WA0101-CS040414April 14, 2004
T H E C I T Y 0 F
COPPELL
Gary Hendricks, P.E.
Birkhoff, Hendricks & Conway, L.L.P.
7502 Greenville Avenue, #220
Dallas, Texas 75231
RE: S.H. 121 Water Line Project (Coppell Road to Denton Tap Road)
WA 01-01
Dear Mr. Hendricks:
Because of some concerns over the billing associated ~vith the Belt Line Rd./Denton Tap Rd.
Water Line project, I also reviewed the billings associated with the S.H. I21 Water Line project.
Upon review, I have some concerns. Those include the incIusion of printing as a Special Service,
when the contract states that it should be a part of the Basic Services, and only the final plans and
specifications are included as part of the Special Services. I am also concerned that with the
March 29, 2002 invoice, the desigm survey was adjusted to be the $4,600, which was the project
maximum. We have recently been invoiced on April 7, 2004 with an additional $649.22 for
design survey. I am unsure what this includes.
The original contract was setup so that the water line would be contained entirely within the S.H.
121 right-of-way. Your cover letter for the contract states that there could be some conflicts with
CoServe and that you were including a nominal amount in the contract to prepare easement
documents. The nominal amount in the project was $1,200 for boundary surveys and $5,900 for
preparation of easement documents for a total of $7, I 00. This is approximately one-half of the
entire Special Services total. To date, the City has received two easements, both for properly
north of S.H. 121 adjacent to CoppelI Greens. We have already paid $3,I11.60 and been
invoiced an additional $2,347.49.
In addition to the above items, on the April 18, 2002 invoic, we began receiving billings for
redesign of the project. To date, we have paid $5,727.85 for the redesign of the S.H. 121 water
line. I am unsure what future billings might hold.
Prior to processing the invoice of April 7, 2004, the following items need to be resolved:
1. The printing cost should be absorbed under the Basic Services section, not paid separately
under Special Services.
2. A change order to the design of the project should be provided for the redesign detailing what
the redesign includes.
3. Clarification of whether or not the two easements provided are the extent of the easement
work or whether there will be additional costs associated with easements for this project.
If you should have any questions please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Kenneth
M Griffin, P.E.
Director of Engineering / Public Works
Office 972/304-3686
Fax 972/304-7041
E-mail kggr~n l~n(~c i .coEpcll .tx.u s