HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 11328e > '~ ~ a.
Y
ORDINANCE NO.,~,~nCiQ
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35, WATER AND SEWERS, OF
THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT WORTH ( Y 98 6 } , AS AMENDED , BY
AMENDING EXHIBIT A, INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO
SECTION 35-70.2(a}; FURTHER, BY AMENDING EXHIBIT 8,
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO SECTION 35-70.2(b);
FURTHER, BY AMENDING SCHEDULE ~, INCORPORATED BY
REFERENCE INTO SECTION 35-70.3(a}; FURTHER, BY AMENDING
SCHEDULE 2, INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO SECTION
35.70.3<b); FURTHER, BY AMENDING EXHIBIT C, INCORPORATED
BY REFERENCE INTO SECTION 35-71.(a); FURTHER, BY AMENDING
EXHIBIT D, INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO SECTION 35-
72(x); FURTHER, BY AMENDING EXHIBIT E, INCORPORATED BY
REFERENCE INTO SECTION 35°76.(x); FURTHER, BY AMENDING
EXHIBIT F, INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE TNTO SECTION 35-
77.(x); MAILING THIS ORDINANCE CUMULATIVE OF PRIOR
ORDINANCES AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES AND PROVISIONS OF
THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT WORTH IN CONFLICT HEREWITH;
PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITX OF FORT WORTH,
TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
Exhibit A, incorporated by reference into Section 35-70.2(x)
of the Code of the City of Fort Worth (1986) , as amended, is hereby
amended and, after having been so amended, shall be and read as
shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 2.
Exhibit B, incorporated b,y reference into Section 35-70.2(b)
of the Code of the City of Fort Worth (1986), as amended, is hereby
amended and, after having been so amended, shall be and read as
shown on Exhibit B, attached hereto.
O~ICU! RECORQ ''~
CITY SECRf TARY
f 1. WORTH, TEX.
> > ~ 1
SECTION 3.
Schedule 1, incorporated by reference into Section 35-70.3(a)
of the Code of the City of Fort Worth (,1986), as amended, is hereby
amended and, after having been so amended, shall be and read as
shown on Schedule 1, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
Schedule 2, incorporated by reference into Section 35-70.3(b)
of the Code of the City of Fort Worth (1986), as amended, is hereby
amended and, after having been so amended, shall be and read as
shown on Schedule 2, attached hereto.
SECTION 5.
Exhibit C, incorporated by reference into Section 35-71.(a)
of the Code of the City of Fort Worth (1986), as amended, is hereby
amended and, after having been so amended, shall be and read as
shown on Exhibit C, attached hereto.
SECTION 6.
Exhibit D, incorporated by reference into Section 35-72.(a)
of the Code of the City of Fort Worth (1986), as amended, is hereby
amended and, after having been so amended, shall be and read as
shown on Exhibit D, attached hereto.
SECTION 7.
Exhibit E, incorporated by reference into Section 35-76.(a)
of the Code of the City of Fort Worth (1986), as amended, is hereby
amended and, after having been so amended, shall be and read as
shown on Exhibit E, attached hereto.
2
a~~~~r~ t~~C~1p Li.
C11Y SEC~4~TA~~
F1. WOR~I~,
SECTION 8.
Exhibit F, incorporated by reference into Section 35-77.(a)
of the Code of the City of Fort Worth (1986), as amended, is hereby
amended and, after having been so amended, shall be and read as
shown on Exhibit F, attached hereto.
SECTION 9.
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 10.
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.
iibi~ooo-ooi.oan 3
OFFlCIAL RECUl10
CITY SECRETARY
LR. WORTH, TEX.
SECTION 12.
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and
effect from and after June 5, 1993.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
4 ~
City Att e/y ~~ ~~~--~ s~r~~-
!' Date : 6 f ZL g~
ADOPTED: l° ~~- ~ 3
EFFECTIVE : G _ ~ '
iibi~ooo-ooi.oan 4
OEFiCIAI RECORD ~
CITY SECR~'ARY
FT. WORTH, TEX.
SCHEDULE I
WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE
METER EQUIVALENCY WATER WASTEWATER
SIZE ~'~ FACTOR IMPACT FEE IMPACT FEE
3/4" 1 890.00 967 00
1" 1.67 1,486.30 1,614 89
1-1/2" 3 33 2,963.70 3,220 11
2" 5.33 4,743.70 5,154 11
3" 10 0 8,900 00 9,670 00
4" 16.67 14,836.30 16,119 89
6" 33.33 29,663.70 32,230 11
8" 53 33 47,463.70 51,570 11
10" 76 67 68,236.30 74,139.89
92138701.FEE
OFFICIAL RI:COR~J
CITY SECRETARY
~T. wo~Tlf, T~z.
1
n ~
SCHEDULE 2
WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE
COLLECTION SCHEDULE
METER EQUIVALENCY WATER WASTEWATER
SIZE FACTOR IMPACT FEE' IMPACT FEE"
3/4' 1 356.00 580.20
1' 1.67 594.52 968.93
1-1 /2' 3.33 1,185.48 1,932.07
2` 5.33 1,897.48 3,092.47
3' 10.0 3,560.00 5,802.00
4' 16.67 5,934.52 9,671.93
6' 33.33 11,865.48 19,338.07
8' 53.33 18,985.48 30,942.07
10' 76.67 27,294.52 44,483.93
Water is 40% of the total maximum assessable amount.
** Wastewater is 6096 of the total maximum assessable amount.
OFFICIAL RECORD
CITY SECRETARY
FT. WORTN, TEX.
EXHIBIT A
~ LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
WATER FACILITIES
~ 1993-2013
June 2, 1993
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
WATER FACILITIE S
1993-2013
Prepared for:
CITY OF FORT WORTH
WATER DEPARTMENT
Prepared by:
CARTER :: BURGESS
Consultants in Engineering, Architecture,
Planning and the Environment
3880 Hulen Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76107
(817) 735-6000
June 2, 1993
C&B No. 92138701E
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ENABLING LEGISLATION 1
BACKGROUND 1
WATER SERVICE AREA 1
SERVICE AREA POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT 4
THE EXISTING WATER SYSTEM 8
IMPROVEMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE WATER
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN 9
FIGURES:
1 -WATER SERVICE AREA 3
2 - NCTCOG FORECAST DISTRICTS 12
TABLES:
1-TOTAL EXISTING AND PROJECTED POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
DATA WATER WHOLESALE CUSTOMERS 5
2 -WATER SERVICE AREA EXISTING AND ESTIMATED POPULATION
AND EMPLOYMENT DATA 7
3 -SUMMARY OF POPULATION FORECASTS 8
EXHIBITS:
A -METHODOLOGY USED IN PREPARING DEMOGRAPHIC ESTIMATES 10
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
WATER FACILITIES
1993-2013
ENABLING LEGISLATION
Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 395 states that a political subdivision imposing an
impact fee shall update the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan at least
every three years The initial three year period begins on the day the Capital Improvements
Plan is adopted
The City of Fort Worth adopted Ordinance No 10601 on June 5, 1990, entitled "An
Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 -Water and Wastewater -Establishing Water and
Wastewater Impact Fees "The purpose of the present document is to update those land use
assumptions and assumptions about population growth and employment prepared for the
Ordinance No 10601 in 1990 in accordance with the applicable state law
BACKGROUND
This document updates the previous land use assumptions for water facilities and the
summaries of assumptions about population growth and employment in Fort Worth adopted
in the 1990 Ordinance for the 1990 to 2010 period. This document adopts the previous
methodologies of use of population and employment populations for making the basic land
use assumptions Also, this document will address the land use assumptions for the twenty
year period from 1993 to the year 2013
WATER SERVICE AREA
The City of Fort Worth provides service to its customers in what is known as the water
service area. The water service area is defined as the water benefit area plus all the
wholesale water customers The water benefit area is defined as that area within the city
limits of Fort Worth and its ETJ where water service is provided on a retail basis
By City Charter, the City of Fort Worth Water Department provides retail water service to
the citizens of Fort Worth. The Water Department services approximately 137,085 retail
water accounts located within the City's corporate limits at the present time
' 92138701.81 Page I
' In addition to the retail water sales, the Department also provides wholesale potable water
service to twenty-six (26) wholesale water customers in Tarrant County by contract.
Generally, the wholesale water customers are suburban communities lying either within or
adjacent to the Fort Worth corporate limits Total current service area population,
including both retail customers and wholesale customers, is approximately 649,785 The
' wholesale water customers which are served at the city limits of Fort Worth include all or
parts of
Benbrook
Burleson
D/FW International Airport
1 Edgecliff Village
Forest Hill
Haslet
Keller
Lake Worth
Richland Hills
' Sansom Park
Tarrant County MUD #1
Trophy Club MUD #1
Wentworth Village
Bethesda Water Supply Corp
Crowley
Dalworthington Gardens
Everman
Haltom City
Hurst
Kennedale
North Richland Hills
Saginaw
Southlake
Trinity River Authority (TRA)
Westover Hills
White Settlement
The water service area for the years 2003 and 2013 is shown on Figure 1 The service area
boundaries are strategic planning boundaries which were defined by the 1989 Water Master
,~ Plan Study and are still considered appropriate for the years 2003 and 2013
' 92138701.81 page 2
ROANOKE
tROPNr cwe
WESILAKE (~'
NASLET
_ ~ SOI7TN LAKE
PELICAN BAY
KB1EA
013
-~~ `// EO(iE(Ylfi rRLAOE .~.
-~-aiyY/ _ KENNEDALE
BENBROOK ~ ~Sf N~
/^~ EVERMAN _
BETNESDA WATER CORP
OFW AIRPORT
DALWORTNINGTON GARDENS
t; r
-t-'d
I
FIGURE -1. WATER SERVICE AREA 2003 /2013
Page 3
SERVICE AREA POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
1 This portion of the document presents land use assumptions which consists of populations
and employment projections for the water service area for the years 1993, 2003 and 2013
The demographic data used in all summaries and shown as 1993 is the data as of December
31, 1992 These assumptions, which are considered as the most fair and equal basis for
distribution of capital costs, will be the basis for development of a capital improvements
plan and the resulting impact fee for water facilities within the City of Fort Worth.
Historically, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) has been the
official population planning agency for the north central Texas area. Based upon the U S
Population Census, which is conducted each ten years, the NCTCOG will prepare
population forecasts for the sixteen county region encompassed by its boundaries The 1990
U S Census of Population having been completed, the NCTCOG was at the time of
preparation of this document in the process of assembling data for regional, county and
municipal population forecasts, however, the population forecasts were not completed in
time for use in this document. The last population forecasts prepared by NCTCOG was in
' 1988 and was based on 1980 U S population data. Those forecasts were the basis for the
land use assumptions for the original 1990 Water/Wastewater Impact Fee Ordinance
For this document, population and employment forecasts developed for the Fort Worth
Water Service Area are based largely upon information provided by the records of the Fort
Worth Water Department wholesale customers Estimates of population and employment
for the City of Fort Worth were prepared by demographic consultants with the forecast
results being reviewed and approved by the Fort Worth Planning Department. Similarly,
each wholesale customer also reviewed and concurred with the population and employment
forecast for their own municipality or service area. Thus, population and employment
forecasts contained in this document have been approved by the effected wholesale
customer The summary of total wholesale customer forecasted population and employment
for Fort Worth and wholesale customers for the years 1993, 2003, and 2013 is shown on
Table 1 Methodology for preparation of the demographics for the Fort Worth Water/
Wastewater Service Area is described more fully in "Exhibit A" attached.
92138701.81 Page 4
R R r r r MN MR- RR I ER RN- UM N SR n--
TABLE 1
TOTAL EXISTING AND PROJECTED POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT DATA
WATER WHOLESALE CUSTOMERS
Wholesale Customer
BENBROOK
BETHESDA
BURLESON
CROWLEY
DALWORTHINGTON GARDENS
D/FW AIRPORT
EDGECLIFF VILLAGE
EVERMAN
FOREST HILL
FORT WORTH
HALTOM CITY
HASLET
HURST
KELLER
KENNEDALE
LAKE WORTH
N RICHLAND HILLS
RICHLAND HILLS
SAGINAW
SANSOM PARK
SOUTHLAKE
T C. MUD #1
TRA GRAND PRAIRIE (1)
TROPHY CLUB
WESTOVER HILLS
WESTWORTH VILLAGE
WHITE SETTLEMENT
TOTALS
* Forecast Assistance by Consultant
(1) Population based 1 million gallon per day contract with FWWD, 110 gallon per day per capita consumption.
RESIDENTIAL
1993 I 2003 a 2013
19,766 31,300 45,060
18,000
16,164
7,000
1,920
0
2,750
6,000
11,490
*450,877
32,800
825
33,765
14,700
4,200
4,606
47,646
9,754
8,600
4,000
7,983
4,500
9,090
4,515
672
2,350
15,240
739,213
20,000
19,060
8,740
2,700
0
3,000
*6,500
11,600
*482,450
33,128
1,875
35,980
23,300
5,500
5,061
57,120
9,888
9,030
4,000
17,900
6,500
0
8,202
717
2,500
15,800
EMPLOYMENT
1993 I 2003 I 2013
3,000 6,290 9,000
24,000 0 0 0
21,330 5,450 8,860 11,360
10,654 *1,780 *1,952 *2,690
3,500 500 600 800
0 53,000 67,000 82,000
3,300 600 700 750
*6,700 500 *550 *600
11,850 1,150 1,240 1,450
*511,355 *322,800 *386,600 *458,800
33,459 *11,560 *14,650 *19,200
4,261 200 1,000 3,272
38,533 19,568 22,860 24,456
35,000 *1,905 *5,075 *8,550
8,000 *1,360 *1,805 *1,995
5,574 3,000 3,300 3,630
67,800 11,700 16,430 21,160
10,554 5,595 6,977 8,412
9,482 3,426 4,615 6,150
4,000 *745 *794 *890
26,000 *1,650 *4,359 *7,225
9,000 160 300 500
0 0 0 0
12,211 *207 *413 *704
762 18 25 29
2,500 *280 *405 *585
16,430 3,700 4,020 4,590
821,851 921,315 453,854 560,820 678,798
4/20/93
92138701.R1 Page 5
' The percent of the total population and employment to be served by Forth Worth in
accordance with the 1989 Water-Wastewater Master Plan was calculated by first dividing the
total water usage of each wholesale customer by its total population to obtain the per capita
water usage The total water supplied by Fort Worth to the wholesale customer was then
divided by the per capita usage to obtain the number of people served. Fuially, the number
of people served by Fort Worth was divided by the total population of each wholesale
~' customer to obtain the percent of total population served by Fort Worth. An example of
the calculation.
Ciry of Crowley Total Population A
Total Water Usage of the Ciry of Crowley B cud
Per Capita Usage of the Ciry of Crowley B/A = C andc
Water Supplied by City of Fort Worth
to the Ciry of Crowley = D end
Number of People Served by
Fort Worth's Water D evd / C audc = E
Percent of People Served by
,, Fort Worth's Water in the Ciry of Crowley E/A =
Table 2 shows the percentage of projected population and employment for each wholesale
customer served by the City of Fort Worth.
Additionally, awater/wastewater and future land use survey was sent to each wholesale
customer of the Fort Worth Water Department. A question on the survey asked for the
wholesale customer's estimate of the total per cent of their water usage for the years 2003
and 2013 anticipated to be purchased from the Fort Worth Water Department. In those
instances that the question was not answered, the above calculation was used, otherwise, the
' data contained in Table 2 was prepared on the basis of the wholesale customer survey
responses
The 1993 population in the Fort Worth Water Service Area is estimated to be 649,785 It
is anticipated that by the year 2003 the Fort Worth Water System will be serving 719,962
people and by the year 2013, it will increase to 794, 728 people The employment population
for Fort Worth is approximately 402,869 in 1993 and employment population is estimated
to be 497,149 in the year 2003 and increase to 600, 825 by the year 2013
Background and methodology used for demographic forecast is described in "Exhibit A"
attached.
92138701.81 Page 6
1 s- I E-- E MI M- O r- r all E OM i
TABLE 2
WATER SERVICE AREA
EXISTING AND ESTIMATED POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT DATA
WHOLESALE CUSTOMER
BENBROOK
BETHESDA (1)
BURLESON
CROWLEY
DALWORTHINGTON GARDENS
D/FW AIRPORT
EDGECLIFF VILLAGE
EVERMAN
FOREST HILL
HALTOM CITY
HASLET (2)
HURST
KELLER
KENNEDALE
LAKE WORTH
N RICHLAND HILLS
RICHLAND HILLS
SAGINAW
SANSOM PARK
SOUTHLAKE
T C. MUD #1
TRA GRAND PRAIRIE
TROPHY CLUB
WESTOVER HILLS
WESTWORTH VILLAGE
WHITE SETTLEMENT
TOTALS
% SERVED
1993
2
4
98
82
48
29
100
43
100
100
0
93
98
0
25
70
49
75
0
100
90
66
100
100
40
% SERVED
2003/2013
5
16
100
100
68
33
100
38
100
100
0
93
97
0
30
70
60
100
0
100
98
85
100
100
39
POPULATION
1993 2003 2013
395
775
15,840
5,740
922
1,565 2,253
3:100 6,000
19,060 21,330
8,740 10,654
1,836 2,380
0 0 0
2,750 3,000 3,300
2,580 2,470 2,546
11,490 11,600 11,850
32,800 33,128 33,459
0 0 0
31,401 33,461 35,836
14,406 22,601 33,950
0 0 0
1,151 1,383 1,672
33,352 39,984 47,460
4,778 5,933 6,332
6,450 9,030 9,482
0 0 0
7,983 17,900 26,000
4,050 6,370 8,820
9,090 0 0
2,980 6,972 10,379
672 717 762
2,350 2,500 2,500
6,096 6,162 6,408
EMPLOYMENT I
1993 2003 2013
30 189 270
5,341 8,860 11,360
1,450 1,952 2,690
240 408 544
20,670 22,110 27,060
600 700 750
215 209 228
1,150 1,240 1,450
11,560 14,650 19,200
200 1,000 3,272
18,785 21,250 22,744
1,867 4,923 8,294
0 0 0
750 825 1,089
8,190 16,430 21,160
2,742 4,186 5,047
2,570 4,615 6,150
0 0 0
1,650 4,359 7,225
144 294 490
0 0 0
137 351 598
18 25 29
280 405 585
1,480 1,568 1,790
198,051 237,512 283,373 80,069 110,549 142,025
Source: Individual Wholesale Customers * Population and employment up to December 1998.
(1) Population based on 250,000 gallons per day contract equal to 250 meters x 3.1 persons per meter
(2) Haslet has a single nonresidential customer using Fort Worth Water.
4/20/93
92138701.R1 Page 7
TABLE 3
SUMMARY OF POPULATION FORECASTS
' FORT WORTH
WHOLESALE CUSTOMERS
TOTAL POPULATION SERVICED
POPULATION EMPLOYMENT
1993 2003 2013 1993 2003 2013
450,877 482,450 511,355. 322,800 386,600 458,800
198,908 237,512 283,373 80,069 110,549 142,025
649,785 719,962 794,728 402,869 497,149 600,825
' THE EXISTING WATER SYSTEM
The existing Fort Worth Water System consists of several major components Currently,
Fort Worth receives its entire raw water supply through long-term contractual arrangements
with the Tarrant County Water control and Improvement District No 1 (TCWCID) Raw
water sources owned by the TCWCID include Eagle Mountain Lake, Lake Bridgeport,
Cedar Creek Reservoir, and Richland-Chambers Reservoir
The water distribution system consists of all the pipelines, pump stations, and storage
t facilities necessary to supply potable water to customers The system is divided into eight
pressure planes These pressure planes include Holly Pressure Plane, Eastside II Pressure
Plane, Southside II Pressure Plane, Southside III Pressure Plane, Westside II Pressure
' Plane, Westside III Pressure Plane, Northside II Pressure Plane, and Northside III Pressure
Plane The distribution system consists of approximately 2,300miles of water mains, ranging
' in size from 2 inches to 66 inches in diameter
Raw water is treated at one of four water treatment facilities prior to entering the
distribution system. The four water treatment plants currently treating raw water are the
North Holly Water Treatment Plant, the South Holly Water Treatment Plant, the Rolling
Hills Water Treatment Plant, and the Eagle Mountain Water Treatment Plant. The
combined capacity of the North and South Holly Plants is approximately 160 million gallons
per day (MGD), the capacity of the Rolling Hills plant is 160 MGD, the capacity of the
Eagle Mountain plant is 30 MDG
1
92138701.81 PQBQ 8
' IMPROVEMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE WATER
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
The 1989 Water Master Plan Study identified and recommended projects which include
- construction of a water treatment plant and improvements and expansion of the distribution
' system ,which includes pipeline, pump stations and storage facilities In addition, the Ciry
has participated with the TCWCID to provide future improvements, which includes the raw
water supply to Fort Worth with the construction of the Richland-Chambers Reservoir and
' certain transmission and related facilities The basis for calculating impact fees will be the
General Benefit Facilities capital improvements as described in the amendment to the
wholesale customer agreement. Also included will be a portion of the cost of the
construction of Richland-Chambers Reservoir and related facilities The cost of
improvements to the distribution system piping will not be included in the Water
Improvements Plan. The time period of the Water Improvements Plan is from year 1993
' to year 2003
1
r
92138701.81 Page 9
t
EXHIBIT A
' METHODOLOGY USED IN PREPARING
DEMOGRAPHIC ESTIMATES
J
1
' BACKGROUND
The demographic data used in the land use assumptions report for the original Fort Worth
Impact Fee Ordinance adopted in June, 1990, were based upon the resources of the North
Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) Regional Data Center The NCTCOG
' Regional Data Center is responsible for maintaining the demographic data for the nine
county Fort Worth/Dallas Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area. The demographic
data is maintained for the counties, municipalities and smaller geographic areas called
Traffic Survey Zones in the nine county area. The demographic information used in the
1990 Fort Worth Impact Fee Ordinance was based upon the NCTCOG forecast data which
was based upon 1980 U S Population Census
' The demographic data prepared for this document was intended to be based upon the
NCTCOG demographic forecasts which were to be based upon the more recent 1990 U S
' Population Census However, due to the requirement of meeting a specific date for the
adoption of the 1993 updated Impact Fee Ordinance by the City of Fort Worth and the
timing of the release of the updated demographic forecasts by the NCTCOG, a deviation
from the previous demographic methodology is in order for this (1993) document.
' BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEMOGRAPHIC FORECAST
METHODOLOGY
Understanding that populations forecasts are a fair and equitable means to make
assumptions about existing and future land uses, this document draws heavily upon the
water/wastewater system users assistance in the preparation of the system population
forecasts (i.e land use assumptions) Letter surveys were taken asking each wholesale
customer to review their future growth plans and provide their forecasts of populations for
the years 1992, 2003, 2013 This request also included a similar question related to their
anticipated employment population for the same years
' Several wholesale customers and the City of Fort Worth did not have sufficient data to
make forecasts for either populations or employment population, or both, for the forecast
period. Population estimates for those wholesale customer were prepared and have been
' based upon.
• Comparative analysis of the 1986 estimates of population for wholesale
i customers and the 1990 U S Population Census count for the customers to
determine the extent of change from the NCTCOG 1986 forecast and the
actual population count.
• Use of the NCTCOG compounded annual growth rate for .the subject
wholesale customer from 1990 U S Census to the NCTCOG estimate of
' population for 1992
92138701.81 Page 10
r • Use of the Texas State Comptroller of Public Accounts forecast of population
and incomes for the Fort Worth MSA Cities not included in the City of Fort
Worth Water/Wastewater Service Area were factored out of the
Comptroller's forecasts
' • Analysis of 1990 population, usable land, non-usable land and rates of growth
for each Forecast District in the Fort Worth Water/Wastewater Service Area
to establish high growth potential Each Forecast District was also analyzed
' in terms of its extent of existing and planned access to major utilities (1989
Water Master Plan), extent of major access availability to the Forecast
District (freeway extensions, major thoroughfare planned for the Forecast
District, etc) and numbers of mid-high income and high income households
• NCTCOG identification of high population growth rate Forecast Districts
^ • Comparisons of population forecasts made by NCTCOG in 1986 to the
preliminary population estimates of this document coupled with analysis of
' national and regional population trends, and economic growth indicators as
determined by national demographers to ensure that the estimates provided
in this report are in a range of reasonable growth. In no case does this
' document change any of the population or employment population provided
by wholesale customers on the returned survey questionnaires
Upon completion of the preliminary demographic estimates, each wholesale customer was
shown their demographic estimates and were ask to approve or concur that the estimates
' are acceptable prior to the formalization of this document.
1
t
C'
92138701.81 P°ge ~~
264.2
25~,. 0
258.0
265.0 I 277.0
257.
264.1
?_79.0
278.01
256.0
263. 0 275. 276.0
249.0 255. 271 284.
25 0 26 0
2
284. 1
245. 287.0
24 0
261.0 282. 0
24
.~
1.0 2
288.
24
242. 281. 28 .0 286. 289
234.
231 2 1 0 .0201.0 208.0
23 0
222 0 203
235.0 0 21 20 .0 206.1
223.0
202
213. . _
205.0
225.
226.
22
.0 206.2
227 0 214.0 215.0 206.3
228.0
229.0
216.
217.0
NCTCOG FORECAST DISTRICTS
FIGURE 2~
_ Page 12
EXHIBIT B
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
WASTEWATER FACILITIES
1993-2013
June 2, 1993
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
~ WASTEWATER FACILITIES
~ 1993-2013
Prepared for:
CITY OF FORT WORTH
WATER DEPARTMENT
Prepared by:
CARTER :: BURGESS
Consultants in Engineering, Architecture,
Planning and the Environment
3880 Hulen Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76107
(817) 735-6000
June 2, 1993
C&B No. 92138701E
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ENABLING LEGISLATION 1
BACKGROUND 1
WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA 2
TRA SERVICE AREA LOCATED IN FORT WORTH 4
SERVICE AREA POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT 4
EXISTING WASTEWATER SYSTEM 8
IMPROVEMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE WASTEWATER
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN 8
FIGURES:
1 -WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA 3
2 - NCTCOG FORECAST DISTRICTS 11
TABLES:
1 -TOTAL EXISTING AND PROJECTED POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
ESTIMATES FORT WORTH AND WHOLESALE CUSTOMERS
2 -ESTIMATED POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT SERVED BY VCWWTP
EXHIBITS:
A -METHODOLOGY USED IN PREPARING DEMOGRAPHIC ESTIMATES
6
7
9
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
WASTEWATER FACILITIES
1993-2013
ENABLING LEGISLATION
~ Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 395 states that a political subdivision imposing an
impact fee shall update the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan at least
every three years The initial three year period begins on the day the Capital Improvements
Plan is adopted.
The City of Fort Worth adopted Ordinance No 10601 on June 5, 1990, entitled "An
Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 -Water And Wastewater -Establishing Water and
Wastewater Impact Fees "The purpose of the present document is to update those land use
assumptions and assumptions about population growth and employment prepared for the
Ordinance No 10601 in 1990 in accordance with the applicable state law
BACKGROUND
i This document updates the previous land use assumptions for wastewater facilities and the
summaries of assumptions about population growth and employment in Fort Worth adopted
in the 1990 Ordinance for the 1990 to 2010 period. This document adopts the previous
methodologies of use of population and employment populations for making the basic land
use assumptions Also, this document will address the land use assumptions for the twenty
year period from 1993 to the year 2013
92138701.82 Page I
' WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA
The City of Fort Worth provides service to its customers in what is known as the wastewater
service area. The wastewater service area is defined as the wastewater benefit area plus all
the wholesale wastewater customers The wastewater benefit area is defined as that area
within the city limits of Fort Worth and its ETJ where wastewater service is provided on a
retail basis
Included within the wastewater service area are the areas served by the Trinity River
Authority (TRA), and twenty-three (23) wholesale customers, all or parts of which are
served by the Fort Worth Wastewater System. Pursuant to contracts, Fort Worth provides
each wholesale customer with wastewater services at the Fort Worth city limits The
wholesale customers are
1 Arlington * Benbrook
Blue Mound Burleson
r Crowley Edgecliff Village
Everman Forest Hill
Haltom City Hurst
Kennedale Lake Worth
North Richland Hills ** Pantego
Richland Hills River Oaks
Saginaw Sansom Park
Tarrant Count MUD #1 TRA ***
Westworth Village White Settlement
Westover Hills
* Also serves Dalworthington Gardens
** Also serves Watauga
' *** Three party contract serves a portion of North Richland Hills and Hurst.
The wastewater service area for the years 2003 and 2013 is shown on Figure 1 The service
area boundaries are strategic planning boundaries which were defined by the 1989
Wastewater Master Plan Study and are still considered appropriate for the years 2003 and
2013
This document presents land use assumptions which consist of population and employment
estimates for the wastewater service area for the years 2003 - 2013 The assumptions will
- be the basis for the development of a capital improvements plan and impact fee for
wastewater facilities within the service area of Fort Worth.
921381O1.R2 Page 2
~.s v
RONNOKE
~~
~~ •~ ~
• .~~
•• HASIET
•••
PELICAN BAY I
___
..
"~ ~~~~ w 2003 /2013
1
~- l _~
BtLIE MOIIN .
O YVATABGA
1AK61OE
LAKE WORM + i5K1ST
SANSOM PARK ~~ IIKlS
__. ___.
.. ~ HAl70M CRY
WFSfVVORTH WILAGE
'~ °^~ 2013_
WHITE sEnLt#iEHr
_wESr
rneL Inccs
_
,. 8~~ , ~ B~„~
~
- ._. _
..
BENBBOOK vaL ACE
/ - ~ ,
-.... -
P
ORFSf M41: KDINmA LE
I r
EVEAMAN
- ~.
_._ -
BERESDA WA1HI CORV~
® W : . .
HOLESALE CUSTOMER eunlES O„
YEAR 2003 WASTEWATERS C
\
1 YEAR 2013 WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA
C
T
I
IES NOT INCLUDED IN SERVICE AR
D FORT W
ORTH AREA WASTEWATER TREA BY TRA
FIGURE 1. WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA
..
2003 /2013
~~
' TRA SERVICE AREA LOCATED IN FORT WORTH
As indicated in Figure 1, the small area at the far eastern edge of Fort Worth (Centreport
Area, Post Oak Village, and Mosier Valley) is within the Trinity River Authority wastewater
service area Also, portions of the area in northern Fort Worth which cannot be served by
gravity sewers to the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant will be served under
contract by the TRA.
1 The northern area in question drains to two different TRA sewersheds Big Bear Creek and
the Denton Creek. The portion of the area in the Big Bear Creek sewershed will be served
by TRA's Big Bear Creek Interceptor Future Fort Worth sewers will connect to the new
TRA interceptor near the town of Keller Treatment will be provided at TRA's existing
Central Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant.
1 The area of Fort Worth north of the Big Bear Creek system is in TRA's Denton Creek
Regional Wastewater System service area. The Fort Worth sewers connect to the TRA
Henrietta Creek and Cade Branch Interceptors and to a trunk extending to Alliance Airport.
r Treatment is provided at the Denton Creek Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant.
SERVICE AREA POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
Historically, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) has been the
official population planning agency for the north central Texas area. Upon the completion
of the U S Population Census, which is conducted each ten years, the NCTCOG will
prepare population forecasts for the sixteen county region encompassed by its boundaries
The 1990 U S Census of Population having been completed, the NCTCOG was at the time
of preparation of this document in the process of assembling data for regional, county and
municipal population forecasts, however, the population forecasts were not to be completed
in time for use in this document. The last population forecasts prepared by NCTCOG was
in 1988 and were based on 1980 U S population data Those forecasts were the basis for
the land use assumptions for the original 1990 WaterlWastewater Impact Fee Ordinance
Population and employment forecasts developed for the Fort Worth wastewater service area
'~ are provided by the records of the Fort Worth Water Department wholesale customers
Estimates of population and employment for the City of Fort Worth were prepared by
demographic consultants with the forecast results being reviewed and approved by the Fort
Worth Planning Department. Similarly, each wholesale customer reviewed and concurred
with the population and employment forecast for their own municipality or service area.
Thus, population and employment forecasts contained in this document have been approved
by the effected wholesale customer The methodology for preparation of the demographics
for the Fort Worth Water/Wastewater Service Area is described more fully in "Exhibit A"
attached
^
92138701.82 Page 4
' A portion of the west side of the City of Arlington falls in the service area of the Village
Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (VCWWTP) This portion of the City of Arlington has,
by contract with the City of Fort Worth, been served by the VCWWTP The existing
contract between the two cities expires in February 2001 Fort Worth notified Arlington in
1989 of its intent to terminate service at the conclusion of the contract. At this time it is
~ not known how service to that area of Arlington will be provided and by whom.
'Table 2, "Population and Employment Served by VCWWTP," shows a service area
population of the City of Arlington which is the estimated population served by VCWWTP
in 1993 prior to the time of expiration of the existing contract. This is done to ensure that
adequate wastewater capital facilities are in place to serve that population until the year
1 2001 The Wastewater Service Area map shown as Figure 1 indicates the Wastewater
Service Area for the City of Fort Worth for the years 2003 and 2013 That portion of the
City of Arlington served by the contract which will expire prior to 2003 is not shown.
Table 1 summarizes the total Fort Worth and wholesale wastewater customers projected
population and employment for the years 1993, 2003 and 2013 However, due to
topographic constraints of the wholesale customers, only areas served by gravity are included
in the estimates of projected population and employment. Table 2 reflects the changes and
summarizes the population and employment for the years 1993, 2003 and 2013 of the service
area served by the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (VCWWTP) The total
projected population estimated to be served by the VCWWTP is also illustrated in Table 2
The current population in the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant service area and
the Fort Worth area served by the Trinity River Authority (TRA) is estimated to be
approximately 765,562 Approximately 9,000 are served by private or individual disposal
systems but are in the Fort Worth Service Area. Those persons generally are those in newly
annexed areas and who have not yet been extended wastewater service or those on privately
' owned wastewater systems, such as the Oak Grove area. It is estimated that by the year
2003, the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant will serve 741,428, and by the year
2013, the service population will be an estimated 809,012
92138701.82 Page 5
F
H
W
~~
oa
W
Y~I
/-~ 0
W
' ~U
W
o
~w
a ~~
~
F ®
~A
~~
~x
c~
® 0
~
~
' ~~
~
w
1
r
O ~ O
O ~ ~ O
O O
~ O
O O
V1 O
O g ~0
V' v1
1 O~ O
M ~ O
O N
.-. 0
~ 0
~ 0
O~ 0
O ~0
M O~
N V1
00 O
~ M
~
O
O
.--
~
~ M
.-.i
~p
N
00
(~
~p
~'
~
.-i
~
00
N
O~
et
d
O~
~ .--
~p
~ M
•-
.--
+ N
i .-.
~
~ 00
~
~
.
-
~
i 00
~'
v1 ~
^
V7
~'
~ ~
N
~--~
*
~
*
N
io-
N
* N c} ONO
~
v.
~ o
H ~
~Wy O
0o ~ O
~ ~ vN'~ 0
~ 0
I ~ 0
~ 0
N 0
~ 0
~ 0
~ v'~
0 O
O O
M O
V'1 t~
t~ O
V7 ~
•--~
~
O
~ v~
N ir1
O O
N t~
t~ o
c
~ N oo O~ 0
0 0
0 M er ~-- w O~ M ~O ~ M O~ ~ O M o
'~ p l~ ~p 00 .--~
* ~' .~ ~
M eY N
N .--~
iF M ~0
~--~ •--~
iE ~p •--~ V ~' ~ '~'
~
~ is
o
N ""~ ,% ~
a
w ~
N o
O ,r,
~ o
~ o
~ o
~ o
~ o 0
~ 0
0 0
~ oo
~ o
M o
p
S o g ~n
~ o
N ~o v, ~ o ,~0 ~ 0O ~ ~,
M
Q~ M
t0
M
V1
^~ h .
-i
.--~ 0
0
N
•--~
CT
•--~
Cn ~
•.~ O
•••~
V1
,-~ ~
M ~
'x' .-r h
..~ N
iF ~ O~ a~
~
O~
~ O~ 1F N
~ .-~
.)(. .~ iF .--~ iF , M ~
~ v
y
C
O
.
O
O
~D
O
O
~A
M
O
M
M
eh
~
~O
O
0
V~
O
M
O
0
l~
O
h
00
~1
N
M
O~
V7
e
M
M
V
O
C C
~
t~
0
O
0
O
et
V7
O
O
N
00
p
O
O
O
N
d'
N
O
0
O
~
~A
M ~
y
7
~
j ) p try 00 ~p t/~ O !t O O O ~ V
'1 O
O c
C ~ N N O M M ~ ~ „~,+ M M 0p V7 E N O [~ O~ eF O~ .-~ N ~ N y N
~ T
~
a s
~
E.y
O
~
O
O
O
Vl
O
~D
O
'd'
p
S
o
O
o
O
o
O
o
~
oo
N
o
00
o
~
o
o
oo
~
g
o
c~
g
~
~
o
o
0
^~ ~~
.~
M M O t~
0 t~ O
M V7 ~O et .-.
M a~ h O ~ h 0
0 O O O ~ et ~ h 0
0 ~
A C ~ M N ~ 0 N ~ ~ ~ < M l/'1 U1 ~ N O~ [~ O~ et ~O N N .~..i C w c
~
i
0
o
~
~
C/1 r- _
U c
a
c
00
M
~ ~O
~D
~ O
O
~'?
~
^' O
pp
O O
N
O~ O
V7
t~ O
O
O O
O~
et l~
t~
00 O
O
00 H
~D
l~ O
O
N ~D
O
~D ~O
~ .-+
l~ X
V1
~ 0
O 0
O
~ 0
O 0
O O~
O N
~ O
V1 O
!t 00
.--~ ~ ~,
e
~
[~
O~
N
~C
l~
.--i
N
~
ri
O
N
M
~
tt M
N l
~ O
~ D
00 O
[f h
~ V ~ M
N N O ~ o
y~
~~
~
"'~
N
•--~
•--~
•--~
~
M
M ~ N ~ ~
O~ v
i a
i
~ .
o
.g y
U a
o e
v] a.°~ d
z
w o~
`" ~
a ~~ ~
0 o ~ ~~
~
w
¢ ~ a z ~
°
~ o
~
a _
x
a
~
~
~ ~.o
~A~ s
_ A
z Z > a x H F A x ~ ~ x x F °~a d
o
~ Z
O
O
O
~
x
w
H
~yi.
F~ a
~
x H
O ~
U w
¢
¢
A
~
a"
~
¢
~+
W
~ r~.
z o
3
o
o
~ O
~
w
a w/
W
o
a
¢
~
H
3
~
A Q
3
a
x Q
o
z
¢
o
3
¢
~
A
x
C7
x W
>
0
~, (~
a p.
H
~ ,~
~OcS
z
~ a
co
w w
a
3
3 U
w
x ~
w
H o
H H
~ w
z U w a x z o
~
¢ o 3 w ~ ~~0 3
a
z
x
rx
o
a
c~
w
rx
x
a
~
z
a~ ~
a H
z
~
~ ~
o ~
z
a H H H
~
~
~ ~
¢ owa ~ ~ ~ A w w O ° x x ~ a z a a a ~ ~ ~
H 3 w
3 w
3 x
3 ~ o
.
~
a
0
_M
N
O~
W
O
a
N W H
A~
~U
1 a ~'
ppqq
~
E
-~ a A
as
a
~
1 W
W
O g
O 0
O 0
~
M 0
~
~O 0
O 0
V'1 0
O O
~ O ~O
~ ~
C~ O
M O
~O C
O N
.-- O
~ V' 0
1 ~ 0
O~ 0
O `0
M 0~
N N
DD O
Q~ M
Cr1 ~
~
M
..w
O~ .-r
~°-~
N 00 l~ ~D
'x' ~t
.~ N
O~ !f O w ~O
M ~ N ~
~ et
~ ~
~ 00
* V'~ M v'1
* N M
M
p
N .~ ~1E ~--i
iF N * N dF N ~ M
N
,..~
z
p 0
N 0
.--~ 0
00 N
O~
~p O
[~ O
V1 O
N O
~O O
00 vl
00 p
M O
~t O
..~ l~
O~ O
M tI'1
t0 ~
~ O
~ ~
~ y~
N ,~
~ O'
O l~
~
O O
N 'K' ~--~ N iF .--~
°
a
W can
~D O
O ~ ~
C 000
t~ 0 0 0 ~
' ~
V1 ~ ~ 0 0
~ 0 ~ O N ~
~7 0
~O M
O pp
..,.~ 0
0p 0
O 00
O
M V7 ~D V7 ^
~ ~ M O l w ~ N ~ ~ .--~ h N ~ 11')
O~
..y ~-+ iF .--~
*. .-r
O
0
N
0
0
~D
O
0
~
M
0
M
M
l/')
~D
0
h
.-~
0
0
M
0
O
[~
0
h
00
C~
tI')
e!'
~
M
•-+
O
O
O
~t
l~
h
v1
~--~
O~
O
~'
yNj
O
Op
O
N
~
cow
p
~
~
~
N
~D
~
O
O
O
M
00
M >.
~
~
M
C ~ N N O M M ~ ~ M M o0 ~ ~ N O t~ O~ ~t O~ ON N ~ O
~''~ M u
a U
.o
e!
~ a
0
r
I O g O
~ O
~ O
'ct O
M O
O O
O O
O o0
N O~
~O O
O ~
~O ~n
M O
O 00
00 O
O O
M O
O pp
O N
~ ~ O O ~
M M O [ c!' O N ~ ~ ~A V'1 O N ~ 00 O O O ~ N ~ V1 00 ~O
W O M N O~ 00 N M ~ .~-i M M ~ V'i ~ N O~ [~ O~ of ~ ~ O N ~ ~ o
A N N °'
~ ~
~W
/
~ ~ '
1
1 C
~
t ~O
~
l~ pp
O
M ~}
~D
~--~ O
O
O OG
N
t~ O
~A
t~ O
O O
O~ O
O
CO v~
O
~O O
O ~O
O ~"~
~O
~ .-.
n et
V~ O
p O
0 O
0 O
0 e!'
0
~
N
~O
.~-i ~'
~
`
~
O~
N
~G
l~
.-~
N O
~O ~ N
~ ~O
~ l M
N t~
O~ O
l~ ~D
00 O
~ ~
~ N
O ~p M
N N
v ~D
V' 3
~
ry ~ M M ~ N l
"'" I
~ ~
M ~
z O
~~
w °'
•o
~
~
E A
x
¢
a
G .;
o
o
z
z ~
~ ~
>
a y,
~
w
~ x
A a
x
~
~
~ ~
x >
x w
H ~~~
~~~
3 o o ~ ~ a o a ¢ ~, ~ A 3 a
x o z
¢ o 3
¢
~ a
A o
x > o ~
~ ~~~
z~
z ~ w ~ 3 3 w a w ~ ~ z W ~ H a x z o ~ ¢ ~ ~ w ~,~~-
a
x
¢ z
w
a~ a
a
aa x
x
a~ o
x
c~ a
¢
A ~
A w
> x
o a
¢ a
A z
~
~¢ a z
¢ x
~ w
> c~
¢ z
¢
c~ H
¢ ~
w ~
w ~
x F"
O ~~~
w~
w w w x x a z a x rx ~ ~ H 3 3 3 3 H
a
0
_M
N
D\
r~
TABLE 2 continued
PROJECTED POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT SERVED BY VCWWTP
FORT WORTH
WHOLESALE CUSTOMERS
TOTAL POPULATION SERVICED
POPULATION ESTIMATES EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES
1993 2003 2013 1993 2003 2013
*441,877 *473,450 *502,355 322,800 386,600 458,800
345,617 **290,650 **330,638 92,508 100,927 123,333
787,494 764,100 832,993 415,308 487,527 582,133
* Excludes private wastewater systems and septic tanks ** Excludes Arlington service
EXISTING WASTEWATER SYSTEM
Fort Worth's existing wastewater system consists of a collection system network and a single
treatment facility The existing collection system consists of over 2,100 miles of gravity sewers
ranging in size for 6 inches to 96 inches in diameter In addition, TRA provides additional
treatment facilities serving the far eastern and northeastern edge of Fort Worth.
The Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant uses a conventional activated sludge process Raw
wastewater entering the plant passes through barscreens then receives primary clarification,
activated sludge treatment, disinfection with chlorine and dechlorination with sulfur dioxide prior
to discharge into the Trinity River Primary sludge is degritted and thickened using gravity
thickeners The waste activated sludge is thickened with dissolved air flotation thickeners and
combined with the primary sludge, and then both are anaerobically digested The digested sludge
is either dewatered in belt presses or dried in drying beds and then reused beneficially
IMPROVEMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE WASTEWATER
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
The 1989 Wastewater Master Plan and the 1989 Facilities Plan update have identified projects,
which include the expansions of the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant capacity by twenty-
four million gallons per day, and included in the Capital Improvements Plan are aeration basins,
final clarifiers and a dechlorination facility For the purpose of calculating potential impact fees
for wastewater facilities, only treatment facilities which serve projected growth within the corporate
limits of Fort Worth will be included in the Capital Improvement projects for wastewater facilities
Also, included will be a portion of the construction cost of TRA's treatment facilities The cost of
improvements related to the collection system will not be included in the Wastewater
Improvements Plan. The time period of the Wastewater Improvements Plan is from year 1993 to
year 2003
92138701.82 Page 8
J
EXHIBIT A
METHODOLOGY USED IN PREPARING
DEMOGRAPHIC ESTIMATES
' BACKGROUND
' The demographic data used in the land use assumptions report for the original Fort Worth
Impact Fee Ordinance adopted in June, 1990, were based upon the resources of the North
Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) Regional Data Center The NCTCOG
' Regional Data Center is responsible for maintaining the demographic data for the nine
county Fort Worth/Dallas Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area. The demographic
is maintained for the counties, municipalities and smaller geographic areas called Traffic
Survey Zones in the nine county area. The demographic information used in the 1990 Fort
Worth Impact Fee Ordinance was based upon the NCTCOG forecast data which was based
upon 1980 U S Population Census
The demographic data prepared for this document was intended to be based upon the
NCTCOG demographic forecasts which are to be based upon the more recent 1990 U S
' Population Census However, due to the requirement of meeting a specific date for the
adoption of the 1993 updated Impact Fee Ordinance by the City of Fort Worth and the
timing of the release of the updated demographic forecasts by the NCTCOG, a deviation
from the previous demographic methodology is in order for this (1993) document.
' BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEMOGRAPHIC FORECAST
METHODOLOGY
Understanding that populations forecasts are a fair and equitable means to make
assumptions abut existing and future land using this document draws heavily upon the
water/wastewater system using assistance in the preparation of the system population
forecasts (i.e land use assumptions) Letter surveys were taken asking each wholesale
customer to review their future growth plans and provide their forecasts of populations for
' the years 1992, 2003, 2013 This request also included a similar question related to their
anticipated employment population for the same years
' Several wholesale customers and the City of Fort Worth did not have sufficient data to
make forecasts for either populations or employment population, or both, for the forecast
period. Population estimates for those wholesale customer were prepared and have been
' based upon.
• Comparative analysis of the 1986 estimates of population for wholesale
' customers and the 1990 U S Population Census count for the customers to
determine the extent of change from the NCTCOG 1986 forecast and the
,~, actual population count.
• Use of the NCTCOG compounded annual growth rate for the subject
wholesale customer form 1990 U S Census to the NCTCOG estimate of
population for 1992
92138~O1.R2 page g
i~l
~u
i
~l
~~
0
~ Use of the Texas State Comptroller of Public Accounts forecast of population
and incomes for the Fort Worth MSA. Cities not included in the City of Fort
Worth Water/Wastewater Service Area were factored out of the
Comptroller's forecasts
• Analysis of 1990 population, usable land, non-usable land and rates of growth
for each Forecast District in the Fort Worth Water/Wastewater Service Area
to establish high growth potential Each Forecast District was also analyzed
in terms of its extent of existing and planned access to major utilities (1989
Water Master Plan), extent of major access availability to the Forecast
District (freeway extensions, major thoroughfare planned for the Forecast
District, etc) and numbers of mid-high income and high income households
• NC'TCOG identification of high population growth rate Forecast Districts
• Comparisons of population forecasts made by NCTCOG in 1986 to the
preliminary population estimates of this document coupled analysis of national
and regional population, and economic growth indicators as determined by
national forecasters to ensure that the estimates provided are in a range of
reasonable growth. In no case does this document change any of the
population or employment population provided by wholesale customers on the
returned survey questionnaires
Upon completion of the preliminary demographic estimates, each wholesale customer was
shown their demographic estimates and were ask to approve or concur that the estimates
are acceptable prior to the formalization of this document.
92138701.82 Page 10
264.2
25~,. 0
258.0
264.1
265.01 277.0
256.0
257.
?_79.0
278.01
263. 0 275. 276.0
249.0 255. 271 284.
25 0 26 0
2
284.1
245.' 287.0
24 0
261.0 282. 0
24 .~
1.0 2
288
24
242.
281. 28
.0 286. .
289
234.
231
2 21 .0
1.0 201.0 208.0
23 0
222 0 203
235.0 0 21
20 .0
206.1
223.0
213. 202.
205.0
225. 2
26.
0 22
0 206 2
'
227 0 214.0 215.0 206.3
228.0
229.0
216.
217.0
N CTC O G FORECAST DISTRICTS
FIGURE 2
Page 11
EXHIBIT C
~~
3
_r~
t-'ti ;
KBI~{a
iO1~8T 1~1
EY6WAN .
,L_.. ,. ~
.~
lEt~64DA wA7ER CqV
WATER SERVICE AREA 2003/2013
r
e.n~n~~ o
~ Capital
i 1 mprovements
~ Pan
For Determination Of
r
t
t
Water Impact Fees
Prepared For.
-~
Fort wo,tn
Water
Department
June 2,1993
°•~P~` o~ ~~~~~~
N .~....
G. D. MfOOLETON ~
~ ,~ 40518 p ~f~~
~~
Prepared By
CARTER & BURGESS, INC.
in association with
CH2M HILL
Contents
Page
Executive Summary ......................................... 1
Introduction .............................................. 3
Eligible Facilities ........................................... 4
Raw Water Sources and Transmission ...... .... ............ 4
Water Treatment Plants ... .... ... .... .... ... ... 4
Pump Stations ........... .... .. ... ................ 6
Storage Tanks .......... ........... ........ 6
Engineering Studies ..... ......... .... .... ..... .. 7
Capacity Criteria ... . ....................................... 8
Raw Water Sources and Transmission ....... .... .... ... ... 8
Water Treatment Plants .. ........ .. .. .. 8
Pump Stations ....... ...... .... ... .... .. .. . 9
Storage Tanks ................ .. .. 10
Facility Requirements ....................................... 12
Raw Water Sources and Transmission ... ......... ...... 12
Water Treatment Plants ........ ........ ... 12
Pump Stations .... ..... ........ ..... ... ........ 15
Storage Tanks .. .... ... ...... .... .....:... 16
Engineering Studies .. ... .... ... 16
Service Unit Determination ................................... 17
Appendix A. CIP Projects
Appendix B Pumping Capabilities
Appendix C Distribution System Storage
Appendix D Meter Summaries
w
~t
Executive Summary
Water Capital Improvements Plan
~I
` This report contains the Water Capital Lnprovement Plan (WC1P) for determination of
impact fees. When combined with the Carter & Burgess, Inc. report titled "Land Use
`~ Assumptions -Water Facilities, 1993-2013" (Land Use Assumptions) the WCIP provides
the necessary engineering calculations and justification for determining the maximum
assessable unpact fee under the Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 395. This report
updates the initial CIP and impact fee study performed by the Fort Worth Water
Department in 1990 The impact fee law requires that the reports and impact fee
ordinance be updated every three years and the impact fee revised, if necessary.
The general approach to the WCIP preparation was similar to the 1990 study. As in
~~ 1990, the Fort Worth Water Department chose to exclude the water distribution system
from the WCIP which lowered the maximum assessable fee but also significantly reduced
the complexity of the WCIP.
The WCIP analyzed what facilities would be required to serve growth between the years
1993 and 2003. Eligible facilities included in this study were treatment plants, pump
stations, storage facilities, and engineering studies. The present and future capacity of
these facilities was analyzed based on the Fort Worth design criteria found in the 1989
Water Master Plan, system operating records over the past 20 years, and the Land Use
Assumptions. The following table compares the results of the 1990 and 1993 studies.
1.0
~1
WCII' Costs $54,187,919 $ 30,558,978
Total Equivalent Meters 64,616 34,318
Maximum Assessable Impact Fee $839 $890
The following items are changes made for the 1993 WCIP along with the inpact (1990
versus 1993) on the maximum assessable fee.
Equivalent meter factors have been changed to more accurately reflect the
maxunum system demand the respective size meter exerts on the system.
This item increased the maximum fee for the 3/4 inch meter but lowered
the fee for larger size meters
~' 2. Inactive meters have been excluded from the service unit determination
since these meters exert no demand on the system. This item increased the
maximum fee
~:
DFWIITHX35i34.AU1E?CBCS[JM
t
~~ 3. Fire st
orage is no longer included in deternuning elevated storage needs
This item decreased the fee
~~.
4. The Northside Satellite Service Center has been deleted from the WCIP It
' was doubtful that this project would be built in the next ten years because
,~'' of changes in system operations. This item decreased the fee.
~~ 5. The costs for the Master Plan Study were allocated over ten years rather
than a 20 year basis because Master Plans are typically updated every ten
years This item increased the fee.
6 As shown in the Land Use Assumptions, population projections have
dropped considerably since the 1990 study. The projects and the allocations
in the WCIP have been adjusted to reflect the revised population forecasts
Generally this lowers the fee because fewer newer facilities are required to
meet the growth.
The maximum assessable impact fee fora 3/4" water meter was found to be $890, which
is up from $839 in the 1990 study The primary reason for this increase was the
~ adjustment of equivalent meter factors and the deletion of the inactive meters. Although
the maxunum unpact fee fora 3/4" meter increased, larger size meters will actually be
~~ paying less than before since the new equivalent meter factors are lower. For example,
` the maxunum charge fora 2" meter under the 1990 study would be $839 tunes an
equivalent meter factor of 7 or $5,873 Under the new maximum rates, the charge would
rI be $890 times an equivalent meter factor of 5.33 or $4,744
The impact fee calculated in this report is the maximum assessable fee. The City of Fort
Worth is legally allowed to charge any impact fee up to the maximum amount. Lower
fees may be adopted to encourage growth. The difference between what is required by
by the WCIP and the amount collected through impact fees will need to be made up
through higher water rates or other sources of revenue.
1
DFWIITEX35134.A01EXECSLJM
a
City of Fort Worth, Texas
Water Capital Improvements Plan
for Determination of Impact Fees
INTRODUCTION
This document contains the water Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for determination of
~~,- impact fees for the City of Fort Worth, Texas and calculates the maximum assessable fee.
This study updates the report prepared by the Fort Worth Water Department in 1990.
The City of Fort Worth provides water to retail as well as a number of wholesale
customers in Tarrant County as described in "Land Use Assumptions -Water Facilities,
1993 - 2003"(Land Use Assumptions) The purpose of the CIP is to identify those
projects which will be required to be constructed to serve new growth occurring in the
Fort Worth service area between the years 1993 - 2003 The water service area is defined
as the water benefit area plus all the wholesale customers. The water benefit area is
defined as that area within the city limits of Fort Worth and its extraterritorial
jurisdictions where water service is provided on a retail basis. Population projections
found in the Land Use Assumptions report have been used when determining the size and
quantity of new facilities. Detailed sizing and sitting of facilities within the Fort Worth
system is beyond the scope of this project. For impact fee determination purposes,
projects identified in the 1989 Fort Worth Water Master Plan (Master Plan) or other
projects which conform to the general system needs determined in this study have been
selected for inclusion into the CIP
The impact fee includes only that portion of the cost of an improvement which is directly
related to new growth. Those projects required to allow the system to serve present
customers such as upgrades and additional treatment processes are not included except to
the extent that they have excess capacity which will also serve future growth. Likewise, it
may be cost effective to oversize some expansion projects to take advantage of economies
of scale. For impact fee purposes, however, only that portion which serves growth in the
1993 - 2003 study period is included.
The impact fee will be determined based on the number of service units projected to be
added in the i0-year study period. This study assumes a 3/4' water meter to be the
standard service unit for both water and wastewater. Other size meters will be assessed a
higher rate based on the hydraulic capacity of the meter as described later in this report.
DFW i \TEX35134.A0\RPT001.51
L
1
ELIGIBLE FACILITIES
~` The impact fee law allows all those projects which were undertaken to serve growth
during the study period to be included in the impact fee calculation. This includes costs
for the development of raw water sources, transmission lines, treatment plants, collection
or distribution systems, pump stations, storage tanks, customer service facilities, and
engineering studies. The City of Fort Worth has elected not to include the water
distribution system in the impact fee calculation. This decision simplifies the calculation
but lowers the total allowable fee which can be collected. The following paragraphs
briefly describe the existing facilities in the Fort Worth Water System and lists those
projects which may be eligible for consideration in the CIP. Figure 1 shows the physical
location for these projects. Appendix A describes each of the projects in greater detail.
Raw Water Sources and Transmission
The City of Fort Worth currently has five sources of raw water:
• Lake Worth
• Clear Fork of Trinity River via Lake Benbrook
• Richland Chambers Reservoir
• Cedar Creek Reservoir
• Eagle Mountain Lake
The costs associated with construction of the raw water sources is reflected in the raw
water rate structure and proportional to the amount of water withdrawn. Since the raw
~1 water supplier has already included these costs in the rate structure, they aze not eligible
`°- for inclusion into the impact fee calculation: The cost for raw water pump stations and
transmission mains, however, may be included if they aze owned and operated by Fort
'~ Worth The intake structure and raw water pipeline built to serve the new Eagle
Mountain Water Treatment Plant are examples of this type of facility. They may be
included in the CIP to the extent that their capacity is used to serve growth during the
study period.
Water Treatment Plants
The Fort Worth system currently has four water treatment plants in operation. The oldest
plants are the North Holly and South Holly plants which have a combined capacity of 160
_' million gallons per day (MGD) The third plant is the Rolling Hills WTP which was built
in 1973 with an 80 MGD capacity and expanded in 1983 to a total capacity of 160 MGD
,~ The Eagle Mountain WTP has a capacity of 30 MGD and was completed in 1992. The
present total available treatment capacity is 350 MGD.
r
DFwi 1TEX35134.AO~RPT001.51 4
t
1
~~'
"i
~'
4
a
`~ The Master Plan identifies two additional projects which may be needed to accommodate
future growth. These area 30 MGD expansion of the Eagle Mountain plant (Phase II)
and another 70 MGD expansion of the Rolling Hills plant (Phase III).
Pump Stations
The Fort Worth system contains fifteen pump stations with a combined capacity of 330
MGD (200 MGD firm) in the distribution system. In addition, each water treatment plant
has a pump station with the combined capacity of these stations equalling 637 MGD (535
MGD firm) These pump stations transfer water among the various pressure planes and
customer cities as well as helping maintain pressure in the system. Appendix B lists the
pump stations presently in the Fort Worth system.
The water Master Plan identifies three projects which were anticipated to be needed
during the study period. These were:
• 40 MGD expansion of Randoll Mill Pump Station
~_ • New 46 MGD pump station at North Beach Street
• New 0 5 MGD Westland Tank Pump Station
Storage Tanks
Fort Worth has both elevated and ground storage tanks within their distribution system..
Tanks are classified as elevated or ground based on their overflow elevations and the
pressure in the pressure plane to which they are allocated. A tank may act as a ground
,~ storage tank to one pressure plane and an elevated tank to a lower pressure plane. A
tanks volume may only be allocated once, however, so a tank which has its water
allocated as elevated storage in a lower plane may not be counted as ground storage in the
pressure plane in which it physically resides.
The Fort Worth water system currently has 19 storage tanks within the distribution
~, system, ranging in size from 0.5 to 9 2 MG. A list of the existing storage tanks and the
pressure planes in which they are allocated is shown in Appendix C. The system contains
54 7 MG of storage classified as elevated and 71 2 MG of total storage.. In addition to the
,~ storage within the distribution system, each water treatment plant has ground storage
available. This storage capacity is:
~~ -
North Holly 9 MG
South Holly - 12 MG
Roiling Hills - 17 MG
Eagle Mountain - 7 MG
'1!~ Total 45 MG
~~ DFW 1 \TEX35134.AO~RPT001.51 ()
t
~~{
The latest Fort Worth Capital Improvements Plan identifies seven projects which are
,+; anticipated to be required during the study period. These are:
• 6 MG ground storage at Como
• 2 MG elevated storage in Blue Mound (Harmon Rd.)
• 2 MG elevated storage in Eastside II Low
• 4 MG ground storage at Alta Mesa
• 2 MG elevated storage in Westside IV
• 2 MG ground storage in Southside II
• 2 MG ground storage in Westside IIi
~, In addition, storage at the water treatment plants will need to be increased as the capacity
of the plants is increased.
Engineering Studies
There are several engineering studies which are eligible for inclusion alto the CIP The
following is a brief list of the projects.
,S 1 1989 Master Plan -This comprehensive engineering report projected growth
and analyzed growths effect on the Fort Worth Water System through the
year 2010 The project was required to guide the capital improvement
program and ensure construction in a planned and cost effective manner
2. 1999 Master Plan -This comprehensive engineering report will update and
extend the 1989 Master Plan Study It will analyze the effect growth has
on the Fort Worth system through the year 2020 and will guide the capital
improvements program during those years.
3. Water Impact Fee Update -This engineering report is required by law
every 3 years in order to verify that the impact fee charged new customers
to the system is reasonable and proportionate to their impact on the system.
The original impact fee was approved in 1990 so reports during this study
period will need to be performed in 1993, 1996, 1999 and 2002
' ~,
DFWI\TEX35134.A0\RPT001:51 7
CAPACITY CRITERIA
Raw Water Sources and Transmission
The City of Fort Worth has a long term contractual agreement with the Tarrant County
Water Control and Improvement District No 1 to obtain as much raw water as desired.
The sources of raw water are therefore considered adequate at present and throughout the
study period
The raw water pumping facilities and transmission lines aze sized based on the rated
capacity of the plant they aze serving. As such, they aze allocated to future growth in the
same proportion as the water treatment plants. Facilities which feed the Holly and Rolling
Hills plants have been in place for some time and are considered to only serve existing
customers. The facilities associated with the Eagle Mountain WTP can be allocated to
future growth as described under the "Water Treatment Plants" section of this report.
Water Treatment Plants
The water treatment plants should be designed with a total rated capacity equal to the
systems maximum day demand. The Master Plan identified the maximum day demand for
Fort Worth only as 1 90 times the average day use based on historical data. For the
wholesale customers, the maximum day was computed in the Master Plan based on 2.3
times average day These factors were re-evaluated based on five more years of historical.
data and found to still be reasonable. Therefore they will be used in computing maximum
day demand. For the entire system, the weighted average of the max day to average day
ratios based on number of connections is 2.02.
The Master Plan also identified the expected average day flow. It was determined that the
j average consumption per capita per day would be 226 gallons for the entire system, again
based on historical records. The Master Plan further stated that the consumption rate per
capita was not increasing over time. A re-evaluation of the historical data seemed to
indicate that per capita consumption was increasing slightly over time, although an
analysis is difficult due to the widely variable average usage due primarily to weather
conditions and the level of economic activity The re-evaluation did confirm, however,
~; that 226 gallons per capita-day (gpcd) was a reasonable design average flow for the
system It was determined that any future increases in per capita consumption during the
study period would be slight and probably offset by planned conservation measures.
Therefore, the consumption rate was considered to remain constant.
DFW 1 \TEX35134.A0\RPT001.5 i 8
~'
The maximum day demand was computed as follows.
MAX = AVG x FACT
Where MAX = Maximum Day Consumption Per Capita
AVG = Average Day Consumption .Per Capita = 226
FACT = Max Day/Avg Day Factor = 2 02
MAX = (226) x (2.02) = 456 gpcd
Based on 1993 populations as provided in the Land Use Assumptions, the maximum day
equals.
Max. Day = 456 gpcd x 648,928 capita
Max. Day = 296 MGD
In the year 2003, the maximum day would equal
,~
r Max Day = 456 gpcd x 719,962 capita
~ Max. Day = 28 MGD
Based on these figures 32 MGD (328 MGD minus 296 MGD) of treatment capacity is
required to serve future growth.
Pump Stations
The state (Texas Water Commission) requirements for pump station capacity is 0 6 GPM
per connection for cities with an elevated storage capacity greater than 200 gallons per
connection such as Fort Worth. On a system wide basis, this computes to a required
pumping capacity of• (0 6 GPM/conn) x (208,317 corm.) x (24 hrs/day) x (60 min/hr) _
180 MGD Since much of the water is pumped more than once to reach the more distant
and higher pressure planes, on a system-wide basis this capacity underestimates the
pumping required. In addition, the state requirements are minimum values and if greater
pumping capacity is required to meet demand and maintain system pressure, then it must
be provided
,~ The City of Fort Worth uses the requirement that pumping capacity must equal the greater
of peak hour flow or the maximum day flow plus fire flow On a system-wide basis in
1993 the required pumping capacities compute to:
~~ Pump Capacity = Max Day x Peak Hour factor
= 296 x 1 4
Pump Capacity = 414 MGD
V
Where:
,~~
DFWi\TEX35134.A0\RP`T001.51 9
~~
Max Day =
Peak Hour Factor =
System Maximum Day Flow (from previous
section)
Peak Hour/Max Day factor from Master Plan
Or, based on fire flow plus max day:
Pump Capacity =
Max Day + Fire Flow
296 + 46
304 MGD
where fire flow is based on Ft. Worth and state criteria requiring a 4000 GPM fire flow
per pressure plane
Fire 4000 GPM x 60 min/hr x 24 hr/day x 8
pressure planes
= 46.0 MGD
Therefore, the controlling factor will be peak hour demands and the pumping capacity
required to serve existing customers will be 414 MGD in 1993
In the year 2003, the peak hour pumping capacity required is:
Pump Capacity = 328 x 1 4
= 459 MGD
1
t
1
i
These calculations show 45 MGD of pumping capacity (459 MGD - 414 MGD) is
required to serve growth in the years 1993 to 2003
Storage Tanks
State water system design criteria require 200 gallons per connection of total storage and
100 gallons per connection of elevated storage. Since Fort Worth provides storage to
many of its wholesale customers, all wholesale customers were treated as retail customers
when computing the amount of storage required by Texas Water Commission criteria.
The computed state storage requirements are:
1993 Total = 200 gaUconn. x 208,317 Conn. = 41 7 MG
Elevated = 100 gaUconn. x 208,317 cone. = 20 8 MG
2003 Total = 200 gaUconn. x 232,077 Conn. = 46.4 MG
Elevated = 100 gal/conn. x 232,077 Conn. = 23 2 MG
DFW 1 \TEX35134.AOUtPT001.51 10
These requirements are well below the 116.2 MG of total storage (71 2 MG in the
distribution system plus 45 MG at the water treatment plants) and 54.7 MG of elevated
storage in the Fort Worth System. Again, the state requirements are minimum, however,
and must be increased if required on an operational basis. Design criteria used by Fort
Worth are:
Total .Storage = Avg. Day Consumption (Ft. Worth Only)
Elevated Storage = 1) Operational Storage + Fire Storage
or 2) State Fire Standards
Presently 7.7 MG of elevated storage in the Fort Worth system is dedicated to fire
storage. Fire storage was based on a 4000 GPM fire fighting flow for 4 hours to each of
the eight pressure planes. For the purpose of calculating impact fees, the fire storage
volume has been subtracted from available elevated storage and will not be included when
calculating future demands for elevated storage. This leaves 54.7 - 7.7 = 47 MG of
available elevated storage and changes the criteria for elevated storage capacity to
Elevated Storage = Operational Storage
Fort Worth average day consumption was found in the Master Plan to equal 231 gpcd.
Operational storage has been determined based on historical data to be 20 % of the
maximum day flow The storage required is computed as follows:
1993 Total Storage = (231) (450,877) = 104 MG
Elevated Storage = .20 (296 MGD) = 2 MG
2003 Total Storage = (231) (482,450) = 111 MG
~~ Elevated Storage = 20 (328 MGD) = 65.6 MG
The controlling design basis for total storage is 104 MG in 1993 and 111 MG in 2003
For elevated storage the basis is 59.2 MG in 1993 and 65 6 MG in 2003
i
A
1
DFW 1\TEx35134.A0\ItP'i'o01.51 11
,~
Facility Requirements
This section justifies the projects selected for the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) and
allocates their cost to existing, planning period, and beyond planning period customers.
Table 1 summarizes the projects selected for the CIP and shows $30,558,978 worth of
projects can be directly attributable to growth during the study period. The actual project
costs were used when available and Master Plan projections were used on future projects.
The following paragraphs describe the allocation and justification for each of these
projects.
Raw Water Sources and Transmission
As previously discussed, the City of Fort Worth is provided as much raw water as
required by the TCWCID No. 1. The cost for developing these raw water sources is
included in the rate structure to the City and are not included in the impact fee
calculation
'`~ The raw water pump station and transmission line for the Eagle Mountain WTP are
,~ included, however, since it was built by Fort Worth to serve the same mix of customers
as the Eagle Mountain WTP. As such, its costs are allocated the same as the water
treatment plant described in the following section.
Water Treatment Plants
The current capacity of water treatment plants in the Fort Worth system is 350 MGD As
~~ described previously, the maximum day demand is expected to rise from 296 MGD at
present to 328 MGD in the year 2003 Figure 2 graphically shows the water demand and
treatment capacity available during the study period. It is assumed that the entire capacity
of the two Holly plants (160 MGD) and the first phase of the Rolling Hills plant (80
MGD) are dedicated to existing customers. In order to determine the allocation between
~, Rolling Hills Phase II and the Eagle Mountain WTP an estimate of the demand in the
Eagle Mountain service zone in 1993 and 2003 was performed using 1990 forecast zone
= population data. The estimated max day demand in the Eagle Mountain (EM) service
zone in 1993 is 12.3 MGD The Eagle Mountain WTP is allocated to existing customers
by•
EM _ Existing Capacity Used -Total Capacity
EM 12.3 MGD _ 30 MGD
EM = 41
The 1993 demand on Rolling Hills Phase II is calculated as.
RH-II = Total Demand -Holly - RH-I - EM
RH-II = 296 MGD - 160 MGD - 80 MGD - 12.3 MGD
RH-II = 43 7 MGD = 54 6
DFW 1\TEx35134.A0\RPT001.51 12
IIII 111111 Olt IN is is so or NIB NMI 'OM MINI IIIIII IIIII 111111 111111
TABLE 1
WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS FOR IMPACT FEES
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TOTAL COST ALLOCATED COST ALLOCATED COST ALLOCATED
PROJECT TO EXISTING TO EXPANSION TO EXPANSION
ID PROJECT TITLE COST START DURATION COMPLETION 1993 CAPACITY 1993-2003 BEYOND 2003
($) DATE (MONTHS) DATE ($) ($) (3)
STORAGE TANKS
W2-4 6 MG GROUND STORAGE AT COMO (ENGR) 85,000 01-JUN-93 12 31-MAY-94 51,850 27,203 5,950
W2-4 6 MG GROUND STORAGE AT COMO 850,000 01-NOV-94 12 31-OCT-95 518,500 272,000 59,500
N3-4 2 MG ELEVATED STORAGE IN BLUE MOUND AREA (HARMON RD) (ENGR) 233,450 01-JUN-94 12 31-MAY-95 142,405 74,704 16,341
N3-4 2 MG ELEVATED STORAGE IN BLUE MOUND AREA (HARMON RD) 2,334,500 01-SEP-95 12 31-AUG-96 1,424,050 747,040 163,410
E2-3 2 MG ELEVATED STORAGE (EASTSIDE II LOW) (ENGR) 233,450 01-FEB-96 12 31-JAN-97 142405 74,704 16,341
E2-3 2 MG ELEVATED STORAGE (EASTSIDE II LOW) 2334,500 01-APR-97 12 30-MAR-98 1,424,050 747,040 163,410
S2-2 4 MG GROUND STORAGE AT ALTA MESA (ENGR) 66,125 01-AUG-95 12 31-JUL-96 40,336 21,160 4,629
S2-2 4MGGROUNDSTORAGEATALTAMESA 661,250 01-NOV-96 12 30-OCT-97 403,360 211,600 46,290
W4-3 2 MG ELEVATED TANK AT WESTSIDE IV (ENGR) 233,450 01-OCT-97 12 30-SEP-97 142,405 74,704 16,341
W4-3 2 MG ELEVATED TANK AT WESTSIDE IV 2,334,500 01-JAN-99 12 30-DEC-00 1,424,050 747,040 163,410
S2-4 2 MG GROUND STORAGE AT SOUTHSIDE II (ENGR) 37,950 01-JUL-98 12 29-JUN-99 23,150 12,144 2,656
S2-4 2 MG GROUND STORAGE AT SOUTHSIDE II 379,500 01-OCT-99 12 31-SEP-00 231,500 121,440 26,560
W3-4 2 MG GROUND STORAGE AT WESTSIDE III (ENGR) 37,950 01-JUL-01 12 29-JUN-02 23,150 12,144 2,656
W3-4 2 MG GROUND STORAGE AT WESTSIDE III 379,500 01-OCT-02 12 30-SEP-03 231,500 121,440 26,560
PUMP STATIONS
E2-1 EXPANSION OF RANDOLL MILL PUMP STATION - 40 MGD (ENGR) 46,000 01-AUG-96 12 31-JUL-97 0 46,000 0
E2-1 EXPANSION OF RANDOLL MILL PUMP STATION - 40 MGD 460,000 01-DEC-97 12 30-NOV -98 0 460,000 0
W4-1 NEW PUMP STATION AT WESTLAND TANK - 0.5 MGD (ENGR) 19,550 01-OCT-97 12 30-SEP-98 0 19,550 0
W4-1 NEW PUMP STATION AT WESTLAND TANK - 0.5 MGD 195,500 01-JAN-99 12 30-DEC-00 0 195,500 0
TREATMENT FACILITIES
RAW WATER PIPELINE 3,481,696 01-FEB-90 24 31-JAN-92 1,427,495 2,054,201 0
INTAKE STRUCTURE 6,163,190 01-FEB-90 24 31-JAN-92 2,526,908 3,636,282 0
EAGLE MOUNTAIN LAKE WTP (PHASE I) (ENGR) 3,571,637 01-JAN-88 52 30-APR-92 1,464,371 2,107,266 0
EAGLE MOUNTIANIAKE WATER TREATMENT PLANT (PHASE I) 24,778,294 01-APR-90 24 31-JAN-92 10,159,101 14,619,193 0
ROLLING HILLS WIT EXPANSION (ENGR) 903,487 01-OCT-80 27 30-DEC-82 493,304 161,724 248,459
ROLLING HILLS WTP EXPANSION 16,348,615 01-OCT-83 37 29-OCT-86 8,926,344 2,926,402 4,495,869
ENGINEERING STUDIES
1989 WATER MASTER PLAN (ENGR) 908,500 01-FEB-86 47 30-DEC-89 302,800 605,700 0
1999 WATER MASTER PLAN (ENGR) 908,500 01-FEB-96 47 30-DEC-99 605,700 302,800 0
IMPACT FEE STUDY (ENGR) 160,000 01-JAN-93 120 01-JAN-04 0 160,000 0
GRAND TOTAL
68,146,094 32,128,734
30,558,978 5,458,382
BF/DFW 1 /TEX35I 34.A0/TA131 WCIP WK 1
400
350
320 MGD
0 ��
304 �- 296 M
o'
Q 250 -" \
.12 240 MGD
13.1
C3
200
150 t
1980 1985
380
.00
. ' MOUNTAIN
EAGLE MGD)
PHASE 11
.
.
328 MGD
EAGLE
MOUNTAIN
PHASE 1 (30 M
I
2004
i995
1990 YEAR
FIGURE 2 SANDS
Y�w
OJECTED SYSTEM DE CAPACITIES ,
sow
maw
PR PLANT CA
AND
I
2010
I
2015
ION
2005
The demand in the Eagle Mountain service zone in 2003 includes several extraterritorial
jurisdictions which are to be added to the system as well as part of the Eastside II pressure
~~~ plane which formerly was included in the Rolling Hills service area. These factors along
with relatively high growth projections in the northern service area caused the 2003 max
day demand to grow to 47.5 MGD in the Eagle Mountain Service Area. This is 17.5
MGD more than the capacity of the Eagle Mountain WTP To eliminate this shortfall,
one of two methods can be used -construct the second phase of the Eagle Mountain WTP
or continue to supplement the Eagle Mountain service area on max day from the Rolling
Hills WTP Because excess treatment capacity exists on a system-wide basis and because
' it results 1n a more conservative impact fee, it was assumed that the Rolling Hills plant
would continue to supplement the Eagle Mountain service zone.
The Eagle Mountain WTP will be 100 % utilized in the year 2003 with 59 % allocated to
the study period (100% - 41 % previously allocated) Likewise, Rolling Hills-II will have
a utilization of•
RH-II _ Total Demand -Holly - RH-I - EM
RH-II 328 - 160 - 80 - 30
RH-II = 58 MGD = 72.5%
and the amount attributable to growth in the study period for Rolling Hills, Phase II is.
RH-II = 2003 allocation - 1993 allocation
RH-II = 58 MGD - 43 7 MGD
RH-II = 14.3 MGD = 17.9
The remaining 22 MGD (27.5 %) of the Rolling Hills Phase - II expansion is allocated for
use by growth after the year 2003
Pum Stations
P
The most accurate method for computing pump station utilization is on a pressure plane
basis. An approximation of the effect of growth on utilization can be obtained on a
system wide basis but it will be conservative in that it fails to account for water pumped
more than once. The data available for the land use assumptions computed population and
population forecasts on a city-wide basis making it impractical to break down growth by
pressure plane. For this reason, asystem-wide basis is used even though it is
conservative.
The necessary pumping capacity is projected to increase from 414 MGD in 1993 to 459
MGD in 2003 as shown earlier. This results in 45 MGD of new pumping required to
serve future growth The Master Plan identifies three projects with a total pumping
capacity of 86 5 MGD which were projected to be needed during the study period.
DFWi\TEX35134.A0\RPr001.51 15
The construction of the Ea le Mountain WTP and inclusion of the u r sections of the
g PPe
Eastside II pressure plane into the Eagle Mountain service area have eliminated the need
for the project to construct a new 45 MGD booster pump station at North Beach Street.
~- Therefore, it has been removed from the CIP for impact fee purposes. Since the
remaining projects have a combined capacity of 40 5 MGD which is less that the 45 MGD
required to serve growth, 100% of the cost of the two projects will be allocated to the
study period
r Storage Tanks
The City of Fort Worth currently has 116.2 MG of total storage in their water system.
This is adequate capacity to supply growth through the study period.
Elevated storage within the Fort Worth System totals 47 MG plus 7.7 MG dedicated to
fire storage. This is below the 59 2 MG excluding fire storage currently required by Fort
Worth design criteria and below the 65 6 MG excluding fire storage required by the year
2003 The Master Plan and the latest Fort Worth capital improvements plan identified
seven projects to eliminate this shortfall. The CIP projects have a combined capacity of
20 MG. These projects are lumped together for impact fee purposes and allocated as
follows.
Existing Customers 59 2 - 47 = 12 2 MG (61 %)
Study Period 65 6 - 59 2 = 6 4 MG (32%)
Beyond 2003 67 - 65 6 = 1.4 MG { 7 %)
200MG
Engineering Studies
There are three studies which have been included in the impact fee calculation. They are:
1989 Master Plan -This study was required to guide the capital
improvements program and ensure construction in a planned and cost
effective manner The master plan covered the years 1990 to 2010 but
master plans are typically updated every 10 years. The cost has been
allocated based on the 10 year update schedule. Three years (1990-1993)
or 33 3 % of the cost has been allocated to existing customers. Seven years
(1993-2000) or 66 7% of the cost has been allocated to the study penod.
The total cost shown is half the overall project cost with the other half
being assessed in the wastewater impact fee.
~ 2. 1999 Master Plan -This study is allocated in the same manner as the 1989
Master Plan. Three years (2000-2003) or 33.3 % has been allocated to the
study period. Seven years {2003-2010) or 66.7 % is allocated to growth
beyond the year 2003. The total cost shown is half the overall project cost
with the other half being assessed in the wastewater impact fee.
r
DFW 1 \TEx35134.A0\ltrl'oot.51 16
3 Im act Fee Stud -This stud is r uired b statute eve three ears to
P Y Y ~1 Y rY Y
update the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the effect growth has on the
system. The cost for four impact fee studies (1993,1996,1999, and 2002)
~° are allocated entirely to the study penod. The total cost shown is half the
overall project cost with the other half being assessed in the wastewater
impact fee.
SERVICE U1~tIT DETERMINATION
The equivalent meter has been selected as the method to measure consumption by new
growth for impact fee purposes. The equivalent meter is defined as the unit equivalent to
the hydraulic capacity of a 3/4" water meter The 3/4" water meter was selected because
it represents the water meter size for an average single family home. Other meter sizes
are represented by a number of equivalent meters through multiplication by an equivalency
factor based on the hydraulic capacity of the meter. Table 2 shows the equivalency
factors used in this study for meters of various sizes.
The total number of meters in the Fort Worth service area is provided in Appendix D
This meter information is broken down by type (residential or non-residential) and size,
and by whether the meter is serviced by the City of Fort Worth or serviced by a
wholesale customer The appendix also summarizes the data for all the wholesale
customers. The remaining pages break down the meter data by wholesale customer In
nearly all cases, the wholesale customer was the source of meter information.
Once the number of equivalent meters has been determined, the next task is to calculate
the number of people represented by a residential meter and the number of jobs
represented by anon-residential meter This calculation was performed for the City of
Fort Worth alone and for the wholesale customers as a group in order to get better
accuracy in comparing population or employment changes to number of meters. The
results for the present (1993) system are:
1
DFW 1\'rEX35134.A0\1tP1'001.51 1 ~]
1
1
TABLE 2
EQUIVALENT METER TABLE
ACTUAL METER SIZE EQUIVALENCY FACTOR
5/8" or 3/4" 1 0
1 " 1 67
1-1/z" 3.33
2" 5.33
3" 10.0
4" 16.67
6" 33 33
8" 53 33
10" 76.67
Source: American Works Association; Manual of Water Supply Practices
No M6, "Water Meters-Selection, Installation, Testing, and
Maintenance".
DFWI\TEX35i34.A0\ItP1'001.51 18
1
1
1
1
i
1
i
1
i
1
1
1
1
Fort Worth On1X Residential Non-
Residential
a. Number of Equivalent Meters 143,460 37,822
b Population 450, 877 ---
c. Employment -- 322,800
Population per Equivalent Meter (b/a) 3 14
Employment per Equivalent Meter (c/a) -- 8.53
Wholesale Customers Residential Non-
Residential
a. Number of Equivalent Meters 99,313 14,932
b Population 288,336 --
c. Employment -- 131,054
Population per Equivalent Meter (b/a) 2.90
Employment per Equivalent Meter (c/a) -- 8 78
Using the ratios determined above, the next step is to determine the increase in service
units caused by growth in population and employment. Using population and employment
projections found in the Land Use Assumptions for the years 1993 and 2003, the
estimated number of additional equivalent meters can be calculated as follows.
Fort Worth
Residential
Non-Residential
Wholesale Customers
Residential
Non-Residential
DFW 1\TEX35134.AOULPT001.51
_ (Population Change) - 3 14
_ (482,450 - 450,877) _ 3 14 = 10,055
_ (Employment Change) _ 8..53
_ (386,600 - 322,800) = 8..53 = 7,479
_ (Population Change) _ 2.90
_ (237,512 - 198,908) _ 2.90 - 13,312
_ (Employment Change) _ 8 78
_ (110,549 - 80,069) _ 8 78 = .3.472
Increase in Equivalent Meters = 34,318
19
' The final step in determining the maximum assessable impact fee is to divide the total
costs included in the CIP (See Table 1) by the increase in equivalent meters. This
calculation yields the impact fee assessable per equivalent meter (3/4" size). The fee for
other size meters will equal the fee fora 3/4" meter times the equivalency factor found in
Table 2. The maximum assessable impact fee is calculated as:
Maximum Im act Fee = CIP cost _ crease in uivalent Meters
P ( ) ~ ~ )
$30,558,978 - 34,318
Maximum Impact Fee $890 per equivalent unit
This impact fee underestimates the actual cost of providing service to new customers of
the Fort Worth Water System. The underestimate is caused by the City's decision not to
include water distribution mains and by the effects of considering pump stations on a
system wide instead of a pressure plane basis as discussed previously If these were to be
included, the maximum assessable fee would be increased.
The City of Fort Worth is legally allowed to charge any impact fee as long as it does not
exceed the maximum assessable fee. A lower fee can be adopted to encourage growth,
however, the difference between what is required by the CIP and the amount collected in
impact fees would need to be made up through higher rates to existing customers or other
revenue sources.
DFwI\TEX35134.AOULP'i'001.51 20
1
Appendix A
A endix A
PP
CIP Projects
Following is a brief description of proposed projects recommended by the Master Plan to
be included in a water capital improvements plan. Most of these projects have been
included in the CIP for impact fee purposes.
Project Title: 6 MG ground storage at Como W2-4
~' Description. Design and construction of a 6 MG ground storage tank for the
Westside II pressure plane.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water
demand due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed for
the Westside II Pressure Plane. This improvement is recommended by the 1989
Water Master Plan Study, but has been up-sized to 6 MG from 5 MG
Status. Planning stage.
Project Title: 2 MG elevated stora a in Blue Mound area, N3-4
J g
Description. Design and Construction of an elevated tank (2 MG) at the
intersection of Harmon Road and Hicks Road in Northside III pressure plane.
Purpose: Based on the current Water Master Plan, the existing elevated tank
capacity for the Northside III pressure plane is not sufficient to meet projected
population water demand and to meet the operational requirement criteria. Hence,
additional elevated storage is recommended.
Status. Planning stage.
Project Title. 2 MG elevated storage (Eastside Low), E2-3
Description. The design and construction of a two million gallon elevated storage
facility to be located in the vicinity of the intersection of Highway 183 and
Highway 360 in the Eastside II Pressure Plane.
Purpose: Due to the creation of the Eastside II (I.ow) pressure plane and meeting
the storage requirements the design and construction of this 2 MG elevated storage
to feed the new l..astside II (Low) pressure plane is recommended by the 1989
Water Master Plan.
Status: Planning stage..
DFW i\TEX35134.AOUiP'I'001.51 22
Project Title: 4 MG round stora a at Alta Mesa, S2-2
J g g
Description. Design and construction of a 4 MG ground storage tank to be located
at the existing Alta Mesa reservoir site in the Southside II pressure plane.
r Purpose. Due to the future developments in Southside II and III pressure planes,
additional storage facilities are required to meet operational storage requirements.
This project is also recommended by the 1989 Water Master Plan.
Status. Planning stage.
Project Title: 2 MG elevated storage at Westside IV, W4-3
Description. Design and construction of a two million gallon elevated storage tank
to be located in the new Westside IV pressure plane.
Purpose: In order to provide sufficient storage and supply for the future Westside
IV pressure plane and to meet the operational storage requirements, the
construction of a one million gallon ground storage facility is recommended by the
1989 Water Master Plan Study The tank size has been increased to 2 MG in the
latest Fort Worth CIP.
Status. Planning stage.
Project Title: 2 MG ground storage at Southern Site, S2-4
Description Design and construction of a ground storage tank (2 MG) to be
located at the southern part of the Southside II pressure plane.
'~
Purpose. 1989 Water Master Plan recommends that additional storage capacity
will be required by year 2003 to serve Southside II demand, based on the storage
requirement criteria.
~ Status. Planning stage.
"" Project Title: 2 MG ground storage in Westside III pressure plane, W3-4
Description. Design and construction of a 2 MG ground storage facility in
Westside III pressure plane.
Purpose: Due to the inadequacy of the existing storage facilities in the Westside
III pressure plane, and to meet the present and future demand, the installation of
this 2 MG ground storage facility is part of the recommended Master Plan
improvements.
' Status: Planning stage.
' DFW1\TEX35134.AO~RP'r001.51 23
1
1
Project Title: Upgrade Randol Mill Pump Station, E2-1
Description. Upgrade pumps in Randol Mill Pump Station to increase capacity 40
MGD
Purpose. The eastern-most arm of the Eastside II Pressure Plane will have
difficulty maintaining adequate pressures under increased future demands. Low
pressure in this area is not a result of high ground elevation, but a result of the
configuration of the pressure plane and the distances involved in transporting water
from the Rolling Hills Treatment plant. To address this situation, this eastern arm
must be isolated from the remainder of the Eastside II zone, thus creating a
separate pressure plane. Elevated tanks located in this area will require lower
overflow elevations than the existing Eastsicle tanks. Therefore, this area is termed
Eastside II (Low) To serve this Eastside II (Low) pressure plane, the Randol Mill
Pump Station will be upgraded with new pumps.
Status. Planning stage.
Project Title: New Booster Pump Station, E2-2
Description. Design and installation of a new Booster Pump Station to be located
on North Beach Street.
i
Purpose: A booster pump station is needed to serve the portion of the eastside II
Pressure Plane located north of the Holly Pressure Plane and west of Haltom City
This area is currently served by paralle154-inch and 36-inch transmission mains.
With increased demands in this area, it is not possible to maintain sufficient
pressure in this area or maintain sufficient water levels in the North Beach
Reservoir Hence, an in-line booster pump station is needed.
Status: Project canceled due to Eagle Mountain WTP construction.
Project Title: New pump station at Westland tank - 0.5 MGD, W41
Descnption: Design and construction of a 0.5 MGD pump station to be located at
the Westland Reservoir site in the Westside IV pressure plane.
Purpose: Due to a lack of any pumping facilities in the Westside IV pressure
plane for existing conditions and in order to meet the pressure requirements for
future demands, the installation of this pump station is recommended.
Status. Planning stage.
DFW 1 \TEX35134.A0\RP'i'001.51 24
1
Project Title: Eagle Mountain Lake Treatment Plant, (Phase n
Description. Construction of the proposed Eagle Mountain Lake Water Treatment
Plant, including the intake structure, clear wells, pump station and raw water line.
Purpose: As the development of the northern segment of Fort Worth continues
and additional water is required by wholesale customers (Keller, Southlake,
Saginaw, Sansom Park, etc..), more potable water will be needed, which will
exceed existing water treatment plant capacity; hence a new water treatment plant
will be needed. The Eagle Mountain Lake Water Treatment Plant will not only
serve the Northside III pressure plane, but also will serve a portion of demands in
' the Northside II pressure plane.
,' Status. Project completed
Other Projects
Project Title. Rolling Hills Water Treatment Expansion to 160 MGD
Description. Design and construction of Rolling Hills Water Treatment Plant
expansion to treat 160 MGD
Purpose: Rolling Hills WTP was constructed in 1973 in two 40 MGD units and
was designed to permit expansion to 160 MGD by doubling the existing facilities.
Because of the rapid growth of the City's south and east sides and projected water
1 demand increase, this project was recommended. in the 1979 Water Master Plan.
Status. Construction was completed in 1986.
Project Title.. 1989 Water Master Plan
J
Description: Engineering study to prepare Water Master Plan.
Purpose: A comprehensive water study was required to help guide long-term
capital improvement projects to ensure that the most cost effective projects are
constructed. In addition, it was necessary to update the 1979 Water Master Plan.
The Growth Management Study done by the Planning Department had identified
the need for the Water Department to have a Water and Wastewater Master Plan
' Allocation This Water Master Plan will cover the planning period from the year
1990 through the year 2010 but is expected to be updated after 10 years. The CIP
covers the period 1993 through 2003. The cost has been allocated. based on the 10
' year update schedule. Three years (1990-1993) or 33 3% of the cost has been
allocated to existing customers. The remaining seven years (1993 - 2000) or
66.7 % of the cost has been allocated to the study period.
DFWi\TEX35134.AOtRP'r001.51 25
1
Status. Stud was com leted in 1989.
Y P
Project Title: 1999 Water Master Plaa
Description Engineering study to update the Water Master Plan.
Purpose: This water master plan update will project the system flows and needs
for the years 2000 through 2020 The Master Plan guides the capital
improvements program to ensure cost effective expansion of the system.
Allocation. This water master plan will cover the planning period from the year
2000 through the year 2020 but is expected to be updated after 10 years. The CIP
covers the period 1993 through 2003. The cost has been allocated based on the 10
,, year update schedule. Three years (2000 -2003) or 33 3 % of the cost has been
allocated to the study period. The remaining seven years (2003-2010) or 66.7% of
the cost has been allocated to growth beyond year 2003
Status. Planned
Project Title: Impact Fee Update
' Description An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and
recalculate the maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
1 Purpose. By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every
three years.
' Allocation• 100 percent of the cost for studies in the years 1993, 1996, 1999, and
2002 can be allocated to the planning period.
Status. On-going
'' DFWI\TFJC35134.A0\RPT001.51 26
1
1
Appendix B
1
A endix B
PP
~ Pumping Capabilities
North Holly Plant:
Five 27 MGD and three 15 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units. Total
' capacity 180 MGD
South Holly Plant:
Four 30 MGD and one 15 MGD electrically drive centrifugal units. Total capacity
135 MGD
Rolling Hills Plant:
' Seven 30 MGD, one 17 MGD, two 15 MGD and one 10 MGD electrically driven
centrifugal units. Total capacity 267 MGD
' Eagle Mountain Plant:
Two 8 MGD, Two 15 MGD and Three 3 MGD electrically driven centrifugal
units. Total capacity 55 MGD
South Side Pressure Plane II (850'):
Edwards Ranch Station.
Two 16 MGD, one 10 MGD and one 5 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units.
Total capacity 47 MGD
South Slde Reservoir Station.
Two 5 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units. Total capacity 10 MGD
South Side Pressure Plane III (990'):
' Russom Ranch Station.
One 3 MGD and one 6 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units and one 10 MGD
electric and gas unit. Total capacity 19 MGD.
' Alta Mesa Station.
Two 5 MGD .and two i0 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units. Total capacity
' 30 MGD
' DFWI\TEX35134.A0\RP'1'001.51 28
' '
):
North Side Pressure Plane II (853
' North Side Station.
Three 3 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units and one 4.5 MGD gas driven
;' unit. Total capacity 13.5 MGD.
' Cantrell-Sansom Station.
One 2 MGD, one 3 MGD, and one 5 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units.
Total capacity 10 MGD
North Beach Station;
One 2 MGD and one 4 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units. Total capacity 6
MGD
North Side Pressure Plane III (936'):
Jenkins Heights Station.
One 2 MGD, one 500 GPM (720 MGD) and one 800 GPM (1 152 MGD)
electrically dnven centrifugal units. Total capacity 3.872 MGD.
West Side Pressure Plane II (857'):
West Side Station:
One 12 MGD, one 6.33 MGD and two 5 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units
and one 7 MGD gas driven standby unit. Total capacity 35.33 MGD
' Como Station.
Two 15 MGD, one 10 MGD and one 5 75 MGD electrically driven centrifugal
units. Total capacity 45.75 MGD.
West Side Pressure Plane III (915'):
Stagecoach Road Station.
' Two 6.33 MGD and one 2 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units. Total
capacity 14 66 MGD
'
West Side Pressure Plane IV:
(There is no storage in this pressure plane).
'
Cha le Creek tion•
' One 75 GPM, one 400 GPM and one 1000 GPM electrically driven centrifugal
units. Total capacity 2.124 MGD
DFW 11TEX35134.AO~RPT001.51 29
~.
East Side Pressure Plane II (805 ).
East Side Station.
One 22 MGD, one 17 MGD and three 5 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units
and one 7 MGD gas driven standby unit. Total capacity 61 MGD.
Randol Mill Station.
Two 5 MGD and one 10 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units. Total capacity
20 MGD
Fleetwood Station.
Two 2 MGD, one 2.5 MGD, and one 5 MGD electrically driven centrifugal units.
Total capacity 11 5 MGD
r
i
~~ DFW 1~T6X35134.A01RPT001.51 30
r
1
0
Appendix C
~~
t
1
I
r
t
n
~r .
Appendix C
Distribution System Storage
Capacity (MG)
Hollv Pressure Plane (760'1.
` *North Side Concrete Reservoir 4 5
*South Side Concrete Reservoir 5.0
*Como Ground Storage Reservoir 6.0
East Side Pressure Plane II (805'):
*Eastwood Elevated Steel tank 1.5
*Timberline Elevated Steel Tank 2.0
*Meadowbrook Elevated Steel Tank 2.0
Randol Mill Ground Reservoir 6.0
Beach Street Ground Reservoir 5.5
Fleetwood Ground Reservoir 5.5
Southside Pressure Planes•
Elevation 850' Plane II
*Seminary Hill Elevated Steel Tank 2.0
*Alta Mesa Ground Storage Reservoir 9.2
Elevation 990' Plane III
*Armstrong Ranch Elevated Steel Tank 2.0
*Sun County Elevated Steel Tank 2.0
i Northside Pressure Planes:
Elevation 853' Plane II
~ *Northwest Elevated Steel Tank 1 0
Caylor Ground Storage Reservoir 5.0
Elevation 936' Plane. III
G
*Jenkins Heights Elevated Steel Tank
0.5
Westside Pressure Planes:
Elevation 857' Plane II
*Calmont Elevated Steel Tank 1.0
*Stagecoach Ground Storage Reservoir 5 5
Elevation 974' Plane III
*Westland Ground Storage Reservoir ~_0
Total Storage in Distribution System 71.2
Total Elevated Storage in Distribution System 54.7
* Classified as Elevated Storage
DFW i\TEX35134.A0\RP1'001.51 32
1
1
l
r
1
Appendix D
t
1
r
Meter Summary
Clty: Fnrh Wnrhh
Provided: w ~ wu/
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~" 1 0 111,819 111,819
1" 1 67 9,421 15,733
1 '~ " 3.33 1,872
6,234
2" 5 33
1,648
8,784
3" 10 0
8
80
4"
16.67
20
333
6" 33 33
12
400
8"
53 33
0
0
10 76 67 1
77
Total -- 124, 801 143,460
Non-Residential Meters
'~" 1 0 6,171 6,171
1 " 1 67
1,922
3,210
1 '~" 3.33 1,209
4,026
2" 5 33 2,470 13,165
3" 10 0
205
2,050
4" 16.67
203
3,384
6"
33.33
97
3,233
8"
53.33
24
1,280
10" 76.67 17 1,303
Total 12 318 37 822
3O Fort Worth Sewer 98 Total Meters 137,119
% Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 1 S 1 282
Total 1993 Population 450, 877 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 14
Weighted 1993 Population 450,877 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/]obs 8.53
Total 1993 Employment 322, 800 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3.29
Wei hted 1993 Em to merit 322 800 Wei hted Meters 137.119
CLW/DFW 1 /35134.A0/FRMCWO1.51
J
t
Meter Summa
city: ~
Provided:
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
s~ " 1 0
93,537
93,537
1" 1 67 3,007 5,022
1 '~" 3.33 100
333
2" 5 33
79
421
3 " 10.0 0
0
4"
16.67
0
0
6" 33 33
0
0
8" 53.33
0
0
10 76.67 p _ U
Total -- 96,723 99,313
Non-Residential Meters
s~ " 1.0 4,294
4,294
1 " 1 67
$33
1,391
1 '~ " 3.33 215
716
2"
3 " 5 33
10.0
964
65
5,138
650
4"
6"
8"
10"
Total
16.67
33.33
53.33
76.67
72
30
3
5
6 481 _
1,200
1,000
160
383
14 932
`Yo Fort Worth Sewer NA Total Meters 103,204
% Fort Worth Water 68.7 Total Equivalent Meters 1 i4 245
Total 1993 Population 288,336 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.90
Weighted 1993 Population 198,051 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 8.77
Total 1993 Employment 131,054 Ratio-Capita/Totai Meters 2.79
Wel hied 1993 Em to went 80 069 Wei hted Meters 71 198
CLW/DFW 1 /33134.A0/FRMCW02.51
I1
A'
1
~~t
Meter Summary
Clty• Ranhrnpk
Provided: w ~ vv~r
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1.0 *6,066 6,066
1" 1 67 -
1 ~h" 3.33 -
2" 5 33
3" 10 0 -
4" 16 67 -
6" 33.33 -
8" 53.33 _
10 76.67 -
Total -- 6,066 6,066
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1.0 *434 434
1 " 1 67
1 '~ " 3.33
2" 5.33 -
3" 10 0 -
4"
16.67
_
6" 33 33
8" 53 33 ._
10" 76.67 _
Total 434
434
Fort Worth Sewer
Fort Worth Water i00
2 Total Meters
Total Equivalent Meters 6,500
6 600
Total 1993 Population 19,766 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.26
Weighted 1993 Population 395 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 145
Totai 1993 Employment 3,000 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3,04
Wei hted 1993 Em to merit 30 Wei hted Meters 130
*Not broken out by size
CLW/DPWl/35134.A0/PRMCW03.31
1
J
1
y
1
A
Meter Summary
Cify: Rafhesda Wafer f nr~
Provided: w ~
Residential Meters
S~ Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 5,997 5,997
1" 1.67 0 0
1 'k " 3 33 0 p
2" 5 33 0 p
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 p
8" 53.33 0 p
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 5,997 5,997
Non-Residential Meters
3'~ " 1 0 0 0
1" 1 67 0 0
1 '~ " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 3 16
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 3 16
Fort Worth Sewer NA Total Meters 6,000
45 Fort Worth Water 4 3 Total Equivalent Meters 6,013
Total 1993 Population 18,000 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 300
Weighted 1993 Population 775 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs --
Total 1993 Employment 0 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3,00
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment 0 Wei hted Meters 258
CLW/DFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCW04.51
y
1
l
t
Meter Summary
Clty' Rnrl~nn
Provided: w ~
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/a " 1 0 5,128 5,128
1" 1 67 17 28
1 'k " 3 33 S 17
2" 5 33 2 l I
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 5,152 5, i 84
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 335 335
1 " 1 67 54 90
1 'fz" 3.33 46 i53
2" 5.33 SI 272
3" 10.0 10 100
4" 16.67 i 17
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 p
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 497 967
Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 5,649
9b Fort Worth Water 98 Total Equivalent Meters 6,151
Total 1993 Population 16,164 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 12
Weighted 1993 Population 15,840 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv MeterslJobs 5.64
Total 1993 Employment 5,450 Ratio-Capita/Tota1 Meters 2.86
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment 5 341 Wei hted Meters 5 536
CLW/DFW i/35134.A0lFRMCW05.51
r
t
1
t
t
t
l
l
r
Meter Summary
C'ity' f'rnwlp~
Provided: w ~ ww
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/a " 1 0 2, 300 2, 300
1" 1 67 20 33
1 'k" 3.33 0 0
2" 5.33 11 59
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 2,331 2,392
Non-Residential Meters
'/~ " 1 0 60 60
1" 1 67 0 0
1 'fi " 3 33 0 0
2" 5.33 5 27
3" 10.0 1 10
4" 16 67 3 50
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 69 147
Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 2,400
3'o Fort Worth Water 82 Total Equivalent Meters 2,539
Total 1993 Population 7,000 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.93
Weighted 1993 Population 5,740 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 12.11
Total 1993 Employment 1,780 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.92
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 1 450 Wei hted Meters 1 968
CLW/DFW 1l35134.A0/FRMCW06.51
t
1
l
r
1
~~
r
Meter Summary
Clty: itaiwnrfhinatnn f arrianc
Provided: w/v~/w
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 *811 811
1 " 1 67 -
1 '~" 3.33
2" 5.33 -
3" 10 0 _
4" 16 67
6" 33.33 -
8" 53.33 -
10 76 67 -
Total - 811 811
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1.0 -
1"
1.67
-
1 '~" 3.33 _
2"
5.33
-
3" 10 0 -
4"
16.67
-
_
6" 33.33 -
8" 53 33 _
10" 76.67 -
Total
~O Fort Worth Sewer 90 Total Meters 811
Fort Worth Water 48 Total Equivalent Meters 811
Total 1993 Population 1,920 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2,37
Weighted 1993 Population 922 ' Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs -
Total 1993 Employment 500 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2,37
Wei hied 1993 Em to ment 240 Wei hied Meters 389
*Not broken out by size or type
CI,W/DFWI/35134.A0/FRMCW07.51
t
l
t
1
1
[]
t
Meter Summary
City' n~ e~ Toot
Provided: w
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 0 0
1" 1 67 0 0
1 'fz" 3 33 0 0
2" 5.33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 0 0
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1.0 1 1
1 " 1 67 5 8
1 'k " 3.33 24 80
2" 5.33 60 320
3" 10 0 10 100
4" 16.67 36 600
6" 33.33 9 300
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 4 307
Total 149 1 716
~O Fort Worth Sewer NA Total Meters 149
5b Fort Worth Water 39 Total Equivalent Meters 1,716
Total 1993 Population 0 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 0
Weighted 1993 Population 0 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 30 89
Total 1993 Employment 53,000 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 0
Wei hted 1993E to meat 20 670 Wei hted Meters 149
CL W/ D F W I /35134 . A 0/PR MC W 08.51
f
t
I
C]
r
Meter Summary
City: F.tg~ra'e Jage
Provided: w ~ ~
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
s/a" 1 0 1,002 1,002
1" 1 67 14 23
1 '/z " 3.33 0 0
2" 5.33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 1,016 1,025
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 1 1
1" 1 67 1 2
1 'k " 3 33 0 0
2" 5.33 5 27
3" i0.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 1 77
Total I 8 107
9o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,024
~O Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 1,132
Total 1993 Population 2,750 Ratio-CapitalResidentiai Equiv Meters 2.68
Weighted 1993 Population 2,750 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 5.61
Total 1993 Employment 600 Ratio-Capta/Total Meters 2.69
Wei hted 1993E to ment 600 Wei hted Meters 1 024
CLW/DP W i /35134.A0/FANG W09;51
t
U
i
1
r
Meter Summary
City: Fven**a~
Provided: w ~ vyw
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
3/a " 1 0 1,796 1,796
1" 1.67 5 8
1 'k " 3 33 5 17
2" 5.33 0 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 1,806 1,821
Non-Residential Meters
3/a " 1 0 108 108
1" 1 .67 1 2
1 '/z " 3.33 1 3
2" 5 33 10 53
3" 10 0 1 10
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76 67 0 0
Total 121 176
g'o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,927
% Fort Worth Water 43 Total Equivalent Meters 1,997
Total 1993 Population 6,000 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.29
Weighted 1993 Population 2,580 Ratio-Non-Res-dent. Equiv Meters/Jobs 2.84
Totai 1993 Employment 500 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 i 1
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 215 Wei hted Meters 829
CLw/DFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCW 10.51
e
i
~~
s
1
Meter Summary
Clty' Fnrpct >riill
Provided. w ~ vvw
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency. Factor uantit Equivalent
'•~ " 1 0 3, 838 3,838
1" 1 67 0 0
1 'k " 3.33 0 0
2" 5 33 2 11
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 3, 840 3, 849
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 142 142
1 " 1 67 16 27
1 'fi " 3.33 0 0
2" 5 33 76 405
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 234 574
9o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 4,074
3'o Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 4,423
Total 1993 Population 11,490 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.98
Weighted 1993 Population ' 11,490 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 2.00
Total 1993 Employment 1,150 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.82
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment 1 150 Wei hted Meters 4 074
CI,W/DFWl/35134.A0/PRMCW 11.51
r
t
[]
1
Meter Summary
City; Naltnm f :fv
Provided: w ~ ~
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/a " 1 0 9,256 9,256
1" 1 67 16 27
1 'fz " 3 33 0 0
2" 5.33 U 0
3 " 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 9,272 9,284
Non-Residential Meters
3~4" i 0 1,128 1,128
1 " 1 67 5 8
1 '/~l" 3.33 0 0
2" 5.33 15 80
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 3 50
6" 33.33 4 133
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 1155 1 399
% Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 10 427
9o Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 10,682
Total 1993 Population 32,800 Ratio-Capita/Residentiai Equiv Meters 3.53
Weighted 1993 Population 32,800 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 8.26
Total 1993 Employment 11,560 Ratio-CapitalTotal Meters 3 14
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 11 560 Wei bled Meters 10 427
CI:W /DFW l /35134.A0/FRMC W 12. S 1
t
1
t
Meter Summary
City• il-ac1Ct
Provided. w
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Eauivalent
'/a " 1 0 303 303
1" 1 67 5 8
1 '/z " 3.33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 p
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 308 311
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 10 10
1" 1 67 3 5
1 '~ " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 3 16
3" 10 0 1 10
4" 16 67 1 17
6" 33 33 1 33
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total i9 91
~O Fort Worth Sewer NA Total Meters 327
~O Fort Worth Water 0 Total Equivalent Meters 402
Total 1993 Population 825 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.65
Weighted 1993 Population 0 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 2.20
Total 1993 Employment 200 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2,52
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 200 Wei hted Meters 150*
*Note: Haslet uses Ft. Worth water to only serve 1 customer (Alliance Airport). (10") It serves atI the
customers shown above with its own well water
CLW/DFWI/35134.A0/FRMCW13.5i
1
1
Meter Summary
City• u~~.~t
Provided: w ~ ~
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 9,461 9,461
1 " 1 67 12 20
1 '~ " 3 33 2 7
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 9,475 9,488
Non-Residential Meters
'~a " 1 0 764 764
1" 1.67 135 225
1 '~" 3.33 10 33
2" 5 33 82 437
3" 10 0 9 90
4" 16,67 0 0
6" 33 33 9 300
8" 53.33 0 p
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 1009 1 849
% Fort Worth Sewer 93 6 Total Meters 10,484
3o Fort Worth Water 93 Total Equivalent Meters 11,337
Total 1993 Population 33,765 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.56
Weighted 1993 Population 31,401 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 10.58
Total 1993 Employment 19,568 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 22
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 18 785 Wei heed Meters 9 750
CLW/DPW 1 /35134.A0/FRMC W 14.51
f
1
t
1
Meter Summary
Clty' KPtlar
Provided: w
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit E uivalent
'~ " 1 0 6,448 6,448
1" 1 67 38 63
1 `~ " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 11 59
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 p 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 6,497 6,570
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 154 154
1 " 1.67 29 48
1 '~ " 3.33 0 0
2" 5.33 11 59
3" 10 0 5 50
4" 16.67 2 33
6" 33.33
0
0
8" 53.33
0
0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 201 344
96 Fort Worth Sewer NA Total Meters _6,698
~O Fort Worth Water 98 Total Equivalent Meters 6 914
Total 1993 Population 14,700 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.24
Weighted 1993 Population 14,406 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 5.54
Total 1993 Employment 1,905 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.19
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 1 867 Wei hted Meters 6 564
CLW/DNW 1 /35134.A0/FRMCW 15.51
Meter Summary
City• uP...,p.ta~P
Provided: w ~ ~
Residentia[ Meters
ize Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 .1,375 1,375
1 " 1 67 55 92
1 '~" 3 33 10 33
2" 5 33 10 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0-
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 1,440 1,500
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 150 150
1" 1 67 25 42
1 1~" 3 33 10 33
2" 5 33 25 133
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33 33 2 67
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 212 425
~O Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters ..1,652
3'o Fort Worth Water 0 Total Equivalent Meters 1 925
Total 1993 Population 4,200 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.80
Weighted 1993 Population 0 Rafio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 3.20
Total 1993 Employment 1,360 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.54
Wei kited 1993 Em to ment 0 Wei kited Meters 0
CLW/DFWI/35134,A0/FRMCW 16.51
t
Meter Summary
city: i.akt+ Wp~]~
i Provided: w ~ ~
1
Residential Meters
:Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 1,722 1,722
1 " 1 67 0 0
1 '~" 3.33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 .0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 1,722 1,722
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 160 160
1" 1 67 10 17
1 `~" 3 33 5 17
2" 5.33 15 80
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 3 50
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
i0" 76.67 0 0
Total 193 324
4O Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,915
~O Fort Worth Water 25 Total Equivalent Meters 2,046
Total 1993 Population 4,606 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.67
Weighted 1993 Population 1,151 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 9.26
Total 1993 Employment 3,000 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2,40
Wei kited 1993 Em to ment 750 Wei kited Meters 479
CLW/DFW 1 /35134.A0/FRMCW 17.51
t
Meter Summary
City' Nn.-1h Richland Aillc
Provided: w ~ ~
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1.0 19, 882 19, 882
1 " 1 67 821 1, 371
1 '~ " 3.33 62 206
2" 5 33 39 208
3 " 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
$" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 20,804 21,667
Non-Residential Meters
'~a " 1 0 424 424
1" 1.67 193 322
1 '~ " 3.33 78 260
2" 5.33 340 1,812
3" 10.0 11 110
4" 16 67 10 167
6" 33.33 2 67
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 1 058 3 162
~O Fort Worth Sewer 87 6 Total Meters 21,862
~O Fort Worth Water 70 Total Equivalent Meters 24, 829
Total 1993 Population 47,646 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.20
Weighted 1993 Population 33,352 Ratio-Non-Resident.. Equiv Meters/Jobs 3 70
Total 1993 Employment 11,700 Ratio-Capita/Totai Meters 2.18
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment 8 190 Wel hted Meters 15 303
CLw/DFW 1 /35 t 34.A0/FRMC W 18.51
1
t
1
Meter Summary
City: Rirhlan~ iiillc
Provided: - w ~ ww
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 2, 892 2, 892
1" 1.67 52 87
i '~ " 3.33 3 10
2" 5.33 0 0
3 " 10.0 0 0
4" 16,67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 2,947 2,9$9
Non-Residential Meters
3~` " 1 0 0 0
1" 1 67 90 i50
1 '~ " 3.33 1 3
2" 5 33 35 187
3" 10.0 2 20
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 128 360
~O Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters .3,075
Fort Worth Water 49 Total Equivalent Meters 3,349
Total 1993 Population 9,754 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.26
Weighted 1993 Population 4,778 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv MeterslJobs 15.54
Total 1993 Employment 5,595 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 17
Wei hted 1993 Em to meat 2 742 Wei hted Meters 1 507
CLW/DFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCW19.51
r
t
Meter Summary
City: ~a$inaw
Provided: w ~ ~r
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 2,509 2,509
1 " 1 67 p 0
1'~" 333 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 2,509 2,509
Non-Residential Meters
s~ " 1 0 94 94
1 " 1 67 27 45
1 '~ " 3.33 1 3
2" 5 33 69 368
3" 10.0 1 10
4" 16.67 2 33
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 194 553
Y Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters .2,703
4o Fort Worth Water 75 Total Equivalent Meters 3,062
Total 1993 Population 8,600 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 43
Weighted 1993 Population 6,450 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 6.20
Total 1993 Employment 3,426 Ratio-Capita/Totai Meters 3 18
Wei hted.1993 Em to ment 2 570 Wei hied Meters 2 027
CLW/DFW l/35134.AO/FRMCW20.51
i
1
Clty• Cancnm Parir
Provided: - w ~ WW
Meter Summary
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 1,425 1,425
1" 1 67 10 17
1 'fi " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 2 11
3" 10 0 0 0
4" I6 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 1,437 1,453
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 10 10
1" 1.67 0 0
1 '~ " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 p
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 U
Total 10 10
3o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,447
Y Fort Worth Water U Total Equivalent Meters 1,453
Total 1993 Population 4,000 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.75
Weighted 1993 Population U Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 74.5
Total 1993 Employment 745 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2,76
Wei kited 1993 Em to went
0
Wei kited Meters _
0
CLW/DFW 1 /35134.A0/PRMCW21.51
n
1
Meter Summary
City: c~„th~a>_e
Provided: w
Residential Meters
S!~ Eauivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 964 964
1 " 1 67 1,565 2,614
1 `~ " 3 33 12 40
2"
5.33
4
21
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0
0
6" 33 33
0
0
8" 53.33 0
0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 2,545 3,639
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1.0
0
0
1" 1 67 138 230
1 `~ " 3.33
5
17
2" 5 33
30
160
3"
10.0
0
0
4"
16.67
4
67
6" 33 33
1
33
8" 53 33 1
53
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 179 560
35 Fort Worth Sewer NA Total Meters 2,724
4'o Fort Worth• Water i00 Total Equivalent Meters 4 199
Total 1993 Population 7,983 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.19
Weighted 1993 Population 7,983 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 2.95
Total 1993 Employment 1,650 Ratio-Gapita/Total Meters 2.93
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment 1 650 Wei hied Meters 2 724
CLW/DFW3/35134.A0/FItMCW22.51
r
Meter Summary
City: Tarrant f n~tv ]I~TII f11
Provided: - w ~ ~
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 1,000 1,000
1" 1 67 220 367
1 '~ " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
g" 53.33
0
0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 1,220 1,367
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1.0 46 46
1" 1 67 14 23
1 '~" 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 27 144
3"
10.0
0
0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 87
213
% Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,307
% Fort Worth Water 90 Total Equivalent Meters 1 580
Total 1993 Population 4,500 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.29
Weighted 1993 Population 4,050 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 0.75
Total 1993 Employment 160 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 344
Wei kited 1993 Em to ment 144 Wei kited Meters 1 176
CLW /DF W 1 /35134. AO/FRMC W 23.31
1
i
t
t
1
Meter Summary
City TR d _ r'tand~cairie
Provided: w
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit E uivalent
1 " 1 67 - -
1 'k" 3 33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3 " 10.0 - -
4" 16.67 - -
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10 76.67 - -
Total -- - 3, 030*
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 - 0
1" 1.67 - -
1 '~ " 3.33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3" 10.0 - -
4" 16 67 - -
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10" 76.67 - -
Total 0
Y Fort Worth Sewer NA Total Meters .3,030
Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 3,030
Total 1993 Population 9,090 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 0
Weighted 1993 Population 9,090 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv MetersJJobs -
T'otaf 1993 Employment 0 Ratio-CapitaJTotai Meters 3 0
Wei hted 1993 Em io merit 0 Wei hied Meters 3 03U
*No Data -calculated based on 3 persons/meter -Contract Expires in 1998
CLW/DFWI/35134.A0/FRMCW24.51
1
1
1
Meter Summary
Clty: Trninh~(`juh
Provided: _ w
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/a" 1 0 1,320 1,320
1" 1 67 111 185
1 'k " 3.33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3 " 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
b" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 1,431 1,505
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 69 69
1" 1 67 3 5
1 `~ " 3.33 13 43
2" 5.33 32 171
3 " 10.0 14 140
4" 16.67 5 83
6" 33.33 2 67
8" 53.33 2 107
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 140 685
% Fort Worth Sewer NA Total Meters 1,571
% Fort Worth Water 66 Total Equivalent Meters 2,190
Total 1993 Population 4,515 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 300
Weighted 1993 Population 2,980 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 0.30
Total 1993 Employment 207 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2, g7
Wei hted 1993 Em to merit 137 Wei hted Meters 1 037
CLWJDFW 1 /35134.A0lFRMCW25.51
1
s
Meter Summary
City: WpctOver Nillc
Provided: w ~ ~
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~a " 1 0 - 224*
1" 1 67 - -
1 'k " 3.33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3" 10 0 - -
4" 16 67 - -
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10 76 67 - -
Total -- - 224
Non-Residential Meters
''~ " 1 0 - 0
1" 1 67 - -
1 'k" 3 33 - -
2" 5.33 - -
3" 10 0 - -
4" 16 67 - -
6" 33 33 - -
8" 53.33 - -
10" 76 67 - -
Total - 0
~O Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 224
4o Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 224
Total 1993 Population 672 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 0
Weighted 1993 Population 672 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs -
Totai 1993 Employment 18 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 0
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment 18 Wei hted Meters 224
*No Data -calculated based on 3 persons/meter
'~ CLW/DFW I/35134.A0/FRMCW26.51
1
1
1
Meter Summary
City: Wrc1..,nrth pillage
Provided: w ~ ~
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 593 593
1 " 1 67 0 0
1 '~ " 3.33 0 0
2" 5.33 0 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 593 593
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 5 5
1 " 1 67 1 2
1 `~ " 3.33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3 " 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67
0
0
6" 33 33
0
0
8" 53.33
0
0
i0" 76 67 0 0
Total 6 7
~O Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 599
% Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 600
Total 1993 Population 2,350 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.96
Weighted 1993 Population 2,350 Ratio-Non-Resident. Equiv Meters/Jobs 40.00
Total 1993 Employment 280 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 92
Wei tiled 1993E to went 280 Wei hted Meters 599
CLW/DFW 1/35134.A0/PRMCW27.51
1
1
CLW/DFW I /35134.A0/FRM(,'W2g.;i
Meter Summary
Clty: Wl,:to C"tt1e1114~t
Provided: -_ w ,e, Mini,
,~
EXHIBIT E
..
;•: ~
~~
;;~
~:~
::~:
.~ ~~~
S [ ~ •~ ~;,
~~
~~
~~
~,
.~-
,~
-- .~~ ,
_ ,
~~
Capital
Improvements
Pan
r
For Determination Of
Wastewater
~ Impact Fees
Prepared For.
-~
Fort wortn
Water
Deparhnent
June 2,1993
Exhibit F
4,s.~~.a~~e,\
rr y~Pt~ OFN'"`'~11
~ * ''~ rr ~
z a
~ ~~;r E
G. D. MIDDLETON t
.M.Mw.~~ ~ ~~./.
40518. f~,~",%
•~~I~g~~~~ ~~w~
..„.~ vw o .~.
~e ~~~~~rn
A
~„{~7~
Prepared By
CARTER & BURGESS, INC.
in association with
CH2M HILL
~,
t
J
Contents
Page
t
r
Executive Summary ......................................... 1
Introduction .............................................. 3
Eligible Facilities ........................................... 4
Treatment Plants , , 4
Engineering Studies 6
Capacity Criteria ........................................... 7
Facility Requirements ........................................ 9
Service Unit Determination ................................... 17
Appendix A. CIP Projects
Appendix B Meter Summaries
Executive Summary
Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan
This report contains the Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan (WWCIP) for
determination of impact fees. When combined with the Carter and Burgess, Inc. report
titled "Land Use Assumptions -Wastewater Facilities, 1993-2003" (Land Use
Assumptions), the WWCIP provides the necessary engineering calculations and
justification for determining the maximum assessable impact fee under the Texas Local
Government Code, Chapter 395. This report updates the initial CIP and impact fee study
performed by the Fort Worth Water Department in 1990. The impact fee law requires
that the reports and impact fee ordinance be updated every three years and the impact fee
revised, if necessary.
The general approach to the WWCIP preparation was similar to the 1990 study. As in
1990, the Fort Worth Water Department chose to exclude the wastewater collection
system and lift stations from the WWCIP which lowered the maximum assessable fee but
also significantly reduced the complexity of the WWCIP
The WWCIP analyzed what facilities would be required to serve growth between the
years 1993 and 2003 Eligible facilities included in this study were treatment plants and
engineering studies. The present and future capacity of the treatment plants was analyzed
based on Fort Worth design criteria found in the 1989 Wastewater Master Plan, system
operating records over the past 10 years, and the Land Use Assumptions. The following
table compares the results of the 1990 and 1993 studies.
1990 1993
WWCIP Costs $56,135,613 $ 34,945,030
Total Equivalent Meters 43,693 36,109
Maximum Assessable Impact Fee $1,285 $967
The following items are changes made for the 1993 WWCIP along with the impact (1990
versus 1993) on the maximum assessable fee:
Equivalent meter factors have been changed to more accurately reflect the maximum
system demand the respective size meter exerts on the system. This item increased
the maximum fee for the 3/4 inch meter but lowered the fees for larger size meters.
2. Inactive meters have been excluded from the service unit determination since these
meters exert no demand on the system. This item increased the maximum fee.
DF W 1 U~i_PHLLPS~RPT008.5 i
'~ 3 The Northside Satellite Service Cen r
to has been deleted from the WWCIP. It was
doubtful that this project would be built in the next ten years because of changes in
,~`' the system operations. This item decreased the fee.
4 The costs for the Master Plan study were allocated over a ten year rather than a 20
year basis because Master Plans are typically updated every ten years. This item
increased the fees slightly.
5 As shown in the Land Use Assumptions, population projections have dropped
considerably since the 1990 study The projects and the allocations in the CIP have
been adjusted to reflect the revised population forecasts. Generally this lowers the fee
because fewer newer facilities are required to meet the growth.
6. The two projects related to the Trinity River Authority - TRA Central WWTP and
TRA Denton Creek WWTP -have been deleted. Costs assessed to Fort Worth for
these plants are presently being paid through the rate structure and there is no
contractual method presently available to disburse impact fees to pay for these new
facilities with TRA.
t
7 It has been assumed that the City of Arlington will drop out of the system when their
~' contract expires in the year 2001. This has the effect of lowering the impact fee b
Y
freeing capacity and limiting capital projects which would have been needed to serve
~, growth. This lowering effect on the impact fee will be more pronounced in updates
closer to the year 2001
The maximum assessable impact fee fora 3/4" water meter was found to be $967. This fee
"~~ was down from $1,285 in the 1990 study The prim reasons for the decrease were the
m'Y
deletion of the TRA projects and the reduction in growth related capital facilities because of
the excess capacity made available by the projected departure of the City of Arlington from
the s stem
Y
The impact fee calculated in this report is the maximum assessable fee. The City of Fort
Worth is legally allowed to charge any impact fee up to the maximum amount. Lower fees
may be adopted to encourage growth. The difference between what is required by the
WWCIP and the amount collected through impact fees will need to be made up through
higher wastewater rates or other sources of revenue.
DFW 1 VvI_PHLLPS~RP1'008.51 2
City of Fort Worth, Texas
Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan
for Determination of Impact Fees
INTRODUCTION
This document contains the wastewater Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for
determination of impact fees for the City of Fort Worth, Texas, and calculates the
maximum assessable fee. This study updates the report prepared by the Fort Worth Water
Department in 1990
The City of Fort Worth provides wastewater services to retail as well as a number of
wholesale customers in Tarrant County as described in "Land Use Assumptions -
Wastewater Facilities, 1993-2013" (land Use Assumptions) The purpose of the CIP is to
identify those projects which will be required to be constructed to serve new growth
occurring in the Fort Worth service area between the years 1993 and 2003 Population
projections found in the Land Use Assumptions have been used when determining the size
and quantity of new facilities. For impact fee determination purposes, those projects
currently under construction, those recently completed, and those listed in the "1989 Fort
Worth Wastewater Master Plan" (Master Plan) have been considered for inclusion into the
CIP
The impact fee. includes only that portion of the cost of an improvement which is directly
related to new growth. Those projects required to allow the system to serve present
customers such as upgrades and additional treatment processes are not included except to
the extent that they have excess capacity to serve future growth. Likewise, it may be cost
effective to oversize some expansion projects to take advantage of economies of scale.
For impact fee purposes, however, only that portion which serves growth in the
~, 1993-2003 study period is included.
The impact fee will be determined based on the number of service units projected to be
~, added in the 10-year study period. This study assumes a 3/4-inch water meter to be the
standard service unit. The water meter was selected because its hydraulic capacity is
easily determined and a direct relationship exists between the amount of water used and
r the quantity of wastewater produced. Meters larger than 3/4 inches will be assessed a
d~
higher rate based on the hydraulic capacity of the meter as described later in this report.
DFW i\TSx35314.A0/RPT013.51 3
t
r
ELIGIBLE FACILITIES
The impact fee law allows all those projects which were undertaken to serve growth
during the study period to be included in the impact fee calculation. This includes costs
for the collection system, lift stations, treatment plants, customer service facilities, and
engineering studies. The City of Fort Worth has elected not to include the wastewater
collection system or lift stations in the impact fee calculation. This decision simplifies the
calculation but lowers the total allowable fee which can be collected.. The difference
between the cost of a CIP project and what is collected in impact fees will need to be
financed through the rate structure and paid for by all customers.
The following paragraphs briefly describe the existing facilities in the Fort Worth
wastewater system and lists those projects shown in the Master Plan which may be eligible
for consideration in the capital improvement plan. Figure 1 shows the physical location
for these projects. Appendix A describes each of these projects in greater detail.
Treatment Plants
The City of Fort Worth treats its wastewater at the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment
Plant (WWTP) which is rated for an average flow of 120 MGD In addition, Fort Worth
has contractual agreements with the Trinity River Authority (TRA) to treat wastewater
from part of the Fort Worth service area at the TRA Central WWTP and the TRA Denton
Creek WWTP The TRA Central Plant serves an area northeast of the Village Creek
VVWTP in portions of the West Fork above Mountain Creek and Walker Branch
sewersheds which cannot be served by gravity from the Village Creek plant. The Denton
Creek WWTP serves those areas in far north Fort Worth north of the Big Bear Creek
sewershed. The City of Fort Worth has elected not to include the TRA plants in the
impact fee calculation.
The Village Creek WWTP has a number of projects which have recently been completed,
are under construction, or are planned during the study period. These projects can be
divided up into four primary categories.
• Category A. Projects to upgrade the treatment process at the plant. These
projects are constructed primarily to meet the needs of existing customers
but there may be a small amount of excess capacity which can be assessed
to future customers.
• Category B. Projects related to a 24 MGD plant expansion to meet future
flows. Many of these projects have been completed or are presently under
construction. These costs can be directly allocated to growth in proportion
to the amount of the facility expansion utilized by growth in the planning
penod
DFWI\TEX35314.AO/RPT013.51 4
4
Olt IMO 1111 *1111 low *it mot am ma aft as sit ism let tie ow
PCs PP
• L. rw
,Ppz•Zre.
I
1
'71:Z 1 /
FORT WORTH WATER DEPARTMENT
pyi
,
2E]
r;•
si_S
P
al ... • CI , -P.)::; ' ....m....
fi4e6ilte, .
C
ZAPI
)eirftti
soro
7;41741i1.10
. I
UPDATED 201 F ACILITES PLAN
PHASED EXPANSION OF THE VILLAGE CREEK WW TP
FORT WORTM. TEXAS
0
8
75.uk
.5 50.00
.5 60.00
50.00
kg01
1111111111
P,P,SEi5S IW.0 sk.on, CLAPVEPS
PHASE H•Z Kai PLC. RUMS
ROSE n3.- OAXSTERS Ane *HP> CMOS
PHASE it POPP t T00X •`.0,
FHA% 16 0909 'WMC, 'Er
PHASE 2A ra.sEPE
F.7 PHASE 29 AEPAinti ISAS,H5 CLAPPIEPS
•
MOSS 2C MOP, %%omen
RAM 38 secouo.. TKATIJEUT
PHASE 39 SOUPS HANDLPte
PHASE s• ASP ..311 •PE.• 3 AltHAEOXA,30
11111 PHASE se ELEC TPAC. POIAPICATCHS
PHASE AC MPG, MAHA083•900
MIMUSE 48 C0101.1iP S STEN VMAGIDADI,
RENO.5L» KPOrri
FIGURE 1
~' Category C. Projects to upgrade the treatment process which serves
existing customers as well as future customers through the 24 MGD
~' expansion. The costs for these projects are allocated to existing customers,
study period growth, and growth beyond 2003 in proportion to the amount
_, of the 144 MGD capacity used.
Category D. Projects to upgrade the treatment process which serve
existing customers as well as those future customers through the 24 MGD
expansion and an additional 17 MGD expansion. The costs for these
projects are allocated to existing customers, study period growth, and
growth beyond the year 2003 in proportion to the amount of the 161 MGD
capacity used.
Engineering Studies
There are several engineering studies which are eligible for inclusion into the CIP The
following is a bnef list of the projects
• 1989 Master Plan. This comprehensive engineering report projected
growth and analyzed the effect growth will have on the Fort Worth
wastewater system through the year 2010 This project was required to
guide the capital improvement program and ensure construction in a planned
and cost-effective manner
• 1999 Master Plan. This comprehensive engineering report will update and
extend the 1989 Master Plan Study It will analyze the effect growth has
on the Fort Worth system through the year 2020 and will guide the capital
'~~ improvement program during those years.
• Wastewater Impact Fee Update. This engineering report is required by
law every 3 years in order to verify that the impact fee charged new
customers to the system is reasonable and proportional to their impact on
the system. The original impact fee was approved in 1990 so reports
during the study period will need to be performed in 1993, 1996, 1999, and
2002
DFW 1\TEX35314.A0/RPT013.51 6
CAPACITY CRITERIA
Treatment Plants
' Wastewater treatment plants are rated on their ability to treat an average flow on a three
month rolling average of maximum month basis. The hydraulic capacity of a plant is
generally much greater in order to be able to handle the wide daily fluctuations in
wastewater flow and the fluctuations caused by heavy rainfalls. In this report, all capacity
criteria will be based on maximum month average flow (rated capacity) with the
assumption that the actual hydraulic capacity of the plant will be higher to meet
wastewater flow variations.
The Master Plan estimates annual average wastewater flows based on population,
employment, and groundwater infiltration. The formula used is.
Q,~g = BWF + 65 GI
Average wastewater flow (annual average)
Where. Q,,,g
_
BWF Base wastewater flow defined as 75 gallons per capita per
day (gpcd) plus 35 gallons per employee per day (gped)
GI = Groundwater infiltration calculated as 400 gallons per acre
sewered before 1986 plus 200 gallons per acre sewered after
1986
'~
To convert the annual average flow to a three month rolling average maximum month
flow, the annual average must be multiplied by a peaking factor By analyzing the last ten
years of data for the Village Creek WWTP a peaking factor of 1 19 was found. The 1 19
factor was used in the CIP to determine the plant capacity required.
The Master Plan study computed that 134,783 acres in the Fort Worth service area were
sewered prior to the year 1986. The Master Plan also estimated sewered acres through
the year 2010 In 1993, it was estimated that 155,700 acres would be sewered. By the
year 2003, the sewered acres would grow to 174,400 acres including Arlington. The
service contract with the City of Arlington expires in 2001 and is not expected to be
,~ renewed The year 2003 sewered acres was reduced by 12.2 % (Arlington's contribution
'
s departure.
to total system population) to account for Arlington
Based on population and employment values provided in the Land Use Assumptions, the
following flows were calculated for the years 1993, 2001, and 2003. The plant will need
to be expanded to serve the greater flow between year 2001 flows with Arlington and year
2003 flows without Arlington. The population and employment figures in the following
_ calculations for the year 2001 are based on straight line interpolations of growth during
the study period The calculations show that the Village Creek plant, when expanded to
DFW i1TEX35314.A0/RPT013.5 i 7
r
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
A
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
144 MGD, has adequate capacity in the year 2003 but is just slightly overloaded by the
end of the year 2001 just pnor to Arlington's departure. The 0 1 MGD overload is not
enough to justify inclusion of an additional plant expansion into the CIP The expected
flows are:
1993
Population = 787,494 x 75 gpcd = 59 1 MGD
Employment = 415,308 x 35 gped = 14.5 MGD
BWF = 73 6 MGD
GI = (134,783 acres) (400 gal/acre) = 53 9 MGD
(155,700-134,783 acres)(200 gal/acre) = 4.2 MGD
GI = 58 1 MGD
Qa„g = 73 6 + 65(58 1) = 111 4 MGD
Q ~ ~,~ = Q8„g x Peaking Factor
Q ~ mom = 111 4 x i 19 = 132.5 MGD
2001
Population = 857,066 x 75 gpcd = 64 3 MGD
Employment = 488,057 x 35 gped 17.1 MGD
BWF = 81 4 MGD
GI = (134,783 acres) (400 gal/acre) = 53 9 MGD
(170,660 - 134,783 acres) (200 gaUacre) = 7.2 MGD
GI = 61 1 MGD
Q,,,g = 81 4 + 65 (61 1) = 121 i MGD
Q >~ mom = 121 1 x 1 19 = 144.1 MGD
2003
Population = 764,100 x 75 gpcd = 57 3 MGD
Employment = 487,527 x 35 gped = 17.1 MGD
BWF = 74 4 MGD
DF W 1 \TEX35314. AO/RPT013.51
8
~~ GI = (134,783 acres) (400 gal/acre) = 53 9 MGD
(153,123-134,783 acres)(200 gal/acre) = 3.7 MGD
,~ GI = 57 6 MGD
Qa~g = 74 4 + 65(57 6) = 111 8 MGD
Q ~ mom = 111 8 x 1 19 = 133.1 MGD
The plant will be expanded to serve the maximum flow during the study period. With
Arlington's departure from the system, the peak flow occurs in'the year 2001 as shown
above. The amount of the expansion allocated to growth is equal to the peak flow year
(2001) minus the existing flow, or•
Change in treatment capacity = 144 1 - 132.5 = 11.6 MGD
FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
This section justifies the projects selected for the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) and
allocates their cost to existing, planning period, and beyond planning penod customers.
Table 1 summarizes the projects selected for the CIP and shows $34,945,030 worth of
projects which can be directly attributed to growth during the study period. The actual
project costs were used when available and Master Plan projections were used on future
projects. The following paragraphs describe the allocation and justification for each of the
projects. Figure 2 graphically shows the allocation of the Village Creek WWTP projects
by category Amore detailed description of the projects can be found in Appendix A.
Treatment Plants
As described earlier, projects at the Village Creek WWTP can be divided into four
categories. The following paragraphs describe the projects and allocation included in the
CIP by category
r
DFWI\TEX35314.A0/RPT013.Si 9
MINI fill 111111 Ili ill lila INN O 111111 IIIII r
1
ID
2
PROJECT TTILE
VILLAGE CREEK FACILITIES
CATEGORY A: CONSTRUCTION PRIMARILY
TO MEET PRESENT FLOWS(6)
ALLOCATION: 1993 - 2003 EXPANSION
COSTS = 483%P (INELIGIBLE EPA COSTS)
I-B-1 SLUDGE ONLY LANDFILL
I-B-2 DIGESTERS AND THICKENERS
I-B-3 INTERMEDIATE PIPELINES
CATEGORY B: EXPANSION TO MEET
FUTURE FLOWS
ALLOCATION: 1993 - 2003 EXPANSION
COST = 483% (CAPITAL COST)
TABLE 1
WASTEWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS FOR IMPACT FEES
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TOTAL COST ALLOCATED COST ALLOCATED COST ALLOCATED
PROJECT TO EXISTING TO EXPANSION TO EXPANSION
COST START DURATION COMPLETION 1993 CAPACITY 1993-2003 BEYOND 2003
($) DATE (MONTHS) DATE ($) ($) ($)
II -A 24 MGD EXPANSION (PHASE II -A) (ENGR)
II -A 24 MGD EXPANSION (PHASE II -A) (CM/T)
II -A 24 MGD EXPANSION (PHASE II -A)
II-B 24 MOD EXPANSION (PHASE II-B) (ENGR)'
II-B 24 MGD EXPANSION (PHASE II-B) (CM/T)'
II-B 24 MGD EXPANSION (PHASE II-B)•
II-C 24 MGD EXPANSION (PHASE II-C) (ENGR)
II-C 24 MGD EXPANSION (PHASE II-C/PUMP UPGRADE) (CM/T)
II-C 24 MGD EXPANSION (PHASE II-C/PUMP UPGRADE)
III-B SOLIDS AREA EXPANSION (ENGR)
III -B SOLIDS AREA EXPANSION (CM/T)
III - B SOLIDS AREA EXPANSION
IV -C1 AUXILIARY HEATING DIGESTERS (CM)
IV-C1 AUXILIARY HEATING DIGESTERS
IV-D1 CONTROL SYSTEM (PHASE I) (ENGR)
IV-D1 CONTROL SYSTEM (PHASE I) (CM)
IV-D1 CONTROL SYSTEM (PHASE I)
IV-F PRIMARY EFFLUENT PUMP UPGRADE (ENGR)
7,860,403 23-JUN-87 25 01-AUG-89 7,583,253 277,150(1) 0
15,250,000 22-NOV-88 18 15-MAY-90 14,660,740 589,260(2) 0
1,244,000 16-MAR-89 5 01-AUG-89 1,170,095 73,905(3) 0
974,080 13-MAY-86 33 01-FEB-89 503,599 470,481(5) 0
866,950 13-FEB-89 24 13-FEB-91 448,213 418,737(5) 0
17,565,920 13-FEB-89 24 13-FEB-91 9,081,581 8,484,339(5) 0
1,134,806 13-MAY-86 44 15-JAN-90 586,695 548,111(5) 0
1,134,806 13-JAN-90 30 13-JUL-92 586,695 548,111(5) 0
12,889,500 01-MAR-90 24 29-FEB-92 6,663,871 6,225,629(5) 0
573,732 13-MAY-86 65 01-OCT-91 296,619 277,113(5) 0
900,000 01-NOV-92 24 30-OC1'-94 465,300 434,700(5) 0
16,288,520 01-NOV-92 24 30-OCT-94 8,421,165 7,867,355(5) 0
1,346,400 01-NOV-96 12 01-NOV-97 231,797 216,554(4) 898,049
1,346,400 01-NOV-98 24 31-OCT-00 231,797 216,554(4) 898,049
16,830,000 01-NOV-98 24 31-OC1'-00 2,897,470 2,706,920(4) 11,225,610
10,000 01-MAR-90 12 01-MAR-91 5,170 4,830(5) 0
100,000 01-FEB-90 6 01-AUG-90 51,700 48,300(5) 0
246,250 24-JAN-89 12 15-JAN-90 127,311 118,939(5) 0
292,315 30-JAN-90 30 30-JUL-92 151,127 141,188(5) 0
1,780,000 30-JAN-90 12 30-JAN-91 920,260 859,740(5) 0
150,000 01-DEC-89 4 01-APR-90 77,550 72,450(5) 0
• onTTIIII nn'* P I I%WIr,D WV 1
TABLE 1
WASTEWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS FOR IMPACT FEES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TOTAL COST ALLOCATED COST ALLOCATED COST ALLOCATED
PROJECT TO EXISTING TO EXPANSION TO EXPANSION
ID PROJECT TITLE COST START DURATION COMPLETION 1993 CAPACITY 1993-2003 BEYOND 2003
(5) DATE (MONTHS) DATE ($) (3) ($1
CATEGORY Ct EXPANSION TO MEET PRESENT
AND 144 MGD PLOW
ALLOCATION: 1993-2003 EXPANSION
COST = 8.1% (CAPITAL COST)
IV-B ELECTRICAL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (ENGR)' 398,620 23-AUG-88 40 08-DEC-91 366,332 32,288 0
IV-B ELECTRICAL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (CM)* 541,207 10-MAR-90 29 08-JUL-92 497,369 43,838 0
IV-B ELECTRICAL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS' 6,362,679 10-MAR-90 29 08-JUL-92 5,847,302 515,377 0
IV-B2 ELECTRICAL GENERATION EXPANSION (ENGR) 400,000 01-JUL-95 6 30-DEC-95 367,600 32,400 0
IV-B2 ELECTRICAL GENERATION EXPANSION (CM) 400,000 01-DEC-95 24 30-NOV-97 367,600 32,400 0
IV-B2 ELECTRICAL GENERATION EXPANSION 5,000,000 01-DEC-94 18 31-MAY-96 4,595,000 405,000 0
IV-D2 CONTROL SYSTEM (PHASE II) (ENGR) 1,297,004 17-OCT-89 13 30-FEB-92 1,191,947 105,057 0
IV-D2 CONTROL SYSTEM (PHASE II) (CM) 579,755 01-JUN-90 36 01-JUN-93 532,795 46,960 0
IV-D2 CONTROL SYSTEM (PHASE II) • 3,351,418 01-JUN-90 36 01-JUN-93 3,079,953 271,465 0
IV-C3 ENERGY MANAGEMENT (ENGR) 688,235 06-JUN-91 23 30-APR-93 632,488 55,747 0
IV-C3 ENERGYMANAGEMENT(CM) 562,000 01-JUL-93 18 01-JAN-95 516,478 45,522 0
IV-C3 ENERGY MANAGEMENT 11,710,000 01-JUL-93 18 01-JAN-95 10,761,490 948,510 0
CATEGORY D: EXPANSION TO MEET EXISTING
144 MGD AND BEYOND
ALLOCATION: 1993-2003 EXPANSION
COSTS = 7.2% (CAPITAL COSTS)
0
I-B-4 SLUDGEDEWATERINGFACILITY(ENGR) 200,000 01-JUN-93 6 30-OCT-93 164,600 14,400 21,000
I-B-4 SLUDGE DEWATERING FACILITY (CM) 100,000 01-FEB-94 60 30-JAN-99 82,300 7,200 10,500
I-B-4 SLUDGE DEWATERING FACILITY 10,000,000 01-FEB-94 60 30-JAN-99 8,230,000 720,000 1,050,000
CATEGORY E: ENGINEERING STUDIES
1989 WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN
1999 WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN
IMPACT FEE STUDIES (ENGR)
908,500 01-FEB-86 47 31-DEC-89 302,800 605,700 0
908,500 01-FEB-96 47 31-DEC-99 605,700 302,800 0
160,000 01-JAN-93 120 31-DEC-03 0 160,000 (7) 0
11P/DPWI/I'EX33134A0/TAB1/WWCIP WK1
1 111111 1 11111 1141 1 1111 1
1
ID
2
PROJECT TTTLE
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS
TABLE 1
WASTEWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROJECTS FOR IMPACT FEES
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TOTAL COST ALLOCATED COST ALLOCATED COST ALLOCATED
PROJECT TO EXISTING TO EXPANSION TO EXPANSION
COST START DURATION COMPLETION 1993 CAPACITY 1993-2003 BEYOND 2003
($) DATE (MONTHS) DATE ($) (S) ($)
STATE REVOLVING FUND PROTECT - APPROVED
(1) 7.3% INELIGIBLE FOR EPA GRANT
(2) 8% INELIGIBLE FOR EPA GRANT
(3)123% INELIGIBLE FOR EPA GRANT
(4) 33% FOR YEAR 2003 (TWO OF SIX DIGESTERS REQUIRED FOR EXPANSION)
(5) REMAINING CAPITAL COST ALLOCATED TO BEYOND YEAR 2003
(6) ALLOCATION TO PRESENT PLANT DETERMINED BY EPA AS NOTED
(7) HALF OF TOTAL ENGINEERING FEES FOR 4 STUDIES.
142,352,000 34,945,030
160
150
110
ti PLANT RATED.
r
r
1980 1985
161 MGD
144 MGD S I I .
I
I
I
133.1
PEAK MONTH FLOW
4 M
G
G
2 K
A
E
CREEK
VL
1
L
GD
EXPANSION
A
N
s
0N
CATEGORY
SEE TEXT
CATEGORY
B " 11.6+144
- 24
-
CATEGORY p _ 11.6 11.6 ± 161
CATEGORY
t
0
i
5
2 0
1
0
1990 1995 2000 2405
WON
YEAR
FIGURE.z �OSTh -
0000
wow
F PROJECT AI -LOCATION oGp,Tt°N__.
i
1
Category A -Primarily for Existing Flows
These projects are each allocated based on the percent of construction cost eligible for
EPA grant money plus the percent of the additional capacity used by existing, study
period, and beyond year 2003 customers. The costs greater than the EPA grant amount
are allocated as follows for each of the Category A projects.
Study Period = (144 1 - 132.5) - 24 = 48 3
Existing = Remaining Costs = 100 - 48 3 = 51 7
1 Sludge Only Landfill. This project provides solids handling and disposal
capabilities through 2010 The U S EPA made grant funds available for that
portion of this project attributed to the 120 MGD plant. The EPA grant covered
92 7 % of the construction costs. The remaining 7 3 % is allocated to the study
period by growth's proportion of the 24 MGD expansion.
2 Digesters and Thickeners. This project provides sludge stabilization facilities and
improved thickeners. The U S EPA made grant funds available for that portion of
this project attributed to the 120 MGD plant. The EPA grant covered 92 0% of
the construction costs. The remaining 8 % is allocated to the study period by
growth's proportion of the 24 MGD expansion.
3 Intermediate Pipelines. This project installed the pipelines to connect the new
sludge landfill with the treatment plant. The U S EPA made grant funds available
for that portion of this project attributed to the 120 MGD plant. The EPA grant
covered 87 7 % of construction costs. The remaining 12.3 % is allocated to the
study period by growth's proportion of the 24 MGD expansion.
Category B - 24 MGD Expansion to Meet Future Flows
The projects in Category B are ali associated with expanding the rated capacity of the
Village Creek plant from 120 MGD to 144 MGD With the exception of project No 4
(Solids Area Expansion), all of the projects are allocated to the study period by growth's
proportion of the 24 MGD expansion (11 6 _ 24 = 48 3 %). The Solids Area Expansion
is designed for flows beyond the 24 MGD expansion. Only one-third of the project is
required to serve the 24 MGD expansion Costs for this project are allocated 66 7% to
,~ future growth beyond 2003 and 33 3 % to the 24 MGD expansion. Of the amount
allocated to the 24 MGD expansion, 48 3 % will be allocated to the study period, and the
remaining 51 7% will be allocated to existing customers. The engineering and
construction management phases of each protect will be allocated in the same proportion
as the construction. The projects required for the 24 MGD expansion are.
• Filter Area and Chlorination, II-A
• Aeration Area, II-B
• Primary Area, II-C
DFwI\TEX35314.A0/RP'1'013.51 14
1
• Solids Area, III-B
• Digester Heating, IV-C 1
• Control System (Phase I), IV-D1
• Primary Effluent Pumps, IV-F
Category C -Expansion to Meet Existing and 144 MGD Flow
The projects in Category C are all improvements to the plant which will serve the existing
customers plus future customers through the expansion to 144 MGD. Costs for these
projects are allocated in proportion to the amount of the 144 MGD capacity utilized.
Study period customers are allocated 8.1 % (11 6 MGD - 144 MGD), and existing
customers are allocated the remaining 91 9 % The engineering and construction
management phases of each project are allocated in the same proportion as the
construction. The Category C projects are:
• Electrical System Improvements, IV-B
• Electrical Generation Expansion,. IV-B2
• Control System (Phase II), IV-D2
• Energy Management, IV-C3
Category D -Expansion to Meet Existing and l61 MGD Flow
The project in Category D is a sludge processing facility This improvement to the plant
will serve the existing customers plus future customers through the planned expansion to
161 MGD The cost for this project is allocated in proportion to the amount of the
' 161 MGD capacity utilized. Existing customers are allocated 82.3 % (132.5 MGD
161 MGD), study penod customers are allocated 7 2 % (11 6 _ 161 MGD), and
customers beyond year 2003 are allocated 10 5 % (16.9 MGD _ 161 MGD) The
construction management phase of this project is allocated in the same proportion as the
construction.
Category E -Engineering Studies
t There are three studies which have been included in the impact fee calculation. They are.
1 1989 Master Plan -This study was required to guide the capital
improvements program and ensure construction in a planned and cost
effective manner The master plan covered the years 1990 to 2010 but
master plans are typically updated every 10 years. The cost has been
allocated based on the 10 year update schedule. Three years (1990-1993)
or 33 3 % of the cost has been allocated to existing customers. Seven years
(1993-2000) or 66.7% of the cost has been allocated to the study period.
The total cost shown is half the overall project cost with the other half
being assessed in the water impact fee.
DFw1\TEx35314.A0/1tP'['o13.51 15
1
r
2. 1999 Master Plan -This study is allocated in the same manner as the 1989
Master Plan. Three years (2000 - 2003) or 33 3 % has been allocated to the
study period. Seven years (2003 - 2010) or 66 7 % is allocated to growth
beyond the year 2003 The total cost shown is half the overall project cost
with the other half being assessed in the water impact fee.
3 Impact Fee Study -This study is required by statute every three years to
update the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the effect growth has on the
system. The cost for four impact fee studies (1993, 1996, 1999, and 2002)
are allocated entirely to the study period. The total cost shown is half the
overall project cost with the other half being assessed in the water impact
fee.
DFwI\TSx35314.AO/1tP'1'o13.51 16
1
n
SERVICE iJNIT DETERMINATION
The equivalent meter has been selected as the method to measure consumption by new
growth for impact fee purposes. As stated earlier, the water meter will serve as the
service unit for both water and wastewater impact fee calculations. The equivalent meter
is defined as the unit equivalent to the hydraulic capacity of a 3/4-inch water meter The
3/4-inch water meter was selected because it represents the size water meter for an
average single family home. Other size meters are represented by a number of equivalent
meters through multiplication by an equivalency factor based on the hydraulic capacity of
the meter Table 2 shows the equivalency factors used in this study for meters of various
sizes. The total number of meters in the Fort Worth service area is provided in
Appendix B This meter information is broken down by type (residential or non-
residential) and size, and by whether the meter is serviced by the City of Fort Worth or
serviced by a wholesale customer The appendix also summarizes the data for all the
wholesale customers. The remaining pages break down the meter data by wholesale
customer In nearly all cases, the wholesale customer was the source of meter
information.
Once the number of equivalent meters has been determined, the next task is to calculate
the number of people represented by a residential meter and the number of fobs
represented by anon-residential meter This calculation was performed for the City of
Fort Worth alone and for the wholesale customers as a group in order to get better
accuracy in comparing population or employment changes to number of meters. The
results for the present (1993) system are:
Fort Worth Onlv
a. Number of Equivalent Meters
b Population
c. Employment
Population per Equivalent Meter (b/a) _
Employment per Equivalent Meter (c/a) _
Wholesale Customers
a. Number of Equivalent Meters
b Population
c. Employment
Population per Equivalent Meter (b/a) _
Employment per Equivalent Meter (c/a) _
Non-
Residential Residential
142,331 33,132
450, 877 ---
-- 322, 800
3 17
9 74
Non-
Residential Residential
181,616 23,134
533,141 --
-- 174,197
2.94
-- 7 53
DFWIITEX35314.A0/RPT013.51 17
1
1
1
1
TABLE 2
EQUIVALENT METER TABLE
ACTUAL METER SIZE
(inches)
EQUIVALENCY FACTOR
5/8 or 3/4 1 0
1 1 67 _
l lh 3 33
2 5 33
3 10 0
4 16 67
6 33 33
8 S3 33
10 76 67
Source: American Water Works Association, Manual of Water Supply
Practices No M6; "Water Meters -Selection, Installation, Testing,
and Maintenance"
' DFW I\TEX35314.A0/RPT013.5 i 18
1
1
Using the ratios determined above, the next step is to determine the increase in service
units caused by growth in population and employment. When computing the population
and employment changes for the wholesale customers, Arlington's growth between the
years 1993 and 2001 was added to the growth predicted for the remaining wholesale
customers between the years 1993 and 2003 Using population and employment
projections found in the Land Use Assumptions, the estimated number of additional
equivalent meters can be calculated as follows.
Fort Worth
1
C
[1
Residential = (Population Change) - 3 17
(473,450 - 441,877) - 3 17 = 9,960
Non-Residential = (Employment Change) - 9 74
_ (386,600 - 322,800) _ 9 74 = 6,550
Wholesale Customers
Residential = (Population Change) _ 2 94
_ (393,215 - 345,617) _ 2.94 = 16,190
Non-Residential = (Employment Change) _ 7.53
_ (118,176 - 92,508) _ 7 53 = 3.409
Increase in Equivalent Meters = 36,109
The final step in determining the maximum assessable impact fee is to divide the total
costs included in the CIP (See Table 1) by the increase in equivalent meters. This
calculation yields the impact fee assessable per equivalent meter (3/4-inch size) The fee
for other size meters will equal the fee fora 3/4-inch meter times the equivalency factor
found in Table 2. The maximum assessable impact fee is calculated as.
Maximum Impact Fee = (CIP cost) _ (Increase in Equivalent Meters)
_ $34,945,030 - 36,109
Maximum Impact Fee = $967 per equivalent unit
This impact fee underestimates the actual cost of providing service to new customers of
the Fort Worth Water System. The underestimate is caused by the City's decision not to
include the wastewater collection system and lift stations in the CIP. If these were to be
included, the maximum assessable fee would be increased.
DFWI\TSX35314.A0/RP'i'013.51 19
1
The Ci of Fort Worth is le all allowed to char e an im act fee as lon as it does not
tY g Y g Y P g
exceed the maximum assessable fee. A lower fee can be adopted to encourage growth,
' however, the difference between what is required by the CIP and the amount collected in
impact "fees would need to be made up through higher wastewater rates to existing
customers or other revenue sources.
ii
1
' DFWI\TEX35314.A0/RPT013.51 20
1 Appendix A
ii
Appendix A
CIP Projects
CATEGORY A. IMPROVEMENTS TO MEET PRESENT FLOWS
Project Title: Sludge only Landfill, 1-B-1
Description. The 156-acre landfill and solids processing area provides capacity to
bury dewatered sludge through year 2010 The area surrounded by the levee also
provides a location for the sludge processing facility The new landfill is sealed
from exfiltration by a clay slurry curtain wall and the underlying impermeable
strata.
Purpose: The existing sludge drying beds are an inexpensive and effective way to
dry the digested sludge. However, the area is too small and unreliable in wet
weather for the projected plant flows.
Allocation Costs to existing plant determined by percent eligible for EPA Grant
Funds (92.7% of construction costs) Costs to 1993 to 2003 period based on
percentage of 24 MGD expansion applied to planning penod (48 3 % of remaining
costs) Remaining costs applied to existing customers.
Status. Construction is complete.
G
Project Title: Digesters and Thickeners, 1-B-2
Description: Four dissolved air flotation thickeners replaced the gravity sludge
thickener and centrifuges. Four digesters and a blend tank provide for sludge
stabilization
Purpose: The four sludge thickeners concentrate the waste activated sludge prior
to digestion. The sludge is mixed with primary sludge in a blend tank and
distributed to the anaerobic digesters for fermentation. The four additional
digesters provide sufficient detention time for complete reduction of the organic
compounds. An existing gravity thickener was converted to a final clarifier,
thereby adding capacity to the activated sludge system
Allocation. Costs to existing plant determined by percent eligible for EPA Grant
Funds (92 0% of construction costs) Costs to 1993 to 2003 period based on
percentage of 24 MGD expansion applied to planning period (48 3 % of remaining
costs) Remaining costs applied to existing customers.
Status: Construction is complete.
DFW 11TEX35134.A0\RP1'002.51
21
1
Project Title: Intermediate Pipeline, 1-B-3
Description. Four pipelines linking the treatment plant with the sludge only
landfill. Conversion of existing pipelines to the sludge drying beds.
Purpose: Pipelines are required to transport the stabilized sludge from the plant to
the sludge only landfill and to return the sidestream from the sludge processing
' facility and working disposal area. Piping modifications were required in the
existing sludge drying beds to accommodate revised piping.
Allocation. Costs to existing plant determined by percent eligible for EPA Grant
Funds (87.7 % of construction costs) Costs to 1993 to 2003 period based on
percentage of 24 MGD expansion applied to planning penod (48 3 % of remaining
costs) Remaining costs applied to existing customers.
Status. Pipelines were completed in 1989
' CATEGORY B. EXPANSION TO MEET FUTURE FLOWS
' Project Title: Filter Area and Chlorination, II-A
Description. Project includes the construction of continuous backwash filters, a
new chlorination facility, chlorine contact .basins, and expansion of the existing
chlorine contact basins.
' Purpose: The result is a greatly enhanced ability to filter the clarifier effluent and
an improved ability to discharge low-turbidity effluent during wet weather periods.
' Allocation. All costs allocated to 24 MGD expansion. Planning penod costs are
48.3 % (11 6/24) of costs. Remaining costs allocated to existing customers.
`' Status. Construction is complete.
' Project Title: Aeration Area, II-B
Descnption: The construction consists of two large aeration basins, three final
clarifiers and a dechlorination facility.
Purpose: The aeration basins and clarifiers extract the organic matter from the
' sewage and reduce the oxygen demand on river The dechlorination facility was
added to the project to meet the new standard for discharging anon-chlorinated
effluent.
' Allocation: All cost allocated to 24 MGD expansion. Planning period costs are
' DFW l\TEX35134.A0\RPT002.51 22
48 3 % (11.6/24) of costs. Remaining costs allocated to existing customers.
' Status. Construction is complete.
Project Title: Control System (Phase n IV-Dl
1 Descri tion. The exisdn central control s stem was re laced with .a modern
P g Y P
' distributed process control and information management system. The first phase
establishes control over the Phase II-A Project and the entire solids handling
system. It also establishes costs for the remainder of the equipment necessary to
finish the conversion.
Purpose: The existing control system was installed in 1975. It has suffered
' severe corrosion since construction, is now at capacity, and is difficult to
maintain The new system employs a distributed processing system for improved
reliability and expendability
Allocation. All costs allocated to 24 MGD expansion. Planning penod costs are
48 3 % (11 6/24) of costs. Remaining costs allocated to existing customers.
Status. Construction is complete.
' Project Title: Auxiliary Heating Facility, IV-Cl
Description. The existing gas fired boiler was moved from the Engine/Blower
Building to the digester area and installed in a temporary building.
Purpose: The boiler is required to provide heat to the four new digesters.
Allocation. All costs allocated to 24 MGD expansion. Planning period costs are
48 3 % (11 6/24) of costs. Remaining costs allocated to existing customers.
Status. Construction is coin lete.
P
' Project Title. Primary Effluent Pump Upgrade, IV-F
Description. Addition of primary effluent pumps. revision of wet wells, and
improvement to storm water pumping and electrical feeds.
' Purpose: Primary pump stations are unable to pump all of the projected wet
weather flows to secondary area, leading to possibility of flooding in primary
treatment area.
Allocation. All costs allocated to 24 mgd expansion. Planning period costs are
' DFWI\TEX35134.A0\RPTU02.51 23
'~ 48 3 % 11 6/24 of costs. Remainin costs allocated to existing customers. The
( ) g
construction and construction management costs for this .project have been
combined with Project II-C. The engineering portion was kept separate.
Status. Under construction with Project II-C.
Project Title: Primary Area Expansion, II-C
Description. Construction of two additional primary clarifiers, additional effluent
~ pumping capacity, influent bar screens, and an influent line will provide solids
separation capacity as the sewage enters the plant.
Purpose. Increased flows require capacity expansion of the pnmary area to
effectively remove the settleable sludge and pump the flows to the expanded
secondary area.
' Allocation. All costs allocated to 24 MGD expansion. Planning period costs are
48 3 % (11 6/24) of costs. Remaining costs allocated to existing customers.
Status. Under Construction.
Project Title: Solids Area Expansion, III-B
~ Description. Increase the solids treatment capacity by adding four to six digesters
and possible additional secondary sludge thickeners
Purpose: Increased solids loading due to increased pnmary sludge and secondary
sludge requires additional heated anaerobic digester space to adequately reduce the
organic material and make it suitable for dewatenng and landfilling Additional
dissolved air flotation thickeners may be necessary to condense the secondary
sludge prior to digestion.
Allocation. Since only two of the six digesters are required for the 24 MGD
expansion, 33 3 % of the costs were allocated to the 24 MGD expansion. Forty-
;, eight point three percent of the 24 MGD expansion costs were allocated to the
planning period. The remaining expansion costs were allocated to existing
customers.
Status. Planning.
CATEGORY C. EXPANSION TO MEET PRESENT AND .144 MGD FLOW
Allocation. Improvements to the existing plant which will also serve the 24 MGD
expansion facilities. Planning period costs are 8 1 % (11.6/144) of the total costs.
DFWI\TEX35134.A0\RPT002.51 24
Remainin costs allocated to existing customers.
g
Project Title: Electrical System Improvements, IV-B
Description. The origina12400-volt feeders in the primary area replaced with a
high-voltage system. Replaced engine/generator control and switching systems.
Provided synchronization gear
Purpose. The primary electric distribution system at the plant was badly in need
of upgrading. Improvements in generator controls and switching allows more
efficient utilization of plant-generated power Generated power frequency matches
utility power and allows shared use of feeders and improved efficiency.
i Allocation: Category C standard (91 9 % present and 8 1 % to planning period)
Status. Construction is complete..
Project Title: Control System (Phase In, IV-D2
Description Phase II will utilize the equipment selected in Phase I, and will
include software development and installation of the remainder of the control
system to provide centralized control of the entire plant.
Allocation. Category C standard (91 9 % present and 8 1 % to planning period)
Purpose: Project will replace existing computer control system.
Status. Under construction.
Project Title. Energy Management, IV-C3
Description. Constructed a methane and natural gas boiler facility in the digester
area. Installed hot-water supply lines and engine heat exchangers. Installed a gas
compressor facility and storage sphere.
'~ Purpose: Digesters must be maintained at 90-95 °F to effectively stabilize the
sludge. The existing heating system used jacket heat from the engines.
i
d
i
lure ma
e
t
Mechanical breakdowns in winter and potential hot water line fa
necessary to provide an alternate source of heat for the entire digester area. The
gas compression and storage facilities are required to effectively utilize the
methane gas produced in the additional digesters and improve the utilization of the
gas from the existing digesters. The heating facility was constructed in the 91-92
fiscal year to provide heat to all the digesters so that the engines can be repaired
without lowering the digester's temperatures.
DFWI\TFX35134.A0\RPf002:51 25
r
Allocation. Category C standard (91 9 % present and 8 1 % to planning period)
Status. Construction complete.
Project Title: Electrical Generation Expansion, IV-B2
'' Descri tion. Expansion of the energy recovery capacity of the plant by adding
P
large engine-driven generators.
Pu se. Generators will utilize the methane generated by the digesters to power
engines and drive generators which will provide power to the plant electrical
distribution system. Waste heat from the exhaust gases and the jacket water will
be used to heat the digesters.
Allocation Category C standard (91 9 % present and 8 1 % to planning period)
Status. Planning stage.
CATEGORY D. EXPANSION TO MEET EXISTING AND FUTURE FLOWS
'~ Project Title: Sludge Processing Facility, I-B-4
.~ Description. Facility includes sludge storage tanks, press areas, loading areas,
chemical storage and feeding area, and support facilities. The sludge drying
facility will be located in the sludge only landfill area.
~~
Purpose: Increased flows and improved solids separation generate sludge which
must be concentrated prior to landfilling or land application.
Allocation. Improvements to the existing plant which will also service the 24
MGD Phase II expansion and the 17 MGD Phase III expansion. Cost allocated to
present facilities is based on the ratio of present capacity utilized (132.5 MGD) to
^ future capacity for which the project was designed (i61 MGD) or 82.3% The
cost allocated to the planning period is 11 6 MGD/ 161 MGD, or 7.2 % The
remainder is allocated to growth after the year 2003.
Status. Design completed in 1988, construction scheduled for 1994
~~i'
CATEGORY E. ENGINEERING STUDIES
Project Title: 1989 Wastewater Master Plan
Description. The wastewater master plan projects the collection system flows and
;~ DFWl\TPJC35134.A0\RPT002.51 26
t
~~ needs through year 2010
;~ Allocation. The wastewater master plan study covered the planning period from
year 1990 through year 2010 but is expected to be updated every 10 years. The
CIP covers the period 1993 through 2003 'The cost has been allocated based on
;~ the 10 year update schedule. Three years (1990-1993) or 33 3% of the cost has
been allocated to existing customers. The remaining seven years (2003-2010) or
.. 66 7 % of the cost has been allocated to the study period.
Status. Complete.
;~' Project Title: 1999 Wastewater Master Plan
Description. This wastewater master plan update will project the system flows
and needs for the years 2000 through 2020
Allocation. This wastewater master plan will cover the planning period from the
year 2000 through the year 2020 but is expected to be updated after 10 years.
The CIP covers the period 1993 through 2003 The cost has been allocated based
j on the 10 year update schedule. Three years (2000-2003) or 33 3 % of the cost
~ has been allocated to the study period. The remaining seven years (2003 - 2010)
or 66.7 % of the cost has been allocated to growth beyond year 2003
Status. Planned
'~E Project Title: Impact Fee Update
Description. An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and
recalculate the maximum allowed fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every
three years.
Allocation. 100 percent of the cost for studies in the years 1993, 1996, 1999, and
,~ 2002 can be allocated to the planning period.
~. Status On-going
i
t
!~ DFW 111'E}C35134.A0\RPT002.51 27
n
w
[~
i
Appendix B
i
fl
~[!
1
r
'~~
d
Meter Summary
City• Fort tiYorth
Provided: w ~ ww
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 111,667 111,667
1" 1 67 9,146 15,274
1 'h" 3 33 1,814 6,041
2" 5.33 1,587 8,459
3" 10.0 8 80
4" 16 67 20 333
6" 33 33 12 400
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76.67 1 77
Total -- 124,255 142,331
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 6,063 6,063
1" 1 67 1,701 2,841
1 'h" 3 33 1,081 3,600
2" 5.33 1,835 9,781
3" 10 0 202 2,020
4" 16.67 195 3,251
6" 33 33 93 3,100
8" 53 33 22 1,173
10" 76.67 17 1,303
Total 11 209 .33,132
`Yo Fort Worth Sewer *98 Total Meters 135,464
% Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 175,463
Total 1993 Population 450,877 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 17
Weighted 1993 Population 441,877 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 9 74
Total 1993 Employment 322,800 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 33
Wei kited 1993 Em to ment 322 800 Wei kited Meters 132 754
* Reflects those on septic tanks & private services
CLW/DFW 1/35134.AOJFRMCW01.51
t
Meter Summary
Clty' -- Wl+nlacaly ~'11Sd0=alc
,_ Provided. wtu
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 - -
1 " 1 67 - -
1 'fz" 3 33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3" 10 0 - -
4" 16 67 - -
6" 33 33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10 76 67 - -
Total -- - 18I,6I6
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 - -
1 " 1 67 - -
1 'fz" 3 33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3" 10 0 - -
4" 16.67 - -
6" 33 33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10" 76 67 - -
Total - 23 134
Y Fort Worth Sewer 33 7 Total Meters 190,260
~O Fort Worth Water NA Total Equivalent Meters 204,750
Total 1993 Population 533,141 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.94
Weighted 1993 Population 345,617 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 7.53
Total 1993 Employment 174,197 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2, 80
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 92 508 Wei hted Meters 122 430
CLW/DFW I/35134,A0/FRMCW02.51
l
t
n
[l
1
1
1
t
i
1
r
y
Meter Summary
Clty' Arlin$r~On
.Provided: N'i't'
Residential Meters
Size EquivalencyFtictor•~°~- antit'° - Equiwalent~--~•°•~-
'/a " 1 0 - 92, 358
1 " 1.67 - -
1 ~fi" 3 33 - -
2" 5.33 -- -
3" l0A - -
4" 16.67 - -
6" 33 33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10 76.67 - -
Total -- - 92, 358
Non-Residential Meters
'/a " 1 0 - 10, 984
1 " 1 67 - -
1 ifi " 3.33 - -
2" 5.33 - -
3" 10.0 - -
4" 16.67 - -
6" 33 33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10" 76.67 - -
Total - 10,984
Fort Worth Sewer 33 i Total Meters 96,000
Fort Worth Water NA Total Equivalent Meters 103,342
Total 1993 Population 267,838 Ratio-CapitafResidentiai Equiv Meters 2.90*
Weighted 1993 Population 88,756 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 8.77*
Total 1993 Employment 96,327 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.79*
Wei hted 1993 Em to meat 14 638 Wei hted Meters 3 i 776
Note: All meter quantaties are weighted based on percentage of population served by Fort Worth.
*Data not available. Numbers based on wholesale customer average for water
CLW/DFW I /35134.A0/FRMCW04.51
Meter Summary
C1ty• Ra~II1L:~A1C
., Provided. w ~ u/u/
c~
~'
1
~~
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/a " 1 0 *6,066 6,066
1 " 1 67 - -
1 ~h " 3 33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3" 10 0 - -
4" 16 67 - -
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10 76.67 - -
Total -- 6,066 6,066
Non-Residential Meters
'/s " 1 0 *434 434
1 " 1 67 - -
1 ~h " 3.33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3" 10.0 - -
4" 16.67 - -
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10" 76.67 - -
Total 434 434
9o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 6,500
9o Fort Worth Water 2 Total Equivalent Meters 6,500
Total 1993 Population 19,766 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.26
Weighted 1993 Population 19,766 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 145
Total 1993 Employment 3,000 Ratio-Capita/`Total Meters 304
Wei hted 1993E to went 3000 Wei hted Meters 6 $pp
*Not broken out by size
~ CLw/DPW I/35134.A0/FRMCW03.51
1
i
f
Meter Summary
City• ~1nPmOUn~
Provided: ww
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 755* 755
1" 1.67
1 '~ " 3 33
2" 5 33 -
3" 10 0 -
4" i6 67 -
6" 33.33 -
8" 53.33 -
10 76 67 -
Total -- 755
755
Non-Residential Meters
s~ " 1 0 21 *
21
1 " 1 67
i '~" 3 33
2" 5 33
3" 10 0 -
4" 16.67 _
6" 33 33
8" 53 33 -
20" 76.67 _
Total 21 21
9o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 776
`Yo Fort Worth Water NA Total Equivalent Meters 776
Total 1993 Population 2,300 Ratio-CapitalResidential Equiv Meters 3 OS
Weighted 1993 Population 2,300 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 3.57
Total 1993 Employment 75 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.96
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 750 Wei hted Meters 776
*Meters based on wastewater connections and were not broken down by size.
CLw/DF W 1 /35134. A 0/FRMC W 07.51
1
~~.
r
1
~.
i
Meter Summary
Clty' R{LQSO~
Provided: w 8r~1YW
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
3/a " 1 0 5,128 5,128
1" 1 67 17 28
1 'fz " 3 33 5 17
2" 5 33 2 11
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 5,152 5, i 84
Non-Residential Meters
~/a " 1 0 335 335
1 " 1 67 54 90
1 'fi " 3 33 46 153
2" 5 33 51 272
3" 10 0 10 100
4" 16 67 1 17
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 497 967
g'o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 5,649
Fort Worth Water 98 Total Equivalent Meters 6,151
Total 1993 Population 16,164 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 12
Weighted 1993 Population 16,164 Raho-Jobs/Nan-Resident. Equiv Meters 5.64
Total 1993 Employment 5,450 Ratio-Capita/'fotal Meters 2.86
Wei hted 1993 Em to meat 5,450 Wei hted Meters .5,649
CLw/DFW 1 /35134.A0/FRMCWO5.51
i
A
i
r
r
t
1
Meter Summary
Cit3" =_~.COHCLPY
Provided: W Rr Wei'
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit: Equivalent
'/a " 1 0 2, 300 2, 300
1" 1 67 20 33
1 'k " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 11 59
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 2, 331 2, 392
Non-Residential Meters
'/a " 1 0 60 60
1 " 1 67 0 0
1 'k " 3.33 0 0
2" 5 33 5 27
3" 10.0 1 10
4" 16 67 3 50
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 69 147
4o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 2,400
% Fort Worth Water 82 Total Equivalent Meters 2,539
Total 1993 Population 7,000 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equly Meters 2.93
Weighted 1993 Population 7,000 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 12.11
Total 1993 Employment 1,780 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.92
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 1,780 Wei hted Meters 2 400
CLW/DFW 1 /35134.AU/FRMCW06.51
1
1
~~~,
1
r~
r
t
Meter Summary
City• I2alwocthi~ton Gardens
Provided: -1~YLK'.V~S'
Residential Meters
Size Epuiyalency Factor uanti Equivalent
3/a " 1 0 *811 811
1 " 1 67 - -
1 'h " 3.33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3" 10 0 - -
4" 16 67 - -
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53.33 - -
10 76.67 - -
Total -- 811 811
Non-Residential Meters
'/ " 1 0 - -
1 " 1 67 - -
1 'h " 3.33 - -
2" 5.33 - -
3" 10.0 - -
4" 16 67 - -
6" 33 33 - -
8" 53.33 - -
10" 76.67 - -
Total -
~O Fort Worth Sewer 90 Total Meters 811
% Fort Worth Water 48 Total Equivalent Meters 811
Total 1993 Population 1,920 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.37
Weighted 1993 Population 1,728 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters -
Total 1993 Employment 500 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.37
Wei hied 1993 Em to went 500 Wei hted Meters 730
*Not broken out by size or type
CLWlDFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCWOIA.51
1
1
i
Meter Summary
city _~'dgeCrflt' village
Provided: -fit' & Vu33'
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/a " 1 0 1,002 1,002
1 " 1 67 14 23
1 'k " 3 33 0 0
2" 5.33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 1,016 1,025
Non-Residential Meters
'/a " 1 0 1 1
1 " 1 67 1 2
1 ~fi " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 5 27
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 1 77
Total 8 107
Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,024
Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 1,132
Total 1993 Population 2,750 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.68
Weighted 1993 Population 2,750 Ratio-JobslNon-Resident. Equiv Meters 5 61
Tota! 1993 Bmployment 600 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.69
Wei kited 1993 Em to ment 600 Wei kited Meters 1,024
CLW/DFW 1/35134.A0iFRMCW09.51
1
1
1
A
t
Meter Summary
city: Fverman
Provided: VY~.~Y
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uanti Equivalent
'/ " I 0 1,796 1,796
1 " 1 67 5 8
1 'k " 3 33 5 17
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 1, 806 1, 821
Non-Residential Meters
'/ " 1 0 108 108
i " 1 67 1 2
1 'fi " 3.33 1 3
2" 5 33 10 53
3" 10 0 1 10
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 121 i 7b
~o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,927
~O Fort Worth Water 43 Total Equivalent Meters 1,997
Total 1993 population 6,000 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 29
Weighted 1993 population 6,000 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 2.84
Total 1993 Employment 500 Ratio-Capita/Tota1 Meters 3 11
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 500 Wei hted Meters .1,927
CLW/DFW 1 i35134.A0/FRMCW 10.51
trlty' rPCt Nill
Provided. ~i' Rr WW
Meter Summary
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/ " 1 0 3,838 3,838
1 " 1 67 0 0
1 'fz" 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 2 11
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 3, 840 3, 849
Non-Residential Meters
'/a " 1 0 142 142
1 " 1 67 16 27
1 'fz " 3.33 0 0
2" 5.33 76 405
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 234 574
~O Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 4,074
`Y Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 4,423
Total 1993 Population l 1,490 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.98
Weighted 1993 Population 11,490 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 2.00
Total 1993 Employment 1,150 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.82
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 1 150 Wei hted Meters 4,074
CLw/DFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCVV11.51
Meter Summary
Clt3': Naltnm [`ity~
Provided: W ~
~,
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 9,256 9,256
1" 1 67 i6 27
1 '/z " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 9,272 9,283
Non-Residential Meters
'~" 10 1,128 1,128
1 " 1 67 5 8
1'fz" 333 0 p
2" 5 33 15 80
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 3 50
6" 33 33 4 133
8" 53 33 p p
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 1 155 1, 399
3o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 10,427
Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 10,682
Total 1993 Population 32,800 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.53
Weighted 1993 Population 32,800 Ratio-JobslNon-Resident. Equiv Meters 8.26
Total 1993 Employment 11,560 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 14
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment 11,560 Wei hted Meters 10 427
CLW/DFW I/35134.AO/FRMCW12.51
r
i
~~
Meter Summary
city: u~~r
Provided: W ~4r~.VW
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/a " 1 0 9,461 9,461
1 " 1 67 12 20
1 'fi" 3 33 2 7
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 9,475 9,488
Non-Residential Meters
3/4 " 1 0 764 764
1" 1 67 135 225
1 'k" 3 33 10 33
2" 5 33 82 437
3" 10 0 9 90
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 9 300
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76 67 0 0
Total 1,009 1,849
9'o Fort Worth Sewer 93 6 Total Meters 10,484
% Fort Worth Water 93 Total Equivalent Meters 11,337
Total 1993 Population 33,765 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.56
Weighted 1993 Population 31,605 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 10.58
Total 1993 Employment 19,568 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 22
Wei hted 1993 Em to went . 19 568 Wei hted Meters 9 813
CLW/DFW I/35134.A0/FRMCW 14.51
1
t
1
i
r
Meter Summary
City• uP.,.,pdate
Provided: w Rz-VYW
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uan 't Equivalent
'~a " 1 0 1,375 1,375
1 " 1 67 55 92
1 'k" 3 33 10 33
2" 5.33 0 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 1,440 1,500
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 150 150
1" 1 67 25 42
1 '~ " 3.33 10 33
2" 5 33 25 133
3" i0.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 2 67
8" S3 33 0 0
10" 76 67 0 p
Total 212 425
~O Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,652
3'o Fort Worth Water 0 .Total Equivalent Meters 1,925
Total 1993 Population 4,200 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.80
Weighted 1993 Population 4,200 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 3.20
Total 1993 Employment 1,360 Ratio-CapitalTotal Meters 2.54
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 1 360 Wei hted Meters 1 652
CL;W/DFW i/3513d.A0/FRMCW 16.51
~~
i
Meter Summary
City• i a4e lb'otth
Provided: W & 1~'
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/ " 1 0 1,722 1,722
1 " 1 67 0 0
1 'h " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 1, 722 1, 722
Non-Residential Meters
'/a " 1 0 160 160
1 " 1 67 10 17
1 'h" 3.33 5 17
2" 5 33 15 80
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 3 50
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
i0" 76 67 0 0
Total 193 324
~O Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,915
~O Fort Worth Water 25 Total Equivalent Meters 2,046
Total 1993 Population 4,606 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.67
Weighted 1993 Population 4,606 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equrv Meters 9.26
Total 1993 Employment 3,000 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.40
Wei tiled 1993 Em to went 3000 Wei hted Meters 1,915
CLw/DFW 1 /35134.A0/FRMCW 17.51
r~
1
C
t
City' Nprth RiChlapd i-Tiiic
Provided: W & WAY
Meter Summary
Residential Meters
Size Epuivalenc~Factor uantit Equivalent
~/a " 1 0 19, 882 19, 882
1" 1 67 821 1,3'71
1 'k" 3 33 62 206
2" 5 33 39 208
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16.67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 20, 804 21, 667
Non-Residential Meters
'/a " 1 0 424 424
1" 1 67 193 322
1 'fi" 3 33 78 260
2" 5.33 340 1,812
3" 10 0: 11 110
4" 16 67 10 167
6" 33 33 2 67
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 1,058 3,162
9'o Fort Worth Sewer 87 6 Total Meters 21,862
% Fort Worth Water 70 Total Equivalent Meters 24, 829
Total 1993 Population 47,646 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.20
Weighted 1993 Population 41,738 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 3 70
Total 1993 Employment 11,700 Ratio-Capita/Tota1 Meters 2.18
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment i0 249 Wei hted Meters 19 151
CLW/DF W 1 /35134.A0/FRMC W i 8.51
t
1
~~
1
Meter Summary
city' Pant~n
Provided: WW
Residential Meters
Size Eauivalencv Factor uantit Equivalent
'k" 1 0 641* 641
1 " 1 67 - -
1 ~fi " 3 33 - -
2" 5.33 -- -
3" 10 0 - -
4." 16 67 - -
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53.33 - -
10 76 67 - -
Total -- 641 641
Non-Residential Meters
'/a " 1 0 129 * 129
1 " 1 67 - -
1 'k " 3.33 - -
2" 5.33 - -
3" 10 0 - -
4" 16.67 - -
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10" 76.67 - -
Total 129 129
Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 770
Y Fort Worth Water NA Total Equivalent Meters 770
Total 1993 Population 2,371 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 70
Weighted 1993 Population 2,371 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 7 75
Total 1993 Employment 1,000 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 08
Wei hted 1993 Em to meat 1,000 Wei hted Meters 700
*Meters based on wastewater connections and were not broken down by size
CLW/DFW1/35134.A0/FRMCW08.51
C
1
f
1
1
U
Meter Summary
City' Richland uil)c
Provided: VL' 14r ~N
Residential Meters
Size EguivalencX Factor uantit _ Equivalent
'/a " 1 0 2, 892 2, 892
1 " 1 67 52 87
1 'fi " 3 33 3 10
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 2, 947 2, 989
Non-Residential Meters
'/a " 1 0 0 0
1" 1.67 90 i50
1 'k " 3.33 1 3
2" 5 33 35 187
3 " 10 0 2 20
4" I6 67 0 ~ 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76 67 0 0
Total 128 360
g'o Fort Worth Sewer , 100 Total Meters .3,075
~O Fort Worth Water 49 Total Equivalent Meters 3,349
Total 1993 Population 9,754 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.26
Weighted 1993 Population 9,754 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 15.54
Total 1993 Employment 5,595 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 17
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 5 595 Wei hted Meters 3.075
CLW/DFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCW 19.51
1
1
i
Meter Summary
Clty• RiyPr (lake
Provided: ____]NW
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 2,501 2,501
1 " 1 67 29 48
1 'fz " 3.33 4 13
2" 5.33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 2,534 2,562
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 127 127
1 " 1 67 14 23
1 '~" 3.33 16 53
2" 5 33 15 g0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16.67 1 17
6" 33 33 1 33
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 174 333
Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 2,708
Fort Worth Water NA Total Equivalent Meters 2,895
Total 1993 Population 7,000 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.73
Weighted 1993 Population 7,000 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 3 60
Total 1993 Employment 1,200 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.58
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 1,200 Wei hted Meters 2,708
C1.W/DFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCW 13.51
1
i
Meter Summary
City: -,~~utw
Provided: w ~ yyyy
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 2,509 2,509
1 " 1 67 0 0
1'~" 333 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10.0
0
0
4" 16 67 0 0 ,
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 2,509 2,509
Non-Residential Meters
''~ " 1 0 94 94
1 " 1 67 27 45
1 '~" 3.33 1 3
2" S 33 69 368
3" 10 0 1
10
4" 16 67 2 33
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 194 553
~O Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 2,703
9'o Fort Worth Water 75 Total Equivalent Meters 3062
Total 1993 Population 8,600 Ratio-Capita/Residential Frquiv Meters 3 43
Weighted 1993 Population 8,600 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 6.20
Total 1993 Employment 3,426 Ratio-Capita/Totai Meters 3 18
Wei kited 1993 Em to went 3 426 Wei kited Meters 2 703
CLW/DFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCW20.51
1
1
1
t~
Meter Summary
c,'ty' Cupm Party
Provided: - W~Rr WW
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/~ " 1 0 1,425 1,425
1" 1.67 10 17
1 'fi" 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 2 11
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 1,437 1,453
Non-Residential Meters
'/a " 1 0 10 10
1 " 1 67 0 0
1 'fz " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 p
3" 10 0 0 0.
4" 1b.67 0 0
b" 33 33 0 0
8" 53.33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 10 10
Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,447
~Y Fort Worth Water 0 Total Equivalent Meters 1,453
Total 1993 Population 4,000 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 2.75
Weighted 1993 Population 4,000 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 74.5
Total 1993 Employment 745 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2,7b
Wei hted 1993E to went 745 Wei hted Meters 1,447
CI.W/DFW 1 /35134.A0/F12MCW21.51
f
1
1
1
r
Meter Summary
City' Tarrant COi~nt~Zln.~~
Provided: - W & lYW
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'/a " 1 0 1,000 1,000
1" 1 67 220 367
1 'fz " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 p
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76.67 0 0
Total -- 1,220 1,367
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 46 46
1 " 1 67 14 23
1 'fz " 3 33 0 p
2" 5 33 27 144
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
b" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 7b 67 0 0
Total 87 213
4o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 1,307
~O Fort Worth Water 90 Total Equivalent Meters 1,580
Total 1993 Population 4,500 Ratio-Capita/Residential Frgmv Meters 3.29
Weighted 1993 Population 4,500 Raho-Jobs/Non-Resident. 1?qurv Meters 0.75
Total 1993 Employment 160 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 44
Wei hted 1993 Em to went 160 Wei hted Meters 1,307
CLW/DFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCW23.51
1
1
1
A
Meter Summary
City: ~'t'Atauga
Provided: - WW
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor an ' Equivalent
'4 " 1.0 - 7,038
1" 1.67 -
1 'k" 3.33 - .--_
2" 5.33 - -
3" 10.0 - -
4" 16.67 - _.
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53.33 - -
10 76.67 - -
Totat -- - 7,038
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1.0 - 171
1" 1.67 - -
1 '~ " 3.33 - -
2" 5.33 - -
3 " 10.0 - -
4" 16.67 - -
6" 33.33 - -
8" 53.33 - -
10" 76.67 - -
Total - 171
% Fort Worth Sewer 99 Total Meters 7,315
% Fort Worth Water NA Total Equivalent Meters 7,209
Total 2993 Population 20,409 Ratio-Capita/Resideatial Equiv Meters 2.90*
Weighted 1993 Population 20,204 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 8.77*
Total 1993 Employment 1,503 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 2.79*
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment .1,503 Wei hted Meters 7 242
*Data not available. Numbers based on wholesale customer average for water
CLWlDFWI/35t34.A0/FRMCWO1B.51
1
U
1
C'
n
l
U
Meter Summary
City• WestnYP~u~n~
Provided: w 8r~i.W
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 - 224*
1" 1 67 - -
1 'fi" 3 33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3" 10 0 - -
4" 16.67 - -
6" 33 33 - -
8" 53 33 - -
10 76.67 - -
Total -- 224*
Non-Residential Meters
a~ " 1 0 - 0
1 " 1 67 - -
1 'f~ " 3 33 - -
2" 5 33 - -
3" 10.0 - -
4" 16 67 - -
6" 33 33 - -
8" 53 33 - -.
10" 76.67 - -
Total - 0
4o Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters 224
9o Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 224
Total 1993 Population 672 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 0
Weighted 1993 Population 672 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters -
Total 1993 Employment 18 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 0
Wei hted 1993 Em to ment 18 Wei hted Meters 224
~~~ *No Data -calculated based on 3 persons/meter
CLW/DFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCW26.51
Meter Summarv
Clty: - Wnc .,nrth Vilf~e
,~, Provided. - W 14r WW
1
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
'~ " 1 0 593 593
1" 1 67 0 0
1 'h " 3 33 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 593 593
Non-Residential Meters
7~ " 1 0 5 5
1 " 1 67 1 2
1'h" 333 0 0
2" 5 33 0 0
3" 10 0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33.33 0 0
g" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 6 7
% Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters Sgg
~O Fort Worth Water 100 Total Equivalent Meters 600
Total 1993 Population 2,350 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3 96
Weighted 1993 Population 2,350 Ratio-lobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 40.00
Total 1993 Employment 280 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3 92
Wei kited 1993 Em to went 280 Wei kited Meters 599
CLW/DFW 1 /35134.AO7FRMCW27.51
1
1
1
1
1
1
Meter Summary
City• ~~te Sett~en*Pn+
Provided. - W 1Rr WVY
Residential Meters
Size Equivalency Factor uantit Equivalent
s~ " 1 0 4,195 4,195
1" 1 67 47 78
1 1/z " 3 33 1 3
2" 5.33 8 43
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 0 0
6" 33 33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10 76 67 0 0
Total -- 4,251 4,319
Non-Residential Meters
'~ " 1 0 199 199
1" 1 67 68 114
1 '~" 3 33 21 70
2" 5 33 70 373
3" 10.0 0 0
4" 16 67 2 33
6" 33.33 0 0
8" 53 33 0 0
10" 76.67 0 0
Total 360 789
Fort Worth Sewer 100 Total Meters _ .4,611
Fort Worth Water 40 Total Equivalent Meters 5,108
Total 1993 Population 15,240 Ratio-Capita/Residential Equiv Meters 3.53
Weighted 1993 Population 15,240 Ratio-Jobs/Non-Resident. Equiv Meters 4 69
Total 1993 Employment 3,700 Ratio-Capita/Total Meters 3.30
Wei hted 1993 Em to merit 3 700 Wei hted Meters 4,611
CLWIDFW 1/35134.A0/FRMCW28.51
e
City of Fort Worth, Texas
Mayor and Cou~uil (,ommunication
VN~L nL~ LnLn{.L OVI•IYLn VvM ..~.-.~ ••--
05/25/93 G-10189 60WWFEES 1 of 2
SUBJECT I PUBLIC H
ASSUMPTI
WASTEWAT
ING AND ACTION CONCERNING PROPOSED ,AMENDMENT TO LAND USE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN AND IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE FOR WATER AND
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council take the following action regarding updated
impact fees: '
1. Hold a public hearing regarding amendments to the Land Use Assumptions, Capital
Improvements Plan and Impact Fee Ordinance for water and wastewater, and
2. Adopt the amendments to the Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan and
Impact Fee Ordinance for water and wastewater.
DISCUSSION:
In accordance with Chapter 395, Texas Local Government Code, the Fort Worth City
Council appointed the Capital Improvements Plan Advisory Committee (CAC) on December
5, 1989 to assist and advise the Council in the consideration, adoption and amending
of impact fees.
The State Statue requires that the original Impact Fees Ordinance and any amendments
to it be reviewed each three years and amended as necessary to reflect any changes in
the Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan and the Impact Fee Ordinance.
On March 23, 1993, the City Council approved a resolution calling for a public hearing
to consider the adoption of amendments to the Land Use Assumptions, Capital
Improvements Plan and Impact Fee Ordinance.
The amendments were filed with the City Secretary on May 17, 1993., and have been
available for public inspection since that date.
Revised Impact Fee Ordinance:
The Impact Fee Ordinance which amends Chapter 35 of the Code of the City of Fort Worth
by adding Section 35-58.2, applies to all new development within the corporate
boundaries of Fort Worth and its extraterritorial jurisdiction ("benefit area"). The
revised ordinance establishes a maximum impact fee assessment per service unit of
$890.'00 and $967.00 for water and wastewater facilities respectively, to be assessed
as set forth in Schedule 1, an attachment to the Ordinance. Anew development would
be assessed at the time of final .platting using Schedule 1 and would pay the fee at the
time a building permit is approved. Impact fees collected pursuant to the Ordinance
must be kept in a separate interest-bearing account and used only to finance projects
designated in the Capital Improvements Plan. Procedures for refunds, rebates and
relief procedures are described in the Ordinance.
0FF1CiAL RECORD i
fT. WORTI~~ a~ ~,~~~ ~8,
' ,:{
City of Fort Wort)y exas
Mayor and Council C'~rrmnunica~ion
DATE
05/25/93 EFEREN E NUMBER
G-10189 L NAME
60WWFEES PA E
2 of 2
SUBJECT PUBLIC, HEARING AND ACTION CONCERNING PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO LAND USE
ASSUMPTIONS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN AND IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE FOR WATER AND
WASTEWATER
FISCAL INFORMATION/CERTIFICATION:
The Customer Service Division of{ the
computations and collections of water and
MG:b
Water Department is responsible for all
wastewater impact fees.
Su Otte or City Manager's FUND ACCOUNT CENTER AMOUNT CITY SECRETARY
Office by: to
PW53 488013 06053020004 APPROIJED
Mike Groomer 6140 PW53 488023 06053020005 iT r~Atn f
Orig Hating Departeent Nea PS58 488343 07058020004 CI! Y C ®UIY IsIL,
PS58 488353_ 07058020005
Richard Sawey 8207 from ~~N ~ ~
d
opted Ordinance No,
For Additional Inforoiation ~Cccs,J ~s~~J_
Contact ~ City &ecrotarq of the
Citq of Fori Worth
1"exas
Richard Sawey 8207 ,
7
Printed on recycled paper