Alexander Ct-CS0710262010) Ken Griffin - Tidbits Page 1
From:
Kathy Bowling
To:
Directors
CC:
Scarlett Hovland
Date:
10/26/2007 3:38 PM
Subject:
Tidbits
Attachments:
Tidbits1.doc
T H E C 1 T Y O F
COPPELL
T o
W-W, 8 q
VIA E -MAIL
MEMORANDUM
TO: Directors
FROM: Jim Witt, City Manager
DATE: October 26, 2007
REF: Tidbits
1. We received a demand letter from Mira Mar Development, and forwarded it to TML, as
well as our city attorneys. We have placed a copy of the letter in your boxes for your
review. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. The Taylor Olson
firm has been retained by TML to represent us.
2. Contrary to most 2007 calendars, we do not turn clocks back this Sunday. Legislation
decreed that beginning in 2007 we would "fall back" the first Sunday in November. In this
case it is November 4.
3. Just a reminder, we have a joint meeting with the Park Board on Tuesday, October 30 at
6 p.m. in the second floor conference room. Dinner is Chicken Mogia, and will be
provided by Gloria's.
JW:kb
J. 50010
OCT 25 3007 14:02 FR 31 436_0 X01 0
3145650010 T1- 3723047063 P.01
NiCHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD,
HAGER & SMITH, L.L.P.
1$00 LINCOLN PLAZA
500 N. AKARD
DALLAS, 'T'EXAS 75201
(214) 965 -9900
(214) 965 -0010 FAX
PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING TO:
NAME: Jim Witt
Clay Phillips
COMPANY: City of Coppell
FAX NO.: 972 -304 -7063
DATE: October 25, 2007
FROM: J. David Dodd, III
TRANSMITTED BY: Elandra Pruitt
NUMBER OF PAGES (Including Cover Sheet): 7
RE: Alexander Court/City of Coppell - Fax from
Walter Leonard Dated October 25, 2007.
OCT 25 2107 14:02 FR 21496' '10 2149650010 Tr 9723047063 P.02
UC I ._UI!r" IC!: -1.: I-+.1 I.f"L -F' L1. LE(2 IIr -IP1) 17 S Z
WALT W..LEONARD
A "r�R�'EV:t7 LA1l'
�I•iE SUVIAJAVENUe" 6:7•'35-6538
S!:ITE :0 10 FAX 617 -335- -7932
cOn'rWORTH TEXAS 7F, 1 �� el.lAll wv.iRpv.�r�n7.crm
FAX TRA SHEE
DATE
Omber 25, 2007
TO
David D odd
FRONt
Walt. Leonard
FA O: 214/965-0010
-- ----
CL1ENT,'FILY N0- Hawlun /Coppe _ 5120
TOTAL. NUMBER OF PAGES WNCLIMM COVER SHEET): ...,_ —.6 _, _ _•�,
THIS TR_AS�IISSIONV IS SLBMITTED
x FOR YOUR FTLE FOR YOUR P_VFORMATION
FOR YOUR APPROVAL X FOR YOUR REVIEW
X FOP, YOUR RFSPONSF PER YOUR REQUEST
C ONEVEENT S -
See following.
THE ORIGINAL IS x BEING SENT VTA MAIL
1S NOT
NOTICE.: THE. LNFORNW - ION LN THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE LS ATTORNEY�CLIIENT
PR.IR7LF01M AND CONI:IDYNT.IAL Pt.FORIMAT1ON INTENDED ONLY FOR THE UWVWUAL OR
ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THI.SMESSAGE IS NOT THE PITENDED RECIPIENT,
OR THE ]EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR IIELMRY TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT,
YOU ARE HERNRY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSE;'VWATION, DISTRMUTT.ON OR COPYING OF TF11S
COMMLNICATION IS A.N ERROR. IF YOU FIAVE RECEIVED THIS FACSIMILE IN ERROR, PLEASE
MT EDIATFLY NvOTIFY THIS OFFICE BY COLLECT TELEPHONE CALL AND RETURN THE
ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THY. OFFYCf ADDRFSS ABOVE BY U.S. POSTAL SF.RVICF..
&�fMRE ARE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THIS TRA.NS;�4JTT•4L. PLEASE CONTACT
AT 817/335.6538.
OCT 25 2007 14:02 FR 21496 710 2149650010 T 9723047063 P.03
.., I - —.__— - - , Li 'j :•1 C-1 11 L.iH_.tti i.I - LEiDtIAPD R1 = ,'dC +3::
WA LTZER W. LEONARD
A rr��kFV xr L
0 "• E SUMtoI1 a 1ENJE
dt�S3E•663i
Su'TE Ir,9n CA'! g7- 335.093?
rgRT I•vpRTH TEXAS 16`02 October 25., 7007 EtAA1_ ww:!ryien�juno.�om
Mir- David Dodd VIA FAX NO.. 214/965 -0010 AND
Nichols, Jackson, Dillard, Hager & Smith, L.L.P. VIA REGULAR. U.S. MALL
1800 Lincoln Plaza
Ualla5, T' 75201
RE: Alexander Court/City of Coppell
Dear David:
At the request of my client, T am enclosing a letter from hirn which both encapsulates some
of his thoughts -with regards to the harm ;hat has been done to him by what we feel to be the City - s
Failure to comply %%titli current statutes and la , , , , , s and he also feels that it should be iaterpreted ac an
attempt to open some sort of dial ogue, if such is possible, to attempt to resolve all or most of these
matters.
As he indicated when be told the City that be would comply with the City's development
requirements but attempt to resolve some of these coocems through the statutory process, he still
feels there are nwiy issues which have not been answered. He certainly does not feel that the
Council's hearing procedure was sufficient to air these matters oor was there any real attempt to
resolve anything other than simply to entrench positions
By lus letter and by this letter, we arc indicating a willingness to discuss these matters and
awaiting some sort of response from Lbe City with regards to its willingness, or not, to tty to defuse
all of these matters at this early 9tage.
Please give me a ring so that we can discuss <this and I look forward to hearing from you.
Very truly yours,
r
Walter W. Leonard
WWL:cd
cc: .John Hawkins
enc 1.
OCT 25 2007 14:02 FR 21496' 71 a
10;4 �.iri t.IHL T E P' :.r. I EptIAPYr
Oct 24 07 12:20p John L. }Iw i na
617 -- 329-1792
0/
pGJELCPMENi � ""
COaPCw�'riora
m "car Planned Mulirs
W. Jim Witt, City Manager
City of Coppell
255 Parkway Blvd.
Coppell, T'x- 75019
17car Sir,
October 24, 2007
Re: Alexander Court
Expense Retmboraement
F.
I first appealed for resolution about evolving questions pertaining to the
City's development requirements to Mamie Diamond by letter January 16
and you via my letter of Apri 1 17, when it fira became known that the flood
plain was going to be more of an issue than was originally anticipated_ The
first appeal to Ken Griffin was my April 27 letter. Having failed to resolve
the most vital issues, I provided a written request for response, via a lctte7r
dated July 9; which Ken ignored. After writing to Clay Philips August 7, we
requested an appeal by Council of several exaction issues, which financially
impacted my property. Council met August 28, denied all but one claim
and steadfastly refused to engage in any wear ingfW discussion. After
receiving David Dodd's lettcr of September 17, it was obvious the City had
become incommunicative, adopted an adversarial posture and had no interest
in reconciliation, or complying with State law. Since the filing deadline wag
at .hand, I had no hope for resolution but to file a lawsuit September 26,
or lose any opportunity to pursue these questions.
Prior to filing the suit from January to September, either I or my attorney
had offered eighteen (18) letters to either the City staff or your attorney,
in an effort to resolve the exaction issues, all to no avail. Having not
received any response from your October meeting, I must assume nothing
has improved; 'Therefore, in accordance with the provisions set forth and
therein stated within the body and intent of the state statute for the Local
Goveniment Code section 212.904, which provides for the apportionment of
Municipal Infrastructure Costs, the undersigned herein makes this formal
DEMAND FOR RRINSUR.SEMENT of all unjurtt Pecs and costs accreted,
FLs an illegal expense, to Mira Mar Dev. Corp., by the City of Coppell_ These
unjustified actions and imposition of certain exactions without any requisite
appropriate justification or evidence of public necessity and without any
Page One of Four
2149650010 T 9723747063
P.04
P. r_f :y
6003 Smnd- erZand Drdoe • Co(l- y...ille, Byers 7
W. (8.1 996 -6698 • Au- (81 - 7) 329,,179.z
- OCT 25 2007 14:03 FR 2149E 310 2149650010 T 9723047063
1Q:.ti rtM WHL -TEP LI_ I-F'(:)tIARD e1
Clot 24 07 12:21p Jahn L. Hawking 617329 -1'792
Expense Reimbursement
Page Two of Four
individualized determinations being made, as required by lave, are described
in detail per my original letter to Ken Griffin of fuly 9. The City is required
to prove a public need for all exactions imposad on private property owners
and likewise prove there to be reasonable, on an individual basis. None of
this has been done.
These fees and unnecessary associated costs, as estimated to date,
are enumerated as follows:
1) Rolled Curbs:
Disallowed without justification or precedent, arbitrary
and adverse to accepted development practice, no individual
determination for applicability or aesthetic amenity 30,000
2) Extra .Inlets:
Not required according to accepted engineering standards;
Street water carrying capacity sufficient as designed 12,000
3) Public Sidewalk:
No utility or connectivity as located, No access for AC
residents and City mandated free easement; objections
raised to City staff by letter 01/16/07; no response
4) Two Raised Bldg. Pads:
Not required for flood safety; excessive and unjustified,
according to City ordinance and existing similar sites
5) Headwall Piers:
Excessive; Not required for soil recension, extended toe
wail sufficient for accepted engineering standards
6) Extm Sewer Manhole:
Unnecessary, according to Director of Public Works,
Spacing is acceptable and cleamwt access sufficient
7) Water line Concrete Caps:
Unnecessary, based on individual determination;
Surface to be destroyed and resurfaced in near future
P -2
17,000 '
5,000
2,000
3,000
3,000
P.05
P _ C. 1
OCT 25 0007 14:0 FR 2146F 01P L146650010 T" 6723247063
T- .:'S -; nn, 1 0 : • }- ari P L EK• rr. EEOrraPP
Oct 24 07 12:21p John L. Hewkin%
817-329-1792
Expense Reimburgemeut Page Three of Four
8) Retaining Walls & 4.1 Yard Slopes:
Unnecessary and uniustified, City mandated Walls
30% Excessive and 3:1 slope easily m$intainable 23,000
9) Dirt moved twice its Flood Plain:
Unnecessary additional movement of Bldg. Pad dirt,
Due to indecision by Engineering Dept. 12,000
10) Duplicate Flood Study:
Unnecessary requirement; no public justification
or provision by ordinancc, checking for City benefit 2,000
I 1) FEMA I.OMR Application:
Unjustified 2.5 month dcle.5' for City convenience 12,000
12) Engineering Fees:
Unnecessary redesign fees required for City accommnodation 7,000
13) Park Fees:
Arbitrary, unjustified; no relative individual determination 37,265
p.3
14) Roadway Assessment Fees:
Arbitrary, unjustified; no individual detz=inatjon 19,444
15) Tree Mitigation Fees:
Arbitrary, unjustified; no relative individual determination 34,500
16) Inspection Fees:
Arbitrary, inconsistent; no individual detemiination 27,000
17) Attorney Fees & Administration costs:
Unnecessary added costs with recovery allowod by statute 40,000
TOTAL RFWBURSEMENT EXPENSE: = s 285,200
P.06
P. 0-;
Several of the items could be mitigated, to some degree, if the City werc
willing• to acknowledge State and Federal law arid provide some sort of
OCT 25 2007 14:03 FR 21496° 910 2149650010 T'" 9723047063
U� T— :_'S— l:C1(D i l �71 •d •L Hri Wl A , EP ll. LEOhrNRD
Got ?4 07 12:22p John. L. Hawk i nz
Expense Reimbursement
617- 329 -1792
p.
Page. Four of Four
individualized deter ivahon of the supposed burden the subdivision places
on the City's infmtnlcture and some justificat for the exaction fees. It is
unfortunate the City has taken an intractable position and chosen to refuse
any dialogue between the parties, such that we are unable to resolve this
dispute; However, without further reconciliation, we must proceed with this
DEMAND FOR PAYMENT in the current estimated amount of $ 285,200,
which uili be requested as damages in the lawsuit.
cc: Walter W. Leonard, Esquire
P.07
P -06
1
Joan L. Hawkins, Pres.
** TOTAL PAGE.07 **