Loading...
ST0301A-CL110111 (8/15/2011) Keith Marvin - Tree damage claimPage 1 From: Keith Marvin To:Anderson, Jerod CC:Elias, John; Griffin, Ken Date: 1/11/2011 5:27 PM Subject: Tree damage claim Attachments:Pajares claim memo - Draft.doc Jerod, See may attached memo regarding the damage claim at 256 W. Bethel. Let's talk about this when you've had a chance to read it. Keith Keith Marvin, P.E. Project Engineer (972) 304-3681 MEMORANDUM TO: Jerod Anderson, Purchasing/Risk Manager FROM: Keith R. Marvin, P.E., Project Engineer DATE: 1/11/2011 REF: Claim No. 01032011.1 – 256 Bethel Road On or about August 11, 2010 JRJ Paving, Inc. or it’s subcontractors entered a portion of the land owned by Mr. Luis Pajares located at 256 Bethel Road. During the progress of construction the contractor caused damage to some of the trees in the vicinity. At the time, the contractor was working for the City of Coppell on the Bethel Road Paving & Utility Improvements project (ST 03-01A). At the time of this damage, the contractor was constructing a footer and subsequent retaining wall. On 8/18/2010 John Elias, our city arborist, and I met on site with Mr. Pajares to review the damage to his trees. John subsequently had a crew trim damaged roots, treated trunk damage, and offered to trim the trees at the appropriate time in an effort to minimize the long term effect of the damage. At this time the full extent of the damage is not known. No trees were removed, and none are known to have died as a result of the damage. On or about 8/23/2010 the engineer of record on the project, Freese and Nichols, Inc. sent their surveyor out to the project to verify the extent to which the retaining wall footer encroached Mr. Pajares’ property. Through field survey it was determined that the footer has a triangular encroachment on Mr. Pajares’ property of approximately 12” at the west end of the footer, to no encroachment at approximately 50 feet east of the west end of the footer, and encompassing approximately 25 square feet of land. Verbal discussion with Mr. Pajares concerning the appearance and location of this retaining wall began as early as June, 2010. Mr. Pajares met with Ken Griffin and I on July 6, 2010 to discuss the appearance, and requested that we build a 6-7 foot tall solid screening wall along his property line that he could then face with rock to give the same appearance as his existing screening wall. We discussed that this would require an agreement between the property owner and the City of Coppell. At this time, Mr. Pajares sent me an email message giving the city permission to build the wall on a portion of his property. I subsequently gathered the necessary information and sent Mr. Pajares an estimate of the costs on 7/29/2010. The total cost to modify the retaining wall/rail to match what Mr. Pajares requested was going to be approximately $26,000. Mr. Pajares chose not to pursue this option due to the cost involved. A couple of notes concerning this issue, the original design of the retaining wall was to be a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall, where the face of the wall is attached to drilled shafts, and there is no structure in front of the wall. During the bid process the design engineer changed the design of the wall to a poured in place wall with a spread footing. In this type of wall there is a footer that extends out from the face of the wall. This footer is the portion that extends outside our city right of way. The contractor building the wall had staked the right of way prior to building the footer, and never brought it to our attention that he was building outside the right of way. Upon being notified by the home owner of this possible encroachment, and the surveyor verifying the encroachment, we discussed the situation at great length with all parties. I made the decision to leave the wall where it was rather than removing the encroachment. This decision was made with the intention of entering into a comprehensive license agreement with the property owner that allows the wall to remain where it is, and allows the property owner to add a rock façade to our wall that will more closely match his existing screening wall in accordance with his original desire as discussed during our 7/6/10 meeting. It was also noted during our survey work on this wall that Mr. Pajares’ screening wall encroaches the city right of way by approximately 6” for approximately 3 feet. I am currently working with Mr. Pajares and his builder to put together a license agreement that would be brought before City Council for approval.