-----Original Message----- From: Bruce Dunne [mailto:bdunne@icon-engineers.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 6:11 PM To: Nancy Cline Subject: RE: Vitruvian Park - Outstanding Issues Nancy - I didn’t feel it would be appropriate to copy all those listed below regarding our response for additional information from Albert Halff, but I thought I would at least respond to you to let you know the status of each item below before our meeting tomorrow. I will address each of these items tomorrow during our meeting. The statements from Halff are in black and our response is in red. Second, we need to confirm the length and elevation of the Southern Pedestrian Bridge. While we have received information that confirms we have located this bridge correctly, we still haven't received any CAD file from Icon that acknowledges the 148'-6" dimension from face of abutment to face of abutment. (We should point out that we are using a dimension of 151'-6" from CL of drilled shaft to CL of drilled shaft while Icon's files are currently showing a dimension of 150'-0".) All of the current drawings for this bridge from Icon, Kevin Sloan and Victor Lissiak were prepared with a bridge length of 150’ from centerline of abutment to centerline of abutment. I discussed this at length with Eric several weeks ago and I told him that if we have to modify this length to conform to a pre-fab bridge design, then we would do that. He said that isn’t necessary, that even though they are pre-fab bridges, they can be built to any dimension. Therefore it seems logical to have them design to the 150’ length. Reference the attached email sent to Eric on March 22nd. He states that he wants to modify the dimension for the length of this bridge by ¼”, which I didn’t see as a problem. If now they are proposing to change this length by a foot and a half, then that is a change requiring Kevin Sloan, Viewtech and Icon to have to modify our drawings to conform to the new length. This is a decision that the Town and UDR should address as I would anticipate a significant cost impact to make the changes on behalf of all the consultants. In addition, the elevation of the landings has not been set. At last Thursday's meeting, Icon indicated that raising these landings would be acceptable. I actually stated that I would look into the possibility of whether we could add retaining walls as well as regrade the channel embankment area in order to accommodate the raising of the bridge elevation. At that time, I had no idea that UDR had completed the retaining walls and access walk into the Savoye One building. To raise the bridge elevation at this point would have a huge impact on UDR’s property including the removal of the walls, fencing and site access to accommodate this grade change request. Once again, this is a decision that would need to be decided by the Town and UDR and again would involve a significant cost impact. On Friday, Icon informed both the Town and Halff that something else should be considered for the structure as the Continental Keystone pedestrian truss would not be feasible. After another round of email today we still don't have a workable solution. Moreover, it seems that Icon is unwilling to consider changing the landing elevation by even a few inches. I was sent an email by Eric yesterday saying that he had calculated that we currently had 0.83’ of clearance above the floodplain, and that they were requesting the supplier to shallow up the truss by 6-8”, thereby leaving us only 6-8” shy of the required 2’ freeboard. Only problem is they were using an incorrect flood level (it was off by 0.47’) and we were now being asked to raise the bridge by 12-14” (not a few inches), which I don’t think is feasible, but something the team should discuss the impacts of). Finally, we are also still trying to confirm the location of the RW-3 line near the east abutment. This information is not currently available on the CAD files to which we have access. All of our drawings are on Projectmates and available to Halff. Even if Halff chose not to try to access the drawing files on Projectmates, one could easily scale the hard copies of the drawings that they have been provided by us as well, and they would find that the return water line in question is 20’ away from the bridge landing abutment and piers and has no impact whatsoever on their design (unless the landing is built 20’ off where it should be). I also addressed this at last weeks meeting by telling Eric that there is no profile of this line (it is a pressure line and not a gravity line) and it would have 42” of cover from the existing ground line, which this should be totally insignificant anyway since the line is 20’ away from any piers). We should note that when we contacted Joel Massey of Icon (at Bruce's suggestion) last week, he was unable to offer us any useful advice. Instead, he suggested we contact Bruce to get the data we needed. Third, we still need to confirm a number of items at Bella Lane Bridge. Specifically, we need to know the elevations at each end of the bridge (at last weeks meeting I informed Eric that I was able to reduce the increase for raising Bella Bridge from the 2 feet that I initially thought was going to be required, to one and a half feet. The elevation at street station 28+58 will be 562.63 and the elevation at 29+99 will be 561.50. These are top of pavement grades since Halff has not shown what happens with the curb as it enters the approach slab to the bridge), the new rip-rap slope and limits (this should be a part of the bridge design and not something that Icon should be responsible for. That said, we have regarded the area around the bridge (as well as the areas under the bridge) to accommodate the bridge elevation change and will present our plan for this area at the meeting tomorrow) , the location of the seawall (in CAD) (once again, all this information is found on Projectmates as well as the hard copies given to Halff) as well as the location of utilities near the bridge (in CAD) (the only “utilities” in the vicinity of the bridge are two proposed storm drain lines that are located on the centerline of the bridge, and they have the profiles for each line, which they should be able to easily plot on the drawings). After Bruce suggested we contact Joel Massey for this information, we did so last Friday. Unfortunately, he could not provide us with any useful information for this bridge either. We should also point out that we are trying to confirm available power sources for each of the bridges. While we will direct these questions to Joel Massey (again courtesy of Bruce's suggestion), we don't believe this effort will be successful. Eric stated that Diane Popkin would be calling Joel to discuss. As of today, no one from Halff has called to discuss. Once again, all the information regarding power sources is on our drawings and they have been provided to Halff via Projectmates and through hard copies. I have attached the sheets that clearly define the bridge lighting plans for Ponte and Bella. Absent this data, Halff has no alternative but to continue working on assumptions. Numerous problems could result from this approach. For example, we might inadvertently recommend that a drilled shaft penetrate an existing sanitary sewer because we didn't know where the utility was located, or we might not locate the interior bents at the Bella Lane Bridge in the correct location because we didn't know the proposed location of the seawall. We have been requesting much of this data since March 18 to no avail (total bull – let Halff show me one e-mail request that we haven’t responded to. As a result, we respectfully request that the Town actively encourage Geotel and Icon to provide the information listed above by Noon on Friday, April 16. If we don't have this information by that time, we might have no alternative but to delay the delivery of our plans and specifications to the Town of Addison. We have spent numerous hours of our time trying to assist Halff, but it is obvious they feel it is easier just to call me and get me to dig up the information and to send them what they need instead of actually doing the work themselves through Projectmates or the drawings they have been sent, or heaven forbids, to actually visit the site. Also attached is an email from last Friday where we once again sent them all the CAD files necessary for them to locate their bridges from, this time with their Bella Bridge design in place since they couldn’t seem to locate properly within the site. I get the feeling that instead of sending them information, I probably need to send them a CAD operator instead. See you tomorrow. ________________________________ From: Nancy Cline [mailto:ncline@addisontx.gov] Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 10:15 AM To: Bruce Dunne; Tom Lamberth (TLamberth@udrt.com); Eric T. Little; Lea Dunn; Carmen Moran; Clay Barnett Subject: FW: Vitruvian Park - Outstanding Issues Importance: High To all: Attached are the items we need to resolve tomorrow at our weekly meeting. Lea has tasked me to get this information out to everyone. We need to be able to keep progressing so I have noted with each item below the people who should be working to complete this item. Please let me know how I can help. Thank you, Nancy -----Original Message----- From: Christiansen, Eric [mailto:echristiansen@halff.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 5:01 PM To: Clay Barnett Cc: Nancy Cline Subject: Vitruvian Park - Outstanding Issues Importance: High Clay, After our meeting last week, it is clear that a number of issues are still delaying Halff's design effort. Unfortunately, these issues are outside of our contract and therefore, outside of our control. Specifically, we are referring to the lack of a signed geotechnical report as well as the lack of civil engineering information at the Bella Lane Bridge and at the Southern Pedestrian Bridge. First, a sealed geotechnical report is still needed from Geotel or another geotechnical engineering firm to confirm the acceptability of the foundations at each bridge structure relative to global stability. The report must also confirm the active, at-rest, and passive soil pressures, as well as the soil spring constants that Halff has been using in the design of the drilled shaft foundations. We understand this report will be completed by April 16 and look forward to receiving a copy. Eric Little – is this going to be ready? Also, have you confirmed the completion and location of the bores? If not, Clay has requested and received a proposal from Kleinfelder to perform this work. Second, we need to confirm the length and elevation of the Southern Pedestrian Bridge. While we have received information that confirms we have located this bridge correctly, we still haven't received any CAD file from Icon that acknowledges the 148'-6" dimension from face of abutment to face of abutment. (We should point out that we are using a dimension of 151'-6" from CL of drilled shaft to CL of drilled shaft while Icon's files are currently showing a dimension of 150'-0".) In addition, the elevation of the landings has not been set. At last Thursday's meeting, Icon indicated that raising these landings would be acceptable. On Friday, Icon informed both the Town and Halff that something else should be considered for the structure as the Continental Keystone pedestrian truss would not be feasible. After another round of email today, we still don't have a workable solution. Moreover, it seems that Icon is unwilling to consider changing the landing elevation by even a few inches. Finally, we are also still trying to confirm the location of the RW-3 line near the east abutment. This information is not currently available on the CAD files to which we have access. We should note that when we contacted Joel Massey of Icon (at Bruce's suggestion) last week, he was unable to offer us any useful advice. Instead, he suggested we contact Bruce to get the data we needed. Bruce – please submit the requested data to Eric C. Please also come to the meeting with a detailed drawing (including elevations, grading, etc.) of the impact of raising the south pedestrian bridge 1.5 ft. Third, we still need to confirm a number of items at Bella Lane Bridge. Specifically, we need to know the elevations at each end of the bridge, the new rip-rap slope and limits, the location of the seawall (in CAD), as well as the location of utilities near the bridge (in CAD). After Bruce suggested we contact Joel Massey for this information, we did so last Friday. Unfortunately, he could not provide us with any useful information for this bridge either. Bruce – please provide this information to Halff. We should also point out that we are trying to confirm available power sources for each of the bridges. While we will direct these questions to Joel Massey (again courtesy of Bruce's suggestion), we don't believe this effort will be successful. Bruce – please coordinate with Eric C. on the confirmation of power sources. Absent this data, Halff has no alternative but to continue working on assumptions. Numerous problems could result from this approach. For example, we might inadvertently recommend that a drilled shaft penetrate an existing sanitary sewer because we didn't know where the utility was located, or we might not locate the interior bents at the Bella Lane Bridge in the correct location because we didn't know the proposed location of the seawall. We have been requesting much of this data since March 18 to no avail. As a result, we respectfully request that the Town actively encourage Geotel and Icon to provide the information listed above by Noon on Friday, April 16. If we don't have this information by that time, we might have no alternative but to delay the delivery of our plans and specifications to the Town of Addison. Obviously, it is Halff's preference to receive this data and complete the project in a timely manner. Hopefully, with the Town's assistance, this can still be accomplished. Sincerely, Eric Christiansen Eric S. Christiansen, P.E., SECB, LEED AP Senior Structural Engineer HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC. 1201 North Bowser Road Richardson, Texas 75081 Phone 214-346-6284 Fax 214-739-0095 Cell 972-955-2996 www.halff.com ****************************************************************************************************************** This e-mail and any files or attachments transmitted with it contains Information that is confidential and privileged. This document may contain Protected Health Information (PHI) or other information that is intended only for the use of the individual(s) and entity(ies) to whom it is addressed. If you are the intended recipient, further disclosures are prohibited without proper authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, printing, or use of this information is strictly prohibited and possibly a violation of federal or state law and regulations. If you have received this information in error, please delete it and notify Hamid Khaleghipour at 972-450-2868 immediately. Thank you. *******************************************************************************************************************