1,500 $1,500 TPW Storm Water Utility (... Drainage Improvements TPW 100186 South Crestwood Drainage Arlington 7 Burdette $212 $212 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements Heights • S(TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the Oproposed projects. Appendix D• ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY • D- 25 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED- ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 1 Project Name Central Arlington Heights Drainage Improvements Phase 1 9700 Trinity Boulevard Eastside Culvert Improvements I Planning SectorCouncil District TPW 100432 Hammond Street Drainage Improvements TPW-100498 5100 Cromwell Marine Creek Road culvert improvements TPW-100506 2400 Meacham Boulevard drainage improvements TPW-100508 Raider -South Pipeline channel improvements TPW-100516 TPW-100524 Scott -Sunset storm drain improvements TPW 100526 Tony's Creek detention pond rehabilitation TPW 100541 9100 Trinity Blvd. culvert improvements (Walker Branch) TPW-100555 Quail Run drainage improvements TPW 100605 TPW 100606 TPW-100608 TPW-100623 TPW 100778 Shore View Road culvert improvements Arlington Heights Southside Far Northwest Far North Eastside Far West Northside Northside Eastside Arlington Heights Butler -McClure culvert Southside improvements Rolling Hills Addition Southeast drainage improvements Linda Lane storm drain Southeast improvements Berkshire -Hallmark storm Sycamore drain extension Longstraw Channel Far North Improvements IEstimated Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 all- ---- 201/ ' ,,,- 2013- ---......... 2014 :,:---2015-2014 ' 21)20;42029 ........, 7 Burdette, 9 - $42,000 $2,000 $40,000 Bums 5 - Moss 9 Burns 7 Burdette 2 Espino 5 Moss 7- Burdette 7 - Burdette 2 - Espino 5 - Moss 7 - Burdette 9 Burns 8 Hicks 8 - Hicks 6 - Jordan 4 Scarth $2,000 $2,000 $1,100 $1,100 $1,400 $1,400 $1,700 $300 $1,400 $920 $920 $1,000 $1,000 $650 $650 $300 $300 $8,000 $1,000 $250 $250 $2,000 $200 $1,800 $765 $765 $620 $620 $2,400 $2,400 $820 $820 $7,000 Responsible Dent/Agencv TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. • 1 Funding Source Storm Water Utility 2004 General Obligation Bond Community Facilities Agreement, Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility a S a • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • D-26 Appendix D. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 41 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS — FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ro'ect # Protect Name Planning coma Estimated Pronosed Exuenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Responsible Funding Dent/Agency Sector District Cost ($1.0001 So rce ,Ailid '. ', ,2611, ' ': 2012; V 201$' ' ' ,724114 ' - 2015-,2019 , 202 2 'd•Pi-; t v. ,` ..1"-:4'7,."7 7 :''' ", — ,' :-'7,''' ' " ', ' "'' :,:,,, ;/"' ----:- ..: "..2-7,,,4,„-?„",i"-;.,',,,,7::,,„iy :,,,:',:,:e%' -;;•0;:';:::;, "-(''j ....:—.— PW 100779 Upper Lebow Detention Northeast 2- Espino $1,320 $120 $1,200 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements 1411 , TPW 100780 iTPW-100782 ' PW 100783 TPW-100784 PW 100785 TPW 100786 Lower Lebow Bridge Northeast 2 Espino $2,400 $1,500 $900 TPW Storm Water Utility, Improvements TxDOT Kings Oak Addition Eastside 4 Scarth $1,000 $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility drainage improvements Cooks-Ederville culvert Eastside 4 - Scarth $600 $600 TPW Storm Water Utility erosion protection Waverly Park drainage Western 3 Zimmerman $1,275 $1,275 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements Hills/Ridglea Ruby Place Channel Western 3 - Zimmerman $900 $100 $800 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements Hills/Ridglea East Como Channel Arlington 7 - Burdette $2,100 $100 $2,000 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements Heights TPW-100788 Forest Park-Parkview Downtown 9 Bums $8,000 $8,000 TPW Storm Water Utility Storm Drain Rehabilitation West Downtown Storm Downtown 9 Burns $2,000 $300 $1,700 TPW Storm Water Utility Drain Structural Rehabilitation PW 100790 Harvey Street Park storm Southside 8 Hicks $2,400 $2,400Storm TPW Water Utility drain rehabilitation PW-100791 Upper Sierra Vista Southside 8- Hicks $1,200 $200 $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility detention improvements TPW 100792 Provine Street Drainage Eastside 8- Hicks $275 $275 TPW Storm Water Utility Improvements PW 100793 Santa Channel TCU/Westelf. 3 - Zimmerman $680 $680 TPW Storm Water Utility Rehabilitation W-100794 Wedgwood storm drain Wedgwood 6 Jordan $2,700 $2,700 TPW Storm Water Utility extensions TPW 100795 Glen Garden West drainage Southeast 8 - Hicks $850 $850 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements ( PW 100797 Summercrest Court TCU/Westclf. 3 Zimmerman $680 $680 TPW Storm Water Utility drainage improvements TPW 100798 Westlake Drive drainage Wedgwood 3 Zimmerman $1,100 $100 $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements • (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. WT'his table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the ("Proposed projects. D- 27 Project # TPW 100862 TPW 100868 TPW-100869 TPW 100870 TPW-100871 TPW-100577 TPW-100992 TPW 100993 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Project Name Bellaire Park Court drainage improvements Tulsa Way drainage improvements East Downtown Storm Drain Structural Rehabilitation Cedar Breaks storm drain extension Lochwood Court drainage improvements Wesleyan Hills storm drain improvements Lake Crest Drainage Improvements Brennan Avenue Drainage Improvements Wastewater Projects PLN-100261 Wastewater Street/Maintenance Related Projects Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant PLN-100263 PLN-100264 Trinity River Vision PLN-100265 PLN-100281 PLN-100282 PLN-100948 Major Wastewater Collectors various locations PLN-100949 Lift Stations Wastewater System Security Citywide Sanitary Sewer Main 402 Big Fossil Parallel Relief Alignment Sanitary Sewer Main 253A Replacement Planning Council Sector District Estimated Responsible Funding Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30151.0001 Dent/Agency Source 2011 " '2012 4 2013; ' . 2014, ''', 2015-2019 : ' 21120-2029 - TCU/Westclf. 3 Zimmerman $500 $500 TPW TBD Arlington 7 Burdette $1,100 $100 Heights Downtown 9 Burns $2,000 $300 Far North 4 - Scarth $600 $100 Far Northwest 7 Burdette $440 $100 Southeast 8 Hicks $3,000 $500 Far Northwest 7 Burdette $1,000 $180 Northeast 2 Espino $4,000 $750 Citywide Eastside Downtown, Northeast Citywide Eastside Eastside Citywide Citywide 1 Citywide $38,391 $9,598 5 Moss 2 - Espino, 9 - Bums 1 Citywide 4 - Scarth 4 Scarth, 5 - Moss 1 Citywide 1 Citywide $30,205 $4,193 $1,000 $1,700 $500 $340 $2,500 $820 $3,250 $12,515 $12,515 $3,762 $1,810 $9,730 $1,131 $3,335 $10,006 $41,725 $2,086 $1,304 $326 $978 $8,345 $27,205 $20,400 $1,353 $237 $1,721 $6,810 $9,005 $1,274 $11,200 $775 $4,350 $6,075 $16,050 $2,646 $3,054 $8,998 $1,352 $7,028 $1,157 $3,226 $2,645 $4,089 TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW TPW Water Department Water Department Water Department Water Department Water Department Water Department Water Department Water Department (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. D- 28 --; Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Operating Fund Commercial Paper, State Revolving Fund Commercial Paper Commercial Paper State Revolving Fund State Revolving Fund Commercial Paper, State Revolving Fund Gas Well Bonus/Royalty Impact Fee Appendix D ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY • S S • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ro'ect # TR-100972 WTR-100979 Estimated Ftaling. Platugiin 1 Council 1 Responsible Project Name Sector District 1 Cost ($1,000) Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Enclitic Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Dept/Aeencv Source:;,,,,,,„,,f;,, ., - - ,,, %,,, : -:, ! 2010 ,:% , 2011 , 2012, ' - 2013 -,-, : 2014 I --,-2015-2019 ,, ,-/ 2.020-2029 --, -,.........-- Miscellaneous Wastewater Citywide 1 Citywide $185,725 $9,286 $1,760 $32,787 Water Department Commercial Paper, $22,151 Projects State Revolving Fund $2,800 $103,941 $13,000 S.H. 121 Wastewater Citywide 1 Citywide $20,864 $6,153 Water Department Commercial Paper Mains $12,141 $2,570 TR-100980 Mains 325 and 257 Far South, N/A 6 Jordan, 8 $33,394 $4,825 $11,722 $15,946 $901 Water Department State Revolving Fund Hicks, N/A Water LN-100254 Water System Security & Citywide 1 Citywide $1,400 $1,263 $137 Water Department Commercial Paper Information Technology Citywide LN-100253 North and South Holly Downtown 9 Bums $41,443 $3,918 $33,654 $3,871 Water Department Commercial Paper, Water Treatment Plants State Revolving Fund LN-100257 Eastside Reclaimed Water Eastside 5 Moss $22,620 $5,655 $14,748 $2,217 Water Department State Revolving Fund Delivery System LN-100259 Water Street/Maintenance Citywide 1 Citywide $85,197 $17,937 Water Department Operating Fund Related Projects $ LN-100280 Lake Worth Dredging Far West 7 Burdette $27,000 $6,750 $54 178,60742 $8,788 $2,646 Water Department Gas Well Bonus/Royalty iLN-100453 S.H. 121 Water Main TBD TBD $30,877 $12,132 Water Department Commercial Paper $14,650 $4,095 1 t LN-100454 Westside Water Treatment Far Northwest 7 Burdette $49,162 $10,350 $38,812 Water Department State Revolving Fund Plant LN-100945 Transmission Mains Citywide 1 Citywide $9,809 $7,055 $2,754 Water Department Commercial Paper various locations P LN-100946 Tanks and Pump Stations - Citywide 1 Citywide $1,945 $486 $1,268 $191 Water Department Commercial Paper, various locations State Revolving Fund LN-100951 Eagle Mountain Water Far Northwest 7 - Burdette $2,500 $625 $1,630 $245 Water Department State Revolving Fund Treatment Plant LN-100959 Miscellaneous Projects Citywide 1 - Citywide $20,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 Water Department Commercial Paper, $1,000 $1,000 $5,000 $10,000 Operating Fund, State Revolving Fund WTR 100971 Trinity River Vision Downtown, 2 - Espino, 9 $18,924 Water Department Commercial Paper Northeast Bums $3,984 $14,940 TR 100977 Medical District - Water Southside 9 Bums $10,703 $5,940 Water Department Commercial Paper, Supply Upgrade $4,359 $404 Operating Fund • (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. Willis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the eoroposed projects. • Appendix D. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Planning Sector Council Estimated District Cost ($1,000) Project # PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - FUNDED AND PARTIALLY FUNDED: MUNICIPAL FACILITIES Project Name Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30 6L0001 2013 ITS-100140 New Radio Towers PLN-100393 James E. Guinn School Restoration Arlington 5 - Moss, 9 Heights, Bums Downtown, Southeast, Southside Southside 8 - Hicks $6,400 $4,600 $1,800 $3,400 $2,300 $1,100 TPW 100038 Harley Service Center Arlington 7 Burdette $8,469 $8,469 (Demolition of Center and Heights Realignment of Harley Ave.) 2015-2419 °%.2424-Z429 Responsible I Funding DentlAeencv Source ITS TPW TPW (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. General Obligation Bond City Funds, Economic Development Administration, State Funds General Obligation Bond Appendix D. MUNICIPAL FACILITIES • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • D-30 • r• APPENDIX E: PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED • • • • The capital improvement project tables on the following pages provide a list of pro- • posed capital improvement projects identified by the City's various departments and cooperating agencies. The tables are listed by category headings that match the chap- • ter headings of the Comprehensive Plan, and they indicate projects by City Planning • Sector (see Appendix C). Appendix E includes unfunded projects. Funded projects are listed in Appendix D. Proposed Capital Improvements - Funded and Partially Funded. 11111 Inclusion of a project does not necessarily reflect the City of Fort Worth's commit- • ment to the project. The capital improvement project tables are intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. They do not imply any obliga- • tion to expend funds for the proposed projects. While all of the proposed projects • may be beneficial, the City and other responsible agencies must prioritize the projects for funding, given limited resources. Further information on project status can be �• obtained by contacting the responsible department or agency • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • E- 1 Appendix E. Proposed Capital Improvements ACRONYMS FOUND IN THE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TABLES ACRONYM DEFINITION CDBG Community Development Block Grant CMAQ Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Improvement Program D/FW Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport EDA Economic Development Administration HED Housing and Economic Development Department HFC Housing Finance Corporation HOME Housing Investment Partnership Program ITS Information Technology Solutions Department ISD Independent School District NCTCOG North Central Texas Council of Governments NTTA North Texas Tollway Authority STEP Statewide Transportation Enhancement Program T/PW Transportation/Public Works Department TDHCA Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century TIF Tax Increment Financing TxDOT Texas Department of Transportation UPARR Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program USGSA United States General Services Administration E-2 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • Planning ro'ect # Proiect Name Sector LN-100918 Supportive Housing Units Citywide and Affordable Housing Units PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED. HOUSING Council Estimated District Cost ($1.0001 1 Citywide $54,400 LN-100919 Central Resource Facility Southside 8 Hicks $4,900 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1,0001 013-2012..: �0 3-201?-................... O18=2029,...., Responsible I Funding DepUAgencv JI Source $11,000 $9,000 $34,400 Housing and Economic CDBG, City Housing Development Department Trust Fund, HFC Trust Fund, HOME Funds, Low Income Housing Tax Credits, Private and Nonprofit Developers, TBD $4,900 Housing and Economic Private and Nonprofit Development Department Developers • • • •. • • . • • • I. • • • (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. 11F11 table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the ("proposed projects. Appendix E. HOUSING • E- 3 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES lAarygiin Council Responsible District I Estimated Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 (S1.0001 Dent/Agency Project # Project Name Sector 'fl -:•,';;.'".",•X'',•",-.' :, ,'; r' ',' ,,,- ,, ,. , , ,, 1 , , , ,, 2011-2012 :., %; 1913-2017y4:. 1 2018:20297i • . „ „, , ,,, ,, . , , , . , , • . ,, . : , „ , , , : ; • , , , , •., "„ - •• „ PLN-100962 Cobb Park Improvements Southeast 8 - Hicks $9,520 $9,520 Parks and Community General Obligation • • 0 1 110 Funding Source • , .. Services Bond • PLN-100964 Natatoriums - Southeast Far Southwest, 3 - Zimmerman, 8 $70,000 $70,000 Parks and Community City Funds, General and Southwest Southeast Hicks Services Obligation Bond • PRK 100049 New Playgrounds at Parks Arlington 3 Zimmerman, 4 $1,638 $655 $983 Parks and Community General Obligation 5 which do not have Heights, Scarth, 5 - Services Bond playgrounds Eastside, Far Moss, 6 Jordan, III Southwest, Far 7 Burdette, 8 West, Hicks, 9 Burns Ill Southeast, Southside, • Wedgwood PRK-100063 Developing Areas Citywide 1 -Citywide $4,000 $1,600 $2,400 Parks and Community City Funds • Services • PRK-100065 Tennis Court Citywide, 1 Citywide, 2 - $1,056 $422 $633 Parks and Community City Funds Replacement/Conversion to Northside, Espino, 3 Services • Other Recreational Use Southeast, Zimmerman, 5 Southside, Moss, 6 Jordan, • TCU/Westclf. 7 - Burdette, 8 - Hicks, 9- Burns II PRK 100069 New Shelters at Parks that Far North, Far 2 Espino, 3 $2,293 $917 $1,376 Parks and Community General Obligation do not have Shelters West, Zimmerman, 4 Services Bond • Northeast, Scarth, 5 Moss, Northside, 6 - Jordan, 7 Wedgwood, Burdette, 8 Western Hicks, 9 - Bums Hills/Ridglea PRK 100070 Shelter Replacement Northside, 2 Espino, 5- $692 $277 $415 Parks and Community Gas Well Southeast, Moss, 6 - Jordan, Services Bonus/Royalty General Southside, 7 - Burdette, 8 - Obligation Bond Wedgwood Hicks, 9- Burns PRK 100073 Pool Replacement / Downtown, 2 Espino, 4 $29,120 $11,648 $17,472 Parks and Community City Funds Renovation Eastside, Scarth, 8 - Hicks Services Northeast, Southside PRK-100075 Neighborhood Park Units Citywide 2 - Espino, 3 $6,638 $2,655 $3,983 Parks and Community General Obligation with no Parks and Zimmerman, 4 Services Bond Population Greater than Scarth, 5 Moss, 2000 7 - Burdette, 8 - Hicks, 9 - Bums, Location TBD (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. E- 4 Appendix E. PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES • • • • • • • • • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Planning Sector Council District Special Use Education and Downtown, Far 1 - Citywide, 3 - Tourism Facility West, Zimmerman, 6 - Improvements Northeast, Jordan, 7 Northside, Burdette, 9 TCU/Westclf.. Bums Wedgwood, Western Hills/Ridglea New Trails Arlington 2 Espino, 3 Heights, Zimmerman, 4 Downtown, Scarth, 5 - Moss, Eastside, Far 6 - Jordan, 7 - North, Far Burdette, 8 Southwest, Hicks, 9 - Burns Northeast, Northside, Southeast, Southside, Sycamore, TCU/Westclf., Wedgwood, Western Hills/Ridglea Upgrade Existing Practice Northeast, 2 - Espino, 4 - Fields Northside, Scarth, 5 Moss, :AK 100092 New Community Parks RK 100093 New Athletic Fields RK-100095 New Park and Recreation Innovative Facilites RK 100315 Neighborhood Park Acquisition and 9 Development PRK 100316 Zoo Renovation and Addition Southeast 8 - Hicks, 9 Bums, Location TBD TBD 2 Espino, 5 Moss, 7 Burdette Far North, Far 2 - Espino, 6 Southwest, Far Jordan, 7 West, Burdette, 8 Northeast, Hicks Sycamore Eastside, 4 Scarth, 8 Northeast Hicks Citywide, TBD Location TBD TCU/Westclf. 9 Burns Estimated Cost ($1.0001 $106,054 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.000) 2011-2012. *01.3-204, 201812029 $42,422 $63,632 Responsible Dept/Agency Parks and Community Services Funding ource Federal Funds, Gas Well Bonus/Royalty General Obligation Bond, Private $20,827 $8,331 $12,496 Parks and Community TBD Services $1,347 $539 $808 Parks and Community Gas Well Services Bonus/Royalty, General Obligation Bond $7,800 $7,800 Parks and Community General Obligation Services Bond $17,373 $6,949 $10,424 Parks and Community General Obligation Services Bond, Unknown $10,868 $700 $18,045 $4,347 $700 $1,500 $6,521 Parks and Community Gas Well Services Bonus/Royalty, General Obligation Bond Parks and Community General Obligation Services Bond $16,545 Parks and Community General Obligation Services Bond, Private (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. Willis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the 'proposed projects. E- 5 Appendix E. PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES • Project # PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED. PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES 1 Planning Council Project Name Sector District PRK 100648 Playground Renovations Citywide 3 Zimmerman, 4 Scarth, 7 Burdette PRK 100649 Comprehensive Pool Study Citywide 1 Citywide PRK-100650 Walk and Trail Replacement PRK-100651 Ballfield Lighting Replacement Citywide Citywide PRK 100653 Trail Bridges or Structural TBD Renovations Needed PRK-100656 Parking and Roads PRK-100657 Replace Existing Competition Athletic Fields PRK 100659 Drainage and Erosion Control PRK-100668 Reserve Park Sites PRK-100681 General Park Development Citywide Citywide Citywide Eastside, Far North, Far Northwest, Far South, Far Southwest, Far West, Wedgwood Citywide IEstimated Responsible Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Dent/Aeency Ali 2011-2012 ;. ' 2013-201i :: t l 20184029 $364 $146 $218 Parks and Community Services $312 2 Espino, 3 $1,449 Zimmerman, 4 - Scarth, 6 Jordan, 8 Hicks, 9- Bums, Location TBD 2 - Espino, 9 $250 Bums 2 - Espino, 3 - $520 Zimmerman, 6 - Jordan, Location TBD 2 Espino, 3 - $7,431 Zimmerman, 4 Scarth, 5 Moss, 6 Jordan, 7 Burdette, 8 Hicks, 9 Bums, Location TBD 2 - Espino, 8 $988 Hicks 2 Espino, 3 - $4,212 Zimmerman, 4 Scarth, 5 Moss, 6 Jordan, 7 Burdette, 8 - Hicks 2 Espino, 4 $12,164 Scarth, 5 - Moss, 6 Jordan, 7 Burdette 1 Citywide $1,872 $312 $148 $250 $208 $1,301 Parks and Community Services Parks and Community Services Fundin Source General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond Parks and Community General Obligation Services Bond $312 Parks and Community General Obligation Services Bond $2,972 $4,459 TPW General Obligation Bond $395 $1,685 $4,865 $749 $593 $2,527 $7,298 $1,123 Parks and Community Services TPW Parks and Community Services Parks and Community Services (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. General Obligation Bond Gas Well Bonus/Royalty General Obligation Bond Gas Well Bonus/Royalty General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • E- 6 Appendix E. PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES S • • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED. PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Proiect Name RK-100682 Service / Support Facility Planning Sector TBD RK-100684 New Regional Parks TBD RK-100685 New Pools Far Southwest RK 100686 New Community Centers Eastside, Far Northwest Council District TBD $11,050 TBD $20,800 6 - Jordan $18,720 4 - Scarth, 7 - $6,240 Burdette Estimated I I Responsible Cost ($1.000)j Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 (S1.000) J Dent/Agency 2011-2012 213-2917 2018-2029 " $4,420 $6,630 $8,320 $12,480 $7,488 $11,232 $3,120 $3,120 Parks and Community Services Funding Source General Obligation Bond, Streams And Valleys Incorporated Parks and Community General Obligation Services Bond Parks and Community Services Parks and Community Services • • 11 • • • • ;Al tp.• • • S J. • (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. lifhis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the "proposed projects. Crowley ISD Bond, General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond E- Appendix E. PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES • 7 Prole # Proiect Name PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: LIBRARIES Planning Council Sector District Estimated Cost (S1.0001 LIB-100133 New Wedgwood Branch Far Southwest 6 Jordan $6,500 Library LIB-100134 New Meadowbrook Branch Southeast 5 - Moss $6,500 Library LIB-100135 Central Library retail space Downtown 9 Burns $3,670 finish out PLN-100267 Central Library Facade Downtown 9 - Burns $6,500 Replacement PLN-100270 Central Library Third Level Downtown 9 Burns $49,000 Expansion PLN-100271 Riverside meeting room Northeast 2 - Espino $120 expansion PLN-100275 Summerglen Branch Far North 4 Scarth $1,676 Library -Add 5,000 square feet PLN-100476 Central Library Renovation Downtown 9 Burns $1,800 and Expansion of Genealogy/Local History Division PLN-100856 New Far North Branch Far North 2 - Espino $4,650 Library Pronosed Exnenditures bv Fiscal Year Endion Sent. 30 61.0001 Dent/Aeencv I Source lid ., . j01t:16i '2634011 ''':: ; ! 2iflit=2029 $6,500 Library Dept. General Obligation • Bond • • • 1 • Resnonsible Fmuglin • $6,500 Library Dept. General Obligation Bond • $3,670 Library Dept. General Obligation • Bond, Private $6,500 Library Dept. General Obligation • Bond • $49,000 Library Dept General Obligation Bond • $120 Library Dept. Private • $1,676 Library Dept. General Obligation ID Bond • $1,800 LibraryDept. Private • • $4,650 Library Dept. General Obligation • Bond, Private (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. E- 8 Appendix E. LIBRARIES • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ro'ect # I Project Name CD-100320 TIF #2 Speedway PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PlanningCouncil Estimated Sector Disfrict Cost ($1.000) Far North 2 Espino $30,756 ECD-100321 TIF #3 North Downtown Downtown 2- Espino, 9 $98,927 $3,587 Bums CD-100322 TIF #4 Medical District Southside 8 - Hicks, 9 $17,269 $2,317 Bums CD-I00324 TIF #6 Riverfront Downtown, 2 Espino, 9 $2,284 $1,067 Northeast Bums LN-100470 TIF #7 North Tarrant Far North 2 - Espino $5,791 $459 Parkway LN-100471 TIF #8 Lancaster Corridor Downtown 9 Bums $18,563 $967 PLN-100472 TIF #9 Trinity River Vision Arlington 2 Espino, 8 $227,098 $1,315 Heights, Hicks, 9 Burns Downtown, Northeast, Northside LN-100473 TIF #10 Lone Star Far North 2- Espino PLN-100474 TIF #11 Southwest Arlington 3 - Zimmerman Parkway Heights, TCU/Westclf. LN-100697 TIF #12 East Berry Southeast, 8- Hicks Renaissance Southside PLN-100927 TIF #13 Woodhaven Eastside 4 - Scarth • • • • • • $8,590 $490 $95,000 $20,100 $12,857 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 I Responsible Dept/Agency I Enuilijig. Source -1; 21i/1-2012i $1,372 $2,953 $7,705 $18,726 TIF #2 Board of Directors TIF District #2 $9 756 $44,208 $41,376 TIF #3 Board of Directors TIF District #3 $6,336 $6,616 $2,000 TIF #4 Board of Directors TIF District #4 $803 $414 TIF #6 Board of Directors TIF District #6 $1,771 $3,561 TIF #7 Board of Directors TIF District #7 $2,013 $6,529 $9,054 TIF #8 Board of Directors TIF District #8 $4,044 $22,302 $199 437 TIF #9 Board of Directors T1F District #9 $909 $2,348 $4,843 TIF #10 Board of TIF District #10 Directors $3,012 $22,033 $69,955 TIF #11 Board of TIF District #11 Directors $1,000 $9,000 $10,100 TIF #12 Board of TIF District #12 Directors $107 $1,697 $11,053 TIF #13 Board of TIF District #13 Directors • a6(TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. IPThis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the aproposed projects. Appendix E. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT I. E- 9 Protect # 1 Project Name Arterial Projects PLN-100717 PLN-100720 PLN-100724 PLN-100726 PLN-100728 PLN-100729 PLN-100730 PLN-100731 PLN-100732 PLN-100733 PLN-100734 PLN-100737 PLN-100744 PLN-100746 PLN-100747 N. Beach Street (Champions View to SH 170) Ray White Road (Wall Price Keller to Wyndrook) Timberland Blvd. (N. Beach Street to US 377) Keller Hicks (Timberland to Ridgeview & Park Vista to US 377) Cantrell Sansom/Old Denton Road Cantrell Sansom Rd. (Old Denton Rd. to IH 35) Mark IV Parkway (IH 820 to Cantrell Sansom) Park Vista Blvd. (Ray White to Keller Hicks) Park Vista (Caylor to Timberland) N. Riverside Dr. (Villages of Woodland Springs to SH 170) N. Riverside Dr. (Heritage Trace to Timberland) Fossil Creek Blvd. Bridge over IH 35 Avondale -Haslet (E of BNSF RR to Senders Ranch) Academy (Silver Creek to Sparrow Hawk) Harmon Road (Golden Heights to 500 feet north of US 287) PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED. TRANSPORTATION Plaimgtin Council I Estimated Sector District Cost ($1.000) Far North 2 Espino Far North Far North Far North Far North Far North Far North Far North Far North Far North Far North Far North Far North Far West Far North 2 - Espino 2 Espino 2 - Espino 2 - Espino 2 - Espino 2 Espino 2 Espino 2 Espino 2 Espino 2 - Espino 2 - Espino 7 Burdette 7 - Burdette 7- Burdette $6,300 $4,000 $15,900 $13,900 $3,859 $1,600 $2,877 $8,900 $5,000 $4,000 $17,000 $6,061 $17,500 $2,387 $14,000 Responsible Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endine Sept. 30 ($1,0001 Dept/Aeency L. 2011-.2012 '013:2017 —„:018:2629 $6,300 $4,000 $15,900 $13,900 $3,859 $1,600 $2,877 $17,500 $2,387 $14,000 Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works $8,900 Transportation/Public Works $5,000 Transportation/Public Works $4,000 Transportation/Public Works $17,000 Transportation/Public Works $6,061 Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. E- 30 • • Fundina grce • S General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond • . • • • • • • Appendix E: TRANSPORTATION ea • • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: TRANSPORTATION 1 l'utigiin Protect Name Sector LN-100750 Cantrell Sansom Rd. (Blue Far North Mound City Limit to Mark IV Pkwy) LN-100751 Bailey -Boswell Rd. (Boat Club to Old Decatur) LN-100752 Park Road (Boat Club to Old Decatur) iPLN-100753 LN-100754 LN-100757 LN-100760 LN-100761 LN-100763 LN-100764 LN-100765 LN-100766 LN-100767 1P LN-100772 LN-100773 LN-100774 Willow Springs (Avondale -Haslet to US 287) Old Decatur Rd. (820 to River Rock) Marine Creek Pkwy. (Longhorn to TCC) Meacham Blvd. (IH 35 NB to N. Beach St) Cooks Lane (John T White to Randol Mill) Randol Mill Rd. (Precinct Line to Racquet Club) Randol Mill Rd. (Oakland to Woodhaven) Cooks Ln. (Brentwood Stair to Dottie Lynn) Wichita (Mitchell to US 287) Euless/S. Main (TRE to Euless St.) W1 Boaz Rd. (Boat Club to Old Decatur) Heritage Trace Pkwy (FM156-Harmon) McPherson Blvd. (1H 35 to Oak Grove) Far Northwest Far Northwest Far North Far Northwest Far Northwest Far North Eastside Eastside Eastside Eastside Southeast Eastside Far Northwest Far Northwest Sycamore 1 Council District IEstimated Cost ($1.000) 7 Burdette $7,367 $16,700 $13,200 $9,900 $1,356 $6,700 $3,200 $9,150 $10,000 $3,400 $10,300 $10,000 $4,500 $17,646 $21,408 $7,000 7- Burdette 7 Burdette 7 Burdette 7 - Burdette 7 Burdette 4- Scarth 4 Scarth 4 - Scarth 4 - Scarth 5 - Moss 5 Moss 5 Moss 7- Burdette 7 Burdette 8 - Hicks Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30 ($1.000). Responsible Dent/Aeency 1 2011120124! 7, 2033447 i038:2029L 7 $7,367 Transportation/Public Works $16,700 $13,200 Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works $9,900 Transportation/Public Works $1,356 Transportation/Public Works $6,700 Transportation/Public Works $3,200 Transportation/Public Works $9,150 Transportation/Public Works $10,000 Transportation/Public Works $3,400 Transportation/Public Works $10,300 Transportation/Public Works $10,000 Transportation/Public Works $4,500 Transportation/Public Works $17,646 Transportation/Public Works $21,408 Transportation/Public Works $7,000 Transportation/Public Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. IPThis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the Oproposed projects. General Obligation Bond Community Facilities Agreement, General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond Appendix E. TRANSPORTATION 4111 E- 11 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: TRANSPORTATION Plannin Council Estimated Sector District Cost ($1,0001 PLN-I00960 Harley Realignment/Drainage/Bro wnfield Encapsulation TPW-100000 Everman Parkway (E. terminus to IH-35W) TPW-100001 Risinger Road (McCart Avenue to Crowley Road) TPW 100005 Cromwell -Marine Creek Road (Boat Club Road to Old Decatur Road) TPW-100013 Trinity Boulevard (IH-820 to Greenbelt) TPW 100016 Oak Grove Road (Alta Mesa Boulevard to Everman Parkway) TPW-100025 Keller Hicks Road (Timberland Drive to US377) TPW 100026 North Riverside Drive (Summerfields Boulevard to Heritage Trace Parkway) TPW 100027 Kroger Drive (US 377 to Park Vista Boulevard) TPW 100219 Meacham Boulevard (IH35W-FM156) TPW 100866 Bryant Irvin Road (Continuous left turn from Geddes to Manhattan) TPW 100875 Academy Blvd (West Point-IH 30) TPW 100887 Precinct Line (1000ft S of Trinity-Randol Mill) TPW 100889 University Drive Reconfiguration TPW 100894 Alsbury (I35W FR-Entrance to Spinks Airport) Arlington 7 Burdette $45,000 Heights Sycamore 6 Jordan $16,000 Far South 6 - Jordan $6,079 Far Northwest 7 - Burdette $19,000 Eastside 4 - Scarth, 5 - $43,300 Moss Sycamore 8 - Hicks $14,700 Far North 2 - Espino $13,900 Far North 4 Scarth $15,900 Far North 2 Espino $9,392 Far North, 2 Espino $6,000 Northeast Far Southwest 3 Zimmerman $2,100 TBD 7 Burdette $8,500 TBD 4 Scarth $17,500 TBD 9 Bums $5,000 TBD 8 Hicks $2,013 Responsible !Funding_ Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Derdavencv Source 4010 :,; i 2011L2012 '2013-2017 2818:2829',: $22,500 $22,500 Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond, Storm Water Utility $16,000 Transportation/Public Developer Funds, Works General Obligation Bond, NCTCOG $6,079 Transportation/Public Developer Funds, Works General Obligation Bond $19,000 Transportation/Public Developer Funds, Works General Obligation Bond $43,300 Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond, TxDOT $14,700 Transportation/Public Developer Funds, Works General Obligation Bond $13,900 Transportation/Public City Funds, Developer Works Funds $15,900 Transportation/Public Developer Funds, Works General Obligation Bond $9,392 Transportation/Public Developer Funds, Works General Obligation Bond $6,000 Transportation/Public City Funds, Federal Works Funds $2,100 Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond $8,500 Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond $17,500 Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond $5,000 Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond $2,013 Transportation/Public City Funds Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. E- 12 Appendix E: TRANSPORTATION • • • ro'ect PW-100897 4TPW 100898 TPW 100901 PW 100902 PW 100905 TPW 100907 PW 100909 TPW 100911 PW 100912 TPW 100916 (Mark IV Pkwy-IH35W SBFR) *like Projects 1Proiect Name PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED. TRANSPORTATION Planning Sector Bryant Irvin (Add 2 lanes TBD on bridge @SW Blvd) Caylor W (Caylor N-Katy Rd) Currie St (W 7th St-Crestline) Foch (W 7th St Trinity Park Rd) Northeast Parkway (Mark IV -Great SW Parkway) Old Decatur (Longhorn -Blue Ribbon) Old Denton (Cantrell Sansom-South of Western Center) Silver Creek (WSISD-Westem Oaks) Verna Trail (White Settlement -Silver Creek) W Cleburne Rd (Hulen-Meadownoll& Crowley Clebum McPherson) Wagley Robertson (Bonds Ranch -Darby Ln) PW 100228 Great Southwest Parkway 'Bicycle Projects Bridge Reconstruction Projects 1 LN-100383 Silver Creek Rd./Silver Creek • • TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Citywide Far West Council District 3 Zimmerman 2 Espino 9 Burns 9 Bums 2 Espino 7 Burdette 2 - Espino 7 Burdette 7- Burdette 6 Jordan 7- Burdette 2 - Espino 1 - Citywide 7 - Burdette Estimated Cost 1$1.0001 $3,312 $4,725 $3,380 $5,530 $3,900 $3,780 $3,000 $18,848 $12,968 $2,354 $325 $2,650 Responsible Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 1$1.0001 Dent/Agency 2011:2012Y° ,• 20134017 ;0140021 $3,312 Transportation/Public Works $4,725 $3,380 $5,530 $3,780 $3,000 $18,848 $325 $2,650 1 $11,000 1 1 $1,000 1 $3,000 1 1 i 1 $1,500 1 1 1 Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works $3,900 Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works $12,968 Transportation/Public Works $2,354 Transportation/Public Works $6,400 $1,500 Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works, TxDOT ...... Transportation/Public Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. IPThis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the /proposed projects. Funding Source City Funds City Funds City Funds City Funds City Funds City Funds City Funds City Funds City Funds City Funds City Funds City Funds ICity Funds, NCTCOG 1 Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds • E- 13 Appendix E: TRANSPORTATION PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED. TRANSPORTATION S • Planning Project # Project Name Sector PLN-100384 Silver Creek Rd./Live Oak Creek PLN-100385 PLN-100386 PLN -100387 PLN-100388 PLN-100715 TPW 100121 TPW 100122 TPW-100803 TPW 100804 TPW-100805 TPW 100807 Silver Creek Rd./Silver Creek Tributary Christopher Dr.Nillage Creek Tributary Ranch View Rd./Whites Branch - Rehab McCart Ave./Sycamore Creek Tributary -Rehab Trinity Uptown Bridges (Main, Henderson, White Settlement) North Riverside Drive Southbound Bridge Reconstruction at West Fork Trinity River North University Drive Northbound Bridge Reconstruction at West Fork Trinity River E Rosedale St Bridge Replacement over Sycamore Creek E Northside Dr Bridge Replacement over Samuels Ave S University Dr (southbound) Bridge Improvements over Clear Fork Trinity River Long Ave over Little Fossil Northeast Creek Bridge Replacement Far West Far West Sycamore TCU/Westclf. Wedgwood Arlington Heights, Northside Southside Arlington Heights Southeast, Southside Northeast Arlington Heights, TCU/Westclf. Council District 7 Burdette 7 Burdette 8 Hicks 3 Zimmerman 6 - Jordan 2 - Espino 8 - Hicks 7 Burdette, 9 - Bums 8 Hicks 8 - Hicks, 9 - Bums 9 Burns 4 - Scarth Estimated Cost ($1.0001 $1,000 $900 $6,100 $400 $500 $67,000 $7,000 $1,024 $6,000 $1,500 $6,000 $3,000 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Responsible Dent/Agency 2011-2012 :„„20134017. 2011140291-,1' $1,000 Transportation/Public Works $900 Transportation/Public Works $100 $6,000 Transportation/Public Works $400 Transportation/Public Works $500 Transportation/Public Works $67,000 $7,000 $6,000 Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works $1,024 Transportation/Public Works Transportation/Public Works $1,500 Transportation/Public Works $6,000 Transportation/Public Works $3,000 Transportation/Public Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. E- 14 Funding Source Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds General Obligation Bond Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds Federal Funds, TxDOT Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds City Funds, Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds City Funds, Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds City Funds, Federal Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds Appendix E. TRANSPORTATION • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • eighborhood Street Projects I LN-100645 I Residential Streets I L ew Development Projects LN-100390 New Development Projects TBD ailroad Crossing Projects N-100663 Railroad Crossing Surface Improvement Program TPW 100131 Railroad Crossings and Quiet Zones egional Projects PW 100231 IH-30/Walsh Ranch Parkway Interchange PW-100298 iTPW-100299 IH-35W (SH 183 to Northside Dr.) 4th Street) IH-820 (US 287 to Meadowbrook Dr.) • s • rolect# Proiect Name PW-100808 W Lancaster over Foch St Bridge Rehabilitation TPW 100809 E 4th St Bridge Rehabilitation over West Fork Trinity River TPW 100810 NW 30th St over Marine Creek Bridge Rehabilitation ntersection Improvement, Projects PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED. TRANSPORTATION Planning Council Estimated Responsible Sector District Cost ($1,000) Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent 30 ($1,000) Dent/Aeencv ZIf�10 2011-2012 2013-204 2018-2029 Arlington 9 Burns $500 Heights Northeast 8 Flicks $10,000 Northside 2 - Espino $1,000 TPW 100033 )lntersection Improvements Citywide I Citywide $10 200 i I $3,000 ICitywide 1- Citywide $140,000 I I $40,000 I I Citywide 1 Citywide $45,000I I $22,500 I Citywide 1 Citywide $400 $400 Citywide 1 - Citywide $7,200 $1,200 TBD TBD $9,000 Funding Source $500 Transportation/Public City Funds, Federal Works Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds $10,000 Transportation/Public City Funds, Federal Works Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds $1,000 Transportation/Public City Funds, Federal Works Funds, General Obligation Bond, State Funds $6,600 I Transportation/Public I City Funds Works $100,000 I Transportation/Public I General Obligation Works Bond $22,500 I Transportation/Public I City Funds Works Transportation/Public City Funds Works $2,000 $4,000 Transportation/Public General Obligation Works Bond $9,000 TxDOT Developer Funds, State Funds Eastside, 5 - Moss $466,000 Southeast Northeast 2 Espino $18,600 $18,600 PW 100300 IH-35W (Northside Dr. to Northeast 2 Espino, 8 - $51,805 $51,805 Hicks Sidewalk Projects $466,000 TxDOT TxDOT TxDOT (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. 'This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the 'proposed projects. Federal Funds, TxDOT Federal Funds, TxDOT Federal Funds, TxDOT E-15 Appendix E: TRANSPORTATION PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS — UNFUNDED• TRANSPORTATION 1LbugCouncil iin 1 Protect Name Sector District City Sidewalk and Curb TBD 1 Citywide Ramp Projects Traffic Signal and Intelligent Transportation System Projects , IPLN-100666 ITS Projects Transit Projecti, ICitywide 1 - Citywide PLN-100965 Modern Streetcar Project Citywide 1 - Citywide Estimated Responsible Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.000) Dent/Agency Cost ($1.000) A011:201,r 72o134011 2018-2029 $77,000 $17,000 I $250,000 $1,250 $2,000 $550 1 $8,750 $67,000 Transportation/Public Works „, • $5,000 $10,000 Transportation/Public Works $187,088 $62,363 Planning and Development, Transportation/Public Works (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. Futjskrt Source General Obligation Bond ICity Funds Federal Funds, Gas Well Bonus/Royalty Hotel Occupancy Tax, PID, T Funds, Tarrant County, TIF • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • E-16 Appendix E. TRANSPORTATION PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED. EDUCATION trm'EL# 0 Protect Name ° 13LN-100279 PLN-100283 0 1 1;3LN-100709 13LN-100710 It/31,N-100711 :3 . LN-I 00944 Eagle Mountain -Saginaw ISD Various Renovations Eagle Mountain -Saginaw ISD 14 elementary schools, 5 middle schools, 2 high schools Hurst -Euless -Bedford ISD-1 elementary school White Settlement ISD-3 elementaries, 1 intermediate school, 1 middle school Northwest ISD-17 elementary schools, 3 middle schools, 1 high school Keller ISD 1 Elementary School, Athletic Stadium, Miscellaneous PlanningCouncil Sector District Far Northwest 2 Espino, 7 Burdette Far Northwest 2 Espino, 7 - Burdette Eastside 5 Moss Far West 7 Burdette Far North 2 - Espino, 7 Burdette Far North 2 Espino Estimated Cost f$1.0001 . „ I i $37,690 $571,190 $10,000 $112,000 $344,000 $134,000 Responsible Funding Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Dent/Acency Source $37,690 $165,280 $12,000 $405,910 $10,000 $100,000 $344,000 $96,000 Eagle Mountain -Saginaw ISD Eagle Mountain -Saginaw ISD Hurst -Euless -Bedford ISD White Settlement ISD Northwest ISD $38,000 Keller ISD TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. 'his table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the Iroposed projects. • Eagle Mtn. -Saginaw ISD Bond Eagle Mtn. -Saginaw ISD Bond HEB ISD Bond White Settlement ISD Bond Northwest ISD Bond Keller ISD Bond E- 17 Appendix E: EDUCATION Pro ect # ,,,”•,,,,. Protect Name PLN-100241 Fort Worth Convention Center Expansion Phase 3 PLN-100243 New Will Rogers Arena PLN-I00398 Seal and repair plaster at Cowtown Coliseum and associated power building Planning Sector PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: ARTS & CULTURE Council District Downtown 9 Burns Arlington 7 Burdette Heights Northside 2 - Espino $120,000 $110,000 $181 Responsible Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept 30 ($1,000) Dent/Aeencv 2011.-212 • 2013-2011 '20AS-2029 , • $110,000 $181 $120,000 Public Events Public Events Public Events Funding Source (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. General Obligation Bond, Occupancy Tax General Obligation Bond, Private General Obligation Bond Appendix E: ARTS & CULTURE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • E-18 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED. POLICE SERVICES ro'ect # Protect Name . . Planning Council Estimated Sector District Cost f$1.00011 OL 100111 Neighborhood Policing TBD Location TBD $620 District #3 POL 100112 Future 6th Division TBD Location TBD $10,000 Headquarters OL-100115 Heliport Facility Northside 2 Espino $1,500 OL-100138 Auto Pound Facility TBD Location TBD $3,000 OL-100662 Police/Fire Training TBD Location TBD $150,000 Academy p 0 Responsible Funding Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.000) Dent/Agency &trce, 2i10 2011 2012 26.3-2617 -3'1.'"5011:2029 „ $620 Police Dept. General Obligation Bond $10,000 Police Dept. General Obligation Bond $1,500 Police Dept. TBD $3,000 Police Dept. General Obligation Bond $25,000 $80,000 $45,000 Police Dept. City Funds (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. his table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. Appendix E. POLICE SERVICES E-19 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES • • I Project # Project Name ;:j., ,,,1::';',?,r '1,'‘i'?",‘,/,'',•% '',,,,7 ;•;;, • -',, 1 Plannine Council Estimated Sector District Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 2011-2012 20 2017 -2018-2029 Resnonsible Derit/Agencv , • ; .-. Funding Soi_zu , „ „ • , , FIR-100088 Opticom Traffic Downtown I Citywide $1,461 $1,461 Fire Dept. City Funds Intervention System FIR 100100 Replace Fire Station 40 Far Northwest 7 Burdette $3,190 $3,190 Fire Dept. City Funds FIR-100103 Far Southwest Fire Station Far Southwest 6 Jordan $2,344 $2,344 Fire Dept. City Funds FIR-100104 Far South Fire Station Far South 8 Hicks $2,344 $2,344 Fire Dept. City Funds FIR 100105 Mosier Valley Fire Station Eastside 5 - Moss $2,344 $2,344 Fire Dept. City Funds FIR 100334 Replace CAD System TBD TBD $9,160 $9,160 Fire Dept. General Obligation Bond FIR 100336 Replace SCBA Facility Southside 9 - Bums $3,190 $3,190 Fire Dept. General Obligation Bond FIR-100337 Hazardous Materials TBD TBD $457 $457 Fire Dept. General Obligation Equipment Storage Bldg. Bond FIR 100338 Reserve Apparatus Storage TBD TBD $344 $344 Fire Dept. General Obligation Bond FIR 100339 Remodel Fire Station 44 Northside 2 - Espino $187 $187 Fire Dept. General Obligation Bond FIR 100341 Rebuild Fire Station 15 Northside 2 Espino $187 $187 Fire Dept. General Obligation Bond FIR-100342 Remodel Fire Station 16 Western 7 Burdette $187 $187 Fire Dept. General Obligation Hills/Ridglea Bond FIR-100343 Replace Station 37 Far North 2 Espino $3,190 $3,190 Fire Dept. General Obligation Bond • • so to • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 111 • (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the 11111 proposed projects. Appendix E. FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES 41I° E- 20 • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS — UNFUNDED: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Project # Planning Council Estimated Project Name Sector District Cost ($1,0001 Storm Water Projects , ;LN-100252 Bailey's Industrial Addition Arlington 9 Bums $20,000 Heights ?LN-100963 Botanic Gardens Arlington 7- Burdette $6,000 I Stormwater Management Heights Parking Area FPW 100084 Big Fossil Creek Watershed Far North, Far 2 Espino, 4 $8,000 Improvements Northwest Scarth, 7 - Burdette -1 -PW 100155 Drew Street Detention Southside 9 - Burns $300 Pond FPW 100158 Glen Garden Drainage Southeast 8- Hicks $2,500 Improvements 1. rpw 100159 Westland Drainage Far West 3 - Zimmerman $4,000 1 Improvements FPW 100161 Hemphill Heights -Devitt Southside 9 - Bums $15,000 Drainage Improvements FPW-100162 Cottonwood Creek Channel Eastside 5 Moss $1,200 / Improvements r-100184 Manderly-Suffolk Drainage Southside, 3 - Zimmerman, 9 $4,000 Improvements TCU/Westclf. - Burns 4'W-100189 Henderson Street Drainage Downtown, 8 Hicks, 9 $25,000 Improvements Southside Bums l ,PW 100430 Libbey-Goodman Drainage Arlington 7- Burdette $5,000 Improvements Heights 'PW-100431 Lower Como Creek Arlington 7 - Burdette $3,000 Improvements Heights 'PW 100433 Indian Creek Channel Arlington 7 Burdette $600 Improvements Heights PW 100485 9600 Wagley Robertson Far Northwest 7 Burdette $1,600 culvert improvements at Big Fossil Creek PW-100486 200 Bonds Ranch Road Far Northwest 7- Burdette $800 West culvert improvements PW-100487 9300 Harmon Road culvert Far North 2 - Espino $1,000 improvements at BFC-2 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30 ($1.000) Responsible Funding Dept/Agency Source r 013-201F17:'2 141 • „ " • •‘, •••••••••••16.00N.. $20,000 Engineering Department, Storm Water Utility TPW $6,000 TPW General Obligation Bond $8,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $300 TPW Storm Water Utility $2,500 TPW Storm Water Utility $2,000 $2,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $15,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,200 TPW Storm Water Utility $4,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $3,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $750 $4,250 TPW Storm Water Utility $450 $2,550 TPW Storm Water Utility $600 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,600 TPW Storm Water Utility $800 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility MD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. his table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the -oposed projects. E- 21 Appendix E. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED- ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Sector Council District , . • TPW 100488 11000 Old Denton Road Far North 2 - Espino $1,200 $1,200 TPW Storm Water Utility culvert improvements at Big Bear Creek TPW 100489 3700 Keller Hicks culvert Far North 2 - Espino $600 $600 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements east of Alta Vista TPW 100490 10900 Alta Vista culvert Far North 2 - Espino $1,500 $1,500 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements at Big Bear Creek TPW 100491 4900 Golden Triangle Far North 2 - Espino $1,500 $1,500 TPW Storm Water Utility culvert improvements east of North Beach TPW 100492 5400 WJ Boaz Road Far Northwest 7 - Burdette $1,000 $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility culvert improvements Furadkgi Source Estimated Responsible Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endine Sent. 30 (S1.000) Dent/Aeencv 20114012 f 1 -4684024 TPW 100493 4700 WJ Boaz Road Far Northwest 7- Burdette $1,200 $1,200 TPW Storm Water Utility culvert improvements TPW 100494 Harmon Road culvert Far North 7 - Burdette $600 $600 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements at BFC-3 TPW 100495 Prewett Channel drainage Far North 4 - Scarth $4,000 $4,000 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements TPW 100499 Macie Avenue culvert Northside 2- Espino $800 $800 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements in Sansom Park TPW 100500 Sansom Park Drive culvert Northside 2- Espino $700 $700 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements in Sansom Park TPW-100501 Parsons Street drainage Northeast 2- Espino $700 $700 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements TPW-100502 35th Street NW culvert Northside 2 Espino $800 $800 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements @ Cement Creek TPW-100503 East Long -South Meacham Northside 2 Espino $6,000 $6,000 TPW Storm Water Utility storm drain improvements TPW 100505 Little Fossil Creek channel Far North 2- Espino $6,000 $6,000 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements TPW 100509 11800 Mosier Valley Road Eastside 5 Moss $1,200 $1,200 TPW Storm Water Utility culvert improvements TPW-100510 12000 White Settlement Far West 7- Burdette $800 $800 TPW Storm Water Utility culvert improvements at Live Oak Creek (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. E- 22 Appendix E. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS — UNFUNDED: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 0 Platsgtin ro' ect # Project Name Sector PW 100513 PW-100514 TPW 100515 PW-100517 TPW 100518 PW 100519 PW-I00520 TPW 100521 PW 100522 TPW 100523 PW-100525 TPW 100527 PW-100528 PW 100529 TPW 100530 PW 100531 Council Estimated Funding Cost ($1.0001. Pronosed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Responsible District Dent/Apencv Source ,'",„2011-2012 , 30134011 ; 20184029 - ' • '1 . ;, 700 block Verna Trail Far West 7 Burdette $600 $600 TPW Storm Water Utility North culvert improvements 500 block Verna Trail Far West 7 - Burdette $500 $500 TPW Storm Water Utility North culvert improvements 200 Zuni Trail North Far West 7 Burdette $1,200 $1,200 TPW Storm Water Utility culvert improvements at pond Menefee Creek capacity Northside 2 Espino $3,500 $525 $2,975 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements McCandless-25th storm Northside 2 Espino $1,000 $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility drain improvements Kearney-23rd storm drain Northside 2 Espino $4,000 $4,000 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements McKinley at NW 30th Northside 2 - Espino $400 $400 TPW Storm Water Utility culvert improvements Ephriham storm drain Northside 2 - Espino $3,000 $3,000 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements Ohio Garden Road culvert Northside 7 - Burdette $900 $900 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements at Quail Trail 3900 Ohio Graden culvert Northside 7 - Burdette $800 $800 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements Marine Creek/Stockyards Northside 2- Espino $15,000 $15,000 TPW Storm Water Utility drainage improvements Circle Park storm drain Northside 2 Espino $25,000 $3,000 $17,000 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements North Grove-21st NE storm Northside 2 Espino $350 $350 TPW Storm Water Utility drain improvements Near Northside drainage Northside 2 Espino $4,000 $4,000 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements Monticello storm drain Arlington 7 Burdette $6,000 $6,000 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements Heights Kimbo Road drainage Northeast 4 - Scarth $2,000 $2,000 TPW Storm Water Utility improvements (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. his table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. Appendix E. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY E- 23 Project # TPW 100532 TPW 100533 TPW-100534 TPW 100535 TPW 100536 TPW 100537 TPW-100538 TPW-100539 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY jitin Council I Estimated Project Name Sector District Cost ($1.0001 Cold Springs Watuaga drainage improvements Dry Branch Creek Phase 4 drainage improvements Samuels-Delga drainage improvements Northeast Northeast Northeast East CBD drainage Downtown, improvements Northeast Lower Dry Branch Creek Eastside, drainage improvements Northeast Fosdic Lake dam Eastside rehabilitation 4700 Lake Havasu Trail culvert improvements Lower Woodhaven Creek capacity improvements TPW 100544 4000 Lost Creek Blvd. drainage improvements at golf course pond TPW 100545 10500 Chapin Road culvert improvements TPW 100546 3420 Alemeda St culvert improvements @ MSC 1 Eastside Eastside Far West Far West Far West TPW 100547 Las vegas Trail storm drain Western improvements Hills/Ridglea TPW-I00548 3101 S. Normandale Street Western culvert improvements @ Hills/Ridglea MSC-1A TPW-100549 Pensacola -Royal drainage Western improvements Hills/Ridglea TPW 100550 TPW 100551 TPW-100552 Burton Hill Bottoms Arlington drainage improvements Heights Lovell-Bourine drainage Arlington improvements Heights Diaz -Halloran storm drain Arlington improvements Heights 2 - Espino $1,000 2 Espino, 4 - $20,000 Scarth 8 Hicks, 9 $3,000 Bums 8 - Hicks, 9 $8,000 Bums 4 Scarth $5,000 4 Scarth $1,275 4 Scarth $250 4 - Scarth $5,000 3 - Zimmerman $250 3 - Zimmerman $250 3 - Zimmerman $500 3 Zimmerman $4,000 7 - Burdette $250 3 Zimmerman $2,000 7- Burdette $2,500 7 Burdette $2,500 7 - Burdette $15,000 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30 t$1.0001 2010 Responsible Dent/Aeency i !2018-20ii' „ . $1,000 TPW $20,000 TPW $3,000 TPW $8,000 TPW $5,000 TPW $1,275 TPW $250 TPW $5,000 TPW $250 TPW $250 TPW $500 TPW $4,000 TPW $250 TPW $2,000 TPW $2,500 TPW $2,500 TPW $15,000 TPW (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. E-24 Funding Source Storm Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Appendix E. ENVIRONMENTAL a a S Water Utility • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • QUALITY 4111 • PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 'ro'ect # • ; Project Name Plannin Sector Council I Estimated Responsible Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endine Sent. 30 ($1.0001 District Dent/Aeencv :„ 2011P .2011-2012 , 201.3-2011 4018-2029 ' 'PW 100553 Ridglea Hills storm drain & Western 3 Zimmerman $5,000 channel improvements Hills/Ridglea 71'W-100554 Luther Lake outfall channel Western 3 Zimmerman $1,600 improvements Hills/Ridglea 'PW 100556 East Arlington Heights Arlington 7 Burdette $15,000 storm drain improvements Heights 71'W-100557 West Arlington Heights Arlington 7- Burdette, 9- $25,000 storm drain improvements Heights Bums 7PW 100558 Tanglewood Neighborhood TCU/Westclf, 3 Zimmerman $2,500 storm drain improvements 7PW 100559 Bellaire Drive North TCU/Westclf. 9 - Bums $300 culvert improvements at TCU Stadium 'PW 100560 Linwood -West Side Arlington 7 Burdette, 9 - $8,000 drainage improvements Heights Bums PW 100561 13th Avenue drainage Southside 9 - Burns $300 improvements at FWWR 'PW 100562 Fairmount -West Magnolia Southside 9 Burns $15,000 storm drain improvements 'PW 100563 University -Park Hill storm TCU/Westclf. 9 Bums $2,000 drain improvements PW-100564 1700 Park Place culvert Southside 9 - Bums $300 improvements at railroad 7PW-100565 Ryan Place -Arlington Southside 9 Bums $8,000 Street storm drain improvements PW 100566 South Ryan Place storm Southside 9 - Bums $4,000 drain improvements PW 100567 East Vickery-1M Terrell Southside 8 Hicks $20,000 storm drain improvements PW 100568 Highlands Addition storm Southside 8 Hicks $5,000 drain improvements Mr 100569 Vickery's-Hyde Park storm Southside 8 Hicks $25,000 drain improvements 'W 100571 2300 E. Berry St culvert Southeast 8 Hicks $500 improvements @ SC 3 $4,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,600 TPW Storm Water Utility $12,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $20,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $2,500 TPW Storm Water Utility $300 TPW Storm Water Utility $6,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $300 TPW Storm Water Utility $12,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $2,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $300 TPW Storm Water Utility $6,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $4,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $20,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $5,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $25,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $500 TPW Storm Water Utility 'BD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. is table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the oposed projects. E- 25 Appendix E. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 1 Planning Council Project # Project Name Sector District TPW-100572 Conner Ave. bridge Southeast 8 Hicks improvements at Ludelle Channel TPW-100573 2400 East Vickery Blvd. Southeast, 8 - Hicks bridge capacity Southside improvements @ Sycamore Creek TPW 100574 700 Collard Street drainage Southeast 8 Hicks improvements under UPRR TPW 100575 Ayers -Lancaster storm Southeast 8 Hicks . drain improvements TPW 100576 Maddox Ave at Sycamore Southeast, 8 Hicks Creek bridge capacity Southside improvements TPW 100578 Englewood Heights storm Southeast 5 Moss drain improvements TPW 100579 Forty Oaks drainage Eastside, 4 Scarth, 5 - improvements Southeast Moss TPW 100580 Plant Avenue drainage Eastside 5 - Moss improvements TPW-100581 Dunbar Creek drainage Southeast 5 - Moss improvements TPW-100582 Wildcat Branch channel Southeast 5 - Moss improvements TPW 100583 Pate watershed storm drain Southeast 5 - Moss improvements TPW 100584 Ryanwood storm drain and Eastside 4 - Scarth channel improvements TPW 100585 La Valle Grande drainage Eastside 4 - Scarth improvements TPW 100586 Quail Road at Elizabeth Southeast 5 Moss Road culvert improvements TPW 100587 Overton Park Creek TCU/Westclf. 3 Zimmerman capacity improvements TPW-100588 Inwood channel TCU/Westclf. 3 Zimmerman improvements Estimated Cost ($L0001 $2,000 $2,000 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 gat '2011-2012 :, 2013-2017F 2018-2029 $2,000 TPW - Storm Water Utility Responsible JI Dent/Agency Funding Source $2,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $250 $250 TPW Storm Water Utility $4,000 $4,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,700 $1,700 TPW Storm Water Utility $25,000 $20,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $25,000 $3,000 $17,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $500 $500 TPW Storm Water Utility $6,000 $6,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $6,000 $6,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $20,000 $20,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $15,000 $15,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,000 $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,500 $1,500 TPW Storm Water Utility $2,500 $2,500 TPW Storm Water Utility $15,000 $15,000 TPW Storm Water Utility (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. E-26 Appendix E. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS — UNFUNDED. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 'roject # CPW 100589 FPW-100590 FPW 100591 FPW 100592 FPW 100593 CPW 100594 CPW 100595 CPW 100596 CPW 100597 7PW 100598 PW 100599 PW 100600 PW 100602 PW 100603 PW 100604 ?W-100607 'W 100609 Project Name PlanningCouncil Estimated Responsible Funding Sector District Cost ($1.0001 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.0001 Dent/Agency Source T2011461.2 Spurgeon -Staples storm TCU/Westclf. 3 Zimmerman $1,500 drain improvements Upper Willow Lake Wedgwood 3 Zimmerman $1,000 channel improvements Wedgwood storm drain Wedgwood 6 Jordan $15,000 improvements South Hulen storm drain Wedgwood 6 Jordan $10,000 improvements 6300 Vega Drive culvert Wedgwood 6 Jordan $300 improvements Bluebonnet Hills storm Southside, 3 Zimmerman, 9 $20,000 drain improvements TCU/Westclf. - Bums McLean -Boyd storm drain TCU/Westclf. 9 - Burns $15,000 improvements Rosemont storm drain Southside 9 - Bums $25,000 improvements Hubbard Heights storm Southside 9 - Bums $1,200 drain improvements College -Spurgeon drainage Southside 9 - Bums $1,000 improvements Seminary Hill drainage Southside 9 - Bums $4,000 improvements Southgate -Walton drainage Wedgwood 6 - Jordan $15,000 improvements Rayburn channel Wedgwood 6 - Jordan $1,000 improvements OLV Worth Heights storm Southside 9 Bums $15,000 drain improvements Brentmoor-Echo Lake Southside 9 - Bums $500 drainage improvements Upper Fair Park channel Southeast 9 - Burns $40(1 improvements Fair Park-Beddell drainage Southside, 8 Hicks $3,500 improvements Sycamore $1,500 TPW $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $15,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $10,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $300 TPW Storm Water Utility $20,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $4,000 $11,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $3,000 $22,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,200 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $600 $3,400 TPW Storm Water Utility $15,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $1,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $15,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $500 TPW Storm Water Utility $400 TPW Storm Water Utility $3,500 TPW Storm Water Utility 'BD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. is table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the oposed projects. Storm Water Utility E- 27 Appendix E. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Project # I Project Name TPW-100610 Savage -Roma Highland Hills drainage improvements TPW-100612 Miller -Howard storm drain improvements TPW-100613 Glen Park storm drain improvements TPW-100614 Prairie Dog Creek drainage improvements TPW-100616 Sun Valley drainage improvements TPW-100618 6100 Columbus Trail culvert improvements TPW 100619 8000 Old Granbury Road culvert improvements TPW-100620 9600 Cleburne Road West culvert improvements Planning Council Sector District Sycamore 8 - Hicks Southeast 5 - Moss, 8 Hicks Southeast Southeast Southeast Wedgwood Wedgwood Far Southwest Far Southwest Far Southwest Estimated Cost (S1.0001 $300 $15,000 5 - Moss $4,000 5 - Moss $3,500 5 - Moss $3,500 3 - Zimmerman $800 3 - Zimmerman $1,600 6 Jordan $500 TPW-100621 1800 Risinger Road West 6 Jordan $1,200 culvert improvements @ Sycamore Creek TPW 100622 2400-2500 6 Jordan $1,600 Crowley-Clebume Road North culvert improvements TPW 100624 Hallmark neighborhood Sycamore 8 - Hicks $3,000 drainage improvements TPW 100625 Everman Parkway channel Sycamore 8 Hicks $4,000 improvements TPW 100626 9800 Oak Grove Road TBD 8 Hicks $1,600 culvert improvements TPW-100627 10600 Oak Grove Road Far South 8 Hicks $1,000 culvert improvements TPW 100628 9700 Race Street South Far South 8 Hicks $1,000 culvert improvements TPW-100629 7900 Anglin Drive at EKB Far South 8 - Hicks $1,000 Road culvert improvements Pronosed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.000) € 2011 2012 ;013-2017 $2,250 $1,600 2018-2029' $300 TPW $12,750 TPW $4,000 TPW $3,500 TPW $3,500 TPW $800 TPW TPW $500 TPW $1,200 TPW $1,600 TPW $3,000 TPW $4,000 TPW $1,600 TPW $1,000 TPW $1,000 TPW $1,000 TPW Responsible Dent/Agency (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. Funding Source Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility Storm Water Utility E- 28 Appendix E. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Planning Council Project Name Sector District 1i-1W-100630 Rendon New Hope Road Far South 8 Hicks Estimated Cost 61,0001 $700 / culvert improvements @ Elm Branch iTPW 100631 Garden Acres drainage Far South 8 Hicks $3,500 improvements 'FPW 100632 1600 Oak Grove Road East Far South 8 Hicks $800 / culvert improvements irPw 100633 11600 Oak Grove Road Far South 8 Hicks $2,000 South culvert improvements 11CPW 100781 Lower Lebow Channel Northeast 2 - Espino $9,000 1 Improvements ipFPW 100796 Citywide seepage projects TBD 1 Citywide $750 ifPW 100872 Dry Branch Riverside Northeast 2- Espino, 4 - $4,000 Culvert Improvements Scarth kPW-100922 Panola-Collard storm drain Eastside 8 Hicks $15,000 improvements rasteiiaier Projects i'LN-100955 Village Creek Wastewater Eastside Treatment Plant i'LN-100956 Riverside Plant Southside LN-100957 Major Wastewater Citywide Collectors r.N-100958 Lift Stations various Citywide locations VTR-100973 Mary's Creek Satellite Plant Far West NTR 100974 Large Diameter Sewer Citywide Main Inspection Program Arater LN-100276 Automate and Centralize Citywide Control of All Water Treatment Plants and Distribution System Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1.000) Responsible Dept/Agency „..' 2011.2012. 284029 : • r NINA. Funding Source $700 TPW Storm Water Utility $3,500 TPW Storm Water Utility $800 TPW Storm Water Utility $2,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $9,000 TPW Storm Water Utility $750 TPW Storm Water Utility $600 $3,400 TPW Storm Water Utility $15,000 TPW Storm Water Utility 5 - Moss $99,350 $3,415 $28,051 $66,574 $1,309 Water Department 8 Hicks $13,140 $6,184 $6,957 Water Department 1 Citywide $7,595 $108 $6,733 $754 Water Department 1 Citywide $7,390 $1,101 $6,289 Water Department 3 Zimmerman $1,500 $1,353 $147 Water Department 1 Citywide $3,000 $902 $2,000 $98 Water Department 1 Citywide Commercial Paper, Operating Fund Commercial Paper Commercial Paper, State Revolving Fund Commercial Paper, Impact Fee Impact Fee Commercial Paper • $4,411 $371 $40 $2,400 $1,600 Water Department Commercial Paper TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. 'his table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the roposed projects. E-29 Appendix E: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PLN-100943 Transmissions Mains Citywide 1 - Citywide $239,232 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Endino Sent. 30 ($1,0001 i 1201d ' 1018-2029 Responsible Dent/Aeencv $16,370 $222,862 Water Department various locations PLN-100950 Rolling Hills Water Sycamore 8 Hicks $92,085 $1,000 $11,025 $77,166 $2,895 Water Department Treatment Plant PLN-100952 Tanks and Pump Stations Citywide 1 - Citywide $43,481 $800 $17,081 $23,798 $1,802 Water Department PLN-100953 Security and Information Citywide I Citywide $9,160 $1,858 $5,336 $1,966 Water Department Technology WTR-100975 Southwest Water Treatment N/A N/A $93,600 $90 $10 $4,600 $80,316 Water Department Plant (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. E- 30 Fut_ Source Commercial Paper Commercial Paper Commercial Paper Commercial Paper Impact Fee • • to • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Appendix E. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 411 • • • ro'ect # PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: PUBLIC HEALTH Planning Estimated Protect Name Sector District Cost ($1,000) Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 (S1.0001 Responsible FundingDent/Agency Source : „ • ' II OD-100149 Northside Animal Care and Northside 2 Espino Control Center • • • • • • • • • • • • 4) PO • • • • S • IS3,455 I $3,455 I Code Compliance ii(TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. Willis table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the Iproposed projects. General Obligation Bond Appendix E: PUBLIC HEALTH Council • E- 3 1 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - UNFUNDED: MUNICIPAL FACILITIES Project # COD-100165 COD-100172 COD-100173 COD-100174 COD-100175 ITS-100136 ITS-100139 ITS-100141 PLN-100637 PLN-100638 PLN-100639 PLN-100644 PLN-100860 TPW 100039 1Project Name Code Compliance Sector #2 Code Compliance Sector #4 Code Compliance Sector #5 Code Compliance Sector #6 Code Compliance Sector #9 Trunked Radio System New 311 Center Southwest Communications Tower Planning Sector Council District Far North Eastside Southeast, TBD Far Southwest Southside Downtown Downtown Far Southwest Northern Communications TBD Tower Southem Communication TBD Tower Replacement Digital TBD Microwave System Community Arts Center Arlington HVAC Upgrade Heights Code Compliance TBD BSD/SED Upgrade elevators in City Downtown Hall Annex 2 - Espino, Location TBD 4 - Scarth 5 - Moss, Location TBD 6 Jordan 9 - Bums 1 Citywide 1 - Citywide 3 Zimmerman TBD TBD TBD 7 Burdette Location TBD I Citywide Estimated Cost ($1,0001 $600 $600 $600 $600 $600 $80,000 $2,000 $8,200 $12,000 $12,000 $15,000 $1,150 $1,800 $630 Proposed Expenditures by Fiscal Year Ending Sent. 30 ($1,0001 $8,200 $15,000 $600 $600 $600 $600 $600 $80,000 $2,000 $12,000 $12,000 $1,150 $1,800 $630 2018-2029, Responsible Dept/Asencv Code Compliance Code Compliance Code Compliance Code Compliance Code Compliance ITS Funding Source General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond TBD Information Technology Federal Funds, General Solutions ITS ITS ITS ITS TPW Code Compliance TPW (TBD) To Be Determined. Funded yearly amounts are Bold. This table of proposed capital improvements is intended to serve as a general guide for the allocation of financial resources. It does not imply any obligation to expend funds for the proposed projects. Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond General Obligation Bond E- 32 Appendix E. MUNICIPAL FACILITIES •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••i• APPENDIX F: ANNEXATION PLAN, POLICY, AND PROGRAM A Resolution AMoVled ReS,,lua,5,: ire.c, . ADOPTING AN ANNEXATION PLAN FOR THE CITY OF FORT WORTH WHEREAS, the 76th Texas Legislature adopted SB 89, which made substantial amendments to the Texas Annexation Act, Chapter 43, Texas Local Government Code, effective September 1, 1999; WHEREAS, Section 17(b) of SB 89 requires that each city adopt an annexation plan on or before December 31, 1999, that includes territory the city plans to annex three years from the date the territory is placed in the plan in accordance with Section 43.062, Texas Local Government Code; WHEREAS, SB 89 provides several exceptions that authorize cities to annex territory without placing the territory in an annexation plan; WHEREAS, for the foreseeable future, annexations contemplated by the City of Fort Worth come within one or more of these exceptions; NOW, THEREFORE, SE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT WORTH: That the City Council has reviewed the future expansion needs of the City and the prospects for development within the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction. After studying the effects of amendments to the Texas Annexation Act enacted by S8 89, 76s' Texas Legislature, the City Council has determined that, at this time, the City does not intend to annex any territory that is required to be in an annexation plan in order to be annexed. The City Council reserves the right to amend this annexation plan In the future to add territory for annexation. FLAJ-LPTaiiriPsign---1Lpi, CITY OF FORT WORTH This annexation plan is approved this 14' day of December, 1999, and shall become effective on December 31,1999, Kenneth Barr, Mayor of the City of Fort Worth APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY. tt Leet-. Ord. -- Assistant City Attorney Amend- Resolution Adoption ment No. No. Date F-1 Action 1 2860 8/13/2002 Added Linkwood Estates (152 acres). 2 2863 8/20/2002 Added El Rancho Estates (198 acres). 3 2884 10/29/2002 Added Eagle Mountain Zone (7,744 acres) and 287 Zone (1,238 acres). 4 2897 12/3/2002 Removed Linkwood Estates (152 acres) and El Rancho Estates (198 acres). 5 2946 5/20/2003 6 3097 6/22/2004 7 3101 6/29/2004 8 3200 5/10/2005 9 3201 5/10/2005 10 3261 10/18/2005 11 3262 10/18/2005 12 3263 10/18/2005 13 3267 10/25/2005 14 3268 10/25/2005 15 5269 10/25/2005 17 3297 12/13/2005 18 3298 12/13/2005 19 3557 11/27/2007 20 3558 11/27/2007 21 3575 1/22/2008 22 3623 6/03/2008 23 3717 03/10/2009 Removed 21 acres from 287 Zone to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed Eagle Mountain Zone (1,238 acres) to execute agreement for provision of services in lieu of annexation. Removed 67 acres from 287 Zone to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed 12 acres from 287 Zone to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed 200 acres from 287 Zone to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed 327 acres from 287 Zone to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed 1 acre from 287 Zone to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed 15 acres from 287 Zone to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed 2 acres from 287 Zone to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed 350 acres from 287 Zone to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed 51 acres from 287 Zone. Added 537 acres out of Jose Chirino Survey Added 178 acres out of the Jesse Billingsley Survey Added 304 acres east of N. Beach St. and south of Keller Hicks Rd. Added 489 acres east of Old Denton Rd. and north of Golden Triangle Rd. Removed 23 acres from Area 12 to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Removed 68 acres from Area 12 to facilitate owner -initiated annexation. Remove 82 acres from Area 15 to allow additional annexation notice. Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program ANNEXATION POLICY Approved by the City Council on September 7 2004, by adoption of Resolution No. 3120. I. PURPOSE AND INTENT The City of Fort Worth seeks to annex property within its extraterntorial jurisdic- tion for the following purposes: • To promote orderly growth by facilitating long-range planning for the pro- vision of municipal services and by applying appropnate land use regula- tions, development standards, property maintenance standards, fire codes, construction codes and environmental regulations. • To diversify the economic base and create job opportunities by annexing property for commercial and industrial development. To fulfill these purposes, the City has formulated this annexation policy in order to: • Provide the City Council with more specific, objective, and prescriptive guidance for making annexation decisions. • Enable the City to be more proactive in identifying areas for annexation by providing for an annually updated five-year annexation program. • Provide for meaningful public participation in formulating the annexation program as part of the annual update of the City's Comprehensive Plan. II. DEFINITIONS Annexation — The legal process by which a city extends its boundaries. A city may annex property only within its extraterritorial jurisdiction, unless the city owns the area. Annexation Plan — A document required by Texas Local Government Code, Sec- tion 43.052, identifying certain kinds of areas that a city intends to annex. 1 The plan must identify any areas with 100 or more separate lots or tracts of land containing residential dwellings that the city intends to annex, unless more than 50 percent of the property owners request annexation. 2. The plan may also identify other areas. 3 Areas that are identified in the plan may only be annexed three years after the plan is adopted. Annexation Policy — A set of guidelines for making annexation decisions. Annexation Program — An annually updated document identifying areas that the City wishes to consider for initiation of annexation during the succeeding five-year period. The annexation program expresses the City's intent to consider specific areas for annexation, but is not legally binding. Inclusion of an area in the program does not obligate the City to annex that area, nor does exclusion of an area from the program prevent the City from annexing the area. Certificate of Convenience and Necessity — A utility service area permit authorizing a specified utility to be the sole service provider Disannexation — The legal process for a city removes an area from its boundaries. Enclave — An area within the City's extratemtonal jurisdiction that is surrounded by the corporate limits of the City of Fort Worth and/or the corporate limits or extraterri- torial jurisdiction of other municipalities. Extraordinary Economic Development Project — A commercial or industrial pro- ject that is eligible for property tax abatement under the City's tax abatement policy as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) — Unincorporated area extending generally five miles from the city limit, excluding other incorporated municipalities and their ETJ, in which the City has the authority to annex property Full Municipal Services — Services provided by an annexing municipality within its full -purpose boundaries, including water and wastewater services and excluding gas or electrical service. The City of Fort Worth provides the following services, includ- ing but not limited to fire and police protection, emergency medical services; access to water and wastewater services unless such services are provided by another utility; solid waste collection, operation and maintenance of parks, publicly -owned facilities, and streets; library services; drainage and storm sewer maintenance; enforcement of environmental health, zoning and subdivision ordinances; enforcement of building and construction codes, and inspection services. Full -Purpose Annexation — The legal process for annexing an area in order to pro- vide full municipal services. The city enforces all ordinances, provides services as provided by law, and assesses property taxes and sales taxes. Growth Center — An area that contains, or has the capacity to contain, compact, higher intensity urban land uses, as designated by the City Council in the City's Com- prehensive Plan. There are two types of growth centers: • Mixed -Use Growth Centers — A highly urbanized area that has many char- acteristics of a downtown. a concentration of jobs, housing units, schools, parks, and other public facilities, public transportation hubs, pedestrian activity and a sense of place. This mix of uses supports sustainable devel- opment, which seeks to balance access, mobility, affordability, community cohesion, and environmental quality • Industrial Growth Center — An area consisting pnmarily of industrial and commercial uses, with a high concentration of Jobs, mostly industrial in nature. Other related and supporting uses include office space and ser- vices. Unlike mixed -use growth centers, residential uses are generally discouraged within industrial growth centers. Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program F-2 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •• • • • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Infrastructure — Facilities necessary to provide city services, usually referring to physical assets such as streets and utility lines. Limited -Purpose Annexation — The legal process for annexing an area in order to provide only certain regulatory services for a specified penod of time. Cities with populations of more than 225,000 have the authority to annex property for limited purposes. Cities may enforce planning, zoning, health and safety ordinances in ar- eas annexed for limited purposes, but do not collect property or sales taxes or pro- vide full municipal services. Residents may vote in city council elections and char- ter elections, but may not vote in bond elections or be elected to a city office. Long -Term Development — Planned construction of residential, commercial and/or industrial uses that is anticipated to occur beyond a three-year timeframe. deadline to 4'/2 years after annexation for services that cannot reasonably be pro- vided within 2'/Z years. Urban Development — Development requiring water, sewerage and other munici- pal services to promote public health, safety and welfare. It may include residential development with a density equal to or greater than one dwelling unit per acre, as well as commercial and industrial development. III. ANNEXATION CRITERIA AND PROCEDURE A. Full -Purpose Annexation The City will consider full -purpose annexation of any area within its extraterritonal jurisdiction if and only if the area meets one or more of the following five criteria. Municipal Utility District — A political subdivision providing water, sewerage, 1 drainage and/or other municipal services within a specified geographic area. Planning Study — A document prepared by a municipality, pursuant to Section 43 123 of the Texas Local Government Code, prior to annexing an area for limited purposes, which identifies projected development; the need for annexation; the im- pact of annexation on surrounding residents, landowners, and businesses; and the proposed zoning of the area. Protest Petition — A statement expressing opposition to a proposed City -initiated annexation and containing the signatures of property owners representing 50 per- cent or more of the parcels within the territory to be annexed and 50 percent or more of the land area within that territory Regulatory Plan — A document adopted by the City Council, pursuant to Section 43 123 of the Texas Local Government Code, at the time an area is annexed for limited purposes, which identifies the planning, zoning, health and safety ordi- nances that will be enforced in the area and states the date by which the city will annex the area for full purposes. Service Plan — A document adopted by the City Council, pursuant to Sections 43 056 and 43 065 of the Texas Local Government Code, describing the schedule for a municipality to provide full municipal services to an area annexed for full pur- poses. On the effective date of annexation, a municipality must provide: police and fire protection, emergency medical services; solid waste collection, operation and maintenance of water and wastewater facilities in the area that are not within the service area of another water or wastewater facility; and operation and maintenance of roads and streets (including lighting), parks, playgrounds, swimming pools and other publicly owned facilities, buildings or services if those services are provided by the municipality within its corporate boundaries. A municipality must provide full municipal services, which means all services provided within the city including water and wastewater services, within 2Y2 years after annexation but may extend the F-3 2. Enclave: The area meets both of the following conditions: a. The area is an enclave and the City and its citizens would benefit from a logical city limit boundary that provides for the orderly and effi- cient provision of services, and b. The City is able to provide municipal services upon annexation in accordance with State law, without negatively impacting ser vice provision within the city Urban Development: The area meets all three of the following conditions: a. The City is aware of or anticipates development activity of an urban nature in the area, and b. The City is able to provide municipal services upon annexation in accordance with State law, without negatively impacting service pro vision within the city; and c. The City has determined through an appropriate analysis of prospec- tive revenues and expenditures, as described in Section V (Preparation of Fiscal Impact Analysis) below, that cumulative revenues will ex- ceed cumulative expenditures for each affected budget fund over the 10-year period immediately following annexation, or over a longer period as appropriate for long-term development. Growth Center The area meets all three of the following conditions: a. The area encompasses a designated growth center and thus requires urban services to develop as planned, and b. The City is able to provide municipal services upon annexation in accordance with State law, without negatively impacting service pro- vision within the city c. The City has determined through an appropriate analysis of prospec- tive revenues and expenditures, as described in Section V (Preparation of Fiscal Impact Analysis) below, that cumulative revenues will ex- ceed cumulative expenditures for each affected budget fund over the 10-year period immediately following annexation, or over a longer period as appropnate for long-term development. Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program 4 Adverse Impact: The area meets both of the following conditions: a. Without annexation, potential development activity is likely to have an adverse fiscal or environmental impact on the City due to unregulated land uses and the City's inability to enforce development standards, building codes, and environmental regulations, and b. The City is able to provide municipal services upon annexation in ac- cordance with State law, without negatively impacting service provi- sion within the city 5 Option to Expand. The area meets both of the following conditions: a. Without annexation, interested parties may incorporate one or more separate municipalities or take other legal actions that might be detri- mental to the City's orderly growth. b. The City is able to provide municipal services upon annexation in ac- cordance with State law, without negatively impacting service provi- sion within the city In accordance with Sections 43 056 and 43 065 of the Texas Local Government Code, the Planning and Development Department shall prepare a service plan that provides for the extension of full municipal services to each area to be annexed for full purposes. The Planning and Development Department shall prepare the service plan after the City Council establishes the annexation timetable and shall make the plan available to the public for review and comment in advance of required public hearings. The City shall adopt the service plan by ordinance at the time the City annexes the area for full purposes. B. Limited -Purpose Annexation The City will consider limited -purpose annexation of any area if one or more of the five cntena in section A (Full -Purpose Annexation) above are met, and if either of the following two critena is also met: 1 Populated Area. The area contains 100 or more separate lots or tracts of land containing residential dwellings and thus must be included in the mu- nicipal annexation plan three years pnor to full -purpose annexation per State law The area would be considered for limited -purpose annexation so that the City might control land use and the quality of development m that populated area, pendmg full -purpose annexation. 2. Long -Term Development: The area is proposed for long-term develop ment. The City will determine the feasibility of entering into an agreement with the property owner(s) for limited -purpose annexation so as to establish the timing of full -purpose annexation. The agreement may provide for the property to be annexed for full purposes in phases. Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program F-4 C. General Provisions The following provisions apply to all proposed full- and limited -purpose annexa- tions: 1 As a prerequisite for any proposed annexation, the City Manager shall certify that the proposed annexation would have no adverse effect upon the provision of municipal services within the City 2. The City will annex any nghts-of-way that are adjacent to and provide access to annexed property D. Protests of City -Initiated Annexation 1 Annexations Included in Annexation Plan. For any City -initiated an- nexation included in the annexation plan, the City shall comply with Sections 43 0562 and 43 0564 of the Texas Local Government Code as they prescribe procedures for negotiations and arbitration regarding the provision of municipal services. 2. Annexations Not Included in Annexation Plan. For any City -initiated annexation not included in the annexation plan, and not subject to any of the exemptions in paragraph 4 of this section, affected property owners may submit a protest petition to the Planning and Development Depart- ment prior to the date of the second City Council public hearing on that annexation. The Planning and Development Department shall determine the validity of this protest petition within 15 days of receipt. If the Plan- ning and Development Department determines that the petition is valid, the City at that time shall request the petitioners to select five representa- tives to serve on a committee with City representatives to prepare the service plan (in the case of full -purpose annexation) or the regulatory plan (in the case of limited -purpose annexation). The service plan or the regulatory plan, as applicable, shall document any objections that have been expressed by a majority of the petitioners' representatives on this committee. In any decisions regarding the proposed annexation, the City Council shall take under advisement the City's receipt of the protest peti- tion and all deliberations pertaining to the service plan or the regulatory plan, as applicable. 3 Third -Party Fiscal Impact Analysis: At the request of affected property owners, through a valid protest petition as defined herein, the City shall hire an independent certified public accountant to conduct a third -party fiscal impact analysis using the methodology set forth in Section V of this policy This provision for third -party fiscal impact analysis shall not apply, however, to City -initiated annexations that are subject to any of the exemptions in paragraph 4 of this section. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••-•••••••••••• 4 Exemptions. The following kinds of annexation areas shall be exempt from the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 • Street rights -of -way; • Enclaves existing as of the date of adoption of this policy (see Map 1, attached), with fewer than 100 lots or tracts containmg residential dwellings; • Interjurisdictional boundary adjustments; • Areas with environmental conditions that pose an imminent threat to public health and safety, as determined by the City Council, • Areas that are subject to extraordinary economic development pro- jects; and • Areas with the minimum length and width necessary to provide conti- guity with the city limits for owner-mitiated annexations. IV DISANNEXATION In accordance with Section 43 141 of the Texas Local Government Code, a majority of the qualified voters of an annexed area may petition the City Council to disannex the area if the City fails to provide services to the area within the period specified by the service plan. Similarly, the City may seek to disannex an area if it deter- mines that it is unable to provide municipal services to that area in accordance with State law V PREPARATION OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS For any proposed annexation, the Budget Office, in cooperation with other pertinent departments, shall conduct a fiscal impact analysis that considers prospective reve- nues and expenditures for both the General Fund and the Water and Sewer Fund. The Budget Office shall prepare a fiscal impact report for review by the City Coun- cil, and shall make such report available for public review upon request. A. Revenues The following revenues shall be considered. 1 Property taxes to be generated by existing land uses, based on Tarrant Ap- praisal District assessed values and the City's current property tax rate. 2. Property taxes to be generated by proposed land uses, based on anticipated assessed values and the City's current property tax rate. 3 Sales taxes. 4 Other General Fund revenues including: Other Local Taxes, Licenses and Permits, Fines and Forfeitures, Use of Money and Property, Service Charges, and Other Revenue. 5 Water and wastewater tap and impact fees 6. Water and wastewater service fees. F-5 B. Expenditures The following expenditures shall be considered: 1 Operation and maintenance costs for all municipal services. 2. Required capital improvements. C. Analysis Timeframe The number of years in the analysis shall be based on the estimated build -out of the development, the repayment timetable for any debt assumed in the analysis, or 10 years, whichever is longer D. Per Capita Data Sources For budget information, the most recently adopted Annual Budget shall be used. For total population and land use data, the most recently adopted Comprehensive Plan shall be used. E. Population Estimate To estimate population for an area, the number of housing units proposed for con- struction or annexation shall be multiplied by the average household size for Fort Worth, or for a comparable area within Fort Worth, according to the latest U.S. Census. F Methodology 1 Areas with Existing or Proposed Development: If an area is fully devel- oped, or substantially undeveloped but subject to an approved concept plan and/or preliminary plat, the analysis shall be based on the following guide- lines. a. For any undeveloped areas, the anticipated rate of development shall be based on the construction timetable provided by the property owner b. Sales tax revenues and other General Fund revenues (item A 4 above) shall be estimated on a per capita or per acre basis, as appropriate. c. Water and wastewater revenues shall be based on existing land uses and any proposed land uses provided by the property owner d. Expenditures shall be estimated on a per capita, per acre, or per linear foot basis, as appropriate, unless actual costs can be determined. 2. Other Areas: If an area is undeveloped and not subject to an approved con- cept plan or preliminary plat, the analysis shall be based on the following guidelines. a. The mix of land uses shall be as depicted in the Comprehensive Plan. b. The anticipated rate of development shall be based on the annual growth rate for the pertinent planning sector of the city c. Sales tax revenues and other General Fund revenues (item A 4 above) Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program shall be estimated on a per capita or per acre basis, as appropriate. d. Water and wastewater revenues shall be based on the future land use identified in the Comprehensive Plan. e. Expenditures shall be estimated on a per capita, per acre, or per linear foot basis, as appropriate, unless actual costs can be determined. G. Timing for Preparation of Fiscal Impact Analysis 1 Annexations Initiated by Property Owners: Upon receipt of a valid annexa- tion petition and application, the Budget Office shall conduct the fiscal impact analysis within 30 days and prior to the City Council public hearing on establishing the annexation timetable. As an alternative, the City will verify the accuracy of the fiscal impact analysis submitted by the property owners prior to initiating the annexation process. 2. Annexations Initiated by the City• The City will conduct the fiscal impact analysis pnor to scheduling the required City Council public hearing on establishing the annexation timetable. VI. PREPARATION OF FIVE-YEAR ANNEXATION PROGRAM The Planning and Development Department and other pertinent departments, shall prepare an annexation program that identifies areas that the City wishes to consider for initiation of annexation during the succeeding five-year period. The program shall be incorporated into the City's Comprehensive Plan, and revised as part of the annual update. The program will estimate the year in which each proposed annexation might occur In preparing its capital improvement program and annual operating budget, the City shall determine the feasibility of providing municipal services to areas identified in the annexation program. The City shall involve property owners and community organizations from the extraterritorial jurisdiction, as well as those from the City itself, in formulating the five-year annexation program. In formulating the annexation program, the City shall assign pnority to annexing areas that are located within the geographic scope of its Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN), within the geographic scope of another CCN that complies with the City of Fort Worth's standards for water and wastewater infrastructure, or within a Municipal Utility District that complies with such standards. The City wishes to allocate sufficient time for the transition of proposed annexation areas from the ETJ into the city This transitional period would enable the City to arrange for the provision of adequate municipal services, and would enable affected property owners to prepare for the impacts of annexation. Accordingly, the annexa- tion program shall delay any City -initiated annexations for three years or more from the date of the annexation area's initial inclusion in the program. The following Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program F-6 kinds of annexation areas, however, shall be exempt from this waiting period. • Street rights -of -way; • Enclaves existing as of the date of adoption of this policy (see Map 1, at- tached), with fewer than 100 lots or tracts containing residential dwellings, • Interjurisdictional boundary adjustments; • Areas with environmental conditions that pose an imminent threat to pub- lic health and safety, as determined by the City Council, • Areas that are subject to extraordinary economic development projects, and • Areas with the minimum length and width necessary to provide contiguity with the city limits for owner -initiated annexations. Inclusion of an area in the five-year annexation program does not obligate the City to annex that area. Similarly, exclusion of an area from the five-year annexation program does not prevent the City from annexing the area. VII. PREPARATION OF THREE-YEAR ANNEXATION PLAN In accordance with Section 43 052 of the Texas Local Government Code, the City of Fort Worth shall amend its annexation plan to identify certain areas that the City intends to annex. The annexation plan must include any proposed annexation area with 100 or more separate lots or tracts of land containing residential dwellings. An area identified in the plan may only be annexed beginning on the third anniver- sary of the date the plan is amended to include that area. Upon adoption of the five-year annexation program, the Planning Department shall identify those areas with 100 or more separate lots or tracts of land containing resi- dential dwellings and schedule necessary amendments to the annexation plan. The three-year annexation plan will not necessarily contain all the areas that are in- cluded in the five-year annexation program. VIII. EXTERNAL COMMUNICATION In addition to public hearing requirements established by Sections 43 0561 and 43 124 of the Texas Local Government Code, the City of Fort Worth shall seek to communicate with City residents, affected property owners and pertinent govern- ment agencies throughout the annexation process. The City shall use its website, community meetings, direct mail, the City Page, and other appropriate media to disseminate information about any City -initiated annexation. Upon request, the City's Community Relations Department shall assist affected property owners in establishing neighborhood organizations so as to facilitate communication with the City The City shall seek public comments during the annual update of the annexation program at meetings of various community organizations throughout the City and ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••-•••••••••••••••••r••••r•-•••••• its extraterritorial jurisdiction. At these meetings, the City shall explain the benefits of annexation, including full municipal services; planning, zoning, health and safety regulations; economic development; and orderly growth. The City shall also ex- plain the costs to be incurred by the City and by affected property owners as a result of annexation. Prior to conducting formal public hearmgs on any City -initiated annexation, the City shall conduct one or more public information meetmgs to explain the purpose of the annexation and to describe the annexation process. The City shall notify af- fected property owners about these meetings by direct mail. Upon adoption of any annexation ordinance, the City shall notify the pertinent county government agencies and affected property owners. Map 1. Enclaves Existing as of September 7, 2004 0 �-d,.w 2 4 6 8 6 des - Planning Department 4/7104 EXictivins P ,.. �aL e:e+Mrwte lNkkt CD uuun C • Enclaves are areas within the City's ETJ that are surrounded by the corporate limits of the City of Fort Worth and/or the corporate limits or ETJ of other mu- nicipalities or otherwise approved by Fort Worth City Council The above map depicts enclaves that existed at the time the annexation policy was adopted Several have since been incorporated into the city, and new enclaves have formed (Source. Planning and Development Department, 2004.) F-7 Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program FIVE-YEAR ANNEXATION PROGRAM January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2014 On September 7, 2004, the City Council adopted an annexation policy for the City of Fort Worth to provide more specific guidance for making annexation decisions, to be more proactive in identifying annexation areas, and to promote more meaning- ful citizen participation during the annexation process. The policy calls for the an- nual preparation of a five-year annexation program. The City Council adopted the first annexation program, as part of the Comprehensive Plan, on February 22, 2005 This program identifies areas that the City wishes to consider for annexation during the succeeding five-year period. It expresses the City's intent to consider specific areas for annexation, but is not legally binding. Inclusion of an area in the program does not obligate the City to annex that area, nor does exclusion of an area from the program prevent the City from annexing the area. While the annexation program merely serves as a guide, its preparation enables the City to be more proactive in identifying areas that might be suitable for annexation and to involve affected prop- erty owners and other stakeholders well in advance of any annexation decisions. The program consists of this narrative and a set of maps and accompanying tables that describe the areas to be considered for annexation. The annexation program is incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan and updated annually The annexation program follows calendar years, and each year begins on January 1 and ends on December 31 The City anticipates that it will process any City -initiated annexations proposed during a specific year of the program during November and December of that year The City involves property owners and community organizations from the extrater- ritorial jurisdiction (ETJ), as well as those from within the City, in formulating the five-year annexation program. The City conducts meetings with pertinent local governments, property owners, and community organizations directly affected by potential annexations. In addition, the City conducts public hearings to receive comments on the annexation program from interested citizens. This narrative dis- cusses the procedures followed to prepare the annexation program, the potential City -initiated and owner -initiated annexation areas over the next five years, the po- tential annexation areas over the subsequent six to twenty years, and the relationship of the annexation program to the City's Comprehensive Plan and capital improve- ment program. Procedure to Prepare Annexation Program The annexation policy provides that the Planning and Development Department and other pertinent departments, prepare the annexation program. Staff reviewed areas meeting the annexation criteria contained in the annexation policy, mcluding: • Enclaves, Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program F-8 • Areas of urban development, • Designated growth centers, • Areas posing an adverse environmental or financial impact if not annexed, and • Areas deterring the City's option to expand. The City assigned priority to areas that are located within the geographic scope of its Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) or within the geographic scope of another CCN that complies with the City of Fort Worth's standards for water and wastewater infrastructure. City staff from various departments, including Planning and Development, Water, Transportation and Public Works, Fire, Police, Budget, and Law, met to discuss potential areas satisfying the annexation critena and to pri- oritize them for annexation over the next five years and beyond. With this information, the Planning and Development Department prepared a draft annexation program for review and discussion by the City Council, pertinent county governments, property owners, and community organizations directly affected by the annexation program. City staff held individual work sessions with the City Council members and their appointed City Plan Commissioner and Zoning Com- missioner Citizens were also able to comment on the annexation program at a City Plan Commission public hearing and a City Council public hearing held as part of the annual update of the Comprehensive Plan. Potential City -Initiated Annexation, 2010-2014 The following sections describe areas for which the City may wish to initiate an- nexation proceedings within the next five years. Map 1 and Table 1 describe these areas in more detail. Any of these areas may be subject to property owner -initiated annexation before the year in which it is listed. Thirty-one potential City -initiated annexation areas, totaling 9,408 acres or 14 7 square miles, are included in the an- nexation program for the years 2010-2014 The City wishes to allocate sufficient time for the transition of proposed annexation areas from the ETJ into the city This transitional period enables the City to arrange for the provision of adequate municipal services, and enables affected property owners to prepare for the impacts of annexation. Accordingly, the annexation pro- gram delays City -initiated annexations, excluding enclaves and other areas de- scribed in the policy, for three years or more from the date of the area's initial inclusion in the program. Year 1. 2010 There are nine areas identified for annexation during Year 1 Areas 9, 12, 15-1, 29, 37, and 59 are enclaves. Area 23-1 is an anticipated urban development/enclave and area 66-2 is an adverse impact. Area 52, the Eagle Mountain Zone limited -purpose annexation area consisting of 1,056 acres, is subject to an agreement that requires the City to provide services in lieu of annexation until January 1, 2009 Since Janu- ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ary 2009, the City could consider initiating annexation of this area for full purposes. The City did not initiate annexation in 2009, but will annex the area in 2010 if deemed appropriate. The 190 acre area just south of the Eagle Mountain Zone could be postponed pending an agreement between property owners and the City Seven of the areas in Year 1 are withm the City of Fort Worth's CCN that can be provided full municipal services upon annexation. Two areas are outside of the City of Fort Worth's CCN Year 2. 2011 There are five areas identified for annexation in Year 2. Areas 1, 13, and 42 are enclaves. Areas 69 and 70 are expected to experience urban development. All ar- eas are within the City of Fort Worth's CCN boundary Year 3. 2012 Two areas are identified for annexation in Year 3 Area 3-1 is an enclave. This area was part of a larger designated area in the long-range annexation plan. The eastern portion remains in the long-range plan, since it is primarily developed as large lot residential. The west side is mostly undeveloped and was added to the five-year annexation plan in anticipation of urban development with the expansion of North Beach Street as a principal arterial. The other area, Area 55, is anticipated to experience urban development due to its adjacency to a proposed transit station along the Southwest -to -Northeast rail corridor The City may consider Limited Purpose Annexation for this area prior to Full Purpose Annexation to ensure appro- priate development occurs near the proposed transit station. Year 4. 2013 Seven areas are identified for annexation in Year 4 Areas 56-1 and 56-2 are within a growth center, and along with area 71 are expected to experience urban develop- ment as the extension for SH 121T, which abuts the areas, is completed. Comple- tion of SH 121T is expected in 2012. Areas 72 and 73, near Texas Motor Speedway and Alliance Airport are scheduled for annexation to avoid adverse impacts associ- ated with noise produced by Texas Motor Speedway and Alliance Airport. Limited Purpose Annexation may be considered in 2010 for these areas. The final two ar- eas, Areas 11 and 15-2, are enclaves in north Fort Worth. An agreement was reached with the community in Area 15-2 to annex in 2013 Area 11 is subject to a development agreement which expires 2013 Year 5. 2014 Eight areas were added for annexation in Year 5 Areas 2, 18, 43, 46, 49-1, and 49- 2 are enclaves. Area 7 is an enclave within a mixed -use growth center Area 66-1 is an adverse impact due to its proximity to Texas Motor Speedway These areas are all relatively small with the largest being 216 acres and the smallest three acres. All areas are within the City's CCN F-9 Potential Owner -Initiated Annexation. 2010-2014 The annexation program also considers areas within the City's ETJ for which prop- erty owners may wish to initiate annexation and which may meet the annexation criteria set forth in the policy These areas are generally located in close proximity to water, wastewater, and fire services, and may be subject to valid preliminary plats and/or concept plans, or are anticipated sites for urban development. At this time, two potential owner -initiated annexation areas have been identified. Area Q is a 10-acre area on the west side of Fort Worth near the Loop 820 and I-20 inter- change. The City expects that the owners of this property will pursue annexation in 2010 Area J, the Edwards-Geren limited -purpose annexation area consisting of 276 acres, is scheduled to be annexed for full purposes by December 31, 2014 An enclave created by this limited -purpose annexation area will be considered for an- nexation through the City -initiated process at the same time. This area may be sub- ject to an additional development agreement due to its agricultural exemption status, which would push the scheduled annexation beyond 2014 As new developments are proposed, those areas may be added to the annexation program during its annual update. Potential Annexation. 2015-2029 The City has also evaluated enclaves, limited -purpose annexation areas, concept plans, and preliminary plats, that may not be ready for annexation within the next five years, but may be considered in the next six to twenty years. Map 2 and Table 2 describe these areas in more detail. For enclaves and preliminary plats, these ar- eas may not be within the City's CCN or be able to be served with City water, wastewater, or fire services in the near future. Limited -purpose annexation areas may be subject to development agreements with property owners, which require that portions of the areas be annexed for full purposes as they are platted. Forty potential annexation areas are considered for annexation during years 2015 to 2029 These areas consist of 20 existing enclaves, three potential enclaves, 16 areas with anticipated urban development, and one area of adverse impact. Additionally, 14 areas of anticipated owner -initiated annexation are noted. The Walsh Ranch limited -purpose annexation area, Area H, consisting of 7,296 acres, is scheduled to be annexed for full purposes as sub -areas are platted with the full area to annexed by May 26, 2026. An enclave created by this limited -purpose annexation area may be considered for annexation through the City -initiated process at the same time. Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program Relationship to Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program The Comprehensive Plan is a general guide for making decisions about the City's growth and development. It presents a broad vision for Fort Worth's future and describes major policies, programs, and projects to realize that vision. The Compre- hensive Plan contains both the annexation program and the capital improvement program as appendices. These programs are revised as part of the annual update of the Comprehensive Plan. In preparing its capital improvement program, the City must determine the feasibil- ity of providing municipal services to areas identified in the annexation program. The City has identified capital improvements, beyond those covered by the current bond program, that will be necessary to provide adequate municipal services to the potential annexation areas. These improvements are addressed to the right accord- ing to the potential annexation year .0... s^$�f:?Y,&'�P''id#:$.4 F'r: wDescriptiou,of<Nged CalPitlImP ements; V t. i_ Fire Stations: Area 9 would be served by existing Fire Station 41 and then be served by proposed Fire Station 34 when it is built. Areas 12 and 15-1 would be served by existing Fire Station 37 Areas 52, 23-1, and 29 would be served by existing Fire Station 40. Areas 37 would be served by existing Fire Station 15 Areas 59 and 66-2 would be served by existing Fire Station 11 Year 1 2010 Roadways: (Areas 9, 12, 15-1, 23-1, 29, 37, 52, 59, and 66-2) • To make comparable to area streets: $127,000. Potential funding source: general fund. • To meet City standards: $71.3 million. Potential funding source: future bond program. Fire Stations: Area 1 would be served by existing Fire Station 11 Area 13 would be served by existing Fire Station 37 Areas 42, 69 and 70 would be served by existing Fire Station 23. Year 2: Roadways: (Areas 1, 13, 42, 69, and 70) 2011 • To make comparable to area streets: $0. • To meet City standards: $31.0 million. Potential funding source: future bond program. Fire Stations: Areas 3-1 would be served by existing Fire Station 35 Area 55 would be served by existing station 36. Year 3 Roadways: (Areas 3-1 and 55) 2012 • To make comparable to area streets: $450,000. • To meet City standards: $69 million. Potential funding source: future bond program. Fire Stations: Areas 11 and 15-2 would be served by existing Fire Station 37 Areas 56-1, 56-2 and 71 would be served by existing Fire Station 36 and then be served by proposed Fire Station 42 when it is built. Ideally a new fire station would be built in the area to allow the Fire Department to meet its 5 minute response time goal. Areas 72 and 73 would be served by I,ear 4: existing Fire Station 11 2013 Roadways: (Areas 11, 15-2, 56-1, 56-2, 71 72, and 73) • To make comparable to area streets: $0. • To meet City standards: $78.6 million. Potential funding source: future bond program. Fire Stations: Area 2 would be served by Fire Station 35 Area 7 would be served by existing Fire Station 38. Area 18 would be served by existing Fire Station 37 Area 43 would be served by existing Fire Station 26. Area 46 would be served by existing Fire Station 28. Areas 49-1 and 49-2 would be served by existing Fire Station 36. Area 66-1 would be served by station 11 Year 5- 2014 Roadways: (Areas 2, 7, 18, 43, 46, 49-1, 49-2, and 66-1) • To make comparable to area streets: $0. • To meet City standards: $53.8 million. Potential funding source: future bond program. *Water and Sewer All extensions to be funded by developers of adjacent property and/or Water & Wastewater capital improvement program. Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program F-10 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • •. • • • • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Map 1i I,� i;-, Potential Annexation 2010-20141 t� my 400011in i?:Fa,1Ro?"i s. .confedeia • R N'! 43_ k_ (uo Legend Caaay Boundary O .ot, Lim. ® LimYd Purpose AHexxen ®Subject to Landed Purpose Arxhcvatnn a 61ratemterol. n001aorl 1Aspect Coy y/?i1 La ha Potential Oamef-9074310d 0 Tea 1: 2010 Tow5, 2014 POtet1wl City-leiliated Program Pass 201022014 Year 1: 2010 Yam 2: 2011 Teat 3: 2012 Tm 4: 2013 Year 5: 2014 Thirty-three City- and owner -initiated potential annexation areas are identi- fied in the short-range annexation program between 2010 and 2014 F-11 Map ID 0 12 15-1 23-1 CCN IFuture Land Use City of Fort Worth SUB, NC 149 PRIM, Coy of Fat RURAL, SF Worth MH, INST, NC, LI City of Fort SF INST, NC, Worth LI City of Fort Worth 344 211 TABLE 1: ANNEXATION PROGRAM POTENTIAL ANNEXATION 2010-2014 I IAaseseed Value (ilk Res Parcels Ras units G�eb land Cee0Mat10 Improvements POTENTIAL WY -INITIATED ANNEXATION 33 320 44 SF GC /93 6 29 I Coy of Fort RURAL, SF worth MOR 37 I City of Fort Worth 52 City of Fort RURAL, SUB, Worth SF NC 59 IApuaUlles,I Inc. 66-2 IARua U0Tires,I Inc. Coy of Fort Worth Coy of Fort Worth City of Fort Worth City of Fort 69 Worth 70 Cmot Fort Worth Coy of Fort Worth 1 13 42 3-1 55 City of Fat Worth 11 I City of Fort Worth 15-2 I G Witt INST SF GC GC. IGC SF SF RURAL, SF SF IGC, MUGC, SF. RURAL SF NC, GC, MUGC, INST, INFRA GC SF 561 I None I MUGC 56-2 ( Johnson County WSC, MUGC None 71 I Cayof Fort WoM 72 IA UNWZ I SUB, LI 73 Ctyof Fhb LI, SF IGC 2 I e WOrFat I IGC M SF 7 I Cltyo:Fat I SUB,MUGC, I p Worth INFRA 18 I CWo� I SF, LI I 49-1 49-2 OJ City of Fort Worth 46 Coy of Fat I Worth City of Fort Worth City of Fort Worth 66-1 City of Fort Worth INFRA SF SF SF GC 29 183 3 24 35 12 154 50 40 I 10 55 1 0 I 0 1 2 1,058 21 10 138 2 15 247 518 305 451 749 593 8 80 295 280 805 435 1.466 56 86 62 50 57 216 1 8 2 18 2 12 2 0 0 14 18 2 28 0 34 8 3 28 15 1 406 I 375 6 2 10 O 0 5 O I 0 17 91 27 6 6 25 O I 0 I 2 32 27 2 109 109 O I 0 2 0 enclave enclave enclave urban development urban devekonenl enclave, growth center enclave, urban development 0 45,535,031 1,727,029 grewM0enter 1,002,188 I grpwlh center 8235'140 I mean devkanem 12.693,154 I adverse Impact I 10,851,869 I adverse impact I 42,786 I enclave I enclave, growth I oerN, 39,875,978 I enclave I 3 I 95,000 3 292,920 263.550 2,162,959 309,120 POTENTIAL OWNER -INITIATED ANNEXATION 7,064,668 27,633,460 20,804.779 3,217,639 13,866,869 1,388,2 6 6,154,278 76,842 4,805,242 224,508 7,676,730 2.328.125 1,742,020 4,090,420 15.060,318 10,302,271 Program Year enclave 2010 Comments Staff anticipates ablty to provide services N 2010. Populated area added to the annexabor enclave 2010 plan In 2007. Staff anbdpates away to provide services N 2010. enclave 2010 enclave, urban devebprmmt I enclave I Ienclave I WA: Addend OrrWed purposes In2002. enclave adverse impact 5,818,217 enclave enclave enclav0 enclave enclave adverse 9npast Staff anticipate' ability to provide service' H 2010. Owor has agreed to sign development agreement which would expire 2014. However, this agreement has not been signed yet 2010 I Staff anticipates ability to provide services th 2010. Staff anticipates abgoy to provide services a 2010. Eagle Mountain Zane United-purp0se annexation area subject t0 621/04 contracts/Oh property Owners and COi, decislon no Bader than 1I1/09. 2010 I Staff el0dates ability te provide I ices 6)2010. Area not currently In City's CCN. Staff 2010 an9cipates Milky to provide services in 2010. 2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 2014 Most of the area MWn Coy' CCN. Staff antldpales Meaty to provide service' 8. 2011. Staff anticipates army to provide smokes in 2011. Staff anticipates ab5hy to provide servioas in 2011. Ste/ante/pates alloy to provide services In2011. Staff anticipates ability to provide services In 2012. Completed 3-year delay p, anne0etlon policy. Staff and clpetav ably to provide services in 2012. May consider for Limited Purpose Annexation. Subject to development agreement to expire 2013. Agreement with wmmudty to annex I 2013, Staff an001001es ablMy to provide I .rvices In2013. Subpe t to development agreement to expire 2013, Staff antiWtes ability to provide services in 2013. UmoeE purpose annexation In 2010, 2013 with full purpose annexation schedded tea Limited purpose annexation in 2010 w th full purpose annexation schedtdee to for Subject to development agreement to I ex0he 2014. Staff an5dpaies ability to provide services In 2014. Staff anudpates day le provide services In 2014. Easement wet come into Coy when 2014 Edwards -Garen molted -purpose annexation area J)does. Staff anticipates ab0ty to provide ',Maas n 2014. 2013 2014 2014 2014 Staff anticipates ability to provide services In 2014. Staff anticipates ability to provide services In 2014. Sut9ecl to development agreement to expre 2014. 1 O Cay W,of Fort SF 0 0 urban 2010 Scuff anticipates abilitytoprovidedevebprnenl services in2009. Edwards-GarenJ Coy of Fort Worth MUGC 276 0 0 0 enclave 2014 annexation area subject to C by 12/31/14 Areas with large bold lettering contain or are anticipated to contain 100 or more dwelling units and have been added or will be added to the Glty's annexation plan in the appropriate year. Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program Map .2 Potential Annexation, 2015-2029 F11 Ra 914 y 4 e ItO We414 M s44107 r' w Legend QCCargyeo0lMaty 0 04 umb O Esl7atenlrorid 5Plsdlcgmf ''.E: ikeiw-onelaty take Potential City -Initiated Yaor16.20: 20/562029 iIpbuadriG.40itltied 0 Yes1620 Special Utility °Wad -HUD, Estate° sl= mutx Pam 62 Wa0. Racism Forty potential annexation areas are identified in the long-range annexation program between 2015 and 2029 61 48 40 I None IGila( Fort 41 Anne StORes, Inc. IMap ID 6 CCN LanF Use 47 CM of Fort WPM 16 G WOlOt 3--2 CIIY of Fort WoM 4 Cory of Font WaM Aqua UtititieS, Inc City of Fat Worth City of Haslet 10 20 21 Aqua UONIes, Inn SF LDR, NC, LI SF RURAL, SF NC. INFRA, MUGC SF SF U. RURAL RURAL SF MN AOua RURAL UNaies, me. Acres 70 169 982 185 282 25 164 347 22 City of Fort SF 104 Worth 30 I Ctly INFRA. PBNY 31 CSy of Fort RURAL. WOM SUB 35 CityWof Fort INFRA OM 38 I C WA, "of F� ISF PUBPK I LokoAto ISF, NC, GC' 119 LI I 29 SF NC. LI I 421 SF NC I 109 44 Kennedale INFRA, U 45 CayWMho(FOII LI Aqua RURAL UNates, Inc. Coy alFormors I RURAL. LI w 50 I County INST 53 I COyofFortI SF MOR. Worm NC 57 C4y o1 Fort SF Worm 55 I Cityof Fort I RURAL, WoM NC K 60 I l 1 I RURAL Aqua RURAL, Unties me SF NC, PRIPK PRIPK, City of Fort RURAL. Waal SF, NC, U. INFRA 473 75 50 73 3 339 88 10 302 28 191 112 959 1135 63 City a(Fort PRIPK, SF 230 WoM 67 trnni, SF 674 68 Worth°^ I SF I 21 TABLE 2: ANNEXATION PROGRAM POTENTAL ANNEXATION 2015-2029 Vacant Assessed Parcels IRes UnlfRes � PRes eels I Parcels I (4nYovemenl5 I 8IMM to POTENTIAL CITY40TIATED ANNEXATION 6 101 102 2 53 218 200 29 95 81 49 206 0 115 200 21 0 0 127 91 O 0 3 3 Ise 132 231 149 22 3,387,482 enclave Program Year 2016 6 21,075,930 enclave 2018 21 82 19,132966 enclave 6.20 1 4 12 Dill 4 O 3 36 30 O 5 O 18 26 31 O 0 0 1 I 0 82 4 3 1 1 1 291 1291 22 122 00 O I 0 0 0 O 0 42 I 39 3 62 I 57 5 79 I 79 0 44 1 424 22 244 1 143 O 0 0 255 159 I° Table continued on pg. F-13 Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program F-12 11 0 254,999 I enclave 13,701,058 57,127,080 enclave 2,940 10,061,472 I enclave 40.888,100 5,559,900 1,610,373 24,210,260 2,750,354 2,498.301 14,301,919 15 I 2,219,507 15 I 15,902,797 9 738,731 3 I 306,064 2 48,660,165 14 6,635,482 3 95.000 1 959,377 0 18,551.500 3 13,275,987 2 11 527 16 4 O 19 22,646,945 116,547,144 100,542,200 48,218,364 3.895,737 enclave enclave enclave enclave slave enclave enclave enclave enclave enclave enclave enclave urban development urban development enclave Potential enclave Potential enclave adverse impact enclave urban development O 2 198,588 enclave 6-20 6-20 6-20 6-20 620 6-20 Comments Staff anticipates ability to Provide services In 2016 Staff encipates amury le provide services In 2018. Populated area. Staff does not anticipate Way to provide services In 5 years. 6-20 Dovekpment agreement04th dry. Populated area not entirely In Cities CON. 6-20 Staff does not anticipate ab8y to provide services in 5 years. 6-20 Staff does I Populated area not currently in C1ys CCN. not anticipate atwry to provide services In 5 years. Pogdated area not currently In Citys CCN. 620 Staff does not anticipate ably to provide services m 5 years. Staff does not anllpate abi0ry 0 provide services in 5 veers. Standees not amlpete ability to provide services in 5 years. Stan does not anticipate ab8ty to provide sinews In 5 years. 6-20 620 620 620 6-20 Tarrant County maintenance faculty. Populated area rot entirely in Citys CCN. Staff does not anticipate abet). to prevbe services in 5 years. Area not currently In COys CCN. Staff 620 does not anticipate ability to provide services in 5 years. 620 Pan of area rthl currently in Clys CCN. Staff does nnootan5cyare ability to provide ices In 5 years. Area not dmentiy m Gays CCN. Stan 6-20 does not anticipate ability to provide services in 5 years. Odd shaped area v6kh only covers small 6-20 portions of Individual properties. May be candidate for boundary adjustment Poplated area rat entirely in Clys CCN. 6-20 Staff does not antk0ate abl0ry to provide services In 5 years Area not currently in City. CCN. Staff 6.20 does not anticipate ability to provide services In 5 years. 620 I Staff does oanOGpate ability to provide seethes m 5vears. 6.20 I Staff does 000 anticipate entity to provide services in 5 veers. 620 I Staff does not anticipate ability to provide services In 5 Years. IPopulated area. Standees not anticipate eblly to provide services In 5 years. Area not amend). in Citys CCN. Populated area. Staff does not anticipate ably to provide services In 5 years. Populated area. Staff does not aneapate ability to provide services in 5 years. Area not currently m Cdys CCN. Addibaul area winded in development pan net in Clys ETJ. 000&07 nenl agreement with dry, s107ea to ounce2023 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• A C G N Aom SF NC Moen. Inc. Aqua UM., Inc., AG, SF City of Fon Worth City of Fort Worth, SF INST Abrams None. Cay of Fat SF INFRA Worth AG. SF MDR, NC. Co of Fort GC. Worth. Non MUGC. LI, INFRA. PRIPK CM of Fon Worth, 1 Texas Wate Services. SF. LI Tarrant K County SF FWSOI Tarrant L County SF FWSS1 Johnson M County SF Rural WSC Aqua Utl88es, Inc., SF, LOR, Suet.* NOR, NC USA Inc 331 50 TABLE 2: ANNEXATION PROGRAM POTENTIAL ANNEXATION 2015-2029 POTENTIAL OWNER4NITIATED ANNEXATION 282 145 137 8 19,164227 deurban veloptnmt 8-20 Area not currently In Coya CCN. urban 0 0 0 2 135,1D4 davebgns:m 6-20 Pan of area not currently In Clya CCN 1,343 3 2 6,084,655 day mart 6.20 Pen of area not aurantly MC0ys CON. 1.618 0 1,330,135 �, urban ant 6-20 Pan of area not currently m Citys CCN. 7296 755 0 0 0 O 0 0 20.114,154 4.205,531 52 157 56 101 1 10,170214 28 167 73 I 94 1 I 10.315,889 117 90 38 52 I 2 10,915,291 2,177 2 • IUa0NesaN4 SF NC I 548 • I CityWof Fort SFIINFRA NC,U.I 2,622 erth Aqua UOmea. Inc.. Coy of Fat Watt, None S Coy of Fat WOW, R SF SF 2270 147 0 230 173 12 0 105 3 42 0 O 0 0 28 N/A- Annexed for lensed purposes in 2003, urban development urban developnant unbar development urban development 6-20 Walsh Ranch Molted -propose annexation area subject to 50903 contract Mth property owners and City derision by 52626. Pan of area net currently In Clys CCN. 6-20 Staff does not anilolpate abrhy to provide services In 5 years. 6-20 Area not currently in Cays CCN. 6-20 Area not currently In Gays CCN. 6-20 I Area not currently In Clys CCN, 1.225.536 dese&onlnnenl 6-20 126,358,697 urban developnent urban 16,803,122 develoome t 8,476,708 urban development Area not currently In Ciys CON. 6-20 I Populated area not aaramty In Cava CCN. 6-20 6-20 Staff does net anticipate adNy to ptovdo serves, In 5 years. Pan of area not currently 8 Gays CON. Mahlon not anWpab abmty m provide services In 5 years. U48 5 1,186,343 Eeurban veloonumt 6-20 Stag does not anadpab to provideservices In 5 years. Areas W1th large bold lettering contain or are anticipated to contain 100 or more dwelling units and have been added or will be added to the Cittls annexation plan in the appropriate year. F-13 Appendix F Annexation Plan, Policy, and Program ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••i•• APPENDIX G: POLICY CONCERNING CREATION OF CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION DISTRICTS POLICY CONCERNING CREATION OF CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION DISTRICTS Adopted by the City Council on May 3, 2005 I. PURPOSE AND INTENT The City of Fort Worth (the "City") wishes to allow the prudent use of political subdivisions that are created pursuant to Article III, Section 52, and/or Ar- ticle XVI, Section 59, of the Texas Constitution and that are authorized by law to provide water, wastewater, drainage and other services ("districts"), in order to fa- cilitate development within the City's corporate boundaries and extraterritorial ju- risdiction that is generally consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. This policy is intended to be equitably applied to the creation of, inclu- sion of land within, and operation of all proposed distracts, while allowing flexibil- ity necessary to address unique factors that may arise with respect to each proposed district. Prior to considering whether to consent to or support the creation of a district, the City will consider whether the City is able to provide water and waste- water service to the area proposed to be included in the district and whether the City wishes to annex such area in the foreseeable future. The purpose of this policy is to carry out the following purposes to the extent allowed by law. • Encourage quality development; • Allow the City to enforce reasonable land use and development regu- lations, • Provide for construction of infrastructure consistent with City stan- dards and City inspection of such infrastructure; • Provide notice to residents of the district that the City may annex the district at some future time; • Facilitate cost-effective construction of infrastructure to serve the area within the district, including police and fire stations, that is consistent with City standards and plans, so that the potential financial burden on G-1 the citizens of Fort Worth will be reduced, m the event of annexation of such land by the City; • Provide for extension of water and wastewater lines that will serve future growth m the City and its extratemtonal jurisdiction consistent with the City's regional utility planning; • Establish guidelines for reasonable conditions to be placed on. 0 Issuance of bonds by the district; and 0 The City's consent to creation of the district, including conditions consistent with the City's water and sewer bond ordinances re- garding creation of districts that might otherwise detrimentally compete with the City's utility systems; • Establish guidelines for other mutually beneficial agreements by the City and the district; • Provide a procedural framework for responding to a petition seeking the City's consent to the creation of the district; and • Encourage communication with county officials and staff members of the county or counties in which a proposed district is to be located. II. DEFINITIONS Bond — Instrument, including a bond, note, certificate of participation or other in- strument evidencing a proportionate interest in payments due to be paid by an is- suer, or other type of obligation that: (1) is issued or incurred by an issuer under the issuer's borrowing power, without regard to whether it is subject to annual appro- priation, and (2) is represented by an instrument issued in bearer or registered form or is not represented by an instrument but the transfer of which is registered on books maintained for that purpose by or on behalf of the issuer. Certificate of convenience and necessity (CCN) — A permit issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ("TCEQ") authorizing a specified utility to be the retail water or sewer service provider in a specified area. City Council — City Council of the City of Fort Worth. Consent agreement — An agreement between the City and owners and developers Appendix G. Conservation and Reclamation District Policy of land in a proposed district, which, if agreed to, shall be attached to the consent resolution adopted by the City Council. Consent resolution — A resolution approved by the City Council setting forth terms of its consent to creation of a distnct. Consent to creation of a district — Authorization for the owners of land in a pro- posed district to initiate proceedings to create a district as provided by law District - A municipal utility district ("MUD"), water control and improvement district ("WCID"), fresh water supply district ("FWSD") or similar political subdi- vision created to provide water, sewer or drainage utility services, roads or other services allowed by law to a specified area, pursuant to Article III, Section 52, and/ or Article XVI, Section 59, of the Texas Constitution. Extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) — Unincorporated area generally extending five miles from the City limit, excluding other incorporated municipalities and their ETJ, in which the City has the authority to annex property, as determined in accor- dance with Chapter 42 of the Local Government Code. Strategic partnership agreement — An agreement between the City and a district addressing the relationship between the City and the district, including limited pur- pose annexation of commercial areas and other matters pursuant to Section 43 0751 of the Local Government Code. TCEQ — The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality or its successor III. PREREQUISITES TO CONSENT TO CREATION OF A DISTRICT Before the City Council consents to creation of a district, the following issues shall be considered. 1 If applicable, whether the area proposed for inclusion m the distnct meets criteria for annexation set out in the City's annexation policy and is likely to be annexed by the City within the foreseeable future; and 2. Whether the City will provide water and wastewater services to the land within the proposed district at a reasonable cost and will commence con- struction of facilities necessary to serve the land withm 2 years and sub stantially complete such construction within 4% years after submittal of the petition. If the determination on both issues 1 and 2 above is negative, then before consent - mg to the creation of a district, the City Council should consider further whether the creation of the district is feasible, practicable, necessary for the provision of the proposed services and would be a benefit to the land, and therefore warrants the Appendix G Conservation and Reclamation District Policy G-2 City's consent, consistent with the other considerations in this policy If the determination on either of the two issues is affirmative, then the City Council should not consent to creation of the district unless the petitioner demonstrates that unique factors Justify its creation. If appropriate under the circumstances, the City shall. • Commence negotiations with the owners of at least 50 percent of the land in the proposed district and a majority of the qualified voters concerning the City's provision of water and wastewater services, upon receipt of a petition submitted by such persons in accordance with Local Government Code, Section 42.042, or • Commence proceedings to annex the land in the proposed district. IV. COMMUNICATION WITH COUNTY OFFICIALS The City will initiate communication with county officials for the county or coun- ties in which a district is proposed to be located in order to promote mterlocal coop- eration on shared local goals and to support regional planning. V. STAFF ANALYSIS Upon receipt of a petition seeking the City's consent to creation of a district and after a preliminary determination of the Article III prerequisites, City staff shall analyze the proposed development and its potential impact on facilities and ser- vices. The petitioner is encouraged to provide the following preliminary informa- tion relative to the land proposed to be included in the district, if available: 1 Engineering report showing: a. Preliminary water availability study, including copies of any proposed contracts; b Preliminary wastewater treatment availability, including copies of any proposed contracts; c. Preliminary drainage study; and d. Preliminary road study for any roads proposed to be reimbursed by bonds. 2. Preliminary cost estimates for water, wastewater, drainage or road facili- ties or projects, and any other proposed district facilities to be reim- bursed or paid for by the issuance of district bonds; 3 Master development plan showing general layout of proposed land uses; major streets and roads; water, wastewater and drainage facilities, and any other district facilities; •••......••...*.• ..•..•.•w..•e• 4 Information concerning provision of firefighting and law enforcement services; 5 Estimated buildout schedule by year with estimated assessed valuations in the district; 6. Estimated ultimate amount of bonds to be issued by the district, ultimate debt service requirements and and projected district tax rate; 7 District boundary and vicinity map; 8. Traffic study identifying potential impacts on. a. The City's road system serving the land proposed to be in- cluded in the district, if all or any portion of the land is located within the City or within 2 miles of the City's boundaries; and b. The county's road system. This traffic study is in addition to any traffic studies required by the City's subdivision regulations in connection with submittal of subdivi- sion plats, 9 If all or any portion of the proposed district is located outside the City's boundaries, proof that the petitioner has provided the following informa- tion by certified mail to the County Judge and each member of the Com- missioners Court of the county or counties in which the land proposed to be included in the district is mcluded: the name, acreage and location of the proposed district, buildout schedule, estimated population on total buildout and map of the area, 10 Such other information as City staff may reasonably require to analyze the need for the proposed facilities and the development's potential im- pact; and 11 Any proposed City consent agreements. VI. CONDITIONS TO CITY'S CONSENT TO CREATION OF DIS- TRICT If the City Council elects to consent to the creation of, or inclusion of land within, a district, then it shall impose the following requirements as conditions of the City's consent, and such requirements shall be stipulated in the consent resolution and/or other ancillary agreement, unless the City Council determines that requirements are not appropriate with regard to a specific district. 1 All water, wastewater, drainage and road infrastructure and facilities, as well as any other infrastructure or facilities to be reimbursed or paid for by the issuance of district bonds, shall be designed and constructed to City standards, including without limitation fire flow standards and util- ity and road design, construction and installation standards, in accor- dance with plans and specifications that have been approved by the City In the event of a conflict between City water and wastewater standards and standards imposed by the CCN holder for the proposed district, City standards will prevail, unless otherwise agreed by the City 2. The City shall have the right to inspect all facilities being constructed by or on behalf of the district and to charge inspection fees consistent with the City's Policy for Installation of Community Facilities, as amended from time to time. 3 Bonds, including refunding bonds issued by the district, shall, unless otherwise agreed to by the City, comply with the following require- ments, provided such requirements do not generally render the bonds unmarketable: a. Maximum maturity of 25 years for any one series of bonds; b. Interest rate that does not exceed 2% above the highest average interest rate reported by the Daily Bond Buyer in its weekly "20 Bond Index" during the one month period next preceding the date notice of the sale of such bonds is given, c. The bonds shall expressly provide that the district shall reserve the right to redeem bonds at any time subsequent to the tenth (10`h) anniversary of the date of issuance, without premium. No variable rate bonds shall be issued by a district without City Council approval, and d. Any refunding bonds of the district must provide for a minimum of 3% present value savings and that the latest maturity of the refunding bonds may not extend beyond the latest maturity of the refunded bonds unless approved by the City Council. 4 The City shall require the following information with respect to bond issuance: a. At least 30 days before issuance of bonds, except refunding bonds, the district's financial advisor shall certify in writing that the bonds are being issued within the existing economic feasibil- ity guidelines established by the TCEQ for districts issuing bonds for water, sewer or drainage facilities in the county in which the district is located and shall deliver the certification to the City G-3 Appendix G• Conservation and Reclamation District Policy 4 Secretary, the City Manager and the Director of the Development Department. b. At least 30 days before the issuance of bonds, the district shall deliver to the City Secretary, the City Manager and the Director of the Development Department notice as to i. The amount of bonds being proposed for issuance; ii. The projects to be funded by such bonds; and iii. The proposed debt service tax rate after issuance of the bonds. If the district is not required to obtain TCEQ approval of the issu- ance of the bonds (other than refunding bonds), the district shall deliver such notice to the City Secretary, the City Manager and the Director of the Development Department at least 60 days prior to issuing such bonds. Within 30 days after the district closes the sale of a series of bonds, the district shall deliver to the City Sec- retary, the City Manager and the Director of the Development Department a copy of the final official statement for such series of bonds. If the City requests additional information regarding such issuance of bonds, the district shall promptly provide such infor- mation at no cost to City 5 The purposes for which a district may issue bonds shall be restricted to the purchase, construction, acquisition, repair, extension and improve- ment of land, easements, works, improvements, facilities, plants, equip- ment and appliances necessary to - a. Provide a water supply for the district for municipal uses, domes- tic uses and commercial purposes; b. Collect, transport, process, dispose of and control all domestic, industrial or communal wastes from the district whether in fluid, solid or composite state; c. Gather, conduct, divert and control local storm water or other local harmful excesses of water in the district; and d. Pay organization and administrative expenses, operation expenses during construction, cost of issuance, interest during construction and capitalized interest. If appropriate in a particular district, the City may consent to issuance of bonds for purchase, construction, acquisition, repair, extension or improve- ment of fire stations, roads and/or other capital improvements that are mu- tually agreed upon by the City Council and the petitioner VII. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS The City may address issues relating to the district in a consent agreement, strategic partnership agreement, development agreement, community facilities agreement or other documents acceptable to the parties. The City shall consider proposing addi- tional terms, subject to the mutual agreement of the parties and as allowed by law, including without limitation the following: 1 The district shall contain sufficient acreage to assure the economic viabil- ity of the district but no more acreage than can feasibly be annexed at one time. In general, a district is not expected to include less than 200 acres or more than 500 acres. 2. Development within the district shall be generally consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 3 No district shall include land in more than one city's extraterritorial juris- diction. 4 The City and the owners of all land in the proposed district may reach agreement on the terms of a development agreement pursuant to Local Government Code, Section 212.171, et seq., to extend the City's planmng authority over land included in the district by providing for approval of a development plan, authorizing enforcement by the City of land use and development regulations, and including other lawful terms and considera- tions the parties consider appropriate. The development agreement may include provisions that are mutually acceptable to the parties relating to the following matters: a. Land use plan reflecting all approved land uses and residential densities; b Compliance with City construction codes, including permit re- quirements, c. Compliance with City and other applicable stormwater and water quality regulations; d. Development standards comparable to City zoning regulations; and e. Dedication and development of park areas. The above list is not intended to be exhaustive. It is expected that the parties will cooperate to identify those matters unique to that district that may be addressed in a development agreement. 5 At least 30 days before issuance of bonds, the district shall certify in writ- ing that the district is in full compliance with the consent resolution ap- proved by the City Council and, to the extent such agreements impose re- 41 a • a a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Appendix G. Conservation and Reclamation District Policy G-4 quirements on the district, with the consent agreement, strategic partner- ship agreement and all other agreements executed by the City and the dis- tract, and shall deliver the certification to the City Secretary, the City Man- ager and the Director of the Development Department. 6 No land within the district shall be allowed, at any time in the future, to incorporate, join in an incorporation, or be annexed into any incorporated city other than the City of Fort Worth. 7 No land shall be annexed by the district without prior City Council ap- proval. 8. The district shall not construct or install infrastructure or facilities to serve areas outside the district or sell or deliver services to areas outside the dis- trict without prior City Council approval, provided, however, the district may serve a maximum of 10 retail residential connections outside the dis- trict without City Council approval. 9 After creation of the district, and unless otherwise expressly authorized by the consent agreement or development agreement, no district shall be con- verted into another type of district, consolidated with another district, di- vided into two or more new districts, or seek additional governmental pow- ers that were beyond its statutory authority at the time the district was cre- ated, without prior City Council approval. 10 The City may annex any commercial development within the district for limited purposes pursuant to Local Government Code, Section 43 0751, and may impose a sales and use tax within the area annexed for limited purposes. The City may consider sharing tax receipts with the district, provided the district's share is used to finance infrastructure, retire bond debt or for other purposes acceptable to the City 11 The district shall not issue any bonds other than those authorized by the consent agreement without City Council approval. 12. The district shall file a notice in the real property records of all counties in which the district is located stating that the City has authority to annex the district. The parties may attach a form of such notice to the consent agree- ment or development agreement. 13 The district shall send a copy of the order or other action setting an ad valorem tax rate to the City Secretary, the City Manager and the Director of the Development Department within 30 days after district adoption of the rate. 14 The district shall send a copy of its annual audit to the City Secretary, the City Manager and the Director of the Development Department within 30 days after approval. 15 The City will encourage the district to maintain a debt service structure that will ensure that the district's taxes are maintained at a rate at least equal to the City's tax rate, to the extent feasible. 16. The district shall provide copies of any material event notices filed under applicable federal securities laws or regulations to the City Secretary, the City Manager and the Director of the Development Department within thirty (30) days after filing such notices with the applicable federal agency 17 Construction of capital improvements such as fire stations and recreational amenities will be encouraged. 18. Sharing of fire stations, recreational amenities and other capital improve- ments by the City and the district will be encouraged. 19 If construction or expansion of a wastewater treatment facility is proposed to serve the district, the plant design shall conform to all applicable state and federal permitting and design standards. In addition, any wastewater discharge shall be permitted to meet effluent limitations no less stringent than (a) current permit requirements for Village Creek Wastewater Treat- ment Plant; (b) current permit requirements for Denton Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant; or (c) 5-5-2-1 (5 parts per million {"ppm"} biochemical oxygen demand, 5 ppm total suspended solids; 2 ppm nitrogen, and 1 ppm phosphorus), whichever is strictest. The City reserves the right to protest any wastewater treatment facility permit application or amendment. 20. The board of directors of the district and landowners within the district will assist the City in annexing one or more areas, each of which may not ex- ceed 525 feet in width at its widest point or such other width limitation subsequently imposed by law, as reasonably necessary for the City to con- nect areas to the City that are outside the district and that the City intends to annex in the foreseeable future. 21 If it is determined that the development will place a burden on City roads that will provide access to the development, the City may require the dis- trict to construct, widen or improve such roads (or contribute funds for such purpose) in proportion to the traffic generated by the development. 22. The City may agree not to annex and dissolve the district any earlier than the first to occur of (i) extension of water, sanitary sewer and drainage fa- cilities to serve 90% of the land within the district; or (ii) 15 years after G-5 Appendix G: Conservation and Reclamation District Policy creation of the district. The contract between the City and the district may provide that the City may set rates for water and/or sewer services for property that was within the district that vary from those for other proper- ties within the City in order to compensate the City for assumption of dis- trict obligations upon annexation, in compliance with any statutory re- quirements applicable to such an agreement. 23 The consent agreement and ancillary documents should include terms pro- viding for the district to be fully developed and ready for full purpose an- nexation by the City within a reasonable time period. 24 The petitioner shall reimburse the City for expenses incurred by the City in connection with the City's consent to formation of the district, including but not limited to professional fees incurred in connection with negotiation and preparation of the consent resolution, consent agreement, development agreement, strategic partnership agreement and related documents. Appendix G. Conservation and Reclamation District Policy G-6 Potential Special Districts mil r- e Potential Special Oistrigte Tradition Addition'', �Ornebpmeras Future'Phases CIFus Phases Cortitkatos of Convenience & Necessity Tradition Addtionl*'BFat� e Phase 1 ®JONeat CdanUy Rural Water Supply City Until 4 Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Fail Wont. City Unlit C Lurked Purpose Annexation . a Fat Wail) ETJ ©1t�n. �o �YIfW P°G rew'".?t> * ■ ay, d �' / fir �� �P'[�tl!•� Haywire RsnCx t.. o Ya nc C Ifi� ��,_ , �l Luton Phases i ��t ©Igi - :'I k.. ■�'7111�C_��i�l I .s+yrt� Ili � � P.��� '^ _.� �i)� Iv t'« ', ► yap �01 �a : t �-�.����r l«.�11 �, wOtwwaaeseheeKh4rvemanw vi P n u uuin. mW fN17712007 Iraqi trace wrysmo �o • •' • •1 • s • • • • • • • • • • • •' • • • • • • • s • • • • • • • 110 • • • • • • • • • • • • APPENDIX H. TAX ABATEMENT POLICY STATEMENT City of Fort Worth General Tax Abatement Policy Effective June 17, 2008 through June 16, 2010 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 1.1 Purpose. Chapter 312 of the Texas Tax Code allows, but does not obligate or require, the City to grant a tax abatement on the value added to a particular property on account of a specific development project that meets the eligibility requirements set forth in this Policy In order for the City to participate in tax abatement, the City is required to establish guidelines and criteria governing tax abatement agreements. This Policy is intended to set forth those guidelines and criteria for persons or entities interested in receiving a tax abatement from the City This Policy shall expire on June 16, 2010 1.2. General Eligibility Criteria. A tax abatement can only be granted to persons or entities eligible for tax abatement pursuant to Section 312.204(a) of the Texas Tax Code, which persons or • entities as of the effective date of this Policy are (i) the owner of taxable real • property located in a tax abatement reinvestment zone; or (ii) the owner of a leasehold interest in real property located in a tax abatement reinvestment zone. Although the City will consider all applications for tax abatement that meet the eligibility requirements set forth in this Policy, it is especially interested in • development projects that: • '• • • • • S • • • • 1111 • result in the creation of new full-time jobs for Fort Worth Residents and Central City Residents, and • are located in the Central City; and • result in development with little or no additional cost to the City while producmg a positive economic impact to the tax paying citizens of Fort Worth, and • have a positive impact on Fort Worth Companies and Fort Worth Certified MIWBE Companies, and • promotes quality, affordable housing and/or mixed income development. 1.3. General Exclusions and Limitations. 1.3.1 Lessees of Real Property A person or entity seeking tax abatement on real property that is leased from a third party should be advised that, pursuant to state law, the City can only abate taxes on the increased value of the taxable leasehold interest in the real property, if any, and the increase in value of taxable improvements and tangible personal property located on the real property and subject to the leasehold interest, if any Before applying for a tax abatement from the City, such persons or entities should seek professional and legal guidance, and may wish to consult with the appraisal district having jurisdiction over the property in question, as to whether their development projects will result in a taxable leasehold interest in the property and, if so, the anticipated value of that leasehold interest. 1.3.2. Property Located in Neighborhood Empowerment Zones ("NEZs"). The City Council has designated certain distressed areas of the City needing affordable housing, economic development and expanded public services as NEZs. Notwithstanding anything that may be interpreted to the contrary, this Policy does not apply to property located in a NEZ. A person or entity seeking tax abatement on property owned or leased in a NEZ should refer to the NEZ Policy 1.3.3. Property Located in Tax Increment Reinvestment Zones ("TIFs"). The City Council has designated certain areas of the City as TIFs. This Policy does apply to property located in a TIF However, a person or entity seeking tax abatement on property owned or leased in a TIF should be advised that state law requires a TIF's board of directors and the governing bodies of all taxing jurisdictions contributing tax increment revenue to a TIF to approve a City tax abatement agreement on property located in that TIF before the agreement can take effect. H-1 1.3.4. Property Located in Enterprise Zones. The State of Texas has designated certain areas of the City with high unemployment as enterprise zones. Various economic development incentives are available to owners of property located in enterprise zones. In accordance with state law, all property located within an enterprise zone is automatically designated as a tax abatement reinvestment zone. However, the City typically designates individual tax abatement reinvestment zone overlays when it wishes to grant tax abatements on property located in an enterprise zone. 1.3.5. Business Relocations Due to Maior Public Infrastructure Proiects. Appendix H: Tax Abatement Policy Statement Pursuant to Resolution No. 3556-11-07, the City Council has approved a Relocation Incentives Policy (the "Relocation Policy") for qualifying businesses that are required to relocate due to a Major Public Infrastructure Project, as that term is defined in the Relocation Policy Tax abatement is one of the incentives authonzed by the Relocation Policy Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, any tax abatement granted by the City under the Relocation Policy shall be governed solely by the terms of and in accordance with the Relocation Policy 2. DEFINITIONS. Capitalized terms used in this Policy but not defined elsewhere shall have the following meanings: Abatement or Tax Abatement - A full or partial exemption from ad valorem taxes on eligible taxable real and personal property located in a Reinvestment Zone for a specified period on the difference between (i) the amount of increase in the appraised value (as reflected on the certified tax roll of the appropriate county appraisal district) resulting from improvements begun after the execution of a written Tax Abatement Agreement and (ii) the appraised value of such real estate prior to execution of a written Tax Abatement Agreement (as reflected on the most recent certified tax roll of the appropriate county appraisal district for the year prior to the date on which the Tax Abatement Agreement was executed). Abatement Benefit Term — The period of time specified in a Tax Abatement Agreement, but not to exceed ten (10) years, that the recipient of a tax abatement may receive the Abatement. Abatement Compliance Term — The period of time specified in a Tax Abatement Agreement during which the recipient of a tax abatement must comply with the provisions and conditions of the Tax Abatement Agreement and file an annual report with the City which outlines and documents the extent of the recipient's compliance with such provisions and conditions. Business Expansion Project — A project in the square footage of a facility or facilities currently located in the City will be expanded. Capital Investment - Only real property improvements such as, without limitation, new facilities and structures, site improvements, facility expansion, and facility modernization. Capital Investment does NOT include (i) land acquisition costs; (ii) any improvements existing on the property prior to execution of a Tax Abatement Agreement; or (iii) personal property such as, without limitation, machinery, equipment, supplies and inventory Central City — A geographic area within the City, defined by the City Council and shown in the map of Exhibit "A" of this Policy Appendix H: Tax Abatement Policy Statement Central City Resident — An individual whose principle place of residence is at a location within the Central City Commercial/Industrial Development Project — A development project in which a facility or facilities will be constructed or renovated on property that is or meets the requirements to be zoned for commercial or industrial use pursuant to the City's Zoning Ordinance. CDBG Eligible Area — Any census tract in which fifty-one percent (51%) or more of the residents in that census tract have low to moderate incomes, as defined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. Commitment - An agreed upon amount and/or percentage related to the utilization of Fort Worth Companies and Fort Worth Certified M/WBE Companies for construction spending on a given project or for Supply and Service Expenditures and related to the hiring of Fort Worth Residents and Central City Residents. Fort Worth Certified M/WBE Company — A minority or woman -owned business that has a principal office located within the corporate limits of the City and has received certification as either a minority business enterprise (MBE) or a woman business enterprise (WBE) by the North Central Texas Regional Certification Agency (NCTRCA) or the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), Highway Division. Fort Worth Company — A business that has a principal office located within the corporate limits of the City Fort Worth Resident — An individual whose principal place of residence is at a location within the corporate limits of the City Mixed -Use Development Project — A development project in which a facility or facilities will be constructed or renovated such that (i) at least twenty percent (20%) of the total gross floor area will be used as residential space and (ii) at least ten percent (10%) of the total gross floor area will be used for office, restaurant, entertainment and/or retail sales and service space. M/WBE Advisory Committee (MWBEAC) — A committee appointed by the Fort Worth City Council to review and make recommendations as to Commitments proposed by an applicant for Tax Abatement if any such Commitments contam less than a 25% expenditure with Fort Worth Certified M/WBE companies for construction spending and for Supply and Service Expenditures and to advise the City as to the availability of Fort Worth Certified M/WBEs. H-2 Principal Office — An office facility that is fully operational and has sufficient equipment, supplies, and personnel to provide the product or service of the business in question to clients in the City without significant reliance on the resources of ••••w••••••••••••••••••••••w•e••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• another entity or affiliate or of an auxiliary facility of the business which is located outside the corporate limits of the City Reinvestment Zone — An area designated by the City as a tax abatement reinvestment zone maccordance with Chapter 312 of the Texas Tax Code. Residential Development Project — A development project in which a facility or facilities will be constructed or renovated as multi -family living units on property that is or meets requirements to be zoned for multi -family or mixed -use pursuant to the City's Zoning Ordinance. Supply and Service Expenditures — Discretionary expenditures made as part of normal business operations on the real property subject to tax abatement, such as, by way of example only, office supplies, janitorial supplies and professional services. Tax Abatement Agreement — A written Agreement that the recipient of a tax abatement must enter into with the City and that outlines the specific terms and conditions pertaining to and governing the tax abatement. 3. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR TAX ABATEMENT To be eligible for tax abatement under this Policy, a Residential Development Project must meet all of the criteria set forth in one of the following paragraphs. 3.1. (i) Be located in the Central City; and (ii) Satisfy the Capital Investment and affordability criteria necessary for a Residential Development Project to be eligible for tax abatement under the NEZ Policy; and (iii) Meet all of the Conmtments set forth in Section 7 of this Policy (Standard Requirements for Residential Development Projects, Certain Commercial/ lndustnal and Mixed -Use Development Projects); or 3.2. (i) Be located in a CDBG Eligible Area, and (ii) Have a capital investment of at least $5 million; and (iii) Meet all of the Commitments set forth in Section 7 of this Policy (Standard Requirements for Residential Development Projects and Certain Commercial /Industrial and Mixed - Use Development Projects); or 3.3. (i) Be located outside of the Central City; and (ii) Have a capital investment of at least $5 million; and (iii) Meet all of the Commitments set forth in Section 7 of this Policy (Standard Requirements for Residential Development Projects and Certain Commercial/Industrial and Mixed -Use Development Projects). In addition, an applicant for a Residential Development Project tax abatement that includes, in whole or in part, the renovation of one or more existing structures shall provide, as part of the applicant's Tax Abatement Application, a detailed description and the estimated costs of the renovations contemplated. 4. COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR TAX ABATEMENT To be eligible for tax abatement under this Policy, a Commercial/Industrial Development Project must meet all of the criteria set forth in one of the following paragraphs: 4.1 (i) Have a minimum Capital Investment of $250,000; and (ii) Be located in the Central City or on property immediately adjacent to the major thoroughfares which serve as boundanes to the Central City, or within a CDBG Eligible Area, and (iii) meet all of the Commitments of Section 7 of this Policy (Standard Requirements For Residential Development Projects, Certain Commercial/Industrial Development Projects, Mixed -Use Development Projects, And Business Expansion Projects); or 4.2 (i) Have a minimum Capital Investment of $10 million, and (ii) meet all of the Commitments of Section 7 of this Policy (Standard Requirements For Residential Development Projects, Certain Commercial/Industrial Development Projects, Mixed -Use Development Projects, And Business Expansion Projects); or 4.3 (i) Have a minimum Capital Investment of $100 million, and (ii) satisfy additional requirements that may be set forth by the City on a project -specific basis. In addition, an applicant for tax abatement on a Commercial/Industrial Development Project that includes, in whole or in part, the renovation of one or more existing structures shall provide, as part of the applicant's Tax Abatement Application, a detailed description and the estimated costs of the renovations contemplated. 5. MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR TAX ABATEMENT To be eligible for tax abatement under this Policy, a Mixed -Use Development Project must meet all of the criteria set forth in one of the following paragraphs. 5.1 (i) Have a minimum Capital Investment of $250,000; and (ii) Be located in the Central City or on property immediately adjacent to the major thoroughfares which serve as boundaries to the Central City, or within CDBG H-3 Appendix H: Tax Abatement Policy Statement Eligible Area, and (iii) meet all of the Commitments of Section 7 of this Policy (Standard Requirements For Residential Development Projects, Certain Commercial/Industrial Development Projects, Mixed -Use Development Projects, And Business Expansion Projects); or 5.2 (i) Have a minimum Capital Investment of $10 million, and (ii) meet all of the Commitments of Section 7 of this Policy (Standard Requirements For Residential Development Projects, Certain Commercial/Industrial Development Projects, Mixed -Use Development Projects, And Business Expansion Projects); or 5.3 (i) Have a minimum Capital Investment of $100 million, and (ii) consist of multiple land uses, whereby no single land use would comprise greater than 40% of the project's land area, and (iii) emphasize live/work/play opportunities with multimodal access; and, (iv) satisfy additional requirements that may be set forth by the City on a project -specific basis. In addition, an applicant for tax abatement on a Mixed -Use Development Project that includes, in whole or in part, the renovation of one or more existing structures shall provide, as part of the applicant's Tax Abatement Application, a detailed description and the estimated costs of the renovations contemplated. 6. BUSINESS EXPANSION PROJECTS FOR EXISTING FORT WORTH BUSINESSES. To be eligible for tax abatement under this Policy, a Business Expansion Project must meet all of the criteria set forth in on the following paragraphs. 6.1 (i) Be located in the Central City or a CDBG Eligible Area, and (ii) Have been in business continuously for at least six months prior to the submission of an Application to the City for Tax Abatement, and (iii) Have a total real and personal property investment of at least $250,000; and (iv) Meet all of the Commitments set forth in Section 7 of this Policy (Standard Requirements For Residential Development Projects, Certain Commercial/Industrial Development Projects, Mixed -Use Development Projects, And Business Expansion Projects); or 6.2 (i) Be located outside of the Central City and CDBG Eligible Area and (ii) Have been in business continuously for at least five years prior to the submission of an Application to the City for Tax Abatement, and (iii) Have a total real and personal property investment of at least $10 million (a minimum Capital Investment of $1 million) and (iv) Meet all of the Commitments set forth in Section 7 of this Policy (Standard Requirements For Residential Development Projects, Certain Commercial/Industrial Development Projects, Mixed -Use Development Projects, And Business Expansion Projects) improvements. Appendix H: Tax Abatement Policy Statement 7 STANDARD REOUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. CERTAIN COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. AND BUSINESS EXPANSION PROJECTS. To be eligible for property tax abatement, a Residential Development Project meeting the requirements set forth in Sections 3 1, 3.2 or 3.3 of this Policy; a Commercial/Industrial Development Project meeting the requirements set forth in Sections 4 1 and 4.2 of this Policy; a Mixed -Use Development Project meeting the requirements set forth in Sections 5 1 and 5.2, and a Business Expansion Project meeting the requirements set forth m Sections 6.1 or 6.2 shall meet all of the following requirements: 7.1 Commit to provide full-time employment to a set number and/or a percentage of fulltime jobs offered on the real property where the Development is located, to Central City Residents, which Commitment will be agreed upon and set forth in the Tax Abatement Agreement; and 7.2 Commit to provide full-time employment to a set number and/or a percentage of fulltime jobs offered on the real property where the Development is located, to Fort Worth Residents, which Commitment will be agreed upon and set forth in the Tax Abatement Agreement; and 7.3 Commit to spend a set amount or percentage of total construction costs and annual Supply and Service Expenses with Fort Worth Companies, which Commitment will be agreed upon and set forth in the Tax Abatement Agreement; and 7.4 Commit to spend a set amount or percentage of total construction costs and annual Supply and Service Expenditures with Fort Worth Certified M/ WBE Companies. Any Commitment below 25% of the total construction costs and of the annual Supply and Service Expenses will require an applicant for Abatement to meet with the City of Fort Worth's M/WBE Advisory Committee to seek input and assistance prior to action by the City Council. The M/WBE Advisory Committee will provide the City Council with a recommendation related to the utilization of Fort Worth Certified M/WBEs. The M/WBE Advisory Committee's recommendation, if different from the Commitment made by the applicant for Abatement, will be non -binding, but should be taken under advisement by the City Council. 7.5 For Residential Development Projects and Mixed -Use Development Projects that include rental residential units, commit to a set number or percentage of total rental residential units that must be set aside exclusively for lease to qualifying households whose adjusted incomes do not exceed the then - current eighty percent (80%) income limits established by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") for the Fort Worth- H-4 •••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Arlington, TX HUD Metro FMR (fair market rents) Area at rents that are affordable to such households, as defined by HUD 7.6 All Commitments established pursuant to Sections 7 1 through 7.5 will be agreed upon and set forth in the Tax Abatement Agreement and, if not met, will serve to reduce the value of Abatement in accordance with the specific terms and conditions of the Tax Abatement Agreement; and 7 7 Commit to file a plan with the City (within six weeks of City Council approval of the Tax Abatement Agreement) as to how the Commitments for use of Fort Worth Certified M/WBE Companies will be attained and, in order to demonstrate compliance with that plan, (i) to file monthly reports with the City and the Minority and Women Business Enterprise Advisory Committee throughout the construction phase of any improvements required by the Tax Abatement Agreement reflecting then -current expenditures made with Fort Worth Certified M/WBE Companies, (ii) list the name of a contact person that will have knowledge of the construction phase of the project, and (iii) from the start of the First Compliance Auditing Year (as defined in Section 8) until expiration of the Tax Abatement Agreement, to file quarterly reports with the City reflecting then -current expenditures made with Fort Worth Certified M/WBE Companies. The City Council may, in its sole discretion, require a Commercial/ Industrial Development Project meeting the criteria set forth in Section 4.3 of this Policy and a Mixed -Use Development Project meeting the criteria set forth in Section 5.3 of this Policy to satisfy some, all or none of the requirements set forth in this Section 7 8. TAX ABATEMENT CALCULATION All Tax Abatement Agreements shall require the recipient to construct or cause construction of specific improvements on the real property that is subject to the abatement. Failure to construct these specific improvements at the minimum Capital Investment expenditure and by the deadline established in the Tax Abatement Agreement shall give the City the right to terminate the Tax Abatement Agreement. The amount of a particular tax abatement shall be negotiated on a case - by -case basis and specifically set forth in the Tax Abatement Agreement. The calculation of tax abatement for a Commercial/Industrial Project that meets the requirements of Section 4.3 of this Policy or for a Mixed -Use Development Project that meets the requirements of Section 5.3 of this Policy shall be negotiated on a case -by -case basis and governed solely by the terms and conditions of the Tax Abatement Agreement. The calculation of tax abatement for any other project shall be negotiated on a case -by -case basis, but shall be governed directly in accordance with the degree to which the recipient meets the four (4) Commitments set forth in Sections 7 1, 7.2, 7.3 and 7 4 of this Policy, which will be outlined in the Tax Abatement Agreement. A Tax Abatement Agreement may establish a base abatement that is (i) reduced in accordance with the recipient's failure to meet one or more of such Commitments or (ii) increased in accordance with the recipient's meeting and/or exceeding one or more of such Commitments. 9 TAX ABATEMENT IMPLEMENTATION The term of a tax abatement shall be negotiated on a case -by -case basis and specified in the Tax Abatement Agreement. The City will audit and determine the recipient's compliance with the terms and conditions of the Tax Abatement Agreement for a full calendar year prior to the first year in which the tax abatement is available (the "First Compliance Auditing Year"). The Compliance Auditing Year shall either be the full calendar year in which a final certificate of occupancy is issued for the improvements required by the Tax Abatement Agreement for the real property subject to abatement or the following calendar year, as negotiated and set forth in the Tax Abatement Agreement. The first tax abatement will be available to the recipient for the tax year following the Compliance Auditing Year. In other words, the degree to which the recipient meets the Commitments set forth in the Tax Abatement Agreement will determine the percentage of taxes abated for the following tax year The City will continue to audit and determine the recipient's compliance with the terms and conditions of the Tax Abatement Agreement for each subsequent calendar year, which findings shall govern the percentage of taxes abated for the following tax year, until expiration of the Tax Abatement Agreement. 10. TAX ABATEMENT APPLICATION PROCEDURES. Each tax abatement application shall be processed in accordance with the following standards and procedures: 10.1 Submission of Application If a given development project qualifies for tax abatement pursuant to the eligibility criteria detailed in Section 4, Section 5, Section 6, or Section 7 of this Policy, as the case may be, an applicant for tax abatement must complete and submit a City of Fort Worth Tax Abatement Application (with required attachments) (the "Application"). An Application can be obtained from and should be submitted to the City's Economic and Community Development Department. In order to be complete, the Application must include documentation that there are no delinquent property taxes due for the property on which the development project is to occur. 10.2 Application Fee Upon submission of the Application, an applicant must also pay an application fee. This application fee shall be $15,000 ("Application Fee") of which $13,000 will be credited to any permit, impact, inspection or other fee paid by the • s H-5 Appendix H: Tax Abatement Policy Statement applicant and required by the City directly in connection with the proposed project, as long as substantive construction on the project, as determined by the City in its sole and reasonable discretion, has been undertaken on the property specified in the Application within one (1) year following the date of its submission. If any Application Fee funds are remaining after the development project covered in the Application has received a final Certificate of Occupancy (CO) from the City, the applicant must submit a letter to the director of the City's Economic and Community Development Department requesting a refund of the remammg funds. The request must be made within three (3) months from the date of the final CO. Application fees remaming after the development project covered in the Application has received a final CO will become the property of the City and will not be eligible for refund, even if a final CO was issued, if the applicant does not submit the written request for refund as required by this Section. The remaining $2,000 is non- refundable and will be utilized for City staff expenses associated with processing the Application and fees associated with legal notice requirements. 10.3 Application Review and Evaluation The Economic and Community Development Department will review an Application for accuracy and completeness. Once complete, the Economic and Community Development Department will evaluate an Application based on the perceived merit and value of the project, including, without limitation, the following criteria. • Types and number of new jobs created, including respective wage rates, and employee benefits packages such as health insurance, day care provisions, retirement packages, transportation assistance, employer -sponsored training and education, and any other benefits; • Percentage of new jobs committed to Fort Worth Residents; • Percentage of new jobs committed to Central City Residents; • Percent of construction contracts committed to (i) Fort Worth Companies and (ii) Fort Worth Certified M/WBE Companies; • Percentage of Supply and Service Contract expenses committed to (i) Fort Worth Companies and (ii) Fort Worth Certified M/WBE Companies; • Financial viability of the project; • The project's reasonably projected increase in the value of the tax base; • Costs to the City (such as infrastructure participation, etc.); • Remediation of an existing environmental problem on the real property; • The gender, ethnic background and length of employment of each member of the applicant's board of directors, governing body or upper management, as requested by the City; • For residential projects, number or percentage of units reserved as affordable housing for persons with incomes at or below eighty percent (80%) of median family income based on family size (as established and defined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development); and Appendix H: Tax Abatement Policy Statement • Other items that the City may determine to be relevant with respect to the project. Based upon the outcome of the evaluation, the Economic and Community Development Office will present the Application to the City Council's Central City Revitalization and Economic Development Committee. In an extraordinary circumstance, the Economic and Community Development Department may elect to present the Application to the full City Council without initial input from the Central City Revitalization and Economic Development Committee. 10.4 Consideration by Council Committee The City Council's Central City Revitalization and Economic Development Committee will consider the Application in an open meeting or, if circumstances dictate and the law allows, a closed meeting. The Committee may either (i) recommend approval of the Application, in which case City staff will incorporate the terms of the Application into a Tax Abatement Agreement for subsequent consideration by the full City Council with the Central City Revitalization and Economic Development Committee's recommendation to approve the Agreement; (ii) request modifications to the Application, in which case Economic Development Office staff will discuss the suggested modifications with the applicant and, if the requested modifications are made, resubmit the modified Application to the Central City Revitalization and Economic Development Committee for consideration, or (iii) deny to recommend consideration of the Application by the full City Council. 10.5 Consideration by the City Council A Tax Abatement Agreement will only be considered by the City Council if the applicant has first executed the Tax Abatement Agreement. The City Council retains sole authonty to approve or deny any Tax Abatement Agreement and is under no obligation to approve any Application or Tax Abatement Agreement. 11. GENERAL POLICIES AND REOUIREMENTS. Notwithstanding anything that may be interpreted to the contrary herein, the following general terms and conditions shall govern this Policy. 11.1. A tax abatement shall not be granted for any development project in which a building permit application has been filed with the City's Development Department. In addition, the City will not abate taxes on the value of real or personal property for any penod of time pnor to the year of execution of a Tax Abatement Agreement with the City 11.2 The applicant for a tax abatement must provide evidence to the City that demonstrates that a tax abatement is necessary for the financial viability of the development project proposed. H-6 • • • • • • • • • s • • • • • • • • S • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • i 4110 • • • • • • 11.3 In accordance with state law, the City will not abate taxes levied on inventory, supplies or the existing tax base. 11.4 An applicant for tax abatement shall provide wage rates, employee benefit information for all positions of employment to be located in any facility covered by the Application. 11.5 Unless otherwise specified in the Tax Abatement Agreement, the amount of real property taxes to be abated in a given year shall not exceed one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the amount of the minimum Capital Investment expenditure required by the Tax Abatement Agreement for improvements to the real property subject to abatement multiplied by the City's tax rate in effect for that same year, and the amount of personal property taxes to be abated in a given year shall not exceed one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the minimum value of personal property required by the Tax Abatement Agreement to be located on the real property, if any, subject to abatement multiplied by the City's tax rate in effect for that same year 11.6 The owner of real property for which a Tax Abatement has been granted shall properly maintain the property to assure the long-term economic viability of the project. In addition, if a citation or citations for City Code violations are issued against a project while a Tax Abatement Agreement is in effect, the amount of the tax abatement benefit will be subject to reduction, as provided in the Tax Abatement Agreement. 11.7 If the recipient of a tax abatement breaches any of the terms or conditions of the Tax Abatement Agreement and fails to cure such breach in accordance with the Tax Abatement Agreement, the City shall have the right to terminate the Tax Abatement Agreement. In this event, the recipient will be required to pay the City any property taxes that were abated pursuant to the Tax Abatement Agreement prior to its termination. 11.8 As part of the consideration under all Tax Abatement Agreements, the City shall have, without limitation, the right to (i) review and verify the applicant's financial statements and records related to the development project and the abatement in each year during the term of the Tax Abatement Agreement prior to the granting of a tax abatement in any given year and (ii) conduct an on -site inspection of the development project in each year during the term of the Tax Abatement to verify compliance with the terms and conditions of the Tax Abatement Agreement. Any incidents of non-compliance will be reported to all taxing units with jurisdiction over the real property subject to abatement. 11.9 The recipient of a tax abatement may not sell, assign, transfer or otherwise convey its rights under a Tax Abatement Agreement unless otherwise specified in the Tax Abatement Agreement. A sale, assignment, lease, transfer or H-7 conveyance of the real property that is subject to the abatement and which is not permitted by the Tax Abatement Agreement shall constitute a breach of the Tax Abatement Agreement and may result in termination of the Tax Abatement Agreement and recapture of any taxes abated after the date on which the breach occurred. For additional information about this Tax Abatement Policy, contact the City of Fort Worth's Economic & Community Development Department using the following information City of Fort Worth Economic & Community Development Department 1000 Throckmorton Street Fort Worth, Texas 76102 (817) 392-6103 http://fortworthgov.org/ecodev/ Appendix H Tax Abatement Policy Statement • 76020 Snw' 76135 76108 to Seitigolia NIF 76008 Legend Zip codes V Central City V City Limit r4P. CMG Eligible Areas tans 0 -2 Lzdie Wog h g8,179 Az• 76114 , iv at ;31 ,-*** 483 siwo V't ger Appendix H. Tax Abatement Policy Statement Exhibit A Edgeclitt H-8 76137 Watauga 76148 76140 leatth Richland Hill.* 76180 Richland Hills 76016 Kennedale 76060 76034 76021 Bedlotd Aivrst 76022 76053 76013- Pantago 76040' 76006 76012 Dalwaithin ;ten ;!.st, .I 76017 76001 76015 20 Planning Department: SEW 2006 824j(1"3@ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • S. • • • • • • • • • • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••i AIIVS S O'Io 4• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • GLOSSARY -A- Abatement - Full or partial exemption from ad valorem taxes of certain real property and/or tangible personal property in a reinvestment zone. Adaptive Reuse - Rehabilitation of old property and structures for new purposes. Affordable Housing - For purposes of housing assistance with federal funds, such as Community Development Block Grant and HOME. • Rental -Housing cost (rent plus utilities) are no more than 30 percent of a household's income. • Owner -Housing costs (defined as PITI or principal, interest, taxes, and insurance) are not more than 30 percent of a household's income. • Affordable to Extremely Low Income Households -Housing costs are no more than 30 percent of an mcome of 30 percent of median income in the Fort Worth - Arlington Metropolitan Area. • Affordable to Very Low Income Households -Housing costs are no more than 30 percent of an income of 50 percent of the median mcome in the Fort Worth - Arlington Metropolitan Area. • Affordable to Low Income Households -Housing costs are no more than 30 percent of an income of 80 percent of median income m the Fort Worth - Arlington Metropolitan Area. Arterial - Major roadways, usually 4 to 6 lanes, that serve a large geographic area. Avigation Easement - Provides right of flight at any altitude above the approach surface and a right to create noise, vibrations, dust, fumes, etc. without incurring liability Avigation easements are usually purchased from the property owner at 10 to 15 percent of the appraised value of the property -B- Birth Rate - Number of births per 1,000 persons in a population within a specified time period. Brownfields - Vacant, under-utilized, obsolete, or structurally deteriorated industrial or commercial properties where improvements are hindered by real or perceived contamination. Buffer - Separation between land uses by distance, landscaping, berms, fences, masonry walls, or other transitional uses. -C- Capital Improvements Program (CIP) - The tool through which locally funded public facilities, such as sewers, local roads, storm drains, schools, libraries, parks, etc., can be scheduled and built. Central City - The area within Loop 820 consisting of the following: all CDBG- eligible census block groups, all State -designated enterprise zones, and all census block groups that are contiguous by 75 percent or more of their perimeter to CDBG- eligible block groups or enterprise zones. Closing Cost - Includes, but is not limited to, prepayment of insurance and taxes, attorney fees, appraisals, termite inspections, points, mortgage insurance payments, and other miscellaneous expenses associated with the closing on the sale of a property Commuter Rail - A form of public rail transportation designed for antra -or inter -city commuting with relatively few stops along the route. The train travels along standard tracks and may be pulled by a locomotive or use self-propelled vehicles. Comprehensive Plan - The Comprehensive Plan is a general guide for making decisions about the City's growth and development. It presents a broad vision for Fort Worth's future and describes major policies, programs, and projects to realize that vision. The Plan serves as a continuously updated reference guide and decision - making tool for planners and other city policy -makers. The Plan contains information concerning the current status of land use, transportation, infrastructure, housmg, urban design, and economic development, while offering future visions for these components based on population and economic trends and forecasts. Consumer Price Index (CPI) - Measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for fixed -market consumer goods and services. The CPI provides a way for consumers to compare and contrast the cost of market goods and services on different days, months, years, etc. Core Based Statistical Area - A statistical geographic entity consisting of the county or counties associated with at least one core (urbanized area or urban cluster) of at least 10,000 population, plus adjacent counties having a high degree of social and economic integration with the core as measured through commuting ties with the counties containing the core. Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas are the two categories of Core Based Statistical Areas. -D- Death Rate - Number of deaths per 1,000 persons in a population within a specified time period. 1 Glossary Density - Measure of units within a geographic area, such as number of dwelling units per acre or population per square mile. Domestic Migration - People moving from other parts of the country to take up permanent residence in the local area. -E- Endangered Building - Building threatened by deterioration, damage, or irretnevable, irreplaceable loss due to neglect, disuse, disrepair, instability, lack of financial resources, and/or impending demolition. Endangered Species - A species present in such small numbers that it is at risk of becoming extinct. Ethnicity - Categories of people based upon common ancestral culture, customs, or language. Exception - Departure from any provision of the Subdivision Ordinance requirements for a specific parcel, without changing the Subdivision Ordinance. Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) - Unincorporated area extending generally five miles from the city limit in which the City has the authority to regulate subdivision and platting of property -F- Fair Market Rent - An amount determined by HUD to be the cost of modest, non - luxury rental units in a specific market area. With certain exceptions, it is the highest rent allowable for that market under the Section 8 Program. Fair Market Value - Highest price a property would bring in a free and open market given a typically motivated, prudent, and well-informed seller and buyer, and assuming typical financing. Family Income - Combined gross money income of all members of a family livmg in the same household. Concept developed by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Floodplain - Area adjacent to a river or stream subject to inundation by flood waters. Full -Time Employment - Employment status of an individual who works 35 or more hours per week at an income producmg job. -G- Geographic Information System (GIS) - Computer system that allows a user to create custom maps depicting the relationships between any number of mappable Glossary 2 physical features and events. Since virtually all City data are tied to a specific location and can be mapped, a GIS is an effective tool for land records management, land use planning, infrastructure management, environmental management, or computer -aided dispatch of fire and police and other public service tasks. Goal - A broad and general statement concisely phrased. Goals are broad statements of ideal future conditions that are desired by the community and/or organizations within it. Goals can be pursued on a continuing basis, and may never be satisfied completely Goals are statements of intention or general direction. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) - Total dollar value of all goods and services produced within the United States. Gross State Product (GSP) - Total dollar value of all goods and services produced in the State of Texas. -H- Heliport - Full -service facility for helicopters offering maintenance, fueling, and passenger services. HOME - HOME Investment Partnership Program is a HUD program whereby HUD allocates funds by formula among eligible State and local governments to strengthen public -private partnerships and to expand the supply of decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable housing (with primary attention to rental housing), for very low-income families Household - A single occupied housing unit and all of its occupants. A household may be comprised of one or more families, one or more unrelated individuals, or a combination of families and unrelated individuals. Household Income - Combined gross money income of all persons who occupy a single housing unit. The household income can be comprised of the gross money income earned by one or more families, one or more unrelated individuals, or a combination of families and unrelated individuals who occupy a single housing unit. Housing Unit - A house, apartment, mobile home, or other unit, occupied or vacant, but intended for occupancy as separate living quarters. -I- Impact Fees - Costs charged to a developer to cover expenses relating to the provision of city services for a new development. Immigration - People moving from foreign countries to take up permanent residence in the local area. • • • • • • • • • • • • s • • • • • 41 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • i • • • Industrialized Housing - Modular or prefabricated units constructed off -site that meet local building codes and Texas Industrial Code specifications. Industrialized housing is exempt by State law from zoning restrictions. Infill Housing - Housing that is constructed on vacant lots within exiting developed neighborhoods. These lots usually contained houses at one time, but demolition of older housing stock has taken place. Rebuilding houses on these existing lots can provide affordable housing for citizens and revitalize central city neighborhoods. Infrastructure - Facilities necessary to provide city services, usually referring to physical assets such as roads, pipes, city buildings, etc but sometimes including personnel, management structure, etc. -J- -K- -L- Labor Force - Includes all persons 16 years old and older who are either employed or unemployed but actively looking for work and available to accept employment, plus the members of the Armed Forces. Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) - A federally funded program originally conceived in 1964 as a federal -state partnership program that was created to expand the nation's park and recreation system. A percentage of these funds are passed through to local governments to expand and enhance local park and recreation facilities. Land Use - Designations of how land is being used or is planned to be used in the future (e.g., single family, commercial, industrial, etc.). Land Use Classifications. Commercial • General Commercial - Retail goods, services, and offices serving the occasional needs of the surrounding residential areas. In addition to providing neighborhood goods and services, other uses may include specialty shops, small department stores, banks, auto services, and restaurants. May also include mixed -use development. • Mixed -Use Growth Center - Mixed -use, intensely developed high employment area, primarily commercial and residential in nature. May already exist as Downtown, malls, and the Medical District, or be newly forming subcenters of the City Concentrated development is encouraged at these nodes 3 to discourage low -density and stnp commercial suburban development. Incentives may be offered to achieve the desired density necessary to achieve public transportation and the highest and best use of valuable urban land. Mixed -use growth centers may have certain light industrial uses. • Neighborhood Commercial - Retail goods, services, and offices serving the daily needs of adjacent residential areas within three-quarters of a mile. Typical uses include convenience, drug, and grocery stores, as well as personal services such as dry cleaners, beauty shops, and video rental stores. May also include low -intensity mixed -use development. Industrial • Heavy Industrial - Uses that usually require production and transformation of materials. They may be objectionable uses such as concrete batching, rendering, storage of hazardous materials, and manufacturing. • Industrial Growth Center - An industrial growth center will primarily consist of industrial and commercial uses, with a high concentration of jobs, mostly industrial in nature. Other related and supporting uses include office space and services. Unlike mixed -use growth centers, residential uses are generally discouraged within industrial growth centers. • Light Industrial - Industrial land uses that are not noisy, polluting, or otherwise obnoxious. Uses include warehousing, outside storage, distribution/dispatch, research, and light assembly Institutional • Institutional - Public or quasi -public uses including schools (public and private), churches, cemeteries, human services agencies, government buildings (libraries, service centers, offices, jails), and utilities. Residential • High Density Residential - Multiple unit structures with over 24 units per acre. Mixed uses would be encouraged. Open space, building separation, and height would be considered on an individual basis. • Low Density Residential - Two or more units attached or detached on one lot or separately platted lots. May be referred to as duplexes, patio homes, row houses, or townhouses. These units may be rented or owner occupied. Density is usually less than 12 units per acre. • Manufactured Housing - Includes mobile homes constructed before 1976 and manufactured homes built to meet Department of Housing and Urban Glossary Development specifications. These units are constructed off -site and transported on a permanent chassis, and are designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities including plumbing, heating, air-conditionmg, and electrical systems. Permitted only in Manufactured Housing ("MH") zoning district. Manufactured housing is not to be confused with modular or industnalized housing. See defmition of Industrialized Housing. • Medium Density Residential - Multiple -unit, multi -story structures usually in a complex of five or more units under one ownership, condominium, or cooperative tenure. Most medium density residential developments share common open space and parking areas. Density is usually 12 to 24 units per acre, limited to three stories in height. • Rural Residential - One unit per structure and lot, independent of size or tenure. Structures may include site built, modular, or factory -built structures. Density is less than or equal to one unit per acre. • Single Family Residential - One unit per structure and lot, independent of size or tenure. Structures may include site built, modular, or factory -built structures. Density is usually less than eight units per acre. • Suburban Residential - One unit per structure and lot, independent of size or tenure. Structures may include site built, modular, or factory -built structures. Density is less than or equal to two units per acre. • 100-Year Floodplain - Normally dry land adjacent to a body of water and subject to a one percent chance of flooding in any given year • Infrastructure - Major rights -of -way for roads, railroads, and utilities, as well as railroad switching yards and airports. • Private Park, Recreation, Open Space - Private land used for active recreation, cemetenes, or passive land conservation. • Public Park, Recreation, Open Space - Public land used for active recreation, tourism, or passive land conservation. • River, Lake, Stream - Bodies of water • Vacant, Agricultural - One residential unit per structure on one plus acre lot with no City water or sewer service or land with no existing buildings, except for those related to mining, crops, or grazing. Ldn - Day -night sound level over a 24 hour penod. Ldn is used as a means of measuring long-term noise exposure m a community Sound is measured in decibels, Glossary 4 a means of expressing amplitude of sound. The higher the number of decibels, the louder the sound level. Most residential neighborhoods have an Ldn of 50 to 60 decibels. Level of Service - Means of rating the movement of vehicles on an arterial street. Service levels range from "A"- free flowing, to "F"- bumper -to -bumper congestion. Low -Income - Households whose incomes are over 50 percent but do not exceed 80 percent of the median income for the area, as determined by HUD with adjustments for smaller and larger families. However, HUD may establish income ceilings higher or lower than 80 percent of the median for the area on the basis of HUD's findings that such variations are necessary because of prevailing levels of construction costs or fair market rents, or unusually high or low family incomes. Note: HUD income limits are updated annually and are available from local HUD offices for the appropriate jurisdictions or from the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. Low -Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) - Credit against regular federal tax liability for investments in low-income housing projects acquired, constructed, or rehabilitated after 1986. The credit is available annually over a 10-year period. The term for compliance with requirements regarding tenant income, gross rents, and occupancy is 15 years. This is to encourage investments by corporations or high - income individuals in low-income housing. -M- Market Demand - The desire and ability to purchase or lease goods and services. Master Plans - Plans that are developed by individual departments within the City of Fort Worth and by individual agencies that provide greater detail than the Comprehensive Plan concerning departmental plans for future development and service needs. Master Plans generally detail anticipated services and general locations for public facilities such as schools, parks, libranes, and fire and police stations. Metropolitan Division - A county or group of counties within a Core Based Statistical Area that contains a core with a population of at least 2.5 million. A Metropolitan Division consists of one or more main/secondary counties that represent an employment center or centers, plus adjacent counties associated with the main county or counties through commuting ties. Metropolitan Statistical Area - A Core Based Statistical Area associated with at least one urbanized area that has a population of at least 50,000 The Metropolitan Statistical Area comprises the central county or counties containing the core, plus adjacent outlying counties having a high degree of social and economic integration with the central county as measured through commuting. Mission - A statement of core values and ultimate purpose. A mission reflects history • 110011.00 O 0•00 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••0•••••• and traditions, present culture and resources, and future expectations and intentions. Mixed -Use Development - Combination of different but compatible land uses within a single building, site or district. Moderate/Medium Income - Households whose incomes are over 80 percent of the area median income but do not exceed 120 percent of the area median income. The area median income is determined by HUD with adjustments for smaller and larger families. Multi -modal - A type of transportation system that incorporates multiple forms of movement: vehicular, public transportation, bicycle, aviation, and pedestrian. A solid multi -modal system minimizes congestion, improves air quality, and provides all citizens with the means of safe and efficient transportation. Multifamily Residential - Three or more dwelling units attached with a common wall regardless of ownership. Multifamily units are commonly known as apartments or condominiums -N- Neighborhood Unit - An area of approximately one square mile with a population of 3,000 to 6,000, typically bounded by principal arterial streets. The neighborhood unit is characterized by a centrally located neighborhood park. The Neighborhood Park is one of the primary components that comprise "local close to home park space" in the City of Fort Worth. Nonpoint Source Pollution - Pollution that does not originate from a single point. It is transported primarily by storm water runoff, and also discharges from solid waste disposal sites and septic systems. North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) - The regional planning agency for the Dallas/Fort Worth area. The agency assists local governments in the 16-county region in coordinating sound regional development, encouraging cooperation for mutual benefit, and planning for common need. -0- Objective - A statement of attainable, quantifiable, time -constrained achievement that helps accomplish goals. -P- Part I Offenses - Measure of crimes in communities (index) that include murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny -theft, arson, and auto theft. Part Time Employment - Employment status of an individual who works less than 5 35 hours per week at an income -producing job. Personal Income - Consists of wage and salary disbursements, profits from businesses that are not corporations, net rental income, dividends, personal interest income, and transfer payments (such as pensions and welfare assistance). It includes wages and salaries paid in -kind, the net rental value of owner -occupied houses, and the net value of food and fuel produced on farms. Capital gains are not included because they are not attributable to current economic activity Planned Development (PD) District - A zoning district that allows for a mix of land uses and development standards as outlined in a City Council— adopted plan. Policy - A predetermined directive of the City Council designed to guide thinking, decision making, and actions of decision makers and their subordinates in implementing goals or stated missions. Once a policy is adopted, it helps support or guide the creation/change of specific rules or strategies (such as development regulations, budgets, or supplemental plans). For purposes of the Comprehensive Plan, policies should be directly linked to stated goals. Policies are intended to guide implementation. Preservation Easement - A legal document that regulates the use of or changes to real property and may be given or sold by a property owner to a charitable organization or government body Once recorded, an easement becomes part of the property's chain of title and usually 'runs with the land' in perpetuity, thus binding not only the present owner who conveys it, but all future owners as well. A preservation easement gives the organization to which it is conveyed the legal authority to enforce its terms. Exterior and facade easements protect the outside appearance of buildings by controlling alterations and requiring maintenance; they may also control development and air rights of a building. Program - A formalized, defined strategy which has been authorized, funded, and/or designed for specific purposes. Can be long-range ongoing programs such as the national Low Income Tax Credit program or short-range, locally initiated programs. Project - A specific work -oriented program that has been created to achieve special purposes and has narrowly defined scopes and time frames. -Q- -R- Race - Categories of people based upon traits that may be inherited or passed through a gene pool. Rezone - An amendment to the map and/or text of a zoning ordinance to affect a Glossary change in the nature, density, or intensity of uses allowed in a zoning district and/or on a designated parcel or land area. Right -of -Way - Width of land available to incorporate all elements of a roadway, including traffic lanes, turn lanes, frontage roads, shoulders, medians, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and landscaping. A right-of-way may also contain certain public utilities. -S- Sidewalk - Layer of the streetscape that is dedicated exclusively to pedestrian activity Spatial - Relationship between locations or regions, such as distance, area, coincidence, or adjacency Special Exception - A use permitted in a specific zoning district if the Board of Adjustment determines that the use would be compatible with development of adjacent properties and would comply with other cnteria established by the zoning ordinance. Standard Industrial Classifications • Agriculture - Firms involved in the production of food crops, livestock, poultry, timber, game, other plant and animal products, and services related to the production of these products. • Mining - Firms involved in the extraction and processing of materials occurring naturally in the Earth's crust, including oil and gas exploration, drilling, and refining. • Construction - Firms engaged in building construction, remodeling, repair, and heavy construction such as highway and bridge construction or repair, and water and sewer line construction. • Manufactunng - Firms engaged in the mechanical or chemical transformation of agricultural and mining raw materials into final products. • Transportation, Communication and Utilities - Firms engaged in providing passenger or freight transportation, telecommunications services, water, sewer, gas, or electric utilities and all services of the U.S. Postal Service. • Trade - Firms engaged in selling and distributing raw matenals and final products between the producer and the final consumer, including retail and wholesale establishments. • Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate - Firms engaged in banking, lending, securities, commodities, underwriting, property ownership, brokerage, and Glossary 6 management. • Services - Firms providing a wide range of personal, professional, educational, membership, social, emergency, secunty services. Services closely related to another industry are classified with that industry Strategic Goal - A statement of purpose describing a critical, long-term outcome toward which the entire organization directs its efforts. Strategy - An administrative approach to achieve goals and/or policies. Streetscape - All the elements that make up the physical environment of a street and define its character This includes a combination of planters, sidewalks, street trees, street signs, street furniture, and street lights. Subdivisions - Division of a tract of land mto defined lots, either improved or unimproved, which can be separately conveyed by sale or lease, and which can be altered or developed. Sustainable Development - Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. -T- Tax Abatement - [see abatement] Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) - The Texas state agency for highway, bridge, public transportation, and other state -sponsored construction. TxDOT deals with both rural and urban transportation projects throughout the State. The projects are managed through a district structure with a statewide transportation commission. Traffic Calming - The practice of using physical devices or roadway design techniques to reduce automobile speeds, usually in residential neighborhoods and parking facilities. Calming measures include, but are not limited to, 85% low speed limits, speed humps, narrow lanes, curb bulb -outs, and on -street parking. Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) - TODs are dense urban development areas located within 1/4 to 1/2 mile of commuter rail stations, modern streetcar stops, and similar fixed -route transit stations. Successful TODs contain a mix of uses, includmg higher density residential, and are carefully designed to be pedestrian -friendly and specifically oriented to the transit station or stop TODs accommodate growth more efficiently that low -density subdivisions, while supporting increased use of transit and its associated traffic congestion and air quality benefits. -U- Underemployment - Individuals working in jobs requiring a lower skill -base than •. • • • • l• • • •` • • • • • • • • • • • • • •i • • • • •• • • • j•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• their training or abilities permit. typically through the use of native drought -resistant vegetation. Undevelopable Land - Land that has significant regulatory or cost constraints based -Y- on site conditions. For example, portions of the 100-year floodplain are undevelopable. -Z- Urban Village - A highly urbanized place that has a concentration of jobs, housing units, commercial uses, public spaces, public transportation, pedestrian activity, and a sense of place. Villages are frequently located at significant intersections. Within this relatively compact geographic area, different land uses are found side -by -side or within the same structures. Use Permit - Discretionary and conditional review of an activity, function, or operation on a site or in a building or facility The review generally precedes the actual operational use. -V- Variance - Departure from any provision of the zoning requirements for a specific parcel, except use, without changing the zoning ordinance or the underlying zoning of the parcel. The Board of Adjustment grants variances only upon demonstration of hardship based on the peculiarity of the property in relation to other properties in the same zoning district. Veloweb - Interconnected network of off-street trails designed for bicycle commuters. The trails will provide access to employment centers, schools, shopping, and parks. Because the trails will have few signalized or stop sign intersections, and will go over or under major roadways, the veloweb is a safe and efficient way to commute. Vision - A mental image of a possible and desirable future state. It succinctly conveys and reinforces a shared long-term view of where a community wants to be, and serves as the basis for developing goals, objectives, policies, and strategies. -W- Watershed - Topographical areas that catch precipitation and drain to specific water bodies or aquifers. Wetlands - Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. -X- Xeriscaping - Landscaping that conserves water and protects the environment, Zoning - Division of land into districts based on the allowable use of the land. These districts have uniform zoning regulations including those on land use, height, setbacks, lot size, density, and coverage. 7 Glossary