Vista Ridge Project CM memoTO: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning & Community Services
FROM: Alan Ratliff, City Manager ~-
DATE: February 14, 1990
SUBJECT: VISTA RIDGE PROJECT
In regard to our discussions about the Lomas & Nettleton/Vista
Ridge Project, I am submitting this information to provide some
insight into the many complex issues and history of the Lewisville
and Lomas & Nettleton negotiations. You may share with the
Planning and Zoning Commission and others as you feel appropriate.
The Vista Ridge Project has been an item of community discussion
and our personal involvement for the last two (2) years. Shortly
after I was employed by the City of Coppell, I became aware that
the City of Lewisville had, in my opinion illegally, annexed
certain properties which were within Coppell's extra-territorial
jurisdiction. They had; however, secured ratification of that
annexation from the Texas Legislature, as well as a written
Agreement with the City of Coppell that appeared to be a token
gesture to appease Coppell's concerns. It appeared to me that this
matter should be re-opened for further discussions. We found that
the Coppell/Lewisville/Lomas & Nettleton Agreement did not contain
a specific time schedule for one (1) important element: acquisition
of the R.O.W. MacArthur Boulevard. That road was very important
to the City of Lewisville and to Lomas & Nettleton because of the
Vista Ridge Mall. MacArthur Boulevard will provide access to the
Vista Ridge Mall and the Vista Ridge Project for the citizens of
Valley Ranch and the citizens of Coppell.
We were concerned that much needed sales taxes would be diverted
from Coppell to the City of Lewisville and the intersection of
Sandy Lake Road and MacArthur would need costly improvements and
signalization. I approached the City Manager of the City of
Lewisville and suggested that we re-open the discussion on our City
limits and boundary. He asked that we allow them to review the
matter. Almost immediately, we received notice that they had filed
suit against the City of Coppell. Since that time we have spent
many hours negotiating with the City of Lewisville and Lomas &
Nettleton to settle this matter. Our objective was to realign our
Vista Ridge Project February 14, 1990
Page Two
boundaries and bring additional acres of valuable property into
our City and to add to our tax base. After many months of
negotiations and with the cooperation of Lomas & Nettleton, we were
successful in obtaining an Agreement with the City of Lewisville
to realign our boundaries (See attached Agreement Exhibit "A").
Jeff Hurt, attorney for Lomas & Nettleton, was very instrumental
in working as an intermediary with both Cities to resolve many of
the issues.
The negotiations for the new boundary involved three (3) parties;
the City of Coppell, the City of Lewisville and Lomas & Nettleton.
Since the City of Lewisville had already granted zoning of the
Lomas & Nettleton property and had accepted dedication of water and
sewer lines, as well as road improvements, these items were major
considerations to all parties. The following is a synopsis of
those negotiations on these items.
Water and Sewer Service. We attempted to negotiate some agreement
with the City of Lewisville by which they would continue to provide
water and sewer services to the Coppell land via a wholesale water
and sewer agreement with Coppell. However, we wanted to be sure
that Coppell residents were not discriminated against in any manner
and that all citizens of our community were charged equally for
these services. It became obvious after a short while that the
attempts to negotiate the water and sewer service contract with the
City of Lewisville was not possible. We, therefore, asked and
required that Lomas & Nettleton find a method of providing water
and sewer service with the City of Coppell system or the Coppell
Municipal Utility District (MUD) system. Since all utility lines
were in place this was a potentially very expensive problem to fix
and it was only resolved December, 1989, when they were annexed
into the Coppell MUD.
The second primary consideration was the requirement by the City
of Coppell that Lomas & Nettleton would pay all costs for building
the MacArthur Boulevard connection. These costs include building
a bridge over Denton Creek and paying for any costs associated with
securing missing right-of-way South of Denton Creek owned by other
parties. Only this past week has the City of Coppell secured the
major part of that right-of-way via a written Agreement from Mr.
Glen Hinckley. Lomas & Nettleton has agreed that they pay for all
costs of the road structure for Mr. Hinckley in exchange for this
right-of-way. Lomas & Nettleton is also preparing information
needed to obtain the other pieces of R.O.W. and it is our intention
to work with Lomas & Nettleton to secure this R.O.W. and construct
MacArthur Boulevard.
Vista Ridge Project February 14, 1990
Page Three
Another major roadway which we insisted should be included in our
negotiations was Denton Tap Road. These negotiatons included
discussions with the Magnolia Development Company which owned the
property on the West side of Denton Tap. They agreed in principle
to being annexed into the Road Utility District (RUD) and partici-
pating in cost of constructing the bridge over Denton Creek as well
as the extension of Denton Tap, North to the new Coppell City
limits.
Before this Agreement was consumated, Magnolia Development Company
entered into Chapter 11. This changed our plans substantially.
Lomas & Nettleton/Vista Ridge representatives indicated they could
not assume the responsibility for the total cost of the bridge
structure and extension of Denton Tap. They indicated that they
would have to have the participation and cooperation of whoever
owned the property on the West side of Denton Tap. We have not
been able to obtain an Agreement with the present owners for this
project. Since this occurrence, we have been working to find a way
to ensure that the Denton Tap bridge and road are built as was
originally planned. Recently (January 4, 1990), we obtained a
Resolution from the RUD which provides that this property would be
annexed into the RUD and the road and bridge constructed as had
been planned (see attached Rud Resolution, December, 1989). Of
course, this will depend upon the property owner's cooperation and
State approval of the RUD participation.
During our negotiations with Lomas & Nettleton, they expressed
their concern about the zoning or rezoning of the property. I have
stated and reiterated on many occasions that we could not negotiate
the zoning and the decision would be made by the Coppell Planning
& Zoning Commission and the City Council. I expressed my opinion
that the Multi-Family zoning might be of concern to City of Coppell
officials and Lomas & Nettleton/Vista Ridge representatives, on
their own volition, suggested they would reduce the Multi-Family
zoning by some sixteen (16) acres. You will note in attached copy
of the March 6, 1989, draft of the Agreement with the City of
Coppell and Vista Ridge the reference to zoning. This Agreement
has not been executed by the City of Coppell since the
complications surrounding the financial failures of both Magnolia
Development Company and Lomas & Nettleton have impaired our
actions. This has not, however, stopped our continued efforts to
resolve all the issues and all parties have been working in good
faith to complete the negotiations and move forward with the
project.
Vista Ridge Project February 14, 1990
Page Four
During these negotiations we believe Lomas & Nettleton and their
agents, Charles Emery, Senior Vice President & National Director
of Development, Tom Tanner, Vice President & Vista Ridge Project
Manager, and Jeff Hurt, attorney for Lomas & Nettleton, have
demonstrated a high degree of integrity, professionalism and
commitment to successfully complete this project. We believe they
have demonstrated their desire to build a quality development and
to work with the City of Coppell to meet our requirements. They
recently hosted a meeting of the Coppell Economic Development Board
and not only shared their development plans, but provided us with
information related to their efforts to attract major corporations
to the area. In an additional show of cooperation, Mr. Emery, who
is also Chariman of the Lewisville Chamber of Commerce Economic
Development Committee, arranged for Dr. Stearman to present the
Texas A&M Project to their Board. Even though funding of the
project was not obtained, we appreciate his efforts to assist
Coppell in this project. In summary, the courtesy and spirit of
cooperation that they have extended to this office and to others
within the City of Coppell are appreciated.
ADR:ep
Attachments
MEMO
TO: Alan D. Ratlif~,/~ity Manager
FROM: Gary L Sic ctor of Planning & Community Services
SUBJECT: INFORMATION REGARDING THE LOMAS & NETTLETON ZONING CASE #ZC-526
DATE: February 13, 1990
Alan, based on your request for information regarding the Lomas &
Nettleton zoning case - the Vista Ridge development - I'd like to convey
the following information, particularly as it relates to the Multi-Family
area:
- when this property was located in Lewisville, it is my understanding
that of the area annexed into Coppell, approximately 82 useable acres
were zoned for (MF-2) development; the zoning request before us
contains 70 useable MF acres.
- at 22 du/acre (MF-2 density) there is a potential 1,536 unit count.
Based on C.I.S.D. enrollment figures of .18 students per apartment
unit, a potential 276 students could be generated by this project.
- the 276 students would, typically, be spread over 12 grades, hence,
the impact of vastly overcrowded enrollment of an individual school
would not be experienced.
- the MF zoning does allow single-family development if the market is
"soft" for apartments (which Coppell is currently experiencing).
Thus, a lower density and less intensive use is possible even with
the MF zoning.
I will address any additional issues you feel are pertinent at your
request. Incidentally, this case goes to the Planning Commission this
Thursday, February 15, 1990.
GLS/lsg
526
TIMBER CREEK SQUARE
u~ FOREST-
BROOK
z
DR.
· ~' GROVE ROAD
< ~OO~O
.M. 3040 O
~XAS mSmUME~~ ~ '
MF-2
SUBJECT
ZONING EXHIBIT
~ VI~A RIDG[
~ o ~ ~ ~ [EWISVILLE, TEXAS
aC~LE ,. tier ~ LOMAS & NETTLETON
REAL ESTATE GROHP
O~AUM ENC._.~EF~O COI~<~flA110~ II
February 15, 1990
ADDENDUM TO STAFF REPORT - VISTA RIDGE ZONING CASE (ZC-526)
ZONING COMPARISON
LEWISVILLE COPPELL NOTES
Tract 1 G~ HC C: more rest.in uses, cov.,yards, const.
GB LI C: more restrict, in yards, const.
3 GB C C: more restrict, in lot req., const.
4 MF-2 MF-2 C: more restrict, in density
5 nI HC C: more restrict, in lot req., uses
6 LI LI C: more restrict, in lot req., const.
7 LI C C: more restrict, in use, yards, const.
8 MF-2 HC C: more restrict, in use, intensity
LEWISVILLE LEWISVILLE COPPELL COPPELL COPPELL
GB = General Business LI : Light Industrial HC = LI = C =
LC uses [retail shops] GB uses mixed use, office commer-retail uses retail uses
auto repair garages bottling plants comm-retail light industrial uses warehousing
USES dry cleaning plants coal yards hotels warehousing newspaper printing
offices man. plants newspaper prlnting kennels covered auto pkg. garage
printing plants paint production restaurants man./ind, uses auto rental
kennels storage yards man./ind, uses open storage on back 2/3
HT. 180' st. width 220' no max [for O or I) 35'
FT.YD. 0 0 60' 60' 30'
SIDE YD. 0 0 30' I0' 30'
REAR, YD. 0 0 20' I0' 20'
LOT AREA none specified none specified 10,000 sq.ft. 5,000 sq.ft. 0
CON$IRUCTION none specified none specified 80% masonry 80% masonry 80% masonry
COVERAGE no max. specified no max. specified 50% 50% (plus !0% pkg.struct) 40%