Northlake WE P10A-CS 930210~~~~ Coppell. Texas 75019
~J /~ The City With A Beautiful Future / ~/
Nichols, Jac~n, ~rk & Di~d
5~ N. ~d St.
D~las, TX 75201
Re: No~ke Woo~an~ ~ ~ 10, S~tlom A&B, ~velopment
D~
~is let~r is wilton to ob~n a ]eg~ opi~on ~d/or cl~fi~fion on how to
~I1~o, of development f~ on No~l~e W~l~ds ~t Pha~s I0-A ~d I~B.
histo~ as I ~ de~e is as follows:
An ofigin~ plat for ~ pha~s was submit~ to the Ci~ ~at includ~ 375 1o~. Our
development f~s in eff~t at ~at time s~ ~at ~e wa~r ~d ~wer av~bi]i~ ch~g¢ w~
$440 ~r lot, but ~e develo~r was o~y res~nsible for 1/2 of ~at. Our ~s~on ~r~t
w~ 1.5~. On D~mber 16, 1985, ~e develo~r ~d the f~s for Ph~ A ~d B b~ u~,
the as~ssment f~s in ¢ff~t at that time. However, he sub~uenfly only fin~ plaB~
W~]~ds ~st Pha~ 10-A which ~n~ 185 lots. ~e reminder, Ph~ 10-B, which
con~n~ 1~ lots, has never b~n fil~ ~d is ~¢mfore no longer a v~id prelimin~ plat of
r~rd.
~. P~ns h~ conact~ me to as~n whe~er or not ~s f~s have ~n ~en ~ of for
this development. In re~ching ~is mawr, ~e question ~at I have is, b~u~ ~e plat w~
never fil~, do ~ey ~en n~ to come back ~d pay f~s on Ph~ I~B under our cu~ent f~
~sment, or d~ ~e fact ~at ~ f~ were ~d in g~ f~ ~ 1985 for ~ 375 lo~ suffi~
for ~ng ~e of ~e~ f~s on No~l~c W~ds ~t Phis I~A ~d 10-B.
At~ch~ to ~is is a ~py of ~e f~ sch~u]¢ from D~m~r, 1985, showing ~at
f~t pay ~eir f~ b~ on 375 lo~. AI~ a~ch~ is a b~do~ of a f~ mimbur~ment
r~ues~ by ~. P~ns in 1988. I u~ ~at f~ reimbur~ment to ob~n what ~e ac~ f~
shoed have ~n in just Ph~ I~A. M~ provid~ is a le~r from Mr. Stove Mo~n
November, 1987, which provid~ ~e s~t sign f~s ~d ins~fion f~s.
If he h~ ~fisfi~ his r~uirement for ~e development f~ on ~is su~i~on, ~en my
res~n~ to Mr. P~ns w~ ~ ~at ~¢ only f~ ou~d~g would ~ ~y f~s ~~ wi~
ad~fion~ ins~fion f~ ~d/or ~y s~t ligh~ or s~t signs f~s ~at would have ex~
what was initially paid in 1985.
If your opinion is that they should be under the new fee assessmen.t, then there is a difference
to the City of approximately $96,000 plus fees for street signs, street lights, inspection fees and
irrigation fees for Phase 10-B. I have provided a breakdown of how I obtained those costs. I
am trying to respond to Mr. Parsons in a timely manner, as the City in conjunction with the
Grapevine Creek Sewer Line project, is trying to obtain a utility easement from Mr. Parsons.
Mr. Parsons has indicated that he would not be agreeable to signing the utility easement until
he has an understanding of whether or not his fees have been taken care of on this property.
I would be happy to sit down and meet with you on this matter and/or provide any additional
information that you may need to make a determination on this issue.
Sincerely,
Kenn~'~eeth M. Griffin, P.E.
City Engineer
cc:t~Kl~ D. Ratliff, City Manager Frank Trando, Finance Director
Steve Goram, Director of Public Works
KMG/pn
smith.long