Loading...
ST9302-CS04040504/'06/04 TUE 09:23 FAX 9722393820 DALLAS ~001 Kimiey-Horn andAssociates, tnc. April 5, 2004 Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E. Director of Engineenng/Public Works City of Coppell P.O. Box 9478 Coppell, TX 75019 Via Facsimilie- 972-304-7041 · Via U.S. Mail suiI~ 1 Z700 PaA Central D~ve Dallas, Texas 7525~ Re: Sandy Lake Road Accessibility Issues Dear Mr. Griffin: This letter is in two main parts. First, we want to address what we think needs to be done. The second part is a required response to the increasing legalese in the letters. Specifically, we respond to the comments in your March 25, 2004 letter and your October 9, 2003 letter to Accessology. Kimley-Hom remains willing to assist the City m resolving this problem. We have prepared a proposed solution for the five street crosswalks, which calls for the brick pavers at the crosswalks to be removed and replaced with a cross slope not exceeding 2%. This will require some adjustment as is being constructed in the field. This solution will cause some uneven riding surfaces for vehicles, but considering thc existing conditions and the fact that these are not through streets, we believe ~t would be acceptable. A solution to tear out and replace large areas of existing pavement might require utility relocation and maj or costs which we do not think are warranted. Enclosed is a sketch of this solution The sketch shows a 4 foot wide cross walk. This solution should be approved by Accessology prior to doing this additional work. The remaining issues m your letter of February 24, 2004 involve sidewalks or ramps. We believe these issues are related to the City's standard details for driveways and ramps. Based on our observations, the issues at the driveways to the shopping center on the southeast side of Sandy Lake Road/Moore Road are related to ramps rather than crosswalks. Reconstruction of these ramps should solve the problem. The drivc~vay to the Lutheran Church can be solved by constructing a new sidewalk approach to the pavers which currently do not line up with the sidewalk. 2his construction would require the acquisition of additional right of way as we believe the pavers are on private property. Alternatively, the driveway approach and sidewalk could be removed and replaced such that a 2% (maximum) cross slope could be maintained. 04/06/04 TUE 09:24 FAX 9722393820 DALLAS ~002 and Associates, Inc. Mr Kenneth Griffin, P E,, April 6, 2004, Page 2 A solution for the eastern driveway to the shopping center on the southeast comer of Denton Tap Road/Sandy Lake Road is not readily apparent. Any reconstruction of this driveway approach would result in a vertical change in the sidewalk to the east which would be too steep to comply with the accessibility standards. The construct/on of retaining walls on either side &the sidewalk and ramp or the acquisition of additional right of way for realignment of the sidewalk and side sloping would need to occur for this condition to be mitigated. None of these alternatives appear to be practical or cost effective. We believe a variance should be sought in this instance. We believe this plan is the most cost effective and practical solution. Kimley- Horn offers to provide engineering and construction observation services (to help with the field adjustments mentioned above) necessary to implement this proposal at no charge to the City. Finally, we would like to address the points raised in your letter of March 25, 2004, and we feel obligated to comment on your October 9, 2003 letter to Accessology. In your March 25 letter you note that "the clock is ticking on this project". Kimley-Hom has been intermittently involved in this project for over ten (10) years. The project as noted by you was nearing completion in mid 2001, almost three years ago. During our meeting on March 12 you gave us a copy ora letter you had written to Accessology in October 2003. This letter is disappointing in many ways. It states to a third party your conclusions against Kimley-Horn that we disagree with and it does not inlbrm this third party that the City was contractually required to make the TDLR submittal. For the record we do agree with your statement "The City had very real constraints in tr,fing to widen a roadway from a 20-foot asphalt roadway to a 4 lane divided boulevard that already had development along the entire length of the project and trying to tie into the developed driveways, streets, and alleys from Denton Tap Road to MacArthur Blvd." It does appear there is some discrepancy between thc legislation itself and the legislative history regarding design and submittal requirements. Also, there is a discrepancy between what the law says and how the interpretation of that law by state staff has evolved over time, including whether the law applies to these crosswalks. Moreover, considerable ambigmty remains regarding who was responsible for submitting the plans, At a menmum, it seems there was joinl responssbili¢d, though we continue to maintain that the parties coniTactual]y agreed this was not our responsibility. 04/06/04 TUE 09:24 FAX 9722393820 DALLAS ~003 Kirnley-Horn and Associates, I~c. M~ Kenneth Griffin, PE,, April 6. 2004, Page 3 This woject needs to be viewed in the overall context that (1) the Owner was a public agency, with its special legal obligations; (2) the Owner had/ts own in- house registered professional engineer to whom we were reporting and who had the authority to apprnvc or re)ect our work, and who has his own professional obligations; (3) the contract contains a very specific and detailed scope that makes no mention whatsoever of submitting plans to the TDLR and which specifically obligates the City to obtain approvals and permits; and (4) the City dictated that we use standard City details for the handicap ramps which we in fact followed. All of this indicates to us that the Director of Engineering/Public Works of the City of Coppell was the engineer "with overall responsibility for the design of the facilities". The contract also obligates you to obtain the advice of an attorney (section 4.6). It does not seem logical that it was our obligation as your engineering consultant to analyze the sufficiency of the contract or to question your decision to reserve certain tasks for yourself so as to reduce the fee to be charged by your outside consultant. The City seems to take the position that we should be liable for failing to do something which the contract told us not to do. We also note 'that the contract obligated us only to comply with the professional standard of cam used by members of our profession at that time and in the locality of Coppell, Texas. It is our belief that it was not the standard of care for engineers to submit plans of this type to TDLR at that time. The contract specifically excludes all other warranties. Nevertheless, we are willing to share in the fix as we have described above. If the city can hire and pay for a contractor to take out and replace the brick pavers, we will provide the sketches and field observations. Please contact me at your earliest convenience at 972-770-1312, to dxscuss so that we can continue to work towards resolving this problem. Sincerely, ~SOCIATES, INC. Executive Vice President DLB/drh Attachment(s) a/s 04/06/04 TUE 09:25 FAX 9722393820 DALLAS ~004 EXISTING ~.' Cf~055 UJ,AL~ E×ISTING )~JEINFORCED COKICI~ETE PAVEMENT 'X" Sandy Lake Road Cross street Cross Walk Cross $1oloe Adjustments