Northlake WE P10B-CS 930116The City With A Beautiful Futurej\\l /L'
F'U,RLIC VVO~ :~S_._JI
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
214-462-0022
Mr. Pete Smith X
Nichols, Jackson, Kirk & Dillard ~
1800 Lincoln Plaza
500 N. Akard St.
Dallas, TX 75201
~ iions A&B, Development Fees
This letter is written to obtain a legal opinion and/or clarification on how to proceed with the
collection of development fees on Northlake Woodlands l~a~t Phases 10-A and 10-B. The
history as I can determine is as follows:
An original plat for both phases was submitted to the City that included 375 lots. Our
development fees in effect at that time stated that the water and sewer availability charge was
$440 per lot, but the developer was only responsible for 1/2 of that. Our inspection permit fee
was 1.5%. On December 16, 1985, the developer paid the fees for Phases A and B based upon
the assessment fees in effect at that time. However, he subsequently only final platted Northlake
Woodlands East Phase 10-A which contained 185 lots. The remainder, Phase 10-B, which
contained 190 lots, has never been filed and is therefore no longer a valid preliminary plat of
record.
Mr. Parsons has contacted me to ascertain whether or not his fees have been taken care of for
this development. In researching this matter, the question that I have is, because the plat was
never filed, do they then need to come back and pay fees on Phase 10-B under our current fee
assessment, or does the fact that all fees were paid in good faith in 1985 for the 375 lots suffice
for taking care of their fees on Northlake Woodlands East Phases 10-A and 10-B.
Attached to this is a copy of the fee schedule from December, 1985, showing that they did in
fact pay their fees based on 375 lots. Also attached is a breakdown of a fee reimbursement
requested by Mr. Parsons in 1988. I used that fee reimbursement to obtain what the actual fee
should have been in just Phase 10-A. Also provided is a letter from Mr. Steve Morton in
November, 1987, which provided the street sign fees and inspection fees.
If he has satisfied his requirement for the development fees on this subdivision, then my
response to Mr. Parsons will be that the only fee outstanding would be any fees associated with
additional inspection fees and/or any street fights or street signs fees that would have exceeded
what was initially paid in 1985.
If your opinion is that they should be under the new fee assessment, 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 agree_able 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,
Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E.
City Engineer
cc: Alan D. Ratliff, City Manager
Frank Trando, Finance Director
~.~eve Goram, Director of Public Works
KMG/pn
smith.lung
I~tO
I '-3-0
7. Preliminary Plat
8. Final Plat -
non-=es~dent~a]
~. Final Plat - residential
lO. Final Plat -
multi-family
ll. Final Plat -
estate districts
12. Replot
These fees shal! be charged on
S100 plus St per lot
S100 plus $55 per acre
$500 plus S20 per lot
$100 plus $3 per unit
$30 per acre
$100 plus tS per lot
plots, rego:dless of the
action taken by the Planning and Zoning Commission and
whethe: the plat is approved or denied by the City Council.
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY FEE:
The City Manage: shall dete=mtne
the follow~ng schedule:
1. Single F~mily/Duplex/
Mobile Home
2. lownhouse/Multt-FamllY
3. Retail and Commercial
~. ]ndustrta!
the above fee based on
Other non-~esldentta!
$~0 per unit
$300 per unit
S120 pc: 1000 s.f. of
buildtng area
$60 per 1000 $.f. of
building a:ea
$120 per 1000 s.f. of
building asea
50% of the above fee 'shall be paid pzio: to appzovol of the
final plat by the City Council. The ~emaining 50, mh~ll be
paid p~loz to issuance of any building pe=mit fo: the develop
development.
Subdivision Ord.
The City With A Beautiful Future
'.__:?
MENIORANDUM
P O. Box 478
Coppell. Texas 75019
/214 - 462 - 0022
[.3~.cr~n)ber 6, Ig85
TO:
Vivyon Bowman. Administrative Assistant
F;ROM:
Account no.
855
56O
Oebbie Layton. Administrative Secretary
Public Works Oepartment
Asse~=,,ent Fees on Northlake Woodlands East. Phase 10
Type of' Fee
Construction Permit [Based on cost'c
estimate of $-'-~'.2~I~.000)
Water Availability (375 lots (~ $220)
Sewer Availahility (375 lots ~ $220)
Water Load Test ibased on ap~. g.021 feet
of water Hne)
~ ,-..':'~,' ~mt25 /~ ' '¢
Park Park ~ees [375 to~s X $75] ..~
632 '. ,~>~' ''-~' I8,gqq
632 '. · ~,761
Street Light5 (64 ~ $296)
Street Signs (28 Street/Stop Signs)
f22 speed limit signs)
Total Due
· .: e2,500 - I~-/~
g' ~, 82.500 ~,,. .,1
151 / ,~
TOTAL DUE
252,476
!
~0
1251
TO
1257
/(_
1258
.)
,,'0008 ~ 5.0000~
/O00B~sooood
RECEIPT Date-- ~,c~ [~")_19_~__'~ No.
Received Frg~m.c~ ,~ , --~~~
A dress ~2_&-_~ .,~.
. ~: ~ :~u~_ ~_ __2 t '- ' .......
City Wilh A Beautilul Future
P O. Box 478
Coppel[, Texas 75019
214 - 462-9010
I'k~vcmher 18, 1987
'.: ~!<)~,.; Creek #101
'{'m,-~!l , Texas 75019
cosy
[~imr Hr. Parsons:
~.~ :~(~on as I receive your remittance for the:
, ,, ~ ';ign A~essment of $3781.80
,,,: , ~m Fo,, f~r Htility of $7304.39
· ,~ ~ , i i~m ~,'ct~ for Paving of $8739.15
Total:S19,825.34
along with 2 sets of mylar and 2 sets of blue line "As Builts",
,/~m w~[] receive the city acceptance for Northlake Woodlands
[()
Thank you,
Steven M. Morton
Chief of Land Developnr~a-t--
SMM/sm
The City With A Beautiful Future
P.O Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
214-462-0022
June 21, 1988
Mr. Steve Parsons
Northlake Woodlands
102 Meadow Creek #101
Coppell, Texas 75019
Dear Mr. Parsons:
On June 3, 1988 you made a verbal request that the City refund
assessment fees paid on Northlake woodlands East Phase 10, Phase B, in
the a~unt of $29,606.66 (see attached breakdown).
The staff has reviewed the subdivision ordinance and the only reference
to reimbursement pertains to the over sizing of utility lines, streets
and pro rata agreements. No reference was found regarding
reimbursement of assessment fees.
At this time I cannot find any grounds to grant your request. If you
have any questions please do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
Frank Trando
Finance Director/Deputy City Manager
FT/lr
attachment
cc:
Alan D. Ratliff, City Manager
Steve Goram, Director of Public Works
Steve Morton, Chief of Developmental Inspections
Larry Jackson, City Attorney
BREAKDOWN OF FEE REIMBURSEMENT RE~.UESTED BY MR. PARSONS
Construction Permit (Inspection Fee)
(Memo Nov. 18, '85)
Less:
Inspection Fee for Utility of (Memo Nov. 18, 87)
Inspection Fee for Paving of (Men~ Nov. 18, 87)
Amount of Refund Requested from Construction Permit
$33,960.00
(7,304.39)
(8,739.15)
$17f916.46
Street Lights (64 @$296) (Memo Dec. 6, 85)
Less:
Number of Lights Install (33 @$296)
Amount of Refund Requested
$18,125.00
(9,768.00)
$9,176.00
Street Sign (Memo Dec. 6, 85)
(Memo Dec. 6, 85)
Total Amount Paid
$ 4,535.00
1,761.00
6,296.00
Less:
Street Sign Assessment of (Memo Nov.
Amount of Refund Requested
TOTAL AMOUNT OF REFUND REQUESTED
18, 87)
(3,781.80)
$2~514.20
$29t606.66
ASESSFEE.002