Loading...
WA9402-CS 960823 -'~ '"~ tU~cr4, 02- 'Cit ~ 08-29-0~, Al1:1:7~ IN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF ENGINEERING o rving August 23, 1996 Mr. Kenneth Griffin, P. E. Assistant City Manager/City Engineer ',~ City of Coppell 225 Parkway Blvd. P. O. Box 478 Coppell, Texas 75819 RE: Dallas Water Supply Line No. 3 - Section 3B Dear Mr. Griffin: Thank you for your participation and input at our meeting conceming the resolution of the issue of the blow-out of the 12-inch Coppell water line and its relationship to the installation of the 60-inch/54-inch water line being installed by J. C. Evans. This correspondence is the follow up to that meeting. There were two preliminary issues that needed to be investigated and resolved before we could move on to the resolution of the ultimate issue of responsibility of costs. One of those issues was the field measured distance and relationship of the existing facilities (Coppell 12-inch water line and 30-inch Dallas Water Supply to the 60-inch/54-inch supply construction and bore pit). The other issue was the possibility of the repair costs of the 30-inch line incurred by Dallas Water Utilities being passed on to us. In an effort to resolve those initial issues, we have field measured the distances and relationships mentioned. We have also contacted Dallas Water Utilities in an effort to see if there will be any additional costs incurred by us. The measurement of the construction site revealed the following relationships: 1. Distance from edge of bore pit for installation of Irving/Coppell 60-inch line to Coppell 12-inch P. V. C. 45 degree bend (site of first break on 12-inch Coppell line) - 50 feet. 2. Distance from Irving/C oppell 60-inch line to Dallas 60-inch main - 52 feet. 3. Distance from edge of bore pit for installation of IrvingtCoppell 60-inch line to Coppell 12-inch second break - 58 feet. The relationship of the lines as shown on the plans is apparently incorrect. Either the location of the existing 60-inch water line is incorrect and the location of the 60-inch Irving/Coppell "Assuring Public Welfare Thru Engineering Excdlence" 825 West Irving Blvd. · Irving, Texas 75060 · (214) 721-2611 RECYCt_ED PAPER Mr. Kenneth Griffin, P. E., City of Coppell Dallas Water Supply Line No. 3 - Section 3B August 23, 1996 Page 2 line is correct, or the location of the IrvingJCoppell line is incorrect and the location of the Dallas line is correct. In either of the scenarios, the relationship (distance between the two) and thereby the distance between the edge of the bore pit and the location of the water break is more in the neighborhood of 50 to 55 feet. This resulting relationship seems to give credence to the contractor's petition for some relief of responsibility, thereby some reimbursement of costs. As to whether this also gives merit to an argument that the designing consultant should be responsible for more of the "error' is another area which might be pursued. In our discussion, it appeared evident that a possible total reimbursement to the contractor of $12, 152.40 might possibly be received favorably by all parties. (The contractor has requested $61,703.40.) Again, we have been in touch with Dallas Water Utilities. It appears that no additional costs will be incurred by Irving, Coppell, or Lewisville for the repair of the 30-inch water line. In light of the aforementioned, we propose to approach J. C. Evans with the figure of $12,152.40 for reimbursement of the costs associated with the two repairs of the 12-inch Coppell water line. As per the agreement, this cost will be shared as per pro-rata costs stipulated in the contract between Irving, Coppell, and Lewisville. We are also aware of the additional costs the City of Coppell incurred as a result of this situation and are certainly receptive to any additional consideration you feel may be due. The installation of the overall project to get water to Irving, Coppell, and Lewisville is a multi-million dollar effort. While we all certainly need to be attentive and concerned about the manner in which public funds are spent, we need to bring this situation to resolution. After reviewing the facts, we feel that the $12,152.40 figure is fair to all parties. Please cmment. The contractor is anxious to resolve this issue. c el.M~l~ li ng Manager Cm Attachment pc: Jack Angel, Public Works Director Bob Chapman, Deputy Public Works Director File SECTION 2A PROPOSED 54 ~ WATER LINE RVEY 't~ B86 ESTATES, LTD, 2118, PC. 575 ExiSt. 20' UhY/ly Esmt. Ground 'ons. ~toroge Pese~ok ~wer i T. P, 10~ Conc. ~ 0 VOL. -~ Svy. Pt. 24 " ~6" WAr. t _ TEl -- , lO' lO' .' .~ : T~ v~-~ ~ RON BROOKS