Enclaves/FP-CS 950221LAWRENCE W. JACKSON
ROBERT L. DILLARD Ill
ROBERT E. HAGER
PETER G, SMITH
DAVID M. BERMAN
BRUCE A. STOCKARD
NICHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD, HAGER & SMITH, I
Attorneys & Counselors at Law
1800 Lincoln Plaza
500 North Akard
Dallas, Texas 75201
(214) 954-3333
Fax (214) 954-3334
ROBERT L. DILLARD, JR.
OF COUNSEL
February 21, 1995
Gary Sieb
Director of Planning
City of Coppell
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
Dear Gary:
At your request, we have reviewed the proposed Development and Maintenance
Agreement to be entered into by and among the City, WPC - Parkway Development
Corporation, Parkway/Coppell Property Corporation, and the Homeowners' Association of
the Enclaves on the Parkway, Inc.
Having reviewed this document, we wish to comment as follows. We need to have
tangible evidence that the Homeowners' Association has been incorporated. A copy of the
Certificate of Incorporation, together with the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws
should be sufficient.
We should review the deed restrictions for the Enclaves to be sure that they require
membership of all owners, dues, assessments, and maintenance of the improvements that
the Association is responsible for under this Agreement. The City should also have the right
to enforce the maintenance requirements of the deed restrictions with regard to common
areas and the areas the Association is responsible for under this Agreement. If the
Association fails to perform its duties, the City should be authorized to enter on the
property, perform those duties, and levy an enforceable assessment against the property
owners.
Next, has the Parkway/Coppell Property Corporation been created? The same
documents could be reviewed for this as were suggested for the Homeowner's Association
above.
AGG0678C
Gary Sieb
February 21, 1995
Page 2
If this latter corporation has been formed, has the 2.729 acre tract been conveyed to
it? If so, we need a copy of the recorded deed. If not, we should review the proposed deed
to be used and require that the conveyance be accomplished before proceeding.
When we looked at this matter in December, a portion of the drainage area was
owned by RTC. We have seen no evidence that RTC has in fact conveyed that to the
Developer or the other corporation created by the Developer for that purpose.
Is the final plat contingent on all of the above matters, plus this Agreement? If not,
it should be and it should be so stated in the minutes of the City Council meeting where the
final plat is approved.
When will the park fee be paid? The way the Agreement reads, the park fee is to
be paid by the Developer to the City and then back to the Developer to reimburse it for a
portion of the cost of the Area A improvements. I believe this park fee should be paid in
advance by the Developer and then, when the improvements are completed to the City's
satisfaction, the amount of the park fee reimbursed back to the Developer. This should give
both parties an incentive to see that the development is well done.
The City is also agreeing to reimburse the Developer a portion of the cost of the
Area B improvements "as and when payments are required by the applicable construction
contracts." Because of this requirement, it appears to me that the City will be required to
supervise the performance of the construction contracts for the Area B improvements, or
at least to check closely as to the Developer's supervision of those contracts. Under this
Agreement, upon completion of the Area A and Area B improvements, the City is
responsible for Area B and its maintenance.
Although the Agreement provides that the Developer will pay the initial cost of the
Area C improvements, it provides that the City will reimburse the Developer those costs "as
and when payments are required by the applicable construction contracts." The same
comment applies to the Area C improvements as was stated above as to the Area B
improvements. However, if the cost is to be initially paid by the Developer, I am not certain
I understand what the Agreement means when it states that the City is to reimburse as and
when payments are required by the applicable construction contracts. I think that this
means that the Developer writes a check to the Contractor as required by the contract and
the City writes the Developer a check for the same amount at the same time. Again,
AGG~C
Gary Sieb
February 21, 1995
Page 3
management of these construction contracts and the improvements should be closely
monitored by the City at all times.
The Agreement states that upon completion of the Area C improvements, the
channel tract will be conveyed to the City. We should require that the channel tract owner
furnish the City a proposed form of deed at this time, as well as any title commitment or
title policy which may have been secured as to the property. Under the Agreement, the City
is responsible ultimately for the maintenance of Area B, Area C, the channel tract, and the
aeration pump. In cases where the property is not being conveyed directly to the City, the
City should acquire an easement on the plat or by separate easement deed. These
easements should be acquired in connection with this Agreement.
Section 13 of the Agreement refers to a release of this Agreement that the parties
will execute for the Developer. If the Developer has a form of release in mind now, we
should review that. If not, we can review it at the time it is tendered for execution.
Because the City is assuming a great deal of the maintenance cost, some projection
or estimates should be made as to what will have to be budgeted annually to perform that
function. In connection with the pump, there should be some warranties and perhaps some
maintenance obligations by the manufacturer for the near term. However, if a long term
maintenance agreement should be secured, that should be investigated as well.
To justify the City expenditures, it appears to me that the resolution approving this
Agreement should make a finding that reimbursement of the park fee will be for partial
payment of park improvements to Area A and that the reimbursement for the Area B
improvements will be partial payment for drainage improvements furnished by the
Developer. In the latter case, the Council will need to appropriate the amount of the
reimbursement from available funds.
Except for the legal descriptions of Areas A and C, we have not reviewed any of the
Exhibits identified for this Agreement, nor have we reviewed any of the specific plans for
the improvements. These will presumably be reviewed by the Public Works Department.
Other than the comments of this letter, the form of the Agreement is satisfactory.
AGG0678C
Gary Sieb
February 21,
Page 4
1995
Please let me know if you have any other questions at this time about this Agreement
or this development in general.
Very truly yours,
NICHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD, Itg~GER & SMITH. L.L.P.
Robert L. Dillard, III
RLD/ckh
AGG0678C