Kent, Fyi Thanks, Clay Barnett, P.E. Town Engineer Town of Addison 16801 Westgrove Drive Addison, TX 75001-2818 Office: (972) 450-2857 ________________________________ From: Joel Massey To: Robert Farrow Cc: Scott Hale ; Lauren Williams ; Eric T. Little ; Clay Barnett; Bruce Dunne Sent: Fri May 27 10:01:07 2011 Subject: RE: Vitruvian Duct Bank Robert, I am very disappointed in the position your sub (JBC) has decided to take. I completely disagree with any statement that the 4E4 duct was installed before the revised plans were issued. The plans were issued to you on 4/20/11. I was on site on 4/26/11 and no 4E4 duct work had started. You are responsible for staking and your subs. As I have already told Scott and your sub in a special meeting, the additional 4E4 that was installed at E-G is ok. We will not pay for it, but it does not need to be removed. The additional 4E4 at E-E and E-F, however, must be removed. If you do not do the work we will have to pay someone else to do it. Let me re-iterate my previous statements concerning the importance of accurate work on this project. Vitruvian Park is a development that requires very close attention to detail to prevent re-work and/or future additional development costs. Joel A. Massey Project Manager icon Consulting Engineers, Inc. Bicentennial Financial Center 250 W. Southlake Blvd., Suite 117 Southlake, Texas 76092 Phone: (817) 552-6210 Fax: (817) 552-3126 Mobile: (817) 229-7944 jmassey@icon-engineers.com From: Robert Farrow [mailto:rfarrow@concretepaversystems.com] Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 8:45 AM To: Eric T. Little; Joel Massey Cc: Scott Hale; Lauren Williams; David Jones Subject: Vitruvian Duct Bank Eric & Joel I appreciate your taking the time to meet with my guys and work out a solution to the duct bank installation issue. It is my understanding that at this time that the Town would like the portion of the 4E4 duct that extends to the ROW removed back to the stations provided on the April 20 plans. Our subcontractor, John Burns Company (JBC) has provided pricing to our firm for this removal. The position that they are taking is that the change occurred after the work began and they installed the work to the staking our firm provided which had been placed prior to the change. They appear to be totally discounting the fact that we provided them, and requested plan review and any cost ramifications from them on April 21, 2011 for these plan changes, for which they provided none. Although I do not agree with the position they are taking, I do see that our firm has some responsibility in regards to this issue as we did not update the staking after the plan changes and we did allow them to install this and other work not shown on non plan work. I do agree that JBC did incur costs to purchase the materials for this work that they are probably due compensation for. I am writing this email in an attempt to avoid conflicts and get this resolved to the mutual satisfaction of all parties. I ask you this, Is the removal of the duct bank back from the ROW absolutely necessary? If not I would ask that you allow the work to remain in place. CPS Civil will not bill the Town for the 24 feet of E4E in question but will pay JBC for the work placed. This should satisfy JBC and allow this issue to go away. As well this is the best solution for the integrity of the duct bank as great care will have to be taken to cut back and break the concrete from this duct without damaging the remaining duct. I appreciate you guys revisiting this issue. Let me know if this works for you guys. Have a great Holiday weekend! Robert Farrow Chief Operating Officer CPS Civil LLC