FACSIMILE COVER PAGE To: John Baumgartner From: Tony Tramel Time: 06:59:42 Date: 616196 Pages (including cover): 5 Attached is a copy of the Agenda Report submitted as a consent item
to the DART Committee of the Whole (afternoon session) and to the Board (evening session) for action on August 13. 1996. I have spoken to Jan Seidner and she feels this item will be
approved without comment. The town of Wylie also has a grade seperation issue on the agenda this same date. She feels that since Addison is a member city and this action is consistent
with DART's encouragement of economic development that the item will pass with little if any comment. Additionally. this will be the first Board meeting after the scheduled Irving vote.
therefore. she feels that much of the discussion will center on the outcome of this election rather than this consent agenda item. Call me at 747-6336 ext. 28 if you have further questions.

CO"M. I!RI L 214 749 􀁾􀀠P.a2 Agenda Report Atradlmeal: IVoliag Reqlliremenb: I. Map majority DATE: August 13. 1996 SlJBJECT: Crant or. 􀁌􀁉􀁾􀁄􀁳􀁥for aD At·Grade Publle Road CroSl11l11D
Addison RECOMMENDATION Approval ofa resolulion authorizing Ibe PresidentlExecutive Director or his designee to execute a liccme 81'l11Jting an at-grade 􀁰􀁵􀁢􀁬􀁩􀁾􀀠road crossing 10
the Town of Addison. Sllbjecllc the T 0"''11 of Addison providillil additional we.rning protection devices at existing at-grade road crossings in Addison. T"",," a\8 CO!t in Ibe ToWII
ofSSOO.OOO. STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS Board Goal: (SFP) Establish a COmmOn vision lor IrIlll.poftiltiOll tltal is regionally accepted. progrESSively implcmcmed through a comprehensive
system plan. and periodically revisited. Management Ol!jective: (SPF01) Mtivt!ly participate ill planning a<:livities in the region. Sirategic Initiative: (SFPO 1.0S) Identify and implement
joint developmcnl opportunities. DISClJSSION The Town of Addison is mjuesting an at-grade grade creeing on Spectrum Drive to cross the Cotton Belt taillOad right-of-way ;1'1. Addison
(see Allachment I). ElC.istinll alternative access i. availabllt to Iblt development 750 ft<!t either side of the proPO!!Cd at-grade ctOsslng via Quorum Drive and the Southbllund Service
Iload of Dallas North Tollway. By Board Resolution No. 960033. DART adopted a policy to reduce the number of public and private at·grade crt>S>inlls, The Federal Railroad Administration
aIId Texas Department of Tl1IItspooation have similar policies encoURging raill'08.lb to reduce the overall nwnber or at.gmde cros.ings. DART, Ibe Town of Addison, and the developer
have worlced to try to identify Cltisling aI-grade road c",..ings in the To ...n of Addison IIta! could be closed, No realistic tlosW'e opportunities Cltist. In lieu or closure or elimination
of ""isting at-lfIllde public road crossings. the Town of AddisQn and the develom have proposed eslI\bUshing a 1300.000 pc crossing improvement fund 10 design and install additional
warning proteclion device$ 1£1 increase protecticm at existing at-grade crossings, DART acd the Town of Addison will develop a procedun: fOT di5Irur."menl offWlds. JI6.SAWlkh 
CI:M'I. RA I L FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION As Addi.on i... member city, !!Ie license consideration is waived. Approval of this license has no bud,etar,y impaCllo DART. L£GAL CONSIDERATION
SectiOn 452.054 of the Texas Transportation Code authori"'$ DART to ex .. rei ... any power necessary or OODveniet'l' t" carry OUI its responsibility. 316.SAMlsI!.I! 
a:J'1M. R11IL 214 749 3609 P.i!4--.-........-... . (NOllo Sca/e) 􀁾􀁁􀂻􀁄􀁾􀁏􀁎􀁾􀁒􀁔􀀠'_._ ruTURE ItOADWAl' ALlGllMZfITS 􀁗􀁨􀁾􀁾􀁒􀀠EXmBIT 1 • STUDY AREA, FVrtTIU: mGBWAY-IIAlL (ROSSING
I'UTUllE SPECTaVM DRIVE EXTENSION 
CCl"I'I. RAIL 214 􀀿􀀴􀁾􀀠3609 P.32 DRAFT RESOLUTION oflhe DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT (E"....ttve Committee) Grant ofa Lj.,,,,, ... for an At-Gradc P"blic Road Croulng In AddHoII WHEREAS,
the Town of Addison bas n:quested an at-grade public road 􀁾􀁲􀁯􀀵􀀵􀁩􀀢􀁧􀀠on Specttum Drive [0 cross the: Colton Belt Tailroad right-of-way; and WHEREAS, by Board Re:;olution No. 960033,
DART adopted a policy l!:l 􀁾􀁤􀁵􀁣􀁥􀀠the number of public and private at·cmde crossinlll, and WHEREAS, the Federal Railroad AdminislIation ruld lite Texas Department of Ttarulportlltion
have sjmilill" policies to eliminate or consolidate public and private at-grade, bighw-4y-MiI crossings; and WlfEREAS. because no realistic closure possibilities exist. IU1d thc propo5ed
at-grade roud crossing is a critical element in Addison's proposed Addi.on ei,d., dovelopment. additiOlltll waminll protection deviees will be added ot existing crossill8s in lieu ofclosure.
NOW. nrnREFORB. BE IT RESOLYEO by die Dan"" Area Rapid Transit BQard of Directoi'!> !hill !he Presidmr/Exccutive Dim:tOT or his designee is alld1OrW:d to ""..,ute a IicellP fur lII1
at-gl'llde p .. blic road CrOssiIqJ in Addison. lIB shown in Attaciunenl I, SUbject to thc Town of Addison providing additional warning protection devices at existing at-gradll public
road crossings in Addison. Texas at a cos!. to the Town ofl>300,OOO. Prepared by: Lonnie E. Blaydes, Jr. Vice President Commuter Rail & Railroad Management Approved "" to Corm: Office
ofGeneral COlm""( Approved by; Roger Sl10ble PresidenrlExccvti""' Director 416.SAMIJIcb 08/05196 -2: /3 PM TOTR.. "."'2 
r •• DeShazo, Tang & Associates, Inc. F.ngiDeers P1auners 400 South Houstoa. Suite 330 Dallas. Texas 75202 􀁾(214) 748-6140 FAX: (214) 748-70'17 Telecopier Transmittal Date Faxed: I
9 -Ju''1' 9' From: S.teye. <. 􀁓􀁴􀁣􀁬􀁜􀁾􀀨􀀢􀀠Project: Grti-o... &c 11((..,.11 L.j"c Project Number: 􀁟􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀹􀀺􀀮􀀺􀁬􀁩􀀢􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁏􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀮􀀭_______ Transmitted to: 􀁎􀁡􀁭􀁾􀀠___􀁊􀁟􀁾􀁟�
�􀁟􀁨􀁾􀁟􀀼􀁾􀁧􀁟􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁪􀀸􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁨􂂬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁏􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁥􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁦􀁾􀁰􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁢􀁾􀁉􀁻􀁾􀁣􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁓__ CompmY: __􀀭􀀲􀁔􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁾􀁯􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁾􀁾􀁾_______________
________ 􀁏􀁾􀀯􀁳􀁭􀁲􀁥􀀺􀀠___􀁁􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁁􀁾􀁬􀀽􀁓􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁔􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁘􀁾___________________________ FAX Number: fSo-Z S s7 Telephone Number: i 50-2. S & , D FYI o ResponseD Requested Due Date:
Message: Mr. Brtlr,o.rn.j""",fhU, flu, 􀁡􀀮􀁴􀀫􀁴􀁬􀀮􀁃􀁁􀁥􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁳􀁦􀀧􀁲􀁦􀀮􀁾􀁲􀁊􀀬􀁦􀀡􀀮􀁇􀁴􀀠is provl..l...:14 il'l re,pm5€ h yi1'lA(' (";"vtrSOl.tio.... with TO"I"\'1 Tr"rog.{.
Tiu. ""p retMl shALt inc. 􀁾􀁳􀀠d.R..,..., "-(.of ..ttl􀁾􀀠v,uc;{ to cc::\cc::\1 Cc", [",it; th..r.. pffl.n'-t· co&f r"c..7io firr tkt. Spec;frfAm Driv/! q".dysir Rchni tAl 􀁾􀁑􀀮􀁨􀀴􀀡􀁎􀁮􀀧􀁜􀀠y<11
A.' 7 were fS$"'e.c:{. 'The 􀁳􀁰􀁲􀁬􀀡􀁾􀁤􀀮􀁳􀁬􀁶􀁺􀁩􀀺􀁴􀀠j",clM.tU>.s 􀁾􀀧􀁰􀁤􀁃􀁻􀁴􀁥􀁣􀁊􀀮􀀠􀁩􀀢􀁦􀀱􀀬􀁾􀁉􀀧􀁙􀀧􀁜􀀼􀀧􀁜􀀮􀀧􀁨􀁯􀁮􀀠""hick inco-rpCff"o..rn the. 􀁩􀁬􀀧􀁜􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀠􀁣􀁜􀁬􀁦􀁦􀁥􀁮�
�􀁾􀁾􀀠in -tk .CO'rI.s'fr ",-c.1,o,,", cost of '1f"eLc;l£ 􀁳􀁾􀁀􀀧􀀡􀁲􀁃􀁜􀀮􀁴􀁩􀁯􀀢􀀠􀁹􀁬􀁥􀀮􀁬􀁤􀁩􀁾􀀠'" 􀁢􀁦􀁬􀁮􀁾􀀠fi +, cost ....􀁴􀀾􀀮􀁨􀁾􀀠of 0.11 • .Please Cc:t II me WIth Qf\'1
'1w..9froQ,S < a 􀁮􀁾􀀠10 d Iseu!;) a",! tnq"(i f,·C"I.l7o t"lS < jt. our 􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁱􀁮􀁤􀀢􀁭􀀠""""i Ch ylr&o.. fee..l are. Qff[oprjOl.t<i.. Thank:f<t'Y! STe»e Sfrm£.r CuundPg this cover
JeIIcr, we are CtaDlmjlting IfallptJIgetI am DOtm:eiNd. pk:/Ise ca/1: at (214) 748-6140 
􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁾􀁩􀁑􀁮􀀠of 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀠Noxth central Texas council of Government's 􀁾􀁒􀁡􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁯􀁡􀁤􀀯􀁒􀁯􀁡􀁤􀁷􀁡􀁹􀀠Grade Separation Needs 􀁁􀀤􀁳􀁥􀁳􀁳􀁾􀁮􀁴􀀺􀀠A Benefit-Cost RAtio Model,"
August 1987 Data SOlll:ces: DTA 􀁄􀁥􀁓􀁨􀁡􀁾􀁯􀀬􀀠Tang & Associatea, !nc. DART Dallas Area Rapid Tl:ansit COG North Central Texas Council of Governments TTl 􀁾􀁥􀁸􀁡􀁳􀀠Transportation
!natitute 􀁾􀀠Huitt Zollars MODEL Data llsed fron\ :sample problem in the SIC model MonEL' Data used from aampl.. probl.... in the SIC model multiplied by a Consumer Price Index of 1.45
(1983 to 1955) Grade separation is warranted at grade crosainqa with a benefit-cost ratio equal to or exceeding one for the given benefit-cost 􀁥􀁱􀁵􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾􀀠 Equation numbers oorxespond
to the document text. 7118196 DTA 
7/18/96 DTA 
15851 N. Dallas Parkway Suite 855 Dallas, Texas 75248 It E A L T Y T .. U S T (214) 387-149y 􀁔􀀮􀁾For Your Convenience... We are taking the 􀁯􀁰􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁵􀁮􀁩􀁾􀀠of forwarding the atwched
infcmnanon without a cover letter in the beUef thot promptness may be more important U! you dum􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁭􀁡􀁕􀁾􀀮􀀠 · :-. , I ' ..,' I 
UtlUJUL II 􀁾􀁏􀀠􀁉􀁪􀀺􀁪􀁻􀀧􀀯􀁾􀁬􀀮􀀠Ij:dl/NU. 􀁪􀁾􀁏􀁕􀁉􀁉􀀮􀁪􀁩􀁉􀀴􀀠r I.EAL'tY TIl'lIiT TO: F/IX#: LOCATION; FROM: Fa.... # Voice 1# 770-5119 TlO-SIS 􀁄􀁡􀁴􀁥􀀺􀁾􀀠Time: ;-'JtJ
"J!-# Fogel; (Including 􀁃􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁾􀀠􀁓􀁨􀁥􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀩􀀠COMME1';'TS: rmna o.COM1lD£f!IWJTY T ... 􀁾􀁾Inamll",""",i!!e:l with flUs (..:simile is: a) <!lbjd 10 AI:!IlmI:yfc:U<ol prl.>ik.o;
b)_, walk pm4ud; atzdfm: oj c:onlicllclW. n;. Wcmlc:! CIIIy fot!he 􀁩􀁮􀁤􀁩􀁾􀀠or e:.IiliY 􀁾,bo.,,-y"" are I=l>y ""Wid IflII.t IIDf ltiss...-.... di:illfouticm, 􀁾... use 01' or...n-..
upon !he mc01'lllllliolL 􀁾ill ...t ""'-i!!e:l wI!h Ibis ll=imiIe 'by or III 1IDfO"" ok Iiwl !he Idpi..t 􀁤􀁡􀁩􀀧􀁾􀀠abvvo 'by u., !Cdc:-if ....1IIiIorin:I :md ctritIly pn>b.0iIm. f{,.,..
IIlrve m:e!vd !his flo:>imJIc in """"'. pi"",. IID1ify II! immdi>lJ!..ty by fr''1b"". at u., IIlmIbcrli<wl Any fiI=iuIiI. """"""..ty-S=III you :d:ould b. w....:Ii",.ly rc:umd III tM
lO:I<l.e 'by U.S. ...a.or if􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁑􀁬􀁬􀁉􀁳"""Ed'by 11>0: ....􀁾􀀠-1:5&.$1 DALLAl PAaKWAY SV'TE BSS DAI.!...U. 􀁔􀁾􀀩􀁴􀁁􀁓􀀠75:., 214361d,4<JJ fAX 214 􀀷􀀱􀀰􀁾􀀵􀀱􀀹􀀲􀀠
\lliUJUL IJ 􀁾􀀨􀀩􀀠􀀱􀀬􀀺􀁬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁪􀀧􀀯􀁾􀀱􀀮􀀠IJ:jI/NV, j!)\)UIJdI14 r C DeShazo. Tang It AssOciates, Inc. ' BaP".11 -PIaI"e, -r;ehplauIiCt. (114) 741-6740 FAX: CU4) 741-1V37 Teleeopier
Transmittal 􀁄􀁡􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀠__􀁾􀁴􀁾􀀱􀀭􀁾􀁊􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁬􀁾􀀱􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁥􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀬􀁾_______ Pmm: __􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁾􀁔􀀡􀁾􀁲􀁵􀁥􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁉________ __ ProjI:4:t: 􀁟􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀺􀁣􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁃􀁉􀀻􀀮􀀺􀀬􀀺􀁈􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀬�
�􀀢􀁾􀁓􀁣􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁬t.:...:.,fl.;;,.....;:..I!.,,1=.LI!,!,'"":'!!o-_ Prvject NlImbsr. _...;:9:;..;'::..:CI=-6;;;..;;.'________ 1'ranmtittr4 to: 􀁎􀁾􀀺􀀠__􀁾􀁧􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁹􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁎􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀨􀁉
􀁾______--______--______________ Corllpllli7: 􀁟􀀬􀀻􀀺􀀻􀁃􀁯􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀺􀁉􀀺􀀮􀀻􀀺􀀺􀁉􀁉􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀻􀀺􀀻􀀡􀁉􀀡􀁓􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀦􀀭􀀭􀀡􀀺􀀡􀁉􀁬􀁊􀁺􀀬􀀡􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁟􀁈􀀺􀀮􀀻􀀻􀀧􀁴􀁾􀁔􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀽�
�􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁴_____________ 􀁃􀁾􀀯􀁓􀁾􀁭􀀺􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁊􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁔􀁾􀁘􀁾􀀬______________________􀁾________ FAX Number: 􀁟􀁾􀀷􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀻􀀮􀀷􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀻􀁄􀁟􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀁓􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀧􀀭􀀽􀁣�
�􀀮􀀻􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀬􀀬􀀺􀀻􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁟􀀠[3'FYIo o Reapoareo litequeatlid Due Dale: ..sap: (3r,4 t"" revise", d ..... H 􀁉􀁣􀁾􀀠(,,,nu:h.AJ )u.S' --.... e.cli-t«.;\ 􀁾􀀠J ... ", S<.;d.nCt'". Slot&.
(ldo."_lu,<.tI. 1').....+ tN.-Ie t+«."""""V pc.. 􀁾􀁲􀁵􀁲􀁩􀁃􀀧􀀢􀀠-r. Lr..",ic. IlIQ,y clt.5 {"" ..... rc!rpi.:.t of..-tJ.c. ikc::.T he.. ."""'O'I.fl., 􀀬􀁣􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮􀁴􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁛􀁵􀀠s.OQ,.-,
􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀠jtc...,5! We. ur...n.........e C.?1 i1_ fl_,£,-Sh.blr.. up...... ,-.... r!-vj""", ,'carc, fn.-"'" tD R-. ..... 􀀧􀁔􀁤􀁾..d o.t },-r !\.Uc.rc..1"iC!fl, 􀁾􀁍􀀧􀀠Ccumiv.C daiI Q'I'fa:
J.::ucr. W!J4R ". mli'" g"'IIfll'UlJUIIltJU • ....... '1· calli: 
rW)M 􀁾􀁕􀁌􀁖􀁍􀁴􀁬􀁖􀁾􀀠􀁋􀁾􀁁􀁌􀁬􀁙􀀠􀁬􀁋􀁕􀁾􀀱􀀠C14t IfU-o I ,\I n HU I U f. I \ \10 IJ: ;j;j/oT. IJ: J \ INU. ::lOOU ( I j 114 Y 4 DRAFr Lmmie E. BIayde!;, Sr. July 11, 1996 PapZ
Please plKe rhil nquest on the Board'. regullr lcl1eduled meeting ot·August 13, 1996. lfyuu liavelll1)' lUrtherquestions please eont&Ct me at4So.70Z8. Sil1«Vl!Iy. Ron Wbitebead City
Ma"apr TO'WIl of'Addison be: BrymtNail Tony R. TllII!1d. DctShazo. lins & Allsociate$ 
FROM COLUMBUS REALTY TRUST 214+11U-O 129 lTHU) U { 1 J go 1:J 􀀺􀁊􀀲􀀯􀁾􀀱􀀠1J: :31/NU. :Joi)U m 114 P j DRAFT July 11,1996 LowIie E. Blaydes, Jr. YaPmidlmt Com.aMer.Rall &: .KaI1mad
Management Dallas Ana Rapid Transit PO Box 660163 DIll/lIS, TX 75366--1210 BE: I'ropoHd Gme Separatio" I)f the DAllT-CotlOIi Belt'Rail Lide ami SplCtrum RIIad E5tea.ioll ill Addison.
TlWIs; DTIIIA No. 9110" PI_ JCi¢ this amapglJdmw serve II.!! the Town of AI!di6w', request to allaw ID at11'* mil t:rO$ti.ng of DART's rail tmlities at Spectnml Drive in Addison. We
have 􀁾a t«hnlcaJ report 􀁾this issue wbkh is endosal. This report detaiIf the beMfitJ I11III costs associated with the additiggal crossing located betwem the Dallas North Ton9lllY 8IId
Quorum Drive. both ofwhich are II-grade gussings. The cost to grade separale the ficilities is estimated to be 􀁾􀁹56,000,000. Cw:nmtly, only ttnu train. a day cross tbe DaIlII.!l Nw1h
Tunway fi:omage 1'0_ and Quorum Dti've. An analysiJ eomparm, the projected benefits IUld Q;ISQ to the publk: I11III DAllT OPll'ltiollJ indiQtes that the grade sepllJ:lllioo is ID ememely
poor Investment. TIHI benelitlco. ratio oftbe &fide separation is only 0.10. For eIIdJ publil: doilBr jpyested in thilll project, only a single dime (S.I 0) is provided in public: benefits.
We have met with members ofyour staff􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧this wue. PART tt&ff'advises that jr is tlu! pm:IiI;e oIDART, TxDOT and fRA tv n=quia 􀁾oItwo publie or ptMte c:rossiass to obtain any new
aI-811111e c:rossinp. TIle Town', comultlntlll'ld DART stBff' 􀁾􀁶􀁥􀀠mvieweG Addisoo'$ cromnp ad detmniaed thG then: are no p.otenlial 􀁾􀀠within the town's limits. In lieu of two closures,
the Tovm's COIIIUltIIIIfJ llllgesred the additigg of two "four-quad, pled protection tTOSSinp" to apptOllimare (u dose .. pOSlibk) the added safety benIIfits oftwo mm QoJUref. 111. addidol1ll
cost of th_ quad-ple 􀁰􀁲􀁧􀁢􀁉􀀺􀁾􀀵􀀠is app1VXimalf:ly $300,000 rather thm the U,OOO,OOO for • pde sepamiOll After further diseussion with PAIlT staff; it wts recommended thai the
Town ofAddisml set fiide $300,000 wprovide additional wamillJ devlc::es at existing at-gradc c:t05Siup ill Addi$on. 
D 330 Unliln SIaUiln o 􀁔􀁨􀀭􀁾􀀠modal Place D 208 o Sundance" tim DalJas, Texas 75202 8oi3 E. Place 120 West Tn Streel, Suite 2.10 (214) 748·6740 Suite no Fori 􀁾􀁲􀁬􀁨􀀬􀀠Te. s 76102·7401
5 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74133 (8t{) 332-2074 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: ____􀁾􀁊􀁾􀁯􀁾􀁨􀁾􀁮􀁾􀁂􀁾􀁡􀁾􀁵􀁭􀁾􀁧􀁾􀁡􀁵􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁮􀂣􀁥􀁌􀁲______________ _ DATE: Jilly 23, t9"'9"'6________ Director
of Public Works 􀁆􀁒􀁏􀁍􀀺􀁟􀁾􀁔􀁾􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁮􀁹􀁾􀁔􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁡􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁭􀁥􀁾􀁬􀁵􀀯􀁾􀁓􀁾􀁴􀂣􀁥􀁾􀁶􀁥􀁾􀁓􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁥􀁾􀁲____ 16801 Westgrove 400 S. Houston, Suite 330 Addison, TX 75248 Dallas,
TX 75202 JOBNO: _____􀁾􀀹􀁾􀀶􀁾􀀰􀀶􀁾􀀶􀁌􀁟______________ RE: Cotton Belt Rail Line -Spectrum Drive Crossing WE ARE ENCLOSING: No. Copies 1 1 Bound Techni ca 1 􀁾􀀱􀁥􀁭􀁯􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁵􀁭􀀠Renroducible
TplChnilCRl DESCRIPTION "m ForYourUse ____________________________ As Requested __________________ For Your Approval ______________________ Approved as Noted _______________ Remarks:
____________________________________________________________________ _ CopyTo: _
________________ Dallas Area Rapid Tran$1I P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-0163DART 214/749-3278 September 5, 1997 Mr. John R. Baumgartner, P.E. Director ofPublic Works Town ofAddison
P. O. Box 144 Addison, Texas 75001 Re: License Agreement No. 970904 covering the proposed Spectrum Drive crossing Dear Mr. Baumgartner: Enclosed is a fully-executed agreement as referenced
above. Should you need to contact us in the future regarding this document, please reference the agreement number above. Please contact me at (214) 749-2917 if I can be of assistance
with any future crossings of DART-owned railroad properties. Sincerely, 􀁦􀁁􀀮􀀭􀀯􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁩􀁤􀁮􀁥􀁲􀀠Manager, Railroad Facilities Commuter Rail & Railroad Management JMS; Enclosure
Strut 01i!J, -tD 􀁾􀁴􀀱􀁸􀁭􀁥􀀮􀁊􀀱􀁜􀀢􀀬􀀠Keep OAr If ? 'I15pedrum Dr-.K+-en II 
AGREEMENT 􀀣􀁟􀁱􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀭􀀷􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀭􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀭􀁲􀁟􀁷􀀠 LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, by and between DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT, ("DART"), a regional transportation authority,
created, organized and existing pursuant to Chapter 452, Texas Transportation Code, as amended (the "Act"), and the TOWN OF ADDISON, a home rule city ("Licensee"), acting herein by and
through its duly authorized city manager, whose mailing address is P. O. Box 144, Addison, Texas 75001, WITNESSETH: 1. Purpose. DART hereby grants a license to Licensee for the purpose
of constructing, installing, and maintaining a paved four-lane Public Road Crossing (the "Permitted Improvements"), forty-eight (48) feet in width, extending Spectrum Drive across DARTs
tracks on the DART right-of-way at Mile Post 598.09 in Addison, Dallas County, Texas, more particularly described and shown on the plat marked Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated
herein for all pertinent purposes, (the "Property"). The term Permitted Improvements shall include the concrete pre-cast crossing material, pavemeot, grading, barricades, street lighting,
drainage facilities, signs, warning protection devices and approaches as designated by DART. The Property shall be used by Licensee solely for construction ofthe Permitted Improvements
and use by the public, EXCEPT, HOWEVER, AND IT IS UNDERSTOOD BY BOTH DART AND LICENSEE THAT THE GRANTING OF THIS LICENSE SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED IN ANY WAY TO CONSTITUTE A DEDICATION
OF THE PROPERTY TO THE PUBLIC. Licensee's right Ie enter upon and use the Property shall be entirely subject to the terms and provisions of this License Agreement. ' 2. Consideration.
The consideration for the granting ofthis License shall be the following: 2.01. The perfunnance by Licensee of each of the obligations undertaken by Licensee in this License. 2.02. As
further consideration for the granting of this License, and in lieu of closure of two (2) public or private at-grade highway/rail crossings within the town limits ofAddison, Licensee
shall place the sum of$300,OOO.00 into a special fund (the "Crossing Fund") to be used for providing additional warning/median protection devices at certain high traffic count highway-rail
crossings within the Town of Addison as mutually determined and agreed upon between DART and Licensee. Licensee shall monitor all expenditures from the Crossing Fund until money is depleted,
subject Ie audit by DART. 3. Term. The term of this license shall be perpetual subject, however, to termination by either party as provided herein. 4. Non Exclusive License. This license
is non-exclusive and is subjeet to (a) any existing utility, drainage or communication facility located in, on, under, or upon the Property owned by DART, any railroad, utility, or communication
company, public or private; (b) Ie all vested rights presently owned by any railroad, utility or communication company, public or private, for the use ofthe Property for facilities Speclrum
Drive lof6 
presently located within the boundaries of the Property; and (c) to any existing lease, license or other interest in the Property granted by DART to any individual, corporation or other
entity, public or private. 5. Design. Construction. Operation and Maintenance. DARTs use of the Property and adjoining property may include the use ofelectrically powered !l!luipment,
Notwithstanding DARTs inclusion within its system of measures designed to reduce stray current which may cause corrosion, Licensee is hereby warned that such measures may not prevent
electrical current being present in proximity to the Permitted Improvements and that such presence could produce corrosive effects to the Permitted Improvements. 5.01. All design, construction,
reconstruction, replacement, removal, operation and maintenance of the Permitted Improvements on the Property shall be done in such a manner so as not to interfere in any way with the
operations of DART or other railroad operations, (the "Railroad", whether one or more). In particular, cathodic protection or other stray current corrosion control measures of the Permitted
Improvements as required shall be made a part of the design and construction of the Permitted Improvements. 5.02. During the design phase and prior to commencing any construction or
installation on the Property, a copy of the construction plans showing the exact location, type and depth of the construction, any cathodic protection measures and any working area,
shall be submitted for written approval to DART and the Railroad when the construction is going to be within the area of Railroad operations. Such approval shall not be unreasonably
withheld, No work shall commence until said plans have been approved by DART and Railroad, 5.03, By acceptance of this license, Licensee agrees to design, construct, install and maintain
the Permitted Improvements in such a manner so as not to create a hazard to the use of the Property, and further agrees to pay any damages which may arise by reason of Licensee's use
of the Property under this Agreement. 5.04. By acceptance of this license, Licensee covenants and agrees to institute and maintain a reasonable testing program to detennine whether or
not additional cathodic protection of its Permitted Improvements is necessary and if it is or should become necessary, such protection shall be immediately instituted by Licensee at
its sole cost and expense. 5,05, Absence of markers does not constitute a warranty by DART that there are no subsurface installations on tbe Property. 5.06, If at any time, traffic volume
or other circumstances should warrant a grade separation for the crossing licensed hereunder, Licensee shall be responsible for the installation of such grade separation to DARTs standards,
at no cost to DART. 6. Governmental Approvals, Licensee, at its sole cost and expense, shall be responsible for and shall obtain, any and all licenses, permits, or other approvals from
any and all governmental agencies, federal, state or local, required to carry on any activity permitted herein, 7, DARTs Standard Contract and Insurance, No work on the Property shall
be commenced by Licensee or any contractor for Licensee until such Licensee or contractor shall have executed DARTs Standard Contractors Agreement covering such work, and bas furnished
insurance coverage in such amounts and types as shall be satisfactory to DART. Spectrum Drive 20f6 
8. Duty of Care in Construction. Operation and Maintenance. Licensee or its contractor shall use reasonable care during the construction, operation and maintenance period and thereafter,
to avoid damaging any existing buildings, equipment and vegetation on or about the Property and any adjacent property owned by or under the control of DART. If the failure to use reasonable
care by the Licensee or its contractor causes damage to the Property or such aQiacent property, the Licensee andlor its contractor shall immediately replace or repair the damage at no
cost or expense to DART. If Licensee or its contractor fails or refuses to make such replacement, DART shall have the right, but not the obligation, to make or effect any such repair
or replacement at the sole cost and expense of Licensee, which cost and expense Licensee agrees to pay to DART upon demand. 9. Environmental Protection. 9.01 Licensee shall not use or
permit the use of the Property for any purpose that may be in violation of any laws pertaining pertaining to health or the environment, including without limitation, the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA"). the Resource Conservation and Reccvery Act of 1976 ("RCRA"), the Texas Water Code and the Texas Solid Waste
Disposal Act. 9.02. Licensee warrants that the Permitted Use of the Property will not result in the disposal or other release of any hazardous substance or solid waste on or to the Property,
and that it will take all steps necessary to insure that no such hazardous substance or solid waste will ever be discharged onto the Property by Licensee or its Contractors. 9.03. The
tenns "hazardous substance" and "release" shall have the meanings specified in CERCLA and the terms "solid waste" and "disposal" (or "disposed") shall have the meanings specified in
the RCRA; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that in the event either CERCLA or RCRA is amended so as to broaden the meaning of any tenn defined thereby, such broader meaning shall apply subsequent
to the . effective date of such amendment; and PROVIDED FURTHER, that to the extent that the laws of the State of Texas establish a meaning for "hazardous substance", "release", "solid
waste", or "disposal". which is broader than that gpecified in either CERCLA or RCRA, such broader meaning shall apply. 9.04. Licensee shall indemnify and hold DART harmless against
all cost of environmental clean up to the Property resulting from Licensee's use ofthe Property under this Agreement. 10. Mechanic's LienS Not Permitted. Licensee shall fully pay for
all labor and materials used in, on, or about the Property and will not permit or suffer any mechanic's or materialmen's liens ofany nature to be affixed against the Property by reason
of any work done or materials furnished to the Property at Licensee's instance or request. 11. Maintenance of Completed hnprovements. After the Permitted hnprovements have been constructed,
they shall be maintained by the Licensee in such a manner as to keep the Property in a good and safe condition with respect to Licensee's use; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, with respect to the
warning protection devices installed as Permitted hnprovements, such devices shall be maintained by the Railroad, upon acceptance of installation in accordance with approved plans, subject
to reimbursement therefor by Licensee. In the event the Licensee fails to maintain the Property as required, upon discovery, DART shall notify Licensee of such occurrence in writing.
In the event Licensee sball not have remedied the failure within ten (10) days from the date of such notice, DART shall have the right, but not the obligation to remedy such failure
at the sole cost and expense of Licensee. In the event DART exercises its right to Spectrum Drive 30f6 
remedy Licensee's failure, Licensee agrees to immediately pay to DART all costs incurred by DART upon demand, . 12. Future Use by DART. 12.01. This license is made expressly' subject
and subordinate to the right of DART to use the Property for any purpose whatsoever, 12.02. In the event that DART shall, at any time subsequent to the date ofthis Agreement, at its
sole discretion, determine that the relocation of the Permitted Improvements shall be neeessary or convenient for DART's use ofthe Property, or that the crossing must be modified, including
but not limited to the installation of grade crossing signals, Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense make such modifications or relocate said Permitted Improvements so as not
to interfere with DART's or DART's assigns use ofthe Property. In this regard, DART may, but is not obligated to, designate other property for the relocation of the Permitted Improvements,
A minimum of thirty (30) days written notice for the exercise of one or more of the above actions shall be given by DART, and Licensee shall promptly commence to make the required changes
and complete them as quickly as possible. 13. Duration of License. This license shall terminate and be of no further force and effect (a) in the event Licensee shall discontinue or abandon
the use of the Permitted Improvements; (b) in the event Licensee shall relocate the Permitted Improvements from the Property; (c) upon termination in accordance with paragraph 1 &ofthis
Agreement, whichever event first occurs. 14. Compliance With Laws and Rerrulations. Licensee agrees to abide by and be governed by all laws, ordinances and regulations ofany and all
governmental entities having jurisdiction over the Licensee and by railroad regulations, policies and operating procedures established by the Railroad, or other applicable railroad regulating
bodies, and Licensee agrees to indemnifY and hold DART harmless from any failure to so abide and all actions resulting therefrom. Licensee acknowledges the current applicability of federal
and state railroad regulatory agency requirements for the blowing of whistles when approaching at-grade public and private road crossings. 15. Indemnification. 15.01. Licensee shall
defend, protect and keep DART and Railroad forever harmless and indemnified against and from any penalty, or damage, or charge, imposed for any violation of any law, ordinance, rule
or regulation arising out of the use ofthe Property by Licensee, whether occasioned by the neglect ofLicensee, its employees, officers, agents, contractors or assigns, or those holding
under Licensee; 15.02. Licensee shall at all times protect, indemnify and it is the intention of the parties hereto that Licensee hold DART and Railroad harmless against and from any
and all loss, cost, damage or expense, including attorney's fees, arising out of, or from any accident or other occurrence on or about the Property causing personal injury, death, or
property damage, except when caused by the willful misconduct or negligence of DART or Railroad, theirofficers, employees or agents, and then only to the extent ofthe proportion ofany fault determined against DART for its willful misconduct or negligence; 15.03. Licensee shall at all
times protect, indemnifY and hold DART and Railroad harmless against and from any and all loss, cost, damage or expense, including attorney's fees, arising out of or from any and all
claims or causes of action resulting from any failure of Licensee, its officers, Spectrum Drive 4of6 
employees, agents, contractors or assigns in any respect to comply with and perform all the requirements and provisions hereof. 16. Action Upon Tennination of License. At such time as
this license may be terminated or cancelled for any reason whatever, Licensee, upon request by DART, shall remove all improvements and appurtenances owned by it, situated in, under or
attached to the Property and shall restore the Property to the condition existing at the date ofexecution ofthis License. at Licensee's sole expense. 11. Assignment. Licensee shall not
assign or transfer its rights under this Agreement in whole or in part, or permit any other person or entity to use the License bereby granted without the prior written consent ofDART
which DART is under no obligation to grant. 18. Methods ofTermination. This Agreement may be terminated in any ofthe following ways: 18.0 I. Written Agreement ofboth parties; IS.02.
By either party giving the other party thirty (30) days written notice. IS.03. By either party, upon failure ofthe other party to perform its obligations as set forth in this Agreement.
19. Miscellaneous. 19.01. Notice. When notice is permitted or required by this Agreement, it shall be in writing and shall be deemed delivered when delivered in person or when placed,
postage prepaid, in the U.S. Mail, Certified, Return Receipt Requested, and addressed to the parties at the following addresses: LICENSOR: Dallas Area Rapid Transit P. O. Box 660163
Dallas, Texas 15266·1210 Attn: Railroad Management LICENSEE: Town ofAddison P. O.Box 144 Addison, Texas 15001 Attn: Director ofPublic Works Either party may from time to time designate
another and different address for receipt ofnotice by giving notice ofsuch change ofaddress. 19.02. Attorney Fees. Any signatory to this Agreement who is the prevailing party in any
legal proceeding against any other signatory brought under or with relation to this Agreement shall be entitled to recover court costs and reasonable attorney fces from the non-prevailing
party. 19.03 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed under and in accordance with the laws ofthe State ofTexas. 19.04 Entirety and Amendments. TIlis Agreement embodies the entire
agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings, ifany, relating to the Property and the matters addressed herein, and may be amended or supplemented
only by a written instrument executed by the party against whom enforcement is sought. Spectrum Drive 50f6 
· 19.05. Parties Bound. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the executing parties and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
19.06. Number and Gender. Words of any gender used in this Agreement shall be held and construed to include any other gender; and words in the singular shall include the plural and vice
versa, unless the text clearly requires otherwise. ... ,I IN 􀁾􀁓WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement in multiple originals this -f..t.Uday 􀁯􀁦􀁾􀁾,Iw... LICENSOR: DALLAS
AREA RAPID TRANSIT 􀁂􀁙􀀺􀁾􀀠•􀀮􀁡􀀮􀀭􀀢􀁒􀁏􀁧􀁥􀁾I"lI PresidentlExecutive Director LICENSEE: TOWN OF ADDISON 􀀭􀀻􀁹􀀺􀁋􀁾􀀠􀁗􀁾􀁊􀀮􀁾􀀠Printed Name: 'Rc>N. 􀂥􀁌􀁉􀁔􀁉􀁾􀀠Title: elT'(
􀀱􀀧􀀡􀁜􀁾􀁳􀀮􀁊􀀮􀀮􀀠APPROVED AS TO FORM: 􀁾􀀠office ofDART General Counsel Spectrum Drive 60f6 
EXHJBITA KELLER (Not to Scale) j}jtI ADDISON CIRCLE VALLEY • ADDISON AIRPORT '_ • _ FUTURE ROADWAY ALIGNMENTS 100 FUTURE D.A.R.T. TRANSFER CENTER FUTURE HIGHWAY-RAIL CROSSING EXHIBIT
1 -STUDY AREA: FUTURE SPECTRUM DRIVE EXTENSION 
9601 S 8 RESOLUTION RESOLUTION Oollas Ar&a Rapid Transit . .(I( the DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT (Executive Committee) Grant o( a License (or an At-Grade Public Road Crossing in Addison
WHEREAS, the Town of Addison has requested an at-grade public road crossing on Spectrum Drive to cross the Cotton Belt railroad right-of-way; and WHEREAS, by Board Resolution No. 960033,
DART adopted a policy to reduce the number of public and private at-grade crossings; and WHEREAS, the Federal IWlroad Administration and the Texas Department of Transportation have similar
policies to eliminate or consolidate public and private at-grade, highway-rail crossings; and WHEREAS, because no realistic closure possibilities exist, and the proposed at-grade road
crossing is a critical element in Addison's proposed Addison Circle development, additional warning protection devices will be added at existing crossings in lieu of closure. NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED by the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors that the PresidentlExecutive Director or his designee is authorized to execute a license (or an at-grade public road
crossing in Addison, as shown in Attachment I, subject to the Town of Addison providing additional warning protection devices at existing at-grade public road crossings in Addison, Texas
at a cost to the Town of$300,OOO. SandyG on U Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: DART Counsel PresidentlExecutive Director August 13, 1996 Date S16.SAM/skh 08/13/96·3:18 PM 
(Nol to Scale) • ADDISON AIRPORT '_._ FUTUREROADWAY AUGNMENTS 7a 􀁾􀀺􀁃􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁒􀀠EXHIBIT 1 • STUDY AREA: FUTURE HIGHWAY·RAIL CROSSING j-FUTURE SPECTRUM DRIVE EXTENSION 
,I j ,Cotton Belt Rail Line-l . , Spectrum Drive Crossing J Town ofAddison ] 1 July 18, 1996 I ] I DeShazo, Tang & Associates, Inc. 400 S. Houston Street, Suite 330 Dallas, TX 75202-4802
phone 214.748.6740 fax 214.748.7037 
Cotton Belt Rail LineSpectrum Drive Crossing Town ofAddison Tony R. Tramel, P. E. July 18, 1996 DeShazo, Tang & Associates, Inc. 400 S. Houston Street, Suite 330 Dallas, TX 75202-4802
phone 214.748.6740 fax 214.748.7037 
DeShazo, Tang & Associates, Inc. Engineers + Planners 400 South Houston, Suite 330 Dallas, Texas 75202-4802 2141748-6740 + FAX 214n48-7037 -! TedJnicalMemorandmn To: Bryant Nail, Columbus
Realty Trust From: DeShazo, Tang & Associates, Inc. Date: July 18,1996 Re: Cotton Belt Rail Line -Spectrum Drive Crossing; DT&A No, 96066 PURPOSE The purpose of this memorandum is to
provide the staff and Board of Directors of Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DAR1) with technical infonnation for the evaluation of constructing a public atgrade crossing ofthe Cotton Belt
rail line right-of-way and the :future extension of Spectrum Drive in the Town ofAddison, Texas. RECOMMENDATION The Town of Addison, Texas, plans to extend Spectrum Drive from its current
temllnUS at Arapaho Road to Airport Parkway as shown in Exhibit 1. The roadway will serve as a major collector street with a fuur-lane cross-section. Alignment of the Spectrum Drive
eatension intersects the DARTowned Cotton Belt rail line, Based on analyses which consider impact to train operations, public investment justification, safety, and precedent, the construction
of an appropriately designed atgrade highway-rail crossing is recommended. 
July 18, 1996 BACKGROUND The future Spectrum Drive and the existing Quorum Drive will be the major north-south corridors within the planned Addison Circle. Addison Circle, shown in Exhibit
2, is a major planned mixeduse neighbor:bood under construction just west of the Dallas North Tollway. The jointly conceived public-private development which is supported by local development
tax incentives will ultimately consist of 3,000 multi-fiunily residential units, 400,000 square feet of retail space, and 2,500,000 square feet ofoffice space. The extension of Spectrum
Drive will intersect the existing, DART -owned Cotton Belt rail line. Implementation of an at-grade crossing at this location is recommended based on the following meters (supplemental
iaformation is provided in the Appendix): => hlmact to Train Operations: The distance between the five existing at-grade crossings of the Cotton Belt rei! line in the Town of Addison
lie within a distance of approximately one mile as shown in Exhibit 3. The future Spectrum Drive crossing lies between the southbound service road ofthe Dallas North Tollway and Quorum
Drive. The urban character and the proximity of at-grade highway-rei! crossings along the Cotton Belt rail line manipulate the conditions under which trains must operate. Specifically,
trains must travel at very low speeds, approximately ten miles per hour, to safely maneuver within the area. Due to these operational constraints, an additional at-grade crossing on
the Cotton Belt rail line will have little effuct, if any, upon existing and future train operations. => Public Investmeat: The justification of public investmeat is a common issue.
A frequently applied economic evaluation tool is the benefit-oost (h/c) analysis. This analysis determines Vllhether benefits accruing from public works projects exceed the costs of
construction, maintenance, and operation. The North Ceatral Texas Council of Govemmeats (NCTCOG) has developed a procedure known as the "RailroadlRoadway Grade Separation Needs Assessmeat:
A Benefit-Cost Model" for this pwpose. As with other hlc ratio models, a calculated ble ratio greater then 1.0 indicates the investmeat is justified; a calculated blc ratio less than
1.0 indicates the investmeat is not justified; and a hie ratio equal to 1.0, the "breakawn" point, indicates the investmeat benefits are equal to the investmeat costs. Pagel 
July 18. 1996 In the NCTCOG model, the "benefit" tenns include eliminating the following annual costs: • vehicle delay, • futallty, injury, and property damage vehicle accidents, • vehicle
idling, • crossing maintenance costs, and • gate operation at grade crossings wtth freight andlor transit operations. The "cost" term consists of the annualized cost of grade separation
construction and maintenance. Values used in the application of the NCTCOG model were updated where available and are referenced in the Appendix. Results of the economic evaluation for
grade separating the Cotton Belt rail line at Spectrum Drive provided a benefit-cost ration of only 0.11. The benefits ofthe grade separation is only $.11 for every $1.00 invested. Therefore,
the funding required for this public investment is a poor one and is not justified using this accepted engineering evaluation tecbnique. Despite being identified as one of three rail
lines being considered as the future right-of-way for DART's "North Crosstown Corridor", the magnitude oftrain activity required to justifY grade separation from a benefit-cost perspective
is not anticipated. (NOTE: The North Crosstown Corridor is a future eastlwest travel corridor in the northern portion of DART's service area. The Cotton Belt, one ofthree corridors being
considered, is shown in DART's Transit System Plan for Year 2010 in Exhibit 4.) 􀁾􀀠 􀁾Nationally and in the State of Texas, abont half ofall at-grade bighway-rail crossings incidents
occur where traditional "active" warning devices (flasbing lights or flashing lights wtth gates automatically activated by approacbing trains) are in place. A new concept in active warning
devices fur at-grade highway-rail crossings is being implemented in the United States. These systems include full 􀁢􀁩􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁬􀀠approach-lane and departure-lane (i.e. "four quadrant'')
gates in concert wtth non-mountable curbs and medians of at least 100 feet conceptually ilInstrated in Exbibit 5. Page 3 
July 18, 1996 At a test evaluation location in North Carolina, crossings of an at-grade rail line were video taped under fuur different rail/roadway protection conditions fur 20 week
periods. This included the base conditions, installation of a non-mounted median, installation of fuur-quadrant gated system, and the raised median and fuur-quadrant gate system. Violations
of the devices were noted for each condition. The average number of violations of the grade crossing decreased from 43 per week with the traditional active warning devices to only one
per week with the fuur-quadrant gate system with non-mountable medians, (a 98 percent decrease). This represents a significant reduction in risk and accident reduction of rail/roadway
crossings. With the opportunity to construct a new highway-rail crossing at the future Spectrum Drive extension, implementation of a fuur-quadrant gate system with non-mountable medians
and curbs is considered feasible and appropriate in view ofthis comprehensive study. =:> Precedent: In recent years, several new at-grade highway-rail crossings have been requested from
and granted by DART including the fullowing: • the SH-190 George Bush Turnpike service roads • the Collins Boulevard connector to the US-75 North Central Expressway northbound service
road in Richardson • the Baylor Parkway in Grapevine • Industrial Boulevard in Grapevine (under the stipulation that two existing crossings are to be closed) DART resolution 960033 established
a policy on the preservation and use of DART-owned railroad rights-of-way fur future transit use. However, as shown by the cases identified above, regional growth and development and
site-specific conditions indicate that each crossing request be evaluated on a case-by-case basis considering the feasibility, practicality, and merit. DART STAFF DISCUSSIONS Representative's
from Columbus Realty Tru·st met on two occasions with DART staff to discuss the issue ofthe future rail grade crossing of Spectrum Drive and the Cotton Belt rail line. During these these
Page 4 
July 18, 1996 discussions, DART staff indicated their willingness to examme alternatives to a full grade separation at the future Spectrum Drive extension. Using material contained within
this report and knowledge of alternate types ofsafety concepts, (i.e., four quadrant gate systems and non-mountable median barrier approaches to crossings), DART staff was conditionally
receptive to the Town of Addison's request for an additional at grade crossing at Spectrum Drive. DART staff indicated that, ifthe Town was willing to modify other at-grade crossings
in the town, such improvements would offset any misgivings created by the provision of this new crossing, thereby effecting an overall improvement in vehicle and rail safety. This appears
to be a win-win proposal for the Town and DART. For purposes ofthe DART staff discussions, it was indicated that the incremental costs of a fourquadrant gated system with non-mountable
medians and curbs over a conventional gated crossing was approximately $150,000 at each crossing. It was originally proposed that a four-quadrant gated system be installed at Spectrum
Drive and Quorum Drive. Upon closer inspection, applying the four-quadrant gated system at Quorum Drive was considered inappropriate given the existing conditions. Ahematively, the existing
rail crossing at Addison Road was determined to be an ideal candidate location for safety enhancements considering the traffic volume, lack of a median, and the existing railroad gate
protection. Assuming two highway-rail crossings in the Town, a total of $300,000 was identified as the potential funds required for raiVroadway investments considered for approval of
an at-grade crossing at Spectrum Drive. DART staff indicated their support ofsuch a request from the Town of Addison and would place the item on the DART Board's consent agenda. Due
to the overall safety enhancements and operational improvements for rail activity, staff feels their support ofthe Town of Addison's request is justified. This approach provides a creative,
more reasonable, alternative to grade-separating Spectrum Drive which achieves mutually positive results for both DART and municipal constituents such as the Town of Addison. It is believed
that such a result is executable and negotiable that would allow for the implementation of an at-grade highway-rail crossing at the Cotton Belt rail line and the future extension ofSpectrum
Drive. PageS 
(Not to Scale) Ifmm ADDISON CIRCLE • ADDISON AIRPORT '_._ FUTl.JlIE ROADWAY ALIGNMENTS 􀁗􀀣􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁒􀀠R EXHIBIT 1 -STUDY AREA: VALLEY FUTURE IDGHWAY-RAIL CROSSING ..,.. FUTURE SPECfRUM
DRIVE EXTENSION 
Oc:JO.L:j._. " " '. , ' Polenlial Civic Program Areo ' 1., P1.1Wl, 􀀦􀁲􀁫􀁾􀀠2. Medium DelUity 􀀱􀁬􀀮􀂢􀁉􀁪􀁬􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁩􀁾􀀱􀀠3. Atu Dlstriet/E:dstifli 􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁦􀁾􀁵􀁮􀁥􀁥􀀠, &. Theatre
Cetltre 'j 4. 􀁆􀁕􀁨􀀡􀁾Commerc;lal 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀭􀁥􀁬􀁣􀁰􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀠!l 5. Trame RCbryjPlI'bUo; UJJ:! 􀁓􀁦􀀧􀀱􀁬􀁃􀁾􀀠• 6. Btnqllt Tte1! Pan: 7. Future Transit SllltiOO e THEATRE CENTRE 
\ •••iIJp•••KNOLL TRAIT.. (Dallas) 􀁾.._. NB SERVICE ROAD .............__ DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY SIl SERVICE ROAD ';:;> 􀁾􀀠-1iI...--QUORUM DRIVE __ • __ADDISON ROAD __...__ MIDWAY ROAD

EXHIBIT" 􀁬􀁾􀁁􀁎􀁾􀁮􀀠S'rSltJ\vi PLAN YEAR ;21010 .. , LESEND: caD RAIL o STMlEi. SYSTEM 􀁾􀀠STAnCNt LlI!lHT RAIL (FULL CAPACITY) ---Ll611T RAIL QtmRM5lliATE CAPAClTT) ==-...... COMMlltR
iiAlL v////Ji AlJii<NATlVe i'C1! FUT'II:;!! Sl'UOT 􀁾􀁩􀀡􀁬􀁩􀀵􀀡􀀡􀀠FUTURE SYSTaM iXI'ANSICN HOV LANEil GENERAL MOBILli't __II DAIIT PARTlClPATlCN C=:::J! NO DARi PARnClPAtlcN BUS »TRANSit
CSitEi > 􀁐􀁾􀁾LCCATlCN :J> sus OP!$!AJ"lN6 iAc:uTT aus COI!!llllOIll= .... " 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀠... 'I' __ _ 
Non-Mountable Curbs (100' Minimum) ----11-1=-EXHIBIT 5· CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF A FOUR-QUADRANT GATE SYSTEM wrtH NON·MOUNTABLE CURBS AND MEDIAN BARRIERS 
, APPENDIX 
Application of the North Central Texas Council 􀁯􀁾􀀠Government's nRailroad/RoadWay Grade Separation Needs Assessment: A Benefit-Cost Ratio Model," August 1987 Data Sources: DTA DeShazo,
Tang & Associates, Inc. DART Dallas Axea Rapid Transit COG North Central Texas Council of Governments TTl Texas Transportation Institute HZ Huitt Zollars MODEL Data used from sample
problem in the B/C model MODEL' Data used 􀁦􀁲􀁾􀀠sample 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁢􀁬􀁾􀀠in the B/c model multiplied by a Consumer Price Index of 􀀱􀁾􀀴􀁓􀀠{1983 to 1995} Grade separation is warranted
at grade crossings with a benefit-cost ratio equal to or exceeding One for the given benefit-cost equation. Equation numbers correspond to the document text. I I 1: TIME (HOURS) DELAY
(HOURS) OF CARS PER TRAIN OF TRAIN ::AR (FEETI 􀁔􀁾􀁐􀁅􀁅􀁄􀀠(MPH: VAl.--'!!!!. (FT/MI 0,06 0, 52 MODEL 1l=JMOD • DART ' MODEL 2: 􀁩􀁁􀁾􀁾􀁓􀁔􀁾􀁾􀀠0,'1': (He 􀁾􀀾􀁬􀁌􀀭______________________________
______􀁾__􀁾􀁏􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁏􀁾􀁎􀁾􀁬􀁾􀀠VALUE MODEL lon 3: 6: 7: 􀁅􀁉􀁉􀀰􀁓􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾________________􀁾􀁾__􀁾􀀰􀀧􀁾􀀩􀁾􀀴􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁣􀀽􀁥􀁏􀁇􀁾􀁾􀀠:ION .Y {He 0, )0. MODEL TIME 0, )3 EON
2 􀁾􀁁􀁓1 DELAY (: 􀁔􀁬􀀺􀁍􀁅􀁾􀀠SPEED Tl:MEUNDER SPEED DELAY DAILY LINE HOURS OF DELAY/YEAR) HOURS. I/DAY) I (DAYS/YEAR) 34! I 8: DELAY COST ($/YEARl 9: 10: HOURS OF DELAY) y.lII.UE
OF TIME ($ /HOUR) 􀁾􀀠􀁏􀁆􀁾􀀠DAILY lTE VALUE OF DAILY VALUE !lATE PER YEAR AT 􀁁􀁌􀁌􀁾􀁅􀀠􀁍􀁉􀁌􀁅􀁾􀀠DAYS/YEAR) PER YEAR AT ALL GRADE LE MILES (v: $20.41 .3' EON 5+EON $14, TTl 0.
388: 1001 31 11 166 .67 140 􀀽􀁾􀀠COG COG COG MODEl MODEl 0.0000 X A ) x 0,000 0,000 EON 6 7116/96 Bcmodel2, Page 1 DTA 
11 ANNUALI 12 COST OF ONLY VAJ IE ev RATE (; PER YEAR AT ALL GRADE MILES (DAYS/YEAR) ($/YEAR) RATE ION VMT/YEAR) DAILY TRAFFIC AT GRADE ,/DAY) 381 5920, COG COG 􀁃􀁃􀁾MOD MoDEL 􀁾􀁓􀁔PER
FATAI ($/, I___􀁾􀁏􀁎􀀠(DAYS/YEAR) 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀱􀀳􀁾􀀬􀁛􀀮􀁩􀁬􀁩􀀠($/YEAR) TTl MODEL ;/] VMT/YEAR) U\GE DA ,Y AT GRADE CROSSING ]/DAY) CDST PER ($, (DAYS/YEAR) 14 COST OF PDO (S/YEAR) PDQ
RATE VMT/YEAR) DAILY AT GRADE CROSSING (VEHICLES/DAY) COST PER PDO (S, (DAYS/YEAR) 15 􀁔􀁾􀀠PER STOP DELAY (HOURS) TIME ]) 16 HOURS /YEAR) DAILY AT GRADE (' lAY) TIME PER STOP RATIO
(DAYS /YEAR) 17 COST ($/YEAR) HOURS (YEAR) COST ($ /HOUR) $1,145 0.0066 15000 $34,200 340 $280 0.008: 15' $6.61 3, 0.0369 )35 .0334 EON 10 DTA TTL MODEL EON 11 DTA TTL MODEL MODEL EON
2 DTA ;9 EQN 15 )56 EON 4 140 MODEL $838 1048 EQN 16 SO.80 !B, C RATIo: COST RATIO g '/(11+iT) 0.11 A [DELAY COST ($) B COST OF C COST OF A ($ /YEAR) D COST OF PDO (S/YEAR) E COST ($/YEAR)
I! COST ($/YEAR) G CROSSING COST ($/YEAR) 11 GRADE COST (S/YEAR) iT GRADE COST ($/YEAR) FOR (ZED COST lJSING $20.450 $5.934 $1 145 $280 $838 $1 740 $17,280 $2,175 $418,761 EON 8 EON
12 EQN 13EON 14 EON 17 HZ HZ HZ 􀁾􀀮􀀭􀁲􀁉􀁏􀁎􀀠􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁥􀀨􀁾􀀥􀁮􀁾􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀰􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠Time 50
.1 ITota (SJ !Tota -Grade (s) ($),1 'otagost of Grade Cost 􀁓􀀯􀁙􀁾􀁾􀁜􀀩􀁌􀀭__________________________________􀁌􀀭􀁾􀁓􀁾􀁾􀁾______􀁾􀀠7f18196 BcmodeiZ. Page 2 DTA 
,.........." ,0;.-;: North Cantral Texas COunCil of Governments TO: Tony Tramel DeShazo, Tang and Associates FROM; Wes Beckham DATE: 05·08·96 TELEFAX NUMBER: 214/741-1937 Number of pages
(includi.lg this cover sheet): _______e._..:..I'i..L..________ MESSAGE Please see attached . . We are ttansmltting from a Canon FAX·Li76. Our telefax number i!; (ali) 640·3028. If YOIl
have any problems with this transmittal, please call (817) 695·9240. -r Thank. you. TRANSPORTATION 􀁄􀁅􀁐􀁁􀁾􀁔􀁍􀁅􀁎􀁔􀀠616 􀁓􀀻􀁾􀀠Flag. Drove, 􀁃􀁾􀁮􀀺􀁥􀁲􀁰􀁯􀁩􀁮􀁴􀀠Two P 0, Bex
5588. 􀁁􀁲􀁬􀀼􀁮􀀹􀁴􀁯􀁾􀀬􀀠Texas 76005-5888 (817) 695-9240 
4 The 􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁦􀁩􀁴􀀭􀁣􀁯􀁳􀁴􀀠ratio model measures 􀁾􀁾􀁥􀀠benefits of eliminating the annual costs of delay; fatality, 􀁩􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁪􀁵􀁲􀁹􀀬􀀠and property damage accidents; vehicle idlin<;rl
easem:>..nt maintenance; and 􀁧􀁡􀁴􀁾􀀠operation at grade crossings wit.h freight and/or 􀁾􀁡􀁮􀁥􀁬􀁴􀀠operation 􀁡􀁧􀁡􀁩􀀮􀁾􀁳􀁴􀀠the 􀁣􀁯􀁳􀁾􀀠of grade separation 􀁢􀁥􀁴􀁷􀁥􀁥􀀮􀁾􀀠'the
railroad and the roadway. Gracie separation is wa..'TdIlted at grade crossings with a 􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁦􀁩􀁴􀀭􀁣􀁯􀁳􀁴􀀠􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀀠equal to or exceeding One. Delay Cost Idling Cost Grade Due
to Cost of Due to Crossing Freight and/or + Fat.ality,Injury + Fuel,Oil + Operation and Transit a.nd Property and Ma1nte.:lance Benefit/Cost '" 􀁟􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁏􀁰􀁥􀀻􀀺􀀽􀁾􀀢􀀬􀁡􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁴􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀺􀁬􀀮􀀺�
�􀀧00",·-,-__􀀻􀀻􀀺􀁄􀁡􀁭􀁯􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁯􀀢􀀢􀁥􀁾􀁁􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁣􀀢􀀬􀁣􀁩􀀢􀁩􀁾􀁤􀀢􀀬􀁥􀀮􀀬􀀺􀀡􀁮􀁴􀀢􀀧􀁩􀁳􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁣􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀭􀀬􀁍􀀢􀀢􀁤􀀮􀀽􀁩􀁮􀀽􀀮􀀮􀁴􀀢􀁩􀁥􀁮􀀺􀀻􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁡􀁮􀀽􀁣􀁥􀀽____--,C",o",s",
t,,-_ Annualized Grade Separation Construction and 􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁮􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁥􀀠Cost 􀁃􀁡􀁬􀁣􀁵􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁾􀁳􀀠of the mJdel's vQI!OUS components are outlined below in order of exacu'tion by
means of equations. The period of time durin,;! which a railroad/roadway cross.i.'lg' is blocked off to "he vehicular traffic is a function of the speed of the passing train as well
as the len<;!th and the n\,lll1l::1ar oi its cars_ An additional delay term is also acide:l to the total intersection blocki.'lg tine to account for 􀁴􀀮􀁾􀁥􀀠g-ate closure or flashing
light wa..>-ning tille before and after the arrival of the train: .. 􀁵􀁭􀁢􀁥􀁲􀀠of Cars Average car )Elock.i."lg Tille = Warnin<;r + Per Train x Length (ft.) Delay Average Train x 5,280
Speed· (mph) 􀁾􀀠The average stop tiJ!'e fer 'the road1;71y traffic encounterin<;! a blocked crossin';! is assU!ll9d to c.. one-half of the total blocking time: (2) A-'erage Stop T.:!.."",
::: 0.50 " (Elockirlg Tilne) 
Fi rouzeh NourZad 5 i '. Delay per vehicle passenger stopped at a blacked crossir}';l' is a combination of the average stop time and the, vi!hicle's acceleration delay_ T!":us, multiplying
I this term by the occupancy of the car will result in the total person hours of delay 􀁾􀀭􀁲􀀠vehicle 􀀵􀁾􀁏􀁰􀀺􀀠I r Person Hours = i\uto x (Acceleration .. l\-"eraqe Stop) '"' Persen
Hours of Delay per Occupancy \,. Delay Tiroe Per Vehicle Vehicle Stop . The a!'.l1ua! person hours of delay 􀁾􀁩􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁥􀁤􀀠by /l.t.:tcmobile passen9ers at intersections which ere bloc;k!'rl
due tc the passll<.!e of traLTlS 1s the prcduct of i L the above 􀁴􀁥􀀭􀁾􀁉􀀠the 􀁡􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁵􀁡􀁬􀀠traffic volume at that intersection. and the roadway blockage ratio. The roadway blockage
ratio defines the fraction of the daily 􀁯􀁾􀀭􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁮􀀹􀀠hours of a train 􀁾􀁨􀁩􀁣􀁣􀁾􀀠results 􀁌􀁾􀀠the 􀁢􀁬􀁯􀁣􀀱􀁾􀁡􀁧􀁥􀀠ot'an at-grade cros5ing: (4) Roadway Blockage 􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁬􀀰􀀠􀁾􀀠1rain
􀁆􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁩􀀠􀁾􀀠Blocking Tiroe Operating Hours per Day { 5 ) Annual Impact = Person HOUlS Average Daily Roadway Annualization (Vehicle Passenger of Delay per x Tratfic x Blockage
x Factor Bours of Delay) Vehicle Step Volume Ratio Rail 􀁯􀁾􀀭􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁣􀁮􀀵􀀠􀁌􀁾􀀠􀁵􀁲􀁾􀁾􀀠corridors are 'usually subject to regulations 􀁲􀁥􀁱􀁵􀁩􀁲􀁌􀁾􀁧􀀠lower operating speeds
..nen approac.hin<;! at-grade crossings. Thus, passe.'iget's of transit trains e.'<Pet"ience delays due to the decceleraticn, maximum speed control, and reacceleration of trains at grade
crossings_ Parson hours of transit passenger delay may i:e defined as the diiference between the " passer.ger • s travel t:i.me under the regular operating speed and that under overall
reduced speed due 􀁾􀁯􀀠the 􀁥􀀮􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁥􀀮􀀮􀁣􀁥􀀠of grade crOSSings along the rail corridor: (6) Perscn Hours of T.cansit. " Travel Tiroe Under -Travel T1ma Under Passenger Delay
Reduced Speed Normal Operating Speed 
6 I"irouzeh Nourzad {7i l\r>J1ual T:!:'aI!sit Impact 􀁾􀀠Fer50n Hours of x Daily Line x Annualization (Transit ?assenger Hours Transit Passenger Ridership Factor of Delay) Delay W'nen
ane.lyzinq a tr->..:nsit corridor, the· total arlnual person hours of delay should b? a combination of the vehicle passenger ac'; well as the uansit passenger delays. (8) i\nnual 􀁾􀀠.Annual
Impact in P£"scn x 'lalue of T:i.me ($/Hour) Delay Costs Hours d Delay Another irlp::>:::ta.'"lt criterion in t.he benefits ca.lc.llation is the prevention of accidents i.1Wolving m:Yi:cr
vehides .aril trains at. grade crossings. Suc.':I accidents are divided 􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁯􀀠three categories: fatality, 􀁩􀁮􀁪􀁵􀀭􀁾􀀬􀀠and 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁾􀀭􀁴􀁹􀀠dam'>ge only (pool accidents. Accice.'lt
rates used in this m:xiel are defined as the number of 􀁡􀁣􀁣􀁾􀀧􀀢􀁬􀁴􀁾􀀠per one million 0: 􀁡􀀮􀁾􀁵􀁡􀁬􀀠uaffic 􀁶􀁯􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁴􀀠grade crossings! 􀁎􀁾􀁢􀁥􀁲􀀠of Patal 􀁁􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁤􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁳􀀠per
Year (9 ) Patality Accident = Ave=age Daily TraffiC 􀁁􀁮􀁮􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁺􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁮􀀠Rate At Grat:ie Crossings x FactOJ:' 1,000,000· Number of Injury Acc1dents pi!.F Year (10) Injury Accident
=Average Daily 􀁾􀁡􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁣􀀠Annualization Rate At Grade C!:ossir.gs x FactOJ:' 1,000,000 Numl::er of POO /\,ccidents per Year POO A....-cident 􀁾􀀠Average Daily Traffic Annualization
Rate 􀁁􀁾􀀠Grade Crossings x FactOJ:' 1,000,000 (340) 
7 􀀮􀁦􀁩􀁬􀀢􀁏􀁬􀁉􀁾􀁥􀁨􀀠Nourzac,t Annual accident. costs OJ r.ype cf accider,t can 'th.:m te obtained as shown balow: (,:{ ) Annual Cost 􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹􀀠AVaFage Daily Cost of of
Fatality'" Accident x Traffic x Fatal x Annualization Accidents Rate 1,000,000 Accident Factor ( 13) Annual Cost Injury Average Daily Cost ot of Inju-ry " Accident x Tra!fic Yo 􀁉􀁮􀁪􀁾􀁩􀀠x
Annual1zation Accidents Rate 1,000,000 Accident Factor ( 14) Anrmal Cost :1'00 Av.erage Daily Cost of , of l?DO '" Accider.t x Traffic x Poo x Annualization .l\ccidents Rate 1,000,000
Accident Factor FUel cost. of vehicle idling is 􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁴􀀮􀁾􀁥􀁲􀀠􀁴􀁾􀀠of disutility experienced 􀁾􀁪􀀠m:::t.orists stoppe.:\ at grede crossings. Idling coS'ts cc...'"UT d:.lring vehicle
f S delay period dUe to the blockage of the crossing: ( 15) Idling Time " Acceleration + Average stop per Vehicle Stop Delay Time (hou;rs) calculat.ion of annual 1dling hours is si.:nilar
to that of the vehicle passenger how:s of delay (equtitions 4 and 5) less the auto occupancy factor: ( 16) .i'_'ll1ual Average 􀀡􀁤􀁬􀁾􀁲􀁹􀁧􀀠􀁔􀁾􀁾􀀠Roadway Idling =: Daily Traffic
x par 􀁖􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁣􀁬􀁥􀀠x Blockage x .i'Jmualization Hours Volume stop Ratio Factor l<.nnual idling costs incurre::l at blocked grade crossings can 00 calc-.;late:l as: (17 ) 1ll'.nual
Idlil1.q Cost " Annual Idlir..g Hours x Hour 1y Idling Cost lastly, railroad!roedwai' grade separatio:. e.l.ir:li.nates the annual cost of llaterials, operation, and maintenance of sa:sty
equipment at grade crossings as ;;ell as the cro5sill9s' easement upkeep. 
;;i rOl.\zeh Nour;.:ad a Table I su!mI9.::ize:s the 1.1'lpUt variables and d",scril::es the appropriate units of measure. Also listed are scroe 􀀢􀁴􀁙􀀧􀁾􀁩􀀮􀁣􀁡􀁬􀀠values" which r.-ay
be used for ordt!!r of Iragnitude comparison, or in lieu of sl-ce-r;;pecific ·,rakes. The user is encouraqed to determine site-specific values for all 􀁩􀁮􀁰􀁵􀁾􀀠variables 􀁾􀁯􀀠provide
th'" highest degree of accuracy possible. !t should also J:y;, noted that some 'of , I these referenced values were derived using data specific to the Dallas-Fort I, iWorth area or the
State of Te."".as (e.g., auto CI"...c'..tpancy, accident rates, accident costs l. Tab:es 2 a."ld :3 pertain to accioentdata tox use in the rredal. The accident: data is segreqated in these tn."'ee tables b't aCCident t)'P'!S whiel'l include accida."'lts involving fatalities, .1njuries, c::: property
da.'!1age. Tne medel requires accident rates defined as t.."le nlil1ll:>"--.r of accidents per one million of annual daily traffic at grade 􀁣􀁲􀁯􀁳􀁳􀁩􀁾􀁧􀁳􀀮􀀠Table II lists the acc::iclent
cost p"...r 􀁡􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁤􀀬􀁾􀁴􀀠from the National Safety Council {NSC) and the 'l'e..":as Transportation Institute (TTI). NSC advises the use of the l tTl'I accident rates for ba."lefit.-cost
ratio anaJyses. Tl'I aCC!ident rates were I i !.genEll"ated from accident data collected ti'.roughout the state of Te»..as for 􀁾􀀠: aCC!idents occurring tEbreen trains and auton-otive
ve."1icles at grade crossings. 'Ults figure assllIles a total cost of $576,322 (in 1983 dollars) per fatality_ , This Cost is composed of the value of a person's life to hiITsel! ($461,506),
, t.'le value of a personf Ii! life to others ($114,111) I .:.rls\.lJ:·ance administration costs of $554 per fatalityI a.'Xl acci,dent investigation cost of $151. L 
The application of the m::del is il.lustrated th=ough t.he following e.'!ample which de=nsb:ates 'the m::del proce:lure for a hy;:x>thetical case of rail freight traffic only. 􀁾􀀮􀁍􀁐􀁌􀁅􀀠1:
EXCLUSI'VE FREIGb"T OPEl'AT!ON Assumptions: freight operation Period = 24 hours/day Train !"reque.'lCY '" 15 trains/day Average 􀁾􀁡􀁩􀁬􀁹􀀠Traffic at Grade Crossing " 25,000 vehid.as
Nurrit:er of C= "'5 per Train .. 35 Average Length of car 􀁾􀀠55 feet Average Train Speed " 30 mph Auto CicC'.lpancy = 1.38 passengers/ve.l1icle Warning Delay " O. 0 1 .::72 hours Acceleration
Delay" 0.0035 hours RoaO"'<l.j! J..nnualizaticn FactOl.· " 340 days Value of Time = $4.00/hcur Fatality Accident Rate =0.0038 Injury Accident Rate'" 0.Q162 1'00 Accident Rate" 0.0342
Annualized Grade SeParation Construction Cost " $252, 150 ($2.5 Million Atror'"...ized [fie!: 50 Years at. 10 pe-cent Interest) Annual Grade Separation Maintenance Cost = S1500 􀁾􀀧􀁬􀁵􀁡􀁬􀀠At-Crade
Crossing 􀁾􀁡􀁌􀀧􀁬􀁴􀁥􀁮􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁥􀀠Ccst " $1200 Ar.nual CrOSSl.."lg Safety Equiprrer.t 􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁾􀁴􀁥􀀮􀀧􀁬􀁡􀀮􀁬􀀱􀁣􀁥􀀠Cost " $500 
10 • _Fi rcuzeh Ncurzad 􀁂􀁬􀁯􀁣􀁫􀁩􀀮􀁾􀁧􀀠Time ; 0.01472 + 3S X 55 =0.0269 hours 30 x 5,280 Average Stop 􀁔􀁩􀀮􀁾􀀠'" O.SO x 0.0269 􀁾􀀠0.0134 hours Roadway Blockage P.at10 '" (1 5
x 0.0269)/24 " 0.0168 Delay Per Vehicle Stop =1.38 x (0.0035 + 0.0134) " 0.0234 person hours Fnnual Impact " 0.0234 X 0.0168 x 25,000 y. 340 􀁾􀀠3,342 person hours of delay c€lay Cost:
3,342 x 􀀴􀁾􀁏􀁏􀀠􀁾􀀠$13,368 Cost of 􀁆􀁡􀁴􀁡􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁹􀀠􀁁􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁣􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁳􀀠= (25,000/1,000,000) x 340 x 0.0038 x 6i3,38; 􀁾􀀠21,750 ($/year) Cost of Injury Acddents '" (25,000/1,000,000)
x 340 X 0.0162 y. 12,832 '" 1,767 (;;/'iearJ COST. of PDQ i'.ccide.'1'C.s '" (:25,000/1,000,000) x 􀁾􀀴􀀰􀀠x 1).0342 􀀺􀁾􀀠2,100 '" 610 ($/year) Idling Cost '" 25,000 x (0.0134 + 0.0035)
x 0.0168 x 340 x 0.55 = 1,327 ($/year) !3eneht!Ccst Rat.:!.o '" 13,368 + (21,750 +-1..c.1E2....:t.610) + 1,327 + 1,200 + 500 252,150 + 1500 = 0.16 Benefit/Cost Ratio 􀁾􀀠38,822/252,150
= 0.16 < 1.00 Thereto.::e, grad;;! separation is not w-'"'ral'lted. Table 5 illustrates the appl1c:ati;:m of the m:xl.el through a spreadsheet program forrrat. The axa."1'ple -shO';IJ)
specifies a r.d.Xe.d-US$ rail e>peration which involves cpo-rating freight trains and peak/off-peak transit 􀀤􀁾􀁲􀁶􀁩􀁣􀁥􀀠on the same right-of-way. 
Tl'.ELE 1 REQUIRED INPUT OAT:/>. FOR NCICCG GRADE SEPJI.?JI.'l'ION' NARPANT MODE!. Reqll.i.red Input Data Units Typical , . Values• ,Average Daily Traffic at Grade Crossing Vehicles/Day
100% Freight 60% 􀁐􀁾􀀠40% Off-Peak Total Average Daily 'I:raftic at Grade Crcssir:g Vehicli'sjOay Train Frequency Trains/Day (Freight, Transit Peak, Transit Off-Peak) Train O:-...eration
HOl.!.rs/Day (Freight, Transit Peak, 'Transit 􀁏􀁦􀁦􀀭􀁐􀁾􀁡􀁫􀀩􀀠NurnI:;);;r of Cars Per Train Train/Cars Average Length of Train Car Feet Freight ; 55 Transit .: i4 Average Traia,
Speed l".ilcs!Eour Average Daily Auto 􀁾􀁊􀁰􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁹􀀠 Passengers 1.38 Daily Per Vehicle 1.25 Peak 1.49 Off-Peak " 
TABLE 1 ( Cant. ) REQUIRED lNPUT !:lATA FOR NCI'CCG Required Input Data Units T"ipical Values WarniI1g Delay Acceleration Delay 􀁁􀁲􀁫􀁾􀁵􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁺􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠Factor Value of TiJre NIJI11bar
of Fata1 Accidents at. Grade CrOS$ings Nu.'lLfJer of Ir.jury Accidents at Grade Crossings NumJ::er ot POO Accidents at Grad", Crossings Accident Cost Per Fatal l'.ccident 􀁁􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁤􀁂􀁾􀁴􀀠Cost
Per Injury Accident Accident Cost Fer FDO Accident Idling Cost* Transit Average Travel Time Transit. Line Ridership 􀁦􀁵􀁾􀁵􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁺􀁥􀁤􀀠Grade.Separation .Costs 􀁈􀁯􀁾􀁳􀀠Ds,:,s/Yea:r:.
S/Bour Accidents Acc::l.dents Accidents $/1Iccident $/Hour :Hour/Passenger Persons S/Year 0.01472 (53 Seconds) 0.0035 ( 1 3 Seconds) 340 Freight 280 Transit $4.00 I(In 1985 DoHers):
(See Table 2) (See Table 2) (See Table 2) (See Table 4) (See Table 4) (See Table 4) $0 .. 5S :lIn 1985 Dollars): I $252'/150 i! In 1 985 Dollars): '" 􀁾􀁯􀁵􀁲􀁣􀁥􀀺􀀠AASHTO, ")\ Mal"mal
on User Benefit An<llysis of High-"ay and Bus Transit Improvements," 1978. (tlfclated ValUes 􀁵􀁳􀁩􀀮􀁾􀁧􀀠CP!). 1 
TAStE 2 ,, 1965 GRADE CROSSING ACClOEN'l'S (Train 􀁡􀁾􀀠Motor Vehioles) Accidem:: 􀁾􀀠􀁎􀁵􀁭􀁢􀁐􀁾􀀠of 􀁁􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁤􀁡􀁾􀁴􀁳􀀠Dallas COlii1ty Tarrant County , Fatal Injury 4 (4 fatalities)
17 \26 injured) 2 (2 fatalities) 8 (9 injured) Property Dam3.ge only (POO) 36 20 Average Daily Traffic At Grade Crossings 3,095,544 1,497,079 -,! 
TABLE 3 ACCIDEN"l'S ?ER ONE mUIOlf OF i\NN(JJ\L TRIlFFIC AT GAADE Cil.OSSING Accident Rates 􀁾􀀮􀁣􀁣􀁬􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀠Type Pallas County Tarrant County ,, ,'--------:--------------, Fatal
.., 0.0038 0.0039 Injury 0.0162 0.0157 PCO 0.0342 0.0393 ,, 
TABLE 4 ACCID2NT COST PER ACCOmr !>ISC (al '!TI (b) •, It 1985 dollarsl(1983 dollarsl Fatality Injury $ 217,200 $ 13,800 $ 672,387 •. , $ 12,832 PDQ $ 1,200 $ 2, ]()O " (,,) ';::-:'
"Nat1onal Safety Ccu.'lcil ;: i:: i _ TE:Y..a.s 􀀧􀁲􀀧􀀡􀀢􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁰􀁣􀁲􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀀮􀁾􀀠!nrtitu":e, Cost of }lQtor v-ehiele 􀁁􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁾􀀠
, ' . .---I.......-::..-:: North Central Texas Council Of Qovemments TO: Andy Royse FROM' Was Beckham, Senior Transportation Engineer DATE: 05-24-96 TELEFAX NUMBER: 2141748-7037 Number
of pages (inCluding this cover sheet);_______.-::.5___________ MESSAGE Attached are the page5 showing the updates to the parameters for the raikoad grade separation benefit/cost ratio
model as requested, Concerning the accident cost per accident, please nole ,hat I suggest yo:.! contact TTl to verify the values, I have piovided updated 􀁾􀁡􀁩􀁵􀁥􀁳􀀠based vn applying
a Consumer Price Index (Cpr). However. the CPI may noi iJe a reliable method of ul)datinQ accident costs. ---_._We are lransmittil\g from a Canon FAX-L77S. Ourteleia,: number is (817)
640-3028, If you have any prot.lems wllh this transmittal. please call (51?) 695·9240. Thank. you. TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT em; 􀁳􀀻􀁾􀀠Flags DeIVA. Centerpoint Two ? 0 Box 5888, Arlmgton,
Texas 􀀷􀀶􀀰􀀰􀀵􀂷􀀵􀁾􀀸􀀸􀀠 (8171Sg59240 
r .....' .. .."' . TAIlLE 1 REQU!Rm INFt1l' DATA FOR NC'ICCX:; GRADE SEPARlIT!ON WlIRRI\NT MODEL " Required Input Data Units Typical values Average Daily Traffic at Grade Cross;ng Vehicles/DaY
100% Freight 60% Peak 40t Off-Peak Total Average Daily Traffic at Grade Crossing Vehicles/Day 'l:'rain Frequen..,,:{ Trains/Day (Freight, Transit Fealt, Transit Off-Peak) Trah Operation
!-lours/Day (Freight, Transit Peak,. Transit Off-Peak) N;nnber of Cars Per Train Train/Cars Average Length of Train Car Feet Freight", 55 Transit '" 74 Average Traill Speed MiJes/Hour
Passengers 􀁾􀀠-l . 38 􀀭􀁄􀁡􀁩􀁬􀁹􀁾􀀬􀀠Per Vehicle ; 1.25 Peak : 1.49 Off-Peak •--c-------------.---.,---------'--------
􀁾􀀬􀀠, TABLE 2 Dl\LlJIS-FORT 􀁾AREA 1985 GRlIDE CR03SmG ACCIDENTS (Train and Motor Vehl.cles) Nt1l1lber of Accidents Accident 'ryPe Dallas County Fatal l.b1 y (4 fatalities) ?;.b7 ;¥/Injury
\ ,,6 injured) ,, Property Damage Only I \.0 )6" (POO) , .. , ,􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀂻􀁾􀀭􀀭,, . }<.''erage Dai)y T:t'af. fie 3,095 􀁾􀀠At Grade Crossings -I Tarrant County "i 2 (2 fatalities)
8 (9 injured) 20 1,497,079 I'1Q3 3-YioAfL Iqqy. I 'illS-TOI IWq FA TAL 􀁁􀀺􀁕􀁬􀁄􀁾􀁔􀁓􀀠3 I \ S I. b7 􀁜􀁴􀀮􀀩􀀮􀀩􀁜􀀱􀁾􀀠A,-CLI ClIO ......S13 7 􀁾􀀠J,.b 􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀷􀀠PDO 9 lb t 33 1\.00

• 1 I .... I h::c1clent 􀁾: Dallas CQUIlty I T.arn.nt. Counq, . · '-----; Fatal· ;O.OOI}.OOlB 0.Q039•• : tJ. 􀁏􀁾􀀢􀀠􀁾􀀠􀀡􀁮􀁪􀁾􀀠: 0.0152 0.0157 •• : 0 00&;' I roo :' "tI.0342 0.Q393f__________􀁾__
________􀁾__________ f 
, ' .i' TABtZ 4 '􀁶􀁟􀁬􀁟􀁌􀁾􀁪􀀠vsinc. cPr 􀁾􀀢____􀁾􀀮􀁾__􀁾􀁟􀁟􀀠􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀠J : NSC (a) ; Tl'! (}:)l, \'\ t ____: (1985 dpll2:sH 1993 dollarsl (',,'IS &110:(:» • , I Fatality lrlju..'i'
; S 211,lOO : $ 13,800 ; S 673.397. I. ; $ 12,B32 ; 􀁾􀀠􀁱􀀷􀀶􀁾􀀴􀁬􀀯􀀠fi'$ 18'}'-9':> 1'00 ; $ ! . 1,200 : $ 2,100 ; f> 3045' I {aJ NSC 􀁾􀀠 Na1:ional Satety 􀁃􀁯􀁵􀀮􀁾􀁣􀁩􀀮􀁬􀀠(!;)l
Ttl "Texas '!'ransp::::rtation :r.rti'tl.!':-$, 􀁃􀁯􀁾􀀠o! 􀁍􀁾􀁯􀁲􀀠Vehicle A.."'C.:!.d!mts 11l Texas, 19BS •-..'[ TOOl< iHE trI: VALVeS AtJO VPOA-TcO /HEM F(Z.DM. 􀁉􀁣􀁲􀁾􀀳􀀠$ ,0
tC(CfS 11 By 􀁖􀁓􀁉􀁎􀁾􀀠A CO!0SVoVtEYl-y.?r1-lct uJOt:x. 􀁈􀁏􀁗􀁦􀀺􀁖􀁢􀁾􀀩􀀠It MAy BE f3G$! I F-you CONTAC.TeD TTI to ve-(2.(F'" SINC£: n.\&: cPI M!6I-lT NOT iMe.k. ORTJ2.EN 0 4 CC
0 fLPl /J6 ,0 CPI 􀁔􀀯􀁺􀀧􀁻􀀻􀁎􀁾􀀠. 
_. I; -:. , . , ' " I .T+xas Transportation Insti4tte The Texas A&M 􀁕􀁮􀁩􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁳􀁩􀁴􀁹􀀠Sfstem I ,I 'j It,i i· Telephone: (817) 􀀲􀀶􀀱􀀭􀁾􀀶􀀶􀀱􀀠, i I Pax: (817) 461-1239 jl I 'I.'.
., . JSystem Operation 􀁍􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁉􀁴Program Number of pages faxe4: 3 (includes title page) l' Date: ro Yv/'7 b '! Time: 􀀱􀀱􀀱􀁾􀀠I! . . 􀁾Sent By: 􀁖􀁾􀀠Sf:c-c-tSr-'y I ,i. Texas1j,Transportation
􀁉􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁴􀁵􀁴􀁥􀀠i ! ,1600 Ej. Lamar Blvd.} Suite 120 i ,,J ' 1lington, TX 76011 ! ; , , . ; TO: 􀁾􀀫􀀮􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀀮􀀠Sfpn.er ! ! J ! , /}T 1 : 􀁾􀀠, .i" . . IJ;I I Special CommentsYlnstruction:
. . I j 􀁾􀀠{:itfe 􀀨􀁾􀀠tL4 vpP(w/-e. t).. c c cleJf A:;Pc..tl..l 􀁾􀀠i t"1..! t, 
" ,~ National Safety 􀁾Council -, , i; , , . : i 1 ,.I I,;! Estfmating the Cost of Uniqtentiona/:lnjiiries, 1994 􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀭􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀬􀁾􀀻􀀭
􀀬􀀮􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭j l '. j '"'""',,,' ',;,'y ",,",11 m"" Jm'''' "'"􀁾􀀽􀀬􀀮􀀠re_' 23.'.1".".,.;'".",,,,,,L 􀀻􀀱􀀽􀀢􀁾􀀧􀁏􀀠" costs of falal and nonfatal unintention.1 injuries to illustrate,
Motor Vehicle 􀁔􀁲􀁾􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁣􀀠Accidents (filth Edirlon}-ANSi Standard the., impact on the nation's economy. THe cOSts <Ire a measure of the doliars spent and income norJreceived because
of accidents, injuries, and fatalities. I: is anbther way to measure the importance ofprevention work, I, Estimating costs is not 􀁥􀁸􀁡􀁾􀁴􀀠-they bn only be approximated. The estimates
depend on many 􀁾􀁡􀁣􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁳􀀬􀀠Effective with the 1993 bulletin, thoe Council extensively revised its cost l",s:irl}al:ngp,roqe.clwes.Nev.' 􀁣􀀰􀁭􀁰􀁯􀁲􀀮􀁥􀁾􀁴􀁬􀀻􀀠were, added, new
benchmarks and inflation factors 􀁡􀁤􀁯􀁰􀁴􀁥􀁾􀀬􀀠and a new discount' r.te of 4 percent was assumed. For 􀁾􀁨􀁪􀁳􀀠reason, :he cost estimates shown hsre are not comparabl4 to tl)ose
puhlished in the 1992 or earlier bolietins, ' I Triis bulletin 􀁳􀁨􀀨􀀩􀁾􀁳􀀧􀀠how costs 􀁣􀁡􀁾􀀠be estimated for a community or state. The figures ShOUld br used to estlm3!" the actual
costs to' the nation of 􀁤􀁥􀁡􀀡􀁨􀁾􀀠and injuries. The comprshensive cost ligures (discussed 􀁢􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁷􀁊􀀠!:hould 􀁢􀁾􀀠used for cost benefit analyses. ' i It is important (0 fOUI,d
an estim.lle, to show it is 􀁡􀁾􀀠,Jp:-cximation, not ar. exact figure. The 􀁾􀁥􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁤􀁥􀁤􀀠rule is: ir 􀁴􀁾􀁾􀀠'estimate is-less than $3:000,000,tround to the nearest 5100,000;
Ii $3,000,000 to $'10,000,000'rouna to nearest S500,OOO; if $10,000,00G to $30,OOO,boo round to nearest S 1 􀀬􀁏􀁏􀁄􀁾􀁏􀁏􀁏􀀻􀀠if more 􀁩􀁾􀁡􀁲􀀻􀀠􀁓􀀳􀀰􀁾􀁯􀁯􀁯􀀬􀁯􀁤􀁉􀁏􀀠rour.d to
nearest $5,000,000. 1 : COST OF MOTOR-VEH'Cl1ACCI DENTS The cakulable COS!S oi motor-vehide aC;ddents are wage and productivity l05Se5, medical expenses.. adtninisrratlve expense:>#
m('lt(H 􀁶􀁾􀀮􀁲􀁤􀁤􀁥􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁤􀁡􀁴􀁮􀁾􀁧􀁥􀀯. .and employer 􀁣􀀨􀀮􀀾􀁾􀀮􀁳􀀬􀀠(See the 􀁤􀁥􀁦􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁴􀁢􀁾􀁾􀀠on 􀀺􀁾􀁥􀀠reverse fora description of wholt is included in each 􀀮􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁾􀀡􀁬􀁴􀀩�
�,i,n 􀀱􀀹􀀡􀀧􀁦􀀴􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀠costs ;:f fll thes/: !tems. iOl,each cie?th (no! ra:ai'BcCld,,,)t),, !Ojuf')"(not!O)ury aQcldenlJ; arid propo.rt)' . 􀁤􀁑􀁭􀁡􀁾􀂣􀀮􀁾􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁲􀀮􀁴􀀧􀁶􀁶􀁥􀁬􀀭􀁥􀀺􀀧􀀠,"
:. "'I'" : " I., I.Death, , ........ , ........• ' . , , .. j' ••.•••• $ 920,000 Nonfatal Disab!ing Inj,";Y .... , .. ". j' , , ....•• $ 34,209 1PrOj1eI1:Y Damage Accloent i i (including
minor i,njur;es) ..••.... 'I' . , . " .... $ 6,600 , 􀁾􀁯􀀠􀁥􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁭􀁡􀁬􀀷􀀠(he CO$! of motor.vehicleiaccidents that OCCllr whIle on the Job, see ·Cost of Other Inj4'ies" below. i Motor-vehicle
injuries by severity; 􀁅􀁾􀀡􀁬􀁲􀁮􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁳􀀠are gi\".ln ,.ere of the 1994 costs by severity of 􀁩􀁾􀁪􀁵􀁲􀁩􀁾􀁳􀀬􀀠as defined in . I D16.1-1989. 􀁔􀁨􀁾􀁥􀀠injury severity deSignations
are sometimes referred to as "A,i' "B," and "C." : ! ',' '! "Incapacitating irjjury' ........ , •. '. '.,! ....... $46,000 'Nonincapacilating evident injury"' .....', •.•... $14,000
"Possible injury'! ........' ••.. , ; .• ; . J .. , . . .. $ 8,800 ' !,' : ' I These 􀁥􀁅􀁬􀁩􀁲􀁮􀁡􀁬􀁥􀁾􀀠rr.ay,be, nil.!p\ul 􀁦􀁾􀀬􀁲􀀠c,tie$an8 'l.3tenn'l.! do not use the con.tept
of uctfsabling7injury (see definitions). Estimates csed forldsaths or propertY damage accidents are not changed by using these estimates,! , ' :, JI' i" ,,' Co,t·bel1efit 􀁡􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁹􀁳􀁩􀁳􀀮􀀠􀁔􀁨􀁾􀀻
iigureS abovJ are appropriate for measuring the ectJnoniic loss to a community resulting from past motor.vehi<!le 􀁡􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁾􀁴􀁳􀀮􀀠They 􀁳􀁨􀁯􀀧􀁾􀁬􀁤􀀠not be used, however, in
comp'uting the 􀁾􀁯􀁬􀀡􀁡􀁲􀀠v41ueof rut"re benefits due , ' to traffiC safetf measures because they' do 􀁮􀁾􀁴􀀠mclude the value of ayer:on's 􀁮􀁡􀁾􀂷􀁊􀁲􀁡􀁬􀀠􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁩􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁯􀀠live
longer or t? protect the 􀁱􀁵􀁾􀁬􀀡􀁴􀁹􀀠or (me's hfe. That IS, tDe eConbmlC Joss 􀁥􀁓􀁾􀁬􀁭􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁳􀀠do not induce what pe,pie are 􀁷􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁮􀁧􀀠to; pay 􀁦􀁣􀁾􀁲􀀠iniproved safety.
Recent work has beer. done fo create the necessarY theoretical groundwork and Jmpi;ical 􀁶􀁴􀁩􀁬􀁵􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁾􀀠or 􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁾􀁲􀁹􀀠CO;15 􀁵􀁾􀁤􀁥􀁲􀀠the 􀁦􀁬􀁷􀁡􀁩􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁮􀁦􀀺􀁾􀀤􀀠to pay"
or compr'ehensitfe cost Foncept. 􀁅􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁭􀁾􀁴􀂣􀀡􀁳􀀠;n the ic.llowing section are based or the 􀁣􀁜􀀾􀁾􀁰􀁩􀁥􀁨􀁥􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁜􀀧􀁥􀀠cost concept a..d should be used for 􀁣􀁯􀁳􀁴􀀺􀁢􀁥􀁲􀁩􀀶􀁦􀁩􀁾􀁡􀁮􀁡
􀁬􀁲􀁳􀁥􀁳􀀠wherever feasible. I , i 'I , Comprehensive costs of motor-vehide acddents. In "dditio!1 to the e¢onomic cost componeni!;,listed "bove, the folbvling 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁰􀁾􀁾􀁨􀀢􀀬􀁾􀁳􀁩􀁶􀁥􀀬􀀠cost
eStimateS a!soinc,iude,.,<, measure of the ""!!,Ie of lost 􀁱􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹􀀠af life which was obtained through 􀀮􀁥􀁮􀀺􀁰􀁩􀁲􀁩􀁣􀁾􀁦􀀠studies Sf wha\ pliloeie 􀁡􀁾􀀡􀀬􀁉􀁾􀁬􀁊􀁹􀀠pay
to reduce 􀁴􀁮􀁥􀁬􀁾􀀠saf;:;' and 􀁨􀁥􀁾􀁬􀁴􀁨􀀠risks, 􀀡􀁾􀀻􀀬􀀠r994 1tlS average comprehenSIVe CrSl.S or. a Pt1; pe;st 􀁢􀀧􀁾􀀺􀁉􀁾􀀺􀁷􀁥􀀬􀁾􀀻􀀧􀀮􀀠,;" i' . i;!Oeath , .. , ••• ",
.. , • , ....•. , ',' .. , .!. • •• $2,890,000 Incapacitating injury .... " .. '..•:.... " ..••. $193,000 Ncnincapacitating evident injury. ,' .....', ...... $44,000 􀁐􀁯􀁳􀁾􀁩􀁢􀁬􀁥􀀠injury
..1. .......'.: •....:••...!....... $23,000 No inJury •.. , ..:..... , .. ,. , , .........:....•... $2,600 Because the lostlqualily of me inciilded in:these figures does , , net represent
realjincome. 1101 received Or Txpenses incurred, they.hcu:d not 􀁢􀁾􀀠used to determine the economic impact of past accidents. i 
i These figures co nCI include an)' estimate oj prOperlyCOST OF OTHER 􀁉􀁾􀁊􀁕􀁒􀁉􀁅􀁓􀀠􀁤􀁡􀁭􀁡􀁧􀁾􀀠or nonc,sabling injury costs and srou1d not be used to 1 e;t;mate the 􀁴􀁯􀁴􀁾􀁬􀀠ec.:momk
Joss to a 􀁣􀁯􀁲􀁮􀁭􀁾􀁮􀁩􀁴􀀩􀀧􀀠irom 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁣􀁾!3ec2use obtaining information en thejnu:nber ;3;"ld severity of kinds of injuries; , nonfatal injuries from hOmE'1 public t,onmotor-venide,
and To estimate,the cost of a work-mo\or-ven,de accia". ,-""'o'ork is dlificult, the best approach is to! estimate total COSts. on 􀁻􀀡􀀧􀁔􀁬􀁯􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁾􀁶􀁥􀁨􀁫􀁬􀁥􀀠􀁾􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁩􀀺􀀠'."hiJa
on :the job}, use. work injur,' the "per death-basis using these 􀁡􀁶􀁾􀀨􀁡􀁾􀁥􀁳􀀺􀀠! costs, inc!uding:employer costs, if there Js reason to believe lh<lt uninsured costs resulted Irom:the
􀁩􀁮􀁪􀁾􀁲􀁹􀀮􀀠If no uninsuredHome injuries, per death .......... Ij••••••.• $3,500,000 costs occurred, 􀁾􀁳􀁥􀀠figures ·for eith"er motor..vehide accidentsPublic nonmotor-vehicie injuries.
per qearh .... $3,200,000 or work injuriesiexduding 􀁾􀁭􀁰􀁩􀁯􀁹􀀮􀀮􀁥􀁲􀀠􀁣􀁯􀁳􀁾􀀮􀁗􀁯􀁲􀁾􀀠iniuries, per death, I ,without employer costs ...•..•..••...... $2_,000,000 wilh employer
costs .•..•.•...•. r...... $24,100,000 􀁄􀁅􀁆􀁾􀁎􀁉􀁔􀁉􀁏􀁎􀁓􀀠, I I.,,\ultiplying the number of deaths times these overage costs 􀁜􀀧􀁖􀁡􀁾􀁥􀀠and produdth'ity losses; 􀁩􀁮􀁤􀁵􀁤􀁾􀀠the
totll o( wages and fringt:!gives an estimate C'f the economic loss 􀁾􀁵􀁥􀀠to both deaths and beiiefits together 􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁨􀀠an estimate of the 􀁲􀁥􀁰􀀡􀁾􀁣􀁥􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀼􀁯􀁳􀁴􀀠value of
injuries in these caiegories. I hoosehold serviais. Also includes travel dei"ay for :noter.vehicl. 􀁔􀁨􀁾􀀠$24,100,000 work injury. figure "(ilh en:p:oyer costs in􀁡􀁣􀁣􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁳􀁾􀀠cludes
the monetary value of tIme 􀁬􀁯􀁳􀁾􀁢􀁹􀀠Uninjured workers who :were directly or indirectly involted in injuries. Losses Medica! 􀁥􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀺􀁰􀁥􀁮􀁾􀁥􀁳􀁨􀁮􀁤􀁵􀁤􀁰􀀺􀀠􀁣􀁯􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁲􀀠fees;
􀁨􀁏􀁓􀁐􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁊􀀠di'!rgP-S, the cmi! 01 from 'fiies are the only property damagr costs included in the' medicines, future 1medicat costs, 􀁾􀀺􀀧􀁬􀁣􀁬􀀠􀁡􀁡􀁭􀁢􀁵􀁬􀁾􀁮􀁣􀁥􀀬􀀠helicopter,
and work; home .md public figures. No satisfactory eSlirnales of , 'other emergency medicaf :services. . other, property damage costs are availa4le. i . i\dministrative 􀁥􀁸􀁰􂂬􀁮􀁳􀁥􀁾􀀠inciude
the aoministiative cost of puhHc andWiiile multiple-fatalit, accidents, suchl"s those 􀁤􀁩􀁳􀁾􀁵􀁳􀁳􀁥􀁤􀀠,ier private insurance,! and police and !Et&ai 􀁣􀁯􀁾􀁴􀁳􀀮􀀠Private insurJ?l'l:cemotor-vehic
le accidents, probabl)' are jlOI common. 􀁯􀁾􀁥􀀠f,,€, adm;nistratlve 􀁣􀁯􀁳􀁾􀀠are the difference-􀁢􀁥􀁨􀂷􀁬􀁥􀁾􀁮􀀠premlumj paid h.:eXf)lo5ion, or other oisaster may 􀁡􀁣􀁣􀁯􀁾􀁮􀁾􀀠for
most of a smaH inS:lr2nCe coml=enies. and daims pard out by them. It is their co.:;t c;community's annual ac::iciental fatality! t,,;al. !i tllis happens. doing business an1:l 􀁩􀁾􀀠part
of thE: coSt tota!.] Claims paid OUt byestimate the costs by: (1) counting 􀁯􀁾􀁩􀁹􀀠one death for the !nsurar:ce companies zre nO( identified separatelYl as every dai:n is: disaster
IJs;ng the cost f;-om·tne above 􀁦􀁩􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁥􀀤􀀻􀀠and (2) adding to cOl1ipemation for 􀁴􀁯􀁳􀁳􀁥􀁾􀀠'Sucn as \.....ages. 􀁭􀁥􀁤􀁩􀁣􀁾􀁦􀀠expenses.. proparty this figure the cost for
other disaster deatns usir,g the $920,000 damage, etc. . ! cost per death from the motor vehicle sbetion. Even though a community generall,. \hn not be ;,.;ble to esti.. 􀁍􀀺􀀺􀀾􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁾􀁶􀁥􀁨􀁫􀁩􀁥�
�􀁤􀁡􀁾􀁡􀁧􀁥􀀠􀁩􀁮􀁤􀁵􀁤􀁾􀀠the value of: property damage 􀁾􀁯􀀠vehicles from r.·:tt6r·\'€hic!c accidents. The C05.t of normai wear and mate the number of disabling inj"rie5 that occur
in work, tear to vehicle:. 1ft riol indude,:(􀁨􀁯􀁭􀁾􀀢􀀠and. public nOi1!iiotor·vehide injp:-ies, ;t may bE: usefUl to know the appro>:;",.te economic Iqss per death and per Employer
costE 􀁡􀁴􀁾􀀠an eSiirr.ate of the uninsured COS!5-􀁩􀁮􀁣􀀺􀀺􀀻􀁾􀁲􀀢􀀻􀀡􀁤􀀠bydisabiing injury in theo" three dasses elf accidei1ts. The table !?;.ip)oyers and 􀁲􀁥􀁰􀁾􀁳􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁳􀀠the
nioney value oftf.:ne fost by u.,lnjiJred be!o":, shows the per ('.ase average] ;:ost of wage 2nd V\-'crk.ers. tl includd:. includd:. time spe!1t 􀀻􀁲􀁮􀁶􀁥􀁳􀁴􀀻􀁧􀁡􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀠and iepo,ting
;nju,ie$, productiv;ty losses, medical 􀁥􀁸􀁰􀁥􀁮􀁳􀁥􀁾􀀬􀀠and administrative 􀁧􀁨􀀯􀁩􀁾􀀢􀁜􀁧􀀠firs, aid, ptod!..:ction slo"",'downs, tra:riing of :eplacement ,expenses. .....crkers,
a.:"lo extra cost of overtiole for uninjureo workers. : :I . ;! DISABLING 􀁄􀁾􀁳􀁡􀁢􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁬􀁧􀀠injury ;£ \}ne 'wnkh results ir! death, some deg.ree of perma· 􀁮􀁾􀀡􀀧􀁬􀁴􀀠Impairment,
ot 􀁲􀁥􀁮􀁤􀁥􀁲􀁾􀀠the injured 􀁰􀁥􀁈􀂷􀁳􀁯􀁾􀀻􀁵􀁮􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀬􀁢􀁬􀂣􀀠to effectivelyDEATH INJURY p..:,,·dl)l!'n his or hSfJ rcg·.d:ar duties for 􀁾􀀠fuU da)' 􀁢􀀡􀀡􀀩􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁬􀀡􀀻􀁤􀀠.the
d:!.y c·f􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁯􀁢􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀠 . . " 􀁾􀀬􀀢􀀢􀀠., •. , ...• , • " :po,", J vU .9,500 .nOln'!;; ItljUf;t!S I injury. j .'􀁐􀁵􀁢􀁬􀁩􀁾􀀠noomotor-vehicle injuries 􀀤􀀶􀀲􀀰􀀬􀁾􀁏􀁏􀀠$ 7,400
Work'injuries ' I [Nole: A brid oe;criPlion of fhe Naiional Safety Council'. cost witha:.!t employer co>:s •• . .. $i80,OOD $26,000 e;rimating 􀁰􀀮􀁯􀁣􀁾􀁤􀁊􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀠may be rmmd ir\ th9
Technical Appendix or with employer employer costs .... .. 􀀤􀁩􀀹􀀰􀀬􀁾􀁏􀁏􀀠$29,000 ,'\ccident racf.5, 􀀱􀀹􀁾􀀵􀀠edition,] ! i i, . .\ 1 I II Prepared by Stati!iics Depnrtment , Naiion,l
$,,(ely Council • 1:1121 Spring take D.iv(',i!afca, lIIin"is 􀀶􀀰􀀱􀁾􀀳􀀠SC89S Printed in U.s.A. 
i-lUlll L,\JUL\l D Engineen I Architects Dai1a: • Fort Wonk • HOUS/lJlI • El PIlID • Phoenix 0 􀁏􀁲􀁴􀁬􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀠Cour.ry FACSIMILE TRANSMmAL 􀁄􀁡􀁴􀁥􀀺􀀮􀀭􀁕􀁤􀁾􀀬􀀺􀀬􀀺􀀩􀁏􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁊􀀯􀀺􀀮􀁊􀀮􀀷􀀱􀁾􀁨__
__ 74S-7b17Fax No.: H-Z ProJ. No. DI If?2:Z< r NQ. ofPages;__2=:-:---:---,-_ (Including Cover Sheet) o URQEN"l' ,. For Your 􀁾􀁶􀁬􀁥􀁷􀀠0 please Call Upon Receipt 0 Olig. To Follow By
Mati f: , r SENT By:,______-:--:::-__::--TIME:-:--__􀁾􀀭DATE:_______ 1.f .!Iou had any 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁢􀁾􀁭􀁳􀀠􀁾􀁥􀁴􀁶􀁴􀁨􀀵􀀠tho 􀁆􀁑􀁃􀀤􀁾􀀧􀁔􀁬􀁕􀁮􀀠'Tmrtlltllttal. 􀁰􀁾􀁣􀁳􀀼􀀣􀀠(onta.:t
Ms. Janet VrtlUs Of' the lrtdt"fd.uol Usted. abou. '" (214) 871·3311. 1'tlank!lOIL 3131 McKinney Ave,,1J.t • Suitt 600. Dallas. Texas 75204 • (214) 871·3311 • FAX (114) 871·07S7 
-,. June9,l996 FAX .1-214-871-0757 -􀁾$l:eHs Ft.Worth,Texas Hili.ct-ZoIIat1!, Inc. 3131 Mc:Kcnny Ave. Suitt: 000 Dallas, TX 75204 Art: Mr. Bill Brown Dear Sir; Per our telephone oon..-.mat:ion
listed below are anticipated lIllnual cost associated with maintwance ofi 4 quadrant gllted 􀁒􀀮􀁴􀁗􀀭􀁓􀁴􀁾􀀠OI'ossing warning .system. At time ofInstalhtion; TeJOt Relays, Cross aI!d
Grounds and Meggl:f 􀁕􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁬􀀮􀀱􀀮􀁮􀁤􀀠cable$ alld 􀁾up record sheets .--------... ---••• $ 350.00 Vandalism; This oan vary according to 8.re!l from $300.00 to SOOO.OO, average --$2000.00
Glue Arm DlIIll!lg8; 6 sate arms @S100.00 each ... $4200.00 and 4 hours overtime to replace each, @SIS.OO+ lSO % "" $ 180.00 X 6 -SJOSO.OO------·.··.----Total----.....--$5280.00 Gate
!flasher 􀁫􀁮􀁾􀁤􀁯􀁷􀁬􀁬damage can very with Auto md Truck trIIffic It\fet'tlgc 1 each year ------•••-------.------------$6500.00 Normal Maintenance -------....-.-------.--$2500.00
NomuU maimenancl: Parts and IlUpplles 􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾..----$1000.00 Cottt "fUtilities ( Electricity) ----.--•••----.-.----.-$ 360.00 Ifyou have lilly quesUo!lll concerning the
above please advise. B.B.Gaddis Signal. &:. Comm. COQllUltants Corp. 1125 Oak Glen Circle Ft. Worth, Texu 76114 mrrrZOLI.wpD st. /
HUITT·ZOLLARS, INC. 3131 McKinney Avenue, Suite 600 DALLAS, TEXAS 75204 (214) 811·3311 ,0 J0c.s1H420 • T&t-lG. 􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀤􀁓􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀬􀀡􀀡􀀺􀁀􀁩􀁓􀀠/'tJI:.-., 4-00 <;a,,-nl-􀁾􀀷􀁨􀀾n:w-:>
i ;;;;:. I!"'F= '330 'PATf; I.JOB 5Iz.$./96 6,' NO. ii5"'0118 ZZ-z./A1'Tl!NT1QN miff:. . c;;:-TE-V<":' 5rQNJEI? RE, A PDt$,Q.r,.1 􀀨􀁾􀁉􀀿U 􀁾􀀠WE ARE SENDING YOU ¥ Attached 0 Under
separate cover via C"w'Z.! S?f1,. the following items: o Shop drawings \'SO Prints o Plans o Samples o Specifications0 ___________________________________ o Copy of letter o Change order
1 I ! COPIES DATE NO. DESCR!PTfON I \ YIl"''-I...... v r'in<I /lANli),,"> DF P!7bl.SMt./= 􀁲􀁾􀀼􀁲􀀭I \ I ?L.A-.-> 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁬􀀲􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀠oI.t....::: ,!k.,......... '" C>VI ( 􀁦􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀭􀀢_/-VI'
􀀮􀁾􀀠./I I THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: o For approval o Approved as submitted 0 Resubmit__· _copies for approval o For your use MAs requested I ci For review and comment
o Approved as noted 0 Submit __copies for distribution o Returned for corrections 0 Return __corrected prints 0 ______________________________________ o FOR BIDS DUE _________19 0 PRINTS
RETURNED AFTER LOANJO US REMARKS ____________􀁊􀀻􀀻􀁜􀀻􀀻􀁾􀀡􀀺􀁡􀁾􀁲􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁛􀁬􀁾􀂷􀁍􀁾􀂧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀭􀁾􀁬__􀁾􀁟ll9,'ii:S \f:71$ utr-,\\\\\ L COPY TO 􀁾􀀠􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁓􀁉
􀁇􀁎􀁅􀁄􀀺􀂷􀀠I //7/>. ,./4.1k!///C:"//
-., CLIENl': TOWN OF ADDISON PAGE: lOF4 PROJECT: SPECTRUM DRIVE UNDERPASS DESClUP'IlON: FROM NEW ARAPAHO 1m., DNDEKTHE RAILROAD10FIJI'tlBEMlLDREDST. SUMMARY OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTlDN
C05IS PAVING ST.RUCTtJRES STORM SEWER WA'1'ERAND WASTEWA'1'ER FRANCliISED U1'lLlTIES 51.368.114 SU87.I24 5570.740 $113.300 5604.000 CONST.RUcnON SUBTOTAL 55.043.278 CONTINGENCIES (20'l!.)
51.008.650 CONSTRUcnONTOrALJ NOTES: 1. ENGINEERING. lESTlNG.lNSPEClION. GEO'IECHNICAI. AND SURVEYING ARE NOT lNCLUDED IN'IlIESE COSTS. l. THE LIMITS OF THESE COSTS ARE FROM STA. 19+50
TO STA.l9+OO AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWING DATED IJ:l6I9SPREPAlUID BY HtlIIT·ZOllARS.lNC. 
J PROJEcr, Sl'ECTRtlM DRIVE UNDERPASS PAGE: %01'4 PAVING tlNlT TOTAL D!'§£R!mON !1mI !:!II. 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠MOBlLlZATlON IS 1 S3OO,OOO.OO 5300,000 CLEARING AND ORIlBBJNO STA 9.5 Sl.ooo.OO S9.soo
lJNCLASSIFlED S1RBSt'EXCAVATION (SOn.) CY 14518 56.00 S87.108 UNCLASSIFlEDS1RBSt'EXCAVATION(ROCK) CY 26443 S20.00 SS%&.860 SIONALlZATlON AT ARAPAHO LS 1 S6O.OOO.00 ' .•S6O.OOQ REMOVE
EXIST. CONe. PVMT. sY 70 $8.00 SS60 REMOVE EXIST. CONe. SIDEWALK SF 62S 51.35 5&44 RElNF. CONC. S1RBSt'HEADER l.F liS $7.00 S4SS 10" RElNFCONe. PAVEMENT sY SZS.OO $156.800= 6" LIME STAB.
SUBGRADI! sY 2OSO Sl.7S 53.588 HYDRATIID LIME ; TON 33 S90.00 S"-970 4" ntERMOPLASTIC LAN!! MARKI!R (WHl1:E) l.F 2380 SI.oo ru80 4" ntERMOPLASTlC LAN!! MARKI!R (YELLOW) l.F 1900 SI.00
SI.900 CONCRETE TRAFFIC llARRII!R l.F 950 S30.00 S2B.soo 2" PVC SJREETUGHl'CONDUIr l.F 1900 53.50 56.650 SJREETUGHT &: FOUNDATION EA 10 S2.5OO.00 S"..5.000 STREETLIGHTPUUBOXES EA 10
S200.oo S2.ooO DETOURS AND BARRICADES MO 18 51.soo.oo Sl7.000 FENCl! l.F 1200 S20.oo 514.000., MISe. PRlVATE PROPI!RTY MOD. LS 1 5100.000.00 5100.000 PAVlNGTOrAL 51,368,l14 • 
PROJEC[, SPEcnwMDRlVEUNDERPASS PAGE: 30F4 S'l'ROC'IVRl!S llNll' TOTAL D&'!CRIPTION llNll' 2!!. ' PRICE COST RETAINING WAlL STRUCTURAL EXCAVAnoN (SOIL) 'CY 448l 56.00 $26.892 STRUCTURAL
EXCAVATION I,ROCIQ CY 3003 $20.00 S78,Q60 SHOTCREDYSUPPORTOFEXCAVATION SF 20900 $3.00 S62.700 DEWATERING LS I Sll5.000.00 $135,000 WAlL FOOTING CY I906 ms.OO S428.8.S0 .. PRECAST WAlL
PANELS SF 28900 $2$.00 ST.l:!.500 CAST IN PLAcE WAlL PANELS SF 3000 SlS.OO 575.000 SELECTFnl. CY 4236 512.00 SSO,832 BACKFILL CY 40ZlI 57.50 $30.210 RETAINING WALL SllBTOTAL SI.610,()44
DAll,TRAJLROAD OVERPASS a.!GHTRAILl 42" DlA. DRILlED SHAPTS LF sao S125.00 S62.S00 ABUTME:NT CONe. CY 71 $315.00 $26.625 PRESTRESSED TYPE IV BEAMS LF 600 565.00 $39.000 REINFORCED SLAB
SF 3300 510.00 $33.000 SERVICE WALKWAY CY 53 S4OO.OO 521.200 APPROACH SLAB CY 30 S275.oo SS.250' WATERPROOFING SY :m $35.00 513.230 BAlLAST. TIES. RAILS LF 150 S!20.00 SI8.000 DART OVERPASS
stnrCOTAL 5221.805 SERYICE ROAD OVERPaSS 42" DlA. DRILlED SHAPTS LF 7lI3 SI25.00 S'n;Jl75 ABUTME:NT CONe. CY 7ll $315.00 S29.250 PRESTRESSED BOX BE!AM4B34 LF 900 595.00 SS5.s00 REINFORCED
SLAB CY 4S SZSO.OO 511.250 SIDEWALKS CY 13 S22S.00 $$.175 APPROACH SLAB CY 74 S275.00 $20.350 TSOI RAIL LF 3S5 S3O.QO S10.650 SER. RD. OVERPASS stnrCOTAL S260.050 S'X6' BOX CULVERT (INCLUDES
􀁴􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀠42" DIA. DRILlED SHAFTS LF 200 5125.00 SlS.ooo ABUTME:NT CONe. CY 17 $315.00 56.375 BOX CONCRETE LF .167 S450.00 575,1$0 WATERPROOFING SY 250 $35.00 SS.750 , ' 8'X6" BOX
CtlLVERTstnrCOTAL 5115.275 4'XS' BOX CULVERT 42" DIA. DRILlED SHAPTS LF 100 512S.00 $12.500 ABUTME:NT CONe. CY 10 $315.00 $3.750 BOX CONCRETE LF 126 S4so.00 $56.700 WATERPROOFING SY
200 535.00 57.000 4'XS BOX CtlLVERT SUBTOTAL $79.950 STRUc:rtJRESTaTAL S2,2S7,.\24 
I /'. .) PROBer, SPECI'RUMDRlVE IJNDERPASS DI!SCRlI'1ION 24" ClASS mRCP 54" ClASS m RCP 7'X6' BOX CULVERT (mLl') GROutED RIP-RAP LIFT STATION 14'!NLET MISe. EROSION CON'IROL TRENCH SAFIITY
DESIGN TRENCH SAFIITY DI'3ClUPTION CONCRET.6 BLOCKING FITTINGS 12" WATER MAlN IN SP!!CTRtlM .. FIRE HYDRANT MISe. WATER LlNEAPPtlRTENANCES TRENCH SAFETY WATER TEST 􀀱􀀵􀀢􀁗􀁁􀁓􀁔􀁅􀁗􀁁􀁔􀁅􀁒􀁾􀀠WASTE
WATFJiI. MANHOLE WASrEWATER TEST DROP MANHOLE 5rORM SEWER. UNIT 􀁾􀀠"LF 350 LF 000 CY 305 CY 150 EA 1 EA 6 LS I LS I P,4.GE: 40U tJlIIIl' PRICE $43.00 SlltlOO $4SO.OO $lOO.oo $300.000.00
S3,tmOO S15.OOO.OO S2,OOO.OO LF l%!O S2.OO STORM SEWER TOTAL W,4.TER;\NO W ASI'EW,4.TEa UNIT . 􀁾􀀠CY so roN 4 LF 950 EA . 2. LS 1 LF I5SO LS 1 LF 800 EA 4 LS 1 EA 1 tJlIIIl' PRICE Sloo.oo
S3.ooo.oo Sl2Q.OO SUlQ.OO szs.ooo.oo S2.OO ss.ooo.oo S40.oo 51.200.00 $5.000.00 ss.ooo.oo W,4.TER & W.4.STEWATER TOTAL FRA.NCRISED tJ'IILITlES tJlIIIl' DI'3ClUPTION UNIT 􀁾􀀠PRICEGAS LF :zoo S2Il.oo FIBER. OPTIC'l'ELEPBONE LS 1 S3OO,OOOoo \2" PEIROLEOUM 􀁾asoLl') LS 1 S3OO,OOOoo 1O'tA.L gm 515.050 $66.000 5137.:zso 515.000 S3OO.ooo -. 518.000 S15.ooo $2.000 $2.440
$570,740 'TOTAL . COST SS.OOO 512,000 $114.000 $2.400 $25.000 S3,I00 SS,OOO 53"...000 54.800 SS.OOO SS.ooo S2l3,309 'TOTAL COST 54,000. S300,000 S3OO.llOO FRA.NCRISED UIlLlT1ES TOTAL
$604,000 • 
--I 92022 9 -RESOLUTIONRESOLUTION Dallos Area Rapid Transit of' the Dallas Area'Rapid Transit (Executive Committee) License Agreement for Crossing DARTPAC-owned Right-of-Way in the City
of Grapevine WHEREAS, in January 1991, DART purchased 52 miles of st. Louis Southwestern Railroad right-of-way (Cottonbelt) from Wylie to Fort worth; and . WHEREAS, development along
the Cottonbelt corridor in the city of Grapevine has resulted in the need for one, at-grade crossing of the DARTPAC-owned st. Louis Southwestern Railroad' right-of-waYi and WHEREAS,
the city of Grapevine seeks a License Agreement for construction and maintenance of one, at-grade crossing between I State Highway 26 (Ira E. Woods Avenue) and Lancaster Drive on the
DARTPAc-ownea st. Louis Southwestern Railroad right-of-way, outside the DART Service Area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors that: I
section i: I The License Agreement terms and consideration as presented in closed session is approved by the Board in principle. section 2: The Executive Director or negotiate and execute
a the terms and conditions Closed Session with the his designee is authorized to License Agreement containing presented to the Board in city of Grapevine for one, • at-grade crossing
between. State Highway 26 (Ira E. Woods Avenue) and Lancaster Drive, outside the DART se;:;z:;: • 􀁉􀁮􀀾􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀡􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀠􀁱􀀭􀁾;+d-..􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁭􀁡􀀺􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁴􀁯􀁾􀀠David
R. McAtee, Secretary Chairman " j , 1.O'SU.DOC ,O/23/1!l!l2/pjb i 
• • {J2022 II -.'• APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: .. 􀀤􀀰􀁾􀀮􀀫􀀽􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀠 DARe:::ounse Evans • lve Director 11-1J a-q-r .% Date .,October 27, 1992 • • .;It• • f • ..• • 􀁾􀀠, r 10-Sll.DOC
tO!23!1992/pjb 
= Policy Report 􀁯􀁣􀁴􀁯􀁾􀁥􀁲􀀠20, 1992 Rail Planning and Development oommittee License Agreement for crossing DAR'rPAC-owned Right-of-way in the city of Grapevine The purpose of this
item is to approve an agreement to grant a license to the city of Grapevine for construction and maintenance of one, at-grade public roadway crossing on DARTPAC (Cott<:mbelt)right-of-way
between state Highway 26 (Ira E. Woods Ave.) and Lancaster Drive to provide direct access to Baylor Medical center. The Committee will be briefed in Closed Session on this item. RECOMMENDATION
Approval of a resolution authorizing the Executive Director or his designee to negotiate and execute a License Agreement for construction and maintenance of one, public at-grade crossing
on DARTPAC (Cottonbelt) right-of-way between State Highway 26 and Lancaster Drive to provide direct access to the Baylor Medical Center. BACKGROUND In January, 1991 DART purchased 52
miles of st. Louis Southwestern Railroad tight-of-way (Cottonbelt) from Wylie to Ft. Worth for the purpose of right-of-way preservation in the northern segment of the DART Service Area
consistent with the approved 1989 System Plan. The City of Grapevine, a non-member city of the DART Service Area, has requested a License Agreement to cross DART right-of-way for the
purpose of constructing street improvements to improve access to Baylor Medical center. On March 28, 1992, the voters in the city of Grapevine 􀁾􀁰􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁤􀀠bonds for construction
of the improvements as shown in Attachlllent 1. DART staff has examined the proposed crossing location and has determined that the crossing will not prohibit or significantly or unreasonably
impairDART's future use of the right-of-way. " At the May 5, 1992 Rail Planning and Development committee meeting, staff was instructed to develop a policy governing new grade crossings
of DART-controlled right-of-way. That policy is under development and is being discussed with the DART member cities and the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) through the Technical
Advisory Staff committee (TASC). Although the -311.000 09/1992/pjb 1 
1 r􀁾􀀠-􀁾􀁬􀁬􀀠policy is still in draft form, this License Agreement is consistent with the key terms of the proposed policy as discussed with the Rail Planning and Development Committee
on July 21, 1992, 􀁛􀁾with the addition of financial consideration. The Grapevine city Council has been briefed by their staff and 􀁛􀁾􀀠supports the License Agreement. Financial consideration
is currently under discussion with the Grapevine staff. L,DART staff has reviewed the proposed concept design with the Cityof Grapevine. staff will brief the Committee on the terms of
the proposed License Agreement, and financial consideration in Closed 􀁛􀁾Session. FINANCIAL 􀁃􀁏􀁎􀁓􀁘􀁄􀁅􀁒􀁁􀁾􀁘􀁏􀁎􀁓􀀠[ This agreement will not require the expenditure of funds
by DART. LEGAL CONSXDERATXONS Section 10 (m) of DART's enabling statute authorizes lease, convey, or otherwise dispose of any of DART's interests in real property which are not inconsistent
efficient operation and maintenance of the system. Prepared by: 4'􀁉􀀮􀁖􀁾􀁖􀁾 BOWell BOWell Weems Director Real Estate Approved by: Venturato [Ass P. s ant Executive Director 􀁅􀁮􀁧􀁾􀀠eering
& Construction [ [' [ [ DART to [rights or with the I;i... 􀁾􀁛􀀠[ }O-311.DOC l/25/1992/pjl:> 
" .... 960109 RESOLUTION ofthe RESOLUTIONDALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT Danos Area Rapid Transit (Executive. Committee) Grant ofa License for an At-Grade Public Road Crossing in Grapevine
WHEREAS, the City of Grapevine has requested an extension of Industrial Boulevard to cross the Cotton Belt railroad right-of-way at-grade; and, WHEREAS, by Board Resolution No. 960033,
DART adopted a policy to reduce the number of public and private at-grade crossings; and . WHEREAS, the Federal Railroad Administration and the Texas Department of Transportation have
similar policies to eliminate or consolidate public and private at-grade, highway-rail crossings; and WHEREAS, DART in a cooperative effort with the Cities of Grapevine and Southlake
have 􀁷􀁯􀁾􀁫􀁥􀁤􀀠to consolidate and/or close two at-grade crossings in Grapevine. " NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Dallas AIea Rapid Transit Board of Directors that the PresidentlExecutive
Director or his designee is authorized to execute a license for an at-grade public road crossing in Grapevine, as shown in Attachments I and 2, subject to DART and Grapevine approving
and agreement providing that Grapevine will identifY two public or private at-grade crossings in Grapevine, Texas, which shall be closed at no expense to DART. SecretarY ' APPROVED AS
TO FORM: ATTEST: 􀁒􀁾􀁧􀁥􀁲􀁓􀁮􀁯􀁾􀀠PresidentlExecutive Director May 28, 1996 Date 538{A.5AM/skh 05128196. 9:00 PM 
•• J.' ... ---.. ATTACHMENT 1 OOlLlIlli MILLS Z8 .I proposed crossing --.J.L..>. , 
.. '96010 i-} : 􀁾􀀠q 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠n:z:a: I'll Z... .., "0 􀁾􀀠0 "0 0••a. .. 􀁾􀀠0••S' CO • 1 r I .: 
, .' ! Agenda Report Attachments 1 and 2: Voting Requiremeats: Maps , majorityI DATE: May 18, 1996 SUBJECT: Grant ofa License for an At-Grade Public Road Crossing in Grapevine RECOMMENDATION
Approval of a resolution authorizing the PresidentlExecutive Director or his designee to execute a license granting an at-grade public road crossing to the City of Grapevine, subject
to the elimination and closure of at least two public or private at-grade road crossings elsewhere in Grapevine, Texas. DISCUSSION ' .. • The City of Grapevine is requesting an extension
of Industrial Boulevard to cross the Cotton Belt in Grapevine at-grade (see Attachments 1 and 2). • Existing alternative access is available to the site, including an existing at-grade
crossing within 112 mile ofthe proposed crossing. By Board Resolution No. 960033, DART adopted a policy to reduce the number of public and private at-grade crossings. The Federal Railroad
Administration and Texas Department of Transportation have similar policies encouraging railroads to reduce the overall number ofat-grade crossings. DART, the City of Grapevine, the
City of Southlake, developers and property owners have worked to consolidate and/or close two existing private road crossings in Grapevine to help accommodate the new at-grade public
crossing. • The recommended resolution conditionupproval of-the at-grade license to the closure oftwo public or private at-grade crossings in Grapevine. LEGAL CONSIDERATION Section 452.054
of the Texas Transportation Code authorizes DART to exercise any power necessary or convenient to carry out its responsibility. 338.SAMfskh 1 05121/96 -2:29 PM 
.' , DRAFT RESOLUTION oUbe DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT (Executive Committee) Grant ofa License for an At-Grade Public Road Crossing ill Grapevine WHEREAS, the City of Grapevine has requested
an extension of Industrial Boulevard to cross the Cotton Belt railroad right.of-way at-grade; and WHEREAS, by Board Resolution No. 960033, DART adopted a policy to reduce the number
of public and private at-grade crossings; and WHEREAS, the Federal Railroad Administration and the Texas Department of Transportation have similar policies to eliminate or consolidate
public and private at-grade, highway-mil crossings; and , WHEREAS, DART in a cooperative effort with the Cities of Grapevine and Southlake have worked to consolidate andlor close two
at-grade crossings in Gr.apevine. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors that the PresidentfExecutive Director or his designee is authorized
to execute a license for an at-grade public road crossing in Grapevine, as shown in Attachments 1and 2, subject to closure oftwo public or private at-grade road crossings in Gr.apevine.
Texas. Prepared by: Approved as to form: . Approved by: Roger PresidentfExecutive Director 438.SAMlsIch 1 051211% -12:30 PM 
FROM THE DESK OF WM. KYLE KEAHEY 
--.3 ·+' *., ..􀀧􀀻􀁾􀀠•, FROM THE. DESK OF WM. KYLE KEAHEY