-ro J.C<􀁶􀁮􀁾􀁳 yY1c 􀁃􀁯􀁾􀁾􀀩􀁾 C112-3/2-1"1./-5 􀀨􀁻􀀮􀀮􀁾􀀩 􀁃􀁾􀁝􀁐􀁬􀁥􀁴􀁥􀁤by: JIrrl l1evc..e Contact number: Q?7.-'f50-')-879 Email address: J 􀁴􀁮􀁥􀁹􀁣􀀮􀀮􀁾 Q 􀁃􀁴􀀬􀁌􀀴􀁊􀀯􀀡􀁊􀁤􀀱􀀱􀁾
ft. tiS AIR QUALlTYffDM SCORECARD DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERVICE AREA I f)-I). -<:J'+-RESPONDENT: IOWtl D+ AtJJ""" Yes or Points No for Yes Car and Van Pooling: Does City/County
conduct employee transportation surveys to determine commute ND 15 patterns and provide information and education to employees regarding commute alternatives? Does City/County have an
Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC)? Yes 15 Does City/County provide priority parking for car and van pool vehicles? No 5 Does City/County promise a guaranteed ride home to car
and van pool riders? "'0 5 Does City/County subsidize the cost of van pools or offer alternative transportation Yes 10 allowance? Variable Work Hours: Does City/County allow its staff
to work flexible hours at the employees' discretion No 5 (other than public safetv)? Does the City/County stagger its employees' work schedules? No 5 Does City/County offer the alternative
of a compressed work week? Yes 5 Does City/County execute employee trip reduction strategies and alter schedules for No 10 equipment operation on ozone alert days? Telecommuting: Does
City/County allow home-based work? I/o 15 Bicycling and Walking to Work: Does City/County provide safe, convenient employee bicycle storage at the Nf) 5 workplace and a place for those
who bicvcle and walk to freshen up? School Contacts: Does City/County participate/cooperate with schools to provide traffic management )II> 5 at school sites during drop off/pick UP
hours? Does City/County encourage and work directly with schools on an on-going basis to No 25 develop school air qualitylTDM programs? . Commercial Employer Contact: Does City routinely
contact major employers to encourage and assist with ND 25 implementation of air qualitylTDM proarams? Transit Use: Does City/County participate in DART's Discount Pass Program? Program?
Yes 35 Does City/County provide information/education to its employees regarding transit 􀁙􀁥􀀮􀁾 5 schedules? Side One Score 70 ***Please complete other side for bonus points*** C:\mydocwnents\tdm
2004\survey dart front 2004.doc -
AIR QUALITYrrDM SCORECARD DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERViCE AREA SIDE TWO RESPONDENT: Yes or Points No for Yes Vehicles and Equipment Conduct an inventory of all diesel-fueled
on-and off-road vehicles and equipment over 8,500 2 pounds gross weight (GVW) and develop a four-year capital plan to retrofit or replace vehicles and /'1o eQuipment with high nitrogen
oxide (Nox) 􀁥􀁭􀁩􀁳􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳􀀮 Adopt methods through bidding and contracting provisions to involve contractors on public 2 jobs in the reduction of Nox emissions from vehicles and
equipment that they own, lease, or otherwise bring to the iob site. N° Adopt a procurement policy that requires the purchase of the cleanest vehicle available which yes 2 meets the functional
reQuirements of the governmental entity. Scrap rather than auction vehicles owned or controlled by the governmental entity which cannot NO 2 meet emission testing reQuirements. Building
and Facilities 2 Inventory all energy efficiency strategies which have been implemented since 1999 and any which yts are scheduled for future implementation on buildings owned or leased
by the governmental entity. Conduct an energy audit on buildings and facilities with high..energy demands, if an audit has not 2 been completed in the past four years, and develop a
four-year capital plan for implementing yts recommendations of new audits. Implement a four-year capital plan for converting to hlgh..efficiency lighting in all existing 3 governmental
entity-owned or leased buildings or facilities and continuing this practice in all new No buildings and facilities. Implement the use of "cool roofing" materials, where practicable,
on new governmental entity-No 2 owned buildinas and for replacement roofs. Other Governmental Entity Actions Irnplement a four-year capital plan for converting to light..emitting diodes
(LED) lamps in all existing 1tS 2 traffic signals and continuina this practice with future traffic signals. Limit governmental meetings, particularly those requiring extensive travel
of participants, between NO 2 the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. during the ozone season. Institute and promote expedited freeway clearance practices follOWing an accident or incident.
IVO 3 Institute and promote a pre-tax, ozone season employee trip reduction program. Ale 2 Institute and promote a pre-tax, ozone season transit pass program where applicable. NO 2 Policies
Affecting the Private Sector Consider adopting green energy building codes such as "Energy Star" which has been adopted by NO 3 the City of Frisco. Consider an ordinance requiring large
commercial and industrial buildings to have energy audits Ala 2 and resulting recommendations implemented. Consider an ordinance requiring the use of "cool roofing" materials, where
practicable, on new NO 2 privatelv-owned buildings and for replacement roofs. Consider an ordinance requiring truck stops to provide technological alternatives for reducing or IJD 2
eliminating the need for long-term idling of diesel engines. Adopt sustainable development practices which result in reducing overall miles of travel. All) 2 Total Score -Side 2 fI Total
Score -Side 1 70 TOTAL SCORE ..,,, C:\mydocwnents\tdm 2004\survey dart back 2004.doc
Completed by: _ Contact number: _ Email address: _ AIR QUALlTYfTDM SCORECARD DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERVICE AREA' RESPONDENT: IOWtl D+ AJJ"(H Yes or Points No for Yes Car
and Van Pooling: Does City/County conduct employee transportation surveys to determine commute No 15 pattems and provide information and education to employees regarding commute alternatives?
Does City/County have an Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC)? Yes 15 Does City/County provide priority parking for car and van pool vehicles? No 5 Does City/County promise a guaranteed
ride home to car and van pool riders? No 5 Does City/County subsidize the cost of van pools or offer alternative transportation Yes 10 allowance? Variable Work Hours: Does City/County
allow its staff to work flexible hours at the employees' discretion i/o 5 (other than public safety)? Does the City/County stagger its employees' work schedules? No 5 Does City/County
offer the alternative of a compressed work week? Yes 5 Does City/County execute employee trip reduction strategies and alter schedules for No 10 eauipment operation on ozone alert days?
Telecommuting: Does City/County allow home-based work? 110 15 Bicycling and Walking to Work: Does City/County provide safe, convenient employee bicycle storage at the No 5 workplace
and a place for those who bicycle and walk to freshen up? School Contacts: Does City/County participate/cooperate with schools to provide traffic management )If) 5 at school sites during
drop off/pick UP hours? Does City/County encourage and work directly with schools on an on-going basis to No 25 develop school air aualilylTDM programs? . Commercial Employer Contact:
Does City routinely contact major employers to encourage and assist with ND 25 implementation of air aualitvrroM programs? Transit Use: Does City/County participate in DART's Discount
Pass Program? Yes 35 Does City/County prOVide information/education to its employees regarding transit 􀁙􀁥􀀮􀁾 5 schedules? Side One Score 70 ***Please complete other side for bonus
points*** C:\rnydocuments\tdm 2004\survey dart front 20M.doc -
,.. AIR QUALITYrrDM SCORECARD DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERViCE AREA SIDE TWO RESPONDENT: Vehicles and Equipment Conduct an inventory of all diesel-fueled on-and off-road
vehicles and equipment over 8,500 pounds gross weight (GVW) and develop a four-year capital plan to retrofit or replace vehicles and eQuipment with high nitrogen oxide (Nox) emissions.
Adopt methods through bidding and contracting provisions to involve contractors on public jobs in the reduction of Nox emissions from vehicles and equipment that they own, lease, or
otherwise bring to the job site. Adopt a procurement policy that requires the purchase of the cleanest vehicle available which meets the functional reQuirements of the Qovernmental entity.
Scrap rather than auction vehicles owned or controlled by the governmental entity which cannot meet emission testing reauirements. Building and Facilities Inventory all energy efficiency
􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁾􀁳 which have been implemented since 1999 and any which are scheduled for future implementation on buildings owned or leased by the governmental entity. Conduct an
energy audit on buildings and facilities with high-energy demands, if an audit has not been completed in the past four years, and develop a four-year capital plan for implementing recommendations
of new audits. Implement a four-year capital plan for converting to high-efficiency lighting in all existing governmental entity-owned or leased buildings or facilities and continuing
this practice in all new buildings and facilities. Implement the use of "cool roofing" materials, where practicable, on new governmental entityowned buildings and for replacement roofs.
Other Govgmmental Entity Actions Implement a four-year capital plan for converting to light-emitting diodes (LED) lamps in all existing traffic signals and continuing this practice with
future traffic signals. Limit governmental meetings, particularly those requiring extensive travel of participants, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. during the ozone season.
Institute and ·promote expedited freeway clearance practices following an accident or incident. Institute 􀁡􀁮􀁾 promote a pre-tax, ozone season employee trip reduction program. Institute
and promote a pre-tax, ozone season transit pass program where applicable. Policies Affecting the Private Sector Consider adopting green energy building codes such as "Energy Star" which
has been adopted by the City of Frisco. Consider an ordinance requiring large commercial and industrial buildings to have energy audits and resulting recommendations implemented. Consider
an ordinance requiring the use of "cool roofing" materials, where practicable, on new privately-owned buildings and for replacement roofs. Consider an ordinance requiring truck stops
to provide technological alternatives for reducing or eliminatina the need for 􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁾􀀭􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁭 idling of diesel engines. Adopt sustainable development practices which result in reducing
overall miles of travel. Total Score -Side 2 Total Score -Side 1 TOTAL SCORE C:\mydocwnents\tdm 2004\survey dart back 2004.doc Yes or No 􀁴􀁩􀁾 y€5 No yes No No NO 4JD No Ala IJD All)
Points tor Yes 222222322232232222 70
DALLAS-REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION If you have any questions concerning the survey, please give me a call (972-312-1644). As in prior years, the top two agencies in each category will
receive special recognition at the North Dallas Chamber of Commerce Transportation Crossroads set for November 4, 2004 at the Anatole Hotel. l.JkL LAIIIl'''''''' J.'-.UCIU Suite 113-205
Dallas, Texas 75248 9721312-1644 9721312-]645 (FAX) gpa@FSI9@Bjgpaj' lIS Survey results are CITY MANAGER '-James McCarley, Executive Director Travel Demand Management (TDM)/Air Quality
Survey Results DRMC City Managers/County Judges Inside DART Service Area FROM: The annual DRMC TDM Survey has been completed. attached for your infonnation. SUBJECT: TO: October 4, 2004
Executive COmmittee Ron Hams, Co-Chair Margaret Keliher, Co-Chair Sandy Greyson, Vice-ehair Grady Smithey, Secretary Rick Stopfer, Treasurer ChadAdams Gary Base Bruce Beaty Bill Blaydes
Angie Chen Button Terri Dunn Pat Evans David Green John L. Heiman, Jr. Mary Hom C. Shane Johnson PeteKamp Gordon Mayer Mike Nowels Jayne Peters Bob Phelps Frank W. Robertson Mike Simpson
Gary Slagel Mark Stokes Steve Terrell Paul N. Wageman Bill Whitfield Charles Emery William Hale Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris GaJyThomas Ex-Qfficio Members Executive Direetor James McCarley
David A Griffin, Associate Attachments • 2004 results -inside DART • 2004 comparisons ..:.... inside DART
) \ , ) DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT SCORECARD JULY, 2004 INSIDE DART SERVICE Car & Variable Tele-Bicycling! School Commercial Transit Bonus Score· Respondent
Van Work commuting Walking Contacts Employer Use Total Poolinl! Hours Contact Addison 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No response Carrollton 15 15 15 0 5 0 40 21 111 Dallas 10 25 15 5 30 0 40 37 162
Dallas 0 25 15 0 0 -0 40 18 98 County Farmers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Branch response Garland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 pending Glenn 10 0 0 0 5 0 5 6 26 Heights Highland 20 20 15 5 5 0 40 12 117 Park
Irving 30 15 IS 5 30 25 40 27 187 Plano 40 20 15 5 30 25 40 18 193 Richardson 50 15 15 5 30 25 40 22 202 Rowlett 0 10 0 0 5 0 5 8 28 University 15 5 0 5 5 0 40 0 70 Park * Maximum score
available is 229 Mydocumcntsl2004 results -inside.doc
) DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT SCORECARD COMPARISON OF 1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003, & 2004 SURVEYS INSIDE DART SERVICE 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
2004 Respondent Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Score * Score * Score ** Score ** Score ** Score ** Score *** Addison 45 80 40 90 65 60 No response Carrollton 75 20 85 85 85
100 111 Dallas 75 85 125 75 80 180 162 Dallas County 75 70 95 80 95 90 98 Fanriers Branch 55 55 40 40 130 130 No response Garland 20 35 55 75 50 40 pending Glenn Heights 0 No No 5 No
No 26 Response response response response Highland Park 30 30 35 40 50 70 117 Irving 70 70 70 170 170 160 187 Plano 50 50. 135 90 150 150 193 Richardson 130 130 180 180 180 180 202 Rowlett
No No 50 45 50 25 28 response Response University Park 90 30 35 40 35 80 70 * Maximum score available is 140 ** New scoring system (2000); maximum score available is 190 ***New scoring
system (2004); maximum score available is 229 Mydocumentsl2004 comparison -inside.com
,') DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION CITY MANAGER 7522 Campbell Road Suite 113-205 Dallas, Texas 75248 972/312-1644 972/312-1645 (FAX) Executive Committee Ron Harris, Co-Chair Margaret
Keliher, Co-Chair Sandy Greyson, Vice-Chair Grady Smithey, Secretary Terry Waldrum, Treasurer ChadAdams Gary Base Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs Angie Chen Button Jim Dunn Pat Evans Stanton
Foerster Robert Franke John L. Heiman, Jr. Mary Hom Mike Nowels James O'Neal Jayne Peters Bob Phelps Frank W. Robertson Mike Simpson Gary Slagel Mark Stokes Steve Terrell Paul N. Wageman
AlanWalne Bill Whitfield Ex..Qflicio Members Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Gary Thomas Executive Director James McCarley David A Griffin, Associate June 9, 2003 Mr. Ron Whitehead
City Manager Town ofAddison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 7500 The D las Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC) is conducting its te annual travel demand management survey to determine the extent
that DRMC Participants are engaging in employee trip reduction activities. The DRMC Executive Committee adopted a revised format in 2000 to allow local governments additional credit
for expanded TDMIAir Quality efforts. The revised format also establishes three different categories to reflect geographic differences. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
yet to approve the Dallas -Fort Worth area State Implementation Plan (SIP)). Formal approval of the plan has been delayed due to lack of funding for the Texas Emissions Reduction Plan
(TERP) and a recent lawsuit from environmental groups on the extension of an attainment date to 2007 for Texas SIPs. A key component of the SIP, although not yet mandatory, includes
local efforts to reduce the number of ,trips' for business and pleasure. While the area will be mandated to implement all items in the SIP, the measuring stick for the current 2007 attainment
date is the number of times area monitors exceed the threshold for air quality. Thus, voluntary efforts such as TDM programs may be the key to meeting federal requirements. The DRMC
Executive Committee continues to feel the programs implemented by local governments to affect employee trip reduction have a strong impact in encouraging the private sector to expand
and/or implement similar travel demand strategies. Under the survey categories, recognition will be provided to the top two local governments from 1) Dallas County and cities inside
the DART service area, 2) cities outside the DART service area, and 3) counties outside the DART service area The awards will be presented at the annual Transportation Crossroads sponsored
by the North Dallas Chamber ofCommerce in late 2003. If you have suggestions or comments as to how DRMC can make the survey more effective or accurate, please let us know. Preliminary
tabulations will be sent to respondents for verification before the results are publicized. 􀀡􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀱􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀱􀁨􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺 􀁾􀁾􀁙􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁦􀁏􀀺􀀳􀁾􀁾􀁒􀁅􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁖 􀁾􀁧􀀱􀁴􀁾􀁧􀁾􀀺
􀂷􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁜􀁾􀁰􀁢􀁥􀁩􀁬􀁒􀁯􀀡􀀱􀁤􀀬 Ste: 113-205, Dallas, Tex!iS7S24S'orfax 972-312-1645. . Thanks for our assistance, participation, and support! nclosure -TDM Survey xc: R. Scott Wheeler,
Mayor -Town ofAddison Bob Phelps, Mayor -City ofFarmers Branch
· Completed by: J \VV\ v1 en..eContact numberlemail address:1.72-lf-56 -J.fi71 AIR QUALITY/TDM SCORECARD Jf)l e.V'c2-Q cJ.... a..&&1.5.fY1. helUS DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART
SERVICE AREA RESPONDENT: Town of Addison Yes or Points Respondent's No for Yes Score Car and Van Pooling: Does City/County conduct employee transportation surveys to determine tJO 15
commute patterns and provide information and education to employees regarding commute alternatives? Does City/County have an Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC)? ifs 15 \5 Does
City/County provide priority parking for car and van pool vehicles? tJD 5 Does City/County promise a guaranteed ride horne to car and van pool riders? No 5 Does City/County subsidize
the cost of van pools or offer alternative tJO 10 transportation allowance? Variable Work Hours: Does City/County allow its staffto work flexible hours at the employees' 100 5 discretion?
Does the City/County stagger its employees' work schedules? NO 5 Does City/County offer the alternative of a compressed work week? 􀁜􀁬􀁾􀁊 5 5 Does City/County execute employee trip
reduction strategies and alter schedules 􀁾􀁏 10 for equipment operation on ozone alert days? Telecommuting: Does City/County allow horne-based work? Nco 15 Bicycling and Walking to
Work: Does City/County provide safe, convenient employee bicycle storage at the ND 5 workplace and a place for those who bicycle and walk to freshen up? School Contacts: Does City/County
participate/cooperate with schools to provide traffic Nv 5 management at school sites during drop off/pick up hours? Does City/County encourage and work directly with schools on an on-going
No 25 basis to develop school air QualitylTDM programs? Commercial Employer Contact: Does City routinely contact major employers to encourage and assist with ND 25 implementation of
air qualitvlTDM programs? Transit Use: Does City/County participate in DART's Discount Bus Pass Program? itS 35 35 Does City/County provide information/education to its employees regarding
bus 􀁩􀁥􀁾 5 5 S schedules and bus use? Max Score 190 f.oO C:\mydocurnents\tdm 2003\survey dart cities 2003.doc
) HP LaserJet HP LASERJET 3200 3200se invent JUN-16-2003 9:08AM Fax Call Report Job 889 Date 6/16/2003 Time 9:07:14AM Type Send Identification 99723121645 Duration 0:58 Pages 1 Result
OK I' 1\ n A . Compblodhy: J\VV\ Aene.. Or {-'r(JlCXISe::lr\ COII..<l .......r/....D.dd....: 97.l-If-5<>-a;V1 AIRQUALITYrrDMSCORECARD JP' ..rc.LQ ci-. o.&J'!>hl, 'he.us DALLAS COUNTY
AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERVICE AREA RESPONDENT, Taw••fAddbo. Yes or hill.. Rapoadeat's No for Yes Score Cu aDd V•• Poo1iog: Does City/Couilly conduct employee tnuL'lportalion survey'
to dett:rmine kio 15 commute pitt.... and provide wannatim and educa1ioolo employ... regarding commute alternatives? Does City/County have an Employ.. Transportation Coordinator (ETC)?
ie; IS \5 Does City/CountY provide priority patkiog for car aod van pool v<hicl..? NO 5 Doo9.city/COllIlly prllIIIige a guarontocd ride home io car and van pool riden? tJO ·5 Doo9 City/CountY
.ub,idizo tho co,l ofvon poob or offer alternative 􀁾􀁏 10 trDD9oDJ1etioo allowance? Varlabls Work Boan: Doo9 City/Counly allow it9 ,tafflo work O..ible hours at the employ...' 100 5
di9cmion? Doo91he CityICoonty "a8ll'" i19 employ...' work ,chedul..? rJO 5 Doo9 City/County offer !be ahemative ofa comp",...d work week? 􀁜􀁬􀁾􀀿 5 5 Doo9 City/County ....ute employee
trip n:ductioo strategies and alter 'chedul" 1V0 10 for rion on ozone alert days? Ie.mmatiDg: Doo9 CitylCounty allow hom",bued work? N'D 15 Bicydior • .geI Wand.. to Work: Doo9 CityfC<Junty
provide ..fa, convenient employee bicycle storage.t the ND 5 workolace.Dd. olace for lhose who bicycle and walk to frcsheo uo? Sel!ool Cop.tt: Doo9 City/CountY participate/cooperale
with schools to provide1raffic Nu 5 mana....... II school 'ites􀁾elroo offloii:k up hours? Does City/CountY eDCOlU'Igo and work directly with school, on an on-going No 25 basis to devoIoo
.chool air oualitvlTDM prolll8lll!l? COllUMrdallillDloyer CoPt: Does City routinely contact major employers to eocaurago and ossisl with No 25 impl<mentatioo ofair .".lityfTDM nr""""",?
􀁾 Doo9 City/CDDJIly participate in DART'. Discount Bus Poss Program? it? 35 35 Doo9 Cily/Coun\y provide wonnationfeducalion 10 its employees regarding bu, 􀁩􀁾 5 S scMduJes and bus
use? Mix 8eore 190 <00
SUMMARY: Council Agenda Item: 􀁾 '\J #R9-/The Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC) has drafted a resolution for consideration by member cities that would support legislation facilitating
the entry of new cities into DART. This is essentially the "new member city" policy initiative that was initiated in the Metroplex Mayors forum earlier this year. This item was tabled
at the November 12, 2002 Council Meeting. Paragraph 1 of the Resolution has been reworded to address the concerns of Council as to the source of funds and procedure for paymeIitof funds
to DART. A redlined version ofthe Resolution is included in your packet so that you can compare the language as originally drafted by DRMC and as now proposed by staff. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
No Impact. BACKGROUND: For mass transit to realize it's full potential in the Dallas metropolitan area, the service must be expanded beyond the current 13 member cities to a wider base
of jurisdictions. Under current state law, a city must adopt a one-cent sales tax to become a member of DART. Many cities in the area do not have one cent to give under the current State
sales tax cap of 8.25%. It is in the best interest of the region to allow these cities to join DART if they are able to pledge the equivalent of a one-cent sales tax. Legislative change
such as that suggested in the attached resolution would enable such a payment for DART membership. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend Council approve the Resolution supporting legislative change
to allow expansion and extension ofDART services to local jurisdictions that elect to pledge their one-cent municipal sales directly to DART.
,) (draft resolution for potential adoption bv DARTmember cities based on DRMC DART Committee recommendation) RESOLUTION # _ A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF ADDISON SUPPORTING NECESSARY
LEGISLATION AND DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT (DART) POLICY CHANGES TO ALLOW EXPANSION AND EXTENSION OF DART SERVICES TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT JURISDICTIONS THROUGH LOCAL OPTION CITIZENS ELECTIONS
PLEDGING PAYMENTS TO THE DART SYSTEM OF ITSIN AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO A ONE-CENT MUNICIPAL SALES TAX. . ---... --------WHEREAS, mobility throughout the North Texas area is a key element
of a continued positive quality of life and economic viability; and, WHEREAS, the Town of Addison finds that to maintain mobility, enhance the quality of life for citizens, promote economic
development, and address issues associated with reducing roadway congestion and achieving federal air quality mandates, quality transit services must be available; and, WHEREAS, such
transit and mobility services provided by DART can contribute to achieving the above cited elements; and, WHEREAS, current State law and DART policy prevents extension and expansion
of DART services to other areas unless that area has the capability to implement a one-cent sales tax within the existing State cap on sales tax of 8 % cent; and, WHEREAS, the benefits
of extension of DART services to areas in the future enhance the entire North Texas area; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS, ON THIS THE
26th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2002, THAT: 1. The State Legislature and DART provide necessary legislation and policy changes to allow a city to become a member of DART with a pledge of tfle equivalent
of one cent sales tax of city secured funding that is from non State and/or non federal funds. its one-cent municipal sales tax paid directly from the Sate Comptroller to DART. Such
"membership" should would require a citizen vote and a binding commitment to DART to match existing requirements on "member" cities as to any future withdrawal by the city and continued
funding to DART on debt related issues. OFFICE OF THE CITY SECRETARY R02-XXX
2. Legislation should provide a means, by a single ballot proposition, for a city having adopted an economic development sales tax to join a metropolitan transportation authority by
public election and dedicating the required sales tax to the authority upon satisfying its previous tax obligations or dedicating alternative funding equal to the required sales tax,
thus allowing a transition to full membership. 3. Upon adoption by a super majority of the current thirteen "member" DART cities such a proposal should become a priority for legislative
action. 4. Copies of this Resolution shall be forwarded to the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition, the DART Board, and appropriate officials at the State level. -------------_.---Mayor
ATIEST: City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ken Dippel, City Attorney OFFICE OF THE CITY SECRETARY R02-XXX
Council Agenda Item: LR/{) SUMMARY: The Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC) has drafted a resolution for consideration by member cities that would support legislation facilitating
the entry of new cities into DART. This is essentially the "new member city" policy initiative that was initiated in the Metroplex Mayors forum earlier this year. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No
Impact. BACKGROUND: For mass transit to realize it's full potential in the Dallas metropolitan area, the service must be expanded beyond the current 13 member cities to a wider base
ofjurisdictions. Under current state law, a city must adopt a one-cent sales tax to become a member of DART. Many cities in the area do not have one cent to give under the current State
sales . tax cap of 8.25%. It is in the best interest_of the region to allow these cities to join DART if they are able to pledge the equivalent of a one-cent sales tax. Legislative change
such as that suggested in the attached resolution would enable such an equivalency payment for DART membership. DART policy on the admission of new member cities would also need to be
changed to reflect the change in law if passed by the legislature and signed into law. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend Council approve the resolution supporting legislative change to allow
expansion and extension of DART services to local jurisdictions that elect to pledge the equivalent of a one-cent sales tax to DART.
) .. ;1"fJtJ -:t. (dJ·aft resolution (or potential adoption byDART member cities based on DRMC DARTCommittee recommentloJion) RESOLUTION # _ A RESOLUTION OF THE SUPPORTING NECESSARY
LEGISLATION AND DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT (DART) POLICY CHANGES TO ALLOWEXPANSION AND EXTENSION OF DART SERVICES TO LOCAL GOV"ERNMENT JURISDICTIONS THROUGH LOCi\L OPTION CITIZEN ELECTIONS
PLEDGING PAYMENTS TO THE DART SYSTEM IN AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO A ONE-CENT SALES TAX WHEREAS. mobility throughout the North Texas area is a key element ofa continued positive quality
of life and economic viability; and, WHEREAS, the finds that to maintain mobility, enhance the quality oflife for citizens, promote economic development, and address issues associated
with reducing roadway congestion and achieving federal air quality mand.:'ltes quality transit services must be available; and, ---WHEREAS,.-such. 􀀺􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁊􀁉􀁳􀁩􀁴􀀭􀁡􀁮􀁤􀀭􀁭􀁇􀁾􀁔􀀭􀀭􀁳􀁧􀁲􀁶􀁫􀁥
􀁳􀀭􀁰􀁲􀀭􀁯􀁶􀁩􀁤􂂬􀁤􀀭􀀹􀁙 􀁊􀀻􀀩􀁾􀀱􀀧􀀭􀁻􀀺􀁡􀀮􀁲􀁈􀀺􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁢􀁵􀁴􀁥􀁬􀁯􀀭􀁡􀁥􀁨􀁨􀁩􀁥􀁶􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀭􀁴􀁨􀁥 -ab0Ve ---------citedelements; and, WHEREAS, current State law and DART policy prevents extension and expansion of DART seJ.vices to other areas unless that area has the capability to implement a one-cent
sales tax within the existing State cap on sales tax of8 Y4 cent; and, WHEREAS. the benefits Of extension of DART services to areas in the future enhance the entire North Texas area,
NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE _ ON TInS THE DAY OF_.,....... -'. 2002. THAT: 1. The State Legislature and DART provide necessary legislation and policy changes to allow a city
to become a member of DART with a pledge of the equivalent of one-cent sales tax of city-secured funding that is from non-State and/or non-federal funds. Such 'membership' should require
a citizen vote and a binding commitment to DART to match existing requirements on 'member' cities as to any future withdrawal by the city and continued funding to DART on debt related
issues. 2. Legislation should provide a means, by a single ballot proposition, for a city having adopted an economic development sales tax to join a metmpolitan transportation authority
by public election and dedicating the required sales tax to the authority upon satisfying its previous tax obligations or dedicating alteJ.native funding equal to the required sales
tax, thus allowing a transition to full membership. 3. Upon adoption by a super majority of the cun-ent thirteen 'meJ.nber' DART cities such a proposal should become a priority for legislative
action. 4. Copies of this Resolution shall be tOlwarded to the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition, the DART Board, and appropriate officials at the State level. ATIEST _
'.1 DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION .7522 Campbell Road Suite 113-205 􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁳􀀬 Texas 75248 􀁾􀁾􀀯􀀳􀀱􀀲􀀭􀀱􀀶􀀴􀀴 972/312-1645 (FAX) The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
still in the process of reviewing the Dallas -Fort Worth area State Implementation Plan (SIP). Formal approval of the plan has been delayed by a number of lawsuits at the federal and
state level. A key component of the SIP, although not yet mandatory, includes local efforts to reduce the number of 'trips' for business and pleasure. While the area will be mandated
to implement all items in the SIP, the measuring stick for the 2007 attainment date is the number of times area monitors exceed the threshold for air quality. Thus, voluntary efforts
such as TDM programs may be the key to meeting federal requirements. 2002 .) i _.--􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀭__ ' 􀁾􀀢􀁟􀀢􀁟􀀧􀁾􀁟􀀧􀀢 __ 􀁾 _., 􀁮􀁟􀁾, MAY 2 1 ; 􀀺􀀽􀁟􀀮􀁾 1·::";'; J} (,\ /J
􀁲􀀿􀀮􀀮􀀺􀁾 ,. L".-, ...J; ::-" II IV! 􀁉􀀺􀀢􀁾 -:,..0 __-::l 􀁾 U l::.::J r-.'-'...-....-.--------.... , , i: i. ... May 17, 2002 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town ofAddison P.O.
Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 DearMrrd: 􀁾􀀮 The Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC) is conducting its ninth annual travel demand management survey to determine the extent that
DRMC Participants are engaging in employee trip reduction activities. The DRMC Executive Committee adopted a revised format in 2000 to allow local govermnents additional credit for expanded
TDM!Air Quality efforts. The revised format also establishes three different categories to reflect geographic differences. Ex-officio Members Executive Committee Lee F. Jackson, Co-Chainnan
Ron Harris, Co-Chainnan Sandy Greyson, Viee-Chair Grady Smithey, Secretary GaI)'Base Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs Angie Chen Button HughCaims AlComelius Don Dozier Jim Dunn Robert Franke
John L. Heiman, Jr. Ken Lambert Mike Nowels James O'Neal Bob Phelps Frank W. Robertson Candy Sheehan Mike Simpson GaI)' Slagel Mark Stokes Paul N. Wageman AlanWalne Cynthia White Jerry
Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson GaI)'Thomas Executive Director James McCarley The DRMC Executive Committee continues to feel the programs implemented by local govermnents to affect
employee trip reduction have a strong impact in encouraging the private sector to expand and/or implement similar travel demand strategies. Under the survey categories, recognition will
be provided to the top two local governments from 1) Dallas County and cities inside the DART service area, 2) cities outside the DART service area, and 3) counties outside the DART
service area The awards will be presented at the annual Transportation Crossroads sponsored by the North Dallas Chamber ofCommerce in late 2002. David A Griffin, Associate If you have
suggestions or comments as to how DRMC can make the survey more effective or accurate, please let us know. Preliminary tabulations will be sent to respondents for verification before
the results are publicized. 􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀮􀁬􀀭􀁴􀁨􀁥􀂷􀁳..rvey 􀁢􀁹􀁊􀁵􀁄􀁥􀀲􀀸􀀻􀀭􀀱􀁾􀁉􀁬􀁍􀁊􀀴􀁓􀁒􀁅􀁇􀁉􀁏􀁎􀁁􀁌􀁍􀀰􀁂􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁙􀁥􀀨􀀩􀁁􀁌􀁉􀁔􀁉􀁑􀁎􀀮 You' may send the survey
via mail to DAlLAS REGIONAL MOBH..ITY COALITION, 7522 Campbell Road, Ste. 113-205, Dallas, Texas 75248 or fax 972-312-1645. Thanks for your assistance, participation, and support! //Sincer
"; 􀁾 Enclosures -TDM Survey xc: R. Scott Wheeler, Mayor -Town ofAddison Bob Phelps, Mayor -City ofFarmers Branch
') I) Completed by: 􀁟􀁊􀀮􀀽􀀮􀀮􀁌􀁜􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁍􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁲􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀻􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀽􀀻􀁥􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁲􀁵􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀭􀁟Contact numberlemail address: C(1;b-,+50 -itJlJ'1 AIR QUALITY/TDM
SCORECARD DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERVICE AREA RESPONDENT: Town ofAddison Yes or Points Respondent's No for Yes Score Car and Van Pooling: Does City/County conduct employee
transportation surveys to determine 􀁦􀁊􀁾 15 commute patterns and provide information and education to employees regarding commute alternatives? Does City/County have an Employee Transportation
Coordinator (ETC)? 1􀁥􀀬􀁾 15 l5 Does City/County provide priority parking for car and van pool vehicles? NO 5 Does City/County promise a guaranteed ride home to car and van pool riders?
\Jo 5 Does City/County subsidize the cost of van pools or offer alternative \JO 10 transportation allowance? Variable Work Hours: Does City/County allow its staff to work flexible hours
at the employees' l.\eJ 5 6 discretion? Does the City/County stagger its employees' work schedules? \\10 5 Does City/County offer the alternative of a compressed work week? 􀁾􀁾􀀩 5
S Does City/County execute employee trip reduction strategies and alter schedules NO 10 for equipment operation on ozone alert days? Telecommuting: Does City/County allow home-based
work? 􀁾􀀧􀁩􀀩 15 Bicycling and Walking to Work: Does City/County provide safe, convenient employee bicycle storage at the Jo 5 workplace and a place for those who bicycle and walk to
freshen up? School Contacts: Does City/County participate/cooperate with schools to provide traffic 􀁾􀁏 5 management at school sites during drop off/pick up hours? Does City/County
encourage and work directly with schools on an on-going VO 25 basis to develop school air qualityITDM programs? Commercial Employer Contact: Does City routinely contact major employers
to encourage and assist with 􀁾􀁜􀀩 25 implementation of air qualityITDM programs? Transit Use: Does City/County participate in DART's Discount Bus Pass Program? 􀁾􀁥􀀭􀀿 35 )6 Does
City/County provide information/education to its employees regarding bus it? 5 tJ schedules and bus use? Max Score 190 le5 C:\mydocuments\tdm 2002\survey dart cities 2002.doc
UP LaserJet TOALASERJET 3200 9724502837 MAY-29-2002 5:15PM Fax Call Report ) 3200se invent Job 30 Date 5/29/2002 Time 5:14:37PM Type Send Identification 99723121645 Duration 1: 11 Pages
1 Result OK C..p....dby: J*, 􀁾􀁾􀁥􀀮􀁵􀀮 Ol...et ....ber/...U.dd....: q . ,!!iQ -y1'j AIR QUALITYITDM SCORJ:CARD DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERVICE ARJ:A RJ:SPONDENT: Taw••r
AddlJo. Vesor Poiatl RespondeDl'. N. filrY.. Score Car and VIP PooIIpg: Doeo City/County conduct emploY"< transpol1alion surveys to determine 􀁖􀁾 IS commutc patmns and provide informatioo
and education to """Ioyeeo regarding commute aJb::matives? Doeo City/County bov. an Employee Transportation Coordinalcr (ETC)? 1fh IS IS Doeo City/County provide priority parking lor
car and van pool vehicl..? NO S Doeo City/Cowrty prlllIlise D8'Wanleed ride borne to cor and van pool riders? lJo S Doeo City/Cowrty subsidize the cost of van pooh or offer .llernative
\JD 10 Itronsportation allowance? v.rllble Work HO'n; Doeo city/Cowrty aUow its staff to work flexible hollis at the employees· 􀁾􀁥􀀻 S 6 discretion? Doea the City/CoUDly sla8F its
employ.... work schedulea? 􀁾􀁏 5 Doea City/County offer the altanalive ofa oompressed work wect? 􀁾􀁴􀀬􀀮􀀧􀀩 S 5 Does CitylCoUDly ..ecute employee trip_onstrategi.. and alter scbeclul..
No 10 for eauimnent ODCI'Btion on ozone alcl't days? TeleqmmptiDl: Doeo City/Coonty allow homo-based work? tJO IS BIo;ye!lM aMw,Ddgg 10 Work: Doeo CitylCowty provide.aIe, _venienl employ..
bicycle storage al the Jo 5 workel..e and a Dl... for 1hose woo bicvcle and walk to fn:sben no? ·SdoooICo."ct3: Does City/County participato'cooperare with school, to provide traffic
􀁾􀁏 5 mana...,.". at IItbooI ,itl:a duriwl droo offIDitk uo hours? Does City/County """"""'go and work directly with schools 011 an oo-going VO 15 basis to develoo school airOu..ntvITDM
DI'OlIrlIllllI? ColIUIIeI'CIaI Employer Co.1M!: Doeo City routinely cootatl major employCfll to encourag. and assist with 􀁾􀀱􀀩 lS imnlementation ofair ooaJilvlTDM DrollrOJ1lll? Im!i.tl.!Ki
Doea City/County participate inDART's DistounI Bus Pus Program? 􀁾􀁥􀀮􀁾 35 )6 Does City/COIDIty provide information/ed_lion to its employees regarding bus ,\t') 5 '5 stheduleoandbus
....? Mu Score 190 ItS
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT SCORECARD COMPARISON OF 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,2000 & 2001 SURVEYS INSIDE DART SERVICE 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Respondent
Total Score* Total Score* Total Score Total Score Total Score ** Total Score ** Addison 40 35 45 80 40 90 Carrollton 30 60 75 20 85 85 Dallas 85 70 75 85 125 75 Dallas County 70 70 75
70 95 80 Fanners Branch 50 50 55 55 40 40 Garland 25 5 20 35 55 75 Glenn Heights Not surveyed No response 0 No Response No response 5 Highland Park 5 60 30 30 35 40 Irving 45 50 70 70
70 170 '. Plano 50 50 50 50 135 130 Richardson 105 105 130 130 180 180 Rowlett 0 No response No response No Response 50 45 University Park No response 80 90 30 35 40 * Maximum score
available is 140 ** New scoring system; maximum score available is 190 Mydocumentsl2001 comparison -inside.com
AGENDA SURFACE TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL COMMITTEE Friday, March 23, 2001 Transportation Board Room North Central Texas Council of Governments 11 :30 -1:15 Mobility 2025 Plan Update Workshop
(Lunch provided for members who RSVP) 1:30 -3:00 Full STTC Business Agenda 1:30 -1:35 1. Approval of February 23, 2001 Minutes 0" Action 0 Possible Action 0 Information Minutes: 5 Presenter:
Jim Driscoll, SITC Chairman, City of Irving Item Summary: Approval of the February 23, 2001 minutes contained in Reference Item 1 will be requested. Background: N/A 1:35 -1:55 2. Transportation
Improvement Program 0" Action 0 Possible Action 0 Information Minutes: 20 Presenter: Dan Rocha, NCTCOG Item Summary: Endorsement of Regional Transportation Council (RTC) approval of
revisions contained in Reference Items 2.1 and 2.2 as well as approval of revisions contained in Reference Item 2.3 will be requested. Administrative amendments will be presented for
information. An overview will be provided on the development of the 2002-2004 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and additional draft components will be distributed at the meeting.
Background: In order to avoid a potential loss of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funding, staff has developed a proposal to expedite the expenditure
of CMAQ funds in FY2001 to be balanced against other . funding programs in later years. Additional information and corresponding modifications are contained in Reference Item 2.1. A
revision related to the Dallas Area Traffic Management Center is included as Reference Item 2.2. Due to the need to expedite inclusion of these revisions in the Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP), these revisions were presented to the RTC on Thursday, March 8, 2001 for approval contingent on SITC endorsement. Additional revisions to the 2000 TIP are
contained in Reference Item 2.3 for the Committee's consideration. Administrative amendments, provided for information, are contained in Reference Item 2.4. These modifications have
all been reviewed for consistency with the air quality conformity determination and financial constraint of the TI P.
1:55 -2:05 NCTCOG Transportation Department staff has been 1 working with the staffs of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) District Offices, local governments, and transit
providers td update the projects currently programmed under various funding categories as part of the development of the 2002-2004 TIP. Public meetings were held in March, and more pUblic
meetings will be held in April as part of this development process. Several components of the draft 2002-2004 TIP were provided to the Committee at the February meeting. Draft components
for the Surface Transportation Program-Metropolitan Mobility (STP-MM), the CMAQ Program, and the transit programs are currently being refined and will be distributed at the meeting.
Final recommendation for RTC approval of the 2002-2004 TIP will be requested at the April 27, 2001 meeting. 3. Regional Transportation Councilrrexas Transportation Commission Partnership
Program o Action Presenter: Item Summary: Background: o Possible Action 0 Information Minutes: Minutes: 10 Dan Rocha, NCTCOG STTC recommendation for RTC approval of the 2005 Strategic
Priority Program will be requested. Each year, the Regional Transportation Council develops a proposal for expediting transportation projects by leveraging funds with the Texas Transportation
Commission. TxDOT has requested to receive candidate projects for the 2005 Strategic Priority Program by April 17, 2001. NCTCOG staff is currently working with TxDOT staff to develop
a proposal for RTC consideration. This proposal will be presented to the Committee at the meeting. Reference Item 3 is a listing of projects submitted earlier this year by the RTC to
TxDOT, but remain unfunded by the Commission. Additional projects may be presented at the meeting. 2:05 -2:20 4. Unified Planning Work Program o Action Presenter: Item Summary: Background:
o Possible Action 0 Information Minutes: 15 Dan Kessler, NCTCOG NCTCOG staff is proposing modifications to the 20002001 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) to add several new projects
and modify the source of funding on several others. Additional information regarding this request is included in Reference Item 4. Also, NCTCOG staff is in the process of preparing the
Draft 2001-2002 UPWP. A brief summary regarding the status of this effort will be provided at the meeting. The Unified Planning Work Program is prepared annually by NCTCOG staff in cooperation
with local governments and transportation providers. This document is required by federal and state transportation planning regulations and in order to receive metropolitan area transportation
planning funds. The UPWP provides a summary of the
1<. 2:20 -2:30 transportation and air quality planning tasks to be conducted by MPO staff over the course of the fiscal year beginning October 1 of each year. Also contained in this
document is a summary of the transportation and air quality planning funds to be available from various federal and state agencies, as well as background on the MPO planning process.
5. Funding Proposal for Clean Vehicle Technologies' Call for Projects 0" Action Presenter: Item Summary: Background: o Possible Action 0 Information Minutes: 10 Nan Miller, NCTCOG A
summary of the projects will be provided showing the air quality benefits and cost of each. The Committee will be· asked to approve a plan for selecting and funding projects. In December,
information was presented on 31 proposals received under the Call for Projects. Since the Program is oversubscribed, the projects were scored and ranked according to cost per emission
benefit. This information is provided as Reference Items 5.1 and 5.2. In the Western SUbregion, $2,480,376 is available and will cover projects submitted by city and county governments
that demonstrate emissions benefits costing $135 or less, and projects submitted by other entities as funds allow. In the Eastern Subregion, $1,349,873 is currently available, and $1
,633,580 will be added to fund projects submitted by city and county governments that demonstrate emissions benefits costing approximately $140. Additionally, $1,313,400 will be added
to fund projects in the other category in the Eastern Subregion. 2:30 -2:40 6. Metropolitan Transportation PlanlTransportation Improvement Program/Air Quality Conformity o Action Presenter:
Item Summary: Background: o Possible Action 0 Information Minutes: 10 Dan Lamers, NCTCOG The Committee will be briefed on the status of the Mobility 2025 Plan Update. NCTCOG staff have
been working on the development of the Mobility 2025 Plan Update, the 2002 Transportation Improvement Program, and the associated Air Quality Conformity determination. A technical workshop
for members of STTC, the Travel Demand Management/Congestion Management System Committee, and the Bicycle/Pedestrian Transportation Task Force will be held on March 23, prior to the
STTC meeting. Reference Item 6 contains information which was presented at the public meetings held on March 5-7, 2001. Dan Lamers will brief the Committee on the status of the Mobility
2025 Plan Update as well as comments from the technical workshop.
2:40 -2:45 \/7. Creation of a Value-Pricing Task Force o Action Presenter: Item Summary: Background: o Possible Action 0' Information Minutes: 5 Dan Lamers, NCTCOG The Committee will
be briefed on the creation of the Value Pricing Task Force. The metropolitan transportation plan, Mobility 2025, recommends new and expanded tollways and HOV/managed facilities which
include provisions for potential value pricing implementation. The value pricing concept is considered in the Plan as both a revenue generating and system management option. Additionally,
the Federal Highway Administration is sponsoring a Value Pricing Pilot Program aimed at implementing demonstration projects using the value pricing concept. A Value Pricing Task Force
is being formed jointly with the Texas Department of Transportation, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Fort Worth Transportation Authority, and the North Texas Tollway Authority to investigate
the region's existing and proposed value pricing policies and to recommend potential corridors for for consideration under the Value Pricing Pilot Program. Dan Lamers will brief the
Committee on the Task Force creation. Reference Item 7 contains additional information on this issue. 2:45 -2:50 8. Public Involvement Process 2:50 -2:55 o Action Presenter: Item Summary:
Background: 9. Fast Facts o Action Presenter: Item Summary: o Possible Action 0' Information Minutes: 5 Lynn Hayes, NCTCOG A summary of public meetings will be provided. Public meetings
were conducted on March 5, 6, and 7 to solicit public comments. Over 78 citizens attended the three meetings held in Irving, Fort Worth, and Dallas, respectively. Minutes from those
meetings, along with citizen comments will be distributed at the STTC meeting on March 23. NCTCOG staff submitted newspaper advertisements to 11 local newspapers to publicize the meetings
and personal invitations to the meetings were mailed to over 5,600 interested parties, 380 members of the media, and over 300 homeowner/neighborhood associations. Flyers were mailed
to 120 cities cities and counties and 90 public libraries. A flyer announcing the dates, times, and meeting locations of the upcoming series of public meetings is provided as Reference
Item 8. o Possible Action 0 Information Minutes: 5 NCTCOG Staff Brief presentations will be made on the following topics: • Dan Kessler-Partners In Mobility • Ken Cervenka -Travel Models
for Local Governments • Chris Klaus-Regulatory SIP Conditions • Greg Royster-Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Rail Access Study
2:55 -3:00 10. Progress Reports o Action 0 Possible Action !if Information Minutes: 5 Item Summary: Progress Reports are provided as Reference Item 10 on the following activities: •
Texas Transportation Commission • Legislative Update • Sustainable Development Regional Mobility Initiatives Tour • Upcoming Events 11. Other Business (Old or New): This item provides
an opportunity for members to bring items of interest before the group. 12. Next Meeting: The next meeting of the Surface Transportation Technical Committee is scheduled for Friday,
April 27, 2001 at 1:30 p.m., at the North Central Texas Council of Governments.
) Mobility 2025 Update Technical Workshop March 23, 2001 North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department
CONFORMITY OF THE 2002 TIP AND 2025 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE SCHEDULE DATE MILESTONE January 26 STTC Action to Approve Schedule February 8 RTC Action to Approve Schedule
February 8 Press Briefing and Public Meeting March 1.................. Press Briefing March 5, 6, and 7...... Public Meetings March 23................ Technical Workshop (STTC, Bike/Ped,
TDM/CMS) SITC Information ApriI 4..................... Press Briefing (/<lid ktt 1!r;nJ t)lV vi 􀁊􀁾􀁻􀁴 􀀡􀁕􀁦􀁾 C, ) April 9, 10, and 11 Public Meetings April 12 RTC Presentation on
Conformity Results April l8 TDM/CMS Committee Action April 25 Bike/Ped Task Force Action April 27................... SITC Action May 10................... RTC Action May 11 TIP and Conformity
Analysis Submittal July 26 TxDOT Approval of Statewide TIP July 27 Latest Conformity Subrrlittal (90-Day Process) October 25 Conformity Determination Deadline (18 Months After SIP Submittal)
TDM/CMS =Travel Demand Management/Congestion Management System Committee BikeiPed = = BicycleiPedestrian Transportation Task Force STTC =Surface Transportation Technical Committee RTC
=Regional Transportation Council SIP =State Implementation Plan
!'oJ MOBILITY 2025 DEMOGRAPHICS DALLAS-FORT WORTH METROPOLITAN AREA Population + Population Employment Employment 1995 4,121,000 2,336,000 6,457,000 1999 4,536,000 2,691,000 7,227,000
2025 6,671,000 3,907,000 10,578,000 Ratio 1999/1995 1.10 1.15 1.12 2025/1999 1.47 1.45 1.46 0/0 Annual Growth 1995 to 1999 2.50/0 3.80/0 3.00/0 1999 to 2025 1.8% 1.70/0 1.8%
w TRAVEL MODEL VALIDATION RESULTS 1995 1999 Total Links 21,436 21,922 Links With Counts 8,874 6,459 Overall Percent Error -2.25% -0.860/0 Root Mean Square Error 51.40/0 55.2% 􀀮􀁾􀀯
􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁊
+:' MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE POTENTIAL RAIL SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS Revisions Fort Worth Circulator to/from Growth Centers (Study Underway) 􀀧􀁾 Lewisville to Denton Commuter Rail (KCS RR)
Additions Fort Worth South to Johnson County (BNSF RR) DFW Airport Rail Access (Study Underway) S.H. 121 to U.S. 380 (BNSF RR) Southern Dallas to Ellis County (BNSF RR) South Oak Cliff
LRT Extension to Future Olympic Village Site • -----:--Results of Completed MISs Northwest Corridor Alignment through Irving/Las Colinas
􀀢􀁾􀁟􀀯􀀭􀀧 North Central Texas N Council of Governments A Transportation fA. end 􀁐􀁦􀀯􀀯􀀺􀁊􀁜􀁊􀁪􀁊􀁊􀁲􀂻􀁾 D1 _ Clarify Rail 􀁁􀁬􀁩􀁧􀁮􀁭􀁾􀁩 􀁾􀁓 _ Potential Additions _ Potential
Revisions .. Mobility 2025 Plan Recommendations o DFW Airport Rail Access Freeways/Parkways Existing Rail Corridors H+I+t+f Special Events o Possible Eastern Terminus All existing railroad
rights-of-way should be monitored for potential future transportation corridors. New facility locations indicate transportation needs and do not represent alignments. CO'LVU r NAPT=
=R:i /f+E zcrzd) wrr/l. OA/LT 􀀶􀁾􀁫􀁁􀁁 pl1;2-t...1 /(ii(3 Texas/Motor sPJway 1lM􀁾;<P"' 􀁾􀀧􀁬􀁾 JXd-1t-? 􀁾 e-􀀰􀀱􀀭􀀱􀁾 h' Dpc? Mobility 2025 Update r I ",,"Y l,i'e'/" I! (tP' Y
Rail System I) • I DRAFT c5 \ \ 􀁇􀁾 􀁾􀀡􀁙􀀢 ¥\1M gf'v.{f' 0{
Mobility 2025 Rail System Legend New facility locations indicate transportation needs and do not represent alignments. NA North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Light
Rail Pending MIS/PE/EIS Special Events North Crosstown Corridor Study Cooperatively Funded Freeways/Parkways Existing Rail Corridors • Possible Eastern Terminus All existing railroad
rights-of-way should be monitored for potential future transportation corridors. ••• ---_ Commuter Rail -• At a minimum, evaluate the engineering feasibility and environmental implications
of: rail along the Santa Fe line and the Burlington Northern line, including the feasibility of an alternative connection alongS.H. 190; rail along the full Cononbelt Corridor, from
Parker Road to DFW Airport; and rail along the Cottonbelt Corridor from DFW Airport with an eastern transition to light rail along LBJ Freeway at an Addison Intermodal Center.
MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE FREEWAY I TOLLWAY I HOV I MANAGED FACILITIES DRAFT ROADWAV/HOV 􀀧􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾 .. Mobility 2025 Plan Potential Modification Facility Limits Recommendations Mobility
2025 Update : Corridor Refinement Studies I.H.30 Ballpark Way -Cooper Street N/A Add Frontage I.H.35E Royal-Walnut Hill N/A Add Frontage I.H.635 I.H. 35E -U.S. 75 Reconstruct -8 /10
Lanes Widen -10 Lanes I.H.820 Meadowbrook -U.S. 287 Widen -6 Lanes Widen -8 Lanes President George Bush Turnpike (East) S.H. 78 -I.H 30 New Staged Tollway -4 Lanes New Staged Tollway
-6 Lanes S.H.114 International Pkwy -S.H. 183 Widen· 8/6 Lanes Widen· 8 Lanes New HOV /Managed· 1 Reversible New HOV /Managed -2 Reversible S.H. 121-Southwest Parkway F.M. 1187 -U.S.
67 New Staged Parkway -4 Lanes New Staged Tollway· 4 Lanes S.H.183 S.H. 121 -Dallas CL Widen -10 Lanes Widen· 8 Lanes New HOV /Managed -2 Reversible New HOV /Managed -3 Reversible Trinity
Parkway I.H. 35E SRLT -U.S. 175 New Staged Tollway -8 Lanes New Staged Tollway· 6 Lanes Trinity Westfork Loop 12 -Trinity Pkwy New Staged Tollway· 4 Lanes New Staged Tollway -6 Lanes
Trinity Westfork S.H. 360 -LOOP12 Preserve ROW New Staged Tollway -6 Lane Frontage Other Initiatives Central Dallas ConnectorlTunnel (Not Mapped) S.H. 183 -U.S. 75 N/A Further Study·
Not Mapped Dallas North Tollway U.S. 380 -F.M. 720 New Staged Tollway -4 Frontage New Staged Tollway -6 Lanes I.H.35 MPA -I.H. 35E /I.H. 35W Widen· 6 Lanes Widen·8 Lanes I.H.35E U.S.
67 -I.H. 20 N/A Widen -10 Lanes Loop 288 U.S. 380 • I.H. 35E Upgrade to Parkway· 4 Lanes Upgrade to Parkway· 6 Lanes S.H.114 F.M. 156 -I.H. 35W New Staged Freeway· 4 Lanes New Staged
Freeway -6 Lanes S.H.121 U.S. 75 • Preston New Staged Freeway -4 Lanes New Staged Freeway -6 Lanes U.S. 67 HOV I.H. 20 -Belt Line Road N/A New HOV /Managed -1 Reversible U.S. 75 MPA
-F.M. 543 N/A Widen -6 Lanes U.S. 75 F.M. 543 -S.H. 121 Widen·6 Lanes Widen·8 Lanes 781234569 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Map Ref. # "'-! SOURCE: North Central Texas Council
of Governments 3/23/01
Additional and improved freeway interchanges and service roads should be considered on all freeway facilities in order to accomodate a balance between mobility and access needs. New
facility locations indicate transportation needs and do not represent specific 􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁧􀁮􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀯 "-'--) NA Dallas CBD Fort Worth CBD Mobility 2025 Freeway and Tollway
System Legend _ Improve Existing Freeway _ New Staged Freeway _ New Staged Tollway New Staged Parkway _ Upgrade to Parkway Preserve ROW 􂀢􀁓􀁾 North Central Texas Council of Governments
Transportation '"
Legend Mobility 2025 HOV and Managed Facility System , --..-/' NA North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation All HOV facilities will be managed for mobility efficiency.
Reversible _ Managed HOV/lntegrated Tollroad ". Two-Way Freeways/Parkways Arrows represent the direction of travel during the morning peak period. Direction of travel is reversed during
the afternoon peak period on these HOV facilities Right-of-Way preservation should be encouraged in all freeway corridors to accommodate potential future HOV facilities. New facility
locations indicate transportation needs and do not represent specific alignments. • I ,I IIIII,I (
DRAFT -/" 􀀮􀁾􀀧 NA Fort Worth ceo North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Dallas ceo New facility locations indicate transportation needs and do not represent specific
alignments. Additional and improved freeway interchanges and service roads should be considered on all freeway facilities in order to accomodate a balance between mobility and access
needs. Mobility 2025 Update Freeway and Tollway System Legend _ New Frontage _ Capacity Revisions Managed I HOV Revisions _ New Staged Tollroad f:mft\;t;JMobility 2025 Plan Recommendations
REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM Quantifies future arterial capacity needed to support the Metropolitan Transportation System Complements and enhances the freeway and transit systems and provides
local access Based on the "Regional Arterials" identified through the Regional Thoroughfare Plan Regional Thoroughfare Plan identifies the arterial roadway facilities having regional
travel significance REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM Mobility 2025 Plan Update A review of the Regional Thoroughfare Plan indicates: • McKinney amended their Thoroughfare Plan removing a portion
of the McKinney Loop • Lanes revised on portions of Regional Arterial System based on local government feedback • Thoroughfare spacing review indicates deficiencies outside core area
• Other changes will be noted for inclusion in the next Plan: Mobility 2030 'l 11
Mobility 2025 Update Regional Arterial System ! 􀁾 ysr LEGEND liWBl Thoroughfare Spacirg Review N Regional Arterials N Existing FrE!El'A8YS and Toll Reads lv' Proposed FreeII\BYS and
Toll Roads Preserve Right-d-Way /,,'" County 8oLn::Iary NMetropoIitanIWaBoundary N L..ocaI govemrrent thoroughfare plans vary in these corridors. Fat Worth CBD Scale (dee) DlflasCBD
10 NeNfacility locations indicate transportation needs and do not represent specific alignments. Based on 2000 Regional Thoroughfare Plan. • ... N 􀁾􀀭􀀬􀀭 toondof__ A -
Summary of Transportation System Management Recommendations I 􀀭􀁾􀀯 Estimated Cost{s): Capital cost =$308 million Estimated Impact{s) of Strategy: Reduction in congestion delay of 205,000
personhours per day. Estimated Cost{s): Costs are included in ATM/ITS and TMA programs. Estimated Impact{s) of Strategy: Enhanced accessibility; reduction in congestion dela Estimated
Cost{s): Capital cost =$227 million Estimated Impact{s) of Strategy: Increase in average speed on freeways and parallel arterials; reduction in congestion delay The bottleneck locations
identified from the aerial photo's were compared to bottleneck projects in the TIP, corridors projected to be reconstructed by 2007 and corridors with MIS. The remaining bottleneck locations
will be inventoried and studied. Identification of projects can occur in the MIS process and by regional traffic management teams, among other efforts. Includes traffic control devices,
tun lanes, traffic islands, grade separations, and channelization Includes signal optimization, sign upgrade, and system interconnection. Freeway bottlenecks identified in the traffic
data collection effort will need to be considered as corridors improvements and major investment studies are funded and developed. -----􀀤􀁊􀁧􀁮􀁾􀁮􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁑􀁮􀀮􀀺􀁊􀁭􀁰􀁲􀁑􀁶􀁾􀁭􀁾􀁮􀁴􀀤􀁦
•• :::f:. 􀂷􀀬􀁾􀁮􀁬􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁱􀀪􀀡􀁰􀁮􀀮􀁬􀁭􀁰􀁲􀁱􀂥􀁾􀁭􀁾􀁮􀀪􀁾􀀧 .•·• ..... w Total T5M Costs Capital costs =$898 million
Summary of Intelligent Transportation System Recommendations -_/􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀧 Reduction in non-recurrent traffic congestion of 123,460 person-hours per day. Estimated Impact{s) of Strategy:
Reduction in recurrent traffic congestion of 68,263 personhours per day. Estimated Cost{s): Capital cost =$314 million Operating costs =$32 million per year • Priority Deployment Criteria:
priority projects, corridors, and systems identified in subregional ITS plans • System Development Criteria, which includes: -Fill gaps in the existing ITS communications infrastructure
by completing critical system linkages -Enhance or provide communication and information exchange between TxDOT districts, local transportation agencies, and regional ITS partners -Leverage
transportation resources by targeting investment, where possible, to facilities undergoing reconstruction -Leverage transportation resources by creating or enhancing public/private partnerships
which will provide communications infrastructure for regional ITS • Consistency with National/Regional ITS Architecture: Projects must be consistent with the architecture and standards
described in the Dallas Area-Wide Intelligent Transportation System Plan or the Fort Worth Regional Intelligent Transportation System Plan, the current ITS plans for this region. • Operating
agreements will be developed between affected and collaborating parties. • Open architecture should provide for future system expansion. • Evaluation and reoortina of ITS effectiveness.
Focus on deployment of Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS), Advanced Traffic Management Systems (ATMS), and Advanced Public Transportation Systems (APTS). 􀀺􀁁􀁱􀁙􀁾􀁑􀁱􀁾􀁾􀁭􀁴􀀧􀁲􀁾􀁮􀂧􀁐�
�􀁾􀁴􀁉􀀹􀁮􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁑􀁾􀁧􀁾􀁭􀁾􀁮􀁾􀁬􀀬􀁊􀁴􀁾􀁾 iL"" ..... +:' Total System Costs (TSM & Capital cost =$1.21 billion ITS) $32 million/year operating cost at full imolementation
") ....\I TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT Freeway Bottleneck Removal System Monitoring -Peak Period Commuter Traffic Fall 1999 Data Collection Identification of traffic bottleneck
locations and levels of service Initiate Bottleneck Program Corridors undergoing reconstruction should address identified bottlenecks Major Investment Studies should develop solutions
for bottlenecks in their final recommendations Identify and study remaining bottleneck locations 15
· TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal Integration and Monitoring Project Funds established in 1999 Call for Projects Initiate a Call for Projects
to repair defective loops (FY 2001) Assess system performance (FY 2002 to FY 2003) Develop and implement improvements (FY 2004 to FY 2006) Conduct Measures of Effectiveness Studies (FY
2002 to FY 2006) 16
,) ,') INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS Efforts Accomplished to Date ITS Investment $125 million existing and funded (40% complete) Sub-Regional ITS Plans Dallas Area-Wide Intelligent
Transportation System Plan (1996) Fort Worth Regional Intelligent Transportation System Plan (1999) Interagency Communications Analysis and Recommendations Study (2000) Guiding principles
for system implementation Regional consensus on interagency communication 17
INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS Current Effort: Define the Regional Architecture Development of Dallas-Fort Worth Regional ITS Architecture Framework for fostering institutional cooperation
Enables regional compatibility and operability Comprised of individual ITS projects, and provides guidance to individual ITS projects Regional Integration and Information Exchange Builds
on the existing TxDOT Center-toCenter software Provides support for a decentralized system 18
INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS Support for Future Projects Incorporate RTC Policies into Mobility 2025 Update Based on the Interim Guidance Establishes local review process Expedites
state and federal review process 19
Mobility 2025 Plan Update Sustainable Development Chapter Data -Report on land use at rail stations -Report on land use types and travel patterns -Report on land use and regional mobility
access 􀁾 -Encourage local commitment to transit oriented development at rail stations -Review land use and transportation regulations -Implement new RTC policy on the Transportation
Accessibility Program Policies 􀁾􀁩􀀭 􀁾􀁾 􀀧􀀩􀀮􀁾 􀁾 No Programs -Update to match NCTCOG Executive Board action on the Center of Development Excellence -Recommend long-term transportation
issues public involvement program -Recommend town centers and travel patterns study 􀀢􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾
N.... Mobility 2025 Plan Update Sustainable Development Chapter NCTCOG Long-Range Planning Process Executive Board Regional Transportation Issues Council Issues Growth Stormwater Air
Quality Growth Traffic Congestion Air Quality Land Use Water Supply Land Use Transportation Financing " " .... 1999 -2003 Strategic Plan ..... ... Mobility 2025 (Jan. 2000) 􀁾 " " Center
of ... Development Excellence r Mobility 2025 Update (on-going) ..... ..... (May 2001) ,.. ,r Future ...... ..... Future Mobil ity Plan Integrated Plan .... (May 2004) r -. -/-,,--./
Mobility 2025 Plan Update Intermodal Freight Chapter NN Regional Process· Rail Crossings NAFTA -New process for input from the intermodal freight community -More detailed analysis -New
RTC Initiative -Issues Update .,--/. 􀁾
Mobility 2025 Plan Update Transportation Enhancements Chapter NW Regional Inventory Policy Issues Financial Constraints -Update projects -Update with new RTC policy on regional eligibility
-Minor changes in future projections 􀀮􀁾 : 􀀧􀀭􀁾..:-,,/-j
Mobility 2025 Plan Update Pedestrian and Bicycle Chapter Accessibility -Focus on Bike/Ped Access to Rail Bicycle Districts Regional Veloweb N . & .r::f'v. 􀁾 􀀨􀁜􀁾 oJ 􀁾 x . 􀁾 ,,'<5
􀁾 " 􀀬􀁾 \. '0 􀁾1" 􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁥􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁡􀁮Districts 􀁾 􀁾 Spot Improvements Financial Constraints -Minor route modifications -Right of way study recommended -No changes to districts
-District study recommended -Update to match new rail stations -District study recommended -No changes -No net change
Low-Emitting Vehicles Program Plan's Recommendations Remain the Same: 1. Encourage the displacement of petroleum fuels. 2. Facilitate the sharing of refueling stations. 3. Explore the
feasibility of electric vehicles complementing rail and other transit facilities. 4. Facilitate the adoption of emerging technologies. 5. Fund incremental costs. 6. Expand funding for
private fleets. 7. Expose the general public to low-emitting vehicles. 8. Seek financial and non-financial incentives to promote low-emitting vehicles. Program Will Comply With the Adopted
Clean Vehicle Policy: 1. Requires funded vehicles to meet Ultra Low Emission Vehicle Standard, or demonstrate ULEVequivalent emissions. 2. Provides 'funds for hybrid electric and neighborhood
electric vehicles. 3. Allows conversions in some cases. 25
NCl'l MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE Transportation and Environmental Justice* Title VI of the Civil Right Act of 1964 To avoid, minimize, or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse human
health and environmental effects, on minority populations and low-income populations. To ensure the full and fair participation by all potentially affected communities in the transportation
decision-making process. To prevent the denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in the receipt of benefits by .minority and low-income populations. *Environmental Justice Is Not
a New Requirement 􀀬􀁾....
MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE Environmental Justice The Department of Transportation (DOT) Order on Environmental Justice and Executive Order 12898 pertains to the following groups: N"-J Black
Hispanic Asian American American Indian and Alaskan Native Low-Income -A person whose household income is at or below the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines.
􀀮􀁾
Nco MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE MPO Responsibilities Environmental Justice Evaluate Public Involvement Process Identify minority and low income transportation needs Identify and incorporate
into Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) "'---.-../Develop performance measures to determine impacts of TIP and Long 􀀭􀀭􀁾 Range Transportation
Plan recommendations
MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE Financial Planning Mobility 2025 Mobility 2025 Update Revenue & Cost In 1999 $ 2001 $ Planning Horizon 2000 -2025 2001 -2025 Legislative Actions No Change No Change
Impacts on Financial Plan: Total Revenue is Slightly J-ligher in 2001 $ (-2%) Total Cost is Slightly Higher in 2001 $ (-20/0) Shortfall of About $3 Billion in 2001 $ 29
CONFORMITY OF THE 2002 TIP AND 2025 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE FOR THE DALLAS/FORT WORTH METROPOLITAN AREA Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 100 wo 400 -􀁾 􀁾 300 Us s::::
-.o.-.-tn.5-200 tn .t-n Ewoo > 0 ....'...... -1990 SOURCE: NCTCOG Transportation Department Attainment Demonstration SIP voe Emission Budget = 107.60 (tons/day) 2007 2015 Analysis Year
2025 .. 􀁾 ..--"
CONFORMITY OF THE 2002 TIP AND 2025 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE FOR THE DALLAS/FORT WORTH METROPOLITAN AREA Nitrogen Oxide Emissions 400 w..... ...-.. 􀁾co 􀁾 300 co :t::..
oco .Ci) 200 o .-Ew>< oz1000 ....'..... -Attainment Demonstration SIP NOx Emission BUdget = 164.30 (tons/day) 1990 SOURCE: NCTCOG Transportation Department 2007Analysis Year2015 2025
North Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: The Surface Transportation Technical Committee DATE: March 8, 2001 The Bicycle/Pedestrian Transportation Task Force The Travel Demand Management!
Congestion Management System Committee FROM: Michael Morris, P.E. Director of Transportation SUBJECT: Mobility 2025 Plan Update Workshop On March 23, 2001, there will be a workshop to
discuss the development of the Mobility 2025 Plan Update currently underway. The workshop will begin at 11 :30 a.m. in the Board Room, Second Floor, of the North Central Texas Council
of Governments (NCTCOG) offices, and will end at approximately 1:15 p.m. prior to the regularly scheduled Surface Transportation Technical Committee (STTC) meeting. A deli style lunch
will be provided to those who wish to attend the workshop. In January 2000, the current Metropolitan Transportation Plan, Mobility 2025, was adopted. Since that time there have been
ongoing efforts to move forward with the recommendations of the Plan. As a result of these ongoing efforts, NCTCOG, in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT),
North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA), Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), Fort Worth Transportation Authority (FWTA), and local governments, is developing the Mobility 2025 Plan Update.
The purpose of the Update will be to incorporate the latest efforts associated with the policies, programs, and projects contained in Mobility 2025. The Update is being conducted concurrently
with the development of the 2002 Transportation Improvement Program and associated Air Quality Conformity. Attachment 1 contains background information on the review of mobility performance
measures between 1995 and 1999 as well as the potential policy implications of many of the transportation-related activities that have occurred over the last year along with the schedule
for this effort. Attachment 2 contains information regarding how these activities may affect the metropolitan transportation plan. '-(ES ,,-We look forward to your participation in this
workshop. lease RSVP to Roxane R berts by Tuesday, March 20, 2001 at (817) 695-9244, or email atrrobes@dfwinfo.com. If you ha questions about the workshop, please call Dan Lamers at
(817) 695-63. DL:rr Attachments cc: 2000-01 UPWP Element 4.01 Project File STTC Correspondence File TDM/CMS Committee Correspondence File BPTTF Correspondence File 616 Six Flags Drive,
Centerpoint Two P. O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806 is> recycled paper http://www.dfwinfo.com
J . \. -j . j Mobility 2025 Policy Review Public Meetings March 5, 6, and 7, 2001 North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department
PERCENT CHANGE BETWEEN 1995 AND 1999 Measures Percent Change Population 10.1 0/0 Employment 15.2 0/0 Vehicle Miles of Travel 18.4 % Roadway Capacity 1.8% Signal and Congestion 37.00/0
Delay Time Level of Service 52.1 0/0 "F" Facilities 􀁉􀁲􀁔􀀺􀁨􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁰􀀺􀀻􀁩􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁦􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁓􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀻􀀺􀀻􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺�
�􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀱􀀱 II Excess roadway capacity has been II II used up and congestion delay will
.. il increase at a faster rate. .. 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::;::::::::::::::;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀱
c' \ .. ) FEDERAt.. REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER POLICY IMPLICATIONS IMPACTING MOBILITY PLAN UPDATE (MAY 2001 AND MAY 2004) 1. Progress on Corridor Refinement "Studies" 2. Air Quality Conformity
(Speed Limit, Sustainable Development, High Emitting Vehicle Program, Low Emitting Vehicle Program, Legislative Initiatives) 3. Implications on Financial Constraint ("Studies", Deletions/Additions,
Legislature, New Administration/Discretionary Funds) 4. Policy and Program Review 5. Olympic Plan (2012) 6. NAFTA Initiative 7. Recent Congestion Report 8. SIP Approval: Proposed Conditions
9. Update Environmental Justice Performance Measures 10. Progress on Thoroughfare Plans
, CONFORMITY OF THE 2002 TIP AND 2025 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE SCHEDULE MILESTONE DATE(§} STTC Action (Approve Schedule and Public Meeting Dates).............. January
26 RTC Action (Approve Schedule and Public Meeting Dates)............... February 8 STTC Information '. .......................... March 23 Press Briefing February 8; March 1; April
4 Public Meetings February 8; March 5, 6, and 7; April 9, 10, and 11 RTC Presentation on Conformity Results...................................... April 12 TDM/CMS Committee Information...............
................................. April 18 SITC Action.. .. ... .... ...... ...... ....... ..... .. .... .. .. .. ...... .. .... .. .. .. April 27 RTC Action ,.. . .. . .. .... ... ...
.. .... .. May 10 TIP and Conformity Analysis Submittal.......................................... May 11 TxDOT Approval of Statewide TiP.............. JUly 26 Latest Conformity Submittal
(90-Day Process)................................ July 27 Conformity Determination Deadline (18 Months After SIP Submittal)... October 25 TDM/CMS =Travel Demand Management/Congestion
Management System Committee STTC =Surface Transportation Technical Committee RTC =Regional Transportation Council , SIP =State Implementation Plan , ----' ''"--./
.. ) '1/MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE Public Meetings March 5-7, 2001 North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department
J CURRENT TRANSPORTATION PLAN MOBILITY 2025 Mobility 2025 Adopted in January 2000 Current Update -May 2001 Next Update -May 2004 Identifies $45 Billion of Policies, Programs, and Projects
for Continued Development Multimodal System Includes Light Rail/Commuter Rail High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes Freeways Tollways Bike/Pedestrian Facilities Intelligent Transportation System
Management Other Major Programs Include Travel Demand Management Sustainable Development Alternative Fuels Elderly and Disabled Public Transportation Intermodal/Freight Initiatives Includes
Financial Analysis and Planning Includes Positive Air Quality Conformity Test
MOBILITY 2025 TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION PROCESS 􀁉􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁟􀁾􀁾 2025 Programmed Network (Conformity) 􀁾 ,r ..!Infrastructure Maintenance!;;: J!} J-£ 􀁾 􀁾 m w 􀁾 􀁾 -CMS 􀁾􀁾__􀁾
􀁾 o -􀁾 -VI 5 (TSMITDM, 􀀮􀁾 o Bicycle/Pedestrian) 􀁾 􀁾 -:= + c.. em5 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁬􀀺 Rail and Bus 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁩 -􀁾 .: 􀁾 E 􀁾 􀁾 (ij 􀀱􀀴􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀭 HOV
􀀱􀀴􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀢􀁅 .--CJ 􀁾 􀁾 .= . FreewaylToliway and LL 􀀱􀀴􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾 ---Arterial --"o(1) ...>.-.. ..m..-.. .--c:: ..... c:: (1) ECo -(1) >(1) c(1) -.cm.c-:: m..... o􀁾 CJ) '-----------'
􀁾 : ! 2025 Plan 􀁉􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮 2
MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE 2001 Refinement Areas Performance Measures Short Range Environmental Justice Travel Demand Management Implementation of Existing RTC Policy Air Quality Conformity
(TCMs) Speed Limits High Emitting Vehicle Maintenance Sustainable Development Center of Excellence Accessibility Program Transportation Enhancements New RTC Eligibility Criteria Alternative
Fuels Low Emitting Vehicles Program Intermodal/Freight New Process NAFTA Corridors Safety At-Grade Rail Crossing Program
·'\ ) .1 . . ,I MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE 2001 Refinement Areas TSMBottleneck Locations Thoroughfare Audit Program Rail/Bus Corridor Refinement Studies/Other Initiatives Local Transit Initiatives
2012 Olympics D/FW Airport Access Commuter RaillTransit Authority Expansion HOV/Managed Corridor Re'finement Studies/Other Initiatives Regional Value Pricing Task Force FreewaylTollway
Corridor Re'finement Studies/Other Initiatives Regional Arterials Regional Thoroughfare Plan Review Financial Planning Corridor Refinement Studies/Other Initiatives Legislative Initiatives4
RAIL MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE POTENTIAL CORRIDOR CHANGES DRAFT n Potential Update to Facility Limits Mobility 2025 Corridor Refinement Studies Fort Worth Systems Study Various Routes Consider
Options Northwest Corridor Rail Options (Irving Alignment) Northwest Hwy -DFW Airport Clarify Alignment Other Initiatives Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) -Southwest Commuter Rail
FW CBD -South through Burleson and Cleburne Possible Inclusion DFW Airport Rail Access Various Routes Consider Options Denton Commuter Rail Denton -Lewisville Clarify Alignment Northwest
Corridor Rail Options (Frisco Extension) S.H. 121 -Frisco Possible Extension South Oak Cliff Line Extension I.H. 20 -Proposed Olympics Village Possible Extension Union Pacific -Southeast
Commuter Rail Dallas CBD -South through Lancaster and Waxahachie Possible Inclusion 􀀭􀁾􀀧 􀀭􀀭􀁾
ROADWAY/HOV MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE POTENTIAL CORRIDOR CHANGES DRAFT 0'1 Facility Limits Potential Update to Mobility 2025 Corridor Refinement Studies I.H.30 Ballpark Way -Cooper Street
Add Frontage J.H.35E Royal-Walnut Hill Add Frontage I.H.635 I.H. 35E -U.S. 75 Lane Revisions I.H.820 Meadowbrook -I.H. 20 Lane Revisions President George Bush Turnpike (East) S.H. 78
-I.H 30 Lane Revisions S.H.114 International Pkwy -S.H. 183 Lane & Managed Facility Revisions S.H. 114/S.H. 121 S.H. 114 -International Pkwy Lane & Managed Facility Revisions S.H. 121-Southwest
Parkway F.M. 1187 -U.S. 67 Upgrade to Tollroad S.H. 121 /S.H. 183 I.H. 820 -S.H. 121 Lane Revisions Trinity Parkway I.H. 35E -U.S. 75 Lane Revisions Trinity Westfork Loop 12 -Trinity
Pkwy Limits and Lane Revisions U.S. 287 Berry Road -I.H. 820 Lane & Managed Facility Revisions U.S. 287 /I.H. 20 Express U.S. 287 -U.S. 287 Managed Facility Lane Re\isions U.S. 75 HOV
North of I.H. 635 Possible Realignment and Extension Other Initiatives Central Dallas ConnectorlTunnel S.H. 183/I.H. 30 -I.H. 635 Possible Inclusion D/FW Airport East-West Connector
S.H. 360 -S.H. 161 Downgrade to Arterial Local Government Thoroughfare Planning Regional Arterials Possible Revisions Loop 288 I.H. 35 -I.H. 35E Lane Revisions Proposed Denton/Collin/Rockwall
Outer Loop /Grid System Various Alignments Possible Inclusion Proposed McKinney Loop Stacy Rd -S.H.5 Possible Removal S.H.121 U.S. 75 -Preston Lane Revisions .-...,.//
􀀮􀀬􀁾􀀯 NA Fort Worth ceo North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Dallas ceo New facility locations indicate transportation needs and do not represent specific alignments>:.---/Add
itional and improved freeway interchanges and service roads should be considered on all freeway facilities in order to accomodate a balance between mobility and access needs. Mobility
2025 Freeway and Tollway System Legend _ Improve EXisting Freeway _ New Staged Freeway _ New Staged Tollway New Staged Parkway .. Upgrade to Parkway Preserve ROW •
Mobility 2025 HOV and Managed Facility System Legend Reversible _ Managed HOV/lntegrated Tollroad .. 􀁔􀁷􀁯􀁾􀁗􀁡􀁹 Freeways/Parkways Arrows represent the direction of travel during
the morning peak period. Direction of travel is reversed during the afternoon peak period on these HOV facilities 􀁒􀁩􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁦􀀭􀁗􀁡􀁹preservation should be encouraged in all freeway
corridors to accommodate potential future HOV facilities. New facility locations indicate transportation needs and do not represent specific alignments. All HOV facilities will be managed
for mobility efficiency. 􂀢􀁡􀁾--North Central Texas N Council of Governments 4 Transportation t\ . e-=-􀀧􀁾􀀮 -./
DRAFT NA Fort Worth ceo North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Oallas ceo Additional and improved freeway interchanges and service roads should be considered on all
freeway facilities in order to accomodate a balance between mobility and access needs. New facility locations indicate transportation,􀁾􀀮 needs and do not represent specific alignments.
Mobility 2025 Update Freeway and Tollway System Legend _ Potential Additions _ Potential Revisions _ Mobility 2025 Plan Recommendations
CENTRAL DALLAS CONNECTOR TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIVES1 1. Reduced Circuity and Vehicle Miles of Travel 􀁾 2. Reduced Signal Delay ...... 3. Reduced Roadway Emissions N 4. Improved Mobility
and Reliability 5. Reduce Neighborhood Drive-Through Traffic 6. Enhance Pedestrian and Traffic Safety 1Need and Location Under Study
AGENDA MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE TECHNICAL WORKSHOP March 23, 2001 1. Introduction and Schedule (Dan Lamers) /2. Draft Mobility 2025 Update Recommendations: Project Level /Travel Forecasting
(Ken Cervenka) /Rail (Greg Royster) ,/, Freewayrrollway/HOV/Managed Facilities (Dan Lamers) v' Regional Arterials (Wes Beckham) ,,/3. Comments and Discussion (AII);/4. Draft Mobility
2025 Update Recommendations: Program/Policy Level /Management and Operations Overview (Dan Kessler). /Transportation System Management (Dan Rocha) ,/Intelligent Transportation Systems
(Dan Rocha)//Travel Demand Management (Barbara Maley) I Elderly and Disabled Transportation 􀀨􀁂􀁾􀁲􀁢􀁡􀁲􀁡 Maley) /Sustainable Development 􀀨􀁍􀁩􀁫􀁾􀁩􀁭􀁳􀀩 Intermodal/Freight (Mike
Sims) /Transportation Enhancements (Mike Sims) V Bicycle/Pedestrian (Mike Sims)V' . /Low Emitting Vehicles (Nan Miller) V 5. Public Involvement and Environmental Justice (Lynn Hayes/Dan
Kessler) v" 6. Financial Planning (Mahmoud Ahmadi) V /7. Air Quality Conformity (Chris Klaus) v 8. 8. Comments and Discussion (All)
DEVELOPMENT OF 2002-2004 TIP Guide to Project Review Worksheets The North Central Texas Council of Govemments is requesting your review of surface transportation projects in the following
funding programs: the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), the Surface Transportation ProgramMetropolitan Mobility (STP-MM), the Urban Street Program, and
the Urbanized Area Formula Program. The CMAQ program directs funds toward transportation projects in nonattainment areas for ozone and carbon monoxide as designed by the federal Clean
Air Act. These projects must contribute to the attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The majority of STP-MM projects are roadway widenings on various farm-tomarket roads
and major arterials as well as construction of new arterials. The objective of the Urban Street Program is to rehabilitate deteriorated streets that feed the State Highway System. Project
Review Worksheets have been included for the CMAQ, STP-MM, and Urban Street programs. These are sorted by subregion, funding program, city, and project code. Each project is presented
in a doubl'e-entry format: the first row indicates the project attributes from the 2000-2002 TIP, and the second row shows the project as proposed for the 2002-2004 TIP. A Comment field
has also been incorporated to facilitate review of proposed project adjustments. For the most part, the information contained in this field is self-explanatory. However, the following
explanations may be helpful: 􀁾 "NO PROJECT STATUS FORM REC'D" indicates additional information is needed on the status of various phases of project development 􀁾 "TXDOT SPLIT" indicates
that TxDOT is proposing to subdivide the project into two or more manageable components 􀁾 "CITY 200X; COG 200Y" indicates that although the city or agency requested a particUlar funding
year for the project, NCTCOG staff review of the status along with average implementation time frames resulted in a different funding year recommendation 􀁾 "PME" indicates that this
project is part of the Dallas County Project Management/Engineering effort; in some cases, PM/E estimates are also provided For additional information, and to discuss projects included
in the listings, contact: Dan Rocha, Program Manager LaDonna Smith, Eastem Subregion Contact Nathaniel Bamett, Western Subregion Contact 616 Six Flags Drive, Suite 200, Centerpoint Two
P.O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 Phone: (817) 695-9240 fax: (817) 640-3028 http://www.dfwinfo.com
Transportation Improvement Program Project Review Worksheet Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan Area PROJECT COST (dollars in thousands) FEDERAL FUNDS BY FISCAL YEAR (doliars in thousands)
OTAL FUNDED Current totals PROJECTS Adiusted totals Printed 3/23/01 Sorted by: District, Funding Program, City, Project Code
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT '","!7JD __ iii. Zqa::gSd 􀁉􀁬􀁾® Post Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 May 4,2001 Mr. James McCarley, Executive Director Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition
7522 Campbell Road, Suite 113-205 Dallas, TX 75248 Re: Travel Demand Management Survey Dear Mr. McCarley: ) (972) 450-2871 16801 W1estgrove This is to return the Travel Demand Management
Survey as requested in your letter of April 30, 2001. If you have any questions about the survey, please call me at 972-450-2879. Very truly yours, Town of Addison 􀀧􀁉􀁙􀀮􀀹􀁾􀁾􀁾 J
es C. Pierce, Jr., P.E. ssistant Public Works Director cc: Ron Whitehead, City Manager Chris Terry, Assistant City Manager Michael E. Murphy, P.E., Director ofPublic Works
c 􀁾􀀮 '-\ .:J ) , AIR QUALITYffDM SCORECARD DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERVICE AREA RESPONDENT: Town of Addison Yes or Points 􀁒􀁥􀁳􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀧􀁳 No for Yes Score Car and
Va! Pooling: Does City/County conduct employee transportation surveys to determine Ye.S 15 !15 commute patterns and provide information and education to employees regarding commute alternatives?
Does City/County have an Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC)? "reS 15 i!\5 Does City/County provide priority parking for car and van pool vehicles? No 5 iI Does City/County promise
a guaranteed ride home to car and van pool riders? 􀁾􀁖 5 I, Does City/County subsidize the cost of van pools or offer alternative 􀁾 fS 10 ,10 transportation allowance? Variable Work
Hours: Does City/County allow its staff to work flexible hours at the employees' No 5 discretion? Does the City/County stagger its employees' work schedules? \[es 5 J5 Does City/County
offer the alternative of a compressed work week? '-I e5 5 I .5 Does City/County execute employee trip reduction strategies and alter schedules 􀁾􀁏 10 for equipment operation on ozone
alert days? Telecommuting: Does City/County allow home-based work? tVa 15 Bicycling and Walking to Work: II Does City/County provide safe, convenient employee bicycle storage at the
NO 5 i workplace and a place for those who bicycle and walk to freshen up? ScboolContacts: Does City/County participate/cooperate with schools to provide traffic NO 5 manag;ement at
school sites during; drop off/pick up hours? i Does City/County encourage and work directly with schools on an on-going 00 25 basis to develop school air quality/TDM pro)1;Tams? I Commercial
Employer Contact: , 00 i Does City routinely contact major employers to encourage and assist with 25 i implementation of air quality/TDM programs? I Transit Use: Does City/County participate
in DART's Discount Bus Pass Program? \\ eJ 35 􀀱􀁾 Does City/County provide information/education to its employees regarding bus 􀁾􀁥􀀧􀀿 5 $ schedules and bus use? TI Max Score 190
CKo , :\mydocuments\tdrn\tdrn dart cities 200I.doc
) DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION 7522 Campbell Road Suite 113-205 Dallas, Texas 75248 972/312-1644 972/312-1645 (FAX) Executive Committee '.,'.; ':', April 30, 2001 As this survey
is distributed, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is in the final stages of review for the Dallas -Fort Worth area State Implementation Plan (SIP). Formal approval of the SIP
is anticipated later this year. A major part of the recommended plan, although not yet mandatory, includes local efforts to reduce the number of 'trips' for business and pleasure. While
the area will be mandated to implement all items in the SIP, the real 'test' for the 2007 attainment date is the number of times area monitors exceed the threshold for air quality. Thus,
voluntary efforts such as TDM programs may be the key to meeting federal requirements. MAY 2 2000 ; 􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀭 .. Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town ofAddison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, 􀁾􀁾.7/ln,/..
. Dear Mr. 􀀷􀁥􀁡􀁾􀀺 _ r The Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC) is conducting its eighth annual travel demand management survey to determine the extent that DRMC Participants
are engaging in employee trip reduction activities. The DRMC Executive Committee adopted a revised format last year to allow local governments additional credit for expanded TDM/Air
Quality efforts. The revised format also established three different categories to reflect geographic differences. Lee F. Jackson, Chairman Barbara Mallory Caraway Vice-Chairman Grady
Smithey, Secretary Linda HaJpeT-Brown, Treasurer JeranAkers Ruben Avelar Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs Angie Chen Button HugbCairns AI Cornelius Don Dozier Robert Franke Ron Harris John
1. Heiman, Jr. Mike Nowels Bob Pbelps Ernest Randall Frank W. Robertson Richard Rozier KathySeei Candy Sheehan Gary Slagel Mark Stokes Paul N. Wageman AlanWalne Cynthia White Ex..Qfficio
Members Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Roger Snoble Executive Director James McCarley David A Griffin, Associate The DRMC Executive Committee continues to feel the programs
implemented by local governments to affect employee trip reduction have a strong impact in encouraging the private sector to expand and/or implement similar travel demand strategies.
Under the revised categories, recognition will be provided to the top two local governments from I) Dallas County and cities inside the DART service area, 2) cities outside the DART
service area, and 3) counties outside the DART service area. The awards will be presented at the annual Transportation Crossroads sponsored by the North Dallas Chamber ofCommerce in
late 200I. If you have suggestions or comments as to how DRMC can make the survey more effective or accurate, please let us know. Preliminary tabulations will be sent to respondents
for verification before the results are publicized. Return by June 15, 2001 to: DALLAS REGIONAL MOBll-ITY COALITION 7522 Campbell Road, Ste. 113-205 Dallas, Texas 75248 Thanks for your
assistance, participation, and support! E closures -TDM Survey xc: R. Scott Wheeler, Mayor -Town ofAddison Bob Phelps, Phelps, Mayor -City ofFarmers Branch
') DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION \) 7522 Campbell Road Suite 113-205 Dallas, TX 75248 972/312-1644 972/312-1645 (FAX) Executive Committee If you have questions or need to clarify
any element of the survey, please call the DRMC office (972-312-1644). As communicated to you with the survey document, a new scoring system was implemented this year to offer an opportunity
for local governments to show indirect activities related to TDM programs. Since the scoring system is different, preliminary tallies are enclosed for your review prior to release of
the survey at the DRMC meeting. There is increased interest in the survey this year due to the continuing issues related to air quality in this area along with related impact of daily
trip reductions. . -..-.. .􀁟􀀭􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁩 August 2, 2000 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 􀁄􀁥􀁡􀁲􀁾􀀯􀁾􀀺􀁲 .--' The seventh annual
DRMC Air Quality/Travel Demand Management (TDM) survey will be reviewed at the September 8, 2000, DRMC Executive Committee meeting. Recognition for the top two local governments is set
for the annual 'Transportation Crossroads' sponsored by the North Dallas Chamber ofCommerce in November. Ex-officio Members Lee F. Jackson, Chairman Barbara Mallory Caraway Vice-Chairman
Grady Smithey, Secretary Linda Harper-Brown, Treasurer Jeran Akers Ruben Avelar Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs Angie Chen Button Hugh Cairns AI Cornelius Don Dozier Robert Franke Ron Harris
John L. Heiman, Jr. Mike Nowels Bob Phelps Ernest Randall Frank W. Robertson Ricbard Rozier Kathy Seei Candy Sheehan Gary Slagel Mark Stokes Paul N. Wageman Alan Walne Kirk Wilson Jerry
Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Roger Snoble Executive Director James McCarley David A Griffin, Associate J mes McCarley RMC Executive Director Enclosures -TDM Comparison, TDM Scorecard
Results, TDM Scorecard (blank) xc: R. Scott Wheeler, Mayor -Town ofAddison Bob Phelps, Mayor -City ofFarmers Branch
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT SCORECARD COMPARISON OF 1996,1997,1998,1999 & 2000 SURVEYS INSIDE DART SERVICE II I 1996 I 1997 I 1998 I 1999 J 2000 Respondent
Total Score* Total Score* Total Score* Total Score* Total Score ** Addison 40 35 45 80 40 Carrollton 30 60 75 20 85 ----_._--------------'-------,-Dal1as 85 70 75 85 125 Dallas County
70 70 75 70 95 Fanners Branch 50 50 55 55 40 Garland 25 5 20 35 55 Highland Park 5 60 30 30 35 Irving 45 50 70 70 70 Plano 50 50 50 50 135 Richardson 105 105 130 130 I 180 Rowlett 0
No response No response No Response 50 University Park No response 80 90 30 35 * Maximum score available is 140 ** New scoring system; maximum score available is 190 MydoclIl11cnls/l000
col11parison . insidc.col11
􀁾 . .) DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALrnON TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT SCORECARD JUNE,2000 INSIDE DART SERVICE Car& Van Variable Tele-Bicycling/School Commercial Transit Respondent Pooling
Work commuting Walking Contacts Employer Use U Hours Contact Addison 30 5 0 0 5 0 0 40 Carrollton 15 25 0 0 5 0 40 85 Dallas 45 15 15 5 5 0 40 125 .. --_. Dallas County 20 20 15 0 0
0 40 95 Farmers Branch 30 0 0 5 0 0 5 40 Garland 0 25 15 5 5 0 5 55 Highland Park 20 0 0 5 5 0 5 35 Irving 30 15 15 0 5 0 5 70 Plano 40 20 0 5 30 0 40 135 Richardson 50 15 15 5 30 25
40 180 Rowlett 0 10 0 0 0 0 40 50 University Park 15 5 0 5 5 0 5 35 * Maximum score available is 190 MydocunlCII[sl20(l(l results insidc.doc
AIR QUALITYffDM SCORECARD DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERVICE AREA RESPONDENT: Yes or Points Respondent's No for Yes Score Car and Van Pooling: Does City/County conduct employee
transportation surveys to determine 15 commute patterns and provide information and education to employees regarding commute alternatives? Does City/County have an Employee Transportation
Coordinator (ETC)? 15 Does City/County provide priority parking for car and van pool vehicles? 5 Does City/County promise a guaranteed ride home to car and van pool riders? 5 Does City/County
subsidize the cost of van pools or offer alternative 10 transportation allowance? Variable Work Hours: Does City/County allow its staff to work flexible hours at the employees' 5 discretion?
Does the City/County stagger its employees' work schedules? 5 Does City/County offer the alternative of a compressed work week? 5 Does City/County execute employee trip reduction strategies
and alter schedules 10 for equipment operation on ozone alert days? Telecommuting: Does City/County allow home-based work? 15 Bicycling and Walking to Work: Does City/County provide
safe; convenient employee bicycle storage at the 5 workplace and a place for those who bicycle and walk to freshen up? School Contacts: Does City/County participate/cooperate with schools
to provide traffic 5 management at school sites during drop off/pick up hours? Does City/County encourage and work directly with schools on an on-going 25 basis to develop school air
quality/TOM programs? Commercial Employer Contact: Does City routinely contact major employers to encourage and assist with 25 implementation of air quality/TOM programs? Transit Use:
Does City/County participate in DART's Discount Bus Pass Program? 35 Does City/County provide information/education to its employees regarding bus 5 schedules and bus use? Max Score
190
Jim Pierce To: Cc: Subject: Ron Whitehead Chris Terry; Michael Murphy Next Year's Budget/Employee Transporation I would like to propose that money be put in the budget for employee transportation
purposes. The employee survey that we did last fall showed that 15 employees would be able to commute to work on public transportation. My proposal would be to subsidize most, if not
all of the cost for a monthly transit pass for those employees that would use public transportation instead of driving their car to work. The cost of a local pass is $28 per month, and
a premium pass (express service from downtown) is $58 per month. Assuming 10 local and 5 premium users, the cost would be $6,840 per year. Also, even though we could not get a vanpool
going, there seemed to be some potential based upon the grouping of where people lived. The total cost to vanpool riders is $400 per month, split between the riders. If the Town would
fully subsidize the cost of the van, and the riders could ride free, this could possibly provide the impetus needed for a group to form. This cost would be $4,800 per year. Both of these
initiatives would require some administrative effort, but I believe it would be small. Both of these initiatives would help our "score" on the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition scorecard,
which assesses our Travel Demand Management efforts. In April, 1999, we scored 80 out of 140 possible points. With the above programs, we would score 125 out of 140 possible points.
Please let me know if I can provide any additional information. Jim Pierce, P.E. Assistant City Engineer PO Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 972-450-2879 1
.') DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION -00 • _ .... --' 7522 Campbell Road Suite 113-205 Dallas, TX 75248 972/312-1644 972/312-1645 (FAX) Executive Committee Lee F. Jackson, Chairman
Barbara Mallory Caraway Vice-Chairman Grady Smithey, Secretary Linda Harper-Brown, Treasurer Ruben Avelar Bruce Beaty Angie Chen Button AlCornelius Don Dozier Robert Franke Milburn R.
Gravley Ron Harris John L. Heiman, Jr. John Longstreet Jack Miller Mike Nowels Bob Phelps Ernest Randall Frank W. Robertson Richard Rozier Kathy Seei Candy Sheehan Gary Slagel Paul N.
Wageman Buddy Wall Alan Walne Kirk Wilson Ex-Officio Members Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Roger Snoble Executive Director James McCarley David A Griffin, Associate April 24,
2000 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town ofAddison P.O. Box 9010 Addison. TX 75001-9010 "'"Mr. 􀁾􀀻􀀬􀀮􀀬r The 􀁾􀁡􀁳 Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC) is conducting its seventh annual
travel demand management sum:y tQ,.detennine'the'extentthatDRMC-participants·areengagingin employee trip reduetionactivities. The DRMC Executive Committee adopted a revised format for
the year 2000 to allow local governments additional credit for expanded TDMlAir Quality efforts. The revised format also establishes three different categories to reflect geographic
differences. As this survey is distributed, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) is adopting a new Dallas -Fort Worth Area State Implementation Plan (SIP) for submission
through the Governor to the EPA. A response from the EPA is expected by mid-summer. A major part of the recommended plan, although not yet mandatory, includes local efforts to reduce
the number of 'trips' for business and pleasure. Also enclosed, for your information and consideration, is a list of 'Clean Air Initiatives' developed by the TNRCC. The DRMC Executive
Committee continues to feel the programs implemented by local governments to affect employee trip reduction have a strong impact in encouraging the private sector to expand and/or implement
similar travel demand strategies. Under the revised categories, recognition will be provided to the top two local governments from I) Dallas County and cities inside the DART service
area, 2) cities outside the DART service area, and 3) counties outside the DART service area. The awards will be presented at the annual Transportation Crossroads sponsored by the North
Dallas Chamber ofCommerce in November. If you have suggestions or comments as to how DRMC can make the survey more effective or accurate, please let us know. Preliminary tabulations
will be sent to respondents for verification before the results are publicized. 􀁾􀁭􀀬􀁢􀁹 􀁊􀁵􀁰􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀲􀁏􀁄􀁄􀀻􀁴􀁯􀀺 .. D .' .'. . 􀂷􀁾􀀤􀀧􀁏􀁏􀁁􀁌􀁬􀁔􀁉􀁏􀁎 , 􀁡􀁴􀁮􀁰􀁾􀁥􀀡􀀱􀀺􀁡􀁑􀁡􀁤􀀮􀀬􀁓􀁴
􀁥􀀾􀀧􀀡􀁈􀀳􀀭􀀲􀀰􀀵 􀁄􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁾􀀺􀁲􀁾􀀷􀀵􀀲􀀧􀀱􀀭􀀸 Thanks for your assistance, participation, and support! Enclosures -TDM Survey and Clean Air Initiatives xc: R. Scott Wheeler,
Mayor -City ofAddison Bob Phelps, Mayor -City ofFarmers Branch
· 'J AIR QUALITYrrnM SCORECARD DALLAS COUNTY AND CITIES INSIDE DART SERVICE AREA RESPONDENT: Town ofAddison Yes or Points Respondent's No for Yes Score Car and Van Pooling: Does City/County
conduct employee transportation surveys to detennine 􀁩􀁥􀁾 15 15 commute patterns and provide information and education to employees regarding commute alternatives? Does City/County
have an Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC)? it$ 15 \S" Does City/County provide priority parking for car and van pool vehicles? tJO 5 -Does City/County promise a guaranteed ride
home to car and van pool riders? l\Jo 5 -Does City/County subsidize the cost ofvan pools or offer alternative No 10 -transportation allowance? Variable Work Hours: Does City/County allow
its staff to work flexible hours at the employees' ND 5 -discretion? Does the City/County stagger its employees' work schedules? No 5 -Does City/County offer the alternative of a compressed
work week? 􀁩􀁥􀁾 5 CS Does City/County execute employee trip reduction strategies and alter schedules No 10 for equipment operation on ozone alert days? -Telecommuting: Does City/County
allow home-based work? ND 15 --Bicycling and Walking to Work: Does City/County provide safe, convenient employee bicycle storage at the N" 5 -workplace and a place for those who bicycle
and walk to freshen up? School Contacts: Does City/County participate/cooperate with schools to provide traffic 7 y* 5 􀁾 management at school sites during drop off/pick up hours? Does
City/County encourage and work directly with schools on an on-going No 25 -basis to develop school air qualitylTDM programs? Commercial Employer Contact: Does City routinely contact
major employers to encourage and assist with 􀁾􀁏 25 -implementation ofair quality/TDM programs? Transit Use: Does City/County participate in DART's Discount Bus Pass Program? No 35
-Does City/County provide information/education to its employees regarding bus No 5 schedules and bus use? -Max Score 190 to C:\mydocumeots\tdm\tdm dart cities 2000.doc
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION Executive Committee 7522 Campbell Road Suite I 13-205 Dallas, Texas 75248 972/312-1644 9721312-1645 (FAX) Lee F. Jackson, Chairman Barbara Mallory
Caraway Vice-Chairman Grady Smithey, Secretary Linda Harper-Brown, Treasurer Ruben Avelar Bruce Beaty Angie Chen Button AI Cornelius Don Dozier Robert Franke Milburn R. Gravley Ron Harris
John L. Heiman, Jr. .Iohn Longstreet Jack Miller Bob Phelps Ernest Randall Frank W. Robertson Richard Rozier Kathy Seei Candy Sheehan Gary Slagel Paul N. Wageman Buddy Wall Alan Walne
Kirk Wilson Ex-Officio Members Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Roger Snoble Executive Director James McCarley David A. Griffin, Associate Executive Summary -Need for Congressional
Action Re S. 1053/H.R.1876 Transportation Plan Non-Conformity -Air Quality Revised Ozone Standard -July 2000 Two court cases at the federal level removed authority for EPA to provide
flexibility on air quality conformity for previously approved transportation projects. While the Dallas -Fort Worth area has met transportation plan conformity for the current one-hour
ozone standard, the EPA is scheduled to designate the four-county (and possibly surrounding counties) as nonattainment under the revised ozone standard in July 2000. Due to these court
rulings and EPA's decision not to appeal them, any transportation project that has not commenced by July 2000 could be considered non-conforming and halted. No federal funding could
be secured until conformity was met and design and right-of-way acquisition could not be authorized. S.1053 and H.R. 1876 simply codify EPA's previous rules to provide a oneyear grace
period upon an area's designation as non-attainment and allow projects previously approved to move forward (the grandfather provision). The effort to secure passage of this legislation
is not an attempt to delay or reduce requirements for any area to achieve air quality standards. Since many of the projects potentially impacted are actually part of the solution, passage
of this bill will help accelerate an area's compliance. Bipartisan support should be considered due to the impact on an area's air quality, mobility, and economic development. Congress
needs to act in early 2000 to prevent the issue from becoming a focus of the presidential race.
Transportation Plan Non-Conformity /July 2000 /Revised Ozone Standard • Two recent federal court cases removed the EPA's rules that allowed previously approved transportation projects
(grandfathered) to move forward in non-attainment areas. The EPA did not appeal. • In July 2000 the EPA is scheduled to designate new areas across the nation (potentially over 600 counties)
as non-attainment under the revised ozone standard. In Texas this will probably include the Dallas -Fort Worth, Houston -Galveston, EI Paso, Beaumont -Port Arthur, Tyler -Longview, Austin,
and San Antonio areas. • Transportation Plans could be immediately 'non-conforming' since the EPA cannot provide a grace period or allow grandfathered projects to move forward (due to
the court rulings). Up to $2 billion worth of projects in the Dallas -Fort Worth area could be halted, and design and right-of-way acquisition could not move forward. Projects such as
the Trinity, LBJ, IH 35E, SH 161, SH 121, and DART rail extensions could be severely delayed. • S. 1053 and H.R. 1876 were introduced in Congress to codify the previous EPA rules allowing
a one-year grace period and grandfathering of projects previously meeting conformity. Many of these projects enhance traffic flow and decrease congestion, thus actually improving air
quality. The legislation does not remove an area's obligation to implement control measures and meet air quality attainment deadlines. • Congressional leadership has indicated there
must be bipartisan support for the bill(s) to move forward. The Senate needs action in the House with support of the bill from key Democratic and Republican leaders. In an effort to
keep the issue from becoming more embroiled in the presidential race, action early in 2000 has been encouraged. • Pros for the legislation... • Projects continue moving through development
and construction • Enhanced mobility for the region through project completion • Air quality goals realized through better mobility and decreased congestion • Economic development capability
capability continues through efficient transportation system • Cons on the legislation... • Environmental groups criticize supporters for 'harming the environment' • Perception that
grace periods and grandfathering delay area's attempt to comply with clean air standards
Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition Interim Transportation Finance Legislative Policy (as adopted by the DRMC Executive Committee 0/1/-07-00) The Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC)
supports the efforts by several organizations and legislative committees to address Texas transportation, mobility, and air quality issues in a comprehensive way. To support development
of such a strategy, DRMC believes that: 1. Maximum and efficient use must be made of existing resources, policies, and methods. Studies of new methods, new organizational structures,
and new legal authority, along with management studies and audits, should be implemented without delay to assure legislators and the public that existing transportation resources are
being used to their fullest impact. 2. Every area of the State should be included in the development of new advocacy and planning organizations. Local elected officials, economic development
groups, and business and civic leaders need to join traditional transportation organizations organizations in involving state leaders to make transportation and air quality a higher
priority for the legislative sessions of 2001. 3. The State of Texas needs a better, more clearly understood strategy for maintaining an acceptable level of mobility and roadway safety
for all residents. A prerequisite to transportation and air quality improvement will be the development of criteria and measurements of the effectiveness of existing transportation systems
and acceptable minimum standards for the future. 4. We support consideration of additional revenues to meet Texas transportation needs after a careful study of current services and after
a plan is adopted to address the needs of all areas of the state. We recognize that some State officials and interest groups do not believe that all of these issues can be addressed
by the 2001 legislative session, but we do not support postponement of the initiation of this planning process. We believe the plans and goals should be established in 2000 in order
to be addressed in 2001. DRMC will support these specific approaches: A. We support a performance audit of TXDOT to be conducted by the State Comptroller in 2000. If there are organizational
improvements which can improve the efficiency of the department, we will support prompt implementation of those recommendations. We urge state leaders, however, to recognize that such
improvements will be only a part of addressing the State's mobility needs, not a substitute for a comprehensive plan. B. We support a bold reexamination by House and Senate interim committees
of all options for improving Texas' transportation and air quality programs. Other states may have innovations which can be adapted to Texas and used to improve our planning, financing,
project acceleration.. management, and public involvement in these important quality of life issues.
0\J We support serious consideration of granting design/build project authority to TxDOT and other transportation providers as a means to accelerate timely completion of projects. We
support evaluation of State right-of-way acquisition requirements to remove barriers to the timely completion of projects. C. We support the initiatives of the Partners in Mobility,
Texas Transportation Funding Coalition (TTFC), and the Tex21 Coalition to build new statewide coalitions to advocate for effective transportation solutions by bringing all regions and
interest groups of Texas together around a common transportation agenda. D. We urge State leaders to underscore their commitment to better mobility by agreeing on several clearly expressed
transportation goals which address the needs of all regions of Texas and which will constitute a strategic plan to guide state agencies and future legislative sessions. E. We support
stabilizing the amount of State fuel tax dollars (Fund 6) allocated to the Texas Department of Public Public Safety, thus providing more of these dollars for direct transportation related
projects. F. We support use of State issued bonds to accelerate completion of projects with the stipulation that such projects must meet prioritization criteria established by TxDOT.
G. We support evaluation of existing fees and permits, such as motor vehicle registration and overweight permits, to develop equity on a user fee basis. H. We support the principle that
all areas of the State of Texas have vital transportation needs and that all these different issues need to be recognized and addressed fairly before future resources are dedicated to
specific localities, regions, or selective programs. I. We urge the State of Texas to recognize the challenge presented to most of the State's metropolitan areas by the National Clean
Air Act and to consider the need for modifications of state laws and programs to help address the special needs of non-attainment areas. We believe this is such a difficult problem that
the State should look for opportunities to grant different kinds of program flexibility, financial incentives, and legal authority in the non-attainment areas.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁉􀀡􀁉􀁬􀀮􀁲􀁭􀀪􀀮􀀡􀁬􀁩􀀡􀁉􀀡􀁩􀀡􀁬􀁡􀁡􀂷 ® Posl Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001·9010 MEMORANDUM (972) 450-2871 16801 Weslgrove To: From: Subject:
Ron Whitehead, City Manager JJ Jim Pierce, Assistant City Engineer 0--\. Travel Demand Management I have attached a copy of my letter to James McCarley regarding our scorecard. We could
have scored higher if we subsidized the cost of vanpools or participated in DART's Discount Bus Pass Program. While we do not have our employee survey info back yet from DART (due to
a software upgrade problem), I have a sense there is not too much interest in vanpools. However, if the Town subsidized the vanpools, there may be more interest. I would like to suggest
the Town putsome money in next year's budget for vanpools and the discount bus pass program. And, if we really want to take a bold step forward, I suggest DART's E-Pass Program. EPass
is.an annual photo J.D. bus/rail pass the Town would purchase for Town Council and ALL employees that provides unlimited use of DART bus/rail facilities. The program includes 2 free
emergency rides home per quarter via taxi. A ballpark estimate of cost to the Town for this program to cover Council and all employees is $20,OOO/year. DART believes this program would
really get people to use the system who otherwise would not use it. If the Town would subsidize these programs it could be -counted as another valuable employee benefitand would demonstrate "corporate" good will. A subsidy would also enhance recruitment and employee retention. Interestingly, the first $65/month of any benefit funded by the Town is
not counted as income to the employee, which makes the benefit even more valuable. Other benefits to the Town are less vehicular traffic, less parking space required, less air pollution,
and each participant is provided reliable transportation. Participation by the Town would show strong support of the DART transit system. These programs can be paid for out of our DART
LAP/CMS funding if so desired. If we subscribed to the E-Pass program, we would be the first Member City to do so. I'm sure we could get some good publicity while we underscore our leadership
position. Cc: John Baumgartner, Director of Public Works
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001·9010 . (972)450-2871 16801 Weslgrove MEMORANDUM To: From: Subject: Ron Whitehead, City Manager JJ Jim Pierce, Assistant
City Engineer 0--\. Travel Demand Management I have attached a copy of my letter to James McCarley regarding our scorecard. We could have scored higher if we subsidized the cost of vanpools
or participated in DART's Discount Bus Pass Program. While we do not have our employee survey info back yet from DART (due to a software upgrade problem), I have a sense there is not
too much interest in vanpools. However, if the Town subsidized the vanpools, there may be more interest. I would like to suggest the Town put some money in next year's budget for vanpools
and the discount bus pass program. And, if we really want to take a bold step forward, I suggest DART's E-Pass Program. EPass is an annual photo I.D. bus/rail pass the Town would purchase
for Town Council and ALL employees that provides unlimited use of DART bus/rail facilities. The program includes 2 free emergency rides home per quarter via taxi. A ballpark estimate
of cost to the Town for this program to cover Council and all employees is $20,OOO/year. DART believes this program would really get people to use the system who otherwise would not
use it. If the Town would subsidize these programs it could be counted as another valuable employee benefit and would demonstrate "corporate" good will. A subsidy would al.so enhance
recruitment and employee retention. Interestingly, the first $65/month of any benefit funded by the Town is not counted as income to the employee, which makes the benefit even more valuable.
Other benefits to the Town are less vehicular traffic, less parking space required, less air pollution, and each participant is provided reliable transportation. Participation by the
Town would show strong support of the DART transit system. These programs can be paid for out of our DART LAP/CMS funding if so desired. If we subscribed to the E-Pass program, we would
be be the first Member City to do so. I'm sure we could get some good publicity while we underscore our leadership position. Cc: John Baumgartner, Director of Public Works
j' . "\J 'e¢@i\ltiftN#U' May 4, 1999 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 (972) 450-2871 16801 Westgrove Mr. James McCarley, Executive Director Dallas
Regional Mobility Coalition 12655 N. Central Expressway, Suite 820 Dallas, TX 75243 Re: Travel Demand Management Scorecard Dear Mr. McCarley: On behalf ofRon Whitehead, City Manager,
this is to transmit the Travel Demand Management Scorecard for the Town ofAddison. The Town, with DART, has taken a survey of the Town employees to determine ifthere are opportunities
for car or vanpools within our ranks. However, DART has had a problem with the software that scans the survey forms and interprets the results. Once we get the results, we will encourage
employees to car or vanpool as appropriate. Please give me a call at 972-450-2879 ifyou have any questions or need further assistance. Very truly yours, Town of Addison 􀁾􀁥􀁲􀀢􀀢􀀬Jr.,
_, DEE Assistant City Engineer cc: Ron Whitehead, City Manager John Baumgartner, Director of Public Works Enclosure
TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT SCORECARD APRIL, 1999 INSIDE DART SERVICE AREA RESPONDENT: City of Addison Yes or Points Respondent's No for Yes Score Car and Van Pooling: Does City/County
conduct employee transportation surveys to determine 15 IS commute patterns and provide information and education to employees 􀁾􀀮􀂣􀁓 regarding commute alternatives Does City/County
have an Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) Ye.S 15 } 5 Does City/County provide priority parking for car and van pool vehicles Yes 5 5 Does City/County promise a guaranteed ride
home to car and van pool Yes 5 riders 5 Does City/County subsidize the cost ofvan pools or offer alternative Il/b 10 transportation allowance -Variable Work Hours: Does City/County allow
its staff to work flexible hours at the employees' 􀀧􀁩􀁥􀁾 5 S discretion as a way to reduce Travel Demand Does the City/County stagger its employees' work schedules as a way to 􀁜􀀩􀁥􀁾
5 S reduce Travel Demand Does City/County offer the alternative ofa compressed work week as a 5 ,-way to reduce Travel Demand 'ItS 􀁾 Does City/County execute employee trip reduction
strategies and alter 􀁾􀀤 5 :; schedules for equipment operation on ozone alert days Telecommuting: lJo Does City/County allow home based work as a way to reduce Travel W 15 rr?-Demand
Bicycling and Walking to Work: Does City/County provide safe, convenient employee bicycle storage at 􀁾􀀵 5 5 the workplace Does City/County provide a place for those who bicycle and
walk to "ir:S 5 freshen up before work 5 Does City/County require commercial development to be designed in 'It' 􀁾 5 . "..-ways that promote bicycling and walking !J Transit Use: Does
City/County participate in DART's Discount Bus Pass Program Alo 35 Does City/County provide Information/Education to its employees 'ItS 5 􀁾 regarding bus schedules and bus use Max Score
140 􀁾􀁏
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION Dei: :h-'􀀢􀀺􀀾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀱 /26199911 -----------.--:.;: 􀀺􀁾) I :,_ I ' ( t -: ••• \ f .._------------12655 N. Central Expwy. Suite 820 Dallas, Texas
75243 􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀹􀀭􀀱􀁾 972/404-9721 (FAX) March 24, 1999 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town ofAddison P.O. Box 144 Addison, TX 75001 Executive Committee Lee F. Jackson, Chairman Barbara
Mallory Caraway Vice-Chairman Grady Smithey, Secretary Linda Harper-Brown, Treasurer ScottArmey Bruce Beaty Angie Chen Button AI Cornelius Bob Day Don Dozier Robert Franke Milburn R.
Gravley Berry Grubbs Ron Harris John L. Heiman, Jr. John Longstreet Jack Miller Ernest Randall Frank W. Robertson Richard Rozier Kathy Seei Candy Sheehan Gary Slagel Paul N. Wageman
Buddy Wall Alan Walne Ex-Officio Members Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Roger Snoble 􀁾􀁾􀁜􀀼􀁴􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀽􀁰􀀮 􀁾 .. 􀁾􀁾􀁾 . . pO 􀀧􀁬􀀩􀁾 􀁾􀀯 /,P' ./? OJffV -<./,fy/v 􀁄􀁥􀁡􀁲􀁍􀁾􀁾􀁡􀁤􀀺
r 􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾P /The Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition is conducting its sixth annual travel dem£ management 􀁾􀀮 tJ survey to determine the extent that DRMC Participants are engaging
in employee trip reduction \ . 􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾 activities. /"\ cV As this survey is distributed, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) is in . • J :t the process of meeting
two critical federal EPA deadlines for submission of a plan to show how the./. f) y "\ Dallas /Fort Worth non-attainment area (Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant counties) will meet
_:!-;J'X--federal air quality standards. Last year, the EPA 'bumped-up' our area from a moderate to serious 􀁾Vdesignation. Since most ofthe control measures currently in use, and those
which may be proposed, involve mobile source emissions (vehicles), the level of interest in travel demand management continues to increase. The DRMC Executive Committee continues to
feel the programs implemented by local governments to affect employee trip reduction have a strong impact in encouraging the private sector to expand and/or implement similar travel
demand strategies. Recognition was provided last year by DRMC for successful TDM programs by local governments, and a similar award program is planned during the fall of 1999 at the
North Dallas Chamber ofCommerce Transportation program. If you have suggestions or comments as to how DRMC can make the survey more effective or accurate, please let us know. Executive
Director James McCarley Preliminary tabulations will be sent to respondents for verification before the results are publicized. Rich Beckert, Mayor )tetllin by May 10, 1999 to: DALLAS
REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION 12655.N. Central Expwy., Suite 820 Dallas, Texas 75243' Thanks for your assistance, participation, and support! i' .' iAttachment 􀁾 xc: u:S.in}erely, .1,.-,
.' I tt11'YV lames McCarley Executive Director David A. Griffin, Associate
􀁾􀀧􀀪􀂥 *&&W*"M*iSllli 􀀮􀁾􀂮 May 27,1998 MEMORANDUM ) PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 144 Addison, Texas 75001 (972) 450-2871 16801 Westgrove To: From: Subject: Ron Whitehead,
City Manager Jim Pierce, Assistant City EngineerCfR DART Rideshare Programs I have recently become aware that DART has several employer programs available to promote the use of the Train/Bus
system and carpooling. Of these programs, the Monthly Pass, "E-Pass", and the Van Program seem the most appropriate for consideration for use by the Town of Addison. The monthly pass
is simply a program whereby the Town would be able to buy monthly bus/rail passes at a slight discount for employees that would use them. The Town could subsidize the cost of the pass,
partially or fully. A local bus service pass would cost $28/month and a premium pass would cost $58/month. Premium service providesnon-stop rides between transit centers, park & ride
lots and downtown. E-Pass is an annual photo I.D. bus/rail pass the Town would purchase for ALL employees that provides unlimited use of DART bus/rail facilities. The program includes
2 free emergency rides home per quarter via taxi. A ballpark estimate of cost to the Town for this program to cover all employees is $20,000/year. DART believes this program would really
get people to use the system who otherwise would not use it. The Van Program can work for between 7 and 15 people who can get together and form a pool. DART provides the van and the
cost ranges from $29 to $67 per month per rider if the commute is 90 miles per day or Jess. DART provides a fuel allowance which would cover most of the fuel cost -the remainder would
have to be made up by the riders. The "Captain" of the van rides free, and can use the van for 250 personal miles per month, as "compensation" for driving and collecting the fees. Two
free emergency rides home are provided for any rider per quarter. I have attached a sheet that gives some more details of this program.
,-If the Town would subsidize these programs it could be counted as another valuable employee benefit and would demonstrate "corporate" good will. A subsidy would also enhance recruitment
and employee retention. Interestingly, the frrst $65jmonth of any benefit funded by the Town is not counted as income to the employee, which makes the benefit even more valuable. Other
benefits to the Town are less vehicular traffic, less parking space required, less air pollution, and each participant is provided reliable transportation. Participation by the Town
would show strong support of the DART transit system. These programs can be paid for out of our DART LAPj CMS funding if so desired. If we subscribed to the E-Pass program, we would
be the frrst Member City to do so. I'm sure we could get some good publicity while we underscore our leadership position. I am sending this memo because it is budget time, and perhaps
an appropriate time to gauge the level of Council interest. As you probably know, DART will be glad to come out and make any presentations appropriate. Please let me know if I can provide
further assistance. Cc: John Baumgartner Pam Storaci
new DARTVan Program FARES' o Captain rides free in exchange for driving and collecting fares. o Captain can use van after work apd has 250 free personal miles. I5-Passenger Van (Captain
and 10 -14 Paying Riders) ... . .... . . 91-95 ... 96-100 >101 􀁾 105 . 106-110. 111-115 116 -120 􀁾 􀀻􀁾 -. '0" .", # orRJders 1-90 MUes Miles···· Miles .' Miles , Miles ... . Miles
.• ., Miles 14 529 $34 $39 $44 $49 $54 $59 13 531 $37 $42 $47 .$53 $58 $63 􀁾 12 533 $40 $45 $51 $57 $63 $68 I II $36 $43 $49 $56 $62 $68 $75 ) 10 540 $47 $54 $61 $68 $75 $82 -8-Passenger
Van (Captain and 6 -7 Paying Riders) 91-95 96 -100 101 -105 106 -110 111-115 116 -120 # of Riders 1-90 Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles 7 557 $67 $77 $87 $97 SI07 $117 6 $67
$77 $87 $97 $107 S117 $127 15-Passenger Van -$ I00 per month fuel allowance 8-Passenger Van -$60 permonth fuel allowance EMERGENCY RIDE HOME Personal Emergencies Work Related Emergencies
0 Rider gets sick or injured on the job. 0 Unexpected business appointment. 0 Rider's child gets sick or injured. 0 Unexpected overtime. b Rider's family member gets sick or injured.
0 Normal vanpool arrangement fails to 0 Rider has personal crisis at home. operate on the trip home. IRS allows employers to subsidize vanpool fares up to $65 per month per employee
and not count the subsidy as added income and amount can be deducted as a business expense. 2 Fuel cost above allowance, as with tolls and parking will be shared by riders. . Per 􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀱
􀁾ill,) YlcA. Trip' b1lln-th1 Cos-/-f-?r P.lder
Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition A voluntary coalition of five counties and twenty-seven cities in the TxDOT Dallas District, DRMC promotes areawide mobility issues, projects, and
programs for transportation improvements. The Executive Committee is comprised largely of elected officials from member agencies with Collin County Judge Ron Harris and Dallas County
Judge Margaret Keliher serving as CoChairs. DRMC has given high priority to promoting more efficient use of existing roadways through HOV lanes, intelligent vehicle systems, incident
management, and travel demand management. Concerned about the area's EPA nonattainment status, DRMC has implemented an annual survey assessing local government implementation of Travel
Demand Management.(TDM), which includes car pooling, van pooling, transit alternatives, flexible work schedules, and work at home programs. Four years ago additional survey elements
were added allowing agencies to indicate efforts in working with school districts and private businesses to to promote TOM programs. The survey encourages local governmentsto set an
example for the private sector in TOM efforts by reducing the number of employee trips each day, reducing vehicle travel during peak traffic hours to relieve congestion and improve air
quality. The survey, now in its tenth year, recognizes that each local government workplace (similar to the private sector) has a different TOM potential and there is no one absolute
solution for employee trip reductions. Three different survey instruments are used to measure progress by local governments inside and outside the DARTservice area along with counties
without full DART service. Today DRMC recognizes the City or Richardson and City orDal/as (within the DART service area), the City orDenton and City orAl/en (outside the DART service
area), along with Collin County and Ellis County (counties outside the DART service area) for their exceptional efforts to implement and promote travel demand management strategies.
A list of DRMC agencies is on the reverse side of this summary. DRMC also extends appreciation to the North Dallas Chamber of Commerce for this opportunity to provide recognition to
these regional leaders.
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2003 REPRESENTING Judge Ron Harris, Co-Chair Judge Margaret Keliher Dallas County Councilwoman Sandy Greyson, Vice-Chair Mayor
Pro-Tem Grady Smithey, Secretary Deputy Mayor Pr-Tem Terry Waldrum, Treasurer Judge Chad Adams Gary Base Commissioner Bruce Beaty CounCilman Bill Blaydes Mayor Pro-Tem Mark Burroughs
Angie Chen Button Councilman Jim Dunn Mayor Pat Evans Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem Stanton Foerster Mayor Robert Franke Councilman John L. Heiman, Jr. Judge Mary Horn Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem Mike
Nowels Mayor Pro-Tem James O'Neal Mayor Pro-Tem Jayne Peters Mayor Bob Phelps Councilman Frank Robertson Mayor Mike Simpson Mayor Gary Slagel Mayor Mark Stokes Mayor Steve Terrell Paul
N. Wageman Bill Whitfield Ex-Officio -William Hale Ex-Officio -Jerry Hiebert Ex-Officio -Michael Morris Ex-Officio -Gary Thomas James McCarley Associate -David A. Griffin Collin County
Dallas County City ofDallas Dallas County City ofIrving Ellis County Area Chambers Rockwall County City ofDallas City ofDenton City ofDallas City ofGarland City ofPlano City ofRowlett
City ofSachse City ofCedar Hill City ofMesquite Denton County City ofLewisville City ofLancaster City ofDeSoto City ofHutchins City ofGlenn Heights City ofCoppell City ofUniversity Park
City ofFarmers Branch Town ofAddison Town ofHighland Park City ofGrand Prairie City ofFrisco City ofRichardson City ofCarrolton City ofAllen City ofDallas City ofMcKinney City of Wylie
TxDOT Dallas NTTA NCT/COG DART Executive Director