ST8601-AG 890717AGENDA REQUEST FORM
CITY COUNCIL MEE?ING July 17, 1989
ITEM NO.
iTEM CAPTION:
Article 6252-17, Section 2
lease or value of real property.
b. Acquisition of right-of-way for MacArthur Blvd.
SUBMITTED BY: '~*'~ STAY? ~EP.:
(Director s Signature)
OTHER REP.:
EVALUATION OF ITEM:
(f) discussion concerning the purchase,
- City Atty.
DATE:
exchange,
Larry Jackson
BI,GET AMT.:
CO~ENTS:
AMT. ESTIMATED:
AMT. +/- BUDGET:
FINANCIAL REVIEW BY:
LEGAL REVIEW BY: REVIEWED BY CM:
AGEndA REQ FORM.05SSDf
KIRK & DILLARD
"~Formerly Saner, Jack, Sallinger &
At~rneys & Counselors at Law
Dallas,1800 Lincoln Plaza500 TexasN' Ak~d75201
(214) 954-3333 . Lou,$ N,C~OLS
Facsimile (214) 954-3334 or COUN~£L ~ ~
Mr. Alan D. Ratliff
City Manager
City of Coppell
P. O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
Re:
MaeArthur Boulevard Extension - Univest
Our File Numbers 151 and 287
Dear Mr. Ratliff:
This is in response to your handwritten memorandum of June 9, 1989, requesting
a response by June 25.
I contacted Mr. Mike Allen concerning the city's desire to have a very simple
agreement under which the city would agree not to assess Univest for the street
improvement to be constructed by Lomas & Nettleton in return for Univast's dedication
of the street right-of-way. I was advised by Mr. Allen that I should contact their
organization through their attorney, Mr. Richard Dooley.
I contacted Mr. Dooley and he in turn advised me to deal directly with Mr. Glen
Henkley.
I had a long conversation with Mr. Henkley who appeared very anxious to proceed
with the agreement. I told him that we would not agree to the voluminous contract
prepared by their attorney which rehashed many old things already included in other
agreements and that we were interested in a very simple two or three page agreement
which would provide that the city would see that the road is constructed without street
assessment against Univest in return for dedication of the right-of-way. He said he
would review the matter and get back in touch with me, which he did a short time
later and said that he would agree to this with the following exceptions which he said
were a part of the original agreement reached at a meeting with you:
1. City would see that the road is eonstrue~6d at no eo~t to the Univest
Joint Venture with no assessment for road construction costs and no assessments for
utilities, trunk lines, storm drainage lines, etc. being put into the roadway.
2. That the validity of their plat be extended for a period of 12 months
beyond the date of completion of and acceptance of MaeArthur Boulevard.
3. That construction of the roadway would include median cuts and drive
apron turnouts which Lomas has agreed to construct.
Mr. Alan D. Ratliff
June 21, 1989
Page 2
4. That we would agree to the side slope of five to one that they had
arranged with Lomas.
5. That there would be some agreement between the three parties as to time
for construction to start.
I could certainly prepare an agreement containing these items which would be
much simpler than the complicated agreement that they have submitted to ns. Please
give me your thoughts concerning any of these items which you could not agree to.
Very truly yours,
LWJ/sb
SALLINGER, NICHOLS, JACKSON,
KIRK & DILLARD