ST0502B-CS121119 • ' — memo
t - — — - V illi
W — v • WP ■ Arredondo, Zepeda & Brunz, LLC.
11355 McCree Road
Dallas, Texas 75238
November 19, 2012
Mr. Michael Garza, P.E.
Civil Engineer
City of Coppell
255 Parkway Blvd.
Coppell, Tx 75019
Re: Comments on Meeting of 11/14/12 at City of Coppell offices
Freeport Parkway Extension from Sandy Lake Road to SH 121
Dear Mr. Garza:
I have discussed our meeting with my client, Mr. William F. Callejo, and have presented him
with key discussion issues raised during the meeting regarding the plan prepared by the city's
designers (Teague, Nall & Perkins) proposed for the extension of Freeport Parkway. The items
which I believe were pertinent and those which I discussed with Mr. Callejo include (discussion
and his comments are presented in each item listed):
1. An additional easement request of 15' to parallel the proposed ROW of Freeport
Parkway to accommodate a trail.
Mr. Callejo does not appear to be favorable to granting this request since it adversely
impacts the financial investment of his investors on property which is being sold on a
square footage basis and affects the remaining developable area.
2. The Citys' request for additional ROW to provide a right turn lane on Sandy Lake
Road at the intersection with Freeport Parkway.
Mr. Callejo appears to appreciate the City's' desire to improve traffic flow through the
proposed roadway extension, and is favorable in granting the additional ROW on Sandy
Lake Road. He would appreciate the City request for the additional ROW in this area be
kept to a minimum.
3. The additional widening beyond the 110' ROW at two intersections (at Sandy Lake
Rd. and the other at SH 121).
The previous request which he had already considered and accepted as an additional
ROW request was for Freeport Parkway at Sandy Lake Road. The new request is for
additional ROW on Freeport Parkway at SH 121. It appears he doesn't have a problem
with the additional ROW request approaching SH 121 intersection, but would prefer to
keep the ROW width to 130'maximum.
4. Accommodations to provide continued access to the Microwave tower.
Continued accessibility in the form of a driveway and path is imperative for the
microwave tower. Mr. Callejo has asked me to approach the Microwave tower
representative and share with them the Citys' roadway proposal plan and obtain their
input for accessibility changes.
civil • environmental • municipal • surveying • construction management
r7141341_QQnn . Fav(71d) 3d1_QQ9
Mr. Garza,PE
Nov. 19,2012
Page 2 of 2
5. Appropriate accommodation of drainage from and through the property.
The drainage plan as presented in the meeting is deemed not acceptable, as it imposes an
unacceptable outfall elevation and flow adversely impacting the land area surrounding
the outfall. REFER to item no. 7 for an acceptable solution.
6. Roadway profile elevation issues, specifically the concept of constructing the
roadway with 8 ft. of fill from the Microwave Tower to SH 121.
The proposed roadway elevation profile with fill of up to 8 feet from the microwave tower
to SH 121 is not acceptable. The proposed height and elevation of the roadway would
call for a considerable amount fill material or limited access points with retaining walls
throughout the "Callejo"property. Mr. Callejo realizes that the intersection at SH 121
will require the roadway to rise to meet the present elevation, but would prefer that the
elevation along the remainder of the roadway to and past the microwave tower be kept as
close as possible to the nominal surface elevation as possible. If there is a need to
elevate the roadway profile, that the elevation from natural grade to top of pavement not
exceed 4'. (Mr. Callejo realizes that the topographic surface elevations in the area vary
significantly and is amenable to reasonable request by the city which may exceed the 4'
limit).
7. Consideration to lower the pipeline was suggested by Mr. Ken Griffin, PE (City
Engineer, City of Coppell) in order to appropriately address the elevation
constraints presented by the proposed drainage outfall, as well as the reduced
accessibility to the "Callejo" property caused by a proposed 8 ft. of elevation
difference between the ground surface elevation and the proposed roadway surface
elevation.
Mr. Callejo is appreciative to Mr. Griffin for recommending the possibility for the city to
take responsibility for improving both the drainage and roadway profile elevation (items
previously discussed in no. 6 and no. 7 above) with the suggestion for his designers to
investigate the feasibility in lowering the pipeline to improve the said conditions.
8. Mr. Griffin, requested confirmation of the roadway ROW being deeded over to the
City by the foundation.
Mr. Callejo confirms that the intent of the foundation is to, in fact DEED the ROW over
to the City, in exchange for certain credits previously offered by the city. He would like
to remind the City that a roadway path has already been recorded by the foundation, but
not deeded over to the City. This recorded property will have to be abandoned or
removed and replaced with the new ROW. Once the overall roadway plan and profile is
reviewed and deemed acceptable to the foundation, Mr. Callejo would appreciate the free
use of the City generated survey documents, including a metes and bounds description for
the Foundations' conveyance and recording of the proposed deeded land.
Sincerely,
Arredondo, Zepeda& Brunz, LLC
'!
Victor M. Zepe. ., P.E.
civil • environmental • municipal • surveying • construction management
(914) 'A1_QQ In . Gav (914)341_QQ9c