Deer Run-CS000303 -03-00P04:27 RCVD
,HARRINGTON ENGINEERING~ INC.
3023 ROUTH STREET
DALLAS, ~ 7520 I
Mr. Mike Martin, P.E.
City of Coppeil Engineering Department
255 Paricway Blvd.
Coppell, Texas 75019
RE: Sttl on
Dear Mr. Martin:
This letter is in response to the on-site meeting Mr. Philip Flink of Ryland and I had with you and Mr.
Campbell on Monday, February 28, 2000. After discussing the situations with Ryland the following
proposals are respectfully submitted.
1. Sidewalk and Barrier Free Ramp_ North of Lot 6B. Block 1
Ryland ~11 adjUst the barrier free ramp at the southwest corner of the development and install the
sidewalk along the section of parkway which does not front on any lots. As discussed we propose
to install the sidewalk 3.5 feet off the edge of pavement to be able to obtain an a~ceptable slope up
to the existing ground. Please see the attached drawing.
2. iMlev SI(me Protection
We ~xopo-sed to eliminate as much of the alley slope protection as possible and instead install
curb in the areas where a 3:1 slope or flatter can be obtained behind the curb~ Please see
following exhibit for the limits. There are some areas where the alley slope protection
needed. I have reviewed our archived plans and have determined ~at we have shown the Alley
Slope Protection on the plans since October 2, 1998. We are of the opinion that since the Alley
Slope Protection is called for on the Approved Plans and is shown in the City of Coppell Standard
Construction Details that it is an acceptable construction method. We are also of the Olyinion that
special permission or a maintenance agreement should not be necessary since it is shown l"n the City
Standards as "Required Where Slope of Ground Is Greater than 3:1." While this may not be the
· ·
most desirable solution, it is the most practical solution and is definitely in compliance with the City
o
Since Lots 10A & 10B are angled only lots
by the Concrete Alley SlOpe Protection.
The Alley Slope Protection should not he a maintenance problem for the City. Its purpose is to
eliminate the need to maintain a steep slope which may have a tendency to sluff off, and be difficult
Page 2
Mr. Mike Martin, P.E.
March 3, 2000
to mow. However, if the City is still concerned about the maintenance of the Alley Slope Protection,
Ryland is agreeable to adding it to the HOA documents as required maintenance by the HOA, but
not if this requires council approval.
As you know, Ryland is moving very quickly on this project. They intend to proceed with the
installation of the Alley Slope Protection unless they receive written notice from the City that an
ordinance exist that prohibits the use of the Alley Slope Protection as required by the City Standard
Construction Details in these situations.
3. Sidewalk alone Cot)nell Road
If the City is agreeable to our proposal to proceed with the reduced amount of Alley Slope. Protection
then Ryland is agreeable to installing 150 feet of additional sidewalk in the R.O.W. of Coppell Road.
This additional sidewalk would begin at the North property line of this development and end at the
existing driveway which is approximately 150 feet north of the development. ~J~/(~f0 c o~ ~ ~'~,~
We hope that this letter meets with your approval and that you agree that this is a reasonable solution
the concerns you voiced on Tuesday. We will be glad to meet with you again to discuss these matters
further if necessary.
Thank you for your help with this matter, ff you have any questions or need additional information
please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
President
enclosures
cc Mr. Fred Philips Ryland Homes of Texas
Mr, Phil Flink Ryland Homes of Texas
1-.-47.50 HAWKEN DRIVE 1-48.15 HAWKEN DRIVE
- 0+00.00 ALLEY B1 = 1.52.97 ALLEY A1
<:~ 1-68.49 C.R.
)_ T.C. 511.11
I
!
0*11.81C.R. LT. 4' SIDEWALK TO I 1.27.81C.R. LT.
T.C. 511.89 BE INSTALLED WITH , ~511.31
CONSTRUCTION !
0'01.85, 11.92'0/S C.R. LT. I 8A 8B 9A
T.C. 511.96 ~ ~ , 7A 7B
'IAWKEN DRIVE (WEST SIDE) 'FUTURE 4'~IDEWAL
HAWKEN ............ DRIVE ,(SOUTH 6B BY BUILDERiSi.o0
,%,,,, T.C. 512.23 HAWK DRIVE
....... -CD- ..........
0 ', r~ 1*27.16 C.R. RT. 2 56.00 C.R. RT.
I ~ ~ ¥.~:'~5~1.~-1- -- .C. 510.67
r~ 6A /x
,, ,,~ ~ ~ 6B , 7A
-- --POWER POLE TO "--"1 FUTURE 4' SIDEWALt'<~
" ' _ .... OTHERS (TYP.) -+- (TYPICAL)
'-EEY-C1- ~ BLOCK 2
BLOCK 2
~ PVG. STA 1.84.68
0.39.00 C.R. RT. CONST. 12' CURB INLET
T.C. 511.75 T.C. 511.0,3
F.L. 507.05
T.C. 512.14 1*67.84 C.R. RT.
T.C. 511.11
------~--- ........ 1 .................. j
~. '~' 12A 14B 1SA 15B
" 9~ 1.00 2'00 ~-00 4.00
o llB
.... m--. ~
........... I ! L I