R2006-126 08-14-06 FAILED
FAILED
RESOLUTION NO. R2006-126
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND,
TEXAS, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT WITH GRAND VALLEY HOMES, INC. AND SOUTHWOOD
ESTATES, INC.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS:
Section 1. That certain amended Development Agreement by and between the
City of Pearland, Grand Valley Homes, Inc. and Southwood Estates, Inc., a copy of which
is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof for all purposes, is hereby
authorized and approved.
Section 2. That the City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to execute
and the City Secretary to attest the amended Development Agreement.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this the day of
A.D., 2006.
TOM REID
MAYOR
ATTEST:
YOUNG LORFING, TRMC
CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DARRIN M. COKER
CITY ATTORNEY
AGENDA REQUEST
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS
AGENDA OF: 8-14-06 ITEM NO. R2006-126
DATE SUBMITTED: DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: ADMIN.
PREPARED BY: DARRIN COKER PRESENTOR: BILL EISEN
SUBJECT: COLD RIVER RANCH- DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ADDENDUM
EXHIBITS: R2006-126
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED - N/A
AMOUNT BUDGETED - N/A
ACCOUNT NO.
ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION REQUIRED N/A
ACCOUNT NO.
FUNDS A V AILABLE N/A (Finance Department Approval)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This proposed addendum is the result of the June 19,2006 City Council workshop that was
conducted to discuss the merits of amending a previously adopted development agreement to allow
for a higher density in exchange for the dedication of additional parkland or its cash equivalent (see
previous agenda request summary attached). While staff does not directly endorse the addendum, it
was prepared, at the urging of the developer, so that the City Council could proceed with the
proposal ifit so desired. The most significant concerns raised at the workshop focused on sidewalks
and solid waste collection; or the lack thereof. The May 19, 2006 letter from the developer (see
attached) established a July 1,2006 target date to install the sidewalks, but as of today, August 9,
2006, the sidewalks have not been installed. It is my understanding the HOA has contracted with
Waste Management for solid waste collection services in the neighborhood. Ifthe Council desires to
move forward, the addendum contains additional provisions regarding the sidewalk requirements
and the required inspections of all residential properties. For you review, I have included a list of
concerns that have been raised by various members ofthe City's staff, and that may factor into your
decision making process.
AGENDA REQUEST
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS
t
AGENDA OF: June 1, 2006 ITEM NO. Workshop #3
,
DATE SUBMITTED: DEPT. OF ORIGIN: Administration
PREP ARED BY: Bill Eisen PRESENTOR: Bill Eisen
SUBJECT: Cold River Ranch
I EXIDBITS: .. I
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
AMOUNT BUDGETED:
ACCOUNT NO.:
ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION REQUIRED:
ACCOUNT NO.:
FUNDS AVAILABLE (Finance Department Approval)
.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.
The developer of Cold River Ranch subdivision (Cas a Linda Homes) recently approached the City
Council regarding a modification of their Development Agreement. The original agreement allowed for 50-
foot wide lots in Phase I of the development but required tl1at the remaining phases meet a maximum density
of 3.6 units per acre. Casa Linda has developed all of the lots in Phase I and is now requesting that the
agreement be amended to allow 50-foot lots on the remainder of their property.
Cas a Linda approached the staff regarding this issue and they were advised that the Council may
consider the request if the developer would agree to acquire and deed to the City land that would remain
vacant and that would, when combined with land being developed, result in a net density of no more than 3.6
units per acre.
This proposed amendment was submitted to the City Council in a workshop setting. At that time
several issues were raised which the City Council wanted resolved before they would consider action on the
matter. Casa Linda has prepared a letter (copy attached), which they believe addresses the issues. In the
letter, they indicate that they have entered into a contract with a construction company to build sidewalks
throughout Phase I, the HOA have taken bids for trash collection services, and arrangements have been
made for the HOA to include the Fire/EMS service fee ($4.38/month) as part of monthly dues. A question
also arose at the Council meeting regarding the number of foreclosures on builder-f11lanced homes. This
information is provided in the letter.
.
May 19,2006
.
City of Pearland
Bill Eisen
City Manager
3519 Liberty Drive.
Pearland, TX 7581
Re: Cold River Ranch
Mr. Eisen,
As you know, several items have been addressed by the city council in regards to the Cold
River Ranch development. We have addressed these issues and will attempt to show the
result of our efforts in this letter. We want to constantly strive to meet and exceed all the
requirements set aside in our development agreement and to fulfill all the city ordinances
applicable in every subdivision we develop within Pearland's jurisdiction.
.
lst- We have been informed that the city requires a 4' sidewalk to be constructed at Cold
River Ranch.
Resolution- We have contracted J.C. Hernandez Concrete Company to immediately install
sidewalks in both existing phases of Cold River Ranch. We will target to have this work
completed by July 1st, 2006.
2nd- The issue of trash being deposited on site was addressed.
Resolution- We had CIA Services (HOA Management Co.) bid the trash pickup costs to
several contractors. The terms of each agreement are quarterly payments. The next quarter
we can pay the trash bill for all of our homeowners will be July 1 st, 2006. We will notify
each homeowner immediately that this will occur at such time and the need for them to
place their trash at the curb on the specified days. Outside of this we will continue (at our
cost) to pickup any trash dumped on site by people outside Cold River Ranch in an effort to
uphold the aesthetic value or our community. CasclL · rl"
m~HID
1409 N. Main · McAllen, Texas 78501 . (956) 607 -2638 . (956) 631-6000 . Fax (956) 682-6000
May 19, 2006
Page 2
.
3rd- The Fire/EMS fee that is to be paid by each homeowner at a rate of $4.38 per month
has not been paid to this point. The issue of TCEQ approval of our private utility provider
attaching this bill to their statement has been denied.
Resolution- CIA Services has agreed to attach this payment to the current HOA dues. This
will not be an easy task initially as the HOA has no funds to pay from initially. Thus we
will have to supplement the HOA until they can become self sufficient. The past due fees
will be paid by June 1 st, 2006. The HOA will have the monthly bills paid thereafter.
4th- A question was asked of our total foreclosures in the Cold River Ranch community.
Answer- One, we have had only a single foreclosure. Certainly this is significantly below
the typical FHA rate of foreclosure.
.
In Conclusion, we are hopeful that the city will see through this letter our serious
commitment to this project. As a result, we would hope for the council to address our
request of an amendment to the development agreement as promptly as possible.
Thanks,
John Holt
Land Development Manager
Casa Linda Homes L.L.C.
(281) 489-5222
.
1409 N, Main · McAllen, Texas 78501 . (956) 607-2638 · (956) 631-6000 · Fax (956) 682-6000
Community Services
City of Pearl and
Memo
To: Bill Eisen
From: Nicholas J. Finan
cc: Lata Krishnarao
Rhonda Cyrus
Date: June 29, 2006
Rec Cold River Ranch
It appears now that there is some interest by city council to consider the request to amend the
agreement to allow more small lots and not require any of the larger lots as originally agreed to by the
developers within the agreement. While there is interest, no commitments were made and several
issues were raised: one in particular regarding enforcement of the subdivision ordinance and building
code inspections. I will address these issues at the end of this memo. In addition, I would like to
combine the comments and issues that you referred to in the meeting of June 19th with city council that
were prepared by myself and staff. Some of the issues can be addressed in some form within the new
agreement, but some cannot be resolved because the developer's request is contrary to the issue itself.
Attached below are the concerns I raised and below that the response by Rhonda Cyrus, Parks
Director, and Lata Krishnarao, Planning Director.
Parks:
The proposal, as I understand it, would be that in addition to the open space Cold River Ranch would
provide, they would also pay park fees for a park in the area.
. This area is outside the city and not likely to be annexed soon. That would most likely mean
the city would be acquiring land outside its city limits, but would not invest in improvements
outside its city limits.
. The parkland purchased would not be within the development, but would be for regional use.
When the city annexes it and develops it, it would then become a benefit in the area, but until
then would not be of much recreational benefit to the area. And not necessarily being close or
connected with trails it would not be a benefit to the residents in any type of capacity until
developed.
. There is no commitment to develop the land within the subdivision. There are no parks with
any amenities, except two soccer goals. There are no playgrounds, improved ball fields,
basketball courts, formal trails, etc. Even the trees are sparse and small.
. To allow for the smaller lots, there is no commitment to develop the additional open space land
into an amenity.
. The short history of the subdivision has shown little enforcement by the HOA or developer,
indicating any strength in the idea that an HOA will be enough to maintain any parks or open
space within the development. It is my understanding the agreement will be expanded to
address this. It does need to be strengthened, and the parks department may assist in
discussing how this can be accomplished. Each visit to the site (last one on June 29) shows
no maintenance of the drainage ditches. High weeds are congesting the ditches. The banks
of the detention lakes are eroding.
. Any land dedicated to the city or that the city would acquire would require the city crews to
maintain. The location and distance from the city limits would add a burden on the crews to
travel there to maintain it. However, the maintenance would be limited only to periodic
mowing.
Rhonda's comments:
There are some basic needs that are not currently being met for the subdivision:
A. The park is not currently being maintained. These items need to be repaired:
Broken picnic tables under the vine arbor (upon inspection two weeks later on
June 29 table still broken and now one bench is broken)
Replace dead trees (3 or 4)
Grass is very tall - about 8 inches plus
B. It would have a very positive impact to the residents if the following improvements
could be added at a relatively low cost to the developer:
Have a six foot trail along the detention basin and tie in back to the park
Put up a true shade structure in the park. The current facility is just a vine arbor
that allows the sun to come through. (The material is not high quality and subject to high
maintenance)
Provide Water fountains (2)
Provide sidewalk or trails for connectivity
Install some type of a play structure with an approved fall surface
Add more green space for this type of a density with a back stop (out of the
detention basin)
Planning:
There are several concerns that affect planning:
. Sidewalks are required, but there are no standard enforcement opportunities since no building
permits or street inspections are required. There is no way of telling how far along or when
they have houses that need the sidewalks. The developer agreed to the meet the
requirements of the subdivision ordinance in the development agreement. Regardless, if the
agreement is amended, the comment from planning staff after the meeting is that the
sidewalks are required in the existing sections. They were agreed to, were specifically
mentioned on the plat (in some cases by street name). So, the sidewalks should be placed in
the area already built (especially since the developer and builder are the same and developing
this subdivision together). The city should not at its expense have to police or have another
system put in place for outside developments in order for a developer to comply with the
ordinances that he agreed to on the plat and within the development agreement. It is my
understanding from your conversations with the developer he is willing to go back and put in
the sidewalks in the sections already completed.
· The Comprehensive Plan speaks to lot size mix as well as density. It states that there are
enough smaller lots, but there needs to be larger lots. So, even if the proposal satisfies the
issue of maintaining a certain level of density, it does not improve the lot balance. It only
creates more of an imbalance.
. Page 2
. Control and maintenance of the open space and facilities are not clearly defined and to date
have not been well maintained. Being outside the city, it is difficult for engineering, code
enforcement, and planning staff to visit and enforce violations of the agreement or applicable
codes, regulations, etc. without taking up a considerable amount of time. In addition, the
residents are outside the city and of the impression the city does not enforce any codes within
their subdivision; therefore, they are less inclined to call the city.
. There have been other developments that have requested smaller lots and have been turned
down. Some have already started a development and this could impact there development.
They, too, would like to have additional smaller lots (e.g. Savannah).
. The existing county road is narrow and with open ditches. If there is an increase in lots due to
the allowance for smaller lots, this could impact the capacity of the road and entrances to the
subdivision. However, if the agreement maintains the density within the area as the same, it
would not. But my understanding is the park land may be located near the subdivision, but not
necessarily in the area, making the density in this particular area a concern of traffIC impact on
the county road.
Lata's Comments:
1. Agree with Mr. Finan comments re: sidewalks. All sidewalks that were required for the first
phase need to be constructed before any further approvals are granted. Each phase
needs to be complete before the next one is started since there are no other mechanisms
to ensure that work is completed as approved.
2. Agree with Mr. Finan's comments regarding Comprehensive Plan and lot mix. The area is
designated as Low Density Residential with recommended zoning of a minimum of 8,800
sq. ft (R-1) lots or larger (SR-12, SR-15, RE). Fifty-foot wide with 5,000 sq. ft. lots do not
conform to this designation.
3. Density: The recommended density for this area ranges from 1.3 units per acre to a
maximum of 3.2 units per acre. The proposed density is higher than that recommended
by the Comprehensive Plan. There have been other developments where a higher
density of 3.6 units per acre has been utilized. However those developments (Savannah,
Shadow Creek Ranch etc.) have design standards that are higher than City's standards.
These subdivisions have provided a greater level of amenities, trials, landscaping etc. in
conformance with City's belief that greater level of amenities, innovative and creative
design needs to justify higher density. In this regard the proposed development does not
seem to justify the higher density.
4. The City recently adopted a new set of codes to guide all development in the City after
much deliberation on the quality of development. Staff recommends that this development
be subject to all requirements of the Subdivision requirements of the UDC in terms of
sidewalks, landscaping, fencing etc. This would ensure a quality of development that
would be consistent with some existing and all future developments in the City considering
that this area would be annexed into the City in the future.
The overall agreement was made with the expectation that there would be mixed lot sizes. The
proposal does not seem to meet all of the concerns that may have been the reasons for the original
discussion for mixed lot sizes. The current proposal does not appear to be warranted because of any
drastic changes in the ordinances or policy of the city. And, unless developed in the city, it seems there
are few controls, without additional burden to the city staff, to insure that the open space, parkland, and
other requirements are adequately addressed.
. Page 3
City Council did request that staff investigate the possibility of city inspections of the houses. Under
state statutes, all homes are to be built in accordance with the International Residential Building Code.
This code is part of the International Building Codes; the family of international codes that the city of
Pearland has adopted for all buildings. You suggested at the city council meeting that the third party
inspection firm we currently have for the poag & McEwen project may be able to provide the service
and not be a burden on the city. I have spoken to the company and they would be able to provide such
service. It would require a new contract. The fee schedule would be different since it is residential
versus commercial. The agreement could be negotiated to include some other items and reporting.
Depending if it is a total pass through or if the city would want to maintain some administration
involvement the fee would range from roughly 80% to 100% of the fees.
The issue raised by city council about enforcement of the subdivision ordinance may require city staff
inspections on the construction of the facilities. If the third party inspection services were hired for the
building permits, they could assist to insure the sidewalks are put in, setbacks are adhered to, ditches
are being maintained, report on the condition of the open space, etc. They would not be able to
perform the infrastructure such as storm sewer, water, sanitary sewer, street construction, etc. We
could investigate the hiring of another firm or negotiate with this firm to seek qualified personnel.
. Page 4
RESOLUTION NO. R2006-126
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND,
TEXAS, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT WITH GRAND VALLEY HOMES, INC. AND SOUTHWOOD
ESTATED, INC.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS:
Section 1. That certain amended Development Agreement by and between the
City of Pearland, Grand Valley Homes, Inc. and Southwood Estates, Inc., a copy of which
is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof for all purposes, is hereby
authorized and approved.
Section 2. That the City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to execute
and the City Secretary to attest the amended Development Agreement.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this the
day of
A.D., 2006.
TOM REID
MAYOR
ATTEST:
YOUNG LORFING, TRMC
CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DARRIN M. COKER
CITY ATTORNEY
EXHIBIT
10
.!l!
D
D
3
I'A '""
n ~.~. ": T
~J t, ..'~ .
ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Exhibit "A" to Resolution No. )
This Agreement is entered into this _ day of
PEARLAND, TEXAS, (hereinafter "City"),
("SEI") ?
, 2006, by and between the CITY OF
(the "Developer"), and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2003, the City, Developer and SEI entered into a Development
Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") for the purpose of establishing specific development standards
for certain property generally located north of SH 6, west of CR 48 and south of CR 58; and
WHEREAS, the City, Developer and SEI desire to amend the terms of the original terms of the
Agreement to allow a higher density ratio of units per acre, provided certain incentive requirements are
complied with.
W!TNE~~ETH:
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, it is hereby agreed as follows:
1. Paragraph 4 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows: "Subject to the provisions of
paragraph 6 of this Agreement which allow for a higher density ratio of units per acre, the
minimum lot size for Tracts 2,3 and 4 ("Tracts") identified in exhibit "A", attached hereto, shall
be 50 feet x 100 feet. Developer agrees to construct residential sidewalks within the boundaries
of the Property in accordance with the standards set forth in the City's Unified Development
Code. Developer agrees that City is authorized to enforce all City regulations relating to the
inspection of residential property (including the collection of all fees associated with the
permitting, plan checking and inspections). Developer agrees to create a nonprofit homeowners
association that shall be responsible for entering into a solid waste collection contract to serve
the Property."
2. Paragraph 6 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows: "Developer agrees to dedicate on
site park/open space property for the Tracts in accordance with the terms of the City's Park
Dedication Ordinance. As additional consideration (hereinafter "Incentive Requirement"),
Developer agrees to dedicate supplemental park/open space property, as one contiguous tract of
land, at a location approved by the City's Parks and Recreation Director, and in a total amount
of acres that, when combined with the acreage ofthe Tracts, would result in a net density on.6
units per acre. In the event the additional acreage cannot be located, agreed upon and acquired
prior to the final plat being submitted, Developer shall make a payment to the City's Park
Dedication Fund that is equal to the price per acre of similar residential property that is located
within a one (1) mile radius of the Tracts, multiplied by the number of additional acres required
to result in a net density of3.6 units per acre. An independent appraiser that is agreed upon by
both the City and Developer shall determine the price per acre of additional land, but in no
1
event shall the price per acre be less than $20,000.00 per acre. Failure by the Developer to
comply with the Incentive Requirement of this section within sixty (60) days following the
execution of this addendum by both parties shall void the terms of this addendum and the terms
of the original Agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit "B", shall apply. Furthermore, the
provisions of paragraph 1 of this addendum shall not become effective, and shall not apply until
the Incentive Requirement has been fulfilled by Developer."
3. The effect of this Addendum is limited to the terms above and all other terms ofthe original
Agreement endure as previously agreed. This Agreement may only be amended, modified, or
supplemented by written agreement and signed by all parties.
2
or:~:(l.o.\ ~9C'<'e.,",~"~
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered into this _ day of ,2003, by and between
the CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS, (hereinafter "City"), Grand Valley Homes, Inc.
(hereinafter "Developer") and Southwood Estates, Inc. (hereinafter "SEI").
WHEREAS, Developer plans to develop approximately 170 acres ("Property") described
in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated for purposes, as a single-family
residence community; and
WHEREAS, the Property is generally located north of State Hwy 6, west of CR 48 and
south of CR 58, and lies within the extraterritorial jurisdiction ("ET J") of the City; and
WHEREAS, Southwood Estates, Inc., is an investor owned utility (with an existing
Certificate of Convenience and Necessity ("CCN") that includes part of the Pearland
ET J, part of the city limits of Iowa Colony, and part of Brazoria County) that desires to
enter into a dual CCN with the City for SEI to provide water and sewer service to the
Property;
WHEREAS, the Property is also located within the boundaries of the City's Certificate of
Convenience and Necessity, thereby requiring the City's consent to dual certification in
order for Developer to receive water or sewer service from SEI;
WHEREAS, in consideration for the City's consent to SEl's application for dual water
and sewer certification over the Property, Developer and SEI agree to comply with
certain developmental standards to maintain consistency with the City's current
development guidelines.
WIT N E SSE T H:
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, it
is hereby agreed as follows:
1. City consents to SEl's application for dual water and sewer certification over the
Property.
2. Developer agrees to comply with all City infrastructure design and construction
standards, and agrees to configure the water and sewer utility system such that
the portion of the water and sewer system located on the Property and within the
ET J of Pearland can be readily isolated from the rest of SEl's CCN. Such portion
of the water and sewer system to be isolated shall include contain all water and
sewer distribution lines within said Property, including any above-ground water
storage tanks and associated pumps, sewer lift stations and pumps and other
associated hardware or real estate, but shall not include wastewater treatment
plants or water wells, pumps or lift stations, above ground water storage tanks or
any other associated hardware or real estate owned by SEI not on said Property.
Specifically excluded from the terms of this Development Agreement are any
wastewater treatment plants, water wells, lift stations, pressure tanks, above
ground water storage tanks, pumps, and any other utility-related items located on
the 11.5 tract owned by SEI, more fully described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto
and made a part hereof, and referred to for all pertinent purposes.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Chapter 27 of the Code of Ordinances, Exhibit
B, Section 3d, the City agrees to allow a drainage and detention system for the
Property that utilizes a mechanical pumping system. All other provisions of
Exhibit B and the Drainage Criteria Manual are applicable. City reserves the
right to approve the drainage plan for the Property, which approval shall not be
unreasonably withheld or delayed. The parties acknowledge that neither the City
or Brazoria Dranage District No.4 shall be responsible for maintenance and
operation of the detention system, including mechanical pumping systems.
Developer shall record deed restrictions prior to approval of a final plat for any
portion of the Property and implement said provisions through the creation of a
homeowners association or similar assessment to ensure perpetual operation
and maintenance of the detention and mechanical pumping systems.
3. Developer agrees to record, prior to approval of a final plat for any portion of the
Property, in the Brazoria County Deed Records, deed restrictions for the
Property, that require all structures to be constructed with 100% brick facades.
Residential structures having less than a 15-foot side yard aggregate separation,
shall be limited to a maximum of an 18 inch extension from the wall. Under no
circumstances shall there be a side yard aggregate separation of less than 12
feet.
4. The minimum lot size on Tract 1 of the Property shall be 50 feet x 100 feet.
Developer agrees to limit the remaining portions of the Property (Tracts 2,3 and
4) to a residential density not to exceed 3.6 units per acre, exclusive of detention
and open space.
5. Developer shall prepare a traffic impact analysis in conformance with City
standards and shall be responsible for implementing the improvements identified
therein. Improvements identified as having an immediate impact and necessity
shall be constructed by Developer in accordance with a mutually agreed upon
schedule. Improvements constituting a long-term need shall be funded by
Developer on a pro-rata basis by converting the improvement to a cost estimate
and dividing the estimate by the total number of expected units. Such "per unit"
fee shall be fully paid by Developer prior to the final approval of each platted
section.
6. Developer agrees to provide one acre of park/open space for each 100
residential lots platted. Park/open space located within the storm water detention
facilities shall be credited at a rate of 50% toward the requirements of this
section, provided the detention facility is appropriately designed as a "dual use"
(park/drainage) facility.
Development Agreement-Southwood Estates
2
7. Developer shall submit a disannexation request for any property that is platted
within the current 100 foot City limit strip to insure that no platted lots are located
within said strip. Such request for disannexation shall be submitted to the City
prior to approval of a final plat for that portion of the property.
8. City and SEI agree that the Pearland Volunteer Fire Department serves the
Property and that, pursuant to this agreement, such services shall continue. In
consideration of such services, SEI agrees to add the City's Fire/EMS fee (fee) to
its monthly billing statement and shall actively collect such fee. SEI shall, subject
to approval by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (UTECQ"),
require payment of the Fire/EMS fee as a condition for service. If approved by
the TCEQ, the condition shall be made part of the service agreement between
SEI and its customers. A residential unit shall mean any building or part of a
building designed for permanent occupancy by one family. To fulfill the terms of
this section, SEI agrees to collect, on behalf of the City, the current monthly
charge of $4.38 for each residential unit on the Property that is connected to and
receiving service from SEI, as determined each calendar quarter following the
effective date of this agreement. SEI shall pay to the City, on a monthly basis, no
more than thirty (30) days after SEl's monthly billing cycle, a sum equal to the
number of fees actually collected for the previous month.
9. City agrees to defer the purchase of the SEl's distribution system and waste
water collection facilities located within the Property, as set out and defined in
numbered paragraph 2, of this Agreement, for a period of twenty (20) years from
the date of this Agreement. At such time as City desires to purchase the portion
of SEl's system and assets within the Property, City and SEI shall each obtain
appraisals for the value of the affected portion of the utility system and assets. If
such appraisals are within 10% of each other, City and SEI agree that the
purchase price will be the average of the two appraisals. Under no
circumstances shall the City have any obligation to purchase the utility system
and assets.
10. This Agreement shall commence and bind the Parties on the effective date of this
Agreement and shall continue until the City acquires the components of SEi's
distribution system that is located within the Property.
11. All covenants and agreements contained herein shall bind all successors and
assigns and shall inure to the future benefit of other parties. .
12. No assignment by a party hereto of any rights under or interests in this
agreement will be binding on another party hereto without the written consent of
the party sought to be bound; and specifically but without limitation moneys that
may become due and moneys that are due may not be assigned without such
consent (except to the extent that the effect of this restriction may be limited by
law), and unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an
assignment no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty
or responsibility under this agreement.
Development Agreement-Southwood Estates
3
13. Whenever possible, each provision of this agreement shall be interpreted in such
manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but if any provision of
this agreement is prohibitive or invalid under applicable law, such provision shall
be ineffective to the extent of such provision or invalidity, without invalidating the
remainder of such provision or the remaining provisions of this agreement.
14. A breach of any material provision of this Agreement after notice and an
opportunity to cure shall constitute a default. The non-breaching Party shall
notify the breaching Party of an alleged breach, which notice shall specify the
alleged breach with reasonable particularity. If the breaching Party fails to cure
the breach within a reasonable time, not sooner that 30 days after receipt of such
notice (or such longer period of time as the non-breaching Party may specify in
such notice), the non-breaching Party may declare a default hereunder and
exercise any lawfully available remedies.
15. This agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with and
governed by the laws of the State of Texas.
16. This agreement and all obligations created hereunder shall be performable in
Brazoria County, Texas.
17. This agreement is solely for the benefit of the City, Developer, and SEI and no
other party is intended to be a beneficiary hereof.
18. To accomplish execution of this agreement, it may be executed in multiple
counterparts.
19. TO THE EXTENT ALLOWED BY THE LAW, EACH OF THE PARTIES HEREBY
RELEASES, ACQUITS, AND FOREVER DISCHARGES EACH OTHER PARTY,
ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, SUCCESSORS, AND ASSIGNS
FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS, DEMANDS, RIGHTS OR CAUSES OF ACTION
OF WHATSOEVER CHARACTER OR NATURE, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS'
FEES, ARISING FROM OR BY REASON OF ANY AND ALL BODILY OR
PERSONAL INJURIES, INCLUDING DEATH AND MENTAL ANGUISH,
DAMAGE TO PROPERTY AND THE CONSEQUENCES THEREOF WHICH
MAY BE SUSTAINED BY ANY PARTY, ITS HEIRS, EXECUTORS,
ADMINISTRATORS, SUCCESSORS, OR ASSIGNS AS A RESULT OF THIS
AGREEMENT BY ANY OTHER PARTY, UNLESS CAUSED IN WHOLE OR IN
PART BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS,
EMPLOYEES, SUCCESSORS, OR ASSIGNS. .
[EXECUTION PAGES FOLLOW]
Development Agreement-Southwood Estates
4
In witness whereof, the parties have hereunto set their hands and signatures on the
date first above mentioned.
CITY OF PEARLAND,
A Texas municipal corporation
By:
Name:
Title:
ATTEST:
By:
Name:
Title:
Development Agreement-Southwood Estates
5
Grand Valley Homes, Inc.
By:
Name:
Title:
ATTEST:
By:
Name:
Title:
Development Agreement-Southwood Estates
6
ATTEST:
By:
Name:
Title:
(SEAL)
Development Agreement-Southwood Estates
Southwood Estates, Inc.
By:
Name:
Title:
7