5910w'Plal1o Parkway I : I 􀁾 i i =1ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS Sufre 200 Plol/o, Texas' 7509.'1 November 10,2004 (972) 661-5626 FtlX (972) 661·5614 WWIL'.bntb.c:om Mr. Steve Chutcruan,
P.E. Assistant City Engineer Town ofAddison 1680 I Westgrove Drive Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Re: Richard Byrd Drive Repairs Dear Mr. Chutchian: At your request, we have investigated
repair options for tbe Richard Byrd Drive pavement replacement project. Mr. Mike Ebeling, P.E. and Mr. Michael Hutchison, P.E. visited tbe site on November 9,2004 to evaluate repair
alternatives to tbe pavement. After assessing tbe condition of tbe area in question, we considered tbree options tbat would address tbe Town's concerns. The viable options are: I) Removal
and replacement ofthe entire tbree-inch asphalt surface course and restriping. 2) Milling one inch oftbe entire asphalt surface and applying a one inch overlay and restriping. 3) Milling
\I.i" of tbe entire asphalt surface, edge milling tbe entire lengtb of tbe nortb edge of tbe asphalt surface (along tbe hangar) as well as strategic areas on tbe south edge (to accommodate
drainage) and applying a one inch overlay and restriping. After careful consideration of tbe above alternatives, we recommend option tbree as tbe most practical option for tbis situation.
The \I.i" milling over tbe entire surface is to remove tbe seal coat on tbe existing surface. The seal coat has tbe potential of reducing the bonding capability between asphalt layers.
The contractor will need to comply witb all federal, state, and local regulations in hauling off the milled material. We have included tbe attached cost estimate of option tbree for
your use, and estimate tbe construction cost oftbis strategy to be approximately $52,000. Thank you for tbe opportunity to assist in tbis matter. Please contact me with any questions
you may have. Vel)' truly yours, . HNTBC;:Z;; D. 􀁈􀁏􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁾k. Enclosure M:\JOBS\39131-RichardByrdApron\C01.1MMTGS\LETTERS\one inch overlay recommendation 11 I004.doc Tbe HNTB Companies
OffiCES: i\LEXANIlRI. ... VA, ANNAI'OUS, Mil: ATl.A!\'T.... GA: AtISTIN. lX: nATON ROITI.iE. 1..\: 􀁕􀁏􀁾􀁔􀁏􀁎􀀮􀀠􀁾􀁌􀀢􀀺􀀠CHARLESTON. !ie: 􀁃􀁈􀁁􀁒􀁵􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀢􀁏􀀢􀀧􀀮􀀠U'\': CHICAGO.
II.: CLF.\'ELANn. 01'1: 􀁃􀁏􀁌􀁉􀀧􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁗􀁓􀀮􀀠OH: nAIL"S. i'X: i)E)I.'\'£R. co: DETI!.OIT. l<!I: 􀁅􀁬􀁋􀁛􀁎􀁾􀀮􀀠""y: FAlRFlF.ill. :>:.1: fT. WORTi-I. TX: H ... RTFORn. cr; HOtTSTO:->,
lX: INIlIAi"AI'OUS. IS: IR\1NE, CA: K...."S....􀁾􀀠crn', 􀁾􀁉􀁏􀀮􀀠 KNO}i\'ILLE, n.:: LANSING. MI: LOS ... SGELE.... CA: 􀁌􀁏􀁬􀀺􀁉􀁾􀁜􀀱􀁌􀁬􀀮􀀮􀁅􀀮􀀠 KY: !\1...m:;ON. WI: 􀁍􀁉􀀢􀀧􀁾􀁈􀀮􀀠
Fl: 􀁾􀁈􀁌􀁜􀁜􀀺􀀧􀁁􀁴􀁡􀀧􀀺􀁅􀁅􀀮􀀠 \\:1: MINSEAI'OLIS. MN: K ...SHVIUE. n..:: NEW YOR". NY: O ...KL.. :-;-O. CA: ORL\NDO. n.; On:RL..NI) I'.\RK. KS: PL)"MOl'TH 􀁾􀀱􀁅􀁦􀀮􀁔􀀱􀁓􀁇􀀮􀀠1'.":
l'ORTL"NO. 􀁾􀁉􀁅􀀺􀀠I'ORTL"NO. OR: RALEIGH. l':C: 􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀠􀁌􀀰􀀱􀁾􀁓􀀮􀀠MO: S . lJ.TL"KE cm·. \'1": S.\l': "'I\'ONIO. TX: S.":-': BERl':ARDlSO. C\: :;.\l': FRANOSCO. CA: S."'" 􀁊􀁏􀁾􀀢􀀮􀀠0.:
SEATI1.E. \l:'A: 􀁔􀁁􀁾􀁉􀁉􀀧􀀮􀀢􀀮􀀠Fl: TOlF.llO. OH: 􀁜􀁬􀀺􀀧􀁁􀁓􀁈􀁉􀁾􀁃􀀻􀁔􀁏􀁏􀁎􀀮􀀠D.C. 
TOWN OF ADDISON RICHARD BYRD DRIVE PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT ONE INCH OVERLAY AND RESTRlPJNG 􀁅􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁭􀁡􀁴􀁥􀀠of Construction Cost ITEM NO. I 2 3 4 5 6 -. ESTIMATED DESCRIPTION QUANTITY
PAVEMENT WEDGE MILUNG (6 fr.) 1085 PAVEMENTBUTT!OINTMILLJNG 628 PAVEMENT MILLING (1/4" DEPTH) 5889 PRIME. COAT 1665 HOTMIXASPHALT TYPED, 1" 400 6" SOLID YELLOW TAXILANE CENTERLINE MARKING
1900 I UNITS UNIT PRICE COST i LF $3.16 $3,431 SY $5.75 $3611 SY $1.95 $11483 GAL $2.13 $3543 TON $57.50 $23,000' LF $3.45 $6.555 SUBTOTAL $51.623. TOTAL, $51,623 Nores: 􀁾􀁁􀁳􀁰􀁢􀁡􀁬􀁴􀀠Quantity
based upon 7240 square yards ofpavement. M:\I0BS\39131.RicharOSyrdApromcosTACCT\{1 inch ovel1ay I:llltimate;,:ds]Shee{1 $52,000.00 HNTB Cotpol."AUon 11/IO/2<lO' 
_ APR-30-2004 FRI 02:23 PI1 REBCON, INC, FAX NQ, 912 444 8234 p, U2 REBCON,INC. April 30, 2004 Mr. Steve Chutchian Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001·9010 RE: Richard Byrd
Olive Pavement Replacement Addison Airport Dear Mr. Chutehian: In response to yOUi' correspondence dated April 28. 2004 regnrding Ihe referenced project, please find the 􀁦􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁷􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁾􀀠
• A. I stated in my letter to Mr. Jim Pierce, dated Februal)' 2, 2004. tho pavement was ac.:epted by the Town ofAddison on December 19,2003 upon which the maintenance period began. •
Rebcon was, and !;!i11 is, more interested in providing a satisfactory solmioo to thi, pwblem than arguing if it is a 􀁭􀁾􀀡􀁥􀁲􀁩􀁡􀀮􀁬􀁳􀀠and workmanship issue, so we agreed to correct
􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀠problem, The problem is cosmetic in nature. 110t struct.ural, and the solution you 􀁡􀁧􀁲􀁾􀁥􀁤􀀠with on Mnrch 17, 2004 would have 􀁡􀁤􀁤􀁲􀁥􀁳􀁳􀁾􀁤􀀠this problem. • The work
has not been performed 􀁹􀁾􀁴􀀬􀀠so, ofcourse, the problem still exist,. In R"bcon's and Lewisville Paving's opinion, further deterioration has not occllrred such th.t the heavy sandlseal
coat woulu no longer be a viable solution. Rebcon should be .bl. w determine what it thinks is the best 􀁡􀁶􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁡􀁢􀁬􀁥􀀠option which all parties would be plt!.1$ed witb, The Airport
Staff is vel)' concerned about aestbetics and durahility, and we think. 􀁴􀁾􀁪􀁳􀀠solution 􀁡􀁤􀁤􀁲􀁾􀁳􀁳􀁯􀁳􀀠both of those issues in a positive way. We would n(lt intenl:ionally recommend
a solution Ihat would cause both the Owner and Rebcon problems in tlle futurt. o Upon your approval of our proposed solution, Rebeon entered into a Subcontract agl'eement with LClwisviIJe
Paving Co. fhe agreement was entered into in good faith knowing the work would be perlhrmed, and now you have suddenly cancelled work which Lewisville Paving was prepared to perform.
• M,·. Walter Holloway, Pre!:id"nt ofI.ewisvilic Paving, said the optimum lime to perform the work was mid to late April. because oftemperature, and yot! agreed to this time frame, Mr,
Greg Krieg, of RebCOIl, Inc., has been amnging an agreeable construction lilile with Mr. Luis Eiguezabal, Assistant Director of Addison Airport, since lale in the week of April!9. Mr.
Eiguezabul's schedulo, airtemperaillre. precipitation, .nd Lewisville .Pavil1g's schedule all have to be coordinaled in order to perform the work. If YOll desire, please confirm this
with Mr. E1guczabel. • Robeon has not failed to expedibl Ihe work in an expodient manner, anel we were preparing to perform the work ull!il Y(IU caned Mr. Krieg to SlOp our efforl> on
Wednesday, April 28, 2004.. Mr. Krieg was waiting until the end of April, because he 1868 W. NORTHWEST HWY. DALLAS, TEXAS 75220 972/444.8230 
APR-30-2004 FRI 02:23 PM REBCON, INC. r, U.:J was concemed about temperatures, and he wanted the optimum performance of􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀠seal coat. We were tlnd.r the impression !I.e.Town and
the Airpolt wnl\led the 􀁢􀁾􀀤􀀱􀀠 pe.ttorman':. of th,) material rath.;r than a specific dale. until you called Mr. Kritg. • Standard Section 1.42.1, Removal of Ocfeclive and Unauthorized
work, is nOI applieable to this situation, bocause the work was insp¢cred. tested, and accepted by the Town of Addison, Rebeon has agreed 10 correct the prOblem as a maintenance issue.
• Mr. Krieg met with yon at the project site on Thursday morning. April 29, 2004, t(, discuss 􀀧􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀠issue. The Town anc! Airport suggested Microsurfacing as a 􀁰􀁯􀁳􀁳􀁩􀁢􀁬􀁾􀀠solution
to the problem, and requested Rcbcon to pursue this option. Rather than pursue this idea, or any other solutions whi<:h may be accepted and rejected at a later date, Rebeon will hire
a consulting engineer to properly study the problem and issue an opinion as to what the correct solution is according to industry standards. We will pre.cnt this solution to your for
your approval. • Rebcon had a mutually agreed upon soluthm with the Town ofAddison., which you recently r,jccted, so we. have not caused the delay. We willnol be subject to an arbitrary
fOlln."" (14) calelldar day corro':tion period, but we will work ill an expedient marmer to find a mutually agreeable solution so the problem i. corrected properly. Nor will we be subject
to the deduction ofmoni,I" duo Rebcon. As Slated earlier, this is a maintenance isslle, so Rebcon 􀁾􀁂􀁓􀀠earned all monies due. • Mr. Krio!! told me, allhe April 29 meeting you said
10 disregard the Ictter you were S<ll\ding regarding {his issue. We cannot disregard allegations which damage our credibility and have such serious implications. Unfonunately, tJ,is
(>Toblcm exists, and in the future we would be.very pleased to have a meeling to discuss any problems or issues YOIl have, ,...ther than receive stich a letter. We believe a meeting
witl. "II responsible pal1ies would be more beneficial and solve the problem sOonor. Apparently I have offended )Iou by requesting final payment for tbis project. My understanding was
that RfJbcon would not request final payment until a solution was found and agreed upon. We did this as a show of good faith. even thollgh the project had been completed and a"ccl'ted.
lipan )lour acceplance of(Jur solution to this problem, I then staned pursuing final payment. One reason I ha.ve called the AIrport twice fOl' pn)'n\em help is because of the confusing
;$su. of funding for this project and who is resp,)nsible for payment, Our second application tbr p"ymenl look a vety long time for processing, and I hnd to contact several reoplc to
find Oll! when we would re".ive payment. I apologize ifyou had a different understanding, and we will conlinuc \0 wait for 11111 payment unlil this problem is correcled if that is your
do.ire. Sincerely, R£BCON, INC. 77 Robert -:1ibby 
: l 
REBCON,',N C. ?jqfll/. \ 􀀧􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁜0 􀀠 \' -/rf '(j' Ilt ) , 􀁾􀀨􀀧􀀠 "t.f 1.vY 􀁉􀁾􀀠􀁲􀁑􀁾􀀠71J/./, ,¢'Ii ;t 􀁾􀀠J 􀁾􀀠 March 15,2004 ' (j!:l 􀁩􀁜􀁾􀁷􀀮􀁾􀀠 .j 􀁾􀁜􀀮􀀠 I 'M '» v I"
􀀬􀁾􀁲􀁦􀀠 ,,9 Mr. Steve Chutchian r Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 RE: Richard Byrd Drive Pavement Replacement Addison Airport Dear Mr. Chutchian: Rebcon, Inc.
consulted with Austin Bridge & Road regarding the pavement raveling on the referenced project,and they suggested we contact LewisvilJePaVing Co., Inc. for a solution to the problem.
We met with Mi.'Walter Holloway, President ofLewisville Paving Co" at the' AirPort on ThUrsday, March 11,2004; so he could perform a visual inspection; and he offered the folloWing:
.' , , 􀁾􀁾􀀠 . : ' '.,,' . • ' Treat the area with a heavy 􀁳􀁥􀁡􀁬􀁣􀁯􀁡􀁴􀁾􀁳􀁡􀁮􀁤􀀠coat: • Use polytar heavy duty pavement sealer material as manufactured by Gem-Seal of Dallas.
' • Scrub areas wlUch are showing signs ofraveling with a wire broom in order to remove any loose material. Pre-treat rough areas with a heavy seal coat containing 6 to 8 pounds ofsand,
applied by squeegee, to cover seams and rough , .-.' , "< areas. • Ciean the areawith a high pressure blower to remove any debris. • Apply a first coat or'material contafuing 3 to 4
poiinds of silica sand and approximately 7% ofpolymers by volume. The application shall be approximately 0.12 to 0.15 gallons per square yard applied by spray. • Apply a second coat
Of material containing 2 to 3 pounds of silica sand and approximately 7% ofpolymern by volume. The application 'shall be approximately 0.09 to 0.12 gallons per square'yard'applied by
spray. • Depending on the weather, the ijecond coat will be applied not later than the day folloWirgilie: firSt coat. Thi;, material will need 24 to 36 hours to properly cure , ' 'after
the sec<>nd'coai app1i'catlon, 'The re-striping can commence ,24 hours after -: 'the secOnd'coat is applied. 'No rain =be prediCted for 24 hours after the second ',' application: Teinperaturh
V;;ise, thebesttiine thebesttiine for this procedure is mid to late " April.' . ,: :.' . 1868 W. NORTHWEST HWY. DALLAS, TEXAS 75220 872/444-8280 
Please let me know if this solution meets your approval, and we will start coordinating with airport personnel for an April application time. Sincerely, REBCON, lNC. 3:, enclosure 
lR-l1 94 12:57 FRCM:GEMSEAL TX 6'..... POLYTARTM HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENT SEALER DETAILED APPUCATION SPECIFICATIONS 1. Scope: This ,ecommended practif::ll GOV\1rs the "pplicaUon 01 PolyTsr'••
a high 􀁰􀀮􀁴􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁭􀁡􀁾􀁣􀁥􀀮􀀠polymer modified. emulsified coal tor pa"ement sealer, this 􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠.erveo •• math", protection. 􀁾􀁡􀁵􀁬􀁪􀁪􀁪􀀮􀀢􀀮􀁜􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠of 􀀮􀁵􀁲􀁦􀁂􀁃􀁾􀀬􀀠and
aliphatlc-.ol""n! (petroleum di$tmateli suCh as gas. oil and die.d) rssistani .eal for asphallie fllln,reie PIiV/Irn/lnm nf .irport ",mp. 􀁑􀁮􀀼􀁬􀁬􀀧􀀢􀁩􀁷􀀮􀁾•• 􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀧􀁉􀀡􀁬􀁓􀀠10..,
and dnveways, 2. Referenoes! 2.1 ASTM SpecilleaUon 􀁄􀁾􀁡􀁯􀀻􀀠Siandard SpecllicaUon for Emulsllied Coal Tar FlitctJ (Mineral Colloid Type), ' 2,2 ASTM Spee1f.",Uon 0-490: Standard Spoeif.:alion
for Road Tar, . 2,3 ASTM Specification 0-3<423; Gland.rd Pracllce for ApplicaUon of Emulsifie4 Coal Tar Pitch, 2,4 ASTM 􀁓􀀢􀀢􀁣􀁩􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠O·2S39; Standerd Method. olTeeli09 Emulsified
Bitumens U.ed ,,. Protective Co..􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁾􀀬􀀠 2,5 ASTM SpeoifieaUon 0-'1856: Performance Standard for Coal Tor Pitch Emulsion Pavemenl Sealor Foundation. Conlalning Miner.1 AggrQ9ale;
and Optional POiymerie Admixtures, 􀁾􀀮􀀶􀀠MSHTO Spec!ftc.ation TP5·97; Provisional Standard Test Mothod to! Delermining the Rheological !>r"pertill; of Asphal! Binder Using a Dynamic
Shear Rhe<;>meler, 3. Materials: 􀁾􀀬􀀱􀀬􀀠 The !;Cnndor shalll.l$G F'olyTar '" polymer modified co.aI'lar emulsion. NQ all.maUve wJl1 be a_pl.d, P"IyT&fTM will conform to the fanOWlng
rGquiremenl$; .' i,1,1, ASTM SPllemce.1ion 1).3S10; Non volatile, (Iolidal "hall be 40% ±1%. . 3,1,2. The refined ta, prior 10 polymer modifiClllion shall conform 10 ASTM Q.49Q. gr.de
RT·12, The relinedt.r shall be del'ived from high lempGf1iture «>ke oven t.r. Oil and water gas tars shall nol be uted even though tI1ev mignl comply witn ASTM 0>490, 􀁧􀁲􀀮􀁤􀁾􀀠RT-12.
• 3.1.3. Polymer to refined tar fallo shall be 7% by volume of r.fllled lar{ASTM 0-190. grade RT.12). Md wUl wnrorm Ie' the following criteria: ' DynamIc 5he.r Rh90logy, (OSRI Test Re.uk
Tan OeHa (G'/G'), 60'C los. thon 4,5 10 􀁲􀁡􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁊􀀤􀁥􀁣􀁯􀁮􀀼􀁬􀀮􀀠10'(. 5tr810. raUo 􀁁􀁁􀁾􀀧􀁈􀁔􀁏 'iPG-l:/? ' 3,1.4, The emulsion shah be produced using a colloid mill to insure
homogenelly and appropriate ;,ize of Ihe panlcl•• in suipeniion. 3,1,5, The contractor andlor his suppUer will 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁬􀁾􀀠a ;;:e1lifiC$llon wilh each bulk emulsion denve')' Indicaling
compliance wilh the above r"quiremenlll. Further. 1M t>Jr1ificat. will indical.. the "o".vol.mes (sellds) content and ash conlonl of Ihal peru""l.r t,anspor1lotas dalermined by "'oults
of leot. petformed 011 malerialloaded, Such certifiC1!tions .hall be sUbject 10 VerifICation by 10.ti09 samples of the emul$ion reCllivod lor U1!e on th.. projeet, Costs 01 verification
testing will be born.. by Pfojeot Admin/altator, ' 3,2 Dilution wnlcr shall be potable Bnd free of flx<:,s$;va mineral. end eonlamlnanla, Water will be provided by Ptoje<l AaminiSlralo.
and available within" ....aonabl. distance from lhe job sits, 3,3, Sana wiU be wa.hid and'd••ded silica aand. Of' crushed. WEshed. and graded st.g. free olaU conlamlnant •• and conformin9
to the foUowing 9",dalion: Nate: Gradations OUl$tde these ranges may be used 􀁰􀁴􀁏􀁖􀁬􀁤􀁾􀁤􀀠pasl hlotory show. evidence of II dUtOIble surface, Sieve Size 10 ;0 􀁾􀀠 % 􀁾􀀠101 -'
1-)-,-J-; 4. Equipment: All tool. and aejulpment neceSSitY to perfQrm the conlract In aCCOrOahce with the $peciflad telTl\3 and qqndilions, such as brushes, hand SQueQ9••', pumpa and
hose equip!"en!, oto",Q!' lanks, mixing tonks, _ter dlstribulo,,", power 􀁬􀁗􀁾􀁥􀁰􀀢􀀬•• blowet$, bamcades and applicato. eqUipment ;hall b. prOYlde!! as requwed by the contractor,
AU 􀁭􀀦􀁬􀁦􀁬􀁯􀁤􀁾􀀠􀁥􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁯􀁹􀁾􀁤􀀠In performing 1M work and all 'l'quipmenl nece..:ary for ...."'uting any part of Ihe work &hall be subject 10 approval by Prolocl 􀁾􀀠• Ado'llirtisJr.lor
I:>efore work i. st¥rtad. and when f()\jnd un.aU.raciory will be corrected. All eqUipment Will be in good working coodllion, 
MAR-l1 B4 12:57 FROM,GEMSEl'L TX 2143334399 4.1. Spray !:qulpm",,! 􀁵􀁾􀁥􀁤􀀠on !he job shall have mechanical mixing d....i"".lncorpo't>ted in Ihei, construdlon 10 a••u,,, homogoneou6
milOng or the emulolon and required addillves. Th. pumping system must be adequal& 10 apply" unifQnn coaling al Ihe specified ratu olapplleaUon. Equipment requiring preaauriz.e.!ion
01 the mixing lank for dis!ri!)U!lon wRi !lOt be uMid. 4.2. 􀁍􀁯􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁬􀁺􀁾􀁤􀀠squeegee application equipment wood on til<! Job Wift heve \WO or mo'. device. such ... Squ9gees andlor
dra9 broom 86&Omb""", 10 anure .ven distribullon of !!Ie la, Qrnulelon eyatem. Mech.nical mixing devices will be Incorporated into lhe consltuolion 01 lite appUealOr 10 ....ure homogeneous
mllting of !he emulsion and required additives. 4.3. MiXing or agllaling equipment mey be ellher portable powered or alank-tyPQ power mixer. In any ease. mixers shall be of sufficient
capacify to e$lII.lre homogeneous mixing of the eMulliion and IiIqvlred 􀁡􀁤􀁤􀁩􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁾••md 10 maintain complete 􀀤􀁕􀁾􀁰􀀦􀀢􀁪􀀻􀁊􀁯􀁮􀀠of mlnerol b1i19regate untU Ihft 􀁦􀁕􀀧􀁦􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁲􀁭􀀠W
.. tQM it :1ppUcd to 1M fttl'lcm.nt, All .,lufdio/d 􀁪􀁾􀁮􀁫􀁳􀀠or GI'QP tanlC.ers Shalt be iquipped with medlenk:al agilators eumclenl to keep the coal tar emUlSion hOmOgenous during
.lorag ... 6. Preparation of Surface$: 5.1. Allow new asphaUo eure. Cure time vanes wiIIl type of asphaij. aggregate. weather conditions, and construetion procedure•• Hot mix asphalt
will u.uany cure In 30 -90 day•. Cold mix pavoments .hould ha ... at lea.t 90 days to cure. Required cute time should be determined by Project Administrator, aM awrlUen order to proceed
will be furnished to Iha contraotor, 5.2. Wide orackS. extensivo alligator craoklng patterO$••oft or sunken spolslndicate that the pavement end/or base should he repaired or replaced.
Exlen5iv. pItching ,haD be allowed 10 CUfG prior to seale••Ung In aCCQrdancc with 5.1. 5.3. Thoroughly inspeel the pavement tor minor Ofacke and olhe, ImpetfeoiIQn$. Ignore hairline
cracks. CraCks of apprcx\ma\ely 1/4 -3/4 irich wide should be cleared ot debris and filled With AGem Seat approved crad< sealant In accordance With manufacturers specificallon. (OPTIONAL)
6.4. Remove on ano greaae apotslhet have not permaMntty damaged or softened the pavemenl by scrubblnQ with a detergenl end flu.hingW1th waler untn" water-break-he $1lrface is obIalned.
Oil i!J1d gre.... spots with (1eeper pIIMlralion wiU be treat.d by burning wIIh hand held propane torch, and thlHl coating the opol with"illl approved oil spot primer such •• Tar-Prime.
If Ihe oil spot is so severe 8$10 causa permanent deterioralion 01 the pavement. or" the pavement has failed due to 0\h8r caU$.'. the pavement shall be fllmoved II> 1.l1e full depth
of the damage 8M replaced WIth ni'IW asphalt pavement in aecordance 􀁷􀁾􀁨􀀠paragraph 5.1. 5.5. Old IrafflcconlrOillnes may be clackenad with black epol<)' or black 􀁾􀁣􀁲􀁹􀁬􀁩􀁣􀀠coaUngs.
Excessive build up of lines should be abraded before any pm. coalS of aaphalt or IIlr emul;.lon are applied. (OP'fIONAL) 6.6 Highly oxidit.ed or 􀁷􀁥􀁡􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁾􀀠nphallsurfaeea shall
b& primed w"h a coal of !'>clyT.r'· diluted 1 to 1 with 􀁷􀁡􀁴􀁾􀁲􀀮􀀠TM prima coat shall be allowed to dlY thOroughly b<;tfore proceeding with additionat applie..\iQns. Applicafion
rale $hall 􀁾􀁡􀀠0.09 -0.10 gallon per square yard of diluted PolyTar"'. (OPTIONAL) 5.7. IMmediately b./o" 8Pplieation ot.ealer. clean lila surfa"" ofal! loese 􀁤􀁵􀀮􀁾􀀠dirl. leaveS.
􀁾􀁮􀁤􀀠any omar foreign 􀁭􀀻􀁴􀁾􀁡􀁬􀀤 by ;.weeping, blowing. flUshing with wBter. or any eombination of the three. 6. Mix DeSign and Application Rates: 6.1. Coats 􀁇􀁡􀁩􀁢􀁾􀀠 G::'
􀀱􀁘􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁳􀀮􀁬􀀠 I I Use Mi,;'Gal/Sq. Yd Low 00 0-5 Z-J 􀁏􀁾􀁏􀀮􀀧􀀲􀀠 TraffIC Z 00 0-5 o-;j O. ·0,12 Me<!lum I' IOU ()'5 2-3 0.10 -O.!5 roffiC 􀀲􀁾􀀠 100 IH> ()'3 0.10-0.12 􀁈􀁩􀁾􀁨􀀠
􀀭􀁾􀀠 fralfie i 􀂷􀀱􀀮􀁴􀁃􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁡􀁤􀀠I? 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁜􀀶􀀬􀀮 􀁾􀁾􀁧􀁮􀀠 􀀧􀀡􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁤􀁴􀁵􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁡􀀼􀀡􀁬􀁬􀀮􀀠 ".1 'II ale, need 􀁯􀁮􀀡􀂥􀁾.. aa'led 􀀢􀁨􀀡􀁾􀀠􀁵􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁾􀀠 sand in
the design. 􀀢􀁾􀁈􀁈􀁕 should be Q(\<jed to Iil<! final eMl wken IIkld rClil3lem:e I. needed. Atlrlltlon lal.' polymers or fio.$\ dtylnll additive. of any \;'\>e 10 Poly,."" i$ nol neces.ary
and will be harmlulto lI\e emulolon. NOTE: 1. The.e water 􀁤􀁾􀁵􀁕􀁯􀁮􀀠ratlOll are volU/Mltle and are baStoo on receilling l'oIyTa"" with a solids eonlent of 􀁾􀁏 +/-1 p!!rCfilnl. 2,
Approximatelv 􀁾􀁏 pounds of sand dil!J)illce$ 1 gallon alliquid. pclylOl"pec \/EA.• 
MAR-it e4 12,58 FROM,GEMSEFL TX 2143334399 3. PrOJ6e:t Admlni'I"'tor may requir. the '""nlfaotor 10 submit on. Q' mor. samples, al r"ndom, Ihroughout the ""Uflle of 1M lob for mix design
""lification. )VhRNltIG; 􀀤􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁣􀁯􀀮􀁴􀁥􀀬􀀠when improperly applied and/or IIDder certain environmental condition., 􀁭􀀮􀁾 become slippery, A. with any 􀁰􀁡􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁬􀁫􀁥􀀠coatl09,
repealed applleatlons ,eduC<! texture, Sf(id reslSlal'lee ean be improved wllh addlUone of 3 to 4 pounds of .and per galIOn. CAUTION MUST 9E exERCISED, partleularl)' when 'kid rGSI,lance
Is a major safety fa<:lor. 9.2. L.texa<ldllive.; PotyTar'" <ontllln5 a high moleallar weighl polymer thaUs cross-linked with reftned W (RT-12l. Ills not Inlendedto be used Wlll'I any
additives, lalex or elhe"";II•. Any addlti.,. other than allies sand can b. detrimental to the emulsion and i$ not recommended by Gem Seal Corporallon. 6.3. Saoo will be $lowly addedlnlo!he
PolyTa.... with the mixer engased during lhe .ddltlon of 1M ...0<1 1<:> ••sure unirorm di.per$\(mand \0 􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀠overloading oHM mixing device. Water may 􀁾􀁥􀀠added, if necessary,
should lhe tar emUl8il'>n system bO(;Omtlloo Ihid< 10 b. unlfr)rmly appr.ed. Additional waler will 00 added only after apprQ"al by the Proje<:t Administrator, and addillon. will not
el<cead 50/0 by Volume 01 unQlluted Polyiar"" or tho.e amounls expressly s,ipulalQd by Ihe Project Administmtor. 6.4. Slow 􀁭􀁩􀀮􀁩􀁮􀁾􀀠.hall be conllnuous from Ihelime ali malerial.
are placed Into the mixer until the pavements.eler mix is appHed by the 􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁬􀁯􀁮􀀠eqUipment. During lhe anUM mixing proeetl'S, no breaking, seg'egaling, or hard.nlng of Ihe
emuisic>n, .nd no balling Of lumping of Ihe aggregate ;nell be PlInnltted, 􀀶􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀠 The 􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀡􀁬􀁮􀁾􀀠shaU 00 appKe<l unlfonnly over \116 entrr@pavement iurface 300 fr•• of voids
and plnhol&&. Wl'\en pavement t.mp....lure. are In exeeu 01 120'F, log spraying of pavemenl Wl1h clean waler i$ recommended to acllievo better bond and even spreading of material. Fog
$proy shall damp.n pa"",,,,,,nl ";thold leaving puddles. 􀁉􀁏􀁐􀁔􀁉􀁏􀁎􀁁􀁾􀀩􀀠 6.6. SUbsequent coalS will be applied only IIfier Ihe previous coat Is dried. prof.rably 24 hours 1,lIer,
but no 1.0. than 4 hours under ideal cgndUions. Ideal condillons are temperaturea In OXI;EI$S of 70'f, 􀁾􀁵􀁮􀀮􀁨􀁬􀁮􀁥􀀬􀀠and less than 60% relaliv.. humidity. Marginsl conditione cen
require ourlng timn gr.ater tnan 24 hours. Sub$equoni _I. should be applied &t right 3n91"" 10 the previous coal, 􀁾 possible, 6,7. .sealer vAl! not 00 applied unles.lIla temperature
Is II minimum 50'f and ,;sing end psvem.rillemperetu", is 60"F and rising. Work wUl b. completed so !halihfllre Is a mlnimlJlTl of two hours of sunlighl remelnlng alter complellng the
days wurk. Sealer will nOl be 􀁡􀁾􀁰􀁬􀁩􀁥􀁤􀀠under rainy or weI eenditlons sucll as an overc...􀁉􀀮􀁫􀁾􀀠with high humidity, UNDER. NO CIRCUMSTANCES \\liD worit be performed under cold
and/or wet conditiona, nor will tar emulsion be used !hat h.s been sUlljecled 10 freezing Wl"athor, 7. Incidentals: 7,'. The oonlraclor and Projecl AdminIstrator wl1l coordinate their
activities wilh each other 10 in.\if. the avallabflity ofth. work erea:w .s nollo delay the 􀁥􀁸􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠olth. project, 10 maintilin tr.ffic flow, and It> minimlr.e eetlvld•• Ihat
might be delrimentall" Ihe work in progress $uch as aUlomatic sprinkler systems, Other 􀁃􀁉􀀮􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁭􀀮􀁲􀀠or oonstructlon traffic. etc, 7.2. The contme:tor wm noilly the Project Adminlsl!ator
of pavement ar... that h. t ... " have so deteriorated or have olher oUlsid. faet.... such as poor drainage, Improper eonstruolion, eto., !hal will render Ihe .pplioa\ion Of ••esl «l81
i"",fleetiv ... 7.3. 􀁓􀁬􀁲􀁩􀁰􀁬􀁮􀁾􀀠􀁷􀁾􀀱􀀠be done with a lat .. or acrylic palnl approved by the mlnufadurer. No slriping vAil commence UN. the 􀁳􀁥􀁾􀀱􀀠coat 10 be striped has
ou,ad for at least 24 hours, 7.4. Th. con\tatlorshall.ubmll with hi. pmpatal allea.t thr"" ",f"'ences of previously completed projeets. proof 01 worker. 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁰􀀬􀁾••'!on and ilabifily
insuranee eovafllge, end ailleeal buoine•• li<:en:les and permit••• required by local aulhoritie •. 􀀷􀀮􀁾􀀠 The contractor wiil provide II performance and payment bond 10 the Project
Admlnlstralor -OR -walvers of lI.n from suppliers will he prOl/lded with 680h invoiOO of 􀁰􀀢􀁹􀁭􀁾􀁮􀁴􀀮􀀠􀀨􀁏􀁰􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁉􀀩􀀬􀀠 8, Job Site Location and Scope of Project: See Exhibit
'k' (To be drawn and attached by property Ollmer, manager, '(l( architect/engineer). 9. Basis of Payment: These prices sl'lall 00 IlJ!\ compensation rot furnishing malerials, preparallon,
mil<ing, and applying 􀁭􀀮􀁬􀀮􀁲􀁩􀁾􀀬􀀢􀀠in compliance vAth this epeeifioaiion, and for aK tho 1001..., eqUipment, labor, and incidenlal. ne,,,,,,••􀁾 \0 complete thl. prcj_ot. The
proposal shall uldleata by Uneltem: 1. The 􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁾􀁬􀀡􀀱􀀧􀁉􀁡􀁬􀁥􀀠squate yards and eost Of patching to 1llI perform()d, 2. Th. approximale lineall .... t and <:051 of <:raCk seBlin\l
to b. perormed. 3. The apprlllCirnete square yards and cost of Ille sealeoaUng to be performed. 4, The apprOximate nneal1eel and COsl oHM IrafflG striping 10 be performed. ·OR, A lump
sum co.t when performed in aC(:tlfdance with painting diagrama provided bV the Projecl AdmInistrator. P.I)'Iat"peo VER.2 
MARcil 04 12:58 FROM,GEMSEAl TX 2.14333439'5l 6, Total cost of project. (Applicable taxes. p8rmitllng fees andlOt' miscellaneous charge. shall be Identified by Iyp. and amOunl) 10. WARNINGS
and Miscellaneous Notes: 10.1. Sl<id RflIIiolltnee: 6eetcoatl, When imp",pelly applit<l and/or under certain environmental wnditions. may become sllpp"'Y, At;. with any palnt,like coating,
I\lpeliled appRcation$ rod""" ttlldu's. Skid ",.islam: .. can be Impl'Qlled wlth addl1lons of 3 to 4 pounds of sand per gallon. CAUTION MUST se EXERCISED, partiOtJlerly ..nen skid resistance
Is a malor safety faClor. Ge", S"al Corporation dou not 􀀢􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁾􀁮􀁤 ,oaicoilling asphon paVG"",nts with the foltQwing characteristics; main thoroughfares. runway., steep Inclines,
poor drainaga, and vehide. traveling at speeds 1/1 excess of25 mph thai are subJect!o rapid stops or hydroplaning. Gem Seal Corporation recommends applying coal tar eroolsion to eaphalt
pavement surfllces only. 10.2. C\lnlalner warning! COntalnel$, regal\lleas 01 beirl9 empty, 􀁨􀁡􀁾 full, or full at product, may retain a re$idue of liquid andlor vapor 'od C8II be 􀁤􀁾􀁦􀁜􀀹􀀧􀁲􀁯􀁕
􀀸􀀮􀀠00 NOT PRESSURIZE, OUT. WELD,IlRAZE. 􀁓􀁏􀁌􀁏􀁅􀁾􀀬􀀠ORILL. GRIND, OR 5XPQSE SUCH CON'TAIt-lER$ TO HEAT, FLAME, SPARKS, OR OTHER SOURoes OF IGNITION: THEY MAY EXPLooe AND CAUSE
INJURY OR DEATH. Do not sHemp! to clean since residue Is difficult 10 remove. 'empty" drums shoUld be completely dralnf)d. 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁰􀀢􀀬􀁾􀁹􀀠 bunged, an<! prompllY returned to a <!rum
recolldilloner. Empty pans .hould hal/9 .. hOi. punl:fl9(! In the pail ballom to prevent drowning of 8mall ChRd,...". AI containers should be dii!postd In 1111 OfllIlronmentally s.fe
manner end in accorda""" with govemmen\<ll regulalion•• For work on tanl<a. refer to OSHA regulallon., ANSI 49.1, and ctherllcvemmentalsnd 􀁩􀁮􀁤􀁵􀀮􀁴􀁾􀁡􀁬􀀠 ",feren<:<l. pertaining
10 cleoning, repairing, welding, or olher t:OO!.mploltd operations. 􀁾􀁃􀁯􀁮􀀡􀁡􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁲 rerers to any vessel, can. drum, tanlter, dlslrlblllor tank, ole., Ihat may be used for han<!ling
and/Cf sloring sny of the preducts covered by this gUideline spectftcallon or any prodUct of unknown oriQln. 10.3 􀁈􀁥􀁾􀁬􀁴􀁨􀀠artd Environmentsl; PoIyT6''''I. 001 con&ldered I hazardous
wasle and meets all currenl Federal reqUirements for Indusbioi waal•. AS AN APPUCATOR you should be (amlRar With aU poIanUal hazards prior to entering lhe WOrkplace. TOXlclly Ch....C!e<izaliOn
leaChing I'rocedu", infonma\i()n """ MlIt<Irial Salety Data Sneets will be provided upon reqUl.!sl In "".e of aeeI<Iental 'pllI, eontaln With absOfl)enl motorial, allow 10 dIY, and diapose
of a<XX>f(jing to local, stale and federal regulaUons. 􀀡􀀧􀁲􀁟􀁵􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁾􀀠$houlo b. laken Io-prevenl 􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁦􀁡􀁣􀁥􀀠runoff and PoIyTar'" from entering slorm Qrainage 􀁾􀁹􀁳􀁬􀁥􀁭􀀠Of
ponds. 10.4. Maintenance 01 eosUng ClIO prolong !!JIlife and attractive appearanCli!. Sand, gravel andolhar debris should be ramoved ". they Ilccumulate. Oil dripping$, antifreeze, e\C:. can be .crubblld With mild 􀁤􀁥􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁾􀁮􀁬􀀮􀀠and fliI1lhed with clean wal1!ot. 10.5. Technl",,1
lI""i&tance .""lIalile from Gem Seal CorporltiQ{l upon requeoL 10.6. Oa not allow 10 Imaze. UMITED WARRANTY Poil'Tar'· poii'm., mcdifie<! coellar emulsion Is warranted 10 meet or 􀁥􀁾
all 􀁲􀁡􀁱􀁵􀁩􀁲􀁥􀁭􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁳􀀠Qf ASTM D 3320 .nd conform to all malelial """,irem",,'. in S.<:tion 3.1 oflhls .pecirtCallon. Gem Seal Carporation will provide detailed 'p!>cHicalions
and eerlifitations upon reqIJes\. The manufacturer 􀁷􀁾􀁲􀁲􀀮􀁮􀀡􀁳􀀠Ihese materials \0 be merchantable quality, wilen siored, used, and applied in accQrdance with \he.tO 􀀤􀁰􀁥􀁣􀁩􀁦􀁬􀁣􀁡􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁳􀀮
􀀠 WIllie the manufacturer recommende u.e$ for these materials based on lest. beli.ved reliable, the manufacturer In no way guarant.e$ particular methods 01 use. applications, or pelfomlance
under C<lrlain C(Iflditions. The manufacturer doa. nal warrant Itlese prodUcts 10 be suftable for any use or method of applle.aUon oltler Ih3lllhe general purpose and melhad Of eppUcalion
as Indicated In these spedfieJItlOns. Uabib't\l under this IoIal'flinty '" limiled to Ill. mplacement (lfltle product proven defective or 10 the purChase price. at the manufacturers
option, upon return oftha unur;ed pOllion. Thl$ warrantY;$ made in lieu of III other axprossed or implied .....rr""lle. ontl I>xcludeollabilily fO( eo....equenU.1 domaQC$. trt Ihe ....""t
of II claim under Ihis w/1<ranty. wrillen natice of Ihe complaint must be given to lb" 􀁭􀁡􀁮􀁵􀁦􀁡􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁥􀁦􀀬􀀠 5201 􀁃􀁡􀁵􀁳􀁟􀁾 Blvd.. 4765 Fredericll Or.. S.W. 2200 Ohannel Ave.
3111 W. Saner Ave, 13S S. Walnu! Circle TAMPA, FL 33619 (813) 623-3941 ATLANTA, GA30336 (41)4)6911-7000 MEMPHIS. TN 38113 (90\) 􀀷􀀷􀁾􀀲􀀵􀀸􀀵􀀠 DALLAS. TX 75233 (414) 333·4343 GREENSBORO,
NC 27409 (336) 864-8200 GEMSEALTM poi)o1.ar• .spec \I!!R.2 
HP LaserJet 3200se HP LASERJET 3200 invent APR-28-2004 9:08AM Fax Call Report Job Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 493 4128/2004 9:06:58AM Send 99727889334 1:09 2
OK , 􀀮􀁫􀀭􀁬􀀭􀁜􀁾 􀁾􀀱􀀢􀀵􀀠 9'1).-7?8-tj 33'f 50 YEAR.5 Of fUNl tumCON.INC. 1868WESTNOIlntWES"1HICHWhY I>ALlAS TEXAS """ Re: Town ofAddbon, Texas JtkhudByrd Dfi'«, 􀁐􀀺􀀡􀀮􀁶􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁬􀀠
{'"1M! 􀁾􀀼􀀺 ofNew AlrJWt Pavml«lt Dear Mr, Bibb,. Plcl.lc rcru to khalil, In...􀀧􀁾􀀠􀁃􀁴􀀩􀁬􀀧􀁴􀁕􀁰􀁯􀁮􀁤􀁾 ofMuth 15,. 2{JC14 to Mr, Steve Chuu:his.n, TQIIrIl ofAddhon. in which.
pwc:edlltt is outlined forthcnpm ofarpMlt 􀁰􀀱􀁖􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁡􀀠 =iwzy = It me Addi!.ol'l Anport. The (»'I'd'I\tI'Itlwi bettl: 􀁰􀁾􀀧􀁬􀀧􀁩􀁑􀁷􀁬􀁹􀀠􀁲􀁱􀁾􀁤 by Ihe TilWIl of Additon 'U
deketiv<: atld fiiling 10 conform to wntraet tequ<.r=Idltl. fu «'1l:C3pom:ltnce outlined a melht'ld ofrepair which 'tIIU I1.Ihleq..,tndl verb3lly acuptm by theTown. ofA.h:bQn on Mw:h
17, 􀀲􀁏􀁾􀁷􀁩􀁴􀁨􀀺􀁡􀀠mubWI,. 􀁾upon 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁑􀁮􀀠dOl'll: Qf mid to blt April, ZOO4. The hi1ut( "flteboo". JIl(;. W pe.tf'otm tht 1I,&t'(cQ liP"" 􀁾in an. Q:.pcdic:nl 􀁭􀁾
hu 􀁒􀁓􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁾 in an incrc:ue in :upMll p:u'enutnt IklbiorttiotJ rum Ih:at the lCIl con trt2trJ\1mt U 􀁮􀁯􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀮 􀁾􀀤􀁏􀀡􀁵􀁜􀁩􀁑􀁮􀀬􀀠'l'MToow ofAddiIon􀁷􀁩􀁉􀁉􀁾􀀽􀁲􀁯􀁮􀁬􀁾􀀠 ftpla.eemeneoflhe
􀁤􀁥􀁲􀁾 􀁾 in a 􀁉􀁭􀁍􀁕􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁦􀀧 lD 1M Town. Rcbron.lnc,mmt submit II pbn mr::thod of􀁾􀁶􀁡􀁬 wu.I 􀁴􀀧􀂢􀁐􀁾􀁴 fct 􀁾by the Tr,P:m pri!;X' to w -> 􀁾tunhe; 􀁾􀀡􀁨􀁩􀁴 Itt!« 1.1 fwm:a.I
not:k:e ..fthe intmt ofme Town ofA&:iittm to 􀁃􀀳􀀮􀁾􀁥􀁴􀁨􀁤􀀺􀁲􀁾􀁩􀁦􀁾􀁗􀁬􀁤􀁴􀁣􀁓􀁴􀁡􀁡􀁤􀁡􀁮􀁊􀁓􀁰􀁣􀁤􀁬􀁢􀁴􀀱􀁣􀁮􀀱􀀮􀁗􀁾􀁏􀀡􀀠 Dd'"tmve ad 􀁾Wotk. Rtbetm.lnc. 􀁾􀁍􀁾 fourttt.n
(14) 􀁾􀀠 !byt !'rom the 􀁾􀁴 orlh.l.s noUce til tubn»t a phn. obnin 􀁾oftnt phn &om the Town,.:i6doompku: the_nl and teplatcmmtof!ht! 􀁾􀁲􀁰􀁲􀀺􀁥􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴 III 􀁴􀀱􀁒􀁾􀁴􀁴􀀠 wis&ction
Clftbe TO"¥'Il. 11u: TQ!.\m'1Wl R1'n(dy 􀀱􀁍􀁾􀁾􀁭􀁡􀁮􀁤 damct Iherostof 5UCh (rom IlIt 􀁾o..lI.t:bcun, me. ,}j(lwd Rcbo.m.lw!. W1 ttl 􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁾􀀠 􀁗􀀨􀀯􀁾􀁫􀁷􀁩􀁴􀁨􀁩􀁉􀁈􀁨􀁊􀁳􀀠1lIkttctl
titne. 
􀂥􀁬􀀭􀁜􀁾􀀭􀀶􀀱􀁾􀀵􀀠 91:J---7F8-q 33tf 50 YEARS OF FUN! PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450-2371 FAX (972)450-2837 '____""_"::----"7O':::::;:O® Post Office Box 9010 Addison. Toxa, 75001-9010
16801 Westgrove April 28, 2004 REBCON, INC. 1868 WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY DALLAS TEXAS 75220 Attention: Mr. Robert Bibby Re: Town of Addison, Texas Richard Byrd Drive Pavement Replacement
Final Acceptance ofNew Asphalt Pavement Dear Mr. Bibby, Please refer to Rebcon, Inc.'s correspondence ofMarch 15,2004 to Mr. Steve Chutchian, Town of Addison, in which a procedure is
outlined for the repair of asphalt pavement in a tllXiway area at the Addison Airport The pavement had been previously rejected by the Town of Addison as defective and failing to conform
to contract requirements. The correspondence outlined a method of repair which was subsequently verbally accepted by the Town of Addison on March 17,2004 with a mutually agreed upon
completion date of mid to late April, 2004. The failure of Rebcon, Inc. to perform the agreed agreed upon repair in an expedient manner has resulted in an increase in asphalt pavement
deterioration such that the seal coat treatment is no longer an acceptable solution. The Town of Addison will require removal and replacement of the defective area in a manner acceptable
to the Town. Rebcon, Inc. must submit a plan method of removal and replacement for approval by the Town prior to the work. Please further consider this letter as formal notice of the
intent of the Town ofAddison to exercise their authority if necessary under Standard Specification 1.42.1 Removal of Defective and Unauthorized Work. Rebcon, Inc. will be allowed fourteen
(14) calendar days from the receipt of this notice to submit a plan, obtain approval of the plan from the Town, and complete the removal and replacement of the asphalt pavement to the
complete satisfaction of the Town. The Town will remedy the defective work and deduct the cost of such from the monies due Rebcon, Inc. should Rebcon, Inc. fail to replace the defective
work work within this allotted time. 
Do not hesitate to contact us ifyou have any questions. Yours truly, Town ofAddison /.? L .. /' j 􀀬􀁾􀁊􀁾􀀠 Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E. Assistant City Engineer Via Certified U.S. Mail,
Return Receipt Requested Cc: Michael E. Murphy, P.E. Jerry Holder, P.E. Jim Pierce, P.E. 
ADDISON MUNICIPAk AIRPORT Construction/Maintenance Standards and Specifications May 30, 1991 I. OBJECTIVE: Develop Addison Municipal Airport into a first class "general aviatfon" facil
i ty taking into consideration safety, serviceability, environmental impact and aesthetics. To achieve this objective, the Town and AATI require that the buildings, pavement, drainage
facilities and grounds are maintained in a "general state of good repair and condition". II. AIRPORT SPECIFICATIONS/STANDARDS A, Buildings -Buildings shall be constructed and maintained
in accordance with the building code adopted by the Town of Addison. Broken windows, peeling paint or other obvious defects shall be repaired as they occur. Buildings shall be inspected
annually and the attached building inspection form (Attachment "A") shall be completed and submitted to the airport operator. Any noted defects shall be repaired within 30 days, weather
permitting. B. Maintenance of Existing Pavements -A "general state of good repair" for existing existing pavements shall be pavements with a "pavement condition index" (pcl) as follows;
l. Runway -Minimum PC! 55 Good 2. Main Taxiway "AU, "A-luI and "A-2" -Minimum PCI 50 Fair/Good 3. Major Public Taxiways "Eff , uF·n , "Mit , and liN" Minimum PCI 50 Fair/Good 4. Minor
Public Taxiways irAAn I "a", "BB"I "cn , "celt I "G" , "H"t "JUt "Kn and "Lit -Minimum PCI 40 Fair 5. Private Aprons and Ramps -Minimum pcr 40 Fair 6. Parking Areas -Minimum PC! 40 Fair
In addition, pavements shall not have any potholes, heavy rutting, grass growing in it or other failure detrimental to the operation of aircraft or motor vehicles. EXisting pavements
shall be inspected annually and the attached pavement inspection form (Attachment "5") shall be completed and submitted to the airport op.erator. Any noted defects shall be repaired
within 30 days, weather permitting. 
Repairs shall be in accordance with the Standards/Specifications and details outlined in "Attachment c". C. New Construction/Reconstruction of Airside Pavements All areas of new construction/reconstr
uction shall be designed and constructed in accordance wi th the following FAA advisory circulars using portland cement concrete pavement: AC 150/5320-6C Airport Pavement Design and
Evaluation. 2. AC 150/5370-10A Standards for specifying Construction of Airports. Minimum design loadings shall be as follows: 1. Runway -' 120,000 pounds dual 2. Main Taxiway 100,000
pounds dual 30; Taxiways "A-In 1 nA-2", tlB" I "En I HF" I "M" I & UN" and associated ramps and aprons 60,000 pounds dual 4. Taxiway "L" and associated ramps and aprons 40,000 pounds
dual 5. Taxiways "AA", "BBn , "ee", nC"1 "aft, "H1!, ffJ" and "K" and associated ramps and aprons 12,500 pounds single D. New Construction/Reconstruction of Landside Pavements All landside
facilities shall be constructed/reconstructed in accordance with the attached Standard (Attachment "on) as a minimum. Parking areas shall be a minimum of 5" reinforced portland cement
concrete pavement with fire lanes, dumpster routes, and delivery areas a minimum of 6" reinforced portland cement concrete. E. Drainage Facilities Drainage facilities shall be maintained
in a manner that does not create a hazard or nuisance. This requires regular mowing and removal of trash/debris. All new construction/reconstruction shall be in accordance with the Addison
Drainage Criteria Manual and applicable sections of FAA Advisory circular AC 150/5320-5B. Drainage facilities shall be inspected annually and the attached drainage inspection form (Attachment
"E") shall be completed and submitted to the airport operator. Any noted defects shall be repaired within 30 days, weather permitting. F. Grounds -Grounds shall be kept free of all hazards
and nuisances. This requires the regular mowing and removal of all trash, debris, and nuisance related materials. 
,. ADDISON AIRPORT 2001 COMMITTEE REPORT . ...-EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Au. g ust 25,1998 \ ..... . Attached is acopy of the Addisor{Airport 2001 􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁩􀁴􀁴􀁥􀁥􀁾􀁳􀀠Report. 􀁔􀁨􀁾􀀠2001
Report examines a variety of operational and management issues identified by the Committee as relevant to a complete investigation and development .of-a recommendation foduture management
of Addison Airport. The current long-term lease for management of the Airport expires on December 30, 2000. This community task force spent more than 18 . months analyzing the Airport
and developing this report document ·for the Addison City Council's consideration. The 2001 Committee conducted an inclusive and participatory investigation that involved public input
into the developmeRt of the Committee's recommendation. The 2001 Committee recommends that the City Council hire a professional service provider to administer a competitive bidding process
leading to the selection of an operator of· Addison Airport. by September.:l. 2000 ..The 2001 2001 C,ommittee recommends 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁴􀀠the City Council consider the folloWing policy development
as vital to the successful completion of this management transition process and development of a new contract for services to manage Addison Airport. It is important to remember that
the focus of this process is to identify policy issues for the City Council and bidding process consultant to consider. The 2001 Committee was not charged with developing a detailed
management contract instrument. The 2001 Committee's policy recommendations have been divided into three categories related to recommended elements of the future contract for services,
recommended bidding criteria, and an environmental consideration. The policy recommendations have been prioritized for the City Council's consideration. The 􀁥􀁸􀁥􀁣􀁵􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁾􀀠summary
also identifies report chapters that provide a complete analysis of each of the recommended actions. 2001 Committee PolicvRecommendations: Elements of the Contract 1. Continue privatization
of the airport management furction under a contract for services structure (Chapter VIJI) 2. Contractually recognize that the real estate development responsibilities and the normal
aviation operations responsibilities are two separate functions in the management of the Airport (Chapter VIII) 3. Create a new management structure based on a partnership of openness,
trust, and periodic performance review (Chapter VIJI) 4. Develop an operator compensation structure based on defined quantitative and qualitative performance standards which are prescribed
in the new services contract with bonus incentives for exemplary job execution (Chapter V//I) 5. Ensure airport operations that offer aviation users and aviation industries a location
that provides first class facilities from which to base operations and business(Chapler VII) 6. Ensure that the operator promotes development of the Airport in a balanced and synergistic
approach in concert with all facets of the Addison Airport Master Plan and Town of Addison land use controls and goals as adopted by the City Council(Chapter IV) •, 
,': ,7_ Ensure that future management agreements include hiechanisms for open reporting of financial information between the ..􀁯􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁾􀁲􀀠and Ihe'Town(Chapter V)"" ..... . ',
.•". ' .... ,.. .Bidding Criteria -_ 1. ,Hire a third-party professional 􀁾􀀮􀁥􀁲􀁶􀁩􀁣􀁥􀀠advisor 10 .administer Il)e request forqualificatiol'1s a'nd request for proposals: process
and' 10 assist in the development of a:' new contract for services instrument (Chapter IX) . . 2. Ensure that the operator .possesses 'a strong' underStanding of all relevant 'aviation
regulatory codes and develops a strong working relationship with all relevant regulatory bodies (Chapter 111 and Chapter VI) . Environmental Consideration 1. Recognize Ihat there are
environmental issues existing at the Airport and that the Town of Addison should work to ensure all environmental issues are investigated and resolved before the end of the current management
agreement(Chapter VI) • .t_ ,,--," ••.. -• , •. 
Exhibit A NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS COMBINATION TAX AND REVENUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SERIES 2004 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on November 23, 2004, the
City Council of the Town of Addison, Texas, at 7:30 p.m. at a regular meeting of the City Council to be held at the Town Hall, 5300 Beltline, Addison, Texas, the regular meeting place
of the City Council, intends to pass an ordinance authorizing the issuance of not to exceed $4,400,000 principal amount of Certificates ofObligation for the PU!pOse of paying contractual
obligations to be incurred for the PU!pOse of constructing improvements to and expanding the Addison Airport, including, to wit: (i) constructing improvements to runways, taxiways, lighting,
drainage systems and facilities; (ii) constructing, designing and engineering a fuel farm (collectively with (i), the "Project"), (iii) payment of professional services of attomeys,
financial advisors and other professionals in connection with the Project and the issuance of the Certificates. The Certificates shall bear interest at Ii rate not to exceed fifteen
percent (15%) per annum, and shall have a maxinnun maturity date of not later than twenty (20) years after their date. Said Certificates shall be payable from the levy of a direct and
continuing ad valorem tax, levied within the limits prescribed by law, against all taxable property within the City sufficient to pay the interest on this series of Certificates as due
and to provide for the payment of the principal tbereof as the same matures, as authorized by Subchapter C, Chapter 271, Texas Local Government Code, as amended, and from all or a part
ofthe sUlplus revenues ofthe Town's combined waterworks and sewer system, such pledge of sUlplus revenues being limited to $1,000. TIDS NOTICE is given in accordance with law and as
directed by the City Conncil of the Town of Addison, Texas. GIVEN TIDS October 12, 2004. lsi Carmen Moran City Secretary Town ofAddison, Texas ADDaOOI7100S Dallns Item #R8·2·Noti<;e
ofIntentto issue 2004 Airport COS (2),OOC 
, ,i I' i \ \ 
9 $656 (1995) $732 (1995) 15,700 (1997) 157,000 (1997) Love Field, Redbird Meacham Yes Yes (OAL) No Yes, 11 schools No ? 20 $1,700 (1996) $1,700 (1996) 40,000 142,000 Jolmson County
Executive Johnson County Industrial Yes Yes (MCI) No Yes, 4 schools Yes < 5% (or 7,100) 24 $2,000 (1996) $2,000 (1996) n.a. 213",000 ", . Fulton County,' Cob!> County, Gwrnett 􀁃􀀧􀁯􀁵􀁾􀁴􀁹􀀢􀀠
Yes Yes (ATL) No Yes, 6 schools Yes' '-'.'; . n.a. 25-30 Il.a. n.a. 􀀼􀁓􀀬􀀱􀁾􀀰􀀠 U!;OOO, ••,< • 􀀢􀀬􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀠'., .-' I Yes "',' Yes ' ''(es, 1 school Yes n,a, $, "0/
665 (1997 est) 10%)01,10% turbo 4 ? 70 n.a. n.a. Yes Operator 24 Hours, Dally 16 Hours, Dally Town Fire 􀁄􀁥􀁰􀁾􀀠 235 20% jet, 15% turbo 2 6.0 cents 85 n.a, n.a. No, Individually-owned
􀁓􀁥􀁬􀁦􀁾􀁡􀁤􀁭􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁥􀁤􀀠by owners 24 Hours, Dally 24 Houts, Dally County Fire Dept. 300 >75% Oet + turbo) 3 3.5 cents-S.O cents 30 n.a. n.a. Yes, 1 owned by FBO FBO 24 Hours,
Dally 16 Hours, Dally Airport I I 130 3% Jets, Rest Piston 6.0 cents 120 n,a. n,a. Yes (75%), rest private Airport (75%), FBO (25%) 12 HourG, Daily n.a. City Fire Dept. :'#. 
685 (1997 est) 10% Jet, 10% turbo 4 ? 70 n.a. n.a, Yes Operator 24 Hours, Dally 16 Hours, Daily Town Fire Dept 295 11 % jets, 7% turbo 4 7.3 cents 72 n.a. 25,000·50,000 sq. 11. Yes FBO
24 Hours, Dally 24 Hours, Dally City Fire Dept. 600 n.a. 5 5.0 cents 115 n,a. n.a. Yes (75'10), rest private Airport (75'10), FBO (25%) 24 Hours, Dally 17 Hours, Dally County Fire Dept.
145 2% jets 7.0 cents 99 n.a. n.a. No FBO 16 Hours, Dally 14 Hours, Dally City 􀀮􀁾􀀠 
9 $656 (1995) $732 (1995) 15,700 (1997) 157,000 (1997) Love Field, Redbird Meachem Yes Yes (OAL) No Yes. 11 schools No ? 20 $2,200 (1996) $2,200 (1996) 84,000 140,000 West Moreland County,
Roastaver, Washington County Yes Yes (PIT) No, Possible In Future Yes, 4 schools Yes 30% (or 42,000) 10 $850 (1996) $450 (1996) 69,000 98,000 Oekalb Peachtree, Cobb County, Gwrnett County
Yes Yes (ATL) Yes, Fulton Industrial BlVd. Yes, 1 school Yes < 1% (or 980) j I $400 (1996) n.a. n.3. n.a. No Yes (OAL) No Yes, 1 school Yes n.a. 􀁾􀀮􀀠 5 
Mission, Goals & Airport Objectives Capital 􀁾􀀠 Finances Current ::--=--==;--------1MaFnaacgteomrse nt r Performance Ratio Assessment Oversight Structure Community Liasion Processes
PLANNING PROCESS Town Officials, Airport Users, Tenants Contractor Management Processes Safety & Security Processes Financial Management Processes· Capital Finance Processes Commercial
Tenant Facility/Land Economic Quality Management Management Planning Development Management Processes Processes Processes Processes Processes 
---ADDISON AIRPORT BUSINESS PLANNING PROCESS (cont'd) Define IRefin" Goal; Campemlve & Outline Position Plan Identify IdentifY 􀁾􀁾􀀠 Milestones & Action Items Signals of Success f!dentify
Team I Goals Cr.ate Planning Team Select Operational Option Oplion 1: Oplion6: Renew the Long-term Lease IdentifY Develop Customers, Mission Town Management Mission Goals & Statement
Capital Corporate Goals, Expansion & Culture & Milestones & 􀁾􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁾􀀠 Finance Customer Timetables Oplion 3: Option 4: Option 5: Service 􀁌􀁯􀁮􀁧􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁭􀀠 􀀻􀁊 Interim Town Systems
Contract 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀠 Management Rol.s& 
· (1lt,. I JIM PIERCE, P.E. Assistant City Engineer (972) 450-2879 (972) 450-2834 FAX jpierce@ci.addison.tx.us E-mail Town of Addison 16801 Westgrove Dr. P.O. Box 9010, Addison, Texas
75001-9010 • 
A_ ADDISON PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450-2871 ® poo, Olli"" Box 9010 Addiaon, T.... 75001-9010 16801 Westgrove May 31, 2000 Mr. Jeff Williams Martinaire 4550 Jinuny Doolittle, Hangar
6 Addison, TX 75001 Re: Aircraft Washing Dear Mr. Williams: In response to your recent telephone call to Mr. Pierce regarding Ameriflight, 4553 Jinuny Doolittle, washing aircraft on
their ramp, this is to advise that this activity is permitted onJy ifwashwater drains to the sanitary sewer system. Ifthe washwater drains to tlJe storm sewer system, the activity is
prohibited under the airport's Storm Water Pollution Control Plan. This matter will be turned over to AATI, administrator ofthe Storm Water Pollution Control Plan, for appropriate action.
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Ifyou have any questions please do not hesitate to call me at 972-450-2878. Very truly yours, Michael E. Murphy, P.E. Director ofPublic
Works Cc: Chris Teery, Assistant City Manager Jim Pierce, P.E., Assistant City Engineer Sam Stuart, President, AATI 
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS I SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS March 26,2001 Mr< Steve Z< Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Addison, Texas 75001-9010 RE: Surveying
Services V Addison Airport Boundary S"rv., ddison, Te DTE Job Number 0107. ;0\ Dear Mr Chutchian: \f Dal-Tech Engineering, Inc. is very pie ed to have been selected to provide surveying
services for the Addison Airport Boun ry Survey project Attached is the Level of Effort spr. adsheet, prepared based upon the scope of work as discussed during our meeting of arch 14,
2001. We have further met with Mr. David Pierce and ML Bob Katzen and received a great deal of information both from our discussion with them and from the airport site visit These attaclunents
reflect our first draft of the Scope of Services based on our judgment as to the complexities and expertise that will be involved in delivering this assignment within the quality expectations
of your staff. Please let me know if the cited tasks, manpower loading and proposed lump sum fee of $198,428.00 are consistent with your expectations. Further, you may note that in addition
to the basic services, we have proposed several optional items. These items could be added or subtracted at your request Dalserv/dcbro.!O 107/proposalslPropO$;11 Leiter. Chutchian3 .26.
{) 1 17311 DALLAS PKWY /STE 200 /DALLAS, TX 75248 /972-250-2727 /FAX 972-250-4774 222· W< EXCHANGE f FT. WORTH, TX 76101 f 817-626-8777 f FAX 817-626-5777 webmaster@dai-tech.com 
Mr, Chutchian March 26, 2001 Page 2 We certainly do appreciate this opportunity to serve the Town and are looking forward to working with you, As you have a chance to review the attached
preliminary scope of services and manpower projection for the proposed contract, if further information or clarification is needed, please let us know, Following your review, we will
also prepare and submit the schedule of work with our final fee submittal. Thank you again for this opportunity to be ofservice to the Town, Sincerely, 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀠 Sedi A. Toumani, P,E.
SAT/ats Ene, Scope of Services Manpower Projection OalservidcbroiO107JproposaJslPropOll'aI LettCf_Chutchian,3,26.01 
ADDISON AIRPORT BOUNDARY SURVEY AND BASE MAPPING SCOPE OF WORK. DAL-TECH Engineering, Inc. has been asked to prepare a scope of work and an estimate of probable cost for preparing a
boundary survey and a base map of selected features of the Addison Airport property. Included in the boundary survey are locating the approximately 65 ground leases on the airport, the
through-the-fence leases, joint use agreements, and easements affecting the property. Optionally, DTE can also produce individual lease exhibits if desired. The base map will show all
buildings, taxiways, runways, fences, and streets within or immediately adjacent to the airport boundary. In addition, utilities such as water, wastewater, storm sewer, electric. gas,
and telephone can be located at an optional level of quality as explained in more detail below. The detailed scope of services to accomplish these goals is set out as follows: 1. Gather
data and perform research: A. At Town of Addison and at Addison Airport DTE staff will coordinate with Town of Addison staff in both Public Works and at Addison Airport to gather existing
documents, plans, maintenance records, electronic files, and any other information that will aid in the preparation of the boundary survey, leasehold establishment, and base mapping.
B. At TxDOT's Aviation Division in Austin DTE staff will obtain any relevant information about Addison Airport from Charlotte Bergfeld or her designated representative in TxDOT's Aviation
Division in Austin. C. From County Courthouse Deed Records We will use an outside professional abstracting service to gather the public records research for us. Although several of our
DTE staff are very proficient in using the Dallas County Deed Records, abstracting profeSSionals have access to easement databases that allow them to do thorough easement searches that
we are unable to do. We plan to avail ourselves of this expertise. Deliverables: DTE will prepare a document control system for the project and establish files containing relevant documents.
Dalscrv/dcbralOl071ProposalsiAddison Scope FinaI.3.26.0 I 
2. Establish Control A. Perform GPS surveys and office processing to establish secondary control on permanent monuments. There are several high-order monuments on the airfield established
as part of the National Geodetic Survey's Primary Airport Control Station (PACS) and Secondary Airport Control Station (SACS) program. We will use these monuments as our primary control
points for the project. We will establish six additional secondary control points, which will be constructed to a Town of Addison and OTE mutually approved design at mutually agreed
upon locations. Classical static GPS surveying techniques will be used to record satellite observation files at each of the primary and secondary control pOints and at selected vertical
benchmarks on the airfield. Constraining the resultant network to the National Geodetic Survey monuments' data, we will perform office post-processing to determine the geodetic coordinates,
the NAO 83 (1993) Texas North Central Zone (4202) State Plane Coordinates, and the PACS NAV088 orthometric height for each of the stations in the network. B. Run level loops as necessary
to incorporate existing vertical information. The vertical datum for the PACS I SACS points is GPS-derived NAV088 orthometric heights. These orthometric heights are published to centimeter
precision (-0.03') and are considered to be that precise in relation to other PACS I SACS stations but not . necessarily in relation to other NAV088 known points in the area. Therefore.
we need to incorporate some of the "local" benchmarks to ensure that our GPS vertical model works properly. C. Prepare a report including "recovery drawings" showing each monument, its
physical location, its data, and its metadata on an individual drawing for each monument. After all of the above GPS work and leveling has been completed, OTE will compile a brief report
documenting the GPS work and the associated statistics. The report will contain "recovery drawings" showing each monument, its physical location, its data, and its metadata on an individual
drawing for each monument. Deliverables: Meet with the Town Staff to deliver and discuss the GPS Report with a "recovery drawing" for each monument. Dalscrv/dcbralO l07IProposaislAddison
Scope FinaI.3.26.01 
3. Compile graphic documents of preliminary data. A. Plot deeds, leases, "through the fence" leases, easements, joint use agreements, TxDOT information, and plan data in a digital (AutoCad
or Microstation) file. Using the data gathered in Item 1, above, we will prepare a preliminary work map compiling the known facts concerning the location and extent of airport fee ownership,
leases, utility easements, jOint use agreements, aviation limitations and easements, engineering data, and other knowledge gained during the data gathering and research activities. B.
Analyze plot to identify any problem areas needing special attention and curative work. Special attention will be paid to possible conflicts and problem areas. Those items that are not
locatable due to poor or ambiguous description will be identified for special attention. These items will be added to the preliminary work map to the degree possible for the orderly
and efficient prosecution of the fieldwork. j-\-f',q ) 􀀭􀁾􀀠Deliverables: the preliminary work map in CAD format. [iVieS 4. Prepare a preliminary report and present it to the Town of
Addison Prepare a formal report describing our findings and identifying those items from the data collected that need further attention or definition. Attend a formal meeting with the
Town of Addison staff to present the report and mutuallyto define "action items" for the Town of Addison and the DTE staff. Deliverables: meet with the Town staff to present our Preliminary Report on research. 5. Perform field surveys A.
Establish three-dimensional tertiary control points for use in making boundary ties and mapping. Working from the primary and secondary control points, DTE field crews will use GPS and
conventional methods to establish tertiary control points for use in tying property corners and in mapping. Although these points will be of such permanence as to survive the project,
they will not be published formally beyond the documentation in our project files. Daiserv/debrniO1071Prupooal-' Addison Scope FinaI.3.26.0 I 
B. Locate property corners and evidence of leaseholds using the preliminary work map as a guide. Our crews will use the tertiary control pOints to locate and tie all evidence of fee
simple boundaries and of leaseholds. Artificial monuments recited in deeds will be searched out. The evidence will be tied to the project coordinate system. C. Locate in three dimensions
all buildings, taxiways, runways, fences, streets, and utilities within or immediately adjacent to the airport boundary. In addition to locating boundary corners, DTE personnel will
locate buildings, taxiways, crossovers, runways, fences, streets, and utilities (water, wastewater, storm sewer, electric, gas, telephone). Our involvement with utility location can
be very limited or very extensive as reflected in the four-tiered Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) options stated below: Quality Level D -DTE personnel can conduct "records search"
to obtain information on utilities solely from existing utility records. Quality Level C-DTE can perform perform a "surface visible feature survey" to locate visible aboveground utility
facilities such as manholes, valve boxes, posts and to corralate this information with existing utility racords. Quality Level 8-DTE can utilize the application and interpretation of
surface geophysical techniques which include electromagnetic, magnetic, and elastic wave methods 10 designate Ihe presence and approximate horizontal location of underground utilities.
Quality Level A-DTE can characterize a utility's spatial position, composition, condition, size, and other data that may be reasonably available about the utility and its surrounding
environment through its exposure by nondestructive excavation techniques, such as airlvacuum extraction. *Optionaly, OTE's level of Involvement for Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE)
should be determined by the Town of Addison. Deliverables: Meet with the Town Staff to deliver copies of work notes, sketches, ASCII files, etc. Da1servldebralOl07IProJ'O"lIslAddiso"
Scope Fin.1,3.26.01 
6. Perform office work to process and refine field data into graphic documents. A. Download data collectors, make calculations, and perform analysis and further research to establish
property boundaries, encroachments, protrusions, leasehold limits, and easement locations. After the field evidence is gathered, the data will be downloaded, processed against our control
information, and imported to the project database for analysis. Inevitably, this analysis leads to a secondary level of courthouse research to clarify issues that have become apparent
DTE will provide the services to gain these materials. Once boundary lines have been established, an analysis of the spatial relationship between boundaries and improvements will be
made to identify any encroachments or protrusions of improvements that may exist Leases, jOint use agreements, through-the-fence leases, and easements will then be hamnonized to the
boundaries and the improvements, and, finally, a fieldnote deSCription of the Airport property will be prepared. B. Perform CAD work necessary to prepare a boundary survey I base map
presenting the results of the surveying. The graphic documents presenting the results of the survey will be prepared in CAD format. The drawings will be "layered" to segregate thematically
related data items on the same layer to facilitate the preparation of specialized exhibits in the future. All of the data gathered will reside in this graphic environment, and multiple
drawings may be produced at the Town's request "'Optionally, individual lease exhibits and descriptions can be prepared. Deliverables: Meet with the Town Staff to provide hardcopies
and digital versions of the graphic documents prepared. Dalserv/debralO l01lProposal<;/Addison Scope FinaU.26.0 1 
7. Monument the boundaries of the airport and the leaseholds. A. Perform office work to prepare stakeout files for the field crews. Data collector files will be prepared for the crews
to use to set out the corners. B. Perform field work to set monuments (rebar with plastic caps) at all feasible boundary corners and at leasehold corners if requested by Addison Airport
staff. DTE field crews will set out 5/8" diameter 24" long rebar monuments with plastic caps at angle points in the fee simple boundary where no found monument exists. *Optionally, DTE
crews can set out the same type of monument at lease corners if desired by the Town of Addison. Deliverables: Monuments set in the field. 8. Prepare a final surveyor's report to present
to the Town of Addison. A. Prepare a final report having the following structure: 1. Executive Summary stating the project scope, objectives, and results. 2. A narrative describing the
data gathering activities, preparation of the working sketch, and the conclusions drawn from the the documents gathered. 3. Minutes of the formal meeting with the Town of Addison for
the presentation of the preliminary report, the action items defined in that meeting, and the actions taken. 4. Formal surveyor's report addressing the research issues, the results of
the field work, the interpretation of the evidence gathered, and the professional opinions drawn from that evidence. 5. The boundary survey /base map, signed and sealed, and, optionally,
lease exhibits on individual leases. 6. Appendices a. A list of all documents gathered, their relevance, and their provenance. b. Copies of airport vesting deeds c. Copies of lease agreements
Dalserv/debralO l07IProposaIS/Addison Scope FinaI.3.26.0 1 
d. Monument location sketches, metadata, and horizontal I vertical data for all GPS secondary control monuments that were established. B. Make a formal presentation to the Town Council
of the results. Deliverables: Electronic and Hard Copies of Final Report, Survey and Sorted Lease Documents Daiserv/dcbralOl07IProposaisi Addison Scope FinaI.3.26.0 1 
·OPTIONAL ITEMS 1. Subsurface Utility Engineering and Mapping 2. Individual Lease Exhibits and Descriptions 3. Setting Lease Comers Monument ADDISON AIRPORT $135,00 $100,00 $6C PRINCIPAL
RPLS SURVE TASKS Hours Cost Hour. Cost Hours III. OPTIONAL 5C. Subsurface Utility Englneertng A. Level D 4 $540 32 $3,200 40i B, Level C 4 $540 40 $4000 80 c. Level B 4 $540 40 $4,000
80 D. Level A 4 $540 40 $4,000 SO 6B, Boundary Survey A. Individual Lease Area Drawing and Description 4 $540 95 $9500 180 B. Joint Use Agreements Drawing and Description 4 $540 32 $3,200
60 c. Easements Drawing and Description 4 $540 16 $1,600 40 7B. Setting Leas. Comers Monument 4 $540 16 $1600 32 SUB-TOTAL 28 $3,780 295 $29,500 560 "'t'eJ "'" 
June 6, 2001 Re: Addison Airport Survey Progress Report #1 Dear Steve, Please find attached a schedule ofthe Airport Survey project. The level looping and documentation tasks have been
expanded to include the control reference points on existing Town benchmarks on the perimeter ofthe airport. Below is a discussion of progress on each task: 1. Gather Data and Research
A. We have completed research ofthe airport properties, B. We have completed research ofthe adjoining tracts and rights-of-way, and although a bit challenging, to our surprise we have
been successful in finding the needed records including deeds, abstract maps, and plats. C. This week we have started our search for easements, and expect to complete this task by the
end ofthe week. D. Lease agreements have been located and although we have not yet reviewed each one, they appear to be in good order. A County record search is currently underway, with
some ofthe instruments fuund in excess oftwo hundred pages each. The combination ofTown and County County records should provide the vast majority ofthe lease agreements. We expect to
have them in hand and reviewed in the next two weeks, prior to our June 15,2001 progress report. 2. Controls A. GPS-set secondary controls are completed. B. Level loops are in progress,
and will include several Town benchmarks in the network. C. Documentation is in progress. Please find below a sample ofthe recovery/publication cover sheet for your review and comment.
The OPUS data sheets, containing State Plane coordinates, will be attached to the finaJ product. We expect that these will be complete and submitted with the June 15,2001 progress report.
3. Compile Graphic Documents ofPreliminary Researeh Data Overall airport boundary has been platted using the record deeds, with on-going verification/clarification with the adjoining
tract record drawings. This master drawing will be adjusted with field data for completion. 4. Preliminary Report This progress report, updated and expanded bi-weekly, will serve as
our preliminary report. 
5. Field Surveys A. The federal survey monuments have been located and tied to secondary control monmnents, and the tertiary control network is in progress, in conjunction with vertical
control This task will be complete this week. B. Some property comers have been field-located and marked to assist with office operations. The body ofthis task to be performed in sequence.
C. Feature mapping to begin next week, one week ahead ofschedule. 6. Processing ofField Data Processing offield data to proceed with field operations. 7. Monument Boundaries Will proceed
on schedule, in sequence. 8. Prepare Final Report Will proceed on schedule, in sequence. 
Static Control Point Date: 5-11-01 Observer: Scott Hardin Rec. htlft: 6.56 Rec htlM: 2.000 Vertical Measure Session Start Time: 1:06 PM Session End Time: 3:24 PM Dal-Tech Engineering
912-250-2121 11311 Dallas Parkway, Dallas Tx. 75248 Point Name: AA·1 Description: 3" Aluminum Disk set in concrete, inscribed with "AA-1" Location: Located in the Town of Addison Service
Center Compound, 129' South of the centerline of Sojourn Drive where it intersects the centerline of Westgrove Drive, 329' West of the centerline of Westgrove Drive, and 29' North of
a 5' high masonry wall. Monument set at the south radius (1.5') point of a traffic island, 4" )1below top-of-curb. ,I" -. 􀁾􀀮􀀠 I '(,,1 . I . i ') . /) ! if------l I f Parking 7 􀁾􀀠
􀁾􀀮􀀠 .... ..., 1 􀁾 ,{. , . 􀀮􀁾􀀠 '-' +0 C (D C UL t 􀁾􀀠 :J 00 􀀫􀀬􀁾􀀠 0 • <f) -\. Monument, '.",. .... "'"' ,",' 329' to Center line L􀁯􀁾.􀀠 Of WestQrove Drive (l)/, 0" 􀁵'" 􀁾
. :;:,{ , ! I "\ : I 􀁾􀀮􀀠 /5' High Masonry Wall I -//' 􀁲􀁾􀁔􀁯􀁷􀁮􀀠of Addison Service Center V; 􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀦􀀯􀀧􀀯􀁌􀀠 --.. (I) , c ,--'" > L ."ill L .--0 Not to Scale Not fur Distribution
I 
ADDISON AIRPORT SURVEY May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1. Gather Data and Perfonn Research 2. Establish Control A. GPS Secondary Control B. Level Loops C. Prepare Documentation 3.
Compile Graphic Documents of Preliminary Research Data 4. Preliminary Report 5. Field Surveys A. Tertiary Control Points B. Locate Property Comers C. Locate Mapping Features 6. Process
& Refine Field Data 7. Monument Boundaries 8. Prepare Final Report 
􀁟􀀱􀁬􀁜􀀧􀁉􀁂􀁉􀀱􀁬􀁜􀀧􀁉􀁂􀁉􀀱􀁉􀁉􀀡􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁦􀁉􀁉􀁉􀀱􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁬􀀱􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁩􀀢􀀱􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁩􀁉􀁩􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀀱􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁉􀀡􀁩􀁬􀁬􀀡􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁴􀁾􀁪􀀱􀁾􀁅􀁔􀁬􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀻 ,.., " Strategic
Plan for Real Estate Management and Landside Operations " 􀁾􀀠 'J./"" 􀁾􀀠 \ 􀁏􀀧􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁈􀀢􀁾 .. • .. °"'-1 "".,",<-'" , , 􀀭􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀠 􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁻􀀧􀀬􀁜􀀢􀁾􀁈􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬 C<,' "'; "',i'
,;,< -"""""" ,. "."", '1 ····'Sf!"').;lS 􀁆􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 '. 􀁾􀀠 􀁾IN􀁆C 􀀠,,' 􀀱􀁭􀁉􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁓􀁑􀁾􀀺􀁪􀁾􀀧􀁬􀁉􀀭􀀧 ." \I d',. \ •••• 􀁾. 􀀮􀁜􀁜􀁹􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀢􀁾􀀠􀁶 (,:;,v'
", '0 􀀭􀀻􀀬􀀧􀁾􀀭 ":) i.. r::,. /'''' 􀁜􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀠 ........... SIo"Ye,':t:, • ".,,'" ;..... .;:;; ·Presentea:D.y'!'-·. ), 􀁾􀀠 ._ . .,: 􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀴􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁙􀀧􀁾 􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀮􀀱􀀠 ';
􀀭􀁾􀀠 , .Was"'ington -Staubach \ \'/.' 􀁁􀁩􀁦􀁤􀁩􀁓􀁏􀁾\A.lrporty;enture (..:,.-',." \ ..,􀀧􀁆􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀹􀀬􀁾􀀠 \ \. ',' ,-.-' , ..: :'",:/" . , \ 17 
I <-,' 'III I Strategic Plan for Real Estate Management and Landside Operations ';' •., 􀀭􀀺􀀧􀀾􀁟􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀠 :/"/:::"i. 􀀧􀁟􀀻􀀻􀀬􀁪􀀳􀁡􀀬􀀪􀁩􀁩􀀻􀁩􀁾􀁭􀂷􀂥􀁍􀀥􀁗􀀴􀀮􀀢􀁴􀀠 􀂮􀁀􀀤􀁾􀀧􀀠􀀬􀀻􀀢􀀺􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁾
􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀢􀀠 .. ---􀀧􀁉􀁾􀀭􀀯􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀠 q, . 􀀱􀀢􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀰􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀠"'? 􀀢􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀠\'t.;:, :'\<1-'-\ , £ ::'" ••􀀱􀀮􀀮􀁾􀀠􀀾􀀧􀀮􀀾􀁾􀀠 \III;'\) 􀀮􀀱􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀧􀀠
. £ IX' /. \ ,.1:.'.1" /. 􀀬􀁾􀀠 ;i}:'3' /. 􀁾􀀠 ."t':0..􀁾'"􀀠 ,0 ' 􀀩􀁾 ..--Qi!!VQ lU\.(. 􀁾􀀨􀀩􀁉􀀩􀀭􀁬􀁾􀂻􀀾􀀠 f[limn l\A!ll>4: 􀀮􀁉􀁁􀀮􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁔􀀠 ;.CA"I(t; eal",I'" • , 􀁉􀀾􀁷􀁾􀀠
0" JLf 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁃􀀮􀀢􀀠 ..." ..,1<1 􀀮􀁶􀀮􀀮􀁍􀁾􀁾􀀠 , 􀁾􀁈􀁜􀁉􀀠",-.' 􀀨􀀾􀁏􀁏􀁉􀀮􀁬􀀱􀁬􀀱􀀮􀁾􀀠 l\!).>,D 􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁉􀁾􀀡􀁉􀀻􀀧􀀺􀀮􀀬􀀧􀀧􀀠,',3'\ 
I I ) ) 
Jv)J: gn,1 􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁬􀁲􀁰􀁮􀁲􀁬􀂷􀂷􀀠 Purpose of Strategic Plan 􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀠 ,-.," ..􀁾􀀠:<;;.:';Zr$nffli$-;s;.w hiiluAil.>.· 􀀽􀀮􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀺􀁾 __..__ _ • Identify and set forth management
objectives and strategies necessary to align the airport's real estate portfolio with the Town of Addison's long-term vision for Addison Airport. 4 
trlJffif!!. '-,/Current Situation . t" ", ,.), ': ,\>;%,#tMWHib'M'$M$$i 􀁷􀁭􀁹􀀻􀁻􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀧􀀠 • Fully developed • Landlocked • Incompatible adjacencies • Inefficient land use • Aging
facilities • Long-term leases 5 
􀀬􀁾􀀠􀁊􀁴􀁊􀀩􀁾􀀱􀀠 􀀱􀀱􀁾􀀻􀀱􀁰􀀧􀁲􀁦􀀢􀀠 Strategic Planning Process g; ii5i{lb\I,l';' 􀁾􀁟.... _. • Considered Master Plan • Analyzed existing portfolio • Defined short, intermediate
and long-term objectives • Established processes and procedures for real estate decisions • Developed strategic land-use plan • Established benchmark analyses to track progress 6 
I I J /
􀁾􀀠JJlil.{/f'fl 􀁾􀀠 􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁬􀁲􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀀠 • Address projected demands • Identify growth opportunities • Maximize revenue • Improve overall value of the real estate portfolio • Plan
for orderly redevelopment • Complement the Town's long-term vision E 
\ "................ 􀁾􀀠􀁊􀁊􀁊􀁩􀁾􀀱􀀠 􀀱􀁬􀁾􀁉􀁉􀀧􀀱􀀧􀀮􀁲􀁲􀀢􀀠 Strategic Plan Elements ;'!', >}!;';" 􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀠 ::"",!F:&$:+0Rf.M1WAWUM& n iPWU;${,'·,: ...􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀮􀀠
• Proactively manage the real estate portfolio to meet longterm obj ectives • Minimize incompatible land uses • Target under-developed land and aging facilities • Identify opportunities
for acquisition and expansion • Utilize through-the-fence agreements to leverage operational capacity and offerings • Benchmark progress 9 
I I ) ) 
..,J 􀁾􀀧􀁉􀁊􀀧􀁾􀁉􀀠 -/􀁾􀁬􀁲􀁰􀁱􀁬􀀱􀀢􀀠 Strategic Plan Implementation L.' 􀀢􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀻􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀠􀂷􀀯􀂷􀀬􀀬􀀻􀁾􀂷􀀧􀂷􀁮􀀮􀁽􀀠/cMfmm@lWfiW' 􀀮􀁾􀀺􀁦􀂷􀀧􀀺􀀠􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁾____􀁾􀀮􀀠
• Proactively manage the real estate portfolio to meet long-term objectives 11 
..... 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁊􀁊􀁩􀁬􀀮􀁵􀁮􀀭􀀱􀀠 1l'"ZAi,pq,," • Airport encompasses 373 acres • 129 acres income producing • 8II acres ground leased 7Jacres t< l'1,.''\ 11 vacant acres) 12 
...... ,_/􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁊􀁊􀁾􀀱􀀮􀀠 􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁰􀁯􀁊􀀱' ,Proactive Portfolio Management i4 􀁍􀁩􀁴􀁴􀀮􀀴􀀮􀀡􀀺􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 • 73% of revenue generated from real estate rental and fees • 42% of
all income tied to long-term agreements • 25% of revenue from fuel sales 13 
',--,",' , 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁊􀁊􀁾􀁾􀁉􀀠 1l'"Vllrp• rt" Ground Lease Expirations r_.I::'; ',' 􀁾'􀁾o􀀮w􀁾 􀀻􀀬􀀧􀂣 􀁾􀁊􀁦􀁩􀁩􀁊􀁴􀀿􀀻􀁊􀀴􀀡􀁓􀀿􀁬􀂥􀁁􀁡􀀪􀀬pM-􀁾􀀻􀁁􀁈􀀼􀁾􀀠. 􀀢􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀢􀀢􀀠 􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀬􀀧
􀀻􀀮􀀭 ...􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀠 ..' ...... .,;";\':.'" "\ 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀠 .􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀠.,-􀁜􀀧􀀻􀁴􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀬􀁜􀁾􀁜􀁦􀀭 􀀡􀀧􀁜􀁾􀀠 􀀢􀁾􀀠" ...-tot " . ' 􀁾􀁜􀀬􀀬􀀢􀁉􀀧􀁉􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀧􀁑􀀱􀀧􀀱􀀱􀁾􀀡􀀾􀀡􀁾􀀢􀀻􀀧􀀠";j
, ' ...,;" e,ff '\ 􀀮􀀧􀁾􀁊􀀠 .--;:y,. f., '. 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀠􀁾􀀢􀀺􀀮􀀠 􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁦􀀠 ,"'._ .. 1 ':" 􀀺􀂷􀂷􀁜􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀬􀀠 .!--􀁦􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀧 " -:,;.,;." I '_, ' '1..'. ."-,,-.' '<,, [' /􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀺􀀺􀁾�
�:,' 􀀬􀁾􀀭􀀱􀁲􀁾􀀭 ?; j. ..¥ ,II _., t'..t.-,I," 􀀭,􀀢􀀧'􀀧!􀀢'􀁾 􀀠 -W-t'i·/,I ;"...'..\l • '. '(.Ill' ' --􀀧􀁾􀀠 b, ,202'2 it;": ,.-t'N,. . /,:' .'.... 􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀭 􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀯􀀻􀁲􀀧􀀺􀁦
􀀭􀀢􀁾􀀢􀁾􀀬􀀺􀀬􀀠 "; 􀁾􀀬􀀭􀀻􀀬􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀠 _.-3 􀁲􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀠 .' _'. . 􀁾􀀠 .! ........... r' -,::c,........􀀢􀀢􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀭􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 ., 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁓􀀲􀀱􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀠 ., .-', .􀀭􀀬􀀺􀀭􀀭􀂷􀁾􀂷􀀬�
�􀀬􀀺􀀧􀀬􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀢􀁾􀀻􀂷􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀺􀂷􀀬􀁾􀀺􀁾􀂷􀀭􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀽􀁲􀀭􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀡􀀢􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀧􀁲􀀠 , '_.,t.· :.... -􀀺􀀽􀀺􀁾􀀭 -":;;'':''-:::'--" t'-', ,:..:.::_, ...",,
/,\ 􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀧􀀮􀀢􀀮􀀧 .. 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀠 _. 􀁾􀀭 ') )"0 _t 􀁾􀀠 􀀭􀁾􀀠 􀀭􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀢.. 􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀠 􀁽􀁾 "," 􀀮􀁾􀀭 t! ""11 ,,2022 􀀻􀁾􀀺􀀠 J '< \-,I 􀀫􀁾􀀧􀁦􀀢􀀠 ...." 1'':;)\1.;' 􀁤􀁯􀀧􀀲􀁾􀁜􀁾􀀠'....,,
,",'. _ ' • ,'" 1-).j 􀀱􀀢􀁌􀁉􀁾􀁊􀀮􀀮􀁊􀁬􀀠 <. .. 􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀠", ,____ . , "!' _ _, . ..,..'1 􀁾􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀠 :" II',"1 ,'v .,. ..􀁾v 􀀭, ". ', •,.-. ,. ., 􀀮.􀀬-􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀠 • __ , 2022)11
.! ,-..1",..-[ <.􀁾 􀀬􀀠,-' " 􀀮􀀬􀁾􀀯􀁏􀀠 '" 'A. ,'," ,,-' 2024 . '...., <, '::-.,". II ....... ',,' Q 􀁾􀁉􀀠 􀀢􀁾􀀠 , 􀁾􀀻􀀧􀁏􀀠:<; 􀁾􀀬􀁊􀁉􀁜􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀬􀀧􀀠 " ., " , I' b I ". ' '"
􀀧􀀲􀀰􀀲􀀲􀁾􀁾􀀧 􀁾􀀠,. .2018 'IJ'{'hr 􀀧􀁾􀁉􀁙􀀢􀀠 , 2024 0 • 1i1J, :' '.. '''. , , 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀢􀁨􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀬􀀠 -"(): -'--?!"IW, ,'.,; " InQ'" "",' .􀁾􀀭 ,-,, \ 􀁾􀀭􀀬􀀮􀁊􀀮􀀺􀀠 ,J 2024/,'"
r 􀀧􀁾􀁜􀀺􀀧􀀠 􀀮􀁾....', 0 􀁾􀀠 􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀬􀀧􀀠 k ..... • , ,/.,,, 7';, '" • " "', 􀀲􀀰􀀢􀀲􀀧􀁾􀀠 I, 􀁉􀁾􀁉􀀠 􀁾􀀬􀁁􀁟􀀠 <1'-1,.,. '< ,0 '., "\ ", ..t' 􀁾􀀬􀀠 .......",... • 􀁾􀀠 ,q ,.
'L I;! 􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀠 '" '.'. .':: ' 􀁾􀀬􀀾􀀧􀀭􀀺􀀠􀁾􀀠: ''''' ' JJjj,l': ,"< Ig -, :,' ,,:! J,' .' y..lt.\ 􀀧􀁾􀁜􀀻􀀻􀀢􀀧􀁪􀀧􀀲􀀰􀀲􀀴􀀩􀀬􀁽d,!U , 􀀧􀁉􀁩􀁩􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀠"" r " 11 ,--.' • ,;..;>",
2024 􀁲􀁾􀀠 v"-.:,... ,. .._.:.'"" "'f}' ,J. ",'. 􀀬􀀮􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀠 'f ,",:,' 'Q 2024, I, 􀀬􀁾􀀬􀁟􀀧􀀠􀁾􀀢'" '!".c;-􀀺􀁾􀀬 ... _,k';$.,\',""," k, :,.,,' -"K'" -"fS " ",.A ;"."".t.-."( ,,".'"
-".,... '" 0, ;􀀢'􀀢 􀀧􀁾􀀭􀁜􀀠􀀢􀀬􀀯"􀀧􀀻"􀁬􀁩􀁉"􀀺􀀺,􀁬􀁾'􀀧 􀀢􀀠, rfjll,. 􀀢􀀧"􀁾􀀢'􀁾"􀀧 􀀠,􀀢,􀀧,􀀭''􀀧;􀀧;􀀧'􀁊''􀀺'􀀧''􀀧/􀀧'􀀧''􀀺'􀀱'1􀀧􀂷1􀁾􀀧1􀁊􀀧>􀀧􀁃􀀮' 􀀧􀀠'202.4' .',
,i}'"" ...t: :... 􀁾􀁪􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁊􀀠 c';:, A{; 􀀢􀀬􀁩􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀬􀀢􀁓􀀱􀀺􀁾􀀷􀁾􀀻􀁾􀀺􀁊􀁾􀁾􀀲􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁦􀀻􀁾􀀿􀂣􀁩􀀼􀁾􀀠 /1< ")/1""":;.1(.' 􀀮􀁩􀁊􀀧􀁾􀀠􀀯􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁬􀁲􀂷􀀢􀁬􀁩􀁨􀀢􀀠 f20i2,:trrJ1rr/tr':-.
,.', ,:Y,','j; 􀁾􀀢􀀮􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 , 􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀬􀁩􀀢􀀻􀁾􀀼􀁾􀀬􀀠 􀀧􀁾􀀻􀀯􀀠 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀂷􀀧􀁾􀀴􀀧􀀬􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁴􀁦􀀮􀀻􀀶􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀧􀂷􀀠 􀀬􀀧􀁉􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀨􀁾􀀠 ,r".{ "<;-/".'", I •• ...;, .... " ,_ 􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁽􀀠
􀀮􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁜􀁾􀀠"f" f" 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀠 ..... 􀁾􀀠 􀀺􀁾􀀬􀀠 I 􀀱􀀬􀀩􀁾􀀧􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀧􀀱􀀧􀀠 􀁾􀀧􀀠'. . .' 􀁟􀁾􀀠 J 􀁾􀀭􀀨􀀠 . "", .r.;' /' ,,, 􀀮􀁴􀀮􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀠, 􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁾􀀠􀂷􀁮􀀧􀀩􀁶􀁮􀀮􀀺􀁽􀁾􀁴􀀠 􀀺􀁾􀀧􀁩􀁩􀀠.-.
,,",,_. ,J.{ 􀀧􀁉􀀢􀁾􀀧􀀠 " I ''';'', ,..:::::"'.,.... 􀁾 w. ;u ,', 􀁊􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀮􀁵􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀠 􀀱􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀠 ", ,_ ...... ! ." .. /􀁾􀁩 􀁓􀀮􀂷􀁾􀁫􀁜􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀠 "" 􀁊􀀺􀀧􀀧􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁩􀁊􀀬􀀠
􀀱􀀱􀁊􀀱􀀲􀀡􀀱􀁉􀀢􀂷􀀧􀂷􀀻􀁬􀁯􀁯􀀮􀀭􀀱􀁉􀁜􀁉􀀡􀁲􀀻􀁉􀁗􀁪􀀨􀁊􀁾􀀤􀁁􀀮􀀠 '! /. 􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀠 􀁉􀁦􀁾􀁆􀀠 : hI ·f-l{ \ j .. 􀀮􀀺􀁾􀀩􀀬􀀧􀀠 ,'« ".,<c" , " ,/' ',' ,', ''700'k h'l . ... • " • c",--"
"V""."" j 'ey 0 e com • ':: :' ' 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀧􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀬􀀭􀀺􀀭􀁉􀀺􀀺􀀠 ".;; •• 􀀮􀀧􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀠 ... . • .:12-57'34.79-Ii 90"4':1':18.,0(1" W ,,1i'V ij041\ 1Q(n'. (iiI 1012 It 􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁉􀀰􀀧􀁬􀀠
• 56 􀁡􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁾􀁦􀁬􀁥􀁡􀁳􀁥􀁳􀀠 • First ground lease due to expire 2013 • Two-thirds of the ground leases due to expire between 􀀳􀁐􀁊􀁾􀀮􀀵􀀠 􀀲􀀰􀀲􀀰􀁾2024 rf' 14 
·....􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁊􀁊􀁾􀁉􀀠 ' ....._/1􀁜􀁾􀀷􀁲􀁐􀁏􀁲􀁬􀀢􀀠 Strategic Real Estate Evaluations L' 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁟􀀮􀀬􀀠 .: 1'.f':-'?' 􀀬􀀬􀀻􀀢􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁹􀂷􀀻􀀪􀀬􀀺􀁹􀁭􀁩􀁍􀀣􀁗􀀪􀀦􀀠 􀁩􀁩􀂥􀀪􀁢􀁜􀀢􀀧􀀻􀀻􀁾􀀮􀀮�
�􀀺􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀭􀁾􀀠 • Prepared and reviewed Asset Management Plans for each ground-leased property o Income performance o Leasehold valuations o Type, condition and value of improvements
o Land use to long-term objectives o Tenant needs o Environmental issues o Legal issues o Strategic considerations 15 
􀁾􀀠f(1ij}!!. Strategic Plan Implementation ..􀀧􀁟􀁾􀀠 '," _...L 􀁾􀀬􀀠 􀀬􀁾􀁩􀁴􀂥􀁀􀁀􀂧􀁩􀁍􀁍􀁀􀁳􀀠 2$i_$k;. • Proactively Inanage the real estate portfolio to meet long-term objectives
• Minimize incompatible land uses 16 
"..􀁾􀀠J,JJil.gn.!. --' 􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁬􀁲􀁰􀀢􀀢􀀠 Current Land Use 􀁌􀀮􀁌􀁟􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀠 <;__ 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀻􀀠'.,: .".' 􀁴􀁬􀀻􀀺􀀱􀀭􀀺􀀧􀁦􀀭􀀵􀀧􀁾􀁩􀀻􀀻􀁂􀁩􀁒􀁍􀀥􀁀􀁩􀁬􀀹􀁩􀁍􀀵􀀦􀁭􀁩􀁩􀀣􀀠$ 􀀦􀀤􀁬􀁟􀀪􀁴􀀿􀀬􀁗􀁾􀁩�
�􀀠:' 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀺__..____ . Fixed Based Operators Commercial Corporate Executive! Multi-Tenant T-HangarslTie Downs 17 
,--,/" 􀁾􀁊􀁊􀁩􀁁􀁾􀀡􀀮􀀠 􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁩􀁾􀀠 Strategic Plan Implementation L_ .􀀮􀀺􀀱􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀠 􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁩􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁩􀀮􀀳􀁌􀀦􀀻􀀻􀀺􀁫􀀬􀂧􀁩􀁅􀁍􀁴􀁢􀁗􀁾􀁴􀀠 􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁧􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁲
􀁦􀁴􀁜􀂷􀁾􀂷􀀬􀀺􀀠 􀁾􀀭􀀬􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀮􀀠 • Proactively Inanage the real estate portfolio to meet long-term objectives • Minilnize incolnpatible land uses • Target under-developed
land and aging facilities 18 
A .J,JJiAt1tJ1 '-_/􀀱􀀧􀁾􀀷􀁲􀁰􀁄􀁲􀀺􀀧􀀠 Re-develop Under-developed Land c=:'} '.. 􀀺􀀧􀁾􀂷􀀧􀁲􀀻􀀮􀁲􀀭􀀻􀀨􀀻􀀼􀀺􀀧􀁽􀁾..(:·1r-d%,:tf@@iiJ!W\M f 􀀴􀂥􀀤􀁾􀀱􀀲􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁲􀁲􀁟􀀬􀁲􀁟􀀠 􀁾􀁲􀁟􀀽􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁾
􀀺􀁾􀀺􀁭􀁟􀀢􀀢􀀠 .. " • Reconfigured 6.5 acres of under-developed land into a 20,000 SF corporate hangar including office, dedicated ramp and aircraft/vehicle parking. Area now consists
of 2.4 acres of fully developed land, leaving 2.2 acres for future development. 19 
.... .Jt)J: I. ,J 􀀱􀁬􀁾􀀧􀀠 Aging Facilities L_.__􀁾􀂷􀀬􀀺􀀬􀁾 ...􀁾􀁟􀂷􀀠 A:t,::{,,-,;:.§'$fuM@MW' 􀀻􀀻􀁍􀀻􀀶􀁍􀁴􀁬􀀱􀁹􀀬􀁦􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀮􀀠 • Repair and/or replace aging hangars • Improve
public parking capacity and quality • Enhance overall condition of existing facilities 2C 
'-.../􀁾􀀠1(#}f!!' Strategic Plan Implementation [ 􀁾􀀠.\!r:.:.;;;J;" i ,Ii: 􀀧􀁾􀀬􀀠:!·T/:;l!£iA.htU!f4M\lfW& 􀀧􀁍􀀬􀀬􀁻􀂣􀀡􀀧􀂥􀁾􀀧􀁾__ • Proactively Inanage the real estate portfolio
to meet long-term objectives • Minimize incompatible land uses • Target under-developed land and aging facilities • Identify opportunities for acquisition and • expanSIon 21 
􀁾􀀮􀀠 􀀮􀁊􀀬􀀮􀁊􀁊􀁩􀁊􀀮􀁾􀀱 J 1􀁜􀁾􀁉􀀢􀀬􀁯􀁲􀁴􀀢􀀠 future Development of Owned')Land ,WQ:;< 􀁾􀀽􀀠 • Midway Triangle 1.3 acres • W. Side Tunnel Tract 4.78 acres • Jimmy Doolittle
2.14 acres • Airport Parkway 2.2 acres • Redevelop SE quadrant of airport 22 
'''--./' . I 􀀱􀀮 « 􀁁􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀠 Potential Acquisitions 􀀺􀀮􀀴􀀢􀁀􀁽􀁽􀀬􀀧􀁾􀀠 '.' _' n. ,.",-".--'-_. '---,--', • Physical barriers limit expansion potential • 7 areas (227 acres)
were considered • 4 areas (102 acres) most probable for • expansIon 23 
􀀮􀁾􀀠 􀁊􀁶􀁊􀁊􀁾􀀱􀀠 􀀱􀁬􀁾􀀻􀁴􀁰􀁄􀀢􀀢􀀠 Potential Acquisitions L. :" ·-:.:L1:C:.. (􀀢􀀧􀁴􀀭􀁈􀁣􀀬􀀺􀀺􀁴􀀡􀀧􀁴􀀢􀁩􀁾􀀧􀀧􀁨􀁊􀀦􀁩􀀥􀁗􀁣􀁧􀀠 ;;;;;;;;,,3.t 􀀼􀀧􀀬􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀠
􀁾..w 􀁟􀁾􀁮􀀠 Area 3 (44 acres) & Area 4 (25 acres) • Light industrial office/showroom • Retail along Midway Road • Mostly non-aviation use • Older, underutilized Area 5 (2 acres) •
3 small out-parcels • High visibility • Height restrictions Area 6 (31 acres) • Two-thirds are "off-airport users" • 7 large conventional & T -hangars • Remainder small office/showroom
24 
i ) '-: 
GROUND VEHICLE TRAINING COURSE • OBJECTIVES Ffalml<__or_ __.-: +Theol!port drilling rules ....109-.+--g"",Gnd pe_ +Vehlele _if_ +􀁍􀁯􀁹􀁾 area and Non-MovemE!nt area drMng _1+AlfPOl\_
+Taxiwayareanl«lQnIlion + Runway BrftII ooog1#iOOIl + Communications +l.ighI gun signals DrivIng Rules and Regulations Operator Requiremenlll: )-Salisfact0l11y complete !his class )-AIretaft
have !he right ofway )-15 MPH on roadways )-Perlmet .... gales doses behind vehicle )-ClearancefromATCT before entering !he Movement area )-Ucense holder is responsible for !he currency
of !he airport's driveB ticense 1 
Driving Rules and Regulations , NON-MOVEMENT AREA • Use extreme Caution • AJrcraft have right of way • Watch for blind spots around alrcrafts or buildings • Use perimeter road only 2

NON MOVEMENT AREAS MOVEMENT AREA • Under ATCT control • Vehicles necessary for airport operations • Rotating yellow beacon 3 
MOVEMENT AREAS , TAXIWAYS , UghIs-Blue TAXIWAYS • Signs: -0esIgnaIl0n and DIn>CIion 4 
TAXIWAYS • Mat1<lngs: ,-Runway Hold _ and Centertine -NOIi-MoYeInentArea RUNWAY 15-33 • Ughl&: -Runway Edge • Markings 5 
--Runway • Signs: --Mandelory Hold I!.SHoId_ -RI,.IIM8Y DIstance RemainIng • RUNWAY 15 CRITICAL AREAS 6 
RUNWAY 33 CRITICAL AREAS • ILS ANTENNAS • localizer • Gfideslope t. ,"" " '"' -, ' ,. 􀁉􀀱􀁌􀁟􀀧􀁾􀀠 -COMMUNICATIONS • II'I:>NrrOR THE FREQUENCY • PUt::NI AIRCRAFT TO USE THE FREQUENCY
FIRST .. Watywrtum, M'I:3:ItbaVe 􀁾􀀠 ., Vt'ho you aN, "WheI'tt yoc.l are, IMtat II your intention ... lJiItttl fOr 􀁾􀁲 e.U fIIgn • READBAOK ALL IiOlO SHORT INSTRlJC'llONS 􀁾􀀠 SXAMPtE:
􀁾􀁁􀁦􀁲􀁰􀁯􀁦􀁴􀀳􀂥􀀱􀀱􀀱􀀱􀀠hold 􀁾􀁤􀁲􀁵􀁮􀁷􀁡􀁹 15'" • ACl<NOIVLEOOE ALL T(7NER INSTRUCTIONS • YEILO TO ALL AIRCRAFT AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES 7 
RADIO FREQUENCIES • TOWER -126.0 MHz • GROUND CONTROL -121.6 MHz • ClEMENCE DELIVERY -119.55 MHz • BACK-UP FOR GROUND CONTROL • COMMUNICATIONS STANDBY GO AHEAD WILCO 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀽􀁴􀀭􀀭
NO RADIO PROCEDURES WHAT TO DO IF YOUR RADIO FAILS ..... • WHILE AT HOME BASE • stay there and get new radio • WHILE ON RAMPINON-MOVEMENT AREA • Remain clear of movement a ..... .. Seek
assistance 8 
NO RADIO PROCEDURES • WHILE ON MOVEMENT AREA, INCLUDING WEST SIDE OF AIRPORT • Exit movement area 10 safe location • Remain clear of nmway at all tim... • Look for Light Gun signals
• LIGHT GUN SIGNALS • Steady Green -OK 10 cross Runway or Taxiway o • Steady Red -Slop o • Flashing Red -Move 011 lIle Runway or Taxiway 00 • Flashing While -Go back 10 whem you started
00 • AIIemaling Red and Green -Use IIlCIreme caution 00 9 
• 10 
ADDISON AIRPORT NOISE ABATEMENT/ACTIONS/PROGRAMS INITIATIVES Noise issues are a continuing concern to . any . city whereariairport is 'Iocatea.: . Over the years, the ToWn of Addisori
has worked wiihthe operator to address the ." concerns of residents arid will continue to do so under the new operating agreement witJi. Raytheon/Staubach. To date, the following actions
have been taken: I. A takeoff procedure has been drafted that will minimize over-flight of noise sensitive neighborhoods , 2. Notification materials have been printed arid distributed
to aircraft owners, Airport tenants, and piAots by the current operator and by Fixed Base Operators to remind pilots 􀁯􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁳􀁥􀀠noise, sensitive areas arid the suggested takeoff
procedure to uSe to avoid these areaS., . ,,' 3. A notification sign has been installed at the end dfthe taxiway as a reminder'to pilots (before takeoff) to follow the 'suggested takeoff
procedure to reduce noise over residential areas . Both the Town staff and the staff of AddiSon's FAA ToWer have observed that, when the above procedures are followed, rioise compla,ints
are virtually non-existent and complaints occur' only when ,these procedUres, are 'not followed. The Town has encouraged Airport tenants to follow these voluntary guidelines. NEW OPERATING
AGREEMENT STANDARDS . Under the proposed new operating agreement, additional efforts to control noise will be implemented: The new operator will: .. , I. EXpafld' on existing education
and notification' efforts. These could include efforts each quarter to keep noise abatement concerns and procedures in front oftenants and pilots. 2. Provide Town staff with a monthly
report listing the number of noise , complaints, the, action taken to respond to the complaint and the offending aircraft/user, ·if known. This repoiiingltrackirig mechanism will help
pinpoint repeat offenders so appropriate action can be taken. . . . 3. Meet with aircraft users/operators to discuss noise abatement programs and to secure higher levels ofcooperation
from tenants and pilots. The new operator has agreed to implement these three steps. The new contract will include financial incentives to the Operator for positively impacting better
implementation of noise abatement program and for pro-active pursuit of compliance. " 
/STEPS FOR THE FUTURE . While working thrQJlgh the public.process Qiplanning an orderly transition to a new,operaror, the Townbas continued efforts to addressiloise control issues.'
.' ',.' The Town has submitted a request to the FAA for a Part 150 Noise Study, which' will address all noise issues and potential solutions. When funded by the FAA, this is an extremely
comprehensive study and may take as much as two years to complete after funding has been approved. In addition, a request has been submitted to the FAA to seek the development and implementation
of a Random Area Navigation (RNAV) departure procedure. While the FAA has, tentatively, confirmed that an RNAV departure procedure to reduce noise is • feasible, it takes 6 to 9 month;! for formal action by the FAA.
Since this process will provide an officialFAA departdi:e route, it can be expected to have a positive impact on reducing noise as well as mitigating possible environmental concerns.
The Town and the Operator will pursue obtaining both a Remote TransmitfurReceiver and an ASOS (Automatic Surface Observation System, weather reporting). While not direct solutions, these
two items will have an indirect but positive impact on the noise abatement program when the Addison Control Tower is not in operation. These requests and a follow-up pursuit are being
made to the FAA. ",.\ The possibili.t y of additional operating hours ofthe Ad. dison Control Tower is also ., being considered. The City and new opeI"!ltor have met with the Tower Chief
and will be officially requesting FAA consideration of additional operating hours with the goal of establishing a 24-hour tower operation in the future. While the FAA has guidelines
and operating traffic standards that must be met in order to add operating hours, the Town is considering paying for these additional hours from the Airport budget. Additional hours
of tower operations will provide better service to airport users and better enfurcement of noise control procedures. If you have specific questions concerning any Airport matters, contact
the Town ofAddison, at 972-450-7000. 
NOISE COMPATIBILI1Y PROGRAM The Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) for Addison Airport includes measures to abate aircraft noise, guide land development, and implement and update the
program. F.A.R. Part 150 requires that the plan apply to a period of no less than,five years into the future, although it may apply to a longer period if the sponsor so desires. This
NCP has been developed based on a ten-year planning period. The objective of the noise compatibility planning process has been to improve the compatibility between aircraft operations
and noise-sensitive land uses in the area, while allowing the airport to continue to serve its role in the community, state, and nation. The NCP includes three elements that are aimed
at satisfying this objective. • The Noise Abatement Element includes noise abatement measures selected from the alternatives evaluated in Chapter Five, Noise Abatement Alternatives.
• The Land Use Management Element includes measures to mitigate or prevent noise impact on existing noise-impacted land uses and future land use development in the airport environs.
Potential land use management techniques were evaluated in Chapter Six, Land Use Alternatives. • The Program Management Element includes procedures and documents for implementing the
recommended noise abatement and land use measures, monitoring the progress of the program, and updating the Noise Compatibility Program. 
Each measure of the NCP is summarized in Table 7F at the end of this chapter. Included in the table is a brief description of each recommended measure, the entity responsible for implementing
each measure, cost of each measure, proposed timing of measure implementation, and potential sources offunding. This chapterbegins with a discussion of the recommended airfield improvements
recommended in the concurrent Master Plan and associated effects on the aircraft noise exposure contours followed by a review ofthe alternatives eliminated from further consideration
and a discussion of those alternatives considered to be viable. Finally, the program management element will be outlined and summary of all recommended measures and costs will be provided.
RECOMMENDED MASTER PLAN AIRFIELD IMPROVEMENTS The concurrent Master Plan has recommended several airfield improvements. Among the improvements are a northern 408-footextension ofRunway
15-33, construction ofa west side parallel taxiway that will temporarily be used for a runway while Runway 15-33 is being reconstructed, new fuel storage facilities, and new hangar facilities.
Of the recommended improvements, only the runway extension will affect the noise exposure contours. The extension of Runway 15-33 is anticipated to occur in the next five years. Therefore,
this runwayextension must be reflected on the five-year noise exposure map (NEM). Because the westside parallel taxiway will only be used as a runway temporarily, noise analysis ofthis
airfield configuration is not required under federal guidelines. 2007 NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS WITH THE 408-FOOT EXTENSION TO RUNWAY 15-33 Contour Descriptions The 2007 noise exposure
contours which take into account the runway extension are depicted on Exhibit 7A. These contours replace the contours contained within the Noise Exposure Map document as the official
noise contours. The contours are similar in shape and size to the 2007 noise contours. presented within the Noise Exposure Map document with the exception of the areas north north ofthe
airport. In this area, the 65 DNL contour extends approximately 300 feet further north than the previous contours. The 70 and 75 DNL contours also extend to the north by 200 and 400
feet, respectively. Land Use Impacts As contained within Table 7A, Three hundred and sixty-six (366) dwelling units are contained within the adjusted 2007 65 DNL noise contours. Ofthese
7-2 DRAFT 
-_ .... __ • City Limits ____ 2007 DNL Noise Conlour ----2007 Squared·Off 2007 DNL Noise Contour •••• Runway Extension Single Family Impacts 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁧 Mum.ramily Impacts [: Proposed land
Acquisition Source: North Texas Geographic Information System. Coffman Associates Analysis. Exhibit7D RECOMMENDED MITIGATION AREAS WITHIN THE 2007 NOISE CONTOURS 
without an on-site inspection by a qualified specialist. For planning purposes only, the costs of treating homes is estimated to be $20,000 each and the cost of treating apartments is
estimated to be $5,000 each, including contingencies. This is roughly based on the cost of acoustically treating homes near other airports. This project would be eligible for FAA funding
through the noise set-aside of the AlP. The acoustical treatment costs are eligible for up to 90 percent funding through the AlP. The local match will be provided through the Airport's
capital budget. Timing. These homes will be eligible for treatment after approval of the updated NCP by the FAA, expected in 2004. The overall pace of the program will depend on the
completion of a feasibility study and the amount of funding available. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The success of the Noise Compatibility Program requires a continuing effort to monitor
compliance and identifY new or unanticipated problems and changing conditions. Five program management measures are recommended at Addison Airport. The Airport Authority, as airport
operator, is responsible for implementing these measures. They are discussed below and summarized in Table 7F. 1. Maintain and update the systemfor receiving, analyzing, responding to
noise complaints, and community outreach. Description. The airport currently has a system of recording, responding to noise complaints, as well as pro-active community outreach efforts.
In addition to recording and filing complaints, it is important for the airport management to continue to respond to complaints, even if it is not possible to take remedial action. As
part of this effort, it is recommended that the Airport continue to utilize their web site to keep the public informed of noise-related activities at the airport. Additionally, the Airport
should continue to host meetings between airport users, airport tenants, and private citizens. These meetings are beneficial as they allow Airport staffto gain an understanding of future
potential issues and the success of the current noise abatement policies and . procedures. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a continuation of the Noise Abatement Measure which was included
in the 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R. Part 150. Implementation Actions. The administrative actions discussed above in the "Description" will be necessary. Cost
and Funding. This will involve administrative costs. Timing. This is an ongoing measure that is expected to continue in the future. 7-17 DRAFT 
2. Publish a pilot guide. Description. A pilot guide describing airport noise abatement information should be prepared for wide distribution to pilots using Addison Airport. The guide
should include an aerial photo showing the airport and the surrounding area, pointing out noisesensitive land uses and preferred noise abatement procedures. It could also include other
information about the airport that pilots would find useful. The guide should be suitable for insertion into a Jeppesen manual so that pilots will be able to conveniently use it. Airport
management should distribute copies to all owners of aircraft based at the airport and to the fixed base operators so they can offer them to transient pilots. Relationship to 1991 NCP.
This a continuation of the noise abatement measure which was included in the 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R. Part 150. Timing. Publication of a pilot guide is
planned for 2003. 3. Review Noise Compatibility Program Implementation. Description. The airport management must monitor compliance with the Noise Abatement Element. This will involve
checking periodically with airport users and the local Tower Managerregarding compliance withthe procedures. It may be necessary from time to time to arrange for noise monitoring, noise
modeling, or flight track analysis to study issues that may arise in the future. The Town of Addison should also maintain communications with local planning officials and planning officials
from the cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas, to follow their. progress in implementing the requested measures ofthe Land Use Management Element. Implementation. The Town
of Addison is responsible for arranging for publication of a pilot guide. Cost and Funding. The cost of a pilot guide is estimated at $5,000. It is currently budgeted as part of this
F.A.R. Part 150 Study. The pilot guide should be revised and reissued as needed. For planning purposes, it is estimated that it will need to be republished every three years at a total
cost of approximately $7,500. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a continuation of the noise abatement measure which was included in the 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes
ofF.A.R. Part 150. Implementation Actions. The administrative actions discussed above in the "Description" will be necessary. Cost and Funding. This measure will require administrative
time and staff support. Expenditures for special noise 7-18 DRAFT 
monitoring or modeling studies could be necessary from time to time. For budgeting purposes, this cost is estimated at $20,000 every three years. This will be covered through the airport's
operating budget. Timing. This is an ongoing activity that should begin as soon as the Noise Compatibility Program is approved. 4. Update Noise Exposure Maps and Noise Compatibility
Program. Description. The Town of Addison should review the Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) and consider revisions and refinements as necessary. A complete plan update will be needed
periodically to respond to changing conditions in the local area and in the aviation industry. This can be anticipated every five to ten years. An update may be needed sooner, however,
ifmajor changes occur. An update may not be needed until later ifconditions at the airport and in the surrounding area remain stable or do not change as anticipated in the Plan. Proposed
changes to the NCP should be reviewed by the FAA and all affected aircraft operators and local local agencies. Proposed changes should be submitted to the FAA for approval after local
consultation and a public hearing to comply with F.A.R. Part 150. Even if the NCP does not need to be updated, it may become necessary to update the Noise Exposure Maps (NEMs). F.A.R.
Part 150 requires the NEMs to be updated if any change in the operation of the airport would create a substantial, new noncompatible use. The FAA interprets this to mean an increase
in noise levels of1.5 DNL or more, above 65 DNL, over non-compatible areas that had formerly been compatible. As a rule of thumb, the trigger for determining the need for contour updating
is a 17 percent change in equivalent operations by the loudest aircraft regularly using the airport. To calculate "equivalent operations," any nighttime operations (between 10:00 p.m.
and 7:00 a.m.) must be multiplied by ten and added to daytime operations. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This a continuation of the noise abatement measure which was included in the 1991
NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R. Part 150. Implementation Actions. No specific implementation actions, other than those discussed above, are required. Cost and Funding.
Costs of a complete update of the Noise Compatibility Program are estimated at $300,000. This would be eligible for up to 90 percent funding from the FAA. The Airport's share would come
from the airport's operating budget. Timing. This should be done as necessary. Updates are typically needed every five to ten years, depending on how much change occurs at the airport
and in the local area. For planning purposes, two updates can be expected over the next 20 years. 7-19 DRAFT 
RESIDUAL NOISE IMPACTS Noise contours for the current conditions are shown in Exhibit 7E. These can be compared with the projected noise contours for 2007 and 2022 in Exhibits 7F and
7G. Contours within each of the exhibits include north only the planned runway extension for Runway 15-33, but also the implementation ofNoise Abatement Element Measure Four. This measure
applies to 􀁢􀁵􀁳􀁾􀁮􀁥􀁳􀁳􀀠jets and turboprop aircraft and calls for the creation of a departure procedure for Runway 15 that incorporates maintaining runway heading for 1.5 DME prior
to turning on course. Implementation ofthis measure results in a slight extension of the 65 DNL noise contour to the south, over compatible land uses. The 70 DNL contour actually gets
smaller in size to the south, and the 75 DNL contour does not change. Table 7D shows the number ofdwelling units exposed to noise for baseline conditions and after implementation of
the Noise Compatibility Program. With the implementation of the program, no existing dwellings are added to the 65 DNL contour. Without proper land use planning, an additional nine dwelling
units could be built within the primary noise abatement corridor to the south. Implementation of the recommendations within the Land Use Management Element would prevent these additional
nine units, as well as the other 371 potential units. Table 7E contains the population exposed to noise with implementationof the Noise Compatibility Program in comparison with baseline
conditions. With the implementation of the program, no additional residents would be included within the 65 DNL noise contour. As discussed above, without proper land use planning, an
additional 21 residents could reside within the 65 . DNL noise contour. 7-20 DRAFT 
impacts, none are contained within the 70 DNL noise contour. One noisesensitive institution is containedwithin the 65 DNL noise contour. Future noise impacts were calculated based on
the growth risk analysis contained within Chapter Four of the Noise Exposure Map document. Based on this analysis, approximately 451 total future dwelling units could potentially be
contained within the 65 DNL noise contour, including 59 within the 70 to 75 DNL contour and 21 within the 75 DNL contour. I!TABLE7A 'Noise.Sensitive Land Uses Exposed to 2007 Aircraft
Noise With Implementation of the Preferred Airport Master Plan Alternative Addison Airport • '" ,'_ "'_ N<!ise Contour q)NL). ,'_ Total DWELLING UNITS Existing Dwelling Units 366 o o
366 Future Potential Dwelling Units 371 59 21 451 Total Dwelling Units 737 59 21 817 NOISE·SENSITIVE INSTITUTIONS Places ofWorship o o o o , Schools o o o o Other (Library, Museum, Etc.)
1 Q Q Total Noise-Sensitive Institutions 1 o o 1 i HISTORIC RESOURCES I Total Historic Resources o o o o Population Impacts As contained within Table 4B, Approximately 919 individuals
are contained within the adjusted 2007 noise contour. This estimate is based on the persons per dwelling factor contained within the 2000 census report for the Addison area. A factor
of 2.51 persons per dwelling was used in the calculation. Future population impacts were calculated in the same manner described within Chapter Four of the Noise Exposure Map document.
According to this analysis, approximately 1,132 potential future residents could be located within the 65 DNL contour, including 148 within the 70 to 75 DNL contour and 52 within the
75 DNL contour. 7-3 DRAFT 
TABLE7B Population Exposed to 2007 Aircraft Noise With Implementation of the Preferred Airport Master Plan Alternative , Addison Airport .,.'.. '.' ":':>:...... ' .,: •.•....•.. .. .
. .. -" -",! . :'. • , .... 􀁾􀁭􀁳􀁥􀀺􀁃􀁯􀁩􀀱􀁴􀁯. 􀁵􀁲􀀨􀀱􀀩􀁎􀁌􀀩􀀠 . .....• . , ..•... 'totalA.'\jo"iiIl5DNt. 65-70 70-75 75+ Residents LWP Existing Population 919 0 0 919 346 1
Potential Population 932 148 52 1,132 497 i Total Population 1,851 148 52 I 2,051 ! 843 Notes: LWP = Level-weighted population; an estimate ofthe number of people actually annoyed by
aircraft noise. It is derived by multiplying the population in each DNL contoiir range by the appropriate LWP response factor. The factors used are as follows: 0.376 for 65-70 DNL, 0.644
for 70-75 DNL, and 1.000 for 75+ DNL. , Source: Coffman Associates analysis. , NOISE ABATEMENT AND LAND USE MEASURES ELIMINATED FROM CONSIDERATION Several noise abatement and land use
alternatives were evaluated in this study. These were discussed with the Planning Advisory Committee (PAC), local citizens, and government officials. The following paragraphs summarize
those alternatives, presented for further discussion within Chapters Five and Six, which were eliminated from further consideration after additional study. Three noise abatement alternatives
were considered within Chapter Five, Further evaluation ofthese alternatives resulted in the elimination of two of these alternatives. Alternative Two, moving the run-up location and
adjustingthe aircraft orientation during run-ups, was eliminated as it shifted run-up noise from one group of businesses to another. Alternative Three, construction of a run-up enclosure,
was also eliminated as FAA does not provide funding assistance for mitigation measures that mitigate the noise impacts on office, commercial, or industrial land uses. Chapter Six considered
the establishment ofa Joint Airport Zoning Board to draft, adopt, and oversee an Airport Zoning Ordinance. After further discussions with affected jurisdictions, it was determined that,
due due to the number of jurisdictions involved, it would not be feasible to regulate land use with such a board. The current informal coordination process has been effective in reviewing
projects and maintaining compatibility in the vicinity of the airport. 7-4 DRAFT 
NOISE ABATEMENT ELEMENT The recommended noise abatement measures are described in this section. They include existing measures to be retained and new measures. Recommended noise abatement
measures are described within this section and summarized inTable 7F at the end of this chapter. • EXISTING MEASURES TO BE RETAINED 1. Continue Pilot Education Program. Description.
The purpose of the pilot educationprogram and noise abatement brochure distribution program is to educate all pilots based at Addison Airport as well as transient pilots. The goal of
these programs is to inform pilots of the noise-sensitive land uses within the airport environs and to encourage avoidance of these areas whenever possible. The Town ofAddison has implemented
a voluntary noise abatement program as a means to reduce the number of noise complaints. As part of this program, lighted signage has been installed at each end of the airport's runways
reminding pilots to use proper noise abatement departure procedures. In addition, monthly noise abatement meetings are held by the airport management to discuss ways to educate pilots
about voluntary compliance with the noise abatement program. These meetings are attended by pilots, flight department directors, and other airport users. A hand-out has also been produced
detailing noise abatement procedures and has been placed in FBOs to reach transient pilots and tenants. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a continuation of the Noise Abatement Measure
which was included in the 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R. Part 150 . Implementation Actions. As an existing noise abatement policy, no additional implementation
actions are necessary. The Town ofAddison should continue to hold monthly meetings with airport users to ensure operators are aware ofthe noise abatement program. Cost and Funding. As
an existing policy, no additional costs will be borne by the airport users. The Town will incur normal administrative costs for informational efforts and sign. maintenance. Timing. This
is an existing policy which is recommended to continue. 2. Continue to Encourage use of NBAA Noise Abatement Procedures. Description. TheTownshould actively encourage business jet operators
to use the National Business Aviation Association's (NBAA) Approach and Landing Procedure and Standard Noise Abatement Departure Procedures, or equivalent quiet-flying procedures developed
by aircraft manufacturers. 7-5 DRAFT 
The NBAAstandard procedure involves the management ofthrust, flap settings, speed, and climb rate to reduce noise quickly after takeoff. (A complete description of the procedure is in
Appendix F.) The NBAA has also published noise abatement approach procedures for jet aircraft. These include using minimum approach flap settings, maintaining minimum speed, and minimizing
the use of reverse thrust after landing, consistent with safety. These procedures are also included in AppendixF. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a continuation of the pilot education
program the Town ofAddison initiated after the 1991 NCP was approved by the FAA for purposes of F.A.R. Part 150. Implementation Actions. Since this is an existing policy, no specific
implementation actions are necessary. The Town should reflect this policy in future published pilots guides, signs, pilot mailings, and on the Addison Airport Internet Web Site. Cost
and Funding. As an existing policy, no additional costs will be borne by the airport users. The Town will incur normal administrative costs for informational efforts. Timing. This is
an existing policy which is recommended to continue. 3. Continue to Promote use of AOPANoiseAwareness Stepsby light single and twin-engine aircraft. Description. The Aircraft Owners
and Pilots Association (AOPA) encourages quiet and neighborly flying by distributing generalized noise abatement procedures for use by propeller aircraft. These "Noise Awareness Steps"
have recommendations on how to fly the aircraft, as well as where to fly. Most of the steps provide guidance on pilot technique when maneuvering near noise-sensitive areas. The steps
also encourage cooperation with the airport staff on noise abatement issues. These procedures are listed in AppendixF of this document. It is not possible to predict how often these
procedures would be used, so it is not possible to quantify their effects on noise. Nevertheless, any use of these, procedures will help the overall noise conditions around the airport.
Consequently, the airport staff should continue to encourage their use. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a continuation ofpilot education program the Town ofAddison initiated after
the 1991 NCP was approved by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R. Part 150. Implementation Actions. Since this is an existing policy, no specific implementation actions are necessary. 7-6 DRAFT

The Town should reflect these nOIse awareness steps in future published pilot guides, signs, pilot mailings, and on the Addison Airport Internet Web Site. Cost and Funding. As an existing
policy, no additional costs will be borne by the airport users. The Town will incur normal administrative costs for informational efforts. Timing. This is an existing policy which is
recommended to continue. NEW MEASURES Two nOIse abatement measures currently not implemented are recommended for implementation as listed below. 4. Create a Departure Procedure for Runway
15 that Incorporates Maintaining Runway Heading for 1.5 DME prior to Turning on Course for Business Jets and Turboprop Aircraft. Description. A new departure procedure (DP) for business
jets and turboprop aircraft should be developed that incorporates maintaining runway heading for 1.5 DME prior to turning to the 100-degree heading or a heading designated by departure
control. Maintaining runway heading to the south for 1.5 DME prior to turning would keep aircraft over compatible development and avoid noise-sensitive areas to the southeast and southwest
of the airport. This procedure could also be overlaid in the future with a series of waypoints to define an area navigation (RNAV) departure procedure. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This
is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP. Implementation Actions. This is proposed as a departure procedure. The FAA Flight Standards Division would be charged with the
establishment of 1.5 DME departure procedure from Runway 15. It does not appear that this procedure would require an environmental assessment as the procedure would not direct aircraft
over existing noisesensitive areas at altitudes below 3,000 feet AGL. Neither does the procedure cause increased noise within the 65 DNL contour in existing residential areas. Decisions
about the need for an environmental assessment, however, must be made by FAA. Cost and Funding. Administrative costs will be borne by the FAA Flight Standards Division in establishing
this procedure. The FAA may incur additional administrative costs m undertaking any potential enVIronmental review needed. Airport users may incur increased operational costs due to
a slightly increased flight time and delays during peak periods in a southern flow when this procedure is in effect. Timing. This is recommended for implementation after FAA review and
7-7 DRAFT 
approval of the NCP and following any necessary environmental analysis! approvals. This is anticipated in 2004/2005. LAND USE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The recommended land use mitigation measures
for the vicinity of Addison Airport are presented on the following pages and sUl;nmarized within Table 7F. Many of the measures affect not only the Town of Addison, but also the cities
of Carrollton, Farmers Branch, and Dallas. The Town of Addison is requesting that these cities implement the following measures. Implementation of the measures will help to ensure compatible
development in the surrounding areas to minimize the noise impacts and continue to provide a viable airport that area businesses can depend on. 1. Establish an Airport Influence Area
(AlA) for the purposes of land use regulation. Description. The Town of Addison should adopt an AlA for land use planning purposes. It is requested that the cities of Farmers Branch,
Carrollton, and Dallas also consider the adoption ofsuch a boundary. The suggested AlA is based upon the Airport's F.A.R Part 77 horizontal surface as depicted on Exhibit 7B. The creation
of an AlA would define the area within which the airport now exerts, and in the future may exert, a significant influence on local residents and potentially noise-sensitive land uses.
The AlA would be appropriately contained within the various jurisdictions' general plan or, in the case of Dallas, the zoning ordinance. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure
that was not included in the 1991 NCP. Implementation Actions. The adoption of an AlA can be established by the various jurisdictions by amending their respective general plans or zoning
ordinance. Cost and Funding. Adoption of this measure will involve administrative expenses for the various jurisdictions. These expenses would have to be paid from the respective operating
budgets. Timing. Amendments to general plans and zoning ordinances take time to prepare and process. The required. amendments for this measure are projected for 2004. 2. Update the the
General Plans for the Town of Addison and the cities of Carrolton and Farmers Branch. Description. The Town of Addison should adopt the 2007 65 DNL noise contour in place of the previously
prepared noise contours which are part ofthe existing general plan. It is requested that the cities of Farmers Branch and Carrollton also consider the adoption of the contours. In addition, the Town ofAddison should discourage
7-8 DRAFT 
all noise-sensitive development within the 65 DNL noise contour. It is requested that the City of Carrollton also consider discouraging all noise sensitive development within the 65
DNL noise contour. Currently, those jurisdictions discourage only residential development. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a partial continuation ofa measure which was included in
the 1991 NCP. The 1991 NCP recommended that the City of Dallas and' the Town of Addison incorporate the noise contours into their respective comprehensive and area plans. The 1991 plan
recommended prohibiting residential development within the 65 DNL contour and requiring sound attenuation for all other development within this contour. The Town of Addison and City
of Carrolton currently prohibit residential development within the 65 DNL contour. Implementation Actions. These policies can be established by the various jurisdictions by amending
their respective general plans. Cost and Funding. Adoption of this measure will involve administrative expenses for the various jurisdictions. These expenses would have to be paid from
the respective operating budgets. Timing. Amendments to general plans take time to prepare and process. The required amendments for this measure are projected for 2004. 3. Establish
project review guidelines for the review of development projects within the AlA. Description. This policy is proposed to apply through the AIA. The adoption of special proj ect review
criteria, specifically addressing airport land use compatibility needs, would provide guidance to land use decision-makers as they review project proposals. The following project review
criteria should be included in the local general plans or as checklists for consideration by local planners, planning commissions, and governing bodies. These criteria are specifically
suggested for use in reviewing planned development, rezoning, special use, conditional use, and variance applications within the AIA. The following criteria are suggested: A. Determine
the sensitivity of the subject land use to' aircraft noise levels based on the requirements contained within Table 7C. B. Advise the airport management of development proposals involving
noise-sensitive land uses within the 2007 65 DNL noise contour. C. Locate noise-sensitive public facilities outside the 2007 65 DNL contour and away from the primary aircraft traffic
pattern, if possible. Also, require the dedication of noise and avigation easements to 7-9 DRAFT 
the Town of Addison as airport proprietor. D. Discourage the approval of rezonings, exceptions, variances, and conditional uses which introduce noise-sensitive development into areas
exposed to noise exceeding 65 DNL. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP; Implementation Actions. TheTown of Addison should adopt these
project review criteria either through a general plan amendment or as administrative guidelines. It is requested that the cities of Dallas, Carrollton, and Farmers Branch also consider
implementing this tooL Cost and Funding. This measure will involve administrative expenses, Funding would come from the operating budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. For planning purposes,
this is projected for 2004. 4. Maintain compatible zoning designations within the AIA. Description. Areas within the 2007 65 DNL noise contour that are zoned for compatible land uses
should be maintained. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a continuation of a measure which was included in the 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R. Part 150. Implementation
Actions. This measure would be implemented by the Town of Addison. It is requested that the cities of Carrollton, Dallas, and Farmers Branch also consider implementing this measure.
Cost andFunding. This measure will involve administrative expenses. Fundingwould come from the operating budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. This is an on-going measure with no implementation
time frame. 5. Enact overlay zoningto provide noise compatibility use standards within the AlA. Description. To regulate land uses within the AIA, three districts ofairport compatibility
overlay zoning should be . developed, 'with varying levels of protection based on the district designation. Exhibit 7C depicts the recommended noise overlay zones. Airport Overlay Zone
One (AO·I) would contain the areas within the 65 DNL contour. Future development within this overlay zone would be limited to non-noise-sensitive development such as open space, commercial,
or industrial uses. Airport Overlay Zone Two (AO·2) would encompass the areas within the approach and departure paths. Noisesensitive development in these zones 7-10 DRAFT 
would be allowed, but noise attenuation standards would be required. Airport Overlay Zone Three (AO-3) would then encompass the remaining AlA. The purpose of this zone would be primarily
for public disclosure of potential aircraft noise and overflight impacts. Avigation easements would be required for all new noise-sensitive development within the AlA. Table 7C outlines
a potential noise compatibility 'overlay matrix which would be included within the overlay zone description ofthe zoning ordinance for each jurisdiction. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This
is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP. Implementationiktions. TheTown of Addison should incorporate the various overlay zones into their respective zoning ordinances.
It is requested that the cities of Carrollton, Farmers Branch, and Dallas also consider implementation of this measure. Cost and Funding. This measure will involve administrative expenses.
Fundingwould come from the operating budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. For planning purposes, this is projected for 2004. 6. Amend subdivision regulations to require the granting
of an avigation easement prior to development within the AlA. Description. The Town of Addison should amend its subdivision regulations to support the relevant requirements of the Airport
Overlay Zoning amendments. It is requested that the cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas also consider similar amendments. Specifically, the regulations should be amended
to require the dedication of avigation easements for development within the AlA. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP. The 1991 NCP recommended
acqulrmg avigation easements for all development within the 65 DNL noise contour. Implementation Actions. This requires adoption of an ordinance by each jurisdiction amending its subdivision
regulations. Cost and Funding. This measure will involve administrative expenses. Funding would come from the operating budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. For planning purposes, this
is projected for 2004. 7-11 DRAFT 
TABLE7C Noise Compatibility Overlay Zoning Matrix i Addison Airport Uses allowed within each zone A()"l AO.2 AO·S (65 DNL contour (approach (airport influence, i and greater) zones)
area boundary) IRESIDENTIAL Single family, duplex, multi-No Yes [4,5] Yes [5] family, manufactured housing , Recreational vehicle parks No Yes [4,5] Yes [5] , ! ' Other residentia•l
I No Yes [4,5J Yes [5J PUBLIC FACILITIES I Educational facilities No Yes [4, 5J Yes [5] Religious facilities, libraries, No Yes [6, 5] Yes [5J i museums, galleries, clubs and , lodges
Outdoor sport events, Yes [2, 5J Yes Yes entertainment and public assembly (except amphitheaters) , Indoor recreation, amusement Yes (5J Yes Yes parks, athletic clubs, gyms, : spectator
sports INeighborhood, community, and Yes , Yes Yes , regional parks , Outdoor recreation (Le. tennis, golf Yes Yes Yes I courses, riding trails, etc.) Cemeteries Yes [lJ Yes Yes INDUSTRIAL
Any type ofindustrial facility such Yes [5, 7J Yes [7J Yes as the processing of food, wood, and paper products; printing and publishing; warehouses, wholesale, and storage activities;
refining, manufacturing and storage of chemicals, petroleum and related products; manufacturing of stone, clay, glass, leather, gravel and metal products; construction and salvage yards;
natural resource extraction and processing; etc. 7·12 DRAFT 
TABLE 7C (Continued) i Noise Compatibility Overlay Zoning Matrix Addison Airport Uses allowed within each zone AO-I AO·2 AO·3 (65 DNL contour (approach (airport influence and greater)
zones) area boundary) COMMERCIAL Hotels/motels Yes [1, 5J Yes Yes Hospitals and other health care No Yes [3J Yes services : · . • Services: financiaJ, real estate, Yes [5J Yes Yes insurance,
professional, and government offices Retail sales: building materials, Yes [5J Yes ! Yes farm equipment, automotive, marine, mobile homes, recreational vehicles, and accessories Restaurants,
eating and drinking Yes [5J Yes Yes ! establishments Retail sales: general merchandise, Yes [5] Yes Yes food, drugs, apparel, etc. II : Personal services: barber and Yes [5] Yes Yes
beauty shops, laundry and dry cleaning, etc. Automobile service stations Yes [5] Yes Yes Repair services Yes [5] Yes Yes AGRICULTURE . Animal husbandry; livestock Yes (1, 5] Yes Yes
farming, breeding and feeding; plant nurseries (excludfug retail sales) • Farming (except livestock) Yes [1,5] Yes Yes MISCELLANEOUS . :I Transportation terminals, utility Yes (5] Yes
Yes and communication facilities Vehicle parking Yes Yes Yes 7-13 DRAFT 
II TABLE 7C (Continued) :1 Noise Compatibility Overlay Zoning Matrix : Addison Airport NOTES: 1 The land use or activity is permitted; however, an outdoor-to-indoor noise level reduction
of 45 decibels must be incorporated into the design and construction ofthose buildings where people work, live, or are otherwise received. 2 Land use is compatible provided special sound
reinforcement systoms are installed. 3 The land use or activity is permitted; however, an outdoor-to-indoor noise level reduction of 25 decibels must be incorporated into the design
and construction of buildings and structures. 4 Residential/educational buildings require a noise level reduction of 25 decibels. 5 Avigation easement required for new development. 6
It is suggested that residential development incorporate noise attenuation standards into building and/or landscape design. 7. Uses that produce air pollutants that may obscure vision
in any way, or which involve raw materials, products or by-products, which pose a potential explosive hazard, are not permitted. 7. Amend building codes in each jurisdiction to incorporate
prescriptive noise standards and require an avigation easement as a condition of development, extensive remodeling or reconstruction, as these types of construction typically require
a building permit and inspections. Description. For those areas contained within the 65 DNL noise contour, the Town of Addison should amend its building codes to incorporate prescriptive
noise standards. It is requested that the cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas also consider such an amendment. 7-14 Prescriptive noise standards are perhaps the most commonly
used approach to sound insulation standards. The existing building code would be amended to set forth specific construction standards intended to achieve a given level of noise reduction.
It would be the duty of the local building inspectors to ensure that the correct materials are used and construction is done properly. After installation and a successful inspection,
the building is presumed to be able to achieve the targeted level of noise reduction. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP. DRAFT 
Implementation Actions. This requires adoption of an ordinance by each jurisdiction amending its building codes. Cost and Funding. This measure will involve administrative expenses.
Fundingwould come from the operating budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. For planning purposes, this is projected for 2004. 8. Adopting fair disclosure ordinances to ensure that future
property owners are aware ofthe noise produced by the airport prior to purchasing property within the AlA. Description. The Town of Addison should adopt fair disclosure ordinances in
order to educate future residents of the potential impact of airport operations. It is requested that the cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas also consider the adoption
of such ordinances. Within the ordinances, the responsibilities ofreal estate agents and sellers should be clearly defined and should be limited simply to disclosing the airport noise
levels or overlay districts affecting the property and directing buyers to airport officials for more information. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included
in the 1991 NCP. Implementation Actions. This requires adoption of an ordinance by each jurisdiction. Cost and Funding. This measure will involve administrative expenses. Fundingwould
come from the operating budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. For planning purposes, this is projected for 2004. 9. Acquisition of an 8.61-acre section of land which borders airport
property to the northwest and is contained within the 2007 70 and 75 DNL noise contours. Description. As depicted on Exhibit 7D, a triangular-shaped area of undeveloped land is located
within the 200770 and 75 DNLnoise contour. This 8.61-acre section is located adjacent to the northwest boundary of airport. property and consists of four parcels. . The property is zoned
for compatible industrial and transportation land uses and would most likely be developed as light industrial or office space due to its proximity to the central business district of
Addison. This potential development is concerning as the property is located in close proximity to the site where aircraft maintenance run-ups are performed. Many of the current noise
complaints received bythe Airport are due to the impact of run-up activity on office spaces located near the airport. This site would be closer in 7-15 DRAFT 
proximity to airport activity than any of the offices which currently lodge noise complaints. The FAA typically actively supports airport ownership of land impacted by noise above 70
DNL. This parcel of land falls almost entirely within the 70 and 75 DNL noise contours; thereby, severely limiting the type of development that could successfully operate in such a location.
It is recommended that the parcel be purchased for future aviation uses. Purchasing this parcel would prevent potential incompatible land uses, allowed as conditional uses under the
current zoning, from being immediately adjacent to the Airport. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP. Implementation Actions. Following
FAA approval ofthe NCP, the Town of Addison will need to appraise the parcels to be acquired. Cost and Funding. It is anticipated that the parcels would cost approximately six million
dollars to acquire. This project would be eligible for FAA funding through the noise setaside of the AlP. The property acquisition costs are eligible for up to 90 percent funding through
the AlP. The local match will be provided through the Airport's capital budget. Timing. The property will be eligible for purchase after approval of the updated NCP by the FAA, expected
in 2004. 10. Acoustically treat 15 single family homes and 568 apartment units within the squared-off 2007 65 DNL noise contour. Description. Within the City ofDallas, 15 single family
homes and 34 apartment buildings, containing 568 units, are contained within the squaredoff 2007 65 DNL noise contour. It is recommended that these dwellings, depicted on Exhibit 7D,
be considered for sound insulation. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP. Implementation Actions. Following FAA approval of the NCP,
the Town of Addison will need to secure funding for, a feasibility study and the acoustical treatment ofthe eligible dwellings. The Town will then need to retain the services of acoustical
engineers with expertisein sound insulation ofexisting structures. The engineers will need to coordinate with homeowners in undertaking inspections ofthehomes in order to develop a work
scope and detailed specifications for the treatment program. The Town, in associationwith property owners, can then request bids from qualified contractors, Cost and Funding. It is not
possible to reasonably estimate the cost of acoustically treating the apartments 7-16 DRAFT 
TABLE7D Noise-Sensitive Land Uses Exposed to Noise With Noise Compatibility Program Versus Baseline Conditions Baseline Noise With Noise Compatibility : (Without Program) Program , 2002
20071 2007 2022 Existing Noise-Sensitive Institutions 65+DNL 1 1 1 1 Potential Future Noise-Sensitive Institutions : :65+ DNL NA 0 0 0 i . , Existing Dwellings 65+DNL 283 366 366 40
Additional Potential Dwellings' 65-70 DNL NA 371 380 205 70-75 DNL NA 59 59 38 75+ DNL NA 21 21 11 i Total Future Dwellings •Total above 65 DNL NA 451 460 254 Source: Coffman Associates
Analysis 1 Represents 2007 Noise Exposure Map impacts with Master Plan preferred alternative. z Implementation of the Land Use Management measures would reduce or eliminate potential
, dwelling units within the future noise exposure contours. 7-21 DRAFT 
TABLE 7E Population Exposed to Noise With Noise Compatibility Program Versus Baseline Condition i LWP" above 6$ DNL 279 498 506 281 52 27 i i 1,132 1,153 i 636 i 65-70 DNL 70-75 DNL
75+DNL Baseline Noise (Without Program) 2002 2007' 741 0 0 , I 932 148 52 Total above 65 DNL 741 1 Includes potential future residents of additional housing that may be developed inside
noise contours. ,2 Represents 2007 Noise Exposure Map impacts with Master Plan preferred alternative. L WP -level-weighted population is an estimation of the number of people actually
annoyed by noise. The actual population within each 5 DNL range is multiplied by the appropriate response facter to compute LWP. The factors are: 65-70 DNL -.376; 70 to 75 DNL -.644;
75+ DNL -1.00. See the Technical Information Paper, "Measuring the Impact of Noise on People." 4 Implementation of the Land Use Management measures would reduce or eliminate potential
dwelling units within the future noise exposure contours. Source: Coffman Associates Analvsis SUMMARY The Noise Compatibility Program for Addison Airport is summarized in Table 7F on
the next page. The total cost of the program is estimated at $9,507,500. Most of the costs are related to the purchase of the undeveloped property within the 70 to 75 DNL noise contour
($6,000,000). Othersignificant costs include the costs ofacoustically treating dwellings within the squared-off 65 DNL noise contour ($3,140,000). Approximately 89 percent of the cost
($8,496,000) would be eligible for FAA funding through the noise set-asides of the Federal Airport Improvement Program. Approximately one and threequarter percent of the cost ($67,500)
With Noise Compatibility Program 2007,,2,4 2022'" 953 515 i i 148 94 I would be paid through the Airport's operating budget. Approximately ten' percent ($944,000) would be covered through
the Airport's capital budget. The recommended noise abatement measures can reduce disturbing aircraft noise in the area. The land use planning measures can also help to limit the potential
for future noisesensitive development in the airport area. Continuingprogram management will provide for a timely response to conditions that may change over time and require a re-evaluation
of future noise conditions. While the Town of Addison must provide leadership and coordination of the entire program, success hinges on the cooperation of all involved parties. 7-22
DRAFT 
TABLE7F , Summary of Noise Compatibility Program, 2002-2012 , Addison Airport Direct Potential Airport or Cost to Lead Funding Measure Cost to Government Users Timing Responsibility
Sources NOISE ABATEMENT ELEMENT Administrative None Ongoing Town of Addison Operating Education Program. 1. Continue Pilot budgets Ongoing Town of Addison Operating encourage use of
2. Continue to Administrative None budgets NBAAnoise abatement . procedures. 3. Continue to Administrative None Ongoing Town of Addison Operating promote use of budgets AOPAnoise awareness
steps by : light single and , twin-engine aircraft. 4. Create a Administrative Negligible 2004/Town of Addison Operating departure procedure 2005 & FAA Flight budgets for Runway 15 that
Standards incorporates Division : maintaining runway heading for 1.5 DME prior to turning on course for business jets and turboprop aircraft. :LAND USE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT 1. Establish
an Administrative None 2004 Town of Addison I Operating Airport Influence (Cities of budgets Area (AIA) for the Farmers Branch, ; purposes ofland use Carrollton, and !' regulation. Dallas
are requested to implement this , measure.) 7-23 DRAFT 
TABLE 7F (Continued) ,Summary ofNoise Compatibility Program, 2002-2012 i Addison Airport Cost to Direct I Potential Airport or Cost to Lead Funding i Users J I Measure Government Timing
Responsibility Sources LAND USE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT (Continued) 2, Update the Administrative None 2004 Town of Addison Operating General Plans for (Cities of budgets the Town of Addison
Farmers Branch, and the cities of Carrollton, and Carronton and Danas are Farmers Branch to requested to incorporate the '2007 implement this !65 DNL noise measure,) contour, 3, Establish
project Administrative None 2004 Town of Addison Operating review guidelines (Cities of budgets for the review of Farmers Branch, development Carrollton, and projects within the Danas
are AIA, requested to implement this measure,) 4, Maintain Ongoing Operating compatible zoning Administrative None Town of Addison (Cities of budgets designations within Farmers Branch,
the AlA, Carrollton, and Danas are requested to i implement this , measure,) 5, Enact overlay overlay 2004 Operating zoning to provide Administrative None Town of Addison (Cities of
budgets noise compatibility Farmers Branch, use standards Carrollton, and within the AIA, Dallas are requested to implement this measure,) i 6, Amend Administrative 2004 Town of Addison
Operating subdivision None (Cities of budgets regulations to Farmers Branch, require the granting Carrollton, and of an avigation Dallas are .easement prior to requested to Ii development
within implement this theAIA, measure,) 7-24 DRAFT 
TABLE 7F (Continued) Summary of Noise Compatibility Program, 2002-2012 Addison Airport Cost to Direct Airport or Cost to Measure Government Users Timing LAND USE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT (Continued)
7. Amend building Administrative None 2004 codes in each jurisdiction to incorporate prescriptive noise : standards. . I 8. Adopt fair Administrative None 2004 disclosure ordinances
to ensure that future property owners are aware of I the noise produced ! by the airport prior : to purchasing : property within the AlA. 9. Acquire an 8.61$6,000,000 None 2004 acre
section ofland which borders airport property to the northwest. Lead Responsibility Town of Addison (Cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas are : requested to implement this
measure.) Town ofAddison (Cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas are requested to implement this measure.) Addison Airport Potential Funding Sources Operating budgets Operating
budgets FAA (90%) Airport Capital Budget (10%) i , ! 10. Acoustically $3,140,000 None 2004 : treat 15 single family homes and 568 apartment units ! within the squared. off 2007 65 DNL
i noise contour. i : :PROGRAM MANAGEMENTELEMENT Addison Airport ! FAA (90%) Airport Capital Budget (10%) : , 1. Maintain and .Administrative None Ongoing update the system : for receiving,
: analyzing, responding to noise complaints, and community outreach. Addison Airport Airport Operating Budget 7-25 DRAFT 
TABLE 7F (Continued) Summary of Noise Compatibility Program, 2002·2012 Addison Airport Cost to Direct Potential , Airport or Cost to Lead Funding Measure Government Users Timing Responsibility
Sources PROGRAMMANAGEMENT ELEMENT (Continued) 2. Publish a pilot $2,500 every None 2004 and Addison Airport Airport guidel three years ongoing Operating Budget 3. Review Noise $20,000
every None Ongoing Addison Airport Airport Compatibility three years operating Program . budget Implementation. 4. Update Noise $300,000 None Ongoing Addison Airport FAA (90%) Exposure
Maps and Airport I Noise Compatibility Capital I . Program. Budget (10%) Funding Source Amount Percent Total Costs and Funding FAA $8,496,000 89.4% Airport Operating Budget $67,500 0.7%
I Airport Capital Budget $944,000 9.9% Total $9,507,500 , : 1 Initial cost of the pilot guide is covered under the cost of this Part 150 Study Update. I: 7-26 DRAFT 
NOISE COMPATIBILI1Y PROGRAM The Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) for Addison Airport includes measures to abate aircraft noise, guide land development, and implement and update the
program. EA.R. Part 150 requires that the plan apply to a period of no less than,five years into the future, although it may apply to a longer period if the sponsor so desires. This
NCP has been developed based on a ten-year planning period. The objective of the noise compatibility planning process has been to improve the compatibility between aircraft operations
and noise-sensitive land uses in the area, while allOWing the airport to continue to serve its role in the community, state, and nation. The NCP includes three elements that are aimed
at satisfying this objective . • The Noise Abatement Element includes noise abatement measures selected from the alternatives evaluated in Chapter Five, Noise Abatement Alternatives.
• The Land Use Management Element includes measures to mitigate or prevent noise impact on existing noise-impacted land uses and future land use development in the airport environs.
Potential land use management techniques were evaluated in Chapter Six, Land Use Alternatives. • The Program Management Element includes procedures and documents for implementing the
recommended noise abatement and land use measures, monitoring the progress of the program, and updating the Noise, Compatibility Program. 
Each measure of the NCP is summarized in Table 7F at the end of this chapter. Included in the table is a brief description of each recommended measure, the entity responsible for implementing
each measure, cost of each measure, proposed timing of measure implementation, and potential sources offunding. This chapter begins with a discussion of the recommended airfield improvements
recommended in the concurrent Master Plan !lnd associated effects on the aircraft noise exposure contours followed by a review ofthe alternatives eliminated from further consideration
and a discussion of those alternatives considered to be viable. Finally, the program management element will be outlined and summary of all recommended measures and costs will be provided.
RECOMMENDED MASTER PLANAIRFIELD IMPROVEMENTS The concurrent Master Plan has recommended several airfield improvements. Among the improvements are a northern 408-foot extension ofRunway
15-33, construction ofa west side parallel taxiway that will temporarily be used for a runway while Runway 15-33 is being reconstructed, new fuel storage facilities, and new hangar facilities.
Of the recommended improvements, only the runway extension will affect the noise exposure contours. The extension of Runway 15-33 is anticipated to occur in the next five years. Therefore,
this runway extension must be reflected on the five-year noise exposure map (NEM). Because the westside parallel taxiway will only be used as a runway temporarily, noise analysis ofthis
airfield configuration is not required under federal guidelines. 2007 NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS WITH THE 408·FOOT EXTENSION TO RUNWAY 15-33 Contour Descriptions The 2007 noise exposure
contours which take into account the runway extension are depicted on Exhibit 7A. These contours replace the contours contained within the Noise Exposure Map document as the official
noise contours. The contours are similar in shape and size to the 2007 noise contours presented within the Noise Exposure Map document with the exception ofthe areas north ofthe airport.
In this area, the 65 DNL contour extends approximately 300 feet further north than the previous contours. The 70 and 75 DNL contours also extend to the north by 200 and 400 feet, respectively.
Land Use Impacts As contained within Table 7A, Three hundred and sixty-six (366) dwelling units are contained within the adjusted 2007 65 DNL noise contours. Ofthese 7-2DRAFT 
-------City limits ----2007 DNL Noise Contour ----2007 Squared-Off 2007 DNL Noise Conlour •••• Runway Extension Single Family Impacts 􀁓􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀻.. 􀁾􀀠.. j 􀁍􀁵􀁬􀁴􀁩􀁾􀁦􀁡􀁭􀁩􀁬􀁹􀀠Impacts
...;.􀀺􀁾􀀠 ......... : Proposed Land Acquisition Source: North Texas Geographic Information System. Coffman Associates Analysis. Exhibit 7D RECOMMENDED MITIGATION AREAS WD'HIN THE 2007
NOISE CONTOURS 
without an on-site inspection by a qualified specialist. For planning purposes only, the costs of treating homes is estimated to be $20,000 each and the cost of treating apartments is
estimated to be $5,000 each, including contingencies. This is roughly based on the cost of acoustically treating homes near other airports. This project would be eligible for FAA funding
through the noise set-aside of theAlP. The acoustical treatment costs are eligible for up to 90 percent funding through the AlP. The local match will be provided through the Airport's
capital budget. Timing. These homes will be eligible for treatment after approval of the updated NCP by the FAA, expected in 2004. The overall pace of the program will depend on the
completion of a feasibility study and the amount of funding available. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The success ofthe Noise Compatibility Program requires a continuing effort to monitor
compliance and identifY new or unanticipated problems and changing conditions. Five program management measures are recommended at Addison Airport. The Airport Authority, as airport
operator, is responsible for implementing these measures. They are discussed below and summarized in Table7F. 1. Maintain and update the systemfor receiving, analyzing, respondingto
noise complaints, and community outreach. Description. The airport currentlyhas a system of recording, responding to noise complaints, as well as pro-active community outreach efforts.
In addition to recording and filing complaints, it is important for the airport management to continue to respond to complaints, even ifit is not possible to take remedial action. As
part of this effort, it is recommended that the Airport continue to utilize their web site to keep the public informed of noise-related activities at the airport. Additionally, the Airport
should continue to host meetings between airport users, airport tenants, and private citizens. These meetings are beneficial as they allow Airport staff to gain an understanding of future
potential issues and the success of the current noise abatement policies and procedures. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a continuation of the Noise Abatement Measure which was included
in the 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes of F.A.R. Part 150. Implementation Actions. The administrative actions discussed above in the "Description" will be necessary. Cost
and Funding. This will involve administrative costs. Timing. This is an ongoing measure that is expected to continue in the future. 7-17 DRAFT 
2. Publish a pilot guide. Description. A pilot guide describing airport noise abatement information shouldbe preparedfor wide distribution to pilots using Addison Airport. The guide
should include an aerial photo showing the airport and the surrounding area, pointing out noisesensitive land uses and preferred noise abatement procedures. It could also include other
information about the airport that pilots would find useful. The guide should be suitable for insertion into a Jeppesen manual so tbat pilots will be able to conveniently use it. Airport
management should distribute copies to all owners of aircraft based at the airport and to the fixed base operators so they can offer them to transient pilots. Relationship to 1991 NCP.
This a continuation of the noise abatement measure which was included in the 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R Part 150. Implementation. The Town of Addison is responsible
for arranging for publication of a pilot guide. Cost and Funding. The cost ofa pilot guide is estimated at $5,000. It is currently budgeted as part of this FAR Part 150 Study. The pilot
guide should be revised and reissued as needed. For planning purposes, it is estimated that it will need to be republished every tbree years at a total cost of approximately $7,500.
Timing. Publication of a pilot guide is planned for 2003. 3. Review Noise Compatibility Program Implementation. Description. The airportmanagement must monitor compliance with the Noise
Abatement Element. This will involve checking periodically with airport users and the local Tower Managerregarding com pliance with the procedures. It may be necessary from time to time
to arrange for noise monitoring, noise modeling, or flight track analysis to study issues that may arise in the future. The Town of Addison should also maintain communications with local
planning officials and planning officials from tbe cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas, to follow tbeir progress inimplementing the requested measures ofthe Land Use Management
Element. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a continuation of the noise abatement measure which was included in the 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R Part 150. Implementation
Actions. The administrative actions discussed above in the "Description" will be necessary. Cost and Funding. This measure will require administrative time and staff support. Expenditures
for special noise 7-18 DRAFT 
monitoring or modeling studies could be necessary from time to time. For budgeting purposes, this cost is estimated at $20,000 every three years. This will be covered through the airport's
operating budget. Timing. This is an ongoing activity that should begin as soon as the Noise Compatibility Program is approved, 4. Update Noise Exposure Maps and No"ise Compatibility
Program. Description. The Town of Addison should review the Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) and consider revisions and refinements as necessary. A complete plan update will be needed
periodically to respond to changing conditions in the local area and in the aviation industry. This can be anticipated every five to ten years. An update may be needed sooner, however,
ifmajor changes occur. An update may not be needed until later ifconditions at the airport and in the surrounding area remain stable or do not change as anticipated in the Plan. Proposed
changes to the NCP should be reviewed by the FAA and all affected aircraft operators and local agencies. Proposed changes should be submitted to the FAA for approval after local consultation
and a public hearing to comply with F.A.R. Part 150. Even if the NCP does not need to be updated, it may become necessary to update the Noise Exposure Maps (NEMs). F.A.R. Part 150 requires
the NEMs to be updated if any change in the operation of the airport would create a substantial, new noncompatible use, The FAA interprets this to mean an increase in noise levels of1.5
DNL or more, above 65 DNL, over non-compatible areas that had formerly been compatible. As a rule of thumb, the trigger for determining the need for contour updating is a 17 percent
change in equivalent operations by the loudest aircraft regularly using the airport. To calculate "equivalent operations," any nighttime operations (between 10:00 p.m, and 7:00 a.m.)
must be multiplied by ten and added to daytime operations. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This a continuation of the noise abatement measure which was included in the 1991 NCP and approved
by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R. Part 150, Implementation Actions. No specific implementation actions, other than' those discussed above, are required. Cost and Funding. Costs of a complete
update of the Noise Compatibility Program are estimatedat $300,000. This would be eligible for up to 90 percent funding from the FAA, The Airport's share would come from the airport's
operating budget. Timing. This should be done as necessary. Updates are typically needed every five to ten years, depending on how much change occurs at the airport and in the local
area. For planning purposes, two updates can be expected over the next 20 years. 7-19 DRAFT 
RESIDUAL NOISE IMPACTS Noise contours for the current conditions are shown in Exhibit 7E. These can be compared with the projected noise contours for 2007 and 2022 in Exhibits 7F and
7G. Contours within each of the exhibits include north only the planned runway extension for Runway 15-33, but also the implementation ofNoise Abatement Element Measure Four. This measure
applies to 􀁢􀁵􀁳􀁾􀁮􀁥􀁳􀁳􀀠jets and turboprop aircraft and calls for the creation of a departure procedure for Runway 15 that incorporates maintaining runway heading for 1.5 DME prior
to turning on course. Implementation ofthis measure results in a slight extension of the 65 DNL noise contour to the south, over compatible land uses. The 70 DNL contour actually gets
smaller in size to the south, and the 75 DNL contour does not change. Table 7Dshows the number of dwelling units exposed to noise for baseline conditions and after implementation of
the Noise Compatibility Program. With the implementation of the program, no existing dwellings are added to the 65 DNL contour. Without proper land use planning, an additional nine dwelling
units could be built within the primary noise abatement corridor to the south. Implementation of the recommendations within the Land Use Management Element would prevent these additional
nine units, as well as the other 371 potential units. Table 7E contains the population exposed to noise with implementation of the Noise Compatibility Program in comparison with baseline
conditions. With the implementation of the program, no additional residents would be included within the 65 DNL noise contour. As discussed above, without proper land use planning, an
additional 21 residents could reside within the 65 . DNL noise contour. 7-20 DRAFT 
Name Title Address 1 Address 2 Dear : The fourth Planning Advisory 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁩􀁴􀁴􀁥􀁥􀁾􀁧 for the Master Plan and F.A.R. Pari 150 Noise Compatibility Study for Addison Airport has been
scheduled for July 17,2003, at the Addison Airport Terminal Building, 4651 Airport Parkway. Since our last meeting, our efforts have been focused on developing recommendations based
upon comments received on the previously completed alternatives evaluation. The material to be discussed \vill be in the fonn of two draft working papers for the Master Plan and one
draft working paper for the Pari 150 Study as follows: MasterPlan • Chapter Five -Airport and Financial Plans • Appendix A· Environmental Evaluation • Appendix B· Economic Benefit Analysis
Part 150 • Chapter Seven· Noise Compatibility Plan • Appendix F· Implementation Materials Chapter Seven and Appendix F for the Pari 150 have been enclosed for your review. The Master
Plan Chapter Five and Appendices will be sent to you prior to the committee meeting for your review. Due to the amount of malarial that will be covered at the meeting, we will be discussing
the Master Plan from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. We will reconvene from 1 :30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. to discuss the Pari 150 recommendations. A public workshop has also been scheduled for later
that evening, from 5:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Addison Airport Terminal. We look forward to meeting with you on July 17,2003. In the meantime, ifyou have any questions regarding the
study or ifyou should need additional information, please feel free to call me ( 602·993· 6999) or David Fitz (8-I:6.524.9561l) at any time. tf60 # Sincerely, James M. Harris, P.E. Principal
c. Jim Pierce, Town of Addison David Fitz, Coffman Associates 
.." AIRPORT PLANNING IS OUR ONLY BUSINESS ____-"'C=o.f.lnla!n www.coffmanassociates.com Associales Airport Consultants June 13,2003 James C. Pierce, JR., P.E. Assistant Public Works
Director Town of Addison 16801 Westgrove Drive Addison, TX 75001-9010 , Dear Mr. Pierce: Please find enclosed with this letter four (4) copies of Chapter Seven, Noise Compatibility Plan,
for your review. We are hoping to send this working paper to the Advisory Committee the week of June 23, 2003. For us to make this deadline we will need your comments b)l1une 20, 2003.
) This will give the Advisory Committee plenty oftime to review the materials and bring comments to the meeting on July 17,2003. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please do
not hesitate to call me at 800-892-7772 if you have any questions. Enclosures: as stated cc: Jim Harris, Coffman Associates, Phoenix Cc. /r 􀀮􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠/nrL.M 􀀯􀀮􀁾􀀠 􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠
.Ar 􀁾􀁲􀀭􀁴􀀺􀀭 1=::2􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁹􀀮􀀠Phoenix \J....t!:4M-􀁾􀀠􀁾 237 N.W. Blue Parkway, Suite 100, Lee's Summit, MO 64063 • Phone: 816.524.3500 • 
HP LaserJet 3200se HP LASERJET 3200 invent JUN-19-2003 2:53PM Fax Call Report Job Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 982 6/19/2003 2:46:32PM Send 918165242575 6:33 11
OK PuBLIC WORKS From: Jim Pltrte, P.1l. Ant. PubU. W .... llir. Pllone: 9721454!-2879 ··FAX: 97lI45o..1837· 􀁊􀁾􀁴􀁀􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁬􀁉􀀠 16801 Weslgrove P.o.Box 9010 # .rp_(Iu<ludlug rover'):L
Addt..., TX 75001·YOIO Re: 4M 7 -/11m 􀁲􀁦􀁩􀁹􀁤􀀦􀁊􀁩􀁴􀁾􀀠 Ila... "1'1-03 
Each measure of the NCP is summarized in Table 7F at the end of this chapter. Included in the table is a brief description of each recommended measure, the entity responsible for implementing
each measure, cost of each measure, proposed timing of measure implementation, and potential sources of funding. This chapter begins with a discussion of the f' 􀁾􀀠I Sl'Ii!!!'l Cl !led
airfield improvements recommended in the concurrent Master Plan and associated effects on the aircraft noise exposure contours) followed by a review ofthe alternatives eliminated from
further consideration and a discussion of those alternatives l.k /VI.t..considered to be viable. Finally, the program management element will be outlined anl;summary of all recommended
easures and costs will be provided. RECOMMENDED MASTER .o{'\ PLANAIRFIELD . r j IMPROVEMENTS 􀀾􀀼􀀡􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀠 The concurrent Master PI ([ecommende4) several '# --Am h improvements. ong
t e mprov. ements are a northern 408-fo.o extenslOn ofRunway 15-33, construct! n ofa west side parallel taxiway 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁴􀀠 "'I'II'!H-(.ell\cl 􀁾􀁥􀁉􀀱􀀱􀁰􀁏􀁩􀁤􀁦􀁾􀀠be used for a unway
while Runway 15-33 is being reconstructed, new fuel storage facilities, and new hangar facilities. Of the recommended improvements, only the runway extension will affect the noise exposure
contours. 7-2 The extension of Runway 15-33 is anticipated to occur in the next five years. Therefore, this runway extension must be reflected on the five-year noise exposure map (NEM).
Because the westside parallel taxiway will only be used as a runway temporarily, noise analysis ofthis airfield configuration is not required under federal guidelines. 2007 NOISE EXPOSURE
CONTOURS WITH THE 408-FOOT EXTENSION TO RUNWAY 15-33 Contour Descriptions Shol4Jn The 2007 no' e exposure contours which take into count the runway extension are 􀁡􀁥􀁦􀁬􀁾􀁩􀀻􀁥􀁤􀀠on
Exhibit 7A. These contours replace the contours contained within the Noise Exposure Map document as the official noise contours. The contours are similar in shape and size to the 2007
noise contours presented within the Noise Exposure' Map document with the exception ofthe areas north ofthe airport, In this area, the 65 DNL contour extends approximately 300 feet further
north than the previous contours. The 70 and 75 DNL contours also extend to the nort h b y 200 and 400"le et , respec t'l ve1 y. Land Use Impacts sht>ul'/I" As 􀁥􀁥􀁦􀁴􀁾􀁥􀁩􀀮􀁡􀁉􀁈􀁬􀀠"'ithi&
Table 7A, Three hundred and sixty-six (366) dwelling units are contained within the adjusted 2007 65 DNL noise contours. Ofthese DRAFT 
impacts, none are ontained within the 70 DNL noise co tour. One noise sensitive institution's contained wit the 65 DNL noise contour. Future noise impacts were calc based on the owth
risk contained within Chapter our of the analys1s Noise Exposure Map document. Based on this analysis, approximately 451 total future dwelling units could potentially be contained within
the 65 DNLnoise contour, including 59 within the 70 to 75 DNL contour and 21 within the 75 DNL contour. TABLE7A Noise-Sensitive Land Uses Exposed to 2007 Aircraft Noise With Implementation
of the Preferred Airport Master Plan Alternative Addison Airport Dl1TELLIj'YG UNITS Existing Dwelling Units Future Potential Dwelling Units Totel Dwelling Units NOISE·SENSITIVE INSTITUTIONS
Places ofWorship Schools Other (Library, Museum, Etc.) Total Noise-Sensitive Institutions HISTORIC RESOURCES 866 871 787 o o .1 1 o o 59 59 o o !l. o o o 21 21 o o o o 366 451 817 o
o .1 1 o . Population Impacts As contained within Table 4B, Approximately 919 individuals are contained within the adjusted 2007 noise contour. This estimate is based on the persons
per dwelling factor contained withinthe 2000 census report for the Addison area. A factor of 2.51 persons per dwelling was used in the calculation. 7-3 Future population impacts were
calculated in the same manner described within Chapter Four of the Noise Exposure Map document. According to this analysis, approximately 1,132 potential future residents could be located
within the 65 DNL contour, including 148 within the 70 to 75 DNL contour and 52 within the 75 DNL contour. DRAFT 
NOISE ABATEMENT ELEMENT The recommended noise abatement measures are described in this section. They include existing measures to be retained and new measures. Recommended noise abatement
measures are described within this section and summarizedin Table 7F at the end of this chapter. EXISTING J.VJ:EAsURES TO BE RETAINED 1. Continue Pilot Education Program. Description.
The purpose of the pilot education program and noise abatement brochure distribution program is to educate all pilots based at Addison Airport as well as transient pilots. The goal of
these programs is to inforDl pilots of the noise-sensitive land uses within the airport environs and to encourage avoidance of these areas whenever possible. The Town ofAddison has implemented
a voluntary noise abatement program as a means to reduce the number of noise complaints. As part of this program, lighted signage has been installed at each end of the airport's runways
reminding pilots to use proper noise abatement departure procedures. In addition, monthly noise abatement meetings are held by the airport management to discuss ways to educate pilots
about voluntary compliance with the noise abatement program. These meetings are attended by pilots, flight department director. ,and other airport users. A hand-ut has also been produced
detailin noise abatement procedures and as been placed in FBOs to reach tr nsient pilots and tenants. Relationship to 1991 • This is a continuation of the Noise Abatement Measure which
was included in the 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for purposes ofF.A.R. Part 150. Implementation Actions. As an existing noise abatement policy, no additional implementation actions
are necessary. TheTown of Addison should continue to hold monthly meetings with airport users to ensure operators are aware ofthe noise abatement program. Cost and Funding. As an existing
policy, no additional costs will be borne by the airport users. The Town will incur nOrDlal administrative costs for informational efforts and sign maintenance. Timing. This is an existing
policy which is recommended to continue. 2. Continue to Encourage use of NBAA Noise Abatement Procedures. Description. TheTown should actively encourage business jet operators to use
the National Business Aviation Association's (NBAA) Approach and Landing Procedure and Standard Noise Abatement Departure Procedures, or equivalent quiet-flying procedures developed
by aircraft manufacturers. 7-5 DRAFT 
The Town should reflect these noise awareness steps in future published pilot guides, signs, pilot mailings, and on the Addison Airport Internet Web Site. Cost and Funding. As an existing
policy, no additional costs will be borne by the airport users. The Town will incur normal administrative costs for informational efforts. Timing. This is an existing policy which is
recommended to continue. NEW MEASURES Two noise abatement measures currently not implemented are recommended for implementation as listed below. 􀁾􀁾􀀠 4. Create a Departure Procedure)
for Runway 15 that Incorporates Maintaining Runway Heading for 􀀱􀀮􀀵􀁾􀀠 prior to Turning on Course for Business Jets and Turboprop Aircraft. Description. A new departure procedure
(DP) for business jets and turboprop aircraft should be developed that incorporates maintaining runway heading for 1.5 DME prior to turning to the lOO-degree heading or a heading designated
by departure controL Maintaining runway heading to the south for 1.5 DME prior to turning would keep aircraft over compatible development and avoid noise-sensitive areas to the southeast
and southwest of 7-7 the airport. This procedure could also be overlaid in the future with a series of waypoints to define an.area navigation (RNAV) departure procedure. Relationship
to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP. Implementation Actions. This is proposed as a departure procedure. The FAA Flight Standards Division would be
charged with the establishment of 1.5 DME departure procedure from Runway 15. It does not appe at this procedure would requi an environmental assessment s the procedure would not direct
a' craft over existing noisesensitiv areas at altitudes below 3,000 feet G Neither does the procedure cause Increased noise within the 65 DNL contour in existing residential areas. Decisions
about the need for an environmental assessment, however, must be made by FAA. Cost and Funding. Administrative costs will be borne by the FAA Flight Standards Division in establishing
this procedure. The FAA may incur additional administrative costs in undertaking any potential environmental review needed. Airport users may incur increased operational costs due to
a slightly increased flight time and delays during peak periods in a southern flow when this procedure is in effect. Timing. This is recommended for implementation after FAA review and
DRAFT 
approval of the NCP and following any necessary environmental analysis/approvals. This is anticipated in 200412005. LAND USE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The recommended land use mitigation measures
for the vicinity of Addison Airport are presented on the following pages and summarized within Table 7F. Many of the measures affect not only the Town of Addison, but also the cities
of Carrollton, Farmers Branch, and Dallas. The Town of Addison is requesting that these cities implement the following measures. Implementation of the measures will help to ensure compatible
development in the surrounding areas to minimize the noise impactsjmd continue to provide a viable airport that area businesses can depend on. 1. Establish an Airport Influence Area
(AIA) for the purposes of land use regulation. Description. The Town of Addison should adopt an AIA for land use planning purposes. It is requested that the cities of Farmers Branch,
Carrollton, and Dallas also consider the adoption of such a boundary. significant influence on on local residents and potentially noise-sensitive land uses. The AIA would be appropriately
contained within the various jurisdictions' general plan or, in the case of Dallas, the zoning ordinance. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included in the
1991 NCP. Implementation Actions. The adoption of an AIA can be established by the various jurisdictions by amending their respective general plans or zoning ordinance. Cost and Funding.
Adoption of this measure will involve administrative expenses for the various jurisdictions. These expenses would have to be paid from the respective operating budgets. Timing. Amendments
to general plans and zoning ordinances take time to prepare and process. The required amendments for this measure are projected for 2004. 2. Update the General Plans for the Town of
Addison and the cities of Carrolton and Farmers Branch. Description. The Town of Addison should adopt the 2007 65 DNL noise contour in place of the previously The suggested AlA is based
upon the prepared noise contours which are part Airport's F.A.R. Part 77 horizontal of the existing general plan. It is surface as depicted on Exhibit 7B. The requested that the cities
of Farmers creation of an AIA wouldM d:e:f;i:ne the Branch and Carrollton also consider the area within which .. adoption of the contours. In addition, " t,'" rio ... ""m, 􀁾􀁓􀁩􀀽􀁾􀀧
T=n ofAddi"uhould di"o=",. 7-8 DRAFT 􀁾􀁾 rwn.r 􀁾􀁴􀀴􀀭􀁾 rr-cr 􀁾􀁴􀁌􀀭
would be allowed, but noise attenuation standards would be required. Airport Overlay Zone Three (AO·B) would then encompass the remaining AIA. The purpose of this zone would be primarily
for public disclosure of potential aircraft noise and overflight impacts. Avigation easements would be required for all new noise-sensitive development within the AIA. Table 7C outlines
a potential noise compatibility everlay matrix which would be included within the overlay zone description ofthe zoning ordinance for each jurisdiction. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This
is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP. Implementation Actions. TheTown of Addison should incorporate the various overlay zones into their respective zoning ordinances.
It is requested that the cities of Carrollton, Farmers Branch, and Dallas also consider implementation of this measure. Cost and Funding. This measure will involve administrative expenses.
Fundingwould come from the operating budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. For planning purposes, this is projected for 2004. 6. Amend subdivision regulations to require the granting
of an avigation easement prior to development within the AlA. Description. The Town of Addison should amend its subdivision regulations to support the relevant requirements of the Airport
Overlay Zoning amendments. It is requested that the cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas also consider similar amendments. Specifically, the regulations should be amended
to require the dedication of avigation easements for development within the AIA. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP. The 1991 NCP recommended
acqulrmg avigation easements for all development within the 65 DNL noise contour. Implementation Actions. This requires adoption of an ordinance by each jurisdiction amending its subdivision
regulations. Cost andFunding. This measure will involve administrative expenses. Fundingwould come from the operating budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. For planning purposes, this
is projected for 2004. 7-11 DRAFT 
Implementation Actions. This requires adoption of an ordinance by each jurisdiction amending its building codes. Cost andFunding. This measure will involve administrative expenses. Fundingwould
come from the operating budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. For planning purposes, this is projected for 2004. 8. Adopting fair disclosure ordinances to ensure that future property
owners are aware ofthe noise produced by the airport prior to purchasing property within the AlA. Description. The Town of Addison should adopt fair disclosure ordinances in order to
educate future residents of the potential impact of airport operations. It is requested that the cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas also consider the adoption of such ordinances.
Within the ordinances, the responsibilities ofreal estate agents and sellers should be clearly defined and should be limited simply to disclosing the airport noise levels or overlay
districts affecting the property and directing buyers to airport officials for more information. Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a new measure that was not included in the 1991 NCP.
Implementation Actions. This requires adoption of an ordinance by each jurisdiction. Cost andFunding. This measure will involve administrative expenses. Fundingwould come from the operating
budgets of each jurisdiction. Timing. For planning purposes, this is projected for 2004. 9. Acquisition of an 8.Bl-acre section of land which borders airport property to the northwest
and is contained within the 2007 70 and 75 DNL noise contours. Description. As depicted on Exhibit 7D, a triangular-shaped area of undeveloped land is located within the 200770 and 75
DNL noise contour. This 8.61-acre section is located adjacent to the northwest boundary of airport property and consists of four parcels. The property is zoned for compatible industrial
and transportation land uses and would most likely be developed as light industrial or office space due to its J proximity to the 􀁓􀁑􀁾􀁰􀁊􀀠 lmliiRQ88 MI 􀀨􀀻􀁊􀁾􀀠district of 􀁦􀁾􀁾􀁅􀁩􀁂􀀺􀁩􀀸􀀰􀀡􀀱􀀮􀀠 This potential RoooJ. development is:'-concern.,. as the properly is located in close proximity to the site where aircraft maintenance run-ups
are performed. Many of the current noise complaints received bythe Airport are due to the impact ofrun-up activity on office spaces located nearthe airport. This site would be closer
in 7-15 DRAFT 
without an on-site inspection by a L Maintain and update the qualified specialist. For planning systemfor receiving, analyzing, purposes only, the costs of treating respondingto noise
complaints, homes is estimated to be $20,000 each and community outreach. and the cost of treating apartments is a.t-J... estimated to be $5,000 each, including Description. The airpo"<;urrently
has contingencies. This is roughly based on a system of 􀁲􀁥􀁣􀁯􀁲􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁰􀁯􀁮􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀠to the cost of acoustically treating homes noise complaints, as well as pro-active near
other airports. community outreach efforts. In addition to recording and filing This project would be eligible for FAA complaints, it is important for the funding through the noise set-aside
of airport management to continue to the AlP. The acoustical treatment costs respond to complaints, even if it is not are eligible for up to 90 percent funding 􀁾􀁾􀀠possible to take
remedial action. As through the AlP. The local match JHiH"􀀱􀁐􀁬􀁾􀀠 part of this effort, it is recommende \J5L be provided through the Airport's that the Airport continue to iliz their
capital budget. web site to keep the public in ormed of noise-related activities at the airport. Timing. These homes will be eligible Additionally, the Airport should for treatment after
approval of the continue to host meetings between updated NCP by the FAA, expected in airport users, airport tenants, and 2004. The overall pace of the program private citizens. These
meetings are will depend on the completion of a beneficial as they allow Airport staffto feasibility study and the amount of gain an understanding of future funding available. potential
issues and the success of the current noise abatement policies and procedures. PROGRAMMANAGEMENT ELEMENT Relationship to 1991 NCP. This is a continuation of the Noise Abatement The success
ofthe Noise Compatibility Measure which was included in the Program requires a continuing effort to 1991 NCP and approved by the FAA for monitor compliance and identify new or purposes
ofF.A.R. Part 150. unanticipated problems and changing conditions. Five program management Implementation Actions. The measures are recommended at Addison administrative actions discussed
above Airport. The Airport Authority, as in the "Description" will be necessary. airport operator, is responsible for implementing these measures. They Cost and Funding. This will involve
are discussed below and summarized in administrative costs. Table 7F. Timing. This is an ongoing measure that is expected to continue in the future. 7-17 DRAFT 
RESIDUAL NOISE IMPACTS Noise contours for the current conditions are shown in Exhibit 7E. These can be compared with the projected noise contours for 2007 and 2022 in Exhibits 7F and
7G. Contours within each of the exhibits include 􀁾􀀠north only the planned runway extension for Runway 15-33, but also the implementation ofNoise Abatement Element Measure Four. This
measure applies to business jets and turboprop aircraft and calls for the creation of a departure procedure for Runway 15 that incorporates maintaining runway heading for 1.5 DME prior
to turning on course. Implementation ofthis measure results in a slight extension of the 65 DNL noise contour to the south, over compatible land uses. The 70 DNL contour actually gets
smaller in size to the south, and the 75 DNL contour does not change. Table 7D shows the number ofdwelling units exposed to noise for baseline conditions and after implementation of
the Noise Compatibility Program. With the implementation ofthe program, no existing dwellings are added to the 65 DNL contour. Without proper land use planning, an additional nine dwelling
units could be built within the primary noise abatement corridor to the south. Implementation of the recommendations within the Land Use Management Element would prevent these additional
nine units, as well as the other 371 potential units. Table 7E contains the population exposedto noise with implementationof the Noise Compatibility Program in comparison with baseline
conditions. With the implementation of the program, no additional residents would be included within the 65 DNL noise contour. As discussed above, without proper land use planning, an
additional 21 residents could reside within the 65 DNLnoise contour. 7-20 DRAFT 
7G
j j j j j j j . j . j j j j j 
TABLE7D Summary of Noise Compatibility Program, 2002·2012 Addison Airport Cost to Direct Airport or Cost to Measure Government Users Timing ,NOISEABATEMENTELEMENT 1. Continue Pilot Administrative
None Ongoing Education Program. 2. Continue to Administrative None Ongoing . Encourage use of : NBAANoise Abatement . Procedures. Lead Responsibility Town of Addison Town ofAddison !
Potential Funding Sources Operating budgets Operating budgets i : 3. Continue to Administrative None Ongoing Promote use of AOPANoise : Awareness Steps by : light single and twin-engine
aircraft. 4. Create a Administrative Negli· 2004/Departure gible 2005 Procedure for Runway 15 that Incorporates Maintaining Runway Heading for 1.5 DME prior to Turning on Course . far
Business Jets and Turboprop Aircraft. . 􀁾􀀠$2,400Jl!1O .l'Ione on" un p nelo reo 2005 • L,4.ND USE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT 1. Establish an Administrative None 2004 Airport Influence . Area
(AIA) for the : purposes ofland use ! regulation. Town of Addison Town of Addison & FAA Flight Standards Division ..rown ofAddison Town of Addison, Cities ofFarmers Branch, Carrollton,
and Dallas ! : Operating budg",ts Operating budgets Air ... vapital Budget Operating budgets 7·23 DRAFT 
: TABLE 7D (Continued) : Summary of Noise Compatibility Program, 2002-2012 i Addison Airport Cost to Direct Airport or Cost to Measure Government Users Timing LAND USE MANAGEMENTELEMENT
(Continued) 2. Update the Administrative None 2004 General Plans for the Town of Addison and the cities of Carrollton and Farmers Branch to incorporate the 2007 65 DNL noise contour.
3. Establish project Administrative None 2004 review guidelines .for the review of development projects within the AIA. Lead Responsibility Town of Addison, Cities of Farmers Branch,
and Carrollton Town ofAddison, Cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas Potential Funding Sources Operating budgets Operating budgets , 4. Maintain Administrative None Ongoing
. compatible zoning designations within the AlA. 5. Enact overlay Administrative None 2004 . zoning to provide noise compatibility use standards within the AIA. 6. Amend . Administrative
None 2004 subdivision regulations to • require the granting of an avigation : easement prior to , development within i the AIA. 7. Amend building Administrative None 2004 codes in each
jurisdiction to incorporate prescriptive noise : standards. Town of Addison, Cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas Town of Addison, Cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and
Dallas Town of Addison, Cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas Town of Addison, Cities of Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Dallas Operating budgets Operating budgets Operating
budgets Operating budgets ! 7-24 DRAFT 
TABLE 7D (Continued) Summary of Noise Compatibility Program, 2002·2012 Addison Airport Cost to Direct Potential Airport or Cost to Lead Funding Measure Government Users Timing Responsibility
Sources LAND USE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT (Continued) 8. Adopt fair Administrative None 2004 Town.of Addison, Operating disclosure Cities of Farmers budgets ordinances to ensure Branch, that
future property Carrollton, and owners are aware of Dallas the noise produced . by the airport pnor to purchasing : property within the AlA. i \ 9. Acquire an 16.61$6,000,000 Addison
Airport IFAA (90%) acre section ofland None 2004 i Airport which borders Capital airport property to ! Budget (10%) the northwest. 10. Acoustically Addison Airport FAA (90%) treat 15
single $3,140,000 None 2004 Airport family homes and Capital 568 apartment units Budget (10%) within the squaredoff 2007 65 DNL noise contour" PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ELEMENT 1. Maintain
and Administrative None Ongoing Addison Airport Airport update the system . Operating for receiving, Budget analyzing, responding to noise • complaints, and community outreach. : 2.
Publish a pilot $2,500 every None 2004 Addison Airport Airport guidel three years and Operating ongoing Budget 3. Review Noise $20,000 every None Ongoing Addison Airport Airport Compatibility
three years operating Program budget Implementation. 7·25 DRAFT i 
1 TABLE 7D (Continued) Summary of Noise Compatibility Pr':'gram, 2002·2012 Addison Airport . Cost to Direct Potential Airport or Cost to Lead Funding Measure Government Users Timing
Responsibility Sources PROGRAMMANAGEMENT ELEMENT (Continued) 4. Update Noise $300,000 None Ongoing Addison Airport FAA (90%) Exposure Maps and Airport Noise Compatibility Capital Program.
Budget (10%) . Funding Source Amount Percent Total Costs and Funding FAA $8,496,000 71.3% Airport Operating Budget $67,500 0.6% , Airport Capital $3,344,000 28.1% ! Budget : Total $11,907,500
Initial cost of the pilot guide is covered under the cost ofthis Part 150 Study Update 7·26 DRAFT 
j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j