City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

CITY OF GRAND PRAIRIE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 206 W. CHURCH STREET GRAND PRAIRIE, TEXAS 75053 WWW.GPTX.ORG

Mayor City Manager Charles England Tom Hart

Council Members Deputy City Managers Ruthe Jackson, Mayor Pro Tem Tom Cox At Large Anna Doll

Richard Fregoe, Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Planning and Zoning Commission District 4 Tommy Garret, Chairperson

Mark Hepworth, Council Member Cindie Moss, Vice Chairperson District 1 Carol Ann Adams Jim Swafford, Council Member District 2 Ed Gray

Bill Thorn, Council Member Charles Koerth District 3 Lynn Motley Tony Shotwell, Council Member District 5 George Phillip, Jr.

Ron Jenson, Council Member Brian Waggoner District 6 James Wooldridge Greg Giessner, Council Member At Large

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Planning and Development Department Engineering Bill Crolley, Director Romin Khavari, City Engineer Kevin Lasher, Chief City Planner Mary Elliott, Senior Planner & Project Environmental Services Manager for 2010 Comprehensive Plan Jim Cummings, Director Martin Barkman, Senior Planner Cindy Mendez, Environmental Quality Manager Ryan Miller, Planner Patricia Redfearn, Solid Waste and Recycling Linda Hughes, Sr. Office Assistant Manager Chris Hartmann, Executive Assistant Terri Blocker, Sr. Environmental Specialist Echo Rexroad, Sr. Environmental Specialist Building Inspections Robert Ard, Chief Building Official Fire Department Dennis Morrison, Plans Examiner Clif Nelson, Fire Chief Mike Sieg, Assistant Fire Chief/ Fire Marshall City Attorneys Office C.J. Grippin, Assistant Fire Chief over Steve Alcorn, Assistant City Attorney Emergency Operations

Code Enforcement Housing and Neighborhood Services Steve Collins, Manager Bill Hills, Director Michael Stanley, Inspector Gary Walters, CDBG/Neighborhood Services Manager Transportation Department Jim Sparks, Director Libraries Daon Stephens, Transportation Planner Kathy Ritterhouse, Director

Communications and Marketing Parks and Recreation Department Amy Sprinkles, Director Tim Shinogle, Planning Manager Steve Plummer, Park Planner Economic Development Department Police Department Bob O’Neal, Director Glen Hill, Police Chief Terry Tate, Business Analyst Don Trask, Deputy Chief of Patrol Bureau Terry Jones, Business Manager Eric Hansen, Sergeant, Traffic Patrol Rita Heep, Business Manager Randy Isbell, Sergeant Engineering Jill Eck, Crime Analyst

Brent O’Neal, Development Coordinator Public Works Department Chris Agnew, Assistant Stormwater Utility Ron McCuller, Director Manager Gabe Johnson, Floodplain Administrator Finance Lee Harriss, Special District Administrator

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

I’m so honored to be Mayor of the city in which I grew up and raised my kids. We’ve done so much in Grand Prairie during the past 20 years, and even more is on the horizon.

In 2009 we culminated a year of research into defining characteristics of our city to find Grand Prai- rie is uniquely easy going, friendly, comfortably casual, perfectly located and well known for its great entertainment venues, the lake and our parks. And, our new logo reflects that:

We’re also known as a hot spot for business development, landing four major deals in 2009 when no new deals were happening in the Metroplex due to the economy and opening three major city facilities in 2010:

 Solo Cup distribution center  Discount Tires distribution center  Lady Primrose Cosmetics distribution and packaging center  Farley’s & Sathers Candy Company warehouse  Grand Prairie Public Safety Building for Police and Fire  The Summit active adult recreation center  Lake Parks Operations Center for Fire Station #7, Police Lake Parks Division and Parks Lake Parks Division.

And more is on the way in 2011:

 Having cleared the former Army-Navy store site, see the new Dallas County Courthouse begin construction on that location downtown.  Work with downtown merchants to renovate facades to their 1950s glory.  Demolish the former police building to make way for a Parkland Hospital Clinic.  Begin construction worth millions in new roads: I-20 and I-30 frontage roads; Crossland connection to SH 161; SH 161 main lanes and underpass at Main and Jefferson; Lake Ridge Park- way connection to SH 161 and widening to the lake; January Lane connection from SH 161 to Randol Mill in Arlington; MacArthur expansion from I-30 to Irving; and more.

Here’s to a great future in Grand Prairie,

Sincerely,

Mayor Charles England

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………... 1 Ordinance…………………………………………………………………………. 3 Mayor’s letter……………………………………………………………………. 5

I. Executive Summary………………………………………………………… 9

A. Mission, Vision and Value Statements………………………. 10 B. Legal basis for the Comp. Plan………………………………….. 11 C. 2010 Comprehensive Plan Process……………………………. 12 D. 2010 Comprehensive Plan Goals………………………………. 14 E. Major CIP Projects Since 2005…………………………………… 15

II. Baseline Analysis/Community Feedback……………………….. 16

A. Baseline Analysis…………….………………………………………… 20 B. Community Survey……………………………………………………. 32 C. Community Meetings……………………………………………….. 35

III. Sustainable Development…………………………………………….. 37

A. Future Land Use Map……………………………………………….. 38 B. Thoroughfare Map……………………………………………………. 40 C. Sustainable Development…………………………………………. 43 D. Land Use and Transportation……………………………………. 46

IV. Transportation Planning

A. Master Transportation Plan………………………………………. 54 B. Regional Network……………………………………………………... 56

V. Special Districts…………………………………………………………….. 57

A. Corridor Overlay Districts………………………………………….. 58 B. Planned Development/Zoning Overlays……………………. 64 C. Specific Use Permits………………………………………………….. 66 D. Automotive Related Businesses……………………………….. 68

VI. Economic Development……………………………………………….. 73

A. Entertainment Venues……………………………………………… 75 B. Industrial Districts…………………………………………………….. 76

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

VI. Economic Development (Cont.)……………………..…………….. 73

C. Main Street Façade Program…………………………………….. 79

VII. Neighborhood Amenities and Services………………………… 81

A. Heads Up Notification………………………………………………. 82 B. School Districts…………………………………………………………. 83 C. Planned Development Subdivisions………………………….. 84 D. Fair Housing Choices…………………………………………………. 86

VIII. Municipal Facilities…………………………………………………….. 89

A. Fire and EMS Facilities……………………………………………… 91 B. Police Facilities…………………………………………………………..92 C. Parks and Recreation………………………………………………… 94 D. Libraries……………………………………………………………………. 95

IX. Watershed Planning and Environmental Quality………….. 97

A. Watershed Planning/Drainage Studies……………………… 98 B. Site Planning…………………………………………………………….. 99 C. Water Quality…………………………………………………………… 106 D. Storm Water Quality Program………………………………….. 109 E. Energy Conservation…………………………………………………. 114

X. Intergovernmental Cooperation……………………………………. 117

A. Air Quality………………………………………………………………… 118 B. Regional Cooperation……………………………………………….. 120 C. Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan………………………………. 127

XI. Planning Process/ CIP Planning……..……………………………... 129

A. Planning Process………………………………………………………. 130 B. Capital Improvement Planning………………………………….. 134

XII. Tools for Implementation……………………………………………. 137

A. Public Improvement Districts………………...…………………. 138 B. Tax Increment Financing Districts……………………………… 139 C. Housing and Neighborhood Services…………………………. 142 D. Operation Clean Sweep……………………………………………. 143

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Appendices

Appendix A—Other Plans and Studies…..………………………….. 145 Appendix B—Thoroughfare Plan Amendments……………….... 157 Appendix C—Sample Annexation Plan………………………….…… 165 Appendix D—Historic Timeline………………………………………….. 181 Appendix E—Floodplain Management…….………………………… 189 Appendix F—Glossary………………………………………..……………… 201

Maps and Exhibits

Map 1……………………………………………………………………………….. 2010 Future Land Use Plan Map 2……………………………………………………………………………….. 2010 Thoroughfare Plan Map 3……………………………………………………………………………….. U.S. Corps of Engineers Property Map 4……………………………………………………………………………….. 100 Year Floodplain (North Sector) Map 5……………………………………………………………………………….. 100 Year Floodplain (South Sector) Map 6……………………………………………………………………………….. Watersheds Map 7……………………………………………………………………………….. Municipal Facilities Map 8……………………………………………………………………………….. Parks & Recreation (North Sector) Map 9……………………………………………………………………………….. Parks & Recreation (South Sector) Exhibit 10………………………………………………………………………….. Parks & Recreation Inventory (Spreadsheet) Map 11……………………………………………………………………………… NCTCOG Communities of Con cern Map 12……………………………………………………………………………… Public Improvement Districts Map 13……………………………………………………………………………… Registered Homeowners Associations (HOAs) Map 14……………………………………………………………………………… Tax Increment Finance Districts Map 15……………………………………………………………………………… Annexation Map

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 1 Executive Summary

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

City of Grand Prairie Mission Land uses should be distributed in a manner that enhances a sense of community and Our mission is to create raving fans by deliv‐ neighborhood identity. In addition, residents ering world class service. and visitors should have ready access to amenities, such as recreation, shopping and City of Grand Prairie Vision cultural activities.

Our vision is to be a world class organization (Planning and Zoning Commission Workshop on and city in which people want to live, to August 23, 2010) have a business or just come visit. To be a city people talk about because of our: Key Values Reflected

High quality of life * Extreme commitment Key Values of the City of Grand are reflected to world class service * Unity * Diversity, in this Comprehensive Plan and incorporated inclusiveness * Values * Programs * Attrac‐ into the Future Land Use Plan, Master Trans‐ tions *Facilities * Innovative actions * City portation Plan and Policies. These values fol‐ staff * Commitment to Public Safety * low the stated vision for the city’s future Commitment to our environment growth and include:

 Building economic value in the city Our Values

People * Service * Integrity

2010 Comprehensive Plan

The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the following vision state‐ ment for the 2010 Comprehensive Plan.

Comprehensive Plan Vision

Our vision is to cultivate a mix of land uses that will foster sustainable eco‐ nomic vitality and provide a broad range of opportunities for living, rec‐ reation, shopping and business. Grand Prairie’s Central Park esplanade

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Providing sustainability in new develop‐  Providing multiple and viable modes of ment and redevelopments transportation

 Using floodplains to increase community  Protecting, preserving and enhancing value and improve public safety through the city’s natural features and decreasing flood hazard reduction air and water pollutants

 Providing standards for architectural and  Preserving historic structures and site layout in commercial areas neighborhoods

 Encouraging recycling and aesthetic en‐ Legal Basis for the Comprehensive Plan hancements Grand Prairie’s Comprehensive Plan is a 25‐  Taking advantage of regional access year plan that will guide the City’s growth and development. As new data becomes  Avoiding strip development along major available and new trends emerge, they will roadways need to be incorporated into the plan so it continues to be a useful guide. An overall  Encouraging pedestrian‐oriented retail review of the plan is done every five years, development and annual updates are done once a year to incorporate text amendments, future land  Encouraging vital mixed‐use areas use map changes and other modifications.

 Assuring quality new development in un‐ Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 213 developed sections of the community states that municipalities may have compre‐ hensive plans for the purpose of promoting  Providing quality infrastructure and com‐ sound development of municipalities and munity services promoting public health, safety and welfare.

 Providing for nurturing neighborhoods a) The governing body of a municipality with quality education and diverse job may adopt a comprehensive plan for the opportunities long‐range development of the munici‐ pality. A municipality may define the  Planning safe and accessible surface content and design of a comprehensive transportation with greenways connect‐ plan. ing parks and providing access to the city’s natural resources b) A comprehensive plan may:

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

1) Include but is not limited to provisions on land use, transportation, and public facilities; 2) Consist of a single plan or a coordinated set of plans or‐ ganized by subject and geo‐ graphic area; and 3) Be used to coordinate and guide the establishment of development regulations. c) A municipality may define, in its charter or by ordinance, the relationship between a compre‐ Lake Parks Operation Center. hensive plan and development regulations and may provide standards for determining the consistency set forth in the plan where circumstances required between a plan and develop‐ warrant in making decisions affecting spe‐ ment regulations. cific property. d) Land use assumptions adopted in a man‐ 2010 Comprehensive Plan Process ner that complies with Subchapter C, Chapter 395, may be incorporated into a The planning process began with a schedule comprehensive Plan. and a draft outline based on the 2005 Com‐ prehensive Plan that would evolve into the Chapter 28 of the Grand Prairie Code of Ordi‐ outline for the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. nances directs the City Planning and Zoning Various city staff members that are regularly Commission to formulate a Comprehensive involved with the development or capital Plan and recommend it to City Council. The improvement processes met with planning Commission is also responsible for reviewing staff to give input on the planning process. the plan and recommending changes. The Planning and Zoning Commission re‐ After considering the plan, nothing set forth viewed the outline concurrently with staff. in the Comprehensive Plan or Master Trans‐ Baseline Analysis portation Plan shall prohibit the City Council, city boards or commissions, various city A baseline analysis was created to give groups, departments, divisions, enterprises stakeholders the objective tools needed to and officials from deviating from the policies make decisions based on demographic

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

information, existing plans, economic trends, Community Meetings natural resource survey, existing infrastruc‐ ture, and transportation modeling. Much of Three community meetings were held at the this information was provided by the North following locations: Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCoG) and the American Community Sur‐  Betty Warmack Branch Library, 760 vey, an entity associated with the U.S. Cen‐ Bardin Road at 7:00 pm on June 24, 2010 sus Bureau.  Westridge Baptist Church, 1700 N. High‐ Other sources include existing city plans way 161 at 7:00 pm on July 22, 2010

such as the 2008 Parks, Recreation and Open  City Council Chambers, City Hall Plaza, Space Master Plan. The complete baseline 317 West College Street at 7:00 pm on analysis is included as Section 2 of the 2010 August 24, 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of these community meetings Community Survey was for staff to provide general information on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan and to ob‐ A survey was sent out from March 22, 2010 tain feedback from the community. to May 24, 2010 by e‐mail, regular mail and hand delivered hardcopy. The survey was The community meetings were advertised available on the city’s website, Facebook and using the same methods as for the commu‐ was included in the April issue of the Pipe‐ nity survey. A summary of the community line, the city newsletter that is included with meeting feedback is included in Section 2 of the water bill. Hardcopies of the survey were the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. also available at the city’s recreation centers and libraries. The baseline analysis, community survey and community meeting results were posted on In addition, Grand Prairie’s 14 Boards and the city website during the planning process. Commissions, 57 Homeowners Associations, the Grand Prairie Chamber of Commerce, Goals and Objectives the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and the Grand Prairie Independent School District Revisions to the city’s goals and objectives were notified. were made using information from the base‐ line analysis, and feedback from the survey Almost 1,000 responses were collected from and community meetings. The goals and ob‐ the community survey. A summary of these jectives were also reviewed at the Planning results is included in Section 2 of the 2010 and Zoning Commission workshop on August Comprehensive Plan. 23, 2010 with the following results.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

2010 Comprehensive Plan Goals GOAL 10: Promote and Adopt “Sustainable Growth Practices” The twelve goals for the 2010 Comprehen‐ sive Plan are shown below. GOAL 11: Investigate Opportunities for Intergovernmental Cooperation GOAL 1: Use Sound Land Use and Urban Design Principles to Optimize City GOAL 12: Achieve a Broad Housing Selection Land Resources for a Diverse Population

Substantive Revisions GOAL 2: Encourage Resource Conservation and Renewable Energy Changes to the goals from the 2005 to the 2010 Comprehensive Plan are as follows. GOAL 3: Revitalize Older Developed Areas, Including the Downtown Area  “Optimize City Land Resources” was ex‐ panded upon to differentiate the goal GOAL 4: Maintain and Upgrade the City’s from similar goals. Transportation Infrastructure  “Achieve Sustainable Growth” was re‐ GOAL 5: Promote and Enhance Economic moved since it is identical to “Promote Development Strengths, like the and Adopt Sustainable Growth Prac‐ Entertainment Venues tices.”

GOAL 6: Maintain a Safe City with a High Quality of Life

GOAL 7: Maintain and Improve Drainage in the City through Watershed Plan‐ ning and Floodplain Man‐ agement

GOAL 8: Provide Recreational Op‐ tions and Protect Open Space

GOAL 9: Use Current Technology for a more User Friendly Development Process Bowles Life Center Grand Opening.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 “Encourage Resource Conservation and  “Achieve a Broad Housing Selection for a Renewable Energy” was added since it is Diverse Population” was added to reflect consistent with the city’s environmental changes in the household and to provide goals. for new housing options.

 “Including the Downtown Area” was Major Capital Improvements Since 2005 added since revitalization efforts have been initiated in this area. Bowles Life Center

 “Update Grand Prairie’s Identity” has Bowles Life Center is a 38,000 square foot been removed, since the city has com‐ recreation center with a branch library and a pleted a recent branding campaign. police storefront. The center is equipped with a weight room, full‐scale gymnasium,  “Promote and Enhance Economic Devel‐ indoor track, meeting rooms, and a public opment Strengths” has been added since computer lab. major efforts are underway to promote the Entertainment District and the resort Uptown Theater Revitalization on the Peninsula. The historic Uptown Theater was renovated  “Maintain and Improve Drainage in the on the exterior as well as in the interior. The City” has been expanded to reflect re‐ project transformed the former 1950s movie cent efforts to use a more comprehen‐ house into a fine arts center. sive approach and incorporate more floodplain management strategies into Market Square city ordinances. The Market Square and farmer’s market is  “Protect Open Space” was expanded to located at the northeast corner of the inter‐ include opportunities for passive and ac‐ section of NW 2nd and Main Streets. The tive recreation along open spaces and square has housed many community events, public waterways. like the Hatch Chili Festival.

 “Expedite the Development Process” was Airhogs Stadium removed and replaced with “Use Current Technology for a more User Friendly De‐ The ballpark is home to the Airhogs, an velopment Process.” American Association of Professional Base‐ ball team. In the first season, the Airhogs  ‘Investigate Opportunities for Intergov‐ were the American Association Southern Di‐ ernmental Cooperation” was added to vision Champions. The stadium includes reflect renewed interested in regional about 87,000 square feet of playing field, development initiatives. seating, play area and restaurant facilities.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The Summit at Central Park

The $23 million active adult center is located south of Warrior Trail and west of State Highway 161 in the new Central Park. The center includes 60,000 square feet of fa‐ cilities designed specifically for active adults ages 50 and older. Amenities include state‐of‐the‐art fitness areas, a gym, indoor infin‐ ity edge pool with lap lanes and exercise vortex, theater, locker rooms with sauna and more.

Public Safety Headquarters The Good Link Recreation Trail at dusk

The 149,000 square foot Public Safety Headquarters houses Police and Fire The Good Link Recreation Trail Administration, Criminal Investigations, Field With Texas Department of Transportation Operations and Support Services, Jail, Police/ (TxDOT) funding, the city completed the $9.5 Fire Communications, Records, Property and million Good Link Trail from Waggoner to Evidence and Community Relations. The fa‐ Mike Lewis parks, which includes 75 acres in cility is located just north of the Summit at park expansion, 4.8 miles of paved trails, the southwest corner of Warrior Trail and bridges and elevated boardwalks, four new State Highway 161.

picnic pavilions and more than 1,300 native Lake Parks Operation Center trees. The project includes a 270‐foot long bridge that spans Johnson Creek. The 26,500 square‐foot Lake Parks Opera‐

tion Center houses Police, Fire and Parks in Lone Star Trail Improvements separate buildings on a single campus to The Lone Star Trail is 3.2 miles long and falls more efficiently serve citizens in the city’s within the Entertainment District. The trail Lake Parks area. Lake patrol police officers starts by the Grand Prairie Tourist Informa‐ are stationed here to provide convenient tion Center, goes south along Beltline Road, access to Joe Pool Lake. Fire Station #7 is re‐ turns east along the Trinity River and turns located here. The Parks building will house back north to connect with the City of Irving. the Lake Parks administrative staff and serve as a visitor center for Lake Parks patrons.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 2 Baseline Analysis and Community Feedback

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The City of Grand Prairie, Texas is conveniently located between Dal‐ las and Fort Worth. It spans the western border of Dallas County and the eastern border of Tarrant County, reaching into Ellis and Johnson Counties to the south. Grand Prairie stretches 28 miles long by 8 miles at its widest. point In 2010, the city encompasses 81.4 square miles with an esti‐ mated population of 169,350, making it the seventh largest city in the Dallas/Fort Worth metro‐ politan area.

The city’s northern border lies five to ten minutes south of Dallas‐ Public Safety Headquarters in the SH-161 Corridor Fort Worth International Airport. Its eastern highway thoroughfares. It also offers resi‐ boundary is 12 miles west of downtown Dal‐ dents easy access to the entire metropolitan las and the western boundary is 15 miles area job market. east of Fort Worth. Passing east and west Of the estimated 13, 000 acres of remaining through Grand Prairie and linking the city developable land within Grand Prairie’s cur‐ with major markets are IH‐30 (an entertain‐ rent city limits, much remains in large con‐ ment and business corridor) and IH‐20 tiguous tracts for industrial, retail, service, (quickly developing as a significant retail and and residential development. The City is bi‐ corporate location corridor). sected by the Trinity River flood plain and Because of its central location and proximity open space corridor, and contains a large to air and highway transportation infrastruc‐ recreational lake, Lake Joe Pool. The south‐ ture, Grand Prairie is a well established dis‐ ernmost section of the city, amid hill country tribution center. Much of the Great South‐ ‐like vistas around Joe Pool Lake, is attract‐ west Industrial District lies in Grand Prairie. ing high‐end residential housing and plans Grand Prairie continues to attract new con‐ for resort development. struction of warehouse, distribution and The City of Grand Prairie utilizes a city man‐ manufacturing facilities as a result of the ager form of government. It is governed by a city’s proximity to the international airport, Mayor and eight City Council members, two the large local markets of Dallas and Fort of which are elected at large. Worth, and major rail and

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Baseline Analysis From 2000 to 2010, Grand Prairie grew 27.9%. Since 2008, the city has seen a de‐ A baseline analysis was created to give crease in the rate of population growth due stakeholders the objective tools needed to to the national mortgage crisis and economic make decisions based on demographic infor‐ recession. The city’s estimated population mation, existing plans, economic trends, for 2009 is 168,500 people, which is a 1.1% natural resource survey, existing infrastruc‐ increase over the 2008 population estimate. ture, and transportation modeling. The 2010 population estimate is 169,500 people, which is a 0.5% increase over 2009. Much of this information was provided by the North Central Texas Council of Govern‐ According to the NCTCOG, thee rat of popu‐ ments (NCTCOG) and the American Commu‐ lation growth for the Dallas/FW/Arlington nity Survey, an entity associated with the metropolitan area has declined significantly U.S. Census Bureau. Other sources include due to the “national mortgage crisis and en‐ existing city plans such as the 2008 Parks, suing economic recession that dramatically Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. affected new home construction and em‐

ployment growth.” This can be seen in the Demographic Estimates and Forecasts population growth at the county level. The The 2010 population estimate for the City of Dallas County populationh growt rate is Grand Prairie is 169,350. Grand Prairie has 0.88% for the period from 2009 to 2010.

historically grown at a steady rate since post Population Forecast ‐World War II. NCTCOG lists the city in the top ten cities for population increase for the The NCTCOG forecasts show that growth period from 2000 to 2010 for the Dallas/Fort will be concentrated along the IH‐20 Corri‐ Worth/Arlington metropolitan area. dor and the Peninsula (see maps). The 2010

population forecast differs slightly from the D/FW/A Population Increase 2000‐2010 2010 population estimate due to factors 1. Fort Worth 201,506 such as annexation, changes in local policy 2. Dallas 127,770 and the forecasting model itself. 3. Frisco 73,336 2000 129,356* 4. McKinney 72,531 2005 163,320 5. Grand Prairie 41,923 2010 184,969 6. Plano 42,970 2015 195,147 7. Allen 40,646 2020 205,698 8. Arlington 37,681 2025 223,838 9. Denton 29,763 2030 231,011 10. Mansfield 28,869 *NCTCOG estimate adjusted from 2000 Census count.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Employment Forecast

Grand Prairie is recognized as providing a high quality lifestyle for its residents and as being an ideal location for business. Today more than 500 top aerospace, aviation, light industry, distribution and manufacturing firms are included in the 2,000 businesses that have taken advantage of the city’s ag‐ gressive development attitude. With a cur‐ rent labor pool of more than two million prospective employees living in the Grand Prairie area, the city offers ample resources to commercial enterprises considering a Grand Prairie location. The NCTCOG Employ‐ ment Forecast is as follows (see map).

2000 82,664 2005 96,195 2010 107,226 2015 116,360 2020 122,179 2025 124,541 2030 125,866

Property Taxes Rates

The combined 2009 property tax rate of all taxing jurisdictions in the City of Grand Prai‐ rie varies because the city’s boundaries over‐ lap with six school districts and three coun‐ ties. The two predominant taxing areas in Grand Prairie are Dallas County/Grand Prai‐ rie Independent School District and Tarrant County/Arlington Independent School Dis‐ trict. The 2010 city tax rate is $0.669998 per $100 valuation. The 2010 GPISD tax rate is $1.465 and the 2010 AISD tax rate is $2.572 per $100 valuation.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Sales and Hotel Occupancy Taxes Commuting to Work

The combined local and state sales tax is According to the American Community Sur‐ 8.25 percent (6.25% state and 2% city as ef‐ vey, the estimated number of commuters, fective April 2002). Sales tax is collected on age 16 and over, for 2008 is 85,313 people. rentals, sales, use of tangible property ser‐ The percent of commuters who work out‐ vices. It is not collected on grocery, prescrip‐ side of their city of residence is 75.5% and tion medicine, or property consumed in the percent of commuters who work in their manufacturing and processing. city of residence is 24.5%.

8.25% Sales Tax Grand Prairie Commuter Rates (2006 ‐ 2008) 1. City: 1.0% 2. Sports Corp. (Baseball Park): 0.125% 3. Parks: 0.25% Worked in Place 4. Streets: 0.25% of Residence 5. Crime District: 0.25% 6. Senior Center: 0.125% Worked Outside 7. State: 6.25% Place of Residence 13% hotel occupancy tax 1. City: 7% 2. State: 6% Transportation Modes

Major Employers Jobs Most of the commuters drive to work alone Grand Prairie ISD 3,400 in a car, truck or van. The American Commu‐ Lockheed Martin Missiles and 2,800 nity Survey breaks down the means of trans‐ Fire Control portation as follows for 2008. Poly‐America Inc. 1,800 Bell Helicopter‐Textron 1,300 Cars, trucks or vans (drove alone) 81.7% Lone Star Park at GP 1,200 Cars, trucks or vans (carpooled) 11.8% City of Grand Prairie 1,000 Public Transportation 0.4% Vought Aircraft Industries Inc. 700 Walked, biked or other means 2.3% Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc. 500 Worked at home 3.8% Hanson Pipe & Products, Inc. 500 Wal‐Mart 500 Median Age American Eurocopter 500 Arnold Transportation Services 500 The American Community Survey reports the SAIA Motor Freight Line Inc. 500 median age in Grand Prairie as 32.3 for 2008. 44% of the population is between 25

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Education comprises nine high schools, 13 junior high schools, and 52 elementary schools. Six ele‐ According to the American Community Sur‐ mentary schools are within Grand Prairie city vey, 78% of the residents of the City of limits. Arlington ISD has no junior high Grand Prairie have a high school degree or schools or high schools in Grand Prairie. higher. 20% of residents have a bachelor’s degree or higher. Tarrant County/Grand Prairie students also attend Mansfield ISD schools. Mansfield ISD Independent School Districts has 35 schools overall. Three elementary schools fall within Grand Prairie. There are six independent school districts that overlap with the city’s boundary and Universities and Colleges extraterritorial jurisdiction. These are Grand Prairie ISD, Arlington ISD, Irving ISD, Mans‐ There are six public universities and eight field ISD, Cedar Hill ISD, and Midlothian ISD. independent universities in the region that provide degree programs, business consult‐ The Grand Prairie ISD comprises 24 elemen‐ ing, employee training, community health tary schools, seven middle schools, two sen‐ care services, computer and information ser‐ ior high schools, two ninth‐grade centers vices, and library facilities open to the public. and two alternative education schools. Stu‐ The closest to Grand Prairie are the Univer‐ dents who reside on the Dallas County side sity of Texas at Arlington, Dallas Baptist Uni‐ of the city attend Grand Prairie ISD. versity, and the University of Dallas. In addi‐ tion, Mountain View College and Tarrant Students who reside in Tarrant County and County College, Southeast Campus are Grand Prairie attend Arlington ISD, which within seven miles of central Grand Prairie.

Grand Prairie Education, 2006 ‐ 2008 Below High School Bachelor's Education Degree or Higher 2% 20%

High School Graduate or Higher 78%

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Households Forecast The households forecast shows the concen‐ tration of households based on Traffic Sur‐ vey Zones (see map). All projections are based on 2000 city boundaries. 2000 44,983* 2005 57,063 2010 64,809 2015 68,764 2020 72,446 2025 78,479 2030 80,752

*NCTCOG estimate adjusted from 2000 Census count.

New projections are published every five years to reflect demographic changes. The 2040 Demographic Forecast is currently be created by NCTCOG, and will not be finalized at the time this plan is approved.

Single Family (SF) Building Permits

Building permits reflect the current eco‐ nomic climate. In 2005, the city issued 2,502 SF permits. In 2009, the city issued 335 SF permits. In 2010, the city conservatively pro‐ jects that over 450 SF permits will be issued.

Median Household Income

According to the 2000 Census, the median household income for the city is $46,816. The 2000 median household income for Dal‐ las County is $43,324 and Tarrant County is $46,179. The Census Bureau estimates me‐ dian household income for the city to be $46,955 (2007 Mid‐Decade Update).

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Race and Ethnicity Race % in 2000 White 62.0% The 2000 Census reflected significant in‐ African American 13.5% creases in the minority population from the American Indian, 0.8% 1990 Census. The Hispanic population grew Eskimo or Aleut 105.4% from 1990 to 2000. The African‐ Asian or Pacific Islander 4.5% American population increased by 77.9% Other Race 19.2% from 1990 to 2000. There was a 90.1% in‐ Total 100.0% crease in the Asian and Pacific Islander populationm fro 1990 to 2000. Ethnicity % in 2000 Hispanic Origin 33.0% The Census Bureau does not recognize His‐ panic as a race, but rather as an ethnicity. The chart below comes from the American Ethnic Hispanics often choose the “other” Community survey and shows that the mi‐ category on the Census for race rather than nority populations continue to increase as a White or African‐American. percentage of the overall population.

City of Grand Prairie Demographics by Occupied Housing Units (2006 ‐ 2008)

45.00% 40.00% 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Black or American Asian Native Hispanic or White alone, African Indian and Hawaiian and Latino origin not Hispanic or American Alaska Native Other Pacific Latino Islander

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

According to the United States Census Bu‐ Housing Consolidated Plan reau, persons of Hispanic Origin now repre‐ sent the largest minority population in North On December 11, 2009, J‐Quad Planning Texas. The 2000 and 2010 Census forms in‐ Group presented an Analysis of Impediments cluded a separate question preceding the to Fair Housing Choice as part of the Housing race question, which allowed respondents to Departments process to revise their Consoli‐ indicate whether they identify themselves as dated Plan. Some key findings include: Hispanic.  Minority households face significant In 2000, Grand Prairie had about 33% per‐ challenges to fair housing choice due to sons of Hispanic Origin, consistent with Dal‐ their household characteristics. Female‐ las County, which had about 30% persons of headed households and female headed Hispanic Origin. households with children generally face a high rate of housing discrimination. Household Structure  Families with children and large family The 2000 Census analyzes the household households face similar challenges in the structure using twelve categories. For exam‐ rental housing market. ple, the “married‐couple family with their own children” comprises 23.0% of all White  Employment opportunities in the area households in Grand Prairie, 44.7% of all His‐ and educational levels of the employees panic households and 26.6% of all African have a significant impact on housing af‐ American households. fordability and the location choice of residents. The different categories demonstrate that single parent households, blended family The Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing households and non‐family households are Choice recommends remedial activities to becoming more prevalent in Grand Prairie. address impediments; however, the report finds that the city’s zoning ordinances do not Tenure for housing in Grand Prairie shows an preclude the construction of affordable increase in owner‐occupied housing units housing. The zoning districts allow a variety from 55.0% in 1990 to 57.8% in 2000. In of lot sizes, residential types including both 2000, renter‐occupied housing was 36.6% of single family and multifamily, and the inclu‐ total units, and vacant housing was 5.7% of sion of manufactured and modular homes. total units. Additionally, the zoning ordinance includes The 2010 Census information is not finalized provisions that allow for group homes, sen‐ at the time of this plan’s approval. ior and disabled housing/ services and emer‐ gency shelters.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Public Transportation There are no fare charges for medical/ den‐ tal appointments to the Dallas County Health The Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing and Human Services Nutrition Program but Choice includes a community profile, which all other requests have transit fees. For ex‐ describes public transportation for the city. ample, a ride to the grocery store, school or It states: work is $1.00 each way and packages are limited to five carry‐on bags smaller than a  [The shortage of public transportation] brown paper grocery bag and less than ten poses a large disparity in terms of hous‐ pounds each. In addition, trip requests must ing access for Grand Prairie residents be‐ be scheduled two days in advance of the cause the population being serviced needed date of travel. through public transit more often is not the segment of the population active in Park and Ride the labor force. In order for a city’s popu‐ lation to afford housing they must be The city is currently investigating other able to have transportation access to transportation options for getting residents jobs that will provide the income levels to work, recreation and shopping opportuni‐ needed to access housing. ties. A Park and Ride facility is currently be‐ ing designed for the south side of Interstate The study finds the availability of jobs for Highway 30, which will provide a meeting low‐income persons can be largely depend‐ place for carpoolers and vanpoolers, and ent on the geographic location of the jobs peak time bus service for commuters. and transportation and mobility. If jobs are concentrated in areas far removed from lower income persons, or areas poorly served by public transportation, the ability to get tod an from work may be restricted causing hardships on employees or potential employees.

Demand Response Service

The Grand Connection is a demand response service that is provided to Grand Prairie resi‐ The city is also investigating opportunities dents and run by the City of Grand Prairie. It for light rail or commuter rail along the Un‐ is eligible for residents who are 60 years of ion Pacific rail line, which runs along Main age and over or an individual with a physical Street. More information on the history of or mental disability. this transit alternative can be found in Sec‐ tion 10, Intergovernmental Cooperation.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Water and Wastewater Utilities Storm Water Management Program

Grand Prairie served 46,783 accounts as of The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination March 2009—194 industrial, 3,454 commer‐ System (NPDES) was created by the EPA un‐ cial, 500 governmental and 42,635 residen‐ der the Clean Water Act in order to develop tial. The water distribution system is made a municipal storm water program. Phase I of up of about 800.5 miles of water lines and the program was promulgated in 1990 and 7,010 fire hydrants. The city gets its water relied on the NPDES permit coverage to ad‐ from Dallas Water Utilities, Fort Worth Wa‐ dress storm water runoff from medium and ter Utilities and from city‐owned wells. large municipal separate storm sewer sys‐ tems (MS4s) serving populations of 100,000  Dallas Water Utilities provides water at and greater. two distribution sites; the north with a maximum capacity of 17 million gallons On September 14, 1998, the Texas Commis‐ per day (mgd), and the south with a sion on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) re‐ maximum capacity of 26 mgd. ceived authority to administer the NPDES  Fort Worth Water Utilities provides 2.5 permit program in Texas (renamed the Texas mgd to the northeast portion of the city. Pollutant Discharge Elimination System or  The city’s 10 wells pump about 9 mgd at TPDES). The TCEQ agreed to adopt any new capacity. Storage capacity is 48.8 million rules or permits to comply with storm water gallons, elevated and ground tanks. regulations.

 The city has contracts with Mansfield for The Storm Water Phase II rule, promulgated up to 12 mgd. December 8, 1999, was the next step to pre‐  The city also has contracts with Midlo‐ serve, protect and improve the nation’s wa‐ thian for up to 2 mgd with additional wa‐ ter resources from polluted storm water ter provided, depending on need. runoff. The Phase II program required small  Average water use for FY 07 was 24.6 MS4s (serving populations <100,000 based mgd and wastewater use was 14.7 mgd. on the 1990 census) in urbanized areas to  Grand Prairie has additional capacity for implement programs and practices to con‐ wastewater treatment at a second TRA trol polluted storm water runoff through the plant located in Midlothian. TPDES permit program. The Phase II pro‐ The city operates its own wastewater collec‐ gram includes the City of Grand Prairie.

tion system with 625 miles of gravity sewer Grand Prairie’s TPDES permit includes the lines 11 lift stations. The Trinity River Au‐ Storm Water Management Program thority treats all Grand Prairie’s wastewater (SWMP), which outlines the city’s six Mini‐ and operates seven major trunk sewer lines mum Control Measures (MCMs). For addi‐ serving the city. tional information on the TPDES and SWMP, see Section 9, Environmental Quality.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

City‐Wide Master Drainage Plan Road Map National Flood Insurance Program

There are over 19,000 acres of floodplain in The city of Grand Prairie participates in the the City of Grand Prairie. This accounts for National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) of 36.7% of the total city area, more than any the Federal Emergency Management Agency other city in the region. Large floodplain ar‐ (FEMA). As a participating community, the eas include Joe Pool Lake, Mountain Creek city has adopted Floodplain Management and the West Fork Trinity River floodplain. practices through several ordinances that severely limit the development allowed in City flooding and drainage problems are key 100‐year floodplains. issues when planning for the safety, health, and quality of life for Grand Prairie citizens. The city’s standards require all new struc‐ Many successful projects have been built in tures be constructed two feet above the ex‐ the city to provide flood control, including isting water surface elevation of the 100‐ channels, culverts, bridges, detention facili‐ year floodplain, or one foot above the ulti‐ ties, and lakes. However, many areas are still mate water surface elevation. When devel‐ in need of additional flood control measures oping along a major creek within the city, or repairs to existing structures. The City‐ the developer must submit a Flood Study to Wide Drainage Master Plan Road Map estab‐ the city showing the 100‐year floodplain and lishes the processes for future flood control water surface elevation based on both cur‐ planning for the City of Grand Prairie. rent and future land use assumptions.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Green Grand Prairie  The City of Grand Prairie adopted the Water Conservation Plan by resolution The mission of the Green Grand Prairie pro‐ on April 7, 2009, as well as an ordinance gram is to reduce greenhouse gas (GG) emis‐ providing for enforcement of certain sions by encouraging the recycling, remanu‐ mandatory provisions of the Water Con‐ facturing and reuse of existing materials, ap‐ servation Plan. The Texas Commission on pliances, vehicles and facilities and using Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Texas Wa‐ green technologies and operating to en‐ ter Development Board approved the hance the public welfare and protect the en‐ plan on May 7, 2009. vironment for the wellbeing and benefit of the citizens, and future generations of Grand Environmental Programs Prairie. There are several environmental programs Conservation that have been successfully implemented for several years. Two programs include: The city has taken proactive measures to conserve water and protect water quality.  Stream Monitoring has been done for 22 sites along the city’s streams since 1986.  Landscaping and Screening policies, Arti‐ Once a month, water quality is evaluated cle 8 of the Unified Development Code at each sample site using field measure‐ (UDC), provides a list of native/adaptive ments and laboratory analyses. Data col‐ plants that are drought tolerant, permits lected during these monitoring events nonpotable/grey water for landscaping, are used to detect and eliminate illicit requires irrigation controls to be weather discharges or other threats to human ‐based, requires drip irrigation for and environmental health. ground cover and shrubs, and provides tree credits to encourage retention of  Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) col‐ existing trees. lection events have been done since 1997. The program assists residents with  Parking and Loading policies, Article 10 disposal of household hazardous wastes, of the UDC, include provisions for reduc‐ which are household wastes that can tion of parking requirements for new have a detrimental effect on the environ‐ projects and allow cellular grass paving ment if disposed in landfills or poured systems for overflow parking. down the drain.

 Floodplain Management, Article 15 of There are also numerous Solid Waste and the UDC, provide for best operating prac‐ Recycling programs, such as curbside recy‐ tices in compliance with state, federal cling, and Keep Grand Prairie Beautiful Pro‐ and regional Green (iSWM) Practices. grams, such as Community Gardens.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Community Survey In addition, Grand Prairie’s 14 Boards and A survey was sent out from March 22, 2010 Commissions, 57 registered Homeowners to May 24, 2010 by e‐mail, regular mail and Associations, the Grand Prairie Chamber of hand delivered hardcopy. The survey was Commerce, the Hispanic Chamber of Com‐ available on the city’s website, and was in‐ merce, and the Grand Prairie Independent cluded in the April issue of the Pipeline. School District were notified. Almost 1,000 Hardcopies of the survey were also available responses were collected from the commu‐ at the city’s recreation centers and libraries.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

These “Grand Prairie Community Character‐  In 2006, 55% of respondents stated that istics” questions were worded exactly the “ease of car travel” was excellent or same as the 2006 Citizen Survey. This is a good. In 2010, 64.8% of respondents comparison of the results: stated that “ease of car travel” was ex‐ cellent or good.  In 2006, 48% of respondents stated that the “sense of community” was excellent  In 2006, 65% of respondents stated or good. In 2010, 59.7% of respondents “ease of walking” was fair to poor with stated that the “sense of community” 38% of responses rating fair. In 2010, was excellent or good. 54.8% of respondents stated “ease of walking” was fair to poor with 30.6% of  In 2006, 40% of respondents stated that responses rating fair. “opportunities to attend cultural activi‐ ties” were excellent or good. In 2010,  In 2006, 39% of the survey respondents 58.4% of respondents stated that stated that the “overall image/ “opportunities to attend cultural activi‐ reputation of Grand Prairie” was excel‐ ties” were excellent or good. lent or good. In 2010, 55.9% of survey respondents stated that the “overall im‐  In 2006, 69% of respondents stated that age/reputation of Grand Prairie” was ex‐ “shopping opportunities” were fair to cellent or good. poor with 39% of responses rating fair. In Overall, the indicators are showing positive 2010, 64.1% stated “shopping opportuni‐ improvements in Grand Prairie with some ties” were fair to poor with 34.8% re‐ areas showing great progress, such as sponses rating fair. “recreational opportunities.” In 2010, there

are still three categories that rank greater  In 2006, 49% of respondents stated that than 50% in the fair to poor categories in‐ “recreational opportunities” were excel‐ cluding “shopping opportunities,” “job op‐ lent or good. In 2010, 70.9% of respon‐ portunities,” and “ease of walking.” dents stated that “recreational opportu‐

nities” were excellent or good. Park‐and‐Ride and Bicycle Systems

 In 2006, 62% of respondents stated “job The next four questions address the possibil‐ opportunities” were fair to poor with ity of expanding park‐and‐ride and bicycle 31% of responses rating fair. In 2010, systems in Grand Prairie. A park‐and‐ride 56.0% of respondents stated “job oppor‐ facility is currently being designed for Inter‐ tunities” were fair to poor with 34.0% state Highway 30 (IH‐30). The second ques‐ rating fair. tion examines community interest in this service.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The third and fourth questions are meant to sidered a “High Priority Item” in the sum‐ investigate interest in future park‐and‐ride mary of priority items. facilities for Interstate Highway 20 (IH‐20) and State Highway 161 (SH‐161). The fifth Grand Prairie currently has 14 miles of park question considers the possibility of expand‐ trails (jogging, walking and biking), and has ing bicycle lanes and trails for recreation, some plans for expansion. However, the working or shopping. Parks Master Plan, prepared by Jacobs/ Carter & Burgess, makes the following rec‐ 2008 Parks, Recreation and Open Space ommendations: Master Plan  A city wide Trail System Master Plan will According to the 2008 Parks, Recreation and need to be completed, to identify poten‐ Open Space Master Plan, which was pre‐ tial trail and pathway connections pared by Jacobs Carter Burgess, “more hike/ throughout the city, and guide the plan‐ bike/walk/jog/run and nature trails” are con‐ ning and provisions of paved trails.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Work in tandem to achieve the overall  Plan for market changes goal of creating a citywide network of interconnected trails for the use by mul‐  Zoning for size does not work, must have tiple non‐motorized user groups. quality developments with character

 A Linkage Trail Plan through the Parks  Apartment regulation has not worked System and corridors that allow for ex‐ with 12 units/acre panded residential connections to parks, public facilities and retail/restaurant  Shopping – density and quality infill lead sites needs to be considered. to more dispersed income to improve shopping and dining. Community Meetings  Landscaping – accentuate businesses Three community meetings were held at the with landscaping, not hide businesses. following locations: Take signage into account, can cluster landscaping.  Betty Warmack Branch Library, 760 Bardin Road at 7:00 pm on June 24, 2010  What mass transit types do you want in Grand Prairie? Light rail and bus service.  Westridge Baptist Church, 1700 N. High‐ way 161 at 7:00 pm on July 22, 2010  Phase in rail/mass transit types for future

 City Council Chambers, City Hall Plaza,  Great Southwest Parkway – Work with 317 West College Street at 7:00 pm on adjacent cities for common good. Im‐ August 24, 2010 prove GSW Parkway from end to end.

The purpose of these community meetings  Recreational opportunities must be in‐ was for staff to provide general information corporated into mixed developments on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan and to ob‐ tain feedback from the community.  Recreational and bicycle opportunities for Fish Creek area The community meetings were advertised using the same methods as for the commu‐  Bike lanes on thoroughfare corridors for nity survey. The meeting results were posted citizens to be safe on the city website. Items discussed at the community meetings include:  Evolving trends for Business Parks

 Mixed Use development definition and  Hospital District future and changing examples trends in healthcare

 Future is not starter castles  Commuter rail

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Flexspace and live‐work options  Highway 287 Corridor, FLU and MTP  North sector zoning conflicts amendments

 Planned Development Site Plan process,  Mass transit (rail initiatives and bus rapid challenges and opportunities transit)

 Geographic configuration of the city is a  Economic Development projects, specifi‐ challenge, linear with a lot of floodplain cally the Entertainment District and the Wildflower Resort on the Peninsula.  Cooperation with adjacent cities (ex: Ar‐ lington & GP re: GSW Pkwy)  Casino development as a possibility

 Mass transportation ‐ what the city al‐  Competition with adjacent cities for eco‐ ready has and what the attendants nomic development would like to see considered.

 Changes in residential development due  Park‐and‐Ride on IH‐30 and the possibil‐ to recent economic trends ity of other Park‐and‐Ride facilities along other highways.  Higher density will help with economic development  Citywide bus service versus a Park‐and‐ Ride contracts or bus rapid transit.  Higher density must also be high quality and include amenities  How the housing market is changing. De‐ scriptions of emerging housing trends,  Higher density also means more traffic, such as senior housing and multi‐ ways to accommodate generational housing.

 Timing of overall infrastructure develop‐  Gas well ordinance and implementation ment with private projects  Mixed use and transit oriented development and  Timing of mass transit with destination higher density housing options creation  Bike lanes and a bike plan  New hospital development  Environmental considerations of new  State Highway 161 construction timing and infill development and impact on development  Capitalizing on the city’s strengths  Public Improvement Districts, what they are and how they work  North‐to‐south traffic considerations

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 3 Sustainable Development

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Future Land Use Map Family Three (MF‐1, MF‐2 and MF‐3), and Planned Development (PD) with one or more The Future Land Use Map is a major imple‐ of these uses. mentation tool for the Comprehensive Plan with respect to the city’s future land use pat‐ Mixed Residential (3.5‐6 units per acre over‐ tern. A description of these land use classifi‐ all average): Mixed residential areas should cations includes recommended densities, include master planned neighborhoods with the types of uses, and the typical zoning dis‐ a range of size and type of residential units – tricts for each category. typically referred to as Traditional Neighbor‐ hood Development (TND). Land Use Classifications Mixed Use. Development in this category Low Density Residential (0‐6 Dwelling Units should include a mixture of retail, high den‐ per Net Acre): Appropriate zoning districts sity residential, personal service and some may include Agriculture (A), Single Family limited office uses in a pedestrian oriented Estate (SF‐E), Single Family 1‐4 (SF‐1 to SF‐4), development. and Planned Development (PD) with one or more of these uses. Commercial/Retail. “Commercial”, by defini‐ tion, includes office, service and retail uses. Medium Density Residential (6‐12 Dwelling Appropriate zoning categories for this use Units Per Net Acre): Appropriate zoning dis‐ include Office (O and O‐1), Neighborhood tricts may include Single Family 5‐6 (SF‐5, SF‐ Service (NS), General Retail (GR and GR‐1), 6), Single Family Zero Lot (SF‐ZL), Single Fam‐ Commercial and Commercial Office (C, C‐1 ily Attached (SF‐A), Single Family Townhouse and C‐O), and Planned Development (PD) (SF‐T), and Planned Development (PD) with with one or more of these uses. one or more of these uses. Light Industrial. This category represents High Density Residential (12+ Dwelling Units uses such as R&D on non‐toxic/non‐ per Net Acre): Appropriate zoning districts biological material, warehousing, distribu‐ may include Multi‐Family One to Multi‐ tion, light assembly and fabrication. Appro‐

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

priate zoning districts may include Heavy Commercial (HC), Light Industrial (LI), and Planned Development (PD) which include these uses.

Heavy Industrial. This category represents more intense industrial uses, and activities which involve toxic or biological material. Appropriate zoning districts may include Heavy Industrial (HI), and Planned Develop‐ ment (PD) which include one or more of these uses.

Parks and Recreation. These areas represent the City’s public park system. It includes public golf courses and active recreation ar‐ eas.

Open Space/Flood Plain. Flood plains primar‐ ily comprise the Open Space category in the Land Use Plan. These areas should be pre‐ served as public and neighborhood‐oriented open space, and they should incorporate trails and drainage corridors which are left in a naturalistic state.

The Comprehensive Plan provides policy guidance for development‐related decisions. When zoning changes are proposed that are in conflict with the Future Land Use Map (FLU map), the map and where applicable, the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, should be reviewed and modified as well. This ensures that broader community issues are addressed. The first objective addresses this need and meets Goal 1: Use Sound Land Use and Urban Design Principles to Optimize City Land Resources.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 1 Thoroughfare Map Property will be zoned in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Thoroughfare Map is another major im‐ plementation tool for the Comprehensive Objective 1: Policy 1 Plan. The Thoroughfare Map is part of the Prior to rezoning land to a more intensive Master Transportation Plan (MTP), Article 23 use, a determination that the street sys‐ of the Unified Development Code. The goals tem, utilities, drainage and other require‐ and objectives that relate to the Master ments are adequate to support the more Transportation Plan are described in more intense use must be made; and the use detail in Section 4 of the Comprehensive must be in an appropriate setting. Plan. The interrelationship between the Fu‐ ture Land Use Map and the Thoroughfare Comprehensive Plan amendments are done Map merits a brief description of the Thor‐ when changing conditions merit a zoning oughfare Map in relation to land use goals change that is not in compliance with the and objectives. Future Land Use Map. In addition, the Plan‐ ning and Zoning Commission does an annual Roadway Classification review of zoning changes, text amendments, annexations, disannexations, and any other The Thoroughfare Map reflects a hierarchical changes that affect the Future Land Use map system that defines the role of each street or policies of the Comprehensive Plan. by functional classification. The classifica‐ tions range from those streets that provide Section 11 of the Comprehensive Plan de‐ for traffic movement to those whose pri‐ scribes the process for implementing the mary function is access to adjacent proper‐ Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP for ties. The MTP figure that is shown below, FY2011‐2015 was approved by City Council demonstrates this relationship. (Mobility re‐ on September 10, 2010. Annual updates to fers to the movement of traffic, both in the CIP are done annually or as needed. The terms of speed and capacity. Access refers goals, objectives, policies and strategies of to the accessibility of adjacent properties this document are taken into account when from the particular street.) determining capital improvements.

Objective 1: Policy 2 Conduct regular analysis of current and undeveloped land areas, updating the Comprehensive Plan annually in conjunc‐ tion with the Capital Improvement Plan and Program.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Local streets provide the most access to ad‐ jacent properties but function very poorly as access roads to adjacent properties. With this in mind, streets that carry a higher vol‐ ume of traffic, such as principal arterials, should have a limited number of intersec‐ tions and curb cuts so traffic movements will not be impeded.

Freeway ‐ The freeway is the highest capac‐ ity thoroughfare in the transportation sys‐ tem. This thoroughfare has partial control of access from the adjacent land and streets. Access is restricted to widely spaced inter‐ change points (typically one (1) mile apart) and land adjacent to the freeway is usually accessed by a parallel frontage road that is separated from the main freeway lanes. All thoroughfare crossings are grade separated.

 Right‐way requirements for freeways are usually 400 feet or more.

Principal Arterial ‐ The primary urban traffic carrying system is made up of principal arte‐ rials. The primary function of the principal arterial is to provide for continuity and high volume traffic movement between major traffic centers. These thoroughfares are usually spaced at approximately one (1) mile intervals, unless terrain or barriers create a need for major deviation. The minimum principal arterial cross section contains three moving traffic lanes.

 Right‐of‐way requirements for principal arterials typically range from 100 feet to 120 feet.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Minor Arterial ‐ The primary func‐ tion of the minor arterial thor‐ oughfare is to provide for continu‐ ity and high volume traffic move‐ ment between major traffic cen‐ ters. It also collects and distributes traffic from streets of lower classi‐ fications to the principal arterial. Due to principal arterial spacing and capacity however, minor arte‐ rials may also function as major thoroughfares in limited portions of the city. Minor arterials typi‐ cally provide for a minimum of four moving lanes of traffic and left turn movements can be ac‐ commodated through the use of a continuous left‐turn lane as the State Highway 161 Bridge Overpass for Interstate Highway 20. situation merits.

 A minimum right‐of‐way of 70 feet is re‐  In these types of developments, 70 feet quired for a minor arterial, while the is the minimum right‐of‐way require‐ maximum requirement is 100 feet. ment.

Collector ‐ A collector street’s primary func‐ Local Residential/Rural Street ‐ The function tion is to collect and distribute traffic from of the local street is to provide access from local access streets and convey it to the arte‐ groups of housing units within a neighbor‐ rial system. This thoroughfare is usually lo‐ hood to collector streets. Only vehicles hav‐ cated to not attract through traffic move‐ ing an origin or destination on the local ments. To discourage such movements, street are usually attracted to it. With the streets are typically disrupted near the cen‐ exception of delivery trucks, trucks are nor‐ ter of the neighborhood that they serve by mally prohibited from using local streets as offsetting intersections of curvilinear design. routes to their final destination. Local

 The minimum right‐of‐way requirement streets typically provide two moving lanes of for a residential collector is 60 feet. traffic and one parking lane.

The collector is also used as the internal  These provisions require a minimum of street system for commercial and/or indus‐ 50 feet of right‐or‐way. trial developments.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The rural street design standard is used in units per acre or a low amount of com‐ areas exhibiting a rural setting with very low mercial floor area per acre; development density. Environmentally sen‐ sitive or topographically constrained areas  It relies on a system of large roadways with one acre or larger residential lots are and extreme flood control measures to usually suitable for this type of street stan‐ support this type of development; and dard.  Most retail activity occurs in low density  The minimum right‐of‐way requirement strip retail centers, accessible only by the for a rural street is 60 feet. automobile.

Larger scale copies of the Future Land Use The second objective addresses the most Map and the Thoroughfare Map are pro‐ prevalent characteristics of urban sprawl. It vided at the end of the Comprehensive Plan. meets Goal 1: Use Sound Land Use and Ur‐ ban Design Principles to Optimize City Land The following policy ensures that revisions to Resources and Goal 10: Promote and Adopt the Thoroughfare Map will optimize the rela‐ “Sustainable Growth Practices.” tionship between land uses and the trans‐ portation facilities that serve the uses. It also Objective 2 meets Goal 1: Use Sound Land Use and Ur‐ Encourage development that will reduce ur‐ ban Design Principles to Optimize City Land ban sprawl. Resources. Higher density “mixed use” retail and em‐ Objective 1: Policy 3 ployment centers can be established in the Amendments to the Master Transportation downtown area, the industrial/technology Plan and Thoroughfare Map will be consis‐ districts, and at a possible future transit fa‐ tent with the Comprehensive Plan. cility. Mixed use development refers to a Sustainable Development combination of different but compatible land uses within a single building, site or dis‐ Sustainable development refers to develop‐ trict. For example, retail and personal ser‐ ment that meets the needs of the present vices should be clustered together and easily without compromising the ability of future accessible from a variety of housing choices. generations to meet their own needs. Urban sprawl is typically identified as the opposite Objective 2: Policy 4 of sustainable development. Urban sprawl Encourage land use patterns that reflect a has the following characteristics. mix of integrated community uses with housing, workplaces, shopping, retail ser‐  It is comprised of a uniformly low den‐ vices, schools, parks, trails and open sity, typically five or fewer residential spaces within walking or bicycling distance.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 2 lowing two policies address some of the Encourage development that will reduce ur‐ most prevalent challenges that inhibit infill ban sprawl. development.

Objective 2: Policy 5 Objective 2: Policy 7 Reduce dependence on fossil fuels by en‐ Adopt infill policy and standards that in‐ couraging development that is oriented clude flexible parking, setbacks, building along public transit. Compact development code and associated standards. minimizes the need to drive. Objective 2: Policy 8 Another means of reducing dependence on Ensure that infill land uses are compatible fossil fuels is to encourage home occupa‐ with the area by either being similar to sur‐ tions and live‐work settings. Live‐work refers rounding uses, or by being supportive to to mixed use development that provides ad‐ the neighborhood. ditional space and services for residences of the development who work from home. The City of Grand Prairie has seen many suc‐ cessful examples of infill development since Objective 2: Policy 6 2005. These include a new dialysis clinic Accommodate home‐based occupations along Dalworth Street and Jefferson Retail and live‐work settings, which reduce the along W. Jefferson Street. Both fall within need to commute and thus reduces the Central Business District –Two (CBD‐2). vehicle miles traveled.

Infill Development

Infill development refers to new development that is constructed on vacant lots between existing uses. These vacant lots were often occupied by previous structures. They may still have adequate ser‐ vices, like water connections and driveway approaches, but face other redevelopment challenges. These challenges may include changes in the adjacent land uses, deteriorated infrastructure, and overly restrictive density and di‐ Jefferson Retail along West Jefferson Street. mensional requirements. The fol‐

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Multi‐modal District portation‐land use relationship. The city will establish multimodal quality of service Multi‐modal refers to a type of transporta‐ standards: tion system that incorporates all forms of movement: vehicular, public transportation,  Job/household index (1.5 j/h to 2.0 j/h bicycle, aviation and pedestrian. A solid recommended for an urban area) multi‐modal system minimizes congestion,  Linear feet of sidewalks provided improves air quality, and enables all citizens  Traffic volumes and speed means of safe and efficient transportation.  HOV and/or bicycle lanes provided  Light rail/ bus rapid transit/ park‐and‐ Objective 2: Policy 9 ride provided Create a multimodal district that is a per‐  Levels of Service (LOS) formance measurement tool to be used to  Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) determine progress in terms of the trans‐

Multi‐modal District Institutional uses Light rail

Bus Rapid Transit Light rail Pedestrian/Bike opportunities

Low density Commercial‐ residential Retail uses

HOV lanes

Medium density residential

Park‐n‐Ride

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Land Use and Transportation

Historic development practices emphasize strip retail develop‐ ment, isolated business parks and low‐density, single‐use subdivi‐ sions. This type of development requires residents to work in one area, live in another, shop in an‐ other, and travel among these destinations on major arterial roadways. This pattern increases commuting times, creates traffic congestion, and contributes to air quality problems.

As stated previously, higher den‐ sity “mixed use” retail and em‐ Transit Oriented Development in Downtown Plano. ployment centers address many of these issues. Objective 3: Policy 11 The next objective recognizes the need to Use transportation alternatives to the change from historic development practices drive‐alone automobile, including walking, to development that encourages a more in‐ bicycling, and public transit. tegrated approach to the land use and trans‐ portation relationship. The third objective Higher density development is most appro‐ meets Goal 4: Maintain and Upgrade the priate along principal and minor arterials City’s Transportation Infrastructure and Goal that are designed to handle higher volumes 10: Promote and Adopt “Sustainable Growth of traffic than collectors. While new mixed Practices.” use development is encouraged, it is also important to protect smaller neighborhoods. Objective 3 Ensure a balanced relationship between land Objective 3 : Policy 12 use development and the transportation sys‐ The city should minimize the impact of ex‐ tem. ternally generated traffic carried by resi‐ dential collectors. Driveways for commer‐ Objective 3: Policy 10 cial, multifamily, or other high traffic gen‐ Reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles trav‐ erators should be located so that they do eled through compact, infill, and mixed use not route traffic through single family de‐ development. tached residential neighborhoods.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 3 : Policy 13 b) Designing and constructing roadway in‐ Locate higher density residential uses tersections and access which are com‐ along roadways designated as minor arte‐ patible with roadway functional require‐ rials, principle arterials or limited access ments and the characteristics of adjacent thoroughfares. land uses;

While recognizing the need to fit land uses c) Providing buffer zones where appropri‐ with adjacent roadways, it is also important ate between transportation ways and to ensure interconnectivity between single‐ adjacent areas. family neighborhoods and surrounding com‐ munities. The following strategies apply. For more objectives related to the land use and transportation relationship, see Section  The city encourages the creation of pe‐ 4, Transportation and Section 10, Intergov‐ destrian and bikeway linkages between ernmental Cooperation. residential areas and office/retail areas; and provide such linkages among resi‐ The next objective relates to creating streets dential areas, recreational facilities and and public spaces that are pedestrian schools as well. friendly, and create a sense of civic identity. This objective meets Goal 5: Promote and  Estimated future traffic volumes and the Enhance Economic Development Strengths, resulting level of service for streets and like the Entertainment Venues and Goal 10: intersections are considered when zon‐ Promote and Adopt “Sustainable Growth ing changes are evaluated. Practices.”

 If there is a question regarding the fit Objective 4 between a proposed land use and the Beautify city streets and thoroughfares. adjacent transportation system, then the Director of Transportation has discre‐ Objective 4: Policy 15 tionary authority to require that a traffic The city will require street‐scaping impact study be done. (landscape, trash receptacles, street furni‐ ture..) along designated thoroughfares and Objective 3 : Policy 14 funding for its maintenance. Compatibility between the transportation system and adjacent land uses will be The Unified Development Code (UDC) has achieved by: requirements for street‐scaping and side‐

a) Implementing urban street design crite‐ walks for new commercial development. ria which are consistent with the land Sidewalks are required along all streets per use they serve and are pedestrian Article 12 of UDC. Street and parking lot trees and shrubs are required per Article 8 of friendly;

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 4 Beautify city streets and thorough‐ fares.

While many pedestrian amenities are provided through private de‐ velopment, there are many city‐ initiated projects and public open spaces. The city enhanced the me‐ dians for the Entertainment Dis‐ trict with native landscape materi‐ als, and entry monumentation.

Objective 4: Policy 16 The city will provide attractive en‐ try monumentation and adequate landscaping along key corridors in Veterans Memorial along State Highway 161 and Conover Drive. the city to clearly identify the City of Grand Prairie.

the UDC. Street trees must be provided at In addition, the city has provided sidewalk every 50 feet on center, or clustered. improvements for Main Street as well as Screening fences and buffer zones are re‐ other key corridors. Most of the public im‐ quired for commercial development that is provements related to walking trails, adjacent to residentially zoned property. benches and trash receptacles are handled

though the Parks and Recreation depart‐ Resolution 3924 requires that new residen‐ ment. A park inventory is included at the tial development provide sidewalks and back of the Comprehensive Plan. landscaping as well. Individual residential lots must provide two (3” caliper) trees and Objective 4: Policy 17 a total of 30 gallons of shrubs. In addition, The city will require buffers (berms, open one landscaped monument sign is required space, bikeways) between transportation at a minimum of one street entry along a facilities and adjacent land areas where designated collector or arterial thorough‐ possible. fare. Screening fences must also be coordi‐ nated throughout the residential subdivi‐ The most comprehensive requirements for sion. Screening consists of masonry walls, buffer zones can be found in the city’s over‐ berms, landscaping, wrought iron, or a com‐ lay districts. A more detailed description of bination of these elements. the overlay districts can be found in Section 5, Special Districts of this plan.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 4 Transportation Planning

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Master Transportation Plan As part of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan process, the Thoroughfare Map portion of The City of Grand Prairie was first platted the Master Transportation Plan was and portions of it deeded to the Texas and amended in several phases over a six month Pacific Railway Company Railroad in 1876, period. The adopted changes are shown in the year the railroad completed its track be‐ Appendix B of this plan. tween Dallas and Fort Worth. In the past 129 years, transportation has been a significant Excerpts from Master Transportation Plan contributor to Grand Prairie’s growth and well being. The city’s ability to capitalize on The Master Transportation Plan is designed its centralized location and transportation and developed to provide a sound structural corridors is the key to its long term sustain‐ framework for future growth and develop‐ ability. ment. This plan coordinates the use of streets and on‐road bicycle routes. It is a The Grand Prairie Master Transportation guide used to coordinate individual develop‐ Plan, Article 23 of the Unified Development ments in the City of Grand Prairie to the Code, addresses the need for multi‐modal overall community. The plan encourages the transportation policies. It also projects Capi‐ creation of neighborhoods, minimizing traf‐ tal Improvement costs for maintaining and fic movement through those neighborhoods, developing surface transportation facilities providing alternative modes of transporta‐ to serve a growing population. The Plan is tion and providing high capacity routes for also coordinated with the regional transpor‐ moving regional traffic to and from the City. tation system by participating in the Re‐ The plan establishes right‐of‐way, pavement, gional Thoroughfare Plan and Regional Mo‐ recommended alignment, intersection stan‐ bility Plan of the North Central Texas Council dards and on‐street bicycle routes based on of Governments (NCTCOG). As part of the forecasted future traffic volumes and eco‐ Comprehensive Plan Update, the city’s Thor‐ nomic development. These volumes are oughfare Plan was reviewed for basic logic based on a level of service the City wishes to and continuity. provide.

The Thoroughfare Map is a component of This objective addresses transportation plan‐ the Master Transportation Plan. Changes ning and meets Goal 4: Maintain and Up‐ were made to the Thoroughfare Map since grade the City’s Transportation Infrastruc‐ City Council approval of the 2005 Compre‐ ture. hensive Plan. Most of these changes were based on traffic modeling done by the North Objective 5 Central Texas Council of Governments Develop a transportation planning process (NCTCOG) and staff recommendations. that addresses long‐range needs, but em‐ phasizes short‐ and mid‐range solutions.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 5: Policy 1 amount of traffic is generally considered the The city will maintain a long‐range Thor‐ capacity of a street. The capacity of a street oughfare Map for the purpose of facility is its ability to accommodate a stream of planning and rights‐of‐way reservation and moving vehicles, measured as a flow rate. dedication. The capacity of a street can be affected by the roadway, vehicle performance charac‐ The following strategies relate to implemen‐ teristics, operational controls, and environ‐ tation of Master Transportation Plan, Thor‐ mental elements. Travel modeling and fore‐ oughfare Plan amendments. casting techniques are used to anticipate

 The city should require right‐of‐way needs for future thoroughfares. The follow‐ dedication at the time of platting or re‐ ing policy reinforces these processes.

platting property within the city limits Objective 5: Policy 2 or the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction. The functional classification of future thor‐

 The city should evaluate and update the oughfares should be based on anticipated Transportation Plan when necessary. needs as analyzed by accepted travel mod‐ eling and forecasting techniques.  Amendments to the Thoroughfare Map should be allowed between citywide Levels of Service updates only when essential to the fu‐ The service quality of a thoroughfare is usu‐ ture development of land, and when ally a function of the ratio of the rate of traf‐ supported by a study of the system and fic flow to the capacity of the street. This fiscal impacts of the proposed change. rate is traditionally described as the Level of  Amendments to the Thoroughfare Map Service. The Level of Service (LOS) is a quali‐ will not be accepted solely as a means tative measure of traffic congestion that of mitigating negative traffic impacts of represents the collective factors of speed, a proposed zoning change, but rather travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to for their affect on the entire transporta‐ maneuver, safety, driver comfort and con‐ tion network. venience, and operating costs provided by a thoroughfare under a specific traffic volume As described in Section 3, Sustainable Devel‐ condition. opment, the Thoroughfare Map is comprised of existing and future roadways that are Level of Service C is the service level used as classified as freeway, principal arterial, mi‐ a criterion for design purpose for the thor‐ nor arterial, collector and local streets. The oughfare system recommended in this plan. purpose of a thoroughfare system is to ac‐ Level of Service C is the industry standard commodate a maximum amount of traffic, at because it is acceptable to drivers and this an acceptable service level. The maximum level can generally be reached in the design and operation ofe th facility.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 5 Develop a transportation planning process that addresses long‐range needs, but emphasizes short‐ and mid‐range solutions.

Objective 5: Policy 3 If the target Level of Service of “C” cannot be met, LOS “D” may be acceptable. At no time, how‐ ever, should LOS “E” or “F” be acceptable on arterial streets.

Objective 5: Policy 4 Orderly extensions of all arterial and collector streets, as shown on the Thoroughfare Map, should be constructed. All streets should be extended in a Bardin Road bridge with sidewalk ramp connection to future extension of Fish Creek Linear Park. logical continuation, using stan‐ dard engineering principals. Special consid‐ specific thoroughfare. When determining eration will be given to peak hour traffic. the capacity of a roadway for planning, the specific context must be taken into account. The table below shows how the target Level of Service (LOS) “C” can translate to a differ‐ To provide a better understanding of the ent volume of traffic carried per day, de‐ various levels of traffic congestion, six Level pending on the roadway classification for a of Service concepts are described on the fol‐ lowing page.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Level of Service A: The highest quality of ser‐ Level of Service D: Unstable flow of traffic is vice a particular thoroughfare can provide. approached at this level. Tolerable average It is a condition of free flow in which there is operating speeds are maintained, yet are little or no restrictions on speed or maneu‐ subject to considerable and sudden varia‐ verability caused by the presence of other tion. Freedom to maneuver and drive in vehicles. comfort is low. Most drivers consider this service level unsatisfactory.

Level of service B: Even though this level is a zone of stable flow, operating speeds begin Level of Service E: Traffic operations at this to be restricted by other traffic. Restriction level are unstable, speeds and flow rates on maneuvering is still negligible. fluctuate, and there is little independence of speed selection of maneuvering. Driver com‐ fort is low and accident potential is high.

Level of Service C: This Level of Service still provides stable traffic flows, but at this vol‐ ume and density level, most drivers are be‐ Level of Service F: This level of service de‐ coming restricted in their freedom to select scribes forced flow conditions. Speed and speed, change lanes, or perform passing ma‐ flow rates are very low, and may, for short neuvers. time periods drop to zero.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The centralized location of Grand Prairie center of the Dallas/Fort Worth/Arlington within the Dallas/Fort Worth/Arlington met‐ metropolitan area. ropolitan area makes it essential that consid‐ eration be given to the impact of regional State Highway 161 (SH 161) is currently be‐ traffic on the city’s thoroughfare network. ing constructed and will help alleviate the With this in mind, the Grand Prairie Master north‐south traffic movement that is being Transportation Plan has been designed carried by SH 360. As development contin‐ within the general framework of the regional ues to take place in the southern portion of thoroughfare system. the metropolitan area, a greater emphasis will be placed on north‐south freeways. Regional Network Local Traffic The elements of the existing regional net‐ work that directly influence Grand Prairie While regional traffic significantly impacts are two east‐west freeways, Interstate–30 Grand Prairie due to its central location and Interstate‐20. These freeways are within the metropolitan area, local traffic among the most heavily traveled roads of traditionally represents the majority of trips the regional network since they provide the in an urban area. This local traffic genera‐ primary access routes between Dallas and tion is the result of interaction between the Fort Worth. residents of a community and the land uses

Loop 9 is a future influence on Grand Prairie. This is an outer loop around the Dallas/Fort Worth area and will pass through Grand Prairie south of Joe Pool Lake. This, coupled with the additional growth of employment, popula‐ tion and density in Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlington and Grand Prai‐ rie ewill mak this another high vol‐ ume corridor.

Another element of the regional thoroughfare network that influ‐ ences Grand Prairie is Highway 360 (SH 360). This north‐south freeway supplements the domi‐ Barrier free ramps being installed with street improvements. nant east‐west freeways in the

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

within the community. A decision with re‐ Objective 6 spect to land use imposes a limitation on the Create “protected” corridors for arterial policies that may evolve with respect to thoroughfares with high daily traffic vol‐ transportation, and vice versa. In the long umes. term, a balance between the transportation system and land use patterns must be pro‐ Objective 6: Policy 5 vided if efficient community development is Where economically and physically feasi‐ to be achieved. As a result, decisions in re‐ ble, the city should develop grade‐ gard to transportation and land use must be separated intersections at those intersec‐ made conditional upon one another, rather tions where the projected intersection than being determined independently. traffic volumes exceed recommended ca‐ pacities for arterial thoroughfares. The next objective gives special considera‐ Grade separations are primarily used for tion to high traffic rights‐of‐way and meets highway intersections; however, sometimes Goal 4: Maintain and Upgrade the City’s it is also an appropriate approach for high‐ Transportation Infrastructure.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 6: Policy 7 Where economically and physi‐ cally practical, grade separations should be constructed at the in‐ tersection of railroads and arterial thoroughfares. This will aid in the unobstructed flow of traffic throughout the city and provide additional safety at rail crossings.

Rights‐of‐Way for Bike Lanes

As stated previously, the Master Transportation Plan, Article 23 of the Unified Development Code, coordinates the use of streets and on‐road bicycle routes. Eventually, Residential street and sidewalk improvements. the city will have a separate Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan that will address components such as volume arterials as well, under special cir‐ connections to off‐road bicycle trails. It will cumstances like heavy noise impacts on ad‐ be necessary to preserve rights‐of‐way for jacent land uses or safety considerations. bicycle routes as well. For more information

Objective 6: Policy 6 on planning for bike facilities, see Section 8, To minimize additional right‐of‐way acqui‐ Municipal Facilities of this plan.

sition and potential noise impact, the city Pedestrian Oriented Design should depress the main lanes at grade‐ separated intersections, only where it is When planning for acquisition of rights‐of‐ necessary. way, it is also important to provide opportu‐ nities to walk to employment, shopping and The need to preserve future rights‐of‐way is recreation destinations. Many streets al‐ also illustrated by the possibility of future ready include sidewalks in the right‐of‐way, passenger rail lines in North Texas. The Un‐ and barrier free connections to surrounding ion Pacific rail line and the Dorothy Spur are land uses. However, a pedestrian environ‐ under consideration for commuter rail ser‐ ment should also include amenities, like vice. For more information on passenger rail, seating and landscaping to provide shade. see Section 10, Intergovernmental Coopera‐ For additional information on planning for tion of this plan. public walkways, see Section 12, Implemen‐

tation Tools of this plan.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 5 Special Districts

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Corridor Overlay Districts sirability and attraction of the SH‐161 Corridor. Corridor overlay districts provide a vision for D. To arrange land uses in such a manner as how lands within a specific geographical to develop an efficient, convenient and area should be developed. Corridor plans harmonious land use pattern, and to en‐ designate future land uses, identify demo‐ courage, where appropriate, the use of graphic and other descriptive characteristics buffer zones between uses. for the region, and establish architectural E. To develop a balanced transportation guidelines for physical development. Corri‐ network to include motor vehicle circula‐ dor overlay Districts have been established tion, pedestrian circulation, bicycle circu‐ for State Highway 161 (SH‐161), Interstate lation and integrated parking. Highway 20 (IH‐20), Lakeridge Parkway, the F. To encourage the development of a thor‐ Central Business Districts and the Beltline oughfare network in a manner compati‐ Corridor Overlay District. ble with environmentally sensitive or scenic areas within the Corridor. State Highway 161 Corridor Overlay G. To encourage economic vitality and a

strong ad valorem and sales tax base to The ten‐mile SH‐161 Corridor is becoming a provide for improved city services and major regional north‐south freeway be‐ additional employment opportunities for tween employment centers in the northern current and future residents of the City and central metropolitan areas, connecting of Grand Prairie. the Trinity Toll road to areas south of State Highway 183 (SH‐183). SH‐161 also connects with major east‐west freeways between Dal‐ las and Fort Worth, including SH‐183, IH‐20, and Interstate Highway 30 (IH‐30). The land use policies for the SH‐161 Corridor, as ap‐ proved on January 16, 2001 (Ordinance 6376) and reflected in the 2005 and 2010 Comprehensive Plans are shown below.

A. To preserve sufficient areas of natural and aesthetic character to provide mean‐ ingful relief from urban development. B. To establish a living environment that is aesthetically pleasing, as well as func‐ tionally efficient and practical. C. To establish a natural and built environ‐ ment that enhances the de‐

State Highway 161 Corridor Overlay.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Interstate Highway 20 Corridor Overlay. State Highway 161 Extension

Main lanes and frontage roads between IH‐ 30 and SH‐183 are close to completion. Frontage roads from IH‐30 to IH‐20 are com‐ plete. The railroad crossing at W. Main Street and Jefferson Street is projected to be complete in the fourth quarter of 2012.

Main lanes from IH‐20 to IH‐30 will be built by the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA). Construction is scheduled to be complete by 2012. Progress on construction can be monitored at www.ntta.org.

Interstate Highway 20 Corridor Overlay

The IH‐20 Corridor Overlay District was adopted March 11, 2003 (Ordinance 6811) for the entire 4.7‐mile stretch of IH‐20 that is within Grand Prairie city limits. The district establishes land use, development standards Development standards are established to and design criteria along the corridor that is maximize the corridors’ potential as a city compatible with a high density, highly trav‐ asset with sustainable development, and ad‐ elled urban retail area. dress the concerns of property owners that future development be compatible with ex‐ Current land use in the study area is about isting residential uses. 80% open or undeveloped land. Existing de‐ velopment along the IH‐20 Corridor is retail Lakeridge Parkway Extension and commercial. Mixed use development, which provides for the establishment of a Beginning in late 2010, Lakeridge Parkway mixture of office, retail and residential uses will be extended from IH‐20, where it inter‐ within a unified development, is proposed sects SH‐161. Lakeridge Parkway will be‐ for the section of the overlay district that come a six‐lane arterial roadway to Polo encompasses the SH‐161 Corridor north‐ Road and will be widened from four lanes to ward to Warrior Trail. The majority of land six lanes from Polo Road to Great Southwest uses proposed for the overlay district will Parkway. Design and right‐of‐way acquisition mainly be comprised of retail/commercial are underway and construction is scheduled uses with some multi‐family uses scattered to be complete by late 2012. throughout the corridor.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Lakeridge Parkway Overlay Since these development standards have been successfully applied to site plans in The Lakeridge Parkway Overlay District was these corridors, many of these criteria will adopted May 6, 2003 (Ordinance 6838) and be integrated into the UDC for citywide use. encompasses 7.8 miles along Lakeridge Park‐ This objective meets Goal 5: Promote and way, from IH‐20 to Cedar Hill. It also includes Enhance Economic Development Strengths, the Grand Prairie Peninsula. The outstanding like the Entertainment Venues. feature in the Lakeridge Parkway Overlay District is the peninsula at Joe Pool Lake. This Objective 7 geographic feature dominates the area To Apply new architectural and urban design south of IH‐20. Its watershed reaches into criteria (as amended) from the corridor over‐ the undeveloped area of Ellis County. lay districts in the UDC to citywide use. This will include a 5‐year review of the standards. The city seeks to establish a neighborhood center with specialty retail, entertainment, Objective 7: Policy 1 cultural, recreational venues and other The city will apply new architectural and amenities compatible with the recreational urban design criteria throughout the city theme of the Peninsula. The amenities in the as deemed appropriate by the Planning Peninsula area include: and Zoning Commission and the City Council.  Loyd Park—campsites, a clubhouse, swimming beach, hike/bike trails, and boat ramp and dock.  Lynn Creek Park—picnic shelters, play‐ ground, swimming beach and boat ramp.  Britton Park—boat ramp and access to fishing holes.  Tangle Ridge Golf Course—an 18 hole championship public golf course that in‐ cludes a restaurant and pro‐shop.

Current zoning in the overlay district allows for residential and neo‐traditional mixed use development featuring a central neighbor‐ hood business/retail center. The develop‐ ment standards for the district are the same as the ones adopted for the SH‐161 and IH‐ 20 districts.

Lakeridge Parkway Overlay District.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

In addition to recreation, SH‐161, IH‐20, and Lakeridge Parkway Overlay Districts also provide re‐ gional shopping opportunities and employment. As stated in the baseline analysis, a Park‐and‐Ride facility is proposed for Interstate Highway 30 (IH‐30). There may be additional opportunities for park‐ ing facilities for carpoolers and vanpoolers along the IH‐20 and SH ‐161 Corridors as well. Thus the next objective investigates this option and meets Goal 5: Promote and Enhance Economic Develop‐ ment Strengths, like the Entertain‐ ment Venues. Lynn Creek Marina at Joe Pool Lake. Objective 8 Provide multiple modes of transportation. Use Current Technology for a more User Friendly Development Process. Objective 8: Policy 2 Analyze various locations in the overlay Objective 9 districts for the possibility of future Park‐ Maintain a GIS layer and spreadsheet data‐ and‐Ride facilities. base of vacant parcels with basic informa‐ tion as a quick reference guide. The city’s Geographic Information System (GIS) can be used to analyze site alternatives Objective 9: Policy 3 for Park‐and‐Ride facilities. It is also a useful Create a GIS layer and spreadsheet data‐ tool when making other land use decisions. base of vacant parcels in the overlay dis‐ There are currently GIS layers that describe tricts that include information such as the the boundaries of the overlay districts. Addi‐ current zoning, proposed future land use, tional information can be integrated into the platting requirements, floodplain bounda‐ overlay district layers to use when making ries and zoning history. planning decisions for the overlay districts. The city’s website is another successful tool The next objective builds on the existing for planning and development. Some of this tools that are already part of the planning information may also be implemented into process and meets Goal 9: the city’s website at www.gptx.org.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Central Business Overlay District. Central Business District

Grand Prairie was first platted and portions of it deeded to the Texas and Pacific Railway Company Railroad in 1876, the year the rail‐ road completed its track between Dallas and Fort Worth. In the past 134 years, transpor‐ tation has been a significant contributor to Grand Prairie’s growth and well being. The city’s ability to capitalize on its centralized location and transportation corridors is the key to its long term sustainability.

The Central Business District (CBD) overlays are established to enhance and facilitate im‐ provements and redevelopment in the CBD corridor of Main Street and Jefferson Street. The CBD is intended to encourage facilities that complement existing and recom‐ mended land uses, and to provide compati‐ Extending from SH‐161 to Beltline Road, bility among land uses by application of de‐ CBD‐2 is projected as a mixed use area velopment standards including site planning, including residential units above retail landscaping, signage and urban design which and commercial uses. reflect the genesis of the US‐180—Jefferson  CBD Three (CBD‐3), shown in yellow— Street ‐ Union Pacific corridor. The CBD was Extending from Beltline Road to Bagdad amended in November 2007 [Ord. 7698]. Street, CBD‐3 contains primarily automo‐

tive related businesses which comprise a  CBD One (CBD‐1), shown in red ‐ Strate‐ strong secondary economic base for the gically located between SH‐161 and SH‐ US‐180—Jefferson Street corridor. Land 360, CBD‐1 is also bisected by the Dallas/ uses exclude heavy industrial automotive Tarrant County line and is impacted by activities. transportation infrastructure. CBD‐1 pro‐  CBD Four (CBD‐4), shown in blue—CBD‐4 jects future land uses of primarily manu‐ extends from Bagdad Street to the city facturing, distribution and warehousing. limits, almost to Loop 12. Heavy indus‐  CBD Two (CBD‐2), shown in orange— trial automotive uses are the principle Historically the cultural core of Grand land use in CBD‐4. This area is a south‐ Prairie, CBD‐2 includes the governmental west regional center for auto salvage ac‐ campus of the city, large churches and tivities of major insurance companies. commercial/retail land uses.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The following objectives guide redevelop‐ Objective 11 ment in the CBD corridor, maintain the city’s Make public facilities “people friendly.” scenic corridors and meet Goal 3: Revitalize Older Developed Areas, Including the Down‐ Objective 11: Policy 5 town Area. Where possible, the city will retain and de‐ velop scenic corridors* for public activities Objective 10 and use. A Specific Use Permit and Site The city will adopt flexible parking, setbacks, Plan will be required in a scenic corridor building code and associated standards for for non‐city originated development. infill areas and support the US‐180/Jefferson Street corridors as mixed use areas. * A scenic corridor must include or reflect one or more of the following: Objective 10: Policy 4 a) Character of Grand Prairie The city will encourage mixed‐use urban b) Historic Event or Person housing within a 5‐10 minute walk from c) Character of Neighborhood the US‐180 – Jefferson Street corridors. d) Designated Historical Area Recent development in the CBD corridor in‐ e) Views and Vistas cludes the Beltline Road overpass, SH‐161 f) Architectural Significance improvements, and sidewalk improvements g) Gateways in the Central Area, along Main Street. A h) Parks/Natural Features new Dallas County sub‐courthouse is i) Connecting Routes (e.g. connecting sce‐ planned for the north‐ nic areas) east corner of NW 2nd Street and Church Street. The city is cur‐ rently reviewing policies associated with the CBD and is contributing to capital improvements.

In addition to Goal 3, the next objective also meets Goal 5: Promote and Enhance Economic Development Strengths, like the Entertainment Venues. Main Street Sidewalk and Parking Improvements. (KSA Engineers)

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Beltline Corridor Overlay District has been established with the Lone Star Park horseracing track. Other amenities in the The Beltline Corridor Overlay District, shown Entertainment District include: in blue, is also known as the Entertainment District. It includes the area along Beltline  Verizon Theater—an indoor performance Road from city limits to Interstate Highway space that has a capacity of 6,350 seats 30 (IH‐30), and some properties along IH‐30. and can accommodate a wide variety of It is one of the few overlay districts that was stage productions. This theatre has been approved as a separate zoning district. open since February 2002. Planned Development District 217 (PD‐217)  Airhogs baseball stadium and Lone Star was approved in September 1996 Trail also fall within the Entertainment [Ordinance 5661], and has been amended District, and were described in Section 1, three times. Executive Summary.  Grand Prairie Tourist Information Center A Planned Development (PD) is a type of is located at the southeast corner of the planning approval which provides greater entrance to Gate 1 and Beltline Road. design flexibility by allowing deviations from  Grand Prairie GPX Skate Park also falls the typical development standards required within the Entertainment District. This is by the local zoning code with additional vari‐ a competitive skate park for in‐line skat‐ ances or zoning hearings. The intent is to ing, biking and skateboarding. encourage better designed projects through the relaxation of some development require‐ ments, in exchange for providing greater benefits to the community.

The intent of the creation of the Beltline Cor‐ ridor District is “to provide support for the development of a unified area with a distinct identity as a family oriented recreational destination within the City of Grand Prairie and across the metropolitan area. It is in‐ tended to blend with the Lone Star Park at Grand Prairie race track and the floodplain, open space and water features resulting from the Trinity River to create a recrea‐ tional and equestrian centered park‐like en‐ vironment.” PD‐217 also includes develop‐ ment standards. The architectural standards are based upon a Spanish Revival style that

Beltline Corridor Overlay District.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

As the Beltline Corridor Overlay District con‐ ated as a separate zoning district. Much of tinues to evolve, the city will implement co‐ the property within the district can be found hesive development standards. This objec‐ along Hospital Boulevard, where the street tive meets Goal 10: Promote and Adopt intersects with Great Southwest Parkway. “Sustainable Growth Practices.” The purpose of the HD overlay is to create a Objective 12 single area in which the physical and mental The city will establish land use and urban health needs of the citizenry can be accom‐ design standards for light industrial, com‐ modated in a comprehensive fashion with mercial and retail sites that are compatible support facilities that complement the with surrounding land uses and responsive health care land uses; and to provide com‐ to specific site considerations. patibility among land uses by application of stringent site planning and aesthetic design. Objective 12: Policy 6

The city will develop a coordinated signage This district includes a 233,000 square foot policy for the purpose of maximizing name hospital building and a 30,000 square foot recognition and association with recrea‐ office building on 22 acres. It has more than tional activities in the region and nation‐ 150 private rooms and a 12‐bed emergency ally. department. The facility opened in 1972,

Many of these principles are already imple‐ and closed in 2000. There has been renewed mented throughout the city, such as encour‐ interest in the hospital facility in recent aging mutual access easements wherever years, as well as in the medical offices that practical. The city will continue this policy surround the hospital building. from the 2005 Comprehensive Plan and look for additional opportunities to implement sustainable practices, like shared parking.

Objective 12: Policy 7 Commercial developments such as retail and office centers which may have multi‐ ple ownerships should be comprehensively planned with shared parking and access and have a master sign plan and property‐ owners association.

Hospital District

The Hospital District (HD), shown in orange, is another overlay district, which was cre‐

Hospital District.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The Hospital District shares a mutual border Use Permit requirement for land uses that with Central Business District One (CBD‐1). It may cause a health or safety issue for the also shares many similar characteristics. The district. A Specific Use Permit (SUP) is an‐ border of the district is one block south of other tool for encouraging compatibility the US‐180—Jefferson Street—Main Street among different land uses. corridor. It also includes a variety of adjacent land uses including single family, multi‐ Specific Use Permits family, commercial/retail,d office an ware‐ house uses, similar to CBD‐1. The purpose of the Specific Use Permit (SUP) process is to identify those uses which may The next objective addresses the need to be appropriate within a particular zoning dis‐ encourage redevelopment in the Hospital trict, but due to either their location, func‐ District and consider new alternatives, and tional or operational nature, could have a meets Goal 3: Revitalize Older Developed potentially negative impact upon surround‐ Areas, Including the Downtown Area. ing properties; and to provide for a proce‐ dure whereby such uses might be permitted Objective 13 by further restricting or conditioning them so The city will adopt flexible parking, setbacks, as to eliminate such probable negative im‐ building code and associated standards for pacts. infill areas and support the Hospital District as a mixed use area.

Objective 13: Policy 8 The city will encourage mixed‐ use urban housing within a 5‐10 minute walk from the Hospital District.

Redevelopment continues in the Hospital District. In addition to the hospital facility on Hospital Boule‐ vard, John Peter Smith Hospital has opened a clinic on Sherman Street to serve Grand Prairie citi‐ zens who live in Tarrant County.

The Hospital District includes de‐ velopment standards similar to the other overlay districts. It also Hospital facilities on Hospital Boulevard in the Hospital District. includes a Specific

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

In approving any specific use, the City Council The next objective addresses the need to may impose such development standards and monitor businesses that rely upon chemical safeguards as conditions warrant for the wel‐ processes and meets Goal 6: Maintain a Safe fare and protection of adjacent properties, City with a High Quality of Life. and citizenry as a whole as it may be affected by a proposed use. Objective 14 Encourage businesses that reduce depend‐  The approved SUP ordinance includes an ence upon chemicals and unnatural sub‐ operational plan, which describes the op‐ stances. erations on the site, the number of em‐ ployees and the hours of operation. Objective 14: Policy 9 Prevent activities that emit waste or pol‐  When conditions warrant, the ordinance lutants into the environment. New busi‐ may include a security plan and/or a spill‐ nesses that process hazardous chemicals age response plan. will need to meet or exceed clean air stan‐

 A Site Plan may be required if the subject dards.

property is located inside a designated Objective 14: Policy 10 overlay district. Minimize or reduce the use of chemicals  A Site Plan may also be required if the and employ proper disposal and recycling property is located within 300 feet of any mechanisms. Re‐use processed water Agricultural, Single Family, Two Family, or whenever possible. Multi‐Family zoning districts in order to address residential adjacency. Many of these types of uses are concen‐ trated in the Great Southwest Industrial Dis‐  In situations where Code Enforcement, trict, which will be discussed in greater detail Fire, Police or other health, safety and in Section 6, Economic Development. The welfare matters are a primary concern, Great Southwest Industrial District is not an the SUP ordinance may include additional overlay district or a zoning district, but is a reviews and compliance standards. concentration of similar businesses. Many of these businesses may be found in portions Many uses that involve the transportation, of the SH‐161 Overlay and Central Business storage and/or processing of hazardous or Districts. combustible materials require a Specific Use Permit. The Environmental Services Depart‐ Another concentration of similar land uses ment monitors hazardous materials; how‐ are automotive uses in the Central Business ever, the SUP ordinance may include addi‐ District (CBD‐3 and CBD‐4). The next few tional conditions, such as screening for out‐ pages address the Automotive Related Busi‐ side storage. ness program.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Automotive Related Businesses

Automotive businesses compose a major segment of the commercial and industrial districts along E. Main Street and E. Jeffer‐ son Street and are increasing along other major arterials and collectors. This business sector is operated by diverse economic and cultural groups, which have a strong work ethic and desire to own their own business, but sometimes have no experience with mu‐ nicipal building codes or development stan‐ dards. Applicants also regularly request to establish a business model that is not cur‐ rently allowed or defined within the Article 4, “Permissible Uses” of the Unified Devel‐ opment Code (UDC).

Automotive Definitions

The city has edited and created definitions of automotive businesses and terminology that are used to establish understandable guidelines for automotive related busi‐ nesses. These definitions were imple‐ mented by a Text Amendment to the Uni‐ Auto Related Business Locations fied Development Code (UDC), and added to 2010 ARB Inspections Article 30, “Definitions” and Article 4, “Permissible Uses” of the UDC. the City’s current development standards for masonry facades, concrete paving, landscap‐ Automotive businesses continue to demand ing and screening for storage uses. Along E. space and visibility along some of the city’s Main Street and E. Jefferson Street most of major arterials. On the east side of town these businesses are non‐conforming in they are so pervasive that other businesses some regard to these standards. providing products and services supplying everyday needs are extremely limited. Exist‐ In 2001, the City initiated a requirement that ing businesses and properties are regularly all used car sales lots must obtain a Specific being converted to automotive uses. Use Permit, and in subsequent years many A majority of these properties were devel‐ additional automotive uses have been given oped at a time that predates the same SUP requirement.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Code Enforcement and Environmental Citations from 2006 to 2009. Primary Offense 2006 2009

Accumulation of Debris 25 7 Failure to Obtain/Display Certificate of Occupancy A 40 8 Outside Repair of Vehicles B 16 14 Excessive INOP Vehicles C 17 5 Outside Storage of Parts 11 5 Salvage Yard Violations D 8 0 High Grass 7 5 Curb-stoning / Park on Right of Way E 0 4 2006 2009 Primary Offense

TXDOT – Illegal Auto Dealers F 0 5 Stormwater Violations 118 106 Waste Disposal Violations 79 125 Code Enforcement and Environmental Issues Code Officer and an Environmental Specialist The Environmental Quality Division began monitors these uses for SUP compliance. inspecting salvage yards for environmental This has lead to improved code and environ‐ violations in the early 1990’s. Over the next mental compliance, improved quality of de‐ few years, it was determined that all Auto velopment, and improved compliance with Related Businesses (ARB) have the potential city development standards. to threaten our environment and that a wider scope of inspections was needed. In Other standards that may be considered are addition, the Texas Commission on Environ‐ minimum separation requirements between mental Quality (TCEQ) was in the process of automotive sales sites, and progressive mini‐ creating stormwater mandates for munici‐ mum improvements on vested automotive palities. As a result, in 2006 the city passed sites upon a change of ownership or busi‐ the ARB ordinance and developed an ARB ness operator. This objective meets Goal 3: inspection program. Since this time, any fa‐ Revitalize Older Developed Areas, Including cility whose primary purpose is to obtain a the Downtown Area. profit through sales or repair of vehicles or Objective 15 vehicle parts is visited annually by an Envi‐ Work with the ARB program to create SUP ronmental Specialist and Code Officer. The guidelines that will allow productive auto‐ goal of this program is to ensure that these motive uses and reduce Environmental Qual‐ automotive facilities are in compliance with ity and Code Enforcement issues. local, state and federal regulations.

Objective 15: Policy 11 The initial stages of the ARB inspection pro‐ Clearly define the different categories of gram revealed an excessive number of viola‐ Automotive Related Businesses (ARBs) and tions. However, a uniform improvement in provide conditions in the SUP ordinance the performance of ARBs was seen over the that are easily enforced by the appropriate last few years (see table above). When addi‐ staff. Set timeline for reviews of ARBs. tional automotive uses receive SUPs, an ARB

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

New Automotive Uses & Standards

In repeated dialogue with prop‐ erty and business owners they continually seek to implement automotive business models that are new to Grand Prairie and do not fit into the existing business sites. By adding definitions which define new business operations it is imperative that the City estab‐ lish site development standards consistent with those uses and to develop guidelines for the im‐ provement of existing sites in‐ tended for those new uses.

New definitions for Used Car Sales Used Car Sales Lot along a major arterial. Lots, and Used Car Dealers will offer variation and allow addi‐ The purpose of this section would be to es‐ tional service uses for used vehicles. Also tablish development and operational stan‐ requested are Auto Re‐Builder and Auto Ex‐ dards regulating the location, design stan‐ porter, both with time limited inoperable dards, and providing guidelines for the op‐ vehicle storage and salvage rights. The fol‐ erations of automotive uses, with the objec‐ lowing strategy addresses new guidelines. tive of protecting and promoting public

safety and welfare, and to mitigate any ad‐  Incorporate new uses and guidelines for verse environmental and visual impacts on the improvement of existing automotive the community while promoting the aes‐ uses. thetic design of structures for automotive The proposed amendment adding an Auto‐ uses, which present and provide automotive motive Uses section to Article 4 “Permissible products and services to the public. The fol‐ Uses” will allow requested new uses but lowing strategy addresses incremental im‐ with specific site development standards for provements. both new development and conversion of existing development for varying automotive  Implement site development, opera‐ uses. The city will also recommend clearly tional standards and progressive incre‐ defined operational guidelines for those mental improvements of new and vested uses. automotive uses with text amendments.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The city is taking a cautionary investigative longer periods. Over time this element alone approach to the management and enforce‐ will eventually bring all automotive sites into ment issues of automotive uses. Since the full compliance with the City’s current devel‐ automotive sector has developed in areas opment standards. New site development where existing development standards are standards are being considered which in‐ below the city’s current levels, each new site clude location of specific uses by zoning dis‐ presents significant development challenges. trict, site design standards and configuration Examples of these challenges include the requirements, construction standards, aes‐ following. thetic architectural and landscape and screening design considerations.  The costs of installing or replacing gravel, or deteriorated asphalt with concrete Implementation of these new uses and stan‐ paving, dards will allow the automotive community  adding masonry facades or non‐existent to continue to grow and to contribute to the landscaping and replacing sub‐standard economic base of the City of Grand Prairie screening, while creating a progressive process for in‐  or adding environmental monitoring and creasing compliance with development stan‐ control improvements can be exorbitant dards on existing non‐conforming develop‐ for a small business owner or property ment. owner.

To address this issue the City will consider progressive incremental improvements for non‐conforming sites and uses, and will address both vested and non‐vested prop‐ erties. Specific Use Permits have allowed the City Council to require specific improvements on auto‐ motive sites and bring up existing standards.

Adding progressive incremental improvements to vested proper‐ ties upon change of tenant or ownership will require progressive improvement of all properties over time and extend the redevel‐ Automotive Repair adjacent to single-family residential uses. opment costs over

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The Planned Development (PD) zoning districts are a useful tool when specific site characteristics, such as topography, play a critical role in development of a property. Another advantage of the PD op‐ tion is that the physical develop‐ ment issues associated with spe‐ cific land uses, like medical or en‐ tertainment uses, can be de‐ scribed in more detail than for a general zoning district.

Specific Use Permits are a useful tool when the operational charac‐ teristics of a specific use create health, safety and welfare con‐ Grand Prairie’s GPX Skate Park in the Entertainment District. cerns for adjacent properties. It may also be used as a regulatory Comparison of Planning Tools tool for ongoing implementation.

As shown in Section 2, Baseline Analysis and  Site Plans may be required for properties Community Feedback, the City of Grand Prai‐ in Overlay Districts, Planned Develop‐ rie includes a wide variety of population ment zoning districts or Specific Use Per‐ characteristics, land uses, building types and mit requests. Site Plans are useful tools ages, site layouts and public infrastructure for addressing physical development throughout it 25 miles of length. The corri‐ concerns that are universal to most site dor overlay districts, Planned Development planning situations, such as residential zoning districts, Specific Use Permits and Site adjacency requirements. Site Plans are Plans are some of the planning tools that also used to address physical design solu‐ may be used to address the wide variety of tions to nuisance issues, like noise and needs encountered in a dynamic, evolving light spillage. urban setting. Some of the physical design aspects of these  The Overlay Districts provide a flexible districts will be described in Section 6, Eco‐ tool for addressing urban design and de‐ nomic Development; however, the next sec‐ velopment standards that are unique to tion will take a closer look at the marketing a corridor or a concentrated area with aspects and some of the financing tools clustered, similar land uses. available to encourage economic growth.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 6 Economic Development

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Economic Development  Addition of 636,000 square feet of indus‐ trial space by Crow Holdings in the Grand Grand Prairie is holding its own and doing Lakes Industrial Park, south of IH‐30 and better than most cities despite a deep na‐ east of MacArthur Boulevard. tional recession that included Texas and the DFW area. In 2009, the city recorded three [Excerpt from the 2009 Economic Develop‐ of the largest industrial leases in the DFW ment Report.] area. Farley’s and Sathers Candy Company in January signed ae leas for one million square The Economic Development (ED) Depart‐ feet at Grand Lakes Industrial Park in north‐ ment works with industrial, commercial and east Grand Prairie, seen as possibly the larg‐ retail uses for the purposes of retention, re‐ est lease in the United States. In June, an‐ cruitment and expansion of Grand Prairie other big lease was signed in Grand Prairie. businesses. ED staff can also provide infor‐ Solo Cup leased the SH‐161 Distribution Cen‐ mation on business resources and data‐ ter at Pioneer Parkway, 603,354 square feet. bases, and can explain and assist with city Discount Tire’s plans to expand its distribu‐ regulations. The department also oversees tion operation to 305,000 square feet at the financial incentives that are available to new Trinity Overlook at Trinity and Roy Orr qualified applicants. Boulevards were announced later in the summer. Other recently completed or under Annexation Analysis construction developments include: When large‐scale annexation projects are  IBEW (International Brotherhood of Elec‐ under consideration, Economic Develop‐ trical Workers) credit union and offices, ment, along with Planning and Develop‐ totaling 20,000 square feet, at Tarrant ment, Transportation and Public Works, con‐ Road and east of 7th Street. tributes to the analysis of the project bene‐ fits. For additional information on Annexa‐  A new 29,000 square‐foot medical of‐ tion, see Appendix C of this plan. fices facility on N. Highway 360, north of Post and Paddock Road. This objective addresses the importance of financial analysis in association with this  A new La Quinta Hotel, 47,000 square process and meets Goal 10: Promote and feet (74 rooms), on IH‐20 at Matthew Adopt “Sustainable Growth Practices.” Road. Objective 16  Jefferson Retail Center, 24,000 square Include economic information in the zoning feet at Jefferson Street, east of Carrier review process to provide a well‐rounded Parkway. analysis for decision making.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 16: Policy 1 will bring a high growth rate to the commer‐ A financial analysis will be done for pro‐ cial tax base for a relatively small investment posed development/re‐development in from the city. An example of this type of the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction in partnership is the Estes Peninsula on Joe conjunction with submittal for changes of Pool Lake. zoning request that are under considera‐ tion for annexation and are not in confor‐ Estes Peninsula on Joe Pool Lake mance with the Comprehensive Plan (see Appendix C). The city of Grand Prairie is offering a resort site for Estes Peninsula at Joe Pool Lake. The The Economic Development team is involved Peninsula comprises close to 1000 rural‐like in large‐scale city projects that directly con‐ acres on the 7,740‐acre Joe Pool Lake in tribute to the commercial tax base. For ex‐ southwest Dallas County, surrounded by ample, the Market Square on Main Street Texas Parks and Wildlife property and City of and the AirHogs Baseball Stadium, as de‐ Grand Prairie parkland. scribed in the Executive Summary, are pro‐ jects that contribute to the entertainment The site is an ideal location for resort devel‐ venues, a large sector of the Grand Prairie opment, and the City of Grand Prairie and economy. area taxing jurisdictions have project financ‐ ing mechanisms in place, including: The next objective emphasizes the impor‐ tance of encouraging economic growth and  A 2% increase in the city hotel/motel tax meets Goal 5: Promote and Enhance Eco‐ dedicated to the project. nomic Development Strengths, like the Enter‐ tainment Venues.  A Tax Increment Financing District, which

Objective 17 provides developer revenues for project Promote Grand Prairie’s identity through development as property taxes gener‐ sporting and entertainment attractions in ated by new project development are the future. returned to the developer.

Objective 17: Policy 2  A Conference Center owned by the city The city will continue its strategic market‐ and leased back to the resort developer ing plan, targeting those sectors of activity at $1 per year. that create the greatest synergy with Grand Prairie’s resources. Objective 17: Policy 3 The Estes Peninsula Resort at Joe Pool Lake The ED team is also involved with developing will be developed as an entertainment at‐ public‐private partnerships on projects that traction.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Industrial Districts

Another economic strength of the City of Grand Prairie is the well established industrial sector. The largest and probably best known industrial district in the city is the Great Southwest Industrial Dis‐ trict, which has its own network‐ ing association. However, there are many other successful indus‐ trial parks in the city.

Site planning for new industrial uses is crucial to ensure adequate infrastructure to support the new use and compatibility with sur‐ rounding land uses. The ED team Cooper Tires warehouse and distribution facility. will continue to work with the ap‐ propriate departments toward the next objective, which also meets Goal 5: Pro‐ c) Public service and facilities are, or can mote and Enhance Economic Development be made, available in sufficient quanti‐ Strengths. ties or capacity to support the proposed development, including: Objective 17: Policy 4 Direct the location of industrial uses such  Extra width and pavement strength for that all surrounding land uses are compati‐ streets with truck traffic; ble with each other. Industrial uses will be  Utilities with sufficient reserve capacity; directed toward sites where:  Sufficient drainage for a high percent‐

a) Appropriate transportation access exists age of impervious cover; and for the types of activities proposed, in‐  Sufficient fire protection

cluding arterial thoroughfares, truck d) There is sufficient land to be planned as routes, and/or rail access; a unified, fully integrated industrial dis‐ b) Traffic generated by the proposed de‐ trict or unit, capable of accommodating velopment is not routed through resi‐ buffer zones, accessory land uses, park‐ dential or light commercial areas, or ing, truck loading and other amenities other areas that would be adversely im‐ for viable development. pacted by such traffic;

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Public Private Partnerships available refunds for lost school abatements. Under the law, property owners who en‐ As demonstrated with the Estes Peninsula tered into abatement agreements after Resort proposal, the city will negotiate de‐ January 1996, are eligible for refunds on velopment agreements on a case by case their state sales and use and franchise taxes. basis. Some incentives not mentioned by the The program is administered by the Comp‐ Peninsula example include fast‐track permit‐ troller’s Property Tax Division. ting, development fee rebates, and infra‐ structure cost participation. Freeport Tax Exemption

Property Tax Abatements Grand Prairie offers the Freeport Tax Exemp‐ tion, also known as an inventory tax exemp‐ In addition to development agreements, tion, as do Tarrant and Dallas Counties. The mentioned previously, Grand Prairie consid‐ Grand Prairie Independent School District ers property tax abatements for qualified and the Arlington Independent School Dis‐ applicants on a case by case basis. Eligible trict also offer the freeport exemption. projects must exceed a capital investment of Qualifying businesses may receive a tax ex‐ $5,000,000 and must create and maintain emption on inventory shipped out of Texas employment for at least 25 people. Abate‐ within 175 days. ments may be granted for a maximum of 10 years. The percent of the city abatement is Job Training limited to 75%. The state offers the Skills Development Fund County tax abatements are available in Tar‐ for employee training. The fund targets new rant County. Tarrant County’s policy imposes and expanding companies that face training the following conditions to abatement needs not already addressed in the state’s agreements: new companies must create at educational system. Qualifying companies least 25 new jobs, offer health care benefits, are eligible for up to $2,500 per trainee, with and 25 percent of the employees must come larger amounts possible for small employers. from Tarrant County. For expanding compa‐ No cash/in‐kind match is required, though nies, the Tarrant policy requires that the contributions are weighed in consideration company at least sustain existing employ‐ of an application. Area community colleges ment. Variances to the policy may be re‐ work with the company to apply for the quested. Abatements from Dallas County training grant and to set up training pro‐ may be requested. grams.

School districts seldom provide abatements Another financial incentive is the creation of due to state funding issues. However, state a Tax Increment Financing District, which will Tax Code Sections 111.301 to 111.304, be discussed in more detail in Section 12, passed in 1995, now make Implementation Tools.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The city has many older buildings that may Guidelines for Determination or may not have historical significance. Most of the older structures are located in the Grand Prairie Historic Landmarks will be northern areas of the city. awarded by the Grand Prairie City Council, upon recommendation of the Grand Prairie Historic Landmarks Historic Commission, after the following guidelines have been complied with: Grand Prairie Historic Landmarks were origi‐ nated and designed by the Grand Prairie City  Structure or site must be within the cor‐ Council through the Grand Prairie Historic porate limits of the City of Grand Prairie. Commission in 1979 in order to preserve the  Structure or site should be at least 50 history of the area now recognized as Grand years old or have had a significant impact Prairie, Texas. on the community.  The following basic information should The specific objectives of the Grand Prairie be obtained and documented: Historic Landmark program are as follows: ‐ Historical date(s), including date built, and dates renovated 1. To encourage appreciation for and pres‐ ‐ Exact location ervation of historical buildings, sites, ‐ Chronology of owners, renovations, homes and cemeteries in Grand Prairie. and uses

2. To formally recognize efforts to preserve historically signifi‐ cant structures and sites.

3. To establish an “historical trail” and publish information of historic landmarks for the children and citizens of Grand Prairie to follow in order to learn about the history of their city.

4. To formally recognize the buildings and/or sites of the historic firsts in the area now known as Grand Prairie. In‐ clude such sites as first post office, first school, first store and first church. Historic Uptown Theater on Main Street.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

‐ Complete description of building, site, few intrusions, or by contributing to home or event the overall character of the area ac‐ ‐ Explanation of renovations cording to a plan based on architec‐ ‐ Floor plan tural, historic or cultural motif. 6. Possesses significant archeological  Historical significance to Grand Prairie, value which has produced or is likely to the area or the state should be explained produce data affecting theories of his‐ and documented. The social or eco‐ toric or prehistoric interest. nomic impact should be included, when 7. Is the site of a significant historic event. applicable. 8. Is identified with a person or persons  A current photograph of the structure or who significantly contributed to the site should be included with the applica‐ culture and development of the City of tion. Whenever, possible, historic photo‐ Grand Prairie, State of Texas or the graphs should also be included. United States.  In addition, at least one of the following 9. Represents a resource, whether natu‐ criteria must be met: ral or man‐made, which greatly con‐

1. Is distinctive in character, interest or tributes to the character or image of a value; strongly exemplifies the cultural, defined neighborhood or community economic, social, ethnic or historical area. heritage of the City of Grand Prairie, 10. Is designated as a Recorded Texas His‐ State of Texas or the United States. toric Landmark or state archeological 2. Is an important example of a particular landmark, or is included on the Na‐ architectural style or specimen in the tional Register of Historic Places.

City of Grand Prairie. Designation of a marker will in no way inter‐ 3. Is identified as the work of an impor‐ fere with the property owner’s right to alter tant architect or master builder whose the property. However, the landmark may individual work has contributed to the be rescinded by the Historic Landmark Com‐ development of the City of Grand Prai‐ mission if significant changes occur. rie. 4. Embodies elements of architectural Main Street Façade Renovation Program design, detail, materials or craftsman‐ ship which represent a significant ar‐ In 2008, the City Council commissioned a chitectural innovation. branding survey to understand Grand Prai‐ 5. Bears an important and significant rela‐ rie’s position in the marketplace. The survey tionship to other distinctive structures, revealed a desire from the citizens and busi‐ sites or areas, either as an important ness community for “a revitalized town cen‐ collection of properties of architectural ter that reflects the small town, family‐ style or craftsmanship with friendly spirit of the community.”

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

gram will require participants to follow the design guidelines. These guidelines provide mini‐ mum requirements for the reno‐ vation of existing buildings and for the creation of new developments in the study area. Phase I encom‐ passes a five block area at the in‐ tersection of Main and Center Streets, and is part of the CBD‐2 overlay.

Objective 18 addresses the need to renovate viable older buildings and preserve structures with his‐ toric significance. It also meets Goal 3: Revitalize Older Developed Quik Trip Park is home to the Airhogs Baseball Team. Areas, Including the Downtown Area. In keeping with the goals and vision of the study, Economic Development created in‐ Objective 18 centives for downtown improvements that Revitalize aging and underperforming retail, will enhance and promote the unique char‐ commercial, industrial and residential areas acter and identity of the downtown area. through financial and regulatory incentives and the elimination of disincentives. City Council has authorized the Main Street Facade Renovation Program, which offers Objective 18: Policy 5 grants and no interest‐rate loans to assist Infill development will be encouraged by property owners in improving their building creating financing districts where they will street fronts as part of the revitalization be most effective. process. Objective 18: Policy 6 The program seeks to develop a more coher‐ Infill development will be encouraged by ent, creative and attractive appearance prioritizing capital improvements where along Main Street through the use of en‐ they will have the greatest impact. hanced zoning and design guidelines for pro‐ gram participants. In exchange for financial The Capital Improvement Program will be assistance, the Façade Improvement Pro‐ described in more detail in Section 11, Capi‐ tal Improvements Planning.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 7 Neighborhood Amenities and Services

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Neighborhood Amenities and Services wards information to neighborhood organi‐ zations regarding development proposals The neighborhood unit concept encourages occurring within their jurisdictions or within land use patterns that reflect a mix of retail close proximity of their boundaries. The pro‐ services, schools, parks, trails and open gram is voluntary, and updates to contact spaces within walking distance. A number of information must be supplied by the Home strategies may be used to obtain a cohesive Owners’ Association (HOA) or other group. A neighborhood environment. Residential de‐ map of participating organizations can be velopment should include: found at the back of this plan (Map 13).

 A mix of housing types and densities The following objective addresses the impor‐ throughout the city. Condominiums tance of communication with neighborhood townhouses, patio homes, and other organizations and meets Goal 9: Use Current similar residential unit types should be Technology for a More User Friendly Devel‐ allowed in mixed‐use districts. opment Process.

 Open space and detention ponds, walk‐ Objective 19 ways, trails and other amenities, with Get homeowners more involved with the long‐term maintenance mechanisms for development process and public improve‐ these features. ments within and adjacent to their neighbor‐  Thoroughfare screening (not fencing if hoods. possible) of wrought iron, plant material, trees, stone, berms and other landscap‐ Objective 19: Policy 1 ing materials. Use internet services like e‐mail, Facebook and the city’s website to increase aware‐  Accessible amenities and services, like ness of the HOA notification program. parks, schools and neighborhood serving retail. Public Improvement Districts

Many resources are available for the im‐ A Public Improvement District (PID) is a tax provement and maintenance of neighbor‐ assessment area established to provide for hoods. Communication among stakeholders the enhancement of public improvements is important to identify concerns and to ob‐ and services in the area. Assessments are tain community feedback. generally based on the appraised values of real property within the area. A PID can en‐ Heads Up Notification Program compass and serve both residential and commercial property. Cities ear authorized The Planning and Development Department to create PIDs under Chapter 372 of the offers the “Heads Up” Neighborhood Notifi‐ Texas Local Government Code. cation Program, which for‐

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 19: Policy 2 School as the location for many (not all) of Use internet services like e‐mail, Facebook the district career and technology course and the city’s website to increase aware‐ offerings for 9th to 12 graders. In addition to ness of the Public Improvement Districts, a Texas high school diploma, DCHS offers such as what they are, how they operate accepted students an advanced certificate, and how to establish them. training, certification or specific career field experience unheard of in many of America's Additional information on PIDs can be found high schools. in Section 12, Implementation Tools. A map of current PIDs can be found at the back of this plan (Map 12).

School Districts

There are six independent school districts that overlap with the city’s boundary and extraterritorial jurisdiction. These are Grand Prairie ISD, Arlington ISD, Irving ISD, Mans‐ field ISD, Cedar Hill ISD, and Midlothian ISD. A brief description of the Grand Prairie, Ar‐ lington and Mansfield ISDs was provided in Section 2, Baseline Analysis and Community Feedback.

The Grand Prairie Independent School Dis‐ trict (GPISD) is the largest employer in Grand Prairie with approximately 3,372 staff mem‐ bers. More than 2,100 of those are instruc‐ tional staff. GPISD is a 58‐square mile district serving approximately 26,000 students within the Dallas County portion of the city. GPISD is a Recognized school district with 40% of its 39 campuses rated as Exemplary and 45% of the campuses Recognized.

GPISD recently opened Dubiski Career High School. Dubiski is a non‐traditional, career‐ focused four year high school of choice. The school district selected Dubiski Career High

Independent School Districts in Grand Prairie.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The Arlington Independent School District (AISD) is also a Recognized district for 2010 by the Texas Edu‐ cation Agency. AISD serves a large portion of the Tarrant County side of Grand Prairie.

The city and the school districts can work together toward the fol‐ lowing strategies:

 Exploring opportunities for shared amenities, such as open space and trails,

 Providing mutual support for special events, and

Grand Prairie, South Grand Prairie football.  Planning for a growing popula‐ tion through master planned communities. As shown in Section 2, Baseline Analysis, the incorporated area of the city still has about The next objective encourages continued 18,000 acres of undeveloped land, not in‐ dialogue with the school districts and when‐ cluding floodplain. Much of this acreage is ever possible, pooling of resources towards large parcels of land, south of IH‐20, which mutual goals. It also meets Goal 11: Investi‐ have the opportunity to be master planned gate Opportunities for Intergovernmental communities. Cooperation. In 2003, City Council passed a resolution Objective 20 supporting development standards for fu‐ Increase communication with the six Inde‐ ture single family detached residential land pendent School Districts that are located uses in Planned Development Zoning Dis‐ within Grand Prairie city limits and extrater‐ tricts [Resolution 3924]. The resolution in‐ ritorial jurisdiction. cludes, but is not limited to:

Objective 20: Policy 3  Residential subdivision design guidelines, Maintain regular contact with the school like site layout and traffic circulation, districts through internet services and face ‐to‐face communication.  Guidelines for residential amenities, such as public school facilities and parks,

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Landscaping and Screening guidelines, Many, but not all, opportunities for infill de‐ which also includes entry signage, and velopment are located in older areas of the city, where aging housing stock and other  Architectural, Dimensional and Density factors contribute to housing quality con‐ Guidelines that ensure variation in the cerns. Grand Prairie citizens need to under‐ wall planes and materials for facades stand what the term “fair housing” means along street frontages. and how it applies to them.

Objective 21 acknowledges the need to com‐ Communities of Concern Analysis prehensively plan new residential subdivi‐ sions and meets Goal 12: Achieve a Broad The North Central Texas Council of Govern‐ Housing Selection for a Diverse Population. ments (NCTCOG) did an analysis of Commu‐ nities of Concern based on the Census 2000 Objective 21 information. The purpose of the study is to Increase the supply of quality housing types establish environmental justice to help pri‐ from large lot custom homes to urban style oritize transportation projects; however, the housing in order to accommodate different study is a helpful reference tool to identify age groups, incomes and life styles. areas ofy the cit where housing needs also need to be addressed. Objective 21: Policy 4 Create new neighborhoods with a sense of Communities of Concern classifications are community using the development stan‐ based on the total protected population in dards established for future single family each Traffic Survey Zone (TSZ) relative to the detached residential land uses by Resolu‐ square miles of the corresponding TSZ. tion Number 3924. Protected populations include: Black, Asian, Objective 21: Policy 5 American Indian, Hispanic, Age 65 and Over, Provide for a range of housing types by Disabled, Female Head of Household and considering smaller lot sizes in older areas Below Poverty Line.

of town through the Planned Development This measure does not include double count‐ process to ensure compact and clustered ing of protected classes. The more catego‐ housing that is a high quality product. ries present in a zone with a higher pro‐

tected population and a small TSZ area will There are many areas of the city where new be identified as a Higher concern area as op‐ residential development is primarily re‐ posed to a TSZ zone with a large area, small stricted to infill development due to the population of protected classes and small shortage of large vacant tracts. This type of number of protected class categories in a urban design was discussed in detail in Sec‐ zone. A full size map of this analysis can be tion 3, Sustainable Development. found at the back of this plan (Map 11).

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Fair Housing Choices Evaluating fair housing impediments is a complex process involving diverse and wide‐ The City’s zoning ordinance and public poli‐ ranging considerations. The role of econom‐ cies were examined to reveal any current ics, housing patterns, and personal choice ordinances or policies that impede fair hous‐ are important to consider when examining ing. Grand Prairie’s zoning ordinance does fair housing choice. Grand Prairie has rela‐ not appear to be an impediment to fair tively few impediments to fair housing. How‐ housing choice within the city. The Zoning ever, some issues were identified. Districts allow a variety of lot sizes and resi‐ dential types both single family and multi‐ The analysis of fair housing choice in the City family. of Grand Prairie has resulted in the identifi‐ cation of impediments, identified through a The minimum lot sizes do not preclude the study methodology that included conducting construction of affordable housing. Grand focus group sessions, the construction of a Prairie has two planned development dis‐ demographic analysis of the Home Mortgage tricts that allow developers to build on Disclosure Act (HMDA) data for the City of smaller lots in return for period architecture Grand Prairie, Dallas County and Tarrant styles. In addition, the older traditional County and a fair housing law and public pol‐ neighborhoods zoning requirements are icy and program review. (AIFHC, page ii) loosened to allow developers to build economical infill housing that will meet the architecture aesthetic of the neighborhood.

The City of Grand Prairie Housing and Neighborhood Services De‐ partment retained J‐Quad Plan‐ ning Group, a Community Devel‐ opment, Urban Planning and Housing consulting firm to pre‐ pare a Consolidation Plan.

As part of the process, J‐Quad Planning Group presented the city with an “Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice,” which was completed December 11, 2009. The following excerpts were Fair Housing Choice in Grand Prairie. taken directly from this document.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Home Mortgage Disclosure Act  Impediment: Limited resources to assist lower income, elderly and indigent The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) homeowners maintain their home and data analysis does not provide conclusive stability in neighborhoods. (AIFHC, page evidence of fair housing impediments, how‐ xiv) ever, the data tend to suggest that charac‐  Impediment: Lack of a substantially teristics of redlining may be adversely im‐ equivalent local fair housing ordinance pacting loan originations in some low‐ and local enforcement and a need to in‐ income census tracts in Dallas and Tarrant crease the public awareness of fair hous‐ Counties and Grand Prairie. (AIFHC, page xi) ing. (AIFHC, page xiv)

In Grand Prairie, the least success in lending This objective highlights the need to main‐ was found in the home improvement loan tain older neighborhoods and to ensure fair sector… (AIFHC, page xi) housing choices and meets Goal 12: Achieve

Fair housing choice within the City of Grand a Broad Housing Selection for a Diverse Prairie encounters a number of impedi‐ Population.

ments, as identified through focus group Objective 21: Policy 6 sessions, a review of public policies, the Maintain and upgrade existing neighbor‐ analysis of market conditions, the construc‐ hoods, especially neighborhoods that are tion of a fair housing index, and analysis of identified as Communities of Concern by the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) the North Central Texas Council of Govern‐ data for Grand Prairie City and County. ments (NCTCOG). The following impediments are identified and discussed in Section Six of [the “Analysis Objective 21: Policy 7 of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice”] as The city will utilize the following sustain‐ barriers to fair housing. (AIFHC, page xi) ability indicators to determine residential areas of the city to be targeted for im‐  Impediment: Impacts of the Sub‐prime provements: Mortgage Lending Crises and Increased Foreclosures. (AIFHC, page xii)  DCAD Housing Quality Ratings  Impediment: Low number of loan appli‐  Rental property exceeding 30% (by block cations from minorities. (AIFHC, page xii) group) of housing stock  Impediment: Predatory lending and  Percentage of people below poverty other industry practices. (AIFHC, page level xiii)  Percentage of persons without high  Impediment: Poverty and low‐income school diploma (over age 25) among minority populations. (AIFHC,  Number of Code Enforcement Call/ page xiii) Violations

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 21: Policy 9 Evaluate the feasibility of mother‐ in‐law flats, defined as secondary housing at the rear of a single family detached residence.

The city is also investigating a number of other strategies to ad‐ dress the changing housing and working needs of the population.

Senior housing, which defines the age range of the tenants by deed restrictions, is another recent trend that cities are experiencing. Ordinance provisions for multi‐ family developments do not nec‐ Camp Wisdom Townhomes. essarily fit with the needs of this specific sector of the population.

The housing needs for Grand Prairie are Objective 21: Policy 10 vastly diverse due to various socio‐economic Define multi‐family housing more specifi‐ factors as described in Section 2, Baseline cally to distinguish among garden style de‐ Analysis. Changing trends in society as a velopment, senior multi‐family housing, whole also contribute to housing challenges. commercial multi‐family and higher den‐ For example, due to the recession, more sity development for mixed use and transit families are choosing to combine resources. oriented design.

The next objective recognizes the need to Other trends include: continue to evaluate ordinances and policies in respect to changing conditions and trends.  More people are choosing home occupa‐ It also meets Goal 12: Achieve a Broad Hous‐ tions, rather than commuting long dis‐ ing Selection for a Diverse Population. tances to work.  People also need opportunities for live‐ Objective 21: Policy 8 work environments, where housing com‐ Provide ordinance provisions that allow munities can share office resources. multi‐generational housing options that are socially cohesive, reduce isolation, fos‐ For more information on other urban design ter community spirit, and permit sharing of options for housing, see Section 10, Inter‐ resources. governmental Cooperation.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 8 Municipal Facilities

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Municipal Facilities The next objective also provides guidance for facility planning and meets Goal 6: Main‐ The City of Grand Prairie has about 43 mu‐ tain a Safe City with a High Quality of Life. nicipal facilities located throughout the city. This number includes recreation centers and Objective 23 golf courses, but not parks, trails or open To Provide quality city services and facilities. space. Municipal facilities also include police facilities, fire stations, libraries, a municipal Objective 23: Policy 2 airport, water service centers, City Hall and All city services will meet national and other administration buildings. Some of state standards. Whenever possible, stan‐ these facilities were described in Section 1, dards will be exceeded to “Create raving Executive Summary. For a complete list of fans by delivering world class service.”

municipal facilities, see Municipal Facilities Satellite centers are an efficient method for (Map 7) at the back of this plan. providing services for a city that is 28 miles This objective provides an overall vision of in length, along it’s north‐south axis. An ex‐ how public facilities will serve the citizens of ample of a satellite center is the Lake Parks Grand Prairie and meets Goal 6: Maintain a Operation Center, which includes offices for Safe City with a High Quality of Life. Police officers lake patrol, Fire Station #7, and Parks administration for Lake Parks. Objective 22 Make public facilities “people friendly.” Objective 23: Policy 3 As the population expands to the south, Objective 22: Policy 1 additional “satellite centers” will be estab‐ The city will develop highly visible and eas‐ lished south of IH‐20 to make city services ily accessible public facilities which pro‐ geographically accessible for all residents. mote pedestrian activity, are interactive with aesthetically pleasing interiors and Objective 23: Policy 4 exteriors, and can support special events, Where possible, satellite offices will in‐ while being easily and economically main‐ clude a combination of city services from tained. many different departments to provide services as economically as possible. City staff stays current on codes and best practices. The city is a member of the US Another efficient method for extending ser‐ Green Building Council, developing LEED cer‐ vices is through inter‐local service agree‐ tified public buildings. The city is also a ments with adjacent cities. An example of member of the International Code Council this type of agreement is the Grand Prairie/ (ICC), a membership organization dedicated Cedar Hill Fire Station, which is located in to building safety and fire prevention. Cedar Hill, east of Joe Pool Lake. This fire sta‐ tion serves citizens for both cities.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The following objective recognizes the im‐ Needs Identification portance of considering alternatives for pro‐ viding services and meets Goal 6: Maintain a The general requirement for a fire station Safe City with a High Quality of Life. site is at least two acres in size. This provides adequate space to accommodate fire re‐ Objective 23: Policy 5 sponse and EMS response vehicles. Two The city will investigate joint ventures with acres of land allows for parking and access of adjacent public agencies and private enti‐ all private and emergency response vehicles. ties when opportunities exist to provide The site should be located within access to services on a more cost‐efficient basis. arterials and major thoroughfares, which provides a larger geographic response area Objective 23: Policy 6 and enhances faster response to emergen‐ The city will develop a five‐year municipal cies. facilities plan and will update the plan as necessary. The area of the city north of IH‐20 is covered by seven fire stations and has well estab‐ This section will focus on describing in more lished and proven response times, especially depth some of the city facilities in which citi‐ when viewed in conjunction with existing zens most frequently come in contact. For inter‐local agreements with adjacent cities. additional information on the planning proc‐ Areas south of IH‐20 have continual new de‐ ess that contributes to the development of velopment that is served with emergency these facilities, see Section 11, Capital Im‐ response coverage from Fire Stations 7, 9 provement Planning. and joint Cedar Hill/ Grand Prairie fire sta‐

tion 214. Fire and EMS Facilities

The Grand Prairie Fire Department provides Inter‐local service agreements are in place fire response from nine fire stations located with the cities of Midlothian and Cedar Hill, throughout the city and one joint fire station and under review with Mansfield. operated by the city of Cedar Hill and Grand Recommendations Prairie. Each of these stations has at least one dedicated fire engine and some stations Future fire facilities need to provide emer‐ have fire response units known as aerial/ gency response services that strive for rapid ladder trucks, off road brush trucks, air sup‐ on‐scene response times. This can be accom‐ ply trucks, an underwater lake rescue equip‐ plished by: ment truck and special events ATV’s (all ter‐ rain vehicles). During 2011, six of the existing  Completing relocation of existing Fire nine fire stations throughout our city will Station 7 to the new site on Lakeridge house EMS vehicles (ambulances), collo‐ Parkway. The new Station 7 improves cated with fire response vehicles. coverage to areas south of

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Camp Wisdom Road. As a re‐ sult of the new station, areas around Joe Pool Lake and SH‐ 360 will receive improved re‐ sponse times.

 Confirming the inter‐local agreement with the city of Mansfield for joint response along city limit lines including south of SH‐360.

 Reviewing facilities, equip‐ ment and staffing for areas along the borders of Grand Prairie, Cedar Hill, Midlothian and Mansfield in the southern‐ most portion of Grand Prairie. Fire equipment demonstration for school children.

 Continuing to improve the The new Public Safety Headquarters was de‐ land that has been purchased for future scribed in Section 2, Executive Summary; this Fire Station 10 at the corner of Balboa 149,000 square foot facility serves both Po‐ Drive and Grand Peninsula Boulevard for lice and Fire Departments. coverage around the Joe Pool Lake re‐ gion and Peninsula area. Police Facilities

 Reviewing needs to purchase land for In addition to the Public Safety Headquar‐ future Fire Station 11 along Highway 287 ters, the Police Department also has store‐ and SH‐360, including future inter‐local front facilities, one located in Bowles Life agreements with all jurisdictions adja‐ Center, and an auto impound. cent to Grand Prairie. “The Grand Prairie Police Department is a  Developing future plans to construct a proactive agency committed to the philoso‐ facility through inter‐local agreement; phy of community oriented policing. Re‐ and providing a training ground/drill field sponding to 170,000 + calls for service each complex designed for personnel practice, year, the 223 sworn officers and 103 civilian skills performance and testing of certi‐ employees are committed to providing a di‐ fied emergency personnel assigned to verse community of 160,000 + residents with emergency response. the best customer service available (2009).”

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The Police Department has developed a Objective 24 2009‐2013 Multi‐Year Strategic Plan to ad‐ Make Grand Prairie a safe place to live and dress the major issues that will be impacting enjoy a quality life style through the use of the Police Department in the next five years. design standards and provision of excellent The plan emphasizes the importance of pro‐ city services. viding quality service despite slower than projected population growth. Major issues Objective 24: Policy 7 identified include: The city will use Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) urban de‐  Recruiting, hiring and retaining qualified sign principles (increased visibility, lighting, staff public view, no secluded areas) in the de‐  Succession planning/Retirements sign, construction, use and maintenance of  Police facilities public areas.  Equipment and Technology Both the Police (GPPD) and Fire Depart‐  Quality Training ments provide training, safety and education  Internal communications programs to the community. According to  Supervision and leadership the 2009 GPPD Annual Report, participation  Commitment to excellence in Community Service programs was as fol‐ lows. The Multi‐Year Strategic Plan outlines per‐ sonnel development, equipment upgrades  H.E.A.T. and VIN Registrations—52 and facility improvements as broken down  New Crime Watches Organized—25 by year. One of the major improvements is  Neighborhoods Participating in National for software, a current Tiburon System. This Night Out—31 system provides computer aided dispatch,  Child ID Kits Distributed—184 records management and reporting, mobile  Safeside City Graduates—865 data system, mug shot and imaging system  Neighborhood Watch Groups/ and crime analysis. The estimated cost is Trainings—8 $2.3 million.  Nuisance Abatement Investigations—25

 Officer Friendly Presentations—25 Representatives of both the Police and Fire  Security Surveys—3 Departments participate in the Development  Alcohol Compliance Operations—31 Review Committee, a committee that re‐ views current development proposals. This objective meets Goal 6: Maintain a Safe City with a High Quality of Life. Objective 24 reinforces the importance of including safety personnel in the develop‐ Objective 25 ment process and meets Goal 6: Maintain a Promote programs that make Grand Prairie Safe City with a High Quality of Life. a safer place for the residents, businesses and visitors of the city.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 25: Policy 8 4. Provide direction in the area of acquisi‐ Through word of mouth and internet ser‐ tion and development of park land to vices, increase the number of people who meet future needs. participate in the community crime pre‐ vention programs, like the Police Academy, 5. Conform to the preparation suggestions Citizens on Patrol, Crime Stoppers and and/or guidelines for local Park, Recrea‐ Neighborhood Watch. tion and Open Space Master Plans, pre‐ pared by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Objective 25: Policy 9 Department for Texas Recreation and Through word of mouth and internet ser‐ Parks Account local park grant program. vices, increase the number of people who participate in the fire safety and education In 2008, the Parks Department also com‐ programs, like the Fire Safety Checklist and pleted a city‐wide aquatic study, which pro‐ Fire Drill Programs. vided guidance in development of neighbor‐ hood to regional aquatic facilities. Major ath‐ Parks and Recreation letic complexes, community centers and other leisure service facilities will be needed The Parks Department implements city‐wide in the southern Lake Sector, while maintain‐ leisure service improvements in accordance ing and improving existing facilities in estab‐ with the 2008 Adopted Park Master Plan. lished communities. (For park locations and inventory, see Maps 8, 9 and Exhibit 10 at the back of this plan.) The purpose of the Master Plan is to:

1. Provide the framework for or‐ derly and consistent planning and development.

2. Provide detailed research and facts concerning the commu‐ nity and the roles of parks and recreation.

3. Establish priorities and state‐ ments of direction based on research and documented facts and a community based needs analysis. Police officer providing instruction at Safeside City.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

As discussed in Section 7, Neighborhood As discussed in Section 4, Transportation, Amenities and Services, the Parks Depart‐ the city will eventually have a separate Bike ment has the option to participate when a and Pedestrian Master Plan. The preparation new subdivision is established through Reso‐ for this plan will require input from multiple lution 3924. This provides Parks with the op‐ departments, including Parks, Transporta‐ portunity to acquire property for linear tion, Police and Planning and Development. parks, open space and trails. The Parks De‐ The Parks Department will be one of the key partment also acquires property independ‐ players since the on‐street bike lanes will ent of Resolution 3924. connect with off‐street pedestrian and bicy‐ cle trails. A linear park is an area of open space that usually runs along a drainage corridor, utility Objective 26: Policy 12 easement or body of water. These parks use Trails must meet the specifications of the the linear aspects of the open space to serve city’s Parks and Recreation Department. different types of trails. These trails typically tie into key locations such as schools, resi‐ Objective 26: Policy 13 dential neighborhoods,d retail an other Develop an on‐ and off‐ street bicycle plan parks. that will have the potential to connect with existing and future trail systems. The next objective recognizes the important role that parks and open spaces play in the The Parks Department is also open to partici‐ neighborhood as well as in the community‐ pating in joint use facilities and opportuni‐ wide setting and meets Goal 8: Provide Rec‐ ties for municipal offices located within com‐ reational Options and Protect Open Space. munity and city park classifications in the southern sector. For park locations, see Objective 26 Maps 8 and 9 at the back of this plan. See Provide interconnectivity through a citywide Exhibit 10 for a Parks Inventory Summary. open space and trail system. Libraries Objective 26: Policy 10 Ensure that open space and recreational The Grand Prairie Public Library System in‐ amenities are readily accessible to the cludes the Main Library, the Betty Warmack public and that they are interconnected Branch Library and the Bowles Branch Li‐ and distributed throughout the city. brary. The libraries offer reading, educa‐ tional and reference materials, such as: Objective 26: Policy 11 Trails within subdivisions, planned devel‐  Wireless access to the internet with print opments and planned improvement dis‐ capability tricts will be maintained by the HOA/PID in which they are located.  Cassettes, compact discs, videocassettes, and DVDs

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 27 addresses the need to provide library resources and meets Goal 11: Investigate Oppor‐ tunities for Intergovernmental Co‐ operation.

Objective 27 Provide a wide variety of library services for all geographic areas of the city.

Objective 27: Policy 14 Where satellite centers and co‐ location of compatible facilities are not options, consider inter‐ local agreements with neighboring cities for libraries to maximize quality and convenience of ser‐ The circulation desk at Betty Warmack Library. vices for areas on the edge of the community.  Newspapers and magazines

 Photocopying Public Art at the Main Library

 Geneology and Local History collection Three life‐size bronze figures are being cre‐ ated for a display at the Main Library. The  Computers available for Word Process‐ sculptures are called “Journeys of the Mind” ing, Spreadsheet, Internet, etc. and they will show three children discover‐ ing the joy and wonder of reading. Each fig‐  Books on Tape, Books on CD, Download‐ ure is being cast in several pieces using able Audiobooks molds based on the original clay models. The libraries also offer special events, like storytelling for children, book discussion The public art’s permanent location will be groups and speaker events for adults as well outside of the Main Library. The statues as children. The Betty Warmack Branch Li‐ have been completed and are waiting final brary has a patio area for outdoor reading. installation, which will include some land‐ There are not any new, stand‐alone library scaping and minor construction. facilities proposed within the next five years. Thus, the city will need to research other For the library locations, see Map 7, Munici‐ alternatives for this amenity. pal Facilities, at the back of this plan.

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 9 Watershed Planning and Environmental Quality

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Watershed Planning/Environmental Quality drainage studies to determine potential im‐ pacts on adjacent properties and to deter‐ The City of Grand Prairie takes a proactive mine whether the proposed infrastructure approach to environmental quality. Several can handle the additional storm water run‐ programs were mentioned in Section 2, off. For additional information, see Article “Baseline Analysis,” including Green Grand 14, “Drainage” of the Unified Development Prairie, the Water Conservation Plan and Code (UDC). Solid Waste and Recycling programs. In addition, Storm Water Pollution Preven‐ This section will take a closer look at some of tion Plans (SWPPPs) are submitted with new the programs that are related to the physical development proposals to prevent and con‐ development of the city, such as Watershed trol erosion. Preventing pollution is impor‐ Planning, Floodplain Management, the City‐ tant to protect the drinking water supply, Wide Drainage Master Plan Road Map and maintain a healthy environment for riparian the Storm Water Management Program. wildlife and preserve water recreation op‐

portunities. Watershed Planning

The city has twelve major water basins that Open Space and Public Waterways

overlap with adjacent cities and counties This objective recognizes the importance of (see map at the back of this plan). Water‐ watershed planning and floodplain preserva‐ shed and storm water master plans can be tion in preventing flooding and for protect‐ used to identify drainage and stream seg‐ ing environmental quality. This objective ments in need of improvement or restora‐ also meets Goal 7: Maintain and Improve tion, and potential locations for regional Drainage in the City Through Watershed storm water control facilities. For additional Planning and Floodplain Management. information, see the City of Grand Prairie Watershed Technical Report, February 2005. Objective 28 Preserve floodplains to reduce the risk of Drainage Studies flooding under the “fully developed drainage Ultimately, floodplain elevations will be es‐ basin for the 100 year flood” condition.

tablished for build‐out conditions in the wa‐ Objective 28: Policy 1 tersheds. Watershed planning also takes into Utilize the floodplain and adjacent land to account the accumulative impacts of new provide flood water conveyance and re‐ development on the rivers, lakes, streams gional storm water detention. and other water bodies in each watershed. Article 15, “Floodplain Management” of the When considering new development pro‐ UDC establishes floodplain regulations to posals, the Engineering Division reviews promote the public health, safety, and wel‐

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

fare and to minimize public and private whose time of original construction predates losses due to flood conditions in specific ar‐ current flood damage reduction policies. eas. In addition, the city has a Floodplain Ad‐ Some of these structures may be prone to ministrator whose responsibilities include, repetitive losses due to flood damage. but are not limited to: Objective 28: Policy 2  Reviewing building permit applications Reduce the number of repetitive loss for sites located in, or adjacent to the structures and flood damage to other ex‐ regulatory floodplain; isting residential buildings through Capital  Monitoring permits required by local, Improvement Projects (CIPs) that employ a state or federal agencies; combination of buyouts and structural im‐  Communicating with the Federal Emer‐ provements. gency Management Agency; and  Overseeing the city’s Flood Insurance In addition, the following strategies are cur‐ Rate Maps (FIRM). rently employed or considered to minimize losses due to flood damage. The Parks and Recreation Department also contributes to floodplain preservation by  Adopt FEMA standards in the Floodplain acquiring floodplain to use for linear parks Management Ordinance that prohibits and open space. In addition, the following designated construction in the flood‐ strategies must be considered for any new plain. development along floodplains.  Ensure residents are given adequate warning of floods.  Discourage development in the flood‐  Ensure real estate disclosure of flooding plain. to all potential property purchasers.  Encourage dedication of property within  Make public information available on the floodplain to the city through the flooding problems and hazards through‐ platting process. out the city.  Acquire floodplain when economically  Notify citizens that flood insurance is feasible and encourage retention of available. open space in new development.

 Use the “build out” floodplain map de‐ A number of storm water controls, or Best veloped as part of the Comprehensive Management Practices, may also be imple‐ Plan to site all future development. mented in site design. Some of the most  Establish regional retention ponds, common methods are described here. where practical, to manage increased runoff from upstream sources. Site Planning

The next policy recognizes that there are ex‐ A basic five step process can be imple‐ isting residential buildings in floodplains, mented including the review

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

of (1) Concept Plans, (2) Prelimi‐ nary Plats, and (3) Final Plats. When the site plan in approved, it is then used as a guideline for (4) Construction Inspections and the ongoing (5) Operation and Main‐ tenance. The basic Principles of Storm Water Management Plan‐ ning are:

 The site design should utilize an integrated approach to deal with storm water quality pro‐ tection, streambank protection and flood control require‐ ments. (The basic site design should be done in unison with the layout of the storm water A soccer field may serve as a temporary infrastructure to attain the storage facility for storm water. storm water management  Structural storm water solutions should goals.) attempt to be multi‐purpose and be aes‐

 Storm water management practices thetically integrated into a site’s design. should strive to utilize the natural drain‐ (A parking lot, soccer field, or city plaza age system and require as little mainte‐ can serve as a temporary storage facility nance as possible. (Almost all sites con‐ for storm water. In addition, water fea‐ tain natural features which can be used tures such as ponds and lakes, when cor‐ to help manage and mitigate runoff from rectly designed and integrated into a development, such as depressions, per‐ site, can increase the aesthetic value of a meable soils, wetlands, floodplains and development.)

undisturbed vegetated areas.)  “One size does not fit all” in terms of

 Structural storm water controls should be storm water management solutions. implemented only after all site design (Each site, project and watershed pre‐ and nonstructural options have been ex‐ sents different challenges and opportuni‐ hausted. (The use of natural techniques ties.)

offers significant benefits over structural 1. Site Design Practices and Technique storm water controls.) benefit developer and the public by:

100

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Preserving the natural hydrology and encroachment. If properly designed, a drainage ways of a site buffer can provide storm water manage‐  Reducing the amount of impervious ment functions, can act as a right‐of‐way cover and associated runoff and pollut‐ during floods, and can sustain the integ‐ ants generated rity of stream ecosystems and habitats,  Preserving a site’s natural character and can be used as nonstructural storm wa‐ aesthetic features ter filtering and infiltration zones, and  Preserving riparian ecosystems and habi‐ keeping structures out of the floodplain. tats  Reducing the need for grading and land c. Avoid Floodplains – Floodplains are the disturbance low‐lying lands that border streams and  Making efficient use of natural site fea‐ rivers. When a stream reaches its capac‐ tures for preventing and mitigating ity and overflows its channel after storm storm water impact events, the floodplain provides for stor‐ age and conveyance of these excess 2. Conservation of Natural Features and flows. In their natural state they reduce Resources: flood velocities and peak flow rates by the passage rate of flows through dense a. Preserve Undisturbed Natural Areas – vegetation. Floodplains also play an im‐ Preserving natural conservation areas portant role in reducing sedimentation such as undisturbed forested and vege‐ by filtering runoff, and provide habitat tated areas, natural drainage ways, for both aquatic and terrestrial life. De‐ stream corridors and wetlands on a de‐ velopment in floodplain areas can reduce velopment site helps to preserve the the ability of the floodplain to convey original hydrology of the site and aids in storm water, potentially causing safety reducing the generation of storm water problems or significant damage to the runoff and pollutants. Undisturbed vege‐ site in question, as well as to both up‐ tated areas also stabilize soils, provide stream and downstream properties. The for filtering and infiltration, decreases regulation of the use of floodplain areas evaporation, and increases transpiration. minimizes the risk to human life as well as helps to avoid flood damage to struc‐ b. Preserve Riparian Buffers – A riparian tures and property. As such, floodplain buffer is a special type of natural conser‐ areas should be avoided on a develop‐ vation area along a stream, wetland or ment site. Ideally, the entire 100‐year full shoreline where development is re‐ ‐build out floodplain should be avoided stricted or prohibited. The primary func‐ for clearing or building activities, and tion of a buffer is to protect and physi‐ should be preserved in a natural undis‐ cally separate a stream, lake or wetland turbed state where possible. Floodplain from future disturbance or protection is complementary to riparian

101

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

parian buffer preservation, and can be be designed to conform with or “fit” the combined with riparian buffer protection natural landforms and topography of a to create linear greenways. Depending site. This helps to preserve the natural on the site topography, 100‐year flood‐ hydrology and drainage ways on the site, plain boundaries may lie inside or out‐ as well as reduces the need for grading side of a preserved riparian buffer corri‐ and disturbance of vegetation. and soils dor. Roadway patterns on a site should be chosen to provide access schemes which d. Avoid Steep Slopes – Developing on match the terrain. In rolling or hilly ter‐ steep slope areas has the potential to rain, streets should be designed to follow cause excessive soil erosion and in‐ natural contours to reduce clearing and creased storm water runoff during and grading. Street hierarchies with local after construction. Past studies by the streets branching from collectors in short SCS (now NRCS) and others have shown loops and cul‐de‐sacs along ridgelines that soil erosion is significantly increased help to prevent the crossing of streams on slopes of 15% or greater. In addition, and drainage ways. In flatter areas, a tra‐ the nature of steep slopes means that ditional grid pattern of streets or “fluid” greater areas of soil and land area are grids which bend and may be interrupted disturbed to locate facilities on them by natural drainage ways may be more compared to flatter slopes. On slopes greater than 25%, no development, regarding, or stripping of vegetation should be considered unless the dis‐ turbance is for roadway cross‐ yings or utilit construction and it can be demonstrated that the roadway or utility im‐ provements are absolutely necessary in the sloped area. Building on flatter areas will reduce the need for cut‐and‐ fill and grading.

3. Lower Impact Site Design Techniques

a. Fit Design to the Terrain – All Homes along Joe Pool Lake are clustered site layouts should together and set apart from steep slopes.

102

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

appropriate. A grid pattern may also al‐ ods should be used to limit the amount low for narrower streets and less imper‐ of clearing and grading that takes place viousness as having more than one route on a development site, preserving more for emergency vehicles makes it easier to of the undisturbed vegetation and natu‐ relax minimum street width require‐ ral hydrology of a site. These methods ments. In either case, buildings and im‐ include: pervious surfaces should be kept off steep slopes, away from natural drainage 1. Establishing a limit of disturbance ways, and out of floodplains and other (LOD) based on maximum disturbance lower lying areas. In addition, the major zone radii/lengths. These maximum axis of building should be oriented paral‐ distances should reflect reasonable lel to existing contours. construction techniques and equip‐ ment needs together with the physical b. Locate Development in Less Sensitive Ar‐ situation of the development site such eas – A site layout should also be de‐ as slopes or soils. LOD distances may signed so the areas of development are vary by type of development, size of lot placed in the locations of the site that or dsite, an by the specific develop‐ minimize the hydrologic impact for the ment feature involved. project. This is accomplished by steering 2. Using site “foot printing” which maps development to areas of the site that are all of the limits of disturbance to iden‐ less sensitive to land disturbance or have tify the smallest possible land area on a a lower value in terms of hydrologic site which requires clearing or land dis‐ function using the following methods: turbance. Locate buildings and impervious surfaces 3. Fitting the site design to the terrain away from stream corridors, wetlands 4. Using special procedures and equip‐ and natural drainage ways. Use buffers ment which reduce land disturbance to preserve and protect riparian areas and corridors. Avoid land disturbing ac‐ d. Utilize Open Space Development – Open tivities or construction on areas with space development, also known as con‐ steep slopes or unstable soils. Minimize servation development or clustering, is a the clearing of areas with dense tree can‐ site design technique that concentrates opy or thick vegetation, and ideally pre‐ structures and impervious surfaces in a serve them as natural conservation ar‐ compact area in one portion of the de‐ eas. Ensure natural drainage ways and velopment site in exchange for providing flow paths are preserved, where possi‐ open space and natural areas elsewhere ble. on the site. Typically, smaller lots and/or nontraditional lot designs are used to c. Reduce Limits of Clearing and Grading – cluster development and create more Minimal disturbance meth‐ conservation areas on the site.

103

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

1. Can be used to help protect natural conservation areas and other site features 2. Reduces infrastructure needs and overall development costs 3. Consider Creative Designs – A Planned Development (PD) can be used to implement many of the other site design practices to create site de‐ signs that maximize natural nonstructural approaches to storm water management. This approach may be useful for implementing an open space development. Prairie Paws pet adoption center uses landscaped 4. Reduction of Impervious Cover storm water management “islands.” c. Create Parking Lot Storm Water “Islands” a. Reduce Building Footprints – In order to – Parking lots should be designed with reduce the imperviousness associated landscaped storm water management with the footprint and rooftops of build‐ “islands” which reduce the overall imper‐ ings and other structures, alternative vious cover of the lot as well as provide and/or vertical (taller) building designs for runoff treatment and control in storm should be considered. Consolidate func‐ water facilities. tions and buildings, as required, or seg‐ ment facilities to reduce the footprint of When possible, expanses of parking individual structures. should be broken up with landscaped b. e Reduc the Parking Footprint – Reduce islands which include shade trees and the overall imperviousness associated shrubs. Fewer large islands will sustain with parking lots by providing compact healthy trees better than more numer‐ car spaces, minimizing stall dimensions, ous very small islands. The most effective incorporating efficient parking lanes, solutions in designing for tree roots in parking decks, and using porous paver parking lots is to use a long planting surfaces or porous concrete in overflow strip, constructed with sub‐surface and parking areas where feasible and where compaction resistant soil. Structural con‐ soils allow for infiltration. trol facilities such as filter strips, dry swales and bioretention areas can be

104

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

incorporated into parking lot islands. 2. Natural drainage paths are less hydrau‐ These facilities can be attractively inte‐ lically efficient than man‐made convey‐ grated into landscaped areas and can be ances, resulting in longer travel times maintained by commercial landscaping and lower peak discharges firms. c. Use Vegetated Swale Instead of Curb and 5. Utilization of Natural Features for Storm Gutter – Open vegetated channels along Water Management a roadway remove pollutants by allowing infiltration and filtering to occur, unlike a. Use Buffers and Undisturbed Areas – curb and gutter systems which move wa‐ Runoff can be directed towards riparian ter with virtually no storm water treat‐ buffers and other undisturbed natural ment. Older roadside ditches which have areas delineated in the initial stages of not been maintained suffer from ero‐ site planning to infiltrate runoff, reduce sion, standing water and break up of the runoff velocity and remove pollutants. road edge. Grass channels and enhanced Natural depressions can be used to tem‐ dry swales are two alternatives when porarily store (detain) and infiltrate wa‐ properly installed and maintained under ter, particularly in areas with permeable the right site conditions, are excellent (hydrologic soil group A and B) soils. methods for treating storm water on‐ b. Use Natural Drainage ways Instead of site. In addition, open vegetated chan‐ Storm Sewers – The use of natural open nels can be less expensive to install than channels allows for more storage of curb and gutter systems. storm water flows on‐site, lower storm d. Drain Rooftop Runoff to Pervious Areas – water peak flows, a reduction in erosive Storm water quantity and quality bene‐ runoff velocities, infiltration of a portion fits can be achieved by routing the runoff of the runoff volume, and the capture from impervious areas to pervious areas and treatment of storm water pollutants. such as lawns, landscaping, filter strips It is critical that natural drainage ways be and vegetated channels. Revegetated protected from higher post‐development areas such as lawns and engineered filter flows by applying downstream stream strips and vegetated channels can act as bank protection methods to prevent ero‐ biofilters for storm water runoff and pro‐ sion and degradation. vide for infiltration in pervious soils. In this way, the runoff is “disconnected” 1. Use of natural drainage ways reduces from a hydraulically efficient structural the cost of constructing storm sewers conveyance such as a curb and gutter or or other conveyances, and may reduce storm drain system. the need for land disturbance and grading The city requires Concept Plans to address these site design strategies. The next objec‐

105

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

tive states that they city will continue the  Utilize average density (i.e. units per objective to require Concept Plans, as well as acre) in defining residential zoning dis‐ the accompanying policies and strategies. trict standards in order to encourage This objective meets Goal 7: Maintain and preservation of open space, the creation Improve Drainage in the City Through Water‐ of parks and to encourage a variety of shed Planning and Floodplain Management. housing types.  A minimum of 15% common or public Objective 29 open space should be provided in all resi‐ The City will continue to require Concept dential developments involving more Plans (prior to zoning and/or any develop‐ than 20 units or 10 acres. ment activity) for the purpose of determin‐ ing the pattern of land development and ur‐ Water Quality ban design. The City of Grand Prairie administers local, Objective 29: Policy 3 state and federal regulations affecting area Develop incentives to reduce the need for businesses and the quality of the wastewa‐ grading and land disturbance, providing ter discharged into the city’s sanitary sewer. cost savings for developers. The city sends its domestic and commercial wastewaters to the Trinity River Authority Objective 29: Policy 4 for treatment before being released into the Site layouts should be designed to conform with, or “fit” natural site topography/landforms.

Objective 29: Policy 5 Natural drainage ways, streams and wetlands will be used, where possible, to manage storm water runoff.

The following strategies reinforce the polices for Objective 29.

 Design site layouts to conform with or “fit”natural site topog‐ raphy/landforms.  Utilize natural drainage ways, streams and wetlands to man‐ age storm water runoff where Curbside Recycling is offered to Grand Prairie residents. possible.

106

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Trinity River. In 1977, the Clean Water Act Objective 30: Policy 6 established guidelines for improving the wa‐ Pursue opportunities to remediate and re‐ ter quality of the nation’s waterways develop brownfield sites and other devel‐ through regulation of industrial wastewater. oped lands that suffer from environmental These regulations were implemented to pro‐ constraints. tect the wastewater treatment process and workers, allow beneficial re‐use of bio‐solids, Objective 30: Policy 7 allow reclamation of treated effluent for Monitor sites that are established as mu‐ other purposes, and maintain exceptional nicipal setting designations to prevent the water quality in the receiving streams. A per‐ creation of new water wells, and to allow mit to discharge industrial wastewater to the appropriate redevelopment.

sanitary sewer is required for certain types Solid Waste and Recycling is also a division of industrial activities. These permits are lo‐ of the Environmental Services Department. cally regulated by the Environmental Quality This division implements programs associ‐ Division of Environmental Services. ated with landfill operations, recycling and

There are some sites that have been moder‐ many of the trash cleanups throughout the ately to heavily impacted by manmade proc‐ year. The following objective addresses the esses. Some of these sites may have been need to reduce, reuse and recycle waste; exposed to chemicals, like the chemicals and properly dispose of hazardous materials. used for dry cleaning; and others have been It also meets Goal 2: Encourage Resource adapted with structures that make it difficult Conservation and Renewable Energy.

to convert the site to another use, like the Objective 31 underground storage tanks that are used for Develop responsible alternatives to landfill‐ gasoline stations. ing of solid waste.

The Environmental Quality Division also Objective 31: Policy 8 monitors sites that are established as mu‐ Continue educational efforts to reduce lev‐ nicipal setting designations, and implements els of consumption and waste generation grants for brownfield sites. The following at the household and community levels. objective relates to monitoring and restoring environmentally sensitive sites. It also meets Objective 31: Policy 9 Goal 2: Encourage Resource Conservation Continue educational efforts to educate and Renewable Energy. the public about both short‐ and long‐term risks associated with the use and improper Objective 30 disposal of hazardous materials. Environmentally sensitive sites – areas that have been impacted by manmade processes For more information on the Household Haz‐ – need to be restored and monitored. ardous Waste collection event, see Section 2, Baseline Analysis of this plan.

107

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Another way to develop responsi‐ ble alternatives to landfilling of solid waste is to reuse building materials and recycle building con‐ struction waste materials. A good example of recycling is to use de‐ molished street pavement materi‐ als as a base layer for new parking. It is possible to get LEED credit for these types of practices, and the city does encourage and recognize both private and public buildings that receive LEED certification.

Objective 31: Policy 10 Encourage the use of recycled building materials and recycled building construction waste ma‐ Household Hazardous Waste collection event. terials.

The next objective relates to encouraging Zoning Commission that a proposed project resource conservation by reducing water is using species from the recommended list.

consumption. It also meets Goal 2: Encour‐ Objective 32: Policy 12 age Resource Conservation and Renewable Develop landscaping options that use less Energy. water, such as the use of native plants and

Objective 32 drip irrigation for public facilities, and ad‐ Reduce water consumption and improve wa‐ vertising excellent examples of these prin‐ ter quality. ciples for the private sector to mirror.

Objective 32: Policy 11 Article 8, “Landscape and Screening” of the Continue to encourage and promote Unified Development Code was recently re‐ “Texas Smartscape” strategies for land‐ vised to provide more stringent require‐ scaping standards. ments for irrigation in compliance with state requirements. The city currently provides a list of recom‐ mended drought‐tolerant, native species for Storm Water Management Program

Landscape Plans for commercial develop‐ The next few pages describe in some detail, ment. When these species are utilized, staff the city’s participation in the Clean Water notifies the Planning and Act relative to Storm Water Management.

108

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Clean Water Act permit program. This program includes the City of Grand Prairie and the Dallas County Phase I of the US Environmental Protection Flood Control District #1 (DCFCD). As a re‐ Agency’s (EPA’s) storm water program was sult, the City is required to: promulgated in 1990 under the Clean Water Act. Phase I relies on the National Pollutant  reduce the discharge of pollutants to the Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) per‐ maximum extent practicable (MEP); mit coverage to address storm water runoff  protect water quality; from municipalities serving populations of  satisfy the appropriate water quality re‐ 100,000 and greater, construction activity quirements of the Clean Water Act; and disturbing 5 acres of land or greater, and ten  manage storm water quality activities categories of industrial activity. through the Storm Water Management Program (SWMP). On September 14, 1998, control over storm water permitting shifted from the federal Storm Water Management Program EPA NPDES to the Texas Commission on En‐ (SWMP) vironmental Quality (TCEQ), called the Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System On August 13, 2007 the TCEQ issued the (TPDES). The TPDES permit includes con‐ MS4 TPDES General Permit TXR040000 au‐ struction activity disturbing one acre or thorizing storm water and certain non‐storm more and Phase II of the EPA program re‐ water discharges to the City’s MS4. Small quires Grand Prairie to secure a permit un‐ MS4s that meet the regulated criteria for der the TPDES as an MS4 city. Grand Prairie Phase II of the TPDES Storm Water Program received it MS4 permit on August 13, 2007 were required to submit a Notice of Intent under the Storm Water Management Pro‐ (NOI) and Storm Water Management Pro‐ gram (SWMP). gram (SWMP) within 180 days of the permit issuance. By submitting a SWMP and NOI to Storm Water Phase II Rule comply with the TPDES Phase II regulations, the City of Grand Prairie and DCFCD ac‐ The Storm Water Phase II rule, promulgated knowledge the regulatory authority of the December 8, 1999, was the next step in the TCEQ and agrees to comply with TPDES EPA’s efforts to preserve, protect, and im‐ TXR040000 permitting requirements to dis‐ prove the nation’s water resources from pol‐ charge directly into surface waters. This per‐ luted storm water runoff. The Phase II pro‐ mit and authorization shall expire five years gram requires small MS4s (serving popula‐ after the date of issuance. An annual report tions <100,000 based on the 1990 census) in documenting compliance with the SWMP urbanized areas to implement programs and will be submitted within 90 days of the end practices to control polluted storm water of each permit year (August 13, 2007 anni‐ runoff through the TPDES versary date) or by November 13.

109

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The City of Grand Prairie and DCFCD devel‐ Program Overview oped the SWMP in accordance with the re‐ quirements of the TPDES General Permit There are approximately 170 stream miles in TXR040000. The SWMP will facilitate the Grand Prairie draining to three major water City’s and DCFCD’s efforts in reducing storm bodies: the West Fork of the Trinity River, water pollutants from the City’s MS4, Joe Pool Lake, and Mountain Creek Lake. thereby protecting the City’s storm water The West Fork of the Trinity River runs quality to the maximum extent practicable across the city from west to east on the (MEP). Included in the SWMP are specific northern part of town, dominating drainage best management practices (BMPs) that will patterns to the Trinity River. The majority of be implemented to reduce pollutants, meas‐ creeks run northeast on the south side of urable goals for each BMP, and an imple‐ the Trinity River and southeast on the north mentation schedule developed for the five‐ side of the Trinity River. Major creeks that year permit term. Various BMPs were devel‐ drain directly to the Trinity River within city oped for each of the six minimum control limits are Dalworth Creek, Johnson Creek, measures (MCMs) that are required by the and Bear Creek. Major creeks draining to Phase II Rule. These six MCMs are: Joe Pool Lake and Mountain Creek Lake are Mountain Creek, Fish Creek, and Cotton‐  Public Education and Outreach on Storm wood Creek. Water Impacts;  Public Participation and Involvement; Joe Pool Lake is the focus of recreation in  Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimina‐ southern Grand Prairie. Much of the devel‐ tion; opment and community activities focus on  Construction Site Runoff Control; the recreational aspects of Joe Pool Lake.  Post‐Construction Runoff Control; and This lake was impounded in 1986 and has  Pollution Prevention and Good House‐ two forks created by Mountain Creek and keeping. Walnut Creek. The shorelines of the west‐ ern main body, the entire Walnut Creek The SWMP’s policies and strategies meet branch, as well as the western shoreline of Goal 2: Encourage Resource Conservation the Mountain Creek branch are within city and Renewable Energy and Objective 32. limits.

Objective 32 Mountain Creek Lake, impounded in 1937, is Reduce water consumption and improve wa‐ on the east side of the city. The drainage is ter quality. dominated by Mountain Creek, after the Joe Objective 32: Policy 13 Pool Lake dam. The lake is within Dallas city Utilize Storm Water Management to im‐ limits; however, some tributaries originate in prove the quality of storm water runoff. Grand Prairie, including Fish Creek and Cot‐ tonwood Creek. A fishing ban was issued for

110

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

this lake in 1996 by the Texas Department of A stream monitoring program began in 1986 State Health Services for poly‐chlorinated as the interest in the condition of the waters biphenyls, a group of dangerously harmful within city limits increased. The City cur‐ organic compounds once widely used in in‐ rently samples at 22 sites in and near city dustrial activities. limits once a month. The monitoring in‐ cludes water quality indicators such as tem‐ Historical City Storm Water Management perature, clarity, and chemistry. Quarterly and annually, the water is tested for poten‐ The Engineering Division of the Planning and tially harmful chemicals such as nutrients Development Department oversees and in‐ and pesticides. This information has been spects the infrastructure construction of used to identify sources of pollution and re‐ new development and redevelopment. The duce illicit discharges. To identify problem‐ Engineering Division ensures the effective‐ atic water quality issues and potential illicit ness of erosion control measures during de‐ discharges, the City has also taken advan‐ velopment and redevelopment through per‐ tage of sampling done by the Trinity River mitting. The Engineering Division also en‐ Authority in Joe Pool Lake. courages the preservation of natural chan‐ nels and requires drainage easements and Management Program Development Process control measures in the 100‐year floodplain. The unique hydrology and water quality con‐ The Environmental Services Department was cerns of the City of Grand Prairie have been created and developed to support and pro‐ considered in developing this Storm Water tect public health and promote environ‐ Management Program. In preparing the mental quality. The Environmental Quality Program, the City of Grand Prairie’s Environ‐ Division was created in 1984 to support the mental Quality Division has conducted meet‐ pretreatment program and address other ings with a multitude of city personnel to water quality issues primarily through an discuss the different activities that may have inspection program, monitoring, and citizen storm water impacts. Some of the functions involvement. Problematic areas pertaining that have been identified as having a poten‐ to storm water have been identified and ad‐ tial impact have included streets services, dressed in the past through the storm water equipment maintenance services, landfill, program. Some of these issues have in‐ airport, code enforcement, police, fire, parks cluded salvage yards, sanitary sewer over‐ and recreation, engineering, and building flows, household hazardous waste disposal, inspections. In addition, the Planning and and hazardous material spills. These issues Development Department utilized the con‐ have been addressed through enforcement sulting firm Alan Plummer and Associates, when necessary. Inc. to help in the preparation of the Pro‐ gram regarding construction and post‐ construction.

111

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The Program describes a number of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that address storm water issues iden‐ tified as most prevalent or problem‐ atic in the watersheds served by the MS4. The BMPs meet a number of objectives created by the aforemen‐ tioned departments. These objec‐ tives, organized by minimum control measure, are to:

Public Education:

 Inform residents, visitors, pub‐ lic service employees, busi‐ nesses, commercial and indus‐ trial facilities, and construction site personnel of steps they can take to improve storm wa‐ Prairie Lakes Golf Course. ter quality and explain the im‐ pacts of non‐point source pol‐  Include the public in the development, lution to storm water. implementation, and review of the  Educate commercial, industrial, and in‐ storm water management program. stitutional groups about the impacts of  Include input from different economic their work on the storm water quality and cultural groups. and the steps needed to reduce these effects. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination:  Address the viewpoints of various eco‐ nomic and cultural groups in the design  Develop a comprehensive map of the of the education program. storm sewer system.  Develop a program for the detection and Public Involvement: tracking of illicit discharges.

 Develop an ordinance that will effec‐  Comply with any State and local public tively eliminate illicit discharges. notice requirements when implement‐ ing a public involvement/participation Construction: program.  Have an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism requiring the implementa‐ tion of proper erosion and sediment con‐

112

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

trols, and controls for other wastes, on streets, roads, highways, municipal park‐ applicable construction sites. ing lots, maintenance and storage yards,  Have procedures for site plan review of fleet or maintenance shops with outdoor construction plans that consider poten‐ storage areas, salt/sand storage loca‐ tial water quality impacts. tions, disposal areas, and waste transfer  Have procedures for site inspection and stations. enforcement of control measures.  Procedures for properly disposing waste  Have sanctions to ensure compliance removed from the separate storm sew‐ (established in the ordinance or other ers and areas listed above (such as accu‐ regulatory mechanisms). mulated sediments, floatables, and other  Establish procedures for the receipt and debris). consideration of information submitted by the public. Public Review of the SWMP

Post‐Construction: In accordance with the General Permit TXR040000, Part II, Section D, Number 12,  Develop and implement strategies which the SWMP will be available for review at the include a combination of structural and/ Grand Prairie Memorial Library Repository, or non‐structural BMPs. located at 901 Conover Drive, Grand Prairie,  Have an ordinance or other regulatory Texas 75051, and is also available on the City mechanism requiring the implementa‐ website at www.gptx.org. tion of post‐construction runoff controls to the extent allowable under State, Permitting Options Tribal, or local laws.  Ensure adequate long‐term operation The City of Grand Prairie and Dallas County and maintenance of controls. Flood Control District #1 (DCFCD) are jointly submitting this Storm Water Management Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping Program as described in an interlocal agree‐ for Municipal Operations: ment approved by the aforementioned enti‐ ties on February 5, 2008. According to Part  Review maintenance activities. III of the General Permit, a permittee may  Review maintenance schedules. enter into interlocal agreements with mu‐  Long‐term inspection procedures for nicipalities where the small MS4 is located in structural and non‐structural storm wa‐ order to meet the goals of the permit if the ter controls to reduce floatables and permittee does not have enforcement au‐ other pollutants discharged from the thority and is unable to meet the goals of separate storm sewer. the general permit through its own powers.  Controls for reducing or eliminating the Approximately 20% of the DCFCD is located discharge of pollutants from within the City of Grand Prairie boundaries;

113

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

however, the DCFCD does not have enforce‐ Objective 32: Policy 14 ment capabilities. As a result, the City of The city will continue implementing re‐ Grand Prairie and DCFCD have agreed to the gional water conservation initiatives, such joint submission of this SWMP where the as the prohibition on irrigating between DCFCD is solely responsible for only two (2) 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. BMPs (BMP 6.10 and 6.11). The City of Grand Prairie is entirely responsible for all Energy Conservation

other BMPs described in this SWMP. On Oc‐ st The next objective recognizes that renew‐ tober 1 following the end of each permit able energy is a proactive approach to con‐ year, the DCFCD will provide detailed infor‐ serving our resources. It also meets Goal 2: mation to the City of Grand Prairie on activi‐ Encourage Resource Conservation and Re‐ ties that occur within the DCFCD and City of newable Energy. Grand Prairie boundaries so that the City of Grand Prairie may complete its annual re‐ Objective 33 port for the TCEQ. [Excerpt from Storm Wa‐ Incorporate regional energy efficiencies into ter Management Program] residential and nonresidential construction.

Water Conservation Plan Objective 33: Policy 15 Develop incentives for new residential con‐ The City of Grand Prairie adopted the Water Conservation Plan by resolution on April 7, 2009, as well as an ordinance providing for en‐ forcement of certain mandatory provisions of the Water Conserva‐ tion Plan. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Texas Water Development Board approved the plan on May 7, 2009. The Water Conservation Plan’s policies and strategies meet Goal 2: Encourage Resource Con‐ servation and Renewable Energy and Objective 32.

Objective 32 Reduce water consumption and improve water quality. Wind Turbines on a Warehouse (AeroVironment rooftop array).

114

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

struction to reduce energy consumption. make height a critical consideration for resi‐ Encourage the use of regenerative heating dential‐scale wind energy systems. Even and cooling source alternatives to fossil commercial sites face challenges when trying fuels, such as wind or solar powered sys‐ to justify the initial cost outlay with the re‐ tems. turn on investment, when locating wind tur‐ bines in a weak wind corridor. However, as Small Wind Energy Systems wind turbine technology improves in the fu‐ ture, such systems may become more preva‐ In 2007, the Planning Division of the Plan‐ lent in the area. ning and Development Department created an ordinance addressing Small Wind Energy Solar Energy Systems under Article 9, Section 4, of the Unified Development Code. Under the cur‐ The Unified Development Code does not rent ordinance, small wind energy systems prohibit or restrict solar energy systems. require a Specific Use Permit (SUP) in all zon‐ When considering this renewable energy ing districts and floodplain areas and should option, many homeowners have found that contain a minimum lot size of two (2) acres. private deed restrictions exclude this alter‐ The requirement for a minimum lot size is native for many residential neighborhoods. due to the need to maintain a wind corridor for the wind turbine. The ordinance includes There are residences and businesses in provisions for freestanding tower systems Grand Prairie that utilize solar panels and and rooftop mounted wind turbines. other solar energy technologies. When con‐ sidering this renewable energy alternative, When staff made contact with suppliers of staff recommends that the owner of the these systems to determine the feasibility of property consider the building envelope for this renewable energy alternative, suppliers the zoning districts of adjacent properties, stated that the D/FW area is not currently and the potential full‐growth height for adja‐ considered a significant market for private cent trees to protect long‐term solar access. wind turbine power ‐ primarily because of the amount of local urbanization, and the National Green Building Standard lack of significant annual winds to justify year‐around operation and expense. How‐ Since the International Code Council (ICC) ever, the ordinance does allow residents and released its Green Building Policy Position businesses the opportunity to investigate Statement in late 2006, it has taken many this option. steps on the green front. In 2008, the Na‐ tional Green Building Standards was created In an urban environment, the close prox‐ for residential development, and many cities imity to existing structures, the resulting air have taken steps to include green building turbulence and noise impact standards in codes and ordinances. There

115

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

standards, and a few private non‐ residential builders; however, the city will continue to encourage these standards for both sectors.

Objective 33: Policy 16 Continue to encourage and pro‐ mote nonresidential green build‐ ing standards such as energy effi‐ cient cool roofs, distribution trans‐ formers, variable speed control VAV and exterior lighting.

Objective 33: Policy 17 Allow building materials with low “embodied energy,” which re‐ quires less energy‐intensive pro‐ duction methods and long‐ Fishing dock at Joe Pool Lake. distance transport.

other rating systems, such as the U.S. Green Following are some cost‐effective strategies Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and for residential energy efficiency. Environmental Design (LEED) certification; however, the ICC standards is the only ANSI  Maintain heating and cooling systems by (American National Standards Institute) rec‐ replacing heat pump filters and having ognized standard. annual checks,  Seal air leaks by caulking and weather It is often thought that green building is stripping doors and windows, costly. This is not necessarily true. As green  Install insulated windows or use storm building becomes more mainstream, the ini‐ windows in the winter, tial cost differential between conventional  Seal attic vents and ducts, and check for and green building construction continues to adequate insulation, blur. Some technologies, such as certain ac‐  Caulk and weather proof exterior open‐ tive solar systems, are cost prohibitive, but ings for plumbing and electric service, costs continue to come down. And the im‐  Install a programmable thermostat, and plementation of many of the conservation  Replace traditional light bulbs and fix‐ principles mean cost savings overall. tures with compact fluorescents.

Many large‐scale residential developers are Air quality will be addressed in more detail in implementing green building Section 10, Intergovernmental Cooperation.

116

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 10 Intergovernmental Cooperation

117

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Intergovernmental Cooperation Increment Finance Districts, where the city works with other taxing jurisdictions The City of Grand Prairie works with adja‐ towards common goals. cent cities and other governmental entities towards common goals and objectives. There are numerous other examples, where Some examples are as follows. the city has worked with other municipal, regional and state entities to further mutual  As discussed in Section 8, Municipal Fa‐ interests. This section will focus on some of cilities, the Fire Department recently these areas for the city to continue investi‐ worked with the City of Cedar Hill on a gating in the next five years and beyond. joint fire station to serve both cities. The Fire Department has two other projects Air Quality

pending with adjacent cities. Air quality is a regional concern because of  The city recently worked with the Trinity the cumulative effects of air pollution. Air River Authority (TRA) and the city of Mid‐ pollution is the human introduction into the lothian on a wastewater treatment plant atmosphere of chemicals, particulates, or to serve the southern region of the city. biological materials that can cause harm to  The city continues to work with the humans, other living organisms or the envi‐ Texas Department of Transportation ronment. Contrary to common perception of (TXDOT), North Central Texas Council of associating air pollution mainly with major Governments (NCTCOG), the North Texas stationary sources or smokestack industries, Tollway Authority (NTTA), the Federal mobile sources such as automobiles are Transit Administration (FTA) and County gaining increasing importance. governments on transportation projects.  The city has also worked with the Envi‐ Ozone Alerts ronment and Development Department Ozone occurs in two layers in the atmos‐ of NCTCOG on the city’s Storm Water phere. The outer layer extends from 10 to 30 Management Plan, Water Conservation miles into the stratosphere and is the “good” Plan and other environmental preserva‐ ozone protecting life on earth from the sun’s tion efforts. harmful ultraviolet rays. The inner layer at  The city is currently working with the ground level is the “bad” ozone formed by a Parkland Hospital system on a joint pro‐ reaction of gases called Oxides of Nitrogen ject to construct a new clinic at the site (NOx) and Volatile Organic compounds of the former police headquarters/ jail (VOC’s). Breathing ground level ozone can facility, located at the southwest corner cause acute respiratory problems. of Conover Drive and Carrier Parkway .  Section 12, Implementation Tools, also The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gives examples of intergovernmental co‐ has designated nine counties in the DFW/A operation in relation to Tax area, including Dallas and Tarrant counties,

118

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

as non‐attainment areas of the 8 hour ozone  Combine errands into one trip. It helps to standards. The current threshold value is 85 get things done faster, reduces traffic parts per billion (ppb); however, there is a congestion and reduces air pollution. proposal to reduce it to 70 ppb. Four main When a car is started after it has been sources of ozone precursor emissions in‐ parked for more than an hour, it pollutes clude on road mobile sources like cars and up to five times more than when the en‐ trucks, off road mobile sources like bull doz‐ gine is warm. ers and backhoes, point sources like electric  Share a ride or car pool. An average generating utilities, and other area sources driver spends about 50 cents a mile in‐ such as solvent and agricultural uses. The cluding ownership and maintenance. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality  Regular maintenance and tune ups and (TCEQ) designates ozone alert days based on checking tire inflation can improve gas the weather forecast for parameters such as mileage and extend the car’s life. These temperatures and wind speed. The following simple steps are estimated to reduce are links to the Ozone Alert Status and Air emissions by more than half. Quality Index:  Get fuel when its cool. Refueling early in the morning or late in the evening can  http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/cgi‐bin/ prevent gas from heating up and vaporiz‐ compliance/monops/warning_status.pl ing while filling.  http://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?  Don’t top off the tank. It releases gas action=static.aqi fumes and negates the benefits of the

Air North Texas pump’s antipollution devices.  Report smoking vehicles. When a driver The City of Grand Prairie is a partner of Air sees a vehicle on the road creating visi‐ North Texas, a regional clean air partnership, ble air pollution, the driver can make a and campaign to provide a comprehensive note of the vehicle’s license number. air quality resource; to promote a consis‐ Then, the vehicle can be reported by pro‐ tent, regional air quality message; to lever‐ viding the license number to the state, age existing resources and program and following the instructions at: strengths in a collaborative effort; to in‐ http://www.nctcog.org/trans/air/ crease public awareness of specific opportu‐ smoking/form.asp. nities for residents to reduce emissions; and The vehicle owner will receive informa‐ to motivate residents to make clean air tion from the state on the vehicle emis‐ choices. The city promotes this partnership sions program and the repair replace‐ through our website, educational outreach, ment program. and ad placement.  Share this information. These simple steps will not only reduce air pollution, Simple Steps to Improve Air Quality are pro‐ but will also help reduce gas bills. vided to increase public awareness.

119

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG)

NCTCOG is a voluntary association of, by and for local governments, and was established to assist local governments in planning for com‐ mon needs, cooperating for mu‐ tual benefit, and coordinating for sound regional development. NCTCOG’s purpose is to strengthen both the individual and collective power of local govern‐ ments and to help them recognize regional opportunities, eliminate unnecessary duplication, and make joint decisions. Freight trains run along the Union Pacific railroad. NCTCOG serves a 16‐county re‐ gion of North Central Texas, which is centered around the two urban centers of Mobility 2030 Executive Summary

Dallas and Fort Worth. NCTCOG has over 230 Following are some excerpts from the Mobil‐ member governments including 16 counties, ity 2030 Executive Summary. These excerpts numerous cities, school districts, and special will be followed with additional information districts. from the 2009 Amendment to Mobility 2030. Mobility 2035 The NCTCOG section will also include the Rail Station Concept Plan as prepared by the NCTCOG maintains a long‐range transporta‐ TOD Implementation Plan Group. tion plan that defines a vision for the re‐ gion’s multimodal transportation system. Roadway System This plan is known as the Metropolitan Significant improvements are needed to help Transportation Plan (MTP) and its aim is to relieve the existing roadway system, which identify policies, programs, and projects for for years has been saddled with increasing development that respond to adopted goals congestion. Because Mobility 2030 must be and to guide expenditures for state and fed‐ financially constrained, not all needs can be eral funds over the next 25 years. The new funded. The use of innovative funding strate‐ long‐range plan, Mobility 2035, is scheduled gies such as toll roads, comprehensive devel‐ for adoption in December 2010 and will re‐ opment agreements, public‐private partner‐ place Mobility 2030.

120

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

ships, and managed lanes have allowed the bination of higher costs and less revenue. region to add a number of projects that oth‐ The age of the existing infrastructure will erwise would have been left unfunded. also place more importance on mainte‐ nance. Toll and Managed Facilities Aviation in Dallas‐Fort Worth Toll roads and managed facilities are integral components of Mobility 2030 due to en‐ As a land‐locked port of entry, Dallas‐Fort hanced financing options and the ability to Worth relies heavily on aviation facilities. construct roads much sooner than through Through connectivity to global markets, the traditional funding sources. Many of these region’s aviation facilities boost economic recommendations will be funded through development, increase business activities toll‐revenue agreements, such as the one related to aviation and cargo, improve the made with NTTA. Toll roads and tolls on movement of people and goods, and en‐ managed lanes will be used to raise revenue hance leisure and tourism opportunities for improving mobility throughout the Dallas throughout the world. The North Texas avia‐ ‐Fort Worth area. Plans for managed lanes, tion industry contains a diverse mix of facili‐ which would aid congestion by charging dif‐ ties. Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport ferential tolls by time period and auto occu‐ and Dallas Love Field are both major airports pancy, are moving forward in several key important to the economic vitality of the re‐ corridors. gion. Alliance Airport in Fort Worth is a lead‐ ing cargo facility, but the region also relies Additional Roadway System Needs heavily on smaller facilities. Proving access to and from airports by roadways and transit Additional roadway capacity is needed and is important to passengers and goods move‐ would help alleviate major congestion ment. DFW Airport is located near many throughout the region. However the re‐ congested freeways in the center of the re‐ sources needed to fund many necessary gion. All of the major corridors have planned projects are unavailable. While a need for improvements during the next decade. improvements exists in various corridors, these projects must be deferred until more Key elements of NCTCOG’s Aviation Planning money is available. The nine‐county area Program Include: faces almost $59 billion (2006$) in unfunded needs through 2030. Among these are $32  Review surface access to aviation and billion (2006$) in freeway and toll road im‐ related changes over time.

provements. Just 55 percent of the funding  Study alternative access and conges‐ has been identified. Innovation will prove tion scenarios at commercial airports more necessary as the state and region con‐ based on alternative air travel trends tinue to grapple with a com‐ and airport employment scenarios.

121

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Monitor aviation activity levels Tower 55 (passenger, aircraft operations and air cargo volumes). Tower 55 is the freight rail intersection of the BNSF Railway and Union Pacific Railroad  Report on regional studies related to lines located near downtown Fort Worth. the aviation system and land use sur‐ The core issue at Tower 55 is the high vol‐ rounding key facilities. ume of trains using the intersecting tracks. Long freight trains with lengthy wait times at Goods Movement Tower 55 are responsible for regional ship‐ ping and traffic delays. The goal is to find a Goods movement is the lifeblood of the cost‐effective solution to these and other North Texas economy. Dallas‐Fort Worth problems that is beneficial to both private represents one of the largest “inland ports” and public partners. in the nation, where freight is moved, trans‐ ferred and distributed to destinations Rail Transit System around the world. North Texas has one of the most extensive surface and air transpor‐ Expanding the regional transit system is a tation networks in the world and provides vital part of improving the transportation extensive trade opportunities for the more network in the Dallas‐Fort Worth area. Tran‐ than 600 motor/trucking carriers and almost sit service includes local bus, express bus, 100 freight forwarders that operate out of light rail and commuter rail service. Transit the Dallas‐Fort Worth area. system planning is a coordinated effort in‐ volving NCTCOG, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Truck Lane Restrictions the Denton County Transportation Author‐ ity, and the Fort Worth Transportation Au‐ NCTCOG recently partnered with the Texas thority (The T). DART and The T jointly oper‐ Department of Transportation to conduct a ate the Trinity Railway Express, a commuter Truck Lane Restriction Study that was imple‐ rail service that carries riders between Fort mented on two corridors: IH‐30 in Tarrant Worth and Dallas, with several stops along County between Hulen and Collins streets the way. and IH‐20 in Dallas County between Cedar Ridge Drive and IH‐45. During the study, im‐ Commitment to Rail Development provements in mobility, safety, and air qual‐ ity within the study corridors were docu‐ North Texas is committed to expanding the mented, and there was general public accep‐ rail system throughout the region. A number tance of the restrictions. A comprehensive of potential rail corridors have been identi‐ final report on the lane restrictions was com‐ fied and will be evaluated for further devel‐ pleted in October 2006 and includes recom‐ opment. North Texas rail plans suggest the mendations for expansion. area can be best served by a combination of light, commuter and regional rail.

122

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Rail Transit System Funding 2009 Amendment to Mobility 2030

The transit recommendations include about The Regional Rail and Bus Systems chapter 480 miles of rail. Dallas‐Fort Worth is served of the 2009 Amendment includes informa‐ by 83 miles of rail, and 158 miles have been tion about local bus, express bus, bus rapid programmed and are under development. transit, regional rail, light rail, intercity rail, However, 251 miles are pending alternate and other rail technologies. Currently, tradi‐ funding through a region wide rail transit tional transit service throughout the DFW/A initiative. This initiative brings together fed‐ area is provided by Dallas Area Rapid Transit eral, state and local elected officials along (DART), Denton County Transportation Au‐ with the private sector to achieve consensus thority (DCTA), and the Fort Worth Transpor‐ on how to implement regional rail. [Excerpts tation Authority (FWTA or the T). For exam‐ from NCTCOG’s Mobility 2030 Executive ple, the city of Irving’s TRE line (regional rail) Summary] is operated jointly by the T and DART.

123

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

East/West (Union Pacific Railroad)

The Union Pacific Railroad corridor utilizes the Union Pacific line that extends 37 miles from downtown Fort Worth to downtown Dallas. The UP mainline between Fort Worth and Dallas is a Class I rail line that carries a high volume of freight rail traffic, currently carry‐ ing about 30 trains per day. The UP Railroad owns the right‐of‐way along the corridor. The railroad right‐of‐way is typically 100 feet in width. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway has trackage rights for shared use of the main line under an agreement with the The Grand Connection. UP Railroad.

The UP Railroad corridor is one of eight ex‐ to 10 years) rail development in the corridor. isting freight rail corridors in the Dallas‐Fort However, the implementation issues related Worth area studied for the feasibility of im‐ to the freight activity and private ownership plementing commuter rail, light rail, or other of the corridor must be addressed early in forms of transit service in the Regional Rail any ensuing consideration of rail develop‐ Corridor Study. The final recommendation ment in the corridor, along with the capacity for the corridor is regional rail service. The constraint presented by Tower 55.

proposed station locations are the Texas and DART and the Regional Rail Corridor Study Pacific (T&P) Station, Texas Wesleyan, Oak‐ are the “sources of recommendation” for land, Handley, Cooks Lane, Arlington UTA, the recommended improvements to the seg‐ Ballpark, SH‐360, Grand Prairie, NAS, Single‐ ment that would connect Downtown Dallas ton/Westmoreland, and Union Station. to the Tarrant/Dallas County Line. These stations are for planning purposes only and will be refined when a more de‐ Dorothy Spur tailed Alternatives Analysis Study of the cor‐ ridor is conducted. The Dorothy Spur is about 6 miles long, ex‐ tending from the Trinity Railway Express The 2007 ridership estimates were high (TRE) CentrePort Station to the Union Pacific enough to indicate the need for near term (5 rail line at Division Street with a stop at

124

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Carrier Parkway. It was recommended in Additional planning resources are available Mobility 2030 for further evaluation with from the TOD Implementation Plan Group to costs estimated. This line would connect the assist Grand Prairie in developing code re‐ TRE and the Union Pacific rail line to provide quirements for the UP Railroad Corridor. service options should service be inter‐ rupted. This objective addresses the need to proac‐ tively plan for rail development and meets Rail Station Concept Plan Goal 11: Investigate Opportunities for Inter‐ governmental Cooperation. NCTCOG staff from the Transit Oriented De‐ velopment (TOD) Implementation Plan Objective 34 Group created a Grand Prairie Rail Station To encourage eventual development of a Concept Plan in February 2009. The study regional passenger rail connection in the city analyzes three possible sites for a commuter and to participate in regional and inter‐ rail station, including Main Street and SH‐ jurisdictional transportation programs. 161, Main Street and Center Street, and Main Street and East 5th Street. Objective 34: Policy 1 The city should pursue opportunities for The study also considers other transit op‐ participation in regional passenger rail ser‐ tions, like bus rapid transit. Bus rapid transit vices. along the existing UP Mainline was studied Objective 34: Policy 2 as an alternative transit mode in the Re‐ The city should take advantage of joint de‐ gional Rail Corridor Study. Bus rapid transit is velopment opportunities at regional pas‐ a service that can be in a fixed guide‐way senger rail stations. Station area planning similar to ae rail lin but has the flexibility to should facilitate quality development and utilize the existing roadway when needed. the greatest economic impact possible. Decreased travel times are achievable by signal prioritization, priority queuing, and a Objective 34: Policy 3 fixed guide‐way. Identify potential rail stations along the UP corridor and, if necessary, create the ordi‐ The study also made some general recom‐ nance necessary to implement transit ori‐ mendations for design guidelines and pedes‐ ented (TOD) development. Update the trian connectivity. Many areas of the core Central Business District overlays to com‐ district do not include sidewalks or any type pliment the TOD ordinance. of buffer to shield pedestrians from automo‐ bile traffic. However, much of the study area In developing the draft for Mobility 2035, has sufficient right‐of‐way and pavement there has been much discussion regarding widths to construct additional sidewalks and infrastructure finance. The bulk of funding possibly add an on‐street bike route. for major transportation improvements

125

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

comes from federal, state and local re‐ Objective 34: Policy 6 sources. There is an increased need for inno‐ The city should reduce traffic demand by vative funding strategies, such as toll roads, encouraging carpooling, van pooling, re‐ managed lanes and public‐private partner‐ mote parking, transit usage, alternative ships. NCTCOG supports the Texas Local Op‐ work hours, mixed‐use developments, and tion Transportation Act (TLOTA), which pro‐ other beneficial measures. poses innovative finance measures for state‐ wide transportation infrastructure. Trinity River Authority

The next objective recognizes regional ef‐ Another regional entity, with which the city forts to achieve a viable transportation net‐ has worked, is the Trinity River Authority work and meets Goal 11: Investigate Oppor‐ (TRA). The TRA is a conservation and recla‐ tunities for Intergovernmental Cooperation. mation district providing water and waste‐ water treatment, along with recreation and Objective 35 reservoir facilities for municipalities within To pursue all reasonable funding sources the 17,000 square‐mile Trinity River basin. and participate with other parties and gov‐ TRA also maintains a Master Plan for basin‐ ernmental agencies, like the North Central wide development, and serves as a conduit Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), to for tax‐exempt financing for municipal pro‐ improve access to and within the City of jects and as a local sponsor for federal water Grand Prairie, creating an effec‐ tive and coordinated local trans‐ portation system, which is respon‐ sive to regional transportation needs.

Objective 35: Policy 4 The city should encourage pri‐ vate‐public partnerships as a strategy for funding future transportation projects.

Objective 35: Policy 5 The city should coordinate local thoroughfare design standards and alignments with those of the region and adjacent cities, where feasible, and balance the needs of the City of Grand Prai‐ TRA Mountain Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant in Midlothian. rie with regional needs.

126

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

projects. Each TRA operating project is an emergency management. The Parks and Rec‐ independent financial entity, and TRA re‐ reation Department worked with the USACE, ceives no tax revenues or appropriations. the TRA, Cedar Hill State Park and four other cities to create a circum‐navigational plan Grand Prairie worked with the TRA to de‐ that will provide a trail system around Joe velop the Mountain Creek Wastewater Pool Lake. Treatment Plant. The city contributed one‐ third of the project costs, and the plant will The Parks Department has also worked with serve the southern sector of the city. NCTCOG and other cities to create links to the Veloweb. The Veloweb is an intercon‐ Objective 36 emphasizes the importance of nected network of off‐street trails designed efficiently providing water and wastewater for bicycle commuters. The trails will provide facilities for the city and meets Goal 11: In‐ access to employment centers, schools, vestigate Opportunities for Intergovernmen‐ shopping, and parks. Because the trails will tal Cooperation. have few signalized or stop sign intersec‐ tions, and will go over or under major road‐ Objective 36 ways, the Veloweb is a safe and efficient way Coordinate interconnectivity of water sys‐ to commute. tems. Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan Objective 36: Policy 7 Using intergovernmental cooperation, the When the city develops a Bike and Pedes‐ city will coordinate the interconnectivity of trian Master Plan, other governmental enti‐ water systems that will allow the transfer/ ties will need to be involved and the follow‐ sale of water under emergency conditions. ing factors will need to be considered.

Objective 36: Policy 8  Development Standards for off‐street The Water System Master Plan will coordi‐ and on‐street facilities nate the localized transfer of water ser‐  Ramps at connection points vices to water deficient areas as part of  Bicycle Signage inter‐local agreements.  Standards for striping bike lanes and crosswalks The Corps of Engineers  Bicycle Safety Guidelines with outreach

The U.S. Corps of Engineers (USACE) is a fed‐ programs eral entity that is responsible for the devel‐  Bike racks and water fountain placement opment and management of the Nation’s  Trail Maps that clearly define multi‐use water resources; protection and manage‐ trails from on‐street bike routes ment the natural environment; restoration  Pedestrian push buttons at intersections of aquatic ecosystems; and flood risk and  Street furnishings  Traffic calming measures

127

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

According to CSS principles, some qualities of excellence in transpor‐ tation design include:

 The project satisfies the purpose and needs as agreed to by a full range of stakeholders. This agree‐ ment is forged in the earliest phase of the project and amended as warranted as the project devel‐ ops.

 The project is a safe facility for both the user and the community.

 The project is in harmony with the community, and its preserves environmental, scenic, aesthetic, Bicycle and Pedestrian trails at Mike Lewis Park. historic, and natural resource val‐ ues of the area.

Context Sensitive Solutions  The project is designed and built with minimal disruption to the community. The city will also investigate other strategies for designing a pedestrian environment that The following objective encourages staff to is responsive to surrounding land uses. One keep current on best practices. It also meets strategy is Context Sensitive Solutions, which Goal 10: Promote and Adopt “Sustainable is defined as follows. Growth Practices.”

Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) is a collabo‐ Objective 37 rative, interdisciplinary approach that in‐ City staff will continue to investigate oppor‐ volves all stakeholders in providing a trans‐ tunities for training to obtain the informa‐ portation facility that fits its setting. It is an tion and skills needed to provide current, approach that leads to preserving and en‐ efficient service to the citizens of Grand Prai‐ hancing scenic, aesthetic, historic, commu‐ rie. nity, and environmental resources, while im‐ Objective 37: Policy 9 proving or maintaining safety, mobility and Consider the concept of “Context Sensitive infrastructure conditions. Solutions” as a possible tool for creating a (Joint AASHTO/FHWA CSS Strategic Planning more integrated transportation system Process Summary Report, March 2007) that is context sensitive to surrounding land uses.

128

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 11 Planning Process and Capital Improvement Planning

129

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Planning Process Development Review Committee (DRC)

When a property owner decides to develop The DRC, which is comprised of representa‐ or sell property, it is suggested that the tives from city departments, reviews the ap‐ owner or developer of the property confer plication. Staff meets with the applicants at with the Director of Planning or designee. a DRC meeting, which takes place approxi‐ The owner or developer may schedule a pre‐ mately ten days prior to the Planning and development conference before preparing Zoning Commission hearing. The purpose of the preliminary plat, final plat or re‐plat of a the meeting is to resolve any items that proposed subdivision and secure a copy of should be given special consideration. All the rules and regulations governing subdivi‐ special items must be resolved prior to sion requirements of the city. The applicant placement of the application on a public will also need to determine is re‐zoning is hearing agenda. required, and if the proposal is in confor‐ mance with the Future Land Use Map of the Notification of Property Owners

Comprehensive Plan as approved by the Written notice of the public hearing before Planning and Zoning Commission and City the Planning and Zoning Commission and Council. City Council for a request for a development

service will be sent to all owners of real See Section 3, Sustainable Devel‐ opment, for the Future Land Use Map and land use policies.

Platting or Subdividing

A plat is an instrument to plan the division of a tract of land into de‐ fined lots, either improved or un‐ improved, which can be sepa‐ rately conveyed by sale of lease, and which can be altered or devel‐ oped. Preliminary plats, final plats and certain re‐plats may require that a full set of engineering plans be submitted to the Engineering Department to run concurrently with the application to the Plan‐ ning Division of the Planning and On the Border restaurant with outdoor seating area. Development Department.

130

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Decision Tree for planning processes. property lying within three hun‐ dred feet of the property upon which the development service is requested, as measured from the subject property exclusive of streets and public rights‐of‐way. This notice will be given not less than ten days before the public hearing to such property owners as the ownership appears on the first approved city tax roll [UDC, Sub‐ section 1.11.5.2]

The applicant assumes full respon‐ sibility for the placement of notifi‐ cation signs on the property upon which a development service is re‐ quested at such locations and in such a manner as prescribed by the Department of Planning and Devel‐ opment.

Consent Agenda for Plats Concept Plans

Only plats which have had all issues and con‐ Concept Plans are designed to expedite the siderations resolved may be placed on a development process, reduce costs for de‐ Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission con‐ velopers by working out site design issues sent agenda. A plat on a consent agenda can prior to design of a project, assure compli‐ be approved in a single motion. All plats of a ance with the Comprehensive Plan, federal subdivision, which comply with the terms of and state storm water runoff and drainage Chapter 14 of the Grand Prairie Code of Or‐ regulations, and the city’s Drainage Design dinances without variance or deviation must Manual. According to Article 17, Concept be approved by the Planning and Zoning Plans of the Unified Development Code. Commission. However, any Planning and Concept Plans are required for all new build‐ Zoning Commission member may make a ing and site developments occurring on un‐ motion to remove a plat from the consent platted property prior to the submittal of a agenda for discussion. A citizen may also re‐ preliminary plat, zoning request, clearing quest that a plat be removed from the con‐ and grubbing permit, and/or preliminary en‐ sent agenda for individual consideration. gineering work.

131

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Concept Plans are required for the following development scenarios:

 Proposed residential develop‐ ment of thirty or more resi‐ dential lots occurring on un‐ platted property;

 Proposed non‐residential and multi‐family developments of five acres or more occurring on un‐platted property;

 The P&Z Commission may re‐ quire the submittal of a Con‐ cept Plan as a condition of re‐ cord in conjunction with any request for a change of zoning; Rendering of outlet mall proposal for IH-20 corridor.  For other development scenar‐ ios, regardless of the platted available and new trends emerge, they will condition of the property, for which the need to be incorporated into the plan. An DRC deems the review of a Concept Plan overall review of the plan is done every five is necessary for the purpose of address‐ years and requires a P&Z Commission ap‐ ing issues related to the health, safety proval recommendation with final approval and welfare of future or existing devel‐ from City Council. Annual updates are ap‐ opments and population within adjacent proved by the P&Z Commission to reflect properties. ordinance revisions that have taken place

throughout the year, which impact the plan. Grand Prairie encourages the use of inte‐ Annual updates usually take place in January grated site design practices consistent with at the first P&Z Commission hearing. the Comprehensive Plan and the integrated Storm Water Management (iSWM) Design The city is authorized by Texas Local Govern‐ Manual for site development. ment Code, Chapter 213 to maintain a Com‐

prehensive Plan. Chapter 28 of the Grand Comprehensive Plan Amendments Prairie Code of Ordinances directs the P&Z Grand Prairie’s Comprehensive Plan is a 25‐ Commission to formulate a Comprehensive year plan that will guide the City’s growth Plan and recommend it to City Council. For and development. As new data becomes additional information on these statutes, see Section 1,e Executiv Summary of this plan.

132

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Public Hearing for Zoning Change and Site the authority to review the status of noncon‐ Plan Agenda Items forming uses and permit the reconstruction of nonconforming uses, the resumption of The DRC, P&Z Commission and City Council abandoned nonconforming uses, or the dis‐ meet according to the Application Submittal continuance or amortization of nonconform‐ Deadline Calendar as published by the Plan‐ ing uses. The ZBA does not make land use ning Department. The P&Z Commission will determinations or enforce private deed re‐ conduct a public hearing and subsequently strictions. make a recommendation of approval or de‐ nial to the City Council. The concurring vote of seven members of the board is necessary to decide in favor of Under normal circumstances, zoning change an application on any matter on which the requests and site plans are considered by board has jurisdiction. the City Council one to two weeks after the P&Z Commission public hearing. The City Code Enforcement Council makes the final determination on all zoning requests. The Code Services Department is responsible for handling city code violations. The city is Article 1, General Provisions and Procedures divided into 10 districts, or areas, each of of the UDC has additional information for which has one officer assigned to handle vio‐ appeals to denial recommendations from lations within that district. Code complaints the Planning and Zoning Commission; and can be filed online, and the status of existing for UDC requirements for City Council denial cases can be checked online as well. Other determinations. [UDC, Subsection 1.11.6.4(c) information that can be obtained from E‐ and Subsection 1.11.6.4(d)] Code includes violations, inspection results, previous actions and pending actions. Zoning Board of Adjustments and Appeals Abatement of code violations, in some cases, The Zoning Board of Adjustments and Ap‐ may take several days or even weeks. The peals (ZBA) is a quasi‐judicial board that is city must first notify the property owner of authorized by Texas Local Government Code, the violation by certified letter. In most Section 211.009. Article 1, General Provi‐ cases, the property owner (or tenant) has 10 sions and Procedures of the UDC establishes days to resolve the violation. If the violation parameters for ZBA that are in accordance remains after 10 days, the city issues a cita‐ with the state statues. tion and fine.

The ZBA is appointed by the City Council to For additional information on planning proc‐ consider variances, exceptions and appeals esses related to development, see the city’s as prescribed by the UDC. The board also has website at www.gptx.org.

133

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Capital Improvement Planning (in conjunction with the Budget Office) pro‐ ject current year revenues and expenditures, A Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a tool as well as, propose the following year’s reve‐ through which locally funded public facili‐ nues and expenditures. A budget review ties, such as sewers, local roads, storm meeting is held in May for all staff members. drains, schools, libraries, and parks can be budgeted, scheduled and built. The budget process is comprised of three elements: (1) continuation level/target As part of the Capital Improvement Projects budget (expenditures), (2) budget assess‐ Budget process, the City Council approves a ment‐improvements, and (3) budget assess‐ five year Capital Improvement Plan. This ment reductions. document is a planning tool to prepare for future bond sales and/or bond elections. It is Continuation Level/Target Budget understood that the five year CIP does not obligate Future City Councils to specifically The continuation level budget (expenditures) approve the anticipated projects or bond is a target budget. Each department’s con‐ sales or election amount, but rather the tinuation level budget (expenditures) is Document will serve as a tool to assist the based upon a target number they cannot City and private sector in planning for the exceed. The Fund’s continuation level/target City’s infrastructure development. The City budget (expenditures) will not exceed re‐ of Grand Prairie approved its Capi‐ tal Improvements Plan for FY 2011 ‐ 2015 on September 21, 2010.

Annual CI Projects Budget

The Budget and Research Depart‐ ment prepares and monitors the operating and capital projects budgets to allocate revenues in a cost effective manner; facilitates effective decision making and fis‐ cal responsibility by providing ac‐ curate analysis, operation evalua‐ tion and timely reports to meet the needs of the City Council and city departments.

The budget preparation process Garden at the Ruthe Jackson Center. begins in April when departments

134

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

venue dollars. No additional improvements Council meeting in August. The annual such as personnel, furniture/equipment budget workshop is scheduled for mid‐ and/or other services are included in the August and consists of an intensive one‐day continuation level budget (expenditure). work session. During this workshop, and in the weeks following, the Council may revise Budget Assessment—Improvements or reduce the proposed budget. In Septem‐ ber, the budget is approved, as required by The second element of the budget process is City Charter. The budget takes effect for the an assessment and inclusion of department next fiscal year, beginning October 1. service improvement requests. Service im‐ provements are additional staff and new The budget can be amended during the fiscal equipment not currently utilized. year through City Council approval. A budget

amendment ordinance is prepared increas‐ Budget Assessment—Reductions ing a fund’s appropriation. (Budget in Brief) The last element in the budget preparation process is an assessment and inclusion of 2010/2011 Approved Capital Projects Budget

department service reductions. Service re‐ The 2010/2011 Approved Capital Improve‐ ductions are reviewed annually to assess ment Projects Budget includes $35,433,091 whether current services can be streamlined in appropriation requests. This includes or eliminated. Examples of historical service $7,075,823 in Water and Wastewater re‐ reductions are the elimination of services quests, $17,490,831 in Street and Signal Pro‐ provided by other entities, and position re‐ jects, $4,158,600 in Park Projects, and ductions. $3,014,500 in Storm Drainage Projects.

Once the continuation level/target budget, The FY 2010‐2011 annual Capital Improve‐ reduction, and improvement requests are ment Projects Budget is broken into appro‐ completed, the City Manager reviews the priations and funding sources. The FY 2010‐ department proposals and meets with the 2011 budget is funded with general obliga‐ departments from May to June. tion bonds, certificates of obligation, and

existing resources. Some of the most com‐ Proposed Budget mon funding sources are described here. In July, several meetings between staff and the Finance and Government Committee are General Obligation Bonds

conducted to review all operating and debt General Obligation Bonds are authorized by service funds. an election and backed by ad valorem taxes.

They are used to pay for specifically ap‐ The City Manager’s proposed budget is sub‐ proved projects. Future revenues are used to mitted to the City Council at the first City pay interest on the bonds and the principal

135

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

a guide. In addition, city staff re‐ fers to various documents in pre‐ paring their proposals. For exam‐ ple, the Parks Department refers to the 2008 Adopted Park Master Plan for recommendations on pri‐ oritizing city‐wide leisure service improvements.

The Public Works Department re‐ fers to the Water and Wastewater Master Plans as planning tools, and uses the following guidelines:

a) Consider water system im‐ provements that will maintain wa‐ ter quality while not compromis‐ ing fire protection and other Betty Warmack Branch Library on Bardin Road. needs, amount when due. Interest income earned b) Provide major infrastructure to provide by the purchaser is tax free, which allows the water/wastewater systems, which con‐ purchaser to accept a lower interest rate. sider future growth that is compatible with land use assumptions, and Certificates of Obligation c) Design wastewater improvements to

Certificates of Obligation are secured by ad eliminate on‐site sewage disposal sys‐ valorem taxes and issued for limited pur‐ tems and transport all sewage to ap‐ poses, such as land acquisition. When com‐ proved sewage treatment facilities.

bined with a limited pledge of surplus reve‐ Financial Management Policies nue from an operating system (such as wa‐ ter, sewer, drainage or sanitation), they can The City’s financial operations are guided by be issued for any lawful purpose authorized comprehensive financial policies. The pur‐ by City Council without citizen vote. pose statement of the Financial Manage‐

When revising the annual Capital Improve‐ ment Policies (FMPs) reads in part: “The ment Projects Budget, the City Manager’s overriding goal of the FMPs is to enable the Office and Budget and Research Department City to achieve a long term stable and posi‐ work with multiple city departments to pre‐ tive financial condition. The watchwords of pare a draft for the City Council to review. the City’s financial management include in‐ The Budget Office provides staff with a tegrity, prudent stewardship, planning, ac‐ Budget Instruction Manual as countability, and full disclosure.”

136

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Section 12 Implementation Tools

137

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Implementation Tools ity or county in which the governing body of the municipality or county initiates or re‐ There are a number of regulatory and finan‐ ceives a petition requesting the establish‐ cial tools that can be used to encourage de‐ ment of a public improvement district. A pe‐ velopment and redevelopment. Some of the tition must comply with the requirements of Economic Development tools were discussed Section 372.005. in Section 6. This section will examine some of these tools in more detail and discuss PID Services and Improvements some additional initiatives. PID assessments may only be used to serve Public Improvement Districts (PIDs) or improve public property and may not be used to benefit or enhance private property. A Public Improvement District Policy was Listed below are services and improvements adopted by City Council on September 2, which Grand Prairie PIDs may provide or 2008. As briefly described in Section 6, Eco‐ maintain. Other improvements allowed by nomic Development, Public Improvement the statute will be reviewed and considered Districts is a tax assessment area established individually by the city. to provide for the enhancement of public improvements and services in the area. As‐  Landscaping and irrigation sessments are generally based on the ap‐  Right‐of‐way, median, and other open praised values of real property within the space maintenance, such as residential area. A PID can encompass and serve both detention ponds residential and commercial property.  Perimeter fencing  Entry features The City of Grand Prairie recognizes that  Fountains PIDs are valuable tools which developers and  Distinctive lighting neighborhoods use to enhance the mainte‐  Distinctive signs nance of public property beyond the level  Art or decorations normally provided by the city. It is the intent  Sidewalks of the city to allow direct management con‐ trol of PID operations by advisory boards Listed below are services and improvements consisting of PID property owners. However, which Grand Prairie PIDs may not provide or PID bodies serve advisory functions, and all maintain: final decisions are made by the governing  Buildings body of the PID, the City Council.  Swimming pools Section 372.002 of the Texas Local Govern‐  Construction, improvement, or mainte‐ ment Code, Exercise of Powers, states that nance of privately owned facilities or “Powers granted under this subchapter may land including that owned by a Home be exercised by a municipal‐ Owners’ Association (HOA)

138

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Purely social activities owner escrow payment and pay the assess‐  Travel expenses ment at the same time that ad valorem taxes are paid.  In the case of new additions, it is the pol‐ icy of the city that PID funds will not be For more information on submitting a peti‐ utilized for standard construction ex‐ tion for a PID and how they operate, contact penses typically required as part of a the Finance Department or the city’s website subdivision development, including pe‐ at www.gptx.org. rimeter fencing, right‐of‐way landscap‐ ing, and irrigation systems. These costs Home Owners’ Associations (HOAs) shall be borne by the developer and not funded from PID assessments. The im‐ HOAs maintain private property within a provements must, however, be main‐ subdivision, usually through private deed restrictions. The city does not enforce pri‐ tained by the PID. vate deed restrictions. HOAs are governed  Developers will not finance any improve‐ by their own members and not by City Coun‐ ments for PIDs that PIDs are expected to cil. They also collect their own fees. These repay. fees are not exempt from sales taxes, and cannot be held in a municipal fund or col‐ A PID allows for capital improvements and a lected through mortgage payments. higher degree of maintenance within the PID area, which presumably enhances the prop‐ Maps of PIDs (Map 12) and HOAs (Map 13) erty values. With the establishment of an can be found in the back of this plan. The advisory body, the property owners of the HOA map only reflects those organizations PID have some control over the types of im‐ that voluntarily registered with the city. provements, level of maintenance, and amount of assessments to be levied against Tax Increment Finance Districts (TIFs) the property owners. A Tax Increment Finance District (TIF) is a Assessments are usually collected by the method of financing development activities city’s tax collecting agent and are deposited directly tied to the success of those activi‐ into a specific PID fund. Revenue collection is ties. The city conducts a study of the need simple since a homeowner’s association for a TIF and prepares a plan for the area to does not have to perform fee collection. be designated as a TIF district.

Also, the PID allows for an interest charge The study includes a determination of prop‐ and lien on unpaid assessments. This en‐ erty tax revenue collected in that area be‐ sures a dependable revenue source for the fore redevelopment and development oc‐ PID. In most instances, mortgage companies curs and borrows money by obtaining loans include PID assessments within the property or selling bonds.

139

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The bonds are used in various ways to im‐ As private development occurs in the area, prove the redevelopment and development tax revenue increases, and the excess above prospects of the area by: the pre‐development property tax revenue in the area pays off the loans or bonds and  Construction or improvement of any finances further development and redevel‐ publicly owned building, facility, struc‐ opment activities. That excess is the “tax in‐ ture, landscaping, or other improvement crement” in TIF. within the project area from which the tax increment funds were collected. When determining the location of new TIF Districts, municipalities have to be very se‐  Paying for the installation of publicly lective, not only regarding the district owned utilities in the project area. boundaries, but also regarding the proposed  Meeting the cost of administrative, over‐ TIF district agreement. The proposed district head, legal and other operating expenses boundaries should be an area that has some of the development agency created to potential to increase in property value, but oversee the TIF program. the development might not occur “but for”

The Peninsula includes the Peninsula PID and TIF District #3.

140

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

the use of this incentive. The proposed TIF Taxable value in TIF #1 has increased from district agreement sets contribution levels $53,116,202 in 1999 to $156,378,899 in and may also be contingent upon the occur‐ 2010. TIF #1 will terminate in 2020. rence of specified events. For the TIF district to be successful, the costs of improvement TIF District #2 (IH‐20 Retail District) should be distributed among participating TIF District #2 is located along SH‐161 and stakeholders, and objectives met within a the IH‐20 corridor, and includes service in‐ timeframe as stipulated in Chapter 372, dustries, like banking, retail and restaurants. Texas Local Government Code. Participating districts include City of Grand TIF District #1 (Entertainment District) Prairie, Dallas County, Tarrant County, Dallas County Hospital, Tarrant County Hospital, The city has three TIF Districts. (For a map of Dallas County Community College, Tarrant all three districts, see Map 14 at the back of County College, Grand Prairie Independent this plan.) TIF District #1 is located along the School District and Arlington Independent IH‐30 corridor and includes the property School District. along Beltline Road, which is part of the En‐ tertainment Overlay District. TIF #2 projects completed include, but are not limited to, roadway improvements to TIF #1 includes Lone Star Park Racetrack, Bardin Road, Matthew Road, Robinson Road, Grand Lakes Business Park, Ripley’s Believe It and Great Southwest Parkway. Projects cur‐ or Not Museum, Grand Prairie Ford, Verizon rently under construction include, but are Theatre, QuikTrip Park and others. Partici‐ not limited to the construction of Lakeridge pating districts include City of Grand Prairie, Parkway, Robinson Road wastewater im‐ Grand Prairie ISD, Dallas County, Dallas provement, and the addition of a 12‐inch County Hospital District, and the Dallas water line along SH‐161, from Forum Drive County Community College District. to Mayfield Road.

TIF #1 projects completed include, but are Taxable value in TIF #2 has increased from not limited to, Grand Lakes Business Park $54,141,297 in 1999 to $303,341,844 in infrastructure, IH‐30 frontage roads east of 2010. TIF #2 will terminate in 2020. MacArthur Boulevard, and a 12 inch water line east of Beltline Road. TIF District #3 (Peninsula or Lake District)

Several projects are currently under con‐ TIF District #3 includes the Peninsula Eco‐ struction including, but not limited to, wid‐ nomic Development proposal, residential ening of the MacArthur Boulevard bridge, development and linear parks in the Penin‐ and adding a 24‐inch water line along Wild‐ sula area. Participating districts include City life Parkway. of Grand Prairie, Dallas County, Tarrant County, Dallas County Hospital, Tarrant

141

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

County Hospital, Dallas County Community responsible for implementing grant applica‐ College, and Cedar Hill Independent School tions as a financial tool for encouraging de‐ District. velopment and redevelopment. For exam‐ ple, the Parks and Recreation Department TIF #2 projects completed include, but are applies for and implements grants from the not limited to, developer agreements with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department as well Grand Peninsula, Mira Lagos, Mira Lagos as from other entities that support the ser‐ East and Mosley. Projects completed also vices that the Parks Department provides. include Lakeshore Village Town Homes cul‐ vert and public safety transfers. Pending pro‐ Housing and Neighborhood Services jects include the Peninsula resort proposal, as described in Section 6, Economic Develop‐ The Housing and Neighborhood Services ment. (HNS) Department applies for and imple‐ ments Community Development Block Taxable value in TIF #3 has increased from Grants and other grants associated with $3,064,259 in 1999 to $535,360,467 in 2010. their mission. The HNS mission is to provide TIF #2 will terminate in 2020. community service programs designed to meet the needs of the Grand Prairie commu‐ Since 2001, this economic development tool nity and its citizens for housing, healthy and has enhanced the City of Grand Prairie’s resi‐ safe neighborhoods, economic develop‐ dential and commercial growth. The TIF districts have encouraged development of linear parks, pub‐ lic safety resources, roadway con‐ struction, water and wastewater lines and other infrastructure im‐ provements. Through TIF partner‐ ships with participating entities, total collections for 2011 are pro‐ jected to be $82 million and net approximately $71 million. The city’s total contributions will be approximately $30 million.

Neighborhood Revitalization

Another implementation tool is grant application and administra‐ tion. Various city departments are Landscaping and screening improvements in the Forum Estates PID.

142

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

ment, and neighborhood revitalization, in an  Activities benefiting low to moderate in‐ efficient, timely, courteous and knowledge‐ come persons; able manner. The city’s Housing and Neighborhood Services Department offers  Activities which aid in the prevention or programs designed to assist low‐to‐ elimination of slum or blight, or

moderate income Grand Prairie residents  Activities designed to meet other com‐ with safe, affordable housing. munity needs having specific urgency

(Housing and Urban Development makes Housing and Neighborhood Services does specific urgency judgement). not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, familial status, age, relig‐ Some of the services are housing/emergency ion or handicap, in compliance with the Fair repair program, fair housing, housing recon‐ Housing Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of struction, and housing rehabilitation. 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Section 8 Housing Assistance

Community Development The Section 8 Housing Assistance Division of HNS is available to assist low and very low‐ The Community Development Division of income families with the rental cost of hous‐ HNS assists citizens with housing rehabilita‐ ing through federal funding and landlord tion, housing reconstruction, emergency re‐ participation. pair programs, fair housing issues, and many other community housing issues. For additional information on these grants and programs, contact Housing and Community Development secures and ad‐ Neighborhood Services or visit the city’s ministers federal and state housing grants to website at www.gptx.org. provide assistance benefitting a healthy, safe and sanitary living environment for eligible Operation Clean Sweep Grand Prairie applicants with support of business and other city departments. The Operation Clean Sweep is an initiative that primary purpose of the Community Develop‐ was approved by the City Council and ment Block Grant (CDBG) Program is to pro‐ started in November 2008. Clean Sweep vide safe and decent housing for low to takes code inspectors out of an assigned moderate income families. neighborhood and moves them to a selected area. These specific assignments cover All activities selected for funding under the smaller areas and allow the officers to work CDBG program must meet one or more of door to door inspections throughout the the following statutory National Objectives: neighborhood, identify code violations and issues notices for the resident to correct the violations.

143

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Trash, junk, debris

 High grass/weeds

When a neighborhood is selected for the program, a sign is posted in the designated neighborhood, which states “Code Enforcement is working in your neighborhood. Please assist us in improving your neighborhood. Remove Outside Storage. Remove Trash and De‐ bris. Remove Inoperable Vehicles. Repair Broken or Leaning Fences. Mow/Maintain High Grass and Weeds.”

The sign is moved around the Neighborhood Revitalization in Indian Hills subdivision. neighborhood as a reminder to residents that these and other vio‐ Since its inception, Operation Clean Sweep lations need to be corrected and to afford (OCS) has been active in Indian Hills, Trail‐ the community a chance to be in compliance wood, South Dalworth, North Dalworth and before receiving a notice. Westover Ridge Communities. The OCS offi‐ cers from the Code Enforcement Division When violations are observed, the OCS team have made 4,100 inspections and issued will issue a hand notice to the resident or 2,804 notices giving residents time to correct send a letter to the property owner giving violations. them 30 days to take action or correct the violation. Upon the expiration of the 30 OCS officers look for various types of viola‐ days, a follow‐up inspection is made and the tions, including: appropriate action is taken. For more infor‐ mation on Operation Clean Sweep, contact  Parking on the yard the Code Enforcement Division.

 Faulty weather protection Neighborhood revitalization works well when cleanup efforts can be done in con‐  Dilapidated fences junction with capital improvements in the  Junk/inoperable vehicles neighborhood. For example, Indian Hills also has received landscape improvements to the  Outside storage area around Dalworth Recreation Center.

144

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Appendix A Other Plans and Studies

145

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The City of Grand Prairie created its first Unified Development Code, November 1990 Planning and Zoning Commission in 1949. It has conducted a series of Comprehensive Lake Sector Implementation Plan, February Plans, beginning in 1954. In the 1980’s a se‐ 1994, RTKL Associates, Inc. ries of Sector Plans were completed and as‐ similated as a Comprehensive Plan in 1988. Beltline Corridor Overlay District, Sept. 1996 The 2010 Comprehensive Plan addresses the City as a whole and supersedes the previous I‐30 Entertainment District, I‐20, and Penin‐ Sector Plans and the 2005 Comprehensive sula Tax Increment Finance Districts, 1999 Plan. The inventory sections of the Sector Plans contain information not repeated in Central Business Overlay District, Jan. 2000 the 2010 document. Conceptual Downtown Master Plan, Spring The City Plan for Greater Grand Prairie, 2000, Mesa Design Group October 1954, Powell & Powell Engineers S.H. 161 Overlay District, January 2001 Comprehensive Plan Report, January 1966, Marvin Springer and Associates I‐20 Overlay District, February 2003

Comprehensive Plan Elements, June 1976, Lakeridge Parkway Overlay District, April Marvin Springer and Associates 2003

Estes Park Feasibility Study, August 1987, Comprehensive Plan Update, October 2005, Sedway Cooke Associates URS Corporation

Comprehensive Plan, March 1988, Compi‐ Comprehensive Plan Update, November lation of Staff Sector Plans: 2010

Shady Grove Sector Plan, August 1984 Land Use Policies Lake Sector Plan, February 1985 Northeast Sector Plan, June 1985 Dennis Wilson of Townscape formed the fol‐ South Central Sector Plan, October 1985 lowing policies regarding development is‐ Supplemental Lake Sector Community sues within the City, 2005. Facilities Plan, February 1986 Northwest Sector Plan, August 1986 LU‐1. No property should be zoned to a use Central Area, May 1987 which is not consistent with the Com‐ Hospital District Plan, May 1987 prehensive Plan. A public hearing to Dal/View Sector, February 1988 change the Plan should be held prior to any such rezoning.

146

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

LU‐2. Property should not be rezoned to a c. Provide easy access to retail services. more intensive use without determining d. Provide access to parks, open spaces that the street system, utilities, drain‐ and trails. age and other requirements will be ade‐ quate. LU‐6. Encourage development that will not result in sprawl. LU‐3. Provide for a mix of uses and densities within the City that foster economic vi‐ a. Provide for clustering of development tality, sustainability and increasing prop‐ throughout the city that will result in erty values over time. the preservation of floodplains and the conservation of open space and natural a. Provide for a range of housing types, areas. from large lot custom homes to urban b. Ensure that retail and personal service style housing in order to accommodate uses are clustered in the Downtown different age groups, incomes and life and village centers in new develop‐ styles. ment areas. b. Ensure that open space and recrea‐ c. Strip retail should be avoided. tional amenity is distributed through‐ out the city. LU‐7. New retail development should be a c. Encourage mixed use development in minimum of 12 acres in size in order to the Downtown and at major freeway provide flexibility within the site to ac‐ intersections. commodate changing market condi‐ tions. LU‐4. Support the downtown as a mixed use area. LU‐8. In new areas, retail development sites should be located catty‐corner across a. Encourage infill commercial and resi‐ major roadway intersections in order to dential development. facilitate access from all directions. b. Encourage mixed use and urban hous‐ ing within a 5‐10 minute walk from the LU‐9. Preserve floodplains to reduce the risk downtown area. of flooding under the “fully developed drainage basin for the 100‐year flood” LU‐5. Create new neighborhoods with a condition, and to provide interconnec‐ sense of community. tivity for residents and workers through

a city‐wide open space and trail system. a. Incorporate schools into neighbor‐

hoods. a. Utilize the floodplain and adjacent land b. Provide a mixture of housing type and to provide flood water conveyance and size.

147

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

regional storm water detention, and to which are less than 45 feet in width, provide recreational amenity, natural should be served by a rear alley. areas and buffering of land uses. b. Ensure that open space is accessible to LU‐16. When residential properties abut a all citizens. major collector or larger roadway, they should be designed in one of the follow‐ LU‐10. All thoroughfares and thoroughfare ing ways: re‐construction should include street trees and sidewalks as an integral ele‐ a. Lots facing the thoroughfare should be ment of design and construction. Street a minimum of 1/2 acre in size and ac‐ trees should be limited to species that commodate on‐site parking for 5 vehi‐ do not disrupt pavement. cles and a turn‐around; b. Lots facing an “eyebrow” off the thor‐ LU‐11. All new utilities should be located be‐ oughfare; or low grade in order to enhance property c. Lots siding onto the thoroughfare. values. LU‐17. Townhouse, patio homes and other Residential similar residential unit types should be allowed in multi‐family districts. LU‐12. Preserve stable single family neighborhoods by buffering adjacent LU‐18. A minimum of 15% common or public non‐residential development through open space should be provided in all the use of landscaping, height transi‐ residential developments involving tion, berms, fences, walls or open space more than 20 units or 10 acres. to mitigate adverse effects. LU‐19. No more than 250 units of multi‐ LU‐13. The City should provide adequate family should be located within 1 mile code enforcement in order to ensure of 150 or more units. maintenance and upkeep of residential properties and adjacent retail/ LU‐20. Long, tall fences against the roadway commercial areas. should be avoided.

LU‐14. The City should encourage land use LU‐21. Where residential uses in a Planned patterns that reflect the neighborhood Development abut an existing residen‐ concept. Retail services and open space tial development, the closest PD lots (trails and parks) should be within con‐ should be at least the same size as the venient walking distance where possi‐ existing lots or be buffered by open ble. space, trails, walkways, natural screen‐ ing or a roadway. LU‐15. All residential lots,

148

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

LU‐22. In developments where open space, Industrial trails and walkways, screening and other common areas are provided, the LU‐29. the City should encourage the provi‐ provision of maintenance of these areas sion of adequate land for industrial uses may be required. to ensure a strong employment and tax base, and to direct the location of indus‐ LU‐23. Existing surrounding conditions such trial development such that all land uses as lot size, house styles and existing de‐ are compatible with each other. velopment patterns should be consid‐ ered in determining appropriate zoning. LU‐30. Industrial development should be lo‐ cated away from residential areas as Commercial much as possible, with landscaped or natural buffers separating such develop‐ LU‐24. The City should avoid strip‐zoning ment from adjacent residential areas.

thoroughfares with retail uses. LU‐31. Industrial areas should be protected

from the encroachment of residential or LU‐25. Revitalize aging and underperforming commercial land uses that could inhibit retail areas. Where there is an excess of the full expansion of the district through retail‐zoned land, alternate uses should the use of specific industrial land use be encouraged. designations and open space buffers at

the edge of the industrial district. LU‐26. Retail areas should be pedestrian ori‐ ented and easily accessible to adjacent LU‐32. The location of industrial uses should residential and commercial neighbor‐ be such that their impact on adjacent hoods. residential areas will be minimized by discouraging the placement of loading LU‐27. Commercial developments such as zones, vehicle maintenance areas, and retail and office centers which may have outside storage adjacent to residential multiple ownerships, should be compre‐ areas. Where this is not possible, they hensively planned in terms of shared shall be well screened and buffered. parking and access and have a master sign plan and property‐owners associa‐ LU‐33. Industrial uses should be allowed only tion. on sites where:

LU‐28. In retail districts, up to 50% of the a. Appropriate transportation access ex‐ development should be allowed to in‐ ists for the types of activities proposed, clude lofts, live‐work units, apartments including arterial thoroughfares, re‐ or townhomes. gional thoroughfares, truck routes,

149

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

and/or rail access; incompatible land uses, as set out in b. Traffic generated by the proposed de‐ the Zoning Ordinance. velopment should not be routed c. Maintain infrastructure such as roads, through residential or light commercial drainage, parks and sidewalks in older areas, or other areas that would be ad‐ areas to a high quality in order to en‐ versely impacted by such traffic; courage a similar level of maintenance c. Public services and facilities are or can of adjacent private properties. be made available in sufficient quanti‐ ties or capacity to support the pro‐ LU‐35. Ensure that infill land uses are com‐ posed development, including‐ patible with the area by either being similar to surrounding uses, or be being supportive  Extra width and pavement strength to the neighborhood. for streets with truck traffic;  Utilities with sufficient reserve capac‐ LU‐36. In order to encourage infill and rede‐ ity; velopment on small sites, there should be  Sufficient drainage for a high per‐ flexibility in applying parking, setback, build‐ centage of impervious coverage; and ing code and other standards.  Sufficient fire protection. Downtown d. There is sufficient land to be planned as a unified, fully integrated industrial LU‐37. Commercial and residential “infill de‐ district or unit, capable of accommo‐ velopment” (new development on un‐ dating buffer zones, accessory land developed or underdeveloped proper‐ uses, parking, truck loading and other ties within the area), and redevelope‐ amenities for viable development. ment, should be encouraged within the Downtown area. Infill Residential and Commercial LU‐38. Encourage mixed‐use and urban LU‐34. Ensure that existing neighborhoods housing within a 5‐10 minutes walk are well maintained: from the Downtown area.

a. Utilize code enforcement in combina‐ Extra Territorial Jurisdiction tion with community groups to ensure that individual properties do not nega‐ LU‐39. In the Extra‐Territorial Jurisdiction tively affect surrounding properties. (ETJ) the City should: b. Maintain landscaping and buffering requirements between residential and a. Apply subdivision standards allowed by State law.

150

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

b. Work with adjacent municipalities to investigating the consistency of the city’s rationalize borders and provide ser‐ current level of service standards and defini‐ vices including water, sewer, fire and tions of capacity to those used by NCTCOG. police. In addition to documenting that investiga‐ c. Develop an annexation plan favoring tion, URS made a recommendation that the voluntary annexations of parcels con‐ city modify its definition of capacity to be taining less than 100 lots that are con‐ consistent with NCTCOG’s definition. tiguous to existing City boundaries. URS compared the capacity listed for each Transportation Facilities Thoroughfare Plan road classification in the UDC to the capacity Update calculated using NCTCOG’s “Hourly Service Volume Per Lane” (Dallas‐Fort Worth Re‐ Working with city staff and the North Central gional Travel Model Manual, Exhibits 23 and Texas Council of Governments, URS updated 24). The daily capacity was calculated using the Thoroughfare Plan component of the the assumption that the “Hourly Service Vol‐ 2005 Comprehensive Plan. ume Per Lane” (service volume per lande is another way to say “capacity”) represented The primary basis of this work involved the 10% of the daily capacity. However, 10% is a comparison of NCTCOG modeled traffic vol‐ rough estimate used for planning and may umes to the capacity specified by roadway not be accurate for all roadway types. In classification in Grand Prairie’s Unified De‐ general, the higher a facility’s classification, velopment Code (UDC). In a conference call the smaller share of daily traffic the peak with the project team, URS committed to hour represents.

151

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

As shown in the table, the daily traffic vol‐ allel facilities to relieve projected traffic de‐ ume NCTCOG considers to represent LOS C is mand. Other options for some facilities much lower than the daily traffic volume could include (1) going beyond the street that the city’s UDC considers to be LOS C. classification system and create a limited‐ The city’s LOS C daily capacity lies some‐ access highway, or (2) creating an 8‐lane where between NCTCOG’s definition of LOS classification. D and E for collectors and above. It is important to note that the provision of URS also examined the NCTCOG model fore‐ LOS C (in the peak hour, which is what the casts for the year 2025 produced at Grand NCTCOG method does) is probably not feasi‐ Prairie’s direction on or about October 4, ble for a city of Grand Prairie’s land use and 2004. All Grand Prairie roadway segments in tax base. LOS D and E are more common the NCTCOG model were examined with re‐ goals when planning a roadway system spect to their daily volume and capacity, de‐ based on peak hour traffic estimates. fined both by the current UDC standard and the NCTCOG capacity. The following table Summary and Recommendation summarizes those results. As such, URS proposed that the city use the Criterion Roadway with Total number of NCTCOG definition of capacity for LOS E as Failing segments Failing segments its standard for defining the thoroughfare UDC 23 53 plan. It is crucial to note that the NCTCOG Capacity capacity values for LOS E are not much higher that the current UDC definition of LOS NCTCOG 18 33 C. Although LOS E as we think of it might not Capacity seem like a reasonable level of transporta‐ tion service quality to provide, the following Many roadways have multiple failing seg‐ must be considered: ments, often in succession. Considering that there are several thousand modeled  The NCTCOG model is intended to pro‐ (Collector and above) roadway segments in vide rough estimates of traffic. Grand Prairie, 33 that don’t meet the capac‐  The assumptions the NCTCOG method ity standard should not be considered a high uses are also rough, and applied uni‐ number. It is also worth noting that 18 of formly for all thoroughfare classifica‐ those 33 segments exhibit projected daily tions. traffic volumes above the highest street clas‐  The LOS people notice is at intersections, sification currently available in Grand Prai‐ where turn lanes and good design can rie’s system (P7U). For these locations, the minimize peak period congestion. Inter‐ city would benefit from considering the crea‐ section LOS is not considered at the thor‐ tion or enhancement of par‐ oughfare plan level.

152

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Even a capacity standard consistent with ‐minute periods with the highest total flow. NCTCOG LOS D would result in the City’s In this sense, LOS is intended for use with own plan to require substantial invest‐ detailed data to describe the quality of ment in both roadway widening and transportation service during a period of uni‐ new/additional roadway alignments that form conditions. Since the UDC cites daily provide alternative routes and disperse traffic, quality of service should be described traffic demand. in terms of LOS.

In addition to the use of NCTCOG’s capacity Taking the recommendations of URS into data, URS recommended that the concept of account, the City of Grand Prairie has estab‐ Level of Service be dropped from the Thor‐ lished the following Level‐of‐service classifi‐ oughfare Plan as it stands today. Given the cations and capacities based on LOS criteria roughness of the assumptions that define provided by NCTCOG and the Highway Ca‐ capacity, the use of “Level of Service” to de‐ pacity Manual. The traffic volume for LOS scribe daily conditions should be considered “C” has been adjusted to reflect local condi‐ improper. Such use violates the principles of tions. the transportation engineering industry’s guiding document for operations analysis, Level‐of‐Service “C” is the acceptable LOS for the Highway Capacity Manual the City of Grand Prairie, as indicated in the (Transportation Research Board Special Re‐ below table. The following Thoroughfare port 209, 2000 Edition). Plan changes are recommended based upon the acceptable LOS “C,” continuity of the In the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), the roadway network, local/regional traffic pat‐ primary driver of LOS is the Service Flow terns, development trends, and other local Rate, which is based on the peak 15‐minute conditions. flow rate, or in some cases, the peak hourly flow rate, defined as the four consecutive 15

153

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

154

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

155

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

156

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Appendix B Master Transportation Plan Thoroughfare Map Amendments

157

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Master Transportation Plan Amendments  Reclassification of streets, up‐grading or downgrading specific thoroughfares, The Thoroughfare Map is a component of which was approved by City Council on the Master Transportation Plan. This section July 20, 2010 [Case No. MTP100701, Or‐ highlights substantive revisions to the Thor‐ dinance No. 9056]; and oughfare Map since City Council approval of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan. Changes  Realignment of a portion of Waterwood were based on traffic modeling done by the Drive and changes to specific thorough‐ North Central Texas Council of Governments fares in the city’s extraterritorial jurisdic‐ (NCTCOG) and staff recommendations. tion, which was approved by City Council on September 21, 2010 [Case No. On April 13, 2010, Transportation and Plan‐ MTP100801, Ordinance No. 9079]. ning staff presented the proposed changes to the City Council Development Committee. Thoroughfare Map Changes—MTP100401 The committee recommended that the Mas‐ ter Transportation Plan Amendments, pro‐ The previous alignment had Sara Jane ex‐ ceed through the approval process. tending from the current terminus to the west at Great Southwest Parkway curving As part of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan process, the Thoroughfare Map portion of the Master Transportation Plan was amended in several phases over a six month period. The phases included:

 The realignment of Sara Jane Parkway at the intersection of Sara Jane Parkway with Forum Drive, which was approved by City Council on April 20, 2010 [Case No. MTP100401, Ordinance No. 9015];

 Changes to frontage roads and connec‐ tors for major highways, which was ap‐ proved by City Council on May 18, 2010 [Case No. MTP100501, Ordinance 9027];

 Additions and deletions of specific thor‐ oughfares, which was approved by City Council on June 15, 2010 [Case No. MTP100601, Ordinance No. 9042];

158

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

northward to line up with and tie directly struction documents for State Highway 161 into Waterwood Drive at Forum Drive. (SH‐161), and is now in the process of con‐ MTP100401 moved the connection with Fo‐ structing the limited access highway. As part rum Drive an estimated 700 feet to the east of the process, right‐of‐way was purchased of Waterwood Drive. for frontage roads, and streets that termi‐ nated into SH‐161 were terminated, re‐ Extending Sara Jane Parkway so that it be‐ named or reclassified. This amendment pro‐ comes Waterwood Drive would have cre‐ vided the following changes to SH‐161 front‐ ated traffic conflicts. When the Sara Jane age roads and connectors on the Thorough‐ Parkway alignment was originally deter‐ fare Map. mined, Waterwood Drive continued to Pio‐ neer Parkway. Since that time the section of  Include frontage roads along SH‐161. Waterwood Drive from Arkansas Lane to SH‐161 frontage roads replace a portion Pioneer Parkway was removed, making Wa‐ of N.W. 19th Street. terwood Drive primarily accessible from resi‐ dential streets.  SH‐161 replaces West Freeway.

The section of Waterwood Drive from Forum  Robinson Road (M5U) is renamed to th Drive to Warrior Trail is classified as a minor S.W. 14 Street, where it connects to arterial, four‐lane undivided thoroughfare SH‐161 on the west side. (M4U) on the Thoroughfare Map but there is a heavy concentration of single family resi‐  Remove NW 14th Street (C2U) between dential, park and school uses in the area. Dalworth Street and the northbound SH ‐161 frontage road. The commercial center at the intersection of Sara Jane Parkway and Great Southwest  Extend westbound frontage roads (P3U) Parkway will introduce a large volume of on IH‐30 to the west of SH‐161. traffic to the roadway. A direct connection  Terminate NW 19th Street (C2U) into the to Waterwood Drive would have encouraged southbound frontage road of SH‐161. commercial traffic to use Waterwood Drive north of Forum Drive. The 700 foot offset  Terminate Robinson Road and reclassify will force traffic to turn left or right on Fo‐ (downgrade) from a M5U to a C2U from rum Drive and reduce the traffic through the Pioneer Parkway to SH 161. residential, school and park areas. TxDOT also has plans to eventually improve Thoroughfare Map Changes—MTP100501 the frontage roads along Interstate Highway

20 (IH‐20). The improvements will impact The Texas Department of Transportation the existing connectors and will also require (TxDOT) worked with city staff to create con‐ additional connectors to the

159

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

IH‐20 frontage roads. The following changes Thoroughfare Map Changes—MTP100601 reflect the removal, addition, and reclassifi‐ cation of frontage roads and connectors This amendment applied to the addition, along IH‐20. deletion, realignment and reclassification of specific thoroughfares throughout the city. A  Remove the extension of Endicott Drive summary of the changes follows: (M4U) between Sara Jane Parkway and the existing IH‐20 frontage road.  Reclassify a portion of Gilbert Road to collector (C2U) from Rock Island Road to  Add frontage roads (P3U) for IH‐20 all Gilbert Circle. Remove future Gilbert the way through Grand Prairie. Road from Gilbert Circle to Shady Grove Road. (See “A” on the MTP100601 map.)  Reclassify (upgrade) North Westcliff Road from a local street to a collector  Remove approximately 900 feet of fu‐ (C2U) between Fish Creek Road and the ture Riverside Parkway from approxi‐ future IH‐20 frontage road. mately 500 feet south of Forest Ridge to Green Oaks Boulevard. (See “B” on the  Add a collector (C2U) to the east of MTP100601 map.) North Westcliff Road between Fish Creek  Remove future Magna Carta Boulevard Road and the future IH‐20 frontage road. between Camp Wisdom Road and Doryn  Add a collector (C2U) on the north side Drive. (See “C” on the MTP100601 map.)

of IH‐20 from Dechman Drive to the  Remove connection for Post and Pad‐ westbound frontage road of IH‐20. dock Road/ W. Oakdale Road between 114th Street and Roy Orr Boulevard (See  Reclassify (upgrade) Westchase Drive “D” on the MTP100601 map.) from a local street to a collector (C2U) between Carrier Parkway and the east‐  Add a collector (C2U) roadway from bound frontage road of IH‐20. Koscher Drive to Prairie View Boulevard/ Gifco Road. (See “E” on the MTP100601  Reclassify South Westcliff Road from a map.) one‐way street (P3U) to a two‐way street (M3U), south of IH‐20.  Realign Prairie View Blvd/Gifco Rd to cross the south end of Joe Pool Lake Finally, MTP100501 also included frontage across the existing bridge to FM‐661. roads (P3U) along SH‐360 on areas adjacent (See “F” on the MTP100601 map.) to Grand Prairie, and added frontage roads along SH‐287. SH‐360 was extended from SH  Add a principal arterial (P4D) connection ‐287 to SH‐67. from Prairie View Blvd/ Gifco Rd to fu‐ ture Loop 9. (See “G” on map.)

160

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Realign Davis Drive to terminate into FM‐ sify as a minor arterial (M4D) roadway. 661 and reclassify as a principal arterial (See “I” on MTP100601 map.) (P4D) roadway. (See “H” on map.)  Add a collector (C2U) roadway between  Realign Greenway Trails between Davis Heritage Parkway and FM 661. (See “J” Drive and Heritage Parkway and reclas‐ on MTP100601 map.)

161

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Thoroughfare Map Changes—MTP100701  Reclassify (downgrade) Oakdale Road from a principal arterial (P6D) to a princi‐ The changes included reclassification (up‐ pal arterial (P4D) between Roy Orr grading or downgrading) of specific streets. Boulevard and Beltline Road. (See “B” on

 Reclassify (downgrade) Post and Paddock the MTP100701 map.)

Road from a principal arterial (P6D) to a  Reclassify (downgrade) Daja Lane from a principal arterial (P4D) between River‐ th minor arterial (M4U) to a collector (C2U). side Parkway and 114 Street. (See “A” (See “C” on the MTP100701 map.) on the MTP100701 map.)

162

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Reclassify Freetown Road from a minor  Revise the Thoroughfare Map to reclas‐ arterial (M4U) to a minor arterial (M3U) sify (downgrade) Magna Carta Boulevard between Robinson Road and Corn Valley from a principal arterial (P4D) to a minor Road. (See “D” on the MTP100701 map.) arterial (M4U) between Doryn Drive and future Lynn Creek Parkway. (See “G” on  Reclassify (downgrade) Mayfield Road the MTP100701 map.) from a principal arterial (P4D) to a minor arterial (M5U) between State Highway  Revise the Thoroughfare Map to reclas‐ 360 (SH‐360) and Great Southwest Park‐ sify (downgrade) Mirabella Boulevard way. (See “E” on the MTP100701 map.) from a principal arterial (P4D) to a minor arterial (M4U) between Webb Lynn Road  Reclassify (downgrade) Crossland Boule‐ and Lloyd Park. (See “H” on the vard from a minor arterial (M4U) to a MTP100701 map.) collector (C2U) between Robinson Road and Carrier Parkway. (See “F” on the MTP100701 map.)

163

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Thoroughfare Map Changes—MTP100801

 The Thoroughfare Map needs to reflect the reclassification (downgrade) of Wa‐ terwood Drive from a minor arterial (M4U) to a local thoroughfare from Ar‐ kansas Lane to Warrior Trail. (See “A” on the MTP100801 map.)

(P4D) turns at a 90 degree bend. (See “D” on the MTP100801 map.)

 Extension (straightening from a 90 de‐ gree bend) of the northwestern end of Old Fort Worth Road (P4D), so that Old Fort Worth Road (P4D) ties into Prairie Ridge Boulevard instead of SH 287. (See “E” on the MTP100801 map.)

 Reclassification (downgrade) of Lakeview Drive from a principal arterial (P4D) to a local thoroughfare. (See “B” on the MTP100801 map.)

 Addition of Prairie Ridge Boulevard as a principal arterial (P6D) thoroughfare from State Highway 287 to FM 157. (See “C” on the MTP100801 map.)

 Removal of about 1,000 feet of Old Fort Worth Road (P4D) from where it inter‐ sects State Highway 287 (SH 287) to where Old Fort Worth Road

164

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Appendix C Sample Annexation Plan

165

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

For the majority of Texas cities, annexation pounded by the introduction of multiple an‐ as a “policy” issue is a relatively new con‐ nexation bills at each meeting of the Texas cept. It is the same for Grand Prairie. When legislature. the City of Dallas (in 1928) announced plans to buy 300 acres of land four miles east of In response to the enactment of new an‐ the City of Grand Prairie City Limits and adja‐ nexation laws, many cities are now develop‐ cent to the Dallas‐Fort Worth Pike (and ing annexation plans as policy documents. served by the Texas Pacific Railway and the The following “sample” plan is included in Dallas‐Fort Worth Interurban), Grand Prairie this Comprehensive Plan on the following officials welcomed the initiative and the air‐ page. craft manufacturing plant, federal grants and economic boom that followed. Sample Annexation Policy

However, when Dallas annexed the city‐ I. Purpose and Intent owned Hensley Field, federally owned air‐ craft plants, and Dallas Power & Light Com‐ The City of Grand Prairie seeks to annex pany properties on September 6, 1947. property within its extraterritorial jurisdic‐ Grand Prairie quickly changed its municipal tion for the following purposes:

charter to a “home rule” charter to give  To promote orderly growth by facilitating them greater flexibility and the power to an‐ long‐range planning for the provision of nex adjacent territory. municipal services and by applying ap‐ Grand Prairie then petitioned Dallas, in propriate land use regulations, develop‐ 1955, to disannex theo tw taxpaying aircraft ment standards, property maintenance plants located completely in the Grand Prai‐ standards, fire codes, construction codes rie City Limits. Citing the need for funding for and environmental regulations. a new sewage disposal system, street im‐  To diversify the economic base and cre‐ provements, police protection and traffic ate job opportunities by annexing prop‐ congestion management, “the citizens of erty for commercial and industrial devel‐ Grand Prairie approved bonds which it could opment. not sell because it did not have enough tax valuations. To fulfill these purposes, the City has formu‐ lated this annexation policy in order to: Dallas said such a disannexation would be illegal and that it would not consider the  Provide the City Council with more spe‐ subject anyway for public policy and welfare cific, objective, and prescriptive guidance reasons. for making annexation decisions.  Enable the City to be more proactive in Subsequent years of annexation and disan‐ identifying areas for annexation by pro‐ nexation have followed, com‐ viding for an annually updated five‐year

166

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

annexation program. City to annex that area, nor does exclusion  Provide for meaningful public participa‐ of an area from the program prevent the tion in formulating the annexation pro‐ City from annexing the area. gram as part of the annual update of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Certificate of Convenience and Necessity – Authorizes the specified utility to provide II. Definitions designated service.

Annexation – The legal process by which a Disannexation – The legal process by which a city extends its boundaries. A city may annex city removes an area from its boundaries. property only within its extraterritorial juris‐ diction, unless the city owns the area. Enclave – An area within the City’s extrater‐ ritorial jurisdiction that is surrounded by the Annexation Plan – A document required by corporate limits of the City of Grand Prairie Local Government Code, Section 43.052, and/or the corporate limits or extraterrito‐ identifying certain kinds of areas that the rial jurisdiction of other municipalities. city intends to annex. Extraordinary Economic Development Project 1. The plan must identify any areas with – A commercial or industrial project that is 100 or more separate lots or tracts of eligible for property tax abatement under land containing residential dwellings that the City’s tax abatement policy as set forth the city intends to annex, unless more in the Comprehensive Plan. than 50 percent of the property owners request annexation. Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) – Unincor‐ 2. The plan must also identify other areas porated area extending generally five miles 3. Areas that are identified in the plan may from the city limit, excluding other incorpo‐ only be annexed three years after the rated municipalities and their ETJ, in which plan is adopted. the City has the authority to annex property.

Annexation Policy – A set of guidelines for Full Municipal Services – Services provided making annexation decisions. by an annexing municipality within its full‐ purpose boundaries, including water and Annexation Program – An annually updated wastewater services and excluding gas or document identifying areas that the City electrical service. The City of Grand Prairie wishes to consider for initiation of annexa‐ provides the following services, access to tion during the succeeding five year period. water and wastewater services unless such The annexation program expresses the City’s services are provided by another utility, solid intent to consider specific areas for annexa‐ waste collection, operation and mainte‐ tion, but is not legally binding. Inclusion of an area in the program does not obligate the

167

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

nance of parks, publicly‐owned facilities, and Infrastructure – Facilities necessary to pro‐ streets, library services, drainage and storm vide city services, usually referring to physi‐ sewer maintenance, enforcement of envi‐ cal assets such as streets and utility lines. ronmental health, zoning and subdivision ordinances, enforcement of building and Limited‐Purpose Annexation – The legal construction codes, and inspection services. process for annexing an area in order to pro‐ vide only certain regulatory services for a Full‐Purpose Annexation – The legal process specified period of time. Cities with popula‐ for annexing an area in order to provide full tions of more than 225,000 have the author‐ municipal services. The city enforces all ordi‐ ity to annex property for limited purposes. nances, provides services as provided by law, Cities may enforce planning, zoning, health and assesses property taxes and sales taxes. and safety ordinances in areas annexed for limited purposes, but do not collect property Growth Center – An area that contains, or or sales taxes or provide full municipal ser‐ has the capacity to contain, compact, higher vices. Residents may vote in city council density urban land uses, as designated by elections and charter elections, but may not the City Council in the City’s Comprehensive vote in bond elections or be elected to a city Plan. There are two types of growth centers: office.

 Mixed Use Growth Center – A highly ur‐ Long Term Development – Planned construc‐ banized area that has many characteris‐ tion of residential, commercial and/or indus‐ tics of a downtown: a concentration of trial uses that is anticipated to occur beyond jobs, housing units, schools, parks, and a three‐year timeframe. other public facilities, public transporta‐ tion hubs, pedestrian activity and a sense Municipal Utility District – A political subdivi‐ of place. This mix of uses supports sus‐ sion providing water, sewerage, drainage tainable development, which seeks to and/or other municipal services within a balance access, mobility, affordability, specified geographic area. community cohesion, and environmental quality. Planning Study – A document prepared by a  Industrial Growth Center – An area con‐ municipality, pursuant to Section 43.123 of sisting primarily of industrial and com‐ the Texas Local Government Code, prior to mercial uses, with a high concentration annexing an area for limited purposes, which of jobs, mostly industrial in nature. Other identifies projected development, the need related and supporting uses include of‐ for annexation, the impact of annexation on fice space and services. Unlike mixed use surrounding residents, landowners, and growth centers, residential uses are gen‐ businesses, and the proposed zoning of the erally discouraged within industrial area.

growth centers.

168

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Protest Petition – A statement expressing city including water and wastewater ser‐ opposition to a proposed City‐initiated an‐ vices, within 2 ½ years after annexation but nexation and containing the signatures of may extend the deadline to 4 ½ years after property owners representing 50% or more annexation for services that cannot reasona‐ of the parcels within the territory to be an‐ bly be provided within 2 ½ years. nexed and 50% or more of the land area within that territory. Urban Development – Development requir‐ ing water, sewerage and other municipal Regulatory Plan – A document adopted by services to promote public health, safety and the City Council, pursuant to Section 453.123 welfare. It may include residential develop‐ of the Texas Local Government Code, at the ment with a density equal to or greater than time an area is annexed for limited pur‐ one dwelling unit per acre, as well as com‐ poses, which identifies the planning, zoning, mercial and industrial development. health and safety ordinances that will be en‐ forced in the area and states the date by III. Annexation Criteria and Procedures which the city will annex the area for full purposes. A. Full‐Purpose Annexation

Service Plan – A document adopted by the The City will consider full‐purpose annexa‐ City Council, pursuant to Sections 43.056 tion of any area within its extraterritorial ju‐ and 43.065 of the Texas Local Government risdiction if and only if the area meets one or Code, describing the schedule for a munici‐ more of the following five criteria: pality to provide full municipal services to an area annexed for full purposes. On the effec‐ 1. Enclave: The area meets both of the fol‐ tive date of annexation, a municipality must lowing conditions:

provide police and fire protection, emer‐ a. The area is an enclave and the City and its gency medical services, solid waste collec‐ citizens would benefit from a logical city tion, operation and maintenance of water limit boundary that provides for the or‐ and wastewater facilities in the area that are derly and efficient provision of services, not within the service area of another water and or wastewater facility, and operation and b. The City is able to provide municipal ser‐ maintenance of roads and streets (including vices upon annexation in accordance lighting), parks, playgrounds, swimming with State law, without negatively im‐ pools and other publicly owned facilities, pacting service provision within the city. buildings or services if those services are provided by the municipality within its cor‐ 2. Urban Development: The area meets all porate boundaries. A municipality must pro‐ three of the following conditions: vide full municipal services, which means all services provided within the a. The City is aware of or anticipates devel‐

169

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

opment activity of an urban nature in the development. area; and b. The City is able to provide municipal ser‐ 4. Adverse Impact: The area meets both of vices upon annexation in accordance the following conditions: with State law, without negatively im‐ pacting service provision within the city, a. Without annexation, potential develop‐ and ment activity is likely to have an adverse c. The City has determined through an ap‐ fiscal or environmental impact on the propriate analysis of prospective reve‐ City due to unregulated land uses and nues and expenditures, as described in the City’s inability to enforce develop‐ Section V (Preparation of Fiscal Impact ment standards, building codes and envi‐ Analysis) below, that cumulative reve‐ ronmental regulations; and nues will exceed cumulative expendi‐ b. The City is able to provide municipal ser‐ tures for each affected budget fund over vices upon annexation in accordance the 10‐year period immediately follow‐ with State law without negatively im‐ ing annexation, or over a longer period pacting service provision within the city.

as appropriate for long‐term develop‐ 5. Option to Expand: The area meets both ment. of the following conditions:

3. Growth Center: The area meets all three a. Without annexation, interested parties of the following conditions: may incorporate one or more separate a. The area encompasses a designated municipalities or take other legal actions growth center and thus requires urban that might be detrimental to the City’s services to develop as planned; and orderly growth. b. The City is able to provide municipal ser‐ b. The City is able to provide municipal ser‐ vices upon annexation in accordance vices upon annexation in accordance with State law, without negatively im‐ with State law, without negatively im‐ pacting service provision within the city. pacting service provision within the city.

c. The City has determined through an ap‐ In accordance with Sections 43.056 and propriate analysis of prospective reve‐ 43.065 of the Local Government Code, the nues and expenditures, as described in Planning and Development Department shall Section V (Preparation of a Fiscal Impact prepare a service plan that provides for the Analysis) below, that cumulative reve‐ extension of full municipal services to each nues will exceed cumulative expendi‐ area to be annexed for full purposes. The tures for each affected budget fund over Planning and Development Department shall the 10‐year period immediately follow‐ prepare the service plan after the City Coun‐ ing annexation, or over a longer period cil establishes the annexation timetable and as appropriate for long‐term

170

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

shall make the plan available to the public a planning study and a regulatory plan re‐ for review and comment in advance of re‐ garding the proposed annexation of an area quired public hearings. The City shall adopt for limited purposes, and make the docu‐ the service plan by ordinance at the time the ments available to the public for review and City annexes the area for full purposes. comment in advance of required public hearings. The City shall adopt the regulatory B. Limited‐Purpose Annexation plan by ordinance at the time the City an‐ nexes the area for limited purposes. The City will consider limited‐purpose an‐ nexation of any area if one or more of the C. General Provisions five criteria in Section A (Full‐Purpose An‐ nexation) above are met, and if either of the The following provisions apply to all pro‐ following two criteria is also met: posed full‐ and limited‐purpose annexations:

1. Populated Area: The area contains 100 1. As a prerequisite for any proposed an‐ or more separate lots or tracts of land nexation, the City Manager shall certify containing residential dwellings and thus that the proposed annexation would must be included in the municipal an‐ have no adverse effect upon the provi‐ nexation plan three years prior to full‐ sion of municipal services within the purpose annexation per State law. The City. area would be considered for limited‐ purpose annexation so that the City 2. The City will annex any county and city might control land use and the quality of rights‐of‐way that are adjacent to and development in that populated area, provide access to annexed property. pending full‐purpose annexation. D. Protests of City‐Initiated Annexation 2. Long‐Term Development: The area is proposed for long‐term development. 1. Annexations Included in Annexation The City will determine the feasibility of Plan: For any City‐initiated annexation entering into an agreement with the included in the annexation plan, the City property owner(s) for limited‐purpose shall comply with Sections 43.0562 and annexation so as to establish the timing 43.0564 of the Texas Local Government of full‐purpose annexation. The agree‐ Code as they prescribe procedures for ment may provide for the property to be negotiations and arbitration regarding annexed for full purposes in phases. the provision of municipal services.

In accordance with Section 43.123 of the 2. Annexations Not Included in the Annexa‐ Texas Local Government Code, the Planning tion Plan: For any City‐initiated annexa‐ and Development Department shall prepare tion not included in the annexation plan,

171

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

and not subject to any of the exemptions analysis shall not apply, however, to City‐ in paragraph 4 of this section, affected initiated annexations that are subject to property owners may submit a protest any of the exemptions in paragraph 4 of petition to the Planning and Develop‐ this section. ment Department prior to the date of the second City Council public hearing on 4. Exemptions: The following kinds of an‐ that annexation. The Planning and Devel‐ nexation areas shall be exempt from the opment Department shall determine the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3: validity of this protest petition within 15 days of receipt. If the Planning and De‐  Street rights‐of‐way velopment Department determines that  Enclaves existing as of the date of adop‐ the petition is valid, the City at that time tion of this policy, with fewer than 100 shall request the petitioners to select lots or tracts containing residential five representatives to serve on a com‐ dwellings; mittee with City representatives to pre‐  Interjurisdictional boundary adjust‐ pare the service plan (in the case of full‐ ments; purpose annexation) or the regulatory  Areas with environmental conditions plan (in the case of limited‐purpose an‐ that pose an imminent threat to public nexation). The service plan or the regula‐ health and safety, as determined by the tory plan, as applicable, shall document City Council; any objections that have been expressed  Areas that are subject to extraordinary by a majority of the petitioners’ repre‐ economic development projects; and sentatives on this committee. In any de‐  Areas with the minimum length and cisions regarding the proposed annexa‐ width necessary to provide contiguity tion, the City Council shall take under with the city limits for owner‐initiated advisement the City’s receipt of the pro‐ annexations.

test petition and all deliberations per‐ IV. Disannexation taining to the service plan or the regula‐ tory plan, as applicable. In accordance with Section 43.141 of the

Texas Local Government Code, a majority of 3. Third‐Party Fiscal Impact Analysis: At the the qualified voters of an annexed area may request of affected property owners, petition the City Council to disannex the area through a valid protest petition as de‐ if the City fails to provide services to the fined herein, the City shall hire an inde‐ area within the period specified by the ser‐ pendent certified public accountant to vice plan. Similarly, the City may seek to dis‐ conduct a third‐party fiscal impact analy‐ annex an area if it is unable to provide mu‐ sis using the methodology set forth in nicipal services to that area in accordance Section V of this policy. This provision for with State law. third‐party fiscal impact

172

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

V. Preparation of Fiscal Impact Analysis 1. Operation and maintenance costs for all municipal services. For any proposed annexation, the Budget 2. Required capital improvements. Office, in cooperation with other pertinent departments, shall conduct a fiscal impact C. Analysis Timeframe analysis that considers prospective revenues and expenditures for both the General Fund The number of years in the analysis shall be and the Water and Sewer Fund. The Budget based on the estimated build‐out of the de‐ Office shall prepare a fiscal impact report for velopment, the repayment timetable for any review by the City Council, and shall make debt assumed in the analysis, or 10 years, such report available for public review upon whichever is longer. request. D. Per Capita Data Sources A. Revenues For budget information, the most recently The following revenues shall be considered: adopted Annual Budget shall be used. For total population and land use data, the most 1. Property taxes to be generated by exist‐ recently adopted Comprehensive Plan shall ing land uses, based on Dallas Appraisal be used. District assessed values and the City’s current property tax rate. E. Population Estimate 2. Property taxes to be generated by pro‐ posed land uses, based on anticipated To estimate population for an area, the assessed values and the City’s current number of housing units proposed for con‐ property tax rate. struction or annexation shall be multiplied 3. Sales taxes. by the average household size for Grand 4. Other General Fund revenues including: Prairie, or for a comparable area within Other Local Taxes, Licenses and Permits, Grand Prairie, according to the latest U.S. Fines and Forfeitures, Use of Money and Census.

Property, Service Charges, and Other F. Methodology Revenue. 5. Water and wastewater tap and impact 1. Areas with Existing or Proposed Develop‐ fees. ment: If an area is fully developed, or 6. Water and wastewater service fees. substantially undeveloped but subject to

an approved concept plan and/or pre‐ B. Expenditures liminary plat, the analysis shall be based The following expenditures shall be consid‐ on the following guidelines. ered: a. For any undeveloped areas, the antici‐

173

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

pated rate of development shall be G. Timing for Preparation of Fiscal Impact based on the construction timetable pro‐ Analysis vided by the property owner. b. Sales tax revenues and other General 1. Annexations Initiated by Property Own‐ Fund revenues (item A‐4 above) shall be ers: Upon receipt of a valid annexation estimated on a per capita or per acre ba‐ petition and application, the Budget Of‐ sis, as appropriate. fice shall conduct the fiscal impact analy‐ c. Water and wastewater revenues shall be sis within 30 days and prior to the City based on existing land uses and any pro‐ Council public hearing on establishing posed land uses provided by the prop‐ the annexation timetable. As an alterna‐ erty owner. tive, the City will verify the accuracy of d. Expenditures shall be estimated on a per the fiscal impact analysis submitted by capita, per acre, or per linear foot basis, the property owners prior to initiating as appropriate, unless actual costs can the annexation process. be determined. 2. Annexations Initiated by the City: The 2. Other Areas: If an area is undeveloped City will conduct the fiscal impact analy‐ and not subject to an approved concept sis prior to scheduling the required City plan or preliminary plat, the analysis Council public hearing on establishing shall be based on the following guide‐ the annexation timetable. lines. VI. Preparation of Five‐Year Annexation a. The mix of land uses shall be as depicted Program in the Comprehensive Plan. b. The anticipated rate of development The Planning and Development Department, shall be based on the annual growth rate in cooperation with other pertinent City de‐ for the pertinent planning sector of the partments, shall prepare an annexation pro‐ city. gram that identifies areas that the City c. Sales tax revenues and other General wishes to consider for initiation of annexa‐ Fund revenues (Item A‐4 above) shall be tion during the succeeding five‐year period. estimated on a per capita or per acre ba‐ The program shall be incorporated into the sis, as appropriate. City’s Comprehensive Plan, and revised as d. Water and wastewater revenues shall be part of the annual update. The program will based on the future land uses identified estimate the year in which each proposed in the Comprehensive Plan. annexation might occur. In preparing its e. Expenditures shall be estimated on a per capital improvement program and annual capita, per acre, or per linear foot basis, operating budget, the City shall determine as appropriate, unless actual costs can the feasibility of providing municipal services be determined. to areas identified in the annexation pro‐

174

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

gram. The City shall involve property owners  Areas with environmental conditions and community organizations from the ex‐ that pose an imminent threat to public traterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ), as well as health and safety, as determined by the those from the City itself, in formulating the City Council; five‐year annexation program.  Areas that are subject to extraordinary economic development projects; and In formulating the annexation program, the  Areas with the minimum length and City shall assign priority to annexing areas width necessary to provide contiguity that are located within the geographic scope with the city limits for owner‐initiated of its Certificate of Convenience and Neces‐ annexations. sity (CCN), within the geographic scope an‐ other CCN that complies with the City of Inclusion of an area in the five‐year annexa‐ Grand Prairie’s standards for water and tion program does not obligate the City to wastewater infrastructure, or within a Mu‐ annex that area. Similarly, exclusion of an nicipal Utility District that complies with such area from the five‐year annexation program standards. does not prevent the City from annexing the area. The City wishes to allocate sufficient time for the transition of proposed annexation areas VII. Preparation of Three Year Annexation from the ETJ into the city. This transitional Plan period would enable the City to arrange for the provision of adequate municipal ser‐ In accordance with Section 43.052 of the vices, and would enable affected property Texas Local Government Code, the City of owners to prepare for the impacts of an‐ Grand Prairie shall amend its annexation nexation. Accordingly, the annexation pro‐ plan to identify certain areas that the City gram shall delay any City‐initiated annexa‐ intends to annex. The annexation plan must tions for three years or more from the date include any proposed annexation area with of the annexation area’s initial inclusion in 100 or more separate lots or tracts of land the program. The following kinds of annexa‐ containing residential dwellings. An area tion areas, however, shall be exempt from identified in the plan may only be annexed this waiting period: beginning on the third anniversary of the date the plan is amended to include that  Street rights‐of‐way; area.  Enclaves existing as of the date of adop‐ tion of this policy, with fewer than 100 Upon adoption of the five‐year annexation lots or tracts containing residential program, the Planning and Development De‐ dwellings; partment shall identify those areas with 100  Interjurisdictional boundary adjust‐ or more separate lots or tracts of land con‐ ments; taining residential dwellings and schedule

175

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

necessary amendments to the annexation expense, these districts would construct all plan. The three‐year annexation plan will not water and wastewater facilities for the pro‐ necessarily contain all the areas that are in‐ ject to city specifications and will own such. cluded in the five‐year annexation program. The districts may also construct necessary supply lines outside the district, which will VIII. External Communication be dedicated to the City of Grand Prairie. Grand Prairie would typically give the dis‐ In addition to public hearing requirements tricts a credit on impact fees paid towards established by Sections 43.0561 and 43.124 the cost of these supply lines until the actual of the Texas Local Government Code, the cost of the lines are paid from district reve‐ City of Grand Prairie shall seek to communi‐ nues. The district collects taxes in lieu of city cate with City residents, affected property taxes to pay for the infrastructure installa‐ owners and pertinent government agencies tions. throughout the annexation process. The City shall use its website, community meetings, Once the district gets created, the city and direct mail, and other appropriate media to developer work to negotiate a Development disseminate information about any City‐ Agreement for the provision of wholesale initiated annexation. Upon request, the water and sanitary sewer services to the City’s Community Relations Department proposed project—with the City of Grand shall assist affected property owners in es‐ Prairie serving as the main service provider. tablishing neighborhood organizations so as A service plan may require the district to ab‐ to facilitate communication with the City. sorb the majority of costs associated with required infrastructure improvements to Future Annexation of Planned Residential serve the development. In the agreement, Development in ETJ the city will typically agree to withhold an‐

nexation of the District for a period of fifteen Several proposed development projects are to twenty years or until all infrastructure im‐ being planned for Grand Prairie’s Extraterri‐ provements made by the developer have torial Jurisdiction (ETJ). These projects are been fully reimbursed from district reve‐ being planned in anticipation of the pro‐ nues. posed Loop 9 thoroughfare connecting to U.S. Highway – 287 in Ellis County, and the In consideration of the city’s acceptance to contemplated extension of State Highway ‐ undertake the extension of wholesale water 360 southward to U.S. Highway ‐ 67 in Mid‐ and wastewater services to these districts, lothian. The developers of these projects the developer must agree to implement zon‐ have asked the city to supply treated water ing type restrictions affecting land develop‐ and wastewater services and have created, ment. These restrictions are similar to those under state statutory authority, Fresh Water Utility Districts. At their sole

176

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

utilized by the city in regulation residential 2010, no lots have been developed; how‐ design. Building articulation standards are ever, Prairie Ridge Boulevard has been con‐ also proposed for commercial and retail de‐ structed approximately 1‐mile into the site velopment. The developer would be re‐ extending from the most southern line of quired to receive approval of a Concept Plan U.S. Highway – 287, east of Lakeview Drive from the Planning and Zoning Commission (FM‐661). Additionally, two natural gas well and City Council, which will allocate the sites have been established on this property. amount and location of various types of land uses planned for these projects. Windsor Hills Mixed Use Residential

As of the year 2010, four major projects, Windsor Hills is a 1,362.33 acre mixed use situated within the area‐of‐influence for the development in Grand Prairie's ETJ located proposed Loop 9 thoroughfare, are being in Ellis County. The subject 1,362.33 acres is considered for future annexation: a part of a proposed overall 2,492 acre de‐ velopment, with a portion (approximately Prairie Ridge Residential 1,100 acres) being located within the corpo‐ rate limits of Midlothian. The Ellis County Prairie Ridge is a residential development Fresh Water Supply District No. 2 has been encompassing approximately 1,300 acres established to fund infrastructure and im‐ located inside the extraterritorial jurisdiction provements for this project. The proposed (ETJ) of Grand Prairie that stretches across Loop 9 would generally traverse this project the Ellis and Johnson county line south of along the Grand Prairie/Midlothian city limit U.S. Highway – 287. It is situated east of boundary. Commercial and retail develop‐ Lakeview Drive (FM‐661) and is comprised of ment within a town center concept is being two fresh water supply districts and one proposed along the Loop 9 frontage. Accord‐ road district: ing to the master plan developed by The Planning Partnership in 2007, it is estimated  Ellis County Fresh Water Supply District that approximately 225,000 square feet of No. 1, mixed retail, office and civic uses could be  Johnson County Fresh Water Supply Dis‐ accommodated within the town center com‐ trict No. 2, and ponent of the plan. Development density for  Johnson County Road District No. 1 the residential component will be influenced by the existence of significant flood plain ar‐ A final plat has been approved for Phase I of eas and steep topography. this project for approximately 584 residen‐ tial lots. The total project would contain ap‐ proximately 3,400 single family detached units that would be developed over a 15 to 20 year phasing period. As of

177

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The development is projected to contain ap‐ located in Dallas County inside the City of proximately 5,300 lots. Of the 5,300 pro‐ Grand Prairie, will be developed within a posed lots, approximately 2,650 (half of the Municipal Utility District (MUD) and will be lot total) will be located in Grand Prairie’s zoned as a Planned Development District extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). Approxi‐ subject to review and approval by the Plan‐ mately 24% of these lots would be platted ning and Zoning Commission and the City under the city’s Traditional Neighborhood Council. The remaining 1,320 acres, located Development (TND) regulations. About 21% in Ellis County within the Grand Prairie ETJ, would be platted for townhomes and retire‐ would be developed within a proposed fresh ment condominium development. Approxi‐ water supply district. Approximately 3,500 mately 51% would be platted under the residential lots are projected for the devel‐ standards prescribed in Grand Prairie’s Reso‐ opment, with about 30 acres proposed for lution 3924 for single‐family detached devel‐ retail and commercial land uses. No im‐ opment. This anticipated lot count will be provements, save and except for two natural verified once a concept plan and preliminary gas well sites, have been constructed for this plats are approved for the project. project as of the date of this correspon‐ dence. Neither the fresh water district nor This project would also be developed over a MUD has been established. 15 to 20 year period. No improvements, save and except for two natural gas well sites, Cottonwood Creek Estates have been constructed for this project as of 2010. This is a 147.76 acre subdivision containing 298 single family detached residential lots, Lakeview Hills Residential (District not yet one open space lot and three non‐residential established) lots. The site is located along the southwest‐ erly line of US Highway‐287 at the intersec‐ As of 2010, the developer of this proposed tion of Kimble Road, and is partially situated project is negotiating with Ellis County for within the ETJ of Grand Prairie inside Ellis the establishment of a fresh water supply County. The majority of the single‐family lot district to finance necessary infrastructure count lies within the ETJ. and services to serve the development. The project will extend across the Dallas and Ellis The three non‐residential lots front along US county lines, and will be partially located in‐ Highway – 287 and are located inside the side the City of Grand Prairie. city limits of Grand Prairie. They contain ap‐ proximately 35‐acres. These lots are zoned This project would encompass 1,319.46 Planned Development District No. 307 for acres as a part of a proposed overall 1,596‐ commercial uses with architectural controls. acre tract. An approximate 276.8‐acre por‐ They have not yet been master planned for a tion of the proposed project, particular use.

178

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

In 2005, a proposed alignment for Loop 9 Current Estimated Population in ETJ as of bisected this site, from north to south, ex‐ 2010: 620* tending from the apparent centerline of Kimble Road. A preliminary plat for this pro‐ Estimated projected population increase by ject was approved in 2005. No improve‐ year 2040 under current projected build out ments, save and except for one natural gas conditions: 2500 to 3600* well site, have been constructed for this pro‐ ject as of 2010. * These estimates and household size figures are based on North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) estimates adjusted from the 2000 Census Potential Impact of Fresh Water District count. Development Current Plans for ETJ Infrastructure As these ETJ projects develop, the City as the regulatory entity will enforce all applicable Generally, infrastructure is available or will provisions relating to subdivision plats in the be available in the near future to provide ETJ as prescribed in the Grand Prairie Unified utilities in the areas impacted by Loop 9 in Development Code (UDC). Both the City and Grand Prairie. The following facts are appli‐ Ellis County will review and approve all final cable: plats as property develops in phases. The City of Grand Prairie does not have the au‐ 1. Grand Prairie has, along with the Trinity thority to enforce zoning regulations or River Authority and Midlothian con‐ building codes within areas that have not structed a Wastewater Treatment Plant been annexed into the city. Development to serve this area. This plant is com‐ requirements for that portion of the Cotton‐ pleted and in operation, although not yet wood Creek project located inside the City of treating sewage from Grand Prairie, Grand Prairie will be governed by Planned pending development in the area.

Development District No. 307 for commer‐ 2. Construction on a new lift station to cial uses with architectural controls. transport wastewater to the new plant is

almost complete. The City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehen‐ sive Plan prescribes a mix of residential land 3. The associated force main and collection uses with varying densities, with ancillary lines are designed and the land acquisi‐ commercial and retail uses for the ETJ terri‐ tion is almost complete so that construc‐ tory. If all four of the above referenced pro‐ tion can begin. This pending construction jects are constructed to build out conditions, is already funded in the city’s Capital Im‐ the following demographic projections, provement Program. would be realized: 4. Wholesale treated water supply contracts

179

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

with Midlothian and Mansfield have new lift station. been negotiated and approved by the respective City governing bodies of each 10. Natural gas is not currently available. city.

5. A contract for treated water supply line to deliver water to this area from the Mansfield water plant with a shared cost between Mansfield and Grand Prairie has been approved by both cities. Grand Prairie’s share of funding has been ap‐ proved by the Texas Water Development Board in the form of a low interest Water Infrastructure Loan. We believe Mans‐ field is financing with bond proceeds or cash.

6. A 24 inch diameter water line, jointly funded by Grand Prairie and Prairie Ridge, has been constructed to supply treated water to the Prairie Ridge subdi‐ vision from Midlothian. It is now in place.

7. A proposal to construct a treated water supply line in participation with Midlo‐ thian from the Midlothian water treat‐ ment plant to supply the proposed Win‐ dsor Hills and Lakeview subdivisions has been drafted and is now under review by Midlothian.

8. Cottonwood Creek Estates will be served with treated water directly by Midlothian and wastewater service to be provided by Grand Prairie under an inter‐local agreement.

9. Hilco Electric has a CCN and power avail‐ able in the area. They are serving our

180

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Appendix D Historic Timeline

181

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Moments in Time for Grand Prairie, TX Caruth’s 240 acres of prairie land and 100 acres of timber along the Trinity River. After When the Republic of Texas won its inde‐ the war, he platted the land in 1874 as the pendence from Mexico in 1836, the Black Town of Dechman, giving lots to the Texas Prairie Region in which Grand Prairie is lo‐ and Pacific RR in 1876, in return for the cated extended from Waco northeast to the maintenance of a Depot to serve the town. Red River. Buffalo, bear, wild turkeys, tall native grass, mesquite, post oaks, cotton‐ A.J. Hamilton was appointed provisional gov‐ wood, pecan and walnut trees grew on the ernor of Texas in 1865 following end of war. plains. Texas was again under military rule from 1867‐1870 during Congressional Reconstruc‐ Ranchers were the first to settle in Grand tion Plan, followed by public elections in Prairie. David and Alexander Jordan came 1870. Dave and Alex Jordan freed their nine from Tennessee, bring the first black slaves slaves, dividing 50 acres between them. to the City. David Jordan built the Jordan‐ Bowles home (705 NE 28th Street) in 1845. 1867, School District #28 formed between Mountain Creek and Walnut Creek. The Val‐ President Polk “illegally” annexes Texas as 28th state ley Church was the first school and church,

In 1846, the Goodwin Cabin was built in the located 1/2 mile east of the Bowles Ranch Watson Community of northwest Grand home near the Trinity River.

Prairie near the site of Watson Cemetary Congress “readmits” Texas to the Union in 1870 where Mrs. Goodwin was buried in 1846, the first white woman to be buried west of the 1870, Samuel Mugg established first store Trinity River. Gov. H.R. Runnels (1850) within City limits, succeeded by Dr. William granted 240 acres (later to become the City Haskett in 1872. A U.S. Post Office was of Grand Prairie) to William and Walter added in 1874; W.M. Haskett, Postmaster. Caruth. Alexander Cockrell built the first bridge across the Trinity River in 1854. The Texas A & M opens—tuition is $10/semester Lloyd Homestead was built in 1859 (3401 Ragland Road) by cattle broker and farmer Railroad between Dallas and Fort Worth was Marion Loyd. completed in 1876. Forty two families lived in or near Grand Prairie. In 1882, barbed‐ Texas joins Confederacy in Civil War, 1861‐1865 wire fencing was introduced. Grand Prairie (the name was changed from Dechman by 1861, A.H. Dechman, looking for a home for the Railroad in 1875) was an unincorporated his young family before he enlisted as a pri‐ village. Its Justice Court met the second Sat‐ vate in Company E, 19th Regiment of the urday of each month. Dallas County used Texas Cavalry, traded a broken wagon, ox convict labor to improve the Dallas‐Fort team, and $200 Confederate money for the Worth Pike (US 80) in 1896,

182

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

taking excess rock from Chalk Hill to form a firm roadbed in the valley west of the hill.

Doctor J.E. Payne & John Stubbs installed first telephone service in Grand Prairie to share medical information between the of‐ fice in Grand Prairie and one in Webb (near Mansfield). The North Texas Traction Com‐ pany (interurban) began hourly service to Grand Prairie in 1902 with stops in Arlington and Handley. The fare to Dallas was 30 cents. Service was terminated in 1934.

Rural free mail delivery began in July 1902 from the Grand Prairie Post Office The Dallas ‐Fort Worth Pike (U.S. 80) was graveled in 1907. Dr. Copeland was the first citizen to own an automobile, a 1910 Hupmobile.

Grand Prairie incorporates in 1909, an area of three square blocks.

The fiery death of twin boys and destruction of their home led to organization of the Grand Prairie Bucket Brigade in 1904. A ma‐ jor fire in 1909 destroyed the Texas and Pa‐ cific Depot and three other businesses, dam‐ aging three more. In 1914, six buildings of the Chase Furniture Co. burned. The Grand Prairie Volunteer Fire Department was or‐ ganized in 1917. Equipment included a fire truck mounted on a Model T Ford chassis with solid tires, 1000 feet of single jacket 2 1/2” hose, one ax, and one crowbar. Jesse Small was the first Fire Chief.

It was 1915 when 25‐cycle electricity came to Grand Prairie.

World War I

183

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

1916, Dalworth Park platted, “The City That Was Started Right.”

An American La‐France Hose & Chemical Truck with two 30‐gallon soda and acid tanks mounted on a Model T Ford chassis, 1000 feet of new 2 1/2 “ single jacket hose, a 24‐ foot extension ladder, a 12‐foot roof ladder, several kerosene lanterns, axes and picks upgraded the fire department in 1919. J.C. Swadley, Sr. replaced Chief Small in 1920.

The average teacher’s salary was around $71.50/month. The 1920 Census population was 1,263.

Fire destroyed Lone Star Garage, with 22 cars and the fire truck in 1920; and the town’s largest store and warehouse in 1923. US 80 was constructed in 1920. By 1924, the fire department had two new up‐to‐date trucks!

Great Depression

About 500 workers from Grand Prairie were involved in working on Public Work Admini‐ stration projects. Dallas purchased 300 acres ($250/acre) east of Grand Prairie to build Hensley Field ($75,000 for land and improve‐ ments plus $16,000 from the Dallas Cham‐ ber of Commerce for hangars and improve‐ ments) as anr air base fo the U.S. Army Air Corps in 1928. The 366th Air Reserve Squad‐ ron moved their headquarters from Love Field to Hensley.

July 1929, the Curtis Flying Service Corpora‐ tion of New York purchased 275 acres one mile west of Grand Prairie for

184

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

a flying school for advanced flyers. By 1930 it was the Grand Prairie Municipal Airport, su‐ pervised by R.C. Kirk. It was purchased in 1940 by Lou Foote who trained 116 students that year.

1930 brought the Mountain Creek Lake Pro‐ ject. Dallas paid $40/acre to build the 2,710‐ acre lake to cool Dallas Power and Light Co. generators. It drains an area of 295 square miles. 1930 Census population was 1,529 inhabitants. In 1934 Dallas County con‐ structed, improved and realigned Jefferson Avenue from Oak Cliff to the Tarrant County line.

1940 Census population was 1,595 inhabi‐ tants. Hensley Field was designated as a Na‐ val Air Training Base, receiving $1 million for additional reconstruction.

World War II

Establishment of the $4 million, 1,024,000 million square foot North American Aviation aircraft factory east of Grand Prairie in 1940‐ 41 forced City officials to provide housing on a large scale. The Grand Prairie Housing Au‐ thority was formed and applied to the U.S. Housing Authority for a $3 million appropria‐ tion under the Defense Emergency Program to build more than 1000 new homes. Avion village, a 75‐acre, $750,000 project brought onsite prefabrication of 300 quality homes for low income workers. During the war, the factory employed up to 38,000 workers and constructed 18,500 planes including the AT‐ 6 trainer, B‐24 Liberator bomber and the C‐ 82 Mustang. The factory closed in August 14,

185

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

1945, laying off 15,000 employees. It was reopened in April 1948 by the Chance Vought Division with 1,500 employees.

Without warning, Dallas annexed the former aircraft plant, Hensley Field and Mountain Creek Lake in 1947. Grand Prairie continued to provide services costing more than $171,000 annually without receiving indus‐ trial tax revenues, beginning a contentious relationship between the two cities.

Grand Prairie adopted a new home‐rule city charter with a Council‐City Manager form of government in 1948 and appointed its first Planning and Zoning Commission in 1949. An interim Comprehensive Plan outline was adopted and a comprehensive Zoning Ordi‐ nance and map were implemented in 1950. The 1950 Census population documented 14,594 inhabitants with a median income of $3,358.

A major Street Plan was adopted in 1953 with the Trinity Parkway envisioned as a toll road. In 1954 the City of Grand Prairie pub‐ lished its first comprehensive plan. The City limits incorporated 5.35 square miles with an additional 94.5 square miles in process of annexation for future development. The $58 million Dallas‐Fort Worth Turnpike (IH‐30) was constructed in 1955‐57. When bonds were paid off in 1977 (17 years early) toll booths were removed.

1956—The Great Southwest Industrial Dis‐ trict was formed, an 8000‐acre master‐ planned business park shared by Grand Prai‐ rie and Arlington. The park

186

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

gave Grand Prairie a strong industrial base, offering almost 41 million square feet of warehouse space in 1998, the largest such park in north central Texas.

1957—Conceptual plans for an outer loop along Dallas County’s western edge were proposed and approved by Dallas County voters in 1969 (as Loop 9) running north‐ south (future alignment of SH 161). Chal‐ lenges by home owners in north Grand Prai‐ rie prevented construction for almost 50 years.

1958—1968 Grand Prairie’s first of four Ur‐ ban Renewal Grants resulted in $2 million of new housing, a 17‐acre park and recreation building, $200,000 addition to a school and 10 miles of paved streets, drainage, water and sewer for South Dalworth.

1960—Jack Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson campaigned on Grand Prairie’s Main Street as the population topped 30,386 people.

Civil Rights Act becomes law in 1964

1964‐65—SH 303 was constructed from Ar‐ lington to Mountain Creek Lake. It was later extended across the lake to the City of Dallas as a toll road.

By the 1970 census, Grand Prairie had grown to 50,904 and in 1973 SH 360 was con‐ structed from IH‐20 to SH 121.

1976—IH‐20 was completed through Grand Prairie connecting to I‐635. The 8‐lane road, 400‐foot right‐of‐way freeway had 4‐level “stacks” (intersections) every

187

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

few miles miles and led to new development and is experiencing high growth rates south on the south side of Dallas and Fort Worth. of IH‐20 in the vicinity of Joe Pool Lake.

1980’s—As the City grew to a population of References 71,462, Joe Pool Lake’s 7,470 acres were im‐ pounded in 1986 after extensive environ‐ Flags from State Preservation Board, Texas mental studies by the U.S. Army Corps of State Library and Archives commission, Im‐ Engineers. Designed for flood control, water pact Photography/R. Cross, Dallas Historical supply and conservation, recreation, and fish Society, United Daughters of the Confeder‐ and wildlife conservation the Lake has be‐ acy, Texas Division, Texas Confederate Mu‐ come a year‐round destination for water ac‐ seum Collection, Texas Military Forces Mu‐ tivities. seum, U.S. Army Center of Military History, Battleship Texas Foundation and the Bob Grand Prairie’s first high‐rise office tower Bullock Texas State History Museum. (Fort was built in 1982, housing the Republic Na‐ Worth Star‐Telegram, June 29, 2004) tional Bank of Grand Prairie (now the Bank America building) adjacent to the SH‐161 Vail, Martin; the History of Grand Prairie, right‐of‐way south of Jefferson Avenue). 1954

Into the 1990s, Grand Prairie’s 99,616 resi‐ Sternberg, Rosalie K.; Grand Prairie—From dents opened the 311‐acre Lone Star Race Plains to Planes, 11/30/1983 Track in Grand Prairie as a Class I horse race‐ track in 1995. Voters had authorized a 1/2 Grand Prairie, 1954 Comprehensive Plan cent sales tax in 1991 to construct the facil‐ ity which quickly became an economic suc‐ Grand Prairie, 1966 Comprehensive Plan

cess, contributing millions of dollars to capi‐ The Handbook of Texas Online tal improvements in the City of Grand Prai‐ rie, and hosting the international Breeders Cup in October 2004.

The 2000 Census showed Grand Prairie had grown to 127,427 persons. Texas Next Stage (then Nokia Theater and now Verizon Thea‐ ter) was constructed as a 6000‐seat multi‐ venue entertainment complex in 2001. It was soon rated among the nations top en‐ tertainment sites. As Grand Prairie enters the 21st Century, it anticipates a build‐out population of 265,514 people

188

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Appendix E Floodplain Management

189

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Floodplain Management May, 1949 ‐Discharge of 62,000 cfs (affected by major levee The Comprehensive Plan incorporates poli‐ breaks) cies of the City’s Drainage and Flood Plain May, 1957 ‐Discharge of 59,200 cfs at the Management Plans with the long‐term goals City of Grand Prairie gauge of the City. The Appendix provides an over‐ 1965 ‐Large floods on Johnson view of the Drainage and Floodplain Man‐ Creek and Cottonwood Creek agement Plans. Based on the Federal Emer‐ 1969 ‐Major flood on Mountain gency Management Agency (FEMA) Histori‐ Creek cal Claims, the City of Grand Prairie had 154 1976 ‐Major flood on Mountain structures with 324 losses for a total of Creek $6,649,566 in flood insurance claims paid March, 1977 ‐Flood on Johnson Creek from 1978 to 2010. The City of Grand Prairie above 70 homes had 304 Flood Insurance Policies in force in 1979 ‐Large floods on Johnson August 2010, with $72,255,100 in coverage. Creek and Cottonwood Creek May, 1989 ‐Three people drowned A. History of Flooding where creeks flooded road‐ ways Historical documentation of flooding in June, 1989 ‐Severe flooding over Carrier Grand Prairie is incomplete but indicates Parkway, Beltline Road and substantial flooding has taken place as Matthew Road shown below. The City has over 19,000 May, 1990 ‐Thirty‐six homes flooded acres, or 36.7% of its land area, as floodplain Dec., 1991 ‐Eighteen homes flooded within the City limits. This includes land May, 1995 ‐Dalworth Creek flooded five owned and managed by the Corps of Engi‐ homes neers and the majority of Joe Pool Lake. From 1990 to 2010, the City funded $41.2 Known Flooding in Grand Prairie million in capital drainage improvements and $2.5 million in maintenance of storm May, 1908 ‐Five feet above flood of May drains. These projects reduced the risk of 1957 on West Fork of Trinity flooding for more than 300 of the 650 flood‐ River prone structures located in Grand Prairie. 1922 ‐Major flood on Mountain Creek Many flood prone structures have been re‐ 1928 ‐Major flood on Mountain moved from the floodplain by projects such Creek as the Dorchester Levees, Johnson Creek April, 1942 ‐no comments Channelization and the Dry Branch Channel March, 1945 ‐no comments improvements.

190

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

The City’s storm water utility fee, estab‐ V. Minimize damage to public facilities and lished in October 1993, generates approxi‐ utilities such as water and gas mains, mately $1.9 million annually to be spent on electric, telephone and sewer lines, capital improvement projects for the reduc‐ streets and bridges located in flood‐ tion of residential and non‐residential flood‐ plains. ing, for erosion mitigation, and for miscella‐ neous drainage projects. Investigation has VI. Help maintain a stable tax base by pro‐ shown that some flooding occurs due to viding for the sound use and develop‐ poor site drainage, improper lot grading by ment of flood‐prone areas in such a man‐ home builders in new subdivisions, and ero‐ ner as to minimize future flood blight sion. areas.

B. Goals VII. Help potential buyers become aware of property that is subject to flooding. The impact of flooding within Grand Prairie has been reduced considerably due to exten‐ The City of Grand Prairie has adopted more sive improvements, drainage projects, re‐ restrictive measures beyond the NFIP mini‐ moval of structures from flood risk and the mum regulations. The City requires that the purchase of repetitive loss structures. To lowest floor of the structure be elevated to meet federal and state requirements the the higher of not less than one (1) foot City maintains an active storm water man‐ above the base flood elevation (taking into agement plan as a component of its Flood‐ account the effects of future full develop‐ plain Management Plan. Federal floodplain ment) or two feet above the FEMA base management goals are given below. flood elevation. Additional City objectives Federal (FEMA) Goals are shown below.

I. Protect human life and health.  Reduce the number of repetitive loss structures and flood damage to other II. Minimize expenditure of public money existing residential buildings through for costly flood control projects. Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) that employ a combination of buyouts and III. Minimize the need for rescue and relief structural improvements. efforts associated with flooding that are  Reduce the impact of increased flood generally undertaken by the City at the flows from development in existing expense of the general public. downstream buildings and streambed erosion. IV. Minimize prolonged business interrup‐  Acquire floodplain when economically tions. feasible and encourage open space in developments.

191

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

 Creek studies/master plans.  The City‐Wide Drainage Master Plan  Create GIS Planning Tool for City and ETJ Road Map establishes the processes for that includes: future flood control planning for the City of Grand Prairie. The city’s primary ‐ Drainage Problems goal and objective of the City‐Wide ‐ Erosion Problems Drainage Master Plan is to cost‐ ‐ Open Space effectively manage flood or storm wa‐ ‐ Special Flood Hazard Area ters within budgeting constraints so ‐ Undeveloped Land that conditions don’t get worse as new ‐ Water Quality Monitoring Policy and infill areas are developed—while evaluating and making conditions better  Keep City owned floodplain in natural in the areas of the city that are already state to ensure water quality and con‐ developed. serve existing flora and fauna.  Encourage the reduction of runoff C. Impacts of Development through better design.  Add certain trees to floodplain where Balancing issues of public health and safety, practical. environmental sustainability, economic im‐  Notify citizens that flood insurance is pact, legal liability, regulatory responsibility available. and improved quality of life, with new devel‐  Increase the flood policy base (outreach opment requires careful analysis and mitiga‐ program to insurance companies). tion of development impacts. This includes  Review the Floodplain Management Or‐ measures to reduce the concentration and dinance – Improve, revise, etc. types of pollutants carried by surface water  Ensure that residents are given ade‐ runoff, establishment of detention ponds to quate warning of floods. capture storm water runoff, use of previous  Ensure real estate disclosure of flooding materials where possible, and adoption of to all potential property owners. best operating practices in engineering de‐  Make public information available on sign and construction management. flooding problems and hazards through‐ out the city. D. Storm Water Management  Extensive study of the city’s existing and “built‐out” floodplain comprised a sig‐ In 1990, the Environmental Protection nificant portion of the Comprehensive Agency (EPA) published the first set of re‐ Plan Update. Updated mapping, depict‐ quirements relating to storm water and its ing the built‐out flood plain, will now be discharge (“Phase I”) which pertained to cit‐ used for regulating future development. ies larger than 100,000 in population and for certain industrial activities such as airports, landfills and construction operations.

192

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

In 1992, EPA designated that under ‘Phase  Conveyance Components (pipe systems, II” of the storm water regulations, storm wa‐ culverts, inlets) ter discharges from construction sites dis‐  Grass Channels turbing more than one acres would also be  Dry Detention regulated to protect water quality.  Wet Ponds  Proprietary Structural Controls Storm water management involves both the  Wetlands prevention and mitigation of storm water runoff quality and quality using ya variet of 1. On‐Site vs. Regional Storm Water Controls methods and mechanisms. The following components are included: Using individual, on‐site structural storm wa‐ ter controls for each development is the  Information/System Inventory typical approach in most communities for  Development Requirements controlling storm water quantity and quality.  Storm Water System Improvements The developer finances the design and con‐  Operations and Maintenance struction of these controls and, initially, is  Monitoring responsible for all operation and mainte‐  Pollution Prevention nance. However, the local government is  Public Education/ Involvement likely to become responsible for mainte‐  Funding nance activities is the owner fails to comply.  Watershed Planning  Floodplain Management A potential alternative approach is to install a few strategically located regional storm The City of Grand Prairie’s Drainage and water controls in the sub watershed rather Floodplain Management programs exceed than require on‐site controls. Regional storm federal and state requirements and are con‐ water controls are facilities designed to tinually being reviewed and updated to pro‐ manage storm water runoff from multiple vide safety and quality of life for city resi‐ projects and/or properties through a local dents. A number of storm water controls, or jurisdiction‐sponsored program, where the Best Management Practices, can be used in individual properties may assist in the fi‐ site design. Some of these are listed below. nancing of the facility, and the requirement for on‐site controls is either eliminated or  Bioretention Areas reduced.  Chemical Treatment  Filtration On the following epage ar summarized some  Porous Surfaces of the “pros” and “cons” of regional storm  Re‐Use water controls.

193

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Advantages of Regional Storm Water Federal water quality provisions do not allow Controls the degradation of water bodies from un‐ treated storm water discharges. The EPA,  Reduced Construction Costs TCEQ and the US Army Corps of Engineers  Reduced Operation and Maintenance have expressed opposition to in‐stream re‐ Costs gional hard armor (concrete) in channels.  Higher Assurance of Maintenance Concrete lined channels should be avoided if  Maximum Utilization of Developable possible and will likely be permitted on a Land case‐by‐case basis only. It is important to  Retrofit note that siting and designing regional facili‐ ties should ideally be done within a context Disadvantages of Regional Storm Water of a storm water master planning or water‐ Controls shed planning to be effective.

 Location and Siting Regional Storm Water Controls  Capital Costs  Maintenance As per the City‐Wide Drainage Master Plan  Need for Parking Road Map, regional detention will be ex‐ plored on a watershed by watershed basis. For in‐stream regional facilities: Potential regional detention sites will be identified during each of the watershed  Water Quality and Channel Protection – drainage master plans. The regional deten‐ Without on‐site water quality and chan‐ tion projects will be assigned a ranking calcu‐ nel protection, regional controls do not lation for implementation prioritization as protect smaller streams upstream from set forth by the Road Map. the facility from degradation and stream bank erosion. Developing Short‐Term Priorities and a Long‐  Ponding impacts – Upstream inundation Term Implementation Plan is critical to en‐ from a regional facility impoundment can sure that new floodplain improvements and eliminate floodplains, wetlands and storm water facilities are constructed over other habitat. time to provide the most benefit to the city and community. For the City‐Wide Drainage When a regional storm water control is im‐ Master Plan, multiple improvement projects plemented, it must be designed to handle will be recommended for each individual wa‐ peak flows and volumes without causing ad‐ tershed master plan. An overall, City‐Wide verse impact or property damage. Full build implementation plan has to be developed to out conditions in the regional yfacilit drain‐ prioritize these projects into short‐term and age area should be used in the analysis. long‐term priorities.

194

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Two regional detention projects that were 2. Requirement of an earthwork permit for identified previously have been constructed. general construction; Site 1 (RC1), Kirby Creek at the Grand Prairie 3. Prohibition on locating mobile homes in Airport was completed in 2010. Site 2 (RC2), the flood plain. Kirby Creek West of Robinson Road was completed in 2008. For a detailed review of the City’s drainage and floodplain management programs see Site 1 (RC1) the following documents:

 Located on Kirby Creek at the Grand Prai‐  City of Grand Prairie Watershed Techni‐ rie Municipal Airport cal Report, February 2005  Dry detention pond with approximately  Unified Development Code, Article 14 30 acre‐feet of storage capacity. “Drainage”  Provides water quality protection for  Unified Development Code, Article 15 Grand Prairie Municipal Airport and a “Floodplain Management” large paved area to the west of the air‐ port F. Watershed Planning

Site 2 (RC2) Watershed and storm water master plans can be used to identify drainage and stream  Located on Kirby Creek ap‐ proximately 1,000 feet west of Robinson Road  Wet pond with approximately 50 acre‐feet of storage capac‐ ity

E. Flood Plain Management Ordi‐ nance

A primary component of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan Update is the City’s new Flood Plain Manage‐ ment Ordinance which includes three major initiatives:

1. Addition of run‐off coefficients tied to zoning to facilitate the calculation of drainage impact fee assessments; Arbor Creek check dam reduces channel velocities.

195

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

segments in need of improvement or resto‐ 3. City of Grand Prairie Floodplain Mitiga‐ ration as well as structure and potential lo‐ tion Plan cations for regional storm water control fa‐ 4. City of Grand Prairie Capital Improve‐ cilities. Watershed planning can provide the ment Program (CIP) 2002‐2010 necessary information for conserving natural 5. City of Grand Prairie Annual Repetitive areas, riparian buffers and greenways, water Loss Plan supply, wetland protection, stream bank and 6. NCTCOG iSWM Manuals stream corridor restoration, habitat protec‐ 7. Texas Administrative Code 11.086 tion, protection of historical and cultural re‐ 8. City of Grand Prairie Drainage Design sources, enhancement of recreational op‐ Manual portunities, and aesthetic and quality of life 9. City of Grand Prairie Unified Develop‐ issues. ment Code Articles 14, Drainage, and Article 15, Floodplain Management G. Site Planning 10. HEC 22 Drainage Design Manual 11. The information in this appendix also A basic five step process can be imple‐ comes from Watershed Studies for: mented including the review of (1) Concept Plans, (2) Preliminary Plats, and (3) Final a. Cottonwood Creek Plats. When the site plan in approved, it is b. Johnson Creek then used as a guideline for (4) Construction c. Bear Creek Inspections and the ongoing (5) Operation d. Dalworth Creek and Maintenance. e. Fish Creek f. Kirby Creek For additional information on Site Planning g. Alsphaugh Branch considerations for drainage ways, see Sec‐ h. Joe Pool Lake Masterplan tion 9, “Environmental Quality” of this plan. i. Master Hydrology Study (F&N)

H. Resources and Documentation j. Hight Hollings Branch k. Henry Branch The storm water management concepts and l. Garden Branch recommendations in this report were com‐ m. Beacon Branch piled from various documents. The reader is n. City‐Wide Drainage Master Plan Road referred to the documents below for a more Map (2010 Adoption) detailed description. 2010 Comprehensive Plan Update 1. Code of Federal Registry CFR 44, Na‐ tional Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) The Kirby Creek Regional Storm Water Con‐ 2. Trinity River Corridor Development Cer‐ trols (RC1), located at Grand Prairie Airport, tificate Manual 3rd Edition was constructed since completion of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan. The other re‐

196

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

gional storm water control sites, that were oped—while evaluating and making condi‐ proposed as part of the 2005 plan, are still tions better (prioritized improvements) in under review. the areas of the city that are already devel‐ oped. Since the 2005 Watershed Technical Report, a new City‐Wide Drainage Master Plan has City‐Wide Drainage Master Plan (CWDMP) been approved. The new plan will incorpo‐ Road Map—Goals rate certain elements of the 2005 report into the Drainage Master The City‐Wide Drainage Master Plan, as out‐ Plans for each of the watersheds. However, lined in this Road Map, will accomplish the the Road Map for the 2010 plan lays out a following goals:

more detailed guide for how consultants are 1. Provide the building blocks to reduce to develop the Drainage Master Plans for the existing potential for floodplain and each of the 12 major watersheds (see Wa‐ storm water damage to public health, tersheds, Map #6). safety, life, property, and the environ‐

ment. This Road Map provides consistency be‐ 2. Protect and enhance the quality, quan‐ tween the studies and allows the city to rank tity, and availability of surface water projects across the city based on similar resources. ranking criteria.

City‐Wide Drainage Master Plan

The City‐Wide Drainage Master Plan (CWDMP) was approved by City Council on August 3, 2010 by Resolution 10‐4456. The CWDMP is described in more detail on the following pages.

The CWDMP establishes the proc‐ esses for future flood control plan‐ ning for the City of Grand Prairie. The city’s primary goal and objec‐ tive of the CWDMP is to cost‐ effectively manage flood or storm waters within budget constraints so that conditions don’t get worse as new and infill areas are devel‐ Channel check dam reduces velocities and protects the streambank.

197

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

3. Promote equitable, accept‐ able, and legal measures for floodplain and storm water management. 4. Address the remaining flood‐ ing issues in Grand Prairie, in‐ cluding both inadequate storm drainage systems and flood‐ plains. 5. Provide a comprehensive, City‐ Wide drainage inventory and assessment with recommen‐ dations for flooding and drain‐ age issues. 6. Provide a systematic and fi‐ nancially sound strategy for reducing or eliminating flood‐ ing in Grand Prairie. Baffle block dissipates energy on the outflow of a box culvert. 7. Provide short term goals for constructing smaller projects and a long 2. Review of citizen drainage complaints to range plan for larger, more complex pro‐ more accurately define trouble areas. jects. 3. Review of all existing available data for 8. Identify and prioritize the needed im‐ each watershed, including technical stud‐ provements for small, medium, and large ies, reports, and design projects. projects for both City‐Wide and individ‐ 4. Understanding of unique attributes of ual watersheds. each watershed. 5. Preparation of sound hydrologic and hy‐ To accomplish these goals, the individual draulic and storm drain models and mak‐ Drainage Master Plan for each watershed ing these models consistent for each wa‐ will need to provide the following:Careful tershed. examination of drainage and flooding issues in each watershed, including major streams, A goal of these studies is also to provide tributaries, and storm drainage systems. new, updated models that can be cali‐ brated against Grand Prairie’s new flood 1. Careful examination of drainage and warning system stream gages. flooding issues in each watershed, in‐ 6. Provide new and updated floodplain cluding major streams, tributaries, and mapping based on the best data avail‐ storm drainage systems. able, including modeling, field surveys, and topography.

198

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

7. Prepare detailed, innovative alterna‐ south of IH‐20. Grand Prairie, including its tives for streams, open channels, and two ETJ’s, is located in four counties: Tar‐ storm drainage infrastructure. Consid‐ rant, Dallas, Ellis and Johnson. For the pur‐ erations will be made for “less‐than 100 poses of the City‐Wide Drainage Master Plan ‐year design” in difficult cases. effort, the City of Grand Prairie has been di‐ 8. Document all dams, levees, detention vided into the following major watersheds: located in each watershed and deter‐ mine how these are affecting flooding Table 1—Grand Prairie Individual Water‐ issues. sheds and Planning Study Priority 9. Provide updated GIS information based Grand Prairie Watershed on watershed study results to ensure Individual Watersheds Priority that City staff has the most current, up‐ Joe Pool Lake 1 dated information available for their Fish Creek 2 use. 10. Provide a schedule for maintenance on Cottonwood Creek 3 specific streams and drainage features Cedar Creek 4 for each watershed. Johnson/Arbor/Barrett 5 11. Evaluate and Prioritize stream, open channel, and storm drainage infrastruc‐ West Fork Trinity River 6 ture alternatives so projects can be built Mountain Creek 7 to address both major and minor flood‐ Dalworth Creek 8 ing issues over time and in the best pos‐ sible order. Weigh flood control benefits Gopher/Turner 9 against project costs. Bear Creek 10 12. Provide detailed, easy to understand Dry Branch 11 documentation for City staff to make the best decisions on which projects Alspaugh Branch 12 need to be considered at the appropri‐ ate timeframe in the future. As shown in Table 1, the city has determined the priority of planning studies for each of For related information on drainage studies, the individual watershed areas. Current and floodplain management and storm water future planning studies follow this general management, see Section 9, Environmental order. Figure 1 (on the following page) is a Quality of this plan. map of the watersheds across Grand Prairie.

City of Grand Prairie‐Individual Watershed As each watershed drainage master plan is completed and adopted for use, its recom‐ The City of Grand Prairie extends in a north mendations shall be used for current and to south direction from north of IH‐30 to future development.

199

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Figure 1. Watersheds across Grand Prairie.

200

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Appendix F Glossary

201

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

A Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)—A bus service that can be in a fixed guide‐way similar to a rail Abatement—Full or partial exemption from line but has the flexibility to utilize the exist‐ ad valorem taxes of certain real property ing roadway when needed. Decreased travel and/or tangible personal property in a rein‐ times are achievable by signal prioritization, vestment zone. priority queuing, and a fixed guide‐way.

Adaptive Reuse—Rehabilitation of old prop‐ C erty for new purposes. Capital Improvement Plan—The tool through Affordable Housing—For purposes of hous‐ which locally funded public facilities, such as ing assistance with federal funds, such as sewers, local roads, storm drains, schools, Community Development Block Grants. Af‐ libraries, parks, etc., can be scheduled and fordability is based upon housing costs as a built. percentage of the median income in a met‐ ropolitan statistical area. The housing mar‐ Central Business District—The area between ket includes both rental (rent plus utilities) and on either side of Main Street (US 180) and owner‐occupied (PITI or principal, inter‐ and Jefferson Street from the city’s western est, taxes, and insurance) housing. to eastern boundaries.

Arterial—Major roadways, usually 4 to 6 Commuter (Regional) Rail—A form of public lanes, which serve a large geographical area. rail transportation designed for further travel distances and few stops along the Avigation Easement—Provides right of flight route, often operates in existing railroad cor‐ at any altitude above the approach surface, ridors. Typical station spacing is three to five and a right to create noise, vibrations, dust miles. Construction costs are estimated at fumes, etc. without incurring liability. $12 million to $15 million per mile.

B Comprehensive Plan—The Comprehensive Plan is a general guide for making decisions Brownfields—Vacant, under‐utilized, obso‐ about the city’s growth and development. It lete, or structurally deteriorated industrial or presents a broad vision for Grand Prairie’s commercial properties where improvements future and describes major policies, pro‐ are hindered by real or perceived contami‐ grams and projects to realize that vision. The nation. plan serves as a continuously updated refer‐ ence guide and decision‐making tool for Buffer Zone—Separation between land uses planners and other city policy‐makers. The by distance, landscaping berms, fences, ma‐ plan contains information concerning the sonry walls, or other transitional uses. current status of land use, transportation,

202

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

housing, urban design, and economic devel‐ Ethnicity—Categories of people based upon opment, while offering future visions for common ancestral culture, customs or lan‐ these components based on population and guage. economic trends and forecasts. Exception—Departure from any provision of Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area the subdivision ordinance requirements for a (CMSA) ‐ A large metropolitan area consist‐ specific parcel, without changing the subdivi‐ ing of two or more Primary Metropolitan sion ordinance. Statistical Areas (PMSAs). The Dallas‐Fort Worth‐Arlington CMSA includes both the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) ‐ Unincor‐ Fort Worth‐Arlington and the Dallas PMSAs. porated area extending generally five miles from the city limit in which the city has the Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) ‐ Refers to a authority to regulate subdivision and plat‐ collaborative, interdisciplinary approach that ting of property. involves all stakeholders in providing a trans‐ portation facility that fits its setting. It is an F approach that leads to preserving and en‐ hancing scenic, aesthetic, historic, commu‐ Fair Market Rent—An amount determined nity, and environmental resources, while im‐ by HUD to be the cost of modest, non‐luxury proving or maintaining safety, mobility and rental units in a specific market area. infrastructure conditions. Fair Market Value—Highest price a property D would bring in a free and open market given a typically motivated, prudent, and well‐ Density—The number of dwelling units per informed seller and buyer, and assuming acre. typical financing.

Domestic migration—People moving from Family Income—Combined gross money in‐ other parts of the country to take up perma‐ come of all members of a family living in the nent residence in the local area. same household. Concept developed by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. E Floodplain—Area adjacent to a river or Endangered Building—Threatened by dete‐ stream subject to inundation by floodwaters. rioration, damage, or irretrievable, irreplace‐ Full‐Time Employment—Employment status able loss due to neglect, disuse, disrepair, of an individual who works 35 or more hours instability, lack of financial resources, and/or per week at an income producing job. impending demolition.

203

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

G unrelated individuals, or a combination of families and unrelated individuals who oc‐ Geographic Information System (GIS) ‐ Com‐ cupy a single housing unit. puter system that allows a user to analyze things that exist and events that happen on Housing Unit—A house, apartment, mobile earth and receive the results in the form of a home, or other unit, occupied or vacant, but map. Since virtually all city data are tied to a intended for occupancy as separate living specific location and can be mapped, a GIS quarters. can have many uses such as land records management, land use planning, infrastruc‐ I ture management, environmental manage‐ ment, or computer‐aided dispatch of fire Impact Fees—Costs charged to a developer and police. to cover expenses relating to the provision of city services for a new development. Goal—A broad and general statement con‐ cisely phrased. Goals are broad statements Immigration—People moving from foreign of ideal future conditions that are desired by countries to take up permanent residence in the community and/or organizations within the local area. it. Goals can be pursued on a continuing ba‐ sis, and may never be satisfied completely. Infrastructure—Facilities necessary to pro‐ Goals are statements of intention or general vide city services, usually referring to physi‐ direction. cal assets such as roads, pipes, city buildings, etc. but sometimes including personnel, H management structure, etc.

Higher Speed or High Speed Rail—[See Inter‐ Intercity Rail—This category is designated city Rail] for passenger rail service into and out of the region or service into the Dallas/Fort Worth Household—A single occupied housing unit International Airport on a trail similar to Am‐ and all of its occupants. A household may be trak. comprised of one or more families, one or more unrelated individuals, or a combina‐  Higher Speed Rail: This rail type would tion of families and unrelated individuals. have speeds between 80 mph and 150 mph. to allow for increased speeds, Household Income—Combined gross money roadway and rail improvements would income of all persons who occupy a single be needed, such as crossing gates and housing unit. The household income can be grade separations. comprised of the gross money income earned by one or more families, one or more  High Speed Rail: This rail type has speeds above 150 mph.

204

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

J,K,L Light Rail Transit (LRT): Light rail is typically electric and operates in its own exclusive Labor Force—Includes all persons 16 years right‐of‐way. Typical station spacing is one‐ old and older who are either employed or half to two miles. The estimated cost of con‐ unemployed but actively looking for work struction is between $60 million and $70 and available to accept employment, plus million per mile. the members of the Armed Forces. Light Rail‐New Technology (LRT‐NT): Light Land Use—Designations of how land is being rail‐new technology could be used in corri‐ used (e.g., single family, commercial, indus‐ dors that connect to LRT corridors in addi‐ trial, etc.). tion to regional rail corridors. LRT‐NT vehi‐ cles are similar in size and weight of the LRT Ldn—Day‐night sound level over a 24 hour vehicles except the vehicle may be powered period. Ldn is used as a means of measuring by a diesel engine instead of electricity. The long‐term noise exposure in a community. vehicle would also have crash worthiness Sound is measured in decibels, a means of standards similar to that of regional rail vehi‐ expressing amplitude of sound. The higher cles. This vehicle may be used in most of the the number of decibels, the louder the corridors to further move towards a seam‐ sound level. Most residential neighborhoods less system. The estimated construction have an Ldn of 50 to 60 decibels. costs would be similar to regional rail at $12 to $15 million per mile. Level of Service—Means of rating the move‐ ment of vehicles on an arterial street. Ser‐ M vice levels range from “A” ‐free flowing, to “F” ‐bumper‐to‐bumper congestion. Market Demand—The desire and ability to

purchase or lease goods and services. Low‐Income—Households whose incomes are over 50 percent but do not exceed 80 Master Plans—Plans developed by individual percent of the median income for the area, departments within the City of Grand Prairie as determined by HUD with adjustments for and by individual agencies that provide smaller and larger families. However, HUD greater detail than the Comprehensive Plan may establish income ceilings higher or concerning departmental plans for future lower than 80 percent of the median for the development and service needs. Master area on the basis of HUD’s findings that such Plans generally detail anticipated services variations are necessary because of prevail‐ and general locations for public facilities ing levels of construction costs or fair market such as schools, parks, libraries, and fire and rents, or unusually high or low family in‐ police stations. comes.

205

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Mission—A statement of core values and and also discharges from solid waste dis‐ ultimate purpose. A mission reflects history posal sites and septic tanks. and traditions, present culture and re‐ sources, and future expectations and inten‐ North Central Texas Council of Governments tions. (NCTGOG) ‐ The regional planning agency for the Dallas‐Fort Worth‐Arlington CMSA. The Mixed Use Development—Combination of agency assists local governments in the 16‐ different but compatible land uses within a county region in coordinating sound regional single building, site or district. development, encouraging cooperation for mutual benefit, and planning for common Moderate/ Medium Income—Households need. whose incomes are over 80 percent of the area median income but do not exceed 120 O percent of the area median income. The area median income is determined by HUD Objective—A statement of obtainable, quan‐ with adjustments for smaller and larger tifiable, time constrained achievement that families. helps accomplish goals.

Multi‐generational—An approach to plan‐ P ning that takes into account the varying needs of different types of households and Park‐and‐Ride facilities—facilities that serve the ages and abilities of the residents as collection areas for people transferring to therein, such as families with children, young higher occupancy vehicles. They are often singles, empty nesters, elderly and disabled located and designed to serve bus or rail person households. transit, but may be used by carpoolers and vanpoolers as well. These facilities help re‐ Multi‐modal—A type of transportation sys‐ duce congestion and air emissions. tem that incorporates all forms of move‐ ment: vehicular, public transportation, bicy‐ Part Time Employment—Employment status cle, aviation, and pedestrian. A solid multi‐ of an individual who works less than 35 modal system minimizes congestion, im‐ hours per week at an income‐producing job. proves air quality, and enables all citizens means of safe and efficient transportation. Planned Improvement District (PID) ‐ Based on a petition from property owners, fees are N assessed on property in the district, in addi‐ tion to property taxes, to pay for services Nonpoint Source Pollution—Pollution that and improvements over and above regular does not originate from a single point. It is city services. transported primarily by storm water runoff,

206

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Planned Development (PD) District—A zon‐ S ing district that allows for a mix of land use and development standards as outlined in a Sidewalk—A layer of the streetscape that is City Council adopted plan. dedicated exclusively to pedestrian activity.

Policy—A predetermined directive of the Special Exception—A use permitted in a spe‐ City Council designed to guide thinking, deci‐ cific zoning district if the Board of Adjust‐ sion making, and actions of decision makers ment determines that the use would be and their subordinates in implementing compatible with development of adjacent goals or stated missions. Once a policy is properties and would comply with other cri‐ adopted, it helps support or guide the crea‐ teria established by the zoning ordinance. tion/change of specific rules or strategies (such as development regulations, budgets, Specific Use Permit—Discretionary and con‐ or supplemental plans). For purposes of the ditional review of an activity, function or op‐ Comprehensive Plan, policies should be di‐ eration on a site or in a building or facility. rectly linked to stated goals. Policies are in‐ The review generally precedes the actual tended to guide implementation. operational use.

Strategy—An administrative approach to Q,R achieve goals and/or policies.

Race—Categories of people based upon Streetscape—All the elements that make up traits that may be inherited or passed the physical environment of a street and de‐ through a gene pool. fine its character. This includes a combina‐ Regional Rail—[See Commuter Rail] tion of planters, sidewalks, street trees, street signs, street furniture & street lights. Rezone—An amendment to the map and/or text of a zoning ordinance to affect a change Subdivision—Division of a tract of land into in the nature, density, or intensity of uses defined lots, either improved or unim‐ allowed in a zoning district and/or on a des‐ proved, which can be separately conveyed ignated parcel or land area. by sale or lease, and which can be altered or developed. Right‐of‐way—Width of land available to incorporate all elements of a roadway, in‐ Sustainable Development— refers to devel‐ cluding traffic lanes, turn lanes, frontage opment that meets the needs of the present roads, shoulders, medians, bicycle lanes, without compromising the ability of future sidewalks, and landscaping. generations to meet their own needs.

207

City of Grand Prairie 2010 Comprehensive Plan

T cycle commuters. The trails will provide ac‐ cess to employment centers, schools, shop‐ Tax Increment Finance District (TIF) ‐ An ping, and parks. Because the trails will have identified area designated as a development few signalized or stop sign intersections, and zone in which tax revenues exceeding the will go over or under major roadways, the base year amount are used for capital im‐ Veloweb is a safe, efficient way to commute. provements within the zone based on an ap‐ proved project and financial plan for urban Vision—A mental image of a possible and development. desirable future state. It succinctly conveys and reinforces a shared long‐term view of TxDOT—Texas Department of Transporta‐ where a community wants to be, and serves tion, the state agency for highway, bridge, as the basis for developing goals, objectives, public transportation, and other state spon‐ policies and strategies. sored construction. TxDOT deals with both rural and urban transportation projects W throughout the state. The projects are man‐ aged through a district structure with a Watershed—Areas that catch precipitation statewide transportation commission. and drain to specific water bodies or aqui‐ fers. U Wetlands—Areas that are inundated or satu‐ Undevelopable Land—Land that has signifi‐ rated by surface or groundwater at a fre‐ cant regulatory or cost constraints based on quency and duration sufficient to support, site conditions. For example, portions of the and under normal circumstances do support, 100‐year floodplain are undevelopable. a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. V X Variance– Departure from any provision of the zoning requirements for a specific par‐ Xeriscaping—Landscaping that conserves cel, excepted use, without changing the zon‐ water and protects the environment through ing ordinance or the underlying zoning of the the use of native vegetation. parcel. The Board of Adjustments grants variances only upon demonstration of hard‐ Y,Z ship based on the peculiarity of the property in relation to other properties in the same Zoning—Division of land into districts based zoning district. on the allowable use of the land. These dis‐ tricts have uniform zoning regulations in‐ Veloweb—Interconnected network of off‐ cluding those on land use, height, setbacks, street trails designed for bi‐ lot size, density, and coverage.

208

Inventory Summary

2 c / ) a 1 ) e )

F ) d e t m d e d g f p t m a n m e a n h o t i a e r a e G t t r t g ( h r c , G s i e r r d s u e ( l g i s k t i e t ) ( e y o l n c a s d n A d t b p l M S n e s r a e ) d s e l r e t s o e / l ) u t e p u i F s e l r e n B ( C A r e d t s r h

e ) l e i o o F i d s o l r u r y , d e t i l e s s G g v s e g c l s o F e t t e o e r C t t e a o i i s l a n l t k l e a t e l r r p n l a u l n s ( g r ) e a a C F i M l b c b a w l n s n t d r p n u u t s y o g e t n a e a s i b n l a a e m r r R i a e n e c s i e e s i n u t t o o S r o l W z e a r s b t C a ( t o P f s e / b g u u o l ( f s s t r P o t C t r p d a t r a U C C r , e t P i l r I a t d y / o n l l n C l t e o o n e u d R l o t d u e s e l l d c p C s e o e G e e n o e n d B l l o i r M S c a t b n g c p p e c l u i L n o ( o d i P S a / f n i s l a o i r r L h o a s e a a s a m l n P G l h o m n t R i e a o F u i F e s s r F n l o i C u o h F / e s r u u e t o I d p b b n S T a a e o g o e F c e s t g o C R a t e r r ( t t g i o i r o g s P c a g b h s V n o P P o r m i o y l R e e n e l b t e e h s e G c c e i H r n - - n o i s m e h n e , e l i i i t o r a t e s h s a i i i l g c f k i s b t c c e r i l l l e e e k k b r t c l t n d e t d i m e o l s e t a b e k c n a s i i t t n n y i c v h l l l t e g r v t a s a s s n n n u s r l d c s c e l r v a n n p i i i k a a a a r u i c c a g B e a s u u r v u c e u o a a a e o o l r r o o a a i i r l a e e u o i h k p w a y q i r a - e r r r Parks P A T D A B B B B B C C C C D E F F G H H L M M O O P P P P P P R R R R S S S S S S T T T T T S W W Alliance Skate Park 2.00 S D 2 5 1 2 105 11 1 1 1 10 2 Bear Creek South 2.60 N D 1 1 1 3 1 20 4 1 1 1 6 0.125 1 Bowles Park 23.49 C D 1 1 2 1 245 1 13 1 1 1 1 13 0.3 1 Bradshaw Park 4.00 N D 1 2 1 18 1 6 1 1 4 1 Central Bark Dog Park 3.50 S D 1 40 3 3 Central Park (172 Acres 4 developed) 172.00 R D 1 1 3 1 22 1 1 1 2 1 Charley Taylor Park 17.50 C D 1 3 4 1* 1 155 6 1 1 1 1 30 3 Colgate Park 11.30 S U Copeland Home 0.20 S D 1 C.P.Waggoner Park 62.50 CP D 1 4 6 1 1 285 1 14 1 1 1 1 18 1.6 3 Dalworth Recreation Center 0.80 S D 1 5 1 54 1 1 6 Fish Creek Forest Preserve 37.40 C D 2 5 1 12 1 7 1 4 0.5 Fish Creek Linear Park 110.32 L D 1 1 1 21 4 2 72 1 9 4 1 29 2.5 1 1 Freedom Park 11.00 N D 3 1 2 20 1 8 0.246 1 Friendship Park 20.72 N D 1 2 2 1 23 1 11 1 1 1 2 11 0.5 1 G.P. High School *(joint use) 1.50 C 5 The Good Link Linear Park 47.30 L D 2 21 1 4 1 1 5 2 4.85 1 1 Hendrix Park 1.30 M D 11 2 Hill Street Park 17.70 C D 1 1 1 37 1 4 1 1 3 1 Holland Street Park Leased to Sunset 0.70 M U Jaycees Park 0.65 S D 1 8 Johnson Street Park 0.80 M D 1 Kirby Creek Natatorium 1.43 S D 1 60 1 1 1 Kirby Creek Park Natural Science Center 39.10 S D 1 2 1 48 9 1 1 3 0.057 Lamar Park 0.60 M D 1 1 2 1 2 Live Oak Park 3.50 N D 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 L.B.J. Park 4.90 N D 2 14 11 1 1 Lone Star / Trinity Trail 12.60 T D 1 4 1 1 22 1 3 4 3.2 2 Market Square 0.50 S D 3 10 1 2 McFalls Park 65.50 CP D 1 6 6 1 1 1 1 2 435 1 9 1 2 1 1 1 42 2 McFalls East Park 27.00 C D 1 4 1 166 1 2 1 1 22 1 Mike Lewis Park 98.40 CP D 5 4 2 8 1 1 2 7 8 1 364 4 32 2 2 2 50 2.2 2 4 Mockingbird Park 1.50 M D 1 Mountain Creek Lake Park 117.00 CP D 1 6 1 2 1 42 1 17 1 1 1 8 1 Mountain Creek Soccer Complex 119.00 C D 1 8 1 390 20 1 18 1 4 62 1 Nance - James Park 0.90 M D 1 4 10114 1 1 2 1 Parkhill Park 25.69 C D 1 2 1 393 1 4 1 2 3 1 33 1 Prairie Park 49.50 CP D 1221 Prairie Lakes Golf Coarse 229.00 S D 1 6 1 1 1 27 185 1 30 1 1 1 42 4 Ruthe Jackson Center 3.58 S D 1 6 1 344 1 2 Senior Citizen Center 8.00 S D 1 2 1 2 116 2 1 1 2 2 Sequicentennial Park 0.70 M D 1 6 1 111 South G. P. High School *(joint use) S D 6 Sycamore Park 6.00 N D 4 1 2 Tangle Ridge Golf Club 251.50 S D 1 1 1 18 201 1 1 1 1 24 3 Turner Park 62.00 CP D 1 1 5 1 2 1 1 200 1 1 12 1 2 9 Tyre Park 23.45 C D 1 1 3 11 6 1 1 35 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 11 0.306 1 Veterans Memorial 2.00 S D 1 4 1 Wide World of Parks 0.40 S D 10 1 311131 Winsum Park 6.00 N D 2 3 11821 1 6 Woodcrest Park 6.72 N D 1 1 1 Britton Park 129.00 S D 2 18711 Camp Wisdom Park 175.00 S U Estes Park 1,030.00 S U Low Branch Park 155.00 S U 20 1 Lynn Creek Park 784.00 S D 8 1 108 669 3 100 108 1 3 1 10 8 Loyd Park 791.00 S D 4 1 1 8 221 507 2 16 2 7 1 11 Pleasant Valley Site 224.00 S U TOTALS 5,002.25 27 14 25 12 12 8 157 9 9212221156845841222145463 26 104 377 2 30 1 4 30 1 21 38 37 1 1 4 1 13 484 17.384 3 2 1 60 CP = City Park N = Neighborhood Park C = Community Park L = Linear Park R = Regional Park S = Special Use Park T = Trail Total Undeveloped = 1,429.70 Acres Total Developed = 3,572.55 Acres Total of 56 Park Facilities