ST9902-CS130305
Halie Hernandez
From:Andrew Luce <ALuce@TNPINC.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:10 AM
To:Keith Marvin; Casey McBroom
Cc:Chris Schmitt; Kyle A. Bennett
Subject:RE: Sandy Lake Phase 2A and 2B outstanding questions
Keith,
To follow up on item #9 below, what kind of format would you like our up-to-date base file in so that the City may
finalize the signal plans at Denton Tap? We are currently working in AutoCAD Civil 3D 2011, but can export it to any
previous format before 2011. We want to give the City as much time as possible to finalize these plans so please let us
know how you would like the file and we can send it quickly.
Last week while I was out of town Dean Hodde, a surveyor working with Verizon, requested some files so that they could
lay out their relocations for the section of Sandy Lake Rd. from N. Coppell Rd. to S. Coppell Rd. The files requested were
sent to him but I wanted to forward you the e-mails per your previous direction to be copied on all coordination with
franchise utility companies to document them in your project files. Due to their file sizes, I will be sending them
separately. You should receive five (5) e-mails after this one.
If you have any questions, Casey or I can answer them.
Thanks,
Andrew
Andrew Luce, P.E.
Project Manager
1100 Macon Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
817.336.5773 Main
817.665.8208 Direct
817.336.2813 Fax
aluce@tnpinc.com
From: Keith Marvin [mailto:KMarvin@coppelltx.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:41 AM
To: Casey McBroom
Cc: Chris Schmitt; Kyle A. Bennett; Andrew Luce
Subject: RE: Sandy Lake Phase 2A and 2B outstanding questions
Casey,
Let me work on some answers and get back to you.
1
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.
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.
2
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.
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
3