|
On August 5, 2008, City Council tabled
Consideration and Action on a proposed amendment to the Riverstone General
Plan. Council requested a Workshop
discussion and update on the Riverstone Development Agreement.
Background
City staff and the Developer (project developer,
design consultants and/or legal counsel) have worked together to resolve
Development Agreement and related issues for several years. Initial efforts focussed on infrastructure
participation payments and developing the new City water well and water
treatment plant to serve both Riverstone and the City. More recently, joint efforts focussed on
developing a proposal for funding University Blvd construction and adopting a
supplemental development agreement to facilitate the then-proposed Juno
development project.
Attached is an outline summary of Development
Agreement infrastructure and development related provisions, with notations
as to status. Also attached is a
timeline of related Development Agreement actions and events.
Current Situation
In recent months, Riverstone and staff worked to
develop terms for amending the 2003 Agreement. Currently, the Developer focus is amending
the General Plan and platting portions of the project.
Amending the General Plan is the next sequential
step in the development review and approval process. However, a General Plan amendment does not
resolve the infrastructure and water service issues that hinder project
development and frustrate the Developer.
We need to resolve outstanding Development Agreement issues.
We’ve worked with the Developer to agree on terms
for revising the Agreements and resolve the issues. We’ve reach mutual agreement on most of the
key terms.
The following outline of terms is our
recommendation for solving Riverstone Development Agreement issues. We believe that amending the Development
and Utility Agreements as necessary to incorporate these concepts will
resolve the conflicts and frustrations that have resulted from an incremental
approach. The Developer does not agree
with our recommendation related to construction triggers for second two-lane
section of University Blvd.
Additionally, Fire Protection Service fee issues must be resolved
prior to entering into Strategic Partnership Agreements and Fire Protection
Services Agreements with Riverstone Districts.
We recommend that the Riverstone
Development and Utility Agreements be amended as necessary to incorporate the
following terms or conditions (other terms of the Agreements would remain “as
is”):
1)
Riverstone will
construct the water line planned along University Blvd., to the point of
connection with the water line planned to extend from the new well and
treatment plant.
a)
The water line will
be complete, accepted and connected to the City system at the time the City
puts the new well and treatment plant into service.
b)
Include provisions
for surety or assurance for completion of the line.
Comments: This
water line is essential to providing adequate water flow and pressure for
development. Additionally, the line,
along with other lines, is necessary to allow the City to meet the agreed 45
PSI obligation. This is a District
obligation under the current Agreement.
The current Agreement does not specify a timeframe for completion.
2)
City will construct
the water line that extends from the new well and treatment plant (in Riverstone)
to the existing City system in Commonwealth.
Comments: This
water line serves as a critical component of the Riverstone water system. Also, the line is necessary to connect the
new City water well and treatment plant to the City’s water System. Design and construction funds for this line
are included in the CIP.
Under the current Agreement, the District would construct
and convey this line to the City. The
Agreement does not specify a timeframe construction.
City funding/construction of the line will reduce the dollar
amount of Pre-paid Connection Fee Credits that the District receives to offset
Connection Fee obligations.
3)
City will allow
Riverstone (MUD 128) to receive water services from FBC MUD No. 129, on an
interim basis.
a)
The interim water
supply will cease at the time the City’s well and treatment plant are
operational and in service.
b)
Include provisions
or terms to ensure the interim service ceases.
Comments:
Riverstone has not constructed and conveyed City Trunk Facilities (major
water lines). The resulting partial
Riverstone water system cannot support unlimited development. The interim water supply from MUD 129 will increase
the amount of development the system can support.
The current Agreement requires the District to receive
water and wastewater services from the City unless the City consents to
alternate service providers.
4)
City will construct
University Blvd. from its current terminus to Riverstone.
Comments: The
current Agreement assigns City/Developer responsibilities for constructing
various off-site segments of University Blvd.
This provision shifts the responsibility for all off-site
University construction to City. This
shifts an estimated $3,000,000 in off-site University Blvd. construction
costs from the Developer to the City (compared to the existing Agreement). County Mobility Bonds and cost recovery
through the current $1750/lot Transportation Fee offset this additional City
cost.
This provision is consistent with the mutually agreed
Fort Bend County Mobility Bond proposal developed by City and Developer.
5)
City will agree to
milestones/time frames for City actions to construct University Blvd. to
allow Developer coordination of construction timing and funding
obligations. These may include:
a)
Timeframe for City
to request funding agreement from Fort Bend County;
b)
Subsequent timeframe
for City enter into design services contract;
c)
Following completion
of design, timeframe for City to advertise for construction bids; and/or
d)
Other similar
milestones, reporting provisions, etc.
Comments:
Reasonable timeframes and milestones will allow the Developer to
coordinate University construction obligations. City will establish timeframes and project
management milestones through CIP planning.
The current CIP plan includes this project.
The current agreement does not address timeframes for
constructing University Blvd.
6)
Developer/LID 15
will finance and construct University Blvd. through Riverstone.
a)
Developer/LID 15
will construct two lanes of University Blvd, tying into the City's University
Blvd construction project within 60 days of City’s completion.
b)
Provisions to make
Developer/LID obligation clear will be necessary – The contract must
establish a responsible party.
c)
University Blvd.
sidewalks will be constructed at the time the final two lanes of the
four-lane boulevard section are constructed (Before traffic volumes reach
10,000 trips/day).
d)
Include provisions
for surety or assurance for completion of the street.
Comments: The
current Agreement anticipates LID financing for major streets.
The current agreement provides that Developer will
complete the second two lanes of University Blvd. “prior to the time the
number of vehicles per day on any segment of University Boulevard within
Riverstone exceeds 10,000 trips per day”.
The Developer has strongly stated that modification of the
current 10,000 trip per day trigger is a non-negotiable requirement for
amending the Agreement. The Developer
cites potential for through traffic (traffic without a Riverstone origin or
destination) to trigger the requirement as a problem. This trigger, along with others, was
included in the current agreement to mitigate traffic impacts on Sugar Land
streets and neighborhoods without regard to traffic origin or destination.
We agreed to work with developer to find a mutually
acceptable alternative trigger for completing all four University Blvd lanes. We failed to find an alternative we could
recommend to Council. Problems include:
We were unable to develop a mutually
acceptable alternative that accomplished the same level of traffic mitigation
for the Commonwealth – Palm Royale areas; and,
The 2004 County-City University Blvd.
Funding Agreement includes the same 10,000-trip trigger for constructing the
second University two-lane phase.
Modifying the trigger could shift the construction obligation, and
associated cost, to the City.
7)
Update the Fire
Protection Services Fee-
a)
City Council Policy for
services to ETJ Districts provides for full cost of service fees; Council
sets out-of-City surcharge fees based on terms of Strategic Partnership
Agreements (SPAs).
b) Council will set the fee when adopting the SPA/Fire
Services Agreements.
Comments:
Developer has questions regarding City’s calculation of full cost of
service. Fee issues will be addressed
through subsequent Strategic Partnership Agreements and Fire Services
Agreements. Existing Agreement cost
estimates for future Fire Station capital costs are out of date and require
updates prior to adopting SPAs and Fire Services Agreements.
The balance of the 2003 Agreement terms would
remain.
Background information responsive to Council’s
questions of August 5, 2008, is attached in the form of:
- A timeline of Riverstone Development Agreement
infrastructure and municipal services items.
- A summary and status of Riverstone Development
Agreement terms related to utility services and infrastructure.
- A Riverstone Development FYI Memo dated June 20,
2008.
Options
City Council options include:
- Amend the Development and Utility Agreements
as necessary to incorporate the above terms or other terms Council finds
appropriate;
- Continue an incremental approach for finding
“work-around” solutions for Riverstone Development Agreement issues;
- Attempt to develop a replacement Development
Agreement for Riverstone; or
- Other action Council finds appropriate.
Recommendation
We recommend that the City Council give direction
to staff and the Developer to amend the Development and Utility Agreements as
necessary to implement the recommended terms listed above.
Other
The Developer will attend at the Workshop, with prepared
remarks to present to City Council.
Additionally, the Developer will be available for City Council
questions.
|
