01.11.2001 PEDC MinutesProsper EDC Meeting Minutes
01/11/01
1) Call to order
a) Those in attendance: Erica Krukenbur& Janet Phillips, Judy Rucker, Jim
Herblin, Glen Gammon; Anne Casady
2) Action on approval of consent items
a) Minutes - AC motion; EK 2nd; approved
b) Financial report
3) Action items
a) Annual budget - JP motion; EK 2nd; approved.
b) City logo - bring logo options to city council next Tuesday night for
council approval; bill for logo creation ($3500)-GG made motion; EK 2nd;
approved to pay the bill. ACTION - put Joe Rattan on hold for the
brochure; we want to get the info from the master plan to include in the
brochure.
c) Resolution for TexPool - in order to put funds into TexPool, certain
paperwork must be on file, e.g. resolution authorizing participation in
TexPool and designating authorized representatives - EK motion to accept
resolution and keep $5,000 in our operating account; GG 2nd - approved
unanimous
4) Comments from citizens
a) Prosper Community Circle approached EDC to help with this year's
Roundup, May 56, 2001, in the form of postage and advertising on web -
EK made motion, AC 2nd - motion carried.
5) Discussion items:
a) Reports by board member on PGAL planning firms survey (see
attachments for details):
i) Glen Gammons - College Station for PGAL (1994-1997) - they were a
bit unhappy with this companies (not PGAL but Joe did the project);
Joe lacked expertise in handling hostile environments; Joe could
improve in people skills; Joe got high rating in the engineering skills;
rated entire average, but would have hired another company that was
a bit closer to College Station. Recommended that we have legal
insight in whatever is developed within the Master Plan.
ii) Erica did the city of Bellaire (1995/1996) - rated satisfactory; rated Joe
as needing improvement in hostile environment and user friendliness
of end report; rated high in engineering, althoughthe base
engineering information was already available; rated average;
iii) Judy did City of Coppell (1996) - Joe with KOA at this time - he did a
Master Plan, comprehension plan and a PR brochure - architect for
master plan was Donald Simpson; rated excellent overall; completed
on time.
Prosper EDC Meeting Minutes
01/11/O1
iv) Jim did City of Frisco (1999/2000) - finished within timeframe; rated
good in WS process; rated excellent in overall pert; rated 10 for
planning; they farmed out all engineering and architecture; currently
have another development project with them; comments -Joe is down-
to-earth, delivered good working document; they were very happy
with Joe and would use him again.
b) Reports by board member on MESA planning firms survey (see
attachments for details):
i) Janet did City of Fairview - see attachments
ii) Judy did City of Grand Prairie/City of Allen/City of Richardson Parks
& Recreation/City of Irving/City of Grapevine - all rated MESA
excellent or good (see attachments for details).
c) Reports by Judy Rucker -
i) Texas Statutes and Codes, Local Government Code #
ii) Community library - we still don't have the community library open
yet because we don't have a library aid to man the community time.
We've been notified by the state that we're at risk of loosing the
additional state funding (approx $20,000-$30,000) if we don't get this
community library open and done. ACTION - Judy to meet with
School Superintendent to find out the status and the plans to
accomplish the community library and report back to EDC.
6) ACTION - Janet to send minutes to Judy.
7) Meeting adjourned - JP motioned; JH 2nd. Motion carries
8) Next meeting-1/27/01; 7:30 am -
a) Be prepared to talk about Fairview contracts;
b) Get report on status of community library
Prosper EDC Meeting Minutes
01/11/O1
EREKA KRUKENBURG,s REVIEW PGAL WITH THE CITY OF BELLAIRE
How long did the entire process take? A couple of years
Was the project finished within the original timeframe?
Yes X No If no, why
How would you evaluate the workshops and the overall development
process?
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory X
Not satisfactory Explain:
Who was the principal in charge of the project? HOK, Joe
How would you rate their performance?
Excellent
Good X
Satisfactory
Not satisfactory Explain:
Did the same person follow the project from beginning to end?
Yes X No
How would you rate the company on a 1-10 scale with 10 being the best in
the following areas of expertise?
In planning 8 Comments
In engineering resource — Comments - used prior city info
In architecture 8 Comments
Do you currently have any projects with PGAL?
Yes No X Comments
If Yes, Comments
Overall how would you rate the entire process and final results of your.
project?
Excellent
Good
Average X Why? Joe had trouble with upset citizens and the final
report was not as user friendly as we would have liked to have seen
Not satisfactory Why?
1
Prosper EDC Meeting Minutes
01/11/01
GLEN GAMMONS REVIEW OF PGAL WITH CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
My first quegion concerns the timeliness of theproject.
How long did the entire process take? 3 years,1994 -1997
Was the project finished within the original timeframe?
Yes ✓ No ff no, why
2. How would you evaluate the workshops and the overall development process?
Excellent
Good ✓ (1)
Satisfactory
Not satisfactory ✓ (2) ` Explain: (1) Knowledge. (2) Skills in dealing with
3
4
public, lacked expertise in handling hostile situations.
Who was the principal in charge of the project? Joe Pobiner
How would you rate their performance?
Excellent
Good ✓ (1)
Satisfactory
Not satisfactory ✓ (2) Explain: (1) Knowledge. (2) People skills.
Did the same person follow the project from beginning to end?
Yes ✓ No But Joe left the company at the final stages
printing.
How would you rate the company on a 1 - 10 scale with 10 being the best in the following areas of
expertise?
In planning 6 Comments
In engineering resource 8 Comments Joint venture with outside resource.
In architecture 8 Comments
Do you currently have any projects with PGAL?
Yes No ✓
IfYes, Comments
Comments
5. Overall how would you rate the entire process and final results of your project?
Excellent
Good
Prosper EDC Meeting Minutes
01/11/01
Average ✓ Why? Would prefer to hire a different company.
Not satisfactory _ Why?
COMNKNTs:
• Project was contracted in 1994, finished in 1997. Company contracted was HOK, not PGAL. Joe
Pobiner did the project while worldng for HOK.
• Need to make sure planners have legal advice concerning any zoning and usage. Need legal validation
to avoid future legal problems.
Page 1 of 2
From: Janet Phillips <janetph@nortelnetworks.com>
To: Erica Kruckenberg <Erica.Kruckenberg@pizzahut.com>; Jim Herblin
<jherb I in@on ramp. net>; Judy Rucker <jrucker@gateway.net>
Date: Friday, January 12, 2001 8:53 AM
Subject: FW: Mesa reference
include this in edc minutes
Take care,
Janet phi//fps
Preside Product Marketing, Nortel Networks
2375 N. Glenville. Mail Stop 39D / 03 / A40 Richardson, TX 75082
Phone: 972,684.3563, ESN 444 Fax: 972,684-3044 & 972-346-2599
Cell: 214-858-8645 Emalk fanetphPnortelnetworks.com
-----Original Message ----
From: Phillips, Janet [NGB:T051-M:EXCH]
Sent: Friday, January 05, 20019:51 AM
To: 'James G. Herblin'
Subject: RE: Mesa reference
Importance: High
Hi Jim,
Scott and I finally were finally able to hook up. Here's
the feedback to the questions below...
viliat are you asking them to do? -Develop Commercial District
Guidelines (just starting); they plan to be complete by April.
why did you bring Me s a in? 1) Originally they had contracted PGAL to
revise their Comprehensive Land Plan. 2) As part of another project, they were
also drafting Commercial District Guidelines with another firm and weren't happy
with some of the work. They reworked the PGAL contract to work on this project
(backed off the comprehensive plan in favor of these guidelines for the time being).
They brought MESA into the contract to add the architectural design controls,
landscape controls, pedestrian oriented development ideas, mixed use development
ideas, etc. PGAL brings the infrastructure, ordinance, etc. expertise.
how has it worked using both of them? They have been very good
to work with and come to the table as members of a team (the team is PGAL,
MESA, City of Fairview). They give weekly reports on their progress.
how have you defined their roles (e.g. where does one
stop and another begin, their individual terfs,
etc.)? They used the proposal to divy up the terl Mesa is the lead consultant in
one area and PGAL is the support; and vise versa other area s . Scott drafted the
1/12/Ul
Page Z of Z
first proposal; then was revised with MESA & PGAL's comments. separate
contracts, no one is the lead consultant. The final proposal very clearly defines
everyone's roles in the project (e.g. where one consultant starts and another begins,
etc.). Very Important - Scott stressed to make sure each agrees and signs off on
their role in working on the project. Scott says this is what has enabled them to
work together so smoothly.
what do you see as their strengths (individually &
together) ?
MESA brings artistic qualities; definitely thinking out of the box; architecture
design controls, street scapes, etc.
PGAL brings wonderful technical strengths to the table;
strengths together = full complement of skillsets they can apply to the project
what do you see as their weaknesses (individually &
together) ?
weakness together = more people involved, more meetings, more costs, the
cities' project mgmt investment is large
if you had to do it all over again, which would you
hire? or would you just start with both?
Scott would use both again for this project.
That's all for now. Talk with you later.
Take care,
Janet Phillips
Preside Product Marketing, Norte! Networks
2375 N. Glenville. Mall Stop 39D / 03 / ,240 Richardson, TX 75082
Phone: 972. 684,3563, ESN 444 Fax: 972.684-3044 & 972-346-2599
CO.- 214-868-8645 Email., lanetphonortelnetworks. com