Loading...
Corners Coppell-CS 860815Lichliter/Jameson & Associates, Inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERING PLANNING SURVEYING August 15, 1986 Mr. Ed Powell City Engineer City of Coppell 255 Parkway Blvd. Coppell, Texas 75109 Dear'Mr. Powell: I am writing this letter to provide you with additional information on the pavement construction at Corners of Coppell. I am seeking your permission for continuation of the paving process in accordance with the approved engineering plans. I will address your points of concern with the plans, and ask you to consider proceeding with the project. The first issue which was of concern to you was the lack of paving detail on plans reviewed by Wayne Ginn's office. The paving detail was added dur- ing the final week of April. Submittal of engineering plans with the pav- ing detail were submitted and reviewed by Ginn's office on May g, 1986. Plans were submitted to your office at the same time. Submittals were again made on June 6, 1986, t.~J)~jj office with copies to your office as well. Thus, the plans were&~di~U~'~twice during a period of 35 days. This process was all prior to distribution of approved plans on June 16. In addition, the Building Department had reviewed the architectural plans with the 4" pavement detail and approved the plans without question for Building Permit. We feel that the plans were adequately reviewed by all depart- ments. In response to your concern for the parking lot pavement design, we first must acknowledge that your Subdivision Ordinance does state that parking lots "shall be constructed of 6" concrete." We would point out, however, that this apparent specification is in reality lacking detail as to the quality and strength of the concrete, as well as steel reinforcement. This lack of specific,ation suggests to us that a more specific design based upon soils testing results and recommendation of a professional geotechnical engineer would merit your consideration. We trust, too, that you recognize the validity of a specific design with definite basis as compared to a general requirement assumed to be adequate, even in the absence of sit~ specific information and design criteria. Page Two Mr. Ed Powell August 15, 1986 We would point out the pavement design detailed in L/iA plans for the Corners of Coppell is, in fact, that design recommended by Maxim Engineers, Inc., based upon their geotechnical investigation performed for this pro- ject on this site. A copy of this geotechnical report was sent to Gabe Farve of Ginn, Inc., on August 12th after discussion of the pavement design questions, and a copy is enclosed for your review and consideration, as well. In conclusion, we feel that the parking lot pavement design for the Corners of Coppell project is well supported by technical data compiled by compe- tent professional engineers. Pavement design details as recommended by Maxim Engineers were included in plans prepared by Lichliter/Jameson & Associates as early as the last week in April. These plans were reviewed and approved by both you and your consultant, and provided the basis for contracting of the project. At this point in time, to stop construction and impose greater requirements has substantial negative impact on the project. We respectfully ask that you confirm your previous approval of the design and release the contractor to proceed with the construction in progress. We would like to meet with you at your earliest convenience, if further discussion is necessary. Thank you for your consideration in this matter of real importance. Very truly yours, Project Manager TL/ccw Enclosure CC: Mr. Jim Anderson, Southwest Properties Mr. Steve Hundley, SCH Architects Mr. Gabe Farve, Ginn, 1nc. Mr. Steve Sutherland, Woodcreek Construction Corp. File: 677-0100-07 Lichliter/Jameson & A~sociates, Inc.