CM 1991-07-30 Minutes of July 30, 1991
The City Council of the City of Coppell met in special called session at
6:00 p.m. for an Advisory Board Work Session and at 7:00 p.m. for a
Special Called Session in the Council Chambers of Town Center, 255
Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas. The following members were present:
Mark Wolfe, Mayor
Bill Smothermon, Mayor Pro Tem
Peyton Weaver, Councilman
David Thomas, Councilman
Tom Morton, Councilman
Jim Cowman, Councilman
Ron Robertson, Councilman
Councilman Nelson was absent from the meeting. AlSo present were City
Manager Alan D. Ratliff, City Attorney Lawrence W. Jackson and Assistant
City Secretary Linde Grau.
REGULAR SESSION - (Open to the public)
Item 1 Call to order
Mayor Wolfe called the meeting to order.
Mayor Wolfe asked for a consensus of Council concerning Council's
attendance at the Teacher's Luncheon, sponsored by the Chamber. which is
to be held August 16, 1991, the same day as the City's Budget meeting.
Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon stated that he felt the Council would be taking
a lunch break, and attending the luncheon would give the City Council an
opportunity to extend goodwill to the new teachers of the community. It
was the consensus of Council to break for two-hours to attend the
luncheon.
Mayor Wolfe advised the Council that Councilman Cowman indicated that,
if he had been present, he would have cast his vote in favor of the
motions for the sign variances presented to Council at the July 23 City
Council meeting. This would have constituted a 4-2 vote for approval
rather than the 3-2 vote; therefore, these items will appear as consent
items at the the next City Council meeting.
Item 3 PUBLIC HEARING - TO consider matters relating to Coppell
Gateway Public Improvement District, including consideration
of a resolution making findings regarding the proposed
district and authorization of the district.
Mayor Wolfe then turned the meeting over to Hayor Pro Tam Bill
Smothermon for discussion of the above item. Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon
reported on the report from the Advisory Committee appointed by Council
and called for by law. Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon referred to the report
submitted to Council "Outline of Steps for Organization of PID"
(attached Exhibit A) for the purpose of examining six (6) issues and
make a finding as to there adequacy and, if Council is so inclined,
approve a resolution establishing the district. Mayor Pro Tem
Smothermon further stated that during the public hearing the Council
would hear evidence as to some of the items so that the Council can make
a determination as to the adequacy and have a basis in which to form the
district. The six (6) items are as follows:
1. Advisability of the improvements
2. Nature of improvsmants
- the Advisory Committee found that the area in question does
need substantial drainage, sewer, water and paving
CCH073091
PAGE 1 OF 5
improvements to improve it's market ability and to make an
improvement to the City; therefore, the Advisory Committee
recommended that the improvements are necessary for the
development of the property and will provide enhancement to
the City. Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon referred to information
received from Catellus providing a breakdown of improvements
which involve providing water, sewer, drainage and paving to
the tract of land known as the Gateway Business Park, and
advised Council that the Advisory Board had reviewed the
proposed improvements and found that the nature of the
improvements adds to the enhancement of the property and
provides a benefit to the City by their nature in being
constructed. (Exhibit B and C - Gateway Business Park Phase I
and II "Infrastructure-Roadways and Utilities, Design and
Construction Cost Summary.)
3. Estimated cost of improvements -
Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon informed Council that the Advisory
Board reviewed the estimated cost of these items to determine
their responsibility and whether or not they come within a
reasonable budget to he established by the district and
approved by the City. City Manager Alan D. Ratltff advised
Council that City Engineers from Ginn and Case, Inc. reviewed
the documents that were supplied on the two projects and
indicated that the amounts, unit values and cost placed there,
were reasonable.
Mayor Pro Tem Smothermon requested that Mr. Paul Phy, Attorney, testify
to the items included in the bond issue other than the actual cost of
the improvements. Mr. Phy addressed the Council at this time and
informed them that the construction costs for Phases Iaud II estimated
capitalized interest would be $364,000, letter of credit acceptance fee
$63,450, issuance cost $118,605, which includes administrative costs and
cost of issue for the public hearing and public notices, and
reimbursement to the City for administrative expenses incurred, and an
underwriters discount in the amount of $105,750 included in the petition
which should be the maximum amount to be incurred. Mayor Pro Tam
Smothermon confirmed with Mr. Phy that the items listed for improvements
are the items that have to be constructed by law due to the wording of
the petition and if for some reason the cost of improvements run more
than they're projected to be, then Catellus will bare the cost of the
additional items. Following questions from the Council, Mr. Phy
informed Council that the estimated total would be $4,230,000 inter=st
4. Boundaries of district -
Mayor Pro Tam Smotharmon stated that the Cvmmittee found,
based upon the information that was presented, that the cost
for the project appeared reasonable given the improvements to
be made. The boundaries of the district are entirely within
an area owned by Catellus (Exhibit D). Mr. T. Weldon Davis,
questions from the Council. Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon further
stated that there were no objections from any landowner within
the district protesting the formation of the district, or the
assessment that will be incurred by the landowners.
CCM073091
PAGE 2 OF 5
5. Method of assessment -
Mayor Pro Tom Smoth~'r~on further stated that the method of
assessment suggested by the district is an assessment based
upon nst useable square feet included in each individual
tract. This method of assessment is approved by law and
specifically stated within the statute as being an acceptable
method. The Committee received written testimony from the
Eugineerfpg Company of Albert H. Halff, Associates, Inc., as
well as Catellus Development as to the reasonableness of this
method of assessment within this particular district given the
improvements to be added to the district and the use to which
the land will be put. (These letters are attached hereto as
Ezhfbit D and E)
Mr. Paul Pby was then asked to give the recommendations and findings of
Albert H. Halff, Associates, Inc., as well as Catellus to the
reasonableness of the square footage assessment. Mr. Phy stated that
Catetlns fs the sole ow~er of all the property in the district and there
is no provisio~ for enlarging the district. The Council would have the
option of not including ali the property, but once the district is
formed the boundaries cannot b~ changed. Catellus advised Mr. Phy that
they intend to sub-divide the property into multiple tracts for
industrial and commercial usage and the nature of that in comparison to
the type and use of facilities in short the water, sewer, drainage,
streets, ars all designed to compliment that type of development. The
design has beem done in accordance with the design criteria of the City,
with estimates being based upon that, so that when the line~ are built
and the streets paved they will become the property of the City. The
probable configuration of the various tracts, and intended use of the
tracts, and the fairest and most ~quitable way to pro-rate these costs
among all portioi~$ of the land, is to do it on a net useable square
footage basis as ~ppesed to any ether method which is authorized by the
statute and; therefore, you have not burdened any portion of the land
within the purposed district.
Apportionment of costs between district/city -
Mayor Pro Tom Smothermon requested Paul Phy, Attorney for
Catellus Development Corporation, 8300 Douglas, Suite 800,
Dallas, Texas 75225 and T. Welden Davis, Regional Vice
President of Development, Catellus Development Corporation,
5429 LBJ Freeway, Suite 600, Dallas, Texas 75240, to address
this issue of apportionment of costs between the district and
city. Mr. Phy stated that the improvements to be made
especially benefit the property contained w~thin the 222 odd
acres. Those improvements are to be bore solely and
exclusively by the property owner with a lien on the property
and there is no justification allocating any portion of those
costs to the City as a whole. Mr. Davis, Catellus
Development, agreed that all the improvements are improvements
that are required by the land and they are to be installed in
compliance with City regulations for the development of the
land. However, Mr. Davis also agreed that all the
improvements are for the good of the property and sees no
reason er Justification to ask for any public participation in
funding assessments for these improvements, He further stated
that Catellus will assume all liability for assessments.
Mayor Pre Tom Smothermon stated that this concluded the report of the
CCM073091
PAGE 3 OF 5
u0137
Advisory Committee and the Committee found that it could pass on all six
(6) items. The improvements are needed and the assessment is a proper
method of assessment given the improvements in tract and that all other
conditions required by law have been met.
Mayor Wolfe then asked anyone else who wished to address the Council in
favor of this request. There were none. Mayor Wolfe then asked for
those who wished to speak in opposition of this request. Again there
were none. He then declard the public h~aring closed.
Following a lengthy question and answer period, Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon
moved that the Council finds that the City has adequatly addressed all
six (6) items r~quired by law, that being the improvements called for in
the petition are advisable, the nature of the improvements have been
disclosed in the petition, the estimated costs are reasonable, the
boundaries of the district have been established, the method of
assessment will be net useable square footage which is a reasonable
method of assessment given the improvements of the tract, the use to
which the tract will be put, and the apportionment of the cost between
the district and the City will be the district will bear 100% of the
cost and the City will bear none of the cost. Councilman Thomas seconded
the motion. Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon amended the motion to include the
amount of $4,230,000 as a locked-in fixed figure. Councilman Thomas
seconded the amended motion. Following further discussion Mayor Pro Tem
Smothermon advised Council that after the City Council closes the public
hearing and finds on the above six (6) items the Council will then move
to the discussion of the resolutfon adopting the PID. At that time, the
City Council can further discuss their concerns. Motion carried 5-1
with Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon and Councilmen Weaver, Thomas, Cowman, and
Robertson voting in favor of the motion and Councilman Morton voting
against the motion.
Following further discussion, Councilman Morton expressed his concerns
of the proposed time frame involved. Councilman Thomas stated that the
scheduled dates, as indicated, are proposed dates; however, it is up to
the applicant to expeditiously complete the process by satisfying
Council with all issues, concerns and questions being clarified. Mr.
Davis reiterated that the draft dates are an optimistic guide.
Councilman Weaver requested clarification on the issues (Exhibit F) as
outlined in the rough draft letter from the City Attorney Lawrence W.
Jackson and questioned at what point these issues will become resolved
relative to the process of the "Outline of Steps for Organization of
PID." (Exhibit A) Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon stated that the issues in
question must be resolved before any bonds can be authorized or issued.
City Attorney Lawrence W. Jackson requested that all exhibits be
attached to the minutes as a part of the permanent record.
Mayor Pro Tam Smothermon moved to approve Resolution 073091.1
authorizing the establishment of the Coppell Gateway Public Improvement
District and that the format/on of this district does not allow for the
issuance of bonds until such time as the City's Counsel is satisfied
that the City is not incurring any risk or cost with regard to these
bonds, or the collection of the assessments which will pay these bonds.
Councilman Cowman seconded the motion. Following review of the eight
(8) items addressed in a letter from City Attorney Lawrence W. Jackson
dated July 29, 1991 (Exhibit F), and discussion and concerns expressed
by Council, motion carried 5-1 with Mayor Pro Tem Smothermon, Councilmen
Weaver, Thomas, Cowman and Robertson voting in favor of the motion and
Councilman Morton voting against the motion.
Mayor Wolfe then thanked the members of the Advisory Com~ittee and those
CCM07/30/91
PAGE 4 OF 4
that worked on behalf of the City, and commented on the cooperation
between the public and the City.
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned.
ATTEST:
Ltnaa Grau, Assistant City Secretary
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A - Outline of Steps for Organization of PID
EXHIBIT B - Gateway Business Park - Phase I - Coppell, Texas
EXHIBIT C - Gateway Business Park - Phase II - Coppell, Texas
EXHIBIT D - Letter from Alhert H. Halff Associates, Inc. dated
July 30, 1991 (Coppell Gateway Public Improvement
District (proposed)
EXHIBIT E - Letter from Catellus dated July 30, 1991
Assessment Method - Coppell Gateway Public
Improvement District
EXHIBIT F - Letter from Nichols, Jackson, Kirk and Dillard
McCall, Parkhurst & Horton - dated July 29, 1991 -
Coppell Gateway Public Improvement District
EXHIBIT G - Coppell Gateway Public Improvement District
(Proposed Boundaries) Site Plan - Gateway Business
Park
EXHIBIT H - Letter from Ginn &
Case,
Inc.,
Consulting
Engineers,
dated July 26, 1991 - Gateway Business Park
CCM073091
PAGE 5 OF 5
MINUTES 07/30/91
MNTS3
OuT . NE OF STEPS FOR OF
7~ 1. Public Hearing to make findings required by §372.009(b)
/~ a. Advisability of the improvements
. ~.b. nature of impro~ments ~ i c. estimated costs of improvements ~
· ~. d. boundaries of district
method of assessment and ~ ~
~. f. apportionment of costs between district/city
g. direct Advisory Body(or otherwise) to prepare
(i) 5 year on-going Service Plan
(ii) preliminary assessment roll
AND
establish.rules and procedures for administration
of the district
2. Publish Notice of District Authoization
~--7/~ 3. Advisory Body (or others as directed by'City Council)
-- meets to prepare Service Plan and Assessment Roll
(Catellus provides proposed sequence for construction
and property description for Assessment Roll)
Proposed rules and procedures for
a. preparing plans for improvements and review thereof
b. taking of bids for improvements
c. awarding contracts
d. inspection during construction
e. acceptance of work
f. conveyance of right-of-way and easements
g. method of preparing and collecting assessments
h. procedures for payment of District bills, investment
of District funds, paying agency/escrow agreements
~'~7 4. City Council calls, gives notice and holds public hearing on adoption of Assessment Plan.
9- I0 5. City Council authorizes sale of bonds to fund improvements and levys assessments to pay same
/ 0 - i O 6. Construction commences
"EXHIBIT
GATEWAY BUSINESS PARK
COPPELL, TEXAS
GROSS ACREAGE
Phase I 103.823 acres
Phase II 118.8952 acres
Total 222.7182 acres
NET DEVELOPABLE AREA
(Available for PID Assessment Purposes)
Phase I
ACRF_~ SOUARE FEET
Block 1 26.1265 1,138,069
Block 2 70.1255 ac
Gateway Circle (3.64 ac)
66.4855 2,896,108
Phase II
~'~ Unplatted 118.8952 ac
Freepor~ Parkway (4.1384 ac)
Cowboy Drive (1.03 ac)
Grapevine Creek (7.6666 ac)
106.0602 4.619.982
Total Net 198.6722 acres 8,654,159 SF
0AT, WAY BU~INBSS PAI~
PHAS~ I
COPI~.L, T~XAS
~UCTUR~ROADWAYS & UTIt.WIB~
DBSION & CON~'I~UCTION COST SUMld~Y
'EXHIBIT
.GERT I~Y:C~TELLLr_~ D~L ~ ; ?-Z~-91 12:24F:'M ; 2~4~?,03292-~ ;~
GATEWAY BU~ PAl~
"EXHIBIT
ALBERT H. HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC,
ENGINEERS * SCIENTISTS · SURV£YOR5
DALLAS, ARLINGTON * CHICAGO * FORT WORTH
~,,Ta,~.oo~ July 30, 1991
Mayor and City Council
City of Coppell
P,O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
Re: Coppell Gateway Public
Improvement District (proposed)
Gentlemen:
At the request of Catellus Development Corporation, we have reviewed the proposed
method of assessing property within the referenced District on the basis of net useable
square feet of each site. Catellus, as the sole owner of the property within the District, has
advised us that the property will be subdivided into multiple tracts for industrial/commercial
purposes and specified the type, estimate costs and nature of the proposed water, sanitary
sewer, storm sewer, drainage and street facilities proposed to be acquired or constructed by
the proposed District.
We are also advised that all facilities will be constructed based on the design criteria
of the City and upon completion will become a part of the City's water, sanitary sewer,
drainage and street systems.
Based on the specific nature and type of facilities, the probable configuration of the
subdivided tracts, the nature and type of the intended use of the tracts and the necessity for
these basic infrastructure facilities, it is our opinion that the land within the District will all
be specifically benefitted so that an assessment based on the net useable square/borage of
each tract is a fair, equitable and reasonable means of requiring each site to pay its fair
share of the costs of the specified facilities.
.~/.,ours very truly,
BERT I-~ ~IALFF ASSOCIATES, INC.
Sl~nt .
cc: Mr, T. Weldon Davis
Catellus Development C?rp.
'EX}I/BIT D"
C A T E L L U S
IP
July 30, 1991
The Honorable Mark Wolfe
Mayor
CITY OF COPPELL
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
Re: Assessment Method
Coppell Gateway Public Improvement District
Dear Mayor Wolfe:
Catellus Development Corporation is the sole owner, in fee simple, of the 222.7182 gross land
acres/198.6722 net land acres, within the boundaries of the requested Coppell Gateway Public
Improvement District.
In preparing our request for formation of a Public Improvement District, Catellus has analyzed the costs
and type of improvements required to develop the property as related to the special benefits to be derived
by each of the developable sites. It is our opinion that, considering the proposed industrial and
commercial development planned, the costs expended and benefits derived are substantially and
reasonably equal for each and every development site. It is our further opinion that of the authorized
assessment methods, the fairest and most equitable method seems to be the equal assessment method.
For these reasons, we request and support an assessment method which will result in an equal rate of
assessment for each square foot of net land area within the proposed Public Improvement District.
Furthermore, Catellus will commit to a format which will require that upon the sale of any site the pro
rata share of the cost of PID financed improvements for that site shall be paid in full, bond indebtedness
reduced accordingly, and no further assessment shall be due for that site. As Regional Vice President
of Development for Catellus, I am authorized and empowered to make this representation and
commitment for and on behalf of Catellus with the understanding that you will rely hereon in connection
with your consideration to grant approval to authorize the proposed District.
Sincerely, . . f
(-~'T. Weldon i)avis~
Vice President, Development
TWD:If
CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
5419 LBJ FREEWAY, SUITE 600 ' DALLAS, TEXAS 75240-2609 ' TEL 2~4 980-7707 FAX 114 770-3272
**EXHIBIT E'
TO: Members of the Ci~ Cou~il of the Ci~/of Coppell, Texa~
FROM: Nichols, Jack. n, Kirk and Dillard
McCall, Parkhufst .e, Horton
DATE: July 29, 1991
RI~: Coppcll Gateway Public Impt'ovemeut District
Attached hereto is a ,ucmorandum dret~i b~ Otc CtWs attorneys ia order to clariP/fOr thc developer,
Eatellus Development Corporation CCatelius'), the City's concerns l~'naining to the proposal authorization
of the Coppell Gateway Public Improvement District (the *PID') and the issmencc of honda by the City to
finance ccttein proposed improvements in the PID. The attached memorandum, which l~ summarized below,
is als~ a good.faith effort of thc City to specify for Catelins the conditions tlmt the City needs satisfied in order
to be fully protected ia the issuance of thc r~lUeStCd City as~asment bond.~
It is important to note that thc PID Is not a distinct legal entity with its own soverniag body, but is
in fact j~t one way for the Chy to provide improvcrncnta to a dcP. ued area within the City. Thus, the actions
taken ia this project will bc those of the City, and the City will be responsible roi' this project.
The purpose of authorizing thc PID and issuing the bonds, is to pre~de fends which will bc used to
make public improvements in the PID such as road~ water and sewer iafruslmcture, landscapia$, st~ect liglits
and d~aina~e facilities. Catellu.~ baa reprc~nted that it will develop the area in the PID by building
commercial and industrial properties which will be leased to appropriate tenant~, Catellu~' intent is to twa
tile ~ as a long-term invc.nUnent. Thus. if Catallns rcmaius the only iandowaer in the PID, it will he t~
only entity wldch will make asse~ment payments, and in that casa it will bear the ct~t of the improVcmen~
Carelha~ has stated that it has already incurred ia excess of $1 million for cer~ of such improvemca~ When
the bond~ are tssu~l, thc City will acquire the completed improvements from Cat¢llns by reimbtsrsli~ C. atcllns
out of bond proceo3~. The City will usc the temainia$ bond proceeds to construct the rest of the iatended
improvements. Catellus ha~ advi~ the City that it needs as~umnce~ in the near future Ihet the City will lssn~
thc bonds to provide funding for the remaining imprcn~ems so thai it can So forward with ccrtaia of the
work, most notice, ably on tile drop-structure needed to address drainage problclns in the PID.
itt dtscuasions with Catellus and its financing team lust week, reprmentetlves of thc City advised
Catellua that the City would outline its coll0enm aad .e~mc propor~d conditions raider which ~ step~
can he taken to (a) ensure that sufficient security is provided in coam0gtion with tl~ issuance of bonds to
protec~ the bondboldcr'a inv~tmcnt and thc C/ty~s credit, (b) to ensure tlmt State laws ~ovetliiag tile issuance
of bonds, and in particular, restrict/vt State ~ Fe..f~ining to the pov/e~ of munielpaliti~ to enter into
VariOUS ~iads Of *~it enhal~'ell~"_:lttS.* such lctier'~ of gl*odit* age complied with in afl reap~ (c) that ia the
event that ttte third part}, which co~ttactuaily obligates itseff to provtd~ sucli e~! enhanconsant i~ reqniged
to honor it~ obligations due to insufficient asseasmeflt revenne~, t~ ia an eir~t, Imv co~t end
ftolld~fuptive m~thod of reimbutain8 such pretty alld (d) that f~dcrai incame tax lava ~Nff~tninln~ IO ta~.4~g~lipt
bonds are complied with in all respects.
There fotiows a summary of the conditions which were outlined to CateHIt$ by the City's altont~ys on
July 27, 1991:
SENT BY;3tCCALL P.~KHL;RST ; 7-2cj-9~. : 5:1~.P.~ ; ~,~C.~L PARKHLRST'-CITY OF COPPELL TX :# 8/ ?
Catcllas Development Corporation
1. TI~ City will not publish notto$ of thc PID's authort~ation, which is the fi~Lal act which must
be taken before the P1D is lesally authorized, until an ordinance providing for tl~ pt, o~durm
for administration of thc PID is adopted by tho City Council.
2. The City wQI agree w/th Catcllus as to ti,*' estirnatnd amoum of adminlstrat/vc overbead that
will be allocated to the PID and such amount will be paid annually to tim City.
' 3. Catellm will p~ the City with evidence that all ffMel~, slate and local permits aoeessasy
for tho construction of the improvemenu ILave been obtil~zl.
The bonds ,Mil be approved by the Texas Attorney General in accottlance with Sm:c law.
5. Catellus will provide independent evldeacc for the City Council to rely on In d~termining the
manner in which the asse~ments are allocated to the property, In order that the City Council
makes it cleat that it has discharged ira reaponaibility in an appropriate ~ ptovidod by
Stat~ law,
6. Thc City and Catell~ will mutually asree to a firm of attorneys which has partlct~lar expertise
in tax-exempt ~.,~essment financIngs m act as Special Tax Counsel to cnsuro that the bonds
are issued in accordance with federal income tax la~,~.
7. The bonds shall be issued pursuant to a t_rust indenture. The trustee wifl enforce tho
provisions tieccssary to protect the bondholdet~' investment, and will also cnforee the
agreement of Catellus tO tbe CitT under which Catellos allall prepay any oumtanding
assc~ments if Catellus conveys the land on which the asseasrncnts have been made prior to
the payment of thc bonds.
8. Tile City an~ CatcHus will agrc~ to appropriate Cr"dit enhancement which protec~ tho C/ty's
credit and pfovi4~ ~r an cfficicrtt method of fo~g on the
nc~ I~ ~m ~te C~y will m~t age, re C~J~ ~ ~ ~ w~ ~e ~ss~l ~ C~te~lus has
,~ provided thc City ,Mth thc ~oe~fl~ of thc credit enhan~cmeat through a t~rm shoat,
', commttmeat letter, or othonvi~, that ~ts out In dolail tl~ City's obl~atiOllS ~ a result of
su~it credit enhancement, and special tax couns~ has approved the tcrm~ of tho credit
enhancement as complying ,Mth federal income tax
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DiSTRiCT
COPPELL
GATEWAY
(PROPOSED BOUNDARIES)
PHASE I
SITE PLAN
225 ACRES-COPPELL, TEXAS
~ATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
BBB ......... ~' ~'''
"EXRI'~IT G'
O0,~J 48
GINN & CASE, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS
July 26, 1991
Mr. Gary $ieb
City of Coppell
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, TX 75019
Re: Gateway Business Park
In accordance with your request, we have compared the unit prices
for the Gateway Business Park furni~hed by your office to the
unit prices for some work on ~ome of our recent projects.
In general, the unit prices appea~ to be in line with other
projects of similar scope.
Dis~mer: We have not reviewed the quantities of the various
items of work and do not know if they accurately reflect the
magnitude of the project. This unit price comparison is not an
estimate of the cost of the work.
If we can be of further service, please advise.
Sincerely,
H. Wayne Ginn,
HWG/dsp
171()3Pr¢.~ionRo0d * Suile lO0 a Dallas. Tcx~s75245 · Phone 214/248-49t,','D
P.O. Box796577 * Dallas. Texas75379.6577 '~ FAX 214/931-1452
- ' "EXHIBIT