Jim Pierce From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Our scores are: Jim Pierce Monday, July 10, 2000 10:18 AM Ron Whitehead Chris Terry; Michael Murphy RE: Dallas County Call For Projects Arapaho
Phase III 116 Belt LinefTolI Rd SPUI 91 Belt Line Signal Timing 81 Midway Signal Timing 66 ArapahofTolI Rd U-turn 23 Most projects from other cities scored in the 50 to 80 range. Most
cities have one project in the 100 point range. Dallas Co. staff is moving away from comparing scores between cities. The commissioners will make the final decision on what projects
make the cut in their district. Nothing prevents them from selecting a low scoring project for funding. I get the sense from the county staff that the project selection is "political"
as much as anything else. The staff rankings will be presented to the Count tomorrow. The commissioners will make the final selections in September. Jim. -----Original Message-----From:
Ron Whitehead Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2000 11:52 PM To: Jim Pierce Subject: RE: Dallas County Call For Projects So what were our technical scores and how did we fare in comparison tpo
other projects? Ron -----Original Message-----From: Jim Pierce Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 2: 17 PM To: Ron Whitehead Cc: Chris Terry; Michael Murphy SUbject: Dallas County Call For
Projects I have just received our "technical" scores for the projects we submitted to Dallas County. I made a trip to the County Offices and met with the project manager to go over the
scores. There may be some revisions. Overall, the scores were pretty good. However, in a conversation with Don Cranford, Assistant Director, Transportation Division, he made it clear
that the technical scores are only a part of the decision making process. The rest of the process is subjective and is up to our District Commissioner. Therefore, I would suggest that
we contact Jim Jackson and try to convince him about how great our projects are and how needed they are. I have attached my memo to council to refresh your memory about this. « File:
2000CallMemo to Chris.DOC » Jim Pierce, P.E. Assistant City Engineer PO Box 901'0 Addison, TX 75001-9010 972-450-2879 1
HP LaserJet 3100 Printer/Fax/CopierlScanner 􀀬..)􀀺􀀯􀀢􀀧􀁊􀀮􀀮􀀮"􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭J􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀢􀂷􀁾􀁫􀁅􀁎􀁄CONFIRMATION REPORT Town of Addison 9724502834 Jun-7-00 3:12PM for Job Start
Time Usage Phone Number or ID Type Pages Mode Status 835 61 7 3: 1OPM 2'02" 214 653 6445 Send"""",,,,, ' 51 5 EC 96 Complet ed"",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Total 2'02" Pages
Sent: 5 Pages Printed: 0 From: Jim Pierce, P.E. Assistant aty Engineer Phone: 972/456-2879 FAX: 972/450-2834 jpiera@eLaddUon.tLul PUBLIC WORKS 16801 Wesfgrove P.O.BoJ: 9010 # of pages
(including 􀁣􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁲􀀩􀀺􀁾 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: 􀁦􀁨􀀭􀁡􀀮􀁰􀁡􀀮􀁾 (?J. 􀁾 AdJtsm. &<. k SMrV!1br 6hlJ.... o OrigiDaJ In maD 0 Ptr your 􀁲􀁥􀁱􀁵􀀢􀁉􀁾􀀧 0 CaB me TOWN OF ADDIsoN
To: E1i{b Nj'IJ'b' 􀁾 Company:..lb,ll9;s r:unk, FAX#: Z/Lf-{,c;3-btf'f5 Date: 6 -7-0-0 1-10 -01) 􀁦􀁾􀁴􀁲􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾 'Iii,. (f\ ¥ ).-h-&
ALIGNMENT STUDY REPORT ARAPABO ROAD EXTENSION for the TOWN OF ADDISON Prepared by: --,.....􀀬􀁾􀁾 􀁟􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁏􀁆 1'.. ...􀀮􀀮􀁴􀁾 •••••••••􀁾􀁌 ,J> ?􀀬􀀮"􀁾.􀀬......*..""'r,o..ds-...'.
1'*.' '«'i t·"!·f.···············..􀂷􀂷􀁾􀀮􀀱􀂷􀀱􀀺􀂷􀁾 l-...􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁢􀀮􀀡􀀮􀂷..􀁾􀁾􀂣􀁾􀁾 ...􀁾 􀁾􀁦􀁾􀀱􀀮26569 􀁾􀀧􀁑􀀮􀀯􀀤􀁊 •• • 􀁇􀁉􀁓􀁔􀁾􀁾􀀮􀂷􀂷􀀬􀂧􀀮􀀻􀀧 , •.••••••􀁾􀀧􀁉􀀭􀁜􀁊􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀢
􀁉􀁏􀁈􀁁􀁜􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁟􀀭 􀀧􀁖􀁩􀁬􀁾 HNTB Corporation GBW Engineers, Inc. Jack Hatchell & Associates January,1999 --"',,\ ,c􀀻􀀧,􀀭􀁜.􀀭􀁾..􀁾.•*􀁾•••O••F•••t•..E.'-.\t:\,_ 􀀮􀀮􀀬􀁾 .. i'*/􀀢􀁜􀀮􀁾
1"·"*8-L•••••••••••"•••••••\l .I.;./!􀁾. l RUCE R. GRANTHAM 􀁾 l ..··\·················••••....... 􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀮 62659 􀁩􀁾􀁊􀀬 fn.·. 􀁾 􀁾􀀧􀁑 ..􀁾􀀬 f. .::.•􀀧􀀡􀁉􀁓􀁔􀁦􀀮􀁾•••􀀺􀁾􀁾
,voS 􀁴􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁶􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀧 \'\.lONA\-_-."".....",-
5 "0 0': Beltway Or :>-Q « '5 .:== 􀁾 " 􀁾 􀁾 0 cS t-"C (/) Boyinqton Of cr:: «􀁾 Ci «--' Midcourt Rd Cl E :c ::> 2; t-"C ::> OC cr:: 0 0 >. Z 0􀁾 "C 􀁾 "C Wiley Post Rd > CD 􀁾Q) i::
:> (/') lindberg Dr I I I' -----PROPOSED ARAPAHO ROAD EXTENSION ARAPAHO ROAD PHASE I ( UNDER CONSTRUCTION ) PROPOSED ARAPAHO ROAD EXTENSION EXHIBIT 'e' DART RAILROAD ALIGNMENT
Alternative Alignments (cont'd) The narrowest portion ofthe alignment is between theMNBAbuilding and the DARTrightof-way where 81 feet is available. Although there are no franchise utilities
to contend with, a 60-inch Dallas Water Utility (DWU) transmission main is located in a 30-foot easement adjacent to the railroad. A concrete-lined channel is also located along this
,alignment between Midway Road and the Town ofAddison water tower. I Given the potential access and cost benefits associated with the DART railroad alignment, a more in-depth evaluation
ofits viability was conducted. 2.4 Traffic Analysis At this point in the study, the project team reviewed traffic assignments for the year 2020 which were prepared bytheNorth CentralTexas
Council (NTCOG) ofGovernments for five alternatives for the Arapaho Road Extension. Two ofthese alternatives included entry ap.d exit ramps at Midway Road, one with entry/exit ramps
on the north side only and a second with entry/exit ramps on the south side only. These alternatives are described below. xviii) ''No Build" Alternative -what is the impact on adjacent
streets ifArapaho Road is not extended? il) v) "At-Grade" Alternative -Arapaho Road extended with the Midway Road intersection at grade. "Grade-Separated" Alternative -Arapaho Road extended
with a grade separation at Midway Road without entry/exit ramps. "Ramps on the North Side" Alternative -Arapaho Road extended with a grade separation at Midway Road and entry/exit ramps
onthe north side ofArapaho Road. "Ramps on the South Side" Alternative -Arapaho Road extended with a grade separation at Midway Road and entry/exit ramps onthe south side ofArapaho Road.
2.4.1 Projected Traffic Volumes The following table presents a summary ofprojectedtraffic impacts for the extension of Arapaho Road on Belt Line Road and Midway Road assuming that the
Keller Springs tunnel is in service. 98-094 11 Februmy 1999
SEPARATED .•.....) Alternative Alignments (cont'd) TRAFFICVOLUME COMPARISON (PROJECI'ED DAILY TRAFFIc VOLUMES BY YEAR2020) 􀁾􀁪􀀭􀁬􀀧􀀮..-bl A-l+erntidt//-!-:j GRADE SEPARATED ; GRADE
WITH RAMPS ON WITHRAMPS ON No BUILD AT GRADE SEPARATED NORmSIDE Soum:SIDE ARAPAHO ROAD Addison to Midway 24,000 13,000 18,000 28,000 Midway to Smveyor 6,000 13,000 17,000 17,000 BELT
LINE ROAD Addison to Midway 58,000 53,000 54,000 46,000 50,000 Midway to Smveyor 47,000 46,000 42,000 42,000 45,000 MIDWAYROAD North ofArapaho 52,000 36,000 44,000 44,000 32,000 South
ofArapaho 58,000 57,000 44,000 50,000 60,000 South ofBelt Line 52,000 46,000 47,000 52,000 2.4.2 Evaluation of Traffic Volumes The existing congestion on Belt Line Road and Midway Road
supports an extension ofArapaho Road. Traffic already backs up on Midway Road from Belt Line Road to north ofthe DART railroad much ofthe day; consequently, an at-grade crossing of Arapaho
Road at Midway Road may not be feasible without providing dualcoordination of the traffic signals signals along Midway and Belt Line Roads. The grade separated scenarios, with or without
ramps, all reduce traffic on Belt Line and Midway Roads withthe exception ofthe section ofMidway Road between proposed· Arapaho Road and Belt Line Road with ramps on the south side.
For the grade separated scenario without ramps, year 2020 volumes on Belt Line Road are projected to be approximately 5,000 vehicles per day (vpd) less with Arapaho Road extended. Volumes
on Midway Road are projected to be reduced by 8,000 to 12,000 vpd. Arapaho Road is projected to carry 13,000 vpd from Addison Road to Marsh Lane ifno entry or exit ramps are installed
at Midway Road. According to the projected traffic volumes, the extention of Arapaho Road can be constructed as a four-lane undivided roadway ifno entry or exit ramps are installed at
Midway Road. It should be noted that even though these traffic studies contain a large margin for error, they do serve to support the grade separated configuration with no ramps at Midway
Road. 98-094 12 February 1999
May-31-00 l2:41P ) P.Ol LE ·COVE .. h /f),1 IC'(/) hl0-'' 􀁾􀁾􀀿􀀭􀁢􀀶􀁾􀁦􀀭 OATEfTIME: 2 {.//I U 􀀧􀁾 7 . FAX # !214} 653-6416 PHONE # 􀁾􀀱􀀴􀁌􀀶􀀵􀀳􀀭􀀶􀀱􀀷􀀶 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES
INCLUDING COVER._.__ 􀁃􀁏􀁍􀁍􀁅􀁎􀁔􀁓􀀺􀁾􀁟􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀭_ _ 􀁐􀁴􀀭􀀭􀁴􀁬􀀺􀁶􀁜􀁾􀁖􀁜􀁑􀀬􀁬􀁙 􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀻􀁌􀀱􀁦􀀺􀀺􀂣􀁌􀁾􀁃􀁬􀁲 􀁲􀁊􀁲􀁾􀂷􀂷􀂷 ****IFYOUDONOT
RECEIVE ALL Oli'"THE'PAGES,PLMSECALLTHE NUMBERBELOW. . . 411 ;ELMSTREET DALLAS;TEXAS 7sio2 (214)653-7151
May-31-00 12:41P ) P.02 DALLAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS TO: FROM: , DATE: Rc: Dallas County Cities Donald Cranford Assistant Director. Dallas County Public Works Department 31 May 2000 Dallas
County Major Capital Improvement Program (MCIP): Preliminary Scoring ofFY 2000 Projects. A preliminary scoring ofall projects submitted under our new Major Capital Improvement Program
has been completed, The scores for the projecrs submitted by your city are summarized on the attached table. As this table indicates, projects were scored on ten evaluation criteria,
a local cost participation multiplier, and 3 special case ratings, as outlined in our evaluation methodology paper: "Evaluation Methodology to Score and Rank Candidate Thoroughfare System
Improvements." The paper referred to above accompanied our original Call for Projecls and is available, upon request, for your review. For quick reference the evaluation criteria are
abbreviated as follows: Fe: Sf): TV: TVG: TD: BC; AR: AQ: IMSM: SDR: MULT: ScI: Sc2: Sc3: Functional Classification Rating Speed Delay Rating Traffic Volume Rating Traffic Volume Growth
Rating The scores for each project are indicated as follows: Benefit-Cost Ratio Rating Accident Rate Rating Air Quality I Energy Conservation Rating Intennodal /Multimodal I Social Mobility
Rating Sustainable Development /Redevelopment /"Smart Growth" Rating Local Cost Participation Multiplier Special Case # 1 Special Case # 2 Special Case # 3 Please note that when the
score for any evaluation criteria is recorded as zero, either the project did not qualify for points under the given evaluation criteria (for example proposed new roads do not qualify
for accident rate points) or the information that would have qualified the project for rhose points was not available to the evaluators at the time the evaluation was conducted. 411
Elm Street. 4th Floor Dallas, Tex.as 75202 (214) 653-7151
MaY-31-00 12:42P We strongly encourage you to review this information carefully and contact us by June 􀀹􀁾 2000 ifyou 􀁷􀁯􀁵􀁬􀁤􀁾 1) like further clarification on the scoring or evaluation
methodology, 2) like to provide additional data, such as cost estimates and accident data that are likely to improve the scoring ofyollr projects, Ifwe do not hear from you by the above
deadline, we'll assume you agree with our assessment of your project(s) and proceed to use this information for our final ranking of all projects by June 16, 2000. If you have any questions,
do not hesitate to call Edith Ngwa, Ph.D, who has replaced Michael Schrader, our fanner Senior Transportation Planner, or myself. Thank you. Sincerely, 􀁄􀀻􀀩􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁦􀀺􀀺􀁾 (f 􀁾􀁁􀀭􀁃􀀴􀀮􀁈􀀺
tL Assistant Dire or Dallas County Public Works Department (214) 653-7151 P.03
o::t o. Il 􀁾􀁾tJ,ff-8· . 􀁰􀁾 􀁭􀁡􀀲􀀢􀀧􀁾 􀁩􀁲􀀭􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀮 􀀱􀁾􀁎􀀭􀁬􀁊 􀀭􀀭􀁲􀁾.. Vv'cr---eu::r-1IJ 􀁾 􀀮􀀭􀁥􀀮􀀴􀀭􀁾 Major CapItal Improvement Project Rankillg IV Dis1 Prujt'Ci
Lantian 1# ('orr«bbk Lcagth Project Local Percenf )'r(ljet't 􀀬􀁯􀁜􀁣􀁤􀁤􀁾􀁐􀁉􀁓 􀀨􀁍􀁩􀁬􀁣􀁾􀀩 Cos, 􀁉􀀧􀁕􀁊􀁬􀁤􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾 Ma.ch I)esrrip'iflll Cil)' Beginlling 􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁧 Projec'
􀁓􀁲􀀺􀁄􀁲􀁥􀁾 PC .50 W TVG' TO Be Ait :4(! lMSM SDK Ml'L"r TOIIlI ....{ .r.·2 >t·.l "-/􀁥􀁊􀀮􀁬􀂷􀁾 􀁖􀁾􀁜􀁬 48 1 BeltllM Road WJt.. 22" $2,500,000 $1,675,000 75 RelJiiboII'lanon qqv..\.
Addi.s.on Dalias Parlc'lray (DNTJ 7 NlA 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁻􀁽􀀩 C9 s/6/10 10/10/o'" 0/0/1.75 88 􀁾 i I I I I .! . 􀁾􀁾 4V 1 ArapahO Road 64 1,()2 $14,328,120 512,895,308 SO 􀁃􀁑􀀨􀁊􀀮􀁬􀀡􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁲􀁡􀀨􀁬􀁥􀀬􀀬�
�􀁳􀁥􀁣􀀧􀀮􀁊􀁑􀁩􀁉􀁯􀀮􀀧􀁁􀁲􀁾􀁒􀀴􀀻􀁊􀁴􀁊􀁴􀁉􀁇􀁐􀁉 􀁓􀀢􀀧􀁟􀁴􀀧􀁾􀁑􀁉 IJ 􀁾􀁾 Shltllo Adelson Roiid I-0Io r y.uft'(tl McJrSOll AddisDII Road Surveyor &uJevanJ_ I -rJ;:. I l.. 0\ tpt"LA,
c:.J'-'-"--7 ,/'-I 􀁲􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀮 --< 􀁾 t"...<" /􀁴􀁶􀁴􀁲􀀧􀁴􀁾 􀀮􀁰􀁾􀀰 0/32 LV (ff tv 6/0/r,/0 "!l 72 􀁾􀁉 I I i 􀁾 􀀮􀁾 45 1 BeD L1nll Road 64 1.7 $700,000 $350,000 􀁾􀁏 Re Mil." me
c.<isrNl!l17 􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁏􀁬􀁴􀀧 COCy,Morc" $'9'''0' 􀀮􀁳􀁙􀁪􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁬 afoug 8eJr lNle Hoad JrC'iI,' .\Icl,::.;', L,WI",' (u Acfd[san MfNSh Lane Ql/01IJm Drive 􀁾􀀢􀀰􀀱􀁌􀁎􀀱􀀱 Drive -􀁾
5196.000 􀁒􀁾 􀁾􀁩􀁭􀁥 lhe eX1st.v:g ,14 }IeiN' old 􀁲􀁯􀁯􀁲􀁯􀁤􀁯􀀱􀁬􀁾􀁐􀀮􀀢􀀺􀁲S'gtlaJ Sy'SfefR 􀁡􀁲􀁯􀁲􀁊􀁾 A,frdK·cW 􀁴􀁬􀀮􀁯􀁾􀂷 ttOlrl 􀁾􀀧􀀻􀁊􀀧􀁉􀀢􀀬􀀧􀁩􀁽 II􀁡􀀮􀁙􀁣􀀡􀁾 􀁮􀁾􀁤
I'a O""""t Roars. 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭44 Addison 7V' Mldwa)l Road Spring Valley Road ./10 o DooteyRoad{; 21 '} G' /' 10 1.75 B' $392,000 0/0'" /' o50 ',5 62 I i i I Il No.:.:t Nr-t ooI r-t M1􀁾
III 􀁾 T... 􀁾􀀺􀁳􀁬􀀱􀁴􀁬􀁹􀀮 Mil}' 16.. lOOO '2 V" ./􀁾􀀮 I"" /' ///,. 3 Ie 0 II (,2) \0 1rOO 0 􀀧􀀮􀁾􀁊 48! I i􀁾􀁊􀀧􀁉􀁬􀁾􀁉􀀧 1 u/1-f""aJ( 􀁃􀁫􀁲􀁾 􀁖􀁾 􀁻􀀮􀀭􀁾 4lVt {C-tr· 􀀨􀂢􀁤􀀽􀁫􀀺􀀮􀁾
C---􀁾􀁾
i '1Ii 'J 􀁾􀀮􀀷􀀵 33 I I I I ./o ,/() //0/o 10 1 o o {; 􀁾􀀩􀀢 -􀀮􀁾􀀧 ..----------􀁾􀀮 --_.._----. -_._____•• _0__.-___ /I Corn.dablr 􀁌􀁾􀁮􀁧􀁬􀁨 􀁐􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁾􀁣􀁬 􀁉􀁁􀁬􀁾􀁡􀁬 .·crl'l'nt
􀁉􀀧􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁣􀁾􀀱 􀁁􀁣􀀺􀁴􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁮􀀧􀁾 (Miles) ('os1 Funding MafC'll Description E,.d;ng SD TV TH." 10 Be .'iR ttC! I.tIS,'I SDR MIiI.T T{O'III .'1./􀁾􀁣􀀧􀁬 .\"d 0 $750,000 5552.500
75 RMMJi/ilafton NlA Fe /J 􀁾 --------------------------------------:.; .! Project Lm:atioD Begi'UI;nj! Dallas Parkway Arapaho Road Dis. Propel Sc'ore: ID AdrlisOll Cif}' 41 III o. ll.
/V :j,, i 􀁾0'1 QC -i '--, ll. N􀁾.. Nr-f ooI r-f ('f) I 􀁾I'I;l 􀁾 Tun"dilY. ,"41.1'16, ]OfHl I'ult'< 2<If! •
· .) ."'''-' , .. , " ..
HP LaserJet 3100 Printer/Fax/Copier/Scanner ..)1-----------.<.. 􀀬􀀺􀁾------------, . SEND CONFIRMATION REPORT for Town of Addison 9724502834 May-15-00 10:46AM Job Start Time Usage Phone
Number or ID Type Pages Mode Status 620 5/15 10:45AM l' 33" 99722393820 .................. Send .............. 3/3 EC 96 Completed ........................................ Total l' 33"
Pages Sent: 3 Pages Printed: 0 From: Jim Pierce, P.E. Assistant City Engineer Phone: 972/450·2879 FAX: 972/456-2834 Jplerce@d.addiIOD.!LUS PUBLIC WORKS 16801 Westgrove P.O.Bo:l 9010
# of pages (including cover):---.3...-Addison, TX 75001·9010 Re: Da.!k.s 􀁾􀁴􀀿􀁲􀁹 c'.ll-bpzk-lU-MJ,;,rr {r--J.ur'!tfJl-' TOWN OF ADDIsoN To: pm fbwn Company: J(, 1111ey-J..b rn FAX#:
tt1J -.g.?Jq -3f;J.o Date: f'-l S--dO o Original in maU 0 Per your request 0 FYI 0 c.u 100 Comments: Mm.. IJA.e.J IflflB f q:/Olim 4 {J@bs h 1£ Ldnslc/le:&b CA.st: 1<,---Ui?f..,
J! 􀁕􀁾 Ul 􀁮􀁾􀀺 . 􀀭􀁈􀀧􀁾 n􀁾 ..􀁾 􀀭􀀬􀀬􀁾 iL, -nj -H.Q 􀀭􀁛􀁾 􀀭􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀭􀀱 _ 􀁩􀂷􀁾 _1 JJ '11:i 1. 􀁾􀀭􀀺 􀁾􀁊 I] . -l.!. .. Rj " '.. 􀁾􀀧 ., TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS HNTB I GBW
Engineers 02116/99 ARAPAHO ROAD EXTENSION FROM ADDISON ROAD TO MARSH LANE ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST OPTION 5 -SURVEYOR BLVD. TO ADDISON ROAD -Phase 2 ITEM NO ITEM
DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY ENGINEERS ESTIMATE ROADWAY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 100 PREP. &MAlNT. OF RIGHT-oF·WAY STA 54.0 $ 2,500.00 $ 135,000.00 104 REMOVE OLD CONCRETE IPVMT.l SY 500 $ 3.50
$ 1,750.00 110 EXCAVATION (ROADWAY) CY 7,000 $ 3.20 $ 22,400.00 132 EMBANKMENT (ORDINARY COMPACTION) CY 34,000 $ 8.50 $ 289,000.00 260 LIME TREATED SUBGRADE 16 in) (Mainline) SY 24,200
$ 3.00 $ 72,600,00 360 CONCRETE PAVEMENT (10 in) (Mainline) SY 23,200 $ 31.00 $ 719,200.00 360 MONOLITHIC CURB (TYPE A) 16 in) LF 11,500 $ 2.00 $ 23,000.00 423 RETAINING WALL (CAST IN
PLACE) SF 21,000 $ 32.00 $ 672,000.00 500 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 502 BARRICADES, BARRICADES, SIGNS AND TRAFFIC HANDLING LS 1 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 66.6 REFLECT
PAVE MARKINGS LF 25,000 $ 1.50 $ 37,500.00 . LIGHTING .' LF 5,400 $ 35.00 $ 189,000.00 TRAFFIC SIGNALS (PER INTERSECTION) EA 1 $ 120,000.00 $ 120,000.00 RAILROAD SIGNALS, CROSSING EA
2 $ 250,000.00 $ 500,000.00 681 TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNAL EA 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 LANDSCAPING LS 1 $ 150,000.00 $ 150,000.00 * STRUCTURE SF 51,000 $ 35.00 $ 1,785,000.00 INLETS EA
25 $ 2,500.00 $ 62,500.00 MANHOLES EA 5 $ 5,000.00 $ 25,000.00 LATERALS LF 1,180 $ 50.00 $ 59,000.00 24" RCP LF 3,000 $ 50.00 $ 150,000.00 30" RCP LF 1,310 $ 65.00 $ 85,150.00 36" RCP
LF 500 $ 80.00 $ 40,000.00 6'XS'RCBC LF 260 $ 250.00 $ 65,000.00 TXS'RCBC LF 400 $ 300.00 $ 120,000.00 9'XS'RCBC LF 500 $ 350.00 $ 175,000.00 2 -7' X 5' RCBC LF 800 $ 550.00 $ 440,000.00
2 -9' X 5' RCBC LF 1,460 $ 700.00 $ 1,022,000.00 2 -10' X 6' RCBC LF 920 $ 800.00 $ 736,000.00 HEADWALL CONCRETE CY 30 $ 600.00 $ 18,000.00 REMOVE CONCRETE CHANNEL LINING SY 10,500 $
10.00 $ 105,000.00 105,000.00 REMOVE/REPLACE CONCRETE CHANNEL LINING SY 1,100 $ 60.00 $ 66000.00 OTHER UTILITY RELOCATIONS LS 1 $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00 RIGHT-oF·WAY LS 1 $ 2,650,000.00
$ 2,650,000.00 DEMOLITION LS 1 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 SUBTOTAL $10,915,100.00 20% CONTINGENCY $ 2,183,020.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $ 13,098,120.00
--------.f+;--􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 __----_ .._-_.._--0---------_._----------.. .. ._._. _ ) 􀀭􀀭􀀺􀁟􀁾􀀭 􀀱􀀭􀀭􀀱􀀲􀁁􀁊􀀱􀁾􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁌􀁃
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁌􀁌􀁟􀁡􀁯􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭. . [ . 􀁾􀁥􀁴􀀬􀁨􀀺􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁊􀀱􀁊􀀮􀁤􀁬􀁾 􀀤􀁵􀁶􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ___________ ,L 􀁥􀁟􀁾􀁾 \_1hKG 􀁾􀁩 ,_nt1[Y' _f?f.-fraklAh
lot 􀁾􀁾􀀮 􀁾 _ ------: 􀀬􀁳􀀯􀁲􀁾􀁤􀁬􀀺􀁡􀀮􀁦􀁲􀁴􀀮􀀺􀀽 1f IJ; cYlJ'; /2 D -------------------·L-----7/r2,(!)2-0 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁹􀁮􀁦􀀡􀁾􀀯􀀻􀀿􀀧􀀴􀀧􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 :j ----.-.--.-.-.---'.
=F----.:·-· 􀀯􀀨􀁰􀁾􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀿 􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀯􀀧􀁣􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀭 -------------. 􀁾 􀁾􀀺􀁬􀀦􀀬 C) 􀁃􀀩􀁄􀁾 -􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀧􀀭􀀯􀁾􀁾􀁾 j-, 􀁾 r", --I"";'", __________ 􀁾 . -􀀷􀁾􀀬 G)C>c) _ _
2( h 􀀵􀀢􀁾 "0 CJ /200 _ _____. 􀁾􀁟􀁾 CJ 2.. o/i-L/IO _ ______ . j 􀁾􀁾􀁴􀀺􀁟UJsf Ln c..AAJI􀀻􀀱􀀱􀀭􀁃􀁦􀁬􀁊􀀡􀁌􀁬􀁴􀁲􀁬􀁪􀁬􀁮􀁾􀀭 =-___.._. .. .. _ --11------􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀁬􀁟􀁾 02Y-;-ltmj
{,;L -'t9.-th28; 􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁑􀁟􀁟􀁟.. ..... __ ----,,---------.---..-i --------------------------------------------------------.---..-------..-------------------..-------_..----------------t,-.----------
...--' -.--------------------------_;􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾_wd__________ 􀀮􀁟􀀧􀀲􀀮􀀬􀁟􀁫􀁟􀁾t:2l Dc:J()-X--L2..-Uilltfl-fLtlYj-------4-1fCJ,_Af2Q _ ----------------I L .-.-----------------------...
􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ..-------------------.---,,-----------.-t-. ----.-.--------------------..---.-.-------JiLhJtf:'1 􀂣􀁡􀁳􀀮􀁦􀁾 􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁚􀀭􀀧􀁦􀁃􀀿 00e>LI. 􀁾 􀁾􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁨􀁾􀁊􀀡􀀱􀁦􀀴
􀁴􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀱􀀮􀀸􀁾􀁄􀁏􀁢􀀭􀀭 . ,I _____________________ : ;i . ....__... .._______. ------:$---.., . ,, . ._ ___;􀀺􀁾􀁲􀁊􀀦􀁾􀁍􀀷􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁌􀀱􀁌􀁌􀁃􀁡􀀮􀁳􀁲 ._,": ;;.a3d',dd<i ....._.
_ i ------------------------------------------._-􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁟􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭----------------_._------------_..__._------.._--I ! -------------r-------------
------------.------.---------------; Iri -----------􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀽􀁾􀁾.•.•=-􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁾 ••-==--•.•.•.=-=.==-_ ._----_.__.􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀽􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀽􀁾
􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀽􀁾􀁾 ... -----.--_.--.---1-iJ!-------.--.-.-"'--"-----'---"-----------.. ----.---------------------.-----...----------.-------. -...---.---------------.--------. -.-.-.---------------.
--"----.....---..,, . :1 _____ L_ __ .. I . J, ----"------.----t
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. •Suite 1800 12700 Park Central Drive Dallas, Texas 75251 May 10,2000 Mr. Jim Pierce, P.E. Assistant City Engineer Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison,
Texas 75001-9010 Re: Dallas County Call for Projects Dear Mr. Pierce: Please review the submitted opinion of probable construction cost for the following proposed project(s): Arapaho
Road from Addison Road to Surveyor Boulevard The submitted construction cost opinion for the project(s) listed above varied from an estimate performed by the Dallas County Public Works
Department for a similar project; the guidelines for which are attached. Please document any reasons for the cost differential. Please feel free to call with any questions or comments.
Very truly yours, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Thomas Brown Transportation Analyst 8kn •TEL 972 770 1300 FAX 972 r9 3820 G:ITPTOllofoiectl063026003 nctcogldoclAddisonOl.doc
DALLAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS 24 April 2000 Mr. Tom Brown: Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. 12700 Park Central Drive Suite 1800 Dallas, TX 75251 re: Major Capital Improvement Program Candidate
Projects For Project Year 2004/2005 Base Line Preliminary Estimates OfCost In response to your email request dated 17 April 2000 we list below our estimates ofa typical, base line project
using the typical cross sections stated. These costs were prepared without the benefit ofany field work, map work or even knowing the locations ofthe projects. As you stated , your responsibility
will be to conform these numbers, either upward or downward, based on location, pavement thickness structure, topography, truck/bus percentages, projected traffic volumes, design loads
and all other factors which would drive the costs up or down. These base line costs were based on the following: 􀁾 An 8 in thick. TxDOT CPCD concrete pavement with monolithic curb over
6 in. oflime treated subgrade at 7% over compacted existing subgrade . 􀁾 Minimal lowering ofthe profile grade line to only low enough to receive water from the ROW line. 􀁾 No fill
􀁾 An enclosed concrete storm system 􀁾 An average of9.2 median openings/street intersections per mile 􀁾 An average of3.7 cross drainage structures per mile 􀁾 No bridges are included
in the costs. All new bridges and 􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁡􀁣􀁨􀁥􀁾 should be 2 feet above the 100 year flood plain elevation . 􀁾 No Design or ROW costs included The estimated base line costs based
on the above are: • New 4 Lane Divided Concrete C&G Roadway w/Storm Sewer $650. per LF • New 6 Lane Divided Concrete C&G Roadway wI Storm Sewer $749. per LF • New 2 Lane Concrete C&G
Roadway w/Storm Sewer $325. per LF • New 5 Lane (Continuous Left Tum) Concrete C&G Roadway w/Storm Sewer$700. per LF • Widen From 4 Lane Divided Concrete to 6 Lane 􀁄􀁩􀁶􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁾 Concrete
C&G Roadway w/Storm Sewer. Widen on inside -No Additional Storm Sewer $121. per LF • Widen From 4 Lane Undivided Concrete to 6 Lane Divided Concrete C&G Roadway w/Storm Sewer . $$1,220
per LF 411 Elm Street, 4th Floor Dallas, Texas 75202 (214) 653-7151
" I" DALLAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS • Remove 􀁅􀁸􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁾􀁧 2 Lane Asphaltic Pavement, Build New 4 Lane , Divided Concrete Roadway wI Storm Sewer , • Remove Existing 2 Lane Asphaltic Pavement,
Build New 6 Lane Divided Concrete Roadway wI Storm Sewer Any new bridges can be estimated at $61.00 per Square Foot provided that the structure can be built as a TxDOT CGC (" pan form")
standard bridge with max 30 foot spans. Other designs must be individually estimated: $675.per LF ' $775. perLF Ifyou have questions please contact Jack D. Hedge,P.£., ofmy staff at
214.653.6420 or email at jhedge@dallascounty.org. Sincerely, Alberta Blair-Robinson, P.E. Assistant Director, Engineering and Construction xc: Don Cranford, P.E., Assistant Director,
Transportation and Planning 􀀧􀀩􀁾 Jack D. Hedge, P.E., Sr. Civil Design Engineer Toni Bacchus, Sr. Civil Engineering Designer ABR/jdh prelimestJ.wdJ 411 Elm Street, 4th Floor Dallas,
Texas 75202 (214) 653-7151
) SIN 2781·111·:118 POL·OO152 CITY OF DALLAS March 9. 2000 ADDISON PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. JAMES C. PIERCE. JR. P.O. BOX 9010 ADDISON, TX 75001 RE: Public Information Request # 2000-0148
Dear Mr. Pierce: The Records Section has processed your request for information. This information has been collected and forwarded to you free ofcharge. Enclosed you will find the following
information you requested under the Public Information Act: ACCIDENT LOGS Ifwe may be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us at (214) 670-5604. Sincerely, TERRELL BOLTON
CHIEF OF POLICE .:1-}.. 􀀡􀁦􀁾 􀁾􀀺􀁳􀁳􀁯􀁮 Lieutenant ofPolice Records Section Support Services Bureau POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE AND COURTS BUILDING DALLAS, TEXAS 75201-5203
􀁳􀁥􀁮􀁾 By: Town of Addison; 9724602834; Page 1/1 . '. •.,.􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀬􀀻􀀮􀀻􀀮􀀮􀀧􀁾 I \ I 0" I • \ ! \. ..-.ADDisoN PIJRUC WORI{S DEPARTMENT 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁬􀀡􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁾(f,l l'ORt Office
BUl( 9010 Addison, TexllS 75001-9010 January 20, 2000 City ofDallas Open Records Section Attention Lieutenant Wesson Via Fax: 214-670-5180 Rc: Request for Accident lnfonnatioll Dear
Lieutenant Wesson: RECEIVED 􀁡􀁋􀁎􀁾􀁗􀀽􀁅􀁓􀁔 • 2DOO•• 0. lAF,AO0 (972) 4SO-2BTI 16801 􀁗􀁥􀀦􀁴􀁧􀁾􀁣 1am preparing applications for Dallas County Public Works funding through their
"2000 Dallas COUDty Call for Projects". We are applying for funding for improvements at the intersection ofBelt 􀁌􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁒􀁯􀁡􀁤􀁾 and Dallas Parkway. and. the intersection ofArapaho
Road and Dallas Parkway, One ofthe application requirements is that we attach three years worth ofactual accident data for each intersection. The infonnatioD will be used to determine
ifthe improvements will reduce the 􀁡􀁣􀁾􀁪􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁴 rate. to I am requesting this information pursuant to the Open Government statutes in Texas. I am requesting information about: DescriptionIDetaiis
ofthe accident Report Number , .,; Iunderstand that ifany accident about which I have requested infonl1l1tiolJ is pending litigation I wiil . receive only that portion that is required
to be released; Jun.derstandthat the City. of Dallas has ten djys to process my request. I understand that in lieu ofreleasing the information the City ofDallas may ,I request an opinion
from rhe Office ofthe Attorney General. I understand I will be conracted by mail r by phone when this request is completed. I understand that completed requests win be held for only
fifteen calendar days after notification by mail or phone. (My phone number is 972-450-2879). Thank you for your 􀁡􀁳􀁳􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁥􀀮 Town ofAddison . 􀁾􀀹􀁊􀀭 es C. Pierce. Jr.• P.E.
􀁾􀁳􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁴 City Engineer cc: Chris Terry. Assistant City Manager Michael E. Murphy. P.E.• Acting Director ofPublic Works ,.I
0) j. 03/08/2000 18:50 Dallas Police Department OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES Report Definition Summary Title Display Order
Database in Use Data Group in Use Orientation Report Subset Last Edit Date Last Run Date Report TYpeNumber of OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY &
ARAPAHO 97000804 MAIN CRASHES Environment 97000803 01/31/2000 09:10 03/08/2000 18:50 List Variables Defined : 5 Variable Description Column Width Sum 􀁾 Crash Number 1 12 YES YES Time
2 4 YES YES Date 3 6 YES YES Primary Street 4 23 YES YES Manner of Collision 5 20 YES YES LEVEL 1 Subset Definition ALL CRASHES DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO 18:47
18:47 Title Display Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date OR 2000-0148 97000803 MAIN CRASHES 97000000 ALL DATES 03/08/2000
03/08/2000 II Environment II Records IIDriverII Records IINon-Driverll Records [Searched] 32707 64709 28004 [Matched] 362 [Not Matched] ********** oo Variable Variable Variable Beginning
Group ID Name Value Environment a Crash Number < Equal To > Environment b Block Number 14000 Environment c Primary Street < Equal To > Environment d Reference Location < Equal To > Environment
e Date 01/01/1997 Environment f Manner of COllision [\] Missing Driver/Vehicle g Direction of Travel [\] Missing Environment h Time 0000 Environment i Primary Street < Equal To > Environment
Reference Location < Equal To > IIIFII Statement (a AND b AND c AND d AND e AND f AND g AND h) OR (i AND j) Ending Value Missing 15400 DALLAS PKWY BELT LINE RD 12/31/1997 [0] Unknown
or N/A [0] Unknown or N/A 1200 ARAPAHO RD DALLAS PKWY ----------------------------------------------------LEVEL 2 Subset Definition -----------------------------------------------------Title
Display Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date All Crashes 1997 97000000 MAIN CRASHES ROOT DATABASE 01/01/1997 -12/31/31/1997
11/09/1999 17:14 11/09/1999 17:51 "Environment ll Records IIDriverll Records IINon-Driver ll Records [Searched] 32707 64709 28004 [Matched] 32707 64709 28004 [Not Matched] **********
oo Variable Group Variable ---.!.!2 Variable Name Beginning Value UIFlI Statement Ending Value ----------------------------------------------------Report Definition Complete--------------------------
---------------------------
Page:1 of 1 ORIENTATION: Environment K5 ) Opp-#1 Strt,#2 Left Sngl-Turning Left Ang-Both Straight ARAPAHO RD ARAPAHO RD ARAPAHO RD Report Includes 􀁾 􀁾 2310 032397 1330 093097 1435 123197
Kl 256271F 810760F 1047290F Dallas Police Department OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES DETAIL and SUMMARY Information K4 03/08/2000
18:50 3 Records Processed
03/08/2000 18:50 Dallas Police Department Page; 2 OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES ORIENTATION: Environment Report Includes DETAIL
and SUMMARY Information SUMMARY Follows for All Variables: ( Left Column => VALUE Right Column => FREQUENCY Column 1 (KEY) Summary ==> Crash Number 256271F 1 810760F 1 1047290F 1 Column
2 (KEY) Summary ==> Time 1300-1359 Hours 1 1400-1459 Hours 1 2300-2359 Hours 1 Column 3 (KEY) Summary --> Date 03/23/1997 1 09/30/1997 1 12/31/1997 1 Column 4 (KEY) Summary ==> Primary
Street ARAPAHO RD 3 Column 5 (KEY) Summary ==> Manner of Collision Ang-Both Straight OpP-#l Strt,#2 Left Sngl-Turning Left [1] [25] [41] 111
03/08/2000 18:55 Title Display Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Orientation Report Subset Last Edit Date Last Run Date Report TYpeNumber of Dallas Police Department Report Definition
Summary OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO 98000804
MAIN CRASHES Environment 98000804 03/08/2000 18:55 03/08/2000 18:55 List Variables Defined : 5 Variable Description Column Width Sum 􀁾 Crash Number 1 12 YES YES Time 2 4 YES YES Date
3 6 YES YES Primary Street 4 23 YES YES Manner of Collision 5 20 YES YES ----------------------------------------------------LEVEL 1 Subset Definition ALL CRASHES DALLAS PKWY & BELT
LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO 18:51 18:51 Title Display Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date OR 2000-0148 98000804
MAIN CRASHES 98000000 ALL DATES 03/08/2000 03/08/2000 IIEnvironment" Records IIDriver ll Records IINon-Driver" Records [Searched] 33647 66947 28263 [Matched] 24o [Not Matched] **********
oo Variable Variable Variable Beginning Ending Group ID Name Value Value Environment a Crash Number < Equal To > Missing Environment b Block Number 14000 15400 Environment c Primary
Street < Equal To > DALLAS PKWY Environment d Reference Location < Equal To > BELT LINE RD Environment e Date 01/01/1999 12/31/1999 Environment f Manner of Collision [\] Missing [0]
Unknown or N/A Driver/Vehicle g Direction of Travel [\] Missing [0] Unknown or N/A Environment h Time 0000 1200 Environment i Primary Street < Equal To > ARAPAHO RD Environment Reference
Location < Equal To > DALLAS PKWY IIIFII Statement (a AND b AND c AND d AND e AND f AND g AND h) OR (i AND j) LEVEL 2 Subset Definition -----------------------------------------------------Title
Display Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date All Crashes 1998 98000000 MAIN CRASHES ROOT DATABASE 01/01/1998 -12/31/1998
11/05/1999 11:23 11/09/1999 17:16 IIEnvironment ll Records IIDriver ll Records IINon-Driver ll Records [Searched] 33647 66947 28263 [Matched] 33647 66947 28263 [Not Matched] **********
oo Variable Group Variable ID Variable Name Beginning Value "IF" Statement Ending Value ----------------------------------------------------Report Definition Complete---------------------------------
--------------------
03/08/2000 18:55 2 Records Processed .) Dallas Police Department Page: 1 of 1 OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES ORIENTATION: Environment
Report Includes DETAIL and SUMMARY Information K1 􀁾􀁾 K4 K5 752782G 0727 100798 ARAPAHO RD Sam-Both Strt,S-Swip 846120G 1650 111098 ARAPAHO RD Sam-Both Strt,R-End
03/08/2000 18:55 Dallas Police Department Page: 2 OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES ORIENTATION: Environment Report Includes DETAIL
and SUMMARY Information SUMMARY Follows for All Variables: ( Left Column => VALUE Right Column => FREQUENCY Column 1 (KEY) Summary ==> Crash Number 752782G 1 846120G 1 Column 2 (KEY)
Summary ==> Time 0700-0759 Hours 1 1600-1659 Hours 1 Column 3 (KEY) Summary ==> Date 10/07/1998 1 11/10/1998 1 Column 4 (KEY) Summary ==> Primary Street ARAPAHO RD 2 Column 5 (KEY) Summary
==> Manner of Collision Sam-Both Strt,R-End [llJ Sam-Both Strt,S-Swip [12] 11
Dallas Police Department OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES 03/08/2000 19:01 :..) ;/Report Definition Summary Title Display Order
Database in Use Data Group in Use Orientation Report Subset Last Edit Date Last Run Date Report TypeNumber of OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY &
ARAPAHO 99000805 MAIN CRASHES Environment 99000805 01/31/2000 10:03 03/08/2000 19:01 List Variables Defined : 5 Variable Description Column Width Sum 􀁾 Crash Number 1 12 YES YES Time
2 4 YES YES Date 3 6 YES YES Primary Street 4 23 YES YES Manner of Collision 5 20 YES YES LEVEL 1 Subset Definition Title ALL CRASHES DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO
Display Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date OR 2000-0148 99000805 MAIN CRASHES 99000000 ALL DATES 03/08/2000 03/08/2000
18:58 18:58 II Environment II Records IIDriverII Records IINon-Driver ll Records [Searched] 31393 62434 26896 [Matched] 410 2 [Not Matched] ********** oo Variable Variable Variable Beginning
Group ID Name Value Environment a Crash Number < Equal To > Environment b Block Number 14000 Environment c Primary Street < Equal To > Environment d Reference Location < Equal To > Environment
e Date 01/01/1999 Environment f Manner of COllision [\] Missing Driver/Vehicle g Direction of Travel [\] Missing Environment h Time 0000 Environment i Primary Street < Equal To > Environment
Reference Location < Equal To > !lIFIl Statement (a AND b AND c AND d AND e AND f AND g AND h) OR (i AND j) Ending Value Missing 15400 DALLAS PKWY BELT LINE RD 12/31/1999 [0] Unknown
or N/A [0] Unknown or N/A 1200 ARAPAHO RD DALLAS PKWY ----------------------------------------------------LEVEL 2 Subset Definition -----------------------------------------------------Title
Display Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date All Crashes 1999 99000000 MAIN CRASHES ROOT DATABASE 01/01/1999 -12/31/1999
02/02/2000 08:28 02/02/2000 08:32 II Environment II Records IIDriverII Records "Non-Driverll Records [Searched] 31394 62436 26896 [Matched] 31393 62434 26896 [Not Matched] **********
oo Variable Group Variable ID Variable Name Beginning Value "IF" Statement Ending Value ----------------------------------------------------Report Definition Complete---------------------------------
--------------------
Dallas Police Department Page: 1 of 1 OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES ORIENTATION: Environment Report Includes DETAIL and SUMMARY
Information K1 K2 􀁾 K4 K5 427313H 0230 061299 ARAPAHO RD Sam-#l Strt,#2 Stop 678602H 1640 091099 ARAPAHO RD Oth-#l Strt,#2 Prk 764707H 1720 101299 ARAPAHO RD Sam-#l Strt,#2 Stop 973348H
1014 123199 ARAPAHO RD Aug-Both Straight 03/08/2000 19:01 4 Records Processed \" )
􀁾􀀩 /Dallas OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS 03/08/2000 19:01 Police Department PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS CRASHES Report Includes DETAIL "and SUMMARY Information PKWY & ARAPAHO
Page: 2 ORIENTATION: Environment SUMMARY Follows for All Variables: ( Left Column => VALUE Right Column => FREQUENCY Column 1 (KEY) Summary ==> Crash Number 427313H 1 678602H 1 764707H
1 973348H 1 Column 2 (KEY) Summary ==> Time 0200-0259 Hours 1000-1059 Hours 1600-1659 Hours 1700-1759 Hours 1111 Column 3 (KEY) Summary ==> Date 06/12/1999 1 09/10/1999 1 10/12/1999
1 12/31/1999 1 Column 4 (KEY) Summary ==> Primary Street ARAPAHO RD 4 Column 5 (KEY) Summary ==> Manner of Collision Ang-Both Straight Sam-#l Strt,#2 Stop Oth-#l Strt,#2 Prk [1] [13]
[31] 121
I" February 15, 2000 MEMORANDUM . To: Through: From: Subject: . Chris Terry, Assistant City Manager Michael Murphy, P.E., Acting Director ofPublic Works Jim Pierce, P.E., Assistant City
Engineer 2000 Dallas County Call For Projects Dallas County Public Works is soliciting nominations from cities for projects to be funded through the Dallas County Major Capital Improvement
Fund Thoroughfare Program. In lieu of a traditional bond program, Dallas County has created the Major Capital Improvement Fund, a "pay"':as-you-go" funding mechanism for financing infrastructure
improvements. The County anticipates an annual call for projects. Under this new funding mechanism, approximately $15 million dollars will be available in both FY 2004 and 2005, with
$20 million being available annually in FY 2006 and beyond. The County is currently seeking nominations for projects to be funded for construction in FY 2004. $3.75 million will be available
for funding in our District in 2004. Applications are due at Dallas County for for this calIon March 13,2000. The County will evaluate the projects submitted using complicated formulas
to assign points in the following categories: Roadway Functional Classification Rating (10 points) Speed Delay Rating (10 points) Traffic Volume Rating (10 points) Traffic Volume Growth
Rating (10 points) Travel Desire Rating (10 points) Benefit-Cost Ratio (10 points) Accident Rate Rating (10 points) Air QualitylEnergy Conservation Rating (1 0 points) Sustainable DevelopmentlRedevel
opmentf'Smart Growth" Rating (10 points) Intermoda1lMultimodal/Social Mobility Rating (10 points)
i \ Each project's score is multiplied by a factor that gives credit to local cost participation. For example, ifan applicant pledges a local match of50%, the multiplier is 1.50. Staff
has selected five projects to be submitted to the County under this program (with % local .share and cost distribution shown): Belt Line RoadlDallas Parkway Single Point Urban Interchange
(75%) Town Share -$1,875,000 County Share -$625,000 Southbound to Northbound U-turn on Dallas Parkway at Arapaho Road (75%) Town Share -$562,500 County Share -$187,500 . Arapaho Road,
Phase ill, Surveyor Boulevard to Addison Road (90%) Town Share-$12,895,300 County Share -$1,432,800 Signals Upgrade and Re-timing, Belt Line Rd. from Quorum Dr. to Marsh Lane (50%) Town
Share -$350,000 County Share -$350,000 Signals Upgrade and Re-timing, Midway Rd. from Spring Valley to Dooley Rd (50%) Town Share -$196,000 County Share -$196,000 . -. Draft copies of
the 2000 Dallas County Call For Projects Applications are attached. They will be finalized once once accident data is received from the City Of Dallas Police Department for the Belt
Line Road and Arapaho Road intersections with Dallas Parkway. (These intersections are in the City OfDallas). Staff recommends Council authorize the City Manager to submit applications
for the projects listed above to Dallas County for their 2000 Call for Projects.
· ,1 ) 2000 Dallas County Call For Projects APPLICATIONINFORMATION Submitting Agency: Contact Person: Address: Telephone: e-mail address: Town of Addison Jim Pierce, P.E., Assistant
City Engineer P.O. Box 9010 Addison 972/450-2879 jpierce@ci.addison.tx.us PROJECTINFORMATION TX Facsimile: 75001-9010 972/450-2834 Functional Classification: F # of Correctable Accidents:
-Need (over past 3 years) Existing Through lanes -Belt Line -3, Dallas Pkwy -3 Left turn lanes -Belt Line -1, Dallas Pkwy -1 Right turn lanes -Belt Line -1, Dallas Pkwy -1 Sidewalks
-Belt Line -S, Dallas Pkwy -0 Bicycle lanes -Belt Line -0, Dallas Pkwy -0 Location: Beginning: Ending: Belt Line Road Dallas Parkway (Dallas North Tollway) N/A (Intersection) MAPSCO:
14D Project Length: 0.00 Avg. Posted Speed: N/A Avg. Operating Speed: N/A Traffic Volume: 58,103 -Belt Line Rd. 31,804 -􀁄􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁳 Pkwy. Traffic Volume Source: Count 8/99 Proposed
Belt Line -3, Dallas Pkwy -3 Belt Line -2, Dallas Pkwy -2 Belt Line -I, Dallas Pkwy -1 Belt Line -Y, Dallas Pkwy -Y Belt Line -0, Dallas Pkwy -0 Description of Proposed Improvement(s):
The project will allow the simultaneous operation of left turn lanes for east/west traffic and for north/south traffic. Efficiency of the intersection will be improved by 15 to 20%.
The project consists of the removal of existing pavement, medians and bridge parapet walls, installation of concrete drill shafts and cantilever bridge bents, reconstruction of existing
retaining walls, construction of additional bridge deck and parapet walls, construction of right-turn lanes, construction of dual left-turn lanes and installation of new traffic signals.
Traffic signals will be timed with other signals on Belt Line Road which are covered by another project. Associated work includes traffic control during construction, pavement markings
and signing. Even though this project is located in the City of DaHas, Addison is willing to fund the project as it will improve traffic flow on Belt Line Road within the Town. It will
also benefit the Dallas North Tollway by improving traffic flow on Dallas Parkway. DART busses will benefit from this project as well. This project is an example of regional cooperation
where one Town is willing to fund a project of regional significance (see attached drawing). This is our number 1 priority project for this program. Total Project Cost: Right-of-way
Cost: EngineeringlDesign Cost: Utility Cost: Construction Cost: PROJECTCOSTINFORMATION $2,500,000 $ 170,000 $ 240,000 $ 30,000 $2,060,000 Local Cost Contribution: $ in percent of total
cost 75
2000 Dallas County Call For Projects APPLICATIONINFORMATION Submitting Agency: Contact Person: Address: Town of Addison Jim Pierce, P.E., Assistant City Engineer P.O. Box 9010 Addison
.TX 75001-9010 Telephone: 972/450-2879 Facsimile: 972/450-2834 e-mail address: jpierce@ci.addison.tx.us PROJECTINFORMATION Functional Classification: # of Correctable Accidents: (over
past 3 years) Location: Dallas Parkway (Dallas North Tollway) Beginning: Arapaho Road Ending: Existing Arapaho -3 DalJas Parkway -3 Arapaho -1 Dallas Parkway -1 MAPSCO: 4Z Project Length:
N/A Avg. Posted Speed: N/A Avg. Operating Speed: N/A Traffic Volume: Arapaho Rd. 15,477 /DalJas Pkwy. 35,221 Traffic 􀁖􀁾􀀩􀀩􀁵􀁭􀁥 Source: '99 traffic count Proposed Arapaho -3 Dallas
Parkway -3 Arapaho -1 Dallas Parkway -2 (u-turn, functions like a left turn lane) Arapaho -1 Dallas Parkway -1 1o Arapaho -1 Dallas Parkway -1 1o Through lanes Left turn lanes Right
turn lanes Sidewalks Bicycle lanes Dallas Parkway SB to NB u-turn 0 o Description of Proposed Improvement(s): The widening and realignment of Arapaho Road required the elimination of
the southbound to northbound u-turn lane to accommodate 6 through lanes and 2 left turn lanes across the bridge. The SB to NB u-turn lane must be reestablished when SB to NB turning
movements reach 90 per hour. The project consists of the removal of a portion of existing concrete mono curb along inside curb lines of southbound and northbound Dallas Parkway, removal
of a portion of the east and west retaining walls, installation of concrete drill sbafts and concrete abutments on the east and west sides of Dallas North Tollway, installation of AASHTO
Type IV beams to span Dallas North Tollway, and construction of reinforced bridge deck and parapet walls with associated retaining wall construction. Associated items of work include
traffic control during construction, pavement markings and signage. This is another example of interlocal cooperation where Addison is willing to modify facilities in another city (Dallas)
to improve traffic flow for the region. The project will benefit DART busses that use Dallas Parkway. This is our number 2 priority project for this program (see attached sketch). Total
Project Cost: Right-of-way Cost: EngineeringlDesign Cost: Utility Cost: Construction Cost: PROJECT COSTINFORMATION $750,000 $ 0 $ 90,000 $ 0 $660,000 Local Cost Contribution: $ in percent
of total cost 75 %
2000 Dallas County Call For Projects APPLICATIONINFORMATION .. 􀁾 Submitting Agency: Contact Person: Address: Telephone: e-mail address: Town of Addison Jim Pierce, P.E., Assistant City
Engineer P.O. Box 9010 Addison 972/450-2879 ipierce@ci.addison.tx.us PROJECTINFORMATION TX Facsimile: 75001-9010 972/450-2834 Functional Classification: R # of CorrectaliIe Accidents:
64 (on Belt Line Rd.) (over past 3 years) Location: Beginning: Ending: Through lanes Left turn lanes Right turn lanes Sidewalks Bicycle lanes Arapaho Rd. Addison Rd. Surveyor Blvd. Existing
ooooo MAPSCO: 14 A, B, C Project Length: 1.02 Avg. Posted Speed: 40 mph Avg. Operating Speed: N/A Traffic Volume: N/A Traffic Volume Source: N/A Proposed 41oo o Description of Proposed
Improvement(s): This is Phase III of a three phase project. Phase I was realignment and improvement of Arapaho Road from Dallas Parkway to Addison Road. Phase II will be construction
of Arapaho Road from Marsh Lane to Surveyor Blvd., which will take place prior to 2004. This project (phase III) will construct a new section of Arapaho Road from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison
Road. The roadway will be 2 lanes in each direction, undivided, except at the intersections with Addison Road and Surveyor Blvd., which will have left turn lanes. The intersection with
Midway Road will consist of an overpass with no entrance or exit ramps. The purpose of this project is to reduce traffic congestion on Belt line Road (reliever road or Belt Line by-pass).
This project will benefit the bus routes on Belt Line Road by reducing congestion. This is our number 3 priority project for this program. While we would like a 10% match from Dallas
County, we realize this would put pressure on a.vailable funds. If it would help.secure' funding, the Town would be willing to contribute 95% to the project. We believe this project
will reduce traffic on Belt Line Road and will therefore reduce accidents on Belt Line Road by 15%. Total Project Cost: Right-of-way Cost: EngineeringlDesign Cost: Utility Cost: Construction
Construction Cost: PROJECTCOSTINFORMATION $14,328,120 $ 3,180,000 $ 1,230,000 $ 289,200 $ 9,628,920 Local Cost Contribution: $ in percent of total cost 90 %
2000 Dallas County Call For Projects APPLICATIONINFORMATION Submitting Agency: Contact Person: Address: Telephone: e-mail address: Town of Addison Jim Pierce, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
P.O. Box 9010 Addison 972/450-2879 jpierce@ci.addison.tx.us PROJECTINFORMATION TX Facsimile: 75001-9010 972/450-2834 Functional Classification: # of Correctable Accidents: (over past
3 years) Location: Beginning: Ending: Through lanes Left tum lanes Right tum lanes Sidewalks Bicycle lanes Belt Line Road Marsh Ln. Quorum Dr. R64 Existing 311 Yo MAPSCO: 13 D, 14 A,
B, C Project Length: 1.7 miles Avg. Posted Speed: 40 mph Avg. Operating Speed: 12 mph Traffic Volume: 59,380 Traffic Volume Source: Count 8/99 Proposed 311 Yo Descri tion of Pro osed
1m rovement s): This project provides for retiming the existing 17 year old coordinated signal system along Belt Line Road from Marsh Lane to Quorum Drive. Timing plans for the AM, PM,
Off-Peak, and Friday PM Peak periods will be prepared for teach intersection. The signal hardware at each intersection will be upgraded to include video detection, TS-2 cabinets, and
TS-2 controllers. Additional phone drops will also be installed to provide a communications link to the traffic service center. Existing hardwire interconnect cables will be used to
maintain communication between the signal controllers. Associated work will include installation of new conduit and wiring I at each intersection. The existing power source foe each
location will be used. For this section of road, we have had a total of 429 accidents in the last 3 years. We believe retiming will improve traffic flow, and we estimate accidents will
be reduced b 15%. . . Total Project Cost: Right-of-way Cost: Engineering/Design Cost: Utility Cost: Construction Cost: PROJECT COSTINFORMATION $700,000 $ 0 . $ 90,000 $ ° $610,000 Local
Cost Contribution: $ in percent of total cost 50 %
2000 Dallas County CaD For Projects APPLICATIONINFORMATION Submitting Agency: Contact Person: Address: Telephone: e-mail address: Town of Addison Jim Pierce, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
P.O. Box 9010 Addison 972/450-2879 jpierce@ci.addison.tLus PROJECTINFORMATION TX Facsimile: 75001-9010 972/450-2834 Functional Classification: R # of Correctable Accidents: 21 (over
past 3 years) Location: Beginning: Ending: Through lanes Left turn lanes Right turn lanes Sidewalks Bicycle lanes Midway Road Spring Valley Road Dooley Road Existing 311o° MAPSCO: 14K,
F & B; 4X Project Length: 1.75 miles Avg. Posted Speed: 40 mph Avg. Operating Speed: 16.8 mph Traffic Volume: 51,074 Traffic Volume Source: Count 8/99 Proposed 311o o Description of
Proposed Improvement(s): This project provides for retiming the existing 14 year old coordinated signal system along Midway Road from Spring Valley Road to Dooley Road. Timing plans
for the AM, PM, Off-Peak, and Friday PM Peak periods will be prepared for each intersection. The signal signal hardware at each intersection wiD be upgraded to include video detection,
TS-2 cabinets, -and TS-2 controllers. Additional phone drops will also be installed to provide a communications link to the traffic service center. Existing hardwire interconnect cables
wiD be used to maintain communication between the signal controlJers. Associated work wiD include installation of new conduit and wiring at each intersection. The existing power source
for each location will be used. For this section of road, we have had a total of 141 accidents in the last 3 years. We believe retiming will improve traffic flow, and we estimate accidents
will be reduced by 15%. -Total Project Cost: Right-of-way Cost: EngineeringlDesign Cost: Utility Cost: Construction Cost: PROJECTCOSTINFORMATION $392,000 $ 0 $ 52,000 $ 0 $340,000 Local
Cost Contribution: $ in percent of total cost 50 %
) Jim Pierce From: Sent: To: Cc: SUbject: Jim Pierce . Friday, February 18, 2000 9:10 AM Michael Murphy Jim Pierce FW: Projects Mike: FYI. Alan is a contact with Dallas Public Works
-he put in their TEA-21 applications and is working on the Dallas County call for projects. Lets discuss. Jim. -----Original Message-----From: Alan Hendrix [mailto:AHendrix@pbw.ci.dallas.tx.us]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2000 8:35 AM To: jpierce@ci.addison.tx.us Cc: JAntebi@pbw.ci.dallas.tx.us; JBrunk@pbw.ci.dallas.tx.us Subject: Projects Jim, Per our telephone conversation,
I am forwarding the information you requested. We had two projects on Beltline approved for funding in TEA 21. They are as follows: Beltline from DNT to Preston -Widen existing 6 lane
to divided roadway to 8 lane divided EB to Preston and WB from Preston to E. of Prestonwood. Estimated total cost $2.4 million. Federal funds approved $1,403,880. City of Dallas and
Dallas County will each provide a 20% local match. Beltline at Preston -Add a WB free right turn turn lane. Estimated total cost $400,000. Federal funds approved $240,000. City of Dallas
and TXDOT will each provide a 20% local match. At this time, the following two projects are being recommended by staff for submittal to Dallas County in their call for projects. These
projects have not yet been given the official nod by each respective councilmember nor have they been officially blessed by the entire city council. Arapaho from Knoll Trail to Dallas
Parkway -Widen existing 6 lane divided roadway to 8 lane divided roadway and widen bridge over DNT to accommodate the widened roadway. Dallas Parkway from Westgrove to Trinity Mills
-Widen existing parkway by adding one 12' lane in the northbound 􀁤􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 only. The Arapaho project will be a joint project if both your project and our project are selected.
Would Addison consider submitting the widening of the southbound Dallas Parkway from Trinity Mills to Westgrove? Please let me know if you have questions or need additional information.
Thanks, Alan 1 M4t1/l 2' t.f-b 70 -'+21,.2..
2000 Dallas County Call For Projects APPLICATIONINFORMATION Submitting Agency: Contact Person: Address: Telephone: e-mail address: Town of Addison Jim Pierce, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
P.O. Box 9010 Addison 972/450-2879 jpierce@ci.addison.tLus PROJECT INFORMATION TX Facsimile: 75001-9010 972/450-2834 Location: Beginning: Ending: Functional Classification: # of Correctable
Accidents: (over past 3 years) Existing Through lanes Left turn lanes Right turn lanes Sidewalks Bicycle lanes Description of Proposed Improvement(s): MAPSCO: Project Length: Avg. Posted
Speed: Avg. Operating Speed: Traffic Volume: Traffic Volume Source: Proposed PROJECT COSTINFORMATION Total Project Cost: $ Right-of-way Cost: $ Engineering/Design Cost: $ Utility Cost:
$ Construction Cost: $ Local Cost Contribution: $ in percent of total cost %
) CITY OF DALLAS February 25, 2000 JAMES C. PIERCE JR. P.O. BOX 9010 ADDISON TX 75001 RE: Public Information Request # 2000-0148 Dear Mr. Pierce: The Records Section received payment
of the following amount: $34.67. Enclosed you will find the following information you requested under the Public Information Act: CRIME STATISTICS Ifwe may be of further assistance,
please feel free to contact me at (214) 670-5604. Sincerely, -􀁾􀀱􀁲􀀵􀀢 1A#1=. frcj r4. /Yl 􀁾􀁴􀁴􀁣􀀭􀀼􀁲 \' . It 􀀢􀀳􀀭􀀦􀀢􀁾 􀁳􀀮􀁲􀁾 􀁾􀁥􀀮 􀁾 /)CI-t. -£k 􀁷􀀭􀁩􀁊􀀮􀀮􀁊􀁾􀀮 􀀨􀁍􀀭􀁁􀀮􀁰􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮
􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀭 A.,:) .􀁾 􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾 􀁾 􀁾􀀯􀁕􀁾􀀭􀁦􀁳 􀁾􀁾 2.1," 4'1-􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁾 􀀭􀀱􀀴􀀱􀀭􀁍􀁾􀂭 􀀮􀁾􀀬􀁾'-􀀮􀁑􀁊􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀧 􀁲􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀴􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀭􀁌􀁴 k)M) 􀁾􀀭 M..􀁾 .-, . l'
"" POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE AND COURTS BUILDING DALLAS, TEXAS 75201-5203 Db 􀁾􀀢 TERRELL BOLTON CHIEF OF POLICE SJN2781.(11·318 POL·OO152
Log Number 20000148 Dallas Police Department Records Section Open Record Charges and Fees Date Printed 02/02/2000 Reguestee Information: PIERCE, JR., JAMES C. P. O. BOX 9010 ADDISON,
TX 75001 The following costs are associated with the preparation of the attached document(s) pursuant to an Open Records Act request. These costs are in compliance with City of Dallas
Administrative Directive 2-9 which deals with information subject to public disclosure. REPRODUCTION CHARGES ITEM Sheet Copies Cassette Tapes Video Tapes Offense Reports Accident Reports
911 Call Sheets ' Arrest Reports Prosecution Reports DWI Blood Test Results lAD Resumes Photographs: 3 X 5 5 X 7 8 X 10 RESEARCH AND REVIEW REVIEWER RATE @$ .10 page @$1.00 each @$2.50
each @$ .10 page @$4.00 each @$ .10 page @$ .10 page @$ .10 page no charge @$ .10 page @$ .38 each @$ .80 each @$2.25 each RATE NUMBER 9ooooooooo ooo Sub-Total===»$ TIME COST 0.90 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.90 COST Personnel charge for Research ** *$ 0.00 0.0 0.00 Postal Fee Crime Analysis/programming ADDITIONAL FEES Description of
fees $16.50/hour 2.0 33.00 Sub-Total===»$ 33.00 COST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.77 Sub-Total===»$ 0.77 Amount of Deposit: $ 0.00 Grand Total »» $ 34.67 * (Actual cost but not more than $15.00
per hour.) ** (Twenty percent overhead applied to personnel charge for research)
1>1/31/,2000 09:10 Dallas Police Department OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES Report Definition Summary Title Display Order Database
in Use Data Group in Use Orientation Report Subset Last Edit Date Last Run Date Report TypeNumber of OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO
97000804 MAIN CRASHES Environment 97000803 01/31/2000 09:10 01/31/2000 09:10 List Variables Defined : 5 Variable Description Column Width Sum 􀁾 Crash Number 1 12 YES YES Time 2 4 YES
YES Date 3 6 YES YES Primary Street 4 23 YES YES Manner of Collision 5 20 YES YES LEVEL 1 Subset Definition Title ALL CRASHES DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO Display
Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date OR 2000-0148 97000803 MAIN CRASHES 97000000 ALL DATES 01/31/2000 01/31/2000 08:54
08:54 llEnvironment ll Records IIDriverII Records "Non-Driver" Records [Searched] 32707 64709 28004 28004 [Matched] 12 25 12 [Not Matched] ********** oo Variable Variable Variable Beginning
Group ID Name Value Environment a Crash Number < Equal To > Environment b Block Number 14000 Environment c Primary Street < Equal To > Environment d Reference Location < Equal To > Environment
e Date 01/01/1997 Environment f Manner of Collision [\] Missing Driver/Vehicleg Direction of Travel [\] Missing Environment h Time 0000 Environment i Primary Street < Equal To > Environment Reference Location < Equal To > IIIFII Statement (a AND bAND c AND d AND
e AND f AND g AND h) OR (i AND j) Ending Value Missing 15400 DALLAS PKWY BELT LINE RD 12/31/1997 [0] Unknown or N/A [0] Unknown or N/A 1200 DALLAS PKWY ARAPAHO RD ------------------------------------
----------------LEVEL 2 Subset Definition -----------------------------------------------------Title Display Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last
Edit Date Last Run Date All Crashes 1997 97000000 MAIN CRASHES ROOT DATABASE 01/01/1997 -12/12/31/1997 11/09/1999 17:14 11/09/1999 17:51 "Environment II Records IIDriverII Records IlNon-Driverll
Records [Searched] 32707 64709 28004 [Matched] 32707 64709 28004 [Not Matched] ********** oo Variable Group Variable ID Variable Name Beginning Value IIIFII Statement Ending Value -------------------
---------------------------------Report Definition Complete-----------------------------------------------------
01/31/2000 09:10 Dallas Police Department OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES Report Includes DETAIL and SUMMARY Information SUMMARY
Follows for All Variables: ( Left Column => VALUE Right Column => FREQUENCY Column 1 (KEY) Summary ==> Crash Number 134381F 1 135980F 1 284525F 1 365282F 1 367266F 1 400145F 1 677905F
1 735034F 1 802206F 1 908989F 1 982882F 1 1037766F 1 Column 2 (KEY) Summary ==> Time Page: 2 ORIENTATION: Environment 0000-0059 Hours 0900-0959 Hours 1000-1059 Hours 1100-1159 Hours
1200-1259 Hours 1400-1459 Hours 1500-1559 Hours 1600-1659 Hours 1900-1959 Hours 2100-2159 Hours 2200-2259 Hours 11111121· 111 Column 3 (KEY) Summary ==> Date 02/14/1997 2 04/01/1997
1 04/27/1997 1 04/28/1997 1 05/09/1997 1 08/12/1997 1 09/02/1997 1 09/27/1997 1 11/06/1997 1 12/05/1997 1 12/27/1997 1 Column 4 (KEY) Summary ==> Primary Street DALLAS PKWY 12 Column
5 (KEY) Summary ==> Manner of Collision Ang-Both Straight Sam-Both Strt,R-End Sam-Both Strt,S-Swip Sam-#l l Strt,#2 Stop Sam-#l Strt,#2 Right Opp-#l Strt,#2 Left [1] [11] [12] [13] [14]
[25] 411213
Page: 1 of 1 ORIENTATION: Environment K5 Opp-#l Strt.#2 Left Opp-#l Strt.#2 Left Sam-#l Strt.#2 Stop Sam-#l Strt.#2 Right Sam-#l Strt.#2 Stop Ang-Both Straight Ang-Both Straight Sam-Both
Strt,S-Swip Opp-#l Strt.#2 Left Ang-Both Straight Sam-Both Strt,R-End Ang-Both Straight PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS
DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS Police' Department PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES DETAIL and SUMMARY Information 􀁾 K4 021497 021497 040197 042797
042897 050997 081297 090297 092797 110697 120597 122797 ) Report Includes K2 0920 1935 1525 1420 1000 1521 2110 1135 1242 0020 2220 1610 K1 134381F 135980F 284525F 365282F 367266F 400145F
677905F 735034F 802206F 908989F 982882F 1037766F Dallas OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS 1>1/31/.2000 09:10 12 Records Processed
61/31/02000 09:40 .) Dallas Police Department OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES Report Definition Summary Title Display Order Database
in Use Data Group in Use Orientation Report Subset Last Edit Date Last Run Date Report TypeNumber of OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO
98000804 MAIN CRASHES Environment 98000804 01/31/2000 09:40 01/31/2000 09:40 List Variables Defined : 5 Variable Description Column Width Sum 􀁾 Crash Number 1 12 YES YES Time 2 4 YES
YES Date 3 6 YES YES Primary Street 4 23 YES YES Manner of Collision 5 20 YES YES LEVEL 1 Subset Definition Title ALL CRASHES DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO Display
Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date OR 2000-0148 98000804 MAIN CRASHES 98000000 ALL DATES 01/31/2000 01/31/2000 09:35
09:35 IIEnvironment ll Records IIDriverII Records lINon-Driverll Records [Searched] 33647 66947 28263 [Matched] 10 19 6 [Not Matched] oo Variable Variable Variable Beginning Group --.fQ
Name Value Environment a Crash Number < Equal To Environment b Block Number 14000 Environment c Primary Street < Equal To > Environment d Reference Location < Equal To > Environment
e Date 01/01/1998 Environment f Manner of Collision [\] Missing Driver/Vehicle g Direction of Travel [\] Missing Environment h Time 0000 Environment i Primary Street < Equal To > Environment
Reference Location < Equal To > IIIFII Statement (a AND b AND c AND d AND e AND f AND g AND h) OR (i AND j) Ending Value Missing 15400 DALLAS PKWY BELT LINE RD 12/31/1998 [0] Unknown
or N/A [0] Unknown or N/A 1200 DALLAS PKWY ARAPAHO RD LEVEL 2 Subset Definition -----------------------------------------------------Title Display Order Database in Use Data Group in
Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date All Crashes 1998 98000000 MAIN CRASHES ROOT DATABASE 01/01/1998 -12/31/1998 11/05/1999 11:23 11/09/1999 17:16 "Environment
ll Records IIDriver ll Records IINon-Driver" Records [Searched] 33647 66947 28263 [Matched] 33647 66947 28263 [Not Matched] ********** oo Variable Group Variable --.fQ Variable Name
Beginning Value "IF" Statement Ending Value ----------------------------------------------------Report Definition Complete-----------------------------------------------------
Page: 1 of 1 ORIENTATION: Environment K5 Sam-#l Strt,#2 Right Opp-#l Strt,#2 Left Ang-Both Straight Sam-Both Strt,R-End Sam-Both Strt,S-Swip Sam-Both Strt,S-Swip Ang-Both Straight Ang-Both
Straight Sngl-Moving Straight Sam-Both Strt,R-End PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS K3 010298 031598
032698 030598 041198 042198 043098 050598 081398 100198 􀁾1729 1905 1500 1430 1543 1812 1115 1829 0820 1910 5492G 185950G 214299G 242140G 258505G 286814G 310309G 325967G 604943G 737165G
Kl Dallas Police Department OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES Report Includes DETAIL and SUMMARY Information K4 \)1/31/,2000 09:40
10 Records Processed
􀁾􀀱􀀯􀀳􀀱􀀨􀀲􀀰􀀰􀀰 09:40 Dallas Police Department Page: 2 OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES ORIENTATION: Environment Report Includes
DETAIL and SUMMARY Information SUMMARY Follows for All Variables: ( Left Column => VALUE Right Column => FREQUENCY Column 1 (KEY) Summary ==> Crash Number 5492G 1 185950G 1 214299G 1
242140G 1 258505G 1 286814G 1 310309G 1 325967G 1 604943G 1 737165G 1 Column 2 (KEY) Summary ==> Time 0800-0859 Hours 1100-1159 Hours 1400-1459 Hours 1500-1559 Hours 1700-1759 Hours
1800-1859 Hours 1900-1959 Hours 1112122 Column 3 (KEY) Summary ==> Date 01/02/1998 1 03/05/1998 1 03/15/1998 1 03/26/1998 1 04/11/1998 1 04/21/1998 1 04/30/1998 1 05/05/1998 1 08/13/1998
1 10/01/1998 1 Column 4 (KEY) Summary ==> Primary Street DALLAS PKWY 10 Column 5 (KEY) Summary ==> Manner of Collision Ang-Both Straight Sam-Both Strt,R-End Sam-Both Strt,S-Swip Sam-#l
Strt,#2 Right Opp-#l Strt,#2 Left Sngl-Moving Straight [1] [ll] [12] [14] [25] [39] 322111
D1/31J2000 10:03 Title Display Order Database in Use Data Group in Use Orientation Report Subset Last Edit Date Last Run Date Report TYpeNumber of Dallas Police Department Report Definition
Summary OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY" & ARAPAHO 99000805
MAIN CRASHES Environment 99000805 01/31/2000 10:03 01/31/2000 10:03 List Variables Defined : 5 Variable Description Column Width Sum 􀁾 Crash Number 1 12 YES YES Time 2 4 YES YES Date
3 6 YES YES Primary Street 4 23 YES YES Manner of Collision 5 20 YES YES LEVEL 1 Subset Definition Title ALL CRASHES DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO Display Order
Database in Use Data Group in Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date OR 2000-0148 99000805 MAIN CRASHES 99000000 ALL DATES 01/31/2000 01/31/2000 09:56 09:58
IIEnvironment ll Records IIDriver ll Records "Non-Driver" Records [Searched] 31352 62358 26850 26850 [Matched] 816 5 [Not Matched] ********** oo Variable Variable Variable Beginning
Group ID Name Value Environment a Crash Number < Equal To > Environment b Block Number 14000 Environment c Primary Street < Equal To > Environment d Reference Location < Equal To > Environment
e Date 01/01/1999 Environment f Manner of Collision [\] Missing Driver/Vehicle g Direction of Travel [\] Missing Environment h Time 0000 Environment i Primary Street < Equal To > Environment
Reference Location < Equal To > IlIFlI Statement (a AND b AND c AND d AND e AND f AND g AND h) OR (i AND" j) Ending Value Missing 15400 DALLAS PKWY BELT LINE RD 12/31/1999 [0] Unknown
or N/A [0] Unknown or N/A 1200 DALLAS PKWY ARAPAHO RD LEVEL 2 Subset Definition -----------------------------------------------------Title Display Order Database in Use Data Group in
Use Parent Subset Pre-Subset Dates Last Edit Date Last Run Date All Crashes 1999 99000000 MAIN CRASHES ROOT DATABASE 01/01/1999 -12/31/1999 11/03/1999 17:03 01/12/2000 10:18 "Environment
ll Records IIDriverll Records IINon-Driver ll Records . [Searched] 31352 62358 26850 [Matched] 31352 62358 26850 [Not Matched] oo Variable Group Variable ID Variable Name Beginning Value
"IF" Statement Ending Value ----------------------------------------------------Report Definition Complete-----------------------------------------------------
Page: 1 of 1 ORIENTATION: Environment K5 Sngl-Moving Straight Ang-Both Straight Ang-Both Straight Sam-Both Strt,S-Swip Ang-Both Straight Ang-Both Straight Sam-#1 Strt,#2 Stop Ang-#1
Strt,#2 Stop PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY PKWY DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS DALLAS 􀁾031299 050799 051999 061499 063099 091299 100999 121099 -.B...2200 1730
1728 1747 1530 0200 0910 1450 Kl 174089H 324719H 359827H 434792H 478935H 682997H 755433H 921020H Dallas Police Department OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS
PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES Report Includes DETAIL and SUMMARY Information K4 '01/3J!/2000 10:03 8 Records Processed
'01/32/2000 10:03 Dallas Police Department Page: 2 OR 2000-0148 ALL CRASHES AT DALLAS PKWY & BELT LINE RD AND DALLAS PKWY & ARAPAHO CRASHES ORIENTATION: Environment Report Includes DETAIL
and SUMMARY Information SUMMARY Follows for All Variables: ( Left Column => VALUE Right Column => FREQUENCY Column 1 (KEY) Summary ==> Crash Number 174089H 1 324719H 1 359827H 1 434792H
1 478935H 1 682997H 1 755433H 1 921020H 1 Column 2 (KEY) Summary ==> Time 0200-0259 Hours 0900-0959 Hours 1400-1459 Hours 1500-1559 Hours 1700-1759 Hours 2200-2259 Hours 111131 Column
3 (KEY) Summary ==> Date 03/12/1999 1 05/07/1999 1 05/19/1999 1 06/14/1999 1 06/30/1999 1 09/12/1999 1 10/09/1999 1 12/10/1999 1 Column 4 (KEY) Summary ==> Primary Street DALLAS PKWY
8 Column 5 (KEY) Summary ==> Manner of Collision Ang-Both Straight Ang-#l Strt,#2 Stop Sam-Both Strt,S-Swip Sam-#l Strt,#2 Stop Sngl-Moving Straight [1] [3] [12] [13] [39] 41111
Jim Pierce From: Sent: To: Cc: .Subject: Alan Hendrix [AHendrix@pbw.cLdallas.tx.us] Thursday, February 24, 2000 5:03 PM jpierce@ci.addison.tx.us JBrunk@pbw.ci.dallas.tx.us Dallas County
Call for Projects I just wanted to let you know we will not be submitting a project to Dallas County on Arapaho at this time. The councilmember for that district, Ms. Finkelman, felt
there was a greater need to widen Alpha than Arapaho. We will still be submitting a project on the NB Dallas Parkway from Westgrove to Trinity Mills. 1
#2a -#2b -#2c-#2d -#2e -#2f -#2g -#2h -CONSENT AGENDA Approval of the Minutes for the February 8, 2000, and February 15, 2000, Council Meetings. Award a contract for services in an amount
not to exceed $27,500 to Don Paschal for airport operator contract development services. Award a contract for services in an amount not to exceed $51,000 to Deloitte & Touche for airport
operator contract development services. Award of the purchase of services in the amount of $25,860.50 to Paradigm Traffic Systems, Inc., for rebuilding and replacing signal equipment.
Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to renew the agreement with Mr. Pat Haggerty to provide consulting services associated with land, ROW, and easement acquisitions.
Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit applications for five public works projects for funding through the Dallas County Major Capital Improvement Thoroughfare
Program. Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an an easement agreement with Southwestern Bell Telephone. Award of purchase of services in the amount
of $17,000 to Dallas Backup, Inc. for stage and sound for Taste Addison. City Council Agenda 02-22-00
Cell:B18 Comment: BEGINNING--For linear projects, enter the point of beginning; for intersections, enter the cross-street Cell:F18 Comment: PROJECT LENGTH--Length in miles. For intersections,
enter 0.00 Cell: B19 Comment: ENDING--For intersections, enter NIA Cell: F19 Comment: AVG POSTED SPEED--For corridors with more than one speed limit, the average posted speed (in miles
per hours) is the weighted average of the posted speeds. For intersections, enter "N/A" Cell: F20 Comment: AVG OPERATING SPEED--Operating speed at period of peak demand, in miles per
hours, calculated by dividing the length of the project by the time required (in hours) to traverse the projects. Cell: B21 Comment: 1999 REGIONAL THOROUGHFARE PLAN FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION-F
(Freeway) R (Regional Arterial) o (Other Arterial) N (Not on Regional Thoroughfare Plan) Cell: F21 Comment: TRAFFIC VOLUME--The average daily traffic (adt) of the facility to be improved.
For new roadway facilities, enter "N/A" /-VJ-oo Cell:B22 Comment: NUMBER OF CORRECTABLE ACCIDENTS--number of accidents over that past three that probably would not have occurred had
the proposed improvements been in place Cell: F22 Comment: TRAFFIC VOLUME SOURCE--The source of traffic volume information. For estimates, enter "Estimate"; for real world data, enter
"Count" and the month and year of the count. Cell:B25 Comment: THROUGH LANES--For corridors, use the minimum number of through lanes in both directions anywhere within the project limits.
For example, a roadway that at its narrowest provides for one lane of through traffic in each direction would be encoded as "2". Note that dual left tum lanes or auxiliary lanes are
not included. CFor intersections, use the maximum number of lanes available for through traffic for the direction fJ. I.D . with the minimum number of lanes, including shared lanes.
For example, an intersection that 􀁾 provides for 3 through or shared Ithrough lanes in one direction but only two in the other would be encoded as "2". Note that exclusive turn lanes
are not included in this count. 􀁾􀁷􀁊􀁾􀀵 7
Jim Pierce From: Sent: To: Subject: Joni Ramsey Friday, January 28,20001:18 PM Jim Pierce FW: ACCIDENTS Hope this is what you needed. Let me know if we can be any further help! -----Original
Message-----From: Louise Calvillo Sent: Friday, January 28, 2000 12:40 PM To: Joni Ramsey Subject: ACCIDENTS 5000 BELT LINE RD 1997 26 5 C'" ., 1998 33 0 l; 1999 23 2000 1 TOTAL 83 5000
ARAPAHO RD 1997 3 1998 0 1999 1 2000 0 TOTAL 4 3698 -4998 BELT LINE RD (QUORUM -MARSH) 1997 137J 1998 146 4JJf 1999 146 2000 14 TOTAL 443 3D 0: 􀁉􀁉􀁾 ".+-.l 􀀢􀁝􀀩􀁾􀁉􀁬􀁾 13800 -15798
MIDWAY RD (SPRING VALLEY -DOOLEY) 1997 53] 1998 47 ., ttl 1999 41 2000 2 TOTAL 143 1
;:\) Jim Pierce From: Sent: To: SUbject: Jim Pierce Monday, February 28, 2000 3:45 PM Michael Murphy Dallas County District No. 'I Boundaries Cathy Ways asked for District boundaries
the other night -1don't have a map, but the cities in District No. 1 are: (North) Dallas, the Park Cities, Irving, Farmers Branch, Coppell, Carrollton, Addison, and Richardson. That's
our "competition" for the County Call for Projects. Jim Pierce, P.E. Assistant City Engineer PO Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 972-450-2879 1
;::..•
-: II . ---.J. . I􀁾 )j.1t? 􀁾􀁊􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁪􀁐􀁾􀁾􀁾 ---·.1_¥--􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭-__.I􀁾􀁾􀁙􀀽􀁟􀀱􀀡􀁊􀁟􀁾 -.-.-.-..-.-----'j.l. '.' 􀀮􀁾􀁁􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭 .---.---.------.--.--.-----.---
-.-..---.--.-.--.-.-------.... -.. -··--·-·--· .. -.l.·•. 􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀭􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁭􀀭􀀺􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀺􀁌􀀭􀀽􀀭 􀁾_L 􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟 --.--.------l: ----..-..-.--..􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭 _--.-..__.----..----............-....··--wJd-----'.--...􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭 .. --'1' --. 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭 '... -' -'---.•􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀱􀀱􀀭􀂷􀀮􀂷�
�􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁉􀀡􀀧􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾 l _. .. jd"J'j /) -1-:' ---􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁟_--------_-....... --iii 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀧 '. 􀁾􀁾 . 􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁬􀁪􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁟􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀂷􀀢􀁾􀀽
􀂷􀀢􀁟􀂷􀁾􀁾􀂷􀀽􀀭􀂷􀀽􀁾􀂷􀂷 . III 􀀮􀁴􀁦􀀻􀁾􀁤􀁩􀀷􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀽􀀽􀁾 __-... . !ll III 􀁾􀁾 /J{A 􀁾􀁾 .􀂷􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀭􀂷􀂥􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀢􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁾􀀭 .• -􀁾 i jl _ ............._
_ _ _._.. _. ...., _ __ __." , .. __.._ _ _ _ __ __ .. __ .. '"_. ......... ."... .: . 􀁶􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁫􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾 ..􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀮 III 􀁾􀁆􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁢􀁾 d. " /,.., 􀁾 . III
􀁐􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷􀀫􀀱􀀧􀀭􀀼􀀭
l!Il --{ 􀁾􀀭 􀁾􀁾􀀰􀁾􀀭􀀭􀂷􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀁟􀀭􀁾􀀭 .---.􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 􀁾􀀽􀁪􀁒􀁥􀁬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁮􀁦􀁫􀁟􀁪􀂣􀁊􀁫􀂷􀀭 􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀽􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀁾􀁾•••􀁾•••.••..-......
􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀷􀁊􀀻􀀽􀁾􀁾 􀁌􀁊􀁌􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀱􀁉􀁊􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀻􀂷􀀮􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀮􀁾􀁾 􀁣􀀭􀁾􀁾 􀁌􀀱􀁾 _ 􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁬􀂷 .•􀁾.•..􀀭􀀭􀂥􀁊􀀭􀀭􀁩􀁟􀁬􀀮􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾-􀀭-.-􀀮􀁟.--􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾••􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁣􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀽�
� ••_ 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 ..t:;;2 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭 􀀽􀀽􀀮􀀭􀂷􀁬􀂷􀀭􀀽􀀽􀁈􀀽􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁟 􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭__. 􀀭􀁟􀁮􀁾􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀽􀀮􀀭􀂷 j *' _ -==
:::sat-􀂷􀂷􀀭􀂷􀀭􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀭􀂷􀂷􀀭􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁩􀀮􀀧􀀭 -􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁦􀁁.:=-77--...---. ......------.. -------.-----OJ 􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 ..----------.---.-.---.-..--..---􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀮�
�􀀭􀀭􀂷􀁲􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁦􀀧􀀼􀁬􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀭 __ ---.-.-.---.--.------.-.-. (1..---.----. ··------Ir-····...0--􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭 -----.. -.-e--·--·__··-_· -..-.--.-.-.. -. .-.--_-._--.-.-.-.-.
. ..-... .--..-. ----.......---. 􀁾􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁾 .__ ._. I-􀀲􀀭􀁊􀀭􀁾 􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀁗􀁾 . ._._--􀁾􀀽􀂮􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀴􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁩􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀽 I 􀁾􀁻􀁑􀀽􀀧􀀭􀁾 l4 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁴 􀁾􀁟􀀽 !J
􀀮􀀭􀁾􀁌􀀮􀀭􀀭 .....A:CQ--.=􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁟•􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀽􀀮􀁾􀀽􀀽 I 􀁦􀁯􀁳􀁦􀁾􀀱 􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁃􀀱 --.... -------'---·----··_·-------1 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭 ---"-----.-----------.
----.-' ----.---------..􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭 -.----.--,.-... ',-----,--'.-_..._._--_. .---. -----..---.---..-----------.---. --.-...---...-----..-.-....􀀢􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭�
�􀀭􀀮 -,.-._ .____􀀮􀁾 . 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁦􀀡􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 _. .___ .__ .._.___ . __ •􀀽􀁲􀁊􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁑􀁦􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀭􀁩􀁴􀁾􀀭􀀮􀁾􀁾• 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 􀀭􀀭􀀬􀁩􀁊􀀡􀀺􀁤􀁾􀁴􀁦􀀺􀀵􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁾
􀁾
ell :;. i ·HI rIHi! l!l lJ] lit ii, j j 􀁾 IJI .......---, ---tllrt-''.. -_ 􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀮__􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁟􀀬 􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀬..., 􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀮 __􀀬􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀬..􀁟􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁾 ..-..􀁟􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭
----.--.-.----􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭..-.-._._-_. .. .. . IiI . ._._. . 􀁾__. .__ __..􀁾􀀮􀁟.._ 􀁾 '.'"''''_''' 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀁾􀀭􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀁲􀁲􀁲 ....--.--.-.....--..---------..-.-.---..-..--J
j; 􀁾􀀫􀁴􀁴􀂷􀁟􀀭 .. 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀢 ..-li, --HItlt-􀁾 ; j H1 '--m
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾 􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀁾 n1; Ii Iii I􀁾 ---------------------It􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀩􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾 􀁾 _ 􀀭􀁬􀁲􀁴􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 --------􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁦􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ---------------w ...._--􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾
-------------􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀴􀁬􀁾􀀺􀁨􀁬􀀱􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀭 11------􀀷􀀨􀀮􀀭􀁴􀁴􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾 I 􀁾 _ --------------------.------
--------------------􀀮----􀁾0--􀀮---------------------------
􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂭 'J -0·---··_·-􀀱􀀱􀁾 . 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 􀀮􀁟􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭
/Z :5,1'f-. '\) 􀀮􀂷􀁚􀀱􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁌􀀻􀁾􀀻􀁴􀁾􀀭􀁦􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁭􀀻􀁹􀁾􀁬􀀭􀀭􀀽••.􀁾􀂷•....•.••••••.. 􀀶􀀬􀁾􀁴􀀺􀀭 􀁪􀁾􀁺􀁾􀁲􀀮􀀨􀁧 ·Qm;Y1 ... 11,0rrttA . 􀁨􀀡􀀮􀁉􀁾􀁴􀀢 .. /' 􀁺􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀮 􀀴􀁾􀀹􀀬􀁾􀀱􀁾
J1,Q /1'Lyh. ..􀁦􀁩􀁟􀁱􀁾__t.. 􀁬􀁬􀁟􀁾􀀮 __ ., .. 􀁟􀀿􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀯􀁾􀀮 ,,,_._-JZ·Q .....􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀮
, II􀁾􀁉􀁊 JI _ _____􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁟􀀭􀀫􀀫􀀫􀀭􀀭􀁉 􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀀾 ._ E. ! 􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀭􀀡􀀭􀁾􀀦􀁊􀁲􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁇􀀭 􀀽􀁾__􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁌􀁾 ---.----.-.--.-i -------'-----_._--------------------_.._---_._-_.--,.._--.__.
_..-􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁾 I ---􀁾 􀀶􀁾􀀭􀀬 _ --􀀧􀁟􀁾􀀱􀁌􀁂􀁟􀀻􀁊0 i l _ , tV 􀀸􀀢􀁾􀁜 , 5 r; yo-;/, ----------.-.-.------􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀭-----------.L.!..)-._._.,... 􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁌􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀮__
,0. 􀀬􀁾􀀯 '. _' , ' . . I --------+t+--__􀁾􀁟I 􀀭􀀭􀁁􀁾􀁦􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀧􀀦􀁕􀁬􀁌􀁜􀁊􀀱􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁄􀁾􀀯􀁾 􀁉􀁾 . _ -----H+-----J_fL }Ytr__􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁟􀁾__N'CL .__. _ 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮 􀀺􀁟􀁾􀀽􀁟􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀿
􀀭􀀭􀀽􀁟􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁲􀀻 􀀵􀁾􀀻􀀺-______._ I 􀁟􀀯􀁾 􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀦􀁊􀀻􀁴􀁫􀀱􀀷􀁾􀀭􀁟􀁟􀀻􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁮􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭..􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀳􀁶􀀭 .. . 􀁾 a: 􀀮􀁟􀀽􀀭􀀽􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁪 􀁬􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀀯􀁩􀁩􀁾
􀀽 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽 􀁾􀀭􀁐􀁬􀁾􀀭 .---j\••􀁾􀂷􀀭􀁫􀁩􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁩􀁬􀀯􀀧􀁍􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀽 􀀮􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭 I .__.._._..--􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀮__.._--._-_....__ .... _-..__._._------_....
_---------_._-.._-_.-._._.. _-_..._------..__.__.----. .' 􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁾􀁾 􀁾 .._--------_..._------.-----::1I -·-·----··-----·------·· -------.---------.-----.----.--..--.-------.-.-.-.-.
-.--...---.--.-.-I ____. i L_______. .... .__._. .n.__._... . . . __ ..._.. ..__ ._.. _. __.. _ ._.. . _. ._.. ..iI -_-_ __. '-".-' -.. ---_.--"--" -__ __._---_.__. __.._ _-.-.. -.-"
._ _ -'-'-' .. _-_._ __ _ -_ .
􀁡􀁬􀀱􀁾􀁾 􀀭􀀭􀁾•• -. __ ••• -.< ...",••...• , .. 􀀬􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀭 •. """ --"., ",-_' .-•• -._ •• --_•••••-.--_.__ ••• .-_., •• 􀀬􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀮􀀬 •• ",,-_., .-----.--_.-• ••
􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀭 I! .. ) iI! I 􀁴􀁴􀁮􀁦􀁁􀀮􀀦􀁾 ------.-----.-----􀁾􀁴􀁟􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ---'C...f,L----.----􀀽􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾
􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀽 --! .---􀁎􀁂􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀮 '2£;>. .--------------------ri-------􀀽􀁩􀁥􀁬􀀧􀁾􀀱􀀮􀁌􀀭􀀭 /. __ -3 -fiuu--􀁾 􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀂷􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁬􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 /􀁾 􀀭􀁾􀀭 -------+--􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀨􀀭􀁾􀁾
􀁾􀀭 -----.! 􀁾􀁉􀁦􀁲􀀮􀀻􀀻􀀨 . I 􀁾 􀁾 ---11,, . ( -------:-. 􀀱􀁾􀀭􀂷􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀻􀁲􀁗􀀭􀂷􀂷􀀪􀀭􀂷􀂷.􀁾-􀀭. 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁩􀁲􀁾􀀿􀁊􀀮􀂣􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀭􀀭􀁟􀂷
􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀭􀁾􀁟􀀭􀀮_--_-.-__.-.--4+-1--1 1,.... 􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭..-.-----.-----.-􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁪􀁴􀀱􀀺􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾•.•=....􀁾• --. -=.---=-= _._._---.._-------_._._.__._.._._._-_..__.._-
_... __ .--..__._._---_._._------_.....----...---._--_.-._-_._-_._._.----_._..._-.-._------------_.._--._----------------􀁾 .----------ft----------.-------------.-...---------------.-----.-..
-------..----------:1 ._-_..._ ......._---..._._ .._----_... _.. _._-_._----_.--._-_.-ii 􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾 􀁲􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀽􀀽􀀽􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀽􀀭􀂷􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀭�
�􀀽􀀭􀀽 􀀮􀁾 _. L_... . . ._.__. ... .. .._ ..__..__. .. . .. _ , 􀁾􀁾Ii ---------_.------􀁾..._------------------_.-_.__..._.__._-._-----------_..._----_._---_ ..__._-_.----.._------_._--_._-----_..
.-. 􀁾􀁬 . 􀁾􀀺􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭.._--------------, --_ .. -------,---------------_ .._--_.__. 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 I . 􀁾 ..---.----.-:􀁾􀁴􀀺􀁾􀀭---.-.--------------....----.------.
--.-.--Ii--· -------. ...........---------.-.------------.------.---·--·r t-·--·-----------··--·--+􀁾􀀮
11 1IlIl . I -------11 -1; ___I <j----1 tIlI
._-.-----_._-------------􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ._-----------------_._--_.._---------•.. _._.... _-._...􀁟􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 i . , I I , --_.__ 􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟�
�􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭 -.---_. 􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀁾..._-.._-------_.,..._-'."--' ---_... ,----...__._._--_._-------. ,
DALLAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS TO: 􀁆􀁾􀁏􀁍􀀺 DATE: AIISt8kehp Donald L. olzwarth, P.E. Director of Public Works 􀁾􀀱 January 2000 SUBJECT: FY 2000 Call for Projects submittal extension
The submittal deadline of 4 PM February 21, 2000 as ,Indicated in our Invitation to submit dated 􀁏􀁾􀁣􀁥􀁭􀁢􀁥􀁲 21, 1999, has been changed to 4 PM Monday, 13 March 2000. This change
will prOvide an additional three weeks for the preparation of submittals. In order to accommodate the maintainance of the established time allocation of subsequent phases of the FY 2000
Call For Projects, all other deadlines have also been delayed three weekS. The changes In the schedule art' as follows: ' Mrf Submittal Deadlina p,.limlnary Evaluation Completed Cqmmentary
Deadline QJ.Q ,February 21, 2000 (4 PM) April 21. 2000 May 19, 2000 I!JE!Ii March 13, 2000 (4PM) May 12.2000 June 8,2000 If you nEled any assistance with your submIttal or If you have
any questions please contact Don Cranford or Michael Schrader at 214-653-7151. An "Excelu spreadsheet is available for use in your submittal. If you need a copy please call Michael.
, W, welcome and encourage you to submit 􀁉􀁮􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁭􀁡􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁮 concerning specific projects in addition to thit required on the submittal fonn. You may submit this added information
as a Microsoft Word document (our preference) or as hard copy only. AI!" SUbmittals must inclUde a hard copy of the required forms and any supporting lorOnnalloo, If electronic fonns
are submitted they should agree with the hard copy as the hard copy will be considered to be the official submittal. We hope the extension helps. 411 Elm Street, 4th Floor Oa/las. Texas
75202 (214) 653-7151 c::e"d
B"',# i. 􀁾􀁩. • '!r' . 01 . ,) DALLAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS ) FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION COVER SIIEE1" 􀁉􀀾􀁾􀁔􀁅􀀺 February 1, 􀁾􀁡􀁡􀁯 SENT BY: DALLAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS SENDER: Deb! Campagna
PHONE: 214..653-7151 FAX: 214..653-6445 TO . Public Works 􀁄􀁩􀁲􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁯􀁾􀀯􀁃􀁩􀁴􀁹 Manager FAX NUMBER: 􀁟􀁾􀁟􀁾 ------+--PHONE: '_._------------------..-..;...:-.._-----+--NUMBER OF
PAGES: 2_w/_c_o_ve_r_ COMMBN'TS: For your immediate attention -please call 214-653-7151 if 􀁹􀁯􀁾 have. any 􀁰􀁾􀁯􀁢􀀱􀁥􀁭􀁳 receiving this fax or have any questions concerning the information
􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁩􀁾􀁥􀁾􀀮 _._----------------_----:.._--+--Idle.fax 411 Elm Street Dallas, Texas 75202 65: -7' 10"d
CITY MANAGER .RECEiVED· ) DALLAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS 􀁊􀁾 012000 ASSISTANT· CITY MANAGER [􀀲􀀭􀀭􀁾3\􀀯􀁏􀀩􀀮􀁾 C Mr. Ron Whitehead, City Manager 􀁾11\ II Town of Addison -...J l V V
\ P.O. Box 9010 I I Addison, Texas 75001 . . . WlI\. -tr 􀁲􀁒􀁾 ," 􀀢􀁦􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁛 Re: Major Capital Improvement Fund Thoroughfare Program Call for Projects for Program y£ 2004 . December
21, 1999 Dear Ron, Dallas County is soliciting nominations from cities for projects to be funded through the Dallas County Major Capital Improvement Fund Thoroughfare Program. In lieu
of a traditional bond program, Dallas County has created the Major Capital Improvement Fund, a "pay-as-you go" funding mechanism for financing infrastructure improvements. An annual"Call
for Projects" will allow us more flexibility to focus on high priority projects and to assure that projects can be designed and constructed in a timely manner. Under this new funding
mechanism, approximately $15 million dollars will be available in both FY 2004 and 2005, with $20 million being available annually in FY 2006 and beyond, We are currently seeking nominations
for projects to be funded for construction in FY 2004. .All 􀁮􀁯􀁭􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁑􀁾􀁬􀁱􀁛􀀮􀁉􀁙􀀡􀀲􀁓􀀡􀁩􀁮􀀹􀁬􀀡􀀺􀁬 the FY 2004 program year must be submitted to Dallas County Public
Work y 4 PM on Pebl ad') 􀁾 2000 Evaluations of the FY 2004 submittals will be completed by Apri I 0, and ea h CI YWI e provided with the preliminary rankings of its own projects at
that time for commen and feedback, with 'comments due no later than May 19, 2000. Final project approval will be ompleted no later than June 13, 2000. Projects accepted for Program Year
2004 will begin i itial planning and design to allow award of the construction contract during FY 2004. 􀁷􀁾 411 Elm Street, 4th Floor Dallas, Texas 75202 (214) 653-7151
... ).' Call For Projects --2 Mike Cantrell District 2 \ We have included the evaluation criteria which will be used to rate the proposals. (Note that local cost participation is a key
element in the criteria.) If you have any questions about any aspects of the new MCIP or of this new methodology, we encourage you to contact us or Dallas County Public Works. cc: The
Hon. R. Scott Wheeler, Mayor John Baumgartner, Director of Public Works
) FY 2000 MAJOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM DALLAS COUNTY; Prepared Jointly by the Dallas County Department of PublicWorks and the North Central Texas Council of Governments Proposed Evaluation Methodology to Score and Rank Candidate Thoroughfare System Improvements INTRODUCTION In Fiscal Year 2000,
the Dallas County Commissioners Court is replacing its traditional bond-financing approach to funding infrastructure improvements with a programmed Major Capital Improvement Program.
The underlying theory of this new approach is that a project will take five years or less from approval of funding to initiating final construction, and that every year projects will
be authorized for funding and projects will be completed. Thus, in any given calendar year, there will always be projects in each of the various phases of implementation (Le. design,
right-of-way acquisition, construction), thereby allowing for the more efficient use of personnel and resources. In contrast, under the bond-financing method, all projects projects are
authorized at the same time and are constructed at the same time. This approach creates a project "wave"-initially, there is a flurry of design activity, and the necessity of design
resources; then, the wave passes to right-of-way acquisition, and the design resources become underutilized while right-of-way is bulked to handle the ''wave''; finally, the projects
pass to construction, creating the need to invest in construction-related resources, while the design and right-ofway resources are underutilized. With the new financing and programming
approach, the "project wave" is eliminated, and all project activities are occurring simultaneously (although not necessarily on the same project) and, more importantly, continuously.
Thus, valuable resources are always being utilized and the funds that previously would have needed to be expended on additional resources (as a result of the :'wave" effect) can instead
be devoted to infrastructure. This Program will be implemented by issuing an annual county-wide call for projects to identify and fund needed roadway improvements within the county,
with local governments submitting candidate projects for potential selection and funding under this program. An annual "Call-for-projects" is an improvement over the traditional method
of calling for projects every five years. The advantages of an annual call are twofold.. First, with fewer submittals per Call, the quality of submittals, both of the projects submitted
and the submittals themselves, will improve, as staffs will be able to devote more time per submittal. Second, an annual Call provides more flexibility for cities to determine infrastructure
needs based on changes that may have recently occurred or will soon be
) occurring, such as a new development or infrastructure, instead of trying to 􀁤􀁥􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁭􀁩􀁮􀁾􀂷􀂷 needs based on a conjecture of what might occur five years into the future, . .
EVALUATlON CRITERIA In order to evaluate candidate projects in an equitable and consistent manner,ten evaluation criteria have been developed which will be applied to each project submittal
to establish a basis for scoring and ranking projects. This ranking will identify which projects provide the greatest benefit to the county based on factors such as mobility, costeffectiveness,safety
, and air quality. The proposed evaluation methodology is presented below. Each of the ten evaluation criteria will initially be assigned a maximum value of 10 points, with 100 points
being the· total maximum amount possible for a given project. In addition to the "equal weight" 7 scenario, .. other weighting scenarios can also be evaluated to determine which scenario·
most appropriately addresses the needs of Dallas County. . TECHNICAL METHODOLOGYFOR MODELING PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: Travel Model Forecast Procedures . The Dallas-Fort Worth Regional
Travel Model (DFWRTM) is the planning tool used to help estimate current and future travel demand needs and allows detailed project evaluation to occur. The Major Capital Improvement
Program must have a way of testing and evaluating the mobility benefits of a wide range of potential roadway projects, including the addition of new thoroughfare streets, the extension
of existing thoroughfares, and the rehabilitation of existing thoroughfares. The DFWRTM is the tool used to accomplish this analysis. In order to assess and quantify the benefits of
the projects submitted under this Call-forProjects, it is necessary to develop four different roadway network analyses. These four different network analyses simulate both baseline (year
1995 no-build) and future year conditions with and without the effects of the proposed projects. The four network analyses that will be used to evaluate the benefits of the projects
submitted for the Major Capital Improvement Program are as follows: • Analysis 1: The first analysis replicates conditions as they existed in 1995, the. year the model was validated
for, using the roadway network that existed in 1995 and 1995 demographic data for population, employment, and number of households. • Analysis 2: The second analysis predicts year 2020
conditions assuming a nobuild, or "do-nothing" scenario. In this analysis, the 1995 existing-conditions. roadway network used in the first analysis is modeled using year 2020 demographics.
This analysis shows the performance of the transportation . system in the year 2020 if no improvements are made to it. • Analysis 3: The third analysis predicts year 2020 conditions
assuming that all the projects submitted for funding are implemented and constructed. This is accomplished by coding into the·1995 no-build roadway network. all· the projects submitted
under this Call for Projects, creating a year 2020 build 2
",J ''''':,./'"I /network. This year 2020 build network will be modeled ustr1gyear 20:2'0 ' demographic assuolP!iqr'l$,: " ' • Analysis 4: The fourth analysis predicts year 2020 conditions
assuming anl'aU/or-nothing" scenario. This scenario uses the year 2020 build network 􀀧􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁹􀁥􀁟􀁡􀁲􀀻􀀺􀀬 2020 demographic assumptions, but doesn't use the typicali'capaCity<,
constrained;: technique to model traffic inwhich only a finite number bf 􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁰􀁾􀁃􀁡􀁮􀀮 be assigned to' a particular roadway ,segment. With an 􀀬􀁬􀁉􀁡􀁕􀀧􀀢􀁯􀁲􀀭􀁮􀁤􀁴􀁨􀁬􀀨􀁬􀁾􀀻􀁦􀀧􀀬􀀮
assignment, an infinite number of trips Can be' assigned to. a.particular' segment, and where several different routing options are availab,h3, all tripsafe< assigned to the most desirable
route (based orfcriteria 􀁳􀁰􀁥􀂢􀁩􀁦􀁩􀁥􀁤􀀩􀀮􀁆􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁨􀁩􀁳􀁾 analysis, trips are assigned to the route with the best traveltime" baseqon', ' speed and distance only. This analysis
is used to score projects under,the ,Travel Desire Rating, EVALUATION CRITERIA AND TECHNICAL METHODOLOGY FOR SCORING PROJECTS' Evaluation Criteria Functional Classification Rating -(10
Points) This evaluator assigns points based on functional classification as designated in the 1999 Regional Thoroughfare Plan Update. For any given project, the functional class assifJned
to the project will be the classification of the highest classified facility which 'can' reasonably be assumed to be either directly or indirectly positively impacted by' the, proposed
projed,. Example Arterials A and B are parallel arterials one-mile apart. Freeway X runs perpendicular to both A and B and has interchanges at both. 'Approximately one-quarter", mile
from and parallel to Freeway X the City is proposing to build a four-lane roadway that , will intersect both A and,R ' Scenario 1: Freeway X is the only existing roadway that connects
with both Arterials A and B. Thus, a motorist on A wanting to use B mustuse Freeway X. Under this scenario, the City's new roadway would be scored as a freeway, as it is reasonable to
to 􀁡􀁓􀀵􀁵􀁭􀁾 thaf: , it will reduce congestion on Freeway X by eliminating the necessity of all local trafficgoirig, from A to B to use Freeway X. In other words, there is a certain
percentage of local traffic that is only using Freeway X by default that would divert to an alternate' route: ' 'By' eliminating this local traffic from Freeway X, its congestion ,is
reduced and its ,reserve 􀁣􀁡􀁰􀁡􀁣􀁩􀁾􀁹 is increased. ' , Scenario 2: Freeway X is one of several roadways that connect with both Arterials A and B. Thus, a motorist on A wanting to
use B does not necessarily need to use Freeway x., Under this scenario, the City's new roadway would be scored by its own functional c::lassification, as it is reasonable to assume that
it will not reduce congestion on Freeway',' , X because other routes for [ocal traffic to travel from A to B already exist. In other wordS" local traffic diversion from the Freeway is
already occurring, and the addition of another. . alternate route will not have an impact on 􀁴􀁨􀁾 operation of the FfeeW8y. -' , 3.
Each project will receive a score based on the classifications shown in Table 1. Table 1 Functional Classification Rating Functional Classification Designation Score -----------------------Freeway
(existing and proposed) 10 Points Regional Arterial 7 Points Other Arterial 3 Points Not on Regional Thoroughfare Plan oPoints Speed Delay-Rating -(10 Points) Each candidate project
submitted for funding will be assigned a speed-delay rating based on the anticipated improvement to travel times and speeds that will result from the roadway improvement. This will be
calculated by taking the difference between the posted roadway speed limit (maximum free-flow speed) and a current observed speed on the facility (current operating speed), divided by
the length of the project. Each city submitting a project for funding will be asked to collect and provide recent peak-hour speeds which will be used in calculating this rating. Using
speed delay as an evaluation criterion takes into account both the traffic congestion on and the physical condition of the roadway, both of which affect the operating speed. The delay
rate is defined as the difference between the time it takes to travel a set distance at the posted speed limit without stopping (free-flowing) and the actual time (observed) it takes
to travel that same distance (accounting for traffic control delay and congestion), divided by the distance traveled, expressed in minutes per mile. A 1996 report by Metroplan, the Council
of Governments for Central Arkansas, established a delay rate congestion threshold of 0.41 minutes per mile, based on criteria established in the Highway Capacity Manual, vehicle limitations,
and driver perceptions. In other words, a facility is considered congested when its delay rate is equal to or greater than 0.41 minutes per mile. This number corresponds to the difference
in time it takes to travel one mile at 55 miles per hour versus traveling one mile at 40 miles per hour. From this delay rate,a numeric value for congestion, the "degree of congestion"
or DOC, has been defined as follows: DOC =Delay Rate -0.410 Thus, a facility at the congestion threshold, that is, with a delay rate of 0.41, has a DOC of 0.000. A facility operating
at its maximum free flow speed has a delay rate of 0.00 and a corresponding DOC of -0.410. In order to provide insight into the magnitude of congestion, eight congestion categories were
defined --five for congested facilities and three for non-congested facilities. The DOC threshold for each of the eight categories is shown in Table 2, along with the points assigned
for each category. 4
Table 2 Speed-Delay Rating Criteria Category "Degree of Congestion" Score --------------------------------Extreme Greater than 4.499 10 Points· Severe Between 1.499 and 4.498 8 Points
Serious Between 0.499 and 1.498 6 Points Moderate Between 0.213 and 0.498 5 Points Mild Between 0.001 and 0.212 4 Points Borderline .Between -0.168 and 0.000 2 Points Acceptable Between
-0.410 and -0.167 1 Point None Less than -0.411 oPoints Traffic Volume Rating -(10 Points) This rating evaluates the project according to the magnitude of traffic-flow improvement that
can be expected to result by making the proposed improvement to the facility. The Traffic Volume Rating is calculated by taking the difference between a "build" and a "nobuild" condition,
which yields the additional traffic resulting from making the improvement. Specifically, year 2020 traffic projections will be generated with and without the improvements in place in
order to model the anticipated change. Projects showing the greatest amount of traffic improvement will receive a higher score for this criterion. Specifically, this criterion is calculated
by taking the difference between two year 2020 travel model runs, the "build" condition (Analysis 3) and the "no-build" condition (Analysis 2). The difference between these two analyses
is the expected change in traffic volumes resulting from making the proposed improvement to the facility. In general, projects showing the largest amount of traffic improvement will
receive a higher score for this criterion. The maximum score available for this criterion will be ten points. The range of possible scores will be determined after the analyses are complete
and the data is available to determine minimum and maximum values. Traffic Volume Growth Rating -(10 Points) The Traffic Volume Growth Rating is derived from the growth in traffic volumes
expected to occur on each candidate segment of roadway between the current condition (year 1995) and the future travel model projection (year 2020). This rating assumes that the project
is not in operation in the current year and that it will be operational by the future forecast year. Points will be assigned to each project based on the percentage of growth estimated
to occur during this time period. Specifically, the percent change between traffic volumes in the year 2020 "build" network (Analysis 3) and the 1995 "existing condition" network (Analysis
1) will be calculated. Projects showing the largest amount of change will receive the higher scores. The maximum score available for this evaluator is ten points. The range of possible
scores for this criterion will not be determined until after the model runs are complete and the minimum and maximum values are derived. 5
Travel Desire Rating -(10 Points) This rating will score each candidate project based on its inherent attractiveness and desirability assuming there is no congestion at all on the facility.
When congestion is factored into the equation, roadways that may be more direct and desirable to travel on are sometimes avoided because .of high levels of congestion, even though they
are the preferred routes. This evaluation criteriais derived by looking.at the difference between a year 2020 capacity-constrained model run (Analysis 3), which takes into account the
congestion on the roadway, and an "all-or-nothing" model run (Analysis 4), which assumes that there is no congestion on any roadway. The "all-or-nothing" model run allows vehicle trips
to choose the preferred route (based on shortest distance and fastest speeds) regardless of any effects due to congestion. The percent difference between the two model runs shows whether
the facility is being used because it is the most direct and preferred path ("all-or-nothing") or whether traffic is being diverted to the facility due to congestion on other routes
(capacity-constrained). The maximum score available for this criterion is ten points. The range of possible scores will be determined after the travel model runs are complete and the
maximum and minimum values are identified. Benefit-Cost Ratio Rating -(10 Points) This rating is calculated based on the ratio of benefits resulting from the proposed ·improvement to
the cost of the improvement. The benefits for each project are determined from the reduction in travel-time delay experienced on the roadway segment with and without the candidate roadway·
improvement. Local govemment and Dallas County staffs will estimate the costs for each project. Benefits used in the BIC ratio are calculated from the delay savings gained from an increase
in capacity or speeds on the segment (if, in fact, a gain is induced). The reduction in delay is calculated from the increase in average daily loaded speeds, which are derived from the
travel model runs. This analysis compares the modeled speeds before an improvement (Analysis 2) and the speeds after the improvement (Analysis 3). After average daily loaded speeds and
24-hour projected traffic volumes are determined for both Analysis 2 and Analysis 3, a benefit-cost ratio is calculated based on the following equation: 6
TAB TAC --􀁲􀁉􀀨􀁖􀁏􀁾􀁖􀁏􀁌􀁆􀁁􀁃􀀪􀁌􀁅􀁎􀁇􀁉􀁈􀀩 -(VO{!*VOLFAC*LENGTH)U x DAO x VOT x NOD 􀁾 SPEEDA SPEEDs 􀁾 ( TOTAL COST X CRF) Where: TAB = Total Annualized Benefit ($) TAC = Total
Annualized Cost ($) VOlA = 24-Hour Volume from Run 2 (no-build scenario) Vois = 24-Hour Volume from Run 3 (build scenario) VOLFAC = 0.6. volume factor (peakloff-peakldirectional dist.)
Length = Length of Project (miles) SpeedA = Link Speed from Run 2 (no-build scenario) Speeds = Link Speed from Run 3 (build scenario) DAO = 1.29 persons per vehicle, Daily Auto Occupancy
VOT = $9.70 per hour. Value of Time NOD = 260 per year. Number of Days for annual benefit Total Cost = Total Project Cost ($) CRF = 0.06646, Capital Recovery Factor (40 yrs @6%) Points
are assigned to each project based on the ratio of the total annualized benefits divided by the total annualized cost. Table 3 provides the scoring ranges with their corresponding benefit-cost
ratios. Table 3 Benefit-Cost Ratio Rating BIC Ratio Score ------------------0-0.50 o Points 0.51-0.75 1 Points 0.76 -1.00 2 Points 1.01-1.25 4 Points 1.26 -1.50 5 Points 1.51 -2.00 6
Points 2.01-3.00 7 Points 3.01-5.00 8 Points 5.01 -10.00 9 Points 10.01 or greater 10 Points 7
Accident Rate Rating -(10 Points) Each candidate project will receive an accident rating based on the number of correctable accidents reported on the roadway segment. A correctable accident
is defined as an accident that will be potentially eliminated if the proposed improvements are implemented. For example, while traffic signals commonly reduce the nymber of 􀁲􀁩􀁧􀁨􀁴􀀭􀁡􀁮􀁧􀁬􀁾acci
dents, they also increase the number of rear-end accidents. For traffic signals,then, only rightangle accidents are considered correctable and factored into the Accident Rate Rating.
Each city will be asked to provide three years worth of actual accjdent data for each. _ roadway segment submitted for review.-· Projects with a higher (correctable) accident rate over
this three-year period will receive a higher rating. After all the accident data has been analyzed, a range of scores will be developed between zero and ten points, based on the magnitude
of correctable accidents reported. Air Quality I Energy Conservation Rating -((10 Points) Each project submittal will be evaluated based on its overall impact toward improving the quality
of the region's air. The Dallas-Fort Worth region is currently designated as a nonattainment area by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency based on past exceedances of the national
ambient ozone standard. In order to promote regional air quality goals and objectives, each project will be quantified in terms of air quality reductions. Specifically, the dollars per
pound of nitrous oxide (NOx) emission 􀁲􀁾􀁤􀁵􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳 will be calculated and each project will receive a score based on its reduction potential. Emission reductions will be calculated
by estimating emissions before and after the improvement is in place, and taking the difference. Projects contribute positively toward air quality reductions, in general, when speeds
approach 50 miles per hour and operating performance is improved. The following formula provides the methodology for calculating emission reductions on a project-by-project basis. $
Lb. [ (TOTAL COST x CRF) XCI ] [( VOLBX EFBx LENGTH) -(VOL..x EFAx LENGTH)] x 260 DAYS/YEAR 24-hour modeled volume before improvement (Analysis 2) Emission factor based on speeds from
Analysis 2 (grams/mile) Project Length (miles) 24-hour modeled volume after improvement (Analysis 3) Emission factor based on speeds from Analysis 3 (grams/mile) Total project cost ($)
0.06646, Capital Recovery Factor ( 40 yrs@6%) 454 grams per pound (conversion factor, grams to pounds) Dollars per pound of NOx emissions reductions 8
) Points will be assigned to each project based on the ratio of the annualized cost to the annualized NOx emissions reductions. Table 4 provides the scoring ranges for this evaluation
criterion. Table 4 Air Quality I Energy Conservation Rating $ I Lb. Of Nox Reductions Score --------------------------------> 100.0 oPoints 50.0 -99.99 3 Points 10.00 -49.99 5 Points
5.00 -9.99 7 Points < 4.99 10 Points Sustainable Development! Redevelopment! "Smart Growth" Rating (10 Points) Each project submittal will be evaluated with respect to encouraging regional
sustainable development or "smart growth" patterns (i.e. densification of the urban core counties) 6r redevelopment of distressed areas. There will not be a sliding scale of points available
for this criterion. Each project will either receive the full 10 points or will receive a zero. A project located within a census block classified as "Distressed" or "Under-Utilized"
as defined in the Dallas County Tax Abatement Policy will receive the full 10 points; all other projects will receive a zero. The aforementioned policy defines a "Distressed" area as
a census block whose median family income is less than or equal to 150% of the poverty level for a Dallas area family of four or a census block contained within a federally or state-designated
enterprise zone. An "under-utilized" area is a census block that meets three of following five criteria: 1) Low population growth (percentage change in population that is less than the
County average for 1980-1995) 2) Low employment growth (percentage change in employment that is less than the County average for 1990-1995) 3) Low traffic congestion (roadways where,
in 1995, no more than 30% of lane miles exceeded free-flow traffic levels during peak hours) 4) Low property values (median value of owner-occupied structure is no greater than 50% of
the County median) 5) Predominantly low/moderate income population (at least 51% of population earns less than 80% of the Dallas area median household income) For census blocks that
are at least two-thirds (2/3) undeveloped, only one of the five criteria listed above need to be met to qualify as "under-utilitized." 9
Intermodall Multimodall Social Mobility Rating -(10 Points) Each project submitted for funding will receive a score based either on its ability to involve more than a single mode of
travel or its long-term economic development potential that could benefit the community. There will not be a sliding scale of points available for this criterion. Each project will either
receive the full 10 points or will receive a zero. There are four separate elements that comprise this scoring criteria and a project that addresses anyone of these elements will receive
the full 10 points. These four elements are: • Intermodal Project -A project that provides for the interaction of two or more transportation modes in a given area and which promotes
the efficient movement and transfer of people or goods. • Multimodal Project -A project that facilitates non-SOV (single occupant vehicle)modes of transportation. • Social Mobility Project
-A project that provides transportation services to individuals or groups who need some form of transportation due to an inability to utilize existing forms of transportation. This can·
include services to the elderly and disabled or economically disadvantaged individuals. • Infrastructure Investment Project -A capital project with a likelihood of producing long-term
economic benefits as opposed to an operational project which only provides direct benefits for a given short time period. Special Case Rating Methodology Special Case #1 -If all or part
of a roadway consisted of a new roadway, then it was not possible to calculate a Speed Delay Rating, a Benefit-Cost Ratio Rating, or an Air Quality Rating. In these cases, the Speed
Delay Rating, the Benefit-Cost Ratio Rating, and the Air Quality Rating are all given zero points, and the maximum points for the Traffic Volume Rating are increased to 40. This is accomplished
by multiplying the Traffic Volume Rating by four. Special Case #2 -In certain situations, the Benefit-Cost Ratio may be misleading because the traffic induced by the capacity improvement
was so great that the resulting congestion was higher than without the improvement. This signifies that the project is highly warranted. Projects falling under the Special Case #2 category
will receive zero points for the Benefit-Cost Ratio Rating, and the maximum allowable points for the Traffic Volume Rating will be increased to 20. This is accomplished by multiplying
the points assigned to the Traffic Volume Rating by two. Special Case #3 -The criteria which use percent change as a basis for scoring, Traffic Volume Growth Rating and Travel Desire
Rating, could be misleading if the absolute value of the traffic volumes is less than 5,000 in the year 2020. To avoid overrating these projects, the maximum points available for the
Traffic Volume Growth Rating Criteria and the Travel Desire Rating will be reduced to five for each rating element. This is accomplished by dividing the score for these two criteria
by two. 10
) j LOCAL COST PARTICIPATION MULTIPLIER In order to aide in the successful implementation of the Dallas County CMIP, it is imperative to accept only those projects for funding that have
a strong commitment from all the stakeholders. One strong indicator of this commitment is the value of resources being contributed. In order to reward those projects with strong commitments,
a multiplier based on the value of the local commitment (as a percentage of the total project value) will be applied to the aggregate scores..This multiplier will be equal to 1 plus
the percent of local match, expressed as a decimal. .Thus, if a City commits to a match of 50 percent of a project's value, that project's aggregate score will be multiplied by·1.50
in determining the final score. For a match of 20%, the multiplier is 1.20. As the financial resources of all possible stakeholders are not equal, said multiplier may be considered to
be inherently biased against those possible stakeholders with limited resources. Therefore, in order to mitigate this perception of inherent bias, bonus points will be assigned to those
cities where 60% of the land area falls in census blocks defined as "Distressed" or 51% Low/Moderate Income. This bonus consists ·of adding 0.3 to the multiplier for any project submitted
by a city qualifying for the bonus. For example, a the multiplier for a project submitted by a qualifying city contributing 20% of the total cost of the project will be 1.50 (1.20 plus
0.30), the same multiplier applied to a project for a nonqualifying city contributing 50%. In other words, the qualifying city is receiving the equivalent of 60% of the local contribution
factor (30 of the 50%) in the multiplier. Example 1. Projects for Cities A, 8, C, and D all finish with aggregate scores of 80. Cities A, 8, C, and D agree to contribute 50%, 20%, 0%,
and 20%, respectively, of the cost of the project. City D qualifies for the 60% local match mUltiplier bonus. The multiplier for the four projects are as follows: City A -1.50 City 8
-1.20 City C -1.00 City D -1.50 The final point totals for the four projects, computed by multiplying the aggregate total by the multiplier, are as follows: City A -120.0 City 8-96.0
City C -80.0 City D -120.0 Example 2. City Q is a qualifying city and contributes 20% of the project cost. a's project finishes with an aggregate score of 70 and a total score 105.0.
City R's project finishes with an aggregate score of 100, but since R is not willing to commit local resources (and is nonqualifying), the project finishes with a total score of 100.0,
below a's. So does City S's project with a total score of 102.0, which finished with a higher aggregate score of 85 but was supported with a 20% local commitment (S is a non-qualifying
city) resulting in a multiplier of 1.20 compared to Q's 1.50. 11
I I 1990 BLOCK GROUPS N DISTRESSED AREAS • PREDOMINATELYLOWIMODERATE W E INCOME BLOCK GROUPS 8 0 8 Miles S 􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩
LOt lion of Distressed ...}eas and Under-Utilized Areas Under Dallas County Tax Abatement Policy. I I 1990 CENSUS TRACTS _ DISTRESSED AREAS UNDER-UTIUZED AREAS s SCALE: i"" = 4 MILES
2000 Dallas County Call For Projects APPLICATION INFORMATION Submitting Agency: Contact Person: Address:Telephone Number: e-mail address: Your agency name Your name Street 1 Street 2 (123) 456-7890 johndoe City TX ZIP Facsimile Number: (123) 456-7890 @isp.net PROJECT INFORMATION Location:
Beginning: Ending: Functional Classification: # of Correctable Accidents: (over past 3 years) Through lanes Left turn lanes Right turn lanes Sidewalks Bicycle Lanes Big Street Cross
Street NIA R Existing 111oo o MAPSCO: Project Length: Avg Posted Speed: Avg Operating Speed: Traffic Volume: Traffic Volume Source: Proposed 111YY 45Y 0.00oooo Description of Proposed
Improvement(s): This is where you describe the project in greater detail. At a minimum, this description should detail existing conditions, the proposed project, and how the proposed
project will be an improvement, including the social mobility benefits. For example afacility that serves as abus route will score higher on the ·social mobility rating" than an equal
facility that is not a bus route Schools, low income housing facilities, elderly housing facilities, facilities for the disabled, transit centers, "Park-and-Ride ots, HOV or similar
·diamond" lanes, an abundance of underdeveloped, undeveloped,· and economically distressec properties, and connections to the veloweb and other similar facilities are elements that can
boost a project's score an should be enumerated in this detailed description. Note, however, that it would be redundant to reiterate information (such as project 􀁣􀁯􀁳􀁾 traffic counts,
accident data, etc., tha lappears elsewhere on this form.
2000 Dallas County Call For Projects APPLICATION INFORMATION Submitting Agency: Contact Person: Address: TX Telephone Number: e-mail address: Location: Beginning: Ending: Functional
Classification: # of Correctable Accidents: (over past 3 years) Facsimile Number: @PROJECTINFORMATION MAPSCO: Project Length: Avg Posted Speed: Avg Operating Speed: Traffic Volume: Traffic
Volume Source: Through lanes Left turn lanes Right turn lanes. Sidewalks Bicycle Lanes Existing Proposed Description of Proposed Improvement(s):
Total Project Cost: $ Rjght-of-way Cost: $ Engineering/Design Cost: $ Utility Cost: $ Construction Cost: $ Local Cost Contribution: $ in percent of total cost: PROJECT COSTINFORMATION
511121 20%
2000 Dallas County Call For Projects APPLICATION INFORMATION Submitting Agency: Contact Person: Address: TX Telephone Number: e-mail address: Location: Beginning: Ending: Functional
Classification: # of Correctable Accidents: (over past 3 years) Facsimile Number: @PROJECTINFORMATION MAPSCO: Project Length: Avg Posted Speed: Avg Operating Speed: Traffic Volume: Traffic
Volume Source: Through lanes Left tum lanes Right tum lanes . Sidewalks Bicycle Lanes Existing Proposed Description of Proposed Improvement(s):
Total Project Cost: $ Right-ot-way Cost: $ Engineering/Design Cost: $ Utility Cost: .. $ Construction Cost: $ Local Cost Contribution: $ in percent ot total cost: PROJECTCOSTmFORMATION
% i j
January 20, 21J00 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 ) (972) 450-2871 16801 Westgrove City of Dallas Open Records Section Attention Lieutenant Wesson
Via Fax: 214-670-5180 Re: Request for Accident Infonnation Dear Lieutenant Wesson: I am preparing applications for Dallas County Public Works funding through their "2000 Dallas County
Call for Projects". We are applying for funding for improvements at the intersection of Belt Line Road and Dallas Parkway, and, the intersection of Arapaho Road and Dallas Parkway. One
ofthe application requirements is that we attach three years worth of actual accident data for each intersection. The infonnation will be used to determine if the improvements will reduce
the accident rate. I am requesting this information pursuant to the Open Government statutes in Texas. I am requesting information about: DescriptionlDetails ofthe accident Report Number
I understand that ifany accident about which I have requested information is pending litigation I will receive only that portion that is required to be released. I understand that the
City of Dallas has ten days to process my request. I understand that in lieu of releasing the infonnation the City of Dallas may request an opinion from the Office ofthe Attorney General.
I understand I will be contacted by mail or by phone when this request is completed. I understand that completed requests will be held for only fifteen calendar days after notification
by mail or phone. (My phone number is 972-450-2879). Thank you for your assistance. Town of Addison EVIT"'-W'􀁾􀁾 es C. Pierce, Jr., P.E. 􀁾􀁳􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁴 City Engineer cc: Chris Terry,
Assistant City Manager Michael E. Murphy, P.E., Acting Director of Public Works
HP LaserJet 3100 Printer/Fax/CopierlScanner :,) 􀀭􀀻􀀺􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾'SEND CONFIRMATION REPORT for Town of Addison 9724502834 Jan-20-00 11:13AM Job start
Time Usage Phone Number or 10 Type Pages Mode Status 462 1/20 11 : 12AM 0'30" 2146705180 Send .... ,........ , 11 1 EC144 Completed ........................................ Total 0'30"
Pages Sent: Pages Printed: 0 􂀢􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀺􀁾􀁾 i • ' 􀁾 􀁾 .ADDisoN PIIIIUC WORKS DEPARTMENT 􀀢􀁶􀀻􀀱􀀮􀁜􀁗􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀪 􀁐􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁭􀁣􀁥􀁂􀁯􀁮􀀮􀀹􀀰􀀱􀀰 AddiaGa,Tuu 75001.9010 city of Dallas
Ope" Records Section Attention Lieutenant Wesson Via Fax: 214-670·5180 Rc: Request for Accid.:nt lnfonnation Dear Licutenant Wesson: (972)450-2871 lliOO1WeatlfOYC J am preparing applications
for Dallas County Public Worics funding througb their "2000 Dallas County Call for Projects", We are applying for funding fur improvements at the intersectiOD ofBelt Line Road and Dallas
Parltwuy. aDd. the intersection of ArapaJ1.o Road and Dallas Pari",,'8.)'. One of the application requirements is that we attach three years ,",,'Orth ofactual accident data for each
interst:etion. The informatioD wiD be used. to detennine ifthe improvements will reduce the accident ralc. I am requesting this infonnatioD pursuant to the Open Govemmcnt statutes in
Texas. I am requesting informatioD about: DescriptionlDetails of the accident Report Number I understand that if an)' accideDt about whiclt I have requested information is pending litigation
1will receive only that portion that is required 10 be released. I understand thal the City of DaUas has ten days to process my request I understand Iha1 in lieu of releasing the infonnation
the City of Dallas may request an. opinion from the Office of Ole Attorney General. I understand I will be contacted by mail or by phone when this request is completed. I understand
lhal completed requests will be held for only fifteen calendar days after notification by mail or pbone. (My phone number is 972-450-2879), Thank you for }"Our assistance. Town of Addison
􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁯􀀬 City EogUu:er cc: Chris Terry. Assistant City Manager Michael E. Murphy. P.E.. Acting Din:clor of Public Works
Jan-20-00 09:46A AOO:":}N COURT P.02 db, (TftrI..􀁾􀁄􀁥􀁰􀁡P􀁲o􀁾li􀁔c􀁮e􀁥􀁮􀁾 PLEASE PHINT ALL IN¥ORMATION 'l.'oday·s natc: . Requesto['s Name: Comp 1e tc Mail i n q """':A:'"'"d-:-d-:--r-e-s-s-:--
__--' .. Home Phone Number: Work Phone Nurnb-e-r_:--------.._--------I am requesting infot"mation pursuant to the Open Government statutes i.n 'l'exas. I am requesting information about:
Type of Incidp.nt: _ Report Number: ----Address of IncIdent;----,,-------Name of Party{Parties):-------------------_. ----_. 􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭
-_..---..􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀮􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭----_.---I understand that if the incident about which r have requested information is pending litigal.i.on I will receive only that portion that is
required to be released. I understand that the Addison Police Department has ten days to process my request. r understand that in lieu of releasing _the information the Addison Police
Department may request an opinion from the Office of the Attorney General. I understand that r will be contacted by phone or mail when my request is completed. I understand that completed
requests will be held for only fifteen calendal; days after notification by mail or phone, Signat:.\ire of Requestor... ·----OI!'L·'lCF.: US F: ON LY Oil Le No l. i 􀀨􀁩􀀨􀁾􀁤 : 􀁍􀀮􀁾
i 1 ny WhOlll: Pholle -. -_..._--
..Jan-20-00 09:46A ADD!-?N COURT 􀀹􀀷􀁾 J50 􀀡􀀮􀁈􀁾􀀬􀁏 .........==-_ 􀁾􀀮􀀬􀁏􀁬 " , ) ' .. ,., .. 􀀢􀁟􀀧􀁟􀀧􀁟􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀴􀁾􀀢 It:t., '.7••• :., 􀁨􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀻􀀮􀀢 􀀧􀁾􀁩􀀮􀁦􀀤􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁾􀀬
.. 􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀡􀁾􀀻􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾 􀀢􀀧􀂷􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀺􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀺􀂷􀀻􀀢􀁃􀁾􀀴􀀵􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁕􀁾􀁪􀁯􀁾􀁾􀀣􀁾􀀡􀀡􀁦􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀺􀁴􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀷􀀧􀀽􀀰􀁾􀀹􀁩􀁩􀁦􀀬 .;􀀺􀁾􀀨􀀺􀀬􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀭􀀢􀀧􀀷􀀧
􀁬􀀧􀀻􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀮􀀮􀁹􀁯􀀬􀀬􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀢􀀬 􀀮􀁾􀁩􀁾􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁌􀀻􀀺􀀭􀀺􀁩􀁾􀀣􀀺􀀻􀁾􀀬􀀮􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀢􀁾􀀱􀁩􀁪􀁩􀀺􀀬􀀺􀀻 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀽􀀭..'._, '."=.':: 􀀯􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀭􀁾􀀮􀁴􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀮
_. 􀁾􀀮􀀮 􀁩􀁴􀁩􀁬􀁬􀀢􀁒􀁾􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀺􀀺 .-:􀁾􀁾􀁾. 􀀢 . '.' :"".'"."':'.'t:􀁾.􀀢􀀢 • ",....•.. < 􀀢􀂷'􀁾􀂷"􀂷􀀧􀁙􀁗􀂷􀂷􀀷.W􀀺􀁭􀀡J􀀷J􀁾.􀁉..􀀻􀁾v􀁾·􀁾'􀁬r􀀺􀀧􀀢 .--.. ":" Fax To: From:
.. . '" 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭
· ..... iii . ) 􀁾􀁾􀁴􀀭 J.-1t(.-053 -1151 JI! 􀁾 􀁾 . ... . ._._._J:::-_I. 􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀮__.._._. . .------..------I: 􀀭􀀭􀂷􀂷􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁦􀁃􀁬􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀂷P􀂷􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁬􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁬􀀭􀀭􀀱
7 t:':'" l . _..__._.__._ I L -b5'3 -t. ;;;) . ._.. _ '. ! 􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀧􀀺􀀡􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭..-.---. '. L... _ .-i-:;... 7 .-------...--.-...-.-.-....+.: ---.. -. __..[ft--. t.A: . 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀴􀁁􀁍􀀭􀀱􀁾_
_'"'_JlJ ! ..__.._.... _ ----·-------·-1i--"􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀬􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀺􀁲􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭.􀁾􀀭􀁁􀀡􀀯􀁁􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 . --.--.-----.-..􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 i 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭...-...--.-_
. ..__._,. _ .. ._.. .__ 􀂷􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁄􀁾􀁾 \;:=.􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁟􀁾􀀽􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾 ---.---.-.-.----I!-----􀁾.h..:.-t.. --. -.---1.: __.__..-;; . '._ . -.---.----i-----.--.----􀀭􀁾
n..A. -􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀱􀀩􀀨􀀢􀀢􀀭􀁾􀀷􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭..-.. 􀁾􀁟-.-. 1._..._.._ ..__.. ;. _ hl_ 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀬 􀁥􀁯􀁾 .._.__._. _ -------T . ._----_._--􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁲􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁵.
􀀧--=-. . _ 􀀮􀁟􀀮􀁟􀁜􀁟􀁾 -----􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀺􀀽􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀿􀀭􀀭􀂣􀂣􀀷􀀺􀀻􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁴􀀭 -.􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 i--'--􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁕􀁍􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁟􀁾 􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀭􀁊
􀁉􀀿 + -.---.-----+I -..-------.--_.. /.1 -. .-----*1-----------. _ 􀁾\􀀯􀀭I􀁟􀀮__. 􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀽􀀽..􀀻􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 .._-------. -􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽 ! -.-(p".rLL . 􀀮􀁬􀁾􀁟􀀮 ..._... _. ---------------.1-.----.---.-
I ---------------------------􀀭􀁊􀁙􀀭􀁾 _ ----------􀁉􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭 􀀭􀁾 􀀭􀀭􀀽􀁾 ---------------------.----V-􀀩􀁊􀁖􀁾􀁾􀀭..􀁾􀁩􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭 -----------i 􀀷􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ) ---􀁾􀀭 -----------------------
-----􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭 ---------------._-􀁾I 􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮__._ . -....--..... .._--------I "-.----. --1"---"'·-1L_
.': ... :.\ ::iI '-1--6C;; 3 􀁾 7 /f£"( 􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁬 􀁦􀀱􀀧􀁁􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀮
,-.# I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 
HP LaserJet 3100 Printer/Fax/Copier/Scanner SEND CONFIRMATION REPORT for TOWN OF ADDISON 9724502837 Jan-19-00 12:39PM Job Start Time Usage Phone Number or ID Type Pages Mode Status 141
1/19 12:38PM 1'12" 972 599 9008 Send .............. 4/4 EC 96 Completed ........................................ Total 1'12" Pages Sent: 4 Pages Printed: 0 TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS SERVICE
CENTER FAX NUMBER: 872/45002837 :rD' 􀀧􀀽􀁦􀁾 􀀯􀀳􀀬􀁪􀁊􀁾􀀮 FROM, 􀁾􀁊􀁾􀀶􀀧 COMPANY. 􀁾􀀢􀀭􀁾 FAX 􀁎􀁕􀁍􀁉􀁉􀁅􀁒􀀮􀁱􀀷􀀬􀁬􀀮􀀯􀀮􀀵􀀱􀁩􀀧􀁑􀁾􀀢􀁏􀀮i) DEPARTMENt'. Building ............,on
PHONE, OATE:. I-I If-DO NUMBIIlR UP 8HlEEnI' 1/(lHC:L.UIJINCi COVDI .HIUn) -, .. • . i '. 􀁾 " ,. , OOMMENTB• \) 􀁾 .,. .
􀀬􀀱􀁲􀁾 􀁾􀁃􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁾 . ---.--t-----.----.--..---.. --------.. -------.--.-.-.--.. -.-.---------.-------.---... --. -----.-----.-------.-.---------.---.--. I . . jr c .. flLj.·Pki
... ... 􀁾 ........... 􀁾􀀮􀁧􀁧􀀮􀀮􀁉􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 􀁾 _______________ J,?Qf>__ 􀁾 􀁊􀀲􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁅􀁲􀀮􀀱􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁦􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀨􀁣􀀲􀀧􀁾􀁨􀁾􀁴􀀭􀀭 ? _______.__.
. 11_. ----. . . 􀁾 . .__. _ -'-.---.. _.--_..-􀀭􀀮􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀭 .__.---_. 􀀭􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀭 ._---._.._--..􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁟..􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀬 •....._--._--_...._.---,,,,---,--􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀬􀁾..._
---' ..---..-.._,".--,--'-..􀀧􀀭􀀢􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭 -----_.. ... .-. -.. ' --_._..... _. .._---_.. 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀱􀁾􀀺􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀭􀁾􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀽􀀽(P-tl 􀁾􀁩 􀀮􀁾.􀁾􀁾 ....
,:;;i-. 􀁾􀁾􀀯􀀻􀀺􀁾􀀮 II F (103 1/􀁾􀀢􀁄􀁛􀀼􀀺􀀮􀀮 ... .... . 11------------------ll-·---I:IJ:.;;-,fJ-;?-----·-·c.-·-.ilL_·_----_·.-.-.-. --------.----I] 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭 P -.-------1.1-􀁾􀁾􀀮
.... . .. . .._-. ,J)J-I"'-···11 EL'oll).?,,01::._. 􀀭􀀭􀂷􀁔􀁾􀁔􀁄􀁉􀂥􀁊􀁙􀀧􀂷.... . --􀁩􀀺􀁉􀁉􀁆􀁹􀀩􀁏􀀧􀁌􀀱􀀩􀀭􀀵􀀢􀁾􀁣􀀩􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮 -.----. '-. -..--_,.􀁾􀀭􀁟􀁟􀁟..__􀁅􀀮􀁴􀁾􀀲􀁟􀁾
􀁴􀀬􀁟􀁾..􀁉􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ..-.--_.----------... . . . .. __ _ ___ 􀀺􀁜􀁾􀁟􀁟􀁟_􀁾􀁜􀁌􀀮􀁟􀀡􀀺􀀿􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁌 􀀮􀀺􀀱􀁊􀀭􀁾􀁟􀁾 􀁾 ... .________ __. . ----.----,. 􀀭􀀯􀀻􀀭􀁾
..􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 .. 􀀭􀁾􀁊􀁪􀀮􀁾􀀭 ..------.---".--..-_.------.----------------.---.-.-------,---"-.---.. -... .--..... --.. ....__.. _---------. 􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀁟.._.--._.
-------------------_.. --.._,_ ...-._----------------_.-----,---._----_.----------------------------.-----------.. ----. --._-._-----.. ----_. 􀁾 '" 􀁾 rY )63 -----_. .--'--􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀮􀀭
.".'". 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾 􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾.._._.._--_---' ..".-'-􀀭􀀬􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀬􀁟􀀮􀁾 '.", -..􀁾 . I .--􀁾􀀭 -".-.-_k'_ --t---._.,-. ---.--.---.._ '._.-..􀀭􀀭􀁾 .,----',' _.. ----..􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 -􀁾􀁟..􀁟􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁟
􀀮􀀬 _.' .--_. ._u __._ _A .' .-. . .• -_._••••􀁟􀁾􀀭 -_.-_•••_". ---,----••••--','-• __ .. ---•.-.-" •
-'.") .' .I 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀫􀁬􀀫􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 ...---------. .-'-'.--.--....---' l·----·------------.-----------....-.-...---.--...--... I! -._..... _._ .._-_...._----_..-_._-_..__._-_._.
-----' ;;-.---------------------------------,e/o.---------..--.---------------..-----...-1_.---..-..-..--...----.........-..-------....-_... -..--.---..--...--.-.-.-._.__"'1..􀁾􀁟􀁟􀁟..__._....._
----...---......--_.._-.----.---..----.-.--......---..-; .. ( " ..... -••.•_-----_._--.-. I I"_._-_.-. 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭------􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭•􀀭•􀀭--------------.-----------••------.-------.-.-------••------.-----'.---••-----..... '._----.. -.... --.----..-----_.------􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭 --II
-------------------------------------------.-------------------._----􀁾􀀭--..---.---------H+---􀀽􀀭􀁾􀁬􀁬􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁬􀀡􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁳􀀭􀁥􀁊􀀻􀀻􀀽􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭�
�􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀂷􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀭
􀁾 " 􀁐􀁾􀀯􀀲􀀳􀀯􀀹􀁕 15:17 􀁴􀁲􀀹􀀷􀀲􀀴􀀹􀀰􀁾o􀀲j􀀶􀀱 PARSONS TRANSPOR '. III UOl1015 , oL FAX TRANSMIS -° J'-"------NO. OF PAGES IINCLUDING THIS PAGEl 15" 1 (./.<SION JI/I'I : 􀁾...
􀁡􀀯􀁴􀀭􀁾 : • 􀁦􀁫􀀯􀁥􀁲􀀯􀁄􀁂􀀸􀁣􀁾􀀯􀀻􀁮􀁊 .. -at" '//􀀯􀁉􀀮􀁥􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀁾􀀯􀀧 .. 􀀡􀀯􀀻􀀿􀁤􀁾 􀀶􀁪􀁁􀀱􀁾 􀁾􀀱􀀷􀀹􀀨􀀻􀀧􀁬􀁡􀀷 /,hAU7 􀁦􀀿􀁾 􀁉􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀯􀁾􀀯􀀧􀀧􀀭􀀯􀁰􀁾􀁾􀁤􀀭 􀁾 25; QC"D_
", 9't.9t9, 􀁾t!J f hap< 􀁾 􀀺􀀽􀀡􀁆􀀯􀀯􀁾􀀯􀀷􀁾 􀁾􀁌􀀻􀁻 􀁾 fL tI-7P,."'" J 􀁾 ,)'pJ?fr. 􀁾􀀭 &/-//􀁾 IL .JY" UP'?
􀁏􀁾􀀯􀀲􀀳􀀯􀀹􀀹 15:24 U9724909261 ) PARSONS TRANSPOR /lJ014/015 )£ COST ESTIMATE ': ,/ADDISON -ARAPAHO ROAD U-TURN April 14,1999 ITEM-NBR 1;>ESCRIPTJON UNITS UNIT COST QUANTITY COST
,-􀁌􀁾􀀺􀁾 S50.000.00 .' PAVBMENT REM.IPREP 1 550,000.00 r--,-MOBll.IZAnON LS $50,000.00 1 $SO,OOO.OO ,-.' BARRICADE, SIGN, TRAFFIC CONT LS SSO,OOO.OO J 550,000.00 CONC PAY (CPCD) Sy
_$35.00 200 $7.,000.00 1"--" 1--cONe CURB (TV II)(MONO) LF $2.00 200 $400.00 TV IV 􀁃􀁾􀁎􀁃 BEAM LF $65.00 440 528,600.00 0--" CONCABVT CY $460.00 82 537,720.00 -" 􀁄􀁾􀁾 SHAFT (30")
LF S81.00 350 $28,350.00 RET WALL SF 540.00 1200 $48.000.00 C;:ONC (pARAPET) .-CY 5460.00 25 SI1,SOO.00 ---' RAIL .. LF $40.00 300 SI2,OOO.00 RESJRlPING LS $30,000.00 1 530,000.00 ..
CONC 􀁓􀁌􀁁􀁾 eCL S) CY S300.00 115 534,500.00 1-. --I---SO.OO SO.OO 0-$0.00 􀁾 . ... 50.00 1----I--. .-$0.00 $0.00 I-----SO.OO SO.OO 1---." $0.00 􀁾 $0.00 f--. 􀁾 $0.00 -. ". . so.oo
SO.OO 1-----... ,-SO.OO ,--$0.00 ----r--50.00 SUBTOTAL 5388,070.00 r-" '--' 1--. CONTINGENCIES $201,796.40 201,796.40 f--ENGINEERlNG/SURVEY/GEOTECH 585,000.00 RIGHT-OF-WAY $0.00 1-.
'----TOTAL 5674,866.40 .-
IotETRIC SCALE •. 1: 1000 .) SINGLE POINT UR BELT IJNE ROAD BAN INTERCHANGE AT DALLAS PARKWAY 􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 VILLAGE /IE'OISIC'N 1 PAKDWDYlHRU LANES ON DAL Pli SAKOWITZ ·.. ) BANK 0 F AMERICA
\\ ( II \\ \\ 1J ,I i/////ff Ii \\\' 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾\\\ 􀁾􀀺􀀮􀁜􀁜 􀁾 \\ \\ PROP. R.O.W. \:\\􀁾 􀁜􀁜 \. \ '. 􀁾 i: \\ ADDIllONAL 460 lA2 (49SR•0 •Wo S.F•".) EXIST. R.O.W. SPECTRUM CENTER PEDESTRIAN
(lHUR5. _ COUNTS OCT. 2, 1997) 5/28/3 AM /NOON /Plot 􀁾 i E ? 􀁾 ... ':' -􀁾 􀁾 5 of 􀁾 􀁾 : 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 .•
SrAl[ tlIv. ItO. OIST. NO. METRIC SCALE: 1: 1000 ARSONS TRANSPORT, 1A"\ l1llO<ERN •GROSUTEPIN,N" INC. P1"\􀁂􀀵􀀢􀀺􀁥􀁔􀁾􀁮􀀧􀁜SCHNAN. Oel.Euw. CA DALlAS TEXAS 7S2<O UNE ROAD, SUITE 􀁾􀀹􀀹
erAX: (9 72)' 490-9261 (972) 991-1900 PItOLCT NO. FtD. ROAD STATE FmERAL 􀁾 -'to ABo N "' .. /,,/; ," ../" •.../" .......... ......... ..................... ........,.,..,.......,.-..........
"..,...... ......:...,....􀁾...􀁾􀀺.. 􀁾􀁾 􀀬􀁾􀀼􀀮􀁾 \ . SINGLE POINT URBAN INTERCHANGE BELT UNE ROAD AT DALLAS PARKWAY Designed: ........􀁾􀀮 1 9 Checked: VILLAGE 􀁒􀁅􀁾􀁓􀁬􀁏􀁈 ADD
THRU LANES ON DAL PT Drawn : PKWY BY DArt: Checked: SAKOWITZ PROP. R.O.W. \􀁾 \\\\ , \, II" I \ .\\\ 􀁾 \\ \\\'\ MOBIL MART E E E 0 Q. Q. 0 .0., .0., 0 ,;; j" .0I I 5 5 EQ. 0 8 .., SI
,:.: • AM /NOON /PM \ '\ ......􀁾􀁾􀀮 EXIST. R.O.W. ADDIllONAL R.O.W. '----;...-'4,460 1.42 (4950 S.F.) ".C.,........................•..··",'·.:·· PEDESTRIAN COUNTS (THURS. -OCT. 2.
1997) 5/28/3 SPECTRUM CEI\JTER
'" PROPOSED ARAPAHO U-TURN 􀁾 r----""--__------:.--􀁾 L r--􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮I F!: 0::: oZ V I SCALE: 1· = 40' ARAPAHO ROAD 􀁾􀁌 􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁾􀀽 NO ADDIllONAL R.O.W.
NEEDED \\\\\\!\\ o»F» (j) -0 »;U A􀁾 » -< \ 􀁾 oF» (j) zo;0 -4 :c -4 o􀁾» -< \ 􀀮􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀯􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀴 = LPREVIOUS U-TURN CLOSED DUE TO ARAPAHO ROAD WIDENING o»F» (j) -0 »;0 A􀁾􀁾
􀀬􀁾 /: 􀁌􀀯􀁾 ,/II\\I\\ i.\! !I' I!'I Ii􀁾Ii NO ADDIllONAL R.O.W. NEEDED \1 = 􀁾 ::::d °D 􀁾􀁇 v---D I \ (] 1\ \i r U-lURN BRIDGE SOUlHBOUND TO NORlHBOUND DALLAS PARKWAY AT ARAPAHO
ROAD ADDISON, lEXASI I I I PARSONS TRANSPORTAll0N GROUP, INC. BARTON-ASOit.lAN • DeLEUW. CAlliER • STEINWAN 5485 BElT UNE ROAD. SUITE '99 • DAl.1.AS. TEXAS 75240 (972) 991-1900 • rA'"
(972) 490-9261 STAT[ tJST. NO. I I I 􀁾 I I Designed: Checked: ) Crawn ; I NO. I RE\1SlON BY DATE Checked:
Zo -I-<t oo ...J W C 00 Z Z<t <to: W 􀁃􀁊􀁾 e" Z 􀁾 W 􀁾􀁷 ..J -0: I-<t ...J;t <to Zo: Q<t CI):J: 8.111111 A.l1:» 8.l111n A.U:» QCl: II ) aVOH AVMal1l liNV1 HSHVII AVM110.1 H.1HON 8V11Va
iI --AVM110.1 HUlON SV11Va aVOH NOSlaav S.1....11 A.l1:» II aVOH AVMal1l >1--z: iii: IAVM1 0.1 HUlON SV11Va