􀁾􀀻􀀠 "". 
'i910 rrPfmw PmJ.mwy I : I􀁾 i i =JARCHITECTS ENG[NEERS PLANNERS Suit., 200 Phllll/_ 1,'.\"(15 7509J June 8,2004 (,}7J) 661-5626 h\X (972) 66J-56;·j {1'fNt: inllb.c.HfI Town of Addison
16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Attn: Mr. Steve Z. Chutchian, P.E. ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE mBID Dear Steve: We have reviewed the bids for the rererenced project.
All three of the bidders attended the required pre-bid conference. The low bidder for the project is Archer Western Contractors, Ltd. Attached are three copies of the bid tab. Numbers
highlighted in yellow indicate values that we determined to be incorrect on the bid documents due to mathematical errors. None ofthe errors were on Archer Western Contractors bid and
none of the errors resulted in a change in the low bidder. As a reminder, item 20 of the Special Provisions in the specifications requires a preconstruction confurence to be held. Prior
to the meeting the contractor has to deliver a schedule to you that we can discuss at the meeting. Let us know when you schedule this meeting and we will be glad to attend. Thank you
for letting us work on this proj ect with you and your staff. Very truly yours, HNTB CORPORATION 􀁾􀁾􀁄􀁾􀁈􀀡􀀢􀁦􀁴􀀻􀁾􀀠 . ector ofMunicipal Services IDHlrrnh Enclosure 1'l;e liNTS
CU1IJpan/cs (wnce. 􀁾􀁜􀁬􀁆􀁘􀀬􀁜􀀧􀀮􀀺􀁮􀁛􀀨􀁉􀀮􀁜􀁟􀀠 \.\: 􀀬􀁜􀀬􀁜􀀻􀀢􀀬􀁜􀁬􀀧􀁕􀁉􀁜􀁾􀀮􀀠 \11), ATIA:\T,\. 􀀨􀀻􀁟􀁾􀀮􀀠 AI'ltlll>" TX I\,\TO..... 􀁛􀁉􀁏􀁉􀁜􀁾􀁉􀁜􀀮􀀠 L\, Uo.,'fO;';.
),,1-\, 􀁃􀁦􀀭􀀧􀁍􀁾􀁴􀁆􀁱􀁏􀀢􀀬􀀠􀁾􀁣􀀠􀁃􀁪􀀡􀀮􀁜􀁈􀀡􀀮􀁅􀁾􀁲􀀨􀀩􀀻􀀮􀀻􀀠 W\', 􀁥􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀢􀁏􀀮􀀠 II.. nn-EI"..... n ell-', 􀀨􀀻􀀼􀀩􀀻􀁊􀂷􀀻􀁜􀁬􀁴􀁜􀁬􀂷􀁾􀀮􀀠011 􀁲􀀩􀁟􀁜􀀢􀁣􀁌􀁜􀁾􀀮􀀠'1':\.
1)!;-';YFrt cn. t,!-:mor!', .\11' I 􀁾􀁋􀁲􀁜􀀾􀀮􀀠'It.">., C\Hiflfl.ll. "'.1: I'j: "'''1m!. 1;>;. t;-\P.1T-Oltl\ cr, HOU)'i1\);\, lX. 􀁉􀀭􀀢􀀺􀀡􀁊􀁉􀀮􀁾􀀢􀀧􀂷􀀬􀀾􀀬􀁉􀀧􀀨􀀩􀁕􀁾􀀮􀀠 IX,
lII\·NF. CA. 􀀢􀀮􀁜􀀢􀀬􀀬􀁟􀀮􀀾􀀬􀁟􀁾􀀠on, 􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁬􀀠 ""O"qIiT 1;". LA;'I;M'i(; ,\11 􀁲􀁦􀀧􀁾􀀠 􀀬􀀧􀀭􀀢􀀺􀁇􀁮􀁌􀁾􀀠 C, tOI'IS\RLF. KY. 'l.IADl$O:->, \\1: .\11,\\11. 11 \1I1.",·,I'"rr
\\j, 􀀮􀀧􀁉􀁉􀀺􀀭􀀧􀁾􀁌􀁗􀀼􀁊􀁕􀀺􀀧􀀮􀀠fIX. :":.\P:VlLLr.. T". XEI>; YORK 􀁾􀀬􀀺􀁙􀀮􀀠 0.,"1 ,,,n, C,' 􀀨􀀩􀁾􀁌􀀧􀁾􀁕􀁦􀁊􀀮􀀠IL OY1,?u-;n "\11". 1''', 􀁉􀀧􀁌􀀧􀁾􀁮􀁆􀁭􀀠'.1I r:!J"\\;,
P_I. l'OICL'Xk 􀁾􀀬􀁉􀁌􀀠 􀀺􀀢􀁯􀁬􀁮􀁌􀁜􀁾􀀱􀀩􀀠dR, 11 \1 m;;!.?\c ;>'1 LVU;.. ,w). 􀁾􀀬􀀧􀁉􀁔􀀠􀁌􀁾􀁋􀁆􀀠Cln',::; "'-I" 􀀬􀀧􀁾􀁉􀀨􀀩􀀢􀁉􀁏􀀮􀀠TX. :-.0\:\ m,RX,\Rl)I"O, C\ ..... \'1.
11l.\'U!'<GJ, C\, ,\;\ 􀁉􀁏􀁾􀁴􀀮􀀠C\ 􀁾􀁉􀀧􀁜􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀻􀀭􀁉􀁆􀀮􀀠 \\\, 􀁔􀁁􀁾􀁉􀁬􀀧􀀮􀁜􀀠 n, TOLEiJO. OIl. 􀁜􀁜􀂷􀀬􀁜􀁾􀁭􀀢􀀻􀁔􀁏􀀧􀀮􀀠n,c 
PAVING, UTILITIES, SIGNALIZATION, AND STREETSCAPE 􀁂􀁉􀁄􀁓􀁃􀁈􀁅􀁄􀁕􀁌􀁅􀁓􀁾􀁙􀀠 ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III MARSH LANE TO SURVEYOR BOULEVARD ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Bid Schedule & Description
I. Roadway Improvements Tota! Amount Materi.ls & Services $ 4.886.680.00 II. Utility Improvements $ 3,688,007.00 m. Signalization and Lighting S 864,190.00 V. Bridge $ 4,427,693.40 vr.
Bridge Lighting $ 646,678.25 VII. Streetscape (A) TOTAL BID FOR SCHEDULES 1(B) TOTAL DAYS BID @S4000 $ 1.662,676.30 VIII $ 16,175,924.95 TOTAL PROJECT A+B Archer Orval !Austin Bridge
Average Bid 􀁣􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀺􀀭􀁩􀀽􀀽􀁾􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀭􀁔􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀢􀀠 􀂷􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁉􀀭􀁣􀀭􀁾􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀮􀂷􀂷􀀭􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀂷􀂷􀀮􀀭 $ __􀀺􀀧􀀮􀀹􀀴􀀷􀀧􀀳􀀴􀁾􀀮􀀲􀀲􀀱􀀤􀀠 􀁟􀀷􀁟􀀧􀀱􀀢􀀬􀀰􀁟􀀵􀀭􀁣􀀧􀀵􀁟􀀰
􀀳􀁟􀀮􀀷􀁟􀀰􀁾􀀱􀁟􀀤􀀬􀀢􀀮__.. _ 􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀵􀀮􀀹􀁟􀀵􀁟􀀱􀀮􀁾􀀲􀀶􀀸􀀮􀀴􀀲􀀠l.s__􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀶􀀭􀀬􀁏􀁾􀁏􀁏􀀬􀀸􀀴􀀲􀀮􀀴􀀵􀀠 '$ ___3""􀀷􀀭􀀬􀀴􀀮􀀱􀁾,:030"'3:::.9"'3'-;-'$'---_4,,"',036'"􀀡􀁾􀀬􀁳􀁾..
,S __--'4"'.3::::35"'.4"'66=:.-:::93:.+$"--.........__._.._ 4,037,680.14 -----_.. ; .. 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾 L __ ..􀁾􀁾􀂥􀁏􀀮􀀰􀀹􀀠i􀀤􀀢􀀵􀀬􀀸􀀲􀀵􀀧􀀱􀁾􀀡􀀮􀀴􀀴􀀱􀀠$ 5,229,213.90
_$__.... 5,436.647.14 􀁬􀁾􀀧􀀠 !--...--..-._-_............. _-$'" 􀂷􀂷􀀭􀁾􀀷􀀰􀀭􀀹􀀬􀀸􀁩􀁬􀀺􀀭􀀷􀀵􀀱􀀠$ 714,:iii.7St􀀤􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 755,648.19 .1 ..$:....-.--.········ --726.630.56 ---+-r_._-----_....
$ 1,129,910.66 • $ _____._ ._. -I 􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀠 1,254,216.60 ! $ ............ ! 1.252.742.14.. $ 16.398.232.40 I$ 􀀱􀀹􀀮􀀵􀀷􀀲􀀮􀀵􀀲􀀹􀀺􀀷􀀹􀁔􀀤􀁾􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀭􀂷􀀱􀀸􀀮􀀺􀀱􀀲􀀳􀀮􀀸􀀴􀀳􀀮􀀵􀀷􀀠
$ 18.097.605.25 : I ' --4i5----!-· .... 550 ....􀁉􀁾􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀠 480 485 -·-:-:-::-=-=-=-cc '_"'n' $ _.--1.700.000.00 􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀡􀀮􀀲􀀰􀀰􀀮􀀰􀀰􀀰􀀮􀀰􀀰􀀺􀀭􀀤􀀽􀀽􀁟􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀱􀀭􀀧�
�􀀹􀁟􀂷􀀲􀂷􀁾􀀰􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁏􀁾􀁏􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀰􀁟􀀮􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀰􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀰􀁟􀀱􀁾􀀤􀀭􀀭􀀭 ..--....􀁾􀂷􀀭􀀱􀀺􀀭􀀮􀀹􀀴􀀭􀀭􀀰􀀭􀀺􀁣􀀮􀀰􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀰􀀺􀀭􀀮􀁏􀁣􀀭􀀺􀁏􀁃􀀧􀂷􀀠 $ 18.098.232.40 : s 21.772.529.79 !
$ 20.243.643.57 $ 20.038.135.25 L_.... 􀁾........... 􀁾__ . I ..._ .. 􀁾􀁟􀁾 ..1.. 􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀠􀂷􀀳􀀺􀀳􀀹􀀺􀁾􀀴􀀴􀁾􀀶􀁾􀀰􀀲􀀱􀀡􀀮􀀠 ··356.51860J..I .......___􀀴􀀲􀀡 􀁬􀀬􀀡􀁬􀀶􀀶􀁾􀁾􀀮
􀀰􀀸􀀧􀀸􀀱􀀱"􀁾 ___􀁾􀀳􀁾􀀴􀁾􀀴􀀱􀁾􀀶􀀧􀀷􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀽􀀽􀁾􀀠 1 .._________+1_______ I--::-----.........--f 1----;---1 1 4,000.00 I $ 4,000.00 !$ 4.000.00 4000 343.446.02 I$ 360.518.60 $ 432.866.08
$ 378.943.57 I I (35.100.00)i $ (35.100.00) $ (25,152.00) $ (31.784.00) 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀢􀀠 1 I 􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀴􀀭􀀬􀀰􀀭􀁏􀀭􀁏􀀭􀀮􀁯􀀭􀁯􀀭􀁩􀀭􀁉􀀭􀀤􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀴􀀬􀀭􀁯􀁏􀁩􀁬􀁯􀁯􀀫􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀤􀀭􀁾
􀀠 1 4.000.00 $ 4,000.00 (31,100.00)1 $ (31.100.00)1 $ (21.152.00) $ (27.784.00) $ 18,410.578.42 I $ 22.101,948.39 $ 20.655.357.65 $ 20.389.294.82 1of 14 -Summary 
BID SCHEDULE I ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD, TOADDINSON ROAD 􀁾􀀠 102 IPr."",, STA.' 5,000.00 ' 54, I • 00 􀁾 , 103 ;Fu' LF.' 4.00 1.56<11. 6,256.00 104
􀁬􀀬􀀢􀁤􀁕􀁤􀀢􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁤􀀮􀁐􀁏􀁓􀀮􀁏􀁉􀀧􀀠 ,,,,,,crete, .,y, S 6,00 6 ...1 S 39,526,00 10. Idi",o,",ofexistino concrete sidewa' S.Y.' 10.00 671. 570.00 106 S,Y.. 11.00 ..,. 946,0(!
107 i C.Y.' 9.00 16.0001. 􀁾􀁮􀁯􀀠 C.Y.' 10.00 56.000; $ .nMn.M S.Y. I. 40,00 ,",4001. • """'el. C""" 4000 LF, I. B,oo 11,3251, 90,600,00 • oo,e. 40W PS!!!!l EA. I $ 825.00 BI. 6.600,00
S,Y. I, 38,00 45C $ 16.200,00 i .4oo0"i@S.y, I, 38,00 3!JC, 11,400,00 I IFum's' in"." EA, I, 750,00 c • EA. • 350.00 : • 350,00 ! 116 ! in"aI' Stop EA I. 470,00 , , 940.00 117 !in"'"
50"" lim' EA • 470,00 ,. 2350,00 , '" ",,'all Left L.oo ",,,.,',n (.:>7L) EA. • 470,00 1.410,00 􀀢􀀢􀁒􀀺􀀾􀁾􀁒􀁬􀀠 "Righ'Lane' , Rig" ,ign EA.. 470,00 I, 940,00 120 lI"falil "'.n'....71
EA. , 470,00 I. 1.410,00 i EA. 470.00 I, 470.00 121 F"moh, I W.vsi,n ,R"'A1 EA. • 470,00 '40.00 EA, EA, 0 470,00 21 $ 940,00 124 IFumiSh, EA. I. 470.00 3 , 1,410.00 125 IFUmi" ,"" !
H'ghway Sion ,R<>3A) 940,00 126 IFom"" and inst" Left Lan. Ends sign (R9-2L) I, 470.00 11. 470.00 121 IFu"",'."" Install RR XING (W10-1) I • 470.00 4 • 1.980,00 : "" IFumi,hand ins'aI
00 Not Stop on T"'''''"ion (8.0) EA. Is 470,00 41 $ 1,880,00 129 !install '0 􀁶􀁉􀁍􀁾􀀠 i ,(Rl>11 EA,: • 470,00 • '_,00 130 ! ","""2 T"''''....n IRl5-2\ EA. I. 470,00 • U50,OO' 131 I
!in,Ia1l' 10) EA,' 470,00 • 470.00 square EA. $ .,00 4971 $ 3,978.00 EA' 18,00 ,g:>1 $ 2,196,00 ! bU1t<"lS L$ $ 2.500,00 11 $ 2.500,00 EA., 175.00 221 • 3,850,00 EA.' 200.00 161 $ 3,200,00
􀀢􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁩􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠 54.0 I$ 14,05'.00 I " 􀁾 ••? 􀁾􀀠 ".0 i • 11 ,951.50 I • '"'" ... , no ".0 I • '.200.00 I • ..'" "'" no 1,56<11 $ 2,40 I. 3.753.60 i 1.5541. 3.00 IS
4.692,00 1.5641, 3.00 • 4,"2.00 6,56.1 $ 3.73: $ 24.573.2' 5,"': $ 600 I. 39.528,00 6,5881. 5.00;' 32,940.00 671. 343 I. 229.•' 571. 6.00 I. 402,00 .,1. 10,00 I, 670,00 , 8.; S 3.40
I S 292,40' 86' •.00 00 ;. 51•.00 861. 10,00 , 860,00; 16,000" •.01 I, 96.160.00 15.000 $ 5,00 ;. 80,000.00 16,000' S 3.00 S 48,000,00 56,000;' 3 .•' I, ".,<>nM: 56,0001. 15,00,. IWlnnnM
56,0001. 3,60 i , I 29,4001, 31.94 , , "'.,n",nn I 29,4ll< • 36,00 I, ,","400.00 26,4001. 40,00 , 11,325 , 2,051, 23,216,25 11,325 • 28,047,50 11,32.1 $ 1.05 , 11 ,891,2$ $ 546.94 I,
4.375,52 : • 500.00 ; $ '.000,00 260000 $ • 15.381,00 40.iJO $ la.oOO,oo 450$ 41.00 I. 18.450,00 300 $ 25,00 450 • 34," •• 1.500,00 3001. 36.00 , 10,800,00 47,00 I$ 14,100,00 01. , ,I
, : 8i. I, I • 150,00 S 150,00 150,00 $ 150,00 1 • lBO.87 I s '''''''17 I , 21 , 150,00 • 300,00 2 $ 15O,00 • 300,00 330,741 s 001,4. : 51, 150,00 , 750,00 1,;0.00 • 750,00 , s 310.Q1
I • 1,550.35 1,;0,00 $ 450,00 • 150.00 I • 450,00 • '30,74 Is 992,22 I • 1,;0"" , 300.00 21. 150.00 I. 300,00 I s 330,74 1$ 661.48 , I, 150.00 S 450,00 31, 15O.00 I. 450,00 : 310.00
I. 930,18 I. 150.00 • 15000 150,00 I. 150,00 s 376,21 I. '111," 210 150.00 • 300,00 150.00 I, 300.00 • 310,06 I • 620.12 2 $ 310,06 I , 620,12 3 , 150,00 I, 450,00 : 2!' 150.00' 300,00
I, 150<00 ! • 300.00 ! , , 150.00 I $ 450,00 31. 310071. 930,21 2 S 150,00 I, 300.00 • 150,00 I. 300,00 I. 276,99 $11. 150,001. 150,00 1 $ 150.00 ;. 15O,DO 11 $ 310.06 $ 310,06 1,200.00
: 4 • 1,;0,00 1$ 600,00 I S 376," !. 1,504.84 600,00 600,00 : I. 310.07. 1.240,28 i I, 372,06' 1.4S1l,32 , • 150001, :. 600,00 I , 150.00 I. 600.00 , $ 150,00 '. 600.00 i • 150,00 ,
150.00' 60000: IS 310,07. 1.240,28 $ 150.00' 150,00 , lSOlID ; • 150.00 I S 273119 $ 213,69 • 27,402.00 .• • 4.,000,00' 48,000,00 I • 68,792.71' 68,782,71 550 , 2,75 1$ 1.512.50 : 5sol.
'-60 • 1,430,00 5501. 2.47 • 1.358,50 • 00 $ 3,50 • 1.925,00 550 • 2,10 • 1.155.00 5501. 1,76 , 968,00 4971. 350 , 497 , 2.60 $ 1.292,," 497' , 2,47 $ 1.221.SO 1221 • 14.00 $ 1.700,00
1221 • 10,50 $ 1.201,00 122;S 14,10 • 1.720,20 !$ 200,00 • 200,00 I, 900.00 $ 900,00 11. 704,84 $ 704,84 221 $ 85.011 , 1,870,00 221. 75,00 S 1,650,00 22 • 77.531. 1.705.66 181, .5.00
$ 1,""',00 161, 95,00 , 1,520,00 1.353," 54. • 11.734.83 I. "''''''' no , 1,"" $ 2<80 Is 4,379,20 ' 6,5881 $ 4.91 I, 32,347,08 6' $ G.48 I. 433.114 86 • 6,47 $ 55G,13 , 16.000 $ 4.•'
, 7'.720,00 56,000 • '.51 I. 26,400 • 35,9R S 11.325 • 1.80 , "'.3B5 00 , 1.215.65 '. 9.725.17 ' 450 I, 38,3. S 17,277.00 300 I. 3B,00 • 10,800,00 .1 , , I, 160.29 • 150,29 I. 210.25
I, 420"S ,I • .0336 I. 1,016,76 31. 210,25 I, 530.74 i • 1, 210,2' I • 420,'S 31. 203.35 I. 610.06 11. 22$,40 I. 225AO 21. 293,35 I. 406,71 I, 203,3S I. 406.71 3 , ..". I. 203.35 I.
Sl0,07 2 • 384.S5 ; . ,"'" I , 203.35 4 , 275,40 I, 1,101.61 , 203,38 I, 813.43 : , 22403 !. ."'.11 $ "':<:36 1$ 813,43 $ 191.30 I. 191,30 $ 48,061,57 I. 48.061,,7 sse $ '-S1 I. 1,433.8'
550 $ 2A5 I, 􀀱􀀬􀀳􀀴􀁾􀀮􀀳􀀰􀀠 497 • 2,8$ , $ 1.41',76 122 • 12 •• 7 .$ 1.569.73 1 • 601.61 i. 60, .•' 22 • '9,18 I. 1,141,8' " • sa,l. I. 1,4111)9 M:WOBS\25766Phase3\TECHPROD\Estimales\BidTabph3
bidders list PF 􀁾􀀠2 of 14 -Roadway 
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD. TO ADDINSON ROAD >--'""-.... «'m.",,, (8)-03A r􀁉􀁟 􀀡􀂧􀁝􀁗􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀠Concrete Railroad Crossing Sx6
Steel' hungalow, with con$lant and all other equipment required to eontrol 􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀠devices befow arn1 Furnish ftasher& gale signalswilh 12M LED ,all aluminum
gale atmS, LEO gate lights, signs, $pecl11calions 􀀢􀀧􀀮􀀧􀁩􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁊􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀡􀂣􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀢􀁌􀁉􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀡􀁦􀀡􀁌􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀭􀀡􀀮􀁅􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀀢;1􀁾 􀀺􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀻􀀺􀁾􀀻,u􀀺􀁾n􀀺d􀀺e􀀡r􀁾g􀁾ro􀀺􀀺u􀀺n􀀺d􀁾W
􀁾􀀺i1􀀺􀀧c􀀺 &􀀺􀁪 c􀀠aasb lere, qgUuireemd f"."$, nn"""1 􀀱􀀭􀀮􀀡􀀮􀀧􀀱􀁌􀀬􀀡􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀬􀀠 . trock cru;nector, etc. 􀀱􀀭􀁊􀀬􀁝􀁌􀀬􀀮􀁪􀀭􀀡􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀱􀀺􀁃􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀾􀀻􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀮􀀮􀁌􀁾􀁾􀀴􀁌􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀮
􀀡􀁚􀀡􀀡􀀮􀁑􀁑􀀡􀁬􀁯􀀡􀁬􀀡􀀡􀀮􀁪 i project material, directional boring, , insulaled joints radio control OTMF i 'Und.""", 8ri<",,,,., excav4ticm Fu,n'" ru'" Place 4" v.Tlite stripe
iF'Jmi.'a"" Pface 1Q' chain link fence _$$ 4,941,345.22 $ 7,10S,S03.7{1 $ $ $ 5,951,2&8.42 $ 6.000,842.45 M:\JOBS\257e&Phase3\TECHPROO\Estimates\8idT abph3 bidders li.st PF -3 of 14
• Roadway 
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • BID SCHEDULE II UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD TO ADDISON ROAD $ 27.08 $ 37,803.68 38.00
,$ 53,048.00 58.59 .$ 81.931.24 $ 41.U $ 57,594.31 47,25 $ 55,611L25 $ 55,00 $ 64.735.00 $4,96 $ 78.481,48 55.74 $ 85.609.90 1,706.41 $ 10,236.48 2,400.00 $ 3,039.26 $ 18,235.56 2,381.89
$ 14,291,34 $ 14,343.64 $ 4,200,00 ,$ 15,600.00 • 3,982.48 $ 15,929.92 $ 3,922.81 $ 15.691.25 $ 755.08 $ 4,530.48 500.00 $ 3.000.00 $ 1,152,82 $ 6.916.92 602.63 $ 4,815,80 75.89 $ 22,767.00
91,00 .$ 27.300.00 $ 100.61 .$ 30.183.00 89.17 S 28,750.00 $ s $ $ 5.599.46 $ 27,997.3Q 1,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $; 681.21 $; 3,406.05 2,426.89 $ 12,134,45 50,602,00 $ 50.602.00 $ 54,800.00
$ 54,600.00 $ 36,000.00 $ 36,000.00 47.134.00 $ 47,134.00 $ 27,338.45 $ 27,338.45 $ 51,000.00 .$ 51,000,00 S 100,000,00.$ 100,000.00 • 59,445.48 $ 59,445.48 • 31.04 $ 23.883.52 $ 20.00
$ 15,250.00 S 41.92 :$ 31,984,96 $ 30.99 $ 23,642.83 • 2,674.44 $ 2,500.00 $ s.ooO.OO .$ .$ 1.467.23.$ 2.934.46 $ 1.768.16 $ 3,536.30 • 2.694.36 $ 100,00 S 2,800,00 $ 34.58 $; 968,24
• 79,32 S 2,220,67 96,48 $: 2.394.40 50.00 .$ 1.500.00 $; 98.51.$ 2.955.30 $ 51.66 $ 2.449.90 $ 58,83 $ 3.397.80 $ 10,00 $ 6OflOO $ 7.34 $ 440.40 • 24,66 $ 1,479.40 • 29.07 $ 485,1;2
$ 8.00 .$ 128.00 $ 10,48 $ 187.68 $ 15.85 $ 253.60 • 485.08 $ 485.0e $ 500.00 .$ 500.00 $: 524,01 $: 524.01 $ 496..36 $ 496.36 • 21.03 $ $ 8.00 S 312,00 $ 12E8 $ 490.62 $ 13,37 $ 540,93
418,80 $ 833.50 $ 1.000.00 .$ 2.000.00 $. 6213.81 $ 1.257,62 681.87 $ 1.383,74 156.77 $ 156.77 $ 500.00 .$ 500,00 $ 419.21 $ 419.21 356.66 $: 25.00 S 2,125.00 $ 51.50 S 4.377.50 S 47.16.$
4,008.60 41.22 $ 3,503.70 S 1,753,79 $ 10,522,74 $ 1,890.00 S 11,340.00 S 1,80B.71 $: 10,652,26 • 1,.817.50 $ 10,905,00 • 1,960.00 $ 5.940.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 6,300.00 $ 2,046,43.$ 6.139.29
$ 2.042,14 $ 6,126,43 • 2,320,01) ,$ 2,320,00 $ 2.310,OQ $ 2,310.00 .$ 2.391.83 $ 2,397,83 $ 2,342.61 $ 2,342,31 • 1,750.00 S 12,250.00 $ 1,890.00 .$ 13,230.00 .$ 1.608.71 $ 12,880.97
$ $ 1,816 . .24 $ 12,713.88 s 1,900.00 $ 21,760.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 23..100.00 $ 2,046,43 $ 22,510.13 $ 2.042.14 $ 22,463.58 • 3,600,00 $ 3,600,00 $ 2.940,.00 $; 2,940.00 $ 3,720.78 $ 3,720,76
$ 3,420.26 $ 3.420.28 $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 2,420.00 $ 2,420.00 $ 2,583.66 $ 2,583.88 • 2,501.29 $ 2,501.29 $ 2,300,00 $ 9,200.00 $ 2.420.00 $ 9.660.00 $ 2;l17.17 $ 9,508.68 • 2.365.72
$ 9,462.89 • 1,400.00 $ 18,200,00 $ 1,365.00 $ 17.745.00 $ 1,44{t97 $ 18,810,81 $ 1,403.99 $ 18,251,87 s 1,500.00 .$ 1,500.00 • 998.00 $ ....00 $ 2,067.10 $ 2.067.10 $ 1,521.70 $ 1.521.70
6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 11,800.00 S 11.800.00 $ 445.41 $ 445.41 $ 6.001.00 $ 6,081.80 $ 3,003.06 $ 3,003.06 $ 5,760.00 $ 5,700.00 445.41 $ 445,41 3,076-16 $ 3,076,16 : .. • : .. • 1,005,44
.$ 1,005.44 $ 1,050.00 S 1.OS0.00 $ 1,033.55 $ 1,033.55 $ 1.029.66 $ 1.029.00 • 1.202.30 $ 1,202.30 $ 1,160.00 $ 1.180.00 $ 1.240.26 $ 1.240..26 $ 1,200.85 $ 1,:200,85 $ 1,195.96 .$
7,175.76 $ 1,560,00 $ 9.480.00 $ 943.22 $ 5,659,32 • 1,239.73 S 7,438.38 1,620.42 $ 1,620.42 $ 2,840.00 S 2.1$40.00 $ 1,963.75 $ 1,963.75 2,141.39 $ 2,141.39 $ 59.01 $ 472.06 $ 100.00
$; $ 41.92 $ $ 68.96 $ 551,61 • 51.1a $ 46,760.24 $ 73.00 $ 66,722.00 $ 46.11 $ 42.144.54 $ 56.76 $ 51.875,59 PF -4 of 14-Utility 
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ARAPAHO ROAD" PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD TO ADDISON ROAD .... 􀀭􀁾􀀠 ".124" Rep I ' LF I SS500 '. . I $ 50.875.00 240 30-"ep I LF " 60.00 583/• 34."'.00 241 I.." RCP
"""" LF $ 00.00 40 • 3,200.00 , 242 54" RCP ,,I,. , U' :. 150,00 ,. · , 2.850.00 : 243 .60" RCP ,_ LF • 200,00. 1,200.00 2" LF Is 150.00 24 • 3,,,,,,,,00_ 1 245 LF • 225.00 244 I. <,"'M""
I 246 6'><5' 􀁢􀁯􀀢􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀠 LF $ 275.00 112 I. 30.800.00 . 247 7',5'. LF Is 315,00 "'"I. .'''''''OIl,, "8 W x 5' box 􀁯􀁾􀀬􀁥􀁲􀁴􀀠 LF I. 325.00 590 Is 24. LF Is 350.00 4.516 Is
'.""OMm."'" ,50 [,0', 5' LF Is 375.00 512 I, 10'000."" 251 IUY,S I LF I, 400,00 1.395 I. ,-<;R OfJO.nn 1 252 121" RCP LF " 400.00 .. , 1•.200.00 253 '4" "CPw" I by bore and 1.'" LF •
450.00 42 • 18.900.00 254 130 RCP wi 42" ,Ie.1 , by tw;. and :.ok LF •• 500.00 36 .S 19,000.00 255 4' I LF S 12.00 1.57, $ 1•.8".00 256 .. , pi,. 'LF • ".00 15 • 270.00 257 pvC FI"",os
) PVC pi,. LS • 5.000.00 • 5,000.00 ' -<!is 􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀬􀁯􀁬􀁯􀁥􀀠 LF • 25.00 124 • 3,100,00 259 􀀱􀀼􀁲􀁲􀀬􀁾􀀠SV • 150.00 510 • 76.500.00 2eo , S,.1ion SV I. 100.00 45 Is 4.500.00 , 261
I... ,6" EA I. 3,000.00 I. 3.000.00 262 􀀱􀀸􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀢􀀮􀁥􀀠 LF Is 12().00 85 Is 10,200.00 : 2., I"" 􀁋􀁾􀁏􀁐􀀮􀀮􀀠 ,"'"no,. ,lnd,"'n. OUtnot, (De'OWU LF I. 1,000,()O_ '0I. 80,000,00 284
1,." , LF Is 200.00 30 I. 6,000,00_ 2§S I.. Cl109 PVC Class 150 Wale. _ring LF I. 150.00 I 40 1$ •.000.001 200 IT"",,,, Salelv LF I. 1.75 14,536 I. 25,438.00 267 ISedlmeot <emevaI. In,Id."·
Rep cv 1$ 180,()O 250 " 37.500.00 , "8 " Head"", on W,e " ,,,. . of I e."". EA. • 1,500.00 S 1.500.00 2M I.S • 500.00 1 I. 500,00 27" " pe, p'an" LS • 2(),OOO.OO 1 • 2(),ooo.DO 271 In,outed
RIO... Sy • 40.00 750 1$ 30.000.00 272 I .. HMAC Typet ","veme7􀁾􀁡􀁮Nfl..... '''"' V, sy • 25 00 5001 $ 12,500.00 $: 57.05 $ 52,771.25 $: 72.35 $ 66,923.75 $: 50.30 $: 46,527.50 55.407.50
$ 69.19 $ 40,337.77 $ B6AO $: 50.371.20 $ 62"S8 $: 36,859J.l4 :$ 72,82 $ 42,456.00 $ 106.12 $: 4,244.80 $ 111.00 S 4,440.00 .$ 65.94 $ 3,437,60 $: 101,02 $ 4,040.80 $: 219.93 $ 4,178.87
$: 196,1)0 $ 3.724.00 $: 155.11;$ 2,947.09 $ 190.35 $: 3.616.59 $ 452.96 $: 2.717.76 ,$ 315.00 $ 1,890.00 1,068,96 $ 315.37 $ 1,89224 S 145.44 $; 3,400.56 $: 291.00 $ 6,984.00 $ 138.24
$ 3,269]6 $ 190.89 S 4.561.44 $ 185.62 $: 45,291.2:8 $ 220.00 $: 53,680.00 S 215,89 $ 52,677.18 :$ 2OV7 $ 50,549.48 $: 221.10 $ 24,763.20 $: 167.00 $: 16,704.00 $ 269,34.$ 30,166.08
$: 219.15 $ 24,544.43 $ 288Jl1 S 75,116.00 S 294,00 $ 78,440.00 $ 315.45 $ 82.017.00 $ 299.45 $ 71.6fil.67 S 301.38 $ 177,B14.2O S 313.00 $ 164,870,00 $: 338.51 $ 199,720.90 $ 317.63
$ 167,401.70 S 381.13 $ 1,721,183J)S $ 375.00 $: 1.693.500.00 $: 385.67 $ 1.741,665.72 $ 380,60 $ 1,718.789.60 $ 416.24 $: 213,114.68 $ 436,00 S 223,232.00 $ 459,03 $ 235,023,30 $ 437.09
S 223,790.08 $ 439.31 S 812.837.45 $ 469,00 $ 854,255.00 $: 508.29 S 709,064,55 $ 472..20 $ 658,719.00 $ 313.23 S 15,035.04 ,$ 387.00 $: 18,576.00 $ 431.18 $ 20,725.44 $ 377.34:$ 18.112.11;:
$ 313.70 S 13.,175.40 S 406.00 $ 17,136.00 $: 437.02 $ 16,354.64 16,222.0S $ 338.94 $ 12,879.72 $ 532,00 $ 20,216,00 $ 539.73 $ 20,509.74 $ 470.22:11 17,668.49 S 9,03 S 14,195.16 $ 13.90
$: 21,850.80 57,660.98 $ 19.87 $ 31,235.64 $ 28.00 S 42(I.9(} $: 20.00 $: 300.00 $ 41.92 $ 826.60 $ 29.99 $ 449.90 $ 10,00 S 10,00 $: 500.00 $ 500,00 $ 3,144,06 $: 3,144.06 :$ 1,21R02:11
1,21S,02 $: 38.48 S 4.171,52 S 32.20 $: 3,992.80 $: 46.11 $ 5,717.64 :II 36.93 $: 4,827.32 S 81.16 $ 41,391.60 .$ 69.70 $ 45,747.00 $: 76.60 $ 40.086,00 $ 83.15 $ 42,40it20 $ 73.67 S
3.315.15 S 66.10 $: 2,974.50 $: 47.16 $: 2.122,20 S 62,31 $ 2,603.95 $ 2.591.65:$ 2,591.65 $ 3.000,00 $ 3,000.00 $ 4,192.06 $ 4.192.08 S 3.,261.24 $ 3,261.24 $ 55.18 S 4,690.30 $ 65.00
$: 5,525.00 $: 47.16 $: 4,006.60 $ 55.18 :$ 4,741.30 S 1,413.99 $ 113.119.20 $: 1,990.00 $ 159,200.00 S 1,907.40 $ 152,592,00 $ 1.770.46 $ 141,637.07 $ 143.17 $ $: 300.00 $ 9,000.00
$ 235.60 S 7,074.00 $ 226.32 $ 6.789.70 $ 145.67 S 5,826.80 $ 220,00 $ 6,600.00 ;$ 131.00 S 5,240.00 $: 165.56 $ 6,622.27 $ 1.00 $ 14,536.00 $ {),25 $ 3,634,00 S 1.05 $ 15,262.80 $ 0,77
$ 11.144.27 $ 3Q.74 S 7,685.00 $: 150.00 $ 37,500.00 $ 66,12 $ 17,030,00 $ B2.95 $ 20.736.33 $ 1.256.75 $ 1,256.75 $ 1,500.00 $ 1.500.00 ;$ 1,467.23 $ 1,457.23 $: 1,407,99:$ 1,407.99
$ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 1,500,00 $ 1,500.00 $ 115,904,.17 $ 115.904.17 $: 39,301,39 $ 39,3iJ1.39 $: 18.309.88 $: 18,300.88 $: 52,600.00 $ 52.600.00 ;$ 69,001,57 $ 89,OS1.67 $ 53,330.52:$
53.330,52 $: 36.29 S 27,217.50 $: i3.60 $ 47,700.00 $ 41.92 $ $ 47.27 $ 35.452.50 $ 23.05 $ 11.525.00 S 46.60 $ 23.400,00 $ 36,41 $ 19.205.00 $ 36.09 $ 16,043.33 $ 3,741,303.'93 4.036,269.5S
$ 4,335.466.93 $ 4,037,66t),14 PF 􀁾􀀠5 of 14 􀁾􀀠U1IIiIy 
BID SCHEDULE III SIGNALIZATION AND LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD TO ADDISONROAD $ 23,000.00 $ 23,000.00 $ 23,000.00 $ 23,000.00 $ 24,484.80 $ 24,484.80
$ 23,494.93 $ 23.494.93 $ 10,500.00 $ 10,500.00 $ 10,500.00 $ 10,500.00 $ 11,177,84 $ 11.177.84 $ 10,725.95 $ 10,725.95 $ 5.00 $ 55,015.00 $ 5.00 $ 55,015.00 $ 5.32 $ 56,535.96 5.11
$ 56.188.65 $ 20.00 $ 2. 160.00 $ 20.00 $ 2,160.00 $ 21.29 $ 2,299.32 $ 20.43 $ 2,206.44 $ 25.00 $ 4,875.00 $ 25.00 $ 4,875.00 $ 26.61 $ 5,186.95 $ 25,54 $ 4,979.65 $ 20.00 .$ 4,860.00
$ 20.00 $ 4,860.00 $ 21.29 $ 5,113.47 $ 20.43 $ 4.964.49 $ 2,000.00 $ 1a.000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 18.000.00 $ 2.129.11 $ 19,161.99 $ 2,043.04 $ 18,387.33 $ 3,400.00 $ 217,600.00 $ 3,400.00
$ 217,600.00 $ 3,619.49 $ 231,647.36 $ 3,473.16 $ 222,282.45 $ 8,500.00 $ 110,500.00 $ 8,500.00 $ 110,500.00 9,048.73 $ 117,633.49 $ 8,682.91 $ 112,877.83 $ 1,500.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 7,200.00
$ 28,800.00 $ 7,664.81 $ 30,659.24 $ 5,454.94 $ 21,819.75 $ 6,750.00 $ 27.000.00 $ 6,750.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 7,185.76 $ 26,743.04 $ 6,895.25 $ 27,581.01 $ 1.00 $ 22,706.00 $ 1.00 $ 22,706.00
$ 1.06 $ 24,068.36 $ 1.02 S 23.160,12 $ 0.85 $ 654.50 $ 0.85 $ 654.50 $ 0.90 $ 693.00 $ 0.67 $ 667.33 0.85 $ 327.25 $ 0.65 $ 327.25 $ 0.90 S 34650 $ 0.87 $ 333.67 $ 1.00 $ 11,353.00
$ 1.00 $ 11,353.00 $ 1.06 $ 12.034.16 $ 1.02 S 11,saO.06 $ 1.00 $ 780.00 $ 1,00 $ 780.00 $ 1.06 $ 826.80 $ 1.02 $ 795.60 $ 1.00 $ 390.00 $ 1.00 $ 390.00 $ 1.06 S 413.40 $ 1.02 $ 397.80
$ 800.00 $ 16,800.00 $ 800.00 $ 16,800.00 $ 851.65 $ 17.864.65 $ 817.22 $ 17,161.55 $ 800.00 $ 51.200.00 $ 800,00 $ 51,200.00 $ 851.65 $ 54,505.60 $ 817.22 $ 52,301.67 $ 500.00 $ 12,000.00
$ 500,00 $ 12,000.00 $ 532.28 $ 12,774.72 s 510.76 $ 12,258.24 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 532.26 $ $ 510.76 $ 510,76 $ 6,000.00 $ 18,000.00 $ 6.000.00 $ 18,000.00 $ 6.387.34
$ 19,162.02 $ 6,129.11 $ 18,387.34 $ 614.220.75 $ 637,020.75 $ 677,94';,97 $ 643,062.82 PF -6 of 14 􀁾􀀠Signalization and Lighting 
BID SCHEDULE IV STREETSCAPE & PARK IMPROVEMENTS ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD. TO ADDISON ROAD $ 701.68 $ 25,260.48 S 750.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 716.83 $ 25,sn,sa $ 723,50 $ 26.046,12
$ 377.83 $ 13,979.71 $ 495.00 $ 18,315.00 $ 387.06 $ 14,321.22 :; 419.96:; 15,536,64 $ 205." $ 21,536.55 $ 225.00 S 23.625,00 $ 210,12 $ 22,062,60 :; 213.41 $ 22,406.05 $ 248.29 $ 1,986.32
$ 325.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 254.3fl $ 2,034,88 :; 275,88:; 2,207,07 $ 183.52 $ 7,891,36 S 200.00 S B.600.00 $ 168.00 $ 8,084.00 :; 190.51:; 8.191.79 $ 17.27 $ 3,885.75 $ 22.00 $ 4,950.00 $
17.69 $ 3,980.25 $ 18,99 :; 4,212.00 $ 19A3 $ 2,098,44 S 35.00 S 3,7BO,00 $ 19.91 $ 2,150.28 $ 24.78 $ 2.678,24 S 1£U9 $ 4,257.97 $ 22.00 $ 5.766,00 $ 16,59 $ 4,363.17 :; 18,26 $ 4,B02,38
$ 19A3 $ 3,458.54 $ 2ROO $ 5.162.00 $ 19.91 $ 3,543.98 S 22,78 $ 4,054,84 $ 3.24 $ 5,595.48 $ 6.30 $ 10,880.10 $ 6.19 $ 10,690.13 $ 5,24 $ 9.055.24 $ 2.27 $ 33,362,62 $ 2,80 $ 41,176,80
$ 2..32 $ 34,117.92 S 2.46 S 3fl,225,78 $ 21.59 $ 1,424.94 $ 25.00 $ 1.650,00 $ 22.12 $ 1,459.92 $ 22.90 $ 1,511.62 S 21.59 $ 2.80{HO $ 25,00 $ 3,250.00 $ 22,12 $ 2,875.60 $ 22.90 S
2,977.43 $ 17.27 $ 10,621.05 $ 25,00 S 15.315.00 $ 17.69 $ 10,879.35 $ 19.99 $ 12.291.80 $ 17.27 $ 1.796.08 $ 25,00 $ 2,600,00 $ 17,69 S 1.839.76 :; 19.119 :; 2,016.61 $ 2.43 $ 31,104.00
$ 2AO $ 30,720,00 $ 2A9 $ 31,872.00 :; 244 S 31,232.00 S 0.05 $ 5.254.10 $ 0,05 $ 5,254,10 $ 0,06 $ 6,304.92 $ 0.05 $ 5,604.37 $ 1.62 $ 8.480.00 $ 4,00 $ 16,000,00 $ 1,615 $ 6,640,00
$ 2A3 :; 9,706.67 $ 32.39 $ 11.757.57 $ 38.00 $ 13,794,00 $ 33,18 $ 12,044,34 :; 34.52 5 12,531.97 $ 32.39 $ 11.2Oa94 $ 3800 $ 13,148.00 5 33.18 $ 11,480.28 $ 34.52 $ 11,945.07 S 34.54
$ 11,950.84 $ 55,00 $ 19,030.00 $ 35,39 $ 12,244.94 S 41,64 $ 14,408,59 $ 123,796,62 $ 123.796.62 $ 242,100,00 $ 242,100,00 $ 147.725.92 $ 147,n5.92 S 171,20B.18 $ 171,208.18 PF -10
of 14 Streetscape 
STREETSCAPE & PARK IMPROVEMENTS ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD. TO ADDISON ROAD and instaU modular and instaH decorative metal fence instal! steel $ 14,25 $ 28,728.00 $ 11,80
$ 23.168.60 $ 13,87 $ 21.961.92 $ 13.31 $ 26,826.24 $ 17,31 $ 64.46244 $ 44,315.60 $ 18.33 $ 68.260.92 $ 15.85 $ 59,012.99 s 10,75 $ 48,074.00 $ 7,60 $ 33,987.20 $ 14.16 $ 63,323.52
$ 10.84 $ 48,461.51 $ 3,11 $ 134,373.77 $ 3.50 $ 151.224,50 $ 3,69 $ 159,433.83 3,43 $ 146,344.03 $ 3.10 $ 106.726.50 $ 3.50 $ 100.957.50 $ 3.59 S 106,43M5 $ 3.63 S 104,10U5 $ 12,57
$ 30.117.12 8.30 $ 19,886.80 $ 9.64 $ 23,097.44 $ 10.17 $ 24.361.32 $ 13,61 $ 3,424.88 $ 13.00 $ 3.224.00 18.51 $ 4,590.48 $ 15.11 5 3,146.45 $ 14.12 $ 282.40 $ 3,60 $ 72,00 $ 10,28
$ 205,60 $ 9,33 $ 186,67 $ 1,78 $ 57.628,64 $ 0.95 $ 30,863.60 $ 2,76 $ 89.666.88 $ 1.83 $ 59.453.04 $ 375,31 $ 22, 143.29 $ 350.00 $ 20,650.00 $ 414.71 $ 24.467.89 $ 380.01 $ 22,420.39
15.69 $ 95,709.00 $ 13.50 $ 62.350,00 20,53 $ 125,233.00 $ 1Q1,097.33 $ 1.150.00 $ 8,050.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 7.000.00 $ 1,001.51 S 7,010,51 $ 1,050,50 $ 1,353.52 293,92 $ 6,466.24 1,000.00
$ 22,000.00 $ 1,658.85 $ 36,494,70 $ 964.26 $ 21,653.65 $ 562.21 $ 1.686,63 385.00 $ 1,155.00 $ 629.47 $ 1,888.41 $ 52M6 $ 1,576,68 $ 78.11 $ 11.247.84 $ 46,50 $ 6.696.00 $ 51.47 $ 7,411.68
$ 58.69 $ 8,451.84 $ 4,26 $ 2,590.08 $ 4.30 5 2,614.40 $ 4.71 S 2.863,68 $ 4.42 $ 2,689,39 20.39 $ 2,936.16 $ 20.3fi $ 2,923.20 $ 22.39 $ 3,224.16 $ 21.03 $ 3,027.84 $ 17.35 $ 29.633.60
$ 18,00 5 30,744.00 19,91 $ 34,006.26 $ 18.42 $ 31,461.36 $ 86.75 $ 41,319.75 $ 114.00 $ 54.378.00 121.53 $ 57,969.81 $ 101.43 $ 51,242.52 $ 66.98 $ 59,947.10 $ 85.60 $ 76,612,00 $ 119.54
$ 106,986.30 $ 90.11 $ 81,162,47 $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000,00 $ 10,400.00 $ 10.400.00 s 8,785.18 $ 8,785.18 $ 10,395.06 $: 10,395.06 $ 732,04 $ 4.392,24 5 900.00 $ 5,400.00 $ 995.31 $ 5.971.86
$ 675.18 $ 5,254.10 5.000.00 $ 15,000.00 5 2,000,00 $ 6,000.00 $ 10,335,50 $ 31.006.50 $ 5,718,50 $ 17,335.50 $ 2A3 $ 1.176.12 $ 4,50 $ 2,178.00 s 2.49 $ 1,205.16 $ 3.14 $ 1,519.76 $
$ 1,129,910,66 $ 1,254,216.60 $ 1,374,099.16 $ 1,252,742.14 PF • 11 of 14 • Streetscape 
BID SCHEDULE IV BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD. TO ADDISON ROAD $ 143.59 $ 21,107.73 272,00 $ 39,984,00 $ 149.51 $ 21,977.97 $ 188.37 $ 27,689,90 229,63 $
71,644.56 $ 236.00 $ 73,632.00 $ 240.75 $ 75,114.00 235,46 $ 73,463.52 $ 518.46 $ 189,237,90 $ 532.00 $ 194,180,00 $ 538.61 $ 196,665.65 $ 529.76 $ 193.361.18 $ 500.00 $: 39,650.00 $
525.00 $ 476.25 $ 37,766,63 $ 500,42 $ 39,683.04 $ 600,00 $ 622,500.00 $ 644.00 $ 668,150.00 $ 605.47 S 628,175.13 $ 616,49 $ 639,608,38 $ 650,00 $ 328,300.00 $ 552.00 $ 278.870.40 483.01
$: 244,016.65 $ 561.67 $ 283,755.68 $ 1.400.00 $ 139,160.00 $ 1.510.00 $: 156,058.00 5 1,292,92 $ 128,516,25 $ 1,420.97 $ 141,244.75 $ 10.00 $: 836.800.00 $ 12.90 $ 1.079,472.00 5 11,73
$ 981,566.40 $ 11.54 $ 965.946.13 250,00 $ 1,522,250.00 $ 281100 5 1,141,454.00 $ 247.87 S 1,509.280,43 261,29 $ 1,590,994.81 $ 0,39 $ 3,626,22 $ 3,00 $ 35,332.40 $ 0.78 $ 7,25244 $
1,66 $ 15,403.69 $ 5,00 5 875,000,00 S 4,90 $ 857,500.00 $ 4.40 $ 770,000.00 S 4,77 $ 834,166.67 $ 3,72 $ 47,247.72 $ 4,10 $ 52,074.10 $ 3,45 $ 43,818.45 $ 3,76 S 47,713.42 $ 163,709.30
$ 163,709.30 $ 139,500,00 $ 139,50Q,00 $ 156,643.42 $ 156,643.42 $ 153,264,24 $ 153,284.24 $ 61,99 $ 990431.98 7\.\ $ 62,50 $ 132,330.00 $ 86,27 $ 138.377.06 $ 76,92 $ 123.379.68 $ 92,19
$ 145,383.63 5 (0 $ 87.70 $ 138.302.90 $ 70.93 $ 111,856.61 $ 83.61 $ $ 61.95 $ 97,633.20 $Iv $ 86.00 $ 135,536.00 $ 70,93 $ 111,785.68 $ ]2,96 5 114,984.96 S 73.21 $ 26,628.<18 $ 60,20
$ 29,168.14 $ 78,54 $ 28,565.00 $ 77.32 $ 28,120.07 $ 200.66 $ 14,768.58 $ 414.00 $ 30,470AO $ 275.35 $ 20,265.76 $ 2ll6.67 $ 21.834.91 $ 9,144.80 $ 9,144.80 $ 500.00 $ 500,00 $ 12.402,60
$ 12,4Q2.60 $ 7,349.13 $ 7,349.13 $ 1,139.01 $ 2,278.02 $ 500.00 $ 1,000.00 S 2,583.88 5 5,167.76 $ 1.407.63 $ 2,815.26 $ $ $ 5,825,147,44 $ 5,229,213.90 $ 5,436,641.14 ; .. : ... PF
• 7 of 14 -BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS 
BID SCHEDULE IV BRIDGE LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD. TO ADDISON ROAD ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE $ 3.00 $ 11.610.00 $ 3.00 $ 11,610.00 $ 3.19 $ 12,345.30 $ 3.06
$ 11,655.10 $ 6.00 $ 4,560.00 $ 6.00 $ 4,560.00 $ a39 $ 4,856.40 $ 6.13 $ 4.658.80 $ 10.00 $ 36,200.00 $ 10.00 $ 36,200.00 $ 10.65 $ 38,553.00 36,984.33 $ 10.00 $ 1.500.00 $ 10.00 $
$ 10.65 $ 1,597.50 $ 10.22 $ 1,532.50 S 2.00 $ 900.00 $ 12.00 $ 5,400,00 $ 2.13 $ 958.SO $ 5.38 $ 2,419,50 $ 2.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2.13 $ 2,130.00 $ 2.04 $ 2,043.33 S 1.00
S 1,040.00 $ 1.00 $ 1,040.00 $ 1.06 $ 1,102.40 $ 1.02 $ 1,060,80 $ 1.00 S 3.660.00 $ 1.00 $ 3,680.00 $ 1.06 $ 3,900.80 $ 1.02 $ 3,753.60 $ 0.85 $ 1,262.25 $ 0.85 $ 1,262.25 $ 0.90 $
1,336.50 $ 0.87 $ 1,287.00 $ 0.•5 $ 2,660.50 $ 0.85 $ 2,660.50 $ 0.90 $ 2,817.00 $ 0.87 $ 2.712.67 $ 0.45 $ 2,083.50 $ 0.45 $ 2,063.50 $ 0,46 $ 2,222.40 $ 0.46 $ 2,129.80 $ 0.45 $ 4,684.50
$ 0.45 $ 4,684.50 $ 0.48 $ 4,998.80 $ 0.46 $ 4,788.60 $ 0,35 $ 1,197.00 $ 0.35 $ 1,197.00 $ 0.37 $ 1.265.40 $ 0.36 $ 1,219.80 $ 0.35 $ 2,394.00 $ 0.35 $ 2,394.00 $ 0.37 $ 2,530.60 $
0.36 $ 2,439,60 $ 500.00 $ 4,500.00 $ SOO.OO $ 4,500.00 $ 532.28 $ 4,790.52 $ 510.76 $ 4,596.84 S 150.00 $ 7.S00.00 $ lSO.00 $ 7,800.00 S 159.68 $ 6,303.36 $ 153.23 S 7,967.79 $ BOO.oo
$ 2,400.00 .$ 800.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 851.65 $ $ 817.22 $ 2.451,65 $ 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 S 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 6,387.34 $ 6,387,34 $ 6,129.11 $ 6.129.11 $ 12,000,00.$ 24,000.00 $ 12,000.00
$ 24,000.00 $ 12,774.66 $ 25,549.36 $12,256.23 S 24,516.45 $ 200.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 200.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 212.91 $ 2,554.92 $ 204.30 $ 2,451.64 $ 1,000.00 $ 36,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 36,000.00 S 1,064.56 $ 38,324.16 $ 1.021.52
$ 36,774.72 $ 4,700.00 $ 9,400.00 .$ 4,700.00 $ 9.400.00 $ 5,003.42 $ 10,006.84 $ 4,801.14 $ 9,602.28 $ 4,850.00 $ 19,400.00 $ 4.8SO.00 $ 19,400.00 $ 5,1&3.10 $ 20,652.40 $ 4,954.37
$ 19,817,47 $ 5,100.00 $ 15,300.00 S 5,100.00 $ 15,300.00 $ 5,429.24 $ 16.287.72 $ 5,209.75 $ 15.629.24 $ 4,100.00 $ 8,200.00 .$ 4,100.00 $ 8,200.00 $ 4,364.66 $ 8,729.36 $ ',16S.23
$ 8,376.45 $ 4,250.00 $ 17,000.00 $ 4,2SO.00 S 17,000.00 $ ',524.37 $ 18,097.48 $ 4,341.46 $ 17,365.83 $ 4,500.00 $ 13,500.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 13,500.00 $ 4,790.50 $ 14,371.50 $ 4,590,63
$ 13,790.50 $ 5,500.00 $ 121,000.00 $ 5,500.00 $ 121,000,00 S 5,655.06 $ 128,811,32 $ 5,616.35 $ 123,603.77 .$ 1,000.00 $ 54,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 54,000.00 $ 1,064.56 $ 57,486.24 $ 1,021.52
$ 55,162.08 $ 1,000.00 $ 54,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 54,000.00 $ 1,064.56 $ 57,486.24 $ 1,021.52 $ 55,162.08 $ 1.750.00 $ 64,000.00 $ 1,750.00 $ 64,000.00 $ 1,662.97 $ 89,422,56 $ 1,787.66
$ 85,807.52 $ 2,300.00 $ 4,600.00 S 2,300,00 $ 4,600.00 $ 2,448.48 $ 4,1)96,96 $ 2,349.49 $ 4,698.99 BRIDGE llGHTlNG 8 
ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD. TO ADDISON ROAD $ 2.300.00 $ 4,600.00 $ 2,300.00 $ 4,600.00 $ 2,448.48 $ 4,896.96 $ 2,349.49 $ 4,698.99 $ 4,800,00 $ 96,000.00 $ 4.800.00 $ 96,000.00
$ 5,109.67 $ 102,197.40 $ 4,903.29 $ 98,065.80 $ 5,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 45,ooQ.00 $ 5,322.78 $ 47,905.02 $ 5,107.59 $ 45,968.34 $ 5,000.00 $ 5.000,00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00
$ 5,322.78 $ 5,32278 S 5,107.59 $ 5,107.59 $ $ 709,B71.75 $ 714,371.75 $ 755,648.19 $ 726,630.56 BRIDGE lIGHTING 9 
• • • • BID SCHEDULE VII-BID SCHEDULE IX ALTERNATE BID ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE Iii SURVEYOR BLVD TO ADDISON ROAD 3,000.00 :$ 9,000.00 $ 600.00 S 2,400.00 $ 3,193,67 :5 9,581,01 2,331.22
$ 6,003.67 $ 800.00 $ 2',400,00 1.00 $ 3,00 $ a51.6S $ 2,554,95 $ 5.50.88 $: 1.652.65 $ 1.00 $; 135.00 $ 1.00 $ 135.00 $ 1.06 $ 143.10 $ 1.02 $ 137.70 $ 1.00 $: 270,00 $ 1.00 $ 270.00
$ 1.06 $: 286.20 $ 1,!)2 $ 275.40 $ 11,805,00 $ 2,808.00 $ 12,565,26 $ 9,059.42 $ 377.83 $ 8.312..26 $ 495.00 S 10,890.00 374.50 :$ 8,239.00 415,78 $ 9.147.09 I 248.29 :$ 2,234.61 $
32$,00 S 2,925.00 • 246.10 $ 2.214,90 273.13 $ 2,458.17 $ 0.16 $; 422,72 $ 0:90 $: 2,377.80 $ 0.16 $ 422.72 $ 0.41 $ 1,074.41 I 21.59 $ $ 25,00 $ 225.00 $ 21.40 $ 192.60 $ 22.66 $ 203.97
$ 17.27 $ 9,014,94 $ 2S.oo S 13,050.00 $ 17.12 $ 8,936.64 $ 19.80 $ 10,333,86 $ 17,27 $ 2,348.72 $ 25.00 $ 3.400.00 $ 17.12 $ 2,328.32 $ 19.80 $ 2.692,3$ I 0,66 I 899.64 $ 0.60 $ 793.80
$ 0.67 $ 886,41 0,65 $: 859.95 $ 4.05 $ 22.744.80 • 2.70 $ 15,163.20 $ 4,01 $ 22,520,16 $ 3.59 $ 20,142.72 I 2.43 $ 6,779.70 $ 2.30 $ 6,417,00 $ 2,41 $ 6,723.90 $ 2,36 $ 6,640.20 $ 32.39
$: 7,546.87 $ 38,00 :$ 8,654.00 • 32,10 $ 7,479.30 $ 34,15 $ 7,960.06 $ 32.39 $ 1,295.60 $ 38.00 $ 1,520.00 $ 32.10 $ 1,264.00 $ 34.16 $ 1.366.53 34,54 $ 1.381.60 $ 55.00 $ 2,200.00
• 34.24 $ 1,369.60 $ 4126 $ 1.650.40 $ 6.89 $ 16.003.65 $ 7.40 :$ 16.241.00 13.43 $ 33,104.95 s 9.24 $ 22.776.60 $ 12.60 $: 28,267.00 $ lAO $ 16,61300 $ 9.32 $ 20,923.40 $ 9.77 $ 21,941.13
$ 11.03 $ 5,956.20 $ 4.20 :$ 2,268.00 $ 8.02 $ 4.330.80 • 7.75 $ 4,185.00 $ 12136 S 103,812.80 $ 16.89 $ 136,133.40 s 15.35 :5 123,721.00 $ 15,04 $ 121,222.40 $ 10,92 $ 1,092.00 $ 3.60
$: 360.00 $ 9.95 $ 995,00 $ 8.16 $ 815.67 $ 445.80 $ 6.702.00 • 350,00 $ 5,250.00 $ 401.25 :5 6,018,75 $ 399,35 $ 5,990.25 $ 400.27 $, 10,407.02 $ 500.00 :$ 13,000.00 $ iS02S0 $ 20,865.00
$ 561,59 $ 14,751.;)4 $ 15,88 $ 77.621.44 $ 13.50 $ 65,988,00 $ 19.86 $: 97,075.68 • 16.41 $: 80,225..37 $ 449.1S $ 8,084,10 $ 385.00 $ 6,930.00 $ 609.04 $ 10,962.12 $ 461.06 $ 8.659.14
$ 640,97 :$ 4.486.79 $ 401.00 $; 2,849.00 705.72 $ 4,96U14 585.56 $: 4,098,94 $ 297.97 $ 24,433.54 $ 400,00 $ 32,800,00 $ 560.49 $ 45.960.18 $ 419.49 :$ 34,397.91 $ 2.43 :$ 206.55 $
4.50 $ 382.50 $ 2.41 $ 204.85 $ 3,11 $ 264.83 $ 351,249.66 368.630.70 $ 431,720.92 383,867.09 PF -12 Of 14 -Add Alternate 
BID SCHEDULE VII· BID SCHEDULE IX ALTERNATE BID ARAPAHO ROAD· PHASE III SURVEYOR BLVD TO ADDISON ROAD • $ $ 6.64 0,05 1.913.90 $ $ $ (16,440.64) (5.254.10) (1,913.90) $ $ $ 3,SO 0,05
1,000,00 $ $ $ (8.....00) (5.254.10) (1.000.00) $ $ 3.50 0.05 1,500.00 $ $ $ $ (8 .....00) (5.254.10) (1,500.00) $ 5 $ 4.55 0.05 1,471.30 $ $ $ (11,251.5S) (5.254.10) (1.471.30) $ (23,608.64)
$ (14,92Q,10) $ (15,420.10) (17,982.9') $ $ 356,518.60 $ 426,8S6.08 $ 374,943.57 PF. 13 of 14 􀁾􀀠Add Alternate 
ARAPAHO ROAD -PHASE III SURVEYOR BOULEVARD. TO ADDISON ROAD $ 1,200,00 $ 10,800,00 $ 1,200,00 $ 10,800,00 $ 1,236,00 $ 11,124,00 $ 1,212.00 $ 10,908,00 $ 3,200.00 $ 204,800,00 $ 3,200.00
$ 204,800.00 S 3,296.00 $ 210,944,00 $ 3,232,00 $ 206,848.00 S 7,200.00 $ 93,600,00 $ 7,200,00 $ 93,600,00 $ 7.416.00 $ 96.408.00 $ 7.272.00 $ 94,536.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 22,400.00 $ 5,800.00
$ 22.400.00 $ 5,768.00 $ 23,072,00 $ 5,656,00 $ 22,624.00 $ 331,600.00 $ 331.600.00 $ 341,543.00 $ 334.916.00 $ $ $ $ 2,000.00 3,300.00 8.500.00 6,750.00 $ $ $ $ (18,000.00) (211,200.00)
(110,500.00) (27.000.00) $ $ $ $ 2,000.00 3.300,00 8,500.00 6,750.00 $ $ $ $ (18,000.00) (211.200.00) (110.500,00) (27.000.00) $ $ $ $ 2,000.00 3.300.00 8.500.00 6.750,00 $ $ $ $ (18,000.00)
(211,200.00) (110,500.00) (27,000.00) $ $ $ $ (18,000.00) (211.200,00) (110,500.00) (27.000,00) $ (366,700.00) $ (366,700.00) $ (366,700.00) $ (366,700.00) $ (35,100.00) $ (35,100.00)
$ (25,152.00) $ (31.784.00) PF -14 of 14-Add Alternate 
Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase 2 􀁾􀀠Conceptual Estimate of Construction Costs Description Urban Design Elements Trees & shrubs @thrust blocks Trees & shrubs @retaining walls
Railing around parking lot Civil Works (subtotal) Traffic Control & Temp works Bridge Structure Sleel Arch Soundwalls Pedestrian/Traffic Rail seperation Lighting Bridge Stinger Lights
Arch and Hanger Liaghts Marker Ught -Arch top Marker Ught -Hanger side Bridge Railing Lighls Approach Bridge Deck Lighting Under-Deck Lighting Electrical Services Subtotal Contigency
OVerhead Utility Relocation Total Estimated Cost Range TxDOT Bridge Comments wi landscaping, &lighting $50,000 minimalistic $50,000 minimalistic $160,000 1600 fI@$100/1f $10,000 $3,100,000
abutment to abutment ($35/sf) $260,000 1400 fI conc. wall $80,000 1600 fI@$50m $0 $0 $0 $0 $107,000400 fI of rail each side $170,000 45 light assemblies $85,000 77 light fixtures $55,000
$4,127.000 ??1 
URS June 25, 2003 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E. Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive Addison, TX 7500 I Re: Arapabo Road Bridge at Midway Road Electronic File for Bridge Presentation
Dear Mr. Chutchian: As requested, please find enclosed a Compact Disc (CD) containing the PowerPoint file for our presentation that we have been asked to prepare for the Town Council.
Please review and provide any comments. We await notification of the date that we are to make the presentation. Please be advised that I will be out oftown from July 12 through 16. Sincerely,
URS Corporation 􀁱􀁴􀀲􀁬􀀯􀁾􀀠 Cliff R. Hall, P .E. Project Manager URS Corporation Graystone Centre 3010 lBJ freeway, Suite 1.300 Dafias, TX 75234 Tel: 972.406,6950 Fax: 972.406.6951

URS June 25, 2003 Mr. Jerry D. Holder, P .E. Director ofCapital Projects 5910 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 200 Plano, TX 75093 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road 30% Bridge Plans Dear
Mr. Holder: Please find enclosed II"xI7" prints ofour 30% bridge plans for the Arapaho Road project for inclusion in your plan set and subsequent submittal to the Town ofAddison. These
prints include the Bridge Layouts (sheets 1-4 of4) and the Typical Sections. Sincerely, URS Corporation 􀁾􀀻􀁪􀀨􀀯􀀠 ClifIR Hall, P.E. Project Manager c.c. Steve Chutchian -Town ofAddison
enclosures URS Corporation Graystone Centre 30.10 lBl Freeway, Suite .1300 Dallas, TX 76234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972,406,6951 
----., 􀀢􀁾􀀠 "" 􀀺􀀧􀀼􀀧􀁩􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀺􀀠 , . .,y 􀁃􀁏􀁎􀁇􀁾􀁛􀁬􀂣􀀠 2 'SlORY BRI('t< TYPE SSTR{MOOJ RAIl ! ! i , i ! ScO · I i I . . . : 􀁾..----.... " ...:.". "···· ..·t""··.. ""·....
􀀭􀀭􀁾.... -··...... 􀀭􀁾􀀢 .. ·· .. "'., ..·: ........ ·"·,.··:'"·············l"·······.. ·····!--􀁾􀀠 1 j j 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀮􀁉􀀮􀀠 6tO 1 •• 1 􀁾􀀠 i . : .........! ,*.,'...........................:".
i.... .. ............ .􀁾􀀢􀀠......... ' , ,. . Ovl:RAl.L LErJcTH r:J' 􀁂􀁾􀀧􀁏􀁇􀁅􀀠ALoi<G PGl "b75.00· , 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾 i ,........... T....
·!···....,: ···..·'j;' · ....·...... j...·. ; m bVERJt.LL lENGTH 􀁾􀁾􀀠S$lR' 􀁕􀁾􀁽 RAIL = 􀁾􀀡􀀴􀀮􀀵􀁲􀀠fL n 8. 151' 􀀮􀀴􀀳􀂷􀀨􀁒􀁉􀁇􀁾􀀩 ............ ,.........: J?§Q.•;...............l............
..􀁾...............􀁾......,.......􀁾􀀢.......,.....j.......,.,....􀀬􀁾.•.•,...•.,....i.,.............l.............j ........,......􀁾􀀬.......,.....-l",............􀁾..............􀁾..............�
�...,...........􀁾..,............􀁾...,...........l..........., .. .i...............j..............,;.........".....t..............􀁾..........n ..􀁾.............. 􀁾􀀢􀀬􀀺 ..............􀁾..........
..... •••M9... ' ' ' i ! i , iii i ' i ! . , i i ...:􀁾􀀠 ·· .. ·. ..t ··· .... ······..it· ·· ....r·"· "!!"", .....'.... 􀁾.... ,. .P. .R...o :l. o..s.E...D -. ..P..R.. L􀁾..'.L..E..
..&.. --P--a:.c. ...........I!'.........,.I....!_ ......!, ... , .. ':'. , ..... "" ..􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀠 􀀮􀀬􀁾􀀭􀀭 .. ---"1:'-2v .. ,.. 1 􀁾􀀠 TYPE 􀁓􀁓􀁾􀁒􀀠tMOOI :0 : 3.0n 1. i 􀁾􀀠
f i D 􀁾􀀠 : 􀁾􀀠 . : : VI 􀁾􀀠 1 620 ...! .... · •••.;;·.....t .. • ..􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾....·i.·..·..····....·;.r· ....····..·..t.·:·....··..· .. E.: 􀁘􀁉􀁓􀁔􀁬􀁾..􀁾􀀮􀀻􀀠 ..􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷􀂷􀁾􀀮􀀺􀂷􀂷􀂷..•
••••....·.i .. ·....f..·..·....·..􀀻􀁴􀁾􀀻􀀻􀁾..􀁾􀁴􀁾􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁴􀂷􀂷􀀻􀁾􀁾􀂷..·􀁾􀀧......".;,.:...'..........􀀻􀀬􀀮􀁾........... ..􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀺􀂷􀀠 ; .,.,.",./"-RET􀀮􀁾􀁗􀁁􀁴􀁌􀀡􀀠
: ,j; : : : ':r i::'" tm.mu··r--t-·--·l,' .-4. 􀁾􀀠 􀀧􀀡􀁷􀁡􀁑􀀧􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀢􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀠 n ..... l=··;· ..􀀭􀀭􀀺􀁾􀁦􀀧􀁾􀀻􀁪􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀺􀁵􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁪..... 􀁾􀂷􀀧􀀺􀀽􀂷􀂷..T· ... · 􀀭􀁾􀀠
........... l. .... .......u), ..u··"r·=+..m ..... i...􀀺􀁾􀀧..􀁃􀀻􀂷􀀬􀁟􀁾... JIA .......+ L Gray ;LlKST l wi gf'Cy rhOle Si ; : J : : F I 􀁯􀁾􀀠SHN'T ; : i : I r : OR SHN!T ' ] ii
'''l--"j"""-r-i"-r"""+-"-:-"-"r-r 􀁦􀁾􀁦􀁴􀁴􀀭􀁩􀀢􀀢􀀡􀀭􀀭􀀧􀁴􀀻􀀧􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀢􀀭􀀺􀀢􀀺􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁛􀁩􀀧􀀻􀀧􀁴􀀢􀁲􀁾􀁴􀀢􀀢􀁲􀀢􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀫􀀢􀀧􀀭 f 1....· ..· f L ....···r...... +·.... 1. 􀀡􀁬􀂷􀁬􀂷􀁩􀁀􀁜􀁩􀁑􀁾
􀂷􀁯....t !··.... · ..t· ..t .....t ..··· ..·1·..· .... r··.·j....· :1 .....1·1······,....··..·_........ ·..···1"·· ..: 􀀡􀀢􀁾􀀭􀁴􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀢􀀭􀁦􀀭􀀫􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀭􀀢􀀢􀁔􀀭􀀢􀁩􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀫􀀢􀁴􀀭􀀫􀀢􀀭􀀢􀀫􀀭�
�􀀢􀁩􀀢􀀭􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀢􀁾􀀢􀀫􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁴􀀭􀀭􀀨􀁌􀀢􀀢􀀭􀁪􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀢􀁔􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀡􀀭􀁊􀁾􀀧􀀠 50>00 51+00 52 ..00 53+00 o 20 '0 60 BO SCALE IN FEET GENERAl NOTES: 1. DESIGNED IN 􀁁􀁃􀁃􀁾􀁄􀁁􀁎􀁃􀁅􀀠WITH
AASHTO '"STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOO' HIGHWAY SRIOCES" 17TH 􀁅􀁏􀁉􀁔􀁬􀁏􀁎􀁾􀀠2002. 􀁆􀁾􀀠HS20-44 lOADING. 2. All DIt.£NSICNS ARE EITHER HORIZONTPl. CR VERTiCAl AND t-tJST BE CORRECTED
FM GRADE. CROWN? 􀁁􀁎􀁏􀀯􀁾􀀠SUPERELEVATION• 3. ALL BENTS ARE RADIAl. muss NOTED OTHERWISE. \ FOR INTERIM REVIEW ONLY IIW CLIFF R. HAll •Pol.. 82211 URS CORPoRATION I)oto 􀁓􀁾􀀲􀀵􀁾􀁂􀀳􀀠
􀁾􀁏􀁔􀀠rOil ttHSTIIUCTlDM. RIDDING, tR P(RIHT 􀁐􀁵􀁾􀁐􀁏􀁓􀁅􀁓 ._ 􀁐􀀮􀁩􀁊􀁾􀀺􀂷􀁾􀁒􀁧􀀻􀀺􀁓􀀻􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀬􀀺􀁾􀁩􀁻􀁾􀁦􀁩􀁔􀁩􀀺􀀬􀁛􀀢􀀧􀁩􀁩􀀢􀁩􀀮􀀺􀁬􀀺􀁲􀀺􀀻􀀮􀀺􀀮:..:,"'=,:,,,IJ.􀁩.􀁅.􀀺..􀁩􀀢􀀧􀁩􀀻􀀺
􀀮􀁾􀀠 5URllfY()R BWlEVARiI TO NID[SON ROAD BRIDGE LAYOUT TOWN OF ADDISON. TEXAS n..", CtA1 􀁾􀀮􀁊􀀸􀁉􀁊􀀠 DAlE SGA,l[ >'\IDLeT N:l. Slfil MO. Ci<ed CN<:I< \lW 􀀱􀀱􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀤􀁾􀁉􀀱􀀩􀀠
􀁲􀁾􀀠40" 
.550 Iii : 321.0'J·, U-' ,AIOI UNIT '<107.00' ;'07.00' -,In.oo', , 207. D·' VERTICAL CURVE OATA 􀁾􀀠 .,.().. -? , .."'.Jj}\) .cO"t PI STA !>9t9B.OO n=S49.00· VC"'770.00' E= -5.01 K=146
VPC STA. 56+13.00 VPT STA. 63+&3.00 • U· lEAM UNIT . , . !j:. . 􀁾􀀧􀁓􀁔􀁒􀀠,MOO. ..·; .. •· ...... · .... ; .. ·.... • .. ·· .... ;· ...... ··•.... ., .... · .. · ...... h:0"" ,....................,
................ ; 􀁾􀀺􀀠 /-3.00 '. 0 /􀁾􀀠 ; \ 0 􀀢􀁾􀁬􀀧􀁬􀀠 , .............. ... ... '0' j : ! 55+00 56<00 57+00 56+00 670 􀀵􀀵􀁾􀀠 o i 20 40 60 80 SCALE IN J:'£H I FOR ,NTER, M REV,
EW ONLY !..... CLIFF R. HALL .p.(.82211 URS CORPORATION i)gt. 6-2'5-03 HOT I'M: eottSTIIUClloll, 􀁥􀀡􀁯􀁯􀁬􀁾􀀠 DR P€11I.11f PURPOSES . lOAD • I'IIASB I. . TO ADDISON fK)H) BRIDGE LAYOUT
TOWN OF ADDISON. TEXAS "5,"," I ,'. ". I ........ i 
I 􀁾􀀠 II " .. 􀁊􀀱􀀮􀁩􀀱􀀮􀁑􀁉􀁪􀁾􀀻􀀮􀁏􀁏􀁾􀀢􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁃􀁾􀀨􀁾􀀠U'BEAM IJN,' , IlU r.uu rvv,vv J : BAn 􀁾􀀠 ·.... ",+..,..·t""··"""T"·""""""i"''''''''''''+,' '''''''''·. ... : 59+00 ,
:..... , : 􀁾􀀠il : 􀁾􀀠 o w.cKllERRY I ." ••"". 0'. ",-M" , aVERAL LENGTH OF BRIDGE' ALONG P' • 1575.bo· iOVERALL LENGTH a SSTR 1M DOl RAIL' : . 170.00' STEEL ARCI' UNIT : 60+00 61+00
TYPE SSTRfMODI RAIL 􀁾􀀧􀀴􀀮􀀰􀀰􀂷􀀠 62+00 = U-BEAMUNIT =D'-114_00!, .6BO o I 20 40 SCAl E JN FEET VERTICAl. CURvE DATA 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁯􀁯􀁾􀀠 ..(). 􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀼􀁏􀀢􀀠 PI ST A 59098.00 EL"649.00·
VC-ll0.00' E--5.01 KII'I48 VPC STA. 56+13.00 vPT STA. 631'83.00 60 ..U ..._ lOAD • PIIAI8 III BO, TO ADDISON ROAD BRIDGE LAYOUT SHEET J '" TOWN OF ADDISON. TEXAS iJ,,,,,OJ I ,--". I
HORIZONTAL CURVE OATA CURVE ARAP-3 PI STA 63+05.13 6.>=01-01'41" L T D=01·06'45" 1=44.86' L=89.12' ReSaDa.aO· PC SlA 62+60.21 PT STA 63+49.99 
,.. "'., 􀀢􀁾􀀬􀀭􀀮􀀠 I ! I I l I 6S0 ... SENT No. '3 STA I .: 64+00 1 _..J..1__ J ' 'J • " " , • • • • I" 'I I I 1 1 ... 􀁾􀀧􀀠 IVERALL L 'NGTH rK iMIDoE A CNG I'GL "5T5.00· : : i HOOIZCNT....
CURVE DATA CURVE /Ifl./tIh'j PISTA 63+05.13 A1101 6 01'41" l T O·O,·OS·'S'" T=44.86' L"'B9.7Z' R-SOOO.OO· pe STA 􀁡􀁬􀁾􀀰􀀮􀀲􀀷􀀠 PT STII 63+49.99 􀁈􀁏􀁒􀁉􀁚􀁏􀁎􀁔􀁾􀀠CURvE DATA CURVE
ARAP-4 PI S1 A 12+13.18 A=22-37'Z5" LT D=OZ'''!',,'" 1=520.09' l ..1026.64· R-2600.00· PC STA 66+93..09 PT srA 11+19.1:5 ; o VERTICAL CIIlVE DATA 􀁃􀀧􀀾􀁓􀀾􀀢􀁾􀁏􀀢􀀠 􀁾􀁐􀁉􀁓􀁔􀁁􀀠􀀵􀀹􀁾􀁾􀀠
EtO<;;49.00· E" -5.01 00148 \'PC STA. 56.'3.00 \/PT ST.. 63<63.00 BRO 20 40 60 ao SCALE IN F'EEf I,' ........ + ........ +··1 : .............+...........j.... ,......... +.,.,....."..,..
,..........+...........+..........,I............i,......·...·., .....p.+:,..;...,=·. }.. ·,....o·+....'...·.....' ..._.·T..v.p...􀀬.􀀧􀁪􀁬􀁳􀁾..R..·.'.M..O..O i...............+."·....
, ........ j....·I"....·I·........,, ".,;,...............1:.... j ........:,'" ......,· ....t....··,".......... .. 6'0 i 5' Il • \ Ii, i B40 FOR INTERIM REVIEW ONLY .. CLiff R. HAll
.p.£." 82211 I' URS CORPORAT I ON ! MOl rDR 􀁾􀁔􀁬􀁗􀁃􀁬􀁉􀁏􀁋􀀮􀀠81001HG, DI'l pt,uIJ l'\,Itl>4S($ , I 􀀬􀁾􀀠􀀮􀁾􀀢􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀠 /i woy , ., "," _. ". .. • TO puu",v,; RQNJ (, 􀁾􀀠 '!i)
, 􀁾􀀬􀀠 􀁇􀁾 i............··+· ·..............f ..":;...,..+ ..........·..,,··..·,.., 􀀮􀁾􀀠.............,,..;....... ,,..... .,..............'i'='-......... +,,............,..i....·....·......i,·..
·..·....·1.............. 􀁾 .........􀀢􀀮􀁌􀁾.."........ ..... ""............;,............... ,·i··,·....·....·;·......·...... ·i.........,."..·;·............,,,i..............+··....,,....·,+......
....,..·;........,......􀁾..........,...; BRIDGE LAYOUT S>EET'tF • TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS 55+00 66<00 61+00 ' .... ""'I 
t i I 􀁾􀀠 PEO, RAL 1'-0" SHtOR, ARAPAHO ROft!) ... NOMINAl. fACE or RAil TYPE SSlR (MX)) RAil ... 54" U-BEAM HVPl """-7'-()"!il DRILLED SHAFT TYPICAL SECTION (SPANS 1-8 8. 10-141 <D
REVERSE DIRECTION IN SUPERELEVATI(J< SIDEWAlK VARIES 􀀨􀀳􀀲􀀧􀁾􀀶􀀢􀀠MAXl I 26'-{)" 􀁾􀁖,ISTTYEPEIL TUBE ARCH ER 􀁦􀁬􀁏􀁐􀁅􀁾􀀠__ 6" 8'.0" r roO" """" fAAAPAiiO ROAD OVERALL WIDTH VARIES
􀀨􀀵􀀹􀀧􀀭􀀶􀁾􀀠MAXl , ,I I VARIES 􀀨􀁚􀁬􀀧􀁾􀁏􀀢􀀠 MAX) 􀀲􀀶􀀧􀁾􀁄􀀢􀀠 􀁾􀀠 "-0" SlI.OR.1'-\1" I SHLOO, 2' lAf£S @􀀱􀀱􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀠" 22'.-0" 2' IN£S 90 11'.-{)lit 2Z'-o" roO" " '-::: 􀁉􀀧􀁜􀀮􀁾􀀠
"\ 􀁾􀀠 1'-." WIDE o.APHRAGII 12'4;' ClC , N(HIW. fAC£ 􀁃􀀧􀁅􀁒􀁁􀁌􀁓􀁾 V 􀁾􀀧􀁉􀁗􀀮􀀠f />CE TYPE SSTR or RAIL 1/000. RAn. j I ... ... /PGl .. ITYI".. 􀁾􀀠 Z,08? z.os? I Ir "\ Ir If
􀁾􀀠􀁾54" u-8EAM nYPI TYPICAl SECTION (SPAN 9) NO. OA1( FOR INTERIM REVIEW ONLY Iv CUFF R. HALL .!".toB2211 ullS CORPORATION D'c1. 6-25:03 Nal rDII; t:OIt$TRlCnON. lIOCtIIlG;. 0/1: 􀁾􀁉􀁬􀀠
""""''' R[VISiOO URS CIti'fSTOIIE UJlrAt 3brO LIU FIE£R.'1, SUlfl IlO() O....t..a.s. tx 􀁊􀀬􀀬􀀢􀁾􀀠 _.1.110 _ • PIf_ Ill-TYPICAL SECTIONS TOWN OF ADDISON. TEXAS Chad 0>00. CAlf jJ.',U-Dl
1 M • 􀁾􀁏􀀧􀀠 I 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 i0"" 􀁾􀁾􀁡 SiroIS! 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀠
DATE SUBMITTED: September 3,2002 FOR COUNCIL MEETING: September 10, 2002 Council Agenda Item SUMMARY: This item is for the approval of a Professional Services Agreement for the design
ofthe Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Budgeted Amount: $10.00 Million Cost: $550,965.00 (Engineering) Source ofFunds: Funds are available from the FY 2002 General
Obligation Bond Program. BACKGROUND: The third phase ofthe proposed Arapaho Road extension project extends from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Road. Construction ofthis section of Arapaho
Road will complete an east-west minor arterial roadway that is necessary to relieve traffic congestion on Belt Line Road. It is anticipated that the new street will initially absorb
approximately 11,000 vehicles per day, with a maximum future count of25,000 vehicles per day. A proposed bridge over Midway Road is also proposed as an integral component ofthe roadway
section in the third phase. The firm ofURS Corporation was selected by the Town's Bridge Selection Committee to perform the design ofthis bridge. Attached is a Professional Services
Agreement, in the amount not to elCCeed $550,965.00, for design services related to the construction of the proposed Midway Road Bridge. This agreement provides for coordination ofthe
bridge design by URS Corporation with the design ofthe roadway by HNTB Corporation. The anticipated construction cost ofthe bridge is approximately $4,600,000. The proposed scope ofwork
that this firm will provide is as follows: a. Bridge Design, including Civil & Electrical b. Architectural Design c. Lighting Design d. Noise Study, including Modeling & Analyses e.
Project Management The design ofthe proposed bridge by URS Corporation shall be performed concurrently with the design efforts on the roadway by HNTB Corporation. 
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ("Agreement") This Agreement between Town of Addison ,C'Clienf') and URS Corporation ('URS'), a Nevada corporation; Grayslone Centre. 3010 LBJ Freeway.
Suite 1300 75234; 972.406.6950 ("URS"), is effective as of September 11. 2002 . The parties agree as follows: It is the expressed intent of the parties that this Agreement shall be made
available to the subsidiaries and affiliated companies of URS. For the purposes of this Agreement, as it applies to each Wor!< Order, the term 'URS" shall mean either, URS Corporation,
or the affiliated company identified in the Work Order. The applicable Wor!< Order shall clearly identify the legal name of the affiliate or subsidiary accepting the Wor!< Order. ARTICLE
I • Work Orders. The Scope of Services ('Services"), the Time Schedule and the Charges are to be set forth in a written Work Order to this Agreement. The terms and conditions of this
Agreement shall apply to each Work Order, except to the extent expressly modified by the Wor!< Order. Where charges are 'not to exceed" a specified sum, URS shall notify Client before
such sum is exceeded and shall not continue to provide the Services beyond such sum unless Client authorizes an increase in the sum. If a "not to exceed" sum is broken down into budgets
for specific tssks, the task budgat may be exceeded without Client authorization as long as the total sum is not exceeded. Changes in conditions, including, without limitation, changes
in laws or regulations occurring after the budget is established or other circumstances beyond URS control shall be a basis for equitable adjustments in the budget and schedule. ARTICLE
II • Payment. Unless otherwise stated in an Work Order, payment shall be on a time and materials basis under the Schedule of Fees and Charges in effect when the Services are performed.
Client shall pay undisputed portions of each progress invoice within thirly (30) days of the date of the invoice. If payment is not maintained on a thirly (30) day current basis, URS
may suspend further performance until payments are current. Client shall notify URS of any disputed amount within fifteen (15) days from date of the invoice, give reasons for the objection,
and promptly pay the undisputed amount. Client shall pay an additional charge of one and one-half percent (1 y,%) per month or the maximum percentage allowed by law, whichever is the
lesser, for any past due amount In the event of a legal action for invoice amounts not paid, attorneys' fees, court costs, and other related expenses shall be paid to the prevailing
party. ARTICLE III -Professional Responsibility. URS is obligated to comply with applicable standards of professional care in the performance of the Services. Client recognizes that
opinions relating to enVironmental, geologiC, and geotechnical conditions are based on limited data and that actual conditions may vary from those encountered at the times and locations
where the data are obtained, despite the use of due professional care. ARTICLE IV -Responsibility for Others. URS shall be responsible to Client for URS Services and the services of
URS subcontractors. URS shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of other parties engaged by Client nor for their construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures,
or their health and safety precautions and programs. ARTICLE V -Risk Allocation. The liability of URS, its employees, agents and subcontractors (referred to collectively in this Article
as "URS"), for Client's claims of loss, injury, death, damage, or expense, including, without limitation, Client's claims of contribution and indemnification, express or implied, with
respect to third party claims relating to services rendered or obligations imposed under this Agreement, including all Work Orders, shall not exceed in the aggregate: PSA-1.DOC 19-Mar-02
-I 
(1) The total sum of $250,000 for claims arising out of professional negligence, including errors, omissions, or other professional acts, and including unintentional breach of contract;
and any actual or potential environmental pollution or contamination, including, without limitation, any actual or threatened release of toxic, irritant, pollutant, or waste gases, liquids,
or solid materials, or failure to detect or properly evaluate the presence of such substances, except to the extent such release, threatened release, or failure to detect or evaluate
is caused by the Willful misconduct of URS; or (2) The total sum of $1,000,000 for claims arising out of negligence, breach of contract, or other causes for which URS has any legal liability,
other than as limited by (1) above. ARTICLE VI • Insurance. URS agrees to maintain during the performance of the Servicas: (1) stetutory Workers' Compensation coverage; (2) Employer's
Liability; (3) General Liability; and (4) Automobile Liability insurance coverage each in the sum of $1,000,000. ARTICLE VII • Consequential Damages. Neither Party shall be liable to
the other for consequential damages, including, without limitation, loss of use or loss of profits, incurred by one another or their subsidiaries or successors, regardless of whether
such damages are caused by breach of contract, willful misconduct, negligent act or omission, or other wrongful act of either of them. ARTICLE VIII· Client Responsibility, Client shall:
(1) provide URS, in writing, all information relating to Client's requirements for the project; (2) 'correctly identify to URS, the location of subsurface structures, such as pipes,
tanks, cables and utilities; (3) notify URS of any potential hazardous substancas or other health and safety hazard or condition known to Client existing on or near the project site;
(4) give URS prompt written notice of any suspected deficiency in the Services; and (5) with reasonable promptness, provide required approvals and decisions. In the event that URS is
requested by Client or is required by subpoena to produce documents or give testimony in any action or proceeding to which Client is a party and URS is not a party, Client shall pay
URS for any time and expenses required in connection therewith, including reasonable attomey's fees. Client shall reimburse URS for all taxes, duties and levies such as Sales, Use, Value
Added Taxes, Deemed Profits Taxes, and other similar taxes which are added to or deductad from the value of URS Services. For the purpose of this Article such taxes shall not include
taxes imposed on URS net income, and employer or employee payroll taxes levied by any United States taxing authority, or the taxing authorities of the countries or any agency or subdivision
thereof in which URS subsidiaries, affiliates, or divisions are permanenlly domiciled. It is agreed and understood that these net income, employer or employee payroll taxes are included
in the unit pricas or lump sum to be paid URS under the respective Work Order. ARTICLE IX -Force Maleure. Maleure. An event of 'Force Majeure" occurs when an event beyond the control
of the Party claiming Force Majeure prevents such Party from fulfilling its obligations. An event of Force Majeure includes, without limitation, acts of God (including floods, hurricanes
and other adverse weather), war, riot. civil disorder, acts of terrorism, disease, epidemic, strikes and labor disputes, actions or inactions of govemment or other authorities, law enforcement
actions, curfews, closure of transportation systems or other unusual travel difficulties, or inability to provide a safe working environment for employees. In the event of Force Majeure,
the obligations of URS to perform the Services shall be suspended for the duration of the event of Force Majeure. In such event, URS shall be equitably compensated for time expended
and expenses incurred during the event of Force Majeure and the schedule shall be extended by a like number of days as the event of Force Majeure. If Services are suspended for thirty
(30) days or or more, URS may, in its sole discretion, upon 5 days prior written notice, terminate this Agreement or the affected Work Order, or both. In the case of such termination,
in addition to the compensation and time extension set forth above, URS shall be compensated for all reasonable termination expenses. ARTICLE X • Right of Entry. Client grants to URS,
and, if the project site is not owned by Client, wamants that permission has been granted for, a right of entry from time to time by URS. its employees, agents and subcontractors, upon
the project site for the purpose of providing the Services. Client recognizes that the use of investigative equipment and practices may unavoidably alter the existing site conditions
and affect the environment in the area being studied, despite the use of reasonable care. PSA-l.DOC l1l-Mar-Q2 ·2· 
ARTICLE XI -Documents. Provided that URS has been paid for the Services, Client shall have the right to use the documents, maps, photographs, drawings and specifications resulting from
URS efforts on the project Reuse of any such matertals by Client on any extension of this project or any other project without the written authorization of URS shall be at Client·s sole
risK URS shall have the right to retain copies of all such materials. URS retains the right of ownership with respect to any patentable concepts or copyrightable materials arising from
its Services. ARTICLE XII -Termination. Client may terminate all or any portion of the Services for convenience. at its option. by sending a written Notice to UR8. Either party can terminate
this Agreement or a Work Order for cause if the other commits a material. uncured breach of this Agreement or becomes insolvent Termination for cause shall be effective twenty (20) days
after receipt of a Notice of Termination, unless a later date is specified in the Notice. Notice. The Notice of Termination for cause shall contain specific reasons for termination and
both parties shall cooperate in good faith to cure the causes for termination stated in the Notice. Termination shall not be effective if reasonable action to cure the breach has been
taken before the effective date of the termination. Client shall pay URS upon invoice for Services performed and charges incurred prior to termination, plus reasonable termination charges.
In the event of termination for cause, the parties shall have their remedies at law as to anyother rights and obligations between them, subject to the other temns and conditions of this Agreement. ARTICLE XIII -No Third Party Rights. This Agreement shall not create any rights
or benefits to parties other than Client and URS. No third party shall have the right to rely on URS opinions rendered in connection with the Services without the written consent of
URS and the third party's agreement to be bound to the same conditions and limitations as Client. ARTICLE XIV -Assignments. Neither party to this Agreement shall assign its duties and
obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. ARTICLE XV -Hazardous Substances. All nonhazardous samples and by-products from sampling processes in connection
with the Services shall be disposed of by URS in accordance with applicable law; provided, however, that any and all such materials, including wastes, that cannot be introduced back
into the environment under existing law without additional treatment, and all hazardous wastes. radioactive wastes, or hazardous substances ("Hazardous Substances") related to the Services,
shall be packaged in accordance with the applicable law by URS and turned over to Client for appropriate disposal. URS shall not arrange or otherwise dispose of Hazardous Substances
under this Agreement. URS. at Client's request, may assist Client in identifying appropriate alternatives for off-site treatment, storage or disposal of the Hazardous Substances, but
URS shall not make any independent determination relating to the selection of a treatment. storage, or disposal facility nor subcontract such activities through transporters or others.
Client shall sign all necessary manifests for the disposal of Hazardous Substances. If Client requires: (1) URS agents or employees to sign such manifests; or (2) URS to hire. for Client.
the Hazardous Substances transportation, treatment, or disposel contractor, then for these two purposes, URS shall be considered to act as Clienfs agent so that URS will not be considered
to be a generator. transporter. or disposer of such substances or considered to be the arranger for disposal of Hazardous Substances, and Client shall indemnify URS against any claim
or loss resulting from such Signing. ARTICLE XVI -Venue. In the event of any dispute between the parties to this Agreement. the venue for the dispute resolution shall be any state or
federal court in the United States having jurisdiction over the parties. The foregoing notwithstanding, notwithstanding, if the project is located outside the United States, the laws
of the State of Califomia shall govern and in such event, any dispute under the Agreement not resolved amicably shall be resolved under the binding rules of the American Arbitration
Association. ARTICLE XVII -Integrated Writing and Enforceability, This Agreement constitutes the final and complete repository of the agreements between Client and URS relating to the
Services and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous communications. representations. or agreements, whether oral or written. Modifications of this Agreement shall not be binding unless
made in writing and signed by an Authorized Representative of each party. The provisions of this Agreement shall be enforced to the fullest extent PSA-l.00C 19-M.r-02 -3
permitted by law. If any provision of this Agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable, the provision shall be construed and applied in a way that comes as close as possible to
expressing the intention of the parties with regard to the provisions and that saves the validitY and enforceability of the provision. THE PARTIES ACKNOWlEDGE that there has been an
opportunity to negotiate the terms and conditions of this Agreement and agree to be bound accordingly. CUENT SignalUre SignalUr. Ron Whitehead I City Manager Emily Taylor, P.E.I Vice
President Typed NameITltle Typed NameITlIle Date of Signature Date of SignalUre PSA-1.DOC 19-Mar·02 -4
LUIMP SUM WORK ORDER NO. ____-'0"'D.1.1____ In accordance with the Agreement for Professional Services between Town of Addison ('"Cllenf'). and _ URS Corporation! CURS"), a Nevllda corporation.
dated September 11, 2002 • this Work Order describei the Services, Schedule. and Payment Conditions for URS Services on the Project known as: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD 􀁄􀁾􀁓􀁉􀁇􀁎􀀠DEVELOPM
ENT & CONTRACT POCUMENTS Client Authorized Representative: Address: Pub"c Works Department. P,O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Telephone NO': __􀀭􀀲􀀮􀀹􀀷􀁵􀀲􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀬􀀴􀁾􀀵􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀰􀀽􀀬􀀲􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀸􀀷�
�􀀮􀁊􀀱􀀬􀀭􀀭_______________ URB Authorized Representative: Emily Taylor P.E. Address: Graystone Centre, 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas, TX 75234 Telephone No.; __􀀭􀀬􀀬􀀹􀀷􀁾􀀲􀀽􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀴􀀺􀀡􀀡�
�􀀶􀁾􀀬􀀶􀀡􀀻􀀡􀀹􀀾􀀡􀀡􀀵􀀰􀁌􀀭_______________ SERVICES. The Services shall be described in Atlachment ..JA,,--_ to this WOrk Order, SCHEDULE, The Estimated Schedule shall be set forth
in Attachment -'L-to this Work Order, Because of the uncertainties Inherent in the Selllices. Schedules are estimated and are subject to revision unless otherwise specifically described
herein. PAYMENT. The SelVices described in Attachment A wHi be performed for a "lUmp sum" amount 01 $550,965,00, A breakdown of this "lump sum" cost is included in Attachment..Q....
URS charges shall be on a percent complete basis and payment shall be made monthly based upon statements submilte<:l to the Client for the work pem:.rmed, TERMS AND CONDITIONS. The terms
and conditiolls of the Agreement referenced above shaU apply to this Work Order. except as expressly modified herein, ACCEPTANCE of the terms 01 this Work Order is acknowledged by the
following Signatures 01 the Authori%ed Representatives, CLIENT S1gnature Slgnatu", Ron WhltehRad I City Manager emily Taylor, P.E.I Vice President 1'ypod 􀁎􀀮􀁭􀁥􀁉􀁔􀁾􀀱􀁥􀀠 Dale of
Signature PSA-1.000 19-1.10,·02 . I 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR THE ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE URS will provide the engineering,
architectural, lighting design and noise study services including plans, specifications and estimates as it relates to Arapaho Road from approximate Station 40+67 to approximate Station
70+28 and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of an elevated four-lane roadway with sidewalk located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW)
on a tangent alignment. URS shall prepare plans, details and compute quantities for a steel arch bridge, the "blue-bridge concept", over Midway Road, with prestressed concrete beam approaches.
Design and details will include all bridge details including any soundwalls located on the bridge. URS will also provide all bridge drainage details to accommodate the drainage in accordance
with the Town's Consultant's drainage requirements. URS will also prepare plans, details and compute quantities for any lighting & illumination, and traffic control for the areas under
and immediately adjacent to the bridge and retained wall portion of Arapaho Road with the exception of those portions to be prepared by the Town of Addison's Consultant. URS will also
prepare architectural details for the bridge, the mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls and the sound walls. Additionally, URS will prepare a noise study including ambient
noise measurements, modeling and noise analyses. URS will prepare and submit technical memorandums, preliminary plans and preliminary construction cost estimates at the end of the Design
Development phase for the Town's review. After resolution of one set of comments, URS will prepare all final detail plans, specifications, and estimates as previously described, to be
included into one fmal construction package prepared by the Town's Consultant. URS will submit four sets of plans for review to the Town for 65% review and 95% review and will incorporate
the Town's comments (one set per submittal) in the next submittals. URS will also provide signed and sealed mylar plans, electronic copies ofdrawing files, and specifications related
to the bridge structure at the 100% fmal submittal. URS will coordinate with the Town of Addison and/or the Town's Consultant for all interface design issues as well as coordinate the
format and consolidation of construction plans, specification and estimate into one final construction package. URS will coordinate with the Town and/or the Town's Consultant for revising
the horizontal alignment and vertical profile ofArapaho Road to accommodate the proposed bridge structure. URS will coordinate with the Town and/or the Town's Consultant for the revised
alignment ofthe proposed box-culvert under Arapaho Road as well as bridge drainage and bridge drain tie-ins. URS will coordinate with the Town andlor the Town's Consultant for all geotechnical
information required for the foundation design for the bridge and retaining retaining walls. The Town of Addison will provide to URS all available Arapaho Road geometries, including
but not limited to electronic files for horizontal alignment, vertical profile, typical sections, topography survey, field survey, and utility information. The Town will also provide
boring Jogs, soil parameters and foundation design recommendations (allowable bearing capacities, lateral load analysis, etc.) required for the bridge foundation designs. The Town ofAddison
will provide to URS a field location survey of the existing 60-in. diameter water main, locating the water main precisely, both vertically and horizontally, along the project limits
and specifically in the vicinity of the arch-bridge's main foundations. Additionally the Town will provide any applicable noise regnlations or ordinance 
infonnation, obtain right of ently, and provide all traffic data including but not limited to, peak hourly volumes, average daily traffic, percentages of trucks, and design and posted
speeds that may be required for the noise srudy. The Town will provide all landscape ordinances and guidelines as well as provide a copy of the Town's Consultant's schematic landscape
masterpian and the streetscape design development package. All ROW documentation and plans, Arapaho Road geometries and roadway design, drainage, parking lot layout and design, retaining
wall layout and design, survey, geotechnical engineering, design and details for soundwalls on retaining walls or at grade, landscaping, hardscaping and irrigation for landscaping, permitting,
and construction administration, inspection and record drawings are outside the scope of this agreement and will be performed by others. 
Itemized Scope ofServices Provided by DRS for the Arapaho Road Bridge TASK I -ENGINEERING A. Civil Site Works 1. Final Civil Design & PS&E (65%, 95%, 1000/0 submittal) • Midway Road
Traffic Control Plan • Coordinate Relocation of Overhead Utilities (Along Midway Road) • Retaining Wall Architectural Details • Soundwall Architectural Details • QAlQC • Cost Estimate
• Special Provisions & Specifications • Coordination with Town's Consultants B. Bridges l. Preliminary Bridge Design (-30% submittal) • Develop Design Criteria • Preliminary Bridge Layout
(Finalize Bridge Location) • Preliminary Typical Section • Refme Arch Shape • Size Thrust Block & Refine Shape • Size Foundation • Size Diaphragms • Size Traffic Railing Members • Develop
Soundwall • Coordinate Culvert Layout • Quantities and Cost Estimate • QAlQC 2. Final Bridge Design, & PS&E (65%, 95%, 100% submittals) • Final Bridge Layout • Final Typical Section
• General Notes • Quantities and Bearing Seats • Foundation Layout • Drilled Shaft Details • Abutment Plan & Elevation • Abutment Details • Bent Plan & Elevation • Bent Details • Thrust
Block Plan & Elevation • Thrust Block Details • Prestressed Concrete Beam Unit -Deck Plan • Prestressed Concrete Beam Unit -Deck Sections • Bridge Soundwall Details • Miscellaneous Superstructure
Details (drains, lighting) • Diaphragm Details • Closure Pour Details • Suspension Hanger Details • Steel Arch Design and Details • Steel Arch Camber Details • Bearing Details • Drainage
Details • Railing Details • Architectural Details 
o Erection Sequencing o Prestressed Beam Tables o Compile, Verify & Modify TxDOT Standard Drawings o QAlQC o Coordination with Town's Consultants o Bridge Total Quantities & Cost Estimate
o Bridge Special Provisions & Specifications C. Electrical Engineering I. Design Development o Prepare a preliminary cost estimate 2. Final Electrical Design & PS&E (65%,95%,100% submittals)
o Develop and fmalize a load study for each electrical service source. o Prepare Lighting Calculations for under-deck lighting above the parking lot. • Illumination Layout (2961', 1200'/sht
+ I sheet under the bridge) o Electric Service I Pole Summary o Conduit Runs I Contents Summary o Insert Lighting Consultant Special Details o Insert Latest Town or TxDOT Standerds o
Quantity Summary o Develop Final Cost Estimate (Using Estimator) o QA ON 95% PLANS • Update Drawings per City Review TASK II-ARCHITECTURAL A. Design Development I. Architectural Studies
& Details o Develop one rail option addressing the issues ofbikerlbiker separation from the vehicular traffic and the architectural options to realize the proposed triangular pattern
in the rail. o Coordinate with the engineeriog team to refme the curvature and size of the steel. Produce drawings representing a viable option o Develop option for the fmal material
and form ofthe thrust block. Provide CADD drawings ofpreferred scheme. o Develop a panel scheme for precast concrete retaining walls at approaches. o Develop center pier support shape.
• Develop bridge mounted soundwalls • Atteud Team Meetings and Conference Calls to coordinate the architectoral aspects of the design with structural and lighting Consultants. B. Final
Design I. Coordination 2. Review 3. Specifications TASK III -LIGHTING DESIGN A. Design Development (includes two meetings in Addison) I . Develop one alternative for lighting ofelevated
roadway. 2. Develop mounting concepts for bridge structure lighting. 3. Develop one alternative for lighting ofoutboard railings. 4. Develop one alternative for lighting of underside
ofbridge, roadway under bridge and any adjacent parking areas under bridge. B. Final Design (includes one meeting in Addison) 1. Final details offixtures and mounting for bridge structnre
illumination. 2. Final details offlxtures and mounting for elevated roadway lighting. 3. Final details ofIIXtures and mounting for outboard railing illumination. : .. 􀁾􀀠'". 
4. Final details offixtures and mounting for lighting ofunderside ofbridge, roadway under bridge and any adjacent parking areas WIder bridge. 5. Provide control concept diagrams and
other information suitable for use by electrical engineer describing control intent. TASK IV -NOISE STUDY A. Noise Measurements I. Review existing noise ordinance and eriteria documents
2. Coordinate with the Town ofAddison to discuss noise issues and objectives 3. Perfooo noise measurement survey: Take initial noise readings, both long tenn (24 bours or longer) and
short teoo (less than one bour) noise readings, at adjacent properties. 4. Observe adjacent building construction type to aid in estimating the potential noise effects inside the buildings
B. Noise Modeling and Analyses I. Create a noise model to predict future noise emissions from the proposed roadway and bridge 2. Evaluate noise levels at areas ofconcern for compliance
with applicable noise regulations and standards 3. Develop a range ofsound wall beights and noise noise levels where noise impacts require mitigation. 4. Prepare report and respond to
one round ofcomments. TASK V -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices 1. Prepare Project Management Plan 2. Prepare Progress Reports 3. Prepare Invoices and Billings B. Coordination
I. Coordinate/Administer the Project 2. Manage Subconsultants 3. Implement Quality Assurance/Quality Contrul Program 4. Prepare for and Attend Town Councilor other Town Meetings (I total)
5. Prepare for and run internal project coordination meetings (8 total) 6. Prepare for and attend project meetings with Addison Public Works (3 total) 
DRS Corporation Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Design Development and PS&E ATTACHMENT B Estimated Schedule TASK DESCRIPTION Notlc& to ProCiled Design Development Final Concept's
(-30% Plans) Addison Review Fjnat Design Intermediate Design Submittal (60% Plans) Addison Review Final Design & Construction Documente Final DeSign Submittal (95% Plans) Addison Review
Incorporate Comments Signed and Sealed PS&E (100%) August September October 2 002 200 2 2 0 0 2 • November December January 2 002 2 002 2 0 0 2 • February 2 002 2 March April May June
July 003 200 3 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 3 􀁾􀀠
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE ATTACHMENT C LUMP SUM FEE BREAKDOWN URS CORPORATION TASK I -ENGINEERING A. Civil Site Works B. Bridges C. Electrical
Engineering TASK" -ARCHITECTURAL (Corgan) A. Design Development B. Final Design TASK III -LIGHTING DESIGN (Brandston) A. Design Development B. Final Design TASK IV -NOISE STUDY A. Noise
Measurements B. Noise Modeling and Analyses TASK V -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices B. Coordination Printing &Copying Expenses Total Cost $ 434,400.00 $ 19,370.00 $ 384,680.00
$ 30,350.00 $ 39,220.00 $ 33,920,00 $ 5,300,00 $ 39,580.00 $ 20,620.00 $ 18,960,00 $ 14,045.00 $ 5,540,00 $ 8,505.00 $ 20,920.00 $ 8,080,00 $ 12,840.00 $ 2800.00 GRAND TOTAL $ 550,965.00

580 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀂭 􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭 ROw 􀁲􀀺􀀽􀀽.􀁾 I􀀠 '---·_·l I . I I 􀁾􀀭􀀭 s[}+oo \ 2 S10RY 8RICK <MOO, 51+00 52''+00 TYPE SSTRtMO()}
RAIL 53+00 o--20. .4-0 -60, -80 SCALE IN FEET GENERAl NOTES: 1. OESfGNl:O IN ACCORDANCE WfTH MSHTO ''STANDARO SPECIFICATIONS fCR HIGHWAY BRIDGES" 17TH EOliION-2002. FOR 􀁈􀁓􀁚􀁏􀁾􀀴
4 LOADING. 2. ALL 􀁏􀁉􀁾􀁎􀁓􀁉􀁏􀁎􀁓􀀠ARE EITHER HORIZONiAL OR VERTICAL AND MJsr BE CORRECTED F"OO GRADE. CROWN, AND/OR SUPERELEVATIQN. 3. "'-l BENTS IRE RADiAl UNlESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
FOR INTERIM REVIEW ONLY !􀁥􀁶􀁾􀁲􀁆􀁆􀀠R. HALL ,p.r,-82211 URS CORPORA. T! ON ()pt. 12-12-@3 NOT 1"0lIl COIIsmut'tH'lN. iillltHIIG. OJ< I'£rull T PURPOSES BRIDGE LAYOUT : 􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀠 I1;
if I 
! aOOING 8-22 STA. 55+20 􀀲􀀰􀀮􀁯􀀰􀂷􀁒􀁔􀁾􀀠 ''''0'''' GRASS • 55..00 -----------.....,----_..__.__. 2 STORY CO\lCRET£ 57+00 VERTICAL CURVE OAT A ,()'s, 􀀢􀀼􀁾 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁏􀀠 Ox PI STA
59-t9a.OQ 􀁅􀁬􀁾􀀢􀀮􀁏􀁏􀀧􀀠 vc.. no.oo· E= --5.01 K"'148 ¥PC ST A.. 56+13.00 VPT STA 63+63.00 58+00 o-2-0 '0-6-0 ao SCALE IN fEET FOR INTERIM REVIEW ONLY :au CUFF R. HALL .P, L. 82211
URS CORPORATION 0(11. 12-12-03 iKlT FOR CQHS1Ru::lIOM, IUOOI"!:, OR P£A\I;\T """''' BRIDCE LAYOUT 
-----a 20 40 .0 60 SCAlE IN FEET VERTICAl CURVE GATA 􀀭􀀬􀁾􀀠 􀀧􀀼􀀡􀁾 􀀮􀀢􀀡􀁉􀀬􀀬􀁜􀁉􀁾􀀠 O"r PI ST" 590ge.00 £t.-6<19.DO· vc-no.oo· E--5,01 K-148 VPC STA. 56.13..00 VPT STA. 63+83.00
FOR INTERIM REVIEW ONLY au CUFF R. HALL .P.£.." 82211 URS CORPORATION Oo'hl 􀀱􀀲􀁾􀀱􀀲􀀭􀀰􀀳􀀠 MOT rot COHSTAutfl(lt(, 8!OOIIfG. 011' P£Iti.IIT ......." 60+UO TYPE SSTmfoO)I RAll 􀁾􀁉􀀠62..00
PISTA 63.05.13 A:CI1·01'41" l T l)..()t-08"4S" 1=44.86' l=69.7Z' R=5000.00' PC STA 62'60.27 PI S T A 6:S+<49.99 BRIDGE LAYOUT 
f Nl'i''N1O ROAD OVER"-l WIOTK VNlIES '59'-6" MAXI VIRIES t3l'-6" MAXI VARIES (21'-0" MAiO i I C { Nli'PNiO ROAD '.•.". • • i 6" .. I" I Zl 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭 rrvp) 2,'-()" -.--HANGER ROPE 8'-0"
r I'-ll' I 2,'-0" 􀁾􀀭 .---HANGER "-0" <MAX) 􀁓􀁋􀁬􀁏􀁒􀀬􀁾 )' (J" SHLaR, 2 LANES @1" -0" " 22'-0" 2 IN£S @11'-0" .. 22'-0" f.. NOMINAl FACE I 􀀨􀁊􀀧􀁒􀁁􀁉􀁌􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 SIDEWAll( 􀁖􀁃􀁾􀀼􀁓􀁉􀁒􀁁􀁉􀁌􀀠
C4,SI RAIL. 􀁾􀀠 .. 2,06% .. IjPCl • ;,. 􀀿􀀻􀀺􀀨􀀩􀁾􀀠 .. I • "\ Ir "\ i( '1 I( '\ If IJ ... 􀁾􀁉􀀠 􀁾􀀠 "' 9' -9t4" 􀁾􀀱􀀢􀀠 8' -0' 4' -77' -9f' 4' -78' -0" 4'-7" 7' "n" 12' -0" I
12' "7" I 12' -7" I 12' -7" i 10' "0" I ROPE PEO, RAIL 􀁾􀀠 rI' -0" I 1, 0"" SHLOR. 52'-6' OVERALL WIDTH SHLDR, 1'-0' '2 LANE.S «1 11'-0'::: 22'-0' 2 LAN£S II )'-0":::; 22'-0' 1'-0'
_"lOt f M:£ <T RAIL /:NN..fACE , 􀀺􀀺􀁾 "1'-0· SW v;I.. • 'jPGL .. " .. 􀁾􀀠 􀀢􀀧'􀁾" 􀀠􀁾 Fi S'-H" 4' -78' -0" r l ir "\ If "\ 􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀠 8' -0' 4' -7" 7' -st" 4' -r8' -04' -74' -Sf"
12' -712' -712' -7" S' -9' TYPICAL SECTION (SPAN 9) TYPICAL SECTION (SPANS 1-6 8. 10-14) i FOR INTER lM REV lEW ONLY i :"" CLIFF R.HALL ... , ... _ 82211 URS CORPORATION Oct, 12-12-0;]
HOT FOIl 􀁴􀁯􀁎􀁓􀁾􀁔􀁬􀁏􀁉􀁉􀀬􀀠 &IODIN<;. 0II1V'1K1T P\.IIi'(ISES TYPICAL SECTIONS 
l 64.00 lOR BENT No. 14 "4 iI'Ilifll""-FACE OF BACKWAU STA. 66+10.00 66+00 SEJ-A HOR'ZootP/. CURVE DATA OJRV[ ARN'-3 PI STA 63+05c.13 l;t:Ot-01'4," LT 0-01"'08'45" ,"'44.86' L=80.7Z·
R..SQOO.OO· PC STA 62<60.27 PT S1 A 63+49.99 61+00 HORIZOOT /Il CURVE DATA CURVE AAIP-4 PI STA 7Z+13.tB 4=22·37'26>< LT 0=02-12'r3" T:520.o9' LII1026.64' R=2600.00' PC 5T A 66<93.09
PT STA 7h19.73 .... VERTICH.. CURVE DATA .-i,;,.OG􀁾 􀀠 􀀭􀁾􀀠 Ox PI ST. 590118.00 EL';;49.00· vc..no.oo· [. -!>.oOt K-148 \fPC S1 A. 􀁾􀀢􀀱􀀺􀁓􀀮􀀰􀀰􀀠 VPT 5T.. 63'113.00 o--2.0 ....-60
-ao SCALE fN FEET FOR INTERIM REVIEW ONLY 􀁂􀁶􀁾􀀢􀁇􀁌􀁉􀁆􀁆􀀧􀀠 R. HALL .M:." 82211 URS CORPORAT ION oat. 􀀱􀀲􀁾􀀱􀀲􀀭􀀡􀁐􀀠 IIIlT tOR: COIISTRlJCfI(Vl bIODIJIG. 01'1 PElUl'lT """""
BRIDGE LAYOUT 
•• •• 22' -11 t' CL PIER 10 STA 􀀶􀀱􀀫􀀾􀀴􀀧􀁏􀁏􀁾􀀠 16'-6 .. 22'-9 " 22' -11 t' 16·-4 ....• l---SYMM, ABOUT PGl (Cl PIER 9 SIA 59'44,00 I • 29'-0' • S' 􀁾􀁯􀂷 22'-9 .. 15'-6 " I I I
•• I I,, ,I , •... I, ..•.. , , 􀁾􀁩􀀠 I ,• I I, -• , I, "r , ;., I, -, I, 6· 􀁾􀁏􀀢 , I, , ,I I 2' -0SECTION A-A S' -0-60" OIl. DRILLED SHAfT ,TVP! 10' -I i' 39"H"-S' 􀁾􀁏􀀢􀀠 􀁾􀀠
EL,612,144 2' -0S' -0' IO'-H' STINGER 􀀳􀀹􀀧􀀭􀀳􀁾􀀢􀀠 5' -0' 10' -It' 2'-01' FOR FINISHEO GRtltJ1() LINE INTERIU REVIEW ONLY au a.IEF R.. HAlL ....IE.. 82211 URS CORPORAl ION 􀁲􀀷􀀬􀁗􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀬􀀧􀂷􀀻�
�􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁴􀀲􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁊􀀲􀁾􀀭􀁂􀁊􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 I 1m! 􀁦􀁾􀀠rt.:INSTaut.T.t.O.N... ..!.'.II DOI$, 011 P£iUllf ELEVATION IiO. OAt( REVISION i DRS AllAPAHO_'PlLUllm ! SURVEYOfI £¥JJI.f.VARD TO
NXJ[SON ROAD I 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 ARCH ANCHORAGE PIERS 􀀡􀁧􀁾􀀠 TOWN OF ADDISON. TEXAS 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁌􀀭______________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________􀁾􀁾􀁡􀀮􀀽􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁌􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀲􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁾____􀁾___J 
Prize Bridge Award: Medium Span Dam.en Avenue Arch Bridge Chicago, Illinois Jurors Comments The use of bent, steel pipes for the arches without lateral bracing is innovative ... aesthetically
pleasing The hridge. 􀁬􀁯􀀼􀀧􀁡􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁉􀀠"ix kilollwt.ers northwest of dmnllO\"'1l 􀁃􀁦􀁬􀁫􀁵􀁾􀀨􀀩􀀮􀀠 is rmrt of a 􀁓􀀱􀀲􀀮􀁯􀁾􀁭􀁭􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠􀁨􀁈􀀬􀀻􀁲􀁯􀁜􀀧􀀨􀁾􀂭 nwut proj{'{'l along
<I t't'diou or i\orth ()aruen 􀀧􀁜􀁖􀁴􀁗􀁉􀀱􀀨􀁾􀀺􀀠 Tht, mixt,:!i-u,;.(' propt'rli('s ...􀁵􀁲􀁲􀁭􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀠lhp s.ite al't.' raptdly Ir;m$lti(}ning fronl 􀁦􀁡􀁥􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁴􀀮􀁾􀁳􀀠If,
nllni-muJlfl and condominiulnh. In 􀁖􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁗􀀠of 􀁉􀁨􀁩􀁾􀀠 􀁲􀁦􀀺􀁤􀁴􀁾􀁜􀀧􀁴􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀨􀀧􀁮􀁴􀁾􀀠 the eitv "f ChiCligo pr"f''''''.! to huild a ';1;11<1'􀁴􀁵􀁮􀁾􀀠hridge at
this },ill.' tn 􀀨􀁈􀁾􀁴􀀠 t1 .. the' fo"alpoirll for th" ",,;rali puhlic and private rcvlwlil,.atitJu HI' rlw UN'a. ,\mong the prOjl'I'Cl; 􀁩􀁮􀁻􀁬􀁯􀁶􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁦􀁊􀁮􀁾􀀠anrhe .Irdt riiJ:ilt
",hidI 1m' frCt',i,1anding' anti 􀁥􀀨􀁾􀁉􀁊􀀢􀁬􀁮􀁬􀀨.. t"fl Wilhoul bll'.al hfOfI:,iIlI:!" Alillitiunullv. tht; an"1t i:; uol tii-d. 'fit"ll arcllt':> 􀁮􀁊􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀨􀀧􀁮􀁨􀀺􀁤􀀠Jmtcotiul
tiur;:lhilit) .mcl sarctv 􀁾􀀻􀁮􀁮􀁮􀀬􀀧􀁲􀁮􀀺􀁯􀀻􀀠fn!' hoth ,1..., FI,Jpwt 􀁦􀁴􀁬􀁧􀁨􀁷􀁡􀁹􀁊􀀺􀁜􀀧􀁉􀁊􀁉􀀧􀁩􀁊􀁬􀀬􀁾􀁴􀁮􀁬􀁴􀁬􀁵􀁈􀀠 ;!nd tIll: 􀀨􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁾􀀧􀀠of Chicago. 􀀨􀀻􀁯􀁮􀀨􀀬􀁦􀁾􀁲􀁵􀀢􀀠
whidl hat' 􀁪􀁊􀁶􀁯􀁩􀀨􀁬􀁲􀁾􀀨􀀱􀀠 􀁢􀁾􀀧􀀠diminating liI(' l.i(', Bridge Ile!iatpdOD TIlt' JU'W .iolnu-lurI' 􀁾􀁰􀀮􀀧􀁝􀁮􀀬􀀮􀀠 (J,j m n\I'r lh(· ri\.:r ,Hid 􀁣􀁴􀁬􀁲􀁲􀁩􀁬􀀧􀁟􀁾􀀠
Iwn lau(>tl; vf trafli(" wilh 􀀺􀀭􀁩􀁩􀀬􀁫􀁷􀁡􀁬􀁫􀁾􀀠;dHIll! ('m'h 􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁦􀀧􀁾􀀠 in 􀁾􀂷􀀧􀁜􀁬􀀺􀁨􀀠 \Iin!t:lion. Tilt< two' ril,s dn' fahrit'ali'il fronl 1.2 m-diaflu:t""r 􀁾􀁨􀀧􀁴􀀧􀁬􀀠
pip'" 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁬􀁉􀀠 i", formed inh, Ii \"OUlflUUml l'in'lIhlr ('lIf\'1' u:Sug iu;luelioll hnlt Iwwiing:. bwtt rih 􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁳􀀠in a \'l.Tti(:a! plmw utlcl 􀁩􀁾􀀠 IW'dtC'fl 􀁨􀀨􀀧􀁮􀁜􀀧􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁮􀀠1􀁨􀀨􀁾􀀠
􀁲􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀢􀁵􀁨􀁾􀀧􀁪􀁊􀁜􀀧􀀠aud \'tiIJ':\Hllkb Tit-: rih« hll\'C' a Cnlbl,lIIl' \\J,II Ihid..!WIi'II III' 2.1 mH! throughout Ihd!' l ..'ngth, and i:> till("d with concrete O'ier :1 difitam:(!
of nm ul 􀀨􀁾􀁡􀁤􀀺􀁬􀀠end ttt urdt'r to 􀁲􀁦􀁬􀁳􀁩􀁾􀀱􀀠 􀁩􀁬􀁈􀁾􀀠 hi;!;lwr thrust and UWnlt!Ol Itf"ar Iht' ..spring point-ii, TIt(, 􀁊􀀧􀁮􀁰􀀧􀁾􀁲􀁬􀀡􀁩􀁲􀁈􀁲􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁥􀀠 􀁩􀁾􀀠 NHuprised
of u !ongi{udinaUy 􀁰􀁏􀁓􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁴􀀨􀀧􀁮􀀤􀀭􀁩􀀨􀀩􀁮􀀱􀀱􀀬􀁌􀀠 j'Mt-inplace conaf'lc dnd.. [Uia J'tiffeoillg girdl'"" dJUl <Ire 􀁓􀁉􀁬􀁉􀀩􀁬􀀧􀁏􀁮􀀺􀀼􀁾􀀨􀀱􀀠by 􀁕􀀢􀁤􀁮􀁾􀁜􀀧􀁥􀀢􀀬􀀡􀀢􀀠stl'd
hnx 􀁢􀁣􀁵􀁭􀁾􀀮􀀠The 􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁬􀁵􀁶􀀨􀀧􀁲􀁾􀁴􀀧􀀠 ht:atn!5 ,H:I C(lJll.:-'pu£ih,\ly with ih\! d('('k. The' iH'otIns orf' 􀁳􀁵􀁰􀁰􀀨􀁪􀁲􀁴􀀨􀁾􀁤􀀠rrom 1I11' 􀁊􀀧􀁩􀁨􀁾􀀠hy 􀁳􀁴􀁮􀁴􀁾􀀾􀁬􀁵􀁲􀁡􀁬􀀠
strand haugc:r.s 􀁭􀁪􀁻􀀺􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁭􀁾􀁤􀀠at the holtulfl nOillge and utliH.'hcd to tlw rib.$; us.irrg 􀁾􀁬􀀨􀀺􀁻􀀧􀁊􀀠 􀁧􀁯􀁾􀁴􀀧􀁬􀀠 􀁲􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁴􀀢􀁾􀀠and au upen soctwt. '[he 􀁾􀀱􀁬􀀤􀁓􀁃􀁬􀀠1,lnh>::;
􀁉􀁷􀁴􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁭􀁬􀁴􀀡􀀠 th,· rih Illlti art:' 􀁷􀀮􀁾􀁨􀁫􀂷􀁤􀀠to 􀀵􀁴􀁩􀁭􀂷􀁵􀀮􀁾􀁲􀀠1,]Ult'li and Imlkd to 􀁡􀁮􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀮􀀧􀀵􀀠 to 􀁬􀁲􀁵􀁵􀁾􀁦􀁬􀀮􀀧􀁲􀀠the hmH!Cr 􀀨􀁵􀁲􀀨􀀧􀁉􀀬􀁾􀀠 in'o
􀁴􀁨􀁦􀁾􀀠tih. . . Tlw 􀁾􀁴􀀮􀁭􀁉􀁈􀁬􀁴􀁴􀁱􀁾􀁮􀁬􀁬􀀠niRtllllt'nb autl rib Ihrll"l Mot:k.. Olr..' l(lImdC'd un u cummon 
#/(11-/Council Agenda Item: SUMMARY: This item is to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with URS Corporation for pre-design services/concept refinement. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Cost: $19,800 Funding Source: Year 2002 General Obligation Bond Program -Arapaho Road Project BACKGROUND: On April 11, 2002, three firms presented their design concepts for the Arapaho
Road Bridge over Midway Road as part ofthe Town's design competition to select a firm for the final design of the bridge. DRS Corporation won the competition, and has been invited to
show the visuals to Council that was part of their presentation to the review committee. The purpose of this contract (copy attached) is to provide funding for URS to present their design
concepts and conduct a conceptual design charrette with all oftheir team members and staff. The purpose ofthe design charrette is to work on and clarify all of the design issues connected
with the proposed bridge such that DRS can prepare their proposal for the final design ofthe project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council authorize the City Manager enter into a
contract with URS Corporation for $19,800 for pre-design services/concept refinement. 
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ("Agreement") This Agreement between Town of Addison ,("Client") and URS Comomtlon ("URS"), a Nevada corporation; Prestonwood Tower, 5151 Beltline
Road. Suite 700 75254; 97219804961 ("URS"), is effective as of May 14, 2002 • The 􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁩􀁥􀁾􀀠agree as follows: ' . , . '," . '," -, . : It is 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁥􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁳􀁥􀁤􀀠intent of 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁬􀁾
,that this Ag;.eernent 􀁓􀁨􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁢􀁾􀀧􀁮􀁩􀁡􀁤􀁥􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁶􀁡􀀺􀁩􀁬􀁾􀀶􀁉􀁥􀁩􀁯􀀠􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁓􀀬􀁬􀁊􀁢􀁓􀁩􀁤􀁩􀁡􀁲􀁩􀁥􀁾􀀺􀀦􀁮􀁤􀀬􀀠 affiliated companies of URS. For the purposes of this Agreement,
as it applies to each Work Order, the term ·URS· shall mean either. URS Corporation, or the affiliated company identified In the Work Order. The applicable Work Order shall dearly identify
the legal name of the affiliate or subsidiary accepting the Work Order. ' ARTICLE I -Work Orders. The Scope of Services ("Services"), the Time Schedule and the Charges are to be set
forth in a written Work Order to this Agreement. The tenns and conditions of this Agreement shall apply to each Work Order, except to the extent expressly modified by the Work Order.
Where charges are "not to exceed" a specified sum, URS shall notify Client before such sum is exceeded and shall not continue to provide the Services beyond such sum unless Client authorizes
an increase ,in the sum. If a "not to exceed" sum is broken down into budgets for specific tasks, the task budget mt;ly be . exceeded without Client authorization as long as the total
sum is not exceeded. Changes in conditions, including, without limitation, changes in laws or regulations occurring after the budget is established or other circumstances beyond URS
control shall be a basis for equitable adjustments In the budget and schedule. , ARTICLE II -Payment. Unless otherwise stated in an Work Order, payment shall be on a time and materials
basis under the Schedule of Fees and Charges in effect when the Services are Performed. Client ,shall'pay undispute!J portionsof 􀁥􀁡􀁣􀁾􀀠progress invoice within .thirty (30) days of the, date of the , irivo!C(!, If payment is not maintained 'otiathirty (30) ,day current basis, URS may suspend .further performance
until payments are 'cutrenl. Client shall notify URS of any,dispullild'amount within fifteen (1S) days from date of the invoice, give reasons for the objection, and promptly pay the
undisputed amount. Client.shall pay an additional charge of one and one-half percent (1 y,%) per month or.the maximum percentage allowed by law, whichever is the !esser, for any past
due amount. In the event of a legal action for invoice amounts not paid, attorneys' fees, court costs, and other reillted expenses shall be paid to the prevailing party. ARTICLE III
-Professiona! Responsibility. URS is obligated to comply with applicable standards of professional care in the performance of the Services. Client recognizes that opinions relating to
environmental, geologic, and geotechnical conditions are based on limited data and that actual conditions may vary from those encountered at the times and locations where the data are
obtained, despite the use of due 'professional care, ARTICLE IV -Responsibility for Others. URS shall be responsible to Client for URS, Services and the services of URS subcontractors,
URS shall not be responsible for the acts or .omissions of other parties ,engaged by'Client' nor for their construction' means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, or their
health and safety precautions and programs. . ' . " I , ARTICLE V -Risk Allocation. The liability of URS, its employees, agents and subcontractors (referred to collectively in this Article
as 'URS"), for Client's claims of loss, injury, death, damage, or expense, including, without limitation, Client's claims of contribution and indemnifICation, express or implied, with
respect to third party claims relating to services rendered or obligations imposed under this Agreement, including all Work Orders, shall not exceed in the aggregate: (1) The total sum
of $250,000 for claims arising out of professional negligence, including errors, omissions, or other professional ads, and including unintentional breach of contract; and any actual
or potential environmental pollution or contamination, including, without limitation, any actual or threatened release of toxic, irritant, pollutant, or waste gases, liquids, or solid
materials, or failure to detect or properly evaluate the presence of such substances, except to the extent such release, threatened release, or failure to detect or evaluate is caused
by the willful misconduct of URS; or PSA·j,DOC j9·Mar.{)2 . 1 • 
(2) The total sum of $1,000,000 for claims arising out of negligence, breach of contract, or other causes for which URS has any legal liability, other than as'limited by (1) above. ARTICLE
VI· Insurance. URS agrees to maintain during the perfonnance of the Services: (1) statutory Workers' Compensation coverage; (2) Employer's Liability; (3) General Liability; and (4) Automobile
. Liability insurance coverage 􀁥􀁡􀁣􀁾􀀠in .the sum of $1,000,000. ' . .' ,';-: : . ARTIClEYII. C6nseg uential Damages.. 􀁎􀁥􀁩􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁲􀁰􀁾􀁲􀁴􀁹􀀧􀀠sha)lbe 􀀧􀁉􀁩􀁾􀁴􀀿􀀡􀁥􀁴􀁯􀀠the
other 􀁦􀁱􀁲􀁣􀁯􀁩􀁩􀁳􀁾􀁱􀁵􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁦􀁡􀁬􀀮􀀠 damages, including, without limitation, loss of use or loss of profits, incurred by orie another or their subsidiaries or successors, regardless
of whether such damages are caused by breach of contract, willful misconduct, negligent !lct or omission, or other wrongful act of either of them. . ARTICLE VIII· Client Responsibilitv.
Client shall: (1) provide URS, in writing, all information relating to Client's requirements for the project; (2) correctly Identify to URS, the location of subsurface structures, such
as pipes, tanks, cables and utilities; (3) notify URS of any potential hazardous substances or other health and safety hazard or condition known to Client existing on or near the project
site; (4) give URS prompt written notice of any suspected deficiency in the Services; and (5) with reasonable promptness, provide required approvals and deciSions. In the event that
URS is requested by Client or Is 􀁲􀁥􀁱􀁵􀁩􀁾􀁥􀁤􀀠by subpoena to produce documents or give testimony in any action or proceeding to which Client is aparty and URS is not a party, Client
shall pay URS for any time and expenses required in connection therewith, including reasonable attomey's fees. Client shall reimburse URS for all taxes, duties and levies such as Sales,
Use, Value Added Taxes, Deemed Profits Taxes, and other similar taxes which are added to or deducted from the value of URS Services. For the purpose of this Article such taxes shall
not include taxes imposed on URS net income, and employer or employee payroll taxes levied by any United States 􀁾􀁮􀁧 authority, or the taxing authorities of the countries or any agency
or s\Jbdlvision thereof in which' URS subsidiaries, affiliates, or divisions are pennanently . domiciled. It is .agreed and understood .that these net iriCome, employer .or 'employee
payroll taxes are included in Ilie unit prices or lump sum-to be paid.URSunder the reSpective Work Order. .. '. . ARTICLE IX • Force Majeure, An event of "Forca Majeure" occurs when
an event beyond the control of the Party claiming Force Majeure prevents such Party from fulfilling Its obligatioris. An event of Force Majeure includes, without limitation, acts of
God (including floods, hurricanes and other adverse weather), war, riot, civil disorder, acts of terrorism, disease, epidemic, stn1<es and labor disputes, actions or inactions of govemment
or other authorities, law enforcement actions, curfews, closure of transportation systems or other unusual travel difficulties, or inability to provide a safe working environment for
employees. In the event of Force Majeure, the obligations of URS to perform the Services' shall be suspended for the duration of the event of Force Majeure. In such event, URS shall
be equitably compensated for time expended and expenses incurred during the 􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁮􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁦􀀠Force M.aj!lure. aM the I!cbejiL!I'1! sl1?11 Pel exteoded 'by a like number of-dayS as'lIle-evenf
of Force Majeure. If Services are suspended for thirty (30) days or more, URS may, in its sole discretion, upon 5 days prior written notice, tenninate this Agreement or the affected
Work Order, or both. In the <;ase of SUCh tennination, .in addition to the compensation and time .e. xtension set forth above, . URS s. hall be. compensated . for all reasonable. ten.nioa.tion
.expe. nses. ARTICLE X • Right of Entry. Client grants to URS, and, if the project site is not owned by Client, warrants. that permiSSion has been granted for, a right of entry from
time time to time by URS, its employees, agents and subcontractors, upon the project site for the purpose of providing the Services. Client recognizes that the use of investigative equipment
and practices may unavoidably alter the existing site conditions and affect the environment in the area being studied, despite the use of reasonable care. ARTICLE XI • Documents. Provided
that URS has been paid for the Services, Client shall have the right to use the documents, maps, photographs, drawings and speCifications resulting from URS efforts on the project. Reuse
of any such materials by Client on any extension of this project or any other project without the written authorization of URS shall be at Client's sole risk. URS shall have the right
to retain copies of all such materials. URS retains the right of ownership with respect to any patentable concepts or copyrightable materials arising from its Services. PSA·1.DOC 19·Mar·02
-2
ARTICLE XII -Termination. Client may terminate all or any portion of the Services for convenience, at its option,by sending a written Notice to URS. Either party can terminate this Agreement
or a Work Order for cause if the other commits a material, uncured breach of this Agreement or becomes insolvent. Termination for cause shall be effective twenty (20) days after receipt
of a Notice of Termination, unless a later date is specified in the Notice. The Notice of Termination fOr cause shall contain specific reasons for termination and b()th parties shall
cooperate in good faith to cuye the causeS for termination stated in the , NotiCe. :Termihation shall not be effective if reasonable 􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁯􀀠cure'the breacl) has 􀁢􀁥􀁾 taken
before " • the, effective date, of llie\errninairor{CIi,erit,shliill'payURSup6niilVoice ,fo.l" 􀀧􀁓􀁥􀁲􀁶􀁩􀀬􀁴􀁥􀁾􀀬􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁦􀁣􀁪􀁲􀁭􀁥􀁤􀀺􀀠􀁾􀁩􀀱􀁤􀀠 charges incurred prior to termination,
plus reason'able termimilion charges. In theeven[of termination for ' ' cause, the parties shall have their remedies at law as to any other rights and obligations between them, subject
to the other terms and conditions of this Agreement. ' ARTICLE XIII -No Third Party Rights. This Agreement shall not create any rights or benefits to p?rties other than Client and URS.
No ihird party shall have the right to rely on URS opinions rendered in connection with the Services without the written consent of URS and the third party's agreement to be bound to
the same conditiOns and limitations as Client. ARTICLE XIV -Assignments. Neither party to this Agreement shall assign its duties and obligations hereunder without the prior written consent
of the other party. ARTICLE XV -Hazardous Substances. All nonhazardous samples and by·products from sampling processes in connection with the Services shall be disposed of by URS in
accordance with applicable law; provided, however, that any and alll;uch materials, including wastes, that cannot be introduced back into the environment under existing law without additional
treatment, and all hazardous wastes, radioactive wastes, or hazardous substances ("Hazardous Substances") related to the Services. shall be packaged in accordqnce with the applicable
law by URS a'nd tumed overlo Client for appropriate disposal. URS shall ' not arrange or otherwise, dispose of Hazardous Substances under this Agreement. URS.at Client's request. may
:assist Clien! 'in identifying appropriate altet'flatives for 'off-sitetreatmerit, ston3ge or disposal, ofthe Hazardous"Substances,but URS ',snail not make any independent deterrnin'ation
relating to the selection of a treatment, storage. or disposal facility nor subcontract such activities through transporters or others. Client shall sign all necessary manifests for
the dispoSal of Hazardous Substances. If Client requires: (1) URS agents or employees to sign such manifests; or (2) URS to hire, for Client. the Hazardous Substances transportation.
treatment, or disposal contractor. then for these two purposes, URS shall be considered to act as Client's agent so that URS will not be considered to be a generator, transporter. or
disposer of such substances or considered 10 be the arranger for disposal of Hazardous Substances. and Client shall indemnify URS against any claim or loss resulting from such signing.
ARTICLE XVI • Venue. In the event of any dispute between the parties to this Agreement, the venue for the dispute resolution sha!1 be any state or federal court in the United States
having jurisdiction over the parties. The foregoing notwithstanding, if the project is 􀁬􀁯􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁾􀁤􀁟outsige_􀁴􀁾􀁥􀁟􀁕􀁟􀁮􀁾􀁥􀁧􀀠􀀡􀀳􀁴􀁾􀁴􀀡􀀡􀁬􀁓􀀬􀀠i)le. lal'ls orllle, State
of'Callfornra snair goverrfantfiii suchevenf. any dispute under the Agreement not resolved amicably shall be resolved under the binding rules of the American Arbitration Association.
' ARTICl!: XVII -Integrated Writing and Enforceability. This 􀁁􀁧􀁲􀁥􀁥􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁬􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀠final 􀁾􀁮􀁤􀀠 complete repositorY of ItJeitgiee'rrients'betweElIl'Clierit'ancfURS
relating to the the Services and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous communications, regresentations. or agreements, whether oral or written. ModifICations of this Agreemeht shall
riot be bfnding unless rh,ade in writing and signed by an Authorized Rel:>resentative of each partY. The' provisions'df this Agreement shall be enforced 10 the fullest extent permitted
by law. If any provision of this Agreenteni is found to be invalid or unenforceable, Ihe'provision shall be construed and applied Ina way that comeS as close as possible to expressing
the intention of the parties with regard to the provisions and that saves lhe validity and enforceability of the provision. PSA·1,DOC 19-Mar.o2 3
THE PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE that there has been an opportunity fo negotiate the tE)rms and conditions of this Agreement and agree to be bound accordingly: 'CLIENT . , ' -􀁾􀀠 . ' .. 􀁾􀀠
Signature Emily Taylor, P.E./V-lCe President Typed Namefntle Typed NamefnUe May 6. 2002 Date of Signature Date of Signature PSA·1.00C HI·Mar·02 -4
TIME AND MATERIALS WORK ORDER NO. --,OO",,-,-1__􀁾􀁟􀀠 In accoitlance with the Agreement for Professional Services 􀁢􀁥􀁉􀁷􀁥􀁾􀁮􀀠 Town 'of Addison ("Client"), and URS Corporation]
("URS"). a Nevada corporation, dated April 14, 2002 • this Work Order describes the Services. Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS Services on the Project krioWn as: ':;", ' . Client
Authorized Representative: Address: Public Works Department. P.O. Box 9010 Addison. TX 75001-9010 Telephone No.: __􀀭􀀢􀀹􀁝􀀮􀀬􀀷􀀲􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀮􀀴􀀺􀀡􀀻􀀵􀁾􀁏􀁾􀀮􀀲􀀡􀀬􀁓􀀸􀁵􀀷􀁾􀀱________________
URS Authorized Representative: Emily Taylor. P.E. Address: Prestonwood Tower. 5151 BelUine Road. Suite 700 Dallas. TX 75254 Telephone No.; __.....9."'7"'2."'9""80"'.4"'9"'6"'1_________________·I
SERVICES. The Services shall be described in Attachment-,A",-_to this Work Order. SCHEDULE. The Estimated Schedule shall be set forth in Attachment...li!..-to this Work Order. Because
of the uncertainties inherent in the Services. Schedules are estimated and are subject to reVision unless otherwise specifically described herein. . . PAYMENT. Theestimatedeoslfor these
serVices are includediriattachinent C" lJRS charges shall bil on .' a "time and materials" basis arid shall be in'accordance' with' the URS Schedule' of FeeS and Ctiarges in effect at
the time the Services are performed. Payment prOVisions and the URS current Schedule of Fees and Charges are attached to this Work Order as Atlachment-1!..,. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. The
terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced above shall apply to this Work Order, except as expressly modified herein. ACCEPTANCE of the terms of this Work Order is acknowledged
by the following signatures of the Authorized Representatives. CLIENT Signature EmilyTaylor, P.E. I Vice President Typed Nametrl1le . T)'!led NamemUe May6,2002 Dale ofSignature PSA-l.DOC
19-Mar-02 -1 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT 􀁾􀁗􀁁􀁙 􀁒􀁏􀁾􀀠 WORK ORDER 001" ATTACHMENT A . VRS CORPORATION •􀁓􀁃􀀰􀀱􀁾􀁅􀀻􀀠OF SERVICES -." :, ," ",. , . '" ,"', " ... PHASE I -CONCEPT REFINEMENT 1. Update
Powerpoint presentation and provide boards from design competition for the Mayor's presentation "to the Town Council. 2. Local URS Team members attend Town Council meeting on May 14,
􀀲􀁾􀀰􀀲􀀬􀀠7:30 p.m. 3. All URS Team members attend design charette with Addison stakeholders . ., 
·-..: ...:-􀁾􀀢􀀬􀀮􀁟􀀬􀀠 " , 􀁾􀀺􀀬􀀠. URS Corporation' Arapaho Road BrIdge at Mldway'Road , ", Phase I -Concept Refinement ' ,,'., ATT.i\CHMENT B estImated Schedule . , ' MAY" JUNE
' , TASK DESCRIPTION , 4-10 11-17 18-24 25-31 1.7 8-14 15·21 22·28 .' I '. ;> WORK ORDER NO.OOl ' Update Powerpolnt Presentation and Boards ' , , ., I 􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀠 Town Council Meeting (May
14) , • Ma 14," Design Charette ", ".. May 24 (Tentative) . ',;-,.' , WORK ORDER NO, 002' , Refine the " Blue Bridge " concept, =􀀺;;􀁦;;>􀁾A-􀁾j'"i􀁾l;i; 􀀺􀀮􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀱􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀡􀀢􀀢􀀮􀀬􀁜􀁾􀀧-.􀀮􀁆.�
�􀀧 􀀮􀀢􀀮􀀢􀁩􀀭􀀻􀀺􀀻􀁯􀀻􀀮􀀧􀁾􀂷􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁬􀁅􀁬􀀬􀀱􀁉􀁗􀀻􀁲􀁲􀀮􀀮􀁉􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀭􀁂􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁪􀀮􀁖􀁾􀀢􀁾􀀢􀀨􀀧􀀧􀀢􀁾􀀢􀁩􀁮􀀭􀀠;􀁾c􀀮􀁩􀁜,􀀱,􀀬.􀀡,􀀻-􀀺􀀮,􀀡 :,' -, Review the concept with Addison
Stakeholders <> June 1'j.: ':.:: • , June 25 <> Town Council Meeting (June ,2 5) ,' '; , -If ,'., ,',' " ' 
URS Corporation Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase I -Concept Refinement Work Order 001 . . .... ATrACHMENTC . , ./., '. : ,", . " ', .. . Not to Exceed Amounts URS Corporation
(URS) $13,090.00 Brandston Partnership, hie (BPI) $4,450.00 Corgan Associates, Inc. (OAI) $2,260.00 Total $19,800.00 Estimated Fee Breakdown Description Hours Rate Labor Expenses· Total
URS Principal 16 $ 185 $ 2,960 $ $ 2,960 Sr. Consultant 14 $ 175 $ 2,450 $ 1,500 $ 3.950 Project Manager 20 $ 142 $ 2,840 .$ -$ 2,840 Senior Engineer/Planner 16 $ 140 $ 2,240 $ 1,100
$ 3,340 Subtotal. 6;6 . $10,490 . $ 2,600 $13,090 BPI Partner . 12 $ 175 $ 2,100' $ 2,350' $ 4,450 CAl Principal 14 $ 140 $ 1.960 $ 300 $ 2,260 TOTAL $ 19,800 • expenses include ITavel
expenses with Ihe exception of CAl's expense to updare the architectural boards. 
URS CORPORATION ATTACHMENT D 2002 SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES TOWN OF ADDISON Engineering/Environmental & Consulting Services The following describes the basis for compensation for
services performed dwg the fiScil year 2002. 1his , Scheduk.of·Pees:and Chalges,..;n he.a.djusted.anntWIy.on ·November.l ofeath subsequent Y""". to 􀁲􀁥􀁦􀁬􀁾􀁣􀀧 '. ,.. 'meritand 'ecoil0nlic'
s'!laq 􀁩􀁴􀁴􀁯􀀻􀁾􀁳􀁥􀁳􀀬􀀠􀁾􀁤􀀧􀀺􀁣􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁲􀁩􀁧􀁥􀁳􀀧 itt)!>". expected level. and ,?ode..􀁾􀀨op.rntiops (0; the '!leW year. The new SChedule ofFees and Charges Will .pplyto exlStingaru:l-new
aSSignments:·· . ...., . PERSONNEL CHARGES The charge for all time required itt the perfonnanee of the Scope of Services, including office, field and travel time, will be at the Unit
Priced Hourly Rates set forth below for the labor classifications indicated. Labor Classification Hourly Rate ($) Technical Typist/W ord Processor' 55 Senior Technician" . 80 Assistant
Project EugineerlPlanner 78 Project EngineerlPlanner 100 Senior Project EngineerlPlanner 140 Project Manager 142 Senior Consulting Engineer 175 Principal PrQfessional 185 Charges fur
contract. personnel. j.lllder URS supervision and'using URS·(acilities.will.be made accordittg to.llie hourly rate cOiresponding to their claSsification.· . When staff are perfumting
project fieldwork, a minimum daily charge of4 hours will apply. A maximum of eighl (8) hours travel time per day will be charged for travel within the continental United States. When
URS staff appears as expert' witnesses at court trials, arbitration hearings, mediation and depositions, their time will be charged at $250.00 per hour. Overtime (hours worked itt excess
of eight (8) hours per 􀁾􀁡􀀮􀁙􀁌􀁢􀁬􀀠􀀢􀀬􀁸􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁐􀁉􀁐􀁊􀀧􀁉􀀤􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀱􀀱􀁾􀀱􀀠y.jJ.l.be charged aI.tbe above. straighl time hourly rate. Overtime by non·exempt personnel (classifications
identified with an asterisk "''') will be charged 311.3 times the above hourly.rale. Special . project accoUnting reporting. and finincial services, including submission of invoice support
doc1l!Ilentation, will be charged at the rate of a Technical Typist/Woni Processor. . OTIlER PROJECT CHARGES §ubcontracts and Equipment Rental Other direct costs (excluding subconsuitants)
incurred hy URS will be charged at cost plus 10%. ConununicatioU$ The cosl of communications for office telephone, telex, facsimile, postage, and incidental copying costs will be charged
al a flat rale of2.5% oftota! gross labor charges. Computer Generated Plots There will be a charge of $5.00 each for paper plot and S15.00 each for mylar plot generated by the CADD and
GIS systems. . Docunient R<a,roduction .. 􀁉􀁮􀁾􀁨􀁯􀁵􀁳􀁥􀀠reptoductionwillbe charged 01..$.10' a page for black & white and $1.50 a page for color for letter, legal, and II x 17 size
copies. Other size document cupying will be charged at $2.75. page. Vehicles and Mileage Field vehicles (Pick-ups, vans, trncks, etc.) used on project assignments will be charged at
$50.00 per day. The mileage charge for personal autos will be the then currenl mileage rate established by the Internal Revenue Service. 􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 Specialized Equipment .
The use of specialized URS equipmenl will be the fixed rental !"lites set forth in the .schedule of URS Specialized ...E qnipment C'llli.rges.. . . . This fee schedule contains conjidential
business information and is not to be copied or distributed for any purpose other than the use intended in this contract or proposal. DRS P;\AR.APAHO ROAD BRIDGEWHASE I\DOCS\CONTRAcnFEE
SCHEDULE 2002.DOCfec :schedule 2002..doc 
1JRS CJA,-tA!> 􀁕􀀭􀁁􀀭􀁾􀀠 (/J7u 77F$ (5S /rtf!-.5 April 18, 2003 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re:
Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Work Oi-der No. 003 Resolution ofDWU Issues Dear Mr. Chutchlan: As you know the DRS Team performed additional modifications to conceptual drawings
and participated in numerous meetings to resolve the issues with Dallas Water Utilities (DWU). These modifications and meetings were outside our scope as defined in Work Order No. 001.
Therefore we are submitting a request for additional fee for these services performed. The fee provided was derived from actual hours spent to resolve DWU' concerns. Enclosed please
fmd two originals of Work Order Number 003 for services provided to resolve the issues with DWU with Attachment A -Scope of Services, Attachment B -Estimated Schedule, and Attachment
C -Lump Sum Fee Breakdown. Please execute both originals ofthe work order and return to us for our signature. We will then return one original fully executed work order to you. Sincerely,
CliffR. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Graystone Centre 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas. 1X 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
FIXED PRICE WORK ORDER NO. ___􀁾􀀰􀁾􀀰􀁾􀀳____ In accordance with the Agreement for Professional Services between Town of Addison ("Clienf'), and_ URS Corporation ("URS"). a Nevada corporation,
dated November 11, 2002 , this Work Order describes the Services, Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS Services on the Project known as: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD RESOLUTION
OF DWU ISSUES Client Authorized Representative: Address: Public Works Department. P,O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Telephone No.: __-"-97"'2"'A""5"'0"'.2""871-1'--_______________
URS Authorized Representative: Emily Taylor, P.E. Address: Graystone Centre, 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas, TX 75234 Telephone No.: __􀀭􀀲􀀮􀀹􀀷􀀡􀀮􀁊􀀲􀁾􀀮􀀴􀁾􀀰􀁾􀀶􀁾􀀮􀀶􀀡􀀲􀀹􀀵􀀺􀀼􀀻􀀰􀁌􀀭_
______________ SERVICES. The Services shall be described in Attachment --,A",-_to this Work Order. SCHEDULE. The Estimated Schedule shall be set forth in Atiachment 􀁾to this Work Order.
Because of the uncertainties inherent in the Services. Schedules are estimated and are subject to revision unless otherwise specifically described herein. URS acknowledges that timely
perfonmance of its services is an important element of this Agreement and the Work Order. URS will put forth its best efforts to timely complete the Services. PAYMENT. The Services described
in Attachment A will be performed for a total fixed amount of $23,410.00; in no event shall the payment by Client for the Services exceed the said amount A breakdown of this amount is
included in Attachment J<..... Payment shall be mede monthly based upon stataments submittad to the Client for the work perfonmed. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. The tenms and conditions of the
Agreement referenced above shall apply to this Work Order, except as expressly modified herein, ACCEPTANCE of the tenms of this Work Order is acknowledged by the following signatures
of the Authorized Representatives. CLIENT Signalure Signature Ron Whitehead I City Manager Emily Taylor, P.E.I Vice President Typed NameJT1!1e Typed NamelTitIe Dale of Signature Date
of Signalure PSA-l.DOC 19·Mar·02 -1 • 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES RESOLUTION OF DALLAS WATER UTILITIES (DWU)ISSUES URS will provide conceptual engineering and modifications
to the conceptual plans, as it relates to Arapaho Road from approximate Station 40+67 to approximate Station 70+28 to resolve the DWU concerns related to the 60" water main inside the
proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW). URS shall modifY the conceptual bridge layouts and typical sections as necessru:y to obtain approval from DWU for the construction of Arapaho
Road. URS will attend meetings with the Town of Addison, DWU and the Town's consultant as necessru:y. URS will coordinate the alignment, profile, width and other issues related to Arapaho
Road with the Town's consultant as necessru:y Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS for the Arapaho Road Bridge TASK I -Resolution of DWU Issues 1. Modifications of Conceptual Bridge
Layouts 2. Modifications of Conceptual Typical Sections 3. Preparation for and Attendance of Meetings With Addison Public Works and/or DWU AltlldommlA Srope vJService¥ 1 Work Order No.
aOl DRS 
URS Corporation Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Work Order No. 003 -Resolution of DWU Issues ATTACHMENT B Estimated Schedule TASK DESCRIPTION October November December January Februa
y March April 2 0 o 2 2 0 o 2 2 o 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 0 o 3 2 o 0 3 2 o 0 3 Notice to Proceed • Addison I DWU Meetings (No.) 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 Modifications to Bridge Sections & Layout
Acceptance by DWU • 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003 -RESOLUTION OF DWU ISSUES ATTACHMENT C FIXED PRICE BREAKDOWN URS CORPORATION TASK 1-Resolution of DWU Issues 1. Modifications of
Conceptual Bridge Layouts 2. Modifications of Conceptual Typical Sections 3. Preparation for and Attendance of Meetings With Addison Public Works and/or DWU CORGAN ASSOCIATES, INC GRAND
TOTAL Total Cost $ 22,430.00 $ 2,440.00 $ 12,030.00 $ 7,960.00 $ 980.00 $ 23,410.00 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE· Resolution of DWU Issues MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: I URS Corporation URS CORPORATION Expert
Senior Project Sr IProject WiIness Consu!t. Project Eng/PJan $270.00 M3J1fJf 5165.00 􀁟􀁾􀀱􀀳􀀵􀀮􀀰􀀰􀀠 _$135..00 􀁾􀁏􀁏􀀠 stall 􀁳􀁾􀁾 --i';"'-􀀭􀁾 -Total 􀁾􀁡􀁮􀀠 Tech. WP $65.00 moo
􀁾􀁏􀁏􀀠 J&).OO Holm; --------Total Labor Direct ToIa! Cost Expenses Cost -_.-􀁾􀀭 -_.-􀁾􀀭􀀭 -TASK I-ReSOluUop ofDWU Issues 1, Adjustments to Conceptual Brldge Layout 2. Modifications
to Concepl:uaf Typical Sectlons 3, Meetings with Addison Public WOI'ks and/or DWU (14 􀁴􀁯􀁴􀁾􀁬􀀩􀀠 o 0 68 24 2S 68 12 24 12 􀁛􀁾􀁬􀁟􀁬􀁌I􀁾􀀴􀀠 􀀱􀁟􀀹􀀽􀁾􀀠J􀀱􀀲􀀱􀀲􀁾􀀠tJ 234 30 140
64 $ $$ $ 22.4311.00 $ $ 2.«QOO§$ 12,030.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 22.430.00 2,440.00 12,030.00 1.900.00 CORGAN ASSOCIATES. INC 7h"@1 $ 140.00 I hr q $ 980.00 $ 23.410.00 
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 22, 2005 TO: City ofAddison 16801 West Grove Addison, TX 75001 ATTN: Jenny Nicewander RE: Copy of Subcontract for Arapaho Road Bridge ENCLOSED ARE THE
FOLLOWING: o o Report Copies o Plans o Instrnctions and Requests o Other FOR YOUR: o o Approval Distribution Files Information [J 0 Comments Use REMARKS: Give me a call ifyou have any
questions PLEASE NOTIFY US IF ENCLOSURES LISTED ARE NOT RECEIVED. E-Mail: debbie jacoby@urscorp.com Phone: (972) 406-6955 Fax: (972) 406-6951 
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ("Agreement") This Agreement between the Town of Addison. Texas ,("Clienf') and URS Corporation ("URS"), a_ Nevada corporation; Graystone Centre.
3010 lBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 75234: 972.406.6950 {,'URS"). is effective as of November 11, 2002 . The parties agree as follows: I ARTICLE I -Work Orders. The Scope of Services ("Services"),
the time schedule ("Time Schedule") and the charges for the Services ("Charges") are to be set forth in a written Work Order which is supplementary to this Agreement The terms and conditions
of this Agreement shall apply to each Work Order. except to the extent expressly modified by the Work Order. Where Charges are "not to exceed" a specified sum. all Services shall be
provided by URS for Charges which do not exceed the specified sum. If a "not to exceed" sum is broken down into budgets for specific tasks, the task budget may be exceeded without Client
authorization as long as the total sum is not exceeded. Changes in conditions which directly affect the Services. including, without limitation, changes in laws or regulations occurring
after the budget is established or other circumstances beyond URS control shall be a basis for equitable adjustments in the budget and Time Schedule. ARTICLE II -PaymenL A. Unless otherwise
stated in a Work Order, payment shall be on a time and materials basis under the Schedule of Fees and Charges set forth in the Work Order which are in effect when the Services are performed.
Client shall pay undisputed portions of each progress invoice within thirty (30) days ofthe date of the Client's receipt of an invoice from URS. If payment is not maintained on an at least forty-five (45) day basis, URS may suspend further performance until payments are
current. Client shall notify URS of any disputed amount within fifteen (15) days from date of the Client's receipt of the invoice, give reasons for the objection. and pay the undisputed
amount in accordance herewith. Client shall pay interest on any overdue payment at the rate of one percent (1 %) per month or the maximum percentage allowed by law, whichever is the
lesser. In the event of a legal action for invoice amounts not paid in accordance with this Agreement and the Work Order, attomeys' fees, court costs, and other related expenses shall
be paid to the prellajling party. B. URS shall submit to Client an invoice or.tJ!lIing statement for all work performed. All invoices or billing statements shall include a statement
of Services rendered and the amount owed in connection therewith, an itemized statement of costs and expenses incurred to the date of the invoice, and the sum of all prior payments for
the Services set forth in the letter agreement dated February 21, 2002 (Exhibit AI. The cumulative amounts of progress payments for the Services shall not exceed the Charges. URS shall
not be entitled to any compensation for any services or work not actually performed or for any lost profits as a result of any abandonment or suspension of work by the Client URS shall
perform all work hereunder in a manner satisfactory and acceptable to the Client in accordance with the standard of care set forth in this Agreement C. Notwithstanding any other provision
of this Agreement or the Work Order, Client shall not be obligated to make payment to URS hereunder if: 1. URS is in default of any of its obligations under this Agreement. the Work
Order, or any other documents in connection with the Services (and payment may be withheld to the extent of any such default); 2. Any part of such payment is attributable to any services
of URS which are not performed in accordance with this Agreement and URS' proposal; or 3. If the Client. in its good faith judgment and after consultation with URS, determines that the
portion of the compensation then remaining unpaid will not be suffiCient to complete the Services hereunder, no additional payments will be due URS hereunder unless and until URS performs
a sufficient PSA-1.DOC 19-Mar-02 -I 
portion of the Services so that such portion of the compensation remaining unpaid is determined by Client to be sufficient to complete the Services, ARTICLE III -Professional Responsibilitv.
URS is obligated to comply wtth applicable standards of professional care in the performance of the Services. Client recognizes that opinions relating to environmental, geologic, and
geotechnical conditions are based on limtted data and that actual conditions may vary from those encountered at the times and locations where the data are obtained, despite the use of
due professional care. URS represents and warrants that it is authorized to practice engineering in the State of Texas and that any necessary licenses, permits or other authorization
to practice engineering and to provide the Services set forth herein have been heretofore acquired as required by law, rule or regulation, Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary,
URS and Client agree and acknowledge that Client is entering into this Agreement in reliance on URS' professional abilities with respect to performing the Services set forth herein.
URS agrees to use its professional skill, judgment and abilities in the performance of its Services hereunder, and shall render Services under this Agreement and in connection with the
project in accordance with the professional standards of engineering prevailing in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex area and shall use the skill and care commensurate with the requirements
of the engineering profession, URS shall perform its Services in accordance with laws, regulations, and rules in accordance with the standard of care set forth herein. Without in any
way limiting the foregoing or any other provision of this Agreement, URS shall be liable to the Client for damages, injuries, liability, or other harm to the extent caused by or resulting
from any negligent, grossly negligent, or intentionally wrongful errors, acts or omissions of URS, or URS' directors, partners, officers, employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors,
or any person or entity for whom U RS is legally liable, in the provision of its Services under this Agreement, and for other breaches by URS to the extent URS was negligent, grossly
negligent, or intentionally wrongful in its performance of professional services under this Agreement. ARTICLE IV -Responsibilitv for Others. URS shall be responsible to Client for URS
Services and the services of URS directors, partners, officers, employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors, or any person or entity for whom URS is legally liable. URS shall not
be responsible for the acts or omissions of other parties engaged by Client nor for their construcUon means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedwes, or their health and safety
precautions and programs, ARTICLE V -Insurance: Indemnitv. A. In connection with this Agreement, URS shall provide and maintain in full force and effect the following insurance: (i)
Workers' compensation and employer's liability insurance for the protection of URS' employees, to the extent required by the law of the State of Texas; (ii) Commercial general liability
insurance with limits not less than One Million and NoI100 Dollars $1,000,000.00 eero occurrence combined single limit bodily injury and property damage, including contractual liability
(covering, but notlimiled to, the liability assumed under the indemnificaUon proVisions of this Agreement), personal injury, broadform property damage, products and completed operations
coverage (and if such commercial general liability insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to the Services under this Agreement); (iii) Comprehensive
automobile liability insurance with limits not less than One Million and Nol100 DoUars ($1,000,OOO.00) each occurrence combined single limit bodily injury and property damage, including
owned, non-owned and hired auto coverage, as applicable; and (iv) Professional Liability Insurance to protect from liability arising out of the performanoa of professional services under
this Agreement. Such coverage shall be in the sum of not less than One Million and Nol100 Dollars ($1,OOO,OOO,OO) per claim and aggregate, Equivalent coverage must be maintained for
at least two (2) years after the project contemplated herein is completed, If coverage is PSA-1,DOC 19·Mar·02 -2
written on a claims-made basis, the retroactive date must not be later than the inception date of this Agreement. All such poliCies of insurance shall (a) be issued by insurance companies
reasonably acceptable to Client, (b) except for professional liability and worker's compensation insurance, shall name (by endorsement) the Town of Addison, Texas, its officials, officers,
employees and agents as an additional insured or loss payee, as the case may be, (c) in all liability policies (except for professional liability), provide that such policies are primary
insurance to any other insurance available to the additional insureds, with respect to any claims arising out of activities conducted hereunder, (d) contain a waiver of subrogation endorsement
in favor of the Town of Addison, Texas, and (e) provide for at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Town of Addison, Texas prior to cancellation or non-renewal which affects
this Agreement. Certificates of insurance, along with the endorsement naming the Town of Addison, Texas as an additional insured or loss payee, as the case may be), satisfactory to Client,
evidencing all coverage above, shall be promptly delivered to Town and updated as may be appropriate. The Client reserves the right to review the insurance requirements contained herein
and to reasonably adjust coverages and limits when deemed necessary and prudent by the Client. If, however, the insurance requirements being adjusted results in additional premium cost
to URS, URS shall be reimbursed for such additional premium cost by Client. B. In connection with this Agreement (together with the Work Order) and the prOVision of Services, URS agrees
to and shall indemnify the Town of Addison, Texas, its offiCials, officers, agents and employees (together, for purposes of this paragraph, the "Indemnified Persons') against, and hold
the Indemnified Persons harmless from, any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, losses, harm, damages, liability, expenses, lawsuits, judgments, costs, and fees fees (including
reasonable attomey fees and court costs), for any injury to or the death of any person, or any damage to or destruction of any property, or any other harm for which damages or any other
form of recovery is sought (whether at law or in equity), to the extent resulting from, based upon, or arising out of any negligent, grossly negligent, reckless, or intentionally wrongful
act, error, or omission of URS, its officers, employees, agents, engineers, consultants, contractors, subcontractors, or any person or entity for whom URS is legally liable, under, in
connection with, or in the performance of, this Agreement. The provisions of this paragraph shall survive the expil"!ltion or termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE VI -Client Responsibility.
Client shall: (1) provide URS, in writing, all information relating to Client's requirements for the project; (2) correctly identify to URS, the location of subsurface structures which
have been placed by Client, such as pipes, tanks, cables and utilities ((and Client shall also, at URS' request, provide contact information for utility providers which may have placed
subsurface structures at the project site); (3) notify URS of any potential hazardous substances or other health and safety hazard or condition known to Client existing on or near the
project site; (4) give URS prompt written notice of any suspected deficiency in the Services; and (5) with reasonable promptness, provide required approvals and decisions. In the event
that URS is requested by Client or Is required by subpoena to produce documents or give testimony in any action or proceeding to which Client is a party and URS is not a perty, Client
shall pay URS for any time and expenses required in connection therewith, including reasonable attomey's fees. ARTICLE VII-Force Maleure. An event of 'Force Majeure" occurs when an event
beyond the control of the Party claiming Force Majeure prevents such Party from fulfilling its obligations. An event of Force Majeure includes, without limitation, acts of God (including
floods, hurricanes and other adverse weather), war, riot, civil disorder, acts of terrorism, disease, epidemic, strikes and labor disputes, actions or inactions of government or other
authorities, law enforcement actions, curfews, closure of transportation systems or other unusual travel difficulties, or inability to provide a safe working environment for employees.
PSA·1.DOC 19·Mar·02 -3
In the event of Force Majeure, the obligations of URS to perform the Services and the obligations of the Client hereunder shall be suspended for the duration of the event of Force Majeure.
In such event the Time Schedule shall be extended by a like number of days as the event of Force Majeure. If Services are suspended for sixty (60) consecutive days or more by such Force
Majeure, either URS or the Client may, upon at least 5 days prior written notice, terminate this Agreement and the affected Work Order. In the case of such termination, URS shall be
compensated in accordance herewith for all work properly performed to the date of termination. In the event of such termination of this Agreement and the Work Order, no amount shall
be due for lost or anticipated profits. ARTICLE VIII -Right of Entry. If Client is the owner of the project site, URS shall have access to the project site at all reasonable timas for
the purpose of providing the Services. If Client is not the owner of the project site, Client shall shall use its commercially reasonable efforts to obtein permission for URS to have
access to the project site for such purpose If such permission cannot be obtained, URS will not be liable for the delay in time or its ability to perform the Services at the site. ARTICLE
IX -Documents. Upon payment to URS for work property performed, drawings, designs, plans, specifications, reports, information, and other documents or materials in whatever form or format
(together, 'Drawings') prepared by or for URS in connection herewith belong to, and remain the property of, the Client for its eXclusive reuse at any time without further compensation
and without any restrictions, Reuse of any such Drawings (whether in final form or not) by Client on any extension of this project or any other project without the written authorization
of URS shall be at Client's sole risk. : URS shall have the right to retain copies of all such materials. Drawings shall be submitted to the Client for !he Client's approval, and the
same shall shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. Notwithstanding Client's approval of any of the Drawings, URS wamants and represents that
the Drawings, as the same may be amended or supplemented by URS, shall, to the best of URS' knowledge, information and belief as engineers performing the practice of engineering in accordance
with the standards, duties, and obligations set forth in this Agreement and the Work Order, be sufficient and adequate for construction of the project for which the Services are provided,
shall be free from material error, and shall be satisfactory to the Client. In accordance with the standard of care, URS agrees that if the design of the project should be defective
in any waJ/, URS will assume sale responsibility for any damages, loss, claims, or expenses to the extent caused by URS' defective design. In the event it is determined that any Drawings
are so defective, URS shall promptly correct any defective Drawings at.no cost to the Client. The Client's approval, acceptance, use of or payment for all or any part of the Services
under this Agreement or the Work Order shall in no way alter URS' obligations or the Client's rights hereunder. Approval by the Client of any of URS' Drawings or work, or the use of
or payment for all or any part of the Services, shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of URS, its employees, contractors, subcontractors, agents
and consultants for the accuracy and competency of the same, nor shall such approval be deemed to be an assumption of or an indemnification for such responsibility or liability by the
Client for any defect, error or omission in such Drawings or work, it being understood that the Client at all times is ultimately relying on URS' skill and knowledge in preparing the
Drawings. ARTICLE X -Termination. A. Client may at any time terminate all or any portion of the Services, or abandon or defer the project (or any part thereof) for which the Services
are being provided, provided, for convenience, at its option and in its sale discretion, by sending a written notice within ten (10) days of such termination, abandonment or deferral
to URS. If the project (or pornon thereof) for which the Services are being provided is abandoned or deferred by Client, Client shall have the right to restore and reinstate the project
and the Services hereunder within one (1) year of such abandonment or deferral; provided, however, that if the abandonment or defemal is for more than 90 consecutive days, such restoration
and reinstatement shall be subject to renegotiation of URS' compensation. B. Either party can terminate this Agreement and Work Order for cause if the other party: PSA·l.DOC 19·Mar·02
-4
(il commits a material breach of this Agreement. and (a) such breach remains uncured for a period of 7 days after notice thereof (which notice shall specifically identify the breach)
is received by the breaching party, or (b) if the breach cannot with diligence be cured within said 7 day period, if within such 7 day period the breaching party provides the non.breaching
party written notice of the curative measures which it proposes to undertake, and proceeds promptly to initiate such measures to cure such failure, and thereafter prosecutes the curing
of such failure with diligence and continuity, the time within which such failure may be cured shall be extended for such period as may be necessary to complete the curing of such failure
with diligence and continuity. not to exceed 30 days following the occurrence of the breach, or (ii) becomes insolvent Termination for cause shall be effective ten (10) days after receipt
of a Notice of Termination, unless a later date is specified in the Notice. C. URS shall cease all work and labor being performed under this Agreement immediately upon receipt of the
notice of termination (whether for convenience or for cause). D. In the event this Agreement is terminated for any reason (whether for convenience or for cause), URS shall invoice Client
for all work property completed and shall be compensated in accordance with the terms of this Agreement for all such work accomplished prior to the receipt of the notice of termination.
In the event of termination of this Agreement for any reason (whether for convenience or for cause). no amount shall be due for lost or antiCipated profits. In the event of any termination
and upon peyment to URS for the work properly performed by URS, URS shall deliver to the Client all finished or unfinished documents. data, studies, surveys. drawings, maps, models,
reports, photographs or other items prepared by or for URS in connection with this Agreement, its Services, and the project. E..ln the event of termination for cause, the parties shall
have their remedies at law as to any other rights and obligations between them, subject to the other terms and conditions of this Agreement. ARTICLE XI -No Third Party Rights. This Agreement
shall not creafe any rights or benefits to parties other than Client and URS. No third party shall have the right to rely on URS opinions rendered in connection with the Services without
the written consent of URS and the third party's agreement to be bound to the same conditions and limitations as Client. ARTICLE XII -AsSignments. Neither URS nor Client shall have power
to and shall not assign, transfer, or otherwise convey its interest, rights, duties, or responsibilities in this Agreement or any part thereof without the prior written consent of the
other party, and any such assignment, subletting, transfer or other conveyance shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement (without an opportunity to cure) and the party which
has not attempted to assign, transfer or otherwise convey shall have the right to terminate this Agreement immediately and without further notice; provided, however, that nothing contained
in, this paragraph shall prevent URS from employing such independent professional associates, sub-consultants, and suppliers as URS may deem appropriate to assist in the performance
of the Services. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment or transfer, no assignment or transfer will release or discharge the assignor or transferor
from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement PSA·1.DOC 19-Mar-02 -5
ARTICLE XIII • Hazardous Substances. All nonhazardous samples and by-products from sampling processes in connection with the Services shall be disposed of by URS in accordance with applicable
law; provided, however, that any and all such materials, including wastes, that cannot be introduced back into the environment under existing law without additional treatment, and all
hazardous wastes, radioactive wastes, or hazardous substances (eg, pollutants and contaminants regulated by law) ("Hazardous Substances") from the sampling processes in connection with
the Services, shall be packaged in accordance with the applicable law by URS and tumed over to Client for appropriate disposal (provided, however, that URS shall first give notice to
Client of the existence of such Hazardous Substances). URS shall not arrange for or otherwise disposa of Hazardous Substances under this Agreement. URS, at Clienfs request, may assist
Client in identifying appropriate altamatives for off-site treatment, storage or disposal of the Hazardous Substances, but URS shall not make any independent detennination relating to
the selection of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility nor subcontract such activities through transporters or others. Client shall sign all necessary manifests for the disposal
of Hazardous Substances if Client is required by law to sign such manifests. If Client requires: (1) URS agents or employees to sign such manifests; or (2) URS to hire, for Client, the
Hazardous Substances transportation, treatment, or disposal contractor, then for these two purposas, URS shall be considered to act as Clienfs agent so that URS will not be considered
to be a generator, transporter, or disposer of such substances or considered to be the arranger for disposal of Hazardous Substances, and Client shall indemnify URS against any claim
or loss resulting from such signing. ARTICLE XIV -Venue; Dispute Resolution. A. In the event of any action under this Agreement, venue for all causes of action shall be instituted and
maintained in Dallas County, Texas (state court) or in the northem district of Texas (federal court), as the case may be. The parties agree that the laws of the State of Texas shall
apply to the interpretation, validity and enforcement of this Agreement, and, with respect to any conflict of law provisions, the parties agree that such conflict of law provisions shall
not affect the application of the law of Texas (without reference to its conflict of law provisions) to the interpretation, validity and enforcement of this Agreement. B. In an effort
to resolve claims, disputes or other matters in question arising out of or relating to this Agreement or breach thereof, the parties agree that all claims, disputes, or other matters
in question shall be submitted to nonbinding mediation as a first step in seeking a resolution of the same. The dispute shall be mediated by a mutually acceptable third-party to be chosen
by the disputing parties within thirty (30) days after written notice by one of them requesting mediation. The disputing parties shall share the costs of the mediation equally. By mutual
agreement the parties may postpone mediation until each has completed some specified but limited discovery about the dispute. By mutual agreement, the parties may use a nonbinding fonn
of dispute resolution other than mediation. Any nonbinding dispute resolution process conducted under this Agreement shall be confidential within the meaning of Sections 154.053 and
154.073 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, as amended, and any successor statute thereto. If neither a negotiated settlement or mediated resolution is obtained within a reasonable
time period, the parties may pursue any available legal or equitable remedy. Any request for mediation or another fonn of nonbinding dispute resolution shall be filed in writing with
the other party within a reasonable time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen. In no event shall the demand for mediation or other fonn of nonbinding dispute
resolution be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such claim, dispute or other matter in question would be barred by the applicable statutes
of limitations. ARTICLE XV -Integrated Writing and Enforceability, This Agreement (together with the Work Order) constitutes the final and complete repository of the agreements between
Client and URS relating to the Services and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous communications, representations, or agreements, whether oral or written. Modifications of this Agreement
shall not be binding unless made in writing and signed by an Authorized Representative of each party. The provisions of this Agreement shall be enforced to the fullest extent permitted
by law. If any provision of this Agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable, the provision shall be construed and applied in a way that comes as close as possible to PSA·l.DOC
19-Mar-02 -6 • 
expressing the intention 01 the parties with regard to the provisions and that saves the validity and enforceability of the provision, ARTICLE XVI Miscellaneous. A. The undersigned officers
andror agents of the parties hereto are the properly authorized officials and have the necessary authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto, and each party hereby
certifies to the other that any necessary resolutions or other act extending such authority have been duly passed and are now in full force and effect B. Any provision of this Agreement
later held to be unenforceable for any reason shall be deemed void and all remaining prOVisions shall continue in fulliorce and effect. All obligations arising prior to the termination
of this Agreement and all provisions of this Agreement allocating responsibility or liability between URS and Client shall survive the cancellation, expiration or termination of this
Agreement. Any rights and remedies either party may have with respect to the other arising arising out of the performance of services during the term of this agreement shall survive
the cancellation, expiration or termination 01 this Agreement C. URS acknowledges that timely performance of its services is an important element of this Agreement and the Work Order.
URS will put forth its best efforts to timely complete the Services. D. The rights and remedies provided by this Agreement are cumulative and the:use of anyone right or remedy by either
party shall not preclude or waive its right to use any or all other remedies. Said rights and remedies are given in addition to any other rights the partias may have by law statute,
ordinance, or otherwise. E. URS acknowledges that the project for which the Services are being provided is a public project of the Town of Addison, Texas and is for a public purpose,
and that the property on which the project is to be constructed, the improvements to be constructed thereon, and the funds used by Client in connection with the property acquisHion and
the design and construction of the project are exempt from the filing and enforcement of any liens thereon or with respect thereto and from forced sale. For the consideration set forth
hef!'lin, URS waives and releases any lien, or claim or right of such lien, which URS has or may have in connection with the Services on or in connection with such property, improvements.
and funds, this Agreement and the Work Order. F. All notices, demands, or requests from one party to another shall be personally delivered or sent by United States mail certified, or
registered, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, to the addresses stated below: To Client: ToURS: Addison Service Center Graystone Centre, 16801 Westgrove Drive 3010 LBJ Freeway,
SuHe 1300 Addison, Texlls 75001-5190 Dallas, Texas 75234 Attn: Mike Murphy, Director of Public Works Attn: Cliff R Hall, Project Manager All notices or communications required to be
given in writing by one party or the other shall be considered as having been given to the addressee (i) il by hand delivery, at the time of delivery, or (ii) if mailed, seventy-two
(72) hours after the deposit of same in any United States mail post office box, The addresses and addressees for the purpose hereof may be changed by giving notice of such change in
the manner herein provided for giving notice. Unless and until such written notice is received the last addresses and addressee stated by written notice, or provided herein if no written
notice of change has been sent or received, shall be deemed to continue in effect for all purposes hereunder. G. The Client, without invalidating this Agreement, may request or authorize
changes in the Services within the general scope of this Agreement consisting 01 additions, deletions, or other revisions. Such PSA-1.DOC 19oMar-02 -7 
changes shall be documented by Change Orders prepared by URS for Client's signature. Client and URS will agree to equitable adjustments in EstimatedCosts and Schedule as appropriate for each such change. URS will not proceed with changed Services without written authorization from Client. THE PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE that there has been
an opportunity to negotiate the terms and conditions of this Agreement and agree to be bound accordingly. CLIENT L .c=£<-o lJiU L) Signature 􀁾􀀠 Signa ure Ron Whitehead I City Manager
Emily 􀁔􀁡􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀠P .E. I Vice President Typed NameITllle Typed NameITrtle 11-13-0"2.-II-II-OZ Date of Signature Date of Signature PSA·l.DOC 1!)'Mar"()2 -8· 
FIXED PRICE WORK ORDER NO. ___-----'0"'0'-'-1____ In accordance with the Agreement for Professional Services between Town of Addison ("Clienf'), and_ URS Corporation ("URS"). a Nevada
corporation, dated November 11. 2002 ,this Work Order describes the Services, Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS Services on the Project known as: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY
ROAD DESIGN DEVELOPMENT & CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Client Authorized Representative: Address: Public Works Department P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Telephone No.: __----"9"'72"'.c.:.4"'50"".2"'S'-'.
7....:.1_________________ URS Authorized Representative: Emily Taylor. P.E. Address: Gravstone Centre, 3010 LBJ Freeway. Suite 1300 Dallas. TX 75234 Telephone No.: __􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀹􀀢􀀧􀀷􀀲􀀢􀀧􀀮􀀺􀀡􀀴􀀰􀀶�
�􀀮􀀶􀀢􀀧􀀹􀀢􀀧􀀵􀀢􀀢􀀰_________________ SERVICES. The Services shall be described in Attachment --,A",-_to this Work Order. SCHEDULE. The Estimated Schedule shall be set forth in Attachment
􀁾to this Work Order. Because of the uncertainties inherent in the the Services, Schedules are estimated and are subject to revision unless otherwise specifically described herein. URS
acknowledges that timely performance of its services is an important element of this Agreement and the Work Order. URS will put forth its best efforts to timely complete the Services.
PAYMENT. The Services described in Attachment A will be performed for a total fixed amount of $550,965.00; in no event shall the payment by Client for the Services exceed the said amount.
A breakdown of this.amount is included in Attachment.J!......, Payment shall be made monthly based upon statements submitted to the Client for the work performed. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
The terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced above shall apply to this Work Order, except as expressly modified herein. ACCEPTANCE of the terms of this Work Order is acknowledged
by the following signatures of the Authorized Representatives. CLIENT • 􀁋􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁬􀁾􀁲􀁬􀀲􀀺􀀻􀁏 Signature .... Ron Whitehead I City Manager Typed NamelT"rtle rtle /t-/(-0"2........
Date of Signature Emily Taylor, P.E.I V e President PSA·1.DOC 19·Mar·02 • 1 
October 18, 2005 Invoices paid to URS on the following dates and in the following amounts: 9/30105 $4550.00* 8131/05 1803.24 7/26/05 5982.15 7/19105 2535.00 5/26/05 3520.00 5105105 2115.33
4/01105 1225.00 2117/05 2985.33 1128/05 9133.25 1/03/05 1800.00 11119104 1779.57 11110/04 2452.50 Total $39,881.37** *Invoice not processed **This amount is $2481.37 over the contract
amount of$37400.00 
e l ' · f Stat1on' HP LA ERJET 3200 Sent By: REPORT; CHECK I VEHOOR , NM>lE Jom )0522 31621 ma6 32010 32901 3me 33m 3009 3m! 􀀳􀁾􀀴􀀶􀁡􀀠 TOWN OF 􀁁􀁾􀁾􀁣􀁲􀁬􀁖􀁉􀁔􀁙􀀠 ADDISON; 972
450 7074; GENBAATED; 12 APR 0> 11;41 TOWN Qr ADDISON VENDOR INVOICE PAYHEHT ACTIVITY l0/01/01 -IOIli/OI Oct·18·05 1:07PM; lp.?? RUN, TUBSDAY OCTli2005 13:11 Page 1/1 PAGE PAIMENT UAl'E
INVOICe I 09611 AOOAES5 ! URS CORPOAATION 1I/1i/OI 11/24101 02/03/05 01/06/05 􀀰􀀲􀀯􀁗􀁏􀁾􀀠 04121/05 05/12105 OS/26/05 07/21/05 07121105 09/08/05 1319219 13112'3 Imm 􀀱􀀴􀀹􀁡􀀶􀁾􀀠
􀀱􀁾􀀲􀀹􀁭􀀠 1590531 1643967 101Sm 1719501 1792284 1932SS6 2m.>0 1119.51 nJ3.25 1900.00 2985.33 1225.00 2llU3 3510.00 2>1>.00 5982.15 1803.24 VENOOR TOTRL: ------..􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 35331.31
GAANO TO'i'AJ: 􀁾􀁾􀁋􀁟􀀢􀀬•••􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀠 35331.37 .. =t::1I='''''''''''''$<-a-e.x. 
URS September 30, 2005 Mr. Steven z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase II
-Construction Services Invoice for Professional Services Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please find our invoice for Professional Services during the construction ofthe Arapaho Road Bridge
at Midway Road for the period ofJuly 30,2005 through August 26, 2005. Also included is our Progress Report for this period outlining the services provided. Please note that due to the
number ofmeetings, requests for information and issues with the Erection Plan and the Type B lighting that have occurred over the last three months, we have exceeded our budget by $2,481.37.
Outstanding issues that will need to be addressed include the review ofthe remaining portion ofthe Erection Plan for hanger stressing, review ofthe final hanger stresses, and other miscellaneous
issues that arise. As construction ofthe main span arch is still ongoing, we expect that URS' services will be required for the next few months. In this regard we have previously sent
Change Order No.2 for your review. Per our Agreement, we will need written confirmation to continue to provide construction services. We request that the review and approval ofthis change
order be expedited. Sincerely, URS Corporation Cliff R. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Graystone Center 3010 LBJ Freeway. Suite 1300 Dattas. TX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950
Fax: 972.406.6951 
Monthly Progress Report Construction Services for the Arapaho Road Bridge Over Midway Road DRS Project No. 25334402 Period: From July 30, 2005 to August 26, 2005 1. General Accomplishments
1.1 Responded to questions from HNTB and RFI's from contractor. 1.2 Completed the review and approval ofthe Contractor's "Step-by-Step Construction Analysis with Deflections and Cable
Forces". 2. Progress This Period 2.1 Responded to RFI-119 regarding bundled stirrups in diaphragms. 2.2 Responded to RFI-123 regarding stirrup widths in diaphragm transition zone. 2.3
Responded to RFI-120, 121 & 122 regarding the diaphragm reinforcing details. These RFIs concerned redetailing the U2 bars that were not placed by the contractor and stirrups that would
not fit between the welded splices. 2.4 Responded to HNTB's & Contractor's questions related to the relocation oflighting sleeves in the diaphragm. 2.5 Responded to HNTB's & Contractor's
questions related to the misplacement of a diaphragm mechanical coupler. 2.6 Responded to the the Contractor's engineer's concern related to the stresses in the U-beams during erection.
2.7 Completed the review and approval ofthe Contractor's "Step-by-Step Construction . Analysis with Deflections and Cable Forces". 3. Anticipated Next Period 3.1 Respond to RFls 3.2
Respond to HNTB questions. 3.3 Review/respond to Contractor's "Check ofStructoral Performance During Construction. " 4. Schedule Status 4.1 All outstanding questions have been responded
to. S. Issues /Impacts 5.1 DRS has exceeded the fee for responding to RFI's and the Erection Reports and requires a change order to continue providing Construction Services. : ;>. 
Remittance Page I nvoice Date 10103105 Invoice 1874266 URS Project 25334402 Page 1 For: Design of the Arapaho Bridge Over Midway Bridge Professional Services for Period Ending 08128105
Town Of Addison Attn: Steven Z. Chutchain, PE 16801 Westgrove Dr Addison TX 75001-5190 Total Due: Terms: $4,550.00 Due upon Receipt USD • Make checks payable to: URS Corporation • Please
indicate invoice number andlor project number on check • Please include this stub with payment Regular Mail (USPS): URS Corporation Dept. 1028 P.O. Box 121028 Dallas TX 75312-1028 US
Overnight Courier: URS Corporation Lock Box No. 891028 888 South Greenville Ave., Suite 200 Richardson, TX 75081 Attn: Wholesale Lock Box Processing (972) 68Q..1900 Electronic Funds
Transfer: Account: URS Corporation Bank: Wells Fargo Bank Account No.: 4520-086471 ABA Routing No.: 121-00Q..248 Swift Code: WFBIUS6S Remiftance Information can be sent to: Email: RemitTo@URSCorp.com
Fax: (512) 419-6937 Attn: Cash Applications Please contact Laci Rosas at 512 419-6378 6378 or via email atLaci_Rosas@urscorp.com if you have any questions regarding this invoice. 
2 I nvoice Date 10/03/05 Invoice 1874266 URS Project 25334402 Town Of Addison Attn: Steven Z. Chutchain, PE 16801 Westgrove Dr Addison TX 75001-5190 For: Design of the Arapaho Bridge
Over Midway Bridge Professional Services for Period Ending 08/26/05 Job: 25334402 Design of Arapaho Road Bridge Total this job TOTAL THIS INVOICE Total Contract Value 7,400.00 Amount
Invoiced to Date $27,545.98 Contract Value Remaining -$9,854.02 Page SERVICES 4,550.00 4,550.00 EXPENSES 0.00 0.00 TOTAL 4,550.00 4,550.00 4,550.00 0.00 $4,550.00 USD Please contact
Laci Rosas at 512 419-6378 or via email atLaci_Rosas@urscorp.com if you have any questions regarding this invoice. 
Invoice Date 10/03105 Invoice 1874266 Project 25334402 Page 3 Town Of Addison At1n: Steven Z. Chulchain, PE 16801 Weslgrove Dr Addison TX 75001-5190 For: Design of the Arapaho Bridge
Over Midway Bridge Professional Services for Period Ending 08126105 Job: 25334402 Design ofArapaho Road Bridge LABOR HOURS RATE AMOUNT REGULAR Hall, Cliff R 10.00 155.00 1.550.00 Durham,
Gregg T 2.50 80.00 200.00 Beaupre. Richard J 20.00 140.00 2,800.00 Subtotal 32.50 4,550.00 Total Labor 4,550.00 Total due this job 4,550.00 TOTAL THIS INVOICE $4,550.00 USD Please contact
Lad Rosas al512 419-6378 or via email atLacLRosas@urscorp.com if you have any questions regarding this invoice. F15491744 
Invoice Date 10/03/05 Invoice 1874266 Project 25334402 GIL DATE JOBI SRV DATE LBR CMT GLACeT TASK DOC /lNW Job: 25334402 Design ofArapaho Road Bridge Labor REGULAR 08I261ll5 25334402
50110 10000 T41800638 08I26r05 08119105 25334402 50110 10000 T41793148 00119105 08/12105 25334402 50110 10000 T4 1777856 08/12/00 08lO5ro5 25334402 50110 10000 T41762846 08/05/05 08119105
25334402 50110 10000 T41793084 08119105 081261115 25334402 80110 20000 T41812250 08/261ll5 08l191ll5 25334402 50110 10000 T41796372 08119105 Total Labor EMP/VENDOR # 118081 118081 118081
118001 98483 51513 51513 BILLING BACKUP NAME I DESCRIPTION Hall, Cliff R Project Manager Hall, CliffR Project Manager Hall, CliffR Project Manager Hall, CliffR Project Manager Durham.
Gregg T Assistant Project Eng. 8eaupre, Richard J Senior Project Engineer Beaupre, Richard J Senior Project Engineer HOURS I Q1'Y 2.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 2.50 12.00 8.00 Page 1 RATE BILLING
AMOUNT 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 80.00 140.00 140.00 310.00 465.00 155.00 620.00 200.00 1,680.00 1,120.00 4,550.00 
Steve Chutchian From: Steve ChutC/lian Sent: Thursday. september 22, 2005 9:45 AM To: Nancy Cline Subject: FW: Arapaho Road Bridge Fee Nancy: Thanks for your comments. Steve C. -----Original
Message----From: Steve Chutchian Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 9:43 AM To: 'Cliff Hall@URSCorp.com' Subject: RE: Arapaho Road Bridge Fee Cliff: We would ask you to refer to issues
regarding the couplers (addressed earlier in the project, problems with the concrete due to size of aggregate, and all problems that stemmed from the various steel design components
of the bridge. These all appear to be design issues that came into focus during construction. Thanks. Steve C. -----Original Message----From: Cliff Hall@URSCorp.com [mailto:Cliff Hall@URSCorp.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 4:04 PM To: Steve Chutchian Cc: Jenny Nicewander; Nancy Cline Subject: RE: Arapaho Road Bridge Fee Steve, Could you be more specific on which items
you believe are a result of not meeting the standard of care for design errors or omissions so we can review and respond to these specifically. We do not believe that we have charged
the project for services that were a direct result of items that were not "addressed fully or adequately on (our) plans and in the specifications". We believe that many of the redesign
items resulted from contractor changes or preferences. Cliff R. Hall, P.E. Vice President Engineering Manager URS Corporation 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas, Texas 75234 Main: 972.406.6950
Direct: 972.406.6976 Fax: 972.406.6951 This e-mail and any attachments are confidential. If you receive this message in error or are not the intended recipientr you should not retain,
distribute, disclose or use any of this information and you should destroy the e-mail and any attachments or copies. 1 
..Steve Chutchian" <schutchian@ci.ad dison .. tx.us> To <Cliff_Hall@urscorp.com> 09/21/2005 PM 03:37 "Nancy Clinelt cc 􀀼􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁀􀁣􀁩􀁾􀁡􀁤􀁤􀁩􀁳􀁯􀁮􀀮􀁴􀁸 .. us>, "Jenny Nicewanderff
<jnicewander@ci.addison.tx.us> Subject RE: Arapaho Road Bridge Fee Cliff' We have reviewed the spreadsheet breakdown that was submitted. This spreadsheet shows several item descriptions
and associated costs passed on to the Town that are a result of changes made to the original bridge design. The Town cannot be responsible for any re-design or other changes for construction
that were not addressed fully or adequately on your plans and in the specifications. please review your current list of items and back these costs out. From that point, we can more accurately
address the amount of additional funding that will be necessary to complete the project. Your assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated. Should you have any questions, please
let me know. Thanks. Steve Chutchian -----Original Message----From: Cliff Hall@URSCorp.com [mailto:Cliff Hall@URSCorp.com] Sent' Monday, September 19, 2005 4:55 PM To: Steve Chutchian
Subject: RE: Arapaho Road Bridge Fee Steve, The best I can do is provide a spreadsheet break down of the tasks completed and the hours spent under each labor classification by invoice
period. This information has been provided throughout the project in our progress reports and our invoices. I have created the attached spreadsheet to consolidate this information for
your use. I am hopeful that this will help expedite the Change Order approval process so we can continue to provide constructioh phase services as necessary. (See attached file, Manhour
breakdown. xIs) Cliff R. Hall, P.E. Vice President 2 
Engineering Manager URS Corporation 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas, Texas 75234 Main: 972.406.6950 Direct: 972.406.6976 Fax: 972.406.6951 This e-mail and any attachments are confidential.
If you receive this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should not retain, distribute, disclose or use any of this information and you should destroy the e-mail and
any attachments or copies. "Steve ChutchianU <schutchian@ci.ad dison.tx.us> To <Cliff_Hall@urscorp.com> 09/19/2005 01:46 cc PM Subject RE: Arapaho Road Bridge Fee Cliff: Nancy asked
me to contact you and request a rnanhour breakout of previous work performed on the construction administration/bridge analysis work on Arapaho Rd. She said that she would be more comfortable
approving the next amendment if she had that information in hand. Your assistance is very much appreciated. Thanks. Steve Chutchian -----Original Message----******************************************
************************************************ ************************* This e-mail and any files or attachments transmitted with it contains Information that is confidential and
privileged. This document may contain :.,: Protected Health Information (PHI) or other information that is intended only for the use of the individual(s) and entity(ies) to whom it is
addressed. If you are the intended recipient, further disclosures are prohibited without proper authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, printing,
or use of this information is strictly prohibited and possibly a violation of federal or state law and regulations. If you have received this information in error, please delete it and
notify Hamid Khaleghipour at 972-450-2868 immediately. Thank you. ****************************************************************************************** *************************
3 
From: Cliff Hall@URSCorp.com [mailto:Cliff Hall@URSCorp.com] sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 1:36 PMTo: Nancy Cline Cc: steve Chutchian Subject: Arapaho Road Bridge Fee Nancy, We
still have not received a response to our e-mails regarding URS' continuation of services during construction. Please advise as soon as possible as to how you would like us to proceed.
Cliff R. Hall, P.E. Vice President Engineering Manager URS Corporation 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas, Texas 75234 Main: 972.406.6950 Direct: 972.406.6976 Fax: 972.406.6951 This
e-mail and any attachments are confidential. If you receive this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should not retain, distribute, disclose or use any of this information
and you should destroy the e-mail and any attachments or copies. Nancy, see attached copy of an e-mail we sent to Steve Chutchian on August 22, 2005. We have currently exceeded our fee
on this project as outlined below and will need additional fee to continue providing services throughout construction. Please advise if the attached proposal is acceptable so we can
send a signed Change Order for the Town's execution. Thank you for your attention to this matter. cliff R. Hall, P.E. Vice president Engineering Manager URS Corporation 3010 LBJ Freeway,
Suite 1300 Dallas, Texas 75234 Main: 972.406.6950 Direct, 972.406.6976 Fax: 972.406.6951 This e-mail and any attachments are confidential. If you receive this message in error or are
not the intended recipient, you should not retain, distribute, disclose or use any of this information and you should destroy the e-mail and any attachments or copies. 4 
•• Steve, We will be sending you an invoice soon that will cover work performed through the month of July. Please note that due to several issues including additional meetings and discussions
on the erection sequence report, the revised lighting (specified fixture no longer available), and contractor's RFIs, as of Friday, August 19, 2005, we have consumed the budget as estimated
in Change order No.1. As you may recall, in Change Order No. 1 we only budgeted for three months (May, June & July) of responses to RFls @$1800 /month. The amount of time addressing
the issues has exceeded the budget for RFI responses as well as the budget for reviewing the erection report as we have spent $2,535 in May, $5,982 in June, $1,803 in July and to date,
$2,560 in August. In this regard, we would propose another Change Order to cover any future RFls and the review of the erection report. We have attached a draft copy of these documents
that are in line with what was approved previously for your review. Today we have finally received the Erection Analysis report from Archer Western. We are willing to commence the review
of this report with your confirmation that a Change Order is agreeable. We look forward to hearing from you on this matter. (See attached file: fee proposal C02.doc) (See attached file:
CHANGE ORDER 02.doc) Cliff R. Hall, P.E. Vice President Engineering Manager URS Corporation 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas, Texas 75234 Main: 972.406.6950 Direct: 972.406.6976 Fax:
972.406.6951 This e-mail and any attachments are confidential. If you receive this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should not retain, distribute, disclose or
use any of this information and you should destroy the e-mail and any attachments or copies. 5 
􀁓􀁔􀁾􀁖􀁅􀁎 Z. CHUTCmAN, P.E. AssIstant City Engineer uW· I (972) 450·2886 (972) 450·2837 FAX (214) 673-2518 Mobile schutehian@ci.addison.tx.us E-mail Town of Addison 16801 􀁗􀀮􀁳􀂷"􀁾".􀁯
􀁶􀁥􀀠Dr. P . 0 . Box 9010, Addison, Texas 75001·9010 Wet;e /tJ2.+';?r1ft> J2 􀁾􀀠 Iff L.L ( tv t; 􀁾􀀠_ 7JIA-rvt'5 ( s fe<-e C. . Ste-ve.( 􀁲􀁬􂂬􀁾􀀠D:Sl:: Cl:ff--1-0 re-vvtov-e J}eMI\$
fer-k,,,,, "'0 -k ru\:,I€JV'-"-S wi 􀁾 􀁰􀀨􀁴􀁷􀁴􀁾􀀱􀀠 P I􀁻􀁉􀁾􀀠􀁾 [> vi£/\. 􀁾􀀠(iV\;Vl 011 e cf'Nl:J r c.p... cJU:> 0 -(P.. eVI'e.tAJ £Z.-F ( s ) -, ;_., . ',' . :." :" . ." .'

ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN-HOUR BREAKDOWN THROUH AUGUST 26. 2005 INVOICE PERIOD WORK ORDER NO. 1 August 16, 2004 'iuwgb Seplember
24.lOO4 Rcopalldod to Rl'! Nos. 9. 11. 20 &; 21 Rcopondod to quosti.... w.. HNTB 􀁃􀁾􀀮 CD .fall dniwingfil" for_as 􀁾by IlNTB September 15.10041brough o.tober 19.1004 Rcopondod to Rl'!
Nos. 29 RI:opoudod to quom...w..1lNTB o.tober 30.1004 ,""'ugil N.....ber 26,lOO4 RC3pOodod to Rl'!Nos. 31 Rcopalldod to quomOllllw..HNTB Field visit to review cotwnn staJ:tct bat misalignment
November 17, lOO4 througil December 31,lOO4 RI:opouded to Rl'! N",. 38 Responded to questions from HNTB n:gardiq the U4am. connection d.etail in Span 9 Redeaigned the Uoobcam eoonoction
detail in Span 9. This was a dcaigo change 􀁾by IlNTB &; the """"".tor -RlMJcd aod submittod dni..,;"p to in=:porato the new U-bcam """,,,,,:lion d...il. Rcopondod to 'l""U... 􀁲􀁥􀁧􀁡􀁲􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁳􀁾
10IIj!\IIs ..d8hop dni..,;"p f", bano=. Jaruwy l,llm through Jaouuy 11!, nos RI:opoudod to Rl'!.p RI:opouded to quostiOlI3 w..1lNTB "'pingthe 􀁾Jcoatha aod orectiou 􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀮􀁦􀁴􀁨􀀮􀁾􀀠
􀁾_onthe U..}am diaphragm detail to Avoid conflicts with the tC'Viacd wddcd reNt that MIll_ 􀁤􀁥􀁡􀁬􀁳􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁷􀁬􀁰􀁾 by 1lNTB& the con_ RC3pOododtoquosti....bootthc_c.m..t.Paoel(PCP)8hopdniwing.
Jmuuy :I.!!. 1005 through Febnwy l5.llm Reapondod to Rl'!-6I,Rl'!-62&;Rl'!·74 P_field miew or_IO"'P _ that _ mUpIaccd aod ""1""'ded to the 􀁾􀁯􀁦􀁭􀁩􀁯􀁰􀁬􀀮􀁴􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁟􀀱 in _cap. February
16,2005 through April I, 2005 Rcopondod to Rl'l-69, Rl'!·74 &; Rl'!-77 Responded to HNTBla qucstiona. April:!, 2005 ,btougil AprIl19,llm RC3pOodod toRFl-1 ropins cpoxyrebar. Rcoponded
to Rl'!.J ropzding intc:rl'.,...", be...... deck aod __k ""D. Responded to HNTB's &: Comraetor'. questions related to the att.achment of the pedestrian rail pMlIlIlDt to the pickets.
Responded to qucstiotU regarding the pedestrian rail paint spec. SUBTOTAL WORK ORDER NO. 1 2 11.5 1 6 0.5 3.5 4.5 7.5 8 4 14 44.5 6 2.75 5.5 2 8 14 , I 4 I.S 12 5.5 13 1 15 3 0 57 70
0 48.5 17.75 6 9 21 15.5 12 67.25 29.5 8 23 32 208.3 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002· ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN-HOUR BREAKDOWN THROUH AUGUST 28, 2006 CHANGE ORDER NO.1 April 30, 2005'bn>ojlh May 27, 2005 􀁾􀁥􀁤 to RFI-74
regarding the T-4 rail anchorage. Rcopoodcd to RFI45 ,.gaMing th. approach ,l.b detail. Rcapooolcd to 􀁒􀁆􀁉􀀭􀀸􀀶􀀬􀀮􀁾 th. otingcr _ondetail. Responded toHNT8'11 &: Coutractor's qlJC8tions
rdatcd to the P1csb sed 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁾􀀠 p4DOldetalb. Alt=nded....,.".. _the To"" 􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁧 th. bridgo rail paWing and the Span 9 U· Beam splli:c detail. -.,.ted th. painllypC& and application!ar
1ho rail paWing. May l8, 2_ Ihroujlh July I, 2005 Rcopooded to RFI·95 􀁾om.. bole in 1>uo 􀁾ofotingcr. Rcapooded to RFI·9S 􀁾ground rods in T-4 ..ila' light_. Responded to RFI-101 􀀬􀀮􀁾
th. T-4 rail ",obor bolt _1.... Rcapondcd to lJNl'Ir. &: Contractor's questions related to the Dpt"''''''_''BOcdd ."'''',... panel details. Rcapondcd to HNIB's &: Contractor's qucsticma
J'C:labl to the l'1UIDbcr ofccnduil allowed in the T-4 rail. Responded to 􀁈􀁎􀁔􀁂􀁂􀁾􀀸 &. Town's qucmons rclato:l to the allowable spacing ofthc expansionjoint in the T-4 rail. Rovicmd
the c.m..ewr', (portiaI) mhmi!!aI ofthe B=Uon Plan and provided 􀁾􀀠 Altccded mcotins> _ the T""" and ConIra!:Ior ..􀁾the _onS_PIsn. July1, 2__jIh July 19,%005 Rcapooded to Im-105 􀁾ol..",;e.J
oondult l'laRcapooded to RFI-109 􀁾pcd-'an railllgbticg. Rcapondcd to HNTI!', /II. c.m..ewr', qoooti_..1ated '" the Type nllshtios. Type B 1igh1ing.. opccificd was unavailable whoa ConID_lried
to proourc it Coordinated with 1igh1ing designer" dcvdop a suitab1. aI_. Responded to HNTI!', /II. ConID_', qoootions.clated to the dlaplualJ>tl 􀁾􀀠 Rovicmd tho 􀁃􀀼􀁭􀁉􀁮􀁣􀁴􀁯􀁲􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀬
qoootions.clated to the _ in tho U-bwna during ......... AIIondcd meeting _tho Town, HNTII and Contnw;tor ..ga!Iliog the pcd-'anrail Ushtios and Type B lighting. IS 1.l 20 10 11.5 7
2 S.S I 16.5 45 12 
I 10 I 20 2.5 I 32.5 106 ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO, 002 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN-HQI)R BREAI<lJOlNN THROUH AUGUST 28, 20011 July 30, 2005 tlINlI/Ib A"",,":IIi,
2005 (o.t yet iIm>k:ed) Rcoporu!ed to RFl·119 ..gan!iDg buodIcd IIIhrups in dUpInPI'. Rcoporu!ed to RFl·l23 "'lI"lIinII otimIp widths ill dUplngm tmooition ZOllO. Rcoporu!ed to RJlH20,
121 lie 122 􀁾the dUplngm -inIIdetails. These RFIa 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀁤􀁥􀁴􀁡􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁧 tho U2 bm thuI_not placed by tho 􀁾ami IIIhrups thulwould ootfit __the woldcd apti.... 􀁒􀁾to HNTll', lie
CotItnoctor', qucoIi<ms ..l>1od to the "'location oflighting BI..... in tho diaphragm. Rcspowlcd to HNTB'II &. 􀁾􀁴􀁡􀀺􀁾related to the misplacement ofa diaphmgm """""""cal couplet.
Responded to the ContraoWr*. cnsi:n=r'. ccneem related to tho stl'esIeI in1hc U-bcams during_ 􀁾􀁬􀁣􀁴􀀮􀁤 the nMewaml approvat 􀁯􀁦􀁴􀁨􀀮􀁾.. 􀁷􀁾Co!-..uon Anal,.iswith SUBTOTAL CHANGE
ORDER NO. I Gnmd Total (_KbAuRll'l:lli, 2005) 0 III 103 9 57 18 6 10 314 $39,768.75 $ ARAPAHOROA WORK ORDER I MAN-HOUR BREAK URI CORPORATIO CHANGE ORDER N 􀁁􀁰􀁲􀁩􀁬􀀳􀀰􀁾􀀠lOllS 􀁴􀁢􀁲􀁯􀁵􀁾􀀠
R"'1'OIl<Icd ., RFl·l R"'1'OIl<Icd '"RFH R"'1'OIl<Icd to RFl-1 R<tpondcd tollN'l1 panel details. AlIcrulcd """""'sa . Bcamaplice detail _plod the poi May 18.200\5 t,,",UKi R<tpondcd
to RFloS R<tpondcd to RFl·1 R"'1'OIl<Icd to RFl·1 R"'1'OIl<Icd '" IIN'l1 p.ancl details. 􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁎􀀧􀁬􀀱􀀠 allowed in tbe T-4 t R"'1'OIl<Icd tollN'l1 apamionjoint In tl .R,.<.v,.i.,..........t.
the Conb AlIcrulcd """""'sa • July 2. 2005 tlINoKh • 􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁒􀁆􀁬􀂷􀀱􀀠 Rcoporu!ed '"RFl·l 􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁎􀀧􀁬􀀱􀀠 lishting ..􀁾􀀠 with lishting d<&i1lO 􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀱􀁉􀁎􀀧􀁬􀀱􀀠 􀁲􀁣􀁩􀁮􀁦􀁾􀀠
Rovi.......t the Conb during erection. Attended meeting v liKbtius and Type E 
Apr-28-D4 03:18pm From-URS Corporation 9728882042 T-SSI P.002l009 H23 URS Apri I 28, 2004 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E. Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive Addison, TX 7500
I Re: Arapabo Road Bridge at Midway Road Coordination Commenl$ on 100% Plan. Dear Mr. Chutchian: We have performed a coordination review ofyour consultant's roadway, utility, landscape,
erc. plans for the subject project to check ifcertain coordination issues that have been previously discussed were included in the 100% plans. We have noted several items that we had
requested to be included intO the plans, and that impact the bridge Or are required by the noise study, that were not included. We have included a partial copy of some ofthe plan sheets
outlining these items, as well as listed them below. I. All overhead electrical (OHE) lines that Cross the bridge or interfere with the bridge deck need to be relocated. 2. The finished
ground elevation at bents 9 & 10 (triangular thrust blocks) needs be at EL 616 or above. 3. A 3 oft high barrier is required by the noise .tudy between Arapaho Road and the adjacent
hotel 􀁢􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁮􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁾􀀠 at approximate station 72+07 and ending at approximate station 73+50. Sincerely, URS Corporation CliffR. Han, P.E. Project Manager Enclosures c.c. Jerry Holder
(HNTB) URS CorporatiOn GraYGtone 􀁃􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁴􀁾􀀠 8010 LB) Freeway, Svite 1300 Dallas, TX 75234 Tel: 972.40G.6950 FlIx: 972.406.6951 
Apr-28-04 03: iBp. From-URS Corporation 972SUZ04Z T-G81 P, OD3/009 F-02! 1-. -, -, " , -􀁾􀁟􀁟􀀽􀁲􀀫􀀫􀁟􀀽􀁟􀀴􀀱􀀠 􀀭􀀭􀀭o 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠 I!" 20 .en "9-'" .IN ..... .....
StALe: IN 'EET N lEGENO .0 eo ? S.ANITAAY stWER CI..EANruT FIRE tiYOiWrT WATER VAt.v!: wAf£R MEltR G/oS >ETE'A N fOR INTERIM 􀁾􀁅􀁶􀁉􀁅􀁗􀀠ONLY '" .iI!/O:IlW It. fltLa:<r.. A ' 􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀠L.
"n'! HNle 􀁃􀁏􀁒􀁐􀁏􀁒􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀰􀁎􀀠 􀁄􀁯􀀬􀀮􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁔􀀠'011 􀁴􀁏􀁾􀁕􀁜􀁉􀁃􀀠􀀢􀁾􀀠',OOIIlC,. oa I'[lIlIlt 'L./JU·Of'£l ARAPAHO ROAD • PHASE m SlJR!lQOR 8OIJI£VMO TO NXilSIJII ROil/) EXISTING
IffIUTY PLM STA 50«1 TO 60«1 TOWN OF ADDISON • TEXAS WI'THIN NfO AOJACt:N1 TO THE .Tl1;:t-'PT HJIS SEEM MAO\:: TO LOCATE: 􀁩􀁾􀀬􀀮􀁴􀀮􀀯􀀮􀁊􀀬􀀮􀀠 EXISTING Urn.lllES MAY MOT BE ! LOCATleN
(F THE Un.ITIES Sttt)',r(N .. CIfi THE: 􀁦􀀾􀁬􀁁􀁾􀀮􀀠PRIOO TO THt <CAVAT10N, 111f: 􀁃􀁾􀁔􀁒􀁁􀁃􀁔􀁲􀁥􀀠StVU. /£0 }NO MN<E;: AARANl;t;.£NT$ ItlTY ON THE (1Ji\dJHO. THE "tolE: UTli..JTY
I..Q;ATlC« MARKINGS ECESSAAY. 
􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠 , , ,.,-------_. Apr-2S-04 03, 18po Fro.-URS Corporat Ion 971$892042 T-SSI P. 004/009 F-023 _:rum 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁵􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁾􀁉􀀮􀁉􀁛􀁪􀁾􀁭􀁭􀁊􀁴􀁮􀀭􀁭􀀡􀁝􀁝􀁾􀁾 􀀱􀀱􀀱􀀱􀀡􀁬􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁭􀁵􀁵􀁲�
�􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁕􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁕􀁉􀀮􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁾􀀱􀀱􀁾􀀠􀁉􀁮􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀠 -Kl.\.ec=.\.e. ./JV 􀁾􀀠 􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀭 --.'rr' _.._--... ._. , -, . -'J , --... -􀁾􀀠
.. I -' 􀁾..􀁾􀁾􀀠 IT '-I· -􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁉􀀻􀁌􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀬􀁟.... ..,.. ',-..􀀬􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭 .. .=., 􀁾􀁊􀁲􀁉􀁾􀁔􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀢􀁩􀁾􀁔􀁾􀁏􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽...􀁾...􀁅􀁾􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁓􀁬􀁾􀀦􀁾􀁓􀁾􀁲􀁌􀁾__--==
=____􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀭􀁤􀁣􀁤􀁾􀀧􀀮􀁏􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁲􀁾􀀢􀁔􀁾􀀮􀁌􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁉􀁔􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁎􀁯􀀺􀁲􀁬􀁾􀀭􀁊􀁬􀀭��􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀯􀁬􀀬􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 􀀧􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠􀀣􀁾􀀠 UN1lUlGil 􀁕􀁔􀁉􀁌􀁬􀁔􀁩􀁾􀀠 ST \lITHIN -" t.IMIlS 􀁾 ca-tSTf\Ucrloo. Nf ATTEJoPT HAS B THESE UTILITIES ON THe: 􀁐􀀱􀀮􀀮􀁁􀁍􀁓􀁾􀀠ALl..
EXISTIN( SHOWN G>f THE PLANS, AND THE lIXATtctt OF I-V.Y VAA'f FROM Ttl£: t-OCATl;)lt ON TI-'E PlHBEGINNING CF /tN'I TYPi; CF £XCAVATKlH'. THE': CONTACT THE: UTlt.mES INVOLVE]) !oNb
MJ.,;(E Fm l'HE: LOCATiON cr THE:: urn. IT'!' ON lHE' CCN1RACTCfl SHAlL MAINTAIN nU; utiLiTY U:: _________________________________________________________􀁾􀁕􀁾􀁾􀁌􀁾􀁔􀁾􀁈􀁾􀁅􀁙􀁾􀁁􀁁􀁾􀁅􀁾􀁎􀁡􀁾􀁌�
�􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁒􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁃􀁅􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁒􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮__ I 
--r-SS1 P_005/GG9 '-023 ,-....􀁾􀀭􀀭 • 0 '0 b 0 /0 '" He 􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 , -, 'e 􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀭􀀭 ,:--' ...... 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 . , IIO""lolAlT/t -iif"l1iTtR
, ••• , >P_ __" 􀁾􀀮􀀠 ." 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 ' .. ,---... -111-0.(,\" 􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁮􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀢􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀱􀀬__-Oi) 􀁢􀁾􀀠 􀀪􀁬􀁥􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀱􀀮􀀱􀁾􀀠 I (I) --Ei'!' 􀁟􀁾􀀭 􀀮􀀡􀀭􀀺􀀧􀀮􀁪􀀬􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧�
�􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁁􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 --􀀧􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁹􀀻􀀺􀁬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀧􀀭􀂷􀀭􀀭 ·... ·1-----' 'v_ 􀁾􀁾􀀠:!. I 􀁟􀀻􀀮􀀺􀁟􀀭􀁾􀀠􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀭􀀺􀀭 􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀬􀀭􀁾􀀠--,-..􀀧􀀭􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀢�
�􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀠_ • _ --, -. -.. --, -I' -. ---" --􀁾􀀠'ft"':'T.l12 • 􀁾􀂣􀁜􀀧􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁴􀁬􀁁􀀧􀁴􀁲􀁏􀁬􀀧􀁗􀀮􀀮􀀠 i 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁣􀀻􀀻􀀽􀀽􀁆􀀭􀁉􀀧􀀷􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀺􀀺􀁴􀀭􀁬􀀧􀁩􀁈􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭�
�􀀢􀀭􀀭 '''S-. _" _' ___ 􀁪􀀨􀁾􀀢􀁾􀀭􀀻􀀢􀁾􀀭􀀢􀀨􀀭􀀢􀀭 ... ,e-􀀭􀁾􀀭 􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀭􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀬􀀺􀁾􀁊􀁉􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀢􀀧􀀠'._ .'-. 1;;': 􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀠 _........, _ ,--U 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 ..-..--,
-.._-----._..--.. ---"ri 1"-----', ..' " -.. '" 􀁾􀀠, ...!:!.-----.. 􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠.._---'-'--"--'0""-·-IJ.., , I,lNOfi;;RGRWNO UTn..IT!E:'S (XlST 'WiTHIN N/O .Al)JN;ENT TO 1l1E' LIMITS cit
CC»jSTRUCTICNi. Nt ATTEf'o'PT (iAS BEEN MADE: TO I,.OO'.\TE 'tHtS( UTIUTl£5 ON TMi; PUNS. All 􀂣􀁘􀁬􀁓􀁔􀁦􀁎􀁾􀀠VTIt.tTI£$ 􀁾􀀧􀀱􀀧􀀠 NOT SE 􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠 SHO'oIN
ON THE PlHts. AAD THE LOCATION Cf' tH:E Un.lTIES SHOWN 􀁾􀀧􀁴􀀠 VAA't tROH THE LOCATION: ().I THE PLANS.. PAiOf( TO Tjo{£" eEGIN....lNO Cf' MY TYPE: CF exCAVATION. THE CONTRACTM SHM.L
" I CONTACT THE UTILITIES INVf.X..VED MD HAKe Ni.RNlGE)-€:NiS It", THE: 􀁴􀁯􀁣􀀻􀁁􀁔􀀱􀁾􀀠Of' iH( VTli.1TY a; THe GR()JNO. THE 􀁃􀁾􀀧􀁲􀁃􀁒􀀠SHJIi.\. tJAINTAIN THE IJTH.IT'f LOCATION
f'VRKlNGS UNTIL THEy JRE NO tOHGER NECESSAA'l' 􀁾 , I I I I I I I I I ! I 
03:19pm Fro.-URS Corpo,ation 9728882042 T-SSI P.oos/ooe F-02! ... o .0 60 1 ,;. _.' I •• . J I N '\ ' 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀢􀀠 OR,\INAC£ AWAY FROM £XISTIHO aUILOIHG LEGEND --􀁩􀀤􀀧􀀱􀀴􀀭􀁵􀁾􀀠EXISTING
CONTWR 􀁾􀁐􀁾􀁏􀁐􀁏􀁓􀂣􀁪􀀩􀀠COI<TOOR 􀀩􀀨􀀶􀀱􀁾􀀮􀀴􀁾􀀠 PRCPOS£"!) SPOT GIV\OE. NOTt! GRP()ING OJTSIOE PARKtNG I. ...VCQT ON THesE PLANS IS fOR I'{ruCH GRADINY. CONfR,t.CTCR TO ftEFERtNC£
tAM)scAPt PLNl$ FOO ., ',",' '" !! I -" .':'J'r 1-,'." /..... r'· 􀁾􀀠 ;-'" 1 􀁾􀀠 J 'I . ,I): . \ I . . I -, !iii ::' .,' -'I .j" t I I t 􀀧􀁾􀁴􀀢􀀠 \t t , \\ ,. ',\ \ .. , . -,--------=
: i .I \, 1 I I J I I • FlliIl. GRADES ANO ELEVATIONS fGR TRA!L l.A'fOOT AND LAXOSc.wU<lC SCHe;;t-E. I ----._.. -------._------J 
03:19pm From-URS Corporation 9T2Bm04Z T-661 POOT/oe9 F-023 N • 20 4 • I '" SCAl.E iN FEEi GENERAL NOTES: z..) 􀀸􀁬􀀡􀁩􀁅􀀧􀁙􀁈􀂣􀀺􀁓􀁾􀁃􀀺􀁏􀁈􀁔􀁒􀁏􀁌􀀮􀁬􀀧􀁦􀀮􀀮􀁁􀁕􀁾􀁙􀁤􀁔􀀱􀀭􀁉􀀱􀀩􀀮􀁉􀀠TH"
£eT Fall COOfttlOfA'l'£CONTW. POINT 1lf0000l1ON. 􀀧􀁬􀁾􀀠 􀁁􀁕􀀮􀀱􀀢􀀢􀁲􀁴􀁯􀁾 IIHl>.U.8EsrMfD IN l1-!l;'PTElD 8i'"Tl-IE ctWiAACTORMtJ/!I'PRO\IEO OYTIie' 􀁉􀀮􀀮􀁭􀁄􀁾􀀠 AACHITliC1 mlJ
OWNER'S: REP. PRiOft YQ (:Oo.IB't'fU.IC'nOH 􀁑􀁒􀁉􀁾􀁬􀁴􀀮􀁬􀀮􀀮􀁁􀁩􀁬􀁏􀁦􀁴􀀠 I,) 􀁮􀀮􀀨􀁾􀁂􀁈􀁁􀁕􀀮􀁾􀁪􀁉􀁊􀀬􀁊􀀬􀁾􀁕􀁲􀁴􀂣􀀤􀁗􀀱􀁈􀁅􀀠 F)£U) twon TO 􀁄􀁅􀁃􀁏􀁦􀁉􀁩􀁾􀁇􀀠wcrvc. I.}
􀂢􀁏􀁦􀁬􀁉􀀧􀁦􀁖􀁯􀁃􀁔􀁏􀁒􀀶􀁴􀁗􀁊􀀮􀁖􀁩􀁦􀁕􀁆􀁙􀁉􀀧􀀴􀁌􀁬􀀱􀁔􀁴􀁬􀁭􀁉􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀵􀁾􀂢􀁴􀁉􀀠rn.ESE Pt.NeAi WElL AS /lHt 0lHt:A$1N FIElO PRlOR lO :or.un OF 􀁣􀀮􀁯􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁬􀀻􀀧􀁊􀁜􀁏􀁎􀀮􀀠
II,. 􀁁􀁊􀁊􀀮􀀮􀁃􀁏􀁾􀁷􀁲􀁵􀀮􀁃􀁏􀁎􀁆􀁏􀁏􀁉􀀴􀁔􀁏􀁴􀁬􀀧􀁬􀁅􀀢􀁾􀁏􀁆􀁍􀀩􀁴􀁋􀁓􀁏􀁴􀁦􀀠 􀀤􀁔􀁁􀁎􀁉􀀺􀁗􀁕􀁩􀁓􀁎􀂫􀁊􀁋􀁥􀁬􀁦􀁬􀁃􀁁􀁮􀁏􀁦􀁬􀁧􀀮􀁁􀀻􀀸􀁾􀁁􀁓􀀮􀁰􀀮􀁎􀁹􀁾􀁇􀀠 TXPQ1'OAfL\lUI1:lI\I)$TNlOf.RQ.5
AH08P!:CFltAflOHSfla..ATm TO 'niB MtruECl'. 7., JI.l.L biIolEHIilCH;;; AIIJllO fIACIt 01' CIJR5 􀁾 Il:bOC: 01' 􀁴􀀾􀁁􀁾􀀠 􀁉􀀬􀁉􀁎􀀮􀁴􀀮􀀮􀂣􀁉􀁉􀁓􀁾􀁈􀁏􀁩􀀧􀁦􀁉􀀩􀀮􀀠 1t.1 􀁒􀁅􀁎􀁆􀁏􀁾􀁅􀁲􀁮lfiOOLOM'
􀁃􀁏􀁈􀁮􀁴􀁦􀁴􀀱􀁏􀁖􀁾 jliRC\I£.iH cON'tl\Of. "''''''. LEGEND: 1-.... ! ,t" __ ·_GOO __ _ --eot·__.. "..... .􀁾􀀧􀀱􀁬􀀠 11)1,10 ihtll ."""..,.n. lATA ARAPAHO ROAD EXTENSION JNG CHORD
SV_ fJCIULEVAI10 7t> ADD/SON ROAO 5TA 55+00 TO 60+00 LAYOUT & DIMENSIONING >-___􀁾􀁟􀀺􀁐􀀮􀀻􀁌􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁁􀀮􀀺􀁣􀀮􀁎􀁾__.....,,::-TOWN OF ADDISON • TEXAS 
03:11pm From-URS Corporation 97Z9992042 T-661 P.001/009 F-023 ; . 􀁾􀀠 -2 .fof lAYOUT COORDINATE 􀁔􀁁􀀡􀀡􀁾􀀠 􀁾 :=.9.04 ["ff i .N -lO.H.D..51 􀁴􀁉􀁄􀁾􀁊􀀺􀁥􀁾􀀠 Ii!] 'N 10C611.5D I
tI56II.!I::I I!iJ H 1W6).lI( I!!l H UH12Jl8 ....... eo € 􀁧􀀺􀁭􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀁪􀁥􀁦 8:=':' 􀁛􀀡􀁩􀁊􀁾􀀺􀁏􀁾􀀠 􀁦􀂧􀁊􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀠 I!iI N 101M.lll E ,*".4') 􀁦􀀡􀁬􀀲􀀽􀁾􀀠 I!!J 􀁾􀀠􀀻􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁯􀀠
I!!J N 10150".0, ._.. Ii] 􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀠 ffi1 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 t!!1 : 􀀺􀀡􀁾􀁲􀀠 CONTAlNER I MOW CUM CENTERLINE CURVE OATA CURVE DELTA RADIUS SEARlNG CHORP Me> ,....",. j!l,'7H' 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭�
�􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠 
Q3:19pm ,rom-URS C,rporation -." ., ) 􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀭 .. "--.-. .-. 􀀭􀁾􀀠-. " '-. 􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 .-,,, .-. -􀀭􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀭 "-' --..._' .... , 􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀠 '.,----,-,,f
.􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀭􀁩􀀭 ..-.. _. 􀂷􀂷􀁾􀀬􀁴􀁾􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀠 , 􀀬􀀧􀀺􀀻􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁶 1;;',-_. NW"N(CiROAD , :3 􀁗􀁾􀁌􀁌􀀮􀀠 1!Jp. 􀀭􀁡􀁥􀁾􀁍􀀮􀀠 ."..,\.:.'-'----'-...:------:-. --'-'-'. 􀁾􀁔COORDIWlrE
TABLE 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀽􀁾􀀠 [@􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀡􀀺 : eJ : ;:;: fiiJ 􀁾􀀠􀀻􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀠 IiID 􀀺􀀡􀀺􀁾􀀠 fii} 􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀺􀀠 r,ar H 101to:.1'11 􀁾􀁅􀁴􀁾􀀮􀀱􀀱􀀲􀀠 6E 􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁕􀁾􀀠 fiE] 􀁾 !g::: 􀀸􀁾􀀱􀁾􀀠 IDil
􀁾􀀠;::n􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁳􀀮􀀺􀀠 fIDJ i􀁎 \O􀀧IioU􀁾,O'I 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀠 􀁉􀁗􀁊􀁾􀀺􀀽􀀠 (Ef) 􀀺􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀠 &!l 􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀺􀀠 [!ij 􀁾􀀠􀁩􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀠 fiilli IDICZM e 1i>M1.Dtf 􀁛􀀲􀁊􀁾􀀡􀀽􀁾􀀠 ff!!l 􀁾􀀠􀀻􀀽􀁾􀀠
􀁃􀂧􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀀠 􀀶􀁩􀁊􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀺􀀠 [@::= 􀁛􀀳􀁾􀀻􀀽􀀮􀁾􀀠 Ii!!J 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 􀁦􀂮􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀽􀀡􀁩􀀠 fiEl 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀠 􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀠 Ii!I 􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀠 f!ro 􀁾􀀻􀀽􀀠 l!§j 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀽􀀺􀀠
􀁦􀁬􀁅􀁾􀁩􀀽􀀠 CONTAINER I MOW CVRB CENTERLINE CURVE DATA ffi!] :i=: 1i21::: (!E 􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀠 ffiil 􀁾􀀠􀁩􀁾􀀪􀀺􀀡􀁾􀀠 [ffi} 􀁾􀀠::: CURVE OELTA. RADIUs ARC TANGENT tlURING -CHORll C10
1"·52'501SltOO' 38.... 1.... S 6jJ·OS't,-W ,.... CH 20-1'1'54'" ,s:1,00' .",.. ""OS 􀁓􀁉􀁩􀁾􀀲􀁓􀀢􀁊􀀶􀀢􀁗􀀠 5:4;,66" CI' 􀀧􀁾􀁓􀀶􀀧􀁯􀁲􀀠 .190.86' _3,72 􀁎􀀦􀀴􀁾􀀳􀀱􀀧􀁓􀁲􀁅􀀠 19057'
CJ> ,..,""". 150b),' lUll 35M' H7.f'":J5"2O'" I; 66.'" Cl4 2\1='SO.... $3,s.' 27.11' 􀁎􀀱􀀡􀀮􀁾􀁡􀂷􀀱􀀹􀀢􀀠E "'".. c« ,,..,...,.. 150,011' 4SJ12' Z.14' N1""N49"E 45.".· 01. 21)'= ,,,,-,,,,
􀁳􀀺􀁩􀀬􀁾􀀧􀀠 .v.n' rHZ041'1$" E OJ,'" C1t ,r;mr lSO.00' -45.92' 23,1-4' N11'12'4.1:1" e 4$.14' 01 O>"2li'SZ' 1200.011 71.&lf 3;5,94" tH,'SS'15"' £ 11"'" "'" or.,..,.. 1iSSi.OB" Ill"'"
" t.o/{; N 􀁥􀁔􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁉􀁬􀀡􀁾􀀠e 62... = 1n--:>1"'.... 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 ,. 
DRS July 29,2004 Mr. Michael Murphy, P.E. Director ofPublic Works 16801 Westgrove Drive Addison, TX 15001 Re: Arapabo Road Bridge at Midway Road URS Design Services Dear Mr. Murphy:
As Project Manager for the design ofthe Arapaho Road Bridge, I was discouraged to hearofyour displeasure with URS' service on the Arapaho Road project. On behalf ofURS, I would like
to apologize to you for not providing you the level of service that you have come to expect. As bridge engineers who like to tackle challenging projects, the design ofthe arch bridge
was a dream project for many of our Dallas engineers. In an effort to have more involvement with the design locally, we unfortunately began to sacrifice the schedule due to an over commitment
ofworkload. As your project manager it was my duty to ensure that the project was on schedule. I regret that you and your staff felt it necessary to monitor our progress. I know that
the effort spent by you and your staff was significant and that this effort was just one more task that each ofyou had to fit into an already demanding schedule. More recently, we seem
to have had a series ofmiscommunications that brought further disappointment. I take full responsibility for not better communicating the expected level ofeffort involved in the construction
phase services and for not attending the pre-construction conference due to other conflicts. Finally, I would like to thank you for your candor in expressing your displeasure with our
performance. While it is always disheartening to hear, I will use your comments as a learning opportunity to ensure that I provide better and more responsive service in the future. Sincerely,
CliffR. Hall, P.E. Project Manager c.c. Dave Johnston, URS Emily Taylor, DRS URS Corporation Graystone Centre 3010 lBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas. rx 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951

DRS July 30, 2004 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapabo Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase ill -Construction
Administration Work Autborization No. 002 Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please find a copy of the Work Order Number 002 for the Construction Administration Services with Attachment A
-Scope ofServices, and Attachment C -Schedule of Fees and Charges. This work order has been revised as per our discussions on July 23,2004 and per discussions with Mike Murphy on July
30,2004. Please have both originals signed and return one signed original to us. Sincerely, URS Corporation a[;zd.B CliffR. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure c.c. Mike Murphy URS Corporation
Graystone Centre 3010 LBJ Freeway. Stille 1300 Dallas. TX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
TIME & MATERIALS WORK ORDER NO. _--'0"'0""2 ___ In accordance with the Agreement for Professional Services between Town of Addison ("Clienf'), and URS Corporation ("URS"), a Nevada corporation,
dated November 11, 2002 ,this Work Order describes the Services, Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS Services on the Project known as: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD CONSTRUCTION
ADMINISTRATION SERVICES Client Authorized Representative: Michael Mu h Address: 􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁐􀀺􀀻􀀺..􀀧􀀮􀁵􀀠􀀧􀀷􀁢􀀧􀀡􀀡􀁉􀁩􀁃􀀺􀁓􀁗􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀭􀀧􀀺􀀢􀁏􀀢􀀧􀁲􀁫􀀢􀀧􀁳􀀢􀀺􀀡􀁄􀁾􀁥􀀭􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁭􀀭􀀺􀀭􀁥􀀭􀁮�
�􀀺􀁴􀀭􀀺􀁐􀀽􀀭􀀬􀁃􀁏􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀬􀀻􀀺􀁂􀁯􀀭􀀭􀀻􀁴􀁏􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀱􀀷􀀰􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀺􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀻􀀭􀀱􀀹 //Addison TX 75001-9010 \,)6( Telephone NO.:__􀀭􀀲􀀮􀀹􀀷􀀡􀀮􀁊􀀲􀁾􀀮􀀴􀀡􀀾􀀵􀁾􀀰􀁟􀀽􀀮􀀲􀁾􀀸􀀷􀁌􀀱􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭�
�􀀭􀀬􀁌􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀁉􀁾􀀭􀁟􀁩􀁈􀁌􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀡􀀮􀀭 II URS Authorized \(11 Representative: Address: Telephone NO.: __--""""'===_--'r-______________ 􀁾􀀱􀁎􀀠 SERVICES. The Services shall be
described in A to this Work Order, SCHEDULE. The Estimated Schedule shall be ttachment N/A to this Work Order, Because of the uncertainties inherent in the Services, chedules a estimated
and are subject to revision unless otherwise specifically described herein, URS cknowledges hat timely performance of its services is an important element of this Agreement and e Work
Order. RS will put forth its best efforts to timely complete the Services. PAYMENT. The Services described in A chment A will be perfo ed only when requested by Client for a not-to-exceed
amount of $25,000.00; ent by Client for the Services shall not exceed the said amount without written authorization, A Fee Schedule is included in Attachment 􀁾 Payment shall be made
monthly based upon statements submitted to the Client for the work performed. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. The terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced above shall apply to this Work
Order, except as expressly modified herein. ACCEPTANCE of the terms of this Work Order is acknowledged by the following Signatures of the Authorized Representatives, -",-__ t forth i
CUENT Signalure Ron Whitehead I City Manager Emily Taylor, P.E.I Vice President Typed NameJTrtle Date of Signalure PSA·1.DOC 19-Mar·02 • 1 
ATTACHMENT A -SERVICES CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE When requested by the Town of Addison, URS will respond to the Contractor's request for information
(RFls), submittals, calculations, etc. as it relates to design changes of the bridge or bridge previously designed by URS. All ROW documentation and plans; construction engineering design;
review and approval of shop drawings, Contractor reports, calculations, testing results, erection methods, fabrication plants, etc.; survey, geotechnical services, permitting, construction
inspection and preparation of construction record drawings are outside the scope of this agreement and will be performed by others or under a separate agreement. In addition, all items
related to construction materials testing, fabrication shop verification or certification, mill certifications, and welding qualifications and certifications are outside the scope ofthis
agreement and will be performed by others. 
URS CORPORATION ATTACHMENT C 2004 SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES TOWN OF ADDISON Engineering & Consulting Services The following describes the basis for compensation for services performed
during the fiscal year 2004. This Schedule of Fees and Charges will be adjusted annually on November I of each subsequent year to reflect merit and economic salary increases, and changes
in the expected level and mode of operations for the new year. The new Schedule of Fees and Charges will apply to existing and new assigmnents. PERSONNEL CHARGES The charge for all time
required in the performance of the Scope of Services, including office, field and travel time, will be at the Unit Priced Hourly Rates set forth below fur the labor classifications indicated.
Labor Classification Hourly Rate ($) Technical TypistIWord Processor' 55 Technician' 70 Senior Technician* 85 Assistant Project Engineer/Architect 80 Project Engineer/Architect 110 Senior
Project Engineer/Architect 140 􀁐􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁾􀁡􀁮􀁡􀁧􀁥􀁲􀀠 155 Principal! Senior Consulting Professional 185 Charges for contract personnel md subconsultants under URS supervision
md using URS facilities will be made according to the hourly rate corresponding to their classification. Wben staff are performing project fieldwork, a minimum daily charge of4 hours
will apply. A maximum of eight (8) hours travel time per day will he charged for travel within the continental United States. When URS staff appears as expert witnesses at court trials,
arbitration hearings, mediation and depositions, their time will be charged at $250.00 per hour. Overtime (hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day) by exempt personnel will
be charged at the above straight time hourly rate. Overtime by non-exempt personnel (classifications identified with an asterisk «*") will be charged at 1.3 times the above hourly ratc.
Special project accounting reporting and financial services, including submission of invoice support docwnentation, will be cbarged at the rate of a Technical TypistIWord Processor.
OTHER PROJECT CHARGES Subglntracts and Eguipment Rental Other direct costs (excluding subconsultants) incurred by URS will be cbarged at cost. Computer Generated Plots There will be
a charge of $3.00 each for paper plot and $10.00 each for mylar plot generated by the CADD and GIS systems. Document Reproduction In-bouse reproduction will be charged at $.IO a page
for black & white and $1.50 a page for color for letter, legal, and 11 x 17 size copies. Other size document copying will be charged at $2.75 a page. Vehicles and 􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁥􀁡􀁧􀁥􀀠 Field
vehicles (Pick-ups, vans, trucks, etc.) used on project assigmnents will be charged at $60.00 per day. The mileage charge for personal autos will be the then current mileage rate established
by the Internal Revenue Service. Specialized Equipment The use of specialized URS equipment will be thc fIxed rental rates set forth in the Schedule of URS Specialized Equipment Charges.
This fee schedule contains confidential business information and is not to be copied or distributedfor any purpose other than the use intended in this contract or proposal. DRS 
TIME &MATERIALS WORK ORDER NO. _--'0"'0.2... ____ In accordance with the Agreement for Professional Services between Town of Addison ("Clienf'), and URS Comoration ("URS'), a Nevada
corporation, dated November 11. 2002 • this Work Order describes the Services, Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS Services on the Project known as: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY
ROAD CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES Client Authorized Representative: Michael Murohy Address: Public W<;lfks Department, P.O, Box 9010 ___Addison, TX 75001-9010 Telephone No.:
972.450,2871 URS Authorized Representative: Emily Taylor. P,E, Address: Gravstone Centre, 3010 LBJ F reewav. Suite 1300 Dallas, TX 75234 Telephone NO.: __-2.972t=.:.4"'0""6,"'6""950:i.>!-____________
____ SERVICES. The Services shall be described in Attachment ....AC-_ to this Work Order, SCHEDULE. The Estimated Schedule shall be set forth in Attachment NIA to this Work Order, Secause
of the uncertainties inherent in the Services, Schedules are estimated and are subject to revision unless otherwise specifically described herein, URS acknowledges that timely performance
of its services is an important element of this Agreement and the Work Order, URS will put forth its best efforts to timely complete the Services. PAYMENT. The Services described in
Attachment A will be performed only when requested by Client for a not-to-exceed amount of $25,000.00; payment by Client for the Services shall not exceed the said amount without writtsn
authorization, A Fee Schedule is included in Attachment.JL.., Payment shall be made monthly based upon statements submitted to the Client for the work performed, TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
The terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced above shall apply to this Work Order, except as expressly modified herein, ACCEPTANCE of the terms of this Work Order is acknowledged
by the following signatures of the Authorized Representatives, CLIENT Signature RonWhitehead f City Mall.a"'Q..,e""r_____ Typed NamelTrtle Typed NameJTrtle D7/3t>/6¥Date of Signature
Signature .E.ll1l1lJaylor, P.E. f Vice President PSA-1.DOC 19-Mar-02 -1 
ATTACHMENT A -SERVICES CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE When requested by the Town of Addison, URS will respond to the Contractor's request for information
(RFIs), submittals, calculations, etc. as it relates to design changes of the bridge or bridge previously designed by URS. All ROW documentation and plans; construction engineering design;
review and approval of shop drawings, Contractor reports, calculations, testing results, erection methods, fabrication plants, etc.; survey, geotechnical services, permitting, construction
inspection and preparation of construction record drawings are outside the scope of this agreement and will be performed by others or under a separate agreement. In addition, all items
related to construction materials testing, fabrication shop verification or certification, mill certifications, and welding qualifications and certifications are outside the scope of
this agreement and will be performed by others. 
URS CORPORATION ATTACHMENT C 2004 SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES TOWN OF ADDISON Engineering & Consulting Services The following describes the basis for compensation for services performed
during the fiscal year 2004. This Schedule of Fees and Charges will be adjusted annually on November I of each subsequent year to reflect merit and economic salary increases, and changes
in the expected level and mode of operations for the new year. The new Schedule of Fees and Charges will apply to existing and new assignments. PERSONNEL CHARGES The charge fur all time
required in the performance of the Scope of Services, including office, field and travel time, will be at the Unit Priced Hourly Rates set forth below for the labor classifications indicated.
Labor Classification Hourly Rate ($) Technical Typist/Word Processor' 55 Technician' 70 Senior Technician' 85 Assistant Project Engineer/Architect 80 Project Engineer/Architect 110 Senior
Project Engineer/Architect 140 Project Manager 155 Principal! Senior Consulting Professional 185 Charges for contract personnel and subconsultants under URS supervision and using URS
liIcilities will be made according to the hourly rate corresponding to their classification. When staff are performing project fieldwork, a minimum daily charge of 4 hours will apply.
A maximum of eight (8) hours travel time per day will be charged for travel within the continental United States. When URS staff appears as expert witnesses at court trials, arbitration
hearings, medIation and depositions, their time will be charged at $250.00 per hour. Overtime (hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day) by exempt personnel will be charged
at the above straight time hourly rate. Overtime by non-exempt personnel (classifications identified with an asterisk "on) will be charged at 1.3 times the above hourly rate. Special
project accounting reporting and financial services, including submission of invoice support documentation, will be charged at the rate of a Tecboical TypistlWord Processor. OTHER PROJECT
PROJECT CHARGES Subcontracts and Equipment Rental Other direct costs (excluding subconsultants) incurred by URS will be charged at cost. Computer Generated Plots There will be a charge
of $3.00 each for paper plot and $10.00 each for mylar plot generated by the CADD and GIS systems. Document Reproduction In-house reproduction will be charged at S.IO a page for black
& white and $1.50 a page for color for letter, legal, and II x 17 size copies. Other size document copying will be charged at $2.75 a page. Vehicles and Mileage Field vehicles (Pick-ups,
vans, trucks, etc.) used on project assignments will be charged at $60.00 per day. The mileage cbarge for personal autos will be the then current mileage rate established by the Internal
Revenue Service. Specialized Equipment The use of specialized URS equipment will be the fIxed rental rates set forth in the Schedule of URS Specialized Equipment Charges. Thislee schedule
contains confidential business inlarmation and is not to be copied or distributedlor any purpose other than the use intended in this contract or proposal. 􀁾􀀮􀀠 . URSi 
URS June 16, 2004 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase ill -Construction
Administration Work Authorization No. 002 Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please fmd a copy of the Work Order Number 002 for the Construction Administration Services with Attachment A -Scope
of Services, and Attachment C -Time and Materials, "Not-to-Exceed" Fee Breakdown. Please note that this work order is established as a time and materials work order, since the number
and quality of the Contractor submittals, requests for information (RFI), and shop drawings can only be estimated and is beyond our control. We have revised the number ofexpected shop
drawings, RFI) and submittals to arrive at a "Not-to-Exceed" amount of$85,500 as you have requested. Please note that ifthe number ofsubmittals, RFI, or shop drawings exceed the number
estimated, an increase in fee might be warranted to complete the remaining reviews. Please Please sign both originals and return one signed original to us. Sincerely, URS Corporation
􀁾􀀯􀁉􀀨􀀯􀁴􀀻􀀯􀀠 Cliff R. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Graystone Centre 3010 lBJ Freeway. SUite 1300 Dallas, TX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
TIME & MATERIALS WORK ORDER NO. _--'0"'0"'2____ In accordance with the Agreement for Professional SelVices between Town of Addison ("Clienf'), and URS Corporation ("URS"). a Nevada corporation,
dated November 11. 2002 ,this Work Order describes the SelVices, Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS SelVices on the Project known as: Client Authorized Representative: Michael
Murphy Address: Public Works Department P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Telephone No.: __---"9"-7=2."'4"'5°"'.2""8"'7-11_________________ URS Authorized Representative: Emilv Taylor,
P.E. Address: Graystone Centre, 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas, TX 75234 Telephone No.: __--"9"-72"'."'40"'6"'.6"'9""5"'0'--________________ SERVICES. The SelVices shall be described
in Attachment -,A",-_ to this Work Order. SCHEDULE. The Estimated Schedule shall be set forth in Attachment N/A to this Work Order. Because of the uncertainties inherent in the SelVices,
Schedules are estimated and are subject to revision unless otherwise specifically described herein. URS acknowledges that timely performance of its selVices is an important element of
this Agreement and the Work Order. URS will put forth its best efforts to timely complete the SelVices. PAYMENT. The SelVices described in Attachment A will be performed for a "not-to-exceed"
amount of $85,500.00; in no event shall the payment by Client for the SelVices exceed the said amount without written authorization. A breakdown of this amount is included in Attachment..Q....
Payment shall be made monthly based upon statements submitted to the Client for the work performed. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. The terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced above shall
apply to this Work Order, except as expressly modified herein. ACCEPTANCE of the terms of this Work Order is acknowledged by the following signatures of the Authorized Representatives.
CLIENT URS 􀁾􀁊􀀿􀁍􀁤 fdglfour 􀀯􀁸􀁖􀁛􀁾􀀦􀁾􀀫 Signature Ron Whitehead I City Manager 􀁾􀁾 Emily Taylor, P.E.I Vice President Typed NamelT"rtle Typed NamelT"lIIe b 􀁾 23 --:2cb4 Date
of Signature Date of Signature PSA-1.DOC 19-Mar-02 -1 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE URS will provide the construction
administration services as it relates to the Arapaho Road Bridge design services as perfonned under Work Order No. 001 and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist
of an elevated four-lane roadway with sidewalk located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW) from Station 50+95 to Station 66+70. DRS shall provide construction phase services
for a steel arch bridge over Midway Road, with prestressed concrete beam approaches and the bridge lighting & illumination for which DRS provided design services under Work Order No.
001. URS will attend the pre-construction meetings and respond to the contractor's or Town's request for information (RFIs), review shop drawings, and review the Contractor's submittals
as related to the design services perfonned by DRS under a separate agreement and as outlined in the Itemized Scope of Services. All ROW documentation and plans, traffic control reviews,
construction engineering design, survey, geotechnical services, pennitting, construction inspection and preparation of construction record drawings are outside the scope of this agreement
and will be perfonned by others or under a separate agreement. In addition, all items related to construction materials testing, fabrication shop verification or certification, mill
certifications, and welding qualifications and certifications are outside the scope ofthis agreement and will be performed by others. , 
Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS for Construction Administration Services TASK 1-ENGINEERING A. Civil Site Works \. Respond to contractor's RFl's for traffic control (\ total).
2. Prepare one addenda 3. Omitted. B.Bridges I. Respond to contractor's RFI's (10 total) 2. Prepare One addenda 3. Omitted 4. Attend pre-construction meeting witlt tlte Town, tlte Town's
Consultant, and tlte General Contractor. S. Review Contractor's Schedule 6. Site visits (2 total) 7. Site Visits to Fabrication Facility (\ visit -2 Engineers) g. Review bridge contractor
submittals for compliance witlt tlte contract documents (11 submittals total). o Concrete mix design (4 total) o Prestressed beam strand jacking stress reports (64 beams) o Prestressed
beam redesign calculations (3 total) o Arch erection metltod statement o Arch hanger stressing reports o F ormwork calculations 9. Review bridge contractor shop/fabrication drawings
for compliance witlt contract documents (40 drawings total). o Foundations shaft details • Fonnwork o Miscellaneous superstructure details (SIP furms, PIS deck panels, screed elevations,
expansion joints, lighting supports) o Suspension hanger details and connections o Steel arch details o Arch camber details o Bearing details o Railing details o Stinger details o Temporwy
shoringlfalseworlc o Erection sequencing o Prestressed beam fubrication drawings (64 beams) C. Electrical Engineering I. Respond to contractor's RFJ's (Itotal) 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Review and approve contractor submittals as related to lighting detalls. TASK I1-ABCHITECTURAL I. Respond to contractor's RFI's (I total) 2. Review and
approve contractor submittals as related to architectural details. 3. Observe site mock-ups. TASK III-LIGHTING DESIGN I. Respond to contractor's RFI's (3 total) 2. Prepare one addenda

3. Review and approve contractor submittals as related to lighting details. (5 total) 4. Observe Ibe installation oflighting equipment included in Ibe lighting designer's final recommendations
at Ibe job site (one trip to Addison). 5. Focusing Ibe lighting equipment and program control devices(s). TASK IV -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices 1. Omitted 2. Prepare URS
Invoices B. Coordination 1. Coordinate one addenda 2. Omitted 3. Coordinate responses, reviews and approval ofContractor RFIs, submittals and shop drawings. 
---;;:: 􀁉􀀭􀁾􀁉 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀁉􀀠--; I ................ ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD • ATTACHMENT C WORK ORDER NO. 002· CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION 􀁍􀁁􀁎􀁾􀁈􀁏􀁕􀁒 & 􀁉􀀡􀁘􀁐􀁓􀁎􀁾􀁴􀀺􀀠􀁲􀀮􀁮􀁾
􀁆􀀺􀁾􀁔􀁉􀀢􀀧􀀴􀁔􀁊􀀺􀁩􀀱􀀠 CONSULTANT: URSCORPORATION---no URS Corporation TASK I· ENGINEERING A.. 􀁃􀁾􀁶􀁬􀁬􀀠SHe Works 1. Respond to RFls tortratfleeontrol (1 tOlal) 2. Prepare one
addenda 3.. 􀁒􀁾 and approve Contractor submittal as ruletad tp 􀁾1;OntrOi (by HNTB) B.Brtdgu 1. Respond 10 RFI$ (10 tolal) 2. Pteparu one add;:mda 3. Re:vtow bridge bid tabUfaUOfl$
·Omltt6d 4. Attencl <XIfIstructioo kICk-off meellng 5. Review Contractor'tl Sehedulo a. Sie vlstts (2 total) 7. One Sile Vl.$iI:to Fabtieation 􀁆􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹 (2 peopfe) B. Review bridge
􀁃􀁴􀀩􀁮􀁴􀁭􀁣􀀮􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁾􀁓􀀮􀀨􀀱􀀱􀀱􀀰􀁴􀁡􀁬􀀩􀀠 Concmta mil( design (4 total) pflWtrali$ed beam strand JaddtIg report,a (64 beams) Pl'Qstrassad beam altamala dft$ign eak:oiallons (3
total) Arm erecUon method slllliemMI Ard1 hanger straufng reports FonnwClil eaIculaUMs 9. Review bridge c:ontraaor$i1op/fabrlcalion 􀁤􀁾(40drawlngs totel) Foundatlon5lsttalt dotaiI$
F,,,,,,,,,,, Mlseellal1!llOlJS SL1pmlitJCUn3 Details (SIP fonm;, PIS concrete dade panels, oxpanslonjolnl!l, a!e.) Suspension hanger detail-; and 􀁾􀁳􀀠 Steel etd'! dalails Atd'I eambar
d9lall$ Bearing dolells Railingdetail:S Stinger detail' Temporary 􀁳􀁨􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁾􀀠 ErecUon sequencing Preslrassed beam fabrieatlon 􀁤􀁲􀁥􀁷􀁉􀁮􀁾 (64 bOiilm$} Co 􀁅􀁾􀁉 Engineering 1.
R&SpOOCI to RFls (1 AFIS) 2, Ptvpcn one atfdenda 3, Reviewand appt'OWl Con!tl!lctor submittal as telall!Kl to lighting detslls TASK II· ARCHITECTURALtCorgln 􀁾Inc} 1. RMpondto RFls(1
total) 2, Prepcn one eddands 3, R&VIew end l;\pprove Conll'Bcklr submittal e6 related to 􀁾􀁉details TASK HI. UGHnNG 􀁄􀁅􀁓􀁉􀁾 􀁃􀁂􀀢􀁾 P1utnerwohlp, Inc) 1, Respond to RFJe (3Iotal)
2. 􀁐􀁾􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁳􀀠one eddefIdil 3. Review el'Kf approve Contractor submi!bll as mfatad IG IlghUng details (S total) o 0 88 154 -182 as 0: 28 0 $ 10,000.00 $ 4,210.00 $ 64,260.00 o 0 4
14 0 0 Q 4 0 22 I :: I 1•4 4 .,. .. ... 0 ,.. . ... o 116 '62 51 . .. ·• ,-. -• o •6 16 40 • 24 ... '6 •• 0 • •2 • • • 2 20 12 12• 24 ',0.' •'. 2 ,. , 12 12 .1.4 2 .. 2 12 12• 28 12
,. m 0 Q Q Q Q 0 0 •0 0 0 • 0 0 0 .. .0. • • I •• 12 12 I 0 I I I •• I I I I I 0 􀀱􀂷􀁉􀁏􀁉􀁏􀁉􀂷􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁏􀁉􀁏􀁉􀂷􀁉􀀧􀁉􀁉􀀠 r · I " I • 112 1'6 I • I · I · I • I I 
• • I ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD -ATTACHMENT C WORK ORDER NO. 002 -CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: URS CORPORATION [JjRS CorporatioiiJ
..... ",f 10.;"...:..... 1 e .... l<v I 0-1""" I 􀁩􀁩􀀻􀁾􀀠 Sheeta I,;OflSUII.. t'l'O eel: t:n t:: n 101:(l, VVI" MOurs S1S5.00 $175.00 $16SJ)0 $140.00 1100,00 $80.00 ;SCtOO moo $5S.00
Hili 4. Qbserw!he !ns,toJ!iIIUon of lighting oquipmerrt (one tlip to Addl3Ol'1) 0 􀁾􀁩􀁊􀁾􀀱􀀠 IIIIiM a Focus the lighIffig oqu1pmel'll end program control 􀁤􀁏􀁙􀁾􀀮􀁉􀀡􀀠 0 􀁬􀁭􀀮􀁾􀀠
􀁲􀁓􀁾􀀠 .' ";r, TASK f!I 􀁾􀀠PROJECT Mf\NAGEMENT , , ... , , , 32 7t; S 􀁾 S ........ A Reports and tnvOlceB o 0 12 «> 0 0 0 1) 20 32 1. Pl'epeJv Progress Repot1$ • Omilkld :2. Prepel'li
URS Invoice. In] 1,,1 I I I I loci! B. COOfdInalion 1. Cocr'tilnale one addenda 2, Anand eoortHnot!on meelings (0 to\aI) 1'1'1:: 1'1'1'1'1'1: I! 3. Cotmiitt(lts $hop drawing rospOM$$
end approvals Grand Total o ,. 132 172 218 .. • 28 34 666 S 76.250.00 S 1.210.00 S 85,5(1),00
TIME & MATERIALS WORK ORDER NO. 􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀰􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀰􀁾􀀲____ .. In accordance with the Agreement for Professional Services between Town of Addison \'Clienf'), and URS Corporation ("URS").
a Nevada corporation, dated November 11. 2002 ,this Work Order describes the Services, Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS Services on the Project known as: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE
AT MIDWAY ROAD CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES Client Authorized Representative: Michael Murphy Address: Public Works Department P,O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001·9010 Telephone No.:
__-"'-97'-'2"'.4""5"'0"",2"'87L.l'--_______________ URS Authorized Representative: Emily Tavlor. P.E. Address: Gravstone Centre. 3010 LBJ Freeway. Suite 1300 Dallas. TX 75234 Telephone
No.: __--"9"'72"",""406=,6""9""5"'0_________________ SERVICES. The Services shall be described in Attachment -,A,,--_ to this Work Order, SCHEDULE. The Estimated Schedule shall be set
forth in Attachment NlA to this Work Order. Because of the uncertainties inherent in the Services, Schedules are estimated and are subject to revision unless otherwise specifically described
herein. URS acknowledges that timely performance of its services is an important element of this Agreement and the Work Order. URS will put forth its best efforts to timely complete
the Services, PAYMENT. The Services described in Attachment A will be performed for a "not-to.exceed· amount of $85.500.00; in no event shall the payment by Client for the Services exceed
the said amount without written authorization. A breakdown of this amount is included in Attachment JL. Payment shall be made monthly based upon statements submitted to the Client for
the work performed. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. The terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced above shall apply to this Work Order, except as expressly modified herein. ACCEPTANCE of
the terms of this Work Order is acknowledged by the follOWing signatures of the Authorized Representatives, CLIENT URS WUd82rlfmut 􀀲􀁲􀁖􀁴􀁴􀁊􀁴􂂬􀁾􀁊􀁊􀀠 Signalure Ron Whitehead I
City Manager 􀀮􀀨􀁲􀀻􀀨􀁾􀀠 Emily Taylor, P .E.I Vice President (Typed NameITrtle II< -z-;􀁾 7tx::>4= Date of Signature Date of Signature PSA·l,DOC 19-Mar-02 -I 
􀁾􀁁􀁈􀁏􀁒􀁏􀁁􀁄􀁂􀁒􀁉􀁄􀁇􀁅􀁁􀁔􀁍􀁭􀁄􀁗􀁁􀁙􀁒􀁏􀁁􀁄􀀠 WORK ORDER NO. 002 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE 􀁾􀁁􀁈􀁏 ROAD BRIDGE URS will provide
the construction administration services as it relates to the Arapaho Road Bridge design services as performed under Work Order No. 001 and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction
will consist of an elevated four-lane roadway with sidewalk located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW) from Station 50+95 to Station 66+70. URS shall provide construction
phase services for a steel arch bridge over Midway Road, with prestressed concrete beam approaches and the bridge lighting & illumination for which URS provided design services under
Work Order No. 001. URS will attend the pre-construction meetings and respond to the contractor's or Town's request for information (RFls), review shop drawings, and review the Contractor's
submittals as related to the design services performed by URS under a separate agreement and as outlined in the Itemized Scope ofServices. All ROW documentation and plans, traffic control
reviews, construction engineering design, survey, geotechnical services, permitting, construction inspection and preparation of construction record drawings are outside the scope ofthis
agreement and will be performed by others or under a separate agreement. In addition, all items related to construction materials testing, fabrication shop verification or certification,
mill certifications, and welding qualifications and certifications are outside the scope of this agreement and will be performed by others. 
Itemized Scope ofServices Provided by URS for Construction Administration Services TASK 1-ENGINEERING A. Civil Site Works 1. Respond to contractor's RFI's for traffic control (I total).
2. Prepare one addenda 3. Omitted. B. Bridges I. Respond to contractor's RFI's (10 total) 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Omitted 4. Attend pre-construction meeting with the Town, the Town's
Consultant, and the General Contractor. S. Review Contractor's Schedule 6. Site visits (2 total) 7. Site Visits to Fabrication Facility (l visit -2 Engineers) 8. Review bridge contractor
submittals for compliance with the contract docwnents (I I submittals total). • Concrete mix design (4 total) • Prestressed beam strand jacking stress reports (64 beams) • Prestressed
beam redesign calculations (3 total) • Arch erection method statement • Arcb hanger stressing reports • Fonnwork calculations 9. Review bridge contractor shoplfabrication drawings for
compliance with contract documents (40 drawings total). • Foundations shaft details • Forrnwork • Miscellaneous superstructure details (SIP forms, PIS deck panels, screed elevations,
expansion joints, lighting supports) • Suspension hanger details and connections • Steel arcb details • Arcb camber details • Bearing details • Railing details • Stinger details • Temporary
shoringlfalsework • Erection sequencing • Prestressed beam fabrication drawings ( 64 beams) C. Electrical Engineering I. Respond to contractor's RFI's (I total) 2. Prepare one addenda
3. Review and approve contractor submittals as related to lighting details. TASK n -ARCHITECTURAL I. Respond to contrector's RFI's (I total) 2. Review and approve contractor submittals
as related to architectural details. 3. Observe site mock-ups. TASK UI-LIGHTING DESIGN I. Respond to contractor's RH's (3 total) 2. Prepare one addenda 
3. Review and approve contractor submittals as related to lighting details. (5 total) 4. Observe the installation of lighting equipment included in the lighting designer's final recommendations
at the job site (one trip to Addison). 5. Focusing the lighting equipment and program control devices(s). TASK IV -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices I. Omitted 2. Prepare URS
Invoices B. Coordination I. Coordinate one addenda 2. Omitted 3. Coordinate responses, reviews and approval ofContractor RFIs, submittals and shop drawings. ".-: 
•• • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD· ATTACHMENT C WORK ORDER NO. 002· CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: r-URS Corporation TASK I. ENGINEERING
A. Cll/li Site WorM 1. Respond to RFls lor trafficQOl'llml (1 lOla!) 2. Prepare one addunda 3. Review nnd approlle Contractor submittal as related to traffic eonIrc! (by HNTB) D, Brtdgos
1, Re$pOl'l(l to RFls (10 total) 2. P¥Qpn OM addenda 3. Review bridge bkllabotalions· Onfltle(l 4. Attend COIWruc!loo k.k:»off m&f:lling S. ReviewContradol"8 Schedule 6. Site vlslts
(2 tote!) 7. One Site VI$i1 to Fabncalloo Facility (2 peopta) e. Review bridge tol1lnldorSUibmitl8ls (11 total) Concrete mix design {4 total} Prol!ressed beam strandlacldng raporlti
(64 bQamG; Pm&!mssed beam alternate design C4!lc\Jlotion& (3 total) A.!t:h eteeIion mothod ststamanl A.rt:h hangarlii!ra$$lng reJ.lO!l.$ 􀁆􀁾caiaJ1AUQm: 9, Revlewbi1dge mntrador 6hoplfabrlea1lon
dtawings (40 dl'1!M1nIP IiOIliI) Foul'ldettonsiliheJt details FomlWOIl< MlscaUaI'l(fO\.J$ Sopentrucur& Detalls (SIP forms. PiS 􀁾􀁴􀁡 dedi; pal1e!5, axpen$lon joints. etc.) St.ispenSlon
heoger detalIs and conn&etlons Staal erch detaIls A.!t:h camber dOt.ais Beaiing details Ralling dalail, SIlrIger dalail, 􀁔􀁾 shoool)'fl!llSewofk Emctloo saqueneing Pmtra5sed beam fabricallon
drnwinrgs {54 bliJams) C. Electrfcal Engineering 1. Respond to RFls (1 RFls) 2. Prepare one &idetlda 3. Review and approve Contractor .l!l,Ibmlttaias IlIIEMd to lighting delalls TASK
II 􀁾􀀠ARCHlfECTURAL{Corpn AAoelatu; Inc:) 1, R8$jXiI'ld to RFlu (1 tolBij 2. Pmpml ooe eddenda 3, Review and apptOve COntradtlfsubroitt;,l.l as related to erdllted!Jta! delnils TASK
111-􀁕􀁇􀁈􀁮􀁎􀁾􀀠DESIGN 􀀨􀁂􀁮􀁭􀁤􀁾 􀁐􀁬􀁲􀁴􀁮􀁡􀁾􀁰􀀮􀁬􀁮􀁣􀀩􀀠 1. Respond to RFls (31OInl) 2. Prepero one addanda 3. 􀁁􀀮􀁥􀁾􀁥􀁷 and 8PJ)fOv& Contractor subm!ttalss related' to
lighting datal!! (5 total) .. , 114 182 .. 28· •• • ... " 4 2 ,... •• •-,. • "-4 •-..• I I 2 4 14 • I I I I I I I • .. ... I ..•.. I. 182 58 • 24 " 4 • 2• " 2•• •• 4••12 24 12 ,,.. 2
4 • ."" 1,2 • 4 12 24 .4.' 2' 24 1,,<".. ,". 2,8. ,08 0 0 •• • 0 • 0 •0 0 0 [OI",O,IIO,',',',o, 24 •• 12 0 1 I " , ' I • I 28 I ' I ' I ' I • ,I 􀁪􀁏􀁉􀀱􀀶􀀧􀂷􀀱􀁾􀀲􀀱􀀢􀀬􀀰􀀱􀂷􀁉􀁏􀁉􀂷􀁉􀁉􀀠
$ 80.000.00 $ ".260.00 $ 64,250.00 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD -ATTACHMENT C WORK ORDER NO. 002. -CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION MAN.HOUR & EXPENSe COST ESTIMATe CONSULTANT: ORS Corporation 4. Observe the fns!a!!a!kJn
of lIghting equipment {one bip 10 Addlson) II I· ·1 o 5. FOC05 th& 1[g1Uing equipment end program control dtlv\(:Q$ n"l 1 .... I 1 .. o ••11... 1l1li TASK rv· PROJECT MANAGEMENT o 0
44 O. 0 0-(I: (I 3% A. Ftilports IIJld Involc.l. 0012000002032 1. Prepara Progress Report,. 􀁾􀁏􀁭􀁩􀁴􀁴􀁥􀁤􀀠 2, PI'9pilI'e URS Invoices I 1 12 .. 1:2 B. CoOfdlnatlon I> 0 U 0 0 0 0
(I 12: 44 1, Coordinal1a 01\& addenda 2, Attend OOO!llina1fon meeungs (0 total) 3, Coordinate shop ctmwing responaEllI el"ld epprovals: FI :: : I :. 16.. 8,1180,00" 1,000.00 $ 9,580.00
Grand Total o ,. 132 172 ... .. • .. 34 868 $ 71,260.00 $ 7,210.00 $ 85,600.00 
URS June 28, 2004 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase II -Design
Development & Contract Documents Final Invoice for Professional Services Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please find our final invoice for Professional Services for the Arapaho Road Bridge
at Midway Road for the period between April 30, 2004 and June 25, 2004. Also included is our Progress Report for this period outlining the services provided. Please note that we have
completed our effort under Work Order No. 00 I. Sincerely, URS Corporation CliffR. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Graystone Center 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas,
TX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
Monthly Progress Report Design of the Arapaho Road Bridge Over Midway Road URS Project No. 25334400 Period: April 30, 2004 to June 25, 2004 I. General Accomplishments 1.1 Submitted final
plans. 1.2 Submitted addendum plans. 2. Progress This Period 2.1 Submitted final plans. 2.2 Attended two pre-bid meetings and provided responses to contractor's RFls (outside original
contract scope). 2.3 Submitted two addendum plan sets. 3. Anticipated Next Period 3.1 None project is completed. 4. Schedule Status 4.1 Project is completed. S. Issues f Impacts 5.1
Original scope provided for a 65% and 95% review set ofplans and a 100% final signed and sealed set. Town has requested URS to provide a 65%, 95% and 100% review set, a final PDF plan
set, and two sets ofsigned and sealed mylars (11 'x17" & 22"x34"). Additionally URS was requested to attend two pre-bid meetings and respond to contractor's RFls. Additional plan sets,
pre-bid meetings and responses to RFls were outside the scope ofwork ofthe original contract. 
FIXED PRICE WORK ORDER NO. ____0"'0"'2'--___ In accordance with the Agreement for Professional Services between Town of Addison ("Clienr'), and_ URS Corporation ('URS·). a Nevada corporation,
dated November 11, 2002 ,this Wor1\ Order describes the Services, Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS Services on the Project known as: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD EXPERT
WITNESS TESTIMONY OF NOISE & VIBRATION ANALYSIS Client Authorized Representative: Address: Public Wor1\s Department. P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Telephone NO': __􀀭􀀲􀀭􀀹􀀷􀁾􀀲􀀻􀀬􀀺􀀮􀀴􀀺􀀡
􀀾􀀵􀁾􀀰􀀢􀀬􀀮􀀲􀁾􀀸􀀷􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀱􀁌􀀭_______________ URS Authorized Representative: Emilv Taylor. P.E. Address: Graystone Centre, 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas. TX 75234 Telephone
No.: __􀀭􀀢􀀹􀀢􀀢􀀷􀀲􀀢􀀬􀀮􀀢􀀬􀀴􀀰􀀢􀀬􀀶􀀢􀀢􀀮􀀶􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀹􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀵􀁾􀀰_________________ SERVICES. The Services shall be described in Attachment .....A,,-_ to this Wor1\ Order, SCHEDULE.
The Estimated Schedule shall be set forth in Attachment 􀁾to this Wor1\ Order, Order, Because of the uncertainties inherent in the Services, Schedules are estimated and are subject to
revision unless otherwise specifically described herein, URS acknowledges that timely performance of its services is an important element of this Agreement and the Work Order, URS will
put forth its best efforts to timely complete the Services. PAYMENT. The Services described in Attachment A will be performed for a total fixed amount of $21 ,985.00; in no event Shall
the payment by Client for the Services exceed the said amount. A breakdown of this amount is included in Attachment L Payment shall be made monthly based upon statements submitted to
the Client for the wor1\ performed. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. The terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced above shall apply to this Wor1\ Order, except as expressly modified herein.
ACCEPTANCE of the terms of this Wor1\ Order is acknowledged by the following signatures of the Authorized Representatives. CLIENT Signature :"'-' Ron Whitehead I City Manager Emily Taylor,
P.E.I Vice President Typed NameJTrtlo Typed NameJTrtle Oato of Signature Date of Signature BIZt 0 Ii e: /WIse ( VI 1>J2'1-770 1V ,A.vA£.ySIS PSA·1.00C 19·Mar-02 -1 -'21) rSF 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES EXPERT TESTIMONY OF NOISE AND VIBRATION ANALYSIS FOR PROPERTY CONDEMNATION URS will provide expert
witness testimony for the condemnation hearings relating to the construction and use of Arapaho Road from approximate Station 40+67 to approximate Station 70+28 and as provided in the
itemized scope. The construction will consist of an elevated four-lane roadway with sidewalk located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW) on a tangent alignment. This
task includes preparation and participation of staffqualified in airborne and groundborne noise analysis in the upcoming condemnation hearings (currently scheduled for April 16 and April
23, 2003) for the sites known as The Crouch Property (old MBNA Building) and the Motel 6 Property. In addition to the airborne noise analysis conducted for the project, a groundborne
noise (i.e., vibration) stody will be conducted. Potential vibration impacts would be analyzed for 2 cases -a "close-in" case (the Crouch) property wherein the bridge pier is approximately
27 feet from the building of interest; the second for the Motel 6 property, in which the bridge/roadway is approximately 100 fuet from the building of interest. Vibration from construction
equipment and operations will also be addressed. This study will be a "screening" level ofanalysis as vibration is not expected to have an adverse impact. URS' Michael Greene, INCE Bd.
Cert. # 97008 and Project Manager, Cliff Hal I, P.E., will attend a preparation meeting on April 7, 2003 in Dallas, Texas with Town ofAddison legal representatives and other URS staff.
Noise analysis results to-date will be reviewed and preparations/strategies for the condemnation hearings will be discussed. Following the preparation meeting, relevant presentation
material will be prepared and presented to Town ofAddison legal representatives for review. Because ofthe limited time available between the preparation meeting and the condemnation
hearing, one ((I) round ofreview and revision per hearing is anticipated. Additiolllll review cycles will be considered out-of-scope work requiring additional budget authorization. Michael
Greene and Cliff Hall will attend one condemnation hearing for the Crouch Property and one condemoation hearing for the Motel 6 property and will present the results of the noise and
vibration analyses as they pertain to the subject properties. They will be available fur questions as necessary. When URS staff appear as expert witnesses at court trials, mediation,
arbitration hearings and depositions, their time is charged at 2.0 times the standard rate. All time spent preparing for such trials, hearings and depositions is charged at the standard
labor rate. AIJachmenl A SLape qfServiCe3 Work Order No, 002 URS 
Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS for the Expert Witness Testimony of Noise & Vibration TASK I -Expert Testimony A. Crouch Property 1. Preparation for Strategy Meeting 2. Strategy
Meeting 3. Preparation for Condemnation Hearing -Crouch 4. Vibration Screening (Constr & Opers.) 5. Crouch Condemnation Hearing and Debrief B. Motel 6 Property 1. Preparation for Condemnation
Hearing -Motel 6 2. Vibration Screening (Constr & Opers.) 3. Motel 6 Condemnation Hearing and Debrief t,;.' : " Auachmen/A Scope ojSef1lices 2 WOl'kOrder No. 002 DRS 
URS Corporation Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road· Work Order No. 002 Expert Witness Testimony of Noise & Vibration Analysis for Condemnation Property ATTACHMENT B Estimated Sched ule
Notice to Proceed Preparation for Strategy Meeting Strategy Meeting Preparation for Crouch Condemnation Hearing Vibration Screening Analysis· Crouch Crouch Condemnation Hearing Preparation
for Motel 6 Condemnation Hearing Vibration Screening Analysis· Motel 6 6 Condemnation Hearing 7 8 9 10 11 • 14 15 16 17 1 􀁾􀀧􀀢􀀠-" 􀁾 ... 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONY OF NOISE & VIBRATION ANALYSIS ATTACHMENT C FIXED PRICE BREAKDOWN URS CORPORATION Total Cost TASK 1-EXPERT
TESTIMONY A. Crouch Property $ 14,955.00 1. Preparation for Strategy Meeting 2. Strategy Meeting 3. Preparation for Condemnation Hearing -Crouch 4. Vibration Screening (Constr & Opers.)
5. Crouch Condemnation Hearing and Debrief B. Motel 6 Property $ 7,030.00 1. Preparation for Condemnation Hearing -Motel 6 2. Vibration Screening (Constr & Opers.) 3. Motel 6 Condemnation
Hearing and Debrief TOTAL $ 21,985.00 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE -Expert Testimony for Condemnation Hearing MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: I URS Corporation I
TASK 1-_ItTo>1imony A. Crouch PrQPerty 1. I'!eparatkln!tlr S!!a!egy 1.1_ 2. S!!a!egy Meetlng 3 Preparatlon for Coi'1denmatIon Hearing -crouch ol __ing 􀁾􀀦􀀰􀁪􀁬􀁥􀁉􀁳􀀮􀀩􀀠 5. Cloud!
Condam'-' Hearing and Deb!ief (2 _(!l4.5 hrs) B. MobIl 61't<1!>e1ty 1. PmpatatiOn for Condemnation Hearing -MotelS 2. VIbration SoIeenlng (Constr & Opers.) 3, Moh'li 6 Condemnation Headng
and Debrief (2 persortS G 4.5 hours) 18 6 17 64 8 8 8 129 $ 18,585.00 $ 3.400.00 $ $ $ $ • • 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁊􀀺􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁬􀁡􀀱􀀾􀀢􀀠􀀺􀀧􀀬􀀻􀁾􀀻􀀧􀁻􀁬􀀴􀀸􀀻􀁙􀀬􀀠,: 􀁩􀀺􀁾􀂣􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠􀀡􀀧􀁊􀁩􀀧􀁊􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁾�
�􀀥􀁾􀀠􀀡􀀡􀁦􀀳􀁩􀀧􀀡􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀠􀁩􀀡􀀡􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁬􀀮􀁾􀀺􀁬􀀧􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁩􀀠 1 2 8 2 13 4 12 1 11 2 4 14 8 4 2 34 1 1 6 8 9 2 e 1 II!II1I!iIllii 􀁾􀀧􀀭􀁬􀁩􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁩􀀧􀁾􀀠􀀧􀀺􀀬􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀿􀀠􀀠􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁪􀁬􀀱􀁓􀁴􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀧�
�􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁾 􀁾􀀤􀀹􀁔􀁤􀁍􀀱􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁗􀀮􀀠􀁾􀁩􀀡􀀡􀀡􀁬􀁴􀁩􀁬 1!Ii.' 1 1 4 4 1 11 1 1 4 6 9 2 e 20 $ $ 12,105.00 􀀱􀀨􀀤􀁴􀀱􀁗􀁾􀀲􀁩􀁩􀁩􀀵􀀰􀀻􀁯􀁯􀀧􀀠 1,615.00 2,210.00
$ 1.000.00 3,940.00 $ 250.00 1.110.00 3.830.00 $ 1.000,00 5,1!8O,00 􀀡􀁩􀀧􀁀􀀻􀁽􀀻􀀧􀀴􀀱􀁾􀀱􀀵􀀰􀁴􀁯􀁯􀁽􀀠 1.210.00 $ 150.00 840.00 3,830.00 $ 1.000,00 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 0
$ $ $ 21,985.00 14,955.00 1.615.00 3.210.00 4.190.00 1.110.00 4.830.00 7,030.00 1.360.00 840.00 3,830.00 1.000.00 
Ju1-12-04 09:4Zam Fro,,-URS Corporation T-9S1 P.OOZ/002 F-,47 URS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: 7(1104 TO: HNTB Corp 5910 W. Plano Parkway Plano, TX 75093 FROM: Cliff R. Hall URSCorp 301
0 LBJ Freeway Suite 1300 Dallas, TX 75234 Attention: Jenny NIcewander RE: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE The following items are being sent 􀁾􀁜􀀱􀁡􀁏􀁨􀁥􀁤􀀠 o Under separate cover by o Shop Drawings
0 Prints [8J Plans o Samples 0 Specifications o Copy of LeHer o Other Item Copies Date Description 1 1 7/6/04 Final Bridge Plans 11"x17" Mylar 2 1 7/6/04 Final Bridge Plans 22')(34"
Vellum J 4 5 Transmittals for reasons checked: o ForVourAppfOval o No Exceptions Taken o Resubmil copies for approval [8JFor Your Use o Make Corrections Noted o Submit copies for distribUtion
o As Requested DAmend and ResUbmit o Retum corrected prints o For Review,md Comment o Remarl<s: Copies: SIeve Chutchian -Town of Addison If enclosures ate nol as noted, kindly notifY
us at once. Name: 􀁾􀀨􀁩􀁥􀀱􀀠 URS Corporation LdW' orTn.II:ItlIlnll Rl:\>!d; tilJYOZ 
Ju1-12-04 09:42am From-OR! Corporation T-a!1 POOI/DD2 F-347 URS Facsimile To: FIrm: Facsimile: From: Date: Page 1 of: Subjed:: Message: -;,1 710'1 URS Co<por.oUM 3010 LBJ F(CftWay. SuRe
1300 DallaS. TX 752$4 Tel; 972.04OS,G!iJoSO fp: 972....06.6951 WW'N.Urscorp.c:om CONFIDENTIALITY NOTlCI£ The informtlion in 1hi. 􀁾􀁩􀁭􀁩􀀱􀁥 􀀧􀁲􀁳􀁲􀁷􀁮􀁩􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠is .ntenck:d .",olel)'
ro, the Slated rttipiM( ofd.1I b::uI:ttni",lon. Ir)'OU h:lw I't:ct:iw4 ttJ:i: II. 11'\ etTOf, pkue 􀁾􀁩􀁦􀁹􀀡􀁨􀁥 uadcf immediil¢\,. t>y kilcphone. IfYOil are not lhe 􀁩􀀢􀁬􀁜􀀻􀁩􀁾􀀠m;:ip<Cn'.
,tc::au: be advistd thai diS$C'IlJnwlOoh, di,.trlbulion, or t.oop)'in.e.,rtk ftll'<WJm,d"" Ultbliped in 􀁬􀀢􀁩􀁾􀀠Cn is ""i<tJ), 􀁰􀁲􀀢􀀢􀁩􀁢􀁩􀁩􀁾􀁤􀀮􀀠 
TOWN OF ADDISON PUBLIC WORKS To: Company:__. (/.:0..I'1...:".;->=--_c--'-p_F-a.....o:-'_, _ Phone: 972/450-2,.C,f>(; FAX#: '172 􀁾􀀠4-06 -6'1.>( Fax: 972/450-2837 Date:,___(;'-'1c.....L!1/t_p...:.4_-
-_􀁾__ 16801 Westgrove No. of pages (including 􀁣􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁲􀀩􀀺􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀽􀀳􀁾__ P.O. Box 9010 CLIFF.' 􀁗􀁾􀀠,ARc ,#iT t?.v mE SAA-z E£ Addison, TX 75001-9010 PA-t1E wi 77f Vt/..5 ES"r//fVf-tE,
t7vA(' DEPT· R et-tS EP 77fE.-rv"'-t B tIC> TO t;'EI A ",-"',R E 'RE"qu..r7TC VAL (/e. PLC'/'frE 􀁾􀁋􀁅􀀠􀁒􀁅􀁴􀀭􀀨􀁓􀀯􀁯􀁾􀀠 ( /2C'-.$V.BrL,rt AS,,4f'􀀷􀁍􀀭􀁾􀀵􀀯􀀠
• • 12,210..00 960.00 : 1,520.00 1.&11100 􀁾􀀸􀀷􀀰􀀧􀀢􀀠 3,190,00 􀀱􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁕􀁕􀀠 􀁾􀀮􀀠 1,3ElO.CM:l t'1!J.!.£ : I<fIVlSE'l/BT/......-'I-T fi'" ! S.Zc. ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD
r;;/p/"4 WORK ORDER NO. 002 -CONSTRUCnoN ADMINISTRATION MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ES11MATE CONSULTANT: r-lIRS Corporation URSCORPORATlON No. or rami SheetB Cost TASi( I 􀁾􀀠ENGINEER1HG
o , '02 29' 334 , ;\2 o ... • 100,OtiOJIO S e,350.011 S 106,400,00 A. Civil StllllWorke 0 0 $ 24 " ""0 I) S 0 .. I • 􀁾􀀬􀁏􀀺􀁏􀀧􀀠 -S ... ".....,...,..... . 100,p_ :2(•J QI'O 10 $ 1.-430,00
§ 1. """"""",Rfl''''-'''''"",(2t<>1al) 􀁾􀀧􀀠• $ 2. f'l'epmI 01'10 addenda 2. a 8 18 $ 1,990.00, $ . 1,900,00 , 3. RevieW and approve contractor subm!tlal •• related 'In !raffle control
..Tftt{fa 2 8 ., 14 $ 1,8$.OO $ i MO 􀁾􀀭 aSrtcigos f "'f'l'WIV 0 0 98 224 m 100 0 24 0 714 • .......... 􀁾...... $ . ..;",,, S'S67iJ 1, Respond fD RFfs (JO total) 102 ..,. 􀀱􀁾'30.00
$ __ (i,0I.iD 30 32 '" 2. Prepare one addenda .. 4 16 24 4.-480.00 $' 4,450.00 3.R<Mewbffdg&bicltablJlatkms I)CN6 A(..(Ztl .... r:7 · ,. '" ,• 􀁾􀀳􀀰􀀰􀀮􀀰􀀰􀀠 $ -"". 4. Attend eonstrue:tlon
ttk-oI'f mmmg • "12 :.. 1,74(1,00 $ 1,050..00 $ o,M.OB ./"CO 6. RGVIeW Conlradons SclIedo/e 10 $ 1,270,00 $ , 􀀬􀁾 {(1P{,) 6, SllBvI!IIts (6ttGl) 2·4 1.•6 1,2 52 • 7,160.00 $ 2.-100,,«1
$ 􀁾􀀺􀀳􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀦􀀺􀁖􀀠 7, One St. V\$tl:to Fabr1c9t1on rm::UIty {2 people) 12 12 tl Review bridge eon\J'adDr subm1!!a\9 (11 total) 􀁾􀀱􀁩􀁾􀀧􀁬􀀮􀁬􀁬􀀠'i 􀁉􀁦􀁏􀁬􀁾􀀠 "", 􀁟􀂥􀀮􀁁􀀡􀀬􀁩􀁾􀀻􀁭􀁾􀁢􀁫􀁾
􀂷􀀠 -:'.,,:-, l' 􀀺􀀶􀀬􀀬􀀱􀁩􀀧􀀻􀀮􀀻􀁾􀀠 '" j' " 108 ,S ConcrefB mile dillli!l\1n (4total) B 2 I. , Pre:Wessed beam strand.JickIng ltlpolt9 (54 beams) 12 4 16 :.$, 􀁾bMm flHemal$ design
ealtulal10M (3 total) 14 ,.$ · ,. Areh eted:bn mothoCl vtatement 26 : S Arch hanger stressing reports 2 12 12 .. .. . FOI1'I'lWI)i'k r;ak:uia1lorl!t i. • 9. Review brIdp 􀁣􀁯􀁴􀁲􀁴􀁭􀁣􀁴􀁣􀁲􀀧􀁨􀁏􀁰�
�􀁡􀁾 drawings (9Ototat) ':;t,;o.rr" 􀁾􀀠 •atmf.' 12􀁾􀀠 .• ; 􀀧􀀢􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀠 􀀻􀀭􀀨􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀠 402 $ 43.1\0,00 􀀤􀁾 􀁾􀀺􀀵􀁪􀁏􀂣􀀾􀀠 􀁾􀁨􀁡􀁮􀀺􀁤􀁥􀁴􀀳􀁬􀀱􀁡􀀠 12 • 16-'$' B I. ,. . Mts.;eHaneouD
$tJpmttuctn'8 Oatalla (SIP fOI'tn$, p/Sconcreta dod: panelS, expanslon,/Olrrts. -.) 20 32 62 : $ -::: :f::: S\wpen9bn nanger de1nHa and connections 2 .. • 34 $ 4.470,00 $ 4..jj70.CM:l
stI!II!II arch detall9 , ... 60 􀀱􀀴􀀮􀁾􀀱􀀰􀀮􀀰􀀰􀀠 $ 14,710.00 '''' $ AtdI eamber 􀁾􀀠 S2 32 • 3.2OIl00 $ .3,200,00 &wtngdota.!IS 12 '$' 1,(180,00 $ 1.0&0.00 RaDlngdetalls • 800..00
$' 600.00 Stlngefdetl!l:B, 4 4 • $ 720.00 $' 120.00 • . $ Temperer)' 􀁳􀁨􀁯􀁲􀁦􀁲􀁜􀁡􀁬􀁔􀁡􀁬􀁾􀁲􀁫􀀠 2 6 16 ,. S 3;030.00 $: 3,030.00 Etectlon $l!qlJOndng :2 a 16 2. • '3"oeti.OO $:
·3,030.00 Pro8Il'e3:Sed bfam fabdcatiOn 􀁤􀁾􀁮􀁧􀁡 (64 beams) :2 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 I 42 . $ 3.910.00 $' "",..'.-, , Co 􀁅􀁉􀁾 EngfnMttne o 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 .. .􀁾􀀱􀁉􀀸􀁏􀀮􀀰􀀰􀀬􀀠 •• , J. (NO
i. 􀁾to RRs (4 RFla) 24 ,$ 3.'"",00 §.$ • 2.PJepefe one 􀁡􀁤􀁤􀁬􀀡􀁬􀁮􀁾􀀠 34aOO $ 840.00 • $. 3, RfMeW and 􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁾 COtdJ:actor sUbmrttni :as related 10 IIghtlng detaR, 12 $ 1.880.00 S. I! I J CC§' TASK 1I.ARCHfT:E(;TURAl.(Corg8n
Associate$, Inc) 00010420002: .. 1. Respandto RFIt (2 total) I $, • 15.710.oo§,•􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀠 ,• . ' $ 2. Prepare one addenda S . $ 3. 􀁾􀁡􀁮􀁤 8ppKM!J 􀁃􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁬􀁬􀀡􀁵􀁢􀁭􀁬􀁴􀁴􀁡􀁬􀀠as
retatedto arch!b:dln'at details $ [J 13FI • TASK III 􀁾􀀠UGH11NG DESIGN (S!WIdstOl1 Pattnerehlp. Inc) .. _gulP 1, Re$pond to RF1s (8 rota!) • 􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀺􀁏􀁏§"""''00: . 􀁾 2. Prepare
OM addenda • o $: . .-$ 1°1 􀁾􀀠1°1"1" I 'I 􀁾􀀠I' tiJ 3, FhMeW end epf)rvI/e ContJaetQr aUbmtttal 􀁾􀁳 rebated to Jlghtlt1g damns {12b::ltaJ} • ". 􀁾􀀠 $ . 
--ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 -CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION MAN-HOUR & EXPeNSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT, URS ----, Corporation URS CORPORATION ,,",of 4. OI'.l$aMl
tho fnstallat10n of Ilghtrng equipment (ont:tr/p to AddISon) .,"", L. I􀁾􀁾 I􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀡􀀮􀁉􀀮􀁯􀀯􀀮􀀡􀁾􀀠I􀀧􀀺􀀡􀀡􀁾 I􀁅􀀡􀀡􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀧I 􀀮􀀺􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀠I _h. I .;'!'_ I """" I """ ..".",...
Er-F] ]-'--1-[ I ] : •• 1-]: 5. F1.'IetIS" the Ilgtrtlng equipment aM program CWltrol dl!\llcoll' ,.. TASK tv 􀁾􀁦􀁬􀁒􀁏􀁊􀁅􀁃􀁔 MANAGEMENT o 0-116 0-0-0 0: 0-70 $ 21.830.110;: 1,500.00
$ te,"? tv\ q7$iJ A 􀁒􀁯􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁁􀀢 Iniah 0-0 :sa 0-0 0 0 0 GIl .... • 8:rftLoo. $ 􀁾􀁭􀀢􀁯􀁯 $ 3,780.(10 I 1'$ 3,780',00 ,. .......""BlI OS 4,_00 • ,-.2-(Ja> 􀁾 􀁾􀁅􀁬􀀧􀀠 I::EFT=r3-1!!]
0: 0 &0 0 0. 0 I) 0: 12 .. 13.080.&;l 􀁾1 􀀮aoo.oo $ 14,180.00 􀁾􀀹􀀴􀀰􀀮􀀰􀀰􀀠 $' 5,8118.00 .-J":: 􀁾 3,7'Zi.OO $ 􀁾IOp/""': """'-."""'" (4 ...Q pZl-t+ ,,'r _ . t r-[]: I I r 11: I
.'". • • • •• 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀮􀁟􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀮􀁟􀀢􀀠 􀀹􀀹􀀭􀁜􀁾􀀢􀀵􀁬􀁬􀀵􀁉􀁦􀁲􀀢􀀢􀀠 '" MOO.OO' '''''''00, __ 3<>(10 1'ASi(V-MAlNTENAHCEAHD\NSPECTIONMANUAl I) I) 14 $8 56 I) 28 2e 20 202, Zl.etO,OO
$ '1,05Q.OO $@OC 1. Pmpare DraltlAanual a 40 40 20 20 20 148 S 􀀱􀀴􀀧􀀹􀀴􀀰􀀮􀁯􀁯􀀮􀁾 • 􀁩􀁾􀀠 2.F'l1I'8OJ'lttnCty <4 a 12 $ ,1,740.00 $ 1050.tx:J $ 2..00 􀁾􀁏􀀦􀀠 a Prep!!$ Anar f,tanuaI
'2 8: i6 e 8 ,(2 $ 4,230.00 $. . 􀁇􀁲􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀻􀀭 0 '" "'" 37' ... '00 .. eo .. ,,... ,,,,,"".00 • 􀁵􀀺􀀢􀀺􀁾􀁟􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀫 JI(14; 44-0 
-. ":-􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀭􀀭 ..􀁾...>.-.-:.:..:.--.-"., " .•--..... 􀀭􀀺􀀢􀀺􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀬􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀬􀀺􀀢􀀬􀀮􀀺􀀠 ""..: "-' :. -,,' .-... " ---'.-.'...•. :..:: ..-. ! ;: 􀁌􀀨􀁾􀀠'tcvr-I
.. 1 \ 􀁩􀁲􀁾􀀨􀁏􀁾􀁇􀀯􀁾􀀷􀀠 􀁬􀁾􀀠 : i 􀁬􀁅􀀭􀁲􀁾􀀠􀁲􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁳􀁯􀀱􀁜􀁾􀀠 dk···· . .to OfJ . 􀁾􀀧􀀭􀀭
• • -----,. t 'f'.. "" • en".,.'" TE .I s.Ze, ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAO 61'1/""4 WORK ORDER NO. 0112 -CONSTRUCTION AOMINISTRAllON MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT;
I URS CorporaHon I URI CORPORATION No. or Senior PR>j'" Total Total Lllbof DlmCt T""" Sh68tD Consult UM' HOtlrs Coot 􀁩􀁳􀀩􀀺􀁰􀁯􀁯􀁾􀀠 ""'" I $175.00 $105.00 TASK I· ENGIMEERING o ,..
2110 ... '00 o ., w • 100-OCKiOO, 8.*'00, 108,4O(l00 ("'>6, A. CMum.WorQ 0 0 8 24 .. 0 0 e 0 42 $-&,280.00. M' 􀁾__Z:71t 1. Reepondtu RFIllftlr1nrl'lleo:mtiUI (2 total) 􀁾􀀠 2' '0 ,$
",:.o;o.oo"§ $ ___ I(?OO 2. Prepare 0118 addenda ,2 8 6 1$ $: 1,990.00 S 1,990.00 3. Rev1eWsnd approve COntractor 8ubmtltal as related to Ita1I'tr:; comrol "'-tfll{' 8 f 2: B 4 14 $
1,83tlOO $ 1 830 M -_ B. Bridges 􀁾􀀠 TVW"",, 0 0 &6 224 􀁾􀀠 100 0 :N 0 714 -. '..moo, 8.JeO.OO 'f ," .iRQ"S 5""5'71 '02 $ ,3,'",00 $ 􀁾 Goa) 2. Prepare one addenda .. .. 16 24 4& :
S 4,4IQ.00 $: 4.4ei:tOO 3.RlM8WbrklgebldtabulatlOlUI ()"tv6 Al.f/!t2.A-Dr .{ 12 16 $ 2.SQO.«) $: lI!;!U1tXJ 1. ReaponcllD Rrla (30 total) 􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀡􀁾􀀳􀀲􀁾􀀡􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁾�
�􀁾􀁾 4. AttDnd construetxm klcMll' meetlng .. 8 ,. : $ 􀀢􀀧􀀮􀀷􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀠 $ ''''",00 $ ........ I()U? 5. Re'JIew contractor's. SCI1ecluIe 2 -4 .. 10 : $: 1.i70.00 s 􀁾ItJ!JQ 8. SIte V!Sb
(6 to1al) 24 16 12 52 :$ 7.'_." i"",oo $..,..II.21lO.OO" 􀁾 '" a:> 7. ana St\!o \IJ:!IltttJ Fabrlc:at»n Facllity(2 poopllill) 12 12 • $: 3,200.00' . S. RevIowbltig8 COJl1:radI)r submllta19
(11 toIlal) I I I I •• •! 2 eo , !!! 32 ! ! .! " • • 􀀧􀀡􀀻􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁯􀁬􀀰􀀧􀀻􀁜􀀧􀀠􀀺􀁬􀀧􀁴􀀻􀁾􀁩􀀺􀁯􀀧􀀺􀁊􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁲􀀬􀀠 􀁾􀀺􀀡􀀠 􀁾􀁲􀁯􀁯 m-..􀁾 􀁾􀁩􀀧􀂱􀀧􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀬 􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀪􀁜􀁩􀀩􀀺􀀧􀂫􀁾􀀠
108 $ 12,210,00 􀁾􀁾􀁊􀁩􀁴􀁾􀀠S 12.21o.ro Concrete milt dUfgn (4 toIDI:} 8 2 10 , $ S60.00 $: 960.M Prestressed beamelnlrtdJscklng 􀁾􀀨􀀶􀀴 beIa:rIa) 12 4 16 • $ .􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁯􀁯􀀠 $: 1,620,00
Prastresaed beam alternaw desJgn calcUlalicna (3 total) 2 12 14 $ 1,510.00 .1,&10.00 AldI ereetlOn method st:\rtWm'ien1: '2 24 2G .$ 3,670.00 ,$ 3,,670.00 AJeh hangsr atrm:sll'lg mportS
2' 12 12 2i3 ,$ 3,19O.CO $ 3,iSO,1X) FQrtrlY«)I'k: cak:t.ilatlona .{ 12 16 $' 􀀱􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁏􀁏􀀠 􀁾􀀮􀀠 1.300,00 g. ___-_""""'(90_ 7·.,OJ;l!, "'l!iO."" 􀁾__!lii!!Uf01II'I 􀀡􀁉􀁉􀀻􀁧􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁉􀀡􀀡􀀢􀁊􀁬􀀠
􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀠 402 ,$", ....'lO,!" $', "."" .' $ 192.Sic:>a> 􀁆􀁯􀁵􀁾􀁤􀁥􀀡􀀸􀀱􀀱􀁡􀀠 '2 16 $ 1A20.oo $ ,620.1:0 • • 10 .. "$ 􀁾••".. • " 􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀧.. MisceU8.1IEIOU9 SUpatStr'UCUte Detah (S1P
fOmIa, PIS 􀁾di!ic:k paMhl. -e:cpanem jolnt8, etc.) 32 62 $ 4.fB:I.OO $ ,,!!eo,OO i SuspeMkm hanger detaII:s and amrMdbns !!• 34 $ 4,470.00 $ 4,470.00 J 1Zl $ 14,710.00 $ 14,710.00 .
32 $ 3,200.00 $ 3.'2:0:1.00 2' ....."""""12 $ 1,oeo,0I) $ 1,080,00 Reftlng dalab a $ 300.00 $ 800.00 Stinger detaHs 8 • 720.00 $ 720.00 2fI $ 3.030.00 $ 3,030.00 • 26 $ 3,030,00 $ 3,030.00
􀁔􀁴􀁬􀁭􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁡􀁲􀁹􀁾􀀠 .l! -.......... Preatre88ad beam fabrt:at»n 􀁤􀁾(64 beama) "" "" 42 S 3,910.00 $ C. E'Ie:et$aI !;ngIneetlng 42 • 􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀧􀀬􀀧􀀠 • 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮 J cPt{) 1. ReeponQ
to Rfls,(4 RFI$) 24 $ 3,360.00 a I , 2. Pnlpant one addenda 6 $-$-.840.00 $ &40,00 a RfllliewlllnQ approve Confmctor aubmlltal as m!atadtn IJQMing detals 12 $ 1.f?80.00 $-. 􀀱􀂷􀀱􀂷􀀱􀂷􀀱􀁾􀀱􀂷􀀱􀂷􀀱
􀀰􀀬􀀧􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀠 TASK II 􀁾􀀠ARCHITECTURAL (COrgan.Aasoclmes, (nc) o 0 0 to 42 0 0 0 2 .. • 􀁾􀀷􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀰􀀰􀀠 • ........".... ;'010 1. ReepoI'I(i to RFla(2 total) $ . a$· 2. PNp;w Of'lO
addOtlltlil o S -$ 3. REMewanQ apptOVe Contractcf aubmlltal as m!atad ttl an:tlltedutal detall9 o S -$ TASK III 􀁾􀀱􀀮􀀱􀁇􀁈􀁔􀁉􀁎􀁏􀀠DESIGN (Brandston Partnerehlp, lne) 02401121 02000
.. • '0._00, 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀠 _ t Q(/) t R88pOfld to RFhI ($ IDtaI) o $ • nrr ... , o a$ ,,;-2. Pr1IIpem<m8addlllda o S -$ 3. REMew and appraw! Contnletof submittal as relate<J to
lighting details (12 to!Bl) o $ -$
JRS June 1, 2004 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 1680 I Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase n -Design
Development & Contract Documents Invoice for Professional Services Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please find our invoice for Professional Services for the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway
Road for the period between March 26, 2004 and April 30, 2004. Also included is our Progress Report for this period outlining the services provided. Sincerely, URS Corporation Clift·R.
Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Graystone Center 3010 LBJ Freeway. Sufte 1300 Dalias. TX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
-Monthly Progress Report Design of the Arapaho Road Bridge Over Midway Road URS Project No. 25334400 Period: March 26. 200410 April 30, 2004 1. General Accomplishments 1.1 Submitted
95% review plans. 1.2 Submitted 100% review plans. 2. Progress This Period 2.1 Continued final design and drawing production 2.2 Met with the Town to discuss 95% review comments and
coordination issues (grading around thrust block, monument plaques, etc.). 2.3 Meet with Town's consultant to coordinate drainage, parking and other issues. 2.4 Submitted 95% review
plans. 2.5 Submitted 100% review plans. 3. Anticipated Next Period 3.1 Submit final plans specifications. 4. Schedule Status 4.1 Final plans and specifications will be submitted on May
7, 2004. 5. Issues I Impacts 5.1 The final grading plan was received to finalize the elevations of the drilled shafts for the bridge bents. The elevations ofthe shafts for the thrust
blocks are set. Ground elevations at the thrust blocks need to be revised to provided adequate cover on the shafts. 5.2 Original scope provided for a 65% and 95% review set ofplans and
a 100% final signed and sealed set. Town has requested URS to provide a 65%, 95% and 100% review set, a final PDF plan set, and two sets ofsigned and sealed mylars (11 'xl7" & 22"x34").
Additional plan sets are outside the scope ofwork. 􀁾.. 
URS July 24, 2002 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian., PE Assistant City Engineer 1680 I Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase n -Design
Development, Contract Documents, and Construction Administration Scope of Services & Fee Proposal Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please fmd a copy of the Scope ofServices and Fee Proposals
for Phase II of the referenced project for your review. As advised previously, we have separated the scope and fee into three Work Orders as follows: Work Order No. 00 I -Arapaho Road
Bridge Design Development and Construction Documents Work Order No. 002 -Arapaho Road Bridge Construction Administration Services Work Order No. 003 -Midway Road from Beltline to Lindberg
Design Development and Construction Documents Please note that we have also included a breakdown, by consultant, ofour man-hour estimate for each work order. Please also be advised that
the scope for Work Order Nos. 002 and 003 have undergone some slight revisions from those submitted last week. We look furward to diseussing our Scope of Services and Fee Proposals with
you and providing you the final agreement for your approval. Sincerely, 􀁾􀀻􀀣􀀧􀀠 CliffR. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS CorporaHon Prestonwood Tower 5151 8elUine Road, Suite
700 Dallas, TX 75254 Tel: 972.980.4961 Fax: 972.991.7665 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR THE ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE URS will provide the engineering,
architectural, urban design, lighting design and noise study services including plans, specifications and estimates as it relates to Arapaho Road from approximate Station 40+67 to approximate
Station 70+28 and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of an elevated four-lane roadway with sidewalk located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way
(ROW). URS shall prepare plans, details and compute quantities for a steel arch bridge, the "blue-bridge concept", over Midway Road, with prestressed concrete beam approaches. Design
and details will include all bridge details including any soundwalls located on the bridge. DRS will also provide all bridge drainage details to accommodate the drainage in accordance
with the Town's Consultant's drainage requirements. URS will also prepare plans, details and compute quantities for any landscaping, hardscaping, sidewalks, lighting & illumination,
and traffic control for the areas under and immediately adjacent to the bridge and retained wall portion of Arapaho Road with the exception of those portions to be prepared by the Town
of Addison's Consultant. URS will also prepare architectural details for the bridge, the mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls and the sound walls. Additionally, URS will
prepare a noise study including ambient noise measurements, modeling and noise analyses. URS will prepare and submit technical memorandums, preliminary plans and preliminary construction
cost estimates at the end of the Design Development phase for the Town's review. After resolution of one set of comments and selection of alternatives provided, URS will provide all
final detail plans, specifications, and estimates as previously described, to be included into one final construction package prepared by the Town's Consultant. URS will submit four
sets ofplans for review to the Town for 65% review and 95% review and will incorporate the Town's comments (one set per submittal) in the next submittals. URS will also provide signed
and sealed mylar plans at the 100% [mal submittal. URS will coordinate with the Town of Addison and/or the Town's Consultant for all interface design issues as well as coordinate the
format and consolidation of construction plans, specification and estimate into one [mal construction package. URS will coordinate with the Town and/or the Town's Consultant for revising
the horizontal alignment and vertical profile of Arapaho Road to accommodate the proposed bridge structure. URS will coordinate with the Town and/or the Town's Consultant for the revised
alignment of the proposed box-culvert under Arapaho Road as well as bridge drainage and bridge drain tie-ins. URS will coordinate with the Town and/or the Town's Consultant for all geotechnical
information required for the foundation design for the bridge and retaining walls. The Town of of Addison will provide to URS all available Arapaho Road geometries, including but not
limited to electronic files for horizontal alignment, vertical profile, typical sections, topography survey, field survey, and utility information. The Town will also provide boring
logs, soil parameters and foundation design recommendations (allowable bearing capacities, lateral load analysis, etc.) required for the bridge foundation designs. The Town of Addison
will provide to URS a field location survey of the existing 60-in. diameter water main, locating the water main precisely, both vertically and horizontally, along the project limits
and specifically in the vicinity of the arch-bridge's main foundations. Additionally the Town will provide any applicable noise regulations or ordinance 
information, obtain right of entry, and provide all traffic data including but not limited to, peak hourly volumes, average daily traffic, percentages of trucks, and design and posted
speeds that may be required for the noise study. The Town will provide all landscape ordinances and guidelines as well as provide a copy of the Town's Consultant's schematic landscape
masterplan and the streetscape design development package. All ROW documentation and plans, Arapaho Road geometries and roadway design, drainage, parking lot layout and design, retaining
wall layout and design, survey, geotechnical engineering, design and details for sound walls on retaining walls or at grade, ipigation for landscaping, permitting, and construction administration,
inspection and record drawings are outside the scope of this agreement and will be perfonned by others. :. : ,, 
Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS for the Arapaho Road Bridge TASKI-URBAN DESIGN A. Design Development I. Inventory and Analysis of Project Area • Review existing plans and
coordinate with Town's Consultant • Identify prevailing patterns • Analyze project needs based on above • Develop urban design principles for project • Prepare technical memo ofunderstanding
of existing plans 2, Develop two scenarios for the primary project area (limits ofproject) that incorporate the design principles in item number I. • Landscape for bridge abutments and
retaining wall areas • Hardscape: bridge elements at base to screen parking • Element relocation, adjustment, elimination, or addition (utility poles, signage, medians, sidewalk, etc.)
• Prepare plan & elevation with typical sections ofprimary project area 3. Develop fmal preliminary concept • Identify a final preliminary concept to go forward into final design. •
Prepare support drawings for final concept 4. Prepare for and attend meetings in Addison to collect date and present options (2 total) B. Final Design (65'1'0, 95%,100% submittals) I.
Design development ofhardscape {surfaces, railings, etc.} 2. Create Final Landscape Plan • Identify plants to be removed or relocated • Identify appropriate plant pallets • Design planting
plan • Create plant list • Define maintenance requirements • Urban design and landscape construction documents for the project area 2. Prepare for and attend meetings in Addison (I total)
TASK II -ENGINEElIING A. Civil Site Works L Final Civil Design & PS&E{65%, 95%, 100% submittal) • Midway Road Traffic Control Plan • Overhead Utilities (Along Midway Road) Adjustment
Plan • Reraining Wall Architectural Details • Soundwall Architectural Details • QAlQC • Cost Estimate • Special Provisions & Specifications • Coordination with Town's Consultants B.Bridges
L Preliminary Bridge Design (-30% submittal) • Develop Design Criteria • Preliminary Bridge Layout (Finalize Bridge Location) • Preliminary Typical Section • Refine Arch Shape • Size
Tluust Block & Refine Shape • Size Foundation • Size Diaphragms • Size Traffic Railing Members 
• Develop SoundwaJI • Investigate Culvert Layout • Quantities and Cost Estimate • QAlQC 2, Final Bridge Design, & PS&E (65%, 95%, 100% submittals) • Final Bridge Layout • Final Typical
Section • General Notes • Quantities and Bearing Seats • Foundation Layout • Drilled Shaft Details • Abutment Plan & Elevation • Abutment Details • Bent Plan & Elevation • Bent Details
• Thrust Block Plan & Elevation • Thrust Block Details • Prestressed Concrete Beam Unit -Deck Plan • Prestressed Concrete Beam Unit -Deck Sections • Bridge Soundwall Details • Miscellaneons
Superstrncture Details (drains, lighting) • Diaphragm Details • Closure Pour Details • Suspension Hanger Details • Steel Arch Desigo and Details • Steel Arch Camber Details • Bearing
Details • Drainage DetaHs • Railing Details • Arehitectural Details • Stinger Desigo & Details • Approach Slab Details • Erection Sequencing • Prestressed Beam Tables • Compile, Verify
& Modify TxDOT Standard Drawings • QAlQC • Coordination with Town's Consultants • Bridge Total Total Quantities & Cost Estimate • Bridge Special Provisions & Specifications C. Electrical
Engineering L Design Development • Develop a load stody for Arapaho Road Bridge, approaches and parking areas • Prepare a preliminary cost estimate 2, Final Electrical Desigo & PS&E
(65%, 95%, 100"10 submittals) • Finalize a load stody for each electrical service source. • Prepare Lighting Calculations fur under-deck lighting above the parking lot. • Illumination
Layout (2961', 1200'/sht + I sheet under the bridge) • Electric Service I Pole Sunnnary • Conduit Runs I Contents • Insert Lighting Consultant Special Details • Insert Latest Town or
TxDOT Standards • Quantity Summary • Develop Final Cost Estimate (Using Estimator) • QA ON 95% PLANS • Update Drawings per City Review 
TASKIll-ARCHITECTURAL A. Design Development L Architectural Studies & Details • Develop three rail options addressing the issues ofhikerlbiker separation from the vehicular traffic and
the architectural options to realize the proposed triangular pattern in the rail. • Coordinate with the engineering tearn to refme the curvature and size of the steel. Produce drawings
representing viable options • Explore options for the final material aod fonn of the thrust block. Provide sketch options initially followed by CADD drawings ofpreferred scheme. • Develop
detailed options and refine panel schemes for precast concrete retaining walls at approaches. • Study and Present Options for center pier support shape. • Develop options for bridge
mounted soundwalls • Explore and refine alternate "stinger" designs incorporating lighting as the primary feature. • Attend Team Meetings and Conference Calls to coordinate the architectural
aspects of the design with structural and lighting Consultants. 2. Computer Animation • Minor updates to existing video animation for landscaping, parking, etc. • Produce video animation
in DVD and VHS tape format B. Final Design L Coordination 2. Review 3. Specifications TASK IV -LIGHTING DESIGN A. Design Development (includes two meetings in Addison) 1. Develop two
alternatives for lighting ofstingers. 2. Research and mock-up options for color changing on existing Addison sculpture (to deterntine range of possibilities for color changing on bridge
structure). 3. Develop two alternatives for lighting of bicycle/pedestrian path. 4. Develop two alternatives for lighting of elevated roadway. S. Develop mounting concepts for bridge
structure lighting. 6. Develop two alternatives for lighting ofouthoard railings. 7. Develop two alternatives for lighting of underside ofbridge, roadway under bridge and any adjacent
parking areas under bridge. B. Final Design (includes oue meeting in Addison) 1. Final details for lighting ofstingers. 2. Final details of fixtures and mounting for bridge structure
illumination. 3. Final details of fixtures and mounting fur elevated roadway lighting. 4. Final details of fixtures and mounting for bicycle/pedestrian pathway lighting. S. Final details
offixtures and mounting for outboard railing illumination. 6. Final details offixtures and mounting for lighting ofunderside of bridge, roadway under bridge and any adjacent parking
areas under bridge. 7. Provide control concept diagrams and other information snitable for use by electrical engineer describing control intent. TASKV NOISESTUDY A. Noise Measurements
1. Review existing noise ordinance and criteria documents 2. Meeting with the Town ofAddison to discuss noise issues and objectives 3. Perfonn noise measurement survey. Take initial
noise readings, both long term (24 hours or longer) and short tenn (less than one hour) noise readings, at adjacent properties. 4. Observe adjacent building construction type to aid
in estimating the potential noise e!fucls inside the buildings 
B. Noise Modeling and Analyses I. Create a noise model to predict future noise emissions from the proposed roadway and bridge 2. Evaluate noise levels at areas ofconcern for compliance
with applicable noise regulations and standards 3. Develop a range ofsound wall heights and noise levels where noise impacts require mitigation. 4. Prepare report and respond to one
round ofcomments. 5. Final meeting with Town ofAddison TASK VI -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices I. Prepare Project Management Plan 2. Prepare Progress Reports 3. Prepare Invoices
and Billings B. Coordination 1. Coordinate/Administer the Project 2. Prepare and Update Schedule 3. Manage Subconsultants 4. Implement Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program 5. Prepare
for and Attend Town Councilor other Town Meetings (3 total) 6. Prepare for and run internal project coordination meetings (8 total) 7. Prepare for and attend project meetings with Addison
Public Works (8 total) 
URS Corporation Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Design Development and PS&E ATTACHMENT B Estimated Schedule TAliK DESCRIPTION NotlC& to Proceed Design Development Final Concepts (-300,4
Plans) Addison Review Final Design IntermedIate Design Submittal (60% Plans) Addison Review Final Design & Construction Documents Final DeSign Submittal (95% Plans) Addison Review Incorporate
Comments Signed and Sealed PS&E (100%) August September Oclober 200 2 2 0 0 2 2 Q 0 2 • -November December January 2 0 Q 2 2 Q Q 2 2 0 0 2 February March 2 002 2 0 0 3 April May June
July 200 3 2 0 0 3 2 a 0 3 2 0 0 3 •• r 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE ATTACHMENT C FEE PROPOSAL URS CORPORATION TASK I -URBAN DESIGN A. Design Development B. Final Design TASK II
-ENGINEERING A. Civil Site Works B. Bridges C. Electrical Engineering TASK 111-ARCHITECTURAL (Corgan &URS) A. Design Development B. Final Design TASK IV -LIGHTING DESIGN (Brandston)
A. Design Development B. Final Design TASK V -NOISE STUDY A. Noise Measurements B. Noise Modeling and Analyses TASK VI -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and invoices B. Coordination Printing
& Copying Expenses Total Cost $ 49,420.00 $ 35.192.00 $ 14,228.00 $ 567,454.00 $ 29,780.00 $ 498,454.00 $ 39,220.00 $ 72,674.00 $ 66,238.00 $ 6,436.00 $ 79,049.00 $ 40,262.00 $ 38,787.00
$ 18,795.00 $ 6,942.00 $ 11,853.00 $ 116,224.00 $ 28,362.00 $ 87,862.00 $ 5850.00 GRAND TOTAL $ 909,466.00 
--ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE 􀁍􀁁􀁎􀁾􀁈􀁏􀁕􀁒􀀠& EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: URS 􀁃􀁯􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠 $100.00 ..' 162 0 128 118
0 84 __1_,_No. of Sheets $185.00 TASK I. URBAN DESIGN A. D881gn Dellelopmenl 1. Inventory and Analysis of Project Area RevieN existing plans IdenUfy ptevailing pallerns Analyze project
needs based on above Develop urban design principles fOI' project Prepare technical memo of understanding 01 existing plans 2. Develop 2 scenarios for primary project area Landscape
for bride9 abuunanls and retaining walls Hardscape: bridge elements al base to screen parking Element relocation, adjusLrnenl, elimination, Q( addition (utility poles, signege, medians.
sideNalk. etc.) Plan & elevation 'Nilh typical sections of primary project area 3. Develop final preliminary concept Identify a final preliminary concepllo go forward into final design.
Suppo.1 drawings for final concept 4. Meetings In Addison (2) B. Final Design 1. Design Development Development of Hardscape (surfaces. railings. etc.) 2. Create Final Landscape Plan
Identify plants to be removed 01' relocaled Identify appropriale plant pallets Design planting plan Craate plant list Define maintenance reQuirements Urban clesign ancllal'odscape construction
clocuments for the project araa 3. Meetings in Aclclison (1) TASK II. ENGINEERING A. Civil Sita Works 1. Final Civil Design & PS&E (65%, 95%, 100% submittals) Midway Road Traffic Control
Plan Midway Road Overhead Ulility Acljuslment Plan Retaining Wall Architeclural Details Sound Wall Architectural Details QAfaC Cost Estimate Special Provisions & Specifications Coordil\ilUon
with Other Consultants B. Brldge8 1. Pralimnary Bridge Design (-30% submittal) Develop Design Criteria Preliminary 6lidge Layout (Rnalize Bridge Location) Preliminary Typical Section
Refine ArCh Shape Size Thrust Block & Refine Shape Size Foundation Size DlaphralJTtS 0 0 30 as 24 0 0 26 OS 16 1 4 I I 12 4 6 2 1 4 8 8 12 2 8 16 I I 4 8 _1_1-1__12 8 16 I I 2 2 8 16
2 8 16 I I I I 2 foWl 4 24...l .1 2 0 III!IfmIIII 4 16 24 20 4 I I I r 24 o '20 o 1194 1450 1088 1228 164 46 " " '" "" " 􀁾􀀠 " -1-1------4 32 24 24 16 2 16 16 2 16 16 24 12 8 4 4 12
4 4 8 12 2 16 16 2 -'20 -0 -93-0 1310 1088 1144 34 111111122!11111 ----,8 32 16 8 40 80 80 8 16 12 8 80 40 16 8 40 20 16 4 12 24 4 24 16 2 2 2 5 42. '09 103 17 12 14 22 38 114 28 28
28 30 92 64 28 o 120 52 68 6 6 14 10 4 28 o 5490 296 296 60 40 34 34 48 24 22 34 4826 844 64 200 36 144 84 40 44 43,920.00 $ 5,500.00 49,420.00 • 564,454.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 567,454.00 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: URS Corporation 􀁾􀀠 URS CORPORATION No. of Sheets I _ _I􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁉􀁾􀀧􀀱􀀠
Mangr PrOject Eng/Plan Eng/Plan Tech. WP 1 Hours 1_ Cost 􀁟􀁊􀁟􀁾􀁰􀁥􀁮􀁷􀁳􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁊􀁟􀀮􀀠 Cost Size Traffic Railing Members Develop Soundwall Investigate Culvert Layout QuanUties and
Cost Estimate QAlQC 2. Final Bridge Design, PS&E (65%, 95%, 100% submittals) Final Bridge Layout 5 Final Typical SecUon General Noles Quantities and Bearing Seats Foundation Layout 3
Drilled Shaft DetaIls ,1 Abutment Plan & Elevation , Abutment Details , Bent Plan & Elevation Benl Details Thrust Block Plan & Elevation , Thrust BlOCk Details , Prestressed Collers!s
Beam Unit-Deck Plan , Prestressed Collersts Beam Unit-Deck Sections , Bridge Soondwall Details , Miscallaneous Superstrucure Details Diaphragm Details Closure pour Details Suspension
Hanger Details Sleel Arch Design and Details 3. Steel Arch Cantler Details Bearing Details , Drainage Details , Railing Details Stinger Design & Details ,1 Architectural Details Approach
Slab Details , ErecHon SequenCing : Prestressed Beam Tables COIlll"e, Verify & Modify T)I,DOT Siandald DraWings OAtOC Coocdination with Town or Town's CollsullanlS Bridge Tolal Ouantities
& Cost Estimate Bridge Special Provisions & Specifications C. Electrical Engineering 1. Design Development Develop a load sludy for Arapaho Road, bridge, parking and portion of Midway
RD" Prepare a preflrrUnary cosl esUrnale 2. Final Electrical Design & PS&E (65%. 95%. 100% subrntlals) Finalize a load study for each electrical service source. Prepare Lighting Calculations
for Under·Deck Lighting above the Parlting Lot IIlurnnation Layoul (2961', 12oo'/sht + 1 sht under the bridge) 7 --, , 32 6 , ,, 6 8 ,, 8 8 16 24 ,8 8 96 24 16 -16 1,6 32 32 96 32 40
40 '''' 40 " 16 32 20 80 -24 -'04 12 16 16 24 8 16 24 8 12 ...-. 96 6 12 20 " 88 32 60 32 16 32 64 24 40 36 72 32 64 20 "40 80 24 " 20 40 " 24 20 24 24 160 24 24 '12 24 " 32 20 24 12
32 16 12 24 20 12 24 16 24 24 --3' 40 32 --12 ,8 16 80 12 24 32 "16 40 32 40 40 16 "80 32 24 32 16 24 24 72 24 12 32 32 "" 16 3' 12 16 24 -0 164 ,, , 16 " "28 52 60 3982 '40 32 82 164
140 88 136 96 152 140 " 200 ,00 '" 66 106 76 96 '" 49' 96 52 '"" 60 72 52 100 "" 16' " 124 " 0 0 0 0 0 0 368 , ,, I I 0 358 I I I I o -I --, , --" , I 8 I I 80 I I I I I I 64 I '" 
v• L J '"' "􀁾􀀠 4 4 , 4 4 4 4 ,4 " '" 40 ,. • • 􀀬􀁾􀀠 • 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁾􀁾 -.---_lIIIIi H .. 30 3 '0 10 ELI ' I II ' I ' r' J'T ' I ' I "" $ '94 '" 4 4 , 4 ,4 , 0 '6£ '41 25• 4,, ARAPAHO ROAD
BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: I URS Corporation URS CORPORATION Shoo" Electric Servicel Polo Summary COi'ldult
Ron; I Contents Insert Ughtir;g COOStIllant Spocial Details Insert latEiSl Town or TXOOT Standards QUiiIOIitySUfMlal)' D$v01op Anal Co&I Estimate (IJsing EstiMalor) QA ON 95% PlANS Updalfl
Drawings pet CIty RENi9W (3 Subrrittal$, I>JI D.vgs,) TASK III· ARCHITeCTURAL , , , , • 1S.9G4.00 ..... • 19,414.00 A. Design Dew!Qpmtnt 1. Architectural Studias & Oelaits ()evetop Ihre6
raij opUoos addttwil'l9 the issues af hikerfbiker !Ioepararkln from the 􀁾􀁩􀁃􀀺􀁕􀁬􀁡􀁦􀀠traffic and the Atchl(oQu($l opOOn$ to realize the t)l'(.lposed ttmogIJlar paUem. CoorolMle
With !he engineering teaM 10 (efioe 􀁉􀁍􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁶􀁡􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁥􀀠ami size Of lIHf Sleet Prllduco orewlngs represenilog vi<lble options E,;tj)lOre opliOO$ {(,II' l1Iefinai material (lnd fom'!
of !he Ihr\l$t b!o::iI. Provfde sketCh 􀁯􀁰􀀡􀁬􀀨􀀩􀀨􀁬􀀤􀁬􀁮􀁩􀁾􀁩􀀱􀀱􀁬􀁹􀀮􀀠fo1l;lWOO byCADO drawinGS ot PfefM'ed $Chams. Develop (JeUlileo options and reflne panelluUoo memes for
precast tlIilcrele retaining w,,!l$ <It 􀁡􀁾􀀤􀀮􀀠 Study .mtl 􀁾􀁍􀁴 Options for earlier pier$!,IppOIi; shupe. DcvofO!) oplions for bridge mounted sovnctNa!ls E.M.\'I!oru ami refine
alternate 'Slinger doslgns incorporating lighting as Iile primary ""'-, AUand TosmMQ(lti'ngs and 􀁾􀁣􀁥 Calls \0 CQOfdinata!tle ar¢\itt<:!ural aspeet4 of!ho tio5ign wi!h 􀁳􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁏􀁤􀀠lighUng
Consvltanl$. 2. Computer Animalkm Minor \Jpd<lWS to(IXIsoog Video enimatlon ror/3ndscaplng, panting. etc. Produce 􀁾􀁩􀁲􀀻􀁬􀁥􀁯􀀠iiII'\irMlkm In DVO aflt! VIiS 􀁾 fI.:;mat 50, FI,"-I
􀁄􀁥􀁾􀀱􀀩􀁮􀀠 1. Coordination 2. RO'o'iQW 3. Speeif!C3tfons TASK IV 􀁾􀀠UGHTING DESIGN A. Design Deyolopm.nt 1. DeYelop two alten'lalMiS fO( lighting of slingers. 2. Research and mock-up
OCliOl\S fOl' eo!or-dlllOglng on axistil'lg Addison scu!plut'E! (detorlT'ine tango of poss1l.lliitioo fot eolot-tMnging on brfdgo) 3. Qevelop two allornalivGS for lighting ofbJcyc!efp9ClestrUln
pa!h. 4, Qeyelop two allernatives fIX 􀁉􀀱􀁧􀁾􀁮􀁧􀀠of ekwaled roadway. S. Devotop mounllng COI1C8plS fwoot1gO strtJ(:b.ll'e lighting. 6, Develop two al\QfnaHves for Iigtrtirtg cf ouUloard
􀁲􀁡􀁩􀁾􀁮􀁧􀁾􀀮􀀠 1, DeYeiop two a!\eUIa.!iIlGS for lightil'lg cf undet1lide 01 bridge. roadwaYIJruler bMge 300 any adjacent parting areas urn:ler bridge. e. Final Deelgn 1. Final detailS
loc lighting of$\Jngefs. 2, Anal oo:ails of fj);jura& and mountinQ fOI'blidge stnKltuco Wum'natiM 3. Final oolails offixtura& and fTlOI,mtiI'tQ for eleVated roadway Itghllng. 4. FlI'U:Il
oatalls: offixlura& and f1"rCIVIl1ing toe biCyClelpedestrisn pilU'tw3y l;ghling.. • ,•􀁾􀀠, ,5.2 -,6 ,, • 4 4 " , 6 6, •, • ,•-• • • • , ,,c_ , 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 , ,5.2 • 7,384,01) • • 7.3$4,01)
, •,, 6 4 ,4. %•, 
• •• ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: IURS Co'POraiion-i Grand Subtotal 12. ... 1.259 1,131 1.142
1,414 ,.. 307 7259 $ 161.101.00 • 10,&90.00 $ 778,691.00 '" llOO_@5.00 Isheet $ 4,000.00 Mylar F'l'ots 100 sheets@15.00 I sheel 1,500.00 -••• • • Document Printing -e &w 201Xl sheets
@0.10 ! 5heel • 200.00 Document Printing w Color 100 sh&el!i@USC I sl'!eel • '00.00 Grand Total • , ..",M' I 5, Final de!iliI$ Of fiXtures and mounting !of ou!bo.1Ird tallirl9 iIl1JIrin8l.itoO.
S. FlII"!ai delaim of fi;ili;(es an<! mourning !of lighting of undlmldtt of briOQo , roadWay under bridge and any adj&e$n! parking areas und6! bridQil:. 1. Pf('ll'ido eootrol C1;IOCepl
di.l!grems and otIlerlnfmnallOn w>table fot use by e!ecttieal enginoor deseriblng contrOl inlent TASK V· NOISE STUO-V A. Noise ..easuremontl; 1. Royiew 􀁯􀁸􀁩􀀤􀁾􀁮􀁧􀀠noi.$e ordinance
and criteria documents 2. Mooting with IN! Town of Addison to discuss oose 'Issues and objecllves 3, Perform nOisa measutemem survey. T3ko iniUal noise readings. both loog torm (24 hOurs
Of longer) and short term (1$$$ th,m 0fI(,l hour) noise laadlngs, ill adjacent properties. 4, Observe adJaoontbuiiding (;MSlrUctiOl'l typo WOlid jn aslil'Mting the potenli.ll oo!se 6ff&C\s
ifls1de the bliildings B. Noise Modeling ilInd Analy_ 1a, nCrd&a,t_e a rtOi$$ model to prediGl future noise 4l1W$i$iOO$!'t00\ the PIWOOSO: rOOIdway 2. Evaluate noise I!We!s at areas
of COOC6ln for 􀁾􀁯􀁯􀁷􀁩􀁴􀁨 applicable noise ragulalioo! and standards 3. Develop a range of SOIJIld wall helghls end I'tOi$$levels wlWe: nCi$e 􀁪􀁾 requite miligalioo. 4. Prep;1(6
report and respond 10 one found of 􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀠 5. Final rmel.ing with tile Town TASK Vi • PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices 1. Preparo Project Managermn! Plan 2. Preparo Progress
Reports 3. Prepare InvoiC6s and Billings B. COOtdlnaUon 1. CoordinalBiAdminlsll!l( the Project 2. Preparo and Update SChed!ife 3. Manage SUbcoosultal'lts 4.lmpIemer;t Quality AMuranceJQlJaiity
Control Prograril. 5.. CoullC!l Of ot/let TOWl'! M$etings (3) s.. Internal Pr<l}eet Cocrdinalioo MoetlMgs (6) t. Project M$etings with A.dd!$OI'I Public 􀁾(8) ShFJot!; I 􀁟􀁾􀀠 12 12
., • 22 18 • • '66 • 16,155.00 $ 2,040.00 $ 1s.7!iis,oO 63 •• 54 • 113 0 33 9 5 54 " 920 S 116,224,00 $ 116.224.00 '58 • 44 II I "32 ."!. 4S ,.• " ,'" •'''' " 8 " 32 ,12. • .. "•• ,.
'6 "" 8 6 "" • ,,. 8 __ 􀁾􀁏􀀠 1Q6 0 408 o 32 32 .'". 'o. 15' " '52 64 42 '04 96 o .. • •• 31 o ,o o 2 •• ----•• •2 4 2 2 • .. • 3 • ,• • 0 ",. 22 14 0 8 8 , 1 2 2 1 • , , 3 • '" 12
12 1%4 Q 544 o 32 32 o 18. 18 Q 13& o o o o · •• ,.. u I􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁊􀀡􀀺􀀠I 􀁟􀁾􀁉􀀠 􀁾􀀠 • • 2 
• • • • -•-• • • • • •• •• • • • •• •• •• •• • •. 􀀧􀁾􀀠 ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: Brandslon
􀁐􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁮􀁥􀁲􀁳􀁨􀁩􀁰􀁾􀀠 """"""'" TASK I·URBAN DESIGN A. Design DevelOpment " Inventory aM AnalySis Of Proj&Ct Area Review ex/sling plans Identify prEWsiilng patterns 􀁁􀁬􀀧􀁉􀁡􀁾􀀠prOjeclneed&
based 0f1 above ae",alop Wban design principles. for project Prepare technical mama of \Jfidmtar';dlng 0' existing plan& 2. Develop 2 scenarios IOf primary project area Landscape tor
bridge abutmenl:s and relaffling walls Hardscapa: bridge elements at base 10 screen pal1tJng Element relocation, adjus.tmenl. a!imnallon, or addition (vtJlity pOles., s]Qnage, medians,
sidewalk, etc.} Plan & efevalJon wilh typk:itl secllOllS of primary p;ojad: aNla 3.. Develop final preliminary 􀁾􀁥􀁰􀁴􀀠 Identify a final 􀁰􀀨􀁥􀁬􀁩􀁭􀁩􀁮􀁾 COflcept to goforward Inlo
final deslgn. Supporl drawings for flilal 􀁣􀁾􀁰􀁬􀀠 4. 􀁍􀁥􀁥􀁾􀁮􀀹􀀤􀀠in 􀁁􀁤􀀼􀀺􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁏􀁉􀁬􀀠(2) e. Final O"lgn 1. Design Devol0pman\ of Herdsc.apo (surfacG$. ranirlgs.. elc.) 2.
Creste Final 􀁌􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁣􀁡􀁰􀁥􀀠Plan IdenUfy plants 10 be removQd or relocated IdenUfy appropriate plan! pallets DeSign planting plan Create planllisl Define maintenance requirements
Urban design and landscape COllstrueUon dQ(:uments fOf the 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁾􀀱􀀠area 3. Meetings irI AdO'rson (1) TASK II· ENGINEERING A, Ci",11 Site Wom 1. Final Civil Doo.ign & PS&E 􀀨􀁾􀀥􀀮􀀠􀀹􀁾􀀥􀀮􀀠10
0% sobrrittals) Midway Road Traffie COntrOl Plan Midway Road Qvom!)iiId UtihlyAdjU5\m(¥\\ Pian Re!aining Wag Archilsctural 06tails Sound Wall Arr:;hi!ecuHJ!1 Details ClAIQC C'.at.1E$tilMts
Special Prolllsfons & $pillCilicalioru; CI:x!«.1ifl<llion with Othor ConslAlliInlS 15, PriC$get 1. Pmlimnary Sridge Design 􀀨􀁾􀀳􀀰􀀥􀀠IIlUbrrittal) DeIIelop 08Sign Crileria Pfelirrinaty
Bridgo t.ayool (Fifl<llim Srid9$ I.Ocalioo) Pf6l1rrinaty Typleal S9¢lion RG6no Aren Shaoe Sl2tl Thrust Bloek &Relino Shape Sl2tl Foundalloo Size Qiaphragm& o o o o o o " " • • • • 0
0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 •• o -•-• ---rl--I-I-U-I-I--r"· 0 $ 0 • • ••••• • 0 •• 0 0 0 •0 0 0 0 0• •0 •• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIOGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: Brandalon Partnershlp_ No-,r Sh.... SiZIJ TraffIC Railing Membels
0iM!I!QP Socmdwall Inve.t1ig<!te Cutver1 Layou! OvantJli6$ and Cost Estimate QAIQC 2, Final6ridgEI De1i1gn, PS&E (65%, 95%, 100% 5wmlUlls} Pm'll Bridga1.3yool Final Typical $l)C!iot'I
General NOleS Ovafllilies and 6e<In'ng S!)<I!.$ Foundation Layout OfiI!ed Shaft 􀁏􀂫􀁡􀁾􀀮􀁳􀀠 AbI.M'ItW Plan & Siovatioo 􀁁􀁢􀁕􀀧􀀡􀁩􀁬􀀧􀁥􀁬􀀧􀁬􀁴􀁏􀁯􀁴􀁡􀁩􀁬􀁾􀀠 Be!'!\. Plan & ElevaUon
􀁂􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁏􀁥􀁴􀁡􀁾􀀵􀀠 Thrust Block Plan &. ElevaliOn Thrust Block Details Prestressed Conctete Beam Unit· Deck Plan PrestrMSed Ccnct61e 6mlm Unit· Declo: SeelJons: Bridge SoIJOOwalI
DoIails Misee!lan&eus Sl.iPllrsirucure Details DiaphmgmOotail.t> Closure Poor Details Suspension H<Jnger Detail!; Ste51 AA;h Design emd Delail! SiMi Arch Camber De\.a!ls Bearing [)(I!.a.ils
Drainage oewUs Railing DeWs Slinger D$$ign 8. Dotails Archllactvlal Dolans Approach Slab Details Erection Seqv&ncing Prestressed Beam Tables Compile. Verity 8. M()(!ify T:(ooT Standard
Drawings <woe CoordinaUoo with Town's CQnsullml!.$ Bridge Total Quantities &. Co$I Eslif'f\ijlle Bridge Spac1al Provisklm; &SpociriCOlHOI'\'!i C. Electrical Englneertng 1. Design Developmool
Develop a load sluely /(l( Arapatlo Road, 􀁢􀁾 Pllrking ,mil portion of Midway ""'" Pt9p1lC$ a proIininary cost es.timalb 2. F'1I1a! E1ecJric.a1 Design & PS&E (tiS%. 95%, 100% subnittals)
tmllllt& e load study for each eI6eIrtcat service sOlJwe. Prepare LightJng CalcUlationS for Under-Deck. ugMng abov& the Parl<.lng Lot »il.lrrination Layout (2$61', iZOO'/sh(.1 $ht IJnder
U'I9 bfldge) • • 0 • -,-• I I I I I I I I I I I I I • • • I I I o•••• o o o o o o o o o o•o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o• o o o • o o o 
• • • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: Brandston Partnership SI,,", El&dric S61'Vic& I Pole &JI'l'II'Mf)'
Conduit Ru!'l$/Contents II'ISflr1 Ugl'ltmgCOfISUlWlnt Sp&eiaJ OetaUs fllsertlalest Town or T:MOOT S\arldards Quaillity SUrl'lrMry Develop Flnal Cost Estimoto (U,lng E.$tiJ'llOltQrl QA
ON!iS% PlANS Update Drawings PO( City Raviaw (3 SUbmitta\$. All [),t(g$.) TASK III. ARCHITECTURAL , $ A, 􀁾􀀡􀀮􀁉􀁧􀀢􀀠O4Ivelopment ·o •• · ·o •• · . ••· •• · • ·, •• • •• • • 1. Ateh'ctoetwal
Studies $; Oolail$ -,.. -· oe'lelop W" 􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀠􀁯􀁰􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁳 addres'$lng the issues of hilwlbilo:er separation from Ule velffQJtar traffIC and the A/(hltetlural 0illions to realize the
proposed triangular ".• Coordinate wM the oogirulIE!ring te;;lm to 􀁾􀁲􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁜􀁥􀀠the eurvslure and size of 1.110 steel. Produoe dr$Wlngs lepr&enUrtg Viable Ol)1,lOns 0 EJlplom op'iioos
IOf the /loal rt'latflriat end form of the thrust blOCk. Provlde skalctl optiOtlS inUlalfy* 􀁦􀁯􀀡􀁾 by CADD dtawings ofp;aferted scheme. • Develop detailed opijOO$ and mlirnll pal'lflwliOl'l
scher!'JlM; for precast COOCtate mtIloog walls at 􀁡􀁐􀁦􀁩􀁬􀀧􀁾􀀠 •0 0 Study and PresSl'ltOptkms tot e¥ltM pi&!' sUJ)port shape. 􀁾option& 10( bridGEt mounted sool'lCtvralls Eltpjore
attd reline al!Gmale "$ling&t' d&lgn$ inOO(pora!ing lighting as \he pOmalY feallJra 0 Attend TIWl'\ Meellng& and COrIfemru:& Calls to 􀁾􀁮􀁡􀁴􀁥 1I".a architectural asrrocts Of the design
Wl1h slrueluraland lighting CO<Isullan!:S, 0 2, Computet AnimaliOn 0 Minor updatas: to ml$t:ng video 6flimation fO{ !arldscaping. P800ng. 􀁾􀀮􀀠 1-1I I I I I 0 -Produce vttleo al'lImallOO
m DVO end VH$ tape format I -I • •0 B. Ftnal Design 0 , • 0 0 I t. Ccordit'laUon 0 2, Rlwiew 0 3, Sl'*1fiClltiOt'!S 0 TASK IV· UGHTlNG DESIGN ,.. u. u. • 144 • '13 • 64,1S5.oo $ 7,500.00
• 11,6'65.00 A, De1IOR 􀁄􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁴􀁯􀁰􀁭􀁾􀁒􀀱􀀠 0 Y1 0 70 ,2 0 10. , • , , w w , ,•••• 72 •• GIl .. , ... " 1, Develop IWO allemalives for l,ghUng 01 sliogers, '" " " "'" 0 2. ResearCh
and IT'(IoCk·up optlons (or cotor-chaoging on axisUng Add1tlOt'1 StulpM$ (delermne range 01 􀁐􀁏􀁓􀁓􀁉􀁄􀁾􀁉􀀡􀁬􀁥􀁳􀀠for color-changiog on bridge) ••• • 0 3, Develop two allernaltves
for 􀁾􀁧􀁨􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀠of bh:ydeipedesUian path. 4, Develop two allernal.wes for 􀁾􀁧􀁨􀁕􀁮􀁧􀀠of elevaled rOildway. 5, Develop 􀁭􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁾􀁮􀁧􀀠concepts for bridge sln.Jtlure lighting.
6, Develop 1W0 allematives for iighUng of oulbO<lrd railings. 7. Dev$lop 1W0 altematives lor 􀁾􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀠of underside of bridge, roaaw.y under bridge am:! any adjacent paoong areas
IJnder bridge, B. Fino! Dalsn 27' • 1, Final details tOf l!ghtlng of stingers. •02, Final deialls offfXtJres and mounting for bridQ$ sln.JcMe Yluminiltion. 3. firm delails otfoo.u,ss
end mounting for e1$;ralod rOil4wayltgt'Jling. 0<\, final 􀁤􀁥􀁬􀁩􀁦􀁾􀁳􀀠of foo.ures end mounting for 􀁢􀁾􀁥􀁬􀁰􀁥􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁬􀁲􀁩􀁩􀁦􀁬􀀠palJ'lwilylighling. •
• • • • • • • • •• •• • • • • • • • ,.. • ,,, • ,.. • GraMd Tota:l 513 S 64,185..00 $ 1.500.00 $ 71,665.00 "" • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE
MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE S. Final oolans (If futtures ana mounting tor Ol.Itlroard 􀁲􀁴􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁮􀁧􀀠iliumin(ltion. G. Final dewl!:; of filt!ures and IWunting rcr-lighting of 􀁬􀀮􀁭􀁏􀁦􀀮􀁬􀁾􀁩
􀁤􀁬􀁬􀀠ofbridge , roadway under bridge and any adJaeenl parking "ru.s undl;N' bridge. "I. PrOliide conllol concapl diagr4l11l$ ano oU1or inft,lnTl(ltion $uil<lOle IQr USoil' by elec!l'lcal
engineer deS.erlblng eontrolintenL TASK V· NC»SE STUDY A. Non. Memourtllnents 1. Reviwt ex.istit'lg noise ordmance and cri!Eria 􀁾􀀠 2. Moolil'lQ wltt\lhe Town of Addl$on todi!euSSi
ncise i.s.stul!li <md objectives 3. PeIfofm t'IOI!$I"I'e8!1t.!f8f'OO1'lt survey. Talla JrJlial noise readings, totn long term (24 hours or IOogat) aM shOrl tMm (laM Ihan one hour) noise
readings, at adjacent propElf'!i&$. B. HolM Modeling Ind Al1lt1yU1 1. Creale a a noise roode! 10 prodie1 I\.J'Wr. noise emissiMs fromlhe propoaed roac!way andbridga 2. Evaluate noise
IeV$l$ al areas 01 (l;)ncem b compliance with OlPplicabfe noise regulalioni and S!armfes: 3. Celle/op a range of sound walllWfghtt and m.l!stl !ovfll$ whoro noi$1l 􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁳 reqlfire
mi1lgation. 4. Prepare rlilport!lnc respood '" ooe loood 01 COO'II'I'lt!ln\$, 5. Final IDDDling with the Tawn TASK VI • PROJECT MANAGeMENT A. RllporU ,md Inyolco" 1. Prepare PrOjed ManagetOOfl!
Ptan 2. Prepare ProgrAAll Reports 3. Preparelnvok:es and BI16nl)S B. COOrdination 1. C()(l(dinatelAdminlsler the Project 2. Prepare and Update Scheoule 3. Manage Subconsullanls 4. t:mplement
Quality AsslJrancolQuaJiIyConlroi PrOGram 5. Council or other Town MeoImgs (3) 6. fnlernal PrOject Coordination MIxltinlJ$ (8) 7. Project Meetings. .....1111 Addlsoo Ptll:l1ic Wortw
(al CONSULTANT: Brandslon Partnership No, of Sh"'" • • • • • • • • 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 • • • • • • • • • •• 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000 D D 0 I · I • I 0 0 I 'r' I I • I 0 I • I 0 00• 00• 0• 0•
0• 00• •0 0 •0 0 •0 ...1-" •
• • • • • • • • • •• • • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: I Corgan Associates SheOLs TASK I.URBAN
DEstGN A, Design Devetopment 1, l/\IIentery and An31y.>!G 01 Project Area RellieNli e:dsoog pl1Jll$ ldenlify prevailing ptlllorn$ Analyui projocl needs ba!.Qd I)l'I aboVil De\l$ltlp
l.Irtl;m design prineiples tor ptqor;l Prepare lechniCi!lI n'WlImOof UMarsiandlng of aJlis1ing plans 2. Develop 2 scel'looO$ fOr primat)' project area Landscape tor bfOQge sbUtmenls
and retaining wah Hardscape: bridge eIemanlS at base 10 W&atI p&rS'JtIg Element rellx;alioo, adjustment, 􀁥􀁾􀁭􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀬􀀠Q( addillon (uUlitypoles, slgnage,. roodlans, 􀁳􀁩􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁷􀁡􀁊􀁾􀀬􀀠al
c:.) Plan So elevation with typiC<IJ sectiOns: of jltlmiiry ptojG(;t 􀁴􀁉􀁾􀁡􀀠 3. Develop !!nat 􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁭􀁩􀁮􀀤􀁲􀁹􀀠􀁣􀁴􀁷􀀧􀁬􀁾􀀠 Identify a fuml preliminary Cf.lI'!Clnlllo go Iorward
Into final 􀁏􀁏􀀤􀁾􀁮􀀮􀀠 Support d(awings for final concept 4. Meetings in Mdi$oo (2) 2) S. Final Desl9n 1. D&slgn oavelor.man\: 01 Hatd$t.ape (ststfaoos, railing:;, elc.) 2. Cr$at.e
Filla! Lamlscap& PIaI'! Identify plants to ba tEl moved or relocated tdl:lf\tlfy approj:uiate plant 􀁾􀁉􀀤􀁉􀀤􀀠 Design plsnllng plan Create plant list Define mamtenal'lC9 roqulremenll,ii
Urban desi9n and landscape GOnstructJon 􀁾for Ihe ptojoct area 3. Meetings in 􀁾(1) TASK II w ENGlNEERING A, eM! Site WOfb 1, Final Civil Do:iign & PS&E(S5%, 95%, 100% submiUms) Midway
Rood Traffic Coottol Plan Midway Rood 􀁑􀁾 Wily AdjuslN10nl Plan Reta1n1ngWaH AteMeetural Details Sound Wall ArctlifeehJlal Details <lAIOC C05f Estimale $p&cIai Provisions & $pQCif\c.aVons
Coordination wilh Other C«t!1JItaI'll.$ a.BrldgeD 1. Preliminary Bridge Design i-3O% submiltal) Develop Oo$lgn cmena Preliminary Bridg$layaut 􀀨􀁆􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁬􀁾􀀠Bridge Loealloo) Prelilrinary
TjlPieal SoctiDn Reline Arch Shape sze ll'lrusl Block & Refll'la Shape SIla Foundation Slota Oililpl'lragms $ •, • , • •• , • • • • • • • • • • r'-EI--I--I-'-• .,MII!I • • • 
0 0 ,0 • • • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0• 0 0 0 0•• • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE
MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESl1MATE Stto Traffic Reliling 􀁍􀁥􀀮􀁾􀀠 Devatop SWndwllll Investigate CuIvM 􀁌􀁡􀁾􀀠 Ouarrtil.les and Cost E$tima!e QAIQC 2. Ftn31 BridQf!l Design, PS&E (65%,
9:5%, 100% !lubml!lals) Final Bridge Layw! Final T)'Plcat Sedioo Gef'leral Noles Quanlilies arnJ Bearing Seats Foundation La)'OI.I! DriHoo Shaft 􀁄􀁥􀁴􀀬􀁵􀁾􀀠 Abutment Plan &EIov.tion
Abutrnerrt O9laijs Bent Plan &. Elevation Bent Details Thrust Block Plan &. Ele.,.m;oo ThnJ!\ Btock DetailS f/res.tI'essEKI Concrete Beam Unil-Deck Phm Prestressea Crocreto Beam Unit
-0ecIt Soclion$ eridge Soundwail De:alls p.ts(:ellanOOus Superstruwre Oeta1!s Diaphragm Details Closure PtKlr Details Suspension Hanger Details Stem An:h Otilgn and Detail!l Sleel Atch
C3f1'li.»)r 00101115 Bearing Oetaits Dfail'lage Details R<l11Ir'lg Details Sijnger 0$$Ign & Details 􀁁􀁲􀁣􀁨􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁡􀁴􀀠􀁄􀀦􀁴􀁡􀁾􀁳􀀠 Appr03(:h Stab Details SiQ(:1ion Sequencing
PTasb'essad Beam Tables 􀁃􀁏􀁬􀀧􀁔􀁬􀀡􀁾􀁥􀀬􀀠verify & Modify TxooT SlaI'IdW Drawings OAIQC Cooroination with TO'M1's Coosul!ants 600ge TOIai 􀁡􀁵􀁡􀁮􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁥􀁳􀀠& Cost E&limale BrIdge
SP«!ial Provisions& SpilIQlicaUons C, Electrical Engineertng 1. Design Ooveloprnent R􀁾,,, a Iood $!udy for Arapaho Road, bridge, parking and portion of MidwiIy Prepare a 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁾􀁬􀁔􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁲􀁹
eo&t eslim<ile 2. FinmEioctrical Design & PS&E (65%, as%. 􀀱􀀰􀀰􀀥􀁳􀁵􀁾􀀩􀀠 FinllllUi a load SIIXIy for 0liICh electrical S9fvte& $OUI'ce-Preparo Ughling Celculalioo$ for Urnfor..[)o(;l(
Ughling abow,) \he Paliting lot tluJrinatiorJ liIIyOul (2961', 1200'ishl + 1 shlunder 010 brklge) CONSULTANT: I Co,ga" Associ""'. No,Of Sheets 
•• •• •• •• • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE 6ec'.ric Set;liee I Pole SlJrtrr'IaIy Conduit Runs I CornenlS
Insert 􀁕􀁧􀁨􀁾􀁮􀁧 Consultant l%loolal Details Insert I..<ltEm Town Of TlI:OOT Standards 􀁑􀁵􀁡􀁮􀀡􀁩􀁴􀁹􀁾􀁲􀁹􀀠 09velop Flnal CO$t Estim;;lW (Using Estimator) QA ON 95% PL.A\IIS Updato
Qcay,j"ngs per City ReI/lew (3 Subrnttals, All 􀁾􀀮􀀩􀀠 TASK III 􀁾􀀠ARCHITECTURAL A. Destgn DeYelopment 1. Archileclural Sludles &. Ootail's Develop lhre& raJ optIorls addressing /l1e
isSUErS Ofhikerlbiktlr :!oeparalloo fmrn!he vehicular tralllc and !he ArChiwctl.lral oplions Ie rMlize the proposed triangular ","me Coordinate w;lh the engineering tum to reline /tie
eurvaturs QO(f slte of the sleeL PrOduce dra\\'ings f1)p1'llS$1'l1ing viable oplions ISJr.plore options for (he rmal material and formof h lhfUS1 block. Pro'll(f1ll aketetJ opl.ions
initially 􀁾􀀠foI\Qwe(! by CAOOdrawiflgS of pre1emx.l scheme. Deyelop OO\aied options and (elioo paOOnuUon scherne.s fOl' p.recastOOOO'e!& retalnk1g walls at apprOillct\ea Study and
Pr0$oot OpUons fur eenter pier support shapil, Develop optiOns tor booge mt)IJnted sovnc:twallli Explore and refine alternate "slinga!" destgns il1(:orporallng 􀁉􀁉􀁧􀁨􀁾􀁮􀁧􀀠as 1M
prlmaty feawr&. Att8fld Team MaoUngs and COO'IoroneeCallS to COQf(.lll'l3l& the ;JIQlltocIural il$pocts or the do$ign wi'J'I sIrvclural and flllh\ing CorI$ultants, 2. Computer Animation
MlnOf updtItes!o O»Jsting video anilNlliOo for landscaping, pal'king. &tc. Product! vkI&o 􀁡􀁮􀁬􀁦􀁎􀁾􀁯􀁮􀀠in DVO and VHS tapa fOfmat e. Final O581gn 1. CoordioaUon 2, Review 3, SpeclfieallO<l$
TASK tV 􀁾􀁕􀁡􀁈􀁔􀁉􀁎􀁇􀀠DeSIGN A.. O"lgn Development 1. Develop two attemaliv6$ for lighting of slingsrs, 2, R8S5aI'(:h and roock·up opliOf\$ fOf C(llo«hanging on e)(j$/lngM(.I;S\m
S(;1.IipIUfIii (delellTline tange-of possibilftloo fur ooIof<ha!1ging on bridge) 3, Develop two altemaWes for lighting or bicyclofpOl:iillSlrian path. 4, 􀁏􀁾􀁷􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁰􀀠two alternatives
fO( Irghting of eleva:Ol:i roadway. 5. De\"$lop tOO\.IOllng e.oncepts I\)( bIldg& $tructurelighU!1g. 6. DeWlCp tHO alletnatives for Ughllng Of OIJ1board ramngs. 7. Devaiop two allemaiMJs
rot lighting of Wlderside 01 brid':F' roadwar under bridge and any adjacent pa1k1ng Sr&fi urnter btJdge. 5. Final DesIgn 1, rmalf,lQlail$ for!ight!ng of $\JngElfs. 2. Final 􀁾􀁩􀁬􀀤
oi IIxtures and fOOUf1Ung for b«dge slructvre i!lt;mnalion. 3, Fina! 􀁤􀀹􀁴􀁡􀁾􀀤􀀠of fixtures ,mil mounting for eh:ws!.ed roadway:lgtrtlng, 4, Final detail!; of fllltures and mounting
(Of 􀁢􀁩􀁣􀁹􀁥􀁬􀁾􀁮 palhway 􀁾􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀮􀀠 􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀻􀀠 CONSULTANT: C-Corgan Associates •, 20 • ." S sa.zsD.OO $ $ 53.260.00 , • .1& 21. , ". • • • '''' • '98 L i -L ·---"".
32 18 '" "12• " " _Wl!!!! 2. I ,". 12• " "f-_..al-I I I I I I . I 48 I I ... I 32 .. '"' I ---L I -L .96 --m '28 38 12' '"" • " 104 " DOD 20 aD (I: DOD I 􀁾􀀠 I 20 1 IJ [J ,. ..'. •
• , , , • •• •• •• •, • , • • • • • • , • • • , • • • • •• • 
• • • • • • • • • • • •• •• • • • • .: .., 􀁟􀁾􀁨 ..... _ ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN.HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATO CONSULTANT' I Corgan
Associates URS CORPORATION No,Of ShooIs I ll.i(N\lIt.1 I ..􀀬􀀺􀀿􀀡􀁥􀀺􀁾􀀠 􀀧􀀺􀀢􀀮􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀠I 􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀠I I $Crt. I ..____ I I HOurs L•.,....., MilngI' J WI-' 5. Final details of fJ1.turO$
and mounting for 0I.IIb0ard ra[lln!)lIh,lminallon, 􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭􀁾􀁲􀀭􀁬 6, Finill detailS ot rlXlur9$ aI1d moorrting for !:;nUng of underside
Of bfldge , 􀁾􀀠 under bridge and any ildj3Qilnt parldng area:> under bridge, • 7. Prolliljo t;QnlrOi COf'lcspt diagrams snd other InformallOn SIJiUIbIe for U$.e by 91ectrlGal engineer
i;l1,\$(:riblllg control inion!. I] fJJFl·· I IJ • • TASKV-NOISE STUDY , A. Not" MoasuRimllnbl 1, Ro'tiew existing nolso ordk\ance and ClitGna 􀁤􀁾􀀠 • • • , • • , • • •• •• • · 2. Meetlng
with the TOM'! of Addison to discuss "Cise IsSI.IO& and 􀁯􀁢􀁪􀁥􀁥􀀡􀁩􀁾􀁥􀁳􀀠 0 3. Perlorm noise l'I'ei!$urnrnoni survey. Take lOOIal noise 􀁲􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁳􀀬􀀠both long wnn(24 hoors 01'
b:II'1\'1er) aoo short term (Jess than 00& hour) nelse readings, al. aojacenl plopertias. 0 'L Observe adjawnt building COflmclion type 10 aid In estlma!ing \hit potential noise $ffacts
inside lhlll 􀁢􀁵􀁾􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁳􀀠 a. Nolle Modeling and Analyses 1. Creilte a noise ««h,11o predict fulure I'lOi5fI enVssions from the proposad roadway and bffdf)e 0 2. Evaluate noise
levels aiareas of COOOOfn for c;ompliancewilh .,.,plica'ole noise regulalkm!f Gnd standards D 3. Develop a range of sound wall heights and noise levels where no1:;e-impacts rfIQwfQ n'liligaUO(i.
0•• 4. Prepare 􀁾aM respond to on6 rooM of 􀁾􀁴􀁳􀀮􀀠 S, Final meeI.Ingwith tha TaM) TASK VI 􀁾􀁐􀁒􀁏􀁊􀁅􀀮􀁃􀁔􀀠MANAGEMENT 0000 Q 0000 • A. RfportG and 􀁉􀁮􀁾􀁥􀁳􀀠 o Q 00 \) 0(1) 􀁾􀀠
0 1. Preparo Pmjecl Man8QtllTl8nl Plan 0 2. Pr0tl<lIQ Progtsss Repor1.$ 0 3. Prepn lfl¥oic8$ and BnlinGl> B, Coordination 0(10000o (• 100, •• 0 1. COordinateJMmin!r>w 1M Profect 2. Prepare
3tld Upaate SCN!df,lle • '3. Manage S!,!Ix;Qru;ultants 0 4. tmpIamem Qf,laiity AssuraneetQv(l1ityCofilJoi Program 0 5. CCIOncll orolher TIl"M'l MoDtings {3} 6. InU)mQl PrqjBCI CootainafiQl1
Meetings (8) 7. Project Meeti!lgs with AddJsoo 􀁐􀁵􀁢􀁾􀁣􀀠Works (8) , ••• •, • •, • • • • · Grand Tolal • • • ", .. '16 • no • 638 S 53,260.00 S S 53.260..00 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE DRS will provide the construction
administration services as it relates to the Arapaho Road Bridge design services under Work Order No. 001 and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of an elevated
four-lane roadway with sidewalk located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW) from approximate Slation 40+67 to approximate Slation 70+28. DRS shall provide construction
phase services for a steel arch bridge over Midway Road, with prestressed concrete beam approaches and any landscaping, hardscaping, sidewalks, lighting & illumination, and traffic control
for the areas under and immediately adjacent to the bridge and retained wall portion of Arapaho Road for which DRS provided design services. DRS will attend the pre-bid and pre-construction
meetings, review bridge bid labs, respond to the contractor's or Town's request for information (RFIs), review shop drawings, and review the Contractor's submitlals as related to the
design services performed by DRS under a separate agreement. All ROW documenlation and plans, engineering design, survey, geotechnical services, pemritting, construction inspection and
preparation of construction record drawings are outside the scope of this agreement and will be performed by others or under a separate agreement. In addition, all items related to construction
materials testing, fabrication shop verification or certification, mill certifications, and welding qualifications and certifications are outside the scope of this agreement and will
be performed by others. 
Itemized Scope ofServices Provided by URS for Construction Administration Services TASK I -URBAN DESIGN I. Respond 10 contraclor's RFI's 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Review and approve
subcontractor submittals as related to landscape and hardscape, TASK II -ENGINEERING A. Civil Site Works L Respond 10 contractor's RFI's 2, Prepare one addenda 3, Review and approve
Contractor submittals as related to traffic controL B. Bridges I, Respond to contractor's RFI's (30 total) 2, Prepare one addends 3, Review bridge bid tabulations 4, Attend kick-off
meeting with the Town, the Town's Consultant, and the General Contractor, 5, Site visits (6 total) 6, Review bridge contractor submittals for compliance with Ihe contract documents (lO
total), • Concrete mix design (4 total) • Prestressed beam strand jacking stress reports (64 beams) • Prestressed beam redesign calculations (3 total) • Arch erection method statement
• Arch hanger stressing reports • Formwork calculations 7, Review bridge contractor shop/fubrication drawings for compliance with contract documents (90 total), • Foundations shaft details
• Formwork • Miscellaneous superstructure details (SIP fonns, PIS deck panels, screed elevations, expansion joints, lighting supports) • Suspension hanger details and connections • Steel
arch details • Arch camber details • Bcaring details • Bridge Drainage details • Railing details • Stinger details • Soundwalls • Temporary shoring/fhlsework • Erection sequencing •
Prestressed beam fabrication drawings (64 beams) C. Electrical Engineering 1. Respond to contractor's RFl's 2, Prepare one addenda 3, Review and approve contractor submittals as related
to lighting details. TASK III -ARCIDTECTURAL 1. Respond to contractor's RFI's 2, Review and approve contractor submittals as related to architectnral details. 3, Observe site mock-Ups,

TASK IV -LIGHTING DESIGN l. Respond to contractor's RFI's (20 total) 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Review and approve contractor submittals as related to Iightiog details. (12 total) 4.
Observe the installation oflightiog equipment iocluded io the lighting designer's final recommendations at the job site (one trip to Addison). 5. Focusing the lighting equipment and
program control decices(s). TASK V -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A.. Reports and Invoices I. Prepare Progress Reports 2. Prepare Invoices and Billiogs B. Coordination I. Coordioate one addenda
2. Attend pre-bid, pre-construction and progress meetings with the Town, the Town's Consultant, and the General Contractor (4 total). 3. Coordioate responses, reviews and approval of
bridge bid tabs, Contractor RFIs, submittals and shop drawings. 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 -CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION ATTACHMENT C FEE PROPOSAL URS CORPORATION TASK I • URBAN DESIGN TASK II • ENGINEERING A. Civil Site
Works B. Bridges C. Electrical Engineering TASK III -ARCHITECTURAL (Corgan) TASK IV -LIGHTING DESIGN (Brandston) TASK V· PROJECT MANAGEMENTA. Reports and Invoices B. Coordination Total Cost $ 8,240.00 $ 88,964.00 $ 4,280.00 $ 78,804.00 $ 5.880.00 $ 5,710.00 $ 12,970.00 $ 29,080.00 iii 13,084.00 iii 15,996.00 -....􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭�
�􀀭􀀭􀀭 GRAND TOTAL $ 144,964.00 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002· CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE Shoats TASK I.URBAN CESIGN 1. 􀁒􀁥􀁳􀁾􀁮􀁤􀀠to RFls 2 Pmpar!lon&add$flda
3. Review aoo approv& Convector sul)mfttal as llI!a1ed to 􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁤􀀤􀁥􀁡􀁾􀀠aM tlardscape TASK II-ENGINEERING A. eMI Slie Wor1u 1, Respond 10 RAs 2, Pl'o',(lare one <lddenda 3. 􀁾􀁥􀁷
and approve COI'llfactorsubmiUal as relatecl totrafrlC oonttol B.Bl1dga& 1. Respond 10 􀁒􀁆􀁉􀁾􀀠 2. Prepare 01'1& addenda 3. RsY1ew bridge bid tabula(1ons 4. Atklnd eonslruction I!:lck-off
meeting 5. Sile visits (Slota!) 6, Reyiew luidge coniraclor 􀁳􀁵􀁢􀁭􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁬􀀤􀀠 COrlaete mix design {4IotaJ} Prestressed beam strand jac)i;ing fepOr\$ (64 beams) Prestressed beam allemale
dtl$ign c.lcofalions (3 total) Arch erection I'MU'IOO statement Arch hangel slt'1:lssing I1IPOl1$ FormwotX calculalkms 7. Review blidge contractor shopifabrieatiOn drawings F¢Vodationsis.naft
􀁤􀁥􀁴􀁡􀁾􀁳􀀠 Forn-.worX Miscallansou$ SUPQfslnJcure Delail$ (SIP forms, PIS conete!$ deck paMlis, e;tpans'or! joints, &te.) Suspension hanger det;lifs and f;Onn&C1ions Steet arel'!
details Arch camber tletai:s SeaMnljl tlel.aliS Silage drainage (Smalls Raijing details Slinger details SoundwaUs Tempornry sllorin,,"alsOWOIi: Eredlon soqoenclng Pr(l$1ressad beam fabrlc.aIiOl'l
draWings {64 beams) C. Eloclrical Englrulil'flng 1. Respond lC RFls (6 RPls) 2, Preparo (lno addenda 3, Ro",iew "nd "ppro",,, Contractor $ubmitlal3$ l'1!Iiated {o lighting details TASK
Ill-ARCHITECTURAL 1. Re5pond to RAs 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Rlh'iew al'ld approve Conltactof submittal as related to ilIchitectJJfal details CONSULTANT, I URS Corporallon I 􀁛􀁉􀁏􀁉􀀧􀁉􀀺􀁉􀀺􀁾􀁉􀀧
􀁉􀀧􀁉􀀧􀁉􀀧􀁉􀀠 00 o 31t1350 98 0320 o 0 0 24 4 0 0 : I 4 • (10025034698 0 Z4 􀁾􀁾􀁉􀀠 􀁾􀀺􀁉􀀠 124 l!• 􀀬􀀮􀁉􀁟􀁉􀀭􀀭􀁉􀀭􀀽􀀭􀁉􀁾􀁉􀀠 !me 1'!. 16 12 "" " iI!IIma iIIlIOfiIIII_ 4 12
1II!i2:oo1111 Hr -1. 8 '. " 32 24 8 '" 00 32 ±.3 3, !. • • " -:-'-------:--. 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀠I 􀁾􀀠 I 2. I I (I'I'I!I'I'I'I'I'I 1'1'1'1'1'1'1'1'1'1 "32 4 32 '96 "8 8 " 118 " 100 ",. • 1'0"2
11.. " 12 2. 4"1". 24 52 32 120 32 "" ,,• 24 "4. " 24• 12 , • 0• • 8.240.00 $ 3,640.00 $ sao,," $ 3,640,00' $ &8,$G4.00 " .4)"....,§' . 􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀬􀁭􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀮 $ 1,120.00; i$ 1,120.<iO
$ 1,840.00' 􀁾􀁾􀀠 1,640.00 ,\$ 1;5J0.00, '$ :1.520.QO$ 18.804.00 $ S 1S,a04.00 $ -􀀱􀀲􀁾􀀴􀀰􀀰􀀮􀁏􀁯􀀠 :r-' 􀀱􀀲􀀬􀀴􀀰􀀰􀀮􀁏􀁴􀀩􀀢􀁾􀀠 '$ 4,280:00 S 4.280.00 .' $ 2;240:00 ,,$ 2.2'!W:;oo':
'$ 84iUlO '$. 840,00 '$ 4,580.00 $, 4.soo.oo ' t􀀧,􀀮$􀂷,,􀀻..􀀻;􀀺 􀀻􀀬􀁩􀀱􀀧􀀬􀂷􀁴􀀢􀀮􀀻􀁾􀂷􀀮􀂷􀁾􀀢􀁟􀀻􀁩􀀧􀁑􀁾􀁑􀀠􀁬􀁬􀀤􀁁􀁬􀁩􀀲􀁦􀁊􀀺􀀡􀀡􀁢􀀮􀁴􀀠 􀁴􀀢􀀺􀁾􀁲􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀱􀀢􀀡􀀧􀀢􀀡􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀻􀀢􀁾􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀧
􀀡􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁭􀀱􀁉􀀠 $: 1,000.00 $ t,ool):OO $ 1,SOMO $ ··1,SOD.OO" $ 1,200.00 ,$--HO,D.OI) . $: 3,360.00 .$ 3,360.00 . $: 2,88(}'oO .$ 2,8aO,QO $: 1.336.00-;$ 1,336.00 . t. 􀀮􀀴􀁬􀁩􀀻􀁩􀁩􀀱􀀡􀁦􀁾􀀠􀀡􀁬�
�􀀡􀀧􀁴􀀬􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀠􀀡􀁬􀁩􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁬􀀩􀁪􀁾􀁾􀀩􀁩􀁾􀁩􀀠 ,$ 1,600.00 .:$ 1',6(1).00: : $: 2.Q4MO $ 2.048.00( $ 􀀴􀀻􀀴􀁾􀁏􀁏􀀠 .$ 4,498;00 $ 4.160.00 • 14;.400,00 $ 4;150;00 • 14,4\)0.00
$ 3,200.00 S 3;200.00 . $ 1,068.00 S 1.068.00 S, 1.068,00, 1,069.0;0.' S 800.00 S 800.00 $ 800.00 $ 800." S '''-00 • 2.720.00 $ 2.720.00 ,.$, 􀁾􀀤􀀠 􀀴􀀶􀀸􀁾􀁏􀁏􀀠; 2,120.00 ' 2,120.00:
.$, ••51lOJlO 􀁾,􀁆 􀀠:,3;-'(0) -•. 35,8.850,060 0$ :0,,§;r3;;iSii,aiS:O-.oO oiii $ 840.00' "$ 840.00: $: 1,660.0Q· ,$ 􀀧􀀬􀀱􀀧􀀬􀁓􀀸􀁻􀁴􀁯􀁏􀀧􀁾􀀠 $ S $ • $ $ §: , $ 􀀸􀀮􀀲􀁾􀁟􀁄􀁊􀁊􀁏􀀠.
$ 3,840,00 $ 56Il,QO $ 3;840,00 $ $ 88,1364,00 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 -CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION MAN-HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: URS Corporation URS CORPORATION No. of Sheets ....UIl:;UIL.
􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁉􀀻􀁬􀀧􀁉􀁉􀀢􀁉􀀻􀁬􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀠 TASK IV· LIGHTING DESIGN 1. Respond 10 RFls (20 lotal) 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Review and approve Contractor submittal as related 10 lighting details
(1210Ial) 4. Observe the installation of lighting equipment (one trip \0 Addison) 5. Focus the lighting equipment and program control devices TASK V· PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and
Invoices 1. Prepare Progress Reports 2. Prepare Invoices and Billings B. CoordlnaUon 1. Coordinate one addenda 2. Attend meetings (41o\al) 3. Coordinate responses. reviews and approvals
1'i'lll'i'I'i'I'!! o 180 0 0 0 0 64 244 o 72 0 0 0 0 0 52 12' 􀁾􀀠 12 48 $ 􀁾􀀠 76 109 0 0 0 0 12 120 I :: I I : I "24 68 , $ $ $ $ §l $ $ 29,080.00 $ $ 29,080.00 $ 13,084.00 $ $ 13,084.00
$" '-5.772.00:1 􀁉􀁾􀀤􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀠"-5,7-:}-ioo-: '$ 7i312:00;1$'. "7,,312:.00,' '.'. . $ 􀁟􀀮􀀮􀀱􀀵􀀢􀀢􀀮􀁾􀀧􀁄􀁄...§''.$. 􀁟􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀮􀀧􀀶􀀺􀀢􀀮􀁄􀁄􀁟3,628.oo!.. 3,628,00,: :',$ .$ 3,408:00"
t$ 3,408.00" '$ 􀀸􀀬􀀹􀀸􀀰􀀮􀀰􀀰􀁾􀀠 i,S' 8.96Q.00,1 Grand Total o 180 '52 '82 98 o 32 64 1108 $ 126,284.00 $ $ 126,284.00 
----;:. 􀁾􀀠 ::> 'z" o " -. 􀁾􀁾􀀠 000 0 ==0000000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000 -Q Q 0 I I Q Q I I Q 0 0 0 Q 0 0 I Q Q Q Q Q Q I Q Q I i Q -,---1-1-1l1-1-1'
• • • • • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 • CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: __ Brandston Partnership_ URSCORPORATION 􀁎􀁾􀀢􀀠
Sheets TASK tV. lIGHTING OeSIGN " 10,410.00 , 2,500.00 • 12:,970,00 " Resjl(lfld to RFf$ {20 lotal) S 2, Pl'!Ipare one .II:14erun , s 3, Rovlew aM app(()ye CQI'Iltactor 5\lbmlU41 as
related to righting oetajl; (12 lotal) I ' I ,. I· I ,. I " I · I" ['J " , , • §:4, ChuM! the il'l$talialiOfi of 􀁴􀁬􀁧􀁨􀁾􀁬􀀧􀁉􀁧􀀠equipment(one Irlp (0 AddIson) • , S 5, Focus the
􀁾􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀠eqv1pm$fl1 ;lnd program control d'evlces , , , TA$I( V. PROJECT MANAGEMENT , , , , $ $ A. Ri9ports. lind In\lolce. (} (}" 0 0 0 (} 0 (i ,• r,• • , 1, Proparo Progre»
Repor\$ ETmluuI 1 1 10 2. Prepare Inwlees fjiW 811111'191> • 􀀬􀁾 :I 􀁉􀀻􀀺􀁾􀀢 B. CQordlnallOI\ , , , , , , • • --2. $ 1. Coordfl'lalo ol'lElllddendll .S 2, AIl9nd rMeUng$ (4 total)
1'1'1'1'1' '1'1'1'1 •, , ,$ 3. CO(lrdfnam teSjXlflSel'h revlew:s and apprc\lal$ 1, Grand Total '" " • , , $ 10,410.0(1 $ 2,50D.DD S 12,971MO " " • • • " 
•• ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002· CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: I Cornan Associates URS CORPORATION No. of Sheets TASK
I 􀁾􀀠URBAN DESIGN 0 0 0 o 1. Respond 10 RFI$ o 2. Pr(lpare OI"IEI 􀁾􀁤􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁤􀁥􀀠 1'1 1 1 1','tJ 'lei o !1 Review and approve ConltsClor sub!'l)ltial as rnlated 10 !.1m:lsOilpa and
hardscapa o TASK II * ENGtNeERING 01)(1000000 • A. Ci¥1I Sit. WorD 0 o 1. Rs$l'lOnd to RFls o 2. Ptopilr6 one adderma o 0 0 0 ro,I'I'1 [fllll£LLJ • • , , • o , o -1--_I :ilmIi 􀁾􀀮􀀠
I 1'1' 1'1 I I 3. Re¥l6Vi and approve Conltactot submittal as relaled 10 traffic OOI'llroi o B.BrldS" o 1" Respond (0 RPIS o 2. PI'fI1'l8re one llddel'lda o 3. Ravlaw bridgo bid tsbulaboos
o 4. 􀁁􀁬􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁤􀀠CQr\SInic:tiOfi 􀁾􀁩􀁣􀁫􀀭􀁑􀁦􀁦􀀠meeting o li. Site visits: (8 􀁉􀁏􀁴􀁡􀁬􀁾􀀠 o 6, R$View bridge ct)nltactor submlUalll o Concrete mix: design (4 tole]) o Presl1essed
beam slrand jacking reports (54 beams) o Pfesflessed beam allemaje design calculalfons {3Iotal, o Arch orection melhod statement o Arch hanger sltessing reports o Formwork ca!culations
o 7, Review bridge CQn!iactor shop/fabricaUr::m drawings ,o Foondations/t\heft 􀁤􀁥􀁬􀁡􀁾􀁳􀀠 Formwort o Ml'sceHanoous StJpeNitnJcure Oelillis (SIP forms, PIS conCiele deck panels, expans!on
jo1nts, alt,) o S\JspenSion hanger delaifs and connoctions o stoOl srd! detail$ oArCh ¢amber details ogetufng 􀁤􀁥􀁬􀁡􀁾􀁳􀀠 oBndge dramsge cateHs o Ral!lrlg details o Stingitf details
o o _IS 􀁔􀁥􀁭􀁰􀁯􀁮􀁵􀁹􀁳􀁨􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁴􀁬􀀧􀁡􀁾􀀠 oElection sequencing o PteSlfessed beam fabncaOOn drawings \64 beams} C. Elec!Tk:al EntJInearlng o 1. Raspood to RA$ o 2. Ptapafa OM
aooeMa ,'I · I · I · I 0 I 0 I ' I ' I 0 I o o 3. 􀁾􀁶􀁩􀀦􀁗 and approve Conltador submittal as related to lighling details o $ • • : I I: •S -• s $ .! 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀠 ;$ ,t:::::::jts
.'...' -$ ..􀁾􀀮. :••1..􀁾$ 􀀮􀀭􀀧􀀭 _$ w 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀮􀀠 -. 􀁾􀀠 '$ • . '$' .$ • . :$ 􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀻􀀪􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩􀀨􀀺􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 .';''..$. . ' 􀁾,􀁾􀀰􀀬 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁩􀀺􀀧􀀲􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀭, "
,,',.$ . ", '.• ;]. a " S . ·s 1,$. ' -. .'• .'., If;' :, t'$' s '$ ) IS TASK III w ARCHITECTURAL. 00 Q 1034(\ 0 44$ 􀁓􀀮􀀷􀀱􀀰􀀬􀁾􀀠 1. Raspond 10 RFI$, 2,500.00 2.:500.00 5.650,(10
􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁡􀁾 2. Rov!tiw Olnd appi0V9 Contractor submittal as r6laled to architectural details FIlml :T! ::: 1,SiGMO $ 1,:560.00 3. Observe Site Mocll-up 1,590,0() $ 1.650.00 
• • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 -CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION 􀁍􀁁􀁎􀁾􀁈􀁏􀁕􀁒􀀠& EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: I Cargan Associates No. Of ShO$1$ TASK IV.
UGHT1NG DESIGN $ $ $ 1, RoliPQnd \0 RF1sl20 tOl.<lI) • $ 2. 􀁐􀁲􀁾􀁐􀁩􀁬􀁲􀁥􀀠one OIddenda • $ 3. R$"lew ilutd approve Contractor svbm1t1al as f61ated to fighting details ,12 to\illl)
1'1 ' I ' I ' I ' I ' ['J ' I ' I • • •• §[ 4, OtlsilIMilhe i11.slallaUon ofligMng equ!pmellt (one bip to Addi!.on) 0 5. Focus the lightln9 equipment arld program control devi«ls 0 •
TASK V 􀁾􀀠PROJECT MANAGEMENT o 0 0 0 0 0 $ ft., Aepot't$ end 1...V'Olces 0 , $ 1, Prepare Progress Reports 0 :.. 2, Prepare Invoices and Billings 0 'S I e, Coordination 1. Coordinate
one addenda 0 S 2. AUend meetingr; (4 101a1) 0 ;$ 3. Coordinato responses, reviews and approvalS 0 '$.. Grand Total o o o 10 34 • • • • 44 S 5,65lUO $ 6Q»O $ 5.711MIO 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR MIDWAY ROAD FROM BELT LINE TO LINDBERG URS will
provide the engineering, urban design, and lighting design services including plans, specifications and estimates as it relates to Midway Road from approximately Belt Line Road to approximately
Lindberg Road and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of landscaping, hardscaping, and ligbting & illumination along Midway Road to be consistent with the
urban design and architectural features of the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road. URS will prepare and submit technical memorandums, preliminary plans and preliminary construction cost
estimates at the end of the Design Development phase for the Town's review. After resolution of comments and selection of alternatives provided, URS will provide all final detail plans,
specifications, and estimates as previously described, to be included into one final construction package. URS will coordinate with the Town of Addison and/or the Town's Consultant for
all interface design issues as well as coordinate the format of construction plans, specification and estimate into a complete stand-alone construction package. The Town of Addison will
provide to URS all available Midway Road geometries, including but not limited to electronic files for horizontal alignment, vertical profile, typical section, topography survey, field
survey, and utility information. The Town will provide all landscape ordinances and guidelines as well as provide a copy of the Town's Consultant's schematic landscape masterplan and
the streetscape design development package. All ROW documentation and plans, Midway Road geometries, survey, irrigation design for landscaping, permitting, construction administration,
construction inspection, and record drawings are outside the scope of this agrecment and will be performed by others or are covered in a separate work order. 
Itemized Scope of Services Provided by DRS For Midway Road from Beltline to Lindberg TASK I -URBAN DESIGN A. Design Development I. Scenario Development • Develop two scenarios for the
influence area (up to Va mile) • Design enhancement themes for connections 10 existing areas (Beltline Road, Lendberg Road) • Detennine the design principles gennane to integrating the
bridge project into the overall urban design of the area 2. Develop the preferred alternative urban design theme • Landseape and hnrdscape "Kit of Parts" • General design gnidelines
for implementation ofurbao design development • Plans and sections that show typical application of the "Kit of Parts" B. Final Design I. Develop Construction Documents 2. Develop Specifications
TASK II -ENGINEERING A. Design Development I. Electrical • Develop a load study for portion ofMidway Road • Prepare a preliminary cost estimate B. Final PS&E I. General • Title Sheet
• Index of Sheets • General Notes • Surmnary of Quantities • Removal Pian • Cost Estimate • Special provisions & specifications • QAlQC • Coordination 2. Electrical • Finalize a load
study for each electrical service source. • Prepare Lighting Calculations • Illumination Layout (2 sheets along Midway) • Electric Service I Pole Summary • Conduit Runs I Contents •
Insert Latest Town or TxDOT Standards • Quantity Summary • Develop Final Cost Estimate (Using Estimator) • QA ON 95% PLANS • Update Drawings per City Review TASK ill -LIGHTING DESIGN
A. Design Development I. Develop two alternative lighting concepts for Midway Road in the blocks immediately north and south of Arapaho. 
B. Final Design I.Provide control concept diagrams and other infonnation suitable for use by electrical engineer descnbing control intent. TASK IV -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and
Invoices I. Prepare Progress Reports 2. Prepare Invoices and Billings B. Coordination 1. Coordinate/Administer the Project 2. Prepare and Update Schedule 3. Manage Subconsultants 4.
Implement Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program 5. Prepare for and attend project meetings with Addison Public Works (3 total) 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003 -MIDWAY ROAD ATTACHMENT C FEE PROPOSAL URS CORPORATION Total Cost TASK I • URBAN DESIGN $ 47,284.00 A. Design Development $ 40.580.00
B. Final Design $ 6,704.00 TASK II • ENGINEERING $ 34,340.00 A. Design Development $ 1,120.00 B. Final Design $ 33,220.00 TASK III -LIGHTING DESIGN $ 13,145.00 A. Design Development
$ 12.345.00 B. Final Design $ 800.00 TASK IV· PROJECT MANAGEMENT $ 14,802.00 A. Reports and Invoices $ 3,372.00 B. Coordination $ 11,430.00 Printing & Copying Expenses $ 1,180.00 GRAND
TOTAL $ 110,751.00 
•• • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003 -MIDWAY ROAD MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: iUR$(::"rporalion NO. of TASK I· URBAN DESlGIot • • "10 '12 120 ,
47• • <ff.2&4.00 • • 47,284.60 A., 􀁾􀀤􀁉􀁧􀁮􀀠Davelopment 􀁲􀁦􀀿􀁩􀁾􀁯􀁭􀀠!.%'!Or,!l!l 􀁭􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀦􀁭􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁏􀁾 􀁾􀀱􀁴􀁉􀁾 W?,fo?t.H !r:}:20r-;':: 2.4 2,4. 16 12 16'6 8 􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁦􀀬􀀧􀁬􀁉􀁯􀁲􀁾􀁟􀀠
􀁾􀁾􀀠g i!lilIiiill!1!i'l_;; 􀁾􀁢􀀡􀀲􀁂􀀱 t?!. ,􀀧1'1􀀭" 􀀺_􀁾-,_􀀧 􀀺􀀧􀀢􀀢􀁟􀀮􀀢􀁾􀁉 16 32 24 • a 􀁾􀀠 16 􀁾􀀠 24 32 1& $ o 0 0 112 1$2 "0 60 0 60 404 • 40,580.00 , • 4O,58D,00 " 1.
Scenario Davelopmenl ",.. Develop Mo SCOI1i1Vios lor the JnHl.letlCS 3fN (up to II, mile) 􀁲􀀺􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀺􀁲􀀺􀀢􀀡􀀧􀀺􀀻􀁾􀁉􀀺􀀠l::: Desfsn enhancemenl ihelt)E)S for oormoctlons to axiSli!'lg
areas (B&!IlI06 Road, 􀁌􀁥􀁮􀁾􀁴􀁩􀀶􀁲􀁧􀀠ilwo) .. 24 Delermine !.he assign plindpfas germane to Integr3!ing the btki9S project into \he overall urb.m deslgn or Ihe area ,.. 2. Oiw&lOp
the preferred allernative urban d9!ilgn IMmEl is• • 􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀺􀁉􀁉􀀤􀁜􀀯􀁃􀀼􀀢􀀧􀁪􀀢􀀧􀁩􀀡􀁬􀁬􀁩􀀮􀁴􀀠􀀻􀀲􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀻􀁪 80 7,800..00 $ 7.soo,00 Genaral design gukletinas foc implementation
of f,lfb,;!n design c.feyelog)menl Plans 3Ild sections that show Iypical appb\iQn ollila "Kit of Pa/1s" Landscape and hardseapo "Kit of Parts" 8,280..00 I I $ 8,280.00 8. Final Design
o 0: e II 0 16 40 (I "n $ 6,704.0(1 $ $ 6,704,1)0 1. DeveiorJ coostrucllon docuMents 8 40 $ 4,336.00 ' I • 4,,,,"00 I r' 1, oe."alOP $pooHitalions "24 J. 2,368,00 $ 2,368.00 • • a '.
TASK II • EtrolNeE RING 113 • ,• .. .. .. 20 346 34,340.00 $ $ 34,343,00 A. Oettlgn Development o 0 (I '8 0 0 0 0 0 • 1,120,1)0 $ $ 1,120,00 El&C1!ical Eng:nMOng 􀁲􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀁪􀀵􀀡􀁏􀁖􀀺􀀿􀀡􀀮􀀠􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾
􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁢􀁏􀀡􀁎􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁢􀁜􀀺􀁾􀀠r.f.""f"O'?m 􀁴􀂥􀀬􀁩􀁙􀁯􀀻􀀻􀁹􀀻􀁾􀀠 rs--Oevelop a load Sludyfor Midway ROilld , 􀀢􀀺􀁾􀁲􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁩􀀧􀀠􀁩􀁾􀀺􀁬􀀠 Prepar'8 iii preliminary cosl
esUrnate 550.00 $ 500,00 8. Flnat PS&E o 0: 110 64 0 64 60 2D l3S 33,220.0D $ • $ 33,Z20.00 􀁉􀁬􀀧􀁭􀁜􀀬􀀡􀀡􀀱􀀱􀁅􀀧􀀱􀁴􀁬􀀼􀁬􀀢􀀢􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀡􀀻􀁬􀁬􀀡􀀢􀁊􀁬􀀡􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁌􀁾􀁩􀁩􀀡􀀡􀁬􀀱􀀱􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁣􀀡􀁩􀁊􀁾�
�􀁉􀁾􀁾􀀢􀁩􀀱􀁩􀀱􀁾􀀭􀁉􀁛􀁴􀀢􀀧􀀲􀁩􀁬􀁦􀀢􀁾􀀠 2 .!. ! ..!!. !!. a ! 12 , !. 10 g !!! 4 " 12 5 6 􀁅􀁾􀀱􀀳􀁉􀀡􀁦􀀧􀀻􀀡􀀡􀀱􀀮􀁏􀀧􀀺􀀧􀁇􀀺􀀡􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁭􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁩􀂷􀁀􀀺􀁪􀁲􀀮􀀭􀀺􀁈􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁲􀀧􀁴􀀧􀀭􀁾􀁯􀁬�
�􀀡􀀧􀀱􀀡􀁉􀁦􀁻􀀡􀁾􀁯􀁴􀁾􀀡􀁦􀀮􀀻􀁉􀁦􀁴􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁬􀁉􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁯􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁩􀁩􀀡􀀠 􀁾􀀠 4 1.. 􀁾􀀠 2 4 4 " E. ! !, 32 •, =. •• • ,. Genernl ," ;' 􀀱􀀷􀀬􀀧􀁏􀁏􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀠􀁲􀀤􀁬􀀡􀀺􀁾􀀧􀁓􀀻􀀧􀀮􀀧􀀠
􀀯􀁾􀀡􀀻􀁊􀀧􀁾􀀠􀁲􀁳􀂷􀁾􀁾􀀱􀀷􀀻􀀱􀁱􀁯􀀮􀀡􀁬􀁩􀀱􀀱 • •• • • 'fiUeShlKl! 1,320.00 $ 1,320.00 In_otSh!ilE!1s "12 1,D40.00 $ 1,(140.00 Genaral Noles 22 2,040.00 $ 2,(140,QO SUmmary of Quanlllie$
20 1,76{),00 $ 1,760.00 2,48[),00 $ 2,480..00 Cosl EsUmaI$ Removal Plan $ 1.12[),00 $ 1,120.00 Spocial Provisions and SpedfiealiOi14 "'2 2,Q2().00 $ 2.020.00 " 22 •QAlQC $ 2,600,00 $
2,600.00 COOrtIInalion 26 $ , 2,720.00 2. EIQC!lical $ ",,. is. ". ,.,)"'''",J Flfl.!li:te a load studyfor each e!eclrical 􀁳􀁾$Curee. , •• $ Prepare liglling CalCUlalion5 72 $ 7.1180.00
$ 1.680.00 Ereclric Servico I Pole Surnvnary "Iumination layout (2 sheel:!i along MidWay, , $ 820.00 $ 820,.00 Conduit Ruos I Cootants. 6 • 54MO $ 540.00 !nserl1.atest Town or r-.DQT
Standards ',2 $ 1,530..00 $ 1,530.00 540.00 $ 540.1.10 De\telOp Final Co&!: 􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁭􀁡􀁴􀁡􀀠(lJelng Estimator) Quantity Sunvnary 4 560J)O $ ""'.00 0" ON l'I5% PlANS • 6SO,00 $ 690,00
Updato Drawings per City RQvl$W (3 Subrrlttalt. AI! 􀁾􀀱􀀠 44 $ 3,760,00 $ 3,700.00 , . TASK Ill· UGHTING OESKiN 0000 000 • A. DOSlgn Oe¥efopment 000000 DO • •• 􀀬􀁾􀀠􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭􀁾􀀤 1.
DeYelop IW<l 􀁩􀀳􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁕􀁶􀁥 lighting COI'Ieapts fOr Midway Road in the I.liocU iO'M'Mdiately north and south of 􀁁􀁲􀁾􀁡􀁨􀁯􀀮􀀠 [. [,J .T, [ , I -,f , I I , I 0 •• I-c---..j' B. Final
Oesign 0 0 L!.__-,-.J ' 
Grand Subtotal • • 84 '" 21' " '84 Of) '" ." • 96,416.00 $ $ 96,426.{)0 PIilp!)r Plots Mylar Prols 100 sl'lMIs@40 Sh&6l!@•$ 5,00 I sfleet 15,00 /sheet •$ 50Ma 60Ma Doeurnent PMting·
B & W SOOSheets@$ 0.10 I shefll $ 50.00 OOOumem Prir.ting· CQ1O( 20 $heels@$ 1.50 I sheet $ 30.00 Grand Total 􀀮􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀮􀁾I ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003· MIDWAY
ROAD MAN.HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE URS CORPORATION I. Provide control OMCept diagrams and other inlormatioo 5uNabie for\lS& bye1actrital enginoor 􀁤􀁾c;ootrol Intent. TASK IV· PROJECT
MANAGEMENT A. Reporta aod h'lvo<ees 1. Prepare Progress Reporl.! 2, Prepare Invoices aM Billings B. COordination 1, CoordinatalAdmlnlstar the f'rqact 2, Ptepere ana Update Sd1edule 3.
􀁍􀁡􀁮􀁡􀁧􀁥􀁾􀁉􀁊􀀮􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁳􀀠 4. Imp1iXOOf'll QUi1ily 􀁁􀁳􀀮􀁳􀁕􀁦􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁙􀁑􀁵􀁡􀁬􀁴􀁴􀁾􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁲􀁯􀁬􀀠Program 5. PtoP<lfe <lfId a:ttend project mootl'l1g$ will'l A04:Soo (3Iola1.)
CONSULTANT, URS Corporation ""-of She'" I·· r 􀁔􀁾􀀠a a 01S Q 0: 0 Ii 0: 46 1,3.. 0: 0: 16 0 0: 0: 1) 0: 2.0 '.". r I I: 1m I I I I I:, I is 􀁉􀀺􀁉􀀧􀁉􀁾􀁉􀀧􀁉􀀧􀁉􀀧􀁉􀀧􀁉􀀧􀁉􀁾􀁉􀀠,,"..
"8 $ 1 j:s $ 14,eGUlO $ , 14.602.00 $ 3,371.00 , • 3,372.01) • 1,516.00 'I 1,576.00 •• 1,796,00 􀁉􀁾 1,79GJlO' 11,430.00 • • 11,430.00 • '.Iio;'''' 􀁾.• 2,602,00 • 1,13&.00 $ 1,131:1,.(10
• 2,602.00 $ 2,802,00 • 3,056.00 $ 3,056.00 • 2,r04,00 $ 2,034.00
• • • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003 • MIDWAY ROAD MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE URS CORPORATION TASK r. URBAN DESIGN A. Do$lfJn Development 1. Soonario DevefOj'.ll'llent
DeIIefop two scenarios for tho inlluooC'e atM (up to \1:0 mile) Design enhaooement !hlID'1Q$!'or CQl'lnectkms \0 existing 􀁡􀁬􀀧􀁬􀁕􀁾􀀠(8fI!I11Jine Roild, l;)n11t>eli Road) DeOOrmine
the dalgn prlneipl9S QMTlo1IOo to i1'l1eQt'9!il'lg the bridge proj9C1 into !he overi!ill uri.'uln d8S'iGn of the atM: 2, ee",eiot1 the prefGO'od all®'latNs urban design theme 􀁌􀁡􀁬􀀧􀁬􀁾
and haldscape "Kit of partsGefl8l'al de&iQn QUldolines tOf Il'I1lIet'fleI1talloo of \Il'001'1 design de;"eklpmer.t Plant and $Oct1ons !.hal $how typical appbeation Of lila "Kit Of Pa.1sB.
Anal Design 1. 􀁄􀁥􀁶􀁾 construetion documents z. Dllivmop 􀁳􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁳􀀠 TASK If 􀁾􀀠EN{;:lNeeRING A. OUlgn DeWlOpment 1. ElelCtril;;.'1! ErlQif'l9erinQ Develop a load sIDdy for Miclway
Road PrePQfO a J,ltoiiminarycosl estlrnale B. Final PSAe t GeMral TIUeSheot II'ld&A of Stlebls Gene,al NO\$$ SUI'l'II'I\1I;i)' Of Ouolnlilio:i Removel Plan Cost Estimate Special ProviSions
and spsemcalions ONaC Coordination 2, Electrical Finalize a load study for each electrical saNice source. Prepare lighting Calculations 􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁵􀁭􀁬􀁮􀁡􀁾􀁴􀁉􀁏􀀠layout (2 sheets along
Midway) Elor;:tric SeNIce/Pole Summary Conduit Ftuns , COO{etlts 􀁉􀁮􀁾􀁃􀁦􀀱􀀠La\est lown or TxooT Standards Quantily SIJfM'\afY Dtwc!op An<J1 Cosl estimale (Using Estimator) QA ON
95% PlANS Update Drawings per City Review(3 Submiltals, AU Dwgs.) TASK Ill· UCitrTfNG DESKiN A. Dntgn DevelOpment " Develop \YIo alternative 'iStrung 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁩􀀡􀀡􀁉􀁐􀀨􀁓􀀠for Midway
Roqd fn \he blOOIIs inYMdialely north 8nd sou\h or Arapaho. B. Anal Oost;n CONSULTANT: Brandston Partnership No,of Shoots • 0 • • 0 • 1I!!III!lI_IIIIIOO. -􀀮􀁾􀁊􀁏􀀬􀀿􀀻􀁾􀀠 !!i!!!i
. !!!!!!{-.: 􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀱 􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁴􀀡 􀀡􀀡􀀡􀁩􀁩􀁢􀀺􀀡􀀧􀁬􀀧􀁾􀀠􀁩􀁩􀁩􀀡􀁦􀀨􀀮􀀧􀂣􀀮􀁾􀀠 o 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 􀂷􀁾􀁉􀀡􀀡􀁩􀂥􀀧􀀬􀁾􀁉􀁾􀀧􀁢􀁄􀁉..􀁾􀁾􀀠 lJ!Ill!'o_ll!!!!!ro!l!'!&lI!l!il!i_IIIl!l'
Ol!l!lIIt'O!!Qj'''I1 􀀡􀁟􀁉􀁉􀀡􀀡􀁉􀀡􀁻􀀬􀀡􀁬􀁬􀀡􀁉􀁾􀁟􀀠 􀀺􀂱􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀀶􀁍􀁉􀀡􀁬􀁴􀁬􀁾􀀠 • o o o o o o o o • •• o 􀁭􀁷􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁭􀁲􀀧__􀁉􀁅􀀡􀁭􀁭􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀱􀀠 0 0 •
_I!!ll! i!lllo !!!I:.l<!l!! o 3D 0 o 􀀲􀁾􀀠 0 I "'··I m o 2 28 13 0 29 0 28 13 24 0 2. 13 " 0 __ 0 5 0 $ • S $ • S 􀁬􀀱􀀧􀀺􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁲􀀤􀀱􀁙􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀬􀁜􀀬􀀠
;" 􀀿􀁾􀁬􀀠 $ 􀁾􀀠 . 0 $ 0 $ 􀁾􀁳.$ 0 If ..: 􀀮􀁜􀁾􀀠 􀀭􀁦􀁴􀀢􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁴􀀺􀀺􀁴􀀭􀁾􀀻􀀻􀀮􀀺􀀼􀂷􀀠 .;:-; ·1 0 $ 0 $ 1'$ 0 $• • • 0 • I: $• • •$ • • $ 1 􀁦􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀮􀁾􀂷􀁬􀁲􀁓􀀢􀁣􀀢􀀡􀀧􀀿�
�􀁾􀀻􀀧􀁾􀁉􀁩􀁳􀀡􀀢􀁣􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁣􀀺􀁾 •• $. $.' $. $. o $ $ •• ••••• • • is-.; w.o.>: 􀀧􀀬􀀭􀀬􀁾􀀠'f'.". . I 􀁉􀀧􀁾􀀢􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀧􀀭􀁲􀀧􀀢.-""1 I I I s S s I $ o I $ o I $ o I o is> 􀁾􀀱􀀤􀁾􀀨􀁦􀁩􀀲􀁾􀁾􀁯􀀮􀁾
􀁉􀀺􀀻􀀮􀀺􀀠􀀬􀁾􀀧􀀮􀀠 􀀭􀁾􀀠 • s$ •• • SI $ S S $ o S $o S $o $ $o $o s $ • o • $ " ••100 13,145..0D $ $ 13,145.DO 12,345.011 $ $ 12,345.00 U,34S,OO r----r.$ 􀀭􀀱􀀲􀀮􀁾􀀬􀁏􀁏 93 $ 7
$ 800.00 rr-----:--i $ 􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀠 600.
00 ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003 -MIDWAY ROAD MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT: jkandston 􀁐􀁡􀁾􀁟􀀠 URS CORPORATION No. of Sheets I,.U","UIL. ""UI;Jl;,
11;1<;[1. nOUI:; "'00, 􀁾􀁰􀁥􀁮􀀺􀀻􀁴􀁬􀀺􀀻􀀠 ...<;1:;, 1. Provide control concept diagrams and other information suitable for use by electrical engineer describing control inlenl. 1
2 1 1 5 1 1 􀁾􀀠 • 800.001 I. 800.00 ' TASK IV· PROJECT MANAGEMENT o o o o o 0 • A. Reports and Invoices o 0 0 0 0 • S S 1. Prepare Progress Reports 0 2. Prepare Invoices and Billings
0 •• I I: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 B. Coordination 000000000 S S S 1. Coordinate/Administer the Project • 2. Prepare and Update Schedule 0 • 􀁾􀀮􀁾 3. Manage Subconsultanis 0 4. Implement Quality
AssurancaiQualily Control Program 0 5. Prepare and attllfld project meetings 'Nilh Addison (3 total) 0 1 I. I I I I I I I I I I ••• Grand Total 30 28 13 o 29 o 100 13,145.00 S So 13,145.00

DRS July 18, 2002 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian., PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase II -Design
Development, Contract Documents, and Construction Administration Scope of Services Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please [md a copy ofthe Scope of Services for Phase II of the referenced
project for your review. We have revised this scope after discussions with you and your Consultant (HNTB) to eliminate any overlap of provided services. We have separated the scope into
three Work Orders as follows: Work Order No. 001 -Arapaho Road Bridge Design Development and Construction Documents Work Order No, 002 -Arapaho Road Bridge Construction Administration
Services Work Order No. 003 -Midway Road from Beltline to Lindberg Design Development and Construction Documents We are currently developing a fee proposal based on the enclosed scope
ofservices and should be able to provide the fee proposal to you byno later than July 22, 2002. We look forward to discussing our Scope ofServices with you and finalizing our fee proposal
for your approval. Sincerely, ;;;;JJ! CliffR. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Prestonwood Tower 5151 Beltline Road, Suite 700 Dall••, TX 75254 Tel: 972.980.4961 Fax:
972.991.7665 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR THE ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE URS will provide the engineering,
architeetural, urban design, lighting design and noise study services including plans, specifications and estimates as it relates to Arapaho Road from approximate Station 40+67 to approximate
Station 70+28 and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of an elevated four-lane roadway with sidewalk loeated within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way
(ROW). URS shall prepare plans, details and compute quantities for a steel arch bridge, the ''blue-bridge concept", over Midway Road, with prestressed concrete beam approaches. Design
and details will include all bridge details including any soundwalls located on the bridge. URS will also provide all bridge drainage details to accommodate the drainage in accordance
with the Town's Consultant's drainage requirements. URS will also prepare plans, details and compute quantities for any landscaping, hardscaping, sidewalks, lighting & illumination,
and traffic control for the areas under and immediately adjacent to the bridge and retained wall portion of Arapaho Road with the exception of those portions to be prepared by the Town
of Addison's Consultant. URS will also prepare architectural details for the bridge, the meehanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls and the sound walls. Additionally, URS will
prepare a noise study including ambient noise measurements, modeling and noise analyses. URS will prepare and submit technical memorandums, preliminary plans and preliminary construction
cost estimates at the end of the Design Development phase for the Town's review. After resolution of comments and selection of alternatives provided, URS will provide all final detail
plans, specifications, and estimates as previously described, to be included into one final construction package prepared by the Town's Consultant. URS will submit four sets of plans
for review to the Town for 65% review and 95% review and will incorporate the Town's comments in the next submittals. URS will also provide signed and sealed mylar plans at the 100%
final submittal. URS will coordinate with the Town of Addison and/or the Town's Consultant for an interface design issues as well as coordinate the format and consolidation of construction
plans, specification and estimate into one final construction package. URS win coordinate with the Town and/or the Town's Consultant for revising the horizontal alignment and vertical
profile ofArapaho Road to accommodate the proposed bridge structure. URS will coordinate with the Town and/or the Town's Consultant for the revised alignment of the proposed box-culvert
under Arapaho Road as well as bridge drainage and bridge drain tie-ins. URS will coordinate with the Town and/or the Town's Consultant for an geotechnical information required for the
foundation design for the bridge and retaining walls. The Town of Addison will provide to URS all available Arapaho Road geometries, including but not limited to electronic files for
horizontal alignment, vertical profile, typical sections, topography survey, field survey, and utility information. The Town will also provide boring logs, soil parameters and foundation
design recommendations (allowable bearing capacities, lateral load analysis, etc.) required for the bridge foundation designs. The Town of Addison will provide to URS a field location
survey of the existing 60-in. diameter water main, locating the water main precisely, both vertically and horizontally, along the project limits and specifically in the vicinity of the
arch-bridgE'S main foundations. Additionally the Town will provide any applicable noise regulations or ordinance 
information, obtain right of entry, and provide all traffic data including but not limited to, peak hourly volumes, average daily traffic, percentages of trucks, and design and posted
speeds that may be required for the noise study. The Town will provide all landscape ordinances andguidelines as well as provide a copy of the Town's Consultant's schematic landscape masterplan and the streetscape design development package. All ROW documentation and plans, Arapaho
Road geometries and roadway design, drainage, parking lot layout and design, retaining wall layout and design, survey, geotechnical engineering, design and details for soundwalls on
retaining walls or at grade, irrigation for landscaping, permitting, and construction administration, inspection and record drawings are outside the scope of this agreement and will
be performed by others. 
Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS for the Arapaho Road Bridge TASK 1-URBAN DESIGN A. Design Development L Inventory and Analysis of Project Area • Review existing plans and
coordinate with Town's Consultant • Identify prevailing patterns • Analyze project needs based on above • Develop urban design principles for project • Prepare technical memo of understanding
of existing plans 2. Develop two scenarios for the primary project area (limits ofproject) that incorporate the design principles in item number L • Landscape for bridge abutments and
retaining wall areas • Hardscape: bridge elements at base to screen parking • Element relocation, adjustment, elimination, or addition (utility poles, signage, medians, sidewalk, etc.)
• Prepare plan & elevation with typical sections ofprimary project area 3. Develop final preliminary concept • Identify a final preliminary concept to go forward into final design. •
Prepare support drawings for final concept 4. Prepare for and attend meetings in Addison to collect date and present options (2 total) B. Final Design (65%, 95%, 100% submittals) L Design
development ofhardscape (surfaces, railings, etc.) 2. Create Final Landscape Plan • Identify plants to be removed or relocated • Identify appropriate plant pallets • Design planting
plan • Create plant list • Define maintenance requirements • Urban design and landscape construction documents for the project area 2. Prepare for and attend meetings in Addison (2)
TASK II -Engineering A. Civil Site Works I. Final Civil Design & PS&E (65%, 95%, 100% submittal) • Midway Road Traffic Control Plan • Overhead Utilities (Along Midway Road) Adjustment
Plan • Retaining Wall Architectural Details • Soundwall Architectural Details • QAlQC • Cost Estimate • Special Provisions & Specifications • Coordination with Town's Consultants B.Bridges
1. Preliminary Bridge Design (-30% submittal) • Develop Design Criteria • Preliminary Bridge Layout (Finalize Bridge Location) • Preliminary Typical Section • Refine Arch Sbape • Size
Tluust Block & Refme Shape • Size Foundation • Size Diaphragms • Size Traffic Railing Members 
• Develop Soundwall • Investigate Culvert Layout • Quantities and Cost Estimate • QAlQC 2. Final Bridge Design, & PS&E (65%, 95%, 100% submittals) o Final Bridge Layout • Final Typical
Section • General Notes o Quantities and Bearing Seats o Foundation Layout o Drilled Shalt Details o Abutment Plan & Elevation • Abutment Details • Bent Plan & Elevation • Bent Details
• Tluust Block Plan & Elevation • Thrust Block Details • Prestressed Concrete Beam Unit -Deck Plan • Prestressed Concrete Beam Unit -Deck Sections • Bridge Soundwall Details • Miscellaneous
Superstructure Details (drains, lighting) o Diaphragm Details o Closure Pour Details • Suspension Hanger Details • Steel Arch Design and Details • Steel Arch Camber Details • Bearing
Details • Drainage Details • Railing Details • Architectural Details • Stinger Design & Details • Approach Slab Details • Erection Sequencing o Prestressed Beam Tables • Compile, Verity
& Modify TxDOT Standard Drawings • QAlQC • Coordination with Town's Cunsultants o Bridge Total Quantities & Cust Estimate • Bridge Special Provisions & Specifications C. Electrical Engineering
1. Design Development • Develop a load study for Arapaho Road Bridge, approaches and parking areas • Prepare a preliminary cost estimate 2. Final Electrical Design & PS&E (65%, 95%,
100% submittals) • Finalize a load study for each electrical service source. • Prepare Lighting Calculations for under-deck lighting above the parking lot. • Illumination Layout (2961',
1200'/sht + 1 sheet under the bridge) o Electric Service /Pole Summary • Cunduit Runs /Contents • Insert Lighting Consultant SpeCial Details • Insert Latest Town or TxDOT Standards •
Quantity Summary • Develop Final Cost Estimate (Using Estimator) • QA ON 95% PLANS • Update Drawings per City Review F" 
TASK III -ARCIDTECTURAL A. Design Development I. Architectural Studies & Details • Develop three rail options addressing the issues of hikerlbiker separation from the vehicular traffic
and the architectural options to realize the proposed triangular pattern in the rail. • Coordinate with the engineering team to refine the curvature and size of the steel. Produce drawings
representing viable options • Explore options for the fmal material and form of the thrust block. Provide sketch options initially followed by CADD drawings ofpreferred scheme. • Develop
detailed options and refine panel schemes for precast concrete retaining walls at approaches. • Study and Present Options for center pier support shape. • Develop options for bridge
mounted soundwalls • Explore and refme alternate "stinger" designs incorporating lighting as the primary feature. • Attend Team Meetings and Conference Calls to coordinate the architectural
aspects of the design with structural and lighting Consultants. 2. Computer Animation • Minor updates to existing video animation for landscaping, parking, etc. • Produce video animation
in DVD and VHS tape format B. Final Design I. Coordination 2. Review 3. Specifications TASK IV -Lighting Design A. Design Development l. Develop two alternatives for lighting of stingers.
2. Research and mock-up options for color changing on existing Addison sculpture (to determine range of possibilities for color changing on bridge structure). 3. Develop two alternatives
for lighting ofbicycle/pedestrian path. 4. Develop two alternatives for lighting ofelevated roadway. S. Develop mounting concepts for bridge structure lighting. 6. Develop two alternatives
for lighting of outboard railings. 7. Develop two alternatives for lighting of underside ofbridge, roadway under bridge and any adjacent parking areas under bridge. B. Final Design I.
Final details for lighting ofstingers. 2. Final details offixtures and mounting for bridge structure illumination. 3. Final details offixtures and mounting for elevated roadway lighting.
4. Final details offixtures and mounting for bicycle/pedestrian pathway lighting. 5. Final details offixtures and mounting for outboard railing illumination. 6. Final details offixtures
and mounting for lighting of underside ofbridge, roadway under bridge and any adjacent parking areas under bridge. 7. Provide control concept diagrams and other information suitable
for use by electrical engineer describing control intent. TASK V -NOISE STUDY A. Noise Measurements 1. Review existing noise ordinance and criteria documents 2. Meeting with the Town
ofAddison to discuss noise issues and objectives 3. PeIform noise measurement survey. Take initial noise readings, both long term (24 hours or longer) and short term (less than one hour)
noise readingS, at adjacent properties. 4. Observe adjacent building construction type to aid in estimating the potential noise effects inside the buildings 
B. Noise Modeling and Analyses I. Create a noise model to predict future noise emissions from the proposed roadway and bridge 2. Evaluate noise levels at areas of concern for compliance
with applicable noise regulations and standards 3. Develop a range ofsound wall heights and noise levels where noise impacts require mitigation. 4. Prepare report and respond to one
round ofconnnents. 5. Final meeting with the Town TASK VI-PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices I. Prepare Project Management Plan 2. Prepare Progress Reports 3. Prepare Invoices
and Billings B. Coordination I. Coordinate/Administer the Project 2. Prepare and Update Schedule 3. Manage Subconsultants 4. Implement Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program 5. Prepare
for and Attend Town Council or other Town Meetings (3 total) 6. Prepare for and run internal project coordination meetings (8 total) 7. Prepare for and attend project meetings with Addison
Public Works (8 total) 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE DRS will provide the construction
administration services as it relates to the Arapaho Road Bridge design services under Work Order No. 001 and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of an elevated
four-lane roadway with sidewalk located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW) from approximate Station 40+67 to approximate Station 70+28. DRS shan provide construction
phase services for a steel arch bridge over Midway Road, with prestressed concrete beam approach and any landscaping, hardseaping, sidewalks, lighting & illumination, and traffic control
for the areas under and immediately adjacent to the bridge and retained wall portion of Arapaho Road for which DRS provided design services. DRS will attend the pre-bid and pre-construction
meetings, review bridge bid tabs, respond to the contractor's or Town's request for information (RFls), review shop drawings, and review the Contractor's submittals as related to the
design services performed by DRS under a separate agreement. All ROW documentation and plans, engineering design, survey, geotechnical services, permitting, construction inspection and
preparation of construction record drawings are outside the scope of this agreement and will be performed by others or under a separate agreement. 
Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS for Construction Administration Services TASK I -URBAN DESIGN 1. Respond to contractor's RFl's 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Review and approve
subcontractor submittals as related to landscape and hardscape. TASK II -ENGINEERING A.. Civil Site Works 1. Respond to contractor's RFI's 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Review and approve
Contractor submittals as related to traffic control. B. Bridges 1. Respond to contractor's RFI's (30 total) 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Review bridge bid tabulations 4. Attand kick·offmeeting
with the Town, the Town's Consultant, and the General Contractor. 5. Review bridge contractor submittals for compliance with the contract documents (10 total). • Concrete mix design
(4 total) • Prestressed beam strand jacking stress reports (64 beams) • Prestressed beam redesign calculations (3 total) • Arch erection method statement • Arch hanger stressing reports
6. Review bridge contractor shop/fubrication drawings for compliance with contract documents (90 total). • Foundations layouts and shaft details • Abutment formwork, details and bar
schedules • Bents formwork, details and bar schedules • Thrust block formwork, details aud har schedules • Deck slab plan and bar schedules • Miscellaneous superstructure details (SIP
forms, PIS deck panels, screed elevations, expansion joints, lighting supports) • Diaphragm details and bar schedules • Closure ponr details and bar schedules • Suspension hanger details
and connections • Steel arch details • Arch camber details • Bearing details • Drainage details • Railing details • Stinger details • Approach slab plan and bar schedule • Erection sequencing
• Prestressed beam fabrication drawings (64 beams) C. Electrical Engineering I. Respond to contractor's RFI's 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Review and approve contractor submittals as related
to lighting details. ,. 
TASK m -ARCIDTECTURAL I. Respond to contractor's RFl's 2. Review and approve contractor submittals as related to architectural details. 3. Observe site mock-ups. TASK IV -Lighting Design
I. Respond to contractor's RFl's 2. Prepare one addenda 3. Review and approve contractor submittals as related to lighting details. 4. Observe the installation oflighting equipment included
in the lighting designer's final recommendations at the job site (one trip to Addison). 5. Focusing the lighting equipment and program control decices(s). T ASK V -NOISE STUDY (No CA
Scope) TASK VI -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoiees 1. Prepare Progress Reports 2. Prepare Invoices and Billings B. Coordination I. Coordinate one addenda 2. Attend pre·bid, pre-construction
and progress meetings with the Town, the Town's Consultant, and the General Contractor (4 total). 3. Coordinate responses, reviews and approval ofbridge hid tabs, Contractor RFls, submittals
and shop drawings. 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 003 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR MIDWAY ROAD FROM BELT LINE TO LINDBERG DRS will
provide the engIneering, urban design, and lighting design services including plans, specifications and estimates as it relates to Midway Road from approximately Belt Line Road to approximately
Lindberg Road and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of landscaping, hardscaping, and lighting & illumination along Midway Road to be consistent with the
urban design and architectural features of the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road. DRS will prepare and submit technical memorandums, preliminary plans and preliminary construction cost
estimates at the end of the Design Development phase for the Town's review. After resolution of comments and selection of alternatives provided, DRS will provide all final detail plans,
specifications, and estimates as previously described, to be included into one final construction package. DRS will coordinate with the Town of Addison and/or the Town's Consultant for
all interface design issues as well as coordinate the format of construction plans, specification and estimate into a complete stand-alone construction package. The Town of Addison will
provide to DRS all available Midway Road geometrics, including but not limited to electronic files for horizontal alignment, vertical profile, typical section, topography survey, field
survey, and utility information. The Town will provide all landscape ordinances and guidelines as well as provide a copy of the Town's Consultant's schematic landscape rnasterplan and
the streetscape design development package. All ROW documentation and plans, Midway Road geometrics, survey, irrigation design for landscaping, permitting, construction administration,
construction inspection, and record drawings are outside the scope of this agreement and will be performed by others or are covered in a separate work order. 
Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS For Midway Road from Beltline to Lindberg TASK I -URBAN DESIGN A. Design Development 1. Inventory and Analysis ofInfluence Area • Review existing
plans • Identify prevailing patterns • Analyze project needs based On above • Develop urban design principles for project • Prepare technical memo of understanding ofexisting plans 3,
Develop 2 scenarios for the influence area (up to Y, mile) • Integration into existing urban design • Enhancement ofconnections to existing nearby areas (Belt Line Road, Arepaho b:ikelbike
trail) • Develop designs and plans that integrate with existing plans • Prepare plan & perspective views with typical sections of influence area 4, Develop final preliminary concept
• IdentifY a fmal preliminary concept to go forward into final design, • Prepare support drawings for final concept B. Final Design 1, Design development ofhardscape (surfaces, railings,
etc.) 2, Create Final Landscape Plan • IdentifY plants to be removed or relocated • Identify appropriate plant pallets • Design planting plan • Create plant list • Define maintenance
requirements • Urban dcsign and landscape construction documents for the project area TASK II -Engineering A. Design Development l. Electrical • Develop a load study for portion of Midway
Road • Prepare a preliminary cost cstimate B. Final PS&E 1. General • Title Sheet • Index ofSheets • General Notes • Summary of Quantities • Removal Plan • QAlQC • Coordination 2. Electrical
• Finalize a load study for each electrical service source. • Prepare Lighting Calculations • Illumination Layout (2 sheets along Midway) • Electric Service I Pole Summary • Conduit
Runs I Contents • Insert Latest Town or TxDOT Standards • Quantity Summary • Develop Final Cost Estimate (Using Estimator) 
• Prepare Construction Scope ofWork • QA ON 95% PLANS • Update Drawings per City Review TASK HI -Lighting Design A. Design Development I. Develop lighting concepts for Midway Road in
the blocks immediately north and south ofArapaho. B. Final Design L Final details offixtures and mounting for roadway lighting. 2. Provide control concept diagrams and other information
suitable for use by electrical engineer describing control intent. TASK IV -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices I. Prepare Progress Reports 3. Prepare Invoices and Billings B.
Coordination L Coordinate/Administer the Project 2. Prepare and Update Schedule 3. Manage Subconsultants 4. Implement Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program 5. Prepare for and attend
project meetings with Addison Public Works (3 total) 
DRS URS URS Cliff R. Hafl, PE Project Manager URS Corporation PrestonwOOd Tower 5151 BeltHne Road, Suite 700 Dallas, TX 752_ 􀁾􀀧􀀱􀀠 Tel: 972.980.4961 Fax: 972.991.7665 clltChatl@ufscorp,com
Paulette M. Vander Kamp, Ell Civil" Highway Engineer URS Corporation 4100 Amon Carter Boule ....ard Suite 108 Fort Worth, TX 76155-2600 Tel: 817.545,0891 Direct: 817.359.6678 Fax: 817.545.0534
paulette_vander kamp@urscorp.com David C. Johnston, PE Manager of Surface Transportation URS Corporation Graystone Centre 3010 LEU freeway, Suite 1320 Dallas, TX 75234 Tel; 972.406.6950
Direct: 972.406.6956 Fax: 972.406.6951 davidjohnston @utscorp.com 
URS JW1e 6, 2002 Mr. James C. Pierce, Jr., PE Assistant Public Works Director 1680I Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase
11-Design Development and Final Plans, Specifications and Estimate Draft Scope of Services Dear Mr. Pierce: Enclosed please find a draft copy of the Scope of Services for Phase n ofthe
referenced project for your review. We would like to discuss this scope with you and perhaps your Consultant (HNTB) to ensure that there is no overlap ofservices within the draft scope
before we finalize our fee proposal. We can be available any time next week that is convenient for you 1'i ,,; 􀁾􀁰􀀠 􀀢􀁾􀁾􀁃􀁩􀁾􀀢􀀭 :';􀀨􀀬􀀮􀁜􀀬􀀮􀁲􀀯􀀫􀁾􀀤􀁜􀁬􀁍􀀧􀁬􀁊􀁥􀀠 •• 13.
􀀷􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀠fI ""LL'_ We have also examined the construction costs in a very preliInifary manner for the items detailed in our scope and based on the discussions in our May 28 meetin .
As previously advised, we believe the construction cost ofthe bridge structure will be approximatel $4,000,000 The construction costs for the other items such as; landscaping 4-+-",:;:
and hardscaping along Arapaho and Midway Roads, retaining walls, grading and parking lot pavement W1der the bridge, parking lot drainage, parking lot lighting, Midway Road lighting,
etc., we believe could be an additional 7 "'-f l ..L.I,;)v_ 􀁾􀀲􀀠500,000 to $3,OOO,O.Q,0. Additionally, standard estimating practice would apply a contingency factor to an estimate
ofthis preliminary nature. This project differs from a typical roadway project given the importance and scope ofaesthetics, lighting, urban design and landscaping as well as the W1ique
characteristics of the bridge structure. In addition, we are tasked with developing multiple concepts for some areas of lighting, landscaping and architectural details. While a typical
project may consider 10% to 12% of the construction cost as a benchmark for an appropriate design fee, the uniqueness of this project may preclude such typical "rules ..􀁯􀁦􀀭􀁴􀁨􀁵􀁭􀁾􀀢􀀮􀀠
(l... pty(<r f f'''SSt j34!? 4/... (<-UP'V Foee) We look forward to discussing our Scope ofServices with you and finalizing our fee proposal for your approval. Sincerely, URS Corporation
: : ¥(l/-'/CliffR. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Prestonwood Tower 5.15.1 Beltllne Road, Suite 700 Dallas. TX 75254 Tel: 972.980.4961 Fax: 972.991.7665 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 002 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES PHASE II -DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND FINAL PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES fte> E:W\e11£' [ 1!e>f!1..I,v
'91 f:<.. 􀁊􀀧􀂫􀀧􀁡􀀵􀁾􀀠 URS will provide the engineering, chitectural, urban design and lighting design services 􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁵􀁤􀁩􀁾􀀠 plans, specifications and 􀁥􀁳􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁳􀀠 s it
relates to Arapaho Road from approximate Station 40+67 to approximate Station 70+28 and as rovided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of an elevated four-lane roadway
with sldewal located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW). URS shall prepare plans, etal s and compute quantities for a steel arch bridge over Midway Road, with prestressed
concrete beam approach spans and mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls. URS will also prepare .@ls, details and ute quantities for any grading, paving, landscaping, hardscaping,
sidewalks, king areas inage, lighting & illumination, pavement 􀁾􀀠 markings, traffic control, and storm water po lution prevention pans or the areas un er and 􀀧􀁃􀀢􀁉􀀧􀁾􀀨􀀭􀀻􀀻􀀺􀀻􀀠!f
. immediately adjacent to the bridge and retained wall portion of Arapaho Road with the exception of 􀁰􀁥􀁾􀁾I Jl those portions to be prepared by the Town of Addison's Consultant. Additionally,
URS will prepare plans, details and compute quantities for landscaping, hardscaping, and lighting & illumination along A j2.<. ...e Midw.!l:l:' Road from 􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁬􀁹 Belt Line Road
to approximately Lindberg Roa.4. URS will prepare D.I'::' 􀀼􀁖􀀱􀀱􀀧􀁦􀁉􀁾􀁵􀁢􀁭􀁩􀁴 technical memorandums, preliminary plans and preliminary construction cost estimates at 71'/f5 !
the end of the Design Development phase for the Town's review. After resolution of conJrnents and selection of alternatives provided, URS will provide all final detail plans, specifications,
and estimates as previously described, to be included into one final construction package prepared by the Town's Consultant. URS will coordinate with the Town ofAddison andlor the Town's
Consultant for all interface design issues as well as coordinate the fonnat and consolidation of construction plans, specification and estimate into one final construction package. URS
will coordinate with the Town andlor the Town's '1l'IS £,wl4 (Consultant for revising the horizontal alignment and vertical profile ofArapaho Road to accommodate p.(,f>t.CT 􀁾􀀠l the
proposed bridge structure. URS will coordinate with the Town and/or the Town's Consultant for i!vc,IV. 􀀨􀀭􀁣􀀻􀁾􀁯􀀡􀀠 the revised alignment and construction sequencing of the proposed
box-culvert under Arapaho Road 􀁾􀁾 11'1"'1 vf... as well as surface and bridge drainage tie-ins. URS will coordinate with the Town andlor the Town's l?e 􀁾 Consultant for all geotechnical
infonnation required for the foundation design for the bridge and 􀁾􀀠 retaining walls. The Town of Addison will provide to URS all available Arapaho Road geometries, including but not
limited to electronic files for horizontal alignment, vertical profile, topography survey, field survey, and utility information. The Town will also provide boring logs, stability analysis,
settlement analysis, soil parameters and foundation design recommendations required for the bridge and retaining wall foundation designs. The Town of Addison will provide to URS a field
location 􀁳􀁾􀁹 ofthe existing .? 6O-in. diameter water main, locating the water main precisely, both vertically and honzontally, along ( the 􀁰􀁲􀁾􀁥􀁣􀁴􀀠limits and specifically in
the vicinity of the arch-bridge's main foundations. All ROW documentation and plans, Arapaho Road geometries and roadway 􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁩􀁾􀁥􀁾􀀷􀀱􀀠 survey, and geotechnical engineering are
outside the scope ofthis agreement and will be perfonned by!!.::. ( others. . 􀁾􀀠 ' 1*> 􀁾II) ffieS,e."-'􀁾 􀀬􀁾􀀢 􀁜􀁾...""", . f¥" .F 1f& 1'1\',*>I Wv' 􀁾􀁹􀀠 􀁖􀁾􀀠
Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS TASKI-URBAN DESIGN A. Design Development I. Inventory and Analysis of Project Area and Influence Area o Review existing plans .,Jd1"! . o IdentifY
prevailing patterns 􀁶􀁾􀁾1, • Analyze project needs based on above \ I' ('{J .Q Develop urban design principles for project /' • Prepare technical memo of understanding ofexisting plans
. 2. Develop two scenarios for the primary project area (limits ofproject) that incorporate the design ( principles in item nwnbet 1. -\: 04'" kJ "(' Landscape t. 􀁄􀁾􀀡􀁕􀀯􀁉􀀬􀀮􀀯􀀧􀁾􀀠"'(
􀁾 -Lvf'\O 􀁾 --I 7 "f'{"e-•• Parking and parking access -!'lSI /lie" (1" • 􂀢􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁥􀁾􀁦􀁲􀀺􀁬􀁯􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀬􀀠adjustment, elimination, or addition (utility poles, signage, medians,
sidewalk, etc.) • Prepare plan & elevation with typical sections ofprimary project area 3. Develop 2 scenarios for the influence area (up to V. mile) • Integration into existing urban
design 􀁾􀀠 • Enhancement of connections to existing nearby areas (Belt Line Road, Arapaho hlkelbike trail) -? • Develop designs and plans that integrate with existing plans ? • Prepare
plan & perspective views with typical sections ofinfluence area 4. Develop final prelimiuary concept Iv' M,o<:tf • IdentifY a final prelimiuary concept to go forward into final design.
!-\? 􀁾􀀩􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁥􀀠 Prepare support drawings for final concept a,:> 1 5. Prepare for and attend meetings in Dallas to collect date and present options (2 total) 􀁾􀀮􀁌􀁩􀀧􀁰􀀠 B. Final
Design 􀁾􀀠 pteJ!;5 tv-. 1. Project Area JZ.<{) 'Ie R'C􀁾􀀯􀀠 "/• Design development ofbards cape (surfaces, railings, etc.)·-􀁾􀀠 • Plant identification, planting plan, plant list,
maintenance requirements • Urban design and landscape construction documents for the project area 2. Influence Area W'4' 1'\/􀁉􀀧􀁾A • Draft report and graphics to integrate the project
area into its surroundings ..-ITt.."flV!'D'I • Final report document with supporting plan graphics. 3. Prepare for and attend meetings in -Dallas (1) TASK II -Engineering A. Civil Site
Works I. Design Development • Geometric Layout I Paving Plans • Quantities & Cost Estimate 2. Final Civil Design & PS&E • Title Sheet (By Town's Cousultant) • Index ofSbeets (By Town's
Consultant) • General Notes (By Town's Cousultant) • TypicalSections • Summary ofQuantities (By Town's Consultant) --• Removal Plan ( • 􀁾􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁣 Lay0.!!1--li(YT y, . • 􀀨􀁾 and Drainage
Plan/-T' '1 • Paving De . H-tvT t> • • Storm Sewer Computation Data • Drainage Area Map 
1 _ 􀁐􀀨􀁖􀁾 · l :rairulge Profiles 7 • Drainage Details I • ormWater Pollution Prevention Plan • Traffic Control Plan • Utility Adjustment Plan • Cross Sections • Roadway Lighting Plan
• Miscellaneous Roadway Details • Striping and Marking Plan 1 1 • Retaining Wall Layouts (2 walls -2120' &; 710') ! . • Retaining Wall Typical Sections • Retaining Wall Miscellaneous
&; Architectural Details • Compile, Verify &; Modify TxDOT Standard Drawings • QAlQC • Cost Estimate • Special Provisions &; Specifications • Coordination with Town's Consultants B.
Bridges 1. Preliminary Bridge Design • Preliminary Bridge Layout (Finalize Bridge Location) • Typical Section • Refine Arch Shape • Size Thrust Block &; Refine Shape f • Size Fouodation
,Prec f/1f. /'C1. • Size Diaphragms • Size Traffic Reiling Members '/tv • Investigate Culvert Layout 􀁾􀀮 􀁾􀀠I • Quantities and Cost Estimate {I<!I 􀁲􀁾. ...􀁾Design, Plans, Specifications
and Estimate • Final Bridge Layout • Quantities and Bearing Seats • Foundation Layout • Drilled Drilled Shaft Details • Abutment Plan &; Elevation • Abutment Details • Bent Plan &; Elevation
• Bent Details • Thrust Block Plan &; Elevation • Thrust Block Details • Prestressed Concrete Beam Uult -Deck Plan • Prestressed Concrete Beam Uult -Deck Sections • Miscellaneous Superstructure
Details (drains, lighting) • Diaphragm Details • Closure Pour Details • Snspension Hanger Details • Steel Arch Design and Details • Bearing Details • Drainage Details • Railing Details
• Stinger Design &; Details • Approach Slab Details • Erection Sequencing • Prestressed Beam Tables • Compile, Verify &; MoWfy TxDOT Standard Drawings • QAlQC " 
• Coordination with Town's Consultants • Bridge Total Quantities & Cost Estimate • Bridge Special Provisions & Specifications C. Electrical Engineering I. Design Development • Develop
a load study for Arapaho Road, bridge, paridng and portion ofMidway Road • Prepare a preliminary cost estimate 2. Final PS&E • Finalize a loadstudy for each electrical service source. • Prepare Lighting Calculations 1 • Illumination Layout (4500', 1200'/sht x 2 Elevations + 2 Midway*) ./' , • Electric Service I Pole Summary
• Condo;t Runs I Contents • Insert Lighting Consultant Special Details .., • Insert Latest Town or TxDOT Standards ..... , • Quantity Summary • Develop Fin.l Cost Estimate (Using Estimator)
• Prepare Construction Scope ofWork • QA ON 90% PLANS • Update Drawings per City Review 1 TASK ill -ARCHITECTURAL A. Design Development 1. Architectural Studies & Details • Develop three
rail options addressing the issues tion from. the vehicular traffic and the architectural options to realize the propose ,triangular pattern, ? • Coordinate with the engineering team
tu refine lZe ofthe steel. Prnduce drawings representing viable options • Explore options for the final material and form of the thrust block. Provide sketch options initially followed
by CADD drawings ofpreferred scheme. • Develop detailed options and refine panel schemes for precast coocrete retaining walls .t approaches. • Study and Present Options for center pier
sopport shape. • Explore and refine altern.te "stinger" designs incorporating lighting as the primary feature. • Attend Team Meetings and Conference Calls tu coordinate the architectural
aspects ofthe design with structural and lighting Consultants. 2. Computer Animation • Minor updates tu existing video animation for iandacaping, paridng, etc. • Prodoce video animation
in DVD and VHS tape furmat B. Final Design I. Coordination 2. Review 3. Specifications TASK IV -Lighting Design A. Design Development 1. Develop two alternatives fur lighting ohtingers.
2. Research and mock-up options for color changing 00 existing Addison sculpture (to detennine range of possibilities for color changing on bridge structure). 3. Develop lighting concepts
fur Midway Road in the blocks immediately norfu and south ofArapaho. 4. Develop two alternatives for lighting ofbicycle!pedestrian path. 5. Develop two alternatives for lighting ofroadway.
6. Develop mounting concepts fur bridge structure lighting. 7. Deve!qp two alternatives for lighting ofoutboard railings. 
8. Develop two alternatives for lighting of underside ofhridge, roadway under bridge and any adjacent parking areas under bridge. B. Final Design I. Final details for lighting of stingers.
2. Final details of fixtures and mounting for bridge structure illumination. 3. Final details offixtures and mounting for roadway lighting. 4. Final details offixtures and mounting for
bicycle/pedestrian pathway lighting. S. Final details offixtures and mounting for outboard railing illumination. 6. Final details offixtures and mounting for lighting of underside of
bridge, roadway under bridge and any adjacent parking areas under bridge. 7. Provide control concept diagearns and other information suitable for use by electrical engineer descnbing
control intent. TASK V -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices 1. Prepare Project Management Plan 2. Prepare Progress Reports 3. Prepare Iovuices and Billings B. Coordination 1.
Coordinate/Administer the Project 2. Prepare and Update Schedule 3. Manage Subcousultants 4. Implement Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program 5. Prepare for and Attend Town Council
or other Town Meetings (3 total) 6. Prepare for and run internal project coordination meetings (8 total) 7. Prepare for and attend project meetings with Addison Public Works (8 total)

Trooper Smith, E.I.T. WaterlWaslewater FREIliSE-NICIfOLS Freese and Nicnols. Inc, 1701 North M.rket Street· Suite 500 LB 51 • O.I1.s, Texas 75202 214-920-2500' Fax 214-920-2565' Em.il
tws@t".se,com 􀁾􀀠 (/-lANK 􀁾 fOR. 'PRt>VllJW{, 111£ fA} II/{ --III£. Abbr17f>/JAL IJVFoJUIIA"Tif>AJ FOe.. (7-1£ 
URS May 7, 2002 Mr. James C. Pierce, Jr., PE Assistant Public Works Director Town ofAddison 1680 I Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway
Road Phase I -Concept Refinement Professional Services Agreement Dear Mr. Pierce: As we discussed, please find enclosed two signed copies of the Agreement for Professional Services for
the Arapaho Road Bridge at Mid\\'!\y Road project. This Agreement includes the Time and Materials Work Order Number 001 and Attachment A Scope of Services, Attachment B Estimated Schedules,
Attachment C Not-toExceed Fee, and Attachment D Schedule of Fees. Due to the uncertainty in the level of effort required and the deliverables expected for the concept refinement phase,
this work order only covers the attendance of the May 14,2002 Town Council meeting by the local URS Team members and a one day design charette by all ofthe URS Team members. A second
work order will need to be approved to cover the remaining tasks for the concept refinement phase upon agreement of the Scope of Services. It should be noted that during the concept
refinement phase, fmn Principals, Partners or Senior Professionals perform the bulk of the work. However, as the work progresses into final design, project professionals and technicians
will have a greater role in the project. Please sign each copy of the Agreement for Professional Services and the Time and Material Work Order No. 001 and return one copy with the original
signatures. We look for\\'!lrd to working with you on this exciting project. Sincerely, 􀁾􀀻􀁪􀀮􀁦 CliffR. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Prestonwood Tower 5151 Beltfine
Road, Suite 700 Dallas, TX 75254 Tel: 972.980.4961 Fax: 972.991.7665 
Public Works I Engineering 16801 Westgrove' P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texa, 75001 Telephone: (972) 450·2871 • Fox: (972) 450·2837 DATE 5-21.. CYJIJOB NO. ATTENTION RE. (1/1 n VJA i 􀁾􀀨
If/,; -Jb " I !7 GENTLEMAN: WE ARE SENDING YOU (Attached o Under separate cover via ______ the following items: o Shop Drawings 0 Prints o Plans 0 Samples 0 Specifications o Copy of
letter o Change order 0 _________________________ COPIFS DATE NO. DESCRIPTION I v I I /J i 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭I THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: o For approval 0 Approved as submitted [] Resubmit ____ copies for approval rp{or your use 0 Approved as noted o Submit copies
for distribution o As requested 0 Returned for corrections [] Return corrected prints [] For review and comment [] ___________________________ o FOR BIDS DUE __________ 19,____ o PRINTS
RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS ________________________________________________________________ SIGNED: 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁙􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁌􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 If enclosures are not as noted,
please n 
ADDIsoN ® Public Works I Engineering 16801 Westgrove' P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001 Telephone: (972) 450·2871 • Fox: (972) 450·2837 I DATE '" 5"-1..'1..-()'J-IJ08NO, ATTENTION ,..,
RE' (.1/1,1/1/1 j....£I¥?:1'",J. 1--: A A ,)& J. I 􀁭􀀮􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀠 I U,,; "J-·;{II /, 'f • Au, , I IJ , • , GENTLEMAN: WE ARE SENDING YOU KAttached o Under separate cover via 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁟the
following items: o Shop Drawings 0 Prints o Plans 0 Samples 0 Specifications o Copy of letter 0 Change order D______.____________􀁾_____ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION J /ltfftlJhh..I.
T-hll IJut/A ";' 􀁾􀁪􀀠MAAr7//I. I,,,,,""" 7/UIgf, LId. 7' r-v/J I' J A"".;/.. P1./;M iJ.M1 􀁾􀁁􀁁􀀺􀁹􀀯􀀭􀀮􀀠 /J I IJ , THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: o For approval 0 Approved
as submitted o Resubmit 􀁾_____ copies for approval MFor your use 0 Approved as noted o Submit copies for distribution o As requested 0 Returned for corrections o Return corrected prints
o For review and comment D _____􀁾􀁟􀁾___􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾___􀁾􀁾􀀬__􀁾___􀁾__ o FOR BIDS DUE ____________ 19,____ o PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS __________________________________________________
_________ I I I If i . COPYTO _________________________________ SIGNED: 􀀫􀀧􀀭􀁻􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀲􀀺􀁌􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 If enclosures are not as noted, please n us at once. I 
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (UAgreement") This Agreement between Town of Addison , ("Clienr') and URS Corporation ("URS"), a Nevada corporation; Prestonwood Tower, 5151 Beltline
Road, Suite 700 75254; 9721980-4961 C'URS"), is effective as of May 14, 2002 . The parties agree as follows: It is the expressed intent of the parties that this Agreement shall be made
available to the subsidiaries and affiliated companies of URS. For the purposes of this Agreement, as it applies to each Work Order, the term "URS" shall mean either, URS Corporation,
or the affiliated company identified In the Work Order. The applicable Work Order shall clearly identify the legal name of the affiliate or subsidiary accepting the Work Order. ARTICLE
I -Work Orders. The Scope of Services ("Services"), the Time Schedule and the Charges are to be set forth in a written Work Order to this Agreement. The terms and conditions of this
Agreement shall apply to each Work Order, except to the extent expressly modified by the Work Order. Order. Where charges are "not to exceed" a specified sum, URS shall notify Client
before such sum is exceeded and shall not continue to provide the Services beyond such sum unless Client authorizes an increase in the sum. If a "not to exceed" sum is broken down into
budgets for specific tasks, the task budget may be exceeded without Client authorization as long as the total sum is not exceeded. Changes in conditions, including, without limitation,
changes in laws or regulations occurring after the budget is established or other circumstances beyond URS control shall be a basis for equitable adjustments in the budget and schedule.
ARTICLE II -Payment. Unless otherwise stated in an Work Order, payment shall be on a time and materials basis under the Schedule of Fees and Charges in effect when the Services are performed.
Client shall pay undisputed portions of each progress invoice within thirty (30) days of the date of the invoice. If payment is not maintained on a thirty (30) day current basis, URS
may suspend further performance until payments are current. Client shell notify URS of any disputed amount within fifteen (15) days from date of the invoice, give reasons for the objection,
and promptly pay the undisputed amount. Client shall pay an additional charge of one and one-half percent (1)4%) per month or the maximum percentage allowed by law, whichever is the
lesser, for any past due amount. In the event of a legal action for invoice amounts not paid, attorneys' fees, court costs, and other related expenses shall be paid to the prevailing
party. ARTICLE III -Professional Responsibility. URS is obligated to comply with applicable standards of professional care in the performance of the Services. Client recognizes that
opinions relating to environmental, geologic, and geotechnical conditions are based on limited data and that actual conditions may vary from those encountered at the times and locations
where the data are obtained, despite the use of due professional care. ARTICLE IV -Responsibilitv for Others. Others. URS shall be responsible to Client for URS Services and the services
of URS subcontractors. URS shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of other parties engaged by Client nor for their construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or
procedures, or their health and safety precautions and programs. ARTICLE V • Risk Allocation. The liability of URS, its employees, agents and subcontractors (referred to collectively
in this Article as 'URS"), for Client's claims of loss, injury, death, damage, or expense, including, without limitation, Client's claims of contribution and indemnification, express
or implied, with respect to third party claims relating to services rendered or obligations imposed under this Agreement, including all Work Orders, shall not exceed in the aggregate:
(1) The total sum of $250,000 for claims arising out of professional negligence, including errors, omissions, or other professional acts, and including unintentional breach of contract;
and any actual or potential potential environmental pollution or contamination, including, without limitation, any actual or threatened release of toxic, irritant, pollutant, or waste
gases, liquids, or solid materials, or failure to detect or properly evaluate the presence of such substances, except to the extent such release, threatened release, or failure to detect
or evaluate is caused by the willful misconduct of URS; or PSA·1.DOC 19-Mar·02 • 1 
(2) The total sum of $1,000,000 for claims arising out of negligence, breach of contract, or other causes for which URS has any legal liability, other than as limited by (1) above. ARTICLE
VI • Insurance. URS agrees to maintain during the performance of the Services: (1) statutory Workers' Compensation coverage; (2) Employer's Liability; (3) General Liability; and (4)
Automobile Liability insurance coverage each in the sum of $1,000,000. ARTICLE VII • Consequential Damages. Neither Party shall be liable to the other for consequential damages, including,
without limitation, loss of use or loss of profits, incurred by one another or their subsidiaries or successors, regardless of whether such damages are caused by breach of contract,
willful misconduct, negligent act or omission, or other wrongful act of either of them. ARTICLE VIII • Client Responsibility. Client shall: (1) provide URS, in writing, all information
relating to Client's requirements for the project; (2) correctly identity to URS, the location of subsurface structures, such as pipes, tanks, cables and utilities; (3) notity URS of
any potential hazardous substances or other health and safety hazard or condition known to Client existing on or near the project site; (4) give URS prompt written notice of any suspected
deficiency in the Services; and (5) with reasonable promptness, provide required approvals and decisions. In the event that URS is requested by Client or is required by subpoena to produce
documents or give testimony in any action or proceeding to which Client is a party and URS is not a party, Client shall pay URS for any time and expenses required in connection therewith,
Including reasonable attomey's fees. Client shall reimburse URS for all taxes, duties and levies such as sales, Use, Value Added Taxes, Deemed Profits Taxes, and other similar taxes
which are added to or deducted from the value of URS Services. For the purpose of this Article such taxes shall not Include taxes Imposed on URS net income, and employer or employee
payroll taxes levied by any United States taxing authority, or the taxing authorities of the countries or any agency or subdivision thereof in which URS subsidiaries, affiliates, or
diVisions are permanently domiciled. It is agreed and understood that these net income, employer or employee payroll taxes are included in the unit prices or lump sum to be paid URS
under the respective Work Order. ARTICLE IX -Force Majeure. An event of "Force Majeure" occurs when an event beyond the control of the Party claiming Force Majeure prevents such Party
from fulfilling its obligations. An event ofForce Majeure includes, without limitation, acts of God (including fioods, hurricanes and other adverse weather), war, riot, civil disorder,
acts of terrorism, disease, epidemic, strikes and labor disputes, actions or inactions of government or other authorities, law enforcement actions, curfews, closure of transportation
systems or other . unusual travel difficulties, or inability to provide a safe working environment for employees. employees. In the event of Force Majeure, the obligations of URS to
perform the Services shall be suspended for the duration of the event of Force Majeure. In such event. URS shall be equitably compensated for time expended and expenses incurred during
the event of Force Majeure and the schedule shall be extended by a like number of days as the event of Force Majeure. If Services are suspended for thirty (30) days or more. URS may.
in its sole discretion. upon 5 days prior written notice. terminate this Agreement or the affected Work Order, or both. In the case of such termination. in addition to the compensation
and time extension set forth above, URS shall be compensated for all reasonable termination expenses. ARTICLE X • Right of Entry. Client grants to URS. and, if the project site Is not
owned by Giient, warrants that permission has been granted for. a right of entry from time to time by URS, its employees, agents and subcontractors, upon the project site for the purpose
of providing the Services. Client recognizes that the use of Investigative equipment and practiCes may unavoidably alter the existing site conditions and affect the environment in the
area being studied, despite the use of reasonable care. ARTICLE XI -Documents. Provided that URS has been paid for the Services. Client shall have the right to use the documents. maps,
photographs, drawings and specifications resulting from URS efforts on the project. Reuse of any such materials by Client on any extension of this project or any other project without
the written authorization of URS shall be at Clienfs sole risk. URS shall have the right to retain copies of all such materials. URS ratains the right of ownership with respect to any
patentable concepts or copyrightable materials arising from its Services. PSA-1.DOC 19-Mar-02 -2
ARTICLE XII-Termination. Client may terminate all or any portion of the Services for convenience, at its option, by sending a written Notice to URS. Either party can terminate this Agreement
or a Work Order for cause if the other commits a material, uncured breach of this Agreement or becomes insolvent. Termination for cause shall be effective twenty (20) days after receipt
of a Notice of Termination, unless a later date is specified in the Notice. The Notice of Termination for cause shall contain specific reasons for termination and both parties shall
cooperate in good faith to cure the causes for termination stated in the Notice. Termination shall not be effective if reasonable action to cure the breech has been taken before the
effective date of the termination. Client shall pay URS upon Invoice for Services performed and charges incurred prior to termination, plus reasonable termination charges. In the event
of termination for cause, the parties shall have their remedies at law as to any other rights and obligations between them, subject to the other terms and conditions of this Agreement.
ARTICLE XIII -No Third Party Rights. This Agreement shall not create any rights or benefits to parties other than Client and URS. No third party shall have the right to rely on URS opinions
rendered in connection with the Services without the written consent of URS and the third party's agreement to be bound to the same conditions and limitations as Client. ARTICLE XIV
-Assignments. Neither party to this Agreement shall assign its duties and obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. ARTICLE XV -Hazardous Substances.
All nonhazardous samples and by-products from sampling processes in connection with the Services shall be disposed of by URS in accordance with applicable law; provided, however, that
any and all such materials, including wastes, that cannot be introduced back into the environment under existing law without additional treatment, and all hazardous wastes, radioactive
wastes, or hazardous substances ("Hazardous Substances") related to the Services, shall be packaged in accordance with the applicable law by URS and turned over to Client for appropriate
disposal. URS shall not arrange or otherwise dispose of Hazardous Substances under this Agreement. URS, at Client's request, may assist Client in identifying appropriate alternatives
for off-site treatment, storage or disposal of the Hazardous Substances, but URS shall not make any independent determination relating to the selection of a treatment. storage. or disposal
facility nor subcontract such activities through transporters or others. Client shall sign all necessary manifests for the disposal of Hazardous Substances. If Client requires: (1) URS
agents or employees to sign such manifests; or (2) URS to hire, for Client, the Hazardous Substances transportation, treatment. or disposal contractor, then for these two purposes, URS
shall be considered to act as Clienfs agent so that URS will not be considered to be a generator, transporter, or disposer of such substances or considered to be the arranger for disposal
of Hazardous Substances, and Client shall indemnify URS against any claim or loss resulting from such signing. ARTICLE XVI • Venue. In the event of any dispute between the parties to
this Agreement. the venue for the dispute resolution shall be any state or federal court in the United States having jurisdiction over the parties. The foregoing notwithstanding. if
the project is located outside the United States, the laws of the State of California shall govem and in such event. any dispute under the Agreement not resolved amicably shall be resolved
under the binding rules of the American Arbitration ASSOCiation. ARTICLE XVII -Integrated Writing and Enforceability. This Agreement constitutes the final and complete repository of
the agreements between Client and URS relating to the Services and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous communications, representations. or agreements. whether oral or written. Modifications
of this Agreement shall not be binding unless made in writing and signed by an Authorized Representative of each party. The provisions of this Agreement shall be enforced to the fullest
extent permitted by law. If any proviSion of this Agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable, the provision shall be construed and applied in a way that comes as close as possible
to expressing the intention of the parties with regard to the provisions and that saves the validity and enforceability of the provision. PSA·1.DOC 19-Mar-02 -3
THE PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE that there has been an opportunity to negotiate the terms and conditions of this Agreement and agree to be bound accordingly. CLIENT .-􀁾􀁻􀀻􀀩􀁣􀀮􀁵􀁄􀀠 Signature
􀁣􀁬􀁴􀁦􀁭􀁴􀁴􀁾􀁡􀁊􀁥􀁲􀀠 Emily Tayl()r,i",E.,1 Vice President Typed Namerl1ti Typed Namel1iUe oE; -'}...2._D'""f.....-May6,2002 Date of Signature . ------Date of Signature PSA-1.00C
19-Mar-02 -4
TIME AND MATERIALS WORK ORDER NO. ---'OI(l,Ou.1____ In accordance with the Agreement for Professional Services between Town of Addison ("Client"), and URS Corporation] ("URS"). a Nevada
corporation, dated April 14. 2002 • this Work Order describes the Services, Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS Services on the Project known as: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD
Client Authorized Representative: Address: __--'P:-'u""b"'lic.,.W.uQrks Department. P.O. Box 9010 Addison. TX 75001·9010 Telephone No.: __􀀭􀀢􀀹􀀢􀀬􀀷􀀲􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀴􀀵􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁏􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀮􀀲􀀽􀀾􀀸􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀷�
�􀀬􀀭􀀱_________________ URS Authorized Representative: Emily Taylor, P.E. Address: Prestonwood Tower. 5151 Beltline Road. Suite 700 Dallas. TX 75254 Telephone No.:__-"9""72"".""98"'O"'.4"'9"'6:.!.1_
________________ SERVICES. The Services shall be described in Attachment ""A",--_ to this Work Order. SCHEDULE. The Estimated Schedule shall be set forth in Attachment B to this Work
Order. Because of the uncertainties inherent in the Services, Schedules are estimated and are subject to revision unless otherwise specifically described herein. PAYMENT. The estimated
cost for these services are included in attachment L URS charges shall be on . a "time and materials" basis and shall be in accordance with the URS Schedule of Fees and Charges in effect
at the time the Services are performed. Payment provisions and the URS current Schedule of Fees and Charges are attached to this Work Order as Attachment .Jl... TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
The terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced above shall apply to this Work Order, except as expressly modified herein. ACCEPTANCE of the terms of this Work Order is acknowledged
by the following signatures of the Authorized Representatives. 􀁊􀁥􀀧􀁅􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠URS 􀁾􀁉􀁓􀀮􀀮􀀴􀀮􀀮􀀡􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁗􀁬􀁬􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁕􀁊􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁣􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀩􀀠 C1..u 'If 􀀮􀀺􀁊􀁲􀀮􀁌􀀮􀁁􀁾􀀠
Signalu", Signatu", J 􀁾􀀠 CIty tylCH-11l.!'lt'r EmUyTaylor.P.E./VicePresldent Typed Namef1iiQ;;;;t Typed Namef1i1le (?) S ..... 1 .... 0 'l-..l!'Iay 6, 6, 2002 Date of Signalure Date
of Signature PSA·1.DOC 19·Ma,·02 -I 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER 001 ATTACHMENT A URS CORPORATION SCOPE OF SERVICES PHASE I -CONCEPT REFINEMENT J. Update Powerpoint presentation and provide boards from
design competition for the Mayor's presentation to the Town CoWlCil. 2. Local URS Team members attend Town Council meeting on May 14, 2!J02, 7:30 p.m. 3. All URS Team members attend
design charette with Addison stakeholders. 
URS Corporation Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase I • Concept Refinement ATTACHMENT B Estimated Schedule Powerpolnt Presentation and Boards Council Meeting (May 14) loeslgn Charette
IReview the concept with Addison Stakeholders Council Meeting (June 25) • 14 May 24 (Tentative) ¢ 11 25 ¢ 
URS Corporation Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase I • Concept Refinement Work Order 001 ATTACHMENT C Not to Exceed Amounts URS Corporation (URS) Brandston Partnership. Inc (BPI)
Corgan Associates, Inc. (CAl) Tolal $13,090.00 $4,450.00 $2.260.00 $19,800.00 URS Description Principal Sr. Consultant Project Manager Senior Enl!ineer/Planner Estimated Fee Breakdown
Hours Rate 16 $ 185 14 $ 175 20 $ 142 16 $ 140 Labor $ 2,960 $ 2,450 $ 2,840 $ 2.240 Expenses' $ -$ 1.500 $ . $ 1.100 Subtotal 66 $10,490 $ 2.600 BPI Partner 12 $ 175 $ 2,100 $ 2,350
CAl Principal 14 $ 140 $ 1,960 $ 300 TOTAL • Expenses Include travel expenses with the exception of CAI's expense 10 update the archilectural boards. Total $ 2.960 $ 3,950 $ 2,840 $
3,340 $13.090 $ 4,450 $ 2,260 $ 19.800 
VRS CORPORATION ATTACHMENT D 2002 SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES TOWN OF ADDISON Engineering/Environmental & Consulting Services The following describes the basis for compensation for
,ernces performed during the fiscal year 2002 This Schedule of Fees and Charges will be adjusted annually on November 1 of each subsequent year to rellect merit and economic salary 􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁳􀁥􀁳
􀁾􀀠and changes in the expected. level and mode of operations fOI the new year. The new Schedule of Fees and Charges will apply to existing and new assignments. PERSONNEL CHARGES The
charge for all time required in the performance of the Scope of Services, including office, field and travel time, will be at the Unit Priced Hourly Rates set forth below for the labor
classifications indicated. Labor Classification Hourly Rate (S) Technical TypistiWord Processor" 55 Senior Technician* 80 Assistant Project EngineerlPlanner 78 Project EngineerIPlanner
100 Senior Project EngineerlPlanner 140 Project Manager 142 Senior Consulting Engineer 175 Principal Professional 185 Charges for contract personnel under DRS supervision and using URS
facilities will be made according to the hourly rate corresponding to their classification. When staff are performing project fieldwork, a minirnwn daily cbarge of4 hours will apply.
A maximum of eight (8) hours travel time per day will be charged for travel within the continental United States. When DRS staff appears as expert witnesses at court trials, arbitration
hearings, mediation and depositions, their time will be charged at $250.00 per hour. Overtime (hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day) by exempt personnel will be charged
at the ahove straight time hourly rate. Overtime by 􀁮􀁯􀁮􀀭􀁥􀁸􀁥􀁾􀁴􀀠 personnel (classifications identified with an asterisk ,,* ') will be charged at 1.3 times the above hourly rate.
Special project aecounting reporting and fmancial services, including submission of invoice support documentation, will be charged at the rate of a Technical TypistiWord Processor. OTHER
PROJECT CHARGES Subcontracts and Eguipment Rental Other direct costs (excluding sub consultants) incurred by URS wil! be charged at cost plus 10"10. Commonications The cost of cornmonications
for office telephone, telex, facsimile, postage, and incidental copying cosls will be cbarged at a flat rate of 2.5% of tntal gross labor charges. Computer Generated Plots There will
be a cbarge of $5.00 each for paper plot and $15.00 each for mylar plot generated by the CADD and GIS systems. Docwnent Reproduction In-house reproduction will be charged at $.1 0 a
page for black & white and $1.50 a page fur color for letter, legal, and 11 x 17 size copies. Other size document copying will be charged at $2.75 a page. Vehicles and MileageField vehicle. (pick-ups, vans, trucks, etc.) used On project assignments will be charged at $50.00 per day. The mileage charge for personal autos will be the then current mileage rate
established by the Internal Revenue Service. Specialized Eguipment The use of specia1ized URS equipment will be the fixed rental rates set forth in the Schedule of URS Specialized Equipment
Charges. Thisfee schedule contains confidential business information and is not to be copied or distributedfor any purpose other than the use intended in this contract or proposal. DRS
PMR.APAHO ROAD BRIDOEiPHASE l\DOCS\CONrRACf\FEE SCHEDULE 2002.DOCfee schedule 2OO2.doc 
i12i9ilSS5 T-003 P"ODliD03 F-159 May-O,-C, 04:42pm From-URI Corporation Facsimire "-' 􀀶􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁾􀀭 To: 􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀢􀀠:RG"\tc..G Firm: -r;."'11 e:JF &0'>""",.. Pup....... W"tC->'-$ Facsimile:
<!f 1 Z . I.f 5"0. 2 B "37 From: Date: . Page 1 of; " 3 Message: A􀁔􀀢􀀷􀀢􀀧􀁥􀁾􀁓􀁴􀀾􀀠 ,,. ,,...6 1t.J'''l''It.... -Pi;.AF-,' 􀁾􀁐􀀧􀀠 ruE' 􀁾􀁬􀁴􀀧􀀤􀁦􀁉􀁴􀀺􀁴􀀮􀀠􀀤􀀧􀁃􀁁􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀠
...r..u. Ii t..E"{%e-,!}F 􀁾􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀠 1$ ]:>/f!t!;>IIA6 c.. '( ie6't<);y 0 (,.J fflir'-t' 'ff!)<.:) I-IAO AN"n c: I 􀀬􀁾􀀭􀁲􀀺􀁩􀁓􀁏􀀠.' lle;7WEo 􀁾􀁖􀁉􀁅􀀢􀀢􀀠 Aw.o 1.S? ',. 'J>(
5CL!:>$S A 1"'" 'i"qt.1R (!..e?N rJ(!fi.1J I G"I-Ic..iii • Subject: A'" p..(I:.. J4;" I:;' N c.. --n+E1 "DIt or e P:>1l. 􀁔􀁈􀁾􀀠 1>65,t;,'" ('IlAI.C;7'7I.a , r'LfiilI\?E" N01'6 '(riA""
$i;v(ii'(.A(.. "1'64"'\ 􀁦􀀭􀁬􀀶􀁦􀁁􀁥􀀮􀀶􀁾􀁪􀀮􀀠 ,.U.., .... P.H<,. p:'tSB<-f'!, ;4t$ C1 A(l.6 !!.!:! A,,"/(..AI\(.& J1JQ'f i'o -2:'2:. ce: URS/Oames & Moore I COi'iFl!)['TI,o\f.{rr
.... (rnCE -----., Prestonwood Tower 'Tilt: 􀀻􀁬􀀧􀁉􀁲􀁯􀁮􀁬􀀱􀁾􀁣􀁩􀀼􀁬􀁦􀁜􀀠 􀁩􀁾􀀠dlis ;:';11": : 􀁾..;':i:'l:;L .', I) in:(.nd.::r, i ..􀁾􀁫􀁬􀂷􀀮􀂷􀀠flU t,h( 5151 6eltlille Road,
Suite 700 JI:l(.:d tecipl.:ilI VrL':.') 􀁜􀁲􀀺􀀧􀁾􀁉􀀩􀀺􀁪􀁜􀁉􀁻􀀬􀀻􀀠 . -: Ii:, 􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀧'. 􀁾􀀠f(.:-:i"'eO 􀀱􀀻􀁾􀀱􀁬􀀠􀁬􀀡􀁴􀁾􀀠1:'1 􀁾􀁲􀁔􀁏􀀨􀀮􀀠 Dallas, TX 75240 please
millf)' Ill'! 􀁾•.:ndC'1 􀁭􀁜􀁬􀀬􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀠::::1',' 􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀠 :0 .';":'d,lOC. 􀁉􀁲􀁾􀀧􀀬􀂷􀀺􀀬􀀻􀀠ZlC n·:!! the 􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁣􀁤􀀠{ccipicnl plC:1,t.; bl: .'.:. l:.j l(.:H ::",,','":'\1II:UIDII,
6;J1nbL.:;on, I}r Tel: 972.980.4961 eopyint. urlhe ir:f:jnTuti,m c,; 􀀺􀀢􀀮􀀺􀀧􀁜􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁕􀀠 j:"! 􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀮􀀠􀁾􀀠 ;',.,.' i; wiClJy 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀀮􀁬􀁢􀀻􀁾􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁃􀀧􀁤􀀮 l Fax; 972"991.7665 --"

􀁍􀀮􀁹􀀭􀁏􀁾􀀭􀁏􀁬􀀠 􀀰􀀴􀀺􀀴􀁬􀁰􀁾􀀠 From-URS Corporation e129917m ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD ATTACHMENT A URS CORPORATION SCOpE OF SERVICES PHASE I -CONCEPT REFINEMENT J. Update
Powerpoint presentation and boards for the Mayor's presentation to the Town Council. /2. Attend Town Council meeting on May 14, 2002, 7;30 p.m. 3. 􀁾􀁾::9nd attend design charette on
May IS, 2002 with Addison. Stakeholders 4. Refine the concept for one alternative (the Blue Bridge). Project Limits are approximately from Sla. 40+67 (start/end ofwest retaining wall)
to St«. 70+28 (startfend of east retaining wall). v... A. Architectural Details 1. Refine and elaborate on architcctural detailing for railings, llnust block, lighting integration and
retaining walls. "f-.. B. Urban Design and Landscape Details 1. Resolve and integrale bicycle and pedestrian paths into the overall scheme of the bridge and its adjacencies. Create a
plan with altertlatives along the bridge from east to west that shows the b'<'Ileral resolution ofpedlbike ramp, sidewalks, parking. hardscape and plantings. 2. From !be discussion of
alternatives noted above, create the final overall plan for parking, plantings, hardscape, and pedlbike access to, over, under, and alongside the bridge. 3. Create up to 3 alternative
ramp configurations to move bicyclists and pedeslrians fi'om grade to the bike/ped path that 􀁧􀁯􀁾􀁳􀀠over the bridge and identify the implications of each scheme. 4. Once a preferred
ramp alu.:rnative is selected, detail the dimensions, grade, rail, and other elements associared with the bridge and its attendant ramps. 5. Create twO alternatives for the parking configvration
and details. This includes parking placement and layout, access points, and an analysis ofeach scheme. 6. Develop up to 3 alternatives for railings, light furores, and 􀁯􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀧􀁔􀀠urban
design elements that d<1:tail these elements as well as their placement within the overal1l'roject area. 7. Based on the l'arking sch=es completed above and adjusted in final eonc,,!,!
designs, create two renderings 0 f the parking areas as well as the underside ofth. bridge complete with landscape and ha:rclscape elements. These should include eJemeuts such as lighting
that <:Teate a feeling of safely and security under the bridge. 
May-DS-02 04:42pm From-URS CorporatiD. T-QQ3 P.QQ3/0Q3 F-T59 8. Dele'rmine rhc final design ofall urban design and landscape elements of mc bridge and its accesses and 􀀢􀀧􀁔􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁾􀀠plans
and appropliale sections to explain me dcsi(l11 9. Determine the urban design treatment for Midway from Belt Line to tbe north oime bridge. TIus could illclude plantings, lights, rails.
and other elements that connect the bridge to Belt Line. 10. Develop construction and design opinion of probable cost estimates for all elements oflandscape, urban design, and lurrdscape
detailed in the final 􀁤􀁲􀁡􀀺􀁷􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁳􀀬􀀠 C. Lighting Concepts I. EJ:pJore color-chauging options 2. Develop lighting scheme(s) for underside of bridge 3. Develop preliminruy mOWlting
details for bridge mOWltcd luntinaries 4. In cOrUunclion with. the Urban Designer, develop lighting for parking areas and landscape 5. Dev(.')op COtlct'pts for roadway (fimctionaJ) lighting
6. Prepare lighting fixture schedule including manufacturers names, catalog munbers and power allowances. 7. Pr<-pare preliminary lighting layouts. D. Englneerin{llUld Cost Estimates
1. Review engineering issues resUlting from design charette 2. Review geotechnical boring log infonnation for foundation size 3. Update cost estimate for bridge Deliverables: • Updated
Powerpoint presentation. • Updated vidt'O -includes revising video to incorporate landscaping, parking lind strucrure modifications as well as creating a view along Arapaho Road. • Updated
􀁡􀁲􀁣􀁨􀁩􀁴􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁾􀁬􀀠boards with three additional boards for details • Updated "nighttime" renderings and additional "nighnime" renderings for the underside of the bridge and
color-changing options. • Preliminary lighting layouts and schedule • Updated urb!ll1 design and landscaping boards • Prelintinruy urban plans and section details. • Construction and
design cos! estimates S. Intmncdiatc review of the refined concept with Addison Stakeholders (about June II, 2002). 6. Attend Town Council meeting (tentatively June 25, 2002). 
March 7, 2002 Dear Committee Member, First ofall, I would like to express my appreciation on behalf ofthe Town ofAddison. This. is an exciting infrastructure project fur the Town and
I am pleased you have 􀁾􀁥􀁥􀁤 to participate in our evaluation and recommendation process for the Bridge Competition. As you are all aware, the competition is scheduled fur Aprillllh
from 7:30am -5:00pm at the Addison Confuence Centre (see schedule below). I would also request that all committee members meet in the Board· RQom at 7:30 am to go over the upcoming days
events. There will be breakfast refreshments available. Just a very briefupdate on what events took place to. get us to. the point at which we are 􀁴􀁯􀀮􀁤􀁡􀁾􀀮􀀠 In February 2000,
the Town ofAddison conducted a bond election in which tha town ofAddison voters approved $20Smillion togoto.ward the design and construction ofthe extension of Arapaho Road from Addison
Road to Marsh Lane. A key and crucial element to the overall project is the design and construction ofa bridge to. cross. over Midway Road. In November of2001, we initiated the process
by 􀁲􀁥􀁱􀁵􀁾􀁧 Statements ofQualifications from engineering and architectwal firms. The Town received 12 proposals from a wide 􀁶􀁾 of firms with connections around the nation. These
12prqposals were evaluated by a selection committee and reduced to the three finalists· for the competition (HNTB; URS-Griener and Freese & Nichols). The Town of Addison City Council,
prior to Request for Qualifications, IIRproved a $10,000 stipend to be paid to. each ofthe three finalists.to assist in the costs associated with preparation oftheir proposed bridge
designs. The evaluation process will be conducted as.follows: 􀁾􀀠Each finn will he.given two houl'S to make theirpresentations and answer questionsfrom the panel, with at /east 30 minutes
dedicated to. questioll and answer. 􀁾􀀠Panel wUl use evaluatio.n criteria slated in info.rmation below, with· each item having e1Juoll'aiue to. assist in ranki"g eack.firm. 􀁾􀀠 Each
member will then then individually grade each firm, in a similar: l1UJ{IIIer, giving each item a gradefrom 1-10, with 10 being hest. 􀁾􀀠Each member based on the to.tal score given will
rank the firms in ordo of grade 1", r d, or r. 􀁾􀀠Allpanel memberswill submit their rankings to. establish initial order. 􀁾􀀬􀀠 ! ' 
» Group will have open discussions about individual concerns and opinions. » AU panel members will review their. initial rankings. and re-submitforjinal order. » Each firm will begiven
an overall grade based on rank submitted by each member. 1"place will be awarded one point, 2"d place will be awarded 2paints. and :rd place will be awarded 3 points. Thefirm with thefewest
total points will be the competition wiRlfer. Please note that I have included a copy ofeach finn's original Statement ofQualifications submittal. Thank you, and I look forward to seeing
all ofyou on April}}Ih. Should you have any questions priortoAprillllh, fuel free to COIItactmy office at 972-450-2811 and speak with me or the Assistant Director ofPublic Works, JimPierce.
Sincerely, Michael E. MurphylDirector ofPublic Works 
Arapaho Road Bridge PI!e-Competition Mee,ting Agenda February 14y 2002 I. Welcome and,Introductions: Ron Whitehead, CH.Y Manager II. Directions to Consultant: Mike Murphy, Director ofPU!J11c
Worlcs A. Announce tentative day and time of presentatipns 1. First Presentation 8:00am-10am 2. Second Presentation 10:30am-12: 􀁾􀁰􀁭􀀠 3. Third Presentation 1:301lm-3: 3Qpm B. No morathan
two designs III. Grading will be based on the 􀁦􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁷􀁩􀁾􀀮􀀹􀀠criteria A. Aesthetics -appearance day and night"should.incI,ude lighting de!j.i.gnplan B. 􀁌􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁳􀁣􀁡􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀠
C.' AcousticS,(how will noise aHect adjacent buildil;lgs) D. Vibrations,.(how will motion aHect adjacent buildlggs) E. Estimated cost of construction of the bridge 􀁤􀁾􀁩􀁧􀁮 . F. Functionality
I build 􀁡􀁢􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁾􀀬􀀨􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁬􀁤􀁬􀁝􀁬􀁢􀀬􀁰􀁥􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁡􀁮􀀠and bike 􀁵􀁳􀁥􀁾􀁳􀁡􀁦􀁥􀁴􀁹􀀬􀀮􀁁􀁄􀁁􀀠etc.) G. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings fro....
roadway H. 􀁏􀁶􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁵􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹􀀠and creativity o(.presentation,(visiol]. team plan I effort) 
PresentatioD..Schedule: Time (April 11th) . l!k!!! 7:30am -S:OOam Committee Members 8:00am-l0:00am URS Griener 10:30am-12:3Opm. Freese & Nichok 12:3Opm-l:30pm Lunch 1:3Opm-J:30pm HNTE
3:3Opm-5;QOpm Panel Discussion/Selection Conference Centre LocotWn . Boord Room Stone Cotta.ge BoardRoom BoardRoom Stone Cottage Boord Room 
EXAMPLE SCORE SHEET 1. Aesthetics -􀁾􀁰􀁰􀁥􀁡􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁥􀀠d'1l.Y and night, should include lighting desisn plan (1-tO) __tD POINTS 2. l.andscaping (t.tO) ___7,,-_POINT,S 3. Acoustics
{how will noise affect adjacent 􀁢􀁵􀁩􀁬􀁤􀁩􀁾􀁧􀁳􀀩􀀠 (1.10, 5 POINTS 4. Vibrations (how will motion.impact adjacent buildipgs) (1-'Iot 8 POINTS 5. Estimated costof construction of
the bridge.de$ign (1-10) 6 POINTS 6. Functionality I build ability (parking,.pedestrian and bike users, safety. ADA:etc..) ('f-10) 4 -POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction.
to. aeliaqent buildings from roadway (1.10) '10 1'OINTS 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation (vis,ion, team planJeffOlt) {1--"tO} 9 POINTS .TOTAL SCORE 591'OINTS COMMITTEE
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 TafALSCORE FlRM#l 3 1 3 2 I 3 3 16 #3 FlRMfI1. 2 2 2 I 2 I 2 12 #1 FlRM#3 1 3 1 3 3 2 I 14 #2 
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450·2871 􀁾􀀢􀀭􀀻􀂢􀀠 ------.. . ---.....> .'?[""Jl!i:t ® Post Office Box 9010 Addison. Texas 75001-9010 1680] Weslgrove 12 March 2002 Mr. Bill Crepeau
15101 Midway Addison, TX 75001 Dear Committee Member: Please accept my apology for not including a list ofthe Arapaho Bridge Committee Members in the recent package which was sent to
each Member. The Committee Members are: Art Lomenick Bill Crepeau Diane Mallory Scott Wheeler Ron Whitehead Chris Terry Mike Murphy I look forward to working with you. Very truly yours,
􀀯􀁉􀀻􀁻􀁕􀁦􀁾􀁾􀀠 Mike Murphy, P.E. Director ofPublic Works cc: Jim Pierce /Steve Chutchian Luke Jalbert 
ARAPABO ROAD BRIDGE At MIDWAY ROAD FACT SHEET FEBRUARY 14, 2002 • Total length of bridge, including retaining walls and earthen fill areas is approximately 2,500 ft. • Bridge length,
from abutment to abutment is approximately 1,600 ft. • Width of roadway at bridge section is 44 ft. • Parking under bridge is a provision of this project. • Lighting above and under
bridge shall be included in design. • Impact of bridge on visibility of adjacent commercial properties shall be considered in design. • Elevated pedestrian crossing adjacent to roadway
shall be included in bridge design. • Design schedule is approximately 45 days (April 2, 2002). • Drainage structures shall be considered in the design (double 10' x 7' box culverts).

Steve Chutchian From: Michael Murphy Sent: Wednesday, February 06,20022:32 PM To: Steve Chutchian Cc: Luke Jalbert; Jim Pierce; Sue Ellen Fairley; Chris Terry Subject: FW: BRIDGE SELECTION
COMMITTEE -DRAFT Steve, Below is the list of People who will set on the Bridge design competition committee. (ifpossible I would like to have the precompetion meeting next week) I want
you and Luke to set up the meetings as we discussed. We need to check schedules and confirm everyone's availability approximately 60 days from the precompetion meeting. Since Luke is
out of Town use Sue Ellen to Assist. Also, once you have verified schedules we can set up a pre completion meeting. I want all of the meetings to be first class and have them at either
the stone cottage or the town hall council chambers. preferably the Stone Cottage .... Lets make it happen. See me with any questions /Vlike Mlcl-weL 5. M"'l'I'1I::1' P.5. DiyectoY of
p"bLf.c WaY"", Tow",-of A""[So,,,(;)72 )450-2"7" --Original Message-From: Chris Tony Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 10:06 AM To: Michael Murphy Subject: BRIDGE SELECTlON COMMITTEE DRAFT
Mike, Here is the composition of the committee as Ron and the Mayor discussed it. This is not absolutely final, but close. I will keep you posted as this is still in flux. Committee
Members: Mayor Wheeler Collncilmember Diane Mallory Ron Whitehead Art Lomoneck,.developer BiIl.Crepeall._propertYowner along bridge ROW -Charter Fum. I spoke with Bill Crepeau andhe
said he is 99% sure he will be the new owner. Mike Murphy Chris Tenry .-.; 1 
􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀠 􀁁􀁾􀁄􀁷INSoO'N .l'1.U PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450·2871 ...."'ifiii'!"'F.""Y?..:._ ___......M. lm® Post Office Box 9010 Addisiln. Texas 75001-9010 16801 Wcstgrove Mr.
John Hunt GIS Manager North Central Texas Council of Governments 616 Six Flags Drive P.O. Box 5888 Arlington, TX 76005 Dear Mr. Hunt: The Town of Addison has contracted with HNTB Corporation
to provide engineering consulting services for the development of construction plans and documents for Arapaho Road from Surveyor Boulevard to Addison Road. In addition to this, HNTB
has been shortlisted to compete in a bridge design competition located in the middle of the Arapaho Road project. HNTB has identified the NCTCOG GIS data as a source of base mapping
information for a number of engineering tasks associated with this project. As a member of the NCTCOG, we are requesting that you release the GIS data and aerial photographs that are
available to NCTCOG members to HNTB for use on this project. I have included the Contractor Licensing Licensing Agreement form and the Cooperative Purchase Instructions form. A representative
of HNTB will be contacting you to request the tiles they need. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, A;UzL Steve Z. Chutchian, P.E. Assistant City Engineer Town
of Addison 
COOPERATIVE PURCHASE INSTRUCTIONS Commitments, Areas of Interest, and Products In some cases where Commitment Response Forms were submitted, the commiHed amount did not agree with the
square miles indicated on the enclosed map. (1) If your figures do not match the information on your enclosed Commitment Response Form, (2) if you did not submit a Commitment Response
Form, or (3) if your information does not agree with the area indicated on the enclosed map (see 'Changes in Commitmen!...), please complete the blank Commitment Response Form, and return
it by the deadline. If all your information is correct and there are no changes, please initial the copy of your original Commitment Response Form and return it by the deadline. Changes
In Commitment Area of Interest and/or Products If your area of interest covers more or less than the area indicated on the enclosed map, please include your required boundaries as a
shapefile or an Arclnfo export file when you return the enclosed forms. If you do not have a digital file, please draw the changes in red ink on the enclosed map and return to us. You
may also enclose other paper maps showing your area of interest if you wish. File Formats Upon completion of the project, all files will be delivered on CD. Please specify the desired
format: DIGITAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHS DIGITAL CONTOURS (You may choose both formals if needed) (Pl.ase specify only one format) 􀁾􀁒􀁆􀀺􀁦􀁵􀁲􀁭􀁡􀁴􀀠'" _ ArcView shapefiles Mr. SID (merged
into a single file) Arclnfo cover AutoCAD DXF 􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁏􀁬􀀮􀁬􀁾􀀶􀁾􀁇􀁎􀀠•L Payment Please indicate and enclose the required payment: Agency Name: liNd 9ft 􀁁􀀧􀀾􀁬􀀾􀀧􀁓􀁑􀁾􀀠 Purchase
Order #_______(NCTCOG members onfy. Private sector must pey with check.) Check # _____ Please direct any questions regarding this process to: John Hunt Manager of GIS North Central Texas
Council of Governments 616 Six Flags Drive, Suite 200, Arlington, Texas 76011 Telephone: (817) 695·9163 Fax: (B17) 6404228 E·Mall: jmhunt@dfwinfo.com 
CONTRACTOR LICENSING AGREEMENT I. LICENSE AGREEMENT The following provisions are a license agreement with respect to orthos and/or 2' contours between: 􀁾􀀮􀀠 ;/tJ-rt$ 􀁃􀀴􀁦􀁛􀀻􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀠
and Contractor's me EnlityNamJ Unless otherwise agreed in writing, the NCTCOG data product will be used by the above stated authorized contractors only. A contractor shall be deemed
authorized to use the data products by the Entity or NCTCOG if such use is incidental to a larger relationship between the contractor and the Entity, and is used for purposes no greater
than reasonably needed to achieve the objectives of an actual project undertaken in connection with that relationship. The contractor must agree in writing to be bound by the provisions
of this Agreement. The contractor also agrees to return all NCTCOG data back to the Entity after completion of the project. This data may not be used for other projects or presentations
unless written permission is obtained from either the Entity or NCTCOG. Signing of this agreement states that the contractor understands the restrictions of use for the NCTCOG data,
as well as the return of all said data upon completion of work for the Entity. _ delleY 11 I/,L!>tl? .lit. Printed Authorized Name I (Jtfs6--ate :Mf1i:. DFWinfo.com ".. r..􀁦􀁩􀁮􀁴􀁴􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁬􀁤􀁾􀀮�
�􀀠
AC.E:NTIl.RY 'OFS E'" V I CE ENGI NEE RS·E NVI R ON M E NT Al SC IE N Ti STS'A RCM lTEe rs Trooper Smith. E.n. Program Manayer FREESE-NICHOLS Freese anli Nichols, Inc. 105 S. Tennessee·
Suite 101 t McKinney. Texas 75069 972-54B·240il· Fax 972·54B·1055· Email tws@I"....com 
FREESE· NICHOLS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL , ! I TO: Town of Addison DATE: February 15, 2002 16801 Westgrove Drive PROJECT: Addison, TX 75001 DESCR. : Addison Bridge ATTN: Steve Chutchin
We are sending the I&l Attached o Under Separate Cover VIA following items: o Plans o Specifications o Shop Drawing o Reports o Diskette(s) I&l Other COPIES DESCRIPTION 1 Memo requesting
additional information These are transmitted for your: o Use o Review & Comment o Response o Approval o Distribution to Parties o Record !2?J Other Remarks: None COIl'es to: I File 1
Jim Pierce P,E, DEE i ! ! : : , FREESE AND NICHOLS. 1701 N. MARKETST" SUITE 500 LB51 • DALLAS, TEXAS 7S2W TIlLEPHONE: 972·548-WJ(). FAX: 972·548-1055 
FREESE· NICHOLS MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Chutchian FROM: Trooper Smith SUBJECT: Infonnation Request for Arapaho Rd. Bridge at Midway Rd. DATE: February 15, 2002 Freese and Nichols, Inc.
requests additional information fur the Arapaho Rd. Bridge Design. If possible, we prefer data in digital funnat. 1. Digital version ofHNTB design /' /2. Soil borings in the area, if
available v .¥. Digital aerial rnaps/topo/planimetrics 􀀨􀁾􀀭􀁶􀀭􀁶􀁩􀀺􀀠Existing Future Land-Use Plan for the Town ofAddison ,) Cfli"-l-5. Master Plan ofAddison 􀁃􀁾 􀁾􀀧􀀭 􀁾􀀬􀁾r(o,!,"--􀁾
6. Copy ofThoroughfare Plan for the Town i:fAddison 􀁾􀀠Copy ofany Noise Studies conducted in this area 8. Copies ofany 􀁯􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁥􀁬􀁩􀁶􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁢􀁬􀁥􀁳􀀠submitted to the Town ofAddison
by HNTB on this 0/􀁾􀁾􀁭􀁾􀁳􀀬􀀠utility information, concept layouts, 􀁾􀁣􀁴􀁊􀁶􀁾􀀠 􀁾 9. Any tax maps r ·1 Y available from the Town of Addison. Ifnone are available, we will obtain
the necess tax maps from Dallas County Central Appraisal District. 10. Copies ofUtili tie along Arapabo Rd. and Midway Rd. in this area. n7 tJ 11g We appreciate your effort t gather
the requested infonnation. Thank you. 􀁦􀁾􀀠 Cc: Jim Pierce, File FREESE AND NICHOLS. 1701 N.MARKETST., SUI1li5OOLB51. DAlLAS, "IEXAS75202 TELEPHONE: 214-920-2500. FAX: 972-920-2565

FREESE·NICHOLS LEITER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 15, 2002 16801 Westgrove Drive TO: Town of Addison PROJECT: Addison, TX 75001 DESCR. : Addison Bridge ATTN: Steve Chutchin We are
sending the [g] Attached o Under Separate Cover VIA __ following items: o Plans o Specifications o Shop Drawing o Reports o Diskette(s) [g] Other I· COPIES DESCRIPTION 1 Memo reQuesting
additional information -r These are transmitted for your: o Use o Review & Comment o Response o Approval o Distribution to Parties o Record [g] Other ! Remarks: None ............ Co
·0510: I File I Jim Pierce P.E, DEE 􀁾􀀠 FREESE AND NICHOLS. 1701 N. MARKET ST" SUlTE 500 LBS 1 • DALLAS, TEXAS 75202 TELEPHONE: 972-S4fl.2400. FAX: 972-54fl.l05S 
FREESE·NICHOLS MEMORANDUM TO; Steve Chutchian FROM: Trooper Smith SUBJECT; Information Request for Arapaho Rd. Bridge at Midway Rd. DATE: February 15, 2002 Freese and Nichols, Inc. requests
additional information for the Arapaho Rd. Bridge Design. If possible, we prefer data in digital funnat. 1. Digital version ofHNTB design 2. Soil borings in the area, ifavailable 3.
Digital aerial mapsitopo/planimetrics 4. Existing Future Land-Use Plan for the Town ofAddison 5. Master Plan ofAddison Circle 6. Copy ofThorough.fure Plan for the Town ofAddison 7. Copy
ofany Noise Studies conducted in this area 8. Copies ofany other deliverahles submitted to the Town ofAddison by HNTB on this project (i.e. ROW maps, utility information, concept layouts,
etc.) 9. Any tax maps readily available from the Town ofAddison. Ifnone are available, we will obtain the necessary tax maps from Dallas County Central Appraisal District. 10. Copies
ofUtilities along Arapaho Rd. and Midway Rd. in this area. We appreciate your effort to gather the requested information. Thank you. Cc: Jim Pierce, File FREESE AND NICHOLS. 1701 N.
MARKET ST., SUITE 500 LlI51 • DALLAS, 1l!XAS 75202 TElEPHONE: 214-920-2500 • FAX: 􀀹􀀷􀁾􀀹􀀲􀀰􀀭􀀲􀀵􀀶􀀵􀀠 
􀀭􀁕􀁾􀀵􀀭 􀀢􀁨􀁶􀁾􀀠􀁊􀁯􀁾􀁾􀀠 fill 14k {;re-er H-kJT6 􀁾􀁾􀀠 (972) 450-2871 16601 Wee'grove PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Arapaho Road Bridge Pre-Competition Meeting Agenda February 14,
2002 V I. Welcome and opening comments: Ron Whitehead, City Manager Directions to Consultant: Mike Murphy, Director of Public Works V A. Announce Day and time of presentations April
2, 2002 /1. First Presentation 8:00am-10am (Stone V􀁾􀀵􀀠 Cottage) . J "'2. Second Presentation 10:30am-12:30pm fJN (Conference Centre Board Room) 􀁾􀀠 "';3. Third Presentation 1:30pm-3:30pm
(Stone 􀁾tJ I U Cottage) VB. No more than 2 designs C. Grading will be based on the following criteria 1. Aesthetics --day and night, should include lighting design/plan 
2. Landscaping 3. Acoustics (how will noise affect adjacent buildings) 4. Vibrations (how will motion affect adjacent buildings) 5. Estimated cost of design 6. Functionality (parking,
pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings from roadway 8. Team approach to design concept III. Lottery drawing for
presentation times IV. Bridge technical information (see handout) V. Town of Addison contacts: .Jim Pierce Asst. Director of Public Works 972-450·2879 or Steve Chutchian 972-450·2886.

ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE At MIDWAY ROAD FACT SHEET FEBRUARY 14, 2002 • Total length of bridge, including retaining walls and earthen fill areas is approximately 2,500 ft. • Bridge length,
from abutment to abutment is approximately 1,600 ft. • Width of roadway at bridge section is 44 ft. • Parking under bridge is a provision of this project. • Lighting above and under
bridge shall be included in design. • Impact of bridge on visibility of adjacent commercial properties shall be considered in design. • Elevated pedestrian crossing adjacent to roadway
shall be included in bridge design. • Design schedule is approximately 45 days (April 2,2002). • Drainage structures shall be considered in the design (double 10' x 7' box culverts).

(972) 450-2871 16801 Westgrove PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Arapaho Road Bridge Pre-Competition Meeting Agenda February 14, 2002 I. Welcome and opening comments: Ron Whitehead, City Manager
II. Directions to Consultant: Mike Murphy, Director of Public Works A. Announce Day and time of presentations April 2, 2002 1. First Presentation 8:00am-10am (Stone Cottage) 2. Second
Presentation 10:30am-12:30pm :".. (Conference Centre Board Room) 3. Third Presentation 1:30pm-3:30pm (Stone Cottage) B. No more than 2 designs C. Grading will be based on the following
criteria 1. Aesthetics --day and night, should include lighting design/plan 
2. Landscaping 3. Acoustics (how will noise affect adjacent buildings) 4. Vibrations (how will motion affect adjacent buildings) 5. Estimated cost of design 6. Functionality (parking,
pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings from roadway 8. Team approach to design concept III. Lottery drawing for
presentation times IV. Bridge technical information (see handout) V. Town of Addison contacts: "1m Pierce Asst. Director of Public Works 972-450·2879 or Steve Chutchian 972-450·2886.

ARAPABO ROAD BRIDGE At MIDWAY ROAD . FACT SHEET· FEBRUARY 14, 2002 • Totallengtb of bridge, including retaining walls and earthen fill areas is approximately 2,500 ft. . • Bridge length,
from abutment to abutment is approximately 1,600 ft. • Width of roadway at bridge section is 44 ft. • Parking under bridge is a provision ofthis project. • Lighting above and under bridge
shall be included in design. • Impact of bridge on visibility of adjacent commercial properties shall be considered in design. • Elevated pedestrian crossing adjacent to roadway sball
be included in bridge design. • Design scheduie is approximately 45 days (April 2, 2002). • Drainage structures shall be considered in the design (double 10' x 7' box culverts) •. 
􀀢􀀮􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀭 ,: !> .;:: .':: " , -.' 􀁜􀀺'􀀺"􀀺 􀀭􀀩􀀮􀀧􀁜􀀻􀀮􀀺􀀧􀀮􀀮􀁊􀀭􀁜􀀧􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁊􀀬􀁾􀀶􀁜􀀢􀀲􀀧􀁽􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀂢􀀠 􀁗􀁾􀁾􀀠rfl': '1, "" Ii' '" ,r" -1? 􀁾􀀠-a 3 4 -I"
H0V-!'(\1 1-; 􀁩􀁴􀁾􀀠 =: . ::'::1;: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 􀀻􀀡􀁾􀀠 :' 􀁾􀀡􀀮􀁬􀁍􀁾􀁉􀁴􀀺􀁡􀀠 ... p,O, Box 9010 T'f.. 8164444 U.S.POSTAGEI: C: .L ,'.L.n . ..-'J.oJ'-..I.L 'j ® Addison,
Texas 75001-9010 􀁲􀁯􀁥􀁾􀁯􀀮􀁥􀁾􀀠 􀀿􀀭􀁲􀁊􀀮􀁕􀁾􀁾􀀨􀀩􀀠 􀁾􀀧􀀿􀀭􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀁃􀁜􀁾􀀧􀁏􀁜􀀬􀀻􀁦􀀺􀁦􀁾􀀧􀁏􀁜􀁾􀁾􀀠 " .AU t PII .... ";; " .. .,./, ' ":: 
Attached is a updated request for SOQ, and the evaluation criteria for the proposals. Please not the difference in dollar amount from $7500 to $10000, and the new # of firms to be used,
now 3 instead of 2-4. Please disregard previous letter. 
PUBUC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450·2871 16801 Westgrove REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS ARCHITECTIENGINEERING SERVICES ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD TOWN OF ADDISON The Town
ofAddison is embarking on an exciting projectto construct the portion of Arapaho Road, from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Rd. Included in this significant roadway improvement to our community is a unique bridge section over Midway
Road. This feature will serve as a gateway to The Town of Addison and its renowned amenities. In order to accomplish this goal, The Town ofAddison is undertaking a three-step architect/engineer
selection process, to design the architectural and structural components ofthe bridge. The first step consists of a request for qualifications that is being sent to selected architecture
and engineering firms. The submittals will be reviewed, and a short list ofthree AlE firms (finalists) will be selected to go to the second step. The fmalists will enter a "design competition"
and will be paid a stipend of $10,000 to prepare a design concept for the bridge. The finalists will be asked to meet with the Town to receive vision and direction for the project from
Town Management. Drawings, visual grapIiics;'"and/or a study model will describe jJ1e concept. The fmalists will be asked to present their designs(s) for a selection committee made up
ofmembers ofthe governing body and staff. Lastly, the design competition winner will then prepare a proposal to complete the design, and a fee will be negotiated. The design contract
will go to City Council for approval. A mandatory pre-submittal meeting will be held at 3:00 p.m. November 13,2001 at the Stone Cottage, 4901 Addison Circle Drive. Any firm not represented
will not be eligible to submit a Statement of Qualifications. The proposed bridge must be 4 lanes, and be able to accommodate pedestrian traffic. Midway road is 45' wide, back of curb
to back ofcurb through the bridge section. 
Copies ofthe preliminary plans for Arapaho road will be available at the pre-submittal meeting. Addison will accept written Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) from ArchitecturelEngineering
firms until November 26th, 2001. Four (4) copies ofthe SOQ shall be submitted. The SOQ should contain a maximum number ofthirty (30) single sided pages on 8 Yo" x 11" paper. The firm
may also submit a power point presentation of past bridge design projects. The arehitecturelengineering firm should provide enough information to demonstrate the firm's ability to design
the project. The SOQ shall designate the individuals who will be assigned to the project (Principal-in-charge, Project manager, Project Engineer, Project Architect etc.) with resumes
for each individual. A list of similar projects in scope and size that the firm has recently completed in the last five (5) years shall be provided. A description for each project shall
be provided along with project cost, completion date, names ofproposed design team members involved in the project, name of the client, contact person, and phone number for contact person.
All written Statements of Qualifications and supporting material submitted shall be evaluated by the Selection Committee, which will be made up of Michael Murphy, P .E., Director of
Public Works, James C. Pierce, P.E., Assistant Director of Public Works, Ron Whitehead, City Manager, and Bill Shipp, Assistant to the City Manager. The review of the SOQ's will be based
on the selection criteria shown on the attached page. The SOQ shOUld specifically address each criterion for evaluation. Interested consultants shOUld direct questions and submit Statements
of Qualifications to: Mailing: Steven Z. Chutchian, P .E. Street: 16801 Westgrove Assistant City Engineer Addison, Texas P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Phone: (972) 450-2886
Fax: (972) 450-2837 
I .. ..􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀠 ,-",.""......, 􀂫􀀢􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁪􀀠.-,,,",,,,,,,,_,,,,,':' 􀀢􀀬􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀢􀁊􀀮􀀾􀀮􀁾􀀠
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450-2871 16801 Westgrcve REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS ENGINEERING SERVICES ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD TOWN OF ADDISON The Town ofAddison
is embarking on an exciting project to construct the portion of Arapaho Road, from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Rd. Included in this significant roadway improvement to our community is
a unique bridge section over Midway Road. This feature will serve as a gateway to The Town of Addison and its renowned amenities. In order to accomplish this goal, The Town ofAddison
is undertaking a three step architect/engineer selection process, to design the architectural and structura1 components of the bridge. The first step consists ofa request for qualifications
that is being sent to selected architecture and engineering firms. The submittals will be reviewed, and a short list oftwo to four AlE firms (finalists) will be selected to go to the
second step. The finalists will enter a "design competitions" and will be paid a stipend of $7500 7500 to prepare a design concept for the bridge. The concept will be described by drawings,
visual graphics, and/or a study model. The finalists will be asked to meet with the Town to receive vision and direction for the project from Town Management. The finalists will be asked
to present their designs(s) for a selection committee made up ofmembers ofthe governing body and staff. Lastly, the design competition winner will then prepare a proposal to complete
the design and a fee will be negotiated. The design contract will go to City Council for approval. A mandatory pre-submittal meeting will be held 3:00 p.m. November 13,2001 at the Stone
Cottage, 4901 Addison Circle Drive. Any finn not represented will not be eligible to submit a Statement of Qualifications. The proposed bridge must be 4 lanes, and be able to accommodate
pedestrian traffic. Midway road is 80' wide, back of curb to back ofcurb through the bridge section. Copies of the preliminary plans for Arapaho road will be available at the pre-submittal
meeting. 
Addison will accept written Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) from ArchitecturelEngineering firms until November 26th, 2001. Four (4) copies ofthe SOQ shall be submitted. The SOQ should
contain a maximum number of thirty (30) single sided pages on 8 Yi" x 11" paper. The frrm may also submit a power point presentation of past bridge design projects. The architecture/engineering
firm should provide enough information to demonstrate the firm's ability to design the project. The SOQ shall designate the individuals who will be assigned to the project (principal-in-charge,
Project manager, Project Engineer, Project Architect etc.) with resumes for each individual. A list of similar projects in scope and size that the frrm has recently completed in the
last fivc (5) years shall be provided. A description for cach project shall be provided along with project cost, completion date, names ofproposed design team members involved in the
project, name of the client, contact person, and phone number for contact person. All written Statements of Qualifications and supporting material submitted shall be evaluated by the
Selection Committee, which will be made up of Michael Murphy, P .E., Director of Public Works, James C. Pierce, P.E., Assistant Director of Public Works, Ron Whitehead, City Managcr,
and Bill Shipp, Assistant to the City Manager. The review of the SOQ's will be based on the selection criteria shown on the attached page. The SOQ should specifically address each criterion
for evaluation. The top two or four ranking frrms will be asked to meet with the Town and make oral presentations. The firm the Town deems most qualified will then present a proposal
to perform the work and a fee will be negotiated. The design contract will go to the City Council for approval. Interested consultants should direct questions and submit Statements of
Qualifications to: Mailing: Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E. Street: 16801 Westgrove Assistant City Engineer Addison, Texas P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Phone: (972) 450-2886 Fax:
(972) 450-2837 
Page 1 of} Steve Chutchian From: Luke Jalbert Sent: Tuesday, November 20,2001 1:14 PM To: Steve Chutchian; Jim Pierce; Michael Murphy Subject: A-road bridge cost... I talked with Jerry
Holder this morning about his estimate on the Arapaho road bridge. He told me how they came up with the original estimate and what they think of the budget now. The original budget,
done in 1998 Had an 1160' bridge, 44' wide @$35 a sf which comes to 1.8 million However, since then some things have changed, he just redid the estimate and comes to 1600' bridge, 44'
wide @$30 sf =2.1 million add 10' pedestrian walkWay additional .5 million Total cost of BASIC bridge today = 2.6 million. 1998 report 1.8 million 1.81$35 = only 1160' long wI inflation
=2.1 now 1600*44 they say $30 sIf = 2.1 million ugly wI pedestrian =2.6 million 11/20/01 
REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS RFQ02-08 Architectural/Engineering Services Arapaho Road Bridge The Town of Addison is accepting Statements of Qualifications from experienced
Architectura1lEngineering firms to provide services related to the design of Arapaho Road Bridge. A mandatory pre-submittal meeting will be held at 3;00pm, November 13, 2001 at the Stone
Cottage, 4901 Addison Circle, Addison, TX 75001. Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) from firms will be accepted until 5:00 p.m. November 13, 2001 to Steven Chutchian, Assistant City
Engineer, at 16801 Westgrove, Addison, TX 75001. Specifications can be obtained at www.demanstar.com. If you are not a member of DemandStar.com and wish to obtain a free copy of the
specifications, you may contact the Purchasing Division at 972-450-7091 or pick one up at 5350 Belt Line Road, Addison, TX 75240. 
REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS ENGINEERING SERVICES ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD TOWN OF ADDISON The Town ofAddison is embarking on an exciting project to construct the
portion of Arapaho Road, from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Rd. Included in this significant roadway improvement to our commWJity is a WJique bridge section over Midway Road. TIlis fuature
will serve as a gateway to The Town ofAddison and its renowned amenities. In order to accomplish this goal, The Town ofAddison is nodertaking a three step architect/engineer selection
process, to design the architectural and structural components ofthe bridge. The first step consists ofa request for qualifications that is being sent to selected architecture and engineering
firms. The submittals will be reviewed, and a short list oftwo to four AlE firms (:finalists) will be selected to go to the second step. The :finalists will enter a "design competitions"
and will be paid a stipend 0[$7500 to prepare a design concept for the bridge. The concept will be described by drawings, visual graphics, and/or a study model. The finalists will be
asked to meet with the Town to receive vision and direction for the project from Town Management. The finalists will be asked to present their designs(s) for a selection committee made
up ofmembers ofthe governiog body and staff. Lastly, the design competition wioner will then prepare a proposal to complete the design and a fee will be negotiated. The design contract
will go to City Council for approval. A mandatory pre-SUbmittal meeting will be held 3:00 p.rn. November 13, 2001 at the Stone Cottage, 4901 Addison Circle Drive. Any firm not represented
will not be eligible to submit a Statement of Qualifications. The proposed bridge must be 4 lanes, and be able to accommodate pedestrian traffic. Midway road is 80' wide, back ofcurb
to back ofcurb through the bridge section. Copies ofthe preliminary plans for Arapaho road will be available at the pre-submittal meeting. 
Addison will accept written Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) from ArchitecturelEngineering firms until November 26th, 2001. Four (4) copies of the SOQ shall be submitted. The SOQ should
contain a maximum number ofthirty (30) single sided pages on 8 liz" x 11" paper. The firm may also submit a power point presentation ofpast bridge design projects. The architecture/engineering
firm should provide enough information to demonstrate the firm's ability to design the project. The SOQ shall designate the individuals who will be assigned to the project (Principal-in-charge,
Project manager, Project Engineer, Project Architect etc.) with resumes for each individual. A list ofsimilar projects in scope and size that the firm has recently completed in the last
five (5) years shall be provided. A description for each project shall be provided along with project cost, completion date, names ofproposed design team members involved in the project,
name ofthe client, contact person, and phone number for contact person. All written Statements ofQualifications and supporting material submitted shall be evaluated by the Selection
Committee, which will be made up ofMichael Murphy, P.E., Director of Public Works, James C. Pierce, P.E., Assistant Director ofPublic Works, Ron Whitehead, City Manager, and Bill Shipp,
Assistant to the City Manager. The review of the SOQ's will be based on the selection criteria shown on the attached page. The SOQ should specifically address each criterion fur evaluation.
The top two or four ranking firms will be asked to meet with the Town and make oral presentations. The firm the Town deems most qualified will then present a proposal to perform the
work and a fee will be negotiated. The design contract will go to the City Council for approval. Interested consultants should direct questions and submit Statements ofQualifications
to: Mailing: Steven Z. Chutchian, P .E. Street: 16801 Westgrove Assistant City Engineer Addison, Texas P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Phone: (972) 450-2886 Fax: (972) 450-2837

Steve Chutchian • 91 9Wtn \¥ From: Ron Whitehead ',' Sent: Thursday, October 04,2001 11:16 AM To: Steve Chulchian Subject; RE: Arapaho Road Bridge-Engineering Firms Steve, I would like
to include HKS, RTKL and Mesa Design, Ron ·----onginal Message-···· From: Su.ve Chutci1ian Sent: Tuesday. October 02. 2001 8:49 AM To: Ron Whitehead; Chlis Terry; carmen MOran Ce: Michael
Murphy; Jim Pierce; Luke Jalbert; Slade Sliicidand Subject: Arapaho Road Blidge-Engineeling Rrms A request for Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) from various firms has been prepared
regarding the architectural and structural design of the Arapaho Road bridge over Midway Road. A pre-submittal meeting will be established prior to issuing the SOQ requests to the candidate
firms. The tentative long list of firms for your review and consideration is shown below: HalffAssociates, Inc. Brown & Root Carter & Burgess, Inc. CH2M Hill Freese & Nichols HDR HOK
Parsons BrinckerhOff HNTB Upon receipt of the the SOQ's from the long list, the Town's review committee can begin the process of determining the firms that will participate in the concept
design competition. Thanks. Steve Chutchian ASSistant City Eng,i,neer 1 
Item #R3 -Presentation of results of the 2001 Addison Citizen Survey. Item #R4 -Consideration of an Ordinance approving a meritorious exception to Ordinance No. 096-022 to allow for
specific sign standards for attached tenant signs, located at 5100 Belt Line Road, Suite 840 on application from Dunhill Property Management. Item #R5 -Consideration of an Ordinance
approving a meritorious exception to Chapter 62, Signs, Sections 62-163 Area, located at 4204 Lindbergh Drive, on application from Office Furniture Team. Item #R6 -Consideration of a
Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in an amount not to exceed $5,000.00 for the reception and unveiling of the Town's Pegasus in the Galleria Mall. Consideration of an approval
of expenditure of funds for a stipend of $10,000.00 each to three Architect/Engineering Firms for a "Design Competition" to prepare design concepts for the Arapaho Road/Midway Road Bridge.
Item #R8 -Consideration of a Resolution approving a final plan showing the property encompassed in Addison's Arts and Events District. Item #R9 -Presentation on options for amendments
to the Sign Ordinance. EXECUTIVE SESSION Item #ES-1 -Pursuant to Section 551.071 of the Texas Government Code for closed session of the City Council, presentation and discussion of the
possible purchase from Ms. Anne Cavin of 10,000 square feet of property located .. at 4831 Broadway Street in conjunction with the Addison Arts and Events District. City Council Agenda
10-23-01 
08:51 FAX 972 406 6951 cc: URS 􀁃􀁯􀁲􀁰􀁯􀀬􀀮􀁾􀁯􀁮􀀠 3010 L8J Freeway. Suite 1320 Dalles, TX 75234 ral; 972.406.6950 f ..: 972.406.6951 www.urscorp.com . CONI!lDEN11ALITYNOTlCE The
􀁩􀁮􀁲􀁯􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠in 􀁾􀁩􀁳􀀠􀀨􀁉􀁴􀀮􀀤􀀺􀁩􀁭􀁩􀁊􀁾􀀠lran.sminion is nleru!td lSoldy for the .s:raltd ret1pl:nt o( Ulls lrlJ1smiss}on. Jfytlu have ft:eivr:d diU fnx in error, please:
ni)t\,fy the stoder immediately by Idepho 11;. 1f YDU are not Iht' illteMl!d rcopienl. please be.,ady4ed thai 􀁤􀁩􀁾􀁳􀁣􀁭􀁩􀀠13lioo. di$lriwuoo or eopying of the infcnnl\lion cOtltained
in this ell,)!. 1$ strictly prohibhed. 10/19/01 DRS To: Firm: Facsimile: From: Date: Page 1 of: Subject: Message: .---.,.._.........-..... _.........-........-_.. ' ...._-_._-
10./19/01 08:52 FAX 972 406 6951 URS 􀁾􀁏􀁯􀀮􀀲􀀠 >_.•1.00,2/01 14: 25 FAX 4l078S3o.86 llRS GREINER 􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀲􀀯􀀰􀀰􀀹􀀠 MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION --" NOTICE TO ARCHITECTS
AND ENGINEERS REQUEST FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST WOODROW WILSON MEMORIAL BRIDGE REPLACEMENT A. INTRODUCTION The Woodrow Wllson Memorial Bridge replacement and the 1-9:ilI-495 approach
roadway and interchange projects associated therewith are being pursue{. by the Maryland Department ofTransportation in partnership with the Virginia Department of Transportation, the
District ofColumbia Department ofPublic Works at d the Federal Highway Administration (the sponsoring agencies). for the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge replacement project, the Secretary
of the Maryland Department ofTransportation has certified to the TranspOltation Professional Services Selection Board (TPSSB) the need to utilize the services of architects or engineers.
Final engineering design ofthe bridge replacement is expected tc, be programmed in the Maryland Depar1:n1ent of Transportation Consolidated Transportation Program. The project will be
fully funded for design using 100 percent federal fimds. It is expected that funding for construction ofthe replacement bridge will be progranu 􀁾􀁥􀁤􀀠within the next three yeatS. All
prospective OODSultsDh are hereby Dotified thaI if100 percent fedenl fuads do Bot beeome available, this desigu eODsultmt agFeeneat could be termiDated. To be considered for selection
fur this project, interested consult I!g engineering finns must submit their qualificatiollS in a specified format in an Expres lion ofInterest. I 
10/19/01 08:52 FAX 972 406 6951 !ill 003 .. <'" J.VfJ,.f-EUJ,. 􀁾􀀠 .t .. 􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀠 l'1\.6. "J..U/lSlhlUltti !ill 003/009 B. DESCBJPTION OF THE PROJECT The replacement bridge snd the
adjacent approach roadways and interohanges have been the subject of an extensive project planning study which inclu.led numerous opportunities for public involvement. A Final Environmental
Impact Statement (FETS) has been prepared and approved on September 5, 1997. A Record ofDec:ision (ROD) was issued by FHW A on November 25, 1997. A copy ofthe ROD is included as Attachment
3. The requirements and commitments described in the PElS and ROD must be adhered to throughout the development ofthe design and during constnl! .tion. Attachment 3 contains a full description
of Selected Alternative 4 A, whioh resulted from the planning study. The infonnation below SUl1llJlanzes some ofthe key points contained in Attactunent 3, as they particularly relate
to tbis noticn. • The replacement bridge is to be approximately 6300 ft. long. It will extend from Rosalie Island on the Maryland shore to a point east ofWasrungton Street in Alexandria,
Virginia. The replacement bridge is to be located jUl t downstream of the existing bridge. • The replacement bridge will have a movable span. The naviga tional channel will be at least
175ft. wide centered along the existing llIlvigatiollal channel. The movable span shall provide a minimum of 70 fect ofvertical clearance above mean high water in the closed position
and at least 135 feet ofve::tical clearance above mean rugh water over the entire 175 ft. wide navigational channel in the open position. A major challenge in1hls project will be to
incoq orate Ii durable and reliable movable span into the overall structure in Ii manner which is structurally efficient, aesthetically pleasing. and logical and cons: stent with the
approach spans. The type ofmovable span to be used has not be.:n determined, exCept that Ii swing span type is generally considered to be undesirable. • The replacement bridge will be
designed to clirry twelve lanes of tra:ffic in an express/local configuration, plus shoulders and a pedestrlanlbike-lVay facility;. The proposed !;}'pical section is shown in Attachment
3. • The appearance and aesthetics ofthe replacement bridge and !lIe visual impact on the adjacent communities, as well as up-river and down·river, are items of 􀁭􀁾􀁯􀁲 concem. • The
arrangement ofspans across the river snd, in partioular, m 'er land on the ends ofthe bridge are extremely important. 2 
10/19/01 08:52 FAX 972 406 6951 URS @004 " J.liJ/J.i!.IUJ. 􀀮􀁬􀀴􀀺􀁾􀁢􀀠 lIi\.!. 􀀴􀀱􀁕􀀷􀁾􀀵􀀳􀁴􀁈􀁩􀁴􀁩􀀠 URS GREINIlR 􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀴􀀯􀀰􀀰􀀹􀀠 • This project also includes the design ofa
bridgeldeck structu!'eiO span over I· 95/495 connecting the north and south ends ofRosalie Island in MaIYland. This structure will facilitate use ofRosalie Island and Queen Anne's Purk
as a public recreational area and will serve as a gateway entrance to the State ofMaIY1and. Its dasign must be both aesthetic and iuhctional. The structure type and detailing must be
cLosely coordinated with the design of the bridge replacel [lent structure to provide a eoDSistent theme and visual appearance. .• The existing bridge is to be completely removed. The
existing bridge shall not be removed and must remain open to six.lanes oftraffic until suel! time that at least six lanes oftraffic can be transferred to the new bridge and approach
roadways. • Six lanes oftraffic on 1-95 shall be maintained at all times duriJ Ig construction. Also, all existing traffic movements in the adjacent interchanges !hall be maintained
at all times. Constructability, 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 sequencing and mainterumce oftraffic will be important considerations in the 􀁤􀁥􀁶􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀠ofthis project. • All known geotechnical
and subfoundation COnditiODll are described in a forthcoming report entitled "Synthesis Report -Woodrow Wilson Bridge Improvements Geotechnical Feasibility Study" This report will he
made available to all finns selected for the lWduced Candidate List. • .Spccific design criteria: • Structure: AASHTO Standard Specifications : 'or Highway Bridges, Sixteenth EdifioD,
includiIlg all interim specifications. Load Factor Design shaIl be utilized. Design loading shall be HS-25. 􀁔􀁨􀁾 bridge shall also be designed to accommodate ihture tnmsit loadings.
See Attachment 2 for dehils. • Movable Span: AASIiTO Standard Specifications :'or Movable Highway Bridges -1988 Edition. Open grid decking shaIl uot be used. A full d.:p1h, reinforced
concrete deck is is preferred. A signi;:icant goal ofthis project is to produce II mOVable spa n structure . which is durable. reliable and easilJ' maintainable. Emphasis shOllld be
on proven and reliable systems wbicb.have a high degree ofredunt.ancy and which include fail-safe features. 3 
_---"10/1jllOl_08: 52 FAJ: 972 408 6951 URS @005 19/12/01 14:26 FAX 4101853086 URS GREINER GlI 005/009 • Roadway; AASlITO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Design spe::d
shall be 70 miles per hour. . o Ship Impact: AASKfO Guide Specifications and CommentaJy for Vessel Collision Design ofHighway Bridges, 1991 Edition. Design loadings to ',eused are described
in the report cited above, entitled "Synthesis Report -Woodrow Wi Ison Bridge Improvements Geotechnical Feasibility Study." 􀁾􀀠All pertinent Maryland SHA and Virginia DOT desigr. standards,
policies, practices, criteria, ete. shall be followed as far as practicable. In the event these documents are found to be in conflict, re;;olutions will be detennined on a case.by-case
basis as !hay arise. o For pllIposes ofthis selection process, all materials sball be developed and submitted using English units. Following the selection process, the sponsoring agencies
may require that the contract documents be developed and submitted using metric units. This decision will be made following the selection ofthe winDing finn. A Memorandum. ofAgreement
(MOA), included in Attacbmen'; 3, has been signed among the sponsoring agencies, National Park Service (NPS), J,dvisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), and the State HIstoric
Pmservation Officers (SHPO) of Maryland,. Virginia and the District ofColumbia regarding the Woodww Wilson Bridge Project. The following items concerning the project design and review
are contained in the MOA. Prospective consultants shOUld be aware ofthese items and firms seLected for the Reduced Candidate List will be expected to address and incorporat0 these items
in their submittals. These items will be considered in the evaluation oftt.e entries and the selected finn will be expected to abide by the requirements ofthe MOA throughout the design
development process. The following passage (in italics) is quoted directly from the MOA (see Attachment 3): "Design Goals: 1. 1112 Bridge (Potomac River Crossing) shall be a structure
designed with high aesthetic values, deriving iI6form in relation to the monument.:Il core of Washington, D. C.. and shall be an asset to the Nation 's capitol and the surrounding region.
4 
10/19/01 08:52 FAX 972 406 6951 URS tal 006 10/12/01 14:26 FAX 4107853086 URS GmilNER tal 006/009 2. The concepts for the bridge shall be based on arches in the trait/ion ofnotable Potomac
River bridges (e.g., Key Bridge, Memorial Bridge). 3. The bridge design shall employ span lengths which minimize t.le number of piers occurring in the viewshed ofthe Alexandria Historic
District and other historic properties. Every effort shall be made to minimize the fo 'tprint ofthe project wit/wl't adversely affecting safety and operations. 4. The bridge design shall
also include pier placement which maintains the park use areas in Jones Point Park and iWsalie Island Park, 􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁳􀁥􀁲􀁶􀁥􀁾􀀧􀀠views southward along Rayal. Fairfax, and Lee Streets,
and avoids ten estriol and underwater archeological areas to the maximum ex1ent possible. 5. The bridge design should encourage the use oflands under the bridge ill Jones Point Park.
For example, the structure could approach this goa," by introducing andlor reflecting light into the area under the bridge. 6. The bridge design should preserve or enhance views along
􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀠Potomac River toward the National Capital and Alexandria Historic District. 7. The design ofthe bl'idge and other project elements shall taJr., into account the City ofAlexandria's
Design Guidelines of1he Old and Alexandria Historic District and the Parker-Gray District (1993). The bridge design 􀁾􀁨􀁡􀁬􀁬􀀠also respect the distinguishing historic characteristics
ofthe Alexo.ndria HisJOric District, as defined in the report prepared under Section J ofthis MOA. 8. The bridge design shall incorporate features appropriate to its status as a memorial
to President Woodrow Wilson. 9. Allpracticable measures shall be taken to minimize the cons. 'rUction period of the Project JO. Construction impacts to historic and archeological resources
shall be flIIDided or minimized to the extent possible. .1Jpossible, construction-related traffic in the City ofAlexandria will be routed away from residE nIIal areas via South Street
to minimize conslrui!tion-reiated traffic through thl residential areas north ofthe Capital Beltway. I I. The design ofthe Bridge and other Projectelenrents shall 􀁴􀁾􀁫􀁥􀀠into acco-unt
the planfor the Mount Vernon Merrwrial Highway, the NPS General Management Planfor the factlity, and the agreement between the NPS and the City of Alexandriafor the management ifJones
Point Park and the re"ources therein by the City. the agreement with the Daughters ofthe American Re lolutionfor management ofJones Point Lighthouse, and effects on archaeological resources.
5 
1Q/19/01 08:53 FAX 972 406 6951 URS f4j 007 1Q/t2/01 14:27 FAX 4107853086 URS GREINER f4jo07/009 12. The project shall be designed to avoid all temporary andpel1nanen/impacts to the
Freedmen'li (Contraband) Cemetery. Design Review Coordination: 1. A Design Review Working Group, consisting ofone represeni'ative from the NPS, the ACHP. the District ofColumbia smo.
the Maryland SHPO, the Virginia smo. the Maryland NationalCapital Park and Plann!ng Commission (MNCPPC), the Prince George's Counry Government, and the Ciry ofAlexandria shall be established prior to the initiation ojthe detailed design phase
ofthe project to provide comments to ensure that the project design m·rets the stipulations outlined in the MOA. 2. The FHWA, and as appropriate. the DCDPW, the MSHA, fh" VDOT and the
Project design consultants shall meet with the Design Review r1'orking Group prior to beginning the preliminary design phase to review the g.meral design goals for the project and specific
treatmen/measures for 􀁡􀁤􀁶􀁥􀁲􀁾􀀧􀁥􀀠effects to historic resources. 8ubseqmmtly. this Working Group will COnl'ene to review pertinent plans and specifications at the completion ofprelimin,ry
design (30 percent). intermediate design (65 percent) and pre1inal design (90/95 percent). This Working Group will be i11formed 􀁾 the findings ofthe His tone Resources Identification
and Evaluation Report and measures to minimize effects to historic resources will be incorporated into treatment plans. os appropriate. The FHW A will provide one set ofplans and specifications
to each membel ofthe working group fifteen calendar days prior to each milestone review meeting. Copies of these plans will also be available for review at ihe Woodrow W11so1'1 Bridge
Project Office in Alexandria, Virginia. The FHW A shall al'lnOU.1ce their availability to all parties to this Agreement. 3. The Design Review Working Group shall provide one set oj written
comments to the FHWA within 45 calendar days ofreceiving the design plans and specificaliollfor each mLljor milestone. milestone. Review commentsfrom the working group will be i1lCorporated
in/o the design. ofspecific project efements to the maximum extent possible. IndivitbJal repr-esentatives In the working group may submit separale review comments QIId the FHWA may conslde.-s-uch
comments In addition to tire consensus comments ofthe working group. 4. The FHW A shall contimJe consultations with the Design REview Working Group throughout the delailed design phose
as nece.ssary to ",fdress review comments and other elements ofproject design such as materl2ls. finish. lighting. etc. " 6 
10/19/01 08:53 FAX 972 406 6951 URS I/lJ008 1,O[.12/g1 ...},4,27 FAX HIl78530B6 URS GREINER I/lJ008/009 NOTE: Potentia! consultants should be aware that the invo!veme nt ofthe Design
Review Working Group during the design development will be in addition to 1he noma! project review process used by the sponsoring agencies. The review comments from the Design Review
Working Group shall be inco::porated with 1he review comments provided by the sponsoring agencies. C. DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECflON PROCESS The selection process will consist ofthe following
general steps: • Expressions ofinterest wiIi be solicited from interested, qualifi ed firms. The expressions of interest must contain requiIed in.fonn.ali.on as desc abed herein. A selection
coIIlIllittee composed ofmembers from 1he sponsoring agencies will review and evaluate the expressions ofinterest. Based on qualifi 􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳􀀬􀀠key staff exp\lrience, and similar
project experience, a reduced candidate rst (RCL) ofthree to five firms will be selected. • A pre-proposal conference will be held with the firms on the r"dlIced candidate list to discuss
the remaining process and to answer questions. • The finns will prepare and submit technical proposals and pre: jrninary design plans for a proposed bridge concept which in their view
best me£,ts the conditions, requimnents and design goals for the project. The ma1erials to l,., submitted are generally described herein and will be more fully discussed in dewl following
the selection ofthe reduced candidate list and at the pre-proposal conference. The required information is to be submitted anonymously. A lump s·.un contract for a fixed fee in the amount
of $100,000 will be prepared for each ofthe finns selected for the reduced candidate list. This fee will be paid to each of the RCL:fums who successfully-present an acceptable submission
by the required de;te. • A Selection Panel will review and evaluate the submittals. n.e general makeup ofthe Selection Panel will be as follows: " representatives ofthe sponsoring agencies;
o selected professionals from the ranks ofbridge engine<:ring, architecture, urban design, etc.; • con.unUDity/agency representatives. The exact make-up ofthe Selection Panel has not
yet been fil!ll1i zed. • The submissions will be reviewed by several Advisory Committees who will advise the Seleetion Panel regarding the design, constructability> cost and environmental
sensitivity ofthe respective submittals. Four difl'erent Advisory 7 
141 009 141009/009 Committees are envisioned: I) a Technical Advisory Committee, who will advise the Selection Panel on the technical feasibility and design merits ofthe submittals;
2) a Constroctability Advisory Committee, who will advise the Se: eerion Panel on the constructability aspects ofthe submittals and who will independently verify the construction cost
estimates; 3) aHistoric Advisory Committee, consisting of members comprising the Design Review Working Group as descriiled in the MOA, who will advise llie Selection Panel on the compliance
pftb:, submittals willi llie design goals stated in the MOA; and 4) a Citizen's Advismy Committee, who will advise the Selection Panel as to the relatiye merits ofthe submittals from
the public viewpoint. The Advisory Committees wili prepare a brief report on eu:h submission and will make a presentation to the Selection Panel when they meH to select the winning entty.
The Advisory Committees will not rank the submi' :taIs, but will point out the advantages and disadvantages ofeach submittal. The Advisory Committees will be made up ofappropriate persons
in each area and will include representatives from the General Engineerinr Consultant (GEC), supplemented as..necessary with staff from the sponsoring l.gencies and others as required.
The exact makeup of the Advisory CommitteeH has not yet . been finalized . .. The Selection Panel will meet to review, evaluate, deliberate an.l select the submission which best meets
the requirements ofthe project. The committee will utilize the submitted materials, the advice ofthe Advisory Commi:tees, and 1heir own judgment based on their discussions and deliberations
to seie<:t the winning entry . • The finn submitting the selected entry will be asked to prepare L price proposal in accordance with State ofMaryland procedures. Ifnegotiations ·.vitb
the flIll1 are timely and successful, a contract may be awarded to the firm. 8 
Steve Chutchian From: Ron Lee Sent: Monday, October 22,2001 12:18 PM To: Sieve Chulchian Cc: Slade Strickland Subject: RE: Morris Rd. Change-orders Jim Bowman is going to send over a
written quote for the cabinet by this afternoon. As soon as I get this, I will bring it down to you. I will also discuss it with Chris Terry; I have a meeting with him al 2:00. Hopefully
Bowman's quote will be here by then. The (3) trees are to replace ones we have been holding here at the Service Center for the past year. One has died and (2) have such large portions
that have died that they no longer are suitable specimens. Run.£ee Town 0/.Jildiflson :Parh OJ?eratiuns :Mtzm1[/er ---Original Message-From: Sieve CIlutthlan Sent: Monday, October 22,
2001 7:54 AM To: Ron Lee Subject: RE: Morris Rd. CIlange-orners Ron -Please give me a call this morning. I read a response from Dave Wilde also. Steve Chutchian ----Original Message----From:
Ron Lee Sent: liiday, October 19, 200110:01 AM To: Steve Chutthlan cc: Dave Wilde; Slade Stridcland Subject: Morris Rd. CIlange-orders steve, need to gel with you first thing Monday
moming to go over some changes that our dept. would like to implement on the project: 1) Add (3) more Live Oak trees as three of the ones we were holding for the past year have died
2) Install an electrical cabinet for the lighting controls instead of using the unistrut spelled out on the plans Run.£ee Town 0/.Jildiflson :Parh c!peratiuns :Mtzm1[/er 1 
Steve Chutchian To: Ron Whitehead; Chris Terry; Call11en Moran Cc: Michael Murphy; Jim Pierce; Luke Jalbert; Slade Strickland Subject: Arapaho Road Bridge-Engineering Firms A request
for Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) from various fil111s has been prepared regarding the architectural and structural design of the Arapaho Road bridge over Midway Road. A pre-submittal
meeting will be established prior to issuing the SOQ requests to the candidate fil111s. The tentative long list of fil111s for your review and consideration is shown below: Halff Associates,
Inc. Brown & Root Carter & Burgess, Inc. CH2M Hill Freese & Nichols HDR HOK Parsons Brinckerhoff HNTB Upon receipt of the the 8OQ's from the long list, the Town's review committee can
begin the process of detel111ining the firms that will participate in the concept design competition. Thanks. Steve Chulchian Assistant City Engineer 1 
REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS ENGINEERING SERVICES ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD TOWN OF ADDISON The Town ofAddison is emharking on an exciting project to construct the
portion of Arapaho Road, from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Rd. Included in this significant roadway improvement to our community is a unique bridge section over Midway Road. This mature
will serve as a gateway to The Town ofAddison and its renowned amenities. In order to accomplish this goal, The Town ofAddison is undertaking an architect/engineer selection process,
to design the architectural and structural components ofthe bridge. A Request fur Qualifications is being sent to certain ArchitecturelEngineering firms, and after review ofthe submittals,
a short list ofthree to four ArchitectureiEngineering firms will be made. These finalists will be paid a stipend of$7500 to prepare a design concept for the space. The selection committee
fur implementation will select one concept. Drawings and a study model will describe the concept. Teams must be comprised ofboth architects and structural engineers. A mandatory pre-submittal
meeting will be held October 9, 2001 at 3:30 p.m. This meeting will be held at our Service Center, at 1680 I Westgrove Drive. Any firm not represented will not be eligible to submit
a Statement of Qualifications. The proposed bridge must be 4 lanes, and be able to accommodate pedestrian traffic. Midway road is 80' wide, back ofcurb to back of curb through the bridge
section. Copies ofthe preliminary plans fur Arapahoe road will be available at the pre-submittal meeting. Addison will accept written Statements ofQualifications (SOQ) from engineering
consultants until 5:00 p.m., November 2, 2001. Four (4) copies ofthe SOQ shall be submitted. The SOQ should contain a maximum number ofthirty (30) single sided pages on 8 y," x 11" paper.
The firm should also submit a power point presentation ofpast bridge design projects. The engineering firm should provide enough information to demonstrate the firm's ability to design
the project. The SOQ shall designate the individuals who will be assigned to the project (Principal-in-charge, Project manager, Project Engineer, etc.) with resumes fur each individual.
A list of similar projects in scope and size that the firm has recently completed in the last five (5) years shall be provided. For each project a description shall be provided along
with project cost, completion date, names ofproposed design team members involved in the project, name ofthe client, contact person, and phone number for contact person. 
All written Statements ofQuaIifications submitted sball be evaluated by the Selection Committee, which will be made up ofMichael Murphy, P.E., Director ofPublic Works, James C. Pierce,
P.E., Assistant Director of Public Works, Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E., Assistant City Engineer, and Luke Jalbert, E.LT., Project Manager. The review ofthe SOQ's will be based on the selection
criteria shown on the attached page. The SOQ should specifically address each criterion for evaluation. The top three or fuur ranking firms will be asked to meet with the Town and make
oral presentations. The firm the Town deems most qualified will then present a proposal to perform the work and a fee will be negotiated. The design contract will go to the City Council
fur approval. Interested consultants should direct questions and submit Statements of Qualifications to: Mailing: Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E. Street: 16801 Westgrove Assistant City Engineer
Addison, Texas P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Phone: (972) 450-2886 Fax: (972) 450-2837 
Company Website Albert Halff www.Halff.com Brown and Root Frank Abugatli Carter-Burgess www.carter-burge!!l!,com CH2M Hill www.ch2m,com Freese&Nichols www,freese.com HDR www,hdrtnc,com
HNTB www.hntb,com HOK www,hok,com Parsons Brinckerhoff www.gbwortd.com cBfiEisefar.mil.2. AlIscc jfofWW.bridgefarmer,com 9JlaRlJ Patel & 'ferby www,clriLcom Kimley Ilem www,kimlev-hom,com
PBSd .> Yl'WW.pbs&j.com T..!!CO!lr Collie Brade, n www-tcandb.com .-WHitt-Zolla. s -www.hui!j-zollars,com Architects X x X X X X X X X Bridges X x X X x X X X X X X X X X no bridge or
architecture not that many unusual bri weak bridge section incredible incredible archi 
Page 1 of} Steve Chutchian From: Luke Jalbert Sent: Thursday, September 27,2001 3:16 PM To: Steve Chutchian; Jim Pierce; Michael Murphy Subject: questions for Arapahoe road bridge pre-submittal
meeting Here are some questions I was thinking we need to have answers for before we meet with the firms, please add any that you have to this list so we can make sure we have aU our
bases covered before the meeting. 1. What kind of budget are they expected to work within? 2. What kind of yearly maintenance budget will be available, should we have this as a design
criteria? 3. how much are we going to let them play with the alignment (vertical) and the limits of the bridge? 4. how much parking must we provide those business owners under the bridge?
5. What kind of timeframe, both design and construction, are we talking about? attached is also the RFQ I have so far, I have questions about anything in RED. 9/28/01 
􀁾􀀠 . 􀁾 Wlf4 e 􀁵􀁊􀁌􀁩􀁾􀁴􀁌􀀴􀁾􀀩􀀠 9-ltf-01 􀁾􀀺􀁰􀁾􀁾􀀠 2) 􀁰􀁾􀁄􀁴􀁲􀁥􀀠 /' 􀁾􀀩􀀠 t2)Q.oMA-IL £vv<., y;K10---, .. 􀁴􀁴􀀩􀁾􀁾􀀠 􀁜􀁜􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠 .0) 􀁾􀁴􀁌􀀠Si:t 􀁾􀀠 ClI-(J b) C(
It nf1rl 􀁾􀀮􀀠__ .􀁾􀀠 􀁾-t' cn4--FQ 􀁾􀀮􀁦􀁵􀀺􀀠 , 􀁾 0... 'I -I!fu ' 0 􀁾 301+ '.i-􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀠 􀁾􀁾􀀠" 􀁴􀀧􀁫􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁷􀀭􀁍􀀭 􀁾􀀠 t:-Z-;::Y 􀁾 'fk FL, 
CONCRETE TYPE IV I-BEAM 
" .-'. o. 􀀺􀁯􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀼􀀠 STEVEN Z. CHUTCHIAN, P.E • Assistant Cily Engineer I . i (972) 4541-2886 (972) 4541-2837 FAX (214) 673-2518 Mobile schutchian@ci.addison.tx.us E-mail Town of
Addison 16801 Westgrove Dr. P.O. Box 9010, Addison, Texas 75001-9010 I I 5 C/fErv4-71CS 
o o ], i·I H 􀁾􀁜􀀠 􀁉􀁾 ,1 ! I 1 i i ;: r ........ !i ( r --------! , (A, ,, 􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀭 r" 􀁾􀀠 -+---.,----1 , I : ; I ,I I Ie--.I I . "1 i 
""-""."" " 
I .. ' .. • 0.' • '" 􀀮􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 • # 􀁾􀀠 , • " 􀁾􀀠... .' . 
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450·2871 Fast Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 􀀷􀀵􀀰􀀰􀀱􀁾􀁏􀁏􀁬􀁏􀀠 16801 W.&tgrove REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS ARCHlTECTIENGINEERING SERVICES
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD TOWN OF ADDISON The Town of Addison is embarking on an exciting project to construct the portion of Arapaho Road, from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Rd.
Included in this significant roadway improvement to our community is a unique bridge section over Midway Road. This feature will serve as a gateway to The Town of Addison and its renowned
amenities. In order to accomplish this goal, The Town of Addison is undertaking a three-step architect/engineer selection process, to design the architectural and structural components
ofthe bridge. The first step consists ofa request for qualifications that is being sent to selected architecture and engineering firms. The submittals will be reviewed, and a short list
ofthree AlE firms (finalists) will be selected to go to the second step. The finalists will enter a "design competition" and will be paid a stipend of$1 0,000 to prepare a design concept
for the bridge. The finalists will be asked to meet with the Town to receive vision and direction for the project from Town Management. Drawings, visual graphics, and/or a study model
will describe the concept. The finalists will be asked to present their designs( s) for a selection committee made up of members of the governing body and staff. Lastly, the design competition
winner will then prepare a proposal to complete the design, and a fee will be negotiated. The design contract will go to City Council for approval. A mandatory pre-submittal meeting
will be held at 3:00 p.m. November 13,2001 at the Stone Cottage, 4901 Addison Circle Drive. Any firm not represented will not be eligible to submit a Statement of Qualifications. The
proposed bridge must be 4 lanes, and be able to accommodate pedestrian traffic. Midway road is 45' wide, back of curb to back of curb through the bridge section: 
Copies of the preliminary plans for Arapaho road will be available at the pre-submittal meeting. Addison will accept written Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) from ArchitecturelEngineering
firms until November 26th, 2001. Four (4) copies of the SOQ shall be submitted. The SOQ should contain a maximum number of thirty (30) single sided pages on 8 Y:z" x II" paper. The firm
may also submit a power point presentation of past bridge design projects. The architecture/engineering firm should provide enough information to demonstrate the firm's ability to design
the project. The SOQ shall designate the individuals who will be assigned to the project (Principal-in-charge, Project manager, Project Engineer, Project Architect etc.) with resumes
for each individual. A list of similar projects in scope and size that the firm has recently completed in the last five (5) years shall be provided. A description for each project shall
be provided along with project cost, completion date, names of proposed design team members involved in the project, name ofthe client, contact person, and phone number for contact person.
All written Statements of Qualifications and supporting material submitted shall be evaluated by the Selection Committee, which will be made up of Michael Murphy, P.E., Director of Public
Works, James C. Pierce, P.E., Assistant Director of Public Works, Ron Whitehead, City Manager, and Bill Shipp, Assistant to the City Manager. The review of the SOQ' s will be based on
the selection criteria shown on the attached page. The SOQ should specifically address each criterion for evaluation. Interested consultants should direct questions and submit Statements
of Qualifications to: Mailing: Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E. Street: 16801 Westgrove Assistant City Engineer Addison, Texas P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Phone: (972) 450-2886
Fax: (972) 450-2837 
EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR QUALIFICATIONS POINTS MULTIPLIER SCORE I. The finn's experience, as well as proposed subcontractors, in Sllccessfully performing similar assignments, in scope
and size, for Olhers within the last five (5) years, by personnel still on the finn's staff. Prime and Sub have worked together before. 0-10 4 2. Professional background ofkey personnel
and experience in environmental assessment and reporting The firm's current staff, both in size and related experience, is qualified to provide the desired service. Indicate length 0
f time key employees have been with the firm as well as their home office location. 0 10 4 3. Location ofmain office and/or branch office that will provide services and experience in
the local area. 0-10 4. Management approach to this project. (Include QAlQC, schedule and budget programs). 0-10 5. Technical approach to this project. 0-10 6. Previous clients, for
similar projects express satisfaction with the firm's work (Short listed firms only, if necessary). 0-10 2 7. Oral presentation (short listed firms only, if necessary). 0-10 4 
Iv"1,.,1"''' Page I ofl 􀁾􀁁􀁟􀀮􀁥􀁊􀂭 􀁗􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁬􀁁􀀭􀀭􀂭 Jim Pierce From: Luke Jalbert Sent: Thursday, September 27,2001 3:16 PM To: Steve Chutchian; Jim Pierce; Michael Murphy
Subject: ques1ions for Arapahoe road bridge pre-submittal meeting Here are some questions I was thinking we need to have answers for before we meet with the firms, please add any that
you have to this list so we can make sure we have ali our bases covered before the meeting. 1. What kind of budgat are they expected to work within? 2. What kind of yearly maintenance
budget will be available, should we have this as a design criteria? 3. how much are we going to let them play with the alignment (vertical) and the limits of the bridge? 4. how much
parking must we provide those business owners under the bridge? 5. What kind of timeframe, both design and cons1ruction, are we talking about? attached is also the RFQ I have so far,
I have questions about anything in RED. I 2. 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE At MIDWAY ROAD FACT SHEET November 13, 2001 • Total length of bridge, including retaining walls and earthen fill areas is approx. 2,500 ft. • Bridge length, from
abutment to abutment is approx. 1,600 ft. • Width of roadway at bridge section is 44 ft. • Parking under bridge is a provision of this project. • Lighting above and under bridge sOOll
be included in design. • Impact of bridge on visibility of adjacent commercial properties shall be considered in design. • Elevated pedestrian crossing adjacent to roadway shall be included
in bridge design. • Project budget range is $1.5 to $3.0 million • Design schedule is.___ • Construction schedule is ____ 
f·jJ I-i DU'''I> I : I 􀁾 • III =JARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS l'arl:u'u)".Slrill' 63() nu/,r. IS, 􀁮􀀧􀁟􀁜􀀢􀀢􀀮􀁾􀀠 􀀷􀁾􀀮􀁨􀁴􀀩􀀭􀁩􀁽􀀬􀀧􀁩f April 22, 1999 (;172) "fit· %..!{l I'.,IX
(',172) Mil·j6l.; Town of Addison 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Attn: Mr. Jim Pierce, Jr., P.E., DEE Assistant City Engineer ARAPAHO ROAD ALIGNMENT REPORT
Dear Mr. Pierce: The following issues were discussed, regarding this project, with city staff, HNTB Corporation, GBW, and several property owners on March 15, 1999, at Addison Town Center.
Mr. Ron Whitehead, City Manager, requested that the team of consultants provide a brief report upon completion of an analysis of suggested alternatives discussed during the meeting.
Listed below is a brief summary of the suggestions and concerns discussed during the meeting. Lindberg Drive Alignment Alternative One suggestion made by the property owners present
at the meeting was to further study the Lindberg Drive alignment on the north side of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DAR1) owned railroad as the preferred location due to the dense industrial
developmem presem along this corridor. Lindberg Drive is primarily a two-lane roadway between Addison Road and Midway Road that terminates just west of Midway Road. The project team
identified several issues with the Lindberg Drive alignment. One concern is the number of at-grade skewed crossings required with the DART railroad. Typically, railroad crossings are
required to intersect the tracks at a 90-degree angle whenever possible for safety purposes. Even slightly skewed crossings of a main track are not desirable or typically approved by
the Railroad. The DART railroad is currently a highly utilized freight train track, between Kelly Boulevard and the Galleria retail shopping area, serving many commercial businesses
in Carrollton, Farmers Branch, Addison, and Dallas. Should the existing Lindberg Drive right-ofway be utilized as the extension of Arapaho Road, two significantly skewed at-grade crossings
of the main tracks are required. The flight pattern of the runway at Addison Airport would also be impacted. Currently, Lindberg Drive is restricted from through trucks due to the height
of the planes landing and departing from Addison Airport. The expansion of Lindberg Drive to four lanes could further decrease the available runway length. FAA approval could be required
due to the impact to Tbt' flNTIt C"wjJuJlil!.> onh 􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀠 \lr).. ''..Phn. \ \. \lj \" i \ " \. \1 'iI'... n. 1\\")" WE t". L\, H'hl':.'>, \J\ 􀁾􀀠 IHIUVj( ,'.,. \\\, C :WK,u.!J nrYFl
\"1). 'JII 13\1 i X'. J"\. :)1:\\ ,II CP. lll·rIl, 'IT \Ii f\lar;FU; v. r; ""lnll j"\ lI\lnnHn. u WI! 􀁾􀁈􀀩􀀢􀀢􀀮􀀠 i\ I .... r"\.....wou_. 􀀡􀁾􀀢􀀠 U!\I'.1. l.\. h\'.'.\\ <-1'1', \;"
!.P;,; ....,;. \Il, :,-," '\:t;rl:-,. (\. Ull :"liLd,,"'Y Iii \\11. n. ,UW H "'F, \\ I \n\:":r \1', 􀀩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀬􀀠 'I\:. 􀀢􀁜􀁾􀁬􀀡􀁮􀁝􀁪􀁊􀀺􀀮􀀠1 ". "'-W VOIIK. -':Y fHi<1. \"Il. ("\.
0)<1 X\,\)O, \ L (,\dtL\:'>.ll 1'\](". 􀁊􀀻􀀻􀁾􀀬􀀠 1'1I0F>-:I:-;, \l', 1': Y\HW'I 'I \11.111'\0, ;'.\, ;'.\, I" )HI'. \'1> "I tI:-H(;II:\. "Id UKr orr j "-􀁾􀁜􀁜􀀺􀀠\,\;T<I"10 1"\ 􀁾􀁬􀀧􀁮􀀱􀁬􀁆􀀠
\\ \. l ,\11'.... 1'1 r'b'.O;" 
Town of Addison -2-Arapaho Road Extension Addison, Texas 75001-9010 April 22, 1999 Addison Airpon. Also, a steep grade would be required on the Arapaho Road extension in order to rnstch
the at-grade intersection at Addison Road. Prior to preparing plans for the Arapaho Road extension from the Dallas North Tollway (DNT) to Addison Road, the Town of Addison evaluated
the Lindberg Drive alignment and selected a geoeral corridor south of the railroad tracks. Consequently, right-of-way has already been acquired from several propeny owners south of the
railroad. Changing the alignment to the north of the railroad would increase the project costs. Overpass at Midway Road The height and location of the bridge structure in relation to
the existing businesses was also discussed during the meeting. Several concerns expressed by the propeny owners included the horizontal location of the bridge structure in relation to
Charter Furniture and MBNA. The current alignment places the edge of the bridge deck a minimnm of 10 feet from the buildings. Upon reviewing various other horizontal alignments with
city staff after the meeting, the original alignment was still determined to be the desired horizontal alignment in relation to the buildings, due to the location of the Dallas Water
Utilities (DWU) 60-inch water main. Moving the structure closer to the water main raises access concerns should DWU need to access their water main for maintenance or repair. City staff
will meet with DWU to determine if the recommended location of the structure is acceptable, or other alignments could be considered that would further infringe on the DWU easement. Although
final approval has yet to be received from DWU for the technically preferred alignment, the response to date has been positive. Upon review of the vertical alignment of the proposed
bridge near the MBNA and Charter Furniture buildings, it is anticipated that the height of the overpass structure will be lower than the existing buildings. The existing buildings are
esthnated to be a minimum of 5 to 15 feet higher than the bridge roadway surface elevation. Exhibits are attached for your clarification. Another concern expressed by the propeny owners
was the loss of propeny rights, should the buildings be destroyed due to hail or other catastrophic means. City staff and consultants concurred upon conclusion of the meeting that the
City is able to allow the propeny owners to rebuild to the existing building set backs and not be considered "non-conforming". Additional alignments recommended for further study by
the propeny owners included constructing the bridge structure over the DWU water line. This alignment increases concern related to DWU access to the 60-inch water main along with the
increased cost. It was determined not to be acceptable by DWU due to inability of maintenance and expansion of a rnsjor viaduct type structure. 
Town of Addison -3 -Arapaho Road Extension Addison, Texas 75001-9010 April 22, 1999 Midway At-Grade Intersection The property owners present at the meeting also requested the city staff
examine the potential of removing the traffic signal at Lindberg Drive and Midway Road and relocating it south to a new at-grade intersection at Arapaho Road in lieu of constructing
an overpass. HNTB has reviewed this recommendation and determined that should Arapaho Road be constructed at-grade, the traffic signal at Lindberg Drive would still be required due to
the volume of traffic and safety concerns. Spanning the 􀁄􀁾􀀧􀁊􀀺􀀧􀀠Allgmnent One option also discussed at the meeting was the potential to relocate Arapaho Road onto the existing
DART right-of-way, either with a bridge structure or an at-grade roadway within the existing 1OO-foot railroad right-of-way. Mr. Ron Whitehead agreed to discuss this issue with DART
officials. Upon further consideration, it wasdetermined this option was not feasible. 1bis was primarily due to federal guidelines regarding vertical clearance for electrification facilities, and the required horizontal clearance
width to allow DART to maintain the existing freight traffic in the corridor and to allow for expansion of the service to include passenger rail in the future. Overpass vs. Underpass
The pros and cons of the underpass versus overpass were further reviewed to determine if the technically preferred alternative should remain the same. The overpass alternative provides
improved mobility, minimum disruption of traffic during construction, less restrictive impact on DWU water line, and provides more convenient location for enclosure of the major drainage
ditch to remain on the south side of the railroad. The negative aspects of an overpass include: less aesthetically pleasing to adjacent property owners; potential noise concerns; wall
construction will be partially on DWU easement, above and 7.5 feet from water line; and restriction of the DWU easement width. . The underpass alternative provides improved mobility,
minimizes noise impact, and eliminates most of the visual impacts. The negative aspects of the underpass include: the reduction of Midway Road traffic to two lanes; construction costs
will be increased approximately $1,500,000; a major drainage structure will be required to be constructed on the north side of the railroad to prevent flooding of depressed roadway;
deep excavation for wall construction adjacent to DWU 60" water line is required; major utility relocations in Midway Road which would require temporary closure ofthe railroad; and restriction
of the DWU easement width. The Cottonbelt Railroad, owned by DART, is currently being considered as a future passenger rail line. Should this occur in the future, the intersection of
Midway Road and the railroad is anticipated to be grade separated with an overpass due to the volume of traffic on Midway Road and safety of the motoring pUblic. This further confirms
the recommendation for an 
Town of Addison -4-Arapaho Road Extension Addison, Texas 75001-9010 April 22, 1999 overpass versns underpass. Upon completion of additional review of the underpass and overpass alternatives,
the technically preferred alternative remained the same as previously recommended in the technical report. Summary Upon completion of the analysis of the various issues from the city
staff, property owners and other interested parties; the consulting team continues to recommend the "technically preferred alignment" (TPA) discussed in the technical report. This alignment
is shown in the map pocket of the technical report as Option 5. We hope this technical memo resolves the majority of the questions raised at the meeting with the property owners. If
you desire any future action regarding this specific issue or have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Very truly yours, HNTB CORPORATION 􀁾􀀬􀀿􀀺􀁉􀁾􀀠 CESllnb Enclosures

I ! : :AL SEC ! r:"PIC IrIOIV i : i ! i ! . E /􀁥􀁾􀀮􀀧atfj( St􀁾􀁵􀁣􀁴􀁬jre We,,st 01 M!c􀁾􀁷􀁡􀁹􀀠 I ! STA 5i2+5(0 ! i ! ! I ! ! i ! ! ! I ! ! 635 i rl vnrl. i ! i 635 􀁾􀀠 ! Il.n
􀁾􀀱􀁦􀁴􀀭􀁏􀀡􀀠. : A hH,I61 ! 􀁾􀁦􀁴􀀭􀀼􀀻􀁉􀁮􀀠 " •.. i'n 􀁾􀁦􀁴􀀭 , . I .... 630 􀁾􀀠 ., '.n 630 U 􀁾􀀠 JJ 'mil : 625 i ! i i i /i 1625 ; lYP£ b20Z m FJ .I )( l( i )[ ] )( ) ! ! !
i MBNA BANK 􀁉􀁾􀀠 BUILDING i 620 t i 1 i : 620 10 I • 􀁉􀀡􀁳􀁾􀀠 , 􀁉􀁾􀀠 1\ rtJlr Rod! , 6/5 • ! .. 137t i<>ln In i 6/5 : 1 6/0 l.___ i ! i i 7ft-< 􀁾􀁮􀀠 ! 31ft-Gln ! 6/0 i ---􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀠
J-----j .. 􀁾􀀠 ..' .._-! --.. -..-􀁾􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀭􀂷􀂷􀁲􀂷􀂷􀀭 i i·------.I --_ . . 605 i i ....., 605 .... i l-....... • A I-: I -, A : 600 fy "All A<:I ..􀁾􀀮􀀠 !rrll TTTF. , """I r •
600 I I [lNt. rAI>' ""'" i \.. .... : i i i -..-: : i : i i 
T "PIC􀁾􀁁􀁌􀀠 .... SECIrIaV ! E/e\'ofe( Sf""'ucflire Wei sf at Mlc.lwoy , • SI A :,V+O( ) ,et vorll ! :ft-;;IO • 22ft10 "t-t 0 · n I, " J 􀁾􀀠 Iml. 􀁉􀁖􀁾􀁖􀀢􀀢􀀠 635 /-635 TYPE C20Z
rrY ., J )1 I( )( J XI )1 630 • 630 Ie'S I /: 625 􀁾􀀠 \ ' .odl" CHARTER BUILDING 625 620 7ft... In 􀀳􀀱􀁦􀁴􀁾􀁇􀁬􀁴􀀢􀀱􀀠 1620 6/5 • • I 6/5 ...... I • • • ! i 6/0 i 􀁾􀀮􀀠 6/0 􀁾􀀮􀀭...
...... ....... • I i • 􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠 .....! ................... 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁾.. ------..'--'...............: .......... I .. L................ : I 605 '., "-, ..•,., ' 605 .. ....",. -...
A, I 600 f (y flAil AS IrrrUTIE: r. "'I ! 600 f rSSION 􀀮􀁾􀀠 I rx5' RC8(. \.. 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 i 
<" " 7HOl. 8t":?7􀁾􀀧􀀮􀀯􀀲􀀮􀀹􀀳􀀠 􀁾􀀠 , I d' 􀁾􀀺􀁩􀁓􀁔􀁍􀁃􀁁􀀭􀁌􀀹􀁷􀁅􀁌􀁌􀀠 HALFF 􀁾􀀵􀁚􀁘􀀺􀀯􀁁􀀭􀁔􀁾􀁓􀀠 􀀲􀀱􀀴􀀮􀀧􀀵􀀴􀁻􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁺􀁾􀀠 I:' f ':'i Chtrr!e:; Web" llal/'/Jw!v.v [<:;81f..
Z/¢ . &51 -i'<,/tt5 'c ,'i 􀁾􀁆􀀧􀀧􀀭􀀯 􀀱􀀳􀁴􀁴􀀮􀀻􀀻􀀯􀁾􀀠 􀁩􀀷􀁻􀀴􀀯􀁌􀀯􀁾􀀷􀀠f,?-!lt!/) 214--; q? 3q /0 '. 􀁾􀁤􀁲􀁷􀁊􀀠 CD l1,d,,:> 􀁬􀁓􀁾􀀻􀁉􀀩􀀧􀀭􀁉􀂣􀁩􀀴􀀮􀀯􀀴􀁩􀀱􀁜􀀼􀀧􀀴􀀧􀀠
􀁾 f.ssoc. '77Z-Z3I-:i80 0 i 􀀱􀀲􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁧􀁾􀀠 􀁲􀁢􀀮􀁤􀀬􀀧􀁦􀀮􀁷􀁾 -k6n. 􀀧􀁩􀁾􀁦􀁎􀁟􀁯􀁴􀀺􀀠 􀀱􀁲􀀯􀁦􀀮􀀬􀁍􀀧􀀱􀁾􀀣􀀮􀀱􀀶􀀠 COlt'''' )f4'7fr· 􀁾􀀠 K.),\ rF t-:4t...1... vI<. S Cj1Z·'t80-'{%
I .. 'Mtr-tS 􀁾􀀠 tiw 􀁾 􀀧􀀱􀀱􀀧􀁬􀀭􀁾􀁬􀀮􀁐􀀭􀀴􀁌􀁾􀀠 ( ',I 􀁖􀁴􀁾􀀭􀁮􀀺􀀺􀀬􀁬􀀲􀀮􀀠 􀁜􀀨􀀬􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁥􀀮􀀮􀀠 􀁾􀀮􀁱􀁃􀁤􀀩􀀮􀁾􀁾 /01. 􀁾􀁬􀁣􀀺􀀮􀁴􀀫􀁹􀁱􀀠An 􀁰􀀬􀀮􀁾􀁶􀁊􀁾􀀠TAJ
P 9' 7 1.... -2.S4· 11 ,.s 1(ok.v+ Nk.\'"dt!;.. 􀀱􀀵􀀧􀁖􀁃􀀭􀁣􀀩􀁖􀁜􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁲􀀠 Zt "I -"'5"tAl"0(." viS 􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀭􀁲􀀽􀁩􀀮􀁊􀀠 UE6 11"Z . 􀀴􀀮􀁾􀀮 bC) S"<:> ---rtU'/&u hi I( £noet";'
􀁃􀀻􀀱􀁾􀀧􀁬􀀷􀀱􀀠479'7 􀁾􀀱􀀢􀀺􀀻􀀠 HO!&-2If."!U;J. '-boO 􀁍􀁾􀀠 '214-2>-11 -c6'la􀁾􀀠 Me.BJy, Cf?'L-271-q.t1&7 ,. 2'''', ,,,t..l ·o,s:-1 􀁾 'Z* a'/-8f'T7 􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁊􀀼􀁇􀀪􀀬􀁌􀀭􀁓􀀠 􀁓􀁦􀁬􀂷􀀭􀀷􀁾􀀮􀁳
􀁾􀁾􀀼􀀮􀁻􀀿􀀺􀂻􀀠 .. 􀁦􀁬􀁬􀀢􀀨􀁊􀀢􀀬􀁡􀁊􀀱􀀮􀀺􀀻􀀬􀀨􀀻􀁊􀀮􀁉􀁲􀁾􀀯􀁜􀀠 '77:L-'19r-()-z.2.'9 }:c,-( Parton.> 8YllttcWhClft 2..14 -C38 -.t. 􀁾􀀠¥ 􀁾􀀠 1?tJN1J;i3B5 AfL;tft"kls 91Z-4*1-O!7f
If-IJIS(TA 􀀤􀁾􀁟􀁉􀁦􀁾􀁾􀀩􀀠 '.:>.2-""'7"-.$'03, Q7Z ,tt,-(..s(' z.t (" J( r 
, " , " ••.􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠 ht-1fA7 􀁾􀀠􀁱􀁾 􀁾􀀭􀀼􀁂􀁾􀁉 'T!bt" 􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁪􀁗􀁉􀀧􀀠 LA LA 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 , f1k,i? 􀁾􀁃􀀮􀁗􀀠 luRN8'l􀀨􀁏􀁜􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀧􀁵􀁣􀁻􀁉􀀺􀀩􀁜􀀲􀀮􀀬􀁁􀁦􀁬􀁾􀀠 q '12.' 735 -'30i 0
i,dk;:iUMt Fi::-iZLLL'1 􀁾􀁍􀁜􀁢􀀬􀀭􀀭􀁥􀀺􀀮􀀴􀀠􀁦􀀳􀁬􀁻􀁾􀀶􀀧􀁓􀀠 Dc! 4Z0 -f{o">S 􀁬􀀺􀁦􀁍􀁾􀁊􀁥􀁴􀁬􀁨􀁾􀁓􀀠 l-hi-fl 􀁴􀁢􀁾􀀶􀀧􀁯􀁊􀁥􀀺􀀻􀀠 d-.11-􀁾􀀮􀀠{p257 􀁬􀁩􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠{ZQj,J2.c_Oy/􀀯􀁾􀁟􀀠
􀁱􀀱􀁾􀁲􀀹􀁣􀀮􀀠 ZBS'7Ii 1;rwtd f?ef>tA CMfty f 􀁾􀁪e% rzlf· 􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀠􀁏􀀯􀁾􀀠 :::f;;rIAcf. ?U>):d( {I II /I 􀁩􀁾 P'PrfJI1JJt 􀀱􀁍􀀭􀁮􀁾􀁶􀁦􀁯􀁷􀁴􀁳􀀢􀀠 172.. l:6d-ttSt)o •. Md:l; 􀁾􀀠tUJ1l7
􀁾􀀧􀀴 􀀱􀁾􀀠04«:> iJAWlGSf12l{t 11NiB> "btl{ 14%-YL{urI,bl tl Pe-iv-e..,111 􀁥􀀧􀁅􀀭􀁔􀁾􀁦􀀽􀀮􀀮􀀩􀀭􀀭􀁬􀀭􀀬􀀱􀀠􀀧􀁩􀀢􀀧􀁾􀁳􀀾􀁯􀁣􀁾􀁨􀀱􀁾􀀧􀀠 sn·(,;,3.:5-G:.3"lA7 i.A.\o." G.t&.CJ
ffee.;,c.' 􀁎􀀺􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀢􀁃􀁜􀁾􀂷􀁺􀀮􀁓􀀧􀁏􀁇􀀠 : DAV\D 􀁛􀀡􀁖􀀱􀁾􀁃􀁶􀁕􀁑􀁾􀀠 􀀰􀁊􀀨􀀺􀁾􀁛􀁜􀀨􀁬􀁫􀀠􀁳􀀻􀀭􀁾􀁶􀁶􀀢􀀭􀁜􀀧􀁾􀁜􀀠 '[12 􀀭􀁴􀁮􀁾􀁱􀁩􀁬􀁬􀀠 .: Ko'Ylt-: w!?¥\.; Wn\..􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀢􀁾􀁾
􀁻􀀺􀀺􀁲􀁯􀁨􀁾􀀠 'L\-\ -.1.311-2.(,1.; , ! , : i ! i I I , L: I1 : i •: I: ! 
. .. . .' . ':.:"",':' : J 􀀬􀁾􀁲􀀮􀀠 •. ':;;. 􀀬􀀧􀀻􀀭􀀻􀀺􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀺􀀧􀀧􀁩􀀠 􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀮􀀠 􀀧􀀻􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀮􀀠 􀁲􀁾􀀭 t -':','_'" 􀀬􀁾􀀢􀀠 •.: _ '. _,
...' .. , . . "'.. ·....􀀢􀀧􀀢􀀬􀁦􀀢􀁣􀀬􀁾􀂷􀀠 􀀢􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀠.. ,' ....:..... ' . . . ..,' '. .' , .. -. ', :: .􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀬􀀭 􀁾􀀼􀀺􀁾􀀠 ":" ..,.,......... .. ,"::. -,", 􀁾􀀠 􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀠 ):'
, .􀁾􀁾􀀠 . -. ". ; 􀀮􀁾􀀠 :'. 􀁾􀀠 . . .f'-. '" : ,-.••.,. • >,,,''" .. ,_ .' .. " 􀁾􀀠 " ., . ,. ' . 
L 􀀬􀂷􀁾􀀺􀁦􀁾􀀻􀀧􀀺􀂷􀀺􀀠 .;, :--,' . :-: -j , , " , " 
ABUTMENT CONCEPTS lIJulmen! llilf> 􀁾reaim;e .'.,. 􀁔􀁩􀁾􀁂􀁡􀁤􀁬􀀠Wall Dewl 
CURVED STEEL TRAPEZOIDAL Box 
CURVED STEEL I-GIRDERS c,..􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁯􀁾􀀠T-Pier a, .. 1ion 
SEGMENTAL CONCRETE BOX &001>1. ceO 80, oiIIl Flare PiN 
, i 
DATE SUBMITTED: November 13, 2003 FOR COUNClL MEETING: November 25, 2003 Council Agenda Item SUMMARY: This item is for the approval ofan amendment to the Professional Services Agreement
with URS Corporation, in the amount of$49,470.00, for the design ofthe Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road. FJNANCIAL IMPACT: Budgeted Amount: Not specifically budgeted Cost: $49,470.00
(Engineering) Source ofFunds: Funds are available from the FY 2004 General Obligation Bond Program. BACKGROUND: The third phase ofthe proposed Arapaho Road extension project extends
from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Road. Construction ofthis section of Arapaho Road will complete an east-west minor arterial roadway that is necessary to relieve traffic congestion on
Belt Line Road. It is anticipated that the new street will initially absorb approximately 11,000 vehicles per day, with a maximum future count of25,000 vehicles per day. A proposed bridge
over Midway Road is also proposed as an integral component ofthe roadway section in the third phase. The firm ofURS Corporation was selected by the Town's Bridge Selection Committee
to perform the design ofthis bridge. A Professional Services Agreement was approved in September 2002, in the amount of$550,965.00, for design services related to the construction ofthe
proposed Midway Road Bridge. The anticipated construction cost ofthe bridge is approximately $4,600,000. URS's scope of work is as follows: a. Bridge Design, including Civil & Electrical
b. Architectural Design c. Lighting Design d. Noise Study, including Modeling & Analyses e. Project Management P0:5 3 C/fflM If ff t'P-lHies 157 1/G42. J S6t7 77-115 15 .4 􀀱􀀶􀁾􀀲􀁪􀁻􀀠
I􀁴􀁖􀁃􀁾􀀠iv F-IEf:' : : : .. 
Scf.!&ot/Le ciW 􀀬􀁶􀁾􀁊􀁩􀀠 PIZ'", JV.-...e (5-/---Iv However, the design features for the bridge have changed due to review and evaluation e"" J) "/:;. development ofa bridge noise
and vibration analysis that was used in testimony for two ./'1-ll.S oLvte· by Council, staff; and Dallas Water Utilities. These changes include revised layout and (VJI't'P CI-/structural
design ofthe bridge, traffic railings, re-initiating the structural "stingers" onto the arch sections, developing color and mounting alternatives for lighting the arch, and participating
in additional project meeting with various entities. These additional project features resulted in the Engineer's request fur a contract amendment (shown as Change Order No. 03 in the
attachment), in the amount not to exceed $49,470.00. Change Order No.1, in the amount of$18,715.00, was previously approved and consisted of 1)4/.4different condemnation cases. 􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁝􀀱
in the amount of$23,41 0.00, was f"'P rt'""3 1􀁾􀁡􀀱􀁩 􀁓􀀡􀁏􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁡􀁰􀁾􀁐􀁩􀁲􀁾􀁏􀁖􀁾􀁥􀁤􀁾􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁤􀁩􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁤􀀠 . ". /Iud"'", • -""" b The design ofthe proposed bridge
by URS Corporation shall be performed concurrently with the design efforts on the roadway by HNTB Corporation. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council authorize the City Manager
to enter into a contract amendment with URS Corporation, in the amount not to exceed $49,470.00, for Professional Services associated with the design ofthe Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway
Road. 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD CHANGE ORDER NO. 03 to WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT K ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES ADDITIONAL DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR THE ARAPAHO
ROAD BRIDGE In addition to the design services provided for in the original Scope of Services and Change Orders No. 1 & 2, URS will provide conceptual design development, preliminary
and final engineering and modifications to the plans, as it relates to Arapaho Road from approximate Station 40+67 to approximate Station 70+28 to incorporate the following changes and
as listed below in the Additional Itemized Scope of Services. These changes as presented to the Town Council on August 26, 2003 include developing a colored lighting concept for the
arch, adding the "stingers" on to the structure and revising the rail to a more open traffic rail. URS shall modify the preliminary bridge design, bridge layouts and typical sections
as necessary, attend additional meetings with the Town ofAddison, prepare an additional presentation to the Town Council and prepare a Jighting mock-up for the Town to see the colored
lighting on the blue structure. Changes to Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS For the Arapaho Road Bridge TASK I -ENGINEERING B.Bridges 1. Preliminary Bridge Design (-30010 submittal)
• Revise Preliminary Bridge Layout (Finalize Bridge Location) • Revise Preliminary Typical Section • Refine Arch Shape • Re-size Diaphragms • Revise Traffic Railing Members • Develop
Stingers • Revise Quantities and Cost Estimate 2. Final Bridge Design, & PS&E (65%,95%,100% submittals) • Prestressed Concrete Beam Unit -Add Deck Plan for Widened Deck • Bridge Stinger
Details • Additional coordination with Town TASK n -ARCIllTECTURAL A. Design Development I. Architectural Studies & Details • Develop revised rail option and the architectural options
to realize the triangular pattern in the rail. • Develop bridge mounted "stingers" • Attend Additional Meetings with the Town and the Town Council. TASK m -LIGHTING DESIGN A. Design
Development (includes ODe meeting in Addison) I. Develop color alternative for lighting ofarch. 2. Develop mounting concepts for bridge structure lighting and stingers. 3. Prepare a
mock-up ofpotentia! color changing effects on existing Addison Circle sculpture. 3. Present final lighting design development to the Town Council. TASK V -PROJECT MANAGEMENT B. Coordination
I. Prepare for and Attecd Town Council or other Town Meetings (1 total). 2. Prepare for and attecd project meetings with Addison Public Works (2 total) Attachment A Scope a/Services
1 Work Order No. 001 URS 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD CHANGE ORDER NO. 03 TO WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT L ADDITIONAL FIXED PRICE FEE BREAKDOWN URS CORPORATION TASK 1-Engineering B. Bridges 1. Preliminary
Bridge Design 2. Final Bridge Design. PS&E TASK 11-Architecture (Corgan) A. Design Development TASK 111-Lighting Design (Brandston) A. Design Development TASK V -Project Management B.
Preparation & Attendance of Meetings WI Addison Total Cost $ 23,830.00 $ 10,280.00 $14,280.00 $ 1,080.00 TOTAL $ 49,470.00 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD ATTACHMENT L CHANGE ORDER NO. 03 • ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE MAN·HOUR & EXPENSE COST ESTIMATE CONSULTANT; URS Corporatlon:--l ",;,"J:'" 1. ReVIse Preliminary
Btklge Deslgn (-30% !:1.JbnjttaI) Rovi1o Preliminary Bridge LayOO1 (rlnab Bridge LocaUoo) Reviso Pro!mnary Typlc;,1 Soct!OfI Refne Arch Shape Re.$lu. Diaphragms Ra..dcv1'l109 Tramc Ra1l1ng
MMi:lef5 DevoIop StingOl'$ Coorcfll"lale CA.ltvert 􀁌􀁡􀁾􀀠 Revise Quantities and Cost Esllmate 2. FIf'L81 Brfdge Design, P5&E (55%, 95%, 100% sutmttals) Prettr(lUcd Concrete Beam Unit-Add
Deck Plan fcrWdorKtd Dock Brtdgo 􀁓􀁾􀁄􀁥􀁬􀁡􀁩􀀡􀁳􀀠 AdcfiUonal Cormllnalion v.ith T-own 􀀬􀀺􀀻􀀮􀀬􀁴􀁾􀀧􀁃􀀢􀀠 1. Ard1i1ectural Sludles,& Del. DevFllop revised tMffic rail option and
1he Ald'IItectural option to realIZe \he proposed frlanguIar patlom. Develop i3iidge Mounled 􀀢􀁓􀁬􀁩􀁮􀀡􀁴􀀨􀁬􀁦􀀤􀁾􀀠 Alland AddiIional Meallngs 10 coon:IIrnIl& !h0' archllectutal
alpaCb of Ute dflsign '." A. Otslgn Devefopment t Develop color aI{em;Ilivcs for I1gnting of arch.. 2. Dovnlop IlUJOUng concepts ror brtdge $truc:turo and sting6r Ilghlln&! 3, AlWnd
MdlIiOOBl Meeling 'M1h TOM'! and J)!!II'fOrm Ilghllng fl'WlCk.ufJ 􀁳􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀠I I II 􀁙􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁀􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁦􀁪􀀺􀁭􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁾􀁦􀁲􀁊􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁲􀀹􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁥􀁾􀁩􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀻􀀼􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁳
􀁹􀁾􀁦􀀺􀀹􀀡􀀭􀀡􀁾􀀱􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀭􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀲􀁔􀀺􀂧􀁆􀀮􀁡􀁾􀀱􀀮􀀸􀁩􀀰􀀻􀀧􀀺􀁄􀁬􀁾􀀬􀀭􀁩􀁲􀀱􀁾􀁛􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁇􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁯􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁩􀀺􀀿􀁾􀁽􀀺􀁩􀁯􀀻􀀻􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁩􀀡􀀺􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁊􀁾􀁾􀁙􀁾􀀺􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁩􀀻􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀿􀀡􀁲􀀬􀁾􀀺�
�􀁩􀀱􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁽􀁾􀀻􀀠􀁾􀀱􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁏􀀢􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁾􀂷􀀻􀁾􀂷􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁬􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁦􀀭􀀺􀀧􀀬􀁉􀀤􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀻􀀢􀀺􀀧􀀻􀀱􀀺􀁩􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀺􀂷􀁾􀀰􀀧􀀻􀀧􀀠 B. Coordln4llon DOe 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 $ 1,080,00 m
S 1,O$t!.(lG . . .. . =0=<-. w··..􀀬􀀬􀂷􀀬􀁾􀀠";"'''"'''"''''''''''1 4,COunc:II or olherTown MecU!'IQs (1) 4 4 􀁾􀀡􀀡􀁩􀁴􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂥􀁁􀀻􀀧􀀻􀁉􀀧􀀧􀀮􀀧􀀧􀁊􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀢􀀬􀀻􀀬􀀧􀀺􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁙􀀧􀀡􀀻􀀮
􀀵􀀬􀁐􀁲􀁯􀁊􀁯􀁣􀁉􀁍􀁥􀁥􀁴􀁬􀁮􀁧􀁳􀁾􀁁􀁤􀁤􀀡􀀤􀁏􀁮􀁐􀁵􀁢􀁬􀁬􀁴􀀺􀁗􀁯􀁣􀀱􀁵􀁻􀀲􀁩􀀠 4 [ 4 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩􀀠"1 􀀩􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀻􀁾􀀺....,2;':::! 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁊􀂥􀁩􀀺􀀱 Grand Grand Total .. .. 1\• .. •
22 •• • ". $ 47,230.00 $ 2,600.00 S U.7SlJ.ao " 
CHANGE ORDER NO. 03 In accordance with the Agreement between the Town of Addison ("Clienf'), and URS Corporation ("URS"), a Nevada _ corporation dated November 11. 2002 (for Work Order
No. 001 ) this Change Order describes the agreed upon changes to the Services, Schedule, and Payment for the Services. Project:__---'A"'ra....."pa"'h"o!...!R-"o"'a"d!...!B"'r"'id"g"'e"'a!.!.t.!.!M"'i
d"'w"'a"'y'-'R-"o"'a"'d'---_U RS Project No.25334401 Date:.___ REFERENCE: Drawing No._--'-'N/<.<:A'---_Specification No. N/A Other'-'N!LIA'--___________ The Agreement is hereby changed
as follows: See Attachment K, "ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES" Justification for Change: The need for additional unforeseen coordination with the Addison Town Council and subsequent requested
modifications to the bridge renderings, lighting, traffic rail and layout plans. CHANGE TO ESTIMATED CONTRACT PRICE (See Attachment b) Original Estimated Contract Price: Current estimated
contract price, including previous change orders: The estimated Contract Price due to this Change Order will be increased by: The new estimated Contract Price due to this Change Order
will be: $ 550,965.00 $ 593,090.00 $ 49.470.00 $ 642,560.00 CHANGE TO THE ESTIMATED SCHEDULE (See Attachment MJ The Contract lime will be increased by 1§.L calendar days. The date for
completion of all work under the contract will be: ."J",u",n",e",3",0"",2"'0"'0"'4'---______________ EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS CHANGE ORDER, ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT
REMAIN UNCHANGED Acceplance of the terms of this Change Order is acknowledged by the following signatures of the Authorized Represenlatives. CLIENT Signature Michael E. Murphy, P. E.
I Director of Public Works Emily Taylor, P. E. I Vice President Typed Namemtle Typed Namemtle 1/1 03 /6 ::' Date of Signature Date 6f Signature cc: Accounting CHANGE-ORD1.DOC 4-AUG-DD

DRS May 7, 2003 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase n -Design
Development & Contract Documents Change Order No 01 & Change Order No. 02 to Work Order No 001 Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please find two original Change Orders to Work Order No. 001
of the Agreement for Professional Services fur the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road fur the Town ofAddison's execution. Change Order No. oI covers the additional services provided
to prepare expert witness testimony for the noise and vibration and includes Attachment D -Additional Scope ofServices, Attachment E -Additional Fixed Price Fee Breakdown, and Attachment
F -Revised Estimated Schedule. Change Order No. 02 covers the additional services to satisfY the requirements ofDWU and includes Attachment G -Additional Scope ofServices, AttachmentH
-Additional Fixed Price Fee Breakdown, and Attachment J -Revised Estimated Schedule. Please have all originals ofthe Change Orders executed, and return one executed original ofeach Change
Order to us. Sincerely, URS Corporation 􀁻􀀨􀀡􀀨􀁊􀁾 Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Graystone Centre 30.10 LBJ Freeway. Suite 1300 Dallas. IX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax:
972.406.6951. 
CHANGE ORDER NO. 01 In accordance with the Agreement between the Town of Addison ("Clienf'). and URS Corporation rURS"). a Nevada .corporationdated November 11. 2002 (forWorl<OrderNo.
001 ) this Change Order describes the agreed upon changes to the Services. Schedule. and Payment for the Services. Project: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road URS Project NO.25334401
Date:.___ REFERENCE: Drawing No. N/A Specification No. NlA Other.,N!£/A'--___________ The Agreement is hereby changed as follows: See Attachment D. "ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES· Justification
for Change: The need for a noise and vibration expert witness to testify in the condemnation hearings for the Crouch and Motel 6 properties. CHANGE TO ESTIMATED CONTRACT PRICE (See Attachment§
Original EsUmated Contract Price: Current estimated contract price, including previous change orders: The estimated Contract Price due to this Change Order Will be increased by: The
new estimated Contract Price due to this Change Order will be: $ 550.965.00 $ 550.965.00 $ 18.715.00 $ 569.680.00 CHANGE TO THE ESTIMATED SCHEDULE (See Attachment EJ The Contract Time
will be increased by 150 calendar days. The date for completion of all work under the contract Will be: ",Ja,.,n""u",a!,Jrv",3",,1e....2""0"'04!:!-____________􀁾􀀠 EXCEPT AS PROVIDED
IN THIS CHANGE: ORDeR. ALL TeRMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT REMAIN UNCHANGED Acceptance of the terms of this Change Order is acknowledged by the following signatures of the Authorized
Representatives. CLIENT 􀀴􀁴􀀮􀁦􀀮􀁾􀀠 Michael E. Murphy. P.E. I Director of Public Works Emily Taylor. P.E./Vice President Typed NamelTJ!Je 􀁾􀀧 07 , "200 S Date of Signature Date of
nature cc: Accounting CHANGE-ORD1.00c 4-AUG-OO 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD CHANGE ORDER NO. 01 to WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT D ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES EXPERT TESTIMONY OF NOISE AND VIBRATION RESULTS FOR PROPERTY CONDEMNATION
In addition to the noise analyses provided for in the original Scope of Services, URS will provide expert witness testimony for the condemnation hearings relating to the construction
and use of Arapaho Road from approximate Station 40+67 10 approximate Station 70+28 and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of an elevated four-lane roadway
with sidewalk located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW) on a tangent alignment. This task includes preparation and participation ofstaff qualified in airborne and groundborne
noise analysis in the upcoming condemnation hearings (currently scheduled for April 16 and April 23,2003) for the sites known as The Crouch Property (old MBNA Building) and the Motel
6 Property. In addition to the airborne noise analysis conducted for the project, a groundborne noise (i.e., vibration) study will be conducted. Potential vibration impacts would be
analyzed for 2 cases -a "close-in" case (the Crouch) property wherein the bridge pier is approximately 27 feet from the building ofinterest; the second for the Motel 6 property, in which
the bridge/roadway is approximately 100 feet from the building of interest. Vibration from construction equipment and operations will also be addressed. This study will be a "screening"
level ofanalysis as vibration is not expected to have an adverse impact. URS' Michael Greene, INCE Bd. Cert. # 97008 and Project Manager, Cliff Hall, P.E., will attend a preparation
meeting on April 7, 2003 in Dallas, Texas with Town ofAddison legal representatives and other URS staff. Noise analysis results to-date will be reviewed and preparations/strategies for
the condemnation hearings will be discussed. Following the preparation meeting, relevant presentation material will be prepared and presented to Town of Addison legal representatives
for review. Because ofthe limited time available between the preparation meeting and the condemnation hearing, one (I) round ofreview and revision per hearing is anticipated. Additional
review cycles will be considered out-of-scope work requiring additional budget authorization. Michael Greene and CliffHaH will attend one condemnation hearing for the Crouch Property
and one condemnation hearing for the Motel 6 property and will present the results ofthe noise and vibration analyses as they pertain to the subject properties. They will be available
for questions as necessary. When URS staff appear as expert witnesses at court trials, mediation, arbitration hearings and depositions, their time is charged at 2.0 times the standard
rate. All time spent preparing for such trials, hearings and depositions is charged at the standard labor rate. Attachment D Additional Scope a/Services 1 Change Order No, OJ to Work
Order No, 001 DRS 
Changes to the Itemized Scope of Services Provided by DRS TASK IV -Noise Study C. Expert Witness Testimony of Noise & Vibration Crouch Property 1. Preparation for Strategy Meeting 2.
Strategy Meeting 3. Preparation for Condemnation Hearing -Crouch 4. Vibration Screening (Construction & Operations) 5. Crouch Condemnation Hearing and Debrief D. Expert Witness Testimony
of Noise & Vibration Motel 6 Property 1. Preparation for Condemnation Hearing -Motel 6 2. Vibration Screening (Construction & Operations) 3. Motel 6 Condemnation Hearing and Debrief
Attachment D Addillonal Scope a/Services 2 Chonge Order No. 01 to WorkOtrkrNo. 001 URS 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD CHANGE ORDER NO. 01 TO WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT E ADDITIONAL FIXED PRICE FEE BREAKDOWN URS CORPORATION TASK IV -Noise Study C. Expert Testimony
of Noise & Vibration Crouch Property 1. Preparation for Strategy Meeting 2. Strategy Meeting 3. Preparation for Condemnation Healing -Crouch 4. Vibration Screening (Construction & Operations)
5. Crouch Condemnation Hearing and Debrief D. Expert Testimony of Noise & Vibration Motel 6 Property 1. Preparation for Condemnation Hearing -Motel 6 2. Vibration Screening (Construction
& Operations) 3. Motel 6 Condemnation Hearing and Debrief Total Cost $ 13,270.00 $ 5,445.00 TOTAL $ 18,715.00 
URS Corporation Arepat'to Road Bridse at Mldway Road Design De.....lopment end Contract Documents Change Order No. 01 10 Work Order Ng P01 ATTACHMENT F 􀁾Estimated Sc.hedule TASK OESCRIPTION
0..."." 2 0 0 2 Notice to Pto<:ced iNTP) DWU Coordination Issues NT? Fm P<<f'lIm. Deslgrt Pretlmlnary Desl"n DlWticpment Preliminary Geotech Preliminary Gl'lIIdlng mAreh finalize Bridge-Layouts
final ConCepl$ {-3D% Plans} Addison R;wJew LlghUng Concepts Fhm! GeOI.ehnlclii Report Final Grading PlanB FlnalOesilln Intllmledfate De$lgn Sl.IbmitUl (60% Plans) AAdl$on ReView erldge
Drainage RequlrflJ\en!a Final CXtsIon &. ConstrucUon 􀁄􀁾􀁶􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁦􀀤􀀠 Final Design Submittal (95% Plane) Addf1Wf\ R<6vmv Incorporate Comments. Final PS&E Slgnoo: and Sealed flS&E {100%}
November 2 0 0 2 + December January F$bl"U3ry MatCh 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 3 • April M,y Juno July AUQU$\ SeptemMt 2􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁲􀀳􀀠 􀁎􀁾􀁭􀁢􀁥􀁲􀀠 Oocombar January 2 0 0 :3 2 0 0
3 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 3 ;2 0 0 3 <: 0 0 3 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 ;) 2 0 0 3 􀁾􀀬􀀠 􀁾it +􀁾􀀠 --, • NTP • REQ'O INFORMATION FROM TOWN'S CONSULTANT • 5UBMrTTAl 
CHANGE ORDER NO. 02 In accordance with the Agreement between the Town of Addison ("Clienr'), and URS Corporation ('URS"), a Nevada _ corporation dated November 11. 2002 (for Work Order
No. 001 ) this Change Order describes the agreed upon changes to the Services, Schedule, and Payment for the Services. Project: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road URS Project NO.25334401
Date:___ REFERENCE: Drawing No. N/A SpeCification No. N/A Other"'N!..!./A-'--___________ The Agreement is hereby changed as follows: See Attachment G, "ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES"
Justification for Change: The need for additional unforeseen coordination with the City of Dallas Water Utilities and subsequent modifications to the conceptual bridge typical sections,
and layouts. CHANGE TO ESTIMATED CONTRACT PRICE (See Attachment f:j) Original Estimated Contract Price: Current estimated contract price, including previous change orders: The estimated
Contract Price due to this Change Order will be increased by: The new estimated Contract Price due to this Change Order will be: $ 550,965.00 $ 569,680.00 $ 23,410.00 $ 593.090.00 CHANGE
TO THE ESTIMATED SCHEDULE (See Attachment,jJ The Contract Time will be increased by Q.. calendar days. The date for completion of all work under the contract will be: "'Ja"'n-"'u"'a"'rv<-'3"..1...,..
..,2"'O"'04"--______________. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS CHANGE ORDER, ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT REMAIN UNCHANGED Acceptance of the terms of this Change Order is acknowledged
by the following signatures of the Authorized Representatives. CLIENT URS 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀠 s(&r&1752 Michael E. Murohy. P.E.I Director of Public Works Emily Taylor. P.E. I Vice President Typed
Name/Title 􀀧􀀢􀀩􀁜􀀮􀀭􀁬􀁾􀀠 () 7, 'Zoo"? Date of Slnature cc: Accounting CHANGE-ORD1.DOC 4-AUG.QO 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD CHANGE ORDER NO. 02 to WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT G ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES RESOLUTION OF DALLAS WATER UTILITIES (DWU) ISSUES In addition to
the design services provided for in the original Scope of Services, URS will provide conceptual engineering and modifications to the conceptual plans, as it relates to Arapaho Road from
approximate Station 40+67 to approximate Station 70+28 to resolve the DWU concerns related to the 60" water main inside the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW). URS shall modilY
the conceptual bridge layouts and typical sections as necessary to obtain approvalfrom DWU for the construction of Arapaho Road. URS will attend meetings with the Town of Addison, DWU and the Town's consultant as necessary. URS will coordinate the alignment, profile,
width and other issues related to Arapaho Road with the Town's consultant as necessary. Changes to the Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS TASK 1-Engineering O. Conceptual Plan
Modifications (OWU Issues) 1. Modifications of Conceptual Bridge Layouts 2. Modifications of Conceptual Typical Sections TASK 111-Architecture C. Attendance of Meetings With Addison
(OWU Issues) TASK V -Project Management C. Preparation for and Attendance of Meetings With Addison (OWU Issues) .-". 􀁾􀀠 . Attachment D Additional Scope ofServices Change Order No.
OJ /0 Work Order No. 001 URS 
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD CHANGE ORDER NO. 02 TO WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT H ADDITIONAL FIXED PRICE FEE BREAKDOWN URS CORPORATION Total Cost TASK 1-Engineering O. Conceptual
Plan Modifications (OWU Issues) 1. Modifications of Conceptual Bridge Layouts 2. Modifications of Conceptual Typical Sections $14,470.00 TASK 111-Architecture (Corgan) C. Attendance
of Meetings With Addison (OWU Issues) $ 980.00 TASK V -Project Management C. Preparation &Attendance of Meetings WI Addison (OWU Issues' $ 7,960.00 TOTAL $ 23,410.00 
URS Corporation Ara:paho Road Br1dge at Mklway Road o.$lgo Dewfopment and Contract Oocum&1lt$ Change Ordar No. 02 to Work Order No. Ollf ATTACHMENT J 􀁾EsUn'!at6d ScheduJe TASK OE!$CRfPTION
O!liobar 2 0 0' 2 Nolin to Proceed 􀁾􀁈􀁩􀀧􀁐􀁩􀀠 CWU COOtdlnaUtm Issues. NTP Fo( Pr(1lir'l'l, Design Preliminary DHlgn Development PreUmlnary Geolech Preliminary Grading 011 Arch Finalize
Bridge Uyouts Elq'ltIrt TOliUMMY for Condemnation Final. CQl'lc(lpls {-30% 'Plans} 􀁁􀁤􀁤􀁾􀀤􀁑􀁦􀁉􀀠Review Ughtlng Corn;;opts final Gt<lteeMleal 􀁒􀁾􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀀠 Final Oradlng Plane Final
Design Intermediate Design Subm\tlal (60% 'Plan_) Addison RMf'iew Bn.Dtalnagrt ReQulrements Final Design & Cortstrucuon Documents Final 0!1s1gn Submittal 􀁻􀀹􀀵􀁾􀀠Plans} Addison RevIew
locorporate Comments, Final ps&e SIgned and S%led PS&E (100%} NoIIumber 2 0 0 2 • OecombSf J,,,,,,,,, February 2 () 0 2 2 0 0 3 :2 0 0 3 :2 .(.}. 􀁾0􀀢 􀀠3 • April """ "';0. J,,, August
31 September 􀁏􀁾􀁉􀁑􀁢􀁏􀁦􀀠 f\'(lVembQf 􀁾􀁢􀁥􀁲􀀠 Jetll.lalY :2 0 (} :1 2 0 0 3 2 2 0 0 3 2 {) 0 3 20032003 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 :I :2 {) 0 3 2 (} 0 :.\ 􀁾􀀮􀀠 toI•• •-r-. -• • NlP • REQ'O
INFORMATION FROM TOWN'S CONSULTANT • SUBMITTAL 
, . ,. , , -.' 􀁾􀀠 " . . ,TOWN OF AD[jlS0N , 􀁾􀀺􀀢􀀬􀀠 ' ". ' PAYMENT AUTHORIZATION ,MEMO ' ",.",,' '. " . J. :. ". DATE: Cla,lm #. 􀁃􀁨􀁥􀁃􀁫􀀻􀀧􀀺􀁕􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁻􀁾􀁪􀁬􀁜􀁾􀁾􀀧 . <i,{
...• .. 􀀧􀁾􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁛􀀻􀀺􀀢􀀧􀀩􀀧􀀠 " . ', " .-Vendor t-/o; , " . . ,'.' . " . " : ' ....... 􀀻􀀮􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀠 􀁴􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀻􀀺􀁜􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀬􀁾􀁟.. "':';. " Vendor Name {FRS Co j2 fORA-'770/V
.' .. ...... t: ',' • Address . ", Address 30(0 L BT &e-Etv-A-f-,1 Address DA-LLAS, , rWS 7S234 '.'.. ; , Zip Code > .. . ,.'" . EXPLANATION 􀁾􀁾􀀠 Authorized Signature Finance 
Remittance Page Invoice Date 07114103 Invoice 623699 URS Project 25334400 Page 1 For: Design of the Arapaho Road Bridge over Midway Road Professional Services for Period Ending 06120103
Town Of Addison Attn: Steven Z. Chutchain, PE 16801 Westgrove Dr Addison TX 75001-5190 Total Due: $ 22,448.30 Terms: Due upon Receipt • Make checks payable to: URS Corporation • Please
indicate invoice number andlor project number on check • Please include this stub with payment Regular Mail (USPS): URS Corporation Dept. 1028 P.O. Box 121028 DaUas TX 75312-1028 US
Overnight Courier: URS Corporation Lock Box No. 891028 888 South Greenville Ave., Suite 200 Richardson, TX 75081 Attn: Wholesale Lock Box Processing (972) 680-1900 Electronic Funds Transfer:
Account: URS Corporation Bank: Wells Fargo Bank Account No.: 4520-086471 ABA Routing No.: 121-000-248 Swift Code: WFBIUS6S Remittance Information can be sent to: Email: RemitTo@URSCorp.com
Fax: (512) 419-6937 Attn: Cash Applications Please contact Emilio S Ramirez at 512 419-6786 or via email atEmiJio_Ramlrez@urscorp.com if you have any questions regarding this invoice.

Invoice Date 07/14/03 Invoice 623699 URS Project 25334400 Page 2 T own Of Addison Altn: Steven Z. Chutchain, PE 16801 Westgrove Dr Addison TX 75001-5190 For: Design of the Arapaho Road
Bridge over Midway Road Professional Services for Period Ending 06120/03 This is a Firm Fixed Price Project Total Project Budget is $593,090.00 PHASE 1001O-ENG-Civll Site Work 10021-ENG-Prelim
Bridge Design 10022-ENG-Final Bridge Design 10030-ENG-Electrical Eng. 20000 ARCHITECTURE 30000 LIGHTING DESIGN 40000 NOISE STUDY 50000 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 10040-ENG-Conceptual Plan Mod.
FEE 19,370.00 71,350.00 313,330.00 30,350.00 40,200.00 39,580.00 32,760.00 31,680.00 14,470.00 PERCENT COMPLETE 0.00% 40.00% 0.00% 2.00% 42.20% 2.50% 90.00% 40.00% 95.00% FEE EARNED
0.00 28.540.00 0.00 607.00 16.964.40 989.50 29,484.00 12,672.00 13,746.50 PREVIOUS BILLING 0.00 13,556.50 0.00 607.00 13,587.60 989.50 26,208.00 11,860.00 13,746.50 CURRENT BILLING 0.00
14.983.50 0.00 0.00 3,376.80 0.00 3,276.00 812.00 0.00 TOTALS 593,090.00 103,003.40 80,555.10 22,448.30 TOTAL THIS INVOICE $ 22,448.30 􀁉􀀢􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 b,IC-SX1\'Z-dO' , \.. Please contact
Emilio S Ramirez at 512 419-6786 or via email atEmilio_Ramlrez@urscorp.com If you have any questions regarding this invoice. F3651607 
Monthly Progress Report Design of the Arapaho Road Bridge Over Midway Road URS Project No. 25334400 Period: May 24, 2003 to June 20, 2003 1. General Accomplishments 1.1 Prepared presentation
for the Town Council. 1.2 Continued preparation of bridge layouts and typical sections for submittal to Town's consultant for inclusion in the June submittal. 2. Progress This Period
2.1 Revised "Blue Bridge" renderings and prepare a "White Bridge" rendering incorporating colored lighting schemes. 2.2 Prepared presentation for the Town Council and met with Public
Works to discuss the presentation. 2.3 Continued preliminary bridge design and preparation ofbridge layouts and typical sections. 2.4 Continued architectural concept development 2.5
Attended coordination meeting with roadway consultant. 2.6 Continued architectural considerations for retaining wall panels, piers and traffic rails. 3. Anticipated Next Period 3.1 Finalize
the preliminary design of the bridge looking at the arch and substructure. 3.2 Submit 30"/0 plans and cost estimate. 3.3 Present to Town Council at workshop and get agreement on bridge
color and architectural features. 4. Schedule Status 4.1 Currently on schedule but need feedback on color ofbridge and lighting and architectural features. 5. Issues /Impacts 5.1 Placing
sidewalk exterior to the arch is creating a more difficult structure to design and construct. This may increase the cost ofthe bridge. 5.2 Sidewalk exterior to the arch may affect the
ability to light the arch efficiently and increase the lighting costs. 5.3 Town is considering using a sidewalk greater than 4-ft. Changes to the sidewalk can affect the preliminary
design work prepared to date and delay the design completion. 5.4 Town is considering changes to the color and lighting ofthe bridge. 
URS July 14, 2003 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 1680 I Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase II -Design
Development & Contract Documents Invoice for Professional Services Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please find our invoice for Professional Services for the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway
Road for the period between May 24, 2003 and June 20, 2003. Also included is our Progress Report for this period outlining the services provided. Sincerely, URS Corporation CliffR. Hall,
PE Project Manager Enelosure URS Corporation Graystone Center 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dalias, lX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
TOWN OF ADDISON Review of Funding Related to Addison Circle Phase lib Development SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR STREETS 2000 Spectrum Bond Proceeds (remaining balance) $ 55,900 2002 Spectrum Bond
Proceeds 2,300,000 2002 Bond Fund Unallocated Interest Earnings 100,000 Soulh Quorum/Landmark Project (remaining balance) 500,000 Addison Road Widening (remaining balance) 251,050 Street
capital Project Fund Unallocated Inlerest Eamings 200,000 Total 3,406,950 AfiPlICATlON OF FUNDS FOR STREETS SpectrumConstruetlon (Eslimated) 3,067,600 Quorum Improvements 339,150 Total
3,406,950 DIFFERENCE STREETS $ SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR PARKS General Fund Transfer to Street capital Project Fund $ 707,770 APPLICATION OF FUNDS FOR PARKS Quorum North Park 290,000 Maws
Park 650,000 Tolal 940,000 DIFFERENCE PARKS $ (232,230) TOTAL DIFFERENCE IN FUNDING $ (232,230) Versi0l12 Developed: 11111/03 
TOWN OF ADDISON Review of Funding Related to Addison Circle Phase lib Development SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR STREETS 2000 Spectrum Bond Proceeds (remaining balance) $ 55,900 2002 Spectrum Bond
Proceeds 2.300,000 2002 Bond Fund Unallocated Interest Earnings 100,000 South QuorumlLandmark Project (remaining balance) 666,889 Street Capital Project Fund Unallocated Interest Earnings
200,000 Tolal 3,255,900 APPLICATION OF FUNDS FOR STREETS Spectrum Construction (Esllmated) 3,067,800 Quorum Improvements 339,150 Total 3.406.950 DIFFERENCE STREETS $ (151,050) SOURCE
OF FUNDS FOR PARKS General Fund Transfer to Street Capilal Project Fund $ 707,770 APPLICATION OF FUNDS FOR PARKS Quorum North Park 290,000 Mews Park 850,000 Tolal 940,000 DIFFERENCE
PARKS $ (232,230) TOTAL DIFFERENCE IN FUNDING $ (383,280) Developed: 11/11103 
URS November 3, 2003 Mr. Steven z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 1680 I Westgrove Drive P.O. Box9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase II -Design
Development & Contract Documents Change Order No 03 to Work Order No 001 Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please find two original Change Orders to Work Order No. 001 of the Agreement for
Professional Services for the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road for the Town of Addison's execution. Change Order No. 03 covers the additional services required to make the changes
requested by the Town Council, including adding colored lighting, adding the "stingers", revising the traffic rail and revising the preliminary design and includes Attachment K -Additional
Scope of Services, Attachment L -Additional Fixed Price Fee Breakdown, and Attachment M -Revised Estimated Schedule. Please have all originals ofthe Change Orders executed, and return
one executed original ofeach Change Order to us. Sincerely, CliffR. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Graystone Centre 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas, lX 75234
Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
: ".,It{K-)Dtf IV {f{ C( t-J+e,.v 'I-k it-( c.c 􀁾􀁾􀀠t17j 􀁃􀂣􀁬􀁾􀁾 f"\"1?,. f A t\-tV 􀁾􀀠/IV!) ..\i> -J '1\"S C/) 1'...Jve..,..J u 􀁖􀁌􀁶􀁊􀀢􀁦􀁍􀁊􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 fV! f (Ol-?i q 􀁜􀁾􀀠
" " "." "" 
Council Agenda Item #R8 SUMMARY: This item is for the approval of a Professional Services Agreement for the design of the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Budgeted
Amount: $10.00 Million Cost: $550,965.00 (Engineering) Source of Funds: Funds are available from the FY 2002 General Obligation Bond Program. BACKGROUND: The third phase of the proposed
Arapaho Road extension project extends from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Road. Construction of this section of Arapaho Road will complete an east-west minor arterial roadway that is necessary
to relieve traffic congestion on Belt Line Road. It is anticipated that the new street will initially absorb approximately 11,000 vehicles per day, with a maximum future count of 25,000
vehicles per day. A proposed bridge over Midway Road is also proposed as an integral component of the roadway section in the third phase. The firm of URS Corporation was selected by
the Town's Bridge Selection Committee to perform the design of this bridge. Attached is a Professional Services Agreement, in the amount not to exceed $550,965.00, for design services
related to the construction of the proposed Midway Road Bridge. This agreement provides for coordination of the bridge design by URS Corporation with the design of the roadway by HNTB
Corporation. The anticipated construction cost of the bridge is approximately $4,600,000. The proposed scope of work that this fmi:l will provide is as follows: a. Bridge Design, including
Civil & Electrical b. Architectural Design c; Lighting Design d. Noise Study, including Modeling & Analyses e. Project Management The design of the proposed bridge by URS Corporation
shall be performed concurrently with the design efforts on the roadway by HNTB Corporation. 
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with URS Corporation, in the amount not to exceed $550,965.00, for Professional Services
associated with the design of the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road. 
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ("Agreement") This Agreement between Town of Addison ,("Clienf') and URS Corporation ('URS"), a Nevada corporation; Graystone Centre. 3010 LBJ Freeway.
Suite 1300 75234; 972.406.6950 ("URS"), is effective as of September 11. 2002 . The parties agree as follows: It is the expressed intent of the parties that this Agreement shall be made
available to the SUbsidiaries and affiliated companies of URS. For the purposes of this Agreement, as it applies to each Work Order, the term 'URS" shall mean either, URS Corporation,
or the affiliated company identified in the Work Order. The applicable Work Order shall clearly identify the legal name of the affiliate or subsidiary accepting the Work Order. ARTICLE
I· Work Orders. The Scope of Services ("Services'), the Time Schedule and the Charges are to be set forth in a written Work Order to this Agreement. The terms and conditions of this
Agreement shall apply to each Work Order, except to the extent expressly modified by the Work Order. Where charges are 'not to exceed' a specified sum, URS shall notify Client before
such sum is exceeded and shall not conUnue to provide the Services beyond such sum unless Client authorizes an increase in the sum. If a "not to exceed' sum is broken down into budgets
for specific tesks, the task budget may be exceeded without Client authorization as long as the total sum is not exceeded. Changes in conditions, including, without limitation, changes
in laws or regulations occurring after the budget is established or other circumstances beyond URS control shall be a basis for equitable adjustments in the budget and schedule. ARTICLE
II • Payment. Unless otherwise stated in an Work Order, payment shall be on a time and materials basis under the Schedule of Fees and Charges in effect when the Services are performed.
Client shall pay undisputed portions of each progress invoice within thirty (30) days of the date of the invoice. If payment is not maintained on a thirty (30) day current basis, URS
may suspend further performance until payments are current. Client shall notify URS of any disputed amount within fifteen (15) days from date of the invoice, give reasons for the objection,
and promptly pay the undisputed amount. Client shall pay an additional charge of one and one-half percent (1%%) per month or the maximum percentage allowed by law, whichever is the lesser,
for any past due amount. In the event of a legal action for invoice amounts not paid, attomeys' fees, court costs, and other related expenses shall be paid to the prevailing party. ARTICLE
III • Professional Responsibility. URS is Obligated to comply with applicable standards of professional care in the performance of the Services. Client recognizes that opinions relating
to environmental, geologiC, and gectechnical conditions are based on limited data and that actual conditions may vary from those encountered at the times and locations where the data
are obtained, despite the use of due professional care. ARTICLE IV -Responsibility for Others. URS shall be responsible to Client for URS Services and the services of URS subcontractors.
URS shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of other .parties engaged by Client nor for their construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, or their heelth
and safety precautions and programs. ARTICLE V -Risk Allocation. The liability of URS, its employees, agents and subcontractors (referred to collectively in this Article as 'URS'), for
Clienfs claims of loss, injury .. death, damage, or expense, including, without limitation, Client's claims of contribution and indemnification, express or implied, with respect to thind
party claims relating to services rendered or obligations imposed under this Agreement, including all Work Orders, shall not exceed in the aggregate: PSA-l.DOC 19-Mar·02 ·1· 
(1) The total sum of $250,000 for claims arising out of professional negligence, including errors, omissions, or other professional acts, and including unintentional breach of contract;
and any actual or potential environmental pollution or contamination, including, without limitation, any actual or threatened release of toxic, irritant, pollutant, or waste gases, liquids,
or solid materials, or failure to detect or properly evaluate the presence of such substances, except to the extent such release, threatened release, or failure to detect or evaluate
is caused by the willful misconduct of URS; or (2) The total sum of $1,000,000 for claims arising out of negligence, breach of contract, or other causes for which URS has any legal liability,
other than as limited by (1) above. ARTICLE VI -Insurance. URS agrees to maintain during the performance of the Services: (1) statutory Workers' Compensation coverage; (2) Employer's
Liability; (3) General Liability; and (4) Automobile Liability insurance coverage each in the sum of $1 ,000,000. ARTICLE VII • Consequential Damages. Neither Party shall be liable to
the other for consequel).\ial damages, including, without limitation, loss of use or loss of profits, incurred by one another or their subsidiaries or successors, regardless of whether
such damages are caused by breach of contract, willful misconduct, negligent act or omission, or other wrongful act of either of them. ARTICLE VIII-Client Responsibility. Client shall:
(1) provide URS, in writing, all information relating to Clienfs requirements for the project; (2) <:orrectly identify to URS, the location of subsurface structures, such as pipes, tanks,
cables and utilities; (3) notify URS of any potential hazardous substances or other heatth and safety hazard or condition known to Client existing on or near the project site; (4) give
URS prompt written notice of any suspected deficiency in the Services; and (5) with reasonable promptness, provide required approvals and decisions. In the event that URS is requested
by Client or is required by subpoena to produce documents or give testimony in any action or proceeding to which Client is a party and URS is not a party, Client shall pay URS for any
time and expenses required in connection therewith, including reasonable attorney's fees. Client shall reimburse URS for all taxes, duties and levies such as Sales, Use, Value Added
Taxes, Deemed . Profits Taxes, and other similar taxes which are added to or deducted from the value of URS Services. For the purpose of this Article such taxes shall not include taxes
imposed on URS net income, and employer or employee payroll taxes levied by any United States taxing authority, or the taxing authorities of the countries or any agency or subdivision
thereof in which URS subsidiaries, affiliates, or divisions are permanently domiciled. It is agreed and understood that these net income, employer or employee payroll taxes are included
in the unit prices or lump sum to be paid URS under the respective Work Order. ARTICLE IX -Force Maieure. An event of "Force Majeure" occurs when an event beyond the control of the Party
claiming Force Majeure prevents such Party from fulfilling its obligations. An event of Force Majeure .includes, without limitation, acts of God (including Iloods, hurricanes and other
adverse weather), war, riot, civit disorder, acts of terrorism, disease, epidemic, strikes and labor disputes, actions or inactions of govemment or other authorities, taw enforcement
actions, curfews, closure of transportation systems or other unusual travel difficulties, or inability to provide a safe working environment for employees. . In the event of Force Majeure,
the obligations of URS to perform the Services shall be suspended for the duration of the event of Force Majeure. In such event, URS shall be equitably compensated for time expended
and expenses incurred during the event of Force Majeure and the schedule shall be extended by a like number of days as the event of Force Majeure. If Services are suspended for thirty
(30) days or . more, URS may, in its sole discretion, upon 5 days prior written notice, terminate this Agreement or the affected Work Order, or. both. In the case of such termination,
in addition to the compensation and time extension set forth above, URS shall be compensated for all reasonable termination expenses. ARTICLE X • Right of Entry. Client grants to URS,
and, if the project site is not owned by Client, warrants that permission has been granted for, a right of entry from time to time by URS, its employees, agents and subcontractors, upon
the project site for the purpose of providing the Services. Client recognizes that the use of investigative equipment and practices may unavoidably alter the existing site conditions
and affect the environment in the area being stUdied, despfte the use of reasonable care .. PSA-l.00C 19-Mar·02 • 2 
ARTICLE XI -Documents. Provided that URS has been paid for the Services, Client shall have the right to use the documents, maps, photographs, drawings and specifications resulting from
URS efforts on the project. Reuse of any such materials by Client on any extension of this project or any other project without the written authorization of URS shall be at Clienfs sole
risk. URS shall have the right to retain copies of all such materials. URS retains the right of ownership with respect to any patentable concepts or copyrightable materials arising from
its Services. ARTICLE XII-Termination. Client may terminate all or any portion of the Services for convenience, at its option, by sending a written Notice to URS. Either party can terminate
this Agreement or a Work Order for cause if the' other commits a material, uncured breach of this Agreement or becomes insolvent. Termination for cause shall be effective twenty (20)
days after receipt of a Notice ofTermination, unless a later date is specified in the Notice. The Notice of Termination for cause shall containspecific·reasons for termination af)d both
parties shall cooperate in good faith to cure the causes for termination stated in the Notice. Termination shall not be effective if reasonable action to cure the breach has been taken
before the effective date of the termination. Client shall pay URS upon invoice for Services performed and charges incurred prior to termination, plus reasonable termination charges.
In the event of termination for cause, the parties shall have their remedies at law as to any other rights and obligations between them, subject to the other terms and conditions of
this Agreement. ARTICLE XIII -No Third Party Rights. This Agreement shall not create any rights or benefits to parties other than Client and URS. No third party shall have the right
to rely on URS opinions rendered in connection with the Services without the written consent of URS and the third party's agreement to be bound to the same conditions and limitations
as Client. ARTICLE XIV -Assignments. Neither party to this Agreement shall assign its duties and obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. ARTICLE XV
-Hazardous Substances. All nonhazardous samples and by-products from sampling processes in connection with the Services shall be disposed of by URS in accordance with applicable law;
provided, however, that any and all such materials, including wastes, that cannot be introduced back into the environment under existing law without additional treatment, and all hazardous
wastes,cradioactive wastes, or hazardous substances ('Hazardous Substances") related to the Services, shall be packaged in accordance with the applicable law by URS and turned over to
Client for appropriate disposal, URS shall not arrange or otherwise dispose of Hazardous Substances under this Agreement. URS..c at Client's request, may assist Client in identifying
appropriate altematives for off-site treatment, storage. or disposal of the Hazardous Substances, but URS shall not make any independent determination relating to the selection of a
treatment, storage, or disposal facility nor subcontract such activities through transporters or others. Client shall sign all neceasary manifests for the disposal of Hazardous Substances.
If Client requires: (1) URS agents or employees to sign such manifests; or (2) URS to hire, for Client, the Hazardous Substances transportation, treatment, or disposal contractor, then
for these two purposes, URS shall be considered to act as Clienfs agent so that URS will not be considered to be a generator, transporter, or disposer of such substances or considered
to be the arranger for disposal of Hazardous Substances, and Client shall indemnify URS against any claim or loss resulting from such Signing. ARTICLE XVI -Venue. In the event of any
dispute between the parties to this Agreement, the venue for the dispute resolution shall be any state or federal court in the United States having jurisdiction over the parties. The
foregoing notwithstanding, if the project is located outside the United States, theJaws of the State of California shall govern and in such event, any dispute under the Agreement not
resolved amicably shall be resolved under the binding rules of the American Arbitration Association. ARTICLE XVII -Integrated Writing and Enforceability. This Agreement constitutes the
final and complete repository of the agreements between Client and URS relating to the Services and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous communications, representations, or agreements,
whether oral· or written. Modifications of this Agreement shall not be binding unless made in writing and signed by an Authorized Representative of each party. The provisions of this
Agreement shall be enforced to the fullest extent PSA-l.DOC 19·Mar-02 -3 
permitted by law, If any provision of this Agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable, the provision shaUbe construed and applied in a way that comes as close as possible to expressing
the intention of the parties with regard to the provisions and that saves the validity and enforceability of the provision. THE' PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE that there has been an opportunity
to negotiate the terms and conditions of this Agreement and agree to be bound accordingly. CLIENT Signature Signature Ron Whitehead I City Manager Emily Taylor, P.Eo f Vice President
T)llied Namerrille Typed Namerrrtle Date of Signature Date of Signature PSA·1,DOC 19-Mar·02 -4
LUIMP SUM WORK ORDER NO. ____􀀮􀁬􀀡􀀻􀁏􀁏􀁾􀀱____ In accordance with Ille Agreement for Professional SelVices between Town of Addison C'Cllenf'), and _ URS Corporation! ("URS"). a Nevada
corporation, dated September 11! 2D02 ,this Work Order describes tile SelVices, Schedule, and Payment Conditions for URS SelVices on the Project IInown as: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY
ROAD DESIGN DEVELOPMENT & CONTRACT POCUMENTS Client Authort..ed Representative; Address: Public Works Department, P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Telephone No!: __-"-97...2"'.4"'5"'0'-".2"'S7L1'
--__....._________􀁾__ URS Authori:.ed Representative: Emily Tavlor P.E. Address: Gravstone Centre. 301(j lBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dali!!§!. TX 75234 Telephone No.: .__􀀮􀀮􀁊􀀹􀀼􀀮􀀡􀀷􀁾􀀲􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀡􀀴
􀀺􀁬􀀱􀀻􀀰􀀶􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀶􀀹􀀢􀀧􀀵􀀨􀁬􀀧􀀰􀀧􀀭􀀭_______________ SERVIces. The SelVices shall be described in Attachment -,A,,--_ to this Work Order. SCHEDULE. The Estimated Schedule shall
be set forth in Attachment -Lto this Work Order. Because of the uncertainties inherent in the Services. Schedules are estimated and are subject to revision unless otherwise specifically
descnbed herein. PAYMENT. The Services described in Attachment A will be performed for a "lump sum" amount of 5550,965.00. A breakdown of this "lump sum' cost is included in Attachment
L URS chaflles shall be on a percent complete basis and payment shall be made monthly based upon statements submitted to the Clientfar the work performed. TERMS ANp CONOmONS. The terms and conditions of the Agreement n;oferenced abovEI shall apply to this Work Order. except as expressly modified herein. ACCEPTANCE
of the terms of this Work Order is acknowledged by the following Signatures of the Authorized Representatives. CUENT Signature Signall.n8 Ron Whltehoad I City Manager Emily Taylor, P.E.IVice
President Typed N .... elTiUe Dale 01 Signature Date of signalura PSA-l,DOC . 19oMar·Ot • 1 􀁾􀀠
ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR THE ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE DRS will provide the engineering,
architectural, lighting design and noise study services including plans, specifications and estimates as it relates to Arapaho Road from approximate Station 40+67 to approximate Station
70+28 and as provided in the itemized scope. The construction will consist of an elevated four-lane roadway with sidewalk located within the proposed Arapaho Road right-of-way (ROW)
on a tangent alignment. DRS shall prepare plans, details and compute quantities for a steel arch bridge, the "blue-bridge concept", over Midway Road, with prestressed concrete beam approaches.
Design and details will include all bridge details including any soundwalls located on the bridge. URS will also provide all bridge drainage details to accommodate the drainage in accordance
with the Town's Consultant's drainage requirements. DRS will also prepare plans, details and compute quantities for any lighting & illumination, and traffic control for the areas under
and immediately adjacent to the bridge and retained wall portion of Arapaho Road with the exception of those portions to be prepared by the Town of Addison's Consultant DRS will also
prepare . architectural details for the bridge, the mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls and the sound walls. Additionally, DRS will prepare a noise study including ambient
noise measurements, modeling and noise analyses. DRS will prepare and submit technical memorandums, preliminary plans and preliminary construction cost estimates at the end of the Design
Development phase for the Town's review. After resolution of one set of comments, URS will prepare all final detail plans, specifications, and estimates as previously described, to be
included into one [mal construction package prepared by the Town's Consultant. URS will submit four sets of plans for review to the Town for 65% review and 95% review and will incorporate
the Town's comments (one set per submittal) in the next submittals. URS will also provide signed and sealed mylar plans, electronic copies ofdrawing files, and specifications related
to the bridge structure at the 100% [mal submittal. DRS will coordinate with the Town of Addison andlor the Town's Consultant for all interface design issues as well as coordinate the
fonnat and consolidation of construction plans, specification and estimate into one [mal construction package. URS will coordinate with the Town andlor the Town's Consultant for revising
the horizontal alignment and vertical profile of Arapaho Road to accommodate the proposed bridge structure. DRS will coordinate with the Town andlor the Town's Consultant for the revised
alignment of the proposed box-culvert under Arapaho Road as well as bridge drainage and bridge drain tie-ins. DRS will coordinate with the Town andlor the Town's Consultant for all geotechnical
information required for the foundation design for the bridge and retaining walls. The Town of Addison will provide to DRS all available Arapaho Road geometries, including but not limited
to electronic files for horizontal alignment, vertical profile, typical sections, topography survey, field survey, and utility infonnation. The Town will also provide boring logs, soil
parameters and foundation design recommendations (allowable bearing capacities, lateral load analysis, etc.) required for the bridge foundation designs. The Town ofAddison will provide
to DRS a field location survey of the existing 60-in. diamater water main, locating the water main precisely, both vertically and horizontally, along the project limits and specifically
in the vicinity of the arch-bridge's main fOlUldations. Additionally the Town will provide any applicable noise regulations or ordinance 
information, obtain right of entry, and provide all traffic data includiIig but not limited to, peak hourly volumes, average daily traffic, percentages of trucks, and design and posted
speeds that may be required for the noise study. The Town will provide all landscape ordinances and guidelines as well as provide a copy ofthe Town's Consultant's schematic landscape
masterplan and the streetscape design development package. All ROW documentation and plans, Arapaho Road geometrics and roedway design, drainage, parking lot layout and design, retaining
wall layout and design, survey, geotechnical engineering, design and . details for soundwalls on retaining walls or at grade, landscaping, hardscaping and irrigation for landscaping,
permitting, and construction administration, inspection and record drawings are outside the scope ofthis agreement and will be performed by others. 
Itemized Scope of Services Provided by URS for the Arapaho Road Bridge TASK I -ENGINEERING A. Civil Site Works J. Final Civil Design & PS&E (65%, 95%,100% submittal) • Midway Road Traffic
Control Plan • Coordinate Relocation of Overhead Utilities (Along Midway Road) • Retaining WaH Architectura1 Details • SoundwaU Architectura1 Details • QAlQC • Cost Estimate • Special
Provisions & Specifications • Coordination with Town's Consultants RBridges I. Preliminary Bridge Design (-30% submittal) • Develop Design Criteria • Preliminary Bridge Layout (Finalize
Bridge Location) o Preliminary Typical Section • Refine Arch Shape o Size Thrust Block & Refine Shape o Size Foundation • Size Diaphragms • Size Traffic Railing Members • Develop Soundwall
• Coordinate Culvert Layout • Quantities and Cost Estimate • QAlQC 2. Final Bridge Design, & PS&E (65%,95%, 100% submittals) • Final Bridge Layout • Final TYPicaL Section • General Notes
• Quantities and Bearing Seats • Foundation Layout • Dri!1ed Shaft Details o Abutment Plan & Elevation • Abutment Details • Bent Plan & Elevation • Bent Details • Thrust Block Plan &
Elevation • Thrust Block Details • Prestressed Concrete Beam Unit -Deck Plan • Prestressed Concrete Beam Unit -Deck Sections • Bridge Soundwall Details • Miscellaneous Superstructure
Details (drains, lighting) • Diaphragm Details • Closure Pour Details • Suspension Hanger Details • Steel Arch Design andDetails • Steel Arch Camber Details • Bearing Details • Drainage
Details • Railing Details • Architectural Details 
• Erection Sequencing • Prestressed Beam Tables • Compile, Verify & ModifY TxDOT Standard Drawings • QAlQC • Coordination with Town's Consultants • Bridge Total Quantities & Cost Estimate
• Bridge Special Provisions & Specifications C. Electricill Engineering 1. Design Development • Prepare a preliminary cost estimate 2. Final Electrical Design & PS&E (650/0, 95%, 100%
submittals) • Develop and finalize a load study for each electrical service source. o Prepare Lighting Calculations for under-deck lighting above the parking lot. • illumination Layout
(2961', 1200'/sht + I sheet under the bridge) • Electric Service I Pole Summary • Conduit Runs I Contents Summary • Insert Lighting Consultant Special Details o Insert Latest Town or
TxDOT Standards • Quantity Summary o Develop Final Cost Estimate (Using Estimator) • QA ON 95% PLANS o Update Drawings per City Review TASK IT -ARCHITECTURAL A. Design Development 1.
Architectural Studies & Details o Develop one rail option addressing the issues of hikeribiker separation from the vehicular traffic and the architectural options to realize the proposed
triangular pattern in the rail. • Coordinate with the engineering team to refine the curvature and size of the steel. Produce drawings representing a viable option o Develop option for
the final material and form of the thrust block. Provide CADD drawings ofprefer.red scheme. • Develop a panel scheme for precast concrete retaining walls at approaches. • Develop center
pier support shape. o Develop bridge mounted soundwalls • f..ttend Team Meetings and Conference Calls to coordinate the architectural aspects of the design with structural and lighting
Consultants. B. Final Design I. Coordination 2. Review 3. Specifications TASK m -LIGHTING DESIGN A. Design Development (includes two meetings in Addison) 1. Develop one alternative for
lighting of elevated roadway. 2. Develop mounting concepts for bridge structure lighting. 3. Develop one alternative for lighting ofoutboard railings. 4. Develop one alternative for
lighting of underside ofbridge. roadway under bridge and any adjacent parking areas under bridge. R. Final Design (includes one meeting in Addison) 1. Final details of fixtures and mounting
for bridge structure illumination. 2. Final details offixtures and mounting for elevated roadway lighting. 3. Final details of fixtures and mounting for outhoard railing illumination.

4. Final details of fixtures and mounting for lighting ofunderside ofbridge, roadway under bridge and any adjacent parking areas under bridge. S. Provide control concept diagrams and
otber information suitable for use by electrical engineer describing control intent. TASK IV -NOISE STUDY A. Noise Measurements I. Review existing noise ordinance and criteria documents
2. Coordinate witb tbe Town of 􀁁􀁤􀁤􀁩􀁳􀁾􀁭􀀠to discuss noise issues and objectives 3. Perform noise measurement survey. Take initial noise readings, botb long term (24 hOllIS or longer)
and short term (less tban one hOllI) noise readings, at adjacent properties. 4. Observe adjacent building construction type to aid in estimating tbe potential noise effects inside tbe
buildings B. Noise Modeling and Analyses .\. Create a noise model to predict future noise emissions from tbe proposed roadway and bridge 2. Evaluate noise levels at areas of concern
for compliance witb applicable noise regulations and standards 3. Develop a range ofsound wall heights and noise levels where noise impacts require mitigation. 4. Prepare report and
respond to one round ofcomments. TASK V -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A. Reports and Invoices 1. Prepare Project Management Plan 2. Prepare Progress Reports 3. Prepare Invoices and Billings B.
Coordination 1. Coordinate/Administertbe Project 2. Manage Subconsultants 3. Implement Quality ASSlll'ancelQuality Control Program 4. Prepare for and Attend Town Council or otber Town
Meetings (1 total) 5. Prepare for and run internal project coordination meetings (8 total) 6. Prepare for and attend project meetings witb Addison Public Works (3 total) 
URS Corporation Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Design Development and PS&E ATTACHMENT B Estimated Schedule , TASK DESCRIPTION Notice to Proceed O$$lgn Development Final Concepts
(-30% Plans) Addison Review Final Design Intormodlaro Ooslgn Submittat (60% Plans} Addi.son Review Final Doslgn & Cons.rucUon Documents Final Doslgn Submittal (95% P'ans) Addison Review
IncQrporate Comments Signed and Soaled PSI!.E (100%) AuguSl September October 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 • November December January 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 2 002 • February Marth 200 2 2 003 April
􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁾􀂷􀀧􀁡􀁹􀀠 --june-July 2 003 2 003 2 0 0 3 2 003 • 􀁾􀀠 .. 􀀢􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀠'.'.",""" 
• ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD WORK ORDER NO. 001 -ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AITACHMENT C LUMP SUM FEE BREAKDOWN URS CORPORATION TASK 1-ENGINEERING A Civil Site Works B. Bridges C. Electrical
Engineering TASK II -ARCHITECTURAL (Corgan) A Design Development B. Final Design TASK III-liGHTING DESIGN (Brandston) A Design Development B. Final Design TASK IV -NOISE STUDY A Noise
Measurements B. Noise Modeling and Analyses TASK V -PROJECT MANAGEMENT A Reports and Invoices B. Coordination Printing & Copying Expenses Total Cost $ 434,400.00 $ 19,370.00 $ 384,680.00
$ 30,350.00 $ 39,220.00 $ 33,920.00 $ 5,300.00 $ 39,580.00 $ 20,620.00 $ 18,960.00 $ 14,045.00 $ 5,540.00 $ 8,505.00 $ 20,920.00 $ 8,080.00 $ 12,840.00 $ 2800.00 GRAND TOTAL $ 550,965.00

JRS Corporation Page 3 of4 ,MPLOYEE WORKSHEET NAME: ART 1 • SElF·EVALUATION· PERFORMANCE REVIEW I 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁩􀁉􀁃􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀮􀀮􀁣􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁅􀀭􀁘􀀭􀁃􀀭􀁅􀀭􀁅􀁄􀀢􀀧􀁓􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀠=--'-
;-"""----''DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM i MEETS SOME EXPECTATIONS MEETS EXPECTATIONS I EXPECTATIONS OUTSTANDING EXPECTATIONS I --Performance is . I Performance meets some . Performance consis·tentfy
Performance conSistently IPerformance is exceptlonalmsistently below what is expectations and requirements. meets expectations and exceeds expectations and significantly beyond what
is normally 􀀻􀁸􀁰􀁥􀁟􀁣􀁟􀁴􀁥􀁟􀁤􀁟􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁬􀁬􀁟􀀭􀀽􀀭􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀁾􀁟􀀠 requirements. requirements. i. normally expected. 􀁾􀀠 1 i 􀁾􀀠 2 3 14 􀀡􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁩􀀶􀁣􀀭􀀭􀁌􀁌􀁌􀁾􀁾􀁬􀀠􀀽􀁳􀀽􀁝􀁾􀀠
10 General Performance Categories ISelf.Evaluation: Supervisor's I Employee Comments' 􀀮􀁟􀁊􀁟􀁏􀁟􀁢􀁟􀁋􀁟􀁮􀁾 __'le_d_g_e___________-+_____􀁾__-1-rI-_􀀭􀁟􀁒􀁡􀁟􀁾􀀭􀁟􀁾􀁟􀁮􀁟􀁧__􀀭􀀫􀁜􀁦􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁩􀁬􀀠 􀁟􀁾􀁰􀁟􀁲􀁏􀁟􀁤􀁟􀁵􀁣􀁟􀁴􀁩􀁖􀁟􀁩􀁴􀁟􀁙____________+-________-tI________􀁾􀁉􀀬􀀬__􀁾􀀭 􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭_􀁾􀀭􀁟 􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭_.-_
-_-_-􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀴􀀡􀀠 . Communication Skills , 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 Problem Solving/Decision Making 􀀭􀁾􀀠 . WorkSchedulelTime Management 􀁾􀀠 Cost Control
􀁾􀀠 Attention to Safety 􀁾􀀠 Adherence to QA/QC EEO/Affirmallve Action Awareness 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 􀀩􀁾􀀠Adherence to Company Policies -.-.. i 􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭 i ---------j i ----t 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀧􀀭􀁾__􀁾__􀁾􀁾􀀠
I l and Procedures 1. Initiative 1. Adaptability 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁴􀁦􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀱􀀠 􀁬􀁾􀀠Team Commitment , 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀠
I. Attitude/Enthusiasm I 􀁾􀁾􀁾 f-I ----:=::JI t 􀁾􀁾􀁾 'ECIFIC POSITION RESPONSIBILITIES 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 ! , I 􀁾􀀠 :ach additional sheets as necessary 
••• h U 􀁉􀁾􀀠 IflmWUijJ 􀁊􀁬􀁭􀁗􀁲􀁾􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 11,111,/llllil,I,IIIIII,!11 􀁾􀀠 Iii! i -. ,! ! 􀁾􀀧􀁉􀀧􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁦􀁾􀀠 II 􀁉􀀨􀁾􀁬􀀠iii I if 􀁾􀀠 -i 􀁾􀀠 c C N .: c N N 􀁾􀁩􀀠 N 0:. 􀁾􀁉􀀠
N • c c " N 􀀺􀁾􀀠 .... " N:! ,. ·:1 •• .c :! " :i • • N 0 0 • N 0 01 •• N 0:1 · :! • 􀁾􀁩􀀠 ..E· • ' N 0 0 • :1 :-i .." 􀁉􀀺􀁾
DATE SUBMITTED: August 19, 2003 FOR COUNCIL MEETING: August 26,2003 Council Agenda Item: SUMMARY: This item is intended to brief the Council regarding the status ofthe Midway Road Bridge
design by URS Corporation. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A BACKGROUND: The third phase ofthe proposed Arapaho Road extension project elctends from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Road. Included as an
integral component ofthe roadway section ofthis project is a bridge over Midway Road. URS Corporation is currently under design ofthe bridge. RECOMMENDATION: This item is for Council
information only. 
􀁍􀁥􀁾􀀱􀁜􀁊􀀠 . lIof) ISDN 5.23 POLY-LON® 1900 Marine POLYESTER POLYURETHANE Coatings PART A PARTS B65-500 B65V500 SERIES PRODUCT INFORMATION Revised 1/02 POLY·LON 1900 POLYESTER POLYURETHANE
is ? heavy duty, high performance, two component, exteriorflnterior, VOC compliant, high solids, polyester-aliphatic urethane. When properly cured, this dries to a super tough, "wet
look', high gloss, flexible finish with maximum gloss retention, color retention, and chalk resistance. Designed to withstand aggressive industrial environments and provide excellent
durability against severe weather conditions, prolonged exterior exposure, abrasion, impact, and general chemical attack. • Suitable for use in USDA inspected facilities. • Retains its
exterior appearance over a wide range of chemical, weather, and mechanical conditions. • Superior exterior color and retention. For use over prepared metal and masonry surfaces in industrial
environments such as: • Tank exteriors • Roiling stock • Pipelines • Conveyors • Structural steel • Refineries • Bridges • Walls • Marine vessels • Floors Conlonns to AWWA D102-97 Outside
Coating Systems #5 & #6. Finish: High Gloss Color: Wlde range of colors avajlable Volume Solids: 65% ± 2%, mixed, may vaty by color Ultra White Weight Solids: 76% ± 2%, mixed, may vaty
by color Ultra White VOC (EPA Method 24): Unreduced: 330 gIL; 2.751blgal Pure While, mixed Reduced 10%: 368 gIL; 3.231blgal Mix Ratio: 3:1 by volume, 4 galJon mix Recommended Spreading
Rate per coat: Wet mils: 3.0 -4.5 Dry mils: 2.0 -3.0 Coverage: 360 -545 sq ft/gal approximate NOlE: Brush or roll application may require muillple coalS to achieve maximumfilmlhklknessanduniformityol
appearanca. Drying Schedule @3.0 mils wet @50% RH: @50'F @77"F @100'F To touch: 16 hours 2 hours 30 minutes To handle: 24 hours 10 hours 2 hours To recoat: minimum: 24 hours 12 hours
2 hours maximum: 3 days 4B hours 24 hours To cure: 7 days 7 days 5 days ifmaldm<rnrecoaltimeisel<OE!El<led,abradesurlacebeforerecoating·DfWlg tlmelstemperature,humldily,andfilm!hlcknessdapendent
Pot Life: 5 hours . 4 hours 45 minutes Sweat-In-Time: none required Shelf Life: 12 months, unopened, at 77'F Flash Point: 102·F TCC, mixed ReducerlClean Up: Reducer#132,R7K132 System
Tested: (unless otherwi.e indicated) SubslTale: steel Surface Preparation: SSPC-SPI a 2 cis. Epolon II Primer @2.S mils dlllet I et. Poly-Lon 1900 @2.0 mils dft Abrasion Resistance:.
MeI!lod: ASl'M D4060,CS17 wheel, 1000eycles, I kgkJad Result 76 mg loss (aver3lje of 5Irial.) Adhesion: Ma1hod: ASTM 03359 Method B Result 5B, 100% Retention MeI!lod: ASl'M 04541 􀁒􀁥􀁳􀁵􀁾􀀠
1200 psi Accelerated Weathering, with Diamond-Clad Clear Coat: MeI!lod: ASTM 04587, QUV-A. 10,000 hours Resuits: lOO%glossretan1ion Direct Impact Resistance: Melhod: ASTM 02794 Result
100 In. lb. Dry Heat Resistance: MaIhod: ASTM 0248S Result 2OQ°F, 25Q°F Intennillent Exterior OurabllHy: Melhod: 2 yearsal4S' South ResUlt. Excellent, 87% gloss retention FleXibility:
(urelhane only) Melhod: ASTM 0522, lao'bend, 1/4' mandrel Result Passes HumldHy Resistance: Melhod: ASTM 04585, I ao'F, 2000 hours Result No blistering, cracl<ing, softening ordelamination
Penell Hardness: MaIhod: ASTM 03363 Result. 6H Sail Fog Resistance: Me1hod: ASTM BII7, 1000 hours Rasuit Raling 10 per ASTM 0610 lor rusting, less than 1/16' creepage at scribe. No blistering,
cracking, softening, or delamination oflhe film. Polyurethane 5.23 continued on back 
Industrial and 5.23 POLV-LON® 1900 Marine POLYESTER POLYURETHANE Coatings PART A B65-500 B65V500 SERIES PART B PRODUCT INFORMATION Steel: 1-2 cts. Epolon II Epoxy Primer @2.0 -4.0 mils
dftlct 1-2 cts. Poly-Lon 1900 Polyester Polyurethane @2.0 -3.0 mils dftlct Steel: 1 ct. Zinc Clad II HS @3.0 -5.0 mils dft 1 ct. Epolon II Epoxy Primer @2.0 -4.0 mils dft 1-2 cts. Poly-Lon
1900 Polyester Polyurethane @2.0 -3.0 mils dftlct Steel: 1 ct. Epoxy Mastic Aluminum II @6.0 mils dft 1-2 cts. Poly-Lon 1900 Polyester Polyurethane @2.0 -3.0 mils dftlct Galvanizing:
. 1-2 cts. Epolon II Epoxy Primer @2.0 -4.0 mils dftlct 1-2 cis. Poly-Lon 1900 Polyester Polyurethane @2.0 -3.0 mils dftlct ConereteiMasonry: 1 ct. Kem Cali-Coat HS Epoxy Filler/Sealer
@10.0 -20.0 mils dft 1-2 cts. POly-Lon 1900 Polyester Polyurethane @2.0 -3.0 mils dftlct The systems listed above are representative of the product's use. Other systems may be appropriate.
Surface must be clean, dry, and in sound condition. Remove all oil, dust, grease, dirt, loose rust, and other foreign material to ensure adequate adhesion. Refer to product Application
Bulletin for detailed surface preparation information. Minimum recommended surface preparation: • Iron & Steel: SSPC-SP6, 1-2 mils prOfile • Galvanizing: SSPC-SP1 Concrete & Masonry:
SSPC-SP13/NACE 6 ... Primer required lint with 844 Colorant at 200% lint strength. Five minutes minimum mixing on a mechanical shaker is required for complete mixing of color. Temperature:
40°F minimum, 100°F maximum (air, surface, and material) Relative humidity: At least 5°F above dew point 75% maximum Refer to product Application Bulletin for detailed application information.
Packaging: 1 gallon mix: 4 gallon mix: Part A: .75 gallons 3 gallons Part B: 1 quart 1 gallon (premeasured components) Weight per gallon: 11.4 ± 0.2lb mixed, may vary with color Refer
to the MSDS sheet before use. Published technical data and instructions are subject to change without notice. Contact your Sherwin-Williams representative for additional technical data
and instructions. 
Surface must be clean, dry, and in sound condition. Remove all oil, dust, grease, dirt, loose rust, and olher foreign material to enSUre adequate adhesion. Iron & Steel Remove all oil
and grease from surface by Solvent Cleaning per SSPC-SP1. Minimum surface preparation is Commercial Blast Cleaning per SSPC-SP6: For better performance, use Near White Metal Blast Cleaning
per SSPC-SPl O. Blast clean all surfaces using a sharp, angular abrasive for optimum surlace prolile (1-2 mils). Prime any bare steel the same day as it is cleaned or before flash rusllng
occurs. Galvanized Steel The following is a guide. Changes in pressures and tip sizes Allow to weather a minimum of six months prior to coating. may be needed for proper spray characteristics.
Always purge Solvent Clean per SSPC-SP1. When weathering is not posspray equipment before use with listed reducer. Any reduction sible, or the surface has been treated with chromales
or sili5.23A POLY-LON® 1900 POLYESTER POLYURETHANE IndWitrial and Marine Coatings PART A PARTB B65-500 B65V500 SERtES APPLICATION BULLETIN Temperature: 40·F minimum, 100·F maximum (air,
surface, and malerial) At least 5°F above dew point Relative humidity: 75% maximum must be compatible with the existing environmental and applicates, first Solvent Clean per SSPC-SPl
and apply atest patch. cation conditions. Allow pain! 10 dry at least one week before lesling adhesion. It adhesion is poor, brush blasting per SSPC·SP7 is necessary ReducerlClean Up
...•...... Reducer #132, R7K132 10 remove these trealmenlS. Rusty galvanizing requires a minimum 01 Hand Tool Cleaning per SSPC-SP2, prime the area Alrless Spray the same day as cleaned
or before !lash rusllng occurs. Pressure ........•.............. 2400 • 3000 psi Poured Concrete Hose ............................. 3/8" ID New Tip ..................................0
13' ••017" For surface preparation, refer to SSPC·SP13INACE 6. SurFil!er ...•..•..•..•.....•......•... 60 mesh faces must be clean, dry, sound and oiter sufficient profile to Reduc!ion
..................... As needed up to 10% by volume achieve adequate adhesion. Minimum substrate cure Is 28 days at 75°F. Remove all form release agents, cwing comConventional Spray
pounds, sailS, efflorescence, laitance, and other foreign matGun ..•.....•..••....•............. Blnks 95 ter by sandblasting, shotblasting, mechanical scarification, or Cap .........................
...... 53P suilable chemical means. Refer to ASTM D4260. Rinse thor· Tip .......................••.••..•.• 56 oughly to achieve a final pH between 6.0 and 10.0. Allow to Atomization
Pressure ... 50 • 60 psi dry thoroughly prior to coating, Fluid Pressure •.••••.••:•••• 20 -30 psi . Old Reduction ..................... As needed up to 10% by volume Surface preparation
is done in much the same manner as new concrete, however, 􀁾􀀠the concrele is contaminaled with oils, Brush grease, chemicals, etc., they must be removed by cleaning Brush ...........................
. Natural Bristle wilh a strong detergent. Refer 10 ASTM D4258. Form release Reduction ..................... Not recommended agents, hardeners, etc. must be removed by sandblasting,
shotblastlng, mechanical scarification, or suilable chemical Roller means. If surface deterioration presenlS an unacceptably rough Cover .....•..•.....•..•.•........ 1/4' woven with
phenolic core surface, Kem Call·Coat HS Epoxy FilierlSealer is recom· Reduc!ion •........•........... Not recommended mended 10 patch and resurface damaged concrete. RII all cracks,
voids and bugholes with ArmorSeal Crack Filler. II specific application eqUipment Is listed above, equivalent eqUipment may be substituted. Always follow the ASTM methods listed below:
ASTM D4258 Siandard Practice for Cleaning Concrele. ASTM D4259 Standard Practice for Abrading Concrete. ASTM D4250 Standard Practice for Etching Concrete. ASTM D4263 Plastic Sheet Me!hod
for Checking Moisture in Concrete. SSPC·Sp 131Nace 6 Surface Preparation of Concrete. Polyurethane 5.23A continued on back 
Industrial and 5.23A POLV-LON® 1900 Marine POLYESTER POLYURETHANE Coatings PART A PART 8 865-500 865V500 SERIES HARDENER APPLICATION BULLETIN Surface preparation must be completed as
indicated. Mix contents of each component thoroughly with power agitation. Make certain no pigment remains on the bottom of the can. Then combine three parts by volume of Part A with
one part by volume of Part B. Thoroughly agitate the mixture with power agitation. Allow the material to sweat-in as indicated. Rs-stir before using. If reducer is used, add only after
both components have been thoroughly mixed, after sweat-in. Apply paint al the recommended film thickness and spreading rate as indicated below: Recommended Spreading Rate per coat:
Wet mils: 3.0 -4.5 Dry mils: 2.0 -3.0 Coverage: 360 -545 sq fVgal approximate NOTE: Brush or roll application may require mumple coats to achieve maximumfilmthicknessanduniformityofappearance.
Drying Schedule @3.0 mils wet @50% RH: @50°F @77°F @100°F To touch: 16 hours 2 hours 30 minutes To handle: 24 hours 10 hours 2 hours To recoa!: minimum: 24 hours 12 hours 2 hours maxmum:
3 days 48 hours 24 hours To cure: 7 days 7 days 5 days 􀁦􀁦􀁭􀁡􀁸􀁩􀁭􀁵􀁭􀁲􀁥􀁣􀁯􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁭􀁥􀁾􀁥􀁸􀁣􀁥􀁥􀁤􀁥􀁤􀀬􀁡􀁢􀁲􀁡􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁵􀁲􀁦􀁡􀁣􀁥􀁢􀁥􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁥􀁲􀁥􀁣􀁯􀁡􀁦􀁦􀁮􀁧􀀮􀁄􀁲􀁹􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀠
timelstemperature,humidity,andfllmlhicknessdependent Pot Ufe: 5 hours 4 hours 45 minutes Sweat-In-Time: none required Application of coating above maximum or below minimum recommended
spreading rate may adversely affect coating performance. Stripe coat all crevices, welds, and sharp angles to prevent early failure in these areas. When using spray application, use
a 50% overlap with each pass of the gun to avoid holidays, bare areas, and pinholes. If necessary, cross spray at a right angle. Spreading rates are calculated on volume solids and do
not include an application loss factor due to surface profile, roughness or porosity of the surface, skill and technique of the applicator, method of application, various surface irregularities,
material lost during mixing, spillage, overthinning, climatic conditions, and excessive film build. Excessive reduction 01 material can affect film build, appearance, and adhesion. Do
not apply the material beyond recommended pot life. Do not mix previously catalyzed material with new. In order to avoid blockage of spray equipment, clean equipment before use or before
periods of extended downtime with Reducer #132, R7K132. Mixed coating is sensitive to water. Use water traps in all air lines. Moisture contact can reduce pot life and affect gloss and
color. E-Z Roll Urethane Defoamer is acceptable for use. See data page 5.99 for details. Quik-Thane Urethane Accelerator is acceptable for use. See data page 5.97 for details. Refer
to Product Information sheet lor additional performance characteristics and properties. Clean spills and spatters immediately with Reducer #132, R7K132. Clean tools immediately after
use with Reducer#132, R7KI32. Follow manufacturer's safety recommendations when using any solvent. Refer to the MSDS sheet before use. Published technical data and instructions are subject
to change without notice. Contact you r Sherwin-Williams representative for additional technical data and instructions. 
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET B65T504 05 00 =========================================================================== Section 1 --PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION PRODUCT NUMBER HMIS
CODES Health 2 B65T504 Flammability 2 Reactivity o PRODUCT NAME POLY-LON* 1900 Polyester Polyurethane (Part A), Ultradeep Base MANUFACTURER'S NAME EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NO. THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS
COMPANY (216) 566-2917 101 Prospect Avenue N.W. Cleveland, OH 44115 DATE OF PREPARATION INFORMATION TELEPHONE NO. 20-JUN-03 (216) 566-2902 ============================================================
=============== Section 2 --COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS % by WT CAS No. INGREDIENT UNITS VAPOR PRESSURE 11 110-43-0 Methyl n-Arnyl Ketone ACGIH TLV -50 ppm 2.14 rnm OSHA PEL
100 ppm 20 108-65-6 1-Methoxy-2-Propanol Acetate ACGIH TLV Not Available 1.8 rnm OSHA PEL Not Available 16 7727-43-7 Barium Sulfate ACGIH TLV10 mg/m3 as Dust OSHA PEL 10 mg/m3 Total Dust OSHA PEL 5 mg/m3 Respirable Fraction =========================================================================== Section 3 --HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
ROUTES OF EXPOSURE INHALATION of vapor or spray mist. EYE or SKIN contact with the product, vapor or spray mist. EFFECTS OF OVEREXPOSURE Irritation of eyes, skin and upper respiratory
system. May cause nervous system depression. Extreme overexposure may result in unconsciousness and possibly death. SIGNS AND SYMPTOMS OF OVEREXPOSURE Headache, dizziness, nausea, and
loss of coordination are indications of excessive exposure to vapors or spray mists. Redness and itching or burning sensation may indicate eye or excessive skin exposure. MEDICAL CONDITIONS
AGGRAVATED BY EXPOSURE May cause allergic respiratory and/or skin reaction in susceptible persons or sensitization. This effect may be delayed several hours after exposure. CANCER INFORMATION
For complete discussion of toxicology data refer to Section 11. Continued on page 2 
B65T504 page 2 =========================================================================== Section 4 --FIRST AID MEASURES If INHALED: If any breathing problems occur during use, LEAVE
THE AREA and get fresh air. If problems remain or occur later, IMMEDIATELY get medical attention. If on SKIN: Wash affected area thoroughly with soap and water. Remove contaminated clothing
and launder before re-use. If in EYES: Flush eyes with large amounts of water for 15 minutes. Get medical attention. If SWALLOWED: Do not induce vomiting. Get medical attention immediately.
=========================================================================== Section 5 --FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES FLASH POINT LEL DEL 102 F PMCC 1.1 13.1 FLAMMABILITY CLASSIFICATION Combustible,
Flash above 99 and below 200 F EXTINGUISHING MEDIA Carbon Dioxide, Dry Chemical, Foam UNUSUAL FIRE AND EXPLOSION HAZARDS Closed containers may explode when exposed to extreme heat. Application
to hot surfaces requires special precautions. During emergency conditions conditions overexposure to decomposition products may cause a health hazard. Symptoms may not be immediately
apparent. Obtain medical attention. SPECIAL FIRE FIGHTING PROCEDURES Full protective equipment including self-contained breathing apparatus should be used. Water spray may be ineffective.
If water is used, fog nozzles are preferable. Water may be used to cool closed containers to prevent pressure build-up and possible autoignition or explosion when exposed to extreme
heat. =========================================================================== Section 6 --ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES STEPS TO BE TAKEN IN CASE MATERIAL IS RELEASED OR SPILLED Remove
all sources of ignition. Ventilate the area. Remove with inert absorbent. =========================================================================== Section 7 --HANDLING AND STORAGE
STORAGE CATEGORY DOL Storage Class II PRECAUTIONS TO BE TAKEN IN HANDLING AND STORAGE Contents are COMBUSTIBLE. Keep away from heat and open flame. Consult NFPA Code. Use approved Bonding
and Grounding procedures. Keep container closed when not in use. Transfer only to approved containers with complete and appropriate labeling. Do not take internally. Keep out of the
reach of children. Continued on page 3 
B65T504 page 3 =========================================================================== Section 8 --EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION PRECAUTIONS TO BE TAKEN IN USE NO PERSON
SHOULD USE THIS PRODUCT, OR BE IN THE AREA WHERE IT IS BEING USED, IF THEY HAVE CHRONIC (LONG-TERM) LUNG OR BREATHING PROBLEMS OR IF THEY EVER HAD A REACTION TO ISOCYANATES. Use only
with adequate ventilation. Avoid contact with skin and eyes. Avoid breathing vapor and spray mist. Wash hands after using. This coating may contain materials classified as nuisance particulates
(listed "as Dust" in Section 2) which may be present at hazardous levels only during sanding or abrading of the dried film. If no specific dusts are listed in Section 2, the applicable
limits for nuisance dusts are ACGIH TLV 10 mg/rn3 (total dust), 3 mg/rn3 (respirable fraction), OSHA PEL 15 mg/rn3 (total dust), 5 mg/rn3 (respirable fraction). VENTILATION Local 􀁥􀁹􀁾􀁡􀁵􀁳􀁴􀀠pref
erable. General exhaust acceptable if the 􀁥􀁾􀁯􀁳􀁵􀁲􀁥􀀠to materials in Section 2 is maintained below applicable exposure liffilts. Refer to OSHA Standards 1910.94, 1910.107, 1910.108.
RESPIRATORY PROTECTION Where overspray is present, a positive pressure air supplied respirator (TC19C NIOSH/MSHA approved) should be worn. If unavailable, a properly fitted organic vapor/particulate
respirator approved by NIOSH/MSHA for protection against materials in Section 2 may be effective. Follow respirator manufacturer's directions for use. Wear the respirator for the whole
time of spraying and until all vapors and mists are gone. NO PERSONS SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE AREA WHERE THIS PRODUCT IS BEING USED UNLESS EQUIPPED WITH THE SAME RESPIRATOR PROTECTION
RECOMMENDED FOR THE PAINTERS. When sanding or abrading the dried film, wear a dust/mist respirator approved by NIOSH/MSHA for dust which may be generated from this product, underlying
paint, or the abrasive. PROTECTIVE GLOVES Wear gloves which are recommended by glove supplier for protection against materials in Section 2. EYE PROTECTION Wear safety spectacles with
unperforated sideshields. OTHER PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT Use barrier cream on exposed skin. OTHER PRECAUTIONS This product must be mixed with other components before use. Before opening
the packages, READ AND FOLLOW WARNING LABELS ON ALL COMPONENTS. Intentional misuse by deliberately concentrating and inhaling the contents can be harmful or fatal. Continued on page
4 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------B65T504 page 4 Section 9 --PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES PRODUCT WEIGHT 11.08 lb/gal
1327 gil SPECIFIC GRAVITY 1.33 BOILING POINT 284 -308 F 140 -153 C MELTING POINT Not Available VOLATILE VOLUME 48 % EVAPORATION RATE Slower than ether VAPOR DENSITY Heavier than air
SOLUBILITY IN WATER N.A. VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC Theoretical) 3.68 lb/gal 441 gil Less Water and Federally Exempt Solvents 3.68 lb/gal 441 gil Emitted VOC Section 10 --STABILITY
AND REACTIVITY STABILITY --Stable CONDITIONS TO AVOID None known. INCOMPATIBILITY None known. HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS By fire: Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide HAZARDOUS POLYMERIZATION
Will not occur 􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽 􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀠 Section 11 --TOXICOLOGICAL
INFORMATION CHRONIC HEALTH HAZARDS No ingredient in this product is an IARC, NTP or OSHA listed carcinogen. Prolonged overexposure to solvent ingredients in Section 2 may cause adverse
effects to the liver, urinary and blood forming systems. Persons sensitive to isocyanates will experience increased allergic reaction on repeated exposure. Reports have associated repeated
and prolonged overexposure to solvents with permanent brain and nervous system damage. TOXICOLOGY DATA CAS No. Ingredient Name 110-43-0 Methyl n-Amyl Ketone LCSO RAT 4HR Not Available
LDSO RAT 1670 mg/kg 108-65-6 I-Methoxy-2-Propanol Acetate LCSO RAT 4HR Not Available LD50 RAT 8500 mg/kg i, '.. 7727-43-7 Barium Sulfate LCSO RAT 4HR Not Available LDSO RAT Not Available
Continued on page 5 
· ' B65T504 page 5 􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽 􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀺􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀠 Section 12
--ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION ECOTOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION No data available. =========================================================================== Section 13 --DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS
WASTE DISPOSAL METHOD Waste from this product may be hazardous as defined under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 40 CFR 261. Waste must be tested for ignitability to
determine the applicable EPA hazardous waste numbers. Incinerate in approved facility. Do not incinerate closed container. Dispose of in accordance with Federal, State/Provincial, and
Local regulations regarding pollution. =========================================================================== Section 14 --TRANSPORT INFORMATION No data available. ==============================
============================================= Section 15 --REGULATORY INFORMATION SARA SARA 313 (40 CFR 372.65C) SUPPLIER NOTIFICATION CAS No. CHEMICAL/COMPOUND % by WT % Element No
ingredients in this product Supplier Notification. are subject to SARA 313 (40 CFR 372.65C) CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 65 WARNING: This product contains chemicals known to the State of California
to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. TSCA CERTIFICATION All chemicals in this product are listed, or are exempt from listing, on the TSCA Inventory. =========================
================================================== Section 16 --OTHER INFORMATION This product has been classified in accordance with the hazard criteria of the CPR and the MSDS contains
all of the information required by the CPR. The above information pertains to this product as currently formulated, and is based on the information available at this time. Addition of
reducers or other additives to this product may substantially alter the composition and hazards of the product. Since conditions of use are outside our control, we make no warranties,
express or implied, and assume no liabilitv in connection with anv use of this information. 
DRS June II, 2003 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase II -Design
Development & Contract Documents Invoice for Professional Services Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please find our invoice for Professional Services for the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway
Road for the period between April 18,2003 and May 23,2003. Also included is our Progress Report for this period outlining the services provided. Sincerely, URS Corporation Cliff R. Hall,
PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Graystone Center 3010 LBJ Freeway. Suite 1300 Dallas, TX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
Monthly Progress Report Design of the Arapaho Road Bridge Over Midway Road URS Project No. 25334400 Period: April 18, 2003 to May 23,2003 1. General Accomplishments 1.1 Submitted final
report for the noise and vibration analysis. 1.2 Reviewed architectural concepts with City Manager 1.3 Continued preliminary bridge design and continued architectural concept development
2. Progress This Period 2.1 Completed the noise modeling and analysis, and the vibration analysis. 2.2 Submitted draft and final reports for the noise and vibration study. 2.3 Prepared
exhibits and attended the hearing for the condemnation of the Motel 6 property. 2.4 Attended coordination meeting with roadway consultant. 2.5 Continued the preliminary design ofthe
bridge looking at the pedestrian and traffic rails, and the arch bridge diaphragms and beams. 2.6 Continued architectural considerations for retaining wall panels, piers and traffic
rails. 2.7 Met with the Town of Addison to discuss the latest architectural features. 3. Anticipated Next Period 3.1 Prepare presentation for the Town Council. 3.2 Revise "Blue Bridge"
renderings and prepare a "White Bridge" rendering incorporating colored lighting schemes. 3.3 Continued the preliminary design ofthe bridge looking at the arch and substructure. 3.4
Submit bridge layouts and typical sections to Town's consultant for inclusion in the June submittal. 4. Schednle Statns 4.1 Revised schedule submitted with Change Orders. 5. Issnes /Impacts
5.1 Placing sidewalk exterior to the arch is creating a more difficult structure to design and construct. This may increase the cost of the bridge. 5.2 Sidewalk exterior to the arch
may affect the ability to light the arch efficiently and increase the lighting costs. 5.3 Town is considering using a sidewalk greater than 4-ft. Changes to the sidewalk can affect the
preliminary design work prepared to date and delay the design completion. 5.4 Town is considering changes to the color and lighting of the bridge. , : i 
1 Remittance Page Invoice Date 06/11/03 Invoice 565579 Project 25334400 Page For: Design of Ihe Arapaho Road Bridge over Midway Road Professional Services for Period Ending 05130103
Town Of Add ison Alln: Sleven Z. Chutchain, PE 16801 Westgrove Dr Addison TX 75001-5190 Tolal Due: $ 34,816.24 Terms: Due upon Receipt • Make checks payable to: URS Corporation • Please
indicate invoice number andior project number on check • Please include this stub with payment Regular Mail (USPS): URS Corporation Dept 1026 P.O. Box 121028 Dallas TX 75312-1026 US
Overnight Courier: URS Corporation Lock Box No. 891 028 688 South Greenville Ave., Suite 200 Richardson, TX 75081 Attn: Wholesale Lock Box Processing (972) 680-1900 Electronic Funds
Transfer: Account: URS Corporation Bank: Wells Fargo Bank Account No.: 452()'086471 ABA Routing No.: 121-000-248 Swift Code: WFBIUS6S Remillance Information can be sent 10: Email: RemitTo@URSCorp.com
Fax: (512) 419-6937 Alln: Cash Applications Please contact Emilio S Ramirez at 512 419-6788 or via email atEmilio_Ramirez@urscorp.com if you have any questions regarding this invoice.

URS Corporation Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Design Development and Contract Documents Change Order No. 03 to Work Order No. 001 TASK DESCRIPTION Notice to Proceed (NTP) DWU Coordination
Issues NT? For Prelim. Design Preliminary Design Development Preliminary Geotech Preliminary Grading at Arch Finalize Bridge l.ayouts Expert Testimony for Condemnation Final Concepts
􀀨􀀭􀀳􀀰􀁾􀀯􀁯􀀠Plans) Addison Review Presentation to Town Council Revise Concepts Presentation to Town Council Revise Preliminary Oesign Ughting Concepts Final Geotechnical Report Final
Grading Plans Fimd Design !ntermediate Design Submittal (6{)% Plans) Addison Review Presentation to TOYIn Council Bridge Orainage Requirements Final Design & Construction Documants Final
Design Submittal (95% Plans) Addison Review Incorporate Comments) Final PS&E Signed and Sealed PS&E (100%) October 2 0 0 2 November December 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 + ATTACHMENT M Revised Estimated
Schedule January February March April May June 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 312 0 0 0 3 2 o 0 + :. • • + NTP • RE.yO INFORMATION FROM TOWN'S CONSULTANT + SUBMITTAL 
-___-6 n CENTER RECESS 􀁾􀀭 6" CENTER RECESS ___-FORM LINER ___-FORM LINER EAST/WEST ELEVA TlON @PIER rI NORTH/SOUTH ELEVA TlON @PIER rI o 1 ft. o 1 ft. ARAPAHO BRIDGE 22 MAY 2003 CORGAN

-----. -----------I I 􀁾􀀭 FORM LfNER ___-+ ___ t ----_. --------􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀫􀀭......:""""':------------COLUMN CAP ABOVE 6" CENTER RECESS FORM LfNER 7'-0" DfAMETER PLAN SECTION
@PIER I I o 1 ft. ARAPAHO BRIDGE 22 MAY 2003 ,CDRGAN 
7£ H TRIANGULAR STEEL PLATE • •• 3"Xl" TUBE STEEL END POST ••• •• • •• •• • •• •• •• •f •• ,• •• •• •• •• •• •••I••••• 3" DIAMETER STEEL PIPE GUARDRAIL ••• •• • t • • • II • • • .. •
• • •• I • • &. • • • .. _I ... _!__ , • • • •• _. __A __' __ A __ 􀁾 __U llr BAR STEEL RAILS @6" O.C. SECTION ••• • •• •• ELEVATION @PEDESTRIAN RAIL SECTION ELEVATION @TRAFFIC RAIL
I I 0 1 ft. 􀁎􀁾􀁲􀁪􀁪 51 L 3" DIA. Crl1lj.STEELP/PE \ GUARDRAIL l NXr TUBE STEEL CENTER POST 􀁾􀀠 1"X2" TUBE STEEL 3TJ'X 􀀱􀀧􀁾􀀠----......... TUBE STEEL END POST FORM , LINER co, llr
BAR (') I i STEEL RAILS 0 1 ft. @6 N O.C. M" 􀁔􀁒􀁉􀁁􀁎􀁾􀀮􀀠􀁾􀀠 STEEL PLATE , <:t j= 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀠 1W' 1'-2 l1! " 7 l1! " 7" , 3, S1 •0, (') 1'''X2'' TUBE STEEL SECTlON@PEDESTRIAN
I I 0 1 ft. RAIL SECTION@'. TRAFFIC RAIL ARAPAHO BRIDGE 22MAY 2003 .COftGAIi i 
METAL PEDESTRIAN RAIL REVEALS IN RETAINING WALL IN SAME PROPORTION AS RAILING. RETAINING WALL SETIN SLIGHTLY FROM EOGE OF ROAOWA Y I I o 1 ft. 􀁾􀁒􀁅􀁃􀁅􀁓􀁓􀁅􀁄 AREA & RAILINGS 􀁾􀀠
TERMINA TE TOGETHER Iii i I o 4 ft. PRELIMINARY RETAINING WALL STUDIES -NORTH ELEVA TlON -FLAT RECESSED OPTION ARAPAHO BRIDGE 22 MAY 2003 ,CORGAN 
AS ROADWA Y AND GRADE GET CLOSER CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN RAIL METAL PEDESTRIAN RAIL FORMLINER IMPRINTED ON RETAINING WALL :.----BRIDGE STRUCTURE I I o 1 ft. ---"'r--FORMLINER PA TTERN STEPS
DO WN Iii i I o 4 ft. PRELIMINARY RETAINING WALL STUDIES -NORTH ELEVA TION -STEPPED OPTION ARAPAHO BRIDGE 22 MAY 2003 CORGAH
Recelved Fa . V 8 4' F tatl' LASERJ T May-08-03 03;51pm From-URS Corporation 912898204, T-212 P 001/004 H49 DRS Facsimile To: 2.76116 CH<.>'Cc-J-l. f\ rl linn: 􀀭􀁲􀁄􀀱􀁐􀀧􀁾􀀠I!'f"
􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁓􀀢􀀬􀀮􀁡􀀠 Facsimile: 4'7'2. I../S'"O. 2e31 From: C.. L l'FF 􀁾 ..... 􀁾􀀠 Date: <;; /e/.,,) Page 1 of: Ii !rIa/I? ') Message: i cc: IIRS CO<})Ol1lIion 301Q I.B.I FtOCWrly. sua.
1:120 0aIla<. 'TX 75234 Tel: 972.406.69S0 FW; fi'f'2AiOO.6951 'W'WIN.ul"&COfF.c:om CONFII)EN'l1AUTV NonCE "fhc-iLU'(l:tl'M.tionin this: fwim.iJe traliSmi.5lioft i. inlt:Ddc6 􀁳􀁾􀁥􀁬􀀢􀀠(or
die IUltd 􀁾􀁰􀁩􀁥􀁊􀁮􀁯􀀨􀁤􀁜􀁩􀀤􀁉􀁬􀁗􀁬􀀵􀁭􀀱􀁳􀀱􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀮􀁬􀁲􀀩􀀧􀁃􀀪􀀠II",,: n:.edw:d this fu: in enol, 􀁾􀁉􀁾 lIOtlfJ the 􀁾􀁄􀁤􀁡 􀁩􀁭􀁾􀀡􀁓􀁩􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁴􀁤􀁹 by \t:!qIhoM.lCyou Arc
noc tha iNAOOcd rcc:ipiell'. pleuc be. wvim \hac diuemlnllllQfl. diuribution. 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁣􀀬 oflbe InfQl1'Q1tloo rontaincd i.n ellis fax is 􀁾􀁹 pNhibtled. 
URS May I, 2003 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 1680 I Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase II -Design
Development & Contract Documents Invoice for Professional Services Dear Mr. Chutchian: Enclosed please find our invoice for Professional Services for the Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway
Road for the period between March 22,2003 and April 18,2003. Also included is our Progress Report for this period, outlining the services provided. Some ofthe effort related to the condemnation
hearing is included in this invoice but is outside our original scope ofwork. We have previously submitted a separate Work Order for your approval for this effort. Sincerely, URS Corporation
Cliff R. Hall, PE Project Manager Enclosure URS Corporation Grayslone Center 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1300 Dallas. TX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
Monthly Progress Report Design of the Arapaho Road Bridge Over Midway Road DRS Project No. 25334400 Period: March 22, 2003 to April 18, 2003 1. General Accomplishments 1.1 Began noise
analysis, vibration analysis, and prepared exhibits for and attended condemnation hearing. 1.2 Began preliminary bridge design and continued architectural concept development 2. Progress
This Period 2.1 Began the noise modeling and analysis and a vibration analysis. 2.2 Attended preparation meeting, prepared exhibits and attended the hearing for the condemnation ofthe
Crouch property. 2.3 Attended coordination meeting with roadway consultant. 2.4 Began the preliminary design of the bridge looking at the pedestrian and traffic rails, and the arch bridge
diaphragms and beams. 2.5 Continued architectural considerations fur retaining wall panels, piers and traffic rails. 3. Anticipated Next Period 3.1 Prepare exhibits and attend the hearing
for the condemnation ofthe Motel 6 property. 3.2 Complete the draft noise report and submit submit for comments. 3.3 Discuss preliminary architectural concepts for retaining walls, bridge
piers and bridge railings with the Town and finalize concepts. 3.4 Continue preliminary design ofthe bridge, including thrust blocks and span configurations. 3.5 Begin architectural
considerations for thrust blocks. 4. Schedule Status 4.1 Preliminary and final engineering phase delayed due to the approval process of the bridge location and configuration by DWU.
Revised schedule to be submitted. 5. Issues /Impacts 5.1 DWU coordination has delayed the preliminary engineering phase, which will delay the completion ofthe design. Revised schedule
to be submitted. 5.2 Work Order No. 002 and 003 have been submitted for the meetings and concept plan revisions to resolve DWU's concerns, and for the condemnation hearings. 5.3 Preliminary
Geotechnical information and grading plan are needed in the vicinity ofthe bridge by early May 2003. 
URS May 13,2003 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer 16801 Westgrove Drive P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Re: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Phase II -Design
Development & Contract Documents Final Noise Report Dear Mr. Chutchian: The URS Corporation is pleased to present you with five copies ofthe Final Report for the Arapaho Road Bridge
Noise and Vibration Analysis. Also included in this transmittal is one CDROM containing electronic versions of the submitted information. Should you have any questions or concerns regarding
the content of this submittal package, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, URS Corporation C"JL-􀁃􀀩􀁾􀀮􀀠 Arthur Champlin, PE Project Engineer Enclosure URS Corporation
Graystone Centre 3010 LBJ Freeway. Suite 1300 Dallas, TX 75234 Tel: 972.406.6950 Fax: 972.406.6951 
" .... : ..... " . . :"........:>: ... . These.-G..r e.. \),(.,.\v,rcs 􀁣􀁾􀀠-+h<... b..-; 􀁾􀀵􀀭􀁣􀀺􀀮􀁳􀀠 l{\ 􀁦􀀫􀁯􀁶􀁾􀁾􀁴􀀱􀀬􀀠 KoYl (/vc-" 1-tJ rn-<-..f.v . ..' . -./.. -;.....

I , I».S 1!1}r __ ....􀀮􀁐􀁡􀁬􀀱􀁡􀁳􀁎􀁥􀀧􀀺􀁶􀁳􀀮􀁣􀀢􀀧􀁯􀀮􀀬􀁭􀁾___ _ __􀀭􀀢􀁗􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁆􀁲􀁩􀀧􀀭􀀢􀀭􀀢􀂷􀁤􀀬􀀮􀀢􀁡􀀮􀁊􀁉􀀬􀀠 January 6, 2006 Page 13B Critics: Bridge party a waste
of funds .c J' <: 􀁾􀀠 --V4miJ!' 􀁾􀀠 \ I i l ! "i, r 􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀠,., • p_to n\d lk Thz., a' Th H, 1'1, 1m c.e :s 􀀢􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀧􀀠 e j{e P'. 􀁴􀁾􀁊 ". Cj 􀁾􀀠 q C 2 \, -Addison: Invitation-only
event to mark road's opening cost $50,000 By ELIZABETH LANGTON Staif Writer The town of Addison threw a party Thursday night celebrating the extension of Arapaho Road, but some residents
objected to the $50,000 soiree. • "Having a ribbon cutting for the bridge is not the issue," Addison. resident Bob Jacoby said. "Cle!itly this is a big project for the town"Butspendingtaxpayermoney
in this fashion is unacceptable." Addison leader« 􀁷􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁰􀂷􀁾􀀠'ft :..:.lebrate the 􀀨􀀬􀀢􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁰􀁾􀁣􀁌􀁬􀁯􀁮􀀠 of the I""'n'. largest-ever public works project, which took nine
years to finiSh. The town spent $29 million to extend Arapaho by two miles from the the Dallas NorthTollway to Marsh Lane and build a bridge over MidwaY'Road. the final stretch of Arapaho
between Addison Road and Surveyor Boulevard opens at 6 a.m. Mo"day. "We wanted to make an annOlllloement and market it to the 􀁲􀁥􀁧􀁬􀁏􀁾􀁬􀀮􀀠,.. This is now a major artery that is
being opened," Deputy City Manager LeaDunn said, '!Rather than buying an ad, we fell like this was a better way of getting a lot ofinformation out." The Town Council unanimously approved
the party's budget. The largest expense was a $19,722 .' 0, 􀁂􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁢􀁵􀁾􀁏􀁾 . cords ot Ihanks. Sign the OnUne Guestbook at legacy.com. 􀁉􀀧􀁑􀁲􀁾􀁃􀁏􀁂􀁉􀁉􀀧􀁜􀁥􀁾􀁾􀁯􀁬􀀨􀀲􀀱􀀴􀀩􀀹􀀷􀀱􀀮􀀮􀁦􀀱�
�􀀱􀀲􀀮􀀠 TOUPS, MIRANDA ANN 58-'Pl,I.$Sed away at her home in Dallas on Monday, January 2, 2006. A true practitioner of the healing artS> Mi.randa 􀀧􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀧􀁩􀀢􀀠 was .3. gifted ll:
caH;:ta.ker in life, and in , , her. chosen -. . profession, _ .. 􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁾 .... "",4 DARON DEANjStaffPnotogrnpher Instead ofa standard ribbon cutting to mark the bridge's opening, Thwn
Council members pulled apart a neon orange fiber-optic cable. laser show by Excitement 'lochnology Group. Other expenses included $5,700 for invitations, $5,075 for promotional items,
$2,500 for catering and $2,422 for equipment rentals. Funding for the three-phase Arapaho project came from a $23 million bond issue, the town's capita! projects fund and contributions
from Dallas Area Rapid Transit and Dallas County. According to a town document, an incentive payment that was not needed for the project paid for the party. The town invited about 500
people to the event, including peopIe associated with the project and officials from DART and neighboring cities. The eventwas not advertised to the public, though tovm leaders, said
no one would be turned away. "The citizens paid for it, and the citizens are not imited," Addison resident Bill Signs said. "I have heartburn over that." Mr. Signs suggested using the
$50,000 for maintenance on the road or to make a payment On the project's bond debt. Comparative!y, $50,000 was budgeted this year for roof repairs at Addison's Fire Station No.2. At
the party, gnests ate appetizers in a heated tent on top of the bridge. ' OBITUARY SANDRA CONWAY City employee· who helped the homeless By KIM HORNER StatfWriteT Sandra Conway, a longtime
city of Dallas employee dedicated to helping the homeless on and off the job'.?ied S,:,:day after a brief Instead of a standard ribbon cutting, To",.., Council members pulled apart a
neon orange fiberoptic cable that stretched across the width of the bridge. A green laser was beamed at the cable to simulate itbeing severed. A video depicting the bridge's construction
and a five-minute laser show followed. "I think after eight years' construction and all the hard work, it's a statement to the public," Mayor Jne Chow said. Mr. Chow said the council
considered whether the party's $50,000 price tag was too high. "I really don't feel that way, but I did raise the question for discussion/' he said. "r want to make sure that every penny
of taxpeyer money is spent responsibly." About 20 years agu, Addison officials came under fire for q uestionable spending practices. The Dallas Morning News reported in April 1987 that
town officials had spent hundreds of thousands of LAYNE SMITH/StaffArtist dollars to support a civic choir and pay for a series oftrips to the Far East, Canada and aTexas resort. Mayor
Jerry Redding committed suicide during a subsequent investigation. The Dallas County district attorney's office found no criminal wrongdoing in the case. Mr. Jacoby said the bridge issue
has prompted him to consider starting a watchdog groupto monitor the town government. 'We all love our town, and the town management generally does adecentjob,"he said. "But when they
overspend, someone needs to hold then ac 􀁣􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁢􀁾􀁥􀀮􀁊􀀾􀀠 For the past four years, town officials used surplus funds intended for capital projects to cover deficits in the
operating budget. But because property values have increased and the town last year retired a bond debt issued in 1985, Addison's financial picture has improved. E·mailelangton@dallasnews.com
i \ I I I I \ 
FINAL REPORT ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE NOISE AND VIBRATION ANALYSIS Preparedfor Town ofAddison 16801 Westgrove Drive Addison, Texas May 13,2003 URS 
Affected Environment TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................uu.......u • • u ........... 􀁾....................u ••n ........ES..1
1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................uu.. • ,u.......... 􀁾..... u ........n ......... 1-1 2.0 NOISE FUNDAMENTALS .....................................
................................................................... 2·1 3.0 LAND USE ...................u ...............................u ......................................................un••••
•••••• 3...1 4.0 NOISE REGULATIONS .......................n ...............u ..............................􀁾.................................... 4-1 4.1 Existing Noise Environment ..................
......................................................................... 4-2 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGAnON MEASURES .................................... 5-1 5.1
Thresholds of Significance.............................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 Impacts Analysis and Mitigation Measures .............................
....................................... 5-1 5.2.1 Traffic Noise Modeling ............................................................................................. 5-1 5.2.2 Operational
Noise Impacts ........................................................................................ 5-5 5.2.3 Construction Noise Impacts ...........................................................
........................... 5-5 5.2.4 Vibration ................................................................................................................... 5-5 5.2.5 Good Practices
for Construction Noise Reduction .................................................... 5-7 5.2.6 Good Practices for Operational Noise and Vibration Reduction ..............................
5-7 6.0 LIMITATIONS.................""...................................................................................................n 6-1 7.0 REFERENCES un••••n .......................................................................
.................................... 7..1 Ust of Tables Table 1. Sound Levels OfTypical Noise Sources And Noise Environments (A-Weighted Sound Levels) ................................................
......................................................... 2-3 Table 2. FHW A I TxDOT Noise Abatement Criteria Table 7-Criteria for Impact for Human Annoyance and Interference to Use
of Vibration-Sensitive ............................................................................... 4-1 Table 3. Short-Term Noise Measurements .....................................................
........................................... 4-5 Table 4. Long-Term Noise Measurements ................................................................................................
4-6 Table 5 Exterior Noise Impacts ................................................................................................................ 5-3 Table 6. Interior Noise Impacts
................................................................................................................. 5-4 Equipment* ......................................................................
........................................................... 5-6 Ust of Figure Figure l. Noise Measurement and Modeling Locations ......................................................................
.... 4-3 Fignre 2. Long-Term Hourly Noise Measurement Data ........................................................................... 4-7 URS 511312003 i 
Affected Environment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A noise analysis was conducted to determine the effects of the construction of a roadway extension of Arapaho Road. Noise and vibration effects
at adjacent commercial and transient lodging land uses were investigated as part of this project. The analysis indicates that the noise and vibration resulting from construction and
subsequent operation of the proposed roadway would be below State and federal noise and vibration impact standards. No significant noise or vibration impacts are anticipated from this
project URS 5/13/2003 ES-l 
Affected Environment 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the analysis of potential noise and vibration effects from construction and operation of the proposed project. The project
would extend Arapaho Road from Surveyor Boulevard to Addison Road, in the Town of Addison, Texas. The roadway extension will consist of a 4-lane roadway and includes a bridge/elevated
roadway, spanning over Midway Road. The extension will be approximately 5,400 feet in length. The noise analysis consisted of the following: measuring the existing noise environment
at representative noise-sensitive locations in the area; modeling the future traffic noise from the project; comparing projectrelated noise effects to applicable standards to determine
if the difference would be a significant change; and determining if noise mitigation should be considered, Additionally, vibration from project construction and operations (i.e., from
traffic using the new roadway) was analyzed. DRS 511312003 1-1 
Affected Environment 2.0 NOISE FUNDAMENTALS Noise is generally defined as loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired sound that is typically associated with human activity and which
interferes with or disrupts normal activities. Although exposure to high noise levels has been demonstrated to cause hearing loss, the principal human response to environmental noise
is annoyance. The response of individuals to similar noise events is diverse and influenced by the type of noise, perceived importance and suitability of the noise in a setting, time
of day and type of activity during which the noise occurs, and sensitivity of the individual. Sound is a physical phenomenon consisting of minute vibrations, which travel through a medium
such as air and are sensed by the human ear. Sound is generally characterized by a number of variables including frequency and intensity. Frequency describes the sound's pitch and is
measured in Hertz (Hz), while intensity describes the sound's loudness and is measured in decibels (dB). Decibels are measured using a logarithmic scale. A sound level of 0 dB is approximately
the threshold of human hearing and is barely audible under extremely quiet listening conditions. Normal speech has a sound level of approximately 60 dB. Sound levels above approximately
120 dB begin to be felt inside the human ear as discomfort and eventually pain at still higher levels. The minimum change in the sound level of individual events that an average human
ear can detect in a community environment is approximately 3 dB. A change in sound level of 10 dB is perceived by the average person as a doubling (or halving) of the sound's loudness;
this relation holds true for loud sounds and for quieter sounds. Sound levels of typical noise sources and environments are provided in Table I to provide a frame of reference. Because
of the logarithmic nature of the decibel unit, sound levels cannot be added or subtracted directly and are somewhat cumbersome to handle mathematically. However, some simple rules of
thumb are useful in dealing with sound levels. For example, if a sound's intensity is doubled, the sound level increases by 3 dB, regardless of the initial sound level. Thus, for example:
60 dB plus 60 dB equals 63 dB, and 80 dB plus 80 dB equals 83 dB. Sound frequency is a measure of how many times each second the crest ofa sound pressure wave passes a fixed point. For
example, when a drummer beats a druro, the skin of the drum vibrates at a certain number of times per second. A particular tone that makes the drum skin vibrate 100 times per second
generates a sound pressure wave that is oscillating at 100 Hz, and this pressure oscillation is perceived as a tonal pitch of 100 Hz. Sound frequencies between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz are
within the range of sensitivity of the best human ear. Sound from a tuning fork (a pure tone) contains one single frequency; however, most sounds heard in the environment do not consist
of a single frequency, but rather a broad band of frequencies differing in sound level. The method commonly used to quantify environmental sounds consists of evaluating all of the frequencies
of a sound according to a weighting system that reflects that human hearing is less sensitive at low frequencies and extremely high frequencies than at the mid-range frequencies. This
is called A-weighting, and the decibel level measured is called the A-weighted sound level (dBA). In practice, the level of a noise source is conveniently measured using a sound level
meter that includes a filter corresponding to the dBA curve. URS 5113/2003 2-1 
Affected Environment Although the A-weighted sound level may adequately indicate the level of environmental noise at any instant in time, community noise levels vary continuously. Most
environmental noise includes a conglomeration of noise from distant sources that create a relatively steady background noise in which no particular source is identifiable. A single descriptor
called the Leq (equivalent sound level) is used. Leq is the energy-mean A-weighted sound level during a measured time intervaL It is the "equivalent" constant sound level that a given
source would need to produce to equal the fluctuating level measured. In addition, it is often desirable to know the acoustic range of the noise source being measured. This is accomplished
through the Lmax and Lmin noise descriptors. They represent the root-mean-square maximum and minimum obtainable noise levels during the monitoring interval. The Lm,. value obtained for
a particular monitoring location is often called the "acoustic floor" for that location. Other descriptors of noise are commonly used to predict noise/land use compatibility, as well
as community reaction to daytime and nighttime environmental noise. These descriptors include the DayNight Average Sound Level (abbreviated Lru. or DNL). The Ldn represents a 24-hour
period, and applies a penalty to noise events that occur during nighttime hours when relaxation and sleep disturbance is usually of more concern. Noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00
a.m. (nighttime) is penalized by adding 10 dB to the measured level. L"n is the predominant metric used by local governments to describe noise environments within their jurisdictions
and for land use compatibility planning purposes.' The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) recommends the use of Ldn• URS 511312003 2-2 
Affected Environment Table 1. Sound Levels Of Typical Noise Sources And Noise Environments (A-Weighted Sound Levels) Noise Source (at a Given Distance) Scale of A-Weighted Sound Level
in Decibels Noise Environment Human Judgment of Noise Loudness (Relative to a Reference Loudness of 70 Decibels') Military Jet Take·off with After-burner (50 ft) Civil Defense Siren
(100 ft) 140 130 Carrier Flight Deck Commercial Jet Take-off (200 ft) 120 Threshold of Pain '32 times as loud Pile Driver (50 ft) 110 Rock Music Concert '16 times as loud Ambulance Siren
(100 ft) Newspaper Press (5 ft) Power Lawn Mower (3 ft) 100 Very Loud '8 times as loud Motorcycle (25 ft) Propeller Plane Flyover (1,000 ft) Diesel Truck, 40 mph (50 ft) 90 Boiler Room
Printing Press Plant '4 times as loud Garbage Disposal (3 ft) 80 High Urban Ambient Sound '2 times as loud Passenger Car, 65 mph (25 ft) Vacuum Cleaner (10ft) 70 Moderately Loud '70
decibels (Reference Loudness) Normal Conversation (5 ft) Air Conditioning UnIT (100 ft) 60 Data Processing Center Department Store '1/2 as loud Light Traffic (100 ft) 50 Private Business
Office '1/4 as loud Bird Calls (distant) 40 Lower Limit of Urban Ambient Sound Quiet '1/8 as loud Soft Whisper (5 ft) 30 Quiet Bedroom 20 Recording Studio Just Audible 10 0 Threshold
of Hearing Source. Compiled by URS Corporation DRS 5/1312003 2-3 
Affected Environment 3.0 LAND USE The project is located within the Town of Addison, Texas and consists of the extension of Arapaho Road from Surveyor Boulevard on the west to Addison
Road on the east. The extension would be elevated above the existing grade to accommodate a bridge over Midway Road. The current land uses adjacent to the project alignment consist ofcommercial,
light industrial and transient residential (i.e., motels). URS 5113/2003 3-1 
Affected Environment 4.0 NOISE REGULATIONS Federal, State and local agencies have established policies and regulations concerning the generation and control of noise that could adversely
affect citizens and associated noise-sensitive land uses. The various policies and laws established to control adverse noise recognize both the desirability of peace and quiet and the
necessity and inevitability of noise associated with an urbanized technological society. The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) has established specific sound levels, or Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC), which should not be approached or exceeded. TxDOT defines "approach" as being within I decibel of the
NAC in Table 2. Thus, a peak-noise-hour sound level of 71 dBA L,q for an Activity Category C land use type would be considered as approaching the TxDOT/FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria.
Although this project is not subject to TxDOT or FHW A review, these standards will be used in in the absence of local noise standards for transportation noise. The NAC are stated in
terms of one-hour average sound levels (i.e., I-hour L,q's) for various land uses (Table I). The appropriate NAC for the land uses pertaining to this project are 71 dBA L,q exterior
for commercial and light industrial uses and 66 dBA L,q exterior transient residential uses (i.e., hoteVmotel). The interior NAC for residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms,
schools, churches, libraries, hospitals and auditoriums is 51 dBA Loq. Additionally, TxDOT's Noise Policy defmes increases in noise levels as "substantial" and therefore an impact when
the predicted traffic noise levels exceed the existing noise levels by ten (10) dBA or more. Table 2. FHWA I TxDOT Noise Abatement Criteria Activity Category L,q(h) Description of Activity
Category 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve A (Exterior) an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential
if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. B 67 Parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals. (Exterior) C 72 Developed lands, properties,
or activities not included in Categories A or B (Exterior) above. D -Undeveloped lands. E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools (Interior) Churches, libraries,
hospitals, and auditoriums. 􀁈􀁯􀁵􀁾􀁹􀀠A-Weighted Sound Level-DeCibels (dBA) Federal-Aid Highway Program Manual VoL7, Chapter 7 Transmitlal348, August 9, 1982 Sec. 3, Anachment The
Town of Addison has noise control restrictions on construction noise. Section 70-140 (Noise, Dust and Debris) of the Town's Code of Ordinances (adopted April 9, 2002) specifies that
" ... The permitee shall take appropriate measures to reduce to the fullest extent practicable in the performance of the excavation work, noise, dust and unsightly debris and during
the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. shall not use, except with the permission of the city manager, or in case of of an emergency as herein otherwise URS 5/13/2003 4-1 
Affected Environment provided, any tool, appliance or equipment producing noise of sufficient volume to disturb the sleep or repose ofoccupants of the neighboring property." 4.1 EXISTING
NOISE ENVIRONMENT Baseline noise measurements were conducted within the project study area from January 29 to January 30, 2003. The noise measurement locations are shown in Figure I.
The purpose of these measurements was to assess the existing noise levels and for comparison with the results ofpredicted future-with-project traffic noise modeling. The ambient noise
was measured at 9 locations in the vicinity of the proposed project. Short-term (15 minutes to I hour in duration) noise measurements were conducted at six locations, and long-term (over
24 hours in duration) noise measurements were conducted at three locations. Table 3 presents the results of the short-term noise measurements. Table 4 presents the results of the long-term
noise measurements. Long-term noise measurements are used to assess the noise levels in the project area throughout a typical day-night cycle. URS 5/13/2003 4-2 
"'-____U PROJECT ALIGNMENT NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS ....-, MODELING LOCATIONS IT·' LONG TERM MONITORING ... ST·\ SHORT TERM MONITORING (). N o 125 250 375 500 Feet Noise Measurement
& Modeling Locations Figure 1 
Affected Environment The short-tenn noise measurements were conducted using a tripod-mounted Type I (Precision grade) Larson Davis Model 820 Sound Level Meter (SLM) with statistical
analyzer. Long-tenn noise monitoring was conducted using three Metrosonics db-308 community noise analyzers (CNAs). The SLM and the CNAs were set on Slow time response mode, and used
the "A" weighting filter network that most closely approximates the hearing characteristics of the human ear. To ensure accuracy, the laboratory calibration of the noise instruments
was field checked before and after each measurement period using an acoustical calibrator. The accuracy of the acoustical calibrator is maintained through a program established by the
manufacturer, and is traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The sound measurement instruments meet the requirements of the American National Standard S 1.41983
and the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications 804 and 651. In all cases, the microphone heights were five feet above the ground and the microphones were equipped with
windscreens. Meteorological conditions were conducive to reliable and accurate noise measurements, with clear to partly cloudy skies (no precipitation), calm to light winds (0 -6 miles
per hour), temperatures between 45 and 54 degrees Fahrenheit and relative humidity ranging from 53 to 70 percent. As shown in Table 3, noise levels in the project area during the short-tenn
noise measurements varied from 51 dBA L,q (at ST -5, adjacent to the residential area northwest of the project alignment) to 66 dBA L,q (at ST -4, near The Rink). Predominant noise sources
in the project area were traffic along Midway Road and other roadways such as Beltline Road and Addison Road, aircraft operations from the nearby Addison Airport, nearby and distant
industrial noises, birds and distant trains. Long-tenn noise data, as summarized in Table 4, indicates that 24 hour average noise levels vary from approximately 59 dBA L,q to approximately
66 dBA L,q' In tenns of the Ld" the noise levels vary from approximately 65 dBA Ldo to 70 dBA Ldo' The hourly L" noise levels are presented graphically in Figure 2. Figure 2 shows that
all three of the long-tenn noise measurements display similar diurnal noise patterns, although maximum and minimum levels and times of day vary somewhat. Hourly noise levels for LT-I
ranged from approximately 43 dBA L,q (during the 3:00 a.m. hour) to approximately 67 dBA L,q (during the 6:00 a.m. hour). Hourly noise levels for LT-2 ranged from approximately 46 dBA
L,q (during the 2:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. hours) to approximately 77 dBA L,q (during the 1:00 p.m. hour). Hourly noise levels for LT-3 ranged from approximately 48 dBA L,q (during the 1:00
a.m hour) to approximately 72 dBA L,q (during the 7:00 p.m. hour). URS 5113/2003 4-4 
Table 3 -Short-Term Noise Measurement Data (dBA) , ----Location Meaurement Measurement Duration Description L", LMas. LMiQ Primary Noise Date Start Time (Hr:Min) Sources -ST-l 1129/03
16:50 1:00 Behind Mapseo (Next to Charter 58.8 76.9 51.1 Traffic (Midway Furniture) near picnic table Road), aircraft, (employee break area). occasional exhaust valve (distant industrial)
8T-2 1130/03 10:00 1:00 Comfort Suites NE comer 56.7 80.9 44.1 Aircraft, birds, distant traffic, distant industrial exhaust ST-3 1130/03 11:10 1:00 Homewood Suites, Belt1inc Road 58.8
79.6 48.2 Aircraft, birds, distant behind hedge at rear ofbuilding. traffic, hotel HVAC system ST-4 1130/03 12:40 0:30 The Rink, 15100 Midway Rd., 100' 65.6 80.4 51.5 Traffic (Midway
r-from Midway •.!. Road), aircraft, birds ST-5 1130/03 14:25 0:15 Behind 3228 San Sebastion Dr. 50.2 60.9 46.8 Industrial (Generator, (residential arca near the northwest BVAC at nearby
side ofproject). industrial buildings), birds, distant aircraft ST-6 -1130/03 ----15:05 0:40 lntervest Companies, 4131 57.9 78.1 44 Aircraft, birds, distant Centurion Wy traffic, distant
trains -----------
Affected Environment Table 4.·Long·Term Noise Measurements Site 10 Measurement Date Location 24 hr L.q (dBA) 24 hr Lon (dBA) 24 hr Average LSD (dBA) 24 hr Average L.D(dBA) LT·1 1/29/03-1/30103
4125 Centurion Way 58.5 64.5 49.5 47.5 LT-2 1/29/03-1/30103 Behind Motel 6 Property, on fence of tennis courts 66.4 69.6 53.5 50.5 LT-3 1/29/03-1/30103 Behind Absolute Systems Property,
on fence post 63.3 67.3 54.2 51.3 URS 511312003 4-6 
􀁏􀁏􀀺􀁾􀁉􀀠 00:,1 00:1: 1 OO:ll OC:Il 00:01 00:6 00:9 -! a.... 00:[ c Q) E 00:9 I! :::I 00:£ III III Q) oo:t :iii GlM 1110 ocr .. .-0 ZON _ E j:: >0 0 00:<:: 1:<1 :::leD ON 00:1 XC
1...0. 0.. .. ''"" 􀁅􀁾􀀠 00:0 l±J 􀁾􀀠 til OOT<:: C .°.I oo:a N OO:ll 2! :::I til 00:0<:: i! 0061 OO:SI DOLI 00:91 􀁏􀁏􀁾􀁉􀀠 10 0 10 0 00 l'-l'-<0 <0 10 0 0 '" '" 􀁾'" 􀀠 + .'.":.
...J + 􀁾􀀠 !:•i .., yap 
Affected Environment 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.1 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The project would be considered to produce a noise impact if FHW AlTxDOT
NAC are approached or exceeded. Specifically, if the noise from the project equals or exceeds the NAC for Activity Category B . or C of 66 dBA L,q and 71 dBA L,q respectively, or if
predicted traffic noise levels exceed existing noise levels by more than 10 dBA, the project would be considered to have a significant noise effect and mitigation should be considered.
5.2 IMPACTS ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.2.1 Traffic Noise Modeling After ambient noise data were collected, the potential noise impacts to representative noise-sensitive receivers
were modeled using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM®). TNM® is FHWA's most recent computer-based noise model for highway traffic noise prediction and analysis. TxDOT has approved the
noise model for use in the analysis of their highway projects. 􀁾incorporates featcres that make it it a very good choice for accurate assessment of noise from the proposed project;
specifically, the model allows the analyst to very accurately input and model the geometry of the proposed roadway, surrounding structcres and receivers in three dimensions. Site-specific
data used to model future noise impacts included: • Design year traffic data (traffic volumes, mix, direction, and speed) • Roadway design data (plan and profile) • Topographic data
• Aerial photographs The site-specific data were used to create a digital model of the proposed project alternative in 􀁾􀀮􀀠 The TNM'" runs used the same locations as those where measurements
were conducted. Additionally, supplemental model locations were used in the TNM® model to more fully represent potential changes to the local noise environment. The model receiver locations
are shown in Figure I and listed in Table 5. Year 2020 traffic volumes for the grade-separated alternative (13,000 ADT) were utilized for the noise modeling, as supplied by traffic and
design infonnation supplied by HNTB and Terra Mar, Inc. Modeled speed for the project was 40 miles per hour. Traffic mix (the percentages of autos, light, medium and heavy trucks) was
used as supplied by the traffic study. As shown in Table 5 (exterior noise impacts), the TNM'" results were combined with the existing, ambient noise levels to obtain predicted future-with-project
peak-noise-hour levels. The future-withproject noise levels were then compared with the FHW AfTxDOT NAC to identify any representative URS 511312003 5-1 
Affected Environment noise-sensitive receivers that would have a noise impact from the proposed project. Interior noise levels were also predicted, using the results for the exterior
noise modeling and then subtracting a 25 decibel exterior/interior noise reduction factor for shielding provided by the building structure. The 25 dB reduction factor is based upon guidance
provided by TxDOT, as well as other agencies. This factor assumes a masonry structure ofmodem construction, with single glazing, with doors and windows closed. Most modem commercial
structures would provide well over 25 dB of noise reduction with doors and windows closed; thus, the 25 dB assumption is conservative. The predicted interior noise levels were then compared
to the FHWA/TxDOT NAC for noise-sensitive interior spaces, as shown in Table 6. . .... 511312003 5-2 
Table 5 -Predicted Exterior Noise Levels 􀁾􀀠 -􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀭 􀁾􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 -----"I EXi,ling Ambient Level Estimated! Combined Estimated Future NoiNe Substantial IReceptor# Future Noise: 􀁾􀁾􀁵􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁥􀀠No
ise Increase Over Criterion Noise Increase Receptor Loeation (bBlled upon Level (Ambient Existing Noise Leve1l Level Ex_ds Criterion Noise Level (from Criterion Noise Measurements) Arapaho
Bridge) plu, Project) Level (dBALeq) Level ? (Greater than 10 (dBALeq) (dBALeq) (dBALeq) (dBALeq) dBA) Exceeded ? I W ofCrouch Propel'ly -10' fin bridge 58 57 61 3 71 No No 2 W ofCrouch
Property -35' fin bridge 58 58 61 3 71 No No 3 W ofCrouch Property -60' fin bridge 58 57 61 3 71 No No 4 W .fCrouch Property -85' fin bridge 58 56 60 2 71 No No 5 W ofCrouch Property
-110 ' fin bridge 58 54 59 I 71 No No 6 E ofCroDch Pr"perty -10' fin bridge 58 55 60 2 11 No No 7 E "fCrouch Property -35' fin bridge 58 56 60 2 71 No No 8 E "fCrouch Property -60' fin
bridge 58 56 60 2 71 No No 9 E ofCrouch Property· 85' fin bridge 58 56 60 2 71 No No 10 E of Crouch Property· 110' fin bridge 58 55 60 2 71 No No 11 Outdoor Break Area -Furniture Store
59 54 60 I 66 No No 12 lee Rink in Parking Lot 66 56 66 0 71 No No 13 Adj to Motel 6 63 58 64 I 66 No No 14 Adj to Homewood Suites 59 57 61 2 66 No No 15 Adj to Comfort Suiles 57 65
65 8 66 No No 16 Ad] to E side ofFurniture Store 66 54 66 0 71 No No 17 Adj to Intervest 58 60 62 4 71 No No 18 Adj to SatorifIhe Harbor Group 58 62 63 5 71 No No 19 Adj. to Building
near W side ofProject 􀁾􀁾􀀵􀀸􀁟􀀠 -_62 _ 63 5 71 No No -I -Future noise level from proposed 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁥􀁣􀁾􀀠derived from the FHWA's 'lNM® noise model. 2-Criterion noise levels based
upon TxDOT I FHWA exterior "approach o«xceed" Noise Abatement Criteria fur Activity CategolY C (which includes commcrcialland uses) and Activity Category B (which includes hotellmotelland
uses). 
Table 6 -Predicted Interior Noise Levels -""---Estimated Future Exterior Estimated Future Interior Noise R.ceptor# Receptor Location Nois. Level (Ambient plus Criterion Interior Noise
Lever Level' (Ambient plus Proj ••O Future Noise Level Exceeds Project) (dBA L..) (dBA L,.) (dBA L,q) Criterion Noise Level? 1·10 Croueb Property 61 36 51 No 12 Ice Rink 66 41 51 No
13 Motel 6 64 39 51 No 14 Homewood Suites 61 36 51 No 15 Comfort Suites 65 40 51 No 16 FUIIrltureSlore 66 41 51 No 17 Intervest 62 37 51 No 18 S.lllrifThe Harbor Group 63 3& 51 No 19
Building near W Side ofProject 63 38 51 No I • Asswning a consclValive interior/exterior noise reduction mctor of25 dBA, based upon TXDOT guidance, as well as corroborating guidance
from other stale and federal agencies. Assumes a masonry structure with single-glazing, doors and windows closed. 2· Criterion noise levels based upon TxDOT /FHWA interior Noise Abatement
Crireria ror residences, morels, horels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals and auditoriums. 
Affected Environment 5.2.2 Operational Noise Impacts As shown in Table 5, none of the 19 modeled representative receivers would have exterior noise impacts from the proposed project.
Similarly, Table 6 shows that none of the modeled receivers would have interior noise impacts from the proposed project. 5.2.3 Construction Noise Impacts Construction phase noise would
result from the use of motorized construction equipment. Other shortterm impacts from construction noise could result from construction traffic including materials delivery. Noise levels
would vary depending on the type of equipment used, how it is operated, how well it is maintained, and its proximity to noise-sensitive uses. Standard excavation and installation equipment,
such as graders, backhoes, loaders, tractors, drill rigs, welders, and heavy trucks would be used for construction of project facilities. Although construction would increase local noise
levels, construction noise at anyone location would be of brief duration because of the linear nature of the project and because of the cyclical nature of construction activities. With
implementation of recommended good practice measures (listed below), project construction noise would not result in significant noise effects. 5.2.4 Vibration Groundbome vibration from
heavy equipment operations during project construction and from traffic using the proposed bridge was evaluated and compared with relevant vibration impact criteria. The Federal Transit
Authority's (PTA's) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (1995) provides vibration impact criteria and recommended methodologies and gnidance fur assessment of vibration
effects. Ground-borne vibration is a small, rapidly fluctuating motion transmitted through the ground. Groundborne vibration diminishes (or "attenuates") fairly rapidly over distance.
Some soil types transmit vibration quite efficiently; other types (primarily "sandy" soils) do not. There are several basic measurement units commonly used to describe the intensity
of ground vibration. The descriptor used by FT A is the velocity decibel, abbreviated VdB. The velocity parameter best correlates with human perception of vibration. Thus, the response
of humans, buildings and sensitive equipment to vibration is described in this section in terms ofthe root-mean square (RMS) velocity level in VdB units. As a point of reference, the
average person can just barely perceive vibration velocity levels below 70 V dB (typically in the vertical direction). For this project, PTA's mOre detailed, second-tier General Vibration
Assessment was performed. In this analysis, adjustments to the impactcriteria (level vs. distance) are used to account for vehicle speed, soil type, building/foundation type and roadway structural characteristics (i.e., roadway on bridge structure). For
the General Vibration Assessment, the land-usc-dependent criteria listed in Table 7 would apply. The most stringent vibration criteria is 65 V dB for land use Category 1 receptors. Project-specific
variables included vehicle speed, soil type and building/foundation type. Vehicle speed used for the analysis was 40 miles per hour. The limestone sub-soil underlying the project site
was accounted for by assuming ORB 511312003 5-5 
Affected Environment highly efficient vibration propagation. The elevated roadway structure would act to diminish direct vehicle vibration. In contrast, potential amplification of vibration
within the nearby buildings due to sympathetic resonance was assumed, as a conservative measure. Two cases were analyzed for this project: Case I was for the nearest building (The Crouch
Property) which would be as near as 27 feet from the bridge piers following project construction; Case 2 was for the Motel 6 building which would be located approximately 100 feet from
the roadway following project construction. For Case I, the predicted vibration level within the building would be approximately 59 VdB. For Case 2, the predicted vibration level would
be approximately 55.5 VdB. Both vibration levels would be below the most stringent of the FTA vibration criteria for land uses in which low vibration levels are "essential". Both levels
would also be below the human threshold ofperceptibility. Table 7-Criteria for Impact for for Human Annoyance and Interference to Use of Vibration-Sensitive Equipment' Ground-borne Vibration
CVdB re 1 micro in/secl Events' Land Use Category ? Category Comment Frequent Infrequent Low interior ambient is essential 65 65 Residential &sleep 72 80 3 Institutional &daytime 75
83 4 Cancer! hall, TV/Recording Sllldio » 65 65 5 Auditorium .. 72 80 . 6 Theatre .. 72 80 Frequenlls defined as grealer Ihan or equal 10 70 evenls per day .. See seclion 12.2.2 of FTA
Manual re potential for struclural damage to fragile 5truclures if operational during transit evenls Source: FTA, 1995 Potential vibration effects from construction operations were also
assessed using the FTA methodology contained in the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. For Case 1 (the Crouch Property), in which project construction operations would
take place within 25 feet of the building, drilling and other activities would be well below FTA criteria levels for potential damage to structures, even using the most stringent "extremely
fragile historic buildings" category. The damage criterion for such structures is 0.12 inches per second, whereas the worst-case vibration level is predicted to be 0.09 inches per second.
For Case 2 (the Motel 6 building), the construction vibration level would be substantially reduced by the additional distance between the project site and the building. The vibration
level at the motel would be approximately 0.01 inches per second. Vibration from construction activities would be clearly perceptible at the Crouch Property when construction is underway
near the building, but would not be damaging. Vibration from construction activities at the Motel 6 building is expected to be barely perceptible when construction is underway adjacent
to the property. In summary, no significant impact would result from operational Or construction activities associated with the proposed proj ect. URS 5/1312003 5-6 
Affected Environment 5.2.5 Good Practices for Construction Noise Reduction Implementation of the following recommended practices prior to project construction would ensure that potential
construction noise effects are less-than-significant: • The hours ofconstruction including noisy maintenance activities and all spoils and material transport shall be restricted to the
periods and days permitted by the local noise or other applicable ordinance. Noise-producing project activity shall comply with local noise control regnlations affecting construction
activity or obtain exemptions therefrom. • All noise-producing project equipment and vehicles using internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, and air-inlet silencers
where appropriate, in good operating condition that meet or exceed original factory specification. Mobile or fixed "package" equipment (e.g., arcwelders, air compressors) shall be equipped
with shrouds and noise control features that are readily available for that type ofequipment. ofequipment. • All mobile or fixed noise-producing equipment used on the project, which
is regulated for noise output by a local, state, or federal agency, shall comply with such regulation while conducting project-related activities. • Material stockpiles and mobile equipment
staging, parking, and maintenance areas shall be located as far as practicable from noise-sensitive receptors. • The use ofnoise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms,
and bells shall be for safety warning purposes only. • No project-related public address loudspeaker, two-way radio, or music system shall be audible at any adjacent noise-sensitive
receptor. • The on-site construction supervisor shall have the responsibility and authority to receive and resolve noise complaints. A clear appeal process to the appropriate Town ofAddison
staff shall be established prior to construction commencement that will allow for resolution ofnoise problems that cannot be immediately solved by the site supervisor. 5.2.6 Good Practices
for Operational Noise and Vibration Reduction To assure that vibration and noise is not created by vehicles traversing gaps and/or unnecesary breaks in vertical or horizontal alignment,
the bridge shall be designed and constructed with particular care to avoid any such unnecessary gaps or breaks, to the extent allowable under the current state of the practice. Expansion
joints and changes in grade shall be designed to minimize gaps or sudden vertical "steps" in the roadway surface. 􀁾􀀺􀀠. URS 511312003 5-7 
Affected Environment 6.0 LIMITATIONS The opinions and recommendations presented herein are based in part upon field measurements and observations of what is believed to be typical and
representative conditions of normal motor vehicle and community activity and URS's understanding of the project as presented in this report. The noise and vibration measurements and
analyses were conducted using the professional standard of care as practiced in the industry and are representative of the activity being measured during the environmental conditions
existing during the measurement periods. Because of the variability of mctors not within the control of the investigators, no warranty can be made that the exact noise, vibration, traffic,
or activity levels would be obtained by subsequent field measurements. However, for similar climatic and seasonal conditions, and intensity of community activity, the noise, vibration,
and traffic levels measured would be similar to those reported herein. DRS 5/1312003 6-1 
Affected Environment 7.0 REFERENCES Barry, T.M. and Reagan, J.A., December, 1978, FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, Report number FHWA-RD-77-1 08, by Federal Highway Administration.
Washington, D.C. Beranek, Leo L., ed. 1971. Noise and Vibration Control. McGraw-Hill, Inc. New York, NY. Beranek, L.L. and I.L. Ver, eds. 1992. Noise and Vibration Control Engineering.
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, NY. Beranek, Leo, (Ed.), 1988, Noise and Vibration Control, Institute of Noise Control Engineering. New York. Bolt, Beranek, and Newman, Inc. 1973.
Fundamentals and Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise. U.S. Department of Transportation Contract Number DOT-FH-1l-7976, Office of Environmental Policy, Federal Highway Administration.
Diehl, George M. 1973. Machinery Acoustics. Jon Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, NY. Harris, Cyril M., ed. 1979. Handbook ofNoise Control. Second Edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY.
Harris, Cyril, M., ed. 1991. Handbook ofAcoustical Measurements and Noise Control. Third Edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc. New York, NY. Hassall, J.R. and K. Zaveri. 1988. Acoustic Noise Measurements.
Fifth Edition. Briiel and Kjrer Instruments, Inc. Copenhagen, Denmark. Peterson, A.P.G and E. Gross, Jr. 1972. Handbook ofNoise Measurement. Seventh Edition. General Radio Company. Concord,
MA. Texas Department of Transportation, Environmental Affairs Division. 1996 (rev. 1997). Guidelines for Analysis andAbatement ofHighway Traffic Noise. Austin, TX. Town ofAddison. 2002.
Code ofOrdinances (Noise, Dust and Debris), Section 70-140. Addison, Texas U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, April, 1995. DOT-T-95-16. Transit Noise
and Vibration Impact Assessment. (Prepared under contract by Harris, Miller, Miller and Hanson). Burlington, MA. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office
of Environmental Policy, Noise and Air Analysis Division, June, 1995. Highway Traffic Noise Guidance and Policies. Washington, D.C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1971. Noisefrom
Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment and Home Appliances, Prepared under contract by Bolt, Beranek, and Newman, Inc., Boston,MA. URS 5/1312003 7-1 
STATBMBNT OF 􀁑􀁕􀁁􀁌􀁉􀁆􀁉􀁃􀁁􀁔􀁬􀁏􀁎􀁾􀀠 FOR PROFESSIONAL ARCHITBC'J'J BNGINBBRING SBRVICES FOR: ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE lit lit MIDWAY ROAD NOVEMBER 2001 TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS CONSULTING
ENGINEERS IR VING • FOR r WOR rH • OCN rON IN ASSOCIATION 1I'1TH ED CARPENTER RFQ 02-08 MAYOR R. SCOTT WHEELER CITY COUNCIL GL YNDA TURNER, MA YOR PRO TEM CA THY WA Y5. DEP. MA YOR PRO
TEM BOB BARRETT DIANE MALLORY FRANK R. KLEIN FREDRIC M. SIL VER CITY MANAGBR RON WHITEHEAD DIRBCTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS MICHAEL MURPHY, P.£ 
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS for PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECT I ENGINEERING SERVICES for ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD for the TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS November, 2001 MAYOR R. Scott Wheeler
CITY COUNCIL Glynda Turner, Mayor Pro -Tern Cathy Ways, Deputy Mayor Pro -Tern Bob Barrett Diane Mallory Frank R. Klein Fredric M. Silver CITY MANAGER Ron Whitehead ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
Chris Terry DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS Michael Murphy, P.E. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS James C. Pierce, P.E. ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E. 
December 3, 2001 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E.. Assistant City Engineer Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Re: Statement of Qualifications for Professional Architect/Engineering
Services for Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road Dear Mr. Chutchian: We appreciate the opportunity to submit the enclosed Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) for professional architecVengineering
services to the Town of Addison for the subject project. Our team has and is currently providing similar services as required for this project to numerous municipal and govemmental clients.
We are confident that our experience in the areas of bridge, paving. drainage, hydraulics/hydrology, and water and wastewater system engineering projects qualifies us to be utilized
to provide the services required to properly design all aspects of this project. Teague Nail and Perkins, Inc. (TNP) is a general civil engineering firm offering bridge. paving, storm
drainage, water, and sewer design services to over forty (40) municipal and govemmental agencies. The firm has been in business in Fort Worth for 25 years and continues to enjoy a good
working relationship with its municipal clients in the provision of consulting engineering services either on a project-by-project basis (such as this project) or in the role of City
Engineer in which we handle all engineering responsibilities for the client. TNP opened an office in Irving during 1990, and their Denton office in July, 2000, and we are developing
client relationships with several Dallas and Denton County cities as we continue to do in Tarrant County. The TNP track record of providing quality design along with neat. readable,
and detailed construction plans is well recognized by our clients. We would urge you to contact any of our references for similar projects we have noted in the SOQ. regarding our qualifications,
our timeliness in meeting deadlines, our personal client contact, and our responsiveness to client needs. It is a sincere privilege to submit this SOQ to the Town of Addison. We look
forward to further discussions with you regarding our employment as the Town's consultant on this important bridge design project. Should you have any questions regarding our firm, our
project team members. or any of the other information enclosed in this SOQ, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS, INC. 􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀠 JRP/oc 2001 WEsT
IRVING BLVD. THE RADIO CENTER BUILDING IRVING, TEXAS 75051 1100 MACON STREET 23511( HICKORY. SUITE 100 (972) 254·1765 METRO (972) 251-1527 FORT WOIHH. 1£XAS 76102 (817) 338·5773 DENTON,
TEXAS 76201 r940} 383·4177 FAX (972) 251·4348 fAX (817) 336·2813 FAX (940) 383·8026 
TRANSMITTAL OF ADDENDUM ••**** ••• **•••••••••••••******** •••• ****..........* ••••••• ****••••***.*****••*. INSTRUCTIONS: Acknowledge receipt of Addenda in Proposal, on outer envelope
of bid AND WITH THE FORM BELOW FAXED TO (972) 450-7096 upon receipt. Addendum Acknowledgment FAX to (972)450-7096 I Acknowledge the receipt ofAddendum No. Town of: ADDISON, TEXAS RFQ
02-08 Architect/Engineering Services Project Name: Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road By Facsimile Transmission on this date: November 20, 2001 T e:A <.. V I! 'y,g u... ..q..,.J􀁾􀀠P£fI...I.J.,AJ
S;-X. i<J<... 􀁾􀀮􀁦􀁌􀀬.• 􀁬􀁑􀁾 􀁾Crofts Signature Company Name E·Mail Address: "PLEASE SIGN & FAX THIS PAGE BACK TO TOWN OF ADDISON" (as verification that you received this Fax) 972-450-7096
Total Number of Fax Pages: 5 ADDENDUM No.! RFQ 02-08 ArchitectlEngineering Services Arapaho Rd Bridge at Midway lofS 
ADDENDUM No.1 REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS RFQ02-08 ARCHITECT/ENGINEERING SERVICES ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD 1. Replace original RFQ with attachment from addendum
1. 2. Due date changed of RFQ from November 26, 2001 to December 3,2001. END OF ADDENDUM The undersigned bidder hereby certifies the Addendum No.1 has been incorporated into the 􀀽􀀹􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀠OATE
"Ho' ADDENDUM No.1 RFQ 02-08 Architect/Engineering Services Arapaho Rd Bridge at Midway 20fS 
REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS RFQ 02-08 ARCHITECTIENGINEERING SERVICES ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD TOWN OF ADDISON The Town ofAddison is embarking on an exciting project
to construct the portion of Arapaho Road, from Surveyor Blvd. to Addison Rd. Included in this significant roadway improvement to our community is a unique bridge section over Midway
Road. This feature will serve as a gateway to The Town ofAddison and its renowned amenities. In order to accomplish this goal, The Town ofAddison is undertaking a three-step architect/engineer
selection process, to design the architectural and structural components of the bridge. The first step consists ofa request for qualifications that is being sent to selected architecture
and engineering firms. The submittals will be reviewed, and a short list of three AlE fU11lS (finalists) will be selected to go to the second step. The fmalists will enter a "design
competition" and will be paid a stipend of$IO,OOO to prepare a design concept for the bridge. The finalists will be asked to meet with the Town to receive vision and direction for the
project from Town Management. Drawings, visual graphics, and/or a study model will describe the concept. The fmalists will be asked to present their designs(s) for a selection committee
made up ofmembers ofthe governing body and staff. Lastly, the design competition winner will then prepare a proposal to complete the design, and a fee will be negotiated. The design
contract will go to City Council for approvaL ADDENDUM No.1 RFQ 02-08 Arthitect/Engineering Services Arapaho Rd Bridge at Midway 30f5 
A mandatory pre-submittal meeting will be held at 3:00 p.m. November 13, 2001 at the Stone Cottage, 4901 Addison Circle Drive. Any firm not represented will not be eligible to submit
a Statement of Qualifications. The proposed bridge must be 4 lanes, and be able to accommodate pedestrian traffic. Midway road is 45' wide, back of curb to back of curb through the bridge
section. Copies of the preliminary plans for Arapaho road will be available at the pre-submittal meeting. Addison will accept written Statements ofQualifications (SOQ) from ArchitecturelEngineering
firms until December 3, 2001. Four (4) copies ofthe SOQ shall be submitted. The SOQ should contain a maximum number ofthirty (30) single sided pages on 8 y," x II" paper. The firm may
also submit a power point presentation of past bridge design projects. The architecture/engineering fum should provide enough information to demonstrate the finn's ability to design
the project. The SOQ shall designate the individuals who will be assigned to the project (principal·in-charge, Project manager, Project Engineer, Project Architect etc.) with resumes
for each individual. A list ofsimilar projects in scope and size that the firm has recently completed in the last five (5) years shall be provided. A description for each project shall
be provided along with project cost, completion date, names ofpropcsed design team members involved in the project, name of the client, contact person, and phone number for contact person.
All written Statements of Qualifications and supporting material submitted shall be evaluated by the Selection Committee, which will be made up ofMichael Murphy, P.E., Director of Public
Works, James C. Pierce, P .E., Assistant Director of Public Works, Ron Whitehead, City Manager, and Bill Shipp, Assistant to the City Manager. The review of the SOQ's will be based on
the selection criteria shown on the attached page. The SOQ should specifically address each criterion for evaluation. Interested consultants should direct questions and submit Statements
of Qualifications to: Mailing: Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E. Street: 16801 Westgrove Assistant City Engineer Addison, Texas P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Phone: (972) 450-2886
Fax: (972) 450-2837 ADDENDUM No.! RFQ 02·08 Archilect/Engineering Services Arapaho Rd Bridge at Midway 40f5 
L EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR QUALIFICATIONS The finn's experience, as well as proposed team members, in successfully performing similar assignments, in scope and size. for others within
the last five (5) years, by personnel still on the firm's staff. Prime and team members have worked together before. 2. Professional background ofkey personnel and experience similar
projects. The finn's current staff, both in size and related experience, is qualified to provide the desired service. Indicate length of time key employees have been with tbe finn as
well as thcir home office location. 3. Location ofmain office andlor branch office that win provide services and experience in tbe local area. 4. Management approach to this project.
(Include QAlQC, schedule and budgct programs). 5. Technical approach to this project. 6. Previous clients, for similar projects express satisfaction with the firm's work (Short listed
firms only, if necessary). 7. Oral presentation (short listed firms only, if necessary). POINTS MULTIPLIER MULTIPLIER SCORE 0-10 4 0-10 4 0-10 0-10 0-IO 0-10 2 0-10 4 ADDENDUM No.1 RFQ
02-08 ArchitectlEngineering Services Arapaho Rd Bridge at Midway 50f5 
SECTION A. B. C. D. E. F. G. TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION Background and Description of the Team Experience and Successful Performance of the Team in Similar Assignments, Scope, and
Size Professional Background of Key Personnel Management Approach to Project Technical Approach to Project List of Client References General Qualifications Related to the DeSign of Public
Works Projects 
SECTION A -BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE TEAM Teague Nail and Perkins, Inc. (TNP) is a general civil engineering firm that was incorporated in November, 1976, by Gary Teague.and
John Nail. Both men brought strong municipal/governmental civil engineering backgrounds into the firm. In 1979, Dick Perkins joined the firm having worked for a consulting firm which
worked exclusively for municipal/governmental clients. During 1990, in an effort to further expand their base of municipaVgovernmental clients, TNP opened an office in Irving, and in
July, 2000 the firm opened a third office in Denton. Following the death of fou nding partner, John Nail, Mark Berry joined the TNP staff as a principal in July, 1993. Also a previous
TNP employee, Mike Jones, joined the firm as a prinCipal in April, 1995. TNP is fully staffed with seventeen (17) registered professional engineers, and with the team ofprofessionals
from and their world renowned architectural subconsultant, Ed Carpenter, is equipped to provide all the services required for this important bridge project. All of the design, project
management, and CADD work for these projects will be completed or managed by the firm's Irving office. Design field surveys and right-ofway parcel preparation will be provided by the
firm's in-house survey crews. These crews will employ company-owned state-of-the-art robotics and G.P.S. equipment for this project. The TNP staff is comprised of 85 persons including
registered engineers, designer/project engineers, CAD technicians, registered surveyors, survey field parties, field representatives, and clerical personnel. Each of these people has
significant experience in the design and development of construction plans for all types of public works bridge, paving, drainage, water, and sewer projects. The resumes of the key personnel
on the TNP team that will be assigned to the Arapaho Road Bridge project are found in Section C ofthis SOQ. Although the firm is presently providing engineering services for several
muniCipalities, many of of the present projects are not currently design intensive, especially for the team assembled for the Arapaho Road Bridge project. Therefore, TNP is now in a
position to commence on several new projects and to complete same in a very timely and responsive manner. In recent years TNP has provided consulting engineering services to the cities
of Fort Worth, Irving, Euless, Carrollton, Plano, Grand Prairie, Addison, Hurst, Bedford, Lewisville, Waco, Denton, DeSoto, Coppell. Colleyville, North Richland Hills, Highland Village,
Benbrook, Mansfield, The Colony, Lewisville, Richland Hills, Keller, Pantego, Decatur. Burleson, Trophy Club, Weatherford. Springtown, Dalworthington Gardens, Forest Hill, Grapevine,
Blue Mound. Lake Worth. Crowley. White Settlement. Willow Park, Ponder, Westover Hills, Hudson Oaks, Denton County, and to Tarrant County and A-1 
Dallas County (CDBG projects); [TNP has provided its consulting services to the Town of Addison for an intersection improvement project. The design was completed in 1999. J. Richard
Perkins (principal) and Delvin Black (project manager) were directly in charge ofthis project, and both are on the project design team for the Town's Arapaho Road Bridge project]. The
firm has a reputation of providing quality and timely engineering services to its clients as evidenced by the fact that the above mentioned municipalities and governmental agencies continue
to employ the firm on a regular basis. The firm's municipal base has been growing steadily as a result oftheir reputation with some of their first clients which employed them after the
firm was founded in 1976 (Fort Worth, Hurst, and Pantego). Fort Worth has retained TNP on over sixty (60) separate engineering contracts for designing municipal bridge, paving, drainage,
water, and sewer improvements. TNP serves in the capacity of City Engineer for the Town of Pantego, Benbrook, Bedford, Forest Hill, Crowley, Weatherford, White Settlement, Springtown,
Dalworthington Gardens, Blue Mound, Hudson Oaks, Westover Hills, and Trophy Club, and they handle all the engineering assignments of those cities. For their other municipal/governmental
clients, the firm provides required engineering services on a project-by-project basis. In summary, TNP is committed to serving municipalities and governmental agencies. The firm has
built its reputation on five (5) basic major comrnitrnents to its clients: • PRINCIPAL OF FIRM DIRECTLY IN CHARGE OF EACH MUNICIPAL/GOVERNMENTAL PROJECT • QUALITY ENGINEERING DESIGN
• RESPONSIVENESS TO CLIENT NEEDS • TIMELINESS IN MEETING DEADLINES * • CLOSE PERSONAL CONTACT WITH CLIENT DURING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION • Prime example of this was completion from start-Io-finish
of the $8.0 million Alliance Blvd.lI.H. 35W project in 10 months. All intermediate and the final completion deadlines were met. A-2 
T!AGUE HALL. AND 􀁐􀁅􀁒􀁋􀀱􀁎􀁓􀁾􀀠INC. SECTION B • EXPERIENCE AND SUCCESSFUL PERFORMANCE OF THE TEAM IN SIMILAR ASSIGNMENTS, SCOPE, AND SIZE TNP has provided general consulting engineering
services to municipal and govemmental clients for 25 years. The quality and timely service provided by the firm is partly evidenced by the fact that the firm continues to enjoy repeat
business from its clients. On the following pages we have included descriptions of some of the municipal/governmental projects completed by the TNP team that are very similar in nature
to the scope of work outlined for the Arapaho Road Bridge project for the Town of Addison. The proposed design team for this bridge project have had major design/management responsibility
for each of the projects described. The TNP team is fully staffed to provide quality architect/engineering services for this project. Our six (6) survey crews service all three (3) offices
(Irving, Fort Worth, and Denton), and these crews are supervised by Steve Roberson, an an R.P.L.S. with 26 years of surveying experience. Theteam's architectural associate, Ed Carpenter,
has provided similar services for numerous bridge projects. He has a large repertoire of bridge projects for which he has been directly involved in the aesthetic/artistic and design
aspects of these bridges. He won a design excellence award in 1999 from the Federal Highway Administration for his design of the "Grasshopper Bridge" in Arizona, (see description below).
B-1 
REPRESENTATIVE MUNICIPAL & GOVERNMENTAL BRIDGE DESIGN EXPERIENCE (This is only a sample of the projects actually completed by TNP) Roadway Bridge Projects City of Keller Project Name:
Bear Creek Parkway Bridge at Bear Creek Project Description: 330-foot long. 5-span prestressed concrete girder bridge, horizontal and vertical curvature. skewed to the waterway, four-lane
divided roadway, designed and constructed in two separate contracts. Contact Person: Ed IIshner, P.E., Dir. of Public Works (817) 431-1055 Date of Project: Construction completed November,
1998. Construction Cost: $1,100,000 **************************************************************************************************** Project Name: Town Center Blvd. Bridge at Bear
Creek Project Description: 52-foot single span prestressed concrete box beam bridge, extensive architectural treatment, decorative railing. Contact Person: Ed IIshner, P.E., Dir. of
Public Works (817) 431-1055 Date of Project: Construction completed May, 1999. Construction Cost: $300,000 ********************************************************************************************
******** City of Denton Project Name: Ruddell Street Bridge at Pecan Creek Project Description: 210-foot long, 3-span prestressed concrete box beam bridge, skewed to the waterway, 2-lane
street, provision for expansion to a four-lane undivided roadway, sidewalks each side. Contact Person: Jerry Clark, P.E., Dir. of Eng. and Trans. (940) 349-8358 Date of Project: Construction
completed November. 1999. Construction Cost: $525,000 **************************************************************************************************** 8-2 
City of Crowley Project Name: Industrial Blvd. Over Burlington Northern Railroad Project Description: 93-foot single span prestressed concrete box beam overpass for a four-lane divided
roadway to be constructed in 2 phases, MSE retaining wall parallel to railroad right-of-way and a multiple box culvert (10-barreI10' x 10') with extensive headwall modifications. Contact
Person: Jim McDonald, Dir. of Public Works (817) 297-2320 Date of Project: Design completed July, 1999. Construction Cost (Est.): $500,000 ************************************************************
************************************** Parsons Transportation Group Project Name: Mustang Drive over S.H. 121 ProjectDescription: Widening of an existing 4-span, two-lane bridge to 5 lanes (4 traffic lanes and a left-turn lane. Contact Person: John Chase, P.E. Bridge Section, Fort Worth District (817)
370-6580 Date of Project: Construction completed 2001. Construction Cost: $650,000 ******************************************************************•••****************************.
Project Name: Ramp H Access Bridge from William Tate Avenue to S.H. 121 Project Description: Widening of an existing 3-span freeway access ramp bridge to accommodate an additional lane
of traffic (one lane existing to two lanes). The ramp was constructed on a horizontal curve with the bents and abutments skewed approximately 60°. Contact Person: John Chase, P.E. Bridge
Section, Fort Worth District (817) 370-6580 Date of Project: Construction completed in 1999. Construction Cost: $260,000 ******************************************************************************
******************** B-3 
VLK Architects Project Name: American Airlines Priority Service Facility Project Description: Design of a single span bridge and retaining walls as part of the site improvements required
to construct this facility between the north bound and south bound lanes of International Parkway at DFW Airport. The retaining walls varied in height up to 20 feet and were located
as close as 20 feet to the pavement of International Parkway. Contact Person: John Wallis, AlA, VLK Architects 817-633-1600 Larry E. Telkamp, Architect, Senior Project Manager Date of
Project: Project is under construction. Construction Cost: $1,200,000 -Bridge and retaining wall portion only *****************************************************************************************
*********** B-4 
ED CARPENTER "Signature" Bridges City of Phoenix, Arizona Project Name: Cave Creek Pedestrian Bridge Project Description: Stainless steel: 220' x 10' x 36', "Grasshopper"; received Federal
Highway Administration Excellence in Design Award for this bridge, Highway Contact Person: Date of Project: Construction Cost: Greg Esser -(602) 262-4637 Construction completed December,
1997, $550,000 **************************************************************************************************** City of Dallas. Texas Project Name: Trinity River Bridge Project Description:
7-lane freeway bridge, 3 proposed schemes, Steel and concrete, 2000' x 110' Contact Person: Margaret Robinett -(214) 670-3284 Date of Project: Design currently on hold, Construction
Cost: $48,000,000 **************************************************************************************************** City of Ellensburg. Washington Project Name: Central Washington
University Project Description: Atrium suspension bridge sculpture, 40' x 20' x 20', Steel, cables and dichroic glass. Contact Person: Steve Thompson -(360) 586-5352 Date of Project:
Construction completed September, 1998. Construction Cost: $114,000 **************************************************************************************************** 8-5 
City of Ontario, Oregon Project Name: Welcome to Oregon, 1-84 Freeway Bridge Project Description: Competition computer modeled schematic design, 300' x 100' X 50' Contact Person: Joe
Paiva -(503) 986-3528/0regon Dept. of Trans. Date of Project: Competition entry. Construction Cost N/A ************************************************************************************************
**** City of San Antonio, Texas Project Name: Convention Center Pedestrian Bridge Project Description: Computer model, 12' x 160', concrete and steel Contact Person: Felix Padron -(210)
207-4433 Date of Project: Project not yet built. Construction Cost: $650,000 **************************************************************************************.************* City
of Portland, Oregon Project Name: Light Rail Pedestrian Bridge Project Description: "Fishbird", steel and concrete, 155' Lx 14' W x 22' H Contact Person: Mary Priester -(503) 962-2291
Date of Project: Construction completed August, 2000. Construction Cost: $650,000 ****************************************************************************************************
8-6 
TEAGUE MALL AND 􀁐􀁅􀀧􀁒􀁋􀁉􀁎􀁓􀁾􀀠INCSECTION C • PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND OF KEY PERSONNEL The resume of one (1) of the four (4) principals of TNP, which manages the Irving office-Perkins
(Principal-in-Charge), is included in this Section of the SOQ. We have also enclosed resumes of other key staff personnel including our in-house surveyor. TNP has its own surveying crews
to offer an even more responsive and controlled level of service to our municipal clients. TNP utilizes state-of-the-art G.P.S. and robotics equipment on all of our municipal engineering/surveying
projects. We no longer have to wait to get in the production line for other surveying firms. Our utilization and scheduling of our crews is directly based on the needs of our clients.
We have enclosed an organization chartatthe end ofthis Section ofthe SOQ which depicts the TNP team personnel whose resumes are enclosed and their area(s) of expertise. This chart also
includes the subconsultants we have chosen to utilize on the design team for this project. Ed Carpenter has been selected for the TNP team to provide the aesthetic/artistic design elements
for the project. His resume of only his bridge projects is included in this section of the SOQ. The attached Power Point presentation includes some of the "Signature" bridge projects
in which Ed Carpenter has provided aesthetic/artistic deSign. This presentation also includes pictures of some of the bridge design projects TNP has completed within the lastfive (5)
years. A separate video tape taken bythe TNP staff on a recent aerial flight over the project area has also been attached with this SOQ. C-1 
RESUMES TNP PRINCIPALS Gary J. Teague, P.E (FTW) (Not Included) [25] J. Richard Perkins, P.E (Principal-in-Charge) (Irving) [221 Mark R Berry, P.E. (FTW) (No! Included) [8] Michael A.
Jones, P.E (FTW) (Not Included) [16] PROJECT MANAGER BRIDGE DESIGN DeMn E. Black, P .E. [8] PROJECT ENGINEERS STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN Gary L Vickery, P.E. [5] WA TERISEWER DESIGN & UTILITY
RELOCA TlONS C. Ty Hilton, P.E. [6] AESTHETIC/ARTISTIC DESIGN Ed Carpenter [25] SURVEYOR Stephen H. Roberson, RPLS. [6] GEOTECHNICAL SURVEYS CMJ Engineering, Inc. (Resume not included)
• The figures in [ ] indicate the tenure of employee in years with his respective firm. C-2 
nAGUE NALL AND PERKlNS.mc' J. Richard Perkins, P.E. Principal-in-Charge Education 1963 -B.S., Civil Engineering, Texas Tech University 1966 -M.S., Engineering Administration, Southern
Methodist University Registrations Professional Engineer -31434 Public Surveyor -2677 Professional Experience Principal, Project Manager and Client Developrnent Manager -responsible
for design and managernent of various municipal projects (paving, drainage, water, and sewer irnprovements). Client Manager for cities of Hurst, DeSoto, Addison, Grand Prairie, Irving,
Euless, Mansfield, The Colony, Richland Hills, Carrollton, Pantego, Dalworthington Gardens, Cedar Hill, and Blue Mound. Representative projects that are similar in nature to the Addison
Bridge project in which Perkins has provided project rnanagement and/or design responsibilities include, but are not limited to: Roadway/Bridge Reconstruction Projects: Grauwyler Road
(Story to Pearson) -City of Irving -$13,800,000 (3 Phases) Walnut Hill Lane (Tophill to Story) -City of Irving --$1,500,000 Nursery Road Bridge (Delaware Creek) -City of Irving -$900,000
Westpark Way (lSTEA) (S.H. 10 to S.H. 183) -City of Euless -$4,300,000 Rochelle/S.H. 114 and O'Connor/Spur 348 -City of Irving -$660,000 E. Broad Street Reconstruction (U.S. 287 to Main
St.) -City of Mansfield -$3,800,000 Precinct Line Road (Redbud to S.H. 10) -City of Hurst -$600,000 Handley-Ederville Rd. (lSTEA) (S.H. 121 to Baker Blvd.) -City of Richland Hills -$
1,875,000 Bowen Road/Spur 303 (lSTEA) -Town of Pantego -$2,800,000 Storm Drainage Projects: PEC-4 Channel Improvements -City of Denton -$3,423,000 Darr/Grauwyler (Loop 12 to Grauwyler)
-City of Irving -$350,000 Shulze/Anderson/Hawthorne Storrn Drainage Impr. -City of Irving -$325,000 Precinct Line Road (Pipeline Road to Redbud) -City of Hurst -$785,000 Pipeline Road
Drainage Irnprovernents -City of Hurst -$320,000 Storm Drainage Improvernents at Eight Locations -City of DeSoto -$750,000 CresthavenlWinewood/Oakridge/Robin Storrn Drainage Irnpr. -Town
of Pantego $303,000 Peachtree/Silverleaf/Kidd Storm Drainage Impr. -Town of Pantego -$495,000 Srnith-Barry Road Culvert Irnpr. -Town of Pantego -$247,000 C-3 
7:EAGUE HALL AND 􀁐􀁅􀁒􀁋􀁬􀁎􀁓􀁾􀀠INC. DeMn Black, P.E. Project Manager Education B.S. and M.S., Civil Engineering, Oklahoma State University Ph.D., Structural Engineering, Oklahoma
State University Experience Summary Extensive experience in design and management of projects far various governmental agencies and private entities for aver 28 years. Very strong design
and analysis skills. Experienced in utilizing computerized analysis and design methods. Ability to maintain project schedules and budgets. Successful in meeting client's needs for a
variety of civil/structural engineering projects. Partial Listing ofRecent Bridge Experience • Bear Creek Parkway Bridge Bear aver Bear Creek (Twa Phases) -City of Keller $1,100,000
• Ruddell Street Bridge aver Pecan Creek -City of Denton -$525,000 • Ramp H Bridge to West Bound S.H. 114 -Parsons Transportation Group/City of Grapevine -$285,000 • Mustang Drive Bridge
aver S.H. 121 -Parsons Transportation Group/City of Grapevine -$648,000 • Town Center Entrance Bridge Bridge -City of Keller -$300,000 • Industrial Blvd. aver Burlington Northem Railroad
-City of Crowley -$575,000 • Trinity Boulevard aver Trinity Railway Express -Seefried Properties I City of Fort Warth -$980,000 • Priority Parcel Service Facility -VLK Architects/American
Airlines -DFW AirportBridge & Retaining Wall Portion -$1,000,000 • West Sandy Lake Road over Cottonwood Branch -City of Coppell -$920,000 • Hickory Creek Road aver Fletcher Branch -City
of Denton -$ 200,000 Partial Listing ofRecent Transportation Project Experience • Rochelle Boulevard/S.H. 114 Paving Improvements -City of Irving -$475,000 • Walnut Hill Lane Paving,
Drainage, Water & Sanitary Sewer Improvements (Top Hill to Story) -City of Irving -$1,480,000 • Grauwyler Road Paving, Drainage, Water & Sanitary Sewer Improvements (Story Road to Pearson
Street -3 Phases) -City of Irving -$11,400,000 • North Central Expressway Tunnel for Light Rail System -Dallas Area Rapid Transit -$110,000,000 • Prototypical Light Rail Stations (20
Locations) -Dallas Area Rapid Transit -$25,000,000 • Handley-Ederville Road, S.H. 183 to S.H. 121 -City of Richland Hills -$2,400,000 • Woodall Rodgers Storm Drain Tunnel, North Central
Expressway to Woodall Rodgers & Fairmont -City of Dallas -$7,000,000 Professional Registrations/Associations Professional Engineer-31640, Texas Professional Engineer -8981, Oklahoma
C-4 
􀁔􀁾􀀺􀁁􀁇􀁕􀁅 NALl. AND PERKINS. mc. Ed Carpenter Architectural Consultant Education 1965 -1966 Architectural Design -University of California, Santa Barbara 1968 -1971 University of
California, Berkeley Grants Founder, Public Art Advisory Committee Awards 1989 -Governor's Commendation "The Making of Mainstreet" 1994 -Design Citation, American Institute of Architects,
Rochester, MN 1999 -Federal Highway Admin. Excellence in Highway Design, Phoenix, AZ Professional Experience Designer Consultant -works internationally from his studio in Portland, Oregon,
collaborating with a variety of expert architects, engineers, sub-contractors, and studio assistants. Specializes in large-scale public installations raging from architectural sculpture
to infrastructure (bridge) design. Manages each commission, and installs them himself with a crew of long-time helpers, except in the case of the largest objects, such as bridges. Projects
Mr. Carpenter has provided design management and/or responsibilities includes, but are are not limited to: Bridge/Exterior Reconstruction Projects: Ballona Creek Pedestrian Bridge -Culver
City, California, 12' x 220' (in progress) Trinity River Bridge -Dallas, Texas, 7-lane -freeway bridge (in progress) Fishbird Pedestrian Bridge (airport light rail station) -Portland,
Oregon, 155' x 14' x 22' Cave Creek Pedestrian Bridge -Phoenix, Arizona -220' x 10' x 36' San Antonio Convention Center Pedestrian Bridge -San Antonio, Texas -12' x 140' Broadway Viaduct
-Denver, Colorado -75' x 40' x 12' Dean Science Bldg. -Central Washington Univ. at Ellensburg -Atrium Bridge Sculpture Interior Reconstruction Projects: George Bush International Airport
-Houston, Texas -North concourse sculpture Dallas Convention Center -Dallas, Texas -Lobby light sculpture, 60' x 800' (in progress) Federal Building -Oakland, California -Rotunda glazing
Performing Arts Center -Eugene, Oregon -Bridge glazing Sterling Commerce Building -Dallas, Texas -Lobby windows Aberdeen Office Tower, Dallas, Texas -Skylight & mirrored sculptures First
Community Church -Dallas, Texas -Twelve sanctuary windows C-5 
T!AGUE HAL.L ANI) 􀁐􀁅􀁒􀁋􀁬􀁎􀁓􀁾􀀠INC. Gary L. Vickery, P.E. Project Engineer (Storm Drainage Design) E.ducation 1978 -Olivet Nazarene College, Kankakee, IL, B.A. Religious Education
Registrations Professional Engineer -72626, Texas Professional Engineer -17658, Oklahoma Professional Experience Responsible for hydrology and hydraulics department, including drainage
studies, FEMA map revisions, and flood control construction projects. Responsible for completion of a wide variety of projects, including contract negotiation, design, construction administration,
and management of the project team. Projects have included private development and municipal projects including paving, drainage, detention, water and sewer improvements as well as floodplain
reclamation and major channel improvements, obtaining both Letters of Map Revision (LOMR) and Conditional Letters of Map Revision (CLOMR) from FEMA. Drainage Prolects: DeSoto, Texas
Storm Drainage Master Plan -Plan included study of all twelve (12) major watersheds in City (creeks and pipe systems); established proposed bond program for storm drainage Improvements.
Creekside Plaza, Arlington, Texas -Commercial development including local storm drainage and gablon channel Improvements to Fish Creek -$ 850,000 PEC -4 Channel Improvements, Denton,
Texas -$ 3,423,000 Pecan Creek, Denton, Texas -Master Drainage Plan that included two major channel sections and 27 bridges and culverts. Walnut Creek, Mansfield, Texas -Storm Drainage
Master Plan that included seven miles of major stream and eight bridges. Park Forest, Forest Hill, Texas -Channel improvements and CLOMR for North Fork of South Creek. South Lakes Park,
Denton, Texas -Design of retention lake which is second of a proposed series of three. Roadway Reconstruction Projects: Bennington Road, Houston, Texas -$ 1,200,000 Beach Street, Fort
Worth, Texas -$ 185,000 C-6 
rEA-fiVE NALL AND PERKINS. INC. C. Ty Hilton, P.E. Project Engineer (Water/Sewer Design & Utility Relocations) Education 1989 -B.S .• Civil Engineering. Texas A&M University 1996 -M.E.,
Civil Engineering, University ofTexas at Arlington Professional Registrations/Associations Professional Engineer -80209 Director-at-Large. Texas Section ASCE Experience Summary Project
Manager and Project Engineer responsible for management and design of projects in the areas of water and sanitary sewer design, major thoroughfare and street design, and storm drain
design. Projects with which Mr. Hilton has been closely involved include: Partial Listing ofRecent Water/Sanitary Sewer Project Experience >-Basin 183 & 333 Sewer Evaluation & Improvements
(Part 2) -City of Ft. Worth -$2,200,000 >-Basin 183 & 333 Sewer Evaluation & Improvements (Part 1) -City of Ft. Worth -$1,200,000 >-Basin 204. 205 & 259 Sewer Improvements -City of Ft.
Worth -$3,700,000 >-Basin 36S, 166 & 195 Sewer Improvements -City of Ft. Worth -$2,150,000 >-Glenview Drive Sewer Replacement -City of Haltom City -$155,000 >-Eden Drive Sewer Replacement
-City of Haltom City -$120,000 >-Fossil Drive Sewer Replacement -City of Haltom City -$235,000 >-Layton Avenue Sewer Replacement -City of Haltom City -$215,000 >-Jones Street 20" Water
Transmission Main and Mill Street 12" Water LineCity of Lewisville -$1,125,000 >-Cowan Avenue 12" Water and 8" Sanitary Sewer Replacement -City of Lewisville -$960,000 (estimated) >-Glenview
Drive 12" Water Line Replacement -City of Haltom City-$180,000 >-Fossil Drive 12" Water Line Replacement -City of Haltom City -$281,000 >-Layton Avenue 12" Water Line Replacement -City
of Haltom City-$184,000 C-7 
nAGUEHALL AND PERKINS. INC, Stephen H. Roberson, R.P.L.S. Surveying Manager Education Tarrant County Junior College University of Texas at Arlington Texas A&M University, Advanced Surveying
Technicians Short Course 8 Hour CEU per annum required by Texas Board of Land Surveyors Registrations Registered Professional Land Surveyor -4090 Professional Experience Survey Department
Manager -responsible for management of 6 field crews performing surveying for various municipal and private projects. Equipment utilized includes Trimble Real-Time Kinematic Global Positioning
system, three (3) Geodimeter Robotic Total Stations and other electronic total stations. Mr. Roberson is responsible for the preparation of descriptions used for easements, right-of-way
acquisitions, and boundary conveyances. He has been a Registered Professional Land Surveyor since 1982, involved in various boundary and engineering related projects. Boundary Surveys:
Mira Vista Golf Course and Subdivision -City of Fort Worth Diamond Oaks Country Club -City of Haltom City Hidden Lakes Development -City of Keller Right-of-Way: Kelly-Elliot Road -City
of Arlington Westpark Way -City of Euless TRA Sanitary Sewer -City of Roanoke Sanitary Sewer Rehab Projects -City of Fort Worth Bear Creek Parkway -City of Keller Storm Drainage PEC
4 -City of Denton Precinct Line Road -City of Hurst Storm Drain Improvements at Eight (8) Locations -City of DeSoto Special TxDOT Open-end Surveying Contract -District 2 Open-end Survey
Department Contract -City of Fort Worth C-8 
PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART ARAPAHO ROAD BRIDGE AT MIDWAY ROAD PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE J. RICHARD PERKINS, P.E. Experience: 38 Years ADOoisoN iil3? PROJECT MANAGER DELVIN E. BLACK, P.E. Experience:
33 Years I ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATE PROJ. ENGR./STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN ED CARPENTER PROJ. ENGR./UTlL. SYSTEMS DESIGN GARY L. VICKERY, P.E. C. TY HILTON, P.E. Experience: 16 Years Experience:
25 Years Experience: 13 Years I I FIELD SURVEYS/ROW & Experience: I I I ESMT. PARCELS CADD SUPPORT STORM WATER POL. STEVE ROBERSON, R.P.l.S. LARRY COLVIN, CHRIS EDWARDS MARK HOWDAY 26
Years & CAROL SHUGART Experience: Toial Experience: Over 50 Years I I PREVENTlON PLAN 7 Years GEOTECHNICAL INVESTlGATlONS CMJ ENGINEERING, INC. I CLERICAL SUPPORT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
PAULA CREAR NEWMAN, JACKSON & BIEBERSTEIN Experience: 12 Years IJIE 􀁲􀁅􀀵􀀱􀁱􀁾􀁾􀀠􀀧􀀱􀁦􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀠A!i'P􀁇􀁾􀁾􀁦􀀱􀁋􀁊􀀢􀁩􀁾􀀠 
TEAGUE NALL AND 􀁐􀁅􀁒􀁋􀁉􀁎􀁓􀁾􀀠me. SECTION D -MANAGEMENT APPROACH TO PROJECT (QAlQC, SCHEDULE AND BUDGET PROGRAMS) TNP has developed several methods/programs for assisting in the
day-to-day management of its municipal projects. 1. Project Manager System The size of our company dictates the need for a project management system of operation. The designated principal
(usually the client contact) is assigned as the principal-in-charge (PIC) of a project, and the most qualified and available staff project manager for that project is then assigned and
briefed on the project scope, contract limit, and scheduled project completion date. The PIC then works with the project manager to select one or more project engineers based on various
factors relating to the project. Finally, the PIC selects the CADD technician(s) that are to be assigned to the project. In the case of the Arapaho Bridge at Midway Road project, it
is such a specialized project, that the TNP team has already been selected. The team is noted in the Organizational Chart at the end of Section C of this SOQ. During the course of the
project, the PIC maintains contact with the client and provides overall project coordination efforts. 2. Project Staffing Needs The project managers provide weekly personnel needs forms
for their projects to Mike Jones and Mark Berry, and together they coordinate and schedule work assignments for the Irving, Denton, and Fort Worth offices for the next week, mediate
work load conflicts, and evaluate the practicality and efficiency of CADD staff reassignments to meet contract completion requirements. D-1 
3. Weekly Staff Meetings The project managers then hold weekly staff meetings, after input from Jones and Berry and line out the week's assignment for the project engineers, CADD technicians,
and sUivey crews. 4. Budget Control Currently monthly billing reports identify the budget status for each project as well as tracking project budgets in relation to the respective contract
completion dates. Our current budgetary control computer program allows us to obtain a specific budget status at any time during the month, as time charges are directly input into computers
by all employees at the end of each day's work. This program was developed by our in-house computer/software staff. 5. Principal Meetings As a further means by which to maintain strict
control over production, budgets, and workload changes, the four (4) TNP principals meet at least twice each month to discuss project progress, schedules, and personnel needs. This provides
excellent coordination between the firm's three (3) offices. 6. Work Load vs. Staff Projections In order to maintain accurate projections of workload in relation to staff capabilities,
each principal maintains a 3-month workload vs. budget projection data base for each of his client's projects, This management tool is extremely useful in making early identification
of employment needs so as to hire and train new personnel properly in advance of time/budget conflicts. 7. Design Quality Control Part of any effective project management plan is the
degree of quality control maintained during the course of the project. TNP's Design Quality Control Plan is implemented by the firm on all major projects. This plan has been a valuable
tool in the firm's ability to provide quality professional engineering design and construction plans which are recognized by all of TNP's municipal clients as well as contractors for
their clarity, accuracy, and completeness. Due to the limited space in this SOQ, the details of this plan are not included; however. the plan is available for review by the Town, D-D-2

TEAGUE NALL 􀁁􀁎􀁬􀁊􀁐􀁅􀁒􀁋􀁉􀁎􀀺􀁓􀁾􀀠tNt.. SECTION E • TECHNICAL APPROACH TO PROJECT TNP typically provides engineering services on its projects in four (4) major work phases which
cover the basic "Scope of Work" for public works projects. The methodology to be used by TNP to properly study, design, and administer the Arapaho Road Bridge project for the Town of
Addison will include five (5) work phases, and descriptions of each phase, which would be included in the engineering services contract, is shown in detail with the following outline:
A. Conceptual Design (Phase 1) 1. Initiate a concept design conference for the purpose of introducing team members to the Town staff and establishing points of contact between the TNP
principal-in-charge, project manager, and Town staff personnel responsible for the various aspects of the project design and review. The meeting will also be held for the purpose of
confirming design intent and scope, design parameters, special attributes of the Town that will be used in developing the theme for the bridge design, and to establish times during the
design which would serve as interim review/check points. In addition, franchised utility companies will be requested to mark all underground facilities in the field prior to commenCing
design surveys for the project. TNP may also schedule additional meetings during the course of the design if il offers a means to resolve an issue or to keep the project on schedule.
2. Provide sufficient field surveys to locate all related property corners, and provide field design surveys to tie down all topographic features along the proposed project route for
preparation of construction plans. It is hoped that the TNP team could utilize part or all of any design surveys previously provided to the Town by HNTB in their alignment study for
this portion of their project in order to reduce the surveying costs to the Town for the bridge project. (Field surveys should be made beyond limits of normal surveys to account for
possible route realignments due to possible difficulties in obtaining specific right-ol-way calculated in preliminary design). 3. Confirm preliminary route alignment of bridge layout
based upon available field data, known physical and politicel constraints, Town design criteria, and alignment plan previously prepared by HNTB lor the Town. 4. Research property ownership
and prepare a proposed right-of-way/easement map and superimpose same into digital files of topographic design and property surveys. 5. Provide re-evaluation of initial alignment layout
including possible designiroute alignment alternatives and related effect of proposed improvements on adjacent property owners. This effort would be done in conjunction and in coordination
with the HNTB staff relative to their proposed alignment 01 Arapaho Road east and west of the bridge location. 6. Submit layout and bridge design concept(s) to Town staff for intermediate
reviews and obtain concept approval of route alignment and bridge design. A partial listing of some (but not all) 01 01 the issues that will be carefully considered in the conceptual
bridge design and alignment are as follows; (these are issues that were enumerated in the meeting held on November 13, 2001 regarding this project): E-1 
a. The Town wants this facility to be a "signature" bridge; part of our job is to "create a vision to the Council". b. The bridge needs to provide a solution to the visual and aesthetics
problems encountered in this location. c. The bridge will be in close proximity to the roofs of certain adjacent businesses, and the accompanying noise and the manner in which to handle
pedestrian traffic are big issues. d. Addison has a great sensitivity to each of its projects, and the value of adjacent land must be a key element in the project design. e. The Town
is concerned about pedestrians throwing objects from the bridge onto the adjacent buildings and people. This issue is very important in the design of the pedestrian walkway area along
and/or on the bridge structure. f. The transition from the at-grade (below bridge) sidewalk to the sidewalk area that parallels traffic across Midway Road. g. Proper and frequent coordination
with Addison Airport staff regarding effects of bridge facility on their operations and the security issues of survey personnel on airport property. h. Replacement of open channel along
project route with box culvert and replacement of lost parking spaces under new bridge structure within respective property owners' property. i. Provision of geo-technical services for
core borings for bridge and approach structure. j. Collection of surface drainage on bridge structure rather than allowing it to run off (fall) on adjacent properties. k. Provision of
landscaping under bridge and lighting above and under bridge. I. Bidding ofall elements ofproject under one general contract if determined feasible and cost-effective. m. Other design
parameters: (1) our total scope is approx. 2,500 feet including bridge, retaining walls, and earthen fill areas; (2) bridge length (abutment to abutment) is approx. 1,600 feet; and (3)
width of bridge section roadway is 44 feet excluding pedestrian walk. 7. Prepare color exhibit (1"=20' scale) of digital topographical data with proposed route alignment. 8. Hold public
meeting, ifrequired, to obtain citizen/business owner input regarding proposed route alignment. 9. Revise alignment if needed from public meeting input and obtain Town approval prior
to commencing preliminary design. B. Preliminary Design (Phase 2) 1 . Initiate pre-design conference with Town staff and all potentially affected utility companies to facilitate the
design and any corresponding utility adjustments for the project. (Same as A.1 above). It is strongly recommended that all affected utility companies be required to attend this meeting
for the purposeof providing early notification ofthe Town's intent to construct the project. Each utility representative will be requested to furnish system maps at the meeting which depict the general
location of their facilities within the project area. 2. Gather all available information (including existing utilitieslrights-of-wayfeasementsldeeds and construction plans of existing
facilities and preliminary plans of Arapaho Road from E-2 
HNT8) and assimilate the data and design criteria for the project. 3. Make evaluation, with assistance from Town staff, of existing water, sewer, and drainage master plans to ascertain
any need for additional facilities (utilities) along the route of the project, and/or the need for utility relocations related to the projecl. 4. Prepare architecUengineering study to
include preliminary layouts, cost estimates, design alternatives, and report with design recommendations. Meet with Town officials for review and authorization to commence final design,
5. After Town review, meet with citizen groups if necessarv to present preliminary plans and seek their comments and input prior to commencing final design. C. Final Design (Phase 3)
1. Prepare final design and complete construction drawings (Scale: 1"=20'). We believe the client is best served on municipal construction projects with plans prepared at a scale of
1"=20'. Often plans for a project in a developed area can look cluttered and certain items overlooked by the Contractor during construction when plans are drawn at a smaller scale, (Le,
1"=40' or smaller). In addition to specific items addressed in the preliminary phase, the TNP team will prepare the final design, if needed, with particular attention being paid to providing
for water, sewer, and/or drainage stubouts/extensions of adequate size to service areas of future development and/or reconstruction. The design activities will also include an erosion
control plan. Also design efforts will center around the need to minimize traffic interruption to businesses in the construction area, and a traffic control plan will be included in
the construction plans for the project. 2. Prepare all right-of-way and drainage/utility/slope easement documents in accordance with Town format and design criteria. 3. Prepare complete
construction specifications and contract documents in accordance with Town format and design criteria. 4. In-house review of plans and specifications and right-of-way/easemenl documents.
5. Prepare final quantity takeoffs and opinions of probable cosl. 6. Submit construction plans to all franchised utility companies which have facilities within the project area to make
final evaluation of any potential conflicts with their facilities and the proposed construction. Initiate project schedule for coordination of all utility relocations required. 7. Submit
plans to Town for final review. 8, Meet again with Town staff for final input and obtain approval of construction plans, specifications, and contract documents. B. Bidding (Phase 4)
1. Prepare all necessary Town forms required for bid package including general conditions, supplementary conditions, bid invitation, instructions to bidders, and all other necessary
E·3 
forms required for complete Town compliance. 2. Assist Town in the advertisement for bids-required newspaper advertising-and contact plan rooms for notification of bidding process. 3.
Provide all necessary copies of plans and specifications for prospective bidders and provide opportunity for a pre-bid meeting if deemed necessary by the Town. 4. Assist the Town in
opening, tabulating, and analyzing the bids, and make recommendation of contract award to Town after making check of equipment on hand, financial status, and previous work references
of Contractor. 5. Review status of any proposed subcontractors to the general contractor with Town staff and come to agreement as to acceptable subcontractors. 6. After selection of
Contractor and award of contract, assist in the preparation of contract documents, including contract, performance, payment, and maintenance bonds and all other related Town forms required
to initiate construction on the project 7. Prepare Notice of Intent (NOI) for submittal to EPA for the the NPDES permit, if required. 8. Issue "Notice to Proceed" to the Contractor after
execution of contract docu ments. E. Construction (Phase 5) 1. Arrange pre-construction conference with Town staff, engineer, Contractor, and all affected franchised utility companies.
2. Review construction schedules prepared by the Contractor; review and prepare monthly estimates of cash requirements for work completed by the Contractor. 3. Provide all required construction
control staking for project 4. Provide periodic field representation and monitoring of construction progress. 5. Consult and advise the Town regarding the need for any contract change
orders, and prepare change orders as required for Town approval. 6. Be available for interpretation of plans and specifications as may be required by Contractor in the field. This will
be accomplished by either the Project Manager, Project Engineer, or Field Representative of the TNP office. 7. Prepare and process monthly and final pay requests from Contractor to the
Town. Town. 8. Provide, in conjunction with the Town, a final inspection of the project. 9. Revise construction drawings as necessary to adequately reflect any revisions In the construction
from that which was represented on the plans and/or specifications. 􀁾􀀠 10. Provide Town with one (1) set of mylar reproducible "Record Drawings", and also provide revised drawings
on 3-112" floppy disks in AutoCAD 2000i formatfor Town records, within 30 days after completion of the project E-4 
SECTION F -LIST OF CLIENT REFERENCES We offer the following names and phone numbers of some of TNP's current active municipal/governmental clients. We would urge you to call any or all
of these people regarding the level of quality and timely service we are providing. Namerritle Client Phone Ron Sullivan Asst. City Engineer City of Bedford (817) 952-2246 David Gattis
Asst. City Manager City of Benbrook (817) 249-3000 Frances Johnson City Secretary City of Blue Mound (817) 232-0661 Keith Fisher Project Manager City of Colleyville (817) 577-7587 Ken
Griffin Dir. of Engr. & Public Works City of Coppell (972) 304-3679 Jim McDonald Dir. of Public Works City of Crowley (817) 297-1851 Greg Shugart City of Dalworth-City Administrator
ington Gardens (817) 274-7368 Jerry Clark Dir. Engr. & Trans. Dept. City of Denton (940) 566-8358 Tom Johnson City Engineer City of DeSoto (972) 230-9614 Ron Young Ass't. Dir. of Public
Works City of Euless (817) 685-1646 Randy Walhood Project Manager City of Farmers Branch (972) 919-2588 F-1 􀁾􀀠 , ; " 
NamelTitle Michael Duehring Dir. of Public Works Rick Trice Manager Consultant Services Robert Price Admin. Engineer Greg Van Nieuwenhuize City Engineer Ron Haynes Dir. of Public Works
Bob Chapman/Deputy Dir. of Public Works Ed IIschner Dir. of Public Works Steve Freeman Dir. of Public Works Larry Smith City Manager John Cherry Dir. of Public Works Don Day Program
Coordinator Bill LeGrand Public Works Director Client City of Forest Hill City of Fort Worth City of Grapevine City of Haltom City City of Hurst City of Irving City of Keller City of
Mansfield Town of Pantego City of Richland Hills Tarrant County Town of Trophy Club Phone (817) 534-3591 (817) 871-7959 (817) 481-0371 (817) 222-7750 (817) 788-7075 (972) 721-2611 (817)
431-1055 (817) 473-9371 (Ext. 266} (817) 274-1381 (817) 299-1835 (817) 338-9129 (817) 430-1911 (Ext. 163) The chart references and phone numbers for Ed Carpenter's bridge projects are
found in his project descriptions which are in Section B of this SOQ. F-2 
TEAGUE NALL AND 􀁐􀁅􀁒􀁋􀁉􀁎􀁓􀁾􀀠INC. SECTION G -GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS RELATED TO THE DESIGN OF PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS Teague Nail and Perkins, Inc. (TNP) has had the privilege of providing
design and construction administration services for various types of public works projects for numerous municipal/governmental clients with varying levels of sophistication. We have
provided a representative list and description of these projects at the end of Section B of this SOQ. We are confident that the TNP team can offer a thorough, comprehensive design of
the Arapaho Road Bridge project for a fair and reasonable price. We offer for your consideration a list of other general qualifications which we believe make the TNP team an excellent
consultant to provide the services required for this project. 1. TNP always has a principal of the firm directly involved with, and in charge of each municipal project. 2. TNP has an
excellent reputation in the provision of design services for public works projects. We have chosen to make service to municipalities our market niche. This results from a strong commitment
to making thorough evaluations ofall aspects of the problem areas detected during the preliminary design phase of each project as well as offering a "listening ear" to the municipality
to be especially sensitive to the various aspects of the project with which they are already familiar. In the case of this bridge project. City Manager Whitehead has indicated thatthe
Town wants this bridge to be a "signature" facility. Therefore. TNP's goal throughout the design will be to listen very carefully to the desires of the Town Council and staff regarding
their input relative to both the aesthetic and design aspects of this bridge. Our team will then formulate those ideas into a bridge design concept and then obtain additional feedback
from the Town Council and staff regarding the final design aspects of the project. You will find that our team will not try to cram our ideas down the throat of the Town of Addison,
but we will rather let your desires and wishes be very instrumental in bringing about a "signature" bridge design that will encompass those same desires and wishes. G-1 
3. We are very aware of the fact that in the design and construction of any public works project, close coordination with the Town and affected utility companies is essential in order
to meet deadlines and provide for minimal delays and conflicts during the construction process. TNP has built its reputation on a commitment to being available and responsive to its
clients in order to insure such a level of coordination effort. We believe these qualities truly set us apart from our competition. 4. TNP has developed an in-house design quality control
(DOC) plan which has proved to be very valuable in the production of readable, accurate, and consistent construction plans. A copy of this plan is found in Section D of this SOO. We
have been complimented by many contractors regarding the quality of our plans. G-2 
􀁾 􀁲􀁾􀁱􀁴􀁴􀁾􀀠􀀧􀀻􀁊􀁦􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀠AC/9􀁇􀁲􀀺􀁾􀁬􀀡􀁋􀁊􀁴􀀻􀀡􀁾􀀠 1100 MScott SL 2001 West Irving Blvd. Fort Worth, TeNa. 76102 􀁉􀁲􀁶􀁾􀁮􀁑􀀮􀀠Tex8s 15061 (81T) S36-5773 (972) 254-1765
Creative Engineering Solutions for Our Communities dl 
1 '1 '] 1 it; 􀁾􀀼􀀾􀀡􀀢􀀬􀀭..􀀬􀀾􀁾􀀠 'i1: 1 􀁾􀀠• ,' "<tint.' '-J'", ;.. 􀁾􀁪􀁩􀀮􀀬􀀢􀀢􀀮􀀻􀁦􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀠 1 1 " , ] · .{1It . ", ,'Townof J , Arapaho Bridge 1 at Midway Road ) J 1 ,: "
' I, . , '. " " I , R·DELTA ENGINEERS, INC. I In Association With RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS J ) 
J. FRANK POlMA, P.E. PRESIDENT December 3,2001 Mr. Steven Z. Chutchian, PE Assistant City Engineer P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001·9010 Rei RFQ. Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway Road
Dear Steve: Thank you for this opportunity to submit our qualifications to the City ofAddison to design the architectural and structural components ofyour Arapaho Road Bridge at Midway
Road project. We are extremely interested in working with you and the city on this project. Over the past 23 years, our firms have established an outstanding reputation with local cities.
We have worked together as team on many projects, including the "award winning" Grove Street Bridge in Richardson and are currently working together as a team on the Addison Athletic
Club. We sincerely appreciate your taking the time to review our qualifications. Thank you again for your consideration to be a part ofd1is exciting project. Please ca!! me if you have
any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, 618 MAIN STREET. GARLAND, TEXAS 75040 • (972) 494·5031 • FAX (972) 487·227Q 
Table of Contents Cover Letter Cover Sheet Table of Contents Section 1: Project Approach -Project Understanding -Cost Control Methods -Management & Technical Approach-QNQc Section 2:
Project Team -Project Team -Firm History -R-Delta Engineers -Resumes -Ron Hobbs Architects. -Resumes -Clients and References -Consultants Qualifications and Resumes Section 3: Related
Experience -Similar Experience Last 5 Years -Project List & Photos R,.OElTA ENQINE£RS, INC RON HOaSSARCH1T£C1S 
TOWN OF ADIlISON . All,\I',\IIO J\HIlJC:E Project Understanding Scope o{Work: ProjectApproach: Workpian, We propose to assist the City of Addison in the planning and design of a state-of-the-art
bridge. We expect the completed bridge to be a source of pride to the staff and the citizens ofAddison. We want this project to bring recognition to the city. We believe that we can
best serve the City during the early phases of the Project by working closely with the Staff, interested citizens, and business owners to identify needs and define expectations; by developing
responsive designs; by preparing presentation materials (drawings, renderings, architectural, and other art work); by preparing costs estimates for the entire Projecti and by making
presentations to businesses, civic groups, and other organizations. Upon completion and approval of design work we will prepare thorough construction documents; represent the City during
contractor bidding; and represent the City during the construction process. We believe that good design and carefully site planning can make a difference in peoples lives. Our project
are designed to respect their sites and are scaled to fit perfectly in their environments. We try to express the uspirit" of the community in our designs. Our approach to each project
is unique, with no set solutions, or single style. We do not attempt to design projects without our clients. We seek out our client's goals and the community goals. Our design strategy
involves our clients. They participate, comment, critique, advise and direct every step of the way. Our methods include conducting a series of meetings with the client as well as citizen
groups to solicit input and ideas. Together we will create an optimal design that will respond to the needs of the City. A detailed work-plan will be developed which identifies the steps
we will follow for developing solutions for the new Addison Bridge. The work plan will include specific tasks, products, schedules, and reviews by task, discipline, and team member member
interaction. The major components of our 􀁷􀁯􀁲􀁫􀁾􀁰􀁬􀁡􀁮􀀠will address the following: o Project Schedule o Architectural Programming o Site Analysis o Site Planning o Design o Project
Cost Estimates o Bidding and Negotiation o Construction Administration R·DELTA ENGINEERS INC. RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 
TUWN OF 􀁁􀁦􀀩􀁦􀀩􀁊􀁾􀁏􀁎􀂷􀀠AltAl'AII0 muma: Cost Control Methods Initial Co" Model: Design PIws"" Construction Documenr.<;: Value Engineering: Cost conrrol is an on1lOing process.
It begins with the preparation of initial Project cost model and continues with the development of a series of COSt statements for each phase of work. Cost statements are refined and
updated as each ph.se of work progresses and more information is developed. A preliminary COSt model for the entire project will be es",blisbed at the beginning of the planning! design
process. This initial cost model will be used to esrnblish budget for various portions/pieces of the project. As planning and the design phases proceed, more refined project cost statements
will be developed. Cost statements will be updated to refiect actual design solutions. Furthermore, cost statements will be developed for each potemialalternative design solution. '..ost
statements will be expanded ",1d updated as construction documents are developed. Materials and construction systems are continually evaluated to determine their imp.ct on the Project's
budget. Cost statements during this ph.se ofwork will be based upon actual quantities of materlals and unit prkes for each material and building system, The unit prices we use in OUf
cost statements come from the following sources: IJ Recent R-Delta Projects IJ Published historic.1 COst data IJ Cost information supplied by loc.l contractors Throughout the project
we will consisting review decisions from a view point of Value Engineering. Value Engineering (VE) is an organized and systematic method ofcomparing various alternative materials and
construction systems. The purpose of VE is to identitY and delete unnecessary costs. The VE process improves overall project value by identifying, a The most suitable materials and construction
systems. a The most cost effective materials and construction systems. a Alternative systems to perform same functions for lesser COSt while maintaining quality. o Maintenance issues
R·DELTA ENGINEERS INC. RON HOBBS ARCHlTICTS 
TOWN OF Al)l)J50N AnAl'AI!O HHlnGF. Management & Technical Approach -QNQC Management Approach: Scheduling: R-Delta has developed a project ltUInagement process to insure our projects
focus on c1iem satisfaction by providing high quality work on time and within budget. We begin by establishing clear communication with the dlent1 sulx:onsultants and 􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁨􀁯􀁵􀁳􀁥􀀠
personneL This allows us to ascertain the scope of the project and understand dienes expectations. Our emphasis is placed on the prevemion of problems before they begin. Broad conceptual
goals are divided into manageable tasb tbat can be understood by team membefll and accomplished in a relatively,hort period of time. Proper planning provides the Project Manager with
an accurate means of measuring progress toward project goals) anticipating possible problemsI and avoiding crises. Once the project has been subdivided into assignable tasb, milestones
have been identified, and a detailed schedule has been established, tbe design and production of drawings may begin. This project will include preliminary development and approval ofaesthetic
treatments via .rchitectural sketches and renderings before detailed design may begin. Close coordination with the Town ofAddison will be required to understand the aesthetic requirements,
tastes, and the construction budget for the project. The Project Manager will closely monitor the status of design, document production, the schedule, invoicing, and most importantly
client satisfaction. Through our project management process we have proven success in providing complete, accurate, and quality contrnct documents in a timely manner witb a high degree
of client satisfaction. The quality assurance and control program at R-Delta ensures high quality service from inception through construction. The steps we have taken to ensure quality
in our work are as follows: a Placement of emphasis on individual responsibility and authority a Continuing staff education and in·house training a Corporate standard processes and standards
of care a lnternal Quality Control process including detailed checking of all work and peer review a Construction administration services performed by project design engineers familiar
with tbe detailed project design Project scheduling will be developed using Microsoft "Project" software. The schedule will be continually monitored and updated as required. R"DELTA
ENGI:NElmS INC. RON HonBS ARCHITECTS 
Management & Technical Approach 􀁾􀀠QNQC Tethnical Approach: The technicalapproach to this project is two-fold. The proJect basically divides into development ofaesthetic bridge StrUcnne
alternatives and the detailed structural engineering design of the bridge structure. The technical approach fur development of the aesthetic bridge structure alternatives includes the
following: o Preliminary conceptual design meetings between Architect and Engineer, o Design chatette meeting with Town of Addison Personnel, Architect, and Engineer to identify elements
of key importance for the project, Le. "gateway to Addison", construction budget, style of bridge, emphasis on roadway views and!or elevation view, landscaping) maintenance, roadwaysection,
overaU bridge widths, rail performance crlteria, etc. Input from aU departments as specified by the Addison project manager. Charenes with past clients have included input from Planning,
Parks, Transportarion, Traffic, and Engineering Departmenr personneL Preliminary architectural sketches are presented to establish a starting point for dient input. o Preparation of
sketches and renderings of final aesthetic alternatives with opinions of probable construction cost for selection by the client. The final aesthetic alternatives are a combination of
the Architect's aesthetic design elements) Client preferences, engineering analysis for consttuctabiHty and serviceability, and budgetary analysis. o Upon selection of the preferred
aesthetic alternative, detailed bridge layout and structural design may begin. The technical approach fur detatled structural design includes the following, o Geoteclmical investigation
for foundation design pam meters o Structural analysis of foundarion, substructure and superstructure. The substructure and superstructure type will be driven by project aesthetics and
budgetary considerations, i.e. tbe best looking elements that fit within the project budget. Structural analysis will be by standard techniques and the design loading is assumed to beAASHTO
HS2044. o Sttuctural detatling of bridge components will be in accordance with the TxDot Bridge Detailing ManuaL This manual is the most widely used guide for bridge detailing in the
state and most bridge Contractors are familiar with the plan designations and nomendature specified by this manual. R4YELTA ENGINEERS INC. RON HOBBS ARCHtTECTS 
TOWN or "IlI)j$ON " All./,.1'Al 10 HltlJ)(;f': Management & Technical Approach -QNQC a Architectural details for all non-Structural bridge aesthetic treatments will be prepared. All
elements will be checlred by the bridge structural engineer to ensure long term performance and serviceability. a Detailed plans willl>e submitted to Town ofAddison personnel for review
at 50% and 95% complete and as directed by the client. Close coordination with the client will be maintained throughout the project design and any unusual conditions or design requirements
will be brought to the client's attention immediately. t·' : R·DELTA ENGINEERS INC. R.ON HOB'BS ARCHITECTS 
The RDelta/RHA Project Team Civi! Engineering: Contact Person: Architecture: Contact Person: Acoustics: Contact Person; Noise & Vibration Contro!: Contact Person: Landscape Architect:
Contact Name: R·DELTA and RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS (RHA) have assembled an outstanding design team for the Town of Addison Arapaho Bridge project. The firms and roles comprising rhe R·DELTNRHA
Team are: R-DELTA ENGINEERS, INC. 618 W. Main St Garland, Texas 75040 972494-5031 972487·2270 Fax Frank Pohna, Jr" PE fapolma@rdelta.com RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 614 West Main Street, Suite
200 Garland, Texas 75040 972494-0174 97249H1722 Fax Ron Hobbs, AlA rhobbs@ronhobbsarchitects.net ACOUSTIC DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. 2520 Electronic Lane, Suite 813 Dallas, Texas 75220
214-3504546 214-3504586 Fax Bill Johnson, PE acousdsn@flash.net MIKE FANN &. ASSOCIATES 1701 W. Northwest Highway Grapevine Texas 76051 817-442-8485 817-488-7616 Fax Mike Fann, PE m.fann®Veriwn.net
DAVID C. BALDWIN, INC, 5744 Richmond Ave Dallas, Texas 75206 214-821-8100 214-824·5562 Fax Dave Baldwin, ASLA dave@davidcbaldwin.net fI,·Dt."LTA ENGINEERS, INC. RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS

TOWN OF ADDlSON-AMi"AHO smoot; 􀁒􀁾􀁄􀁥􀁬􀁴􀁡􀀠Engineers, Inc. Firm Background: Services: Mission Statement: R-DELTA ENGINEERING, INC. is a privately held consulting firm offering services
in four disciplines: Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Strucrural Engineering, Electrical Engineering and Surveying. Founded in 1970, the firm's clients are from the public
and private sectors, including: Town of Addison, City of Dallas, City of Garland, City of Richardson, City of Rowlett, City of Rockwall, City of Waxahachie, Rockwall and Collin Counties,
Rockwell International U.S. Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Raytheon, General Motors, Ingersoll-Rand Corporation, U.S. Corps of Engineers and Texas Department of Transportation.
R-DELTA provides a broad range of services, including: Civil Engineering. Bridge Design, Route Srudies, Schematic DeSigns, Land Development, Roadway Design, Hydraulics and Hydrology,
Storm Sewer Design, River and Flood Plain Hydraulics, Letters of Map Revision and Amendment, Utility Design, Pavement Analysis and Design, 􀁅􀁮􀁶􀁾􀀠 ronmental Assessments, Geotechnical
Investigations. Structural Engineering. Bridge Design, Bridge Inspections and Load Rating, Foundation Design, Radio and Antenna Towers, Power Transmission Structures, Earth Retaining
Strucrures, Levee Systems and various Concrete, Steel and Timber Strucrures. Electrical Engineering. High Voltage Transmission Lines, Aerial and Underground 􀁅􀁬􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁲􀁾􀀠 cal Distribution
and Service Lines, Electrical Substations, Commer· cial Building Electrical Design. Surveying. Boundary, Topographic, GPS, Right-of.Way Surveys and Mapping, Property Abstracting, Legal
Descriptions, Title Surveys, Platting To work together with our clients to produce the best possible de· signs for their needs. R,.OEtTA ENOtNi!:ERS, lNC RON HOBBS AR.CHlTECTS 
1 TOWN OF ADDISON_ARAPAHO BRIDGE Frank Polma, P.E. Principal-in-Charge , Mr. Polma obtained his bachelors degree with honors in Civil 􀁅􀁮􀁧􀁾􀀠 neering from Southern Methodist University.
He won the Blum Award for design excellence at SMU and belongs to the Chi Epsilon and Tau Beta Pi engineering honorary fraternities. He is a ProfessionaL Engineer licensed in the State
ofTexas. As Vice President of Operations for R-DELT A, he is responsible for management of all civil and structural engineering projects, including roadway, bridge, private development,
public sector facility development as well as electrical transmission and substation facilities. His project management responsibilities have included the Big Spring Road and Brtdge
over Spring Creek, State Highway 78 and Avenue F bridges over Duck Creek, South First Street and Kingsley Road and Bridge over Duck Creek, Shiloh Road Bridge over Spring Creek, Apollo
Road Paving and Drainage Improvements, 6th Street water utilities, three Centerville Road Bridges (including levee design); the Wynn Joyce-La Prada Bridge over Duck Creek, Brand Road
Bridge over Rowlett Creek, Renner Road Bridge over Prairie Creek, K CS Railway Bridge over Grove Road, Waxahachie Civic Center, Gale Fields Recreation Center, Rockwall City 􀁈􀁡􀁬􀁾􀀠Hurst
Civic Service Center, numerous flood plain studies and drainage fadlity improvements, approximately 35 miles of high voltage transmission lines, and misceUaneous forensic investigations,
all for Dallas area municipalities. He has managed several Texas Deparrment of Transportation high.way design projects, including design of six replacement bridges in Collin County,
the Loop 348 bridge over Elm Fork of Trinity River and US80 bridge over Mountain Creek and Masch Branch, and Old Orchard Road Bridge project in Denton County. He has parricipated in
the TxDOT BRlNSAP Bridge Inspection program, as inspector's helper in 1979, 1985, and 1987, and as a bridge inspector in 1989, 1992 and 1994. Mr. Polma holds the Basic and Advanced TxDOT
Bridge Inspector Certificates, and TxDOT Cerrificate of Fracture and Critical Bridge Inspection, and has completed the Federal Highway Administration course in bridge scour and sediment
transporr. R.DELTA ENGINE6RS.1NC. RON HOI!>BSARCHITECTS 
TOWN OfADD15ON-AliAPAHO BRlOOE ]. Frank Palma, P.E., R.P.L.S. Project Manager Mr. Palma is President of R·DELTA He obtained his B.S., Civil En· gineering, from Carnegie Instirute of
Technology, Carnegie MeUon University and attended the graduate School of Engineering at Southern Methodist University (SMU), Dallas, Texas, where he did work in the area of advanced
structures, strucrural dynamics and non-linear and random dynamics. He is a Registered Professional Engineer (Texas) and Registered Professional Land Surveyor (Texas) and holds a National
Council of Engineering Examiners certificate. Mr. Polma is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Texas Good Roads Association.Mr. Palma has over forty years of varied strucrural and civil engineer. ing experience. He is experienced in design of public works such as roads, bridges, and utilities. He also has
experience in the design of various industrial and military buildings and facilities. A portion of his practice is devoted to forensic engineering and analysis structural failures. As
a principal with R-DELTA, Mr. Polma has performed many engi. neering tasks ranging from design of bridges, highways, bUildings and utilities, to advanced stress and structural dynamics
calculations in the aerospace industry, and analysis and investigation of structural failures. Mr. Polma holds an advanced bridge inspector certificate and has been responsible for inspection
of major U.S. Interstate Highway bridges in urban environments through TxDOT's selection of R· DELTA for participation in the BRlNSAP (Bridge Inspection and Approval) program since its
inception in 1979. Mr. Polma has performed numerous bridge designs for the Texas Department of Transportation. Among these are the Masch Branch and Timber Creek bridges in Denton County,
the East Relief Loop 348 bridge for Elm Fork of Trinity, the No.2 Relief for Mountain Creek bridge on U.S.80, the West Bound main span at Loop 348 Elm Fork of Trinity, six off.system
and on.,;ystem bridges in Collin County. R"DELTA ENGINEERS, INC>. RON HOBilSAACHITELIS 
TOWN OF ADDISON-ARAPAHO BRIDGE Andy Fredrick, P.E. Project Engineer , Mr. Fredrick attended University of Texas at Arlington: where he received a B.S., Civil Engineering, 1994 and the
University of New Mexico where he received a B.S., University Studies, 1977. He is a registered Professional Engineer State of Texas, 2001 His professional history includes: R-Delta
Engineers, Inc. Consulting Engineers, 1994 to date, as well as, Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Financial Consultant. Prior to joining R-Delta Engineers, Mr. Fredrick played
professional football with the following teams: Chicago Bears (1988-1990), Cleveland Browns (1982), Dallas Cowboys (1977-1981) Mr. Fredrick has over seven years of experience in civil
and structural engineering consulting practice. His responsibilities have included engineering design for bridge, highway, and utility projects. Specific project experience includes:
CJ Design Engineer for the KCS Railway Bridge over Grove Road in Richardson, T exes which received the APW A Project of the Year award in 1999. CJ Participated in the TxDOT BRINSAP Bridge
Inspection program. Mr. Fredrick has inspected over 800 bridges and was 􀁣􀁥􀁲􀁴􀁾􀀠 fied for safety inspection for in-service bridges in 1996. CJ Performed design tasks for several
Texas Department of Transportation and municipal highway and bridge projects, including design of Duck Creek bridge channel improvements and Ben Davis bridge over Rowlett Creek for the
City of Garland and the Grove Road railroad bridge for the City of Richardson, Texas. CJ Design Engineer responsible for drainage study and storm sewer hydraulic calculations for the
Chandler Heights residential development in Garland, Texas. R..O&.TA ENGJNS2R.S. INC. RON Hoass ARCHITeCTS 
,.OWN OF ADDISON-ARAPAHO BR100E Ron Hobbs Architects Firm Background: Organization: CAD Capabilities: RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS is a highly regarded, service oriented architectural firm that
has been providing high quality and innovative design solutions to Texas communities for over 24 years. Winner of numerous Design Awards, the firm was founded by Ron Hobbs in 1977 on
traditional values of honesty, loyalty, commitment, and hard work. An excellent word of mouth reputation has resulted in over 160 municipal projects for 39 dties and numerous private
projects around the metroplex and Texas. Our experience is wide and varied. The most important factor in the success of RHA has been our ability to develop long-term professional relationships
with our clients. We believe in responsiveness. We Listen. We maintain a rigorous personal commitment to each of our clients and their interests. Our concern for our clients is illustrated
with over eighty percent of our work for repeat clients. We realize the importance of exceeding expectations and delivering projects on time and budget! RHA is a firm that is committed
to a true ream approach to project design and delivery. Each team of architects and technical support staff is led by Ron Hobbs who actively leads and manages each phase of work and
repons directly to the client. This team approach ensures that each project is thoroughly developed and the critical architectural, interior, and special technical aspects are given
rigorous attention and a total firm commitment. The same team of individuals who are involved in programming studies also produce the design, and ultimately the actual construction drawings
for the project. Ron and the rest of the team are also responsible for the construction administration of the project. This continuity ensures that all detailed program requirements
are incorporated seamlessly into the finished project. This close-knit team approach, is unique in our industry and is at the center of our enhanced client responsiveness and personal
client client service. It is also key to the outstanding quality of our work and the extremely low change order occurrence on our projects. Our office is fully automated and all drawings
are produced on our complete AutoCAD operating system with full in-house computer capabilities. The drawings for our projects are produced in CAD from early schematic design through
construction documents. In ad-F..OELTA 􀁅􀁎􀁻􀀾􀁕􀀧􀁾􀁅􀁅􀁒􀁓􀀮􀁬􀁎􀁃􀀮􀀠 RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 
i TOWN OF ADDlSON-ARAPAHO BRIDGE Ron Hobbs Architects dition, 3-D modeling can be generated, if required for review sessions. Our office is fully networked with Internet access for transfer
of drawings to team members and e-mail. Services: RHA provides a full range of professional services, including the following: Architecture D Feasibility Studies D Programming D Site
Analysis D Architectural Design D CAD Design and Documentation D Contractor Qualification D Bidding and Negotiation D Construction Administration D Post Construction Services D BUilding
Evaluation Surveys D ADA Accessibility Services Planning D Strategic Planning D Master Planning D Land Use Planning Interior Design D Programming D CAD Design and Documentation D Furniture
Specification, Bidding, and Installation D Space Planning Philosophy: The core belief of integrating design excellence with client needs is based on a philosophy to create environments
that go beyond pure function, to enhance the quality of life for those who live and work in them. Each RHA project is approached individually, without preconceptions and designed to
serve the needs of the particular client, always with the goal of achieving design excellence. Mission Statement: To consistently provide innovative solutions that best accommodate both
the current and future needs and desires of our clients, at a level of quality and service that exceeds expectations. R.-DELTA ENGINEERS. INC RON HOBBSARCHITECTS 
TO\VN Of ADDISON-ARAPAHO BRIDGE RESUUE Ronald H. Hobbs, AlA Project Architect Ron Hobbs Architects President Education: University ofTexas at Ausdnt Bachelor of Architecture, 1970 Hobbs/Wiginton/Fawc
ett Architects, Inc. 198Q.90 Ron Hobb.Architecr, 197 H 980 Regiscrations Texas, #5159 Oklahoma, # 1861 NCARB, #25340 1999 Citation of Honor, Dallas AlA Berlutn, /.Ake< Fatdlion 1996
Craftsman Award, Dallas CSI JO( Farmer Recreation Center J985 Design Award, Dallas AlA Fair Park EntT)' Competition 1986 Award afMedr, Park Mainrenance &. Grounds Award., One Eleven
Ranch funic Sh.el...., 1987 Citation af Honor, Dallas AlA One Eleven Ranch funk Sh.elter 1989 Park Design Award, TRAPS Carter Softball FaciUey Tournament Facility 1990 Design Award,
Metal Architecture, Ca"", Mu/d·Pu.rpo5e CtT, III 1990 NatioruU Grand Prize Silho""tI< Op"",,/De:iign Competition Ron is an award-winning architect with over 30 years experience in the
planning and design of municipal projects throughout Texas, He will serve as the Project Architect for the Town of Addison on the Arapaho Bridge Project, Ron's projects are renowned
for innovative solutions that strictly adhere to the budget while meeting, and frequentlyexceeding, programmatic requirements, Ron worked with R-Delta Engineers, Inc. on the design of
the Grove Street Bridge project in which the City of Richardson received the 'American Public Works Association 1999 Project of the Year for Structures Less than $2 million' award, Other
RHA projects that Ron has served as the Principal-in-Charge and Project Designer for projects include: (J Addison Athletic Club Addison, Texas 0 Grove Road Bridge Richardson, Texas (J
Allen City Hall Allen, Texas (J Waxahachie City Hall Waxahachie, Texas (J Hurst City Hall Hurst, Texas (J Rockwall City Hall Rockwall, Texas (J North Irving Police Substation lIVing,
Texas 0 Rockwall Police and Courts Rockwall, Texas Q Rowlett Police and Courts Rowlett, Texas (J Waxahachie Civic Center Waxahachie, Texas Q Plaza 'Theater Renovation Garland, Texas
(J Performing Arts Center Garland, Texas (J Hurst SeIVice Center Hurst, Texas R...DELTA ENGINEERS, INC>. RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 
TOWN OFADDISON· AUAf>AUO BRIDGE Client References R·DELTA ENGINEERS, INC. John E. Baker, P.E. City of Garland Bridges Director of Engineering Garland, Texas 972-205·2179 Steve Spanos,
P.E City of Richardson Bridges City Engineer Richardson, Texas 972-744-4100 Michael Massey Assistant Director. Parks City ofRichardson Parks-Bridges Richardson, Texas 972-744-4100 Charles
Tucker, P.E. Texas Department ofTransportation District 18 Dallas, Texas 214·32().6100 John Yank, P.E. Texas Department of Transportation Paris, Texas 903-7844311 Richard Kaiser Rockwell
International Richardson, Texas 972-705.3988 RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS Slade Strickland Parks Director Town ofAddison Addison, Texas 972-4S()'28SI John Godwin Acting City Manager City of
Rowlett Rowlett, Texas 972-41Ui148 Mark Guy Assistant City Manager City of Carrollton Carrollton, Texas 972466-3000 BobSokoll City Manager City of Waxahachie Waxahachie, Texas 972-937·7330
Allan Weegar City Manager HUTSt, Texas 817-788-7028 BobHaU Parks Director Garland, Texas 97 2-205-2000 H.llLLJ,\ LNClNCEJt!', INC. liON IJOllliSARCHffECTS 
ACOUSTICDESIGN ASSOClATIS, INC. Consultants Qualifications ACOUSTIC DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. Firm Background: Services: Key Personnel: Relevant Project Experience: ACOUSTIC DESIGN ASSOCIATES,
INC. (ADAl) was founded in Dallas, Texas in 1975 and to date has consulted on over 1450 projects. The se range from the very small, such as narration recording booths, to the very large,
including a 1.5 million square foot corporate headquarters facility and multi-bUilding school campuses. In addition to giving design guidanoe. we have conducted field investigation and
measurements, including measuring noise and vibration level.;, mechanical systems noise level.;, reverberation times or sound transmission between spaces. ADAl's philosophy is to provide
professional consulting services which are grounded in education and based on solid experience as well as on knowledge of state-of-the-art thinking and developments in the field of acoustics.
Our focus is in the areas of acoustics and noise and vibration control as they affect bUildings and the environment. The instrumentation we own is field portable and gives us the capability
of quickly identifying specific noise or vibration sources. William R. Johnson President Bill received his Bachelor of Architectural Engineering from OSU, and a Masters of Scienoe Degree
in ArchiteclUral Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin. He served with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Army as a Captain in Viet Nam. He has consulted on a
wide variety of buildings, both in the design phase and in solving problems in existing facilities. As Principal Consultant, Bill has total responsibility for projects, from programming
and early deSign, to completion and final testing. Vehicle Noise o Freeway T rafftc Noise SlUdies Galleria Hotel -Dallas, Texas o Freeway Traffic Noise Impact SlUdies Land Parcel-Grand
Prairie, Texas o Traffic and Aircraft Overflight Noise The Claridge Condominiums -Dallas, Texas o Traffic Noise Study RHD Memorial Hospital-Farmers Branch, Texas R·DELTAENQiNEERS, INC
RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 
ACOUsnCDE: Consultants Qualifications ACOUSTIC DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. Aircraft Noise o Aircraft Overflight Noise Impact Studies Oakwell Farms Development -San Antonio, Texas o Aircraft
Overflight Noise Impact Studies Sandstone at Bear Creek Condominiums -Euless, Texas o Aircraft Overflight Noise Studies American Airlines Southern Reservations Center -Hurst, Texas o
Helicopter Overflight Noise Studies Aspen Square Apartments. Euless, Texas o Helicopter Noise Studies Aerospatiale Helicopter Corporation. Grand Prairie, Texas o Helicopter Noise Studies
VIA Airways. St. Thomas, Vir. Is. Train Noise o Train Noise and Vibration Multifamily Housing Project-Ft. Worth, Texas Other o Construction Site noise monitoring USAA Towers· San Antonio,
Texas o Mechanical Equipment Impact on Neighbors Preston Hollow Presbyterian Church· Dallas, Texas o Music Impact on Neighbors Disco Club· Dallas, Texas ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS o Noise
Impact on Sleeping Quarters Sebring Grand Prix Race Track -Tulsa, Oklahoma o Recreational Boat Boat Noise Studies Lake Sam Rayburn, Texas L.-· R·DELTAENGINEERS, INC RON HOBBS ARClfITECTS
i 
MIKE FANN S<-ASSOCiATES Consultants Qualifications MIKE FANN &.ASSOCIATES Firm Background: Mike Fann &. Associates was founded in 1995. Environmental Acoustics and Micro Vibration facility
design are two specialty areas of service. Projects for Texas Instruments, Motorola, National Semiconductor, ST Microelecrronics and Dallas Semiconductor include sizing new construction
structnre for billion dollar projects. Micro vibration stability and room noise objectives ensure trouble free high tech production. Environmental Acoustics activities vary from participation
in zoning activities to Federal Improvement Program projects around airports. State of the art sound reconstruction and demonstration has become a trade mark of project communication.
Thorough analysis using project specific techniques is ohen lacking in communication. Audio demonstrations allow unique opportunity to share the same experience for discussion. Another
area of specialty is locomotive horn noise issues. Current work includes expert testimony for all major railroads at grade crossing accident litigation. Presently, Mr. Fann is working
with the American Association of Railroads to ensure reasonable Federal Railroad Administration promulgation of horn rules and regulations. Services: Environmental Noise &. Vibration
Consulting Services include: IJ Baseline noise and vibration monitoring surveys that determine existing background levels. IJ ldentification of noise and vibration source (e.g. aircraft,
construction, railroad and automobile traffic) contribution to measured exposure levels (Leq). IJ Creation of noise exposure contours and vibration levels which are used as overlay districts
to establish land use compatibility and sensitive land uses. IJ Determination of appropriate criterion and!or standards for land use compatibility with various noise and vibration sources.
IJ Investigation of measures to reduce undesirable impacts. Alternative noise reduction measures include barriers, buffer zones, construction soundproofing, and zoning recommendations.
IJ Identify local noise and vibration ordinances which may address allowable noise or vibration emanations. IJ Noise and vibration level forecasts to predict future levels. This often
includes historical operational activity documentation, interviews with appropriate personnel, and analytical calculations to first predict operational activity levels of the subject
noise sources. IJ Calculatiou schemes are developed to predict the corresponding R,·DELTAENGINEERS.INC RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 
MIKE fANN & ASSOCL\TF.S Consultants Qualifications MIKE FANN & ASSOCIATES Key Penonnel: Relevant Project Experience: lncrease in noise with increase in activity. o Creation of community
response questionnaires to poll public opinion of past familiarity with the noise sourCe and the extent of perceived intrusion into community activity. o Development of public relation
efforts to introduce new noise sources into the community and to communicatt: efforts to reduce unwantt:d existing impacts. o Expert witness testimony before public forums, governmental
agencies and COllrts of law. MIKEFANN Principal Mike received his Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering, (Center ofAcoustical Studies) at North Carolina State University, Raleigh,
North Carolina (1977) and his Bachelor of Science in Engineering, University ofTennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee (1974). He is a registered Professional Engineer in Texas and Hawaii. o
Irving Residents Class Action Suit Concerning DFW International Airport East Side Runway, Irving Irving 'IX, 1998 Opening of East Side runway in October 1996 created widespread complaints
in Coppell and irving. irving residents sought legal action for current and future impact of aircraft activity on this runway. Expert services focus on aircraft operational parameters
and noise levels sufficient to cause sleep awakening and speech interference. o Texas Motorplex Dragstrip Relocation, Grand Prairie TX, 1999 Evaluation of proposed site showed that drags
trip was consistent with the noise environment which included DFW aircraft overflight, Union Pacific railroad local operations, IH20 and Dallas Naval Air Station. Client, City of Grand
Prairie TX o Project, Response to DaBas Citizens Complaints of Noise & Vibration for DARTNorth COlTidor Construction, 1999 Description: DART management sought to verify and understand
increasing complaints of construction noise and hOllse vibration during build our of north corridor light rail. Periodic measurements of equipment during construction activity documented
noise and vibration levels and made recommendations for mitigation. Client: DART, Dallas TX ,􀁾􀀠 R·DELT A ENGINEERS, INC RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 
Consultants Qualifications DAVID c. BALDWIN, INC. Firm Background: DAVID C. BALDWIN, INC., emphasizes consultations with other design disciplines in a team approach to achieve innovative
sitedevelopment. At the same time, our firm encourages owner involvement in all aspects ofdesign and development. Through this synergy our design team attains the three major goals of
any project: [J Developing a site development plan that is compatible with the goals and needs of the client; [J Designing a plan that is adapted and complementary to its surroundings;
[J Implementing a design that is within budget, on time and realistic in addressing the needs of the client. Organization: Clients who select David C. Baldwin, Inc., know that they will
always be welcomed in the design process, They also have the confidence in knOWing that the company's principal will know the day-today status of their project, Clients can expect creative,
innovative solutionsideas that will set their project apart from others. And our staff takes pride in meeting these expectations. Sewic"" David C. Baldwin, Inc, strength comes through
flexibility. Because of this, the firm is able to address an array of needs and has special design expertise in the follOWing areas: [J Municipal, Institutional and Hospital Sites [J
Church Projects [J Corporate Parks and Offices CJ Parks and Recreational Spaces CJ Hotels (J Retail and Public Places (J Streets and Roadways CJ Residential Developments To facilitate
its clients' goals, David C. Baldwin, Inc" can address the follOWing needs: (J Site Planning & Design Development Programs [J Master Site Development Plans CJ Landscape and Underground
Irrigation Design (J Park and Recreation Planning CJ Site and construction Services -Layout Plans -Grading & Drainage R..DElTA ENGINEERS, INC. RON HOBBS ARCHITECrs 
Consultants Qualifications DAVIDC. BALDWIN, INC. -Landscape Lighting Plans -Water Feature Design -Quantity and Cost Estimates -Construction Details & Specifications -Receiving Bids -Contract
Administration (J Computer generated perspectives and renderings Key Personnel: David C. Baldwin President Principal-inCharge/Designer Mr. Baldwin is a registered landscape architect
(Texas, Louisiana, Minnesota North Carolina) and member of the American society of Landscape Architects, and has worked for more than 23 years helping clients achieve their design goals.
With his thorough academic grounding in ornamental horticulture, his continuing interest in visual art and design and his training in landscaping planning, Mr. Baldwin has been relied
upon again and again by clients to address their outdoor space needs. Project ExpeTience; (J Addison Athletic Center -Addison, Texas (J City of Irving Erosion Control Master Plan -Irving,
Texas (J TBN International Production Center -Irving, Texas (J L & N Service Center School Expansion -Dallas, Texas (J Children's Medical Center Master Plan & Design -Dallas, Texas (J
Greenville Ave. Design District Master Plan -Dallas, Texas CJ Skyline Recycling & Disposal Facility End Use Plan -Ferris, Texas CJ Millennium Business Park -Allen, Texas CJ Allen City
Hall-Allen, Texas CJ Waterview Recreation Center -Rowlett, Texas CJ Bent Tree West Swim & Tennis Club -Dallas, Texas CJ Stonecreek Recreational Center -Flower Mound, Texas CJ Bedford
Plaza -Bedford, Texas CJ Highland Village Municipal Complex -Highland Village, Texas CJ Carrollton City Han -Carrollton, Texas CJ Denton County Courthouse -Denton, Texas (J Plano JOint
Use Facility -Plano, Texas (J Mesquite Arts Center -Mesquite, Texas R.-OELTA ENOIN££RS.INC !tON HOSBS ARCHITECTS 
TOWN OF AOOrSON. ARAPAUO BRlDGE Similar Project Experience Grove Road Underpass at KCS Railway This R.Delta project is a 120 foot long 2-span bridge carrying a single KCS Railway track
over the Grove Road extension in Richardson, Texas. The project was designed for the City of Richardson and involved extensive coordination wirh the KCS Railway Co. The project provides
a gateway to the MCl!Alcate! Office Park in the Richardson Telecom Corridor from the DART park and ride facility, near the future DART light rail terminal. Close coordination by R·DELTA
with the City of Richardson and KCS RaHway ensured a blend of functionality and project aesthetics in the project design and landscape architecture for the roadway corridor. Items of
aesthetic significance for this bridge are as follows: o Use of Reynobond aluminum composite panels to clad the bridge superstructure & substructure. Access hatches were included in
the cladding to allow inspection of all bridge structural components o Use of Cultured Stone veneers veneers on retaining walls throughout the project o Extensive landscaping improvements
with xeriscape plant materials and an irrigation system controlled from offsite. o Enhanced lighting package for roadway and pedestrian areas as well as spot lighting for the bridge
structure itself o Pedestrian seating area Other items of significance in the project design include: o Bridge substructure was precast by Contractor on site and in· stalled over drilled
shafts with heavy steel weldments o Bridge superstructure was preassembled on site and placed on substructure during one 12-hour rail service interruption o All bridge construction was
accomplished with only two 12.hour interruptions to rail service (J Multi-modal trail construction was incorporated into the bridge project Construction Cost & Completion Date: The project
construction cost was $1.9 million and was completed in summer, 1998. This project was chosen as the American Public Works Association's 1999 "project of the year" for structures under
$2 million. Contact Name and Number: City of Richardson Bridges -Mr. Steve Spanos, P.E. City Engineer (972) 7444100 R-DElTA ENCINEERS, INC RON HO»!!SARCHITECTS 
TOWN OF ADDISON· ARAPAHO BRIDGE Similar Project Experience Brand Road Bridge over Rowlett Creek This project is a 900 foot long 9-span bridge carrying Brand Road over Rowlett Creek in
Garland, Texas. The R-Delta project, designed for the City of Garland, required extensive coordination with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers for both floodplain encroachment and 404
permitting issues. Project aesthetics played a vital role in the success of this project. The realignment of Brand Road along the border of the existing Firewheel Lakes Golf Course and
the proposed Bridges of Firewheel Golf Course prOVided an opportunity for many people to view the bridge strucmre from both a roadway and ground level vantage pomt. The scale of the
project as well as the parklike setting of the adjacent golf courses dictated clean, simple lines that pull the viewers eye through the project. Items of aesthetic significance for this
bridge project include: IJ Bridge substructure with aesthetic treatment of the intermediate supports IJ Prestressed concrete box beam superstructure IJ Architectural concrete stain IJ
Custom traffic and pedestrian bridge railing IJ Enhanced bridge illumination package Other items of significance in the project design include: IJ Realignment of approximately 1 [00
linear feet of Rowlett Creek main channel IJ Tied back gabion channel bank retaining walls and gabion mat· ting channel armoring IJ Corps of Engineers Individual Project 404 Permit IJ
Coordination with golf course Architect to incorporate bridge aesthetics into overall concept of Bridges of Flrewheel Golf Course expansion Construction Cost & Completion Date: The project
constrllction was completed in October 2001 with a total project cost of $4,900,000. Contact Name and Number: City of Garland Bridges· Mr. John E. Baker, P.E. Director of Engineering
(972) 205-2179 R..eEl.TA ENC1:-rEER.$, INC RON HOBBS ARCH!TECTS 
TOWN OF ADD1SON 􀁾􀀠ARAPAHO BRIDGE Similar Project Experience Renner Road Bridge over Prairie Creek Construction Co" & Completion Date: Contac' Name and Number: This R-Delta project
is a 300 foot long 3-span bridge carrying Renner Road over Prairie Creek in Richardson, Texas. The first phase of the project was designed by others and consisted of a two lane bridge.
Our design effort involved widening the bridge and approximately 1.0 miles of roadway to six lanes, Items of aesthetic significance for this bridge project include: o Exposed aggregate
finish on exposed substructure elements and riprap o Architectural stain on bridge superstructure and rail elements o Enhanced railing system with extensive stonework o Enhanced bridge
illumination package The project construction was completed in October 2000 with a total project cost of $2,300,000, City of Richardson Bridges -Mr. Steve Spanos, P,E. City Engineer
(972) 7444100 R.DELTA ENGINEERS, LNC RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 
Similar Project Experience SH78 & Avenue F Bridges over Duck Creek CortSt'I'uction Cost & Completion Date: Contact Name and Number: 150 foot long 3-span bridge carrying State Higftway
78 over Duck Creek and 140 foot long 2-span bridge carrying Avenne F over Duck Creek in Garland, Texas, The R-Delta project was designed jointly for the Texas Department of Transportation
and tfte City of Garland under a shared funding program, Coordination with the U,S, Army Corps of Engineers was required to assimilate the project into their overall Duck Creek flood
rehabilitation project, Items of aesthetic significance for this bridge project include: IJ Ashlar pattern finish for all retaining wall panels IJ TxDot Type C411 Classic Combination
Bridge Railing IJ Prestressed concrete box beam superstructure Other items of significance in the project design include: IJ Extensive use of precast retaining wall panels and drilled
shaft soldier piles for channelization of approximately 1,000 linear feet of Duck Creek main channel channel The project construction was completed in November 1998 with a total project
cost of $4,200,000, City of Garland Bridges -Mr, Johl1 E, Baker, P,E, Director of Engineering (972) 205·2179 City of Garland Bridges -Mr, John E, Baker, P,E. Director of Engineering
(972) 205·2179 R-DElTA ENGINEERS, ISC RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 
Grove Street Railroad Bridge Richardson, Texas This R-Delta Engineers/Ron Hobbs Architects project received the "APW A Project of the Year" Award in 1999. R·DELTA ENGINEERS, INC. RON
HOBBSARC'mncrs 
Renner Road Bridge Over Prairie Creek Richardson. Texas l .. r'·' R-OEL1'A ENGINEERS. INC. RON ftOBDSARCHlTECTS I 
Brand Road Bridge Garland, Texas I .. t r R-DELTA ENGINEERS.INC. RON uonUSARCHITECTSi 
Brand Road Over Rowlett Creek Garland, Texas R-DaTA ENGlNEERS,1NC. RON UoansARCHlTECTS 
BRIDGE rROJECTS Additional R-Delta Bridge Projects TxDot Bridges: Loop 348 Bridge over Elm Fork of Trinity & East Relief-Dallas, Texas US80 Bridge over Mountain Creek -Dallas, Texas
SH78 Bridge over Duck Creek -Garland, Texas County Road over Celina Creek -Collin County, Texas County Road over Jones Branch -Collin County, Texas County Road over Sister Grove Creek-Collin
County, Texas County Road over Indian Creek -Collin County, Texas County Road over Whites Creek -Collin County, Texas County Road over Maxwell Creek -Collin County, Texas 12 Bridges
IH35E Ellis County (in contract negotiations with TxDot) Dallas Count:! Public Works Denton Tap Bridge over GrapeVine Creek Department Bridges : Malloy Road Bridge over Cottonwood Creek
Cit:! of Richardson Bridges: KCS Railway over Grove Road West Renner Road over Prairie Creek Arapaho Road Bridge over Cottonwood Creek (under design) Arapaho Road Bridge over West Fork
(under design) Cit:! of Garland Bridges: Brand Road Bridge over Rowlett Creek Avenue F Bridge over Duck Creek Big Spring (Campbell) Road Bridge over Spring Creek Kingsley Road Bridge
over Duck Creek Shiloh Road Bridge over Duck Creek Centerville Road Bridge over Toyah Creek Centerville Road Bridge over Bradfield Branch Centerville Road Bridge over Mills Branch North
Garland Avenue Bridge over Spring Creek Ben Davis Road Bridge over Rowlett Creek (Rehab) Wynn J oyce/LaPrada Bridge over Duck Creek Oates Road Bridge over Duck Creek TxDot Bridge Inspection:
Over 9,000 bridges inspected since 1979 for TxDot BRINSAP program-Districts 1,8,12,15, and 18. RDELTA EN:GlNEERS.1NC RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS 
:",:. :" . 􀁾􀀠 CD " ',I , ' <I , ' , """"'!'".' , « , '.8 " " i i-, . .', .' \ ... , \, " -,," .\ ',.:." 
) /') \ ) ).) ))) .) ) ) ) }' ) ).) 
) ) )1 ).) ) )) ) .. ) ) ) J! ) ) ) ) J ») ) I • 
-....... 􀀭􀀻􀀩􀀬􀁾􀀠 :..... 􀁾􀀠 o_ X 1..1..1 ) ) ) ) ).)))) 1 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 
) »).) J) . ) . ) .) j ).) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ).))) <)) )) ) . ) 
\ J ) j ) , ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 
)) ) )))))) .. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ).J.) )).).) .. ) ) 
J ) .)) ) ) .) ).) ))))).)) ) .J ) ) ) i)))) ). )
')) ).)) ) ) ) ) ') ) ) .) ).) .. ) ) ) ) 
1 ) ') . J .) ) ) ).) )) ) )).)) ») ) ).1))·) ) ) ) ) ) 
) ) ).) ) ) ) ).)1 ) ) ) » ) j ) ) ).) ) j ) , ) 
c: .12 t.,l iii (IJ 􀁾􀀠 .!2 8 ; Q) E i CI) I. s::. I I.l I tn /􀁾􀀠 , 􀁾􀀡􀀠 ;> )) . ) .).j ),) ) ) ) ) ) 1 ) ) J. ))) )) ).) .) )l ) 1 
)) )')')')')).)))) ) '; ) ),) )')'))") J) ) ) )
i I i i r i I 􀁾􀀠 ) ) »)) )) )) ) )))) ) ) ) ) )) ) ) ) J) ) ) ) 
)'1 )) ). ) ) ) ) ) )1 ) ) ) ) ) ).) ) ))).). ) ) 􀁾􀀠 ./J . 
. ., ) J.J .) .) . ) .) ).) ) ) ) ) ) ! 
»)) .) ) J.) ) ) ) ) ) ) , ) ) ).) ).) .. ).) } » ) ) )
) • ») .) ..) )J).) ) ) ) .. ) ).)) ) )) ).) »)) ) ) ), ) ) ) 
) ))) ).).)) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) . ) .) ) ) ) ) ) ) 
i ) ) ") J ) ) )')) ) ) ) ,) ) ) ) )) )'») ) ))). ') -; ) ) .,I . ) ,.
) . i )) )) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
)) J))) ))) ))) ))) ,; ) ) ) ) )) ) ») )) , ) ) 
." . .; J)) »).))))) ) ) i ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ') ) ) 
Everett Spaeth Halff Associates, Inc. 8616 Northwest Plaza Dr. Dallas, TX 75225 Frank Abugatti Kellogg Brown & Root 601 Jefferson Avenue Houston, Texas 77002-4557 Phil Deaton Carter-Burgess
7950 Elmbrook Drive Dallas, TX 75247-4925 CH2MHili 5339 Alpha Road #300 Dallas, Texas 75240-7352 Alfred Vidaurri, Jr., AlA Freese & Nichols 4055 International Plaza, Suite 200 Fort Worth,
Texas 76109-4895 Mike Moran -Architecture HDR, Inc. I 7II I Preston Rd Suite 300 Dallas, TX 75248-1228 Jerry Holder HNTB-Dallas 5910 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 200, Plano, TX 75093 Sandra
Paret HOK 2001 Ross Avenue Suite 2800 Lock Box 106 Dallas, TX 75201 Parsons Brinckerhoff 
2777 N. Stem mons Freeway Suite 1333 Dallas, TX 75207 HKS Inc. Headquarters 1919 McKinney Avenue Dallas, TX 75201 Lance Josal RTKL Associates Inc. 1717 Pacific Avenue Dallas, Texas 75201-4688
Mesa Design Group 3100 McKinnon Street #905 Dalias, Texas 75201 
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450-2871 ),'w<f!ii!&i$""fN'99@Post Office Box: 9010 Addoon, Texas 75001-9010 16801 Westgrnve March 7, 2002 Mr. Sieve Chutchian P. O. Box 9010 Addison, TX
75001 Dear Committee Member: First of all, I would like to express my appreciation on behalf of the Town of Addison. This is an exciting infrastructure project for the Town and I am
pleased you have agreed to participate in our evaluation and recommendation process for the Bridge Competition. As you are aware, the competition is scheduled for April II th from 7:30am
-5:OOpm at the Addison Conference Centre (see schedule below). I would also request that all committee members meet in the Board Room at 7:30 am to go over the upcoming days events.
There will be breakfast refreshments available. Just a very brief update on what events took place to get us to the point at which we are today. In February 2000, the Town of Addison
conducted a bond election in which the town of Addison voters approved $20.5 million to go toward the design and construction of the extension of Arapaho Road from Addison Road to Marsh
Lane. A key and crucial element to the overall project is the design and construction of a bridge to cross over Midway Road. In November of 200 I, we initiated the process by requesting
Statements of Qualifications from engineering and architectural firms. The Town received 12 proposals from a wide variety of firms with connections around the nation. These 12 proposals
were evaluated by a selection committee and reduced to the three finalists for the competition (HNTB, URS-Griener and Freese & Nichols). The Town of Addison City Council, prior to Request
for Qualifications, approved a $10,000 stipend to be paid to each of the three finalists to assist in the costs associated with preparation oftheir proposed bridge designs. The evaluation
process will be conducted as follows: » Eachfirm will be given two hours to make their presentations and answer questionsfrom the panel, with at least 30 minutes dedicated to question
and answer. » Panel will use evaluation criteria stated in information below, with each item having equal value to assist in ranking each firm. » Each member will then individually grade
each firm, in a similar manner, giving each item a grade from 1-10, with 10 being best. 
);> Each member based on the total score given will rank tI,efirms in order of grade 1", r, or 3m• );> All panel members will submit their rankings to establisll initial order. );> Group
wililiave open discUl!ll!lions about individual concerns and opinions. );> Allpanel members will review their initial rankings and re-submitfor final order. );> Eaellfirm will be given
an overall grade based on rank submitted by each member. 1"place wilt be awarded one point, 2""place will be awarded 2 points andr place will be awarded 3 points. Thefirm with thefewest
total points willbe the competition winner. Please note that] have included a copy of each firm's original Statement of Qualifications submittal. Thank you, and] look forward to seeing
all of you on April 11th. Should you have any questions prior to April Il'h, feel free to contact my office at 972-450·2871 and speak with me or the Assistant Director ofPublic Works,
Jim Pierce. Sincerely, Michael E. MurphylDirector ofPublic Works 
Arapaho Road Bridge Pre-Competition Meeting Agenda February 14, 2002 I. Welcome and introductions: Ron Whitehead, City Manager II. Directions to Consultant: Mike Murphy, Director of
Public Works A. Announce tentative day and time of presentations 1. First Presentation 8:00am-10am 2. Second Presentation 10:30am-12: 30pm 3. Third Presentation 1:30pm-3: 30pm B. No
more than two designs III. Grading will be based on the following criteria A. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should Include lighting design plan B. Landscaping C. Acoustics (how
will noise affect adjacent buildings) D. Vibrations (how will motion affect adjacent buildings) E. Estimated cost of construction of the bridge design F. Functionality I build ability
(parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) 
G. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings from roadway H. Overall quality and creativity of presentation (vision, team plan I effort) Presentation Schedule: Time
(Apri/11th) Firm 7:30am -8:00am Committee Members 8:00am-l0:00am URS Griener !0:30am -12:30pm Freese & Nichols 12:30pm -1 :30pm Lunch 1:30pm -3:30pm HNTB 3:30pm -5:00pm Panel Discussion/Selection
Conference Centre Location Board Room Stone Cottage BoardRoom BoardRoom Stone Cottage BoardRoom 
􀁅􀁾􀁌􀁅􀁓􀁃􀁏􀁒􀁅􀁓􀁈􀁅􀁅􀁔􀀠 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should Include lighting design plan (1-10) __10__POINTS 2. landscaping (1-10) 􀁟􀀭􀀡􀀷􀁾􀁟􀀬􀁐􀁏􀁉􀁎􀁔􀁓􀀠 3.
Acoustics (how will noise affect adjacent buildings) (1-10) 5 POINTS 4. Vibrations (how will motion Impact adjacent buildings) (1-10) 8 POINTS 5. estimated cost of construction of the
bridge design (1-10) 6 POINTS 6. Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) (1-10) 4 POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction 10 adjacent
buildings from roadway (1-10) 10_POINTS 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation (viSion, team plan I effort) (1-10) 9 POINTS TOTAL SCORE 59 POINTS 
COMMITTEE 2 3 4 5 6 7 TOTAL SCORE FIRM #1 3 I 3 2 1 3 3 16 #3 FIRM #2 2 2 2 I 2 I 2 12 #1 FIRM #3 I 3 I 3 3 2 I 14 #2 
AODISON C 0", " , " , , f 􀀨􀀧􀀭􀁥􀁾􀀺􀁳􀀠'<-􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀀠IVI T H , ., , , 'Go.\.0 \.s • CeNTRE 􀀺􀁾􀀭 􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀢􀀠 )-\ 0 ¥:SODK. I 
A001SClN COHFEll£NCE • T»eATAE CeN'I'A£ If:I" b.. .., X", 0 '''a!:g'<-) c.""';'" 􀁾'I 􀁾􀀠* Col.· c1""'j'" I N.., 􀁅􀁤􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀩􀀠 tti 􀀬􀁾􀀫􀀭 􀁢􀀲􀁯􀁦􀁲􀁾􀁁􀁊􀁉􀀻􀀧􀀴􀀱􀀠 c::: A B'De'-'"S
􀁾􀁩􀁉􀀺􀁃􀀠if 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 +5' 0 \ 0 􀁾􀀠i { W DIU q 5>L -=-p r...""'1 omL -2 0 0 of ee..-f 􀀫􀁾􀀠\\ 􀀺􀀱􀁓􀁾I 􀁾 1I!!.4 􀁾􀀠 eca.')c I!' 􀁖􀀢􀁾􀀮􀁳􀀠 :=-p..... b \/' C. 􀁾 C c. e.:s-S
:::±?l..O..bl " <.. ¥" e. \ 􀁾 \'" I 0 􀁾􀀠fr= oC II?S.S +0 iE..1' \Ai ,...,;J 􀁌􀀬􀀧􀀧􀁥􀁾􀀭􀁴􀀧􀀬􀀠􀁾􀀠 c 􀁾􀁢􀁬􀁯􀁴􀀮􀀠{stAlC.-c 
Y'$.s+ 􀁾􀀬 ..􀁾 􀁾 􀀼􀀧􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁾􀀠 _lloQQ H \0""0 . I -.. _ ......_-------------
NAME OF FIRM,_--l,,\.<-)􀀭􀁦􀀧􀀽􀁥􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 SCORE SHJiliT 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should-include "1 lighting design plan {1-10j POINTS 12. Landscaping (1-10}
____,POINTS 3. Acoustics (how will noise affect acijacent buildinss) (1-tO) POINTS 4. Vibrations..(how will motion impact acijacent buildillgs) 􀁾􀀠 (1-10} POINTS 5. Estimated cost of
construction of the bricige design 􀁾􀀠 (1-10) POINTS 6. 􀁆􀁵􀁮􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁾 I build 􀁡􀁢􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁾 {parking, pedestrian and bike <i users, safety,.ADA etc.) (1-10} POIMTS 7. How
does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent ti buildings fmm roadway (t-10) 􀁐􀁏􀁉􀁾􀁔􀁓􀀠 t1 8. Overall quality and 􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁩􀀮􀁾􀀠of presentation .(vision, team plan I
effort) (1-10} POINTS TOTAL S,:GRE le. «POINTS 
NAME OF FIRM SCORESHpET t1 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should include lighting 􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁾􀁮􀀮􀀧􀁰􀁬􀁡􀁮􀀨􀀱􀀭􀀱􀁑􀁊􀀠 POINTS '1;, 2. Landscaping ('1-'10) ___,POINTS o 3. Acoustics
.(how will noise affect 􀁡􀁾􀁪􀁡􀁣􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀠buildings) (1-10) POINTS 􀁾􀀠 4. Vibrations (how willll'loticm lll'lpaet adjacent. buildings) (1-10) POINTS 5. Estill'lated cost of construction
of the bridge de'llign (1-10) POINTS 6. Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, 􀁳􀁡􀁦􀁾􀀮􀀠ADA etc::,) (1-10) POINTS Cb 7_ How does the bridge lI'Iinill'lize
obstruction to adjac;ent buildings froll'l roadway (1-10) POINTS 8..-Overall quality and creativity of pr_entation 􀀨􀁾􀁯􀁮􀀮􀀠 teall'l plan I effort) (1-10J POINTS TOTAL SCORE 5i.t
POltiTS 
NAME OF FIRM SCORE SHJ'ET e, 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and-nigh4should include l lighting design plan (1.1Q) POINTS 1 2. Landscaping (1&10) ___POINTS .q 3. Acoustics. (how will noise
affect a,.iacent buildinJl$) (1.10) POINTS i 4. Vibrations (how will motion imJlact adjacent buildillJls) (1.10) POIN,TS (/5. Estimated cost of construction of the brici.se design .
/(1-10) POI,.TS IJ 6. Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA 􀁥􀁴􀁣􀁾􀀩􀀨􀀧􀂷􀀧􀀰􀀩􀀠 POINTS 1 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to
adjacent buildings from roadway (1·10) POINTS '1 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation. (vision, team plan I effort) .(1-10) POINTS TOTAL SCORE (0 S 􀁐􀁏􀁉􀁾􀁔􀁓􀀠
2. Landscaping 􀀨􀀱􀀭􀀱􀀰􀁾􀀠 ) V POINTS 3. Acoustics {how will noise affect ac!ljacent buildil'!gs) (1-10) (,;, POI,.TS 4-Vibrations (how will motion impact adjacent buildings) (1.10)
􀀢􀁾􀀠 POINTS \\ .._ 􀁾fl 5. 􀁅􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁭􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁾 cost of COnstnictiOR􀁾􀁾􀀺kgedesign 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀮􀀠 6 (1.10) r B POINTS C 􀁾􀁲􀀺􀀠 .! 􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀠e..1 3 I '7 1 6. Functionality I build ability
􀀨􀁰􀁡􀁬􀀧􀁫􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁾􀁰􀁥􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁡􀁮􀀠andbike users, safety, ADA etc,) (1.10) I ,,) POINTS • 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings from roadway (1-10)
I 0 POINTS 8. OveraU quality and creativity of presentation (vision, team plan I effort) (1-10) I Q POINTS 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, shoulcl incl,ude lighting designjllanJ1.10J
I'Q POINTS 
NAME OF FIRM i=f ,,"-0' e. '/). ...,d 􀁪􀀮􀀮􀀩􀁾􀀠'-ko\s \-\ 0 t:::. SCORESf{f:ET 1. Aesthelic$ -appearancaday and night, should incl,ude lighting desisnplan(1.1Q} \S2 POINTS 2. Landscaping
(1.10) I £) POINTS 3. Acoustics (how will noise affect adjacent buildin.ss) (1·10) I f,) POINTS 4. Vibrations (how will motion impact aliiacent buildil1gs) (1-10. <;( POINTS 5. Estimated
cost of construction of the bridge design (1.10) ,,:, -POINTS 6. Functionalib' 1build ability {parkins, pedestrian and bike users,safety. ADA etc.) (1-10) !.C POINTS 7. How does the
brid,ge minimize obstruction to aciJacent buildingafrom roadway ('I.10) 'c' POQlTS 8. Overall qualib' and 􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁪􀁾􀀠of presentation (vision, team plan I effort) (1.10) to POIINTS
􀁔􀁏􀁔􀁁􀁌􀁓􀁾􀀰􀁒􀁅 ____􀁾􀀢􀁐􀀴􀁉􀁎􀁔􀁓􀀠 p 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀮􀁊..\'(.. ))!oLe􀁾􀀠 \ Sc-e"",,1€􀁾􀀭 􀁜􀀮􀁊􀁬􀁥􀁾􀀭􀀮􀁓􀀠 , 􀁁􀀮􀁃􀁖􀀧􀁅􀀩􀁾􀁓􀀠 +h.'i?-\i'>\,uclsC I\: fe., 􀁾􀀧􀁆􀀧􀁴-1-"!....,..
􀁾􀁣 􀁾􀀠􀁾'\A \ tJ :p. 0-\>J -t'C h" \:::. -e..s . See 􀁊􀀮􀁁􀀭􀁾􀀠 B􀀭􀁜􀀮􀀵􀁾􀁣􀁜􀁣􀀠􀀠+0 "-"-\ d.AJAi -􀁓􀁾􀀨􀁊􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁳􀁉􀁬􀁜􀀩􀀮􀀮􀀩􀀠 . -::r-c I I\,!'ts.: Cr-e 􀁾􀀫􀀭􀁥􀀮􀀮􀀠 U
0 \ 'S 􀁾􀀠 Dr-I 􀀧􀀭􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁌􀀺􀀺􀀩􀀠 I€). t '"O"C; 􀁾􀀠 --I Co. 1. 􀁾􀀠 If&,."'" 
NAME OF FIRM HAJY13 SCORESHPET 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night..should incl.ude lighting design,plan {1.1Q) 'i POINTS 2. Landscaping (1-10)._'<--_POINTS 3_ Acoustics {how will
noise affect adjacent buildin.as) (1-10} I 19 POINTS 4.. V-Ibrations·(how will motion. impact adjacent.buildQ:ligs) (1-10) (tV POINTS I 5. Estimated cost of constructi_ of the bridge.de$ign
(1-10) fQ POINTS . 6. FunctionalityI build ability (parkiag.pedestrian.andbike users. safeb'. ADA etc.) (1.10) 1 POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize obstructi_to adjacent buildings
from roadway (1....0) -Z POINTS 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation. (vision, team plan I effort) (1-10) .S=-POINTS 􀁾􀁔􀁁􀁌􀁓􀁃􀁏􀁒􀁅__􀁾􀁐􀁇􀁦􀁾􀀠
-Jb( 􀁎􀁁􀁍􀁅􀁑􀁆􀁆􀁭􀀺􀁍􀀬􀀭􀁗􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀽􀁾_____ SCORE SHEET 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should include lighting design plan (1-10) <1 POINTS 2. Landscaping (1-10) :s
POINTS 3. 􀁁􀁣􀁯􀁵􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁣􀁾􀁯􀁷 will noise affect adjacent buildings) (1-10)';;" POINTS 4. Vibrationstowwill motion impact adjacent buildings) (1-10) POINTS . 5. Estimated cost of construction
of the bridge design (1-10) I 0 POINTS . 6. Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) (1-10) % POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction
to adjacent buildings from roadway (1-10) '1' POINTS 8. Overall quality and creativity 􀁾 presentation (vision, team plan I effort) (1-10) 7... POINTS TOTAL SCORE C.:-I'OINTS 
NAMEOF FIRM SCORESHEET 1. Aesthetics -appearance day anyight, should include lighting design plan (t.tO) 􀁾􀀠 POINTS 2. Landscaping (1.10) /0 POIND 3. Acoustics (how will noise affect
adjacent buildings) (1..10) <1' POINTS 4. Vibrations (how will motion Impact adjacent buildings) (t-tO) POINTS 5. Estimated cost of construction of the bridge design (1-10) POINTS 6.
Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) (1-10) POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings from roadway (1-10)
POINTS 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation (vision. team plan I effort) (1-10) POINTS TOTAL SCORE __􀁾􀁐􀁏􀁉􀁎􀁔􀁓􀂷􀀠
Arapaho Road Bridge Competition Agenda April 11,2002 I. Welcome and introductions: Ron Whitehead, City I/IIanager n:. "DirectloBS to C-omm1Hee lIIemllers: JIIIJke lIlfu'Pliy, DIrector0'Public
Works A. Announce presentation schedule: 􀀬􀁾􀀠 "FimPresentatfon vaS-8:1JOam·1lfam 2. Second Presentation Freese & Nichols 1'D:30am·"2:-30pm3. Third Presentation HNTB 1:30pm-3: 30pm
III. Grading will be based on the following criteria A. Aestheties--appellrance-1Iay"and-rnghtjsbould include lighting design plan fL. -L-andscarriD!r C. -Acoustics (how will noise affect
adjacent buildings) 􀁄􀁾􀀠 Vibrations {hOw-will motion mtect-adjacent buildings) E. Estimated cost of construction of the bridge design1'. -Functionalityl-buUd abillty-(parldng,pedesbian-and-blke
users, safety, ADA etc.) G. How-does the -bridge minimize obstruction to -adjaCent buildings from roadway H. Overall quallty-and -creativity ofpresentation-(vision, team plan I effort)

􀁐􀁲􀁾􀁳􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠􀁓􀁣􀁨􀁾􀁤􀁵􀁬􀁾􀀺􀀠 Tune (Aprillllh ) Firm 7:30am -8:00am Committee Members 8:00am -lO:OOam URSGriener lO:30am -12:3Opm Freese & Nichols 12:3Opm -1:30pm Lunch
1:3Opm-3:30pm HNTB 3:30pm-5:00pm Panel DiscussionlSelection Conference Centre Location Board Room Stone Cottage BoardRoom BoardRoom Stone Cottage BoardRoom : " 
Evli1uation Guide Lines: 􀁾􀀠 Each firm will be given two. ho.urs to. make their presentatio.ns and answer questio.ns/rom 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀮􀁰􀁡􀁮􀁥􀁬􀁾􀀠with at least 30 minutes. dedicatedta
question and answer. 􀁾􀀠 Gro.up will have o.pen discussio.ns abo.ut individual co.ncerns and o.pinio.ns. > Panel willuse evaluadon criteria statedin information below, with each item
having equal value to. assist in ranking each firm. 􀁾􀀠 Each member willthen individually grade each firm, in a similor manner, giving each item a gradefro.m 1-10, with 10 being best.
> Each member based o.n the to.tal sco.re given willrank thefirms in o.rder o.f graile 1", r4; or ff"; 􀁾 -Altpanelmembers wittsubmit their ranltings to. establish initlaloriler. 􀁾􀀠
Each firm will be given an o.verall grade based o.n rank submitted by each member. 1"place will be awarded o.ne po.int, r 4 place will be awarded 2 points and3'4place willbe awarded3
po.ints. Thefirm with thefewest Jotalpoints witlbe the co.mpetition winner. f·· : .... 
NAMEOFFIRM iJ 􀁾􀀠 SCORESHEET 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should include lighting design pian 􀀨􀀱􀁾􀀱􀀰􀀩􀀠 POINTS 2. Landscaping (1.10) ___P,OINT&3. AcoustiCs (liow will
noise affect adjacent buildings) (1.10) POINTS 4. Vibrations (how will motion impact adjacent buildings) (1·10) POINTS 5. Estimated cost of construction of the bridge design (1·10) POINTS
6. Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) (1-10) POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings from roadway'
(1-10) POINTS 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation (vision, team plan I effort) (1-10) POINTS TOTAL SCORIi ___POINTS 
NAME OF FIRM 7d i2 5 SCORE SHEET 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should Include lighting design plan (1-10) II POINTS 2. Landscaping (1-10) !( POINTS 3. Acoustics (how will
noise affect adjacent buildings) (1-10) -t:C POINTS 4. Vibrations (how will motion Impact adjacent buildings) (1-10) £ POINTS 5. Estimated cost of construction of the bridge design (1-10)
/() POINTS 6. Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) (1-10) 􀁾􀀠 POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings
from roadway (1-10) 􀁊􀁾􀀠 POINTS 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation 􀀨􀁶􀁬􀁳􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁾􀀠 team plan I effort) (1-10) , POINTS TOTAL SCORE tj9 POINTS 
SCORE SHEET 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should Include lighting design plan (1-10) r POINTS 2_ landscaping (1-10) ,( POINTS 3_ Acoustics (how will noise affect adjacent
buildings) (1-10) 􀁓􀁾􀀠 POINTS 4_ Vibrations (how will motion Impact adjacent buildings) (1-10) :s; POINTS 5_ Estimated cost of construction of the bridge design (1-10) I POINTS 6_
Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) (1-10) I POINTS 7_ How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings from roadway (1-10)
It) POINTS 8_ Overall quality and creativity of presentation (vision, team plan I effort) (1-10) /0 POINTS TOTAL SCORE 􀁾 'Z.v POINTS 
NAME OF FIRM 1111 􀁔􀁾􀀦􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀠 SCORE-SHEET 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should Include lighting design plan (1-10)1 6 POINTS 2. Landscaping (1-10) _-,,-;!_,POINTS \ 3.
Acoustics (how will noise affect adjacent buildings) (1-10) 8' POINTS 4. Vibrations (how will motion Impact adjacent buildings) . (1-10) t POINTS 5. Estimated cost of construction of
the bridge design (1-10) G POINTS 6. Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) (1-10) l ?' POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction
to adjacent buildings from roadway (1-10) t POINTS 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation (vision, team plan I effort) (1-10) 0 POINTS TOTAL SCORE y( POINTS 
SCORE SHEET 1. Aesthetics appearance day and night, should include 6ghtilig design plan (1,10):3 POIIfTS 2. Landscaping (1.10) _..;;;I.o,--_POIIfTS 3. Acoustics (how will noise affect
adjacent buildings) (1.10) 7 POINTS 4. 􀁙􀁬􀁢􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁨􀁏􀁗􀀠willlllotion illlpact adjacent buildings) (1-10) POINTS 5. Estilllated cost of construction of the bridge design
(1.10) I 0 POINTS 6. Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, AOA etc.) (1-10) q POINTS 7. How does the bridge lIIinilllize obstruction to adjacent
buildings frolll roadway (1.10) C POINTS I 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation (vision, tealll plan I effort) (1.10) \'D POINTS TOTAL SCORE 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀽􀀥􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁊􀁐􀁏􀀧􀁎􀁔�
�􀀠 f. ! 
NAME OF FIRM SCORE SH,EET 1. Aesthetics -appearance day anel night, sbould incl.ude lighting des,l.an plan {1-10J 7 POINTS 2. Landscaping (1-10) 7 􀁐􀁾􀁔􀁓􀀠 3. Acoustics. (how will
noise affect acljacent 􀁢􀁵􀁩􀁬􀁤􀁬􀁮􀀮􀁡􀁾􀀩􀀠 (1-1 OJ-or POINTS 4. Vibrations (how will motion illlP8ct adjacent buildings) (1-10) 9 􀁐􀁏􀁉􀁾􀁔􀁓􀀠 5. Estimated cost of construction
of the bridge design (1-10J--, POINTS 6. Functionality I build abili.ty (parking, pedestrian and bike usersFsafetyF ADA etc.) (140) 7 POINTS 7. How does the brige minimize obsJruction
to a!ljacent buildings fl'om I'08dway (1-10) q POI.,.TS 8. O_rall quality and creativib' ofpresentation (vision, team plan J effort) (1-10) 4-_POIJ:lTS TOTAL 􀁾􀁯􀀮􀁒􀁅􀀠 &qPOINTS 
NAME OF F1RM_W--'-t<---'?'-----____ SCORE SHEET 1. Aesthetics -appearance day and night, should Include lighting design plan (1-10) q POINTS 2. Landscaping (1-10) C. POINTS 3. Acoustics
(how will noise affect adjacent buildings) (1-10) .. a POINTS 4. Vibrations (how will motion Impact adjacent buildings) :::C, I (1-10) e POINTS 5. Estimated cost of construction of the
bridge design (1-10) q POINTS 6. Functionality I build ability (parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) (1-10) It> POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to
adjacent buildings from roadway (1-10) ." POINTS B. Overall quality and creativity of presentation (vision, team plan I effort) (1-10) 9 POINTS TOTAL SCORE POINTS (Pt 
NAMEOFFIRM 􀁾􀁾􀀭 f\.-I/CJ!-Dv£" SCORESHJiliT 1. Aesthetics-appearance day and night, should include lighting deliiisn plan (1·10) e POINTS 2. Landscaping (1-10) _-,'6",-_,POINTS 3.
Acoustics {how will noise affect adjacent buildin.9lii) (1.10J-<8 POIJtTS 4. Vibrations (how 􀁷􀁩􀁬􀁾􀀠motion impact adjacent 􀁢􀁵􀁩􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁳􀀩􀀠 (1.10) P:> POINTS 5. Estimated-cost
of construction of the-bridge design (1.10) t POINTS 6. Functionality I builll ability (parking"pedestriananllbike users, safe'-Y. ADA etc,) (1·10) '7 POINTS 7. How does the bridge minimize
obstruction to adjacent buildings from roadway (1.10j q POINTS 8. Overall quality and creativity of presentation (vis,ion, team plan I effort) (1·10) B POINTS TOTAL SCORE 􀀢􀁏􀁉􀁾􀁔􀁓􀀠
SCORE SH,EET 1. Aesthetics appeamnce day and night'" should include lighting de!!'gnplan j1-1Q1 S POINTS 2. Landscaping (1-10) -;:)POINTS l 3. AcousticsJhow will noise affect 􀁡􀁾􀁪􀁡􀁣􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀠buildi
ngs) (1-10) I" POINTS 4. Vibmtions (how will motion impact 􀁡􀁾􀁪􀁡􀁣􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀠buildi..s) (1-10) Ca POINTS S. Estimated cost of construction of the bridge des,gn (1-10) "5 POINTS 6. Functionaliw
I build ability (parkinJl, pedestrian and bike users, safety. ADA etc.) (1-10) 6 POINTS .2"'1 7. How does the 􀁢􀁲􀁩􀁾􀁧􀁥􀀠minimize obstruction to adjacent buildings from roadway (1-10)
B POINTS 􀀢􀁾􀀮􀀡􀀠 8. Ovemll qualiw and creatlvlW ofpresentation (vision.. team plan I effort) (1-10) B POINTS -4 c:; TOTAL SPORE "'P---?PDJIITS 
Arapabo Road·Bridge Competition Agenda April 11, 2002 I. Welcome and introductions: Ron Whitehead, City Manager 11. Directions to Committee lIfemliers: Jltll(e lIfutpliy, Duector0'Public
WOI'f(s A. Announce presentation schedule: 􀀬􀁾􀀠 first Presentation 1JRS"W:OOam·'f1ram 2. Second Presentation Freese & Nichols 􀀱􀀱􀁨􀀳􀁏􀁡􀁭􀀮􀀱􀀲􀀺􀁾􀀳􀀰􀁰􀁭􀂷􀀠 3. Third Presentation
HNTB 1:30pm.3: 30pm III. Grading will be based on the following criteria A. Aesthetics -appeanmw-1Iay-anchright. should include lighting design plan 􀀭􀁂􀁾􀀠 -Landscaping-C. Acoustics
(how will noise affect adjacent buildings) D. Vibrations (",OWwillmotion affect adjacent 􀁢􀁵􀁩􀁬􀁤􀁾􀁧􀁳􀀩􀀠 E. Estimated cost of construction of the bridge design F. FanctionaHtyHtuild
abllity-(parkina.-pedestrianandbike users, safety, ADA etc.) G. Howdoes the bridge minimize obstruction to adjaCent buildings from roadway -H. -overall quality-and creativity of-presentation
-(vision, team plan I effort) 
Presentation Schedule: lime (Apnl11thl Firm 7:30am -8:00am Committee Members 8:00am lO:OOam URSGriener !0:30am -12:3Opm Freese & Nichols 12:3Opm 1:30pm Lunch 1:30pm 3:30pm HNTB 3:30pm-5:00pm
Panel Discussion/Selection Conference Centre Location BoardRoom Stone Cottage BoardRoom BoardRoom Stone Cottage BoardRoom 
Evaluation Guide Lines: > Each firm will be given two hours to make their presentations and answer questionsfrom the􀁊􀀱􀁡􀁮􀁥􀁊􀁾􀀠with at. least. 30 minutes. dedicated to lJuestion
and answer. > Group will have open discussions about individual concerns and opinions. .> P.ane/willuse evahmtinn criteria stJJJedin information below, with each item having equal value
to assist in ranking each firm. > Each member will then buJjvidual1y grade eachfirm, in a similar manner, giving each item agradefrom 1-10, with 10 being best. > Each member based on
the total score given will rank thefirms in order of graae 1"; r d; orr; >-Altpanetmemliers will submit their ranltings to establiSh initlat oraer. > Each firm will be given an overall
grade based on rank submitted by each member. 1"place will be awarded one point, r d place will be awarded 2 points and3'dplace will be awarded3 points. Thefirm with thefewesttotalpoints
wiltbe the competition WInner. 
----------------------NAME OF FIRM (JJ 6) ® SCORESHEET 􀀻􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀤􀁉,􀀠 f 􀁾􀀨􀀱􀀯􀁻􀀧I􀀠 􀀻/J+􀀬V1􀁾i> 􀀮􀀠A'e sthetics -appearance day and night. should include :..--J 􀁾􀀠 rr lighting
design plan (1--1-0) POINT. Sl 5' 􀁾􀀠 , I G,i 71 ! I l cr '1 􀁾􀀠 5/1 ,<;Ya ::: A1 t -7 2. Landscaping (1....0) POINTS 3. Acoustics (how will noise affect adjacent buildings) (1--10)
POINTS b 4. Vibrations (how will motion impact adjacent buildings) (1-10) POINTS 5. Estimated cost of construction of the bridge design (1--10) POINTS 9 6. Functionality I build ability
(parking, pedestrian and bike users, safety, ADA etc.) (1-10) POINTS g 7. How does the bridge minimize obstruction to adjacent buildingsfrvm roadway (1-10) POlttTS 1 5"4-55 8. Overall
quality and creativity of presentation (vision, 􀁯􀀮􀁾􀁧􀀱􀀭 o.&Y% team plan I effort) (1-10) POINTS {)p' "f= 􀁾􀀠 m TOTAl. SCORE ___POINTS,