Coppell Industrial-CS001102Graham Associates, Inc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & PLANNERS
Centerpoint Two Suite 400/616 Six Flags Drive
Arlington, Texas 76011 - Metro 640-8535
October 31, 2¢00
Mr. Mike Martin, P.E.
City of Coppell Engineering Depamuent
255 ParkxYay
Coppell, TX 75019
Re:
Tradepoint Phase I
Review Co,,nment Response
Mike:
Attached are two revised sets of plans and your markup from the construction plan review. The following
explanations correspond to the numbered comments in your October 11 letter.
1. Width of driveways indicated as 40' face to face.
2. No change has been made for the joint sealant specification. Chan~pion has historically used robber
sealant and feels it has performed well for them. N 'landatory use of silicone sealant will have a significant
cost implication to the project considering the amount of pavement involved. Since this is all privately
owned and maintained pavement, we respectfully request a waiver to this requirement.
3. Champion does not feel lime stabilization of pavement subgmde provides any long term benefit to the
project it only gives a convenient working platform during construction. The geotechnical for this project,
Reed Engineering, has recommcnded the specified pavement thickness with 95% compacted subgrade.
Since all pavement in question is privately owned and maintained there is no cost implication to the City of
Coppell. We respecfftfily request a waix'er to this requirement.
4. Utility Plan
o Valves afldeWrclocated as requested
All taps noted as "wet"
· The existing sewer is significantly lower than the existing 16" water line so there is sufficient
clearance to make the connection without a grade conflict. Notes have been added to require the
contractor to pothole the existing 16" water for verification immediately upon mobilization onto
the site.
· Mmthole connection by other than open cut specified.
· Attached is a copy of sheet Fl' 1.00 from the architectural set showing location of the proposed
hrc department connection. More detailed information is not available at this time because thc
fire protection system is being constructed m~der a "design & installation" contract with the fire
protection sub-contractor. We recoguize the requirement for this to be signed and sealed by a
licensed fire line desilc'ter and permitted separately.
· Proposed storm added to the utility plan background.
5. All water & storm sewer crossings shown on sanitary sewer profile. Lowering the site grades by 4'
necessitated installation of one joint of DIP sewer beneath the stom~ drain crossing but there is still
adeqnate clearance.
6. Lowering the site grades by 4' eliminated the need for a 6' dian~eter manhole but the manhole at
2+63.69 was increased to 5' diameter.
7. Water and sanitary sewer crossings as well as hydrauhc grade hne shown on storm sewer profiles.
8. Lowering the depth of the detention pond allowed lowering of the storm sewer profile for both Line A &
B. With the additional depth I believe the question of adequate cover becomes a mute issue.
9. Concrete collars indicated at all pipe size changes.
10. Flowline for ouffall swale along Bethel Road shown on mass grading plan.
11. Storm sexver system shown in background of drainage area map.
12. Drainage from the undeveloped area north of Phase I building is directed easterly by means of a cutoff
swale and berm as shown on the mass grading plan.
13. Drainage area from each of the proposed driveways is shown as X1, X2, and X3 on the drainage area
~nap. In no instance is the nmoffvolurne greater than 2 c.f.s --,
14. The phase I detention pond totals 1,018,00 cubic feet of storage, significantly more than th~'408,150 ':
cubic feet required. The reason for the excess is the dirt requirements for phase I building pad andth~.. /
necessity of having the Bethel Road outfall swale. As mentioned above, the pond is being excavated below
weir dis'charge elevation but no volume below elevation 508.50 is being considered in the available storage
volume. It is proposed to construct the discharge structure for full project buildout with the first phase but
because Phase I developed runoff is much less than full buildout, the discharge rate for 2, 5, and 100 year
events will be less than allowable.
15,16,17. Added to this submittal is the weir discharge structure from the Champion pond to the Duke-
Weeks pond. It appears that a resolution will be reached on this issue and that our pond will be able to
drafix totally by gravity means. Under this scenario, the weeping system is eliminated from the design. The
pump station drawings have not been removed from the plan set at this time because Champion may still
want to install a manually operated station to drain the portion of the pond below the weir discharge
elevation following storm events. If they elect to install this system, it would be only for draining the pond
after storms have passed and would have no role in the detention/storage ~'stem. Since this would be a
optional system, I do not see the need for a backup pump.
Please re~4ew this information and let me know any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
GRAHAM ASSOCIATES,
Chuck Stark, P.E., R.P.L.S.
Vice President
CS/br
CC~
Kerry Burden
David Meinhardt
Jason Nunley
Graham Associates, Inc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & PLANNERS
Letter of Transmittal
TO: Mike Martin DATE: 12/18/2000
Engineering Department- City of Coppell
255 Parkway Blvd.
Coppell ,TX
RE:
Coppell Industrail Addition- Tradepoint
W.O. No. 9741-1091
WE ARE ENCLOSING:
No. Copies Description
2 Conceptual Full Development Storm Water Layout
ReMarks:
~']For Your Use
r'~As Requested
DFor Your Approval
DApprovedas Noted
Attached is the Concept Storm Water Layout with the Contributing Drainage Area Boundaries
shown. If any more information is needed or any changes need to be made, please call.
Signed: MIKE PETERSON
CC to: CHUCK STARK, P.E.
616 Six Flags Dr., Ste 400 * Arlington, Texas 76011 * (817)640-8535 * (817)633-5240
REAL ESTATE STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION
October 16, 2000
Mr. Jim Witt
City Manager
City of Coppell
255 Parkway Blvd.
Coppell, TX 75019
RE: Impact Fee Credits
Dear Mr. Witt:
Thank you and the City of Coppell for considering our request for credits against certain
impact fees for our contribution of future right-of-way for Bethel Road. The granting of
the $109,000 credit per your October 11, 2000 letter (copy attached) will greatly assist in
helping make this development competitive with other similar projects in this market.
Per your request and in consideration of the granting of this credit, please allow this letter
to confirm that the owner of this approximate 100-acre property, CP-Coppell Industrial,
Ltd., agrees to plat the balance of this site by October 11, 2602 (two years from the
granting of the credit).
Once again, Champion Partners thanks you, Ken Griffin, Gary Sieb, Clay Phillips and the
rest of the city's staff for its concerted efforts to assist us in developing this property. We
also look forward to a continuing relationship with the City of Coppell.
/ ~Stephen . g
(.,// Senior Partner
SMG:cc
CC:
Clay Phillips
Ken Griffin
Jennifer Armstrong
Gary Sieb
CHAMPION PARTNERS
15601 Dallas Parkway Suite 1130 Addison~ Texas 75001
972/490-5600 FAX 972/490-5599
,~-~wv.c hampion partners.corn
ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
PROJECT:
DATE:
Coppell Industrial Addition, Lot 1, Block A (Phase I)
10/13/00 (REVISED)
ROADWAY IMPACT FEE:
;ervice Area *
Category **
Land Use **
4
Industrial
General Light Industrial
600,000
Building Area (sf)
Development Units ** 600.00
Vehicle Miles per Development Unit ** 1.06
Fee per Vehicle Mile *** $300
Roadway Impact Fee due = (Development Units) x
Nehicle Miles per Development Unit) x (Fee per Vehicle Mile) = $190,800.00
* (Figure 2 - Roadway Impact Fee Study)
** (Table 3 - Roadway Impact Fee Study)
*** (Schedule 2, Page 3 - Roadway Impact Fee Study)
There is a $109,000 credit as per letter dated October 11, 2000 from Jim Witt, City Manager, to
Steve Golding with Champion Partners.
Calculated Fee $190,800.00
Credit $109,000.00
Revised Fee $81,800.00
I AMOUNTDUE: $81,800.00 I