CF-Park Land-CS 871023
,--
- .)f \ oe.. cl
~v- G~~eu-e~o~'V
-(." Ie.
~
H\-t t,\W't
J
MEMORANDUM FROM
GARDERE & WYNNE
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS
1500 Diamond Shamrock Tower
Dallas, Texas 75201
(214) 979-4500
TO:
Mayor, City Council, Frank Trando,
and Larry Jackson
FROM:
Dean Wilkerson
DATE:
January 23,1987
RE: l Park Contract with u0est
Attached to this Memo is an Amendment to Contract of Sale,
which amends the original contract under which the City
purchased the park land from Univest. The purpose of this
Amendment, as you all know, is to obtain the removal of the
deed restrictions on our park land so that we can receive the
state grant money, but it also includes many of the items from
Univest's "laundry list" of requirements in order to remove the
deed restrictions. We have managed to eliminate or soften some
of the items from their list. Some positive things we have
negotiated are not reflected in this draft because their
attorney did not have time to revise it again since yesterday.
Most of these i terns I have di scussed wi th you previous ly in
executive session, but there are some new items included for
their side and for our side.
:le are on a relatively tight time schedule with regard to
this Amendment if we are to submit our application for
reimbursement of the land acquisition costs of Phase III to the
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department by the end of this month
(i.e., next Friday). Tim Hogsett told Frank Trando and me in a
telephone conversation that they will consider our Phase III
application, including the land acquisition portion, if our
application is submi tted by January 31 and the problems wi th
our previous grants have been addressed -- namely, Obtaining
the appraisal on Phase II and getting the deed restrictions
removed.
I earnestly
Sunday evening
979-4711 with
concerning this
request that each of yOU try to call me either
at home (393-1682) or early Monday morning
an serious roblems or uestions ou have
Amendment. If there appears to be a material
.
..-
-
problem in this Amendment, we will attempt to negotiate further
with Mike Allen and have necessary changes made by his attorney
on Monday and Tuesday in time to have the revised copy of the
Amendment available at the Council meeting Tuesday night for
our approval.
We have now been involved in numerous negotiating sessions
with Mike Allen, some of which included John Kidd and their
attorney, and some of which meetings included Dale Ware and/or
Frank Trando and/or Larry Jackson. All of the items included
in this Amendment have been discussed throroughly at one point
or another. I am not happy with all of the provisions of this
Amendment, but you rarely get everything you want in a
contract, especially if you are in the weaker bargaining
position. The unfortunate bottom line is that Univest is not
legally required to help us in removing the deed restrictions;
it is strictly an accommodation to us to receive the grant
money.
Rather than explain every provision in the Amendment, I
want to tell you what I see as the four biggest risks to the
City, although there are others Larry Jackson or I can explain
if you don't see them already.
1. Money Damages. If we breach this Amendment (which
incorporates all of the terms and provisions of the original
contract unless amended), and we do not cure the breach after
notice, as provided in Paragraph 3 of the Amendment, Coppell
will be liable for a very substantial sum of money. The
catastrophic remedy they had before was that they could simply
repurchase our park land at the price for which we purchased
it. Under this Amendment, Univest would receive a sum of money
equal to the enhanced appraised value of the property, subject
to the ceiling which is equal to 125% of the amount the land
was appraised at in 1985.
Under the old contract, there was not a provision
whereby they had to give us wri tten notice nor did we have a
per iod in which to cure. Under the Amendment, we essenti ally
have 180 days to cure any legitimate default of which they have
given us notice.
2. Repurchase of Phase III. They still have the right to
repurchase Phase III if we breach, until such time as the state
approves us for some type of grant. They would not agree to
remove the deed restrictions on all three phases because it is
not necessary at this time. We have not purchased Phase III
and therefore have no deed with restrictions on it for that
piece of property. At such time as we acquire the property and
are approved for a grant, then they will execute a release of
the restriction.
-2-
/'
-
-
3. Release. This Amendment contains a broad release of
Univest from any claims by the City now or in the future with
respect to the park land and our Town Hall site. They will not
do the deal without this release. By granting this release, we
virtually eliminate any defense or offsetting claim against
them we might raise in a lawsuit concerning any breach we might
commit in the future. We could still bring claims or actions
against them for things they do in Coppell that are not related
to the park or our Town Hall site. But once this Amendment is
signed, we have no further recourse against them for any
excavat ion, drainage, landscaping 0 r other things they might
have done on our property. I am opposed to granting a release,
but the only alternative is to kiss the park money goodbye. As
some minor comfort to us, I have negotiated a waiver of any
defaults the City might have committed up to this point under
the contract. According to Univest, we have already committed
numerous defaults, especially with regard to changing
ordinances and making them applicable to Univest when they were
allowed to be governed by the old ordinances.
4. Open Drainage. The final item I see as having a
significant impact on Coppell is our approval of the concept of
the linear open drainage system they propose. In executive
session, we a 11 agreed that it did not look too bad on its
face. If done in a quality manner, it could be an enhancement
to the Ci ty. I have asked Wayne Ginn' s office to review it
carefully, especially concerning the water quality standards.
They are reviewing the information from Univest and talking
with them concerning this proposal.
In Paragraph 2, they have asked us to pay the ad valorem
taxes on Phase III beginning January 1, 1986. We are not
legally Obligated to do this since Univest granted us an
extension of our option from December 31, 1985 to December 31,
1987. There was no reference to ad valorem taxes or anything
else in the extension of the option. However, they did extend
the option at our request and for our convenience, and they
also lost a significant tax benefit by not having the property
sold by the end o~ 1986. We indicated we would purchase Phase
III by the end of":1986 until we learned we had a shot at our
Phase III grant.
The reference in Paragraph 14C to the reimbursement in
connect ion with damage caused by GTE has been or wi 1 1 be pa id
by GTE, according to Jim Cowman. Jim has assured me he wi 11
get to the bottom of this so that it does not fall on the City.
There are a few other points we' re sti 11 working on wi th
Univest that may find their way into the revised version of
this Amendment that you will have on Tuesday night for your
-3-
.
-
-
/
cons ideration. I wi 11 make sure any changes from th is dr a ft
are marked and explained to you. I urge you to call me with
your questions or comments, and to discuss this Amendment among
yourselves over the weekend. Many items we consider ln our
deliberations are important to Coppell, but this Amendment lS
doubly important because there is significant money avai lable
to us once we have signed it, but there are also significant
consequences associated wi th signing thi s Amendment.
Therefore, it deserves our careful consideration.
..10.1
-4-
l
.
~/.
~;"
.....
-
(' _0. - I 0 "" f"Yb.nf; V
'4'./eO {; Ie
5.Q
This Amendment to Contract of Sale ("Amendment") is made /
and entered into as of the day of ~anuar:y-,- 1987, by and V
between the Parks of Coppe~oint Vent-ure Ie ("Owner"), a
Texas joint venture, and the City of Coppell ("City"), a
municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of
Texas.
WIT N E ~ ~ E T tl
WHEREAS, heretofore on December 30, 1982, Owner and City
entered into a Contract of Sale (the "Agreement"), pursuant to
which Owner agreed to sell to City, and City agreed to purchase
from Owner, a Municipal Center Site (herein so called) and
Phase I of the Park Site (herein so called); and
WHEREAS, in connection with the Agreement, Owner granted
City options to purchase Phase I! of the Park Site (herein so
called) and Phase III of the Park Site (herein so called); and
WHEREAS, the Municipal Center Site, Phase I of the Park
Site, Phase II of the Park Site and Phase III of the Park Site
are described by metes and bounds in Exhibits A, B, C and 0,
respectively, attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement and the option covering
Phase I! of the Park Site, the City acquired: (i) the
Municipal Center Site on December 30, 1982, for a total
purchase price of $361,292.00; (ii) Phase I of the Park Site on
December 30, 1982, for a total purchase price of $233,750.00;
and (iii) '"'hase II of the Park Site on March 14, 1986, for a
total purchase price of $388,800.00; and
WHEREAS, certain appraisals prepared by Bill Dotson &
Associates indicate that the appraised fair market value of:
(i) the Municipal Center Site as of August 5, 1983, was
$960,000.00; (ii) Phase I of the Park Site as of December 1,
1982, was $743,000.00; and (iii) Phase II of the Park Site as
of May 31, 1985, was $2,035,000.00; and
WHEREAS, Owner sold the Municipal Center Site, Phase I of
the Park Site and Phase II of the Park Site to City at a price
substantially less than such properties' true fair market value
as indicated by the aforesaid appraisals; and
WHEREAS, the sales price for Phase II! of the Park Site
also is substantially less than the true fair market value of
such property; and
WHEREAS, the sale of the Municipal Center Site, Phase I of
the Park Site and Phase I! of the Park Site by Owner to City
for a price SUbstantially less than such properties' true fair
market value and Owner's agreement to sell Phase III of the
Park Site to City for a price substantially less than such
property's true fair market value was in part in consideration
of and reliance upon the agreements of City contained in the
Agreement and the options covering Phase I! of the Park Site
and Phase III of the Park Site; and
WHEREAS, initially City agreed to purchase the Municipal j
Center Site, Phase I of the Park Site, Phase II of the Park
Site and Phase III of the Park Site as undeveloped land; and
\ :f
\.. .1
1.1"
i..'
;,.
~>:,~,
"" II ,
"
i
J:
~~ ~-. F'nwJct F;k.
~
,\ -J ()\ __ 'l., \."
B. City Hall Construction - Concurrently with the
execution of this Amendment, City agrees to pay Owner the
sum of $1, 18.L.46 in reimbursement of costs incurred by
Owner in connection with damage caused in the construction
of the Coppell city hall.
I
\~
:- c. Telephone Network Construction - City agrees to
pay Owner the sum of $7,721.94 on the earlier of that date
which is sixty (60) days after the date of this Amendment
or ten (10) days after the date that City collects monies
from GTE, in reimbursement of costs incurred by Owner in
connection with damage caused in the construction of
underground telephone network improvements in Parkway
Boulevard by GTE.
\
15. Parkway Boulevard Pavers. City acknowledges and
agrees that Owner has no further responsibi li ty in connect ion
with the pavers existing at the entrance to the Coppell city
hall, and City accepts all responsibility for any removal,
relocation or additional work in connection with such pavers.
16. Open Drainaqe Channels. Without in any way affecting
Owner's rights to utilize open drainage channels as set forth
in subsection (h) of Section 2 of the Agreement, City hereby:
(i) approves the conceptual design plans for the Linear Lake
system submitted by Owner and agrees to mark City's approval on
one set of such conceptual design plans and deliver the same to
Owner concurrently with City's execution of this Amendment; and
(ii) agrees that the standards set forth on attached Exhibit H
are acceptable to City for maintenance of water quality in
ponds, lakes, channels or other waterways within the Property.
17. Parkway Boulevard.
lane of Parkway Boulevard
before July 1, 1988.
City ag rees to comp lete the no r t h
adjacent to the Park Site on or
18. MacArthur Road Extension. City hereby agrees that
Owner will not be responsible for any costs in connection with
the construction of bridges relating to the extension of
MacArthur Road northward from its intersection with Deforest
Road. City further agrees that City will not levy any
assessments against any portion of the Property or other
property owned by Owner to recover any of such costs.
19. City's Obliqation to Improve Park Site. City agrees
to continue to use City's good faith efforts to make
improvements to the Park Site according to City's current plan
therefor, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit I;
provided that City shall have the right to modify such plan
from time to time. City agrees to apply all funds received
from governmental grants for the Park Site (whether received
for land acquisition costs or for park improvements) toward
improving the Park Site. City hereby reaffirms City's
agreement to use all of the park fees collected in connection
with development within the Property ("Property Park Fees")
toward improving the Park Site; provided, however, City shall
have the right to reimburse City's park fund from future
Property Park Fees to the extent that park fees collected in
connection with developments outside the boundaries of the
Property have previously been used for improvements to the Park
Site.
20. Drainaqe Improvements Approval. City hereby approves
the plans submitted by Owner for drainage improvements at five
(5) locations along Denton and Cottonwood creeks east of Denton
Tap Road, specifically being those plans prepared by
Threadgill-Dowdy & Associates, Consulting Engineers, Parks of
Coppell, plates 1-4, last revised September 3, 1986, and
approved by the City of Coppell Public Works Department. Owner
~'\... 7 -
I,
II