ST0301-CS020523l G~ry Sieb,-Re: Plan Page
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Phil Walker" <pwaiker@lrk.com>
<gsieb@ci.coppelt.tx.us>
5/23/02 2:50PM
Re: Plan
Gary - That sounds good with regard to the final plan. We will be
shipping you the final deliverables within the next few days. Here are
my answers to your questions concerning LRK's role in design review for
the streetscape design:
1 ) The "appropriate" times for our input would consist of starting off
with a beginning "kick off" conf. call meeting so the engineers fully
understand our plan and its intent, then we have reviews at 50%, 75% and
100% completion. We may need to do a quick re-review after the 50%
revisions to be sure it's headed in the right direction.
2) The schedule above would entail 3-4 plan reviews.
3) There would be a variety of ways you could get the plans to us,
including: shipping hard copies, e-mailing electronic versions, or
putting them on a website we can access.
4) We could provide a 1 week turnaround for each review, with the
deliverable being a memo and a marked up plan.
5) If we reach an impasse we should be able to resolve things by a
conference call, but if we need to travel there we'd need to get paid
hourly (additional services beyond the $5K fee) plus expenses.
Regarding the $5,000 fee proposal, the work described above could be
covered for that amount (minus any trips there per #5). However,
additional services you might want to consider us helping with include:
review of specifications, assistance with the bidding process, and
construction/post-construction inspections. We can price those
additional services if you are interested. Two last points: LRK would
assign Hunter Gee and John Van Fossen to this project given their urban
design expertise and familiarity with the master plan, and our contract
would need to be directly with the City rather than the consulting
engineers.
I believe that covers all of your comments and questions. Please let
me know if this all sounds good so I can turn these ideas into a more
detailed scope of services and attach it to a contract for the City to
execute.
Thanks - Phil
>>> "Gary Sieb" <gsieb@ci.coppell.tx.us> 05/23/02 10:45AM >>>
Phil: We'll go with the two plans you provided, although I wish had
more examples.
Thanks for clarifying the Emrich/engineering/design guidelines issue.
To repeat your possible role in the street design issue, I understand
that LRK would r vQ.~L~ the engineering ~of Coppell and Bethel Roads
at "appropriate" times to insure the integrity of the District is
Page 2, ./
_G.a~ si~b,-"P,e: Plan
upheld. A couple of questions come to mind: 1) what are "appropriate"
times? 2) How often would you review the plans? 3) Do we ship the
engineering documents to you? 4) How long does it take to review and
comment to us? 5) VVhat if we come to an impasse with engineering vs.
good planning-do you guys come down here or what? Finally, I
understand you can undertake the review for $5,000, right?
Please address these questions (and anything else you feel needs to be
discussed) and get back to me at your convenience. If we agree to go
this route, I will eventually need a written contract before proceeding.
Ken is getting anxious to start the design of the roads, so a prompt
response would be appreciated.