ST9902-CS130222
Halie Hernandez
From:Chris Schmitt <cschmitt@tnpinc.com>
Sent:Friday, February 22, 2013 9:41 AM
To:Keith Marvin
Subject:RE: Sandy Lake Phase 2A and 2B outstanding questions
Keith,
My son is playing in a basketball tournament today in Frisco. Our first game is at 1:00 and next will depend on whether
they win or lose thus my schedule is in flux for the remainder of the day.
If you can fit me in I can stop by this morning or stop by late in the day or we can schedule a time for first of next week.
Thanks
Chris
Chris Schmitt, P.E.
Principal
17304 Preston Road, Suite 1340
Dallas, Texas 75252
214.461.9867 Main
903.421.1897 Mobile
214.461.9864 Fax
cschmitt@tnpinc.com
From: Keith Marvin [mailto:KMarvin@coppelltx.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:10 PM
To: Chris Schmitt
Cc: Casey McBroom; Chris Schmitt; Kyle A. Bennett; Andrew Luce
Subject: Re: Sandy Lake Phase 2A and 2B outstanding questions
Yes. Let's get together to discuss it. I've got some time Friday afternoon this week.
Keith Marvin
City of Coppell
On Feb 20, 2013, at 11:46 AM, "Chris Schmitt" <cschmitt@tnpinc.com> wrote:
Thanks Keith
1
Also, I'm sure you are busy but wanted to see if you've had any time to review 121 water line proposal I
sent last week?
Chris
tnp
teague nall & perkins
Chris Schmitt, P.E.
Principal
17304 Preston Road, Suite 1340
Dallas, Texas 75252
214.461.9867 Main
903.421.1897 Mobile
214.461.9864 Fax
cschmitt@tnpinc.com
On Feb 20, 2013, at 11:39 AM, "Keith Marvin" <KMarvin@coppelltx.gov> wrote:
Casey,
Let me work on some answers and get back to you.
Keith Marvin, P.E.
City of Coppell
972-304-3681
From: Casey McBroom [mailto:CMcBroom@TNPINC.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 11:08 AM
To: Keith Marvin
Cc: Chris Schmitt; Kyle A. Bennett; Andrew Luce
Subject: Sandy Lake Phase 2A and 2B outstanding questions
Keith
We met internally yesterday to discuss both phases of the Sandy Lake project, and
developed a list of remaining questions that we wanted to run by you prior to our final
submittals. Some of these may be simple answers while others you may wish to meet
to discuss. We are open to whatever works best for you. As previously discussed, our
hope was to have plans to you by the end of the month, possibly sooner if we can
gather all the remaining information we need. Take a look, and feel free to respond to
the items as you see fit. Thanks.
1.We need a copy of the City Bridge Luminaire Details so we can complete the
bridge lighting plans.
2.Does the City have a specific modular block Brand/Type/Color that they would
like for us to specify on the plans at this time? There have been some previous
examples mentioned around the city, but we have never identified exactly what
colors/look would be preferred. This can also be handled later through
submittals if preferred.
2
3.Does the City have a preference on pedestrian handrail Color/Type in lieu of the
less appealing PR-1/PR-2 types? One thought would be a more decorative
handrail with a black or wrought iron look. Again, this could be handled through
submittals if necessary, but would help the contractors in pricing if we detailed
it out prior to bidding.
4.Would the City like to extend the Bridge Railing on the west side of the bridge,
south side of the road, instead of using the selected pedestrian handrail
type? We had discussed the possibility of extending the bridge railing rather
than having two different types abutting each other.
5.Phase 1 had permanent “paint” markings (stripes, arrows, etc.) paid as lump
sum, but had traffic buttons paid by type/each. Would they prefer to do that
again? We noticed this while putting together our list of bid items, and while
unconventional, we can certainly do this again.
6.Would the City prefer that TNP submit (for City review) some form liners for the
cast-in-place concrete retaining walls prior to bidding, or would they prefer to
handle that through submittals with the contractor?
7.Would the City prefer that the trail improvements be included in the plan set for
Phase 2A prior to bidding, or submitted as an addendum once available? Since
scope, fee, etc. is still being finalized, we anticipate a slight delay in this portion
of the plans.
8.After reviewing the Geotechnical report in detail, cement stabilized subgrade is
recommended for the entire 2A and 2B sections. Previous conversations left
open the possibility of dividing the necessary quantity of stabilization into both
lime and cement, and requiring further series testing during construction. Is this
still the city’s recommendation, or is the recommendation from the report
acceptable?
9.We would like to get the revised Denton Tap Signal Plans which the City is
currently preparing. If requested, we can provide the proposed paving and ramp
cad work for incorporation into the City’s drawings.
10.We need the water service line size of the Verizon building for reflection in our
drawings.
11.Has there been any update or changes to the desired submittal/bidding
schedule? As mentioned above, our goal was to deliver plans by the end of the
month with expectations that advertising would follow shortly, but we can
adjust that schedule as the City sees necessary.
Thanks for your help, and we hope to have everything completed very shortly. Please
let us know if you would like to discuss any of these items further, or if there is anything
that you have thought of since we last met.
<image001.jpg>
3
Casey McBroom, P.E.
Project Engineer
17304 Preston Road, Suite 1340
Dallas, Texas 75252
214.461.9867 Phone
972.900.5733 Mobile
214.461.9864 Fax
cmcbroom@tnpinc.com
4