1/29/2009 - Neighbors around Peninsula Club Circle have been concerned about the possibility that drilling rigs could be placed within the circle. I have been speaking with City of Fort Worth employees about this issue. To date, I have been assured that no rigs will be sited there.
A long-time objective of the neighbors has been to turn the land into park. At the end of the year, the Parks Department will develop a comprehensive park master plan for the Lake Worth area. During that process, the SSNA will push to move Peninsula Club Circle out of the Water Department and into the Parks Department as a designated park. Achieving this objective will allow the area to be cleaned up and turned into an attractive neighborhood asset. It will also preclude the area from every being used as a drill site.
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
CIIP - Dredging, Sewers, Water, Parks, and Trails (1/29/2009)
In December 2007, the Fort Worth City Council adopted a plan to complete long overdue capital projects around Lake Worth. The plan, known as the "Capital Improvements Implementation Project" or CIIP, was to be funded from half of the natural gas revenue retrieved from under the lake. The plan includes capital projects that include dredging the lake, building bike trails around the lake, fixing boat ramps, and installing sewer and water around the lake.
As with all large projects, completing the CIIP will take a lot of planning and time. Since there has been no visible action on the plan, many residents think that the plan has been abandoned. This is not true. The projects are under planning and awaiting the receipt of the necessary gas revenues.
I and other officers of the SSNA have been talking with city officials for progress updates. Keeping abreast of progress has been relatively tedious since the various projects cut across several city departments. I have listed the major projects below and the current status of each.
Water Department Projects within the SSNA Boundaries:
1) Dredging Lake Worth - On schedule. Dredging work starts in 2011.
2) Love Circle Water and Sewer Installation - On schedule. Work starts in 2011.
3) Watercress Sewer Installation - On schedule. Work starts in 2013.
Parks Projects within the SSNA Boundaries:
1) Casino Beach Ramp Improvements - On schedule. Work should be started now and completed by Spring 2009.
2) Sunset Park Ramp Improvements - On schedule. Design should start in 2010. The Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association (SSNA) is trying to change this project from a "ramp improvement" to "ramp removal." The SSNA believes that Sunset Park would be more useful to the community if it served swimmers and non-motorized boat traffic.
3) Bike Trails (Phase I) - Behind schedule. Planning was scheduled to start in 2008. Currently, planning with not begin until late 2009 at best.
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
As with all large projects, completing the CIIP will take a lot of planning and time. Since there has been no visible action on the plan, many residents think that the plan has been abandoned. This is not true. The projects are under planning and awaiting the receipt of the necessary gas revenues.
I and other officers of the SSNA have been talking with city officials for progress updates. Keeping abreast of progress has been relatively tedious since the various projects cut across several city departments. I have listed the major projects below and the current status of each.
Water Department Projects within the SSNA Boundaries:
1) Dredging Lake Worth - On schedule. Dredging work starts in 2011.
2) Love Circle Water and Sewer Installation - On schedule. Work starts in 2011.
3) Watercress Sewer Installation - On schedule. Work starts in 2013.
Parks Projects within the SSNA Boundaries:
1) Casino Beach Ramp Improvements - On schedule. Work should be started now and completed by Spring 2009.
2) Sunset Park Ramp Improvements - On schedule. Design should start in 2010. The Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association (SSNA) is trying to change this project from a "ramp improvement" to "ramp removal." The SSNA believes that Sunset Park would be more useful to the community if it served swimmers and non-motorized boat traffic.
3) Bike Trails (Phase I) - Behind schedule. Planning was scheduled to start in 2008. Currently, planning with not begin until late 2009 at best.
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
Love Circle Park - Progress Is Being Made
1/29/2009 - Over the last few months, I have been discussing Love Circle Park (LCP) with city officials and the Parks Board members. Work has now begun to clean the garbage, buildings, light poles and batting cages from the park. Openings will be cabled off to prevent access to motorized vehicles. The park clean up has priority at the highest levels of the parks department and will be completed by March.
Over the next few months, the SSNA will be working with neighbors to create a plan for turning the park into a wonderful asset for the neighborhood and the City of Fort Worth. From my conversations, I have found that there is agreement with the desires of the Parks Department and Love Circle residents. Both want the park to focus on the preservation of wildlife and to be compatable with the the Nature Center.
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
Below is an email I received from Gale Cupp - Chair of the Neighborhood Association on South Lake Worth and Parks Board member. It should provide encouragement to the neighbors that we can make a positive difference when we work together.
**************************************************************
Michael,
I wanted to talk to Harold Pitchford (Assistant Director of the Parks Department) before I responded to your email. Yesterday, Jan 28 at the PACSD Board meeting, I had that opportunity.
I was able to talk to both Richard Zavala (Director of the Parks Department) and Harold. I want you to know that your concern over the state of Love Circle Park, and your messages of support for City parks overall have duly impressed them both. In fact, Richard has designated both Harold and Melody Mitchell as the primary contacts for addressing the Love Circle situation (and the PACSD crews that have been routed to work at clean up). Richard wants LCP clean up completed by mid March 2009. Further, he recently drove with the new assistant City Manager to tour that area of the Lake in an effort to show show some of the challenges we face in our City parks.
You have already sown the seed of neighborhood support for this particular park and I fully encourage that 'adoption'. Nothing impresses the City more than a group of concerned citizens taking on the task of improving a park property--keen example of course is Fort Woof. For a neighborhood park like Love Circle, the opportunities are far reaching. Later this year, the PACS GRANTs program will likely be available again, and as information becomes available, I will forward it to you for consideration. It is a prgm. in which citizen applicants can recieve up to 25K for improvements to a park area (ex: walking trails, landscaping, irrigation) and is generally matched by 'labor' from neighborhood volunteers. This is particularly important in neighborhood parks without a specific master plan.
You've done a real service for Love Circle which lends itself so well to naturalized meadows, serene vistas etc. I think in the coming months, marked improvements will be apparent~congratulations, as you've steered this in the right direction!
-Gale
**************************************************************************
Click here to view my original article on the problems at Love Circle Park. (October 2008)
Over the next few months, the SSNA will be working with neighbors to create a plan for turning the park into a wonderful asset for the neighborhood and the City of Fort Worth. From my conversations, I have found that there is agreement with the desires of the Parks Department and Love Circle residents. Both want the park to focus on the preservation of wildlife and to be compatable with the the Nature Center.
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
Below is an email I received from Gale Cupp - Chair of the Neighborhood Association on South Lake Worth and Parks Board member. It should provide encouragement to the neighbors that we can make a positive difference when we work together.
**************************************************************
Michael,
I wanted to talk to Harold Pitchford (Assistant Director of the Parks Department) before I responded to your email. Yesterday, Jan 28 at the PACSD Board meeting, I had that opportunity.
I was able to talk to both Richard Zavala (Director of the Parks Department) and Harold. I want you to know that your concern over the state of Love Circle Park, and your messages of support for City parks overall have duly impressed them both. In fact, Richard has designated both Harold and Melody Mitchell as the primary contacts for addressing the Love Circle situation (and the PACSD crews that have been routed to work at clean up). Richard wants LCP clean up completed by mid March 2009. Further, he recently drove with the new assistant City Manager to tour that area of the Lake in an effort to show show some of the challenges we face in our City parks.
You have already sown the seed of neighborhood support for this particular park and I fully encourage that 'adoption'. Nothing impresses the City more than a group of concerned citizens taking on the task of improving a park property--keen example of course is Fort Woof. For a neighborhood park like Love Circle, the opportunities are far reaching. Later this year, the PACS GRANTs program will likely be available again, and as information becomes available, I will forward it to you for consideration. It is a prgm. in which citizen applicants can recieve up to 25K for improvements to a park area (ex: walking trails, landscaping, irrigation) and is generally matched by 'labor' from neighborhood volunteers. This is particularly important in neighborhood parks without a specific master plan.
You've done a real service for Love Circle which lends itself so well to naturalized meadows, serene vistas etc. I think in the coming months, marked improvements will be apparent~congratulations, as you've steered this in the right direction!
-Gale
**************************************************************************
Click here to view my original article on the problems at Love Circle Park. (October 2008)
Dock Issues
9/21/2010 - Letter to Residents from Michael Dallas
Video on Current Dock Ordinance Proposal - by Michael Dallas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsvh4S-kKOc
Main portion of ordinance (i.e. verbiage of most interest):
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2010/09/boat-dock-standards-september-21-2010.html
Additional building specs:
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2010/09/dock-ordinance-ch-36-sept-21-2010.html
Neighbors:
With this email, I have included two links to the latest "dock ordinance proposal" by the Fort Worth Department of Planning and Development. Like the last three proposals generated by city staff, this proposal does not honor the extensive community collaboration by the Dock
Steering Committee.
In addition to the actual provisions, you need to read the "Whereas" clauses. These clauses appear at the beginning of the proposal and purportedly give the reason for needing to change the city codes at all. The first four "Whereas" clauses state the need for keeping clean
water, preserving a healthy environment, etc.
What shocks the conscience is the verbiage that comes next. In the fifth through eighth "Whereas" statements, the proposal tries to find legitimacy by stating that the provisions come from the Dock Steering Committee! Let me read it to you:
"WHEREAS on or about July 2008 a steering committee was created which included representatives from various neighborhood associations around Lake Worth, real estate professionals, community members and City staff members; and
WHEREAS the steering committee developed its recommendations for standards for boathouses and other structures to be adopted by ordinance on November 20, 2008; and
WHEREAS the recommendations for boathouses and other structures were presented to the City Council's committee on Infrastructure and Transportation on December 9, 2008; and"
The problem is that this is a lie. Yes - a steering committee was formed. Yes - the Dock Steering Committee did create recommendations based on broad community input. No - the recommendations that are in the proposal did not come out of that process. The dirty little secret is that the provisions found in this latest proposal were specifically and emphatically rejected by the Dock Steering Committee in its very first meeting.
You see, the recommendations contained in this latest proposal come straight out of the archaic Eagle Mountain regulations that were written in the 1950's. In its very first meeting, the Dock Steering Committee emphatically stated that the Eagle Mountain regulations may be fine for
Eagle Mountain Lake, but they are completely inappropriate for needs and character of Lake Worth. Moreover, the Dock Steering Committee went on to state that no provisions would be adopted just because "some other lake did it that way."
For this dock ordinance proposal to be legitimate, there is a choice to made. The proposal either needs to be rewritten so that it matches the actual recommendations created by the Dock Steering Committee or the proposal needs to change its "Whereas" statements to reflect the truth such as, "Whereas, the Dock Steering Committee's collaboration was thrown out and the archaic 1950's regulations for Eagle Mountain Lake were substituted. This substitution was in direct opposition to the committee's wishes and intent." When those "Whereas" statements are
added, then the proposal will be honest.
The final "Whereas" statement says,
"WHEREAS it is advisable to amend the Zoning Ordinance to add regulations for the construction and use of boathouses and other structures to insure the preservation of water quality, habitat and the natural and scenic beauty of Lake Worth as well as provide for the health and safety of its
citizens and visitors."
Unfortunately, no one has been able to provide one tiny scrap of evidence that the archaic Eagle Mountain regulations provide any benefit to achieving these goals. On the other hand, the Dock Steering Committee spent six months in intense community collaboration to create an ordinance that benefits everyone.
It is very important to understand that everyone knows that this ordinance should be the result of community collaboration. If this ordinance is not supposed to be based on community collaboration, then why is that collaboration cited in the ordinance proposal itself?
Other questions need to be answered as well such as:
Why has city staff refused to honor the Dock Steering Committee's recommendations?
The second question is, what evidence does staff have, that the antiquated Eagle Mountain standards are more appropriate for Lake Worth than the standards created by the Lake Worth Dock Steering Committee?
The most important question is, if Fort Worth city staff did not like the Dock Steering Committee's standards, then why didn't city staff bring it up during the Dock Steering Committee meetings? City staff not only met with but lead the committee meetings for 6 months on these issues!
These questions go to the heart of the issue, which is, was this an honest process? You can't call the process a collaboration if you throw out the community's work at the end and insert your own personal preferences. The ordinance proposal is either a genuine product of the Dock Steering
Committee's collaboration or not. And if the proposal is not going to be based on community collaboration, then it needs to state that fact very clearly.
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
817-733-9056
http://www.ScenicShores.net
9/14/2010 - Letter to Residents from Michael Dallas
Neighbors: Your property rights and enjoyment of the lake are about to change. The City of Fort Worth staff is preparing a new zoning ordinance that will severely affect what you can and cannot have on your property regarding docks. If you are concerned about your property rights and property values, I encourage you to get involved. The Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association is forming a committee to review and comment on the newest zoning proposal put forth by city of Fort Worth staff. All residents who want to participate are welcome.
Here is a link to the latest proposal:
http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=55ccltcab&et=1103687741490&s=0&e=001wAH06tysE3SlPrlrZquKvbxcbFYT2xHJmanGxl-6GnXJJEFSuRy7XWTvpkOPj0lxOtasw8CDChKh3asv81QLouVNmpOkK5V4yccvVzK4Bl6DaCq_LBbV9KbRYvurW0818Z7m_Ui90Y7NNOfJQh_shCaLDAqCzlJnvfhAML1OzMk7vTnDH3lp6M6Siv6YwvL54vdvUgdLY7tFUcDOanmoVW5m0AlkftL6kRzeQeMfKw8=
or click here
Sincerely, Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
A short history on the "dock ordinance saga":
Two years ago, a special Dock Steering Committee was formed as a community collaboration to resolve difficult issues regarding the creation of a new "dock ordinance." The committee was composed of city staff and shoreline residents.
In the December of 2008, after six months of hard labor, the committee completed its work and disbanded. Unfortunately, the city staff involved in the process usurped the community collaboration work in favor of his (and his friend's) personal preferences. Three significant revisions to the dock ordinance were successively generated by this staff without any input from the community. After citizens aggressively objected in the Summer of 2009, the dock ordinance issue sat dormant for over a year with no further action or meetings by city staff.
As a new initiative, last week top staff from the Water Department and Planning Department met with members of the Dock Steering Committee. While city staff's newest proposals for a new zoning ordinance do not honor the work of the collaborative efforts already completed, Susan Alanis, Director of Planning and Development, stated that she would be open to working with the four neighborhood associations. It was agreed that the neighborhood associations would garner input from citizens and then provide an outline for second round of collaboration.
Here is Ms. Alanis' letter sent to the neighborhood associations today:
All: Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedules to meet with us last week. I have attached a copy of the slides that we presented at that meeting.
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B9w-tYu1b-N4ZDc5OTk4ZWUtMDhkMi00ZGJlLTlhOTQtZWMxMWM0NzdlZDVl&hl=en
You provided excellent feedback that we are reviewing and working to address in the draft ordinances. We are working on suggested language and will be distributing it for your review shortly. I believe we did conclude that a bit more time is desirable for you to be able to seek feedback from your memberships once the ordinances are drafted.
As I result, I am proposing the following revised schedule for public hearings and City Council consideration. Tuesday, October 12th, 3:00 p.m. at Fort Worth City Hall - Pre-Council Briefing on dock issuesWednesday, November 10th, 10:00 a.m. at Fort Worth City Hall - Zoning Commission Public HearingTuesday, December 14th, 3:00 p.m. at Fort Worth City Hall - City Council Public Hearing Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional comments or questions. We will be back in touch soon. Regards, Susan AlanisDirector of Planning and DevelopmentCity of Fort Worth
_______________________________________________________________
7/12/2010 - Letter to Residents from Michael Dallas
Dear Neighbors:
Michael Dallas's Legal Team's New Proposal for Dock Ordinance (7/12/2010)
Michael Dallas's Legal Team Find Problematic Provisions in Paul Bound's Proposal (7/12/2010)
Paul Bounds's Newest Proposal (6/16/2010) - Contains Problematic Provisions
Last Year's (2009) Ordinance Proposals (for your reference):
Final Ordinance Proposal (6/15/2009)
Problems with Part 1 (10/17/2008)
Problems with Part 2 (10/17/2008)
Dock Rules Proposal - Part 2 (10/17/2008)
Problems with Proposal (10/4/2008)
The City's Proposal (10/4/2008)
6/24/2010 - Letter to Residents from Michael Dallas
Dear Neighbors:
Last week, I received an email from Paul Bounds (at the Water Department) containing his "dock policy proposal" for Lake Worth. For your convenience, I have posted a copy on the Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association website for your review.
Click here to review:
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2010/06/lake-worth-dock-ordinance-proposal-june.html
A careful review the policy finds many problematic provisions. I believe that these provisions have the potential to severely damage shoreline homeowners, expose the City of Fort Worth to unnecessary liability, and benefit absolutely no one whatsoever. A team of legal experts currently is reviewing the document so that problematic provisions can be identified and discussed. When that legal review is complete, I will provide you a copy.
I am optimistic that city staff and shoreline property owners can work together to create a dock ordinance that benefits everyone.
Below I have included the text of the email in which the proposal was sent to me as well as my response. Call or write if you have questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
817-733-9056
-------------------------------------------
From: "Bounds, Paul S." Paul.Bounds@fortworthgov.org
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:58:27 -0500
To: "'Michael Dallas, CFP'" michaeldallas@michaeldallas.com
Subject: FW: Administrative Procedures for Boat Dock Permits
From: Bounds, Paul S.
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:41 AM
Subject: Administrative Procedures for Boat Dock Permits
I have had the chance to visit with most of you on the staff's decision to move ahead and adopt administrative procedures for boat dock permits until there is final approval on the ordinances. The goal is still to finalize the proposed boat dock ordinances and have the City Council adopt them. The staff feels like this should logically come after the adoption of the Lake Worth Vision Plan. Final approval of the Plan is still several months away.
There are currently a number of individuals who have been patiently waiting for the boat dock ordinance to be approved. Their proposed docks are less than 1500 square feet and meet all of the standards and requirements that have been proposed for the boat dock ordinances. The staff would like to go ahead cancel the moratorium on boat dock permitting and adopt administrative review procedures as shown on the attachment. This will allow permits to be issued for docks under 1500 square feet that meet all of the proposed construction and location requirements.
Please review the attached administrative review procedures and let me have your comments.
(This link was inserted here for clarity and for your convenience.)
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2010/06/lake-worth-dock-ordinance-proposal-june.html
Paul
--------------------------------------------
Response to Paul Bounds from Michael Dallas - June 23, 2010
Paul:
A team of attorneys is reviewing your dock ordinance proposal. I think that there would be great benefit to the shoreline residents and to the City of Fort Worth to wait on committing to such an extensive proposal until they have commented. Hopefully, the attorneys will be complete by the end of next week.
I am a bit confused as to why such an extensive policy needs to be signed to provide administrative approval of reasonable dock plans that are pending. Should staff be able to find a way to approve the docks while your proposal is being studied, the Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association would certainly support your helping these homeowners.
I am optimistic that we can create a dock ordinance that benefits everyone.
I have cc'd the city staff who, in your emails twelve months ago, you indicated had endorsed your dock ordinance proposal. I wanted to be sure that they were included in the loop. If I have left someone out, please forward this email to them as well.
(I will be out of the office for a few days and won't be near my email.)
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
cell 817-733-9056
8/17/2009 - Letter to Residents from Michael Dallas
Dear Neighbors:
I just wanted to update you on the proposed dock ordinance. As a result of your large turnout at the July 8th Dock Ordinance Meeting, our city employees seem to be showing an effort to address citizens' concerns about their properties.
As you know, a "dock steering committee" made up of citizens from around the lake, labored for six months last year working with city employees to negotiate a "dock ordinance." It quickly became clear that a reasonable procedure for owners to get a variance from the ordinance would be critical. Without it, many property owners would not be able to own or build the dock of their choice. When the committee disbanded in December 2008, a variance prodecure was in place. However, when the "Final Draft" was unveiled by city employees six months later (June 2009), this cornerstone feature had been gutted out.
Prior to the July 8th public dock meeting, it was clear that city employees had no intention of including badly needed flexibility in their "Final Draft" of the proposed dock ordinance. In a June 29th email response to my concerns, city employee Paul Bounds was very clear that there would be no variance considerations afforded to citizens. He wrote, "While we are still open to suggestions for changes to other parts of the draft ordinance, I feel that the variance process proposed by the Steering Committee that would allow for larger docks will not be part of the staff's recommendation to City Council for the reasons stated. For those that disagree they will have the ability to make their opinions known to City Council either prior to the public hearing to approve the Boat Dock Ordinance or at the public hearing when the City Council votes on the ordinance."
This stance seems to have changed dramatically since the July 8th dock meeting. In a Times Record article about the dock meeting (July 16, 2009) , Mr. Bounds is quoted as saying that a new variance procedure would be added to the next draft of the ordinance, but did not know what form it would take. He also said the five percent variance in dock size provided by the present version of the ordinance was not realistic. "There are so many variables - a shoreline is not like a normal neighborhood - there are a lot of curves in the lot lines."
While I have been disappointed that certain city employees have made the dock ordinance process unnecessarily combative and difficult, I am hopeful that we can move on to engage in productive dialog that benefits everyone. Other than an email outlining a general timetable, I have heard nothing more from city employees on this issue. We should be hearing something soon.
For the media stories, click below:
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2009_07_01_archive.html
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2009/08/dock-ordinance-controversy-ch-11.html
If you have any questions or if I can be of service, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
8/6/2009 - Lake Worth Dock Ordinance in the News - Ch 11
6/15/2009 - Recently, City of Fort Worth employees and interested residents around the lake formed a "dock steering committee" to work together to create a set of dock regulations. After weeks of talks, the committee agreed on a set of relatively liberal standards as well as an appeal process for residents who want to build docks that don't conform. Currently, the document (i.e. regulations) has come back from the City's legal department is being reviewed by neighbors around the lake.
If you want to see the latest document, click here.
There are several concerns about the document. The issues that concern me the most are:
1) Ability for getting a variance is limited - provisions have been added that undermine the flexibility that the steering committeed negotiated.
2) New $2,000 per day fines for "dock infracations" will be possible.
3) Rights of LWMO employees to inspect docks "without notice" seem to violate the spirit of the city's well-established inspection statute.
I'm hopeful that these issues can be resolved quickly and to the lake residents' benefit.
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
Final Ordinance Proposal (6/15/2009)
Problems with Part 1 (10/17/2008)
Problems with Part 2 (10/17/2008)
Dock Rules Proposal - Part 2 (10/17/2008)
Problems with Proposal (10/4/2008)
The City's Proposal (10/4/2008)
Video on Current Dock Ordinance Proposal - by Michael Dallas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsvh4S-kKOc
Main portion of ordinance (i.e. verbiage of most interest):
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2010/09/boat-dock-standards-september-21-2010.html
Additional building specs:
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2010/09/dock-ordinance-ch-36-sept-21-2010.html
Neighbors:
With this email, I have included two links to the latest "dock ordinance proposal" by the Fort Worth Department of Planning and Development. Like the last three proposals generated by city staff, this proposal does not honor the extensive community collaboration by the Dock
Steering Committee.
In addition to the actual provisions, you need to read the "Whereas" clauses. These clauses appear at the beginning of the proposal and purportedly give the reason for needing to change the city codes at all. The first four "Whereas" clauses state the need for keeping clean
water, preserving a healthy environment, etc.
What shocks the conscience is the verbiage that comes next. In the fifth through eighth "Whereas" statements, the proposal tries to find legitimacy by stating that the provisions come from the Dock Steering Committee! Let me read it to you:
"WHEREAS on or about July 2008 a steering committee was created which included representatives from various neighborhood associations around Lake Worth, real estate professionals, community members and City staff members; and
WHEREAS the steering committee developed its recommendations for standards for boathouses and other structures to be adopted by ordinance on November 20, 2008; and
WHEREAS the recommendations for boathouses and other structures were presented to the City Council's committee on Infrastructure and Transportation on December 9, 2008; and"
The problem is that this is a lie. Yes - a steering committee was formed. Yes - the Dock Steering Committee did create recommendations based on broad community input. No - the recommendations that are in the proposal did not come out of that process. The dirty little secret is that the provisions found in this latest proposal were specifically and emphatically rejected by the Dock Steering Committee in its very first meeting.
You see, the recommendations contained in this latest proposal come straight out of the archaic Eagle Mountain regulations that were written in the 1950's. In its very first meeting, the Dock Steering Committee emphatically stated that the Eagle Mountain regulations may be fine for
Eagle Mountain Lake, but they are completely inappropriate for needs and character of Lake Worth. Moreover, the Dock Steering Committee went on to state that no provisions would be adopted just because "some other lake did it that way."
For this dock ordinance proposal to be legitimate, there is a choice to made. The proposal either needs to be rewritten so that it matches the actual recommendations created by the Dock Steering Committee or the proposal needs to change its "Whereas" statements to reflect the truth such as, "Whereas, the Dock Steering Committee's collaboration was thrown out and the archaic 1950's regulations for Eagle Mountain Lake were substituted. This substitution was in direct opposition to the committee's wishes and intent." When those "Whereas" statements are
added, then the proposal will be honest.
The final "Whereas" statement says,
"WHEREAS it is advisable to amend the Zoning Ordinance to add regulations for the construction and use of boathouses and other structures to insure the preservation of water quality, habitat and the natural and scenic beauty of Lake Worth as well as provide for the health and safety of its
citizens and visitors."
Unfortunately, no one has been able to provide one tiny scrap of evidence that the archaic Eagle Mountain regulations provide any benefit to achieving these goals. On the other hand, the Dock Steering Committee spent six months in intense community collaboration to create an ordinance that benefits everyone.
It is very important to understand that everyone knows that this ordinance should be the result of community collaboration. If this ordinance is not supposed to be based on community collaboration, then why is that collaboration cited in the ordinance proposal itself?
Other questions need to be answered as well such as:
Why has city staff refused to honor the Dock Steering Committee's recommendations?
The second question is, what evidence does staff have, that the antiquated Eagle Mountain standards are more appropriate for Lake Worth than the standards created by the Lake Worth Dock Steering Committee?
The most important question is, if Fort Worth city staff did not like the Dock Steering Committee's standards, then why didn't city staff bring it up during the Dock Steering Committee meetings? City staff not only met with but lead the committee meetings for 6 months on these issues!
These questions go to the heart of the issue, which is, was this an honest process? You can't call the process a collaboration if you throw out the community's work at the end and insert your own personal preferences. The ordinance proposal is either a genuine product of the Dock Steering
Committee's collaboration or not. And if the proposal is not going to be based on community collaboration, then it needs to state that fact very clearly.
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
817-733-9056
http://www.ScenicShores.net
9/14/2010 - Letter to Residents from Michael Dallas
Neighbors: Your property rights and enjoyment of the lake are about to change. The City of Fort Worth staff is preparing a new zoning ordinance that will severely affect what you can and cannot have on your property regarding docks. If you are concerned about your property rights and property values, I encourage you to get involved. The Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association is forming a committee to review and comment on the newest zoning proposal put forth by city of Fort Worth staff. All residents who want to participate are welcome.
Here is a link to the latest proposal:
http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=55ccltcab&et=1103687741490&s=0&e=001wAH06tysE3SlPrlrZquKvbxcbFYT2xHJmanGxl-6GnXJJEFSuRy7XWTvpkOPj0lxOtasw8CDChKh3asv81QLouVNmpOkK5V4yccvVzK4Bl6DaCq_LBbV9KbRYvurW0818Z7m_Ui90Y7NNOfJQh_shCaLDAqCzlJnvfhAML1OzMk7vTnDH3lp6M6Siv6YwvL54vdvUgdLY7tFUcDOanmoVW5m0AlkftL6kRzeQeMfKw8=
or click here
Sincerely, Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
A short history on the "dock ordinance saga":
Two years ago, a special Dock Steering Committee was formed as a community collaboration to resolve difficult issues regarding the creation of a new "dock ordinance." The committee was composed of city staff and shoreline residents.
In the December of 2008, after six months of hard labor, the committee completed its work and disbanded. Unfortunately, the city staff involved in the process usurped the community collaboration work in favor of his (and his friend's) personal preferences. Three significant revisions to the dock ordinance were successively generated by this staff without any input from the community. After citizens aggressively objected in the Summer of 2009, the dock ordinance issue sat dormant for over a year with no further action or meetings by city staff.
As a new initiative, last week top staff from the Water Department and Planning Department met with members of the Dock Steering Committee. While city staff's newest proposals for a new zoning ordinance do not honor the work of the collaborative efforts already completed, Susan Alanis, Director of Planning and Development, stated that she would be open to working with the four neighborhood associations. It was agreed that the neighborhood associations would garner input from citizens and then provide an outline for second round of collaboration.
Here is Ms. Alanis' letter sent to the neighborhood associations today:
All: Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedules to meet with us last week. I have attached a copy of the slides that we presented at that meeting.
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B9w-tYu1b-N4ZDc5OTk4ZWUtMDhkMi00ZGJlLTlhOTQtZWMxMWM0NzdlZDVl&hl=en
You provided excellent feedback that we are reviewing and working to address in the draft ordinances. We are working on suggested language and will be distributing it for your review shortly. I believe we did conclude that a bit more time is desirable for you to be able to seek feedback from your memberships once the ordinances are drafted.
As I result, I am proposing the following revised schedule for public hearings and City Council consideration. Tuesday, October 12th, 3:00 p.m. at Fort Worth City Hall - Pre-Council Briefing on dock issuesWednesday, November 10th, 10:00 a.m. at Fort Worth City Hall - Zoning Commission Public HearingTuesday, December 14th, 3:00 p.m. at Fort Worth City Hall - City Council Public Hearing Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional comments or questions. We will be back in touch soon. Regards, Susan AlanisDirector of Planning and DevelopmentCity of Fort Worth
_______________________________________________________________
7/12/2010 - Letter to Residents from Michael Dallas
Dear Neighbors:
With this email, I have included several items on Paul Bounds’s proposed “dock ordinance” / “policy proposal” for Lake Worth, which he released on June 16, 2010. After careful review by a highly skilled legal team, it is clear that this proposed ordinance represents serious problems for residents and the City of Fort Worth. In its current form, this ordinance confiscates property from the lake residents, unnecessarily exposes the City of Fort Worth to class action, and provides absolutely no benefit for any stakeholder whatsoever.
Below, I have included links to legal evaluations of Mr. Bounds’s June 2010 version. I have also included a new Dock Ordinance version that I suggest might be reviewed by lake residents and the Dock Steering Committee for adoption. For your convenience, I have also included a link to the version written by Mr. Bounds and a MS Word “Compare” document showing the differences.
The new version deletes problematic provisions that unnecessarily destroy property values and adds verbiage for neglected items such as “grandfathering” for existing structures.
Please review and contact me with your questions.
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
817-733-9056
Michael Dallas's Legal Team's New Proposal for Dock Ordinance (7/12/2010)
Michael Dallas's Legal Team Find Problematic Provisions in Paul Bound's Proposal (7/12/2010)
Paul Bounds's Newest Proposal (6/16/2010) - Contains Problematic Provisions
Last Year's (2009) Ordinance Proposals (for your reference):
Final Ordinance Proposal (6/15/2009)
Problems with Part 1 (10/17/2008)
Problems with Part 2 (10/17/2008)
Dock Rules Proposal - Part 2 (10/17/2008)
Problems with Proposal (10/4/2008)
The City's Proposal (10/4/2008)
6/24/2010 - Letter to Residents from Michael Dallas
Dear Neighbors:
Last week, I received an email from Paul Bounds (at the Water Department) containing his "dock policy proposal" for Lake Worth. For your convenience, I have posted a copy on the Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association website for your review.
Click here to review:
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2010/06/lake-worth-dock-ordinance-proposal-june.html
A careful review the policy finds many problematic provisions. I believe that these provisions have the potential to severely damage shoreline homeowners, expose the City of Fort Worth to unnecessary liability, and benefit absolutely no one whatsoever. A team of legal experts currently is reviewing the document so that problematic provisions can be identified and discussed. When that legal review is complete, I will provide you a copy.
I am optimistic that city staff and shoreline property owners can work together to create a dock ordinance that benefits everyone.
Below I have included the text of the email in which the proposal was sent to me as well as my response. Call or write if you have questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
817-733-9056
-------------------------------------------
From: "Bounds, Paul S." Paul.Bounds@fortworthgov.org
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:58:27 -0500
To: "'Michael Dallas, CFP'" michaeldallas@michaeldallas.com
Subject: FW: Administrative Procedures for Boat Dock Permits
From: Bounds, Paul S.
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:41 AM
Subject: Administrative Procedures for Boat Dock Permits
I have had the chance to visit with most of you on the staff's decision to move ahead and adopt administrative procedures for boat dock permits until there is final approval on the ordinances. The goal is still to finalize the proposed boat dock ordinances and have the City Council adopt them. The staff feels like this should logically come after the adoption of the Lake Worth Vision Plan. Final approval of the Plan is still several months away.
There are currently a number of individuals who have been patiently waiting for the boat dock ordinance to be approved. Their proposed docks are less than 1500 square feet and meet all of the standards and requirements that have been proposed for the boat dock ordinances. The staff would like to go ahead cancel the moratorium on boat dock permitting and adopt administrative review procedures as shown on the attachment. This will allow permits to be issued for docks under 1500 square feet that meet all of the proposed construction and location requirements.
Please review the attached administrative review procedures and let me have your comments.
(This link was inserted here for clarity and for your convenience.)
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2010/06/lake-worth-dock-ordinance-proposal-june.html
Paul
--------------------------------------------
Response to Paul Bounds from Michael Dallas - June 23, 2010
Paul:
A team of attorneys is reviewing your dock ordinance proposal. I think that there would be great benefit to the shoreline residents and to the City of Fort Worth to wait on committing to such an extensive proposal until they have commented. Hopefully, the attorneys will be complete by the end of next week.
I am a bit confused as to why such an extensive policy needs to be signed to provide administrative approval of reasonable dock plans that are pending. Should staff be able to find a way to approve the docks while your proposal is being studied, the Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association would certainly support your helping these homeowners.
I am optimistic that we can create a dock ordinance that benefits everyone.
I have cc'd the city staff who, in your emails twelve months ago, you indicated had endorsed your dock ordinance proposal. I wanted to be sure that they were included in the loop. If I have left someone out, please forward this email to them as well.
(I will be out of the office for a few days and won't be near my email.)
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
cell 817-733-9056
8/17/2009 - Letter to Residents from Michael Dallas
Dear Neighbors:
I just wanted to update you on the proposed dock ordinance. As a result of your large turnout at the July 8th Dock Ordinance Meeting, our city employees seem to be showing an effort to address citizens' concerns about their properties.
As you know, a "dock steering committee" made up of citizens from around the lake, labored for six months last year working with city employees to negotiate a "dock ordinance." It quickly became clear that a reasonable procedure for owners to get a variance from the ordinance would be critical. Without it, many property owners would not be able to own or build the dock of their choice. When the committee disbanded in December 2008, a variance prodecure was in place. However, when the "Final Draft" was unveiled by city employees six months later (June 2009), this cornerstone feature had been gutted out.
Prior to the July 8th public dock meeting, it was clear that city employees had no intention of including badly needed flexibility in their "Final Draft" of the proposed dock ordinance. In a June 29th email response to my concerns, city employee Paul Bounds was very clear that there would be no variance considerations afforded to citizens. He wrote, "While we are still open to suggestions for changes to other parts of the draft ordinance, I feel that the variance process proposed by the Steering Committee that would allow for larger docks will not be part of the staff's recommendation to City Council for the reasons stated. For those that disagree they will have the ability to make their opinions known to City Council either prior to the public hearing to approve the Boat Dock Ordinance or at the public hearing when the City Council votes on the ordinance."
This stance seems to have changed dramatically since the July 8th dock meeting. In a Times Record article about the dock meeting (July 16, 2009) , Mr. Bounds is quoted as saying that a new variance procedure would be added to the next draft of the ordinance, but did not know what form it would take. He also said the five percent variance in dock size provided by the present version of the ordinance was not realistic. "There are so many variables - a shoreline is not like a normal neighborhood - there are a lot of curves in the lot lines."
While I have been disappointed that certain city employees have made the dock ordinance process unnecessarily combative and difficult, I am hopeful that we can move on to engage in productive dialog that benefits everyone. Other than an email outlining a general timetable, I have heard nothing more from city employees on this issue. We should be hearing something soon.
For the media stories, click below:
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2009_07_01_archive.html
http://scenicshores.blogspot.com/2009/08/dock-ordinance-controversy-ch-11.html
If you have any questions or if I can be of service, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
8/6/2009 - Lake Worth Dock Ordinance in the News - Ch 11
6/15/2009 - Recently, City of Fort Worth employees and interested residents around the lake formed a "dock steering committee" to work together to create a set of dock regulations. After weeks of talks, the committee agreed on a set of relatively liberal standards as well as an appeal process for residents who want to build docks that don't conform. Currently, the document (i.e. regulations) has come back from the City's legal department is being reviewed by neighbors around the lake.
If you want to see the latest document, click here.
There are several concerns about the document. The issues that concern me the most are:
1) Ability for getting a variance is limited - provisions have been added that undermine the flexibility that the steering committeed negotiated.
2) New $2,000 per day fines for "dock infracations" will be possible.
3) Rights of LWMO employees to inspect docks "without notice" seem to violate the spirit of the city's well-established inspection statute.
I'm hopeful that these issues can be resolved quickly and to the lake residents' benefit.
Sincerely,
Michael Dallas
President
Scenic Shores Neighborhood Association
Final Ordinance Proposal (6/15/2009)
Problems with Part 1 (10/17/2008)
Problems with Part 2 (10/17/2008)
Dock Rules Proposal - Part 2 (10/17/2008)
Problems with Proposal (10/4/2008)
The City's Proposal (10/4/2008)
Lake Worth Vision
The draft plan is the result of the November 2008 Lake Worth Vision Workshop, during which a five-member consultant panel met with Lake Worth area stakeholders to determine the most appropriate future land use plan, development pattern and forms, and recreational uses and facilities on and around Lake Worth.
The City of Fort Worth presented the draft Lake Worth Vision Plan on October 26, 2009, at C.F. Brewer High School.
Download a meeting summary or the presentation.
Since the October 2009 public meeting, the City has met with neighborhood associations and other groups to further discuss the plan's recommendations. City staff is currently working on updates to the draft plan based on public comments. Another public meeting will be scheduled in fall 2010 to discuss the updated draft plan. Below, I have included the preliminary 2nd revision created October 5, 2010 as well as the 1st Revision and Original Workshop materials from 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The workshop and draft versions of the Lake Worth Vision are below:
2nd Revision of the Lake Worth Vision - February 2011
Cover, Table of Contents, Executive Summary
Part One: The Context
Part Two: Planning Process
Part Three: Vision Plan
Part Four: Recommendations and Implementation
Appendices
2nd Revision of the Lake Worth Vision - October 5, 2010 (click image to view)
1st Revision of the Lake Worth Vision - October 26, 2009 -
Preliminary Workshop - November 19, 2008 -
Lake Worth Vision Workshop - November 19, 2008 - This was a three day workshop where experts from around the country came to Fort Worth and provided three possible outlines for the area. Download a meeting summary or the presentation.
The City of Fort Worth presented the draft Lake Worth Vision Plan on October 26, 2009, at C.F. Brewer High School.
Download a meeting summary or the presentation.
Since the October 2009 public meeting, the City has met with neighborhood associations and other groups to further discuss the plan's recommendations. City staff is currently working on updates to the draft plan based on public comments. Another public meeting will be scheduled in fall 2010 to discuss the updated draft plan. Below, I have included the preliminary 2nd revision created October 5, 2010 as well as the 1st Revision and Original Workshop materials from 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The workshop and draft versions of the Lake Worth Vision are below:
2nd Revision of the Lake Worth Vision - February 2011
Cover, Table of Contents, Executive Summary
Part One: The Context
Part Two: Planning Process
Part Three: Vision Plan
Part Four: Recommendations and Implementation
Appendices
2nd Revision of the Lake Worth Vision - October 5, 2010 (click image to view)
1st Revision of the Lake Worth Vision - October 26, 2009 -
Preliminary Workshop - November 19, 2008 -
Lake Worth Vision Workshop - November 19, 2008 - This was a three day workshop where experts from around the country came to Fort Worth and provided three possible outlines for the area. Download a meeting summary or the presentation.
Problems with Part 2
DRAFT
Boat Dock, Pier and Boat House Construction Standards
Problem: “Boat Dock” does not appear in the easements.
Solution: Replace with “Dock” throughout the document.
DEFINITIONS:
A. Water Use and Access Easement: the lands enclosed on one side by the lakefront property line, on a second side by the waters of Lake Worth, and on the third and fourth side by two lines, each beginning at opposite ends of the lakefront property line and each being a projection of the side lot lines of each lot as shown on the plat of record.
B. Lake Worth Management Office (LWMO): that group in the Water Department responsible for permit review and approval for improvements at Lake Worth and adjacent properties. This group is under the supervision of the Lake Worth Coordinator.
C. Boat Dock Standards Board of Adjustment (BDSBOA): a nine (9) member board appointed by the City Council to review interpretations, special exceptions and variances of the provisions of this ordinance.
Problems:
1) See above.
2) Acronym is long
Solution: Dock Standards Board of Adjustment (DSBA)
GENERAL PROVISIONS:
A. Boat docks approved under these regulations shall be for personal or family use and shall not be used for commercial activity.
B. Boat docks, piers, and boat houses shall be considered accessory structures. A primary structure must be present on the lot to which the boat dock/walkway is attached.
C. The maximum floor to area coverage allowed for boat docks, piers, boat houses and walkways shall be 25% of the area of the Water Use and Access Easement. Provided that every site regardless of the area of the Water Use and Access Easement shall be allowed a minimum coverage area of 1000 square feet and a maximum coverage area of 2500 square feet.
D. The minimum setback from a projected side yard line shall be based on the width of the property at the lakefront property line.
Lot Width Setback
Less than 50 ft. 5 ft.
50-69 ft. 10 ft.
70-99 ft. 15 ft.
100 ft. or more 20 ft.
E. Improvements may extend to a point 100 feet from the lakefront property line into the waters of Lake Worth regardless of the depth of the water at that point, or to the point at which the elevation of the land lying under Lake Worth is not greater than 584 feet above mean sea level, but in no instance to extend further than 150 feet from the lakefront property line into the waters of Lake Worth.
F. No structure shall occupy more than one third of the channel width and in no case shall extend more than 20 ft. from the centerline of the channel.
G. There will be no living quarters allowed on any boat dock, pier, boat house or walkway that extends over the lakefront property line.
Problem:
1) Ambiguous
More Appropriate: “All structures that extend over the lakefront property line shall be classified as Group U Occupancy.”
H. Enclosed structures are not allowed. In order to protect a raised boat within a dock from the elements, solid sides on the boat house will only be permitted for a maximum of two (2) feet downward to the point where the ceiling joist meets the top plate. No additional materials (i.e. lattice, fencing, bars, screen fabric, doors, glass, etc.) may be installed below the two (2) foot sidewalls.
Problems:
1) No clear and compelling reason was given as to why enclosed structures would be prohibited.
2) There was no consensus of the Dock Steering Committee to disallow enclosed structures.
3) The right to build a “boat house” was granted under the easement. The wording above attempts to revoke that right. Even though the city may now regret its former decision, property rights cannot be revoked without eminent domain proceedings and just compensation.
Solution: Remove the wording.
I. A contained storage area not exceeding 27 sq. ft. is allowed on the first floor (lower deck) of the structure for storing tackle, life jackets, etc. Products considered hazardous or which have warning labels prohibiting its use near public water supplies shall not be stored in these areas.
Problems:
1) See “H” above.
2) 27 feet is laughably small anyway.
Solution: Strike part of wording.
J. No toilet facilities of any type will be allowed on any structure built past the lakefront property line. A potable water supply can be plumbed to the first floor (lower deck) provided that required backflow prevention devices are installed and inspected in accordance with the Plumbing Code of the City of Fort Worth.
K. Fuel pumping facilities exceeding fifty-five gallons are not allowed on structures built that extend past the lakefront property line.
L. Structures shall be limited to a single story (lower deck) and a sundeck (upper deck). The floor of the lower deck shall be no less than the 596 foot elevation. The roof of a structure shall have a minimum of 6 in 12 pitch. The upper deck may not have a permanent roof or covering.
Problem:
1) The wording describes a 45’ pitch.
Correction should read: “1/2 in 12 pitch”
M. Any structure that extends more than 100 feet from the lakefront property line shall be equipped with a white photocell light of no less than 60 watts that operates continually from dawn to dusk. The LWMO may require that lighting be placed on structures less than 100 feet from the shoreline when in their opinion it is warranted to enhance boating safety. It is the dock owner’s responsibility to ensure that all required lighting is properly maintained and operational at all times.
Problem:
1) Wattage is a power usage description – not a brightness spec.
2) Modern lighting continues to provide more brightness with less electrical usage. A “traditional” 60 watt incandescent light produces ~800 lumens.
3) Boats and other vehicles successfully use much dimmer lights at night.
4) Many people don’t have electricity on the end of their docks to power bright lights.
5) Modern solar powered LED yard lighting provides a good and inexpensive solution.
Solution: “200 lumens”
VARIANCES AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS
A. Creation and appointment. There is hereby created a boat dock standards board of adjustment (BDSBOA), consisting of nine (9) members, all of whom shall be qualified electors of the City of Fort Worth. It is the declared policy that the city council will consider for appointment to the boat dock standards board of adjustment only those persons who have demonstrated their civic interest, general knowledge of the community, independent judgment, understanding of land use and planning and availability to prepare for and attend meetings. Preference will be given, where feasible, to appointees who possess knowledge or background in one (1) of the following fields:
1. Law;
2. Property development;
3. Building design; or
4. Mortgaging and financing.
B. Terms of office. The members of the BDSBOA shall be identified by place numbers one (1) through (9). The odd-numbered places shall expire on October 1 of each odd-numbered year and the even-numbered places shall expire on October 1 of each even-numbered year. BDSBOA members may be appointed to succeed themselves. Vacancies shall be filled for unexpired terms, but no member shall be appointed for a term in excess of two (2) years.
C. Organization. The BDSBOA shall hold an organizational meeting in November of each year and shall elect a chairman and vice-chairman for each panel from among its members before proceeding to any other matters of business. The Lake Worth Coordinator, or a designated representative, shall be the secretary of the BDSBOA. The panel of the BDSBOA shall meet regularly and shall designate the time and place of its meetings. The BDSBOA shall adopt its own rules of procedure and keep a record of its proceedings in accordance with the state statutes, this ordinance, and the City Charter. Newly appointed members shall be installed at the first regular meeting after their appointment.
D. Meetings and quorum. Seven (7) members of the BDSBOA shall constitute a quorum for the conduct of business. The members of each panel of the board of adjustment shall regularly attend meetings and public hearings of the BDSBOA and shall serve without compensation, except for reimbursement for authorized expenses attendant to the performance of their duties.
E. Decision by BDSBOA. The affirmative vote of seven (7) members of each panel of the board of adjustment shall be required to reverse or modify any order, decision or interpretation of this ordinance.
F. Staff responsibility. The Lake Worth Coordinator and any designated representatives shall be the regular technical advisors to the BDSBOA.
G. Attendance reports. Each month a report shall be submitted to the city council showing the cumulative attendance of each member with a notation of members who have been absent from three consecutive meetings, and a notation of the non-availability of alternate members to attend meetings for which called.
I. Powers and duties. The BDSBOA shall have the powers and exercise the duties of a board of adjustment in accordance with Sections 211.008--211.011, Texas Local Government Code. BDSBOA members are representatives of the city and shall have the right of inspection of premises where required in the discharge of their responsibilities under the laws of the State of Texas and the ordinances of the city. The board of adjustment's jurisdiction shall extend to and include the hearing and deciding of the types of appeals and applications listed below, and to that end shall have the necessary authority to ensure continuing compliance with its decisions. In addition, the BDSBOA shall have the authority to compel the attendance of witnesses necessary to its decision-making.
1. Interpretation. To render an interpretation of those provisions of boat dock ordinance where it is alleged that there is error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an official in the administration of such provisions. In reaching its decision, the BDSBOA shall establish firm guidelines for future administrative actions on like matters.
2. Special exception. To decide upon applications for special exceptions under General Requirements Section C
3. Variance. To authorize upon appeal in specific cases such variance from the terms of the General Requirements Sections D, E, F and I as will not be contrary to the public interest.
Problems:
1) This section doesn’t exist.
Solution: “General Provisions”
EMERGENCY USE BY PUBLIC AGENCIES: Dock owners shall allow the LWMO, law enforcement agencies, fire departments, and emergency personnel to access and use a dock for emergency purposes, without charge or other compensation, or liability for such use.
Proposed Dock Standards - Part2 (Oct 17 2008)
DRAFT
Boat Dock, Pier and Boat House Construction Standards
DEFINITIONS:
A. Water Use and Access Easement: the lands enclosed on one side by the lakefront property line, on a second side by the waters of Lake Worth, and on the third and fourth side by two lines, each beginning at opposite ends of the lakefront property line and each being a projection of the side lot lines of each lot as shown on the plat of record.
B. Lake Worth Management Office (LWMO): that group in the Water Department responsible for permit review and approval for improvements at Lake Worth and adjacent properties. This group is under the supervision of the Lake Worth Coordinator.
C. Boat Dock Standards Board of Adjustment (BDSBOA): a nine (9) member board appointed by the City Council to review interpretations, special exceptions and variances of the provisions of this ordinance.
GENERAL PROVISIONS:
A. Boat docks approved under these regulations shall be for personal or family use and shall not be used for commercial activity.
B. Boat docks, piers, and boat houses shall be considered accessory structures. A primary structure must be present on the lot to which the boat dock/walkway is attached.
C. The maximum floor to area coverage allowed for boat docks, piers, boat houses and walkways shall be 25% of the area of the Water Use and Access Easement. Provided that every site regardless of the area of the Water Use and Access Easement shall be allowed a minimum coverage area of 1000 square feet and a maximum coverage area of 2500 square feet.
D. The minimum setback from a projected side yard line shall be based on the width of the property at the lakefront property line.
Lot Width Setback
Less than 50 ft. 5 ft.
50-69 ft. 10 ft.
70-99 ft. 15 ft.
100 ft. or more 20 ft.
E. Improvements may extend to a point 100 feet from the lakefront property line into the waters of Lake Worth regardless of the depth of the water at that point, or to the point at which the elevation of the land lying under Lake Worth is not greater than 584 feet above mean sea level, but in no instance to extend further than 150 feet from the lakefront property line into the waters of Lake Worth.
F. No structure shall occupy more than one third of the channel width and in no case shall extend more than 20 ft. from the centerline of the channel.
G. There will be no living quarters allowed on any boat dock, pier, boat house or walkway that extends over the lakefront property line.
H. Enclosed structures are not allowed. In order to protect a raised boat within a dock from the elements, solid sides on the boat house will only be permitted for a maximum of two (2) feet downward to the point where the ceiling joist meets the top plate. No additional materials (i.e. lattice, fencing, bars, screen fabric, doors, glass, etc.) may be installed below the two (2) foot sidewalls.
I. A contained storage area not exceeding 27 sq. ft. is allowed on the first floor (lower deck) of the structure for storing tackle, life jackets, etc. Products considered hazardous or which have warning labels prohibiting its use near public water supplies shall not be stored in these areas.
J. No toilet facilities of any type will be allowed on any structure built past the lakefront property line. A potable water supply can be plumbed to the first floor (lower deck) provided that required backflow prevention devices are installed and inspected in accordance with the Plumbing Code of the City of Fort Worth.
K. Fuel pumping facilities exceeding fifty-five gallons are not allowed on structures built that extend past the lakefront property line.
L. Structures shall be limited to a single story (lower deck) and a sundeck (upper deck). The floor of the lower deck shall be no less than the 596 foot elevation. The roof of a structure shall have a minimum of 6 in 12 pitch. The upper deck may not have a permanent roof or covering.
M. Any structure that extends more than 100 feet from the lakefront property line shall be equipped with a white photocell light of no less than 60 watts that operates continually from dawn to dusk. The LWMO may require that lighting be placed on structures less than 100 feet from the shoreline when in their opinion it is warranted to enhance boating safety. It is the dock owner’s responsibility to ensure that all required lighting is properly maintained and operational at all times.
VARIANCES AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS
A. Creation and appointment. There is hereby created a boat dock standards board of adjustment (BDSBOA), consisting of nine (9) members, all of whom shall be qualified electors of the City of Fort Worth. It is the declared policy that the city council will consider for appointment to the boat dock standards board of adjustment only those persons who have demonstrated their civic interest, general knowledge of the community, independent judgment, understanding of land use and planning and availability to prepare for and attend meetings. Preference will be given, where feasible, to appointees who possess knowledge or background in one (1) of the following fields:
1. Law;
2. Property development;
3. Building design; or
4. Mortgaging and financing.
B. Terms of office. The members of the BDSBOA shall be identified by place numbers one (1) through (9). The odd-numbered places shall expire on October 1 of each odd-numbered year and the even-numbered places shall expire on October 1 of each even-numbered year. BDSBOA members may be appointed to succeed themselves. Vacancies shall be filled for unexpired terms, but no member shall be appointed for a term in excess of two (2) years.
C. Organization. The BDSBOA shall hold an organizational meeting in November of each year and shall elect a chairman and vice-chairman for each panel from among its members before proceeding to any other matters of business. The Lake Worth Coordinator, or a designated representative, shall be the secretary of the BDSBOA. The panel of the BDSBOA shall meet regularly and shall designate the time and place of its meetings. The BDSBOA shall adopt its own rules of procedure and keep a record of its proceedings in accordance with the state statutes, this ordinance, and the City Charter. Newly appointed members shall be installed at the first regular meeting after their appointment.
D. Meetings and quorum. Seven (7) members of the BDSBOA shall constitute a quorum for the conduct of business. The members of each panel of the board of adjustment shall regularly attend meetings and public hearings of the BDSBOA and shall serve without compensation, except for reimbursement for authorized expenses attendant to the performance of their duties.
E. Decision by BDSBOA. The affirmative vote of seven (7) members of each panel of the board of adjustment shall be required to reverse or modify any order, decision or interpretation of this ordinance.
F. Staff responsibility. The Lake Worth Coordinator and any designated representatives shall be the regular technical advisors to the BDSBOA.
G. Attendance reports. Each month a report shall be submitted to the city council showing the cumulative attendance of each member with a notation of members who have been absent from three consecutive meetings, and a notation of the non-availability of alternate members to attend meetings for which called.
I. Powers and duties. The BDSBOA shall have the powers and exercise the duties of a board of adjustment in accordance with Sections 211.008--211.011, Texas Local Government Code. BDSBOA members are representatives of the city and shall have the right of inspection of premises where required in the discharge of their responsibilities under the laws of the State of Texas and the ordinances of the city. The board of adjustment's jurisdiction shall extend to and include the hearing and deciding of the types of appeals and applications listed below, and to that end shall have the necessary authority to ensure continuing compliance with its decisions. In addition, the BDSBOA shall have the authority to compel the attendance of witnesses necessary to its decision-making.
1. Interpretation. To render an interpretation of those provisions of boat dock ordinance where it is alleged that there is error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an official in the administration of such provisions. In reaching its decision, the BDSBOA shall establish firm guidelines for future administrative actions on like matters.
2. Special exception. To decide upon applications for special exceptions under General Requirements Section C
3. Variance. To authorize upon appeal in specific cases such variance from the terms of the General Requirements Sections D, E, F and I as will not be contrary to the public interest.
EMERGENCY USE BY PUBLIC AGENCIES: Dock owners shall allow the LWMO, law enforcement agencies, fire departments, and emergency personnel to access and use a dock for emergency purposes, without charge or other compensation, or liability for such use.
Problems with Part 1
Discussion of problems have been put in yellow text.
Problems include several easement violations and severe violation of property owner privacy rights.
********************************************************
*Chapter 36; added to read as follows:
DRAFT
Chapter 36
Docks, Piers and Boathouses
DEFINITIONS:
A. “Boat Dock, Pier, or Boat House”: a structure extending from the shore into the water to permit the landing and mooring of vessels. The term “boat dock, boat house” or “dock” includes the anchoring system and any walkways or bridges that will attach to the dock itself.
Problems:
1) Definition conflicts with rights granted in easement. This document erroneously implies structures can only be used in the support of boating activities. Easement clearly states that structure can be used for water recreational activities including the storage of boats.
2) Easement uses the words “dock” but never “boat dock.”
More Appropriate: “Piers, docks, and boat houses: structures used for ingress and egress to and from Lake Worth and for water recreational purposes including the storage of boats. These terms include the anchoring system and any walkways or bridges that will attach to the dock itself.”
B. “Walkway” or “Bridge”: a passage that provides access from the land to a boat dock, marina, or other floating facility.
C. “Dead Load”: the permanent inert weight of the dock structure, including fixed or permanent attachments, such as bumpers, railings, winch stands, roof structures, etc.
D. “Decking”: the surface material that forms the floor of the boat dock or catwalk.
F. “Flotation Live Load”: the total load that a dock can carry without capsizing or sinking. The flotation live load is equal to the dead load plus the live load.
G. “Habitable Structure”: any structure on a boat dock or catwalk, whether permanent or temporary.
Problems:
1) Far too ambiguous.
2) Not needed anyway.
Solution: Remove this definition.
H. “Hunt Absorption Test”: a test documenting the rate at which flotation material absorbs liquid, as well as the quantity of liquid absorbed.
I. “Live Load”: any moving or variable superimposed load on the boat dock.
J. “Registered Professional Engineer (RPE)”: a professional engineer currently registered with the State of Texas as a professional engineer with a specialization in civil or structural engineering and experienced in boat dock and pier construction.
K. “Sanitation Device”: any enclosure or equipment used as a toilet or bathing facility,
L. “Lakefront Property Line”: the property line that borders the waters of Lake Worth.
M. “Structural Live Load”: the weight of the dock itself and its ability to support itself.
N. “Working Load Safety Factor”: the ability of a boat dock anchoring system to hold or withstand loads. A safety factor of 3.0 means the anchoring system is rated to hold or withstand a load equal to three times the entire weight of the structure; e.g., if the structure weighs 1,000 pounds, the cable attached to the anchor will be able to hold 3,000 pounds.
Terms Needing Definition:
Lake Worth Management Office (LWMO)
RPE – need to add acronym to definition
3601 Permit Required
3601.1 . No person shall erect, construct, enlarge, alter, or move any dock, pier, boathouse or combination to any body of water within the corporate limits of Fort Worth, that is under the jurisdiction and control of the City of Fort Worth, without complying with the provisions of this chapter. Persons seeking to construct a boat dock must submit to LWMO two complete sets of project plans for the dock, including the anchoring system, and any walkways or bridges that will attach to the boat dock;
(A) When a dock will use existing facilities as part of the new proposed dock, the project plans must include a complete description of the existing facilities, and those facilities must comply with the specifications set forth in these regulations.
(B) The plans must be signed and sealed by a registered professional engineer (RPE), and contain a statement that the proposed dock complies with the specifications set forth in these regulations.
(C) Each plan set also must include a copy of the manufacturer’s certified plans for any components that will be a part of a dock, such as floats, decking, railing, or awning systems.
(D) Both engineered plans and manufacturer’s certified plans must be based upon the actual conditions at the site of the proposed dock.
(E) Upon approval of the plans by the Lake Worth Management Office the plans will be taken to the Fort Worth Development Department and a building permit (missing words).
3601.2 During construction of a dock, a complete set of all permits and approvals required for construction of the dock must be posted in a readily visible location at or adjacent to the construction site, and one complete set of the approved plans must be kept available at the construction site.
3601.3 Construction of a dock must be completed within six months of the date that the permit is approved by the permitting entity.
Problems:
1) The permitting entity already provides for a time limit and extension policy.
Solution: Remove.
3601.4 After a dock is completed, an RPE must submit to the Lake Worth Management Office a signed and sealed certification that it was built in accordance with the requirements set forth in these regulations and the plans submitted to and approved by the LWMO.
3602 Use.
3602.1 Boathouses shall normally be classified as a Group U Occupancy. Other occupancies may be allowed when the use is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, together with the approval of any other appropriate department of the City of Fort Worth, and the construction complies with this code for said use.
3603. Design and Design Loads.
3603.1 Flotation devices for docks walkways, and bridges shall be designed to support the dead load plus 30-pounds per square foot (PSF) live load applied to deck area.
3603.2 Boat dock and dock structural frame shall be designed to support 50 pounds PSF live load applied to the full surface area of the deck.
3603.3 Roofs on docks shall have a minimum flotation live load of 12 pounds PSF and a structural live load of 15 pounds PSF.
3603.4 Walkways and bridges shall be designed to support a live load of 50 pounds PSF.
3603.5 Walkways and bridge handrails shall be designed to withstand a 200-pound load applied in any direction and at any point along the handrail.
3603.6 Walkways and bridges shall have a maximum slope under dead load of a 4:1 ratio in any direction at the lake level of 594ft. above sea level.
3603.7 Boat docks shall be able to withstand a minimum of four-foot high wave action at lake levels up to 601 ft. above sea level. Floating boat docks must be designed with anchorage footing and piers to remain in place without floating off at the 601 elevation..
3603.8 Boat docks, anchoring systems, and connectors, including cables and chains, shall be designed to resist wind loads per the City of Fort Worth Building Code requirements for residential structures.
3603.9 Cables and chains used in anchoring systems shall be designed with a minimum working load safety factor of 3.0 for cables and 2.0 for chains.
3604 - Dock and Pier Construction
3604.1 Piles. Wood piles shall be a minimum of six (6) inches in diameter. Metal piles shall be a minimum of three (3) inches inside diameter pipe Schedule 40. Such piles shall be driven to a minimum depth of twenty-four (24) inches below the top layer of silt. Such piles shall be driven in pairs, one on either side of the platform, and braced as required by section 3604.5. Such piles shall not be spaced apart more than ten (10) feet center to center.
3604.2 Box cribs. Sets of structural columns of the same size forming a box crib may be used. Such crib shall be braced as required in Section 3604.5 and anchored as required in Section 3605.
3604.3 Beams. Beams shall be defined as those members which connect to piles to support the stringers. All beams when of wood shall be a minimum 2-inch material.
3604.4 Stringers. Stringers shall be defined as those members usually supporting the decking. All stringers when of wood shall be of a minimum 2-inch material. Pipe stringers shall be a nominal 2-1/2-inch I.D. Schedule 40 and spaced not more than eighteen (18) inches O.C.
Problems:
1) This is a narrow stringer distance for a Group U structure.
Solution:
Set distance at 24 inches.
3604.5 Decking.
(A). Wooden platform decking shall be of a minimum nominal 2-inch material.
(B). Other materials, to include lightweight concrete or metal decking may be used when approved by the Building Official. Such decking shall meet the load requirements of Section 3603.
3604.6 Bracing.
(A) All wooden bracing shall be of a minimum nominal 2-inch material.
(B) Bracing shall be accomplished by one or more of the following methods:
1. Cross or “X” bracing. Cross or “X” bracing may be used on each set of pier and box cribs.
2. Beams may be used as bracing, provided the connections give sufficient support to resist horizontal forces equivalent to that of cross or “X” bracing.
3. Knee bracing. Knee bracing shall be used on each pier attached to and paralleling the platform deck. Pipe knee bracing shall be a nominal 2-1/2 inch I.D.
Problems:
1) Proscribing bracing is unnecessary. The engineering requirements have already resolved the horizontal wind loads.
2) There are other bracing solutions than those listed here that would be just as viable.
3) Technology advances may provide additional solutions in the future.
Solution: Remove
3604.7 Attachment of deck. Attachment of the platform deck to beams and piles shall be accompanied by one or more of the following methods:
(A). By attaching the beams to the piles and box cribs by lag bolts.
(B). By caps: Wood caps shall be a minimum nominal 4-inch material and anchored by bolts and welded.
Problems:
1) Proscribing attachments are unnecessary. The design requirements have already resolved this issue.
2) There are other attachment solutions than those listed here that would be just as viable.
3) Technology advances may provide additional solutions in the future.
Solution: Remove
3605. Anchorage of Floatation and Box Crib Structures.
3605.1 Such structures shall be anchored with solid units that will provide the following anchorage:
(A). Docks and piers less than fifty (50) feet in length: An anchor on each corner that will support one-fourth of the total dead load plus one-eight the total live load.
1. Docks and piers fifty (50) feet or more in length: Anchors at the midpoint of the piers.
2. All docks and piers shall be anchored to the shore line.
3. All anchors shall be of masonry, concrete, or steel and shall be securely fastened to the dock or pier by wire rope, cable, chain, or other approved methods.
3606. Required Water Proofing.
3606.1 All wood below one (1) foot above spillway elevation on lakes or below one (1) foot above the 50-year flood elevations on other bodies of water shall be treated lumber. Creosote is not allowed.
Problem:
1) Requires additional calculation by homeowner.
More Appropriate: “All wood below 601 elevation shall be treated lumber.”
3606.2 All metal, including bolts, lag bolts, and fasteners, shall be galvanized or painted with paints of similar materials approved for immersion in water.
3607 Flotation Material
3607.1 Flotation material shall be extruded polystyrene, expanded polystyrene, or a copolymer of polyethylene and polystyrene and shall have a minimum density of 0.9 pounds per cubic foot, and be of consistent quality throughout the float. Beads shall be firmly fused together, and there shall be no voids inside the encasement. Flotation material shall have a water rate absorption of less than 3.0 pounds per cubic foot over 7 days when tested by the Hunt Absorption Test. Other flotation material may be considered if it meets all of the requirements set forth in this section.
3607.2 Flotation material shall be encased in solid polyethylene or a polyurethane type coating, both of which shall be watertight and have a nominal thickness of .125 inches.
3607.3 Drums made of plastic, whether new or recycled, or metal shall not be used for encasements or floats.
3607.4 All floats shall be warranted for a minimum of eight years against sinking, becoming waterlogged, cracking, peeling, fragmenting, or losing beads, and shall not be prone to damage by animals.
3607. 5 Floats that are punctured, exposing the foam to erosion or deterioration, shall be replaced immediately.
3608. Boat House Construction.
3608.1 Construction of boathouses or other structures shall meet or exceed the requirements for framing and coverage as specified in other parts of this code. When, in the opinion of the Building Official, the load of the intended use exceeds the capability of the minimum construction design specified in Section 3604, plans and specification may be required to be designed by an engineer registered in the State of Texas.
3609. Inspections, Removal for Violations.
3609.1 Docks may be subject to inspection by the LWMO or its authorized agents, without notice, at reasonable times.
Problems: (Severely violates rights to privacy.)
1) Violates “exclusive use” granted by easement - “The waters of Lake Worth, except that such use shall be nonexclusive except for such piers and docks constructed thereon.”
2) Violates the Constitution of the United States which protects citizens against unlawful search and seizure.
3) The LWMO (or any citizen for that matter) may use the lake as they wish. Inspections from the lake does not need additional authority.
Solution: Remove
3609.2 Dock owners and boat docks must comply with these regulations and any requirements contained in a permit at all times.
3609.3 Failure to complete inspections, follow inspection guidelines set forth above, or to correct any violations of these rules within thirty days of receipt of written notice, may result in the division or permitting entity requiring removal of the dock at the dock owner’s expense.
Problems:
1) Gives undue authority to LWMO agent.
2) Resolution authority for violations already exists in the permitting and code inspection departments.
Solution: Remove
3609.4 The division or permitting entity may remove docks that become hazards to navigation at the dock owner’s expense.
3609.5 When a boat dock is removed for any reason whatsoever, including at the initiative of the dock owner or at the direction of the LWMO, the dock owner shall be responsible for the complete removal of the entire dock including the boat dock, walkway, anchoring system, cables, floats, and any other related components or materials installed in conjunction with the construction, maintenance, or use of the dock.
Problems:
1) Implies LWMO has sole authority to authorize removal of docks and seizure of property without due process.
Solution: Remove portion of sentence.
Problems include several easement violations and severe violation of property owner privacy rights.
********************************************************
*Chapter 36; added to read as follows:
DRAFT
Chapter 36
Docks, Piers and Boathouses
DEFINITIONS:
A. “Boat Dock, Pier, or Boat House”: a structure extending from the shore into the water to permit the landing and mooring of vessels. The term “boat dock, boat house” or “dock” includes the anchoring system and any walkways or bridges that will attach to the dock itself.
Problems:
1) Definition conflicts with rights granted in easement. This document erroneously implies structures can only be used in the support of boating activities. Easement clearly states that structure can be used for water recreational activities including the storage of boats.
2) Easement uses the words “dock” but never “boat dock.”
More Appropriate: “Piers, docks, and boat houses: structures used for ingress and egress to and from Lake Worth and for water recreational purposes including the storage of boats. These terms include the anchoring system and any walkways or bridges that will attach to the dock itself.”
B. “Walkway” or “Bridge”: a passage that provides access from the land to a boat dock, marina, or other floating facility.
C. “Dead Load”: the permanent inert weight of the dock structure, including fixed or permanent attachments, such as bumpers, railings, winch stands, roof structures, etc.
D. “Decking”: the surface material that forms the floor of the boat dock or catwalk.
F. “Flotation Live Load”: the total load that a dock can carry without capsizing or sinking. The flotation live load is equal to the dead load plus the live load.
G. “Habitable Structure”: any structure on a boat dock or catwalk, whether permanent or temporary.
Problems:
1) Far too ambiguous.
2) Not needed anyway.
Solution: Remove this definition.
H. “Hunt Absorption Test”: a test documenting the rate at which flotation material absorbs liquid, as well as the quantity of liquid absorbed.
I. “Live Load”: any moving or variable superimposed load on the boat dock.
J. “Registered Professional Engineer (RPE)”: a professional engineer currently registered with the State of Texas as a professional engineer with a specialization in civil or structural engineering and experienced in boat dock and pier construction.
K. “Sanitation Device”: any enclosure or equipment used as a toilet or bathing facility,
L. “Lakefront Property Line”: the property line that borders the waters of Lake Worth.
M. “Structural Live Load”: the weight of the dock itself and its ability to support itself.
N. “Working Load Safety Factor”: the ability of a boat dock anchoring system to hold or withstand loads. A safety factor of 3.0 means the anchoring system is rated to hold or withstand a load equal to three times the entire weight of the structure; e.g., if the structure weighs 1,000 pounds, the cable attached to the anchor will be able to hold 3,000 pounds.
Terms Needing Definition:
Lake Worth Management Office (LWMO)
RPE – need to add acronym to definition
3601 Permit Required
3601.1 . No person shall erect, construct, enlarge, alter, or move any dock, pier, boathouse or combination to any body of water within the corporate limits of Fort Worth, that is under the jurisdiction and control of the City of Fort Worth, without complying with the provisions of this chapter. Persons seeking to construct a boat dock must submit to LWMO two complete sets of project plans for the dock, including the anchoring system, and any walkways or bridges that will attach to the boat dock;
(A) When a dock will use existing facilities as part of the new proposed dock, the project plans must include a complete description of the existing facilities, and those facilities must comply with the specifications set forth in these regulations.
(B) The plans must be signed and sealed by a registered professional engineer (RPE), and contain a statement that the proposed dock complies with the specifications set forth in these regulations.
(C) Each plan set also must include a copy of the manufacturer’s certified plans for any components that will be a part of a dock, such as floats, decking, railing, or awning systems.
(D) Both engineered plans and manufacturer’s certified plans must be based upon the actual conditions at the site of the proposed dock.
(E) Upon approval of the plans by the Lake Worth Management Office the plans will be taken to the Fort Worth Development Department and a building permit (missing words).
3601.2 During construction of a dock, a complete set of all permits and approvals required for construction of the dock must be posted in a readily visible location at or adjacent to the construction site, and one complete set of the approved plans must be kept available at the construction site.
3601.3 Construction of a dock must be completed within six months of the date that the permit is approved by the permitting entity.
Problems:
1) The permitting entity already provides for a time limit and extension policy.
Solution: Remove.
3601.4 After a dock is completed, an RPE must submit to the Lake Worth Management Office a signed and sealed certification that it was built in accordance with the requirements set forth in these regulations and the plans submitted to and approved by the LWMO.
3602 Use.
3602.1 Boathouses shall normally be classified as a Group U Occupancy. Other occupancies may be allowed when the use is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, together with the approval of any other appropriate department of the City of Fort Worth, and the construction complies with this code for said use.
3603. Design and Design Loads.
3603.1 Flotation devices for docks walkways, and bridges shall be designed to support the dead load plus 30-pounds per square foot (PSF) live load applied to deck area.
3603.2 Boat dock and dock structural frame shall be designed to support 50 pounds PSF live load applied to the full surface area of the deck.
3603.3 Roofs on docks shall have a minimum flotation live load of 12 pounds PSF and a structural live load of 15 pounds PSF.
3603.4 Walkways and bridges shall be designed to support a live load of 50 pounds PSF.
3603.5 Walkways and bridge handrails shall be designed to withstand a 200-pound load applied in any direction and at any point along the handrail.
3603.6 Walkways and bridges shall have a maximum slope under dead load of a 4:1 ratio in any direction at the lake level of 594ft. above sea level.
3603.7 Boat docks shall be able to withstand a minimum of four-foot high wave action at lake levels up to 601 ft. above sea level. Floating boat docks must be designed with anchorage footing and piers to remain in place without floating off at the 601 elevation..
3603.8 Boat docks, anchoring systems, and connectors, including cables and chains, shall be designed to resist wind loads per the City of Fort Worth Building Code requirements for residential structures.
3603.9 Cables and chains used in anchoring systems shall be designed with a minimum working load safety factor of 3.0 for cables and 2.0 for chains.
3604 - Dock and Pier Construction
3604.1 Piles. Wood piles shall be a minimum of six (6) inches in diameter. Metal piles shall be a minimum of three (3) inches inside diameter pipe Schedule 40. Such piles shall be driven to a minimum depth of twenty-four (24) inches below the top layer of silt. Such piles shall be driven in pairs, one on either side of the platform, and braced as required by section 3604.5. Such piles shall not be spaced apart more than ten (10) feet center to center.
3604.2 Box cribs. Sets of structural columns of the same size forming a box crib may be used. Such crib shall be braced as required in Section 3604.5 and anchored as required in Section 3605.
3604.3 Beams. Beams shall be defined as those members which connect to piles to support the stringers. All beams when of wood shall be a minimum 2-inch material.
3604.4 Stringers. Stringers shall be defined as those members usually supporting the decking. All stringers when of wood shall be of a minimum 2-inch material. Pipe stringers shall be a nominal 2-1/2-inch I.D. Schedule 40 and spaced not more than eighteen (18) inches O.C.
Problems:
1) This is a narrow stringer distance for a Group U structure.
Solution:
Set distance at 24 inches.
3604.5 Decking.
(A). Wooden platform decking shall be of a minimum nominal 2-inch material.
(B). Other materials, to include lightweight concrete or metal decking may be used when approved by the Building Official. Such decking shall meet the load requirements of Section 3603.
3604.6 Bracing.
(A) All wooden bracing shall be of a minimum nominal 2-inch material.
(B) Bracing shall be accomplished by one or more of the following methods:
1. Cross or “X” bracing. Cross or “X” bracing may be used on each set of pier and box cribs.
2. Beams may be used as bracing, provided the connections give sufficient support to resist horizontal forces equivalent to that of cross or “X” bracing.
3. Knee bracing. Knee bracing shall be used on each pier attached to and paralleling the platform deck. Pipe knee bracing shall be a nominal 2-1/2 inch I.D.
Problems:
1) Proscribing bracing is unnecessary. The engineering requirements have already resolved the horizontal wind loads.
2) There are other bracing solutions than those listed here that would be just as viable.
3) Technology advances may provide additional solutions in the future.
Solution: Remove
3604.7 Attachment of deck. Attachment of the platform deck to beams and piles shall be accompanied by one or more of the following methods:
(A). By attaching the beams to the piles and box cribs by lag bolts.
(B). By caps: Wood caps shall be a minimum nominal 4-inch material and anchored by bolts and welded.
Problems:
1) Proscribing attachments are unnecessary. The design requirements have already resolved this issue.
2) There are other attachment solutions than those listed here that would be just as viable.
3) Technology advances may provide additional solutions in the future.
Solution: Remove
3605. Anchorage of Floatation and Box Crib Structures.
3605.1 Such structures shall be anchored with solid units that will provide the following anchorage:
(A). Docks and piers less than fifty (50) feet in length: An anchor on each corner that will support one-fourth of the total dead load plus one-eight the total live load.
1. Docks and piers fifty (50) feet or more in length: Anchors at the midpoint of the piers.
2. All docks and piers shall be anchored to the shore line.
3. All anchors shall be of masonry, concrete, or steel and shall be securely fastened to the dock or pier by wire rope, cable, chain, or other approved methods.
3606. Required Water Proofing.
3606.1 All wood below one (1) foot above spillway elevation on lakes or below one (1) foot above the 50-year flood elevations on other bodies of water shall be treated lumber. Creosote is not allowed.
Problem:
1) Requires additional calculation by homeowner.
More Appropriate: “All wood below 601 elevation shall be treated lumber.”
3606.2 All metal, including bolts, lag bolts, and fasteners, shall be galvanized or painted with paints of similar materials approved for immersion in water.
3607 Flotation Material
3607.1 Flotation material shall be extruded polystyrene, expanded polystyrene, or a copolymer of polyethylene and polystyrene and shall have a minimum density of 0.9 pounds per cubic foot, and be of consistent quality throughout the float. Beads shall be firmly fused together, and there shall be no voids inside the encasement. Flotation material shall have a water rate absorption of less than 3.0 pounds per cubic foot over 7 days when tested by the Hunt Absorption Test. Other flotation material may be considered if it meets all of the requirements set forth in this section.
3607.2 Flotation material shall be encased in solid polyethylene or a polyurethane type coating, both of which shall be watertight and have a nominal thickness of .125 inches.
3607.3 Drums made of plastic, whether new or recycled, or metal shall not be used for encasements or floats.
3607.4 All floats shall be warranted for a minimum of eight years against sinking, becoming waterlogged, cracking, peeling, fragmenting, or losing beads, and shall not be prone to damage by animals.
3607. 5 Floats that are punctured, exposing the foam to erosion or deterioration, shall be replaced immediately.
3608. Boat House Construction.
3608.1 Construction of boathouses or other structures shall meet or exceed the requirements for framing and coverage as specified in other parts of this code. When, in the opinion of the Building Official, the load of the intended use exceeds the capability of the minimum construction design specified in Section 3604, plans and specification may be required to be designed by an engineer registered in the State of Texas.
3609. Inspections, Removal for Violations.
3609.1 Docks may be subject to inspection by the LWMO or its authorized agents, without notice, at reasonable times.
Problems: (Severely violates rights to privacy.)
1) Violates “exclusive use” granted by easement - “The waters of Lake Worth, except that such use shall be nonexclusive except for such piers and docks constructed thereon.”
2) Violates the Constitution of the United States which protects citizens against unlawful search and seizure.
3) The LWMO (or any citizen for that matter) may use the lake as they wish. Inspections from the lake does not need additional authority.
Solution: Remove
3609.2 Dock owners and boat docks must comply with these regulations and any requirements contained in a permit at all times.
3609.3 Failure to complete inspections, follow inspection guidelines set forth above, or to correct any violations of these rules within thirty days of receipt of written notice, may result in the division or permitting entity requiring removal of the dock at the dock owner’s expense.
Problems:
1) Gives undue authority to LWMO agent.
2) Resolution authority for violations already exists in the permitting and code inspection departments.
Solution: Remove
3609.4 The division or permitting entity may remove docks that become hazards to navigation at the dock owner’s expense.
3609.5 When a boat dock is removed for any reason whatsoever, including at the initiative of the dock owner or at the direction of the LWMO, the dock owner shall be responsible for the complete removal of the entire dock including the boat dock, walkway, anchoring system, cables, floats, and any other related components or materials installed in conjunction with the construction, maintenance, or use of the dock.
Problems:
1) Implies LWMO has sole authority to authorize removal of docks and seizure of property without due process.
Solution: Remove portion of sentence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)