Loading...
ST9301-CS 951017 r? DALLAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS October 17, 1995 Mr. Ken Griffin, P.E. city Engineer city of Coppell P.O. Box 478 255 Parkway Coppell, Texas 75019 ?0-20-95A?0:28 RCVD Re: Sandy Lake Project 91-838 (Coppell E. City Limits to Dallas city Limit) Letter dated October 10, 1995 Memo to Coppe11 City Manager dated October 5, 1995 & Conference of October 10, 1995 Dear Mr. Griffin: The purpose of this letter is threefold, first to respond to the concerns listed in your letter to Dallas County dated October 10, 1995 concerning the bridge plans, second to provide you comments relative to the issues presented in a memo to your city Manager dated October 5, 1995 and third to provide you minutes of the Agency/Consultant Co-ordination Conference of October 10, 1995. Letter dated October 10, 1995 County staff members met on October 13, 1995 to evaluate your comments. In addition, Irv Griffin of my staff met with our consultant, Charles Gojer and Associates, on the same day to evaluate the design impacts of your comments. For ease of reference we will reply to the seven (7) comments indicated in your letter as follows: $ We had previously instructed our consultant for the project to utilize 4:1 slopes instead of the 3:1 slopes that was shown on the preliminary plans you reviewed. As in Item #1, we had previously instructed the consultant to utilize 27 feet face to face paving lanes in the City of Coppell. 411 Elm Street Dallas, Texas 75202 653-7151 Ken Griffin, P.E. October 17, 1995 Page Two ® Concerning your request to modify the pavement transitions at each end of the bridge, our consultant has been instructed to begin evaluation of your request. At first glance compliance with your request seems possible. Remaining issues (relative to bike lanes) with this request are mentioned in our comments to your memo to Coppell's City Manager dated October 5, 1995 relating to the handling of bicycle traffic on the bridge. At first glance, we believe your request can be accommodated. However, our consultant has several questions prior to making plan changes. Irv Griffin will be contacting you for clarifications or questions relating to vertical clearance, width of flat area desired, guard fence, and what type of traffic, i.e., pedestrians, bicycles, maintenance vehicles, etc., you anticipate needing such access. At the Carrollton end of the bridge, currently no provisions for either bike lanes or sidewalks are provided at the east end of the bridge. By letter to Tim Tumulty dated May 31, 1995 the County requested the City of Carrollton's specific desires with respect to sidewalk and bike lanes at the east end of the bridge. By letter to the County dated June 8, 1995 Tim Tumulty indicated that Carrollton did not desire that either bike lanes or sidewalk be incorporated into the County's project. You are correct in stating that conversations have occurred with Mr. Harrington concerning access to his property. We are aware that Bill E. Jessup, P.E., formerly Project Engineer for Dallas County on this project, met with the property owner to discuss and work out access details. Several of the issues, such as location of retaining wall and the sidewalk that had initially been shown on the plans, mentioned in your October 10, 1995 letter had previously been addressed as you suggested and apparently without your knowledge. I have, additionally, instructed Dallas County's Project Engineers to copy you with all future documents relating to Coppell's portion of this project. Also, you mentioned the plans showing parking on the right of way. This will be revised. This is to inform you that no parking spaces on City Right of Way will be shown on the County plans without first obtaining specific written concurrence of the City of Coppell. Ken Griffin, P.E. October 17, 1995 Page Three Before leaving this topic several other items come to mind. Have you personally talked to Mr. Harrington about the access plan? If you have not, do you feel that a meeting, in the near future with Mr. Harrington would be appropriate? If so, we will make Dallas County Project Engineers and representatives from the appropriate consulting engineering firms available for the meeting. Also, if you like, a representative from Dallas County's Property Division could participate. You may call Irv Griffin at 653-6423 if you wish to arrange such a meeting. This item relates to Item ~3; specifically regarding striping. Again, at first glance, this seems possible. This is to advise you that we have instructed our consultant to evaluate your request for likely compliance. aemo to your city aanager dated October 5, ~995 We appreciate you providing a copy of your memo to Coppell's City Manager dated October 5, 1995 relating to the handling of bicycle traffic on the bridge. Although you did not ask for comments, we are providing the following: You have indicated a desire for bicycle access all the way east to McInnish Park. This desire is somewhat different than that of the City of Carrollton. By letter to the County dated June 8, 1995 Tim Tumulty indicated that Carrollton did not desire an extension of the bicycle lane beyond the limits of the proposed bridge structure. Also, we have verbally discussed this with representatives of the City of Dallas who also did not desire bicycle lanes at this time. In accordance with Dallas County policy all costs associated with the extra pavement width must be funded by the City. To date neither City, i.e., Carrollton or Dallas, has indicated a willingness to fund this extra cost. In your letter to Jim Jackson of March 30, 1995, you indicated a commitment to fund on-street-bike paths. Is the city of Coppell willing to commit to funding on-street-bike paths in another City such as Dallas, in order to accommodate access to McInnish Park? Ken Griffin, P.E. October 17, 1995 Page Four The preliminary park improvement plans provided to Dallas County do not indicate that provisions have been made for bicycles either by widening the Park Access Road 3 feet orby a constructing a separate paved facility for a bicycle path. Conference of October 10, ~995 Please make reference to the minutes of the October 10, 1995 Coordination Conference (copy attached) held at this office. This is to request that you review the entire minutes carefully and advise Dallas County, in writing, of any topic that does not meet with your understanding of the discussions. You may call Irv Griffin or Alberta Blair-Robinson at this office if you have questions concerning the above, wish to review copies of any or all of the letters mentioned in this letter, or have questions concerning any other feature of the bridge project. Sincerely, Allen Bud Beene, P. E. Director of Publi rks CC: Abel Saldana, P.E., Dallas County Project Engineer Lloyd James, P.E., Charles Gojer and Associates Tim Tumulty, P.E., City of Carrollton Selas Camarrillo, P.E., Asst. Dir. DCPW Attachments: Minutes & Sign In Sheet (5 pages) from October 10, 1995 Conference HANDY LAKE ROAD PROJECTH MEETING NOTEB OCTOBER 10~ 1995 After opening remarks by Alberta Blair-Robinson, Irv Griffin co-ordinated issue discussions using an agenda of prepared topics. For ease of reference comments and minutes will follow the agenda format as follows: CITy OF COPPELL PROJECT 91-830 Alignment Issues~ Ken Griffin indicated that the City Council has a pending resolution concerning where the City wants the alignment. This is scheduled for vote during the 10/24/95 City Council meeting. If approved, the resolution should enable plan (paving and drainage) and right of way document preparation to proceed. Bike Lane Issue: Ken Griffin has prepared a memo to his City Manager relative to the County's letter of 8-31-95· Dallas County letter attached a letter from Lloyd James relative to safety concerns involved with a bike lane on only one side of the bridge. Ken has also indicated a suggested interim solution. Additionally, Ken mentioned a barrier wall between bike lane and roadway. His concern (barrier wall) is similar to a question Irv Griffin made of the consultant with mark up plans of May 30, 1995. Although the issue is not yet resolved, we are optimistic that this issue will soon be resolved to the satisfaction of all parties. Drainage Issues: Coppell has received nothing newer than the submittal dated March 1994. Horizontal Control: Consultant stated that issue has been resolved. Abel Saldana to follow through. 5. Preliminary Estimate: Has now been provided by consultant. Preliminary Plan Submittal: Date for submittal deDendant uDon Topic $1 above. Right of Way Issues: Ken Griffin has a ROW issue concerning parking for the Bait Shop. This may or may not still be an issue because the County recently provided instructions to the consultant that may negate this issue. Also, Ken indicated that the City will write a letter to Dallas County requesting consideration for County to acquire ROW at City expense. Preliminary Plan Submittal: Consultant unable to designate a submittal date at this time due to Topic $1 above. SANDY LAKE ROAD PROJECTS MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 10v 1995 Page Two coppell review of Bridge Project Plans~ (new topic not on meeting agenda)· Ken Griffin is providing a letter today which results from his review of County plans for the bridge project. Ken has several concerns, which apparently could have been resolved earlier and easier if the County had communicated better with Coppell. Irv Griffin needs to be sure that Coppell is involved with and receives copies of all submittals and correspondence that involves the portion of the project at or west of the Elm Fork of the Trinity River. CITY OF D~%LL~S PROJECT 91-838 1. ROW Issues= West End of pro~ect: Ken Griffin has a ROW issue concerning parking for the Bait Shop. This may or may not still be an issue because the County recently provided instructions to the consultant that may handle Ken's concern. be East End of Project: Discussions related to a possibility for obtaining a "right of entry" from the Stiles and the Nursery property. In regards to the nursery property Selas Camarillo however, expressed concern that the County would not want to deal with an individual property owner when the City has already started negotiations with that property owner. Tim Tumulty asked if the County was saying "No" to his request that the County consider acquiring ROW at City expense. After lengthy discussion, the matter was tabled without resolution pending resolution of individual issues to be coordinated by Alberta Blair-Robinson. Survey Control~ Coordination currently underway between the consultant and Dallas County. 3. Construction Estimate~ Has now been provided by consultant. 4. Drainage Information from adjacent projects~ East End of Project: Consultant, Charles Gojer has obtained all needed drainage information from the project abutting on the east. County is currently obtaining survey data for a discharge line to the Elm Fork. Irv indicated information would be provided consultant on October 13, 1995. S~'~DY L~KE ROAD PROJECTS MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 10, 1995 Page Three be West End of Project: Only preliminary information from west abutting project information has been provided. For purposes of the bridge project Lloyd James suggested over-sizing the line from the west. Irv indicated concurrence with this suggestion. Invoice: Will be processed after verification of progress on plans. Contract Documents~ Consultant given disk with current version using WP51 format. Next plan submittal~ Lloyd James indicated that the storm sewer route survey data, City of Coppell's ROW concerns and review comments are influencing the schedule for the next plan submittal. CITy OF C~d~ROLLTON P2%RK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Drainage Swale~ Gojer now has the swale information relating to park improvements, needed to finish Sandy Lake Road plans. Status of Geotechnical Reports Geotechnical report now in County office· Irv received October 11, 1995. Corps of Engineers= Original model did not include the City of Carrollton park improvements. Abel Saldana and Walter Skipwith (not present) to follow through on this. CITY OF CARROLLTON PROJECT 91-8~9 ROW &cquisition~ County considering City's request to acquire at City cost· Answer by County not yet provided. Numerous other ROW issues concerning Stiles, Nursery and Amusement Park· Drainage Information~ To be submitted by consultant with paving and drainage plans. Preliminary Paving and drainage Plans= Street may need to be higher, i.e., 447.00 minimum elev. depending on hydraulic profile· Right of Way Documents~ Estimated to take 4 to 6 weeks (including slope easements) after preliminary paving and drainage plans are approved· SANDY LAKE ROAD PROJECTS MEETING NOTES OCTOBER ~0~ ~995 Page Four ROAD AND BRIDGE DISTRICT NO. Detour Construction: this work· County has or can obtain materials for Park Entrance; County has continuous stockpile which may be used for this work. Consideration needs to be given regarding building the detour to the ultimate alignment and grade (finish subgrade elevation) and to the route of a temporary connector to McInnish Park that can be utilized during street construction. Status of Geotoohnioal Report: This was delivered to Mike Sharp on October 12, 1995. Next meetin, scheduled for November 14, 1995 at 2;00 PM. Attachment: Sign In Sheet from the 10-10-95 Conference minutes compiled by Irv Griffin on October 12, 1995: file:Minutes2.838 PROJECT NAME COMPANY PHONE NUMBER ~ 'TS~uCTy 5'2..0 - ~ I -Tdf-TvT'l 4 tdo - ~'2 o o