Loading...
Pecan Hollow-CS 900404 ', DAN M. DOWDEY & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERS 16250 DALLAS PARKWAY SUITE 100 DALLAS, TEXAS 75248 (214)~;-%694 ~ April 4, 1990 ~ %'¥ '%'~%'¢f~ Mr. Steve Goram Public Works Director City of Coppell 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019 REF: Pecan Hollow Addition Dear Steve: We are in the process of addressing your concerns regarding the street alignment, the sanitary sewer alignment and the depth of the sanitary sewer main (Line "A"). The street align)-~ent uas finalized based on the zoning site plan and the preliminary plat as previously approved. I understand that for a 30 MPH zone you have a 7~inimum center!ine ra(~ius of 425 ft. The reduction in radius that we have designed, primarily involves intersection tie-ins. Where we are not at intersections, the only reduced radius is at extremely critical locations regarding lot configurations. As I previously noted in a separate letter, the areas that I have reduced the radius is similar to situations in the majority of the subdivisions in Coppell. I am asking that you consider these issues in the review of this final plat. Had I known that you were opposed to this layout I would have revised the layout at the zoning level. In regards to the radius of the sanitary sewer mains, I addressed several general reasons for the alignment to remain as submitted. After discussing the issue with Howard Pafford, his concern was that cleaning mains with the equi ........... the City has, ~]=~u u~= that were constructed on minimum radii, created a more difficult maintenance situation. There are additional problems with the straight alignment on this project. Due to the extremely large amount of storm sewer and inlets, the straight alignment creates additional conflicts with inlets. I am requesting that you work with us on this issue and only require the straight alignment where you definitely have a major problem. If adjustment of manholes can help, I would like to explore this option. At this final stage of the design, I would like to minimize the adjustments. There is an area, sanitary sewer line"A" that is very shallow. The concern that Mr. Pafford had was the problem of other utilities being located adjacent to the sanitary sewer laterals in the shallow area. In addition to encasing the main in concrete, we could restrict the other utilities to locating their facilities at the rear of the lots or in conduit if necessary. Page 2 Mr. Steve Goram April 4, 1990 I have a concern regarding the minimum 100 ft. vertical length for grade differential in excess of 1%. The only areas that I did not impose vertical curves, was in areas approaching the 1% criteria. This length is difficult to maintain during the construction phase, especially in sag locations, i.e. "birdbaths" are created. On behalf of our client, we would appreciate your help regarding the exceptional matters and hope that we can resolve these concerns with current acceptable engineering design principles. Please call me upon review of this letter. Very truly yours, William A. Anderson, P.E. WAA:hc