Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 March 16, 2005 The Honorable R. Scott Wheeler Mayor, Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010
Dear Mayor Wheeler: As you are aware, the 79th Regular session of the Texas Legislature is underway in Austin. Accordingly, as our partners in regional transportation, DART wanted to
make your city aware of bills filed recently by State Rep. Larry Phillips of Sherman and State Sen. Kim Brimer of Fort Worth. Rep. Phillips, who is vice-chair of the House Transportation
Committee, filed H.B. 2138 regarding transfening a transit system or regional tollway authority to a Regional Mobility Authority (RMA). The companion bill is S.B. 1251 by Sen. Brimer,
a member of the Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee. We have enclosed a copy ofH.B. 2138 for your benefit and S.B. 1251 is identical. Please take time to thoroughly
review this legislation since it has significant ramifications for all DART member cities. After an an initial review of the legislation, we have identified several issues of concern
for DART and our member cities, including the following: 􀁾 Sales Tax Cap -H.B. 2138 and S.B. 1251 both propose a sales and use tax rate of 14 or 12 of one percent for an RMA that creates
or transfers a transit system. Since the state Constitution prohibits unequal taxation by a governmental entity, the effect of that cap on the DART system would be to level down the
tax rate to 12 or 􀁾 cent. It would be impossible for an RMA to build-out DART's current commitments to its member cities or add any new cities to the system on less than one-cent of
sales tax. The twenty-two years of experience by DART and our member cities has shown that it takes a dedicated, full one-cent sales tax to plan, build and operate a multi-modal transit
system. 􀁾 Election to Transfer an Authority -H.B. 2138 and S.B. 1251 as filed would allow the DART Board to vote to transfer the assets of the transit authority to an RMA. No vote in
the member cities would be required. DART feels very strongly that a vote of the member cities should be required before DART could be transferred to an RMA. Additionally, any combination
oftransit and other transportation entities must include safeguards for funding so that all modes are secure in their source of funds. This ensures that entities will maintain the sound
financial ability to pledge for repayment of bonds.
Page 2 March 16, 2005 􀁾 Regional Expansion -H.B. 2138 and S.B. 1251 provide no funding mechanism for a regional transit initiative. DART recently met with Commissioner Robert Nichols
of the Texas Transportation Commission and expressed our concerns with the legislation. Commissioner Nichols views H.B. 2138 and S.B. 1251 as strictly voluntary but is willing to work
with DART to try to address our concerns. To that end, he was very receptive to changing the half-cent sales tax cap in the bill to a one-cent sales tax cap. Additionally, he agreed
that the bill should include language requiring an election be held in each member city before the DART Board could transfer its transportation system to an RMA. In the coming days and
weeks, we will continue to communicate with you as developments occur regarding these bills and ask that you express your concerns to your state elected officials as well. We assure
you we will continue to dialogue with TxDOT and the bills' sponsors and, importantly, with our legislative delegation on our concerns. Should you have any questions on this issue, please
feel free to contact us at the following telephone numbers: Office of Board Support (214) 749-3347, or the DART Executive Office (214) 749-2544. Thank you for your city's long and steadfast
support ofDART. Sincerely, c: Ron Whitehead, City Manager DART Board ofDirectors Enclosure
FILED MAR 07 2005 tt.B. No. 􀁤􀁬􀁾􀀶 A BILL TO BE ENTITLED 1 AN ACT 2 relating to the acquisition, construction, maintenance, operation, 3 and provision of toll facilities .and a transit
system by a regional 4 mobility authority, and the transfer to a regional mobility 5 author ity of the toll facilities, transit system, and related 6 assets of a regional tollway authority
or transit provider or of 7 certain counties; providing criminal penalties; authorizing a tax. a BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: 9 SECTION 1. Subchapter A, Chapter
284, Transportation Code, 10 is amended by adding Section 284.011 to read as follows: 11 Sec. 284.011. TRANSFER OF ASSETS. (a) A county, acting 12 through the commissioners court of
the county, may submit a reguest 13 to the commission for authorization to create a regional mobility 14 authority under Chapter 370 and to transfer all projects under this 15 chapter
to the regional mobility author ity if: 16 (1) the creation of the regional mobility authority 17 and transfer of projects is not prohibited under the bond 18 proceedings applicable
to the projects; 19 (2) adeguate provision has been made for the 20 assumption by the regional mobility authority of all debts, 21 obligations, and liabilities of the county ar ising
out of the 22 transferred projects; and 23 (3) the commissioners courts of any additional 24 counties to be part of the regional mObility authority have 79R6202 MTB-F 1
1 approved the request. 2 (b) The county may submit to the commission a proposed 3 structure for the initial board of directors of the regional 4 mobility authority and a method for
appointment to the board of 5 directors at the creation of the regional mObility authority. 6 Subsequent appointments to the board of directors are subject to 7 the requirements of Subchapter
F, Chapter 370. 8 (c) After commission authorization, the county may transfer 9 each of its projects under this chapter to the regional mobility 10 authority to the extent authorized
by the Texas Constitution if 11 property and contract rights in the projects and bonds issued for 12 the projects are not affected unfavorably. 13 (d) The commission shall adopt rules
governing the creation 14 of a regional mobility authority and the transfer of projects under 15 this section. 16 SECTION 2. Chapter 366, Transportation Code, is amended by 17 adding
Subchapter H to read as follows: 18 SUBCHAPTER H. DISSOLUTION OF AUTHORITY 19 Sec. 366.036. DISSOLUTION OF AUTHORITY; TRANSFER OF ASSETS. 20 (a) An authority may submit a request to
the commission for 21 authorization to dissolve the authority and to create a regional 22 mobility author ity under Chapter 370 if: 23 (1) dissolution is not prohibited under the bond
24 proceedings applicable to the turnpike projects and systems owned 25 by the authority; 26 (2) adequate provision has been made for the 27 assumption of all debts, obligations, and
liabilities of the 79R6202 MTB-F 2
author ity by the regional mobility author ity; and (3) the request has been approved by the commissioners court of each county that is part of the author ity. (b) The authority may
submit to the commission a proposed structure for the initial board of directors of the regional mobility authority and a method for appointment to the board of directors at the creation
of the regional mobility authority. Subsequent appointments to the board of directors are subject to the requirements of Subchapter F, Chapter 370. (c) After commission authorization,
the authority may transfer each of its turnpike projects to the regional mobility authority if property and contract rights in the projects and bonds issued for the projects are not
affected unfavorably. (d) The commission shall adopt rules qoverninq the creation of a regional mobility authority and the transfer of turnpike proj ects under this sect ion. SECTION
3. 􀁓􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁲 "170 .0'J3, Transportation Code, is amended 􀁾􀁹 􀁡􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁧 Subdivision (14) and and adding Subdivisions (16); (17), (18), and (19) to read as follows: (14) "Transportation
project" means: (A) a turnpike project; (B) a system; (C) a passenger or freight rail facility, 123456789 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 including: 79R6202 MTB-F
(i) (ii ) ( iii) tracks; a rail line; switching, 3 signaling, or other
1 operating equipment; 2 (iv) a depot; 3 (v) a locomotive; 4 (vi) rolling stock; 5 (vii) a maintenance facility; and 6 (viii) other real and personal property 7 associated with a rail
operation; 8 (0) a roadway with a functional classification 9 greater than a local road or rural minor collector; 10 (E) a ferry; 11 (F) an airport; 12 (G) a pedestrian or bicycle facility;
13 (H) an intermodal hub; 14 (I) an automated conveyor belt for the movement 15 of freight; 16 (J) a border crossing inspection station; 17 (K) an air quality improvement initiative;
18 (L) a public utility facility; [aa4] 19 (M) a transit system; and 20 (N) if applicable, projects and programs listed 21 in the most recently approved state implementation plan for
the 22 area covered by the author ity, including an ear ly action compact. 23 (16) "Mass transit" means the transportation of 24 passengers and hand-carried packages or baggage of a
passenger by 25 any means of surface, overhead, or underground transportation, 26 other than an aircraft or taxicab. 27 (17) "Service area" means the county or counties in 79R6202 MTB-F
4
(A) included in the plan approved by the for: (i) the use of or access to mass transit by which an authority or transit provider has established a transit system. (ii) the protection
or environmental (2) adopt an official seal; (3) study, evaluate, design, finance, acquire, construct, maintain, repair, and operate transportation projects, individually or as one or
more systems, provided that a transportation project that is subject to Subpart C, 23 C.F.R. Part 450, is: enhancement of mass transit. SECTION 4. Section 370.033, Transportation Code,
is amended by amending Subsections (a), (k), and (m) and adding Subsection (0) to read as follows: (a) An authority, through its board, may: (1) adopt rules for the regulation vi its
affairs and the conduct of its business; persons or vehicles; ar (18) "Transit provider" means an entity that provides mass transit for the public and that was created under Chapter
451, 452,453,454,457,458, or 460. (19) "Transit system" means: (A) property owned or held by an authority authority for mass transit purposes; and (B) facilities necessary, convenient,
or useful 123456789 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 79R6202 MTB-F 5
1 applicable metropolitan planning organization; and 2 (B) consistent with the statewide transportation 3 plan and the statewide transportation improvement program; 4 (4) acquire, hold,
and dispose of property in the 5 exercise of its powers and the performance of its duties under this 6 chapter; 7 (5) enter into contracts or operating agreements with 8 a similar authority,
another governmental entity, or an agency of 9 the United States, a state of the United States, the United Mexican 10 States, or a state of the United Mexican States; 11 (6) enter into
contracts or agreements necessary or 12 incidental to its powers and duties under this chapter; 13 (7) cooperate and work directly with property owners 14 and governmental entities and
officials to support an activity 15 required to promote or develop a transportation project; 16 (8) employ and set the compensation and benefits of 17 administrators, consulting engineers,
attorneys, accountants, 18 construction and financial experts, superintendents, managers, 19 full-time and part-time employees, agents, consultants,.and other 20 persons as the authority
considers necessary or useful; 21 (9) notwithstanding Sections 221.003 and 222.031 and 22 subject to Subsections (j) and (m), apply for, directly or 23 indirectly receive and spend loans,
gifts, grants, and other 24 contributions for any purpose of this chapter, including the 25 construction of a transportation project, and receive and spend 26 contributions of money,
property, labor, or other things of value 27 from any source, including the United States, a state of the United 79R6202 MTB-P 6
1 States, the United Mexican States, a state of the United Mexican 2 States, the commission, the department, a subdivision of this 3 state, or a governmental entity or private entity,
to be used for 4 the purposes for which the grants, loans, or contr ibutions are 5 made, and enter into any agreement necessary for the grants, loans, 6 or contributions; 7 (10) install,
construct, or contract for the 8 construction of public utility facilities, including for transit 9 system purposes as provided by Sections 370.351(e) and (f). direct 10 the time and
manner of construction of a public utility facility in, lIon, along, over, or under a transportation project, or request the 12 removal or relocation of a public utility facility in,
on, along, 13 over, or under a transportation project; 14 (11) organize a corporation under Chapter 431 for the 15 promotion and development of transportation projects; 16 (12) adopt
and enforce rules not inconsistent with 17 this chapter for the use of any transportation project, including 18 tolls, fares, or other user fees, speed and weight limits, and 19 traffic
and other public safety rules, provided that an authority 20 must consider the same factors that the Texas Turnpike Authority 21 division of the department must consider in altering
a prima facie 22 speed limit under Section 545.354; 23 (13) enter into leases, operating agreements, service 24 agreements, licenses, franchises, and similar agreements with a 25 public
or private party governing the party's use of all or any 26 portion of a transportation project and the rights and obligations 27 of the author ity with respect to a transportation project;
79R6202 MTB-F 7
removal of a public utility facility in, on,' along, over, or under a transportation project, and for transit system purposes as provided by Sections 370.351(e) and (f). SECTION 6. Sections
370.l8l(d) and (e), Transportation (14) borrow money from or enter into a loan agreement or other arrangement with the state infrastructure bank; and (15) do all things necessary or
appropriate to carry out the powers and duties expressly granted or imposed by this chapter. (k) An authority may not directly provide water, wastewater, natural gas, petroleum pipeline,
electric transmission, electric distribution, telecommunications, information, or cable television services, except for transit system purposes as provided by Sections 370.35l(e) and
(f). (m) If an authority receives money from the general revenue fund, the Texas Mobility Fund, or the state highway fund it may use the money only to acquire, design, finance, construct,
operate, or maintain a turnpike project under Section 370.003(14) (A) or (D).L...2.!. a transit system under Section 370.351. (0) An authority may not provide a transit system in a 􀀮􀀲􀁾􀁲􀁶􀀭􀁩􀁾􀀮
􀁾􀀮􀀡􀁾􀀬􀁷􀁨􀁥􀁲􀁥 another transit provider has implemented taxing authority unless the service is provided under a written agreement with the transit provider or under Section 370.186.
SECTION 5. Section 370.170(a), Transportation Code, is amended to read as follows: 123456789 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 (a) An authority may adopt rules for
approval of the installation, construction, the authority's relocation, and 79R6202 MTB-F 8
1 Code, are amended to read as follows: 2 (d) An authority may not directly provide water, 3 wastewater, natural gas, petroleum pipeline, electric 4 transmission, electric distribution,
telecommunications, 5 information, or cable television services, except for transit 6 system purposes as provided by Sections 370.35Ue) and (f). 7 (e) Nothing in this chapter, or any
contractual right 8 obtained under a contract with an author ity author ized by this 9 chapter, except for transit system purposes as provided by Sections 10 370.351(e) and (f) , supersedes
or renders ineffective any provision 11 of another law applicable to the owner or operator of a public 12 utility facility, including any provision of the Utilities Code 13 regarding
licensing, certification, and regulatory jurisdiction of 14 the Public Utility Commission of Texas or Railroad Commission of 15 Texas. 16 SECTION 7. Chapter 370, Transportation Code,
is amended by 17 adding Subchapter s I and J to read as follows: 18 SUBCHAPTER I. TRANSIT SYSTEMS SYSTEMS 19 Sec. 370.351. TRANSIT SYSTEMS. (a) An authority may 20 construct, own, operate,
and maintain a transit system. 21 (b) An authority shall determine each transit route, 22 including transit route changes. 23 (e) If an authority contracts with another entity to 24
construct, maintain, or operate electric buses operated by the 25 author ity under this chapter, the electr ic bus system is not 26 subject to any state law regulating or governing the
design, 27 construction, or operation of a railroad, railway, street railway, 79R6202 MTB-F 9
1 street car, or interurban railway. 2 (d) For purposes of ownership or transfer of ownership of an 3 interest in real property, an electric· bus system operating under 4 this chapter
on property previously used by a railroad, railway, 5 street railway, or interurban railway is a continuation of an 6 existing rail use. 7 (e) If an authority establishes a transit system
that 8 includes or is to include bus service propelled by electr ic power in 9 a service area all or part of which is served by the electric power 10 distribution systems of more than
one electric utility company or 11 municipally owned electric utility system, the authority may: 12 (1) aCquire, construct, own, operate, and maintain for 13 the sole purpose of powering
its vehicles over its transportation 14 system, sources of electr ic power, including wholly owned or 15 partially owned generating facilities of any type and at any 16 location, fuel
reserves, and supplies; 17 (2) in conjunction with owning a generating 􀁦􀁡􀁣􀁩􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁹􀁾 18 acquire, construct, own, operate, and 􀁭􀁡􀁩􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁬􀀦􀁾 transmission and 19 distribution
facilitiE'::-' needed to deliver power from the generating 20 facility to its transit system; and 21 (3) contract for the purchase of power and energy with 22 any supplier of power and
energy that serves any part of the service 23 area for the sole purpose of supplying the power and energy 24 necessary to operate the authority's vehicles and eguipment. 25 (f) The parties
to a contract made under Subsection (e}(3) 26 may fulfill the terms of the contract notwithstanding any order or 27 rule of the Public Utility Commission of Texas with respect to 79R6202
MTB-F 10
1 certification, except that any supply of power or energy by a 2 utility into the service area of another utility must be provided 3 over transmission or distribution lines owned by
the author ity. 4 (g) This chapter does not prohibit an authority, 5 municipality, or transit provider from providing any service that 6 complements a transit system, including providing
parking garages, 7 special transportation for persons who are disabled or elderly, or 8 medical transport at ion services. 9 Sec. 370.352. PUBLIC HEARING ON FARE AND SERVICE CHANGES.
10 (a) In this section: 11 (1) "Service change" means any addition or deletion 12 resulting in the physical realignment of a transit route or a change 13 in the type or frequency of
service provided in a specific, 14 regular ly scheduled transit route. 15 (2) "Transit revenue vehicle mile" means one mile 16 traveled by a transit vehicle while the vehicle is available
to 17 public passengers. 18 (3) "Transit route" means a route over which a transit 19 vehicle travels that is specifically labeled or numbered for the 20 purpose of picking up or discharging
passengers at regularly 21 scheduled stops and intervals. 22 (4) "Transit route mile" means one mile along a 23 transit route regularly traveled by transit vehicles while 24 available
to public passengers. 25 (b) Except as provided by Section 370.353, an author ity 26 shall hold a public hearing on: 27 (1) a fare change; 79R6202 MTB-F 11
1 (2) a service change involving: 2 (A.) 25 percent or more of the number of transit 3 route miles of a transit route; or 4 (B) 25 percent or more of the number of transit 5 revenue
vehicle miles of a transit route, computed daily, for the 6 day of the week for which the change is made i or 7 (3) the establishment of a new transit route. 8 (c) An authority shall
hold the public hearing reguired by 9 Subsection (b) before the cumulative amount of service changes in a 10 fiscal year equals a percentage amount descr ibed in Subsection 11 (b)(2)(A)
or (B). 12 Sec. 370.353. PUBLIC HEARING ON FARE AND SERVICE CHANGES: 13 EXCEPTIONS. (a) In this section, "experimental service change" 14 means an addition of service to an existing
transit route or the 15 establishment of a new transit route. 16 (b) A public hearing under Section 370.352 is not reguired 17 for: 18 (1) a reduced or free promotional fare that is
19 instituted daily or periodically over a period of not more than 180 20 days; 21 (2) a headway adjustment adjustment of not more than five minutes 22 du! inq peak-hour service and
not more than 15 minutes during 23 non-peak-hour service; 24 (3) a standard seasonal variation unless the number, 25 timing, or type of the standard seasonal var iation changes; or 26
(4) an emergency or exper imental service change in 27 effect for 180 days or less. 79R6202 MTB-F 12
1 (c) A hearing on an experimental service change in effect 2 for more than 180 days may be held before or while the experimental 3 service change is in effect and satisfies the requirement
for a 4 public hearing if the hearing notice reguired by Section 370.354 5 states that the change may become permanent at the end of the 6 effective period. If a hearing is not held
before or while the 7 experimental service change is in effect, the service that existed 8 before the change must be reinstituted at the end of the IBOth day 9 after the change became
effective and a public hear ing must be held 10 in accordance with Section 370.352 before the experimental service 11 change may be continued. 12 Sec. 370.354. NOTICE OF HEARING ON FARE
OR SERVICE CHANGE. 13 (a) After calling a public hearing reguired by Section 370.352, the 14 authority shall: 15 (1) at least 30 days before the date of the hearing, 16 publish notice
of the hear ing at least once in a newspaper of 17 general circulation in the territory of the authority; and 1B (2) post notice in each transit vehicle in service on 19 any transit
route affected by the proposed change for at least two 20 weeks within 30 days before the date of the hear ins. 21 (b) The notice must contain: 22 (1) a description of each proposed
fare or service 23 change, as appropriate; 24 (2) the time and place of the hearing; and 25 (3) if the hearing is reguired under Section 26 370.352(c), a description of the latest proposed
change and the 27 previous changes. 79R6202 MTB-F 13
1 (c) The requirement for a public hearing under Section 2 370.352 is satisfied at a public hearinq required by federal law if: 3 (1) the notice requirements of this section are met;
4 and 5 (2) the proposed fare or service change is addressed 6 at the meeting. 7 Sec. 370.355. CRIMINAL PENALTIES. (a) An authority by 8 resolution may prohibit the use of the transit
system by a person 9 who fails to possess evidence showing that the appropriate fare for 10 the use of the system has been paid and may establish reasonable and 11 appropriate methods,
including using peace officers under section 12 370.181(c), to ensure that persons using the transit system pay the 13 appropriate fare for that use. 14 (b) An authority by resolution
may provide that a fare for 15 or charge for the use of the transit system that is not paid incurs a 16 penalty, not to exceed $100. 17 (c) The authority shall post signs designating
each area in 18 which a person is prohibited from using the transit system without 19 possession of evidence showing that the appropriate fare has been 20 paid. 21 (d) A person commits
an offense if: 22 (1) the person or another for whom the person is 23 criminally responsible under Section 7.02, Pena1.Code, uses the 24 transit system and does not possess evidence
showing that the 25 appropriate fare has been paid; and 26 (2) the person fails to pay the appropriate fare or 27 other charge for the use of the transit system and any penalty on 79R6202
MTB-F 14
the fare on or before the 30th day after the date the authority notifies the person that the person is required to pay the amount of the fare or charge and the penalty. (e) The notice
required by Subsection (d) (2) may be included in a citation issued to the person by a peace officer under Article 14.06, Code of Criminal Procedure, in connection with an offense relating
to the nonpayment of the appropr iate fare or charge for the use of the transit system. (f) An offense under Subsection (d) is a Class C misdemeanor. (g) An offense under Subsection
(d) is not a crime of moral turpitude. authority may request a transit provider to transfer the provider's transit system to the authority if the board determines that the traffic needs
of the counties in 􀁷􀁾􀀮􀁩􀁾􀀽􀀺 􀁴􀁬􀀺􀁾 3.uthor ity operates could be most ef-F:"cient1y and economically met by the transfer. (b) If an authority makes a request under Subsection
(a), the governing body of the transit provider may authorize the author ity to solicit public comment. The author ity shall conduct a public hearing in each county in the transit provider's
service area if authorized by the governing body of the transit provider. Notice of the hearing must be published in the Texas Register, one or more newspapers of general circulation
in the counties in the transit provider's service area, and a newspaper, if any, pUblished in the counties of the requesting author ity. The notice shall also 123456789 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 1':1 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 SUBCHAPTER J. ACQUIRING TRANSIT SYSTEMS Sec. 370.361. TRANSFER OF TRANSIT SYSTEMS. ( a) An 79R6202 MTB-F 15
1 solicit wr itten comments on the proposed transfer. 2 (cl A board may approve the acquisition of the transit 3 provider if the governing body of the transit provider approves 4 transfer
of its operations to the authority and agrees to dissolve. S Before approving the acquisition, the board shall consider public 6 comments received under Subsection (bl. 7 (dl If the
transfer is approved under Subsection (cl, the 8 governing body of the transit provider shall transfer to the 9 authority all property, funds, and employees of the transit 10 provider.
11 (e) The authority shall assume all debts or other 12 obligations of the transferred transit provider in connection with 13 the aCquisition of property under Subsection (dl . 14 (fl
The authority shall continue to collect any existing 15 sales and use tax at a permissible rate that does not exceed the 16 rate approved by the voters who reside in the service area
of the 17 transferred transit provider for use in that taxing area. 18 (gl Notwithstanding any other' state law, the authority 19 shall continue to collect any state or federal funding
for which the 20 transferred transit provider was eligible and receiving. 21 Sec. 370.362. SALES AND USE TAX. (al If an authority 22 acquires a transit provider with taxing authority,
the authority 23 may impose a sales and use tax at a permissible rate that does not 24 exceed the rate approved by the voters who reside in the service 25 area of the transit provider's
transit system at an election under 26' this subchapter. 27 (bl The authority by resolution may: 79R6202 MTB-F 16
1 (1) decrease the rate of the sales and use tax to a 2 permissible rate; or 3 (2) call an election for the increase or decrease of 4 the sales and use tax to a permissible rate. 5 (c)
If an authority orders an election, the authority shall 6 publish notice of the election in a newspaper of general 7 circulation in the territory of the authority at least once each
8 week for three consecutive weeks, with the first publication 9 occurring at least 21 days before the date of the election. 10 (d) A resolution ordering an election and the election
11 notice required by Subsection (c) must show, in addition to the 12 requirements of the Election Code, the hours of the election and 13 polling places in election precincts. 14 (e)
A copy of the election notice required by Subsection (c) 15 shall be furnished to the commission and the comptroller. 16 (f) The permissible rates for a sales and use tax imposed 17
under this subchapter are: 18 (1) one-quarter of one percent; or 19 (2) one-half of one percent. 20 (g) Chapter322, Tax Code, applies to a sales and use tax 21 imposed under this subchapter. 22 Sec. 370.363. MAXIMUM TAX RATE. (a) An authority may not 23 adopt a sales and use tax rate, including
a rate increase, that when 24 combined with the rates of all sales and use taxes imposed by all 25 political subdivisions of this state having territory in the 26 service area of the
transferred transit system exceeds two percent 27 in any location in the service area. 79R6202 MTB-F 17
1 (b) An election to approve a sales and use tax or increase 2 the rate of an author ity' s sales and use tax has no effect if: 3 (1) the voters in the service area approve the 4 authority's
sales and use tax rate or rate increase at an election 5 held on the same day on which a municipality or county having 6 territory in the jurisdiction of the service area adopts a sales
and 7 use tax or an additional sales and use tax; and 8 (2) the combined rates of all sales and use taxes 9 imposed by the authority and all political subdivisions of this 10 state would
exceed two percent in any part of the territory in the 11 service area. 12 Sec. 370.364. ELECTION TO CHANGE TAX RATE. (a) At an 13 election ordered under Section 370.362(b)(2), the ballots
shall be 14 pr inted to permit votinq for or against the proposition: "The 15 increase (decrease) of the local sales and use tax rate for mass 16 transit to (percentage)." 17 (b) The
increase or decrease in the tax rate becomes 18 effective only if it is approved by a major ity of the votes cast. 19 (c) A notice of the election and a certified copy of the 20 order
canvassing the election results shall be: 21 (1) sent to the commission and the comptroller i and 22 (2) filed in the deed records of the county. 23 Sec. 370.365. SALES TAX: EFFECTIVE
DATES. (a) A sales and 24 use tax implemented under this subchapter takes effect on the first 25 day of the second calendar quarter that begins after the date the 26 comptroller receives
a copy of the order required to be sent under 27 Section 370.364(c). 79R6202 MTB-F 18
1 (b) An increase or decrease in the rate of a sales and use 2 tax implemented under this subchapter takes effect on: 3 (1) the first day of the first calendar quarter that 4 begins
after the date the comptroller receives the notice provided 5 under Section 370.364(c); or 6 (2) the first day of the second calendar quarter that 7 begins after the date the comptroller
receives the notice, if 8 within 10 days after the date of receipt of the notice the 9 comptroller gives written notice to the board that the comptroller 10 requires more time to implement
tax collection and reporting 11 procedures. 12 SECTION 8. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives 13 a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as 14 provided
by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this 15 Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this 16 Act takes effect September 1, 2005. 79R6202 MTB-P 19
DART Dallas Area Rapid Transit PO. Box 660163 Dallas. Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 February 4,2005 The Honorable R. Scott Wheeler Mayor, Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas
75001-9010 Dear Mayor Wheeler: t2. \. RON 􀁍􀁾􀁴􀁏 '31\31& As you know, the 79th Session of the Texas Legislature began on January 11. You will recall that in past sessions, the Dallas
Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors has approved a formal legislative' agenda. This session, however, the Board has chosen not to pursue a formal agenda but instead to adopt a statement
of principles. The Board approved the statement of principles unanimously at its January 25th meeting. The principles reinforce to our legislative delegation DART's steadfastness to
honor and fulfill the commitments made to our 13 member cities and the customers we serve every day. 1 have included a copy of the Board resolution for your information. We believe it
is important to let our representatives in Austin know that DART and our member city partners remain remain unified in our commitment to building out the system as promised to our stakeholders,
customers and bondholders. As partners in fulfilling regional transportation goals, I would urge you to carry this message to Austin as well in your discussions with our delegation members.
Thank you for your leadership on regional transportation issues and for your city's partnership with DART for the past 22 years. If you have any questions or comments regarding DART's
statement of principles for the 79th Legislature,please contact me at 214/749-2544. Sincerely, 􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁜􀁾􀁴 C· 􀀱􀀯􀀴􀀿􀀱􀁾􀀭 􀁲􀁾􀀧􀁔 m President! xecutive Director GCT:sb/jp/fp Enclosure
D Dallas Area Rapid Transit, RESOLUTION of the DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT (Legislative Ad Hoc Committee) Approval of DART's Statement of Principles fOlf the 79th Regular Session ofthe
Texas Legislature 050019 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the mission of Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) is to operate a safe, efficient and effective transportation system for its customers, thereby
improving their quality oflife as well as stimulating economic development in the region through the implementation of the DART Service Plan; and WHEREAS, the 79th Legislature convened
in Austin on January 11, 2005, and will be considering issues of interest and importance to Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART); and WHEREAS, the DART Board has reviewed a series of issues
that form the basis of DART's Statement of Principles that is consistent with the mission of the Agency and in the best interest of the public it serves; and WHEREAS, DART will maintain
its commitment to its 13 member cities by preserving the one percent sales tax funding source that is crucial to its continued growth and helps to ensure that the agency is able to honor
and fulfill its mission for the customers it serves on a daily basis and provide mobility to the region; and WHEREAS, DART will seek opportunities that will enhance our ability to serve
our customers and the region in a more efficient and effective manner; and WHEREAS, DART will remain vigilant in monitoring legislation that could have an adverse impact on the agency
in achieving its goals, mission and expansion schedule; and WHEREAS, DART will monitor and support legislation that will provide for sales tax equity among DART member cities and 4A
and 4B cities; and WHEREAS, the DART Board, staff and Austin counsel will monitor all legislative activities and bills to promote and protect DART's interests consistent with our mission
statement. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors that the Board Chair or his designee and the President/Executive Director or his designee
is authorized to protect the commitments made to DART's customers, member cities and the North Texas region, and is instructed to report such actions to the Board of Directors as soon
as feasible. 012505LAHAf.doc 1/25/20053:04 PM
050019 Approval of DART's Statement of Principles for the 79th Regular Session of the Texas Legislature \\f Secretary /r 012505LAHAf.doc 􀁾􀁾 􀁈􀁵􀁾 Chairman ATTEST: January 25,2005
Date 1/25/2005 12:54 PM
Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 January 21, 2005 Mr. Ron Whitehead Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Dear Mr. Whitehead:
c; 􀁃􀁕􀀧􀀭􀀬􀁬􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀮􀁜􀁃􀁜􀁾􀁪 Mj\-£-..l. c> 􀀺􀀭􀁓􀁜􀁾􀀵􀁃 ._ The purpose of this letter is to provide infonnation for each DART member city regarding the February 2005 Bus Service
Modifications. These modifications were approved by the DART Board of Directors on November 23, 2004 and involve approximately 25 routes that serve various parts of the DART Service
Area (maps enclosed). The majority of the modifications impact routes in the City of Dallas. In suburban areas, several modifications have been approved for the following cities (see
attached maps): • Town of Addison (Route #'s 31, 36, 205, 486) • Farmer's Branch (Route #s 185,331,486,488) • Garland (Route #s 164,412,513) • Irving (Route #s 202, 311) • Plano (Route
#s 316, 350, 572) • Richardson (Route# 463) • Rowlett (Route # 412). The service change modifications will be implemented on Monday, February 21, 2005. If there are questions or concerns
from your council members or constituents, please feel free to contact me at (214) 749-3070. GT/LM/dc Enclosures c: DART Board Sue Bauman Doug Allen
ROUTE 11 [fJ NORTH EXISTING ROUTE 􀀣􀁉􀀫􀁉􀀣􀁈􀁈􀁾􀀫􀁉􀀧 ROUTE(SEGMENT TO BE DELETED Planning &Development
ROUTE 12 J. B. Jackson Transit Center [fJ, NORTH --EXISTING ROUTE •••••-PROPOSED ROUTE Planning & Development
Planning &Development ROUTE 26 ---EXISTING ROUTE HHtlIIIH41+ ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED ffi NORTH
Planning &Development ROUTE 31 LEGEND: --EXISTING ROUTE ffi· NORTH CARROLLTON FARMERS BRANCH ADDISON DALLAS
Planning &Development ROUTE 36 ---EXISTING ROUTE .--.... PROPOSED ROUTE ffi NORTH DALLAS 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀱􀀧􀁴􀁾􀁬 ADDISON 􀁅􀁩􀀧􀀻􀁲􀁾􀀱 FARMERS BRANCH
ROUTE 50 J. B. Jackson Transit Center ffi· NORTH --EXISTING ROUTE ••••-. PROPOSED ROUTE Planning & Development
Planning & Development ROUTE 51 ---EXISTING ROUTE 11111111111111 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED ffi NORTH DALLAS UNIVERSITY PARK HIGHLAND PARK IRVING
1Irml:ma ·z 1:1 C ;0 •• o1:1 oen mc ;0 oC -l m
PROPOSED ROUTING 164 Midday Lineup ffi NORTH --EXISTING ROUTE .......... PROPOSED ROUTE Planning & Development
ROUTE 185 Luna Road Loop Included --EXISTING ROUTE _ .. __.-PROPOSED ROUTE Planning & Development 􀁛􀁾􀁊 NORTH CARROLLTON FARMERS BRANCH DALLAS
ROUTE 202 ffi Additional Valley Ranch Trips, February. 2005 NORTH --EXISTING ROUTE ----.-PROPOSED ROUTE Planning & Development
ROUTE 311 􀁛􀁾􀁬 NORTH bE"';':...__...􀁊􀁾􀁾􀀲􀁩􀀮 􀀮􀀮􀁊􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀀽􀀺􀀱􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁊􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾 LEGEND: L i IRVING ---EXISTING ROUTE Planning & Development
PLANO CARROLLTON RICHARDSON DALLAS RCIUTE 316 : EXISTING ROUTE Planning &Development i ---,
ROUTE 331 Luna Road Loop Discontinued --EXISTING ROUTE 11111111111111 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED Planning & Development ffil NORTH CARROLLTON FARMERS BRANCH DALLAS
Planning & Development ROUTE 341 ----EXISTING ROUTE PLANO CARROLLTON ADDISON 􀁲􀁾􀀮􀁊 FARMERS BRANCH DALLAS ffi NORTH
ROUTE 350 & TI SHUTTLE Proposed Service ffi· NORTH LEGEND: --EXISTING ROUTE _.-.-. PROPOSED ROUTE Planning & Development PLANO
ROUTE 409 J. B. Jackson Transit Center ffi NORTH LEGEND: --EXISTING ROUTE _ •• _.-PROPOSED ROUTE JIIIIIIIIIIIII ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED Planning & Development DALLAS
Planning & Development ROUTE 412 --EXISTING ROUTE ffi· NORTH
-0 􀁾􀁾::!. 􀁾 l.C 􀁾CCD <CD o "C 􀀮􀁾 􀁾..... YCRE ST 1:--CUM8ERLAN OAK FARMS Pt..TMAN 􀁾􀁗􀁅􀁌􀁌 􀁗􀁾 :iaoC -I m
ROUTE 445 ffi NORTH ---EXISTING ROUTE 11111111111111 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED Planning &Development
ROUTE 453 EXISTING ROUTE ---_.-PROPOSED ROUTE ffi NORTH Planning & Development
....-------------------------_._-------------_._----ROUTE: 463 -EXISTING ROUTE 􀀫􀀫􀁾􀁴􀀱􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀀱􀁈􀀫 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED Planning &Development ADDISON FARMERS BRANCH RICHARDSON
DALLAS GARLAND
ROUTE 466 ffi NORTH EXISTING ROUTE -... _.. PROPOSED ROUTE '1+111111111111 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED Planning & Development -=:cJ__W_O_ODHA VE _N􀁟􀁾 SUMMIT RIDGE􀁾􀁃􀁁􀁖􀁁􀁎 TRAiL
RIDG ---
ROUTE 475 Detour ffi NORTH --EXISTING ROUTE --_••-PROPOSED ROUTE Planning & Development
Planning & Development ROUTE 486 LEGEND: ---EXISTING ROUTE .............. PROPOSED ROUTE 1111111t+1+1++ ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED ffi NORTH ADD/SON FARMERS BRANCH DALLAS
Planning & Development ROUTE 488 Selected Trips ---EXISTING ROUTE ._•• _. PROPOSED ROUTE HHIIIIIIIIII ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED ffi NORTH ADDISON CARROLLTON FARMERS BRANCH DALLAS
ROUTE 510 ffi NORTH .. Planning & Development LEGEND: EXISTING ROUTE • __ ._. PROPOSED ROUTE 11111111111111 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED DALLAS
PROPOSED ROUTE 513 􀁛􀁾􀁉􀂷 Downtown Garland Station/Northeast Parkway NORTH --EXISTING ROUTE ._•••-PROPOSED ROUTE 11111111111111 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED Planning &Development
ROUTE 556 Eliminated ffi NORTH Planning & Development LEGEND: 11111111111111 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED DALLAS
ROUTE 572 Eliminated ffi NORTH Planning & Development LEGEND: 11111111111111 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED H##l##1# SATURDAY EXTENSION PLANO RICHARDSON
ROUTE 574 Selected Trips ffi NORTH --EXISTING ROUTE ------PROPOSED SELECTED TRIPS Planning & Development
ROUTE 760 EXISTING ROUTE ------PROPOSED ROUTE 11111111111111 ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED Planning & Development ffil NORTH
8117 Preston Road, Suite 202 Dallas, Texas 75225 USA 214.572.6580 fax: 214.572.6581 wvvw.c1eanenergyfuels.com 􀁾􀁾 Clean Energy'" November 8, 2004 The Honorable R. Scott Wheeler Mayor
Town of Addison P.o. Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Dear Mayor Wheeler: (} 􀁾􀁒􀁏􀁎 f'1'\kCI\O 'STb-VG -liM Please find enclosed information that we have sent to the DART Board concerning
natural gas fueled buses. We thought you might want this information, given your interest in cleaner air for the Metroplex. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns
regarding this information. We welcome any opportunity to visit with you about this. With your help, cleaner air is possible in the Metroplex. Sincerely, Jimmy Ramsey Account Manager
North America's leader in clean transportation
8117 Preston Road, Suite 202 Dallas, Texas 75225 USA 214.572.6580 fax: 214.572.6581 V\Tvvw,c1eanenergyfuels.com 􀁾􀁊 November 4, 2004 Clean Energy'" Mr. Huelon A. Harrison 3310 Grayson
Drive Dallas, TX 75224-3106 Dear Mr. Harrison: DART intends to procure 53 30 foot buses that are exclusively powered by diesel fuel. We believe purchasing diesel buses is a step backwards
for DART and for the region's air quality. The enclosed primer shows that exhaust from natural gas buses is cleaner than even the cleanest-burning diesel bus. We hope you will take the
time to carefully consider DART's responsibility forthe air quality in the Metroplex when making the decision as to which type of bus to purchase. We urge you to consider natural gas
buses. Natural gas vehicles make a difference. Please feel 'free to contact me with any questions or concerns. We welcome any opportunity to visit with you about this very important
environmental matter. ,,/Jimmy Ramsey Account Manager jramsey@c1eanenergyfuels.com Enclosure North America's leader in clean transportation
􀁾􀀼􀁲􀁊 Clean EnergysM North America'sleaderin dean transportation Clean Air Options for DART
TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION HARMFUL CHARACTERISTICS OF DIESEL EMISSIONS DIESEL PARTICULATE MATTER (DPM) NITROGEN OXIDES (NOx) COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS (HEAVY-DUTY ENGINES)
8iodiesel (820 & 8100) DiesellWater Emulsion (e.g. PuriNOx) TxLED (Texas Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel) Natural Gas (CNG & LNG) "BOLT-ON, BOLT-OFF" EMISSION REDUCnON TECHNOLOGIES Diesel Particulate
Traps (DPn Exhaust Gas Re-generation System (EGR) Selective Catalytic Reduction System (SCR) POLICY COURSE FOR DART HOW CAN CLEAN ENERGY HELP? KEY COMPANY SERVICES CONCLUSION DATA SOURCES
APPENDIX A (CLEAN ENERGY CORPORATE PROFILE AND CAPABILITIES) DART's Options for Cleaner Air 2 3334555668889 II 10 10 11 12 12 12
INTRODUGION In the coming weeks, DART will issue an RFP for 30 foot buses. It is our understanding this RFP will be for diesel only. We believe this course of action is a clear step
backwards for DART. The following is a primer describing the continued dangers of diesel exhaust, even with so called "clean diesel"; a diesel bus is a diesel bus. The ongoing air quality
crisis in the Metroplex is an issue every public agency must grapple with; otherwise the region will face Federal sanctions if we fail to clean our air. Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) are the
primary contributors to ozone, therefore reducing NOx emissions will help to significantly reduce ozone in the metroplex. It is estimated that 60% of all toxic emissions come from on-road,
heavy-duty engines. To effectively reduce the amount of ozone the citizens of the Metroplex are subjected to daily, the DART must take aggressive action toward lowering the emissions
of heavy-duty diesel engines. Diesel engines are one of this country's dirtiest transportation modes and most visible sources of air pollution. The majority of DFW residents are exposed
to diesel exhaust and toxic diesel particulate matter, often at levels that exceed those that have been shown to be damaging to human health. Children, the elderly and highly exposed
occupational groups are particularly at risk. Not only do the citizens of the DFW area deserve cleaner, healthier air but the continued economic growth of the Metroplex could depend
on it. DART must continue to reduce its emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) and oxides of Nitrogen (NOx). The future economic growth of the region depends on it. The future
health of the citizens of the region depends on it. HARMFUL CHARAGERISTICS OF DIESEL EMISSIONS Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) DPM's danger lies in its small size, large surface area,
and absorbed organic compounds. It is inhaled deep into the lungs, carrying large quantities of ash, organic carbon, organic compounds and sulfates deep into the lower respiratory tract,
where they can be eluted, metabolized and trans-located throughout the body. Of the absorbed organic compounds, the most harmful are polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and nitro-PAHs,
which are known to have mutagenic and carcinogenic properties. Exposure to DPM also causes: • Eye, nose, and throat irritation and respiratory symptoms • Short-term inflammation of the
airways • Initiation of allergic responses, exacerbation of immunological reactions to other allergens and to ground-level ozone • Long-term decreased lung function and chronic inflammation
of the lungs • Increases risk of premature death from specific types of heart disease o Low grade inflammation caused by soot imbedded in the human lung triggers defense mechanisms that
tend to clog arteries and lead to chest pain, irregular cardiac rhythms and heat attacks DART's Options for Cleaner Air 3
Numerous international health agencies (U.S. EPA, American Lung Association, National Institute of Environmental Health, and others) have concluded that diesel exhaust is a probable
or known carcinogen. Various U.S. studies estimating the lifetime excess cancer risk caused by air pollution have concluded that DPM is responsible for 70% -89% of the total cancer risk
caused by air pollution in the U.S. Certain groups have an even higher risk of developing respiratory problems and cancer as they are exposed to higher than average ambient air concentrations
of DPM: • Children riding in school buses are exposed to DPM levels that would lead to a lifetime excess cancer rate of up to 1 in 256 if they were exposed to this concentration of DPM
over their lifetime. • People living near warehouse distribution center operations and high volume freeways also face an elevated cancer risk: up to one in 1,818. • Certain occupational
groups face an additional cancer risk due to their high exposure to DPM. (e.g. truck, heavy heavy equipment, and farm tractor drivers, outdoor workers and mechanics all face an average
33% -47% increased risk of developing lung cancer. Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) are another component of diesel exhaust that pose a significant public health burden. NOx's
harmful effects on human health come from its acting directly as the gas N02, through its role as a ground level ozone precursor, and in the form of particulate nitrate and other toxic
chemicals, NOx emissions are estimated to account for nearly 40% of air-related premature mortality and 60% of cardio respiratory admissions to hospitals. It is important to note that
technologies used to reduce DPM emissions may not reduce NOx emissions (i.e. Biodiesel). Nitrogen oxides clearly pose a serious health threat and provide further rationale for reducing
diesel exhaust emissions. Since 1970, the U.S. EPA has tracked emissions of the six principal air pollutants -carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide,
and volatile organic compounds. Emissions of all of these pollutants have decreased significantly except for NOx which has increased approximately 10% over this period. Because of the
various compounds and derivatives in the family of nitrogen oxides, including nitrogen dioxide, nitric acid, nitrous oxide, nitrates, and nitric oxide, NOx causes a wide variety of health
and environmental impacts: • Ground-level ozone (Smog) -damages lung tissue and reduces lung function as well as damages vegetation and reduces crop yields • Acid Rain -damages forests;
causes deterioration of cars, buildings and historical monuments; and causes lakes and streams to become acidic and unsuitable for many fish • Water Quality Deterioration -upsets the
chemical balance of nutrients used by aquatic plants and animals; oxygen depletion and reduced fish and shellfish populations • Particles -NOx reacts with ammonia, moisture and other
compounds to form nitric acid vapor and related particles which damage lung tissue and the respiratory system; can cause or worsen emphysema and bronchitis and aggravate heart disease
DART's Options for Cleaner Air 4
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS (Heavy-duty Engines) Although changes in diesel engine technology over time have changed the chemical composition of DPM, total PAH emissions are believed
to have stayed the same and DPM emitted by new diesel engines continues to pose a public health risk. The problem is that even though diesel engines have gotten somewhat cleaner, they're
still running on diesel, an inherently dirty fuel. 8iodiesel (820 & 8100) Biodiesel (fatty acid alkyl esters) is a diesel replacement fuel made from a blend of new and/or used vegetable
oils and/or animal fats. Just like petroleum diesel, Biodiesel operates in compression-ignition engines. Blends of up to 20% Biodiesel (mixed with petroleum diesel fuels) can be used
in nearly all diesel equipment and are compatible with most storage and distribution equipment. These low level blends (20% and less) generally do not require any engine modifications;
however, users should consult their OEM and engine warranty statement. Higher blends, even pure Biodiesel (100% Biodiesel, orB1 00); can be used in many engines built since 1994 with
little or no modification. Transportation and storage, however, require special management and additives must be used to keep them from solidifying in the winter. Using Biodiesel in
a conventional diesel engine reduces emissions of unburned hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, sulfates, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, nitrated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and particulate
matter. But there are some serious problems that come from using Biodiesel and these are: o A 2% -10% increase in NOx emissions o Higher fuel costs (5% -20% more 'p/gallon than conventional
diesel) o Reduced fuel efficiency (engines burn 2% -5% more fuel) o Corrosive to fuel lines o A need to employ expensive, non-EPA approved, "Bolt-on, Bolt-off" technologies in order
to meet 2007 mandates . Diese/IWater Emulsion (e.g. PuriNOx) PuriNOx is a formulation of diesel that uses water to cool a diesel engine's operating temperature. The idea that engine
temperature is the dominant effect on l'lOx emissions has been widely known. Thus, efforts to decrease peak combustion temperatures, and subsequently NOx, have been studied by many researchers.
Direct injection of water was an idea that investigators studied prior to emulsions. It was widely known that the cooling effect of water could help to reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions
and the delayed effect that water had on injection could also serve to reduce particulate matter (PM) emissions. However, the feasibility of this idea was questioned in Iightof the wear
and tear on the engine due to water coming in contact with engine parts. Fuel-water emulsions were DART's Options for Cleaner Air 5
considered a more feasible alternative to direct water injection due to the fact that water could be mixed with the fuel prior to introducing it into the engine. But this, too, has proven
to be rife with problems. Studies have shown PuriNOx to: o Yield up to 40% less torque o Burns 20% less fuel efficient o Average $0.27 more per gallon than conventional diesel o Smoke
more than conventional diesel o Need separation technologies (fuel must be continually agitated to prevent the diesel and water from separating) o Corrode fuel injectors o Require summer
&winter blends o Have higher maintenance problems TxLED (Texas Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel) A few years ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a final rulemaking requiring
drastic reductions in the sulfur content of highway diesel fuel. "Clean diesel," or ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD), enables the use of various exhaust after-treatment devices for new
truck and bus tailpipes. This add-on technology needs very low-sulfur fuel to work. Older engines can run on TxLED and they will experience minimal emission reductions but newer vehicles
equipped with these devices can fail if run on regular diesel. TxLED is Texas' blend of ULSD. Ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel is a specially refined diesel fuel that has dramatically lower
sulfur content than regular on-highway diesel. The current legal limit for sulfur in diesel fuel is 500 parts per million (ppm), while the new rulemaking imposes a limit of 15 ppm. The
lower sulfur content produces fewer sulfate emissions and enables the use of emission-reduction equipment (each with their own set of problematic issues) to lower emissions of particulates
and nitrogen oxides. In general, TxLED will provide some level of emission reductions. But, because the sharply lower sulfur limit will entail new capital investment and higher operating
costs for refiners, there are serious concerns that the transition to ultra-low-sulfur diesel might constrain supplies and significantly raise prices. There is also an issue with the
fuel's availability since, at the present time, only one refinery in Texas has the capability to produce it. As for its ability to reduce NOx emissions, TxLED, alone, will only provide
only a 5.7% reduction as compared to regular diesel. Like all diesel fuel hybrids, TxLED's true emission reductions will come from un-approved "Bolton, Bolt-off" technology. Natural
Gas (eNG & LNG) Natural gas is the cleanest burning alternative transportation fuel available today. Long recognized as an excellent fuel when used to generate electricity, heat homes,
and fuel industrial facilities, the true ability of natural gas as a transportation fuel only recently has been exploited. In the last several years, original equipment manufacturers
(OEMs) have produced an impressive array of natural gas vehicles (I\JGVs), including passenger cars, pickup trucks, school and transit DART's Options for Cleaner Air 6
buses, refuse haulers, and heavy-duty trucks. Many of these vehicles operate using the cleanest internal combustion engines ever manufactured. Without exception, wherever manufacturers
have sought to optimize their engines to take advantage of the unique properties of natural gas (e.g., high octane), NGVs have surpassed all other competitors in delivering superior
emissions performance. Three reasons why natural gas is an environmentally friendly fuel First, pipeline natural gas typically consists of about 90 percent methane (CH4). The emissions
from natural gas vehicles are primarily water, carbon dioxide and small amounts of NOx. Natural gas vehicles on the whole contribute less to greenhouse gas formation because natural
gas has less carbon than gasoline and other petroleum motor fuels. Natural gas also contains almost no toxic components. Gasoline and diesel fuels and their exhaust contain numerous
harmful chemical agents (benzene, 1, 3-butadiene, arsenic, and nickel) which are known to cause cancer in humans. Secondly, the fuel cycle emissions of natural gas are much less than
other transportation fuels. Fuel cycle emissions include emissions that occur during energy extraction, processing, conversion, transportation and distribution. Because it generally
is not refined or transported by truck or barge, natural gas does not pose nearly the transportation related environmental and safety hazards associated with gasoline and diesel. Thirdly,
as a motor fuel, natural gas provides superior emissions performance relative to gasoline and diesel. Among the reasons for this are that natural gas vehicles (NGVs) have virtually no
evaporative or running loss emissions due to their sealed fuel systems and negligible refueling emissions since the fuel is 90-99 percent methane. NGVs also have lower"off cycle" emissions, lower cold-start emissions and have better emission durability due to the reduced complexity of their emission control systems. Furthermore, the benefits of I\JGVs
in reducing" real world" pollutant emissions from vehicles inuse is expected to be even greater than those measured by today's tailpipe standards which do not test for many common driving
conditions. Particulate Matter (PM) Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) .1 2.5 50% reduction 32 % reduction Noise Noise (decibels) 80% reduction The superior emissions reduction of natural gas over
other alternatives to conventional diesel fuel, its benefit of reducing our country's dependence on foreign sources of oil, as well as its ability to act as a bridging technology to
hydrogen fuel cells make it the heavy-duty vehicle fuel of choice. DART's Options fOl' Cleaner Air 7
"BOLT-ON, BOLT-OFF" EMISSION REDUCTION TECHNOLOGIES Although changes in diesel engine technology over time have improved their emissions, they still burn diesel and there is just so
much that can be done to clean up an inherently dirty fuel. Whether diesel is blended with vegetable oils, animal fats, water or has its sulfur content drastically reduced, it is still
diesel and thus will always pose a significant threat to public safety. The only way for diesel engines to meet the U.S. EPA's standards is to incorporate the use of non-EPA-approved,
retrofit technologies like Particulate Traps, Exhaust Gas Re-circulation (EGR) systems and Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) systems among other systems. Diesel Particulate Traps (OPT)
A diesel particulate trap is an external filter that is added to the engines exhaust system. Its job is to catch or "trap" particulate matter (soot) before it enters the atmosphere.
The system works but there is serious concern about the" regeneration" of the trap and thus its overall longevity and cost-effectiveness. Regeneration is the process of cleaning the
carbon deposits off of the filter. Carbon ignites at about 5500 C. In normal operation this temperature would rarely be achieved in the exhaust pipe. So some traps have to use external
means such as fuel burners or electrical heaters to raise the temperature high enough to burn off the soot deposits. Once the carbon has been successfully burned from the filter an ash
residue is left that must then be disposed of. As stated earlier, a drawback to these traps is that not all filters can be successfully "regenerated" and so they must be replaced every
10 -12 months. Diesel particulate traps only reduce particulate matter and must be used in conjunction with other technologies that reduce NOx. These have had very limited success with
stop and go heavy-duty diesel engines like transit buses, school buses, refuse trucks and local-use delivery trucks in stop and go traffic as they cannot generate enough heat to sustain
the burning of the carbon. These regenerative particulate traps also will use 4% to 6% more diesel fuel. Exhaust Gas Re-generation System (EGR) Oxygen is required for fuel to be burned
in an engine. The required oxygen is usually supplied by taking in air from the atmosphere. However, the air that surrounds us also contains a large quantity of nitrogen. The high temperatures
found within the engine cause nitrogen to react with any unused oxygen to form nitrogen oxides [NOx]. An EGR system directs some of the exhaust gases back into the intake of the engine.
These gases have already been used by the engine and no longer contain much oxygen. So, by mixing the exhaust gases with fresh air, the amount of oxygen entering the engine is reduced
and since there is less oxygen to react with, fewer nitrogen oxides are formed. Besides increased maintenance costs, an EGR is limited by the number of diesel engines currently able
to use the technology. It is our understanding that DART has used this system with some success in retrofitting older diesel buses. We applaud DART for reducing emissions from its existing
fleet, however as yet this technology has not been certified by the EPA and until it is the region can not take credit for these reductions. DART's Options for Cleaner Air 8
Selective Catalytic Reduction System (SCR) SCR systems inject liquid urea or ammonia into the vehicle's exhaust stream. The ammonia molecules combine with nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions
to form water and atmospheric nitrogen (a harmless gas). But in order to reduce NOx emissions to the U.S. EPA required levels, an excess amount of ammonia must be injected. This extra
unused ammonia, called "slip", enters the atmosphere, leading to the formation of fine particulate matter and nitrous oxide. Fine particulate matter The Urea or ammonia slip discharged
from SCRs combines with sulfur to form fine particulate matter. Fine particulates, which lodge deeply in the lungs, have been linked to various health problems including asthma, lung
disease and death. Acidification Urea or ammonia contributes to the acidification of soils and lakes. Climate Change and Ozone Laver Depletion Urea or ammonia emissions that land on
soils are converted by soil microbes into nitrous oxide (N20), which is both a powerful greenhouse gas and a stratospheric ozone destroyer. The global warming potential of nitrous oxide
is 320-times greater than that of carbon dioxide. Add-on technologies are expensive, some are unreliable, most are unapproved by the U.S. EPA, but, ultimately, they serve to further
complicate the diesel engine thus drastically increase its maintenance costs. + Source: Southwest Research Institute (SWRI), presentation to American Trucking Association 5/14/2003 DART's
Options for Cleaner Air 9
In some instances the technologies themselves can pose a significant health risk (SCRs). Yet, probably the greatest danger these add-on technologies pose is their ease of removal. Anything
that can be easily added to a system can just as easily be removed. In other words, as soon as fleet managers begin to notice the drop off in power, the decreased fuel efficiency, the
increased fuel costs, and increased maintenance expenses these devices cause, there is precedence where they have been removed, thus the name... " Bolt-on, Bolt-off." POLICY COURSE FOR
DART The recently passed TERP (Texas Emissions Reduction Program) legislation will provide $140 million dollars per year for the next four years to help offset city, county and private
fleet incremental expenses incurred when converting diesel fleets to cleaner burning alternative fuels. Added to other available federal funding sources (Department of Energy, U.S. EPA,
etc.), it is possible for DART to proactively take control of its future. It is imperative that the region take the lead in reducing heavy-duty diesel emissions. DART must lead by example
along with other public and private entities to successfully stave off the clean air crisis that is now before the region. The DART board should require the upcoming purchase of 30'
buses to be natural gas for several reasons: 1. Even when compared to today's cleanest diesel buses, if these 53 buses were natural gas, NOx emissions would be reduced by 12 tons/year
and PM emissions reduced by 1.2 tons/year. 2. Buying diesel buses is a step backwards from clean fuel technologies. DART should maintain its leadership position. 3. TERP can help offset
up to 100% of the incremental cost between new diesel and new natural gas buses. 4. TERP can pay for up to 50% of the cost of infrastructure. 5. DART has a successful track record getting
TERP funding --funding for natural gas buses should be no different. 6. Every gallon of natural gas displaces a gallon of foreign imported oil. With oil prices at $SOlbarrel, DART can
take take a stand by doing something about our dependency on foreign sources of oil. HOW CAN CLEAN ENERGY HELP? Clean Energy is the largest provider of vehicular natural gas for fleets
and related turnkey services in l\Jorth America. We currently design, operate, maintain and support natural gas fueling stations for tens of thousands of vehicles, including refuse,
taxi, shuttle, airport, transit and trucking fleets. Key Company Services • Turnkey CNG and LNG station design, construction, and maintenance DART's Options for Cleaner Air 10
• Long-term, price-protected fueling contracts • LNG delivery • Grant writing • Public policy support Clean Energy not only makes natural gas fueling stations accessible, but also affordable.
For qualifying fleet clients, we will provide up to 100% of the capital needed to design, build and maintain a refueling station in return for a price-protected long-term fueling contract.
In other words, it is possible for us to provide DARTa gas refueling station at no up-front cost. Leveraging our industry-leading expertise, Clean Energy will identify cost-saving strategies
to make fueling solutions predictable and affordable. In addition, as previously mentioned, TERP funding can help offset up to 50% of the cost of installing a new natural gas fuelling
station. CONCLUSION With the U.S. EPA having designated the DFW metroplex as a non-attainment area for ground level ozone, it is more important than ever that DART take an aggressive
role in cleaning the air its citizens breathe. Their health and the region's future future economic growth depend on it. Heavyduty diesel engines are responsible for over 60% of the
toxic emissions in and around Dallas. Therefore, the DART must work to get these dirty engines off the roads and decrease the use of diesel fuel. Today, however, there is an alternative
and it is natural gas. Today... • Natural gas is the only alternative fuel that is able to replace heavy-duty diesel engines. • State and federal funding is available to help offset
incremental cost differences associated with moving to a natural gas platform. • Clean Energy is capable of installing CNG/LNG infrastructure for no up front cost to DART. • DART should
maintain its leadership by going forward by phasing in natural gas and not go backwards by buying diesel. DART's Options for Cleaner Air ] 1
DATA SOURCES 1. "Technical Analysis of the Effect of Biodiesel on Exhaust Emissions," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2. "Closing the Diesel Divide -Protecting Public Health from
Diesel Air Pollution," Hilary Decker, Vickie Patton, Janea Scott, Nancy Spencer 3. "Impacts of lubrizol's PuriNOx Water/Diesel Emulsion on Exhaust Emissions from Heavy-Duty Engines,"
-U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 4. "Greening Garbage Trucks: New Technologies for Cleaner Air," INFORM, Deborah Gordon, Juliet Burdelski, James S. Cannon 5. "The Public Health
Impact of Diesel Particulate Matter," Sierra Club of Canada, Jacqueline Sharp 6. "Failing the Grade: How Diesel School Buses Threaten Our Children's Health," Coalition for Clean Air,
Todd R. Campbell 7. "Selective catalytic Reduction," Ontario Clean Air Alliance, Air Quality Issues Fact Sheet #6 APPENDIX A (Clean Energy Corporate Profile and Capabilities) DART's
Options for Cleaner Air ]2
DART's Options for Cleaner Air 􀁾􀁾 Clean EnergysM North America'sleaderin dean transportation APPENDIX A: Clean Energy Corporate Profile and Capabilities 13
www.c1eanenergyfuels.com Corporate Headquarters 3020 Old Ranch Parkway Seal Beach CA 90740 5624932804 transit Many of Clean Energy's largest and most forwardthinking fleet clients represent
the transit industry. Clean Energy offers the expertise, CNG and LNG solutions, and turnkey services to meet the substantial fueling needs of transit fleets. Many of the industry's leading
transit service providers have benefited from their partnerships with Clean Energy. Beginning 2003, Clean Energy is fueling more than 1,000 transit buses across North America. • Airport
Transit Systems • Denver RTD • Foothill Transit • Ft. Worth T • Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority • Phoenix Transit • RPTA • San Diego Transit Systems • Shuttleport • Sun Line
Transit • Tempe Transit Sun Line Transit The nation's first transit property to convert 100% of its fleet from diesel to natural gas, SunLine Transit has led the industry in exploring
the advantages of alternative fuels. SeNing the Coachella Valley in Southern California, California, Sun Line continues to expand its reach, introducing more communities to the clean-air
benefits of NGVs. Clean Energy's successful partnership aimed at expanding regional infrastructure with SunLine, the first FTAapproved public-private partnership, has served as a model
for similar ambitious collaborations in the transit industry. As SunLine transitioned its fleets from petroleum to natural gas, Clean Energy was there to provide the infrastructure and
support seNices. At the core of SunLine's service, 100% of the Sun Bus fleet operates on compressed natural gas provided by Clean Energy fueling stations. Once associated with using
the oldest equipment in the region, SunBus fleets are now state-of-the-art NGVs. Since acquiring SunLine's fueling stations in 1997 from Southern California Gas Company, Clean Energy
has partnered with SunBus on numerous proJects of mutual interest. Tempe Transit The transit provider for the City of Tempe, AZ, and the surrounding area, Tempe operates more than 100
natural gas powered buses. LNG proved the best solution for accommodating Tempe's longer routes and heavier fuel consumption. Clean Energy designed, built and operates Tempe's LNG fueling
facility, complete with two 11,000 gallon storage tanks. Tempe is currently consuming more than 200,000 gallons per month. Foothill Transit SeNicing the San Gabriel and Pomona Valleys
of Southern California, Foothill Trans.it represents another innovative leader in cleaner transit alternatives. Foothill is also the 2,d largest municipal transit operator in LA County.
In 2001, Clean Energy won a competitive contract, becoming the natural gas fuel provider for Foothill following its decision to purchase 66 natural gas buses. Clean Energy was entrusted
with the design, construction and maintenance of a state-ofthe-art CNG fueling station with a capacity exceeding 2,100 gallons per hour. The station was completed in 2002, at a cost
of $2.5 million. The fueling station will seNe as the backbone of Foothill Transit's CNG fleet for years to come. 􀁾􀁾 Clean Energy'" formerly ENRG San Diego Transit System In June 2002,
Clean Energy and the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) entered into a long-term contract for Clean Energy to become the MTDB's CNG fuel supplier for three transit facilities
in the San Diego metropolitan area. These stations, owned by the MTDB, dispense nearly 5 million gallons per year of CNG, fueling over 500 transit buses. The MTDB has entrusted to Clean
Energy all maintenance and operational duties for these stations. Additionally, Clean Energy acts as a natural gas commodity consultant and broker for the MTDB, providing information
on current and projected natural gas market trends, advice on "locking in" commodity price, and capital to purchase forward contracts. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority In 2003,
Clean Energy begins fueling the natural gas fleet of buses serving the Boston area, the oldest and 4" largest transportation system in the U.S. Airport Transit Systems Clean Energy supports
particularly demanding requirements of airport shuttle bus systems, operating 2417, in such locations as San Francisco, Oakland, Denver, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Phoenix and Seattle-Tacoma.
company profile and vision 􀁾􀁾 Clean Energy'M formerly ENRG www.c1eanenergyfuels.com Corporate Headquarters 3020 Old Ranch Parkway Seal Beach CA 90740 562493.2804 Company Profile Incorporated
in June 2001, Clean Energy was formed by the combined assets of three industry leaders Pickens Fuel Corp., Terasen (formerly BC Gas) and Westport Innovations. Formerly known as Pickens
Fuel, Clean Energy embodies the initial Vision of Boone Pickens, a leading advocate of vehicular natural gas and instrumental participant In clean-air transportation. In creating Clean
Energy, Pickens Fuel joined forces with Terasen, one of British Columbia's key providers of energy and utility services, and Westport Innovations, leading-edge developers of natural
gas fueling systems. In 2003, Clean Energy acquired Blue Energy & Technologies LLC to enter the growing Texas and Colorado markets for CNG and LNG Adding these operations increased the
Company's systemwide count to more than 145 natural gas fueling stations Today, Clean Energy Energy is the largest provider of vehicular natural gas for fleets and related turnkey services
in North America. Leveraging Its founding companies' technologies, resources and industry recognition, Clean Energy services an ever-expanding customer base with stateof-the-art natural
gas fuelIng stations strategically located across the U.S. and Canada. Clean Energy currently designs, operates, maintains and supports natural gas fueling stations for tens of thousands
of fleet vehicles, including refuse, taxi, shuttle, transit, airport and trucking fleets. Volume growth at eXisting stations ("same store") exceeded 80% in 2002. Clean Energy also has
a marketing partnership with Ford Motor Company to assist in marketing Ford natural gas vehicles in North America. Company Vision The Clean Energy vision is two-fold The Company remains
committed to delivering the benefits of vehicular natural gas to fleet operators across North America, with a comprehensive turnkey solution and support services. At the same time, Clean
Energy is dedicated to protecting the environment by promoting c1ea n transportation solutions. Through successful partnerships with recognized fleets, Clean Energy has demonstrated
that business and environmental goals can be achieved, with mutually beneficial results. Key Company Services -Turnkey CNG and LNG station design, construction and maintenance -Long-term,
price-protected fueling contracts -LNG delivery Grant writing -Public policy support
managenlent team 􀁾􀁾 Clean Energy'· formerly ENRG www.c1eanenergyfuels.com Corporate Headquarters 3020 Old Ranch Parkway Seal 8each CA 90740 5624932804 Comprised of experienced industry
leaders, the Clean Energy management team offers a broad range of expertise in the arena of alternate fuel solutions, equally dedicated to improving clients' business operations as well
as the environment. Board of Directors -Gordon Barefoot, Chairman (Senior Vice President, BC Gas) -Alan P Basham, Clean Energy -David Demers (CEO, Westport Innovations) -Thomas Labrecque
(Partner, Perseus Capital) -Andrew Littlefair, Clean Energy -Boone Pickens, Founder -John Reid (President & CEO, BC Gas) -Kenneth Socha (Partner, Perseus Capital) -Milt Woensdregt (CFa,
BC Gas) Advisory Directors -Richard Cromwell (CEO & General Manager, Sunline Transit) -John Herrington (Former U.S. Secretary of Energy) -Warren Mitchell (Chairman & CEO, Southern California
Gas Company, retired) Executive Officers Andrew Littlefair, President and CEO A Board Board Member and Officer of the NGV coalition for the past five years, Mr. Littlefair leverages
his industry expertise in overseeing Clean Energy's daily operations. Mr. Littlefair developed a number of the earliest successful models instrumental in switching fleets to natural
gas, embraced by SuperShuttle, Southern California Gas Company and Chrysler. Alan P. Basham, Executive Vice President With a background including extensive international managerial experience,
Mr. Basham oversees Clean Energy's engineering and operations groups as well as public and private partnerships with OEMs in the natural gas industry. Mr. Basham's responsibilities at
Clean Energy extend to the company's LNG operations. James N. Harger, Senior Vice President, Sales and Marketing During Mr. Harger's tenure at SoCalGas, he assisted in the launch of
the utility company's NGV program and developed economic models for several vehicle classes and stations. For Clean Energy, Mr. Harger has developed the industry model for the company's
company's key public and private partnerships. Mr. Harger is responsible for overseeing all of Clean Energy's sales and marketing activities. Mitchell Pratt, Vice President of Business
Development Mr. Pratt joined the Clean Energy team following an 18-year career at SoCal Gas in which he was charged with overseeing customer satisfaction, financial and distribution
operations, public policy and sales and marketing. Mr. Pratt has a degree in engineering as well as an MBA. Mr. Pratt is responsible for executing Clean Energy's strategic acquisition
and expansion plans. Brian Powers, Director of Operations With a background in natural gas extending over 19 years, Mr. Powers has overseen the successful operation of 40 natural gas
fueling stations in Canada. Mr. Powers was instrumental in developing Canada's initial natural gas industry standards, which served as the model for U.S. standards. Denis C. K. Ding,
Manager of Engineering Mr. Ding has designed, engineered, installed and managed the construction of more than 75 natural gas stations across the globe. Mr. Ding is responsible for Clean
Energy's new station construction as well as ongoing upgrades and improvements to existing stations.
turnkey solution 􀁾􀁾 Clean Energy'· fonnerly ENRG www.cleanenergyfuels.com Corporate Headquarters 3020 Old Ranch Parkway Seal Beach CA 90740 562.493.2804 Thousands of fleet vehicles
rely on Clean Energy's turnkey natural gas fueling solution to keep them operating every day. Clean Energy does more than promise the benefits of vehicular natural gas. It delivers those
benefits with a comprehensive array of expertise and support services -with reliability, and costs modified to meet its clients' needs. Clean Energy will design, build, operate and maintain
customized, private CNG, LNG, or UCNG fueling stations so that clients can remain focused on operating their fleets at full capacity. Comprehensive Clean Energy services include: Project
Scoping: Following an in-depth analysis of fleet and fueling needs, a dedicated Clean Energy Account Manager helps to identify the right fueling model. Grant Preparation: Clean Energy's
full-time Grant Specialists have secured over $40 million in grant funds for fleet clients. Clean Energy will wade through the myriad grant rules and regulations to prepare an award-winning
grant application, as well as prepare the ongoing reporting for the duration of the agreement. Station Design: Clean Energy's full-time projed management team custom-designs fueling
stations, developing and adhering to strid timelines. Experienced Clean Energy engineers offer their expertise to determine the optimal equipment layout and location. Plan Check/Permitting:
Clean Energy will submit the design plans to the appropriate local agency for approval, at the same time securing all the necessary permits and making certain that construdion begins
on time. Construction/Project Management: Armed with the proper permits and approval, Clean Energy begins construction on the station. Working closely withour design engineers, the Clean
Energy construction team ensures that the station matches the specifications. An onsite team member remains available once the construdion is completed to address any issues. Once the
station is operational, Clean Energy familiarizes drivers with the fueling system. Station Operation/Maintenance: With one of the industry's leading maintenance programs, Clean Energy
conduds regular, onsite preventative and scheduled maintenance to ensure peak performance, and is ready to respond 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to keep fleets operating. Customer Service/Billing:
Account Managers provide a single point of contad for any issues regarding daily station operations, and provide ongoing assistance in training, billing, grant information, incentives,
public policy development and more. The Clean Energy Advantage Take advantage of Clean Energy's Turnkey Solution and also take advantage of multiple bottom-line benefits. Little or no
investment: Clean Energy not only makes natural gas fueling stations accessible,. but affordable. For qualifying fleet clients, Clean Energy provides up to 100% of the capital needed
to design, build and maintain a fueling station, in return for a price-proteded longterm fueling contrad. Cost savings: Leveraging its industry-leading expertise, Clean Energy will identify
cost-saving strategies to make fueling solutions even more affordable. Price protection: Clean Energy's long-term fueling contrads allow clients to pay agreed-upon rates regardless of
fluctuating market conditions.
www.c1eanenergyfuels.com Corporate Headquarters 3020 Old Ranch Parkway Seal Beach CA 90740 5624932804 i\r1an)' c-f (iean Energy's largest and rnost fOni\'Cirdthinking fleet clients represEnt
the transit indu5try. Clean Energy 􀁯􀁦􀁦􀁥􀁲􀁾􀁪 the expHtise, 􀁯􀁾􀁣􀀺 anel 􀁌􀀮􀁾􀁊􀁇 solutions, and tUlnkey sel'vices to meet the substantial fueling needs of transit fleets. Many
of the industry's leading transit service providers have benefited fron-, their partnerships with Clean Energy. Beginning 2003, Clean Energy is fueling mOl'e than 1,000 transit buses
across North America. Natura\Gas 􀁾􀁩􀁉􀁬 for Vehicles • Airport Transit Systems • Denver RTD • Foothill Transit • Ft. Worth T • Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority • Phoenix
Transit • RDTA • San Diego Transit Systems • SunLine Transit • Tempe Transit SunLine Tramit The nation's first transit property to convert 100% of its fleet from diesel to natural gas,
SunLlne Transit has led the industry in exploring the advantages of alternative fuels. Serving the Coachella Valley in Southern California, SunLine continues to expand its reach, introducing
more communities to the clean-air benefits of NGVs Clean Energy's successful partnership aimed at expanding regional infrastructure With SunLine, the first FTAapproved public-private
partnership, has served as a model for similar ambitious collaborations in the transit industry. As SunLine transitioned its fleets from petroleum to natural gas, Clean Energy was there
to provide the infrastructure and support services. At the core of SunLine's service, 100% of the SunBus fleet operates on compressed natural gas provided by Clean Energy fuellrlg stations.
Once associated witll using the oldest equipment in the region, SunBus fleets are now state-of-the-art NGVs. Since 'acquiring SunLine's fueling stations In 1997 from Southern California
Gas Company, Clean Energy has partnered with SunBus on numerous projects of mutual interest. Tempe Transit The transit provider for the City of Tempe, AZ, and the surrounding area, Tempe
operates more than 100 natural gas powered buses. LNG proved the best solution for accommodating Tempe's loriger routes and heavier fuel consumption. Clean Energy designed, built and
operates Tempe's LNG fueling facility, complete With two 11,000 gallon storage tanks. Tempe IS currently consuming more than 200,000 gallons per month. Foothill Transit Servicing the
San Gabriel and Pomona Valleys of Southern California, Foothill Transit represents another innovative leader in cleaner transit alternatives. Foothill is also the 2"" largest municipal
transit operator in LA County. In 2001, Clean Energy won a competitive contract, becoming the natural gas fuel provider for Foothill following its deciSion to purchase 66 natural gas
buses. Clean Energy was entrusted With the design, construction and maintenance of a state-ofthe-art CNG fueling station with a capacity exceeding 2,100 gallons per hour The station
was completed in 2002, at a cost of $2.5 million. The fueling station will serve as the backbone of Foothill Transit's CNG fleet for years to come. 􀁾􀁾 Clean Energy" ;O!n;c-riy ENRG
San Diego Transit System In June 2002, Clean Energy and the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) entered into a long-term contract for Clean Energy to become the MTDB's CNG
fuel supplier for three transit facilities in the San Diego metropolitan area. These stations, owned by the MTDB, dispense nearly 5 million gallons per year of CNG, fueling over 500
transit buses. The MTDB has entrusted to Clean Energy all maintenance and operational duties for these stations. Additionally, Clean Energy acts as a natural gas commodity consultant
and broker for the MTDB, providing information on current and proJected natural gas market trends, advice on "locking in" commodity price, and capital to purchase forward contracts.
Massachusett5 Bay Transportation Authority In 2003, Clean Energy begins fueling the natural gas fleet of buses serving the Boston area, the oldest and 4th largest transportation system
in the U.S. Airport Transit Systems Clean Energy supports particularly demanding requirements of airport shuttlebus systems, operating 24n, in such locations as San Francisco, Oakland, Denver, Dallas-Ft Worth, Phoenix and Seattle-Tacoma.
Bob 􀁾􀀧􀁨􀁥􀁬􀁬􀀩􀁳 􀁍􀁾􀁹􀁏􀁩􀀧􀀢 June 7,2004 Mayor R. Scott Wheeler Town of Addison 5300 Belt Line Road Addison, Texas 75001 TJln 􀁥􀁩􀁴􀁹􀁮􀁦􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁳􀁲􀁭􀀩􀁾􀁮􀀳 Or·fJnCf1 T.:l'iaS
C-'. to'" 􀁴􀀭􀁉􀁜􀁾􀁬􀀧􀁜􀀩 􀁾􀀮􀁷􀁲􀁵 Subject: . DART 2030 Transit System Plan Update Dear Mayor Wheeler: Dallas Area Rapid Transit is conducting studies intended to update their long-range
plan for providing transit service. DART has identified numerous potential rail transit routes to be evaluated during the Transit System Plan update process. At the May 25, 2004 City
Council meeting the Farmers Branch City Council adopted Resolution Number 2004-059 in support ofproject for the DART 2030 Plan. The resolution reaffirms that the City's top priority
relative to DART remains the rapid completion of the Northwest Corridor light rail line and initiation of service to the Farmers Branch Station before 2009. The planning of future DART
projects must in no way interfere or delay the completion ofprojects provided for in the current system plan, including the Northwest Corridor project to Farmers Branch. The long-range
planning of future transit service to address needs beyond the fulfillment ofDART's existing Transit System Plan commitments is an activity supported by the City of Farmers Branch. The
resolution also identifies, from among the many routes being studied by DART, routes ofpriority interest to the City ofFa..'1ners Branch. The City of Fai1l1ers Branch recommends that
DART favorably consider adding the following three rail transit routes to the DART Transit System Plan: 1. The Burlington Northern Railroad alignment from the Trinity Railway Express
line in Irving through the west side of Farmers Branch to the Northwest Corridor Line at Belt Line Road in Carrollton. 2. The Inwood Spur /LBJ alignment from the Cotton Belt Railroad
in Addison through the east side of Farmers Branch to the North Central light rail line in Dallas.
Letter to Mayor Wheeler June 7, 2004 Page 2 3. The Cotton Belt Railroad alignment from the Inwood Spur in Addison west to DFW Airport and ultimately to Fort Worth. Finally the resolution
also recognizes that rail transit service on the Cotton Belt Railroad aligilment east ofAddison may be warranted and desirable in addition to light rail service on the fuwood /LBJ alignment.
The City ofFarmers Branch would support rail service on the Cotton Belt alignment east ofAddison provided that it does not replace or delay . provision ofrail transit service on the
Inwood /LBJ alignment and provided that it can be planned and designed in a way that satisfactorily addresses the concerns of the City of Dallas relative to safety and environmental
impacts on nearby residential neighborhoods. . It is our hope that this resolution, a copy of which is enclosed, will be helpful by clearly stating the City's position on the development
of future rail transit facilities. Si/j.eellYY!7' 􀁾􀁾 Bob Phelps Mayor cc: City Managers: Stephen McCullough, City of Irving Ron Whitehead, City ofAddison Leonard Martin, City of Carrollton
Teodoro Benavides, City ofDallas Thomas H. Muehlenbeck, City ofPlano Bill Keffler, City ofRichardson Gary Thomas, President, Executive Director ofDART
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-059 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH IN SUPPORT OF PROJECTS FOR THE DART 2030 PLAN. WHEREAS, the City ofFanners Branch is a founding member city ofDallas
Area Rapid Transit (DARn and has contributed in excess of$177 million in funding for DART since its creation in 1983; and WHEREAS, DART has initiated a planning process to update their
long-range Transit System Plan; and WHEREAS, DART has identified numerous potential rail transit alternative routes to be considered during the Transit System Plan update process; and
WHEREAS, DART has conducted public meetings and has solicited input regarding the Transit System Plan update; and WHEREAS, the City ofFanners Branch would be served by three of the rail
transit alternative routes identified by DART; and WHEREAS, the development ofrail transit service on the three routes serving Farmers Branch would benefit the residents and businesses
ofthe City; and WHEREAS, Farmers Branch and other DART member cities forego the collection of . taxes used by other cities to enhance economic development; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH, TEXAS THAT: SECTION 1. The highest priority of the City ofFarmers Branch remains theTapid completion ofthe Northwest Corridor
light rail line and initiation of service to the Fanners Branch Station before 2009. SECTION 2. The planning of future DART projects must in no way interfere or delay the completion
ofprojects provided for in the current system plan, including the Northwest Corridor project to Fanners Branch. SECTION 3. The long-range planning of future transit service to address
needs beyond the fulfillment ofDART's existing Transit System Plan commitments is an activity supported by the City of Fanners Branch.
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-059 Page 2 SECTION 4. The City ofFanners Branch supports the efforts ofDART to evaluate the potential development of three routes of priority interest to the City
and recommends that DART favorably consider adding the following three rail transit routes to the DART Transit System Plan: 1. The Burlington Northern Railroad alignment from the Trinity
Railway Express line in Irving through the west side of Fanners Branch to the Northwest Corridor Line at Belt Line Road in Carrollton. 2. The Inwood Spur /LBJ alignment from the Cotton
Belt Railroad in Addison through the east side of Fanners Branch to the North Central Line in Dallas. 3. The Cotton Belt Railroad alignment from the Inwood Spur in Addison west to DFW
Airport and ultimately to Fort Worth. SECTION 5. The City ofFanners Branch recognizes that rail transit service on the Cotton Belt Railroad alignment east of Addison may be warranted
and desirable in addition to light rail service on the Inwood/LBJ alignment. The City ofFanners Branch would support rail service on the Cotton Belt alignment east of Addison provided
that it does not replace or delay provision ofrail transit service on the Inwood/LBJ alignment and provided that it can be planned and designed in a way that satisfactorily addresses
the concerns ofthe City ofDallas relative to safety and environmental impacts on nearby residential neighborhoods. 􀁁􀁐􀁐􀁾 t 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁌􀁌􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀻􀀴􀁦􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀭 _ Mayor f PASSED AND
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH, T S, THIS 25TH DAY OF MAY 2004. City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: 􀁓􀀲􀀺􀁥􀁾􀁾
North Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: Regional Rail Corridor Study (RRCS) PolicylTechnical Committee Members and Interested Parties .FROM: Barbara C. Maley, AICP Principal Transportation
Planner SUBJECT: RRCSMay Committee Meetings DATE: May 5, 2004 􀁯􀁗􀀭􀁾􀁾 BarbaraC. Maley This letter is to advise you of the May round of Regional Rail Corridor StUdy PolicylTechnical
Committee meetings.. The attachment contains the meeting dates, times and locations. To date, agenda items include: regional rail, light rail, bus rapid transit, capital/operating cost,
daily ridership, performance benchmarks, station locations,transit-oriented development opportunities and level of service assumptions. The importance of this meeting cannot be understated,
as its our last round of meetings prior to the Regional Transit Initiative Workshop slated for Monday, May 24, 2004. Previous meeting materials (e.g., project orientation, corridor fact
sheets, technology summary, station criteria and land use) may be accessed through the Internet at www.nctcog.org/rrcs. Ideally, half of the meeting will be devotedto discussion. . Should
you have any questions and/or comments on, the above information, please call meat (817) 695-9278. BCM:ac Attachment cc:2003,.2004 UPWP Element 5.01 ProjectFile 616 Six Flags Drive,
CenterpointTwo P. O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817c640-7806 @recycledpaper http://www.nctcog.org
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Policy and Technical Committee Meetings May 17-21 , 2004 Committee 1 E-3 &E-4: Northeast Monday, May 17, 2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. City of Allen Gentry Fire
Training Center 307 Century Parkway Allen, TX 75013 Committee 2 E-5 &E-6: Southeast Tuesday, May 18, 2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. City of Duncanville Council Chambers 203 East Wheatland Road
Duncanville, TX 75138 Committee 3 W-1: Central Tuesday, May 18, 2004 9:30 to 11 :30 a.m. City of Grand Prairie Council Chambers 317 College Street Grand Prairie, TX 75053 Committee 4
W-4 Thursday, May 20, 2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. City of Crowley Public Library 409 South Oak Crowley, TX 76036 Committee 5 W-2 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. City of Grapevine
Council Chambers 200 South Main Street Grapevine, TX 76099 Committee 6 E-2 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 9:30 to 11 :30 a.m. City of Highland Village 948 Training Room 948 Highland Village
Road Highland Village, TX 75077
2004:'04-23 16:32 214-749-3668 DART P 1 ._. , ' 􀁾􀁡􀀮􀁺􀁬􀁴􀀭􀁊􀀻􀁳􀂷􀀮 􀁾􀁥􀁡􀂷􀁩􀁒􀁡􀁰􀁩􀁤􀂷􀁦􀁴􀁃􀁴􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁴. .: ::'-:::;.. ..-. : 􀀺􀁾..,:,:' .. . ._. . .-. From Fred Pratt To Steve
Chutchian Company Town of Addison Number of pages sent (including cover sheet) 10 Date April 23, 2004 Time 4:30 P.M. FAX# 972-450-7027 􀀺􀁾􀀭􀀧 Attached are the DART Board Agendas for
the Board Meeting on Tuesday, April 27, 2004. If you have questions or need additional information please contact Fred Pratt at 214-749-2538. TELEPHONE: 214-749-2543 FAX: (214) 749-3668
􀀲􀀰􀀰􀀴􀁾􀀰􀀴􀀭􀀲􀀳 16:32 214-749-3668 Audit Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 27, 2004, J0:30 􀁡􀀮􀁲􀁮􀁾12:00 p.m. DART Conference Room B -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas
75202 Estimated Meeting Time [1 hour and 5 minutes J DART P 2 Quorum=4 1. Approval ofMinutes: March 23, 2004 2. "'Review of2003 Dcfmed Benefit Retirement Plan Audit (Ray Noah/Albert
Bazls) [20 minutesJ 3. *Contract Audit Report: Report on Examination ofCosts Invoiced by Herzog, Inc. FY2002 & FY2003 Audit#04-ClO (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) /10 minutes J 4. *Status ofFiscal
Year 20041ntemal Audit Plans (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) [10 minutes J 5. *Contract Audit Recoveries (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) /10 minutes I 6. *Quat1erly Audit Follow Up Report (Ray NoahlAlbert
Bazis) /15 minutes I 7. Identification of Future Agenda Items 8. Adjournmen.t *Brieflng Item The Audit Committee may go into Closed Session under ti,e Texas Open Meetings Act, Section
551.071, Consultaii.on with Attorney, for any legal issues, or under Section 55/.074 for Personnel Matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. Tlte next meeting afthe Audit
Committee is May 25, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impail'ed, Sigl'l interpretation is availabk. Please contact Community Affairs at
2/4-749-2543, 48 hours in adl1ance. Chair -Ray Noah Vit:e Chair -Beatrice Martinez Members -Angie Chen Button, Randall Chrisman, Joyce Foreman, Norma Stanton and William Velasco StaffLiaison
-Albert Bazis 0427AU.doc 4/23/04-3:20 PM
2004:'04-23 16:32 214-749-3668 Planning Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 27, 2004, 1:00 p.m. -2:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Tex:as 75202 Estimated
Meeting Time [ 45 minutesJ DART P 3 Quornm=5 1. Approval of Minutes: March 23,2004 2. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion Management System (eMS) Programming Request tor the City
of Plano (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {5 􀁭􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁵􀁩􀁥􀁳J 3. *Update On Route Perforrn.ance Standards for FY 2004 (Linda KooplDoug Allen) [.I5 minutesJ 4. *Momoe Shops Update (Linda KooplDoug
Allen) [.15 minutesJ 5. *Planning Corridor Update -Northwest/Southeast Corridor Light Rail, and East Corridor Major Investment Study (J..inda KooplDoug Allen) 110 minutesJ 6. Identification
of Fut1..1te Agenda Items 7. Adjournment +Same Night Item *B,ieflng Item The Pl.anNing Committee may go into CIDsed Session under lIte Texas Open Meetings Act, Section JJ1.071, Consultation
with Attorney, Jot any legal issues, or under Section J.H.072, DelibettUion Regarding Real Properlyfor real estate issues arising regarding any item listed on thi5 Agenda. The next meeting
o/the Planning Committee is May 25,2004. This facility is wheeJcI,aU accessible. For accO»Unoda/Ums for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. PleD-ftB contact CommWlity
Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Linda Koop Vice Chai, -Randall Chrisman Members -Terri Adkisson, Scott Carlson, MaJ'k Enoch. Joyce Foreman, Robert Pope, Norma Stanton
and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison· DougAllen 0427PL.doc 4/23/04-3:21 PM
2004-04-23 16:33 214-749-3668 Project Management Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 27, 2004, 2:00 p.m. -3:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -lst Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202
Estimated Meeting Time [50 minutes J DART P 4/10 Quorum =5 1. Approval of Minutes: March 23, 2004 2. Contract Modification for Construction ofa Trinity Railway Express (TRE) Bridge Across
thc Elm Fork ofthe Trinity River (Faye Wilkinsrrim McKay) /5 minutes I 3. Declaration and Sale of Surplus Property at 912 22nd Street in Plano, Texas (DART Parcel NC547) (Faye Wilkins/Tim
McKay) [5 minutesJ 4. Declaration and Sale ofSurplus Property at 6817 Patrick Street in 􀁄􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁾􀀬 Texas (DART Parcel G1-25) (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) [5 minutesJ 5. Declaration and
Sale of Surplus Property at 6823 Patrick Street in Dallas, Texas (DART Parcel Gl-7) (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) [5 minutesJ 6. Declaration and Sale of Surplus Property Adjacent to the Shiloh
MissiorJary Baptlst Church in Plano, Texas (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) /5 minutesJ 7. Declaration and Sale of Surplus Property at 1346 Waco Avenue in Dallas, Texas (DART Parcel SOCI-25A)
(Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) [5 minutes J 8. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcels NWIB-026, NWIB-027, NWIB-029, NW1B-050 and NWlB-051
for the Northwest Corridor Line Section NorthweS1-1 B (NW-1B) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedjngs ifNecessary (Faye Wi1kinsITim McKay) [5 minutesJ 9. Declare Public Necessity, Establish
Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcels SEI-OI8, SEI-02I, 􀁓􀁅􀁉􀀭􀀰􀀲􀀴􀁾 SE1-025, SE1-026, SE1-028, SEI-029. SE1-032, SEI-033, SEI034 and SEI-040 for the Southeast
Corridor Line Section Southeast-l (SE-I) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedi.ngs if Necessary (Faye WilkinsITim McKay) [5 minutesJ 10. Declare Public Necessity􀁾 Establish Just Compensation
and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcels NW3-005-l and NW3-005-2 for the Northwest Corridor Line Section Northwest-3 􀀨􀁎􀁗􀁾􀀳􀀩 and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings Proceedings
ifNecessary (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) [5 minutes I 11. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition ofParcel 7 Required for the hlwood Road Principal
Arterial Street System (PASS) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings ifNecessary (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) [5 minutes /12. Identification of Future Agenda Items 13. Adjournment +Same
Night Item *Brkfing Item 0427PM.doc 4/23/04 -3: 19 PM
2004-04-23 16:33 214-749-3668 DART P 5/10 Quorum.=5 Tlte Project Management Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with
Attorney, for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072, Deliberation Regarding Real Property for real estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agendo. The next meeting
ofthe Project Management Committee is May 25,2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is availahle. Please contact
Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Faye Wilkins V"lCe Chair -Norma Stanton Members 􀁾 Terri Adkisson, Scott Carlson, Randall Chrisman. Mark Enoch, Beatrice
Martinez and Robert Pope StaffLiaison -Tim McKay 0427PM.doc 2 4/23/04 -3:19 PM
, 􀀲􀀰􀀰􀀴􀁾􀀰􀀴􀀭􀀲􀀳 16:33 214-749-3668 "External Communications Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 27, 2004, 3:00 D.m.-4:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave.,
Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time I 40 minutes J DART P 6/10 Quorurn=4 ]. Approval of Minutes: March 23,2004 2. *Consumer Programs Update (Robert Pope/Sue Bauman) /20 minutes
J 3. *Governmental Affairs Update -State Relations Update (Robert Pope/Sue Bauman) I 20 minutesJ 4. Identification of Future Agenda Items 5. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefzng7tetn
The External Communications Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney, lor any legal issues arising regarding
any item listed on tltis Agenda. Tlte next meeting ofthe External Communications Committee is May 25, 2004. This facilitv is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing
impaired, sign interpretation is avaifable. "Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Robert Pope Vree Chair -Terri Adkisson Members -Angie Chen Button,
Scott Carlson, Mark Enoch, Linda Koop. Beatrice Martinez and Norma Stanton Staff Liaison -Sue Bauman 0427E.doc 4/23/04 -3:20 PM
16:34 214-749-3668 DART P 7/10 Quorum::::8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M.-6:30 P.M. COMMlTTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, April 27, 2004 -Conference Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas,
TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: April 13,2004 2. TIlis item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent
Items: [5 minutes J 4. Contract Modification for Owner Controlled Insurance Program Administrator (Administ.-ative-William Velasco/Ben Gomez) 5. Approval of Quarterly Disclosure Update
(Administrative-W1l1.iaOl Velasco/Sharon Leary) 6. Approval ofFederal Transit Administration (FTA) Supplemental Agreements tor the Cities of Grand Prairie and Mesquite 􀀨􀁁􀁤􀁭􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁥�
�􀁗􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁡􀁭 Velasco/Sharon Leary) 7-Approval ofthe Transfer ofEquity Interest and Sale of Small Buses (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) 8. Contract Modification for Upgrade
ofDouble Track Between South Irving Station and Elm Fork Bridge Project; Signals and Signal House at Regal Row Bridge and Exercise ofFinal Contract Option (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Kathy
Waters) Individual Items: [1 hour and 40 minutesJ 9. Approval of Financial Standards for FY 2005 Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan Process (Administrative-WilHam Velasco/Sharon Leary)
/5 minutes 1 10. Contract for Benefits Consulting Services (Administrative-William VelascolBen Gomez) /10 minutes J 1L Approval of the Transfer ofEquity Interest or Sale of Trolley Buses
(Operations-Joyce ForemanNictor Burke) /5 minutes J 12. *Regional Transportation Update (planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) /20 minutes J 13. *Trinity Railway Express (TRE) Operating Contract
Update (Huelon Harrison/Gary Thomas) [10 minutes J 14. *Review ofDART Security Activities (Administrative-William VelascolBen Gome7.) /20 minutes I 15. *PersoDnel Ad Hoc Committee Update
(Lynn Flint Shaw) /30 minutes J Other Items: 16. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session und.er the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section
551.071, Consliltatitm with Attorney, for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, under Section 551.074for Personnel matters, or under Section 551.076, Deliheraiion
Regarding Security Personnel or Devices arising regarding any item listed on this Agell.da.. The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-WhQle is May 11,2004. 0427C.doc 1 4123/()4 -3:22
PM
2004'-04-23 16:34 214-749-3668 DART P 8/10 Quorum=8 This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contoct
Community Affairs at 214-749-2543; 48 !lours in advance. 0427C.doc 2 4/2..1/04 -3;22 PM
2004-04-23 16=34 214-749-3668 DART P 9/10 Quorum = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, April 27, 2004 -Board Room 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX
75202 Genera/Items: 1. Approval ofMinutes: April 13. 2004 2. Public Comments 3. Committee Advisory Reports -Paratransit Access Advisory Group (PAAG) (Johnny Hollingsworth ofUCP) -Citizen
Advisory Committee (CAC) (Joe Burldeo) Consent Items: 4. Contract Modification for Owner Controlled Insurance Program Administrator (Administrative-William VelascolBen Gomez) 5. Approval
of Quarterly Disclosure Update (Administrative-William Velasco/Sharon Leary) 6. Approval ofFederal Transit Administration (PTA) Supplemental Agreements for the Cities of Grand Prairie
and Mesquite (Administrative-William Velasco/Sharon Leary) 7. Approval of the Transfer ofEquity Interest and Sale of Small Buses (Operations-Joyce ForemanlVictor Burke) 8. Contract ModifIcation
for Upgrade ofDouble Track Between South Irving Station and Elm Fork Bridge Project; Signals and Signal House at Regal Row Bridge and Exercise of Final Contract Option (Operations-Joyce
Foreman/Kathy Waters) Individual Items: 9. Approval ofFinancial Standards for FY 2005 Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan Process (Administrative-William Velasco/Sharon Leary) 10.
Contract for Benefits Consulting Services (Administrative-William VelascolBen Gomez) 11. Approval ofthe Transfer ofEquity Interest or Sale of Trolley Buses (Operations-Joyce ForemanNictor
Burke) 12. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole only. 13. This item will be discussed at the 􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁩􀁴􀁴􀁥􀁥􀀭􀁯􀁦􀀭􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁾􀁗􀁨􀁯􀁬􀁣 only. 14. This item will
be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole only_ 15. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole only. Other Items: 16_ Officer Reports 17. Chair Report 18. General Counsel's
Report 19. PresidentJExecutive Director's Report 20. Communications and Public Comments 21. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item 042713.doc 4/23/04·3:20 PM
2004-04-23 16:34 214-749-3668 DART P 10/10 Quorum = 10 The Board ofDirectors may go into Closed Session under tlte Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071.• Consultation with Attorney,
for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 jor Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074f01" Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting
ofthe DARTBoard is May 11, 2004. This facility is w/,eelchair accessible. For accommodations for tlte hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs
at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0427B.doc 2 4/23/04 -3:20 PM
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Post Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 (972) 450-7000' FAX (972) 450-7043 5300 Belt Line Road April 9, 2003 Barbara C. Maley, AICP Principal Transportation
Planner NCTCOG Dear Barbara, We would like to request that Steve Chutchian, our Assistant City Engineer be placed on the Regional Rail Corridor Study Technical Committees for the Northeast
(E3 and E4) and the Fort Worth and Western/Cotton Belt (W-2) studies. Your consideration ofour request is appreciated. Sincerely, 􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁄 Ron Whitehead City Manager
ATTACHMENT 2 (fJ Northeast (E-3 and E-4): Policy: Policy: Technical: Technical: 2. Southeast (E-5 and E-6): Policy: Policy: Technical: Technical: 3. Union Pacific Mainline (W-1): Policy:
Policy: Technical: Technical: 4. Burlington Northern Santa Fe (W-4): Policy: Policy: Technical: Technical: V0rtWorth and Western/Cotton Belt (W-2): Policy: _ Policy: Technical: Technical:
.&q.:SiW.lil 􀁾􀀳􀀺􀀰􀀴 􀁁􀁾􀁒 18, 2003 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-2747 #43359 PAGE: 1/7 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages: Description : steve Chutchian TOWN
OF ADDISON 972-450-2837 Friday, Apr 18, 2003 12:57PM 7DART Board Agendas Attached are the DART Board Agendas for the meeting on April 22, 2003. If you have any questions please contact
Carol Gideon at 214-749-3487. Have a great weekend! From: FaxNumber: Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTMF (214)
·iU:aI:w..,I,iM.,WrJ4 􀁩􀀢􀁩􀁩􀁅􀁜􀁩􀁩􀀮􀁬􀁬􀁟􀁬􀁬􀀮􀁉􀁬􀁬􀀡􀁦􀁾􀀺􀁬􀁉􀀪􀀢􀀧􀀮􀁬􀁴􀁬􀁬 13:04 'APR 18, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2747 *43359 PAGE: 2/7 Quorum = 5 Project Management
Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 22, 2003, 1:30 p.m. -3:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [1 hour J 1. Approval
of Minutes: March 25, 2003 2. +Contract Modification for Construction ofthe Northwest Corridor Line Section Northwest-l A (NW-IA) (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {IS minutes J 3. Contract for
Design ofthe Service and Inspection (S&I) Facilities Modification and Contract Modification for General Engineering Consultant II (GECII) Services (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {10 minutesJ
4. Contract Modification for the Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase I Signals System (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {5 minutes J 5. *Review ofthe Real Estate Acquisition Process (Faye
Wilkins/Tim McKay) {30 minutesJ 6. Identification of Future Agenda Items 7. Adjournment •Briefing Item The Project Management Committee nmy go into Closed Session under the Texas Open
Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551. 072 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The
next meeting ofthe Project Management Committee is May 27,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is avai1Jlble.
Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair-Faye Wilkins Vice Chair-Huelon Harrison 1l1embers -Mark Enoch, Randall Chrisman, Joyce Foreman, Norma Stanton,
William Velasco andRichard Watkins StajJLiaison -Tim McKay 422PM.DOC 4/18/03 -12:56 PM
􀁟􀁾􀁭􀀻􀂥􀁩􀁩􀀬􀁬􀂥􀁴••It' Itt&,m'I.i. 13:05 APR 18, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2747 #43359 PAGE: 3/7 Quorum = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING
Tuesday, April 22, 2003 -Board Room 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval ofMinutes: April 8,2003 2. Service Flag Ceremony 3. Operation LifeSaver Award 4. Public
Comments Consent Items: 5. Contract Modification to Building Management Services at DART Headquarters (Administrative-Mark Enoch/Ben Gomez) Individual Consideration Items: 6. +Contract
Modification for Construction ofthe Northwest Corridor Line Section Northwest-l A (NW1A) (Project Management-Faye Wilkinsrrim McKay) 7. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole
meeting only. 8. Approval of Financial Standards for FY 2004 Budget and Financial Plan Process (Administrative-Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) Policy 9. Policy on Shuttle Service from Non-Member
Cities (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 10. Approval of Revisi on to DART's Advertising and Concessions Policy (Administrative-Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) Other Items: 11. Officers' Reports
and Chair's Report 12. General Counsel's Report 13. President/Executive Director's Report 14. Communications and Public Comments 15. Adjournment +Same Night Item * Briefing Item The
Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate
issues, or under Section 551. 074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe DART Board is May 13, 2003. This facility is wheelchair
accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. 422B.DOC 4/18/03 -12:57
PM
it.illlili, ,lB:05'APR 18, 2003 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2747 #43359 PAGE: 4/7 Quorum=8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, April 22, 2003
-Conference Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: April 8, 2003 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will
be discussed at the Board meeting only. 4. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent Items: [5 minutes J 5. Contract Modification to Building Management Services
at DART Headquarters (Administrative-Mark EnochlBen Gomez) Individual Consideration Items: [1 hour 15 minutes J 6. +Contract Modification for Construction ofthe Northwest Corridor Line
Section Northwest-l A (NW-IA) (Project Management-Faye WilkinslTim McKay) /10 minutes J 7. *FY 2004 Budget Planning (Administrative-Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) [20 minutes J 8. Approval
of Financial Standards for FY 2004 Budget and Financial Plan Process (Administrative-MarkEnoch/Sharon Leary) [30 minutesJ Policy 9. *Policy on Shuttle Service from Non-Member Cities (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [15 minutes J 10. This item will be discussed at the Board
meeting only. Other Items: 11. Adj ournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open .Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation
with Attorney for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda.
The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is May 13,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please
contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 422c.noc 4118/03 -12:57 PM
.U4;:;I;$"." ;i:liMt:w.:41tl••lkiilb 13:05 'APR 18, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2747 *43359 PAGE: 5/7 Quornm=4 External Communications Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 22, 2003,
3:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeeting Time {I hour J 1. Approval of Minutes: March 25,2003 2. *Marketing Consumer
Behavior Model Review (Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) { 15 minutes J 3. *Rider Survey Review (Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) { 20 minutes J 4. *Customer Service Update (Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman)
(25 mUlutesJ 5. Identification of Future Agenda Items 6. Adj oumment *Briefing Item The External Communications Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act,
Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues arising regardmg any item listed on this Agenda, The next meeting ofthe External Communications Committee is May 27,2003.
This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accomnwdations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretatwn is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance,
Chair -Jesse Oliver Vice Chair -Mark Enoch Members -Terri Adkisson, Angie Chen Button Huelon Harrison, Linda Koop and Norma Stanton StaffLiaison -Sue Bauman 422EDOC 4/18/03 -12:57 PM
.&:tR4M.I'i £ila.illli.i. 13:06 'APR 18, 2003 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2747 *43359 PAGE: 6/7 Quorum =5 Planning Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 22, 2003, 12:00 p.m. -1:30 p.m. DART
Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meetulg Time {1 hour and IS minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: March 25, 2003 2, Contract for Purchase and
Installation of Passenger Shelters (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {10 minutes J 3. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion Management System (CMS) Programming Request for the City of Irving
(Linda Koop/Doug Allen) { 5 minutes J 4. Northwest Corridor Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project-Service Plan Amendment for Alignment, Station Locations, and Grade Separations in the Medical
Center Area (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {15 minutesJ 5. *Northwest Corridor-Love Field Access Update (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {10 minutes J 6. *DART 2025 Transit System Plan-Work Progress
Report (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {20 minutesJ 7. *Performance and Status of the Planned High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {IS minutes J 8. Identification ofFuture
Agenda Items 9. Adjournment 1/Briefing Item The Planning Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Ad, Sedion 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal
issues, or under Sedion 551.072 for Real Estate issues arismg regardmg any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Planning Committee is May 2 7, 2003. This facility is wheelchair
accessible. For accommodations for the hearmg impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contad Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours m advance. Chair -Linda Koop Vice Chair
-Norma Stanton Members -Terri Adkisson, Randall Chrisman Mark Enoch, Huelon Harrison, William Velasco, Richard Watkins and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison -Doug Allen 422PL.DOC 4/18/03-12:57
PM
.00;4"14.I£L ii-ill...), , 13:06 􀁾􀁐􀁒 18, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2747 *43359 PAGE: 7/7 Quorum =3 Audit Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 22, 2003, 10:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. DART
Conference Room B-1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [1 hour J 1. Approval of Minutes: March 25,2003 2. *Carter Burgess Contract Audit (Ray Noah!Albert
Bazis) [10 minutes J 3. *Bus Shelter and Bench Cleaning Contract -Passenger Amenities Follow-up Audit (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis) [ 10 minutes J 4. *Communications Maintenance Follow-up
Audit (Ray NoahlAlbert Bazis)[ 10 minutes J 5. *Status of 2003 Audit Plans (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis)[ 15 minutes J 6. *Contract Audit Recoveries (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis) [15 minutes J 7.
Identification of Future Agenda Items 8. Adjournment "Briefing Item The Audit Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with
Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Audit Committee is May 27, 2003.
This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Conununity Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in
advance. Chair -Ray Noah Vice Chair -Bill Velasco Members -Tern Adkisson, Randall Chrisman, Beatrice Martinez and Norma Stanton StaffLiaison -Albert Bazis 422ADOC 4/18/03-12:57 PM
{ftt.J. Town of Addison 16801 Westgrove Dr. 􀁾􀁶􀁣 , MICHAEL E. MURPHY, P.E. Director of Public Works (972) 450-2878 (972) 450-2837 FAX mmurphy@ci.addison.tx.us E-mail P.O. Box 9010,
Addison, Texas 75001-9010 P􀀨􀁅􀀬􀁫􀁓􀁾 ,VCA/CE Li7l-TLAf/􀁾􀁍􀁾􀁊􀁊􀀭􀁲􀀮􀀵 ;1..77e;Vb. ·
2003-05-02 16:58 214-749-3668 DART P 1/2 Dallas Are(;l Rapid'Fransit ...FAx TransmiSsion """":".-"':" .-􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀽􀀭􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀭 D4W 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁾. From To Gary Thomas Ron Whitehead
Date 05/0212003 Time Company Town of Addison Number of pages sent (including cover sheet) Hello!!! Please call us if you have any questions! Thanks, Carol Gideon DART 214-7􀀴􀀹􀁾􀀳􀀴􀀸􀀷
FAX# 􀀹􀀷􀀲􀀭􀀴􀀵􀀰􀁾7043 :....'.:.'..i . i'", .... ' 􀀬􀀮􀁾 ,-_ •. ' lAY -jam L.\.i ) L..--' . TELEPHONE: 214 749·3487 FAX; 214 749-3667
2003-05-02 16:58 Dalk!$ Area Rapid Transit p.O Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 214-749-3668 DART P 2/2 May 2,2003 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town of Addison P.O.
Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 􀁄􀀽􀁗􀁈􀁲􀁬􀁴􀁾 On April 30, 2003, I sent a letter to intonn you ofour Board's Budget Workshop held the previous day, in which we discussed the development
of OUT FY04 Budget and Financial Plan. This meeting was key in light of the continuing decline in our sales 􀁴􀁡􀁾 receipts. However, in my letter, the word conseruus was inadvertently
used to describe the Board's deliberations, and I want to clarify that point. No action was taken by our Board at the Workshop on any of the items under consideration, including bus
service reductions, employee reductions, salary and benefit issues, and light rail schedule delays. As Tindicated to you in my letter, we will be building the FY04 budget over the nex.t
seven.l months, leading up to Board authorization to submit it to our member cities for review in in September. In the meantime, I will keep you abreast of our progress sO that you can
keep your Mayor and Council infonncd. Please feel ti"ee to contact me should you have questions or comments. Sincerely,
_d¥i.;iijij.I,' 1t!\iI,.,It"ilij§ ,;;!ailll..i. IliM!tiil:rilli••1t < 15: 05 MAY 09, 2003 ID: DART [FAX ] TEL NO: (214) 749-3520 *44325 PAGE: 1/7 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number:
Time Sent: Description: STEVE CHUTCHIAN TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837 Friday, May 9, 2003 03:05PM 7May 5, 2003 Board Meeting Hello All!!! Attached you will find the agenda's for Tueday,
May 13, 2003 DART Board meetings ••• Please call if you have any questions ••• Thanks, Carol Gideon DART Government Relations 214-749-3487 214-749-3668 c<Jideon@dart.or<J From: FaxNumber:
Phone Number Carol Gideon 2147493676 DTMF (214)
􀁟􀁾􀀻􀂥􀁩􀀢􀁩􀁗••i' 􀁾􀀬􀁩􀁴􀀮􀁬􀁰􀀮􀀻􀀮􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁮􀀧􀁟􀁬􀁬􀁵􀁡 i.ill.i.i, .:I.'MI:II'''1;.I.1t , 15:05 MAY 09, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *44326 PAGE: 7/7 Quorum =2 Regional
Rail Right-of-Way Company Annual Meeting Tuesday, May 13,2003, 12:00 p.m. DART Executive Conference Room A -2nd Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallai, Texai 75202 1. Approval ofMinutes: January
14, 2003 2. Financial Statements 3. Approval of Change to Registered Agent 4. *Update on Asset Transfers 􀁾􀀮 "'Freight Rail Operadng Agreemems on DART-owned Rights of Way 6. *Update
on the Pleasant Grove Line 7. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 8. Adjournment +Same Night Item ... Briefing Item The Regional Rail Right-ol-Way Company may go into Closed SeSSi01!
under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation With Attorney, for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, arising regarding any item li$tua
on thi$ Agunan. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available, please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48
hours in advance. RRROWBoard ofDirectors -Richard Watkins, Ray Noah and Gary Thomas Officers -Kathy Waters and Robert Sims 513R 5/9/03-3:05 PM
_ug':;ilJ¥"I'k it_i"'l.i. :iil.l$tifili.J.I. . 15:08 MRY 09, 2003 1D: DRRT TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *44326 PRGE: 5/7 Quorum =4 Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee Meeting Tuesday,
May 13, 2003, 1:00 p.m. -1:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -lst Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeeting Time {20 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: April 8, 2003
2. *Status of Dallas Alliailce Business Development (Huelon Harrison/Gloria Dixon) {20 minutesJ 3. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 4. Adjournment +Same Night Item "Briefing Item
The Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Ad, Section 551.071, for consultation with Attorneyfor any legal issues arising
TuguTumg uny uurn u.nuu on mu' .'tgunuu. The next 11U!t!.ting ofthe Divt17sity ECOHOmit: OpportllniJy Committee is hlnei0, 1003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations
for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contad Conununity Affairs at 214-749-254.1. 48 hour.v in advance. Chair -Huelon Harrison Vice Chair -Linda Koop Members
-Angie Chen Button, Randall Chrisman, Joyce Foreman, Beatrice Martinez and William Velasco Sta;((Liaison -Gloria Dixon and Ken Mercer 513D 5/9/03 -3:05 PM
_U4It4ilQ;t.lii TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *44326 PAGE: 6/7 Quorum = 4 Opcrotions Committcc Mccting TuesdaY7 May 􀁾􀀳􀀬 􀀲􀀰􀀰􀀳􀀩􀀮􀁾􀁭􀀮 -4:00 p.m. DAR!' (;onference Koom -1sf Floor 1401
Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time { 55 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: April 8, 2003 2. +Contract Modification for Trinity Railway Express Operating Service
Contract (Richard WatkinslKathy Waters) { 10 minutes J 3. Contract for Light Rail Transit (LRT) Right-of-Way Grounds Maintenance (Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) [5 minutes J 4. *Paratransit
Services Update (Richard WatkinslVictor Burke) {10 minutes J 5. "'Opl;;l<1lvl WVlh. SdcdivlI -Mwh.-Up <1l1J OVl;;llillll;; (Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) {I5 minutes J 6. *Operational
Plans for Trinity Fest Service (Rid\Al'd 􀁗􀁁􀁴􀁫􀁩􀁬􀁜􀁳􀁎􀁌􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁬􀀧 􀁄􀁕􀀱􀀧􀁫􀁾􀀩 {15 millutr!J' J 7. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 8. Adjournment +Same Night Item ItBriefing
Item The Operations Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072
for Real Estate ;""""'''' v, ..,..k, 􀁂􀀢􀀬􀁊􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀮 551.074 Iv, !\;,,,v,.,.,,,l mull""" ",;";'''S ''''S",J;'',S .my. d",m t:"I",J v,. II,;" Agenda. This facility is wheelchair accessible.
For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact ConU1JuniJy Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Richard Watkins Vice Chair
-William Velasco Members -Joyce Foreman, Huelon Ham·son, Beatrice Martinez. Ray Noah and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison -Victor Burke and Kathy Waters 5130 5/9/03 -3:05 PM
.&4.:;1414,1" "i4ili'''i, , 15: 07' MAY 09, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *44326 PAGE: 2/7 Quorum == 4 Administrative Committee Meetine Tue§day, May 13, 2003, 1:30 p.m. -2:30
p.m. DART Conference Room C -lst Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 E.dimated Meeting Time I .;() minllte.'f ] 1, Approval of Minutes: April 8, 2003 2. MlIUifil,;<ltivll tv
DART BV<l1l1 Pul.il,;Y 1.06, SulJ:sL<lul,;t;; Auu:st;; PlU!!,1<llU (M<l1k EuvdJBt;;u OVJHt;;l.) /20 mifluteJ J 1 FY01 V􀁮􀁬􀀱􀁊􀁮􀁴􀁾􀁲􀁹 􀁆􀀮􀁮􀁨􀁾􀁮􀁲􀀮􀁲􀀺􀁣􀁩 F.f1rly Rr:tirr:mr:nt
Prneram (Mark Enoch/Ben Gomez) /30 minutesJ 5. Adjournment +\'ilU1tl !\Tight TttlU1 *Briefing Item ml 11111 n I mIn m rt Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation 'with Attorney for
any legal issues, or under SectiOlt 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for PersOimel laontt(tJ(1J D}4ilJisag JlognJldisag nNJI itom lilJtod 􀁭􀁾 thilJ AgolJdn.
TIl II Ilnllt IIIl1ntill" IIfflln 􀁾 􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁉􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁴􀀱􀁕􀁬􀁴􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁪􀁌􀁃􀁭􀁬􀁬􀀱􀁕􀁩􀀱􀁦􀁯􀁰􀁪􀁮􀀮􀁊􀁬􀁬􀁕􀁬􀀨􀀩􀀮􀁊􀀱􀁬 lf1f1i IVIPomnPor,f -fir/err: I ,nr:n warm1, l,ml1l1 1\
(/(/]1, IWYIY(/l1n, RicJiard Watkins and Faye fYilkzns StuffLlab'lm -Shurun Lew'll "Ben uUJ'J'Iek unu' .J1:L\ck)' A:VJgJu /lllJ)lJnrn) 513A 5/9/03 -3.04 PM
.&4·4E.I" 'ti4iEilin._=liM'i,.,I:lii• .tI,I, 15:07 MAY 09. 2003 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3520 t44325 PAGE: 3/7 DftIlu Arell Rllpid Tr:iI.mit 6,.>U 1o'.lVI. HUA.v..U UJ'" 􀁕􀁬􀀮􀁶􀁊􀁛􀁌􀀧􀁔􀁕􀀮􀁶􀀮�
�􀁾􀂷LlllliliTll'lL' Tuesday, May 13,2003 -Board Room 1401 Pa.cific .Jbe., Da.llaw, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: April 22.2003 1. Official Recognidon of Annual Transit
Education Poster Comest Winners 3.. P...􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁲􀁬􀁳􀁩􀁴 Roadeo Proclamations -II llubllo oWing 􀁾 Ol".'IOO ChQ,ngoo "\ Pllhlir. r,('lmmf.nt" Consent Items: 6. Contract for Purchase
and Installation of Passenger Shelters (Planning -Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 7. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion Management System (CMS) Programming Request for the City ofIrving
(Planning -Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 8. Contract for Design ofthe Service and Inspection (S&I) Facilities Modification and Contract Modifications for General Engineering Consultant II (GECII)
Services (Project Mnnngement -Fayo Wilkins/Tim MoKay) 9. Contract Modification for the Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase I Signals System (Project Management -Faye Wilkins/Tim
McKay) Indiyidual Items: 10. +Contract Modification for Trinity Railway Express Operating Service Contract (Operations -Richard Watkins/Kathy Waters) 11. Northwest Corridor Light Rail
Transit (LRT) Project-Service Plan Amendment for Alignment, Station Locations, and Grade Separations in the Medical Center Area (Planning -Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 12. [Approval ofJune
2003 Servioe Modifications (Planning -Lindo. Koop/Doug Allen) 13. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 14. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole
meeting only. Other Items: 15. Officers' Reports and Chair's Report 16. General Counsel's Report 17. President/Executive Director's Report 18. Communications and Public Comments 19.
Adjournment +Same Night Item * Briefing Item The Board ofDirectors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071) consuhation with Attorney for any legal
issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe DARTBoard
isMay 27, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48
hours in advance. 513B I 5/9/03·3:04 PM
.&q·II');I.I'[ dbi,a,";",i,iiijiIIUb .,4il5l.I.], 15:0B'MAY 09, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *44326 PAGE: 4/7 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE
WHOLE Tuesday, May 13, 2003 -Conference Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: April 22, 2003 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting
only. 3. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 4. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 5. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent
Items: {5 minutes] 6. Contract for Purchase and Installation of Passenger Shelters (Planning -Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 7. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion Management System (CMS)
Programming Request for the City ofIrving (Planning -Linda KooplDoug Allen) 8. Contract for Design ofthe Service and Inspection (S&I) Facilities Modification and Contract ModHll.:aLlons
for General EngIneering Consultant II (GECII) Serv1l;es (Project Management -Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) 9. Contract Modification for the Li!!ht Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase I Simals
SYstem (Project Management -Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) Individual Items: { 2 hours 5 minutes] 10. +Contract Modification for Trinity Railway Express Operating Service Contract (Operations
-Richard Watkins/Kathy Waters) { 10 minutes] 11. Northwest Corridor Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project-Service Plan Amendment for Alignment, Station Locations, and Grade Separations in
the Medical Center Area (Planning -Linda KoopJDoug Allen) {10 minutes] 12. tApproval of.Tllne 2001 Service Morlificllt.ions (Planning -T,inilll. Koop/T)olle Allen) {15 minutes] 13. *FY
2004 Budget Planning (Administrative -Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) { 1 hour] 14. *Direct Reports FY04 Budget Review (Robert Pope) {30 minutes] Other Items: 15. Adj ournment +Same Night Item
I:Britifing Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultotion with Attorney fOT any Legal issues, or under Section
551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Secrlon :151. 014for Fersonnel maners arising regartllng any lcem lJsred on rhls Agenda. The.next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-Wltole isMay
17, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-1543, 48
hours in advance. 5l3C 5/9/03 -3:05 PM
Steve Chutchian To: Cc: SUbject: Ron: Ron Whitehead Mike Murphy DART I received a copy of the letter from DART that was forwarded to you, dated May 2, 2003. This letter addressed the
FY04 . BUdget and Financil Plan. I was originally scheduled to meet with you and Mike last Monday to discuss specifics from that meeting. On Friday, May 9th., I also attended the meeting
regarding the DART 2030 Transit System Plan. It was at this meeting that I met Carol Gideon, DART representative. Should I prepare an e-mail or memo outlining the items presented in
the May 9th. meeting or meet with you personally at the June 1st. meeting with Mike & Jim. Your direction is respectfully requested. Thanks. Steve Chutchian 1
_SU'¥ii'J¥t.I,' it-'Ii.i.i, :liMlMjilli...hl, 15:·08 MAY 09, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 #44326 PAGE: 4/7 . Quorum: 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE
WHOLE Tuesday, May 13, 2003 -Conference Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: April 22, 2003 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting
only. 3. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 4. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 5. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent
Items: {5 minutes] 6. Contract for Purchase and Installation of Passenger Shelters (Planning -Linda KooplDoug Allen) 7. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion Management System (CMS)
Programming Request for the City ofIrving (Planning -Linda KooplDoug Allen) Contract for Design ofthe Service and Inspection (S&I) Facilities Modification and Contract Modlflt:ations
for General Engineering Consultant II (GECII) Servlt:es (Project Management -Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) Contract Modification for the Lie:ht Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase I Sie:nals
System (Project Management -Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) 􀁾 rssefJ "\ IndividualItems: {2 hours 5 minutes] 􀁾􀁊􀁉􀁽􀀻􀁖􀁀+Contract Modification for Trinity Railway Express Operating Service
Contract 􀁾 (Operations -Richard Watkins/Kathy Waters) {I0 minutes] p;6seD 1!Y Northwest Corridor Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project-Service Plan Amendment for Alignment, Station Locations,
and Grade Separations in the Medical Center Area -. 􀁾 (PlaMing -Linda Koop/Doug Allen) { 10 minutes] fP6> 􀁾􀁰 QJ!+Approval of June 20m Service Modifications (Planning -T,inrla. Koopffiolle
Al1en)[15 􀁭􀀻􀀮􀁮􀁵􀀮􀁴􀁾􀁳􀁝 􀁾􀁾􀁶􀀧􀁾􀀱􀀳􀀮 *FY 2004 Budget Planning (Administrative -Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) { 1 hour] {'fIJ-Y 14. *Direct Reports FY04 Budget Review (Robert Pope)
{30 minutes] Other Items: 15. Adj ournment +Same Night Item "'Briefing Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation
with Attorney for any Legal issues, 07 under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section jjl. 0T4 for I'ersonnel11Ulllers arising regardlng any icem /1sr.ed on rhts Agenda.
The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is May 27, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accomnwdations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available.
Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. 513C 5/9/03 -3:05 PM
DART Committee-of-the-Whole Tuesday, May 13, 2003 The FY 2004 Budget Planning process was discussed. A proposed 22% reduction in the overall budget, and the associated impact on departmental
staffing and services, was presented to the Board as follows: Economic Opportunity Eliminate 6 positions-all 6 are currently filled Impact: Less visibility in minority community Reduction
in EEO/Conflict Resolution Reduction in national & local seminars Finance Eliminate 18 positions-14 positions are currently filled Impact: Reduction in ability to improve various processes
Eliminate PASS programs Untimely Reconciliation ofTVM revenues Reduction in budget support & transaction process Marketing Eliminate 14 positions-12 positions are currently filled Impact:
Reduce customer service center hours Reduce DART Store hours Reduce customer information projects and advertising Reduce event participation and outreach to schools Reduce contract labor
Office ofthe President Eliminate 1 position-3 positions are currently filled Impact: Longer response time to Board & customers Procurement Eliminate 8 positions-l0 positions are currently
filled Impact: Lack of oversight on contract awards Contract negotiation suffers Reduction in vendor outreach
EVP Administration Eliminate 15 positions-14 positions are currently filled Impact: Reduced transit information services & coverage for network operations center Reduced helpdesk services
& software & hardware maintenance fees Increase in clerical response time Ruman Resources Eliminate 9 positions-7 positions are currently filled Impact: Reduction in security and janitorial
services Increase in hiring time & background verification Reduction in employee communications No annual DART Job Fair or intern program DART Police Eliminate 10 positions-3 positions
are currently filled Impact: Affects deployment between LRT & Bus Reduced security services at 13 locations Program Development a. Commuter Rail No positions eliminated Impact: Varied
train hours Eliminate late night service Three hour headways on Saturday b. Planning & Development Eliminate 11 positions-5 positions are currently filled Impact: Fewer ridership reports
Reduced data on service utilization Limited ability to take on new projects Eliminate the CDA Downtown Improvement Partnership Limited contracts on non-capital items Reduced maintenance
ofROV lanes c. Project Management Impact: Delay to Phase II build-out Expense budget reduced Eliminate 5 positions-2 positions are currently filled
Board Direct Reports Impact: Reduction in Board Support Eliminate 1 position-l position is currently filled EVP Operations Eliminate 9 positions-8 positions are currently filled Impact:
Delay in delivery of bus repair parts Reduced cycle counts Maintenance Eliminate 12 positions-no positions are currently filled Impact: Reduced supervision of some right-of-way sections
Decrease in preventative maintenance work for bus and LRT Reduced bus &LRT warranty credits Paratransit Eliminate 12 positions-II positions are currently filled Impact: Non-compliance
with ADA Act Elimination of Observer & Rider Training Programs Transportation Eliminate 11 positions-6 positions are currently filled Impact: Elimination of all charter & flyer service
Reduction in quality improvement service initiative Merger COTR fixed route contract duties
so+f!'l.e . 􀀯􀀲􀁲􀁊􀁶􀁔􀁬􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁔 P-BeP/< 􀁾􀁹􀁶􀁱 2-b r II 􀁣􀁁􀀯􀁾 Z(J2-..... 􀁁􀀭􀁄􀁾􀁔􀁐􀁥􀁮􀁃 S-e£.t-fre. 4.t.et:5 􀁾􀁱􀀭􀁲􀀻􀀭 z.v 7 . 2-/D 􀁓􀁾􀀧􀁴􀀧􀁣􀁥 u·z:..8/· 􀁥􀁃􀀻􀀮􀀨􀂷􀁁􀀮􀀨􀁾􀁩�
�􀂷 ICPv'T'79 CAGlt 􀁾􀀮 . 􀀨􀀩􀁾 􀁾􀁲􀁥 bed 3 8T Re.. 17 􀁾􀁣􀁥 􀁳􀁾 ?( 'e 1) '-"e TO Pe 􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁏 fli 􀀮􀁦􀀡􀁾􀁾􀁰􀁲􀁦􀁩􀀺􀁝􀀭􀁃􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀯􀁣􀀿􀁱􀁾􀂷􀁐􀁥􀁾􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀻􀀻􀁯􀁾 .1 . 􀀮􀁾􀀻􀁥􀀺􀀬􀀻􀁾􀀿􀁏􀀮
2.-2{; tvT 1/1/􀁊􀀳􀁶􀀭􀁐􀁾􀂷􀁔 􀁯􀁾􀁃 􀀧􀁂􀁾 ;Fe../J"C 􀀢􀁐􀁴􀀡􀀮􀁾 ... 􀀮􀀡􀁾􀀮 􀁟􀁴􀀿􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁉 rl7 t1r-He.. L€ t.e C k-fJ'-C 􀁾 "'-5 􀁃􀁴􀀹􀁾􀁔 􀁦􀁲􀁾􀁓 .;VFFee$ 􀁉􀀩􀁾 7>2-e&-C1f
􀁾􀀭􀁥 Iff 􀁾􀀯􀁰􀀰􀀢􀀭􀀱􀀮 {/4-F/c..-U-p F'e Pt::C '(olO'I/ItV,;T !3lCI 7'-( 􀁾 􀁉􀁾􀀯􀀯􀁄􀁾 e t ("1./4/,.,p-k. j?./;5.$ j?I&:J 􀁣􀀮􀀺􀁾 􀁃􀀯􀁉􀁩􀁚􀁾􀁰􀁾􀀱􀀻􀁙􀀰􀀺􀀭 􀁾􀁃􀁯􀁾􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁾
􀀿􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀺􀁾􀀭􀁶􀀭 /"/<?rC ·EAS-. Lt!Se.L4 􀀬􀁴􀀿􀁐􀁓􀀮􀁌􀀱􀁩􀀨􀀩􀁾 􀀨􀁌􀀲􀀮􀁅􀁻􀀨􀀢􀁾􀀮 􀁾 '-t.-) 4e. /J c--ce CG.--..s TO 􀁾 ez .. .? 􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁥􀁾􀁴􀀺􀁴 .ce e-e􀁾 􀁴􀀡􀁾􀁾
.. _ # \ OA7e 7 .5􀁾 ft-d4eS \ I (vIP.......,. 􀁾.. A,""-F qctt-zA+fJtrv 􀀮􀀯􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀷􀁓 -l \ A-P 􀁖􀀨􀀺􀀺􀁾 7Js.;,v-t:; Fy 􀁾􀁲􀁾 􀁾􀀨 􀁾 v-e t'VT 􀁲􀀧􀁾􀀱􀀷 c 􀁉􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀧􀀩􀀺􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀭􀂷
1< ttl 􀁴􀁖􀁾􀀷 64 􀀡􀁬􀀻􀁦􀁾 I( (JG.---p2(/CIJ '(l.? SC:fTvP 0 f...,v7e ( -C r l5 PfC-0tJ) I ..JJ II
􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁥 I 5' -r (CJ-PIc/L.ep koC-C-ep 􀁾 ( rI I( 􀁾􀁺􀀭􀁔􀀮􀀱􀁟􀁾􀀴􀀭􀁊􀀮􀁴􀀫􀁔􀁮􀀧􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁶 􀀶􀁾􀂣􀁱 􀁣􀁾 c-c:?t-U:A-Ce 􀁆􀁾 􀁾 􀀨􀁾􀁾 􀁯􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁾 􀁥􀁥􀁾 􀀱􀀮􀀮􀁻􀁥􀁾􀀬􀁥􀀿􀀿􀁊􀁾􀁓􀁫􀀺
.5e-/C vt e:-􀁾 􀁾􀁴􀀷 􀁲􀀺􀀭􀀭􀁊􀁾 4--f1 fJr/Z-:OhrJne /V;ff(. . -vr. 􀁆􀁾􀁳 ht7Jee-/N'􀀭􀁉􀀣􀁾 /Zc/tJ 􀁦􀀮􀀯􀁦􀀮􀀯􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢 ( "'1.--' 1 (-I ( II . IIIIi II III!II I . I -Iii I![I II
Iii Fe-/)1-(; 7U'I//-.-􀁾􀀭􀁥 C; t-;e/7Y s.e,ew c--es '/I . I \ T ,A-,y/fZlJeK S.:e£t.i Cd' 􀁾􀁫􀁣􀁴􀁾􀁶􀀢􀀢􀀱􀁊 􀁊􀀬􀁲􀁥􀀬􀁥􀀨􀀡􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁻􀁾􀀭􀀱􀀮􀀮􀀯􀀭 􀀨􀁾􀁾􀁥 ("Ifc"e(;r.-&[ 􀁾􀀰􀀭􀁥􀁃􀀭
e 􀁾􀁾􀁙􀀭􀁥􀁥 t..o.A-t 􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀭􀁴 t"'.A-7-. -/􀀯􀀬􀂣􀁾 #-.5T􀁾 {/p/-tfC!s {to .4-v-,y-􀁾􀀮􀁣 PAK!r JOB 􀁆􀀭􀀺􀀯􀁦􀀨􀁾 􀁾􀁾 Le C (-vrc'7e 't./􀀯􀁾􀀿􀁾 (3 £1C-t-e9 A F r=-ee T5 pee toy
􀁾Nr f?e 􀁉􀁾 t..-fi--r 'Vf2e. /) ctCe-p . . ?e C 􀁖􀀷􀁥􀁾 􀁓􀁾􀀬􀁥􀁴􀀭􀀨 te-S A'T 13 􀁐􀁐􀀺􀀳􀁳􀀭􀁥􀁾 S-e/Z.u L €::-5' Pih 􀁱􀁾􀀢􀀴 oe L.( 0P.,!J/jld/j < (61) ;,,"""'''' TBt.. 􀁾􀀨􀀮
p;&tJ6 ug: 􀀨􀁴􀁊􀁂􀁕􀁾 vMreO 􀁾􀀯􀀧􀁬􀀮􀀯 ..􀁾 f::;: {., ( 􀁾 (It"!l 1e L.f'r1e /V( titt/5f"eWte eWte () U1. 􀁾􀀻fK, /-/-&47..:; M-z/S. tPiV 􀁾􀀯􀀧􀁲􀁔􀁨􀁥􀀮􀀿􀀾􀀭􀀷
--------􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀁾􀀭.. Jee-pvce-o 􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁰 I ,v-􀁁􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀨6t-ry -p 􀁒􀁩􀁩􀀮􀀦􀁚􀀮􀀭􀀯􀀿􀁺􀁾􀁴􀀴􀁴􀀯 􀁾􀁥􀀷􀀧􀁐􀀭􀀮􀀻􀁥􀀮􀀭􀀷􀀮􀁊􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ___ u 􀀦􀀭􀁌􀁊􀁾 _􀁾􀁫􀀹 t7"V___5f-/Evt4:_
VIlLI 􀁚􀁁􀀭􀀭􀁾"1../IZe 1J(.rCe-t!J //f;e I 􀁾􀀯􀀮􀀮􀀭􀂫􀀻􀀯􀀭􀀯 S'6e"f {c-,? L 􀁻􀁾 t --rL/7/A 􀁾/U 7'j l2' 7Y11ce 0'1/A-e 􀁾 ---. 􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀮 ----􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀻􀁐􀁾􀀮􀀻􀁰􀀽􀀺􀁣􀀮􀀷􀀵􀀧 -􀁴􀀺􀀺􀁛􀁊􀁾􀁊􀁾�
�􀀭􀁥 _-rlk-_e.-12/} 􀁦􀀩􀁬􀁊􀁴􀁶􀁴􀁖􀀧􀁦􀀧􀀲􀀭􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁟 .__ 􀁦􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁥 􀁾􀁾 􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁟􀁾 _ ----􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢 􀀶􀁴􀀿􀁾􀀭􀁅 􀁴􀁊􀁾 􀁾􀁴􀀮􀀭􀀭 -􀀭􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀷􀀩 -t'k 􀁾 􀁾 t'lA-)-bv----L--.-S4-:..'
B.... 􀀨􀀯􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀀷 I ( . _. -----.--.... _--􀁬􀁦􀁦􀁬􀁥􀀭􀀨􀀲􀀷􀁲􀁦􀁕􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 -􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭 ---􀁾􀀱􀁉􀁥􀀮􀁾 e14G,e e 􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁟_ . 􀀧􀀷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀼􀁦􀁅􀀯􀀮􀁌􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 f _______
_ 􀁊􀀧􀀡􀂣􀁾􀀭􀁊􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁊􀀲􀁥􀁌􀁊􀁾􀀭 􀁾 t!l.F __ 􀁾􀁟􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁰􀁾 /Ce PC-C--&f;> ....__CyClf 􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀱􀀳 tl-1/>71-T-€vCe 􀁦􀁾 (CVPtCLo/
􀁾􀁾􀁜􀁊􀁜􀁓􀁜􀀱􀀰􀁴􀁬 􀁖􀁬􀁾􀀧􀁩 1. 􀁾 􀀧􀀲􀀮􀁇􀁇􀁾 􀀢􀁯􀁜􀁜􀁾 oo'ri 00 􀁾􀁯􀀧􀀮 ,ho'"o 0'0"'·
􀀮􀁾 .. tA./17l1-·· -/tWfr 􀁁􀁣􀁾􀀭􀀧 q:::. I? 85-e􀀯􀁃􀁌􀁥􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁯􀁾􀁾 /J811..v(;v-q jOA:-e:> 􀁾£&i. ------􀁾􀁐􀀨􀁾 􀁾 IKL. I ( 􀁌􀀮􀀭􀁟􀁬􀀩􀁾􀁟􀀬􀁬􀀧􀁖􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀰􀀦 􀁾􀁣􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁦􀁫􀁾􀂷
... 􀁥􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀨􀀯􀁙􀁉􀀮􀀨􀁴􀁴􀀭􀀭􀀴􀁾􀁊􀀧-----,A-[) 􀁾 II, ' il Ii Ii II II I' I,II If II II [i Ii Ii II rIi 11 I: I! ii Ii Ii JI II Ji II II Ii II il "I: Ii "II ![ Ii ii i[ l'r ii !i
Ii il IiiiIII -----1---IIIIII II II I, !I II II
-UidR:"." ,.'M",], 14:43 MAY 23, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #44860 PAGE: 4/7 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, May 27,
2003 -Conference Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: /1. Approval of Minutes: May 13, 2 o.If· 2. This item will be discussed at the B.ard 3. This item will be discussed
at the B.ard 4. This item will be discussed at the Board!,' 5. This item will be discussed at the Bltard: 6. This item will be discussed at the B.ard Consent Items: {5 minutesJ 7. Contract
for Light Rail Transit (LRT) Ri (Operations -Richard WatkinslVictor:E VISITOR MAY272003 Valid only on date shown above .Intlj.y,idual Items: { 1 hour and 45 minutes J 'Ii \'t-($. *Direct
Reports FY04 Budget Review (Robert Pope) {I0 minutesJ 9. *FY 2004 Budget Planning (Administrative -Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) {45 minutesJ .-,10. +.Qall for Public Hearing on October,
2003 Service Modifications (planning -Linda KooplDoug Allen) {30 minutesJ II. +Contract for Communications, Overhead Contact and Signals Systems for Line Section Northwest-l A (NW-IA)
(project Management -Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {5 minutesJ P"licy 12. Modification to DART Board Policy 1.06, Substance Abuse Program (Administrative -Mark EnochlBen Gomez) { 5 minutesJ
13. +Settlement ofDART vs. Carey Bartoo, Janet Bartoo and Anna Raceway, Inc. (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) {15 minutes J Other Items: 14. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Board
of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate
issues, or under Section 551. 074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is June 10,2003. This facility
is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 527C 5123/03
-2:41 PM
.cvf (; to.{).?rt--t? 􀁾 W-f' 􀁾 (-v DI CA .,tv 􀀬􀀴􀀭􀁯􀁣􀁰􀁲􀀻􀀻􀀺􀀻􀁾􀁌􀁣 (/"",a:;:.-__.-----n IIIiIII Z\:"(OMvt if 6vj} Ce-+-lU?£r 􀁾/V Ii Ii 􀀬􀁦􀁉􀁖􀁴􀁉􀀻􀁥􀁾􀁓􀁉􀀮􀁻􀁖􀁾 1-?J}I
C-4. fe:p 1Jt!J 1/4: MT .]V Co (je􀁹􀁴􀀺􀁊􀁾 t.R tre-c /II II 􀁷􀁾,e1Cf1fz?"'" (tVJll 0 􀁾 ,kP-tJ/17o rt..-rL y􀁾 >hFT ('L/􀁾􀀡􀁌 Ii 5t/(V?J t/'vj ...s el;e j) vLe 􀁰􀁾 fa t-e'-eL 􀁾
..s e.-ewCe. II II I: I[I 􀁧􀁛􀁊􀁾 .1X_;C7/.w( GL 5--e..e 2-? :£ J2e.P CC-7><:> l..--' -bt--e .-e,4 q%4-----.-/7-ttf' 15 I -----. 􀀣􀀢􀀧􀁊􀁎􀁾􀁴􀁥 bf􀀫􀁾 J V0'"e/?.f/tlC' Pes //Ce 􀁾
]0 􀀯􀁬􀀺􀀿􀁾􀁊 􀁾 􀀮􀁊􀀻􀁊􀁾􀀮􀁙O"-P LeveL.! I 􀁳􀁰􀁾 7JVt TYrC S-f R f.,/'e cj.//t-"'Vt:e /'4;J,L)",S.frl-s 1/1/Le Lee /./VW lJl F(e j) ,qO R·fA-IJ\/5-{}e {.-1 t:e C/Ut34 􀁾 ;ze. r'
{,4-Ce /I-f!.. '!/{ S -e /C v( ce-1P-e'17(7 ,PIep r /LrflA/l0'/1-/elY v f£Act 􀁉􀁁􀀯􀁾 􀁾􀀱􀀮􀀮􀀨􀀻􀀱􀁊􀁴􀁊􀀧􀁌􀀯 1"-􀁾􀁱􀁣􀀮􀁥 ¥} 􀁾􀀮􀁴􀁢􀁴􀀺􀀺 I .,. Prf/)P£ fl--f{?J 􀀱􀀯􀁖􀀱􀀮􀁾􀁁􀁦􀁻
k.-/tS .£-JI? 􀁾􀁾 pe--tACrJ.. 􀀨􀁾 {-t0P lMIt-ys fC..zJl./J'e cft4 IV 4'.. ¥ A--X T S."i-/l3S /Pi
,Steve Chutchian To: Cc: Subject: Ron: Ron Whitehead Mike Murphy DART Board Meeting The following is a summary of information provided at the 'last DART Board meeting: The board addressed
a modification to DART Board Policy 1.06, regarding the Substance Abuse Program and a contract for communications, regarding overhead contact and signal systems for Line Section Northwest-1A.
In regards to the FY 2004 Budget, staff expressed the need to reduce the budget at DART's Level 1 of proposed cuts in service and manpower. This would amount to an average reduction
of 14%. However, the budget presented to the DART Committee indicated up to 22% in budget reductions in some departments, with an overall average of 17-18%. The impact on Bus Service
Reduction were stated as follows: • Initial service change proposals in Level 1 were modified to retain some existing service coverage. • Replacement service was identified in some areas
to maintain coverage where reductions in service are not feasible. • Standards were developed for identification of proposed service reductions Ridership impact was estimated for each
route change A net subsidy per rider was calculated Certain midday or weekend services were eliminated The result of the service reductions were as follows: • $13 million in value of
the reductions • Loss of 750,000 riders per year • Some community destinations were deleted Steve Chutchian 1
-d¥i'jllm.l.k l 14:42 MAY 23, 2003 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #44860 PAGE: 1/7 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages: Description: STEVE CHUTCHIAN TOWN OF ADDISON
972-450-2837 Friday, May 23, 2003 02:41PM 7DART Board Agenda's Hello!! ! Attached are the DART Board Aqenda's for the week of June 27, 2003. Please call if you have any questions. Have
a safe holiday weekend!!! Thanks, carol Gideon DART Government Relations 214-749-3487 cqideon@dart.orq From: FaxNumber: Phone Number Carol Gideon 2147493676 DTMF (214)
_tMi'l¥i.I,iW il_iii'i,i. 14:43 MAY 23, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 *44860 PAGE: 4/7 Quornm=8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday,
May 27, 2003 -Conference Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: May 13,2003 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This
item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 4. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 5. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 6. This item will
be discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent Items: [5 minutes J 7. Contract for Light Rail Transit (LRT) Right-of-Way Grounds Maintenance (Operations -Richard Watkins/Victor Burke)
Individual Items: [ 1 hour and 45 minutes J 8. *Direct Reports FY04 Budget Review (Robert Pope) [10 minutes J 9. *FY 2004 Budget Planning (Administrative -Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) [45
minutesJ 10. +Call for Public Hearing on October, 2003 Service Modifications (Planning -Linda KooplDoug Allen) [30 minlites J II. +Contract for Communications, Overhead Contact and Signals
Systems for Line Section Northwest-lA (NW-1A) (Project Management -Faye WilkinslTim McKay) [5 minlites J Policy 12. Modification to DART Board Policy 1.06, Substance Abuse Program (Administrative
-Mark Enoch/Ben Gomez) [ 5 minlites J 13. +Settlement ofDART vs. Carey Bartoo, Janet Bartoo and Anna Raceway, Inc. (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) [15 minutes J Other Items: 14. Adjournment
+Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any Legal issues,
or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551. 074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Commiltee-of-the-Whole
is June 10,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contad CommunityAffairs at 214-749-2543,
48 hours in advance. 527C 5123103 -2:41 PM
iWit¥ii;;i,I¥i"iU itAi""'l' 14:43 MAY 23, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #44860 PAGE: 2/7 Quomrn=4 Audit Committee Meeting Tuesday, May 27,2003, 10:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. DART Conference
Room B -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [55 minutes J 1. Approval ofMinutes: April 22, 2003 2. *Operating Systems Administration and Security
Audit (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis)! 15 minutes J 3. *Paratransit Services Follow-Up Audit (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis) [15 minutes J 4. *Listing ofCompleted Audits from Fiscal Years 1998 through
2003 (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) [10 minutes J 5. *Intemal Audit Process (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis)! 15 minutes J 6. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 7. Adjournment "'Briefing Item The
Audit Committee may go inw Cwsed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Ad, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters
arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Audit Committee is June 24,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for tI,e hearing
impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contad Community Affairs at 114-749-1543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Ray Noah Vice Chair -Bill Velasco Members -Terri Adkisson, Randall
Chrisman, Beatrice Martinez andNorma Stanton StaffLiaison -Albert Bazis 527A 5/23/03-2:40 PM
_a¥iIt&IlZ"." il&,I1'•.1. 14:43 MAY 23, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 *44860 PAGE: 3/7 Quorum = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECfORS' MEETING Tuesday, May
27, 2003 -Board Room 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: May 13, 2003 2. Committee Advisory Reports: -Paratransit Access Advisory Group (PAAG)
-(Jennifer Sheafer) "Most Valuable Driver" Award -Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) -(Joe Burkleo) 3. Raildeo Proclamations 4. Bus Roadeo Proclamations 5. Paratransit Roadeo Proclamations
6. Public Comments Consent Items: 7. Contract for Light Rail Transit (LRT) Right-of-Way Grounds Maintenance (Operations -Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) Individual Items: 8. This item
will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 9. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 10. +Call for Public Hearing on October, 2003
Service Modifications (Planning -Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 11. +Contract for Communications, Overhead Contact and Signals Systems for Line Section Northwest-IA (NW-1 A) (Project Management
-Faye WilkinslTim McKay) Policy 12. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whofe meeting only. 13. +Settlement ofDART vs. Carey Bartoo, Janet Bartoo and Anna Raceway, Inc.
(Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) Other Items: 14. Officers' Reports and Chair's Report 15. General Counsel's Report 16. President/Executive Director's Report 17. Communications and Public Comments
18. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item . The Board ofDiredoTS may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consu1Jation with Attorney for any
legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel1tUltters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe
DARTBoardis June 10, 2003. Thisfacility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodationsfor the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48
hours in advance. 527B 5123103 -2:41 PM
-:;:1·5':".'4 i.,;m...iI 14:44 MAY 23, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #44860 PAGE: 5/7 Quorum =4 External Communications Committee Meeting Tuesday, May 27,2003, 3:00 p.m.-4:00
p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time f 1 hour J 1. Approval of Minutes: April 22, 2003 2. *Follow-up to Rider Survey Review
(Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) /20 minutes J 3. *Marketing Consumer Behavior Model Review (Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) /20 minutesJ 4. *Governmental Affairs Update (Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman)
/20 minutes J 5. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 6. Adjournment *Briefing Item The External Communications Committee ml9l go into Closed Session under the Texas Qpen Meetings Act,.
􀁓􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁮 551. 0?1, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues arising regarding any item lISted on thIS Agenda. The Ilext meeting ofthe External Communications Committee is
June 24, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretatIOn is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,
48 hours m advance. Chair -Jesse Oliver Vice Chair-MarkEnoch Members -Terri Adkisson, Angie Chen Button Huelon Harrison, Linda Koop and Norma Stanton StaffLiaison -Sue Bauman 527E 5/23/03
-2:41 PM
'ii4ili",U 14:44 MAY 23, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 *44860 PAGE: 6/7 Quonnn=5 Planning Committee Meeting Tuesday, May 27,2003, 12:00 p.m. -2:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C
-1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time {I hour and 30 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: April 22, 2003 2. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion
Management System (CMS) Programming Request for the City of Carrollton (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) { 5 minutes J 3. Contract Modification for Preliminary Engineering/Environmental Impact
Statement for the Northwest Corridor (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) { 10 minutes J 4. *Monroe Shops Update (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) { 20 minutesJ 5. *Performance of Current and Status ofthe
Planned High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {20 minutesJ 6. *DART 2030 Transit System Plan -Work Progress Report (Linda KooplDoug Allen) {15 minutes J 7. *Southeast
Corridor Update (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [5 minutesJ 8. *Northwest Corridor -Love Field Access Update (Linda KooplDoug Allen) { 15 minutesJ 9. Identification of Future Agenda Items 10.
Adjournment *Britifing Item The Planning Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issuesJ or
under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Planning Committee is June 24, 2003. This facility is wheelchair
accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Linda Koop Vice
Chair -Norma Stanton Members -Terri Adkisson, Randall Chrisman Mark Enoch, Huelon Harrison, William Velasco, Richard Watkins and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison -Doug Allen 527PL 5/23/03-2:41
PM
-U¥Gt:iIiW.I" i_ill.i.l. 14:45 MAY 23, 2003 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 *44860 PAGE: 7/7 Quorum=5 Project Management Committee Meeting Tuesday, May 27,2003, 2:00 p.m. -3:00 p.m.
DART Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeetillg Time {50 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: April 22, 2003 2. +Contract for the Communications,
Overhead Contact and Signals Systems for the Northwest Light Rail Transit (LRT) Corridor Line Section Northwest-lA (NW-1 A) (Faye Wilkinsffim McKay) {I0 millutes J 3. Contract Modification
to Purchase 20 Additional Light Rail Vehicles (LRVs) (Faye Wilkinsffim McKay) {15 minutes J 4. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of
Parcels NC3-26E and NC3-27E Required for Line Section North Central-3 (NC-3) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings if Necessary (Faye Wilkinsffim McKay) {5 millutesJ 5. Declare Public
Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcel NW2-l for the Northwest Corridor Line Section Northwest-2 (NW-2) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings
if Necessary (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {10 minutes J 6. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcels Required for the Northwest Rail
Operating Facility (NWROF) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings if Necessary (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {10 millutesJ 7. Identification of Future Agenda Items 8. Adjournment 􀁾􀁂􀁲􀁩􀁥􀁦􀁩􀁮􀁧
Item The Project Management Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071) consultation with AJtorney for any legal issues, or under Section
551.071 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Project Management Committee is June 14) 1003. This facility is wheelchair accessible.
For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Faye Wilkins Vzce Chair -Huelon
Harrison Members -Mark Enoch, Randall Chrisman, Jayee Foreman, Norma Stanton, William Velasco and Richard Watkins StaffLiaison -Tim McKay 527PM 5/23/03 -2:41 PM
AGENDA DART Member City Staff Meeting May 9,2003 Conference Room 1-C 9:30 A.M. -11 :30 A.M. • Introductions • Overview and Status • Mobility Needs Assessment • Service Concepts & Technology
Review • Break • Corridor Opportunities 􀁾 Alternatives 􀁾 Evaluation Methodology • Next Steps
2030 Transit System Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Technology Review [DraIft 3/3/03 2:08 PM
2030 Transit System Plan 1J) !NTRODUCTION Previous Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) System Plans have been very specific about the types of technology and alignments to be followed,
focusing on implementation of major fixed guideway projects. The 2030 Transit System Plan focuses on seNice strategies and the identification of transit vehicle technology that could
seNe selected transit service strategies. Emphasis is placed on applying appropriate transit vehicle performance characteristics to mobility needs. 101 Purpose This report identifies
and reviews transit vehicle technologies that could meet the mobility needs of existing and potential transit corridors that will be identified in the DART 2030 Transit System Plan.
A range of transit vehicle technology is available. Some transit vehicle technologies have broad application, while others are more specialized. For each of the technologies identified,
the general focus is on operating and physical characteristics. The range of transit vehicle options reviewed includes the following: Fixed Guideway o Light Rail Transit (LRT) \11 Regional
Commuter Rail (locomotive hauled, diesel multiple unit (DMU), and lightweight DMU) @Heavy Rail o High-speed Intercity Rail o Maglev o Monorail @Automated Guided Transit (AGT) @Personal
Rapid Transit (PRT) @Streetcars $ High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Facilities Fixed and Non-Fixed Guideway o Conventional Bus Transit '. v Rapid Bus Transit (operating strategy) v Enhanced
Bus (operating strategy) Non-Fixed Guideway o Electric Bus Trolley ® Special Vehicles (station cars, paratransit and commuter vanpools) Technology Heview 1Dn"2l'Wl[ 3/3/03 2:08 PM 2
2030 Transit System Plan 2.0 OVERVIEW OF TRANSIT VEHICLES The following section provides a brief overview of potentially feasible transit vehicle technologies for the DART 2030 Transit
System Plan. Also included are emerging engineering and design trends and a list of cities or countries where tile technology is in use. 2.1 light Rail Transit Light Rail Transit is
a medium to high-level passenger capacity service that can be used for both short and line-haul trips. LRT technology has evolved from the historic stre,etcar (Tram) system to a more
modern transit system that goes further and faster. It has the flexibility to navigate sharp curves and travel along streets, highways, or in exclusive rights-of-way (ROW). LRT can operate
in single-track or double-track configuration. Segments of a light rail alignment may be grade separated, in a tunnel, or elevated for operationai, safety or environmental reasons. It
is powered by electricity from overhead wiring which is suspended from poles or buildings. Because it is powered by electricity, light rail is generally considered environmentally friendly.
LRT trains can employ a single car or they can operate as a multi-unit train of up to four cars. Maximum LRT train length is sometimes a function of the minimum length of a city block
so that stopped vehicles do not block vehicular traffic on cross streets. Light rail cars range in length 'from approximately 50 feet to over 100 feet. Depending on the vehicle size,
number of vehicles, and vehicle headway, a light rail train is capable of carrying up to 20,000 passengers per hour per direction. LRT vehicles are available in three boarding configurations,
high floor, high/low floor, and low floor. A high noor design uses a single articulation (two body shells that share a common center truck). This reduces the track overhang when the
vehicle is operated on a curved section of track. The high/low (70% low floor) cars use two articulated sections with a third, short, car body section that shares a truck on both ends
with conventional car bodies. The newer 100% low floor design eliminates the interior steps that are used near the ends of a 70% low floor design. This design does not use the conventional
motorized trucks of the 70% low floor design. Instead, the 100% low floor design has resulted in several innovative traction motor support arrangements that have yet to be proven in
long-term vehicle service. DART's existing fleet of LRT vehicles is composed of custom-configured conventional light rail vehicles. These vehicles have a high-level interior floor that
is reached either by Technology Review IDr(aft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 3
·-.' 2030 Transit System Plan ascending steps from the low-level station platform or from a special high-level boarding platform, while disabled and other mobility-challenged riders
board from a "mini-high-block" platform. LRT vehicles do not meet the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) crash worthiness standards, and for this reason they cannot operate on rights-of-way
with freight traffic unless separated spatially or temporally. LRT average operating speed varies, depending on operating conditions. LRT operating speeds are a function of the exclusivity
of the right-of-way, track geometry, the number of stops and signal pre-emption. Operating in mixed traffic reduces overall operating speed due to safety concerns. The maximum speed
of modern LRT systems is 55 to 65 miles per hour. The DART LRT system has an average operating speed of 25 mph for its Blue line and 26 mph for its Red Line. Station spacing, grade crossing,
physical constraints, and on-street sections have significant impacts on LRT operating speeds. Signal improvements, grade separation and other roadway improvement measures may be used
to mitigate some of these impacts. Station development and location are integral parts of a LRT system. Light rail stations range from simple platforms with canopies to complex buildings
with offices, elevators, message boards, and information centers.· Station spacing for LRT varies within and among systems. LRT stations are typically spaced about one-half mile to one
mile apart. 􀁗􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁮 densely populated activity centers such as a Central Business District (CBD), spacing may be less than one-half mile. Capital cost for light rail infrastructure
ranges from moderate to high, depending on system configuration and where LRT lines are constructed. Where existing rail right-of-way is used, capital cost for LRT can be significantly
lower. Capital cost for LRT passenger cars can range ·from $2 to $3 million. Typical capital cost for a new LRT system can range from $20 to $55 million per mile. Engineering/Design
Trends Light rail development is concentrating on lighter cars, less expensive manufacturing, and standardization. The relatively new 100% low floor car design has been in service for
several years. However, the 100% low floor design does not use conventional motorized trucks. 􀁔􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁳 has resulted in several innovative traction motor support arrangements that still
have to be proven in long-term vehicle service. Examples of Existing light Rail Transit Systems 􀁾 Dallas, TX 􀁾 Portland, OR . Technology Review Boston, MA Salt Lake City, UT Draft
3/3/03 2:08 PM 4
2030 Transit System Plan 2.2 Regional Commuter Rail Commuter rail is primarily oriented toward commuter service to outer suburban regions, and as a result it is typically longer-range
than most light and heavy rail transit lines. Commuter rail lines normally extend an average of 10 to 50 miles from a downtown terminus. In some cities, service is only offered during
rush hour times, while in other cities service is operated throughout the weekday, in the evenings, and on weekends. Service is rarely offered more frequently than one train every 30
minutes. Station spacing varies from one system to another, but the typical range is from 2 to 5 miles apart in urbanized areas. Similar to light rail, commuter rail stations vary from
simple platforms to complex buildings with offices, elevators, message boards, and information centers. Commuter rail trains are normally made up of a locomotive and several passenger
coaches. Commuter rail uses either single or bHeve! passengers cars. The dimensions of each commuter rail coach are 60 to 85 feet long, 10 to 11 feet wide, allowing for a seating capacity
of 60 to 170 passengers. Total vehicle capacity ranges from 90 to 300 passengers. The coaches are dimensionally similar to intercity (Amtrak) coaches, but typically have higher density
seating, as the average ride is shorter. Passenger capacity and speed are the primary advantages of this transit technology. Commuter rail vehicles have an on-board operator, who adjusts
vehicle speed in response to traffic conditions and railway signaling requirements. The maximum speed for commuter rail ranges from 79 to 100 mph. The average operating speeds in the
United States range anywhere between 30 and 50 mph. Where stations are spaced further apart, average operating speeds may be higher. Most commuter rail systems are implemented along
existing railroad rights-of-way. The operating environment for commuter rail tends to be grade-separated in heavily populated urban areas, and at-grade in suburban/rural areas. Commuter
rail vehicles have the ability to share track with freight trains and other intercity passenger service, Le., Amtrak. This attribute makes commuter rail more attractive for long distance
service (typically 30 to 100 miles). It generally has less impact than freight traffic in terms of noise and vibration. Rail corridors used for regional rail are upgraded to improve
operating speeds and traffic safety at grade crossings. Commuter rail generally operates more frequently and at higher speeds than freight traffic. Commuter rail trains are usually either
un-powered cars propelled by a diesel or electric locomotive engine, or self-propelled, Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) rail cars. The Trinity Rail Express (TRE), a joint rail operation between
the DART and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T), operates both locomotive and self-propelled cars. Both conventional diesel and DMU vehicles use a diesel-electric traction
system. Commuter rail vehicles must meet FRA crash worthiness standards when operating on freight tracks. All locomotive-hauled and the majority of DMU systems in the United States Technology
Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 5
2030 Transit System Plan are FRA compliant. The newer lightweight DMU technology is not FRA compliant and requires a FRA waiver to operate on freight trackage. Capital costs for commuter
rail infrastructure range from low to moderate, depending on system configuration and where lines run. Where new rail right-of-way is used, capital cost for commuter rail can be signi"ficantly
higher. Typical capital cost for commuter rail ranges from $5 to $25 million per mile. Typical planning challenges are negotiating use of the tracks with very busy freight rail operators
and finding adequate funding both for construction and for operating subsidies. Engineering/Design Trends New developments in this technology may include hybrid propulsion. A gas turbine
powered version of this technology has been in operation in New York for several years, Examination of the gas turbine powered technology indicates that the additional horsepower improves
train performance. Operational data on maintenance and fuel cost are not readily readily available. Examples of 􀁅􀁸􀀺􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁾􀁮􀁧 Diesel Locomotive RaH Systems 􀁾 Baltimore, MD 􀁾 New
Yark, NY 􀁾 l\Jewark, NJ ;.;,. P. hl'l.adeIphia' , P' ,A, Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 6
2030 Transit System Plan 2.2,1 Regional Commuter Rail -locomotive Hauled Diesel-powered trains normally use locomotives that are semipermanently coupled to one end of the train. Trains
can also be powered by a gas turbine engine or an overhead electric power line. A set of driving controls at both ends of the tra.in allows the train to be operated in either direction
without having to turn the locomotive or the train around upon reaching the end of the line. Diesel-powered trains may operate almost anywhere there is a railroad track, except through
long tunnels where exhaust fumes would accumulate. Diesel engines produce both noise and emissions, with the greatest impacts occurring during acceleration and sustained running. The
commuter coach cars can be either single-level or bi-Ievel in configuration. The number of seated passengers per car ranges from 80 to 170 depending on the vehicle cOFrfigufation. Newer
locomotives are quieter and less polluting than earlier models built in the 1970s and 1980s. Some commuter rail operators may be consideringself-propelled diesel rail cars for less-intensive services because they have fewer environmental impacts than locomotives. Capital costs for diesel locomotive commuter rail (excluding
ROW) ranges, from $3 to $25 million dollars per mile. 2.2.2 Regional Commuter Rail -Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) DMU commuter rail trains are self-propelled commuter rail cars that do
not require a locomotive to push or pull them. A train typically consists of one to th ree units. Each car has an operator's cab at each end to preclude having to turn the train at terminal
stations. Technology Review Drraft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 7
2030 Transit System Plan Two types of DMU vehicles are in operations today: traditional DMU technology and lightweight DMU. Traditional DMU technology (such as that used on the TRE)
typically consists of non-articulated single or multiple-car trains and is FRA compliant. Lightweight DMU is a lighter vehicle and operates primarily in Europe. Traditional DMUs can
operate at the same time as freight or intercity passenger trains, while lightweight DMUs do not meet the FRA's standards for crash worthiness and, are not allowed to operate with freight
traffic unless separated spatially or temporally. Typical capital cost per mile (excluding ROW) is $3 to $25 million per mile. 2.2.3 lightweight DMU Lightweight DMU rail vehicles and
rail operations are similar to electric LRT. These vehicles are designed for regional passenger service primarily in low-density non-electrified corridors up to 30 miles in length that
link city centers and mid-sized towns with suburban surroundings. This technology is more common in Europe as a means to extend the bene'fits of rail transit service over existing railroad
lines with minimal capital cost. The smaller DMU vehicle can provide rail transit service in areas where demand does not warrant high capacity rail service. Stations may be spaced every
one-half to one or more miles. Since the vehicle acceleration rate is less than that for typical light rail vehicles, wider station spacing is preferable. Trains are typically one to
two cars in length. Several European manufacturers have developed lightweight DMU vehicles. The Siemans Regio Sprinter has been widely tested and operated in regular transit service
in Germany. In Europe, lightweight DMU vehicles meet reqQirements for operating on both mainline freight railways and light rail lines. Because of the potential capital cost savings
associated with lightweight DMUs, several manufacturers are developing vehicles for the U.S. market, and some regions are now proposing to use lightWeight DMUs (e.g., the South Jersey
area). Colorado Railcar Manufacturing Recently, Colorado Railcar Manufacturing passed a major milestone in the development of lightweight DMU technology by meeting the FRA's new 49 CFR
part 238 compression test of 800,000 pounds. Passing this test makes the Colorado Railcar the first and only selfpropelled commuter railcar to qualify for use in mixed rail service in
the United States. Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 8
2030 Transit System Plan 2.3 HEAVY RAll-(Rail Rapid Transit) Heavy rail, commonly referred to as rail rapid transit, is a high-capacity, high-speed transit service that operates on exclusive
rights-of-way. Heavy rail systems typically consist of large four-axle rail vehicles powered from an electric third rail with no grade crossings. For safety and operational reasons (Le.,
speed), this technology requires exclusive rights-of-way and is one of the costliest transit options to construct. Capital cost per mile can range between $50 and $250 million. Existing
heavy rail systems operate in subways, at grade or on aerial structures. Heavy rail is appropriate for corridors or alignments with very high demand for transit. Up to three stations
per mile may be found in densely populated areas, but stations are typically one-half to one mile apart in dense urbanized areas and up to several miles apart in suburban areas. The
typical maximum speed is 50-80 miles per hour. Typical service frequency is 5-10 minutes during the peak period and 10-20 minutes during off-peak. Heavy rail vehicles are available in
50 to 75 feet (ft.) cars. Carrying capacity per car is 60 to 80 passengers seated and 125 to 150 with standees. An eight-car train can carry between 480 to 1,200 passengers. Cars are
often design.ed as married pairs, where equipment, such as the a.ir compressor and battery are shared between the pair to reduce car weight and cost. Engineering/Design Trends Heavy
Rail technology has advanced through the design of the latest R-'142 and R-143 New York City car designs. These cars offer communica.tion based train control (CBTC) or a moving block
system. Unlike the current wayside signal block system, where each signal controls a fixed block, CSTC is a moving block system. Moving blocks will allow shorter distances between trains
resulting in increased train traffic. A 'fixed block system allows only a limited number of trains in a given area. CBTC will allow for shorter headways and faster speeds. Another design
trend, the the automated or driverless metro systems, is also becoming more widely accepted. Full automation allows for very precise and rapid service adjustments. New automated metro
systems are planned for Nuremberg, Germany; and Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 9
2030 Transit System Plan Examples of Existing Heavy Rail Systems );> Boston, MA );> Chicago, IL );> San Francisco, CA 2.4 HIGHpSPEED INTERCITY RAil Intercity rail, also known as high-speed
rail (HSR), is designed for long haul service with correspondingly long distances between station stops. lntercity rail design parameters emphasize stable high-speed running, low noise,
and reduced track wear. This technology usually requires upgrades of existing rail line. High-speed trains in Europe typically operate at 150 to 200 mph. Amtrak recently unveiled its
new 150 mph train service known as "Acela" that offers high-speed rail service in the Soston-New York-Washington Northeast Corridor. Additional opportunities for high-speed rail systems
are being investigated for Caiifornia, Florida, and Texas. Capital costs for highspeed rail range between $40 and $80 million a mile. It should be noted that there have been discussions
at the state planning level to fund studies that would consider high-speed rail applications applications in Texas. Given this interest, it would be prudent for the DART System Plan
to address potential light rail/commuter rail! high-speed rail interface opportunities. This technology may also have to be accommodated in DART's Service Area. Long-term industry plans
call "for high-speed rail to reach speeds of 225 mph for commercial use. The French TGV has reached speeds o"f 320 mph. However, the French system is not viable commercially because
of the following concerns: dynamic pressures experienced by the track are overwhelming and would wear out the tracks faster, plus the train tracks and wheels would have to be in absolutely
perfect condition and alignment to run consistently at higher speeds. Given these concerns, many people see the future of high-speed rail in magnetically levitated trains. . Technology
Review lOran 3/3/03 2:08 PM 10
2030 Transit System Plan Examples of Existing Intercity Rail (HRS) Systems );> Amtrak -New York -Washington D.C. Corridor );> Paris, France );> Frankfurt, Germany 2.5 MAGLEV (Magnetically
Levitated Trains) Maglev (magnetically levitated) service is a line-haul, medium to high capacity transit service. It is a transit system in which a rail vehicle runs levitated from
the guideway (corresponding to the rail tracks of conventional railwa s) b usin electroma netic forces between superconducting magnets on board the vehicle and coils on the ground. The
vehicle fioats on a magnetic fieid and is propelled by a linear induction motor. The fundamental design . -objective of this technology is to create very high-speed transit, above 300
mph. Maglev can move people and goods with greater mobility and speed, using much less energy, at lower operating cost, and with greatly reduced pollution, compared to the existing rail
modes. Germany and Japan have run successful test tracks for years. Maglev technologies are expensive, requiring very large -and generally unaffordable government subsidies. High-speed
trains and other maglevs cost $100 to $300 million a mile to construct. First generation maglev systems have already been developed in Japan and Germany and have run successfully as
test tracks for the last two decades, while a secondgeneration system with enhanced performance capabilities is being developed in the United States. Engineering/Design Trend The Maglev
2000 of Florida Corporation is developing a second-generation maglev system that is based on prior maglev inventions. This second generation system has improved performance capabilities
and reduced costs. A key feature of the M-2000 System is the use of super-conducting quadruple magnets on the maglev vehicles. The quadruple configuration enables the M-2000 vehicles
to travel on low cost narrow beam gUideways, and to smoothly transition to a flat planar guideway whenever it is desired to be able to switch the vehicle to a second guideway. This switching
can take place at high-speed, i.e., 300 mph, without having to slow the vehicle down. The switching process is electronic and does not require Technology Review Dmft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 11
2030 Transit System Plan mechanical movement of a section of the guideway. Low-speed maglev systems are also being developed. Examples of Existing Maglev Systems >-China is building
the first commercial system. Scheduled completion: 2003 2.6 MONORAIL A monorail system typically provides a line-haul, medium capacity transit service. Physically, it is a variation
of a people mover that consists of rubber-tired vehicles that operate along a single rail, or beam. The single rail beam, supported or suspended, provides vehicle support and guidance
and contains the power source, which is typically electrical. The majority of monorail installations have been elevated; however, monorail can be designed for a variety of operating
environments and is generally used for short distance service (5 to 10 miles). Monorail must be grade separated from other traffic. Typical services include activity area circulation;
shuttle service and in some cases, line haul transit. Generally, monorail consists of one to four vehicles. Station spacing is comparable to light rail or heavy rail, one-third to onehalf
mile between activity centers and one-half to onemile or more in other areas. The typical capital cost per mile is $100 to $200 million. In the United States, monorail technology has
been implemented in limited applications, i.e., recreational areas or amusement parks (Disneyland/Walt Disney World) and short systems (approximately 1 mile) in downtown Seattle and
Newark International Airport. Outside the United States, straddle beam, large vehicle monorail systems are in operation in Sydney, Australia and Osaka, Kitakyushu, and Tokyo Japan. Engineering/Design
Trends The monorail design concept is not expected to change significantly. Vehicle size will vary to meet the application requirements, with corresponding changes to the traction motor
and drive train. Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 12
2030 Transit System Plan Examples of EXisting Monorail Systems );> Seattle, WA );> Newark, NJ );> Jacksonville, FL );> Tokyo, Japan 2.1 AUTOMATED GUIDEWAY TRANSIT -(People Mover) Automated
Guideway Transit (AGT) or "People Mover" systems utilize fully automated low to medium capacity vehicles. AGT refers to a broad range of fixed guideway technology in which the most prominent
feature is automated train operation. AGT is characterized by steel or rubber-tired vehicles that operate under automated control on an exclusive guideway. AGT can be one of the quietest
transit modes when it uses rubber tired vehicles and electric piOpulsion. Under these circumstances it produces virtually no emissions. In cold ciimates the guideways must be kept clear
of ice and snow. This is typically accomplished through heating devices built into the guideways. It is typically grade-separated from other vehicular traffic. For technical reasons,
at-giade or on-street operation of AGT is not practicable. AGT rights-of-way, other than aerial guideways or tunnels, are virtually unknown. AGTs have high route capacity due to frequent
service. Hourly passenger capacity can be comparable to that of light rail. Vehicles typically accommodate fewer passengers than other rail modes. The relatively small cars can be coupled
into trains that operate with very short station spacing. Stations are spaced one-quarter mile -to one mile apart. Therefore, this transit technology is commonly used at airports, activity
centers, and downtown circulators. Unlike most transit modes that use vehicles controlled by a driver, the lack of an operator aboard AGT vehicles makes it possible to provide very frequent
service at little additional operating cost. Alternatively, at least one AGT system is known to provide off-peak service on a demand-responsive basis. It has been implemented as a line-haul
transit in medium to large metropolitan areas. AGT may use conventional electric propulsion, or alternative types such as linear induction and magnetic levitation. Capital costs for
AGT systems range from $50 to $100 million per mile. Engineering/Design Trends I\lew AGT concepts emerge every few years with variations in guideway design and propulsion concepts. Successful
vehicles are expected to continue to use the central guide beam concept for support, lateral guidance, and power collection. As technology improves Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08
PM 13
2030 Transit System Plan items such as automation, lighter weight vehicles and gUideway construction, the AGT technology will benefit. Examples of Existing AGT Systems 􀁾 Downtown Circulator:
Detroit, MI; Miami, FL 􀁾 Line-Haul Service: Vancouver, Canada; Tiapei, Taiwan 􀁾 Airport Circulator: Atlanta, GA; Dallas/Fort Worth, TX; Orlando, FL 􀁾 Feeder/Distributor Service: Toronto,
Canada; Bukit Panjang, Singapore 2.8 PERSONAL RAPID TRANSIT -(PRT) Personal Rapid Transit is a concept that is intended to provide direct point-to-point, demandresponsive transit service
to individuals and small parties. An automated control system routes small vehicles along a grade-separated guideway system allowing passengers to reach selected destination without
stops. Similar to AGT, intervals between vehicles would be very short. A PRT would primarily serve low-density business parks or suburban areas as well as areas where walking distance
from transit stops may be too great or inconvenient. The level of service would be competitive with private vehicle trave!. In theory, a passenger would summon PRT vehicles to a stop.
The passenger would then be transported to his or her destination without intermediate stops. Stops could be designated at very close intervals since passengers would not be subject
to intermediate stops after boarding. Capital cost for . this technology is not readily available. . Engineering/Design Trend This technology· is currently under development and is envisioned
to compete with the automobile by providing a direct, non-stop trip between origin and destination in private vehicles for up to three passengers. No op.erating systems are in place.
Examples of Existing PRT Systems 􀁾 None Technology Review Dra.ft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 14
2030 Transit System Plan 2.9 STREETCARS (Trolley) Streetcars, also known as trolleys or trams, were once the backbone of urban transit systems until bus and subway transit became more
prominent. In the 1980s, streetcars experienced resurgence with the restoration of several historic trolley systems. Today, streetcar service has re-emerged as a viable option for transit
service in urban areas. Streetcars typically operate in mixed traffic on surface streets or in reserved medians, providing short-headway and frequent-stop service. Similar to light rail,
streetcars are a medium to high capacity intra-urban service. They are well suited to local transit needs in developed urban major activity centers, and are often .used as shuttle service
to attractions, shopping, downtown circulation, parking areas and airports. Track and power supply requirements for streetcars are similar to light rail operations. Because of similar
operating characteristics, streetcar routes can operate on a portion of modern light rail track, however, light rail as a line-haul seNies may not be suitable to operate on tracks designed
specifically for a historic streetcar. Streetcars are electrically powered vehicles of either a small single unit design (two axles assembled into a unit that does not swivel with respect
to the car body) or a larger double unit design (four axles). Single unit vehicles are normally less than 30 feet long and can seat up to 25-30 passengers. Double unit cars are typically
35 to 50 feet and can seat up to 45 to 70 passengers. Streetcars are powered via overhead wire; drawing 600 volts of direct current via a 􀁾 streetcar pole. . 􀁾 􀀮􀁾􀁾􀂷􀀦􀀱􀁩􀀱􀁩􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁾􀀮􀁬􀁬�
�􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀣􀁊􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁤􀀺􀁾 􀁾􀁦􀀽􀁢􀀿􀁨􀁾􀁵􀁢􀀱􀁴􀀱􀀬􀀢􀁓􀁉􀁉􀂷􀁨􀁲􀁬􀁴􀁭􀀴􀁴􀁐􀁬􀁑􀁃􀁦􀁥􀁤􀁬􀁃􀁐􀁑􀁬􀀢􀀬..􀁯􀁩􀁴􀀡􀁴􀁬􀁾 􀀧􀁾􀀻􀁾 Maximum speed ranges up to 35 mile per hour. The average
operating speed is comparable to local bus operations (8 to 12 miles per hour). Similar to light rail operations, streetcar systems are considered to be environmentally friendly. Noise
and vibration impacts would have to be considered. Streetcars can be grouped into two categories, modern and vintage (historical) style. Vintage streetcars are typically low capacity
and low-speed transit. The McKinney Avenue Trolley is an example of a vintage style streetcar. Modern streetcars are generally characterized as low to intermediate capacity. Examples
of modern streetcars can be found in Portland, Oregon and Tacoma, Washington. Modern streetcars offer the ability to negotiate urban streets with sharp turns. Vehicle capacity and performance
characteristics, such as acceleration and maximum speed make historic streetcars less desirable for line-haul service. However, modern streetcars have passenger capacity and operating
characteristics approaching those of light rail system. 􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀩 IbP. ,.,' • Technology Review DraH 3/3/03 2:08 PM 15
2030 Transit System Plan Similar to light rail vehicles, streetcar vehicle development is concentrating on lighter vehicles, less expensive manufacturing, and standardization, Modern
streetcars resemble modern light rail vehicles. Portland, Oregon and Tacoma, Washington use modern 66-foot, four-axle, double-articulated, low-floor "Astra" vehicles. Some cities are
utilizing replica cars that resemble historic streetcars. Unlike historic streetcars, replica cars may include modern features such as air conditioning, and onboard wheelchair lifts.
Capital cost for streetcars varies but tends to range between $10 and $25 million per mile, which is much less than light rail. However, restoration cost of older trolley cars can range
from $400,000 to over $1 million and cost for replica cars can range from $500,00 to $800,000 per car. Minimizing station features and station design can reduce the capital cost for
streetcars. }:> Dallas, TX }:> San Jose, CA }:> Portland, Boston, IVIA }:> New Orleans, LA High occupancy occupancy vehicle -facilities are roadway lanes dedicated for high occupancy
vehicle movement, i.e., carpools, vanpools, and buses. The primary focus of a HOY facility is to increase the person-movement rather than vehicle movement through a corridor. HOY facilities
are one of the many alternatives that metropolitan areas are using to respond to 16 (Q. Technology Review [)R'ah1 3/3/03 2:08 PM
2030 Transit System Plan increasing traffic congestion, declining mobility levels, and air quality/environmental concerns. HOV lanes can operate within several types of ROW, including
on freeways, arterials, or on separate ROW. There are severa.l operational alternatives within the freeway ROW including: concurrent flow, contraflow, reversible, and bi-directional.
Below are the three most common types: • Concurrent flow HOV facilities are lanes added in the same direction of travel as the general-purpose lanes and are not physically separated
from mixed flow traffic. Concurrent flow lanes are normally located on the inside lane or shoulder. Paint striping is used to delineate the HOV lane. • Contraflow HOV facilities are
found where low traffic demand in the off-peak direction will allow for a lane to used as a HOV lane during the peak travel period. The designated lane is separated by changeable 􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁴􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁳
􀀬 such as plastic posts or pylons that can be inserted into holes drilled in the pavement. e Reversible HOV facilities are typically single-lanes that are separated from the mixed flow
lanes by concrete barriers in which the direction of traffic flow can be changed at times of day to match the peak direction of travel during periods of peak demand. There are also several
design alternatives for each including striping-separated and barrierseparated. Two of the most common types of HOV lanes are median concurrent 'flow lanes and barrier-separated reversible
lanes. The City of Houston has the largest system of barrierseparated reversible HOV lanes in the U.S. Concurrent flow median HOV lanes are most common in southern California. DART currently
operates 31 miles of interim HOV lanes on four roadways in the Dallas metropolitan area. On average, these facilities carry 100,000 weekday trips. In FY01, DART's HOV facilities carried
approximately 34 million commuter trips. All of DART HOV lanes are jointly planned and designed by DART and TxDOT. They are constructed by TxDOT and DART is responsible for their management,
operation and enforcement. Maintenance is jointly performed by both agencies. Buses, vanpools and carpools with two or more occupants as well as motorcycles are eligible to use HOV lanes.
Location of DART HOV lanes: e 1-35E (Stemmons Freeway) e 1-635 (LBJ Freeway) s 1-30 (East R.L. Thornton Freeway) €I 1-35E/US 67(Marvin D. Love Freeway) LBJ and Stemmons are concurrent
flow HOV lanes and have no physical barriers between general purpose and HOV lanes. East R.L. Thornton and Marvin D. Love are reversible and contra-flow HOV lanes, respectively. DART
uses dynamic signs, lane control signals, Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 17
2030 Transit System Plan changeable message signs, and cameras to monitor, manage, and respond to traffic operations. Engineering/Design Trend Engineering and design criteria for HOV
lanes are not expected to change significantly. However, innovative approaches to HOV concepts are being developed, Le., high occupancy/toll (HOT) Lanes. HOT Lanes are a relatively new
approach to improving urban mobility. A HOT lane is an HOV lane that allows lower occupancy vehicle to have access for a toll, while making effective use of available space. HOT lanes
offer urban motorists an option of faster, congestion-free travel in dedicated lanes. Basic design standards for HOV lanes are addressed in the Transportation Research Board Report 414:
HOV Systems Manual. Examples of Existing HOV Systems 􀁾 DaHas, TX 􀁾 Houston, TX )7 Minneapolis, MN 2.11 CONVENTIONAL BUS TRANSIT Buses represent the most common and most flexible type
of public transportation. A key attribute of a bus system is the ability to employ buses that combine feeder, line-haul, and distribution functions. Bus transit routes are typically
designed to function as a primary trunk or backbone -for an urban transit system, to provide regional service between urban areas, and to proVide circulator service within communities.
Buses are able to respond to increasing passenger demand by increasing vehicle size and bus frequency. Because of this flexibility, buses can serve corridor volumes ranging from about
1,000 to 2,000 passengers per hour to at least 20,000 passengers per hour. This is comparable to the carrying capacity of light rail. Historically, bus transit in the United States has
been perceived as second-class transit as compared to rail service. However, technological advances in bus vehicle design and operations have improved the buses' image and public acceptance.
Today, there is a growing sentiment within the transit industry to consider buses as a viable option. These new sen/ice concepts have also shown to be sLlccessful in promoting positive
changes to to the Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 18
2030 Transit System Plan surrounding land use. Bus services can be designed to meet a variety of physical and operational challenges. Most routes operate on standard roadways. However,
bus routes can be tailored to meet the needs of individual communities. In Europe and South America, systems have been designed to operate on dedicated bus shoulder lanes, in the medians
of streets, on dedicated right-of-way, and along side railroads and utilities easements. Buses can operate on fixed-routes or on a demand-responsive basis. Fixed-route bus services can
be defined as local or limited stops. Demand responsive services, or paratransit, are those services that provide curb-to-curb services. Local bus route stops are typically as frequent
as one every one to two blocks or every one-eighth mile. Express or limited service is characterized by fewer stops and higher average speeds. Bus transit encompasses a wide variety
of vehicle types, ranging from converted vans to double-deck and articulated transit buses. Typical transit vehicles operated in fixed-route service may include buses 30 feet long or
shorter for neighborhood and feeder service. In the majority of urban and suburban bus services, 35-foot and 40-foot coaches are used. Unlike rail facilities, bus station stops are typically,
simple, ran§ing from a bus stop sign to a stop that has a sign and bus shelter. Speed for conventional buses are governed by city-imposed speed limits and by the prevailing traffic conditions,
except when operating on an exclusive ROW. The average operating speed for conventional buses, in mixed traffic, is 10 to 12 mph. Capital costs for buses range from $200,000 to $1 million,
depending on size and features. DART has a sizeable fleet of conventional buses. It operates nearly 130 local and express bus routes serving Addison, Carrollton, Cockrell Hill, Dallas,
Farmers Branch, Garland, Glenn Heights, Highland Park, Irving, Plano, Richardson, Rowlett and University Park. DART has a total fleet of 877 buses, 14 transit centers, and 11,961 bus
stops. The average weekday ridership is 170,185 passengers. In FY2001, the DART bus system provided 47.8 million passenger trips over 1,455 route miles. DART bus services are c1assHied
into five service categories: Local, Crosstown, Express, Feeder/Distributors, and Rail Feeder. ® Local routes include both local routes and limited-stop routes. ® Crosstown routes connect
non-CBD activity centers together while linking the radically oriented local routes to provide shorter more direct travel. ® Express routes operate non-stop service between transit centers
or Park and Ride facilities and downtown Dallas. G Feeder/Distributor routes operate in a local service mode accommodating trips of relatively low-density population. @Rail Feeder routes
function primarily to collect and distribute riders of light ra.il and commuter rail service. The majority of conventional buses operate on diesel power. Two environmental concerns do
arise, bus vehicle emissions and noise. The issue of bus vehicle emissions can be Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 19
2030 Transit System Plan mitigated via alternative fuels such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), electric buses, and fuel cell buses'. However, fuel cells
offer near zero emissions and significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, as well as potentia.lly more efficient power generation, improve reliability, and lower maintenance
costs. Similarly, noise impacts can be mitigated by electric trolley buses or other noise mitigation measures such as fuel cell transit buses, which are also quieter than conventional
buses. Engineering/Design Trend Bus technology development continues using improved diesel engines, cleaner fuels, external electric power, batteries, hybrid (combination) systems, and
fuel cells. All of these designs are in service. The zero emissions fuel-cell design will improve bus acceptance when its price becomes competitive.Today, a 40-foot fuel cell powered bus is about four times the price of a conventional engine powered bus. Examples of Existing Fixed Route Bus Systems 􀁾 Portland, OR 􀁾 San Diego,
CA 􀁾 Baltimore, MD 􀁾 New York, NY 2.11.1 Bus Rapid Transit and Enhanced Bus Transit Strategies Conventional buses can also be used for different operating strategies including bus
rapid transit (BRT). The primary objective of BRT strategies is a reduction in passenger travel time. Busways provide the speed advantages typically associated with fixed guideway systems.
A central concept is to give priority to transit vehicles that carry more people than automobiles do. With exclusive lanes, travel time can be substantially reduced relative to conventiona.l
bus service. In addition, traffic signal priority and reduced dwell times contribute to reduced travel time. These systems often have fewer stops than conventional bus service. Bus rapid
transit is often referred to as a low cost alternative to light rail transit. Under the BRT operating strategy, conventional buses could operate primarily in easily identifiable exclusive
busways, HOV lanes or dedicated, bus lanes. An exclusive busway is a special roadway designed for the exclusive use of buses. A busway can be in its own right-of-way, or in a railway
or highway right-of-way. Short stretches of streets designated for exclusive buses are sometimes also called busways. A busway can a.lso be built in an active rail corridor. Busways
usually have on-line stations. Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 20
2030 Transit System Plan Bus rapid transit service can be integrated into HOV lanes to provide high-speed and high frequency service. In this operating strategy, BRT buses share the
HOV lanes with rideshare vehicles. Buses can use HOV lanes as part of a point-to-point service with no stops on the HOV portion. Buses on HOV facilities can also pick-up and drop-off
passengers arriving at on-line stations. To provide an enhanced level of service, HOV lanes may have exclusive onand off-ramps for BRT vehicles. A dedicated bus lane is a roadway lane
separated from general traffic lanes by barriers, or simply by signage and road markings. On city streets, there are several ways these can be implemented. A twoway street might have
one dedicated bus lane in each direction, while a 􀁯􀁮􀁥􀁾􀁷􀁡􀁹 street might have one dedicated lane. In general, most local BRT service in dedicated lanes typically operates at average
speeds of 10 to 20 miles per hour. Buses on exclusive busways and HOV lanes average operating speeds that ranges between 20 to 50 miles per hour, depending on the system configuration.
Buses on the DART HOV lanes carry approximately 600 passengers per hour during peak service. In 2000, the average operating speed on the 1-35 HOV portion of the bus routes was approximately
57 mph. For the purpose of this study and in the development of the 2030 Transit System Plan, the overall focus of BRT service is increased operating speed. DART defines bus rapid transit
service as transit service with an average operating speeds of 20 to 29 mph, with limited stops. These speeds are higher than the average speeds more commonly found in local BRT service
throughout the nation, as previously mentioned. Enhanced bus transit is a BRT style service, where conventional buses operate on arterial roadways that have dedicated bus lanes and signal
priority treatment. Enhanced bus transit service also includes patron amenities, such as attractive stations, and integration of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). ITS technology
includes: wireless communication, computer assisted dispatch systems and automated traveler information systems. DART is defining enhanced bus transit service as buses that operate on
dedicated lanes generally operating between 10 to19 mph, as compared to conventional bus transit, 10 to 12 mph. Though enhanced bus service operating speeds are comparable to average
local BRT service throughout the nation, the speeds are much lower than bus rapid transit service as defined by DART, and the two should not be confused. The key difference of enhanced
bus service versus bus rapid transit service is the lower average travel speed and the fact that it does not operate in an exclusive busway, therefore it provides a less dependable service.
Technology Review Drat! 3/3/03 2:08 PM 21
2030 Transit System Plan Capital costs for improved busways, where an exclusive busway is not necessary, are usually lower than capital costs for rail systems. Making use of existing
rights-of-way can reduce capital cost. However, a 'fully featured exclusive busway system can approach the cost of a light rail system. Capital cost for this type of system ranges from
$4 to $40 million per mile, depending on system configuration. These improved busway systems can be incrementally implemented. If properly planned, either of the two service strategies
could serve as the initia.l phase towards the development of a light rail system. 2:12 Electric Trolley Bus Electric trolley buses are a subtype of a standard bus. This technology was
originally implemented as an alternative to the streetcar. Electric trolley buses receive power from an overhead wire. These buses are distinguished from other buses by electric propulsion
only; otherwise, they are identical in size to diesel buses and can operate in the same environments, if an overhead power source is available. Electric trolley buses are appropriate
for hilly terrain since they can efficiently negotiate steep grades, and for very busy routes characterized by short headways. While once common in many cities, few systems or routes
remain. Capital cost for electric trolley buses range between $900,000 and $'1.5 million per mile for electrification. The Electric Trolley Bus design concept is not expected to change
significantly. Several manufacturers are attempting to combine the best features of trams and bus characteristics into an electric trolley system. Bombardier with the tram-on-tires,
Renault-IVlatra with Civis and Mercedes-Benz are looking to develop an electrically' driven 200 passenger doublearticulated bus. Technology Review [Drafft 3/3/03 2:08 PlVI 22
2030 Transit System Plan 2.13 Special Transit Vehicles To meet the growing and often diverse demand for transit services, transit agencies are focusing their energies on developing an
array of transportation services and programs. The growing trend towards suburb-to-suburb travel, increased travel needs of the mobility impaired, and the growth of nontraditional travel
markets have resulted in the use of non-traditional transit vehicles. Transit agencies across the country are recognizing the need to have a range of transit programs and vehicles to
serve their customers' needs. The use of vans, cars and small buses to address the travel needs of lowdensity travel markets and the travel needs of the mobiiity impaired have become
standard practice at many transit agencies. 2.13.1 Station Car The station car concept is a relatively new form of mobility and is simiiar to the concept of Car Sharing. Both concepts
were developed around the same time and are based on the premise that households do not need to own or long-term lease cars to maintain access to goods, services, jobs and other destinations.
Subscribers of both services reserve and use the cars for some, or all, of their trip-making needs. In car sharing, one or two cars are parked in several places throughout residential
neighborhoods. The station car concept places a number of cars at transit stations. With regards to transit, station cars can become an extension of a transit system resulting in increased
ridersbip on line-haul routes, i.e., rail, and express bus service. Station cars provide the same instant access and convenient mobility as conventional vehicles. They can serve low-density
residential and commercial areas that cannot be well served by traditional fixed route systems. Technology f-leview [Dra-ft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 23
2030 Transit System Plan A typical station car is a small battery-powered electric car, but other types of vehicles can and are being used depending on transit needs and demand. Electric
cars are preferred because they are considered to be more environmentally friendly than gasoline or diesel engine vehicles. Electric cars also offer these benefits: • Significantly reduced
maintenance; ., Simplified infrastructure; • Ease of operation; • Durability; It Reliability; • Safety; • Reduced dependence on foreign oil; and • Life-cycle cost effectiveness. The
overaii objective of the station car concept is the reduction of vehicles on the road. With station cars, different users rent the same vehicle more than once a day. Thus, station cars
contribute less to roadway congestion, air, noise and water pollution. The maximum speed for electric station cars is 50 to 65 mph depending 011 the manufacturer. Station cars can be
recharged at queuing stations located at transit facilities, or recharging can be accomplished at the homes of commuters. The driving range for electric station cars is approximately
45 to 70 miies on a fully charged vehicle, depending on vehicle manufacturer and driving conditions. Capital cost for station cars can range from $15,000 to $25,000 depending on vehicle
type, fuel type, and other vehicle options, such as an on-board Global Positioning System (GPS). With federal and state incentives and tax credits the capital cost for station vehicles
can be reduced substantially, up to 45% of vehicle cost. The infrastructure cost for vehicles storage/recharging varies by vendor and location. Cities that have tested Station Cars Programs
include: • San Francisco -(40 electric vehicles at 4 BART stations) @Boston -(Test 31 electric vehicles at various rail station and Park & Ride) • Los Angeles -(3 electric vehicles at
2 Metrolink rail stations) Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 24
2030 Transit System Plan 2.13.2 Paratransit Paratransit services fall in between conventional fixed-route transit and the personal automobile. The service uses minibuses, vans, taxicabs
and/or sedans to provide demandresponsive transportation for people who are mobility impaired. The service is available by reservation or subscription, and usually on a shared-ride basis.
Paratransit service typically provides door-to-door service. Some operators provide service from the customer's origin to American with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant fixed route buses
or trains. Another operating strategy is to provide zone-to-zone service that requires a transfer between vehicles. Paratransit prOVides, on average, 1.4 passengers per revenue hour
or unlinked passenger trip. The average trip length is 8 miles. The average operating speed for paratransit vehicles is 14 to 15 mph. The fleet size for paratransit services varies and
is typically based on the size of the transit agency and the amount of service provided. Small Small urban transit agencies typically have a paratransit fleet that range from 4 to 24
vehicles. In mid-size transit agencies, the fleet size can range from 4 to 75 vehicles. Large urban transit agencies have fleets that can range from 34 to 384 vehicles. Transit agencies
use a mix of vehicles to provide paratransit services. As such, vehicle capital cost varies by agency. Capital cost for paratransit vehicles can range from $30,000 to $70,000 depending
on seating capacity, type of wheelchair lifts, and other operating requirements. Changes in paratransit vehicle design are helping to increase transit productivity and quality of service.
For example, in Europe the latest small bus design allows the internal configuration of the bus to be changed quickly. This allows the bus to be used to carry multiple wheelchairs, to
carry regular transit passengers to a trunk route in rural transit operations, and for package delivery for special services. DART paratransit service provides public transportation
to people people with disabilities who are unable to use standard buses or trains. Paratransit service is a shared-ride service operated with accessible vehicles. Riders who are unable
to access vans by using steps may use wheelchair lifts. Paratransit may provide door-to-door service to ADA paratransit eligible individuals who have the ability to use DART bus or rail
services. DART has approximately 7,000 eligible patrons in its database. Currently, DART provides about 2,500 trips daily within its service area. Technology Heview Dmft: 3/3/03 2:08
PM 25
2030 Transit System Plan 2.13.3 Commuter Vanpools A vanpool is a group of 7 to 15 people who commute together on a regular basis in a van. Riders usually meet at designated pick-up locations
like a shopping center, park-and-ride lots, or some other central location. Each vanpool has a designated driver who is responsible for driVing to and from work locations. Vans are low-cost
alternatives to traditional transit vehicles, and are geared towards serving long-distance travel markets that are not capable of sustaining traditional fixed route service. From an
operations perspective, vanpools are flexible, environmentally friendly, and have the ability to provide riders significant travel time savings by using HOV lanes. Vanpool programs can
be administered in two ways: the transit agency can bUy vans and administer the entire program, covering the costs by collecting fares from riders; the transit agency could lease vans
and-administer either the entire program, some of the program or none of the program-depending on the terms of the lease. Vanpool vehicles come in various seating-sizes: mini-van seats
up to seven passengers; standard-van seats up to nine passengers; and maxi-van that seats up to 15 passengers. The average trip length for vanpool service is 34.6 miles. The average
operating speed is 31 mph. Capital cost for vans vary based on size and manufacturer. The average cost range is from $20,000 to $30,000. . 3.0 VEHICLE PROPULSION In 1998, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) designated the Dallas/Fort Worth area as a serious nonatta.inment area. As a result, NCTCOG and other governmental bodies started promoting the use of cleaner-burning
alternative fuel vehicles as an important air quality control strategy for the region. Internal combustion engines have been identified as a significant source of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions. Both of which have neg,ative impacts on air quality and the economic viability of a community. This section provides an overview of existing
and innovative alternative fuel vehicle technologies. Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 26
2030 Transit System Plan 3.1 Electric Vehicles An electric vehicle (EV) is a motor vehicle that uses a rechargeable battery for propulsion, replacing gasoline, diesel or other types
of combustible fuels. The vehicle is similar in appearance to vehicles powered with internal combustion engines having the same chassis or body, and containing the same accessories as
an internal combustion engine vehicle. The propulsion system of an electric vehicle produces zero emissions and is considered to be more energy efficient then internal combustion engines.
Its primary focus is to reduce the amount of noxious gases that are released into the air. An electric vehicle has the following attributes: o No gaseous emissions; o Simple (not a lot
of moving parts); o Energy efficient; $ Regenerative braking that provides energy to the batteries; • Electric motor is quiet; and o Does not utilize a transmission. An electric vehicle's
battery defines the range, acceleration ability and recharge time for the vehicle. Today's batteries do not provide electric vehicles with the same drive range as internal combustion
engines. Also, there is the lack of uniformity among electric vehicle manufacturers when it comes to a standard for a vehicle's nominal battery voltage. This lack of uniformity means
that different manufacturers may use different charging specifications. Thus, developing charging stations for vehicles would be difficult. There are efforts to create "smarf' chargers
that are microprocessor based. The chargers would be able to access the vehicle's data bank and would be able to regulate the charge according to the manufacturer's specification. Electric
or hybrid-electric (utilizing either clean diesel engines, alternative fuels engines, gas turbines or fuel cells in conjunction with batteries) buses are being used at several transit
agencies around the country. These agencies include the RTD in Denver, the City of Miami Beach, the Grand Canyon National Park, and the l\Jew York Transit Authority. A telephone survey
of transit agencies in Denver, the City of Miami, and the Electric Transit Vehicle Institute resulted in the following findings: Q EV buses are quiet and well accepted by the community;
@EV buses typically operate as shuttle buses in the downtown area or mall area; Q Seating capacity is less than conventional buses; @Typical operating speed range between 15 and 25 mph;
III Capital cost for vehicles is higher than conventional buses (20 to 40 percent); @Operating cost tend to lower (due to reduced maintenance); @Lifecycle cost is about even; and III
EV can be used for low speed, low to high capacity corridors. Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 27
2030 Transit System Plan 3.2 Fuel Cell Vehicles Fuel cell vehicles are an attractive step-up 'from battery-powered vehicles. They offer the advantages of battery power, but can be re-energized
quickly and could go longer between refueling. A fuel cell produces electricity by reacting hydrogen and oxygen with a catalyst to form water. The chemical energy is converted to electrical
energy with high efficiency. Fuel cells are now being evaluated or developed for a variety of mass transit applications, including locomotives, transit buses, people movers and taxis.
There are many different types of fuel cells under development. The most common type is known as the Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) fuel cell. XCELLSiS Xi Bus Hybrid Propulsion System
layout The first bus powered by a pre-commercial fuel cell engine was developed by Ballard Power Systems and XCELLSIS Fuel Cell Engines. Fuel cell engines, based on the Ballard fuel
cell, will be comparable to conventional engines in size, weight, operating life, acceleration and speed, range and refueling time. Today, there are several developers conducting research,
demonstration or evaluation on fuel cell transit vehicles. The Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is working with transit agencies and other partners
to determine the test and evaluation protocols needed to advance implementation of fuel cell technology, as well as document the necessary modifications to transit agencies' maintenance
and operations infrastructure. Several prototype fuel cell buses have been demonstrated in the U.S. and Canada and are expected to be available commercially on a limited basis by 2003.
3.3 Clean Diesel One type of clean diesel fuel is a specially refined fuel that lowers sulfur content and thereby reduces harmful emissions that can hurt air quality. The sulfur content
of clean diesel ranges from 15 to 30 parts per million (ppm). Regular diesel has a maximum sulfur content of 500 ppm. Clean diesel vehicles utilize emission reduction equipment, such
as particulate filters, i Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 28
2030 Transit System Plan that reduces emissions of "fine particulates and toxic air particles by more than 90 percent and emissions of hydrocarbons to nearly undetectable levels. Ultra-low
sulfur diesel fuel has no negative impact on vehicle performance. It provides the same energy and performance as regular highway diesel and meets all specifications for regular on-highway
diesel. Currently, ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel costs more than regular diesel because of production costs. However, it is expected that as more private and governmental entities convert
to clean diesel and more distribution centers come on-line, the production cost of clean diesel fuel will go down. Another type of clean diesel fuel, biodiesel, is an oxygenated fuel
made from soybean oil, other vegetable oils or animal fats. Biodiesel is a mixture of many chemical constituents and is therefore relatively difficult to reform. Researchers have recently
successfully demonstrated the use of regular diesel fuel with a solid oxide fuel cell. They hypothesize that biodiesel would have similar characteristics, though sulfur removal would
be necessary. 3.4 Natural Gas Vehicles Natural gas may be used as a transportation fuel in two forms: compressed natural gas (CNG), and liquefied natural gas (LNG). Compressed natural
gas is pressurized natural gas that is stored in cylinder tanks at pressures up to 3,600 pounds per square inch. Liquefied natural gas is cooled to a temperature of about -260 degrees
Fahrenheit at atmospheric pressure where it is condensed to a liquid state. LNG is stored in tanks that are doublewalled with insulation between the walls. The difference between the
two forms of natural gas is density. Liquefied natural gas carries more energy per pound than compressed natural gas. Natural gas transit vehicles have been in operation for more than
a decade and have the following benefits: fD Lower emissions as compared to gasoline or regular diesel; and @Lower fuel cost. Operating issues/concerns associated with the use of natural
gas are vehicle reliability, vehicle maintenance cost, and vehicle/facilities capital cost. Reliability Liquefied natural gas vehicles have had a problem with engine/fuel-related systems,
Le., fuel leaks, fuel filters, and running out of fuel. It is expected that with advances in fuel technology, this problem will be remedied. Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 29
2030 Transit System Plan Maintenance Cost Maintenance costs for the engine/fuel-related systems on LNG vehicles have been significantly higher than those of diesel buses. Problems with
the engine gas injectors, fuel system leaks, and false alarms by the leak detection system have been a source of increased cost in LNG vehicles. Engine related maintenance costs for
CNG vehicles are slightly higher than diesel vehicles. Most of the cost can be attributed to extra tune-ups required for the spark-ignited CNG engines. Capital/Operating Cost Adding
natural fuel vehicles to a transit fleet requires not only the purchase of alternative fueled vehicles, but also entails additional expenses for refueling and maintenance facilities.
The capital costs for new facilities or modifying existing facilities vary by agency. The operating costs of maintaining storage and refueling faciiities aiso vary depending on the size
and complexity of the facilities. 4.0 Intelligent Transportation Systems Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) involve the application of computer, communications, traffic control,
and information processing technologies to improve transportation operations, safety, air quality and mobility. The use of electronic systems for information storage, processing and
communication is changing the way transit agencies communicate to the public, and in turn, the way the public interfaces with transit systems. The application of ITS in fare collection,
and passenger information systems are two areas that are impacting transit riders. 4.1 Multi-modal Travel Information Systems Multi-modal traveler information systems provide travelers
with real-time transit and traffic information. It gives transit riders the .ability to make fully informed decisions, both pre-trip and en route. Transit riders are provided up-to-date
information about the transportation system, i.e., when the next bus or train will arrive or what is the anticipated travel time from one transit stop to the next or roadway incident
information. This information is disseminated via telephone, television monitors, radio, electronic signs, kiosks, personal computers, pagers, handheld electronic devices, on-board communication
systems, and the Internet. Traveler information systems can be categorized into four areas: Pre-Trip, In-Terminal and Wayside, In-Vehicle Information Systems, and Dynamic Ridesharing.
e Pre-trip information systems provide travelers with pertinent information before they begin a trip. This informa.tion generally consists of transit routes, schedules, fares and other
pertinent information. Traditionally, this information is obtained via telephone, however many transit agencies now provide the same information over the Internet. Transit Technology
Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 30
2030 Transit System Plan agencies are also looking at station kiosks and automated telephone trees as another way to communicate to transit customers. • In-Terminal and Wayside Information
Systems provide travelers with arrival and departure information, schedule updates, transfer information via electronic signs, kiosks and television monitors. In-Terminal and Wayside
Information Systems are not widely used because of the cost associated with deployment. • In-Vehicle Information Systems are similar to In-Terminal and Wayside Information Systems, except
information is provided inside transit vehicles via small electronic displays and annunciators. On ra.il vehicles, annuniciators are frequently used to announce the next stop. • Dynamic
ridesharing systems automate the arrangement of carpools by using advanced computer and telephone technologies. Drivers and riders call a central clearinghouse where a computer searches
a database and finds the best available match for riders and ride seekers. Dynamic ridersharing systems streamline the ridematching process, and increase the usage of HOV modes. 4.2
Electronic Fare Payment/Smart Cards Electronic Fare Payment (EFP) systems use electronic communications, data processing and data storage techniques to automate manuai fare coliection
processes. EFP systems benefit both transit authorities and customers. For transit authorities, EFP systems reduce laborintensive cash handling costs, risk of theft, improve reliability
and maintainability of fare boxes, and permit sophisticated fare pricing based on distance traveled and time of day. For customers, transit becomes easier to use because exact change
is not necessary and only a single fare card is needed to use the system. EFPs can be grouped into three categories: smart cards; magnetic strip cards; and contact cards. Magnetic strip
cards and contact cards are older EFP technologies and have been in use by a number of transit agencies. For the purpose of this study, only the smart card technology is reviewed. A
smart card card is a credit card-sized plastic card with an embedded integrated circuit (IC) chip. This Ie chip contains a central processing unit (CPU), random access memory, and nonvolatile
data storage similar to that found in a personal computer. These properties make the smart card a portable database capable of processing, storing, and safeguarding thousands of bytes
of data, and a bridge to other databases, allowing communication between disparate computer systems. Smart cards are relatively new and are being used in operational tests. The Ventura
County Transit Commission, in Long Beach, CA, coordinates the operations of seven municipal transit authorities in the county. Ventura has about 2,200 smart cards in operation. If the
initial program proves successful, plans are to implement smart cards across all seven agencies. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) is also testing smart Technology
Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 31
2030 Transit System Plan cards. WMATA is selling approximately 7,000 smart cards a month and is expected to have close to 250,000 cards in use in the neaduiure. Smart cards, unlike contact
cards and magnetic strip cards, do not have to make contact with the read/write units. This eliminates the wear and tear associated with running the card through, or holding the card
against a read/write unit. Smart cards are generally designed to communicate with a base unit, one to six inches away. The modulated radio frequency (RF) signal transmitted from base
unit to the card also carries power to the card's circuitry. With smart cards transit riders need only purchase a card embedded with a computer chip that is loaded with a dollar value,
stored rides, or monthly passes. Transit riders will be able to flash the card without having to remove it from their wallets or purses. Smart cards cost more than magnetic strip card,
but offer advantages such as, card reliability, and greater security against tampering.4.3 DART ITS Program DART has eight major ITS elements that will have to work together to provide necessary information to riders. These elements are Bus Dispatch, Transit Police, Light
Rail Transit, Commuter Rail, High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes, DART DATA Warehouse, DART Customer Service and Paratransit. All of these functions will have to be integrated into a common
system to share transit information. Towards this end, DART is developing a comprehensive ITS Plan. The comprehensive plan would also have the ability to integrate with the regional
ITS system. This will enable DART to receive and submit data and video information. Current and Future DARTITS Efforts On-Line Trip Scheduling -Currently, DART· Customer Service staff
use trip-scheduling software to assist customers in planning their trips. DART staff input origin and destination information, and then the software determines which routes should be
used at what time. Future ITS efforts would make this information available on the DART website. DART E-mail -Currently, DART 􀁰􀁡􀁳􀁳􀁾􀁮􀁧􀁥􀁲􀁳 can visit the DART website at www.dart.org
to view rider alerts and other transit related issues, such as construction projects that impact transit service. Passengers can then submit their e-mail addresses to receive periodic
updates on transit service changes/options. On-Board Global Positioning Systems -DART currently utilizes on-board GPS to facilitate automatic passenger counts and automated stop announcements.
Based on GPS data, the bus records how many passengers board at a specific location, or announces the correct stop to passengers. Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 32
2030 Transit System Plan Future GPS efforts would provide transit customers with information on the location and arrival time of a bus or train. GPS data could also be used to improve
passenger connections. Currently, when a transit vehicle is late approaching a transfer location, passengers can miss connections and be required to wait for the next vehicle. During
off peak periods, this could mean a sixty-minute wait. Using automatic passenger counter data and GPS location information, "real time" decisions in the control center can be made to
hold a vehicle for connecting passengers. Signal Priority -Computerized signal timing can improve transit travel time and reliability. In high demand corridors, transit travel time is
impacted by signalized intersections. Computerized and coordinated signals that respond to transit vehicle priority reduce delays and allow for better transit travel times. Sophisticated
signal timing programs allow signals to adjust green or red time to provide transit vehicles priority priority when approaching intersections. Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM
33
.' 2030 Transit System Plan References: Access ITS, May 2002, News Smart Cards Make the Wheels Go Around, http://www.itsa.org (May 2002). American Public Transportation Association,
April 2002, APTA Heritage Trolley Site, http://www.heritagetrolley.org/Overview.htm (April 2002). Bombardier Transportation, Bi-Level Coach -Canada and USA, March 2002, http://www.bomdardier.com
(March 2002).· Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Final Report on the National Maglev Initiative, http://ntl.bys.gov/DOCS/TNM.html(March 2002) Carter & Burgess, Fort Worth Alternatives
Analysis and Environmental Assessment, Technology Assessment, for The City of Fort Worth and The Fort Worth Transportation Authority, August 2001. Connecticut Department of Transportation
Newsletter, New Britain-Hartford Busway EIS Underway, September 2000. Dallas Area Rapid Transit, New Directions For Dallas Area Rapid Transit, System Planning Study Corridor and Technology
Opportunities, Technical Report No.3 Draft Final, for Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board, January 1989. : Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Five-Year Action Plan 1998 -2002, Planning and Development
Department, December 1997. Dames & Moore, Draft Transit Technology Information Report, Marietta-Lawrenceville Transportation Study, for Atlanta Regional Commission, May, 2000. Dane County
Commuter Rail Feasibility Study Executive Summary, http://www.co.dane.wi.us/rail/crfs/html/execsum.htm (March 2002). Demand Response Summary Dart, Most Recent Years, Demand Response
National Total Data. Fiscal Year 2000, http://www.apta.com/stats/modesumm/drsum.htm (May 2002) Eudy, Leslie and Richard Parish, Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation, May 2001. EVs in Transit
-Quarterly Publication of the Electric Transit Vehicle Institute, Winter 2002, Ecotraffic, World Wide Trolley Bus Technology Development Study, for Hong Kong Environmental Protection
Department, March 24, 1999. , Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 34
2030 Transit System Plan Reference: Cont. Federal Transit Administration, Issues in Bus Rapid Transit, National Bus Rapid Transit Forum, January 15, 1998. Federal Transit Administration,
January 1996, Smart Fare Payment Systems for Public Transit. http://www.fta.dot.gov/library/technolgy/APTS/tech10/techbrf6.html(July 2001)... Federal Transit Administration, May 2002,
Transit Intelligent Transportation Systems Electronic Fare Payment Systems, http://www.fta.dot.gov/research/fleetlits/efp.htm (May 2002). Federal Transit Administration, July 2001, Transit
Intelligent Transportation Systems Traveler Information Systems, http://www.fta.dot.gov/research/fleetlits.travinfo.htm (April 2002). Federal Transit Administration, May 2002, 􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁔􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮�
�􀀺􀀮􀁨􀁥􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀽􀁆􀀧􀀭􀀽􀁵􀀽􀁥􀁾􀁉􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀺􀁃􀀽􀁥􀁾􀁬􀁉􀀬 http://www.fta.dot.gov/library/technology/dotweb.htm (May 2002). Florida Department of Transportation, Bus Rapid
Transit Technology: A Case Study of the LYNX LYMMO in Downtown Orlando, Florida, Florida, http://www.nctr.usf.edu/lymmo.htm (April 2002). Francis, Don, Georgia Power, Station Car The
Missing Link, North American Shared Car Conference, April 18, 2001. Fuel Cells in Mass Transit. http://216,51,18,233/fctlbusgoingon.htm (May 2002). Georgetown University, A Federal Transit
Administration Project; Clean, Quiet Transit Buses Are Here Today, December 2001, http://uelcellbus.Georgetown.edu (April 2002). Hybrid-Electric Vehicles, http://www.etvLorg/HighTech/NewHybridHiTechr
ight.html(May 2002). Inter-Regional Corridor Alternative Analysis, Bus Rapid Transit, May 2001. Jakes, Andrew S., President, Jakes Associates, Inc., Transit Technologies Japan Bets Big
on New Transit. in Mass Transit, March/April 1997, http://acultv.Washington.edu/-jbs/itrans/jakees1.htm (July 2001). Janky, Tom, Newsletter, Colorado Railcar, New DMU First to Pass FRA
Safety Structural Specifications, April 2002. Keating, Oliver, The Future of High-speed Rail, November 1997, http://www.okeating.com/hsr/future.htm (March 2002). 35 Technology Review
Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM
2030 Transit System Plan Reference: Cont. Lave, Roy, Systan Inc., and Rosemary Mathias, Multisystems, Inc., State of the Art of Para transit., LKC Consulting Services, Inc., Dallas Area
Rapid Transit -Paratransit Review Final Report, for Dallas Area Rapid Transit, January 2002. LTK Engineering Service, Sound Transit Link Light Rail Project, Transit Technology Review,
for Sound Transit, February 2, 1999. Metropolitan Transportation Authority of Harris County, http://www.ridemetro.org/services/commuter.asp, June 17, 2002. HOV System, National Station
Car Association Information Page, The Initial San Francisco Bay Area Station Car Demonstration, September 1999, http://www.stncar.com/ba.html(May 2002). Parsons Brinckerhoff/Kaiser Engineers
Team, Transit Technology Overview, Technical Memorandum Draft Final, for Seattle METRO, August 17, 1992. Parsons Transportation Group, Cedar Avenue Corridor Transitway Study, Technical
Memorandum H Technology Assessment, for Dakota County, December 7, 1999. PB Farradyne, Trans-Lake Washington Project High Capacity Transit Technology Options, for Sound Transit, October
2001. University of Washington, 􀁾􀁐􀁾􀁥􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁲􀁳􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁯􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁮􀁡􀁾􀁉􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀁒􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁡􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀺􀁰􀁩􀁾􀁤__􀁔􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁡􀁾􀁮􀁾􀁳􀁩􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁌􀁴􀀬
http://faculty.washington.edu (JUly 2001). Pierce Transit, Vanpool Survey Results, http://www.ptbus.pierce.wa.us/rideshare/vanpool.htm (May 2002). November March 1997, 2002, Portland
Transit Info page, April 2002, http://www.portlandtransit.org/streetcar.html Port Authority of Allegheny County, http://www.fta.dot.gov/brtlprojects/pittsburg.html(April 2002). West
Busway, Railwayage, May 2001, .:...:H=is:..:.;to=.rv..l--:...:R=e=pe=.;:a=t,:..s I:..:.;ts=.;:e'-'-'-lf, http://www.railwayage.com/may01/lowcost.html (April 2002). Shaheen, Susan A.
Ph.D., Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways and New Mobility Center, Carsharing in the United States. .' Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 36
2030 Transit System Plan Reference: Cont. Stefano Viggiano, JHR Transportation Engineering, October 1996, Bus Rapid Transit, http://www.citebc.ca/Oct96 BRT.htrnl (May 2002) Status of
North American Light http://www.lightrail.netlprojects.htm (April 2002) Rail Projects, March 2002, Strickland, James, Modern Trolleybuses, http://www.vcn.bc.ca/t2000bc/learning/etb/modern_trolleybuse
s.html(July 01) Texas Transportation Institute, ABC's of HOV, The Texas Experience, September 1999, http://ttLtamu.edu/producticatalog/reports/1353-l.pdf (June 2002) Texas Vintage Trolley
System, Mckinney Avenue Transit Authority, April 2002, http://www.railwaypreservation.com/vintagetrolley/dallas.htm (April 2002). Transportation Research Board, Low-Floor Transit Buses,
A Synthesis of Transit Practice, Transportation Research Board National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1994. Transportation Research Board, National Cooperative
Highway Research Program, Report 414 -HOV Systems Manual, 1998. Triangle Transit Authority, Vanpooling, September 2000, http://www.ridetta.org/vanpool.html (May 2002) Vanpool Summary
Data, Most Recent Year, Vanpool National Total Data, Fiscal Year 2000, http://www.apta.com/stats/modesumm/vpsum.htm (May 2002) Vantuono, William, RailwayAge, Passenger trains for the
21 51 Century, May 1999, http://www.railwayage.com/may99/21stcentury.html(March 2002) Vandewalle & Associates, Quad Cities Balanced Growth Project -Technology Assessment Report, September
2001. Electric Transit Vehicle Institute, What is an Electric Vehicle? http://etvLorg (May 2002) Wilkins, Van, Mass Transit Magazine, Rail Transit Innovations, April 2002. Wohlwill,
Dave, Port Authority of Allegheny County, BRT Telephone Interview, April 2002. XENERGY, Toward a Renewable Power Supply: The Use of Bio-based Fuels in Stationary Fuel Cells, http://www.nrbp.org/pdfs/
pub31.pdf (June 2002) Technology Review Draft 3/3/03 2:08 PM 37
Project Schedule 2001 2002 2003 2004 Task Name April July Oct Jan April July Oct Jan April July Oct Jan vP';(./fX 􀁾􀁦􀁩􀁊􀁦􀀩 , .,.vlU r3J'> 􀁾􀁰􀁴􀁊􀀨􀀮􀀮􀀬 '7 􀁾􀀨􀁣􀁥􀀮 \ 􀁾􀀮 J
,v' \ ,M/. f r--\ \ SV 7 'f r: YLf\tV /} pIP 'roTOR.-,At' \ ./.Ii 1)('-l 􀁾􀁜􀁖􀀬 􀁑􀁜􀁾 \('1 CC \ f Fdlf /.v/l72-peo ft' Project Management Public Outreach Evaluation Framework Mobility
Needs Service Concepts/Technology Review 􀀺􀀺􀀲􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁦􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁲􀀭􀀷􀁃􀀰􀁉􀁉􀁩􀁤􀁯􀁲Opportunities-{:<? (rJ.,Zt T7 0:3> 1u 􀀨􀁁􀁾 w:"",v("',) J)e 5"'+ '" TransIt System Plan Development
(:. 􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀴 fu 􀁾 (,l c-(V\. .' v \1.e vv\ o,t(lc.. II M(l10 Sa.-ru-e. 􀀨􀁘􀀨􀀻􀁾 t,S y(2!Xp\ (?(d/ftftt/J 􀀧􀁾 /􀀩􀁏􀁾 Ai---rec"vAJ1 ie. U 􀁛􀀨􀁾􀁬􀁊 r J2 {/;O t! L.J I 􀁾 􀁾􀁹
1? .:'N'T f'iN, FiY/'<? ..." V/l4}·t2. 􀁾􀀢􀁾􀁾'----􀁾 ,A-T7Z 􀀬􀁾 􀁾􀀬 <􀁄:-􀁾"r􀁄e􀁊p 􀀢􀁾􀀧􀁾 +􀁾 . Ll TZ c fl.-5 ' E (,.·,AL'-/' ----...,,------,.--iHe CiT(O Task: _ Ct) 'V(. c/Z,re/t>,
I Progress:
2030 Transit System Plan Member City Staff Briefing May 9,2003 Overview and Status Planning Process • Evaluation Framework • Mobility Needs Assessment .. Service Concepts/Technology
Review .. Corridor Opportunities • Transit System Plan AGENDA • Introductions • Overview and Status (5 min.) • Mobility Needs Assessment (20 min.) • Service Concepts 8r. Technology Review
(15 min.) • Break (10 min.) • Corridor Opportunities -Alternatives (35 min.) -Evaluation Methodology ( 30 min.) • Next Steps (5 min.) DART 20JOTr:IlL>:iISYJlerol'lan COORDINATION • NCTCOG
-Mobility 2030 • Ridership Forecasting -Transition to Transcad Travel Demand Model • Commuter Rail • HOV -Regional Rail Corridor Study • City of Dallas -Dallas CBD Transportation Study
DART 20)0 TI'lIIJiI :')'<Icm Pl"'l 1
Planning Process • Evaluation Framework • Mobility Needs Assessment • Service ConceptsjTechnology Review • Corridor Opportunities • Transit System Plan Population Trends CART 2030 'I'r:>n<.l
􀁓􀁾􀁗􀀺􀁭 1'''1n Mobility Needs Overview • Travel Patterns UJ 􀁾􀀨 f>te 􀁾 ,/Population + Employment" Trip Density '/Trip Density -System Capacity" COngestion '/Indications of COngestion"
Potential Markets ,1/(1 i/!?(IJ/C! COe:; 20:30 p,4T4 Population Trends 2
D.t.AT" 20JOTr:"u;ISyll=PllIrI Employment Trends z"iflir /􀁾 T/Ze.·1/p> Mobility Needs Overview * .Population growth mostly outside DART Service Area Employment Trends CART 10lo Tmm'l
Sy'lcm 􀁉􀀧􀁉􀁾􀁮 􀀧􀀲􀀭􀀰􀁾 J 􀁾 E "'-'1. f t-C' 'f /'-te ,,-:r 1"12e .Vpr Mobility Needs Overview /. Population growth mostly outside DART Service Area /. Employment growth inside
and outside Service Area ./Increased emphasis on access to jobs inside Service Area 3
Urbanization Trends 2002 Population Density + Employment Density Urbanization 􀁾 2(1)0 Tmu.i, Spl"",Pbn Urbanization Trends 2030 Population Density + Employment Density Urbanization
772 E /l--J/.5 Mobility Needs Overview Va Population growth mostly outside DART Service Area /0 Employment growth inside and outside service Area v ..I Increased emphasis on access to
jobs inside service Area v 0 Increased travel demand focused on growing urban centers in northern Service Area v ..I Choice Rider market becomes more important Regional Activity Centers
(DART Service Area 2030) -Dallas CBD -Telecom Corridor -Legacy -Galleria -Las Colinas -DFW International Airport 4
Mobility Needs Overview • Population growth mostly outside DART Service Area • Employment growth inside and outside Service Area :/'" Increased emphasis on access to jobs inside Service
Area V· Increased travel demand focused on growing urban centers in northern Service Area ./Choice Rider market becomes more important V· Transit connections among and within urban centers
becomes more important DART· 2IUOTr:",":IS)'l1cmPI"" Jobs to 􀁈􀁯􀁵􀁾􀁊􀁮􀀭􀀹􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯 􀁾􀁾􀁌􀀯 DART 10JOT..mlitSy<lrn,rIAII D Mobility Needs Overview • Popuiatlon growth mostly outside
DART Service Area • Empioyment growth inside and outside Service Area '" Increased emphasis on access to jobs inside Service Area • Increased travei demand focused on growing urban centers
in northern Service Area ,/Choice Rider market becomes more Important • Transit connections among and within urban centers becomes more important • Continued need for access to to jobs
in the north from southern Service Area ,/Transit Dependent market continues to be important 5
Mobility Needs Overview Mobility Needs Overview .􀁾􀀮 -.-... 􀁾􀀧 2OJor","";lSY'lcml'l.n -> Mobility Needs Overview 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀭. .. ........... --> , DI.RT 2o)n Tron",! 􀁾􀁹􀀮􀁬􀁣􀁭 PI""
, . . " ..􀁾􀀮 6
2002 FOfecasbed 􀁐􀁥􀁾􀁫 Hour Freeway Level of Service (LOS) -Avg. Daily Property Damage Accidents ·2002:::: 700 Freeway Congestion 2002 .Ava. Dally 􀁆􀁵􀁥􀁬􀀮􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁵􀁭􀁥􀁬􀀺􀀡􀀮􀁾􀁮
􀀮􀀯􀁾􀀮􀀲􀀰􀀰􀀲􀀽 􀀶􀀮􀀷􀁭􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁧􀁡􀁮􀁾 .. Avg Daily yMT ·2002:::: 129 million miles .. AVa. D.lIlIy VMT Mobility Needs Overview • Population growth mostly outside DART service
Area • Employment growth inside and outside service Area " Increased emphasis on access to jobs Inside service Area Increased travel demand focused on growing urban centers in northern
service Area " Choice Rider market becomes more Import3nt Transit connections among and within urban centers becomes more important Continued need for access to to jobs in the north
from southern service Area " TranSit Dependent market continues to be Important 􀁌􀀡􀀧􀁬􀁏􀁾􀁯􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁤􀀧 less reliable Roadway System 􀁾 􀀯􀁾 􀀯􀀧􀁾 ./,/CART W)(l Tllln';l
S),.lcm I'I.n .2030 ::::1,500 Freeway Congestion 2030 􀀰􀁥􀀨􀁕􀁾 Co iV C-eS rep + Le.S.s ·2002 2002 :::: 129 million miles ·2030 :::: 240 million miles .Avo D.i'llIv Fuel Consumption
·2002:::: 6.7 million gallons 􀀮􀀲􀁄􀁾 􀀱􀀱􀀮􀀶􀁭􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁳 ,I ..Ava, Dailv Congestion Delay 􀁾 􀁾 .2002:::: 1.0 mIllion hours ) 􀁾􀀢􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀵􀀮􀀺􀁌􀁭􀁉􀁊􀀱􀀡􀁭􀁬􀀮􀁨􀁣􀀱􀀮􀁾 -Ava.
Dally Property Damage Accidents ·2002:::: 700 7
􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 Market Assessment Transit Use?􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 Mobility Needs Overview • Population growth mostly outside DART service Area Employment growth inside and outside
service Area ./Increased emphasis on access to jobs inside service Area v. Increased travel demand focused on growing urban centers in northern service Area v' Choice Rider market becomes
more important v· Transit connections among and within urban centers becomes more important v Continued need for access to to jobs in the north from southern service Area v' Transit
Dependent market continues to be important More Congested less reJjable roadway system High potential fdr adding 􀁮􀁥􀁷􀁬􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁬􀁲􀁾 Selected Re ional Trave o'Cedar Hill· DeSoto·
􀁄􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁾􀁂 o South Oak. 􀁃􀁬􀁩􀁦􀁌􀁾􀀬􀁒􀁥􀁤􀁢􀁩􀁲􀁤􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧 Q Lewisville· Denton o Lewisville -Valley Ranch" las Colinas ---ff 􀁾􀁎􀁔􀁾􀁾􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁆􀁲􀁩􀁳􀁾 6 lterl--=-Grapevlne
.-/• Rockwall -Dallas eSD o Wylie -Plano/Richardson o George Bush Turnpike o IH635 from Garland to Farmers Branch • McKinney -Frisco o Balch Springs -Dallas CBD 0' DFW Airport -Dallas
CBD ,-"+ • -"1 •o Mobility Needs Overview Population growth mostly outside DART Service Area Employment growth inside and outside Service Area ./Increased emphasis on access to jobs
inside service Area Increased travel demand focused on growing urban centers In northern service Area v' Choice Rider market becomes more important Transit connections among and within
urban centers becomes more important Continued need for access to to jobs in the north from southern Service Area v' Transit Dependent market continues to be important More Congested,
Less reliable roadway system High potential for adding new Transit Patrons to the system Total daily trips are more dispersed 8
Regional Travel Work Trips • Cedar HilVDeSoto-Dallas CBO • South Oak Cliff·Dallas CBO • S. Arlington-Dallas CBO • NW Dallas-Dallas CBD • IH635/US7S-Dallas CBO • Garland/Rowlett-Dallas
CBO • SunnyvateIMesquite-Dallas CBD • Balch Springs-Dallas ceo • S. Arlinglon-Centreport • Lake Dallas-Denton • Allen-North Carrollton • Far North Dallas-Frisco-McKinney • Wylie-Plano
• Rowlett-Sachse-Plano • S. Garland-Farmers Branch • SachselRowlett-NE Dallas • Balch Springs-Sunnyvale 􀁾􀀬 􀀲􀀰􀀩􀁏􀁔􀁴􀀺􀁬􀁮􀀢􀀻􀁬􀁓􀁹􀁾􀁣􀁭􀁬􀀧􀁬􀁕􀀱 Mobility I\leeds Overview •
Population growth mostly outside DART Service Area • Employment growth inside and outside Service Area ../Increased emphasis on access to jobs inside 5ervice Area Increased travel demand
focused on growing urban centers in northern Service Area -/Choice Rider market becomes more important • Transit connections among and within urban centers becomes more important • Continued
need for access to to jobs in the north from southern Service Area -/Transit Dependent market continues to be important "-7'. More Congested, Less reliable roadway system 􀀮􀁾􀀮 High
potential for adding new Transit Patrons to the system 0-7" Total daily trips are more dispersed ,-7· Dallas CBD still predominant regional work trip destination 􀁾􀀮􀀧 􀀲􀀰􀁊􀀨􀁬􀁔􀁲􀀺􀁉􀀮􀁵􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁙
􀁾􀁬􀁥􀁭􀁐􀁉􀀢􀀢 Planning Process .. Evaluation Framework .. Mobility Needs Assessment .. Service Concepts/Technology Review .. Corridor Opportunities .. Transit System Plan t::IoLRT
20.l0TTllI1<iISplcml'bn TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS • DescrtpUon of the Important characteristics of a planned service • Service Concepts are designed to meet Identified travel needs of
a transit market • Service Area has mulUpie travel needs and mulUple transit marketS • CorrIdors or areas may raqulre several Transit Service Concepts • Same transit vehicle can be used
for different Service Concepts I.e. LRT 􀁾􀀲􀀰􀁊􀁏􀁔􀁲􀁵􀀮􀀮􀁵􀁩􀁉􀀵􀁹􀁬􀁴􀁡􀁄􀁲􀁬􀀺􀁬􀀮􀁬􀁬 9
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS Transit Function -Regional Une Haul -Local DlstrlbutorlFeeder or Circulator 􀁾􀀮 20)OT",nliilS;y<lcmPIM 􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁥􀁾􀁰􀁌􀁵􀁬􀁬􀀡 Diagram 01
Transit Sorvlctl CXlncopts Trtlnl;1l Func1lon CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS Transit Networks -Radial -Crosstown -Grid ClJnceplua! Olllgrom 01 T'rol.nsll 􀁓􀁬􀁴􀁲􀁶􀁬􀁾
COf\CfPts TrtlfI:;ll NOIM:lrk.13 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁣􀁥􀁰􀁬􀁕􀁾􀀱 DI3lJfilrn of RegIonal Tmn'.>ll Sarvlc:a Concept:! T'r.msi! C:!p.:r.c!r:y ilnd 􀁓􀁰􀁾 CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS
Capacity Speed 􀁾􀀻􀀬􀁬􀁬􀀮􀁗􀀻􀀻􀁩􀀧􀁴 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀢􀁜􀀧􀀮􀁾 Lr,Y.: ____ O·*,1"lJl'< 􀁏􀂷􀁉􀁴􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀧􀁊􀁩􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁬􀀢􀀢􀀬􀁲􀁬􀀻􀀢􀀻􀁴􀀧􀁬􀁃􀁾􀀢􀀮􀁉􀀻􀀢 􀁾􀀮􀁪 􀁢􀁾􀂢􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁉􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀬 Roqi.<J\tk,;""'Tl)
ru.··1lM'II,.,....; CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS Capacity Range By Transit Service IDGH C(IIlU'lUlluRail 1.5 t04 min. r 10,00010 24,000 LRT I to 3 min. LRT 4la 10 mill
hooa tolO,OOO I '" MEDIUM Commulcr!l..lil J hI 10 min 􀁾 Aniculall.'tI Bu, [10 '.5 min. C'on\C'on\mulcrR.-1i1 Sw]Omin, I 􀁅􀀺􀁬􀀺􀁰􀁮􀀺􀁾􀀬􀀻 IltL'ilJlOV I 1<1 5 min. o S(Xllu),{IOO
WW L.ip:hlluil lO 10 611 min U AniclllalcdllllS 210 10 min. Conventional Bus Iltl(,l1lin BtL> 210 (,min, VERYLQ'W' StreclCJr I.cssl1uIl 500 2 tll Rmin. , , , " '" " " ", IS-􀀮􀀺􀁾 EWn"
2030 􀁔􀀢􀀬􀁮􀀮􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁳􀁓􀀶􀁮􀁧􀁥􀁲 Capacity Per Hour Par Direction (In Thousands) 10
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS Speed Range Bv Transit Service• l:l 0al &1II .-􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬 ,., ,c."-,,,,,,... J 􀁾􀀧􀀲􀀰􀀩􀁏􀁔􀁲􀀮􀀾􀁉􀁕􀁩􀁉􀁓􀁙􀁬􀁬􀁣􀁭􀁉􀀧􀁊􀀮􀁳􀁮 Average
Operating Speed(In MPH) CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE COI\lCEPTS CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS • Regional Transit Service Concepts Speed Express (High Speed) Rapid
(Medium Speed) Capacity 30 mph + 20-29 mph High Expreas Commuter Rail He Rapid Commutor Rail He 10k to Expra:n LIght Rail He Rapid Light Rail He 24k Medium Express Cnmmuter RGII Me Rapid
Commuter Rail Me 3k'" Expreu Light Rail Me Rapid Light Rail Me 10k Express ArtIculated Bus on Rapid ArtIculated Bus on Transltway Me Transllway Me Low Express Commutlu RGII LC Rapid
Commuter Rail LC SOOto express Light Rail LC Rapid Light Rail LC 3k Express ArtIculated BUll on HOV Rapid Articulated Bus on or Transltway LC Transltway LC Very Express Bus on HOV or
R8pld BUll on Tmnsltway VLC Low Trnnsltway VLC R8pld Bus on Partial HOV VLC c500 Vannool on HOV V.nnGol nnGol on FreaWDU DAAT· 2OJor"'...... lSy.lc:rnPI.%I1 CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT
SERVICE CONCEPTS • Reliability • Guideway • Street or Road ·BusLanes • Transltway ·RaII ·Bus •Transit Traffic Signal Priority 00Il.Jri-20JO Tr.W';tSy<lcm Pbn • Convenience ·Transfers
·WaltTlme 11
Cooeoph.1<11 Cln!Jrnm 01 TrOll::J!! Servlc/:! Concept!! CHARACTERISTICS OF Trnnslt Loeol Service TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS • Comfort • Sit or stand • Capacity Supplied 􀁾 20)OTmn";\SYllemfh,,
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS c.A.RT 20JOTmnAlSyllCTnPbll C"roo;il'( 5;."1e'} 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁨􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀽 L...'"·...... 􀀻􀀾􀀢􀀧􀁏􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁜􀀧􀀭􀁟 o E.:.I,'.........-.
􀁬􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀱 Fxl'<l 􀁒􀁬􀀧􀀮􀁾... lJ,;s D· 􀁮􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁊􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀢 T'a""l 􀀬􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁏􀁉􀁩􀀻􀁦 􀁬􀀨􀁬􀁾􀀼􀁬􀁬 􀁄􀁬􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀼􀁬􀁉􀀼􀁊 􀁲􀀻􀁾􀁬􀀻􀁬􀁃􀀺􀀧􀁬􀁾􀂷􀀢 0:.<$ _ 􀀮􀁾􀁥􀀾 LcclllG,r;;li:lcl·
..􀀼􀁾􀀬 CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS Transit Facilities .. Rail Stations "Transit Centers ·Park and Ride Lots DART 􀁾􀁏􀀩􀁛􀀩 1m"<it Sy'll:m 􀁉􀀧􀁉􀁾􀁮 CHARACTERISTICS
OF TRANSIT SERVICE COI\lCEPTS • Other Service Concepts • Shuttle Services • Rail station or Transit Center to Major Destination .. Special Event .. Employer shuttles • High to Low Capacity
Needed 12
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS • Other Mobility service Concepts • Rldeshare I HOV • Station Cars • System Level Specialized
Services • Para transit CART 􀁾􀀰􀀳􀀨􀁬 Tr.",,;. Syucm PI,," • Other Public Transportation Providers • I.e. taxis • Non-Transit • Walking • Bicycling 􀁾 20)OTronliISylotcml'I." CHARAcrERISTICS
OF TRANSIT SERVICE CONCEPTS 􀁒􀁏􀁗􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁾􀁥􀁳 A Fixed Guideway 􀁉􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀢 Exclusive ROW Heavy Rail Express LRT People Mover Grade Croaolnllll Light Rail Express transit Commuter Rail
Rapid Bus C Mixed Tralllc Streetcar Rapid transit Regular Bus Enhanced Bus Stroot Transit D.Urr ""To"" 􀁾􀀧􀁉􀁩􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀧 perfonnance: speed, reliability, capacity, Image SERVICE CONCEPTS
Example -Express Bus •Transltway Service [] Boardhtp (rom ret.ioMl Pllrk a rido 􀁬􀁯􀁴􀁳􀀮􀁕􀁕􀀱􀁥􀁸􀁰􀁾􀀮 aBW't:S exit 􀁥􀁾􀁯􀀢􀀮􀀬 dedicated ramp :Ind stopont)'.rtrltSl buswlIY station.
for 􀁰􀁡􀁺􀁥􀁮􀁾􀁥􀁮 to tTlinsfer to local service. 􀁯􀁅􀁸􀁰􀁾􀁳􀁥􀁲􀁶􀁩􀁣􀁣 􀁬􀀧􀁦􀁉􀁾􀁫􀁥􀁳 timited ar no stop::!" at Intermediate busway 􀁾􀁵􀁴􀁬􀁏􀁉􀁕􀀧􀀬 Q BUies 􀁣􀁩􀁲􀁣􀁵􀁢􀁬􀁾
thn:lUgh cbwntoYJn Hartford. Clt.AT ZOJOTnll<itSY'I<::mPloll 13
SERVICE CONCEPTS Example -Rapid Bus-Transitway Service SERVICE CONCEPTS Example -Feeder Bus Service lloLes: 􀁉􀁬􀁨􀁮􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀱􀁾􀁬􀀡􀀺 fOlJtEi onll'. 􀁯􀁾 􀀧􀁥􀁏􀁤􀀨􀁬􀁲􀁓􀁥􀁦􀁖􀁾􀁏
􀁉􀁾 􀁰􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀼􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁡􀀮 o Feeder bUtM drop passengers off alb_oy statklns, but do nol enter the busway. 􀁣􀁐􀁬􀁩􀁓􀁓􀁥􀁮􀁾􀁥􀁲􀀮􀀻􀀺 transfer to bus:PiS 􀁖􀀮􀁾 , on busway 􀀧􀁾􀁜
routes to .-contilue trip. 􀁜􀁾 􀁾􀀧􀁤􀁾􀁾 C4.AT' 2030 T"'n<ll Sy.tnn PI c Buses stop at every sUition, like " local 􀁳􀁵􀁢􀁷􀁾􀁹 lino ItlOutd 􀁦􀁵􀁮􀁣􀁴􀁾􀀮 c Buses m4Y thon circulate
􀁴􀁨􀁲􀁯􀁾 thtl dov.nto\"M arellS. SERVICE CONCEPTS Example-Local Collector Bus -Transitway Service Technology Review D􀁂􀁾􀁑􀀤 􀁏􀁲􀁩􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁡 in .. toca\ .1"rtI.Il "nd circulate,
o BUIes Ill1ter btmYay and tould $ttJp al:Jf}loc:tad 􀀧􀁩􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁭 on the _to de:Sllnlltion. c Bus.es circulAte wlthlnUul!r desUnllUon are". " Objectives -Examine and document existing
and emerging transit vehicle technologies -Identify transit technologies that could be used to meet ldenttfled demand 􀁲􀁬􀁾􀀺􀁅􀀧􀁓􀀺 􀀱􀀱􀁉􀁭􀁴􀁲􀁾􀁜􀁨􀁲􀀮 rovll'l 􀁾􀁮􀀺􀁪􀀧 􀁲􀀮􀁭􀀬􀀬􀀧􀁯􀁲􀀮􀁧􀁾
􀀻􀁲􀀧􀀻􀁴􀁜􀀧􀁃􀀢 '!oC'.'on,C1IIl"r""I:.r-tLotl 􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀢􀁰􀁏􀁈􀁾􀁲􀀮􀀬􀀮 D.¥lT' 20Jot",n<i'Syllcml'l"" 14
Technology Review Technology Review Fixed Guideway Technologies Examined l Fixed Guideway • Non-Fixed uldeway -Ught Rail _ Conve nel Bus -Regional Commuter Rail • Bus pld Transit -H8BYy
Rail 􀁾 _ High Speed Intercity RaIl -Elect c s Trolley _ Maglev -Stat n Ca , -Monorail -􀁐􀁡􀁾􀁮􀁳􀁬􀁴 -Automated Guideway -Venpool Transit -Personal Rail Transit -Streetcar -High Occupancy
Vehicle D.A.Ai .. Lan8ll 2OJOT""1I;ISyucmi'lon [" Light Rail Technology h Attributes -Medium to high capacity Intra-urban servlca -Flexible, can be used for both short and line haul
trips -StatIon spacing typically every mile or less -Can operate at grade, in tunnels or on separate rights-of-way -Cannot operate within active freight rail ROW -Typical capital cost
per mile $20 to $55 mil Technology Review Fixed Guideway Commuter Rail FRA Compliant • Attributes -Primerily oriented toward long haul, high speed service (Intercity) -Trains are self·
propelled commuter cars or diesel powered -Can operate within freight rail ROW -Station spacing spacing typically every three to five miles -Typical capital cost per mile $5 to $25 mil
Technology Review Fixed 􀁇􀁾􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁷􀁡􀁹 \, Commuter Rail . Attributes DMU Non-FRA 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁩􀁡􀁾 -,Low to high speed " service \ ,. -Intended for low '\ density non-electrlfled \
areas \; Smaller vehicles 􀀭􀁜􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁥 widely used In E"rope -Stations are typically spaced one mile or less -Typical capital cost per milo $5 to $25 􀁐􀁦􀁾􀁪􀁬 1'( /t1;rZ(4"'1:3 <)
vt..y /l.-C-'-I ' 'v U/<--('fl:;--p .5 /)4/'tj ./4:;1 ..... 15
Technology Review Fixed Guideway Heavy Rail 0 Attributes -Serves high capacity, high speed corridors -Operates on exclusive rights-of-way -Stations are typically one-haff to one mila
apart -Typical capital cost per mile $50 to $250 mil Technology Review Fixed Guideway Technology Review Fixed Guideway High Speed Intercity Rail 0 Attributes -Designed for long haul
servIce with long dlstsnces between station stops -Station spacing Is typically greater than 20-30 miles epart -Can opemte within freight mil ROW -Typical capital cost per mile $40 to
$80 mil OAAT 20)0 􀁔􀁾􀀬􀁵􀀺􀁩􀀧 Sy>.lcm 􀁐􀁉􀁾􀁮 Technology Review Fixed Guideway Maglev o Attributes -Typically proVides line haul, medium to high capacity service -Station spacing
Is typically greater then 20-30 miles apart -Opamteson an exclusive ROW -Typical capital coat per mile $100 to $300 mil Monorail o Attributes -Typically provides medium capacity short trips (5 to 10 miles) -Stations spacing Is typically
greater than one-third to one-half miles epart -Operates on en exclusive ROW -Typical capital cost per mile $100 to $200 mil 16
Technology Review Fixed Guideway Automated GUideway Transit • Attributes -Designed for short and line haul trips -Station spacing Is typically one quarter of a mile to one mile apart
-Technology Is commonly used at airports and activity canters -Oparates on an exclusive ROW -Typical capital coat per mile $50 to $100 mil Technology Review Fixed Guideway Personal Rapid
Transit . Attributes -TypIcally provides polnt-to-polnt, demand respoRIIlve servlca ........--__.,-----_-----, -PrImarily serves lowdeRIIIty busln8llll parils -StaUon spacing Is typically
at very clolle Intervals, one to two blocks apart -Operates on and exclusive ROW -Capital cost per mile unknown o..u:rr-2010Tllln;;ISyllcmPI:lO Technology Review Fixed Guideway • Attributes
-Low to Medium capacity Intra-urban IIBrvlca -Typically operates on surfaca streatll providing shortheadway and frequent stop servlca -OperatBII within mixed traffic -Typical capital
cost per mile $10 to $25 mil Technology Review Fixed Guideway HOV Strategy . Attributes -Dedicated lanes that offer high speed, high capacity servlca -Typically serve a travel market
that conslata of long haul tripa -Average operating speed 35 -45 mph -Can be used for Express Bus service -Cost per mile varies 17
Technology Review Non-Fixed Guideway Conventional Bus • Attributes -Provides local, feeder, demand responsive and line haul sarvlce -TypIcally operate In surface streets providing shortheadway
and frequent stop servIce -Operates wfthln mixed traffic -Typical vehicle cost $0.2 to $1 mil J Technology Review Non-Fixed Guideway Bus Rapid Transit • Attributes 􀁲􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀨􀁂􀁾􀁒􀀧􀀷􀁔�
�􀀭􀁣􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁓􀁟􀁴􀁟􀁲􀁡􀁟􀁴􀁟􀁥􀀭􀀽􀁧􀀺􀀮􀀺􀁹􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬 _Provides regional and local transit serviced -Medium capacity bUll operations via .' dedicated tmnsltway
-Medium to high speed -Average bus operating speed ranges between 20 and 35 mph Technology Review Non-Fixed 􀁇􀁌􀁾􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁷􀁡􀁹 ,//Technology Review Non-Fixed Guideway . Attributes -CombInes
feeder, linehaul, and distribution X· functions -Receive power via overhead wire or hybrid dlesal electrlc -Average bus operating speed rang9B blllween 20 and 30 mph -Typical capital
cost range betwuen $0.9 $1.5 mil per mile (electrification) Station Car Car • Attributes -Provide tmnslt users the same convenient mobility as conventional vehicles -Serve low-danslty
residential and commercial areas -Typical vehicle cost ranges between $15k and $25k 18
Technology Review Non-Fixed Guideway Technology Review Non-Fixed Guideway Paratransit • Attributes -ProvIde demand responslvelflxed route lI8I'Ylce -Typlc:ally selVe the mobility ImpaIred
-Average oparatlng speed Is 14 to 15 mph -Can be oparated Inhouse or by third party contract -TypIcal vehIcle cost ranges between $3Ok and $70k Vanpool • Attributes -Provides low capacity
line haul selVlce -Typically selVes lowdensity travel markets -Average oparatlng apeed Is approximately 31 mph -Typical vehIcle cost ranges between $20k and $30k Technology Review Summary
.. Transit Vehicles Technology Be...,.."t'er mobiliTy -For pe.ople. \Norld\Nide CART 20)0 Tl'll.ll<i1 􀁓􀁹􀁾􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁬􀀬􀀬􀀢 '" Corridor needs and demands will determine the type of
vehicle technology to be used ",Some transit technologies can serve mulOple service concepts 7 --19
Break Planning Process • Evaluation Framework • Mobility Needs • Service Concepts /Technology Review • Corridor Opportunities -Alternatives -Evaluation Methodology • Transit System Plan
Development DAfl1" 20)0 TI'ln<l1 SpLan 􀁲􀁬􀁾 Transit Planning Corridors -North Cenb'al -Northeast _east ·Pleasant Grove -South Oak cliff -West Oak CUff -Turnpike -Northwest .Stemmons
-Tollway -Loop 12 ·lBJ .Outer Belt 4121 COrridor DART 2030 􀁔􀁾􀁉􀀢􀁬􀁴 􀁾􀀩􀀧􀁉􀁬􀁣􀁭 riM 􀁏􀁉􀁬􀁒􀁔􀁐􀀬􀁯􀁰􀁯􀀮􀁴􀁈􀁬􀁔􀁲􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁐􀁦􀁬􀁮􀁮􀁬􀁮􀁄􀁃􀁯􀁲􀁲􀁬􀁤􀁇􀁲􀁳 North Service Area
Issues Stemmons Corridor -Denton County Plans? Tollway Corridor -Need for High capacity Service? North Central Corridor -Rail Extension? Outer Belt (G8) & LBJ -Need for East-West Rail
Service? D..tLAT 􀁬􀁏􀁊􀁏􀁔􀁲􀀺􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀺􀁩􀁉􀁾􀁙􀀧􀁬􀁃􀀢􀀬􀁉􀀧􀁉􀁾 DART Propol6d T,,,,,,,II Pllnn/ll!] CorrIdor, 20
Central Service Area Issues ·DallasCBD -Regional Transit -2'· lRT Alignment? -Circulator Transit -Enhanced service? ·East Corridor -SCyene lRT Branch? ·West Dallas -Need for rail service?
.loop 12 Corridor -Connect lRT Lines? 20)0 Tr.>ruilSy.t=mPlm 2030 Rail Alternatives -Cotton Belt -KCS East • UP North Central • UP Northwest -KCS Alignment -BNSF Alignment -UP East -UP
West -Santa Fe Spur -Grapevine Alignment -Tollway Alignment -Southeast lRT Ext. -West Oak Cliff -Scyene Alignment !».AT 20';OT"",lilSpleml'bn OARTPropo..d TrUlsl! PlannJno Con111ors
DART 2030 Trllfl8ft Syatom Plan Roll AltorMllvlJS South Service Area Issues ·West Oak Cliff Corridor -lRT Extension? ·Pleasant Grove Corridor -lRT Extension? ·loop 12 Corridor -Connect
lRT Corridors? c.a.¥" 20)0 Tr:In.si1 Sy.lcm PI"" 2030 HOV Alternatives -1-30 -US-so -1-45 -US-175 -1-35E -US-67 -1-20 -Spur40S -SH-1S3 -SH 114/121 -1-35E -lBJ -G. Bush -Tollway -US75
20)0 Tr.>n';l Sy.•'tl\l 1'1.\tj DART Propll1led TrMll,11 PLltlnJna Corridor. 21
2030 Bus Alternatives Express Bus -Glenn Heights-I-35E -Lake R. H. -1-30 y\ oS. Garland-1-30 􀁾􀁦 􀀽􀁾􀁾 Loop 12 􀁜􀁴􀁊􀁾 Bush VJ _-....--\-Tollway Rapl -Loop 12 Enhanced Bus -Beltllne
-Gaston ·Ferguson -M.L. King -Jefferson -Hampton -cedar Springs -Loop 12(Interim) Proposed Corridor Alternatives Evaluation Factors • Corridor Attributes -ROWWidth -Potential for Transit
Priority • Right-of Way Availability -OWnership Connectivity -To other High or Medium capacity Transit • Urbanization Index -Population Density + Employment Density Service To Activity
Centers • Travel Time • Ridership Potential • Cost per Rider 006.AT 20)0 Tn.uit !>ysh::n, Plan Proposed Corridor Alternatives Evaluation Factors 8 Corridor Attributes -ROW Width • High
= 84' or more • Medium = 42' to 83' • Low = 41' or less -Potential for Transit Priority • High = Exclusive use of ROW • Medium = Shared use with moderate voiume of freight rail • Low
= Shared use with high volume of freight rail Proposed Corridor Alternatives Evaluation Factors 8 8 Right-of-Way Availability -Ownership • High = DART ownership • Medium = Public Transportation
Corridor • Low = Privately held land 􀁾􀀮 􀀲􀀰􀁊􀁏􀁔􀁲􀀺􀀢􀀢􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁙􀀧􀁫􀁭􀁲􀁢􀁮 22
Proposed Corridor Alternatives Evaluation Factors • Connectivity -To other high or medium capacity transit • High 􀁾 3 or more connections • Medium 􀁾 2 connections • Low 􀁾 1 connection
DAWr 2ClJO Tl'lnsil Sy<lem PI"." Proposed Corridor Alternatives Evaluation Factors • Urbanization Index -Population Density + Employment Density • High 􀁾 1.5 or more X Benchmark • Medium
􀁾 1.0 to 1.4 X Benchmark • Low 􀁾 Less than 1.0 X Benchmark Benchmark: Within 'h mile 􀁾 15.7 Within 3 miles 􀁾 12.4 DlloRT 20.10Tf:lIl.1i,Sy'lrnll'lo..., Proposed Corridor Alternatives
Evaluation Factors • Service to Activity Centers -Connections to Regional Activity centers • High 􀁾 2 or more • Medium 􀁾 1 • Low = none DART lOlOTl'ln";ISy.lcmPbn 23
UGHT RAIL. BUILDOUT Regional Activity Centers oOallas CBO oTelecom oGalleria oLegacy oLas Colinas oOFW Airport Proposed Corridor Alternatives Evaluation Factors .. Ridership Potential
-Forecast 2030 Daily transit trips per mile • High =1.5 X Benchmark • Medium = 1.0 to 1.4 X Benchmark • Low = Less than 1.0 X Benchmark Benchmark =NE 30,700 forecast /11.2 miles =2,700
per mile e.t.nT 20JOTr>m:ilS,'>l"""I'bn Proposed Corridor Alternatives Evaluation Factors .. Travel Time -Forecast 2030 Travel time /Auto travel time (AM Peak) • High = Transit travel
time less than auto • Medium = Transit up to 1.2 X auto • Low = Transit 1.3 or more X auto 􀁾􀀧􀀲􀀰􀀩􀁄􀁔􀁮􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁪􀁉􀁓􀁹􀀧􀁩􀀽􀁬􀁦􀁬􀀢􀀢 Proposed Corridor Alternatives Evaluation Factors
.. Cost Effectiveness -Annualized total cost per rider • Alternatives will be compared to one another and ranked 24
Transit Cost Estimation .. Objectives -Develop a logical and sound methodology for developIng conceptual cost for selected transit a1temaOves DART' 10)0 Tl'!I.n<il Syo.tem PI"" Capital
Cost Elements • Infrastructure III Rail Vehicles Capital Capital Costs Cost -SlleWork -Track work .Rail Vehicles -Rail SlJUctures -Stations -Fare Collection -Traction Electrlflcetlon
-Signal Syslem -Communications -Utilities -CrosslngIRoedway -Malnlenanca Facility • Real Estate -Environmental -Contingencies DART IOJOTl'lI.n";tSyslcml'bn Cost Estimation Approach •
Conceptual Cost ,. Develop per unit capital and operating cost -From Southeast, Northwest Corridor Studies and ongoing studies • Ridership Forecasts ,. Data to be generated via NCTCOG
Model • Apply Costing to Candidate Corridors • Develop a Cost per Rider per Mile Estimate 􀁾 IO)OTr::ln";ISYltcmPIUI J Capital Cost Methodology .. Main Alignment Capital Cost Variables
-Right-of-Way Cost -Number of Grade Separation Structures -Number of Grade Crossings -Number of Stations -Number of Vehicles Needed o.a..RT' 2030 Tr.lll.<it !»'lem I'bn 25
Operating & Maintenance Cost Elements • O&M Cost -Transportation -Vehicle Maintenance -Fixed Facilities -General Overhead -Fringe Benefits Next Steps .. Evaluation Framework .. Mobility
Needs .. Service Concepts /Technology Review .. Corridor Opportunities .. Transit System Plan Development Example • Rapid Rail Option-Segment 1-_ miles -Estimated Total Capital Cost:
$__ --Estimated Total Capital Cost per Mile $__ -O&M Annual Costs: $__ -Average Annualized Total Cost Per Mile: -Forecast Daily Ridership: _ -Forecast Annual Ridership _ -Average Annual
Cost per Mile per Rider: $_ 􀁾 2DJorr:onl.itSysl=lPbn SCHEDULE Project Schedule T.1.<\:: 􀁢􀁓􀁈􀀦􀀮􀁾􀁭􀁴􀁴􀁬 YroJ81=:--26
-.---DART 2030 Transit System Plan Bus Transit Alternatives ffi NORTH Source: DART Five Year Plan! DART4o.aOTrja!sit System Plan Planning & Development May 8, 2002 Legend Bus Stations/Stops
-Implemented by 2007 --Implemented by 2015 .............. Additional Bus Alternatives after 2015
I I! ,I /DART 2030 Transit System Plan Rail Alternatives axahachie ffi NORm //////􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀭􀂷􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁔􀁾'-',.J->...:; "l: \C-: ,;.. ( ;II'" \'1 -􀀧􀁾􀁜􀀧􀁲􀀯􀀧􀀯 /Source:
DART Planning '"' Legend Planning & Development May 8, 2002 Express (Characlcrhalc 01 Comllullct Rail OpctatlnJ;l Slralcgy) Rapid 􀀨􀁃􀁨􀀮􀁲􀀮􀁣􀁬􀁯􀁾􀀮􀁴􀁬􀁣 DI Light Ran Opor.til\ll
Sfr.logy) -Existing/Programmed
DART 2030 Transit System Plan HOV Alternatives ffi NORTH /I Source: DART 2010 Transit System 􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮􀀯􀁾􀁃􀁔􀁃􀁃􀀿􀁟􀁾􀁣􀀡􀁊􀀮􀁉􀁯􀁢􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹2025 Update ?' Planning & Development May
B, 2002 Legend -HOV -Existing/Programmed HOV
DART 2030 Transit System PlanExecutive Summary S.1 Study and Service Area Mobility Needs S.1.1 Mobilitv Needs Executive Summary m"',"'Si'CIl.TA.T.I.O.N 􀁐􀁬􀀧􀁾􀁾 􀁐􀀧􀁏􀁏􀁇􀁁􀀮􀁁􀀮􀁍􀁍􀁩􀂻􀁇􀁐􀁦􀁜􀁾
􀁏􀁦􀀨 􀁾􀁃􀁉􀁉􀁬􀀱􀁾 -= The Mobility Needs Assessment characterizes the need for transit improvements in and around the existing DART Service Area by analyzing demographic and transportation
trends within the region. These trends will be matched with an analysis of the current transit system and DART's financial capacity for the coming years in order to assess how well the
current DART planned and programmed improvements will meet the needs of the DART Service Area. The Mobility Needs Assessment report documents existing demographic and transportation
conditions; analyzes the projected 2030 demographic and transportation conditions; and evaluates the transit system for needs that will not be met by the programmed transit system. Current
and future mobility needs for the DART Service Area and the study area are summarized in the Specific Mobility Needs discussed below. Other regional, intrastate, and interstate mobility
needs and potential services to meet these needs must also be considered in the context of the DART Transit System Plan. S.1.2 Interstate and Intrastate Interstate Amtrak service now
uses the Union Pacific rail line that enters Dallas from the east. The Dallas Terminal is at Union Station. Amtrak also uses the Union Pacific rail line from Union Station to Fort Worth.
It is assumed this rail line will continue to be used for this purpose in the future. This corridor is the planned interstate rail corridor in the Mobility 2025 Plan. There has been
some consideration by Amtrak to use the KCS rail corridor through Wylie, Garland, and Dallas to Union Station or the Cotton Belt to DFW International Airport for interstate rail service.
The needs of interstate passenger rail in the DART Service area must be taken into account in planning for the DART Transit System Plan. Figure S-1 illustrates the Trans Texas Corridor
concept, which is an intrastate transportation proposal currently under t consideration by the Texas ,I Department of Transportation Figure 5-1: Trans Texas Corridor (TxDOT) that would
include 􀁾􀁉􀁩􀁧􀁨􀀭􀁳􀁰􀁥􀁥􀁤 passenger rail and commuter rail as well as freight rail and highway facilities. Although the priority corridors of the Trans Texas Corridor (TTC) would
bypass the Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-l
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Executive Summary Dallas Fort Worth urban area, the need for high-speed rail and commuter rail connections in the DART Service Area should be considered
in the Transit System Plan. S.1.3 Regional The region's Mobility 2025 Plan includes a network of planned commuter rail and staged rail lines for the Dallas-Fort Worth Region as well
as a system of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes. These are shown in Figures S-2 and S-3. Many of these rail lines are within the study area and DART Service Area. Potential transit
service on these rail lines will be considered during development of the DART Transit System Plan. There is also the potential for regional express bus service either as an interim service
leading up to rail service or as a long-range stand-alone service. This potential service will also be considered in the planning for the Transit System Plan. FIGURE S-2: MOBILITY 2025
UPDATE-RAIL SYSTEM Mobility 2025 Update Rail System Legend _ COmmuter Rail _ Light Rail _ North Crosstown Corridor Study • Possible Eastern Terminus _ Staged Rail • D--•• Special Events
•••". Intercity Rail CorrIdor -Freeways/Parkways ...... Existing Rail Corridors . -.J • North Contral Texas N Council of Governments 1 TtansportDtion t\. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT
3/12103 S-2
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Executive Summary FIGURE 5-3: MOBILITY 2025 UPDA"rE-HOV and Managed Facility System " Mobility 2025 Update HOV and Managed Facility System l.egend RDVllrsiblo
_ Ml1l'I"ll"d HOVllntt>gmlod TcU""ml fa Two-Way -FroewllYmlParl<way" 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁤􀁬􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁫􀁊􀀺􀀶􀀨􀀱􀁦􀁴􀁊􀁶􀁶􀁤 du""1l""'''''''nl''ll_J!'If!od. 􀁾􀁦􀁕􀁤􀁊􀁏􀁮􀀨􀁩􀁬􀁴􀁦􀁬􀁨􀁬􀁬􀁬 til
fO'Wll'1:60 dul1fJQ.U\t aftemtlOftpek{nriod Qn IJtBttl!I HQV bciftiliu 1l1!ll»...,.w...__􀁬􀁩􀁣􀁉􀁴􀀾􀁱􀁨􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀢 􀁾􀀮ill jgl 􀀡􀀧􀁴􀁥􀀴􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁩􀀴􀀰􀁲􀁴􀁯􀀱􀁬􀀩 􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁬􀁦􀁩􀁉􀁬􀁉􀀮􀁉􀁬􀁦􀁵􀁟􀁩
􀁬􀁏􀁖􀁟􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁬􀀧.. " ... ...,llIlyl..._ltRlI-.. 􀁾􀁭􀁯􀁤􀁬􀁊􀀮􀀺􀁭􀁤􀁤􀁯􀁮􀁯􀁴 􀁲􀁾􀁭􀀺􀁴􀁾􀁦􀀱􀁉􀀺􀁾􀁕􀁧􀁮􀁾 Afl HOV hIdtl:tJ..will bb maMgOtl tot ...bllItrolt«l"""I" Mobility Needs
Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-3
DART 2030 Transit System Plan S.2 Mobility Needs in Specific Planning Corridors Executive Summary Specific planning corridor mobility needs and opportunities are identified from analyzing
current and projected travel patterns throughout the region. Indications are that many areas of the service area and study area are forecasted to experience high levels of roadway congestion
in 2030. This problem is indicative of too many cars and insufficient roadway capacity. Unfortunately, the region can no longer build its way out of congestion with additional freeway
capacity due to a lack of funds as well as deteriorating air quality. In fact, the Dallas-Fort Worth Region is facing a potential downgrade of its nonattainment status for ozone from
serious to severe. As a result of these considerations, public transit could become a more attractive transportation choice not only for the transit-dependent market, but also for the
choice rider market if the services offered are reliable and provide travel-time savings. -Population and employment forecasts for 2030 already suggest that transit services within the
DART Service Area will need to be expanded. In order to further assess the demand for increased transit services, the study team will test alternative transit systems and will analyze
travel demand model results in order to project future capacity needs. Existing Transit Planning Corridors are shown on Figure S-4. These corridors were originally developed in 1989
and are derived from transit trip forecasts that are in turn derived from demographic and socio-economic forecasts. Figure S-5 depicts the proposed Transit Planning Corridors for the
2030 Transit System Plan effort. These corridors were revised from the 1989 corridors based on updated travel pattern data as well as land use and demographic changes that have occurred
over the past decade. It is significant that the new corridor boundaries extend to areas outside of the current DART Service Area. This is indicative of the fact that the DART system
increasingly increasingly serves patrons who reside outside of the service area. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-4
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE S-4: 1989 TRANSIT PLANNING CORRIDORS 1989 Transit Planning Corridors Executive Summary Souroe: NCTCOG and DART Data February 12. 2003 Planning &
Development Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 􀁾􀀡􀀡􀀵􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀀶 Miles S-5
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Executive Summary FIGURE S-5: PROPOSED 2030 TRANSIT PLANNING CORRIDORS DART Proposed Transit Planning Corridors ffi IIIIIH Source; NerCOG and DART Data
FebnJ3ry 12, 2003 􀁾􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀡􀁩􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁬􀀶 Miles Planning & Development The following is a summary of the predominant travel characteristics, service area needs, and
study area needs expected to occur in each of the proposed planning corridors by 2030. The predominant travel characteristics were derived from the 2030 Regional Desire Lines of Travel
(All Trips and Work Trips) maps found in figures S-6 and S-7 respectively. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-6
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 5-6: 2030 Regional Desire Lines of Travel-All Trips 2030 Predominant Selected Daily Trip Trends (Total Trips) Executive Summary ffi II1I11I Existing
and Programmed Rail Freeways o DART Member Cn:ies Planning & Development .... PredominaM Daily Trip Trends Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-7
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 5-7: 2030 Desire Lines of Travel -Work Trips 2030 Predominant Daily Work Trip Trends Executive Summary Planning & Development Mobility Needs Assessment
DRAFT 3/12103 S-8
DART 2030 Transit System Plan S.2.1 West Oak Cliff (U.S. 67/1-35E) Corridor Executive Summary S.2.1.1 Regional Desire Lines of TraVel (All Trips) • High volume travel pattern between
southwestern suburbs (Duncanville, Cedar Hill, DeSoto, Ovilla, and Glenn Heights) and Dallas CBD. • High volume northwest travel pattern between Glenn Heights and southwest Dallas. S.2.1.2
Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern between southwestern suburbs (Duncanville, Cedar Hill, DeSoto, Ovilla, and Glenn Heights) to Dallas CBD. • High
volume travel pattern between South Arlington/Mansfield to Dallas CBD. S.2.1.3 Service Area Needs • Consider capacity needs of Glenn Heights and Red Bird Express Service to Dallas CBD.
• Review capacity needs of planned permanent HOV lanes on U.S. 67 and 1-35E. • Consider extension of HOV lanes on 1-35E between the U.S. 67 merge and 1-20. • Consider increasing transit
service availability in the West Oak Cliff LRT Corridor and extending this corridor to Red Bird Lane. • Consider providing transit service between Glenn Heights and southwest Dallas
(Red Bird area). . • Study potential impact of study area growth on service area services. S.2.1.4 StUdy Area Needs • Potential demand for transit service from Midlothian and the southwestern
suburbs to service area (Reserve ROW on BN-SF). • Potential demand for extension of HOVlanes on U.S. 67 and 1-35E (this is being reviewed as part of the Southern GateVl(ay Major Investment
Study). ! S.2.2 Turnpike (1-30 West) Corridor S.2.2.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • No high volume desire lines of travel:,l : S.2.2.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel
(Work Trips) • No high volume desire lines of travel. S.2.2.3 Service Area Needs • Planned HOV lanes on 1-30. • Review HOV capacity needs. • Review Trinity Study transit 􀁲􀁥􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮�
�􀀮 Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-9
DART 2030 Transit System Plan S.2.2.4 Study Area Needs Executive Summary • Potential demand for HOV capacity. Although the desire lines of travel aren't indicative of it, heavy weekday
peak period traffic volumes do occur along 1-30 eastbound in the AM and westbound in the PM. S.2.3 Northwest (S.H. 114) Corridor S.2.3.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) •
High volume travel pattern between Dallas CBD and Irving/DFW International Airport. S.2.3.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • No high volume desire lines of travel. S.2.3.3
Service Area Needs • Documented in the Northwest Corridor Major Investment Study and the DFW International Airport Rail Access and Implementation Study. • Review potential impact of
study area growth on service area services. • LRT expansion is planned to the DFW International Airport Central Terminal Area from the Dallas CBD via Las Colinas. • HOV lanes are also
planned on S.H. 114 from S.H. 183 to DFW International Airport. • Double tracking of the Trinity Railway Express (TRE) from Dallas Union Station to Centreport is planned. S.2.3.4 Study
Area Needs • Preserve rail ROW from TRE (Centreport Station) into Central Terminal Area of DFW International Airport. • Potential demand for additional capacity on TRE. • Potential demand
for transit service from northeast Tarrant County communities. 5.2.4 Stemmons (1-35E) Corridor S.2.4.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • Moderate volume travel patterns between
Dallas CBD and Carrollton. • High volume travel patterns between Lewisville and Denton. S.2.4.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern between the
Dallas CBD and northwest Dallas. • High volume travel pattern between Corinth and Denton. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-10
DART 2030 Transit System Plan S.2.4.3 Service Area Needs Executive Summary • Documented in the Northwest Corridor MIS and the Northwest Corridor 'LRT Line to Farmers Branch and Carrollton'
Draft Environmental Impact Statement. • LRT expansion is planned from the Dallas CBD to Frankford Road in Carrollton. • Review capacity of the above LRT line. • Review potential impact
of study area growth and the proposed Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) on DART Service Area services. S.2.4.4 Study Area Needs • Documented in the Denton County Transportation
Authority Service Plan. 5.2.5 Tollway Corridor S.2.5.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel pattern between 1-635 and U.S. 380 north of Frisco (including
Legacy Park area). • High volume travel pattern between McKinney and Frisco (McKinney Hook). S.2.5.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern between
President George Bush Turnpike (S.H. 190) and U.S. 380 north of Frisco (including Legacy Park area). • High volume travel pattern between McKinney and Frisco (McKinney Hook). S.2.5.3
Service Area Needs • Consider rail or bus rapid transit in Tollway or Preston Road corridors from Legacy Park to 1-635 as well as to the Dallas CBD. S.2.5.4 StUdy Area Needs • Potential
demand for rail or bus rapid transit in Tollway or Preston Road (S.H. 289) corridors from U.S. 380 to Legacy Park. • Potential demand for rail or bus rapid transit linking McKinney to
Frisco along or between the U.S. 380 and/or S.H. 121 corridors. 5.2.6 North Central S.2.6.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel pattern between the Dallas
CBD and 1-635. • High volume travel pattern between Plano/Richardson and into Allen and McKinney. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-l1
DART 2030 Transit System Plan S.2.6.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) Executive Summary • High volume travel pattern between the Dallas CBD and 1-635. • High volume travel
pattern between Plano and Richardson (Telecom Corridor). S.2.6.3 Service Area Needs • Review capacity needs of North Central (Red) LRT Line. • Review need for express service from Plano
into the Dallas CBD. • HOV lanes are planned for U.S. 75 from Plano to 1-635. S.2.6.4 Study Area Needs • Potential demand for rail or bus rapid transit from Allen, Fairview, and McKinney.
• Potential demand for HOV lanes from Plano to U.S. 380 in McKinney. 5.2.7 Northeast S.2.7.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel pattern from Sachse and
Rowlett to the Richardson/Plano area, northeast Dallas, Mesquite, as well as to the Dallas CBD. • High volume travel pattern from Rockwall to the Dallas CBD via Rowlett (Also see East
Corridor). • High volume travel patterns from Wylie to multiple destinations in Allen, Plano, Richardson, and the Rowlett area. S.2.7.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) •
High volume travel patterns from Rowlett to Garland and the Dallas CBD. • High volume travel patterns from Wylie to Richardson and Plano. • High volume travel patterns from Sachse to
Garland, Rowlett, Richardson, and Plano. S.2.7.3 Service Area Needs • Review capacity needs of Northeast (Blue) LRT Line. • LRT expansion is planned from downtown Garland to Rowlett.
• HOV lanes are planned on 1-635 from U.S. 75 to just north of 1-30. S.2.7.4 Study Area Needs • Potential demand for rail or bus rapid transit from Wylie, Sachse, and the Rockwall area
to the points in the service area including Richardson and Plano as well as to the Dallas CBD. e Potential for HOV lanes on President George Bush Turnpike linking Garland, Rowlett, and
Sachse to the Richardson/Plano employment centers. • Potential enhanced Bus Service on east-west corridor linking Garland and Rowlett to northeast Dallas. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT
3/12103 S-12
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 5.2.8 East Corridor S.2.8.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) Executive Summary • High volume travel pattern from Rockwall, Heath, Rowlett, Garland,
Sunnyvale, Mesquite and East Dallas to Dallas CBD. S.2.8.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern from Rowlett, Sunnyvale, Mesquite and East Dallas
to Dallas CBD. S.2.8.3 Service Area Needs • Consider potential to use the Union Pacific rail corridor as a high-speed commuter rail corridor. • Consider potential demand for rail transit
along the Santa Fe from Garland to the Dallas CBD (The East Corridor MIS is studying this). • Review capacity of planned permanent HOV lanes on 1-30. • Consider potential demand for
rail or bus rapid transit in the Union Pacific/Scyene/Military Parkway corridor from the service area boundary (St. Augustine Rd.) to the Dallas CBD. S.2.8.4 Study Area Needs • Potential
to use the Union Pacific rail corridor as a high-speed commuter rail corridor. • Potential demand for HOV lanes on 1-30 from Mesquite to the current service area boundary. • Potential
demand for rail or bus rapid transit from Mesquite, Sunnyvale, Heath, and Rockwall to the service area (including Garland, Richardson, Plano, and the Dallas CBD). 5.2.9 Pleasant Grove
Corridor (southeast) S.2.9.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel patterns from Mesquite, Balch Springs and Pleasant Grove (southeast Dallas) to the Dallas
CBD. S.2.9.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel patterns from Mesquite, Balch Springs and Pleasant Grove (southeast Dallas) to the Dallas CBD. S.2.9.3
Service Area Needs • Consider potential demand for extension of the Southeast LRT Line. • Review capacity needs of the Southeast LRT Line. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-13
DART 2030 Transit System Plan S.2.9.4 Study Area Needs Executive Summary • Potential demand for extension of the Southeast LRT Lineinto Balch Springs/Seagoville. • Potential demand for HOV lanes along U.S. 175 into Balch Springs/Seagoville. 5.2.10 South Oak Cliff Corridor S.2.10.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel
(All Trips) • High volume travel pattern from the Lancaster Road/Loop 12 (Ledbetter) area into the Dallas CBD. S.2.10.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel
pattern from the Lancaster Road/Loop 12 (Ledbetter) area into the Dallas CBD. S.2.10.3 Service Area Needs • Review capacity needs of South Oak Cliff LRT Line. • Consider potential demand
for HOV lanes on 1-45 and 1-35E from the U.S. 67 split south to 1-20. S.2.10.4 Study Area Needs • Potential demand for extension of HOV lanes along 1-35E and US 67 into northern Ellis
County. 5.2.11 S.H. 121 Corridor S.2.11.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel patterns occur along the corridor from Allen on the east side to Southlake
on the west (cities in between include: Grapevine, Coppell, Lewisville, Carrollton, The Colony, Plano, and Frisco). Regional actiVity centers in this corridor include Legacy Park and
DFW International Airport. S.2.11.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel patterns to Legacy Park from Allen, Lewisville, and Carrollton. S.2.11.3 Service
Area Needs • This corridor lies primarily outside the DART Service Area. S.2.11.4 Study Area Needs • Potential demand for rail or bus rapid transit providing high capacity service in
the S.H. 121 Corridor. .. Potential demand for HOV Lanes on SH 121 Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-14
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Executive Summary S.2.12 Outer Belt Corridor (President George Bush Turnpike-S.H. 190 & S.H. 161) S.2.12.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) •
High volume travel patterns stretching along the northern side of the corridor between Carrollton and Richardson/Plano. • High volume travel patterns stretchifl9 along the eastern and
northeastern sides of the corridor between Mesquite/Sunnyvale through Garland and Rowlett to Richardson/Plano (The southern part of this travel pattern is largely served currently by
1-635. In the future, '9-planned new Parkway that basically is an extension of the President George Bush Turnpike from 1-30 to U.S. 175 will serve it). S.2.12.2 Regional Desire Lines
of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel patterns from Balch Springs and south Mesquite to Sunnyvale and north Mesquite. • High volume travel patterns from Rowlett and Garland to
Richardson/Plano. • High volume travel patterns from Carrollton to the Legacy Park area of Plano. S.2.12.3 Service Area Needs • Study the need for rail transit service from Downtown
Plano to DFW International Airport. • Potential demand for express /bus'rapid transit service and HOV lanes on the President George Bush Turnpike 􀁦􀁲􀁯􀁾 Garland to Carrollton. • Study
potential impact of study area growth on service area transit services. S.2.12.4 Study Area Needs • Potential demand for express /bus rapid transit service on the new Parkway mentioned
above that will basically be an extension of the PGBT from 1-30 to U.S. 175. • Potential demand for rail transit service, from Wylie to Downtown Plano. S.2.13 LBJ (1-635) Corridor S.2.13.1
Regional Desire Lines of 􀁔􀁲􀁡􀁶􀁾􀀱 (!\II Trips) • High volume travel pattern from Mesquite and Garland (1-30) to Farmers Branch (1-35E). ' " ' S.2.13.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel
(Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern along the north side of 1-635 between U.S. 75 to west of the Dallas North Tollway. Mobility I\leeds Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-15
DART 2030 Transit System Plan S.2.13.3 Service Area Needs Executive Summary • Consider high capacity rail or express bus transit service along the 1-635 corridor from just north of the
1-30 interchange (service area boundary) to 1-35E (HOV lanes already exist along most of this corridor and are planned from 1-30 to U.S. 75). • Study potential impact of study area growth
on service area transit services. S.2.13.4 Study Area Needs • Potential demand for HOV Lanes on the eastern and southeastern portions of 1635 along with express bus transit services.
S.2.14 Loop 12 Corridor S.2.14.1 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • Medium volume travel pattern along the northern side (Northwest Highway) between U.S. 75 and 1-35E. • High
volume travel pattern along southern side (Ledbetter) between 1-45 and Spur 408 (Red Bird area). • Medium volume travel pattern along the western side (Walton Walker) from the 135E/Loop
12 split to south Irving. S.2.14.2 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • No high volume regional work trips are indicated. S.2.14.3 Service Area Needs • Consider bus rapid transit
service along the southern, eastern, and northern sides of Loop 12. • Consider rapid or express bus transit service along the western (Walton Walker) portion of Loop 12. • HOV lanes
are planned for the western portion of Loop 12, as it is an existing freeway facility. S.2.14.4 Study Area Needs • There are no study area needs for this corridor as it lies entirely
within the current DART Service Area. S.3 Local Mobility Needs Local mobility needs can be identified by analyzing the 2030 Local Desire Lines of Travel. Local trips by automobile are
more likely to use the arterial street system. These facilities will also be subject to some of the congestion that will be evident on our freeway system in 2030. As a result, public
transit could capture a larger share of this market. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-16
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Legacy Executive Summary This major employment area is located south of S.H. 121 along both sides of the Dallas North Tollway. The current employment is
28,000 but it is forecasted to grow significantly by 2030 to just over 80,000. The existing employment centers in Legacy attract large numbers of local trips from all directions. This
indicates that many workers live in the surrounding area. A significant number of these trips come from north of S.H. 121, which is outside the limits of the current DART Service Area.
Red Bird This major employment area is located just south of Loop 12 on the west side of U.S. 67. The current employment is 23,000 but it is forecasted to grow to 37,000 by 2030. The
Red Bird Industrial Park Area attracts trips from the surrounding area including areas just south of the DART Service Area. Skyline This major employment area is located in east Dallas,
just east of Loop 12 between the 1-30/U.S. 80 split and Scyene. The existing employment is 12,000 and and is forecasted to grow to 20,000 by 2030. The Skyline Area local attracts trips
from the surrounding area including areas outside the DART Service Area in Mesquite. Garland Garland has one of the heaviest concentrations of local trips. Garland has a good balance
of employment and population. Many local trips are also attracted to various locations along the 1-635 employment corridor. Irving has a heavy concentration of local trips. Irving also
has very high employment opportunities, which allows residents to find local employment. Denton The Denton area has a high number of local trips. It also has a good employment to population
balance and is home to the University of North Texas, which no doubt plays a part in this heavy local trip pattern. However, Denton is not in the DART Service Area. McKinney/Alien McKinney
and Allen have a high number of local trips. They also have a good employment to population balance. However, McKinney and Allen are not in the DART Service Area. Lewisville The Lewisville
area has a heavy concentration of local trips. It also has a good employment (retail, commercial, and industrial) to population balance. However, Lewisville is not in the DART Service
Area. Mobility !\leeds Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-17
DART 2030 Transit System Plan South Arlington Executive Summary South Arlington has a high level of local trip activity. This area is comprised of a large number of single-family residences
that commute to employment areas located south and north of 1-20. However, Arlington is not in the DART Service Area. Central Arlington Central Arlington also has significant local trip
activity. The area is a high employment area (industrial and commercial) and has a high population pool. However, Arlington is not in the DART Service Area. Mid-Cities The western Mid-Cities
(North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Watauga, and Hurst) area exhibit high local trip patterns. The area has a good employment (retail and commercial) to population balance. However,
this area is not a part of the DART Service Area. 5.4 Regional Activity Center Circulator Mobility Needs Circulator mobility needs cannot easily be identified by forecasts from the regional
travel model because many trips within activity centers are intra-zonal. Indicators of need include a high intensity of population and employment as well as a mixed-use land use pattern.
The following regional activity centers are areas with existing or future circulator mobility needs. Dallas CBD The Dallas CBD is in need of a circulator that would link it to surrounding
areas such as Uptown, Medical/Market Center and Deep Ellum. Because of the complexity of this area, a comprehensive circulator study is needed. The City of Dallas Central Business District
Transportation Study is addressing these circulator needs along with input from DART and the McKinney Avenue Transit Authority. Telecom The Telecom Corridor has circulator service. As
the area further develops, the need for circulator service will be reevaluated and adjusted to the growth. Planning for circulator service can be handled by periodic service reviews.
Legacy Legacy has not yet demonstrated a need for a separate circulator service. However, with the development of the urban center, the circulator needs should be reviewed. reviewed.
Galleria The Galleria area has existing circulator service. As the area further develops, the need for circulator service will be reevaluated and adjusted to the growth. Planning for
circulator service can be handled in the short-term by periodic service reviews. A more Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-18
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Executive Summary comprehensive circulator study will be needed in the future to examine the potential use of the Inwood rail corridor for transit circulator
service. Las Colinas The City of Irving sponsored a land use study of Las Colinas that recommended a light rail alignment and station locations along with an associated transit-oriented
development plan for areas around the future DART Light Rail Stations. The Northwest Corridor DFW/lrving EIS/PE Study will review these recommendations. This study will also examine
the circulator role of the LRT in relation to other transit circulator service. 5.5 2030 Transit System Plan Approach The DART 2030 Transit System Plan will address many regional trends
including: • Regional population and employment growth; • Expansion of the urbanized area; • Dispersed travel patterns; • Increase in congestion; and, • Increase in transit demand. The
2030 Transit System Plan will look well beyond the current transit program developed from prior prior system plan efforts and will outline the next steps toward achieving a comprehensive
transit system in the Dallas region. Developing the 2030 Transit System Plan will entail many tasks. The Evaluation Framework established the guiding principles, objectives and selection
criteria for the 2030 Transit System plan. The Mobility Needs Assessment identifies current and future transit needs in the DART Service Area. The Technology Review considers trends
in transit vehicle technology. The Identification of Corridor Opportunities specifies transit service possibilities by geographic sub regions within the service area. Public involvement
activities will be conducted during each task to solicit comment and to inform coordinating agencies and the general public of DART's progress. Completion of these tasks will enable
the final development of the DART 2030 Transit system plan. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 3/12103 S-19
DART 2030 Transit System Plan DART Member City StaffBriefing May 9,2003 DART representatives gave an overview and status ofthe 2030 Transit System Plan. The current schedule includes
a draft submittal ofCorridor Opportunities in October, 2003. The approval process would then take approximately 3 months. After the draft is prepared, DART will hold three public meeting,
including one in the northern sector. It was stated that some alternative routes could be eliminated in the future, ifthey don't perform well under staff evaluation and public input.
Eventually, the preferred routes will be set and the results will be forwarded to the municipalities concerned. Apparently, the schedule may change and target dates moved back further
in time. Under Mobility Needs Assessment ofthe alternate routes, travel patterns will consider population, employment, and congestion. The population growth is considered to be mostly
outside the DART service area. The employment growth will be inside and outside Service Area, and there will be an emphasis on access to jobs inside the Service Area. In addition, there
will be more importance placed on Choice Rider market and transit connections among and within urban centers. The roadway systems are anticipated to be more congested and less reliable.
Consequently, there is an increased travel demand focused on growing urban centers in the northern Service Area. In 2002, the average daily congestion delay was 1.0 million hours. In
2030, the average congestion delay will swell to 5.1 million hours. This results in a high potential for adding new Transit Patrons to the system. DART listed 2030 predominant selected
daily trip trends (total trips) to include the Dallas North Tollway, between ill 635 and Frisco. However, DART still considers the Dallas CBD as the predominant regional work trip destination.
Transit Service Concepts are designed to meet identified travel needs of a transit market, and the Service Area has multiple travel needs and transit markets. Corridors or areas may
require several Transit Service Concepts. The same transit vehicle can be used for different Service Concepts (i.e., LRT). Characteristics of Transit Service Concepts include reliability,
convenience, and comfort. The Concepts may include Rail Stations, Transit Centers, Park & Ride Lots, Shuttle Service, Rideshare/HOV, and Para Transit. Technology reviewed consisted ofFixed
Guideway, such as Light Rail, Regional Commuter Rail, and HOV lanes. Commuter rail attributes are primarily oriented toward long haul, high speed service, with self-propelled commuter
cars. Stations are spaced optimally. The capital cost is $5-25 million per mile. Light Rail attributes include medium to high capacity intra-urban service, and can be used for both short
and line haul trips. Station spacing is closer. It can operate at grade, in tunnels, or on separate rightsof-way. However, it cannot operate within active freight rail right-of-way.
Typical capital cost per mile is $20-55 million. The HOV attributes include dedicated lanes that offer high speed, high capacity service. It serves a travel market that consists oflong
haul trips. Average operating speed is 35-45 mph. It can also be used for Express Bus Service. The cost per mile varies. In summary, corridor needs and demands will determine the type
ofvehicle technology to be used. Some transit technologies can serve multiple service concepts. DART staff indicated that North Service Area Issues will be studied more in depth in the
next planning stage, including the need for high capacity service in the Tollway Corridor. The factors for evaluation include Corrider Attributes (r.o.w. width and potential for transit
priority), Right-of-Way Availability, Connectivity to other high or medium capacity transit, Population Employment Density, Service to Activity Centers, Travel Time, Ridership Potential,
and Cost per Rider.
DART·· Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 April 11, 2003 Mr. Michael Murphy Director of Public Works Town of Addison P. O. Box 9010 5300
Belt Line Road Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Dear Mr. Murphy: You are invited to a DART Member City Staff Coordination Briefing on the 2030 Transit System Plan (TSP). During the briefing,
the TSP staff will discuss our recent progress; mobility needs assessment, technology review, service concepts, and corridor opportunities. DART staff will also give an overview on the
progress of the entire System Plan, address any comments or questions, and discuss future items. An agenda has been enclosed for your information. The briefing has been scheduled as
follows: DART 2030 Transit System Plan Member City Staff Coordination Briefing Friday, May 9, 2003, 9:30 a.m. -11 :30 a.m. DART Headquarters Conference Room 1-C 1401 Pacific Avenue,
Dallas, Texas Please RSVP to Carol Gideon, DART Government Relations at 214-749-3487 by May2, 2003, and she she will be able to secure parking for you in the building. Should you have
any additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 214-749-3539. 􀀨􀁴􀀻􀁓􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁉􀁙􀀧 \ Jay Kline, AVP System Plan and Program Management ..IK/cg Enclosure
DART 2030 TRANSIT SYSTEM PLAN DART Member City Staff Briefing Agenda DATE: TIME: PLACE: Friday, May 9,2003 9:30 p.m. -11 :30 p.m. DART Headquarters Conference Room 1C 1401 Pacific Avenue,
Dallas, Texas 1. Progress (5 minutes) 2. Mobility Needs Assessment (20 Minutes) 3. Technology Review (10 Minutes) 4. Service Concepts (10 Minutes) 5. Corridor Opportunities (30 Minutes)
• Alternatives • Evaluation Methodology 6. Development of 2030 Transit System Plan (5 minutes)
DART 2030 Transit System Plan DART Member City StaffBriefing May 9,2003 DART representatives gave an overview and status ofthe 2030 Transit System Plan. The current schedule includes
a draft submittal ofCorridor Opportunities in October, 2003. The approval process would then take approximately 3 months. After the draft is prepared, DART will hold three public meeting,
including one in the northern sector. It was stated that some alternative routes could be eliminated in the future, if they don't perform well under staff evaluation and public input.
Eventually, the preferred routes will be set and the results will be forwarded to the municipalities concerned. Apparently, the schedule may change and target dates moved back further
in time. Under Mobility Needs Assessment of the alternate routes, travel patterns will consider population, employment, and congestion. The population growth is considered to be mostly
outside the DART service area. The employment growth will be inside and outside Service Area, and there will be an emphasis on access to jobs inside the Service Area. In addition, there
will be more importance placed on Choice Rider market and transit connections among and within urban centers. The roadway systems are anticipated to be more congested and less reliable.
Consequently, there is an increased travel demand focused on growing urban centers in the northern Service Area. In 2002, the average daily congestion delay was 1.0 million hours. In
2030, the average congestion delay will swell to 5.1 million hours. This results in a high potential for adding new Transit Patrons to the system. DART listed 2030 predominant selected
daily trip trends (total trips) to include the Dallas North Tollway, between ill 635 and Frisco. However, DART still considers the Dallas CBD as the predominant regional work trip destination.
Transit Service Concepts are designed to meet identified travel needs of a transit market, and the Service Area has multiple travel needs and transit markets. Corridors or areas may
require several Transit Service Concepts. The same transit vehicle can be used for different Service Concepts (i.e., LRT). Characteristics of Transit Service Concepts include reliability,
convenience, and comfort. The Concepts may include Rail Stations, Transit Centers, Park & Ride Lots, Shuttle Service, Rideshare/HOV, and Para Transit. Technology reviewed consisted ofFixed
Guideway, such as Light Rail, Regional Commuter Rail, and HOV lanes. Commuter rail attributes are primarily oriented toward long haul, high speed service, with self-propelled commuter
cars. Stations are spaced optimally. The capital cost is $5-25 million per mile. Light Rail attributes include medium to high capacity intra-urban service, and can be used for both short
and line haul trips. Station spacing is closer. It can operate at grade, in tunnels, or on separate rightsof-way. However, it cannot operate within active freight rail right-of-way.
Typical capital cost per mile is $20-55 million. The HOV attributes include dedicated lanes that offer high speed, high capacity service. It serves a travel market that consists of long
haul trips. Average operating speed is 35-45 mph. It can also be used for Express Bus Service. The cost per mile varies. In summary, corridor needs and demands will determine the type
ofvehicle technology to be used. Some transit technologies can serve multiple service concepts. DART staff indicated that North Service Area Issues will be studied more in depth in the
next planning stage, including the need for high capacity service in the Tollway Corridor. The factors for evaluation include Corrider Attributes (r.o.w. width and potential for transit
priority), Right-of-Way Availability, Connectivity to other high or medium capacity transit, Population Employment Density, Service to Activity Centers, Travel Time, Ridership Potential,
and Cost per Rider.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan DART Member City StaffBriefing May 9,2003 DART representatives gave an overview and status ofthe 2030 Transit System Plan. The current schedule includes
a draft submittal ofCorridor Opportunities in October, 2003. The approval process would then take approximately 3 months. After the draft is prepared, DART will hold three public meeting,
including one in the northern sector. It was stated that some alternative routes could be eliminated in the future, if they don't perform well under staff evaluation and public input.
Eventually, the preferred routes will be set and the results will be forwarded to the municipalities concerned. Apparently, the schedule may change and target dates moved back further
in time. Under Mobility Needs Assessment ofthe alternate routes, travel patterns will consider population, employment, and congestion. The population growth is considered to be mostly
outside the DART service area. The employment growth will be inside and outside Service Area, and there will be an emphasis on access to jobs inside the Service Area. In addition, there
will be more importance placed on Choice Rider market and transit connections among and within urban centers. The roadway systems are anticipated to be more congested and less reliable.
Consequently, there is an increased travel demand focused on growing urban centers in the northern Service Area. In 2002, the average daily congestion delay was 1.0 million hours. In
2030, the average congestion delay will swell to 5.1 million hours. This results in a high potential for adding new Transit Patrons to the system. DART listed 2030 predominant selected
daily trip trends (total trips) to include the Dallas North Tollway, between ill 635 and Frisco. However, DART still considers the Dallas CBD as the predominant regional work trip destination.
Transit Service Concepts are designed to meet identified travel needs of a transit market, and the Service Area has multiple travel needs and transit markets. Corridors or areas may
require require several Transit Service Concepts. The same transit vehicle can be used for different Service Concepts (Le., LRT). Characteristics ofTransit Service Concepts include reliability,
convenience, and comfort. The Concepts may include Rail Stations, Transit Centers, Park & Ride Lots, Shuttle Service, Rideshare/HOV, and Para Transit. Technology reviewed consisted ofFixed
Guideway, such as Light Rail, Regional Commuter Rail, and HOV lanes. Commuter rail attributes are primarily oriented toward long haul, high speed service, with self-propelled commuter
cars. Stations are spaced optimally. The capital cost is $5-25 million per mile. Light Rail attributes include medium to high capacity intra-urban service, and can be used for both short
and line haul trips. Station spacing is closer. It can operate at grade, in tunnels, or on separate rightsof-way. However, it cannot operate within active freight rail right-of-way.
Typical capital cost per mile is $20-55 million. The HOV attributes include dedicated lanes that offer high speed, high capacity service. It serves a travel market that consists of long
haul trips. Average operating speed is 35-45 mph. It can also be used for Express Bus Service. The cost per mile varies. In summary, corridor needs and demands will determine the type
ofvehicle technology to be used. Some transit technologies can serve multiple service concepts. DART staff indicated that North Service Area Issues will be studied more in depth in the
next planning stage, including the need for high capacity service in the Tollway Corridor. The factors for evaluation include Corrider Attributes (r.o.w. width and potential for transit
priority), Right-of-Way Availability, Connectivity to other high or medium capacity transit, Population Employment Density, Service to Activity Centers, Travel Time, Ridership Potential,
and Cost per Rider.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan DART Member City StaffBriefing May 9, 2003 DART representatives gave an overview and status ofthe 2030 Transit System Plan. The current schedule includes
a draft submittal of Corridor Opportunities in October, 2003. The approval process would then take approximately 3 months. After the draft is prepared, DART will hold three public meeting,
including one in the northern sector. It was stated that some alternative routes could be eliminated in the future, ifthey don't perform well under staff evaluation and public input.
Eventually, the preferred routes will be set and the results will be forwarded to the municipalities concerned. Apparently, the schedule may change and target dates moved back further
in time. Under Mobility Needs Assessment ofthe alternate routes, travel patterns will consider population, employment, and congestion. The population growth is considered to be mostly
outside the DART service area. The employment growth will be inside and outside Service Area, and there will be an emphasis on access to jobs inside the Service Area. In addition, there
will be more importance placed on Choice Rider market and transit connections among and within urban centers. The roadway systems are anticipated to be more congested and less reliable.
Consequently, there is an increased travel demand focused on growing urban centers in the northern Service Area. In 2002, the average daily congestion delay was 1.0 million hours. In
2030, the average congestion delay will swell to 5.1 million hours. This results in a high potential for adding new Transit Patrons to the system. DART listed 2030 predominant selected
daily trip trends (total trips) to include the Dallas North Tollway, between ill 635 and Frisco. However, DART still considers the Dallas CBD as the predominant regional work trip destination.
Transit Service Concepts are designed to meet identified travel needs of a transit market, and the Service Area has multiple travel needs and transit markets. Corridors or areas may
require several Transit Service Concepts. The same transit vehicle can be used for different Service Concepts (i.e., LRT). Characteristics ofTransit Service Concepts include reliability,
convenience, and comfort. The Concepts may include Rail Stations, Transit Centers, Park & Ride Lots, Shuttle Service, RidesharelHOV, and Para Transit. Technology reviewed consisted ofFixed
Guideway, such as Light Rail, Regional Commuter Rail, and HOV lanes. Commuter rail attributes are primarily oriented toward long haul, high speed service, with self-propelled commuter
cars. Stations are spaced optimally. The capital cost is $5-25 million per mile. Light Rail attributes include medium to high capacity intra-urban service, and can be used for both short
and line haul trips. Station spacing is closer. It can operate at grade, in tunnels, or on separate rightsof-way. However, it cannot operate within active freight rail right-of-way.
Typical capital cost per mile is $20-55 million. The HOV attributes include dedicated lanes that offer high speed, high capacityservice. It serves a travel market that consists of long
haul trips. Average operating speed is 35-45 mph. It can also be used for Express Bus Service. The cost per mile varies. In summary, corridor needs and demands will determine the type
ofvehicle technology to be used. Some transit technologies can serve multiple service concepts. DART staff indicated that North Service Area Issues will be studied more in depth in the
next planning stage, including the need for high capacity service in the Tollway Corridor. The factors for evaluation include Corrider Attributes (r.o.w. width and potential for transit
priority), Right-of-Way Availability, Connectivity to other high or medium capacity transit, Population Employment Density, Service to Activity Centers, Travel Time, Ridership Potential,
and Cost per Rider.
JOHN CORNYN TEXAS WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4305 May 9, 2003 .R1 􀁾 ec 􀁾 UVi lE [Q) JUN 02 1003 MAYOR/CIJY COUNCIL The Honorable Scott Wheeler Mayor , Town of Addison P. O. Box 9010 Addison,
Texas 75001-9010 Dear Mayor Wheeler: c:eorJ S-reJ.e:: C,' Thank you for contacting me regarding funding for the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) in the reauthorization of the Transportation
Equity Act for the 21 sl Century (TEA-21). As Congress reviews this legislation to authorize spending on road, rail and other transportation, initiatives, I am committed to working with
my colleagues to fund local Texas transportation projects. Like you, I recognize that our transportation corridors are vital to continued prosperity, and I will ensure that Texas transportation
needs receive the priority they deserve. Moreover, I am committed to securing our state a fair share of federal transportation funds and the flexibility to use them effectively. I will
fight to increase our state's unacceptably low rate of return on federal gasoline taxes sent to Washington. I will also support giving local and state authorities a larger voice on which
projects are most pressing, and greater flexibility in implementing priority transportation initiatives. As the reauthorization process moves forward, I will continue to work with my
colleagues to advance DART and other transportation priorities to alleviate congestion, spur economic development, and provide a better quality oflife for people in Addison and throughout
Texas. It is a privilege to represent you in the United States Senate. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of further assistance in this or any other matter. 􀁓􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁥􀁲􀁥􀁾
􀁾 JO CORNYN 􀁌􀁾 Unite States Senator JC:am
c\l . i DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 06-06-03 AGENDA ITEM n EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES MAY 2, 2003
DAllAS REGIONAL MOBILI1Y COALmON EXECUTIVE COMMITfEE MEETING MINUTES May 2, 2003 A meeting of the Executive Committee of the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition was held May 2,2003 at
2377 Stemmons, Dallas, Texas. Executive Committee Members attending were: Ron Harris (Collin County) Margaret Keliher (Dallas County) Sandy Greyson (Dallas) Grady Smithey (Dallas County)
Terry Waldrum Qrving) Chad Adams (Ellis Co.) Gary Base (Area Chambers) Mark Burroughs (Denton) Angie Chen Button (Dallas) Stanton Foerster (Rowlett & Sachse) John Heiman, Jr. (Mesquite)
Executive Committee Members absent were: Bruce Beaty (Rockwall County) Don Dozier (McKinney & Wylie) Jim Dunn (Garland) Pat Evans (plano) Robert Franke (Cedar Hill & Duncanville) Mary
Hom (Denton County) Mike Nowels (Lewisville) Ex-Officio Members attending were: Katie Nees for Jerry Hiebert (NTTA) Michael Morris (NCT/COG) Jay Nelson (TxD01) Gary Thomas (DAR1) James
O'Neal (Lancaster, DeSoto, Glenn Heights & Hutchins) Bob Phelps (Farmers Branch, Addison, & Highland Park) Frank Robertson (Grand Prairie) Jayne Peters for Candy Sheehan (Coppell & University
Park) Mike Simpson (Frisco) Gary Slagel (Richardson) Mark Stokes (Carrollton) Steve Terrell (Allen) Paul Wageman (Dallas) Alan Walne (Dallas) Staff: James McCarley C:mydocuments\050203drmcmins.doc
Others attending were: Kim Brooks, Bob Brown, Jim Carvell, Matt Craig, Harold Denney, Jim Driscoll, Charles Emery, Cliff Franklin, Tony Hartzel, Jerry Holden, Dub Holloway, Don Holzwarth,
James Huffinan, Ross Jacobs, Mark Janicki, Rita Johnston, Lou Jones, Tony Kimmey, Sonny Loper, Nan Miller, Cesar Molina, Koorosh Olyai, Amanda Oneacre, Walter Ragsdale, Ernest Randall,
Ken Ransom, Milton Richter, Ayub Sandhu, Gary Shippy, Carol Short, Vic Suhm, Scott Turner, Carol Walters, Tom Walton, Mark A. Young Co-Chairman Ron Harris called the meeting to order
at 11:45 AM. He recognized NTTA Chairman Don Dillard as a member ofthe audience. Judge Harris recognized Congressman Michael Burgess as a guest and expressed appreciation on behalf of
DRMC for his interest and dedication of time to attend the Executive Committee meeting. The Judge then moved the federal issues portion of Agenda Item VII (Legislative Update) forward
to allow Congressman Burgess to provide any comments or updates due to his time constraints. The Congressman noted the reauthorization process for TEA-21, or now what some call T-3,
continues to move forward and some initial action may be taken by the House in the Mayor June time period. If the bill does not move forward by that time, there will likely be a Continuing
Resolution (CR) necessary in October to keep federal highway dollars flowing prior to finalization ofthe reauthorization. He also indicated his office continues to work on key policy
issues with the reauthorization, including the SHARE proposal co-sponsored now by 22 of the 32 Texas House 􀁾
􀀮􀁾􀁜 . .. 􀁾􀁾􀁃 Executive Committee Minutes 05-02-03 Page 2 Members. This bill would attempt to assure donor states of at least a 95% return on federal fuel tax dollars. He noted
recent actions in Houston to convert some parts of an Interstate Highway to toll lanes for capacity projects and indicated the concept will probably be expanded due to a lack of overall
funding for major projects throughout the nation. In a response to questions on the air quality issue, he indicated efforts continue to address streamlining requirements for portions
of the environmental process and provide a better time alignment for transportation conformity review. The air transport issue remains to be addressed. The Congressman also addressed
issues raised by Denton regarding local option funding to expedite mobility projects. Congressman Burgess encouraged the group to contact his office for any desired information or provide
additional input on these issues. James McCarley provided a brief update on other federal issues of interest to DRMC to allow Congressman . Burgess an opportunity to add any comments.
McCarley noted the effort underway in the Texas House to get all 150 House Members to sign a request to the entire Texas Congressional delegation to co-sponsor the SHARE bill. To date,
148 of the 150 have indicated support for the bill. He also updated the group on various elements of the T-3 funding levels as adopted in the House budget Resolutions in Congress, noting
the difference between the Senate and House versions. The DOT proposals fall short of either Senate or House versions. Additional information was also provided on HR 1767, the 'freeing
alternatives for speedy transportation' (FAST) bill sponsored by Rep. Mark Kennedy (D-MN) and Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA). This bill would allow the placement of tolls on interstates to ildd
capacity with a stipulation that the tolls would be removed once bonds were paid for the construction. Additional information was also provided on the air transport issue as it relates
to the pending EPA federal notice on the North Texas area State Implementation Plan (SIP). The EPA continues to review various alternatives regarding the SIP, including a possible move
to the proposed eight-hour standard. Upon a motion by Grady Smithey, and second by Mark Burroughs, the April 4 Executive Committee minutes were approved unanimously. Treasurer Terry
Waldrum reviewed the financial information for April as provided by the City ofIrving. Terry moved approval of the financial statements and James McCarley's invoice for April. After
a second by Gary Slagel, the motion carried unanimously. Judge Harris opened discussion on Agenda Item IV and asked James McCarley to review the proposed DRMC budget for FY 2003-2004.
McCarley referred the group to information provided in the packet on the budget detail and a handout that indicated an update based on recently announced NCT/COG population estimates
for 2003. He noted little change in the budget for next year, responding to questions regarding any possible interim legislative session that sufficient funds should be in the budget
for any potential interim session or interim committee meetings. Considering the anticipated revenue and current fund balance, the dues assessment for member agencies can remain at 9/12
of the full assessment, as had been the practice in prior years. He also reminded the group the budget is adopted during this time frame to allow sufficient notification to member agencies
for budget planning purposes although dues are not due until October 1, 2003. After discussion, Gary Slagel moved, with a second by Grady Smithey, that the proposed FY 2003-2004 budget
be adopted and notifications on dues provided to member agencies. The motion carried. Judge Harris opened Agenda Item V on various DRMC policy issues and legislative status, asking James
McCarley to provide the updates. McCarley noted the DRMC/DART Membership Flexibility issue has now moved from the Senate to the House. SB 972, as noted last month, is the bill that would
allow cities collecting a variety ofoptional sales taxes, such as 4A14B, to hold a single election and convert those taxes to a transit tax, also allowing any current debt to be paid
from those funds and the DART membership being effective when the full 1 cent was available for the transit system. The bill, sponsored by Senator Shapiro, was heard in the Senate Infrastructure
Development and Security Committee last week with testimony from DRMC and DART. The Committee certified it for the Senate Local and Uncontested Calendar on which it passed yesterday.
Rep; Brian McCall will carry the bill in the House and it should also move to the local calendar in that body. As a reminder, the other issue from the DRMC ad-hoc committee was to allow
partial use of the regular one-cent municipal sales tax. Although the bill was filed (SB 971), it was later determined such action might require a C:mydocuments\050203dnncmins.doc s
DRMC Executive Committee Minutes 05-02-03 Page 3 Constitutional Amendment, and was thus not pursued this session. An update was then provided on the status of the WolenslBrimer bills
(lIB 2953 and SB 1558) that would authorize TxDOT to create a six-county Regional Mobility Authority (Collin, Dallas, Denton, Parker, Rockwall and Tarrant) in North Texas. The Senate
bill has not been scheduled for a hearing. After the hearing on the House (Wolens) bill in the House Transportation Committee on April 8, the bill remains pending. A number of representatives
from North Texas appeared at the hearing and provided testimony against the bill. The only testimony in support of the bill was from the sponsor, Rep. Wolens, and Fort Worth Mayor Ken
Barr. TTC member Ric Williamson testified on the bill. It appears the specific bill will not move forward, although action will be monitored in the House and Senate for any attempt to
amend another bill with the same language. A brief update was provided on Sen. Jon Lindsay's SB 1462, a bill that would create a 'Transportation Enhancement District (TED)' upon local
voter approval in several urban areas of the State. A TED could only be established by local option after presentation of a plan to the voters by the county(s) affected. The TED could
then levy up to a 5-cent add-on fuel tax within the TED for use on local transportation projects. This bill has not moved forward, and probably won't, due to the aspect of the fuel tax.
Another bill (lIB 2312), as discussed by Rep. Krusee when he spoke at DRMC in March, would allow an RMA to establish up to an 8-% cent sales tax on motor vehicle fuels. This action would
also only be allowed after a plan was submitted to local voters within the RMA area showing how the funds would be used on transportation projects. This bill has been passed from the
House Transportation Committee and may appear on the House Calendar in the near future (May 14 is the last day a House Bill can be considered on second reading in the House). McCarley
combined the updates on the Texas Mobility Fund, the Trans Texas Corridor, and Regional Mobility Authorities (RMA). He noted an omnibus bill had been filed in the Senate and House to
combine various bills relating to what is now called the Governor's Transportation and Trauma Care Program. HB 3588 by Krusee and SB 1927 by Ogden contain the Trans Texas Corridor Act,
the RMA rewrite, rail authority for TxDOT, shadow tolling, the driver responsibility program to create funds for trauma care and the general fund, along with funding for the Texas Mobility
Fund. There was no public testimony taken in the House Transportation Committee on HB 3588, with Rep. Krusee indicating most of the bills had been heard in other forums. The House Committee
voted the bill from Committee last night (May 1) with several amendments sought by DRMC. McCarley noted Judge Harris and Judge Keliher had attended several meetings in Austin with the
Governor's office and Rep. Krusee. The key elements of concern for the DRMC area was language in the bill that would 'protect' both NTTA and DART from an RMA having overlapping jurisdiction,
thus possibly negatively impacting planning and financing for NTTA and DART. The House sponsor and Governor's office have accepted these amendments. The Senate Infrastructure Development
and Security Committee conducted hearings on May 1 and today, with another hearing set on Monday, May 5, on SB 1927 and other associated bills. It appears testimony in the Senate hearings
may cause some of the elements of the bill to be changed, depending on any final action by the House on HB 3588. While there is little in the 'package' that will affect the DRMC area,
funding for the Mobility Fund could provide up to about $250 million per year to the Fund, thus allowing around $2.5 -$3 billion in bonds to be issued for transportation projects. Efforts
also continue with TxDOT and the Governor's office to develop a Metropolitan Mobility Plan to address the crisis in urban congestion. Parts ofthis plan, although not in any legislation,
would provide a certain base level of funding for urban areas along with various incentives to develop regional add-on funding approaches. Some of the elements ofthe Plan will require
additional legislation. TxDOT DE Jay Nelson is serving on the Committee to put together the urban plan, and DRMC has participated along with other transportation groups in meetings with
the Governor's Office and TxDOT on the issue. There was considerable discussion on the bill(s), some directed to the issue of how funds might be diverted from urban areas to Corridor
projects. It was noted that language in the bills continues to use the Texas Mobility Fund as one of the potential funding sources for the Corridor. While not in the legislation, part
ofthe commitment on the urban mobility plan will be some form of agreement on how much of the mobility fund will be expended in urban areas. There has also been language added to two
other bills (SB 1083 and SIR 44 by Ogden) that would restrict use of any money from bonds (up to $5 billion backed by the Highway Fund) to non-trans Texas corridor projects. It appears
several members of the Senate share the concern over how funds might be diverted to Corridor projects. After additional discussion, Grady Smithey moved with a second by Terry Waldrum,
that the Co-Chairs be authorized to submit C:mydocuments\050203drmcmins.doc . 􀁾 I j
􀁵􀀺􀁌􀁆􀁸􀁟􀁶􀁥􀁾􀁟􀁍􀁩􀁮􀁟05-02-03 Page 4 a letter ofsupport on CSlIB 3588 if all amendments were included as agreed upon. The motion carried. McCarley provided an update on the air
quality issue at the State level. He noted lIB 1365 (Bonnen and Harris) had cleared the Senate Natural Resources Committee with a substitute that shifted the major funding element for
the Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) to a new motor vehicle title fee instead of an add-on diesel fee of 3 cents per gallon. Senator Harris also removed other elements of the bill,
indicating he was not interested in establishing additional environmental policy for the State, rather simply desiring to provide full funding for TERP as required by the EPA. The bill
may have other amendments added on the floor of the Senate, although all the 'leadership' has acknowledged the criticality of passing the legislation. It will be on the floor ofthe Senate
sometime next week. The Texas Clean Air Working Group (TCAWG) remains active in supporting the bill. No items were addressed under Agenda Item VI, Project Monitoring. An update was then
distributed to reflect current status on bills monitored by DRMC. James McCarley provided information on several items of interest. lIB 471 by Picket will address the cash management
issue experienced by TxDOT last year, allowing short term borrowing by TxDOT. SB 165 by Carona will provide additional liability protection for local law enforcement agencies when taking
on freeway management tasks, such as moving stalled vehicles from the roadway. . This is a major element of the DRMC Freeway Management Program. lIB 659 by Pitts would name the US 75/IH
635 intersection as the 'David M. Laney High Five Interchange' and has been passed by the House and now moves to the Senate. There was a brief discussion on lIB 901 by King, the automated
red light enforcement bill. As many had noted from media reports, an amendment was added to the bill that would restrict use of the system only to a city of 50 or less. Shortly after
that action, the bill died by a vote of 103-34. A motion was also made that essentially killed the bill for the session. McCarley noted several legislators discussed the need to not
bring the bill back for a session or two since it has become such a target each year. SB 361 by Shapiro, the access management bill, has cleared the Senate and should be reported from
the House Transportation Committee today (May 5). It will probably have some additional amendments which will have to be considered by Senator Shapiro prior to concurrence. Several bills
addressed the increase in size of the TTC from three to five. The bill has a strong movement, with apparent interest from the 'leadership'. It has been reported from the House and Senate
Committees, with an increase to five with no specific geographic requirement. There was discussion on the bill and the DRMC position, earlier stating the increase in size would be supported
if appointments were based on population rather then simply geography. With the change in leadership, the bill will probably make it through the process and to the Governor's desk, and
he'll probably sign it, thus giving him two more appointments. There was a discussion on the highly publicized school finance bill as proposed in the Senate. Various groups have questioned
what level of impact some of the proposed changes might have on local government funding and services, including transportation and/or transit. The group exchanged thoughts on the issue
yet no conclusion was reached due to the limited information. McCarley also noted the House, along with the Governor; indicate the issue may not be addressed until a special session
later this year regardless of any Senate action. NTTA Deputy Executive Director Katie Nees reported in the absence of Jerry Hiebert and distributed the monthly NTTA update and highlighted
a few sections. She noted average daily transactions on the Bush Turnpike for the week ending April 27 were 360,900, with a peak day of 452,200 set on December 20, 2002. NTTA continues
to work with other agencies to address the US 75 and Bush Interchange congestion issue. Segment IV of Bush (IH 35E to ill 635) now has all construction contracts awarded and right-of-way
acquisition is 99% complete. A public hearing on the East Extension (SH 78 to ill 30) has been set for June 24 in Garland, thus moving the alignment selection process forward. She updated
the group on the DNT/121 interchange progress, noting traffic flow will be moved to accommodate additional construction. Scheduled completion is now summer 2004. NTTA has awarded a bid
for installation of a northbound auxiliary lane at DNT and ill 635 to address some of the congestion issues at that location. A brief update was provided on the Trinity project, noting
NTTA is reviewing the impacts of the 'hybrid' alternative on regional air quality and congestion. ,Additional updated toll feasibility studies are also being conducted to evaluate the
impact of C:mydocumems'il50203dnncmins.doc
DRMC Executive Committee Minutes 05-02-03 PageS shortened toll segments and revised connections to freeways and arterial streets. Jay Nelson noted the Trinity project remains a key to
other radial elements for mobility in the Dallas area. Discussion indicated TxDOT has not changed its position that this roadway must address capacity requirements for the canyon /mixmaster
area. Grady Smithey also indicated his perception the roadway is a major issue for the southern Dallas area and a decision should be reached as soon as possible on the roadway. Katie
provided updates on NTTA evaluation of express lanes for various regional projects, an upgrade in NTTA bond ratings by Fitch from stable to positive, and continued work with DFW Airport
to tolltag use. The report also noted over 686,000 toll tags now in use. DART President Gary Thomas distributed his monthly report and reviewed several ofthe key items. HOV use reflected
a 2.8% increase over April 2002, such numbers being the first increase in several months. Charts in the report reflect peak period violation rates all comparable with national norms,
showing a high of 4.4% on 135E and a low of2.5% on LBJ. Peak hour occupancy rates indicate a high of 3.07 on the 1-30 HOV, and a low of 2.14 on the LBJ HOV. Gary noted DART had presented
to TxDOT, Irving, and property owners, an alternative that places the light rail transit (LRT) between the westbound main lanes and frontage road along SH 114 between Tom BraniffParkway
and Rochelle Blvd. The report also updated the group on various HOV lane projects, including the final design for the US 75 Reversible HOV lane project from Midpark Blvd. to Renner Rd.
Mayor Slagel also commented on the continuing issue for the HOV design, comparing barrier separated with open lanes. DART continues to work with the City of Dallas to improve LRT in
downtown Dallas considering signal priority in the West End area." Gary called the group's attention to a new section in the monthly report that reflects 'rail transit and economic development.'
This section highlights the impact and actions associated with LRT as the system expands and matures. TxDOT Dallas District Engineer Jay Nelson distributed handouts and discussed several
TxDOT items. He noted TxDOT has published revised draft access management rules for review by interested parties. James McCarley noted these draft rules were provided in the DRMC packet
and encouraged DRMC members to make sure appropriate staff personnel reviewed the draft rules and provided any appropriate comments to TxDOT. There has been some discussion on the section
of the draft rules that deal with the TxDOT approval process for local government access management rules. Jay noted the continued emphasis by the TTC on Tollway expansion, citing the
recent statement that the Grand Parkway in Houston will be a Tollway and the extension ofUS 183 in the Central Texas area. He called attention to the Texas Highway Construction Report,
showing the Dallas District with 122 projects under contract for over $1.2 billion. He also noted the House number, citing 169 projects underway there also for over $1.2 billion. He
reviewed the lettings for May, with a little over $4 million for the District for four projects. He complimented Matt MacGregor for continued efforts on the LBJ project, with a public
hearing set for June 5 for the western segment of the LBJ improvements. Jay reviewed several complemented projects, including FM 407 in Denton County from IH 35W to SM 1830. Responding
to the question from Mayor Slagel on the HOV study, Jay indicated preliminary results will soon be available and he will discuss them with the Mayor. Michael Morris, Director of Transportation
for the North Central Texas Council of Governments, distributed his top ten report for the month. He noted the NCT/COG 2003-2007 Strategic Plan, including the transportation elements,
would be presented to the COG Executive Committee next week with a formal public presentation at the NCT/COG annual meeting on June 6. He then reviewed recent public meetings conducted
on the 2004-2006 Transportation Improvement Program with over $2.8 billion in projects under review. An outline was presented on the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
schedule for the 8-hour standard, with final EPA designations set for April 2004. Work continues to move the LBJ managed lanes project to design through efforts of various agencies.
He updated the group on the partnership program as proposed by the RTC to the TTC, including the three elements of raillrolllHOV, raillHOV, and air quality. Michael reported he was encouraged
by the TxDOT effort to develop a Metropolitan Mobility Plan that would include performance based allocation of funds to urban areas, thus addressing the issue of congestion rather than
simply a project. He reviewed the RTC position on the SHARE program in the US Congress, hopefully yielding at least 95% return of federal fuel tax dollars to Texas. An attachment to
his handout also evaluated speed surveys to show how the reduction in speed limits for the air quality issue has been accepted. He noted the data reveals general acceptance although
additional enforcement may be necessary in some areas. A summary was also provided on progress of the AirCheck Texas Repair and Replacement Assistance Program 􀁃􀀺􀁭􀁹􀁤􀁯􀁣􀁵􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁳􀁾􀀵􀀰􀀲􀀰􀀳􀁤
􀁲􀁭􀁣􀁭􀁩􀁮􀁳􀀢􀁤􀁯􀁣 . i . )
􀁊􀀮􀁩􀁬􀀢􀀭􀀧􀁾􀁃 Exedutive Co:mnittee Minutes 05-02-03 Page 6 administered by COG for the four county area. He noted five new counties would be added effective May 1 to reflect the
expansion ofthe inspection and maintenance program to those counties. He reminded the group that 10% of the vehicles are estimated to cause over 50% of the emission problem. Since October
28, 2002, over 6150 calls have been received on the program, with 2,060 applicants, 1,379 vehicles diagnosed and repaired, and 43 vehicles retired or replaced. Total average repair cost
is $469. Judge Harris requested consent of the Executive Committee to move the time of the June 6 meeting to 9 AM that day in lieu of 11 :45 AM. This change is to avoid a conflict with
the annual NCT/COG meeting scheduled that day. There were no objections. Time being expired, the meeting was adjourned at 1:35 PM. Grady Smithey, Secretary C:mydocuments\050203dnncmins.doc
9
DART UPDATE DART UPDATE • Dallas: PS&E as well as parcel maps and descriptions are being fmalized for widening, reconstruction and other improvements along Hampton Road from Fort Worth
Avenue to US 67. Construction letting is anticipated during FY 2004. • Dallas: PS&E as well as parcel maps and descriptions are being finalized for widening, reconstruction and other
improvements for Mockingbird Lane and Harry Hines Blvd. Interchange. Construction letting is anticipated during FY 2004. • DaUas: PS&E as well as parcel maps and descriptions are being
fmalized for widening, reconstruction and other improvements for the intersection of Jupiter Road at Northwest Highway. Construction letting is anticipated during FY 2004. • Dallas:
PS&E as well as parcel maps and descriptions are being fmalized for widening, reconstruction and other improvements for the intersection of Plano Road at Northwest Highway. Construction
letting is anticipated during FY 2004. • Dallas: Construction activities for widening and reconstruction of South Central Boulevard (SH310) from Loop 12 to Overton Boulevard are 60%
complete. Estimated completion is June 2003. • Dallas: DART has identified several street and intersection capacity improvements as part of the SE-I LRT project in conjunctionwith the R. B. Cullum Street grade crossing. As agreed. the proposed improvements will be incorporated to an existing $5.5M PASS project in the vicinity of Fair Park (SH 3521Parry Avenue
from Haskell to Second Ave.). TxDOT will evaluate to see if this adjustment to the funding can be accomplished. • Dallas: Preparation of preliminary schematics and conceptual plans for
grade separation of Northwest Highway at Luna Road is underway by TxDOT as part of widening and reconstruction of Luna Road from Royal Lane to Spur 348. Garland: PS&E as well as parcel
maps and descriptions are being finalized for widening, reconstruction and other improvements of Forest Lane from Plano Road to Oarland Road. Construction letting is anticipated during
FY 2004. • Garland: PS&E E as well as parcel maps and descriptions are being finalized for widening, reconstruction and other improvements of Oarland Road from 1-635 to Forest Lane.
Construction letting is anticipated during FY 2004. Garland: PS&E as well as parcel maps and descriptions are being finalized for widening, reconstruction and other improvements for
Plano Road from Buckingham Road to Forest Lane. Construction letting is anticipated during FY 2004. • Irving: DART is currently working with the City of Irving to address closure of
Irby Road. This issue will be presented to the Irving City Council on May 5, 2003. Total estimated cost is approximately $30 million for the proposed 2!4 mile grade separation of Trinity
Railway Express (TRE) from east ofStory Road to west of Belt Line RoadConstruction showing columns of the future Direct Connector HOY lane at the 1·635/US 75 Interchanee ....'""'--::'c
􀀧􀁾􀀧 2\ 1:29PG 􀀻􀀺􀀻􀀴􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁦􀀻 . HOY LaDe Operations Personnel conducting Incident Management activities • A new bridge across the Elm Fork of the Trinity River will be constnlcted
on the TRE Corridor in the cities of Dallas and Irving. The new bridge will be constructed adjacenlto an existing bridge. The project includes new bridge construction, replacement of
the wooden approaches to the existing bridge and the addition of double track capability between the bridge and Wildwood Road to the west and through Regal Row to the east. Transportation
Svstem Manar.ment (TSM) • DART is assessing the potential closure ofNorwood Road crossing with the Trinity Railway Express in the City of Dallas. Preparation of construction documents
for improvements to address LRT/vehicuiar operations by enhancing advanced pavement markings and signing are underway. • Construction of improvements at Northwest Highway at Plaza will
commence following utility relocation by the City ofGarland. • Intersection improvements and traffic signal installation at Archerwood Street and Parker Road in Plano are underway. Constnlction
of improvements (brick-paved sidewalk, bus pads and shelters) on Malcolm X Blvd (peabody to Pennsylvania) is expected to bC completed by May 2003. • Work on the off-street, enhllnced
shelter improvements at Malcolm X at Southland is expected to start by Summer 2003. Competitive bids are currently being solicited. • Installation of illumination poles for the parldng
lot is the only remaining item at the Addison Park and Ride facility. The poles and light assemblies have been procured and will be installed this month. Construction of the parldng
lot expansion and bus driveway improvements has been completed. • City of Dallas comments on the plans for Elm Street Reconstruction were incorporated and sent for final review. A formal
draft presentation was prepared to share with interested stakeholders. Project completion has been extended to September 2003. • DART, The "1''' and Dallas & Fort Worth District offices
of TxDOT are planning to install more than one hundred new guide/trailblazer signs on ill 30, SH 183, SH 360, SH 121, Loop 820, ill 35W and SH 287 and other major arterials leading to
six TRE stations in Dallas, Irving, Arlington, Hurst, Richland Hill and Fort Worth. Transit PASS The Principal Arterial Street SysteIll (Transit PASS) is a $90 million program funded
by DART, TxDOT, Dallas County, Collin County and eligible DART member cities. Several projects in Addison, Carrollton, Dallas, Farmers Branch, Plano and Richardson have been completed.
• Dallas: Project development, engineering, right-of-way acquisition and construction are in various stages of completion for more than 40 capacity improvements at intersections along
Loop 12 from Luna Road to Buckner Boulevard. Expected completion is FY 2002-2005. Dallas: DART and TxDOT are in the process of executing an Advanced Funding Agreement for widening, reconstruction
and other improvements in the vicinity of MocJcingbird Lane. Lemmon Avenue and Airdrome Drive. ROW acquisition is nearing completion. Expected letting is June 2003. Dallas: DART and
TxDOT are in the process of executing an Advanced Funding Agreement for widening, reconstruction and other improvements along Lemmon Avenue from Inwood Road to Oak Lawn Avenue. ROW acquisition
is nearing completiolL Expected construction letting is June 2003. Dallas: DART and TxDOT are in the process of 􀁥􀁸􀁥􀁣􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧 an Advanced Funding Agreement for widening, reconstruction
and other impro.vements along Lemmon Avenue from Bluffview Lane to Airdrome Drive. ROW acquisition is nearing completion. Expected construction letting is June 2003. • DlIlJas: DART
and TxDOT are in the process of executing an Advanced Funding Agreement for widening, reconstruction and other improvements for the intersection of Mockingbird Lane at Inwood Road. ROW
acquisition is nearing completion. Expected construction letting is June 2003. 0-PageJ DAItT-MobUJty PrtJgruu 􀁄􀁥􀁈􀁊􀁱􀁰􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀧􀀭 51212(J(J3 Pug." D..fRT􀁾 Mobllily Proll'UII""
Dn1.loplflen' -5nnOOJ
􀁾􀀭􀀧 DART UPDATE DART UPDATE HOV Transitwavs • The 1-30, I·35E, 1-635 and I·35FJUS 67 HOV lanes carried an average of 104,800 weekday passengers during April 2003. This represents
a 2.8% increase over April 2002. • Peak period violation rates for the Dallas area HOV lanes are shown below. I I Peak Period Violalion Rates -April 2003 0.1 • Last month, DART presented
an alternative that places the LRT between the westbound main lanes and frontage road along SH 114, between Tom Braniff Parkway and Rochelle Blvd., to TxDOT, City of Irving and property
owners. Preparation of schematics for widening SH 114 from SH l83/Loop 12 to SH 121 for main lanes, frontage roads and HOV lanes are ongoing. • This month, DART will present alternative
plans for the widening and reconstruction of I-35E at President George Bush Turnpike (PGBT) to accommodate 2 permanent reversible HOV lanes, an HOV "1''' ramp and Dickerson Blvd. overpass
to TxDOT, City of Carrollton, NTfA and property owners. PlalUled facility will provide the most operationally feasible directional HOV access between I-35E and the PGBT service roads,
and the new DART Transit Station. • Final design for the US 75 Reversible HOV lane project, from Midpark Blvd. to Rermer Rd., started last month following the approval of schematics
by FHWA and TxDOT-Austin. TxDOT comments on the EA document are being incorporated. Expected construction letting is 2004. • The East Corridor MIS Study Team is completing final travel
demand model runs and the detailed evaluation of alternatives, and will be developing recommendations with the Agency Work Group (AWG) this spring for Policy Advisory Committee (PAC)
consideration. • TxDOT is pursuing approval to use Exclusive Development Agreement (EDA) for a design-build type ofcontract for the West Section ofthe LBJ Corridor. Public Hearing is
now plarmed for end of May 2003. Work on HOV access scenarios at Shiloh and SH 78 is ongoing. Peak hour vehicle occupancy rates on all the HOV lanes are shown below. Peak Hour Occupancy
Rates -April 2003 • Since DART began light rail operation in 1997, major development has occurred within rail corridors totaling $1.2 billion of investment. In a recent study by the
University of North Texas, Drs. Bernard Weinstein and Terry Clower, found that retail, residential and office property values next to DART LRT stations increased more compared to other
properties. This study can be found at www.dart.org. DART has been wodcing with the member cities regarding the highest and best use of properties' around and adjacent to transit facilities.
DART also meets with developers to encourage transit oriented developments that encourage ridership as well as enhance the neighborhoods. DART encourages member cities and developers
to incorporate building orientation, setbacks, and pedestrianlbicycle linkages from the transit facilities to the development and beyond. • Many DART member cities have developed or
are in the process of developing plans and ordinances for development around and adjacent to DART facilities. The The cities of Plano, Garland, Richardson, Farmers Branch. Irving, Carrollton,
Addison and Dallas have some level of planning to complement light rail that is in place or plarmed. • The NW-IA line section (Victory Station) begins at Houston Street and ends near
Turtle Creek. It consists of relocating a portion of the existing Trinity Railway Express (TRE) mainlines, constructing approximately 7,700 feet ofLRT guideway, 6 new bridges and constructing
the Victory Station (a joint TRE and LRT facility). The station will include a pedestrian plaza and walkway to serve the adjacent American Airlines Center (AAC). TRE partial service
with a temporary platform to the AAC began on July 28,2001. Full LRT and TRE service is anticipated by 2005. Intelligent Transportation Systems flTS) DART is working with the City of
Dallas to improve LRT operations in downtown Dallas. DART has asked City of Dallas to simulate an initial signal priority request in the West End area to include Houston, Record and
Market Streets for the the extension to the American Airlines Center. • The evaluation report for the DARTPersonalized Public Transit Operational Test will be finalized this month. Results
suggest that limitations in service during the operational test period may have affected the overall performance of the project and that further research may be needed to reach a conclusion
on this innovative concept. This report will be posted at www.fbwa.dot.gov soon. • DART stakeholders and NCTCOG are reviewing the fina1 DART ITS Plan. Comments from stakeholders are
still being accepted and incorporated. • City of Dallas has granted DART a trial period to reduce headway to less than 10 minutes to investigate any LRT impact on the city surface street
system. DART is evaluating the best course of action with the City of Dallas for acquiring permanent LRT headway reduction along the North Central Corridor. • Southwest Research Institute
(SWRI) has started the DaiTrans system design by looking at software portability within ihe state. This process will make it easy to share software designed for the Dallas area with
other cities in the state with similar ITS needs. Actual design of the DaiTrans project will start this summer. • DART has developed a plan that encourages development of a common, integrated
passenger information system for all TRE stations. This project was submitted to NCTCOG for CMAQ funding. Once funding is approved, DART will initiate the design and implementation process.
• NCTCOG is wodcing with its partners to collect the local match for a high-level communication network design. Software will be ready in June to upgrade existing interface for the Center-to-Center
infrastructure. As a result, the region will migrate to a new protocol for data exchange. Rail Transit and Economic Development • Project development has been initiated to implement
a barrier-separated reversible HOV lane in the median ofl-30 (Old Turnpike), west ofl-35E. As part of the project, TxDOT has issued a contract for the design ofa barrier-separated reversible
HOV lane within the Loop1211-30 Interchange area. 􀀱􀁾􀀵 1·35E/US 67 1-635 1-35EIUS 67 4.4% 1-35E 1·35E )·30 1·30 3.07 o I"""....... r-.. T ",..." 4 􀁾,., g 2 􀁾"8 o 0.08 u􀁾0.06 c .g
.g 0.04 ;; 0.02 • --Pallel DART· Mob/lit, I'rqgrllM$ Dne/op.enl-5I1I2DOJ PII8,2 O.fRT· MD/>111Jj/Progo... 0,..1_,.,-snnOOJ
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 06-06-03 AGENDA ITEM IV UPDATEffiISCUSSION DRMC POLICY ISSUES lS 'Jj
􀁬􀁩􀁩􀁾􀁉􀀢􀁟􀁊􀁴􀁩􀀬􀁩􀁟􀁉􀀺􀁩􀁕􀀶 it_ill'i,i. 15:40.JUN 06} 2003 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 *45553 PAGE: 1/9 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages: Description
: STEVE CHUTCHIAN TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837 Friday, Jun 6, 2003 03:39PM 9DART Board Agenda's Hello!!! Attached are the DART Board Aqenda's for Tuesday, June 10, 2003. Please call
if you have any questions. Thanks, Carol Gideon DART Government Relations 214-749-3487 cqideon@dart.orq From: FaxNumber: Phone Number Carol Gideon 2147493676 DTMF (214)
_&;A&iUij.I,.! i.aiili.i... IlilItlWi:lJi.J,i, 15:40 JUN 06, 2003 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #45553 PAGE: 2/9 Quorum =4 Administrative Committee Meeting Tuesday, June 10,2003, 1:00
p.m. -2:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeeting Time { 1 hour and 15 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: May 13, 2003 2. Approval
ofQuarterly Disclosure Update (Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary){ 5 minutes J 3. Approval of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Supplemental Agreement for the Cities ofGrand Prairie and Mesquite
(Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) {5 minutesJ 4. Initiation ofLitigation Against Jose M. Lopez (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) { 5 minutesJ 5. Initiation of Litigation Against Edwin D. McCoy (Mark
EnochIRocky Angle) {5 minutesJ 6. Initiation of Litigation Against Clarence E. Sanders (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) {5 minutes J 7. +Initiation of Litigation Against Jennifer Marie Nedzel
(Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) {15 minutesJ 8. +Authorization to Initiate Litigation Against the Performance Bond Sureties on Track Installation Contract for the Buildout, Contract C-99000077;
and on NW-IA Line Section Project, Contract C-I003853-1 (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) { 10 minutes J 9. +Disputed Terms of Severance Agreement with Former General Counsel (Mark Enoch/Rocky
Angle) { 20 minutesJ 10. FY03 Voluntary Enhanced Early Retirement Program (Mark Enoch/Ben Gomez) {15 minutesJ 11. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 12. Adjournment +Same Night Item
1<Briefing Item The Administrative Committee may go into Cwsed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, and consuliation with Attorneyfor any legal issues, or under
Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Administrative Committee
is July 8,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,
48 hours in advance. Chair -Mark Enoch Vice Chair -TerriAdkisson Memhers -Angie Chen Button, Linda Koop, Ray Noah, Ricnard Watkins andFaxe Wilkms StaffLiaison -Sharon Leary, Ben Gomez
and RockyAngle (Interim) 610A 6/6/03 -3:38 PM
_aU44')$"'" Itil••t¥.fi,i,"WWUS i.iii.i,u 15:41 JUN 06, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 *45553 PAGE: 3/9 Quorum = 10 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: 2. Public Comments Dallas
Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, June 10,2003 -Board Room 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 May 27, 2003 Consent Items: 3. Local Assistance Program
(LAP)/Congestion Management System (CMS) Programming Request for the City of Carrollton (Linda KooplDoug Allen) 4. Contract Modification for Preliminary EnvironmentallEnvironmental Impact
Statement for the Northwest Corridor (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 5. Contract Modification to Purchase 20 Additional Light Rail Vehicles (LRVs) (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) Individual Items:
6. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcels NC326E and NC3-27E Required for Line Section North Central-3 (NC-3) and Authorize Eminent
Domain Proceedings if Necessary (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) 7. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcel NW2-1 for the Northwest Corridor
Line Section Northwest-2 (NW-2) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings if Necessary (Faye WilkinslTim McKay) 8. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize
the Acquisition ofParcels Required for the Northwest Rail Operating Facility (NWROF) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings ifNecessary (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) 9. +Initiation of Litigation
Against Jennifer Marie Nedzel (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) 10. +Authorization to Initiate Litigation Against the Performance Bond Sureties on Track Installation Contract for the Buildout,
Contract C-99000077; and on NW-IA Line Section Project, Contract C-I003853-1 (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) 11. +Disputed Terms ofSeverance Agreement with Former General Counsel (Mark EnochIRocky
Angle) 12. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 13. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. Policy 14. Modification
Modification to DART Board Policy 1.06, Substance Abuse Program (Mark Enoch/Ben Gomez) Other Items: 15. Officer Reports 16. Chair Report 17. General Counsel's Report 18. President/Executive
Director's Report 19. Communications and Public Comments 20. Adjournment 610B 6/6/03 -3:38 PM
􀀮􀁾􀁊􀂥􀁩􀀧􀁡􀁩􀀧􀀲􀂥􀁩􀀮􀁬􀁩􀀧 ii_ill.i.l. li.'iitiijlli••It 15:41 JUN 06, 2003 ID: DART +Same Night Item * Briefmg Item TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 *45553 PAGE: 4/9 Quorum = 10 The Board
ofDirectors may go into QosedSession under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.071 for Real Estate issues,
or under Section 551.074 for Personnel mntters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe DARTBoard is June 24, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible.
For accomnwdations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. 610B 2 6/6/03 -3:38 PM
_tIM"J;••'· 15:42 JUN 06, 2003 10: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 REVISED #45553 PAGE: 5/9 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, JWle
10, 2003 -Conference Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 GeneraL Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: May 27,2003 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent Items:
[ 5 minutesJ 3. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion Management System (CMS) Programming Request for the City of Carrollton (Linda KooplDoug Allen) 4. Contract Modification for
Preliminary Environmental/Environmental Impact Statement for the Northwest Corridor (Linda KooplDoug Allen) 5. Contract Modification to Purchase 20 Additional Light Rail Vehicles (LRVs)
(Faye WilkinslTim McKay) Individual Items: [ 2 hours and 25 minutes J 6. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcels NC3-26E and NC3-27E
Required for Line Section North Central-3 (NC-3) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings ifNecessary (Faye WilkinslTim McKay) [ 5 minutes J 7. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just
Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcel NW2-1 for the Northwest Corridor Line Section Northwest-2 (NW-2) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings ifNecessary (Faye Wilkins/Tim
McKay) [ 5 minutes J 8. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcels Required for the Northwest Rail Operating Facility (NWROF) and
Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings if Necessary (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) [ 5 minutes J 9. +Initiation of Litigation Against Jennifer Marie Nedzel (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) [ 15 minutesJ
10. +Authorization to Initiate Litigation Against the Performance Bond Sureties on Track Installation Contract for the Buildout, Contract C-99000077; and on NW-IA Line Section Project,
Contract C-1003853-1 (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) [ 5 minutes J 11. +Disputed Terms of Severance Agreement with Former General Counsel (Mark EnochIRocky Angle) [ 20 minutesJ 12. *FY 2004
Budget Planning (Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) [ 1 hour J 13. "Direct Report Mid-Year Performance Reviews; PresidentlExecutive Director, Director of Board Support, and Interim General Counsel.
(Robert Pope) [ 30 minutesJ Policy 14. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. Other Items: 15. Adjournment 610C 6/6/03 -3:38 PM
-5445144••1' ,'!4,iC•••U 15:42,JUN 06, 2003 ID: DART +Same Night Item *Briefing Item TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 REVISED *45553 PAGE: 6/9 Quorom=8 The Board of Directors 􀁭􀁾 go into Closed
Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551. 074for
Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is June 24,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations
for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is availahle. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 610C 2 6/6/03 -3:38 PM
_ltg'SIlAt.." 􀁬􀁩􀁪􀁾􀀮􀀬􀁇􀁗􀀱􀀮􀀬􀁉􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁬􀀺􀁊􀁵􀁡 iii_ili'i,il . 15:42· JUN 06, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #45553 PAGE: 7/9 Quorum=4 Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee
Meeting Tuesday, June 10,2003, 12:00 p.m. -1:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -lst Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [50 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes:
May 13, 2003 2. Authorization to Delegate Contracting Officer Authority (Hue1on Harrison/Ken Mercer) [5 minutesJ 3. *Review of Solicitations with Disadvantaged, Minority, Women-Owned
Business Enterprise (DMWBE) Goals of Less than Ten Percent (Hue1on Harrison/Gloria Dixon) [5minutes J 4. *Diversity and Economic Opportunity Department Functions (Hue1on Harrison/Gloria
Dixon) [ 20 minutesJ 5. *Status ofthe Texas Unified Certification Program (TUCP) (Hue1on Harrison/Gloria Dixon) [15 minutes J 6. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 7. Adjournment +Same
Night Item •Briefing Item The Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, for consultation with Attorney for
any legal issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Diversity Economic Opportunity Conunittee is July 8,1003. This facility is wheelchair accessible.
For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 114-749-1543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Huelon Harrison Vree Chair
-Linda Koop Members -Angie Chen Button, Ranaall Chrisman, Joyce Foreman, Beatrice Martinez and William Velasco StaffLiaison -Gloria Dixon and Ken Mercer 610D 6/6/03 -3:38 PM
_Miliia••,· liill"¥;lIi,iMWWUd MaiMli.ii IlilfdSiilJi.'l,.I, 15:43, JUN 06, 2003 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622Quorum = 4 *45553 PAGE: 8/9 Operations Committee Meeting Tuesday, June
10,2003, 2:30 p.m. -4:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time {I hour J 1. Approval of Minutes: May 13,2003 2. Restated
Interlocal Cooperative Agreement for Trinity Railway Express (TRE) Service with the Fort Worth Transportation Authority and Financial Plan Amendment (Richard Watkins/Kathy Waters) {20
minutes J 3. Declaration ofa Tract ofTrinity Railway Express (TRE) DFW Mainline Right-of-Way Adjacent to Medical Center Drive as Surplus Property by the Transit Authorities and Authorization
to Sell to the University ofTexas Board ofRegents (Richard Watkins/Kathy Waters) { 5 minutes J 4. Contract Modification for Light Rail Vehicle Cleaning (Richard WatkinslVictor Burke)
{5 minutes J 5. *Review of Operator Run Cuts (Richard WatkinslVictor Burke) {20 minutes J 6. *Paratransit Services Update (Richard WatkinslVictor Burke) {10 minutes J 7. Identification
ofFuture Agenda Items 8. Adjournment +Same Night Item "'Briefing Item The Operations Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation
with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551. 074 for Personnel motters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda.
The next meeting ofthe Operations Committee is July 8, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please
contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Richard Watkins Vice Chair -William Velasco Members -Joyce Foreman, Huelon Harrison, Beatrice Martinez, Ray Noah
and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison • Victor Burke and Kathy Waters 6100 6/6/03 -3:38 PM
.&;;;;i'i¥i••i; 􀀱􀀱􀀱􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀻􀀴􀀬􀁩􀀬••􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁪􀁩􀁡 itaill.,.u , 􀁦􀀵􀁾􀀴􀀳􀀬 JUN 06, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 *45553 PAGE: 9/9 Legislative Ad Hoc Committee Meeting Wednesday,
June 11, 2003, 2:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 1. Approval of Minutes: March 18, 2003 2, *Review ofDART Legislative Agenda (Jesse Oliver/Sue
Bauman) 3. *Review of Other Legislation (Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) 4. Identification of Future Agenda Items 5. Adjournment itBriefmg Item The Legislative Ad Hoc Committee may go into
Closed Session llnder the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation With Attorney for any legal issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. This facility is
wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair-Jesse
Oliver Members -MarkEnoch, Huelon Harrison, Linda Koop, and Robert Pope StaffLiaison -Sue Sue Bauman 61lL 6/6/03 -3:39 PM
TOWN OF ADDISON PO BOX 9010 ADDISON TX 75001-9010 http://www.ci.addison.tx.us FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET COMPANY: 0CTGo k> FROM--V 􀁦􀀧􀁑􀁾 DATE: FAX NUMBER: PIt 􀁾􀁴􀁜􀀼􀁄􀀭􀀮􀀳􀀰􀀧􀁺􀀮􀀮􀁾
PHONE NUMBER: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: SENDER'S PHONE NUMBER: 972-450-SENDER'S FAX NUMBER: 972-450-7043 o URGENT o F.Y.I. o PLEASE COMMENT/REPLY COMMENTS: 􀁾􀁖􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁜􀀺􀁓
􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁜􀁁􀁲􀁾
ATTACHMENT 1 REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY ,,, ,'--------,;;,,-,:􀀭􀀭􀀾􀀼􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀺 --􀁃􀁯􀁦􀁬􀁩􀀬􀀿􀀭􀁃􀁏􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁹 E-3 ,,, , ,, , ........􀁾􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 Tarrant coun1}' 􀁾 -_ Johnson
County ," Joshua ...... /........, t----,," " ,---' Clebume RAIL CORRIDORS ,,, " \ 􀁾 \.--... ------, ah.achie ----------'-\ 1 _ _, ,; "--... " , LEGEND -N { A/Northeast: E-3: Dallas
Area Rapid Transit: Piano/Alien/McKinney E-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: CarrolltonlThe Colony/Frisco Southeast: E-5: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Duncanville/Cedar Hill/Midlothian
E-6: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Dallas/Lancaster/Red OakIWaxahachie W-1: Union Pacific Mainline: Fort Worth/Dallas (includes Dorothy Spur) W-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Fort
Worth/CrowleylBurleson/JoshualCleburne W-2: Fort Worth & Western/Cotton Belt: Southwest Fort Worth/Tarrant County line _ Airports County Lines Rail Corridors Under Study Mobility 2025
Plan Update -Passenger Rail /:v Roadway .:. ,. Railroads , E"= East/URS Corporation W = West/Carter-Burgess, Inc. Map Revised: March 18, 2003 L0" ?(
TO: FROM: North Central Texas Council Of Governments County Judges and Mayors within Collin, DATE: Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, and Tarrant Counties Max W. Wells, Chair, DFW International
Airport Gyna Bivens-Mathis, Chair, Fort Worth Transportation Authority Robert W. Pope, Chair, Dallas Area Rapid Transit Charles Emery, Chair, Denton County Transportation Authority Jay
Nelson, P.E., District Engineer, TxDOT-Dalias Maribel Chavez, P. E., District Engineer, TxDOT-Fort Worth Michael Morris, P.E. Director of Transportation March 20, 2003 II '\ 􀁃􀁾􀁊 L'1[S(I
􀁪􀁜{􀁬􀁾 SUB,JECT: Regional Rail Corridor Study-Formation of Policy and Technical Committees This letter is to solicit your input regarding persons to serve on Policy and Technical
Committees of the Regional Rail Corridor Study. The Regional Transportation Council set aside $1 ,325,000 in technical planning funds to expedite transit improvements in the region.
The study encompasses corridors within Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, and Tarrant Counties. For your convenience, a map is included as Attachment 1. The Policy Committee will
consist of locally elected officials,district engineers, private sector leaders and transportation authority board members while the Technical Committee will consist of private and public
(e.g., local, regional, Stateand federal) transportation professionals. PleCise use Attachment 2 to provide North Central Texas Council of Government (NCTCOG) staff with your suggestions regarding persons to serve
on each of the committees. Weare reqIJestingadeadline of Friday, April 4, 2003 to receive your 􀁳􀁵􀁧􀁧􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁾 Given your location, there will be occasions where you wish to
make suggestions on more than one corridor. Existing committees will be used in the Trinity Railway Express (E-1 and W-3) and Denton County Corridors (E-2). By copy of this letter, NCTCOG
staff is also soliciting committee suggestions from your Executive Staff. \illbe\return faxsbouldbe directedtotbefollowing: 􀂧􀁾􀁲􀀹􀁀􀁲􀁡 C. 􀁍􀁃􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁹􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁐 PriricipalTransportation
Planner (817) 􀀶􀀴􀀨􀀩􀀭􀁾􀀰􀀲􀀸􀀨􀁦􀁡􀁸􀀩 Members of the two committees will serve for the duration of the study, which is estimated at 12 to 18 months. While staff supports the effort
through study oversight and travel demand forecasting, consultant assistance has been obtained for rail operations, planning/public participation, and engineering services. Should you
have any questions and/or comments on the above information, please call Barbara Maley or me al (817) 695-9240. 􀁾􀁾 BCM:cs Mic ael Morris, P.E. Attachments cc: County Administrators
and City Managers Jeffrey P. Fegan, Chief Executive Officer, DFW International Airport Gary Thomas, PresidenVExecutive Director, DART Richard Ruddell, PresidenVExecutive Director, FWTA
2002-03 UPWP Element 3.04 Project File 616 Six FlagsDrive, Centerpoint Two P. O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806@recycled paper http://www.dfwinfo.com
TEL NO: (214) 749-2747 ,.. : ff f·· 2003 ID: DART . . . . . .. *43359 PAGE: 4/7 Quorum=8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, April 22, 2003
-Conference Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: April 8, 2003 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will
be discussed at the Board meeting only. 4. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. ..., Consent Items: {5 minutesJ '5. Contract Modification to Building Management Services
at DART Headquarters 􀀨􀁁􀁾􀀮􀁄􀀩􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁥􀀭􀁍􀁡􀁲􀁫 Enoch/Ben Gomez) Individual Consideration Items: {I hour 15 minutesJ. tvf{o t.e 6. +Contract Modification for .construction
ofthe Northwest Corridor Line Section Northwest-IA....... 􀁾􀁊􀁌􀀮􀀵􀁔􀁾􀀭􀁴􀀺􀁲 (NW-IA) (Project Management-Faye Wilkinsffim McKay) {I 0 minutes J . . A-T !>7Y177d"V 7. *FY 2004 Budget
Planning (Administrative-Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) {20 minutesJ 􀀧􀀭􀀮􀁳􀁾 8. Approval of Financial Standards for FY 2004 Budget and Financial Plan ProcessV A-/7Jt:l-cl/􀁾 (Administrative-Mark
Enoch/Sharon Leary) {30 minutesJ Policy 9. *Policy on Shuttl'e Service from Non-Member Cities V (planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {I5 minutesJ 10. This item will be discussed at the Board
meeting only. Other Items: 11. Adjournment 'J\ +Same Night Item 'Briefmg Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation
with Attorney for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda.
The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is€!....3, 2000 This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please
contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. 422C.DOC 4118/03 -12:57 PM
􀁾 t.o ..􀁾 ...;-_m􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀱 􀁾􀀲􀀭􀁧􀁴 I [)A/􀀮􀀮􀀲􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁆􀁪􀁾􀁟 􀁾􀀩􀁾􀀮􀁳__=L_t!!􀀲􀀮􀁦􀀻􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁟􀀳􀂷􀁾􀁊􀀮􀀲􀁟􀁁􀀱􀀮􀁊􀁻􀀬􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀧􀀡􀁬􀀮􀀨􀀮􀁦􀁥􀁓􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁃􀁊􀀳􀀭􀀧􀀶􀀩
1""1.1 􀀮􀁾 __ {PA/t.).'lQ9-fL.A-tI!eJ E. 􀀧􀁦􀁦􀁥􀁾 􀁃􀁩􀁾􀁴􀁶􀀭􀁔􀀧􀁪􀁟-(f?cr:= 􀀿􀀭􀁾􀀲􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀧􀁊􀀧􀁦􀁓􀀬 gt. 􀁟􀀨􀀩􀁟􀁾 }5i3 1v J3&5 -(-􀁾􀁲􀁯􀀭 􀁾􀁃􀀭􀀨 􀁾
(2.. q) jl :3 4-2. ,SVJ􀀯􀁚􀁴􀁊􀁾􀁴􀁥􀀱􀁊􀀮 -:l jl-fo/ZT 􀁆􀁁􀀭􀁾 {'I/Fr (/4-. 􀁾􀀮 3 Ci,2.. 􀁾
SCALE IN FEET 3000 i 2000 BOOK PAGE 1075 1600 CONTINUED ON MAP 35 CONTINUED ON MAP 55 o II, 'I> ....,,.. 􀁾zoo OJ => Z􀁾Zou COPYRIGHT 1958, 2000 by MAPSCO, INC. -ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
." ..-," ..... " MAR 24 2003 -..-:.', Dallas Area Rapid Transit . SENT B'L:DART roY/COM REL. FAX Transmission ::.. ...-... 1 '. -".....• ...... -.J. From Carol Gideon, DART Gov. Relations
Date 􀀰􀀳􀁾􀀲􀀴􀀭􀀰􀀳 To The Honorable R. Scott Wheeler Time 12:00 p.m. Company Town of Addison FAX# 972-450·7043 Number of pages sent (including cover sheet) 11 HelloH! ....... '" Attached
you will find a letter that you will be receiving regarding several bills that could potentially affect DART. Please call Fred Pratt at 214-149-2538 should you have questions. Carol
Gideon DART Govemment Relations 214-.749-3487 214-749-3667 cgideon@dart.org TELEPHONE: (214) 749·3487 FAX: (214) 749-3667
SENT BY:DART G<:JV/COM REL. 3-24-3 DART GOV/COM REL..... 972 450 7043;# 2/11 Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Oollas. Texas 75266-0163 21./7.9·3278 March 24, 2003 The Honorable
R. Seett Wheeler Mayor City of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison,TX 75001·9010 Dt:ar Mayor Wheeler: As you are probably awue, two 􀁢􀁩􀁾 were filed last week ill Austin calling for the creation
of a regional mobility authority (RMA). 􀁅􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁾􀁥􀁤 for your review 􀁩􀁾 a copy of SO 1558 by Senator Kim Brimer and UR 1953 by Representative Steve Wuleus. ali well as a copy of
a letter sentby the County Judges of Dallas. TaJTant, CoJiin and Denton Counties to the bills' authors regarding the proposed legislation. Also enclosed is a copy of an article that
appeared in last Saturuy'sDallas Morning News regarding these two bills. While Senator Brimer's and Representative Wolenll' bills differ llignificantly from the initial drafts we were
able to review. sa 1558 still includes references to Chapter 452. Neither bill would dissolve any existing public transportation authority; however, references in SB l558 could be construed
t9 replace the DART Board of Directors with the newly created RMA BOllTd. 􀀢􀀮􀀺􀁴􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮iti y, t .. e bill's. language could be 􀁩􀁮􀁴􀁃􀁉􀁰􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁤 tp mean that rlle RMA could become
a omp pu 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀧rtaticn agency, providing transit services within DART's cunent ond , . 'e D T continues to seek clarification and will work with both Senator Rrimer ,',;;" and Repre
.en 􀁾􀁴􀁩 ,.,pl '. s to shure our concerns and we encourage you to do likewise, should you 􀀮􀀯􀀨􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀭 have any qucstlons or cems. 􀁁􀁤􀁤􀁩􀁴􀁪􀁏􀁮􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁙􀀮􀁽􀀧􀀭􀀺􀁾2459. a 64-page
􀁾􀁩􀁉􀁬􀀬 was tiled by Rql. Km.'lee. ChaimliUl or the House Transportation Committee, relating to the power,.; and duties of a regional mobility authority. It is much more comprehensive
in scope and will lequire a turther analysis (already \,wderway). We urge you to review that proposal as weU. During the last 20 years, DART has 5enied iU> 􀁴􀁨􀁾 regional mobility leader
through our partnership with our 13 member eitie.'Jl iI11d members ofour 􀀶􀁾 and federal delegation. While there 􀁩􀁾 always '[00111 for improvement and new ideas., vvC 􀁾􀁊􀁪􀁥􀁹􀁾
Jtl.!t􀁾􀁾 we have aU successfully planned aDaconstrUcte(l one'oftheJeadiDg transit 􀁾􀁹􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁭􀁳 in this country. As you know. the dialogue has been underway fot some time at the Metroplcx
Mayors 􀁾􀁮􀁤 Dallas Regional Mobility Coa1i11\')n reguMing regional mobility inside and outsi\k the DART service ar"a. DART will continue to lend this cfTort as it applies to transit,
􀁮􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁯􀁧􀁮􀁩􀁺􀁩􀁮􀁧 that discussions on regional mobility must be inclusive of all interebted parties. These discussions must take into account current and future transportation
conunitments,.growlh oftbe region, air quality issues. the overall transportation needs of the region (inclusive of the numerous ltansportation entities and partners), as welJ as our
t"deral funuing needs. Most importantly, the issues of governance and funding. if it ill. to be local funding, should he t"tlsolved at the local level tirst.
SENT BY:DART GOV/COM Ra. 3-24-3 12: 13 DART GOV/COM Ra..... 972 450 7043;# 3/11 The Honorable R. Scott Wheeler March 24.2003 Pagel Our experiences in WashinglQl1 lIDd Austin 􀁨􀁡􀁶􀁾
wught us that lawmakers are interested in listening to a united cOWt'tituency who will bring forth solutions. not only problems and concerns. We believe that working with you and others
in the region can result in a plan that better meets the needs of tht' entire region and reflects the success we have achieved as a transportation entity. To that end, we must continue
to work togeth"l to ensure that this regional mobility proposal reflects the vision ofthe leaders througboUlthe region. We will keep you advised of any developments on this 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁰􀁯􀁾􀁤
legislat.ion; however. should you have any additional questions. please feel free to contact me directly at my office (972.964-8801). Sincerely, Q¥1Jf+ Robert w. Pope Chair, DART Board
ofDirectors RWP/jp Enclosures cc: The Honorable Kim Brimer Texas Senate, DistricllO The Honorable Steve Wolens Texas Ho45C of Representatives, District 103 .County Judges DART Board
ofDirectors Gary C. Thomas, DAR'!' President/Executive Director Ron Whitehead, City Manager
SENT BY:DART GOV/COM REL. ; 3-24-3; 12:14; DART GOV/COM REL.... 972 450 7043;# 4/11 Sincerely, Man:h 12, 1003 Dear Senator Brimer: The Honorable Kim Brimer ' P.O. Box 12068 capitol Station
Austin, Texas 18711 . .,􀁾i ;i :r 􀁾 1 :, i: i􀁾 :, i 􀁾 :. l. II􀁾 􀁾 I 􀁾 it if H!.;, 􀁾 : il H"􀁾I We ate writing to let you know that we are very supportive of 􀁾 regionaf transportation
system. We are concemaJ, however, about any bill being drafted in 􀁴􀁨􀁩􀁾 legislative session that will create a regional transportation authority until we have had time to 􀁨􀁾 "regional"
discussions on this issue. . II r . i j • The prospect of creating;one regional transpo{tation authority W. obviously complex and wourd take time to flesh out the 􀁤􀁥􀁴􀁡􀁩􀁊􀁳􀁾 􀁉􀁾
may even be more prudent La 􀁡􀁾􀁤􀁲􀁥􀀵􀁓 this Issue when the legislatIve session concludes to ensure that all necessary 􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁩􀁥􀁾 are Involved and everyone has . rnput concerning
the authoritY, funding, structure, etc. We are iteady and willing to d;scuss any ideas with you, and we appreciate your efforts, on 'behalf of 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁩􀁐􀁥􀁯􀁰􀁬􀁥of our region. We are
all working toward a transit system that wllf 􀁉􀁭􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁾 mc:>bihty, 􀁤􀁥􀁾􀁢 the air, and affett citizens' lIVes in the most positiveway.. . 􀁩􀁾 .i We ask that you please keep us
involved in thIs process, and 􀁾 look forward to working with you ' in the future. Again, thank you for your 􀁤􀁥􀁤􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁾􀁮 and interest/itn bettering the lives of all Texans. 􀁾 .
􀀡􀁾 iiH!. Ij 11 ;: 􀀱􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 • j' . 􀀧􀁪􀁾􀀬 􀁾􀀭􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮 􀁾• I; 􀀬􀁾 . Miuy Hom H Tom Vandergriff Denton 􀁃􀁯􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁹 Judge ' Tarrant County Judge cc: Pallas area defegatiOn members
􀁄􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁾 County commIsSioners Court Dalll$ Mayor Laura MIller Ft. Worth MayOI' Kenneth Barr DART TheT NITA
SOO B't:DART GOV/tOM RB... ; 3-24-3 .Read Bill-HB 2953 -As Filed 12:14 DART GOV/COM RB....... 972 450 7043;# 5/11 Page 1 of2 Di11 Number: 'rX7 RRllI3 2953 Aut.hor; Wolens Piled: 03-14-2003
A an.I, '1'0 RF. F.N'1'T'l'T.F.n 1 AN ACT 2 􀁲􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁴􀀮􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀮 to 􀁴􀀺􀁨􀁴􀁾 􀁣􀁲􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁟􀁩􀁯􀁮 and 􀁰􀀨􀀩􀁷􀁥􀁲􀁾􀀻 uf a Ilu:!:'l:h Tr:xf.l::; rp.gi ontt.l 3 rnobllity allthority
. 4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE 􀁌􀁅􀁇􀁉􀁓􀁌􀁁􀁔􀁕􀁈􀁾 􀁏􀁾 􀁔􀁈􀁾 STATE UF 􀁾􀁅􀁘􀁁􀁓􀀺 5 SF,c'Y'T.ON ,. Suhr-hapter. A, Cha-ptcr 361., Tr.a.nsport.('Jtion Code, 6 is amended by adding Section
361,003'5 to read as follows: 7 􀀡􀀿􀀮􀂧􀀡􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀮 JE.iJ.,J!.Q.3 S. N.QB1'I:L'l',E:J.!:AS 􀁒􀁅􀁇􀀮􀁔􀁏􀁎􀁁􀁾􀁉 􀁍􀀹􀁾􀀱􀀱􀁘􀀧􀀡􀁾􀁘􀀭􀁁􀁙􀀮􀀧􀁊􀀱􀁩􀁑􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁲􀁸􀀮􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀮 8 J."-}
.. 'rht;l commisston. by orcie.:!:' may 􀁡􀁜􀀮􀁉􀀬􀁴􀀮􀁨􀁯􀀺􀁲􀀻􀀷􀀭􀁾 the 􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁟􀁾􀀮􀁴􀂷􀀵􀀮􀀼􀀧􀁉􀁌􀁾􀁦 􀁾 􀀹􀁦􀁾􀀹􀀮􀁩􀁑􀁧􀁁􀁊􀀮__.l!l2R.iJj,JY__􀁩􀀡􀁬􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀺􀁢􀀮􀁑􀀱􀀧􀁬􀁊􀀡􀁙􀁟..􀁴􀁊􀁊􀁾􀀡�
�􀀮􀁟􀀿􀀬􀁬􀁊􀀬􀀹􀁊􀁾􀁱􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁟􀁃􀀻􀀻􀀲􀀱􀁟􀁴􀁴􀁌􀁬􀀡 ....􀁐􀁾􀀩􀁊􀀬􀀮􀁟􀁧􀀬􀀮􀁬􀀺􀀺􀁩􀀮􀀧􀀮􀀮 .􀀮􀁊􀀩􀀮􀁾􀀡􀁴􀁾􀀹􀁊􀁨􀀮 1(} 􀀮􀁴􀁵􀀬􀀺􀀨􀁾􀁾􀁬􀀮􀀧􀀮 􀁒􀁯􀁣􀁫􀁷􀁾􀁬􀁬 􀁌􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁅􀀡􀀻􀁜􀀮􀀺􀁕􀁾
􀀮􀁲􀀺􀁮􀁾􀀮􀀡􀁬􀁬 _􀀧􀁩􀁬􀀩􀁕􀁬􀀡􀁊􀀢􀀮􀀡􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀮 11 l!?) The govez'ninq body of the 􀁾􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁌􀀡􀀡􀁬􀀮􀀹􀂣􀁩􀀬􀁬􀁩􀁴􀀺􀁙􀀮Ql!):Jlority u; 12 ·.Ci.__board g!__􀁧􀀮􀁾􀁲􀁾􀀹􀁴􀁱􀁾􀁟􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁟�
�􀁟􀁲􀁨􀁾􀀮 􀁣􀁯􀁴􀀺􀁊􀀺􀁬􀀮􀀡􀀡􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁑􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁟..􀁟􀀹􀀮􀀹􀁟􀁾􀁲􀀮􀁾..of. ear:h count.y in t.h,-: 13 :3·Ut.horit:y.. l;ha 􀁬􀀩􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀺􀁰􀁰􀀨􀀩􀁾􀁾r.. 􀁟􀁃􀀿􀀡􀀱􀁾 ..(j i.Tee:
􀁾􀀮􀁯􀁲􀀮􀀬 .V. 􀁴􀁬􀀱􀁾􀁊􀁉􀁾􀀹􀀮􀂧􀀮􀁴􀁟􀀮􀁐􀀮􀀹􀁐􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀱􀀮􀁊􀁃􀁉􀁜􀀱􀀮􀀡􀀿 14 􀀡􀁉􀀡􀁾􀁑􀁩􀀨􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁰􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁊..􀁴􀀺􀀮􀁹􀀧􀀮􀁪􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁾 ...􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁟􀁴􀀻􀀭􀁓􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁙 ... 􀁊􀀮􀀺􀁩􀁦􀀻􀀧􀀮􀁾�
�􀁾 ....􀁩􀀬􀁲􀁟􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀡􀀿􀁅􀀺􀀡􀁾􀀡􀀺 􀁩􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁾.. 􀁊􀁾􀀮􀀩 _.. !",!.i;l.;:s._g__􀁐􀀹􀀮􀁐􀀮􀁾􀁬􀁾 t 􀀺􀁩􀀬􀀮􀀹􀀮􀀡􀀮􀁾 15 􀀹􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀡􀁬􀁜􀁏􀁲􀁥 tll<!..l!.. !?QO 􀀬􀁑􀁑􀁾􀁴􀀬􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁾
...􀁾􀁹􀁃􀀩􀁲􀁟􀁯􀁦􀁟.􀀮􀀡􀀺􀁨􀁾􀁴􀀬 􀀮􀁮􀁬􀁕􀀡􀁬􀁩􀁣􀁊􀁰􀀿􀁈􀀮􀁴􀀺􀁹􀀮􀁾􀁨􀀬􀁾􀁕􀁟..ClP'p"oi.n,t 1.6 􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁾􀁩􀁲􀁾􀀹􀀮􀁴􀁯􀁲 _ 􀁲􀁬􀀧􀁨􀁥􀁟􀀮􀁧􀁟􀀨􀀩􀁾􀀻􀀢􀀡􀀱􀀹􀀮􀁲􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀱􀀱􀁾􀀮􀀡􀀭􀀮􀁬􀀮􀀳
􀀮􀁾􀁯􀁩􀁮􀁴 one director wh,?__sha11 17 􀀡􀀿􀁓􀀡􀀮􀀡􀀺􀁙􀁑􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁌􀁴􀁾􀀱􀀡􀀿.. 􀁐􀀡􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀮􀁬􀀿􀁴􀁧􀀮􀁩􀀮􀁔􀀮􀁊􀁧 .. 9.f,f.},_r,:5·!!". of 􀁾􀁨􀁣 􀁨􀁏􀁾􀁊􀀻􀀢􀁱􀀬__...:J:J_..􀁴􀁊􀀺􀀮􀁉􀁾􀁕􀁉􀁬􀀺􀁵
􀁮􀁢􀁾􀁬􀀺􀂷 fJ_.f. 18 􀁾􀁌􀀡􀁐􀀵􀀺􀁁􀁬􀁝􀀬􀀱􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁧􀁬􀀡􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀹􀁅􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀡..s..􀁟􀁾􀀺􀁑􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁸􀁣􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁉􀀺􀁜 .. l.l'llnhrn:, t)'lc;_..􀁾􀁐􀀮􀁐􀀮􀁾􀀡􀀮􀁾􀁊􀁾 ..􀁃􀀻􀀹􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁟􀁉􀀺􀁊􀀺􀁪􀀬􀀮􀁾
􀁅􀀻􀀡􀀽􀁴􀁑􀀺􀁲􀀺􀀺􀀻 19 .shalJ ..􀁥􀁬􀀮􀁾􀀹􀀮􀁾􀀮 􀀨􀀩􀀮􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀮 􀁾􀀱􀀵􀁩􀁣􀁉􀁩 t. ionllL .. ct:i rectnr ... 􀁙􀁬􀀮􀀮􀁨􀁑􀀮􀁟􀀡􀁬􀁴􀁕􀀻􀀧􀀻􀀮􀁌􀀮􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀮􀁥􀁳􀁊􀁟􀀴􀀮􀁾􀁾__􀁾􀁉􀁌 ..Cl.
􀀵􀁾􀀹􀀮􀀱􀀬􀀡􀀮􀁲􀀡􀀮􀁾􀁙􀁟..:t.;l, 20 􀀡􀁐􀁾􀁟:t:enjJ:_q.:tY.._􀁯􀀮􀀮􀁌􀁾􀀡􀁬􀁟􀀹__􀁡􀁊􀀬􀁬􀀮􀁾􀁨􀁑􀀺􀀡􀀻􀁩􀀮􀁴􀀮􀂥􀀮􀀺 21 􀁩􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀩__􀁾􀁟􀁊􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀨􀁬􀁮􀁾􀁌􀀺􀁬􀁦􀁬􀁯􀁬􀀩􀁩􀁬􀁩􀀮􀁊􀀺􀀩􀀧􀀮􀀧􀁬􀁬􀁉
􀁾􀀡􀁬􀀨􀁬􀁔􀁾ty created under 􀀡􀀭􀀡􀀮􀁬􀁩􀁾􀀮 22 􀁾􀀬􀀿􀀺􀁃􀀻􀀺􀀮􀁕􀀬􀁾􀂷􀀮􀁲􀁾...􀁾􀀡􀀨􀁬􀁾 .􀀮􀀧􀀩􀁊􀁬􀁟􀁾􀂷􀁴􀀮􀀧􀁥 􀁦􀁬􀁃􀁬􀁗􀁬􀀧􀁯􀁴􀂷􀁾 <"It .) 􀁲􀂷􀁁􀀹􀁩􀁮􀁬􀁾􀁩􀁩􀀮􀀡􀀮􀁾􀁑􀁨􀁩􀁬􀁈􀀮􀁙..
?;!lql(.)rity 􀁣􀀮􀀮􀁲􀁾􀁃􀀡􀀭􀁴􀁲􀀺􀀧􀁊 2 􀀳􀁾􀀱􀀡􀀱􀀮􀀨􀁪􀁾􀁲 Sect).oT1 ) 61,: 00] <)c 􀀮􀀻􀀻􀁬􀁮􀁯􀁴􀀮􀁨􀁾􀁲 􀁬􀁾􀁷 􀀮􀁯􀁾....􀀮􀁴􀀮􀁨􀀻􀁩􀀮􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀻􀀭􀀮􀀮􀁴􀀻􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀵􀀬􀀮􀁥􀀮􀀮􀀺
.. 24. (d) ..􀁾􀀧􀁏􀀨􀀺􀀺􀁊 􀁓􀁉􀁏􀀧􀁧􀁲􀁮􀀮􀁾􀁔􀀱􀀮􀀱􀀺􀁟..9f.;:I 􀀮􀁨􀁩􀀮􀁧􀁬􀁬􀁗􀁩􀁊􀁾􀁏􀁊􀁟􀀺􀁜􀀻􀀮􀁟􀁨􀁾.. 􀁦􀁬􀀻􀁾􀁣 ..;>.li\le hi'ihwt.\Y 1 II ..... 􀀬􀀢􀀺􀁾 •• .!i_ 􀁬􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁉
_.t.. .1 _ _.. 􀀢􀂷􀀧􀁾􀁖􀀢􀀧􀁕􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁡􀀢􀁉􀁊􀀧􀀩􀀢􀁖􀀢􀀢􀁜􀁃􀀧􀂷􀂷􀁊 1,·S1"
.SENT BY:DART GOV/COM REL. ; 3-24-3 Read Hill-HO 2953 -As Filed 12:15 DART GOV/COM REL..... 972 450 7043;# 6/11 Pa.gc 2 of2 1 􀁾􀂧􀁾􀁾􀁭􀀮 .􀀮􀁳􀀩􀁾􀀢􀀳􀀭􀀡􀀡􀀮􀀮􀁊􀀬􀀺􀁾􀁡􀀹􀀮􀀿􀁟􀀢􀁩􀁮􀁴􀀹..{!.nd
..9UJ._of t:h<:: tC':T.ritOl"Y of the rr:gicmal 2 􀀡􀀡􀁩􀁱􀀡􀀺􀀡􀀮􀁕􀁾 􀀱􀀬􀁹􀀮􀀹􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁵􀀮􀀱􀀬􀁊􀁾􀀹􀀮􀁉􀀬􀁾􀀺􀁩􀀮􀁴􀀢􀁹􀀧..􀀬􀀭􀀮􀁛􀁬􀁾􀁥 􀁊􀀢􀀩􀁉􀀻􀁴􀁻􀁾􀁴 of 􀁉􀁨􀀺􀁲􀁉􀀿􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀺􀀺􀂷􀁯􀀮􀁔􀀻􀀻..!
?f ttlt=!;;n!th<:n:i..tY...􀁬􀀺􀀡􀁩􀀺􀁉􀀮􀁾 ..􀀢􀁴􀀺􀂷􀁢􀀮􀁾 3 􀁲􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁐􀁏􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁊􀀻􀀺􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀮􀀼􀀮􀀭􀁜􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀮􀁾􀁨􀁾􀁾􀁂􀁐􀁡􀁲􀁾􀀬􀀡􀀡􀀡􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁌 under 􀁓􀁥􀁣􀁾􀁾􀁩􀀢􀁑􀁬􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀿􀀻􀁬􀁟􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁬􀀮�
�􀁾􀁌􀁾􀁾􀁊􀀺􀁟􀁴􀀡􀁈􀀺􀁬 4 􀁃􀁏􀁉􀁬􀁝􀁾􀀺􀁩 􀀱􀀺􀀡􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀹􀁊􀀮􀁌􀁜􀀡􀀡􀁬􀁤􀂧􀀮􀁲􀀺... 12J. .OOtl.lJllt: onJ.x. if 􀁴􀁨􀁾 lJocu-d. 􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁾 into un 5 3grCCtn<:nt 􀁾􀁪􀀬􀀮􀁴􀁾􀁌􀁴􀁨􀁰􀀮􀀨􀀻􀀹􀁾�
�􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀡􀁾􀁑􀀮􀁉􀁽􀁟􀀮􀁵􀁮􀁤􀁥􀁲which t-he. reg it.>n<.\l !OO}21..li l:;:t 6 authori ty : 78 􀁾􀁾􀁮􀀬􀁌􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁴__􀁴􀁊􀁬􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀮􀁨􀁊􀀹􀀡􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀳􀀬􀁹􀁟􀀮􀀿􀁟􀁳􀀮􀁟􀀮􀁲􀀮􀁾􀁱􀁵􀁩􀁲􀁣􀀺􀁤
by 􀁓􀁥􀁣􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁮 222.102i or 9 (2) assumes each 􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁴􀁙􀀮 􀁾􀁳􀁳􀀺􀁩􀁧􀁮􀁣􀁤 t.o t.he 􀁾􀁯􀁔􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀱􀁩􀁳􀀺􀀻􀁩􀀨􀁭 by 10 Section 􀀳􀀶􀀲􀀮􀀰􀀰􀀴􀁾􀀮 11 􀁓􀁊􀁯􀀺􀁃􀀧􀁲􀁔􀁏􀁾 7..
'Phi.s Act. t.<:ikes effect irnmediC:l.tely if iL 􀁲􀁥􀁴􀀮􀀺􀁥􀁬􀁶􀁦􀀻􀀡􀁾 12 a vote of Lwo-thi:cds of all the members elected to each house. as 1.:3 provided by Section 39, Artit;le
III, Tex.aS 􀁃􀁵􀁵􀀺􀀺􀀻􀁌􀀱􀁌􀁬􀁾􀁌􀁬􀁯􀁉􀁌􀀮 I[ lh-i.::; 14 Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, 􀁴􀁨􀁩􀁾 15 Act 􀁌􀁤􀁘􀁥􀁳􀁾􀁛􀁛􀁥􀁣􀁬􀁟 Sepl-e.ttfbe.c l,
],003.2
· SENT BY:DART GOY/COM REL. ; 3-24-3 12: 15 DART GOY/COM REL.-t 972 450 7043;# 7/11 Read Bill 􀁾 sa 1558 -As Filed Bill NUllltH,:n:,: 'l'X'/8RSB 1558 Autl10Y: p.r.irncr Filp.n: 03-14-2003
A BILL '1'0 BB 'RNTITLED' 1 􀁾􀁾􀁃􀁔 :l. reluting '(:0 the cr.eation and tluwe:cs ot a north 'l'nx('l:; regional 1 mobility authority. '1 BE :l'f ENAC'I'F.D BY THE LECISLAl'UKB OF THE
􀁓􀀧􀁬􀀧􀁾􀁔􀁒 QF TRXAS: SECTION 1. Subchaptnr A, chapter J 61. 'l'('ansportat.; on Coc'}{::, 6 is aJtl£'..nded by adding section J61.003!:i to read as follows: 7 􀀱􀀿􀀮􀀢􀀧􀁬􀁾 •. 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁊􀀮
0035. NORT1LI;:XAS 􀁾􀁅􀁇􀁉􀁏􀁎􀁁􀁲􀀮 MOBILITY 􀁁􀁴􀁊􀁔􀁈􀁾􀀩􀁒􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀡􀀧􀀡􀁾 11 l-b) The governi.ng body 􀁯􀁾􀁟 the regio!1.!i1.JIlo.b.})J ty 3\lthority 􀀬􀁩􀀬􀀮􀁾 12 􀁡􀀮􀁾 board <:>f
􀁤􀀡􀁾􀁥􀁦􀁴􀁯􀁊􀀻􀀺􀀬􀁾 '. 'J'ho. 􀁃􀀺􀀺􀀼􀀿􀁉􀀡􀀱􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁩􀀬􀀡􀀻􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁥􀀮􀁲􀁳􀀮􀁾􀀹􀀮􀁾􀁮...9f F.!dch 􀁣􀁏􀁬􀁾􀁮􀁴􀀺􀁹 _􀁩􀀮􀁑􀀮􀀮􀁟􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁾􀀮 13 il'llthori t.Y 􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀮􀁬􀀺􀁬􀀮􀁾􀀺􀁉􀀺􀀮􀀡􀀮􀁟􀁾
􀁐􀁐􀁯i n􀀢􀀡􀀺􀁟􀀮􀀹􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾__9i.:t::e.ct.or.. .... I f 􀁟􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀡􀀡􀀡􀁑􀀻􀀿􀁟􀀡􀀻􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀢􀁊􀁾􀁰􀁾􀀡􀁑􀁉􀁊􀀮􀀺􀀳􀀮 14 􀁭􀁵􀀺􀁴􀀺􀀡􀁁􀂫􀀻􀀺􀁁􀁰􀁾􀁴􀁴􀁴􀀻􀁹__􀁾􀁟􀁧􀀬􀀮􀁁 ..􀁓􀀻􀁾􀀡􀀱􀀮􀀡􀁽�
�􀁴􀁹 ....1;􀁾 to 􀁾􀀼􀀻􀀱 .:j,.F.. 􀁓􀁵􀁑􀁾􀁊􀀺􀁾􀁣􀀼􀀺􀀺􀁟􀁌􀀮􀀮􀁢􀀹􀀡􀁌 􀁟􀀡􀀮􀀼􀁬􀁌􀀩􀁬􀀮􀁾􀀿􀁉 ... 􀁾􀀱􀀬􀀮 1J1)pul􀁤􀀮􀁾. .i I) [ I 21 1 ..., I ....'·' tr..."'t
SENT BY:DART GOV/COM REL. ; 3-24-3 Read Bill -SB 1558 􀁾 As Filed 12: 16 DART GOV/COM REL..... 972 450 7043;# 9/11 Page 3 of3 1 􀀱􀀲􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁑􀀮 A!.1...._the 􀁉􀁬􀁯􀁬􀀮􀁩􀀮􀀮􀁣􀁾􀀮􀁊􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁕􀀺􀁟�
�􀁴􀁊􀁾􀁥 􀁃􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁦􀀽..􀁴􀀻􀁟􀁩􀀮􀀺􀀹􀁾􀀮􀀺􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀮􀁊􀁟􀁌􀀮􀁬􀁾􀂧􀀮􀁾􀁟􀁴􀀮􀁨􀀢􀀡􀁾 <1 􀁭􀁡􀁪􀁮􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁌􀂣􀁦 􀀲􀁬􀀻􀀬􀁴􀁾􀁥 􀁶􀀹􀁴􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀻􀀻 􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀲􀀮􀁴􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁲􀀡􀀮􀁌􀁊􀀭􀁊􀁌􀁦􀁩􀀺􀁬􀀮􀀮􀁶􀀮􀁑􀁌􀀮
􀀹􀁴􀀮 􀁴􀁨􀁾 􀀮􀀺􀁐􀁬􀀺􀁑􀁉􀀿􀁯􀁾􀁩􀀡􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀹􀁟􀁉􀀡􀀮􀁉 ...l:=.hl:? nuLhority ro,3-Y :} 􀁮􀁱􀁾􀁩􀁬􀀡􀁬􀁐􀁯􀁳􀁥 a 􀁟􀁾􀁯􀁬􀁌􀁯􀁬􀀡􀁵 ;;" scglnent_ot a 􀁨􀁩􀁧􀀡􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁹􀀮􀁯􀁦 the 􀁦􀁲􀁥􀁥􀁾􀀮􀁴􀁾􀁵�
�􀁾􀀮􀁨􀀡􀀹􀁦􀁬􀁾􀀮􀀺􀁬􀁙 4 􀁳􀁹􀁳􀁴􀁾 􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁴 leads 􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀿􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁤 out.Ql 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁯􀁌􀁙 ot the 􀁌􀁾􀁧􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁬 SlTlO1?J.lJ.Jy_. 􀁾􀁾􀁊􀁴􀁨􀁯􀁤ty:_ 6 Lil_.).f u
􀁭􀁩􀀺􀁬􀀬􀁊􀀮􀁑􀀡􀀢􀁌􀀡􀁙􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀹􀁟􀁴􀁟􀁴􀀡􀁬􀁾􀀮􀀮􀁶􀁯􀁌􀁥􀁳 cast-art;! :i n 􀁦􀁾􀀺􀁶􀁃􀀿􀁉􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀡􀀽􀁨􀀮􀁾 7 Plo.QosJ1j.9_11,._. 􀁴􀁬􀁊􀁾 􀁟􀁾􀀺􀁬􀁬 t:ho_:I: 􀁩􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁟􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁹􀀧
....􀀬􀀰􀀡􀀢􀁜􀀱􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁧􀁾􀁟􀁤􀀮 􀁴􀁾􀁽􀀺 y 􀁲􀀮􀁯􀁯􀁦􀀡􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁜􀀮􀁲􀀻􀁾􀁆􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁟􀀹􀀮􀁉􀁬􀁟􀁓 􀁴􀁟􀁊􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁊􀁯􀁾 13 􀁯􀁦􀁟􀁾 ...to.ll syst·em provi.ded that;._.?-Lol1 is_. g.!1.Jy
..i.mposc::d 􀀢􀁾􀁮􀁯 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀂧􀁟􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀮􀀭􀀲􀀡􀀮 9 the 􀀻􀀡􀀢􀁾􀁥 highway 􀁾􀁹􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁣􀁲􀁮 locatl;9 wi thin 􀁴􀁬􀀱􀀮􀀡􀀺􀀮􀁥􀁾 !OJ) cs of the. .Q.!!..termo:il. 10 terr.:i.tory
...9J_ the autB2.!"ity_dS. 􀁤􀁾􀀮􀁳􀀮􀁧􀁁􀀮􀁢􀁥􀁤 in 􀁳􀁕􀁢􀀮􀁳􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁊􀁾􀀺􀀿􀀡􀁌􀁊􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁬. 11 Jj) If a 􀁭􀁡􀁪􀁯􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁙􀀹􀁦 􀁴􀁨􀁬􀀼􀁬􀀭􀀭􀁹􀁯􀁴􀁥􀁳􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁴__􀀧􀀡􀁌􀂷􀁾 In....􀁊􀀮􀀬􀀻􀀱􀀮􀁙􀁾􀁦
'lr...􀁴􀀱􀀮􀀱􀀮􀁾􀀱 12 􀀮􀁩􀀲􀁦􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁉􀀲􀀲􀀮􀀡􀀾􀀮􀁩􀁕􀁑􀁾􀀡.. the .􀁩􀀡􀁴􀀬􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀻􀁰􀁯􀀡􀀢􀀺􀁾􀀮􀁀􀁾􀁬􀁌􀀮􀁾􀀡􀀮􀀧􀀿􀀡􀀺 i..nto 􀁟􀁾...􀁾􀀧􀁹􀀢􀁬􀀻􀂷􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁉􀁉􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁉􀀡􀀮􀁌􀀧􀀭􀁉􀁉􀁊􀀮􀁴􀁢􀁟􀀮
􀁜􀀻􀀮􀁾 13 C.91l1Rl1sslon 􀁵􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁌􀁾􀁄􀁊􀁣􀁨 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀮􀁲􀁾􀁽􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁵􀁬 mobil 􀁊􀁯􀀡􀁾􀁙􀁟 􀀮􀀺􀁳􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁯􀁲􀁩ty: 14 (:J.,). 􀁡􀁾􀁓􀁜􀁬􀀡􀁬􀁬􀁥􀀸 􀁴􀁨􀁾.. 􀀵􀀭􀁢􀁾􀁴􀁹 t.o maintain
or 􀁉􀀧􀁾􀁨􀁡􀀱􀀺􀁬􀀮􀁊􀀩􀁊􀀮􀁴􀀮􀁡􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀩 the 15 􀁾􀁥􀁧􀁭􀁥􀁮1:_..Qf._r-DP..h i.􀁧􀁨􀁾􀀡􀀺􀁜􀀧􀁹 􀁡􀁾 􀀺􀁮􀁾􀁾􀁬 r 􀁜􀀺􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁊􀀩􀀮􀁙. .9..1.':.(; t.i 911 ..7􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀬 1 02; or 16(:2L_..􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁕
􀁬􀀡􀁾􀀮􀁬􀀻􀀮 p.i).d} .. 􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁾􀂧􀁊􀁧􀁊􀁬􀁥􀁧 ..!9...t::hp. comm.!-_m;io!!.J.?Y.. 1'7 􀁓􀁣􀀻􀁾􀁊􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀺􀁩􀀬􀁯􀁮􀁟􀀮􀁊􀀮􀂧􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀹􀀰􀁾􀀱 ..,. 18 SF-eTlON 2 _ This AC·t-t.<.'.l)c.(:s
effect 􀁩􀁭􀁭􀁾􀁤􀁩􀁡􀁌􀀮􀁥􀁬􀁹 i. t. it receives 19 a vote of two-thirds of all U'IC'" mfO.!!1bers elected to 􀁾􀁯􀀧􀁬􀁃􀀧􀀺􀁨 hOUGe, 􀁡􀁾􀂷 20 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁩􀀮􀁤􀁾􀁤 hy Secti<Jn 39. Article
TIl, TexaS Constitution. If this 21 Act does not receive the 􀁶􀁯􀁾􀁣 􀁮􀁣􀁣􀁣􀁺􀁾􀁡􀁲􀁹 [or" immp.diatc effect, this 22 Act takes cffecl September. 1, 2003.3 ·lnn/(n
SOO BY:DART .GOY/COM REI... 3-24-3 12:16 DART GOY/COM REL.... 972 450 7043;#10/11 rilgt: l Ul .L DallasNrws.(om II)r;DaUa. Jl(ormo􀁾 More ton roads could be on area's horizon Dill. caD
for regional transit authority, fees on most interstates 0311512003 By TONY HARTZEL I The DaUal Morning New$ The future oftransportation in North Texas may include more toll roads -even
on hiehways where motorists don't pay to drive now. Two statelawmakers filed bills Friday that would create a regional transportation authority to oversee the construction ofroads and
rail lines. The six-county North Texas Regional Mobility Authority could supersede the powers oftollway and transit agencies already in place. Under the proposal, most major interstates
in Collin, Dallas, Denton, Parker. Rockwall and Tammt counties would be subject to having tollbooths. "Ifwe don't 518rt looking for money to affect our region's roads and to do something
to enhance our mosli-tr.msit network, we're not going to meet the needs ofthe 􀁦􀁵􀁴􀁾􀁥􀀬􀁮 said state Sen. Kim Rrimer. RFort Worth, author ofone ofthe bills. "Some revic:ws I have
seen show that people will vote to increase 􀁣􀁯􀁳􀁴􀁾 in their own region if the money is used in their own region.". The bills face several high hurdles, both locally and nationally.
Adding tolls to frwways would require congressional approval. Mr. Brimer's bill also would allow voters to decide whether they want their citiel; to join the mobility authority and whether
to place tollbooths on existing roads. "It won't fly," said Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano. "This is not the time to be talking about it, and I've been talking about regionalism forever."
Many ofthe biI1s' goals could be reached with agreements among existing agencies. Stale legislation allows the Texas Transportation Commission to place tolls on freeways. "We don't need
someone trying to overlay something on what we've already done," said Collin County Judge Ron Hams, who lllNO serves as cluWman of the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition, a local lobbyingmd
transportation planning group.. State Rep. Steve Wolens, D-Dalla.lJ, filed the House version ofMr. Brimer's Senate bill. Mr. Wolens said North Texas must do something soon because of􀁩􀁴􀁾
smog problems that could result in lhe loss of federal highway funds --a development tlJat would devastate the 􀁲􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀧􀁾 economy. Adding more rail lines would help get mOTe people
out ()f their cars and could improve air quality, he said. http://www.dallasnews.com/cgi-binlgold..Juint.cgi 3/21/03
SENT BY: DART (jOY/COM Ra. 3-24-3 12:17 DART GOY/COM REL.... 972 450 7043;#11/11 risgt: L UJ; L i> Mr. Brimer said that without changing its highway funding methods, Texas will soon
ron out ofmoney to build highways because it must pay more money to maintain roads. "We've got to look at North Texas as a region and not as a collection ofcities," Mr. Wolens said.
"The absence ofpublic debate on this means we wiU go nowhere on regional transportation." Ifeither bilJ is passed. cities that do not belong to a transit agency could rely on the new
toU roads to help them raise money for transit. The gop} is to rai" an equivalent amount ofa 1 percent sales tax, the amount now paid by Dallas Area Rapid Transit member cities. Mr.
Brimer said that putting tolls back on Interstate 30, for example, could raise about $600 million a year for highway maintenance and for rail projt%.1s. The highway opened in 1957 as
II turnpike and had tollbooths until 1978. Other options for transportation financing have been offt'fl:<! llllS year. Regionalleadcrs have discussed expanding the 􀀵􀁕􀁉􀁾􀀭􀁬􀁡􀁸 cap
to allow more cities to join mass transit. In addition. state Sen. Jon Lincbay ofHouston has filed a biU that wuuld allow residents ofuman coWlties to vote on adding a nickel-per-ga1Jon
gas tax that would. fmance local transportation project-C!. The toll road idea was borne ofnecessity because Gov. Rick Perry has said he will oppose any tax bills, Mr. Wolcns said. "I'm
going with user fees on existing.roads," he said. "lftht' yoLers don't wool us to do that, we won't do it But I'm not going to sit back and wait for the EPA to shut us down." Local leaders
say they have discussed the issues thoroughly, and they have been taken aback by the speed and breadth of the lawmakers' propOsals. The county judges ofCollin, Dallas, Denton and T31Tant
counties have signed u resolution saying they are concerned about the creation ofa new umbrella agency without having time to consider all the details. "All of us believe we'yt' proven
how successful regionalism can be," Mr. Harris said.•tAny bill that doesn't involve regional consensus and pluming is very ill-advised." The bills do not directly addres!i: the fate
ofthe North Texas Tollway Authority, but several observers said the creation ofa new toll authority would jeopardize the existing agency's future. DART, the Fort Worth Transportation
Authority and the Denton County Transportation Authority would not be dissolved unless voters chose to do so. Creating one umbrella agency may sound likt' a good idea, but "I'm not sure
wc will ever get to the point where one agency can address transportation aetoss the region efficiently," said DART board ehainnan Robert Pope. "Having another layer ofgovernment over
transportation is surely not the way to go. But thank goodness people are now talking about this." 􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟..........􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀁾 ..􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀭
Online at: 􀁨􀁕􀁰􀀱􀁉􀁷􀁷􀁷􀀮􀀮􀁧􀁦􀁊􀀮􀀮􀀡􀁬􀁦􀀮􀁬􀁓􀁮􀁥􀁷􀀤􀀮􀁑􀁑􀀮􀀡􀁬􀁬􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁬􀁮􀁥􀁷􀁭􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁑􀁲􀀮􀁩􀀮􀀹􀁾􀀯􀀯􀀰􀀳􀀱􀁾􀁡􀁤􀀮􀁮􀀮􀁭􀁥􀁴􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁪􀁴􀀮􀀵􀀮􀁡􀀷􀁾􀀱􀀮􀁨􀁴􀁭 I http://www.daUasnew
s.com/cgi-binlgold-print.cgi 3/21103
(ftt.I. MICHAEL E. MURPHY, P.E. Director of Public Works (972) 450-2878 (972) 450-2837 FAX mmurphy@ci.addison.tx.us E-mail Town ofAddison 16801 Westgrove Dr. P.O. Box 9010, Addison,
Texas 75001-9010 􀁐􀀯􀁾 ftr (bcJ 1-DpJ<-r
Steve Chutchian To: Cc: Subject: Ron: Ron Whitehead Mike Murphy DART Bus Route Revisions On July 8, 2003, DART has scheduled a public hearing to receive public comments on proposed bus
service modifications. Although the Town will not experience total elimination of any existing bus routes, some changes are proposed to certain routes, including the following: Route
400: Service extends from N. Irving to the Downtown Garland Station, and runs east on Belt Line Rd toward the Addison Transit Center. A reduction in the total number of scheduled trips
is planned. Route 321: Route 322: Route 342: Route 344: This route will become a part of modified Route 488. This route will become a part of modified Routes 31 &331. This route will
be replaced by an employer shuttle service. This route will operated during rush hour periods only. Other proposed route changes do not directly affect service to the Town of Addison
or Addison Transit Center. Thanks. Steve Chutchian 1
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON TEXAS 􀁾􀁮􀁪􀁴􀁲􀁯 􀁾􀁕􀁬􀁴􀀨􀁓 􀁾􀀨􀁮􀁡􀁴􀀨 WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4304 June 12, 2003 The Honorable R. Scott Wheeler Mayor City Of Addison PO Box 9010 Addison, TX
75001-9010 Dear Mayor Wheeler: COMMITIEES: APPROPRIATIONS COMMERCE, SCIENCE, ANOTRANSPORTATION RULES AND ADMINISTRATION VETERANS' AFFAIRS Thank you for your letter concerning Dallas
Area Rapid Transit (DART) funding in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) reauthorization. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this important matter. I have
always been an advocate of rail and public transit. DART is an example of a public transportation investment which has experienced enormous ridership C?f roughly 70,000 commuters per
day. I fully support efforts to expand the Northwest and Southeast corridors, and will work within the Appropriations Committee and during the reauthorization ofTEA-21 to ensure that
DART has the necessary funding to meet its current and future needs to enhance the economic benefits it brings to Texas and to Addison. I appreciate hearing from you and hope you will
not hesitate to contact me again on any issue of concern to you. KBH:jcn Web=http://hutchison.senate.gov
June 3,2003 DART Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 􀁦􀀿􀀶􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁾􀁾􀁛􀁑􀀩 JUN 05 1003 CITY MANAGER Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town
of Addison P. O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 76208 Dear Mr.􀁾􀁶􀀺􀁾 The Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) Board of Directors met on April 30 to continue discussion on the FY04 Budget and the
projected $29 million shortfall in sales tax revenue. DART is considering significantadministrative cutbacks, up to an additional one year delay in the light rail expansion program, and performance-based bus and rail service reductions. We reviewed all rail and bus operations,
using established standards to evaluate the routes and service that did not meet a minimum threshold of efficiency. Routes that do not meet this minimum standard are currently proposed
for service reductions. To ensure that our member cities are fully informed regarding these proposed changes in service, the DART Planning staff will be or may have already contacted
a member of your Transportation staff to brief and discuss these changes prior to the beginning of the public meetings on June 10. The following list of proposed service changes will
specifically impact the City of Addison: 􀁾 Route 31 -Rush hour frequency reduced from 20 minutes to 25 minutes to reflect ridership demand 􀁾 Route 321 -Service replaced by DART On-Call
and modified route 488. 􀁾 Route 322 -Service replaced by DART On-Call and modified routes 31, 331. 􀁾 Route 342 -eliminated, Employer Shuttle to replace. 􀁾 Route 344 -reduced to rush
hours only. 􀁾 Route 400 -Trips reduced between N. Irving and Addison, Luna trips eliminated.
Mr. Ron Whitehead June 3, 2003 Page 2 In addition to the specific changes listed above, Attachment I lists all of the proposed service changes that are under consideration. Attachment
2 provides maps that show where the proposed service modifications are located within your city. In addition, Attachment 3 lists all of the public meetings that will be conducted in
June to gather public input on these proposed changes. A public hearing will also be held on July 8, 2003, at the DART Board of Directors meeting. If you have any comments or questions
regarding this process or on any DART-related issue, please do not hesitate to let me know. Sincerely, W&; GaryC homas Preside xecutive Director GCT/fp Enclosures c: DART Board of Directors
iROUTE 31 Selected Trip J 􀁌􀁅􀁇􀁅􀁎􀁄􀁾 ..... ,t" Ol'" EXISTING ROUTE ............... PROPOSED ROUTE 􀁾\\ 􀁄-􀀮r􀁁􀁾.."􀀩'.􀁐j'􀁬􀁡􀁴􀀱􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁧& Development
-----------------------------------------------------.--,...---------' 􀁾T' % fI''P.E5 􀀬􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀧 ,"j'" \' f A.."} 􀀯􀁾􀀢􀀮 . A·c-\: c:. .l--c I 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀢􀁌 l.IM( 􀁾 _,·v
􀁾􀁃􀁾􀁩􀁾􀀧􀁕 GlEN I'· LEGEND: #l#H#l+H+ ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED J I A I I I ! I '!l -' u 􀁾􀀧􀁾 lv. 􀁾Planning & Development
1-\
PROPOSED ROUTE 342 October 2003 ffi NORTH c-' I'IOBEMtAD /..-.-----. LEGENJ:h 􀁾 ROUTE/SE.GME.NT TO BE DELETED \--\ \ \ \-\ 􀁄􀁾􀀯􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁧 & Deveiopment L__J'
t<lRa", BRAKE 􀁾􀀱 cox k , """ --... ROUTE 344 . .-,:... ..... I 􀁾".; 􀁾􀁉 􀁾;::1 􀁾>: 􀁾􀁉 􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀭􀁲􀀽􀀽􀀭􀁾􀁾 􀁬􀀻􀁬􀁬􀁾 t􀁾 􀁾 :: ) oJ􀀭􀁾 􀀮􀀺􀁌􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀮􀁊􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁬􀀮􀁯�
�􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾-'U􀁾U􀁾U􀁾􀁾􀁾......􀀭.....􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀮 D Planning &Development LEGEND: EXISTING ROUTE
PROPOSED ROUTE 344 October 2003 '\!">' aw--J >-􀁾-' --J o1-AIRPORT QSPRI TRI \ 􀁬􀁅􀁇􀁅􀁎􀁄􀁾 II""'" " EXISTING ROUTE ... .............. PROPOSED ROUTE 􀁾􀀣􀁩􀀫􀁉􀀫􀀡􀀱􀀣􀁬􀀣 ROUTE/SEGMENT
TO BE DELETED ____________________---.1
HANCH or+-\ \ ''-1 􀁾􀀮􀁾....._...:>--J •"--0 400 ROUTE 400 Proposed Service L.EGEND: ..._".... EXISTING ROUTE +H#I+l+l+l# ROUTE/SEGMENT TO BE DELETED
Notice ofDART Public Hearing October 2003 Bus Service Modifications Tuesday, July 8, 2003 -6:30 p.m. DART Board Room 1401 Pacific Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202 On May 27,2003, the DART
Board of Directors authorized a call for a public hearing to receiVe public comments on proposed bus service modifications. The proposed bus service modifications are a result of ongoing
budget deliberations and the need to address service efficiency. If approved by the DART Board, these 􀁭􀁯􀁤􀁩􀁦􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾􀀬􀁷􀁯􀁵􀁬􀁤be implemented on October 6, 2003. The proposed
bus service modifications are as follows (Route and Description of Change): Route 8 -The rush hour frequency reduced from 20 minutes to 25 minutes to reflect ridership demand. Route
29 -The Pleasant Grove and Maple branches of the route will be separated, with each branch turning around in the downtown area. Frequency of service on the Maple to downtown route will
be reduced from every 15 minutes to every 20 minutes. Additionally, The Prairie Creek branch and will no longer extend to Spruce HS and instead will be looped around Holcomb, Elam, Pleasant,
Maddox to Buckner then continuing on Lake June to Prairie Creek. The Pleasant Grove portion will be renumbered 37. Route 31 -The rush hour frequency reduced from 20 minutes to 25 minutes
to reflect ridership demand. Route 39 -The rush hour frequency reduced from 15 minutes to 20 minutes to reflect ridership demand. Route 49 -The rush hour frequency reduced from 11_minutes
to 13 minutes to reflect ridership demand. Route 59 -The rush hour frequency reduced from 10 minutes to 12 minutes to reflect ridership demand. Route split into two routes, with each
route.operating into the Downtown area. The northern end of the route will be renumbered 185. Route 63 -The rush hour frequency reduced from 10 minutes to 12 minutes to reflect ridership
demand. • Route 103 -Proposed for deletion due to low ridership. Route 155 -The hours of service operated during a.m. and p.m. periods will be reduced to reflect ridership demand.
Route 161 -The Pleasant Grove and Glen Oaks branches of the route will be separated, with each branch turning around in the downtown area. The frequency of service on the Glen Oaks portion
of the route will be reduced to reflect ridership demand. The Pleasant Grove portion will be renumbered 165. Route 202 -Weekend service is proposed for elimination due to low ridership.
Associated service to DFW on Route 310 is also proposed for elimination. Route 303 -Service on this route that operates north of the North Irving Transit Center is proposed for elimination.
Limited service on the Valley Ranch portion of Route 202 will continue to provide service in this area. Route 321 -This route is proposed for elimination and replacement with DART OnCall,
a curb-to-curb flexible van service. Route 488 would be modified to provide all-day connections from Addison Transit Center to Brookhaven College. Route 322 -This route is proposed for
elimination and replacement with DART OnCall, a curb-to-curb flexible van service. Service to the business area west of 1-35 would be provided by a modified Route 331. Service along
Midway, north of Beltline will be provided by Route 31. Route 342 -This route is proposed for elimination due to low ridership. An Employer Shuttle will be pursued with Comp USA. Route
344 -Service on this route will be reduced from all-day to rush hour periods only due to low ridership. Route 353 -This route is proposed for elimination due to low ridership. An Employer
Shuttle will be pursued with area employers. Route 377 -Weekday frequency of service is proposed to be reduced, from 20 minutes to 30 minutes and Sunday service is proposed for deletion
due to low ridership. Route 400 -The added trips that operate between the North Irving Transit Center and the Addison Transit Center are proposed for elimination. Service west of Luna
Road on Beltline will be deleted. Route 404 -This route will be split into two routes at the South Irving Transit Center. The portion of the route between the South Irving Transit Center
and the North Irving Transit Center will be modified to operate shorter hours and will be coordinated with the TRE operating schedule. This portion will
be Route 507. Route 412 -The frequency of service and operating hours of this route are proposed for reduction, due to low ridership. Route 444 -The non peak frequency reduced from 40
minutes to 60 minutes to reflect ridership demand. Route 453 -This route will be split into two routes at the Hampton Rail Station. The 'service south of Hampton Station will be renumbered
556. Service frequency will be adjusted to reflect ridership demand. Route 466 -The rush hour frequency reduced from 16 minutes to 20 minutes to reflect ridership demand. Route 475 -This
route is proposed to be modified to eliminate service north of Hillburn. In addition, Sunday service would be deleted in response to low ridership. Route 503 -Service north of Lovers
Lane is proposed for elimination and replacement with DART On-Call, a curb-to-curb flexible van service (the 503 would operate along Lovers Lane to the Lovers Lane Station). Route 505
-Sunday service on this route is proposed for elimination due to low ridership. Route 518 -This This route is proposed for elimination. Route 574 would be modified to operate along Kiest
from Walton Walker to Westmoreland and provide service from this area to the Westmoreland Rail Station. Sunday service would be eliminated due to low ridership. Route 527 -This route
is proposed for elimination, with the majority of the route alignment now served by a modified Route 569 an extended operation of Route 768 (the Mustang Express). Route 539 -This route
is proposed for elimination due to low ridership. Service will continue to be available on Routes 8,26,44,51 and 503. Route 549 -Minor changes in service frequency are proposed to reflect
ridership demand. In addition, service north of 1-30 would be deleted. Route 550 -This route is proposed for elimination due to low ridership. Service will continue to be available on
Routes 410,372 and 560. Route 560 -Sunday service on this route is proposed for elimination due to low ridership.
Route 567 -Service south of Walnut Hill is proposed for elimination and replacement with DART On-Call service, a curb-to-curb flexible van service. Route 569 -A restructuring of route
569 into two separate routes is proposed to improve service performance. Service North of Kingsley will become Route 534. Route 570 -This route is proposed for elimination and replacement
with DART OnCall, a curb-to-curb flexible van service. Route 575 -This route is proposed for elimination and replacement with DART OnCall, a curb-to-curb flexible van service. Route
585 -This route is proposed for elimination. Service to the Hamilton Park area will be provided by Route 488. Service to Texas Instruments will be provided by the T.!. Shuttles at the
LBJ Central Rail Station. Route 703 -This route is proposed for elimination. Service to portions of the route available on Routes 562, 360. An Employer Shuttle will be pursued with area
employers as a replacement for Route 703. Route 705 -This route is proposed for elimination. Service to portions of the route available on Routes 360,371. An Employer Shuttle will be
pursued with area employers. Route 712 -This route is proposed for elimination due to low ridership. Alternate service is available on a variety of local routes in downtown. Route 761
-This route is proposed for elimination due to low ridership. Service to the area covered by this route will be provided by DART On-Call. Route 823 -This route is proposed for elimination
due to low ridership. Alternate service is available on Route 569.
Attachment 3 Pre-Public Hearing Community Meetings DART has scheduled the following Community Meetings prior to the Public Hearing to receive customer feedback on the proposed bus service
modifications: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 6:30 pm (Routes 29, 161,475) Skyline Public Library Public Library, 6006 Everglade Road, Dallas, Tx 75227 MAPSCO 48-J Wednesday, June 11, 2003 6:30
pm (Route 155) Highland Hills Public Library, 3624 Simpson Stuart Road, Dallas, Tx 75241 MAPSCO 66-Q Monday, June 16, 2003 7:00 pm (Route 569) Knights of ColumbuslDallas Council #799-Lower
Hall, 10110 Shoreview Rd, Dallas, Tx 75238 MAPSC027-V Tuesday, June 17,2003 7:30 pm (Routes 353,570,575,761) Plano City Hall, (Building Inspections Training Room), 1520 Ave K, Plano,
Tx 75074 MAPSCO 659-S Tuesday, June 17,20036:30 pm (Routes 29,161) Pleasant Grove Christian Church, 1324 Pleasant Drive, Dallas, Tx 75217 MAPSCO 58-M Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:00 pm
(Routes 703, 705) Renaissance Hotel (prelude Room), 900 E. Lookout Dr., Richardson, Tx 75082 MAPSCO 7-R Monday, June 23, 2003 7:00 pm (Route 377, 412, 550, 560) Granville Arts Center
(Meeting Room), 300 N. Fifth St., Garland, Tx 75040 MAPSCO 19-Z Monday, June 23, 2003 5:30 pm (Routes 59, 549, 404, 453) Jaycee/Zaragoza Recreation Center, 3114 Clymer, Dallas, Tx 75212
MAPSCO 42-L Tuesday, June 24, 2003 7:00 pm (Routes 103, 202,303,400, 404) Irving City Hall (Council Chambers), 825 W. Irving Blvd., Irving, Tx 75060 MAPSCO 31B-WIX Tuesday, June 24,
2003 6:30 pm (Routes 505, 585) Willie B. Johnson Recreation Center, 12225 Willowdell Drive, Dallas Tx 75243 MAPSCO 16-T Thursday, June 26, 20031:00 pm (Routes 321,322,342,344,400,709)
Addison Conference Center, 15650 Addison Road, Addison, Tx 75001 MAPSCO 4-U Thursday, June 26, 2003 6:30 pm (Routes 503, 527, 539, 567, 569) Campbell Center (Tenant Conference Room),
8350 N. Central Expwy, Dallas, Tx 75206 MAPSCO 26-X Monday, June 30,20036:30 pm (Routes 321, 322, 400 ) Farmers Branch City Hall (Council Chambers), 13000 William Dodson, Farmers Branch,
Tx 75381 MAPSCO 12-V Tuesday, July 1,20036:00 pm (Routes 453, 161,518) Thurgood Marshall Recreation Center, 5150 Mark Trail, Dallas, Tx 75232 MAPSCO 63-M Wednesday, July 2, 2003 6:30
pm (Route 412) Rowlett City Hall (Council Chambers), 4000 Main Street, Rowlett, Tx 75088 MAPSCO 30-D Wednesday, July 2, 2003 12:00 pm (All Routes) DART Headquarters Board Room, 1401
Pacific Ave, Dallas, Tx 75202 MAPSCO 45-K Wednesday, July 2, 2003 7:30 p.m. (Routes 331, 344) Carrollton City Hall (Council Chambers), 1945 Jackson, Carrollton, Tx 75006 MAPSCO 3-N
Attachment 3 PROCESS FOR RECEIVING COMMENTS: The DART Board encourages public comments during the public hearing or in writing beforehand. Those desiring to speak should contact DART
Community Affairs at (214) 749-2543 to register. Written comments received before the close of the public hearing will become part of the official record. Comments may be submitted in
person during the hearing as well. Those sending comments should include their name, address, and telephone number. Written comments should be sent to: October 2003 Bus Service Modifications
Public Hearing DART Community Affairs P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-7232 NOTICE FOR THE HEARING AND VISUALLY IMPAIRED: If you wish to attend this public hearing and need sign interpretation
or special accommodations, please notify DART 24 hours in advance by calling the TTY number 214-749-3628 or DART Community Affairs at 214-749-2543. A Braille or taped version of the
information will be made available upon request. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Please contact DART Community Affairs at 214.749.2543. Para informacion en espanol, llame a 214.749.2721.
11 :00 JUI'! 20, 2003 In: DART " 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *46381 PAGE: 1/8 􀀢􀀢􀀻􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁾 􀁾 (C 􀁾 􀁾 '¥I 􀁾 fD) 􀁄􀀴􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁾􀁪 JUN 20 2003 ....
-. CITY MANAGER To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages: Description : Ron Whitehead TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-7043 Friday, Jun 20, 2003 10:59AH 8DART Board Agenda's for
Tuesday, June 24, 2003 Attached are the agenda's for Tuesday's Board Meetings. If you have any questions please contact Jay Barksdale at 214-749-2707. From: Fax Number : Phone Number
Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTHF (214)
11:00 JUN 20, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *46381 PAGE: 2/8 Quorum = 4 Audit Committee Meeting Tuesday, June 24, 2003, 1:30 p.m-2:30 p.m. DART Conference Room B -1st Floor 1401
Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [ 1 hour J 1. Approval of Minutes: April 22, 2003 and May 27, 2003 2. *STV, Inc. Contract Audit (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis)[ 10
minutes J 3. *KJM & Associates Contract Audit (Ray N:oah/Albert Bazis) [ 10 minutes J 4. *Materials Management Audit (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) [ 20 minutes J 5. *Status of 2003 Audit Plan
(Ray Noah/Albert Bazis)[ 10 minutes J 6. *Contract Audit Recoveries (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) [ 10 minutes J 7. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 8. Adjournment "Briefing Item The Audit
Committee may go into OosedSession under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters
arising regarding any ium listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Audit Committee isAugust 26, 2003. This faciliLy is wheelchair accessibk. For accommodations for the hearing impaired,
sign interpretDtion is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Ray Noah VICe Chair -Bill Velasco Members -TerriAdkisson, Randall Chrisman,
Beatrice Martinez andNorma Stanton StaffLiaison -Albert Bazis 624ADOC 6/20/03-10:58 AM
11:01 JUN 20, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *46381 PAGE: 3/8 Quorum =10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, June 24,2003 -Board Room 1401
Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: June 11,2003 2. Committee Advisory Reports: -Paratransit Access Advisory Group (PAAG) -(Brian Loiacono) -Citizen
Advisory Committee (CAC) -(Joe Burkleo) 3. Public Comments Consent Items: 4. Authorization to Delegate Contracting Officer Authority (Huelon Harrison/Ken Mercer) 5. Approval ofQuarterly
Disclosure Update (Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) 6. Approval of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Supplemental Agreement for the Cities ofGrand Prairie and Mesquite (Mark Enoch/Sharon
Leary) 7. Initiation of Litigation Against Jose M. Lopez (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) 8. Initiation of Litigation Against Edwin D. McCoy (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) 9. Initiation of Litigation
Against Clarence E. Sanders (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) 10. FY03 Voluntary Enhanced Early Retirement Program (Mark Enoch/Ben Gomez) 11. Declaration ofa Tract of Trinity Railway Express
(TRE) DFW Mainline Right-of-Way Adjacent to Medical Center Drive as Surplus Property by the 􀁔􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁩􀁴 Authorities and Authorization to Sell to the University ofTexas Board of Regents
(Richard Watkins/Kathy Waters) 12. Contract Modification for Light Rail Vehicle Cleaning (Richard WatkinslVictor Burke) Individual Items: 13. +Report ofGeneral Counsel Search Committee
and Direction for Further Employment Action (Ray Noah) 14. Approval of Financial Standards for FY 2004 Budget and Financial Plan Process (Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) 15. +Settlement in
Legal Center ofJose Angel Gutierrez, P.C. v. DART, Roland Castaneda, et aI., Litigation (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) 16. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting
only. 17. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. Other Items: 18. Officer Reports 19. Chair Report 20. General Counsel's Report 21. President/Executive
Director's Report 22. 22. Communications and Public Comments 23. Adjournment +Same Night Item • Briefmg Item 624B.DOC 6120/03· 10:58AM
11:02 JUN 20, 2003 ID: DRRT TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *46381 PAGE: 4/8 Quorum = 10 The Board ofDirectors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consulti$.on
with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551. 074for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda.
The next meeting ofthe DARTBoardis July 8, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact
Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 624B.DOC 2 6/20/03 -10:58AM
11:03 JUN 20, 2003 ID: DRRT TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #46381 PRGE: 5/8 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, June 24, 2003 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: June 11,2003 2. lbis item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. lbis item will be discussed
at the Board meeting only. Consent Items: {5 minutesJ 4. Authorization to Delegate Contracting Officer Authority (Hue1on Harrison/Ken Mercer) 5. Approval ofQuarterly Disclosure Update
(Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) 6. Approval of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Supplemental Agreement for the Cities ofGrand Prairie and Mesquite (Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) 7. Initiation
of Litigation Against Jose M. Lopez (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) 8. Initiation of Litigation Against Edwin D. McCoy (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) 9. Initiation of Litigation Against Clarence
E. Sanders (Mark Enoch/Rocky Angle) 10. FY03 Voluntary Enhanced Early Retirement Program (Mark Enoch/Ben Gomez) 11. Declaration ofa Tract of Trinity Railway Express (TRE) DFW Mainline
Right-of-Way Adjacent to Medical Center Drive as Surplus Property by the Transit Authorities and Authorization to Sell to the University ofTexas Board ofRegents (Richard Watkins/Kathy
Waters) 12. Contract Modification for Light Rail Vehicle Cleaning (Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) Individualltems: {I hour and35 minutes J 13. +Report ofGeneral Counsel Search Committee
and Direction for Further Employment Action (Ray Noah) { 15 minutes J 14. Approval of Financial Standards for FY 2004 Budget and Financial Plan Process (Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) { 20
minutes J 15. +Settlement in Legal Center ofJose Angel Gutierrez, P.C. v. DART, Roland Castaneda, et aI., Litigation (Mark EnochIRocky Angle) { 15 minutes J 16. *Status of Air Quality
in the D/FW Nonattainment Area Update (Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) { 15 minutes J 17. *FY 2004 Budget Planning (Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) { 30 minutes J Other Items: 18. Adjournment +SameNight
Item ifBriefmg Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any Legal issues, or under Section
551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. 624C.DOC 6120/03 -10:58AM
(ftt.I. Town ofAddison 16801 Westgrove Dr. STEVEN Z. CHUTCIllAN, P.E. Assistant City Engineer (972) 450-2886 (972) 450-2837 FAX (214) 673-2518 Mobile schutchian@ci.addison.tx.us E-mail
P.O. Box 9010, Addison, Texas 75001-9010 :se;2f2-y u( D/tR-/U-(u fI.,4 i.e /l1. 0 􀁾 I Lt 71j #/2-{4--74-1-2-S? /
11:00 JUN 20, 2003 ID: DART " TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *46381 PAGE: 6/8 Quorum = 8 The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is July 8, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible.
For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 􀀲􀀱􀀴􀁾􀀷􀀴􀀹􀁾􀀲􀀵􀀴􀀳􀀬48 hours in advance. 624C.DOC 2 6120103 •
10:58 AM
11:01 JUN 20. 2003 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *46381 PAGE: 7/8 Quorurn=4 External Communications Committee Meeting Tuesday, June 24, 2003, 3:30 p.m.-4:00 p.m. DART Conference Room
C -lst Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time (30 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: May 27,2003 2. *Overview ofDART 20th Anniversary Event (Jesse Oliver/Sue
Bauman) {IS minutesJ 3. *TrinityFest: Volunteer Plan and Marketing Coordination (Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) { 15 minutesJ 4. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 5. Adjournment itBriefing
Item The External Communications Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney Jor any legal issues arising regarding
any Item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe External Communications Committee is Aug'ust 26,2003. This faci.litJ!. is wheelchair accessible. For accommodotions for the hearing
impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Jesse Oliver VICe Chair -Mark Enoch Members -Terri Adkisson,
Angie Chen Button Huelon Harrison, Linda Koop and Norma Stanton StaffLiaison -Sue Bauman 624E.DOC 6/20/03 -10:58 AM
11:02 JUN 20, 2003 10: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *46381 PAGE: 8/8 Quorum = 5 Planning Committee Meeting Tuesday, June 24, 2003, 2:30 p.m. -3:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [ 45 minutes J 1. Approval ofMinutes: May 27, 2003 2. Agreement with The Rouse Company for Shuttle Service to Collin Creek
Mall (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [15 minutesJ 3. *DART 2030 Transit System Plan -Work Progress Report (Linda KooplDoug Allen) [30 minutesJ 4. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 5. Adjournment
itBriefmg Item The Planning Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section
551.072 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Planning Committee is July 8, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For
accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Linda Koop VICe Chair -Norma Stanton
Members -Terri Adkisson, Randall Chrisman Mark Enoch, Huelon Harrison, William Velasco, Richard Watkins and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison -DougAllen 624PL.DOC 6/20/03-10:59AM
ATTACHMENT 4 Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee Meetings July 2003 Agenda 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Study Orientation 3. Committee Questions and Feedback
4. Other Transportation Comments 5. Closing Remarks/Next Steps Michael Morris, P.E. Transportation Director North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) Michael Morris, P.E.I
Barbara C. Maley, AICP Principal Transportation Planner NCTCOG All All Michael Morris, P.E.I Barbara C. Maley, AICP
Attachment 1 North Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: County Judges and Mayors within Collin, DATE: March 20, 2003 . Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, arid Tarrant Counties Max W.
Wells, Chair, DFW International Airport Gyna Bivens-Mathis, Chair, Fort Worth Transportation Authority Robert W. Pope, Chair, Dallas Area Rapid Transit Charles Emery, Chair, Denton County
Transportation Authority Jay Nelson, P.E., District Engineer, TxDOT-Dallas 'Maribel Chavez, P. E., District Engineer, TxDOT-Fort Worth FROM:. Michael Morris, P.E. . Director of Transportation
SUBJECT:· Regional Rail Corridor Study -Formation of Policy and Technical Committees . . . Th.is letter is to solicit your input regarding persons to serve on Policy and Technical Committees
of the -Regional Rail Corridor Study. The Regional Transportation Council set aside $1,325,000 in technical . planning funds to expedite transit improvements in the region. The study
encompasses corridors within Collin, Dallas, Denton,Ellis, Johnson, and Tarrant Counties. For your convenience, a map is included as Attachment 1. The Policy Committee will consist of
locally elected officials, district engineers, private sector leaders and transportation authority board members while the Technical Committee will consist of private and public (e.g..,
local, regional, State and federal) transportation professionals. Please use Attachment 2 to.provide North Central Texas Council of Government (NCTCOG) staff with your suggestions regarding
persons to serve on each of the committees. We are requesting a deadline of Friday, . April 4, 2003 to receive your suggestions. Given your location, there will be occasions where you
wish to make suggestions on more than one corridor. Existing committees will be used in the Trinity Railway Express (E-1 and W-3) and Denton County Corridors (E-2). By copy of this letter,
NCTCOG staff is also soliciting committee suggestions from your Executive Staff. . The return fax should be directed to the following: Barbara C. Maley, AICP Principal Transportation
Planner . (817) 640-3028 (fax) . . . Members of the two committees will serve for the duration of the study, which is estimated at 12 to 18 months. While staff supports the effort through.study
oversight and travel demand forecasting, consultant assistance has been obtained for rail operations, planning/public participation, and engineering services. Should you have any questions
and/or comments on the above information, please call Barbara Maley or me at (B17) 695-9240. 􀁾􀁾 BCM:cs Mic ael Morris, P.E. . Attachments cc: County Administrators and City Managers
. JeffreyP. Fegan, Chief Executive Officer, DFW International Airport Gary Thomas, PresidenVExecutive Director, DART . Richard Ruddell,PresidenVExecutive Director, FWTA . 2002-03 UPWP
Element 3.04 Project File 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint Two P. O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806 @recycled paper htlp://www.dfwinfo.com
ATIACHMENT2 REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY .'. , ····,·· ,....... t ........ ·' . , . -' .....􀁾 .... 􀁾􀀧 ' . f ! MC!<innel 1 NA RAIL CORRIDORS Northeast: E-3: Dallas Area Rapid Transit:
Piano/Alien/McKinneyE-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: CarrolltonlThe Colony/Frisco Southeast: E-5: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Duncanville/Cedar Hill/Midlothian E-6: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Dallas/Lancaster/Red
OakIWaxahachie Central: E-1: Trinity Railway Express: Dallas County line/Downtown Dallas W-3: Trinity Railway Express: Fort WorthlTarrant county line W-1: Union Pacific Mainline: Fort
Worth/Dallas (includes Dorothy Spur) W-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Fort Worth/Crowley/Burleson/JoshualClebume W-2: Fort Worth & Western/Cotton Belt: Southwest Fort WorthlTarrant
county line IE-2: Union Pacific: Carrollton/Denton LEGEND _ Airports County Lines Rail Corridors Under Study Mobility 2025 Plan Update -Passenger Rail Roadway /' .. Railroads , E"= EasUURS
Corporation W = WesUCarter-Burgess, Inc, Map Revised: March March 18, 2003
ATTACHMENT 3 Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee Meetings July 2003 Meeting Dates. Times and Locations W-4: Fort Worth to Cleburne Tuesday, July 8 3:00 p.m. to
5:00 p.m. East Half of Auditorium Cleburne, Texas 12345 E-3 and E-4: Northeast Wednesday, July 16 10:00 a.m. to Noon Council Chambers Carrollton, Texas 12345 E-2: Carrollton to Denton
Wednesday, July 16 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Council Chambers -Worksesion Room Denton, Texas 12345 E-5 and E-6: Southeast Thursday, July 17 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Council Chambers Duncanville,
Texas 12345 W-1: Fort Worth to Dallas. including the Dorothy Spur Friday, July 18 10:00 a.m. to Noon Council Chambers Grand Prairie, Texas 12345 W-2: Southwest Fort Worth to the Tarrant
Countv Line Friday, July 18 Council Chambers 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. North Richland Hills, Texas 12345
• -===T==0 W N 0 ==OF;=--.ADDIsoN OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER ® Post Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 July 3,2003 Mr. Tim Newby AVP Public Service Planning Dallas Area Rapid
Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, TX 75266-9299 Dear Tim: (972) 450·7001' FAX (972) 450·7043 5300 Belt Line Road Thank you for meeting with us recently to visit about the DART Trolley
program in Addison. As we discussed, current revenue trends in the Town's hotel/motel receipts are requiring us to reevaluate programs and eliminate certain expenditures. We have made
the determination that the Town can no longer financially support the DART Trolley program and request termination of this service in our comrilunity. I appreciate your willingness to
work with the Town in instituting the trolley service. Unfortunately, "ridership" never approached the levels we had hoped despite our best efforts. Perhaps economic circumstances will
enable DART and the Town of Addison to explore new rider service programs catering to smaller numbers ofpassengers in the future. Thank you again for all your assistance and support.
Sincerely, Ron Whitehead, City Manager c: Town ofAddison City Council Lea Dunn, Deputy City Manager Randy Moravec, Finance Director Bob Phillips, Visitor Services Director Mike Murphy,
Public Works Director
09:35 JUL 07, 2003 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #46979 PAGE: 1/4 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages: Description : STEVE CHUTCHIAN TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837
Monday, Jul 7, 2003 09:34AM 4DART Board Agenda's Hello!! ! Attaohed are the DART Board Agenda's for Tuesday, July 8, 2003. Please oall if you have any questions. Thanks, Carol Gideon
DART Government Relations 214-749-3487 From: FaxNumber: Phone Number Carol Gideon 2147493676 DTMF (214)
09:35 JUL 07, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #46979 PAGE: 2/4 Quorum = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, July 8, 2003 -Board Room 1401
Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: June 24, 2003 2. Public Hearing on October, 2003 Service Modifications 3. Public Comments Individual Items: 4. This
item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 5. Agreement with The Rouse Company for Shuttle Service to Collin Creek Mall (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 6. +Contract
for Printing ofDART Bus/Rail Customer Timetables (Extern.al Communications-Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) 7. +Approval of October 2003 Service Modifications (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen)
8. +Interview of General Counsel Candidates and Further Direction for Employment Action (Robert Pope) 9. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. Other
Items: 10. Officer Reports 11. Chair Report 12. General Counsel's Report 13. President/Executive Executive Director's Report 14. Communications and Public Comments 15. Adjournment +Same
Night Item it Briefing Item The Board ofDirectors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under
Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting oftheDARTBoardis August 12,2003.
This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodntions for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance.
708B 7/7/03 -9:33 AM
09:35 JUL 07, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #46979 PAGE: 3/4 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 2:30 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, July 8, 2003 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: June 24, 2003 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will be discussed
at the Board meeting only. Individual Items: [3 hours ] 4. *Status of Air Quality in the D/FW Nonattainment Area (External Communications-Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) { 15 minutes] 5. Agreement
with The Rouse Company for Shuttle Service to Collin Creek Mall (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) { 10 minutes] 6. +Contract for Printing ofDART Bus/Rail Customer Timetables (External
Communications-Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) { 20 minutes] 7. +Approval ofOctober 2003 Service Modifications (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {15 minutes] 8. +Interview ofGeneral Counsel
Candidates and Further Direction for Employment Action (Robert Pope) { 1 hour and 30 minutes] 9. *FY 2004 Budget Planning (Administrative-Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) {30 minutes] Other
Items: 10. Adj ournment +Same Night Item "Briefmg Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney
for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting
ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is August 12,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact
Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 708C 7/7/03 -9:33 AM
09:36 JUL 07, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3622 #46979 PAGE: 4/4 Quorum =5 1. Approval of Minutes: Planning Committee Meeting Tuesday, July 8,2003, 1:30 p.m. -2:30 p.m. DART Conference
Room C -lst Floor 1401Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [ 1 hour J June 24, 2003 2. +Approval ofOctober 2003 Service Modifications (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [20
minutesJ 3. *Northwest Corridor Update (Linda KooplDoug Allen) [20 minutes J 4. *Regional Transportation Council 2003 (RTC) Transit Partnership Program Briefmg (Linda Koop/Doug Allen)
[20 minutesJ 5. Identification of Future Agenda Items 6. Adjournment *Briefmg Item The Planning Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071,
consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Planning Committee
is August 26,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48
hours in advance. Chair -Linda Koop Vice Chair -Norma Stanton Members -Terri Adkisson, Randall Chrisman Mark Enoch, Huelon Harrison, William Velasco, Richard Watkins and Faye Wilkins
StaffLiaison -Doug Allen 708PL 7/7/03-9:33 AM
North Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: Selected County JUdges, County Administrators, DATE: June 27,2003 Mayors and City Managers Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical
Committee Members FROM: Michael Morris, P.E Director of Transportation SUBJECT: Northeast E-3 &E-4 -July 16, 2003 Meeting Notice The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the upcoming
Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee meeting. The meeting is to be held at 10 a.m. in the Council Chambers at the Carrollton City Hall, 1945 East Jackson Road.
In addition to providing an orientation to the study, staff is interested in soliciting any input you and your staff might have at this initial stage. As you will recall 'from my March
20, 2003 letter (Attachment 1), the Regional Transportation Council set aside $1,325,000 in technical planning funds to expedite transit improvements in the region. The study encompasses
corridors within Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, and Tarrant Counties. For your convenience, a study map is included as Attachment 2, a schedule of meeting dates for each corridor
as Attachment 3, and a meeting agenda as Attachment 4. Should you have any questions or comments on the above information, please call Barbara Maley or me at (817) 695-9240. We look
forward to working with you on this effort. 􀁾􀀩 CHZ: ac Attachments cc: Gyna Bivens-Mathis, Chair, FWTA Maribel Chavez, P. E, District Engineer, TxDOT-Fort Worth Charles Emery, Chair,
DCTA Jeffrey P. Fegan, Chief Executive Officer, DFW International Airport Jay Nelson, P.E, District Engineer, TxDOT-Dallas Robert W. Pope, Chair, DART Richard Ruddell, President/Executive
Director, FWTA Gary Thomas, President/Executive Director, DART Max W. Wells, Chair, DFW International Airport 2002-03 UPWP Element 3.04 Project File 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint
Two P. O. Box 5888. Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817·640·7806 @recycled paper http://www.dfwinfo.com
eetings Michael Morris, P.E. Transportation Director North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) 2. Study Orientation Michael Morris, P. E.I Barbara C. Maley, AICP Principal
Transportation Planner NCTCOG 3. Committee Questions and Feedback All 4. Other Transportation Comments All Michael Morris, P. E.I Barbara C. Maley, AICP 5. Closing Remarks/Next Steps
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Polley and Technical Committee Meetings • www.nctcog.orgltrans July 2003 North central Texas Council 01 Governments TransporlaUon Department REGIONAL POPULATION
GROWTH REGIONAL POPULATION GROWTH lYiJ r' -----------------􀁾􀀿􀁜 1
INTERURBAN SYSTEM .-CJ -..-...--_____0.. _____c.. __􀁔􀁟􀁾􀁣􀀮􀀮 _ 􀁾􀁏􀁉􀁉􀁉􀀧􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁩􀀧􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁃􀁬􀁬􀁉􀀮 REGIONAL RAIL SYSTEM CUIT.nt Light/Commuter Rail Sy...m Llgend _ 􀁾􀀱􀁢􀁉􀁌􀀮􀀭􀀮
_ ..... RllLIMa _ *-11:." RAILROAD CROSSING RELIABILITY PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM 2
TRANSIT: THE MATURING REALITY Building Blocks Toward Acceptance IIndividual Independence fRellablllty :􀁾: IIIFlexibility, Sustainablilty it ICorrtdor 5ensIUvlty, Air Quality IWorld
Cia•• City, Mobility, Community service IEnergy Availability, Sustainablllty of Local Economy 1170 1!l1lO 1990 2000 2010 INABLE DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE Objectives Mobility 2025 Updato
-...--􀀭-_􀁾-e􀀭-._..., ._•...............---._T.-_--'-Il-IIe...-.__.........􀁾 --------------_-..-_... -".,-.-----........ .. _ .......:-=....-.._-.._..-􀀻􀁾􀀺􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀻􀀺􀀮 3
I j PLANNING AND PROJECT DEVELOPMENT Process IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM Phases Phase 1: Multlmodal Transportation Needs Identification ''What do we need?" Phase 2: Evaluation of Implementation
Options "How do we get to where we want to go?" Phase 3: Process to successfully Implement What I Want "How do I succeed In what I want?" R"onaJ Rail ConIdor SIudy Aolle--. ""-fr==a.....
N_ .1..._.&ofUIIIIe:-_ 􀁟􀁾􀀭 1t_.-..e..:.-.----____.r...____ 􀀽-􀀽...􀀽..􀁅--􀀺,􀀺.,􀀽..􀀽._􀀭􀁓􀀭-􀁾-.._"'_'__" __􀁾􀁕􀁯􀁯 􀁬􀁡􀁾􀁟􀁾 4
J REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Study Organization 􀁯􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁮􀁴􀀭􀁔􀀬􀀮􀀮􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁉􀁤􀁯􀁮􀁾 (PIln*Ig SMvIc8I) _0,," 􀀨􀁾􀁾􀀩 URS 􀀱􀁾􀁉􀁡􀁬􀁾􀁬 REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Consultant Corridor
Responsibilities Western Subregion: Carter & Burgess, Inc. W-1: Union Poclllc: Fort WorlhIDollu (1..1_Donllhy Sp..) W-2: Fort Worth & W_m'Collon llell: 8011I_ Fort WorWT...... County
L1.. W-3: Trtnlty 􀁒􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁷􀁯􀁹􀁾􀀺 Fort WorWTornnt County U.. W-4: Burll_n_"m_ Fo: Fort WorthICIowloylB.......",Jooh.-........ Eastern Subregion: URS Corporation E-1: Trinity Rallwoy
Ellp...: DoIlu County UnoID__n Dollu £..2: Union P.ctftc: Carrolnowo.nton E-3: DoIIu _ RopId Tn..lI: PlonoiAllonlMcKlnnoy E-4: Burllngllon _ .....n Sonlo Fo: Co"",ncnlTho CoIonylFrIoco
E-5: Bwflngton Mort",n SIInt11 Fe: DUnc:llrMllWCedIlr HRllMldktttMn E": Burllngllon _ .....n Sonlo Fo: DoIIulLa_orIIlod OokIW_hlo REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Guiding Principles Enhance
Mobility Consider Appropriate Technologies Public PlIrtlclpatlon Consider Envlronmentel Effects Achieve Regional Consensus 5
I REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY PolicylTechnical Committees 0 ....'240 lettera mailed on March 20, 2003 County JudgM. 􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁡􀀮 Admlnlatndora, 􀁍􀁡􀀬􀀮􀁾􀁲􀁡􀀮 _nd TranapDrtatlDn Authority
Board Membera Policy Committee: locI.lty EIKted OffIcIal_, DI8trk:t Engl..... Prtvllte Sector l..eecMra.1Ki Tr....portMJon Authortty Board Membera Rooponolblilly and Frwq..ncy Teehnlcal
Commtttee: Prlvate.1Ki Public (e.g., locI.l, RegIo...I, SUta .nd F.....I) Tra...portatlon ProfnalDrwla A-.po...lblltty .nd Freq_ncy INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES Plan of Action Develop and
Implement a Public Outreach Stra1egy Collaborate to Cleal8lhe Necessary Structure search tor InnovaliYll Funding OpUons Reflne legislative Platform Create Regional Task Force TRANS TEXAS
CORRIDOR Coordination of Plans 6
NEW PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FY2003 1. TxDOTINTTAlPrivate sector: FreewaysITolI Roads/HOY Amount (Millions) a. Texas Transportation Commission Pa1orman....Based Approach (2003-2013) b. Rew-Priority
2 Projects c. NCTCOG ATe Surface Transportation Program d. Commission Strategic Priority Program e. New Toll RoadslManaged Lanes 2. Transportlltlon Aulhorltles: Rail/HOY 3. Local Govemrnems:
Air Quality Projects 􀁾􀁾􀁾.... 8E-=-$900 $300 $300 $500 $1,300 $3,300} $350+ PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM # 2 Transit ProjectS and Immediate Action HOY DRAFT 7
COLORADO RAILCAR 2003 Regional Tour self-propelled Commuter Railcar With the capacity to Pull Two Commuter Coaches Meets the FRA 49 CFR Part 238 Structural Requirements Able to Run In
Mixed Freight service; No waivers ReqUired Fuel and Maintenance Efficiency and NeIghborhood Friendly 30 to 40 gallons (DMU) va. 120 to 180 gallons Oocomotlve hauled) -T....day. 5eptember
2 to Sunday. september 7 Sialic DI.play. and Rail Trip Policy OffIcial•• TransportaUon Profes.lonal•• Public. and Media For Questions: Barbara C. Maley. AICP Principal Transportalion
Planner North Central Texas Council of Governmenls Email: bmaley@nctcog.org (817) 695-9278 (direClllne) (817) 640-3028 (fax) 8
Map Revised: July 9, 2003 Regional Rail Corridor Study Rail Corridors Legend Rail Corridors Under Study Mobility 2025 Update :' 􀁜􀁾􀀯 Existing Rail Corridors NRoadway E =EasVURS Corporation
W =WesVCarter-Burgess, Inc. Northeast: E-3: Dallas Area Rapid Transit: Piano/Alien/McKinney E-4: Burlington Northem Santa Fe: CarrolitonfThe Colony/Frisco Southeast: E-5: Burlington
Northem Santa Fe: Duncanville/Cedar Hill/Midlothian E-6: Burlington Northem Santa Fe: Dallas/Lancaster/Red Oak/Waxahachie Central: E-1: Trinity Railway Express: Dallas County linelDowntown
Dallas W-3: Trinity Railway Express: Fort Worthrrarrant County Line W-1: Union Pacific Mainline: Fort Worth/Dallas (includes Dorothy Spur) W-4: Bur1ington Northern Santa Fe: Fort Worth/Crowley/Burles
on/JoshuaiCleburne W-2: Fort Worth & Westem/Cotton Belt: Southwest Fort Worthrrarrant County Line E-2: Union Pacific: Carrollton/Denton North Central Texas AN Cou neil of Governments
Transportation
*** *** E-3 &E-4 Northeast PolicylTechnical Committee Agency Policy Technical Addison Steve Chutchian Allen Steve Terrell Peter Tian Arlington *** Carrollton Becky Miller Cesar Molina
Matthew Marchant Tom Hammons Celina Dave Carter Dave Carter Coppell *** Dallas Sandy Greyson John Brunk Terri Adkinsson Fairview Sim Israeloff Alan Efrussy Farmers Branch Ben Robinson
Dave Davis Frisco George Purefoy Frank Jaromin Scott Young Brian Moen Garland * Hackberry * Hebron * IrvinQ Rick Stopfer Jim Cline Lewisville * Little Elm * McKinney John Childers John
Kessel Melissa David Dorman Bob Heimberger Bill Reynolds DouQlas Box Murphy * New Hope * Parker * Plano Lloyd Neal Marcos Fernandez Princeton * Prosper * Richardson John Murphy Walter
Ragsdale Gary SlaQel GeorQe Human The Colony * Weston * TX-Dallas Bob Brown Brian Berth Collin County * Dallas County Sam Wilson No response to date. Declined. Representatives on two
or more corridors.
Regional Rail Corridor Study Fact Sheet E-3 Corridor: Plano to McKinney ---. . 􀀧􀁾􀀢 Owner{s) of Line Operator{s) of Line Length of Corridor Trains per Day Existing Passenger Rail Service
Existing Stations Jurisdictions Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) and Dallas, Garland, and Northeastern (DGNO) Approximately 16 miles Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) reports 4 to 20 through trains None None Plano, Allen, Fairview, McKinney, Collin County
Owner(s) of LineRegional Rail Corridor Study Fact Sheet E-4 Corridor: Carrollton to Frisco Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) Operator(s) of Line Length of Corridor Trains per
Day Existing Passenger Rail Service Existing Stations Jurisdictions Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) Approximately 19 miles Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) reports 7
through trains None None Carrollton, The Colony, Frisco, Dallas County, Denton County, Collin County
Legend Population Within a 4-Mile Buffer -E4 Corridor c=J 4-Mile Buffer People Per Square Mile 0-250 251 -500 501 -1000 __ 1001-5000 .. 5001 -12000 .. 12001 -25000 --Primary Highway
---Secondary Highway Major Arterial 2000 2030 Location Population Population Collin County 96,300 230,433 Denton County 116,561 258,046 Dallas County 110,672 132,227 Entire E-4 Corridor
323,533 620,706 Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-4 -f-r 1 . -\ . 􀁜􀀭􀁾􀀯􀁉-􀀭􀀻I􀀡N􀀭;􀁬􀁾 \ -\-l---f------. III t-/I __\. L___,__ , _ 'T .-r 􀁾􀁾 _1[1· 2000 Population 2030
Population
2000 Employment 2030 Employment Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-4 Legend -E4 Corridor c::J 4-Mile Buffer Employment Per Square Mile 0-250 251 -500 501-1000 1001 -5000 5001 -25000
_ 25001 -75000 Ia.I 75001 -175000 --Primary Highway --Secondary Highway Major Arterial Employment Within a 4-Mile Buffer 2000 2030 Location Employment Employment Collin County 48,057
118,476 Denton County 19,264 48,303 Dallas County 165,126 226,571 Entire E-4 Corridor 232,446 393,351
N lil1_l!"". 2000 Population 2030 Population Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-3 Legend -E3 Corridor c=J 4-Mile Buffer People Per Square Mile 0-250 251 -500 501 -1000 ..............
1001 -7000 I-. 7001 -10000 I-. 10001 -13000 --Primary Highway --Secondary Highway Major Arterial Population Within a 4-Mile Buffer 2000 2030 Location Population Population Collin County
255,292 481,771 Dallas County 26,285 32,271 Entire E-3 Corridor 281,577 514,042
Employment Within a 4-Mile Buffer Legend Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-3 -E3 Corridor c=J 4-Mile Buffer Employment Per Square Mile 0-250 251 -500 501 -1000 1001 -25000 _ 25001
-50000 11II 50001 -100000 --Primary Highway --Secondary Highway Major Arterial -2000 2030 Location Employment Employment Collin County 125,441 277,610 Dallas County 45,601 78,741 Entire
E-3 Corridor 171,041 356,351 N -A N 1. 2000 Employment 2030 Employment
WE ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE TO ASSIST THE REGION IN EXPANDING SEAMLESS TRANSIT REGIONAL TRANSIT SUMMIT August 15, 2003 www.nctcog.org/trans BJJ:Regional -J􀁾 Transportation 􀁾􀁃􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁣􀁩􀁬
Success And Vision Transit Needs And Constraints Process For Inclusion Schedule For Your Participation Mr. Robert W. Pope, Chair Dallas Area Rapid Transit Mr. Charles Emery, Chair Denton
County Transportation Authority Ms. Gyna Bivens-Mathis, Chair Fort Worth Transportation Authority Commissioner B. Glen Whitley, Chair NCTCOG Regional Transportation Council 􀁃􀁾􀀻􀀡
REGIONAL SUCCESSES IN TRANSIT Proven Service Delivery Proven Financial Stewardship Success of Light Rail and Trinity Railway Express Success of "Bottom-up" Public Involvement Process
Proven Seamless Transit System Success in Innovative Financial Partnership Regional Planning Process Underway 􀀮􀁾􀁾 VISION 􀁓􀁔􀁁􀁔􀁅􀁍􀁅􀁾􀁔 To provide a bottom-up process for the
exchange of information and ideas among elected representatives, policy officials, and the general public regarding options for the implementation of a seamless transit system for North
Central Texas. 1
TRANSIT: THE MATURING REALITY Building Blocks Toward Acceptance IIndividual Independence "..oCo :; 0.. IReliability IFlexibility, Sustainablllty I Corridor sensitivity, Air Quality IWorld
Class City, Mobility, Community Service IEnergy Availability, Sustainablllty of Local Economy 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 􀁃􀁩􀁾􀁢 PROBLEMS AND 􀁃􀁾􀁟􀁎􀁓􀁔􀁒􀁁􀁉􀁎􀁔􀁓 PROBLEMS Air Quality
Compliance Growing Cost and Unreliability of Automobile Travel Growing Population Without Transit Options CONSTRAINTS Sales Tax Caps Reached 4A14B vs. Transportation Local Competition
at Federal Level Regional Rail Corridor Study RaIl COITldors ::, 􀀧􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀧 􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀽􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀮 􀀧􀁾.... 􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁥􀀭􀀮􀀬􀁟􀁣􀀾􀁾􀀮􀀢􀁾􀀧 .,., 􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀺�
�􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀧􀀻􀀺􀀮.􀀮.,.. 􀁾􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀭 ,--<:.-􀁻􀁉􀁉􀀮􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀂭 \'.-. .... <:--N_ 2
􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀻􀁾􀁉􀁦􀀬 NEED 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 Transit capability throughout entire region: How do we get there? CONSENSUS PROCESS: A "Bottom-Up" Approach FINANCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL 􀀬􀁾􀁉
STRUCTURES 􀁾􀁛􀀬􀀻􀀬􀀮􀀻􀁲􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀮􀁰􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭􀁉􀁡􀀽􀁮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀽􀁯􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀁦-=--A:..::c-=:ti.=o.:..:n_ Implement Recommendations From Transit Summits Create Ten Regional Task
Forces Develop and Implement a Public Outreach Strategy Search For Innovative Funding Options Review Legislative Options Collaborate to Create the Necessary Changes 3
J PROPOSED COMMITIEE 􀁾 STRUCTURE Committees 1 _ 6 Refining Transit Needs in Mobility 2025 Update Committee 7 Committee 8 Committee 9 Committee 10 Identifying Additional Transit Needs
for Mobility 2030 Evaluate Financing Options Evaluate Institutional Structures Judges/Mayors Communicate Options to Legislature PUBLIC OUTREACH STRATEGY 􀁃􀀢􀁾􀀪􀁾􀁟􀁍􀁟􀁰􀁟􀁯􀁟􀁡􀁟􀁮􀁟􀁤􀁟􀁔􀁟􀁲􀁟􀁡
􀁟􀁮􀁟􀁳􀁟􀁰􀁟􀁯􀁟􀁲􀁴􀁟􀁡􀁴􀀮􀁩􀁯􀁮 Authorities Transit Summit, March 21.2002 Widespread Denton County Support, November 5, 2002 Regional Transit SummlUChallenge, August 15, 2003 Task
Force PartlclpationtPubllc Meetings Colorado Railcar Regional Tour, September 1 -7,2003 Support for Denton County Election, September 13,2003 Committees 1-6 Meet, september 15 -19, 2003
Transit Summit (Committees 7 -10), Fall 2003 Judges/Mayors WorkshopIMld-Year Review, February 2004 Transit Summit,. Summer 2004 Judges/Mayors North Texas Legislative Conference, Summer
2004 Legislative Proposal, Fall 2004 􀁾􀀻 CONCLUSION Need Your Support and Involvement Consultants Under Contract to Assist Focus on How to Implement Plans Focus on Nine County Region
One Year Schedule for Consensus Legislature Awaiting Response 4
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Land Use 􀁾􀁳􀁳􀁵􀁥􀁳 Schedule for RRCS Land Use Discussions JulyIntroduction and Growth Issues September The Why, What, Who, When, How and Where of Transit-Oriented
Development November Focus on the How and Where of Transit-Oriented Development Discuss corridor specific land use issues January Set working assumptions on land use issues 1
Why? Corridor E-3 Population Population Within a 4-Mile Buffer 2000 2030 Location Population Population Collin County 255,292 481,771 Dalias County 26,285 32,271 Entire E-3 Corridor
281,577 514,042 Why? Corridor E-4 Population Population Within a 4..Mile Buffer 2000 2030 Location Population Population Collin County 96,300 230,433 Denton County 116,561 258,046 Dallas
County 110,672 132,227 E-4 Corridor 323,533 620,706 2
Why? 1999 Congestion Levels Legend Areas of Moderate PeakPeriod Congestion Areas of Sever Peak-Period Congestion Annual Cost of Congestion = $5.3 Biliion DRAFT Why? Mobility 2025, 2004
Update Congestion Levels Legend Areas of Moderate PeakPeriod Congestion Areas of Sever Peak-Period Congestion Annual Cost of Congestion = $13.4 Biliion 3
Why? Rail Development Patterns Lower Vehicle Miles Traveled Per Household (1995 data shown below) Histone Street Car Developments and Recent Growth Patterns • Average Home-Based VMTJHH
80.00 70 00 􀁩􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀽􀀭􀀭__􀀮.-' 45 50.00 􀁲􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁣􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭
..􀀭􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀢􀀭 Regional Average 40.00 L__.,. 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀻􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬 ..􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁟􀁾__􀁾􀁾..􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀧􀁣􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀢
􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭_.', _,_. ::: 􀀬􀁾 -:..􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭 I---.. -􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁉􀂷􀂷=-= 1000 􀁾 -􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 􀁾􀀭 ----􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 000 --Historic Street Car Historic Street Car Historic Stree\
Car System in Denton System in System in Dallas Fort WorthWhy? Transit=Oriented Development (TOO) Benefits Mixing land uses and increasing densities increases the frequency of trips
by walking, bicycle or rail. Allows the choice of walking for short trips and the option of driving shorter distances. Maximizes the use of public infrastructure. Increases tax base
in the district without reducing tax values of surrounding properties. Creates a neighborhood with an authentic sense of place. Rail investments tend to increase surrounding occupancy
rates and values. 4
What? Transit-Oriented Development Mixed use development that capitalizes on the location advantages of transit stops. Features walkable, sustainable neighborhoods. Sometimes features
neighborhood retail; sometimes major destinations. Includes varied land uses; a mix of residential, commercial, and retail space which are clustered around a rail stop. Accommodate parking
and bus needs. What? Transit-Oriented Development Single-use zoning has isolated and segregated land uses, requiring people to drive from place to place; transit-oriented development
allows short trips. Low VMT Area Type 5
Who? Implementation Partners Private Sector -Homeowners, commercial developers, remodeling contractors, non-profit groups, residential developers, railroad owners/operators Local Government
-Cities, counties, special districts Regional Government Transit Authorities State Government -Texas Department of Transportation, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Texas Department of Economic
Development When? The Basics Less dense suburban development patterns may fail to meet TOO market thresholds. Near-term land use may be different than long-term potential. Land outside
the rail corridor will compete for development opportunities. Effective use of form-based zoning in the near-term future can help create immediate TOO identity and brand the station
area as a TOO for future marketing. When development occurs in advance of a rail station, transitoriented development standards still need to apply. When rail stations are opened in
advance of development or redevelopment, the station site should maximize potential development opportu nities. 6
When? The Suburban LRT Example Downtown Plano Transit Center Parker Road Station is a has revived the heart of Plano commuter-oriented station with through revitalization efforts 1,555
parking spaces and a bus netting $34 million in new private transfer center. It was opened as investment, including 234 units park and ride/transfer center and neighborhood retail at
the originally. The large parking lot station platform. There is no secures the land in case of station-specific parking available. development opportunities. When? The McKinney Avenue
Trolley Example Pre WWII -Part of Dallas' original trolley car system. 1950's -Service abandoned. 1980's -Public and private partnerships develop to restore service in 1989. 1990's -Trolley
service helps to define and brand the surging Uptown District. Current -Service extensions increase functionality and use. 7
When? The Trinity Railway Express Example Jobs walking distance in FW eBO: 40,000+Jobs walking distance at Bell: 4,000+ Jobs walking distance in Dallas eBO: 40,000+ How? Advice from the Urban land Institute: 1. Make It Better with a Vision Daily Ridership: 9,000+
Parking Spaces at all stations: 2,238 2. Apply the Power of Partnership 3. Think Development When Thinking About Transit 4. Get the Parking Right 5. Build a Place, Not a Project 6. Make
Retail Development Market Driven, Not Transit Driven 7. Mix Uses, But Not Necessarily in the Same Place 8. Make Buses a Great Idea 9. Encourage Every Price Point to live Around Transit
10. Engage Corporate Attention More on "How" to Create TOO's at the next meeting. 8
Where? Where? Corridor E-3 ",\'(I _ r North Central Texas Jurisdiction Map Legend DMPA -Regional Rail Corridors 2 Mile Buffer 􀁾 Area Within Existing Cities Umits 􀁾 Green Space Major
Lakes 9
Where? Corridor E-4 Where? Important 'where' factors: local land Use Control Technical Rail Constraints The Market ParkingfBus Access Needs More discussion on 'where' at the next meeting.
Homework: Review NCTCOG Land Use Maps Submit major land use constraints/opportunities to COG 10
Additional Questions Can new development patterns fit within existing communities? Can local governments adopt zoning to allow TOO and forms that transition to TOO? Can new automobile
traffic generated by station development be accommodated? Can the region make investments in rail where land use will be incompatible to bicycling and walking in the long-term? Will
an increase in the number of stations dilute interest in TOO? Can current parking and bus access needs be designed to accommodate future TOO growth? What are the opportunities for commuter
rail to leverage TOO? What will the Policy/Technical Committee input on land use issues be? Additional Information Contact: Mike Sims 817.695.2226, msims@nctcog.org NCTCOG Center of
Development Excellence www.developmentexcellence.com Additional Resources www.uli.org www.dpz.com www.placemakers.net www.gatewayplanning.com www.municode.com 11
05 0.5 Legend 􀁾􀁅􀀳􀁃􀀼􀁬􀁲􀁲􀁯􀀺􀀺􀁏􀁬 o 11'2 'Jl1c8v,ler M.1JorEmprO'lers A 􀁾􀁏􀁟􀀵􀀻􀁏 ::\ 􀀶􀀷􀀰􀂷􀀱􀀨􀁾􀁏 A. m.O-6250 A 5250 crg'etler -P1:rM'Y H'9hw3y 􀀭􀁓􀁃􀁉􀀻􀁏􀁍􀀮􀁡􀀧􀁙􀁈􀁪􀀻􀀻􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀢􀀮
􀁡􀁹 --Malor 􀁁􀁲􀀮􀁥􀁲􀁾􀁬􀁾 􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁖􀁥􀁾􀁩􀀺􀀾 􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁦􀀢􀁥 􀁾􀁒􀁥􀁬􀁡􀀧􀁩 􀁛􀁀􀁬􀁮􀁳􀁬􀁾􀁕􀀧􀁬􀁊􀁬􀀾􀀢􀁾􀀱 mHolelMmel _NIlsln,r T"nspan,rron But,I'.<tS 􀁾􀁁􀁾􀁰􀀺􀁮 􀁾􀁐􀀡􀁲􀁩􀀼􀁳􀁒􀁥􀁣�
�􀁈􀁜􀁴􀁯􀁮 􀁾􀁵􀁲􀀮􀁃􀀡􀀨􀀬􀁲􀁬 􀁾􀁕􀁮􀀼􀀺􀀺􀁥􀀧􀁃􀁣􀁍􀁉􀁉􀁉􀀢􀀾􀀺􀁉􀁉􀁏􀀢 FioodCor1!lOI 2 Miles 􀁌􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁌􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀁟􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁌􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁌􀁾􀁃􀁟􀁊􀀡 Legend =E3C<lrr,C!o,
D'(.!M,loBI.1rer 􀁍􀀺􀁬􀁊􀁯􀁲􀁅􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁯􀁾􀀨􀀱 A. 􀀧􀀲􀁾􀀮􀀶􀀷􀀰 /\ J\ 2750·5'250 A 5250 01 sre"'er -Pnrn,r,' 􀁈􀀧􀁓􀁨􀁷􀁾􀁹 -Sel;Ol\d''YH><J"way 􀀭􀀱􀀮􀁢􀀩􀁣􀁲􀁁􀁲􀁴􀁥􀀢􀀡􀀧􀀬􀁾 ........
Veloweb 􀁾􀁒􀀢􀀢􀁬􀁯􀁡􀀺􀁡 􀁓􀁬􀁬􀁉􀀹􀁬􀁥􀁆􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁲􀁵􀁾 .ornu R"Rellld 􀁾􀁬􀁲􀁵􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁕􀀧􀁬􀀧􀁏􀁮􀀺􀁬􀀱 BHOlelMclel IIlI!IIlnc1U1.l''''1 • _._", 􀁔􀀧􀁾􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁰􀁡􀁮􀀺􀁬􀁉􀀧􀁏􀀢 􀁾􀁕􀁬􀀻􀀡􀁲􀁴􀀺􀁮
􀁾􀁁􀀮􀀱􀁐􀁏􀁲􀀱 .P!lIo3Rec,uloon D3uI'II:!l'l 􀁟􀁕􀁮􀁮􀁤􀁥􀀧􀁃􀁏􀀢􀁾􀁜􀀨􀁕􀀺􀁬􀁬􀁏􀀢 2 Miles L.l---'----'------L-L---'_'--, Corridor E-3 (North Section) DRAFT Corridor E-3 (Central
Section) DRAFT 12
􀁾􀀮􀀭//\ ..... ......... FM2170 ") -1__􀀭􀀱􀁟􀁾􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀧􀁐􀀢􀀢􀀽􀀧􀁋􀁐􀁁􀁒􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀧􀀻􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀢􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀭􀀭 Legend c:=::lEJeomdor Dlr.lM,leBuffcr /,bIoI 􀁅􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁯􀁶􀁥􀀡􀁾 A.'-\ 67(1·1450
1.150· 􀀲􀀷􀁾􀁏 :'-\ 2750-6250 A 6250.,rg,ealer -PomaryH<g......ay -SeC£lMaryH,;"...,y -Ma)lltAtlenals •••••••• Velowel> 5;ngleFam,y 􀁍􀁵􀁬􀁾􀀮􀁆􀁡􀁭􀀧􀁦􀁬 􀁾􀁏􀁴􀁦􀁕 􀁾􀁒􀁥􀁬􀁾􀀱􀀱
􀁾􀁬􀁮􀁓􀁬􀁾􀁵􀁬􀀬􀁯􀁮􀀳􀀱 􀁾􀁋􀁯􀁬􀁥􀁉􀁍􀁯􀀨􀁥􀁬 EIt1au11nai T'SrlSparr'T:cn 􀁾􀁕􀁉􀀢􀀬􀀮􀀬􀁥􀁳 􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀱􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁲 􀁾􀁐􀁡􀁲􀁫􀁳􀁒􀁥􀁣􀀬􀁥􀁾􀁉􀀬􀀢􀁮 􀁟􀁶􀁮􀁣􀀺􀀺􀁥􀁲􀁃􀁑􀁮􀁾􀁬􀀧􀁵􀁃􀀡􀁬􀁏􀁮
0.5 2 Miles I Corridor E·3 (South Section) DRAFT Legend 􀀭􀀻􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁤􀁏􀁦 􀁄􀁜􀁉􀀲􀁉􀀮􀁜􀀮􀀺􀁥􀁂􀀬􀀢􀁲􀁾􀁥􀀬 !k1jorEmployen ,f.\ 􀀻􀀾􀁾􀀭􀁇􀀷􀀰 A!\ A 􀀶􀀲􀀵􀀰􀁯􀁉􀀹􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁬􀁥􀁦
-PnmaryH<gIT"'sy -Se""n<::aryHlgl\way -Ma)crAr.Cllsls •••••••. Velo.....eb S!rIgleF;rTU'r ifD.:lli 􀁍􀁯􀁊􀁾􀀮􀁦􀀢􀁡􀁭􀁬􀀢 􀁾 MotNle Homes 􀁧􀁾􀀱􀀲􀀧􀀶􀁩 Group Qwane" E:!ar>e:c mlRcla,1
BlnW,<JlOOnal I!!!!J Hotel Motel 􀁟􀁾􀀱􀁴􀁲􀀮􀁡􀁬 ,,, "c; 􀁔􀀬􀁡􀁾􀁾􀁐􀀼􀁬􀀢􀁡􀁬􀀧􀁏􀁮 mUI,"llel 􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁛􀁰􀀢􀁮 gPalksReCIUl.On m!1l.at1afJII ll!IIIuMerConstll.J:I'On 0.5 2 Miles I
Corridor E-4 (North Section) DRAFT 13
0.5 05 "􀀻􀀬􀁾 RANKFORD Legend -E4Corn(lc, 􀁄􀁬􀁲􀀮􀁉􀁊􀀬􀀡􀁾􀁂􀁵􀁦􀁦􀁎 􀁾􀁢􀁬􀁣􀁲 􀁅􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁯􀁹􀁥􀁲􀁾 A 􀁾􀁏􀂷􀀶􀀷􀀰 ._\ 670·1450 􀀱􀀴􀁾􀀰􀂷 2750 /-\ 2750·6250 A 􀀶􀀲􀁓􀀰􀁃􀁬􀁉􀁬􀀧􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁗
-Pnmery H'9""'lly -SeconoaryH,>!I'?w'''Y 􀀭􀁍􀁬􀁬􀁉􀁃􀁴􀁁􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁮􀀢􀁬􀁾 •••.••" 􀁖􀁾􀁬􀁣􀁷􀁥􀁢 ScngleFamlti 􀁍􀀢􀁬􀁴􀀬􀁆􀁬􀁬􀀢􀀧􀁾 􀁾 􀁍􀁯􀁴􀀾􀁊􀁾 Homes 􀁟􀁯􀁲􀁦􀁾􀁯 9 Relarl 􀁾􀀱􀀢􀁓􀁉􀁾􀁕􀀱􀀢􀀬􀁮􀁾
􀀱 I2ml HOlel MOlel 􀁟􀁬􀁮􀁯􀁵􀁾􀁉􀁍􀁉 ,', 􀁔􀁲􀁡􀀢􀀬􀁰􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁉􀀧􀁏􀀢 􀁾􀁕􀁜􀀬􀁵􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁾 􀁾􀁐􀀭􀁊􀁊􀁰􀀺􀁭 􀁾􀁐􀁬􀁬􀁉􀁜􀀼􀀱􀀮􀁒􀀽􀁥􀀢􀁬􀀾􀁃􀁮 􀁾􀁌􀁯􀁲􀀧􀁬􀀼􀁬􀁲􀁏􀁩 BIUl'Ider 􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁜􀀮􀁃􀁜􀁊􀁯�
� Floo<:lConlrol 2 Miles L--'--L-J._L--'---'--"-_' Le.gend -E-ICC/IJdc, D1r. kh1 e8<.tler 􀁾􀁢􀁊􀁯􀁲􀁅􀁮􀀧􀁬􀁰􀁬􀁯 ... r. A 􀁾􀀵􀀰􀂷􀀶􀁩􀁏 :'\ 670·10\50 1.;50· 􀁾􀀷􀀵􀀰 ;\ 􀁾􀀷􀀵􀀰􀀮􀀶􀀲􀀵􀀰
A 􀀶􀀲􀀵􀀰􀁃􀀨􀀹􀀧􀁾􀀱􀁬􀀺􀁴􀁲 -􀁐􀁮􀁭􀁾􀁲􀁹 􀁈􀀢􀁊􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁙 -Secono.lryH'£jl'tWlly 􀀭􀁍􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁲􀁁􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁮􀁬􀁬􀁬• ••••••-􀁖􀁾􀁩􀀼􀀾􀀢􀀢􀁴􀁢 -Rll,lrOllO' 2 Miles 􀁌􀀮􀀮􀁬􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀁟􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭�
�􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀁟􀁾􀀬 Corridor E-4 (Central Central Section) DRAFT Corridor E-4 (South Section) DRAFT 14
DRAFT Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-3 Legend Population Within a 4-Mile Buffer --E3 Corridor ="-1 4-Mile Buffer --Primary Highway Secondary Highway --Major Arterial People
Per Square Mile 0-250 􀁴􀁓􀁾􀁾􀀦􀁦􀁬 251 -500 _ 501-1000 _ 1001-7000 _ 7001 -10000 _ 10001 -13000 2000 2030 Location Population Population Collin County 255,292 481,771 Dallas County
26,285 32,271 2000 Population 2030 Population Entire E-3 Corridor 281,577 514,042 DRAFT Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-3 Legend Emplo mentWithin a 4-Mile Buffer --E3 Corridor
':.-_---.J 4-Mile Buffer --Primary Highway ---Secondary Highway --Major Arterial Employment Per Square Mile 0-250 251 -500 􀀵􀀰􀀱􀁾􀀱􀀰􀀰􀀰 1001 -25000 _ 25001 -50000 􀁾 50001 -100000
2000 2030 Location Em loyment Employment Collin County 125,441 277,610 Dallas County 45,601 78,741 2000 Employment 2030 Employment Entire E-3 Corridor 171,041 356,351 15
Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-4 Legend 96,300 230,433 116,561 258,046 110,672 132,227 Location --E4 Corridor 􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁩 4-Mile Buffer 􀁾􀀭 Primary Highway Secondary Highway People
Per Square Mile 0-250 251 -500 501-1000 81001-5000 ..5001 -12500 ..12501 -25000 Population Within a 4·Mile Buffer 2000 2030 Population Population Dallas County Collin County Denton County
DRAFT2000 Population 2030 Population E-4 Corridor 323,533 620,706 Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E·4 Legend 48,057 118,476 19,264 48,303 232,446 393,351 165,126 226,571 Location
4-Mile Buffer --Primary Highway 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾 Secondary Highway Employment Per Square Mile 0-250 251-500 501 -1000 1001 -25000 25001 -50000 _ 50001 -175000 Emplo ment Within a 4·Mile
Buffer 2000 2030 Employment Employment Dallas County Denton County E-4 Corridor Collin County 2000 Employment 2030 Employment DRAFT 16
Agenda [Project Overview Station Criteria land Use 22 Station Criteria 101 Station Planning Process This Process is highly interactive and seeks to determine: o Where stations should
eventually be located along alternative rail corridors; • What functions each station will serve (commuter station, park-and-ride, transfer center, etc.); and, • Conceptual prototypical
station layout, to best serve regional rail patrons while fitting into context of the surrounding environment. Station Planning Goals 1. Select sites for stations that wili provide rail
patrons with convenient access to the regional rail system; 2. Provide opportunities for increased ridership without threatening the integrity of communities and neighborhoods; and 3.
Select sites that can be cost-effectively implemented. 23 DRAFT 12
Station Criteria 101 Target Station Area: Identification and Assessment This step in the process: • Seeks to identify target station areas based on: • Previous system planning efforts
• Trip-making characteristics • Site visits • Aerial photography Land use development • Community plans Following the identification of target station areas, several interactive steps
will be taken to confirm and assess the target station areas: • Meetings with local city planners for station areas within their jurisdiction; • Input from the RRCS Policy and Technical
Committees; • Input from the general public during public meetings. 24 DRAFT Station Criteria 101 Station Site Evaluation Criteria • Site Configuration (ridership, station spacing, geometric
requirements, design constraints) • Traffic and multi-modal access (parking and circulation, access/egress, grade separation requirements, local traffic impacts, pedestrian/bicycle access)
• Environmental Issues (neighborhood compatibility, relocations and displacements, environmental compatibility) Economic Developmentffransit-Oriented Development (Local plan compatibility,
existing zoning -transit supportive, transit oriented development potential) 2S DRAFT 13
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Policy and Technical Committees September 2003 􀁾.•................ 􀁾 www.nctcog.org/trans North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department
Agenda Project Overview Corridor Fact Sheet Technology Summary Station Criteria land Use 2 1
Legend All uistlng I"iIllroad rights-ot-way should be monitored for potential future lransportallon corridors. N • \ North Central Te,.;as ..); . -.",,:.-. Council of Govomml!nl!l __,;;:".
Transportation _ Commuter Rail I'fi§!lI Light Rail .. North Crosstown Corridor Study e Possible Eastem Terminus 5ffB Staged Rail * a·D" Special Events .••• --Intercity Rail Corridor
-Freeways/Parkways .••••. Existing Rail Corridors • STAGED RAJL (Must mont two 01 the following) Rllflnecll"illl forecasts are nllcll:s.sary to determine technology and alignment EX1cnsJon
Into Olympic Village Sito {South Oak Cliff LRT) InslltuUonar structure for ImplemontatJon 10 bo delermlned • OART and FWTA IIxpanslon (profolTod) or New transit .authorlUcs will be created
• Othllr 􀁳􀁯􀁵􀁲􀁣􀁾􀁳 of funding 10 bo pursuod 􀁎􀁾􀁷 facility 􀁬􀁯􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁳 Indicate transportatJon 􀁮􀁾􀁤􀁳 Olnd do not represent spc<:ltIc aJlgnments. Mobility 2025 Update Rail
System ':---,----,,-;-------.--------, (', Regional Rail Corridor Study Rail Corridors Nor1heasl: E·3: Dallas Area Rapid Transit Plano/Alien/McKinney E-4; Burlington Northern Santa Fe:
CarrolitonfThe Colony/Frisco Southeast: E·5: Burlinglon Northern Santa Fe: DuncanvilleJCedar Hitl/MidloU1ian E·6: Burlington Nor1hern Santa Fe: DaliaslLancas\er/Red OaklWaxahachie Central:
E·l: Trinity Railway Express: Dallas County line/Downtown Dallas W·3: Trinity Railway Express; Fort WorthfTarrant COlH'lty Line W·1: Union Pacific Mainline: Fort Wor1h/Oallas (incluOas
Dorothy Spur) W·4: BUrlington Northern Santa Fe: FortWorthlBurJeson/JoshualCleburne W·2: Fort Worth & Weslern/Cotton Belt: SoutllNest Fort WorthfTarrant County Line E·2: Union Pacific:
CarrolllonlDenton Legend NRail Corridors Under Study /"./Existing Rail Corridors NRoaa.ny E= EasVURS Corporalion W = WesVCarter-Burgess. Inc 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁊􀀺􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺 ti 􀁔􀁲􀁎􀁬􀁓􀁰􀁯􀀮􀀱􀁾􀁜􀁩􀁯
􀁮 MipUpo:hlod: Seplomoo 11.2003 2
TRANSIT COMPONENTS Elderly Persons w/Disabilities > Demand Response Local Bus > Express Bus/Park and Ride/HOV Bus Feeder Bus/Circulator Rail Circulator Regional Rail Light Rail Intercity
Rail > Rail STUDY ORGANIZATION Rev. 091/08/03 Carter Burgess Inc. (Issue Identification) Project Manager: Mike McAnelly Project Direclor: Tom Shelton Manuel Padron & Associates, Inc.
(Revenue and Costs) InterSlar Marketing & Public Relations (Public Participation) Dunbar Transportalion Consulling (Assess Feasibility, Travel Markets) Michael Morris Barbara Maley Ruth
Boward Christie Zupancic Aruna Birakayala Angie Carson URS Corporation Principal in Charge: Tim Baldwin Project Manager: Tim Baldwin Deputy Project Manager and Public Involvement: Cinde
Gilliland Dunbar Transportalion Consulting (Planning Services) Jacobs Civil (Railroad Coordination) URS (Implementation Planning) 6 3
CONSULTANT CORRIDOR RESPONSIBILITIES Western Subregion: Carter & Burgess, Inc. W-1: Union Pacific: Fort Worth/Dallas (includes Dorothy Spur) W-2: Fort Worth & Western/Cotton Belt: Southwest
Fort WorthlTarrant County Line W-3: Trinity Railway Express: Fort WorthlTarrant County Line W-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Fort Worth/Crowley/Burleson/JoshualCleburne Eastern Subregion:
URS Corporation E-1: Trinity Railway Express: Dallas County Line/Downtown Dallas E-2: Union Pacific: Carrollton/Denton E-3: Dallas Area Rapid Transit: Piano/Alien/McKinney E-4: Burlington
Northern Santa Fe: CarrolltonlThe Colony/Frisco E-5: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Duncanville/Cedar Hill/Midlothian E-6: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Dallas/Lancaster/Red Oak/Waxahachie
GUIDING PRINCIPLES Enhance Mobility Consider Appropriate Technologies Public Participation Consider Environmental Effects Achieve Regional Consensus 4
POLICYITECHNICAL COMMITTEE Formation: Over 240 letters mailed on March 20, 2003 County Judges, Mayors, Administrators, Managers, and Transportation Authority Board Members July 8 to
July 18 Meetings: Project orientation Question and answer period September 16 to September 19 Meetings: Sustainable development and station selection criteria Question and answer period
Policy Committee: Locally Elected Officials, District Engineers, Private Sector Leaders and Transportation Authority Board Members Technical Committee: Private and Public (e.g., Local,
Regional, State and Federal) Transportation Professionals 􀀫􀀮􀁎􀁉􀁾􀀮 􀁒􀀮􀁧􀀬􀁾􀁮􀁊􀁉 Rill 􀁃􀁾􀁮􀁬􀁨􀀧􀁓􀁴􀁵􀀶􀁹 •.􀁾􀁬􀁗􀀮 C>MT 􀁃􀂫􀁬􀁾􀀭􀀧􀁉􀁬􀁾 l'oul......".Ip!s + "I'-lIW'Tllllqortr.:on
P,nlduJnunlury ... 􀀧􀀬􀀢􀀡􀁾􀁟􀁾􀀧􀁁􀁬􀁲􀁃􀁨􀁈􀀧􀀬􀁔􀀮􀁬􀀼􀁬􀀮 fin.n"'.JA>:ownc. 􀁐􀁉􀁾􀁧􀀧􀀮􀁭 ... 2003-:2OO<-U?W1' ... 20042Cm TIP ... 􀁉􀀮􀀨􀀮􀁬􀀾􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁨􀁴􀀮􀁮 􀁔􀁕􀁾􀀮􀁲􀁴􀀮􀁉􀀺􀀺􀁬􀀮􀁮
Plill Se<lfch lha NCTCOG web 􀁾 DFWinfo.com normeJ:rrt:IIIe:asCCIIJncld 􀀮􀁦􀀱􀀧􀁕􀁕􀀬􀀮􀁊􀁌􀀮􀀺􀀾􀁬􀀩􀁖􀁾􀂷􀁻􀀮􀁵􀁌􀁩􀀮􀁶􀁬􀁌 􀁖􀁥􀁬􀁵􀁌􀁬􀀢􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁨􀁾􀁉􀁌􀁬 Tronsit Summit Present!!ltlon
August 15th, 2003 .•. We accept the challenge to assist the region in expanding seamless transit. " tffi"1JO,.olltu.nory 9111 8K. 􀀹􀀯􀀱􀀶􀀭􀀹􀁦􀀱􀀹􀁾 􀁾 i Rll. Edt Yew .. 􀁦􀁬􀁬􀁖􀁏􀁦􀁾􀁾
. Tc;w:k ..HOIP 􀁉􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀧􀂷􀂷􀀬 Ii> dJ :::ill"," 􀁾􀁆􀁾􀀢􀀬􀀧􀁾 􀁾􀁊􀀥􀀮 oj 􀁦􀁦􀁩􀀮􀂷􀀺􀁊􀁾􀀺 @. i 􀁍􀀺􀁫􀁥􀁾􀀧􀁴􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁟􀀬􀁟􀁾􀁟􀁴􀁾􀀿􀀹..􀀰􀁲􀁬􀁊􀁬􀁢􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀡􀀭
9124 EEJIE. 9fl6 ITI£ 􀁾 ..--...􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀢􀀭 ..􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀭􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀭 ----",-..--.----.__.;C 􀁴􀀮􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁮􀁥􀁴􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 to 5
9;5.?AM 􀀮􀀻􀂣􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀸 11 R.glanlJ R..U "􀁏􀁁􀁒􀁔􀁃􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀱􀁬􀀱􀀬􀁑􀀧 po TIJr:<;:<>l!.Ill<>n Inlol}' AlIChld<Tvcu ....unt.Pr<>g'""l 04UP'lif' o:lllP Ie NCTCOG wab 􀀭􀀭􀁾 T"'l<o curwablltcrsurva'fiJ
DFWinfo.com north certr.... te.:aCOUl'1cl 01 ,boot Us ByPwur<!rn An:a ByTOflic 6ot1mclVod L!aps and Data PubUea:tjons Cammfltees RfPs Traveler lu(o 9/11 BE. 9126 .sI:Ir. ,. _ J',."".;,,,,
../.->""" ,. Air Qualtty Conformity ,. AlrQualityPlannirl{) J CommunltyOulJellch ,. CompLtter 􀁾􀁥􀁭􀁳 J Con{lostjon hfana{lenumt Sy5;tcm Corridor Mlf SUb.AIea Planning. East Canidar
Md SubArea Planning. WeS"l Dep.ar1menl AdmInlstmtlon Fiscal Administr3l10n Infatmation Syitems ------LantI·Useilransportation and Intermodal Freight PlMning 􀀮􀁉􀁫􀀢􀀺􀁉􀀺􀂷􀁪􀁬􀁊􀀮􀁾
􀁾 􀀮􀁣􀂷􀀢􀀻􀁉􀀺􀁉􀁉􀁾 LtettopolitanTranspanation Plan PuhUc TrunsportmJon Ptannlna Transportation Programmlna 9116-9119 􀁾 Trawl FOl2castin{) 􀁾 􀁖􀁟􀁥􀁾􀁩􀁣􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁾􀁡􀁟􀁬􀁜􀀿􀁾􀀵
9114 eE1IE VIelcum£:' to ill';' 􀀢􀁾􀁄􀁲􀁴􀁬􀀬 Cenl:ri,rTm-i,dS Council of GO<;(lrnrrmn!:; 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁵􀁤􀀢􀁙 -􀁓􀁬􀁬􀁰􀁴􀁾 .....b<!r 10, 􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾.. .J":! l, 􀁾 􀁨􀁴􀁴􀁰􀀺􀀯􀀯􀁷􀁷􀁷􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁦
􀁯􀀮􀁏􀁔􀀮􀁬􀀯􀁕􀀳􀁬􀀧􀁊􀁓􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁩􀀡􀀡􀁮􀁬􀀻􀁲􀁰􀁦􀁫􀀺􀀻􀀭􀁤􀁴􀀻􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀁳􀁴􀀢􀀧􀁉􀀬􀀻􀀬􀁬􀀬􀁴􀁩...􀁾􀀮 :􀁲􀁮􀁾􀁸􀀭 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀧􀀺􀂷􀁉􀀭􀀭􀁪􀁊􀀭􀁅􀀻􀁶􀀮􀀻􀁭􀁣􀀺􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀺􀁉􀀭􀀻􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁡􀁟􀁯􀀮
:􀀱􀀮􀁩􀁊􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁜􀁪􀀻􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀺􀂷􀀺 I' 􀀰􀁾􀁒􀁍􀁤􀁥􀁲 1􀁀􀀩􀁐􀁲􀁥􀀲􀁦􀁴􀁾􀁬 􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁄􀁾􀀨􀁔􀀨􀁏􀁇 Tra-: fi.e. EiS:. V_ 􀁦􀁡􀁶􀁴􀁤􀀮􀁾 􀁔􀁾 I-lelp ."'B.x> . 􀁾􀀬 -;)!1f􀁾􀀢􀁾􀀢􀀺􀀻􀀢􀀧􀁟􀁾􀁆􀀢􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀬
􀀮􀁾 􀁬􀁌􀀧􀁪􀁜􀁊􀀺􀀭􀀢􀁾􀁉􀀡􀂥􀁬􀀧􀀡􀀺􀁂 􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀰􀀮 􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁉􂂬􀁬􀁬􀁩􀀺􀁴􀁰􀀺􀁊􀁬􀁭 ......􀁲􀀱􀀼􀀺􀁴􀀨􀁾􀀮􀁏􀀨􀀨􀁊􀀨􀁴􀁲􀁻􀁓􀀧􀀺􀁓􀁦 -DFWinfo.com n/ll'ttlcefltnflo:ueounclc1QCJnmrnenis
Public Tfclnsportati,:,nPJanning ProgranTArea Leiid Barbara Maley, Program Managor Olhe, SMfl. Michelle Bloomer, Senior Transporlaticln Planner Ruth Soward. Senior Transportation Planner
Christie Zupancic, Senior Tr3nsporl'<l1ion Planner A1una 8irakayala. Transporl3tian PI3nner I ('on!'lcl r;pr\j9nS for 􀀵􀁲􀀢􀁮􀁾􀁣 lcpirs to Ihl) ofQm3m 􀁾􀁦􀁾􀀺􀀱 NCTCOG's Public Transportalion
Planning and Management Sludies Group provides assislance 10 lacal 􀁧􀁯􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁮􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁬􀁳 3nd Iransport31ion 3ulhorities "";th public Iransport3tion planning activities th31 focus on
idenllfying opportunilills for incre3sed service in the region 3S 't'('8!l as improving the efficiency and effectiveness or cuuenl syslems, WClrk 31so 􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁯􀁬􀁶􀁯􀁥􀁳 helping metropohtan,
urban, rural, 3nd private transportation pfovidels 10 beller underst3nd the needs of Ihe transportal ion disadvantaged, Including low-income, elderly, and persons 'Wi1h disabilities.
Siaff 31so works with the private-for-hire transpClrtalion indusl!)' to beller understand lheir operaling environmenls, which could result in suggeslions for 􀁩􀁭􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁾􀁥􀁤 regianal
efficiency and effectiveness .. Puhlic TranspQf1Jl!lon Main PM!} ........ DFW Ail""" R<'Iil PI<'Inninn SllldV .. Rogional Transit Surnmil P'lIflilB. Trinity Railway 􀁆􀁽􀁬􀁰􀁬􀁰􀀮􀁾
Ridership SUIVP.Y _ Job Accoss I Rel/olSe [ommulo Program IJ'IIIiI1iIIII. Rel1ional Rlli! Corriclor Sludy !:::!..Q.mfl..1 .l@!lli;;onarion Hom'" I O€pilrtmenfs: I􀁾 I􀁾 DFI'IINfO,CO"'l
􀁾 North Cllnt1l! Tlllt,u ClIun<:i! of GOllorn.....llnc 616 s;" F101Qf Ori". P.O. 100)( 5eee k\inqton, T)( 760Cl5-5asa 12 6
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁏􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾..-.-..􀁟􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮 <1< ••,• .-';l:) @I 􀁾 ':!\Seorch 􀀡􀁂􀁆􀁯􀁶􀁯􀁮􀁴􀀢􀀧􀀮􀀧􀀳􀁉􀁾􀂷 "" 100:
!B 􀁾􀀮 [Q. s 􀁉􀁾 􀁨􀁴􀁴􀁰􀀺􀀯􀀯􀁷􀁷􀁷􀀮􀁤􀁦􀁷􀁩􀁮􀁦􀁯􀀮􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁾􀁕􀁬􀁓􀀯􀁰􀁵􀁢􀁬􀁩􀁕􀁲􀁡􀁮􀀤􀁦􀁒􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁑􀁮􀀧􀀧􀁕􀁬􀀬􀀬􀁩􀀱􀀯􀁲􀀧􀀧􀁕􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀮􀁨􀁴􀁟􀁭􀁾􀁟Regional Rail Corridor study
» Interactive Study Map ,,,,.. "Public Meetings • December 2002 • Ju" 2003 » policy and Technical Committees Public Transoortation Home Home I Transportation Home I Deoartments I Search
I􀁾 OFWINFO.COM 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀮􀀬􀀬􀀭􀁟..._,-"._----_..._..􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭 􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 ..􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭 ..􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭-------'$ 􀁉􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁭􀁥􀁴􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾
􀁉􀁟􀁌􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀺 __􀀮􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁷 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁴􀁟􀁾 __ ,__􀁾􀁾 􀁾 ,. __,, , __ 􀀬􀁟􀀮􀀬􀁟􀀬􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾__., •. _,_"",_.,, ._..__ ___ 􀁬􀁾 ul jAddress 1:eJ http://www.dfwinfo.com(trans/public3rol..\S/R
egionol_Roiljlnteract.pdf Regional Rail Corridor Sludy RJil Corridors II 􀁴􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀻􀀮􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀻􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀺􀀬􀀬􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀻􀀮􀀬􀀻􀀬􀀬􀀺..􀀮.􀀬.......,, IT'E::=:::::: 􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮�
�􀁾􀁾 ..... N-.=o_ 􀁾􀁑􀂻􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀮􀀢􀀮􀀢􀁾 􀁴􀁶􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁾􀁉􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧 N--H 9.96x7.461n I 0 􀁬􀀽􀁾 _ l5' X .. 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀮 ::OJ 􀁾􀁇􀁯 I 14 7
i File Ed.,,: 􀁾􀀧􀁥􀁷 􀁆􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁓􀀢 T"'* Heb 􀀭􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀺􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀻􀀺􀁩􀁬􀁔􀁉􀁤􀁾􀁾􀁆􀁾􀂷􀂷􀁾 􀁉􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁪􀁽􀁾􀁾􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁟􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷 -..... . . 􀁾􀁾􀁊􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀡􀀺􀁴􀂣􀀨􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁃􀀮􀀢􀀻􀁾􀀮􀁾�
�􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀭􀀺􀁢􀁾􀀧􀀳􀀬􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 _ __._.__. . M, • 􀀻􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁾 DFWinfo.com nathOl.'llrOlflslIlIa:llIntld CNetnm.:r:11 Northeast Corridor <-E-3, E-4 c 􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁭􀀻􀁜􀁬􀁾􀁾 Formation
"-July 16 ')003 Presentation 􀀮􀁾 • <:;ign-jn Sh(!(!! • COfriderFacl Sht>p! • 1:.3 Ponl!!i!liop 􀁾􀁲􀀮􀁤 EmnIQ..-mer,! S!:llislics 􀁾 􀁅􀂷􀁾 Popul<lliol111l1d Emplo\lmo?l1! S!;:;!lslics
Reo,on;:;1 R;ld Cor,;dqr S:qdl' P',lplic Tr.=tr'.sport.=tlion Home DFWIHFO.tOH 􀁾 North C,nlTlI T.",.s Co"nc;il of OO""l1m'l1tl 616 Si" FlaQs Dn"_ P.O. /lox :sen Allill<;lton, 1)( 76005''-868
For Mare Information visit: 2l,JJ,'J!.c Tr.;n<oofq;llon conqcts: 􀀺􀁥􀁊􀀧􀁨􀁴􀁴􀀻􀀾􀀡􀁦􀁦􀁟􀁬􀁗􀁾􀁤􀁗􀁤􀁣􀀮􀁴􀁃􀁬􀁊􀁬􀀯􀁢􀀢􀀻􀁶􀀭􀀮􀁳􀁊􀁰􀀮􀀮􀁴􀁪􀀨􀁪􀁲􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀺􀁓􀁹􀀺􀁾􀁊􀁕􀁹􀁬􀀱􀀺􀂷􀁾􀀭
1itSstartl. 􀁾 􀁾 $!. 􀁭􀁲􀁲􀁢􀀺􀁉􀁬􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁯􀀭􀀻􀀩􀁳􀁣􀂷 .. 􀀱􀀳􀁳􀁮􀁣􀀺􀁰􀁲􀁾􀁥􀁴.. 1􀁀􀁾􀁟􀁭􀁬􀁬􀂣􀀮􀁬􀁒􀀮􀀴􀁩􀁈􀁄􀁉􀀧􀁵􀀮􀁥􀁒􀀮􀀭 􀁾􀁍􀁣􀁲􀁯􀁳􀁯􀁴􀁴􀁐􀁣􀁬􀁙􀁥 􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁷􀁗􀀻􀀻􀁴 􀀺􀀻􀀬􀁩􀀭􀁩􀀡􀁬􀀱
􀀳􀁾􀁓􀀱 􀁾􀀭􀀭 15 REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Common Misperception: Transit is subsidized, highways are not Reality: Transit subsidies are a direct government expenditure, while most
automobile subsidies are indirect (costs borne by society.) Private automobiles cover 66 to 80% of their costs. Private automobiles account for 85% of all transportation costs. While
both transit and highway projects get federal money, transit gets significantly less. Automobile subsidies are far greater per user, since drivers tend to travel more than transit riders.
8
For More Information: Western Subregion Christie Zupancic Senior Transportation Planner North Central Texas Council of Governments Email: czupancic@nctcog.org (817) 608-2335 (direct
line) (817) 640-3028 (fax) Eastern Subregion Ruth Boward Senior Transportation Planner North Central Texas Council of Governments Email: rboward@nctcog.org (817) 695-9275 (direct line)
(817) 640-3028 (fax) Agenda Corridor Fact Sheet Technology Summary larnd Use 17 18 9
FT Corridor E·3· (North Section) 2 Miles I 1I0.5 Institutional Legend 1450 -2750 ,"0."" Veloweb -+--Railroads Single Family MUlti-Family Mobile Homes Group Quarters ..Office Retail Hotel
Motel ..Industrial Transportation Utilities Airport Parks Recreation 􀁾 Landfill ..Under Construction Flood Control Vacant Water )'1. 2750 -6250 A 6250 or greater --Primary Highway --Secondary
Highway --Major Arterials ---E3Corridor o 1/2 Mile Buffer Major Employers A 250 -670 Pi. 670 -1450 oI FM 546 􀁾􀁅 A A l() I'->S:r: C/) :::>
FT 'Corridor E-3 (Central 'Section) 2 Miles I 1I0.5 Institutional Legend 1450 -2750 --+---Railroads Single Family Multi-Family Mobile Homes .000.... Veloweb /\ 2750 -6250 􀁦􀀧􀀬􀁾 A
6250 or greater --Primary Highway --Secondary Highway --Major Arterials Group Quarters ..Office Retail __III E3 Corridor o 1/2 Mile Buffer Major Employers A 250 -670 A 670 -1450 Hotel
Motel .-I Industrial Transportation .. Utilities Airport Parks Recreation ..Landfill ..Under Construction Flood Control Vacant Water oI BETHAN􀁉􀁾 ESTATES EXCHANGE 􀁾ZG) mr m (f) oz
a:: 0... (f) oz ir: «o a:: M 2170 FM 170 FM 720
F Corridor E-3 (South Section) 2 Miles I 1I0.5 Vacant Water Institutional Legend ........ Veloweb -l--Railroads Single Family Multi-Family Mobile Homes Group Quarters ..Office Retail
Hotel Motel ..Industrial Transportation ..Utilities Airport Parks Recreation .. Landfill ..Under Construction Flood Control ___E3 Corridor o 1/2 Mile Buffer Major Employers A 250 -670
1\ 670 -1450 1450 -2750 A 2750 -6250 A 6250 or greater --Primary Highway --Secondary Highway --Major Arterials oI FM 2170 LANO 0 ·•·•·􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀹􀀮􀀧􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁄􀁾􀁏􀀮+.·•···􀁾 .......":•.
Io ...J I(J) m;;0 FM 2170 FM2170 »r 􀁾 » »r 􀁾 » PAR ER LEGACY 􀁯􀁯􀁬􀀩􀁣􀀢􀀮􀁾􀁡􀀧􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁉􀀱􀁗􀀱􀀳􀁊􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁾􀁅􀁐􀁴􀁲􀁏􀀮 :Ull:lm l3l!11I1:II:IClQl:IIIlIrIg•
Population Within a 4-Mile Buffer 26,285 32,271 255,292 481,771 2000 2030 Population Population Legend Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-3 =--E3 Corridor 4-Mile Buffer Primary
Highway Secondary Highway Major Arterial People Per Square Mile 0-250 251-500 501 -1000 1001 -7000 7001 -10000 10001 -13000 Location Collin County Dallas County F 2000 Population 2030
Population Entire E-3 Corridor 281,577 514,042
F Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-3 Legend 48,057 118,476 19,264 48,303 165,126 226,571 .... E3 Corridor o 4-Mile Buffer --Primary Highway --Secondary Highway -------Major Arterial
Employment Per Square Mile 0-250 251 -500 501 -1000 1001-25000 25001 -50000 50001 -100000 Location Employment Within a 4-Mile Buffer 2000 2030 Employment Employment Denton County Collin
County Dallas County 2000 Employment 2030 Employment E-4 Corridor 232,446 393,351
F Corridor E-4 (North Section) 2 Miles I 1I0.5 oI HICKORY (J) /Legend -i »-i /E4 Corridor m o 1/2 Mile Buffer r0 0 Major Employers 1J N co A 250 -670 c.D A\ 670 -1450 "" """ " ." .....
..." !l 1450 -2750 p, 2750 -6250 1. A 6250 or greater (J) -i --Primary Highway »-i m VIRGINIA --Secondary Highway I --Major Arterials 􀁾-< CDCOCO" Veloweb Nco -+--Railroads c.D Single
Family Multi-Family Mobile Homes (J) Group Quarters -i » -i 􀁾Office mI Retail 􀁾-< Institutional Nco c.D Hotel Motel ..Industrial Transportation .. Utilities Airport Parks Recreation
Landfill IIIlII Under Construction Flood Control Vacant Water FM 720
F Corridor 􀁅􀁾􀀴 (Central Section) 2 Miles I --1I0.5 Water 250 -670 670 -1450 1450 -2750 Landfill 􀁾 Under Construction Flood Control Legend -+--Railroads Single Family Multi-Family
Mobile Homes Group Quarters 􀁾 Office Retail "000'''' Veloweb Vacant Institutional 􀁾 Hotel Motel ..Industrial Transportation Utilities Airport Parks Recreation A 2750 -6250 A 6250 or
greater --Primary Highway --Secondary Highway --Major Arterials --E4 Corridor o 1/2 Mile Buffer Major Employers oI A A A lJ »G5 m lJ »G) m
F Corridor 􀁅􀁾􀀴 (South Section) 2 Miles I 1I0.5 250 -670 Institutional 670 -1450 AA'􀁾 DOO'O'O' Veloweb Legend Hotel Motel ... Industrial Transportation ... Utilities Airport Parks
Recreation .. Landfill ..Under Construction Flood Control Vacant Water 1450 -2750 A, 2750 -6250 A 6250 or greater --Primary Highway --Secondary Highway --Major Arterials ----I-Railroads
Single Family Multi-Family Mobile Homes Group Quarters ... Office Retail --E4 Corridor o 1/2 lVIile Buffer Major Employers oI $: o􀁾 » -< o􀁾 -< RNAT/ONA A KELLER SPRINGS FRANKFORD
---E4 Corridor __'I 4-Mile Buffer Primary Highway Secondary Highway People Per Square Mile 0-250 251 -500 501 -1000 1001 -5000 5001 -12500 12501 -25000 Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor
E-4 Legend Population Within a 4-Mile Buffer 2000 2030 Location Population Population Collin County 96,300 230,433 Denton County 116,561 258,046 Dallas County 110,672 132,227 E-4 Corridor
323,533 620,706 2000 PODulation 2030 Population UKAt' I
Employment Within a 4-Mile Buffer 48,057 118,476 19,264 48,303 232,446 393,351 165,126 226,571 2000 2030 Employment Employment Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor E-4 Legend --E4 Corridor
c=J 4-Mile Buffer --Primary Highway Secondary Highway Employment Per Square Mile 0-250 251 -500 501 -1000 1001 -25000 25001 -50000 50001 -175000 Location Dallas County Collin County
Denton County E-4 Corridor 􀀢􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 2000 Emnlnvment 2030 Emolovment
Char cteristics of ifferent Technologies Typical Commuter! Regional Rail Heavy Rail Comparison Data Self-Propelled (DMU) Regional Rail Characteristics Locomotive pulled or pushed and
pUlled single or bi-Ievel cars or mUltiple electric units operating on railroad track Single or articulated mUltiple unit vehicle operating over existing railroad track (FRA compliant)
or exclusive track (non-FRA compliant) Articulated mUltiple unit cars operating on city streets, atgrade, elevated, or subway alignments Street bus, articulated bus, or trolley bus operating
on an exclusive at-grade, subway, or elevated gUideway Multiple unit married pairs or triples operating over exclusive subway, elevated, or at-grade right-of-way Vehicle or vehicles
using monorail, guideway beam, or rails on dedicated right-of-way or guideway Power Source Diesel-electric or electric with overhead catenary Diesel-electric or diesel with direct drive
Electric with overhead catenary Diesel, alternative fuel, or wire. Usually 600 to 750 \Olts DC overhead electric trolley wire Electric with third rail, usually 750 Electric with or without
magnetic to 1000 \Olts DC levitation, linear induction motor, or other such power source Stations and Typical Spacing Maximum Operating Speed Low or high level platforms with or Low-level
with shelter or structure. Low or high-level platforms with or Low level with platform area and without shelter or station Spacing of 2 to 5 miles. without shelter or station shelter
or building. Spacing of structure. Spacing of 3 to 5 miles structure. Spacing of Y2 to 2 several blocks to several miles miles 79 to 90 mph 60 to 90 mph 55 to 65 mph 55 to 65 mph High
level platforms with station structure. Station spacing of 1 to 3 miles. 50 to 80 mph Usually high level platforms with stationstructure and station spacing of 1 block to several miles 25 to 55 mph Route Length Maximum Grade Cars or Units per Train (Consist) Seated Capacity per Car or Unit Capital Cost per Mile
(excluding right of way) Capital Cost per Vehicle Vehicle Life Expectancy Availability 20 to 100 miles 10 to 100 miles 8 to 25 miles 2 to 60 miles 10 to 100 miles 5 to 10 miles 3 to
4 percent 3 to 4 percent 7 percent 10 to 13 percent 4 to 6 percent 4 to 6 percent 3 to 12 1 to 6 1 to 4 2 to 10 1 to 8 80 to 170 60 to 170 32 to 90 44 for street bus 60 to 80 seated,
125 to 150 with 10 to 30 62 for articulated bus standees $2-20 million $2-20 million $20-55 million $1-20 million $50 -250 million $100 -200 million $1-3 million $3-4 million $2-3 million
$0.2 -0.5 million $2-5 million $1-4 million 25 to 30 years 25 to 30 years 25 to 30 years 9 to 12 years 25 to 30 years 20 to 25 years In production FRA compliant designed In production
In production In production In limited production (Colorado Railcar); Non-FRA compliant in production in Europe Applicability Urban passenger train service for local short to medium
distances travel operating between a central city and adjacent suburbs Urban passenger train service for local short to medium distances travel operating between a central city and adjacent
suburbs Medium to high capacity passenger service used for short or line-haul trips, on fixed rails in right-of-way not necessarily separated from other traffic. Cannot be used in rights-of-way
with freight railroad traffic unless separated spatially or temporal Local service in urban areas or travel from outlying suburbs. Operations can include a mix of local, express, and
Skip-stop services at different times of day. High speed and rapid acceleration Most commonly used in nonfor hea"Y \Olume of traffic in urban transit settings, for activity area settings
with densely populated circulation or shuttle service. areas. R FT
R FT Regional Rail Corridor Study Fact Sheet E-3 Corridor: Plano I Allen I McKinney Length of the Corridor: Approximately 16 miles Trackage Rights: None Operator of the Line: Dallas
Area Rapid Transit (DART) Dallas, Garland, and Northeastern Railroad (DGNO) Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) Plano, Allen, Fairview, McKinney, Collin County On an average weekday there
are two local switching trains traveling to local industries. None 28 at-grade highway /railroad crossings 4 grade-separated highway /railroad crossings None There is a single track
with one siding located in McKinney. There is no railroad signaling on this track. The entire corridor is operated with a maximum speed limit of 10 mph. There is currently no service
between Plano and McKinney. Four total Owner of the Line: Passenger Service: (Existing) Railroad Crossings: Trains per Day: Track Summary: Passenger Stations: (Existing) Industrial Sidings:
Jurisdictions: Corridor Issues: All new track would be needed on this corridor. All bridges on this corridor would need to be rehabilitated. New service would need to be coordinated
with DART Light Rail service ending at Parker Road in Plano. Centralized Traffic Control (CTC) signal system would need to be installed on the corridor.
RAFT Regional Rail Corridor Study Fact Sheet E-4 Corridor: Carrollton I The Colony I Frisco Length of the Corridor: Approximately 19 miles Trackage Rights: None US HWY 380 Burlington
Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) On an average weekday there are 12 to 14 trains, of which approximately half carry rock. None None Carrollton, The Colony, Frisco, Dallas County, Denton
County, Collin County There is a single track with one siding located at Hebron. There is no railroad signaling on this track. The entire corridor is operated with a maximum speed limit
of 49 mph. 26 at-grade highway /railroad crossings 6 grade-separated highway /railroad crossings 2 at-grade crossings with other railroads Owner of the Line: Operator of the Line: Burlington
Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) Trains per Day: Passenger Service: (Existing) Railroad Crossings: Passenger Stations: (Existing) Track Summary: Jurisdictions: Industrial Sidings: Four
total Corridor Issues: Centralized Traffic Control (CTC) signal system would need to be installed on the corridor.
Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee Meetings JUly 2003 Agenda 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Study Orientation 3. Committee Questions and Feedback 4. Other Transportation
Comments 5. Closing Remarks/Next Steps Michael Morris, P.E. Transportation Director North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) Michael Morris, P.E.! Barbara C. Maley, AICP Principal
Transportation Planner NCTCOG All All Michael Morris, P.E.! Barbara C. Maley, AICP
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Policy and Technical Committee Meetings www.nctcog.orgllrans July 2003 North central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department REGIONAL POPULATION
GROWTH REGIONAL POPULATION GROWTH 1
r-INTERURBAN SYSTEM '-" 0-.-.--...._ 􀁔􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀢􀀧􀁯􀀮􀀮 T__-,._ __􀁔􀁟􀁾􀁯􀀮􀀮 􀁟􀁲􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁏􀁯􀀮 a==-A. REGIONAL RAIL SYSTEM Current Light/Commuter RallSy8tem L'liJI'nd RAILROAD CROSSING
RELIABILITY PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM 􀁾􀁾 ; < 􀁾􀀯 i .1 2
TRANSIT: THE MATURING REALITY Building Blocks Toward Acceptance I Individual Independence ., 'o" Co 􀁾 IReliability IFlexibility, Sustainablllty ICorridor senslllvlty, Air Quality IWorld
Class City, Mobility, Community service I Energy Availability, Sustainablllty of Local Economy 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE Objectives UtJIIz:8 ExbtJng
Syatem Copeclty :---.....􀁾 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀢􀀬􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭M..o.b..i.li.t.y.2025 Update --'-----__􀁥􀀭􀁾...... .􀁟􀁾􀁴􀁟-_ -. -􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮-􀀬􀀮􀀭􀁾 .__ .......􀀭􀁾 M .. _ .. -----------_---------_
....-..---..-.---------_---_.. ........ _....-._".,"'4 _ .__.._....--.,sF :􀁾II!!!􀀽r -􀀭-'-􀀭 3
PLANNING AND PRO.IEeT DEVELOPMENT Process I Systems Planning L Alternatives Analysis 􀁾 Preliminary I Engineering C1 Final Design I YConstruction I IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM Phases Phase
1: Multimodal Transportation Needs Identification "What do we need?" Phase 2: Evaluation of Implementation Options "How do we get to where we want to go?" Phase 3: Process to successfully
Implement What I Want "How do I succeed in what I want?" Regional Rail Corr1dor Study RaIl Corrldon 􀁛􀁾 ... 􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 _--,.􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾 •• •• 0..-.-__ .._--,._--􀁾􀀮 ::􀀧􀁓􀀽􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁓􀀧􀀽�
�􀀭􀀽􀁾􀁟----_..􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭 4
--s.rtoar:. ...1ey Ru!h Bo.an:l 􀁃􀁍􀀮􀁾􀁾 AnlM SWakayW P-wt KowomkJ DIlflt.tTrw.porIIItkItlConsuitina 11'lanr*'O$etYil:e) 􀀢􀁾􀁃􀀢􀀢􀁉􀁉 􀀨􀁾􀁃􀀼􀁄􀁤􀁎􀁴􀁩􀁬􀀻􀁲􀁯􀁬 UR. 􀀨􀁭􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁫􀀺􀀡􀁴􀀧􀁬􀁆􀀧􀁬
􀁡􀁮􀁮􀁩􀀧􀁬􀁧􀀩 REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Study Organization w.nu.I Pdtln • A..􀁯􀁤􀁡􀁾􀀬􀁬􀁮􀁥􀀮 􀀨􀁾􀁷􀁬􀁤􀁃􀁏􀁬􀁢􀁬 lntwStw Matbtll"ll "Put& R_Dora; 􀀨􀁐􀁵􀁢􀁬􀁩􀁣􀁐􀁾􀀱 Dunt.r
Truaportllbrl Consurtlng (......... FN;,ibiI'f', T,..... MatUII) REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Consultant Corridor Responsibilities Western Subregion: Carter & Burgess, Inc. W·1: Union
Pacific: Fort Wol1lVDa.11u (Includd Dorothy Spur) W-2: Fort Worth & W....􀁾􀁮Belt: Southw." Fort Worth/Tarrant County Line W-3: Trinity Ralfway Expnlu: Fort WorthlTarrant County Une
W-4: BUrlington Northern Santa Fe: Fort Wol'ltVCrow5eyl8ur1nonlJoshualCWuJfne Eastern Subregion: URS Corporation E.1: Trinity Railway Exp.....: Dalla County UnelDowntown Callas E-2:
Union Pacific: Carrolltarw'Denton E·3: Dalla Ana Rapkl T... nalt: PllllnoIAU.nlMcKlnney E-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: CarroUtaTVrM CokmylFrIsc:o e--5: Burlington Northern Sante
h: DuncanYlls.lCedar HlIlIMldlothian E-6: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: D1IUu/LancuterJRMJ OakIWaxahach" REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Guiding Principles Enhance Mobility Consider Appropriate
Technologies Public Participation Consider Environmental Effects Achieve Regional Consensus 5
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY PolicylTechnical Committees Owt 240 lette.... mailed on March 20, 2003 County Judges. Meyora, AdmlnJatnrtora, 􀁍􀁡􀁮􀁴􀁬􀁾􀁲􀁡􀀮 and Transportation Authortty
Board Membera Policy CommtttM: Locally EIeetMI otnelals, Dilltrk:t Englnoen, Prlvale Sector Leadera and TrllflllporlaUon Authortty Board Membera R••ponslblltty and Frequency Tochnk:e:1
Cammttt..: Prlvat. and Public: (e.g., Local, Regional, Stat. and Federal) TrllnsportaUon Profe••lonal. R••ponslblltty and Frequency INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES Plan of Action Develop and
Implement a Public Outreach Strategy Collaborate to Create the Necessary Structure search for Innovative Funding OptIons Refine legislative Platform Create Regional Task Force TRANS
TEXAS CORRIDOR Coordination of Plans a,==:.A 6
NEW PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FY 2003 1. TxDOTINTTAlPrlvate sector: FreewaysfToll Roads/HOV Amount (MIllions) a. Texas Transportation Commission Performance-Based Approach (2003-2013) b. Review
Priority 2 Projects c. NCTCOG ATC Surface Transportallon Program d. Commission Strategic Priority Program e. New Toll RoadslManaged Lanes $ 900 $ 300 $ 300 $ 500 􀁾$3,300 2. Transportation
ALllhorltles: RaIVHOV 3. Local Governments: Air Quality Projects } $350+ -􀁾􀁾-􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁭􀁲􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀫􀀺􀀧􀀢􀀧􀀻􀀻􀀧􀀺􀀭􀁟􀀧􀁲􀀭__"""'_"'" -􀀭,􀁾,􀀮-􀁟--􀀭--__0e-"-"_'._""_
_ e-"__'''''''' PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM # 2 Transit Projects and InmedJate Action HOV 􀀮􀁾􀀬 􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀯􀁆 DRAFT -. : 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬 􀁬􀀮􀀲􀀮􀁬􀀱􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀧 􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀮 􀀷􀀢􀀮􀀱􀁾􀀱􀁓􀀮􀀱􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀲􀀮􀁥􀁴
U,"fWl '.1UD.:JO.".40 ....􀁾􀁟 lQ.l1,lt.2'.:N ••' T...., .........E.-1'.2' _0.-l'l,%Z.X1 1M 14.2SP.a.:-." TtlINTIiloI 􀀡􀁉􀀺􀁬􀁉􀀢􀀢􀀭􀀻􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁾􀀧􀁾 􀁾􀀽􀀺􀁴􀀺􀀺􀀭􀁟17.:lIl
OlNr'....􀁾􀀮 7
COLORADO RAILCAR 2003 Regional Tour sell-propel/ed Commuter Ral/car With the capacity to Pul/Two Commuter Coaches Meets the FAA 49 CFR Part 238 Structural Requirements Able to Run In
Mixed Freight service; No waivers Required Fuel and Maintenance Efficiency and Neighborhood Frlendty 30 to 40 gal/ons (DMU) v•. 120 to 180 gal/on. (locomotive hauled) Tuesday, september
2 to Sunday, september 7 Static DI.play' and Ral/Trip Policy Officials, Transportation Professionals, Public, and Media For Questions: Barbara C. Maley, AICP Principal Transportation
Planner North Central Texas Council of Governments Email: bmaley@nctcog.org (817) 695-9278 (direct line) (817) 640-3028 (fax) 8
Population Within a 4-Mile Buffer Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor W-2NALegend -W2 Corridor c::J 4-Mile Buffer --Primary Highway Secondary Highway People Per Square Mile 0-250 251
-500 _ 501 -1000 .. 1001-5000 .. 5001 -25000 ..25001 -75000 II1II 75001 -150000 2000 2030 Location Population Population Oa lias County 37,088 43,079 Oenton County 961 2,435 Tarrant
County excluding ceo 526,926 675,392 Fort Worth ceo 1,972 9,331 W-2 Corridor 566,947 730,237 2000 Population 2030 Population
Employment Within a 4-Mile Buffer Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor W-2NALegend -W2 Corridor c=J 4-Mile Buffer --Primary Highway Secondary Highway Employment Per Square Mile 0-250
251 -500 501 -2500 2501 -10000 10001 -50000 50001 -100000 _ 100001 -500000 􀁾 500001 -1000000 2000 2030 Location Employment Employment Dalias County 58,348 97,638 Denton County 34 231
Tarrant County excluding caD 334,833 506,348 Fort Worth caD 55,605 79,452 W-2 Corridor 452,403 687,353 --------2030 Employment /' 2000 Employment /.'
Owner(s) of LineRegional Rail Corridor Study Fact Sheet W-1 Corridor: Fort Worth to Dallas Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Operator(s) of Line Length of Corridor Trains per Day " Existing
Passenger Rail Service Existing Stations Jurisdictions 'ft' Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Approximately 31 miles Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) reports 19 through trains Amtrak
Amtrak Stations in Fort Worth and Dallas Fort Worth, Arlington, Grand Prairie, Dallas, Tarrant County, Dallas County
Owner(s) of LineRegional Rail Corridor Study Fact Sheet W-2 Corridor: Fort Worth to Grapevine Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) Operator(s) of Line Length of Corridor Trains per Day Existing
Passenger Rail Service Existing Stations Jurisdictions Fort Worth and Western Railroad (FWWR) Approximately 26 miles Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) reports 3 to 8 through trains
Tarantula Steam Train (Excursion Train) Tarantula Train Depots in Grapevine and Fort Worth Fort Worth, Haltom City, North Richland Hills, Colleyville, Grapevine, Tarrant County
Map Revised: July 9, 2003 Regional Rail Corridor Study Rail Corridors Legend Rail Corridors Under Study Mobility 2025 Update /\'':/Existing Rail Corridors NRoadway E =East/URS Corporation
W =West/Carter-Burgess, Inc. Northeast: E-3: Dallas Area Rapid Transit: Piano/Alien/McKinney E-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: CarnolltonlThe Colony/Frisco Southeast: E-5: Burlington
Northern Santa Fe: Duncanville/Cedar Hill/Midlothian E.{3: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Dallas/Lancaster/Red Oal</Waxahachie Central: E-1: Trinity Railway Express: Dallas County line/Downtown
Dallas W-3: Trinity RailWay Express: Fort WorthlTarrant County Line W-1: Union Pacific Mainline: Fort Worth/Dallas (includes Dorothy Spur) W-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Fort Worth/Cnowley/Burles
on/JoshualCleburne W-2: Fort Worth & Western/Cotton Belt: Southwest Fort WorthlTarrant County Line E-2: Union Pacific: Carnollton/Denton North Central Texas AN Cou neil of Governments
Transportation
*** *** W-2 Fort Worth &Western Cotton Belt PolicylTechnical Committee Agency Policy Technical Bedford * Benbrook Ron Sauma Dave Gattis Blue Mound * Collevville Mark Skinner Clayton
Husband Coppell Jayne Peters Ken Griffin Dallas *** Edgecliff Village ** Euless * Flower Mound Van James Kent Collins Forest Hill * Fort Worth Christa Sharpe Dana Burghdoff Grapevine
Sharon Spencer Ramana Chinnakotla Haltom City Kent Flynn Hurst Richard Ward Mike MorQan Irving Rick Stopfer Jim Cline Keller * Lewisville * North Richland Hills Tim Welch Mike Curtis
Scott Turnage Steve Norwood Richland Hills * River Oaks * Saginaw * Sansom Park * Southlake * Watauga Harry Jeffries Kerry Lacy Rick Nelson Johnnie Reagan Westover Hills ** Westworth
Village * TxDOT -Fort Worth * Tarrant County * No response to date. Declined. Representatives on two or more corridors.
*** *** W-1 Union Paci'fic Mainline PolicylTechnical Committee Agency Policy Technical Arlington Steve McCollum Kathy Morgan John Cartusciello Keith Melton, P.E. Jeff Williams Bedford
* Cockrell Hill *** Dallas Ed Oakley Ken Melston Dalworthington Gardens * Euless * Forest Hill * Fort Worth Ralph McCloud Christa Sharpe Wendy Davis Dana Burqhdoff Grand Prairie Harrv
Enqlert Jim Soarks Haltom City *** Highland Park * Irving *** Panteqo ** University Park** TxDOT -Fort Worth * Tarrant County * No response to date. Declined. Representatives on two
or more corridors.
Population Within a 4-Mile Buffer Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor W-1NALegend --W1 Corridor c=J 4-Mile Buffer --Primary Highway Secondary Highway People Per Square Mile 0-250 251
-500 501 -2500 --2501 -10000 􀁾 10001 -25000 ..25001 -50000 .. 50001 -150000 .. 150001 -4000002000 2030 Location Population Population Dallas County excluding CBD 463,920 573,070 Dallas
CBO 1,654 16,337 Tarrant County excluding CBO 694,906 866,165 Fort Worth CBD 1,517 10,832 W-1 Corridor 1,161,997 1,466,404 2000 Population 2030 Population
Employment Within a 4-Mile Buffer 2000 I 2030 Location IEmployment Employment NA 464,908 604,671 130,473 160,733 375,892 522,095 126,696 154,014 1,097,970 1,441,514 Legend --W1 Corridor
c=J 4-Mile Buffer --Primary Highway Secondary Highway Employment Per Square Mile 0-500 501 -1000 1001 -5000 5001 -10000 10001 -25000 25001 -50000 50001 -75000 _ 75001 -100000 􀁾 100001
-3100000 Regional Rail Corridor Study Corridor W-1 Tarrant County excluding CBD W-1 Corridor Fort Worth CBD Dallas CBD Dallas County excluding CBD 2030 Employment 2000 Employment
\ BORE CHART/SKETCH WR# glOlt3 U JOB NAME DATE f'i::7J -".J' JOB LOCATION/ADDRESS A I I-?"?,,,R.r FJk Lt/t/CITY Ad".),:'S'/JA.J ul:.... 'n o(START 15' 30' 45' 60' 75' 90' 105' 120' 135'
a' $" J' -3 #10'# 􀀳􀁾􀁊􀁉􀀢 ,-/' ij' If' 􀁾 r, 􀁬􀁦􀁾􀀻􀁬􀀢 4.f ' e5? " 0/. 3" 150' 165' 180' 195' 210' 225' 240' 255' 270' 285' '-/. 􀁬􀁾 􀀬􀁾 LJ" f' Lf/! " LI. 'I If "I. , 'I ! 􀁓􀁾
'I./a I.J ! #I 'i "I 300' 315' 330' 345' 360' 375' 390' 405' 420' 435' "I' " II 1.1.811 !# 't 􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁉 S' 5' 'fi" 􀁾􀀮􀀬 ;f "'I 􀁾 II 'i" /I 450' 465' 480' 495' 510' 525' 540' 555' 570'
585' ;'--' ALIGNMENT TO PROPERT LINE . o(START) 15' 30' 45' 60' 75' 90' 105' 120' 135' 150' 165' 180' 195' 210' 225' 240' 255' 270' 285' 300' 315' 330' 345' 360' 375' 390' 405' 420'
435' 450' 465' 480' 495' 510' 525' 540' 555' 570' 585' SKETCH F1i'EfHT 􀀩􀀮􀀮􀁦􀂷􀁴􀁊􀁾 3'1' 􀁾􀁁􀁓􀁲􀀭 af VAl 11<. 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀨 --. -d\:..0'1 . 􀀧􀁟􀀧􀂫􀁾􀁟􀀢􀁟􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁔 􀁾􀀮__ , .•􀀬􀀬􀁟􀀬􀀬􀁟􀁾􀁧􀀮􀁘􀀮
􀁳􀀮􀁌􀁉􀀺􀁌􀁎􀁾 a' I (I) IW• () ;-()o START 􀁓􀁃􀁊􀁾􀁥􀀮 1..􀁾 􀁾􀀧􀁜􀁜􀁜 􀁾􀁴􀁩􀀾 .-Notes: 1) Indicate "North" with arrow 2) Indicate start point of bore on sketch -Page__of__
\ BORE CHART/SKETCH ' WR# ¢cllJf5 JOB NAME DATE "''?9-ay JOB LOCATION/ADDRESS .4 /2 (jffj R.'r PA:wv CITY ./i_L.Jtf:< 011) " LJC""M o(START 15' 30' 45' 60' 75' 90' 105' 120' 135' 􀀢􀁾􀀮
i-!Jl,' " .. ..". .1'1 I, 3 •'I I' !. If,f S·8" I'r 7 II ;) ]. 'j" S I ) " 150' 165' 180' 195' 210' 225' 240' 255' 270' 285' 3' a" 3' , .t 3'0/" :1' i" '1' 0/,' 􀁾􀀬􀀡 ; $, " " 􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀬
II ,J6 II 300' 315' 330' 345' 360' 375' 390' 405' 420' 435' 450' 465' 480' 495' 510' 525' 540' 555' 570' 585' ALIGNMENT TO PROPERT LINE o(START) 15' 30' 45' 60' 75' 90' 105' 120' 135'
150' 165' 180' 195' 210' 225' 240' 255' 270' 285' 300' 315' 330' 345' 360' 375' 390' 405' 420' 435' 450' 465' 480' 495' 510' 525' 540' 555' 570' 585' SKETCH ---' L􀁾􀁎􀁃􀁾􀁾􀁜􀀧 􀁾 it
all􀁾 􀀻􀁓􀁥􀀧􀁾􀀬 , brtlt) , fjp'qHT 􀁾 􀁲􀁁􀁾􀀧􀁦 􀁥􀁯􀁾􀁥 Notes: 1) Indicate "North" with arrow 2) Indicate start point of bore on sketch , Page_of__
Steve Chutchian From: Sent: To: SUbject: Ron Whitehead Thursday, July 24,20032:14 PM Steve Chutchian RE: DART Regional Rail Corridor Study Steve, Good report. We will visit more about
this soon. Ron ··---Original Message-'··' From: Steve Chutchian sent: Thursday, July 24,200310:18 AM To: Ron Whitehead Cc: Mike Murphy Subject: DART Regional Rail Corridor Study Ron:
The various Policy and Technical Committees associated with the DART Regional Rail Corridor Study have recently met. Each meeting served as a general update for committee members. The
following information was provided: The Northeast E-3 &E-4 Policy &Technical Committees met jointly and a presentation was given by Michael Morris, P.E., Transportation Director for
NCTCOG, with the following: • The Dallas-Fort Worth Area will have a projected population of 8.4 million people in the year 2030, versus 5 million people in the year 2000. • The population
in the Metroplex increased by 140,000 in 2002. • Factors that affect the acceptance of transit in this area include individual independence,energy availability, sustainability of local
economy, corridor sensitivity, air quality, and system reliability. • Objectives for sustaining development include improving rail mobility, utilizing existing system, promotion of mixed
uses, and improving access management • The process of planning and project development begins with systems planning, and continues through alternative analysis, preliminary engineering,
final design, and finally construction. • Carter &Burgess is the designated consultant responsible for the western subregion, including W-2 (Fort Worth &Western/Cotton Belt), and URS
Corporation is responsible for the eastern subregion, including E-3 (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) and E-4 (Burlington Northern Santa Fe). • The principles guiding the Regional Rail Corridor
Study include enhancement of mobility, consideration of appropriate technologies, public participation, consideration of envirionmental effects, and achievement of regional consensus.
• The Plan of Action for Institutional Structures includes development and implementation of a public outreach strategy, collaboration to create the necessary structure, searching for
innovative funding options, refinement of legislative platform, and creation of a regional task force. • In early September 2003, a self-propelled railcar will be guided through certain
cities in the area for demonstation. It will be capable of pulling two commuter coaches. • Another joint meeting of the Policy and Technical Committees will be held in 6-8 weeks. • The
next meeting will focus on Station Location and Integration of Land Use. The Fort Worth and Cotton Belt W-2 Policy &Technical Committees met jointly and the same presentation, as above,
was given by Michael Morris, P.E. Mr. Morris expressed surprise that the Town of Addison was interested in the W-2 segment of the overall Corridor Study. He felt that it did not have
a significant effect on our community. Steve Chutchian 1
Steve Chutchian To: Cc: Subject: Ron: Ron Whitehead Mike Murphy DART Regional Rail Corridor Study The various Policy and Technical Committees associated with the DART Regional Rail Corridor
study have recently met. Each meeting served as a general update for committee members. The following infonnation was provided: The Northeast E-3 & E-4 Policy & Technical Committees
met jointly and a presentation was given by Michael Morris, P.E., Transportation Director for NCTCOG, with the following: • The Dallas-Fort Worth Area will have a projeeted population
of 8.4 million people in the year 2030, versus 5 million people in the year 2000. • The population in the Metroplex increased by 140,000 in 2002. • Factors that affeet the acceptance
of transit in this area include individual independence,energy availability, sustainability of local economy, corridor sensitivity, air quality, ano system reliability. • Objeetives
for sustaining development include improving rail mobility, utilizing existing system, promotion of mixed uses, and improving access management • The process of planning and project
development begins with systems planning, and continues through alternative analysis, preliminary engineering, final design, and finally construction. • Carter & Burgess is the designated
consultant responsible for the western subregion, including W-2 (Fort Worth & Western/Cotton Belt), and URS Corporation is responsible for the eastem sUbregion, including E-3 (Dallas
Area Rapid Transit) and E-4 (Burlington Northern Santa Fe). • The principles guiding the Regional Rail Corridor Study include enhancement of mobility, COnsideration of appropriate technologies,
public participation, consideration of envirionmental effects, and achievement of regional consensus. • The Plan of Aetion for Institutional Structures includes development and implementation
of a public outreach strategy, collaboration to create the necessary structure, searching for innovative funding options, refinement of legislative platform, and creation of a regional
task force. • In eal1y September 2003, a self-propelled railcar will be guided through certain cities in the area for demonstation. It will be capable of pulling two commuter coaches.
• Another joint meeting of the Policy and Technical Committees will be held in 6.8 weeks. • The next meeting will focus on Station Location and integration of Land Use. The Fort Worth
and Cotton Belt W-2 Policy & Technical Committees met jointly and the same presentation, as above, was given by Michael Morris, P,E. Mr. Morris expressed surprise that the Town of Addison
was interested in the W-2 segment of the overall Corridor Study. He felt that it did not have a significant effeet on our community. Steve Chutchian 1
North Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: Selected County JUdges, County Administrators, DATE: June 27, 2003 Mayors and City Managers Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical
Committee Members FROM: Michael Morris, P.E Director of Transportation SUB..IECT: Fort Worth and Cotton Belt (yV-2) -July 18, 2003 Meeting Notice The purpose of this letter is to inform
you of the upcoming Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee meeting. The meeting is to be held at 2 p.m. in the Council Chambers at the North Richland Hills City
Hall, 7301 Northeast Loop 820. In addition to providing an orientation to the study, staff is interested in soliciting any input you and your staff might have at this initial stage.
As you will recall from my March 20, 2003 letter (Attachment 1), the Regional Transportation Council set aside $1,325,000 in technical planning funds to expedite transit improvements
in the region. The study encompasses corridors within Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, and Tarrant Counties. For your convenience, a study map is included as Attachment 2, a schedule
of meeting dates for each corridor as Attachment 3, and a meeting agenda as Attachment 4. Should you have any questions or comments on the above information, please call Barbara Maley
or me at (817) 695-9240. We look forward to working with you on this effort. Michael Morris, P.E CHZ: ac Attachments cc: Gyna Bivens-Mathis, Chair, FWTA Maribel Chavez, P. E, District
Engineer, TxDOT-Fort Worth Charles Emery, Chair, DCTA Jeffrey P. Fegan, Chief Executive Officer, DFW International Airport Jay Nelson, P.E, District Engineer, TxDOT-Dallas Robert W.
Pope, Chair, DART Richard Ruddell, President/Executive Director, FWTA Gary Thomas, President/Executive Director, DART Max W. Wells, Chair, DFW International Airport 2002-03 UPWP Element
3.04 Project File 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint Two P. O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806 @recycled paper http://www.dfwinfo.com
Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee Meetings September 2003 Committee 5 Tuesday, September 16 10:00 a.m. to Noon Grapevine City Council Chambers 200 S. Main St.,
Grapevine, Texas 76051 Committee 4 Tuesday, September 16 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Burleson Public Library 248 SW Johnson Avenue, Burleson, Texas 76028 Committee 3 -Central Wednesday, September
17 10:00 a.m. to Noon Arlington City Council Chambers 101 W. Abram St., Arlington, Texas 76010 Committee 6 Thursday, September 18 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Highland Village Police Training
Center 1000 Highland Village Road, Highland Village, Texas 75077 Committee 2 -Southeast Friday, September 19 10:00 a.m. to Noon Lancaster Recreation Center 1700 Veterans Memorial Pkwy.,
Lancaster, TX 75134 Committee 1 -Northeast Friday, September 19 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Frisco Chamber of Commerce 6843 Main St., Frisco, Texas 75034
North Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: Regional Rail Corridor Study PolicylTechnical Committee Members DATE: September 5, 2003 FROM: SUBJECT: Barbara C. Maley, AICP Principal
Transportation Planner Regional Rail Corridor PolicylTechnical Committee Meetings This letter is to advise you of the September round of Regional Rail Corridor Study PolicylTechnical
Committee meetings. Attachment 1 states the date, time and location of all the meetings. Attachment 2 is a copy of the study map with the areas for Committees 1 though 7 clearly delineated.
The meeting agenda is currently comprised of the following: 1. Welcome 2. Project/Meeting Overview 3. Corridor Fact Sheet 4. Technology Summary 5. Station Criteria 6. Land Use (e.g.,
sustainable development, transit-oriented design and corridor population and employment) Following the presentations, there will be a question and answer session regarding the various
topics. Your active participation is essential to the success of the Study. Should you have any questions and/or comments on the above information, please call me at (817) 695-9278.
Siinerely, 􀁾􀀴􀁾􀁃􀀮 Barbara C. Maley, AICP BCM:ac Attachments cc: UPWP Project File 5.01 025012 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint Two P. O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817)
640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806 @recycled paper http://www.dfwinfo.com
Regional Rail Corridor Study Rail Corridors legend Committee 3 -Central: E-1: Trinity Railway Express: Dallas County line/Downtown Dallas W-3: Trinity Railway Express: Fort WorthlTarrant
County Line W-1: Union Pacific Mainline: Fort Worth/Dallas (includes Dorothy Spur) " , 􀁬􀁋􀁡􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁮 \ Minami Wells ,..: ,;----......... '/'/-'-. , ,/----􀁾􀀮􀁡􀁬􀁨􀀮􀁲􀁬􀀮􀁾􀁤 ./􀀮􀁾􀀻
Millsap -.. ......... NANorth Central Texas Council of Govemments Transportation Map Rl'lvised: August 28, 2003 􀁁􀁾􀁒􀁡􀁩􀁩 Corridors Under Study 􀀻􀁾 Existing Rail Corridors NRoadway
E =East/URS Corporation W =West/Carter-Burgess, Inc, Committee 5: W-2: Fort Worth & Western/Cotton Belt: Southwest Fort WorthlTarrant County Line Committee 4: W-4: Burlington Northern
Santa Fe: Fort Worth/Cleburne Committee 1 -Northeast: E-3: Dallas Area Rapid Transit: PIano/Alien/McKinney E-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: CarrolitonlThe Colony/Frisco Committee 2
-Southeast:E-5: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Duncanville/Cedar Hill/Midlothian E-6: Burlington Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Dallas/Lancaster/Red OaklWaxahachie Committee 6: E-2: Union Pacific:
Carrollton/Denton Committee 7: Other Geographical Area
09/29/2003 04:51 PM Dallas Area Rapid Transit PO. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266·0163 214/149-3278 September 25,2003 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison,
TX 75001-9010 Dear Ron: TOWN OF ADDISON -TOWN HALL 972 450 7043 1/1 􀀺􀁾 Ie IE 1';1' Ell» SEP 29 Z003 CITY MANAGER DART's Board of Directors approved the FY 2004 Budget and Twenty-Year
Financial Plan on Tuesday, September 23,2003. As you are aware, because of sales tax shortfalls, approximately $1.4 billion in approved capital projects were deleted from the FY 2003
Draft Twenty-Year Financial Plan, and the Light Rail' (LRT) Northwest and Southeast extensions were delayed two to three years. Due to projected sales tax shortfalls in FY 2003 and the
expected continuing economic downturn in FY 2004, the FY 2004 Financial Plan indicates that the LRT expansion will be delayed up to an additional year. Of course, the delay will depend
on actual sales tax receipts. Actual sales tax receipts for FY 2003 are trending better than the revised projections, indicating the additional delay will most likely be less than anticipated.
The resolution approving the FY 2004 Budget included a provision to continue to review expenses and revenues on a quarterly basis with certain priorities in mind. If sales tax receipts
are higher than projected in the FY 2004 Financial Plan, the first priority will be to eliminate the additional 12-month delay in the LRT build-out. Other areas to be reviewed are: reduction
of the delay of construction of the Southeast Corridor section to Fair Park, agencywide compensation issues, and a reduction of the two-to-three year construction delay anticipated during
FY 2003. If sales tax receipts continue to decline, we will provide you with information on steps we are taking to adjust expenses in accordance with the revenue decline. If you have
any questions, please do not hesitate to call me (214-749-3070). c: Board of Directors
Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee Meetings September 2003 Committee 5 Tuesday, September 16 10:00 a.m. to Noon Grapevine City Council Chambers 200 S. Main St.,
Grapevine, Texas 76051 Committee 4 Tuesday, September 16 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Burleson Public Library 248 SW Johnson Avenue, Burleson, Texas 76028 Committee 3 -Central Wednesday, September
17 10:00 a.m. to Noon Arlington City Council Chambers 101 W. Abram St., Arlington, Texas 76010 Committee 6 Thursday, September 18 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Highland Village Police Training
Center 1000 Highland Village Road, Highland Village, Texas 75077 Committee 2 -Southeast Friday, September 19 10:00 a.m. to Noon Lancaster Recreation Center 1700 Veterans Memorial Pkwy.,
Lancaster, TX 75134 Committee 1 -Northeast Friday, September 19 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Frisco Chamber of Commerce 6843 Main St., Frisco, Texas 75034
North Central Texas Council of Governments l'arn[);lYis Roben Pope Sim lsmelofT TcmWallOD Dou.gLuDo.\. 􀁾 MhCWti. Mm:o:tFt:m\nI:ICz 􀁗􀀮􀁡􀀡􀁜􀁑􀁾􀁥 """Wil.", Sc:oaNee1l:y AlmEflUSS)'
WiJdJ,Won ROlIRypimti 􀀢􀀬􀀻􀀻􀀬􀀢􀁾􀁾􀁾 ThnG=lin RktwdC. Muon 􀁟􀁾 .("'.mdeGiI1i1aP:l ours oftravellj • The overall costofi::!? tion in America: -5.7:􀁢􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁧􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁳 of 􀁾􀁡􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁤
fuel -3.5billionhoufs in lost productivity. -A total loss of 􀀤􀀶􀀹􀀺􀁾􀀮 billion to the economy. 1
ral cost billion or $711 excess fuel 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁵􀁭􀁾􀀧􀁩􀀮􀀯􀀮􀁩􀀮 -If public transi9?Idnot eJdstmtlle region, annual congestion 􀁤􀁥􀁱􀀩􀀧􀀩􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁤􀁭􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁳􀁥 by 10,720,000 hours
or 2.8 hours per person. -Actual savings due to pUblic transit Use asa strategy to reduce congestion was 􀁾􀀲􀀱􀀷 million, or $57 per person. system Compatibility (TOD) • Compatibility
with railroad operations· Chnractcrbtia Power Source Slnlioos and Typical SpBCing 􀁾􀀱􀁄􀁊􀁬􀀮􀁩􀁭􀁵􀁭 Operating Spttd Route length 􀁾􀁨􀁬􀀺􀁬􀁬􀁭􀁵􀁭GnKie Can or l'niL, per TNln 􀀨􀁃􀁯􀁦􀁬􀁓􀁌􀁾􀁴􀀩
Seultd CupBClly per Car 01" t:nil Cnpitnl Cost per Mile (cnludlng right t/WII)') Cupllal CU'l1 Pfr Vehicle Vd\ltlc Lire Expcdancy A\lIl1abiUI}' Cnmmuter/Regional Rail Locomotive flullal
or pushed azul pulled single or bi-Ievel cars or multiple dcclric unils operating on J1Iitroad track Dicy;I..,tieclric or electric with 􀁯􀁶􀁴􀁲􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁤 ca.tenary Lo..li or high level
platforms wilh Df without sheller or station SlfUcture. SPo<:lng oD 10 5 miles 791090 mph 2010 100 miles: 3104 perCOlf 3 to 12 8010 170 52·20 million 51·3 million 25 [030 years In. Jlroduction
Evaluation Criteria Regional/Commuter Rail Ability to satisfy operdtlons and service Intis Satisfies operallons and service lenLs CompaUbillty with txisting rtgionaJ transit Not compatlblt
with DART at Plano systtms CompatibiUty with lOCAl land use and Compatible with txisUng railroad use en...lronrmntal plans In corridor CompaUbllity with TOO CompaUble CompaUbilUy with
raIlroad operaUons Compatible AWiptablllty for expanWibllUy and phasing AWiptable for expansion and pha.'iing A...a1lablllty of technology Currently in production Capital Cost Low Operating
and malnttnance cost Low APPLICABILITY TO &3 CORRIDOR AppllC41blt 2
Maximum Operutlng Sp«d 601090 mph 􀁾􀁴􀁵􀁩􀁭􀁵􀁭 Grode 3104 percent Route Length 1010 100 􀁭􀁩􀁬􀁥􀁾 Diesc:I-electric ordicsc:ll.I.·ilhdireCI dri"e Single or aniculatetl multiple: unilsdfl1ropdlttl
vehicle oper.uLn£ over ex.istin£ railroad tntk Self-Propelled (DMU) Regional Rail FRA-Compliant CapItal Cost per Vehidr 5)-4 million Copihd COS! per 􀁾􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁥 52-20 million Indudhtg
tight 0( way) Vrh.lcle Life Expectoncy 2510)0 years Po....er Sourer Ctulruclrmllt"3 AVlIilllblllty FRA oomplianl desigTl currenlly only 1I.\';lil.:lbh; from Colorado Railcar Seilled
Cllplldly p<-r Car or 6010 170 l'nil Co..., or l'nils per Train 1 106 (Com:lst) Evaluation Criteria Regional/Commuter Rail Ability to salisf)' operations and 􀁾􀁮􀀧􀁩􀁣􀁲 !r...els Satisfies
operations and 􀁾􀁮􀀧􀁩􀁣􀁥 Inels Compatibllily with existing regional transit Not comp:J.tlble with DART at system; Carrollton Compatibility 􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁨 local land use and Compatible with
existing railroad a<;t In en...ironmenlal plans corridor Compatibility with TOD Compatible Compatibilit)' with railroad operation.<; Compatible Adaptability for expandablllt}" and phasing
Adaplable for expansion and phasing A...ailability or technology Currently In production Capital Cost Low Operating and maintenance cost Low APPLlCADlLlIT TO fA CORRIDOR Applicable Evaluation
Criteria Self-Propelled (DMU) FRA-Compliant Ability to satisfy operations and service Inels Satlsfies operatIons and 5eTYjce le"els Compatibility with existing regional transit Not compatible
wUh DART at Plano system; Compatibility wUh loc.alland US(' and Compatible with existing raJlroad USt' In en...ironmrntal plans corridor Compatibility with TOD Compatible Compatibility
with railroad operations CompaUble Adaptability ror expandabilily and phasing Adaptable ror expansion and phasing Anllability or techno logy A...ailable only rrom Colorado Rail Car at
nus lime Capital Cost Low Operating and maintenance cost Low APPLlCABILlIT TO E-3 CORRIDOR Applicable Evaluation Criteria Self-Propelled (DMU) FRA-Compliant Ability to satisfy operations
and 5eTYlce le"els Satisfies operations and 􀁾􀁔􀁙􀁩􀁣􀁥 Jnels Compatibility with existing regioi1::lJ transit Not compatible 􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁨 DART systems Compatibility with local land use
and Compatible wilh existing railroad u.<;t In en...lronmental plans corridor Compatibility wl1h TOD Compatible Comp.atlbility with railroad operallons Compatible Adaptability ror expandabJlity
and 􀁰􀁨􀁡􀁳􀁪􀁮􀁾 Adaptable ror expansion and phasing A...ailabllHy or technology A...aUable only rrom Colorado Rail Car at this time Capital Cost Low Operating and maintenance cost
Low APPLlCABILlIT TO E-4 CORRIDOR Applicable Self-Propelled (DMU) Regional Rail Non-FRA-Compliant Cbractutruo SinEle or articublcU mllltiple anit sc:lf-propdlal "ehiclt opc:n.ting o...er
sep.lUll.le tnd:s or over existin£ fllilroad II1I.d: if separ1llc:d from freighl operations Powrr SOCln:t Diesel-dectric. diesel wilh diner drive. or dual powerUI diesd-elc:ctric and
overhead c:Ieclrk po.....er Stations aDll Typical Low-Ievc:l wilh sheher sheher or .1tructurc. 5poerinc Spacing of I 10 3 miles r=iii;y-;:"';-,.....,"""'" 􀁾􀁌􀁵􀀻􀁩􀁭􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀺􀁬􀁬 OptBtlnz:
sJlftd 60 (0 80 mph R/l(Iloo Ltagth 10 In SO miles 􀁾􀁉􀀮􀁵􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁬􀁭 Gndr 3 10 4 perc:::c:nl Cns or uaas pu Tnb. 1 106 (Coll.'i'hlj .st-.t.td Capacily poor Car or 5010 100 llllli C.pitaI
Cost ptr Milr 5240 million 􀀨􀁮􀁤􀁵􀁤􀁾 litht of ....,.1 C.pit.aI Cost prrVn.lcW 534 million Vrh.ldt urr 􀁅􀁾􀁰􀁋􀀱􀁡􀁊􀁉􀁲􀀬􀀮 251030 yars Evaluation Criteria Self-Propelled (DMU) Non-FRA-Compliant
, Ability 10 satisry operations and scn'ice le ...els Satl'ifies operations and service le ...els Compatibilily with existing regional transit Compallble with DART (rdual mode systems
"ehicle CompaliblJit)" with local land use and Similar to current DART system en"ironmental plans Compatibility with TOD Compatible Compatibility wUh railroad operations Not compaUble
due 10 FRA noncompliance Adaplabllily ror e:qJandablUty and phasing Adapt;;tble ror expansion and phasing A...allability or technology CUrrRntly in production Capital Cost Low Operating
and malnlenanc.e cosl Low APPLlCABlLrIT TO E·3 CORRIDOR Applicable 3
Evaluation Criteria Self-Propelled (DMU) Conventional Light Rail Non-FRA-Compliant Ability to satisf)' opl'rations and senice Satisfies opl'raLions and senice level,; levels Compatlbilit}·
with 􀁥􀁸􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁾 􀁲􀁣􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁬􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁕 Compatible with DART If dual mode systems \'ehicle Compatibilit)' with local land usc and Similar 10 current DART system environmental
plans Comp"tlbilHy with TOD Compatible Compatibility with railroad 􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳 Not compallblc due 10 FRA noncompliance Adaptability for exp;mdability and phasing Adaptable for
expAnsion and phasing Availability of technology Currently in production Capital Cost Low 􀁏􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁮􀁧 and maintcrumce cost Low APPLICABILITY TO E-4 CORRIDOR Applicable. If on separate
tracks Po....􀁥􀁲􀁓􀁬􀀩􀁬􀁜􀁲􀁾 Slations and T)'pltnl 􀁓􀁰􀁡􀁃􀀢􀁩􀁾 􀁾􀁴􀁡􀀻􀁬􀁬􀁭􀁵􀁭 􀁏􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁾 Speed 􀁒􀁯􀁵􀁴􀁥􀁵􀁾􀁴􀁨 'to.l'.imum Grnde: Can or lTnil, per Trnin (Consist)
Capito.l Cost per .'lIIe (e:xc:ludltll: tight of way) Capital CQ'it per Vehicle: Vehicle: Life: Ell:p«'tancy A\'ailobility AnicuL:alet.l multiplc: unit ors OPc:Jl!tinB on cily SlrccG.
at·paur. 􀁥􀀺􀁜􀁣􀀺􀁾􀀻􀁉􀁉􀁣􀀺􀁤􀀬 or subway alignme:n15 Elcctr1l;; with o\'emead calenlll)' .....ire: Usually 600 to 750 􀁶􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁾 DC Low or hiBh·lnc:! pilltforms with or withoul
she:lter or station s!JUcrure:. Spacing or '11 W2 miles 55 1065 mph 81025 milc:s ., perct:nl I to 4 ]21090 S20-55 million S2-] million 􀀲􀀵􀀱􀀰􀁽􀁏􀁾􀁲􀁳 III production Evaluation Criteria
Conventional Light Rail Ability to satisfy 􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳 and service levels Satisfies 􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳 and service levels Compatibility with 􀁥􀁸􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁾 region:Ulnmslt Same
as current DART lechnology syslems Compatibility with local land use and Same as current DART system environmental plans Compatibility with TOO Proven compatibility for TOO Compatibility
with railroad operations Not compatible due 10 FRA noncompliance Adaptability for expandabllily "nd phasing Adaptable for expansion and phasing Availability of technology Currently In
production Capital Cost Medium Operating and maintenance cost Medium APPLICABILITY TO E-3 CORRIDOR 􀁁􀁰􀁰􀁬􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁢􀁾 Evaluation Criteria Conventional Light Rail Ability 10 satisfy operalions
and service levels Satisfies 􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁳 and service levels Compallbility with existing regional lransil Same as current DART technology systems Compalibilily with locaJ land
use and Same as current DART system environmental plans Compatibility with TOO Proven compallbility for TOO Compatibility with railroad opl'ratlons Not compatible dlk' to fol{A 􀁮􀁯􀁮􀁾
compliance Adaptability for expandabJllly and phasing Adaptable for expansion and phasing Availability of techno!ogy Cu.rrenlly in produeUon Capital Cost Medium Operating and maintenance
cost Medium APPLICABILITY TO E-4 CORRIDOR Applicable, If on separate tracks Po....er 􀁓􀁬􀀩􀁬􀁜􀁲􀁾 SlnUom "nd T)'plc:a1 Spacing, Mo.l'.imum Ope:rtlllIll: Spttd 􀁒􀁯􀁵􀁬􀁥􀀺􀁵􀁾􀀨􀁨
􀁃􀁡􀁾 or Vnits per Tnaln (Consisl) Se:ot«! 􀁃􀁴􀁬􀁰􀁾􀁴􀁹 p.!r Ctlr or 􀁬􀁾􀁮􀁬􀁴 Caplllil CQ'il per Mile: (excludllll: tight of way) Capital CQ'it per Ve:hlc:le: Ve:hlcle: Life Ell:pedDIK)'
"' ...ollabllll)· Bus Rapid Transit Slreel bus. artiClllalet.l bus. ortrolle:y bus opcrnUng on an exc::!osi...e: II-pe:, !>Ubwl1Y. or e:leVlllet.l guideway Diesel. ollemalive: flld.
or o...erhnu electric trolley wire l..llw 1e:...e:1 with plalrorm lIn:a and shelter or builuinF. Spacing of seVe:Rt blocks 10 !>evel'1ll mile:s 55 to 65 mph 21060 miles 10 ID 13 pucenl
44 fOT suee:1 bus 62 for artil;\llalet.l bus SI·20 ntillion SO.2 -0.5 million 91012 years III prodaction Evaluation Criteria Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Ability 10 satisfy operations and
strvlce Satisfies operations and stnlce levels levels Compatibility with existing regional Compatible with bus system; not transit systems compatible with DART 􀁥􀁾􀁥􀁰􀁴 \'ia tr.msfer
Compatibility with local land use and Compatible. but more visual and ph)'slcal environmental plans Impact than rail. Should be outside RR ROW. Compallblllty with TOD Compatible Compatibility
with ra.llroad 􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁳 Not compallble Adaptability for expandabillty and Readily expandable phasing Availability of technology Readily available C.pltal Cost Low Operating
and maintenance cost Low APPLICABILITY TO E-3 CORRIDOR Applicable If located either In RR ROW or on llS Highway 75 4
Evaluation Criteria Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Ability to 5<1.tisf)' 􀁯􀁰􀁥􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳 and service Satisfies oPfr.ltion.. and sen'icl' 1l'\'CLs If levels located outside of RR RO\\' Compatibilil}'
with existing regiorull transit Compatible with bus system; not systems compatible with D,\RT except via 􀁴􀁾􀁮􀁳􀁦􀁥􀁲 Compatibility with locOilland use and Compatible, but more visual
and physical environmental plans Impacllhan 􀁾􀁩􀀱􀀻 should be located out of RRROW Compatibility with TOD Compatible Compatibility with railrnad oPfrations Not compatible Adaplabillt)'
for expandabillt}' and phasing Readilyell:pandable l\ vailabllity of teChnology Readilyayailable Capital Cost Low Operating and mainterulnce cost Low APPLICABILITY TO E-4 CORRIDOR Applicable
if located out ofRR ROW (e.g. State lIighway 289) Evaluation Criteria Heavy Rail Transit (Third Rail) Ability to satisfy operations and service levels Capacity far exceeds oPfrations
and servke Inels Compatibility with ex.lsting regional transit Not compatible systems Compatibilit)' with local land usc and RequJres exclusive ROW, often with environmrntal plan.. aerial
alignment Compatibility with TOD Proven compatibility for TOD Compatibility with railroad operations Not compatible Adaptability for expandabillty and phasing Expandable If extended
from ends or at· grade section Availability of technology Currently In production Capital Cost IIlgh Operating and maintenance cost High APPLICABILITY TO E-3 CORRIDOR Not applicable
Heavy Rail 􀁃􀁨􀁮􀁲􀁴􀁬􀁥􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁩􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁣􀀺􀀧􀁬 Multiple UnillTUlTi«i pairs or triples operating aver exclusive subwJy. e!e\"lItetl. or at-grade 􀁲􀁩􀁾􀁴􀀭􀁯􀁦􀂷􀁷􀁡􀁹 Power SoorC'C:
Electric wilh third n.iL usually 750 to 1000 vollS DC Statiorn and Typleal Hlrh Irvc:1 platforms with st.llion sUUeture, Station 􀁓􀁊􀁬􀁏􀁬􀁃􀁭􀁾 of I 103 miles. Spacing M8Ximum 􀁏􀁰􀁥􀀺􀁲􀁡􀀨􀁩􀁾
501080 mph Spttd Roule Length 10 to 100 miles Maximum Grade: .lIO 6 percent CnN or 􀁬􀁬􀁮􀁬􀁌􀁾 per Tr'IIin 2 lo 10 (Consist) Se:ate:d C"pllcily per Car 60 10 80 seateU. 120 or t;nit
10150 with stanLlecs Cilpilni Cost per :>.1ilc 550 ':!50 million (excluding right v( WilY) Capilill Cost per Vc:hiele: 52·5 million Ve:hle!r Life: Exptetnney 251030 years Avullabllll)·
In prodnetion. Evaluation Criteria Heavy Rail Transit (Third Rail) Ability to satisfy oPfrations and service levels Capacity far excet"ds ofM'rations and serviCe Inel<. Compallbility
with existing regional transil Not compatible systems Compatibility with local land usc and RequJres exclu.sh'f ROW, onen with environmrntal plans aerialalignmrnt Compatibility with
TOD Proven compaUbility for TOD Compatibility with railroad oPfrations Not compatible Adaptability for expandabUity and pha."lng Expandable if extended from ends or at· grade section
Availability of technology Currently in production Capital Cost IIIgh OPfr3.ting and maJntenance cost !Ugh APPLICABILITY TO E-4 CORRUJOR Not applicable Chnnu:le:mtirs Po'We:rSourC'C:
Siallorn and TyplcnJ SpaciIl& Maximum 􀁏􀁰􀁥􀀺􀁲􀁡􀁕􀁾 Spttd Route: lenglh 􀁾􀁢􀁸􀁬􀁭􀁵􀁭 Grade: Grade: Can or llnits per Train 􀀨􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁬􀀩 Se:ntrd Cnpaclt)' pel" Car ol"Unll
CapilRl Cosl 􀁰􀁥􀁬􀀢􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁥􀀺 (exduding 􀁲􀁩􀁾􀁨􀁬 olwB}') CnpllBI Cost per Vdude Ve:hJele Life Exptetaney A\'1l.ilobllll)' Monorail Ve:hicle: or yehicles using monon.iJ. gnide:wlY
beam or rails on. L1edieated ri1!ht-or·way or guidew;J)' Eleclric wilh or wilhout lT1ag-netic !e\'jIDtion. 1mau' inlluction motor, or other Stich power sotlrcc Urually hirh Ie:vel platforms
with station sUUcture fUIl.l sl.iItion spacing or 1 bloek 10 se:ven.l mile:s 25 lo55 mph 5lo 10mi.le:s .l 106 pel'C'C:nl 1108 101030 5100 ·200 million 51-4 million 201025 years In limited
production Evaluation Criteria Monorail Ability to satisfy oPfrations and service levels Not proven in ruml commuter tyPf of service Compatlbillty with existIng regional transit Not
compatible systems Compatibility wUh local land use and RequJres exclusln aerial a1lgnmrnt enylronmental plans Compatibility with TOD Usually serves exlsllng market with IImUed or rt'Stricted
TOD potential Compatibility wUh raJJroad operations Not compaUble Adaptability ror expandablllty and phasing Expandable if extended from ends or If Inlennedlate switching structure alreadye:dsts
Availabllity of technology Limited production due to SpeC121i7..r-d applications Capital Cosl JUgh OPfraling and maintenance cost IIlgh APPLICABILITY TO E-3 CORRIDOR Not applicablr 5
Evaluation Criteria Monorail Abilily to s:l.tisfy operations and sen-ice levels Not pro\'en in rural commuter type of sen-ice Compatibility with existing regional transit Not compatible
S)'stcms Compatibility with local land use and Requires exclush'e aerial alignment environmental plans Compatibility with TOD llsuallJ sen-es 􀁥􀁸􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁾 market with limited or
restricted TOO potenllal Compatibility with railroad operation... Not t::ompatible Adaptability for expandabllity and pha.sing Expandable if extended from ends or if intermediate switt::hlng
structure already exists A\'ailabilil)' or tl'chnolofJ' Limited production due to specialized appliullon<; Capital Cost /IIgh Operating and maintenance cost 􀁈􀁩􀁾􀁨 APPUCA DlUll' TO
E-4 CORRIDOR Not applicable • Select sites thatcan be cost-effectively implemented. Local plDn conip8libility -ExisLing zowng -transilsupportive -Transil-oriemed developmenl poIential
6
R':;G::-p,:;1 Rei: Ccnij.:rSI:.;j','􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀀮􀀯􀀢􀀧􀀮􀀮􀁔􀀮􀁲􀁯􀁲􀁲􀁮􀁾􀁴 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀁣􀀬􀀮􀁟''''.=-o:J 􀀧􀁬􀀺􀀮􀁣􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁾􀁮􀂷􀁊􀁙􀁏􀁊 􀁾􀁲􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀲􀀲􀀮􀀱􀀮􀁑􀀧􀀻 􀀮􀀴􀁾􀀮 'NlAlO
􀁷􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁐􀀾 􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀺􀁗 􀁡􀁾􀂷􀂷􀁾􀀻􀁸􀁸􀁬 Ul,o::.o 􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀢􀁥􀀮􀀭􀀺􀁊􀀺􀁊􀀺􀁉 "".,r.roooo '13',C1X tIC,IX)? 7
􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀬􀀧􀀺􀀾􀀧 Research on fundingtzonbtg best practices on-going More information on 􀁩􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁥􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁬􀁰􀁨􀁡􀁳􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁩􀁓􀁓􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁳􀁾􀁴􀁦􀁵􀁬􀁵􀁲􀁥 meetings 8
9
•• DART'sBusi identified in 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁾􀀿􀀿􀀱􀁹􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁾􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮 _. Moolto be 􀁣􀀨􀀩􀁉􀁉􀀱􀁒􀁉􀁔􀁾􀁤􀀧􀁪􀁉􀁬􀀲􀀰􀀱􀀰 t()20p 􀁴􀁩􀁩􀁨􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁭􀁥 • The 2030 􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁗􀁨􀁥􀁬􀁰􀀮􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁢􀁬􀁩􀁳􀁨􀁴􀁨􀁥fut
llre'direction and priorities for DART -Will also identify other potential mobility needs in region FTA 􀁐􀁲􀁯􀁊􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀱 DevelQpigl@l1t Process (with 􀁲􀁥􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁳􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁶􀁥􀁴􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁥􀀩
.i 􀁳􀁯􀁴􀁩􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀡􀁊􀀡 Se Transit Dependem • More Congested, 􀁌􀁥􀁳􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁲􀂢􀀡􀁪􀁡􀁢􀁊􀁬􀀺 11:1111l'\YllJr syst@liA High potemial for 􀁡􀁤􀀨􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁾􀀺 new Tlram,itpatrclDs Ilo tile
system Total daily trips are more dispersed Dallas CBD stiRpredoJ:l1inant regional work trip destination • Match service to demand';','; ./RefIne undmtanding of tr.lve) ,:..: 􀁰􀁡􀁾􀁭􀁳
.,; Altemati"'e service concepls '" lntnlmingscen.arios ,/TechnoLogy 1 -I I 􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀮􀁟1---1 10
,( Goa.lsofCoo + Dialogue .Consistem 􀁁􀁰􀁰􀁲􀁯􀀱􀂧􀁾􀁻􀁥􀁴􀁉􀁊􀀼􀀿􀀼􀁬􀀰􀁉􀁏􀁧􀁹 . • Common 􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀧􀀻􀁦􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀬􀁰􀁥􀁤􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁮􀀬􀁬􀁡􀁫􀁩􀁮􀁧 • Relationship toDAR',l'System ..I
Issues & Impacts • Relationship to l\-1obility 2025 & 2030 Update ImpJementiliioriii FY 04 Business l"lan -Take; into 􀁡􀁣􀁣􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁙􀁓􀁤􀁴􀁬􀁾to 􀁥􀁾􀁯􀁮􀀿􀁭􀁹 -DART's
goaiis to ityio re-gain as much of 􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁧􀁩􀁉􀁬􀁾􀀱 2006-8 schedule as possible Both 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁳􀁾􀁪􀁝􀁊 add ab9ut28 miles and 19 stations 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀻􀀢􀀺􀁣􀀺􀁾 to LRT system a
• Draft 2030 􀁔􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁹 .... • Public 􀁍􀁥􀁥􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁳􀁻􀁓􀁴􀁡􀁾􀁥􀁨􀁯􀁬􀁤􀁥􀁲􀁂􀁲􀁩􀁥􀁦􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁳 • Final 2030 Transit SystemPlan -Initiate more detailed analysis oukey priorities
-Regular System Plan updates to respond to changing .vn,'-, conditions """,_. ".....,•. 􀁾 TiiIfIIIJ 􀁾 􀁶􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀻􀀺􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾 c· 􀀺􀀺􀀽􀁾__ ''?!!'U 1 -Olrrent fundIDgas;;llWP ons: •
DART -􀀤􀀲􀀰􀁍􀀨􀁩􀁮􀁄􀁴􀁍􀁾􀁵􀁳􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁳􀁳􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮􀀩 • City of 􀁄􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁟􀀤􀀵􀀳􀀬􀁾􀁈􀀨􀁰􀁲􀁩􀁉􀁮􀁡􀁲􀁵􀁵􀁹 through Uirpon passenger fucility 􀁣􀁨􀁡􀁲􀁧􀁥􀁾􀀩 .,. ....., • RTC -$60
M($20Mthrough paitnershlp; $40Mto be sought from Texas Mobility Fund/other soorces) • Dallas 􀁃􀁏􀁕􀁄􀁬􀀩􀀧􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀲􀀶􀀮􀀷􀁍􀀨􀁴􀁨􀁲􀁯􀁵􀁧􀁨 Call fo., Projects) -Funding commitments must
be in place by 􀀮􀀬􀀬􀀻􀀭􀀬􀁣􀁾􀀺􀁾 June 30. 2004 a 11
ali Downtown T ...: Goalis to defi possible co;Ti'for further study inmore detailed alternatives analysis -ppro . >,. to DFW Airp0r;ti'c,. .•. .......• ..,.•• -􀁃􀁨􀁡􀁉􀁬􀁥􀁮􀁧􀁩􀁾􀁆􀁊􀁬􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁥􀁅􀁴�
�􀁩􀁙􀁾􀁮􀁩􀁊􀀮􀁯􀁥􀁸􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁲􀁡􀁩􀁬 r 􀁲􀁩􀁧􀁨􀁴􀀭􀁯􀁦􀀭􀁷􀁾􀁹􀁾􀁸􀁩􀁾􀁬􀀤􀁡􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁧 co;Tidor -Key issue is alignment from Las COlinasto DFW Airport· 12
Cl , Trat:lSitWorks!i()P,> 􀀼􀀢􀀢􀁾􀁾 • .JudgeslMayors 􀁗􀁏􀁲􀁫􀁳􀁨􀁑􀁐􀀡􀀱􀁹􀀱􀁩􀁤􀁾􀁙􀁥􀁡􀁩􀀭􀁒􀁥􀁶􀁩􀁥􀁷 i· 􀁆􀁥􀁢􀁲􀁵􀁡􀁲􀁹􀀯􀁍􀀻􀁲􀁲􀁣􀁬􀁴􀁧􀁾 . . • Transit Sumrnit;Summer 2004
• Legislative Proposal, Fall 2004 This study iscoordi 1111emiodal, Freighland Safety 􀁓􀁕􀁢􀁣􀁯􀁲􀁮􀁭􀁩􀁴􀁴􀁾􀀨􀀩􀁦 thllRTC. Stakeholder and public meetillgs',are on-going. The study's
results will 00 il1corPorated in a Mure Mobility Plan Update. • Western SulbreglonL.ea,I:, -Christie Zupancic czupancic@i!cicog.org 13
10:03 NOV 10, 2003 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *54541 PAGE: 1/7 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages : Description : steve Chutchian TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-7027
Monday, Nov 10, 2003 10:02AH 7DART Board Meeting Agendas Attached are the agendas for the DART Board Meeting on Tuesday, November 11, 2003. If you have any questions please contact Fred
Pratt at 214-749-2538. From: Fax. Number: Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTMF (214)
10:04 NOV 10, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676QUOrulil= 4 #54541 PAGE: 2/7 Operations Committee Meeting Tuesday, November 11, 2003, 3:00 p.m. -4:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st
Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time I 35 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: October 7, 2003 2. Contract for Maintenance Service for Cityplace Station Escalators
and Elevators (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke)[5 minutes J 3. Contract for Non-Revenue Vehicle (NRV) Fuel Purchase and Management Program (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke)[5 minutes J 4. *Paratransit
Services Update & Status of Supplemental Service Procurement (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) {20 minutes J 5. *Status of Request for Proposals (RFP) for Trinity Railway Express (TRE) Operating
Services (Joyce Foreman/Kathy Waters)[5 minutes J 6. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 7. Adjournment +Same Night Item ,;,Briefmg Item The Operations Committee may go into Closed
Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074
for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Operations Committee is December 9,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations
for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Joyce Foreman Vice Chair -Faye Wilkins Members
-Scott Carlson, Linda Koop, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint Shaw and William Velasco StaffLiaison -Victor Burke and Kathy Waters 1I110.DOC 11/10/03 -10:01 AM
10:04 NOV 10, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #54541 PAGE: 3/7 Quorum = 4 Audit Committee Meeting Tuesday, November 11, 2003, 10:30 a.m-12:00 p.m. DART Conference Room B -1st Floor
1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time {1 hour and 15 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: October 28,2003 2. *HNTB Corporation Incurred Cost Audit (Ray Noah/Albert
Bazis) {10 minutes J 3. *F. R. Harris Corporation Incurred Cost Audit (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) { 10 minutes J 4. *Risk Assessment (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) { 10 minutes J 5. *Audit Process
(Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) ( 10 minutes J 6. *Audit Plan For 2004 (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) { 15 minutes J 7. *Budget For 2004 (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) {15 minutes J 8. *Orac1e Database Audit
Update (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) [5 minutes J 9. Identification of Future Agenda Items 10. Adjournment itBriefing Item The Audit Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open
Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next
meeting ofthe Audit Committee is November 25, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact
Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Ray Noah Vice Chair -Beatrice Martinez Members -Angie Chen Button, Randall Chrisman, Joyce Foreman, Norma Stanton and William
Velasco StaffLiaison -Albert Bazis 1111AUDOC 1 11/10/03-10:01 AM
10:04 NOV 10, 2003 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #54541 PAGE: 4/7 Quorum. = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, November 11, 2003 -Board Room
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: October 28,2003 2. Public Comments 3. Board Member Recognition Consent Items: 4. Modification to Agreement
for Plano DART On-Call Service (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 5. Contracts for Architectural and Engineering Services (A&E) for Transportation System Management (TSM)/Principal Arterial
Street System (PASS)/High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)/Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)/Traffic Engineering Projects (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) Policy: 6. This item will be
discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. Individual Items: 7. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 8. This item will be discussed at the
Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 9. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. Other Items: 10. Officer Reports 11. Chair Report 12. General Counsel's
Report 13. President/Executive Director's Report 14. Communications and Public Comments 15. Adjournment +Same Night Item all Briefing Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session
under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551. 074for Personnel
matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe DARTBoard is November 25,2003. This facility is wheekhair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing
impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 1111B.DOC 11110/03 -10:01 AM
10:05 NOV 10, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #54541 PAGE: 5/7 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, November 11, 2003 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: October 28,2003 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will be discussed
at the Board meeting only. ConsentItems: r5 minutes J 4. Modification to Agreement for Plano DART On-Call Service (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) 5. Contracts for Architectural and Engineering Services (A&E) for Transportation
System Management (TSM)/Principal Arterial Street System (PASS)/High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)/Intelligent Transportation Systems (lTS)/Traffic Engineering Projects (Planning-Linda KooplDoug
Allen) Policy: 6. Amendment to the Site-Specific Shuttle Policy (Planning-Linda Koop-/Doug Allen) [10 minutesJ Individual Items: [1 hour and 40 minutes J 7. *Love Field Interlocal Agreement
Update (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) Allen) [30 minutes J 8. *RT Realty, et al v. DART and Gilbert Construction, Inc., Litigation (Administrative-William Velasco/Rocky Angle) [ 30
minutes J 9. *Performance Reviews-Director of Board Support, General Counsel and President (Huelon Harrison) [30 minutes J Other Items: 10. Adjournment +Same Night Item ..Briefmg Item
The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real
Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is November 25,2003. This
facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance.
111lC.DOC 11/10/03 -10:01 AM
10:05 NOV 10, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *54541 PAGE: 6/7 Quorum = 4 Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee Meeting Tuesday, November 11,2003, 12:00 p.m. -1:00 p.m. DART
Conference Room C -lst Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [ 1 hour J 1. Approval of Minutes: October 7,2003 2. *Review of Solicitations with Disadvantaged,
Minority, Women-Owned Business Enterprise (DMWBE) Goals of Less than Ten Percent (Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) [10 minutesJ 3. *Dallas Alliance Business Development Super Fair Update
(Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) [10 minutesJ 4. *Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase II Construction Program Concept (Randall Chrisman/Ken Mercer) [30 minutesJ 5. *Reporting ofDisadvantaged,
Minority, Women-Owned Business Enterprise (DMWBE) Participation (Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) [ 10 minutesJ 6. Identification of Future Agenda Items 7. Adjournment +Same Night Item
lIPBriefmg Item The Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, for consultation with Attorney for any legal
issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee is December 9, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible.
For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community AjJairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Randall Chrisman Vice Chair
-Joyce Foreman Members -Angie Chen Button, Beatrice Martinez, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint Shaw and William Velasco StaffLIaison -Gloria Dixon and Ken Mercer IlllD.DOC 11110/03 -10:02 AM
10:06 NOV 10, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *54541 PAGE: 7/7 Quorum = 4 Administrative Committee Meeting Tuesday, November 11,2003, 1:00 p.m. -3:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C
-1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeeting Time [I hour and 35 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: October 7,2003 2. Contract for Short-Term and Long-Term Disability
Insurance Coverage (William Velasco/Ben Gomez) [ 5 minutes J 3. Contract Modification for Short-Term and Long-Term Disability Insurance Coverage (William Velasco/Ben Gomez) [15 minutes
J 4. Memorandum ofUnderstanding for Police Operations (William Velasco/Ben Gomez) [15 minutes J 5. Contract Modification for Employee Medical Services and Third Party Administration
(TPA) ofthe Substance Abuse Program (William Velasco/Ben Gomez) [ 10 minutes J 6. *Review of Fare Structure --Free Fares and Fare Elasticity (William Velasco/Sharon Leary) [ 15 minutes
J 7. Approval to Amend Fare Structure (William Velasco/Sharon Leary) [ 5 minutes J 8. *Review ofNew ofNew Farebox Functions and Procurement (William Velasco/Sharon Leary) [15 minutes
J 9. *Review of FY03 DART Police Activity Report (William Velasco/Ben Gomez) [ 15 minutes J 10. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 11. Adjournment +Same Night Item "'Briefing Item
The Administrative Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551. 071, and consultation with Attorneyfor any legal issues, or under Section 551.072
for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Administrative Committee is December 9,
2003. Thisfacility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodationsfor the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in
advance. Chair -William Velasco Vice Chair -Ray' Noah Members -Terri Adkisson, Mark Enoch, Linda Koop, Beatrice Martinez and Lynn F1int Shaw StaffLiaison -Sharon Leary, Ben Gomez and
RockyAngle 1111AD.DOC DOC 11/10/03 -10:02 AM:
Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee Meetings November 10-14,2003 Committee 1 E-3 & E-4: Northeast /Tuesday, November 11 2:00 to 4:00 PM Gentry Fire Training Center
307 Century Parkway Allen, Texas 75013 Committee 2 E-5 & E-6: Southeast Monday, November 10 2:00 -4:00 PM Council Chambers 502 Cedar Street Cedar Hill, Texas 75104 Committee 3 W-1: Central
Wednesday, November 12 9:30 to 11:30 AM Intermodal Transportation Center 1001 Jones Street Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Committee 4 W-4 Thursday, November 13 2:00 to 4:00 PM Community Center
120 North Hampton Road Crowley, Texas 76036 Committee 5 W-2 Wednesday, November 12 2:00 to 4:00 PM City of Southlake -Training Room 3D 1400 Main Street Southlake, Texas 76092 Committee
6 g-2 Friday, NOvember 14 9:30-11:30AM Hedrick House 1407 Creekview Drive Lewisville, Texas 75067 Attachment 1
Regional Rail Corridor Study Rail Corridors Legend Committee 1 -Northeast: E-3: Dallas Area Rapid Transit: Piano/Alien/McKinney E-4: BUrlington Northern Santa Fe: carrolitonlThe Colony/Frisco
Committee 2 -Sou1heast: E-5: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Duncanville/Cedar HilVMldlothian E-6: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Dallas/Lancaster/Red OaklWaxahachie Committee 3 -Central:
E-1: Trinity Railway Express: Dallas County One/Downtown Dallas W-3: Trinity Railway Express: Fort WorthlTarrant County Line W-1: Union Pacific Mainline: Fort Worth/Dallas (includes
Dorothy Spur) Committee 5: W-2: Fort Worth & Western/Cotton Belt: SW FortWorthlTarrant County Line 􀁾(') :T 3.:r:.Ds.. I\) Mlbark K<>rop Kaulman 􀁗􀁾􀀨􀁉􀁴􀁬􀀨􀁊􀀢􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁤 Millsap Milara
WOlls NANorth central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Rail Corridors Under StUdy Existing RanCorridors NRoadway E = EastiURS Corporation W= West/Carter-Burgess, Inc. Committee
4: W4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: FortWorth/Cleburne Map Revised: August 26, 2003 Committee 6: E-2: Unbn Padfic: Carrollton/Denton Committee 7: other Geographical Area
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Policy I Technical Meetings November 10 through 14, 2003 AGENDA 1. Welcome 2. Transit Fast Fact 3. Technology Applicability a. Corridor Evaluation Questions
and Answers 4. Stations a. Location Selection Criteria b. Prototypical Layouts Questions and Answers 5. Land Use Status Report Questions and Answers 6. Corridor Specific Item Questions
and Answers 7. Transportation Authority Report Questions and Answers 8. Committees 8, 9 and 10 Status Report 9. Freight Bottleneck Study Update 10. Meeting Wrap Up Attachment 3
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Rail Alternatives ffi NORTH ///i " , . -j"" Planning & Development May 8, 2003 axahachie (! /Legend Express (Chafilcrcri5.tlc 01 Commuter Rail 􀁏􀁾􀁣􀁲􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁮􀁾
Stralcay) Rapid (Characlori.tlc 01 Light Rail Oporatlng Stralogyj -Existing/Programmed
ffi NORTH DART 2030 Transit System Plan Bus Transit Alternatives ii Source: DART Five Year Plan! ____..􀁄􀁁􀁒􀁔􀁟􀀴􀀮􀀮􀀰􀁟􀁾􀁟􀁏􀁟􀁔􀁲􀁾􀁳􀁩􀁴System Plan Planning & Development May
B, 2003 Legend B Bus Stations/Stops ''''''''''.'=0/"" Implemented by 2007 -Implemented by 2015 --Additional Bus Alternatives after 2015
DART 2030 Transit System Plan HOV Alternatives ffi NORTH i Source: DART 2010 Transit System ., +. . 􀁾􀁉􀀼􀀺􀁉􀀡􀀧􀀡􀁉􀀡􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁏􀁇jobilitv 2025 Update Planning &Development May 8, 2003
-Legend HOV Existing/Programmed HOV
R. SCOTT WHEELER MAYOR TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS September 18, 2003 Post Office Box 9010, Addison, Texas 75001-9010 (972) 450-7026 Fax (972) 450-7043 E-mail: swheeler@ci.addison.rx.us Mr.
Jay Kline Assistant Vice President System Planning and Project Development Dallas Area Rapid Transit 1401 Pacific Avenue, 4th Floor Dallas, Texas 75266-7213 Re: 2030 Mobility Needs Assessment
Report Dear Mr. Kline: The Town of Addison recently received the DART 2030 Mobility Needs Assessment Report and reviewed the findings and analysis. Our community is unlike any other
municipality in the service or study area. Although the Town only has a residential population of 14,000 residents, we provide service to many thousands more on a daily basis. We also
feel that it is critical that all transportation planning for the future consider policy and case study examples that promote and highlight the central location to a major commercial
and business region, including shopping and restaurant accessibility. The Town of Addison obviously represents such a location. In review of the report, we agree with the determination
that our existing transit center provides a high potential for increased transit supply and use within the Tollway Corridor. However, Table 6-6 of the report indicates that the Town
is not a good candidate for new or improved service due to your established Transit Opportunity Index, which indicates a lesser demand for service in relation to supply. We believe that
the figures shown in this table do not accurately reflect current and future ridership conditions. Actually, the reverse is true, due to the fact that our ridership supply comes largely
from outside the service area in lieu of surrounding sites. Actual trends and ridership through our existing transit center does contradict the index values and makes the Town of Addison
an excellent location for a future light railJcommuter system. The Town of Addison has adopted a land use plan that is relative and supportive of transit development, as indicated in
section 4.5 of the report. Our newly developed Arts & Events District is adjacent to the existing transit center and further exemplifies the area as an ideal location for a future rail
station. Accordingly, we support and encourage your evaluation for Service Area Needs, as indicated in Section 8.2.5 Tollway Corridor. This section states the need for consideration
of rail or rapid bus transit in the Tollway Corridor from Legacy Park to 1-635. Although the Town of Addison is not recognized as having population and employment growth potential, our
central location and history with the existing bus transit center makes the Town of Addison a very viable site for light rail service.
We appreciate the opportunity to respond to this report. The geographic location of the community, and existing bus ridership demand in this area, make the Town more appropriate than
surrounding sites for a future light rail/commuter station and system expansion. Your consideration and support of our efforts to bring a light rail system to our community is necessary
and appreciated. Sincerely, Scott Wheeler Mayor
Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 DART Dallas,Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 August 7, 2003 Mr. Michael Murphy Director of Public Works Town of Addison P. O. Box 9010 5300 Belt
Line Road Addison, TX 75001-9010 RE: 2030 Mobility Needs Assessment Report DRAFT Dear Mr. Murphy: Attached for your review and comment is a draft copy of the 2030 Mobility Needs Assessment
report. We would like to receive your input by the first week of September to allow for sufficient time to respond. Please forward your comments and questions to: Rosalyn VanWinkle System
Planner I 1401 Pacific Avenue, 4th Floor, # 4262 Dallas, TX 75266-7213 214-749-3375 If you would like to contact me directly, please do not hesitate to call me at 214-7493539. Thank
you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of and response to this effort. Sincerely, {j;C6 Jay Kline Assistant Vice President, System Planning and Project Development JK:RVW Enclosure
(ftt!. Town of Addison 16801 Westgrove Dr. STEVEN Z. CHUTCIllAN, P.E. Assistant City Engineer (972) 450-2886 (972) 450-2837 FAX (214) 673-2518 Mobile schutchian@ci.addison.tx.us E-mail
P.o. Box 9010, Addison, Texas 75001-9010. 􀁾􀁾 􀀲􀁾􀀱􀀬􀀮􀁯􀂷􀁳􀀮 􀁾ADDiSON 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀢 RON WffiTEHEAD (972) 450-7028 ROt1r -/Is rA-,eT tJF O,A-J2T 1S !3vOtjET f >E/2HCc R. EP t/C T/cJttr
f?LA 11/J V/f £/􀁾 '-5 f3 t:s RQf--/B -K--􀁾􀁾􀁉 􀁃􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁬􀁬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁱􀀮 • 􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾 B (,s J2Ql.--.7F5 .BY 12 e-/Zvt(/I.--I/f/zr DAR! Sf'/1-pF. nA-zF Bef/V f C£) /VsoLI .0/1 (EJ) (JJ<
FC/LL. Iv( L-L ARE ELf 􀁾 (ky4 TE1J' Acep,e t>J /V t;t:--YJ COI1.---TRAe T ST/t F FIt'Vf· 15. Bc-/IV Ii 􀁥􀁌􀁉􀁾 (!'VA-TEIJ. Tffe 􀁾 lv-! J2 EI4J e:J.) BE HA tVZJL. E1J􀁾 􀁌􀁾 r/2-/03
D4RT Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 August 21,2003 􀁾􀁾􀀨􀁣􀁾􀁕􀁖􀁴􀁩􀁄 AUG 28 1003 '--􀁃􀀱􀀱􀁉􀁙􀁟􀁾 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager
Town of Addison P. O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 􀁄􀁥􀁡􀁲􀁾􀁦􀁯􀁾 Like many of our member cities, DART has experienced a significant drop in sales tax receipts over the last few
years. The impact of this reduction in sales tax revenue has led DART to continue to take a critical look at the way we do business and provide service to our customers. After evaluating
bus service delivery, it was decided to terminate the bus operating contract, which currently operates approximately one-third of our fixed route service. As of October 6, 2003, all
bus service will be provided with DART employees and facilities. The contract employees will have the option to apply for full-time positions with DART. As we make this transition, if
you should experience service quality issues, please refer customer concerns to our Customer Service Center at 214-979-1111. We appreciate your continued support. We are committed to
maintaining the level of high quality service that you have come to expect. Sincerely, 􀁾􀁯􀁭􀁾 PresIdent/Executive Director GCT/bc c: DART Board ofDirectors Victor H. Burke Sue Bauman
10:12 AUG 25, 2003 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #49062 PAGE: 1/7 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: ROB WltH:eheaa TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-'643 2S?31 Time Sent: Pages: Description
: Monday, Aug 25, 2003 􀀱􀀰􀀺􀀱􀁾 7DART Board Agendas Attached are the Board Agendas for the meeting on Tuesday, August 26, 2003. If you have any questions please contact Fred Pratt
at 214-749-2538. From: FaxNumber: Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTMF (214)
10:13 AUG 25, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #49062 PAGE: 2/7 Quorum = 5 Project Management Committee Meeting Tuesday, August 26, 2003, 2:30 p.m. -4:30 p.m. DART Conference Room
C -lst Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time { 1 hour and 20 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: May 27, 2003 2. Contract Modification for General Engineering
Consultant II (GECII) Services -Fiscal Year 2004 (FY04) Annual Work Program (AWP) (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {10 minutesJ 3. Contract Modification for Project Control Consultant (PCC)
Services for Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase II -Fiscal Year 2004 (FY04) Annual Work Program (AWP) (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) { 10 minutesJ 4. Contract Modification for Systems
Integration Consultant (SIC) Services for Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase II -Fiscal Year 2004 (FY04) Annual Work Program (AWP) (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) { 10 minutesJ 5. Contract
Modification for Systems Design Consultant (SOC) Services for Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase II -Fiscal Year 2004 (FY04) Annual Work Program (AWP) (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {
10 minutesJ 6. Declaration and Sale of Surplus Property at 5425 Greenville Avenue in Dallas, Texas (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) { 10 minutesJ 7. +Settlement in Mainstage, Inc., and Tower
Land Investment Company, Inc., v. DART and Lane Construction Company, Inc., Litigation (Faye Wilkins/Rocky Angle) { 30 minutesJ 8. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 9. Adjournment
'Briefing Item The Project Management Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorneyfor any legal issues, or under
Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Project Management Committee is September 23, 2003. This facility is wheelchair
accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Faye Willcins
Vice Chair-Huelon Harrison Members -MarkEnoch, Randall Chrisman, Joyce Foreman, Norma Stanton, William Velasco andRichard Watlcins StaffLiaison -Tim McKay 826PM.DOC 8/25/03 -10:lOAM
10:13 AUG 25, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #49062 PAGE: 3/7 Quorum = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, August 26, 2003 -Board Room 1401
Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: August 12,2003 2. Public Comments 3. Paratransit Services/FTA Award Presentation -Robert Patrick 4. Committee Advisory
Reports: Paratransit Access Advisory Group (PAAG) -(Sharon James) Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) -(Joe Burkleo) Consent Items: 5. Collection of Administrative Fee for Fare Violations
(Administrative-Mark Enoch/Ben Gomez) 6. Declaration of Highland Industrial Lead Spur Track Rights ofWay as Surplus to the Transit Authorities and Authorization to Dispose ofthe Property
(Operations-Richard Watkins/Kathy Waters) 7. Contract Modification for Uniform Rental Services (Operations-Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) 8. Contract for Light Rail Vehicle Friction Brake
Overhaul (Operations-Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) 9. Contract Modification for Forty-Foot Suburban Buses (Operations-Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) 10. Contract for ZF Transmission Parts
(Operations-Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) Individual Items: 11. +Authorization to Add Bad Faith Claim in Pending Litigation Against the Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, et al. (Administrative-Mark
Enoch/Rocky Angle) 12. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 13. +Settlement in Mainstage, Inc., and Tower Land Investment Company, Inc., v. DART and
Lane Construction Company, Inc., Litigation (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Rocky Angle) Other Items: 14. Officer Reports 15. Chair Report 16. General Counsel's Report 17. President/Executive
Director's Report 18. Communications and Public Comments 19. Adjournment +Same Night Item '* Briefing Item The Board ofDirectors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings
Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding
any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting oftheDARTBoard is September 9, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation
is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 826B.DOC 8/25/03 -10:10AM
10:13 AUG 25, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #49062 PAGE: 4/7 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:30 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, August 26, 2003 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: August 12,2003 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will be discussed
at the Board meeting only. 4. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent Items: [5 minutes J 5. Collection of Administrative Fee for Fare Violations (Administrative-Mark
Enoch/Ben Gomez) 6. Declaration of Highland Industrial Lead Spur Track Rights ofWay as Surplus to the Transit Authorities and Authorization to Dispose ofthe Property (Operations-Richard
Watkins/Kathy Waters) 7. Contract Modification for Uniform Rental Services (Operations-Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) 8. Contract for Light Rail VehicIe Friction Brake Overhaul (Operations-Richard
Watkins/Victor Burke) 9. Contract Modification for Forty-Foot Suburban Buses (Operations-Richard Watkins/Victor Burke) 10. Contract for ZF Transmission Parts (Operations-Richard Watkins/Victor
Burke) Individual Items: [1 hour and 5 minutes J 11. +Authorization to Add Bad Faith Claim in Pending Litigation Against the Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, et al. (Administrative-Mark
Enoch/Rocky Angle) [ 5 minutes J 12. *Review ofFY 2003 Third Quarter Operating & Financial Performance Report (Administrative-Mark Enoch/Sharon Leary) [30 minutesJ 13. +Settlement in
Mainstage, Inc., and Tower Land Investment Company, Inc., v. DART and Lane Construction Company, Inc., Litigation (Project Management-Faye WilkinslRocky Angle) [30 minutes J Other Items:
14. Adjournment +Same Night Item ;,Briefmg Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any
Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe
Committee-o.fthe-Whole is September 9,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community
Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 826C.DOC 8/25/03 -10:11 AM
10:14 AUG 25, 2003 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #49062 PAGE: 5/7 Quorum = 4 External Communications Committee Meeting Tuesday, August 26, 2003, 3:30 p.m.-4:00 p.m. DART Conference
Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time I minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: June 24, 2003 2. (Jesse Oliver/Sue Bauman) I minutes J 3. Identification
ofFuture Agenda Items 4. Adjournment "'Briefing Item The External Communications Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation
with Attorney Jor any legal issues arising regarding any Item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe External Communications Committee is September 23, 2003. This facilitv is
wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is avaifable. "Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Jesse
Oliver Vice Chair -Mark Enoch Members -Terri Adkisson, Angie Chen Button Huelon Harrison, Linda Koop andNorma Stanton StaffLiaison -Sue Bauman 826E.DOC 8/25/03 -10: 11 AM
10:14 AUG 25, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #49062 PAGE: 6/7 Quorum=5 Planning Committee Meeting Tuesday, August 26, 2003, 12:30 p.m. -2:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -lst Floor
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [1 hour and 15 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: July 8, 2003 2. Amendment to Southern Methodist University (SMU) Site Specific
Shuttle Agreement (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [5 minutesJ 3. Extension of American Airlines Center Shuttle Agreement (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [ 10 minutesJ 4. Contract for the Construction
of an Enhanced Shelter at Malcolm X Boulevard and Southland (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [ 10 minutesJ 5. Approval ofan Interlocal Cooperative Agreement Between North Central Texas Council
of Governments, City of Dallas, DART, and Dallas County for the Development ofa Comprehensive Transportation Plan for the Dallas Central Business District (CBD) (Linda Koop/Doug Allen)
[15 minutes J 6. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion Management System (CMS) Programming Request for the City of Plano (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [5 minutesJ 7. *Monroe Shops Update
(Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [ 10 minutesJ 8. *DART 2030 Transit System Plan -Work Progress Report (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [ 20 minutesJ 9. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 10. Adjournment
*Briefing Item , The Planning Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section
551.072 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Planning Committee is September 23,2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible.
For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Linda Koop Vice Chair -Norma
Stanton Members -Terri Adkisson, Randall Chrisman Mark Enoch, Huelon Harrison, William Velasco, Richard Watkins and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison -Doug Allen 826PL.DOC 8/25/03-10:11 AM
10:15 AUG 25, 2003 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #49062 PAGE: 7/7 Quorum = 4 Audit Committee Meeting Tuesday, August 26, 2003, 10:30 p.m-12:00 p.m. DART Conference Room B -lst Floor
1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [I hour and 10 minutes j 1. Approval of Minutes: June 24, 2003 2. *Materials Management Audit Update (Ray Noah/Albert
Bazis) [ 20 minutes j 3. *Funds Administration Follow-Up Audit (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis) [10 minutes j 4. *Bus Field Operations Follow-Up Audit (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) [ 10 minutes j 5.
*Paragon Project Resources, Inc. Incurred Cost Audit (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) [ 10 minutesj 6. *Parsons Transportation Group Incurred Cost Audit (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis) [10 minutes j
7. *URS GreinerIncurred Cost Audit (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) [10 minutes j 8. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 9. Adjournment ;,Briefmg Item The Audit Committee may go into Closed
Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding
any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Audit Committee is September 23, 2003. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign
interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Ray Noah Vice Chair -Bill Velasco Members -Terri Adkisson, Randall Chrisman,
Beatrice Martinez andNorma Stanton StaffLiaison -AlbertBazis \ 826ADOC 8/25/03-10:11 AM
􀁾􀀪 I Texas Department of Transportation DEWITI C. GREER STATE HIGHWAY BLDG. -125 E. 11TH STREET -AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701-2483 -(512) 463-8585 August 15, 2003 The Honorable R. Scott Wheeler
City of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Dallas, TX 75254 Dear Mayor Wheeler: It has been called "the most comprehensive transportation legislation in the state's history." It is House Bill 3588,
78th Legislature, Regular Session, which created new financing tools to fund transportation projects that will improve commuter drive times, spur economic development and prevent highway
tragedies. I Through the hard work and visionary efforts of the Texas Legislature, HB 3588 is law. It is now time for the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and our partners
in local government to step up to the plate and put the innovative new tools in this bill to work. The bill itself is 311 pages. To assist you and your constituents in understanding
the key provisions, TxDOT has developed an informative brochure. A copy is enclosed with this letter; please feel free to request as many copies as you may need. TxDOT's intent is to
be aggressive in using these new tools along with existing ones to get traffic moving. On behalf of the agency, I appreciate all you have done and continue to do for mobility in Texas.
Sincerely, '--rr?tJ.􀁾 Michael W. Behrens, P.E. Executive Director cc: Texas Transportation Commission An Equal Opportunity Employer
Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee Meetings November 10-14, 2003 Committee 1 E-3 &E-4: Northeast Tuesday, November 11 2:00 to 4:00 PM Gentry Fire Training Center
307 Century Parkway Allen, Texas 75013 Committee 2 E-5 &E-6: Southeast Monday, November 10 2:00 -4:00 PM Council Chambers 502 Cedar Street Cedar Hill, Texas 75104 Committee 3 W-1: Central
Wednesday, November 12 9:30 to 11 :30 AM Intermodal Transportation Center 1001 Jones Street Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Committee 4 W-4 Thursday, November 13 2:00 to 4:00 PM Community Center
900 Glendale Crowley, Texas76036 Committee 5 W-2 Wednesday, November 12 2:00 to 4:00 PM City of Southlake -Training Room 3D 1400 Main Street Southlake, Texas 76092 Committee 6 E-2 Friday, November 14 9:30 -11
:30 AM Hedrick House 1407 Creekview Drive Lewisville, Texas 75067 Attachment 1
Regional Rail Corridor Study Rail Corridors FT Legend Committee 3 -Central: E-1: Trinity Railway Express: Dallas County IinelDowntown Dallas W-3: Trinity Railway Express: Fort WorthlTarrant
County Line W-1: Union Pacific Mainline: Fort WorthlDalias (includes Dorothy Spur) Committee 1 -North east: E-3: Dallas Area Rapid Transit: Piano/Alien/McKinney E-4: Burlington Northern
Santa Fe: CarrolitonlThe Colony/Frisco Committee 2 -Southeast: E-5: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Duncanville/Cedar HilVMidlothian E-6: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Dallas/Lancaster/Red
OaklWaxahachie »􀁾(') :::r 3CI) .;..j. N .-....\...•. &1-'" '\KaJfman \ ,mp 􀀮􀁬􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁴􀀮 􀀨􀁨􀀭􀁾􀁪􀀢􀁪􀁜 MOOaok ,( '''-'''1 ..􀀬􀁲􀀧􀁊􀁾 Wells 􀁾􀁾"-............ 􀀧􀁩􀀮􀁾􀀡􀁜 􀀯􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁚􀀢�
�􀀮􀀬􀁲􀁬􀀰􀁊􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁜 /􀁾􀀡 􀀯􀁍􀁩􀀹􀁳􀁾 ":>.-/•••. 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁴􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭B NANorth Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Committee 4: W-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: FortWorth/Cleburne
Committee 5: W-2: Fort Worth & Western/Cotton Belt: SW Fort WorthlTarrant County Line Map Revised: August 26, 2003 NRaii Corridors Under Study -'\ -' Existing Rail Corridors 1\1 Roadway
E = EasUURS Corporation W= WesUCarter-Burgess, Inc. Committee 6: E-2: Union Padfic: Carrollton/Denton Committee 7: ather Geog raph ica IArea
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Policy I Technical Meetings November 10 through 14, 2003 AGENDA 1. Welcome 2. Transit Fast Fact 3. Technology Applicability a. Corridor Evaluation Questions
and Answers 4. Stations a. Location Selection Criteria b. Prototypical Layouts Questions and Answers 5. Land Use Status Report Questions and Answers 6. Corridor Specific Item Questions
and Answers 7. Transportation Authority Report Questions and Answers 8. Committees 8, 9 and 10 Status Report 9. Freight Bottleneck Study Update 10. Meeting Wrap Up Attachment 3
North Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: Regional Rail Corridor Study (RRCS) PolicylTechnical Committee Members and Interested Parties DATE: November 3, 2003 FROM: SUBJECT: Barbara
C. Maley, AICP Principal Transportation Planner RRCS November Committee Meetings This letter is to advise you of the November round of Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy/Technical Committee
meetings. Three attachments are included for your convenience: Attachment 1: Meeting dates, times and locations Attachment 2: Study Map Attachment 3: Agenda To date, the Committee meetings
have included PowerPoint presentations as well as a multitude of handouts covering: project orientation, corridor fact sheets, technology summary, station criteria and land use. Generally,
half of the meetings are devoted to questions and answers. During the November meetings, you will note that Policy and Technical Committee membership has grown, following the call on
September 26 of prioritization of service on Committees 1 through 10. Should you have any questions and/or comments on the above information, please call me at (817) 695-9278. BCM:ac
Attachments cc: 2003-04 UPWP Element 5.01 Project File 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint Two P. o. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806 @recycled paper
http://www.dfwinfo.com
Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy and Technical Committee Meetings November 10-14, 2003 Committee 1 E-3 &E-4: Northeast Tuesday, November 11 2:00 to 4:00 PM Gentry Fire Training Center
307 Century Parkway Allen, Texas 75013 Committee 2 E-5 &E-6: Southeast Monday, November 10 2:00 -4:00 PM Council Chambers 502 Cedar Street Cedar Hill, Texas 75104 Committee 3 W-1: Central
Wednesday, November 12 9:30 to 11 :30 AM Intermodal Transportation Center 1001 Jones Street Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Committee 4 W-4 Thursday, November 13 2:00 to 4:00 PM Community Center
900 Glendale Crowley, Texas 76036 Committee 5 W-2 Wednesday, November 12 2:00 to 4:00 PM City of Southlake -Training Room 3D 1400 Main Street Southlake, Texas 76092 Committee 6 E-2 Friday,
November 14 9:30 -11 :30 AM Hedrick House 1407 Creekview Drive Lewisville, Texas 75067 Attachment 1
Regional Rail Corridor Study Rail Corridors FT legend Committee 3 -Central: E-1: Trinity Railway Express: Dallas County linelDowntown Dallas W-3: Trinity Railway Express: FortWorthlTarrant
County Line W-1: Union Pacific Mainline: Fort WorthlDallas (includes Dorothy Spur) Committee 1 -Northeast: E-3: Dallas Area Rapid Transit: Piano/Alien/McKinney E-4: Burlington Northern
Santa Fe: CarrolitonlThe Colony/Frisco Committee 2 -Southeast: E-5: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Duncanville/Cedar Hill/Midlothian E-6: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: Dallas/Lancaster/Red
OaklWaxahachie »6f o::r 3CD:::s N \ 8' ,\KaJfman \ 'K","P 􀀧􀀻􀀺􀀭􀁜􀀧􀀾􀁾􀁫􀀱􀁲􀁯􀁡􀁮􀁫 ''-<' 􀁜􀁩􀁾 MncralWells 􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀧..... 􀀯􀀢􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀩􀀬􀀢􀁚􀁍􀀮􀀢􀀧􀀰􀀮􀀱􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀻􀁜 ./􀁾􀁩 ;'M"",
"':c--... NANorth Central Texas Council of Governments Trans portation Map Revised: August 26, 2003 NRail Corridors Under Study /\ -' Existing Rail Corridors NRoadway E = EasUURS Corporation
W= WesUCarter-Burgess, Inc. Committee 5: W-2: Fort Worth & Western/Cotton Belt: SW SW Fort WorthlTarrant County Line Committee 4: W-4: Burlington Northern Santa Fe: FortWorth/C leburn
e Committee 6: E-2: Union Paafic: Carrollton/Denton Committee 7: Other Geograph ical Area
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Policy I Technical Meetings November 10 through 14,2003 AGENDA 1. Welcome 2. Transit Fast Fact 3. Technology Applicability a. Corridor Evaluation Questions
and Answers 4. Stations a. Location Selection Criteria b. Prototypical Layouts Questions and Answers 5. Land Use Status Report Questions and Answers 6. Corridor Specific Item Questions
and Answers 7. Transportation Authority Report Questions and Answers 8. Committees 8, 9 and 10 Status Report 9. Freight Bottleneck Study Update 10. Meeting Wrap Up Attachment 3
North Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: Regional Rail Corridor Study (RRCS) Policyrrechnical Committee Members and Interested Parties DATE: November 3,2003 FROM: SUBJECT: Barbara
C. Maley, AICP Principal Transportation Planner RRCS November Committee Meetings This letter is to advise you of the November round of Regional Rail Corridor Study Policy/Technical Committee
meetings. Three attachments are included for your convenience: Attachment 1: Meeting dates, times and locations Attachment 2: Study Map Attachment 3: Agenda To date, the Committee meetings
have included PowerPoint presentations as well as a multitude of handouts covering: project orientation, corridor fact sheets, technology summary, station criteria and land use. Generally,
half of the meetings are devoted to questions and answers. During the November meetings, you will note that Policy and Technical Committee membership has grown, following the call on
September 26 of prioritization of service on Committees 1 through 10. Should you have any questions and/or comments on the above information, please call me at (817) 695-9278. BCM:ac
Attachments cc: 2003-04 UPWP Element 5.01 Project File 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint Two P. O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806 @recycled paper
http://www.dfwinfo.com
DART Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas. Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 n 􀀯􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀯􀁴􀁴􀀾􀁶􀀧􀀭􀁌 􀁾􀀨􀀡/i April 9, 2004 Mr. Ron Whitehead Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010
Addison, TX 75001-9010 Dear Mr. Whitehead: On behalf of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors, I would like to thank you for traveling to Washington, DC and meeting with Congressional
leaders and other decision makers regarding DART's reauthorization and appropriations requests. We appreciate your time and efforts as we continue to build and expand our transportation
system in North Texas. Your participation was a key component in making this trip successful. With your continued support, we are confident that DART's federal funding requests will
receive appropriate consideration. Your efforts today will have a direct impact on the quality of life in North Texas for decades to come. son hairman, DART Board of Directors HH/jcb
cc: DART Board Gary C. Thomas .Sue BaUman ---
Delegation Meetings Salutation IFlrst Name ILast Name IICompany IAddress lCity i 1 State TZfp-Mr. /Peter IROQoff IISenate Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee 1144 Dirksen Senate
Office Building IWashington ID.C. I 20510 Mr. IAaron IKlein IISenate Banking Committee 1534 Dirksen Senate OfficeBuildinq IWashinatpn ID.C. I 20510 The Honorable IJohn ICornyn II United
States Senate 1517 Hart SenateOffice Building IWashington ID.C. I 20510 Ms. /Amy IMaldonado 1I0ffice of Senator John Cornvn 1517 Hart Senate Office BUiiding IWashington ID.C. I 20510
The Honorable IKay Bailey IHutchison II United States Senate f284 Russell Senate Office Building lWaShingtbn ID.C. I 20510 The Honorable Martin U.S. House of Re resentatives ----Mr.
Mike House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee The Honorable Pete U.S. House of Representatives The Honorable Jeb U.S. House of Representatives The Honorable ITom /Petri IIHouse
Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee on Highways and Transit 12462 Rayburn HOB IWashinoton ID.C. I 20515 The Honorable IMichael IBurgess Ilu.s. House of Representatives 11721 Lonqworth
HOB IWashinQton ID.C. I 20515 Mr. IPaul IDoerrer !!Senate Transportation 􀁁􀁰􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁰􀁲􀁩􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾 SU_bcoTTlmittee __ _ _ _ 􀀱􀀱􀀳􀀳􀁟􀁄􀁩􀁾􀁳􀁥􀀢􀀭􀁓􀁥􀁾􀁴􀁥 Qffice Building IWashingt!:m
ID.C. I 20510 The Honorable U.S. House of Re resentatives The Honorable U.S. House of Representatives The Honorable U.S. House of Representatives Ms. IKate /Hallahan IISenate Transportation
Appropriations Subcommittee 1144 Dirksen Senate Office Building IWashinaton ID;C.' 20510 Mr. IJoe !Guzzo !!Office of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison -----1284RusseilSenate Office BUilding
IWashingtpn ID,C. I 20510 Mr. Office of SenatarRayBaney HUtchison 284 RUssell Senate Office Building 20510 Mr. Office of Congressman Martin Frost 2256 Rayburn HOB 20515 Mr. Tucker Anderson
Office of Congressman Pete Sessions 1318 Longworth HOB Washingtbn D.C. 20515 Ms. Dee Buchanan Office of Congressman Jeb Hensarling 423 Cannon HOB Washingtbn D,C. 20515 Ms. Randi Reid
Office of Congressman Michael Burgess 1721 Longworth HOB Washington D,C. 20515 Mr. Barry Brown Office of Congressman Michael Burgess 1721 LonQworth HOB WashlnQton D;C. 205151 Mr. Josh
Martin Office of ConQressman Michael Bumess 1721 Longworth HOB Washington D.C. 205151 Ms. ILeslee IGilbert 1I0ffice of Conaressman Ralph Hall 12405 Rayburn HOB !WashinQton ID.C. I 20515
Ms. Office of Congressman Sam JOhnson -11211 􀁌􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁨􀁈􀁏􀁂 􀁾􀁧􀁴􀁯􀁮 􀁉􀁄􀁾􀁃􀀮 I 205151 Mr. Office of ConQresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson 1511 Longworth HOB 􀁗􀁡􀁳􀁨􀁩􀁮􀁾
Gary's Meetings Ms. ILvnn Mr. IJoe The Honorable IRobert Ms. IMariia Sahaj Carnaggio Jamison Zimmerman Federal Transit Administration Federal Transit Administration Federal Transit Administration
Office of Conqressman Blumenhauer 400 7th Street, S.W. Room 9328 400 7th Street, S.W. Room 9328 400 7th Street. S.W. Room 9328 2446 Ravburn Washinoton ID.C. Washinglon ID,C. Washinolon
ID.C. Washinq/on ID:C. 20590 20590 20590 20515
􀁾 􀁾􀁬􀀯􀁾 􀀰􀁾􀂩􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁯􀀧 I 11 l!dJ .I l.i APR 1 2 2004 Gi fV MANAGER April 8, 2004 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town ofAddison PO Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 􀁾 Dear
Mr. Whitehead: It was a pleasure to work with you during our recent visit to Washington, D.C. The timely construction of the DART Northwest Corridor rail line is a high priority of the
City of Farmers Branch. We were pleased to observe that is a high priority with so many elected official and community leaders. DARTwas fortunate to have the participation of such a
knowledgeable and articulate group of people working on their behalf. It was clear during our meetings at the Capital that members of congress and their staff were impressed by the representation
of business and community leaders who had taken their time to join DART and city officials in promoting the need for federal funding for DART's light rail expansion. The DART light rail
expansion clearly united a diverse group ofpeople as we focused on working together to promote DART during the visit to Washington. Thank you for your help on the Northwest Corridor
project. We look forward to continuing to work with you to get the Northwest Corridor project completed as soon as possible for the benefit of all who live, work or play in the northwest
corridor. ".. 􀀧􀁾 ';"';' "",. " ..:; ) 􀁾 ".; .;., .. -:' Bob Phelps Mayor 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 Linda Grd6mer CityMana"ger City of Farmers Branch P.O. Box 819010 Farmers Branch. Texas 75381-9010
972/247-3131 Linked in Friendship with District of Bassetlaw, England, Garbsen and Schonebeck. Germany. Internet L1RL ... http://www.ci.farmers-branch.tx.us
12:03 APR 09, 2004 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *64057 PAGE: 1/9 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages : Description : steve Chutchian TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837
Friday, Apr 9, 2004 12:01PM 9DART Board Agendas Attached are the DART Board Agendas for the DART Board Meetinq on Tuesday, April 13, 2004. If you have any questions please contact Fred
Pratt at 214-749-2538. From: Fax Number : Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTMF (214)
12:04 APR 09, 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620Quornm=4 *64057 PAGE: 2/9 Operations Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 13, 2004, 3:30 p.m. -5:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeeting Time I 55 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: March 9, 2004 2. +Contract Modification for Upgrade of Double Track Between South
Irving Station and Elm Fork Bridge Project; Signals and Signal House at Regal Row Bridge and Exercise of Final Contract Option (Joyce Foreman/Kathy Waters) [20 minutes J 3. +Contract
Modification for DART On-Call Service (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) [10 minutes J 4. Approval ofthe Transfer of Equity Interest and Sale ofTrolley Buses (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) [
5 minutes J 5. Approval ofthe Transfer ofEquity Interest and Sale of Small Buses (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) [ 5 minutes J 6. *Transportation Department Update -Operator Procedures
(Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) [15 minutes J 7. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 8. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The OperatWns Committee may go into Cwsed Session under
the Texas Open Meetings Act, SectWn 551.071, Consultation with Attorney, for any legal issues, or under SectWn 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551. 074for Personnel
matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Operations Committee is May 11, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodatums for the
hearing impaired, sign interpretatWn is available. Please contact Conununity Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Joyce Foreman Vtce Chair -Faye Wilkins Members -Scott
Carlson, Linda Koop, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint Shaw and William Velasco StaffLiaison • Victor Burke and Kathy Waters 04130.DOC 4/9/04 -11:58 AM
12:04 APR 09, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *64057 PAGE: 3/9 Quorum = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, April 13, 2004 -Board Room 1401
Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: March 23,2004 2. The Texas Safety Association Golden Lantern Award For Overall Safety, 2003 (Kathy Waters) 3. The
Texas Safety Association Award ofHonor In Recognition ofOutstanding Service and Worthy Accomplishments in Accident Prevention To A Safer Texas (Kathy Waters) 4. Public Comments Consent
Items: 5. Approval ofa Site-Specific Shuttle Agreement with McKinney Avenue Trolley Authority (MATA) (Plamling-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 6. Call for Public Hearing for a Service Plan Amendment
on Station Location Changes in the Northwest Corridor MedicallMarket Center Area (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) 7. Contracts for Environmental Site Assessments (Project Management-Faye
Wilkins/Tim McKay) 8. Approval of Light Rail Transit (LRT) Level Boarding Mode of Operation Operation Concept (Project Management-Faye WilkinslTim McKay) 9. Contract Modification for
Construction ofNortheast Corridor Line Section Garland-2 (G-2) for Final Quantity Adjustment (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) 10. Limited Waiver of Section 7.3 ofthe DART
Administrative Employment Manual for Barrett Atkins, P.E. (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) II. Contract for the Fabrication and ReplacementofInformational Pylon Panels (External
Communications-Robert Pope/Sue Bauman) Individual Items: 12. +Contract Modification for Upgrade of Double Track Between South Irving Station and Elm Fork Bridge Project; Signals and
Signal House at Regal Row Bridge and Exercise of Final Contract Option (Operations-Joyce ForemanlKathy Waters) 13. +Contract Modification for DART On-Call Service (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Victor
Burke) 14. +Contract for Benefits Consulting Services (Administrative-William VelascolBen Gomez) IS. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition
of Parcels SEI22,23,27, & 31 for the Southeast Corridor Line Section Southeast-I (SE-I) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings if Necessary (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay)
16. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcel NWIB45 for the Northwest Corridor Line Section Northwest-IB (NW-IB) and Authorize Eminent
Domain Proceedings if Necessary (Project Management-Faye WilkinsITim McKay) 17. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole only. 18. This item will be discussed at the
Committee-of-the-Whole only. Other Items: 19. Officer Reports 20. Chair Report 21. General Counsel's Report 22. President/Executive Director's Report 23. Communications and Public Comments
24. Adjournment 0413B.DOC 4/9/04 -II :59 AM
12:04 APR 09, 2004 1D: DART +Same Night Item it Briefing Item TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *64057 PAGE: 4/9 Quorum = 10 The Board ofDirectors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open
Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney, for any legal issues, or under Section 551.071 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074for Personnel matters arising
regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe DARTBoard is April 17, 1004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign
interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 114-749-1543,48 hours in advance. 0413B.DOC 2 4/9/04 -II :59AM
12:05 APR 09, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *64057 PAGE: 5/9 Quorum =2 ByLaws Ad Hoc Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 13, 2004, 12:00 p.m. -1:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -lst
Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 1. *Review ofDART Bylaws and Rules of Procedures (Robert Pope) 2. Identification of Future Agenda Items 3. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing
Item The ByLaws Ad Hoc Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney, for any legal issues arising regarding any
item listed on this Agenda. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at
214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Robert Pope Members -Norma Stanton and Terri Adkisson StaffLiaison -Nancy Johnson and Rocky Angle 0413BY.DOC 419104 -II :59 AM
12:05 APR 09, 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *64057 PAGE: 6/9 Quorum=8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 5:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, April 13, 2004 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: March 23,2004 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will be discussed
at the Board meeting only. 4. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only Consent Items: {5 minutes J 5. Approval ofa Site-Specific Shuttle Agreement with McKinney Avenue Trolley
Authority (MATA) (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) 6. Call for Public Hearing for a Service Plan Amendment on Station Location Changes in the Northwest Corridor Medical/Market Center
Area (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) 7. Contracts for Environmental Site Assessments (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) 8. Approval ofLight Rail Transit (LRT) Level Boarding
Mode of Operation Concept (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) 9. Contract Modification for Construction ofNortheast Corridor Line Section Garland-2 (G-2) for Final Quantity Adjustment
(Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) 10. Limited Waiver of Section 7.3 ofthe DART Administrative Employment Manual for Barrett Atkins, P.E. (Project Management-Faye WilkinslTim
McKay) 11. Contract for the Fabrication and Replacement ofInformational Pylon Panels (External Communications-Robert Pope/Sue Bauman) Individual Items: {1 hour and 15 minutes J 12. +Contract
Modification for Upgrade of Double Track Between South Irving Station and Elm Fork Bridge Project; Signals and Signal House at Regal Row Bridge and Exercise ofFinal Contract Option (Operations-Joyce
Foreman/Kathy Waters) {10 minutesJ 13. +Contract Modification for DART On-Call Service (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) [5 minutesJ 14. +Contractfor Benefits Consulting Services
(Administrative-William VelascolBen Gomez) ( 10 minutesJ 15. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcels SEI-22, 23, 27, 27, & 31 for
the Southeast Corridor Line Section Southeast-l (SE-l) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings if Necessary (Project Management-Faye WilkinslTim McKay) [5 minutes J . 16. Declare Public
Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcel NWIB-45 for the Northwest Corridor Line Section Northwest-lB (NW-IB) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings
if Necessary (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {5 minutes J 17. *DART 2030 Transit System Plan (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) {30 minutes J 18. *Procurement Plan Update (Huelon
Harrison/Gary Thomas) {10 minutesJ Other Items: 19. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefmg Item 0413C.DOC 4/9/04 -12:00 PM
12:06 APR 09, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *64057 PAGE: 7/9 Quomm=8 The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation
with Attorney, for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda.
The next meeting ofthe Committee-o.f-the-Whole is April 27, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodatiom for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available.
Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0413C.DOC 2 4/9/04 -12:00 PM
12:06 APR 09, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *64057 PAGE: 8/9 Quorum =4 Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 13, 2004, 1:00 p.m. -2:00 p.m. DART Conference
Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeeting Time I 40 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: March 9, 2004 and March 23,2004 2. *The Diversity Fund Proposal:
MWBE Contractor Capital Loan Program (Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) (20 mUlUtes J 3. *Review of Solicitations with Disadvantaged, Minority, Woman-Owned Business Enterprise (DMWBE) Goals
of Less than Ten Percent (Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) I 20 minutesJ 4. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 5. Adj ournment +Same Night Item ;,Briefing Item The Diversity Economic
Opportunity Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney, for any legal issues arising regarding any item listed
on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee is May 11, 2004. 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired,
sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Randall Chrisman Vice Chair-Joyce Foreman Members -Angie Chen Button,
Beatrice Martinez, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint Shaw and William Velasco StaffLtaison -Gloria Dixon and Ken Mercer 0413D.DOC 4/9/04 -12:00 PM
12:06 APR 09, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 464057 PAGE: 9/9 Quornm=4 Administrative Committee Meeting Tuesday, April 13, 2004, 2:00 p.m. -3:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st
Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., DaJlas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time /1 Iwur and 5 minutes 1 1. Approval of Minutes: March 9, 2004 2. +Contract for Benefits Consulting Services (William
VelascolBen Gomez) [10 minutes J 3. Contract Modification for Owner Controlled Insurance Program Administrator (William VelascolBen Gomez) [10 minutes J 4. Approval of Quarterly Disclosure
Update (William Velasco/Sharon Leary) [ 5 minutes J 5. Approval of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Supplemental Agreements for the Cities of Grand Prairie and Mesquite (William
Velasco/Sharon Leary) [ 5 minutes J 6. Approval of Financial Standards for FY 2005 Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan Process (William Velasco/Sharon Leary) [ 20 minutes J 7. *Benefits
Review -Miscellaneous (William Velasco/Ben Gomez) [15 minutes J 8. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 9. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item· The Administrative Committee may
go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Seetinn 551. 071, consultaJion with Attorneyfor any legal issues, or under Section 551. 072 for Real Estate issues, or under
Section 551.074for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Administrative Committee is May 11,2004. This facility is wheekhair accessible.
For accommodotinns for the hearing inqJaired, sign interpretatiDn is availahle. Please contaet Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -William Velasco Vice Chair
-Ray Noah Memhers -Terri Adkisson, Mark Enoch, Linda Koop, Beatrice Martinez and Lynn F1int Shaw StaffLiaison -Sharon Leary, Ben Gomez and RockyAngle 0413AD.DOC 4/9/04 -12:00 PM
North Central Texas Council of Governments 􀀧􀂷􀀧􀁨􀀡􀁾􀁴 •••.••• r. 􀂷􀀷􀁐􀁴􀁾􀁲􀁔􀀱􀁬􀀱􀀮􀀮􀀮 -TechnologYE"fl-1 --Station' 􀁌􀁯􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀩􀁜􀁮􀁡􀁙􀁾􀁬􀁳 -Orientation to the 􀁱􀁾􀁲􀁲􀁩􀁤􀁯􀁲􀁳
(Infrastructure) • November 2003:<;/' -Technology Applications in Corridors -Station Prototypical Layouts -Land Use Status Report -Freight Bottleneck Study Update -Transportation Authority
Update 1
erll200' • 􀁔􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁲􀁃􀁨􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁦􀀱􀁧􀁧􀀻􀁩􀀯􀁾􀁩􀁲􀁬􀁾􀁦􀁩􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁚􀁁􀁵􀁧􀁵􀁳 .. 003 • ColorCido. 􀁒􀁡􀁩􀁬􀁣􀁡􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁧􀁬􀁾􀁮􀁆􀁩􀂧􀁥􀁰􀁾􀀨􀀻􀀩􀁊􀁾􀁢􀁥􀁉􀀲􀀰􀀨􀀩􀀳􀀢 • Financial,
􀁉􀁮􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁴􀁵􀁴􀁩􀁏􀁉􀁜􀁬􀁃􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁌􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁳􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁥􀁏􀁲􀁩􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀭 January 􀀲􀀹􀀬􀀲􀀰􀀰􀀮􀀴􀀺􀀯􀁾􀁲􀁪􀁚􀁩􀀨 , • Financial, Institutional and Legislative Meetings
-Winter, Spring and SurTl.mer2004 􀁊􀀻􀁽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀯.../( 􀁍􀁬􀁤􀀭􀁃􀁾􀁴􀀮􀁊􀁲􀁩 •. /c' • Committee? Meetin ....•.....•....iay.20'20p4' • 􀁔􀁾􀀮􀁩􀀳􀀮􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁴 Summit .,..-􀁁􀁵􀁾􀁾􀁳􀁴􀁴􀁡􀀬􀀻􀀲􀀰􀀸􀀴􀁬
• Judges/Mayors 􀁎􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁡􀀬􀁾􀀺􀁌􀁥􀁧􀁬􀁳􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁥 ConferenceSummer/Fall 2004.i1';:<·" 􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀧􀀬 >....􀀻􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀻􀀮􀀮􀀭 ".,". ,,'.,,' • Legislative Proposal":" Fall 2004
• Regional Rail Corridor Study Conclusion -December 2004 2
.?U.rnp ons -Projected Gapital 􀁃􀀿􀁾􀁴􀁾􀀮􀁆􀁻􀁥􀁧􀁩􀀨􀀩􀁮􀁡􀁬 Rail Only) -Projected 􀁒􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁲􀁳􀁨􀁩􀁰􀀨􀁾􀁾􀁧􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁊􀁡􀁩􀁊Only) -Performance 􀁂􀁥􀁾􀁣􀁬􀀱􀀿􀁾􀁡􀁲􀁫􀁳􀀨􀁒􀁾􀁧􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁬
RailOnly) • Non-Rail TransitServices (15 min.) -Discussion • Transit-Oriented Development (1.5 min.) -Discussion, time permitting 3
REGIONAL.. RAIL TECHNOI..OGM STATIONS· Regional Rail StatioriL . oSiteCorifig . ""'Ridershlp -.Stations -: Geornetric -DesignC Traffic and ::: .􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁧􀁲􀁥􀁳􀁓􀀻􀀧􀁾􀂧 -Grade separationrequirements
-Local traffic impacts -Pedestrianlbicycle access Environmental'lssues: -Neighborhood compatibility -Relocations and displacements -Environmental compatibility Economic DevelopmenVTransit-Oriented
Development: -Local pian compatibility Existing zoning -transit supportive -Transit-orienled development (TOO) potential UrtJan Station TOO Concept 4
<:'::",',: COST .•ESTIMATES -Structures -Stations -Vehicles -Other • Real Estate l\Iot Included • UsesRegio Approved Demographic Forecasts • Ridership Forecasts for Light Rail Transit
Alternatives·Under 􀁄􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁾 5
EstYmated Daily Ridersh PerformanceBenchmark (Cost Effectiveness)' $6.28 Annualized ,Cost per Annualized Rider 6
DRAFT e:3 CORRIDOR L.ightRail 7
E-3CORRIDOR 8
$5.79 Annualized Cost per Annualized rider ····6840108360/. average dail;ridership E-4 CORRIDOR ,[S)ummary Qata Performance'Benchmark (Cost Effectiveness) 9
E-4CORRIDOR. Railroad Coordination -DART Coordination .. •. llrthe ... .•··.··Sig ••. '..•...•StfuCtu .EvaluationofTrini, I Bridges, UnionStatf6n, ITCfT&P, 􀁔􀁯􀁾􀁥􀁲􀀮􀀵􀀵􀀬􀁥􀁴􀁣􀀮􀀩
• Evaluation of 􀁁􀁮􀁙􀀤􀁌􀀱􀁧􀁧􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁤􀀮􀁾.. Modifications to'Alternatives Presented in This Meeting • Continued Refinement of Ridership Forecasts 10
11
AC"'I.􀀬􀀡􀀮􀁉􀁾􀁙􀀭􀀮􀁃􀁅􀂷􀁎􀀬􀀮􀁅􀂷􀁆􀁬􀁅􀀮􀁄􀀮􀁚􀁩 ... . <S'TRATEGIE 12
TRANSIT HUBS AFFECTING'PRIVATEINVESTMEN TOO Development Forms Edge Suburt>on Suburbon Ceo!»r Ur1>Iln Ceo..... Urban Core -it---+-I--I I I T3 T4 TS TS.S T6 13
BASIC MARKET FACTORS, gthJweakness of Housing/Commercial state Market in Surrounding Are ... 􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀼􀀺􀂷􀁯􀁾 and 􀁁􀁶􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁧􀁾􀀩 . . • Availability of Developable Land and/or Infill
Development Opportunities • Healthcare Access, Crime, Education and Other Quality of Life Issues • Dual Use with Freight 􀁦􀁲􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁳 .. • Train Noise 14
SuburbanFonn .•. .Suburban center "),",,·,.,,,_,.,.V.':,</,...'.' .. , ':",.., "-.' LOCALiGOVERNMENTFACrORS • Assembled Parcels/Urban flenewal Strategy (if applicable) • Adequate Code
Enforcement • Block Structure TRANSIT-ORIENTED-DEVELOPMENT FORMS liltme .'. Edge Fonn o Building B Struclured P.rkJl'IO ::::::: Surf.c. Parkll'lO _81ke'PodAc.e." _ &lIAceeu .' !WJllill
II ll[l jll[; Example '.. Building Height . Residential Density (units/acre) Office Employment (employees/acre) Aetail Employment (empioyees/acre) HursVBeU Slatioo Parner Aoad Station
(i Surtace Parning to Single Story 6 100 75 -12 22S 125 ." Mockingbird Station Cllyplace Sta"oo 4 Stories 11 Stories . .. 24 48 .. 450 900 250 525 DowntoWn Dallas Downtown Fort Wollh
18+ Stories 96 1800 1050 Uses Sman Code 10 sl residential, some sf residential, mf sf residential, mf sf residentIal, mf mf residenlial, retail, offIce, light to residential, retail,
residential, retail, residential, high· high-density retail, heavy industrial office, light to heavy office, light industrial density retail, office, oHice, industrial entertainment
entertainment T3 T4 T5 T5.5 T6 15
6 .100 75 sf residential, some retail, office, light to heavy industrial T3 16
12 225 125 sf residential, mt residenlial. retail, omce. light to heavy industrial T4 12 225 125 sf residential, mf residenlial, retail, omce. lightlo heavy industrial T4 SI..JBI..JRBANFORM'.
Multi-family Residential -CentrePort Station 17
Suburban Center Form 24 450 250 sf residential, mf residential. retail, office,light industrial T5 24 450 250 sf residential, ml residential, retail, oNice, light industrial T5 :StJSI.,JRBAN
CE:NTERFORM SUBURBAN CENTER FORM· Multi-family Residential -Addison Circle 18
Urban Cenler -Form 900 525 T5.5 48 900 525 sf residential, m' residential, highdensity retail, office, entertainment T5.5 URBANXCENr.ERFORM. URBAN CENTER FO 19
96 1800 1050 mf residential, high-density retail, office, T6 18+ Stories 96 1800 1050 ml residential, highdensity retail, ellice, entertainment T6 20
QUES1iIONS/CONTACTINFORMATION 􀁩􀁴􀁹􀀮􀁌􀀱􀁴􀁈􀁩􀁚􀁾􀁊􀁺􀁻􀀩􀁾􀁩􀁨􀀹􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁓􀁾􀁾 opporlunitiesat. transit stations? • How 􀁣􀁡􀁾 a city encourage 􀁰􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁓􀀡􀁲􀁩􀁾􀀭􀁦􀁲􀁩􀁥􀁮􀁤􀁉􀁙
developments next tq rail stations and 􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁾􀁵􀁴􀁯􀀢􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁤 developments that limit transit access near rail stations,?! . For Additional Information: http://www.dfwinfo.com/trans
/program_areas/landuse.htmI http://www.developmentexcellence.com/Alicia Hopkins: ahopkins@nctcog.org • Contacts: PublicTranspOqationTeam -NCTCOG, TransportationDepartment (817)695-9240
• Website: -www.nctcog.org/rrcs 21
􀁦􀀢􀀮􀀧􀁾 l'l4 􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁉 i'l "I I Pri,;ceton 􀁜􀀩􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮 I"' NA-t.!.",'Mo".11 􀁲􀁬􀁾􀁉􀁏 Sl,oon• •" O.n.. 􀁾􀁉􀀮􀁊􀁏􀁲􀀧􀁴􀂢􀀬 kltllVJn< k>,modt""Opu'po<u..-.l, 10.000 􀁘􀁊􀁝􀁾􀁾􀁦􀀮􀁩
NA_ ....; ..n 􀁅􀀬􀁾 "'.,..., 1> 􀁾􀀮 􀁾􀁨􀁬􀁯􀁮􀀬 ... 􀁾􀀮􀁮...I."".,.'O;;II..,n' lo'rr.. 􀁾􀁯􀀬􀀮􀀮􀂷􀁧􀁐􀁊􀀧􀁰􀁯􀀼􀁵...oIJ 10.000 􀁝􀁑􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁮
COMMENT SHEET Policy /Technical Committee 1 North Central Texas Council of Governments Corridors E-3 and E-4 Tuesday, March 23, 2004 Oak Point Recreation Center, Plano Please indicate
your comments on the items below and turn in to NCTCOG staff before you leave -or mail or fax to: Ms. Barbara Maley, Transportation Department, NCTCOG, P.O. Box 5888, Arlington, TX 76005-5888
or 817-640-3028 (fax). Ica e your Interest .In the f0 IIoWing non-ral ransl services b)y check'Ing the appropn.ate box. Transit Service Agree -It is Needed Don't Know Disagree -It is
Not in My Area Needed in My Area Regional Services Express Bus Routes Limited-Stop Routes Park and Ride Service Local Services Feeder Routes Local Circulation Flexible Routes Demand
Responsive Activity-Centered Based Services Shuttle Services Subscription Buses Vanpools RidesharinQ Transit Hubs/Centers At Rail Stations At Suburban Downtowns At Malls Ind' t Please
indicate your comments or suggestions below on the proposed station location areas. Continue on the back if you need more room. ICheck the Corridor Number: E-3 __E-4] Optional: Name
_ Phone/Fax/Email _ Please circle, as appropriate: Policy Committee Member Technical Committee Member
BOOK PAGE 1204 THIS PAGE ALSO APPEARS IN THE MAPSCO COLLlNGRAYSON STREET GUIDE AS PAGE COLLIN 1]4. r= o '/. i 1j, CONTINUED ON MAP 8 COPYRIGHT 1958, 2000 by MAPSCO, INC. -ALL RIGHTS
RESERVED
l\Iorth Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: Regional Rail Corridor Study (RRCS) . PolicylTechnical CommitteeMembers and Interested Parties FROM: Barbara C. Maley, AICP Principal
Transportation Planner .SUBoJECT: RRCS March Committee Meetings DATE: February 27,2004 This letter is to.advise you of the March round of Regional Rail Corridor Study PolicylTechnical
Committee meetings. The attachment contains the meeting dates, times and locations. To date, agenda items' include: preliminary ridership forecasts, cost estimates/effectiveness and
􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁤 development. .Previous meeting materials (e.g., project orientation, corridor fact sheets, technology summary, station criteria and land use) may be
accessed through the Internet at www.nctcog.org/rrcs. Ideally, half of the meeting will be devoted to discussion. Should you have any questions and/or comments on the above information,
please call me at 􀀨􀀸􀀱􀀷􀀩􀀶􀀹􀀵􀁾􀀹􀀲􀀷􀀸􀀮 􀁣􀀱􀁤􀁬􀁾􀀨􀁽􀁍􀀭􀁾 Barbara C. Maley, AICP􀁾 BCM:ac Attachment cc: . 2003-2004 UPWP Element 5.01 Project File 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint
Two P.O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806 @recycled paper http://www,nctcog.org
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Policy and Technical Committee Meetings March 22-26, 2004 Committee 1 E-3 &E-4: Northeast Tuesday, March 23,2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. Oak Point Recreation Center
6000 Jupiter Rd. Plano, TX 75086 Committee 2 E-5 &E-6: Southeast Monday, March 22, 2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. Midlothian Conference Center 1 Community Circle Midlothian, TX 76065 Committee
3 W-1: Central Tuesday, March 23, 2004 9:30 to 11 :30 a.m. Irving City Hall Council Chambers 825 W. Irving Blvd. Irving, TX 75060 Committee 4 W-4 Thursday, March 25, 2004 9:30 to 11
:30 a.m. Cleburne City Hall Council Chambers 10 N. Robinson Cleburne, TX 76033 Committee 5 W-2 Wednesday, March 24, 2004 9:30 to 11 :30 a.m. Colleyville City Hall Council Chambers 5400
Bransford Road Colleyville, TX 76034 Committee 6 E-2 Wednesday, March 24, 2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. Denton City Hall Council Chambers -Work Session Room 215 East McKinney Denton, TX 76201
,15:32 MAR 19, 2004 1D: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *62148 PAGE: 1/8 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages : Description : steve Chutchian TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837
Friday, Mar 19, 2004 03:23PM 8DART Board Agenda 3/23/04 Attached are the DART Board agendas for the DART Board Meetinq on Tuesday, March 23, 2004. If you have any questions, please contact
Fred Pratt at (214)749-2538. From: Fax Number : Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTMF (214)
, 15:32 MAR 19, 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: .(214) 749-3676 #62148 PAGE: 2/8 Quorum=4 Audit Committee Meeting Tuesday, March 23, 2004, 10:30 a.m-ll:00 a.m. DART Conference Room B -1st Floor
1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time {30 minutesJ 1. Approval of Minutes: February 22, 2004 2. *Materials Management Audit Follow Up (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis)
[30 minutes J 3. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 4. Adjournment i<BrieJing Item The Audit Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551. 071,
Consultation with Attorney, for any legal issues, or under Section 551. 074 for Personnel Matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Audit Committee
is April27, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign iI,terpretation is available. Please contact Communi!)' Affairs at 214-749-2543,
48 hours in advance. Chair -Ray Noah Vice Chair -Beatrice Martinez Members -Angie Chen Button, Randall Chrisman, Joyce Foreman, Norma Stanton and William Velasco StaffLiaison-Albert
Bazis 0323AUDOC 3/19/04-3:21 PM
, 15:32 MAR 19, 2004 10: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *62148 PAGE: 3/8 Quorum = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, March 23, 2004 -Board Room
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: March 09,2004 2. Public Comments 3. Committee Advisory Reports -Paratransit Access Advisory Group (PAAG) -(Sherry
Taylor) • Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) -(Joe Burkleo) Consent Items: 4. Contracts for Non-Revenue Vehicles (Operations -Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) 5. Contract Modification for Non-Revenue
Vehicle (NRV) Fuel Purchase and Management Program (Operations -Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) 6. Contract Modification for Bus Batteries (Operations -Joyce ForemanlVictor Burke) 7. Contract
Modification for Bus Low Pressure Exhaust Gas Re-circulation Emissions Reduction Kits (Operations -Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) Individual items: 8. +Approval ofMay 2004 Service Modifications
(Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 9. +Proposed Modification to Building Maintenance Contract (William VelascolBen Gomez) 10. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole
only. 11. Adjournment +Same Night Item '" Briefing Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetillgs Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney,
for any legal issues, or under'Section 551.072, Deliberation Regarding Real Property for real estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel Matters arising regarding any item
listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe DART Board is April 13, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is
available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. 0323B.DOC 3/19/04·3:22 PM
15:33 MAR 19, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *62148 PAGE: 4/8 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, March 23, 2004 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: March 9,2004 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will be discussed
at the Board meeting only. Consent Items: { 5 minutes J 4. Contracts for Non-Revenue Vehicles (Operations -Joyce ForemanNictor Burke) 5. Contract Modification for Non-Revenue Vehicle
(NRV) Fuel Purchase and Management Program (Operations -Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) 6. Contract Modification for Bus Batteries (Operations -Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) 7. Contract Modification
for Bus Low Pressure Exhaust Gas Re-circulation Emissions Reduction Kits (Operations -Joyce ForemanNictor Burke) Individual items: {I hour and 5 minutes J 8. +Approval ofMay 2004 Service
Modifications (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) { 15 minutes J 9. +Proposed Modification to to Building Maintenance Contract (William Velasco/Ben Gomez) {20 minutes J 10. *Performance
Review ofPresident/Executive Director (Hue1on Harrison) {20 minutes J 11. Adjournment +Same Night Item '"Briefmg Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas
Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney, for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072, Deliberation Regartling Real Property for real estate issues, or under
Sectioh 551.074 for Personnel Matters arising regarding any item listed on this AgendJJ. The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the:'Wlwle is April 13, 2004. This facility is wheekhair
accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0323C.DOC 3/19/04 -3:22
PM
.' 15:33 MAR 19, 213134 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3575 *62148 PAGE: 5/8 Quornm=4 Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee Meeting Tuesday, March 23, 2004, 11 :00 a.m. -12:00 p.m. DART
Conference Room C -lst Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time f 1 hour J 1. *Department ofTransportation Requirements for Setting DBE Goals and Local Procedures
for Setting MWBE Goals (Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) f 30 minutesJ 2. *Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase II Construction Program and Contract Development (Randall Chrisman/Ken
Mercer) f30 minutes J 3. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 4. Adjournment +Same Night Item WBriefing Item The Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee may go into Closed Session under
the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney, for any legal issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Diversity Economic
Opportunity Committee is April 13, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community
Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Randall Chrisman Vtee Chair -Jojlce Foreman Members -Angie Chen Button, Beatrice Martinez, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint Shaw and William
Velasco StaffLtaison -Gloria Dixon and Ken Mercer 0323D.DOC 3/19/04 -3:22 PM
, 15:33 MAR 19, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *62148 PAGE: 6/8 Quorum=4 External Communications Committee Meeting TuesdaYt March 23t 2004t 3:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. DART Conference
Room C -lst Floor 1401 Pacific Ave. t Dallast Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [ 1 hOllr J l. Approval of Minutes: January 27, 2004 2. Contract for the Fabrication and Replacement
ofInformational Pylon Panels (Robert Pope/Sue Bauman) [10 minutesJ 3. *Federal Funding Issues in Congress Update (Robert Pope/Sue Bauman) [30 minutesJ 4. *Customer Service -Lost & Found
Update (Robert Pope/Sue Bauman) [20 minutesJ 5. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 6. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefmg Item The External Communications Committee may-go into Closed
Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney, for any legal issues arising regarding any Item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe
External Communications Committee is April 27, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact
Community Affairs at 214-7􀀴􀀹􀀭􀀲􀀵􀀴􀀳􀁾 48 hours in advance. Chair -Robert Pope Vice Chair -Terri Adkisson Members -Angie Chen Button, Scott Carlson, Mark Enoch, Linda Koop, Beatrice
Martinez and Norma Stanton StaffLiaison -Sue Bauman 0323E.DOC 3/19/04 -3:22 PM
15:34 MAR 19, 2004 ID: DART 􀁾 TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 #62148 PAGE: 7/8 Quorurn=5 Planning Committee Meeting Tuesday, March 23, 2004, 12:00 p.m. -1:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -lst
Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time I 1 hour and 30 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: February 24, 2004 2. +Approval ofMay 2004 Service Modifications
(Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {IS minutesJ 3. Approval ofa Site-Specific Shuttle Agreement with McKinney Avenue Trolley Authority (MATA) (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {IS minutesJ 4. Call for Public
Hearing for a Service Plan Amendment on Station Location Changes in the Northwest Corridor Medical/Market Center Area (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {I 0 minutesJ 5. *North Central Texas Council
of Governments (NCTCOG)/DART Transit Partnership Program Update -Phase 2 (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {20 minutesJ 6. *DART 2030 Transit System Plan (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {IO minutesJ 7.
*Regional Transportation Update (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {IO minutesJ 8. *NorthwestlSoutheast/East Corridor Update (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {JO minutesJ 9. Identification ofFuture Agenda
Items 10. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Planning Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Ad, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney,
for any legal issues, or under Section 551.071, Deliberation Regarding Real Propertyfor real estIlte issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Planning
Committee isApril17, 1004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretatWn is available. Please contad Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48
hours in advance. Chair -Linda Koop Vice Chair -Randall Chrisman Members -Terri Adkisson, Scott Carlson, Mark Enoch, Joyce Foreman, Robert Pope, Norma Stanton and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison
-DougAlIen 0323PL.DOC 3/19/04-3:22 PM
, 15:34 MAR 19, 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3676 *62148 PAGE: 8/8 Quorum =5 Project Management Conunittee Meeting Tuesday, March 23, 2004, 1:30 p.m. -3:00 p.m. DART Conference Room
C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [1 hour and 10 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: February 24,2004 2. Contracts for Environmental Site Assessments
(Faye WiUdnsrrim McKay) [ 10 minutesJ 3. Approval of Light Rail Transit (LRT) Level Boarding Mode of Operation Concept (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) f20 minutesJ 4. Contract Modification
for Construction of Northeast Corridor Line Section Garland-2 (G-2) for Final Quantity Adjustment (Faye Wilkinsrrim McKay) flO minutesJ 5. Limited Wavier of Section 7.3 of the DART Administrative
Employment Manual for Barrett Atkins, P.E. (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) flO minutesJ 6. Declare Public Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcels SEI-22,
23, 27, & 31 for the Southeast Corridor Line Section Southeast-l (SE-l) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings if Necessary (Faye Wilkinsrrim McKay) flO minutesJ 7. Declare Public
Necessity, Establish Just Compensation and Authorize the Acquisition of Parcel NWIB-45 for the Northwest Corridor Line Section Northwest-lB (NW-IB) and Authorize Eminent Domain Proceedings
if Necessary (Faye Wilkinsrrim McKay) flO minutesJ 8. Identification of Future Agenda Items 9. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Project Management Committee may go into
Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney, for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072, De/iheration Regarding Real Propertyfor
real estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe ProjectManagement Committee is April 27, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For
accomnwdations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Faye Wilkins Vice Chair -Norma
Stanton Members -Terri Adkisson, Scott Carlson, Randall Chrisman, Mark Enoch, Beatrice Martinez and Robert Pope StaffLiaison -Tim McKay 0323PM.DOC 3/19/04 -3:23 PM
North Central Texas Council Of Governments '. TO: Regional Rail> Corridor Study (RRCS) Policyrrechnica.1 Committee Members and Interested Parties FROM: BarbaraC. Maley, AICP Principal
Transportation Planner SUBJECT: RRCS March Committee Meetings DATE: February 27,2004 ThiS letter is to advise you of the,March round of Regional Rail Corridor Study Policyrrechnical
Committee meetings. The attachment contains the meeting dates, times and locations. . To date, agenda items include: preliminary ridership forecasts, cost estimates/effectiveness and
transit-oriented development. Previous meetingmaterials (e.g., project orientation, corridorfact sheets, technology.summary, station criteria and land use) may be accessed through the
Internet at www.nctcog.org/rrcs. Ideally, half of the meeting will be devoted to discussion. Should you have any questions and/or comments on the above information, please call me at
(817) 695-9278. L£1M-A.-(i 􀁾 . BarbaraC. 􀁍􀁡􀁬􀁥􀁹􀀬􀁁􀁾􀁾 BCM:ac Attachment cc: 2003-2004 UPWP Element 5.01 Project File. 􀀶􀁾 6 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint Two P. O. Box 5888, Arlington,
Texas 76005-5888 (817)640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806@recycled paper http://www.nctcog.org .
REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY Policy and Technical Committee Meetings March 22-26, 2004 Committee 1 E-3 &E-4: Northeast Tuesday, March 23, 2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. Oak Point Recreation
Center 6000 Jupiter Rd. Plano, TX 75086 Committee 2 E-5 &E-6: Southeast Monday, March 22, 2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. Midlothian Conference Center 1 Community Circle Midlothian, TX 76065
Committee 3 W-1: Central Tuesday, March 23, 2004 9:30 to 11 :30 a.m. Irving City Hall Council Chambers 825 W. Irving Blvd. Irving, TX 75060 Committee 4 W-4 Thursday, March 25, 2004 9:30
to 11 :30 a.m. Cleburne City Hall Council Chambers 10 N. Robinson Cleburne, TX 76033 Committee 5 W-2 Wednesday, March 24, 2004 9:30 to 11 :30 a.m. Colleyville City Hall Council Chambers
5400 Bransford Road Colleyville, TX 76034 Committee 6 E-2 Wednesday, March 24, 2004 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. Denton City Hall Council Chambers -Work Session Room 215 East McKinney Denton, TX
76201
15:44 MAR 05. 2004 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-2744 *61132 PAGE: 1/6 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Nwnber : Time Sent: Pages: Description : steve Chutchian TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837
Friday, Mar 5, 2004 03:38PM 6DART Board Agendas Attached are the DART Board Agendas for the DART Board Meeting on Tuesday, March 9, 2004. If you any questions, please contact Fred Pratt
at (214) 749-2538. From: Fax Number : Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTMF (214)
15:44 MAR 05, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2744Quorum =4 *61132 PAGE: 2/6 Operations Committee Meeting Tuesday, March 9, 2004, 5:00 p.m. -6:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeeting Time I 55 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: February 10,2004 2. Contracts for Non-Revenue Vehicles (Joyce ForemanlVictor Burke)!
5 minutes J 3. Contract Modification for Non-Revenue Vehicle (NRV) Fuel Purchase and Management Program (Joyce ForemanlVictor Burke) { 5 minutes J 4. Contract Modification for Bus Batteries
(Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) { 5 minutes J 5. Contract Modification for Bus Low Pressure Exhaust Gas Re-circulation Emissions Reduction Kits (Joyce ForemanlVictor Burke) { 5 minutes
J 6. *Materials Management Division Update (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) {15 minutes J 7. *Transportation Department Update (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) { 20 minutes J 8. Identification
ofFuture Agenda Items 9. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Operations Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation
with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda.
The next meeting ofthe Operations Committee is April 13, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessibk. For aceomnwdations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please
contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Joyce Foreman Vice Chair -Faye Wilkins Members -Scott Carlson, Linda Koop, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint Shaw and William
Velasco StaffLiaison -Victor Burke and Kathy Waters 03090.DOC 3/5/04 -3:38 PM
15:45 MAR 05, 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2744 *61132 PAGE: 3/6 Quorum = 10 DaBas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, March 9, 2004 -Board Room 1401
Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: February 24,2004 2. Public Hearing on May 2004 Service Modifications 3. Public Comments Consent Item: 4. Amendment
to the Lease Agreement for Office Space at Union Station, Dallas, Texas (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) Other Items: 5. Officer Reports 6. Chair Report 7. General Counsel's
Report 8. President/Executive Director's Report 9. Communications and Public Comments 10. Adj ournment +Same Night Item lie Briefmg Item The Board ofDirectors may go into Closed Session
ullder the Texas Opell Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attomey for allY legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074for Pers01melmatters
arising regarding allY item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe DARTBoard is is March 23, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired,
sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0309B.DOC 3/5104 -3:38 PM
15:45 MAR 05. 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2744 *61132 PAGE: 4/6 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, March 9, 2004 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: February 24, 2004 2. This item wiH be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will be discussed
at the Board meeting only. Consent Item: [5 minutes J 4. Amendmentto the Lease Agreement for Office Space at Union Station, Dallas, Texas (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay)
Other Items: 5. Adjournment +Same Night Item wBriefmg Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney
for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting
ofthe Committee-o.f-the-Whole is March 23, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact
Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0309C.DOC 3/5/04· 3:38 PM
15:45 MAR 05. 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2744 #61132 PAGE: 5/6 Quorum =4 Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee Meeting Tuesday, March 9, 2004, 3:30 p.m. -4:30 p.m. DART Conference
Room C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., DaHas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time[1 hour J 1. Approval ofMinutes: February 10, 2004 2. *Review of Solicitations with Disadvantaged, Minority,
Woman-Owned Business Enterprise (DMWBE) Goals of Less Than Ten Percent (Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) I 5 minutes J 3. *Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase II Construction Program
Update (Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) I 30 minutes J 4. *Second and Third Tier Subcontract Reporting -Research Findings (Randall Chrisman/Ken Mercer) I 25 minutesJ 5. Identification
ofFuture Agenda Items 6. Adjournment +Same Night Item ItBriefing Item The Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section
551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. . The next meeting ofthe Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee is April
13, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available.· Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48
hours in advance. Chair -Randall Chrisman Vice Chair -Joj!ce Foreman Members -Angie Chen Button, Beatrice Martinez, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint Shaw and William Velasco StaffLiaison -Gloria
Dixon and Ken Mercer 0309D.DOC 3/5/04 -3:38 PM
15:46 MAR 05, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-2744 *61132 PAGE: 6/6 Quorum=4 Administrative Committee Meeting Tuesday, March 9,2004, 4:30 p.m. -5:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -lst
Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time /30 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: February 10, 2004 2. *Benefits Review -Insurance Programs (William Velasco/Ben
Gomez) [ 30 minutes J 3. Identification of Future Agenda Items 4. Adjournment +Same Night Item IIBriefing Item The Administrative Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas
Open Meetings Act, Section 551. 071, consultationwith Attomey for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The
next meeting ofthe Administrative Committee is April 13, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available.
Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours ill advance. Chair -William Velasco Vice Chair -Ray Noah Members -Terri Adkisson, Mark Enoch, Linda Koop, Beatrice Martinez
and Lynn Flint Shaw StaffLiaison -Sharon Leary, Ben Gomez and Rocky Angle 0309AD.DOC 3/5/04 -3:38 PM
12,: 23 FEB 20, 2004 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *60139 PAGE: 1/7 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages : Description : steve Chutchian '1'OWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837
Friday, Feb 20, 2004 12:21PH 7DART Board Agendas Attached are the DAR'1' Board Agendas for Monday, February 23, 2004 and Tuesday, February 24, 2004. Please call Fred Pratt at 214-749-2538
if you have any questions. Thanks From: Fax Number : Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 D'1'MF (214)
l2:23 FEB 20, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *60139 PAGE: 2/7 Quorum =5 Project Management Committee Meeting Tuesday, February 24, 2004, 3:30 p.m. -4:30 p.m. DART Conference Room
C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [45 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: January 27,2004 2. Amendment to the Lease Agreement for Office Space
at Union Station, Dallas, Texas (Faye WilkinslTim McKay) {30 minutes J 3. *Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase II Construction Program Update (Faye WilkinslTim McKay) [15 mUllites
J 4. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 5. Adjournment +Same Night Item oJ:Briefing Item The Project Management Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act,
Section 551.071, consultation witl, Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting
ofthe Project Management Committee is March 13, 1004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact
Community Affairs at 114-749-1543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Faye Wilkins Vice Chair -Norma Stanton Members -Terri Adkisson, Scott Carlson, Randall Chrisman, Mark Enoch, Beatrice Martinez
and Robert Pope StaffLiaison -Tim McKay 0224PM.DOC 2/20/04 -12:20 PM
12:23 FEB 20, 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 #60139 PAGE: 3/7 Quorum=4 Audit Committee Meeting Tuesday, February 24, 2004, 1:00 p.m-2:30 p.m. DART Conference Room B -1st Floor
1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time {I hour and 5 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: January 27, 2004 2. *TRE Audit Update (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) { 20 minutes
J 3. *Pinnac1e Consulting Management Group Inc. Incurred Cost Audit (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) { 10 minutes J 4. *Status of Fiscal Year 2004 Internal Audit Plans (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis)
{ 10 minutes J 5. *Contract Audit Recoveries (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) { 10 minutes J 6. *Quarterly Audit Follow Up Report (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis) {15 minutes J 7. Identification of Future
Agenda Items 8. Adjournment *Briefing Item The Audit Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal
issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Audit Committee is March 23, 2004. This facility is wheelchair
accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Ray Noah Vice
Chair -Beatrice Martinez Members -Angie Chen Button, Randall Chrisman, Joyce Foreman, Norma Stanton and William Velasco StafJLiaison -Albert Bazis 0224AUDOC 2/20/04-12:21 PM
12:24 FEB 20, 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *60139 PAGE: 4/7 Quorum =10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, February 24, 2004 -Board Room
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 General Items: 1. Approval ofMinutes: February 10,2004 2. Public Comments 3. Committee Advisory Reports
-Paratransit Access Advisory Group (PAAG) -(Sarah Mills) -Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) -(Joe Burkleo) Consent Items: 4. Approval of2004 Annual Disclosure Statement (Administrative.William
Velasco/Sharon Leary) 5. Call for Public Hearing and Approval of Submission ofthe Fiscal Year 2004 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Grant and Grant Amendments (Administrative-William
Velasco/Sharon Leary) 6. Fixed Route Services Contract and Settlement Agreement (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) Individual Items: 7. Approval ofthe Love Field Interlocal Agreement
(Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 8. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. Other Items: 9. Officer Reports 10. Chair Report 11. General Counsel's Report
12. President/Executive Director's Report 13. Communications and Public Comments 14. Adjournment +Same Nigllt Item *Briefing Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under
the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551. 074 for Personnel
matters arising regarding any item listed Oft tllis Agenda. The next meeting ofthe DART Board is March 9J 2004. Tllis facility is wlleelchair accessible. For accommodations for tile
hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0224B.DOC 2I20{04 -12:21 PM
12:24 FEB 20, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 #60139 PAGE: 5/7 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:30 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, February 24, 2004 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval ofMinutes: February 10,2004 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will be discussed
at the Board meeting only. Consent/tems: [5 minutes J 4. Approval of2004 Annual Disclosure Statement (Administrative-William Velasco/Sharon Leary) 5. Call for Public Hearing and Approval
of Submission ofthe Fiscal Year 2004 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Grant and Grant Amendments (Administrative-William Velasco/Sharon Leary) 6. Fixed Route Services Contract and
Settlement Agreement (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) Individual Items: { 1 hour and 20 minutes J 7. Approval ofthe Love Field Interlocal Agreement (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen)
{ 1 hour J 8. *Review ofFY03 DART Police Activity Report (Administrative-William VelascolBen Gomez) {20 minutes J Other Items: 9. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefmg Item The Board
of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate
issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Committee-oJ-the-Witole is March 9,2004. This facility
is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0224C.DOC
2/20/04 -12:21 PM
12:25 FEB 20, 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 #60139 PAGE: 6/7 Quorum=5 Planning Committee Meeting Tuesday, February 24, 2004, 2:30 p.m. -3:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeeting Time { 1 hour J 1. Approval of Minutes: January 27,2004 2. *NorthwestfSoutheast/East Corridor Update (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [30
minutes I 3. *Review ofthe October 2003 Service Modifications (Linda Koop/Doug Allen) [30 minutes I 4. Identification of Future Agenda Items 5. Adjoumment +Same Night Item *Briefing
Item The Planning Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney/or any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for
Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Planning Committee is March 23, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations
for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Linda Koop Vice Chair -Randall Chrisman Members
-Terri Adkisson, Scott Carlson, Mark Enoch, Joyce Foreman, Robert Pope, Norma Stanton and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison -Doug Allen 0224PL.DOC 2/20104-12:21 PM
12:25 FEB 20, 2004 ID: DRRT TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *60139 PAGE: 7/7 DART Board of Directors! Dallas City Council Transportation and Telecommunications Committee Meeting Monday, February
23, 2004, 12:00 p.m.-2:00 p.m. Dallas City Hall -Room 4EN 1500 Marilla, Dallas, Texas 75201 1. *Love Field Light Rail Transit Service -Interlocal Agreement with DART 2. *DART Transit
System Plan Update 3. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 4. Adjournment Open working lunch meeting with DART Board representatives to discuss upcoming matters which affect the City.
;,Briefmg Item The DART Board of Directors! Dallas City Council Transportation and Telecommunications Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section
551.071, Consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. This facility is wheelchair
accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0223J.DOC 2/20104.12:21
PM
13:10 FEB 06. 2004 1D: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *59635 PAGE: 1/7 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages : Description : steve Chutchian TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837
Friday, Feb 6, 2004 01:09PM 7DART Board Agendas Attached are the DART Board Agendas for the board meeting on Tuesday, February 10, 2004. If you have any questions please contact Fred
Pratt at 214-749-2538. From: Fax Number : Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTMF (214)
13:10 FEB 06, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *59635 PAGE: 2/7 Personnel Ad Hoc Committee Meeting Tuesday, February 10,2004, 12:00 p.m.-1:00 p.m. DART Conference Room B-1sf Floor
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 1. Approval of Minutes: January 23, 2004 2. *Discussion ofPersonnel Issues for Direct Reports. 3. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 4. Adjournment
+Same Night Item * Briefing Item The PersonnelAd Hoc Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation With Attorney, for any legal
issues, or under Section 551.074for Personnel Matters arising under any item listed on the Agenda. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired,
sign interpretation is available, please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Lynn Flint Shaw Members -Terri Adkisson, Mark Enoch, Joyce Foreman andRay
Noah 021OP.DOC 2/6/04-1:08 PM
13:11 FEB 06, 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *59635 PAGE: 3/7 Quorum = 10 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: 2. Public Comments Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF
DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, February 10, 2004 -Board Room 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 January 27, 2004 Consent Items: 3. Contract for Demolition Services (Project Management-Faye
Wilkinsrrim McKay) 4. Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with the City of Plano for Maintenance of Signs, Signals, and Pavement Markings (Project Management-Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) 5. Call for
Public Hearing on May 2004 Service Modifications (Plalll1ing-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) 6. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion Management System (CMS) Programming Request from the
City of Garland (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) Individual/tems: 7. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 8. Route Performance Standards for FY 2004
(Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) 9. Determination of Contract Anniversary Dates for Direct Reports (Huelon Harrison) Other Items: 10. Officer Reports II. Chair Report 12. General Counsel's
Report 13. President/Executive Director's Report 14. Communications and Public Comments 15. Adjournment +Same Night Item * Briefing Item The Board ofDirectors may go into Closed Session
under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel
matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe DART Board is February 24,2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing
impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. 0210B.DOC 216/04 -1:08 PM
13:11 FEB 06, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 159635 PAGE: 4/7 Quornm=8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:30 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, February 10,2004 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: January 27, 2004 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent Items: [5 minutes
J 3. Contract for Demolition Services (Project Management-Faye WilkinsfTim McKay) 4. Interlocal Agreement (lLA) with the City ofPlano for Maintenance of Signs, Signals, and Pavement
Markings (Project Management-Faye WilkinsfTim McKay) 5. Call for Public Hearing on May 2004 Service Modifications (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) 6. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion
Management System (CMS) Programming Request from the City ofGarland (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) Individual Items: [45 minutes J 7. *Procurement Plan Update (Gary Thomas) [5 mUlutes
J 8. Route Performance Standards for FY 2004 (Planning-Linda KooplDoug Allen) [20 mUlUtes J 9. 9. Determination of Contract Anniversary Dates for Direct Reports (Huelon Harrison) [20
mmutes J Other Items: 10. Adjournment +Same Nigltt Item *Briefing Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under tlte Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation
witlt Attorney for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda.
Tlte next meetmg ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is February 24,2004. Tltis facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the Itearing impaired, sign mterpretation is available.
Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. 0210C.DOC 2/6/04· 1:08 PM
13:12 FEB 06, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 #59635 PAGE: 5/7 Quorum=4 Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee Meeting Tuesday, February 10, 2004, 1:00 p.m. -2:00 p.m. DART Conference
Roome -Ist Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [ 50 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: January 13,2004 2. *Review of Solicitations with Disadvantaged,
Minority, Woman-Owned Business Enterprise (DMWBE) Goals of Less than Ten Percent (Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) [ 5 minutesJ 3. *Review of DART's Vendor Complaint Procedure (Randall
Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) [ 15 minutes J 4. *North Central Texas Regional Certification Agency (NCTRCA) Overview (Randall Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) [30 minutes J 5. Identification ofFuture
Agenda Items 6. Adjournment +Same Night Item ItBriefing Item The Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551. 071,
consultation with Attorney for any legal issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee is March 9,
2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours
in advance. Chair -Randall Chrisman Vice Chair -Jo}!ce Foreman Members -Angie Chen Button, Beatrice Martinez, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint Shaw and William Velasco StaffLiaison -Gloria Dixon
and Ken Mercer 021OD.DOC 2/6/04 -1:08 PM
13:12 FEB 06. 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620Quorum =4 *59635 PAGE: 6/7 Operations Committee Meeting Tuesday, February 10, 2004, 3:30 p.m. -4:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st
Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time /40 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: January 13, 2004 2. Fixed Route Services Contract and Settlement Agreement (Joyce
Foreman/Victor Burke) { 10 minutes J 3. *Para1ransit Services Update (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) { 15 minutes 1 4. *Materials Management Update (Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) { 15 minutes
J 5. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 6. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Operations Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section
551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters. arising regarding any item
Usted on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Operations Committee is March 9, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for d,e hearing impaired, sign interpretation
is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Joyce Foreman Vice Chair -Faye Wilkins Members -Scott Carlson, Linda Koop, Ray Noah, Lynn
Flint Shaw and William Velasco StaffLiaison -Victor Burke and Kathy Waters 02100.DOC 2/6/04 -1:09 PM
13:12 FEB 06, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *59635 PAGE: 7/7 Quornm=4 Administrative Committee Meeting Tuesday, February 10,2004, 2:00 p.m. -3:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -lst
Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [I hOllr and 10 minlltes I 1. Approval of Minutes: January 13,2004 2. Call for Public Hearing and Approval of Submission
ofthe Fiscal Year 2004 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Grant and Grant Amendments (William Velasco/Sharon Leary) { 10 minutes J 3. Approval of2004 Annual Disclosure Statement (William
Velasco/Sharon Leary) [5 minutes J 4. *Financial Planning Process Review (William Velasco/Sharon Leary) {20 minutes J 5. *Review ofFY03 DART Police Activity Report (William VelascolBen
Gomez) { 15 minutes J 6. *Benefits Review -Leave Programs (William VelascolBen Gomez) {20 minutes J 7. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 8. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing
Item The Administrative Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072
for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Administrative Committee is March 9, 2004.
This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodatiollS for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in
advance. Chair -William Velasco VICe Chair -Ray Noah Members -Terri Adkisson, Mark Enoch, Linda Koop, Beatrice Martinez and Lynn Flint Shaw StaffLiaison -Sharon Leary, Ben Gomez and
Rocky Angle 02 IOAD.DOC 2/6/04 -1:09 PM
15:58 JAN 23. 2004 10: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58890 PAGE: 1/8 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages : Description : steve Chutchian TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837
Friday, Jan 23, 2004 03:49PM 8DART Board Agendas Attached are the Agendas for the Board Meeting on Tuesday, January 26, 2004. If you have any questions please contact Fred Pratt at 214-749-2538.
From: FaxNumber: Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTMF (214)
15:59 JAN 23, 2004 10: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58890 PAGE: 2/8 Quorum =2 Regional Rail Right-of-Way Company Board Meeting Tuesday, January 27,2004,10:00 a.m. DART Conference Room
B-1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 1. Approval ofMinutes: January 13,2004 2. Ratification of Resolution Authorizing Transfer of Funds from RRROW to DART 3. Identification
of Future Agenda Items 4. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Regional Rail Right-of-Way Company may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071,
Consultation With Attorney, for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estale issues, arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. This facility is wheelchair accessible.
For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. RRROWBoard ofDirectors -Ray Noah,
Randall Chrisman and Gary Thomas Officers -Kathy Waters and Shirley Thomas o127R.DOC 1/23/04-3:48 PM
15:59 JAN 23, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58890 PAGE: 3/8 Quorum = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, January 27, 2004 -Board Room
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬 ---_. General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: January 13,2004 2. City of Rowlett Presentation 3. Public Comments 4. Committee
Advisory Reports -Paratransit Access Advisory Group (PAAG) -Paul Hughes -Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) -Joe Burkleo Consent Items: 5. Contract Modification for Janitorial Services
for Transit and Rail Facilities (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) Individual Items: 6. Contract for Benefits Consulting Services (Administrative-William Velasco/Ben Gomez) 7. Determination
of Contract Anniversary Dates for Direct Reports (Hue1on Harrison) 8. DeKrey, et al v. DART, et aI, Cause No. 02-05268-E: Authorization to Indemnify Daryl Martin under Chapter 102 ofthe
Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code (Administrative-Hue1on Harrison/Rocky Angle) 9. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 10. This item will be discussed
at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. Other Items: 11. Officer Reports 12. Chair Report 13. General Counsel's Report 14. President/Executive Director's Report 15. Communications
and Public Comments 16. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Board ofDirectors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation
with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The
next meeting ofthe DART Board is February 10, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is al'ailable. Please contact
Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0127B.DOC 1123/04 -3:48 PM
15:59 JAN 23, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58890 PAGE: 4/8 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 3:30 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, January 27,2004 -Conference
Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: January 13, 2004 2. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. 3. This item will be discussed
at the Board meeting only. 4. This item will be discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent Items: {5 minutes J 5. Contract Modification for Janitorial Services for Transit and Rail
Facilities (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) Individual Items: { 2 hours J 6. Contract for Benefits Consulting Services (Administrative-William Velasco/Ben Gomez) {15 minutes J
7. Determination of Contract Anniversary Dates for Direct Reports (Huelon Harrison) {15 minutesJ 8. DeKrey, et al v. DART, et aJ, Cause No. 02-05268-E: Authorization to Indemnify Daryl
Martin under Chapter 102 ofthe Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code (Administrative-Hue1on Harrison/Rocky Angle) {30 minutes J 9. *Regional Transportation Update (Planning-Linda KoopiDoug
Allen) {30 minutesJ 10. *Discussion of Managed High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes Concept (Planning-Linda Koop/Doug Allen) {30 minutes J Other Items: 11. Adjournment +Same Night Item
*Briefmg Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any Legal issues, or under Section
551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Committee-of-the-Whole is February
10, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours
in advance. 0127C.DOC 1/23/04 -3:49 PM
16:00 JAN 23, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58890 PAGE: 5/8 Quorum=4 External Communications Committee Meeting Tuesday, January 27,2004, 2:30 p.m.-3:30 p.m. DART Conference Room
C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time [1 hour and 5 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: November 25, 2003 2. *State Relations Update (Robert Pope/Sue
Bauman) [30 minutes J 3. *Federal Relations Update (Robert Pope/Sue Bauman) [15 minutes J 4. *201h Anniversary Celebration Update (Robert Pope/Sue Bauman) [15 minutes J 5. *2004 Texas
Transit Summit Update [5 minutes J 6. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 7. Adjournment +Same Night Item ;,Briefmg Item The External Communications Committee may go into Closed Session
under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney Jor any legal issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe External
Communications Committee is February 24,2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is avaifable. Please contact Community
Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Robert Pope Vice Chair -Terri Adkisson Members -Angie Chen Button, Scott Carlson, Mark Enoch, Linda Koop, Beatrice Martinez and Norma
Stanton StaffLiaison -Sue Bauman 0127E.DOC 1/23/04 -3:49 PM
16:00 JAN 23, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58890 PAGE: 6/8 Quorum =5 Planning Committee Meeting Tuesday, January 27,2004, 12:30 p.m. -1:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st Floor
1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 EstimatedMeeting Time [50 minutes I 1. Approval ofMinutes: November 25,2003 2. Route Performance Standards for FY 2004 (Linda KooplDoug Allen)
[5 minutes I 3. Call for Public Hearing on May 2004 Service Modifications (Linda KooplDoug Allen) [15 minute I 4. Local Assistance Program (LAP)/Congestion Management System (CMS) Programming
Request for the City of Garland (Linda KooplDoug Allen) [5 minutes I 5. Love Field Interlocal Agreement (Linda KooplDoug Allen) [20 minutesI 6. *NorthwestiSoutheastJEast Corridor Update
(Linda KooplDoug Allen) [5 minutes I 7. Identification of Future Agenda Items 8. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Planning Committee may go into Closed Session under the
Texas Open Meetings Act, Sedion 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda.
The next meeting ofthe Planning Committee is February 24} 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available.
Please contact Commllnity Affairs at 214-749-2543} 48 hOllrs in advance. Chair -Linda Koop Vice Chair -Randall Chrisman Members -Terri Adkisson, Scott Carlson, Mark Enoch, Joyce Foreman,
Robert Pope, Norma Stanton and Faye Wilkins StaffLiaison -Doug Allen 0127PL.DOC 1/23/04-3:49 PM
16:01 JAN 23, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58890 PAGE: 7/8 Quorum = 5 Project Management Committee Meeting Tuesday, January 27,2004, 1:30 p.m. -2:30 p.m. DART Conference Room
C -1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time { 1 hour J 1. Approval of Minutes: November 25,2003 2. Contract for Demolition Services (Faye Wilkinsrrim McKay)
{5 minutesJ 3. Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with the City ofPlano for Maintenance of Signs, Signals, and Pavement Markings (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {5 minutesJ 4. *Review of Level Boarding
Mode of Operation (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {25 minutesJ 5. *Light Rail Transit (LRT) Buildout Phase II Construction Program Update (Faye Wilkins/Tim McKay) {25 minutes J 6. Identification
of Future Agenda Items 7. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briejing Item The Project Management Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071,
consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072for Real Estate issues arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Project Management Committee is February 24, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible.
For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. Chair -Faye Wilkins Vice Chair -Norma
Stanton Members -Terri Adkisson, Scott Carlson, Randall Chrisman, Mark Enoch, Beatrice Martinez andRobert Pope StaffLiaison -Tim McKay o127PM.DOC 1/23/04 -3:49 PM
16:01 JAN 23, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58890 PAGE: 8/8 Quorum =4 Audit Committee Meeting Tuesday, January 27,2004, 10:30 a.m-12:00 p.m. DART Conference Room B -lst Floor
1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meetu,g Time {I hour and 30 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: November 25,2003 2. *Review of Fiscal Year 2003 Financial Audit (Ray
Noah!Albert Bazis) f 20 minutes J 3. *Construction Contracts Administration Audit (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis) f 15 minutes J 4. *Status of Fiscal Year 2004 Internal Audit Plans (Ray Noah!Albert
Bazis) f 10 mi,mtes J 5. *Contract Audit Recoveries (Ray Noah!Albert Bazis) f 10 minutes J 6. *Quarterly Audit Follow Up Report (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis)f 15 minutes J 7. Performance Review-Director
ofInternal Audit (Ray Noah/Albert Bazis) f 20 minutes J 8. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 9. Adjournment *Briefing Item The Audit Committee may go into Closed Session under the
Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda.
The next meeting ofthe Audit Committee is February 24, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please
contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Ray Noah Vice Chair -Beatrice Martinez Members -Angie Chen Button, Randall Chrisman, Joyce Foreman, Norma Stanton
and William Velasco StaffLiaison -Albert Bazis 0127AU.DOC 1/23/04-3:49 PM
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Interim Tasks/Reports 2003 i 2004 ! 2005 December 􀁾􀁊􀁡􀁮􀁵􀁡􀁲􀁹 February March _ April__ 􀁾 June 􀁊􀁵􀁬􀁾 􀁾􀁵􀁳􀁴 􀁾􀁰􀁴􀁥􀁭􀁢􀁥􀁲 October November
Decemjler [January February i* 􀁾 1* 􀁾 -1 Mobility Needs Ass. *! Public Outreach --Public Meetings Board of Directors --Council Briefings --Staff Briefings Technology Review -􀁾􀁾 -!
; j ..A.) ; 􀁾 Xi --Transit Service Concepts _ Evaluation Methodology _-Modeling Methodology 􀁾􀀺 Corridor Opportunities! .. _.'•••• Alternatives Development i j j Cost Estimation Methodology
_ Alternatives Testing! ! Evaluation i!!;:!;; DRAFT Plan I Ii! j i 􀁾 FINAL Plan/Approvals ill ! iii i I : : : : : : : : : 1/15/04 _Draft _Final • Briefings * Presentation/Meeting *
ApprovallDec;sion r:; 􀁾 (J tv 71ts .It J)p £7..J TV n -z, E L.. ( 􀁾􀁅􀀺
13:38 JAN 09, 2004 ID: DART FAX TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58259 PAGE: 1/7 To: Company: FaxNumber: Phone Number: Time Sent: Pages: Description : steve Chutchian TOWN OF ADDISON 972-450-2837
Friday, Jan 9, 2004 01:36PM 7DART Board Meeting Agendas Attached are the agendas for the Board Heeting on January 13, 2004. Please call Fred Pratt at 214-749-2538 if you have any questions.
From: Fax Number : Phone Number Maria Castaneda 2147493676 DTHF (214)
13:38 JAN 09, 2004 10: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58259 PAGE: 2/7 Quorom=2 Regional Rail Right-of-Way Company Board Meeting Tuesday, January 13, 2004, 12:00 p.m. DART Executive Conference
Room A-2nd Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 1. Approval ofMinutes: August 12, 2003 2. Determination ofBoard Chair 3. AppointmentlReappointment ofRRROW Officers for Two (2)
Year Term 4. Quarterly Financial Report 5. *Status of Transfers of Real Estate Interest and Common Carrier Obligations 6. *Proposed Amendments to Dallas, Garland & Northeastem Railroad
Trackage Rights Agreement 7. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 8. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The Regional Rail Right-of-Way Company may go into Closed Session under
the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, Consultation With Attorney, for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, arising regarding any item listed on
this Agenda. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available, please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543,48
hours in advance. RRROWBoard ofDirectors -Ray Noah, Randall Chrisman and Gary Thomas Officers -Kathy Waters and Shirley Thomas 0113R.DOC 1/9/04-1:35 PM
13:38 JAN 09, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 458259 PAGE: 3/7 Quorum = 10 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 6:30 P.M. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Tuesday, January 13,2004 -Board Room 1401
Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 -------------------------------General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: 2. Public Comments December 9, 2003 Consent Items: 3. Grant of License Agreement
to the City of Plano for an At-Grade Highway-Rail Crossing (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Kathy Waters) Individual Items: 4. +Declaration of Spur Track Rights-of-Way in the Brookhollow Industrial
District as Surplus and Authorization to Sell (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Kathy Waters) 5. +Approval ofthe Transfer ofEquity Interest and Sale of Additional Trolley Buses (Operations-Joyce
Foreman/Victor Burke) 6. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 7. This item will be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 8. Determination
of Contract Anniversary Dates for Direct Reports (Huelon Harrison) 9. This item will be be discussed at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. 10. This item will be discussed at the
Committee-of-the-Whole meeting only. Other Items: 11. Officer Reports 12. Chair Report 13. General Counsel's Report 14. PresidentlExecutive Director's Report 15. Communications and Public
Comments 16. Adjournment +Same Night Item ok Briefmg Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation with Attorney
for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551. 074 for Personnel matters arising regardi!lg any item listed on this Agenda. The !lext meeting
ofthe DARTBoard is January 27, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs
at 214-749-2543,48 hours in advance. 0113B.DOC 1/9/04 -1:36 PM
13:39 JAN 09, 20041D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 GROUPPHOTO AT5:00 P.M *58259 PAGE: 4/7 Quorum = 8 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 4:00 P.M. -6:30 P.M. COMMITTEE-OF-THE WHOLE Tuesday, January
13, 2004 -Conference Room C 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, TX 75202 -----------_. ------------------------------General Items: 1. Approval of Minutes: December 9,2003 2. This item will be
discussed at the Board meeting only. Consent Items: {5 minutes J 3. Grant ofLicense Agreement to the City ofPlano for an At-Grade Highway-Rail Crossing (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Kathy
Waters) Individual Items: {1 hour and 25 minutes J 4. +Declaration of Spur Track Rights-of-Way in the Brookhollow Industrial District as Surplus and Authorization to Sell (Operations-Joyce
Foreman/Kathy Waters){5 minutes J 5. +Approval ofthe Transfer ofEquity Interest and Sale of Additional Trolley Buses (Operations-Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke) {5 minutes J 6. *Review ofFY
2003 Fourth Quarter Operating & Financial Performance Report (Administrative-William Velasco/Velasco/Sharon Leary) {20 minutes J 7. *Quarterly Procurement Plan Update (Huelon Harrison/Gary
Thomas) [10 minutes J 8. Determination of Contract Anniversary Dates for Direct Reports (Huelon Harrison) {5 minutes J 9. Direct Report Performance Reviews-President/Executive Director,
General Counsel and Director of Board Support (Huelon Harrison) I 30 minutes J 10. *Discussion of Future Agenda Items { 10 minutes J Other Items: 11. Adjournment +Same Night/tem *Briefmg
Item The Board of Directors may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act} SectiOlI 551.071} consultation with AUorney for any Legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for
Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel maners arising regarding any item listed 011 this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Commiffee-of-the-Whole is January 2'02004.
This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impaired) sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance.
Ol13CDOC 1/9/04 -1:36 PM
13:39 JAN 09, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58259 PAGE: 5/7 Quorum=4 Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee Meeting TuesdaYt January 13t 2004t 1:30 p.m. -2:30 p.m. DART Conference
Room C -1st FIQor 1401 Pacific Ave. t Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time I 45 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: December 9,2003 2. *Minority Women-Owned Business Enterprises
Participation and Goal Attainment (RandaH Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) I 15 minutesJ 3. *DaHas Alliance Business Development -2003 (RandaH Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) I 15 minutes J 4. *Diversity
and Economic Opportunity Department Functions (RandaH Chrisman/Gloria Dixon) I 15 minutes J 5. Identification ofFuture Agenda Items 6. Adjournment +Same Night Item *Briefing Item The
Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551. 071, for consultation with Attorney for any legal issues arising regarding
any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Diversity Economic Opportunity Committee is February 10, 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the
hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Randall Chrisman Vice Chair -Joyce Foreman Members -Angie
Chen Button, Beatrice Martinez, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint Shaw and William Velasco StaffLiaison -Gloria Dixon andKen Mercer 0113D.DOC 1/9104 -1:36 PM
13:40 JAN 09. 2004 1D: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620Quorum = 4 458259 PAGE: 6/7 Operations Committee Meeting Tuesday, January 13, 2004, 3:30 p.m. -4:00 p.m. DART Conference Room C -1st
Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time {25 minutes J I. Approval of Minutes: December 9, 2003 2. +Declaration of Spur Track Rights-of-Way in the Brookhollow
Industrial District as Surplus and Authorization to Sell (Joyce Foreman/Kathy Waters)!10 minutes I 3. +Approval ofthe Transfer of Equity Interest and Sale of Additional Trolley Buses
(Joyce Foreman/Victor Burke)[10 minutes I 4. Contract Modification for Janitorial Services for Transit and Rail Facilities (Joyce ForemanlVictor Burke)[5 minutes I 5. Identification
of Future Agenda Items 6. Adjournment +Same Night Item 􀁾Briefmg Item The Operations Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, consultation
with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.072 for Real Estate issues, or under Section Section 551.074 for Personnel matters arising regarding any item listed on this
Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Operations Committee is February 10J 2004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations for the hearing impairedJ sign interpretation is
available. Please contact Community Affairs at 214-749-2543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -Joyce Foreman VICe Chafr -Faye Wilkins Members -Scott Carlson, Linda Koop, Ray Noah, Lynn Flint
Shaw and William Velasco StaffLiaison -Victor Burke and Kathy Waters 01 130.DOC 1/9/04 -1:36 PM
13:40 JAN 09, 2004 ID: DART TEL NO: (214) 749-3620 *58259 PAGE: 7/7 Quorum =4 Administrative Committee Meeting Tuesday, January 13, 2004, 2:30 p.m. -3:30 p.m. DART Conference Room C
-1st Floor 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202 Estimated Meeting Time {45 minutes J 1. Approval of Minutes: December 9, 2003 2. Contract for Benefits Consulting Services (William
Velasco/Ben Gomez) {15 minutes J 3. *Review ofFY03 DART Police Activity Report (William VelascolBen Gomez) {10 minutes J 4. *Employee Benefits Review-Retirement (William VelascolBen
Gomez) {10 minutes J 5. Identification of Future Agenda Items 6. Adjournment +Same Night Item I<Briefing Item The Administrative Committee may go into Closed Session under the Texas
Open Meetings Act, Section 551.071, and consultation with Attorney for any legal issues, or under Section 551.071 for Real Estate issues, or under Section 551.074 for Personnel matters
arising regarding any item listed on this Agenda. The next meeting ofthe Administrative Committee is February February 10, 1004. This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations
for the hearing impaired, sign interpretation is available. Please contact Community Affairs at 114-749-1543, 48 hours in advance. Chair -William Velasco Vice Chair -Ray Noah Members
-Terri Adkisson, MarkEnoch, Linda Koop, Beatrice Martinez andLynn Flint Shaw StaffLiaison -Sharon Leary, Ben Gomez and RockyAngle OII3AD.DOC 119/04 -I :36 PM
R. SCOTI WHEELER MAYOR TO\X1N OF ADDISON, TEXAS September 18, 2003 Post Office Box 9010, Addison, Texas 75001-9010 (972) 450-7026 Fax (972) 450·7043 E-mail: swheeler@ci.addison.tx.us
Mr. Jay Kline Assistant Vice President System Planning and Project Development Dallas Area Rapid Transit 1401 Pacific Avenue, 4th Floor Dallas, Texas 75266-7213 Re: 2030 Mobility Needs
Assessment Report Dear Mr. Kline: The Town of Addison recently received the DART 2030 Mobility Needs Assessment Report and reviewed the findings and analysis. Our community is unlike
any other municipality in the service or study area. Although the Town only has a residential population of 14,000 residents, we provide service to many thousands more on a daily basis.
We also feel that it is critical that all transportation planning for the future consider policy and case study examples that promote and highlight the central location to a major commercial
and business region, including shopping and restaurant accessibility. The Town of Addison obviously represents such a location. In review of the report, we agree with the determination
that our existing transit center provides a high potential for increased transit supply and use within the Tollway Corridor. However, Table 6-6 of the report indicates that the Town
is not a good candidate for new or improved service due to your established Transit Opportunity Index, which indicates a lesser demand for service in relation to supply. We believe that
the figures shown in this table do not accurately reflect current and future ridership conditions. Actually, the reverse is true, due to the fact that our ridership supply comes largely
from outside the service area in lieu of surrounding sites. Actual trends and ridership through our existing transit center does contradict the index values and makes the Town ofAddison
an excellent location for a future light rail/commuter system. The Town of Addison has adopted a land use plan that is relative and supportive of transit development, as indicated in
section 4.5 of the report. Our newly developed Arts & Events District is adjacent to the existing transit center and further exemplifies the area as an ideal location for a future rail
station. Accordingly, we support and encourage your evaluation for Service Area Needs, as indicated in Section 8.2.5 Tollway Corridor. This section states the need for consideration
of rail or rapid bus transit in the Tollway Corridor from Legacy Park to 1-635. Although the Town of Addison is not recognized as having population and employment growth potential, our
central location and history with the existing bus transit center makes the Town of Addison a very viable site for light rail service.
We appreciate the opportunity to respond to this report. The geographic location of the community, and existing bus ridership demand in this area, make the Town more appropriate than
surrounding sites for a future light rail/commuter station and system expansion. Your consideration and support of our efforts to bring a light rail system to our community is necessary
and appreciated. Sincerely, Scott Wheeler Mayor
􀁾􀁲􀁧􀂩 rg D '1/rg [JJ JUL 25 2003 CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM DRMC Executive Committee August I, 2003 Executive Committee Meeting (remember -back to 11:45AMMeeting Time) James McCarley,
Executive Director July 22, 2003 TO: FROM: Item III on the August Agenda includes consideration of the consultant contract (that's me) for 2003-2004 along with the regular fmancial reports.
Also included for your infonnation (page 3) is a letter to the Dallas TxDOT District offices supporting a pilot project for non-barrier separated HOV lanes on US 75 starting at LSJ north
through Plano. This letter was authorized by the DRMC HOV/Freeway Management Committee (Sandy Greyson -Chair) and co-signed by Judge Harris and Judge Keliher along with Mayor Evans from
Plano and Mayor Slagel from Richardson. SUBJECT: During the summer 'break,' several topics have been addressed by DRMC based on previously adopted directions and/or policy. Included
for your infonnation (page 2) is a 'support' Resolution requested by the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA) for the Eastern Extension (SH 78 to IH 30) of the Bush Turnpike. DRMC adopted
this project as one of the monitored items and the Resolution continues previously announced support for the project without recommending a specific alignment. DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY
COALITION 7522 Campbell Road ;) Suite 113-205 f\ tl1 L;l\:> Dallas, Texas 75248 , V 972/312-1644 972/312-1645 (FAX) ________________________________________􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁬􀁩􀁉􀁥􀁷􀁬􀁯􀁩􀁬􀁡􀁉􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁈􀀮􀀮�
�􀁣􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁣􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁏􀀢􀀹􀁩􀀺􀁬􀀱􀁀􀀢􀀧􀁡􀁬􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁲􀁭􀀮􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁡􀁩􀁾􀁬􀁮􀁬􀁩􀁪􀁥􀁪􀁪􀀢􀁴􀁟􀁌􀀢􀀭 􀁾􀁾􀁖􀁾􀀱 \ 􀀯􀀭􀀻􀁦􀁚􀀭􀁾 Executive Committee Ex-Officio Members Jerry Hiebert
Michael Morris Jay Nelson Gary Thomas Ron Harris, Co-Chair Margaret Keliher, Co-Chair Sandy Greyson, Vice-Chair Grady Smithey, Secretary Terry Waldrum, Treasurer Chad Adams Gary Base
Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs Angie Chen Button Jim Dunn Pat Evans Stanton Foerster Robert Franke John L. Heiman, Jr. Mary Hom Mike Nowels James O'Neal Jayne Peters Bob Phelps Phelps Frank
W. Robertson Mike Simpson Gary Slagel Mark Stokes Steve Terrell Paul N. Wageman Bill Whitfield Executive Director James McCarley David A. Griffin, Associate Item IV is a key discussion
item including remarks from State Senator Florence Shapiro regarding transportation issues in the region. Senator Shapiro has led efforts over the past few years to create the Texas
Mobility Fund and other items addressing critical mobility needs across the region and State. Infonnation will also be presented by area county judges on discussions relating to regional
mobility alternatives. The Project Monitoring item (V) will provide a brief update on the High Five project along with a status report on the LSJ Corridor project. Agenda Item VI, the
Legislative Update, will report on several final actions from the 78th Session, along with bills of interest from the I sl Called Special Session underway in Austin. Infonnation is also
included on the access management issue and proposed rules issued by TxDOT. Congress also is moving forward, although slowly, on the TEA-21 reauthorization (SAFETEA) legislation with
updated infonnation in the packet. An air quality update is included under Item VII and the monthly Agency Reports will be covered under Item VIII. See you on August 1st! -Remember.
back to 11:45AMthis month. Attachments
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION 7522 Campbell Road Suite 113-205 Dallas, Texas 75248 9721312-1644 9721312-1645(FflLX) email ccu9@ainnail net Judge Ron Harris, Co-Chair Collin County
Judge Judge Margaret Keliher, Co-Chair Dallas County Judge Executive Committee Ron Harris, Co-Chair Margaret Keliher, Co-Chair Sandy Greyson, Vice-Chair Grady Smithey, Secretary Terry
Waldrum, Treasurer Chad Adams Gary Base Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs Angie Chen Button Don Dozier Jim Dunn Pat Evans Stanton Foerster Robert Franke John L. Heiman, Jr. Mary Hom Mike Nowels
James O'Neal Jayne Peters Bob Phelps Frank W. Robertson Candy Sheehan Mike Simpson Gary Slagel Mark Stokes Steve Terrell Paul N. Wageman Bill Whitfield Ex-Officio Members Jerry Hiebert
Michael Morris Jay NeJson Gary Thomas Executive Director James McCarley David A. Griffin, Associate RESOLUTION # 03-03 A.RESOLUTION OF THE DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE (DRMC) REAFFIRMING SUPPORT FOR THE PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TIlRNPlKE AND THE EXPEDITED PERMITTING AND COMPLETION OF THE EASTERN EXTENSION WHEREAS, improved traffic mobility in
this region will accelerate economic development, improve air quality, advance traffic safety, and generally enhance the quality of life for all residents; and WHEREAS, the North Texas
Tollway Authority (the "NTTA"), supported by the Texas Department of Transportation ("TxD01'''), Dallas County, and the several directly affected cities, has committed to design, construct
and operate the President George Bush Turnpike (the "PGBT") from the an eastern terminus at SH 78 in northeastern Dallas County to a western terminus at West Belt Line Road in the City
of Irving; and WHEREAS, the NTTA is evaluating the further extension of the PGBT from SH 78 to IH 30, which is designated as the "Eastern Extension" of the PGBT; and WHEREAS, except
for the Eastern Extension, all portions of the currently planned route of the PGBT have received all required permits and approvals, and are either open to traffic or under construction;
and WHEREAS, as a transportation advocacy group affected by the project study corridor, the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition Executive Committee (DRMq recognizes the value and necessity
of the Eastern Extension to stimulate, facilitate and sustain the diversity and vitality of local and regional economic development; and WHEREAS, the NTTA is currently seeking environmental
approval for the Eastern Extension, and the DRMC desires to evidence its support for (1) the issuance of that approval at the earliest possible date, and (2) the construction of the
Eastern Extension so as to enhance mobility in the region and achieve the resulting economic and social benefits. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALmON
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE on this the 14th day of July, 2003, THAT: SECTION 1. The DRMC reaffirms its support for the PGBT, and particularly the Eastern Extension, as proposed, designed, constructed
and operated by the NTTA, and; SECTION 2. The DRMC urges the NTTA, TxDOT, Dallas County, the other affected municipalities and all local, state or federal agencies participating in the
approval process to make every effort to expedite the issuance of the necessary environmental permits and approvals for the Eastern Extension due to the critical importance of that portion
of the PGBT in meeting regional mobility needs. 􀂣􀁾 􀀴􀀱􀁲􀁾
IALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION LJljve Commjttee 7522 C,mpbell Ro,d Suite 􀀱􀀱􀀳􀁾􀀲􀀰􀀵 D,lIas, Texas 75248 9721312·1644 9721312·1645 (FAX) email ccu9la>airrnail.nel Our cities,
counties, and transportation agencies appreciate the dedication that TxDOT continues to show to improving the transportation infrastructure in this area. We look forward to working with
you and your staff to implement this pilot project. cc: James McCarley, Executive Direclor, Dallas Regional Mobility Coalilion Gary Thomas, P.E., President/Executive Director, Dallas
Area Rapid Transit Authority Michael MOllis, Director orTranspOrlation, North Central Texas Council ofGovemments Jeny Hiebert, Executive Director, North Texas Tollway Authority DRMC
HOV Committee Members -Jim DUM, Frank Robertson, Paul Wageman Harris. C<>-Chalr :artt Kclihc:r, Co-Chair y Grcyson, Vicc.chair ySmithey. Socmary ,Waldrum, Treasurer Adams Base ,Beaty
Burroughs 􀁾􀁃􀁨􀁣􀁮 Button lunn vans 􀁯􀁮􀁆􀁾􀁴􀁣􀁲 rt Franke L Heiman, Jr. Hom Nowels sO'Neal 􀁾 Peters 􀁾􀁨􀁣􀁬􀁰􀁳 ; W. Robertson Simpson Sl'8,1 Stokes Terroll N. Wageman lJhitticld
Walnc Vhitficld fficio Members HicbCr1 aelMorris elsoR Thomas 􀁾;McCarley I A. Griffin, Associnlc v..,) July 6, 2003 Mr. Jay Nelson, P.E. District Engineer Texas Department ofTransportation
P.O. Box 133067 Dallas, TX 75313-3067 Dear Jay: Thank you for attending the recent Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC) HOV Subcommittee meeting held at Richardson City Hall to
discuss the issue ofHOV Lanes. The DRMC, along with the Cities of Dallas, Richardson, Plano, and Dallas and Collin Counties have been regional supporters of HOV Lanes since the implementation
of the first such facility in the Metroplex. We recognize the benefits of improved mobility and air quality these lanes provide. For many years, regional transportation plans have included
HOV improvements in the US 75 Corridor from IH 635 into Plano. In these difficult economic times, we recognize that the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is struggling with
the need need to provide all of the roadway improvements necessary to meet the requirements of this growing metropolitan area. Consistent with the consensus of the group at the recent
meeting, the DRMC HOV Committee, the Cities of Dallas, Richardson, and Plano, along with Dallas and Collin Counties request that TxDOT install a pilot project of reduced section HOV
Lanes in the US 75 Corridor. These improvements would be implemented as a stripe-separated HOV Lane in the center of US 75, operatiorial both northbound and southbound 24 hours a day.
We feel such a system would yield more mobility and air quality benefits than the reversible HOV lane previously planned and could be accomplished with a substantially reduced construction
cost and implementation schedule. Intelligent Transportation System technologies could also be utilized to provide for better safety and enforcement programs. We would suggest that DART,
as the regional provider of HOV Lanes, manage the design and construction of the project. DART would work work closely with our cities and counties, along with the North Texas Tollway
Authority as improvements are being made at US 75 and President George Bush Turnpike. Should the committed US 75 HOV funding from the Regional Transportation Council not be available
as planned, the cities of Richardson and Plano are willing to consider bearing the cost of the pilot project. Sincerely, 􀁾􀂣􀁾 􀁬􀁓􀁾􀁇􀁾 􀁾􀁾 􀁾 Margaret Keliher Co-Chair, Dallas Regional
Mobility Coalition Dallas County Judge Ron Harris Co-Chair, Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition Collin County Judge Sandy Greyson Vice-Chair, Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition Chair,
City ofDallas Transportation Committee Chair, DRMC HOV Subcommittee Gal)' Slagel Chair, DRMC Legislative Committee Mayor, City of Richardson Mayor, City of Plano Member, DRMC Executive
Committee
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION AGENDA FRIDAY, AUGUST 1,2003 11:45AM REMEMBER NEW REGULAR MEETING TIME I. Call to Order/Introductions II. Approval of Minutes from June 6, 2003 Executive
Committee Meeting -Page 5 III. Treasurer's Financial Report and Approval of Expenditures for June and July, 2003 -Page 12 • Review/Approval-Annual Consultant Contract -Page 13 IV. Update
/Discussion -Regional Transit/Transportation Issue -Page 17 • Expansion ofDART Service Area -Senate Bill 972 by Senator Shapiro o Senator Florence Shapiro -Comments • Regional Mobility
Authority -HB 3588 • Regional Mobility'Alliance' Alternative • Other Interest Groups /Transportation Groups Efforts V. Project Monitoring -Page 36 • High Five Status • LBJ Modifications
/Funding VI. Legislative Update -Page 40 • State Issues -Overview of Legislative ActivitylBills o Final Actions Related to 78th Session • Proposed Access Management Rules -Senate Bill
361 o Items ofInterest from 151 Called Special Session • Federal Issues TEA-21 Renewal /SAFETEA /SHARE /FAIR • Transportation Advocacy Group Activities o Texas Urban Transportation Alliance
(TUTA) o Partners in Mobility VII. Air Quality Update -Page 66 • Status Report -Dallas /Fort Worth State Implementation Plan • Eight Hour Standard Update • Air Transport Status VIII.
Agency Reports • Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) • Regional Transportation Council (RTC) • North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA) .• Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) IX. Other
Business X. Adjournment FYI Starts on Page 92 080103 DRMC Agenda.doc
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 08-01-03 AGENDA ITEM II EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 6,2003
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXEClmVE COMMIITEE MEETING MlNlITES June 6, 2003 Ameeting of the Executive Committee oflheDallas Regional Mohility Coalition was held June 6, 2003 at 2377 Stemmon.. Dallas, Texas. DRMC Excculive Committee Minutes 06-06-03 Page 2 approved unanimously. Treasurer Terry Waldrum
could not be present at the Executive Committee meeting due to a conflict. James McCarley reviewed the financial infonnation for Mayas provided by the City of Irving. Grady Smithey moved
approval of the financial statements and James McCarley's invoices for May and June. After a second by Paul Wageman, the motion carried unanimously. Others allending were: Jim Carvell,
Harold Denney, Jim Driscoll, Thad Helsley, Don Holzwarth, George Human, Ross Jacobs, Mark Janicki, Dan Kessler, Sonny Loper, Sian Lynch, Wes McClure, Cesar Molina, Lloyd Neal, Gabe Nesbitt,
Koorosh Olyai, Janie Pena, Dan Petty, Robert Pope, Fred Prall, Waller Ragsdale, Ernest Randall, Milton Richter, Ayub Sandhu, Carol Short, Dan Slephens, Vic Suhm, Cissy Sylo, Charles
Tucker, Tom Wahon, Mark Young, Janice Zimmemlan Judge Harris and Judge Keliher noted thai DRMC Execulive Direclor James McCarley had been cxcused from Ihe meeting room for a few minutes
as the meeting commenced. At that time, Judge Harris and Judge Keliher recommended to the Execulive Commiltee that McCarley be awarded a supplemenlal payment to his contract in the amount
of SIO,OOO based on his efforts during the 78'" Texas Legislative Session. The motion was unanimously adopted by the Executive Committee. McCarley was then asked back into the room and
informed of the action by the Executive Committee. Co-Chairman Ron Harris called the meeting to order at 9:05 AM. He welcomed newly elected McKinney Mayor Bill Whitfield to Ihe DRMC
Execulive Commillee as well as Coppell Mayor-Pro Tem Jayne Peters who will serve as the designated represenlative for Coppell Mayor Douglas Stover. Charles Emery was also recognized
represenling Lewisville Councilman Mike Nowels atlhis meeting. Judge Harris reminded the group lhe DRMC meeting lime of 9:00 a.m. was set last month to avoid a conflici with the annual
North Central Texas Council of Governments General Assembly Ihis dale al noon in Arlington. 􀁾􀁾􀁾 :t: 􀁾 Executive Committee Members attending were: Ron Harris (Collin County) Margaret
Keliher (Dallas County) Sandy Greyson (Dallas) Grady Smithey (Dallas County) Chad Adams (Ellis Co.) Pal Evans (Plano) Slanton Foerster (Rowlett & Sachse) Mary Hom (Demon County) Executive
Committee Members absent were: Bruce Beaty (Rockwall County) Gary Base (Area Chambers) Mark Burroughs (Denton) Angie Chen Button (Dallas) Jim Dunn (Garland) Robert Franke (Cedar Hill
& Duncanville) John Heiman, Jr. (Mesquite) James O'Neal (lancaster, DeSoto, Glenn HeighlS &. Hutchins) Frank Robertson (Grand Prairie) Ex·Offic:io Members attending were: Kntie Nces
lbr Jerry Hiebert (NITA) Dan Kessler for Michael Morris (Ncr/COG) Charlie Tucker for Jay Nelson (TxDOn Gory Thomas (DART) Charles Emery for Mike Nowels (lewisville) Bob Phelps (Farmers
Branch, Addison, &. Highland Park) Jayne Peters (Coppell &. University Park) Gary Slagel (Richardson) Alan Walne (Dallas) Bill Wbitlield (McKinney and Wylie) Mike Simpson (Frisco) Mark
Slakes (Carrollton) Sieve Terrell (Allen) Paul Wageman (Dallas) Teny Waldrum (Irving) 􀁾􀀺 James McCarley Judge Harris opened Agenda Item IVan various DRMC policy issues and legislative
status, asking James McCarley to provide the updates and results of the 78" Texas Legislature. McCarley noted the DRMC/DART Membership Flexibility issue has now passed (SB 972) and awaits
the Governor's signature. He noted the process for action by the Governor for bills passed within the last ten days of the Session, stating the option of a signature, allowing the bill
to become law without his signature, or a veto by June 22, 2003. The effective date of various bills will vary based on enacting clauses placed in the bills and any bill needing immediate
implementation requiring a 2/3 vote of the House and Senate prior to forwarding to the Governor's office. Senate Bill 972, as sponsored by Senator Shapiro and Rep. Brian McCall will
become effective upon action by the Governor although it would take some time for any city wishing to use the new option to take advantage of the legislation. This bill will allow any
city, at the option of the City Council, to call an election to convert any one of several existing municipal sales tax collections, such as 4A14B, to a transit tax through a single
ballot proposition. Once the full one cent is available after any existing debt is fulfilled, DART could allow that city to become part of the DART service area. As noted in May, the
other option recommended by Mayor Gary Slagel's DRMC DART Membership Committee (use of the current one cent municipal sales tax for DART) was not pursued during this session due to legal
advice that a Constitutional Amendment would be required to make use ofthose funds for transit in a binding agreement. McCarley updated the group on the final outcome of bills med by
Rep. Steve Wolens and Sen. Kim Brimer 10 establish a six-county Regional Mobility Authority (RMA) comprised of Collin, Dallas, Denton, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant counties. Though
the bills differed somewhat, such an RMA would have authority to convert existing tax supported roadways into toll roads and divert excess funds from such conversions to other mobility
projects. DRMC, along with the four county judges and other groups, strongly opposed these efforts due to a lack of involvement of local officials in developing an RMA for the region.
The House bill did receive a hearing in the House Transportation Commillee but was never considered for additional action. The Senate bill did not receive a hearing in the Senate Infrastructure
and Security Committee. Several DRMC members indicated the continued need for discussions in the region on a method and process to determine the need andior desire for a regional transit
system. There will be additional meelings and discussions to attempt to reach a consensus among agencies, the business community, and political leadership on this issue prior to the
next regular legislative session in 2005. An update was provided on the final outcome of the 'Governor's Transportation Package' (HB 3588), including a summary of the 20 articles in
the final bill. McCarley provided an overview of the bill's progress through the system, noting the bill was in jeopardy of failure until the last few hours of the session due to a major
disagreement between the House sponsor (Rep. Mike Krusee) and Senate sponsor (Sen. Steve Ogden). Most of the disagreement centered on the Senate version removing many of the powers for
a Regional Mobility Authority (RMA) as provided in the House version. From the DRMC and North Texas perspective, the key goal in Ihe bill was to retain authority for the NITA and DART
if any RMA was established in the region while making sure funding was included in the bill for the Texas Mobility Fund. The final result achieved bOlh the DRMC goals, wilh the bill
providing broad new powers for RMAs and TxDOT as it relates to the potenlial implementalion of the Trans Texas Corridor program. TxDOT gains authority for new methods to acquire righI-of-way
for Corridor projects, including franchising for development andior participation of landowners in toll revenue from Ihe Corridor. Additional authority is also provided for Corridor
projects and RMAs to accelerale 'Iakings' of property Ihrough condemnation under certain conditions. The bill does fund the Texas Mobility Fund, although language was added at the last
minute that may restrict some of the Mobility Fund money from becoming a reality until 2005. The lawyers and accountants are still working on analysis of the process due to the cUrrenl
Slate budget situation. Once implemented, the Mobility Fund could receive up to S300 million annually, rhus allowing a one-time infusion for projects in the S3-S5 billion range. Funding
for the Fund is somewhat complex in Ihat it moves money generated by Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) driver's license aClivities to Ihe 􀁾 Upon a motion by Gary Slagel, and second
by Bob Phelps, the May 2, 2003 Execulive Commillee minutes were C:mydocumcnls\060603drmcmins.cJoc C:mydocummlS\060603drmcmins.doc
DRMC Executive Committee Minutes 06.()(,.03 Page 3 Mobility Fund while creating a new 'driver responsibility program' to create replacement money For those funds previously dedicated
to general revenue. Additionally, a new $30 add-on cost will be applied to most traffic violations in municipal and JP courts. Part of the driver responsibility program fees (50%) and
a portion of the increased court costs ($10 of the $30) will create a new 'trauma' fund to address emergency health care in the hospitals having a Class I trawna center. One article
of the bill also allows, with the passage of a Constitutional Amendment on September 13, issuance of up to $3 billion in bonds with the backing of current Fund 6 (fuel tax) monies. The
enabling legislation would allow up to $1 billion a year issuance for three years along with a requirement that 20% of the monies ($600 million) must be expended on 'safety enhancements'
under criteria to be developed by TxDOT. Sen. Ogden placed this requirement in the bill to supposedly supposedly address his concerns for SH 6 in his District. The new concept, at least
for Texas, of 'shadow tolling' is also in the bill although the name was changed to 'pass through tolls.' This portion of the bill allows TxDOT to develop rules for mutual agreements
between TxDOT and the public/private sector for construction of a roadway with TxDOT paying that entity back For all and/or a portion of the roadway based on usage as identified in the
agreement. Numerous other items were also added to the bill, including a long sought after mandate for TxDOT to develop performance based criteria for expenditure of roadway funds, involving
local officials in the process, and accountability to congestion relief. This measure was added based on input from the Texas Urban Transportation Alliance (TUTA) and agreements with
the Governor's office, as the bill was moving through the process. Although not a direct part of the legislative process, an update was provided on the proposed Metropolitan Mobility
Plan under development by TxDOT in conjunction with the urban areas. While a number of groups have strongly urged additional consideration for funding of mobility projects in urban areas,
including DRMC, the Partners in Mobility, and the Houston area, direction to TxDOT from the Governor to develop such a plan is primarily the outgrowth of a recommendation from the Governor's
Business Council as chaired by Mike Stevens ITom Houston. Stevens is a close ally of Governor Peny and is very active in TUTA. A copy of the draft plan was included in the DRMC packet
and work continues, including participation by DRMC Co-Chairs Harris and Keliher in the TUTA and TxDOT working group. The final plan should be adopted sometime this summer and formally
approved by the Governor's office. It is intended to complement the Trans Texas Corridor Plan outside the urban areas and allow a needs based plan, rather than fiscally constrained plan,
for mobility projects within the eight urban areas of Texas. TxDOT Dallas District Engineer Jay Nelson has also been working with TxDOT Austin on the Plan along with District Engineers
ITom the other urban areas. Updates will be provided on the Plan at future DRMC meetings. One of the major issues addressed during the 􀀷􀀸􀁾 Session was full funding For the Texas Emissions
Reduction Plan (TERP). As discussed at previous DRMC meetings, the EPA had provided formal notice through the federal register that Texas must address the shortFall in funding For TERP
if State Implementation Plans (SIP) were to continue approval. In the case of the Dallas -Fort Worth SIP, the EPA has not Formally approved the SIP due to the TERP funding issue. The
situation is further compounded by the recent 5'" Circuit Federal Court decision regarding the 2007 attainment date allowed in the SIP due to the air transport theory. HB 1365, similar
to the previously discussed HB 3588, was in jeopardy until the last couple of days of the Session due to disagreements between the House sponsor (Rep. Dennis Bonnen) and the Senate sponsor
(Sen. Chris Harris). After visits with several key officials, inclUding Judge Harris and Judge KeJiher meeting with staFF from the Governor's office, an agreement was reached on the
bill to provide sufficient funding For TERP to meet the EPA deadline of September I, 2003. To generate funding For TERP, the bill sets an additional Fee on the title transfer for motor
vehicles along with a change in the excise tax placed on heavy equipment (trucks over 14,000 Ibs) use or sale. There is a diFFerential in the motor vehicle title fee for anainment and
nonaltainment areas along with a diFFerential in the excise tax For newer vehicles (1997 and forward) to assist in generating an approximate $150 million per year for TERP. A side element
in the bill is dedication of the vehicle title increase 10 the Mobility Fund starting in 2008. McCarley also updated the group on continued eFForts regarding Congressional action on
authority for the EPA to extend attainment dates using the air transport criteria. While it does not look too bright at the presenl, the potential still exists for this authority to
be provided to the EPA. Along that line. brief information was provided on recent discussions with the TCEQ and EPA on the timeline For designation of eighthour nonattainment areas.
It appears several counties surrounding the current four-county one·hour nonaltainment area will be recommended by the TCEQ to the Governor this month. Final action by the EPA will take
place in early 2004 on these designations. Discussion also continues on the best approach for the DFW SIP if the 2007 attainment date cannot be maintained, possibly moving to the new
eight-hour standard with a 2010 􀁾 C:mydocumcnts\060603drmcmins.doc DRMC Execulive Committee Minutes 06-06-03 Page 4 attainment date. With no comments or requests on Agenda Item V (Project
Monitoring), Judge Harris asked McCarley to continue with additional legislative updates as noted under Item VI on the Agenda. McCarley called allention to the updated legislative status
report as distributed at the meeting. This report reflects the final slatus, other than by Governor's action, on all bills monitored by DRMC during the 78'" Session. Prior to reviewing
some of those bills, he distributed a listing of the 22 Constitutional Amendments that will be subject to citizen vote on September 13, 2003. The Legislature, for several reasons, moved
all the ballot propositions on the Constitution to the September date instead of November. Although ballot positions have yet to be designated, a key proposition on the transportation
ITont is HJR 28 by Rep. Joe Picket. This Amendment has two sections; I) authorizing TxDOT to make use of short-term borrowing capacity (up to two years) to address any cash flow shortfalls
to keep projects moving; and 2) a new provision as previously discussed that would allow TxDOT to issue highway construction bonds in the amount of up to $3 billion using Fund 6 money
to back the bonds. Considering TxDOT now has been issuing nearly $3 billion per year for all construction and maintenance, this additional $1 billion per year for three years could really
jump-start a number of major projects around the State. As discussed earlier, there is a provision that at least $600 million of the $3 billion must be applied to safety enhancements
under criteria to be adopted by the TIC. A summary was provided on several key pieces of legislation passed during the session affecting transportation, including a) increase in the
TIC ITom three to five members, one of which must be from a rural area (SB 409), b) local government preemption of TxDOT access management rules unless TxDOT owns the access rights (SB
361), 3) the 'push.bumper' bill to provide additional authority and liability protection for local law enforcement and DART in removing vehicles ITom Ihe roadway (SB 165), 4) moving
the point of collection of state motor vehicle ruel taxes from the distributor to the rack (HB 2458), and 5) TxDOT authority to implement non-truck lanes along major roadways after consultation
with the local governments governments affected (HB 1208). Although not affecting the DFW area, McCarley noted a piece of special legislation passed for the San Antonio area that designates
an 'advanced transportation district' that can use the transit (VIA) sales tax (by voter approval) for roadways and mObility projects other than transit. Notable among bills that did
not make it through the session were the automated red light enforcement bill, the previously mentioned six-county RMA for the North Texas area, and restrictive language on lolltag interoperability.
McCarley responded to several questions on the legislative program and indicated additional updates would be forwarded iFthe Governor took unexpected action on any oFthe key bills. An
overview was provided on recent federal activities with specific notations on release by the Administration through the Department of Transportation (DOT) of the SAFETEA proposal. Although
T3 is much easier, the SAFETEA proposal is the six-year authorization renewal for the Federal transportation act. While it has a number of positive recommendations For Congressional
consideration, the funding levels recommended by the Administration Fall Far short of that needed to fulfill maintenance and construction needs across the nation. A summary oFthe SAFETEA
proposal was included in the DRMC packet along with altemale viewpoints from key Congressional leaders on the Funding issue. While not a part of the SAFETEA proposal, the eFFort to increase
return to the donor states For Federal fuel tax allocations to a 95% level (as opposed to the current 89-90%) is being led by Congressman Tom Delay from Houston. Discussions also continue
ITom some groups in Washington to either increase the federal fuel tax or index the current fuel tax (18.4 cents) to address innation. The increase in the fuel tax doesn't seem to have
much ofa chance while there may be some outside possibility on the indexing proposal. The Administration opposes either approach. As reported last month by Congressman Burgess, eFForts
continue to mark-up a bill in the House beFore the summer break. IF there is no final House or Senate version by then, it will be difficult to meet the October I deadline For a new transportation
bill. In the past, there have been Continuing Resolutions to keep programs moving Forward. or in the eo« 01' the TE;A.21 process, a one-year extension of the current authorization until
the House and Senale can agree. In the mi.., as usual, is the annual appropriations process for all federal operations, and Ihere are numerous projects submilted For earmarking from
Texas, including several for the DRMC area aFFecting Ihe LBJ project. More to come in the next Few months. DART President Gary Thomas distributed his monthly report and reviewed several
of the key ilems. He also noted the previous discussion on SB 165, stating elements of the legislation will allow DART law enforcement operations to have a greater degree of impact on
ITeeway management support. HOV use continued to renecl a small increase ITom May (2.7%). Round-trip traveltimesavings range from 17.4 minules on the 1-35E segment to C:mydocumcnls\060603drmcmins,doc
􀁾 DRMC Executive Committee Minutes 06-06-03 Page 5 11.3 minutes on the l-35E1US 67 segment. Average peak hour speeds for the HOV 11II1es range from 62 mph on the 1·35E segment to 52
mph on the IH-30 segment All main 11II1e speeds for the HOVs, as compared to stats prior to HOV implementation, also continue to reflect an increase after the HOV implementation. The
final design for tile US 75 reversible HOV 11II1e from Midpark Blvd. To Renner Road has been initiated following the approval of schematics by tile FHWA lII1d TxDOT Austin. Construction
is expected to stort in 2004. Due to time conslnlints, Gary referred the group to tile wrilten update and responded to quostions. Regarding off-peak enforcement of the HOV 11II1es on
US 67 south, Gary responded that it is the responsibility of the DART police officers to enforce the lane restrictions. He will pass infonmolion along to the DART police on the situation.
Judge Harris commented on the continuing regional discussions on the need/structure for a regional lnlnsit program, and Gary indicated DART was working with The T and the new Denton
County Transit Authority to look at the technicallll1d planning side of the issue. Discussions again indicated the need for consensus building from all interested porties rather than
one group or the major cities deciding a course of action. Concern was again expressed regarding any impact on the upcoming September vote in Denton County regarding implementation ofsales
tax funding for the Denton agency. (insert title) Charlie Tucker reported on TxDOT activities in the absence ofTxDOT Dallas District Engineer Jay Nelson. He noted that witil the 78"
Texas Legislature adjourning there has been more time to work on the District's regular business the last few days. The District is working toward tile next three-year lening process
with hopes of reducing andlor eliminating some of the backlogged 'ready to go' projects. He reported on the suceessful public hearing on the western segmem ofthe LBJ project While rnost
of the fonmal proteSS has been completed, the major hurdle remains finding the approximately $1.3 billion required to build the project. Charlie expressed appreciation on the City of
Dallas' $10 million included in the recenl bond eleclion and indicated additional bonding may be used to move portions of the project, such as the lulIIIel, to completion. The 2004 Unified
Transportation Program (UTP) work continues to move forward with lII1ticipated release of the document for public comment within tile next few weeks and adoption by the ITC in September
or October. The District is moving forward on design of the Loop 12I35E project in lII1ticipation that funding may become available and it would be best to have plans ready to go should
the dollars become available. In response to questions on Ihe Southern Gateway project, Charlie indicated the planning process is still underway and TxDOT has not modified its position
thai some fonm of Trinity Parkway must be in place to facilitate implemenlalion of the Southern Gateway project project and Pegasus (mix master/canyon issue) project The group also discussed
efforts of the TUTA to focus more funds toward urban projects lII1d positively affect the congestion issue. Parts of the proposed Metropolitan Mobility Plan under development by TxDOT
for the Governor will also focus on the urban congestion issue and implement an accountability process for TxDOT in addressing the urban problems. McCarley again noted a key part of
the Plan would be how the local urban area addressed any 'gap' between funds from federal/state coffers with local contributions and or revenue methods. NCT/COG Deputy Director ofTransportation
Dan Kessler reported on RTC activities in the absence of Michael Morris. He noted the NCT/COG 2003 General Assembly is scheduled today at noon and expressed appreciation for DRMC moving
the monthly meeting to accommodate those anending the Assembly. Dan reported that the State appropriations bill as passed by Ihe Legislatllre incilldes a Cllt ofobout $550,000 to NCT/COG.
The agency is developing a plan to address the shortfall in funding and it will probably require additional malching dollars from local governments on some programs previously funded
by COG. The main goal is to ,"aintain sufficient funds to leverage federal dollars although some of that may be in jeopardy. DlII1 noted this was the first time he was able to represent
COG at DRMC since the annual Partners in Mobility presentation in March and expressed his appreciation to tilose people and agencies assisting in tile program and sUbmining new ideas
for the lII1nual event. The group will elect new RTC officers next week and various meetings continue to present the annual work plan to comply with federal guidelines. He provided additional
infonmation on the previously discussed SAFETEA proposal as advanced by the US DOT and the Administration, noting involvement of MPOs across the nation in seeking changes in various
provisions of the current TEA-21. Regarding the Texas Mobility Fund. he indicated potential for additional additional funding and also noted recent activities at tile federal level seem
to focus on additional funds through indexing the fuel taxes as compared 10 increasing the base federal tilel tax. Dan noted the continued participation by the RTC in regional raiVtransit
activities, with the RTC and agencies addressing many of the technicaVplanning issues for an ultimate decision by the area policy makers on a need/method to implement a full regional
system. The Tarrant County area continues to look at a method to organize a group similar to DRMC for tile Fort Worth andlor Tarrant County TxDOT District. He also updated the group
on the C:mydocumenls\060603drmcmins.doc: DRMC Execulive Committee Minutes 06-06-03 Page 6 expansion of the AirCheck repair aod assistance program since five additional counties have
now started full inspection lII1d maintenance of vehiCles for air quality compliance. The program now has a total of eight staff members to handle the project. There was some discussion
on the potential for DRMC to expand membership to the Fort Worth area resulting in a general consensus to maintain the current structure due to vase differences in the issues in the
two TxDOT districts. NTTA Deputy Executive Direclor Katie Nees reported in the absence of Jerry Hiebert and distributed the monthly NTTA update and highlighted a few sections. The average
daily transactions for the Bush Turnpike continue 10 increase, with the week of June I reflecting an average of 342,800. The peak day remained December 20 with 452,200 transactions.
She updated the group on Segment IV of the Bush Turnpike (IH 35E to IH 635) with all four roadway contracts now underway. The Eastern Extension (SH 78 to IH 30) is moving 10 the public
hearing phase with a meeting set for June 24. The DNT/SHI21 interchange continues to move forward with SH 121 bridges under construction. Completion date remains ahead of schedule for
the summer 2004 opening date. Selection of design engineClS is also now underway for the northern extension of the Dallas North Tollway through Frisco to US 380. Katie reported work
is also srarting for Ibe cOllSlrUction of a northbound auxiliary 11II1e along the Dallas North Tollway at LBJ to relieve daily congestion at that point. Work also continues along with
several other agencies on various elements ofthe proposed Trinity Parkway. Design work is also moving forward on the proposed Lewisville Lake Toll Bridge with some of the project recently
approved by TxDOT for connections to the bridge. Tolltag interoperability in conjunction with the Harris County Toll Authority is in the initial testing phase with full implementation
set for this summer. Katie updated the group on extended customer service hours for lolltag customers. noting late hours on weekdays 10 7 PM and opening on Saturday from 9 AM to I PM.
AIlII1 Walne noted his concern on the Trinity Project and questioned if full infonmation from the RTC, NITA. and other groups would be ready for an upcoming Dallas City Council discussion
and potential decision on the nature of the roadway. NITA reported their infonmalion would be ready, as did RTC. One of the key decisions among the group would be a decision on whether
all or part of the roadway would be toll and the practicality lII1d financial feasibility of that approach. Prior to concluding the meeting, JUdge Harris discussed with the group the
potential of having various cities at the DRMC meeting proViding an overview /updale on various transportation issues andlor solutions found by those cities to such problems. There seemed
to be consensus to give a brief period oftime on the agenda for such items in the future. There being no more time or business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:32 AM. Meetings will move
back to 11:45 AM in Augusl with no meeting scheduled for July. Time being expired, the meeting was adjourned at I:35 PM. Grady Smithey. Secrelary C:mydQl;umenb\060603drml;n'lins.doc
DART UPDATE • Review comments by NCfCOG on the diaftDART ITS Plan are being incorporated. Copies of the draft DART ITS Plan will be distributed shortly to internal stakeholders for comments. DART is awaiting City of Dallas for the preferred
method to use for permanent headway reduction along North Central Corridor. The final engineering study was submitted to the city last year. • Southwest Research Institute (SWRl) will
start working on the DalTrans system design this summer. DART is a partner in the project and will be sharing the control room space in DalTrans with TxDOT. • DART is waiting for CMAQ
funding approval to start the design for an integrated passenger information system for all TRE stations. • NCTCOG is attempting to collect the local match for the design of a high-level
communication network. An amount of $30,000 of match money will need to be collected from the regional partners to start the design for the network. Rail Transit and Economic Development
Construction continues for LRT guideway subgrade excavation in the OC-l to Woodall-Rodgers area. At the Continental Avenue area, relocation of the TRE's mainline tracks onto the temporary
bridge and shoofly is anticipated for 1Wle. At the Victory Station area, installiltion of canopy structural steel has begWl and concrete placement for the slab-on-grade is complete for
platforms 3 & 4. Hi Line Bridge structure assembly is complete. Full LRT and TRE service is anticipated by 2005. A new rail bridge across the Elm Fork ofthe Trinity River is under construction
on the TRE Corridor in the cities of Dallas and Irving, Texas. The .contractor, Austin Bridge & Road, L.P., is approximately 300A> complete with pier cap installation and lOOA> complete
with precast beam installation. Installation of footing for Pier 29 is complete. Work has begWl on Regal Row Bridge. The project is approximately 21% complete and on schedule. Transoortali()ft
System Management aSH) Construction of improvements including brick-paved sidewalks, bus pads and shelters along Malcolm X Blvd. from Peabody to Pennsylvania was completed in May 2003.
• Work on the off-street, enhanced shelter improvements at Malcolm X and Southland is expected to start by Swwner 2003. Pre-bid meeting was held in May 2003. Bids are due in 1une. City
of Dallas comments on the Elm Street Reconstruction plails from Akard Street to Olive Street have been incorpomted into the design plan. Eighty percent ofthe design work is complete.
DART has completed detailed plans for fabrication and installation of more than one hWldred new guitk/trailblazer signs on IH 3D, SH 183, SH 360, SH 121, Loop 820, IH 3SW and SH 287
and other major arterials leading to six TR:E stations in Da11as, Irving, Arlington, Hum, Richland Hill and Fort Worth. Transit guide signs are being developed for otherDARTpark & ride
facilities at this time. Installation of illumination poles for the parking lot at the Addison Park and Ride facility was completed last month. The facility has been opened to public.
• The Norwood Road crossing with the Trinity Railway Express in the City ofDallas is under study for potential closure. Enhancement of pavement markings and signing to address LRT/vehicular
operations at light rail crossings is underway. Construction of intersection improvements at Northwest Highway at Plaza bas been completed and opened to traffic. • Construction of improvements
and traffic signal installation at Archerwood Street and Parker Road in Plano are underway. The project is presently on-hold temporarily pending utility relocation conflicts. DART UPDATE
Transit PASS • The Principal Arterial Street System (Transit PASS) is a $90 million progmm funded by DART, TxDOT, Dallas County, Collin County and eligible DART member cities. In the
last few years, several projects in Addison, Carrollton, Dallas, Farmers Branch, Plano and Richardson have been completed. DaUas (Widening and intersection improvements) Pro):! Umlb
IT.taICoot I FUDdhlg rA:d:u;Dced PS%I<E1Rl%pl., EstImated I'WlD1ag C.mp.... Way I LctlIog Com"lete Comalete Date Loop 12 I.uDll Rd. to IIucIcDcr SI7,500,000 TxDOT 100 Forty iatenectiou
impIDvcmcotl _ in Blvd. various stallll!!. ofcom letion. LemmoD @Airdrome St,215,000 DAlITrr.DOT 100 100 9g lllDe2003 I.eDun;m _lDOokLowo S2,352,000 DAlITIIlUlOT 100 100 '98 llUlO2003
I.eDun;m BI_iewto Airdrome SI,729,ooo DAlITIIlUlOT 100 100 9g I_Z003 Moclcinsbinl @1DwoocI sl,m,ooo DARTIIlUlOT 100 100 9g 1... 2003 IlomptoD Fort Worth to US 67 $2,780,000 DARTIIlUlOT
100 95 75 M...h2004 MoclciDghini @Harry IIines $622,000 DARTfTxDOT 100 9S 75 M...h2004 Jupi"'Rd. @_atl/wy. $:123,000 DAlITfTxDOT 100 95 75 M...h2004 3333 PIaDo Rd. @Northwest I/wy. $:123,000
DARTfTxDOT 100 9S 75 M...h2004 􀀧􀀨􀁓􀀮􀁃􀀺􀀢􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁉􀀮􀁤􀀮 Loop 12 to OvertoD BI.d. SI2,OOO,ooo TxDOT 􀁃􀁯􀁉􀁬􀁓􀁬􀁮􀁬􀁣􀁾􀀽􀁾􀀺􀀺 􀁩􀁳􀁵􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀷􀁾􀁪 Expected SH·3S2I Pony Several
_ UJd_onoapocity imprv\I....... 20d A.o. to ""'kcU $:I,soo.ooo TxDOT .... part 01 lhe S5-1 LRT proj"" iD COnjlll1CUoD with Avo. the R. B. Cullum SC=t grade .....ill8-North....t GI8deSepmlion@SCbtmali
cs ani EA is LUJderway by TxDOT in Highway !=II S5,SOO.ooo TxDOT 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾 􀀺􀀧􀁓􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁏􀁦􀁌􀁷􀀱􀁡 Rood pmjeot SkillmoolAudelia Rigbt-of-WIIY for IIH 635 Intm:hanae $1,000,000
DART 100 1 10 1 5 IFV 2004-05 Garland (Widening and intersection improvements) ITotal Coot I I 􀁾􀀮 ,.. ,.. Pro)od I Umlts 'allldlng AdVIIlllced PS&E Righi or Exllmaled PlaDniDI CompJete
Way LettIng Comftlele Comolete Date Forest Lane Plano Rd. to Oarland $1,311,000 DARTrr.OOT/Cily 100 95 75 M...􀁾􀁚􀁏􀁏􀀴 Rd. Garland Rd. 1-635 10 Fo.... Lone $2,755,000 DARTrr.DOT/Cily
100 9S 75 M...􀁾􀁚􀀰􀀰􀀴 Plano Rd Buckingham Rd. lD Forest Lane SI,234.ooo DARTrr.OOTlCity 100 95 75 􀁍􀀧􀁒􀀺􀁾 2004 Irving (Grade Separation) 􀁾􀀮 􀁾􀀮 􀁾􀀮 P,o)od Advanced PS&E Rlptor
Esllm.ted PIoDIDI C....'Id' Way L«dng COAl lete Com de Date TrinityRmlwoy Iw...01 BcldineRd.I $30000000 IDARTIr DOT/City I 􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁡 Expras 6S 50 OclDbor 2003 (TIlE) to _ ofSOllY Rd.
" • lO"",yol 􀁾 Ptrgf".l ..... 􀀢􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 ' ••• "to:;. :.,. "," DART􀁾 MD6In", 􀁐􀁲􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀢 Dlfw{np"",,' --61612003 􀁐􀁬􀁉􀁧􀁾􀀴 DART-Mo6iJJty Prot/Nru Dewt.p,.,", -61612003
DART UPDATE DART UPDATEDART· MoIUJJty􀁾DncI4p_aJ -6/6116113 • The East Corridor MIS Study Team is nearing completion of the travel demand modeling effort, which is all that remains of
the detailed evaluation portion of the MIS. Study team will be developing recommendations this sununer for Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) consideration. • Last month, D{-RT presented
to TxDOT !he locally preferred alternative for widening and reconstruction of 1-35E at President George Bush Turnpike (pGB1) interchange to accommodate 2 permanent reversible HOV lanes
and a drop ramp off Dickerson Blvd. oVeIpass. Plarmed facility will provide the most operationally feasible directional HOV access between 1-35E and the PGBT service roads, and the new
DART Transit Station. Scope of work is being fmalized to start design of a barrier-separated reversible HOV lane in the median of 1-30 (Old Turnpike), west of 1-35E. TIl is collecting
travel time information and traffic volume information in order to assess the HOV lane access points. Barrier Transfer Vehicle Frame Assembly • Fabrication of the two new barrier transfer
vehicles (BTYs) for the 1-30 HOV lane is underway. Delivety of the machines is expected this summer. Intel/igelll Trunspflrtut;fIn Sv.•tem.• aTSI • A meeting will be set up this month
with the City of Dallas staff and lheir consultants to discuss the progress of the traffic signal priority study in downtown Dallas. The study includes a simulalion for an initial signal
priority request in the West End area to include Houston, Record and Market 􀁓􀁴􀁲􀁥􀁥􀁌􀁾 lor the extension to the American Airlines Center. • The final evaluation report for the DART
Personalized Public Transit Operational Test has been completed. Results suggest that limitations in service during the operational test period may have affectcd the overall performance
of the project and that further research may be needed to reach a conclusion on this innovative concept. This report will be posted at www.fhwa.dol.gov soon. I-35E/US 67 HOY Lane Operations
• DART is currently working on an alternative which places the LRT between the westbound main lanes and the frontage road along SH 114, between Tom Braniff Parkway and Rochelle Blvd.
Preparation of schematics for widening SH 114 from SH 183/Loop 12 to SH 121 for main lanes, frontage roads and HOV lanes are ongoing. Further coordination efforts are required between
NCTCOG and TxDOT's TPP Division to fmalize traffic projection for the SH 114/SH 121 corridors. 􀁐􀀢􀀸􀁾􀀲 't.'PT. 􀀬􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀻􀁉􀁩􀀧􀀢 r _. n 1,.,.,.,,.trl "II,,?"'" 1-3SE/US 67 1-6351US
75 IDler.baD!!" (HOY DC) 1-3SE/US 67 1-035 1-035 62 1-35E 17.4 1-30 1-35E 􀁾􀁳􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀺􀁲􀀮􀀮􀁲__..._ 25 ,jj c ],20 􀁾 􀀮􀁾 15 Vl 􀁾 10 F= <l 5 >e I-0 o 1-30 80 􀁯􀀮􀁵􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀢 ,...􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁴􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁟
􀁉􀁉... t ...._ :2ro E :;40 II 􀁾 20 Round-Trip Travd Time 􀁓􀁾􀀢􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁳 -May 2M3 • Molin L.ne, "Before" HOvll Main Lanes "Afte," HO\ll HOY Lane Construction Construction HOV Transitway
System Peak Hour Speeds. May 20113 • Several options will be presented for HOV access to and from the South Garland Transit Center at Shiloh Road as part of the reconstruction of 1635.
Public Hearing was held for the West Section of the LBJ Corridor on June 5, 2003. • Final design for the US 75 Reversible HOV lane project, from Midpark Blvd. to RelU1er Rd., has been
initiated following the approval of schematics by FHWA and TxDOT-Austin. The EA document for the project has been completed. Expected construction letting is 2004. • Average peak-hour
freeway speeds for lhe corridors with HOV lanes "before" and "after" their construction are shown below. The peak hour speeds for HOV lanes are also shown for last month. HOV Transitwqys
• Last month, ridership on the 1-30, 1-35E, 1-635 and 1-35E1US 67 HOV lanes was 109,600 weekday passengers. 1ms represents a 2.7% increase over May 2002. • Round trip travel time savings
for lhe Dallas area HOV lanes are shown below. P"f!1' 1 􀁾
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE CONIMITTEE MEETING 08-01-03 AGENDA ITEM IV UPDATEffiISCUSSION -REGIONAL TRANSITffRANSPORTATION ISSUE It
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION 7522 Campbell Road Suite 113-205 '< Dallas, Texas 75248 972/312-1644 9721312-1645 (FAX) email ccu9@ajrrnail net Executive Committee MEMORANDUM State
Senator Florence Shapiro has requested an opportunity to address the DRMC Executive Committee on recent transportation legislation and issues under discussion at the regional level.
Her remarks and perspective may provide additional discussion elements for the Executive Committee as efforts move forward to develop a regional consensus prior to the 79th Legislative
Session. A number ofkey policy issues for the DRMC area and entire region remain unanswered after the 78th Regular Session of the Texas Legislature. While the number one problem, 'where
do we get sufficient funds to maintain and enhance the area's mobility' remains, various groups continue to discuss several forms of 'governance' to possibly create a 'regional' approach
to transportation and/or transit operations. James McCarley, Executive Director DRMC Executive Committee Update /Discussion -Regional Transit/Transportation Issues FROM: July 22, 2003
SUBJECT: TO: Ron Harris, Co-Chair Margaret Keliher, Co-Chair Sandy Greyson, Vice-Chair Grady Smithey, Secretary Terry Waldrum, Treasurer Chad Adams Gary Base Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs
Angie Chen Button Jim Dunn Pat Evans Stanton Foerster Robert Franke John L. Heiman, Jr. Mary Hom Mike Nowels James O'Neal Jayne Peters Bob Phelps Frank W. Robertson Mike Simpson Gary
Slagel Mark Stokes Steve Terrell Paul N. Wageman Bill Whitfield Ex-Officio Members Expansion o(DARTService Area Background Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Gary Thomas Executive
Director James McCarley As part of DRMC Legislative Priorities for the 78th Session, and after a request to the DART member agencies to adopt a supporting Resolution, a proposal to provide
additional flexibility for DART 'membership' was adopted. The proposal would allow cities, through a local option citizen vote, to become part ofthe DART service area through the following
methods in addition to the current process of a one-cent local sales tax within the State 8 14 cent cap: David A. Griffin, Associate • Allow citizen vote to authorize up to one cent
of the municipal sales tax to be dedicated to transit membership, and; • Allow citizen vote by a single ballot issue to convert current 4A/4B sales tax to be dedicated to transitional
transit membership with allowance for any debt service reduction on previously committed 4A/4B debt. There would be no board representation until the full one-cent sales tax was available
to the transit agency. • Provide that the Comptroller would collect and forward either of these taxes to the transit agency. Senator Shapiro filed SB 971 and SB 972 to create additional
flexibility for membership in DART. Legal Counsel indicated during the Legislative Session that the approach to allow a citizen vote to authorize a portion of the municipal sales tax
(first bullet above and SB 971) would probably require a Constitutional Amendment. Thus, after discussion with Senator Shapiro, DART, and other parties, that issue was not pursued as
part of the legislative effort. SB 972 addressed the second bullet and this bilI cleared the Senate and House Committees (sponsored in the House by Rep. Brian McCall) and has been signed
by the Governor. The bilI
was 􀁥􀁸􀁰􀁾􀁤􀁥􀁤 to include the potential for cities having several other local municipal sales taxes (other than the previously mentioned 4A/4B taxes, to convert those taxes to a
transit tax once the full one-cent was available within the State cap of 8 Y4 cents. Regional Mobility Authority Legislation Background As reviewed at the June DRMC Executive Committee
meeting, the Governor's Transportation Package (HB 3588) contained a massive 'rewrite' of the Regional Mobility Authority (RMA) legislation. Due to a number of areas in the State considering
formation of a RMA, along with the current Central Texas RMA (Williamson and Travis counties) pursuing expanded powers for that area, RMAs now have much broader powers to develop mobility
projects. The North Texas area can form an RMA based on the request of a county or counties to the Texas Transportation Commission (TTC). If a RMA was formed in the Collin, Dallas, Denton,
and/or Tarrant county area, certain restrictions were placed in HB 3588 to make sure there was no negative impact on operations of the NTTA, DART, The T, or the new Denton County Transportation
Authority. A key provision requires any RMA in the area to reach a written agreement with one of those agencies should the new RMA desire to develop/construct a toll or transit project.
Additionally, if there was a decision to create an RMA in the four-county area, the county and/or NTTA could propose an alternate governance structure than the form mandated in the legislation
with approval resting with the TTC. A similar provision enables Harris County to make the same proposal. As you recall, at the April 4 DRMC meeting, the DRMC Executive Committee established
a formal position opposing bills by State Representative Steve Wolens and State Senator Kim Brimer that would have allowed the TTC to create a six-county RMA (the four core counties
plus Parker and Rockwall counties) with additional authority to convert existing tax supported roadways to a toll road and transfer funds from those converted roadways to other mobility
(transit) projects. DRMC supported a direction that discussions should be conducted locally among area officials prior to any legislation, and encouraging area local governments to take
a similar stand in opposition to the bills. HB 2953 (the Wolens bill) received a public hearing in the House Transportation Committee on April 8 and several DRMC members appeared at
the hearing in opposition to the bill. SB 1558 was never set for a hearing in the Senate Infrastructure and Security Committee. Neither bill moved forward during the 78th Session after
broad opposition was experienced from other Senators and Representatives from the region. Discussion among regional leaders continues to evaluate any need/desire to form a RMA for the
area based on HB 3588 provisions. One of the main concerns focus on the perception that the last thing the area needs is another layer ofgovernment to oversee mobility along with additional
cost and bureaucratic procedures. A Regional Mobility 'Alliance' Alternative Over the past several weeks, since the end of the 78th Regular Texas Legislative Session, the county judges
from the current NTTA operation area (Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant counties) have discussed the pros and cons of formation of a RMA for the area. These same counties also comprise
the current four-county nonattainment area for federal clean air standards under the 'one-hour' measuring stick. While these discussions continue, the judges have started discussions
with various transportation groups in the area on the best approach to develop a regional consensus on what, if anything, needs to be accomplished to maintain local control over direction
of regional transit and transportation in lieu of some State mandate such as the WolenslBrimer bills. One method under consideration would be the formation of a regional 'alliance' rather
than a RMA. This approach basically would operate through Interlocal Agreements (lLA) among the parties (such as the counties and/or cities) rather than a formal governance structure.
The judges (since three of the four serve on the DRMC Executive Committee) will discuss this issue with the DRMC Executive Committee at the August 15t meeting. Other Interest Groups
/Transportation Groups Efforts As with most major topics, every group has an opinion (or is developing one) on how best to address the regional transit/transportation issue. Some groups
seem to feel the last legislative session came close to mandating an approach to the North Texas area through the WolenslBrimer bills. The reality is that the bills had little, ifany,
support from members of the Legislature, especially those from the North Texas area. This is not to say the region should not consider how best to expand enhanced mobility in the area.
Excellent planning for mobility, including transit, is handled now by the respective agencies
(DART, The T, and the new Denton County Transportation Authority) in conjunction with the North Central Texas Council of Governments (COG). The major issue is MONEY.....where are the
resources going to come from to implement a truly regional system. The other issue, although not addressed very much, is CONTROL. ....who/what is going to decide what project is best,
and in some cases, how it is going to be funded. The planning, as noted, is easy. Finding the money is a very high hurdle, especially during the time when the State is looking in every
nook and cranny (I've always wondered what a cranny is) for dollars and most area counties and cities are suffering similar budget problems. The political leadership of the area will
be the key decision makers on the desirability/feasibility of regional transit. If a consensus cannot be achieved in the area, the State leaders may again try to force a system on the
area. Attachments /1
S.B. No. 972 Code. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a tax imposed by the city under this section is subject to reduction in the manner prescribed by Section 452.6025,
Transportation Code. SECTION 3. Section 4B, Development Corporation Act of 1979 (Article 5190.6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes), is amended by adding Subsection (n-l) to read as follows:
(n-l) This subsection applies only to a city that is located within the territorial limits of a regional transportation Chief Clerk of the House I hereby certify that S.B. No. 972 passed
the Senate on May 1, 2003, by the following vote: Yeas 31, Nays O. Secretary of the Senate I hereby certify that S. B. No. 972 passed the House on May 28, 2003, by the following vote:
Yeas 144, Nays 0, two present not voting. regional transportation authority under Section 452.6025, Transportation Code. (b) The board shall reduce the sales and use tax imposed for
the benefit of the district to the highest rate that will not impair the imposition of the regional transportation authority's sales and use tax on or before the effective date of the
addition of the municipality to the authority as determined by the executive committee of the regional transportation authority under Section President of the Senate Speaker of the House
authority that has been added to the territory of the authority under Section 452.6025, Transportation Code. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a tax imposed by the
city under this section is subject to reduction in the manner prescribed by Section 452.6025, Transportation Code. SECTION 4. Subchapter 0, Chapter 363, Local Government Code, is amended
by adding Section 363.1541 to read as follows: Sec. 363.1541. REDUCTION OF TAX RATE FOR CERTAIN DISTRICTS. (a) This section applies only to a district created by a municipality that
has elected to be added to the territory of a 452.6025, Transportation Code. SECTION 5. Section 379A.082, Local Government Code, is amended by adding Subsection (d) to read as follows:
(d) Notwithstanding Subsections (a) -(c), in a municipality that is located within the territorial limits of a regional transportation authority and was added to the authority under
Section 452.6025, Transportation Code, -a sales and use tax imposed by the municipality under this subchapter is SUbject to reduction in the manner prescribed by that section. SECTION
6. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this
Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2003. AN ACT accompanied by a map of the authority clearly showing the territory added.
---SECTION 2. Section 4A, Development Corporation Act of 1979 (Article 5190.6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes), is amended by adding Subsection (0-1) to read as follows: (0-1) Notwithstanding
Subsection (a), this subsection applies only to a city that is located within the territorial limits of a regional transportation authority and has been added to the authority on a date
determined by the executive committee if: (l) any part of the municipality is located in a county in which the authority has territory; (2) the governing body of the municipality calls
an election on the addition of the municipality to the territory of the authori tv; and (3) a majority of the votes cast in the election favor the proposition. (d) The election in a
municipality to approve the addition of the municipality to the territory of the authority is to be treated for all purposes as an election to reduce the rate of the municipality's special
sales and use tax, on the effective date determined by the executive committee, to the highest rate that will not impair the imposition of the authority's sales and use tax. relating
to the addition of certain municipalities to the territory of a regional transportation authority. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: SECTION 1. SUbchapter P, Chapter
452, Transportation Code, is amended by adding Section 452.6025 to read as follows: Sec. 452.6025. ADDITION OF CERTAIN MUNICIPALITIES BY ELECTION. (a) In this section, "special sales
and use tax" means: (1) a sales and use tax levied by a municipality under: (Al Section 4A or 48, Development Corporation Act (e) At any time after the date of the election approving
the addition of the municipality to the territory of the-authority, the executive committee and the governing body of the municipality may enter into an interlocal aqreement that provides
for the eventual admission of the municipality to the territory of the authority. (f) Notwi thstanding Section 452.607, a sales and use tax imposed by the authority takes effect in the
municipality on the first day of the first calendar quarter that begins after the date the comptroller receives a certified copy of an order adopted by the executive committee 􀁡􀁤􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁲􀁲􀁩􀁴􀁯�
�􀁹of the municipality, (2) an additional municipal sales and use tax levied by a municipality under Chapter 321, Tax Code. (b) This section applies only to a municipality that levies
a special sales and use tax that, when combined with the authority's sales and use tax, would result in a sales and use tax rate of more than two percent in the municipality. (c) Notwithstanding
Section 452.606, a municipality that is not part of an authority may be added to the territory of an of 1979 (Article 5190.6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes); (B) Section 379A.08l, Local
Government Code, for the bene!!t of a municipal development corporation; or (C) Section 363.055, Local Government Code, for the benefit of a crime control and prevention district; or
terri tory of the authori ty under Section 452.6025, Transportation 􀁾􀀮
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE S.B. 972 By: Shapiro Transportation Committee Report (Unamended) For the territory of a municipality to be added to a regional transportation
authority, such as the Dallas Rapid Transit System, the citizens of the municipality must first approve the expansion through a referendum. Some municipalities cannot be added immediately
because the addition of the authority's sales and use tax would, in combination with other municipal taxes, exceed the two percent cap that may be imposed in the territory of a municipality.
S.B. 972 authorizes certain municipalities to be added to the territory of a regional transportation authority by election, but would postpone the addition until currently imposed sales
and use taxes are reduced to such a level that the imposition of the authority's sales and use tax would not exceed the two percent cap. Sec. 363.1541. REDUCTION OF TAX RATE FOR CERTAIN
DISTRICTS. (a) Provides that this section applies only to a district created by a municipality that has elected to be added to the territory of a regional transportation authority under
Section 452.6025, Transportation Code. effect on a certain date. SECTION 4. Amends Subchapter D, Chapter 363, Local Government Code, by adding Section 363.1541, as follows: (b) Requires
the board of directors of a district to reduce the sales and use tax imposed for the benefit off the district to the highest rate that will not impair the imposition of the regional
transportation authority's sales and use tax on or before the effective date of the addition of the municipality to the authority as determined by the executive committee of the regional
transportation authority under Section 452.6025, Transportation Code. SECTION 2. Amends Section 4A, Development Corporation Act of 1979 (Article 5190.6, V.T.C.s.) by adding Subsection
(0-1) to provide that this subsection applies only certain cities. Provides that a tax imposed by the city under this section is subject to reduction in the manner prescribed by Section
452.6025, Transportation Code. SECTION 3. Amends Section 4B, Development Corporation Act of 1979 (Article 5190.6, V.T.C.S.) by adding Subsection (n-l) to make a conforming change. S.B.
972 78(R) BILL ANALYSIS It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
SECTION 5. Amends Section 379A.082, Local Government Code, by adding Subsection (dl to make a conforming change. ANALYSIS SECTION 1. Amends Subchapter P' Chapter 452, Transportation
Code, by adding Section 452.6025, as follows: Sec. 452.6025. ADDITION OF CERTAIN MUNICIPALITIES BY ELECTION. (a) Defines "special sales and use tax. 1I SECTION 6. Effective date: upon
passage or September 1, 2003. EFFECTIVE DATE Upon passage, or, if the Act does not receive the necessary vote, the Act takes effect September 1, 2003. (bl Provides that this section
applies only to a municipality that levies a special sales and use tax, that, when combined with a regional transportation authority's (authority) sales and use tax, would result in
a sales and use tax rate of more than two percent in the municipality. (c) Authorizes a municipality that is not part of an authority to be added to the territory of an authority on
a date determined by the executive committee if certain conditions aremet, notwithstanding Section 452.606. (dl Provides that the election in a municipality to approve the addition of the municipality to the territory of the authority is to be treated
for all purposes as an election to reduce the 􀁲􀁡􀁾􀁥 of the municipality's special sales and use tax, on the effective date determined by the executive committee, to the highest rate
that will not impair the imposition of the authority's sales and use tax. (e) Authorizes the executive committee and the governing body of the municipality to enter into an interlocal
agreement that provides for the eventual admission of the municipality to the territory of the authority, at any time after the date of the election approving the addition of the municipality
to the territory of the authority. 􀁾"" (f) Provides that a sales and use tax imposed by the authority takes
McKill11ev Couriera-Gazette row· ( 'ollill 􀀨􀀧􀁯􀁬􀁭􀁾􀁾􀀧 􀁮􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁜􀀧 ,V"!I'SlmINI' Sillc'.' 181)7 . Wednesday's lnleroell!dillon, 10:55 AM, July 02,2003. DART testing interest
in Collin rail expansion By TIMOTHY LEE 􀁾 McKinney Courier-Gazette -' Thc potential expansion ofDART rail systcms into North Texas was tlie topic of discussion Friday whcn Collin County
Commissioner Joe Jaynes hosted a bimonthly mecting of rural mayors, Robert Popc, DART board chairman and a 30-yc..'U' resident ofCollin County, broached the sensitive subjcct offunding
for rapid transit in the region, telling local offioials that membership requires a minimum ofone cent sales tax per community. "As many ofyou know, there are communities represented
here today which don't have that one ccnt available," he said. City ofFairview Mayor Sid Israelofhsked how towns or cities can preparc now for future participation. Pope said that potential
member cities can reslnlcture local h\xeS, whioh would allow officials to participatc in planning meetings. For example, in McKinney, which has two half-cent taxes supporting McKinney
Economio Developmcnt Corporation and McKinney Commwuty Dcvelopmellt Corporation, an election would have to be held to substitute the transit tax for the 4A and 4B taxes. Such an shift
in taxation would give the city a voice in decisions being made today that could affcct future DART development. A bill, sponsored by Sen. Florence Shapiro and Rep. Bl'ian McCaU, passcd
in this legislative session and was signed by Gov. Pcrry on Friday. The mcasure will allow a 4A·4B eity to hold one election to convert to the transit tax, instead of the two elections
previously required. Whilc the city would not be ablc to become a member ofDART lllltil the tax is actually collected, city leaders could sit at the plan1ling table when critical decisions
may be made. Additionally, to protect bond repayment for which much of the cxisting tax: is dcdicated, the bill allows cities to delay the effective date ofjoining the transportation
authority until bond debt has been satisfied. Appointed to the board by the City ofPlano in 1996, Pope, who has bccn chair for nearly two years, said one ofllis highest priorities was
to help develop and implcmcnt a plan for the rcgionaltran5it system, "We wenlta Austin early and asked legislators from our area what their top ten issl1es werc,anc.ltransportation was
not one of them," Pope said. "I don't know what happened, but transpOltation hll$ become a very important issue. Ifwc don't comc up with a plan before the next session, we might have
somcthing forced on llS." 􀁾􀁾 Pope said that, while the Regional Transportation Council has developed a rcgienal rail plan through 2025, DART is limited by its current boundaries. The
point ofprimary interest to Collin residents, Pope said, includes the cxtension ofthe Parker ROlld Station in Plano and the Cross-Town COllidor, which will likely utilize thc Cotton
Belt or another rail alternative. Tho Cross-Town expansion proposes extension ofthe Burlington-Northern rail from Carrollton, through west Plano into Frisco, Prosper and Celina. Pope
added that the current plan was not dcvelopcd beyond DART's boundaries, but that future planning has now become a necessity. Pope produced a map that included staged rail from Parker
Road into MeKinney and commuter rail through Frisco up to U.S. 380 near Prosper. "Our build-out plan will be complcte about 2015," Pope said. "We've started looking at what comes after
that. It is time we take our plan and look down the road, so we are preparing our 2030 plan." Pope said that 2030 plan provides a glimpse at what might be in the works if DART had no
boundaries. The potential plan shows a commuter rail from Parker , Road Station to McKinncy. Pope, in answer to questions regarding ex:pansion even J further north, said DART is being
pressed to envision service as far as Sherman. According to Pope, the 13 cities cU1Tently members ofDART are understandably opposcd to paying for development outside areas that will
be to their direct bencfit. Blue Ridge Mayor Fran Slater askcd about the potential of "Park and Ride" facilities in the unincorporated areas. Pope said that there wcre a number ofviable
options available for the citics as DART looks to the future. The mayors agreed that the future oftransportation in Texas hinges largely on the quick and sllccessful development of an
effectivc rail system.
....}.. Allen eager for mass transit but isn't.sure 110W to get itStaff'grapbic such as Carrollton do notyet have rail servioebut continue to pay ioto the system. Another alternative
would resemble. an agreement between DART and Grayson County, where a bus transports people to the Plano DARTstation. . .E-mail 􀁳􀁣􀁨􀁡􀁶􀁥􀁺􀁀􀁾􀁡􀁳􀁮􀁥􀁷􀁳􀀮􀁣􀁯􀁭 Pope said the city,
could team up with McKinney and other cities to build a commuter rail line. A train would then transport pe0ple to the nearest light-rail station in Plano. Such a plan could help the
city avoid waiting 10 or more years for a light rail line, Mr. Vargas said. Current DART member cities -_._..􀁟􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀺
􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀽􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀽􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀽􀀺􀀻􀂭 DART ATAGLANCE Sentce area: 13 cities. 700 square miles 2003 operatJog budget $305.7 million 2002 systemwide rkIonblp; 93,8 million
passenger trips Number of b.... 􀁾􀁮􀁤􀀮􀁤􀁥􀁳 trolle,,}: 897 Nwnber of bus stlIps: 11.961 A....􀁧􀁯􀁾􀁢􀁬􀁉􀁳􀁲􀁬􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁨􀁬􀁰􀀺122.826 (February 2003) Number.' IIg11t·..Utrains: 95
length of UglltoJllIsystem: 44 miles Numberofstltkm:34 , A....go_,IIg11t·rIJI _Ip: 55.151 (February 2003) , DIeseI ......utertraln fleet 13 rail diesel cars, 4 locomotives, 10 coaches,
􀁾 4 cab cars lefIgth 0' line: 34 miles 􀁾 Number of_lIS: 9 : A....go_'""""",,,-ridership: 7.666 (February 2003) Miles of blgh.....,."" ..blcle lanes: 31 Awengeweelda,trIps: 100,000
(January 2003) i SOUllCE:Oa1IaSAreeRapit:ITnIlM CrmtinuEdfrom Page IB suburbs. Allen has chosen to dedicate 1 percent of its sales tax to economic and community development rather than
joining DART. But with its population rapidly growing, some city officials now say that mass transit is no longeran option, butanecessi·· ty. Eyes on Legislature While the city is eager
to resolve the issue, City Manager Peter Vargas said a decision about whether to join DART wouldn't happen quickly. Several bills that would affect mass transportation are pending in
the' Legislature, and Mr. Vargas said many cities, including Allen, are awaiting the outcomeofthose bills. Onebill would give cities more flexibility in how they spend their sales-tax
revenue. Now, cities can l'!"Yal percent sales tax to finance !liecity's general fund and anothef 1percent toward transit or ceoDomicdevelopment, butnotboth. : :In AlIen's case, half
of that 1 percent goes to the city's economic development corporation 'and \he other half to the AlIen Com!"unity DeVelopment Colp., which focuses on parks and other i-el:reational projects.
; • Some leaders say they want to ableto divvyuptbemoueyhilw , ,secefit. ," ", , ,. "",' For exumple;J'j>e1'eent'ooul4' toward mass transit Wbl1e the Q er percent'would,be divided" 􀁯􀁯􀁧􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁧􀁥􀁮
􀁾􀁦􀁵􀁩􀀡􀁤􀀬􀁥􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁮􀀭􀀻 : 􀁤􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁴􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀡 "We need;i 􀁾􀁶􀁥􀀧􀁗􀁡􀁹􀁩􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁾 said council' member Sus8D !'D'"y. Arm hoping'we'Can put a'i'II\Y to do,itthat's not:
: the detriment of the EDC 8¥d :: because they Illll the m..son.' , en is.where itis toda,y." , " 􀁍􀁩􀁩􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁓􀁴􀁵􀀮􀁤􀁹􀁾 Aside from pending bills, AlaI$o is waiting on 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁾􀁵􀁬􀁴􀁳􀀨􀁬􀁦
dy by the North Central 'Iex-, Council of Goven>ments. In 2 01, Allen, Frisco and McKln-, D asked the council to study 􀁾􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 options.Thestudy 􀁾 supposed to have been
compteled by March 1, but city 􀁯􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁾 􀁾say they haven't recei,ved it y . , 'At a meeting Friday with the en ChamberofCorume=, Mr. , SeeALLEN Pag< 6B Allen weighs trallsit (}Io/Ii
't -;l6 􀀮􀁾􀁊 Funding still a hurdle for city officials as they consider DART option By STELLA M. cHAVEZ StaB'Writer Three or four times a week Brad Rothbauer boards a train at the
Parker Road station in Plano for a 2()..minute ride to Texas Instruments in Richardson. 􀂷􀁍􀁲􀁾 Rothbauer,· aIf Allen" resident, says his commute would he easier ifhe didn't have to
drive to a neighhoringcityto catch aride on the Dallas AreaRapid 'Iransit system. "I'd love it ifit expanded up into Allen and there was a station we could drive to there,· he said.
Allen officials say they, too, would welcome a rail system, so residents could use it instead of hattling traffic on Central Expressway. But the city faces a hig question -bow to implement
such a system. Should the cityjoin DART or come up with a mass transit alternative? DART chairman Robert W. Pope said Fridaythat the agency is eagertohaveAllenjoin its system hut he
also mentioned other 􀁰􀁯􀁳􀁾 sibilities that would not require the city to join. Mr. Pope said DART and nonmember cities need to come up with a mass transit solution before the Legislature
passes a bill that no one might favor."They can dictate things that none of us will like; he said. "We've gotto address [mass transit] regionally." In recent weeks, DART and AlIen officials
have discussed options that include commuter rail. An AlIen task force appointed last month to study mass transit is working to answer questions such as how the city could pay for rail
service and whatthe best solution is for transportation needs. Allen residents said in a survey that they favor mass transit, but they don't agree on how it should be financed. Uke several
other
DaUasHews.com ft.l)t jDnJIa,S iI.ornillg 􀁬􀁴􀁴􀁾 Bill will give Allen nlore transit options City could join DART and still keep development boards 05/31/2003 By STELLA M. CHAVEZ1The
Dallas Morning News A bill that could help Allen in its effort to add mass transit service is awaiting the governor's signature to become law. Allen officials say the bill, which would
allow cities to keep their community development and economic development boards and still join a regional transportation authority, gives the city some flexibility in addressing its
transportation needs. "It allows the city options that they did not have before," said Marina Sukup, Allen's director of planning and development. "Up to now, there has been a prohibition
[from joining DART and keeping both boards], and now they've taken that prohibition away." Currently, cities can levy a 1 percent sales tax to finance the city's general fund and another
1 percent toward transit or economic-community development but not both. In Allen, the second cent is equally divided between economic and community development. But under a bill approved
by the Senate on Thursday, the city could split that second cent among the general fund, economic development and community development. That would enable the city to dedicate its first
1 percent sales tax to Dallas Area Rapid Transit. Ms. Sukup and several staffmembers have been charged with researching the city's transportation options. City officials have said they
would like to provide some form of mass transportation, but how they go about it remains uncertain. In a survey, residents also said they favored mass transit. The city is also considering
other options. Ms. Sukup said the city is looking at the possibility of providing commuter rail service rather than light rail. Another consideration is whether the city could participate
in a regional transit authority separate from DART. In any case, she said it's too early to know whether residents would be voting on the issue anytime soon. "There's a lot ofwork to
do, and the City Council and city manager want to approach it cautiously," she said. E-mail schavez@dallasnews.com Online at: http://www.dallasnews.comJlocalnews/city/collin/stories/053103dnccoallend
art.210b6.html
,.,.....", ......' •••••• •••• ••••• $ .'f • •••••• • \lj< NORTH TEXAS COMMISSION IlLIlLDING Tin KlCI(l"l OF CliOICl Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex Increases in Resident and Outbound Workforce
1990 -2000 Total Resident Increase 247,336 Total Outbound Increase 242,274 Parker County Resident 5,617 Outbound 6,178 Duree: U.S. Census Bureau (2003) ompiled by: North Texas Commission
(3{03) 􀁾􀁾􀀢 Denton County Resident 37,752 Outbound 46,883 Collin County Resident 63,706 Outbound 56,122 Hunt County Resident 264 Outbound 5,450 .ockwall County Resident 3,337 Outbound
4,774 Henderson County Resident 2,707 Outbound 4,398
IIil •• oil> e••• ••• ••• <t•e••• •.•.,•;; • •••••• • '" NORTH TEXAS COMMISSION IWILDING HIE IUCION Of ellOreE Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex Regional Commute Patterns Resident Workforce
71% Outbound Workforce 29% Parker 41% 49% Denton 44%7% Tarrant 76% Johnson 42% 5% 19% 6% Collin 49% 5%Dallas 87%41% Kaufman 43% 5% Henderson 55% Percent shown within county boundaries
represents resident workforce in that county. Lines correlate to county color and represent outbound workforce to commute destination in other counties. Source: U.S. census Bureau (2003)
Compiled by: North Texas Commission (3/03) 􀁾􀁾
.. .IZ.i•.••••_•.li.l ••. -•• ,-"tI.·. .-. 􀀮.􀀮􀁾 ••• o Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex Resident and Outbound Workforce 1990 -2000 Hunt County 1990 2000 20,806 21,070 7,490 12,940 7 2 NORTH
TEXAS COMMISSION BUILDING HIE KEelON Of CIIOIC( Resident Workforce 1,806,134 ---Outbound Workforce 721,514 Parker County 1990 2000 11,057 16,674 18,179 24,357 Denton County 1990 2000
65,846 103,598 85,191 132,074 Johnson County 1990 2000 19,473 24,743 24,495 33,650 Collin County 1990 2000 64,565 128,271 79,208 135,330 Kaufman County 1990 2000 10,756 13,981 11,46518,723
Rockwall County 1990 2000 3,858 7,195 9,248 14,022 Henderson County 1990 2000 13,13915,846 8,714 13,112 50urce: U.S. Census Bureau (2003) :ompiled by: North Texas Commission (3/03) 􀁾'X)
. , --􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀬􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 -.. _----:-;:-:-.;:--_. __ ... In 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁩􀁤􀁊􀁏􀁃􀁫 􀁤􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀢􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀡􀀺􀀡􀁾􀁾􀁵􀁥􀀬􀁲 I 􀁾 Driving the issue is gridlock on Dallas-! us,"
,FortWorth highways, a shortage of fund-Planners hope to create a 􀁳􀁭􀁾􀁬􀁥 􀁡􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁹 ing and the area's non-conformance with to oversee development of pubhc raJ I ,md the 1990 Clean
Air Act amendments. By bus 􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 in a six-county Nonh 2007, the region must meet standards set Texas regIon. The 􀁍􀁾􀁴􀁲􀁯􀁰􀁬􀁥􀁸 􀁾􀁉􀁬􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁤􀁹 has by the
law or risk losing millions in fedthree separate transit agencies: Dallas eral highway dollars, Area Rapid Tmnsil; the Fort Worth Trans-A.regional rail corridor study now portation Authority;
and the recently under wav is considered a key to solving furmed Denton County Transit Authority. the 􀁲􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁯􀁬􀁾􀁡􀁬 transit problem. Afundarnen-The issue uf a regional transit authori-tal
􀁰􀁲􀁾􀁬􀀱􀀱􀁩􀁳􀁥 of the study is efficient land ty proved controversial during the 78th use and "sustainable development," legislative session, when lawmakers which envisions people
living close to
􀁾􀁾 ON THE RIGHT UNE.: The Trinity Railway Express, right, already links stations served by the Dallas Area Rapid Transit light-rail network with downtown Fort Worth. "A 0° Rai/roads
N N Roadway Rail corridors _AirpOrts under SlUdy /rCounty lines Legend .' 􀁾 j);2+ I I 􀁾􀀮 I 􀀭􀁉􀁾 􀂷􀁟􀀮􀀬􀁡􀁲􀁲􀁡􀁭􀀢􀀧􀀶􀁕􀁾 ,.",.. Contlct: DB) writer 􀁍􀁡􀁲􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁴 Allen at mallen@bizjournals
.comor(214) 706·7119. hearings scheduled through early fall wm enable NCfCOO, the consultants and the committees to assess community reaction to commuter rail. where rail stations are
required and the commercial and residential development needed around Slations. When completed, NCTCOG can apply to the Federal Transit Adminislration's "New Starts Program" for federal
funding for the system. d.lI,s.b/zjou,".'S.CO", 􀀧􀀺􀁉􀁾􀀢 Buun.,:_􀁊􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀧􀁶􀁾􀀮 􀁊􀁕􀀧􀁙􀀬􀁾􀁬􀀭􀀱􀀷􀀮 2003 1 1 _f.,\f5.!$\. 􀀧􀁾􀀢 􀀧􀁾􀁻􀀬􀀺􀁩􀀢􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀺􀁻􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀮􀂷􀂷􀁤􀀮􀀧􀁉􀁬􀁾􀀮􀀳􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁩􀀢�
�􀂷􀀧 ' III ,; Dallas area; Atlanla-based Manuel Padron & Associates Inc., revenue and costs; Fort Worth-based InterSrar Marketing & Public Relations, public panicipation; Bloomington,
III.-based DunbarT....nsportation Con· sulting. feasibility, travel markets and planning services; and California-based Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (NYSE: JEC), railroad coordination.
Six "policy" and "technical" committees were fonned to lead what Morris en· visions as a grassroots process. Each committee will have 20 10 30 members. Public .,here they work and shop.
The traditional pany's DalIas office. model called for fliclories on one Side of The sllidy1akes a look· at eigilJ existiDg town and homes ontheother;· . 􀀢􀂷􀀢􀁾􀂷􀀭􀂷􀀢􀀧􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀺􀁦􀁲􀁥􀁊􀁩􀁢􀁬􀀧􀁴�
�􀁩􀁬􀀧 . 'corridors' identified' by "The region can't swtain itself in the' NCTCOO iri Dallas, Collin, 􀁔􀁨􀁭􀁭􀁾 Denlraditional mold," said Morris, noting that Ion; Johnson and Ellis
counties.,NCfCOG legislators are no longer willing 10 boost· has said a regional rail system could cany taxes 10 pay for cOstly bighway consiruc-58,000 riders a day. tion, and that "the
public will never toler-Through a process of publiC bearings, ate paving the region." NCTCOG and its hired consultants will One of those continuing to lead the determine when and how
corridors should charge is well-known community leader be developed for commuter mil, light rail and Dallas businessman Walt Humann, a: and bus service; the cost for each corridor; staunch
advocale ofa regional approach 10 the priority corridors; a development timetransportation. line; and the development of adjacent real Humann has met during the past few estate for efficient
land use. weeks with executives from DAlIT; the T, "We can no longer continue 10 build DCfA and the chambers of commerce more and more lanes of highways and from various cities to taIIc
about forming freeways," Sheltoo said. ''There gets to be the regional ttanspoItati0ll8llthority. a point.ofdiminishing returns. It's not jwt ·We need to get 10.work now," Humann money.
But we physically cannot buildthe said. In April, he was among a handful of highway lanes fast enough 10 alleviate the Metroplex officials testifying in Austin congestiOIL" against HB
2953. The bill-sponsored by Many options are being considered and Rep. Steve Wolens, D-DalIas, to create a wiD be presented, he said For· example, it regional transportation autbority
-was might be that freight and commuter rail criticized widely in Northlewfor its lack 1ines could opemte on shared track; or that of local input. the commuter track might be bui1t inside
"We almost lost regional authority 10 existing rights of way and opemte alongthe slate in the last legislative sesSion," side.freight lines. Humann said. "We bad a lot ofintemicene With
Ihree lnlIIsit ageacies already in warfare. We didn't have our net together. p\ace, Sheltoo said the region wants to "II'S time for us to work logether as a avoid competing with itselffor
tight federunited front because we only have 400 al dollars. days left." '"Ihe first hunlle has been clcaRd," he The 18-month, $1.5 million Regional said "Everyone realizes we have a
probRail Corridor Study was commissioned by lem on a regional basis and that it needs to NCTCOG 10 come up with solutions. Fort be addressed" Worlh.\lased Carter & Burgess Inc. is a
Besides Carter & Burgess, which is lead consultant. handling the western subregion roules, The project is just now getting under consultants bired to help are San Francisway in 􀁥􀁡􀁭􀁥􀁳􀁾
said Tom Shelton, project co-based URS Corp. (NYSB: URS), lead director for Carter & Bwgess in the com-COnsultant, eastern subregion routes in the
June 6-12,2003 -Dallas Buslne.. Journal -dallas.bizjournals.com 4aI4b bill paves way to divert funds for'transit. Contact DBJ Tarrant/Denton editor Michael Whiteley at mwhitele)@bizjournals.com
or (817) 693-0023. way for a regional transit system. Brock plans to ask Denton voters to approve a half-cent"for the transit system and says the city would have to give up the sales
tax money pledged previously to reduce ad valorem taxes. In Frisco, Jim Gandy, president of the Frisco Economic Development Corp., said the city won't be giving up its 4a and 4b money,
Among the projects credited with help from 4a/4b money is the new $300 million Frisco sports complex that includes the new minor-league ballpark for the Frisco RoughRiders, a new headquarters
and training facility for the Dallas Stars, an Embassy Suites Hotel and a 100,000square-foot convention center. Frisco is not a member of DART, which requires a full penny of sales tax
from each of its cities. "I think there's some interest in planning for mass-transit services in Frisco for the future," Gandy said. Charisse Reaume, executive director of the Allen
Economic Development Corp.. said her city is discussing mass transit but can't afford to sacrifice its 4a and 4b corporations. "We're still young enough that we need both of these corporations,"
Reaume said. "What we're saying is, 'Let us decide where the penny comes from.' We haven't decided on the mechanics." HELPING HAND: Jim Gandy, president of the Frisco Economic Development
Corp., at Frisco's new sports complex, which was built with the help of 4a/4b funds. The city plans to keep those funds intact. the concept of a bus and rail system last fall, will be
able to vote in September on whether to spcnd up to a full penny of sales tax for the system. North Texas lawmakers also moved to guarantee that existing transit systems won't be affected
by the new mobility authorities. The 4a allll 4b taxes have been targets following complaints that the funds were misspent to attract new business. Shapiro said those reports had proved
unfounded, but the idea of diverting some of that money to transit encountered no opposition. "llhink it's available and I think it's a coopcrati ve arrangement," she said. Shapiro,
Humann and others, however, say no cities in the Metroplex have announced plans to hold an election. Denton Mayor Euline Brock, recently named to head the Metroplex Mayors Association,
said the bill does pave the transportation." Hopes for a regional transit system were lost in a battle over a more thomy problem -regional mobility authorities. which can create toll
roads and issue bonds for highways -in the House Transportation Committee. But Sen. Florence Shapiro. R-Plano, passed SB 972. which allows cities now collecting up to a half-cent of
sales tax each for 4a and 4b to hold an election at which a majority of voters could decide to divert some or all of that money to public transit. The bill also would allow cities such
as Fort Worth to convert the tax they now spend on crime districts and other special taxing units after holding an election. In addition, Rep. Burt Solomons. RCarrollton, and Sen. Jane
Nelson, RFlower Mound. pushed through legislation, HB 3017, guaranteeing that voters in Denton County cities, who approved By MICHAEL WHITELEY Tarrant/Denton. Editor GREATER METROPLEX
-In a session buffeted by party bickering and mired for months in a $9.9 billion sea of red ink, efforts launched by Dallas and Fort Worth to forge a regional transit system sank early
o 0 3 and never resurfaced. But sponsors of a plan to revive the 23-year-old push for a concept once known as the Lone Star Transit Authority did spark hope of a little help from the
state's embattled 4a/4b economic development sales talles and an assurance that the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority, the Fort Worth Transportation Authority and the new Denton County
Transit Authority will survive as separate entities. Walt Humann, the Hunt Oil Co. ellecutive who spearheaded the drive for a regional transit system, said that is all he hoped for.
"This has really been a wild and mercurial session," Humann said. ·"The good news is, (since) we started talking about this now a lot of people are seeing the need for regional cooperation
in Cities c.an now hold elections to convert tax money 􀁾􀁾
i I Apnl 25-May 1, 2003 • Dall.. Bualnep Journal • dallas.bizjournals.com 4a14b study shows millions still available The bill, filed by Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, also allows voters
to delay the effect ofthe conversion until the cities payoff bond debts incurred from 4a and 4b projects. I Humann said he supports Shapiro's i bill, but also is pushing to let cities
vote 10 I pop the state sales-tax cap and spend more on regionaltransil. "You'll find that many of those cities have long-tenn debt and would not be allowed into the system untilthey've
paid off the debt," Humann said. Of 31 cities surveyed in Dallas County, only six chaIge less than the two cents of local sales tax that the state allows them to chaIge. Fourteen ofthe
30 Collin County cities have room left to tax. In Tanant, where the Fort Wonh Transportation Authority runs on tax money from only four cities, 14 of the total 37 have sales tax money
left. In Denton County, 23 of the 40 towns have room left to tax. Voters in the cities of Denton Denton County will decide in September whether to contribute one-founh cent to the newly
created Denton County Transportation Authority, which is planning its own bus and rail system. Humann's plan would merge the new entity with both DARTand The T. o McKinney, for example,
is capped but '1 predicted to grow from 75,000 to 225.000 by the year 2030. Joe lliss, the city's senior long-range planner, said McKinney I!s not aDARTmember and is considering I Il.S
options. I "We have 4a and 4b and we can ecr· [tainly point to things Ihatthe city's doing that are successes and are popular," iii" said. ''We're just in the beginning stages oflooking
at public tnlllsportation. As we grow, public l(ansponation will be an ill-Icreasing pan of what we do here in McKinney." IContact DBlTarranVDenton editor MIchael Whiteley at mwhllele)'@b!ziOumals.co
mor(817) 693-Q023. 􀁾􀁏􀁧􀁤􀁥􀁮 The cities all charge an additional penn)' for general revenue. The state imposes a 6.25% tax and caps the total at 8.25%. In all, Humann said, the taxes
comprise a base of $41.5 billion. The study also shows !hat if all !he cities in !he Metroplex not now participating in Dallas Area Rapid Transit kicked in a penny for regional transit,
the take would exceed $2 J8 million. Humann released the analysis this week as the Senate Infrasuucture Development and Security Committee passed SB 972, which would allow local referendums
among Metroplex cities to conven 4a and 4b tax money to regionallI1UJsit In addition, cities such as Fort Wonh could convert tax money from crime and other special districts. Call to
leadership Call your city's mayor. Ask himor her to take the lead in convening a regional summit to discuss creating a unified and integral public transit system. Urge your city council
to vote for membership. Ask your legislators to build support for enabling cities to collect the taxes that would be necessary tojoin. The key eontacts are: * Dallas MayorLaura Miller,
214-670-4054 E-mail (via Web site): http://www.dallascityhall. com* FortWorth MayorMike Moncrief, 817-871-6118 E-mail: mike.moncrief @fortworthgov.org * Rep. Mike Kmsee, R-Round Rock,
chairman of tlle Transportation Committee, 512-463-0670 E-mail: mike.krusee @house.state.tx.us *Sen, Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, chairman ofthe Infrastructure Development and Security Committee,
512-463-0105 E-mail: steve.ogden @senate.state.tx.us But more needs to be done. The region's mayors and county executives should hold a public transit summit, perhaps as part of the
sixth annual Texas Transportation Summit that Irving will host in August. They should agree on the importance of a unified public transit system and work together to sell the idea to
their constituencies. And they should collaboratively explore belter funding mechanisms than that proposed by Mr. Wolens, such 'IS Mr. Humann's goodidea ofasking the Legislature to allow cities to charge a 1 perC!'nt sales ta, for public transit regardless ofwhether they have reached the cap set bylaw. Camoutlage iII becomes a place
with DallasFort WOlth's high aspirations. In the realm of public transit, the region needs to think solid shades. forge a consolidaled network of bus and rai I through Collin, Dallas,
Denton and Tarrant counlies, released a study this week showing that 32 cities in !he region levy an economic development sales tax HUMANN: under section 4a of the Wants sales-tax tax
codes and 70 cities cap lifted impose a 4b tax. Section 4a allows cities to collect as much as a half-penny oftax to finance projects related to manufacturing and industrial development,
job training and educational facilities. The 4b tax can be used for recreation and civic facilities, road and bridge improvements and libraries. Crazy Qu􀁾􀀱i􀀧􀁩l􀁦􀀬􀁁t􀀯 ·? ;L -03
Transit map shouldn't have blank areas A·shade-coded map of cities belonging to Dallas-Fort Worth's several public transit 􀁡􀁧􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁩􀁾􀁳 would resemble nothing so much as hunter's
camouflage, with the dark areas in Dallas Area Rapid Transit, the light areas in the Fort Worth Transportation Authority and the gray areas in the still-gestating Denton County Transportation
Authority. But the map also would have many blank areas because, believe it or not, more ofthe region's eities don't belong to a transit agency than do. For example, DART comprises only
Dallas, Plano, Richardson and 10 others. The Fort Worth '''I comprises only Fort Worth, Lake Worth and Richland Hills. The Denton County Transportation Authority is so new that it doesn't
even own any buses or trains. In a public transit sense, such major cities as Arlington and Duncanville, Grand Prairie and DeSoto are, to paraphrase the Elizabethan poet John Donne,
"islands, entire ofthemselves." It shouldn't be this way. The map should be a seamless whole, every city, in Mr. Donne's words, "a piece of the continent, a part of the main."The region
should not be allowed to fall into the motley collection of "transportation haves and have-nots" that local public transit Dvisionary Walter Humann ,', foresees unless something is .'.
done to prevent it. , 􀀮􀁾􀀮 . There should be one effi-.,: ,. cient and highly flexible pub-, .::,' 􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀧 lic transit system to which all . cities belong and contribute. Such a system
would be hugeWalterHumann ly beneficial. By providing more opportunities for people to ride trains and buses, it would reduce highway congestion and air pollution. It would improve transportation
planning. It would raise more tax revenUe to build a bigger and better public transit system and improve the region's ability to secure federal transit funds. The region's leaders need
to cooperate to make the dream ofa unified public transit system become a reality. Some leaders already are stepping fonl'ard. For exanlple, Mr. Humann has been trying to persuade DART
and the "T" to make greater common Cause. State Rep. Steve Wolens, D-Dllllas, proposed a bill that died for lack ofsupport that would have funded a regional mobility authority by charging
tolls on existing highways. State Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, gained passage ofher bill to allow cities to dedicate a percentage of their sales ta, to public transit after they finish
paying certain bond debts. Denton cities have most potential to pay for regional transit system By MICHAEL WHITELEY Tarranl/Denton Editor GREATER METROPLEX -Targeti ng a tax base that
could generate an extra $218.6 million to launch the region's first mass transit system, the system's chiefpromoter is warning that efforts to tum 4a and 4b sales tax money into fuel
may bog down in long-tenn debt. Hunt Oil Co. executive Walt Humann. who was tapped by the mayors of Dallas and Fort Wonh last fall to head efforts to Jo
Saturday, June 28, 2003 ------_._._--------, Agenda We recommend that all perti. nent parties agree; • That the traffic/pollution problem is the region's most significant challenge.
• To meet monthly, With regular progress reports, to create a North Texas Regional Transit Authority. • To build consensus for the Authority's funding, governance and structure. • To
complete this task by August 2004. EDITORIAlS Irving􀁊􀁬􀁊􀀧􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 North Texas can't refuse transit summit 􀁾􀁾 . 'J> 􀁾􀀮 􀁾 􀁾 . c::: ::l ... '" III m 2 003 I' ITwo regional mobility
\autbority bills crash \. .jJ1J:l ? .􀁾 '.(3 II ... Strong local opposition ist.ing tollway authorities." .􀁍􀁣􀁾􀁡􀁲􀁬􀁥􀁹 , S31d. "Our area was not seekmg It. The \ may have helped
kill regional mobility legislation 􀁾􀁡􀁳 􀁾􀁯􀁲 II . I t' other areas around the state, pnmarlly egIs a IOn Central Texas." . Besides the Dallas Regional Mobility , 8y MARGARET ALLEN
Coalition, opponents to the bills includ-􀁾􀀡􀁃􀁬􀁦􀁦 Writer ed county judges in four counties and i ··GREATER METROPlEX -Local government mayors and council members of numer-.\ and
transportation 'leaders are breathing OUS cities in those counties. Fourteen of a sigh of relief 15 members of the Dallas City Council knowing two went on record opposing the bill, with
bills touting a only Wolens' wife. Dallas Mayor Laura new regional mo-Miller. supporting it. bility authority The opponents charged Brimer and died a quiet death Wolens had moved ahead
without develthis session. oping any regional consensus for the HB 2953, tiled by Rep. Steve Wolens, bills. Critics said a new entity: D-Dallas, and SB 1558, filed by Sen. • Would add
anotherlayer of bureau-Kenneth Brimer, R-Fort Worth, were cracy; broadly written to create governance and • Duplicate the four-county North funding for highway and public transit Texas
Tollway Authority; rail projects in Dallas. Tarrant, Collin. • Wrongly assume toll roads would I Denton, Parker and Rockwall counties. solve funding problems; The bills, which their
authors conced-• Could tangle debt payments and fued were sparse on details. would also ture revenue bond issues; and have granted authority to build new toll • Place area toll rouds
under the Texas roads as well as convert existing free-Department of Transportation. rather ways to toll roads to fund transit pro-than NTTA. which was created to gain ! jects. local
control. It was a relicf to sce thc bills calling Local govcrnment ortldals banded .for a North Texas Regional Mobility Au-together to voice their opposition. thority rail. said Jamcs
McCarley. execu-Brimer ultimately allowcd his hill (0 die tive director or the Dallas Regional Mo-quietly without a hearing in thc Senate's bility Coal.ilion. The coalition's mem-Infrastructurc
Developmcnt und Securibel'S arc clectcd officials rrom the ti.ve ty Committee. counties of Dallas. Denton, Collm. Wo!ens. however. pushcd on, and his Rockwall and Ellis. as well as 26
cities in bill had a hearing bcforc the House those counties. Transportation Committee, where nu-"Certainly we didn'l want it to go merou.S representatives from Dallas, Fort anywhere
in the form it was submitted," Worth and other cities and counties testiMcCarlcy said. He cited 􀁾B 3588, tied against the bill. Only onc person teswhich did pass the seSSion, which
allows titied in fuvor of the bill. then-Fort Worth 􀁣􀁯􀁵􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁥􀁾 to create a regional mobility au-Mayor Kenneth Barr. The bill was not thonty It they so dcslre. voted out of committee.
"If a county or counties want to form one to do a transit or tollway authority, it Contact OBi woler Margaret Allen at would have to reach agreement with ex-mallen@bizjournals.comor(214)706·7119.
until they devise a solution that includes funding, governance and 􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁵􀁣􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁾􀀮 They would adopt a timeline leading to the 2004 general elections so that support for a regional
transit authority could become an issue in political campaigns. The region is fortunate to have two very good public transit agencies, Dallas Area Rapid 'Il'ansit and the Fort Worth
Transportation Authority. A third -the Denton County Transportation Authority -is preparing to be born. But the shocking reality is that more ofthe region's cities belong to no transit
agency than do. That shouldn't be. Everyone is harmed by air pollution. Everyone loses from highway gridlock. Every city in North Texas will suffer if the federal government imposes
economic sanctions for the state's failure to develop an adequate plan for· cleaning the air. A regional transit agency would eliminate redundancies and lower costs. It would be a more
attractive magnet for federal public transit subsidies than the current balkanized arrangement. It would ensure that everyone contributes, that no one freeloads. Residents ofDallas-Fort
Worth's more than 200 cities and counties should contact their mayors and city managers and urge them to pledge Irving their encouragement and support. The moment is propitious to launch
the discussion. Irving is nobly offering to provide the venue, to be a kind of Switzerland in a continent of antipathetic powers. The least its neighbors could do is attend in a spirit
of mutual solidarity. The city of Irving has an offer that its fellow North Texas cities can't refuse. • The offer is to host a regional public transit summit on the margins of its sixth
annual Texas Transportation Summit in mid-August . There are no strings attached. Irving isn't conditioning its offer on the construction of a commuterrail station or intercitybus terminal.
Its motive wouldwarm the heart ofanydevotee of Adam Smith, David Ricardo or Milton Friedman: enlightened self-interest. In Irving's correct estimation, a less congested, less polluted,
more cooperative metropolitan area would create a better Irving. Arising highway entrance· ramp lifts all vehicles, one might say. .It isn't Irving's intention to hold everyone until
rising white smoke indicates that they've agreed on a plan to· combine their brains and wealth for the common good. On the contrary, its expectations for the summit are modest. The participants
-every jurisdiction from Allen to Wylie -would sign a protocol affirming that the lack ofa unified regional transit authority is one oftheir biggest problems, that they need to solve
it together and that certain disinterested and yet-to-be-detennined private organizations would be part ofthe process. The participants would agree that it is infinitely better for them
to solve the region's traffic and air pollution problems by themselves than for the state or federal governments to impose a solution on them. They would agree to meet regularly -say,
once a month -and to compile regular progress reports. They would agree to keep meeting I􀁾 ..........
Mayors want to improve rapport By Eva-Marie Ayala Star-Telegram Dallas Bureau STAR-TELEGRAM/STEWARTF. HOUSE 􀁊􀀺􀀮􀀩􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁳􀀻􀀻􀁦􀀡􀁬􀁡􀁙􀁏􀁲􀀬 􀁬􀁀􀁹􀀬􀁲􀁡􀁍􀁩􀁵􀁾􀁰􀀺􀁱􀀺􀁥􀁬􀁨􀁦􀁾􀁴􀀤􀀻􀀬􀁨􀀷􀁾
􀀧􀀻􀀧􀀢 ' 􀁩􀁾􀁡􀀬􀁵􀁧􀁊􀁊􀁲􀁡􀁬 􀁾􀁤􀁤􀁲􀁥􀁳􀁳􀀢􀁍􀁯􀁮􀁤􀁡􀁹.􀀮􀀮􀁳􀁨􀁾􀀧 􀀨􀀩􀀱􀁩􀁉􀁾􀁊􀁾􀁮􀁥􀀨􀁌􀁨􀂢􀁲 ' 􀀹􀀨􀀱􀀩􀁡􀁬􀁾􀀼􀁦􀀹􀁴􀁴􀀡􀁊􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁬􀁔􀁬􀁩 􀁩􀁑􀁬􀀺􀁉􀀬􀀢􀀬􀁉􀀡􀀡􀁀􀀺􀁲􀀻􀁾􀁾
' ' 􀁴􀁩􀀡􀀧􀀡􀁾􀀢􀀺 " . rtll 􀁗􀁩􀁕􀀺􀁗􀁾􀁛 .. DALLAS -Fort Worth and Dallas have shared a relationship akin to two feuding neighbors, leading a Cowtown restaurant to sell T-shirts
reading, "Life is too short to live in Dallas." Lately, though, those relations have grown warmer. After taking the oath of office Monday, Dallas Mayor Laura Miller began her first full
term by outlining goals to make her city shine and to build on a budding friendship with her neighbor to the west. "I want Dallas and Fort Worth to work together as one on the important
issues of air quality, transportation, education, international trade and in the the selling and marketing of the Metroplex as a dynamic, culturally magnificent, famously hospitable,
ethnically diverse destination location for our country," she said in a speech after she was sworn in. Fort Worth Mayor Mike Moncrief, who attended Monday's ceremony, said that he and
Miller will work to change the "feud" mentality of many of the cities' residents. "We need to eliminate not only the solid line, but the dotted line that has been between our cities,"
he said. Miller and Arlington Mayor Robert Cluck attended Moncriefs swearing-in May 20. On June 19, Moncrief, Miller, Cluck and Denton Mayor Euline Brock plan to meet in Arlington for
what they hope will be the first of regular meetings. Cluck attended Monday's ceremony and said he hopes creating a regional transportation system and improving air quality will be among
the first issues tackled by the mayors. "None of us can do it alone. We have to all work together," Cluck said. Among other initiatives Miller said she plans to implement in Dallas are
a job task force, a business adoption program for parks, and a faith-based coalition to help with a future homeless intake facility and with the relocation of residents in the Cadillac
Heights neighborhood whose houses are being bought by the city. Miller said she wants to see construction begin in the next two years on the first signature bridge and recreational lake
as part of the Trinity River corridor plan. Councilman Ed Oakley will be chairman of the new Trinity River Committee aimed at moving the project forward. Voters approved the project
in 1998. "' ... " ,,'
The project's goal is to get all the cltles to ap:eo QJI a plan in the neXt 18 montru." 'I'ben the plllIl'could be presented to the Legislature for aPProval in 2005. Some of the trains
could be ruIIDint: by 2008-11,. while 0thers probably wouldn't be oper 􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁄􀁧􀁵􀁮􀁴􀁩􀁬􀁭􀁵􀁣􀁨􀁾 lla1l Jines IDoSt likely to be built titst Include all extension of the '1):inity
􀁒􀁡􀁩􀁬􀀮􀁾􀁾 Intel SouthM:st Fort'Worth and the Cotton Belt line connecting downtown Fort Worth to the north end of nollas/Fort Worth Akport.. . . BedfOfd reSldent]iD1 􀁾􀁢􀁣􀁲􀀮 who
u..e,·Metroplex l'reeways daily.tomaR sales calls fOl' his 􀁴􀁥􀁾􀁣􀁡􀁬 staf/ing business. belleves tllat a lllajOtity ofvoten ill tha 􀁾􀁰􀁬􀁥􀁸 support regional rall and wllI hold
elected officials 􀁡􀁣􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁮􀁢􀁢􀁬􀁥 Ibr coming up with II S\JCCesstill regional nil systmD. '"I'be answer Is. traffic. ttaffic. ,traJiu:," Lief1et said. -·We haw to do simurthing
because it is bec;oming llb I:os Angeles. People'are starting to get 􀁡􀁮􀁾 If· they ,[politicians] sit quietly ". it will catch up to them.· FORTWORTH STAR TELEGRAM JUN 162003 Planners
ofrail system askilig'cities to climb aboard By GOIlOON lJICItSON" 􀁩􀁮􀀢􀀱􀁴􀁾􀀭 resldants to a trans-bulustry, 1D000t of the right of STAIH'ELEOR... "'Aft WAfTllI portatlon forum􀁾lilt
way =i:iIed.to operate II pas-􀁾buying one tlclcet pnd 􀁴􀁡􀁦􀁾 for Aug. 11, hllllllid. leaecr tIa1D. system Is 14 place, It trainwlwever Y9U need to go '" The sales p1lch will. be wm-greatly
rl!duclng startup 􀁾􀁯􀁳􀁴􀁡􀀬 􀁾 Met.rop,lex '-tei work,. school, cuI1ln cities whm offlc:iall MomSsaid. sho in' ax ')Ust an 􀁥􀁶􀁾 out. have gone em recmd opposm, "We are taking 􀁡􀁤􀁶􀁡􀁮􀁬􀁡􀁧􀁾
of 􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁬Texas needs such II system. raU serviee, organhen say. 1II11880s IDveSIDWIt in freight and J1ee:d. to 􀁳􀁾􀁡􀁲􀁴 buildlng It now, Resldcuts wmbo as1lI;d.to look raiJroads.'
he:􀁾 . 􀁢􀁥􀁉􀁯􀁾􀁥 an additlonal3 millloJl 􀁾􀁳􀁩􀀭 blt)"lmd.thdr D\luUcipo1 bor-􀁆􀁏􀁦􀀱􀁡􀁲􀁡􀁩􀁬􀁳􀁹􀁳􀁦􀁥􀁭􀁴􀁯􀀧􀀤􀁜􀁬􀁾􀁥􀁤􀀬 cU!nts 􀁾􀁯􀁶􀁥 here. suwort= at a 􀁾􀁭􀀭 den den
lUId crellte a system (Qf p.opone:ats say, passengers mub!r railsysteID􀁾 ., the goodoftharresloJl. ' must he' able to go auyw1ie1"e 􀁳􀁷􀁬􀁾 dozens of dt:ia!l·-The flnt step will be
in the Metrol'lex wiI:h a sWgle But 􀁾􀁥􀁴 "to ate the SYSlem -=:pIDiDing that the rail 5}'stem 􀁴􀁴􀁥􀁫􀁥􀁴􀀮􀁾􀀮also sbollld 'WoPt toFthoE'it 􀁾will bl! difficult. !iSn't just fcl&􀁾.residents
110 􀁾􀁦􀁯􀀮􀁴􀁷􀀺􀁢 tbdr dest!pa_ and 􀁐􀁉􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁕of'Th:mnt :md Den.ton but lIlllo for the alOte tbll11.:3 tlOliS Withimt ha9Ing to repe:lt-Manyr . it _ miUion JIeWl:OIDCrs expected
edly c:hanp tiaW•. 􀀼􀀺􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁾 lothu.d!y 􀁾􀁉􀁔􀀺􀀺􀁓 􀁾􀀱􀀱􀁢􀀴 II 'In'the area by 2025, Morris Worklng out those details 􀁡􀁲􀁧􀁵􀁾 al .'\1 􀁾 '0:0 domlniWl sa1d. . will 􀁒􀁾 trem=dous
CQQp-WoISte 􀁑􀂣􀁾􀁥􀁹 􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁥􀁪 they 􀁾􀁹􀀬 CIties axe being encoutagedl erlltlon 'Jilong cities. The by 􀁡􀁵􀁴􀀧􀁭􀁾􀀧 cnton blgh.ways. to insist that developelS build Metro.,lex
hqs t'i!:e tranait 􀁷􀁯􀁾be sPeople on bOth sides commUDilie. 􀁾􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁤 the ran al1thoritle$ that c:ollect s.Ues 'Ibi.,􀁾􀁰will get a cli:mce10 ll:aes so \hat. RSideJJt$ CaD llV1!,
tQer -the FmWorth Thm9-of the tau "" a " . . wotIc and sb/;)p;witliin wa1ldD,g' podation Anthorit1l the Densound Qif, Ws ou.!' to ,be a di'lt2Dce. ton County Transportation "The ow.;ar·!lwlsystem..·.
sald "Wowdn'tlt be II shame If Authority ant! Dallal Are::a 􀀬􀁳􀁵􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁣 􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 􀁾􀀭 we waited 'imtil 3 rtIillion pea-Rapid Trall61t. Many cities Mic""",' .. 'PIe had
moved Into the region, along the p\allned r.Ul routes lor for the North Central.􀁾􀁾􀁵􀁮􀀭 and then we built the railsr don't belong to an aut!iority. cil of GovcrnJllents. "We want
to Monts salil. 􀁾􀁬􀁮􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁡􀁤􀀬 we and. there lllust be a-way for 􀁾out, 􀁤􀁾􀁥􀀱􀁯􀁰 COJ1Sens'Il$ 􀁾 find sbould be 􀁡􀁢􀁬􀁾 to build the them topay Into the syste:PL out IOX;lCtly
what 􀁷􀁥􀁾􀁥 doJns In e;u:h r:Uls fits, and have: the peopla 􀁾 Leadl!n 0{ some.cities sa., corritlQ'C," : • . ·loc1Ite where 􀁾 J;aiIls." . . they _'t lilrerestell hualslng Deslsners
are duwLOg \II!. plans {Of The Trill1ty Railway .•ales cUes but wo\lld be open a r.ill 􀁳􀁾 )0 times IDe s17;'l at tha Express sOrlie, about 8,000 to other 􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁥􀁥􀁳 offunding, .
'rdnity RlIilway Express, wblcll con-riders per cia}'" 'l'hat's.equal. 􀁾 􀁾􀁉􀁬 aeeds to btl a taxin 'Ol:llll neets c,lawntown Furt Wurth lU I>alla;s adding one lfeeway iane'm relatio:o
to bow your city WIllS :md 􀁬􀁾 the ,area's only commuttl: raU ea.ch dirllction betwe:n I:!ol1as the systera," Grapevine Mayor line. . lU1d Port Worth, Moms 􀁳􀁾􀁤􀀺􀀭 William 0, Tat';
sOlid. "DART The COUDcU ofgove=enlS EarlY predictions 􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁭􀁾􀁴􀁥 :md !be T ;Ire a1tJlost obsolete Is pidcirig up 1M 􀁴􀁡􀁾 for plans lhat a r<;gional rail 􀀤􀁹􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁭 iJ1 their
,funding. We've beel1 to connect 􀁃􀀺􀁏􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁮􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁥􀁳􀀬ma!?Y could serve UP.to 58,000 ndexs looking (or II 􀁳􀁯􀁬􀁵􀁾􀁮 tbat of which h!lve lltt!.: pubhc per day. takes care
of the needs of a lrnnsit, 11Iey include 􀀡􀁵􀀧􀁾􀁮􀁧􀀮 , The cost is not yet knoW!?_ UlI\jority ofour teaidents." . ton, Clebq.rne, colleyv.llle, but developing commub!r tail DentoJ\
County, Grapevm\' and on existing 1in=I generally l'I1II$ North Richland Hills. :no million to $16 IIiillion per Officials there aoC! 􀁢􀁥􀁩􀁾􀁧 lIlile, Ilccording to estlmlltes lISked
to lake an active role 􀁾 from the council of governl.:re;ltitlg a cqmptebensivc: raU ments. Starting a rail liDe 'from system. , , acratch can cost upward of$40 "Cities that begin tIl
thlll!' aillII\lIn per mllc. , that WilY will be part of􀁴􀁉􀁜􀁾 􀁾 Becallse North Texas has system lhat emerges. 􀁃􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁥􀁳 blstorical 􀁴􀁩􀁾􀁟􀀮 tn Ibe 􀁲􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁄􀁧􀁾 that don't
think that way nught be left out:' &aid Wes Jurcy, I'rcsiul:nt of the Arllngton ChDmber of Commerce, Ar!inp;tol\ leaders plap to' ..; >-.)
If the governor signs the bill, the RTA will seek federal matching funds to build a system ofeast-west bus and rail connections to make the north-south Tri-Rail trains a much more practical
transportation option. Carey-Shuler said the bill isn't the one that the three counties asked the Legislature to approve. The three counties wanted to increase license plate fees by
$2 a year to raise $2.67 million apiece to run the RTA and secure up to $350 million in federal and state matching funds over five years. But anti-tax Republicans led by Rep. Connie
Mack ofFort Lauderdale called the fee a new tax. So business leaders pushing the RTAdropped it and struck a deal with Mack and Sen. Steve Geller, D-Hallandale Beach, chainnan ofthe Broward
Legislative Delegation. The compromise bill would allow the counties to come up with $2.67 million from their own funds. Or, they could seek approval directly from voters for the $2
tag surcharge -but only ifthe money couldn't be found elsewhere. Bill to create S. Florida transit agency appears doomed Transportation Writer -S "";1/.J£MiAlG( May 21, 2003 I' After
months of contentious negotiations, plans for a regional approach to mass transit in South Florida have run into yet another roadblock. Broward County commissioners made a last-ditch
effort on Tuesday to persuade their counterparts in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties not to oppose a bill that would transfonn Tri-Rail into a new regional transportation authority.
But it didn't work. Bill 10 crcalc S. Florida lrallsil agcllcy appears doomcd 1'llp://\\"".SUII-SClllincl.cOIII/lclllplalcslnlisdpriIlISIOIJ.JSp·'slug"sf.. Even while Broward commissioners
were issuing their plea, Miami-Dade commissioners voted to ask Gov. Jeb Bush to veto a bill that would create the RTA and require the counties to pay for it. The Senate passed the measure
last month by a vote of33-3. The House followed with a unanimous vote in its favor. Earlier this month, Palm Beach County commissioners asked the governor to kill the RTA plan. That
leaves Broward as the lone county championing it. Miami-Dade Commission Chairwoman Barbara Carey-Shuler said local road and transit projects would be cut if the counties have to dip
into their own pockets to pay for the RTA. "We worked very hard, and we were very committed to having an RTA," she said. "We just felt that we shouldn't be given a mandate. The state
is always mandating something but doesn't give us the funds to do it." Broward Mayor Diana Wassennan-Rubin pressed officials in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties not to oppose the regional
transit plan. Wassennan-Rubin and other commissioners disliked the Legislature's draft of the regional transit plan, but fear the veto effort will kill any chance for creating a viable
mass transit system in South Florida in the near future. "I hate to give this up," Wasserman-Rubin said. "I really do." Broward commissioners also are writing Bush, urging him to sign
the legislation despite the concerns ofthe neighboring counties. "We need to step up and say we believe in regional transportation," Commissioner Lori Parrish said. But Commissioner
Jim Scott held out little hope in light ofthe opposition. "If these two counties don't want it. then 1don't know what good it does for us to insist," he told his colleagues on Tuesday.
Aspokesman for Bush's office said he has not yet received the bill. "The governor is aware of the concerns," spokesman Jacob DiPietre said. "However, Gov. Bush is supportive of any efforts
that leverage federal dollars. He supports an improved and more coordinated transit system." -..]V 􀁾 Only Broward was willing to go along with the compromise. Congress is preparing
to allocate funds this year when it reauthorizes the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century. If South Florida doesn't have a local funding source, the region will have to wait
another six years until the next federal highway and mass transit bill is considered. StaffWriter Scott Wyman contributed to this report. Michael Turnbell can be reached at mtumbell@sun-sentinel.como
r 954-356-4155. Copyright © 2003, South Florida Sun-Sentinel 1: ",r1 :.:
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 08-01-03 AGENDA ITEM V PROJECT MONITORING
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION Executive Committee 7522 Campbell Road Suite 113-205 Dallas, Texas 75248 97213l2-1644 972/312-1645 (FAX) email ccu9@airmai! net Ron Harris, Co-Chair
Margaret Keliher, Co-Chair Sandy Greyson, Vice-Chair Grady Smithey, Secretary Terry Waldrum, Treasurer Chad Adams Gary Base Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs Angie Chen Button Jim Dunn Pat
Evans Stanton Foerster Robert Franke John L. Heiman, Jr. Mary Hom Mike Nowels James O'Neal Jayne Peters Bob Phelps Frank W. Robertson Mike Simpson Gary Slagel Mark Stokes Steve Terrell
Paul N. Wageman Bill Whitfield Ex-Officio Members Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Gary Thomas Executive Director James McCarley David A. Griffin, Associate MEMORANDUM July 22,
2003 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: This item allows any DRMC Executive Committee member to address pending issues on a monitored project. DRMC, or the appropriate agency, will review any issues
and report to the group or the Executive Committee member. For the August 1Sf DRMC, TxDOT Dallas will provide an update on two key regional projects:1) The High Five Interchange Project
(US 75 and IH 635), and 2) LBJ (ill 635) Modifications, including funding issues Attachments
•. ··Feasibility. PJaflni'ng • ae"'-'""1"""11 􀁾􀀺􀁟􀀪 I Tea, OepartmM1t of Tfflnaport,,"on • Direct Connection Ramps' In December 2003, complete direct connection ramps from eastbound
LBJ Freeway to northbound & southbound NCE ................................................ ................................................ • Eastbound LBJ Ramp -in September 2003,
open permanent eastbound exit ramp to Colt Road • LBJ Freeway east of NCE from TI BOUlevard underpass to Greenville Avenue -in August 2003, construct permanent westbound pavement; maintain
four traffic lanes in each direction Please forward this construe/ion update 10 other people in your company. II you are not the right persan 10 receive this in/ormation, please call
me. Clill Franklin (972) 994·0034 • Bridge structures· of the 710 total columns, 400 or 56 percent are complete; of the 409 total caps, 213 or 52 percent are complete; of the 163,619
linear feet total of beams, 71,992 linear feet or 44 percent have been set and of the 47 acres of bridge decking, 16.92 acres or 36 percent have been done • Overhead work at the Interchange
began in July 2002. This work consists 01 erecting the pre-cast segmental sections for the direct connectors between freeways; of the 623 total sections, 283 or 45% have been erected.
• LBJ Freeway west of NCE -In June 2003, traffic shifted to permanent west· bound main lane pavement from westbound entrance ramp from Coit to westbound exit ramp to Preston Road; began
reconstruction of permanent eastbound main lanes and exit ramps for NCE northbound and southbound. • TI Boulevard -in late 2003, complete northbound approach from south of LBJ Freeway;
completed two lanes In each direction under LBJ Freeway In August 2002 • Midpark BrIdge over U.S. 75 • In March 2003, completed new south 􀁨􀁡􀁾 of bridge and shifted traffic to new
bridge; In March 2003, demolished remaining north half and began reconstruction of new bridge· complete in July 2003 •n Access Bridge' in January 2003, demoliShed west bridge and began
reconstruction ot new Wider bridge; east bridge to remain open until new west bridge Is completed In September 2003 • Hillcrest at LBJ Freeway· opened westbound U-turn In September 2002;
opened eastbound U-turn In January 2003 • Park Central Drive at LBJ Freeway -opened westbound U-turn In May 2003 ;;􀀦;􀁢g􀁶J􀁾:􀁬.i􀀮lle Work to be completed in 2003 • Greenville Avenue
U-fum • Midpark Road and TI Access Bridge • Coit Road from Alpha! Emily to Banner including .bridge over 1·635 • Right-hand lanes of U.S. 75 •and 1-635 Frontage Roads Work to be completed
in 2004 • Direct Connection Ramp between freeways -HOV Wishbone Ramp on U.S. 75 Work to be completed in 2005-2006 -1-635 Main Lanes and HOVLanes • U.S. 75 Main Lanes -Continuous Frontage
Roads through the Interchange along U.S. 75 and /-635 -HOV T-Connection Ramps at TI Soulevar -Reversible HOV Direct Connection Ramp Additional information is available on the Dallas
High Five website at. www.DallasHighFive.org No lane closures will be permitted during peak traffic hours (6·9am & 3:30-7pm Monday Thursday and 6-9am & 2-9pm on Fridays). .* I Tons Dflpsrtment
0' 1hJDSportlJtlon Dallas High Five Construction DurlngThlrd Quarter of 2003 July 1, 2003 Good News. After 18 months of construction or 30 percent of the contract time, the High Rve
construction Is 38 percent complete. The areas of construction during the third quarter of 2003 and into the fourth quarter of 2003 may include: • Work will be completed on the outside
two lanes of the frontage roads at the following locations: • Northbound NCE (North Central Expressway) frontage road from Forest Lane to LBJ Freeway -complete in August 2003 • Westbound
LBJ frontage road from Greenville Avenue over DART rail to TI Boulevard· complete In September 2003 • Eastbound LBJ frontage road from Tl Boulevard over DART rail to Greenville Avenue
-complete In April 2004 • Southbound NCE frontage road from LBJ Freeway to Forest Lane • complete in December 2003 • Southbound NCE frontage road from southbound Midpark exit ramp to
Goldmark DriveDrive· complete in January2004 • Westbound LBJ frontage road from Colt Road to Park Central Drive • completed in October 2002 • Eastbound LBJ frontage road from Park Central Drive to Coit Road • completed in
November 2002 • Northbound NCE frontage road from Midpark Road to Spring Valley Road inclUding opening the new northbound entrance ramp from Midpark -completed in November 2002 • Southbound
NCE frontage road from Midpark Road to Coit Road Including bridge over Cottonwood Creek -completed May 2003 Westbound LBJ frontage road from TI Boulevard to Cottonwood Creek -completed
May 2003 . • Northbound NCE frontage road from Cottonwood Creek to Midpark • completed In May 2003 • Colt Road -in December 2002, completed construction of new southbound pavement and
bridge from Alpha/Emily to Banner Drive; shifted traffic to new pavement and began reconstruction of new northbound pavement and bridge; In June 2003, complete northbound lanes and split
northbound and southbound traffic on bridge; In August 2003, complete center section of bridge and open to traffic (to complete bridge means three through lanes and two left turn lanes
in each direction plus U-tum lanes on the frontage roads)
tlJlllIuuLIl 􀀯􀁬􀁾􀀺􀁉 6 -b 􀁾 High Five gets a high five, Glenda Vosburgh gvosburgh@bizjoumals.com If you've ever been audited by the IRS. you're familiar with "the look." The one
your friends give · you when they hear the news •something that says ."you're · toast." . · That's the look I got when I told : friends, about a year and a half ; ago, that my employer
would •move our offices to new digs in a building at LBJ Freeway and Central Expressway -overlooking the dreaded High Five interchange construction project. I was bombarded with tales
of horror, and I imagined some ofthose myselftruth be told. I pictured myselfsitting in traffic for hours during the hot summer months with the overheated engine ofmy car giving up the
ghost ... or watching the gas gauge needle sink as high-priced fuel drained from my car's tank. Employees of a company that moved out of the building we were moving into, and into our
thenbuilding (to avoid the construction woes) snickered when they heard where we were moving. That made me feel, well, to quote Charlie Browri -doomed. For weeks my co-workers and I
investigated alternate traffic routes, comparing notes about the most time-efficient ones and how many stop signs/traffic signals and school zones we encountered. We moved in January,
2002, about the same time construction began. And, feeling somewhat prepared for the worst, we waited. We're still waiting. All those horror stories just haven't come true. The bark
of(and about) the High Five project was -at least so far -much worse than its bite. Of course, there has been the occasional exception, but for the most part it's been a pleasant surprise.
Traffic as I drive in ,every morning from up north and back again every evening has moved at a pretty fair clip most ofthe time. The progress of the project has been phenomenal. When
we moved into our new offices we were looking down on the construction. Now, we're looking out on it. CliffFranklin ofthe North Central Mobility Task Force says the project is 38% completed
and about seven seven months ahead ofschedule. It was planned in a way that tries to minimize inconvenience to motorists during peak traffic times. Zachary Construction Corp., which
is building the interchange, estimates that about one-third ofthe construction will be at night. "You really have to give credit to Zachary Construction and TxDot (Texas Department of
Transportation)," said Franklin, who notes the only driver-caused problems in the construction zone have come when someone is driving too fast. Parts ofall five levels ofthe interchange
are now in place so you can see just how high those lanes will be. Some of my co-workers and I think we aren't likely to drive on something that far removed from the ground, but maybe
we'll have a change of heart. For now, the construction and the traffic can be pretty entertaining (our newsroom is all-windows on three sides so we have a birds-eye view). Like the
day we spotted one ofthose blue portable outhouses perched atop the highest level ofthe roadway. Or the day we watched as about a half-dozen drivers tried to go around traffic by cutting
across a benignlooking grassy median only to get stuck in the mud. Franklin says the next big part ofthe project to be finished will be consftuction of new northbound lanes on the Coit
Road bridge over LBJ by the end of June. Northbound and southbound traffic on the bridge will then be split and, in August, the center section ofthe bridge will be opened to traffic.
The $261 million interchange is scheduled for completion in 2006. According to Franklin, more than I million vehicles pass through the LBJ/CentraJ interchange daily. When the High Five
is completed, those vehicles will have more room to maneuver and will be able to travel at higher speeds. I'm told that's a good thing. We'll see. Vosburgh is assistant managing editor
of the Dallas Business Journal.
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 08-01-03 AGENDA ITEM VI LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION Executive Committee MEMORANDUM 7522 Campbell 􀁾􀁯􀁡􀁤 Suite I J3-205 Dallas, Texas 75248 972/3 I2-I644 972/3 I 2-1645 (FAX) email ccu9@ainnaiJ.net
As the DRMC packet goes to the printer, there is no final decision on Congressional Redistricting, and a number of the other bills mentioned have yet to make it through the House and
Senate. It appears, if the Senate cannot agree on a new Congressional map, the Governor may call another special session and the Senate may change a long-standing tradition on the 'two-thirds'
requirement (21 Senators agreeing) to bring an item to the Senate floor for debate. Two items of importance to the DRMC Legislative program have been included in the Special Session:
1) Corrections to HB 3588, the Governor's Transportation Bill; and, 2) Corrections to HB 1365, the Texas Emissions Reduction Program (TERP) funding bill These items will be discussed
later under this Agenda Item. It was really just a figment of your imagination that the Texas Legislature was finished for the year! The I5t called Special Session (when the notation
'1 51> is used you know there will probably be more!) began on June 30th and will conclude, one way or the other, on July 29th • While the only item officially noted in the Governor's
proclamation calling the Special was Congressional Redistricting, the 'cal\' has now been expanded to cover a number of items. Most of the expansion deals with issues discussed during
the Regular Session allowing a major degree of reorganization of State government. A number of the issues would also significantly increase the direct power of the Governor in dealing
with agencies within the State government. Ron Harris, Co-Chair Margaret Keliher, Co-Chair Sandy Greyson, Vice-Chair Grady Smithey, Secretary Terry Waldrum, Treasurer Chad Adams Gary
Base Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs Angie Chen Button Jim Dunn Pat Evans Stanton Foerster Robert Franke John L. Heiman, Jr. Mary Hom Mike Nowels James O'Neal Jayne Peters Bob Phelps Frank
W. Robertson Mike Simpson Gary Slagel Mark Stokes Steve Terrell Paul N. Wageman Bill Whitfield Ex-Officio Members Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Gary Thomas Executive Director
James McCarley David A. Griffin, Associate July 21, 2003 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: i DRMC Executive Committee 􀁾􀁾􀁤􀁐􀁩 James McCarley -Executive Director Legislative Update 080103 Legislative
Update evr.doc Final Actions Related to the 7Gh Legislative Session No major surprises related to transportation and/or air quality legislation occurred after the Legislature adjourned
and the bills went to the Governor. Although about forty or so bills were vetoed, only one related to any DRMC transportation topics. Governor Perry did veto a couple of House Transportation
Chairman Krusee's bills relating to expanded Regional Mobility Authority (RMA) powers, but that action was at the request of Chairman Krusee since the same language in those bills was
included in HE 3588. Highlighting HB 3588, the Governor had about three 'ceremonial' signings of HB 3588 in Houston, San Antonio, and Georgetown. He noted, along with bill sponsors Rep.
Krusee and Senator Ogden, that this bill was the most significant piece of transportation legislation in decades and would set the stage for enhanced statewide mobility for several decades
to come. The Governor also signed the Texas Emissions Reduction Program (TERP) funding bill (HE 1365) by Rep. Bonnen and Senator Harris. This bill provides about $150 million per year
to fully implement TERP and address concerns of the EPA on State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the Dallas -Fort Worth area and other nonattainment counties in the State. Governor Perry
did veto SB 1782 by Senator Lindsay. This bill would have extended local
control of access management issues to the Harris County (and adjacent counties) area. Several reasons were cited by the Governor for this action, and Senator Lindsay has filed a similar
bill as part of the Special Session to address the issue again and correct any concerns of the Governor's office. Proposed TxDOTAccess Management Rules /Senate Bill 361 The Governor
also signed SB 361 by Senator Shapiro (sponsored in the House by Rep. Fred Hill) relating to local precedence of access management rules over any rules adopted by TxDOT unless TxDOT
owned the access rights and/or the federal Highway Administration (FHWA) notified the State that federal funding could be affected by the local access management decision. At the June
28th TIC meeting in Austin, TxDOT issued proposed rules to implement new access management procedures for the State. Updates have also been made to the new 'Access Management Manual'
that is referred to in the proposed rules. Three public hearings have been set on the proposed rules, with one at the Irving City Hall on Wednesday, July 23rd, 6 PM, along with similar
hearings in Austin and Houston. The proposed rules, and draft manual, are available on the TxDOT web site, www.dot.state.tx.us. Considering the DRMC position on the access management
issue, and efforts by Senator Shapiro to leave control of access management at the local level, the proposed rules fall short of even acknowledging the concern of local governments and
property owners. Based on the previously adopted DRMC position, DRMC will submit comments of concern at the hearing in Irving and file written comments by the August 11 th written comment
deadline. While the draft rules create a new opportunity for local governments to directly issue access permits under certain conditions, such authority would only be granted if TxDOT
'approves' of the local government's rules. A detailed procedure for such . approval is contained in the draft manual. The missing part of the rules seems to be any acknowledgement of
provisions of Senate Bill 361 directing that local rules prevail over TxDOT's' except in a couple of circumstances. No guidelines are included on the procedure for the locals and/or
TxDOT District offices on treatment ofpermits under provisions of SB 361. An alert from DRMC was forwarded to all DRMC members and other interested parties (copy attached) encouraging
submittal of testimony and/or comments to TxDOT on the proposed rules. Senator Shapiro will also be communicating with TxDOT on the issue, and the Texas Municipal League (TML) has already
expressed concern similar to that ofDRMC (copy also attached). 1st Called Special Session ofthe 71th Texas Legislature As mentioned in previous items, the I sl called special session
of the 78th Legislature convened on July 30th and will conclude on July 291h • At first only Congressional Redistricting was included in the items eligible for consideration by the House
and Senate, but the 'call' has been significantly expanded since that time. Two items are under consideration of interest to the DRMC Legislative program: 1) Corrections to HB 3588 -As
publicized during the debate over certification of the State budget by the Comptroller, certain provisions of HB 3588 affecting transfer of monies to the Texas Mobility Fund (and trauma
care) needed corrections. Senate Bill 21 (Senator Ogden and Representative Krusee -copy attached) redirects the money flow by dedicating new revenue from the Driver Responsibility Program
and the 'State' traffic fme increase of $30, to the Mobility Fund (and trauma care) while leaving money from the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) drivers license operations dedicated
to the General Revenue Fund until 2005. These items will then 'switch' and by that time there should be sufficient history to satisfy various parties about revenue projections. Several
other provisions have been added to the bill to address some legal concerns over bonding and 'takings' by the Harris County Tollway Authority. System fmancing by TxDOT has also been
reworded to satisfy the legal folks along with other technical corrections. The bill has passed the Senate and is out of the House Transportation Committee ready for House action. 2)
Corrections to HB 1365 -A minor wording change to HB 1365 is included in HB 53, the massive Government Reorganization Bill. The wording simply clarifies that local governments in 'affected
counties' and designated nonattainment counties 'may' give preference in bids to fmns using lower emission equipment, etc. Updates and any additional actions will be presented at the
August 1sl meeting. 080I03 Legislative Update Cvr.doc
Federal Issues House Aepropriators Boost Highway Funds (as reported by AASHTO) House transportation appropriators on July 11 reported out a bill that would boost highway funding by nearly
$3 billion for FY 2004. The bill went before the full appropriations committee for action on Wednesday, July 􀀲􀀳􀁲􀁤􀁾 In addition to the $34.134 billion highway obligation ceiling,
the bill would also provide $400 million of which $100 million is set aside for highway projects. The remaining $300 million would be allocated to states on a formula basis, with eligibility
for use to continue Amtrak services. The appropriators included a new funding category, providing $50 million to be allocated at the discretion of the secretary of transportation for
no less than five public-private partnership projects. The projects are to be complex and capital-intensive. The purpose of the pilot program is to identify ways in which a partnership
approach can save money, and also to identify impediments that may exist. Together with close to $1 billion in funds outside the obligation ceiling, which include minimum guarantee and
emergency relief funds, the total federal-aid highway program being proposed by the Subcommittee would be $35.583 billion. Funding for highways in FY 2003 amounted to $31.6 billion,
plus $1 billion outside the obligation ceiling. AASHTO Executive Director John Horsley said, "Chairman Ernest Istook and the House transportation appropriators have shown great leadership
in addressing the nation's highway needs. It is vitally important for transportation advocates to make known to Congress their strong support for this highway funding increase. Competition
for transportation dollars will be fierce, and our support is needed to retain this much-needed highway funding." One element of the highway funding proposal that has stirred controversy,
however, is the provision to let a portion of the highway projects funding be used to pay expenses of Amtrak. Industry lobbyists have expressed concern that the provision would open
the doors of the Highway Trust Fund for rail funding, setting a future precedent. Another proposal sparking concern is the proposed elimination of the Transportation Enhancements Program,
which was funded at $600 million in FY 2003. Some $5 billion has been invested in more than 15,000 transportation enhancement projects nationwide since the inception of the program,
which has been well received by the public. Such projects range from bike paths to restoration of historic bridges. The bill also contains $592.8 million in earmarks for funds in the
categories of discretionary bridge, borders and corridors, ferry facilities, interstate maintenance, public lands highway, scenic byways, the transportation community, the systems preservation
pilot program and intelligent transportation systems. AASHTO Urges Support for Funding Levels AASHTO President James Codell, Secretary of the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, expressed
support for the Subcommittee's proposal to increase the highway obligation ceiling by $2.5 billion, and to maintain transit "at close to the previous year's level, albeit with a $59
million reduction." In a July 17 letter to Appropriations Committee Chairman C.W. Bill Young (R-FL), Codell said, "This will mean states can continue to make much-needed investment in
roads and in transit," supporting over 120,000 American jobs. The letter also stated AASHTO's support for the Transportation Enhancements program, noting "this program is popular with
many states because it contributes to projects that add to the quality of life and directly affects projects in localities." Codell urged the Committee to delete this provision "which
in many cases would preclude the states from carrying out alreadyplanned commitments." In regard to the discretion to use Highway Trust Fund money for Amtrak, the letter also noted that
AASHTO has long-held policy that opposes the diversion of resources from the Trust Fund for purposes other than highway and transit investment. 080103 Legislative Update Cvr.doc
Amtrak Cut by Nearly Half Amtrak funding took a significant hit from the appropriators, being reduced by nearly a half billion dollars from the FY 2003 level of $1.043 billion to $580
million. Of that amount, $360 million is provided for operating subsidies, $120 million for general capital improvements, and $100 million for Northeast Corridor capital improvements.
The bill would continue requiring a series of reports to the secretary of transportation regarding the business plan, and would require that Amtrak ensure sufficient funds to meet contract
obligations for commuter operations. Transit Funding Reduced Transit funding was also reduced from the $7.179 billion enacted in FY 2003 to $7.12 billion. The cuts came in the "new starts"
program, which would decline by about $100 million from $1.214 million to $1.1 04 million. The bill would direct the reallocation of discretionary new start and bus funds that remained
unobligated after three years, but also includes a list of projects that would be protected protected from such reprogramming. Funding for buses would increase from the current $607
million to about $728 million. Funding for fixed-guideway modernization would be set at $1.2 billion, bringing the total for the capital-investment grant program to $3.046 billion. The
job access and reverse commute program would drop from $149 million to $85 million. Other Funding . The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration would see a healthy increase in FY
2004, increasing from the current $305 million to $478 million. However, the appropriators did not go along with the increased safety funding and restructuring sought by the Bush Administration
for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Funding for NHTSA would increase only slightly, from $434 million to $440 million, not to the $665 million level in the administration's
budget request. In aviation, states would see an increase in the airport grants obligation limitation, which would rise from the current $3.377 billion to $3.5 billion. Aviation Aviation
funding overall would increase from $7.023 billion to $7.532 billion. However, funding for the Essential Air Service program would be cut by some 60 percent to only $41.5 million for
FY 2004. The bill would also require that communities served by the program must be at least 210 miles from a current airport, except for current recipients in Alaska and Hawaii. This
will be the first year that transportation appropriations will be considered together with appropriations for other agencies --specifically the Treasury Department and independent agencies
such as the General Services Administration, the Office of Personnel Management and other administration offices. It appears likely that the bill will now go to full committee markup
on Wednesday. Authorizers Aim for Post-Recess Mark-Up August may not prove to be much of a recess for members and staff of the House and Senate transportation authorizing committees,
as they continue to press for the financial solutions that will allow them to report their TEA-21 reauthorization bills. Even as they concede they will not achieve their targets of marking
up bills before Congress recesses next week, transportation leaders still hope to come up with a funding proposal that will produce the significant increased they seek in highway and
transit funding. TEA-21 expires on September 30th, only four weeks aOer Congress returns (rom recess. The Bush Administration has proposed $247 billion in its Safe, Affordable, Flexible
and Efficient Transportation Equity Act of2003 (SAFETEA) reauthorization. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is proposing $375 billion that includes indexing the gas
tax, while Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond (R-MO), chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure, is calling for a $255 billion, six-year highway investment. AASHTO has
called for a highway program that increases to at least $45 billion over six years, and a transit program that reaches at least $11 billion. Meanwhile, donor states have introduced legislation
--H.R. 2208 (called SHARE) --which would provide that all states receive back at least 95 percent ofthe revenue they pay into the Highway Trust Fund. Another coalition, called the Fair
Alliance for Intermodal Reinvestment (FAIR)" has formed to oppose any change in the current federal funding system. Achieving a goal of a 95 percent return without reducing funding for
some states below 080103 Legislative Update CVLdoc
current levels is only possible with increased highway spending. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young (R-AK) has been a strong advocate for indexing the
18.4 cent-per-gallon federal gasoline tax back to 1993, with indexing continuing through the six-year life of the bill. On the Senate side, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
Chairman James Inhofe (R-OK) has also indicated a willingness to consider some form of indexing. However, many advocates see great difficulty in raising any gasoline taxes this year,
particularly in the face of opposition from the White House and the reluctance of Congressional tax-writing committees to raise any taxes. Interest now appears to be increasing in a
possible tax-credit bond proposal, which would leverage available funds and provide funding to all states distributed on a formula basis, such as AASHTO's proposed Transportation Finance
Corporation. Short Term Extension Possible In the event Congress doesn't pass a full six-year reauthorization of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century by the Sept. 30 expiration
date, there is the likelihood that a temporary stopgap funding measure, or "short bill," for the nation's transportation system. As reported in the July 11 AASHTO Journal, TEA-21 contains
a provision that will halt any reimbursements to the states of federal funding from the Federal Highway Administration in the absence of a reauthorization or action to change the provision.
During a press conference on Tuesday, Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said there is a chance Congress will propose a "short bill
to get a longer bill later." A spokesperson for Tauscher's office said that a short bill could authorize current funding levels to the U.S. Department of Transportation and states for
a period of three to six months, passing the matter ofa broader six-year reauthorization into Congress in 2004. AASHTO Executive Director John Horsley said, "We are currently conducting
a survey of the states to document the tremendous impacts on projects and jobs that could occur ifwe face either a long-term delay in the enactment of reauthorizing T&I Committee Members
Stump for Intelligent Transportation in Reauthorization Members of the U.S. House of Representatives' Transportation and Infrastructure Committee used a technology fair at the Rayburn
Office Building Tuesday to promote their $375 billion reauthorization proposal, and to illustrate the use of intelligent transportation solutions in relieving traffic congestion. Committee
Chairman Rep. Don Young (R-AK) hosted the Congestion Mitigation Technology Fair, where a host of computer models and software were on display. Intelligent transportation systems figure
prominently in the T&I Committee's proposed bill to reauthorize transportation funding of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, which expires Sept. 30. ITS funding would
increase 60 percent with reauthorization of TEA-21. Also speaking at the fair was the committee's ranking minority member, Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), as well as Rep. Ellen Tauscher
(D-CA) and ITS Caucus Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI). Rogers is not a T&1 member, but sits on the Energy and Commerce Committee. Young, Oberstar and Tauscher credited intelligent transportation
systems with making travel improvements possible in previous reauthorizations, citing electronic toll collection, changeable signs over and beside highways, ramp metering, trafficsignal
synchronization and real-time traffic data systems. Transportation Advocacy Group Activities Texas Urban Transportation Alliance ([UTA) As reported in May, a new name was established
for the previous Greater Houston -Dallas/Fort Worth Transportation Alliance. With the San Antonio area, and possibly Austin, joining the fold, the Texas Urban Transportation Alliance
(TUTA) has been formed as a non-profit group. TUTA met several times during the Legislative Session to seek changes in various key legislative items related to mobility in urban areas.
areas. Work also continues to develop a state and federal action plan on a longer-term program to seek additional resources for urban area funding. 080103 Legislative Update Cvr.doc
TUTA has been active with the Governor's Office and TxDOT to develop and refine the Governor's mandated Metropolitan Mobility Plan for the State. A copy of the draft was provided in
a previous packet, and the TIC is set to consider adoption of a [mal version at the August TTC meeting in Austin. This report combines several recommendations from previous drafts along
with information extracted from the Governor's Business Council recommendations. Coupled with provisions included in HB 3588 regarding funding, this document could provide a blueprint
for urban mobility efforts through stronger partnerships between federal, State, and locals along with a true performance based system has as been long suggested by DRMC. Another key
element of the Plan is a stable base level of funding for urban districts over a longer term than can now be projected. Partners in Mobility The Partners in Mobility (PIM), of which
DRMC is a member, met on July 11 th to review recent legislative activity and methods to address a regional consensus on transportation and transit issues. Judges Harris, Hom, and Keliher
also presented a discussion on the pros and cons of a Regional Mobility Authority (RMA) for the area as compared to an 'Alliance' as discussed in other portions of this Agenda. Additional
Research will be conducted by the group on various approaches under consideration throughout the area for developing a regional approach to some ofthese issues. Attachments 080103 Legislative
Update Cvr.doc
F-. To Voice Phone Number: From: James McCarley Company: Dallas Regional Mobility Coalit Fax Number: 972 312 1645 Voice Number:972-312-1644 MESSAGE DRMC Executive Committee and DRMC
City Managers SUBJECT: Proposed TxDOT Access Management Rules TxDOT has again proposed the rules to implement new access management policies throughout the State. The rules, along with
the latest draft of the Access Management Manual, can be downloaded from the TxDOT Web Site (www.dotstate.tx.us). A pUblic hearing on the proposed rules has been set in the North Texas
area for Wednesday, July 23rd, 6 PM, at the Irving City Hall (825 West Irving Blvd). Public hearings will also' be conducted in Austin on . July 28th and Houston on July 29th). The proposed
rules and draft manual indicate TxDOTs potential to allow local governments to issue certain access permits directly IF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS' ACCESS MANAGEMENT RULES ARE APPROVED BY
TxDOT. While this may definitely benefit some cities, the rules, nor the manual, address recent legislation sougth by DRMC and other groups (Senate Bill 361 by Senator Shapiro) that
mandates local access management rules PREVAIL over any rules issued by TxDOT unless TxDOT owns the access rights for the property or the FHWA has notifieQ TxDOT that federal reimbursements
would be affected by allowing the access under local rules. You are encouraged to have appropriate staff review the proposed rules and also eitfier submit testimony at the hearing or
file written comments as indicated in the proposed rules by the August 11th deadline. DRMC contends the rules should address provisions of SB 361 that prOVide local access management
rules prevail over TxDOTs' outside the exceptions prOVided in the bill. It is also SUGGESTED that cities with current access management policies on the books notify the TxDOT District
office of your intent to apply Senate Bill 361 provisions for granting access to property along State roadways. -Call the DRMC officies if you desire additional info. (972-312-1644)
James McCarley, Ex. Dir., DRMC ...., Date: 7/07/03 Pages: 1 of 1
􀁾􀀪 I Texas Department of Transportation DEWITI C. GREER STATE HIGHWAY BLDG. -125 E. 11TH STREET -AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701·2483-(512) 463-8585 June 27, 2003 Mr. James McCarley Executive
Director Dallas Reg. Mobility Coalition 7522 Campbell Road, Ste. 113-205 Dallas, TX 75248 Dear Mr. McCarley: Access management is an engineering and planning method of balancing the
needs of mobility and safety on a highway system with the needs of access to adjacent land uses. Access management is one method of preserving the substantial public investment in the
ground transportation system by preserving the roadway level of service. Further, access management can significantly enhance traffic safety by reducing traffic accidents, personal injury,
and property damage. It has been noted that access management practices can promote a more coordinated intergovernmental, long term approach to land use and transportation decisions
in the context of quality of life, economic devetopment, livable communities, and public safety. Given the benefits to the ground transportation system and public safety, it is the intention
of the Texas Department of Transportation (T"xDOT) to promote the use of access management on highways under the jurisdiction of the department. Based on input from cities, counties,
metropolitan planning organizations, private development groups, and elected officials, the Texas Transportation Commission, at their June 26,2003 meeting, proposed new rules to promote
the use of access management on highways under the jurisdiction of TxDOT. In addition, the proposed rules provide an opportunity for local agencies to practice access management along
roadways within their jUrisdictions. TxDOT is conducting public hearings on these proposed access management rules. We invite you to attend any of the following hearings to share your
comments. The schedule for these public hearings is: DailaslFort Worth July 23, 2003 at 6:00pm Irving City Hall 825 West Irving Blvd. Irving, Texas 75060 AustinlSan Antonio July 28,
2003 at 6:00pm Bass Lecture Han 24th &Red River Streets Austin, Texas 78713 Houston Area July 29, 2003 at 6:00pm Houston-Galveston Area Council 3555 Tmmons Lane Houston, Texas n027 The
proposed rules, along with a draft Access Management Manual, can be found on the TxDOT Web site at wWw.dot.state.tx.us. If appropriate, we request immediate distribution of this infonnation
to your organization or association members. If you have comments or additional questions regarding this issue, please contact Ken Bohuslav, Director of the Design DMsion, Texas Department
of Transportation, 125 E. 11th Street, Austin, Texas 78701-2483, telephone number (512) 416-2601. The deadline for receipt of written comments at this address is August 11, 2003. Sincerely,
Ken Bohuslav, P.E., Director, Design Division An Equal Opportunity Employer
NiL E X A S C.PAL LlAGV& July 14, 2003 Ken Bohuslav, P.E. ------Director, 􀁄􀁥􀁳􀁩􀁾􀁯􀁮 125 Ea§t-HtIr'Street Austin, Texas 78710-2483 Dear Mr. Bohuslav: Please accept this letter on
behalf of the. Texas Municipal League in reference to the Texas Department ofTransportation's proposed highway access management rules. The debate over whether the state or individual
cities should have jurisdiction over . highway access rules has gone on for some time. Cities and business groups have argued successfully, based on a platform of local control, that
removing city authority in this area would have a negative effect on safety and economic development along state highways in Texas cities. Ken Bohuslav July 14, 2003 Page 2 ..The Legislature
has determined that cities know how to best control access to state highways that are inside .city limits. TML's position is that, while our members are always interested in cooperating
with TxDOT on highway projects, the Legislature has granted cities local control OVer highway access. TxDOT should recognize this and incorporate the provisions of S.B. 361 into its
proposed rules. P_lease.contact me with que$lions or concerns. 􀁾 􀁪􀁪􀁦􀁬􀀱􀁁􀁾 Scott N. HouSton Legal Services Director 2t RUlhcrfonJ 􀁌􀁡􀁾 Suile400 􀁴􀁜􀁵􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁮􀀮 􀁔􀁥􀀮􀀺􀁬􀀮􀁾
18154.'128 5121719·6300 F:lJII: Sl217I9-6390 􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀢􀁭􀁌 ...g 􀁾 The proposed access management rules repeal the current 43 T.A.C. §§ 11.50 -11.53 and substitute new provisions, including
43 T.A.C. § 11.52. The proposed § 11.52 is beneficial for many cities because 'it allows TxDOT to delegate access permitting authority to cities in certain circumstimces. This provision
is a step in the right direction. However, we are concerned that the proposed rules completely fail to address the provisions of Senate Bill 361, which was unanimously passed by both
the Senate and the House of Representatives during the Seventy-Eighth Regular Legislative Session. S.B. 361 was signed by Governor Perry shortly thereafter and became effective on June
20, 2003. TML is concerned that the proposed access management rules does not adequately reflect the bill's requirements. The proposed § 11.52(a) states that "[t]he intention of the
department is to allow local public agencies that have formally adopted access management plans or guidelines approved by the department to decide the location ofaccess connections to
highways that are within the jurisdiction of the local public agency." S.B. 361, on the other hand, amends Transportation Code § 203.032 to expressly provide that a highway access management
plan adopted by the Transportation Commission "does not supersede a conflicting rule or ordinance ofa municipality, including a home-rule municipality." While many ofour member cities
would take advantage ofthe proposed rule's delegation of permit issuance, a rule requiring TxDOT approval as a condition precedent to enforcement ofa city's rules is inconsistent with
the provisions ofS.B. 361. . cc: The Honorable Florence Shapiro P.O. Box 12068 Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711 James McCarley .........--. Executive Director Dallas Regional Mobility
Authority 2617 Walnut Lane Plano, Texas 75075 Frank SturzI Executive Director Texas Municipal League Shannalgo Director of Legislative Services Texas Municipal League
DaliasHrw5.(om W}t19a1la.s ptDrniD4l ;N'tbP,i Proposal may add billions for roads Bad drivers might pay more in transportation finance overhaul 06/02/2003 By TONY HARTZEL /The Dallas
Morning News Long-awaited road projects like the LBJ Freeway reconstruction could get a huge boost under a massive transportation bill making its way to Gov. Rick Perry. The legislation,
which had cleared the House and Senate by Sunday, will raise billions for road projects, part of it coming from bad drivers who must pay more to keep their licenses.. The bill allows
the state to issue $5 billion in bonds backed by future federal road money. In addition, the state could get a one-time $2 billion boost by issuing bonds based on revenue from the bad-drivers
fees. In comparison, the Texas Department ofTransportation in 2002 spent $5 billion on road construction, maintenance and related expenses. "The impact ofthis bill will be felt in a
short period oftime, given the time it usually takes projects to work through the pipeline," said Texas Transportation Commission Chairman John Johnson. "This will move projects that
are ready to go but without funding." The additional revenue could begin flowing by the end ofthe year, but a large portion ofit probably won't start flowing for several years. First,
voters must approve a constitutional amendment giving the state the power to issue the road bonds based on future federal transportation funds. Also, the state must gather several years
of revenue history before it can issue bonds backed by higher driver's license fees, Mr. Johnson said. State Transportation Department planners have proposed a $1. 7 billion reconstruction
ofLBJ Freeway, including a pair of three-lane tunnels under part ofthe highway. Until now, they had difficulty paying for such massive projects without affecting other road-construction
plans. But now, Texas' transportation system and the way it is funded get a much-needed overhaul with the I27-page bill. Its importance meant that Mr. Perry watched the bill's progress
closely. "It's one ofGovernor Perry's big priorities, and it has been from the beginning," said Kris Heckmann, the governor's transportation policy director. Penalizing bad driven Bad
drivers will feel the brunt of the state's new fund raising for roads and for trauma care centers. State officials estimate that in the first two years, the bill will add $300 million
in extra funding to trauma centers and another $300 million for highway projects. The highway money would then be used to issue $2 billion to $3 billion in bonds. Beginning Sept. I,
the bill would tack on points to a driver's license for certain infractions. Moving 􀁾􀁾 violations such as speeding are two points, and moving violations that result in an accident
are three points. Motorists caught speeding receive points only if they are driving 10 percent or more above the posted speed limit. Drivers who receive six points within three years
must pay $100, and $25 for each additional point. The fines are assessed for each year that a driver amasses more more than the minimum points. Motorists convicted ofdriving while intoxicated
face much larger fines -$1,000 a year for three years under the first conviction, and $1,500 a year after that. Penalties would reach $2,000 ifa driver's blood alcohol level exceeded
twice the legal limit. Supporters ofthe measure argue that only bad drivers will face the additional penalties, and that they receive points only for convictions. Points will not be
assessed if motorists take defensive driving to keep an offense off their record. With the points program, lawmakers have found a way to devote money to the Texas Mobility Fund. The
fund was created two years ago, and voters approved it in a constitutional amendment election. But it has sat unfunded since then, and its prospects of having a steady stream of revenue
looked slim as the state battled its budget woes this year. "It's been a long-term goal ofthe state to get more money in the po!," said Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition Executive Director
James McCarley. The other bonding provision has limits to its use. It allows the state to pledge future federal gas tax revenue for $5 billion in bonds, but the money can be used in
only a few categories: in emergencies like the collapse ofa bridge; to attract more federal funds that the state otherwise wouldn't receive; to build a road project as part of an economic
development incentive to lure a business to Texas; to widen state highways that connect small towns; and to build a road that creates its own toll revenue. New powers The bill also means
that for the first time, the Texas Department ofTransportation will have some authority to help build rail projects, but the agency's financial participation cannot exceed certain levels.
The state would be able to buy land in the middle of a highway project and prepare it for rail lines, a vision laid out in Mr. Perry's Trans Texas Corridor plan. "It wasn't for passenger
rail as much as freight," said state Rep. Linda Harper-Brown, R-Irving, a member ofthe House Transportation Committee. "It will help get big trucks otfthe road and put them on rail."
Regional mobility authorities also get more power under the bill. The agencies, which can be created locally, help build highway and toll road projects and could have some roles in mass
transit planning. The provisions probably won't have much effect in North Texas, because its existing transit agencies and the North Texas Tollway Authority perform most ofthose functions
already. The bill also allows for local governments to build a road and have the state pay them back over time according to how many vehicles use it, a concept known as shadow tolling.
The bill would help Texas keep up with the demand for new infrastructure, Mr. Johnson said. "As far as advancing our ability to deal with mobility challenges our state faces, we need
these tools. Right now, we are continuing to tread water or losing ground,· he said. E-mail thartzel@dallasnews.com
10f2 --------.-.--.. ---o-----------. --..--.w_-r -··· Posted on Thu, May. 29, 2003 Senators unanimously approve landmark transportation bill By Karen Brooks Star-Telegram Staff Writer
AUSTIN -Legislation changing the way Texas pays for highways and transportation projects won unanimous approval in the senate on Wednesday. The bill, touted as the largest transportation
bill in the history of Texas, continues the North Texas Tollway Authority and draws up to $1 billion into highway projects through bonds. The bill's author in the Texas House, however,
slammed the senate version and said he will call a conference committee to work: out the differences. House Bill 3358, by Rep. Mike Krusee, R-Round Rook, establishes gUidelines for the
4,000-mile, $175 billion Trans Texas Corridor Plan, Gov. Rick Perry's vision for creating a separate network: of corridors that would approximately parallel existing interstate highways.
Under the bill, the transportation commission could appropriate up to 20 percent of the state's highway reimbursements from Washington, levy tolls and other user fees, accept donations
and private investments, collect money from motorists who get excessive tickets, tap the Texas Mobility Fund and issue debt. The corridor plan is described as the most ambitious surface-transportatio
n proposal ever in Texas and the most sweeping in the nation since the Eisenhower-era creation of the interstate highway system. And it creates a Driver Responsibility Act that would
use fines paid by drunken drivers and drivers with multiple violations to fund transportation projects and help overburdened trauma centers. Krusee, who described the highway system
as "overloaded and on the brink of collapse," said the House version of the bill is a solution to that crisis. He said the Senate bill, however, would "emasculate" the regional mobility
authorities created in 2001, and he vowed to take it to a conference committee. The bill's Senate sponsor, sen. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, said there are "probably hundreds" of differences
between the two chambers in the 148-page legislation. The bill would create the Driver Responsibility Act, which would establish a point system in which drivers would be penalized $300
for racking up multiple traffic violations. An amendment by sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, requires the Legislature to review that system in 2007. The act is one of two sources of revenue
in the legislation. The other source is a $30 increase in fines for speeding tickets. Staff Writer Gordon Dickson Contributed to This Report. Karen Brooks, (512) 476-4294 kbrooks@star-telegram.com
5/29/2003 3:08 PM
DaliasHews.com 1!1)t;&1.IlI,' jIt.orlliag 􀁾􀁴􀁬􀁵􀀬􀁓 Proposal may generate billions more for roads Transportation funding overhaul could require bad drivers to pay extra 06/03/2003
By TONY HARTZEL1The Dallas Morning News Long-awaited road projects such as the LBJ Freeway reconstruction could get a huge boost under a massive transportation bill making its way to
Gov. Rick Perry. The legislation, which cleared the House and Senate on Sunday, will raise billions ofdollars for road projects, part ofit coming from bad drivers who must pay more to
keep their licenses. The bill allows the state to issue $5 billion in bonds backed by future federal road money. In addition, the state could get a one-time $2 billion boost by issuing
bonds based on revenue from the bad-drivers fees. In comparison, the Texas Department ofTransportation in 2002 spent $5 billion on road construction, maintenance and related expenses.
"The impact ofthis bill will be felt in a short period of time, given the time it usually takes projects to work through the pipeline,' said Te"as Transportation Commission Chairman
John Johnson. "This will move projects that are ready to go but without funding.' Delayed revenue Dow The additional revenue could begin flowing by the end ofthe year, but a large portion
ofit probably won't start flowing for several years. First, voters must approve a constitutional amendment giving the state the power to issue the road bonds based on future federal
transportation funds. Also, the state must gather several years of revenue history before it can issue bonds backed by higher driver's license fees, Mr. Johnson said. State Transportation
Department planners have proposed a $1.7 billion reconstruction ofLBJ Freeway, including a pair.of three-lane tunnels under part ofthe highway. Until now, they had difficulty paying
for such massive projects without affecting other road-construction plans. But now, Texas' transportation system and the way it is financed get an overhaul with the 127-page bill. Its
importance meant that Mr. Perry watched the bill's progress closely. "It's one of Governor Perry's big priorities, and it has been from the beginning," said Kris Heckmann, the governor's
transportation policy director. Penalizing bad drivers Bad drivers will feel the brunt of the state's new fund raising for roads and for trauma care centers. State officials estimate
that in the first two years, the bill will add $300 million for trauma centers and another $300 million for highway projects. The highway money would then be used to issue $2 billion
to $3 billion in bonds. 􀁾 Beginning Sept. I, the bill would tack on points to a driver's license for certain infractions. Moving violations such as speeding are two points, and moving
violations that result in an accident are three points. Motorists caught speeding receive points only if they are driving 10 percent or more above the posted speed limit. Drivers who
receive six points within three years must pay $100, and $25 for each additional point. The fines are assessed for each year that a driver amasses more than the minimum points. Motorists
convicted ofdriving while intOlocated face much larger fines -$1,000 a year for three years under the first convie,tion, and $1,500 a year after that. Penalties would reach $2,000 ifa
driver's blood alcohol level exceeded twice the legal limit. Supporters ofthe measure argue that only bad drivers will face the additional penalties and that they receive points only
for convictions. Points will not be assessed if motorists take defensive driving to keep an offense off their record. With the points program, lawmakers have found a way to devote money
to the Texas Mobility Fund. The fund was created two years ago, and voters approved it in a constitutional amendment eleCtion. But it has sat unfinanced since then, and its prospects
of having a steady stream ofrevenue looked slim as the state battled its budget woes this year. "It's been a long-term goal ofthe state to get more money in the pot," said Dallas Regional
Mobility Coalition Executive Director James McCarley. The other bonding provision has limits to its use. It allows the state to pledge future federal gas tax revenue for $5 billion in
bonds, but the money can be used in only a few categories: in emergencies such as the collapse ofa bridge; to attract more federal funds that the state otherwise wouldn't receive; to
build a road project as part ofan economic development incentive to lure a business to Texas; to widen state highways that connect small towns; and to build a road that creates its own
toll revenue. New powers The bill also means that for the first time, the Texas Department ofTransportation will have some authority to help build rail projects, but the agency's financial
participation cannot exceed certain levels. But the state would be able to buy land in the middle ofa highway project and prepare it lor rail lines, a vision laid out in Gov. Perry's
Trans Te"as Corridor plan. Regional mobility authorities also get more power under the bill. The agencies, which can be created locally, help build highway and toll road projects, and
could have some roles in mass transit planning. The provisions probably won't have much effect in North Texas because its existing transit agencies and the North Texas Tollway Authority
perform most of those functions already. The bill also allows for local governments to build a road and have the state pay them back over time according to how many vehicles use it,
a concept known as shadow tolling. The bill's myriad components will help Texas keep up with the demand for new inrrastructure, Mr. Johnson said. "As far as advancing our ability to
deal with mobility challenges our state faces, we need these tools. Right now, we are continuing to tread water or losing ground," he said.
E-mllil 􀁣􀁨􀀨􀀩􀁉􀀩􀁉􀀩􀁃􀁾􀁦􀀧􀁤􀁮􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁌􀀢􀁬􀁮􀁣􀀮􀀢􀀧􀁜􀀧􀁉􀁬􀀧􀁬􀀬􀁴􀀧􀁬􀁬􀁮􀁬 Bad drivers could fuel' raising of $600 million 􀁾􀁾􀀨􀁖 􀁾􀀬􀁽􀁤􀁾 . . " 􀀬􀁾 Many senators said
they dis-Senate gives initial OK' liked the money-raising methods SkMoOgden JohnWhitmlrc , , ' of the bill, saying they were hnr-. funds to go to trauma densome and merely disguised
theoostofthefees" care transportation new taxes on drivers. The senators agreed. that fund-" , UnderthebiII,driverswouidbe ing fur public bospital emergency By CHRISTY HOPPE assignedpointsforcertaind
riving rooms was woefully inadequate Austin Bu..... infractions. A moving violation and neariug a crisis. Ambulanccs AUSTIN -Bad drivers would 􀁷􀁯􀁵􀁬􀁾 be two points; a moving vi-are
often being turned away from , 'beIp fuel about $600 million in olation that resulted in an accident' busyhospitals. funds for trauma care centers and would be three points. Points Sen.
Robert Duncan, R-Lubfur highways and railways undera would be assessed on speeding bock, said the funding mcthod for bi!! tentatively approved by the tickets only forthose going10 per·
hospitals and highways was inge· 'Senate on Thesday nighL ' , cent over the limit, for example, nious. '_, The sweeping legislation ere-going 78 in a70 mphzone. 'It doesn't put a fee
on tickets; • ales regional trausportation au-Drivers who glIlher six points it puts a fee on drivers' licenses for .thorities to add' flexibility fur Within a three-yilar period would
bad driving. And it's going for a building, increases reliance on be fined $100, and $25 fur eBCh purposewemustfund,"hesaid. 'toUways and prods the Texas De-point above six. Sen.JohnLindsaY,R·Houston
, partment ofTransportation to in-Motorists convicted of DWi said he would vote for the bill, vest in railways that can ease con-would be fined $1,000 and $1,500 "while holding my nose"
gestion that comes from the state's for each conviction after the first. ' Mr. Whitmire persuaded cuidependence on roadways -,all And $2,000 would be assessed if leagues to to add a
pro,ision U,at part of a mobility plan pushed by the driver's blood alcohol level ex-would end the fee. programs in Gov. Rick Peny. teeded 0.16 -twice the legal lim-fuur years unless
rcnewed by the . .' "This biD addresses the full iL Legislature. He said such a mea-, S(Opeoftransportatioo nowfacing Another surcharge of $100 sure would allow a careful assessthe state,"
said bill sponsor Sen. would be automatically billed fur ment ofhow the system was work-􀁾􀁥 Ogden, R-Bryan. driving without a license or with a ing. . The measure also would lead to
suspended license. The bill is also expected to raise increased taxes from used-<m Those whofailed to pay the fees another sin million by changing sales and impose new, stririgent would
have their driVers licenses the way the stale collecL"ales taxfees on top oftraffic violations and suspended. es on used cars. driving while intoxicated charges. Sen. John Whitmire,
D-Hous-The House has passed asimilar State officials estimate that in ton, argued that all all these fees were bill, and final approval from the the first two years of the plan, being
piled on top ofexisting court Senate is expected Wlodnesday. about $300 million would be fees and conviction fines a1rcady The mea.sure then would l:O to raised for .trauma centelll
and an coUected by the state. confereoce committce where lawadditional $300 million for high-"00 you really believe that our makers would work out differencways. Ifthat $300 miDion is
used eriminaljusticc system can absorb es between the bills before the sesto iSsue new bonds, the money these fees added onto all the oth-sion ends Monday. could be e,q,anded to yield
$2 bil-ers?" he said. "The court system, r lion for highwaycoustruction. believe, is goiog to collapse under ., :-,. ;, un." an attorney wilh Jackson Walker L.LP.. serves as SIBle affaIrs
chairman for the Greater Dallas Chamber. drafts would have cut funding 4% to 11%. Tuition deregulation passed, as did 􀁩􀁯􀁤􀁩􀁲􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁳􀁴 recovery for research (estimated to bring
more than $3 million to our region.) However to the surprise and the disappointment of 􀁩􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁴􀁵􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳across the state including our own University of Texas at Dallas, University
ofTexas at Arlington and University of North Texas. the governor vetoed the Texas ExceUence Fund.a$16miIlion loss ofunivelSity research funding that local legislators fought hard to
maintain during the session. , £cGnomic development. The new $295 million Texas Enterprise Fund, gives the state a war chest to support local efforts to recruit compa· nies to Texas.
The fund will help Texas recruit businesses strategically important to the health ofthe state's economy. The Texas Department of Economic Development was dissolved. its functions moved
to the govemor's office to streamline the state's business-recruitment efforts. Tort/medical malpractice liabilitJ refonn. Legislators capped noneconomic damages that injured individuals
can recover against doctors, hospitals and other health care providers. In addition to limits on damages, the legislation also changed many more technical provisions of the law regarding
settlement offers. venue for trials, class-action lawsuits, allocation of respoosibility among defendants and produclliability. Successful passage of this legislation has long been a
priority for D-FW area 􀁨􀁯􀁳􀁰􀁩􀁴􀁡􀁬􀁾􀀮 No doubt about it, the 78th Texas Legislature was a victory for the D-FW business community. However, ooe piece of unfinished husincss -public
school finance -looms large enough perhaps to open most elements of the slate's tax slructure to reconsideration. Expected in spring 2004, a special 􀁳􀁥􀁾􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁮 on school tinance
may well prove as important to lhe economic heallh and business climate of Texas as il will to our education system. Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston that would otherwise have resulted
in significant losses offedCfl\I highway funding, the Legislature funded the TERP program primarily by raising the cost of transferring a vehicle title. TERP legislation will also fund
the DFWlHouston air quality initiative, enabling us to conduct research to more clearly identify, and position us to more effectively respond to, our region's air quality Challenges.
This partnership, the Texas Environmental Research Consortium, will receive approximately $3 million per year ,for the next four years. Transpoltation. The governor's Trans-Texas Corridor
became the centerpiece of the legislature's massive transportation legislation this session. More innovative methods of building and financing highway and toll road capacity throughout
the statewere the first orders of business. The Department of Transportation emerged from the session with significantly enhanced authority. One example: assuming the passage of a proposed constitutional
amendment in September, TxDOT will be able, forthe first time ever. to borrow against the State Highway Fund (up to $1 billion per year). Also, a revenue source was identified and authorized
for the Tex'Ls Mohility Fund. which may allow $1 billion toS3 billion in bonds to be issued over the next few years, or Southwestern and higher education. Despite announced acmss-the-board
cuLs for highereducation when House ,md Senate budgeteers opened the session. North Texa.s higher education institutions fared fairly well. UT Soulh 􀁷􀁥􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁭􀀮􀁬􀁨􀁣 biggest success
story of the sc!ision for our rc2ioll 􀁾􀁉􀁦􀁴􀁣􀁲 incurrin!.! i.1 4.2o/r fomlula I'unding decreasc. will n..􀁣􀁥􀁩􀁶􀁾 lIn addilional $7 million per year t"r " new Ceoter I'or Nobel
Prize and Nation,,1 Academy 01' Science Re 􀁾􀁥􀁡􀁲􀁣􀁨􀀮 UTSW also received tuition revenue bonding authority for a $56 millioo building. Funding for D-FW institutions nmged from roughly
6% increa.ses to 7% cUls. Original bUdget For Dallas-Fort Worth, the , 78th legislative session was a success. Despite a $9.9 billion budget shortfall, changes in House and Senate leadership
and the quorum-busting . events over redistricting, the Legislature tackled an astonishing number of major issues this session. Included were the budget, tort reform, homeowner's homeowner's
insurance, clean air. transportation, college tuition deregulation, ethics reform and creation of the Texas Enterprise Fund. We can thank local elected officials and community leaders
for keeping Metroplex issues alive while many communities competed for stale dollars. Our slate's leadership is to be commended as well for bringing about major resulL< on key issues.
Each session. the Greater Dallas Chamber develops an agenda of state legislative issues that will direclly benefit the business community. This session included six priorities vital
for the region: air quality. tmnsportation, University ofTe"" Southwestern Medical School. higher educ"tion. economic development and mcdicalmalpraelice liability reform. Air quality.
The Texas Emissions Reduclion Plan will receive full funding, appmximately $160 million a year for the next four years. to provide gmnLs and other incentives for improving air quality
Ihroughout the state. Under the threal of failed state implementation plaos in David Laney EnnlliJIU ,eJ,OJ 7,'(' 􀁾t,J3 Victory for D-FW business community From higher education to
transportation, the area benefited from the latest legislative session \t\ 􀁾
􀁰􀁬􀀩􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁾 S)"l'tl'l1l. (!ri\'c:rs ('ilul'"illV,lwll mridcllt.. all'(ll:lCC thl' ...􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁾 \1l:llillt\".aml the linl's l'Sfili"h: wilh lllon: lickets Clr ("ullisiuns. Rcpeal
dri\·· ing whih-inlelxil'i1lt'd \'il)lillilllll' n::.ult in mhliliun;d lilll"s lip 1.11 SlllOOI with all till-1I1111ll'y 􀁬􀀡􀀮􀁬􀁉􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾 tl)\\"i\rd ·1'l':m... lraUll\i1 􀁴􀀧􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁉􀁾􀁬􀀢􀀺􀀭􀀮
Pro\"isilll\S in tlw \m.... lhilt an: immedialc.:l\' I:tkt·li\·f.:: • Forl'l'; drin·r.' who ral'k up al least thn't" m;ljllr 􀀱􀀱􀁉􀁦􀀩􀁜􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾 violations. sllt'h iL" 􀀺􀁾􀁬􀀩􀁬􀀢􀁴􀂷􀁤􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁶􀀻
\Tlor(! tlmn 10 n\ph OWl" tin' limit or 􀁲􀁵􀁴􀁬􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁡 􀁲􀁥􀁤􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁨􀁬􀀮􀀮 iiI pitY :-:-11111 n\tln: to n'new 􀁴􀁨􀁬􀁾􀁩􀁬􀀧 􀁬􀁩􀁻􀀧􀁦􀂷􀁮􀁾􀁉􀂷􀀺􀀭􀀮 􀁴􀀻􀁬􀁉􀁤􀁬􀁾􀁲 thl' new
"Help Lo; on the way" for 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁵􀁴􀁣􀁾 Gov. Rick PCMj S4\id t)f the bill he signed inlo law 􀁔􀁨􀁬􀀱􀁲􀁳􀁤􀁡􀁾􀂷􀀮 AssQciatcd Press HOUSTON -Gov. Rick Perry signed 􀁾 sweeping transportation
bill 'Thursday that broadens the state'. ability to build trade corridors and improve IIrban mobility while forcing ehronic traffic scolflaws tD fund trauma centers. "Ib the penple who
are tired of silting in traffic, choking on ex· haust fumes. help is on thc way," Mr, Perry si\id at i\ signing ceremony at the TranStar Center. a mission eontrol-like facility th....t
monitars traffic conditions across the HoustonamL He said that if ""tcrs in Sep' tember approve a constitutional amendment authorizing shorttenn borrowing tor tran:-iportation projects.
􀁴􀁽􀁬􀁦􀁾 state could r....isc up to $6 billion tor 􀁲􀁏􀁬􀀱􀁤􀁾􀀬 rail and other items to JlCt people and good. moving. l'ransportation law to get drivers going Pl'ftY 􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀲􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁾
. 􀁾􀀻􀀢...<􀀯.􀀬. J:IT' I •Provides funtls for Mr, Pcr· Measure targets repeat 􀀺􀀺􀁦􀀺􀀻􀀧􀁾􀁻 ... i. 􀁲􀁹􀀧􀁓􀀬􀀧􀀢􀁉􀀧􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁔􀁥􀁾􀁡􀁳Corri,dor" pr..,jel'I, •• &rj.._ _ I . \yhlCh
enV1Slons major 􀁲􀁯􀁡􀁣􀀮􀀮􀁬􀁜􀁜􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁾 VIolators, gives state . 􀁾 􀁾􀁬􀀮􀀮􀀮 􀀮􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀢􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 i·........:-..:. and rail trade artcl·.ies cris....<:ro:-:.smore
building power " ,";;..l :. .,.. I "􀁟􀁾􀀮􀀧 􀀬􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀻􀀧􀀿􀀻􀁫􀀢􀀻􀀬􀀧􀁾 􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀢􀀧􀀱􀀭􀀭 do ,'C.".' \ iwngh.lcthhhecssatua..t.el sahnoduldarnllnd <ilie" kecpdangel·· j .'. ... -OliS
materials Ol1t of thr. densest . population centcrs, • Allows the slab.' to buy uptions on riJl;ht<; of way bcl'orl: it rutlte is apprm·cd. whith 􀁾􀁬􀁲􀀮 ?1.'lT:. said wi11 help reduce
land loipl't:Ultltion. Also, the: transporti\tillll (\1" partment C'dn set a..',;ide 􀁬􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁾 lill environmental rcmellintinn III" cnnf;tructiol1 pruject::i. • 􀁇􀁩􀁶􀁾􀀨􀀩􀁜􀀧􀁣􀁲􀁳􀁩􀁬􀀭􀀡􀀻􀁨�
� Pll\\"l·r,.; tIl till" ·Iexa.<; 􀁄􀁴􀁾􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴 fIr 􀀧􀁬􀀧􀁲􀁡􀁉􀁬􀁓􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁬􀁩􀁬􀂭 tion, 􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁷􀁩􀁮􀁾 cxpan<k-d 􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁬􀀱􀁾 IIptions l()r large rlladway
􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁬􀀮􀀧􀀨􀂷􀁴􀁾 such a<; toll mads. The IH:W Ii.llld· ing mechanisms should ,:-pt:l-d 􀁨􀁩􀁾􀁨􀁷􀁬􀁬􀁙 CDIlSll"Ill'lifJI\ hy nIl 􀀱􀀨􀀩􀀱􀀱􀁾􀀨􀀧􀁲 requiring that 􀁴􀁬􀁜􀀨􀁾􀁹
hI" pay·n::'-yllll· 􀁾􀁬􀀩 project... Mr. Perr)' SOlid llll: 􀁉􀁲􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁬􀀧􀀢􀁲􀁬􀀢􀂷 tion law ilnd.lIl(,lllel"hill ht: 􀁳􀀻􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁉􀀧􀁬􀁬 Inst week that aims til lowl'r mil! practice
􀁩􀁮􀁳􀁵􀁲􀁩􀁜􀁬􀁬􀁮􀁾 rilles will !ak.· prl.'sslIrt' 􀀨􀀩􀀱􀀱􀀧􀁣􀁭􀁬􀀧􀁲􀁾􀁬􀀧􀁭􀀺􀁹 1"f1(lm:-. SemIe apr:clal to OK plan to benefit care c:eaten, transportation DaUas IlAY 2 9' 2003
MondD,-New. Bad.driverscouldfuel. funds 􀁾􀀻􀁲􀁾􀀺􀀽􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁮􀁩􀁬􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀽 􀁾􀁟􀁊􀀾􀀮􀁈􀀮􀀭 􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁟....-......111..... Io0o_. 􀁾 .. 􀁾..,,""pooridoItl" piIcd oa 1l;lP or
aiotIDI aat feu Dil;q. 􀀮􀀮􀁡􀁵􀁥􀁯􀁦􀁴􀁢􀁥􀁥􀁬􀁬􀀢􀁴􀁯􀁬􀁢􀁴􀁬􀁴􀁡􀁬􀁲􀁬􀁄􀁃􀁬􀁾 􀁾 QIRISn' sorn and CIl8ditIDa tintS'-'" ·/r ct<-\ 10..>;..':'1􀁾llfld,.T 􀁉􀁨􀁾 hli. 1IIIlIII"'--1I!dtdhJ*___
-p&lleco)ll,k\;· stllQ",lwrclJh3Ye Iopo.y lIIOaDo AD9DH -1bI cmcn: WCIlkI 􀀢􀁄􀁄􀁾􀁮􀀮􀁄􀀱􀁴􀀧􀁣􀁬􀁩􀁥􀁶􀁴􀁤􀁲􀁬􀁬􀁕􀁬􀁬􀁦 .. ilplll:t:l.ftcl."cbits'I__ 􀁤􀁥􀁲􀁬􀁨􀁥􀀧􀀱􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁥􀁢􀁯􀁡􀁬􀀨􀀮􀁐􀁾􀁏􀁄
help lbcl·" S600 IIIIalam 􀁡􀁩􀁉􀁉􀁤􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁉􀁾 DUD" 􀁾 foc toi dtWq. ..\nJ it's 􀁂􀁏􀁾 "•• dlc cu.1dIsa 􀁉􀁨􀁾 an prvride 􀁾􀁊􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀽􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺 􀁾􀀺􀁳􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀥􀀮􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁲􀁔􀁪􀁊􀀢􀀬􀀭􀁾􀀱􀀺
􀀺􀀢􀀢 􀀧􀀢􀀧􀁩􀁾􀀺􀀽􀁃􀀺􀀻􀁩􀁉􀀽􀁾􀀱􀁩􀁭􀁩􀁉􀁡􀁲 WldIid..aDCdDIIlDpblliDIl w-i.... • ...􀁾 ........... uid MWlJLIldvotctllb:: hii bill ;nd&AIIllppruval wa... etpef-.........8ImIIlcm..",..
􀁾􀁃􀁬􀁦􀁉􀀱􀁉􀁤􀁩􀁌 "'w!IieidlftlmJaca-IN 􀁗􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀺 in the Sm:1le. The "'_ 1ho_....,.s*"W. 'k._"......,m' ...... ""''''''''p ....... ........ 􀁾􀁃􀁉􀁄􀀭 􀁰􀁍􀁡􀁢􀁣􀁬􀁐􀁴􀁬􀁬􀀺􀁾􀁉
IDaJd.proyil)oo 􀁾􀁥􀁭􀁺􀁾􀁷􀁨􀁩􀁣􀁨􀁷􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁫􀁊􀁢􀁍 ... 􀁾􀁾􀁡􀁵􀀭 􀀧􀁉􀁉􀁄􀁉􀁦􀁩􀁬􀁉􀁊􀀧􀁾 'Oll1derdthtfGlpqrllZllin(fU' 􀀱􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁷􀁭􀀨􀀩􀁬􀁊􀀬􀁾􀁨􀁥􀁦􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁨􀁥 _10011-..,"'_ lIIlI·priv
􀁾􀁾 __.....ol"'l!oup. "'".. 􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁾􀁟􀀮 ill ... inl:Teases titiam on • --......6Qm bbft. He said'" a 􀁭􀁥􀁬􀁕􀁬􀁕􀁾 _ .....1rdpng:lboTcxasDc. u,hmpiM. 􀁾􀁾􀁯􀁴􀀢 I«laid .. 􀀸􀀡􀀧􀁾
_􀁾􀁄.􀁲..􀀢.􀀢..􀀢,.􀀢-􀀧-􀁉_􀁏􀀢. SaL ..... __z.,.aaaWDwtdiiDIi 􀀽􀀮􀀻􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀭􀀺􀀽 ...It·...pgtt ofI"'"pIIa 􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁾􀀽􀀢􀀱􀁢􀀼􀁦􀁵􀁉􀁬 :",..:..-::r:-::.􀁾 1-1..I.o-a1a_:6:.􀁾.<.􀁗1􀁕0􀁯_􀁬􀁉􀁤_ka..
tl.D. 􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁡􀁯􀁯􀁾􀁥􀁡􀁮􀁡􀁣 􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁭􀁡􀁬􀁣􀁤􀁬􀁨􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁄 􀁾􀁴􀁡􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁵􀀮􀀺 􀁾 cata1 W ;)," aOlitic:rel 􀀽􀀽􀀺􀁾 􀁾􀀢􀀽􀀢􀀧􀁾 ... liked lie mOlZ)'-rnising mdhJds 􀀭-scme.m:f􀁾􀁾.􀂭..
lIB (II, U.......__1>0 assigned poiru fa' CIftIia lhivin& _A 'IDlIINl& violation WaWd 􀁾 tao poIIIII; , mov;ng 􀁶􀁩􀁵􀁬􀁾 lion... -e-lliDw._.1Id.d-.B* _ ..lpOO'1IIIDaUcI_a.o.lr.. k 􀀢􀁡􀁩􀁹􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁬􀁃
􀁊􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁲􀁴􀁨􀁥 ..... r"' """18i1l• ., mph.,: _. ..dnD1ar 􀁰􀁴􀁲􀁩􀀮􀁾 WllUU" ftncd 'lOO,pplZ"'-"""'...._ • ...,;"d.DW1 􀀱􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁉􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀧􀀧􀀺􀀭􀁾 􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀱􀀱􀁩􀁡􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁡􀁡􀁲􀁭􀁮􀁾
.. would b.:: hump.,:cl ,,10 t2,OOOldle_llDooI,loix>l 􀁾􀁥􀁬􀀮􀀮􀁷􀁏􀀮􀁉􀀨􀁉􀀭􀁴􀁷􀁩􀁣􀁥􀁬􀁢􀁥􀀮 􀁾_􀀢1􀀢o􀁲o􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁯_􀁲􀀮􀀱􀁬􀁉􀁏 bIIoIk ................wiIb& .......-.sevml new 1001,
10 rurKI hiS. way conaltUlllion. CAd'll Aid 8 new $30 Cee on IlIffio tickcll: and inc:1'CIICd 􀁴􀀻􀀺􀀱􀁾􀁯􀁦􀀺􀀺􀁩􀁯􀀺􀁶􀁭􀁾􀁾􀁨 =. lboul S200 mIDion 8 y!t, 10 the Tena Mobilily Pund.
which could IMrt be used 10 secure boad, for construclion projllCtJ. Those fees also would nUJC. nentually. more than am million. yeat \Q pay fOI trauml ""' It T«cu hospI. tala, he Slid.
The WMtoI _ who Slid M h.J nol been pulled onr for. 􀀺􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀧􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁄􀁾􀁾􀁯􀁤􀁏􀀺􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁲 􀁬􀁾 Increased nna .re excesSively high, "It 5 • voluntlry fcc: Ir yOu 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀧􀁬􀁬􀁨􀁥􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾
􀁾􀀺􀀢􀁾􀁾􀁤􀁾􀁯􀁮􀀧􀁬 vio· 􀁣􀁾􀀳􀁾􀀺􀁯􀀺􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀽􀀱 􀁉􀁾 November. the Departmenl of Tronsportalion would be 1I.1I0Md 10 borrow S3 I;lillion .IIglins1 revenue from lhe gas ta.1C.
Twenly 􀁰􀁣􀁮􀀺􀁾􀁬 would be 􀁤􀁩􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀱􀁃􀁤 10 fund Slfet\' improvements on dlngCfouS roads. which Ogden Slid 􀀺􀁴􀁔􀁾􀁾􀀶􀀱􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁯􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁡􀁾 lio". AftOthcr l'O'1ion of IIle
bill would c.llbli.b Ihe TnlnJ TCUI CClTidm. Pmy', plill eo"T. 􀁾􀁏 0100 . 􀁾􀁩􀁬 􀁢􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁉􀀺􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁥 􀁬􀀺􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁬􀁩􀀺􀁾 /u':J: .mounlll of 􀁦􀁥􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁬􀁩 Ieron Ihe IUle. The
plIO nul he Kid he i, haPJl)'wilh 􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁃􀁬 parlly 011 lhc: QJnJIJ'UC. The linal pnxtUCl. wflich could ! 􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁯􀁾􀁯􀁬􀁾􀁭􀀶􀁤􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁥 􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀺􀁮 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁢􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾 tho [)qwtmcnl
of'1'l'1msPoRll' for rtCw biltr.ny consIr\.lCIkln lion bl'Md ALlthorJr)' 10 build in T,m.. : 􀁬􀁵􀁲􀁌􀀦􀀬􀀺􀁣􀀺􀁾􀁥􀀽􀀬 􀁾 :::,1:. co'-􀁰􀁉􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺 :;c: 􀁾􀀧 .= lected. on thGK' rOld.
WDuld be hive no. IS connrvction used 10 lCeun:: bond, uncle' 􀁣􀀺􀁡􀀬􀀪􀁩􀁴􀁹􀁾􀀧 he Mid. -I bcliCYCl the pI.n. tliat. Wlilin 1hc ncxl two to he􀁾􀁾 􀀱􀁾􀁤􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁮􀁴 􀁬􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁮􀁳
􀁳􀁾􀁾􀀺 􀁬􀁯􀁹􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀽􀁴 i, nol 􀀽􀀺􀀽􀀺􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁰􀁬􀁊􀁓􀁉􀁉 􀀱􀁾􀀱􀀺􀁾􀁾 • "ClIMI LeoS.,' .rMIll11cfrfts 18 r ••. 􀂷􀂷􀀮􀂷􀁾􀁾 f, .••.•••.• ; •• I.! ...t-..• -.\ •·..".,o:et......􀁊􀀡􀁉􀁉􀁾􀀧􀀡􀀧
􀁾􀁴􀁶􀁮 ... 8m. Srcw Ogden -who lovcrased hi. SCQ.to committee chlirmaMhip to push • musin l1amponation bill lhroush lbe I.ea filature -On Monday JlRd:ielcd lhe !cIP,I.lion will lead
to • bllbway· buildiNJ boom. Daden', eherishod IttMportaliO'l'l 􀁑􀁾􀁾 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁹􀁾􀁦􀁾􀁬􀁥􀁊􀁯􀀺􀁬􀁾􀁦 the 􀁌􀁣􀀸􀁩􀁳􀁬􀀮􀁴􀁾 on • Molio Sund.y 􀁬􀁬􀁓􀁬􀁲􀁾􀀸􀁳􀀺􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁊􀁴􀁩􀀺􀁮􀁾􀀧􀀷􀀧􀀢􀁬􀁨􀁣
􀀺 bill would inm:ax Ibn for nmc V;olatiDM 10 rt.isc billiolll for 0'111-􀁾􀁨􀁡􀁃􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁩􀀺􀀺􀁴􀁮􀁳 􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁾􀁯􀁬􀁾􀀧 iDcraase the number of loll roads IC'l"DIS feus.
The bill .ho would lei vot..._ decide whelher III amm:l lhe Te1C's Conslilution 10 Illow stale 8uolirtC tal (Undl \Q PI.:--(or hiShWloY proj· ccll. '1lhirtk iI's 􀁤􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁭􀀧􀁬􀁴􀁣􀀮􀁾
Osdcn. R. Hry.n. yid from the Caflilol on lhe lasl ell)' (If Ihe Jl.t.uioflo. '"And if lbe voters or Teus approve lhe 􀁬􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁤􀁾􀀮 I lhink ,,'C'II *'C lhe biuesl acceleration of highway
c:enslruclion since we 􀁾􀁥 buildins the inletsl'le highw.ys:· Osdon Slid 1.wrnaJ(an nick_ named Ihe bill "MOAB." or "'lnOlhcf of III bill:\-" borrow· ina (rom the 􀁷􀁥􀁬􀁬􀀭􀁫􀁾􀀢 U.s.
milillry bomb lhal bel" lhe lime acronym. The: lcgi!dl' lion C(lffloprillCl 14 Irlieln llInd 􀁉􀁉􀁜􀁨􀁥􀀧􀁭􀀻􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀺 ;e 􀀧􀁔􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾 Dcplrlmcnl nr 􀁔􀁲􀀮􀁮􀁾􀁰􀁯􀀢􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁯􀁮 BryID-CaUege
SlItiDD .lUll 0 • 􀁾􀁉􀀧􀀢 EaP • •." Ogden: Bill paves way for construction boom -By JO-IlNW-IAS ,.CoUege SlatioD. JUN 2 0 2003 E.gle gden bill blamed for delay in certification ofbudget
􀀿􀀱􀀺􀁏􀀭􀁾􀁾 􀁭􀀺􀁁􀁊􀁾􀁧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽 fled as baliinced hetilre the ,vc iL 􀁾􀁾 !his 'I 􀁾(􀁾 . :his is an embarrassment and lethi"g thai can be: lixed 􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮 :000 some 1
it during 􀀭􀀺􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁉􀀢􀁦􀁍􀁬􀁳􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁳􀁾􀁥 􀀤􀁾 . ton and cannot he ocrtifie<l lptrol1cr carole Keeton Slrtly n said ·fbwsday. She 􀁾􀀱􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁡􀀿􀁧􀀺􀁣􀁾􀁾􀁧􀁯􀀧􀁊􀀺􀁥 .fall. gdcn
said he docs not-yet 􀁾􀁖􀁾􀁜􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁦 􀁾 ,SJXlr1Ulioll hill. He attrlb. III to (he Slress or lhe wanday:-orthc regular lel1Stasession. he bill ftl1thorizes the statu build
Pern:'s qro'QOsed ans Tcx<ls Corridor," 1:1 􀁾􀁷􀁾􀂧 􀁾􀁮􀁾 􀁏􀁾􀁾􀁉􀀺􀀱􀁬􀀮 i 􀁥􀁓􀁾􀁾􀁌􀁮􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁩􀁭􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁳 􀁉􀀺􀁦􀁬􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁤􀁾􀁾􀁙􀁓􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁴 p-Sljln I:On'ilruclion
and 􀁾􀁳 fine'!> lor habitual speed· ttl pav fur Inlllma care. n hOllT hcltm: PerrY signed bill illlu liJ\Y during a C\:tt· IV al lhe TC:\ilS Tnmsporta· I' i1l...litulc hl°udquartcrs.
Ivhorn 􀁡􀁬􀀱􀁮􀁯􀁵􀁭􀀺􀁾.'.d she .lel IInl f,;cI1il...· the the out-ot. nee butlccl. . 􀁉􀁲􀁡􀁜􀀢􀁨􀁮􀁲􀁮􀁾 l>;lid Ogden's Ispllrlillitll1 hill would 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁊􀁉􀀻􀁥􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁦􀁣􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁮
􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁓 fwmlhl' I!.l'm:roll w,mJ 10 il lWil'v 1:(lIlSirlll:lion aCCuunl :seal year 200.'\. !luI Ol!.dcn I 􀁉􀁣􀁧􀁩􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁵􀁲􀁳 illlcm)..:trUl<lI \l.... In slil\· in the gl.TIl,.,..,d
; 􀁵􀁾􀁮􀁬􀁩􀁬 2006. e S<lid the miswkc 􀁾􀁰􀀧􀂥􀀮 ,. W,IS irN.T1w in the i"C 'iI.TSiUIl uf the ln1Il.<ralien hill. lilt: version sub-􀁾􀀧􀁉􀀮􀁬 rllr I'W\,'s signature. CSIX>Ildil1g:
10 qllQilions
San Anlonio JUN 2 0 2u03 hpl'tSS-'ew. Perry' signs far-reaching transportation bill· ForiWordi sw.Tdqnm Jill 0 2 2003 Riches for roads sclloolztWlf. 􀁾􀁮􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬 ponolll.. $100 for
lilt "'" sIJI poitts $ISlor IICilIddlticNI point $100 for Omlne wl\llout a vl:allIlOo l"oI"'"..'... __ 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁏􀁬􀁟􀀬􀀮􀀮 qulllll ..IIIIllr_..... 􀁾􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁤􀁲􀁜􀁙􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁷􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬�
�􀀮 I!IIlOlIGlco1l1Id1to._Ol_ qllllilDWlccnv_ 1$2i,lIIIlO for a_OWl colonYvatIet.l.on • -0.11, w111cb .._lilt loP u.o ...,.,.., to lI... lDl'IYlIIt ...... 􀁬􀁾 Driver Responsibility
Program 111I DopwtliO'It It PIotIlIe 8alIl'( wtlllook It Or1'/llS' ,........ MI'/yw .nd ... _.dwlllntl._ hll aoOllmulatld ,1'1 po",ts or morl on his or rlIrli:tnlt _tIlIposIilno""" 1IIIlIneI
WIll III palO at .. tim, of l!unA 'Ift,wal. Ingvt'enlatlUon....._rro..mar-_ tar StpL 1, and wRI be as11I1'1II" """'" .llWI-notp,.o.l.o.l.ll:_ ...... _llIIl_ln v.I.o.-. clont No poHs:_dIntl.
I lilt _il<aivinIl .... IIIIllIO P_MlIIlt""""" ... IbIt .-pi Ills local tranopot1Blion needs. .nO they will !mYe the add<>! benefd of keeping 10caIIy ___ tnDI\lOI1alilII doIlIn i" their
local communiti.. for future Ifllj<cts,-1'1I11 soid nandlJ. H, caI1Id the mobility authon. ties \hi< "most intriguing and JIIn,lI be1/ll'lll piece of lbla 1IIIaIatklll-" wuu.-C<omIJ
e-Io_ 􀁇􀁲􀁥􀁾 8oIlf\1llllll8lll tllaltbl-.tboClbelllllbllit:l authotit1 is tfle loca1 deClIloDo lIIUbII thol will enable !he CllWIlIIs to "COIltroI oar own dIItID1 and be .bI. to set
_e 􀁉􀁦􀁬􀁬􀁾 􀁊􀀺􀀢􀀦􀁮􀁬􀁥􀁬􀁥􀁤􀁾􀀧􀁯􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁡 sor-titas ,p<roJvsdisOiolnI1s1lm..l\IaSliIntSed 10 lb. mobility lutII«ItJ lIIIt of COIlo_eDmothdali 't_lte \plDltUllilsJNlIdOIOlMau!al'oDls'
P!'WCf. 􀁾 8'l1ued tbo i:IlIIIpt IIamaInmc the author· ity% ability to 􀁾!he toll l'08llI and build them quicker BDd 􀁾􀁢􀁥􀁡􀁰􀁥􀁲􀀮 ThOf.C powaI 􀁾􀁡􀁥 􀁾􀁧􀁾􀀢 "The a.uthority also
can CODnrtalatblcfroeatallllliibWap to loll roods. bul only dIf holdiDg public hearings. no CII1v1a. appr..,l flllll1 lbe T.... Transportation ConunissioD 8llIll9\lllbllnlDlthesta\2ftlrthe
pasl_ond_ 1IIIlC8 COIlS .r the road 􀁾􀀭 IUJUl'ID ROCK -Gov. Rick Petry ,igntld a massive tI8lISportation bill __ thai empowetS Williamson and 1 ravis counties to build toU Nda\oplIlor
l114adl1&lIIlIIfar bad driv.... 10 fund 1rI_ centen. All afternoon event in Round Rock capped. clay of lJ8iIIlllIY onrBouaoBUlSS88.1!le1lUllP of whicll was led 111 two .1IIIIIawn who
represenf W_ COIlnIY: Rep. Mike-.IIRooad Rock. lIIl<l Sell. Steve ()e. dell, R·!lrYIIl. Th, bm I.Ues ef· fect immediately. "h', soinS 10 make. dnmllli< """'go 1II1h• ...,. ... t<eI'"
po!IIl A III pain! B In Texas," 􀂰􀁴􀁤􀁒􀁮􀁯􀁵􀀬􀀻􀁴􀁾􀀮􀁤 for the t!lIl'lI and fm.1 evenl of the day for the transportation bill, PCIT}' said \he 􀁬􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁳􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁣􀁮 􀁾􀀻􀁉􀁉 makt
T"'.. \hi< national leader in􀁾 ,I"" lruI.pol1a'ion soluliOll5." Th. bill give! the p&lleI4 [or PIn11 plan ror the 'l'nm Te:,.. Corrldor,ac.OlIO<IIlIa_llor toll roads. rtU Knm lIIld
1IllJltJ 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁡􀀽􀁾 􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀧􀀢􀁲􀀺 tmIIDa .enlor. Cl'Itf \hi< neXl five JWI by fming hnbilWllly bod okiven. _. The TIUS Driver 􀁒􀀢􀀧􀁰􀁬􀁉􀁎􀁾 bility Program odd, SIOU 10
II· ClUe renewul fees tor drivers who ure C4)nvicted of three moving \'iollllioo! CC' of moo;ins violations thllt C3U.1e 􀀨􀁾􀀧􀁯 ao.:r· dents within lhm: ytm. oerorethebomettiwncrowdoC
William...," Counly leadcr.l, 􀁾 gOI a Iinle ernotionol when he """,pared the Round Rock 􀁾􀁩􀀸􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁧 witll the: 􀁏􀁬􀁨􀁾 two ,VeDII of the dov. 110 said 􀁢􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁾 lugothor'w_
nnd l'nt\"is counties-which he likened \l) '"'c8l\ and dop" -in the Cen..1 T""" R''gional M<> bl1l1Y A\llllort<1 00d:d ,,<II (Of his e!Torts to !>rins Iosether \he Ll."gislamfC tQr !.his
.Ibold'· 􀁾􀁬􀁋􀁉􀁲􀁴􀁡􀁻􀁪􀁾􀀧􀁮 initiativu. "We're lwing to be oble to build ruo<h that we ··ever ewld iIIW bull bef"",: _ said The nwbilitr authority won the paRr h) issue bonds to
pay lor......roodsIUI4condIlllII!IJId '\oni "" rood pdI. Ttoa COftlaI TCX1l5 c:oa11t1oD is the tirst IIIIonaI mol>i1ily authority In the sIBle and hIlS named .. its top prioriti.. a
toll·road bypass of 􀁾􀁻 􀁽􀁾..":s 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀧􀁮􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁯􀁵􀁉􀁾 lOId ill S...th....1 Austin. "With \hi< authority 10 form regional mobility aiJlhorilies, Joad OIlOlmuniti.. will have the
lIexibitity \hey n.... 10 addless ByKaltAtu" .\.\CEItIl°•.\,\o"-.••,,ns.\l\,\:.T.\fl" AutiD Americao-SUtesmu JUN 2 0 2003 Road-building agency enabIed Law that authorizes Travis-Williamson
toll authority also adds penalties for bad drivers leglelatlve elbles and olber new laws GOv. RJoIl Pwry.......... ldtooI I« -GIl ".,.,. hn lID lliIl .. !IUIdlI. 1ft. 􀁾 <l1tcIIior dIIlIIlt
􀁣􀁉􀁕􀁤􀁉􀁬􀁴􀁧􀁬􀁢􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁄􀁴􀁯􀁵􀁧􀁉􀁉􀁡􀁮􀁾 or ...... lIIIllItiI.sdIoaIII.. "Not I..... __• lCIlooI<IlItIiI AlIstollllnlU poIIIIcaI mo" IOlIvIly <II_ In-__ liIod _ .. dIsUIotlnlbl_
1606lnlblflnlldlyt.,lIlt_ ....... AlMltIII 􀁯􀁬􀁡􀁮􀀬􀁬􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁬􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉 _1II<lT_Io ....... """'''''disIIII:lIon<lllll" ID _ 1iI_"'po_lnlllt,.. bonofthe__••• iIr ..... W .....lIIlD
.... pay ... 1llo 1InII ........ w_11I aal_tarlnllQlnt Rap. _ WDItns, o.oa.... ""'" . cilI _ ....... tIlI .. llt1l1T••• .-__􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀽􀀢􀀢􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀽􀀺 lilt..........,. ... ..,h
􀁾􀀮􀁉􀀬􀁮 ' ...po,n ... WItlIIII to _. ._...1IlIDlI􀁾-.􀀮..􀀮.􀀮.,􀀮.... 1IIclrIdlr d1WwlII.l.......... -pIb. L'9Io1'Io" wII 1...,." • '-_.-0iI/iDII _ __ IIltdlllllltller-....ry ...
1lIl"poIdlo"'_. _lD_2,-. 1Iytd ,ilglsIttM _ .......·MIoIIIIIS _ lftn not /fin' lilt-"""-SIIIIa PIYIII8_1n1tGtl ilia 􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁉􀁎􀁉􀁮􀀢􀁕􀁬􀀾 stot••,•..,. lIoIIlD..__ -.,.c oIIIolalo
In"'" III Co••I,IIon. mOlettt..lDUIlOtniI-• __11I-_ lIlIlIlIIllcSolallllIlnlcIlsII1<It willi t_ill .. II......_.. Soadr ........... IInaIIclII.. tI/tlSlD ...... 1dIIlIItr _1Ial_ftIIdlri_
IIltIt. aIIIdIIL .........fIIIIIIIIIllI Fw.at.llllolllllll....llI lof 'due."•• ""1.. _,, l_ilt ....-......l.l. gWo lD Io-InlmrtlIIrinD..,_far brdIeJWtll boyond lilt _ II't"SO'1It <I
lilt h1glllgldO: illIaIlII 101I II lInUblI I ._.B.-1-N.1171'.4e_x-" tra.-.,....1IiIIIIlU... 􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁬􀁄􀀸􀁬􀁉􀀮 ,tidy '!I.rded t......􀁾􀁉􀁉􀀮 OUllIlnlca_ II lilt U.S.-lY'",dllt
• SIIIIt...-Allows lite cIuti _ rritIlary IoreIt, ill-"'.nll I••1" .n efuOitg ""_IGlIIId. WIll CIIdII or 0Ib0 ...... 5A-A\IIIoItZtS ' _10_,... • _ to be oxpolod _ 10 l<hoob. iDa_ to
""'IbI7 the "'"'alent or I3cmllL That mak", ....... TnnspoJ181ioo needs musl be met. and lbc planning must start DOW. Gasoline taxes ate plid t.r the peq>Je ..m lie the naIs, and 1lJal·s
the best way to nite the ncces$ary 􀁾 Federal IIanSpOrUlion IiIIldo musl be matched at lbc stale ,"-,·If Texas projecls "" to poc<ed. GGIt IllcIt fary has opposed aly incrasc in the
stale gosolinc lax. saying that now highway cxpellditures sbou1d be dir=ltd to 1011 1OOlil. Tex.. las not r.tised 􀁩􀁾 􀁾 gallon gasoline laX since 1991. Stale transportation olrodok
say that !he e<oI ri mdcr:I higInwy pnIjoolI in the ....e cumsttly outpaces avaibIJIc 􀁬􀁩􀁡􀁉􀁤􀁏􀁴􀁉􀁾􀁬 Shifting much of !he emphasis to loll roads wiD help fill part of that need.
􀁾􀁳􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀽􀀮􀀬􀁾 􀁦􀁾􀁾 fust time have IIP.PlO"'l baavwiac """"y far mad ............... wlII help. Ncvef1ho:..... it is unIiUIy that Tex.. can avoid ils own pooIiDe tax ..........
mldl Jm&er. 8IIlII/II!r Ilo IiIned Jut .... that abnt lD --􀁾lnIunnao _ will 􀁬􀁉􀁉􀁡􀁉􀁾􀁤􀁬__ Ci>md IIIItbodI to _ tralIIe dIIlilIIt dl__.-.II. u:II • de-IiInOII􀁾... detllIIIIw dri¥tIlI
eI-, 11II1 WlllIIIIp tiltIIIa ...... 􀀽􀀬􀁲􀀭􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁾􀁊􀁬􀁩􀁉􀀮􀂷 pic􀁾􀀱􀁰􀁷􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀽􀀺􀀽􀁲􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺"-/.IMaM"" 􀁾 -in !he UniIod Slah:sla a daunt-hlg""" and 1.....11I pion _ iDg
task -but il musl be doae ...... comlll9 up wlth lIIe II10lMIY beausc !he <um:nl natiORal Inlns-to PlY far It. pa1aIiaI plan expir.. iD􀁾 PerlIaps !he ani)' thing lDUghcr 􀁾 this I...
is fiprias oot how to pay lor thooe improvcmenlS -boa. again, it mIlO be <b1e. II must be done because much oj our frIIJIIlGr'atluD infrastnlclUre is aumbling around US; beca...., <iwIy
of our roads are jammed with lEIffic: because too many commutm waste too mll:h valuable lime and spend ..., many frustrating hoors S1l1Ck in that traffic: and 􀁾􀁡􀁵􀁳􀁣 availabk mass
I_nnsit othpetiorn-s.Ihavo only beglm·to The chairman of the U.S. Hou.<.: Ux:unrmllce dt!Jgld with dnfIiDc • now fcdml highway 3nd tramiI plan, us. Rep. Tem 1'dri of Wrscoasia, "" cudineel
a 5375 billlOa proposal that would give Te... an eslimalcd $20.8 biiCII ill highway faIIds in tho 20041UJ9 liocaI y..... n..r•• S7.59 I>iIlioD iD:rrase flier the !lbl£'s c:anmr fl.m..
"' levels. Thm: is no doubt dill the r>:<d is Ill...., but whero 00.,. the """"--y come fran? Petri advocates an inmcdialc ......... in the fodctaJ gasol'" lax. now '" at 18.4 ......
"" $allm Thlt _ h.. not been raised SIJIL'C 1m, and iDlbIioll has eroded its puzduIo-􀁾 Measure might have put tilIIIlD pIJ 110O_torenew their 11-state budget in crash dive. "'ii:rtIII_
JlllinIIIJIlBD, drtwn 􀁾two wndIIllIoe1lle_lIft!. III IIld lilt ilia.... wltII_ tIdt-· BY MAItIl IlUlN2lX ......-.􀁾dItvinI_ A\lOOAlIO"1II 􀁬􀁄􀀭􀀮􀀮􀁳􀁾􀀭􀀮􀁉􀁬􀀱􀁬􀁬􀀱􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁬􀁬
_ "'lDRA _ oD lbt_1I> IIOUSl'ON -Goo< Rldc Ptrry aIped q -.d.....__ a JMelIlnI 􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁮 bID 1IlaIndI:Y !'11m' 11m' said die 􀁾􀁩 low ",d thai broodms tlIo __slblllt1lD bldId · 􀁾lUl'ldar9
and􀁾urban _ · billly while b'dnr cbnlnlc lrIftI tid--',0 fund _ .""m. : UnlntenllcnlllJ tho new .... -· helped lUZTl,he iMraII bud(o:' -reM-· kill 􀁾􀁮􀁣􀁮 "ale Complroller CIzulI 􀁾
lOll SlraYhDm ... 'nlunlIl\l'􀁾to "flify Ir.e blemiIl ,pending bIlL "No sinIIe iBIe is the IllIilu* mar. gin,-SlraYbaIlI said, thoullh the tIIJ15. pat1a\llXI bill WIll the oNY IIIOftI\lIla:
-.no lIht monlioned 􀁾 blaming a lastill1nllle 􀁾 lb. I IIlIMIli SZl6 mIIIIoIt out d tilt 􀁾 fllnd Th. 'IB/. hUdge! ..<It,d up SIS5.9 mlDIIluanrlnsItuats.ilIPilIIIneIal_d. lD 11<0>0-Ion
-.-w... SlnIt...,,·, I1l' lllJIlIllleDlIIlIl AllIlln -Asry lIt1IWd riI aq.-obaut tbo􀁾or a lIaltJ1d0IIohtlI tnhjeoc_IIaaINlIOlI -.I <II "1'0 the__..... an _ or silllhl 1lI ll8lIl<; cIloIdIlc
oa IilDIIIt a-. boIp It en lIlo 'WII1f' PIny-. Htllldtllat IrWlln 􀀱􀁉􀁬􀁾 􀁬􀀧􀁉􀀢􀀮􀁾􀁾 mtri nUlhnri:!.'llg JbtJrt...,."􀁾 fllr transpartation PI"Q)ed:I. the :stale al\IllI ra1!e up
IDIIb8lIon JIIr roods. ndI GIld otber llamo II> 1ft popIe ODII """" ":8W -.!IlOpIIonIod 􀁾􀀮 Rep. Mil:e Krusee. R·'Il\Jlllt lind Sen SIC"e Ogden. R.(.QUege 􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀮 U'I\lK ..:tTecl
􀁾 medla!eIy lIpolll'my's IlRIIlIWL Speaklnc III Ihe TnInSlar cent=; the 􀁉􀁉􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁬􀁊 counter'PBrt 10 San Antonio's funsGuide 􀁴􀁮􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁯􀁾 IIdIiIx P!rrY \:Iclled oll' Ihe
_. dIlII' points: • fW1ds ltiTf. '1'nno Teas eon;. 00r" projed, _ 8I\'IIlIq ma J0 r 􀁾 8Ild 􀁾 Inldt -.. .... a'0l8l1lll1e/! Iho S_lllio I"oo'e"p .8.l.lI.I.II.ld...c.lI_Iet, bl'Itla
out It demo􀁾􀁟• Alows Ih..: !l.tIlh: to 􀁨􀁵􀁾􀂷 oplioo!\ on riIlblS of way beb'e a nlUIe Is aPlW"OlL whloh I'erTy satd will t.:lp redUct land 'lJItlIIallan. AIoo, 11i< Tvao 1"'P.8nmenl
nl TransponDlltm can .-: a.\idc land for envir<lnmentII nonedlItloct t4 aIllIlnx> tilIl pvje<U. • 􀀨􀁪􀁊􀁜􀀮􀁾 1'It.'\'t fJVeni&bt powers for the lz>nIlalrtatlat􀁾allo\\in!! fit· llIIldod
!lI>an:lng ll\ll1OI1S rnr (IItIJe<lI 􀁓􀁜􀁬􀁬􀀻􀀮􀁨􀁬􀁬􀁾 Th< nell rund". lIIllCiIarti.sm 3houW alloIr lallI lnYis lD do In about _ l'!CS wh", ntI&ht ha'" _ I; undor tbo _ bMt 'J1IUndIjl
A11111*t Ittilt bID _ by DIaaao DelIsI, R'I\mplt,􀁾 clztRn who .... 􀁾It '-Uww moJor IIlOYIna viola--"
6» EDITORIAlS' Traffic tickets to cost extra $30 under bill approved by Senate AS Thursday, July 17, 2O=..::O.=.3_---=.cPag=e.::5A:= • Mobility Plans .//11􀁾 t 􀁾 􀀯􀀱􀁾􀁯􀀭􀀳 Collin
County benefits from state legislation E-mail tstulz@dallasncws.com noted. An amendment to the bill would reqnire that traffic violation defendants be informed ofthe additional fee before
entering a plea Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, said the legislation was ua major departure from the way traffic tickets have been handled in the past" in Texas, where individual circumstances
could he considered by traffic court judges. . Earlier this year, lawmakers approvcd a new system offines for traffic offenses and driving while intoxicated. It will assign drivers points
depending on the infraction. Those who pick up' six points in a threc-year period will pay an annual surcharge of $100, plus 825 for each point ahove six. Mr. Ogdcn said the $231 million
budget shift will fund priority itcms ofthe Legislature, including partial restoration offunding cuts in the statc's Medicaid program. Gov. Riek Perry and the legislative Budget Board
will specij'y ",hell' the additional moncy is spcnt based on those priorities. If plan becomes law, added revenue to fund trauma care, road work ByTERRENCE STUTZ Austin Bureau AUSTIN
-Drivers who plead ';Uilty or are convicted of misde.neanor traffic offenses -includng speeding and running a red ight -would have to pay an addi:ional $30 in fines undcr a hill apJroved
Wednesday hy the Senate. The measure earmarks the udlitional revennc from the tines i'll' ruuma care centers and 􀁨􀁩􀁾􀁬􀁭􀀧􀁡􀁹 lrOjl'Cts. . Also addressed in the measurc Jy Sen. Stcve
Ogdcn, R-R1:van. .vas a glitch in a massive transporation bill passed in May that temlorarily led the statc cOlllptl'Olk'r o refuse to certif,' the new stale Judge!. The glitch inadvertently
;hifted money out of the state's 􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁬 revenne fund in 2005. 􀀬􀀧􀁡􀁶􀁩􀁮􀁾 a hole in the hudp;d. Mr. Ogdcn said the bill passed Nednesday would put thl' $231 nilJion nilJion
in question -gcnerated by license and inspection fees back into the general revenue ti.md in the" bndget that hegins Scpt.!. Senators approved the bill on a 28-1 vote, 􀁜􀁜􀁾􀁴􀁨 Sen.
Mike Jackson, 􀁒􀀭􀁌􀁾 Porte, casting the "no" vote. During floor debate, Mr. Jackson \'oiced concen> that even motorists who agree to take defensive dri\ing to resolve traffic offenses
􀁜􀁜􀁾􀁉􀁬 have to pay the new $30 state fine in addition to other charges. Last Year, an estimated 640,000 'motorists took driver safe!}' COHrses to get their traffic tickets dism issed.
Mr. Ogden said 􀀧􀁰􀁡􀀩􀁾􀁮􀁥􀁮􀁴 ofthe tine shonld Ilot affect insurance rates of motorists who take defensiVl' 􀁤􀁲􀁩􀁜􀁩􀁮􀁾􀀮 in part, to avoid higher insllrant'e premiums. "This
􀁜􀁜􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁭􀁡􀁫􀁥 death, taxes and trallk lines -a certaintv:' said Sell. Eliot Shapleigh, D-EI Paso, refcrring to the mandatory nature ofthe fine. "A 􀀮􀁩􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁥 􀁜􀁜􀁾􀁉􀁬 have no
discretion about the S;lO line. :LillI tlwn therc will still be a range of $100 to $200 above that that the violation will cost the defendant," he I f there's anything that mars the
quality of life in Collin County, it's traffic. But actions taken in thejust-ended session of the Texas Legislature provide hope for improved mobility -including hope for communities
that are eager to join DallasArea Rapid Transit. State Sen. Florence Shapiro worked on three mobilityissues whose·passage were particularly beneficial to the county because oftheir potential
affect on clogged arteries. Theyare: • Anewmetbodbywhich cities attbeirsales tax cap can plan tojoin DallasArea Rapid Transit. Senate Bill 972, which Sen. Shapiro authored, will allow
cities that have dedicated 1Percent oftheir sales tax to economic and community development to also enter DART. Those cities can have areferendum to join DART at a specified date when the use ofthe sales tax for economic and community development is reduced or restructured. Previously, cities had to wait until their
other commitments ended before they could have a DARTelection. Undercurrent law, cities can levy a 1percentsales tax for the city's generalfund and another 1percent for transit or economic-eommunity
development, but not both. The change gives cities greater flexibility in the use oftheir 2 percent sales tax, allowing them to change the configuration as long as they don't violate
anybonded indebtedness commitments. Years ofwaiting for mass transit could be reduced for such cities as Allen, McKinney and Frisco -all ofwhich are at their sales tax cap -ifthey choose
to take advantage ofthe new law. The change would allow Allen, for example, to dedicate its first 1 percent sales tax to DART and split the second 1 percent .amoDI?f.!1e general fund,
economic and community develop-􀂷􀀱􀀼􀀬􀂷􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀻􀁩􀁦􀁽􀁾􀁣􀁁􀁯􀁯􀁳􀁥􀁳􀁾􀁧􀁯􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁲􀀮􀁯􀀻􀁵􀁴􀁥••.. " '. '.' '.'-."". $eedmoD.\lY,.t;ogeneraf,ebilliQDBJDooJidfundsfornew·· "tf&1Ri;;il
J: 􀀺􀂷􀁻􀁾􀁑􀁓􀁴􀁾􀁥􀁥􀁤􀁥􀁑􀁦􀁭􀁃􀀱􀁵􀁤􀁩􀁩􀀺􀁩􀁧􀁎􀁑􀁲􀁴􀁩􀁻􀁔􀁨􀁸􀁡􀀤􀀬􀁔􀁨􀁦􀁭􀁩􀁩􀁴􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁬􀁥􀁘􀁩􀁳􀀺􀁾 of 􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁉􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀱􀁡􀁾􀁾􀁾 !:'. "The _ ·and cities have 􀁾􀀸􀁴 odds:
􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁲􀁷􀁨􀁯􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁲􀁯􀁬􀁳 .11: " pla,nnirig. 􀁾􀁯􀁲 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁤􀂷'egreSs. to-state i-oiIdsthai: 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁾 ..f::·C·.":·.i jtlOhir-taotulQgnh't􀀦h􀁾c􀀮i􀁍i􀁬·􀀱·􀀧t􀀮􀀺v􀀬􀀺i􀀺b􀁾e􀀧􀁦c􀁵a􀁡U􀁄􀁤S􀁾􀁾e�
�t􀀻h􀀧e􀀧􀀧T􀀧e􀁨􀁥i􀁰a􀀢s􀀮':􀀬O􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮..􀀮l􀀮i.􀀮r􀀮ti\i.. f 􀁦􀁭􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁾 . ,base10d..''·on.1 " . .>•;. '.. . 􀁾􀀱􀀢􀀢 ts. specifieationsrll.therthanthecities'needs.·· ,'.' :. ':"
I: ,'. 1..... 􀁔􀁨􀁥􀀻􀁾􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁥 􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁏􀀮 pr.eyiUl·hi:.liOuimuiutfes . ·1.: ....􀂷􀀻􀂷􀀮􀁴􀁨􀁡􀁴􀁾􀁬􀀻􀀮􀀻􀀬 ..􀁾􀀮􀁬􀁵􀁩􀀮􀁶􀁥􀀧􀁰􀂷 􀁴􀁾􀁟􀁾 fO;'.)l;;""';"". ·an..Ji.' ., ...
􀂷􀁾􀂷􀂷􀁦􀀮 ·state'high'i:".' . I, . -!"":':'l .....􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀻􀁜􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀢 􀁾􀁾􀁽􀁉.. " ,: +\va􀁾􀀬􀁔􀁨􀁩􀁳'􀀮will. :aJI..O..􀁬􀁗􀀧􀁣􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁏􀀮􀂷􀀮􀁊􀀺􀁩􀁩􀁜􀁯􀁜􀀧􀁥􀁴􀁐􀁯􀁲􀁥􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁲􀁯􀁉􀁏􀂥�
� 􀁥􀁲􀁾􀁣􀁦􀁬􀁯􀁷 '. 􀀢􀀻􀀻􀀧􀁾 􀀮􀂷􀀻􀁟􀁴􀁊􀀺􀁵􀀧􀁯􀁵􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁊􀁉􀀧􀁣􀁯􀁩􀁮􀁭􀀱􀁩􀁊􀁵􀁴􀁩􀁥􀁳􀀮􀀻􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀻􀀮􀁾􀂷􀂷 '.' . : ,...:t<,. '. '" 'J:: ·.r 􀀢􀀺􀀧􀁔􀁨􀁥􀁳􀁥􀁡􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁊􀁉􀀢􀀬􀁶􀁾􀁃􀁰􀁭􀁥􀁟􀁾
􀁥􀁳􀀺􀁡􀁮􀁤 􀁧􀁯􀁯􀁤􀀧􀁾􀁥􀁷􀁓􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁃􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁮 1-.' 􀀾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮 􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀿􀀻􀀭􀁾􀁴􀁾􀀻􀀩􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀿􀁊􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀂷􀀬􀀺􀀧􀀭􀁾􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀧 􀀧􀁜􀁾􀀧􀀿􀀾􀁾􀀧􀀮􀀻􀁾􀁽􀁾􀁾􀀻 􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁲􀀬􀀹􀀻
..,,;",
􀁾 July 8, 2003 Texas Legislature Might Weigh Local Option Gasoline Taxes for Transportation Projects By Mike Hailey Capllollnsld. Editor Governor Riek Perry and key legislators are
coneidering a push for legislation that would allow local option elections to increase gesollne taxes to generate funding for regional transportation projects. Texas would become one
of 16 states to authorize local taxes on the aale of motor vehicle fuels If the RepUblican Govemor and the Legislature follow through with plans to glve local govemments the power to
Impose additional gasoline and diesel fuel taxes Ifapproved first by voters. Local taxes on motor vehicle fuel sales are used extensively in states such as Florida, Hawaii and Nevada
for county road budgets -and they are a source of funding for programs outside the transportation arena such as education and health care in states like Alabama and New Mexico. Perry
has said nothing publicly about his interest in allowing local governments and voters the abUity to supplement state funding that has been targeted for projects designed to alleviate
congestion and speed the flow of traffic along the system of state highways and county roads in Texas. Sources say the Govemor Initially Indicated to some local business and govemment
leaders that he would add local option elections for gasoline tax hikes for transportation spending to the agenda of the current special session that was called for the primary purpose
of Congressional redistricting. The prevailing thought now, however, is that he will hold off until the speclal session that he plans to call on school flnance this fall or next spring
before throwing such a proposal Into the legislative ring. Local option gasoline taxes had been weighed as a possible plank In the omnibus transportation bill that the Govemor signed
Into law after the regUlar session ended last month. State Rep. Mike Krusee, a Round Rock Republican and chief sponsor ofthe ambitious transportation measure, filed a bill in the regular
session to allow regional mobility authorities and certain counties to impose a local fuel tax in increments of one-eighth percent up to a maximum of 8.25 cents on the dollar· an amount
equivalent to the combined state and local sales tax in most areas. Because motor fuel taxes in Texas are dedicated, one out every four dollars raised by the local gasoline and diesel
fuel tax would have gone to public education while the remainder could be used for transportation system improvements. Local govemment officials would have been forced to submit tax
phms to the Texas Department of Transportation for preliminary approval before taking them to local voters. Counties that operate toll ways would have been eligible along with regional
transportation authorities. The Legislature in 2001 gave counties the ability to team up to create regional mobility authorities known as RMA's for the development and operation of tumpikes
and toll ways. The bill would have also allowed regional authorities to impose voter-Capitol Inside approved sales and use taxes up to one percent on transportation-related ijems. According
to the Comptroller's office, that could push the local sales tax rate beyond the maximum two percent allowed under current law. The measure was approved by the House Transportation Committee,
which Is chaired by Krusee, but it died In the Calendars Committee after Perry determined that it would violate his vow of no newtaxes during the regular session. The move to allow local
option gasoline taxes for transportation has been spearheaded by local leaders from the Dallas-Fort Worth area -with Collin County Judge Ron Harris playing the most prominent role so
far. The Chairman of the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition, Harris and other local leaders opposed legislation this year by State Rep. Steve Wolens, O.Oallas, and State Sen. Kim Brimer.
R-ArIlnglon, to create a six-county North Texas RMA because they said it would force local transpiration planners to relinqUish too much control to the state. But local leaders in Texas
and around the country have found local option taxes attractive for a variety of reasons. According to a study by the University of California, some states have found that local option
taxes for transpiration have been an effective way to replace state and federal highway funding that has been shrInkIng in recent years. They have been a welcome source of revenue In
states where local property taxes are high or restricted by rollbacks and other limitations by voters. Given Industry's critical dependence on viable transportation systems. local taxes
on motor fuel sales are viewed as a tool for economic development as the state and local governments attempt to attract more blitlness Investment. From e political standpoint, local
option fuel taxes make sense because local govemments ostensibly are more accountable to voters who are more likely to know mayors, council members. commissioners and other elected officials
on a personal basis. Local govemments have more ftexlbility and freedom to determine how tax dollars will be Invested when they are raised with less strings attached by the state. Perry's
opposition to new state taxes or increases in existing state levies did not stop him from signing a bill to give Dallas County the ability to hold a local election for increases in hotel
and rental car taxes to help build a new stadium for Dallas Cowboys' owner Jerry Jones. The bill by State Sen. Royce West, D·Dailas. and State Rep. Fred Hill, R-Richardson, breezed through
the Legislature with enough support to take immediate elfectwhen Perry signed it in late May.
) 1. 2. 3. 4. Government Reorganization Bill -HB 53 SwinfordlEllis Teleconference Meeting of the Legislative Budget Board • Allows the LBB to meet by telephone conference call, video
conference call, or other telecommunication device. Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the LBB must be present. All notice and open meetings requirements apply. Governor's Budget Authority
• Removes the criminal penalty for the Governor submitting his budget by a prescribed date. Governor must submit budget before State ofthe State Address. Demutualization • Requires the
dormancy period for funds received for the ownership shares of demutualized insurance companies to begin either on the date of last contact or the date ofdemutualization, whichever is
earlier. Requires the holder ofproperty subject to delivery under demutualization to deliver the property and required reports to the Comptroller on or before August 1. Texas Veterans
Commission • Removes restriction that did not allow more than one member to be from a senatorial district composed of a single county. 5. Commissioner of Insurance • Removes requirement
that the Commission have five often years ofexperience in the field ofinsurance. Commissioner will continue to be appointed for a two-year term. 6. Parks and Wildlife Commission • Allows
Governor to appoint commissioners that represent geographical areas, rural and urban areas, and interest and knowledge ofparks and wildlife issues. Governor shall appoint nine members
to staggered terms. 7. Board of Pardons and Paroles • This provision reorganizes the Board of Pardons and Parole, replacing the current 18member board, including the policy board, with
a seven-member board led by a presiding officer. It requires the Board to employ parole commissioners to participate in panels along with Board members to determine release, conditions
ofparole, and modification and withdrawal or mandatory supervision. 8. Building and Procurement Commission • Commission members -three appointed by the Governor; two appointed by the
Governor from a list of nominees submitted by the Speaker; two appointed by Lt. Governor. Page 1 of 5
9. Designation of Presiding Officers • The Governor may designate a member ofthe governing body of each state agency as the presiding officer ofthat governing body (Standard sunset language)
10. State Aircraft Pooling Board (Senator Ratliff) • The State Aircraft Pooling Board would no longer be a free-standing agency, but would become a division of the Texas Department of
Transportation. The new division would charge fees to cover its costs, including replacement aircraft as needed. It would continue to provide air transportation services for state officers
and employees. The employees and assets would transfer to TxDOT. The appointed Aircraft Pooling Board (the governing body of the current agency) would not continue to exist. 11. Texas
Commission on PrivateSecurity • Commission is abolished and all powers, duties, and personnel are transferred to the Department of Public Safety. ) 12. Innocence Commission (Senator
Ellis) • This provision gives the Governor the power to create an Innocence Commission should he see fit. The commission would consist of nine members representing a cross section of
the criminal justice community and be charged with investigating thoroughly all post-conviction exonerations. It would have broad investigative powers and would be required to determine
errors and defects in the criminal procedure used in the prosecution of these individuals. The commission would develop solutions to correct the errors and identify procedures to prevent
future wrongful convictions. 13. Environmental Reports • Consolidation of the number of environmental reports required to be published. 14. Environmental Permitting Study • An interim
study to review the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality's permitting process: identification ofproblems; streamlining ofthe permitting process; user-friendly aspects of the permitting
process; promotion of economic development. Study committee shall consist of three Lt. Governor appointees, three Speaker appointees, and one public member appointed by the Governor.
15. Considerations by the Board of Pardons and Paroles regarding Clemency Matters • Requires the Board of Pardons and Paroles to meet in private to discuss clemency recommendations,
but requires the ultimate decision to be made public. However, in the instance of capital case clemency recommendations, the Board would be required to meet publicly. }16. TxnOT Lease-Purchase
(Senator Whitmire) Page 2 of 5
• Allows TxDoT to lease purchase space for their Houston district office on land already owned by the Department. The Appropriations bill contains a contingency appropriation for this
provisions. 17. 􀁌􀁥􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁥 􀁁􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁹 Reorganization @Creation of a Legislative Information Services Board to handle the computer and infrastructure requirements of the
Legislature (Board shall consist of the Lt. Governor, Speaker, Chair ofHouse and Senate Administration Committees, five House members and 5 Senators. Lt. Governor and Speaker shall serve
alternate terms as Chair and Vice-Chair) • Financial Audits by State Auditor transferred to LBB -All financial audits of state agencies and institutions of higher education are transferred
to the LBB. • Performance Review Commission -Sunset Commission is abolished and all powers are transferred to the new Performance Review Commission. Consists ofthe Lt. Governor, Speaker,
three Senators, three House members. Speaker of the House is Chairman ofthe Commission. The Commission shall conduct all performance audits of all state agencies and institutions of
higher education. Commission shall also conduct economy and efficiency audits, effectiveness audits, review interscholastic competition, and records management review. • Legislative
Policy Council to perform policy analysis and statistical research for the Legislature. It is structured after the LBB with the Lt. Governor as Chair, Speaker as Vice Chair, four Senators
and four Representatives. The Legislative Policy Council will provide legislators with invaluable assistance in making policy and budget decisions in a variety ofpolicy areas including
workers comp, health and human services caseload forecasting, dropout rates, teacher shortage and criminal justice. 18. Unclaimed Wages • This provision declares state wages unclaimed
for more than one year as abandoned and directs the funds to the state. 19. Bicycle Tourism Trails • Requires the statewide bicycle coordinator, with the regional bicycle coordinators
and advisory committee established by TxDOT, to advice the Texas Transportation Committee on the development of bicycle tourism trails. 20. Research and Oversight Council on workers'
Compensation (Senator Brimer) • Moves the Research and Oversight Council on Workers' Compensation professional research and study duties to the Texas Department of Insurance and allows
TDI to set the rate and assess the maintenance tax based on the expenditures authorized and the receipts anticipated in legislative appropriation; entitles the Commissioner of Page 3
of 5
· )) 21. 22. Insurance access to the files and records of TWCC, TWC, DRS, Texas Mutual Insurance Company and other state agencies to fulfill TDI's objective (Subpoena authority); it
appropriate funds for the purpose ofperforming the department's duties. Liquid Waste Management (Senator Shapleigh) • Currently, Texas law details what information must be included on
a liquid-waste manifest, or trip ticket, but Texas does not require a standard state-wide form for a liquid-waste manifest. The lack of a uniform liquid-waste manifest creates confusion
among liquid hauling companies' forms and leads to inaccurate or missing information in a manifest. This provision would create a pre-numbered state-wide uniform manifest system to accompany
liquid-waste shipments from cradle-to-grave. It would require a person who generates, collects, convoys, transports, processes, stores, or disposes ofcertain liquid-wastes to keep records
and use a uniform manifest system as prescribed by TCEQ to ensure that the waste is properly tracked and transported to an appropriate processing, storage, or disposal facility or site.
State Agency Internet Reports (Senator Shapleigh) • This provision would require state agencies to make their printed state publications accessible form the agency's website in an electronic
format. If the agency does not have a website, the agency would be required to deposit the electronic source file for each publication with the Texas State Library in a manner prescribed
by rule by the state Library. The State Library already has a system known as Texas Records and Information Locator or TRAIL, for allowing electronic assess to state publications, but
this amendment would help ensure that all state publications are accessible through this system. 23. State uniform e-mail (Senator Shapleigh) • This provision would require the Department
ofInformation Resources to implement a standardized electronic mail service that includes a cost impact analysis. If the cost impact analysis reflects that the benefits outweigh the
costs, the department would be required to develop an implementation schedule and state agencies would be required to implement the plan according to the schedule developed by the Department.
) .' 24. City of Austin of Land School (Lt. Governor's office) • The state conveyed the land along the north shore of the Colorado River (now Town Lake) from Waller Creek to Shoal Creek
to the city ofAustin in 1917. The land is restricted to use for park purposes with a reversion to the state if the restriction is violated. In order to allow a minor encroachment into
the area by one ofthe downtown hotels the city wants assurance that this de minimus impact will not trigger the reverter. The change allows up to 1/10 of an acre to be used for other
purposes without triggering the reverter. The law is permissive with the city and the deal has to Page 4 of 5
) 25. 26. 27. ) be submitted to the Land Commissioner for comment. Voters' Approval of Increased Governor's Powers (Senator Ellis) • Requiring the voters to approve or disapprove in
a referendum of any increase, change, modification, alteration ofthe Governor's powers that are passed during the First Called Special Session. Texas Emissions Reduction Plan clean-up
language (Senator Harris) • Last session, HB 1365 contained a "clean contractor" provision, which allows units of government to provide a limited preference to contractors in "affected
counties" who operate heavy-duty equipment that are in compliance with existing standards. Unfortunately, the provision was intended to include all counties which are out of compliance
with the EPA, but accidentally excluded "non-attainment" counties like Harris, Dallas, Tarrant, and the surrounding areas. This language would include "nonattainmentlt counties in the
provision to incentivize cleaner contracting. School Sport Safety Regulations (Senator Wentworth) • Requires certain individuals (athletes, coaches, trainers) involved in UIL athletics
to complete a safety training course. Because the medical community is not yet geared up to offer low-cost heart screenings, the bill does not require each athlete to receive one, but
it does require UIL to recommend them. The enforcement mechanism in the bill is the cancellation of a school's schedule while they are out of compliance. 28. County and District Retirement
System Clean-up language (Senator Harris) • Last session the Legislature passed The Uniform Prudent Investor Act which provided more uniformity and clarity in the interstate investment
environment regarding the duties and responsibilities oftrustees. An oversight resulted in The Texas County and District Retirement System (TCDRS) being held to a "prudent investor"
standard. However, the standard enumerated for TCDRS in the Texas Constitution is a "prudent person" standard. This amendment will provide the investment standard for TCDRS to be a "prudent
person" standard. ) Page 5 of 5
􀁾 INS IDE WASHINGTON Lobbying for more transportation funds By Mark Preston The author is Washington correspondent for American City & County. As Congress works to reauthorize a massive
highway bill, city and county leaders are requesting a bigger share of federal transportation funds and more say in how the money is spent. The bill, which has not been formally named,
could allocate as much as $375 billion over the next six years to pay for new roads and bridges and to maintain existing ones. The most recent highway bill, the Transportation Equity
Act for the 21st Century (TEA-2i), expires on Sept. 30. Mayors and county commissioners are urging Congress to place a greater emphasis on local needs as they write the first major transportation
bill of the 21st Century. "Congress should give metropolitan areas 􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁥 resources and greater decision ability to direct transportation funds where they are most needed," Knoxville,
Tenn., Mayor Victor Ashe told the House Highways, Transit and Pipelines Subcommittee last month. While Congress is likely to agree that local funding needs to be boosted, it is less
clear if federal lawmakers feel there is a need to send money directly to local governments. Still, local leaders are calling on Congress to suballocate funds to cities and counties
and bypass the states, which traditionally have served as the main distributor of federal highway funds. "Under the current law, local officials are only allowed to make decisions on
approximately six cents of every federal transportation dollar," Laredo, Texas, Mayor Elizabeth Flores told the House panel. "This is a woe-Local leaders are expected to continue to
make appearances before other congressional committees in the coming months to argue the same point. In addition to suballocating funds, city and county officials also are calling on
Congress to increase funding for mass transit projects, which they say are key to alleviating traffic congestion. It is estimated that 14 million people use transit each day, and that
number is increasing, says Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels. "People, businesses and communities rely on transit to get around, and [they] depend on their elected officials to make a strong
investment in buses, commuter rail, light rail, ferries and other transportation modes that provide choices other than being stuck in traffic," Nickels tol.d the subcommittee. Congress
uses the Department of Transportation's (DOT) report, "The Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges and Transit," to help determine funding levels for building and maintaining highways.
The cost to improve the nation's bridges and highways over the next 20 years is $106.9 billion per year, according to the report. Maintaining the current infrastructure would cost $75.9
billion per year over the same time period, according to the DOT. Maintaining the status quo does not appeal to at least one key House member. "The current level of funding for the federal
highway and transit programs is insufficient to meet the needs of our deteriorating transportation infrastructure," says Rep. The new bill could allocate $375 billion over the next six
years. fully modest allocation of resources to metropolitan areas that represent more than one-half of the nation's population and 80 percent of the nation's employment, income and production
of goods and services. This is an insult to mayors on the front line." Ashe and Flores were just two of the five mayors and county commissioners who appeared before the subcommittee
in May to plead the case of local governments. Tom Petri, R-Wis., chairman of the Highways, Transit and Pipelines Subcommittee. Unlike most issues on Capitol Hill, very little partisan
fighting exists over the reauthorization of the highway bill, which has the potential to deliver millions of dollars to every congressional district in the country. The sparring this
year will be between Congress and the White House, which is trying to cut back on federal spending. 1):{ /1
FY 2003 FHWA DISCRETIONARY PRO(;RAMS • CONGRESSIONAL_LY DESIGNATED I .10,'689.8751 7f I 31.371;252 I 231 /.i't§",,,, I 1 I 71 I ITS $ 1 # 519.964 1 11 3.743.740 I 2 1 5.303,6321 1 I
I $ (# 500,0001 11 I I 1.663.884 I 11 6.400.000 110 TRANSPORTATION " COMMUNITY & SYS. PRESERV. 6 P11 I 1 $ I # CORRIDORS & BORDeRS􀀢􀀻􀁑􀀻􀁾􀀢􀀱􀁭􀀿􀁯􀀱􀀱􀁩􀀮􀁜􀁩􀁩􀁾 I I 15.000.000
I 6 I 993,5001 1 L'I $ 1 # DISCRETIONARY BRIDGE· REPL. & REHAB. 􀁾 1 2,980,500 1 -11 Boo.oOO I 21 T 4,222,375 I 11 11.244.500 1 $ # I 432,073 􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁩􀂣􀁡 6,678,934 PUBLIC LANDS HIGHWAYS
1 21 4,093.320 ;;;riW""',' 31 I 11 3,228.875/2,533,425 $ I # INTERSTATE MAINTENANCE I 31 21 I1 $ 1 # 3.974,0001 􀀲􀀬􀁾􀀸􀀰􀀬􀀵􀀰􀀰 f FERRYBOATS $ I 4# 7,698,898 I 41 1;663.884 I 11 STATE
TOTAL 26,569.313 I 20 fI STATE Alabama 􀁾􀁉􀀬􀁛􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀬􀁾 ro.C. IConnecticut 1Arizona 􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁩􀀻􀁊􀁴􀁾􀁙􀁦􀀮􀁪􀁟􀀺􀀾..., 1Georgia I IIdaho 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀮􀁦􀀻 I 4;849.000 I I 11.023;834 I 651
496.750 II 111 􀁾􀀶􀀬􀀷􀀵􀀰 11 211 􀁲􀁡􀁾􀀭􀀼􀁩􀁩􀁾 909,627 1/􀁾􀀺􀀢􀀢􀀭􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧 2.980.500 I ml!i 1,490.250 1 11 11 875,000 I 8.000,000 1 21 21 II II r 623.957 f l11 11 11 41 41 11 111
11 831,942 I 415.971 1 415,971 1I 207,986 I 623,957 I 2.911,798 1 3.119.783 I I1I 11 3/21 11 11 I1I 250.000 I 500.000 I 100.000-' 2,000,000-1 11 2.187,000 I 11 41 1/411 iI!I 111 iBrm,;.,
600.0001 500,0001 2,000,000 I 6.800,000 I 3.000.000 I 1.275.0001 8,000,000 I 1,000.000 1 III 1I 􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁗􀀧􀀢 1 􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀬􀁾􀁩􀀱􀁅􀂫􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁀􀀡􀀱 W,i)QOlI'IIl'rR......􀁬􀁩􀁏􀁬􀁬􀁉􀁗􀁉􀀡􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀧􀂷
􀁾􀀭􀁗􀁬􀁦􀀧􀀢 351 ;L•. 􀀻􀀧􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁦􀁩􀁩􀀡􀁬􀀬􀁕􀀻􀁟􀁊􀀬􀀺􀁾􀁩􀁭􀁬􀀧 8444.750 21 .. '1;"; -"',.,, $L ..􀁾􀂷􀀮􀀧􀁩􀁒􀀮 􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁡􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁬􀀦􀁾􀁟􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁍􀁲 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀢􀀻􀀮􀁾􀀻􀁴􀀭􀀮􀁾􀁘􀁴􀁪
􀁾􀀧􀁦􀀡􀁧􀁡􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁆􀁾􀀱􀁴􀁾􀁊􀁬􀁭􀁦􀁬􀀱􀁜􀁩􀁦􀀮􀂷􀂷􀀢 363.851 ..􀀬􀀭􀀬􀀡􀀧􀁒􀀧􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁉􀀧􀁲􀀭 5,093,909 I 6.039,921 I 2 9,460.118 t 􀀺􀁴􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁉􀁩 􀁩􀁾􀁽􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀮 1 􀁾􀁾􀁊􀀡􀁉 􀁟􀁾􀀱􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁩􀁬􀀺
I 496-:7'501 6,954.500 1 2 􀁣􀁩􀁾􀀬􀁭 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀮􀁾􀀻􀁰􀁾􀁻􀁉􀁩􀀮􀁜 1993.500 I 11 1I1I 11 2,235 375 31 227,407 I 11 993.500 I 11 j,,-' 􀀬􀀭􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁉􀀻􀁟􀁾..􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀬 􀀮􀁾􀀼
􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁊􀀻 11 I11III 496,750 r 496.750 I 2;009,471 I 31 8.401.895 I 8 8,606,801 1 71 10,956.868 I 6 􀁩􀀢􀀮􀁾􀀻􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁟􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀮 􀀧􀁾 /I􀁗􀀶􀀧􀀪􀀢􀁩􀁦􀀮􀀽􀁾􀁲 I 4.394.783 I 51
􀁾􀁾􀀷􀀹􀀳􀀱 5 􀁾 .;.j\ i 􀀢􀀡􀁩􀁮􀀮􀀱􀁬􀁬􀀨􀁦􀀬􀀴􀀻􀁩􀀡􀀮􀁊􀁉􀀧􀀮􀁦􀁾􀁕􀁩􀁦􀁲􀀹􀀮􀀸􀀷􀀸r 13f Montana Nevada Mississippi 􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁡1't.'l,.,--l"".'," IMichigan ILoulsiana '&!C.•􀁴􀁨􀁴􀁦􀀯􀀮􀁾􀀻􀁾
􀁉􀀧􀁍􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁤􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀢 IKansas ITennessee-I 9,805.392 I 91 21 11 31 11 11 831,942 1 1r 2.287,841 I 2.961,7141 1.663,8841 1,559,6921 1.247,913 1 21 31 31 11 3\ 1 I 250,000 1 3.200,000
I 2.100.000 I 1.500.0001 3,352,000 I I 11 71 21 31 -I --I I 7.100,000 1 􀀳􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮 1.500.000 f 3,900,000 I r 􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁩􀀩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁱􀁩􀁴 􀀱􀀢􀀧􀁩􀀩􀁬􀁦􀁉􀁩􀀧􀁬􀁦􀀡􀁜􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀮 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀭
,r;,l!!i. : _ . 􀀡􀁬􀀱􀁩􀁾􀀢 􀀡􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁉 J􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁄􀁟􀁾􀁾 􀀧􀁾􀁉􀀡􀁉􀁬􀀻􀁬􀁾􀁲􀀢􀀭􀀢􀀬 􀁲􀁴􀁾􀀱􀁔􀁨􀁴􀁷􀀱􀁉􀁾􀁦􀀺􀁫􀀧􀁭􀁷􀁴􀁩􀁩􀁦 􀀬􀀻􀁊􀁾􀁬 761,812 I 473,006 I 􀀬􀀻􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁀..c 11
11 21 11 1b 􀀢􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁱 1 745.1251 745.1251 496,750 496.750 III 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁪􀀮􀁾􀁩􀀥􀁉􀀳􀁾􀀻􀁩􀁥􀁪􀁗􀀻􀀥􀁦􀁭􀁾 􀁾 'iii 􀁾􀁆􀁾􀀧 11 1 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬 1II T I 8,941.500 -, 496,7501 5.336.890
I 51 􀁲􀁾􀀹􀀻􀀬􀁾􀁩􀁬 ,WlI" 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁾 '12,306,839 I 151' I . -6;632,9661 6\ -I 10,535,254 I 31 􀁾􀁜􀀢􀁩􀁍􀁡􀁊􀀨􀁬􀁕􀁒􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁪􀁀􀁩􀁩􀁫􀀢 ..... -/South Carolina I 4,994,663 I 6 ",.,<il!':OW'"
INorm uakota 1 IUtah 1Oklahoma 1􀁐􀁥􀁾􀁳􀁹􀁬􀁶􀁡􀁮􀁬􀁡 ---.1 if.l IVlrglnla I 15.346,091 I 101 11 I I 8,732,415 I 31 1.987,000 I 11 2,188,000 I 11 650.0001 2/1.788.676 I 31 􀁉􀁷􀀺􀁴􀁶􀁉􀀷􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁾
I 22.135.750 I 7/I I I I 1 "1:<1"""-':' 4,470,750 I 􀁾 11 16.615,000 I 41 1.050,000 I 2f I I IWyomlng I 6,{)74.673I 31 _ I_I 1,987,0001 -111]91,8461 1/_I L L L I 1 2,495,827/-11 􀁾􀀶􀀹􀀲􀀻􀀷􀀹􀀵􀀮􀁾�
�􀀱 􀁾􀀸􀀱 1I,883,QQO I 201 99.350,0001 541 76,273,376 I 591 68,551,500 I 321 􀀲􀀵􀀵􀀬􀁏􀁏􀁏􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀰 U291 ..13,905,000 I 1131 99.833.065 I 911 􀁾 nOTAL # Number of Projects 6/16/03 Release
6/16/2003
THE TRANSPORTATION WRECK Will we avoid it? •••••􀀰􀀰􀀰􀀰􀀰􀀰􀁩􀁴􀀮􀁵􀁲􀀺􀁪􀁡􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁩􀀮􀁴􀁩􀁩􀁉􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀻􀁾􀁩􀁩􀀭 I.MICHAEL STEVENS Chairman TramportaUon Task FoI'c& Governor's Suslness
Council Chairmen Mlcheel srewns Interests. Inc. 􀁾.. ' ...􀁾􀀺􀀬 -. 􀀮􀁾􀀮 .;.: David Ellisl Tim Loma.1 (979) 845-8165 (979) 845.9980 d..e11110IUma)I.lamu.edu 1.k)mallOlamu.8du MORE
INFORMATION , I .;.U•••U....4.I:IO......􀀺􀀺􀀻􀁾􀀬􀀻􀁊􀀴􀀺􀁩􀁊􀀮􀀬􀀻􀀺 WF metropolitan areas we included in th. study,the cosioI' congestion over the last 10 years alone represents a value to Texas and Texansof$46 billion in increased travel lime and wasted fuel. That's more than was spent by the Stale
on our highways." The research team reporls that over the next 25 years, jf current trends continue. the total cosl of congestion will be over $182 billion. However. Ibe benefits of
the improvements from less delay. fewer gallons of wasled fuel and increased efficiencies 10 business and commerce arc estimated to total $511 billion. In addition. addition. almost
120.000 new jobs will likely be ""led. ,md hydrocarbon emission$ will be reduced by 775.000 Ions during lhal period, Michael StevensofBo",lon, Chilirmall of the 1'",nsportation Committee
of the (;overnor's Business Council said, "I haw found TTl to he an inc.:redibly vulu;'lhle and limitless resource for Imllsport.uiol1 informacion und research. They .In.: a ,rilkal
assel 10 thf".' shire during this timc= of growing congeslion. The study we rcc.:cruly completed shows th:11 it is critical we provide additional funding inl0 our tro,nspnrl.ui1m system.
i.ll1d Ibal (() lin so provides us with a $433 billi..n prolil. ExcellcnllVork!" Iii Index of VMT, Vehicles, Drivers, and Miles of Road 450 400 H;.-... ,N,,u,".,"N.to."lW*J•-• V 􀁾 .••.
M9nolAol,d V 0 ... ",.-l! 300 I........... • /! 2lIO /---:::::-.......... ... ",.--..... .., /. 􀁾􀀢 lO. W...... .. . ...... ... , '00 1885 1870 1975 1980 1985 19iO '990 1195 2000 Year
􀁔􀁨􀁾 chan o1bove 􀁾􀁨􀀨􀀩􀀮􀁎􀀧􀀩 􀁬􀁨􀁤􀁾 tho;! mIll'';, 01 roadways have not 􀁊􀁮􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁾􀁥􀁤 Jt the same rdh! 􀁊􀁓􀁉􀁉􀁾􀁨􀁬􀁣􀁬􀁣 mill'S trllveled and number of 􀁜􀁉􀀨􀀧􀁨􀁬􀁣􀀱􀁥􀁾
and drivers How Do WE KEEP THE GROWING 􀁃􀁏􀁎􀁇􀁅􀁓􀁔􀁉􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁌􀀺􀁾􀁟􀁬􀁊􀀮􀁎􀁾􀁾􀁒􀁃􀁏􀁎􀁔􀁒􀁏􀁌􀀿􀁟􀁾􀁩􀁦 TheCOSTof CONGE TION ----,---=-------TTl leads effort for the
Governor's Business Council Good transportation is crucial to the future of the Texas economy and to our standard of living. The most serious transportation-related threat to the State's
economy is the increasing delay in passenger and freight travel as a result ofcongested roads. To no one's surprise. the problem is most serious in the major metropolitan areas. and
will increase to dramatic levels unless substantial solutions are implemented. Defining the magnitude ofthe problem is the easy parL Finding the solutions is the hard part. The Transportation
Commillee of the Governor's Business Council, an advisory commillee appointed by Governor Rick Perry. sought the help of the Texas Transportation Institute (TTl) to answer some key questions
about the future needs of the state's transportation system. TTl researchers Tim Lomax and David Ellis, along with consultants Alan Pisarski and Wendell Cox, recently completed a study
entitled, Tex...•Road....yo-TtxM· Future: A Look at State Roadway Supply. Demand. Cost, and Benefits. The study had two purposes: first, to establish a process whereby vision. needs
and accountability drive the selection of transportation improvement 􀁯􀁰􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁾 rather than how much money is available to solve immediate problemsi and second, to define minimum
􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁡􀁾 tion system performance standards and identify the costs and benefits of achieving those standards. The study developed projeclions of population, daily vehicle
miles of travel (DVMT). fuel consumption and vehicles to determine traffic demand. Those projections were coupled wilh estimated state and federal funds available and conslruction coslS
for various types of roadway. The final product is" model that gives cost estimates of what it would take 10 achieve various levels of mobility across the Slate over the neXl 25 years.
Researchers found that in order 10 simply keep congestion from gelling worse. Ihe Slate will need to spend $179 billion in conslant year 2000 dollars over the next 25 years on new construclion,
reconstruction and 􀁭􀁡􀁪􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁾 nance. Thai is $39 billion more Ihan Ihe $140 million that is expected 10 be aV<lilable. given currenl lax rates and projected population and Iravel.
To reduce congestion to levels where trips during peak hours take no more than 15 percenllonger than Irips during non-peak hours will require $78 billion marc than is expected to be
available. "The cost of implementing Ihe needed additional improvements would be dwarfed by the benefits," says TTl Associate Research Scientist David Ellis. "In the -be strained further
as growth slows. stops or reverses. and our tax base deteriorates. The importance of transportation to businesses. individuals and the economy is becoming more evident every time we
take a poll or try to bring business to the State. While Texas still fares well by comparison to most other states. we are and have been growing at a significantly faster rate than others.
placing greater strain on our transportation system. In the next 25 years, 90 percent of all population growth (8 out of 9 million new people) will occur in the urban areas where 15
million people currently live, where congestion is currently the worst and where the majority of jobs and gross domestic product are generated. Moving from point to point within the
urban areas is and will be the major transportation problem facing Texas. 1\vo-thirds ofall traffic volume in the State occurs on the State highway system, making it practically impossible
for the urban areas to solve their congestion problems unless the State simultaneously reduces congestion on the urban highway system. Furthermore. public transit ridership only carries
a 1.8 percent share oftotal slate transportation volume, has been dropping nationally for 40 continuous years, and does not offer a realistic alternative to road construction or tfilffic
management solutions. The new people being added to the State's population will not start paying for their use of the transportation system unlilthey are actually using it under the
current tax system (primarily gasoline tax, vehicle registration fees and other user taxes). Unfortunately. it takes 10 years prior to that initial use 10 design and build the new roads
they are going to be driving on. Any business would quickly realize that this mix of high population growth. user tax, pay-as-you-go highway construction and the IO-year lag from conception
of construction to completion is a recipe for disaster. This is why planning in advance is so imporlant in both business and transportation. and why the State's commitment to a fiscally
unconstrained. long-term strategic plan for transportation is so critical. We do not have time to procrastinate nor to make the wrong decision. To avoid the wreck, we must act now. III
􀁪􀁾 " The answer! According to the Governor's Business Council report entitled Texa,' Roadways-Texas' Future. commit 10 spend $78 billion over the next 25 years on Ihe State's highway
system in excess of what will be available under the current tax system. The benefits stated above do nol include those to Ihe economy. business and our personal lives for becoming the
easiesl ,md safesl state in the Uniled SlateS in which to get around. Nor do they take into account the equally profound cosls of not spending the extra money. Congeslion will rise by
350 percent, making the State a less desirable place to live. Altracling and retaining businesses, employees, visitors and students will be more difficult. Moving goods and services
throughout the State will take more time and be less reliable. increasing the cost of everything from housing and education to groceries. Getting to work, school and running errands
will consume more ofour available time causing further relocation ofpeople and business to the the outskirts ofmajor cities or to states offering a less congested environment-or a solution
to the problem. Ultimately, our resources will What can pay for the entire $58.7 billion annual operating bUdget for Texas for the next 7 years from savings, reduce statewide traffic
congestion by 50 percent, add 120,000 permanent jobs and reduce emissions from hydrocarbon pollutants in the State by 775.000 tons. all at the same time? 􀁾:;I.Q ·ililll " ".:.0.. .;,.,6J
􀀭􀀬􀀺􀀮􀀺􀁾
.,., DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 08-01-03 AGENDA ITEM VII AIR QUALITY UPDATE
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION Executive Committee 7522 Campbell Road Suite) )3-205 Dallas, Texas 75248 972/312-1644 972/312-1645 (FAX) email ccu9@ainnail.net Status Report -Dallas
/Fort Worth State Implementation Plan (SIP) As reported over the last few months, the DFW SIP is in somewhat a state of suspension. The EPA had published a federal Register notice that
the State must 'fix' the funding /implementation issue for the Texas Emissions Reduction Program (TERP) as adopted in Senate Bill 5 from the 77th Texas Legislative Session. A deadline
of September 1,2003, was set in this notice. OK, as noted earlier in the Agenda, HB 1365 from the recently completed 78th Session 'fixed' the funding for TERP by creating about $150+
million per year for fuJI implementation of the program. This was accomplished by a new motor vehicle title fee increase along with a change in the excise tax on sale of heavy equipment
(over 7 tons) to generate the required revenue. So that part of the EPA requirement, assuming the EPA accepts the 'fix' is done. Ron Harris, Co-Chair Margaret Keliher, Co-Chair Sandy
Greyson, Vice-Chair Grady Smithey, Secretary Terry Waldrum, Treasurer Chad Adams Gary Base Bruce Beaty Mark Burroughs Angie Chen Button Jim Dunn Pat Evans Stanton Foerster Robert Franke
John L. Heiman, Jr. Mary Hom Mike Nowels James O'Neal Jayne Peters Bob Phelps Frank W. Robertson Mike Simpson Gary Slagel Mark Stokes Steve Terrell Paul N. Wageman Bill Whitfield Ex-Officio
Members Jerry Hiebert Michael Morris Jay Nelson Gary Thomas July 22, 2003 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM i DRMC Executive Committee , 􀁾􀁾 James McCarley, Executive Director 􀁾􀁉 Air
Quality Update 􀁾􀁉􀀧 Executive Director James McCarley David A. Griffin, Associate Since the issuance of the federal Register notice, the federal courts have ruled that the EPA was
not authorized to use the 'air transport' science as a reason to extend the attainment date from 2005 to 2007. Although the specific case addressed approval by the EPA of the Beaumont
-Port Arthur SIP, the same would probably hold true for the DFW area if a lawsuit was file if/when the EPA were to approve the DFW SIP. The EPA has indicated there will probably be no
approval ofthe DFW SIP due to this court ruling. So, where do we go from here. There has been considerable publicity, and some misguided editorial statements (that statement is McCarley's
editorial statement!) on efforts by leadership in the area to 'transition' from the current one-hour standard to the upcoming eight-hour standard. Depending on final rules to be adopted
late this year by the EPA on the eight-hour standard implementation, this method could provide a new attainment date of201O. Commitments from the area would continue all elements of
the current proposed SIP along with filing of a new SIP for the eight-hour standard within time lines established by the new rules from the EPA. This issue will also be discussed at
the August lSI DRMC meeting.
Eight Hour Standard Update As briefly discussed in the previous topic, a timeline has now been established by the EPA and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for implementation,
and designation, of the eight-hour standard for ozone. Information is attached on this timeline. The TCEQ has also formally recommended to the Governor, and he has accepted, preliminary
recommendations for counties to be included in the new nonattainment areas for the eightOhour standard. In the North Texas area, Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Parker, and Tarrant
counties have been designated. As you may note from the attached timeline, there are opportunities for adjustment to these recommendations prior to final adoption by the EPA in 2004.
Early Action Compacts in some areas of the State have assisted several counties subject to the eight-hour nonattainment designations. These counties implemented programs and reached
signed agreements with the TCEQ in an attempt to ward-off more intrusive programs and attempt to achieve air quality compliance. Air Transport Status Discussions by DRMC and various
other groups, including several outside Texas, have yet to yield any strong effort in Congress to provide a change in the law to allow the EPA to use air transport as a reason to extend
and/or standardize attainment dates for areas. While such action meets the logic and common sense test (another editorial opinion!), the environmental groups generally oppose such a
change and most members of Congress are reluctant to tackle the issue. While not directly related, there is an effort to address some of the transportation conformity issues as part
of the SAFETEA proposal that is slowly moving through the Congressional process. These changes might provide better 'matching' of conformity analysis with transportation planning efforts.
Attachments
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, July 14, 2003 TCEQ Commissioners OK Preliminary Plan To Designate 21 Counties in Non-Attainment of EPA's New 8-Hour Ozone Standard Recommendation Goes to
Texas Governor Perry; EPA to Make Final Decision April, 2004 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's(TCEQ) three-member -_ board today formally approved a plan to initially designate
21 Texas counties in non-attainment ofthe Environmental Protection Agency's _ (EPA) new 8-hour health-based air 􀁱􀁕􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹 􀁳􀁴􀁾􀁤􀁾􀁤 for groun.d I:vel ozone. The counties were
selected based on air mOnttormg data that mdlcates . .. current violations of the 8-hour standard and status under the existing I-hour standard. !hIS recommendation Will now be forwarded
to Texas Governor Rick Perry who will make a formal recommendatIOn on behalf of the state. Counties initially considered in non-attainment ofthe 8-hour standard include: ••••• Dallas,
Tarrant, Collin, Denton, Ellis, Jobnson, Parker Harris, Brazoria, Galveston, Montgomery, Cbambers, Fort Bend, Liberty, Waller Jefferson, Hardin, Orange Bexar (deferred) Travis (deferred)
Gregg (deferred) E-mail r1oftis@dalJasnews.oom . Prior to this recommendation, fourteen counties in three 􀁭􀁥􀁴􀁲􀁯􀁾􀁯􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁡􀁮 areas--Austin, 􀁾􀁡􀁮 Antonio, Tyler/LongviewlMarsball--voluntarilye
ntered into Early ActIOn Compacts 􀁾􀁅􀁁􀁃􀀩 􀁗􀁉􀁾 the .EPA 􀁾􀁤 TCEQ d outlining measures they would undertake to meet the new standard. Non-attamJ?ent deSignation Will be deferre
for any designated counties in an EAC area as long as all milestones and commitments are met, "This is only the beginning of a nine-month, multi-step pro,cess. Th: 􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁡􀁾􀁨 􀁷􀁾
have 􀁴􀁡􀁫􀁥􀁾 is one. 􀁴􀁾􀁡􀁴 recognizes and builds upon long-standing regional air quality plannmg relatIOnships. We believe thiS IS what makes the most sense for Texas," said TCEQ
Chairman Robert J. Huston, Commissioner Kathleen Hartnett White stated, "As we transition from the current 􀁉􀀭􀁾􀁯􀁵􀁲 􀁳􀁴􀁡􀀬􀁮􀁾􀁡􀁲􀁤 to the new 8hour standard it is important to
note that communities across the state are 􀁡􀀱􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁾􀀾􀀺 takmg 􀁰􀁾􀁳􀁬􀁴􀁬􀁶􀁥 steps 􀁴􀁾 reduce air pollution in their regions and those efforts will continue without any backshdmg
and Without delays, Commissioner R,B, "Ralph" Marquez said, "We have historically reduced ozone 􀁾􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁵􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 􀁵􀁳􀁩􀁮􀁾 􀁾􀀬􀁲􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁬 air quality appioach and this plan
follows that approach. We will work togther to achieve cleaner au. These recommendations are the first step in a 9-month process. The TCEQ and the governor 􀁾􀁩􀀱􀀱 have tw? more opportunities
to revise the recommendations during a 􀁃􀀿􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁊􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 period 􀁷􀁩􀁾 the 􀁅􀁾A. Additional counties may be added or removed from the non-attainment designation hst at the conclUSIOn
of thiS year's ozone season. The EPA will issue the final designations April 15, 2004. 􀀧􀀢􀁲􀁥􀁸􀁾􀁁􀀻􀀡􀁪􀁮􀁥􀁳 toa.ange 􀁭􀁾􀁰 􀁯􀁦􀁳􀁭􀁯􀁧􀁶􀁩􀀻􀁢􀁴􀁾􀀻􀀧 􀁂􀁹􀁡􀁾􀁌􀁅􀁅􀁌􀁏􀁆􀁔􀁉􀁓
way ozone is measured to clamp ElIis,Johnson and Parkercounties. st:atiJs deferred deferred as a reward forhav-En\'ironmental Writer down on smog and better protect When the environmental
com-ing taken early; voluntary action to AUSTIN -Thxas officials de-public health. mission released itS proposed map controlsmog. cided Monday to stick with a map. Allstat.esaresubmittingsimilar
in June, Ellis County officials un-All the counties ofmetropolitan ofThxas' smog-violation areas that maps, based on local air-quality successfully asked to be left out. Houston and
Beaumontviolatethe has stirred protests from business readings and anti-pollution strate-Dallas-Fort Worth environmental-existing standard and will vioiate groups, local governments
and en-gies. ists also failed to get Rockwall and the newone. vironmentalists in some of the TheTexasCommission on Envi-Kaufmancounties included. The environmental co=nisstate's biggest
urban areas. ronmental Quality's map desig-Officials and business leaders sion voted Mondayto send the i:ec-The map is the state's proposed nates Dallas, Thrrant, Collin and from Travis
and Bexar counties onunendation without changeS to outlineofwhich counties will violate Denton counties as violators ofthe complained that their counties GuY. Rick Peny, whowill forward
it a tougher limit on smog, or ozone, newsmogstandard. weresingledoutasozoneviolators to the EPA. The EPAhas until April that the U.S, Environmental Protec-Those counties already violate
while surrounding areas weren't. to ruleonthe reconunendation. tion Agency is putting into force. the existingstandard, Joiningthem However, Travis, Bexar and Gregg The new standard
changes the under the new guidelines would be counties would have their violator
Nole: Shaded areas are statulOly steps required by the tedcrU aeon Ai: Act. Status: Bill passed both houses on 6/1/03, and Is now headed to Governor for signature. Bill Summary: Restores
TERP funding ($150 million per year average through 8131/08 Three eligible counties added: Henderson, Hood, Hunt Increases the cost for a certificate oftllle application for an automobile
from $13 to: $33 In affected counties ($20 Increase) $28 in all other counties ($15 Increase) After 9/1/08 the fee is $28 statewide Surcharge on sale, lease, or rental of off-road diesel
eqUipment Increased to 2% Affected "equipment" now Includes mining equipment New 1%surcharge on retail sale, lease, or use of on-road diesel motor vehicle over 14,000 Ibs. of model year
1997 or later Commission allOWed to make stationary engines eligible under incentives program • TERP programs may add vehicles and equipment other than diesel-fueled Diesel grant program
to receive 87.5% of TERP funding (currenUy 72%) Increases the percentage funding of new new technology research and development program to 9.5% (currently 7.5%) • At least 20% of these
funds must be allocated to air quality research for the Houston and DFW areas Removes funding for the motor vehicle purchase or lease Incentive program (currently 15%) Removes funding
for the energy efficiency grant program (currently 7.5%) Repeals language regarding publicizing the Iight-duty motor vehicle purchase and lease incentive Allows General Land Office to
Implement an energy-efficient building program for accreditation of buildings exceeding building energy performance standards by 15% or more • TCEQ to perform outreach to near-nonattalnment
areas on the benefits of implementing energy efficiency Initiatives Prohibits TxDOT from determining a speed IImil for environmental purposes BUT grandfathers existing speed limit reductions
(Lower speed IImils In DFW area ·70 to 65 mph, 65 to 60 mph -have been in effect since 9/1/01) TEXAS EMISSION REDUCTION (TERP) PROGRAM UPDATE 6/6f03 Mike Magee, TCEQ SIP Team Presented
at the DFW Photochemical Modeling Meeting June 6, 2003 House Bill (HB) 1365 (78'" Legilature, 2003) I!PA poposes ils 8-bour iriJpIemenlation nile. Memo liom BPAAssisIaDl Adminislrator
for Nt and Radiali... .mudiDg dale for stale IOCOIIIIIlOIIdaODS to July 15,2003. Go__submits my final cbangts 10 Stale rccommcndltions. .. 􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁩􀁳􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁶􀁣􀁤􀁾 torwanlcd
10 GoveiDor'. om.. tor wbmillallo I!PA. EPA􀁾to GoYanor roqucsting desipalion r=nvneadaIiOllS by ApnllS, 2003. Draft 8-Ho:or Ozone Designation Schedule Proposed_datioaspublisbod for
Juae 20, 2003 Commissioners' Wod< Session. Commission takes public comments and 1lCli0ll on final proposed JCCOmIJICIIdations II CommissiOllOlS' WOlle SessIon. December 2003 June 12,
2003 June 27, 2003 Junc 20, 2003 February 1,2004 Sprins, 2003 FebNaly 27, 2003 December 13, 2002 􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁂􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾 4(E. rA'" 􀁊􀁴􀀻􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁦 􀁾
􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀻􀀻􀁩􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁉􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁊􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁩􀀺􀀮􀁯􀀺􀀮􀁬􀀧2(011 • . ft""2lJ_ Posted on Tue, Jul. 15, 2003 7 area counties are ozone violators By Nell Strassman Star-Telegram
Staff Writer Star!Je1egram "We need to focus on what we need to do to improve air Quality. We've got to get serious about this," said Coiiln County judge Ron Harris, chairman of the
the North Texas Clean Air Steering Committee, a group of elected and community officials. "Outlying counties that contribute pollution to the Metroplex need to be Included In the clean
air plan." The EPA will make a final decision on reclassifying the counties by April 15, said Dave Bary, EPA spokesman in Dallas. If they are in violation, they "most likely" would have
to draft new clean air plans, but those rules have not been finalized, Bary said. 􀁾 Seven counties in North Texas are among 21 Identified Monday by state environmental officials as
failing to meet new, tougher federal health limits for ozone. Based on air monitoring data, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Identified Tarrant, Dallas, Collin, Denton,
Ellis, Johnson and Parker counties in North Texas In violation of the new ozone standard. Gov. Rick Perry Is expected to name the Texas counties with bad air pollution In a formal recommendation
to the Environmental Protection Agency today. The counties may have to draft new clean air plans, showing how they can cut ozone smog, EPA officials said. The final tally of counties
violating the standard could change. "A good summer this year, with few ozone violations, might take some counties off the list, and a bad ozone summer In some areas could add additional
counties," said Andy Saenz, commission spokesman. EPA and state environmental officials will meet to review the scientific data that served as the foundation for the recommendation.
"Some factors could change the designation," Saenz said. Eleven southeast Texas counties in the Houston, Beaurryont and Port Arthur area are also on the list. Travis, Bexar and Gregg
counties also violate the ozone health limit, but fall into another category, because they have taken voluntary steps to clean the air. Their designation to the EPA would be deferred
under Perry's recommendation until 2007, the deadline for those counties to meet the new standard. The new air-pollution standard measures concentrations of ozone over a rolling eight-hour
period rather than focusing on a one-hour pollution peak. Under current federal law, areas such as North Texas that haven't met the federal limit for ozone under the old standard must
do so before trying to meet the new standard. The EPA, however, Is considering some changes. One option under consideration would leave the law the same; another would allow areas like
North Texas to opt out of the old requirements In favor of the new standard. This Article Contains Material From the Associated Press. Neil Strassman, (817) 390-7657 strass@star-telef/ram.com
02003 Slat Tclegnun and wire service sOtJrccs. All Rights R...rved. http://www.dfw.c:om
.1 It's not too late to be heard • Contact Gov. Rick Perry before July 15 at 512-463-2000 or bye-mail through the Web site: http://www.governor.state.tx.us. '. HOOD i. JOHNSON! fLUS
: -:. ,-.. -··....-1 ". ...,--, ".. ./'. HENDERSON ... '--,.,..,....... ""/",---_.-1. 􀀺􀁬􀀧􀀩􀀨􀁊􀀱􀁾􀁴􀁾􀀻􀁪􀁣􀁩􀁅􀁁􀁎􀀧􀁁􀁩􀁒 piAN .'..''•. OffiCials ha,ve worked hard to fight air
pollution Re: "Worst oflWo Worlds -Region faces pollution andsanctions,' Editorials, June 11. . You concludedthestate has failed to take anti-pollution laws senously, and that the state
must address the region's 'air pollution woes -as ifnothing has beendone. That conclusion is demonstrably wrong. . • The Dallas-Fort Worth region has a clean-air plan in place that IS
􀁾􀁥 result ofyears ofhard work among the Environmental Protection Agency, the Texas Commission on Environmental 􀁑􀁵􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁾 􀁉􀁾 elected 􀁯􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁣􀁩􀁾􀀬 environmental groups and other
North 􀁔􀁥􀁸􀁾 Citizens: 􀁕􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁲 thIS plan, nine counties are working closely on clean-wI' Imtia-. . tives that implementtoughervehicle emissions inspections, require pollution reductions
at power plants and cement kilns, . cleaner diesel fuel, cleaner airport ground equipment, reduced·speed limits mid 􀁾􀁵􀁣􀁨 more. These measures have been adopted by TCEQ and 􀁡􀁲􀁾
􀁾􀀮􀁥􀁾􀁥􀁣􀁴􀀬 and the 􀁅􀁾􀁁􀁨􀁡􀁳􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁤 13 ofI9 separate regulatory initiatives. These actions are projected to achieve the EPA's current clean"air standards by 2007. What
has cast a pall of uncertainty' 􀁯􀁶􀁾􀁲 that plan is a federal court that has ruled out consideration that air quality is substantially affected by pollution from other areas. In 2000
the EPA proposed to approve the D-FWplan with an attainment date 01'2007 to match that ofHouston's plan. The 5th Circuit didn't dispute tbe effects oftransported pollution, but ruled
that extension ofan at. tainmentdatefrom 2005 to 2007based on transport is outside our authority. We can'tjust flip a switch and advance the existing plan by two years. That simply can't
be done. Adding additional complexity, the EPA in 2004 will finalize rules that require a new plan for the more stringent eigbt-hour standard for measuring ozone.This new standard will
havc a profound 􀁥􀁦􀁦􀁥􀁾 on air quality planning nationwide. The eight-hour standard WIll allow no delay of the one-hour clean air commitments already adopted by Texas. Wewill carry
out the current plan without backsliding, enhance programswhere possible and move forward with development and implementation of the eight-hour plan. That's exactly what you concluded
in your editorial weshould do -albeit aftergratuitollsly calling for additional litigation. . , The Dallas-Fort Worth air quality picture is complex. But there IS no doubt that, contrary
to the editorial's claim of"years ofinattention,"the EPA, TCEQ, local counties and air qualitygroups have together crafted substantive solutions to our air quality problems. These solutions
are beingimplemented and showing results. Whatever shape future regulations take, we must continue to worktogether to form new solutions while fully implementing the measures already
adopted to protect the health ofthe people. RobertJ. H1UItrm, chai1mrtn, Texas, Commission on Environmental Quality, AI/$tin RichardE. Greene, regional admini<trator, EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,
Dallali No more delays: Impose dirty air penalties now! 􀁾􀁥􀀺 "Clean-air delay is criticized -Residents object to EPAplan to tighten smog rule, postpone deadline,"yesterday's news storyon
the EPApublic hearing in 􀁾􀁧􀀮 : 'N!!! "!i" no! Myfa!iAly, and I are tiled ofbreathing progressively ;: 􀁻􀁜􀁖􀁏􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁔􀁨􀁥􀀮􀁏􀁊􀀬􀁬􀀡􀁹􀁊􀀻􀁨􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀿􀁖􀁜􀁢􀁡􀁣􀁊􀀺􀁩􀁷􀀮􀁣􀁥􀂷􀁯􀁦􀁾􀁡􀁤􀁩􀀺􀁬􀁦􀁥
􀁲􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁥􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁨􀁥 􀁾􀀮 '." tbreatotunIJ?SitioiiOfpenaltleso,niliiS8i-eaimIesssteps aretakeri -,-<·.tomakethelUfcleaner•."::'.:. '.' .:.r :.: ..•. ,..... ::." ... ' ' '.' i'·• .N:o
delidline s!loiild be 􀁩􀁩􀁯􀁂􀁴􀁐􀀼􀁩􀁮􀁾 MoVing the 􀀧􀁤􀁾 until : 􀀬􀀮􀁻􀁾􀁏􀁬􀁑􀁾 􀁮􀁯􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁡􀁱􀁾􀁾􀀮 􀁾􀁗􀁩􀁬􀁬􀀤􀁾􀁴􀀾􀁬􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁲􀁥􀁧􀁩􀀨􀀩􀀻􀁄 iIn'ex-:: 􀀺􀁃􀁃􀁜􀁊􀁓􀁥􀁮􀁯􀁴􀁴􀀺􀁯􀀮􀁧�
�􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁵􀁳􀁾􀁵􀁴􀁾􀁬􀁕􀁦􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁢􀁬􀁥􀁭􀁳􀁲􀁯􀁲􀁡􀁦􀁵􀁗􀁬􀁉􀀡􀁯􀁲􀁥􀁹􀁥􀁡􀁲􀁳􀀮 . . ',. 􀁾􀀬􀁰􀁯􀁳􀁥􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁾􀁬􀀺􀁓􀁮􀁑􀀺􀁙􀁉􀁩􀁡􀁮􀁱􀁾􀁵􀁓􀀧􀀨􀀩􀁮􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁲􀁯􀁡􀁤􀁴􀁯􀁣􀁬􀁥􀁡􀁮􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁩􀁲􀀡
'. ":','" .' ..'..,...": '::. ::;.::-' 􀀧􀀼􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀺􀁂􀁡􀁩􀀭􀁲􀁹􀁒􀁏􀁳􀁥􀁮􀀬􀁄􀁡􀁬􀀯􀁡􀁡􀀺 ".; .:--' .,.., .,' .;;' 􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀻 :, . Staffgraphic consider controls on sources over a larger
area due to the pervasive nature of ground level ozone and transport of ozone." Furthermore, so-called metropolitan statistical areas should be the "presumptive boundary for eight-hour
non-attainment areas." There are 12 counties in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, not seven. Rockwall, Kaufman, Hood, Hunt and Henderson counties should have to pull their fair
share of the load, too. Theyare part of the problem; they must be part of the solution. The commissioners should amend their recommendation. If they do not, then Gov. Rick Perry, should amend it before his July
15 deadline for forwarding it to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. If he does not, then the federal agency should use its authority under the Clean Air Act to include all 12
counties. Enough of underperformance, inaction and excuses. The state has had 14 years to clean the air. In that time, it has made foot-dragging an art fonn. In that time, it has taken
Dallas-Fort Worth from a "moderate" violator of the clean-air laws, to "serious," to the brink of "severe." Halfmeasures simply will no longer suffice, If the sanctions fall, if children
continue to sicken and elders to die prematurely, Texas will have only itselfto blame. r=: TCEQ plan Dallas-FortWorth residents may influence the state's recommendation about which counties
should bear tbe burden for cleaning the region's air. • Present written or oral comments at 10 a.m. Friday at the Thxas Commission on Environmental Quality's Austin office, Building
E, Room 2018,12100 Park 35 Circle. iii-\" ! DENrON \ COWN : HUNr 􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀁌􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀢 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀻􀁒􀁏􀁾􀁋􀁗􀁁􀁬􀁬 I I ' . 􀁾􀀭 IPARKER ITARRANT i DALLAS i" I. .._._. L_.__ .c_-_.
i KAUFMA Dallas-Fort Worth residents are used to' Texas' endronmental commissioners doing the bare minimum to make the region's polluted air fit to breathe. So thc commissioners' decision
to recommend that the major burden for cleaning the region's air fallon only seven North Te.xas counties should corne as no surprise. The commissioners Robert Huston, Ralph Marquez and
Kathleen Hartnett White -had a grand opportunity to allay doubts about their determination to bring the air 'within legal guidelines. In typical fashion, they missed it. But there is
timeyet for tbem to correct their mistake. Maythey do it for the sake of an 'economy already suffering from the prospect of federal sanctions and of the multitudes of people whose .lungs
and sinuses are being corropted by excesses ofozone and fine soot. Last week, the Texas Commission for Emironmental Quality recommended that only Dallas, Collin, Denton, Tarrant, Ellis,
Parker and Johnson counties be required to crack down in order for the region to comply with the federal government's tough, new "eight-hour" standard for lung-scorching ozone. But in
so doing, it violated the federal guidelines for determining which counties to include. According to the guidelines, "it is best to 12 counties, not just 7, need to'clear the air EDITORIALS
'£J/11;Y 6-17,0..3 . North Texas Pollution 71
􀁃􀁬􀁾􀁾 Uilllii'j ]lh1('fllUli 􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁉􀀡􀀮􀀿 􀁜􀁖􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀡􀀡􀀮􀀭...􀁾􀁾􀁪􀁾􀁬􀁙 ••lIme IK. 20( J:; Dirtv 􀁾􀁩􀁲 deadline missed ag-ain? -lJiJI/Y b ·1.5/tP,) • Delay option criminal:--------'--Re
: "North lexas makes play We share the blame for a clean-air delay _ As '05 Re: "Carrollton: Level orange," deadline looms, planners seek by Sarah Boykin, Thesday Letters.. more time,
stifter standards" I feel for Ms. Boykin and her' Thesday newsstory.' 􀁣􀀴􀁵􀁧􀁨􀀮􀁴􀁥􀁾who have asthma. The: Who are these people from the 􀁾􀀱􀁉􀀿􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 mDallas or any otherbig:
North Central Texas Council of, CIty IS extreme and very dangerotls : Governments? Where did they get 􀁾􀁯􀁲 some. However, the sad 􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁬􀁾􀀧 -􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁾􀁵􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁴􀁹􀁴􀁯􀁢􀁥􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁨􀁡􀁲􀁧􀁥􀁯􀁦�
�􀁣􀁯􀀭 IS that sh.e doesn't recognize her: ordinatmg regional clean-air ef-own role 1.0 the ve.ry real problem' 􀁦􀁯􀁾􀀢􀀿And whose interest are they ofurban aIr pol!uti?n. ,: servmg?
It certainly isn't the citi-. Heat pollution IS probably the ; zens ofNorth Texas bIggest contributor to our over3ll : Recently, we h;W the third-, • pollution levels and heat pollution:
hig.hest ozone reading since moni-Beingable to lJreathe air that IS 􀁾 our fault. In any city, it is un-: tonng began 10 years ago and the ' l':ll' ., aVOIdable no matter what you do'
earliest level purple ever. Yet Mike won t1ft ,'lJO'U' 18angM. to lower 􀁾􀁭􀁩􀁳􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳 on cars, trucks : Eastland, its executive director, is or factones, for that matter. Heat:
􀁴􀁾􀁮􀁧􀁴􀁯 delay cleaning our air un-Jim Schennbeck, Slaton helps create ozone and ozone :is : til 2010. This is not onlY stupid'it. o.ne of the worst pollutants. The is criminal.
'. 􀀧􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁾􀁥􀁳from area counties, cit-􀁳􀁬􀁤􀁥􀁜􀁾 that Ms. Boykin jogs on : The ozone level in Dallas is so les, 􀁢􀁵􀁳􀁭􀁾􀁳􀁳􀁥􀁳 and environmental contnbutes to the creation
'of: bad that often our childrcn ate not and 􀁰􀁵􀁢􀁬􀁾􀁣 health groups. Since ozone as do the streets she driV\!S: allowed to go outside for recess the offiCIal ,conveners of that on
and the roof on her house, Her' Dallas Mayor Laura Miller should steering committce haven't sched-air conditioning and cars are also: 􀁭􀁾􀁥 clean air her No.1 priority. uled a meeting
since March, one offenders. We should not be tryiiIg: Ghstening huildings and a beauti-wonders how long this postpone-to find other scapegoats. The fa;ct : 􀁾􀁬􀁬 Trinity River corridor
will be of ment 􀁳􀁴􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁧􀁹 has been in the 􀁴􀁨􀁡􀁾 we 0oose.to live in an urban : httle benefit if we can't see and en-works Without any public knowl-setting (mcluding the suburbs)
is ' joy them. edge ofit. the biggest cause. ' , 􀁾􀀮􀀮 Pat Stodghill, Dalll.ls And how long the charade .Additionally, there are other Old hi}" would have gone on without the thmgs
that we could all do to lower -SC 00 pO ltiCS publieation ofMr. Loftis' article. energy Ilse that would help im-: . Re: "North Tex,., makes play Iftherc'severgoingto beasuc-prove the
air we breathe. Solar" for a 􀁣􀁬􀁾􀁡􀁮􀀭􀁡􀁩􀁲 delay," hy Randy ccssful clean air plan for Dallas-pancls can provide electricity for: Lee Loftis, Tuesday ncws storv. Fort Worth, ifs
going to havc to houses and reduce dependence on ' , A' a.longtiml' spectator 􀁴􀁾 the come from a more inclusive and energy companies. New products ' saga of Dallas-Fort WOIth's air
,democratic process than the one can reduce heat absorption in atpollution machinations, what's that mannfactured this decision to tics by as much as 70 percent. So-􀁳􀁾􀁉􀁾􀀱 ahont
this story is that it iden-?elay. We just suffered the earliest lar-powered attic fans reduce attic liftcs anew an inherent impcdi-vcry unhealthy" day to breathe cv-􀁴􀁥􀁭􀁰􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁥􀁳
\vithout consuming 􀁮􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁴 to de,to a1nlOt causcd bVl,n-cr on May ;\1. This occurred de-electnclty. Gas-electric hvbrids as gm('s or fill'llaces: !lId-school spite Illost of the sWtl"S
existing well as diesel cal's and trucks, 􀁾 politICS,. plan to control (IZ(>IlC already in 􀁥􀁸􀁴􀁲􀁣􀁭􀁾􀁬􀁹 good miles per gallon: It seems a del'lsion has ,11 ready place. CollectIvely
􀁜􀁾􀁃 are not making any bcen made hy the powl'rs-that-be .How many Dallas-Fort Worth of thcse chOICes. Has Ms. Boykiri t􀁾􀁬􀁈􀁴 Dallas-Fort Worth should add 􀁲􀁥􀁳􀀬􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁾 will
sntler, ami, yes, die, made any ofthem? ' hI'!, more years onto an almost dc-from pOIsonous air in thosl' Iivc ex-In the cnd, we are to blame, not 􀁣􀁾􀁬􀁤􀁣􀀭􀁣􀀱􀁣􀁬􀁡􀁹􀁥􀁤 promise
of cleancr 􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁾􀁣􀁡􀁲􀁳 􀀮􀁢􀁣􀁩􀁮􀁾 proposed? some nameless big L'Orporation. aIr and 􀁓􀁬􀁾􀁳􀁰􀀨􀀺􀁮􀁣􀁬 tbe current pro-!mafraid your Wednesdayedi-􀁎􀁾􀁴 Rx.,on or Enron or TXU:
􀁾􀁳􀁳 that IS ehargcd with Iinding 􀁾􀁬􀁉􀀱􀁡􀁬 􀁉􀁾􀀧􀁡􀁳 correct about the neeL'S-:OIntmg fingers doesn't work, 'it 􀁦􀁕􀁔􀀡􀁾􀁥􀀮􀁲 relh!ctions in pollution. Slty of a .lawsuil..
Being able to 􀁊􀁕􀁾 makes it less likely that there IhiS option to delay h,., never b.reathe aIr that won't kill you is a Will ever be any kiml of solution.' . hecn discussed. llIuch
less voted nght. As has so oftl'n hecn the case It would be nice to see a Dallas on. in any public forum. That in-in this state, citizens IllUst turn J:'f017ling News series on the 􀁳􀁵􀁾
􀁣􀀱􀁵􀁣􀁬􀁣􀁾 the official Clean Air now to. the COUlts lor protection Ject. 􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁥􀁳􀁴 education withoutthe Stcel1nll; Committee with repre-and enforcement oftheir rights. eco-hberal
agenda is needed. ". Jim Sche,.m!Jeck, Siatan Frank Miller, Coppell' i􀁾􀁾 I Clean-air I delay iscriticizedResidents object to EPA plan to tighten smog rule, postpone deadline By RANDY
LEE LOFTIS Environmental Writer IRVING -North Texas residents told federal officials Thesday that they don't like a plan that might postpone clean-air deadlines for the region.Members
of the public made the comments at a hearing on upcoming changes in federal smog rules. One provision favored by states might give polluted areas such as Dallas-Fort Worth years longer
to meet 􀁃􀁉􀁾􀁡􀁮 Air Act health standards.That idea drewfire at Thesday's hearing, one of three that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is holding across the country this week."No
more extensions, no more delays, no more 􀁥􀀮􀁾􀁣􀁵􀁳􀁥􀁳􀀬􀀢 dcmanded Bech)' Bornhorst of DeSoto. 'This standard is about public health, and we should not forget that."Others agreed.
"Have you seen the fcar in the facc of a child who cannot breathe?" asked Susybelle Gosslee, president ofthe League of Women Voters of Dallas. ihe ex-, pectation of the taxpayers who
fund this agency is that the EPA will protect the emironment li,r all the peoplc."The EPA is planning to shift to a tougher standard on smog, or ozone. Thc old polit'y 􀁭􀁥􀁡􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁥􀁳
, high ozone levels during one-hour : periods; the ncw one, considered more protectivc, avcrages levels over an cight-hour peliod. The agency is eonsidering an approach that would allow
areas such as Dallas-Fort Worth that violate the existing standard to switch over to the new standard as I early as 2005 -letting them bypass deadlines that are looming under the existing
rulcs. , The Dallas-Fort Worth area faces a 2005 deadlinc under the f M,,. ' rl·.11 I.': ,I . 􀁩􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁾 HOW TO COMMENT The EPA will take written comments on the region's clean air
plan until Aug. 1. Comments can be e-mailed toA-and-R-Docket@epa.gov or mailed to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West (Air Docket), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Room: BlOB,
Mail Code: 6102T, Washington, D.C. 20460. Materials on the EPA's proposal are available at www.epa.grN/􀁡􀁩􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁫􀁳􀀯􀁡􀁩􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁫􀁳􀀴􀀮􀁨􀁴􀁭􀁬 one, the area would face no new deadline
until 2010. EPA officials said urban areas that switch to the new standard would not be allowed to abandon efforts currently in place, such as vehicle inspections or curbs on industrial
pollution. "This policy doesn't alIow for backsliding," said Tom Diggs of the EPA's Dallas office.However. another provision would allow counties that are newly added to an existing
ozone violation area to avoid full-fledged pollution controls. That proposal, if approved, would mean that airpollution rules in Ellis, Parker and Johnson counties could be more lenient
than those in in Dallas, Tarrant, Denton and Collin counties. Residents and environmentalists called that a bad idea. 'We expect that the EPA proposal would mean more of the same [pollution]
for Ellis County," said Katy Hubeuer, executive director of the Blue Skics Alliance, a North Texas environmental group. "What we're talking about is economic equity." Opponents also
questioned the 􀁔􀁥􀁸􀁡􀁾 Commission on Environmcntal Quality's recommendation last wcek to omit Rockwall and Kaufman counties from the designated ozonc violation area. The)' notcd that
EPA guidelines favor 􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁵􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁩􀁲􀁥 mctro areas. By year's end, the EPA hopes to publish final languagc on how it \vill put the ncw ozone standards intoplacc_l-:-mail
r1nf\:is@daJlasne\'r"5.Q>m
MA1l.GAREr KEuHER Go after the dirtiest cars on the road' -Dal108 Cuuntyju As reteIlt as Thursday, an article in To Dal108 Morm"l'; News noted that ev. using our lawnmowers is hazardous
our air and health. Wemustchangetheway\ live -even in smallways -to improve ourI . quality.Afteo several coutt deo sions, the region is in flux to whal; the Environmenl Protection Agency's
requiJ ments will be, But while t EPA and the Texas Comm sion on Environmen QlIality arc working on t region's requirements,,' mustcontinue to do all we can to clean theai Whatis interestingfor
this region isthate pollution is primarily vehicular. The source , our problem is mobile, not industrial. Itis eI mated that fewer than 10 percent of the ..,. cles in our area create
50 percent ofthe pol tion,We need to make sure those vehicles are ther repaired and ron clean or are "scrappo and taken off our roads. Ai10leck Texas. I state'sclean air program, even
provides 'a nu ber to report "smoking" vehicles. 1-800-41 SMOG, Our goal isn't to punish those " high-polluting cars but to repair them and people moving in the cleanest air possible.
1 Dallas County Commissioners Court is wo ing on justthat Don't lose sight of our progress The Dallas-Fort Worth area continues to have days that violate ozone standards. so additional
ways to improve Our air arc neoded, But I would characterize the effort to date as being on the right t!'ad<, and we shouldn't lose sight ofthe significantprogress. The region and the
state adopted a clean air plan in 2000 that is aimed at reducing pollution by nearly 60 percentlt is to eliminate unhealth)' ground-level ozone through such measures alitoughervehicleemissionsin_.spe
ctions. power plant and cement kiln controls, and reduced speed limits, . 􀀻􀁾􀀬 Gov, Rick Penyand the Legislature demonSlrdled bold leadership earlier this year when, during a session
dominated by a budget crisis, they agreed to $600 million in funding for clean air programs, At the federal level. the Environmental Pr0tection Agency has established new standards for
cleaner cars and trucksas \Veil as forcleaner. low-emission fuels, Those controls tackle the primary contributors to the airquality problem in North Tcxa& President Bush's key environmental
proposal now before Congress calls for major reductions in air pollution from power plants. Known as Clear Skies. it would protect human health and significantly improve air quality.
In North Texas, mandatory compliance measures would reduce pollution from local sources Os well as f!'om power plants in others parts ofthe' country whose Operations send pollution adrift
and in our direction, Most in,portant, good citizenship is having a beneficial impact, As we become more knowledgeable about how indi\1dual practices impact air quality, we realize the
powerful cumu-' lath'e benefits of all of us together doing our part. ... EPA rCJ:,r10Ila{ administrator I", ...•...::.'.'..􀁾􀁾 -...•.. " ''0' :.•-", 􀀢􀁾􀀧 ;.; KENMENGFS Buy morenatural-gas
buses Are we on the right track to cleaning up our air? 'lbe simple answer to that complicated question Is "no." I suggest threeareas on wblch to fucus, First and foremost, we need sound
science to develop smartsolutions. Ourregion bassuffered from a lad< of leadership by stalegoyemmentfor more than six )"8I'S in seriously studying the problem and developing tough solutions,
Recent legislatiVe DCtionto begin stud' the migration ofair 􀁾􀁴􀁳 is ' late, but atleastitis a start' Second, we don't neQlSsarily have to drive less. but we ,must drive . smarter.
As North Texas residents, we have yet to fully appreciate that two-thirds of our air pollution is directly attributable to ourvehicles. We should take serious steps to penalize vehicles
that are gross polluters, as well as give the Dallas Area Rapid Thtosit agency financial incentives to buy lower-pollution vehicles. such , as buses that ron on compressed natural gas.
, ' '!bird, we urgently need more monitoring and better care for those people hutt by badair. ' This environmental problem took decades to create, and itwon't blow awayovernightln the
meantime,.we should devote more resources to community health services to help those most affected by bad air, especiallychildren. -Dalla.s liLwyer and fimner NlJI'th T..... Clean AirCoalition
chairman RICHARD GREENE 􀁾􀁪􀁾 We aSked the e:rpert:s andfellow breathers' , ", ... ,;, """\., -/lAo A/? 'J 􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀧 '. ""'''''',' ' t///I/" -tJ 􀂷􀁾􀁏􀀭􀁊 _ H(jw can N. Texas clean
up its air? . I 􀀺􀁾 'i·' , "\ JAYGAJrrNEa"",';;', " Find ?ut J!{oreahouikilns",it.1..-ea·t '>';Y;',',''' ' UU· , .....,e:,.\ As a 􀁰􀁨􀁹􀁳􀁩􀁣􀁩􀁡􀁮􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁴􀁮􀁩􀁡􀁴􀁳 asthma. I: am
.' concerned eYe!)' day about the polfu"" , tion produced bf the'cement plantiiOin ' ,. Midlothian, It is 􀁾􀁾 cbaIIenge,SinCe' i the facilities have been granted speeiaI exemp-. " tions
from laws thatreguJatetheolderkilnC.. ',; 1'11Ie. plume from.' the kilDs ' ! otten bas beennipOrted blowing right into Dallas, Fort Worth ana beY(lIid.Asli doclO1;'1 find particular
meaning in thatponuti!>1I, " because there have been'reporlBpossiblylinking itto re-' , ,_" spiratory and sinus troubles ., -"liS well as genetic mlJIfurmations in animals andeVen clIildreri.
.;"', ::' " Jencourage anyoneelsewho is coneemed to contact the SierraClub or the DOwnwindenat Risk, both ofwhich havebeenveryadiveonthe issue, The groups wilIlet you know specifia.I1y
whatyou can dotoeducateyoursclfand who in 􀁾􀀢􀁶􀁥􀁲􀁬􀀩􀁊􀁮􀁣􀁮􀁴 to contactto help bring an end to tlw 􀁦􀁲􀁩􀁾􀁨􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁧 problem._ Do1lD8 areaphysician It is a given that many
Texans need their vehicles to make the daily trek, but that shouldn't hinder us from exploring alternate means of accomplishing that task. Mass transit is a viable option, and I applaud
the Dallas Area Rapid Thlnsit agency for it< renown system, Hut 􀁭􀀢􀀭􀁾􀀧􀁴􀁲􀁤􀁊􀁬􀁳􀁩􀁴 is only one ofseveral possible remodies for relieving the traffic congestion that contrihutes
to pollution, One innovative idea is AirCheek Texas, Emissions testing in this .rea no\\' is among the toughest in Texas, AirChcck ll-.xas offers financial assistance to Iho...t.· who
can'l illJ(lrd to make emissions repilir:-;or n'pl<l.('j' nldl'r 􀁜􀂷􀁣􀁨􀁩􀁤􀁣􀁾􀀮 \Vilh alll'111phi\."is on 􀀬􀁾􀁜􀁉􀁣􀁨 􀀮􀁾􀀨􀁬􀁬􀁵􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳􀀮 North 􀁔􀁴􀀧􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁓 c:all 111C1\"(,
􀁩􀁴􀁾 'lir quality prohlcms doy.'Tl Ihcnl;ld.Help those who can't afford repairs Anvone who cranks his car and makes his 􀀬􀁾􀁡􀀩􀀧 to work contributes to a problem that pl<lgUes all
of North Texas, Vehicle emi&<ion, not only affect the quality of air we beeathe but also threaten the region's economic prospects. '>"1"';',.", n"/I,, ROYCEWFsr----._-_ .._------􀁾􀁾
liVe asked the 􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁴􀁳 andfellow breathers '" .'. . 1);1;,,/1/?--I 􀀮􀁾􀁯􀀳 How can N. Texas clean up its air? i\ R_A._M-O--N_A...LV,AREZ 􀁟􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾 ..-􀁾􀀬 -Environmmtal Difimse
scientist Cut insurance rates. for driving less N0rthTexasis makingsomeprogressto ward meeting air quality standanh but it still is falling short of proteclini public health and rt"idents'
quality oflife. An, it will continue to fall shor until the focus shills fron doing the bare minimun needed to gain the approva. oftooernl bureaucrats to tak· ing all of the steps necessal')
toclean the air. The minimalist 􀁡􀁴􀁴􀁩􀁴􀁵􀁤􀁾 was evident in the Legislature this year. In assessing whether his clean air bUlcameclose to meeting the stale's needs, Dennis Bonnen,
chainnan of the House Environmental Regulation Committee, said, "Does it come close? You bet it comes close, because the people of Thxas de-mand that wedQ simply what is required ofils
-notanyless,notanymore: .. Comingclosemeantcuttinggrantsfuren""': gy efficiency and rebatesfur low..,mission ClIIll, two mudest but important programs establishedbythe last Legislature.
'. " We must 􀁤􀁾􀁭􀁡􀁮􀁤 more of our government officials. We wou't have clean air as long as doing the minimum remaius the standard. There are a number of innovative strategies that
will help North Thxas achieve clean air, such as offering drivers financial rewards if they drive fewer miles by finding alternative ways to get aroundor eliminating unnecessazytrips.
Offering bard-<:ash incentives is asurerway of reducing emissions from CBI'S and trucks'-; the region's \argest pollution category -than simply asking people to drive less because it
is therightthingtodo. Environmental Defense"s favorite consumer incentive for Thxans is 'pay as you drive" car insurance, which sets premiums based on how much you drive. Want to pay
less? Drive less. Such a strategy notonly reduces air pollution, it also reduces traffic congestion and makes in, surance more aIfordable fur low-income driv" ers. LO.I.S.·FINKEI.MAN
-._---..-...-Look at what City Hall is doing The Dall,,-< City Council i.< committed to cleaning up our air. But the region has an uphill oottle, since its harmful emissions primarily
are from vehicles. Individuals nlu5I begin to car pool, drivc cleaner allll, ride bikes or use publie transportation. The city of Dallas has implementedanumberofclean air initiatives.
. . Where feasible, cit¥ sta1I' . members have shifted:work schedules from five eighthour days to four IOchour days, reducing vehicles tlav-. eling to and from work.oDe day aweek. ,.
.-It has encouraged developments like Mockingbird Station to put people close to jobs, recreation andtransit. .'.,' j .., .;" I The city h.. heen aggressively purcbBsing compressed naturalgasvehicles
andis bui\lliD.g.,. two fueling stations that will be open 􀁉􀀻􀁑􀀮􀁾 ,; 􀁰􀁵􀁢􀁬􀁩􀁣􀀮􀁬􀁴􀁯􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁳􀀸􀀳􀁬􀀱􀁮􀁡􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁮􀁬􀀭􀁧􀁡􀁳􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁾􀂷􀁬􀁩􀀻 tive-fueled vehicles .. well
as 14 e1ectriq:1IY: :" brids, making up about 20 percentofthefleet....... co.'... 1 The city uses about 1million galloos.'?i'bio:-',. diesel fuel annually to reduce air emissionS.,.
from heavy-duty and light-duty diesel eqiup-;..:, ment. ", .. ,... ,., I New city buildings, like the Jack Evansl'<>-.· 'i lice Headquarters, will meet the U.S. Greeu.: I, Building Council's
standards, and city departmenls are developing plans to reduce 􀁥􀁮􀁾􀀮 usage. . , m·',,-And the council itselfhas provided a 􀁾􀀢 example when it delayed the start of Coimcil ;. meetings
until 10 a.m., reducing thenumber of , , vehicles driven during the hours when ozope is produced. ':. I The city is makingprogress, but it mustcontinue to work with others to develop
clf'Jlll air I initiatives at the local, regional and stale levels i to ensure bcalthy air for alI. -Dallas City C&uncil mmrber TOM U;PPERT 􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀭 Change your driving habits
Cleaning up the air ranks as one ofourregion's most pressing conoems.lt is a top bw;incss priority for the Greater Dallas Chamber, becausc it affeets the health of our people andour
cronomy. The Legislature nQw has funded both the Texas emissions reduction plan and research for DallasFort Worth to find better ways to combat airpoUution. Air quality plans for our
region call for measures .,.. .cleaner fuels, stricter vehicle inspections and cuts in erni&-. sions from utilities and ee.. ment kilns -that will im" prove.the atmosphere. They are
in the 􀁷􀁯􀁲􀁾􀁾 , I The area's county judges are providing excel-. : lentleadership. Automobiles cause much of our bad air.--, Changing driving habits is a daunting !ask",oo Programs
supported byemployers -ridesbar-", ing, transit passes, teleworking and lleodbl!, schedules -can help reduce traffic and emis-. siODS and should continue to be implemented. . ,. Individuals
also must take responsibility for their driving habits. . The imposition offederaJ sanctions, such as the loss oftransportation funding, is no way to solvethe problemin Dallas-FortWorth.
In fact, the loss ofthatfunding could increaseair polluc tion in the region by increasing traffie congestion. Air quality is acritical issue. Unless wesolve , it, we can expect the region's
quality oflife and.. economy to decline. . -Greater Dallas Chamberchairman .L-O._N.---B_U.-R.. NAM _-Quit stalling on cleanup Breathcl'S deserve bettcr. They Mould demand more oftheir
elected officials. Dallas, Thrrant, Collin and Denton counties arc designated dirty-air counties. A clean air plan is written. The environmental and public health communities largely
are ignored. The plan includes, anlOng other recommendations, a50 percent reduction from cement plants in Ellis County, but the stale environmental agency approves . a 30 percent reduction.
The' . ,!. 􀁾 airumpirescall'Strikeonel' The fudernl Environmen-. tal Protection Af,ency rightfully chooses not to approve the clean air plan but agrees to a correction process. Thxas
Indnstries,oneofthreecementplantsinEllisCounty, sues thestate. Both parties reacll an agreement, . and the stale caves and awards TXI $2 million to burn tires along with hazardous waste.
The stale environmental agency writes rules loose enough to eucourage dishonesty. The air um-· pires call 'Strike two!" TXI applies for several pennit amendments. More pollution. The
air umpires call "Strike three'" Because of the three cement plants, Ellis County violates the same clean air law .. the ,; four other counties, but it is. awarded a walkto 􀁾􀀺 home
plate. The state en.,roomental agency .􀁾 refuses to act. The air umpires appeal to the EPA. TheEPAstillishemmingandbawing. The correction process should be proceed:, 􀀮􀁾 mg, but it
isn't. Elected leaders choose to wait : . .and see how the EPA changes will alter the : clean air process. More stalling. More dirty air. ,. ,'. Cement plants and Ellis County get a
home ""': run. Breatbcrsare sent backto the dugout. .􀁾􀀧􀀮 -statereprescntatilJejromFortWorth ,,",.' KArr HUBENER Get tougher with our politicians Ourclean air plan needs resuscitation.
We must tell our politicians no more apologies -just make our air safe to brealhe. Environmentalists, physicians and public health organizations can't do it :llone. And when we tellour
politicians,·we must teU them to look at pollution regionally and force Ellis County and . other North Texas counties 􀁾􀁴􀁯􀀱􀁢􀁥 plan. We must tell them to f0CUS on more than just
C8IlI and cnICk downon otherpollution sources, such as cement plants.which prodwleemissionseqllll!to about 2.3 million vehicles annually. We must tell them to enforce the law vigorouslyandrequireindu
stria1facilitiestomodernizeovertime. We must tell them to require energy efficiencyon all CODStNction to help reduce pollution from power plants. . . Wemust tell them tosay no to Rep.
Joe Bartonand other membeni ofCongress who would . llllherwea1wl clean airlawsthanacluallyclear theair. We must tell them that cleaning up dirty diesel enginescan'tbe theonlyclean airsuceess
story. Texas eon and mustoobetter. .No more delays, no more excuses, no more rollbacks, -BlueSkiuAUianardirectur 􀁾􀁾
E--mail 􀁲􀀱􀁯􀁁􀀮􀁩􀁾􀁀􀁩􀁤􀁮􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁓􀁉􀁬􀁃􀁗􀀡􀁌􀁃􀁏􀁏􀁬 violator counties, she said. Mr. Mueller of the state environmental commission said a county doesn' escape pollution controls
just because it isn't in the designated smog violation area. For example, in North Texas only Dallas, 􀁔􀁨􀁲􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁾 DentDn and Collin counties are now listed as violators, 'but motorists
in adjacent counties to the 􀁷􀁾 south and east also must get annual emis· sions checks on gasoline-powered cars andtrucks. Rockwall County Commissioner Scott Self, an avid cyclist and
the new standard. For that reason, sailor, said he's thrilled to hear his the proposal released Thursday home falls below the more strindoes not by itself expand any pol-gent federal
ozone ceiling. lution controls on vehicles, facto-"!t's healthier for us,' he salil. ries, power plants, small business-"It's certainly a quality-of-Jife isesorothersources. sue, especially
for OUf senior citi. Although some pollution con-zensandpeoplewhohaverespiratrols come automatically when a tory problems who would be at county is designated as a violatDr. risk.' most
measures are negotiau:d by However, whether outlying stale, regional and local offieials, counties would attract poUuting with federal approval. industries is an opcn question. the ...
Vote sclteduled: ..... 􀀺􀂷􀀭􀁾􀁦􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁲􀀧􀁪􀀻􀁾􀁴􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁤􀀺􀂷􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁾􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁣􀁵􀁾 Commissioners are to meet scen in the construction of new June 20 in Austin to hear publie power
plant, in Ellis Count)·, just commentsand vote on the prop'''-south ofthe existing violation area. al. D dl' . Some advocates of tighter ea me uncertam smog controls said the proposal
The EPA guidelines (In implewasapositive step. But they point-menting the new standard also ed out potential controversies over would atfect another North Te;'(as whieh eounties were
indmled. issue: whether the Dalla.,-Fort "It does menn that we're cvcn-Worth area must meet clean-air 􀁴􀁵􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁹􀁧􀁯􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁾􀀩 get cleaner "ir." s"id requirements by 2005,lhe eurrent
Katy Hubener of the Blue Skies deadline, or 2010, the likcly dead· Alliance, a Dallas-Fort Worth eo-lino under the newst.ndard. ...ironmenta1 group. Howl'\'er. she Regional planners
and some said Rockwall and Kaufman t:oun-local officials have 􀁳􀁕􀁾􀁬􀀡􀁳􀁴􀁣􀁤 byties should be included. noting passingthe 2005 deadliue, whieh that federal guidl'tincs 􀁵􀁩􀀤􀁬􀀧􀁏􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁡􀁾􀁃 the area almost certainly willnol baving a patchwork (If ruks for meet, and working instClid tC),. the counties
in a metro a'''''. 2010 date under the new nile. (,n-Ult c.locsn't make 􀁾􀁬􀀧􀁮􀁳􀁣 I<)r them vironmentalists oppose that to go ahl'au and designate most change. countie:s hut nut Rockwall
nnd Kaufman: Ms. Hubener said. Slaff",riterJejJ!>"'.i,-rcfmtrilr Those eounties could become uled 10 thi.<report. magnets lor polluting industries escaping tighter restrictions in the
address Is Texas Commissk>n on Environmental Quaflty.12100 Pari< 35 Circle. AusUn. Texas 78753. The proposal Is available at www.tceq.state.tx.us. The EnvIronmental Protection Agency
will hold a public hearing On guideHnes for the new ozone standard lrom 8:30 a.m. to.5 p.m. Tuesday at the Maniott DFW NoM holel. 8440 Freeport Parl<way in IrvIng. PUBLIC INPUT SOUGHT
The Texas Commission on Erl'oironmental Quality is scIleduled to meetJune 20 In Austin to hear public comments and vote on whether to send this proposal, or a modified version, to the
governor. An)one wishing to submit written comments for that meeUng should do so by 5 p.m. Wednesday, The e-mail address for comments Is siprules@toeq.state.tx.us; the mailing fore,
the move to a tighter standard is. adding dozens" of wban areas nationwide to the list of smogviolators. The 12 millionTexans breathing dirty air under the new sllmdard is an increaseofnearly2
million OI'Or those covered by the old rule. Joining the violators' list for the first time are Austin, San Antonio and Longview -Travis, Bexar and Greggcounties, respcctively. Deferred
violations In all three of those counties, the stale is proposing to "defer" their violations because they already had signed binding pacts to take steps against smog before they had
to. EI Paso, a current violator, is said!o be in compliance with the proposc<1 standard. Elsewhere in Texas, all the far southeastern counties around Houston and Beaumont viola.tc the
new rule as they do the nld. State offieials eho.'e whieh al"eas to include based on o,">IIe readings ITon' 2000-02, silid Chuck MueUer, an 􀁡􀁩􀁲􀁾􀁱􀁬􀀱􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁴􀀩􀂷 planner with the
Tcxa.c:;, Commi.'isian on Envinmmenlal Quality. Counties cOlild be addtd or "'moved after 2003 readings ,trc eomplete, he "tid. The EPA ha.' until April 2001 to rule un the state,' reeommenda·
tions. Only then will stales tOme 􀁵􀁰􀁾􀁴􀁨 new strategic.c; for meeting State puts D-FW on smog list.: .Loc;ation does no, rIa¥e tt1'e, yearS of diU dutlnC2000.'02 I· ., ContinuedfrarnPage
IB I..!ion people, more than half of all . Thxans, live in eounties with high , smoglevels under the new rule. '!\va other area counties aren't 6n the lisL In Rockwall County, smog levels
measured in recent . ye:ars were harely below the f,. llIDount that would trigger a viola· ,·tion.Andin Kaufman County, officials said there wasn't enough infonnation to make a decl,ion.
!".' The recommendations, which · will go to the EPA after the stale environmental commission and GW; Rick Perry approve them, are · a key part ofimplementing a longdelayed crackdown
on ozone, the . part of smog that burns people's lungs. The newstandard, based on ,} a change in how 􀁯􀁾􀁮􀁥 is 􀁭􀁥􀁡􀁾 :q,.sw-ed. recognizes Ibat the existing 'standard underestimates
the o'lunber ofareas where Americans · 􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁵􀁮􀁨􀁥􀁡􀁊􀁴􀁨􀁹􀁡􀁩􀁲􀀮 . ·Orone results when summer . .. . . , \ sunli&ht cooks pollution from YO-North Texas ozone readings " 􀀡􀁬􀁾􀁥􀁳􀀬
diesel equipment, indu.. Under the new lederal standalll forgJ1lund-I"",1 alone, I' bjes'and natural and other sourereadin", are taken all day and then averaged during eight·hour I es.nt's
especially harmful to periods. The maximum 8·hour average allowed Is 85 pans per : 􀁣􀁬􀁲􀁬􀁉􀁤􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀬 the elderly and the .,11, billion. Highest readings meaSllred at area monitoring
stations: :. but at hIgh levels ,t becomes a nsk 3·year i .to healthy people as well. Location 2000 2001 2002 IMlrage:. OK'd' 1997 FrisCo t06 102 lQO 101 I I".:. m Anna 95 104 90 97
II'· The EPA approved the new 􀁄􀁡􀁬􀁾􀁳 Hinton St 106 '112 118 115 01Alne standard in 1997, but a DaMas North No.2 109 100 103 102 court ehallenge by business Dallas 􀁅􀁸􀁥􀁣􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁥􀁁􀁬􀁲􀁰􀁯􀁾
􀁜 ; 101 87' 98· 93' groups kept it in !imbountil200I. Sunnyvale Long Creek .. 33 85· 95 90 The EPA is now eousidcring how Denton Airport South .,. III 107. "·114 111 to dovetail the
neW standanl \\;th MldtothlanTower lOB 78 99 89 the existing. Ie" <tringcnt rule. Granburt 95 98: 87 93 Under the new rulo. states ClebumeAiljlort 94 95 114 105 must tell thl' EPA which
areas KaUfman' 80. '81 81 81 within their borders have (lZOlle Parker COunty 97 107 108 lOB levels thal ,;olate the new slan-Roc:kvrfall Heath 99'. 88 88 96 92 dard, Those arl'a.'i arc
cartcel non-Arlington Regional OffIce" 103 83 attainment 􀁡􀁲􀁾􀀺􀁌􀀧􀀢 bccall!'c tht:y ha-Eagle MoUlltilin Lake. 101 112 .' 123 118 ven'tattainl'd the clean air that the FortWorthNOl1.hweSt
.102 116 113 115., role requires -no more than 85 Kolle< . 102 125 125 125· parts per billion of O7.0ne, aver-Grapevine Fa,rway 105 112 127 120 agedOver eight haul's. MinglOn Mun;apal
Airpoil" , . ,101.. The nld standard i,,,'t as striet ':-" no more than 125 parts per bil-_. lion during anyone hour. Thereeounty COllin COllin .D•.las Dalias Dallas Dallas 􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁮
Ellis 1l9Ou Johnson Kaufm.n Parl<er Rocl<Wall Tarrant TaJ18lll Tarrant Tarrant TarrarD TaiTarD S..STATE Pag.2B <rIIC pallas 3Ullfuing Xcws Frid<lY. JUlie 1:1. 200:1 ---.----􀁾􀀭􀀬...
􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀀻 Ii, State puts D-FW on its dirty-air list ./J!fr,4 "I :1 􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀭􀀳 .. '. .. -In North Texas, Ellis, John-7 area counties violate SOli <1/1(1 Parker counties
joill h /.. Dallas, 􀀱􀁜􀁴􀁲􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁾 Denton and toug Cl' ozone IIluts Collin as areas where people ullder Texas proposal breathe illegally dirty air under a state recommendation to the
8)' RANDY Lm·: UWrIS U.S. Environmental Protection EII\'irunnwnlal Wrih'f Agency. Aetillg on lhlenll orders, Their addition brings the T"xas ufficials said Thur,;day uumber of North
Thxans exthaI 21 countie' -including posed to high ozone to 4.9 milse\"en in the Dal",,·!'orl Worth lion -the most people living area -violate the tougher, undersmoggyskiesofanylexas
nlore protcctiw lil1\il on urban region. Statewide. Some 12 milsmog that the fedcral govcrnnwnt i.'i phasing in. .• COunties violating Sohour standalll • Counties meeting S.hour standard
Ozone counties In violation Seven counties in the Dallas-Fort. Worth area violate the limit on urban smog being phased In by the lederal govemment In NoM Texas; Ellis. Johnson and Parker
counties join pllNious violators Dallas, Tarrant Denton and Collin counties. Rockwall and Kaufman counties are not considered violators, '1ar"
By Jonathan Osborne 􀀮􀁾􀁬􀁄􀁉􀁊􀁃􀀬􀁯􀁜􀁉􀀯􀀬􀀧􀁬􀀧􀁬􀀻􀁜􀁬􀁕􀀧􀁬􀁴􀁾􀁜 !IT,\fF Officials plan costlier vehicle tests, other steps to avoid U.S. mandates I\uaUIl Amerlcan-5tatesman
II IN 1 8 ?II01 Central Texans to get bill for dirty air ,'.... Pelu HoU Is CEO ojHOLT CAT and IJjounding membD' of !he Mob/if ErnilliOIJl Reduction CoalJUOIl. I c; ..... 􀀢􀀧􀁾 􀀮􀀭􀁦􀀬􀀨􀁯􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁾
\&:>...... "d.er\tIIld th2 potential elfectI; at' the penalt1es and regulatiallS· that the EPA (Ould Impose If lllJI1.attalnmsnt areas (1IkB Dal· las·Fon Worth and Houst/JIl) b't meet
cleen aIr $lBnd8rds by 1JfI, 'nIere Is 8lBo the threat of s-n AntoDlo, AlI&tIn and other near lIOIlollttainlllent areas Calling Into non-attllinment status. Fund1nlI TERP to pr0-vide
Incentives to replace cider macb1nes and \ll1iInes with new clean diesel plays an important put In reduClni emissions. One of the BllllItest. c:hal1enges in meeIinc cleen all goals is
eiucatlan. ManY cltl2.enl stm do not understllnd the purpose 1i"0WQe action days" or the drut1e c0nsequences If Texans don't work toeet/ler to eIeen up OW' a.iJ: In our own 1nd\lSt1jt
we bave contracted with expert outside l'1l5IlIllC8S to help educate heavy equ ipm ent users in CCiIlStrUlltian and other i11dustrIes about the incel:ltives available ercm TERP to replace
macldnes and re-power engines w1lh clean diesel 􀁌􀁥􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁳 have taken a a!g· niftcant step in elIorts to clean up Texas' aIJ: We at HOLT CAT and the heavy equ1pr:nent and
􀁾 tion industry B1Jppon tIleDl and stand resdY to asslsl .:.:.. :..... CoN lion Agency requirements In the Da1IasIFort Worth and BoustanIGalwsm areas with out implementing more slrlngent
rel\ulalory measures. Unfortunately most ofthe fundI!lg was declared unconstitutional. House Bii l365 is actually an amendment to SB5 and Is Intended to help restare TERP t\lnd1ng. In
this blIl, the heavy 􀁾􀀮anll ClIIStNdIOtIIndDstrles sbou Ider a lar!\e pol' lion of the 1\IndIJlg burden vla cIw'ps end fees that add to the hiIb cost or condw:t1ll& busIness. ThIJ
includes a 2 percent surcharlIe on every piece of ilew ana used equipment that Is sold In the state -even tllough 􀁾ofthe new machines am designed to·DJeetthe Iatl!st emIssIoIls slI1'ldards
by em1ttlnI slcn!1kan1ly Ies8 p6Ilo.taII1ll than the alder mocJelL There has been minimal oppoaltJon to tbla tax, prImBrlly because the heavy 􀁥􀁱􀁾 and constnIctlcIl industries llI\.
San Antonio Expras-News JUN 1 6 2003 By PrnR Hw:r Texas Iegjs1ators shou Id be applauded for their efforts to Improve our air 􀁑􀁵􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁾 Beinl\ tasked with finding a Thxas sowt1an
to a Bloblll problem certal1llY isn't an easy job. Funding lhe solution in 􀁬􀁉􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁯􀁦􀁾 􀁾􀁟􀁵􀁥 shortfalls makes the task seem an the more daunting. House Bm 1365 is tbe Legislature's
attempt til meet . this cIlaIlenge. As 8 re!emIIle point, the TIth Legisl.ature enacted Senate 8m 3 in :nll, creating the Tez8a EmIssions Redud:iaD Plan, or TERP, a set of Incentlw-balled
prognIIllS lnteIllkd to nldWlol 􀁾􀁉􀁬􀁤􀁮􀁳 emissions. SB 6'S prOVISions were delligned to satIsfY EnvlronmeI1ta1 Prot8c> I 'Clean air bill needs public support December or the rollowing
year.i Clean Air Focce leaders IIBlh· ered at Tuesday's news conference to announce that they had turned over a draft of the proflosed measures to the EPA. an the TCEQ. The programs
will (' ron through computer simula· tions to detennine the ones that will be mosl effective i The region's leaders, InclUd·: ing Austin Mayor Will WYIlll. : called on residents to help
the ;, 􀁣􀁡􀁵􀁾􀁢􀁹􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁢􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁣􀁮􀁮􀁤􀁳􀁡􀁮􀁤 ' keeping cars and Iawnmowera j well-tuned. Wynn says he is do lnghis part byridingabicycletoJ City COWlcil meetings. Slipping
into non-compliance and letting the federal govern. lIlent take over has worked to reduce ozone to safe levels bu bas eHeels rar be.vond Ihe air. ! Just ask DaIlali, which was I , recently
competing with 􀁾 Antonio ror a Toyota plant. /1 "That went to San 􀁁􀁮􀁴􀁯􀁮􀁩􀁾􀀮 ! They didn't have as many re. quirements down there. That was one ofthe factors that went against
us." said Sally Camp. bell, a board member and co. . founder of the North Texas Clean Air Coalition, a group that was started in 1993 and has been on a public relations campaign since
to help lower ozone levels in the Melroplex. "j'lI say this, for the last 10 years. the DaUas-Fort Worth Metroplex has been the fastest growing metro area in the ;ountry," Campbell said.
'We're not in attainment, but to stay almost the same or a have little increase here or there against that kind of .curb, we : think. we've done fairly well. We're probably ioing 10
have to do even more." 􀂷􀀬􀁟􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁴􀁥􀁓􀁭􀁡􀁮􀀮􀁣􀁥􀁭􀀻􀀴􀀴 5·3621 of which would require car owners to get inspections annually for any vehicle at least 2 rears old. That's going
to be something that's going to be hard to avoid in all five counties; he said. If the federal govenunent mps in, the meaBlJres could in· cludethelolsoffederalhighway dollars, restrictions
on economic develOpment and a one&e-fits-all array of anlipollution mandates that might not necessarilY jibe with what's best for the community. "We risk having local control removed."
􀁈􀁥􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁮􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁬􀁮 said. "That's something that diht now we have available to 􀁵􀁾􀀢 AlsO a t risk, HeWsensteln said, is public health. High ground-level otone is believed to cause
IWlg damage as well as make it difficult to breathe, es· pecially for children. the elderly and people with exlstlng respl 􀁮􀀮􀁴􀁯􀁾􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁢􀁬􀁥􀁭􀁳􀀮 rne 􀁾􀁯􀁮􀀧􀁳􀁬􀁥􀁡􀁤􀁥􀁲􀁳􀁨􀁯􀁜􀁬􀁦􀁬􀁴􀁨􀁡�
� the measures will help brlnl a 􀁾􀁪􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁮􀁴 ozone reduction by The EPA's current staildardli for "attainment" limit the levels afOlOneIntbealrto125pan,Pl1t billIOn, meaBlJred on
an hourly basls.Thenewrules, whIchtalce eft'ect in 2004, measure average O1.One levels over an e1ght-hoW' period and drop the cutoff to 86 Pans per bi1hon. RoDen HUBlon, chaiIJll3ll
of the Texas CommIssion on En. vironmental QualiI.y, said his qeDCY is wOlking to identifY areas throughout the state thlt are lIOt in Compliance with the toUihel"Standaids. The state
agency and Gav. Rick PellY W1I1 continue to revise the list of areas with O2One JIl'ObIems before turning it over to the Environmental Protection Agency, which wlU make its ftnIl designations
in 􀁾that call were made today, those (Central Texas) monitors do show nonattalnment," he said. But becauseTtavIsCountr,as well as Bexar and Gregg counties. is taking steps to clean
up the air, llial nonaltalnment designation would be deferred. San Antonio was the first city to alrike such a deal with the EPA, which also gives local govef'!lments more rune to set
rules m place.TheplanforCentralTeus must be finalized by March. and the controls must be 􀁾 place by 7 Driving In Central Texas is about to get more expensive. And that's the eood news
Local oft1cJals have decided that IIWIltatory vehicle emissions tests and other potentially costly measures are necessary to fares1all even more rteld and WipOpular anti-pollution measares
for the area. . The five cOUI11ies around Austin have ozone levels higher than federal guidelines allow, and the 111 will have to COllIe from "v o!unt3ry" local changes or from federal
mandates, Political leaders held a press conference Tuesday -coinci· dentally, an Ozone Action Day. as is today -to say they are olltlngfortheformer, whlcflwlU allbutl:ertainlymeaosetUngup
an emissions testing program that will raise the cost of annual car insp ections. "There's no alternative to taking action now," said WillIamsOn County Commissioner MIke HeWjl!l1lItein,
who chairs the Clean Air Foree of Central Texas. "Without an inspection and maintenance of vehicles prosram, We're not goinA to be able to reach oW' pls. "We're going to have to get
the dirtiest vehicles off our roads." Heiligenstein said he expects an emissions testing program for Travis, Williamson. Hays, Bastrop and Caldwell counties -all represented 111 the
Clean Air Force·to be in place Within the next two vears. 􀁔􀁨􀁥􀁴􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁗􀁏􀁵􀁉􀁤􀁡􀁤􀁬􀁬􀀤􀁬􀁑􀁉􀁯􀁾􀀱􀀵􀁴􀁯􀁣􀁡􀁲 inSllec!&s that now cost $25. Thellstofmore thanSOproposaIsincludesuslng
cleaner and more expensive fuels; lirnitinA con. strnetion. lawnmowlllg and other ps,poWllred activities on ozone action days; placing emission controls on dry cleaners and adaIing Wlwieldy
vaPOl'traPliIni hoods-to cU nozzles at pumping stations. But at the top of the list is the inspection and maintenance program, the most likely version 􀁾
Bexar may shoulder air burden; TCEQ doesn't fault area counties for excessive ozone. By Christopher Anderson San Antonio Express-News Web Posted: 07/151200312:00 AM them long enough
to determine whether they, too, are in violation. TCEQ commissioners cited the agreement signed by the four counties to work together as a sufficient good-faith effort to clean up the
region's air, and they said declaring them all in violation was unnecessary. "We believe this is what makes the most sense for Texas," said Robert J. Huston, TCEQ chairman. AUSTIN -Commissioners
with the state's environmental agency recommended Monday that Bexar County alone be designated in violation of federal ozone limits -letting the surrounding counties of Comal, Guadalupe
and Wilson off the hook. It also could remove an incentive for the other three counties to reduce air pollution in their communities, as they promised to do in an agreement signed last
year, they added. "There is no doubt in my mind it makes it much more difficult," said Jay Jay Millikin, a Comal County commissioner who also serves as chairman of an Alamo Area Council
of Governments committee looking at more than 50 pollution-control strategies. Residents likely will face mandatory auto emissions tests in Bexar County. If the other counties fail to
take action in reducing air pollution, it could result in additional measures for Bexar residents, such as more expensive fuels in government fleets and lower speed limits. San Antonio
exceeded national air pollution standards from 2000 to 2002. Because at least 25 percent of the residents in Comal, Guadalupe and Wilson counties work in Bexar County, they are part
of the federally defined San Antonio Metropolitan Statistical Area. Elected leaders in all four counties signed an agreement committing them to cleaning up their air in exchange for
avoiding possible federal penalties -which could include a loss of federal highway funds. The recommendation from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality moves to Gov. Rick Perry,
who is .expected to forward it today to the EnVironmental Protection Agency. The EPA will make its final decision on which counties to designate no later than April 15, 2004. Some local
officials predicted the move could lead to more onerous restrictions and regulations in Bexar County if left to shoulder the burden alone. Flash graphic • Alone in the smog To view the
graphic you must ha... the Flash piugin. Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff, who disparaged the commission's recommendation as "illogical," said elected leaders in ComaI, Guadalupe and
Wilson counties will be reluctant to approve any effective emissions controls that also are unpopular. "The problem that you're going to have with this is that in the other three counties,
politically it's going to be very difficult." Wolff said. "They'll be able to say, 'This is a Bexar County problem. It's not our problem.... The TCEQ recommendation appears to run counter
to the EPA's own guidelines, which state that metropolitan statistical areas should serve as the "presumptive boundary" whenever ozone limits are violated. "Particularly when it comes
to vehicles, which are a huge part of the air quality picture, we've got to look to those counties which have a large number of vehicles that come into Bexar County," said David Newman,
San Antonio's environmental services manager. canderson@express-news.net 07/15/2003 Click here to return The TCEQ made its decision based on the fact that Bexar County alone recorded
excessive ozone levels. Area officials argued that Wilson has no ozone monitor at all, and the others haven't had 􀁾􀁾
EPA wants counties held in violation By Christopher Anderson San Antonio Express-News Web Posted: 07/16/2003 12:00 AM Although Texas wants Bexar County alone to be branded as in violation
of federal ozone limits, the federal government appears unwilling to allow surrounding counties off the hook 50 easily. In a recent letter, the Environmental Protection Agency asked
the state's environmental agency to "re-evaluate" its plan to exclude Comal, Guadalupe and Wilson from being designated as in violation of the federal Clean Air Act. Commissioners with
the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, who voted Monday to include Bexar and drop the other counties in that designation, argued that only Bexar had three years' data indicating
ozone levels exceeded national health standards. Bexar officials critical of the state's decision noted Wilson has no ozone monitor at all, and the others haven't had them long enough
to determine whether they, too, are in violation. In the letter, EPA officials reminded TCEQ officials of federal guidelines stating that outlying counties that contribute air pollution
to a city with excessive ozone also should be designated as in violation. Bexar County officials worry that the state's decision could leave them largely stuck with the burden of cleaning
up the region's polluted air. And if they fail to do so, the county could face a loss of federal transportation funds and restrictions on businesses. In addition to the likely possibility
that San Antonio residents will face mandatory vehicle emissions tests, other measures might now be required such as lower speed limits and cleaner but more expensive fuel in government
fleets. All four counties signed an agreement last year pledging to reduce air pollution. Gov. Rick Perry endorsed the TCEQ's recommendation Tuesday, said Gene Acuna, a Perry spokesman.
Area leaders predict the state's position will make it difficult for Comal, Guadalupe and Wilson counties to adopt unpopular emissions controls because residents will cite the TCEQ recommendation
as proof they don't have a problem with ozone. In the letter sent to the TCEQ last month, Rebecca Weber, an associate director in the EPA's regional office in Dallas, reiterated the
agency's view that federally defined metropolitan statistical areas should be used to determine boundaries for ozone designations. The San Antonio.Metropolitan Statistical Area 􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁵􀁣􀀡􀁾􀁾
Bexar, 􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁾􀁬􀀬 Guadalupe 􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁟 Wilson counties. Weber said if the state wants to exclude any counties from designation, it needs to justify its decision by citing factors such
as traffic patterns, growth and emissions sources. TCEQ spokesman Andy Saenz said the state has not yet provided such justification but that it would do so before the EPA makes its final
decision April 15. Ramon Alvarez, a scientist with the advocacy group Environmental Defense, said he believes EPA will stick to its guns. "I would expect EPA is going to push back for
the larger boundary, and I think TCEQ fully expects it," Alvarez said. "That's what's so frustrating about this maneuver. I think it just creates confusion among the public. "It's almost
like this little dance where the state tries to do as little as possible, and then the feds try to get them to do more. I think everyone agrees we need a regional plan. Why is that not
reflected in the designation?"
N. Texas makes play for a clean-air delay , ,tfhIY 􀀯􀀭􀀭􀀯􀀢􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀳 As '05 deadline looms, planners seek more time, stiffer standards By RANDY LEE LOFTIS Environmental Writer Faced
with the near certainty of blowing still another federal deadline for cleaning up the area's smoggy air, North Texas regional planners are quietIy pushinganew idea: stop enforcing the
current health standard for smog and postpone the deadline fur five moreyears. The proposal, tied to recent federal court rulings and an upcoming shift in federal smog rules, would:
• Let the region bypass its looming deadline of 2005 and not face another until 2010. • Abandon plans for a formal review next year of North Texas' smog-fighting strategy -a promised
midcourse correction that helped sell the strategy to the federal government and the public in 2000. • End federal enforcement ofcurrent rules and immediately shift the region to a newstandard
being phased in nationwide. Although the new, tighter rule, called the eight-hour standard, is designed for better public health protection, it also extends Clean Air Act compliance
deadlines by years. Regional plannerS have discussed the idea with state and federal officials but haven't made a formal presentation, and it's unclear whether it would work. Effectively
erasing North Texas' current clean-air violations might not be legal, and environmentalists are objecting to the idea as a re-SeePLANNERS Page 6B ':Planners make play for a clean-air
delay ',: TIGHTER RULES, BUT LONGER DEADLINES 1 Continuedfrom Page IB treat in the fight against smog. ::' Backers say the plan would not harm ongoing efforts to reduce "smog-causing
emissions. Those .include restrictions on industries 􀁾􀀧􀁡􀁮􀁤 other sources, as well as feder'a1 fuel and vehicle standards and a ':state incentive plan to encourage replacement ofolder,
high-pollut,'ing diesel engines. '., "We're not proposing to back offon anything we are doing now," said Mike Eastland, executive di"rector of the North Central Texas Council of Governments,
a planning agency coordinating regional clean-air efforts. He said the extra 'time, combined with newly avail-, "!lble state money for environmen-L \:tfal research, could actually speed
. up clean air. ': "We would like to have the time 'to get a good scientific underistanding," said Mr. Eastland, who )utlined the proposal in a May 19 􀁾 !---_. letter to a state environmental
research eonsortium. "I don't think anybody is ready to throw in the toweI." list ofmissed deadlines But environmentalists say the change in strategy would mean at least 20 years of
illegally polluted air since Congress rewrote the Clean Air Act in 1990. The DallasFort Worth area failed to meet federal deadlines in 1996 and 1999 and is virtually sure to miss the
upcoming deadline of2005. "We shouldn't be looking for legal loopholes; we shouldn't be looking for reasons to delay," said Ramon Alvarez, a senior scientist with the group Environmental
Defense. Although meeting any existing deadline is questionable, "I don't know that we should give up," he said. The region had been given two extra years, until 2007, to comply with
the smog standard because pollution blo\ving in from the Houston area contributes to the local problem. However, federal appeals courts have ruled that such extensions were illegal.
Although no group has sued to force a ehange in the Dallas-Fort Worth deadline, the conrts have prohibited the government from approving any more extensions. That means that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency can't approve the most recent Dallas-Fort Worth plan, because it sets a 2007 compliance date. That fact resets the compliance date to 2005, according
to EPA officials a major factor in the push to change strategies. "This, most likely, is an unachievable deadline," Mr. Eastland wrote last month in a letter to John Hall of the Texas
Environmental Research Consortium. "Thus, we are considering the legality and feasibility of having the region placed under the eighthour standard, which would give us until 2010 to
achieve attainment [ofthe standard.]" In any case, Mr. Eastland wrote, the state and region no longer plan to issue a formal progress report on smog next year. Instead, he wrote, they1l
write a new plan, Possible approaches EPA officials can't say how they would greet a proposal to shift the region's strategy, agency spokesman David Bary said. ''Thc (Iilemma is, we
don't havc thc necessary implementation guidelines [for the new standard] in pJaceyet," he said. "We feel that wc'd be gelling way ahead ofourselves." The EPA has laid out possible approaches'
to putting the ncw standard, which mcasures owne levels over an eight-hour period instead of the current one-hour time frame, into force. They include one that would allow a metro area
to come under thc new . The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is implementing anew rule to govem ozone, the main ingredientof urban smog. The EPA approved the rule in 1997 but had
to defend it in court until 2001. Here's how the old and new rules differ. Old rule: Called the one-hour standard because it measures ozone ! levels dUring anyone-hour period, The 􀁾􀀺􀁳􀁴􀁯􀁺􀁯􀁮􀁥
allowed in the alris 125 standard before it complies with the old one -the situation that Dallas-Fort Worth faces. However, final decisions won't come before next year. Potential violators
On Thursday, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality is scheduled to publish a list of metro areas that it believes will violate the newer, tougher standard; most large urban regions
ofTexas, including about a dozen counties in North Texas, will beon the list. , parts per billion. Dallas-Fort Worth is required to meetthis standard by 2005. New rule: Called the eight-hour
standard because it averages ozone levels over an eight-hour period -a better measurementof health risks. The most allowed is 85 parts per billion, Oallas-Fort Worth would probably have
until 2010 to meet this standard, Meanwhile, the EPA will hold a public hearingJune 17 in Dallas to discuss how it will implement the new standard. The meeting is from 8:30 a.m. to 5
p.m. m. at the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport M;u-riott hotel, 8440 Freeport park-. way in Irving. 􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁬 "The stakes are huge in 􀁔􀁾􀁾􀀡 said Dr. Alvarez, ofEnvironment;;\: Defense,
"and fortunately, .we'D; have achance to talk about rit iii: Texas." : . E-mail rloftis@dallasnews.com
􀀸􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽 AMUUI',,-' 􀁃􀁉􀁉􀁾 & <:'11 '\.1" diesel fuel produced by London-based BP in its buses and found a 10 percent reduction in particulate emis· sions. Concurrently, the authority's
engine manufacturer, Detroit-based Detroit Diesel, upgraded the exhaust gas recirculation (EOR) control and the particulate filter aftenreatment systems on its Series 50 engine. In July,
the agency contracted with flP to supply approximately I million g.lllons of ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel annually. Additionally, AATA ordered 19 buses with the new engines from Hayward,
Calif.-based Gillig t,) replace aging vehicles. All new buses purchased by the agency will be filled with the new engines, and all other buses will be retrofilled with particulate filters.
AATA is paying 1Z to 15 cents more per gallon t"r the ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel than its ptevious fuel. bill Cook expects that price to drop as more fleets begin using . the fuel.
-(:( FLEET MANAGEMENT Jun<' ZOO, Agency switches fuel, engines to lower emissions The Ann Arbor (Mich.) Transport.tion Authority (AATA) has begun using ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel to
power its buses. It .Iso is replacing its current diesel engines with engines filled with particulate filters. In combimltion, the fuel and the engines are expected to reduce emissions
of particulate maller, hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide from the autho;ity's buses by 90 percent. For several years, AATA has been studying alternative 􀁨􀁬􀁴􀁾􀁬􀀻􀀧􀁩 .md searching
for a way to reduce emissions from its 100 buses, "We found over the years that a diesel engine will run on just about any kind of fuel base that you put in ii, bur what kind of emissions
you get out is the important rhing." says AATA Executive Director oreg Cook. "We're after an alternative fuel that will tun our fleet and will give us a clean burn." AATA has been using
low-sulfur diesel fuel. in its buses . since 1995. Last summer, AATA tested ultra-low-sulfur 54 Fort Wortb JUL 04znn3 StaJ'oTcle&(ll)ll Area clean-air plan faces hazy 􀁦􀁵􀁾􀁥 􀁾Confusion
O\'er how to EPA officials arc nol 􀁾proceed postpones expected to (mallie new tules mntln9s 10 review North Teus' 􀁦􀁾􀁲 the tougher 􀁾􀁩􀁰􀀬􀁨􀁴􀀭􀁨􀁯􀁵􀁲 acbou plan. Olone standard
Wltil'becember. and drafting 0 MW cIrmdeadline of 2010. . air plan could take a year or In his letter .to C<?ffiMlnee more, delaying the implerncn· members, Harris sald 􀁭􀁾􀀭 lalion
of any new smog-cul· ings would resume 􀁡􀁾 soo as ting measures" for several state and federal 􀁾􀁶􀁵􀁯􀁭􀁮􀁃􀀧􀁄􀂷 yem, say elean-aU" 􀁾􀁯􀁥􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁳􀀢 III 01l'1<1a1s 􀁾􀁭􀀮 whcthcr
"Scropping.lhe revIew and to COnhnUCI With the nud-the meetings IS a" excuse 10 course review of the cwrent delay cleaning UtJ the air in plan. begindevelopmenl oT 0 North Texas," sold
Neil Cor-DCW plan With a 2005 deadille, man. clem air programs manstart a transition to the nC'W ager for 'the Lone Star Siem eight-hour ozone Slandard "or Club. "How many children combine
some of lhese alter-this summer will go to emer· native! 􀁩􀁮􀁾 an 􀀸􀁴􀁴􀁩􀁾 pili!" " geney rooms while they sus· '"1bat 19 the diSCUSSIOn, pePd their meetiDgs'" soid Richord Greene,
EPA Tom Smith, director of regional administrator. "We Public Citizen Texas. soid are going to conb.Due 10 work. cities and counties could with the state to clean up 􀁴􀁨􀁾 implement
a1 leat 30 diff'ete1'Il air in North Texas and do It measures to reduce pollution tOODer. rather thaD later." without waiting for the state Ralph Marqnez, tl)c .state 10 acL environmental
COlllDllSs:loneT 1bere is no reasOD 10 wait 􀁭􀁾 resJlCll:'ible fC;'&' air quali-for the regulatory cloud to ty ....... SlId aftiCaIa faced .. c1"," Smitli ,lid. great amo1D11 of confusion"
Hmris said the meetings ova' whtt 10 do. could resume next mooth or "Tbe dfort to Ft' emis;oion in Ser-ember. The cleaIHu reductions has to contmue advocates said they 􀁥􀁾􀁰􀁥􀁣􀁴 a
I<pIdleos or 1Iow 􀁾 10 .boul much I",*" d<Iay. the next phase, Wlth 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀮􀁾 IItlISllBlNt.(In)J'It"'PlC1 hour standard or the eIght· .trI.........,.QIlII boor 5landud," MarquC1 >aid
IlJ IlIILSI'lAS$MAN ST.ut'I'I1.UlIt'IITAWWRI'f'P Regional officials have stopped lheir review of the North teXas cl......ir pilln and possible new smog-cuthng measures because of oonfusion
over bow 10 proceed Meetings of the North Texas Clean Air 5merinI Commil1ee hove beon "poslponcd ontil fw1her notice," .collin COIDIty Judge Ron Hania wrote In 0 ]\1110 20 letter 10
commidee membcn. CIeaD-air advoealel criticized the ..lion, calling il 0 delayins loctic lbot could jeopordizo tho health of people KnSitive 10 ,ir pol1utiOlI. 1be CCIIIIIIillee oT 10<&1
.le<Iod aod _. munity 􀀱􀁾 shoukl continue to ""'<I to 􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁥 plan thoy ...... 001 Ranis, dIaltmilIl of the at.... , .in1 commiuce thot helped to draft \be regioo's clean-oir pion
limo )..... lIB" laid lbllllClay. "We 1UJt don't want to have meet,a ings withoul direction and lOIDelhi:ls lo evaluate, we we still commillod 10 oU the m<a-SIU'CS ill the pl." Vehicle
emissions tests are DOW ,equlmI in nino MI!tIoo pia counties, and a pmsnm 􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀦􀁣􀁭􀁴􀁨􀁯􀁴􀁴􀁨􀀬􀀺􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀺􀁥􀁾 ceeding. Ham, said. Power PIlAU nave reUuced emission?, and the slate
has al>pmed a .program 10 cut dles'l pollutlOl1. ADd progrmll to iotroduce "'cleaner fuels and other measures are , slated to bcein iD the ncxl few y...., he said The conunittee 􀁢􀁥􀁾􀁮
a "'midcoursc review" of the plIO In October. If the ...iew Indicated thol North Te"", could not meel the federal health sLalldard for OlOIle, the conuninee, along with state cnvirorunental
officials. was supposed 10 :Jubmit a revised plan with addi1ioaal smoa-eutling mt::lSlUtS 10 the Environmental Protection Agency in 􀁍􀁢􀁾􀁾􀁾 clc8n-oir landscape hils chon@oo radically
thIS year. • Nortll Te:;:u mav have 10 comply wi\h \he Clean" N.r l\c\ : by 200S -two yeaI' abc" of i EPA's original deadline . 'because of a series l>r recL'11l rt.-dcrul 8PP.lsls court
decisions lhat do nol allow the 􀁑􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁹 10 cONider the elrCCI 01 pollution moving throll@ll'III a·region. • A new air-pol!util>n health standard thal mca:JUTCS eoneeJl1l'8lion:l
of azOGe over I rOlUol 􀁥􀁩􀁦􀁣􀁨􀁴􀀮􀁾􀁯􀁵􀁲 period 􀁨􀁯􀁾 pe':k 􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁊 :e:..ex:; sIBle must \mle a DeW cleanair plan with a" exlended Benum"."1 JUL 15 LUa3 Enterpr"" Agency suggests
new ozone policy 11II WImboI!IllI ohoinnm __􀁾 11' -• new dlssiflCllion. oT"" Air ()uaI4y A<!Yi'!"Y ot: 􀁾 IbI•• _ ...... <S ...... would CommiIloe rL Iho'Sodh!!ail ._",llil'!II1IL'
_ Iho ...-or emis-Texas Regional 􀁾 􀁾refcrn<l to. tiaDs 1bD􀁾must ad to ConDission, said IlO4hiog cIe<:isi<lIl dJoj _ aad EPA ............ it is on \IId< .. winould cbmgo iolm<diaIdjI
Dmt'"_ ......... .-II .----the .... os tho IDIIIIIII-􀁾􀁾__ • Some members oTtho Air tee CllIlIliluoI to craft • .... eorIaoIi'or_--" QaIIlrI 􀁾􀁃􀁯􀁯􀁭􀁮􀁬􀁴􀁴􀁣􀁥 plan '0 ...... _\ianal
􀁾...aoonAlr""" dIiDk '.... ei ...... WIIb Ibe rtdaaI cIotn-G low. A_ pl!IbI on .,. cIInI-*, .... . 􀁅􀀢􀀭􀁾􀁾 : ................ 211.... 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾ill _ ....,. A Iawtuit in 200l dlII-IfSiIIt
i D tJiIiIaInI f.-lions 1IIdl .. --.of IqaI the EPJlt'--􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁡􀁯􀁴􀁉􀁥􀁾 bftIIwoy 􀁾􀁾 lion of _ T 10 !lad> \No _ at or IB .ieje.clIiD-D o-f-In"du-st'ri-al .b.a.s.e.d.......i.nTthCelPllIIion19.9.0.
.0. 􀀽􀁾•􀁭􀁬•􀀱.1IL4lO 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀮􀁲􀁤􀁾 1a:aD'I':􀁾 \0 it il P ..\1lAWI .... tho molKu otDIar<I, tIiO Ieckn1 .. 􀁾􀀱􀁉􀁩􀁤􀀮􀁟􀁟 -....... region .... be .1IlIlIIIicaIiDB _ Ibe missed.-td
COIllpliance 􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁡􀀱􀁯􀁬􀁯􀁦􀁣􀁬􀁬􀁯􀀭 __at Iho -.. __Ib&In_-"'.􀁾EI'A ....... A silk agm:y Mooday .... ommeaded ;l more preciu: mclh>d of m"","", amoe air dudo:n that could 􀁩􀁭􀁐􀀡􀁯􀁶􀁾
ttx: chance ref So!.iJ'r:ast TCX3S &.n'A'l:%..wi1h tho Teden! 1hc new method would meas= ozone 􀁾 e!P'}pr pcriolk in 21 Texas c:GWl... ilIIl<ad of Ill: mclh>d used Da'tf, which is to
mea.<;ure the Ilrll<lIPberic ooI1uWD III onebour5\lil,eS. . Tbei 􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁾 mcasuremenl l)eriod ac:IU8IlY could result. in tewer Nc:ordad m:essIVe epDodts given the volalile DItIft of
OZDOC. Tot poIIadI r""" nl ditpenes muIcaIIy. based on _ """'.... m:lI IS 􀁨􀁯􀁡􀁾 wiod 1DI sadiIl>l-. Ozone could T.... ""'" emissi(JIS from rlll:tOries, "chtcle exhaust and fumes from
ckaJy'irg.C matler mix in tho a willl tal ani sunligJII. 􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀽􀀦􀀺􀀬􀀺􀀺 BRm. such u 1be lIous\On met· ropolitan ...... and o;ornbUIe 􀀭􀁭􀁉􀁬􀁹􀁾􀀭 Ozone causes addiliot1al iJIl:oJIIIas..-for
peopIc .... u=.Jy haY. rcspiJaUlly&' "'" nl couIJ al!rl:t tho.kIcr1y and Ibevo'Yl'"I1ll1-well. 1bc 􀁔􀁾􀁘􀀳􀁓 Commission on 􀁾􀁑􀁵􀁄􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹 􀁡􀁰􀁾􀁶􀁥􀁤 the recomrnenda-􀁾􀁾􀀻 􀁾􀁾􀁭􀁾􀁦􀁣􀁷􀁾
fill 􀁤􀁡􀁬􀁾􀁡 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁾􀁔􀀻 would go 10 the Fmin.'l'a'nertLa! ProtCl.'I.icm Agm::v, -wfticb, 􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾 􀁁􀀻􀁲􀁩􀁺􀁲􀁾􀀮􀁡 Bna1 In II>.: now n...'hod. "'" Ihreshol..l aJ'1lQUI\I1Cl
rc meai sURd wwkl dr0gty almt.a. . 􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁉􀀺 Una. buI th.. ......-.ld 􀁨􀁡􀁶􀁾 lu P'o'r.'U;l· 􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁲 .011 grolll1d 1m! 10 ....... itc:cr'dtd C'(l;C:S!ijvc CC1iscOl: 1be_CXIUlI1itsclSau1bot
TC't:lS -Je&ngn. HaI:dtD and Orange .;1tlo: b:duded Ip Ib! ru:umml:tilii..m 1bt UrNm u-ac; around [)aIlas.I1l1l W,<1h >\J \\<.... Ion also 311.: included 3,.": MI 􀁾􀀧􀁊􀀺􀁲􀀺􀁾􀀽 􀁡􀁮􀀺􀁡􀀮􀁾
of SaD Antooio. Auo.1ln and1')ior·l.ongYiewongYiew·Mmha!\. lbos,; !;L"'11hrcc area.>; at,; derf.-m:d Itom immediatc inchL"ion h.:lo:llU."'= Ihl....· voJ. wnarity Cllh.TI.-d 􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁾
.3grCCP menls 10 rcUll:C cml!.'lKTLJ 1.0 help th.,.-nl l\l.IIv within ('lean Air At1 c.'mpli:au. •􀀱􀁬􀀱􀁾 IhT-:c metro Ift8I were nil' 􀁣􀁾􀁜􀁮􀀡􀀧􀁩􀁤􀁣􀁲􀀭􀀽􀁤 1>Ul 01' 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁣
with the Clean Air Act wU"T the 􀀧􀁬􀁉􀀧􀁉􀁯􀀺􀁾􀁨􀁯􀁵􀁲 Itlnbrd sdIJ in cITed \ 􀁾
San Antonio .xpress-News JUN 2 2 2003 )ata flaws .cloud air quality action lomers, she said. The Slale colleels more lhan $4 bunon annually. Johnson said. "I don'l expect a 101 of upset
people. I do expeel a 101 of questions:' Mosl people are p'relly understandrng once Ihey know why something's being done, she added. The legislalion also added a charge 10 Ihe sales
lax on some diesel vehicles. A 2.5 percent ehurge will be added 10 lhe 6.25 percent sales tax ofon-road diesel vehicles lIlal weigh more Ihan 14,000 pounds und are 1996 models or older.
A 1percent charge will be added Ibr such vehicles Ihal are model years 1997 Or newcr. The bigger lee is being charged on Ihe older ones because Ihey presumably cause more pollullon.
Johnson said. Thosc charges go inlo eneel July I. R••ch this reporter at: 1409)8J3.33I1,e1t. 427 mtren.btaomontenl!lP/iso.eom Ihose extra funds wID EO 10 the Texas Mobility Fund. That
fund supports public transportation systems. Godeaux, 51ha purchasing diteC1or, said e thought it would be beUer if the .,government asked car manula"'urers to find ways to decrease
car emissions instead of gelling Ihe money from taxpayers. "With what they charge now for cars, I think lfiey could gel the manufacturers 10 do someIhing wilh lhe cars," he said. When
he docs pay the increased fee, il'lI just be part of the expense of gelting a new car, he said. Miriam Johnson. counly lax assessor-colleclor, suspecled Ibal Jefferson County gOI the
higher increase because of its proximity to Houston. The counly gets $5 of lIle tille fee lor operating COSlS. That won't cliange with the inerease, Johnson said. The county colleclS
about SI4 million each 􀁾􀁥􀁡􀁊 in molor vehiele fees from 206,000 eus-"Due to the e1!ectIve date 0/the • Harris. Mont(llYMry. Waller. bill, there will be IwdIy 81IY pub-Galveslon. Brazoria.
tic notiee o/""e -changes; Bellen-Chambers. Uberty and FOl1 court said. Bend ........._Ihe 41 The Texas Emissions Reduc-affected counties. lion Plan will receive Ihe in-• Tho CX>Sl ot
a 'Ue applicatIOn creases on lille applicetion lees j<mp, from 513 10 333 in unW Sepl I, 2008. Then al! COUll-a"eded <ounlie, . ties nsort to a $24 lee 10<' title ap-• 2 5 􀁾􀁮􀁬 surcharga
'MIl I'!icatian. wilh S\l of lhal pUI!Dlo be added 10 Ihe 􀁾􀁡.. 01 saJa the '1'eIas MobUity 􀁾 a bigb-01 on-road _I vehicles mal """ f1md. waigh more rhan 14,000 More than $4 biion
is coUetled pounds and III a mod!I yea, annuallylnmotor vehicle fees and 􀀡􀀡􀀱􀀹􀀹􀀶􀁾􀁏􀁉􀀡􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀡􀀡􀁯􀁾􀁉􀁤􀁉􀁲􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮 _ wea taxes. 􀁾􀀱 r:"􀁳􀁡􀁉􀁡􀀢􀀧􀀺􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁳􀁾􀀱rJbe
COST OF CL£AH AIR similar vehida, mod!I year OriveB in ..1 Texas Counties 1997 or newer. must pay hlgher lees to fund a source: 􀁔􀀮􀁾􀁡􀁬 Oeoel'Jl"lel'll d rederaly mandatecl clean
air TtwoortatlOn plan. JUN 202m Beaumont Enterprise Vehicle title fees go up Monday IIy'VANESSA EVERETT TilE EN1'ERPRISE BEAUMONT -Bobby Godeaux ofVidor peeked at Ihe Corvelles parked
In the dealership's showroom. He said he was sho'pping for a Tahoe. although he d 􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁥 10 buy a Velie. Whether Whether GodeaWl gets the Tahoe or Ihe Corvell.. he1l1llte1y pay S20
more than he 􀁥􀁘􀁾􀁬􀁥􀁤 on Ihe lax Iille and license fees. [ITcclive Monday. Texas residcnts will P,ly $15 10 $20 more on the title application lee when buying a new car or transferring
tilles on lIsed cars. The Ice increase.comes from " hii passed thJs·session br Ihe Legislature. The Increase Will go loward ellorts 10 light emissions Ihal po/lule Ihe air. In Jeflerson
County and 40 other 􀁣􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁬􀁩􀁥􀁳􀁾 Ihe fee goes up from $13 10 )33. In tfie other Texas counties, the tee goes from $13 10 $28. Aller 2008. all 254 counties will pay Ihe $28 􀁉􀁬􀁾􀁥
fee and population "When you compOund people and <an 011 top of a􀁾 izldus. trial base -􀁲􀁥􀁦􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁲􀀮􀁩􀁾􀀱 petrochemical indusay, sevenu million =:"􀁾􀁥􀀺􀁩􀁾to DIlllIe The last
lille incmlSe lee 10 $13 was in December 1991. said Roger I'oIson. spoke,man for Ihe ThXas Depmmenl of Transpol1ation VehIcle niles and Registralion Division. As Ihe largesl county in
the scate, Harris County fias more 􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀬􀁡􀀽􀁩􀁾􀀬􀀥 Ihan lIII;f olher The law's immediale elTect c:ouId eatcll some vehicle bl\)'l!l$ off.guard, said Hanis County Tax Assessor.:colleclor
Paul &tWIcourt. AUSTIN -Driven In Harris and some IWTOunding counties will feel a llnancla1 pineh nexl time Ihey buy or change ownership. of a car 􀁾 a new law designed to generate some
dollats to clean up Texas air. House Bill 1365, sigI)ed into law by Gov. Rick Pcrry on Sunday, immediately puts aS20 Increase '" • current $13 fee for a llUe applica' lion in 41 counties,
Including Brazoria. Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harri" Llbe!:IY, Monlgomery aud WaDer. Elfeclive 1mmedialely, a liUe application Is $33. Title IriJIsIer rates will rise 10 fl& 􀁾􀀽􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁮
af,!;5a::"::""􀁾' 􀁥 􀀢􀀧􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁥􀀽􀀺􀁮􀁾􀁲􀁾 of on-road dieseJ vehicles welghlng more than 14,000 pounds anQ 1996 􀁾􀁊􀁦􀁾􀀺􀁩􀀱􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁲􀁯􀁾􀁥􀁾 vehicles Ihal Through lhe.se
Inerea.ses, $150 mIIllon wiD be ralsed annually to fund Ihe Texas EmissIoil RedueIlon Plan for the nexl four )'e8!'S. The 􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁮 is designt!! to meel federal Clean air standards. Drivers
should absorb Ihe increase as a eo,l of pollution, said Andv 58_ a spokesman for lbe Texas CommiSSIon on EnvironmenIal Qualily. "Because 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁹 drive. they are 􀁾 0/the proDIem," Sa8llZ
said. 'That lee.-Ihem pan of Ihe solulion-Ihal is Ihe cosl of pollution In Taas." The increases almost did not happen. The bill was in joopardy until a Ia&t·miuute compTomise reached
by lawmakers In the final days of 􀁉􀁾􀁥 legislalive session If Ihe bll had died, lhe slale muld hove lost millions of doDars in federal highway funding and 􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁤􀁬􀁾􀁯 􀁕􀀤􀁾􀁴􀀺􀁊􀀮􀁯􀁾􀁾
Ptotection Agency. The stalling of Ihe bill's 􀁾􀁣 also threatened the slate's plans to dean the worst non·anainment a.reas, those exceeding, recenl, touJ!;her ozone standards: Houslon·aalveston
and Dallas· Fort Worth. "!'hose p1ans would bave been in danger. whieh eould have Icd 10 sanctlGns Md ro''''Iuences by the l"cderal governmenl.'· Saenz said. Mo" tha" half of aU Texans
live in areas wh.... the air is unsafe 10 brealhe on some da}'S 8/Id vi0lates Environmental Protection Agency standan!s, aeconling to TCEQ. Through the emission, plan, an Austin·based
learn ";11 review s0lutions 10 the stilte's environmen· tal problems, fund research and 􀁾􀁭􀁥􀀮􀁮􀁴􀀮 and conlinue 10 re-duee anissions of oxides of nittogen through voluntary incenUve
prognuns. Saem said it's no secret that the problem in Houston needs some allention due to Us large By MELISSA DII0IJACK Houston Chronicle Auslin Bureau Houslun Chronicle JUN 2 4 2003
Price of clean 􀁡􀁩􀁉􀁾􀀧 deflates wallets of area car buyers and new JesS.poUullDi equip menl at CODIJIIen:ial airJl!lrU. Mark I.aDdord. pre.,denl Ii Citizens 􀁾􀁤 for Coed 􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁢􀀺
􀁾 􀁦􀀺􀁉􀀺􀀮􀁾J:: sioos tests. lIIeslillled wby ... 􀁴􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁾 should 􀁰􀁯􀁬􀁥􀁮􀁾 be ..ked 10 \lIIl' a" ema $17 a JBU; 10 􀁾􀁥 !beir vehicles tested when sudl bne manQIls of error·war.e
toIeraled. IlIinll Ihal it'. 100 mDch 􀁾10 take """1 from San Antonio'. ccoDOlDY for UDICim 􀁴􀁩􀁦􀁴􀁾􀂷 plVVCII tests." be said. New B1'8111tfe1s Mayor Adam Cod< llBid local IIO'8f1lIIl8IS1
should consider PlIlYlDI up 􀁾 to pay.for a 􀁾􀁮􀁤 oMzoannebaImI otomitmorpmrogvesttahbeon_ at l'ICl' That 100. could be 18001, baw-􀁾􀁽􀁜􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁳􀀽 mended thai BexIl Cowil;y alooe be
declared in violatioa of 􀁾􀁵􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀢􀀺􀀽􀀢 􀁾􀁵􀁢􀁾 be 􀁓􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁡􀁮􀁬􀁮􀁡􀁩􀁲􀁬􀁢􀁥􀁳􀁨􀁯􀁾􀀮􀁲􀀺􀀷􀀻􀀮􀀬 gOlL activists .... olfocials Sl'[ Peler Bella. MCOO" natural reso.....
direc:lor. said dtal despile. "J past ,"",,10m, wjlb a jl8rt1cufar motulor, these IS UtIle question that the San AIIlO: NO .... h.. III ozooe problem. He said th.1 for 23 yem Ibe regiool
b.. bad _ levels thai would bave ..-led \\lI8l is allowed lodav about 70 _ of the time. . . "There i, ac:lioo thai needs 10 be 10k..; lleI1a said. "'We bave 3 continuing air 􀁾prablent."
􀁣􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁳􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁡􀁰􀁲􀁡􀁳􀀭􀁾􀀢 and sunlight It can be barmflll when excessive, especially to the e1der!l1 cblIdnD and people "ith bmllhinS pWIema, Dave SUl1MIIl, a data analYSt analYSt
with the TCEQ said he woUld mommeod thaI if Ibe MarsbaII mooitor', data were adjusted to 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀦􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀮􀁾 amended 10 lb: tlawed data fmn :IDOO and 2001 at the same IIIllIIltol: SuI1lVaD
said a faulty alia· Iyzor at the Marshall monitor, ..llIe!> has since been rePlaced. uodem:ported _ levels by as muon .. 20 percent In 2000 ..d 30 pcIC<1It In 2001, If the moDilor'.
readings w_ere adjouzsotende to renect more Ieveb for these lhtee years, it would lle\1I8Il\ result m a higher llUlDe aver: .ge for \he Sin ADtonio regim at that location. he said Tbe
entile is.... Illl\Y be 1rreI· 􀀽􀁬􀀺􀀢􀀽􀁾􀁬􀀻 lupe and Wilson COWlIies live up 10 an agreement that they SlBl!ed I8It year. 10 avoid pouible feden! P'" callies assoeiated with exe...
,ive. ozooe Ieveb IIId 10 lessen Ibe elfe<t 00 public heahh. olIl· da1I in these four counties commilled their comnwnities 10 voluntarily redueiIlg local emissioos dial contritiule to
. ozone. 􀁾􀁾tF.'rn-"ec"Jv::: of varioos clelll air slIalegies is DOW beilg lested. AI1lOIlI the options are mandalDry vehicle emiuions rests, lo\\.., speed limits. cl_ 􀁾l!I'soline,
vapor·reeov· 'ery deVices at .... sas sl.1lims 􀁾'-CIlIlISltll'HIJl A>IOU:$OH IlISofllIMP.v,,,,,,",,, But even without the lisreading, experts say s..\. air is polluted. 'I. tlny tralIer
Slln'OlIIlded by bed wire IIId _1IdI1DWa'1 CIl Nonhwesl Side is the foeus ,conl,oveny 0YIt" the l\I1IIre San Anlonio', ,ir Quail!): r('If more than a decade. the lte·nm ()UlI')t monitor
has iellv sampled and tested the .'.., 􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁄􀁨􀁡􀁬􀁬 Ilia SehooI. :..ast year. it recorded ozone eis llial were high enousJa 10 Ip push the San AnI0ns0 no .. above wbst i. permilled
:lor fedel1ll law The problem is that lhose lev· were more than 10 pe....t lher than they should have ,n. lhe Texas Commission <II ..ir..mental Qualily ,dmila. e 8Rency abo )lid it has
no .. io co,,",,1 lb. numbers. The question now: Doeo it :lter? )pponen1S of mandatol)' '" 􀁾 emissions lests, one of a ies of Slllllegi.. ander .... mtion 10 reduce _In. , ""·e seized
upon Ibe faullr ta and are !JY!Jlg 10 IIlIIl8 it o a YOl'Y big ..... ·'10 submit .uch data may en IIIlOUIII to scientific JIlif. Iduc," said Fomsl MlIIII,' ,mber of an Alamo Ana uncil
of GoYommmsta air .liIY ,ubcommill... who b.. 􀁬􀁜􀁜􀀺􀁾􀁤 to "vigorously pumII: 15.'U(, The EPA uses , c:omplex for. 1la 10 d..:t(llDine if ozone lev. 're Ie"t II 10k.. Ibe fourth ghe't
rfaily eighl-bow read@. (rom each O;l.one monitor 􀁾􀁾􀁡􀀩􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁲 􀁾􀀧􀀻􀁦􀁊􀀮􀁥􀁳 thai The 􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁵􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁬􀁬􀀮 average ('If the ar.;hall miter i, 116 pans r􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁫􀁤􀀺􀀺􀁣􀀺􀁅􀁊􀁾􀁾tr
l'l. Thol " ..cdol 11.. 84 ?Ph .1· ,d by !be EPA. COrTeC\ Ihal 2002 ,...jing. ..d 􀁾􀁊􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁪􀁯􀁮􀁇􀁜􀁾􀁦􀀧􀀺 lional siandard for 3 .,-ariel)' of masons. hot,. 'fl',
the overstated measure-::ie 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁣􀀧􀀺􀀬􀀮􀁾􀁃􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁨􀀺􀁲􀁾e::: :tJng ozone data they claim IW 10 ha \'e /r:fCCled. ore not 􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀨􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀺 .:neu:..: "ntob·<'O if lhe stale decided
10 row out lhe measumnents ,m lhe Mar.;lwll monilor _ ,d it has no i>Ions to do so: 􀀢􀀬􀁩􀁮􀁾 wOIIld ',liU be in. vjot10n 01 IlDhonol O"l,one lmulS .: If) Ie\'els m;ordo1 II atMXh.
lI;r monitor al Caplp BuIIb. Ozone result. when ell..... ",is relellsed by vehicles. 'WI, planu and other 'OIIlCes :acl in the 􀁰􀁾􀁮􀁣􀁥 of heat
By mid-JUly, the states also must report to the EPA the number of counties it would expect to include in ils roster of nonattainment areas based on a stricter monitoring requiremenl
BEAUMONT -Air quality In Southeast Texas should be da.vngraded from moderate to serious or severe to comply with the federal Clean Air Al::t, an EPA official said Monday. The Environmental
Protection Agency's regional administrator said the ultimate designation depends on comment from the public, interested parties such as the stale, environmental advocacy groups and industry,
and from federal agency's a.vn analysis of those comments. The comment period will last 30 days. A final designation mighl be available by lale fall. Richard Greene, EPA's regional administrator,
said the change in air quality classification resulted from a federal appellate court's ruling this past December. In'1 ggg, EPA reclassified Southeast Texas as moderate lor failure
to reech the standard, agreeing that polluted air masses from the Houston area drifted overhead, adding to local pollution. It gave Southeast Texas until 2007 to reach the federal c1ean-air
standards. However. the Sierra Club successfully argued at the Fifth Cill:lJlt Court of AppealS In New Orieans that EPA had no statutory authority to consider the mixing of the air masses,
a phenomenon called "transport." Because no such legal authority exisled in the Clean Air Act, the appellate court had no choice except to nullify EPA's eariier reclassification. However,
Southeast Texas might not have the option 10 return to a serious designation because the deadline to demonstrale compliance with thai classification has expired. Thai leaves severe,
which is the same deslgnation applied to Houston. "The action we're taking is deslgned 10 get Inpul from Interesled parties," Greene said. 'We thought our eariier decision was valid,
based on science and common sense. Since we have to reconsider, our tendency would be to go to serious. But we 􀁤􀁯􀁮􀁾 know how it will be eventually decided." Neither designation would
result In immediate economic impact, such as halting industrial construction or road improvements or In Imposing compulsory vehicle exhaust Inspections or mandating the use of reformulated
gasoline. Bill Wimbertey, chairman of the regional Air Quality Advisory Committee, said Induslly willleel the Impact of the redassification to some degree. "The public at large won'
be affected per se, excepl for road development," said Wimberiey who is environmental manager lor the Motiva Enterprises refinery In Port Arthur. He said part of the regional plan for
culling pollution Includes more emission reductions that have not phased in yet. Next year. the region and EPA will produce a mid-course review of emission reductions and the overall
impact in reducing ozone pollution, Wimberiey said. "If Beaumonl-Port Arthur were classified based on ozone design values, we would not be severe. The stigma atteched 10 severe puts
us on a par with Houston," Wimberiey said. The Air Quality Advisory Committee also has its regular meeting today at the Southeast Texas Regional Planning Commission office, 2210 Eastex
Freeway. Wimberley said 'he EPA announcement likely would be a prominent topic of discussion. EPA could downgrade air quality By DAN WALLACH The Enterprise 06/10/2003 The new standard
also could double the number of areas that no longer would comply with the Clean Air Act. In Texas, some areas that already are on the bubble have pUI pollution control pians into place
to assure they are not penaliZed by the stricter standard. Saenz said. The areas are Longview-Marshall, San Antonio, and Travis County, he said. Four areas in the state already are considered
nonallainment for the Clean Air Act. Besides Southeast Texas, they include Dallas-Fort Worth, EI Paso, and the Houston-Galveston area, which is rated as severe. IS Beaumonrs air quality
as bad as Houston's? "That's a good question," Saenz said. Greene would not commit to an answer. "We'll see what the comments tell us," Greene said. "We'll do whars in the interest of
the general public. Once a designation Is made, irll be a year before anything is done." EPA categories The Environmental Protection Agency's classifications for those areas not meeting
Clean Air standards are: Marginal Moderate Serious severe Extreme Houston is currently severe. Southeast Texas is currently Moderate and faces reclassification to Serious or Severe.
To write the EPA: Written comment on the Environmental Protection Agency's ruling on the air quality in Southeast Texas may be sant to the EPA's regional office, addressed to: Thomas
H. Diggs Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD·L) EPA Region 6 1445 Ross Ave. Suite 1200 Dallas TX 75202-7233 Reach this reporter at: (409) 833·331 1, ext. 450 dwallach@beaumontenterprise,com
@The Beaumont Enterprise 2003 Righi now, the EPA considers readings of ozone pollution in excess of 125 parts per billion for a period of one hou(s duration as an excess episode. An
area is allowed three of those excess episodes in a three-year period. Ozone lorms from pelrochemical and hydrocar1lon emissions reacting with heat and sunlight. Ozone pollution harms
people with existing breathing difficulties and could cause problems for othelWise healthy people. The new monitoring requirements would average ozone formation during an eight-hour
period, eliminating Ihe spikes in its formation. I The eight-hour standard Is supposed 10 reflect more specifically a person's exposure to ozone. I1 ,Andy Seenz, a spokesman for the
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said the new elght·hour standard further confuses the issue. 􀁾..we have to talk to EPA on the transition period (from a one-to eight-hour
standard). We don'l know what it does to any of the rules. Whal are the deadlines under the eight-hour standard? Thars complicating the ole process," Saenz said. hUrsday, the TCEQ's
executive director will recommend a stance on the elght-hour standard to the cy's appoinled commissioners.
------,EDITORIAlS Wednesday, J:W1e 11, 2003 􀀬􀀧􀁾􀀢 .. \ ., ';, '. " .. ;' Thestate's plan for reducing air pollution in '''j ,IJal\as-Fort'Worth is looking, deader than " ,," 􀁾􀀭􀁯􀁬􀁤
roadkill.,,, ' " Federal environmentiilists IllUst reject the .::-' .jllail because they illegally extended by two , yearsthedeadlinebywhich􀁾 , Ii the regiOn must meet the ':, old"
soon-to-be-pba.sed-' 􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁯􀁵􀁴 􀁾􀁤􀁡􀁩􀁤 for lung:' 􀀻􀀻􀀺􀁳􀁃􀁏􀁲􀁣􀁨􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁯􀁺􀁯􀁮􀁾􀀧 􀁾􀀢􀀢 , "The ,region thus faces theworSt of two worldS: toO much ozone and the a1" ' Illost
' certain 'prospect of federal, sanctions, ' which wouid involve strict limits , onindustrial growth and a freeze onlong-term highwayplanning. .. Arewehaving fun yet? As The DallasMomingNerJJ8
reported yes, 􀁾􀁤􀁡􀁹􀀢􀁲􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁬 officials are scrambling to find a wayout ofthe fix into which their years ofinattention have put the region. Among the solutions they're disCUSlling
are asking Congress to bypass the CUITent 2005 deadline ilnd impose another in 2010 for a stricter, soon-to-be-implented ozone standard, and abandoning a midcourse review and correction
ofthe current plan. Ll-"lv 'l-,il-a 't' have notdemandedhybnd or tric vehicles"like other states d countries'use because itmight􀁾 us more. We have not clamored 􀁾􀁴 the doors Of the
major eat-mailU. factureri; to give us those•S" Jeep alid Ford have been" .. their feet to plaa; their slnllJ1 ' 􀁨􀁹􀁢􀁲􀁩􀁾􀀢 On thii rnark¢t for till Iyears, AndWlieie'ar!"c1eari"!lfr
"Thedirty 3􀁾ll'hIues", lraowstnus,,m!dowreer.s?',<:,lo'ps,,􀁴􀀱􀁊􀁾"􀀬 nJi,lWt , Re: 'Imperfect Suitor -Why This is abOut ii1cliV\dual "%-Dallas has trouble wooing !inns; sponsibility too, rome and yoiiis, Editorials,June30. 'Wemnsteachand everfolieor.1Js
: So Boeing and Toyota don't demand clean air, c1C8Il 􀁩􀁩􀁴􀁤􀁴􀁾􀁾 want to move here bOeause of the and clean-air, irebicli!$ aniij;!;;: I dirty air? I was born and raised chineI}'
􀁦􀁲􀁯􀁭􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁲􀁥􀁰􀁮􀀤􀀮􀁥􀁮􀁾•.􀀧, I h.ere and I don't want to live here -national, stale and Joq.!"::c c ' " linymore either. But I think your well as the 'manuDictuieri, , e emti>rial
missed acouple ofthings. cannot sit JJack, ii.nd' 􀁢􀁥􀀬􀁾􀁰􀁩􀁵􀁨 c .: -Since thefederaJ Clean Air Act abouiiraily more. Will itrost " Was revised in 1990, Dallas has 'too much? 􀁗􀁯􀁮􀁤􀁥􀁲􀀬􀁾􀀺
' niissed all its deadlines for c1ean-does oDe life' cost when" h "ing its, air. We as residents/ron-frorn the#fectsofthi:i'!"?lIu' _ Sumers have not demanded 􀁭􀁯􀁲􀁥􀀬􀀬􀀧􀁓􀁨􀁡􀁲􀁯􀁩􀁩􀁖􀁡􀁬􀁥􀀱􀂢
􀀬􀁾 􀀧􀀺􀀬􀀦􀁾􀁧􀁥􀁮􀁴 vehicle "inspections be-" ",,:1: cause it would rost lis more. Hey, "it's:"not just the SUVs, g..ys, We " 107i' -, ' ."/)1;.;1/?-f.J-c>3 •HelpWorkers use DART
, , ,"Dallas City Council member LoIs Finkelman in last Sundays Viewpoints says look at what City Hall is doing to eurbairpollution. " Look at what City Hall is not doing. "In April
of 2002, the city stopped its 44 percent subsidy of 􀁾􀁰􀁬􀁯􀁹􀁥􀁥 DART passes. That worked oul to be acostof$14,126 .10 the city. As a result, twl>-thirds ' Q( those formerly participating
in 'theDARTprogram no Jongerdo. ' .. 􀀧􀀬􀁾􀁔􀁨􀁥 rouncH is lOOking atwa,y.; ,to motiVllle employees and reduce '.",P9)Jution, here's One. 􀀧􀀮􀀺􀁾􀀨􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀺 KeuinR0bert8,DaIlas NORTH􀁾􀁐􀁾􀁉􀁦􀀮􀁕􀁦
􀁅􀁄 􀁾 Downtown 􀁳􀁭􀁯􀁧􀁾􀁧􀁧􀁥􀁲􀁥􀁤 soo;;oasthma attaCk Several weeks ago, a frightening event occurred in downtown Jallas that few people were aware of, Ozone pollution reached
condition purple -ronsidered very Inhealthy -which is up the warning􀁳􀁾􀁥 Irom green, yellow and ed. ' The sun-IY blue ;kies on Satlrday, May //11, provided "j 10 warning #. Intil my
nildlyasthnatic son luffered a Frightening >sthma attack while roller skating al a downtown birthday part;y. Wonderingwhat could trigger the unusual attack, Ivisited the TexlIS Commission
for EnvilCDJDental QualityWeb site that publishes real-time data from an air pollution monitor near downtown. The same Web site also displayed a computer map ofOZOne ronditions for the
same day. It showed a purple bull's-eye, surrounded by orange and yellow rings, centeredjust north ofdowntown Dallas. Thismap confirmedmylongtime suspicion about ozonein Dallas; Wecannot
blame theozoneon heavyindustlylocated far 50Uth in Midlothian. The calm winds and purple bull's-eye centered on white-collar Dallas told the story clearly; Thesame oversized vehicles
that carted children to the weekend birthday part;y and drive their parents toWOrk caused the ozone that choked my5On, Unless we each decide tobe pel50nally responsible for our automotive
choices, our children will continue to wheeze and choke. WesSchlenker, Dallo.s Ifenvironments so clean, why red ozone alerts? Re: 'Environmental lobby shooting at wrong target," by Christie
Whitman, yesterdays Viewpoints. Maybe,just maybe, an environmentalist finds it hard to believe the new EPA's 'Drafl' Report on the Environment' when there is a red ozone alert waiting
right outside their door. Cleaner air? Progress? Ijusl can\ buy the word oflhc agcnty's departing administrator. ChristopherAnders<tn, Dallo.s Constmction crews should do their part
Ai; we sat in bumper-to-bumper traffic on 1-30 at 1-,15 on a recent level red air pollution day, my teenage daughter and I dis· cussed the fumes we were generating waiting to get to
the 'Road Work Ahead," After at least two miles oflane closure, we came upon a crew repairing a guard rail. On level red days, why not Iimit(jfnot eliminate) road work that could stall
traffic? If citizens are encouraged to carpool and usc public trnnsporlalion on these days, government could do its p'ut. Marc Ruffini, DalllUJ ._. __.---..•_._---􀁾
,_, 􀁾 .. 􀀬􀀬􀁾 􀀬􀀬􀀻􀁾􀀮􀀬 ·.••.􀁟􀀮􀁾􀁟..􀁩􀀮􀁬􀀮􀀮􀁎􀁖􀀻􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀢􀁊􀀮􀁷􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀮􀁬􀁴􀁷􀀪􀁴􀁩􀀬􀂷 . It.""'!'rl " 􀁾􀀭􀀢􀁟􀀮􀁁􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁾􀁾􀁟to $95 million annually. • A I% 􀁳􀁵􀁲􀁣􀁨􀁡􀁲􀁧􀁾
on heavy-duty diesel tlUcks of model year 1997 and newer. That joins a 2.5% surcharge on 1996 and older models that was approved by the 77th Legislature. That will raise about $10 million
to $20 million annually. • An increased surcharge on the sale. lease or rental of construction-type equipment from the existing I% to 2%. That will raise $30 million annually. "This
was the most important bill that went through the committee," said Covar, "and one of the Top 10 that wenl through this session, behind the budget and school finance." TERP was passed
two years ago by the 77th Legislature. But funding met with resistance from special-interest lobby groups, which succeeded in gutting from SB 5 a handful of small taxes on diesel motors,
leaving only about $35 million. TERP is just one of many programs to clean D-FW's FW's air by removing emissions of nitrogen oxide, or NOx -a precursor to smog -created by combustion
engines. Contact DBl writer Margaret Allen at mallen@bizjournafs,com or (214) 706-7119. NG-CHOKE ZONE?: The Texas Emissions Reduction Plan offers monetary incentives to heavy-equipment
users, such as those building the High Five highway construction project at LBJ and Central in Dallas, who replace old equipment with machinery that creates less pollution. • An increase
in on-road vehicle titletransfer fees, rising from $13 statewide now to $33 per title transfer in nonattainment and affected areas like Dallas-Fort Worth, and $28 in the rest of the
state. . That will raise an estimated $90 million TERP funding is critical to clean up diesel emissions and smog in the Metroplex. Specifically, the Dallas-Fort Worth area must hit a
Sept. I clean air deadline with the Environmental Protection Agency for approval of a complex State Implementation Plan that outlines in detail every effort the region will make to clean
up ozone, a precursor to smog. Without approval of the so-called SIP,. sanctions would include losing $1.1 billion annually in federal highway money, stricter pollution controls that
would limit industry, wholesale bans OIl daytime construction and possibly even nodrive days, where alternating vehicles are banned from the road on certain days. "This was one of our
major priorities," said James McCarley, executive director of the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition. The coalition's members are elected officials from the five counties of Dallas,
Denton, Collin, Rockwall and Ellis, as well as 26 cities in those counties. "1 think it was one of the key legislative pieces. September was the deadline they gave us. So certainly the
timing was very important to get it done this session." Money for TERP will come from three sources, according to Zak Coval', chief committee clerk for the House committee on environmental
regulation: By MARGARET ALLEN Staff Writer TERP to aid D-FW's clean air efforts GREATER METROPLEX METROPLEX -Considered Olle of the Top 10 bills of the 78th legislative session, the
Texas Emissions Reduction Plan will keep the state from being hit with tougher EPA restrictions on industry and from losing biIlions in federal highway dollars. House legislation dealing
with funding forTERP was debated until the last minute between members of the House and Senate. Controversy focused on how to fund the program. The $320 million TERP provides financial
incentives to help heavy-equipment users around the state, such as construction companies and Dallas Area Rapid Transit, pay to replace old machinery and buses with cleaner-burning equipment,
according to Nan Miller, a senior transp0l1ation planner with the North Central Texas Council of Governments. "It's not too drastic a change from the other versions," Miller said. "We're
very pleased with the support the Legislature has shown for clean air." June 6-12, 2003 -Dallas Business Journal -dallas.bizjournals.com 􀁾􀁾 Q
_______._..__􀁊􀁾􀁍􀁊􀁍􀀮􀁟􀀸􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁊􀁬􀁅􀁇􀁉􀁑􀁎􀀮􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁳􀀡􀀡􀀡􀀡􀁲􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁮􀁤􀀢􀁹􀀬 􀀮􀀢􀀮􀁴􀀡􀁬􀁾 􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 .._....1':'1\.". "!l lK to go out? Check smog
􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁥􀁣􀁡􀁳􀁾􀀬 TIM 􀁒􀁒􀁊􀁾􀁉􀁏􀁘 the thought that an)' eovironmental group actually wou!(l support thl' Bush administration. Onl'!es.<;;<10 llrarm'd 􀁤􀁵􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁾 my 29 months at
tht: Environmental Protection 􀁁􀁾􀁣􀁮􀁬􀀧􀁙 is that until the tone ofthe debate over environmental policy l'hanges, the nc.\t gcncmtion of cnvironmcntal progress \vill 􀁨􀁴􀁾 harder
than it should be. If environmental W'(Jups truly an' interested in progrcs.s, not po!i· tie,. thev 'hould let the tiut, ,peak fa'r them'elves and seck WHys to support eftClits to gd
to 􀁡􀁣􀁬􀁣􀁡􀁮􀁥􀁲􀁴􀁾􀁭􀀻􀁮􀁭􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀮 Our "Draft. RClxlrt nn til£' 􀁅􀁮􀁶􀁩􀁮􀀺􀁭􀁭􀁬􀀧􀁮􀁴􀁾 docsjllst Ihal hy 􀁧􀁩􀁶􀁩􀁮􀁾 liS it thL1ual and nonJ>o, Iiticallook at whcre \\'I:
are Hnd where we IIccd togo. Thoughtful critici'm 􀁡􀁬􀁷􀁡􀁾􀁾 is welcome and productivl:. Mindlcs'''; all.lcks are IIOt. Chri'h"e WhitmU3'Z eruJe(1 hertenuTcSundaya.'iudmirli.'itrator
'if the Environmental Protection Agency. environment. I wonder whv environmentalists find it so'hard to admit the)' reall)' h,we made a difterenee. By many mea."nrcs, rlor air is cleaner,
our drinking water is pun'r, and our land is better protected -and thcy can take priddn thaI. Rut 0111' repul1 also shows real 􀁴􀀧􀁨􀁾􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁴􀀧􀁬􀁬􀁧􀁬􀀢􀀧􀀢 􀁩􀁮􀁤􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁾 sometimt's
lInlwlllthy air in large parts of the l'Olintry, pollution in thousand" of waterways and 􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁲􀁴􀀧􀁡􀁳􀁩􀁮􀁾 WiL"tc muterials. Thmie are 􀁣􀁨􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁣􀁮􀁋􀂫􀁾􀁳 we all should work
011 tugethl'r. Untc>rtulliltcly till' the tcnor of puhlic dchatt'., too m,my in the ellvironnH:ntal lobhy W'01t to hear onlr till: had news. o l1mt L" why we 􀁩􀁾􀀱􀀧􀁜􀁾 treated to
hiza.rrc 􀁾􀁰􀁣􀁤􀁡􀁣􀁬􀁣􀁳 􀁾􀁉􀁬􀁣􀁨 as what happened this spring wht:n the Natural Rcsources Defense Council praised i\ Bush 􀁡􀁤􀁭􀁩􀁮􀁾 istration 􀁰􀁭􀁲􀁯􀁾 tn limit emissions from
dic."c1 engines on tractor.;, bulldozers and other off-road vehieles. "Hcresy; cried thcir allies, ap"lIled at polloters. Measuring process instead ofprogress may be easier, butithas
made it difficult to adapt environmental policrmaking to changing times and challenges. When the environmental debate turns on questions of process, attempts at innovation haye a hard
time getting out of the startinggate. An attempt to modernize a law is cast as an effort to undermine it. A goodfaith effort to try new methods of achieving better results is characterized
as a retreat from c:<istingeommitnlents, That i, why I w"" disappointed thilt so many of those people who make their living a.s Washington environmentalists instint.1ively attacked our
report. Because it 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁤􀁩􀁬􀀧􀁴􀁾 their public stancc that the state ofour rnvironment is had and gettinI{ 􀁷􀁯􀁾􀁣􀀬 they shot the mc."scnKer before the)" could 􀁤􀁩􀁾􀁣􀁳􀁴
thc meSSi\gc. But facts arc stunnorn things, as John Adnms snid. and the simple fact is that the environmcnt's health hitS improved rnnsidemhly ovcr the 􀁉􀁡􀀮􀁾􀁴 sevcral dccades. The
􀁉􀁉􀁈􀁋􀀱􀁾 ern and hipaltisan commitment to envimnmenlaJ protection -inaugurated hy a Repuhlicnn prc.,ident, Richnrd Nixon, 33 years ago and sustained by six president." 11'001 both
partic." ever since -has prodoct'l1 rcal and mc..'urable resolts. That should hearten everyone who carr4Ci ahoul the I..Environmental 􀀺􀁬􀀻􀀧􀀮􀁾 .. i lobby shooting 􀁾􀀻 at wrong target
. "tJJI.<1,e;.. .J]; 􀁾 Anyone who doubts that .". the tone of the debate . over environmental Policy in Washington is in serious need ofimproYement need only look at the reaction to
last week's release of the Environmental Protection Ageney's first "Draft Report on the Envi-CHRISTIE WHITMAN ronment" The report, the prcaluct of more than two years' work collaborating
with more than two :' dozen federal departments and agencies and state and privatesector contributors, is designed to help answer a qoestion I posed at my coofirmation hear-. iog 2,/,
years ago: AIe Americas Americas environmental policies 'making our air cleaner. its water porer and it, land better protected -or not? Butjudgillg by the reaction of some professional
environmentalist" to our l'epOlt, you would think we had tried to pass oft'Th, SIc"1i1ieaJ En.tironmentalist 'L' Silent Spring. To somt', it doesn't seem to matter that our report uses
sound anel sophisticated scientific datn to look ilt the ..1ual health of our t:m;mnJ1lcnt and help us nlt'ilsure where our 10 years oremlrt h;we maele it positive diftcrence amI where
they haven't mct expct·tations. Some l'ondemn the report because it doesn't discu,s global c1in,.le change. It doesn't, but it tim's indudc dozens of 􀁳􀁣􀁩􀁥􀁮􀁥􀁣􀀭􀁉􀁭􀁳􀁴􀁾􀁤 cm;ronmental
indicator.-; for air, water and land. The report shows us where we arC', so we have a better idea of what wc must do to get where we want to he. For too long, the environmental debate
has centered on cOunting the number of new ". .lawswe haye passed and on tal-I.: \yinguphowmuchinfines,fces . and pennltics we haye levied on !:. 􀁾􀁾 .-> Iy in real time when monitors
record high ozone. Mid-to late afternoon, prime time for a smog buildop, is when the warnings come. The ozone watches try to go the weather forecast one better, predicting how high the
ozone could go. "The weather forecast gives a percent chance of rain, but it usoallywon't say whether it will rain a quarter-inch or a halfinch;Mr. Lambeth said. An orange-level watch
prediets conditions that arc unhealthful for sensitive people the yoong, the elderly, or people with asthma, emphysema or other breathing difficulties. That's aboot one in four people,
A red-level watch means the air might become onhealthful for everyone, even the fittest; people who exereise outdoors might be at extra risk. On the rare porple day, the message is that
the air might become very unhealthful for eyeryone. The only purple day so far this year, May 31, was predicted as a high ozone day, bot at the orange level -two stages less serioos
than it turned out to be. More often, however. the error has gone the other way, with the predicted leyels being too pessimistic. That was the case with all five level-red predictions
so far this year. On foor days, including Wedoesdav. thc actual levels jllst reached orange. On the fifth, ozone never reaehejl high levels al all.As with anr toreeast, the more detailed
it is, the bigger a Irdmbk it becomes. But the risk is on,' that the ozone forecasters accept in the intere,t of protecting pllblie hcalth. And for thc most part, it pays off. "Even
when we don't get itjlls1 right; Mr. Lambeth said, "we're really close." If the \\;nd picks up and blows the ozone away, the local skies would be cleaner, but some city .downwind might
pay the price. Scieutists regularly track plumes ofsmog aeroSol) continents. Dallas-Fort Worth blames Houston for some of the North Texas smog. All of East Texas, in turn, blames the
coal-burning power plants of Ohio. "And in Oklahoma City, they point the finger back at Texas; Mr. Lambeth snid. But if a cold front traps the air over the metro area. o"l.one le\'el.li
can go way up -􀀱􀀱􀁾 the}' did on Mar 31, when 􀁷􀁡􀁲􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁳 hit the purple zone, considered "ery unhealthful for eYeryone. "Pollotion that usually flow, out ju,t got collected;
Mr. Lambeth said. Shared terminology The ozone forecasting system also horrows language from weather ">recasting: A tomad" watch means conditions arc right for a twister, whereas a warning
means a tornado has been spotted. In the same way, an ozone wateh is a prediction of smoggy skies, and a warning is a notice that monitors haye pieked op high ozone readings. The watches
usually go oot the afternoon before a predicted high 07..one day, Warnings go out ncar-MEI-CHUNJAU!StaffPhotographcr DomLampe ofthe NorthTexas Clean Air Coalition and Phyllis Nelson
Grover ofAmbientAirMonitoringvisitamonitoring stalion.lMntyhigh ozone da,YShave been predicted this year. One way is to ask how often a high ozone forecast came true. The system has
predieted high ozone readings for urban North Texas' 20 timcs this summer; 12 predictions tumed out righl That's like a weather forecaster who predicts rain 20 time." and people get
wet 12 time, -a 60 percent accuracy rate. But the sy,tem failed to predict two days when ozone readings reached prohlem leYels. Add in those days, and the system correctly predicted
the next da)'s ozone 12 out of 22 􀁴􀁩􀁭􀁾􀀬 dropping accuracy to ;);) perr,lmt. l11CI'C'$ one mom w.\\' tn look at the 􀁦􀁩􀁨􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧 􀁨􀁯􀁷􀁥􀁙􀁾􀁲􀀺 How many ofthe 􀁨􀁩􀁾􀁨 ozone
d:lys raml' as a surprise? The answer is two out of 14 -an H6 percent 􀁡􀁣􀁣􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁡􀁾 cy relte. Ozonl' 􀀱􀀨􀀩􀁬􀀧􀁥􀁴􀀧􀁩􀁌􀀢􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁾 􀁩􀁾􀁪􀁵􀁳􀁴 a lew year:; old. hilt it draws
on the science of weather forecc1,sting, Sitnply put, if today werea high ozone day and tomorrow looked as though it might be hot with wenk winds, tomormw might also he a high ozone
day. That's because 'trong sunlight cooks the o7.one-making 􀀬􀁥􀁭􀁩􀁳􀁾 sions in the air and then the weak winds can't blow the resolting ozone away. The hotter the weather and the
weaker the wind, the worse the 07.onc might get. Alerts predict ozone :vels, let people decide 'hether to stay indoors By RANDYLEE WFI1S Environml!ntal Writer Wednesday was a level-red
..cast day. Ozone, the stull' that ts the sting in smog, was pre'ted to hit levels that would be .healthful for everybody. Such gloomy prognostications vc become a summertime smJ, with
a color-coded ozone ,teh or warning seeming to me nearly every day. Ozone ltches or warnings have gone t 22 times in the 46 days sinee ay 23. From June 28 to Friday, erc was a watch
or warning evyday. Although no alert had been ised for Monday as oflate Sunday sht, the regular drumbeat oforge or red alarms has raised pubawareness of the air pollution at plagues
North Texas skies orohlcm that comes from cars, dustrics and other sources. If people heed pollution alerts ,d stay indoors, they coold prent trips to the emergency room possihle death.
Ozone levels inle arc usually one-third as high those outside because air-contioningunit-.rcmove07.0nc. But the wntche... and warnings 'iO ('arry risk, say thr people' who semh1<-them.
To he eredihle, cy say, the 􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁣􀁣􀁡􀀮􀀢􀁩􀁴􀁾 have tn he cur'lte. Otherwise, the people cy'rl' supposed to henefit would ut iKnorinp; them. Helps with planning 'ihe purpose is to
let 􀁰􀁣􀁯􀁰􀁬􀁴􀁾 kc :wtion to avoid high oulsidc .onl: levels," said Bryan L.1.nJ 􀁾􀁴􀁨􀀬 a 􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁴􀁥􀁬􀀩􀁭􀁬􀁯􀁾􀁾􀁴 with thc !xas 􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁮 on Envil'Onental Quality
who coordinates e forecasts. '(ne trick is to set the Lr Sf) thc system doesn't miss the ark too often, he said while anding in a trailer ncar Love eld, one of the 􀁭􀁯􀁮􀁩􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁾
sites 'ound the metro area. 􀁾􀁨􀁏􀁗 accurate is the systcm? epends. '\
EPA says progress, made in big picture ,(J/prt 􀁢􀂷􀁾􀁲􀁾􀀮􀀳 releasing fewer toxic chemicals. Report doesn't address Ms. Whitman, who is leaving bal ' b calls the EPA this week, acknowledged
glo chmate ut . the picture is far from rosy. U.S. environment better 􀁁􀀱􀁴􀁨􀁯􀁵􀁾 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁡􀁩􀁲􀁩􀁳􀁣􀁬􀁥􀁡􀁮􀁥􀁲􀀬􀁨􀁡􀁉􀁦 thepopulation lives in areas where Associated Press air
quality does not meet federal WASHINGTON -The Envi-health standards on some days. ronmental Protection Agency re-This puts the elderly, children and leased a mixed "Report on the En-those
with respiratory ailments at vironment" on Monday that special risk, health experts have outlined progress in areas from air said quality to drinking water but said Wetlands are being
lost at the plenty ofproblems remain. rate of 100,000 acres a year, de-While the report assessed envi-spite pledges by successive adminronmental matters from water istrations to develop
policies to clarity to the ozone hole, it said end the decline, the report states. nothing nothing about climate change. In a glaring and intentional Sharp disagreements between the
omission, the EPA assessment has EPA and White House became not even a mention of worldwide public last week over how the c1i-climate change. Under asection timate issue should be character-tied
"Global Issues," it cites progized, which prompted the agency ress made in dealing with depleto drop the section altogether. tion of Earth's ozone layer, which EPA Administrator Christie
filters out harmful ultraviolet radiWhitman said the long-overdue ation. It ignores, however, fears of report attempts to "tell us how far manyclimatc scientists about afuwe've come
and suggest where we ture warming ofthe Earth because still need to go." ofmanmade pollution. Although progress is mixed in Ms. Whitman chose to scrap some areas, overall the nation's
en-the entire section on climate vironment is improving, the two-change after. a dispute developed volume draft report said. For ex-over how the issue was to be charample: acterized.
White House officials • The air is 25 percent cleaner had directed a major rewrite ofthe than it was 30years ago. section to emphasize uncertainties • Thc water is safer to drink, they
said surround global warmwith better than nine in 10 water ing and deletc references to any systems in the country meeting impact rising global tcmperatures health standards, up from
79 per-might have on health and theenvicent adecade ago. ronment. • Virtually all hazardous waste .Officials noted the document is either recycled or treated, and released Monday was
a draft, still the number of Superfund sites -subject to public comments in the toxic industrial sites waiting to be coming months. Aset1ion on clicleaned -continues to decline. mate
feasibly still could be added. • Factories and busi.;lesses are 􀁾􀁾 White House hea,yilyedits EPA 􀁤􀁴􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁰􀀨􀀩􀁲􀁴 : 􀀬􀁴􀁝􀁾􀁤􀀢􀁉􀁦􀀯􀀮􀁉􀀿􀀧􀁊􀂷 . '., " .. ",.:. ,.... '. """'".'
'C" , .' _ "'" .,' drafts and a memo in which some" White House, to avojd Criticisili, HOuSedirectingtheseeretaryofla" Long:section on rising , agency officials 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁾 ,the, ¥ 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁹􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁶􀁥�
�􀁹􀁦􀁩􀁬􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁢􀁩􀁧􀀢 􀁢􀁏􀁾􀁴􀁑􀀸􀁬􀁲􀁥􀁲􀁵􀁮􀁥􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁤􀁡􀁴􀁡 to " b" . . . "'change!.􀁾&ge!1cy<?fficials 􀁣􀁯􀁾􀀬 SCIencetoswtpolicy. ;"" 􀁰􀁡􀁭􀁴􀁡􀁾􀁃􀁬􀁃􀀨􀁪􀁮􀁏􀁉􀁄􀁉􀁣􀁰􀁬􀁣􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁥�
� , . glQ al temperatures i finned the' nature of the 􀁤􀁯􀁣􀁕􀁾􀀺 ' AdmiiJistration officials. de.; lliatbrofthe!'ePC>.rt-have been "whittleddown . 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁾􀀮 ..'., '; : ':';:,'
"fended the report and 􀁾􀁤 􀁴􀁨􀁾 , 􀁾􀁧􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁬􀁮􀁡􀁮􀁹􀁴􀁰􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁨􀁳􀀬 but a ! ..' '. . ',. .,'.;,' The editing eliminated." was nothing untOWard about the paIticuJarlyheavyroundofiewrit-;"
􀁂􀁹􀁁􀁎􀁄􀁾􀁃􀀮􀁒􀁅􀁖􀁋􀁉􀁎􀀢 􀁥􀁮􀁃􀁥􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁭􀁡􀁮􀁹􀁾􀁤􀁩􀁥􀁳􀁣􀁯􀁮􀀧􀁣􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀬 proeessthatproduCedit • ;'. ingandcuttingbyWliiteHouseofi ' and'I(ATIIAlUNE 􀀹􀀭􀁳􀁾􀁮 'that
recent. warming is. at, least. .Ms..Whitman said she :was': ficials 􀁩􀁮􀁊􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁁􀁰􀁲􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁡􀁮􀀺􀁥􀁲􀁱􀁰􀀭 I:'· ,N....y'oil<'rlmes:N"1'"Service . partly caused.. byrisin.. gcon.cen..
􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁾 􀀢􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁦􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁬􀁹􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁦􀁯􀁾􀁬􀁥􀂷 with the. tionOfP1Otest.amongEPA.officials . The Environment'al P'rotection tions of smokest;ack and tailpipe el;Iited version; She said
that the .workPJgonthereport ." , '. .. :' Agency is preparing to publish a enrlssionsand:could 􀀧􀁾􀀧 agencyhadbeenworkirigforyears" ;.AnApril?9"issuepaper"circudraft report next week
on the state 􀁨􀁥􀁡􀁬􀁴􀁨􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁾􀀧 .' ..... , : 􀁴􀁯􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁤􀁵􀁣􀁥􀁡􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁨􀁥􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁶􀁥􀁡􀁮􀁡􀁬􀁹􀁾 lated amqngEPA stairme'mbers . of ·tht envirolUllent, but after· Ainongt'hedcletionswi:rere
f-> sis of several envirolUllentalin<Ji.;: 'saidthatwiththeWhiteHouse-re, heavy editingby theWmte 􀁈􀁯􀁾􀀧 eienCes to the 􀀧􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁵􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁾􀀧 of acators in easily 􀁵􀁮􀁤􀁥􀀧􀁲􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁡􀁢􀀩􀁾
'qUe$terl 􀁾􀁾􀁯􀁾􀀬 the section on '.' a' long'sectj'.on descri'.􀀮􀂷􀁢􀁩􀁉􀁊􀁧􀀮􀁾.. ' ·;.... 2001repQIt."byctbe--l!Jii'􀁡􀀱􀁾􀀮. 􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁬􀀱􀀡􀀺􀁬􀁾􀁹􀁲􀁴􀀧􀁨􀁥􀁰􀀧􀀡􀁐􀁊􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀬􀀮􀁴􀁾􀁤�
�􀁦􀀢􀀬􀂷􀀬􀀻􀁉􀀺􀁕􀀬􀁭􀁬􀀡􀁴􀁥􀁷􀀢􀁬􀀻􀁬􀁏􀀮􀀩􀁏􀁾..􀁾􀀮􀀧'.' 􀀮􀁜􀁬􀀧􀁾􀀮,:', '. ; from risin .g1obal,tern tili'eS, ••. 􀁾􀀮 􀁃􀁯􀁵􀁩􀀺􀁊􀁾􀀧􀂷􀀻􀀺􀁴􀁩􀁩􀀧􀁾􀀧 '.􀁾􀀡􀁬􀁦􀁩􀀧􀁾 cles
􀀧􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁾􀀬􀁩􀁾􀁣􀁉􀁩􀁮􀀧􀀢'" \' 􀀺􀁦􀁢􀁫􀁡􀁊􀁾􀁴􀁳 l:i-ieiltifri> ,'" ,'1M ioJii.l I " .' g, 􀀬􀁾􀀬 '."" ',," til· 􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀮 Jl , . .", "",.. ":"'l\,.,j.... r"'lr"i<' '. 􀀴􀁲􀁬􀁩􀀦􀀧􀁾􀀻􀁪
I i has: been whittled.'to a,few; ·noli."··,HouSehadco . In' d." owanotho up ea'.naljiSis.': mate.ch8nge.,· .....,:':.: .' ';. ' , i 􀁾􀁄􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁉􀁩􀁴􀁴􀁡􀁬􀁰􀁾􀀮􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀬 􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀻􀀬􀀺􀀧􀀺􀂥􀀼􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁾�
�􀁤􀁏􀁬􀀺􀁓􀁥􀁤􀀬 4W,", 􀀱􀀧􀁨􀁾M 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁊􀀮􀀱􀁩􀁥􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁤􀀬 10' The report,C!llllDl1SS1oned 'm', 􀀮􀁾􀁥􀁳􀀬􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀧 .. , 􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀢􀀧􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀮 􀁾􀀯􀁾􀀢 ! ill!, fustl:1tiJ.ftS,
'conl-aifted everything',: : rry: t6eWhifu''HQuse' C<)uncilon 2001 by the agelicy's lII!miDi$a"" '.; :White House officials alSO dele-:-: .she said iii a brieftelephoile inter-" 􀁅􀁮􀁶􀁩􀁲􀁯􀁾􀀮􀁥􀁮�
�􀁡􀁬 􀁾 although tol) ChristieWhiman, was aimed ted a reference to aWide1y cited 􀁾􀀧􀀬 view from New York, where she .the' 􀁾􀀮􀁯􀁦 Mlinagement and at providing the fustcOmprehen-1999
study ..shoW!Pg: that. global ..... 􀁾 Waiting to tape71le Late Slwt#-Budgetjvas 8lso inyolved, accordsivereview'ofwbiltiskI1own:.about 􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁮􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁾􀁓􀁰􀁩􀁫􀁡􀁬􀀭􀁳􀁨􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁰􀁬􀁹􀀧
WtthDavidLettemuz.1ii.'.... -''1'' 􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁴􀁏􀁾􀁅􀁐􀁁􀁯􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁾􀀧 . , various envirOJ!lllental problems. in the last decade cOmpared with . "As it went through the review, '. . . , ,
where gaps in understanding􀁾 leYeIs over the !lIst'I,OOO years; in' 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁷􀁡􀁳􀁬􀁥􀁳􀁳􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁥􀁮􀁳􀁵􀁳􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀧􀁳􀁣􀁩􀁾 andhowtofillthem. .'; .' its place, administration officials,
Cllce and conclusions on climate I .AgeJ1Cy officials said itwas ten-added a reference to a new study, change,"she said . . ' . I tative\y scheduled'to be released partly financed by
the American . Private environmental groups . : next week, before Ms.. Whitman Petroleum InStitute, that ques-sharply criticized the changes. leaves office June27. tioned that conclusion.
'Political staffare becoming in" The draft ofthe climate section, In the end, EPAstaffmembers, creasingly bold in forcing agency with change! sought by the White after discussions with
administra-officials to endorse junk science,· House, was given to 71Ie New York tion officials, said they decided to saidJeremySymons,aclimatepolTi11le8 on Wednesday by a former delete
the entire discussion, in-icy expert 'at the National Wildlife EPA official, along with earlier cluding material. inserted by the Federation. "This is like the White
:nrO1n1Uti·on prompts,'wa.rmng ;F r1 W rth SI:r.Te.:gram JUN 1 0 2002 : ',', IJIIIIII 􀀢􀁾􀀴􀀭􀀳􀀧 "iTexas tops Off·road diesel pollution : .. '"'. , .. 11 􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁬􀁩􀁭􀁩􀁴􀁾 . .-.·
',," '" tures,.'andwe'regomgtohaVe8Il 1!as IlIlrq>io ""._"' _. 􀀬􀀮􀀺􀁁􀀺􀁩􀁮􀀭􀁬􀀮􀁜􀁾􀁦􀁴􀀻􀁊􀀺􀁾􀀬􀂷􀀢􀂷 "''','"Sa;urday'smeasurements:wmexceedarice,' .', . "'.',:;.:"'. • if. d ==--*'1
_...., _ '. . 􀁬􀁲􀁌􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁧􀀮􀁬􀁓􀁡􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁓􀀧􀁢􀁡􀁳􀁥􀁤 h!'e2ding' f' Thh' hem .<1lft!I' ill 0 -roo ......_ , 􀀮􀀺􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁻􀁩􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀻􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁦􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁓􀁾􀂷􀁩􀀦􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁣􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀧
diesel. __ -..-..'"""'_.=:-: ='::::::-'5:-: 􀂷􀂷􀀬􀁾􀀾􀀮􀁜􀁊􀁊􀀱􀁲􀁯􀁎􀁙􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀬􀀬􀀧􀀨􀀧􀀯􀂷􀁾􀁧􀁴􀁨􀁯􀁳􀁥􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁯􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁉􀁜􀀻􀁗􀁪􀀺􀀳􀀬􀀱􀀹􀀹􀀶􀀬􀁖􀁬􀁢􀁥􀁮􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁳􀁾􀁥􀁤􀂷 pollutIon
""'T" ,ft "I MI '" .; ";::", 􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁓􀁴􀁯􀁬􀁔􀁜􀀡􀁾􀀻􀀮 """ ",,' ....,!''',. ivill 􀁦􀁡􀁉􀁬􀀺􀁕􀁄􀁤􀁥􀁲􀀬􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀢􀁭􀁯􀁲􀁥􀀬􀁾􀁴􀀩􀀮􀀺􀁊􀀳􀀵􀀬􀂷􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁓 per billion,
􀀧􀁬􀀱􀀩􀀮􀁾 highest ....􀁾 6J64 '" 1l1.1l4 "I ::: 􀀺􀀭􀀧􀁁􀁾􀁩􀀡􀀣􀁣􀀱􀁯􀁵􀁤􀁏􀁦􀁓􀁊􀁩􀁩􀁯􀁩􀀺􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁾􀀺􀀬􀀬􀀺􀁣􀁩􀁾􀀷􀁾􀁯􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀬􀂥􀁩􀁾􀁷􀁉􀁮􀁩􀁩􀁊􀁴􀀾 r¥dingrecoOOedsineemonitoring
􀁾A.tUdV'.....::: 􀁾 ::: 􀁾 ::: 􀀺􀁬􀁭􀀡􀁬􀀧􀀻􀁎􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁨􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀺􀁡􀁬􀁓􀀼􀁩􀁲􀁥􀁣􀀺􀀾􀁯􀁯􀁥􀁡􀀺􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁆􀁀􀀬􀁴􀁢􀁙􀁉􀁾􀀺􀀬􀁨􀁥􀁧􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁾􀁧􀀮􀀴􀀬􀀱􀀹􀀹􀀹􀀬􀁷􀁨􀁥􀁮 _a1dlo..' ".....
I,'" '" lim '" . 􀀺􀀽􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁦􀁲􀁴􀁢􀁥􀁚􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁬􀀻􀀬􀀮􀀬􀁾􀀻􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁾􀀧􀂢􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁲􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧 .ll·...d 􀁾􀀽􀀭 i: 􀁾 􀁾􀀱􀁉􀀺􀀺 tbetbild-bigbestpoDUtionl'eading:!r
iori on 􀁅􀁲􀁩􀁶􀁩􀁴􀁯􀁾􀁴􀁡􀁬 􀁑􀁵􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀧􀀬 􀀩􀀺􀁔􀁨􀁥􀁳􀁥􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁢􀁬􀁧􀁨􀁥􀁳􀁴􀀼􀁩􀁺􀁯􀁮􀁥􀁩􀁥􀁡􀁤􀀭􀀢􀀬 .. HER. ST1WSIlAN 􀁾eo..... allll 34ll _ ".. 'silioe··..·',iiionito
· "10 ".,' Suedalevclo' , .DUtioiiWalcIi"."· ·otturreda'diI JatermAr!ing-o'! "..'''m.........''... llH lllJ '" lUll Illi ,1. ,'.,'" ,JlIlll 􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀬 ...􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀧􀀢􀀧􀀧 N-'-"'" .,.E?pOblcb·.
.' . .1Ilg wh . 'I... " . OOed'"T.... ...w fi'" and FOOl SHIll l. '" 3l.llO 1M ,&gq;; I • : 􀀧􀁾􀀮􀁾 • " :'J"i....􀁾 􀁉􀁕􀁾 􀁗􀀢􀁟􀁗􀀻􀁊􀀮􀁾􀁾 "II ',means, 􀁊􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁣􀂻􀀻􀁬􀀬􀀧􀀬 􀁾􀁥􀁮 monitors ret() I Worth-DeU.,
mnlh nabolJllly' 2,J3Z 41' ».37' 21' , '.' '> 􀁁􀁮􀀧􀁡􀁩􀁲􀁱􀁜􀁬􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹􀁩􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁩􀁮􀀧􀀶􀁥􀁮􀀢􀁉􀀴􀀺􀁖􀀱􀁬􀁬􀀬􀀻􀁢􀁥􀁊􀁬􀁩􀁩􀁮􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁷􀁦􀁾􀁮􀁓􀁬􀁴􀁩􀁾􂂬􀀬􀀭􀀬􀁯􀁲􀁯􀁮􀁥􀁬􀀧􀁥􀁶􀁩􀁩􀁲􀀮􀁩􀁩􀁡􀁴􀀱􀀶�
�􀁾􀁉􀁩􀁥􀁲􀁢􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁯􀁄􀀮􀁲􀁩in􀀧 _ .m''';o... liom of!--',101 4IIll UI III ··traJ·DaIIaS--'.......... 􀀱􀀶􀁩􀁰􀁩􀁵􀁴􀁳􀁐􀁥􀀧􀁩􀁦􀀧􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁫􀂢􀁤􀁾􀁴􀁬􀀱􀁥􀁬􀁾􀁢􀀧􀁥􀁴􀁗􀁾􀁉􀁐􀀻􀀬􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁔􀁨􀁥􀁢􀁩
􀁩􀀺􀁢􀁖􀁬􀁄􀁮􀁾􀀱􀁥􀁙􀁥􀁉􀁓􀁊􀁩􀁩􀁌􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁴􀁊􀁥􀀧􀁜 ,.ad d!osc' ""S'".' .uch ," li.:.,... :: III 11I1l III . ,'._-'" weD·;p, ""d'-'I' 'd''''''' . ., 􀁾􀁟􀁾􀀢􀀺􀁦􀁴􀁾 d with'· ",,-'-""
•..:_. I billinn of ozone at 6 pJIL, ; 􀁯􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁾 an purp e -, enotes un-if ....􀀬􀁾􀀧􀀶 to 'hoso '" co..InIo:"on "'I"'P' '" lJ,GI "I 0 .u""'"' ...... ' men' ...onl,"S '0 0 IIUdy --\.
,... ll,I4I "I abave 􀁾 threshold of 126 partS" 􀁨􀁾􀁬􀁴􀁩􀁙􀁥􀁉􀀦􀁴􀁢􀁲􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁲􀁥􀁰􀁬􀀩􀁰􀁵􀁬􀁡􀀭􀀢 hllSrecentlydriftedfromMexico. ,1·.I....l Monday, =' 􀁾 \II '" -III perbilliOnlOqua\ifyasavi
oJalion liOD.' "", ',;" .: ". " ,",,< : :, . ',Saturday's reading coincides Th..,udy by .h. nonp,.r.r Dow LID -I..,,, III ,ofClJ:n!'lllfe<leralstandai-ds., .:':; 􀀴􀁜􀀸􀁣􀀱􀀼􀁯􀁦􀁷􀁩􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁤􀁊􀁩􀁩􀁧�
�􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁡􀁮􀁣 withattemplsby the LegislOtureto , 􀁾􀁉􀀺􀁵􀀭􀀺􀁡􀁴􀀽 􀀺􀁾􀁜􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺 _ 􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾 ", ,,<;',:'Thi8 ';S,; <ErIillD\y IinUsual 􀁦􀁵􀁾􀀬􀂷􀀮 􀁵􀁳􀁕􀁡􀀱􀀧􀁾􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁩􀁉􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁥􀁳
probably con" fwld programs that will help clean,', ...oIyzcd Envi'........ta1 _ ... IlioF '''' 'SI 11,01I '" , 􀀧􀀻􀀧􀁾􀁆􀁏􀁲􀁴􀁗􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁬􀁩􀀢􀀭􀁴􀁯􀁢􀁡􀁖􀁥􀀧􀁡􀀺􀁶􀁩􀁯􀁉􀁡􀀭􀀧 tributed
'to' the 􀁢􀁬􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁬􀀡􀁡􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁾 Mr. c,. the ..,g;on's air:EPAofficials have' 'ion AS"ncy ai. pollution.... WII;_<J__ .......-......... . 􀁾􀀮􀀺􀁬􀁩􀁏􀀮􀁬􀁴􀁢􀁩..􀁳:eany.,..􀀧􀁩􀁮􀁫􀁥􀁳􀁭􀁡􀁮􀀻􀁴􀁨�
�􀁾􀁦􀁵􀀧 saItbe·d. 􀀢􀁾􀀺􀀢􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀮 ThDallahs,li.ig."h, te.'m..n.jJeratureI,nrt.'h'·\warn fu' n􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁥􀁤􀀬􀀬􀁾t?N'estate rth 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀧clout 􀁴􀁨􀀮􀁾􀀺 􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁮􀁯􀁲􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁾􀁉􀀽
'0 II•• um. 1"",1... hishway a.. ,",li.r f"'m .he ,..,.', n"" 􀀮􀀧􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀻 a.spa . r . 􀁕􀁑􀀴􀀬􀁵􀀮􀁊􀀮􀁾􀀱􀁾.•' 1...􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁏􀀮 ... 􀁾􀀬􀁯 ....􀁾 􀁾􀀭􀀸􀁉􀁦 IradI liI::a 􀁾􀀹􀀱􀀰 􀁾
2001. 􀁾 by 2014. .. . . cnussron redlJ;tion prosfllm ."\ 􀂷􀀮􀂷􀂷􀁾.. 􀁄􀀸􀁉􀁉􀁡􀁳􀁏􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁯􀁯􀁯􀁦􀁴􀁢􀁥􀁂􀁮􀁹􀁭􀀾􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁬􀀮 􀁴􀁥􀁭􀁡􀀲􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾􀀺 􀁁􀁩􀁲􀁰􀀺􀀩􀁬􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀮􀁷􀁡􀁳􀀧􀀬􀀹􀀶􀀻􀀬􀁴􀁨􀁥
pl..a:D;·will-fail and the, sanctions "'Controll,IRgemlS310ns rrom 􀁾􀁂􀁜􀁉􀁉􀁨􀀮􀁳􀁭􀁉􀁒􀁉􀁾􀁴􀁮􀁴􀁬􀁯􀁮􀁬􀁳 that.Gov. 􀁾􀀩􀁯􀁾 Perry hu 􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁮􀁁􀁧􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁹.."· 'normalhighforMay31is87,;'
couldbecoDsidered. theso engines would be.a c:,ommdlcd.CO leduc,IRg 􀀬􀁲􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁾 promised CO 'I.n rnlo law. Thai . 􀁾􀀮 -. . . '; " .blgh" " • li.!....􀁾􀁾...... -." 'd"d ..' sbowswh'
'eed· 'rc:rn:md0US mow:: .rorward.!n non from 􀁾􀁥􀁳􀁣􀁬 􀁭􀁧􀁬􀁾 Slid 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁧􀁾􀀡􀀱􀀱 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁬􀁤􀁾 [lronl!! unO .,', Once 􀁾 􀁾􀁾 or, 􀁾 . '. _"It 19 􀁡􀀮􀁾􀁵􀀮􀁊􀀮􀁾􀀱􀀻 an . we
?n'l:. "lbisJust . !wen . to publlo hcallh," !8Jd, P'lrtncla Calhy Milbourn, a' EPA SUbSldlcs to relrolil Uf rcple..:..: smog.wammgwas 􀁾􀁥􀁤􀀬􀀮􀁯􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁣􀁩􀁡􀁬􀁳􀀮 haveabugeamountofconu;nuting.
pass ever·strongel. 3lI' pollution. NOJlwn, 􀁉􀁾 report.s au/Itor, old diescl engines \\ith 􀁮􀁥􀀢􀁾􀁲 .. Wlf:'Ded: that 􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁲􀁹􀁯􀁾􀁥􀀬 especially 􀁂􀁵􀁴􀁴􀁨􀁾􀀧􀁳􀁡􀁬􀁯􀁬􀁯􀁦􀁖􀁥􀁢􀁩􀁣􀁬􀁥􀁳􀁯􀁵
􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁤 􀀱􀁡􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀡􀂷􀁓􀁡􀁩􀁾􀀱􀁢􀁭􀀢􀁓􀁭􀁩􀁴􀁴􀁹􀀢􀁓􀁭􀁩􀁴􀁨􀀬􀁥􀁸􀁣 􀁾􀀮􀁲􀁾􀁮􀀺􀀬􀁾..n8'''' have "Controlling emissions 􀁾􀀮􀀺􀁤􀀢􀀺􀁣􀀺􀀻􀀧􀀺􀁩􀀮􀁩􀀺􀀮 ''''''pm.n, '0 cbi!c!ren;
􀁳􀁨􀁾 limit 􀁯􀁾􀁴􀁤􀁯􀁯􀁲 ex7 􀁾􀁵􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁬 the 􀁾􀁡􀁳􀀭􀁙􀁏􀁲􀁴 W:0rtb ar. eculive.􀁾􀁲 of the Thxas office· FIne _ ond ",Irot. pon;doo ITom these engj nes -Tho, WI' ,he pRSump'ion
ertiOD. OfIicials alsocautioned that ea, Mr. Bary saId. Combllle that ofPublic Citizen. r..m 1 ..􀁢􀁩􀁤􀁾􀀮 ODd off,,?'d would be be..... oil oIons; said o..ss Cook•.• people with respiratorY
diseases with the meteorological conditions """ • ,.,.. ..... risIr. a ,me,IUII,US fonne, EPA rcsional .dmini.· should avoid all outdoor exertion 􀁬􀁩􀁫􀁥􀁃􀁡􀁬􀁭􀁷􀁩􀁮􀁤􀁳􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁨􀁩􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁴􀁥􀁭􀁰􀁥�
�􀁡􀁾 E·;..uU,artzeI@daIIa:m......OllI1l' "Y, os! 􀁾 """ move fOlWilIII m jWlic ''''0' who ",n'he .s....yI". .' . .,.' , , suggClt. thallhe e.mlS&I0!'S may health. 00. ad .: I yeu and
lobbied the l.qUllluR lead. 10 lnCrhSc:s In cardiacand. ro wese an the pIUBRID'S bcWI: -f1 irIS respualo?, 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁢􀁬􀁥􀁭􀁾􀀬 . engines have gotten a always my bclier we had 10 deal
. PoI!lItIon rrom diesel cngmes free ride" wlih on:.roed pollulion. cspc-IS CllllTIIIc:d to C8U5C: I􀁾􀀬􀀧􀀿􀁏􀁏􀀧 ciaUy 􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀧􀁏􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀮 in ordcr 10 deaths 􀁡􀁮􀁮􀁵􀁡􀁾􀁬􀁹
and 􀁾 mIllion -􀁐􀁡􀁢􀁩􀁣􀁬􀁡􀁾 mect rcderal health 􀁳􀀱􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁡􀁲􀁤􀁾 cases of resplrstory allmenls a ..u.or Q qu1 ir air tpliry." rear and. has been linked 10 Raleigh ROus.eu. prcsilJcnl
Increases 􀁾􀁮 􀁣􀁡􀁮􀀮􀁥􀁥􀁾 and ilStluua. ,pohnromln in WnhinglOb. orthc AllIOCi,ted General Con-EPA offlelaJ, said In 20Cl0. TIMI., Thc EPA 􀁣􀁳􀁾􀁭􀁡􀀮􀁬􀁣􀁳 lhat by Ifllclors chapler
in North 􀁾 year. lhe 􀁡􀁧􀁾􀁮􀁣􀁹 adopted rules 􀁟􀁏􀁾􀁏􀀮 the: rcducllon In off·road which rcprcs.cnls many I:(lmpa' rOf cleaner 􀁾􀁉􀁥􀁳􀁣􀁬 rllel and INCk diesel pollulion will 􀁰􀁾􀁶􀁣􀁮􀁬
nics IIlat operale ofT.rMd ap.M .nd bus englDeS. .. morc lhon 9.600 premalure meat, said the nc:w 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁧􀁮􀁬􀁾 . Those rule., Cllt 􀁥􀁾􀁬􀁳􀁳􀁬􀁯􀁮􀀬 􀁾 Milbourn IIIid. will allow
for "si nifllo:anl hom ne\V dlcsel engUlcs br' Hou,lOn rsnkcd fhird in off. . I .. . g b' more,lhan 90 percenl, begin-fOld diod 􀁾 bdind 􀁾 􀁾􀀺􀁩􀁾􀀺􀁩􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁭􀁥􀁮 􀁾 In Io:ur mg
􀁾 UI m,. -;ad 􀁾 the Id· York and Los Angeles. North "'Ibi, will provide Ihe ability 􀁬􀁗􀀢􀁃􀀧􀁏􀁉􀁬􀁾􀁯􀁬 diesel rlld. Tex.s hGd WOrse pollulion Itllm • In April. 􀁾􀁐􀁁 issued a
.pro-urban eenlCD :luch IS l>Clroil. 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁲􀀺􀁩 oj lhl.: poilu+ptJNllo lCqlllre olT-road dlescl Ckvdnt Sc:aIdc ..t ..u.c. equipmenl 10 reduce pollution Texu will gl:l.!Jome immNj.
􀁾􀁾 J!-mail 􀁲􀁬􀁯􀁦􀁴􀁩􀁳􀁀􀁤􀁡􀁊􀁬􀁡􀁳􀁮􀁥􀁶􀁮􀀮􀁣􀁯􀁾 CbriIllIe Wbitmaa Whitman troubled by , .possibility of early . 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁰􀁾􀁩􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁥 deadlines By RANDYLEE LOFTIS, EDviromneatal
Writer Outi;oing Environmental Pr0tection Agency Administrator Christie Whitman, making her last sclIeduled visit to Dallas as the EPA' obiet; said Wednesday that she leaves the agencystronger
imd better able to keep the environment and the economyhealthy. .The formet New Jersey governor told reporters at the agency's regional headquarters'in downtown Dallas thatshe and President
BUsh agreed'on thenalion's environmentalgoaIS, despite reports of conflicts between Ms. Whitman and White House officials over. clean air and otherissues. . . "There's only one pen;on
in the White House that I care about, and 􀁴􀁨􀁡􀁾􀁳 the president,· she said. "We were always on the same page.' Ms. Whitman, the first EPA head under Mr. Bush, announced last week
that she would leave the EPA on June 27 to return to her home state and spend lime with her family. Mr. Bush has not narned a successor. Shesaid progress in Thxas' fight against urban
smog depends on funding by the Legislature, where a bill to pay for state clean air programs was pending Wednesday before a House-Senate conference EPA chiefmakes 􀁬􀁾􀁧􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁡􀁬 visit
. conunittee. ../She said fed'eralclean air'effOrtil would not work by themselves. " "You don't solve these problems if You' don't see a c:pmrRitment at 'the . . state and local level;
Ms. Whitman said. "I1iat's whatwe'reseeinghere.· She said she was troubled by federal appeals court rUlings that could,forcethe Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston areas to niilet clean air
standards by 2005 inste8d. of 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁣􀁵􀁲􀁲􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀲􀀰􀀰􀀷date. No one bas sued to furce the earlier deadlines for those areas, and Ms. Whitman said the EPA doesn't anlicijlitte having
to obange the compliance dates. " . TheEPAhas given some urban areaS, including Dallas-Fort Worth, two extra years to comply with federal clean-air standards becaiJs;e "some'of t1ieir
pOIlution 'drifts in from other areas. Howe\''er, three federal appeals courts have ruled that the EPA had no legal authority to grant the extra lime. Ms. Whitman was in Dallas to address
aseminaron environmental researob grants. On Thesday, she 'l1so spoke at a 'ceremony in Dallas honoring EPA employees who helped recover debris from the spaceshuttle Columbia. 􀁾'-:)
DRAFT MTP/Conformity Timeline Mobility 2025 (New Demographics) i-Hour Conformity Std. MOBILES Mobility 2025 a-Hour Conformity Std. MOBILE6 Mobility 2030 a-Hour Conformity Std. MOBILE6
*Indicates Dates When Conformity Determination is Expected by FHWA Updated: 7/02/03 DRAFT 2025 MTP/Conformity Timeline gO-Day MTP Public Involvement Process ;JJ m'11 m;JJ mZ('l m RTC
Partnership Program #1 Complete MTP Public Meetings 30-Day AQ Public Involvement Process STTC MTP/AQ ACTION GO-Day AQ Conformity Review Process Conformity EPA Determination 8-Hour Decision
RTC Partnership Program Public Meetings RTC Partnership Program Public Meetings RTC Partnership Program #2&.3 Complete MTP/AQ Public Meetings RTC MTP/AQ ACTION And AQ Conformity Submittal
EPA SIP Withdrawal Effective Date Updated: 6/26/03
............................................................................•......................... Counties Administering Emissions Testing and Assistance Program: Collin Kaufman
Dallas Parker Denton Rockwall Ellis Tarrant Johnson Statistics: October 28, 2002 -June 30, 2003 89 Recognized Emissions Repair Facilities (RERFs) participating 6580+ calls received at
toll-free hotline 2897 applicants 2029 vehicles diagnosed/repaired successfully 67 vehicles have been retired and replaced Average repair cost paid by AirCheck Texas is $419 Total average
repair cost is $483 (participant cost + AirCheck Texas cost) -I m;;: 'm" "Tl m'm" z() m AirCheck Texas Update Repah ilnd Repl,lcemenl Assistance PIOg.,llll .. .". A*lrChec.kTexas. March
Ilpnl May June Month February AirCheck Texas Update Nowmber December January Reptlh and Rel)I,lCell1ent Asslst.luce Plogram ....... A"l*rChecI.<rexas_ 50 300 350 400 -,---------------_
100 Number 01 VehIcles DIagnosed and Repaired November 2002 • June 2003 o 􀀫􀀭􀁬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 •.••••....•..........••...••......•..........•......
..•...•...••...••..•••...•..••.•..•....•...•...•.. J 250 j/.I: 􀁾'0 200 .8E i 150
􀁾 ,:,'::::\ --:;!:='--'!' "It uses a combination of a gasoline-powered 9ijuine and an electric battery,' explained Robin Holder, the Support and Acquisition Coo'i.#inator of the city's
Fleet Services. 􀁾􀀧 "It might look unusual, but it's great for the environment ana it has very efficient gas mileage." "People laugh when they see it," said Robin. 'But.when they get
out in it, they're impressed by its get-up-and-go. People seem to 􀁬􀁩􀁫􀁥􀁾􀁓􀁌􀁊􀁮􀁩􀁱􀁵􀁥􀁮􀁥􀁳􀁳􀀮 It's so odd, it's fun. But you know -more and more people are requesting it. It's
almost alwaYs leased out to city employees." 􀁦􀁦􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁀􀂥􀁲􀁃􀁏􀁬􀁮 t·800·926·0234 wVlw.hgacbuy.com We are celebrating 30 years of experience in helping 1.300 local governments,
government agencies. districts and authorities With thelf capilal product procurement needs. We write the specs. solicit. evaluate and award competitively bid contracts, and process
your orders. WE ARE A GOVERNMENT·TO-GOVERNMENT PURCHASING PROGRAM AVAIu\BlE NATIONWIDE CONTRACTS IN: »( ( Fire ApparatushTractor & MOViers '" Earth Moving Equipment :" Sewer Cleaners
;:' Refuse Collection Bodies:<>: School & Transit Buses .'>. Remotely Operated Robots II lease Purchase Financing :.:; Chemical, Biological & Radiological Detechon Equipment :<, Emergency
EquipmenthHazmat &SWAT Applications ;:>: Motor Vehicles h Communications Equipment :'/and many more maior capital products 􀁾􀀢....'.)'" rn H-GAC DO THE BIDDING AND""lAVE YOU MONEY!
Fuel cell technology is very qUickly coming to the fore-front in the automotive industry and I am sure that the City of Lubbock will be using this type of vehicle in the near future.
Iy happy with it," she said with a smile. "1<\ very comfort· able, it's very quier and it's very roomy. r low: ito" There are a handful of othtr hybrid cars in rown. bu, Robin says th,,,
she ,rill carcbes people staring ar tbe car when she's in it: "People in taller cars will nolice the UIl\lSU· al display in the dashboard and will be curious about it. You can jWl see
them making comments abouf ic to each other. It's neat." In the meantime, keep an eye our for the hybrid. JUSt use your ears -it's the quietesr one on the road.* and I wanted something
more efficient than !haL" Her mileage says that she has gone 428 miles on one tank of gas (which holds 11.8 gallons). "I've gone up ro 500 miles on one tank befOre," she related proudly.
Inside the car, it's remarkably roomy for a compact car. There are twO electronic displays prominent in the dashboard. The one in the middle is the usual speedomerer and other information.
The other is more unusual and shows an "energy monitor" which shows from which energy souroe the car is pulling its power -either the electric battrty or the gas engine. The car searnlessly
switches from one to the other with no noticeable change in performance. depending on what conditions 􀁩􀁾􀁳 being asked to perform under and how much energy is available in each source.
"It automatically switches from one energy source to the other on its own,· explained Robin. "There's no no plugging it in or anything like that. 1\$ it works, the excess power from
the motor gets sent to the battery. It uses the friction from the braking to send power to the battery. It uses all the power it can find and saves what it can." Por example, if you're
sitting at a stOp light, the car will slap completely. "It takes getting use<! to," Robin said. "but it's only because it's changing from one source [0 the other. If you're on the highway,
you don't notice the change al all." And in faer, the car is quite peppy when you drive it. "People think it's going to be a pokey little car, but it's really not," she said. lames Oswalt,
the city marshall with the municipal coun, is one ofthe employees who has used the vehicle himself. "II'S a pretty good car," he said with conviaion. "The way it handles, the way it
performs -I've been teally 􀁩􀁭􀁰􀁾 with iL I was concerned about the possible lack of power when enteting the Loop for example, but it was fine. I had no problems and I was actually
impressed with it." The car has also been tested on trips out of town, A number of departments throughout the city organization have wed it to go on 􀁯􀁵􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁦􀂷􀁛􀁯􀁷􀁮 trips to Abilene,
Midland. and some other Texas cities, and Robin and her family have use<! her own personal hybrid vehicle to lake the family down to the Austin area. "I am extreme-I􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀧􀀮􀀧􀀮􀀧
l'1; 􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀀮􀁩􀁬􀁩􀀮􀀧􀀮􀀢 􀀬􀁩􀁾􀀬 .' in shape perhaps, but different. It's a hybrid car, the the wave of the future. .-i':.: "Puel cell technology is very quickly coming to the fOrefront
in the automotive indUStry and I am sure that the City of Lubbock will be using this l}'PO of vehicle in the near future: he added. According to Robin, the City of Lubbock put out for
bids for a hybrid car, and the only bids that came were from Toyota dealerships in the Houston area. "We would have been 6ne with any brand ofhybrid car really. No one in the city seemed
to mind the idea of using one in the fleet, so we JUSt went ahead and got one." One of the best charaereristics of the hybrid car is the gas mileage it gelS. "I'm getting 44 miles per
gallon on my own personal hybrid cat, and that's in town," Robin explained. "I used to have a big truck which only got 17 miles per gallon, The hybrid car, a Toyota Prius, was added
to the fleet of city cars in May 2002. It came as the tesult ofefforts by Randy Ervin, then-Pleet Services Manager, and Martha Ellerbrook, then-Director of Management Services, who were
bOlh interested in finding new ways to save on the city gas coSts. "We decided to put it in our fleet service pool so that we could have many drivers report back to us about the pro's
and con's of the automobile: said Randy. "We knew [hat not all departments could use a car like this, but we understand that other models are being developed, like compact piclwps and
vans. We have been evaluating the car since mat rime to determine whether or not it is something that the city can use." It looks like an ordinary white compact car. A basically the
same. However, under its hood is somethi only one of its kind in the city's fleet of cars, and it mig How's the
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 08-01-03 AGENDA ITEM VIII AGENCY REPORTS
DALLAS REGIONAL MOBILITY COALITION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 08-01-03 FYI
ETE SESSIONS "'0 OI$lflICT. Tf-IlAS :>MMITIEE ON RULES ELECT COMMITTEE ON OMELANO SECURITY OMMITTEEON INANCIAL SERVICES IN LEAVE) ESULTS CAUCUS HAIRMAN May 2, 2003 􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁧􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁾 of
tbe Wntteb 􀁾􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁾 􀀱􀀡􀀱􀁯􀁾􀁴 of 􀁬􀁜􀁴􀁰􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁮􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁩􀁢􀁴􀁊 o 1318 LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILOING WASI1INGTON, DC 20515-4332 TELEPHONE: 202.225.2231 FAX: 202.225.5878 DISTRICT
OFFiCE: o PARK CENTRAL VII 12750 MERIT DAlVE SUITE 1434 DALLAS. TEXAS 15ZS1 lEL£PHONE: ¥11.J92.0505 FAX: an.392.0615 . 􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁍􀁉 taking cars off the road will help in reducing
pollution and improve the overall air quality in the area. Thank you for your continued support of this project, and remaining committed to its principles. As you know, without local
and community support, this project would not be possible. If you seek additional assistance or questions with this appropriations request, please contact Tucker Anderson in my Washington
office at 202.225,2231 Thank you for writing, and best wishes to you. Judge Ron Harris Co-Chair Judge Margaret Keliher, Co-Chair DaUas RegIOnal Mobility Coalition 7522 Campbell Road,
Suite 113-205 Dallas, Texas 75248-1702 Dear Judges H..a.rr.i.s.and K-eliher: Thank you for writing to me regarding Dallas Area Rapid Transit's (DARn request for $700 million in federally
authorized funding for the Northwest/Southeast light rail extension. I care greatly about this important project's overall impact on the region, and this year as your Representative
I am continuing my commitment to its success. I am a firm believer that the Northwest/Southeast light rail extension will play a vital role in providing future mobility to the greater
North Texas region. Last month, I submitted an authorization request to House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young (R-A1aska) for $700 million in authorized
federal funding to complete this project. As you know, this year's authorization request for DART's light rail extension is almost double the amount I asked for last time. I am counting
on DART's proven reliability and stewardship of the public's money to provide the necessary foundation for Chairman Young's fulfillment of the request. In any event, I can assure you
DART's Northwest/Southeast extension will be a transportation priority of mine until its completion. DART's member cities have been patiently waiting for this new phase of construction
and passenger service to begin. I fully support their efforts to make this dynamic and modern transportation project a reality, and share their eager anticipation. Imermodalism will
be a central feature of the extension, and I expect that economic expansion will follow the project's completion. The existing DART light rail system has been a tremendous success, and
it must be expanded to ensure this success continues. Light rail expansion deeper into the suburbs and to Dallas/F011 Worth International Airport will serve to reduce congestion on the
main highways into the city and provide swift, dependable rail service for passengers to and from their jobs. Additionally, 􀁾 􀁾􀀺􀀧 'J"'--Pete Sessions Member ofCongress PS/sc
MICHAEL C. BURGESS. M.D. 28TH DI&llUCT, T£x.tJJ 􀁾􀁾􀀧 1721 lONGWOAm HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON, DC 20516 12021 225-m2 􀀽􀁾 1660 SOUTH Sll.MMONS STREET SUm: 230 lEwISVILLE. TX
75067 19721434-9700 􀁃􀁬􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁧􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁾 of tbe l1niteb 􀁾􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁾 􀁾􀁯􀁕􀀵􀁴 of 􀁬􀁜􀁴􀁰􀁴􀂣􀁓􀂣􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁢􀁾 Uublngton. :iD(: 20515-4326 July 9, 2003 COMMmeES; TFlANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE """""""''''' )OiJOHWAYS, TRANSIT. AND PIPEUNES ECOHOMtC DEVELOPMENT, PuBUC BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY MANAoEME'NT SCIENCE """""""""" SPACE AHD AERONAUTICS ENVIRONMENT. TECHNOLOGY,
AND STANDARDS MICHAEL C. BURGESS. M.D. 28TH DI&"UCT, r4iXA$ 􀁾􀁾 1721 lONGWOATIi HouSE: OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON, DC 20515 (202) 22s-n72 =CfEJl:£' 1660 SoUTIi STEMMONS STREET SUITE
230 lEwISVILLE, TX 75067 (972) 434-9700 􀀨􀀻􀁯􀁮􀁧􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁾 of tbe l1niteb 􀁾􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁾 􀁾􀁏􀁕􀀵􀁴 of 􀁬􀁜􀁴􀁰􀁴􀁴􀁊􀁭􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁢􀁾 Dasblngton.1D(: 20515-4326 July 9, 2003 COMMITTEES:
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUElC(lUt.IfTTUS; HIGHWAYS, TRANSIT, AND PIPELINES ECONOMIC OEvELOflMENT. PUBLIC BUILDINOS. AND EMEROENCY MANAGEMENT SCIENCE SUElCOMt.llnEES: SPACE
AND AERONAUTICS ENVlAONliIENT, TECHNOLOGY. AND STANDARDS The Honorable Ron Harris Co-Chair Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition 7522 Campbell Road, Suite 113-205 Dallas, Texas 75248-1702
HOUSE REPUBLICAN POLICY COMMITTEE The Honorable Margaret Keliher Co-Chair Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition 7522 Campbell Road, Suite 113-205 Dallas, Texas 75248-1702 HOUSE REPUBLICAN
POLICY COMMITTEE Dear Judge Harris, Thank you for expressing your support for the Transit Rail New Start Project sponsored by Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART). I appreciate hearing from
you on this important matter. The increase in traffic and congestion over the past three decades is a result of unprecedented population and employment growth experienced in the Dallas-Fort
Worth Metroplex. With ever-increasing demands on our transportation system for both local mobility and international trade transportation improvements, it is essential that North Texas'
voice be heard in Washington, D.C., this year as the Congress considers the future ofour nation's surface transportation systems. As a member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee, the reauthorization of federal surface transportation programs is the top priority for my legislative agenda in the 108th Congress. I intend to fully address our region's
growing transportation needs by exploring all opportunities to provide increased funding for those needs. To address these transportation infrastructure improvements, 1support the S700
million for a Transit Rail New Start Project sponsored by DART known as the 22·Mile NWISE MOS, Pleasant Grove to Farmers Branch. The authorization request constitutes 47 percent ofthe
total project cost ofthis SI.5 billion. DART currently operates a highly successful 44-mile light rail system. This request is a segment of the next 35 miles of light rail, which will
connect Carrollton and Fanners Branch, Irving, South Dallas and Pleasant Grove. The total estimated cost ofthe overall 35-mile project is S2.5 billion (including SI.8 billion of local
investment), and it is included in Texas' State Transportation Improvement Program. To express my support for the DART New Start Project, I signed the high priority project request letters
to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on March 14, 2003. As the Committee moves forward with the surface transportation reauthorization bill this year, it is essential
that we work together to ensure the federal investment in the DART New Start Project as well as the entire state's aging transportation infrastructure. Again, thank you for taking the
time to contact me. I appreciate having the opportunity to represent you in the U.S. House of Representatives. Please feel free to visit my website (www.house.gov/burgessl or contact
me with any future concerns. Dear Judge Keliher, Thank you for expressing your support for the Transit Rail New Start Project sponsored by Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART). I appreciate
hearing from you on this important matter. The increase in traffic and congestion over the past three decades is a result of unprecedented population and employment growth experienced
in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex. With ever-increasing demands on our transportation system for both local mobility and international trade transportation improvements, it is essential
that North Texas' voice be heard in Washington, 􀁄􀀮􀁃􀁾 this year as the Congress considers the future of our nation's surface transportation systems. As a member of the House Transportation
and Infrastructure Committee, the reauthorization of federal surface transportation programs is the top priority for my legislative agenda in the 108th Congress. 1intend to fully address
our region's growing transportation needs by exploring all opportunities to provide increased funding for those needs. To address these transportation infrastructure improvements,l support
the S700 million for a Transit Rail New Start Project sponsored by DART known as the 22-Mile NW/SE MOS, Pleasant Grove to Farmers Branch. The authorization request constitutes 47 percent
of the total project cost of this SI.5 billion. DART currently operates a highly successful 44-mile light rail system. This request is a segment of the next 35 miles of light rail, which
will connect Carrollton and Farmers Branch, Irving, South Dallas and Pleasant Grove. The total estimated cost of the overall 35-mile project is S2.5 billion (including SI.8 billion of
local investment), and it is included in Texas' State Transportation Improvement Program. To express my support for the DART New Start Project, I signed the high priority project request
letters to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on March 14,2003. As the Committee moves forward with the surface transportation reauthorization bill this year, it is
essential that we work together to ensure the federal investment in the DART New Start Project as well as the entire state's aging transportation infrastructure. Again, thank you for
taking the the time to contact me. I appreciate having the opportunity to represent you in the U.S. House ofRepresentatives. Please feel free to visit my website (www.house.gov/burgess)
or contact me with any future concerns. MB/rr MB/rr 􀁾
Awards honor Richardson's pr'omotion of DART, mayor's leadership 06111J1003 By SARAHPOST/'1110 nllllAJ Morllllli Ncwa Tho oity ofRlehardson and its mayor received accolades at the North
Ccntta1 Texas Council of GovemJDCllls' annual meeting. The council gavc Ricbardson lis Celebrating Leadership In Development &cellenco Award in recognition of thc city's aUempls to raise
public awareness about Dallas Area Rapid Transit, illllight-rail stations and the benefits oftransit-oricnted development Thc city publisbed a series in its monthly newsletter RJcluudson
Today from December 2001 to 1uly 2002 explaining the concept ot'transll-oricnted development and the opening ofDART light-rail facilities in the area. Richardson Mayor OaT)' Slagel then
received the William 1. Pitstick Concept ofRcglonalism Award, Named for a26-ycar oxecutiw <llrcctor ofthe council. the award Is given to city officials wbo promote coordination and cooperation
among cities to solve regional issues, "Gary Is a team player as we develop transportation improvement programs in Collin County," said Collin County 1udge Ron Harris during the annual
meeting Friday. He was one oCtbe five people who nominated tho mayor for the award. "He has the ability to promoto Richardson interests wbilo understanding \he broad goals oftransportatlon
in our region." Mr. Slagel has bean sucee.o:sful in uniting various public and privBlO inlerests in the 20 years he has dedicated to public service -12 as Richardson mayor. Mr. Slagel
bas worked directly wltb the council for seven years. Ho has been Its president and a mombcr ofils Regional Transportation Council and executive board. Gary Thomll.q, DART's president
and executive director, also nominated Mr. Slagel. Mr. Thomas commended the mayor for bis role, while on the Dallas Regional Mobilily Commission, in obtaining federal funds for tho extension
ofDART light rail beyond Dallas. "Gary is an avid proponent ofregional transportation and other regionalism efforts," Mr. Thomas said. 􀀢􀁈􀁾 often works with 10cailegisiatoIS to encourage
lheir support ofissucs affecting the North Texas region." Mr. Slagel said he was sU'l'rised, honored and humbled to receive the award. "A lot ofpeople probably deserve it before I do,"
he said. "There are a lot ofpeople in the region who've bccn working hard. I work with a goodteam: the council, city staffand a bunch ofregionnl players." Mr. Slagel is the third Richardson leader to receive the Concept ofRegionalism Award since it was created in 1993. Former
Richardson City 􀁍􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁧􀁥􀁲 Bob Huey received the award in 1995, lind Ray Noah, a former Richardson mayor and current municipal eourtjudge, was the 1998 recipient, 􀁾'\ 􀁓􀁴􀁡􀁲􀁾􀁭􀀡􀀡􀀡
Posted on Fri, May. 23, 2003 Motion sensors let planners track motorists' behavior By GonIon Oidcson S.....􀁔􀁾􀁭􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁦􀁦􀁗􀁲􀁩􀁟 ARLINGTON -Embedded In the pavement of some major
Metroplex freeways are small motion sensors that help tralllc experts keep track of congestion. The motion sensors send signals back to a computer at the Texas Department of Transportation's
TransVislon center in southwest Fort Worth. There, experts review the data and In an Instant, determine whldl roads are moving at normal speed, and whldl aren't. The North central Texas
Coondl of Governments has not been able to capture the data and store It ror long-term use, but that will soon dlange. On Thursday, the coundl's executive board agreed to purchase 1,000
gigabytes of computer storage space, whldl will allow the coundl to obtain more Inrormatlon. ·We want to collect tramc control data to understand freeway behavior,· said Mldlael Morris,
the coundl's transportation director. The board, which represents 16 counties, has already spent $224,000 to upgrade the sensor program and will spend an additional $88,000 ror the comput!!C
memory. Trame offldals said the system should be capable of storing a year's worth of data, and possibly three years, which would allow them to conduct long-term studies about how motOl1sts
behave on spedllc roads at spedllc times. In other news, the coundl of governments: • Agreed to Indude small portions of Wise and Parker counties In the rederally dellned urban area.
The urban area Is used by the federal government to calculate how much federal money the area should receive. The new portions added to the Metroplex's urban area map Indude: 5.3 square
miles with 3,680 residents in Parker County, an area west of Azle and south of Reno; and 0.5 square mile With 284 residents In Wise County, an area along the western shore of Eagle Mountain
Lake, across from Newark. • Hired the consulting llrm of Hallf Associates to perform a hazard mitigation action plan. The Federal Emergency Management Agency expects local governments
to have a hazard plan In place to help determine how much funding Is needed when a disaster Is over. ONUNE: North centJ711 Texas CDundl ofGovernments: www.dfwlnfo.rom Gordon Dickson,
(817) 685-3816 gd/ckson@star-telegram.rom
Researcbtargets • treewaYCOngestion Advance warning systems considered W􀁾-,·-'t.·>-·.• t.-;.·􀁾 􀀺􀀧􀁾 '. .: •.",:' -.J GinUl:r GooLiIn n,I?)4J;/.I"'''f, 􀀹􀂷􀁉􀁊􀁴􀀬􀀧􀀬􀁲􀁨􀀢􀁾􀀧􀁬􀀺􀁉􀀢􀀧􀀢
....1;, Beverly Kuhn (tj791862<15!ifl b-kl,hnll':'l"mu.C'chJ 􀁐􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁳􀁩􀁮􀁧Icgislarion to cnsure 􀁉􀁃􀁾􀀻􀁬􀁬 aUlhority 10 de,·c1op projecrs. 􀁓􀁾􀁜􀁊􀁬􀀱􀁬􀀧 of the rl'sults Ilf IhI.'
􀁉􀁱􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁬􀀻􀁬􀁴􀁩􀁜􀀢􀁥 rl.'Sl';Hch (Sec TTl Resl'arch 􀁒􀁾􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁬 􀀧􀁬􀁉􀁨􀁬􀁬􀀭􀁾􀁩 ;m:' \:urrl'l1llr hl;,'ing implemcnled in \'i1rious forms in thl' 101l.\ Icgishllive session
illlcXilS In 􀁣􀁮􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁬􀀧 thm Txl)OT has th\.' illlthurily 10 implcllll'nt ,lll)' 􀁰􀁬􀁬􀁫􀁮􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁜􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁬􀁧􀁬􀀧􀁊!;lIIl' 􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁧􀁹􀀮 Educating to gain support from
the public and policy makers. TxDOT i!' using lhl' l'dU(.lIiol1 hrochllrl's dncloped for the nll'l!iil .\Ill! polic.:ym;'lkl'rs to ('om1ll1lnic.:cHc the 􀁯􀁢􀁪􀁥􀀧􀁬􀁩􀁜􀀧􀁣􀁾 ollll!
ildvilnl.lgCS of mun.lged 1;,1I1l'S (Sec TTl Rcsc;,lfch Ikpnrls 􀀧􀁾􀁬􀁦􀁬􀁏􀂷􀀷􀀮 416n·:;:;·pl. i1nd 4161l-6-1'2). Funding and financing to overcome barriers to implementation. New
􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾 oplitlns for Txl)OT ;HC hl'illg considcrl'd in Ilw .... urrl.·nl Il'gishlliw Sl'ssitlll inTex;;ls(SceTTIH.l·"cilrc.:h Rl.·pllrl tlllt!.')!. .. I !l\. 􀁲􀁬􀂷􀀢􀁾􀂷􀀮􀁉􀁉􀁾
h Il·"11 h" II I '11; ,b," I';' 'I", I h.l\ \ ,"Il',' .'1 I ILl· I'l" k, I 1illl\·," ·..1\··.1 .,:1, I, I ":",, 1-,,/,'1 II 1,-.1111, \ 1:, l'ldlltlll" \11\ j"illll dIll" "'1 .llld i·'"''
l r ,hI," I"l . 1111"'1 􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀢􀁨 11III'1l'lIWlIl.111111r ..·.:ii ;'"'' i"ll:' ..... 1\ [,".".1',[, !l\,I" I IIi.: "' '. II( )"1' 1'\.llL .111.1 d,-;;'.11 "',I 􀁾 ..I·:" 􀁾 1.,11\'"
r., ·.,'1 \ \' ; Itt' 111 ..1,.1111,.1 k:\,IIl·.illllr,·llIlllI' Managed lanes prOVide Iravelers Wllh more chOICes 1han dll\llng alone on " congested freeway. Rising construe cosls,
land consumption, neighhorhood impact and environmental 􀁩􀁓􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁬􀀧􀁾 are aU factors that must be conside"'d when examining transportation alternatives, particularly on our freewily
systems. There is a growing realiZiItion that simply adding more general-purpose lanes to freeways is not always the answer to increasing mobility and travel efficiency. A viable and
increasingly popular method for meeting wban mobility needs is the concepl of"managedO lanes. Managed lanes maintain free-flow travel speeds on the designated lanes by aUowing only eligible
user group' on those lanes through management strategies such as setting ""hicle-occupancy levels, pricing and vehicle types. These eligible user groups can vary by time ofday or other
factors, depending on available capacity of the facility, as well as the mobility needs of the community. Some regional transportation agencies have made a public policy decision to
proceed with multiple managed lanes projects. and managed lanes are options in major investment studies underway in Texas and across the country. Because Ihe managed lanes concept is
so new. and the experience base is so small, the Texas Deparlment of Transportation (TxDOT) began a major research project in September 2000 to examine planning. designing and operating
successful managed lanes. As the project nears the end of its third year, Texas Transportation Inslitute (TTl) researchers have already completed a number of tasks providing directiollltl
1111· Department and others interested in managed 􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁮􀁣􀁾􀀮 "'There are so many things to consider at illl 􀁓􀁬􀀺􀁬􀁾􀁬􀀧􀀢 of a managed lanes project, but gelling started ""I I,,·
particularly challengingl " says Beverly Kuhn. Olll' of IIH· TIl research supervisors of the effort. "With so 1ll.IIIY agencies and stakeholders involved. and with all nf 111.· ideas
and strategies that are possible, the 􀁧􀁲􀁯􀁌􀁬􀁉􀀱􀁾􀁨􀁜􀁬􀁉􀁲􀁾 has to be in place before a successful project can 􀁨􀁬􀀧􀁃􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀧 a reality." ITI research results in three
areas key to 􀁬􀁡􀁹􀁩􀁬􀀱􀁾 111:11 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁗􀁍􀁍􀁑􀁯􀁉􀁾􀁾 groundwork are now being implemented: ProIMtCJ.4413.! 1-;;;';;;;"'" ",...􀁾􀀻􀀭􀀭 PoonamWlI.. (817) 482·0524
p·wlleaOtamu.edu expect backups and still be surprised," Wiles says. "And our study of the DFW freeways confirms that in some cases, the queue would grow so . fast that drivers could
have a hard time reacting to it.0 Finding an effective and feasible early warning system for these areas is expected to increase the safety of those who must drive these routes every
day. PRvious research has concluded that with one second of additional warning time. about 90 percent of rear-end crashes could be avoided. And with half a second more warning time.
60 percent could be avoided. The research team has evaluated a number ofearly warning devices, such as detectors, signs and message boards. found across the U.S. and as far away as Europe
and New Zealand. They are now testing two of these devices on metroplex freeways. One of the devices being tested is shown in the cenler page illustration. Researchers will eventually
make n final implementation recommendation based on results of the testing. "We need to know how far in advance drivers should be warned of stopped or slow traffic," says Jay Nelson,
T,DOT's Dallas District Engineer. "Il serves not only Ihe safety purpose of giving people warning Ihilt thc,,"s gning to be slow or stopped traffic, but it also helps relieve congestion
when people are informed of iI closure f'Ir enough ahead that they can take a valid alternate ruutc." nT. lesling nf the warning devices in the Dallas-fort Worth 'lrca will conclude
this fall. The results should be puhlished in 2004. III You're on your way to work. The 􀁭􀁏􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧(2. commute seems prelly routine. Then. you 􀁾 suddenly notice it unexpected traffic
. congestion. Your . . ... first response-slow down as fast as . possible to avoid hilling vehicles in front of you, or move into an adjacent lane of traffic. Then. you look in your
rearview mirror, hoping no one slams into your vehicle. In addition to being a major safety issue. unexpected slow or stopped traffic is a costly and irritating problem on freeways in
metropolitan ar-'''''".,.. cas of Texas. "I'm used to urban traffic. and 􀁾 􀁾 I'm still frequently surprised by lines of stopped 􀁾􀀬 or slow freeway traffic," says Poonam Wiles, a
research engineer with the Texas Transportation Institute (TTl) "We have observed these queues growing very rapidlyover 800 feet in just 10 seconds." Wiles and co-researchers Scoll Cooner,
Carol Wallers and Ed Pultorak. are working on a research project sponsored by the Texas Department of Transportiltion (TxDOT) to find devices and techniques that ciln wilrn drivers rapidly
approaching stopped traffic. "This research is a great example of how Wl' listen and respond to the driving public," says Jay Nelson. TxDOT's Dallas District Engineer. "It was suggesled
by people stopped in traffic." Specifically, the project is looking i1t cOllgesl ion caused by not only freeway incidents, but i115<) recurrent congestion at freeway exit ramps and connl'ctors.
as well as al work zones. About 50 locations exist in the I).tlli\$fort Worth (DFW) Metroplex where the averilge speed of the morning drive suddenly dips below 30 miles per hour on freeways.
About 40 locations slow down signifieilntly during the evening commute. Many motorists h.lVe come to expect delays at specific locations. "But even if you are aware of the trouble spots,
the nature of congestion 􀁾 fluctuates so much. you might not know exaclly where to
July 8, 2003 Completion of Major Conelruction Project The Honorable Jerry Madden Texas State Representiative District 67 620 E. Central Parkway, # 236 Plano, Texas 75074 Dear Representative
Madden: In accordance with Section 201.608, Transportation Code, V,T.CA, the followIng Information pertaining to a major road project located In the district you represent Is provided:
Highway: FM 982 limits: From CR 400 S of US 380 In Princeton To CR 451 N of FM 3354 in Culleoka Type of ConstrUction: Widen, Recondition &Resurface Conlract Amount $1,795.426.27 Completion
Oala: July 2, 2003 Should you desire more informatIon concerning this project, please feel free to contact me at the address or phone number shown above. We appreciate your continued
interest In the lranGportation $¥:tem of Texas. 0367-05-012 MAO Note: HD·67 80-8 Dear Representative Denny: In accordance with Section 201.608, Transportation Code, V.T.CA, the following
information pertaining to a major road project located In the dlGtrlct you represent Is provided: HIghway; fM 407 limits: From IH 3&N To FM 1830 Type of Construction: Rehabilitate roadway,
Contract Amount: $3,359,238.17 􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁌􀀮 􀁾􀀧􀀭􀁾􀁾 ,-Texas Department of Transportation P.O, 80'1133087. Dallas, TX 75313-3087 l:nmolalion Data: ADr1I14. 2003 June 12.2003 April
24, 2003 Completion of Major Construction Project The Honorable Mary Denny Te)(l\$ Slate Representative Oistrlct63 1001 Cross Timbers Rd•• Suite 1245 Denton, Texas 75028 CompleUon of
Major ConslrucUon Project The Honorable Tony Goolsby Texas State Representative Dislrlct 102 9696 Skillman St., Suite 210 Dallas, Texas 75243-8254 Dear Representative Goolsby: In accordance
with Section 201.608, Transportation Code. V.T.C.A., the follOWing information pertaining to a major road project located In the district you represent Is provided: Highway: IH 635 limits:
From Kingsley Road To West Abutment of the BNSF RR 􀁶􀁾􀁯 An 􀁅􀁱􀁬􀁊􀁾􀀱 Oppgrtunlry 􀁅􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁄􀀧􀀱􀁾􀁲 Type of Construction: full Depth Concrete Pavement Repair Contract Amount: $1,801,201.30
Completion Date: June 9, 2003 􀁾 ......,-_... _-.... ,,"" ..
,.;; ". .' Tony Harlzel can be reached at thartzel@clallasn.ews.rom and at P.O. Box 655237, Dallas,. Te:ca8, 75265. new poll shOWli that motorists·Bamit taking moretlian afew chariees
while behind the. 􀁾􀁥􀁥􀁬􀀮 The survey' of 1,100 motorists 16 and older shows that people 26 to 4;.4 years old most often. push their luck. In addition, 71 percent 'of' drivers admit
speeding,. and. 􀁲􀁮􀁯􀁾 have no problem exceeding the speed limitbY5mph.,: The poll's sponsors, AAA, tPe Partners, for Highway Safety and Volvo, want drivers to test their knowledge
by logging on .to www.safedrivjJigtest.com. . Two 􀁳􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁾􀁪􀁒􀁏􀀡􀁊􀀮􀁽􀁨􀁾 great lane debate: L ingering in .the left lane of n.uliuNNER ;, . traffic -or even simply "> talking about
it -gets DANGEROUS DRIVING . many motorists boiling over like an Anew poll has found that 91 percent of drivelS surVeyed admitted to some old radiator in the Texas summer. fonmof dangerous
dliving within the last six months. Among the dangerous 1\vo weeks ago, I wrote about a behavior admitted to by dlive.lS: 􀁾 state law that requires slower vehi-Speeding: 71 percent
des to drive in the right lane. Since eating while driving: 59 percent then, dozens of motorists have chimed in on both sides of the is-TONY IIAKIzEL using a cellphone'whlle driving:
37 percent sue. Running a' red or yellow traffic signal: 30 percent As reader Art Townley of Rich-to wonder whether drivers can ex-Not using a seat belt 28 percent ardson put it, "I
am a little tired of ceed the speed limit ifthey're going Not using a tum signal: 26 percent you speeders trying to put the with the flow oftraffic. Passenger not using a saat belt 23
percent blame on thosewhochooseto obey No such luck, said Capt. Gary Improper vehicle malntanance: 17 percent the speed laws." Lindsey of the Dallas Sheriff's De-Reading while driving:
14 percent A little to my surprise, a 2-1 ra-partment. tio of people who COntacted me "The confusion exists because' Aggressive driving: 13 percent 􀁾􀀬 challel)ged the law, arguing
that it individuals want to take one sec-Driving while drowsy. 10 perceDt . , appeared to turn a blind eye to tion of the Transportation Code Changl!lllianes without I.ooklng: 7 percent
. ,,; speeders under the guise of traffic and ignore other sections," he said. SOURCE: DriW for Ule and Mason-Oixon 􀁐􀁾􀁉􀁉 of 1,100 licensed driW,,16 or older. 􀁍􀁾􀁲􀁧􀀱􀁮 01 enor
::.' safety. "To go with the flow oftraffic above is plus or mlnu.·3 percentage points. .. But many defended the need to the speed limit is not permissible." have room to maneuver in
the left Many readers correctly point¢ people who are driving the speed lane. out that speeders cause more .limit is rldiwlous,· wrote Cathy "I regularly' drive the interstates crashes
than left-lane lingerers. In Reynolds ofSachse. "I say set the in a200-mile radius around Dallas 2000, an estimated 29 percent of speedlimit and don't allow self-aband the left-lane
hogs are really fatal vehicle crashes in the United sorbed angry people to rule the clueless," wrote Richard S. Ander-􀁓􀁴􀁡􀁾􀁥􀁳 were caused by excessive road: son, also ofRichardson.
speed, acCording to the National Several readers brought up the I wrote the column to get peo-Highway Traffic Safety Adminis-European example, where motorpIe thinking about driving safely.
tration. In Texas, 38 percent ofthe ists follow the left-lane rule more My experience of having speeders state's 3,769 traffic deaths that Closely. Thaffic appears to flow bearing down
on me in the left lane year involved speeding, according much more smoothly and safely led me to realize it was better to get to the federal agency's statistics. there, said ChuckSheffield
ofMesout of their way than to be dead That, many readers wrote, il-quite. right. lustrates the need for more en-"While there is definitely na-The law states "motorists mov-forcement.
Others argued that the tional arrogance there, the people ing more slowly than the normal left-lane rule can get confusing generally are more attuned to the speed of other vehicles ...
shall when motorists encounter encounter an exit 'common good' as opposed to the drive in the right-hand lane avail-ramp on the left side of the high-'me syndrome' that prevails here,'
able for vehicles: way. he said. That wording led many readers "I believe blaming accidents on . • Speaking of safe driving, a \ " . BACKUP PLANS Potential traffic bottlenecks for this
week: oINTERSTATE 35E 35 • 'gIValious southbound lanes of 1;.. w._< IntelStale 35E from Interstate 30 to Zang 􀁾􀀬 Boulevard will be closed from 9 a.m. 10 3 " p.m. Monday. Q INTERSTATE
635 V Valious north-and southbound lanes of InlelState 635 atTowne Centre Olive will be closed from 9 a.m. 10 3:30 p.m. Mondlll'. A U.S. HIGHWAY 175 .. V.Valious eastbound 􀁉􀁾􀁮􀁥􀁳
of u.s. HlgliwaY 175 from Stale Hlghwiiy 310 10 Malloy 8lidge Road will be closed from 7 oa.m. 10 3:30 p.m. Monday. U.S. HIGHWAY 175 V Valious westbound lanes of U.S Highway 175 from
Malloy Bridge 􀁾􀁯􀁡􀁤 to Stale Highway 310 will be elosed from 9 a.m. t9 7 p.m. Monday. 􀁾 U.s. HIGHWAY 75 V Northbouni(!!Xit ramps ramps for Hall/Lemmon arid KnoX/Henderson/Monlicello
on U.S. Highway 75 will be closed from 7 p.m. Monday 10 6 a.m. Tuesday. Staffgraphic coMMUtER Q&A : Questlon:.The rebuilt in-: tersection at Abrams' and Centennial in RichardSon is .
great, especiallythe dual left-, turn lanes from northbound Abrams. But why is one' blocked? I often have to wait through twO traffic-light cy-. cles to turnleft. . Answer: The city
ofRichardsonneedstoretiinelillthe . traffic signals along Centen-. niallQ catch up to the .im-: proveme,nts, said Walter Ragsdale, assistant. director . of traffic and transportation
: in the city's 􀁤􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁭􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁉􀀱 ' se.rviees department.. 'The :. closed lane at Abrams will be , reopened when all the traffic . signal . ret;iming is imple-' mentedthis summer.
􀁾􀁷􀀢􀁩􀁬 yourqr.resti0n8 or t:rojJic problems to thart!lel-@dallasnews . .rom ormailthem to The Dallas Morning News, P.O. Boa: 655237, Dallas, Te:ca8 75265.:
You can 􀁳􀁾􀁲􀁵􀁴 your autoJs 􀁾􀁪􀁊􀁬􀁪􀁦􀁾􀀴􀀧􀁑􀁊􀁬􀁴 not on the street 􀁩􀀻􀀤􀁾􀁜􀁾􀁾􀁩􀀬 .·.'0·,·.·.·,·".·,···: \ . -EiUSCo. 􀁾 ----... ::L· ..􀀺􀀯􀀮􀀺􀀬􀁾 •. 􀁊􀁩􀀸􀂷􀁾􀁁􀀮􀀺􀁉􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁦􀁾􀁾􀁲
. ,::Varipus southboUnd 􀁉􀀮􀁡􀁾 01 􀁮􀁴􀀡􀁩􀁾 3?E '11111 􀁢􀁥􀁣􀁬􀁾􀀬􀀡􀁲􀁬􀁬􀁒􀁜 .... ',venue to Interstate 20·fnjm.9 􀁡􀀮􀁾􀁭􀀻 tb. .m.,Monday; .".. ". 􀀺􀀻􀀬􀁾􀀢 ... 􀁾􀀺􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁭􀁡􀁬􀁮
lanes 'of 􀁷􀁥􀁾􀁵􀁾􀁾􀂷􀀩􀀺􀂷 p12 will be c1l)Sed from I<lestl '..':."::' dOlevard to illinois Avenue from 9im; . 13 p.m.. 1ft,TOM BRANIFF ig Several north-and southbound anes oITom
Braniff will be closed at ighway 114 from 7a.m. to 4 p.m. onday. • . CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY . Various northbound lanes 􀁾􀁦 Central -xpreSSWaY will be closed between Hall :treet and Mockingbird
Lane from 7p.m. londay to 6 a.m. Tuesday. . 􀁾INTERSTATE 35 . 􀁾Various southbound lanes of ntel5tate 35E will be closed between· op 288 and Corinth Par1<Way from 7 .m. Monday 10 5 a..m.
Tuesday. ROADRUNNER ToNY IlARlZEL racing movies helped make the· highly flammable fuel popular. Shops such as Ground Zero can install the equipment that boosts car performance for about
$600 to $800, but it is illegal to have the equipment on a car that is using a public road. _ Making vehicles ride too low. By law, vehicles cannot sit lower than the lowest point ofthe
said. wheel rim. In some vehicles with "People are finding out they thin tires, the space between condon't have to have muscle cars,' crete and fuel tank or muffler may he said. be as
little as 2or 3 inches. In the world ofvehicle modifi-_ Installing license plate covcations, there are as many ways to ers. Anything that covers a rear Iiget a ticket for illegal accessories
cense plate is illegal, but clear as there are ways to trick up a car covers rarely attract attention. or tmck. Some other common Deputy Braggs said he has heard mistakes, according
to Deputy of special James Bond-type gadBraggs: gets that can obscure a plate at _ Installing too-dark \vindow the press of a button, and then tint, or installing tint that goes quickly
restore the plate's appeartoo low on a front 􀁷􀁩􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁨􀁩􀁥􀁬􀁤􀀮 A ance. state law has been in effect for Officers have the discretion on about 15 years that is designed to whether
to write tickets for many help officers see into vehicles they of the above offenses, Deputy are approaching. Still, people Braggs said. But it's a gamble that want limousine-style tinting.
If many motorists should avoid. police stop the vehicle, that $200 "It's a roll of the dice," he said. tint job can result in $759 in tick-Sometimes it comes up snake ets. eyes. . "I
tell customers that it's illegal," said AI Jafari, the manager ThnyHartzelcan bereaclwJ. at of Ground Zero. "They don't. thartzel@dallasnews.crnn and at care." P.O. Bo:c 655237, Dallas,
Texas, _ Using nitrous oxide. Street 75265. IRWlNTHOMPSON/Staft"Pholographer Dallas Coqntysherift's DeputyWilliamBraggsshows sOmecar accessories that can getyou a ticket:ifusedonthe
stI'eeL C ·EDAR HILL -The big ;.,. screen should soon mean .big business for auto auto accessory shops. . l1ilt also will mean big business .. for.nallas Countysheri1fs Deputy William
Braggs. . The street racing movie 2 Fast. 2 FuriCYU8 hit theaters this week 􀁥􀁾􀁤􀀬 and lawenforcement officers . e1jFect to see cars sporting much . if....neon and other decorative
e·e􀁾􀀮􀀬 ,just as can be seen in tJ.te I·Yehicle modifiCations may 􀁬􀂷􀁾 . nice, but the vast majority of tb mare illegal for road use, Dep'uty Braggs said. 1 The most popular accessory
abd the most common legal in.f$ction -is using ·snake eyes: the small ·lights installed over Windshield washer spouts on vehide hoods. ;"You can buy all the lights you 􀁾􀁴 􀁴􀁯􀀬􀁾
Deputy Braggs said. "As lopg as you're driving on the road, keep them turnedolf." IVehicle owners and accessory sHops do not break the law by instjilling the lights, which cost allout
$30. Motorists commit an olTense when they ignore the ver 􀁢􀁾 and written warnings that the lIAicessories are for off-road use o*ly. i "The first thing people say is, 'I bought it.
They sold it to me,' • the deputy said. "A lot of times, people buystuffthat lists on the package that they need to check with ldcallawenforcement." ! To some teenagers and young adults,
the warnings go in one ear aDd Ollt the other. . "We olfer cllstomcrs a switch to tllrn the lights on and off, bllt most want them to tllm on when tIley tllrn on their headlights; s<iid
Eric Giinack, installation njanager for Ground Zero FX and :¥«:essories in Cedar Hill. "I have had cllstomers come back and wltnt me to take them off." : The movie cOllld help neon effeCts
become poplllar again, Mr. 􀁾􀁉􀁮􀁡􀁣􀁫 said. According to state 􀁬􀁾􀀬 the lights are legal if they drn't shine to the front or rear. The CIlstomization craze proves that the desire
to stand out la' a sea of sedans can be strong. I s ev.en getting easier because ore street racers are customizig small 'cars, Deputy Braggs ::: .. " . )" \,,. :,> (. ;;..;, f'"; l'"
,.. Ii ..... , .,' 􀁾􀀬 􀁾􀁾
Question: Can you tell me if Mapleshade Lane between Ohio Drive and Coit Road in Plano will ever be built? This 􀁶􀁩􀁯􀁵􀁬􀁤􀀧􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁩􀁤􀁾 an alternate route to Frankford 􀁒􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁯􀁢􀁾
'. . no plan to develop this SegJ)1ent Of road, according to the TranSporta" tion Department Ifthis linkis det .veloped, it will probably be 􀁤􀁾 oper-sponsored. . 􀀮􀁾 .' Several developers
have eif pressed an interest in this area; th.!l timing of major road 􀁩􀁭􀁰􀁾􀁾 ments depends on their readin""f to moveforward. '_) E-TIUJil􀁹􀁯􀁵􀁾 quations01' i:ro.ffic problema
to tha:rtiel@dallasneui!J .com 01' TIUJil them to The Dallas Morning News, P.O. Bo:c 655237" Dall.as, Thras75265.:) 􀁾􀁕􀁒􀁃􀁅􀀺􀁡􀁾􀁯􀁉􀁄􀀮􀁉􀁉.. 9 p.m. means the entire 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁾
wni take . HarWood streets. Improvements The city might pay a little more longer to complete. . to Akard and Market streets have for the project because ofthe eve-"Both streets have
a significant begun. " Ding and weekend schedules; amount ofbus lanes. Weexpect to . Those projects willlilst abOut a "But ifthe workers continue to haveasignificantamountofrepair year
and will provide brick sidework quickly, we're able to get it in the bus lanes," said Steve Schell, walks with decorative tile, benchdone sooner; Mr. Dybalasaid. project manliger for
the city of es, trees,lighting,sidewalkwheel-Getting the project done soon-·. Dallas. . chair ramps' and 􀁯􀁭􀁡􀁭􀁩􀁭􀁾 er also means that both roads will'.Pretlyfast' fences at parking
lots. undergo repairs at the same time. In addition, Dallas voters last Resurfacing must be substan-The. project pales incompari-month !lpprovtld $8 million in petiallycompletebyearlyOctober,in
son with the total re<Xlnstruction destrian improvements that have time for the grand opening of the ofMain Street about 10 years ago, ' not been scheduled..Those proNasher Sculpture
Center in the said !.any Fonts, president ofthe jects include new sidewalks, 􀁾 Arts District.Work outside the im-Central Dallas Association. That and landscaping for more sections mediate
downtown area can be project also called for moving ofAkard, Ervay, St. Paul aria Field completed afterthe grand opening many underground utilities. _ streets. . ifneeded. "The work
moves pretty fast; ."It's going to make it a lot 􀁭􀁯􀁲􀁾 Uncertainty about whatlies be-he said. "rniglad it's being resur-pedestrian-friendly," Mr. Dybala neath the roads could affect
the faced. It's badly needed.' said. "We're trying to bUild streets project schedule and mean more While Elm and Commerce get to fit residential uses that are comwork. a new coalo,some
of downtown's ingdowntown." _, Workers must grind the top other streets will get a new look. ! layer of pavement to deiermine The city, with $4 million from'the Tony Hartzel can be reached
c¢ the condition of the underlying Dallas City Center taxing district, thartzel@dallasnews.comand Of pavement. In some cases, half the will add pedestrian-friendly looks P.O. BrxI: 655237,
Dall.as, 􀁔􀁥􀀮􀁲􀁾 road may have to be rebuilt, which to Akard, Field, Ervay;St. St. Paul and 75265. " .. .'. -I -COMMUTER Q&Ar ToNY IIAIrrz.EL BACKUP PLANS Potential traffic bottlenecks
for this week: '0CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY 'U'Various lanes of the frontage roads on north-and southbound Central expressWay from Plano Parkway to U.S. '. Highway 30 will be closed from 8 a.m.
to . 4 p.m. Monday. 1ftINTERSTATE 30 . 'Y'The right lane of eastbound Interstate 30 from Hampton Road.to Sylvan Avenue will be closed from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday. 1ft INTERSTATE
20 􀁾Various lanes of eastbound Interstate 20 from Bonnie View Road to JJ. Lemon will be closed from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Monday. A INTERSTATE 30 􀁾􀁔􀁨􀁥 right lane of eastbound Interstate
30 from 19th Street to 􀁂􀁥􀁾 Une will be closed from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday. A CENTRAl EXPRESSWAY 􀁾Various lanes of the southbound frontage road of Central Expressway from .Park
Lane to Mockingbird will be closed from 7 p.m. Monday to 6 a,m, Tuesday. Smoot!liPg the bumps downtown ROADR 􀀮􀁊􀀢􀁾 􀁂􀁅􀁁􀁕􀀱􀀱􀁆􀁙􀁉􀁎􀂷􀁇􀂷􀁄􀁏􀁗􀁎􀁩􀁏􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀩􀁾􀁾􀁩􀀧􀀧􀀺􀀧􀀻􀀧􀁦􀀺􀀬
The city of Dallas soon williaiinch' .' Commerce Street and most Of EIrl! along five north-south StleetS 􀁷􀁬􀁉􀁉􀀧􀁾 -l. ' tJs'E)' 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀨􀀻􀁪􀁬 􀁾 􀀮􀁾􀀻􀀺 A drive down Elm Street
or Commerce Street in downtown Dallas can be a jarring experience Large ruts in the pavement and crumbling curbs and gutters bring a rough edge to the daily central business district
commute. Starting next month, both roads will undergo a $1.6 million resurfacing to smooth out the bumpsand soften the rough edges. . About the same time, $4 million will go toward sidewalk
improvements to improve downtown's appeal. Working around the heavytraffie on both streets will pose a challenge, as will the inability to work overnight because of downtown's growing
residential population. "We're working with property owners up and down the streets to accommodate them," said David Dybala, director ofthe Dallas Public Works and Transportation Department.
'We don't take that lightly." Minimal closures Much ofthe work will be done on weekends, when crews will close all but one ortwo lanes. During rush hours, only one lane on each street
can be closed, and only two lanes maximum can be closed between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. Work also will be allowed between 6 and
VIA􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁳􀁨􀁾􀁲􀁳 take their work·on roads to the streets ROAD RUNNER University of Thxas at Ar· . lington professor Ernest . Crosby likes to leave the water mnning atwork. .It could
help engineers design better roads. .Researchers want to know how water flows across different roads, so theyhave built a 2o-foot-by-68foot road section in the basement of-Neddernum
Hall. Thfy ron thousands of ga!JDns a minute llCro5S the· simulated streels in hopes of better determining how muchwater remains on a road 3l1d how that changes .depending on the road's
surface.. "-Engineers have used the Slime equations since the .1940s to de'sign roads so that water moves as quickly as possible olfthe surface. . Butiftheequationsareolfandwa. ten:ollects
on a road, it increases tho chances that vehicles will hydroplane and drivers will lose control /'TIris will help US design better roads and make sure that doesn't happen:said Dr. Crosby,
who notedthat the equations may be otrby 20 percent at times. "This will help us make roads safer.· The experiments, funded by a $436,000 grant from the Texas Department of 'lransportation,
will last another year. The threeyear project included theconstruction of dozens of panels, each tankineightminutes. . "We 􀁤􀁯􀁄􀀬􀁾􀂷􀁨􀁡􀁶􀁥 a complete picture ofthe equations because
nobody bas put the money into designingitbefore.• . The research could lead to new road designs, including making streetssteepe1" overall butiIatterin the center•. On roadsides, more
TONY lIAKrzEL drainsmay1H!needed.lneddition, . moremoneymayhavetogotoward·. weighing 600 to 700 pounds, 􀀮􀁾􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁩􀁧􀁮􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁳􀁜􀁮􀀱􀁤􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀮􀀮 which fit together to make a
two-. . The litde'􀁾$Uclliid bythe: . lane road. The panels tilt in an cli-experiment may escape lXl0torisls, rectionsto simulatediff'erent road butthey'recrucialtoengineers;','·;>.
andwaterronolfoonditions. . "It:snotveryglamorous,.butits "It's huge. It's a roadway down 􀁾important 􀁴􀁯􀁨􀁡􀁶􀁥􀁾.. there in the 􀁢􀁡􀁳􀁥􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀬􀁾 said Dr. n.eetl!trBined. to !lEep'lEep'·our
infriI.John Patterson, associate .dean of structure up,» Said Dr.: Patterson. theUTAcollegeofengineering.. :"It'simportanttotheoveraIlh!!8lth Panelscanhaveoneoffourtest oftheeconomyofourarea."
.. ,;: .. surfaces, including two inches of .. Theprofessotsand 􀁳􀁴􀀬􀁵􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁮􀁾 concrete; asphalt; androckchips.gineers have nQi 􀁾􀁥􀁤 '811:' "The lVugher the surface, the other
use for the basement 􀁉􀁵􀁡􀁤􀁾 slower water moves across it,·.Dr. 􀁴􀁯􀀭􀁮􀁯􀁷􀁨􀁾 once they finish 􀁴􀁨􀁾 Crosby said. "That roughness tests. ManY ofthe sections Will be hasn'tbeenproperlycahbrated
for saved and used in other expe,riall the new materials used in ments, Dr. CrosbYsaid. • . . roads." . 􀁇􀁲􀁡􀁤􀁾􀁳􀁴􀁕􀁤􀁣􀁭􀁴􀁳􀁡􀀱􀁲􀁥􀁬􀁩􀁤􀁹􀁢􀁡􀁶􀁥 I A40,000-gallonwirtertankre-.thought
of one JiOaSIble, noilaca-. circulates water after it runs across detuic use:. tying an inner tube on the road. Water flows can be set :the platform and simulatirig a ride from four
gallons to 82 gallons per downtheGuadalupeRiver. second, and meters measure bow fastthewater flows acrossthe 00-TlmYHartJilel can be readuJd at ous surfaces. . tJw.rtzd@dallosnews.cum.
and cit At its fastest flow rate, a pair of P.O. Baz 655237, Dallo8,. Thxa8 pumps can emptythe large storage 75265. Question: We live near the in· tersection of Highway 380 and Fann
Road2931 in Denton County. There are sand pits in the area, and 18-wheelers drive on FM2931 con· slBntly. Is there any way the trucks can be rerouted from the £ann road to Highway 371
to reach the sand pits? Answer: The 1exas Department of'Iransportation can generally exclude trucks 􀁦􀁲􀁯􀁾 􀁾the state highway system only ifa lo,adzoned bridge is involved or ifa
city enacts an alternate truck route that's equal to the existing route in tenus of truck access and tiavel tim.e. Inthis case,the DentonCounty SheriJI's Department and the Thxas Department
ofPublic Safety monitor for overweight trucks and law violations, but 􀁉􀁾􀁥 else can be E-mailyour questions ortraffic 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁢􀁾 tb tlw.rtzel@tkiQamew8.cum en" mail t1Jpn to The Dallas
Morning News, P.O. 􀁾 655237, Dallo8, T){ 75265. Q;teries caniwt be answered indivU1uaIIY, 1m! as mo:n.yasposaiblewilZbepublished BACKUP PLANS Potential traffic' bottlenecks for this
week: ftlNTEllSl"ATE 30 . 􀀧􀁕􀀧􀁖􀁡􀁾􀁯􀁵􀁳 lanes of ...estbound IntelSlale 30 from lltmar Street to Reunion Boulevard ...111 be closed from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday. A INTERSTATE
!5E 􀀹􀁖􀁡􀁾􀁯􀁵􀁳lanes of southbound Intel5tate 35E from Oanieldale Road to Wintergreen Road ...ill be closed from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. Monday. iAllNTERSTATE 35E ¥ Vanous lanes, an entranca
and exit ramp of northbound and southbound Interstate 35E 111 continue to be closed from U.S. High ay 77 to FM3040 from 6 p.m. Monday to 6 a.m. Tuesday. ,ft STATE HIGHWAY 114 V'lhe westbound
frontage road of State Highway 114 from the 􀁔􀁾􀁮􀁩􀁴􀁹 Raijway Express to Rochelle Road ...iII be closed from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday. 9 INTERSTATE 3SE I V Various northbound lanes
of i Intel5tate 35E from FM2t8t to Corinth ! Parkway will be closed from 8 p.m. IMonday to 6 a.m. Tuesday. 􀀯􀁾􀀮
Tony Hartul can be rea£hedttt· thartzel@dnlla••nellJ8.£om and at P.O. Bo.r 655237, Dallas, Te:ras 75265. DART vows smooth rides on 4th p7$.¥ /.."l,..,.)$ , . Thousands of people are
ROAD RUNNER TAKING DART $3.50, with 50 cents of that goexpected to attend this TO TR NIlY FEST ing to DART to cover part of 􀁩􀁾 year's July 4 Trinity Fest I costs. DART has several
suggescelebration, and Dallas Area Trinity Fest attendees wIIo lake Dallas tions for riders: Rapid Transit has vowed to be Area Rapid 􀁔􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁾 trains to the event • Buy a $2.50 light-rail
day ready for them. and back home use specific stations. pa.o;s at light-rail station ticket This year, the agency has ere-Red line trains will skip Union Station. machines or at participating
ated new plans for handling the and will pick up and drop off Minyard. Carnival and Sack 'n crush ofriders expected after the eventgoers at the Convention Center Sa\'c food stores. A
ticket purfireworks end, Laslyear, throngs TONY HAKf'"J:EL Station only. Blue line trains will skip chascd filr till' trip downtown a1-ofrail customcrs crowded Union the COl1\lention
center Station to pick so will be good for the trip home. Station and waited for hours to of fewer than 100 tickets, up and drop off patrons at Union • Be prepared to wait.. Beget a
ride home. though, DART is considering Station only. cause the event falls on a Friday, "We have things really well sealing back its TRE service or 􀁾􀀭􀀭..􀀮􀁊􀀮􀀮􀀧􀂷􀀳􀀧􀀵􀀭􀁅􀂷􀀮􀀬􀁾..􀀱􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀭�
�􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀮 􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀱 . rail passengers can stay a little planned out," said Tun Newby, canceling it altogether. A deci-,.__p later after the fireworks end. DART's assistant vice president
sion could be madeThesday. . llIetee Trains \\ill run almost two hourS for service planning and sched-􀁏􀁮􀁣􀁾 transit riders get to the . 􀁾􀁾 COllI , longer than usual and possibly
uling. event, 76 DART volunteers win Union , 􀁾􀁏􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁦􀀬 : later ifneeded. Rather than have one station be on hand to point them in the Sllltloll ::>;:ntIoII •TRE customers must
buy for. patrons, the transit agency right direction. Waiting lines 􀁾If'·..• ,.s.t.a.Uo.9. their rail tickets in ad\'lInce. has come up with a plan that di-will be established for train
rid-I -.' 􀁾 Trains will leave CentrePort at 5, vides the crowds according to ers to return home, a more or-j.-'.30-. 􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀮, 6 and i p.m.• and each 􀁣􀁯􀁬􀁯􀁲􀁾 which line they ride.
derly scenario than last year's I.....l. : coded ticket will be good for a re-Red line trains will skip crush of crowds at Union Sta-·35£ ' , tum trip at a set time: 10:45, Union Station,
and will pick up tion. Trains often arrived at ". 11:15 and B:45 p.m. Passengers: and drop off festivalgoers'at the Union already full ofpassengers Slafl'Rrdphic must have a TRE ticket
to be alJ Convention Center Station only. who got on the trains at other to wait in line, and people are lowed on the platform to waitfcii Blue line trains will skip the Con" stations.
going to have to stand on trains.' that train. . vention Center Station to pick up Trains will run every 10 min-DART volunteers will be on • Tickets for Trinity Fest and and drop off
patrons at Union utes starting at noon. They will hand to count passengers who for the TRE service can be purStation only. continue to run until ahout 1:30 will be allowed on the platform
chased through Thursday at The Trinity. RaHway Express a.m., well after the agency usual-for the next train. Each rail car downtown Dallas DART stores commuter line could offer spe-Iy
halts service. Trains will run will carry 125 people, and 72 of located at the Akard light-rail cialservicetoTrinityFestforthe even more frequently after the them will have seats. station
and at Elm and En'llY first time. Tickets must be pur-fireworks end. Most trains will have three strcets. Trinity Fest tickets can chased in advance for the com-"The intent is to have
this or-cars, which means the 􀁡􀁧􀁥􀁮􀁾􀀧􀀩􀀧 be also purch'ased through Frimuter trains, which will stop on-derly and planned out," said Mr. will be able to carn' at least day at the
grocery stores 􀁬􀁩􀁾􀂷 Iy at the CentrePort, West Irving Newby, who added that it's diffi-4,500 people per hour in one di-above, but TRE tickets cannot... and South Irving stations
before cult to predict crowd behavior rection and 4,500 people per reaching Union Station. based on one day of experience hour in the other direction. Commuter line tickets are $6 from
last year's inaugural festi-Those figures are based on 10each or $18 for afour-ticketfam-val, which attracted 300,000 minute frequency. i1y pack. Based on low early sales people. ·People
are going to have Tickets for Trinity Fest are CQMMUfERQ&A Question: At the southeast intersection of Interstate 35E and State High\\'lIY 121, the right Jane is required to tum right,
blit the signs aren't clcar, and tlie paint on the road is faded. Call anything be done? Answcr: The signs at the in': tersection comply \\ith standards. The pavement markings. aren't
required but were adde3 to help drivers negotiate the 􀁾􀂭 tersection, according to the Texas Department of Transportation. Drivers who have problems at the intersection should contact
the Le\\isville Police Departmcnt. the enforcemel'!t agency in that area. E'/I/(/il.1Jour 'i"l'stion.. or 􀁴􀁲􀁱􀁦􀁊􀁩􀁾 problem.. to thartzel@rlallmm.ew". .com or /IIoifthern to The
Dallas:-,Joming News, P.O. Bo;r 6.55237; Dolla.<. Tr.m.• 7.526.5. Querie•• can: /Il>t bc (/1l."'i('CTcd individually. but 0.< /1111/1.1/as !,o.<.,ible leill be !Jllbfished. ",., ; //.
·15 wiseo.. (. , .•.. :.1.: , /'j j..􀁾􀀢􀀬􀀮 ,------------------------------_._.._------BACKUP PLANS I Potential traffic bolt/enecks for ! this week: !itINTERSTATE 30 'I' 'Y'The right
lane of westbound Interslate 30 from Interstate 35E to Beckley Avenue will be closed from 9 : a.m. to 3 p.m. Monday. i 1ft.INTERSTATE 35E IV The right lane of southbound \ Interstate
35E from Pleasant Run Road to Belt Une Road will be closed from 7 , a.m. to 2 p.m. Monday. I 1ft.INTERSTATE 30 I􀁾Various lanes of westbound I Interslate 30 from Dalroek Road to Belt
I Une Road will be closed from 11 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday. 'I ,@,INTERSTATE635 V Various southbound lanes tif ! Interstate 635 from Oates Drive to I Galioway.Avenue will be closed from
9 , a.m. to 3.30 p.m. Monday. I A BElT UNE ROAD : 􀁾Various 􀁮􀁯􀁾􀁨􀁢􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁤 and southbound lanes of Belt Line Road from Interstate 30 to Hunter Ferrell Road will be closed from 9
a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday. 1'---------------------_·_-_··--....._._.. ..c.. ' ,,'
Tony Hartzel can be reachedat thartzel@dollasnews.com and at .RO. BO:I1 655237; Dallai, TX 75265. !DART 􀁡􀁤􀁾􀁦􀁊􀁩􀁪􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀺 􀁔􀁨􀁾􀁴􀀧s a wrap Coming to a street near #. ROAD RUNNER
a year and costs $12,000 to ap-more people to shop and visit you: a crawfish on wheels. ply. spots along the rail line. With a Because of a f1ounder-DART uses its advertising $2.50 day
pass, rail riders can reing economy, Dallas Area Rapid revenue to pay for its marketing ceive discounts at several hun-Transit has revived its own ver-campaigns. In the current fiscal
dred restaurants, shops and atsion of modem art on wheels -year, DART expects to collect tractions. the full bus wrap advertisement. about $2 million in advertising, A complete list
of partners Nineteen of the staid yellow-and the agency will spend $1.4 can be found at www.dart.org.at and-white vehicles are out. In million on its own promotions. downtown Dallas
DART stores their place, shrink-wrapped bus-TONY 1IA.R:rzEL The remaining $600,000 and by callingDARTat 214-979-es bearing advertising for busi-goes to DARTs general revenue 1111. nesses
including Cookie Bouquet dent for marketing and commu-fund. Next year, financial con-DART has had offers to raise and several homebuilders, and a nications. "This is what advertis-straints
will· force more of the more money through advertising crawfish hawking inexpensive ers want -to imprint something money to go to the general fund on bus shelters, but it has not lunches
at Razzoo's Cajun Cafe. that people see in an advertise-and less to marketing, Ms. Bau-been able to get its membercities Recently, part ofaDARTbus was ment." man said. 'toagree: wrapped
to resemble a loaf of Homer's odyssey The agency could raise more ' NIck· n h' lters Mrs Baird's bread. money by placing ads on the in-0 U 0 s e And Marilyn Monroe, George Many people
recalled the bus side or outside ofits rail ears. But Companies have proposed a W. Bush and Britney Spears of-bearing the likenesses ofcartoon both ideas have failed to catch . program
where they would build ten ply area streets, thanks to a characters Bart and Homer the attention of DART decision-and possibly maintain all bus bus wrap advertisement for Rip-Simpson.
That wrapped bus was makers. shelters if they were allowed to ley's Believe it or Not! and the one of the agency's most-re-"Jjght-rail vehicles are the sell advertising on them. Cities
Palace ofWax museum in Grand quested vehicles at special best advertising we could have as ,have balked over concerns about Prairie. events. an 'agency," Ms. Bauman said. aesthetics
and relaxing their sign A maximum of 40 buses at a For those wondering, here's "When people see them, they ordinances. , ' time can have the full bus wraps, how a bus gets wrapped: have
a positive reaction. It's sort "So far, we've not been sue· about 5 percent of DARTs fleet. Artwork is applied to a mas-of like free advertising for cessful with that," said Ms. BauThe
transit agency receives a flat sive sheet of perforated window DART." man; "People sometimes feel that , fee fee of $143,000 for allowing its film, made by 3M. The vinyl-like The DART
board of directors any encroachment on the sign bus advertising contractor to of-material, complete with tiny has strongly opposed placing ads ordinance will open too many fer businesses
the chance to holes for passengers to see on the outside of trains. Inside doors." hawk their wares on a 40-foot through, has adhesive that a1-the trains, space is very limited moving
canvas. lows it to stick to the bus. It also for private advertising. "They are the equivalent of a can be removed without damag-DART also is hoping that a gigantic rolling billboard,"
said ing the vehicle's paint. new type ofadvertising, its desti-Sue Bauman, DARTs vice presi-Atypical bus wrap lasts about nations deals program, entices BACKUP PLANS Potential traffic
bottlenecks for this week: O INTERSTATE 30 VOne westbound main lane of Interstate 30 will be closed from Loop 12 to MacArthur Boulevard from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday. fJ' INTERSTATE
35E . V Several north-and southbound lanes of Interstate 35E will be closed between Frankford Road and Round Grove Road from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday. Q INTERSTATE 635 W Various southbound
lanes of Interstate 635 will be closed from Oates .Drive to the U.S. Highway BO interchange from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. _ OSYLVAN AVENUE Wolf< will continue Indefinitely on Sylvan Avenue
between Fort Worth Avenue and Kessler Palf<way. oU.s. HIGHWAY 175 Various westbound lanes of U.S. Highway 175 will be continuously closed between Highway 310 and Malloy Bridge Road from
9 a.m. to 7 p.m. .Staffgraphic .COMMUTER ' Q&A Quextion: What are the plansforFM2181 in Corinth? I know that construction has started along Interstate. 35E near VISta Ridge Mall, and
I read that I-35E will be 􀁷􀁩􀁤􀁾 enedfrom Corinth to Denton. Answer: The ThXas Department of. 􀁔􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁰􀁯􀁾􀁯􀁮 plans to widen FM2181 from twolanes to fourfrom 1-30Ein Corinth,
east and north· to the south side ofDenton.The project will probably be built in two phases. Bids are to be awarded in 2007. but that could be earlier if iJlansand right of way are completed
,JiS06ner. ' E-mail your questimuf or trajfic ]YTOblems to tharbrel @dollasnews.com or mail them to The Dallas Monilng News, RD. Box 655237, Dallas, TX 75265. Queria.cannot be answered
indiuiduolly, but as many as possible will be publiahed.
.. '. :.::' ....: ' . . '..:.•.:.;_:...:....:.:.􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀺 ' .. -, DallasNpws.com [lJf 􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁾 JUOrnittq. 􀁾􀁴􀁬􀁕􀀢􀁩 Gonna litter? Then expect
a letter 0712012003 By TONY HARTZEL I The Dallas Morning News Cigarette-tossing motorists really are a burn. Each year, people toss 140 million cigarette butts onto Texas roadsides.
Rather than wait 25 years for them to decompose, someone usually has to pick them up. Picking up butts and other trash costs Texas taxpayers $32 million a year. In 16 North Texas counties,
the housekeeping tab last year ran to $6.5 million, and $2.4 million of that was in Dallas County alone, according to the Texas Department of Transportation. "lfwe spend $3 million picking
up trash, it's $3 million that we can't spend on fixing a roadway," said Gary Bailey, the assistant director of maintenance for the Transportation Department's Dallas office. "If we
didn't have to do that, we could devote those dollars to other safety-related projects." Trashy roads are throughout the Dallas area, but some of the worst problems occur near one of
Dallas'landfills along the old Central Expressway, or State Highway 3 10, in southern Dallas. Consequently, the state has a contract to send litter crews to Highway 310 roadsides every
two days in some areas, and every eight days in other areas. Each time, they cart away about two trash bags full of litter for each acre combed. "A lot of it is around that landfill,"
Mr. Bailey said. Police can issue a ticket to a litterbug if they observe the offense being committed. If caught, offenders face a maximum $500 fine. Texas law also requires motorists
to cover their loads when transporting trash, but much of the littering occurs when things blowout oftrucks. The state tarp law has numerous loopholes, and it is rarely enforced. The
state can't save money by just ignoring the trash problem, either. Tires, roofmg shingles and many other kinds of debris fall out of vehicles and pose safety hazards. Sometimes, items
such as newspapers and washing machines fall out oftrucks and are ignored by motorists unwilling to clean up their own mess. "I was riding down the road one day and say a large spool
of wire," said Mr. Bailey, referring to the industrial-sized spools typically used by telecommunications companies. "I was on LBJ Freeway, and I had to push it to the side of the road
with my bumper." Some people apparently believe that the roadside is a good place to dump all their trash. The state has had problems with obscured areas beside highways that become
illegal dumping grounds. Even with all the big items that fall by the roadside, it's the little things that quickly add up in the litter battle. Not only are cigarette butts a fire hazard
in the dry days ofsummer, but they also are time-consuming to clean up. Those litterbugs' callousness leads me to occasionally consider keeping a stash ofmy friends' old cigarette butts.
Whenever I see one go out a window, I want to drive beside that car and flick one back at the offender's vehicle. vehicle. But now I and all other Texans have another, less-dangerous
way ofgetting that point across. Last year, the state created a Web site and a phone number for people to report litterbugs. Rather than confront fellow motorists, the state wants people
to go to www.dontmesswithtexas.org and click on the "Report a Litterer" link, or call 888-TEX-8683. Reports should include the license plate number (Texas plates only), make ofthe vehicle,
date and time of day, location, type of litter and who tossed the trash. . . ... _...•.__ ... The Transportation Department will send a letter to the litterbug, along with a Don't Mess
with Texas trash bag and information about state litter laws. Tony Hartzel can be reached at thartzel(a1dallasnews.com and at P.D. Box 655237, Dallas, Texas 75265.
E-mail vloe@daJlasnews.com fore Mr. Krieger's and Mr. Hargreaves' firms revamped not only the road butthe park. Among the key findings is that new development spurred by the park and
road -or even the park alone -would generate .tens of millions ofdo)lars in newtax revenue for the city, county and public . schook Those gains will be ptore . than enough to cover the·
project's operating costs. Even so, the city, which wOuld pay the local share of the initial construction costs, would not recoup its investmentfor more than 30years. . Dallas Independent
School. District "wi11 be the major benefi.ciary ... largely through increases in the commercial property tlix base: conclude the analysts, headed bythe engineering and urban planning
firm HNTB. That being so, they suggest, Dallas mustlook to the big picture :-such as easing traffic congestion -rather than the tax impact of new development next to the river, in deciding
howto shape the project. . In addition, the report says the city might look to the school district or the cOuntyto sharesome of the tax bounty. In 1998, city voters approved sel1jng
$246 million in bonds· for the river project. Roughly $115 million of that is earmarked for the park and road. Among· the five road alignments analyzed in the study, the most conducive
to 􀁤􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁭􀁾􀁴is the one tentatively selected by the council in 1997 but later rejected by Ms. Miller. It would put half the lanes on the downtown side and halfon the OakCliffside.
On the other hand, the park alone with no highway, because of the lower construction costs, would come closest to generating city tax revenue equal to its costs. The gap between the
alternatives is relatively small. Spread over 30 years, the total difference is no more' than $1.7 million a year.· . The study projects substantial economicbenefitsforthecommunity 􀁡􀁾
large. HNTB forecasts 15,000 to 20,000 newpermanent jobs by year30 that would not exist without the project. It forecasts 200,000 overnight visitors and 960,000 day-trip visitors a year
who would not come otherwise. COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS • Tuesday, Yvonne Ewell Townview . Center cafeteria, 1201 E. Eighth St. • Thursday, Hillcrest Church, 12123 Hillcrest Ave. • June 30,
Dallas City Hall, 􀁾􀀵􀀰􀀰 Marilla St., conference center on level L1 All meetings are from 6 to 8 p.m. CityofDaII... An artisi's rendering depicts.pIazaspanningtbe proposed . Trinity
Parkway at Reunion BoulevBl'd. vard, recomiecting neighborhoods in South Dallas. . • Use tolls and other mechanisms to keep trucks offthe road. • Be partially funded aild fully operated
and maintained by the North Texas TollwayAuthority. Scrutiny The council will be asked. to fomally approve the design in August, once a· more detailed writteri report, includingcost
estimates, is completed. Then it must pass muster with the Federal Highway Administration, which has been scrutinizing an environmental analysis of road alternatives developed before
Ms. Miller began the urban design review. The city fUld highway agencies will argue to federal officials that the design is not a new alternative but merely a variation ofone presented
earlier, said Karen WaIz, executive director of the Dallas Plan, which has been at the.center ofthe redesign process. That is a crucial point; to be forced to undertake a fresh environmental
review at this stage would have far-1'eiiChing ramifications. Plans for the 'Ilinity highway are intertwined with plans to rebuild the clogged tilixmaster interchange and the Interstate
30 􀁣􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁯􀁮downtown. . Big investment Also MOJ;1day, the council will review the findings ofan eConomic development study, commissioned three years ago, long beraised by Ms. Miller.
In its latestand, Ms. Miller hopes, final-version, the road would: • Be a 55-mph tollwayfrom its northern junction with State Highway 183 to its southernjunction \vith Interstate 45
and u.s. Highway 175. . • Be built solely on the downtown side oft1)e river, rather than split, with some lanes running along the Oak Clifflevee. • Be six lanes north of Continental
Avenue and four lanes south ofit. • Use an improved Industrial Boulevard as a "collector-mstributor" road to funnel downtown traffic to and from the parkway between WycliffAvenue and
Martin Luther KingJr. Boulevard. . • Include a levee-top road on the Oak Cliff side running from Commerce Street to Interstate 35, enhancing .the likelihood ofhighdollar redevelopment.
• Allow S.M. Wright Freeway to be converted back to a boule-Road plan takes afallllIiarroute1«"'1 t/t?1;'1/􀁴􀁢􀂷􀁾 ,..• > Trinity Parkway design to be unveiled Monday is similar to
Central By VICTORIA LOE HICKS Staff Writer Dallas drivers could experience deja vu when they see the reredesigned 1\inity Parkway, which will be unveiled Monday to the City Council.
In the crucial downtown stretch, it's close kin to Central Expressway. The road surface -four lanes at that point -would be sunk deeply into the inner slope ofthe river levee, with a
pedestrian promenade cantilevered· over it, screening it from the view of peopie above. On the other side, a floodwall concealed by a landscaped lO-foot earthen berm would hide the road
from people in the city's planned riverside park. Alarge, elaboratelylandscaped plaza at Reunion Boulevard would span the highway, linking downtown to the river, lakes, wetlands and
other recreational fea-. tures. The plan also calls for a second "pedestrian plaza deck: but does not specify a location. "I am very happy with this solution. I hope and pray that the
council will be happy," said Mayor Laura Miller, who instigated hiring an urban design team to rethink the park and highway. The revised design represents two months of furious number
crunching and negotiation, and design changes shepherded by Michael Morris, director oftransportation for the North Central Texas Council ofGovernments. On one sidewas the city's tearn,
which wanted to minimize the road's effect on the 1\inity greenbelt; on the other were state and regional transportation planners, who wanted to be sure the new road shoulders a sufficient
share ofthe traffic burden. "The urban design and transportation partnershiphas reached consensus," proclaims the presentation prepared for Monday. Residents can see and commentonthe
plan at three public meetings over the next week. The plan is the work of urban designer Alex Krieger, transportation planner William Eager and landscape architect George Hargreaves,
hired with private funds
• 􀁂􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁫􀁴􀁨􀀮􀁥􀁄􀁾􀂷􀀻..􀀳􀀮􀁾 Trinity plans have'beenbottled,too long, The Dallas City Council is devoting its 'First, the Council should decide the prop-.,' ' , entire schedule
today to the llinity er route for the road built in or around the River improvements plan. Good for llinity River. There will be 'five option's on it. Nothing on its agenda this year
is more the table. There ought to be'only one by the important than get-􀀬􀁟􀀢􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀧􀀨􀀧􀀢 : end ofthe day. ' , ting the 1linity plan Elected officials ale out of the ditch and so
should work toon the road to reality. ward resolvmg any Enough studies lingering issues with have been done. the city's partners in Enough numbers this project -the have been crunched.
U.S. Army Corps of Action is what voters Engineers, the North expected when they Texas Thllway Auapproved an unprece-, thority and the Notth dented $246 million Central Texas Council
in bonds for llinity River improvements ofGovernrnents. Even some ofthe environfive years ago. Action is is what they deserve mental groups seem ready,tQvgork toward rightnow.comp!:"Ornise.
All parties. ,seeI*.'poised tq. In March, noted urban designer Alex make something good hapPeIlin the vast ' Krieger and transportationexpert Williarnwastelandalongtheriver. " Eager handed the council a bold yet highly Some critics arguethat the Ttinity plan is workable vision for the river corridor that just another
costlydream toyfor downtown dealt with most of the stumbling blocks in Dallas. They couldn't be mqre'YlPng. The the way of earlier llinity development entire city -in fact, tlte. entire
region -will' plans. ' benefit from the llinity River improve-It resolved, for example, questions about ments plan. The, project will open up,thoubuilding a lake in the river corridor.
The sands 􀁯􀁾acres ofunused land for public enplan calls for a series of smaller, terraced joyrnent.' The, Great llinity l"orest will lakes that will have much greater impact. become
an environmental wonder for stuThe consultants, hired by Mayor Mayor Laura 􀁤􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁳 and visitors alike. The series ofsmall Miller with privately donated funds, re-lakes, proposed by
the consultants, will proceived widespread applause for their work vide Dallas with its own version of'New and the clever way they incorporated a toll York's CeD.traiPark., , " road
along the levees without hindering the This is an important moment. The llini-' recreational uses ofthe improved river way. ty Plan has been up on bloCks, too long. The It's time now
to stop applauding, and Dallas City 􀁃􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁣􀁩􀁬􀀬􀁾􀁥􀁥􀀼􀁬􀀤 􀁾 fire up the enstart doing. ' ' ginetoday.,' 􀀧􀀡􀁦􀀻􀀢􀀺􀁾􀁦􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀻􀀻􀁩􀀻􀀻􀀬􀀢 '.
Parkway design 'pretty,' but ••• 􀀨􀀧􀁩􀁜􀁾􀀧􀀢􀁦􀁮􀀺􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁡􀀺􀀧 port the plan, including funding its key elements. But there has not been a detailed cost estimate or an agreement about
how much mane" each of the socalled "flmdinf: p311ncrs" \\"onld supply. 􀁐􀁲􀁥􀁶􀁩􀀨􀀩􀁵􀁾 􀀨􀀧􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁭􀁡􀁬􀀨􀀧􀁳 put tht' price of the rorti! at more than S600million, In 1998, city
voters approved $84 million for transportation improvements along the Trinity corridor. Analysts for the North Tex"sToliwav Authorit\' estimate that till' 􀁡􀁾􀁬􀀧􀁬􀁩􀁬􀀧􀁙 Call1'(Hitribllll'
il.S mucll as Slf,O million. Michael Morris, transportation direclor for the North Central Texa.< Council of Governments, ,aid he wa.' confident that thl' Regional '])-ansp0l1al ion
Coun<:il would contribute funds. The balance \\ill /,\11 to the Texas !)cpan111l'11t {)f1ran:-::'I)()rl a1 i,m. those were sufficient to handle traffic and spur development. "Connectivity
is important so that 30 years from now we're not looking for ways to connect to this road road so economic deyelopment doesn't bypass theseareas,"Mr. Salazar said. Disappoinbnell( A
rew council members also expressed disappointment that the road is a high-speed tollway rather than a low-speed parkway. 'Sandy Greyson, chairwoman ofthe riouncil's transportation committee,
voiced the sharpest displeasure. "We haye spent a lot oftime and money to go from an eight-lane tollway to a six-lane tollway, and I don't think that's what the public wants," she said.
. Residents will haye a chance to express their views at three public meetings this week. By VICTORIA LOE HICKS StutfWriler Dallas City Council members liked the fir;t course they were
"'rwd Mondav b,' the cit,,'s Trinity River urhiln 􀀧􀁤􀁥􀁾􀁩􀁧􀀺􀁮 "con!'l1ltallis. hut s('\"('Tal clamored for a Illllrt: 􀀺􀀭􀀺􀁬􀁬􀁨􀁳􀁴􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁬􀀧 rol'a 1. ") "ppn·t'iate the
prell,. piclures: council mcmber Lois Finkelman said, "but I'm very frustrated that there are no hard numbers, there are no cost figures.... "I hope this works: her colk'agllt' !\'1ill'hd]
HiL",ansh"Y :-:aid, ·'bull want tosee 􀁷􀁨􀁥􀁲􀁥􀁷􀁾􀀧􀁲􀁥going to get the money," Until Friday, the city's urban design team was still negotiating \\ilh ,tHIe and regiOl",1 highway
planllers on', the shape of the 􀀱􀀢􀁬􀁉􀁷􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀧 thaI is olle of the project's major componcIIts. 'nw dc,if:n leam told Iho ell\111l'il 􀁾􀀧􀁉􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁡􀁾􀀧 lhal all parties hart'
􀁡􀁾􀁮􀀧􀁥􀁤 in ('Ollcept to SIlPncr William Eager into the planning process, called the result of their work "a triumphant compromise.-But other council members weren't fully convinced.
Oak Cliff representatiycs expressed concern about whether residents south and west ofthe riy· er would haye adequate access to thetoilway. Presently, highway planners envision connections
at Westmoreland Road, Hampton Road, Sylvan Avenue and Interstate 35E. Council members Elba Garcia, Steve Salazar and Ed Oakley pressed planners about whether • Tuesday, Yvonne Ewell
Townview Center cafeteria, 1201 E. Eighth St • Thursday, Hillcrest Church. 12123 Hillcrest Ave. • Monday. Dallas City Hall. 1500 Marilla St. conference center on level Ll All meetings
are from 6 to 8 p.m. 'rRINITY PLAN COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS vard and an undetermined location, connecting downtown and the park • Augmented by an enhanced Industrial Boulevard, which would
funnel downtown traffic to and from the tollway in the downtown stretch • Also augmented by a leveetop boulevard along the Oak Cliff levee, which would stimulate development and help
ease traffic bottlenecks On thatsideofthe river ,Triwnphant' Ms. Miller, who raised private funds to bring urban designer Alex Kriegel' and transportation plan-Roads on top ofthe le"ee
would allow downtown and neighborhoods to cxl'and to the river's edge. l'llllatlll' pi'll'. Oak Clilfwollid IlCl·,oJllwl1,'<.llo lhcT,·inity. Continuedfrom Page IB Cost figures are supposed
to be supplied to the council in August. At that time, Mavor 􀁾􀀬􀁵􀁲􀁡 Miller wants the t'Ounrii to furmallv endorsl' Ihe revised road and'park configuration. In the latest version,
the road would be: • Atollway, with a posted speed of 55 mph, running from State Highway 183 in the north to U.S. Highway 175 and Interstate 45 in the south. • Six lanes north ofContinentaI
Avenue and four lanes south ofit, with the capacity to expand to sLx lancs after 2025 • Raised 011 an earthen bench along the inner li,ce of the east le\'l'C along most or its length
and flanked b\' a IO-Ioot earthen berm in the 􀁤􀁴􀀩􀁾􀀧􀁮􀁴􀁏􀁜􀀧􀁮 stretch to hide it from abo\'C and below • Bridged 􀁢􀁾􀀧 landscaped pedestrian 􀁤􀀨􀀧􀁬􀀧􀁫􀀮􀁾 at Rl'union Houle-Urban
designers' plans for the Trinity River in Dallas include landscaped pedestrian decks at Reunion Boulevard. In an arti.<;l's rendering, the tolhvay would run along the eal>1.leveeand
be raised.,,9n an􀁾􀁥􀁮bench and flanked by a berm. _ ' r,//,4/tf/p ";{r-pJ .;..􀁾􀀮􀁾:=1--! Council menlbers say Trinity 􀁾 i ) River proposal is long on visual : appeal but short on
cash facts
.. -., ..-.......---_. __. IJ )':' ....r' . 􀀧􀀱􀁾􀀢􀀬 .",.; 􀁾􀁾. ::'C.';'!'P!"," . . '. . ... 􀀬􀀬􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁟􀁩􀀬􀀫􀀺􀀬􀀻􀀻􀀺􀀫􀀭 􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁥 Trinity Riyer Rroposal: Stopthe talk 􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁤􀁑􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀮􀁬􀁴
􀁬 􀀧􀀼􀁾􀁩􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁉􀀬 􀀧􀁾􀀦􀀻􀁶 ,6 ,,;jr /13 . .􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁜􀀺􀀧􀁲􀀧􀀻􀀺􀀧􀁩􀀼􀀧 ' Standfug on the .Iumpy side-is 􀁳􀁨􀁯􀁾􀁰􀁩􀁮􀁾 􀁡􀁲􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁾 the newest in-lakes, handsome boulevards
along 􀁰􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁴 and concrete overIid.·?vnWa walk, at the nuddle of the carnation m a senes of plans to the levees and a spectacular pedes-kind of watercolor dreammess. It . Continental
Viaduct, it turn the muddy 'llinity and its trian promenade that extends looks like what we all wouldIike takes a lot ofiinagination to see the swampy bottomland into Dallas' downtown
Dallas to the water's the future to be. possibilities the so-called Trinity "signature" amenity. edge. The plan, understandaPly, has River Corridor presents. You have The proposal presented
to the Artist renderings of the plan skeptics. . to work at it. City Council this week is an ambi-look like those beautiful hand-There has been high talk in The latest of many do-some-tious
redevelopment that includes tinted, linen-finished postcards thing-with-the-river-committees a new freeway, a chain of pristine , from the 1940s, with even the as-􀀬􀁩􀀺􀁾 .. 􀁾􀁉􀁾􀂷
􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀺 􀀮􀀼􀁴􀀬􀁾􀁊􀁁􀁃􀁑􀁕􀁲􀁮􀁌􀁙􀁎􀁎 FLOYD 􀀮􀀻􀀺􀂧􀁴􀁾􀀻􀀡􀀻􀀻􀀮 ", "'.\'_. ''.;{__.􀁾􀀺􀁡􀀺􀀭􀀮􀀻􀀮 􀁊􀀬􀀬􀁩􀁾􀀮􀁉􀁟􀁾􀁜.􀁕􀁇.􀁦􀁦􀀧 "_'___ -.. • ',' If,:, 􀁾􀁴􀁡􀁮 grapun:: JACQillELYNN
FLOYD Dallas deserves Trinity River development E-mailjfloyd@dallasnews.com <, county jail is prominent in the ing curves of its natural path 􀁾 view to the left, and a towering se-Give
Us Trinity Sinuosity·· ries of power line stanchions (GUTS!). marches into the distance on the Dallas needs this. right ' You can buy postcards that i But it is also a mighty swath of
show the city 􀁳􀁫􀁙􀁾􀁥 reflected: wild and pristine nature that Dal-magically on the 􀁲􀁩􀁶􀁥􀁲􀀧􀁾silverysur-;. las has all but ignored for 100 . face, and every photOgrapher in I·
:: years. ,to.wn knows that. this photo can:.! The basin between the levees is . only be' shot from a remote vista :": vast, verdant and luxuriously when there's a flood. With tl!e ....!
green. llinity River Corridor VISion Plan . .:! If you look long enough, you (please,somebody think of a new'. ) see that the raw materials for a . name),wecouldallgooyerailds& ' J huge
and spectacular urban park it anyold timewem<e.,:l..; .. ; .t· ., 􀁡􀁲􀁾 right here in our midst. This plan will. pi'9,bii,bly neep . During a lull in the traffic, you andis certain
to 􀁧􀁥􀁴􀁳􀁯􀁷􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁮􀁥􀀭􀁴􀁵􀀴􀂭 can hear birds and frogs and in-ing and amendmerit;':arid IDa.UY sects. I watched an egret coasting competing 􀁩􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁾 are going fa lazily along
the river's path, pass-. say theyaren'tfully satisfied 􀁗􀁩􀁾 ing under the bridge beneath my its elements. 􀁐􀁥􀁯􀁰􀁬􀁾 will worty feet as if there were no trucks or about cost and
road routes and 􀀦􀁾􀀭 . buildings, no cityfor miles around. curity, and they'll bicker over wljp Plan supporters say engineer-gets the final sayon the specifiC$::; ing can turn the
river that almost But this is a spectacular gift; a . no one ever bothers to notice into present that Dallas owes itself..Jj::s Dallas' most recognizable feature, long overdue. :. 􀀧􀁾􀀮
right down to restoration of. the "-river's "sinuosity" -the meander-Continuedfrom Page lB the audience wore that earnest, civic-minded look common to Dallas about "reclairniD.g" the
des-people willing to forgo Wheel of erted stretch of river at the city's Fortune for a boring meeting in a heart for more than 25 years, and school cafeteria. people have gotten conditioned
to The working title of the redenothing ever happening. Suspi-velopment proposal is "lHnity dous environmentalists call it a River Corridor Vision .Plan," flimsy excuse to use park moneyto
which I don't think really sets peobuild a freeway, and the potholes-pIe onfire. They need a snappy ac-. first crowd sees it as grandiose taX-ronym that could fit on a lapel pin, payer
scam. ;." such as Trinity Action Pronto The hard-and-fast details· (TAP!) or Corral Our River Now about 􀁷􀁨􀁡􀁴􀀭􀁧􀁥􀁴􀁳􀀭􀁢􀁵􀁩􀁬􀁴􀁾􀁷􀀴􀁥􀁲􀁥 and (CORN!). 􀁨􀁯􀁷􀀭􀁩􀁴􀀭􀁧􀁥􀁴􀁳􀀭􀁰􀁡􀁩􀁤􀀭􀁦􀁯�
�􀁡􀁬􀁾􀁹􀁳 seem' Or maybe they just need to one more consultant report or send everybody out to the middle blue-ribbon planning committee ofthe ContinentaI Viaduct. away. People get
cynical and indif-r parked at one end of the ferent. . bridge, next to an abandoned .But Dallas needs this. . shopping cart full of trash, and I honestly think that if every-hiked out
to the middle, trying to bodystood up -hearme out, here ignore the cement trucks blasting -just stood up and said, "We past and the drivers staring at me want it, let's get going," it
could as ifl were nuts. happen. There's money in the The view from the middle is bankto get started. initially unprepossessing: a slug-I dropped in at a public hearing gish, muddy ribbon
of river lined on the newest proposal this week. by overgrown trees in a wide, 􀁾 Most of the 40 or so members of swampybasin. Thebacksideofthe 􀁾􀁾
E·ml\i[ vloe@dallasncw'i.clIm the standard for all freeways -especially given that no freeway in Dallas has a posted specd of 70 mph. "We could have some discussion about whether that
is an acceptable base rate, or if it s.hould beratcbeted down,'she said. More broadly, she said, it's valid to ask: "What's an acceptable level ofcongestion during a rushhour period?
Some people would argue that ifyou can travel at40 or 45mph, that's prettygood: In a perfect world, with unlimited money, Mr. Nesbittsaid, highway planners wollld add enough lanes so
that evezy freeway, during every hour of the day, achieved what he called 'ideal, driver-preferred conditions,' meaning )'Ou never have to hit the brakes. In the imperfect real world
of downtown Dallas, they are willing to accept an Fduring four hours of the day. The toll road along the Trinity -supplemented by improvements to existing freeways, more mass transit
and other strategies -is supposed to make sure that's still the case in 2025. "We know we can't desiJ\ll a a perfect system. but '\I,'C "'...anl 􀁴􀀬􀁾􀁻􀁬􀀬􀀧􀂷 sign the most efficient
system we can,"Mr. Nesbitt said Mr. Morris said that even if the Thansportation Department oould add enough lanes to 1-30 and r-35E to handle additional vchicIes -and it can't, he said
-having a second highway is a bettcr solution. Having one freeway is like having one hose, he said. If an accident clogs it, you've got no a1ternativeroute. '"I'he 'Iiinity is the second
hose,' he said. Stafl'graphic Council ofGovernments are using when they say the freeways around the mixmaster are congested. City Council member Lois Finkebnan,. who is on the council's
transportation committee and participated in the 1998 investment study, said even public officials may be hazy about what highway planners mean by "congestion: As a result, she said,
'our discussions may be a whole lot less valid than they ought to be." Ms. Finkelman, who serves on the Council of Governments' Regional 'II-ansportation Council, said she's surprised
that 70 mph is which uses 70 mph as the standard for freeways, regardless of the legal speed -a road gets an F whenever traffic can' move faster than 49 mph. At that point, the freeway
is officiallycongested. That means the canyon is congested whenever traffic must slow to 6 mph below the legal limit of 55 mph. Put anotherway, the canyon gets an Fwhen traffic is ableto
move at 89 pereent of the posted limit On 1-35, where the posted speed is 60 mph, a segment is graded F when traffic is able to move at 82 percentofwhat's legal. Those are the standards
the Thansportation Department and lousy geometries. In layman's terms, they're twi&, ty, convoluted and confusing, forcing drivers to slow down regardless of how much or little traffic
there is. Those problems will be improved but not eliminated by a recoJistruction now on the drawingboanls. Based on the densities and calculated speeds, each highway segment was assigned
a letter grade ..,. A, B, Co D, E or F -for each hourfrom 6:30to 9 s.m. and from 3:30to 6:30 p.m. Thegradingsystern was developed by the American ksociation of State Highway and 'II-ansportation
Officials. Under their grading cuJve -ed the speed at which traffic on each highway segmentwas able to· move. The greater the density, the s10werthespeed: 20carsperlanemile translates
to about 55 mph; 80cars equals about 20 mph. The council's photos found no densities as high as 80 􀀨􀁣􀁯􀁾 sponding to 20 mph) in either the canyon or mixmaster. In several spots, photos
showed peak-period densities ofjust 45 cars per lanemile, colTesponding to 50 mph. However, narratives accompanying the charts generally estimated speeds as being somewhat lower than
the numbers alone would indicate. Mr. Morris said the difference maylie in the roads' . COntinudjromPtJgdA transportation Institute documented average speeds of36 to 49 mphduringpeakperiods.
"It's bani to believe it comes out to more than 30 mph," said .Tim Nesbitt, the 'Iransportation ·Department'schiefplsnner on the Trinity ton road project. "From pmoDsl experience, I
lawW that [[tral;iling through the niixmas-·\erJY'lW'foot is onthat brakeped 􀁾􀁾.•.' .. '.. . ... .·";"'-'Ibe 􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁴􀀧􀁳 1998 Major . ·ThUlsportation In_ent Study 'OftheTrinitycorridor,
􀁷􀁢􀁩􀁲􀀮􀁨􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁾 eluded. that only buildiDg a. neW bigliwaycould adequatelyunsnarl· 􀁾􀁭􀁊􀁸􀁭􀁡􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁲􀀮􀁤􀁩􀁤 not presentthe 'iiiiderlyingcongestion daIa. Itwas 􀁾..on, a. Council
of Govern-.. Dients' model that predicts traffic' .based oli popuWion and elDPIoy-·iDeRtpatterns. ..: 􀁾 ::'Ibe modell00kil at how:many peOple live in the region, wbere they live; where
the jobs are and a host of Olher variables, then 􀁰􀁾 :·dicts bowmanyvebicles will use a given road during given boW'S on· an averagewee1tday... The resultsarevalidated insevera! ways,
primarily by spotchecking the predictions against actual traffic counts. OYer time, the model bas proved to be extremely aa:urate, said Michael Morris, the council's director of transportation.
. The council's 2000 study of commuter traffic took a di1ferent approach; it was based on observation. ResearclIers used aerial photography to document the number ofvehicles on Dallas'freeWlI}'S
at various times of day over several days, then counted the number ofcars per lane per mile. Usinga formula, they calculat-I J: I: I·ij (. '.'.'., ..􀁾􀁾 :.;i/".:.c 􀁾 􀀻􀀧􀁾􀁩􀁷􀀮􀀧....􀁾.•􀁾􀁾...._
_....;.... 􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀢􀁾􀁟.••:,;:__......_ •..:._..• 􀁥􀁥􀁤􀁳􀁯􀁦􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁾􀀬􀀧􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾..· 􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁴􀁗􀁡􀁳􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷 􀀲􀀰􀁯􀁯􀁊􀁮􀁤􀁪􀁬􀁩􀁙􀁾􀁾􀀰􀁲􀀺􀁴􀀡􀁜 «::#1"-"'\,; 􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀧􀁬
􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀹􀀸􀀧􀁾􀀹􀁊􀁬􀀨􀀮 :..􀁾CouncilofGOWrimlents. i •. ,;· 􀁩􀁬􀁪􀀺􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀥􀁾􀀴􀀺􀀳􀁝􀀡 B'······· lC!l•. 􀁾􀁾
Transportation commission slots may go to VaIIeyites McAllen Monitor 1.-/01-' FJUN 222003 By Jessica Rocha Monitor Staff Wrller larocha@themonllor.comMcAllen Monitor JUN 22 2003 􀁾􀀱􀀺􀁲􀀭
Among those expressing interest Is Paul Cowen, lucio's chief of staff. Cowen has been with the senale for almost 14 years. "With all my exptlrlQOCe I have, I think I could do a tremendous
Job for the border,'Cowen said. adding, 0' know the governor wants to taka care of the border and wants to put someone that wanls to represent that area.". 􀁾􀁾􀀮 McALLEN -GoV, Rick
Perry Is considering appointing a border resident to fill one of two newly created positions on the powerful Texas Tl'a/lsporlallon CommIssion, which could lead to more money for the
historically under funded Rio Grande Valley. area transportallon advocales say. "We know (Perry) will appoint someone from the border region, but we need someone from the Valley" said
Bill Summers, president and chief executive of the Rio Grande Valley Partnership, a public and private coalition that lobbies for transportation fundIng, Summers is considered one of
the polential nominees for the post. The govemor's olnce did not return telephone calls spe<:lflcally asking If Perry Intended lQ nominate a border resident. In late May, Perry signed
a bill Increasing to five. from three, the number of members appointed to the Texas Transportation Commission. Commissioners serve staggered six-year terms .expirlng Feb. 1of every odd-numbered
year. The commissIon Is responsible for overseeing the slate's transportation plans and OKs project funding, amounting to almost 10 percent of the state budget, or $10.5 billion, over
the next two years. Transportation Is the stale's thirdlargest expense behind health and human servIces andeduoaUon. "All economic development, the majority of cilles and many of the
big trade organizations spend a great a mount of time at (the TB1C8S Department of Transportation). You couldn't underestimate the Importance of the commIssion," said John Crutchfield,
president and chief executive of the Harlingen Area Chamber of Commerce. The leglslallon, sponsored by Sen. Eddie Lucio Jr.• o-arownsville, states the geographic makeup of the commission
should reflect the state's regions. One commIssioner must come from a rural area. The law takes effect Sepl 1. Candidates can apply for themselves, be nominated by a third party or ba
solicited by the governor's office. Applications go through the governor's appointment division, WhIch reviews the applications and makes recommendations. The senate must approve the
govemor's appointments. '"The Idea Is to liast as wide a net as possible to 98t the most qualified candidates," said Kathy Walt, press secretary for Perry. There are no deadlines for
filt1ng the vacancies. To date. 72 poople from around the stale have contacted the governor's office expressing Interest In (lervlng 8S a commissioner. Other possible candidates, some
ofwhom hllVe contacted the governor's office, InclUde Port of Browll!lville Director Raul Bestelro Jr.; Harlingen-based Texas stala Bank executive Vice President Alan Johnson; Harlingen
Mayor Connie de la Garzai Brownsville rancher and prominent businessman '-:rank YlUrriai McAllen lawyer Tom Wingate and Mission Mayor Norberta Salinas. Hlstortcally, the border has been
underrepresented on the transportation commission, local offlclals said. Deep South Texes has never been represented for a full term on the commission. McAllen lawyer Ruben Cardenas
Is the only Valley resIdent to ever hold the poslllon, for 18 months under Gov. Ann RIchards. About $600 million in hlghway expansIon projects are under way In the fourcounty area of
Starr. Hidalgo, Wl1Iacy and Cameron, However. traffic has increased 􀁲􀁮􀁾􀁲􀁫􀁥􀁣􀁬􀁬􀁹 In Ihe past dec;ade with trade-related and population growth, and the area's roads have had difficulty
copIng with Increased use. With a population of about 1 million, the Valley Is believed be the most populous part of the United Slates without an Interstate highway syslem. Local lawmakers
and economlo development officials continue bJ puSh (or the creaUon of 1·69, or the NAFTA superhighway, which would connllCt Canada with Mexico and Include U.S. Highways 71,83 and 281.
Currently, commission members are Chairman John W. JOhnson, a Houslon oil executive; Robert Nichols. a business executive from JacksonviDe In East Texas; and RIchard F. "Rio" Williamson.
a former state legislator from Weatherford, in the DallalrFort Worth area. The commission meets monthly. At the next meellng on June 26, members of the Rio Grande Valloy Partnership,
a coalllion of Valley-area elected officials, administrators and economIc development groups, will present Its transportation priorities and request funding for them. Jessica Rocha covers
business, economics and sociallssues for Valley Freedom Newspapers. She Is based at The Monitor and can be reached at (958) 683-4448.
ferry considers appointment to Transportation Commission Off/clals say govenor could Jlldc borcler reslllllnt to fill position 􀀺􀀢􀁾􀁉 􀁑􀀢􀁯􀁉􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀧 i:.:=-r::r:;: 'PI. 0..;, iii!
no tak r_ bopm 1IlIl ... 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮 .:sIJ., :: cIIIs .. tbo trip wII..... bDOI: lbatlbo Rio 01md0 Volloy is -.....-.. '01"_ .-=.,pIIlbIou..lJdp-􀁇􀁴􀁯􀀺􀁩􀁡􀁉􀀱􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁉􀁯􀁟􀁯􀁲􀁬􀁨􀀮
􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀽􀀢􀁄􀁟􀁉􀁉􀁉 '"Wo ..􀁾ClIo D&Cefo JI'1 101 ilDpoviq .....p>dllioo) by .iopIJ .... linIcnlho........,..y.....,. 􀁭􀁟􀀢􀀧􀁗􀁯􀁟􀁾􀀱􀁇 􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀽 􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾 _ ... _ ..... NIw
... .. 􀁯􀁐􀁡􀁩􀁤􀁡􀁉􀀮􀁉􀀮􀁾.-. ow nqaeI1.. lbII II" it elSa :=.u==:-"==,, C<Jaoeclioat """"" Ilab 􀀺􀁓􀁾􀁩􀀮􀁾....":'" 􀁁􀁮􀁊􀁗􀁡􀁉􀀱􀁬􀁩􀁉􀁄􀁾•. ', bBDspOtIatioo DCO<b is􀁾 􀀽􀁴􀀮􀁾..
-·rTlDOTJ commissiOOert 􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀡􀁣􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀽 coming »uk for mOllCY. A ,trddlolI'OldDIIJ·iD. 􀀽􀁾􀁬􀁹􀁬􀀢􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀧􀀺􀀮􀀧􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀮􀁾 come before die OOIIUIIaD:II .. 􀁲􀁯􀀮􀁲􀀺􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀺􀀻􀀧􀀽􀀭􀀢􀀬􀀬􀁾
""G"I"r;"ia'....w.....it..is IifIicIJI fer • JJl!I'I!'lO lid ClIe ar or lbe IhRe nDOT_-CIIIlrman John W. JohDsoD (rom HOUIlOo,No_....... _ad_If_ [rom /MIoofrIIII& TsD01' COIIIJDiIaa.
meet WESlJICO -The failure of Pharr and SID Juan to joiD a ..gioooIlAltr""lbItt<lllmed willi tbo T_ !leJ*1m"" or T_IIoII""_"",1d jeopIrdize If much • SJ bWDD iD bdiDa fl1' 1110 mucb
􀁾 loterBlatc: 69 Cld othor umI-􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁩􀀽􀁾􀁾 deep -I ..... !bo<JIb'l'd 1>0 ..,mJ Ibis, but we have to include P!Iar..... 􀁾 Ihcy c!oa', pay UP, 􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁍􀁩􀀮􀀧􀁁􀁩􀀧􀁩􀀺􀁮􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀺 baboonlmemberadl""
!deIIl or lho McAIIeo􀁾 Dovelopmoal c..,...-..... 􀁦􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁃􀀺􀁖􀁤􀁯􀁲􀁍􀁣􀁬􀁩􀁜􀀮 ilyr.t,on:o -_COIl_ Of row 􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁴􀁳 and tileR tBID 40 ci,;", includiDg /oIcAIIoa. /lit. 􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀻􀁳􀁾􀁾
,ioo lltlll4ly. .\me :Ill. 11I<y will􀁾a c:omprcbensivc pIOI........,1lloVolle)o'o-palatioo ""cds 1luouBh tho li'J"J:'=-1IMo PrmP1s lak force bo'ldoutl Hidalgo COIIIlIy and San BenIto
have rtlCeDtIy 􀁾 tel' fmldtboi!"'p,mWDg_ and San Juan the only local cuLities not cooperating with tho tast foree, aid Bill Sum· mcrs. di","'CtOr or lbc Ric1 cmde 􀁖􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁹 flltncnlip.
Tbc Rio <1ranlk VaJlq 􀁰􀁾􀀮 ncrsbip SJ'W"heodcd !he 1001< force more thI:a 10 Jem aeo. PtIme ClUs seekinS commQI £rom Phan City Mmagef kNlO lDpez ad Son .... Cay MIll. IIC' 1otJ. 􀁁􀁲􀁣􀀮􀁵􀁾
Wert! nol _ by preP time M",<iIy. Tbe task force's S2OO.ooo budge' i. _ 􀁰􀁾􀀮 utIY participating c:i.tlCl lUld OOlllllies 00 • per capiUI (Ol1lnda Pharr and su. Juan ba"c oplld 1:101
10 ply ,boal SJo.DOO. or Ibout 22 tenb pet milbl The. tl5k force h. 􀁾􀁲􀁾 the .,..', tnRSpOf18lion nc:cd3 In t)w study it will prestN. 10 􀁾􀁲 neu week, Summm lrlIn.-dty 􀁨􀁩􀁧􀁨􀀧􀁗􀁾
10 CDnDetl .... cilia I"􀁦􀀱􀁩􀁤􀁯􀁾 """-IDd Slnr.a. Milia IIR pII1 or lhe _pS1ua,0U0well 11!1 pIara 10 b.u..il.l IIId. fbur that would 1:000necl with the mucHwai«elllnla'. 11aIt69,
McAIlou U 17 2l!!I IV8118YiDObility plan lDap unveiled v*Y8'J=....=-., McAllenMonitor 􀁾.2-JUN 2S2003 McALLEN -Gov. Rick Perry Is considering appointing il border resident to fill Dne
or two newly createc! positions on the powerful Texas Transportation commIssion, which could lead to mOrtl money for tho hlstorlcally under fUnded Rio Granc!e Valley, anti transportatlon
advcx:al:e.l AY. By JeSSICA ROCHA The Monitor The commiSSion Is responsible lor overseeing the state's transportatlon plan. and OKs project I\IOOln9, 􀁾􀁭􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁴􀁬􀁮􀁧 to almost 10
perceht or the state budget, or $10.5 bdlkm, over the nexnwo yeers. Transportation Is the state's third·largest expense behind health and humlln sel"llces and educatIOn. 'All economic
development, tile majorlty or eltles lind many or the big tnde ol'llanlzlltlons spenllll great amQunt of time lit (the Texas Department of Transportation). You couldn't underestimate
the Importance 0/the commission,· $bId John CtUtcMeld, president and chief exeCUtlvll or the Harlingen Ala Chamber or Commerce. The Illglslatlon, sponsored by Sen. Eddie LuQo Jr., D-Browmvllle,
states that the geographic makeup of the commIsSIon should reflect the state's regions. One commissioner muse come frOm a rural lIrea. The law takes erreet Sept. 1, Candidates can apply
for themseMts. be nominated by a third patty or be solicited by the governor's offlce. ApplicationS go through the governor's appointment division, whld! reviews the appl1Ol1Uons and
makes rncamrnendaUons. The senate must approve the appolntmentf made by the !joveI'llor. "The Idea Is to Cilst as wide I net as possible to get the most quallned 􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁬􀁤􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁳􀀬􀀧
said Kathy Walt, press secretary for Perry. Th.rc are no deadlines ror nlllng the vacancies. To date, 72 people I'rom around the state hilve contaetecl the governor's offlce expressing
Interest In serving ilS a commissioner, 'We know (Perry) will appoint someone Irom the border region, but we need someone from the Valley,' $illc! alii summers, preslclent Dnd chlel
􀁾􀁴􀀻􀁃􀁕􀁴􀁬􀁶􀁥 or the RID Grande ValleY l'artnershlp, I public Bnd private coalltlon that lobbies ror transportation fUnding, SummeR Is considered 0," of tile potentlal nominees
for the post. TIle governor's office did not 􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁮 telephone calls 5llednc:a11y aslclng If Perry Intended to nominate a border rl!Sldent. In late MOlY. Perry signed a bill Increasing
to t1ve,lI'om three, the number of members appoInted to the Texas Transportation Commission. CommlSflonelll serve staggered sIx-yeet terme expiring Feb. 1 of every odd-numbered year,
Among those expressIng Intcrest 15 Paul Cowen, 􀁾􀁵􀁣􀁬􀁯􀀧􀁳 chief of st<lff. Cowen has been wIth the senate lor almost 14 yeurs. "With all my experience 1 have, I thInk I could do
a 􀁴􀁲􀁥􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁤􀁯􀁾􀁳 Job fOf the border,' Cowen said. adding. "I know the governor wants to take caro of the border and WZlnlS to put someone that wants to represent thitt area." Other
possible eandldDles, some of whom have contacted the govemor's ottlca, Include POrt or Brownsville Olrector Raul Bestelro Jr.; Harllngon-based Texas State Bank Executive Vice President
Alan Johnson; Harlingen Mayor Connl. de la Gana i Brownsville rancher and promll\ent businessman frank Yturrlil; McAllen 􀁉􀁾􀁷􀁶􀁥􀁲 Tom Wlng.te and MIssion Mayor Norberto Salinas.
. Historically, the border has been underrepresented on tM transportation commission. local omclab said. Deep South Texas has never been represcnttld /or a lull term on the commission.
'\ McAllen lawyer Flubsn Cardenas 1$ the only Valley resldent to ever hold tne pO$ltlon,ror 18 mDnths under GOV. Ann Richards,
Page6B Friday, June 20. 2003 ,'i Bush Turnpike hearing focuses on Rowlett, Garland, Sachse Officials urge residents, civic groups to attend meeting on extension By STEPHEN TERRY Rockwall-Rowlett
Bureau ROWLE1T -Rowlett officials are encouraging residents to make their voices heard Thesday at a hearing on the planned e:\1ension of the Bush Thrnpike through the city."We have spent
a lotoftime, energy and resources preparing and strategically planning for the tollway; Mayor Shane Johnson said. "This is the last opportunity for residents and ci\;c groups to make
public comments about their wishes. It is important for our voices and wishes to be heard and expressed." The City Council adopted a resolution'Thesday night reaffirming its support
for the turnpike extension, which Rowlett officials view as crucial to the city's efforts to attract businesses that can take some ofthe tax burden offhomeowners. The hearing by the
North Texas Tollway Authority is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. at the Patty Granville Arts Center, 330 N. Fifth St. in Garland. It will be preceded by an open house from 2to 6:30 p.m. The
authority wants to hear from officials, civic leadero and residents from Rowlett, Garland and Sachse. The extension from State Highway 78 south to Interstate 30 would go through each
of the citIes.The turnpike stretches 21 miles from Carrollton through southwestern Collin County to Garland. An additional3.9-mile segment in Irving will be connected to the rest of
the turnpike by 2006, when a 5.2-mile connector is to open. Rowlett City Manager Susan Thorpe said tollway authority officialshad encouraged Rowlett leaders to become familiar with a
draft environmental impact statement on the project. That document examines the social, economic and environmental consequences of two alternative routes and of not buildingthe extension.
The route alternatives arc identical through much ofRowlett but diverge in the north and at Interstate 30. Rowlett's resolution supports ,the longer route because it would provide access
to nearly 1,000 acres that the cityhas set aside for a technologyand research district. The cost estimates for the extension through Rowlett range from $394 million to $436 million,
depending on which route is chosen. Rowlett's preferred route would have an estimated economic benefit of$l.45 billion to the immediate area that includes Rowlett, Garland and Sachse
and bring in more than 10,000 jobs, the report says. The other route would add nearly 6,900 jobs and have $860 million in economic benefit. About $240 million in economic benefits and
900 jobs would be created if the turnpike weren't built, the study found. Building the extension would displace a couple ofdozen houses, several businesses and up to 439 apartments,
the report said. Local officials recently viewed an animated presentation ofwhat the turnpike extension could loqk • • •• Alternative 1 c::::::::::I Alternative 2 ", OBoxlt$ Indicate
" wIIere the highway might be depressed Staffgraphic like as it Winds through the three cities. The presentation depicted exit and entrance ramps, atoll pla.za, the connection to Interstate
30, and the depression ofthe highway below grade level from north of State Highway 66 south past Rowlett High School. Residents will have an opportunity to view the same presentation
duringThesday's open house. Texas Department of'Ihmsportation and NITA staff will be present to answer questions and provide information about the tollway authority's program for compensatingand
helping residentswhose propertieswould bedisplaced. This story also appears in'the Rockwall-Rowlett Morning News. . E-mailsterry@dallasnews.com EDITORIALS Toll Jumpers tJlftV brtf􀀭􀀿􀁾
, ' Do they realize whom they are stealing from? Let's just ho,pe St. Peter is not taking a lot ofnotes on us , when we're driving. We do some pretty thoughtless things. Like cuttingpeople
off, orpretending not to see a hopeless driver trying to merge or stealingfrom ourneighbors. That's what people do when they sail through TollThg lanes on the Bush Thrnpike and Dallas
North Tollway without having paid forthe privilege. It's stealing, plain and simple. It's a shame that so many people do it that the North Texas Tollway Authority can only focus on tracking
the worst offenders. Drivers who skip a toll once or twice won't be hit with the $25 fine that can accompany every skipped toll, but they should be. They are contributing to a loss of$5
million to $6 million a year for the NTfA, which uses revenue to build and improve highways that haveserved as virtual steroids for fast-growirig Collin County. Residents here, ofall
places, should appreciate what the tolls pay for. Yet several ofthe top offenders are Collin County residents. , Where would we be without the tollway or the turnpike? How fast would
Frisco grow without plans for further tollway '" expansion? , ' And the system just keeps growing. It will cost about $400 million to connect the turnpike to Interstate30onthe east side
of the area, and that investment could produce an estimated ·$22billionin economic impactand $1 billion in tax revenue for North Texas cities. The system is also growing in the other
direction, with plans to connect with Interstate 20 through Grand Prairie on the western edge ofDallas County. So it seems very conservative, by comparison, to pay for $2 million in
equipment and $1.2 million annually to track thieves who jump tolls. Honest TollTag users should appreciate that inveStment and the new technology used to track cheaters. If anything,
they should demand that theNTfAexpand these efforts. , But drivers have a role toplay, too. Get a TollThg. Neighborhood welcome wagons and apartment complexes should include TollTag
information in welcome packets for all new residents. Companies should encourage participation by 􀁧􀁥􀁮􀁥􀁲􀁰􀁵􀁳􀁬􀁹􀀮􀁲􀁥􀁩􀁭􀁢􀁾􀁧􀁷􀁬􀁬􀁳 􀁾.the course ofbusiness or commuting.:""""
, .'''. ',' ':" These are not publit< toads fimdedby our state taxes. These are pristine, new, fast highwa)'ll (most ofthe time) thatcome at a price. Ifyou don'tthinkit's worth it interms
ofsavedtime and economic impact for Plano, Frisco and all of Collin County, ,then stickto the roads you have,paidfor. ' 7b get a ToUTag online, go to https://tagstMe.ntta.org! tagstMe.
􀀯􀀯􀁾
I! 7 88 $13.9 billion $1.2 billion Altematlve2 Blue,sourthem 9.5 miles " $393.6 million 3 462 $22.9 billion $1.8 billion E-mail rab:-.hire@dallasncws.<:om A1tematlve 1 Green, northem
9.9 miles $436.5 million , native '1. It would destroy more apartments -363 units in the Lakeway Shore Apartments and 76 units in the Windward Apartments -but fewer single-family homes
than alternative 2. 'We're not worried about the loss of apartments," said association spokesman John Ragland. "We have more apartments in south Garland than anywhere else." Scott Sullivan
said he was concerned that the NITA maps and aerial photographs were not up to date. "I live in The Shores ofWellington," he said. "And my home's not on the map." Sandy Wesch-Schulze,
project managerfor Carter&Burgess Inc., , acknowledged that the aerial photos were dated. "Once a preferred site is chosen, we will refly the route and reassess, because we know there
has been a lot ofdevelopment," she said. sachse Mayor Hugh Cairns said he could not officiallv endorse either route until the City'Council's publichearingJuly7. But"as aprivate citizen
and a businessman," he said he preferred alternative I because it would give the city more opportunity for economic development. Rowlett Mavor Shane Johnson endorsed alternative I. He
said it would displace fewer Rowlett residents. "Rarely dowe have an opportunity to playa role in a project that will mean thousands ofjobs," Mr. Johnson said. "We are eager to work
side-by-side with our neighbors in Sachse and Garland. Rowlett's readyto go to work." Garland Mayor Bob Day cited a 1994 council resolution supporting the extension. He said the council
would endorse a route after a July 22 public hearing. Roby and Tiffany Grenier, who live in a new housing addition in Rowlett, said they favored alternative 1because of its greater potential
for economic impact and job growth. By RICHARD ABSHIRE 􀁬􀁾􀀺􀁴􀁲􀁬􀀺􀁬􀁉􀁬􀁤 Bureau Public weighs in on how best to connect Highway 78, 1-30 Here is the North Texas Tollway Aurthority's
breakdown of the two rourte altematives for the eastem extension olthe 8ush Tumpike. Estimates are In 2001 dollars. . BUSH TURNPIKE ROUTE COMPARISON GARLAND -The planning marathon that
began in 1968 hit the homestretch this week with a public hearing on route choices for the extension of the Bush Thrnpike Ii'om State Highway 78 to Interstate 30. Staffers had to hustle
more chairs into the Atrium at the Patty Granville Arts Center to accommodate more than 500 Garland, Rowlett and Sachse residents who attended Thesday's meetings. Sachse lies in both
Dallas and Collin counties. The North Texas Tollway AuthDlitv board ofdirectors will consider the residents' oral and written comments in deciding whether to recommend a route or not
build the 􀁥􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁮 at aIL Christopher Anderson, planning director for the authority, said the board would like to make a recommendation by late September. Mr. Anderson said
either oftwo routes 01' a hybrid alternative, combining portions of the two routes, was possible. The first two dozen speakerscity council members, economic development ·officials and
chamber of commerce representatives -supported the extension. Most backed alternative I, also known as the green route and the "northern" route. It would loop east through Sachse before
turning south toward Lake Ray Hubbard. Alternative 2, the blue or "southern" route, would clip a corner of Sachse. But alternative 2 would be shorter by four-tenths of a mile, displace
fewer residents and cost $42.9 million Jess to build. Representatives of Garland Residents Interested In Transportation, an association ofmorethan 100 lakeside homeowners, presented
petitions in favor of alter-Common names Length Total cost Economic benefit Jobs, development Taxrevenue Displacements Business Residential lSOURCE: NMh Tex.s Tollway Authority IN THE
WAY As many as 28 houses, five businesses and 439 apartment units would have to be removed to make way for the President George 8ush Tumpike extension south through GMand and Rowlett
to Interstate 30. Here are details by block number: ........... ."3'"0"E"", SOURCE: North Teus Tollway Aulliolity •••􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾􀀻􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀧􀁬􀁬 = Alternative 2 I e 􀁁􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁳 where
homes. 'I bUSlOesses or apart· menls may need to be 'I'j removed to make way for the turnpike. I 􀁾􀀼􀂷􀁾􀀷􀁩􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀢􀀧􀀼􀀮􀀮􀁊 j 􀁾 ,.,;. 􀁾􀀮􀁜 '" I 􂀢􀀼􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾 􀁾 \. 'I .-', 􀀮􀀮􀀻􀁪􀁾􀀢
-i i \"" '". 􀁾 I :', .ROWLETTe " i GARlAND';) r·J :,';11 [----t66__ 􀀨􀁬􀁡􀁫􀁥􀁾􀁾􀁗 􀁐􀁡􀁾􀁡􀀱􀀭􀁟􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀧􀁟􀁾􀀧􀀮􀀮􀁬 r----.,\1 t;:--;--􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀮 -'-_:=:" , ml i '.( .' 􀁾􀁣 " 􀁾􀀡
I 1\, If" i \ I 􀁲􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀬􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁜􀁾􀁟􀀮􀀭Miller _... -4-.t...-....􀀧􀁟􀀮􀀺􀁾􀁾 ---J J .,.'--I\ 􀁪􀁾 /􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀢 I , /\ 􀁾􀁾 • ! : I Alast look at􀀱􀀿􀀡􀁊􀀱􀁊􀀺􀁾􀁦􀁾􀁥 options ·1jII
'1Alternative 1 ! 6100 Liberty Grove, Rowlett. 3 houses 7300 Liberty Grove, Rowlett, 2 houses 5000Jlamingo, Rowlett, 2 houses 5800 Uberty Grove, Rowlett. 2 houses 5700 Uberty Grove,
Rowlett, 3 houses 5600 Liberty Grove. Rowlett. 1 house 4800 Liberty Grove, Rowlett, 1 house 4800 Lakeview Par1<way. Rowlett, 2 businesses 4800 Industrial, Rowlett, 1 business 2600 Kirby.
Rowiett, 1 house 4300 Zion. Garland. 3 houses 4200 Zion, Garland, 4 houses 1200 '·30, Garland, 1 house 1200 Forest Creek, Garland, Lakeway Shore Apartments, 363 units 10001·30, Garland,
Windward Apartments. 76 units Alternative 2 2400 Pleasant Valley Road. Garland, 1 house 3200 Castle Road, Rowlett. 4 houses 3900 Hickox Road, Rowlett, possibly 1 house 3800 Hickox Road,
Rowlett, 2 houses 7100 Liberty Grove, Rowlett. 3 houses 6100 Liberty Grove, Rowlett. 3 houses 5000 Flamingo, Rowlett. 2 houses 5800 Liberty Grove, Rowlett. 2 houses 4400 Main, Rowiett,
possibly 1 hOuse 2600 Kirby. Rowlett. 1 house 4800 Lakeview, Rowlett. 3 businesses 4700 Industrial, Rowlett, 2 houses 4600 industrial, Rowlett. 1 house 4500 Zion. Garland, 1 house 4400
lion. Garland, 1 house 4700 Zion, Garland, 1 house 5000 lion. Garland, 2 houses 8001,30, Garland, 2 businesses 1000 /·30, Garland, Windward Apartments, 52 units 2001·30, Garland, Lakeway
Meadows I Apartments, 12 units 􀁾􀁾􀀺... , I I If' , .78 f /V '':.''
Notice of Public Hearing All interested parties are invited to attend this Public Hearing and Open House. Verbal and wrmen comments may be presented at the Public Hearing. Written comments
should be submitted to NITA, P.O. Box 260729, Plano, Texas, 75026, Attn: Mr. Chrlstopher Anderson. The deadline lor receipt of comments Is 5:00 p.m. on July 7, 2003. If additionallnlormation
is needed in regards to this project or to request a copy 01 the DEIS, please contact Mr. Anderson at the address above or by phone: 214-461-2000. Persons with disabilities planning
to attend this public hearing who require auxiliary aids or services such as interpreters lor the hearing impaired, readers, or Braille, should contact Lanl Un at (214) 583-8497 at least
two working days prior to the hearlng so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Because the hearing will be conducted in English. any request lor language Interpreters or other special
communication needs should also be made at least two working days prtor to the hearing. Reasonable accommodations will be made to meet these needs. Page 2 012 Conceptual schematic drawings,
the DEIS and Section 4(1) Evaluation, and other project related inlormatlon will be displayed at the public hearing. The DEIS and Section 4(1) Evaluation and conceptual schematic drawings
have been placed on lile with the cities 01 Garland (200 North Fifth Street, 18' Floor, Garland, 75040), Sachse (Sachse City Hall, 5560 State Highway 78, Sachse, 75048), Rowlett (4000
Main Street, City Secretary Office, Rowlett, 75088) and Dallas (1500 Marilla. Room L1 BN, Dallas, 75201). These items are also on file and available lor pUblic inspection and review
at NITA Offices, 5900 West Plano Parkway, Suite 100, Plano, 75093; TxDOT, 4777 E. Highway 80, Mesquite, 75150; and Dallas County, 411 Elm Street, 4'" Floor, Dallas, 75202. Copies 01
the DEIS are also available lor review in hard copy lormat at: Garland Central Library, 625 Austin, Garland,75040; North Garland Branch Library, 3845 North Garland Avenue, Garland, 75040;
Ridgewood Branch Ubrary,120West Kingsley, Garland, 75041; South Garland Branch Library, 4845 Broadway Boulevard, Garland, 75043; Walnut Creek Branch Library, 3319 Edgewood Street, Garland,
75042; Rowlett Public Library, 3900 Main Street, Rowlett, 75088; Sachse Public Library, 3815 Sachse Road, Suite C, Sachse, 75048; and J. Erik Jonsson Central Ubrary, 1515 Young Street,
Dallas, 75201. A bound copy 01 the DEIS may be purchased lor $60.00 (pius $6.00 for shipping and handling) or a CD·ROM of the . document in Adobe Acrobat lormat lor $6.00 (plus $1.00
lor shipping and handling). Page 1 of 2 Proposed Eastern Extension 01 the President George Bush Turnpike SH 78 to IH 3D, Dallis County, Texas rhe North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA),
in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation :TxDOTl, will conduct a Public Hearing on Tuesday, June 24, 2003, at 6:30 p.m. at The Atrium at the Patty 3ranville Arts Center
located as 330 North Fifth Street, Garland, 75040, to discuss the proposed Eastern Extension 01 the President George Bush Turnpike Irom State Highway 78 to Interstate Highway 30. in
Northeastem Dallas County. An Open House will be held Irom 2:00 to 6:30 p.m. prior to the Public Hearing at the same location to allow lor questions and review 01 project exhibits. NTTA
and TxDOT stall will be present to answer questions regarding the proposed project at the Open House. The lormal public hearing will begin at 6:30 p.m. lollowed by a public comment period.
The project involves the proposed construction 01 a six-lane controlled access tollway on new location. The corridor is approximately 10 miles in length and crosses Rowlett Creek and
Lake Ray Hubbard. The purpose and need 01 the proposed project is to improve mobility in Northeastem Dallas County. The project traverses the municipalities 01 Garland, Sachse, Rowlett,
and Dallas. The proposed action has the potential to impact land use; farmland; single-and multl-Iamily residents; businesses; economics; noise levels; wetlands and.jurisdictional waters
01 the U.S.; floodplains; cultural resources; and hazardous/regulated materials. Two Build Altematives (Altemative #EIS· 1 and #EIS-2) and a No-Build altemative have been analyzed in
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and Section 4(1) Evaluation and will be presented at the public hearing. Both altematives encroach upon the Rowlett Creek and Lake Ray
Hubbard floodplains. Right-ol-way requirements lor the Build Altematives range Irom approximately 428 to 473 acres and the width 01 the additional right-ol-way varies Irom 350 leet to
1600 leet. Potential displacements lor the Build Alternatives vary Irom 97 to 465 residenceslbusinesses. Inlormation conceming the NTTA's Relocation and Assistance Program will be discussed
at the public hearing. The benelits and services lor displacees as well as inlormation about a tentative schedule lor right-ol·way acquisition and construction 􀁾be obtain.ed Irom the
NITA. 􀁾
SOURCE: Notth Texas Tf)llway AuthOrity Some of those accused of racking up hundreds oJ tollbooth violations say they didn't know their vehicles had been Involved. Others said they didn't
receive citations. The North Texas Tollway Authority says motorists should be sure the personal Information on their To1ITag accounts and vehicle registration remains up to dale 10 avoid
misundelStandings, If you're unsure about your account, check at www.nna.org or call 972-991·0033, E-mail tb.....l@dellasncw&c:om 11e issue comes down to individul accountability vs.
legal reqw.ments, prosecutors and tollWO)Ilgency officials said 􀁾 amnesty program allows Ii timeotFendersto seek a waiver n administrative fines if they a e to keep a lbll1llg account
ntfor six months. "We by to give customers an information," Mr. Henington .d. "Buthow much arewegoing spend to make sure someone is ;ponsible? Where do we draw ,e line between customer
service dpersonal responsibility?" ['Toll jumpers racing 􀁴􀁾􀁭􀀪􀁥 things right # ----aboutthe aboutthe increasing number ofvi-Thousands contact olations. The newspaper also pub-I STAYING
AWARE ft \. . lished a list of the top 10 violators agency a er L'it of _ eight of whom have contacted major violators released the tollway authority to try to resolve matters. By TONY
HARTZEL "We've had significant prog-􀀧􀁲􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁦􀁘􀁬􀁲􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 Writer rcss" on the top 10 vehicle owners, . . Thousands of vehicle owners said Rick Herrington, assistant ex,. concerncd
about past tollbooth in-ecutive director for the tollway au-discretions contacted thc North thority. "We've had a lot of re'.. Thxas Tollway Authority la,t week sponse from violators
and Toll1ag to byto make amends. customers updating their ac-. The number of tollwav viola-counts." tors has grown rapidly in recent About 3,000 people a day years, thanks to thc addition
of called the agency last week. While "temPting, wide-open express TolI-that's more than average, the Thglanes. Last Sunday, The Dalla., Morning News published a .tory SeeTHOUSANDS Page
12B ,t addres'! in.liming notices can-so1iDbeeded,which raises the &elf.m4llarts the severe 􀁰􀁥􀁮􀁡􀁉􀁖􀁾􀀺􀀺 􀁾􀁩􀀺􀁊􀁾􀁤􀀮􀁬􀁴􀁦􀁾􀁬􀀧 .. the afternwn, Motorist Rob -West or Dallas
appeared before Judge Yarhrough til try to dcar up the 175 violations attributed to him. His problem: A credit card linkcd to his ToliTagaccount was declined. am] he unknowingly r""ked
lip violations by tra'-eling thTCJllgh express lanes that do not havc warning lights and bells. "I didn't know, "Ibey send onc letter to the address on your driver's license," he said,
noting that his vehicle registration and driver's license addre.ses were not updated. "Ifyou don't get that letter, the case goes to warrants, and you go through what I went through
sitting in an officer's car for a couple of htmrs huping to 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁴􀁾 up for each violation, and vehicle O\\l1ers can be arrested if they df> not appear in court to addre>s the charges.
Vehicle owners with the high, est number or viulations ranged from 963 skipped tolls and 104 citations in Ms. 􀁓􀁴􀁥􀁰􀁨􀁣􀁮􀁾􀀧 ease to 367 skipped tolls and 48 citation< issued rorthe
No. 10 violator. Effect on the court Tollbooth jumping is taking up a larger share of Justice of the Peace Mike Yarbrough's court in Frisco, where two days a month are set aside solely
for toll-jumping cases. About a dozen vehicle owners showed up Wednesday morning for court hearings, amI another group was schcclnled for 􀁯􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾 to vehicle O\\l1ers. If a vehide
run. through enough tollbooths without paling within a sct time, the vehicle owner I'lecs a 82" fee for e""h toll .kipped. Offenses are tied to the vehicle owner, not the dri\'er. Mo,
torist< have a month to pay after recciving the notice. In the last six month.. tl,e agency has collected $1 million in fees, less than the amount required to track down violators, Mr.
Herrington said. Tollway authority officials send the violations to a collection agency or to the Texas Department of Public Safety if vehicle owners fail to contact them. The law enforcement
enforcement agency can issue misdemeanor 􀁣􀁩􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾 TOP 10 TOLL VIOLATORS Elghtof the North T1!lIlIS Tollway Autholity's top 10 registered owners whose vehicles were determined
to be skipping tolls have contacted the agency to work out payment plans. The top Jumpers: ConlactodNlTA or_ngoul Name Hom_ Card....n Violations DPS CltatiOlll p""8nt plan? ChartottaStephens
,.! Richa$lm 19941s!m1 963 104 Yes David D,Johnsoo Gariand 2001 Fon:I F150 560 48 Yes John C. Neal : Diill'"i;''' . 2001 FOri! FoCus. .,,532 0 , Yes RonaldA, Davis Dallas 1994C8llIliac
STS 508 0 Yes 􀁒􀁯􀁢􀁥􀁾􀁓􀀮􀁈􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁮􀁳􀁬􀁬 PTand 1999DOdgeStatus 491' 13·,. ":".," !,No Matthew W, Hicks Addison 2001 Honda UEX 454 0 Yes (paid In full) CryslBlA.BlOOks" Gartarid 1996AcurallS"
430 14":' '.',"";:'ve.i GregoryO,Smothermon Frisco 1997NJssanSCmra 395 4 Yes NotpnMded"" N/A,,'.· 2000ChlMOIetCamaro· . 392 0 N/A Sheldon Mallory Plano 2002 Chevrolet Blazer 367 48 Yes
" Lentvehlcle to anotherdriver, tollway authority has 18duced penalties, and citations were waived "" Registered ownerldentifled; ,'''''''cos mailed Friday SOlJRC€:NOfthTe:msTollwll'fAU1t10rity
STAY UPDATED Tha source of most tollbooth violations comes from oulllated Infoonation on Toillag accounts. according to ttle Nonh Texas Tollway Authori1l< Some advice on keeping accounts
current • Customers can check account balances and activity by • Use cash for tolls when driVing a vehicle with tempOral)' logging on to www.ntta.org. Customer service license plates.
representatives are available at 972,991,0033 and at the • Motorists who encounter a tollbooth that does not agency office, 5900 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 200, Plano. accept their cash
can 􀁲􀁥􀁰􀁯􀁾 the incident to • Personal information must be current That/noludes websupporl@nna,orgorcall 972·991·0033. license plates of vehicles linked to TollTags and addresses
• Those repOrts will be filed ami will not be considered on driver's licenses and vehicle registrations. violations. If an attendant is presenl, motorists may ask for • Expired or declined
credit cards will cause violations. a receipt Update the expiration date of the credit card linked to • Motorists who usually use express lanes should drive TollTags online at www.ntta.orgor
by calling through a tollbooth lane occasionally. Green. yP,lIow or red 972·991-0033, lights will indicate the status oJ the Toillag .ceount. I • Don't shift TollTags among vehicles.
OwnelS 01 newly • Always update names and addresses on vehicle 'I purchased vehicles, although using atag from a prelJious registrations when a car is sold. lJehicle. could generate
violations until the new license plate is recorded with the NTTA. SOURCE: NOM Texas Tollway AlIlhority ''------_....-._._-.-.._---_._------_.. _.._---------._._--_._ ....-._-_._..._..-_.
-_... _._-----_.-._, .. COllliflW:djl'Olll Page 18 number of customcrs checking their accounts on the Internet and in person at toll authority sites spiked dramatically. Most vehicle
owners sought to make sure their accounts remained in good standing, officials said. Charlotte Stephens ofRichardson, whom the agency lists as its 􀁾􀁰􀁶􀁩􀁯􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁷􀁩􀁴􀁨 963 skipped
tolls, ,. one of the vehicle owners who 􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁣􀁴􀁥􀁤 the tollway authority. i\She also appeared Wednesday in a "Frisco justice of the peace court, where she received a two-month
delay so that her attorney Could have more time to prepare her case. "Ms, Stephens has never knowinglyfailed to paythe tolls on those rare occasions she has used the tollway 􀁨􀁥􀁲􀁳􀁥􀁬􀁾􀀢
said her attorney, S. Michael McColloch, "But the truck is used' by her husiness for deliveries, and the drivers, mostly teinponuy contract employees, were provided change in the event
that travel on the tollway was needed." "We intend to work toward a resolution with the tollway authority, but we also intend to address the serious constitutional due process implications
of attempting to impose penal sanctions on a person who did not commit the act ofdriving through without paying and didn't even know about it" State law clearly allows the tollway authority
to pursue tollbooth runners, Mr. Herrington said. Toll runners are charged an administrative fine, much like a parking ticket. Vchicle O\mers can only bc arrested 1'01' failing to appear
in court -not for nmning a toll, he said. <lOur attome\'s arc not concerned at this point" about legal challenges, Mr. Herrinh>too said. Millions Potentially lost An estimated 880,000
vehicles adayzip tllTough tollhooths on the agency's roads, its one bridge and its one tunnel. About 35,000 of those transactions arc violations, meaning the agency could lose , about
$5 million to $6 million a [ year if it didn't pursue tollbooth i nmners. I:"\. In the last 12 months, 12,716 ci-,...." lations have been issued for failure 1(\ to..pa;.y tolls, In the
same time peri-V"t .ocl.._ .. the toU authority 􀁩􀁳􀀮􀀡􀁾􀁵􀁥􀁴􀁬 . \ 198,133 notices of multiple toll vi
<I,. 􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁦􀀯􀁩􀀯 t .;'1· j) J .Tollway promise broken I enjoyed the front-page article last Sunday regarding drivers who refuse to pay toll fees. Ifound it almost funny that your
paper would 'i· print the names of the top 10 reLpeated offenders along with the i· mugshot ofthe No.1 offender. ·. It needs to be noted, however, · that a major portion ofthe tollway,
,J. the segment first started in the late 'I":' 19605, haS been paid for many I.times over, while still charging a 􀁾 toll charge. I cannot really blame I 􀁾 drivers who see this as
a free road ; now, some 35 years after it was r4,:.,: originally built. Drivers back then were told thatoncethetollwaywas >paid for, itwould be free. ;, DannySenkow, Dallas 􀀬􀁾 􀀱􀁾􀀢􀀢
'. Tgll'X9'ysytake sense 􀁬􀁾􀀺 Ifaffuy Senkowvs §tnday letter, 􀁫􀁾􀁯􀁉􀁬􀁷􀁡􀁹 promise broken," de 􀁾􀀺􀀧􀁳􀁥􀁲􀁶􀁥􀁳 a comment. He represents [that "drivers back then were told ,;!that
once the tollway was paid for, 􀁩􀁾􀁩􀁴􀀮􀁷􀁯􀁵􀁬􀁤 be free." I haven't both 􀁾􀀧􀁥􀁲􀁥􀁤 to research his claim but I i'doubt he can substantiate it. Ei 􀀱􀀬􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁷􀁡􀁹􀀮 some ofus
thinkit'sa bad 􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁡 to stop collecting toIls. f;' We heard a similar silly "prom,lise" rationale when the tollbooths ,h.were removed from the D/FW \J\unpike in the 70s. Since
then, 􀁩􀀻􀀻􀀬􀁾􀁥 state has spent many tens of :/millions of dollars upgrading and 􀀮􀁩􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁰􀁡􀁩􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁴􀁨􀁡􀁴􀁲􀁯􀁡􀁤􀁷􀁡􀁹􀀮 Thatmon 􀁾􀀮􀁥􀁹 was diverted from other urgent f,l\O.ads
that could have been built. :;tNow we have to wait years to get 􀀢􀁾􀀡􀀩􀀺􀁲􀁡􀁺􀁹interchanges redone such as "rLoop 12 at !-30.We 􀁷􀁥􀁾 obvious-·'.'ly happy with the bargam the tolls
'. "represented. ". just as your home purchase is 􀁉􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁪􀁵􀁳􀁴 the begIDning of the money ;\drain, so, too, are all public works. '''',We spend several multiples ofthe 􀀧􀁾􀀺􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁴􀁩􀁡􀁬
purchase price on upkeep 'I:'over the life.of the asset. Why not i:'.'keep the tolls on? It's an extremely 􀀻􀁾􀀮 rational and fair way of paying for, 􀁾􀀺􀀬􀁲􀁯􀁡􀁤􀁳􀀬 . ;:: Save the
gasoline tax to support 􀁉􀀺􀁧􀀬􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁡􀁲􀁹 roads that can't be justi;;. fled WIth revenue bonds. 􀁾􀀬􀁜 . RolandD.Freeman, Dallas money 10 keep up wilb demand. teIlWlY!l conuo across lIS a YIIIllIlool. The ,1Ildy w\Il I"""ilJe esIi_ted tnlDc and loU charges for T.... lSI as woD as now lanes schoduIed
10 be buiIt a1msI U.s. 281 and Locp 1604 III ill. N<IItb Side. One scenario looks at add· ing lolls 10 existing main Ian.. of Loop 1604. The pojections will belp determine how much in
bonds C8Il be ,old to 'Wad coo,tram of loll roads. IIUIr County conunission en w...1d brJ. 10 CIOBIe s IePmal mobility authority 10 IIIIIl8Ill the toll system, and they plan to hold
a public lfrins on the mat*' Aug. II's apparent that the study will show s need for tsl ,ub. sidies to h.lp build toIIlallOS, 10<a1 ClftlclaIa 􀁾 BUl support appealS likely because ,hlle
oIDcIaII aren', just encouraging lGIII. they re pressuring QIIlIIIItmitIn 10 consider the ophoa. The ,ubjecl often comes up sl T.... Transpcrtalion Com· 􀁾􀀽􀁳􀁳􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁾 son made
poin'.d comments aboUl Ibe polential of llIIIiD& LooD 1604 .0Dd other state "",as that have COIIIrOIled access. "'We need to waste no _ .. Williamson said. "Iflo 􀁾 don', want to do
it we understand, we'D do it for thlm.-IIUIr COISIIy Ju. Nebon WaUl' ..14 it rilakes sense to mainlain local control. "I'd llIIber do it .....elves," be said. "Keep the decisions 1IaI,
keep the """'BYbore: in our_IIIII\J" First toll road? IlllIo 0liioi*.11 lUll'" h IIooIIIItIYrI ........ toson ...... _T_161oUlbo hthl Texas 15\ would be the filst of several in Bexar
County BY P.mx:x DucoU. 􀀮􀁟􀁮􀁾􀁾􀁗􀁴􀁩􀁔􀁒􀁉first loll "",d ""u1d opOn within two y"" on the West Side, Ioc:8l Officials !Ill' ..... a fast-track pcoject. it 􀀽􀀮􀁾􀁳􀁡􀁾􀁯􀁭􀁢􀁹􀁍i
ccclJ>r of lb. San Antoaio Moo 1 bDlI7 Coalition. W Even lh...gb ••1lIdy 00 \10' 􀁌􀀢􀁾􀀽􀁮􀁩􀁊 lIIltial 10UJlIOjects for ibe 􀁾 􀁾 NoEth and W.st sides is not 􀁾..... 'l '--. due IIDtilnext
week, officials 􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁬􀁬􀀧􀀭􀁾􀀢􀁾􀀧 aJready have a gocd idea of --wbere: to ,tart . Texas 151. stretching 10 miles from U.S. 90 10 Loop l6lM near SeaWorld, seems 10 􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀺 􀁾􀁩􀁾1C:n
open nexl summer and taxes 􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁔􀁉􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁾􀀺􀁲􀁢􀁥 tolled, wbile Ibe maing froa. loge roaoII would ....... f<ea. "II', 181 ideal I""j«t." Griebel said "k con be ......tially 􀁾􀁴􀁾􀀱􀁉
􀁦􀀺􀁥􀁴􀁷􀁾 􀁴􀀺􀁥􀁾􀀱 city" It would lake more t1JIIlIlo add toU plazBs and a system to read electronic tags on T.... lSI, m.ybe up '0 IIlOlher year, said Jom XelJy, district 􀁥􀁾􀁥􀁲
here for the T.xas 1JeJ>8rImcnt of 1".lIOI18lIDD. Signs likely woulcl be posled to ,ay lbe new I.... are tempocarily free. TIIliu&h ieIlf feels comfort· abl. sayingJexa. 151 rn\8ht OJ)III
u • 1llII road somebme in 2005, he sa1lI il possibly =could be SOOIIcr U slsle trans· oIIIdaIs shin IIl8Ir "U's klDd of a paradigm ,hi1\," be sUI. "After I gel my. mind .djlllled '"
'oil I!"'jecu, emndayobfe_we.con get it oy the 11'11 be • acw way of Ihink. Ina fOT 􀁭􀁏􀁜􀁯􀁲􀁾􀁉􀁊􀀬 100. ";:1 􀀦􀀧􀁦􀁾 􀁉􀁾􀁈􀁾it,: Norlhwesl Side resident who has ""sod loll roads
ill Dallas and Atlanlic Cily. "II eases lbe lnIlIc to ,cm. extenl My only concern is lhat those who can't .fford it 􀁬􀁨􀁾 ban to rely on the old W83l Drivers in HOIlSIoo and Dallas
pay an average of 9 to 12 cents l;,..":." 10 use toU roads. say thai wilb the amount Of diiving, out· stripPing booming population llIOWth and nol .nough )lIIrIQIl@I;rpra.s-lNw.1II1
San Antonio Express-News • 0 I 2. Toll road eyed within 2 years from the north going toward the downtown area -you're stuck. It was stopped," Parker said. "And it's the same way both
directions. It doesn't matter what time of day it is. There's just a lot of people on two lanes of highway.... And it's that way every morning." In backing up his proposal for toll roads
along I-35W and Northeast Loop 820, Hillwood Chairman Ross Perot Jr. showed the NITA just how much growth has OCCUlTed along those two freeways. In 200 I, the number of cars traveling
along I-35W just north of Northeast Loop 820 􀁨􀁡􀁾 jumped 93% from the 46,000 that drove that freeway in 1989. That number is expected to grow another 40% to 124,200 cars in 2020, according
to the Hillwood presentation. In that same span, the number of cars that drove along Northeast Loop 820 near U.S. 377 rose 37% to 129,000 cars in 200 I and is expected to increase 67%
to 215,700 in 2020. However, toll roads may not be the only answer. "We build toll roads," Parker said. "But we also have great partners that build transit, rail ... highways and freeways.
It's a mix. We're not saying thattol,l roads are the only solution. but something h ... t· .... h 􀁾 .r."., ... ·· David Wethe t6 :l dwethe@bizjournals.com q.,,;-') Michael Whiteley
mwhiteley@bizjournals.com Donna Parfler certainly didn't need a fancy PowerPoint presentation from Hillwood to know just how much her fellow commuters need an express lane to carve through
the clogged freeways of Tarrant and Denton counties. The board vice chairwoman of the North Texas Tollway Authority leaves her North Fort Worth home every morning to drive to Irving
for her other job as vice president of the powerful nonprofit business group, the Nor1h Texas Conunission. But on this particular morning ofApril , 16, Parker had to weave through down.
town Fort Worth to make an appearance .at the southern end of town and listen to Hillwood's request for the NITA to build tollways through the two counties. HT\..:.·i ... ,.... ,'.........,....",,\
1','" I .....-.. ; ....􀁾 ''''laJTujtlBto1tuLBtzL ,7l"," IIHillwood uses statistics Ito bolster toll road plan 􀁾􀁾Wil!J..􀁬􀀮􀁾􀁡􀁮􀁴 􀁃􀀮􀀿􀀮􀁴􀀡􀀡􀀻􀁯􀀯􀀮􀀬􀁬􀁾􀀡 􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁰􀁂􀀺􀀬􀁦􀁮􀁾􀀺􀁵􀀺􀁥�
�􀀬􀀺􀀢􀀮 􀀺􀁾􀀺 SPECAL TO ;I' new revenue mlo our shlle s\'sh:1I1 ,......., . S I' • "lIB whcn..a q CClllti:Dlent of Hurst-come from loll mads Oil ccrl:lin 􀁲􀁾􀁥 Dtpa,1mellt of PublIc
Sat&:y out Eul.....Bed.fonll••d... rccemIy Ir3V-already.paid'lor f",owa,·s in Ihe or ChdimJ. . . . ded to Austin to taIlr.about the vital inner core of urban l:ouiuic!' huns 3 . I hI:
TCX:lli (OIlSlllllll,on could eas. expansion of 􀁁􀁩􀁾􀁲􀁴 Frccwa>:. 􀁾 rational subsidy into B 􀁃􀀧􀁏􀁉􀁮􀁲􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁬􀁽 􀀮􀁉􀁉􀁾􀁾 􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁣􀁮􀁤􀁣􀁤􀀮 10 dc<l!cate II 􀁦􀁾􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁣 Texas
Transportation Comnusslon irrational sanction 8lUtinst :)omc IIH:rcasc III Ihe gas tax soleI) to had a clear ccsponse: If you want to urban drivers. 􀁾 Iransportlltion. expedite thia
project. you should And the proposed burden is n01 The stnte ,..11l6u...,"clft,lft that 95 convert lOUr existing freeway into 8 even fairly dislrihuted wirhin Ihe perr:enl of 􀁦􀁬􀁊􀁦􀀡􀁾
local dollar raised loll road '. urban ""unties. The slalc is provid. by." 1001 ....d would!" inIo 1M local The .xp.....on of A'lJl?rl. 􀁆􀁾 ing Southlak.. Trophy Club and praJect ,
. way IS at the top of the pnonty list Roanoke with 1I ne\"'" e:\:pandC'd Ir IS 3 stotc road. II should be paid for H-E-B. It' is Tarraot COWlty'.s Texas D4 _ \\oith no 􀁴􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁾 􀁯􀁾
the new for \\ith slate monC'y. busiest road, with mon:: traffic per lanes, much less existing lalles. Ta.... ;ncretJMa an!' bad for tIu! lane than 'he LB1 Frc:eway (lnlershlte H.E-B
residcn" desc",e whal ":Onomy. 635) in Danaa, and that 􀁢􀁵􀁲􀁾 i, 􀁾􀁢􀁾􀁥 cities got: 3 nice. sufticicnr The !o\"crnment serves some growing daily. state freeway paid lor with stare
vital functions. Pro\"idinS good roads Some local lead.... righUy frus-;5 on. of 'hem. Ending gridlock "ill trated by delays in the project. have fWIlIl. . . '. help our economy. not
hurt it. .xpressed support for lolls if tha' is Fals. but po"I'cally convenl.nt finallv. Ihi, lor H.E.B residents: what it takes to end congestion But OUJWDentl hav,c heen made for why
Grab )'OUr wallets. because -DO new 􀁈􀁾􀁅􀂷􀁂 should not have to choose we should not Incrcase !he ga$ tu:: taxe:!:" politica) pledges are: about to berween suffering in congestion
and 􀁔􀁨􀁾􀀬􀁵 tax ;8 an ineUk"nt 􀁦􀁾􀁑􀀮􀀢 cosr you money. bearing I disproportionate share of 10 􀁲􀁡􀁬􀁳􀁾 􀀡􀀬􀀢􀁡􀀢􀀧􀁰􀁏􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁯􀀬􀀮 dolla,.. "'10"'1."';...'"',.,....,=_::::-•.,..,....,....-."
".-.-..,-.'='m"'I1"""""w"". the ,'acc', transportation COils. HctJUN Z;JHrcen, .. 􀁤􀁲􀁤􀁬􀁣􀁮􀁾􀁤􀁬􀁯 􀁮􀁾􀁉􀀺􀀳􀀢􀀹􀁭􀁯􀁳􀀺􀁏􀁦􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁴􀁉􀁕􀁳􀁉􀀧􀀨􀁬􀁉􀁲􀁥􀁳􀁳􀀢􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁦􀁬􀁬􀁒􀁬􀀮􀁟
My constituents face this particu· II ttIt JrwsHoN. larly unfair choice only because of Ihe Slate's ongoi"B failuro 'ofu1flllits fiscal responsibility our sial. bas hislorically paid
for increasing transportation costs with' periodic ine......s in the gas tall, now 20 cenes per sallon. The gas I" is like a U.S. poslage slimp: lis price must be raised simply to maintain
its purcha.ing power. The gas lax was IBsl raised in I99l and has lo.t mueb of its purahasing power. It is a user fee: The mon:: you use our roads, rhe mon:: gas you use and the more
you pay. The slsle's political leadership has historically and understandably prer lerred campaign slogans like ·no new taxes" over "Let me explain the realities ofthe gas tax.n Greal
politics, bUI poor policy. Ou, roads Bre clogged. OUr poIIulion is thickening. The system is underfunded. The 􀁰􀁲􀁡􀁣􀁨􀁾 effect of the Transportation Commission'a sugseslion is thaI
Ute new money coming into the stab: system will be generatled by Ihose who drive in lhe four or so 􀁭􀁯􀁾􀁴 consested urban areas (Dallas, Fori Worth.. Houston and. San Anto. nio), while
Ute 78 percent of Texans who live CIKWhcrc continue to pay what Ihey paid F2 years ago--unJess rhey have a more 􀁦􀁵􀁾􀁉...B"lCicnl v.hi. cle. in which case they pay less. The price
of bread is up. 􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁉􀁫􀀧􀀮 Lip. Rent is up. The cosl of roa\ls for nual drivers will. however. continue 10 drop. Urban drivers already help pay tor rural drivers' roads. Becausc
urban areas have more drivers per IDne 􀁭􀁩􀁬􀁥􀁾 thc cosl per person for adequate rODds is much less than in rural 􀁡􀁦􀁬􀀧􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁓􀀺 M.ore people create g.realer eJllClencu:s. Because
rural drivcrs could nut .ITord lhe lull COllI of their roads, 'he 􀁧􀁡􀁾 ta.'t provides an appropriate sub.sidy by requiring urban drivers to pa.y as muoh a8 nan! drivera.
JUN 222003 FORTWORTH STAR TELEGRAM E-mail kgoolsby@dallasnews.com Thi3 story also appears in the Northeast Tarrant Morning News, . PushtoexpandAirportFreeway"", 􀀮􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀢􀀧 Son
,_29,_ ....rm I'd , 9yGOllDONDICKSON The 􀁾􀁯􀁕􀁄􀁴 that coll1d be PlLttl1enhips with'toll-road '/:S,,\v·.iii:'t,:•.· ", 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀬􀀮 . ... ': .. 􀁾􀀮 ". b .:...􀁾􀀬􀀮􀁜􀁦􀁊􀁴􀁬􀀧" BS··1'
􀀮􀁮􀀢􀀮􀁤􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁁􀀧􀀧􀁆􀀧􀁴􀀮􀁇􀁒􀁬􀁁􀁕􀀴􀀾􀁔􀁏􀀧􀀧􀁒􀀧􀀧􀁬􀀧􀀧􀁕􀀧􀀧􀁓􀁉􀀡􀁏􀁉􀁔􀁬􀀧􀁒􀁬􀀧􀀢 raised With tol1ll1nes on Air-offietlils s\lch as "the North '. '. .' . 􀁾􀁬 . port Freeway
hasn't been stud-Te::qa 'lbUway AuthoritY and· .. ;:' 􀁾􀁵􀁳􀁬􀁯􀁡􀁤􀁾 􀀹􀁦􀀮􀁾􀁥􀁤􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁤􀀬 "tate su es"t:s,. C .ar , -;;, 0 Ell}ess llnd Hurst 􀁉􀁾 􀁢􀁾probably y,rould cover p!esent
a,ul11ped l"egional ;. 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁴􀁬􀁩􀀺􀁾􀁩􀀧􀀩􀀧 .' gg.. ..__ .'".' ,-w-=-residents will Vavello Austin 011 Thw:sclay 0 ya outlOp==t lU lSper-Yision fOr sharing the cost of ',-􀀧􀀢􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧
􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀮􀀧􀀧􀀧"",""'" .' . .. . . ';': -. ': 10 plead f,?r money to expand expand AIrport lIree-CCD.tbof the project's costs, s;aid 􀁾􀁬􀁐􀁡􀁤􀁯􀀬 he saId. ...􀁾􀀨􀀮􀀻􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀻􀁲􀀮􀀧􀁾􀁩􀀻􀀮􀀻􀀮
􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁴..;.;,¥i".: . . . .dH'.·gh' '. 18"·.l way. l' . . 􀁾􀁣 lIel Moa:\ll. transp01'talion "We IlIe Willing to put up· t.": 􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀻􀀮􀀬 '1 . 􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁔􀁾􀀧 . ...._. 􀁬􀁺B􀁥u􀀮t 􀁬􀁴􀁯􀁨􀀱􀁾􀁬􀁹􀀮�
�􀁨􀀮􀁡􀁔􀁤􀁥􀀹􀁵􀁾􀁳b􀁾e􀁑w􀁲i􀁴lli􀁡ng􀁴􀁬to􀁯a􀁮1.1􀁾.l:􀁮hor-director for the North Central stat!! II10IlfJy II locals lite will-Y.·· ',,:, ..... ".yt' &11. . Oro, Texas COlSneil
of Govern-. ingtogetmtopartll.e:rsb!.n.... do 􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀬􀀮􀀻􀁉􀁑􀀱􀀺􀁜􀁾􀁾􀁡􀁮 . ." . .:v I· ,''''i'..'>;.',.,,· ...􀁜􀁾 membqs Say, IfW,are 􀁾􀁡􀁢􀁯􀁵􀀻 get_ II1ents. 'Local dollars a\$O
c:ould ." traffic 􀁾􀀱􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁣􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀮 􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀢􀁾􀀢 .:::􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾...t' .... --': -, ,.-"",' 􀁾􀀭 ting Tal'rant 􀁥􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁹􀀧􀁳 bU$lest freeway be: used. but lha state, would he. said,
"If y.o1.l hRve • )/1'.:?-' • • .,'..􀁾􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀮 state," he saId: "T?e question 'IS expanded before 2'0l2.-,still !\eed to <:over morll thau $270 .million pro)ec.t and you ::.':; :'l\:while
Idea could speed whether 􀁾 constituents should MCIIlbe1'5 of the del tion s they are 􀁨􀁾􀁴􀁢􀁥 t:b• can talse 􀁾􀁯 milliOn •.• them, .: J{i'fun"din fi tli . paymorem order to use nonconwilling
10 acCtlpt tolls􀁾 cxpr:is lanes If tI 'We c:oll1d 􀁾􀁥􀀡􀁊􀁩􀁮 􀁣􀁯􀁾 suddenly; Jt's only a $l20 mil· ";; 􀀿􀀨􀁾􀀺 . g or e project, I gested roads than other people that'. what it
rakes to get the project under ye': 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀺􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁣􀁬􀁙 􀁾􀀮 lion 􀁤􀁬􀁾 ofour ca,sh􀁾􀁯􀁷􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁲􀂷􀁳􀁯􀁭􀁥 queStion fairness I in the state. The burden ought to WOIY by 2007 or
short1y 􀁴􀁨􀁾􀁥􀁲􀀮 ' the 􀁃􀁾􀁭􀁭􀁬􀁳􀁉􀁩􀁾􀀻􀀧 􀁍􀁯􀁾􀁾 'We wOll1d,􀁾 􀁾􀁵􀁨􀀮 Does 􀁾􀁴􀁦􀁩􀁴􀀻􀁾􀀺􀀬􀂷 . .... , bebomebyeveryone." The expansion-1=Qiletl dc:lay.!d by more More
than 200;000'vclllcles Jsb) 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁬􀁲􀁾􀁾plan? We've 􀀡􀁾􀀧􀀺 By KAnn'A. GOOlSBY i: Thmsportaliori Commission· th "A.," b high" -_.:I ... fr .:I-il 􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁾􀁾 sottotlq,thIS.';"" ilk·
.... · Northeast1immIBurean " ep Robert 􀁎􀁉􀂷􀁣􀁨􀁯􀁬􀁳􀁳􀀧􀂷􀁾􀀻􀁤 th 'J:..Cl 􀁾 a 􀁾􀁥 􀁣􀁣􀁡􀁾 􀁾 pnorit,Y ..-. use.".e ,1lC'Wll'/"'!' )I "'4.\' '11l!' <!eJegati0I1 has'20min-','i<
" .' 􀁾 l' +. ... -.e urel. p:oJects have recl!.Ived the state's limlted fic J:l expected to nearly dOll-liteS to ,try to persuade the ' ....􀀻􀀮􀀧􀀮􀁾.......•......OffiCIals. and 􀁲􀁥􀁳􀁬􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁳
froom.. tax IS diVided among numerous' 􀁬􀁵􀁾􀁹money. . . . ble by2025, . 􀁣􀁯􀁾 to flwd the 0-.' Cities along State Highway 􀁾􀀸􀁾 . programs, whereas tolls 􀁾 used 'Ie's \:onstandy
slipping and admittedly AIrport Fl'ceway in its pre-F . ."-.: 􀁬􀁬􀁜􀁾􀁥􀁤 last week that there IS a .only for the road on which they transpor.tl1tion 􀁾􀁤􀁳 ;re 'IIery dear and sent
􀁾􀁲􀁭 was built to 􀁨􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁬􀁾 ject aDd set a firm date. . 􀀺􀀧􀀻􀀧􀀻􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁹􀀧 to fund expansion on the' are collected. . ' c:ompetltlVe; but·for'solJllll'eason 0IIr pal" no 􀁾 t!wI
J.4<!.OOO vehicles At Jeast 100 people are. '. 􀀮􀁴􀀮􀁾􀁏􀁳􀁴􀁾􀁵􀁳􀁥􀁤 􀁥􀁡􀁳􀁴􀀭􀁷􀁾 􀁴􀁬􀁷􀁭􀁕􀀲􀁨􀁾􀂷􀀮 TblLThxas 􀁄􀁥􀁰􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁯􀁦 tlc\llar llar 􀀧􀁻􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁡􀁹 haa slipped oll'the
l'adar per day, according to Teus expe<:ted to make the trip, 􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀮 . N rth 11 . toUles . 􀁲􀁾􀀧 . '. 􀁓􀁃􀁾􀁉􀁬􀀺 said Mike 􀁍􀁾 􀁈􀁾􀁳􀁴 develop-DepllrtrJlent of'Ihul,sportation
Inc:l\idlng Hur$t-Hules,..Bed-' ."",em ,,0 exas. an. Transportation has funding for -meDt r:\4'ector. " . figures. '['he freeway, reached ' fotd Chainbel' of COJllmerce . .' 􀁍􀁯􀁲􀁾
than 100 people from only one-third of the state's 11)(: six-lane freeway. i9 􀁾 l1Iairrc:on-its, capacity In 1987, spoke8lllaD' officia1ll ;md 􀁾􀁴􀁬􀁶􀁥􀁳'ot."Hurst, Buless and Bedf9rd
􀁷􀁾􀁯 needed projects, he said, and nectioD between Port Worlh Michael Petefssaid.· all thi-cities.. Speakers will ". 􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁥􀁤􀁾 􀁭􀁾 to Austin Highway 183 is not on the list.
and Dall.as/Fott Worth Air-Commission me.mber Ric argue that lrnE.lC Is expected to .heard that 􀁳􀁵􀁾􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁦􀁲􀁯􀁾 􀁾􀁥􀁸􀀭 Without tolls, itwould be at least port. A plan to
expand 7,6 WI1l!alUson said he c<ouldn't continue to mere"se, with as transportation coIDDUSSlon-11O years before the highway gets miles of 􀁾 highway at a "CSt comment on Airport Free-envlremmental
and safety con-" ers. The idea was met with both: funding of abou( $274 million haS been 􀁷􀁡􀁹􀀧􀁾 chances of receiving sequences. , enthusiasm and resistance. .! "If the communities
support 'plannedfor years. . funding, but he stressed t:!Il1t· a .Schedll1cd speakers include ' "I am fior it and I think most rtin' th 'sti'ng lanes to Th ad uld be and-. .:......l
.d ,.conve g e eXi e to . yJO exp I1l!W stata law 􀁓􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀭􀁾 'I'.hursday· H-li-B 􀂷􀁣􀁨􀁾 er PreSl ent ; of us in that room were for it," 11 Ian "M N'chols 'd, 'ed to 10 mam lanes
plus two by Gov. 􀁒􀁫􀁫􀁾 enc:otmlgeS Charle$ Powell, state R.ep. ,', I M M lib S . toes, r. I SaI Iiigh-oc;;cupancy vehicle lancs the state to look (Dr: waYll to Todd Smith, :i-EUkss.
Tlirrant \ SaId Eu ess ayor ary a-: "then we could issue 􀁥􀁮􀁯􀁵􀁾 toll -or e1tpres$ Isnes -from 􀁵􀁾􀁥 toll 􀁦􀁵􀁮􀁾􀁉􀁊􀁬􀁧 to' atretc:h 􀁃􀁯􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁹 ColD.llli!lsioner Glen \. 􀁬􀁥􀁨􀀬􀁯􀁮􀁥􀁯􀁦􀁦
􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁬􀀬􀀧􀁏􀁏􀁰􀁬􀁥􀁷􀁨􀁯􀁳􀁤􀁰􀁯􀁫􀁾 road.bonds to do 􀁾􀁥 entIre ex-'Northeast Loop 820 to .Ihe highway,axdcil1;>rs. . WhItley and Euless Mayol' to the commissioners. "We on t.
panslOn -everythm?; they want :Th"!is 183/121 spUt; and to eil;ht '''rolled projects 􀁾􀁥 1l0iD.g Ma;tI..ib Saleh. " . . want Airport Freeway to become from one end to another -now."
maID l:mes and three HOV to pL'obably get built 􀁦􀁾􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁲 'It's a1mOlit at a crisis 􀁾 Airport Freezeway and we thinj 'Thrrant Co C ., 'lan7s 􀁦􀁲􀁾􀁭 the spUt to Texas than non-toll
projects.' now," Saleh said. "'Ws' time. to .th t ightb 􀁳􀁯􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀮􀀧 Wh't\unty'domlmlsslon-.161 mlrvmg. . Williamson said., ''Xt's simply a wake up and see what b gomg . a mea
er Glen I ey sal .pans are 􀁾 The HOY laoes could bo mailer orcash flow." onin this area." . '. She supports a plan to leav expand the road to eight or 10 dlconverted into toll lanes,
Local govemments lire oNLIHE:TwIOepaltm,nhf1I'1l1$' 1l1$' some lanes and the fiontag rectionallanes, with at least two allowi,;g motorista to brpass being encpuraged to create p«iatlan,
www.dat..state.lx.us roads toll-free. . additional lanes designated as the srldlock that routl!1ely " 􀀧􀀿􀀧􀀴􀀡􀀭􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀬􀀺􀁯 r.o, 0.',:1,<-􀀢􀀺􀁴􀁪􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀻􀁾􀀻􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁻􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁩􀀬 􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀬􀀩􀁾
. GordOll DIcks"" 91H1!r3B16 . . But 􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁾􀁥 Rep. Todd Smith" R high-occupancy-vehicle lanes. forms op the freeway, reglonal 􀁍􀁾􀀮􀁰􀁯􀁩􀁴 􀀧􀁆􀁬􀀡􀁥􀁗􀁡􀀮􀁙􀀮􀀺􀁾􀀧􀁾 􀀺􀀺􀀡􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀺􀀺􀀺
/'';''l 9aldls..􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁴􀀮􀁬􀁬􀀹􀁦􀁬􀁭􀀮􀁣􀁯􀁭 Euless, said a toll would unfaIl'1, tnffic p1'\.lUlus say. 'Ib encou\" 􀁬􀁾􀀻􀀨 '•••. , 􀁴􀁾􀀨 􀀮􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁴 ;; .. I • ,: \􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁬􀀢 .
Ell.... F. MOllison. 811-61lS-3a8B ' burden area residents. aile carpooling, vehicles-􀁷􀁩􀁾 􀁕􀁉􀁾􀀢􀁬􀁾􀀡􀁊􀁉􀁊􀁉􀀬􀁾􀀬􀁜􀀢􀀺􀀮􀁬􀀧􀀬􀁾􀀴􀁩􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁴􀁩􀁩􀀺􀀢􀁾 .._ .•􀁭􀁯􀁲􀁲􀁩􀁳􀁯􀁮􀁀􀀮􀁉􀀮􀀢􀁉�
�􀀡􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁃􀁢􀁭 '. "'The way wehave historical\' One occupant CQuld: 􀀧􀁯􀁾􀁥 '. 􀂷􀀧􀁩􀀲􀀱􀀢􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀨􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀺􀀬􀀺􀀬􀁈􀁗􀁾􀁁􀁾􀀧􀁩􀂥􀁾􀁾􀁽􀀺􀁣􀁩􀁩􀀧􀁬􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁀􀀬 funded roads in
Texas is by wW 􀁣􀁾􀁡􀁲􀁧􀁥􀁤 a 1011, wbllll vehicles ; 􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁲􀀧􀀻􀀺􀀻􀁾􀁦􀀻􀀮􀁽􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁬􀀡􀁬􀀬􀀮􀁪􀁩􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷􀀤􀁦􀀦􀁖 of the gas tax which is 􀁣􀁨􀁡􀁲􀁧􀁾 pWaIstsh fmoruflrtiepel.e
oC':llpanlS couid '􀀨.•􀁾' 􀀺􀁩􀀡.􀁗_􀀭_ 􀀢􀀧I􀁊!I.􀀮J􀀡.\!􀁬IJ􀀱􀀲􀁾·􀀻s􀀱􀁾􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀧􀀡􀀮􀀧􀁩􀀼􀀻􀀱􀂢􀁻􀁾􀁾 I d eq'uitably across th t' U III even Yan Unlike freeways, which are paid
with tax dollars, tpll roads are paicl by investors who buy 􀁧􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁭􀁭􀁾􀁄􀁴 bonds. The debt is then repaid by tolls from mOlorists, 􀁾􀁾
The remaining lanes could be used without charge and would mostly be meant for local traffic. In previous discussions, highway officials had considered placing tolls on new lanes after
the freeway has been expanded and only on new express lanes, not existing lanes. 􀁾.. 􀁾􀁩􀀮􀀧􀀺 ..::.}<" AumN -Tarrant County's busiest freeway might not be a free ride much longer.
The Texas Transportation Commission strongly encouraged leaders In Bedford, Euless and Hurst on Thursday to begin collecting tolls on Airport Freeway to raise money for later expansion.
Commissioners suggested that some of the lanes drivers now use at no charge could require fees, with proceeds going toward eventually adding lanes and easing congestion on Tarrant County's
busiest roadway. JI rl-l:-U 􀁵􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀢􀀭􀀧􀁑􀁉􀁾 ", .... 'H " ...... , ,·:'-... '........ 􀀬􀁌􀀬􀁾 l(;;U-.JL:.:> 􀁕􀁾􀁉􀁌􀀺........ < •• 􀁟􀀢􀁾􀀢 , ••••• ,: y, ""<"'; ':It',l L(,; \,.....
􀁾􀀮􀀬 ..I ONUNE: Texas Department of TransportiJtlon: www.dot.state.tx.us Gordo1 .-..... ,....,.. ?D1C ...􀀢􀀧􀁲􀀢􀁣􀀺􀀬􀂷􀁴􀁮􀁀􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁩􀀱􀁲􀂷􀁴􀁥􀁬􀁥􀁡􀁲􀁡􀁭􀀮􀁣􀁯􀁭 JUN 􀁾 42003 fORTWOIlIHSTARTEf.
EGRMI Map outa plan enter into a partnership with the North Texas Tollway Authority, which manages several toll-only roads in the Metroplex, officials said. The tollway authority could
issue bonds, possibly raising enough money from Investors to cover most of the Improvements. The Texas Transportation Commission would pay the balance of the Airport Freeway tab, commissioners
said. State officIals' long-term plan for Airport Freeway Is to expand the road to 10 main lanes plus two toll lanes from Northeast Loop 820 to the Texas 183/121 split, and to eight
main lanes plus three toll lanes from the split to Texas 161 In Irving. State Rep. Todd Smith, R-Euless, was visibly upset Thursday by the idea of collecting tolls on existing lanes.
He predicted a backlash from motorists. He criticized Perry and legislative leaders Who repeatedly have said that charging tolls to pay for road projects was preferable to raising the
state gasoline tax. "The leadership of this state Is unwilling to make decisions to avoid that duty, leaving this as the only alternative. I believe all Texans ought to pay equally for
the right to drive In the state,' Smith said. "If the only way to solve our transportation problems Is toiling urban roads, that Is unfair to my urban constituents•• But most Tarrant
County leaders who attended the meeting said they would go along with the toll road proposal because they believe It Is the only way Airport Freeway wlll get the Improvements It needs.
•All across America, there are toll roads,' Euless Mayor Mary Lib Saleh said. "We're willing to get on a noncongested road and pay for these Improvements.' Tarrant County Commissioner
Glen Whitley said toll proceeds are a more efficient way to pay for roads because almost all of the money goes directly Into road work, except for nominal administrative costs. "We've
been promised that we'll get 95 percent of that [toll] mo.ney back,' he said. ... Tho 􀁾􀁥􀁮 o( the Tcu.s 'Ihll.t-iij"!I@h!hil'Uftt will taQ more pomtlon CommIs$Ion have _ 1b1t than
10bbyln.lJ to i' before: bllSloads o(people frcm a paro 91t expansIon 01 Airport FreeWay 􀁉􀁬􀁾 part pC the stile puI1Jac lip In started. . . "fronl'o( the eoollDisslon's Austin beadql1&CWs
lD lobby for a local road prebend Why • road thaI overloaded project. . wouldn't ,get lmmedialo attcntioD. Bul 011 Thuraday, It wW be about 100 .the reason Is c1ear,.'1l!xas Is faIliDg
m.people frcm the HursI-EuI_Bedb-d tjlcr aDd further behind OD laldnI clIro art:a pleadf,ng for e;<plUlS!on of veM-ollts trauspcirtallon Deeds. . cle-<l<>ll8"d Airport Freeway. To pul
il anotber way, thore are Tlie bottollllille Is 'I GuniIlar one: evell bigger prDblems elsewhere, There is only enough manoy lD ""Vlll' some of them rlghl here In Fort &bouts tbhd of
the highway work that Wozth·Pallas.. . needllD be 􀁤􀁯􀁾 In U:us. So what ell1l local (olks do, other So In PUllhing (or puticalu pro-thaG pIead their ..... in AluIiD1 jocts, local deleglltions
DOt oalr hwe . For mu: thing. tIien> Is a hIsb p«>beto demDnslrale the need but alao biIIty \hot myAIrport l'_ye:tpan. show thot thoy Ille willms to take alon would Include adding Ion
1aI>es. steps 10 help. 'l1Jc Hunt-I!uless-Ded-III that way, 􀁰􀁾􀁯􀁰􀁬􀁥 .....ho drive that (oN group has !bose'bases eav«ed. 􀁬􀁏􀁬􀁬􀁾 often elllllUllp pay (or the worlr. _The need
to capand Allport l'rae-A $274 mlllio!, 􀁰􀁾􀁯􀁬􀁥􀁣􀁴 to expand way Is appot1'eDt to anyone who drl90a AIrport 􀁆􀁴􀁥􀁦􀀺􀁗􀁾 /'roln Noorthcest Loop It. It was builr to handle DO DlOl'<!
thaa 820 to 'ICus 161 In Irving hu.Ions 140,000 vllhlcles pet day, and It \ beOn on the drlIwlnll boUlb. Maybe reached that 􀁣􀁡􀁾􀁡􀁣􀁬􀁬􀁹 16 yean IIG. by woddns Ingather, the local
de1ellaMono thon 2oo,oiIo vebk:les .... .Alr-tIOll headlng fOr AI1sdn on 1'hurJlfay POtl Freeway dally, and tnffle I. and the Tr....portatiOn ColmJIluIon expected to nCarly ,bible by
2Il2S. melllbe1'6 can find ways 10 lft.ake it >','" l .., l r .... • _..' 􀁴􀀮􀁾 ..••. Star:Je1egram By Gordon Dickson Star-Telegram Staff Writer Tolls urged for Airport Freeway But
commissioners said Thursday that converting Airport Freeway Into a toll road as soon as possible, perhaps within two years, would almost guarantee enough funding for a $274 million expansion
of the highway before 2012. Without tolls, there probably will not be any funding before then, they said. "We wouldn't go Into a community and force [tolls] on anyone, but we're here
to tell you that this project could. zoom like a rocket with tolls,' commissioner Ric Williamson of Weatherford said. Future of the freeway A state law signed last week by Gov. Rick
Perry allows the Texas Department of Transportation to convert part or all of existing freeways Into toll roads. Airport Freeway could be among .the first candidates for conversion,
state officials said. The switch would have to be approved first by the North Central Texas Council of Governments, a planning group that oversees highway funding for the region and
InclUdes members from Hurst, Euless and Bedford. The commission's Idea would be to divide Airport Freeway's six lanes of traffic Into toll and nontoll sections. At least two lanes, and
possibly four, would be converted Into express I"nes where tolls would be collected electronically. There would be no tollbooths. Motorists who use the lanes would affix ToliTags to
their Windshields so payments could be made automatically. Ucense plates of violators would be photographed with toll cameras and the vehicles' owners would be mailed citations. Posted
on Frl, Jun. 27, 2003 The commissioners' comments surprised many of the more than 100 Hurst, Euless and Bedford officials who traveled to the state Capitol by bus Thursday to ask for
Immediate funding Instead of haVing to walt a decade for financial help. ·What we got today was an honest dlscussfon about what It's going to take," said Charles Powell, chairman of
the Hurst-Euless-Bedford Chamber of Commerce. 'We're going to go back and talk to our constituents. Initially, there might be some hesitancy, but there Is so much congestion, I think
people will seriously consider it." 􀁾􀀮􀁪􀀩􀁩􀀺􀂷􀁾􀀱􀀡􀁩􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁕􀁩􀁬􀁬􀀮􀀲􀁬 ...-.,..􀁾􀁾 , 􀁟􀀬􀀬􀀺􀀧􀀡􀀮􀀭􀁩􀁬􀀺􀁉􀀧􀁾
I V 􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁾 0 􀁾 􀁋􀁾􀀼􀀺􀀮􀁏􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 \>. -I -0.3 ._-.-'.----Editorial Aprayer for those 􀀢􀀺􀀧􀀱􀀱􀁬􀁥􀁪􀁓􀁡􀁲􀀬􀁩􀁨􀁡􀁴􀁬􀀮􀁾􀀬􀁭􀁮􀁢􀁥􀀲􀀰􀀱􀁡􀁯􀁡􀁾􀁢􀁥􀁴􀁷􀁥􀁥􀁬􀁬􀁄􀁥􀁯􀀱􀁏􀁬􀁬
. ' .. ' '., ' ,,' and Dallas by 20?..l); 􀁷􀁥􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁬􀁴􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁴 l>ewideenougb.l-35E Wh0"'d, 'r·iv,',e', t0'","0'a'II'as,. -b􀁳e􀁴􀁩L􀁬w􀁬e􀁷e􀁩D􀁭􀀧D􀁴􀁢e􀁥n􀀧1􀀧O􀀧􀁾ll􀁤a􀁥n􀁥d􀁯􀁯l>􀁵􀁧a􀁨l1􀀺U􀁵
􀁄c􀁉a􀁥n􀀦􀁴b􀁎o􀁯􀁲u􀁴􀁨w􀀬􀀡il􀁥le􀁸􀁂u􀁮i􀁳t􀁟;􀁷ia􀁥􀁡l􀁮o􀁴n􀁨g􀁥􀁭a􀀭u􀀧d it , • , -aelvea ftum their IIltomobiles 8Dd ernbnice some Conn of E""'Y􀁾AD¢o. Grail'oo must leave her
home in lIl1W tranIit. ,,;., " ." : ' ., , '. ',' Corinth aud drl\oe to DeIIas,whmubeworks at '1ba1l1w1rythe'wwt oftbe􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁴􀁡􀀮􀀮 l'arldand Hospital nis bad eoough to 􀁨􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀧􀁴􀁯
aid up 􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁁􀁵􀁤􀁬􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁴􀁊luoimportaDt, aud wiry ills mlSsiaD'shower . In DeDas for lID)'te85OlI, but ptting'tbere on llltentate 3&B 'uotbethwsrtedbysbortrsightediDdividiJlI1!"groups,orcomjustad
dainsulttoiujury., ; mUllilirs(,,:';":' 􀀢􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀧 '. ' . ' ,: ' ADdnow􀁩􀁾 􀁧􀁥􀁉􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁾 as Ma. Graffeo informedthe " ..􀁖􀀺􀁡􀁮􀁊􀀭􀀮􀀮􀁆􀁊􀁯􀀢􀀬􀁾􀁲􀁍􀁏􀁵􀁄􀁤􀀧􀁳 town lIIIIIlllgu
IIlIl1 am_ber paperJate lastweek.1beTeus DeparlmeatOf::' oftbe'liaDsitAuthoritPaecutiYe ClOIlIIIIitW,liu faiIhlUII)' 'fraDsportatIonhas embarkectu(lOll 􀁡􀁭􀁯􀁄􀀱􀁨􀁾􀀱􀁏 􀁭􀁬􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁥􀁤􀀺􀁢􀁩􀁳􀁾􀀸
&eneraI attitude OIl tnDIportatioaa repair BJld.repaint the I·36E􀁾--.'CoiInth aDd loIiua: 'IbitiS; 􀁴􀁢􀁩􀁩􀁴􀁙􀁴􀁥􀀬􀁾􀁢􀁡􀁜􀀧􀁥 to teartbetteering-wheel.s'of the DsIIa.s CountyIiiIe,
anddriYa'8Qn I!IjIeI:tlineclmmat theirSINs from tbrlrcolcl;deadfiD&ers., -end long wjlil3 -􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁬 the􀁾dOoe ill J.uIy..' ' 􀁾􀀮 JIIlleS has l4lOf'ed at prellmiDary bllS routes bein«
,"ThetrIl1Iic Is bad eaough in North"ThDs;' Ms.GnB'eo' . perUsed by the'a>mmitIee,'8Dd􀁾that llOIIleoDe has p1e!Dlive1y told 011I:reporlet;."JIowwe have to deil withtbia.", 􀁾thelIoollB
􀁾􀁉􀀡 ridenhip'Bbic!Jes. , We feel ADge/a GnJfeo'B pain;Wec8DDo&CXllIIlt'tbe timl!lI ..,"That􀁾􀁬􀀨􀁴􀁲􀁥􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁃􀁴 IeIIIiIy now:" Mr. Jamea baa s8id of we haYeIleen cruiBing down1-31iE
oaIyto befOrced to slow ' the',ridershiP􀁰􀁲􀁾 "Th,at oo.;til!sJilY in 􀁾􀀰􀀲􀀵􀁩 t!Iat 􀁤􀁏􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁄􀀳􀁴􀁯􀁰􀀬􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁷􀁡􀀱􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁧􀀮􀁷􀁩􀁴􀁨􀀧􀁣􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁲􀀧􀁬􀁥􀁄􀁵􀁷􀀧
, 􀁣􀁬􀁑􀁥􀁭􀀧􀁴􀁒􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁾􀀡􀁮􀀧􀀲􀁏􀁉􀀡􀀹􀁾 .. ,,",: " motorists as ell ofaswaldled the-DeedIeB on,lliir tempeIa., , ),fr.JIlI!I!\S 􀁗􀁳􀁩􀁤􀁡􀀬􀁾 a_UDitywbere II1most turepuge$riBe.
"": ',:', i ' l!Wl)'llDewillbeabletobUyfuenbr1lleirpenoaahilolol" Sometimes 􀁗􀁥􀁾 to 􀁳􀁥􀁥􀁾􀁥 cause oftbe deiaY:wt-our veIii.,e.;1io􀁾hOW tbeprice BOUB,That Is their reality, at carfinaDy int'helr put,thebottleneCk. OtlieI:.tiDies,'thoir&b.; Ieastlbrnpw.IIlil,the)o'iIon't seem'miIch ooJil:eined at this thezda De)U a clue 􀁾 to whitcaused
tlie de1i.y.'Letk io ,'JlOiDtK,the rraJlli.. that other COIIIlIlUllitles lite.' ,':. " 􀁨􀁯􀁲􀁄􀁥􀀬􀁊􀁡􀁫􀁥􀀻􀁩􀁴􀀧􀁳􀀬􀁾􀁟􀀧 " . 􀁾􀀧􀁟,: : ' . .":. ButMiJameamlghtdoWeD.IoCOllSidertbisposaibi!ity:
Whatit is, ectueDy, is growth -eJlPllIH!Dtial,doubIe.:" WhentmlIlc aD I.:.:llil!. reicheooI c:ritiCal inais; it_'tmelle , 􀁣􀁬􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁥􀁭􀁡􀁊􀀮􀀮􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁾􀁯􀁮􀂷􀁥􀁯􀁧􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁧􀁲􀁯􀁶􀀻􀁴􀁨􀀢􀀺
􀁾i6ouly', 􀁁􀁉􀁜􀁙􀁾􀁾 haWmuCb'1liODCyyou􀁾Ioi psoIiDe. WbaI gomgtogelworse. ' ,-,... , 􀀬􀁟􀁾􀁰􀁯􀁉􀁉􀁡􀁮 gratmaes ofHoudaqmarestalled out ' Angela Grail'eo lIIId berfellow drivm are
􀁾􀀱􀁨􀁥􀀼􀁩􀁄􀁬􀁹 . ',.. . 􀁉􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁦􀁴􀀽􀁾􀁾 the􀁾froiD&-Mound,wi11 011.. who bave oursympathy. The poor,'I1'IIDspoItali,...... be'lltDduightomthere with them. ' ," , .. Department
bas the Skyp/!eaJljob ofkeepiogtbis road in ' , , good repairand -eYeD harder -wicleDiDgit to 1IUOIlIIDO-, date the burgeoning trallic tJow belweeu 􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁤 DaiIas. But ttial
may be chan'1" Inv: In rece.llests, , re_hen 􀁾􀁶 that Sub/eetlw messages have proven useful In helP/no molorlsts , nlllltgale ....rVlng 1,,1I1e. WervlnQ Is acommon cause , of ""nvatlon
and roild rag.. , Tha rew 1'ran5portalion lnstltule In 2001 conducted I, lest on Interstate 30 In Del· les, where I rlVhl 'an' was clused for road work.' ' Researchers Installed'. ;/90
the! road,"toIenle Here, rake Yqur l\Im." , ReeerchlltS believe the lubjectlve "QIl delayed rus'" hour conOtAtlon lly III Jill.. utes 1IIld redUced 􀀹􀁲􀁊􀁤􀁉􀁾 by I,BOO feet. The report
CO/l" dudes lIlat It would be wwtf\. ....hlle lor tfIe stille 10 conduel 'mol'li tests. . ," To vr.l'l 􀁴􀁨􀁾 􀁾􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀀬 tilled "Undenl!Ilndlnv Road Rag..: ,Drlwr Irrltant.s and P,romf,Slnv'
'MJlIgll1l6n'MellSlIiils,-vlsit ' tIIe'lnllftultt online at' Ill.tamu.e<lu.-GordtJn Oicl<sOtl 􀁳􀁩􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀭 JUN 232003 ' FORTVIORlliSTAR1aEGIwI • : Owlrtimc, urban chivors 􀁾.􀁯􀁯,'􀁫􀁩,
,􀁮􀁧' 􀀧"􀀺, ' =have-crco􀁾L􀁬c􀁬d􀀺a􀁤coc:docaoclfuctot.mG-el>-􀁾two1aDeo IlIeIgo SCltntlsb who IIttdy 􀁾 ......... rol"e' +lIllo ODe, clrlvtr510 both Ime$ lmfflc behavior 􀁐􀁬􀀧􀁴􀁬􀁾􀁲
lhat 1iO' ll.li:1J\! ...supposed10 take􀁾But hklhway slclns orrtr motorlsb • ' Blich􀁾lCqm<es all obJectJvt Intonnllldn audl as • : '", dJiWl'll1o be􀁾atlondml. '·LlIlt ends, 500'"Ifmercnna
,Sub-'WhICbbrlDPusbacl<lo 􀁊􀁥􀁩􀀺􀁴􀁊􀁾􀁲􀁮􀁥􀁓􀁓􀁓􀀸􀁑􀁮􀁳􀁵􀁣􀁬􀀾􀀢 0:-4b-Ot􀁏􀁊a􀀭􀁌]􀁾 RIns Lad)< Shio is IIll1on the .Use Cautlan" uS\II11y a" dis-a I S er Phoile ..􀁳􀁨􀁇􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁬􀁯􀁴􀁨􀁥
COu..-.. oir.·.-p,wbJchill tooohorl 10 .-􀁾with. Theft: ....o.tlly two ' N: JliiW. IDIIbllanao oil Loop 820, so. sl9ns,asklng wl=)'01lmupy.m've 110110 for courtesy 􀁾􀁬􀁣􀁬􀀼 􀁡􀁳􀁰􀁯􀁬􀀬􀁾
, havjtbeen shown to work In 'RlngLady isbolfwiyciowD DaUbs, but hliVlng drivers \he_romp wIu:n olIo ....11zd l'IIio are hiss distracted may tllotolie'l alrMslDUtoflllellr' eliro bea
key. 􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁡􀀺􀀧􀀽􀀱􀁾 rmloadb>g.pack oftush-,ill abort_IDCIJI8t rlam anIbe bout dri9'ets on southbmmd biQ:s alllI ........ to 􀁾􀁾􀁦􀀡􀀮􀁥􀀱􀁥 􀁄􀁉􀀡􀁉􀁬􀁉􀀬􀀼􀀾􀁁􀁈􀁩􀁾􀁢􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁬􀁄􀁳
􀁓􀁬􀁩􀀾􀁰􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁨􀁬 a :'=.1 􀁾􀁨􀁥􀁲􀀮 loallof'QS : 'I"'!'p lI2O.A , ' FInalllI she chops the phmu; , sport utllIty ". Ihoo st<erblg wl>oelwith , vehicle is to =IwIda aDd jlits the
gaS '.. "!Y􀁲􀁩􀁳􀁨􀁾 ":'l'! Pl=doL SIlonmes hu'way Ioto rbe driver". tro8Ic, snd sewraI WhIcles DII ; ,,'accelecating. dietrCcwa:ybmla: ba:d. Con-, , .", Shs cuts ' 􀁾􀁫 aVoid<d, but
thls poorly-,6OnIQD." ahelldofD1ll 􀁾􀁾􀁊􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁏􀁢􀁯􀁢􀁉􀁹􀁷􀁩􀁬􀁬 iiiiAiMiiiii lXI rhe II:ft cause pldIock alIlhe way to ' Ian. ftIld 􀁳􀁾􀁸 rhiDk 10 lIlJ"'eIf.At 􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀧􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁤􀀬whicli
Is.fine, la<t JIbig Lady so\.RooCl '􀁾that ohe l:Jl'""".,upicd. $Ie..,1f􀁰􀁥􀁤􀁩􀁡􀁾􀀧􀁗􀁩􀁩􀁉r=eno-O\IrPW.ls abouttopuU 011' be&' 10 pa)'atl<DliOn I_Ulm... zcWl',ioult 1'reeWllY.lIlCIll">􀁾
' : Inlooldllg tor WllyS to make '''';' I$!dJa.odaiblp., 'g_ """Idea tbat sa-, 􀁾􀀬􀁬􀁉􀁣􀁲􀁲􀁬􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁨􀁡􀁮􀁤 j",holdb>g ,=areotwlflusls 10􀁾 zte1J{llloDclolicr,eBrAIe.ft hlshwJIr.•
.lbattiomlDd ,,' IiaodIIonthe Sleeril:lgwliJlel iuotorists 10 IDOIg<l oourIcously, lll:ld llhc ls,wiggIIrJsher􀁾 'The.copld be plAced at 􀁓􀁦􀀩􀁾􀁨􀁏􀁴􀁬􀀧􀁩􀀱􀁬􀁰 spBIlde In we 􀁾􀁄􀁢whali
drivcm momins suullghl. tlh-<lb. O"r C' wait 100IBtllto 􀁾􀀧􀁄􀁦􀁶􀁥􀂻􀁬􀁣􀁬􀁥􀁳is almost to' 􀁾DlltD􀁾1Oe<ge tho 0l"'fl'DlP, 'IXId DIY 'Illder too SOOII wboo appzoachjng a 􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁊􀁉􀁳
me lhar we'rallhout c:imauucllc>,,..,alatOd l3no cIo-10 ineIgIng lioubfe.. .....eoud'use \0mob:_lOr : pre tIw1.h3Jf Dfthe dJi· 􀁯􀁴􀁨􀁾 10Dle<ge, V/ift)Vbo took pori lXI. 2001 .; til.
_tal, • OIgn thot 􀁾Thmsponallon Instllull! i*'<l "Me<gew....'X1lI<e 'Ybur studx said melllingwas thedli-'Ibm"was installod""1..mJ '4usluk that caused thi:m the di.ll'Jl'OlllDterslatc
30 In Dallas. must stress.' 11Rduccd !USb·hour gridlock Sc!uJ>!ists are otudying ways bf14 nDnules. , 10 ge/drivers tDmerg!l 􀁭􀁄􀁾􀁥 , , lIut some rcsean:bera lIlC safdy.StatclawgiYesthonght·
􀀧􀁾􀁴􀁨􀁡􀁴􀁬􀂣􀁬􀁨..igDS_" oMWy ID vehiCles lIlready au • 1VidelYused, they wouldWOrk, , freeway; tho... entering tho onlyfor • boD.eyn>o"" pedod. 􀁦􀁲􀁾are required to blend After
ataw 1llOll!hs, 􀁤􀁲􀁬􀀧􀁾 suc:h In r.a&1y. This.bowevu.,was. "" llID3x..dywouldjlUlused to mudi .hnpler endeavor the signs, :and igiiOiO them. t1__􀁾􀁬􀀧􀁥􀁳 ago, when traJIic lnmporbtloDqueldoDl
Call rna ;;,;;;;rt..",ongested, , .. (817) 68S-38llS "" ..... _ 􀀺􀀢􀁾􀁉􀁟... 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁲􀁾􀀬􀀿􀀬􀀿􀀾􀂷􀀢􀀬􀀮
DallasNpws.com ([lIt 􀁾􀀩􀀨􀁉􀁜􀁬􀁡􀁲􀀬 11lornillll 􀁾􀁴􀁜􀁵􀁾 Rockwall's transportation options may expand Proposal calls for vans, minibuses, feasibility study of park-and-ride 0611
JIZOOJ By JUDY EVANS' Tire DaUas MornIng New. Minibus mutes in Rockwall? A troIley bus plying the streets ofthe historical disnict? A park-and-ride lot wllere residents could catch a
lift to aDART station in Rowlett or Garland? Such visions lllCtllltly became less far-fctchcd wben western Rockwall County reacbed a great enough population density to qualify as urbanized,
making the area eIlgible for more federal money. Aproposal ullder consideration by city officials calls for expanding some transit services and studying tbe fcasibillty of implementing
otbCtS. Is Rockwall to the point of needing an expanded transit system? "Probably close," said Mayor Pro Tem Bob Colli. "As fast as the city's growing, there's only so much we can do
with the roads. It would be worthwhilo for us to pursue apfOgrBm to get cars off the roads instcsd ofcoming in lI11er it's a bigger problem." But Mr. Cotti and council member Billy Morris
said they weren't ready to get fully on board without carcfuIly assessing the costs. "This program won't bc casy to accomplish becausc it docs require an Investment by thc city," Mr.
Cotti said. Mr. Morris saId he didn't have enough detailed information and would find the program difficult to SUppOit. "On thc basis ofwhat I know now, wc don't have the money," hc
said. "And then you have to ask, 'Do we havc a nced for this?' 1don't know thaI." City Managcr Julie Couch said tho program deserves a look 1I0W that it is available to thc city. "We
necd to study the plan and decidc ifit is time for us to consider a park-and-ridc to get some cars off our roads," she said. The proposal amounts to a large expansion oCThe Connection,
the transit system opeC"ated in Rock-wall by Ihc Hunt County 􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁩􀁬􀁴􀁾􀁥 on Aging. Thc Connection provides van service at $1 pcr ride for people who eall in advance to schedule
a Irip. The initial. $2.3 million proposal would require the city to chip in about $276,000, plus an undetel1l1incd amount Cor opcl'ating costs. It would includc: 􀁾 • Two 30·foot minibuses
to take largc groups ofscnior citizens or people with disabilities on special trips. Thc vehicles could also be used to take commulers to DART rail and bus statioIls in Garland and Rowlett.
•A fensibility study for a park-and-ride lot. • 4nd purchase and construction. • Van stop shclters with bcncbes atld signs; three 2o-passenger vans and a IS-passenger van; and two maintenancc
vehicles. • A troIley-type bus for a fixed Touto in Rockwall's historical district. Thc projects bavc been approved by the North Central Texas Council ofGovernments but would stili require
approval by !lIC Federal Transit Adminimtion, said Sally Chavarria, exccutive director ofthe Hunt County Committco on Aging. City officials havc thc option of adopting all or part of
tho proposal, which was approved by a local committee appointcd by Ms. Chavarria that included included city officials and othel'S. Mr. Cotti, a member ofthc cOTDDliltee, said Rockwall's
growth has increased the need for public transportation to take peoplo to shopping areas in the city. But he didn't think thc city would spend even halfof the proposed $276,000 next
yoar. "I'd prefcl' to take it in small steps as opposcd to giant leaps," he sald. "There may be some things we can do In 2004, but 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁲􀁾 are sevcral projects that I'd like more
infolInation on before we consider funding studies. But I can see the city adopting part ofthe program now." That part, he said, might include the purchase ofone or two more vehicles
for The Connection and a sharc ofthe maintenancc costs. Ms. Chavarria said it is time to consider expanding transit services. "Wc'rc kind ofbel1ind in gclllng this offthe ground," shc
said. "With the city's growth and tramc, a program should already he in placc." The limited 􀁳􀁥􀁲􀁶􀁩􀁣􀁾 offered now by The Connection is used mostly by the elderly, she said. 􀁍􀁯􀁲􀁾
than 4,000 pcople used the city service last year, Ms. Chavarria said. The city pays $15,600 annually for The Connection, said Mary Smith, Rockwall's finance director. The annual cost
for the proposed program would bc much bigher. she said, but the amount hasn't beon 􀁤􀁥􀁴􀁾􀁲􀁲􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁤􀀮 "Wc're cValuating the merits ofthe proglllm now and deciding whal the city
can do," Mrs. Smith said. Ms. ChavalTia said tho Rockwall City Council needs to decide by budgcting scason in August which, if any, plllts of the proposal thc city will implement. 􀁅􀀭􀁭􀁡􀁩􀁬􀀮􀁩􀁇�
�􀀮􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁀􀁤􀁮􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁳􀁮􀁥􀁷􀁳􀀮􀁣􀀨􀁬􀀱􀀱􀁊
.. '. 􀁾 ." ..". 2" At that point, people began Shouting, not coming to the microphone to speak and interrupting Burgess. Order was restored only when HVPO Capt. Chuck Bahr suggested
that everyone seWe down. "We're here to talk and debate In a calm manner," Bahr said. "Let's be civilized." Burgess opened the meeting by discussing his accomplishments thus far as a
freshman congressman In Washington. He slressed issues such as natIonal security, the U.S. economy, education and federal funding for local roads and highways. A town hall meeting conducted
by U.S. Rep. Michael Burgess. R·Highland Village. to discuss national Issues affecting the area quickly turned into a protest against the proposed expansion of Farm-to-Market Road 2499,
with an off-duty Highland Village police officer stepping in at one point to calm down upset resIdents. It was the latter Issue that seemed to bring the bUlk of the audience to the meeting.
"I hava dedicated much of my time to transportation issues," Burgess said. "I am your transportation advocate in Washington." He said the Transportation Reauthorization Act will bring
$20.8 billion of transportation funding to Texas in the next six years. with one-fifth of that eannarked for North Texas. However, the intended use of some of that money was what concerned
many in the audience. One Highland Village resident questioned Whether a local road such as FM 2499 could receive federal funding under the U.S. Constitution, He argued that the constitution
does not llilow the federal govemmentto authorize money for projects like the FM 2499 extension and asked Burgess not to seek federal funding for the project. His request was met with
applause from the audience. Burgess responded by noting that the Federal Highway Administration identified FM 2499 as a project of federal significance and that It would remain an active
Texas Department of Transporlation inItiative. "Whether I get any funding or not, It will 5till move forward," he said. "2499 is a stand-alone project." The meeting got heated When Burgess
expressed his support for the FM 􀀲􀀴􀀹􀁾 project, but he said it didn't matter how he felt about it. Members In the audience shouted back, ·Yes it dOBS: Once orderwas re-establlshed,
Highland Village resident Patrick Brown Inquired as to how the congressman, who elso lives In Highland Village, came to support the FM 2499 project. Burgess explained his personal journey
began while he was growing up in Denton, He said that Carroll Road In Denton Waf/, originally slated to connect Denton to the Mid-CIties. When that didn't happen. he attended meetings
in the 1980s during which FM 2499 was discu$$ed as an arterial route to D/FW airport. Burgess said the fate of the project and Highland Village's section of it was largely determined
when Flower Mound constructed Segment 3 of the project and right of way was acquired In Highland Village. "The current foolprlnt was set by those two events,· he said. "2499 Is the road
I longed for, for a long time. and It has not been a stretch for me to feel like it is an Important project for the area.· l3urgess rellPonded to criticism that he was not representing
the views of his constituents by repeatedly saying that the authority to stop tha project rests with TxDOT, not the U.S. Congress. and that those concemed aboutlhe project should attend
the upcomIng TxOOT meeting July 31 at Marcus High School. Not all In attendance were against the FM 2499 eldension project. At least three spoke up In favor of the project, even though
to do so met With disapproving comments and outright hostility. Jack MillIgan said he voiced his support and was InUmldated by the response he received. "It wasn't a big deal," he said.
"Anytime you're in the minority, ifs hard to speak out." Highland Village councilman Fred Buschll'said though most of people at the meeting may oppose the project-many wore "Stop 2499"
stickers on their shirts -the majority of HIghland Village residents supported the extension of FM 2499. . "This Is a very vocal minority,· he saId. "ThIs wasn't even an Issue In the
election. I thought (Burgess) handled It very well." On other J5sues, Burgess saId his accomplishments InclUded House Resolution 1588 and similar legislation in the Senate designed to
modemize the U.S. Department of Defensa. The measure Includes a 4.1 percent pay Increase for military personnel and money for out-of-pocket housing 00$1$. He cited also the $380 billion
dolfar defense budget, a 15 percent Increase from last year. and the $35 billion homeland security budget, an 18 percent increase from last year. as evidence of Congress' commitment
to national security. On edllcatlon. Burgess oxpressGd his support for PresIdent Bush's "No Child Left Behind" Act. 􀀰􀀶􀀯􀀱􀀱􀀯􀀲􀀰􀀰􀁾 FM 2499 foes dominate Burgess talk 􀀸􀁹􀁓􀁲􀁥􀁬􀀧􀀩􀁾􀁦􀀱􀁹􀁮�
�􀀬StollWriW L t 􀀢􀀧􀀯􀁾􀁶􀀯􀀧􀀭􀁬 E-􀁴􀀮􀁆􀁾􀂣􀀨
:!Jallas regIon"SroaGSIae asSIstance Rrogram 10 grow ·'8tf1rI 1 􀁾􀀮 113""': (.' -{ . . tion authorities say. . plans for 53 employees in the pro-wrecks and stalled cars. 􀂷􀁾􀁩􀁭􀁣􀁩􀁬
of Governments will an-gram. ·CoUrtesy patrol staff set The transition from the Texas gram instead ofthe current 26. The program is paid for by fed-nounee the change, which took ef-The
department is working to · .' h ..:.m Department of Transportation' "Our goal is to get these inci-era! grants and' state 􀁭􀁡􀁴􀁣􀁨􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀢􀀻􀁾􀁊􀁵􀁮􀁥􀀮􀀮 take over traffic enforcement
and .:.',,;:to double as S euu s will allowthe number of employ-dents cleared more quickly," she funds. Ms. Sams said that she didj':\i;Among the changes will be a patrol duties along
highways '::Department takes over ees to double arid the area they said. 􀁾􀀧􀁶􀁥 seen whatthe Sherifi's not know the cost of the program . nel()ook to the courtesy patrol throughoutthe
county. " eoverto increase, said Terry Sams, 􀁄􀁥􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁮􀁴􀁾􀁴 is doing, and we but that the Transportation De-.tiui:ks, which will be outfitted to "We're trying to be more effi-􀀬􀁾􀀻􀀮
By IAN McCANN . director of transportation opera-could see that their goals and our partment and the NorJ:h Thxas : 􀁾􀁑􀁑􀁉􀀮􀁴 more like a Sherifi's Depart-cient and getthetraffie
programto 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀮 . StaffWriter ti?ns.for the state agency's pallas goalswere re3nysimiIar.􀁾􀀮 . 'Ibllway Authoritywould continue 􀀧􀁭􀁾􀁴 vehicle, 􀁍􀁾􀀮 SamS sai? be more efficient,"
Sgt Peritz said. :;;,';: More c0lll'tes>: patrol 􀁾􀁯􀁲􀁫􀁥􀁲􀁳 district ... . .. Patrols help 􀀮􀁣􀁬􀁩􀁾 􀀮􀁾􀀬 glve 􀁴􀁯􀁦􀁵􀁬􀀱􀁹􀁦􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁥􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁾􀀮 􀀮􀂷􀁾􀁬􀁾􀁧􀁴􀀮 Don
Peritz, a 􀁓􀁨􀁾􀁲􀁩􀁦􀁩􀀧􀁳 J?e-􀀢􀁙􀁯􀁵􀁾 see more ofthem out there, -'ar¢ expected to hit area highways 'Staffing limits m the district 􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁾 motorists up to a gallon On
Wednesday, offiCials from 􀀮􀀺􀁾􀁥􀁮􀁴 spokesman, sald the]fi-and It doesn't cost the taxpayer a .'!!it.the roadside assistance prO-have kept the agency from ex-of g3s, let people make
etllphone the Sheriff's Department, the TeX-:.leniiStomakethecourtesypatrols pennyextra." "gram shifts to the Dallas County panding the program, Ms. Sams calls, provide water or antifreeZe
as Department of Transportation ,'WOrk smoothly with the depart-----_ -" ,:Sll'erifi's Department, transporta-said.' The Sheri1l"s Department and help dirt:ct traffic' around and the
North Central Texas.. ··ment's freeway management pro-E-mail imccann@dallasnews.com . • ... . '. . .';:,..􀀮􀀧􀀮􀀧􀁟􀀺􀁌􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁾\' Signsin Richardson remind drivers not tonmred lights.
E-maillbcil@dallasnews.coin For now, Ms. Stowe says, Texans \vill tolerate only so much law enforcement. She pointed to the recent defeat in the Thxas legislature of a proposal to allow
the use of cameras to catch violators, a practice eommon in European countries. "It's not a mindset of, 'Oh, great, they're doing this to keep us all safe.' .. Dr. Redelmeier says that
organizations pushing for change often find that practices that are good for public health are bad for public relations. "I'm not happy when I get a ticket myself, but what I dislike
even more is getting involved in a serious motor vehicle crash," , he says. Contill/ledfrom Page IE nxperts: Social pressure needed on light runners ting caught, a behavior such as speeding
or miming red lights 􀁨􀁡􀀮􀁾 . to become socially unacceptable, says Peter Cummings of the Uni· versity ofWashington, who 􀁨􀁡􀀮􀁾 al.so studied the 􀁥􀁦􀁦􀁥􀁣􀁬􀁾 oftraffic laws on
safety. For example, drun ken .driving rates have declined, but this wasn't just the re.sult oftough.er laws. Groups like Mothers ,..Against Drunk Driving helped {transform attitudes
toward drinki :ing and driving, he says. In the I, ease of lesser traffie violations, :;'people'see little harm. ',,; "Unless the publicity, or the <,threat of getting a ticket, is great,
,yihey're just not going to change 􀁾􀀬 tIieir habits,· he says. SeeEXPERTS Page 2E conditions may change, or the far, and most traffic violators eomposition ofdrivers on the road aren't
stopped anyway. For a lastmay change. ing effect, a city's entire way of To control for some ofthe sta-thinking has to shift. Enforcing tistical background noise, Dr. Re-traffic laws
is only part ofacomplidelmeiei' and his colleagues cated process. looked at each driver's chance ofa "It's a very slow process to fatal collision -not just fatalities change people's
behavior," says in general -before and after get-Martha Stowe, director ofthe Intingfined. Theyalso looked at data jury Prevention Center ofGreater over a long stretch of time, from
Dallas, based at Parkland Health 1988 through 1999. ,&Hospital System. "Our biggest Theyfound that people do tend. desire in Dallas is to get someto drive more carefully after being
where as fast as you can, it's not to ticketed. The effect lasts onlya few get there as safe as you can." months, but during those months, And if you have to barrel a life may be saved.
Aecording to though a light that's just turned the Toronto .calculations, about red, what's the harm? "Right now, 80,000 tiekets means one less fa-it's real acceptable to run red tal
collision. lights," Ms. Stowe says. "Dallas is "People get sloppy unless they far more accepting than other citget· reminders," Dr. RedeImeier ies." says. In addition to the fear of
get-But he and others say that a fear ofgetting caught goes only so PUBIJC HEAll1I Study finds citations lead to more careful driving, for a while The UniversityofToronto trauma specialist
-who treats the damaged bodies that result 􀁦􀁲􀁯􀁭􀁾 dangerous driving -recently set out to study whether the number By LAURA BElL of traffic citations actually affects Medical Writer
traffic fatality rates. If so, his re-Dr. Donald Redelmeier has suIts suggest that the Dallas Police heard thl! usual complaints about Department's current crackdown why a poliee officer
shouldn't be . on speeders and red-light runners sueh a fast draw on the radar gun. may truly be making the streets a Thatdrivers will be so obsessed little safer. Dr. Redelmeier's study
with watching for patrol cars that appeared last month in the medithey won't pay attention to the caljournal The Lancet. road. That drivers are inclined to Studying the effects of traffic
speed recklessly once they pass an laWs is fraught With hazards, aI)d officer, anxious to make up for lost no single study is likely to answer time. That pulling vehicles in and any
question. Traffie fatality rates out oftraffic to issue tickets is in-rise and fall for a lot of reasons, herentlydangerous. . and tying anyone trend to laws or "All ofthese views are
inconsis-enforcement oflaws is difficult. At tent with the data," he says. a given time, for example, driving Traffic tickets.linked to saved lives £},,1/,AJ ? 1 -c3 􀁾􀁾
DALLAS HIGH FIVE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TEAM AGENDA June 10, 2003 TxDOT Field Office North Central Expressway at Churchill Way 10:00 AM -12:00 Noon DALLAS HIGH FIVE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TEAM
MINUTES May 13. 2003 The Dallas High Five Traffic Management Team met at 10:00 AM on Tuesday, May 13, 2003 at the TxDOT Field Office on North Central Expressway at Churchill Way. Seven
members were present as indicated on the attached sign in sheet. Larry Tegtmeyer called the meeting to order at 10:03 AM. The minutes of April 8, 2003, were approved as submitted. I.
II. Call to Order Approval of May 13, 2003 Minutes Larry Tegtmeyer Larry Tegtmeyer Construction Plans for the Interchange -Brian Salerno distributed a Major Activity 3 Month "Look Ahead"
schedule. He reviewed the status of construction and plans for the next three months. 􀁾􀁾 III. Construction Plans for Interchange IV. Status Reports as Required A. Right-of-Way Acquisitions
B. Utility Relocations C. CTR StUdy of Frontage Box D. DART Light Rail E. DARTHOV F. LBJ Project Office G. Transportation Operations H. City of Dallas I. City of Richardson J. Public
Information Campaign V. Other Business VI. Next Meeting -JUly 8, 2003 Brian Salerno, zachry Construction Pete Garza Pete Garza Nabeel Khwaja Carlos Huerta Mahesh Kuimil Matt MacGregor
Andy Oberlander Bahman Bahramnejad Arturo Serna Montrose Cunningham Larry Tegtmeyer Westbound LBJ frontage road from TI Boulevard to Cottonwood Creek completed this Thursday, May 15.
Northbound NCE frontage road from Cottonwood Creek to Midpark Road complete end of May 2003; completion of frontage road needed to work on ramps EN and WN. Cottonwood Creek U-turns -May
2003, permanently close southbound Cottonwood Creek U-tums after opening northbound frontage road. Coit Road U-turn -early June, open eastbound-to-westbound U-turn before Coit Road is
completed in July 2003. Southbound NCE ramps -in early June 2003, open entrance ramp from Spring Valley to sou1hbound US 75 and open exit ramp from southbound US 75 to Midpark Road;
then close entrance ramp from Midpark Road to southbound US 75 and close exit ramp from southbound US 75 to Coit Road. Northbound NCE ramps -in early June 2003, close northbound entrance
ramp to US 75 south of Midpark Road and close northbound exit ramp to Spring Valley Road; these ramp closures will follow opening northbound frontage road in late May 2003. Midpark Bridge
over US 75 -in March 2003, completed new south half of bridge and shifted traffic to new bridge; in late June 2003, complete new north half of bridge. • Coit Road -in December 2002,
completed construction of new southbound pavement and bridge from Alpha/Emily to Banner Drive; shifted traffic to new pavement and began reconstruction of new northbound pavement and
bridge; in June 2003, complete northbound lanes and split NB & SB traffic on bridge; in August 2003, complete center section of bridge and open to traffic (to complete bridge means three
through lanes and two left turn lanes in each direction plus U-turn lanes on the frontage roads); Northbound Northbound NCE frontage road from Forest Lane to LBJ -complete in July 2003.
Direct connector segmental erection on ES-13, ES-11 and ES-10; about one month for each connector. Permanent retaining walls -started near Coit, Midpark, NB FR (northbound frontage road),
SB FR, EB FR and WB FR.
􀁾 􀁾 TI access bridge over LBJ Freeway -in January 2003, demolished west bridge and began reconstruction new wider bridge: sequence of construction modified to keep the east access
bridge open to Executive Centers during construction of new access bridge -complete in August 2003. 54-inch water line from TI Boulevard to Greenville Avenue -in February 2003, began
installation; work has been stopped due to a conflict with a retaining wall; waiting on HNTB approval of revised plans. LBJ main freeway lanes from TI Boulevard underpass to Greenville
Avenue in June 2003, begin main lane construction with a revised traffic control plan that maintains four lanes in each direction; traffic switch after completion of 54inch water line
and Greenville U-tum. LBJ eastbound exit ramp to Coit Road and westbound exit ramp to Preston Road -work on retaining walls day and night to complete in July 2003. Right of Way Acquisitions
-Dan Peden said there were no changes in ROW acquisitions since the last meeting. Utility Relocations -Dan Peden indicated that Zachry would remove the building sign for North Central
Plaza I. A sign also needs to be removed from parcel 33 in the southeast quadrant. Project Milestone -Brian Smith distributed a summary of project milestones showing the credit days
and days charged for each milestone. Larry Tegtmeyer observed that Zachry was working when areas were available and is still ahead of schedule. Intersection Lane Assignments & Signalization
-Dan Peden said that in two weeks, CTR (Center for Transportation Research) will complete a study of traffic signals for the frontage box. The current plans for the NB-to-WB and the
SB-to-EB movements include islands that prohibit dual left tums for the NB and SB traffic. Eliminating these islands and redesigning the traffic signal standards would increase the options
to accommodate future traffic demands. Larry Tegtmeyer remembered similar islands on the NCE frontage roads at Forest Lane that prohibit dual right turns. DART HOV -Mahesh Kuimil was
unable to attend the meeting, but reported that the 1·635 HOV lanes carried 36,100 passengers every weekday in April 2003. Roundtrip travel-time savings were 17 minutes. Total HOV system
weekday ridership was 104,800 commuters. LBJ Project Office -Matt MacGregor was unable to attend the meeting, but he sent a report announcing the LBJ West Section Public Hearing on Thursday,
June 5lh at the Holiday Inn Select North Dallas. 2645 LBJ Freeway. The 100% Churchill Way plans are completed. ROW appraisals have not begun. The letting date for construction has been
shifted from November or December 2003 to June or August 2004. The LBJ early frontage road project from Hillcrest Road to Merit Drive is scheduled for letting in December 2004 subject
to right of way acquisition. The 65% plans including the traffic control plans are being reviewed now. City of Dallas -Bahman Bahramnejad reported that the plans for capacity improvements
at Coit Road and Churchill Way will be let in late 2003 or early 2004. City of Richardson -Arturo Serna indicated that the installation of a citywide fiber optics system is still under
construction. Until August, some streets in the vicinity of the interchange could be impacted by the construction. Waterview Drive is being repaired and overlaid from Campbell Road to
Belt Line Road. Campbell Road is under construction fromGlenville Drive to Greenville Avenue TxDOT transferred the Courtesy Patrol to the Dallas County Sheriffs Department. Larry Tegtmeyer indicated that on the NCE project to restripe the
main lanes and frontage roads, the contractor is concentrating on the section south of LBJ Freeway. Public Information Campaign -Larry Tegtmeyer stated that the next public meetings
are scheduled for Tuesday, June 3rd at 7:00 PM and Wednesday, June 4lh at 9:00 AM in the Marriott Residence Inn, 7642 LBJ Freeway. The next meeting of the TMT will be at 10:00 AM on
Tuesday, June 10th at the TxDOT Field Office. The meeting adjoumed at 11:02 AM Cliff Franklin Attachment
PURPOSE OF Community Work Group Meeting MEETlNG: ), . n>q['=' PEGASUS 􀀺􀀽􀁾 PROJECT: PRESENT: IH 30& IH 35E (Canyon/Mixmaster/Lower Stemmons) . Members/Alternates Ken Menges, Chairman
Larry Fonts, Central Dallas Association Esther Gebhardt, Greater Dallas Chamber of Commerce Robert Hensley, Mixmaster Business Association Jake Marks, Stemmons Corridor Business Association
Rich Morgan, American Institute of Architects Thom Ridnouk, Downtown Improvement District Kristian Teleki, Mathews Southwest Marcus Wood, Mixmaster Business Association 􀁾Janis Jelrick
Amy Kohls Kathryn Steel project Staff Tim Nesbitt, TxDOT Richard Mason, TxDOT Tim Starr, City of Dallas -PWT Sandy Wesch·Schulze, Carter & Burgess Athena Bolton, Carter & Burgess Dave
Retzsch, Carter & Burgess Bryan Copeland, Carter & Burgess Doug Bowen, Jacobs Civil Inc. Meeting Report CSJ: 0009·11·181 0196·03·199 0196·03·205 LOCATION: Dallas City Hall, Room L1FN
DATE OF April 15, 2003 MEETlNG: Community Work GrouP April 15, 2003 Page 2 He then introduced Ms. Sandy Wesch·Schulze, Carter & Burgess (C&B), to review the refinements since the last
CWG meeting. Sandy referred to the drawings laid out on the table showing the refined alignment. With the changes made based on the VE study, the overall cost of the project was about
$40 million or 5.5 percent. In some areas we saved money; in other areas we spent more money. Overall, the team feels the design and operation are improved. The types of structure that
should be used were evaluated. In the Canyon area, it was recommended that box beams be used to help with the vertical clearance issue. In the Mixmaster and Stemmons, the team recommended
the use of lJ.beams for typical spans and a steel trapezoidal beam for long or curved spans. Dave Retzsch will be showing some pictures of these later. lJ.beams are being used on the
approaches of the High Five Interchange. In the IH 30 Canyon, a slight modification was made to the number of lanes on two ramps. The eastbound entrance ramp from Griffin/Lamar was reduced
to one-lane and the exit ramp to Harwood/South Central was made two·lanes. This will improve the weaving section between the two ramps. One of the design changes in the Mixmaster was
combining the eastbound IH 30 Industrial exit ramp with the Beckley exit. Traffic to Industrial would have to exit sooner but would not have to travel through any signals to get to the
collector·distributor road over the Trinity River to Industrial. This change saved about $6 million dollars and allows for a symmetric design over the river if the city wants to build
a signature bridge. The design was also modified to eliminate reconstruction of the Union Pacific Railroad bridge just south of Woodall Rodgers which saved about $5 million. Other changes
included simplifying and consolidated the ramps for the High Occupancy Vehicle/Managed (HOV/M) tanes. Some other ramps were also modified to improve weaving distances. Marcus Woods asked
when the drawings would be available on the website. Ms. Wesch·Schulze slated the drawings would be available on the website by the end of the week. Mr. Woods also asked how southbound
IH 35E traffic would get from Industrial. Ms. Wesch-Schulze illustrated the options utilizing the maps. Traffic could exit to Commerce to get to Industrial or they could exit further
south, use the collector-distributor road to exit to Cadiz/Industrial. Access from westbound Woodall Rodgers to northbound Dallas North Tollway (DNT) was also studied. She also noted
that due to vertical clearances and steep grades, access from westbound Woodall Rodgers to DNT would not be possible. Mr. Nesbitt added that maximum allowable grades usually are 5-6
percent. The design would require much steeper vertical grade; the design would not meet FHWA or TxDOT design standards. The follOWing is our understanding of the SUbject matter covered
in this meeting. If this differs from ¥our understanding, please notify us within five working days. The April 15, 2003, meeting for the Community Work Group (CWG) was held at Dallas
City Hall in Room L1 FN, 6:30 p.m. Handouts made available to the attendees included the meeting agenda and public involvement report. Mr. Ken Menges. Chairman of the CWG, convened the
meeting by welcoming the members and guests. He then turned the meeting over to Mr. Tim Nesbitt, Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Project Manager. Mr. Nesbitt reviewed the
current status of the project. Mr. Nesbitt briefly discussed the Value Engineering (VE) study that was recently completed for the project. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires
a VE study when federal money will be used for construction and the cost of the project is over $25 million. Staff members from the FHWA, TxDOT, City of Dallas, Dallas County, Texas
Transportation Institute, North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), and the consultant study team participated in the week long study. The purpose of the study is to review
the proposed design to save money and provide a beller design. The VE process also makes the review process easier because because some of the people participating will ultimate review
the design. 􀁾􀁾􀁜 Doug Bowen, Jacobs Civil, Inc., reviewed the changes to the Stemmons corridor. The main changes include the use of braided ramps and improvements to traffic weaving.
Though these changes would increase costs for this segment, braided ramps would improve traffic flow and safety. Changes would also include changes to access to Market Center, Oak Lawn
and Wycliff; bypass lanes would be added but the exit ramp to Wycliff has been removed. Doug noted that meetings with adjacent properties owners were taken into account in making decisions
regarding changes to the design. The team will be meeting with the Anatole regarding impacts to the hotel. Mr. Nesbill introduced Dave Retzsch (C&B). Mr. Retzsch reviewed potential urban
design elements for the project. He referred to the drawings posted on the wall. Urban design can Include numerous elements such as retaining wall designs/patterns, bridges. bridge column
shapes, landscaping, etc. Structural elements, such as U-Beams and box beams, create a more modem look. Stemmons has many overhead structures; lJ.beams would give a "cleaner" look undemeath.
In the Canyon area, box beams could be used to reduce the depth but also give a "cleaner" look underneath. Lighting along the roadways would need to include high-mast fixtures. Under
bridge lighting could consist of canister lights. Carter::8urgess
Community Work Group April 15, 2003 Page 3 Mr. Retzsch also discussed signage and landscaping options. Landscaping could include the use of planters. In the Mlxmaster area, the focus
on design of bridge structures could include the use of color and column treatments. As proposed by the city, a pedestrian promenade could be included along Reunion. Along Commerce,
there are large landscape areas which could be utiiized to create a portal. The Stemmons Park could include bike trails on Oak Lawn and possible pedestrian connection to the DART station.
Parking could be included below structures. Mr. Retzsch requested that any suggestions regarding urban design should be directed to him. Richard Mason: Native grasses should be used
for easier maintenance. It will be important for the community to prioritize these because it is unlikely the city and the community can afford to do everything. Ken Menges: The use
of ivy has not been very successful in the pasl Honey suckle and clinging vines may be more successful. Planters used could have rotating seasonal vegetation along the pedestrian walks.
Between Old City Park and Farmers Market native grasses should be used. Marcus Wood: I have safety concerns regarding Texas U-turns. Plantings are growing too tall and it makes visibility
poor, especially at Mockingbird and Yale. Dave Retzsch: There are not many Texas U-turn bridges Included on IH 30 (Griffin, West Harwood, and Ervay). Visibility will be laken into account
during the design phase. Marcus Wood: Economic development should be taken into account in VE, for instance, future convention center expansion to Cedars West and the Cowboys situation.
As you look at VE recommendation consider stacking lanes and double right turn lanes at intersection. Plan for development. Tim Nesbitt: We will still be receptive for the next 1-2 months
regarding future plans. In June we will be finalizing the schematic for review by FHWA. The new Cowboy stadium is may not be determined by the time and it is not a sure thing. Marcus
Wood: When will right-of-way be acquired? Tim Nesbitt: We will slart 3-4 years from now, at the earliest. Marcus Wood: What about decking of IH 30? Thorn Ridnouk: This is very costly
for IH 30 to be planned with deck parks. Sandy Wesch-SchUlze: The issue on implementing decks is local funding. TxDOT can design Project Pegasus not to preclUde the future installation
of decks, but cannot finance decking construction. Financing will be the responsibility of the City of Dallas. Richard Mason: Priorities need to be set by the city regarding costs for
options. Marcus Wood: Have the coiors been picked for the structures? Can lights be directional? Dave Retzsch: Colors will not be finalized at this time. Lights can be direction with
the use of shields. Marcus Wood: How will funding be done? Tim Nesbitt: Funding for the reconstruction will be 80 to 90 percent Federal and 10 to 20 percent state. Funding for amenities,
above what TxDOT typically does will be the responsibility of the city. Larry Fonts: Will TxDOT pay for irrigation? What plants would be used? Dave Retzsch: Initial funding would pay
for the system to be installed and for 2 years maintenance. After that someone else would be responsible for funding. The types of plants will be determined during detailed design. Thorn
Rldnouk: We should let the experts pick Which plants are hardier. Dave Retzsch: As an example, McKinney Avenue includes a crepe myrtle trail. Thorn Rldnouk: What would the city have
to pay for? Modifying lights? Marcus Wood: When do you consider things amenities or accessories? Community Work Group April 15, 2003 Page 4 Richard Mason: TxDOT would typically pay for
items that are Within 5% of typical TxDOT costs. Items within 5% of TxDOT typical cost would not be considered an accessory and would be paid for by TxDOT. Architectural elements would
be considered accessories and would have to be paid for by the city. Rich Morgan: The Canyon roadway falls under context sensitive design with some of the NCTCOG funding programs. Are
there any advantages to that category? Will the next transportation bill still include an enhancement category or signature bridges? Richard Mason: The Calatrava Bridges would not be
included in the new transportation bill. Transportation enhancement funding is for projects that would be completed stateWide in 2-3 years. Dave Retzsch: The next transportation bill
shOUld Include funding for bike trails and scenic/historic items; however, the funding level and categories have not been determined. Richard Mason: NCTCOG should be involved with planning
regarding air quality and enhancement projects that serve transportation. Mr. Nesbitt reviewed the public involvement effort. Many organizations have been briefed: TIF Board, Stemmons
Group, and Scottish Rite HospilallMarket Center. There will also be a meeting with the Anatole hotel. There will also be a briefing by Michael Morris with NCTCOG to Dallas City Council
on Wednesday, April 16'h regarding the new Trinity proposal. Tim Starr asked Ms. Wesch-Schulze to brief the Dallas Transportation Committee on May 12'h regarding urban design. She stated
the team was preparing to brief the committee. Mr. Menges thanked everyone for attending the meeting, and slated that the next CWG meeting will be held on June 17, 2003. The meeting
was adjourned at apprOXimately 9:15 pm. These notss are only summariss of key points olths mssling and are not msan/to be used as a transcript of /hs mssting. REPORTED BY: Athena Bolton
Copy to: Community Work Group Members Project Coordination Work Group Members File 􀁾􀁾 Carter::Burgess CarterllBurgess
􀁾>-; '-J DALLAS HIGH FIVE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TEAM MINUTES June 10, 2003 The Dallas High Five Traffic Management Team met at 10:00 AM on Tuesday, June 10, 2003 at the TxDOT Field Office
on North Central Expressway at Churchill Way. Ten members were present as indicated on the attached sign in sheet. Larry Tegtmeyer called the meeting to order at 10:03 AM. The minutes
of May 13, 2003, were approved as submitted. Construction Plans for the Interchange -Brian Salerno distributed a Major Activity 3 Month "Look Ahead" schedule. He reviewed the status
of construction and plans for the next three months. Coit Road U-turn -in June, open eastbound-to-westbound U-turn before Coit Road is completed in August 2003. Southbound NCE ramps
-in early June 2003, open entrance ramp from Spring Valley to southbound US 75 and open exit ramp from southbound US 75 to Midpark Road; then close entrance ramp from Midpark Road to
southbound US 75 and close exit ramp from southbound US 75 to Coit Road; restripe the main lanes to 11-foot lanes; revise the overhead sign to have the same miles to Midpark & Coit exit
and add Coit to Midpark exit sign. Northbound NCE ramps -in early June 2003, close northbound entrance ramp to US 75 south of Midpark Road and close northbound exit ramp to Spring Valley
Road; these ramp closures will follow opening northbound frontage road in late May 2003. Northbound NCE ramps -by the end of August 2003, open new northbound exit ramp to Spring Valley
Road and close existing northbound exit ramp to Midpark Road. Midpark Bridge over US 75 -in March 2003, completed new south half of bridge and shifted traffic to new bridge; in late
June 2003, complete new north half of bridge and open to traffic. Coit Road -in December 2002, completed construction of new southbound pavement and bridge from Alpha/Emily to Banner
Drive; shifted traffic to new pavement and began reconstruction of new northbound pavement and bridge; in June 2003, complete northbound lanes and split NB & SB traffic on bridge; in
August 2003, complete center section of bridge and open to traffic (to complete bridge means three through lanes and two left turn lanes in each direction plus U-turn lanes on the frontage
roads); Northbound NCE frontage road from Forest Lane to LBJ -complete in July 2003. Direct connector substructures and superstructures -concentrate on WN and WS (eastbound LBJ to northbound
and southbound NCE). Direct connector segmental erection on ES-13, E5-10, ES-11 and NE-04; about one month for each connector. Permanent retaining walls -installation at various locations
including Coit. Midpark, NB FR (northbound frontage road), SB FR, EB FR and WB FR. TI access bridge over LBJ Freeway -in January 2003, demolished west bridge and began reconstruction
new wider bridge; sequence of construction modified to keep the east access bridge open to Executive Centers during construction of new access bridge -complete in September 2003 and
open to traffic. 54-inch water line from TI Boulevard to Greenville Avenue -in. February 2003, began installation; work was stopped due to a conflict with a retaining wall; begin installation
again in June 2003. HOV wishbone ramp on US 75 -in September 2003, begin construction; shift US 75 main lanes to the outside to begin work in the middle. LBJ main freeway lanes from
TI Boulevard underpass to Greenville Avenue in August 2003, begin main lane construction with a revised traffic control plan that maintains four lanes in each direction. LBJ westbound
exit ramp to Preston Road -working on retaining walls and paving to complete in July 2003. LBJ eastbound exit ramp to Coit Road -in August 2003, open new exit ramp; will allow work on
approach to WN bridge. Right of Way Acquisitions -Dan Peden said there were no changes in ROW acquisitions since the last meeting. TxDOT has right of entry to the remaining parcels so
there is no impact on the construction schedule. Utility Relocations -Brian Salerno said that utility conflicts are diminishing. Kenny Krishnan reported that a reply will be sent to
DART this week responding to the DART requirements for installing the 54-inch water line under the DART tracks. eTR Study of Frontage Road Box -Travis Fluitt, CTR Research Assistant,
distributed the results of the simulation analysis of the turning volumes for the frontage road box, specifically the single lane left turns on the northbound and southbound sections.
The conclusions of the study are that when the network is operating at capacity, the single yield left tums can only handle left turn percentages of 20-25% or 750 vehicles per hour maximum.
Dual left turns significantly improve operations when left tum volumes approach these limits. The current frontage road plans for the NB-to-WB and the SB-to-EB movements show an island
that prohibits dual left turns for the NB and SB movements (inside lane mandatory left tum and next lane optional let or straight). The suggested revision was to remove these small islands
and to revise the turning radius by pouring and island of on top of the slab, which will also provided a foundation for for the signal mast arm pole. CTR assumed the small islands would
be constructed and modeled a single left turn land and dual left lanes with a yield condition. These options are different from the revision suggested by the City of Dallas. The TMT
members discussed various options. It was agreed that the plans should be revised to initially construct the final foundation for the traffic signal pole, to provide the longer mast
arm and to construct the revised turning radius as an overlay or with buttons, but not as a monolithic pour. Bahman Bahramnejad suggested that he review the CTR findings with the City
of Dallas signal engineers before any decision is finalized. Larry Tegtmeyer asked him to convey the Dallas position to Dan Peden who will coordinate the plan revisions with HNTB. LBJ
Project Office -Larry Tegtmeyer reported that about 100 people attended the LBJ West Section Public Hearing on Thursday, June 5th at the Holiday Inn Select North
Agency to let cities seek funds to fix traffic signals http://www.dfw.comlmldldfw/newsilocaV6079700.htm?template=co... Dallas. Four people had comments that were generally positive.
Matt MacGregor expects to receive the FONSI (Finding of No Significant Impact) this fall after 10 years of planning. TxDOT expects to enter into an EDA (Exclusive Development Agreement)
with a private firm or firms in the near future to design and construct L13J Freeway. Construction would begin in two or three years. TxDOT would not build this project. Dan Peden asked
the status of the tunnel. Larry Tegtmeyer said that in each direction LBJ would have four main lanes, three frontage road lanes and three HOV/HOT managed lanes. From 1-35 to Midway Road,
the managed lanes would be constructed as cut-and-eover under the frontage roads. From Midway Road to Preston Road, the managed lanes would be in bored tunnels. City of Dallas -Bahman
Bahramnejad stated that Texas Instruments has hired two police officers to direct traffic at the NCE frontage roads and Midpark Road since the southbound-ta-northbound U-turn was closed
at Cottonwood Creek. It is difficult to manually direct traffic at a diamond interchange because the officers at each frontage road must coordinate with one another. There are working
vehicle detectors on the southbound frontage road and on eastbound Midpark Road. With these detectors, the signal controller can operate the intersection more efficiently than the officers
can manually direct traffic. Bahman will coordinate this change with Texas Instruments. It was suggested to make the inside lane on the southbound frontage road a mandatory left turn
only until the north half of the Midpark bridge is completed later this month. This would separate the U-turn traffic, primarily Texas Instruments and Raytheon employees, from the through
traffic. Moving the southbound US 75 exit for Coit Road to the Midpark Road exit will also increase the southbound through traffic on the frontage road at Midpark. Bahman will discuss
this suggestion with Dan Peden. City of Richardson -Arturo Serna indicated that the installation of a citywide fiber optics system is still under construction. Until August, some streets
in the vicinity of the interchange could be impacted by the construction. Richardson ISO has some construction at most high schools, but there should be minimum impact on High Five construction.
Public Information Campaign -Montrose Cunningham indicated that 25 people attended the Community Meeting on June 3rd and 37 people attended the meeting on June 41h• Suggestions made
during the meetings are being reviewed for implementation. Construction photos and the Revised Second Quarter Construction Newsletter have been added to the High Five website. The next
meeting of the TMT will be at 10:00 AM on Tuesday, July 8th at the TxDOT Field Office. The meeting adjourned at 10:58 AM Cliff Franklin 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾.. 􀀢􀁾􀀬􀀡􀀮􀀻􀀻􀁩􀁹􀁬􀁾 􀁾􀀬..􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀭􀀧
􀁾 􀀢􀀡􀁾􀀧􀀭􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁟􀀢􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀭􀀧 Posted on FrI, Jun. 13, 2003 Agency to let cities cities seek funds to fix traffic signals By Gordon Dickson Star-Telegram Staff Writer TRAFFIC
SENSORS If that red light seems like it's taking too long to turn green, you may be right. Dozens of traffic signals In the Fort Worth-Dallas area aren't woridng properly because their
high-tech sensors are malfunctioning, traffic planners say. The electronic sensors tell the lights when to change for arriving vehicles. But, In a region that has about 5,000 Intersections
with traffic signals, traffic may be stuck unnecessarily in as many as 100 places because the detectors are broken. To help fix the problem, the Regional Transportation Coundl agreed
Thursday to allow North Texas cities to apply for federal funding to repair damaged detectors or to replace them with new, more reliable systems. "Some agencies have a large number of
malfunctioning detectors and don't have a budget to fix them," said Natalia Bettger, a transportation planner for the North Central Texas Council of Governments. The amount of money
needed to fix the detectors will depend upon how many cities submit applications, but it could cost $500,000 or more, said Michael Morris, the council's transportation director. Any
city In the 16 counties covered by the council can apply for the money. The program could be a cost-effective way of reducing air pollution, Morris said. About 45 percent of all traffic
Is on local streets, not freeways, so reliable traffic signals are crucial to keeping rush-hour traffic moving, he said. Intersections with the most wear and tear are most likely to
have damaged detectors, he said. "There are truck corridors with loop detectors In the pavement that keep getting tom up," he said. Cities use various forms of technology to manage their
traffic signals, and all are eligible for the funding, Bettger said. Many North Texas cities use loop detectors, an older technology that relies on thin wires embedded In the pavement.
The metal in a passing vehicle trips the lights. Those cities should consider converting their systems to one of several wireless devices that are now widely available, said Jack Hatchell,
a Collin County commissioner who sits on the transportation council. The motion of oncoming traffic typically trips wireless detectors. Some cities use video cameras to detect motion,
others use radar. "We should recommend that they go to radar detectors,· Hatchell said. "That way, you don't have to replace your equipment.· Attachment 􀁾􀁾 lof2 ONLINE: North Central
Texas Cou"cl! of Govemments, www.dfwlnfo.com GordOfl DlcksOfl, 817-685-3816 gdickson@star-telegram.com 06/19/2003 4:25 PM
Trinity River Corridor Project, Interagency Executive Team (lET) June 24, 2003, 1:30 p.m., City Hall, L1 Conf. Rm. A Agenda A. Opening Remarks, Approval of Previous Meeting's Minutes
1. Boat Ramps, Trails (Santa Fe, Katy. Buckeye), Interpretive & Equestrian Centers 2. Moore Park (Eighth Street) Area -Design 3. Elm Fork Floodplain Management Study 4. Land Acquisition
5. USACE 1135 Program Projects 6. LakesJWater Quality Study 7. Woodall Rodgers Extension "Signature" Bridge Design 8. 1-30 Bridge 9. Beckley Avenue Expansion 10.Trinity Commons Foundation
11. "Trinity River Corridor Comprehensive Land Use Plan with Economic Impact Analysis and Implementation Strategy" 12. Urban Design Study B. USACE 1. Dallas Floodway Extension -Design,
Funding, EIS Supplement 2. Upper Trinity River Feasibility Study -Dallas Floodway C. TxDOT 1. Woodall Rodgers Extension to Beckley Avenue 2. Canyon/Mixmaster/Lower Stemmons Interchange
(Project Pegasus) 3. Other Projects (Trinity Corridor, et al.) D. NTTA -"Trinity Parkway Reliever Roadway Environmental Impact Statement" E. Dallas County F. EPA G. NCTCOG H. TCEQ I.
Interagency Public Information Team J. Interagency Calendars K. Other Business 􀁾 Adjournment 􀁾 City of Dallas, Trinity River Corridor Project (TRCP) INTERAGENCY EXECUTIVE TEAM PROCEEDINGS
May 27, 20031:30 p.m., City Hall, L1/F/N Conf. Rm. A A meeting of the Interagency Executive Team (lET) was held May 27, 2003, at 1:30 p.m. lET attendees were as follows: Sam Wilson,
Dallas County Gene Rice, USACE Warren Benoy, COD Sid Slocum, TCEQ Support Personnel were present as follows: David Morgan, Halff Associates Craig Holcomb, Trinity Commons Foundation
Natalie Wilson, COD Sam Lopez, COD A. OPENING REMARKS, APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS' MINUTES Rebecca Dugger welcomed the attendees. Minutes were distributed to all those in attendance.
Rebecca stated that if anyone had any changes to send them to Natalie Wilson. 1. Boat Ramps -Rebecca Dugger stated that award of construction contract was made by Council on May 14 on
the Loop 12 12 Boat Launch. Construction should begin in June. Interpretive Center A public meeting was held May 20th by the consulting firm BRW. Approximately 20 to 30 individuals were
in attendance. Selection of the location for the center is being narrowed down. Pedestrian bridges are being considered. Gene Rice stated that approval of design would need to go through
USACE for pedestrian bridges. Santa Fe Trails -Nothing new to report. Buckeye Trail -Design is substantially complete and a construction contract should be awarded in June or August.
3. Moore Park -Design is continuing. 4. Elm Fork Study -Briefing should be made to Council in August or September. City staff is working with two councilmembers and local interests to
select the best location for the soccer fields. 5. Land Acquisition -City staff is continuing efforts on the purchase of the Caldwell Property and the Linfield Landfill property. Commissioners
Court assessment for the Sleepy Hollow Golf Course approximately $3 Million. A court appeal is very likely. Mary Ayala is also completing surveys on a piece of property in Pemberton
Hill that will hopefully be purchased at the end of this year. 6. USACE 1135 Program -There was no new business to report.
H. TCEQ No new business to report. E. Dallas County 1. No new business to report. G. NCTCOGThere were no representatives from NCTCOG present. There were no representatives from EPA present.
2. Canyon/Mixmaster/Lower Stemmons Interchange (Project Pegasus) -Nothing new to report. 3. Other Projects -Nothing new to report. K. Other Business 1. Gene Rice asked if there would
be a Mayor's Summit this year. Rebecca Dugger stated that at this time there was not ohe scheduled. She emphasized the "Trinity Day" with the Council on June 23rd as a way to brief the
Mayor as well as the members of the Council on the status of the Trinity River Corridor Project. J. Interagency Calendars 1. The next lET meeting will be held June 24, 2003. The meeting
will be held in L1 Conference Room A. I. Interagency Public Information Team 1. Sam Lopez reminded everyoneof the upcoming Trinity Fest sponsored by the Trinity Commons Foundation. He expressed the desire to have all partnering agencies represented in the City's tent. The display area will
close down around 9:00 p.m. Sam also stated that the Trinity Commons Foundation is seeking volunteers to work throughout the day. Natalie Wilson will email each team member a handout
from Trinity Commons for partnering agencies to distribute. F. EPA1. D. NTTA 1. "Trinity Parkway Reliever Roadway Environmental Impact Statement" -David Morgan stated that comments were
received from TxDOT and FHWA in April. Corrections and updates are currently being made to include their comments. 7. LakelWater Quality Study -City staff and the consultant team is
continuing to meet with the Urban Designers. Discussions with the team include issues such as wetlands (high or low), treatment provisions, and the width and character of the "on-channel
facility." 8. Woodall Rodgers Extension Signature Bridge Design Rebecca Dugger extended an invitation to all interagency team members to attend an architectural presentation on the bridge
by Santiago Calatrava. The presentation will be made on June 3rd at 10:00 a.m., City Hall, Conference Room 4EN. A meeting will take place later that afternoon with TxDOT to discuss technical
details. 9. 1-30 Bridge -The City has received a proposal from Santiago Calatrava on the bridge. The money being contributed by the County depends on TxDOrs purchase of the detention
facility and agreement that the roadway will be a reliever route. 10. Beckley Avenue Extension -Nothing new to report. 11. Trinity Commons Foundation -Nothing new to report. 12. "Trinity
River Corridor Comprehensive Land Use Plan with Economic Impact Analysis and Implementation Strategy" Rebecca Dugger annouhced that June 23rd will be "Trinity Day" for the City Council.
The agenda will include a presentation by Bryan Kilburn (TRCP office) on the Great Trinity Forest, Comprehensive Land Use Plan Phase IV (Five Parkway Alignments and Economic Analysis),
Trinity Interpretive Center as well as a presentation by the Urban Design Team. 13. Urban Design Study -No new business to report. C. TxDOT B. USACE 1. Dallas Floodway Extension (DFE)
-The Corps is continuing design on the DFE project. The "30-day review period" for the EIS will end June 9th. At that time, the USACE will prepare the Record of Decision to be sent to
Washington for approval. After the Record of Decision has been signed, the Corps will prepare a motion to go to the judge to release the Corps from the injunction. Hopefully, construction
will be restarted in Spring 2004. The Corps is continuing to work with the City on land acquisition. 2. Upper Trinity River Feasibility Study (UTRFS) -The stUdy is on hold pending lake,
river, and roadway alignment decisions by the Urban Design Team. There was no representative from TxDOT present at the meeting. Meeting was adjourned at 2:09 p.m. 􀁾􀁾 1. Woodall Rodgers
Extension to Beckley Avenue -Nothing new to report. 􀁾
􀁾""' City of Dallas, Trinity River Corridor Project (TRCP) INTERAGENCY EXECUTIVE TEAM PROCEEDINGS June 24, 20031:30 p.m., City Hall, L1/F/N Conf. Rm. A A meeting of the Interagency
Executive Team (lET) was held June 24, 2003, at 1:30 p.m. lET attendees were as follows: Rebecca Dugger, COD Greg Ajemian, COD Mary Ayala, COD Sam Wilson, Dallas County Gene Rice, USACE
Sid Slocum, TCEQ Michael Copeland, NTIA Jack Tidwell, NCTCOG Support Personnel were present as follows: Martin Molloy, Halff Associates Natalie Wilson, COD Sam Lopez, COD A. OPENING
REMARKS, APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING'S MINUTES Rebecca Dugger welcomed the attendees. Minutes were distributed to all those in attendance. Rebecca stated that if anyone had any changes
to send them to Natalie Wilson. 1. Boat Ramps -Mary Ayala stated that the Dallas County License Agreement on the Loop 12 boat ramp was scheduled on the City Council Addendum for June
25. Interpretive Center -Mary Ayala stated that the next step would be to brief Park Board on August 14. The new Trinity River Committee will be briefed on August 4. She also stated
that the choice of a location has been narrowed down. We are looking at the Loop 12 corridor -either north or south. A meeting is scheduled for next week with Jill Jordan and the Sanitation
Department to discuss the impact of the McCommas Landfill Project that is ongoing. Santa Fe Trails -Interlocal agreement was received from TxDOT. Buckeye Trail -Will be advertising for
construction of trail soon. Katy Trail -Mary Ayala stated that she was working with Friends of the Old Trinity Trail to extend the trail from American Airlines Center to the Trinity
River. She stated a request waS submitted to participate in the Corps' Section 1135 Program. 3. Moore Park -The Park Department is doing a tour with Councilmember Chaney of Moore Park
in hopes that some discretionary fund monies could be used to fund a Skate Park. Gene Rice asked how clean up of Sylvan Avenue Boat Ramp was handled after recent rains. Mary Ayala stated
that Park Department handled maintenance. Mary Ayala asked Gene Rice if the Corps had reviewed the Buckeye Trail. Gene stated that he expected an answer back soon. 4. Elm Fork Study
-A "field trip· was conducted with the Park Department and representatives for the landfill occupants. A footprint was shown that could accommodate the soccer field. A final report will
be ready by the end of July. 5. Land Acquisition -Linfield Landfill and Caldwell property appraisals approved. Council resolution should be approved in August. Union Pacific property
-Greg Ajemian has been in contact with a Union Pacific representative who seems supportive. We are waiting on finalization of the boundary survey by the Corps. Mary Ayala added that
we are also looking at Pemberton Hill/Sam Houston property and property off of Bruton (Lake). The Pemberton Hill property also includes a house also. A survey on Sam Houston property
will be completed by the end of June. 6. USACE 1135 Program -There was no new business to report. 7. LakelWater Quality Study -Greg Ajemian stated that the vision plan is acceptable.
The next step will include detailed cost estimates, phase one construction and functionality of the floodway components. The Urban Design team should be completed by the end of July
and briefed to Council in August 8. Woodall Rodgers Extension Signature Bridge Design Rebecca Dugger stated that the Woodall Rodgers bridge model is in the Trinity River Corridor Project
Office for viewing. 9. 1-30 Bridge -There is not enough funding to begin design on the 130 bridge. 10. Beckley Avenue Extension -Nothing new to report. 11. Trinity Commons Foundation
-A new president and vice president was elected to the Trinity Commons Foundation. Bob Meckfessel is president. Jerry Thompson is vice president. 12. "Trinity River Corridor Comprehensive
Land Use Plan with Economic Impact Analysis and Implementation Strategy" Briefing was made to Council on June 23rd. 13. Urban Design Study -The Dallas Plan will be meeting with the public
during the last two weeks of June to present the Urban Design Study. B. USACE 1. Dallas Floodway Extension (DFE) -Gene Rice stated the Corps received four comments on the Final Supplement
to the EIS. Letters went out to each of those who commented. The draft Record of Decision is in routing and should go out June 24 or 25. The Record of Decision should be signed by end
of July, and
1. 2. C. TxDOT 1. 2. 3. subsequently submitted to the Federal District Court for consideration. Upper Trinity River Feasibility Study (UTRFS) -A meeting will be held June 26 to discuss
the Upper Trinity Feasibility analysis. There was no representative from TxDOT present at the meeting. Woodall Rodgers Extension to Beckley Avenue -Nothing new to report. CanyonlMixmasterfLower
Stemmons Interchange (Project Pegasus) -Nothing new to report. Other Projects -Nothing new to report. Sam Lopez announced the new Trinity River Committee chaired by Councilmember Ed
Oakley. The meetings will be held on the 1s1 and 3111 Mondays of the month at 3:00 p.m. Sam also mentioned the Trinity Fest and asked for agencies to join the TRCP office by setting
up a booth with information on their agencies relating to the Trinity River Project. J. Interagency Calendars 1. The next lET meeting will be held JUly 22, 2003. The meeting will be
held in L1 Conference Room A. K. Other Business 1. There was no other business to discuss. Meeting was adjoumed at 2:56 p.m. D. NTTA 1. "Trinity Parkway Reliever Roadway Environmental
Impact Statemenf' -Martin Molloy stated that the "parkway stops" was sent out via email. Chris Anderson is asking for comments. Preliminary discussions have been made with TxDOT and
FHWA regarding the EIS. TxDOT and FHWA want to identify another alternative (3A). Martin stated that he and Chris Anderson would reconvene the Community Advisory Work Group to inform
them of updates. E. Dallas County 1. Sam Wilson stated that the County reviewed the mix-master plan with Carter/Burgess. He stated that there was a stakeholder meeting on June 26 to
discuss the mix-master plan. F. EPA1. There were no representatives from EPA present. 􀁾.N G. NCTCOGJack Tidwell stated that he had attended a meeting on the Hazard Mitigation Action
Planning (HazMAP) initiative that is underway at the NCTCOG. H. TCEQ No new business to report. I. Interagency Public Information Team 􀁾
), PEGASUS 􀁾􀁾 Meeting Report Project Coordination Work Group June 24, 2003 Page 2 Richard Mason (TxDOT) asked if the southbound frontage road would cross over Reunion Boulevard. Sandy
stated no. The following is our understanding of the subject matter oovered in this meeting. If this differs from your 􀁵􀁮􀁤􀁥􀁲􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁡􀁳􀁬􀁌􀁮􀁯􀁬􀁩􀁦􀁹 us within five working
days. There was some discussion regarding the changes made to the alignments between Commerce and the HOVIM (access) lanes. Sandy answered questions regarding the alignment and details
utilizing the maps presented. Design Updates Tim N. began the meeting with Item 1 of the agenda regarding design updates. Last week a minivalue engineering (VE) study was conducted to
discuss the HOVIM connections at Commerce and Ihe connection from northbound IH 35E to eastbound IH 30. Tim N. then turned the discussion to Sandy Wesch-Schulze (Carter & Burgess). The
June 24, 2003, meeting for the Project Coordination Work Group (PCWG) was held at the Dallas City Hall in Room L1FN at 9:00 a.m. Handouts made available to the attendees inclUded the
meeting agenda, the pUblic involvement report, and an e-mail dated June 20, 2003, tilled Commerce HOV solution trom Joel Fitts (Parsons Transportation Group). Tim Nesbitt, Texas Department
of Transportation (TxDOT) Project Manager, convened the meeting by welcoming the attendees. Carol Walters (Texas Transportation Institute) expressed a concern over limiting direct access
from downtown to the freeway system. Sandy stated that with the new design, traffic westbound on Elm and Main would have the option of accessing the freeway via the HOVIM lane or a ramp
that would allow access to both IH 35E southbound or westb;ound IH 30 while only going through one signal light. While today this traffIc does not have go through a signal, this is very
rare. The design (going through a signal prior to accessing a freeway) is typical and would not be a major inconvenience to motorists. Carol asked Joel if this new alternative had been
modeled and was the queuing checked as well as the stacking distance for both HOV/M lane and left·turn onto the southbound frontage road. Joel illustrated on the board the proposed lane
configuration and stated the diagram in the handout was not to scale and did not show the proper storage lengths and lane configuration proposed On Commerce. Carol suggested the design
of the roadway be incorporated into the design to show the proper lane assignments and queuing distances and then be relayed to Terry Sams for review. Joel questioned if the signals
are going to be operated by city or TxDOT. Tim N. noted that the city would operate the signals, but TxDOT would install them. Michael Copeland (HNTBINTTA) asked what would the right
turn lanes look like on Commerce and could truck movements be accommodated. Sandy stated that we are still working out the cross section for Commerce based on the latest traffic modeling
by Joel. Michael asked if Sandy she was aware of DART traction power substation being placed along near the DNT bridges for the Northwest light rail line. Dennis Henning had contacted
NTTA. George Avalos (DART) stated Bud Beene was working on that section and he would have Bud call Sandy to confirm. Prior to the PCWG meeting, TxDOT had been contacted concerning the
substation's possible confiict with TxDOT/regionaltransportation objectives. Tim N. asked if the Commerce AM ramp (northbound to IH 35E) and the northbound IH 35E ramp from westbound
Elm could be simplified. combined at Martyr's Park. Sandy stated it might be possible. She would have the engineers check and revise if there were no design issues. Sandy then mentioned
the issues regarding the connection between northbound IH 35E and eastbound IH 30. Currently, the design shows a two-lane connection, whereas Ihree-Ianes are needed. During the VE study,
the source of this problem was identified to be weaving constraints. The design team did come up wilh a solution. The Colorado ramp to the northbound collectordistributor and IH 35E
exit want to weave across each other. The design team brought Ihe two together to provide additional 1000 feet of weaving distance, which should fix Ihe problem by lengthening our weaving
distance. Tim S. asked if the proposed ramp shown (southbound IH 35E frontage to westbound IH 30 collector-distributor road and eastbound IH 30) would still be proposed if Ihe frontage
road were grade separated. Joel replied that there would be two bridges over Commerce -the frontage road and the ramp to the westbound IH 30 collector-distributor road and eastbound
IH 30. Tim S. asked how westbound Commerce traffic would get to Reunion. Joel stated that movement would still be possible via the at-grade frontage road. DATE OF MEETING: June 24, 2003
CSJ: 0009-11-181 0196-03-199 0196-03·205 LOCATION: Dallas City Hall, L1FN PROJECT: IH 35EnH 30 (Lower StemmonslMixmaster/Canyon PURPOSE OF Project Coordination Work Group Meeling MEETING:
PRESENT: 􀁾George Avalos, DART Doug Bowen, Jacobs Civil, Inc. Michael Copeland, NTTAlHNTB Joel Fitts, Parsons Transportation Group Richard Mason, TxDOT Tim Nesbitt, TxDOT Isela Rodriguez,
Dallas County Tim Starr, City of Dallas -PWT Carol Wallers, rn, Arlington Sandy Wesch·SChulze, Carter & Burgess Sandra Williams, carter &Burgess Nancy Vaughn, Dallas Water Utilities
Sandy referred to the handout of the e-mail dated June 20, 2003. The solution would include two design changes: adding a ramp and grade separation of the southbound frontage road. The
ramp that would be added would only be used in the morning to allow eastbound Commerce Street traffic to the northbound IH 35E collector-distributor road. The loop ramp would only be
used in Ihe evening peak period. Joel stated that the added ramp could not serve the evening Commerce traffic because it would cause severe congestion on Main and Elm. He mentioned that
a changeable message board would need to be added to help direct traffic to the correct lanes. The southbound IH 35E frontage roads would need to be grade separated to obtain an acceptable
level-of-service. 􀁾'Z Z CarternBurgess
Project Coordination Work Group June 24, 2003 Page 3 Tim N. also discussed the minor design changes made in the Canyon area, which would eliminate the Impact to the Iron fence and parking
lot adjacent to the Weisfeld Building. This was done by reducing the frontage road to two-lanes between Akard and Ervay. Traffic only shows about 400 vehicles In the peak hour (in 2026)
on this section of frontage road so the reduction in lanes would not affect level-of-servlce. In order to also avoid the Weisfeld site, an available landscaping pocket was eliminated
from (adjacent to) the IH 30 mainlanes. Tim Starr (City of Dallas) noted that the property owner also had concerns regarding the noise. Sandy Wesch-SChulze (Carter & Burgess) stated
a noise wall would not be justified for the property because the building would be a single receiver; noise walls are not feasible for only one receptor. Sandy also mentioned one other
design changes; the southbound IH 35E to eastbound Woodall Rodgers connection and the northbound IH 35E1westbound IH 30 to eastbound Woodall Rodgers connection are now combined to provide
a smoother transition in the area and improve weaving distances. Traffic Modeling Update Sandy asked Joel for a status on the traffic modeling. Joel stated the morning peak period was
complete and the evening was 90% complete. Sandy asked about the status of traffic line diagram with existing/proposed traffic numbers daily traffic volumes. Joel replied that would
be finished today and sent to the design team. Tim N. mentioned that at the last Community Work Group meeting that the issue was raised again about a lack of connection (due to geometric
constraints in providing for all other, higher volume/higher demand connections) from westbound Woodall to Dallas North Tollway. II was also pointed out at the CWG that westbound Woodall
traffic would not be able to access Oak Lawn. Tim N. asked if TTl had any data about the number of vehicles accessing Oak Lawn from westbound Woodall. Carol stated that in prior on-site
counts a camera was not placed at Oak Lawn and another study would have to be conducted to gain this information. Tim N. stated it would help in solidifying what the low volume counts
for 2026 are already indicating-in so far as revisiting the DNT and Oak Lawn movements via new on-site counts. Carol asked when (what time of day) should the data be taken. Sandy stated
she would review the previous information and get Carol a suggested time of day. public Involvement Report Tim N. then briefly reviewed the public involvement report. Tim N. then reminded
everyone the next Project Coordination meeting will be on July 22, 2003. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:00 am. TraIIlformifti Our Downtoim Fmways CANTON • 􀁈􀁾􀂷 UJWIasllllNONI
Agenda Project Coordination Work Group Meeting July 22, 2003 9:00 a.m. Dallas City Hall, Room L1FN 1. Project Status Update IJ Design Schematic IJ Design Exception Report IJ Interstate
Access Justification Report IJ Environmental Assessment 2. Public Involvement Report 􀁾 􀀮􀁾 Copy to: Project Coordination Work Group Members File Carter11Burgess TlllCaS Oepa_nl ofTransporlalion
DallasDiSlricl P.O. Box 1331167 Dallas, TlllCaS 75313-3067 (214) 320-6100 Fax: (214) 320-4470 􀁗􀁗􀁗􀂷􀁐􀁾􀁵􀁳􀀮􀁏􀁦􀁬􀁬 Next Meeting: August 26, 2003, 9:00 am, Dallas City Hall, Room
L1FN 'I
Item 2 July 22, 2003 PCWG Meeting Item 2 July 22, 2003 PCWG Meeting PubUc Involvement Reporl PubUc Involvement Reporl 26 31 11 47 39 25 20 42 39 42 27 16 64 35 30 29 23 14 32 14 17 21
35 41 28 23 15 29 1 38 29 I 24 16 I 20 709 1'.1'11'.3571'.102/1 ,4651'.27011 ,2451',46411,3031',38712,07411,46711 ,60111.87011.641 14 I 20 I 25 1 19 27120122129129124 26 I 21 I 551 􀁾
I 71 1 88 I 87 I T7 I 104 I 69 I 53 I 56 I 53 I 60 I 43 I 59 I 38 90 I 69 I 􀁾 I 86 I 87 I 71 I 73 I 79 I 62 I 69 I 66 1 72 I 116 I 125 I 100 I 106 I 88 43126128130138130 􀁾􀀱􀁾􀀱􀁾􀀱􀀮􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁔􀀷􀁬􀁮
􀁬􀁮􀁬􀁾􀁉􀁔􀀷􀁬􀁯􀁯􀁬􀁲􀁯􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁲􀁯􀁉􀁎􀁉􀁾 􀁾􀀱􀀳􀀹􀀱􀀶􀀹􀀱􀀶􀀹􀀱􀀶􀀹􀁬􀁡􀁬􀀳􀀹􀁉􀀵􀀴􀁬􀁯􀁯􀁬􀀶􀀹􀁉􀀳􀀴􀁉􀁄􀁬􀁮􀁬􀀶􀀹􀀱􀀶􀀹􀀱􀁾􀀱􀁾 11 I 10 1100 I 37 I 51 1 36 I 45 I 39 I 40 I
45 I 42 I 43 I 64 I 52 I 50 I 54 I 54 177 1 143 I 217 I 196 I 180 I 196 I 227 I 1751 194 I 166 I 146 I 123 I 169 I 182 I 181 I 177 I 192 􀁾􀀱􀁾􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾
􀁉􀁾 111 I 87 I 105 I 106 I 108 I 83 I 86 I 90 I 76 1 T7 I 62 I 78 I 146 I 104 I 104 I 87 I SO 211 1138 I 236 I 221 I 247 1198 I 236 I 217 1198 1 191 1 160 1186 I 305 I 245 I 232 I 206
I 199 183 I 98 I 156 1 215 I 236 I 210 I 191 I 172 I 156 I 184 I 138 I 192 I 258 I 221 I 218 I 190 I 172 Road Rage Links Kiosk Informallon News & Events Mailing Ust Fonn Site Index FAOs
ProJect Infonnalion Public & Agency Involvement 􀀡􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁦􀀺􀀡􀁆􀀺􀁬 􀁾􀀱􀁾􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁟􀁉􀁾􀁬􀁭􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 Community Work Group: The next meeting will be held August
19, 2003, 6:30 pm, Dallas City Hall, Room L1FN. All Community Work Group meeting minutes are posted on the project website. 20:37118:36117:09104:11105:57104:58105:23104:22104:11104:5213:3714:0913:531
4:4314:3415:0414:53 Information Packets: In November-December 2001, over 280 information packets were hand delivered to business and property owners along the corridor. Packets included
an overview of the project, background, location map. schedule, public Involvement, project newsletter, and mail-back card for the mailing list. All property owners, leasing agents,
and tenants were added to the project mailing list. www.QO<XIte.com Top Referring Sites (No. of Visitors): 􀁜􀁗􀁎􀁬􀀬􀁤􀁾􀁴􀀮􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁬􀁥􀀮􀁴􀁸􀀮􀁵􀁟􀁳 Presentations: PresentationS/briefings
were given to the following interested parties: Fall ASCE Meeting, Dallas, Texas, September 26. 2003 Greater Dallas Planning Council, August 28, 2003 City of Dallas Council Transportation
and Telecommunication Committee, May 27, 2003 Wyndham Anatole Management, May 9, 2003 Stemmons Corridor Business Association, April 8, 2003 Scottish Rite Hospital, March 28, 2003 Dallas
Section of Institute ofTransportation Engineers, March 13, 2003 Dallas American Society of Civil Engineers. March 3, 2003 Stemmons Corridor Business Association Board, February 28, 2003
Downtown Dallas TIF Board, February 10, 2003 Fort Worth Section of Institute of Transportation Engineers, December 19, 2002 Design Center Area Group on November 25, 2002 North Dallas
Chamber of Commerce Transportation Committee on November 12, 2002 Briefing to Senator Royce West on October 25, 2002 Trinity River Urban Design and Transportation technical work session
on September 27, 2002 City of Dallas Council Transportation and Telecommunication Committee on September 9, 2002 North Texas Tollway Authority Board of Directors on July 17, 2002 Trinity
Fest on July 4, 2002 Trinity River Corridor Project Interagency (Mayor) Summit on June 20, 2002 Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) Board on June 18, 2002 Methodist
Hospital/Charlton Methodist Hospital Executive Administrative Board on May 24, 2002 Woodbine Development Corporation on May 20, 2002 Central Dallas Association on April 1, 2002 Preston
Trail Chapter -Texas Society on Professional Engineers on March 21, 2002 The Dallas Morning News on March 12, 2002 Dallas Central Business District Managers Group on March 6, 2002 Hispanic
Contractors Association on November 2,2001 Urban Land Institute on October 17, 2001 Trinity River Corridor Project Interagency Summit on October 11, 2001 Dallas County Judge Lee Jackson
on October 3, 2001 Kiosk: The kiosk is currently not on display. The project kiosk has been on display at: • J. Erik Jonsson Central Library, October 28" thru November 25, 2002 • Second
series of Public Meetings, May 28" and May 30", 2002 1700 Pacific Avenue Building from May 11, 2002 to April 15, 2002 'Vlsionneering' SemInar at the SMU on February 16. 2002 First series
of Public Meetings, November 15" and November 20", 2001 NOTES: • PeJ1'cx1 for 11130/2001 report Incfudes two months, beginning 101112001, which was the iniUal startup period for the
web sileo .. Acllvity reported for 313112002 and 4/3012002lndudBS hits generated as 8 ntsult ala virus residing on other servers. Visits· the number of times a visitor came to the slle.
Home page hits ·lJle number of times the home page was vis!tec:l. Referring site -a web sit., which refers a visJlor 10 the site by linldng to II. Revised: July 17. 2003 Newsletter:
The third newsletter has been printed and mailed in mid-January. The second project newsletter was published in May 2002 and was made available at the second series of public meetings.
The newsletters were also mailed to persons on the mailing list mid-May 2002. The first newsletter was published in November 2001. PUblic Meetings: Public meetings were held January
281h and 30", 2003. Two other series of public meetings were held in May 2002 and November 2001. Summaries of the May 2002 and November 2001 meetings and comments are posted on the project
website. The same will be posted for the January 2003 meetings once the summary is completed and adequate time and been allowed for written comments. '-􀁾 Revised: July 17. 2003 (,.\
www.dallasne.NS.com 'WYNf,trlnitvrlverconidor,ora www.search.nelsC308.Com 􀁗􀁖􀁎􀁩􀀮􀁬􀁨􀁥􀁳􀁑􀁵􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁭􀁱􀁡􀁾􀁊􀁭􀁬 Mailing Ltst Requests Comments Received 11 12 12 I 10 12 11
􀁾􀁭􀀮􀀱􀁊 I D.ew=ll I new. ; top ator••• 􀁎􀁾􀁷􀁾 rl' 􀁣􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀢􀁭􀁑􀁤􀀩􀀺 :I! M\lrketplo:ttQ :.: Joh:; 􀁋􀁮􀁾 􀁏􀁴􀀬􀀮􀁥􀁴􀁾􀁔􀁾 HOWMUCH DEBTDO YOU HAVE? 1$10,000 -􀀤􀀲􀀰􀀬􀀰􀀰􀁾
􀀱􀀭􀀺􀀬􀁾􀀺􀀬􀀧􀀬􀁬􀀱􀁋􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀱 \ Mesquite resident's quest for a barrier wall to be :onstructed along approximately three 􀁭􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁾 of southern I" .35 gained a 1I"le attention from
state agencies and ,ff1clals, as well as from a woman who lost a young family nember to a crash along that same stretch of road. 'Wllare very sympathetic to the loss of life along one
of our roads; he said In the e-mail. "TxDoT would like to put up a barrier wall along every road we halle, but thIs Is not fiscally prudent or practicel. Thara why the unique idea for
paying for barrier walls Is being discussed.' CHosqulle News 2003 She said her cousin had pulled over to assist his wife, Who had sustained a nat tire and pulled over onlo the shoulder
of the freeway. Baker said a motorist-later found to be under the innuence of alcohol attempted to go around her cousin on the shOUlder and slammed Into his vehicle. She said her cousin's
slx·year-old daughler. Loren died from blunt force trauma. Mellnwhlle, Loren's slstars also sustained Injuries In the crash. 'Slephanle, 11, suffered a broken neck and a crushed spine'"
Baker said. 'Sarah, 8. suffered a broken pelvis. "That part of LBJ Is very dangerous and I definitely think a wall could save lives. , most definitely support the wall effort and my
heart goes out 10 the Blasingame family.' Ball sakl the prospect of the wall Is being discussed by TxDoT officIals In Meanwhile, Blasingame fs set to meet at some point In the fUlure
with Austin. repre&enlatlves from TxDol, and wonders how long the 'complete revIew' will take, "The cars may be theoretically able to change direction, but that doesn't necessarily mean
they have anywhere to go" Texas Deparlment of Transportalfon officials had their Interested piqUed at the funding possibility and eXpressed sympathy in the loss of Rachel Blasingame
In a trafflo related death on a Texas roadway, ' 'Please accept our deepest sympathy to you and your family regarding the tragla loss of your daughter,' wrote Randall Dillard. dIrector
of pUblic Information for TXDoT In an e-malllransmission to Julie Blasingame. '"We have shared your e-mail with our Dallaa District office, which covers the areil, and we are discussIng
your suggestion regarding a memorial fund With approprtate staff.' Dillard's correspondenca Indicated Blasingame will be provided with a complete responsll as soon as staff members complele
their review of ·this novel Idea: Congressman Jeb Hensarling's office slaff has also expressed Inlerestln meeting with her. TXDoT staff members did take umbrage with some traffic statistics
reported in last week's The Mesquite News. The statistics were correclln number, but were mlsreported. Last week, It was reported there were more than 890 fatality accidents along that
southern stretch of \-635 between January 1993 and June 2001. In fact, there were 892 total accidents reported -19 of which were fatalities. "Last year. peopla were calling 1-20 the
highway of death after a few serlOUli accldents; said Milrk Ball, TxDoT Dallas District publio information officer via an e-mail message. 'If the almost 900 number [for fatallUes) were
true it could have easily clalmlld this title -and it would have been just for the section [of I. 835) fOUnd in Mesquite,' Texas Department of Public Safllty officials ware unable to
delermine how many of the totar accidents or fatanties were the result of cross-over collisions -such as the one that killed Rachel Blasingame. However, DPS officials said of the total
892 traffic aCCidents in the 7-year period that 599 were Injury related crashes. Blasingame remains convinced a barrierwall along that stretch or freeway would have saved her daughter'S life. Mesquite resident Cindy Baker believes a barrIer wall separating northbound from southbound would have silved
the life or a slx-year-old family member, In August of 2001, Baker said her cousin was Involved In a crash along 1-635 -very close to Where the crash occurred that claimed the life of
Rachel Blasingame. 07/03/2003 Sta'r "'''Ifll..N'wr....''... Qten Watkins, The Mesquite News ',(',J l'f'U'" 􀁬􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀬􀁦􀁾􀂷􀁜􀁾􀀧􀁴􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀧 Jli,./' t. . I a t '.I "''1 it.. 'l'.'j r
"In i,,;.."I/H' .u. 􀁾􀀧􀁬􀁬􀁉􀁨􀀬􀀧 .ttc'.1 :Iilh..,. J.'CiJ eonard said he continues to study and learn about highway design. =or Instance,ln the doslgn manual it tells us that there
Is 46 feet of rtgot of 'ay, cars can change direction sarely; he said. "Along that stretch of 1-635, lcre might be 70 fellt of right of way, but I would say there Is probably 10 mes
the amount of traffic flow on the freeway than when it was originally uill. ulie Blasingame announced her misllion to get the state or federal ovemment to authorize constructing a benler
wall separaUng the norUlbound nd southbound lanes of lraffic on the freeway. ,he went as far as to say she would help pay for the conslructlon of such a 'all by starting a fund In the
name of of her daughter -Rachel Marie ,Iasingame, who wall killed In a head-on collision May 30 on 1-635 near New larket Road, ·he said she would be willing to take her federal per child
tax credltxpected to be receIved later this month -and use It to start the fund. ulie Blaslngaml!l said her family is expected to receive $1,200. ler request Initially sparked the Interest
of Kaufman County Commissioner :en Leonard, whose daughter, Tabitha, receiVed Injuries In the crash as a aasenger In Rachel's car. Bonard said he has been vlslUng with state and federal
elected officials, but lat it is really too early to outline a lime frame as to when or If a concreto afflc barrier will ba constructed on the section of _635 In question. lowever, he
said InlUal response has been supportive and encouraging. 'm reluclant to name names at this point because there Is a protocol to ,IIow," he said. '"We want to handle It tactfUlly. But
we are working to pursue Ie wall and seek funding: 1m-rlor wall mis::;ioll gathers steam 􀁾􀁾 .'j
By IAN McCANN Stat\'Writer Traffic officers in Dallas will be seeing red the rest of the year as they focus on stoplights and those who run them. On Wednesday afternoon, otIicers began
stepped-up enforcement at Central Expressway and Haskell Avenue, which police say is the worst in Dallas for red-light running. Within two hours, police had issued 34 tickets. "All too
often in Dallas, when citizens pull up to a light and it turns green, they have to wait five seconds and then hold their nreath to see if anybody ('ames through the intersection," said
Police Chief Terrell Bolton. The red-light patrols \\ill work in tandem with the department's stepped-up enforcement of scat belt laws and against speeding in school zones and Oil hi!!,'11
W;I,\'S, The depaltnlC:'llt plans to monitor 90 intersections -15 in l'uc11 of Dallas' six patrol divisions -that were selected because of the 􀁦􀁩􀀧􀀼􀁾􀂭 quency of accidents, number
of red-light runners, traffic volumes and suggestions by residents lmd officers. 'fraffic teams will be staking out ';': E·mail imccann@dalIasnews.com Staffgraphic most effective. Some
of those programs could be L'Ontinued next year, depending on what the analysis shows. ''The residual effect is what we're looking for," Lt. Bernal 􀁳􀁾􀁤􀀮 "Hopefully, people will get
into the habit of driving better.» (1...S_.3. ) 􀁾 . . . . 􀁾 :·,·HAZARDo'lIs··jNTERsECTIONS.·.􀁾􀂷􀁟.􀂷􀀧􀀺􀁔􀀧􀀢􀀧􀀢􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀺􀀢􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁣 ..·:.. ,·'7:7·7.""-· ..,.1\., These
are the top intersections In the city of Dallas for red-light runners In . 2002 that will. be targete9by Dall8S PQIICll•. The ranklngs are pased on number. • .of cltationsJor 􀁲􀁵􀁮􀁮􀁬􀁻􀁬􀁧􀀧􀀬􀁥􀁤
􀀺􀀧􀁬􀁬􀁧􀁢􀁴􀁳􀁩􀀺􀁶􀀨􀀩􀁬􀁩􀁩􀁭􀀦􀀩􀁊􀀨􀁾􀁑􀀬 'number,Qfaccldentsan,d: ..'" ii.' , Input from officers and the public: ' .?..!. ,.< '. . F COWN co. : 1; North Central Expressway service
road and :. .... DALI.AS co'--.. 􀁾 ... 􀀧􀀮􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀧 North.HllskeJI Ayenue .' ...' • i: .•..•.........􀂷􀁛􀁴􀀢􀀬􀂷􀁑􀀺􀁾􀀺􀁂􀁾􀂷􀀺 .􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀱􀁳􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁡􀁮􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁰􀁾􀁾􀁫􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁉􀀱􀁥􀁲􀀧􀀯
'I!' . ...." .,!:';i'; Roya!J,aneiinQ Marsh !,ane, ". " . .'. 􀂷􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀺􀁎􀁯􀀢􀁕􀀨􀀺􀀮􀁂􀀴􀀮􀁣􀁬􀁕􀀩􀀬􀁥􀁲􀁾􀀱􀁬􀁾􀀡􀁥􀁶􀁡􀂫􀁬􀀮􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁊􀁯􀁨􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁳􀁴􀀮􀀮 ·1· _ . ',. Road:' ',".:"
.'. I "635,.....􀁾. 􀀮. 5;. oallasparkw.a.yan.d .Ke.I.Ie.rSprings.Road .' I -'".,-., 􀁾 ,6. West 􀁄􀁡􀁶􀁬􀁬􀀡􀀻􀁡􀁬􀁜􀁾􀁆􀁯􀁲􀁴 Wprth Avenue ' ;i ;:1:.; •. .' ... ..' 7...NO.rtl). 􀁅􀁗􀁬􀁲􀁬􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁹�
�􀁭􀁩􀁥􀀺􀁩􀁩􀁮􀁤..':East Eightil···"1 . .,3SE; m' j \ . Street·,' ,'. .' .' .:.., . . 􀁾 . 􀀧􀁾􀀮 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀻􀀲 . 8. 􀁆􀁯􀁬􀁴􀁷􀁾􀁲􀁴􀁨􀁁􀁶􀁥􀀮􀁮􀁱􀁾􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁎􀁏􀁲􀁴􀁨 Hampton . I' 0"-...,:1'"
·.0,: A i ....0)."Vtfst .' 􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁪􀁑􀁜􀀮􀁯􀁯􀀭􀁾 [80"1\ .. i 􀁾􀁾􀀺 􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁩􀁄 􀁾 I 􀁾􀀢􀁆􀀭􀀶􀀼􀀷􀁄􀀢 . ,.. i ---.i.q,,, @) 􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁧􀀾􀀭􀀴􀂷􀂷􀀮 SOURCE: Dallas Pollca 􀁄􀁡􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁭􀁾
=.............................. :.:.......'\. . .,..... 2003 than in thesame period ayear ago,The traffic division has written more than 11,500 more tickets so far this yeal; compared
with the same time frame in 2002. At the end ofthe year, Lt. Bernal said, the department will look atthe increased traffic enforcement programs to detennine which were Police send a
signal to red-light runners IJrt/6 ,rZG 􀁾􀀷 the 10 worst intersections on Stop or we'll stop you Wednesdays, LtJulian Bernal said. ffi ' Red-light runners accounted Dallas 0 eel'S warn
for about 26 percent oftratIic fataliscofflaw motorists 􀁴􀁩􀁥􀁳􀁩􀁮􀁄􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁳􀁩􀁮􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀲􀀮 In the red-light teams, undercoverofficers watch for people driving through red lights
and radio to uniformed officers, who pull the drivers over and write tickets. A red-light citation c<,U'ries a $195 tine. Arlington resident Reagen Anderes, 18, said she thought the
traffic light was still yellow as she crossed ill to the intersection at Central Expressway and Haskell Avenlle, "1 thought I could make it, but apparently I didn't," she said. "Ijust
wasn't paying attention." Said Chief Bolton: "Our goal is to get people to remember, if you drivesmmt, lives can be saved." Lt. Bernal said officers have noticed a change in people's
driving habits with the stepped-LIp traffic initiatives. The depaltment's "safety rides," in which patrol cars drive abreast at the speed limit across all lam's. have pla,ved a big role
in that, hesaid. "When we Jo them, people aren't jockeying for position, like when we first stalted," he said, "[Safl,t)' rides] are a constant reminder that they need to take responsibilitywhcn
they're driving," Through Sunday, five fewcrtraf· fie fatalities have been recorded in ';.' .. ' 􀁾􀁾
M"y -I. 2003. 8:08/'M Voters face choice between roads, rail By JOHN Wll..LIAMS Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle IT LOOKS LIKE Houston-area voters will get to decide the question they
didn't in 1991. Do you want to build rail? Or lay more blacktop? That's what the debate over the Metropolitan Transit Authority's proposed $3.3 billion rail-and-bus proposal boils down
to in its simplest form. Ofcourse, there are other questions dancing at the periphery. Does Houston want to continue its sprawling ways or make efforts to manage growth? Can Houston
ever clean its polluted air without providing an alternative to automobiles? Can Houston build enough roads to match a huge increase in population projected for the area? Still, ifone
takes the sage advice often offered to 􀁲􀁥􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁾 -follow the money -it comes down to rail or blacktop. Metro has enough money to add an additional 41 miles to the 7.5-mile light
rail system already under construction or to continue sending about $100 million annually to local cities and Harris County to spend on roads. It is an either-or situation. Forget both.
'Metro transfer' started it all To pay for the rail extensions, the transit agency has proposed ending the so-called "Metro transfer" that Bob Lanier put in place within months after
becoming Houston mayor in January 1992. The centerpiece ofLanier's 1991 mayoral election was his plan to transfer money from Metro to the city of Houston, Harris County and 14 smaller
cities for those entities to spend on general mobility projects. General mobility is a bureaucratic term that means roads. Lanier campaigned on the idea that giving the money to Houston
would free up city road funds that then cOuld be used to hire 655 police 􀁯􀁦􀁬􀁩􀁣􀁾􀀮 After Lanier beat state Rep. Sylvester Turner in a runoff, he set about with the Metro transfer,
killing a monorail proposal Metro was pushing and sending the money to the different entities. He could do that because the mayor of Houston appoints a majority ofthe Metro board. The
process eventually drained a $650 million cash surplus the transit agency had been saving to build rail. Lanier said his election was a voter mandate to force Metro to make the changes.
􀁾􀀮 Perhaps. But it wasn't a clear mandate because the 1991 mayoral race was about a lot more than just 􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁩􀁬􀀮 􀁾􀀮􀀬 _ , . HoustonChronicle.com --http://www.HoustonChronicle.comISection:
Local & State May 30. 2003. f2:fOAM State awards contract for expansion of Katy By RAD SALLEE Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle Construction to expand the chronically congested Katy Freeway
has begun. On Thursday the Texas Transportation Commission awarded a $208 million contract to rebuild and widen the 6.9-mile segment from Texas 6 past Mason Road in Katy. The job went
to Williams Brothers Construction Co. ofHouston, the low bidder, and is scheduled for completion early in 2006. Transportation Department spokeswoman Janelle Gbur said the segment now
has three main lanes, one diamond lane and two frontage road lanes in each direction, but the frontage roads have gaps. After rebuilding it would have four main lanes, one diamond lane
and three continuous frontage road lanes in each direction, Gbur said. This segment ofthe $1.4 billion widening ofthe chronically congested freeway has .been less controversial than
those for the segment from the West Loop to Texas 6. The Katy Corridor Coalition, a citizens group, filed a federal court lawsuit in September challenging plans for that segment on legal,
environmental and public health grounds. The group seeks to halt construction until appropriate studies and alternatives have been explored. Plans call for funding the challenged segment
with a mix of federal dollars and revenue from four toll lanes, operated by the Harris County Toll Road Authority, in the middle ofthe widened freeway. By contrast, the segment awarded
Thursday "is on a fast track for completion in three years," Gbur said. "They will be working simultaneously all along its length." 􀁾
\,> ENVIRONMENT Roadkill Rage TOM ARRANDALE If highways can imperil grizzlies in remote areas, they're even more of a menace to wildlife in settled regions. To watch a grizzly bear in
the wild is to see nature at its most indomitable. A grizzly can drive a wolfpack away from elk it killed in the spring, and then can rove hun, . . dreds of miles throughout the summer
to find pine . nuts, moths and trout to subsist on. But.even grizzlies run into trouble where they encounter high, ways. Two grizzly sows were killed by trucks in the past couple of
years trying to cross a tw0'larie route leading to Glacier National Park. And, the four-lane Interstate 90 corridor through Montana will probably deter Yellowstone National Park's isolated
grizzly population from wandering north to breed with other remaining bears to assure a threatened species' survival. lfhighways imperil North America's most redoubtable animal, even
in the Rocky Mountain backcountry, they're even more of a menace to wildlife that's still hanging on in more settled regions ofthe country. Cars and trucks on American roads kill 1 million
birds and animals a day. Traffic collisions with wildlife cost 177 people their lives in 2001 and injured nearly 30,000. The roadkill issue also provides a glimpse into insidious environmental
damage. Asphalt pavement, metal· guardrails and concrete Jersey barriers fracture forests, wetlands and grasslands, especially along the rural,urban fringe surrounding big metropolitan
areas. Some wildlife, such as deer, can thrive, but many others may be doomed when they're segregated into small and isolated populations. With 4 million miles of roads now crisscross,
ing the country, "we're doing a number on biodiversity across America, and we need tO'repair that," says Richard T. T. Forman, a Harvard University professor and co-author ofRoad Ecology.
. Governments can mend the landscape. As highway engineers begin to replace old and crumbling bridges and rebuild country lanes that suburban growth has 􀁾􀁲􀁮􀁥􀁤 into traffic,choked
thoroughfares, governments can redesign this infrastructure to recon, nect wildlife populations. As David J. Scott, the Vermont Agency ofTransportation project director, points out,
"if you're going to lengthen a bridge anyway, by adding 10 or 20 feet on either side you can provide a natural corridor for the animals." Florida's transportation program has taken even
more proactive measures, building 24 underpasses along 1-74 to give endangered Florida panthers safe passage beneath the roadway. Florida has also installed passes for black bears, deer
and turtles that have suffered heavy losses along the roads built as subdivisions spread across their habitat. 60 G 0 V ERN I N G June 2003 Massachusetts has constructed a culvert for
salamanders, and Vermont is putting up 3-foot-high fabric fences to keep frogs from Lake Champlain marshes from crossing the road. Protecting wildlife doesn't come without some controversy.
Near Orlando, a task force appointed by Florida Governor Jeb Bush has recommended redesigning redesigning a controversial bypass project to build a 7-mile,long elevated parkway to protect
natural springs and let black bears move freely beneath the roadway. Apopka and Lake County officials are campaigning against the redesign. They think it cuts short the region's economic
prospects. Ofcourse, . highway engineers and local officials have been moaning for years that dealing with environmental concerns delays important road, building projects. But others
now rising through state agency ranks recognize that it makes more sense to take wildlife impacts seriously and incorporate solutions into well-designed plans that don't invite protracted
legal challenges. Vermont's agency has brought state Natural Resources Agency biologists into preparations for the rebuilding of a state highway near Lake Champlain, and Florida is setting
up interagency teams to review all road,building plans to make sure they mesh with the state's comprehensive plan for preserving wildlife habitat. The U.S. Congress has directed every
state to develop similar biodiversity plans. Geographic inforrna, tion system technology gives govern, ments a powerful tool for determining· where wild animals are likely to move. Then
engineers can redesign roads so the animals can go there. The White House is streamlining federal environmental reviews, which means states need to do their biology homework. Federal
officials are, for instance, expediting Montana's project to widen a 50-mile stretch ofU.S. 93 where the two grizzlies died in traffic. To their credit, state officials and two Native
American .tribes are ready with plans to incorporate 40 culverts and underpasses beneath the refurbished road to accommodate a rich multiplicity of fish and wildlife along the highway.
They'll also build a 150-foot,wide "land bridge," covered with native vegetation, where wolves, mountain lions, bobcats, elk and grouse commonly cross the right ofway. The bridge also
will let grizzlies move south from the Bob Marshall Wilderness toward the Bitterroot Mountains. Biologists are thinking ahead about similar 1-90 crossings that could re-; establish links
all the way to the Yellowstone ecosystem: The 􀁾 U.S. 93 bridge will cost $2 million or more, but that's not too 􀁾 much to pay to give grizzlies a better chance to survive. [!) 􀁾 Governing.com
! -..:.' Iowa Unloads Its Less,Traveled Roads REPAIR CARE FOR THREE YEARS, the Iowa Department of Transportation tried to transfer more than a conventionalWall. It is aisa" 900 miles
of lightly used highways to worth it to near-by homes.·A 1996. 􀁾􀁴􀁵􀁤􀁙 ' city and county govemmentr-to no by two researchers at the University...of ... avail. localities saw the "gift"
as a California, Davis, found that 􀁮􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁕􀁾 .·f1nanclal burden. 400,000 homes are close enough to high-::\ This year, cities and counties are willways to lose value due to
noise. . ' " Ing to talk. The change of heart Isn't This is the first bridge application iIi the due to a newfound sympathy with United States, according to Cyro Indus:';.· DOT's argument
that state funds should tries, the company that makes the 􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁧􀀺􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁾 target upkeep on heavily traveled parent acrylic panels. The lightweight highways. Rather, it's the dose
of reality. product can be engineered so that ifit gets' that came with the introduction of hit and is dislodged from its holding, it state legislation to tum over the roads doesn't
fall, says Steve Barratt, Cyro's to localities and a desire to make a marketing manager. deal with DOT before officials in Des Barratt adds that transparent sound Moines mandated how
much money walls are becoming common oversea&-an each locality would get to assume the engineeron the Wilson bridge spotted one new responsibilities. in Europe, piquing interest in the
technol-So far, Iowa local govemments have ogy-and similar sound walls are planned agreed to take over 152 miles of roadfor upcoming projects in Alaska, Colorado way in exchange for
$35 million. Some and Ohio. -Alan Greenblatt of the payout, which will come from state funds intended for repairing highway pavement, will be given to local governments up front in a
lump sum; the rest will be spread out over two or three years. Kevin Mahoney, director of DOT's Highway Division, says the sum shOUld be enough to cover the costs of fixing up the roads,
many of which were were once major highways but have fallen into disuse. In the eyes of the state, the roads should be in the hands of local governments regardless of whether they need
to be fixed.•Repair really has nothing to do with it except that every road has its own story and its own condition: 􀁍􀁡􀁨􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁹􀁾􀀮 -&roo Wheaton 􀀺􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁪􀀬􀀬􀀧􀀬􀀺􀁩􀀮􀀢􀀢􀀺􀀮􀁲􀀧
.-;' 􀁾 $200,000 ormored $50,000-$74,999 􀁾 $100,000-$199.999 I!!!!!!J $25,000:$49.999 Ii.!!!!J $75,000-$99,999 􀁾 Lesslhon $25,000 Source: Surface Transportalion PolIcY Project States
ranked by average yearly safety spending per traffic fatality The Price of Safe Streets 62 G 0 V I; R N I N G June 2003 _:FEDERAL transportation authorities in May approved the use of
a transparent 􀁳􀁯􀁵􀁮􀁾 barrier along part of the rebuilt .WoodrowWilson Bridge, a major section ofthe Interstate 95 system south ofWash.ingtQn, D.C. .. The sound barrier will extend
from the 􀁢􀁲􀁩􀁤􀁧􀁥􀀧􀁾 abutment to shield nearby residents in Alexandria, Virginia, from noise. Its transparency answered concerns over .. safety, maintenance and aesthetics that
, had made traditional sound walls unacceptable, according to Ronaldo "Nick" Nicholson, project manager on the bridge for the Virginia Department of Transportation. "The intention of
Woodrow Wilson is to be a signature bridge, and the aesthetics ofan opaque wall was in conflict with that," he says. That makes the transparent barrier worth its cost-as much as three
times
􀀫􀀾􀁾 [nvironmental Analysis to begin soon on Irving 􀁕􀁧􀁾􀁴 Rail Transit to DfWAirport. The Northwest Irving/DFW Corridor (west branch of the Northwest Corridor) is being advanced
to the next level of project development. The Environmental Analysis process will provide more detailed definition about the project's alignment, station locations, operations, and the
environmental impacts associated with the project. Corridor Background • 1983-Northwest Corridor identified in DART Final Service Plan. • 1989-DARTTransit System Plan includes rail to
North Irving. • 1995-System Plan refines light rail line to N. Irving Transit Center. • 2000-Northwest Corridor MIS (Major Investment Study) approved by DART Board, including an LRT
line to serve N. Irving and DFW Airport in response to significant new developments in area. • 2002/2003-Alternative LRT alignments identified through city of Irving and into DFW airport,
varying from MIS alignment. • 2004-lnitiate Environmental Analysis and conceptual engineering process. DART encourages you to attend the following public meeting scheduled for January
2004. This informational meeting, along with future update meetings, will provide an opportunity for public input and to better define the issues to be addressed during the Environmental
Analysis process. Corridor Update Meeting Wednesday, January 21, 2004,7:00 p.m. Irving Arts Center (Suite 200) 3333 North MacArthur Blvd. Irving, Texas 75062 MAPSCa 31B-A For more information,
contact DART Community Affairs at 214-749-2543 or visit DART.org. Pronto se iniciara el Analisis Ambiental en el Sistema 􀁾􀁥 Transito 􀁾􀁥􀁬 Tren [Iectrico de Irving 􀁾􀁡􀁣􀁩􀁡 el Aeropuerto
DfW. EI Corredor Noroeste de Irving/DFW (Ramal oeste del Corredor Noroeste) avanzara hacia el siguiente nivel de desarrollo del proyecto. EI proceso de Analisis Ambiental brindara una
definici6n mas detallada sobre la alineaci6n del proyecto, la localizaci6n de las estaciones, las operaciones y los impactos ambientales relacionados con el proyecto. Antecedentes del
del Corredor • 198HI Corredor Noroeste es identificado en el Plan de Servicios Final de DART. • 1989-EI Plan del Sistema de Transito DART incluye el riel hacia North Irving. • 1995-EI
Plan del Sistema define la linea del tren electrico hacia N. Irving Transit Center. • 2000-EI MIS (Estudio de Grandes Inversiones) del Corredor Noroeste es aprobado por el Consejo Directivo
de DART, que incluye una linea LRT entre N. Irving y el aeropuerto DFW en respuesta a nuevos eimportantes desarrollos en el area. • 2002/2003-Se identifican alineaciones alternativas
de LRT en la ciudad de Irving hacia el aeropuerto DFW, que son diferentes a la alineaci6n del MIS. • 2004-lnicio del Analisis Ambiental y del proceso de ingenierfa conceptual. DART 10
invita a asistir a la pr6xima junta publica que se realizara en enero de 2004. Esta junta de caracter informativo, y otras juntas de actualizacion que se Ilevaran a cabo en el futuro,
brindaran la oportunidad de informar al publico y de definir las cuestiones que se abordaran durante el proceso de Analisis Ambiental. Junta sabre el Progreso del Corredor Miercoles
21 de enero de 2004 a las 7:00 p.m. Irving Arts Center (Suite 200) 3333 North MacArthur Blvd. Irving, Texas 75062 MAPSCa 31 B-A Si desea mas informacion, comuniquese con la aficina de
Asuntos Comunitarios de DART al 214-749-25430 visite el sitio de DART.org.
NORTHWEST CORRIDOR LRT LINE TO FARMERS BRANCH AND CARROLLTON DART . a.··.···INiiI:!!IIl.lIA, 􀀧􀁾􀁇 •• NORTHWEST CORRIDOR LRT LINE TO FARMERS BRANCH AND CARROLLTON DAR -􀀺􀀾􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁣􀁲􀀮􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁃􀁬􀁌􀁴
􀁬􀀺􀁲􀁕􀁯􀁥􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀻􀁵􀀧􀁍􀁴􀀮􀀧􀁤􀁾 􀁃􀁯􀁬􀁮􀀺􀁥􀁦􀁃􀀢􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁮 CplJon!J(6allOAl""nllOrr.) e Propo;;.ec$l;r:lon5 • • FrankJnrd Rd \\Environmenlallmpacl Sta1emenl "'-. Le wi SlI,U Ie
DARTRO'N(Corto-18e'1) Shady 􀁇􀁲􀁯􀁾􀀧􀁣 Rd 8o.ndy Loile Rd Coppell 􀁾 " SH 183 􀁾 Figure 5-1 LRT Line to Farmers Branch and Carrollton PLANNING PHASE NEARS COMPLETION ••••••••••. 1
LRT ACCESS TO DALLAS LOVE FIELD••••••••••••••••••• 3 SELECTED LRT ALTERNATIVE •••••..••••••••••••••••••••••.4 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••6 INSIDE THIS
ISSUE SfJUlW: DART. 2001 Hospital property before rejoining the DART-owned UP RR right-of-way. On September 17, 2002, the DART Board approved the Northwest Corridor alignment and stations
as shown in Figure 1. This included the Option D alignment through the Medical Center area. The DART Board did not approve the JULY 2003 Option D presented at July 2002 Public Hearings
In order to find an alignment that could satisfy both the hospital's concerns and the public concerns with Options A, Band C, DART worked with the hospitals to develop Design Option
D, which was presented at the July 2002 public hearings. Option D avoided the numerous displacements and added costs because it was located primarily on Parkland JULY 2003 PLANNING PHASE
NEARS COMPLETION DEIS Medical Center Options The DEIS included the "Base" alignment, as well as three design options in the Medical Center area (Design Options A, B and C), and a Love
Field Design Option. The Base alignment generally followed the existing DART-owned Union Pacific Railroad (UP RR) corridor to Frankford Road in Carrollton, but followed Harry Hines through
the heart of the Medical Center district. It included two stations -one near Parkland, and one near the UTSW North Campus. Design Options A, Band C were developed to address hospital
concerns with the Base alignment, and included one station near Parkland, with the second station near Inwood and Denton. While Options A, Band C still provided good service to medical
facilities south of Inwood, they resulted in numerous displacements and added costs that made them compare unfavorably to the Base. (Refer to Newsletter No. 4 or the DEIS on www.DARlorg
under Expansion Studies to review these options). NEWSLETTER NO.5 Planning work on the Northwest Corridor LRT project is nearing completion. Since the July 2002 public hearings were
held for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), work has focused on issues in the Medical Center and Love Field areas. The DEIS, which describes the project, including alignment
options in the Medical Center and Love Field areas, as well as impacts and mitigation, was published in June 2002. A 45-day public and agency review period was held from June 14 through
July 30, 2002, during which DART held three public hearings to receive comments on the project and the DEIS. The public hearings provided the basis for the staff recommendation for the
alignment and stations, which was approved by the DART Board on September 17, 2002. Subsequent changes in the Medical Center were proposed and approved on May 13, 2003, as described
below. <lnU8AV :>!Jpod lOvl 􀁾􀀡􀁓􀁕􀁏􀁊􀁬 􀁐􀀡􀁤􀁯􀁾 O<lJV SOlloa or Rosa Cavazos Rosteet DART Community Affairs Phone 214-749-2522 Fax 214-749-3667 rrosteet@DART.org Kay Shelton DART
Planning Phone 214-749-2841 Fax 214-749-3844 kshelton@DARlorg QUESTIONS? If you have questions or would like more information, contact: Construction and revenue service dates may be
delayed from their original dates (opening in 2007-2008) by two or more years due to lower sales tax revenues. The DART Board is discussing possible delays and is working hard to minimize
any delays beyond two years. Revised dates should be available in fall 2003. iJJ! : ! j i I • ; ! 1 􀁾 !1£ ! t 1!I 􀁾 􀁾 i l J􀁾 I I 1 t1i 􀀮􀁾 I ! 􀁾 ill tit 􀁾1i , ; 1􀁾 i ill! 􀁾
! ! \ !􀁾 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? The Final EIS is expected to be complete in August 2003. Once complete, DART will mail out a notice of availability to key agencies and everyone who has
provided written or verbal comments on the project. It will also be available at local corridor libraries and on the DART website (www.DARlorg under Expansion Studies). The Draft EIS,
which contains information on other parts of the project that have not changed since the July 2002 hearings, is currently available at local libraries or at www.DARlorg. After the FEIS
is published, the next steps are: Final Design Construction 􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀹􀁌 Xl. 'UOS!PP\f 8110J8 lS8M 􀁾􀀰􀀸􀀹 􀁾 UOS!PP\f 􀁾􀁯 UM0.L 1i4dmV'J 8)j!V'J Revenue Service i:':£C';L-9n;QL Xl'solloa
£9 l099 xog 'ood
, , ;' I 􀀧􀀭􀁜􀁾􀁅􀁬􀂣􀁖􀀢􀀢􀁔􀁏􀁊􀁬􀁉􀀾􀁓􀁔􀀮􀁯􀀮􀀮􀁴􀁲􀀱􀀧􀁓 i_' 􀁾􀁟􀁾􀀧􀁜􀁜􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀢 : If you need this information in an accessible format, contact Rosa at 214-749-2522. Se desea
mas informacion, por favor comuniquese con el Departmento de Asuntos Comunitarios de DART al 214-749-2522. FIGURE 14 -CARROLLTON SQUARE STATION FIGURE 13 -FARMERS BRANCH STATION NORTHWEST
CORRIDOR LRT LINE TO FARMERS BRANCH AND CARROLLTON DART FIGURE 10 -BACHMAN STATION FutURE SOUTHW£ST AIRLINES EXPAHSlONAREA Figures 9 through 16 illustrate the additional 8 stations north
of the Medical Center area. This project definition will provide the basis for finaldesign, which will start after the Record of Decision is received from FlA, signifying completion of the environmental process. Additional Changes In addition to the issues and changed
conditions in the vicinity of Parkland Hospital, DART proposed three additional changes: Grade separation of Maple Avenue due to an updated traffic analysis • Relocation of the Market
CenterjOak Lawn Station (required with the change to the UP RR alignment) • Relocation of the Inwood Station (based on DEIS public comments, and a reassessment of impacts and costs)
Figures 4 and 5 illustrate the proposed site plans of the relocated Market CenterjOak Lawn and Inwood Stations. The Market CenterjOak Lawn station was relocated to These issues, coupled
with the planned expansion of Medical Center facilities eastward towards Maple Avenue, led DART and the Medical Center to reexamine the DART-owned UP RR right-of-way for the alignment
through the Medical Center area. Figure 2 illustrates the location of the Option D and UP RR alignments in this area. While the UP RR rightof-way appeared too far removed from the Medical
Center district during the Major Investment Study (MIS), Parkland's recent announcements of property acquisition east of the alignment towards Maple Avenue make the UP RR alignment a
more attractive alternative since a cost-effective solution to Option D is not available. Moving the alignment results in relocation of the Parkland Station. The proposed station location
is over Motor Street (see Figure 3) so that access is provided to areas both north and south of Motor. It also includes a bus transfer facility just east of the alignment and north of
Motor Street. NORTHWEST CORRIDOR LRT LINE TO FARMERS BRANCH AND CARROLLTON DART Subsequent Refinements to the Medical Center Alignment During preparation of the Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS), Parkland Hospital and DART continued coordination on the Option D alignment and station in conjunction with more detailed planning and facility concepts for the Parkland
Master Plan. One of the key complicating factors that arose was the issue of service tunnels, basement-level connections, and at-grade autojpedestrian connections between proposed Parkland
facilities, which would be separated by the below-grade, open-cut Option D LRT alignment. Given the early stage of their planning process, Parkland wished to maintain maximum flexibility
for these connections depending on the ultimate placement of buildings. Accommodating this need for flexibility would add up to $20 million to the project due to increased excavation,
a longer tunnel section, and potentially increased ventilation requirements. Love Field Tunnel Option at that time. However, there are continuing discussions between DART and the City
of Dallas to determine if the tunnel can be reconsidered (see page 3 for more information). .􀁾 a--., 􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀯􀁾􀁜 sg .NIihi 2 JULY 2003 JULY 2003 5
NORTHWEST CORRIDOR LRT LINE TO FARMERS BRANCH AND CARROLLTON DART people provided verbal comments at the hearing. About 25 written comments were also received. LRT ACCESS TO DALLAS LOVE
FIELD 􀁾=􀀺􀀺􀁤􀁾􀁲􀁯􀁤􀁯􀁊􀁏􀁰􀁾􀀮􀁏􀁊􀁉 􀁾 Lov" F eld Design Option Considered 􀁾􀀬 􀁾􀁂􀀸􀁬􀁣􀁷􀀭􀁇􀁲􀁡􀁣􀁥􀁉􀁃􀁰􀀮􀁥􀁲􀁟􀁃􀁵􀁴 o PDpo:;odBo-QH·Grod:l9.a:ion 􀁬􀀺􀁾 • P1JpOSedM-GrooeStedon
The DART Board approved the changes on May 13, 2003. All other stations and the alignment north of Mockingbird remain unchanged. The most recent changes are being incorporated into the
Final EIS as the Selected LRT Alternative (see Figure 8 on next page). Verbal and written comments are being included in the Final EIS with responses provided for each comment. The DEIS
also included a Love Field Design Option which would have provided direct tunnel access to the Dallas Love Field terminal area (see Figure 6). An open-cut station would have been located
just south of the existing terminal near a possible future ticket area and baggage claim wing with pedestrian access to the main terminal. While there is support for this tunnel connection
from the majority of the public, it is estimated to add $160 million The Inwood Station was relocated from north of Inwood to south of Inwood, west of Denton Drive. This relocation avoids
five business displacements, lessens potential impacts to Rusk Middle School and reduces project cost. This relocation was proposed in part due to comments from affected property owners
during the DEIS comment period. Public Involvement and DART Board approval Prior to seeking DART Board approval of using the UP RR right-of-way rather than Option D through the Medical
Center area, as well as for the additional changes described above, DART held an informational public meeting on April 3, 2003. A summary of the changes was provided at the public meeting
and DART and consultant staff were available to discuss the changes with attendees. A formal public hearing was held on April 10, 2003 to take comments on the proposed alignment and
station refinements. Approximately 60 people attended each meeting, and 6 to the project. Given the downturn in the economy, DART's sales tax revenues, its primary source of funding,
have been greatly affected. Lower sales tax revenues have resulted in potential delays of about two years or more to the Northwest Corridor LRT project. Without additional outside funding
for the Love Field tunnel, adding the tunnel to the project would increase delays by another year or more. These additional delays are unacceptable to many of DART's member cities, including
the cities of Dallas, Farmers Branch and Carrollton. JULY 2003 3
NORTHWEST CORRIDOR LRT LINE TO FARMERS BRANCH AND CARROLLTON DART rypical at-grade junction 􀁾.. '-" .... 1 : ..􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀻........ J 􀁟􀀮􀁾􀁬 -,-􀁾􀀭􀀧 -􀁾 􀁾 potentially $700 million
in funding would be lost. However, if the tunnel does get a "recommended" rating, and if the additional funds can be found, then there is the possibility that the tunnel could be built.
As a potential alternative, DART and the City of Dallas have developed a Love Field spur option (see Figure 7). The Love Field spur is a much lower cost option (about $70 million) to
directly serve Love Field with light rail. However, the additional funds for this option must also be found before it can be implemented, and those requirements are also included in
the ILA. SELECTED LRT ALTERNATIVE While the past several months have focused on issues in the Medical Center area, the majority of the project remains unchanged from what the Board approved
in September 2002. The most recent project changes are being combined with the remaining project elements north of Mockingbird, and are reflected in the Final EIS as the Selected Alternative.
Figure 8 illustrates the Selected LRT Alternative. Because of the additional delays and added costs, the Final EIS does not include the Love Field tunnel as part of the selected alternative.
However, DART is working with the City of Dallas on an "interlocal agreement" (ILA) that outlines the necessary steps for the tunnel to be reconsidered. One of the key elements of the
ILA is identification of the $160 million in funds. The DART Board has pledged $20 million towards the $160 million cost difference. Similarly, the City is seeking a Passenger Facility
Charge (PFC) at Dallas Love Field to help fund its share of $53.3 million. That leaves about $86.7 million that still must be found. With DART's support, the City of Dallas plans to
seek additional funds from the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), Dallas County, and other sources to help fund the project. The second key element of the ILA is that
DART must submit the project with and without the tunnel to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) as part of its New Starts funding application. The FTA rates several New Start projects
every year, and if the project receives a "recommended" or higher rating, then it is eligible for federal funds. DART is seeking $700 million in federal funds for the Northwest and Southeast
corridors. If the project with the tunnel is "not recommended" then the tunnel cannot be included since 4 'II e 􀁾"'-Frankford 0 􀀧􀁾 " SH 190 PQ,8 TrinilyMilill􀀭􀁾 11 Irving ',i. QJ
! 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 SH 193 11 11 -s-:w..cooUUAligM'lo)nt 􀀮􀁐􀁬􀁯􀁾􀁓􀁬􀀳􀁴􀁩􀁣􀁭 􀁾 R.lIlOptrEllhg'F.aclly \ 111 &eIlLneRd FcweGllJ'l JULY 2003
􀀬􀀭􀁾 L Texas Department of Transportation .. 22 .... 3 i.'i·.' .•..... ···.4 , 4 .. 4 The East Corridor MIS includes an area bounded by downtown Dallas to the west, Dalrock RoadlDallas
County line to the east, Garland/Ferguson Road to the north and Military/Scyene to the south. It encompasses portions of Dallas, Garland, Mesquite, Sunnyvale and Rowlett. nvcu ::J <o<
ro 3ro ::J M Ageoey APP'M,I 􀁾0 Potential 􀁓􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁥􀁳􀁾 Mode 􀁓􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁥􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁾􀁜􀀽􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀽􀀮􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀮􀀽􀀽􀀱 Alternative Development􀁾
Initial Concept 􀁅􀁶􀁡􀁬􀁵􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾 \========/Short List of Hybrid Alternatives􀁾 Detailed Evaluation􀁾 Recommendation 􀁾 Q. Is the Study Team considering an alternative to the 'Mixmaster'
for drivers in the East Corridor trying to reach Uptown or other areas near downtown besides the Central Business District? A. There is a separate project underway to review downtown
traffic issues. Additional information about these projects can be found at www.projectpegasus.org and www.thesoutherngateway.org. Q. Where are we in the MIS process? A. The funnel to
the right shows the process that we've been following. Currently, the Study Team is completing the detailed evaluation of each alternative that made the short list. Next, the Study Team
will make their suggestions in the form of a Locally Preferred Investment Strategy (LPIS) and present them for approval to the local governing bodies involved with the study. Q. Are
plans already in place to upgrade 1-30, or would it only be upgraded to add new HOV lanes? A. 1-30 would need rebuilding in the future due to facility design life and to meet current
safety standards. It is important to remember that the existing transportation system was not designed to meet today's demand which should only increase by the year 2030. It is desirable
to make overall major facility upgrades (i.e. design standards) in conjunction with highway capacity-increasing projects. Public meetings were held in Garland, Mesquite and Dallas during
December 2001, March 2002 and l\Jovember 2002. Attendence was encouraging with as many as 60 members of the public participating. Below is a summary of the questions asked during those
meetings and responses to them. Q. What kind of transit is being considered along the Scyene alignment and the Union Pacific railroad line? A. The Study Team is considering light rail
transit (LRT) along Scyene, and commuter rail along the Union Pacific railroad line. Federal regulations regarding LRT, commuter, and other types of rail service make the LRT option
unfeasible along the UP line. Furthermore, the UP line is privately owned and is heavily used for regular freight rail service, which would hamper LRT efficiency. Dallas Area Rapid Transit,
in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the North Central Texas Council of Governments, is conducting a corridor transportation study of the area east of downtown
Dallas. The study is referred to as the East Corridor Major Investment Study. Public Meeting Results 2 0 0 3 Rosa Cavazos Rosteet Community Affairs Representative Dallas Area Rapid Transit
Phone: 214-749-2522 Fax: 214-749-3667 E-mail: rrosteet@dart.org F a 03153nD3l:J NOID3l:Jl:JO) SS3l:JOOIf ltlL-99cSL s12xal's12I1120 anual\'i7' J!JP12d LOt L £9 L099 x08"O"d l!SU12Jl
Pld12tj 12aJ'i7' S12III20 Ernie Martinez or Project Manager Dallas Area Rapid Transit Phone: 214-749-3201 Fax: 214-749-3667 E-mail: emartine@dart.org East Corridor MIS information is
currently available at DART.org under Expansion Studies, providing online access to study information, public meeting dates, meeting summaries, maps, newsletters and other information.
Need More Information? If you or your organization would like more information, please feel free to call, write, fax or e-mail: Para informacion en el espanol, por favor lIamada: d 0
New 5 3 mdings, present the LPIS natives, and introduce the sment process. 􀂧􀂷􀁦􀁾􀁟iEiM44,ji,'·"i.fihiBiJ C 0 E a t:mtJijiMl!U1 it;? t4','I.)'tmD 1t3·] a; r: [.j' 4'61 i! 6\ it.] I
E a 5 t
􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀢 j1J U :EJ !='" Eo u '<":: .'."J >o I 4,500 MODES TDM/TSM '<":: .'."J ':"J (l] High-costihigh-impact modes provide a more difficult challenge. During the East Corridor MIS, these
modes are being studied in much greater depth before any final decision is made. That's why you hear more about highways than bike trails during our public meetings. Obviously, a low-costihigh-impact
transportation mode would be examined more thoroughly than a high-costilow-impact option. Unfortunately, high-costihigh-benefit modes and lowcostilow impact modes occur more commonly.
The Study Team developed a strategy to evaluate those types of modes based on feedback from the DART Board of Directors, the Policy Advisory Committee, and other public and private participants.
First, low-costilow-impact modes are recommended in almost any case. While the mode may affect mobility in the East Corridor very little overall, it may remedy a hazardous or inefficient
situation at a single intersection. For the users of that intersection, the improvement could provide a great deal of relief. Alternative Formation and Prioritization The East Corridor
MIS process initially identified many potential transportation modes that may improve congestion and safety issues. However, it is important to consider each mode in relation to its
cost. Comparative Maximum Hourly Mode Capacities 5,000 . ."5' 4,500 ·1······································ ..----... 􀁾 4,000 ';; 3,500 􀀧􀁾 3,000 .--. :; 2,500 .--. U<:: 2,000 .j---.
o􀁾 1,500 '';". 1,000 . 􀁾 500 J: 􀀫􀁟􀁌􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁌􀁾 oto 1 US 80 oto 1 oto 1 0 to 1 1-30 to 1-635 to 1-635 SH 352 nes improvements, ay improvements, evaluated adding s a last resort. oto
1 1to 2 1-635 to Dalrock Rd. Travel Demand Management (TDM) and Transportation System Management (TSM) are 􀁬􀁯􀁶􀁶􀀭􀁣􀁯􀁾􀁴 techniques for addressing congestion in the near-term by
reducing the number of vehicle 􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁰􀀤􀁲􀁮􀁾􀁱􀁥􀁃􀁬􀁮􀁤 optimizing (or fully utilizing) the existing transportation faciliites and programs instead of relyinggn major capital improvements,
like new highway or mass transit construction.TDMand TSM are often used as a short-term solution while larger capital projects 7are still being evaluated and constructed. Some of the
methods used as TDM and TSM strategies include improved signalization, signage, and other intersection improvements.This can 􀁩􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁵􀁤􀁾 signal timing, redirecting travel lanes, and
physical improvements. Some TDM strategies are not physical improvements; rather policy changes that alter driving patterns and peak demand. For example, flexible work scheduling and
telecommuting affect travel demand at peak hours. Not all TDM and TSM strategies focus on automobile travel as improvements to pedestrian and bicycle routes are also important elements.
Improved sidewalks, bicycle lanes,and park-and-ride facilities also have a positive effect on safety and congestion. 1-30 2to 3 oto 1 US 80 to 1-635 In the East Corridor study area,TDM
and TSM strategies are being recommended for both their low cost and immediate results. Trouble intersections and roadways have been identified, and improvements to signalization and
travel lanes are recommended in several areas. 75 and US 80 was the only more than one additional lane in riof 􀁾􀁨􀁥 freeways within the corridor qdition of only one freeway mainlane
in 􀁾􀁃􀁬􀀤􀀧􀁏􀁮􀁧􀁓 to how many lanes to add and where ore the LPIS can be recommended. 3 1to 3 Summary of Highway Improvement Strategies Downtown Mode to US 80 Freeway Mainlanes Managedl
HOV lanes Because no existing rail line exists adjacent to 1-30 in the East Corridor, the 1-30 running alignment would cost much more than other DART lines due to significant right-of-way
acquisitions, not to mention a complicated design to protect access to cross-streets, adjacent properties and existing businesses. The Santa Fe alignment, which follows the existing
Santa Fe rail line from downtown Dallas to the existing Downtown Garland station, has been modeled, and ridership supported only a portion of the route. The remaining section, section,
however, had significant drawbacks, including the lack of Dallas City Council suport previously, the problem of drawing riders from existing LRT lines and ownership and use of a portion
of the line by private freight providers. Three LRT alternatives have been considered during this study.The only alternative to advance to the detailed evaluation portion of the study
is the Scyene Road alignment, which would extend from the planned Southeast Corridor Line along Scyene Road to the Dallas city limits. Modeling has been conducted for this route which
shows that the segment is warranted from a ridership standpoint.The cost effectiveness analysis, typically not considered until Phase II of project development, is currently underway.
Other alternatives considered include the Santa Fe alignment and an alignment running within the 1-30 right-of-way. f Whether these Managed HOV lanes will be elevated, built at-grade
or depressed is a decision that will be made during the Schematic Design phase of the project. During that phase, decisions will also be made as to how to address access to these new
lanes and access to the freeway in general. Managed HOV lanes would serve multiple transportation user groups or vehicle types, yet they are first and foremost intended as HOV lanes.
The "Managed" lane aspect is activated when the number of HOV users does not reach the capacity of the facility, single occupancy vehicles may then be allowed to use the lane for a price.
This concept is being considered only for the future HOV lanes, not the general traffic lanes. Managed HOV lanes Managed HOV lanes have been evaluated for the East Corridor and seem
to be warranted on 1-30 within our study area and possibly the portion of US 80 between 1-30 and SH 352. 􀀮􀁾􀁾 I" J '-. { .' //-.. -_. i'-}' 1--_.._--􀁦􀀭􀀭􀁷􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭 .i Commuter
Rail Commuter rail is another alternative considered for the East Corridor. In terms of service and amenities, it would resemble the service currently provided by the Trinity Railway
Express linking Downtown Dallas and Downtown Fort Worth. Although trains would run less frequently than LRT service, each train has a greater person-carrying capacity. A possible alternative
is a commuter rail line that would run from downtown Dallas east to SH 352 in Mesquite along the existing Union Pacific rail line, located between US 80 and Scyene Road. Given this mode's
incompatibility with pedestrians and automoblies, a real issue is the connection and alignment the line would have in Downtown Dallas, as well as its complicated interaction with one
of the most active freight rail lines in the state. The second step in pursuing this alternative requires serious discussions with the Union Pacific Railroad to determine the Source:
feasibility of construction and operations. u.s, Census 2000 DROVE ALONE 75% A.S PClrt of the Public and Agency Involvement Plan, the 98Ql.qJpnity Work Group has met several times throughout
the MIS process. It was evident from those meetings that bicycle ahd pedestrian transit issues were a recurring theme that required more detailed attention. Therefore, a Bicycle and
Pedestrian Subcommittee was formed. This committee has made va.luable suggestions regarding topics such as safety, sidewalk improvements, addition of amenities such as benches or ?helters
to improve attractiveness, local plan compliance, and connections to the NCTCOG planned Veloweb, specifically use of the Santa Fe Railroad line between White Rpck. Lake and Graham Avenue
as a bike trail (delineated by the light blue line on the map to the right). region's growing concerns over mobility and air quality and its desire to advance development objectives,
pedestrian and bicycle opportunities will offer an to traditional travel. Pedestrian and bicycle programs and facilities alone can not ongestion problems in the East Corridor, but they
offer an option for those whose 􀁾􀀯 ..is conducive to walking and biking, and they also provide for reQreCltiollal opportunities. The Study Team also examined the potential operational
effectiveness of major capital improvements such as: · passenger rail service such as light rail transit (LRT) and commuter rail, · arterial road improvements, · additional frontage
roads, · high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes · freeway mainlanes and · managed lanes. Alternative Transportation Strategies When developing transportation solutions as part of a Major
Investment Study, many different transportation strategies (or modes) are considered.The East Corridor StudyTeam began by examining the potential effectiveness of low-capital improvements
such as: · bicycle and pedestrian facilities, · travel demand management (TDM) techniques/programs, · transportation system management (TSM) and · intelligent transportation systems
(ITS).
Transportation Department North Central Texas Council of Governments 616 Six Flags Drive, Suite 200, Centerpoint Two P. O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 Fax: 817.640.3028
e Schedule. Part of the study process is to identify feasible regional institutional structures for seamless public transportation. Staff, consultants and committee members have agreed
to work toward a consensus by Fall 2004, prior to the 79th Texas Legislative Session. e Regional and Modal Scope. The Study encompasses a nine-county area: Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis,
Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall and Tarrant. The Study includes all forms of public transportation: passenger rail and bus transit services, and is being coordinated with another
NCTCOG initiative, The Regional Freight Bottleneck Study. 79th Texas Legislative Session January to May 2005 Public Cities and Counties Transportation Authorities North Texas Tollway
Authority D/FW International Airport Texas Department of Transportation Amtrak Intercity Bus Carriers Federal Transportation Agencies Private Industry Freight Railroads (operating nationally
and locally) Advocacy Groups Chambers of Commerce Consultants Regional Transportation Council/North Central Texas Council of Governments Study Stakeholders Policy officials and representatives
with technical expertise currently serve on the transit needs committees. Policy committee members include locally elected officials, district engineers, private sector leaders and transportation
authority board members from each corridor under study. Technical members consist of private and public transportation professionals. Committees regarding financing options, institutional
structures and legislative communication have also been formed. This additional traffic congestion mandates the need for cooperative, multimodal transportation solutions throughout the
region. The regional rail corridors under study represent some of the system improvements expected to provide regional, seamless, reliable transportation options. These improvements
can be particularly useful during peak travel in the more heavily congested travel corridors by offering reliable travel times. Regional population and employment growth are are putting
increased demands on the overall transportation system. The growth means severe traffic congestion for a significant portion of the region. Annual Cost of Congestion = $11.8 Billion
• North Central Texes N , , c,', , 􀀢􀁾 Council of Governments it ""flf' Transportation t\ Legend 􀁾 Areas of Moderate Peak-Period Congestion I!!I!I! Areas of Severe Peak-Period Congestion
Mobility 2025: The Metropolitan Transportation Plan, 2004 Update 2025 Congestion Levels e Staff Activities. Committee and public meetings are underway. Interested parties should contact
staff with comments or questions regarding the Study or the larger public transportation effort. e Communication with Officials. The public's voice arid those of local and county government
representatives need to be heard from the early stages of the study through its conclusion. e Public Involvement. The public is encouraged to monitor the study website, www.nctcog.org/rrcs,
watch news coverage regarding the issues and take advantage of public meeting opportunities.
What Is NCTCOG? • 43,000 passengers riding light rail • 78 percent of all transit riders first boarding the system as pedestrians. • 7,500 passengers riding commuter rail Service plans
call for expanding services in the region. Rail will help serve the region's growing population (8.4 million by 2030), by providing reliable service, reducing automobile congestion,
and decreasing air polluting emissions. The rail solution is part of the clean air transportation strategy that our region is committed to implementing. Partners from across the region
are cooperating to promote usage of the rail system. Providing safe, convenient access, and complementary land uses around these stations is vital to the success of the rail system.
Access comes in a variety of forms: walking, bicycling, bus, and private vehicle. Different land uses can hinder or promote access to rail stations. This report addresses access to rail
in seven sections: Regional Rail History, Needs Assessment Study, Bicycle and Pedestrian Access, Vehicle Access and Parking, Transit Supportive Land Use, Implementation Strategies, and
Success Stories. Rail transportation in the Dallas-Fort Worth area is provided by Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T). DART operates
the light rail transit (LRT) system recognizable by its electric overhead wires. DART and The T cooperatively operate the Trinity Railway Express (TRE), a commuter train with a traditional
locomotive engine. On an average weekday, the system has: Bicycle racks at the CentrePort Rail Station provide a secure and visible parking area for transit riders accessing the station
by bicycle. Rail Station Access is key to increasing rail ridership. The completion of the first phase of the region's light and commuter rail system provides new travel opportunities
for area residents, yet many barriers prevent access to the region's rail system. Local improvements such as sidewalk repair or new developments at stations can help solve regional mobility
constraints by providing more transportation alternatives. Regional Mobility Initiatives is a report on the transportation planning activities and air quality programs of the North Central
Texas Council of Governments and the Regional Transportation Council -together serving as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan Area since 1974.
Regional Mobility Initiatives Issues Advanced Transportation Management, March 1996 Air Quality, July 1996 Traffic Congestion, October 1996 Multimodal Solutions in the North Central
Corridor, July 1997 Toll Roads, February 1998 Major Investment Studies, August 1998 The Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century, October 1998 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes,
December 1998 Travel Demand Forecasting Procedures, June 1999 Commuter Traffic, December 2000 Pedestrian Transportation, August 2002 Metropolitan Planning Organization, November 2002
North Central Texas Council of Governments P. O. Box 5888 Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 We would like your comments ... If you have questions or comments regarding the transportation and
air quality programs of the North Central Texas Council of Governments and the Regional Transportation Councilor need additional information, please contact the NCTCOG Transportation
Department at (817) 695-9240, by fax at (817) 640-3028, via e-mail: transinfo@nctcog.dsttx.us. or visit our website at www.nctcog.dsttx.us/trans. The contents of this report reflect
the views of the authors who are responsible for the opinions, findings, and conclusions presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Federal
Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, or the Texas Department of Transportation. This document was prepared in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation
and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration, and Federal Transit Administration. The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) is a voluntary
association of local governments within the 16-countyNorth Central Texas region. The agency was established in 1966 to assist local governments in planning for common needs, cooperating for mutual benefit, and coordinating for sound regional
development. North Central Texas is a 16-county region with a population of 5.6 million and an area of approximately 12,800 square miles. NCTCOG has 230 member governments, including
all 16 counties, 164 cities, 23 independent school districts, and 27 special districts. Since 1974, NCTCOG has served as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for transportation
in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan Area. The Regional Transportation Council is the policy body for the Metropolitan Planning Organization. The Regional Transportation Council consists
of 39 members, predominantly local elected officials, overseeing the regional transportation planning process. NCTCOG's Department of Transportation is responsible for support and staff
assistance to the Regional Transportation Council and its technical committees, which comprise the MPO policy-making structure.
R.egional Rail History NCTCOG Executive Board 2002-2003 John Heiman, Jr. Council member, City of Mesquite Becky Haskin Councilmember, City of Fort Worth Joe Putnam Mayor, City of Irving
Roger Harmon County Judge, Johnson County General Counsel Jerry Gilmore Executive Director R. Michael Eastland Director Oscar Trevino Mayor, City of North Richland Hills Chuck Silcox
Councilmember, City of Fort Worth Pat Remington Councilmember, City of Ariington Director Paula Baucum Councilmember, City of Midlothian Director John Heiman, Jr. Councilmember, City
of Mesquite Director Euline Brock Mayor, City of Denton Director Wayne Gent County Judge, Kaufman County Director Wendy Davis Councilmember, City of Fort Worth Regional Transportation
Council 2003 Director Tom Vandergriff County Judge, Tarrant County Director Jim Jackson Commissioner, Dallas County Director Alan Walne Councilmember, City of Dallas B. Glen Whitley,
Vice Chair Commissioner, Tarranl County Jack Hatchell, Secretary Commissioner, Collin County John Murphy, Chair Mayor Pro Tem, City of Richardson Secretary-Treasurer Bob Phelps Mayor,
City of Farmers Branch Past President Mike Cantrell Commissioner, Dallas County President James O'Neal Mayor Pro Tern, City of Lancaster Vice President Jack Hatchell Commissioner, Collin
County Avenue, Mistletoe Heights, Fairmont, and Arlington Heights. The Cities of Denton and McKinney were also once served by trolley systems in the early 20th Century. The lines provided
service from the town center to the nearby residential areas of these rural communities. Many of the local streetcar lines were in decline by the mid-to-Iate 1920s because of financial
difficulties and were shut down or substituted with bus service by the early 1930s. The only remaining trolley system still in operation is the McKinney Avenue Trolley in Dallas. Operating
on tracks rediscovered during a road repaving project, the McKinney Avenue Trolley runs from the north side of downtown Dallas along McKinney Avenue to the Cityplace Light Rail Station.
Streetcar and Trolley System Streetcars and trolleys were intra-city transit cars powered by electric lines, small steam engines, or other motors. Through the years, many Texas cities,
large and small, have been served by one form of street car or another: horse and mule-drawn, steam powered, electric powered, or motor powered. Dallas acquired its first mule-drawn
streetcars around 1871. Electrification of streetcar lines in Texas began in the 1890s. Both Dallas and Fort Worth were once served by extensive streetcar and trolley systems. These
lines provided service to the downtown areas of Fort Worth and Dallas as well as the surrounding streetcar neighborhoods. Examples of streetcar neighborhoods in Dallas and Fort Worth
include Uptown, the Cedars, Kessler Park, Swiss 1995 Average Vehicle Miles of Travel Per Household Surface Transportation Technical Committee Beth Ramirez Chair Kristy Libotte Keener
Graphic Coordinator, Public Affairs Mark Wright Mayor, City of Kennedale Michael Morris, P.E. Transportation Director, NCTCOG MaxWells Board Member Dallas/Fort Worth Internationai Airport
Grady Smithey Mayor Pro Tem, City of Duncanville Cynthia White Commissioner, Denton County Carl Tyson Mayor Pro Tem, City of Euless Mark Stokes Mayor, City of Carrollton John Tatum Citizen
Representative, City of Dallas Marti VanRavenswaay Commissioner, Tarrant County Oscar Trevino Mayor, City of North Richland Hills Maxine Thornton-Reese Councilmember, City of Dallas
Jared White Transportation Planner II Contributing Staff Linda Koop Board Member, Dallas Area Rapid Transit Rachel Harshman Transportation Planner I Jack Miller Board Member, North Texas
Tollway Authority Ying Cheng Urban Planner I Mike Nowels Councilmember. City of Lewisville Steve McCollum Councilmember, City of Arlington Margaret Keliher County Judge, Dallas County
Jay Nelson, P.E. District Engineer Texas Department of Transportation, Dallas District Kenneth Mayfield Commissioner, Dallas County Mark Housewright Councilmember, City of Dallas Robert
James Citizen Representative, City of Dallas Gregory Hughes Board Member Fort Worth Transportation Authority Lois Finkelman Councilmember, City of Dallas Sandy Greyson Councilmember,
City of Dallas Pat Evans Mayor, City of Plano Mike Sims, AICP Principal Transportation Planner Bob Day Mayor, City of Garland Harry Englert Councilmember, City of Grand Prairie Ron Brown
Commissioner, Ellis County Dan Kessler Assistant Director of Transportation NCTCOG Staff Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Task Force P.M. Summer Chair Maribel Chavez, P.E. District
Engineer Texas Department of Transportation, Fort Worth District Don Dozier Mayor, City of McKinney Wendy Davis Councilmember, City of Fort Worth Mark Burroughs Mayor Pro Tem, City of
Denton Michael Morris, P.E. Director of Transportation Don Ross Collection Trolley.iqeighborhoods were designed to 􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁯􀁵􀁲􀁡􀁧􀁾 pedestrians to 1.19.e the trolley sy§tem. Streets
werelaic;t out in grid patterns. S;hSJrt blocks)vElrEl designed for walking. Walkable downtowns and commercial areas served by trolleys or interurban rail became a central part of a
town's persona,lity. People living in old trolley neighborhoods are able, even today, to drive less, walk more, and a,ccess transIt easier. Block Structure and Historic Rail Development
Patterns Northern Texas Traction on Main St, Ft. Worth, TX Growth Areas in the Metroplex 68.56 VMT/HH Historic Streetcar Neighborhoods in Dallas, Fort Worth, Denton, and McKinney o 10
50 20 30 80 70 60 40 2 ______________________________________15
North Central Texas N Council of Governments A Transportation Legend D Metropolitan Planning Area Texas Electric Railway Co. Texas Interurban Railway Co. Northern Texas Traction Co.
Tarrant County Traction Co. Interurban Railway System of North Central Texas -Circa 1930 To Terrell Interurban railways, at first merely rural extensions of city streetcar lines, were
electric powered trains that stretched out to link urban centers, and offered fast, frequent, clean, and inexpensive passenger service. The Dallas-Fort Worth route was known as the "Crimson
Limited." During its 37 years of operation, this luxurious line carried the greatest number of passengers of any electric railway in the Southwest until service was terminated in 1939.
The last interurban ran December 31, 1948, from McKinney to Dallas. Denton 􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁜 r> Cleburne To Denison 􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁜􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 JAnna /' Melissa /) McKinney
j Allen Lewisville I .-,---_--.1 .-------􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀭... -.... 􀁬􀁟􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭....-------------------Ol,rrOlllon ') f Richardson Mesquite . : Grand D lIa Forney FL 􀁗􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁨􀀢􀁬􀁾􀁮
􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁮􀁧􀁬􀁯􀁮 i Prairie a7\\, l i 􀁾 : Ii iDHUIChlns M : , j Lancaster ,. ) _____􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁌􀁾􀁾􀁑􀁛􀁌􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁨􀀭􀁵􀁵􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀺 I,. I;' i Red°7ak ) I'" Ferns
1, JOShUat7:j: 􀁾􀁜 \1 , ,\ : , ' ) Palmer ... 1 Waxahachie' ) " . EnniS\'; Interurban Rail System The first electric interurban line was built between Sherman and Denison in 1900. By
1924, the railway served 33 cities on lines running from Denison to Waco and reached Dallas, Fort Worth, Denton, Cleburne, Terrell, and Corsicana. A number of different rail companies
operated in North Central Texas, often merging and changing ownership several times. The primary interurban systems, with a combined network of about 365 miles of rail, were the: • Northern
Texas Traction Company, • Texas Electric Railway Company, • Texas Interurban Railway Company, and • Tarrant County Traction Company. Success Stories Nearly $1 billion worth of investment
around DART's $900 million light rail starter system was made through 2002. Private developers are constructing mixed-use developments around existing stations while local governments
are conducting transit-oriented land-use studies around stations scheduled to open within the next few years. Local governments and transit agencies are also identifying possible improvements
to enhance bicycle and pedestrian access. With more than 200,000 people a day expected to use transit by 2025, investments made now will have benefits for transit riders in years to
come. 14 _
d p g PARTNER ROLE SUCCESSES NEXT STEPS Private Transit-oriented South Side on Lamar, Mockingbird Identify market opportunities. Sector developments Station and other DART light rail
Draft site plans with pedestrian, Sidewalks, related developments combine for bicycle, and transit orientation crosswalks, and over $1 billion in private sector and facilities. other
facilities in investments on the $900 million Build bicycle and pedestrian new developments starter system. facilities related to site and redevelopments development. close to rail stations
Local Facility construction Fort Worth, Burleson, Plano, and Endorse elements of the Bicycle Governments and maintenance other cities adopt mixed-use, high-and Pedestrian Access to Rail
Planning and zoning density zoning regulations. Needs Assessment. regulations Dallas and other cities create Identify related improvements Planned Developments (PDs), for inclusion in
Capital Tax Increment Finance Districts Improvement Plans. (TIFs), Business Improvement Define station development areas. Districts (BIDs), and Municipal Management Districts (MMDs)
to Establish planning, zoning, and support infill, transit-oriented subdivision regulations tailored developments. to transit-oriented development, including minimum densities aroun
stations. Require developers to provide specific bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Transit Rail service Customer satisfaction and rail use Adopt system plans that include Agencies Station
access increased. bicycle and pedestrian access issues, station Station area development issues. bicycle parking successfully promoted. Streamline bicycle parking and Development Bicycle
parking at station sites carry-on policies. agreements with permitted. Prioritize and fund needed the private sector on-site improvements. Provide paved waiting areas at all transit
stops. North Regional planning, $40.8 million Joint Venture program Incorporate elements of the Central programming, and provides funding to 19 projects and Needs Assessment into Mobility
coordination the study of additional rail corridors. 2030 and corridor studies. Texas Regional long-range plan supports Identify State and federal funding Council of sustainable development
and sources. Governments identifies $960 million for bicycle Focus fundi ng under the Transit and pedestrian facilities. Enhancement Program to Regional Transportation Council mobility
projects. policy limits Transportation Enhancement applications to mobility projects. Texas Improvements Central Expressway reconstruction Include pedestrian and bicycle Department related
to the State accommodates the KATY trail improvements on State system system (over $2 extension to the Mockingbird roadway projects proximate to of million identified in Station. rail
stations. Transportation the Needs TxDOT corridor study projects Streamline implementation of Assessment) coordinate with rail and veloweb federally funded bicycle and lannin . pedestrian
improvements. Area Roads Light! Commuter Rail Lines • Existing Light Rail Stations • Existing Commuter Rail Stations Light Rail Stations Scheduled to Open _.c o -". by 2008Map Developed
by the North Cenlral Texas Council of Governments Needs Assessment Study From August 2000 to June 2002, NCTCOG staff catalogued needed bicycle and pedestrian access improvements around
60 existing and programmed rail stations. These recommendations include on-site improvements to the actual station site and off-site improvements to the surrounding neighborhood. 4 _
_______________________________________13
Managing parking at stations at st::ltinrlS 􀁉􀁮􀁣􀁬􀀧􀁥􀁡􀁾􀀻􀁩􀁮􀁱 density • Proyidi.ng bicycle <;lnd pedestrian·· faci.lities • Preserving or developing shorter pedestrian-friendly
blocks Keys to Increasing 􀁈􀁾􀁩􀀱 􀁒􀁩􀁣􀁬􀁾􀁲􀁳􀁨􀁩􀁰 • Limited bicycle and pedestrian access to a station • Travel time to rail station • Lack of a destination along the rail line
• Limited pedestrian, bicycle, or shuttle access at a destination station • Limited parking at a station Barriers to Rail Ridership For directions to stations and service schedules,
visit www.DART.org or www.the-T.com RICHARDSON ••􀀬􀁾••• DALLAS FARMERS BRANCH CARROLLTON The ITC Terminal for the Trinity Railway Express provides good pedestrian connections from the
station to downtown Fort Worth. Benefits of Increasing Bicycle and Pedestrian Access to Rail • Mixing land uses increases the number of trip types accessible by rail. • Increasing densities
increases the frequency of pedestrian, bicycle, or rail trips. • Improving sidewalks and other facilities extends the area available to rail patrons. • Increasing access through land-use
and facility changes increases bike/pedestrian trips, safety, and mode share. • Increasing rates of walking, bicycling, and rail usage decreases roadway congestion and improves air quality.
• Place. building fronts/entrancE:}S on the. platform with parking set behind. • Locate bicYGleparking close to the platform and mark it clearly. • Provide separated sidewalks and walkways
to route pede$trians through station parking. • 􀀮􀁾􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁩􀁤􀁥 shelter,c:oncessions, and other amenitie$ on .t.Oe platform. • Sge1tE1r 􀁰􀁥􀁤􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁲􀁩􀀼􀀻􀁬􀁛􀁬􀁳 moving thrqLJgo
the. site andtoth.e platform. • Build $ign direct throughm<;ljqr off-site pedestrian §tcdi9Q Design Recommendations Implementati@n Strategies Making small-scale improvements to sidewalks,
trails, and bicycle routes together with land-use changes such as mixing uses, increasing densities, managing parking, and building pedestrian-friendly blocks at rail stations can improve
air quality by increasing the rate of walking and bicycling to rail. The key concept in the partnership is capturing the value of the rail station. For the private sector, the value
of the stations is in establishing a brand name identity and securing a flow of customers. For the public sector, the value of the station is in vehicles being removed from the roadway
These goals are both served by transit-oriented developments with well-designed bicycle and pedestrian facilities. 12 _ _ 5
Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Needs Assessment Methodology There are three major sources for the facility recommendations of the Needs Assessment Study: 1) Existing local government
plans and proposed projects; 2) Field work conducted by NCTCOG staff in coordination with DART, The T, and local governments; and 3) Public comments received during the course of the
study. Well-designed bicycle and pedestrian facilities should allow safe and efficient access to board trains, enter or exit the station site, and reach destinations around the station.
The table below summarizes the efforts for each category of bicycle and pedestrian facilities evaluated. The total cost identified is $192 million. This mixed-use development in Plano
provides jobs and housing within walking distance to the Downtown Plano Light Rail Station. Multi-family housing near downtown Fort Worth. For example, the City of Plano is working in
conjunction with a private developer to create a mixed-use development adjacent to the downtown Plano rail station which opened in late 2002. This station will act as a focal point for
downtown, creating enhanced pedestrian mobility to the historic main street and the rest of downtown Plano. Similarly, when rail stations are opened in advance of development or redevelopment,
the station site should maximize potential development opportunities. M©1!1'ket fOre:eili Public/private partnerships for developing walkable neighborhoods around transit stations have
a track record of success. Cities can work with developers to create a successful project that establishes a distinct sense of place and location identity for their community that targets
a specific but growing market. The market for transit-oriented development housing includes the growing demographics of empty-nesters, retirees, young professionals, and single-income
families. Individuals in these groups are looking for an alternative from the residential areas separated from retail and commercial activity. Timing Timing is crucial when creating
well designed mixed-use developments that complement existing or future transit stations. When development occurs in advance of a rail station, transit-oriented development standards
still need to apply. Planning ahead of time helps ensure the development will be pedestrian oriented when the future station opens. Mixed-Use Development Mixing the uses in a development
allows people to walk or bike to any number of locations along the rail system or at a rail station. Vertical mixing of uses, such as ground floor retail, greatly enhances pedestrian
opportunities by providing services the residents require within a relatively compact walkable environment. The picture at the bottom left is an example of a vertically mixed neighborhood
in the Uptown area of Dallas. This development combines ground floor commercial and retail uses with residences on the upper floors. A key to promoting more pedestrian activity is to
provide safe and direct connections between compatible land uses. It is important to have good urban design in order to create cohesion within an area and minimize vacant areas that
could become a no-man's land devoid of any activity. edal a connection to the station. CATEGORY RESEARCH FINDINGS On-Station Items inventoried included sidewalks, bicycle Many existing
stations are auto-oriented. Facilities parking, and directional signing. Sidewalk These could benefit from more direct routing placement on the station property was through the parking
lot and driveways to (lockers, covered bicycle reviewed for on-site usefulness and connectivity improve pedestrian safety. racks, sidewalks, signs) to adjacent properties. The provision
and proper placement of bicycle lockers and racks Bicycle parking recommendations include providing additional parking, moving the bicycl was also studied. The need for directional parking
closer to the station platform, and signs at the station to sort out bicycle, providing better signage to inform users of its pedestrian, auto, and bus traffic was also presence. evaluated.
Developing pedestrian-oriented land use on the station site is a necessary next step for these stations. Off-Station Americans will walk 5-to-1O minutes to any Of the nearly 1,200 miles
surveyed, 782 miles Sidewalks destination. Thus, for the sidewalk inventory, contained sidewalks, while 405 miles containe an area within roughly one-half mile of each no sidewalks.
The coverage varied from 100 (crosswalks, curb cuts, station was studied and the presence or percent to 20 percent of needed sidewalks. pedestrian signals) absence of sidewalks was noted.
If a sidewalk The cost of sidewalk-related improvements was in poor condition and deemed unusable it inventoried totals $78 million. was inventoried as missing. Americans with Disabilities
Act standard curb cuts and pedestrian traffic signals were also catalogued. Off-Station A one-mile study area around each station was The region has some on-street bicycle routes On-Street
established for reviewing on-street bicycle coordinated with rail stations, but many access. Staff bicycled streets to determine if modifications and additions are necessary to (signed
on-street they would be appropriate on-street routes. A properly direct on-street bicyclists to stations. bicycle routes) few cities within the study area have existing or A total of
85 miles of new or modified on-street planned on-street bicycle routes. bicycle routes were recommended to guide bicyclists to stations. These improvements tot over $2 million. Off-Station
Potential off-street trails were studied within a Seventy-seven miles of off-street trails were Off-Street one-mile area of the station. The Veloweb, recommended. The majority of these
follow which is the regional system of off-street trails Veloweb alignments in the vicinity of the (Veloweb, trails, designed for bicycle commuters, was key to this stations. The remaining
off-street pedestrian portals) analysis. Sections of the Veloweb within the recommendations follow rail, utility, or other one-mile station study area were identified in rights-of-way
to connect the stations to the the study. In some instances, other trails surrounding neighborhoods. These passed close enough to the station to warrant improvements total over $111
million. 6 _ 􀁾 11
Transit Supportive Land Use The key in walking or bicycling to transit stations lies in the actual places surrounding the station. These include site-specific issues such as the density
of the surrounding area, the overall design of the development, the mix of uses, timing, as well as market forces. To take full advantage of the regional transit system, complementary
land uses around rail stations are necessary. Transit-oriented development with a mixture of land uses will increase ridership by placing people and jobs within close proximity to the
rail stations. Some communities are already altering their station area land uses before the station becomes operational. Needs Assessment Maps A map similar to the one shown below for
each of the 60 stations in the study is available at www.dfwinfo.com/trans/bikepedlraiCaccess. A standard 5-foot-wide sidewalk. An extra wide, 12-foot-wide sidewalk. Bicycle system that
uses the roadway network with signs and/or pavement markings. Bicycle and pedestrian trails that are a minimum of 12-feet-wide and are in rights-of-way separated from automobile traffic.
The facility is on the ground and currently usable. The facility is awaiting construction. Missing sidewalks and potential facilities identified by I\JCTCOG field work, local planning
initiatives, and projects submitted but not funded in past Calls for Projects. • R.ail Station 􀁅􀁘􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁾 ... Funded Facilities Recommended Facilities • •• 1':'1 • .. Sidewalk
Sidewalk , ..􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁟.. 􀀬􀀮􀀬􀁾 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀁾 􀁈􀁡􀁡􀁾􀀮􀁡􀀻 •••••••• Greenwalk Innl•••••• U": Greenwalk ••• ltl .......... Greenwalk -On-Street Route -On-Street Route • """"''''''''''
...... ''''''' On-Street Route Off-Street Trail -Off-Street Trail ==== Off-Street Trail Sidewalk: Greenwalk: On-Street Routes: Off-Street Trails: Existing: Funded: Recommended: Problems
caused by having vast parking lots or obtrusive parking garages can be overcome through good design. Parking areas can be tucked behind buildings to maintain a cohesive unobstructed
pedestrian environment. Parking garages can be blended in with the surrounding buildings by incorporating ground floor retail into the design of the structure. Over time, excessive parking
at mixed-use transit centers may be eliminated as densities increase and more people use transit to access the site. Density Ar@und Rail Stati@ns High density around transit stations
promotes ridership and fosters economic development. To rely primarily on transit services, residents must be able to walk or bike to a reasonable number of destinations. When designing
residences for a high-density development, there are alternatives to the standard apartment complexes, such as townhouses, zero-lot line homes, assisted living housing, and mid-rise
apartments. Urban Design Urban design creates a unique sense of place and defines location by including the neighborhood around the station and incorporating interesting facades, wide
sidewalks, landscaping, public space, and buildings that front the sidewalk to create visual interests and meeting places for pedestrians. An important aspect of urban design at a transit
station is that it should be exclusively pedestrian oriented. Sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities should cater to pedestrian needs by being properly placed and designed to promote
comfortable movement from station to development, and from development to station. Automobile parking and bus interfaces at transit stations discourage walking and bicycling to stations.
Employment options are also varied including retail, office, and entertainment venues. A benchmark for creating this type of development may include minimum density measured in floor-to-area
ratios or units per acre. Another benchmark would be requiring the development to be vertically mixed to increase density, create diversity, and promote pedestrian travel. The pedestrian
bridge over the Mockingbird Rail Station provides a seamless connection from the station to an adjacent mixed-use development. The bridge and sidewalks in and around the development
were paid for by the developer. Other bicycle and pedestrian facilities at and around the station were paid for by DART and federal transportation funds. The West Village, a mixed-use
development in Uptown Dallas, provides high-density residential and commercial uses with pedestrian and trolley connections to a nearby light rail station. 10 _ ----------........-........
7
Vehicle Access and Parking Thousands of Metroplex residents drive to a rail station each day, creating a need for parking. Many more residents ride buses or other transit services to
a rail station, creating a need for quick and efficient transfers. Meeting these needs is key to keeping these customers. These needs must be balanced with transit-oriented development
opportunities that allow pedestrians to move directly from the station to an activity Bus Service Bus service in this region is provided by the two transportation authorities, DART and
The 1. DART provides service to the City of Dallas and 12 member communities while The T provides service to Fort Worth, and three member communities. The efficient integration of the
existing bus service with the rail system is important in increasing ridership and mobility while reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Both transportation authorities have recognized
this and have rerouted existing bus routes and initiated new routes to provide additional access to the rail stations. Express and trolley-bus circulator services were also set up to
provide rail access to and from downtown areas and major employment centers. By providing service to areas not directly located next to a rail station, local bus service offers people
the opportunity to leave their vehicles at home and make their journey completely by transit. Parking at Rail Stations Changing travel behavior can be a difficult task. To encourage
people to make the switch from the private automobile to rail, easy access to parking is important. Combining the ease of transit with the convenience of the automobile is a necessary
step toward reducing overall VMT. VMT is initially reduced with shorter vehicle trips. Instead of driving for the entire work trip, commuters may drive only a short distance to a local
rail station and ride rail to complete their journey to work. Over time, some members of this group may switch to walking, cycling, or taking a bus to the rail station instead of driving.
For commuters underserved by bus service or outside the transit area, parking at a rail station allows them to become part of the transit solution to our region's air quality problem.
For this group, parking needs to be clear and easily accessible. Parking as a Transitional Land Use Parking lots at rail stations also serve as a transitional land use. Certain land
uses complement rail transportation. Higher density, mixed-use developments provide housing, commercial, and employment services in a pedestrian designed developmentoriented towards the transit station. Constructing a parking lot to serve the rail station secures the land immediately around the station until the market is ripe for development. It
also prevents incompatible land uses from locating next to the station. The layout of the parking lot itself is also important for future transit-oriented development. With proper design
of the internal street system and placement of the parking areas, a pedestrian-friendly grid street pattern can be put in place. When the the time is right for redevelopment, the parking
lot will have been configured in a way that promotes walking through a street system that dictates block size and building location. Structured parking will also provide parking for
transit riders and patrons of the new development. The table below summarizes the 1995 land use characteristics within one-half mile of all 60 stations operational by 2008. The parking
lot across from the Cedars Light Rail Station, South Side on Lamar, and the new Dallas Police headquarters, secures land for future transit-oriented development in this redeveloping
neighborhood south of downtown Dallas. Light Rail (Operational by 2008) Commuter Rail 44.6% Population Related Existing Light Rail (Opened by January 2002) Efficient bus access brings
transfer passengers to and from rail stations, supports rail ridership, reduces bus traffic on the roadway system, and shortens transit travel times. 258 DART/TRE Regular Handicapped
Passenger Drop-off Stations Opened 1-------+-------+---------by July 2002 8,979 237 8 9
There's no better time to get onboard WINTER 2004 DART's popular destination 􀁤􀁥􀁡􀁾 program. we'll taKe you 􀁴􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁥 Simply offer a discount or special deal exclusively to DART ticket
or passholders to join more than 500 savvy businesses tapping today's transit-riding market. As a partner, your business will be featured in our destination deal$ guide to the best shopping,
dining and entertainment venues around. Get on 􀁴􀁲􀁍􀁾 􀁷􀁩􀁴􀁾 DART toaay! tor more information, call Tom Tully at 214.149.2104. motion Put your business on 􀁴􀁾􀁥 fast tracK to success!
A PUBLICATION OF DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT P.O. BOX 660163 DALLAS, TX 75266-0163 Address 5ervice Requested
This winter, DART rolls into its 20th year with a great track record and a fresh perspective on the future. To maintain our momentum, we recently streamlined bus and rail services, adjusting
schedules and eliminating or replacing routes to match rider demand. We also reduced administrative overhead as part of a strategy to make DART stronger, more efficient and more resilient.
With newspaper headlines heralding early signs of a national economic recovery, we're advancing our system expansion plans with cautious optimism. Clearly, there's no better time for
a large public works project that generates new jobs, increases spending in the local marketplace, enhances property values and promotes exciting new opportunities for mixed-use development.
The forthcoming light rail link between our Southeast and Northwest corridors will re-energize the North Texas economy by connecting our southern neighborhoods to our northern employment
centers. Along the way, it will create greater access to the busy Stemmons business corridor, Dallas Market Center, six internationally recognized medical facilities, and Dallas Love
Field Airport, plus popular entertainment destinations like Deep Ellum, Fair Park and American Airlines Center. Time and again, North Texans have proven their willingness to use public
transit. In fact, the public's response to our growing line of services is the envy of the transit industry. In a part of the country known for its love affair with the private automobile,
our rush-hour trains are full. And nearly 18 percent of Dallas area residents carpool to and from work, many on DART's 31-mile network of HOV lanes. That's more than any other city in
the state -or the country, for that matter! DART's on a roll in 2004, and one thing's for sure: It's a trip well worth taking. Huelon A. Harrison DART Chairman of the Board
􀁒􀁾􀁾􀁙􀁾􀁖􀁾􀁂􀁎􀁇 􀁛􀁊􀁾􀁾􀁅􀂧 DART's Poetry in Motion program, which places short poems on trains and buses, won an award during the Texas Unbound literary festival at the Undermain
Theater in Deep Ellum. The award was the festival's first to honor public support of poetry. Texas Unbound is sponsored by WordSpace, a Dallas-based organization dedicated to spreading
imaginative words in a variety of forms. Poetry in Motion was started by DART in 1998 as part of a national program coordinated by the Poetry Society of America. The goal is to feature
new poets and give transit riders a way to take a mental break from their day. The local program is cosponsored by Richland College. DART recently was honored with the 5haring 5uccess
Award by the owners of four minority business publications. Presented by MCompany, the award commends the transit agency's efforts toward creating a level playing field in contracting,
professional services and purchasing activities. DART also was praised for promoting teamwork within its ranks to attract and support more disadvantaged, minority and woman-owned business
enterprises (D/M/WBEs). DART has paid more than $266 million to D/M/WBEs in the past five years, almost 23% of its total vendor activity. MCompany publishes Minority BusinessNews DF\N,
MBN Minority Business News Texas, WE Women's Enterprise, Texas, and Minority BusinessNews USA. BUY A TICKET; AVOID A TICKET In 2004 DART will begin phasing in a program that places uniformed
fare inspectors on trains. The inspectors will be very visible, checking tickets and writing citations for those who have not paid the appropriate fare, but they also will serve as ambassadors,
answering questions about destinations and schedules. DART Police had sole ability to enforce fare evasion until late 2003 when a change in the state fare evasion law allowed for fare
inspectors. The statute also provides violators the option of resolving the citation by paying an administrative fee to DART without having to go through the judicial process. of of
the transit-oriented developments at both stations, led by Jack Wierzenski, DART's director of economic development. The Dallas visit was part of a multicity tour called "Privatization
and the U.S. Economy" sponsored by the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and Delphi International. A contingent of business people, economists, government
officials and journalists from 40 nations rode the DART rails recently to see how DART Rail is stimulating economic development. The tour included a ride on the Red Line from downtown
Dallas to Mockingbird Station and Galatyn Park Station. The visitors were treated to a walking tour Northern Texas Traction Company, Car 25 was retired in 1934 and joined a mate, Car
411, on private property at Eagle Mountain Lake where they were used for housing. Both were donated to the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the T) in 1995. Car 25 was restored to
its 1924 "Crimson Limited" condition by volunteers and employees of the T. R(())ILILING HliSmRY The history of public transit in North Texas is on handsome display at the Intermodal
Transit Center (ITC) Station in downtown Fort Worth. Car 25, a restored Interurban trolley car first operated in 1913 between Fort Worth and Dallas, greets passengers who arrive in Fort
Worth on the Trinity Railway Express and Amtrak. Operated by the There are two studies under way. The COG is studying rail for the entire North Texas region. Our 2030 Plan narrows down
to just the eastern part of the region, but we're looking beyond our service boundaries because there will be communities out there that want to be involved in transit. Our 2030 Plan
focuses on the transportation corridors, the modes of transportation, the financial requirements and how you implement projects. We've been working on the plan for almost two years and
should have a preliminary report by March of 2004. The challenge for a regional effort is to determine how to finance and govern EGIONAL Gary Thomas DARTPresideItt and Executive Director
Denton County Regional Transportation Authority received approval in September to develop a system. And we are active in all the initiatives of the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition
and the North Central Texas Council of Governments (COG). As the region continues to talk and plan, we offer the technical expertise of not just how to run a system but how to look at
data from the COG and determine what is needed, what mode of transportation works best, and then how to plan, design and build it. Q DART is working on a 2030 Plan for its service area.
What is the goal and status of that plan, and how does it relate to the regional discussions? "Our 13 member cities recognized the needfor regional transportation 20years ago... the
system needs to grow and include the entire region.)) Let's first acknowledge that our 13 member cities recognized the need for regional transportation 20 years ago. It's not something
that just came up in the last few months. Having said that we agree that the system needs to grow and include the entire region. The T does their part on the western side of the region.
The Many issues impacting DART's services and expansion plans came to the forefront during its 20th anniversary year in 2003. DART President and Executive Director Gary Thomas recently
shared his thoughts about the agency's accomplishments, the regional mobility challenges that lie ahead, and the ways DART is changing the way we get there. Q DART has a 20-year track
record of successfully bringing public transportation to the region. What are the top priorities as the agency moves forward? We must keep our commitment to our member cities to provide
excellent transportation services and to continue the build-out of our system as planned. We're currently seeking $700 million from the pending federal transportation funding bill to
continue our expansion of the light rail system in the Northwest and Southeast corridors. This expansion is vital to our mission to provide regional transportation services that connect
people with jobs, stimulate economic development, relieve traffic congestion and help clear the air over our cities. Q As DART moves ahead with the build-out of its system, what role
will the agency play in the wider regional planning efforts that have made headlines in recent months? FUNDING
Harmony from Chaos The day is coming when commuters will be directed safely and efficiently to their destinations by intelligent transportation systems. Many of the pieces are already
in place in North Texas with DART leading the way. Short Trips DART celebrates 20 years and elects board officers, new buses are on the way, commuters enjoy unique family ties, historic
trolley parks in Fort Worth, world travelers visit rail stations, fare inspectors are coming, and more. Explore the Heart of Garland Eclectic shopping, great dining, lively entertainment
-it's all to be found in downtown Garland at the north end of DART's Blue rail line. Dallas Carpools Lead Nation Van pools and carpools are great for commuters whose routes or work schedules
make riding public transit difficult. DART matches riders and provides vans, employers give support and get tax breaks, and everyone wins with fewer cars on the roads. Travel Patterns
Prompt System Changes Amid shifting commuter patterns and a slow economy, DART debuted a major system overhaul in October. The changes improve system efficiency and help position the
agency for expansion as the economy rebounds. Businesses and Employees Save Big For as little as $30 a year -less than a dime a day per employee -DART Annual Passes help employees commute
with ease, give businesses tax breaks and deliver valuable services and discounts. Funding & Regional Needs Top Agenda DART President/Executive Director Gary Thomas talks about transit
funding, regional mobility and the agency's leadership in North Texas, the 2030 System Plan, recent service changes, the economy and the future of the agency. The center anchors downtown
Garland's interesting mix ofshops, restaurants and entertainment. The Granville Arts Center lights up the nigfJt and is one ofthe fint things visitors see when they ride DART Rail to
Downtown Garland Station. HEART downtown Garland. And with his weekend concerts, he's doing his part to give others a reason to follow. No one is more enthusiastic about the synergy
between DART Rail and downtown Garland than Patty Granville, whose longtime dedication to the arts led to the naming of the Granville Arts Center. "We think it's a wonderful partnership,"
she says. "We're getting up to 170,000 people annually for events, where we used to get about 100,000." Stan Luckie, chairman-elect of the Garland Summer Musicals and a member of the
city's Central Area Plan Implementation Committee, says the committee is exploring ways to enhance downtown Garland's appeal, from transit-oriented development to way-finding signs and
brochures that guide visitors from the rail station to downtown shops. "The City of Garland is extremely pleased with our two DART Rail stations," he says. "We see the traffic counts
continuing to grow." THE Beauty Box or harmonize your decor at Baker's Furniture. Hungry? The Corner Pocket Sandwich Shoppe is a great noontime stop, while Eduardo Ristorante Italiano
serves fine cuisine both at lunch and dinner. Maletta's Coffee Roastery will perk you up with coffee drinks, while the Main Street Coffee Haus adds blues and jazz concerts to its mix
of beverages and desserts. Many downtown Garland merchants offer DART destination 􀁤􀁥􀁡􀁾 -discounts on purchases when you show a DART pass or ticket. And while DART Rail is just a
year old in Garland, business owners agree it's having a positive impact on the city. "Visitor traffic is going to pick up," says. Garfield Fender, Coffee Haus owner. Fender is a true
believer in life along the rails: He lives in a loft at Mockingbird Station and rides the Blue Line daily to A sparkling crystal vase from Ireland, a fine gallery print from France,
rich coffee beans from Sumatra and a keepsake stagebill from a Broadway musical. The spoils from a weekend in the Big Apple? No, just a day of shopping and entertainment in downtown
Garland. Far from major freeways, Garland's downtown plaza is an easy stroll from DART Rail's Blue Line. Get off at Downtown Garland Station and immediately discover entertainment choices
at the Granville Arts Center. The home of Garland's Symphony Orchestra, Summer Musicals and Civic Theatre offers everything from big band music and Beethoven symphonies to Neil Simon
comedies. Before and after a show, there's plenty to do downtown. Browse for collectibles at The Stitchery & Antiques or the Garland Coin Shop. Get in style at Marcia's EXPLORE
Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition ITS Partners Texas Department of Transportation (Dallas and Fort Worth Districts) North Texas Tollway Authority Dallas Area Rapid Transit Fort Worth
Transportation Authority Seven North Texas organizations signed a memorandum of understanding in 1998 to develop comprehensive intelligent transportation systems: Dallas/Fort Worth International
Airport North Central Texas Council of Governments CHAOS Freeway sigllS that warn oftraffic slowdowllS are jllSt one ofthe ITS technologies being deployed in North Texas by regionalorganizatiollS
ineluding DART. FRO M Ti'affic is monitored andproblem reports are issuedji-om DART's ITS control center in North Dallas. A larger center is being developed to handle the region's growing
ITS network. for HOV lane enforcement, and has run pilots of "personalized public transit" -diverting buses from fixed routes using special routing software, GPS and AVL to pick up off-route
passengers. These federally funded tests help assess the viability of ITS concepts in North Texas and elsewhere. Meanwhile, DART has assessed the benefits and costs of HOV lane management,
multimodal traveler information, smart card fare collection and smart onboard systems -technologies that may be deployed in the near future. As well, transit signal priority for light
rail trains is being studied to manage increased traffic in downtown Dallas when the Northwest and Southeast rail extensions open. DART has operated an ITS control center since 1996.
The agency is partnering with the Texas Department of Transportation to build a larger center, which will coordinate the region's interconnected ITS network as elements come on line.
"Travelers don't know when they are moving from one city into another, and they don't care. It's seamless to them," says Olyai. "For ITS to perform well, it has to be seamless too. It
has to be interoperable." HARMONY "Accident, Walnut Hill. Exit Forest, ride DART to CBD." Motorists read that message on Central Expressway, heed the advice, and get to to their destination
in the central business district on time, all thanks to ITS. ITS -intelligent transportation systems -is the name given to information technologies used alone or in concert to move traffic
faster, more safely and more efficiently. DART is leading the way in bringing the benefits of ITS to North Texas. Since 1995, ITS has been an element of the agency's Transit System Plan
for the region, an acknowledgement that a truly effective multimodal system must interconnect the modes: trains, buses and HOV lanes. In 1998, seven regional transportation organizations
committed to work together toward a comprehensive ITS network. "We realized we can have our own ITS plan, but it needs to be interoperable with other agency plans. The architecture has
to be seamless," says Koorosh Olyai, DART's assistant vice president for mobility programs development. Harnessing technology DART uses ITS daily in its operations. Global positioning
satellites (GPS) and automated vehicle locators (AVL) tell dispatchers dispatchers where vehicles are at all times and provide audible street and bus stop information to passengers.
The agency also is a national leader in developing new technologies. DART has tested automated image processing c system. improved efficiency with new light rail and commuter rail ji-equellcies,
and route and schedule changes on the bus DARThas announced numerous local layoffs, the number of work commuters decreased contributing to a 13% decline in DART bus ridership. The slow
economy also reduced the funding source for about 84% of DART's operations -the onecent sales tax collected in 13 member cities. Improving system efficiency Service changes have trimmed
$10 million from operating expenses, with nonoperating cost reductions reaping $18 million in savings. Minimal rider impact was a priority, and the October change impacted less than
2% of DART bus ridership, or roughly 2,900 passenger trips per day. "We looked at how these changes affect the entire system, because most people use multiple routes," says Tim Newby,
assistance vice president, service planning and development. PATTERNS The doubling of the DART Rail network in 2002 coincided with the national economic slowdown. As companies Amid shifting
commuter patterns and a slow economy, DART debuted a major system overhaul in October. The changes improve system efficiency and help position the agency for expansion as the economy
rebounds. To reflect ridership demand, 43 bus routes were modified sUbstantially -rescheduled, rerouted, combined or eliminated -and minor schedule adjustments were made to most of the
remaining 92 routes. In North Dallas, East Plano and Farmers Branch, DART On-Call van service replaced scheduled bus service. DART Rail schedules also were modified, as were those for
the Trinity Railway Express commuter service. TRAVEL L
1q; Sales Tax 84% Advertising & Other Operating 5% Passenger Fares 11% We will come out of this time a much stronger agency and more dedicated to what we're doing. Down times are opportunities
for strong organizations like DART to become even stronger. Q DART is a relatively new agency. Does that give it advantages and opportunities in this economy that older agencies do not
have? Sure. We have the ability to start with a clean slate. We can look at systems throughout the country, what they've done right and done wrong, and implement the best of the best.
One of the shining examples is our transit-oriented development around the stations, which not only enhances our ridership but also enhances the tax base for that particular area. Some
of the best examples in the U.S. of transitoriented developments are right here in our system. Q What will be the legacy of the adjustments DART has made and will continue to make during
this economic time? TOP AGENDA priorities and our number one priority is to maintain this great system that we've worked hard to build. There are agencies a little bit older than us
that didn't allocate funds to maintain their system. Two years ago we did a replacement and maintenance study to determine what we would need to budget and do over the next several years
to keep our system looking and operating like we want it to. Priority number two was to maintain our commitment to our member cities. We're working hard to get rail service expanded
to the Southeast corridor, to the Northwest part of Dallas, and to Farmers Branch, Carrollton and Irving. And the third priority was to provide an efficient transportation system. Given
those priorities, we looked internally at our nonoperating and administrative functions and restructured many of those. We looked at the operating side and changed our service effective
October 6. We stretched some of the headways on the light rail system, restructured our commuter rail schedule, and reduced and modified bus routes that weren't performing well. Operating
Revenue Sources People are not looking at DART by accident. We are the leader in the region, the state and the Southwest when it comes to transportation. That's a tribute to the people
who work here, our constituents, our member cities and our riders. And regardless of what happens regionally, our commitment to our member cities takes precedence over everything else
we do. Q DART celebrated its 20th anniversary this year and has been successful through good times and bad. Most recently, a slow economy forced the agency to take strategic measures.
What were the goals and priorities behind these actions? This process started two and a half years ago as sales taxes started to decline. In the '90s, sales taxes grew between 5% and
6% every year, and we were able to add services and programs. But as the economy began to slow down in 2000-2001, we had to adjust because the bulk of our revenue, 84%, comes from sales
taxes. Last year we made the hard decision to delete or delay many capital projects, including delaying the light rail buildout on the Northwest and Southeast corridors by two to three
years. We hoped sales taxes would rebound as the economists projected, but that didn't happen. In the first quarter of fiscal year 2003, sales taxes dipped 8.8% below the same quarter
in the previous year. It was obvious we had to make more changes to make sure our 20-year plan was financially sound. We looked very hard at how we could restructure our organization
and become more effective and efficient and reduce our costs. We looked at EEDS it. We're willing to participate and help on the technical side, and our 2030 Plan is looking at what
a transportation system for the region may look like. At some point we'll have some form of governance for the region, or there will need to be significant coordination between independent
agencies. We've done that with The T and proved it can work. Don't jump on Bus Route 234 and expect to fade into your seat. The regulars on the express route from Plano to Irving have
shattered the stereotype of the anonymous daily commuter and turned their ride into a family affair. They're led by Germaine Brown, who makes sure newcomers -including new operators
-feel welcome and then encourages them to join in the fun, which ranges from on-board singalongs and trivia games to family picnics in the park. With Germaine as the leader, the Route
234 family has dubbed itself the "Germaniacs." Branch, Garland, Glenn Heights, Irving and Rowlett. Manufactured by North American Bus Industries Inc. (NABI), the buses will join DART's
fleet of NOVA buses, giving the agency a modern fleet of almost 760 buses. The NABI buses look much like the NOVA buses used in local service, but they have reclining seats and individual
reading lights. Along with onboard announcement systems that tell and show passengers what stop is coming up, the buses have larger, higher visibility destination signage not currently
used in DART's suburban buses. The new vehicles are fueled by ultra-low-sulfur diesel, which exceeds current clean-air standards and new state standards scheduled for implementation
in 2005, and which makes them three times cleaner than the buses they replace. Each bus costs $300,000, with a federal grant funding 83% of the cost. TWENTY CANDLES DART celebrated its
20th anniversary in August with a dinner and recognition of the many people who have provided leadership and support to the agency over the years. On hand for the celebration were DART's
former board chairmen, mayors of member cities, county officials, state and national elected leaders, and area chamber of commerce officials. All received com memorative proclamations
and a hearty "thank you" for their service to the agency. years II on aro BOARD OFFiCERS ELECTED DART kicked off the new fiscal year in October with a new slate of board officers who
will serve one-year terms. Huelon Harrison, who represents Dallas, is the new chairman. Mark Enoch, representing Farmers Branch, Garland and Rowlett, is vice chairman. Linda Koop, from
Dallas, is secretary, and Angie Chen Button, representing Garland, is assistant secretary. clockwisefrom upper left: Huelon Harrison, chairman; Mark Enoch, vice chairman; Linda Koop,
secretary; Angie Chen Button, assistant secretaryIt's out with the old and in with the new as DART took delivery in October of the first one of 80 new buses. Scheduled for delivery in
Spring 2004, the new buses will replace aging over-the-road coaches that have been in service since 1991 on express routes in Carrollton, Farmers DART's Gary Thomas (jar left) and Robert
Pope (jar right) presentproclamations to (ji'om left) US. Rep. Martin Frost, US. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, and Lathan Watts representing Us. Sen. John Cornyn. o Bus stop EI Bus Routes
Serving This Stop
BUSINESSES AND EMPLOYEES SAVE BIG TXU Corporation has 1,400 Platinum Annual Pass holders in its downtown Dallas headquarters, and numerous Silver Annual Pass holders in other locations.
Paul Thompson TXU's director ofhuman resources operations Blanca Gonzalez ofGreyhound is a bigfim ofthe Annual Pass program, both as a benefits administrator and a daily rider. off the
road and ride DART's zeroemission light rail system and lowemission buses. "TXU cares about the air we share, and the Annual Pass program contributes to clean air," says Thompson. "It's
good in so many ways." ({Our employees get excellent value from the DARTpass program because they get the benefit immediately -they use it at least twice a day.)) Tax laws allow employers
to subsidize transit or vanpool fares up to $100 per employee per month. Employees receive the pass benefits tax-free, while employers get a full tax deduction and are not assessed payroll
taxes or other costs on the amount provided. If that's not incentive enough, everyone with an Annual Pass can take a vehicle "We absolutely love it," says Blanca Gonzalez, senior manager
for human resources. "This is our fifth year in DART's pass program, and the Annual Pass is a breeze to administer compared to the monthly passes we had 10 years ago. With employees
coming to get passes once a year rather than every month, the time savings is a big advantage, especially for those of us who administer other HR programs." DART's Annual Pass is a great
recruiting tool, she adds. "Commuting on DART attracts applicants that otherwise would not want to drive downtown." As one who rides DART daily, Gonzalez is doubly pleased. "When I first
started riding, I was surprised at how much gas I saved. And I've never had so much 'me' time before. It gives me 45 minutes of personal time to read, chat with others, or do a little
more work so I don't have to stay late. I can even just close my eyes after a long hard day." Tax benefits ... and fresh air While creating a happy, productive workforce is a strong
sellingpoint for Annual Passes, businesses should not overlook the tax benefits. Businesses getting onboard Approximately 100 companies issue Platinum and Gold Annual Passes to 25,000 employees.
Another 32 companies issue Bronze and Silver Annual Passes to 1,050 employees. TXU Corporation got onboard with DART's employee pass programs four years ago, beginning with the Monthly
Pass, and later the E-Pass. Today, the company has 1,400 Platinum Annual Pass holders in its downtown Dallas office, and additional Silver Annual Pass holders in other locations. "We
have a number of satisfied DART riders, and that's on buses as well as on trains," says Paul Thompson, TXU's director of human resources operations. "Our employees get excellent value
from the DART pass program because they get the benefit immediately -they use it at least twice a day. It's a great benefit for our downtown commuters, and at the same time it allows
us to help with traffic congestion and the environment." Greyhound Lines knows how to move people efficiently, so it's no surprise the company has issued Platinum Annual Passes to 394
employees in its downtown Dallas corporate office. For as little as $30 a year -less than a dime a day per employee -DART Annual Passes help employees commute with ease, give businesses
tax breaks and deliver valuable services and discounts. Annual Passes are issued in four colors based on company location and employee participation. All allow unlimited transportation
on DART trains and buses, and three are valid on the Trinity Railway Express (TRE) and the Fort Worth T bus system. The passes are: .. Platinum -downtown Dallas businesses with 100%
employee participation .. Gold -businesses outside downtown Dallas with 100% employee participation .. Silver -businesses throughout the DART Service Area with partial employee participation
III Bronze -businesses throughout the DART Service Area with partial employee participation (valid on TRE only to West Irving Station) All Annual Passes provide extra benefits. Emergency
Ride Home allows pass holders two free cab rides each quarter for personal transportation needs. The Executive Ride Program provides significant discounts from Enterprise Rent-A-Car.
There are special offers from Cingular Wireless, Bluedini Satellite Entertainment, Countrywide Home Loans, Palm Beach Tan, Equity Residential and Bally Total Fitness. And of course,
all pass holders get DART Destination 􀁄􀁥􀁡􀁾 -discounts at shops, restaurants and services near DART Rail stations. These extras come easily because Annual Passes have a magnetic strip
for quick validation by DART operators, cab drivers and vendors.
Shuttlesfrom Cityplace Station to the State Fair (above) and new On-Call vans (below) in sections of North Dallas, East Plano and Fanners Branch are just two ofthe many ways that DARTis
providing customer-driven services. change for small adjustments. Field supervisors and vehicle operators are key in this effort. "Operators are the most important eyes and ears of DART,"
says Barber. ways to bring them back. However, taking advantage of the economy of the light rail system, DART replaced the State Fair Flyers with shuttles from Cityplace Station. Implementation
and Education Change is never easy, and DART's system modifications required passengers and vehicle operators alike to learn how the new system works. Service change brochures were placed
on all vehicles and on DART.org three weeks before the change date, and DART staff volunteers were dispatched to key locations during the first week of the new routes and schedules to
answer rider questions. "In most cases, if a route has been eliminated, there is an alternative," says Newby. For example, underperforming fixed routes in sections of North Dallas, East
Plano and Farmers Branch were replaced with DART On-Call, a curb-tocurb van service between residences, specific businesses and DART Rail stations. Agency representatives also are working
with property managers and large businesses to implement employer shuttles to rail stations. DART provides the vehicle, maintenance and insurance, and the employer operates the shuttle.
"It's a way for us to partner with the private sector and stretch our available dollars," says Newby. Typically a major service change is followed in three months by a minor Reviewing
the initial results, the board asked management to find the perfect balance between significant cost savings and minimal service loss. "They said, 'We want to do this with the smallest
customer impact possible,'" says Newby. Performance standards pave the way Bus system efficiency is measured with a route performance index (RPI), a tabulation of passengers per trip,
passengers per mile and tax subsidy per passenger. The RPI for each route is compared with the RPI for similar routes, and a route performing at 60% or less of the average RPI is ripe
for modification. The route evaluation process, which involved 25 service planners, benefited from the feedback of operators, supervisors and others with unique perspectives on how route
changes affect riders. DART also conducted 19 community meetings and met with advisory groups. Concurrent with the planning process, a six-month implementation schedule made sure the
transition was smooth. "It's an agency-wide process that involves service planning, scheduling, marketing, maintenance, transportation -everyone who touches customers in some way," says
Clarence Barber, project manager. Rail and Flyer changes DART has also adjusted its rail service, with midday frequency on the Blue and Red lines reduced from every 15 to every 20 minutes.
Likewise, the Trinity Railway Express has adjusted its timetables, eliminating some underperforming afternoon and late night runs between Dallas and Fort Worth. Flyer buses to Dallas
Cowboys games and the State Fair of Texas were suspended this year for cost-efficiency reasons, and the agency is exploring "We used modeling to study the impact on ridership, but we
also looked at the impact on specific locations -schools, colleges, hospitals, major employment centers." HANGE ing out a car and trying a carpool. "I was hesitant at first due to the
loss-of-freedom factor, but it's been great and it's a lot of fun," he says. For groups just forming, van pool coordinators offer tips. "We recommend that they get a lot of the personal
things out in the open up front, such as smoking, radio stations and making stops," says Tony Mendoza, who administers the vanpool program. After seven years as a captain, Williams has
a tried-and-true formula for success. His group leaves Kaufman precisely at 6:15 a.m. and departs Dallas promptly at 4:40 p.m. They don't stop for personal errands, and the radio broadcasts
traffic news only. No exceptions are made for anyone, including the captain. While rules are important, coordinators and vanpoolers agree the most important factor is chemistry. "As
long as you have the right mix of people, it's a wonderful situation," says Williams. Six riders in his vanpool have been with him since day one. Williams' dedication led his group to
be named 2003 Vanpool of the Year by DART, the North Texas Clean Air Coalition and the Greater Dallas Chamber. The vanpool is one of seven organized by EPA employees. "It's a wonderful
program," says Williams. "With our group we take five to six cars off the road every day. If more people would try it, they'd be sold on it." Carpoolers share the ride too DART also
helps organize carpools. People interested can call 214.747.RIDE and they'll be matched with other potential carpoolers who live and work near them and have similar work schedules. After
that, it is up to the people to contact each other, get acquainted and work out a car plan. "One of the hardest things for people to do is to make that first call," says Mendoza, "but
they should remember that they are calling someone who is not really a stranger. They are calling someone who has said they want to carpool and share the ride." NATION Ken Williams and
his vanpool have been commuting togetherfrom Kaufman since 1996. The group was 2003 Vanpool ofthe Year. per month plus fuel, with a contractor handling van maintenance and insurance.
Employers get tax deductions for subsidizing van pools up to $100 per month per employee. For Williams and his van mates, whose various employeers provide the subsidy, that means they
commute for free, compared to $500 each per month if they drove alone. Vanpooling with a pro Williams, a geologist in the Region 6 office of the Environmental Protection Agency, became
a van pooler after wearroutes or their work schedules make riding public transit difficult. Vanpools start when DART matches people with similar starting points, destinations and travel
times. The agency agency provides an 8-, 12-or 15-passenger van, and a "captain" is designated to drive and be responsible for the van. The cost to the vanpool is $488.50 LEADS well
the cost and stress of commuting. But the grind improved dramatically in 1996 when he started a vanpool. Today, he and his fellow riders are among the almost 18% of local residents who
ride together. Williams' vanpool is one of 82 vanpools organized by DART and supported by employers that transport some 1,000 people daily. They vanpool because their No city carpools
or vanpools more than Dallas, and few people know more about the benefits than Ken Williams. Driving from Dallas to Kaufman since 1987, Williams knows DALLAS Dallas 17.8% Phoenix. 17.4%
Detroit 17.1% Houston 15.9% EIPaso 15.8% Memphis 15.7% Baltimore 15.2% San Antonio 15.2% Los Angeles 14.7% Chicago 14.5% Dallas commuters share the ride more than their counterparts
in any other major U.S. city, according to Commuting in America /I by Alan Pisarski. The carpool "Top Ten" for percentage percentage of residents riding together are: Dallas Leads in
Carpooling
North Central Texas Council of Governments P. O. Box 5888 Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the opinions,
findings, and conclusions presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, or
the Texas Department of Transportation. This document was prepared in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, and Federal Transit Administration. NCTCOG's structure is relatively simple; each member government appoints a voting representative from the governing body. These voting
representatives make up the General Assembly which annually elects a 15-member Executive Board. The Executive Board is supported by policy development, technical advisory, and study
committees, as well as a professional staff of 208. population of the region is over 5.5 million, which is larger than 30 states. It serves a 16-county metropolitan region centered around
the two urban centers of Dallas and Fort Worth. Currently the Council has 231 members, including 16 counties, 164 cities, 24 independent school districts, and 27 special districts. The
area of the region is approximately 12,800 square miles, which is larger than nine states, and the The l\Jorth Central Texas Council of Governments is a voluntary association of cities,
counties, school districts, and special districts which was established in January 1966 to assist local governments in planning for common needs, cooperating for mutual benefit, and
coordinating for sound regional development. What is NCTCOG?
NCTCOG Executive Board 2003-2004 DFW International Airport Executive Board 2003-2004 DART -Board of Directors 2003-2004 The T -Executive Board 2003-2004 Texas Department of Transportation
Introduction The Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW Airport) has been a vital part of the region since its opening in 1974. It is the fourth largest airport in the country,
serving approximately 60 million passengers per year, including local residents and visitors from other cities. In North Central Texas, it is one of the primary sources of employment
and is a major stimulus to the local economy. Historically, access to DFW Airport has been primarily by automobile, including private autos, taxis, and rental cars. Access via public
transportation modes (bus and rail) has been very limited. Commuter rail service between Dallas and Fort Worth via the Trinity Railway Express (TRE) attracts a small percentage of air
passengers and employees to access DFW Airport via the connecting bus service between the CentrePort TRE station and the terminals, as well as other airport employment centers. Planning
for future regional transportation systems has included an expansion of rail service options near DFW Airport for the year 2025, such as shown in Exhibit I. In addition to the TRE on
the south side of DFW Airport, regional light rail passenger service from Dallas and commuter rail service on the existing Cotton Belt rail corridor would serve areas on the north side
of DFW Airport. These plans and other issues such as airport and regional growth projections, the desire for expanded mode choices for passengers and employees, and the potential for
reduced traffic congestion and air 2 quality impacts generated the desire to explore the prospects for enhanced passenger rail service to DFW Airport. An illustration of NCTCOG projected
growth in the regional population densities between 1999 and 2025 is shown in Exhibit II. Study Process Discussions among the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), DFW
Airport, and the local transit agencies [Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) and Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the T)] led to the development of this Rail Planning and Implementation
Study to define and evaluate viable rail access alternatives, starting in early 2001. A Project Steering Committee (PSC) was formed with the chief executives of each of the above agencies,
as well as the Dallas and Fort Worth offices of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). A consultant team led by DM"IM Aviation, Inc. was selected in April 2001 to conduct the
study under the direction of the PSC, and with the demand forecast analyses conducted by NCTCOG. President Jack Hatchell Commissioner, Collin County Vice President Bob Phelps Mayor,
City of Farmers Branch Secretary-Treasurer Wayne Gent County Judge, Kaufman County Past President James O'Neal Mayor Pro Tem, Lancaster Chair Max W. Wells Vice Chair Santiago Salinas
secretary Pamela Dunlop Gates Chair Huelon Andrew Harrison City of Dallas Vice Chair Mark C. Enoch Glast, Phillips & Murray, P.C. Chair Gyna Bivens-Mathis Vice Chair (Interim) Paul N.
Geisel Maribel Chavez, P.E. Fort Worth District Contributing Consultants DMJM Aviation, Inc. Turner Collie & Braden Inc. Chiang, Patel & Yerby, Inc. Director Tom Vandergriff County JUdge,
Tarrant County Director Euline Brock Mayor, City of Denton Director Paula Baucum Councilmember, City of Midlothian Director John Heiman, Jr. Councilmember, City of Mesquite Laura Miller
Mayor, City of Dallas Mike Moncrief Mayor, City of Fort Worth Pedro Aguirre Secretary Linda Koop Assistant Secretary Angie Chen Button Terri A.G. Adkisson Randall Chrisman Secretary
(Interim) Eduardo (Ed) Canas William Fey William L. Hale, P.E. Dallas District AECOM Trans. Consulting Group Manuel Padron & Assoc., Inc. Lea+Elliott, Inc. Director Oscar Trevino Mayor,
City of North Richland Hills Director Wendy Davis Councilmember, City of Fort Worth Director Chad Adams County Judge, Ellis County Director Mike Cantrell Commissioner, Dallas County
Jerry Haynes Ashok Kumar (AX) Mago Robert L. McAfee Richard Medrano Joyce Foreman Beatrice Martinez LaFayette "Faye" Moses-Wilkins Raymond Noah Glen Forbes Gary Havener Cathy Hirt S.R.
Beard & Associates Arredondo, Zepeda & Brunz, Inc. APM & Associates, Inc. 11 General Counsel Jerry Gilmore Attorney at Law, City of Dallas Executive Director R. Michael Eastland Jeff
Wentworth Glenn Porterfield Robert W. Pope Norma Stanton William M. Velasco, II Robert Jameson Jeff King DMJM+Harris, Inc. Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. Dunbar Transportation Consulting
EXHIBIT VII Conceptual View of the Intermodal Station Conclusion EXHIBIT I 2025 Rail Corridors Union Pacific \ Mobility 2025 Update Rail System Legend 􀁾 Commuter Rail llIllII!I Light
Rail .. North Crosstown Corridor Study e Possible Eastern Terminus Staged Rail * 􀁾􀀭 .... Special Events ------Intercity Rail Corridor -Freeways/Parkways ------Existing Rail Corridors
A conceptual view of the intermodal station is shown in Exhibit VII. Its location will be on the west side of the DFW Airport spine road (International Parkway) between Terminal D and
(future) Terminal F. Commuter Rail, LRT, and the APM platforms will be constructed at varying (vertical) levels as appropriate. Connections to passenger check-in, a passenger security
checkpoint, and a pedestrian bridge providing access with both a central bus station and the east side terminals, and a potential heliport will also be included, as appropriate. The
DFW Airport related portion of the selected alternative will cost approximately $220 million for the full 2025 configuration in the 10 year 2025, with annual operating and maintenance
costs of approximately $20 million. A wide range of potential local, state, and federal funding sources were identified in the study. These will be more fully developed in conjunction
with future environmental, design, and construction activities. In summary, high quality rail service to and from the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport can be achieved within the next ten years
with expansions occurring by 2025. Such service offers a reliable airport access alternative for travelers going to and from the DFW Airport daily and on a less frequent basis. It also
contributes towards the reduction of regional roadway traffic, while helping meet regional air quality objectives. Study Goal The PSC established the goal of the stUdy as follows: "To
provide a seamless, customer sensitive, affordable, clearly achievable rail interface between the regional rail system and the DFW International Airport Central Terminal Area. This service
would provide airport rail access to as many customer markets as feasible. These include airport passengers and employees in both eastern and western portions of the region. The product
is a set of recommendations and an action plan for immediate implementation." 3 The year 2025, consistent with the locally adopted metropolitan transportation plan, was established as
the planning horizon for the study to make comparative evaluations among alternatives. In addition to the horizon year, consideration was given to other phases: immediate, 2010, and
ultimate (or beyond year 2025).
1999 Phasing and lead Agency Responsibilities PopulalionDcosity (persons I sq. mile) o 100 2025 POpulilllon Density (pcrsons/sq mile) o 100 Commuter Rail service via the Cotton Belt
would provide direct airport service "from Fort Worth, cities in northern Tarrant County and from the cities on the north side of Dallas. Since the Cotton Belt service and the extension
of LRT to DFW Airport are not expected until the 2009 to 2015 timeframe, the only immediate action recommended is the enhancement of the bus service for TRE connections to the terminals
and other employee work locations. Also during the 2009 to 2015 timeframe, the 13th station of the APM would be completed, serving Commuter Rail from Fort Worth and LRT from Dallas.
Commuter Rail service to the east of DFW Airport on the Cotton Belt would be added later, within the 2015 to 2025 timeframe, depending upon future developments. At that time, direct
regional Commuter Rail service between Fort Worth and the north side of Dallas could also be added. A summary of the Phasing and Lead Agency Responsibilities is provided below in Exhibit
VI. EXHIBIT II 1995 and 2025 Regional Population Growth Study Objectives • The objectives of the study, also defined by the PSC, were as follows: • • Strive for the most seamless (fewest
mode transfers) rail solution as possible; • Provide direct rail access to Central Terminal • Area (CTA) and Automated People Mover (APM) system with as few transfers • as possible;
• Provide rail service for potential 2012 Olympic sites and transportation • distribution nodes from DFW Airport; • Provide equitable rail service from DFW Airport to both the Dallas
and Fort Worth Central Business Districts with a total trip • time competitive with parallel auto travel time; • Develop transit options that are compatible with existing and planned
regional rail projects; • Identify options that are capable of being strategically staged for implementation; Source: North Central Texas Council of Governments Provide rail options
that can be developed using a variety of funding sources; Ensure the solution is realistically achievable and that a step-by-step action plan is included in the recommendation; Strive
for a solution that enhances the attainment of regional air quality goals; Identify solutions independent of transit authority or other jurisdictional boundaries; Provide service options
for all potential markets -employee, business traveler, vacation traveler, entertainment traveler, and "out-of-town" visitor such as convention visitors; and Identify a solution that
is environmentally sensitive and physically suitable to the areas surrounding its operations. EXHIBITVI Phasing and Lead Agency Responsibilities 􀁉􀁲􀁶􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁬􀁂􀁾􀁗Gorridor LRT Line
_ LRT from Dallas Northwest Corridor to 13th station of APM Lead agency: DART Potential timeframe for start of service: 2009-2015 Final alignment to be selected during PE/EIS (expanded
to cover 13th station destination) Gotton Belt West CR Corridor CR (freight rail compatible passenger rail service) from Fort Worth to 13th station of APM Lead agency: the T and NCTCOG
Potential timeframe for start of service: 2009-2015 Corridor and technology characteristics to be developed during near term major investment study 􀀧􀁍􀁾􀁯􀁴􀁴􀁥􀁭 -BelIr 8asrmslfGorridbr
􀀭􀁾 -$ ---, --': 􀁾 " s 0= _ 􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀢 %, "" " 􀁾 I *' CR from the north Dallas area to 13th station of APM and to Fort Worth Lead agency: DART Potential timeframe for start of service:
Undefined Corridor and technology characteristics: Undefined --TRE GR CorlliCioll (East anCi West) -Bus service to the terminals from CentrePort Station Lead agency: DFW Airport Potential
timeframe: Currently operating Preservation of right of way for future rail options to connect to APM 􀁂􀁾􀁗 Aillpollt AFi!1\1I 1aUI Station -Lead agency: DFW Airport Potential timeframe
for start of service: 2009-2015 Support CR from the north and south, as well as LRT from the east 4 9
Outreach Efforts Alternatives Evaluated , mate Meeting TYRe Location SulJject Throughout the study, efforts were made to involve the community, including the related agencies, local
governments, state and federal agencies, and the general public. Several meetings were held to present information from the study team at various stages of the study and EXHIBIT V Summary
of Project Presentations to solicit feedback from the community. These meetings are summarized in Exhibit V. All pUblic meetings were conducted by NCTCOG. Project materials were made
available to the various agencies and the public through the I\lCTCOG website. Based on the PSC goal and objectives, over 90 potential conceptual airport access alternatives were considered,
including combinations of bus, light rail transit (LRT), commuter rail (CR), and bus rapid transit (BRT) alignments and services, from the north, south, east, and west. Throughout the
study, the complete range of technologies was considered, including the above, plus monorails and other types of APMs. In addition, the term "commuter rail" is used generically in the
study to represent all 'freight rail compatible technologies. To simplify the range of conceptual alternatives, four families of alternatives were suggested by the PSC for presentation
during the public meetings. These included the following, as shown in Exhibit III: Family 1) Shuttles (with transfers at the regional rail corridors); Family 2) Airport Direct (rail
direct to the CTA, but with transfers for regional riders); Family 3) Airport Direct with partial regional connections; and Family 4) Airport Direct with direct regional service through
DFW Airport. Family #1 Shuttles (Bus or Rail) Family #3 Airport Direct IPartial Regional Airport =Direct Regional = Direct Family #4 Airport Direct I Regional Direct Family #2 Airport
Direct TRE Airport = Transfer Regional =No Service Airport =Direct Regional = Partial Direct EXHIBIT iii Sample Alternatives in the Four Families Project definition Project scoping Project
contract Project status Conceptual alternatives Conceptual alternatives MIS background & approach MIS background & approach MIS background & approach Screening of alternatives Detailed
alternatives Detailed alternatives Detailed alternatives Evaluation of alternatives Evaluation of alternatives Additional alternatives Evaluation of alternatives Evaluation of alternatives
Evaluation of alternatives Evaluation of alternatives MIS background and Conceptual alternatives MIS background and Conceptual alternatives Evaluation of alternatives Evaluation of alternatives
Evaluation of alternatives Project phasing/responsibilities Dallas DFW Airport DFW Airport Fort Worth DFW Airport DFW Airport DFW Airport DFW Airport DFW Airport DFW Airport DFW Airport
DFW Airport Dallas Fort Worth DFW Airport DFW Airport NCTCOG DFW Airport DFW Airport DFW Airport NCTCOG DFW Airport DFW Airport DFW Airport NCTCOG Fort Worth Public DFW Board Retreat
Public Public PSC PSC PSC PSC DFW Board Comm. PSC DFW Board Comm. Public Public Public PSC PSC Partnering DFW Board Comm. DFW Board Comm. PSC Partnering PSC PSC PSC Partnering Public
04/03/02 04/12/02 04/18/02 05/09/02 05/30/02 02/14/01 03/21/01 04/18/01 06/19/01 07/18/01 07/19/01 08/06/01 08/07/01 08/09/01 08/24/01 09/19/01 09/19/01 10/01/01 11/13/01 11/14/01 11/15/01
12/19/01 02/22/02 04/01/02 04/01/02 04/02/02 Legend: Light Rail Commuter Rail Bus/other Transfer C Airport Terminals () () () 8 5
Based on guidance from the PSC and public comments, a total of 22 detailed alternatives were ultimately developed and evaluated using a two-level set of evaluation criteria, as follows:
Primary Criteria (quantitative and qualitative evaluations): convenience, trip times, ridership, costs, and cost efficiency ratios. Secondary Criteria (quantitative and qualitative evaluations):
traffic congestion, impacts to regional trip times, service coverage, regional directional equity, compatibility with airport operations, compatibility with regional plans and operations,
schedule and staging compatibility, financial feasibility, land acquisition requirements/impacts, compatibility with DFW Airport and regional facilities and land use, economic development
opportunities, welfare-to-work support, public and employee safety, aesthetics and world class image, potential liabilities and legal considerations, benefits to local and regional air
quality, environmental fatal flaws, and public/agency acceptance and support. 6 The detailed alternatives ranged from a bus only alternative to various rail alternatives with LRT into
the CTA and "x pattern" routing of Commuter Rail through DFW Airport serving both airport and regional riders. Shuttle options included bus, BRT, and APM. Among the other alternatives
were partial solutions, Le. solutions with only some of the types of rail services and with only some of the directions of approach. Elevated, at-grade, and tunnel (for LRT) alignments
were included in the range of alternatives. A numeric technique was developed to evaluate elements of passenger convenience, such as transferring between modes, waiting times, walking
distances, vertical level changes, and baggage handling. Alternatives with the more direct rail services were rated the highest in passenger convenience. Cost-Effective Measures Projected
daily ridership varied from approximately 9,000 to 15,000 passengers per day. Higher ridership levels were associated with more direct airport service. Average trip times to various
regional destinations ranged from 46 to 57 minutes with longer times for alternatives with more transfers, and shorter times for alternatives with more direct and frequent service. The
capital costs of the alternatives ranged from $26 million for the all-bus alternative to approximately $949 million for the APM shuttle. The Family 4 alternatives ranged from approximately
$430 to $770 million.The other solutions ranged from approximately $200 to $400 million. While the bus only alternative from Family 1 was the most cost efficient, the various partial service options from
Families 2 and 3 were also significantly more cost efficient than Family 4. Selected Alternative Based on the detailed evaluations of alternatives and the inputs from the community,
the PSC selected a preferred alternative that serves all areas of the region, but at a relatively low cost. By 2025, both Commuter Rail from the Cotton Belt and LRT from Dallas along
the Northwest Corridor will provide direct service to DFW Airport's CTA at the 13th station of the APM. At that time, the TRE will continue to be served by bus connections to the terminals.
The ultimate system could include Commuter Rail service through DFW Airport, with an extension of the EXHIBIT IV Locally Preferred Alternative Concept 7Commuter Rail from the Cotton
Belt along a preserved corridor to the TRE. The selected alternative, or locally preferred alternative, is shown conceptually in Exhibit IV. Included are three options for the LRT alignment,
depending upon the final alignment through the City of Irving, to be defined during the Northwest Corridor environmental and preliminary engineering studies. The northern and southern
options are elevated or at-grade, while the central option is a tunnel under DFW Airport.
Address Service Requested motion A PUBLICATION OF DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT P.O. BOX 660163 DALLAS, TX 7S266·0163f}C;yy)/4!l. /fclltr;J\f{J/(i9[lllta/,cJ 􀁾􀀬􀁬􀁬􀀨􀁴􀀯􀁬􀁤 9[f(jr('/'.
-<Y!tHg«t.tJ(qqOdo 􀁪􀁻􀀡􀁴􀁊􀁾􀁉􀁚􀁱 . .C;:U!liMlc "{f!lt!d'C;:P y/ti'tq/li !Zf:t.O/' CfP (lja#IJ{!I. DART. .CJJCI&I:' 9.3a/fY 9.31f/!t.a' (;lfuluw 6: 9.Jelt: g:;nl9.J!((I/'r//2/'a/rlc.
9.JMwli ;%11/9.JIlJZ'f!a' 􀁾􀁾􀀷􀀭􀀯􀁦􀁾 􀀶􀁾􀁴􀀺􀀯􀁉􀀬 (lflrtto/l Jfc!#i 9.3. (J(tlbo' :.if1(c/w! 6o/l'tjJ6ell .•·{!6at 1'/G/ljs[3t 9[wwftilCIt/V;I,//la/r· 􀀶􀁾􀁡􀀯􀁖􀁥􀁪􀀧 􀁃􀀡􀁴􀀨􀁃􀁨􀀧􀁾􀂫􀀯􀀱
Salutes 61a/!t.i Cf/t!ltcrm,.9C 61{{/'1t; III .9tfyIY oolt/I/0a{YII.9C Co!t'l7lCW (9" J71({(! @J/<CfI fl1ltl'l{ycr. 9[; (lo/tO/( C;:/t!&({(l/g-C/Y;rwcd$a!@1/'fY· ./f;J{r{]l6110li 0[:Y/Itt/I'
􀁾􀁉􀁴􀀯􀁉 􀀰􀁾􀀬􀀤􀁴􀀮􀀯􀀻􀁯􀀯􀀧􀁚􀁴􀁉􀀻 jf;J{f/!t., 􀁇􀁾 􀁣􀀡􀀬􀁾􀁉􀁏􀁃􀀡􀁴 d/ctclt Board &Ja/(S. r!JofY' ,9'itfycmlt! -It'z ,c71o/Y;r-1.J:ItM'ItlCZ O/I/Voir 0. ,c!l0/I/a: cT 􀁾 '7)
􀀬􀀧􀀷􀀧􀁾 I C':2) I 􀁾 P I (> ?yce, ,i::ff)/'elI'W/I/[Y'?f!I'O!u C/. ,':::fOIOlel" dwoa'/.· .e;t7'{(NW da/atl/IClj Co. Members 􀀯􀁊􀀨􀁉􀀯􀂷􀁃􀁴􀁃􀁲􀁾􀁙􀁊􀀯􀀯􀀯􀁣􀀬􀁩􀀻􀁻􀁦􀀯􀀧􀁚􀁡 c'?/Y/tlc!ac!lJ{I/
'zcu 􀀮􀀹􀀨􀁏􀁉􀀯􀁉􀀮􀁙􀁾􀁯􀁻􀁙􀁥 􀁾􀁦􀁙􀀮􀁙􀀻􀁴􀀯􀁬􀁯􀀯􀂷􀁥 0'o/I.YfJ/·C!o/1 .9'bl{Y .C;;·aeJ·CY' J:f/1//y /);YSC//I' {}Ja'{f!9[, ,i;;YIMs Past and 0{l/I/tlt .91;'tJ'/eac! (jahO.t:,'
.9!amfJ/l; III Jfcllaw.'7({I/YY;l'Oll· %te!/J/I/Jt .%I/Y'I;l'Oll 9[iclta/Y! .91cr/t %C!ti .'7Ct/YJlf/'C! 􀁾􀀫􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀯􀁙􀁮 .%r//t'e!tJ 􀁾􀁻􀀨 􀁾􀁙􀁾􀁉 {}(IJOel't :7.9lifl6J: :3!i/I<\'
.9ftZfllwr 0011.Xi:A;r cf'joe/y11 O/l/f/lel' .%c!t,r· Present '%Y'{: .9lOcjt;e .;{/'t!tl/I· ·91O/It/Ly&ool'l'lt :J'ijt/1fI ,Y:ylt;.7·CJJ.cJ{tC!tSOII/:78///'dJONm: ;%11(7111IC (lJtlf}/cJ.'IX(jO!tIUrIJ
II,' 􀁇􀁾􀁉􀁦􀁉􀀧 .%/It .p;lc!tr .9?jo!' -!!tI;'Y'$/lc1'Y ,;f;J{I/Y}f/li jt!. -!!t/18 ,iZYIIl/f/lC!-It'6el'fllll/I' ,7//1e' -'{j;!ter 0:,!7. 6'/;0 ./f;J{a:-!!:lkIl/IJ :JO!t/lte, jf;J{II',j>!tall
aJoo-./f;J{II'///1 (13a//l'{coc-./f;J{II'//llez ,C)(, 0al/' ./fJ;//!tI///0C!l/lcJ!/C.; ./fij(:JUee 0cwiet ./1/;.0//11 !/(001:/'/"[JJoo" 'lP ././I/L;:c!,ImlYl{'fl Cl}cm ,1fo1Ifilfllt{{/I'
./Iftz//le, )/./f;J{jfJl'e G'f;ncl/If} ./f;J{moz ./l.ii jY{{I!tJtJ'1f1 9[«Y///IJ/Il!􀁾􀀮􀁜􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁡􀁬􀁴 %ssc (if o!tCIC/' ..ll///o jf;J{;.9(d///t:II iliZl7f:< (?Ja//. !13://11 -!/;I'et/a,
􀁣􀀯􀁣􀀮􀀺􀁾 t/<.7 (./iJ!!tI/I0.r 9(oOed Cfj! !lJl'e 9[oOel'/!l3}{oC/' 9[oOed!Z}'ll'(; .91Oa}{lnJ !13//IIff//1 9((IfIIJ/(//l/J ,2aili/lllli/!a. ('Jf {?Joa 9(la/le!' [13001f/(7Oe 9(ctjJel'
,rJJif!; rJi'a/I/jf";j{I/Jlej' {li'a<!jjI' c"). [!?a!!ltal/I/IIC/' 9.31'{'lfC!t1 9[{'fID\' iJ'1t1¥c;7' .C}(tI/el'· (jO!t//c7 .eJ(O{{I!t., ,7Oel9[ooac!t 9[(/f;!t 9(ol!t;iyaec ..f;J{fI'{·o,\'
/J [1?olly<la/!tJ c?I;'fI tT .(}(a.\;rell .1/;m;\· .41 J;I!taItJ .c?JI:; ·!k/n;!' ,f;mtjJ,wI/cJ{;!t11 r13. (j(ll'/m//.c!?oOed, l;'/;I;r ,l;/ltjJ'\'oll Y?klt(/nl,jl/l/;It /,J;II!t;!t
,1;lf/a/llc:k-(})ollff!tlle .9lt;!t'1t (j)mm!' ,j;c!(j/{/It! \;;;I'/IIa ,j/ff/i/Oll (/o!ta (j' :'7U/ff/II. (7: .It-;I!tle .>{o/!tJ/' :7!tO/l/I{,\' ,A;tylJ/' 6//al.!z;!' ,7UY·I'1!.(7:
,c!?oOI'l'/(Ii. ,7!tO//llu\' . Iltu nile ,7!tO/Yi/OII-(j?I'D\'I' rlJ/yI{'(;' (j' ;70a! .C}(o!tm ,/f/f:kf'l' ,7!tOI/Iff,\' (//!/I/;\' (IIJ/ltCflll 'IMI.l'm. II (If! Y?lc!t(/n! 'II!i/;(I/{,\'
G;Y 'IIYM/el' (1/{'J. 'IIM!tI/ltIt'l' ./lit!./' '1IY/l' r!?oOf'l'/('/(IIJ/Oal' '/We 'IIJ/;(I/M' 􀀨􀀷􀁲􀁾􀀯􀁉 'Ili/!trm/.!· -I/llty (II//;(;IIJI,I'OII (/Jm:k (II. (11/{'fjlllf -11/11121
(II{\'I'
iio'li:'!Iiii 􀁩􀁩􀀧􀀬􀀬􀀺􀁾􀁟􀀭􀀻 FARE ZONE DART MEMBER CITY BOUNDARY ROUTE 8 UNION STATIONI PRESTON CENTER PARKING AVAILABLE BUS TRANSFER CENTERI TRANSFER LOCATION J.L --M-liNE STREETCAR
BUS TRANSIT CENTERS (parking available) 􀁾􀀮􀁾 􀁾 TRE & STATIONS FUTURE TRANSIT CENTER! PARK & RIDE FUTURE RAIL CORRIDOR 􀀮􀁾􀁲􀁩􀀢􀀮 • 'zr#ili .. RAIL LINES & STATIONS FUTURE HOV LANES
HOV LANES The DART Board and staff are working hard this summer to strike a healthier balance between daily operations and long-term capital projects -a timely challenge that promises
to build on our 20-year history of hard-won accomplishments. Robert W. Pope DART Chairman of the Board Revenues from the one-cent transit sales tax that funds the vast majority of our
services and programs are down for the third straight year, so we're streamlining our proposed fiscal year 2004 budget. This means modifying, and in some cases eliminating, less productive
services to match ridership demand. It also means reviewing timelines for our planned Northwest and Southeast rail extensions. As in years past, our success is riding on our reputation
as a forward-thinking transit agency that spends wisely and puts its customers first. This summer and fall, we're expanding our popular new DART destination deals program offering great
discounts and other benefits to our riders when they patronize participating restaurants, shops and entertainment venues near our stations. Our new automated online Trip Planner at DART.org
is a big hit with first-time riders, and our new Annual Pass program is making transit service an unbeatable employee benefit for many companies. We owe our milestone achievements in
our first 20 years to the citizens who've supported DART in good times and bad. With every turn of every wheel, the region's investment in a modern transit system is paying big dividends
in the form of greater mobility, cleaner air and new development -valuable returns, especially during tough economic times. C. Enoch, cretary Branch, Garland, Rowlett} Robert 1\7. Pope,
chairman (Plano) Terri A. G. Adkisson, asst. secretary (Dallas) Dallas Area Rapid Transit Fiscal Year 2003 ar Directors
􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁲􀁧 II I BUSINESS REPLY MAil FIRST-CLASS MAIL PERMIT NO.5379 DALLAS, TX POSTAGE WILL BE PAID BY ADDRESSEE DALLAS MARKETING RESEARCH DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT PO BOX 660163 DALLAS
TX 75266-9672 11 ••• 1.1.1 ••• 1.1.11 ••• 11 •• 1.1 ••• 11 ••••• 111.1 •• 1.1 •• 1 NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IF MAILED IN THE UNITED STATES ow much would • c mponles poy for unlimited employee
tronsp rtotion1
a eek . a onth . about Get on the fast trac:k lNith the DART Annual Business Pass! Meet with one of our 􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁾􀁳 representative$" and find out about the added benefits from partners
Hke Blqedini, Palm Beach Tan, Bally Total Fitness and 􀁃􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁵􀁬􀁡􀁲 􀁗􀁩􀁲􀁾􀁬􀁥􀁳􀁳􀀮􀁔􀁯 help us be'tter 􀁰􀁲􀁾􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁥 for our meeting, 􀁰􀁬􀁥􀁱􀁾􀁥 take a moment to fill out and
return this c:ard. 1. Your company's primary address: _ 2. How many employees does your company have? Full-time Part-time 3. Approximately how many of your employees currently commute
using DART? _ Title: Company _ 4. Contact person: 0 Mr. 0 Ms. _ DART.org Phone: E-mail: For faster response, call Brenda Whitaker at 214.749.2724. 􀁾II o e r11 Get a DART Annual Business
Passl (fill out attached questionnaire card and return)
featuring apartments, shops, offices and restaurants, while historic commercial and civic buildings are being restored nearby. The CLI DE Awards Jury recognized these efforts for "redeveloping
the heart of the city into a clean, attractive and historic urban center that will attract shoppers, pedestrians and neighbors to Plano." The atrium of DART headquarters bustled with
entertainment and activity in Mayas the agency hosted its 9th Annual Older Americans Information and Health Fair in celebration of Older Americans Month. Senior citizens from throughout
DART's 13 member cities enjoyed music, dance demonstrations, drawings and giveaways, and received valuable information from more than 30 organizations on health issues, fire and personal
safety, social services and pet adoption. Dale Hansen, WFAA-TV (Channel 8) sports anchor, was master of ceremonies. THE ENVELOPE PLEASE The Transportation Marketing Communications Association
(TMCA) has awarded its 2003 Tranny Award of Excellence to the DART Marketing & Communications team for its 2002 Rail Expansion Campaign. The TMCA, whose membership includes major U.S.
motor carriers, railroads, air carriers, ocean lines and passenger transit organizations, praised DART for a "high level of quality and creativity" in its campaign supporting rail extensions
to l\Jorth Dallas, Garland, Richardson and Plano. The DART campaign was supported by media partnerships with The Dallas Morning News, ABC affiliate WFAA-TV, and Univision's Spanish-language
affiliate, KUVN-TV. Special event partners were Dr Pepper, Red Hot & Blue Barbecue, Bally Total Fitness and Equity Residential. Rail operator Stan Jarvis gives the FTA's Jetllliftr Dol'll
and DART;· Gmy Thomas all up-Font view ofthe rail system. IT MAKES A \fIU.AGE DART is bringing "community" back to communities. A prime example is Plano's Downtown Transit Village, which
was named "Outstanding Redevelopment" in the North Central Texas Council of Governments' Annual Celebrating Leadership in Development Excellence (CLlDE) Awards. Spurred by DART's Downtown
Plano Station, Amicus Partners developed Eastside Village power the car, usually switching to the gas engine at higher speeds and to the electric motor when idling or operating at lower
speeds. The hybrid has earned a superultra-low-emission vehicle (SULEV) rating, which is up to 90 % cleaner than the nextlowest rating, ultra-low-emission vehicle (ULEV). The Prius is
as fuel efficient as it is environmentally friendly, getting up to 59 miles per gallon. DART celebrated Earth Day 2003 by taking delivery of 12 hybrid Toyota Prius sedans for non-revenue
use. The vehicles combine a gas engine with an electric motor. Onboard computers determine which source should TOP TIRIANSIT OFFiCIAL TAKES A TOUIR! The Federal Transit Administration's
top official, Jennifer L. Dorn, visited DART in April while attending a regional workshop on accessible public transit for people with disabilities. As official workshop host, DART had
the opportunity to show Dorn and other attendees its 100% accessible transit system and its plans for future light rail extensions. In addition to wheelchair access, all DART vehicles
are equipped with audible and visual systems that keep riders constantly abreast of their location. "We've invested a great deal in accessibility, and now it's paying off every time
a paratransit customer makes the move to fixed-route service," says Victor H. Burke, DART executive vice president/chief of operations. "A lot of people ride DART to visit our shop because
they know we can take care of their eyewear needs," says Dr. Robert Birenbaum, Eye Pieces therapeutic optometrist. "We even provide onehour emergency service, for example when an out-of-town
visitor comes in from the train or the M-Line." The last stop before the M-Line arcs to its southern terminus in downtown Dallas is the elegant Hotel Crescent Court and The Shops and
Galleries of The Crescent. Crescent retailers include Boehm Porcelain Gallery and Stanley Korshak. The Spa at The Crescent offers indulgent health and beauty treatments, and celebrity
sightings are common at the hotel's Beau Nash restaurant. Toe The M-Line ride down brick-paved McKinney from West Village takes you through the Gallery Walk District, home to antique
shops and other unique retailers. You can feast your way along McKinney, too, whether your taste is a Feed Bag cheeseburger, burritos at Chipotle or dining under a 50-foot-high stained
glass Elvis at Hard Rock Cafe. Among dining adventures at West Village are the new style French cuisine of Paris Vendome and the Berlin coffee house ambiance of Nikita. Moviegoers can
choose among Magnolia Pictures' five screens featuring independent, foreign and classic films. And a West Village shopping excursion might include the haute couture of Bella Bella and
the Glass Slipper, the rich home accents of Design House Stockholm, Legacy Trading Company and Near & Far, spa essentials at Avalon Salon or the chic spectacles of Eye Pieces. Avenue
Transit Authority, the free MLine's restored early-1900s electric cars greet visitors visitors at DART Rail's Cityplace Station for a nostalgic trip to Uptown's three enchanting areas
-West Village, the Gallery Walk District and Crescent Court. Live it up in Uptown P T Neither portrayal is totally wrong. Dallas doesn't deny its big city bustle, and Fort Worth proudly
claims its gentrified cowboy culture. But whether you're into Prada or Tony Lama, the best way to explore the bounty on both sides of our metroplex is by public transit. After disappearing
from Dallas streets in the 1950s, streetcars returned in 1989 along McKinney Avenue, Uptown's main drag. Operated by the McKinney If one area of Dallas blends the city's trademark stylishness
with funk and charm, it's Uptown. Nestled just north of downtown, the history-rich area dates back to pre-Civil War days. Today, Uptown sports three shopping districts and more than
70 restaurants -all served by a trolley line steeped in history: the M-Line Streetcar. Dallas and Fort Worth have long endured stereotypes. Big D as the urbane, fast-paced metropolis.
Fort Worth as the laid back, western-rooted, well, Cowtown. FRO I-lop 011 the lvl-Lille Saeetear ill Upt01U1i fOr (/taste of rock 'II }'oll histol) at the Hard Rock Cafi.· (top) or //louie
magic at lvlagllolia Pict"res ill ,Vest Village (bottom).
Breathing Easier Summer ozone season is here, and DART riders are doing their part to help fight air pollution by traveling to work and play in nonpolluting trains and low-emission buses,
and sharing the ride in van pools and HOV lanes. Short Trips DART destination deals and annual passes are building new ridership, Parker Road Station gets parking relief, seniors rock
DART headquarters, the Super LRV gets a big test, and more. Celebrating Twenty Years Twenty years after its inception, DART is surpassing goals for relieving congestion, improving mobility,
reducing air pollution and creating new economic development opportunities. And, the best is yet to come. From Uptown to Cowtown DART and its North Texas transit partners carry you to
the doorstep of great entertainment and leisure activities. Explore restaurants, shops and galleries in Dallas' exciting Uptown district, and enjoy museums and a taste of the Old West
in Fort Worth. Making New Tracks Planners, engineers and construction crews are beginning DART's next big expansion phase: the Northwest and Southeast rail extensions. Teamwork from
Dallas to Washington, D.C. will make sure the funds are in place to complete the program. DART and its partners in the North Texas Clean Air Coalition recommend people drive less, share
a ride and keep vehicles well-maintained. "The easiest way to help clean up our air is to leave your car at home and ride public transit," says Micah Causey, marketing chairman for the
coalition and assistant vice president of marketing and advertising at DART. "Growing up in this part of Texas, I remember endless days of clear blue skies. The nice thing is, we can
all help bring back those blue skies. It's so simple." The NTCAC implemented an ozone notification program that has evolved into the Air Pollution Watch Notification System -a color-coded
program developed by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. l\Jorth Texas media announce an air pollution watch when conditions on the following day are predicted to be unhealthy.
An air pollution warning is issued when actual pollution reaches levels deemed unhealthy by the EPA. encourage voluntary actions that result in a reduction in the emission to the air
of ozone precursor chemicals," says Howard Gilberg, chairman of the coalition. "If action is not taken, the situation is unlikely to improve." E A 5 IE AIR QUALITY ANNOUNCEME Through
this aggressive fleet upgrade, DART has replaced 83% of its buses over the last four years, reducing total fleet emissions by almost 60% while increasing fleet size by 12% during the
same period. Longtime active participants DART has been an active participant in air quality forums since 1993, when the North Texas Clean Air Coalition (NTCAC) was formed with membership
including DART, the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the T), the Greater Dallas Chamber, the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce, the North Texas Commission and the North Central Texas
Council of Governments. These bus upgrades -combined with the growth and success of DART's pollution-free free light rail system, paratransit service, high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes,
van pool program and the Trinity Railway Express -are reaping benefits for North Texas air quality. "We have an ozone air pollution problem. The mission of the coalition is to provide
public education and T I Ground-.level ozone form.s when gases or pollutants are 􀁲􀁥􀁬􀁥􀁾􀀮􀁳􀁥􀁤 into 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁡􀁩􀁲􀁤􀁈􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁾 hot, sunny, stHI days. Motor vehicles are major contributors,.
emjttjpgpollutallts OJ gases cillled nitrogen oxides (NOx), pmticulilte miltter (eM), 􀀿􀁾􀁲􀁢􀁃􀁬􀁰􀁲􀁮􀀿􀁮􀁃􀁬􀀡􀀼􀁩􀀸􀁾 (CO) and voliltile orgqnic: compounds (Vo<::), Again this summer,
DART riders are doing their part to fight air pollution and keep the alerts out of the Purple range. While vehicle emissions make up 55% of the chemicals that cause ozone pollution,
DART buses are responsible for less than one-half of 1% of the area's air pollution. You don't need a color-coded alert to know the air you're breathing is bad. You can feel it in your
nose, throat, lungs and eyes. But the alerts do come, and on May 31, 2003, it was Purple, the highest alert possible indicating a dangerous level of ozone. It was the worst pollution
day of the year so far, and a troubling hint of what the summer might hold. DART began a push toward cleaner fuels in 1996 when it purchased ultra-Iowemission buses powered by liquefied
natural gas (LNG). Currently DART's LNG fleet totals 184 buses, with 45 buses added in 2002. Another 360 buses will be retrofitted by early 2004 to operate with ultra-low-sulfur diesel
fuel through a $7.5 million grant from the State of Texas. Additionally, DART uses compressed natural gas to fuel 10 trolley-buses. WfDat is Ozone? B R E
1994 -RAILTRAN Interlocal Coop Dallas and Fort Worth 1995 -The first light rail vehicle a 1996 -The first phase of DART's L 1996 -The first la-mile segment with a stop at Dallas' Medical/Mal
1997 -DART extends light rail no 1997 -A 3-mile extension of the starter system 1993 -DART receives $82.6 millie 1994 -Construction crews break 1996 -HOV lanes open on 1-35E 1997 -HOV
lanes open on 1-635 1993 -Garland Central, Hampton 1996 -Downtown Dallas West Bu 1997 -Downtown Dallas East Bus 1997 -DART is named the Americ HOV 1991-First high-occupancy vehicle (HOV)
lane opens on 1-30, east of downtown Dallas 1988 -DART purchases 34.5 miles of railroad right-of-way 1988 -Voters reject long-term bonds for rail construction 1989 -DART acquires almost
80% of the right-of-way needed for planned rail operations 1990 -Light rail construction begins 1991-DART acquires 54 more miles of needed railroad right-of-way 1988 -North Carrollton
and South Irving bus transit centers open 1989 -West Plano, Red Bird and Richardson bus transit centers open 1992 -East Plano Transit Center opens Rail 1988 -Dallas Transit System merges
with DART 1989 -DART Board approves a new DART Transit System Plan 1990 -First transit police officers go on duty Bus August 13, 1983 -Voters create Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART)
to develop and operate a multimodal regional transit system Bus Rail 1985 -New local bus routes open in suburban cities 1984 -DART Board selects light rail mode for the future DART Rail
System 1984 -New nonstop express bus service begins between downtown Dallas and Addison, Carrollton, Coppell, Farmers Branch, Flower Mound, Glenn Heights, Irving, Richardson, Plano and
Rowlett 1986 -Lift-equipped paratransit van service expands to all DART member cities great milestones in DART 􀁨􀁩􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁹 generate economic development. It was a formidable challenge
that often drove public debate. But the long-awaited grand opening of DART Rail dazzled even the biggest doubters. Here's a brief look back at some of the key leaders and the major events
that made our transit agency a local success and a new national model in public transit. unprecedented prosperity and opportunity was vulnerable to the choking effects of traffic gridlock.
So they created a regional authority and taxed themselves to build a multimodal transit system -one incorporating modern buses, light rail and HOV lanes to improve mobility, reduce vehicle
emissions and In the early 19805 amid explosive population, business and economic growth, Dallas-area citizens came to a stark realization: The era of 􀁁􀁣􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁩􀁾 of are con design
for system, Ie breaking ( hiring 􀁒􀁯􀁾 agencyar and succe pullout ell member ( vital to th agency in from 25 tl lawsuit th with finar emerging DAVID R.'MCATEE Chttirman,1992 KATHY.lNGLE
Chai1'1nm The highlight of DART's history for me is the build-out of the Red Line along North Central Expressway, including the subway portion. While that was not finished in our time,
many of the crucial questions were resolved during our time. The North Central corridor has been so successful, and history will judge favorably that DART has played a vital role not
just in regional mobility but in complementary land use. DART has created extraordinary opportunities to positively influence the look and quality of adjacent land. The realization of
that is one of the most rewarding features of DART's success. 􀁍􀁁􀁒􀁖􀁉􀁎􀀻􀁍􀁾􀀧􀁴􀁁􀁎􀁅 Chmi'man, 1989-1992 A major highlight in early 1992 was finally breaking ground for construction
of the light rail system. The construction was a sign of progress -it showed the public that their sales tax dollars were finally being put to use. Also big in the early part of that
year was adoption of the light rail transit plan, which set the framework for the system that is in place today. The initial opening of the HOV lane on East R.L. Thornton Freeway was
another big step. Clearly there was some disagreement during those years, but today people are thankful for our persistence. Chairman, 1986-1988 During my tenure we had a bond election,
election, which we lost, and there were city withdrawal elections, and one city pulled out. Those events were the crucible for what you see at DART now. We had to redraw the entire DART
plan, and that set the stage for the service plan and the economic plan that you see today. And it was all completed on time and on budget. Adlene Harrison and her board members gave
birth to the transit system, and our group kept it alive. 􀁃􀁨􀁾􀁲􀁩􀀱􀀧􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀨􀁭􀀬 1981-1986 Without the interim board, there wouldn't be a DART. There were 25 of us, so it was a historic
moment when we passed the first transit plan. That led voters to approve the sales tax to build rail, to buy buses and expand routes in Dallas, and to bring express and local bus service
to our suburban cities. The years after that were tough because the board members had big differences about the rail system, so we had some lively debates and long nights. Now, every
time I see one of those trains go by, I'm very proud. I know the public agrees it was well worth the effort.
"All these proje< "It's a treacherol plan and other its growing DART 􀁨􀁡􀁾 and Iik accomplishmer forward to seeing loc Farr Noah knows a shared v ahead, I believe connected, not r but
they will be with a regional tl working togethE systell As a 15-year may and presidel of Governnr issues, and in of the Lone 􀁾 encompassed turned down With 20 􀁹􀁥􀁡􀁲􀁾 plan to remain
it is unhesit; Representing Ric Universi leading chain committe JESSE D. OLIVER Ckairmttn, 1999-2001 ROBERT W. POPE The key event during my time as chairman was successfully completing
the bond election and what that meant to the future of the system. Extending the Trinity Railway Express commuter rail into Tarrant County was also a great accomplishment, as was continued
development of the alternative fuel program. All of these have been important elements in the pieceby-piece development of DART. NORMA STANTON Qhttirmttn, 1997-1999 I remember 1997 to
1999 as a time of great enthusiasm for expanding and perfecting the transit system that had weathered stormy controversy to achieve support and even praise from the community it served.
The greatest victory was that ridership far exceeded the numbers that had been predicted and critics had to quit saying "nobody will ride it" or "only indigents and undesirables will
use it." The board and the staff worked together to make DART not just meet but exceed its goals. HOV 2002 -HOV lanes open on 1-35E and U.S. 67 south of downtown Dallas 2000 -Voters
approve $2.9 billion in long-term bonds to accelerate future light rail line construction 2001-DART and the Fort Worth T complete the 34-mile Trinity Railway Express linking Dallas,
Fort Worth, the Mid-Cities and DFW International Airport 2001-Light rail expands northeast with new White Rock Station 2002 -DART completes one of the largest rail expansion projects
in North America with extensions to North Dallas, Garland, Richardson and Plano. The expansion brings DART Rail to 44 miles and 34 stations 2002 -Construction begins on the first segment
of the Northwest Light Rail Corridor extension between downtown Dallas and Victory Station at American Airlines Center 2003 -DART finalizes long-range plans for its Northwest Light Rail
Corridor extension to Farmers Branch, Carrollton, North Irving and DFW Airport, and its Southeast Light Rail Corridor extension to Deep Ellum, Fair Park, South Dallas and Pleasant Grove
2002 -DART system achieves 100% accessibility Bus 1998 -First high-tech NOVA buses go into service, including buses powered by liquefied natural gas, and clean-burning diesel vehicles
are acquired 1998 -Nostalgic trolley-buses begin serving downtown Dallas and other business centers 1999 -Addison Transit Center opens 2000 -The Rowlett Park & Ride opens on the site
of a future light rail station 2000 -Cockrell Hill and Bernal/Singleton passenger transfer locations open 2002 -Lake June Transit Center opens on the site of a future light rail station
2002 -l\.Jew bus patron facility opens at 912 Commerce Street in downtown Dallas 2003 -DART breaks ground for MLK, Jr. Transit Center construction on the site of a future light rail
station Rail 1999 -DA.RT 􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁥􀀮􀁲􀁾 into a $333 million Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) with the Federal Transit Administration -the first FFGA approved under the Transportation
Efficiency Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21) 2001-The American Public Transportation Association names DART Board Chairman Jesse Oliver "Outstanding Tri;lnsit Agency Board Member of
the Year" The highlight for me is easy to pinpoint: the opening of the rail line in 1996. I'll never forget that day at Union Station with all the dignitaries gathered to celebrate and
get on the train. It was the culmination of all the work that came before us, and we had the opportunity to see it to completion and celebrate. There was a great spirit of cooperation
on that board, and our recognition as Transit Agency of the Year by the American Public Transportation Association was a direct reflection of that and the work that led to the opening
of the rail line. Accomplishments that I'm most proud of are completing the planning and design for the 20-mile light rail starter system, letting the first contract and breaking ground
on the construction; hiring Roger Snobleas president of the agency and stabilizing its leadership; and successfully surviving the last pullout elections without losing any member cities. Less visible milestones vital to the
future success of the agency included downsizing the board from 25 to 15 members, winning the lawsuit that allowed us to go forward with financing the starter system, and emerging with
a new level of trust. HOV 1996 -HOV lanes open on 1-35E 1997 -HOV lanes open on 1-635 1993 -DART receives $82.6 million in federal funding for the South Oak Cliff light rail project
1994 -Construction crews)xeak through on two light rail tunnels under North Central Expressway 1994 -RAILTRAN Interlocal Cooperative Agreement clears the way for commuter rail service
linking Dallas and Fort Worth 1995 -The first light rail vehicle arrives for testing 1996 -The first phase of DART's 20-mile light rail transit starter system opens 1996 -The first 1O-mile
segment of the Trinity Railway Express commuter service links Dallas and Irving with a stop at Dallas' Medical/Market Center 1997 -DART extends light rail north to Park Lane with a 3.5-mile
subway 􀁾􀀭 1997 -A 3-mile extension of the South Oak Cliff Line completes the 20-mile starter system 1993 -Garland Central, Hampton, Illinois and North Irving transit centers open 1996
-Downtown Dallas West Bus Transfer Center opens 1997 -Downtown Dallas East Bus Transfer Center opens Rail 1997 -DART is named the American Public Transportation Association's Transit
Agency of the Year Bus vay
It was fitting that RaYItl01Jd Noah, the only person to serve on the DART Board continuously from its inception, was at the controls of the first DART Rail train to arrive in Richardson
last year. "I was proud to steer that first train into the station," he says. "But more than that, I was proud for DART, proud for Richardson, and proud for all the people who worked
on it and made it happen." As a 15-year mayor of Richardson, and board member and president of the North Central Texas Council of Govemments, Noah worked on local roadway issues, and
in the late '70s pushed for the creation of the Lone Star Transit Authority that would have encompassed Dallas and Fort Worth. When voters turned down the proposition, an undaunted Noah
went on to help spearhead DART. "All these projects take a long lead time," says Noah. "It's a treacherous route, with lots of opportunities for plans to get derailed by political, financial
and other forces. DART certainly went through its growing pains, but with the spirit of trust trust and cooperation, it has been successful." Representing Richardson, Addison, Highland
Park and University Park for 20 years, Noah has been a leading voice in DART's key decisions. And as chairman of the budget, finance and audit committees, he has ensured the agency's
fiscal responsibility and public trust. DART has much to do to complete its mission, and likewise Noah is looking beyond recent accomplishments to the challenges ahead. "I looked forward
to seeing DART Rail arrive in Richardson, and I look forward to seeing it arrive in Irving, Farmers Branch and Carrollton," he says. Noah knows the future of North Texas is riding on
a shared vision for better mobility. "In the years ahead, I believe all communities in the region will be connected, not necessarily with light rail or heavy rail, but they will be connected,"
he says. Whether that is with a regional transit authority or individual agencies working together is uncertain. "The ownership of the system is not as important as who is willing to
commit assets to it." With 20 years under his belt, how long does Noah plan to remain on the DART Board? "I'll know when it is the right time to go," he says. Then, unhesitatingly, he
muses, "The next 20 years will be a very stimulating time." ROBERT W. POPE Chairman, 2001-2003 It's hard to top the completion of the Phase I build-out of the light rail system in 2002,
with the opening of 12 stations and 24 miles of rail line. It was a phenomenal year in the life of DART and our region, and the culmination of more than 20 years of challenging, exciting
and often difficult work. As we enjoy the benefits of this model public transit system, we must remember to thank those who had the vision, persistence and commitment to bring us to
this point. JESSE D. OLIVER Chairman, 1999-20.01 The key event during my time as chairman was successfully completing the bond election and what that meant to the future of the system.
Extending the Trinity Railway Express commuter rail into Tarrant County was also a great accomplishment, as was continued development of the alternative fuel program. All of these have
been important elements in the pieceby-piece development of DART. Chairwon,1997-1999 I remember 1997 to 1999 as a time of great enthusiasm for expanding and perfecting the transit system
that had weathered stormy controversy to achieve support and even praise from the community it served. The greatest victory was that ridership far exceeded the numbers that had been
predicted and critics had to quit saying "nobody will ride it" or "only indigents and undesirables will use it." The board and the staff worked together to make DART not just meet but
exceed its goals. HOV 2002 -HOV lanes open on 1-35E and U.S. 67 south of downtown Dallas 2000 -Voters approve $2.9 billion in long-term bonds to accelerate future light rail line construction
2001-DART and the Fort Worth T complete the 34-mile Trinity Railway Express linking Dallas, Fort Worth, the Mid-Cities and DFW International Airport 2001-Light rail expands northeast
with new White Rock Station 2002 -DART completes one of the largest rail expansion projects in North America with extensions to North Dallas, Garland, Richardson and Plano. The expansion
brings DART Rail to 44 miles and 34 stations 2002 -Construction begins on the first segment of the Northwest Light Rail Corridor extension between downtown Dallas and Victory Station
at American Airlines Center 2003 -DART finalizes long-range plans for its Northwest Light Rail Corridor extension to Farmers Branch, Carrollton, North Irving and DFW Airport, and its
Southeast Light Rail Corridor extension to Deep Ellum, Fair Park, South Dallas and IJleasant Grove 1999 '-c DART enters into a $333 million Full Funding Grant Agreement (FPGA) with the
Federal Transit Administration -the first PFGA approved under the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21 st Centwy (TEA 21) 2001 -The Arnerican Public Transportation Association names
DART Board Chairman 􀁊􀁾􀁳􀁳􀁥 Oliver "Outstanding Transit Agency Board Member of the Year" 2002 -DART system achieves 100% accessibility Bus 1998 -First high-tech NOVA buses go into
service, including buses powered by liquefied natural gas, and clean-burning diesel vehicles are acquired 1998 -Nostalgic trolley-buses begin serving downtown Dallas and other business
centers 1999 -Addison Transit Center opens 2000 -The Rowlett Park & Ride opens on the site of a future light rail station 2000 -Cockrell Hill and Bernal/Singleton passenger transfer
locations open 2002 -Lake June Transit Center opens on the site of a future light rail station 2002 -New bus patron facility opens at 912 Commerce Street in downtown Dallas 2003 -DART
breaks ground for MLK, Jr. Transit Center construction on the site of a future light rail station Rail The highlight for me is easy to pinpoint: the opening of the rail line in 1996.
I'll never forget that day at Union Station with all the dignitaries gathered to celebrate and get on the train. It was the culmination of all the work that came before us, and we had
the opportunity to see it to completion and celebrate. There was a great spirit of cooperation on that board, and our recognition as Transit Agency of the Year by the American Public
Transportation Association was a direct reflection of that and the work that led to the opening of the rail line. \ccomplishments that I'm most proud )f are completing the planning and
lesign for the 20-mile light rail starter ystem, letting the first contract and )reaking ground on the construction; liring Roger Snoble as president of the gency and stabilizing its
leadership; nd successfully surviving the last ,ullout elections without losing any lember cities. Less visible milestones ital to the future success of the gency included downsizing
the board 'om 25 to 15 members, winning the lwsuit that allowed us to go forward lith financing the starter system, and merging with a new level of trust. )n 1-35E )n 1-635 HOV vehicle
arrives for testing •DART's 20-mile light rail transit starter system opens segment of the Trinity Railway Express COmmuter service links Dallas and Irving dical/Market Center ht rail
north to Park Lane with a 3.5-mile subway In of the South Oak Cliff Line completes the 20-mile Hampton, Illinois and North Irving transit centers open s West Bus Transfer Center opens
s East Bus Transfer Center opens Rail :2.6 mill.ion in federal funding for the South Oak Cliff light rail project ws break through on two light rail tunnels under North Central Expressway
lcal Cooperative Agreement clears the way for commuter rail service linking he American Public Transportation Association's Transit Agency of the Year Bus
VI tl TPaTBCVI Urr Cdtl Tir CI/' ir dtl RFI dBir 1/1 37th Annual Engineering Excellence Awards in Washington, D.C. The national award, which follows a First Place win in the ACEC's Texas
Chapter competition, recognizes DART's engineering and construction project team led by Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc., and STV, Inc., both of Dallas. Plano's rich railroad heritage
is depicted in a stunning new sculpture at Downtown Plano Station. Weighing 1,000 pounds, the life-size figure of a horse is anything but lifelike. Rather, it's a mass of riveted iron
plates representing the "iron horse" trains that once passed through Plano. The sculpture, created for the station by Spokane, Wash., artist Tom Askman, was installed in March. Other
artistic elements at Downtown Plano Station include patterned pavings, ornamental railings, brick and stone banding around columns, and 19th-century-style gull-wing roof supports that
complement the architecture of the historic 15th Street business district. I1I"S A BIRD ••• n's A PLANE '" iT'S SUPER LRV! You may have seen -and even ridden -a DART Rail car unlike
all the others. This one has an additional 31-foot section in the middle with a low floor that doesn't require stepping up to enter. It's called a Super Light Rail Vehicle, or Super
LRV, and DART is testing it for use in the rail system. Modified for DART by rail car vendor Kinkisharyo, the car is operating on the Blue Line as SLRV 170. It prOVides seating for 24
people and additional space for wheelchairs and standing -a capacity increase of 30% over a standard LRV. DART '03 DART 􀀽􀁾􀁬􀀢􀀬 II", . PIatinI/lll, 'F' •.• 􀁁􀁮􀁮􀁵􀀢􀀬􀁾􀁂􀁴􀁬􀁓􀁓
.• . .. P'emivm B", & 􀁾􀁩􀁬Sertiee With our new Annual Pass Program, companies can provide their employees with bus and rail service for as little as $30 a year less than a dime a day
per employee. No matter what the size of your firm, we can tailor the program to your exact needs. In fact, more than 40,000 metroplex workers already are enrolled! The Annual Pass is
an effective recruitment tool, an unbeatable employee perk, and a great way to help l\Jorth Texas reduce ozonecausing emissions. Want to know more? Call 214.747.RIDE or visit www.DART.org.
Now you can plan your DART trip online, print your itinerary and take it with you! Whether you're headed to work, shopping or a night on the town, our new automated Trip Planner plots
your course on the spot. Just go to www.DART.org.c1ick on the DART Trip Planner, and tell it where you are, where you want to go, and when you want to leave. It's that easy. Of course,
if you still prefer the human touch, our Customer Information Representatives are always standing by at 214.979.1111. DART'S A RAIL WINNER The DART Rail System is a big winner with the
American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC). The ACEC recognized DART's Phase 1 BuildOut with its Honor Award in March at the organization's GREAT DEALS ON WHEELS Bright yellow
DART destination 􀁤􀁥􀁡􀁾 decals are showing up in hundreds of store windows up and down the line, signaling special offers and great discounts available exclusively to transit riders.
Just flash your pass or ticket, and enjoy 10% off your purchase, a free dessert or a special gift. For details, grab a DART 􀁤􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁤􀁥􀁡􀁾􀁧􀁵􀁩􀁤􀁥 or call us at 214.979.1111
to order one by mail. For all the latest deals on wheels, visit www.DART.org. •• Bus Routes Serving This SloP c.>ro" Bus Stop The FFGA directed $333 million in FTA funds to advance our
North Central extensions to Richardson and Plano -new lines that instantly exceeded ridership projections while spawning transit-oriented development and an exciting, new live-work-play
lifestyle. Don Dillard, vice president of Galatyn Park Corporation, enjoys telling lawmakers about the efforts that transformed a Richardson pasture into a landmark regional development.
Richardson Mayor Gary Slagel says the success of Galatyn Park "demonstrates the great things that can happen when the public and private sectors put their heads together. Those rail
station openings were a great day in the history of our city and the start of an exciting new era." "We've parlayed private and public resources to create a 500-acre urban environment
-including a l30-room luxury hotel, a l,500-seat concert hall and conference center, and a mixed-use residential development," he says. "The catalyst for this forward-looking project
is of course DART's Galatyn Park Station that opened in 2002. From the earliest days of planning and study, DART, the City of Richardson and Galatyn Park Corporation have worked hand-in-hand
to make this project a model for public-private development." Building on relationships that helped win the first FFGA, governmental affairs representatives, board members and civic
and business leaders are shuttling between Dallas and D.C., working to ensure the DART project is included in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act
of 2003, known as SAFETEA. Now we're taking the latest success story to Washington, working to secure $700 million for part of the Northwest/Southeast expansion -a 22-mile segment stretching
from Farmers Branch through downtown Dallas to Pleasant Grove. In light of successes such as this, DART's expansion plans are supported by the congressional delegation representing the
DART Service Area: Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and House members Michael Burgess, M.D., Martin Frost, Ralph Hall, jeb Hensarling, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Sam Johnson and Pete Sessions.
Sessions, whose district is aligned with the Northwest corridor, and Eddie Bernice Johnson, whose constituents will be served by the Southeast expansion, are sponsoring DART's application
for new federal funds. The public's enthusiastic response to light rail, coupled with conservative requests for federal assistance, made DART a new national model for public transit
development and the first recipient of a Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) with the Federal Transit Administration. Once the SAFETEA legislation becomes law, DART will work with the
FTA to execute a new FFGA contract. Taking the DART Story to Washington Galatyn Park ill Richarc!son is a natiollal modelfor the creation o.f.mccessfid trflllsitoriellted developmellt
throllgh p"blic-private cooperatioll. The Cfltfllyst fOr the devel0pllleJit was DARTs Galatyn Park Stfltioll. "DART has been an exemplary model for how to plan, design, build and operate
a mass transit system efficiently. The results prove DART is well worth the investment and effort. It has brought an undeniable added value to its entire service area." u.s. Sen. Kay
Bailey Hutchison "There is no question that the Northwest sector of Dallas County continues to explode with growth, and the expansion of DART Rail into this area will play an important
role in improving mobility and reducing congestion and pollution." U.S. Rep. Pete Sessi.ons "Expansion of DART Rail into the Southeast is vital to the economic health of the region.
Our residential community continues to. grow, andrnany people will benefit from PART's ability to. get them quickly gpd safely to. jo.l:Js in the centra.1 city and r17gion-wide." y.s.
Rep. EcJcJie Bergice Johnson
DART's Northwest and Southeast extensions will stretchFom Carrollton, Farmers Branch and Irving to Pleasant Grove, and will increase the current 44-mile rail system to nearly 80 miles.
Forward-thinking communities near the new lines already are taking steps to replicate the success of transit-oriented development (TOD) projects in Dallas such as Mockingbird Station
and South Side on Lamar at Cedars Station, as well as Downtown Plano Station, Downtown Garland Station and Galatyn Park Station in Richardson. plants native to Africa and Texas. A "walk
of fame" will honor civic leaders from the South Dallas and Fair Park areas. The City of Carrollton plans to purchase a large retail site on Trinity Mills Road adjacent to one of three
proposed stations on the Northwest extension. The city will lease the building and later work with the developers to transform it into a mixed-use district that could include office
buildings, high-end multifamily housing, hotels, pedestrianfriendly retail and entertainment, and community amenities. The purchase, a strategic step in the city's long-range TOD plan,
was funded by DART's Local Assistance Program, which allocates funds annually to member cities for transportation -related improvements. Getting ready for rail "This is a significant
milestone in Carrollton's transportation and redevelopment plans," says Mayor Mark Stokes. "Improving mobility and increasing property values around the rail stations will help ensure
a healthy taxbase for our community. TOD is a bold, comprehensive approach to long-range community planning that will produce a valuable legacy for Carrollton's future." E T The 2002
opening of more than 20 miles of tracks and 13 stations put an exclamation point on DART's first two decades. With the public fanfare still fresh, planners, engineers and construction
crews are beginning the next big expansion phase: the Northwest and Southeast extensions that will bring the 44-mile DART Rail system to nearly 80 miles. Just north of downtown Dallas'
West End District, construction is well under way on Victory Station at American Airlines Center. Opening in summer 2004, the station will be served by the Trinity Railway Express (TRE)
with DART Rail service phasing in as the Northwest extension comes on line. Progress in plain sight At the same time, the new Martin Luther King, Jr. Transit Center -a planned rail stop
on the Southeast extension -is going up near Fair Park. Initially, the facility will open in fall 2004 as a bus transit center featuring an enclosed, climatecontrolled passenger waiting
area with pay phones, vending machines, public restrooms and 250 parking spaces. DART worked with community groups to incorporate earth-tone building exteriors, fences decorated with
African tribal patterns, and landscaping with WALNUT HILL/DENTON ROYAL LANE ROYAL SH FARMERS BRANCH CARROLLTON FRANKFORD TRINITY MillS I COllStruetioli is progressillg quickly 011 Victory
StatioII tit Americflll Airlines eel/to; whicb opeJls in SUlllml'r 2004for servia by the Ti-illity Railway D:press press as DARTs Northwest extension phases in. In the West End MarketPlace,
Dallas Cowboy Pro Shop manager Marisela Patnaude says the shop's 10%-off destination deal is drawing new customers. "People have picked up the guide in other stores, seen our listing
and come here to get the discount," she says. "We're really happy about the program." "Our business has increased since we put the decal in our window," says Treina Nelson, Cissistant
generCiI manager of Corner Bakery in downtown Dallas' West End, which offers a 10% discount to DART riders. "We have to restock the destination 􀁤􀁥􀁡􀁾 guide rack two or three times
Ci day." ,I-. 􀁾 􀀧􀀢􀁾􀀭.., are listed in the available at participating businesses, DART Stores or online at www.DART.org. At Rockfish Seafood Grill in Mockingbird Station, a free
appetizer is proving popular with DART patrons. "On some days we've gotten as many as 15 DART customers at lunch, and that many again at dinner," says Lewis Harrison, Rockfish assistant
general manager. Topiary bulls (left) alld trumpetillg allgels at BaH Pe}.!ormance Hall (above) arejwt sOlJle oftbel/mtastic sights alld attractiolls to experience at SUlidalice Square
ill downtowli Fort >Vorth. One more stop is in order before boarding the TRE for your return trip to Dallas. The Fort Worth Rail Market, adjacent to the ITC in the historic Santa Fe
Warehouse, offers produce, plants, dining and Texas gifts. The perfect place to grab a snack for the leisurely ride back to Dallas. TRE passengers arriving at the Intermodal Transportation
Center (ITC) in downtown Fort Worth can pick their pleasure. T buses and trolleys serve the historic Stockyards, with its rodeo shows, Old West shops and the worldfamous Billy Bob's;
the Fort Worth Cultural District, home of the Kimbell Art Museum, the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth and Casa Manana Theater; and Sundance Square, a vibrant downtown shopping, dining
and entertainment scene anchored by Bass Performance Hall. But don't let those duds fool you. Cowtown's also a cultural mecca, with world-renowned museums, a vibrant theater scene and
a first-class performance hall. T Westward Hoi to Cowtown on the IRE The trip is a bargain. A Premium Day Pass good for travel on the TRE and anywhere on the DART and Fort Worth T systems
is just $4.50. Whether you're into boot scootin' or impressionist painting, Fort Worth's delights are an easy ride from Big D on the TRE. Formally known as the Trinity Railway Express,
the 35-mile commuter rail line rolls west out of downtown Dallas' Union Station several times a day, Monday through Saturday. What's the best way to get to Union Station? Take DART Rail
from any of 33 stations in Dallas, Garland, Richardson or Plano. Connections are a snap. From its famed rodeo, to daily cattle drives, to the legendary honky tonk Billy Bob's Texas,
Fort Worth keeps earning its spurs as the city "Where the West Begins." ne, gin h
i I 􀁾􀀮 ! DART 2030 Transit System Plan Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT -July 2003 July 9,2003
DART 2030 Transit System Plan List of Figures Figure S-1: 2030 Population Distribution Comparison S-1 Figure S-2: 2030 Employment Distribution Comparison S-2 Figure S-3: 2030 Land Use
Centers and Corridors S-3 Figure S-4: Programmed Improvements S-4 . Figure S-5: Would You Use Transit? S-5 Figure 2-1: 2030 Transit System Plan Study Area 5 Figure 3-1: 2002 Population
Distribution Comparison (Bar Chart) 7 Figure 3-2: 2002 Population Distribution Comparison (Pie Chart) 8 Figure 3-3: 2030 Population Distribution Comparison (Bar Chart) 8 Figure 3-4:
2030 Population Distribution (Pie Chart) 9 Figure 3-5: 2002 Population Density 10 Figure 3-6: 2030 Population Density 11 Figure 3-7: Change in Population Density, 2002-2030.. 13 Figure
3-8: 2002 DART Member City Population Distribution 14 Figure 3-9: 2030 DART Member City Population Distribution 14 Figure 3-10: 2002 Employment Distribution Comparison (Bar Chart) 15
Figure 3-11: 2002 Employment Distribution Comparison (Pie Chart) 16 Figure 3-12: 2030 Employment Distribution Comparison (Bar Chart) 16 Figure 3-13: 2030 Employment Distribution Comparison
(Pie Chart) 17 Figure 3-14: 2002 Employment Density................................................................ 18 Figure 3-15: 2030 Employment Density 19 Figure 3-16: Change in
Employment Density. 21 Figure 3-17: DART Member City Employment (Bar Chart) 22 Figure 3-18: 2030 Member City Employment (Bar Chart) 22 Figure 4-1: 2002 Urbanization Index 22 Figure 4-2:
2030 Urbanization Index 26 Figure 4-3: Regional Activity Centers 26 Figure 4-4: Land Use Corridors 27 Figure 4-5: DART Rail Stations 30 Figure 4-6: 2002 Sub-Regional Jobs to Housing
Ratio 􀁾 33 Figure 4-7: 2030 Sub-Regional Jobs to Housing Ratio 38 Figure 5-1: Existing DART Bus System 39 Figure 5-2: DART Transit Centers and Park and Rides . 43 Figure 5-3: Existing
DART Rail System 46 Figure 5-4: DART-Owned Right-of-Way................................................................ 48 Figure 5-5: Existing HOV System 51 Figure 5-6: Programmed Improvements
55 Figure 6-1: Focus Group Study Areas 60 Figure 6-2: Summary of Responses to Question 61 Figure 6-3: Opinion on Public Transportation 76 Figure 6-4: 2002 Median Household Income 86
Figure 6-5: 2030 Median Household Income 87 Figure 6-6: Transit Supply.............................. 89 Figure 6-7: Transit Potential 90 Figure 6-8: Transit Opportunity 93 Figure 7-1:
2002 Roadway Volumes 97 Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT iii rL T' I1 _ r􀁾􀀮-1rLr[[Lfr rrrLr L
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Figure 􀀷􀁾􀀲􀀺 2030 Roadway Volumes 98 Figure 7-3: 2002 Level of Service ,. 99 Figure 7-4: 2030 Level of Service 100 Figure 7-5: 2002 Local Desire Lines
of Travel 102 Figure 7-6: 2030 Local Desire Lines of Travel 103 Figure 7-7: 2002 Regional Desire Lines of Travel 104 Figure 7-8: 2030 Regional Desire Lines of Travel 105 Figure 7-9:
Regional Desire Lines of Travel -Work Trips 108 Figure 7-10: 2030 Trip Productions Density 109 Figure 7-11: 2030 Regional Trip Attraction Density , 110 Figure 7-12: Regional Activity
Centers 112 Figure 7-13: Dallas CBD Trip Origins 113 Figure 7-14: Dallas CBD Trip Destinations 114 Figure 7-15: DFW Airport Trip Origins 115 Figure 7-16: DFW Airport Trip Destinations.........
116 Figure 7-17: Galleria Trip Origins 117 Figure 7-18: Galleria Trip Destinations 118 Figure 7-19: Las Colinas Trip Origins .. 119 Figure 7-20: Las Colinas Trip Destinations 120 Figure
7-21: Legacy Trip Origins 121 Figure 7-22: Legacy Trip Destinations 122 Figure 7-23: Telecom Corridor Trip Origins 123 Figure 7-24: Telecom Corridor Trip Destinations 124 Figure 7-25:
CBD Travel Time Contour Comparison, 2002 and 2030 126 Figure 7-26: CBD Travel Time Contour Comparison 127 Figure 7-27: D/FW Airport Travel Time Contour Comparison 128 Figure 7-28: Telecom
Travel Time Contours Comparison 129 Figure 7-29: Galleria Travel Times Comparison 130 Figure 7-30: Las Colinas Travel Time Contours Comparison 131 Figure 7-31: Legacy Travel Time Contours
Comparison 132 Figure 7-32: 1-635/U.S. 75 Travel Time Contours Comparison 133 Figure 7-33: Lewisville Travel Time Contours Comparison 134 Figure 7-34: Love Field Travel Time Contours
Comparison 135 Figure 7-35: Mesquite Travel Time Contours Comparison 136 Figure 7-36: Red Bird Travel Time Contours Comparison 137 Figure 7-37: Six Flags Travel Time Contours Comparison
138 Figure 7-38: SMU Travel Time Contours Comparison 139 Figure 7-39: Allen Travel Time Contours Comparison 140 Figure 7-40: Garland Travel Time Contours Comparison 141 Figure 7-41:
2030 Baseline Ridership 143 Figure 8-1: Trans Texas Corridor 145 Figure 8-2: Mobility 2025 Update-Rail System 􀁾 146 Figure 8-3: 1989 Transit Planning Corridors 148 Figure 8-4: Proposed
2030 Transit Planning Corridors 149 Ii! I. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT iv
[Lf1[[[􀁲􀁾 LT' I:1 -[ DART 2030 Transit System Plan List of Tables Table 4-1: Metropolitan Land Use 24 Table 4-2: DART Member Cities' Land Use 25 Table 4-3: Trips Destined for Regional
Activity Centers in 2030.................................. 31 Table 4-4: Transit Oriented Development Within the DART Service Area 34 Table 5-1: DART's Existing Transit Services 40 Table
5-2: Historical Bus Ridership 41 Table 5-3: Historical LRT Ridership 47 Table 5-4: Historical Commuter Rail Ridership : 47 Table 5-5: DART HOV Lane Descriptions 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮
49 Table 5-6: Historical HOV Lane Use 50 Table 5-7: Historical Para-Transit Participation 52 Table 5-8: Transit Service in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metropolitan Area....... 53 Table 5-9:
Planned and Programmed Improvements 56 Table 6-1: Demographic Characteristics of Focus Group Participants 60 Table 6-2: Summary of Survey Responses 􀁾 62 Table 6-3: Improvements Needed
to Use Transit 77 Table 6-4: Transit Supply Index 91 Table 6-5: Transit Potential Index 91 91 Table 6-6: Transit Opportunity..... 92 Table 7-1: Comparison of Congestion Characteristics
.. 96 Table 7-2: 2030 Base Run Summary of Ridership and Performance Measures 142 ,r·",' "r[r[[[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT v
iIi l
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Executive Summary S.2 Demographics Existing and future population and employment were analyzedto determine impacts on future mobility needs. Population and employment growth, intensity and distribution were analyzed to help determine where potential future transit demand might
require improvements. The Mobility Needs Assessment examined the need for transit improvements in and around the DART Service Area by analyzing demographic, and transportation trends
within the region. It also considered travel and transit market needs. Travel corridors based on future travel patterns were identified. This information provides a basis for the Corridor
Opportunities phase of the study that will examine the needs and opportunities for specific transit and mobility service strategies in the identified corridors. r[' L[ S.l Purpose The
Dallas/Fort Worth region is one on the fastest growing metropolitan areas in the country. By 2030 most of the DART service area will be developed. Much of the the population growth will
occur outside the service area. However, a substantial number of new jobs will be created within the service area. This will likely result in more commuting into the service area from
the surrounding area. FIGURE S-l: 2030 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON Population Growth -9.0 -􀁾 8.0 -.2 7.0 .-6.0 e 5.0 S 4.0 :; 3.0 :c:J. 2.0 􀁾 1.0 2002 Mobility Needs Assessment
2030 Year DRAFT -+-Service Area Population ....Study Area Population S-1
DART2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE S-2: 2030 EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON Employment Growth I"It en 6.0 c-..=2-= 54..00 ---c 3.0 CD E 2.0 􀁾 C. 1.0 Ew-S.3 Land Use 2002 2030 Year
...... Service Area Employment ....StudyArea Employment ii The Dallas/Fort Worth region does not have regional land use planning or a regional land use plan. Land use planning within
the service area is the responsibility of individual DART member cities. This is an important consideration because future land use is the primary determinant of future transit demand.
Residential and employment density in the DART Service Area is relatively low. However, there is increasing interest in mixed use, compact urban activity centers. By 2030 there will
be a number of regional activity centers and numerous activity centers of a smaller scale. The freeway corridors will likely continue to attract development. The LRT corridors will also
attract development to the station areas. DART member cities are working with DART on station area planning, and by 2030 the LRT system is expected to have a significant impact on the
land use pattern. -. Figure S-3, Land use Centers and Corridors, shows future regional activity centers and more intensive land use corridors depicted by the Urbanization Index. The
Urbanization Index illustrates the sum of population and employment density. ·r Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT S-2 iI1_
2030 Land Use Centers and Corridors FIGURE S-3: 2030 LAND USE CENTERS AND CORRIDORS S-3 6 Miles l!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Iiiiiiiiiiiiii Souroe: NCTCOG and DART Data May2D,2DD3 C DART Ser'Vice
Area Urbanization Index 2D30 per Acre DD.16 .>16 . Centers DRAFT ..􀁾􀀮􀀮 ,"Planning & Development /....􀁬􀀮􀁗􀀢􀁦􀁦􀁩􀂷􀁾􀁐􀀻 Mobility Needs Assessment DART 2030 Transit System Plan
i.. r[[[[[r[rr: rI[[r'
DART 2030 Transit System Plan . tI: 5.4 Transportation Services Existing DART transit and mobility services have been documented as part of this study. Programmed improvements were also
examined (Fig. S-4). The 2030 Baseline transit network model run was based on this programmed network and results are reported in the Travel Pattern Analysis section. FIGURE 5-4: PROGRAMMED
IMPROVEMENTS Programmed Improvements Il!I Il, II·I, 1 SOURC:: D.';PT /." ..."-" •.. l,I' 􀁾􀀮􀁊􀁉􀁣􀁨􀁊􀀮 -,,/.' " .. ... E>:is,ing HOV 􀁐􀁦􀁾􀀢􀁮􀁬􀀩􀁤 HO',/3!'J e LRT linE' 61U1J LRT
Lin!} E'Ii}n5i,)n:; RE'd LRT 􀁌􀁾􀁾􀁥 􀁾􀁛􀀧􀁴􀀧􀀢 􀁾􀁮􀁤 s:: LRi Expansions Trinity Rail''''''Y E;,pro?ss II .. I 􀁾􀀮􀂷􀁬􀀬􀁏􀀮􀁾 .I ...I Th. Cobn'.... · " I I" h1\ I ./\. tt:UtslAft'
􀁾􀀮􀀢􀀢 '. .0 "'-', /-' .r·'" Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT S-4
rL DART 2030 Transit System Plan 5.5 Market Assessment The purpose of the market assessment was to determine the views on mobility needs from the perspective of both DART customers and
DART Service Area residents. The market assessment examined regional trends and forecasts and the implications to transit services. Focus groups were conducted to discuss mobility needs
and desires of both transit users and non-users. The results of ongoing DART customer surveys were examined. Several questions were formulated and included in the DART 2002 Climate Survey.
The results of the market assessment indicated that most residents do not use transit on a regular basis, and are not open to using transit in the future (Fig. S-5). However, of those
who have used DART services, their experience services was positive. Furthermore, there is a large group of service area residents that are open and willing to use transit provided the
right services are offered. The key service needs identified were: 1. Service expansion to make service more readily available for their trip needs. 2. Transit information and incentives
with a preference for these to be supplied by their employers. 3. Service that provides security, convenience, cost savings, faster travel times and control. In rating specific future
DART services, additional HOV lanes and building more light rail scored the highest. FIGURE 5-5: WOULD YOU USE TRANSIT? rL f...·.:.. 􀁬􀁾 [' [: ....' , '... L[...., ,: !:: ('"1 [.'...
' .. "'-;.; Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT S-5
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 8.6 Travel Pattern Analysis The travel pattern analysis was performed using data from the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) and the regional
travel demand model. An analysis of 2030 travel included consideration of, trip generation, origin and destination, and travel time. A 2030 base line analysis of the programmed transit
network was included. This information was used' to analyze travel patterns for all trips, the future performance of the roadway system, and an indication of potential transit needs.
A full detailed analysis of transit mobility needs will be conducted in the Corridor Needs task when alternative transit networks have been developed. The results of the travel pattern
analysis shows that there will be a signi'ficant increase in the number of trips. Roadway mobility will decline by 2030 due to . increased congestion. The travel times on the roadway
system will increase and the reliability will decrease. Total daily trips will be more dispersed. dispersed. However work trips will continue to focus on the Dallas CBD and on the regional
activity centers. There will be a continued need for work trips from the southern sector to the northern sector. These factors indicate that a market opportunity will exist for a transit
system that can provide reliable service that is competitive with the automobile in travel times. The transit system will also need to provide the security, convenience and cost attributes
noted in the market analysis results. I[ , i ,iI !I Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT S-6
rrrr: rLLl DART 2030 Transit System Plan 1.0 Introduction The Mobility Needs Assessment characterizes the need for transit improvements in and around the existing DART Service Area by
analyzing demographic and transportation trends within the region. These trends are matched with an analysis of the current transit system to be able to assess how the current DART planned
and programmed improvements will meet the future needs of the DART Service Area. The analysis has been separated into sections: Section 1: Demographics This is a discussion of existing
(2002) and future (2030) population and employment levels for areas in and around the DART Service Area. Section 2: Land Use This is a discussion of land use patterns. Section 3: Transportation
Services This is a discussion of transportation services and facilities. Section 4: Market Assessment This section discusses the various surveys and focus groups conducted by DART and
the consultant team. This Section is used to help identify the public's opinions and attitudes toward DART's services. It also includes an analysis of the transit dependent population
as well as a description of DART's Transit Availability and Transit Potential Indexes. Section 5: Travel Pattern Analysis This is a discussion of existing and future travel patterns
as well as the degree of change that takes place between 2002 and 2030. Items of analysis include regional roadway congestion levels, freeway level of service (LOS) rates, local and
Regional Desire Lines of Travel, trip productions and attractions, regional activity centers, travel pattern maps, travel time contour maps, and baseline transit network model results.
This section also looks at study and service area mobility needs. r[' [[-'--,' [r􀁴􀁾 tI.;, '.:... i-· rl:: Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 1
. II . i
rr[L[' DART 2030 Transit System Plan 2.0 Background 2.1 Planning Context In August 1983, Dallas area voters supported the creation of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority (DART).
The first regional service plan developed for the agency included 160 corridor miles of rapid transit. In August 1988, after the defeat of DART's referendum to pursue long-term debt
to pay for Service Plan improvements, DART initiated 􀁴􀁾􀁬􀁥 first Transit System Plan effort to develop a new vision for transit. The 1989 Transit System Plan, which incorporated a
pay-as-you-go funding approach, recommended: fL lf.-'.''. • 66 miles of radial Light Rail Transit (LRT); • 37 miles of exclusive HOV lanes; • 18 miles of commuter rail service; • Regional
bus service; • Demand response services; and • Local Assistance Program In 1995, the Transit System Plan was updated in response to changing conditions, community desires, and federal
legislation. The 1995 Transit System Plan update also responded to the requirement for a fiscally constrained regional transit system plan based on the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). Significant modifications were made to the plan resulting in the following recom mendations: Since February 2000 the 1995 Transit System Plan was amended.
It currently includes: In August 2000, the citizens of DART's thirteen member cities overwhelmingly voted to allow DART's use of long-term financing to accelerate LRT projects currently
in planning and design. • 93 miles of light rail transit (LRT) • 35 miles of commuter rail service • 110 miles of high occupancy vehicles (HOV) lanes Since the completion of the 1995
Transit System Plan Update, DART has made significant progress towards the implementation of rapid transit, including 44 miles of LRT in operation, 47 miles of LRT in the planning and
design stages, the 37-mile Trinity Railway Express from Dallas to Fort Worth, 23 miles of HOV, preservation of 250 miles of ROW, and extensive bus service improvements. Mobility Needs
Assessment DRAFT DRAFT 2 • 53 miles of radial Light Rail Transit (LRT); • 98 miles of exclusive HOV lanes; • 37 miles of commuter rail service; • Regional and local bus services; • General
Mobility Programs (TSM, TDM, ITS); • Continuation of the Local Assistance Program; and • Continuation of a pay-as-you-go funding approach. 􀁾􀀭 􀁾 -:1L[.r...·'..-L[[[[' [' [,
DART 2030 Transit System Plan In preparation for the next phase of transit improvements in the region, DART has 􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁴􀁩􀁡􀁴􀁾􀁤 the 2030 Transit System Plan. The DART 2030 Transit
System Plan seeks to identify transit needs and opportunities, determine priorities for transit, and outline a future plan of action. 2.2 2030 Transit System Plan Approach The DART 2030
Transit System Plan will seek to address many regional trends, including: • Regional population and employment growth; • Expansion of the urbanized area; • Dispersed travel patterns;
• Increase in congestion; and • Increase in transit demand. The 2030 Transit System Plan will look well beyond the current transit program developed from prior system plan efforts (the1989
Plan and 1995 Plan) and will outline the next steps toward achieving a comprehensive transit system in the Dallas region. The 2030 Transit System Plan differs from prior System Plan
efforts in several ways: • The 1989 and 1995 plans used a horizon vear of 2010. A revised planning horizon of 2030 will reflect changing needs and opportunities. • The 1989 and 1995
plans focused on the light rail starter sYstem. The 2030 Plan will build on an existing light rail and commuter rail system, HOV lanes, and various bus transit services while exploring
expansion in addition to new technologies and service concepts. • Previouslv. financing for the rail program was based on a pay-as-You-go model. As of August 2000, long-term bonding
is permitted, potentially accelerating implementation of capital investments. • In 1989 and 1995. there was cautious support for DART. Presently DART receives broad acceptance. • Urbanization
of areas outside of the current DART Service Area creates opportunities and places demands on service within the service area. Consideration of emerging needs throughout the Dallas region
will help shape the 2030 Plan. Developing the 2030 Transit System Plan will entail many tasks. The Evaluation Framework establishes the guiding principles, objectives, and selection
criteria for the 2030 Transit System Plan. The Mobility Needs Assessment will identify current and future transit needs in the DART Service Area. The Technology Review will Mobility
Needs Assessment DRAFT 3
rF.·.c... (r[r[r DART 2030 Transit System Plan review trends in transit vehicle technology. The Corridor Opportunities will specify transit service possibilities by geographic sub regions
within the service area. Public Involvement Activities will be conducted during each task to inform coordinating agencies and the general public of DART's progress and to solicit comment.
Completion of these five tasks will enable the final development of the DART 2030 Transit System Plan. The existing DART Service Area is made up of thirteen member cities. These cites
include Addison, Carrollton, Cockrell Hill, Dallas, Farmers Branch, Garland, Glenn Heights, Highland Park, Irving, Plano, Richardson, Rowlett, and University Park. The area adjacent
to the DART Service Area boundary that· generates a significant number of trips either beginning or ending within the DART Service Area, but whose complementary origin or destination
is outside the DART Service Area boundary defines the study area. Figure 2-1 identifies which portions of the Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) region are included within the DART Service Area,
and which are included in the study area. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 4
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 2-1: 2030 SYSTEM PLAN STUDY AREA 2030 Sysem Plan Study Area ...􀁾....-y:,. Source: NCTCOG July 2,2002 D Dart SeNice Area "; Areas Included .. in
Study Area .',-... IIrjIII: I. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 5
rf·' ... rr[' L􀁌􀁾 DART 2030 Transit System Plan 3.0 Demographics 3.1 Existing and Future Population The Dallas /Fort Worth (DFW) metropolitan area is one of the fastest growing areas
in the United States. According to the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), the DFW urbanized area (Collin, Dallas, Denton, Rockwall, and Tarrant counties, and portions
of Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman and Parker Counties) population is growing at an estimated 1.76 percent annually. This rate is higher than the national average. Below are demographic findings
from the 2000 U.S. Census. • DFW's regional population is currently 5,309,277. Its population is expected to grow to over 8,000,000 people by 2030. • Between 1990 and 2000, the DFW region
grew by 1,197,529 persons. This represents a 29 percent increase. • Hispanics represent the fastest growing segment of the population, with over a 100 percent increase (549,847 persons)
between 1990 and 2000. • Minorities now make up 40 percent of the total population. • Total Total households in the DFW region increased by 402,604 between 1990 and 2000. 3.1.1 2002
and 2030 Population Distribution and Density • The average household size in the DFW region is 2.7 persons. • 8.1 percent of the population in the DFW region is 65 years and over. •
12.6 percent of the population in the DFW region is 45 to 54 years of age Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 6 • ·One-person households make up 25% of the total households in the DFW region.
• Between 1990 and 2000, non-family households in the DFW region increased by 26%. The following discussions of population distribution and population densities provide the basis for
understanding travel needs in the region. The population data is derived from NCTCOG's Transportation Department where it is used in their travel demand model. To analyze the future
demographics of the study area, DART used the most recent data that had been collected by NCTCOG. The set of demographics used in DART's 2030 Baseline Model Run are different from those
NCTCOG used used in rrr I, • ';i L[[[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan their Mobility 2025 Plan Update in that they utilize the 2000 Census as well as prior growth trends to project the size and characteristics of population
and employment in 2030. The data set used is referred to as pre 2030 because it had not been formally approved as final by NCTCOG at the time the Mobility Needs Assessment was conducted.
By using this data set, DART ensures that their forecast level of transit demand matches NCTCOG's expectations for transportation demand in the future. TSZ's are subdivisions of 1990
Census tracts used in transportation modeling. Overall, the 2002 population distribution inside and outside of the DART Service Area is depicted in Figures 3-1 and 3-2. Figures 3-3 and
3-4 show the 2030 population distribution. Traffic Survey Zones (TSZ's) are used to depict population density in the maps found in figures 3.5 and 3.6. . FIGURE 3-1: 2002 POPULATION
DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON 2002 Population Distribution Comparison II. II: I 6.0 0' 5.0co :-=s= 4.0 c 3.0-o :0: 􀁾 2.0-c. o D. 1.0 0.0 Service Area Source: NCTCOG Demographic Data Mobility
Needs Assessment Study Area (Minus Service Area) DRAFT iii Service Area • Study Area (Minus Service Area) 7 Iri II
FIGURE 3-2: 2002 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON DART 2030 Transit System Plan 2002 Population Distribution Comparison • Study Area (Minus Service Area) II Service Area 56% Source:
NCTCOG Demographic Data r􀁲􀀮􀂷􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀮 fr [' rl. [t As evidenced by the above charts, more people currently live outside of the DART Service Area than live within. FIGURE 3-3: 2030
POPULATION DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON 2030 Population Distribution Comparison rrrLr [-rr [[ 6.0 􀀭􀁾􀀬 '0 5.0-co == 4.0:i 􀁾 3.0-o :;::l .!! 2.0 ::l C. 􀁾 1.0-0.0 Service Area Study Area
(Minus Service Area) Source: NCTCOG Demographic Data Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT II Service Area • Study Area (Minus Service Area) 8
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 3-4: 2030 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON 2030 Population Distribution Comparison fiI • $ervice Area • Study Area (Minus Service Area) Source:
NCTCOG Demographic Data By 2030, this disparity grows even more with 65% of the population residing outside of the current DART Service Area versus 56% in 2002. The next two figures
depict 2002 and 2030 population density for the study area by TSZ. IiI Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 9
2002 POPULATION DENSITY FIGURE 3·5: 2002 POPULATION DENSITY DART 2030 Transit System Plan 10 4 ° Miles Source: NCTCOe Pre-2030 and DART Data Au9ust 2. 2002 E:I Dart Service Area /\/Freeways
􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀧􀀲 Population 􀁏􀁥􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁶 CJO-3 _3-0 _0-9 .9-12 .>12 DRAFT 􀀬􀁾􀁾.. :;'<f-,...􀀻􀀬􀁾􀀮􀀡􀁜􀁰􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁮􀁩􀁮􀀹& Development r 􀂷􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁾􀂷􀁟􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀧􀀿􀀢􀁬 Mobility Needs Assessment
􀁦􀁾 t1 [[L[[[[rJ .,rr L[r-Lr:
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 3-6: 2030 POPULATION DENSITY 2030 POPULATION DENSITY iI 􀁾 ri,􀁾 4 6 Miles Source: HCTCOG Pre·2030 and DART Data August 2, 2002 C D3rt SeNice. Area
/\1 Fre.e.w iilYS 􀁾􀀰􀀳􀁶􀁏 Population Density CJO-3 _3-6 .6-9 .9-12 .>12 ....... . ' ,)Planning & Development ",:"'.-..:'-"'.i,.;!'/Within the DART Service Area, the most significant
increases in population density between 2002 and 2030 occur in portions of Rowlett, South Garland, North Irving, and the Galleria area, as well as along the President George Bush Turnpike
through Carrollton, North Dallas, and Plano. Outside the DART Service Area, population Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 11
DART 2030 Transit System Plan density increases are found in portions of Northeast Tarrant County, South Arlington, the southwestern Dallas suburbs of DeSoto, Duncanville, and Cedar
Hill, as well as along the SH 121 Corridor through Lewisville, The Colony, Frisco, Allen, and McKinney. The geography and degree of population growth will have significant impacts on
DART's future operations. In order to better illustrate these changes, population growth was also measured in terms of changes in density (Fig. 3-7). rlr r[L[[[ Mobility Needs Assessment
DRAFT 12
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 􀀳􀁾􀀷􀀺 CHANGE IN POPULATION DENSITY Changes in population densities help to illustrate that much of the undeveloped land in the study area will
develop by 2030, which will place additional pressure on the transportation system. Source: NCTCOG and DART Data IiIII Nowmber 1'.2002 4 a Miles Population Density Change 2002 -2030
. " .. ,?Planning & Development 􀀮􀀬􀀺􀀬􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀬􀀻􀁾􀁹 MobiHty Needs Assessment DRAFT 13
rrr ',11rr Lf<.. DART 2030 Transit System Plan The 2002 and 2030 population distribution within the DART Service Area by member city is illustrated in Figures 3-8 and 3-9. FIGURE 3·8:
2002 DART MEMBER CITY POPULATION DISTRIBUTION Member City Population Distribution III Addison • Carrollton o Cockrell Hill o Dallas • Farmers Branch • Garland • Glenn Heights o Highland
Park • Irving • Plano o Richardson • Rowlett • University Park Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 FIGURE 3·9: 2030 DART MEMBER CITY POPULATION DISTRIBUTION Source: NCTCOG Demographic
Data DART Member City population distribution between 2002 and 2030 remains fairly constant, with the City of Dallas maintaining the highest percentage of the population. Garland, Plano,
and Irving represent the next highest percentages with each having approximately nine to ten percent of the total. The next group of cities, with one to five percent of the population,
consists of Carrollton, Richardson, Rowlett DRAFT 14 2030 Member City Population Distribution ,-------,1 • Addison • Carrollton o Cockrell Hill o Dallas • Farmers Branch • Garland •
Glenn Heights [) Highland Park • Irving • Plano o Richardson • Rowlett • University Park Mobility Needs Assessment r.t 􀁾 .. [􀁬􀀬􀀮􀁾 [r􀁩􀁾 [[-II,,:' [
DART 2030 Transit System Plan and Farmers Branch. The remaining member cities each make up less than one percent of the total population. 3.2 Existing and Future Employment During the
1990s, the DFW economy experienced a period of steady growth. According to the Office of the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, the DFW area added 215,000 jobs in the last five years.
This is more than a quarter of all new jobs created in the state since 1991. This growth is expected to continue in the near future, but at a slower pace. 3.2.1 2002 and 2030 Employment
Distribution and Density Employment densities are important to transit planning because they can indicate locations that serve as endpoints for high numbers of work trips. Future employment
projections help to predict future transit need because they indicate new or increased concentrations in peak hour trips to specific locations. The employment data, just as the population
data above, is derived from NCTCOG's Transportation Department where it is used in the travel demand model. Overall, the 2002 employment distribution inside and outside of the DART Service
Area is depicted in Figures 3.10 and 3.11. FIGURE 3-10: 2002 EMPLOYMEN1' DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON 2002 Employment Distribution Comparison (i) 2.5 c: .S! -::i 2 tn .Qo "":l Service Area
Study Area (Minus Service Area) • Service Area • Study Area (Minus Service Area) ! Source: NCTCOG Demographic Data Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 15
FIGURE 3-11: 2002 EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON DART 2030 Transit System Plan 2002 Employment Distribution Comparison • Study Area (Minus Service Area) II Service Area 57% 43% r􀁲􀂷􀀮􀂷􀁾
..rr r[[, Source: NCTCOG Demographic Data In 2002, The DART Service Area contains the majority of jobs within the study area. By 2030, employment distribution becomes more evenly spread
between the service area and the study area (51% to 49%). This is illustrated in Figures 3.12 and 3.13. FIGURE 3-12: 2030 EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON 2030 Employment Distribution
Comparison r·-.'· .. r[[[(: [' 3.0 Cil 2.5 c􀁾 :-i 2.0-CIl J:l 􀁾 1.5-1.0 , Service Area Study Area (Minus Service Area) Source: NCTCOG Demographic Data Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT
• Service Area • Study Area (Minus Service Area) 16
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 3-13: 2030 EMPLOYMEN1" DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON 2030 Employment Distribution Comparison 49% 51% • Service Area • Study Area (Minus Service Area) Source:
NCTCOG Demographic Data The next two figures (3.14 and 3.15) depict 2002 and 2030 employment density for the study area by TSZ. i'. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 17
2002 EMPLOYMENT DENSITY FIGURE 3·14: 2002 EMPLOYMENT DENSITY 18 Souroe: NCTCDG Pre·2030 and DART Data August 2. 2002 C Dan Senrice Area 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Miles /\/Fr••OlaY-' 􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀧􀀲
Emplo\'TTlent 􀁄􀁥􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁶 CJO-0.5 • 0.5-1.5 1.5·3.5 .3.5-9.5 .'9.5 DRAFT \}Planning & Development Mobility Needs Assessment DART 2030 Transit System Plan rI rr. [Lr [rl.,.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 3-15: 2030 EMPLOYMENT DENSITY 2030 EMPLOVMENTDENSrrV i. i· II!l Souroe: NCTCOG Pre-2030 and DART Data AIlgust 2.2002 C Dart Service Area 1 ° 1 2
3 4 5 6 Miles /\i Freeways 􀁾􀀰􀀳􀀢􀀰 Employmont 􀁏􀀮􀁮􀁳􀁾􀁹 0 0 .0.5 _0.5·1.5 .1.5-3.5 .3.5· 9.5 .>9.5 􀁾􀁜􀁾 . . ,,(Planning &Development 􀀺􀀢􀁾 .•..0>""." Within the DART Service
Area, the most significant increases in employment density between 2002 and 2030 occur in portions of West Dallas, Southwest Dallas, South Garland, Freeport, Las Colinas, around the
1-3581-635 Interchange, the Galleria, Legacy Park, as well as along the President George Bush Turnpike through Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 19 I:',
r[' [' [r[[l,t DART 2030 Transit System Plan Carrollton, North Dallas, Plano, and Richardson. Outside the DART Service Area, employment density increases are found in Southlake, the
Mid-Cities, Arlington, Duncanville, Denton, and along the SH 121 Corridor through Lewisville, The Colony, Frisco, Allen, and McKinney. Employment growth was also measured in terms of
changes in density. Changes in employment density help to illustrate the amount of development that will take place in outlying areas by 2030 (Figure 3.16). [[' [' [[[[[ Mobility Needs
Assessment DRAFT 20
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 3-16: CHANGE IN EMPLOYMENT DENSITY Employment Density Change 2002 -2030 Souroe: NCTCDD and DART Data .Planning & Development : 0 4 8 Miles. 'lowmbor
11.2002 Figures 3.17 and 3.18 show the breakdown of employment by member city within the DART Service Area. The majority of employment occurs within the City of Dallas, with over 1 million
jobs. The next highest level occurs in Irving with approximately Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT I\lII 21 II,
r[" rLr Lrl'.· DART 2030 Transit System Plan 166,000 jobs. The remaining DART member cities contain less than 150,000 jobs each. FIGURE 3-17: DART MEMBER CITY EMPLOYMENT 2002 Member
City Employment II Addison • Carrollton o Cockrell Hill o Dallas • Farmers Branch • Garland • Glenn Heights g Highland Park • Irving • Plano o Richardson • Rowlett • Unh.ersity Park
Source: S.R. Beard and Associates, 2002. FIGURE3-18: 2030 MEMBER CITY EMPLOYMENT c ' 'I 2030 Member City Employment r-------_ Source: S.R. Beard and Associates, 2002. The distribution
of jobs remains fairly consistent among member cities between 2002 and 2030, however the suburban member cities do pick up a slightly greater share of employment than they had in 2002.
' DRAFT 22 • Addison • Carrollton o Cockrell Hill o Dallas • Farmers Branch • Garland • Glenn Heights l!I Highland Park • Irving • Plano o Richardson' .' • Rowlett • University Park
Mobility Needs Assessment r!L[[' [rr (r
DART 2030 Transit System Plan An implication for transit is that the work force has become more diverse, mobile, and flexible in their work location and work schedule. Employees now
have the options of telecommuting, flexible work hours, working fromtheir cars, or working at mUltiple work locations. These factors also influence when, where and how transit services are provided. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 23
rL. 1';-'. I,i rI DART 2030 Transit System Plan 4.0 EXisting and Future Land Use 4.1 Introduction It is important for the 2030 DART Transit System Plan to address growth and development
in the Dallas region because changing land use patterns affect commute and travel patterns. It is also important to understand how the land uses, inside the DART Service Area compare
to the rapidly changing areas ,outside the DART Service Area. As the areas outside the DART service boundary grow, more and more demand is put onto the roadway and transit network. A
land use analysis can help to quantify existing and anticipated changes in transit demand by documenting the intensity of use in different portions of the metropolitan area. Although
there is no regional land use planning or plans, future land use assumptions are reflected in the demographic forecasts used by the NCTCOG travel demand model. The land use section of
this document introduces the overall land use patterns in the region and within member cities; analyzes analyzes the range of urban investment in areas surrounding DART transit centers
and rail stations; and compares the concentration of jobs to the concentration of housing within the region. It is critical that transportation planning for the future considers policy
and case study examples that could promote transit supportive land use in the DART Service Area including transitoriented land use around DART transit centers and rail station areas.
Overall, the Dallas Fort Worth region is comprised of the following land use breakdown: TABLE 4·1: METROPOLIl'AN LAND USE DFW Metropolitan Area 1995 Land Use (Acres) Residential Industrial
Commercial Institutional Infrastructure Other* Total Acres 475,000 67,390 57,580 39,144 85,731 2,449,718 3,174,563 Percent 15% 2.1% 1.8% 1.2% 2.7% 77.2% 100% Source: NCTCOG 1995 Mid-Decade
Update *Other includes dedicated land, Le., parks, cemeteries, etc; infrastructure, Le., roads, airports, railroads, etc; land under construction; and water bodies. [r[[[[r Mobility
Needs Assessment DRAFT 24
DART 2030 Transit System Plan More specifically, the DART member cities are comprised of the following land uses. TABLE 4·2: DART MEMBER CITIES' LAND USE Cit Addison 549 556 618 137
585 367 2,812 Carrollton 7,403 2,117 899 471 7,964 3,564 22,418 Cockrell Hill 306 8 30 12 14 370 Dallas 88,371 15,975 13,822 8,227 60,045 59,477 245,917 Farmers Branch 2,554 1,134 860
462 1,662 1,005 7,677 Garland 16,588 2,634 1,771 1,155 11,163 3,336 36,647 Glenn Hei hts 747 16 28 20 3,461 113 4,385 Hi hland Park 1,143 31 31 3 219 1,427 Irvin 11,942 2,462 2,946 1,615
13,525 11,054 43,544 Plano 16,156 939 2,850 1,049 17,072 4,448 42,514 Richardson 7,918 1,146 1,473 1,168 3,594 2,747 18,046 Rowlett 3,932 148 189 93 7,184 404 11,950 Universi Park 2,004
4 71 224 1 62 2,366 Total Land Use 159,613 27,139 25,588 14,664 126,273 86,796 440,073 Percenta e 36.3% 6.2% 5.8% 3.3% 28.7% 19.7% 100% Source: NCTCOG 1995 Mid-Decade Update * Other
includes dedicated land, i.e., parks, cemeteries, etc; infrastructure, i.e., roads, airports, railroads, etc; land under construction; and water bodies. 4.2 EXisting and Future Urbanization
DART plans and programs future transportation investments. It is important to identify the areas with land use that would support future transit. For purposes of this analysis, an "urbanization
index" was developed in order to depict the intensity of ,land use by aggregated population and employment density. , Figures 4-1 and 4-2 depict the results of the urbanization index
analysis both inside : and outside the DART SeNice Area Boundary. ' Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 25
2002 URBANIZATION INDEX FIGURE 4-1: 2002 URBANIZATION INDEX DART 2030 Transit System Plan Source: NCTCOD Pre·2030 􀀮􀁮􀁾 OART 0... JUly 18.2002 . N"Uuay. 2 4 8 Mile. C:I 􀁄􀁁􀁒􀁔􀁓􀀧􀁁􀁬􀁾􀁴
Alta 2DD2 UIll•• h:iI Uo. llGu 􀀮􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀲 .12-18 • 18.2( ••2( 􀁾􀀯􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁊􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁧& Development [r["L[rr [' [r[[..•.. ' .. Because urbanization is an indication of population and
employment density, its main use is to indicate the transit potential of certain areas by assuming a re'lationship between potential markets for transit and population and employment
densities. The most urbanized land use areas in 2002 can be found in Las Colinas, the Galleria [[l Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 26
DART 2030 Transit System Plan area, Oak Cliff, around the Dallas CBD, along 1-35E from the Dallas CBO to Carrollton, and along US 75 from the Dallas CBD to Richardson. Outside the Service
Area, high urbanization levels can be found in Central Denton and Arlington. FIGURE 4-2: 2030 URBANIZATION INDEX 'Planning" Developmllllt Urbanization Index 2030 A/,rUlliIIVS -C DART
St ru bt Allil UIba ,lt1rtIO' lult x 2:030 pt r AOI\ Q]D-6 • 6-12 12 -US .'8-2. ••2. "!!!!Ii;;;;l!!!!!!!i;;;;;;;;;;;j4 Mil.. Source: NeTC 0 G Pr.·2030 00" July2,2002 !iI,\. By 2030 urbanization
becomes more dense not only in the same areas as in 2002, but also in portions of Lewisville, the Mid-Cities, South Arlington, West Dallas, Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 27 Ii "
4.3 Land Use Centers DART 2030 Transit System Plan Another characteristic found in the Dallas CBD which is very important to the transit market is paid parking. Other centers such as
airports, entertainment venues, post The spatial delineation of centers is often difficult and somewhat arbitrary because these areas may not originally be planned to be concentrated
and nodal in form. The delineation for transit planning purposes may not be the same as for other planning or economic"development purposes. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 28 Important
transit planning characteristics of centers are not only the number of employees, but also the type of businesses and the nature of the land use. Large industrial parks may employ large
numbers of workers, but may not offer a good transit market because trips are dispersed both spatially and temporally because of shift work. On the other hand, an area like the Dallas
CBD offers a good transit market because there are large numbers of trips with similar origins traveling to the same destination during the same time period. Some activity centers such
as the Dallas CBD have very diverse land uses that generate internal trips and provide a local circulator transit market. There are many types of centers with a variety of functions.
There is no consistent definition for Regional Activity Centers; however, this term is generally applied to centers that have diverse functions and land uses of a regional scale. A Regional
Activity Center might include uses such as regional employment areas, regional shopping centers or other regional uses such as entertainment or specialized functions such as airpo'1s,
hospitals and universities. Centers can be defined at various scales ranging from neighborhood centers to regional centers. At a system planning level, the centers that are destinations
for long distance regional trips are of the greatest interest. Smaller centers or development nodes are important for corridor or area transit planning. The centers in the DART Service
Area with the highest forecast number of daily trips in 2030 are Telecom, Dallas CBD, Legacy, Galleria, Las Colinas and DFW International Airport. Centers are concentrations of land
uses that serve as focal points in an urban area. Land uses within these areas typically include concentrations of employment, particularly commercial uses such as offices and technology
uses and may also include retail and restaurants, pUblic or institutional uses, hotels and in some cases residential units. Other centers may consist of specialized land uses such as
airports, hospitals, universities or stadiums. Centers are important to transit planning because they attract a large number of person-trips. Concentrations of employment are of particular
interest to transit planning, because work trips are commonly made up of a number of similar trips with common origins or destinations. These are trip characteristics that can be effectively
served by transit. Legacy Park, Along US 75 into Plano and Allen as well as along the President George Bush Turnpike in Plano. Not surprisingly, the most urbanized areas show a pattern
similar to the employment density forecast for 2030. This trend is important because it suggests that the areas with the land use characteristics having the most potential to support
transit are employment rather than housing centers. 􀁦􀁾 "􀁩􀁾 􀁾􀀭 , rr L[[t[Lrr: [lrLl: l
DART 2030 Transit System Plan secondary schools and hospitals which have paid parking are usually good 􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁾 markets. Within the study area, some of the largest existing suburban
employment areas are low-density master-planned business parks covering large land areas. Typically, the major employers are office or technology businesses. It is expected that over
time, some of these areas will attract more diverse land uses including residential and will take on more of the characteristics of Regional Activity Centers. The Dallas CBD is the largest
and most diverse Regional Activity Center in the DART Service Area. It contains commercial, institutional and some residential uses. Total employment in 2002 is estimated to be 125,000.
The forecast employment in 2030 is 170,000. Las Colinas is a Regional Activity Center located in Irving near the DFW International Airport. It contains the Las Colinas Business Park
which covers 12,000 acres. Total employment in 2002 is estimated to be 81,000. The forecast employment in 2030 is 150,000. Planning for Las Colinas includes more mixed use, higher intensity
development in the urban center including retail, entertainment and residential uses. At one time, Las Colinas had an automated people mover in service to provide local circulation,
but in recent years, the service has not been in regular operation. The Galleria is a Regional Activity Center located north of IH-635 along the Dallas Tollway. It contains the Galleria
shopping mall, other commercial uses as well as residential uses. Total employment in 2002 is estimated to be 93,000. The forecast employment in 2030 is 140,000. The Telecom Corridor
is a Regional Activity Center located in Richardson along US 75 and the President George BushTurnpike. Total employment in 2002 is estimated to be 68,000. The forecast employment in
2030 is 130,000. Within the Telecom Corridor, the Galatyn Park area is planned to contain a diverse center. of retail, restaurants, cultural and residential uses. Legacy is a Regional
Activity Center located in the north part of Plano which includes a master-planned business community of 2,665 acres. The Town Center has been planned to include retail, entertainment,
recreation and residential uses. Total employment in 2002 is estimated to be 28,000. The forecast employment in 2030 is 80,000. The DFW International Airport is a major Regional Activity
Center that attracts trips from the DFW Region and· beyond. Total employment in 2002 is estimate.d to be 32,000. The forecast employment in 2030 is 60,000. The airport served 61 million
passengers in 2000. Approximately 65% of trips are transfers between connecting flights. . II" Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 29
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 2030 REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS· SERVICE AREA 30 Source: Ncr·COG and OART Dala ""'ly11,2002 . . DART Service Area NFreeways . Planning & Development Source:
NCTCOG and OART Data Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT FIGURE 4-3: REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS rl [r[[[[[ ii. riL
DART 2030 Transit System Plan ...... 600,000 585,000 460,000 310,000 295,000 4.4 Land Use Corridors Land use corridors are linear concentrations of population and employment. Land use
within these corridors typically includes higher intensity employment in the form of multi-level office buildings or high technology office parks as well as a variety of other commercial
uses. Corridors may also include higher intensity residential uses in the form of multi-family housing developments and/or housing intermixed with commercial uses. They are important
to transit planning because higher density population and employment corridors generate a large number of trips that can often be effectively served by transit. More intense land use
corridors have developed along transportation routes including those served by automobiles and transit. Early in the twentieth century, transit corridors were often served by streetcars
and encouraged fairly dense development within walking distance of the routes. The streets were designed to be pedestrian and transit friendly. Remnants of this type of development can
still be found in parts of downtown Dallas and within areas of Uptown, just north of downtown. For example, parts of McKinney Avenue served by the McKinney Avenue Transportation Authority
still exhibit these characteristics. Development along freeway corridors occurs because of easy automobile access. However, this type of development, .including some along suburban arterial
streets, has become less intensive and is designed more for automobiles than for pedestrians or transit. Although these corridors may have higher concentrations of population and land
use, it is a challenge to provide good transit service because of the focus on auto-oriented urban design. : Rail transit corridors, on the contrary, encourage higher intensity development
and redevelopment in and around station areas. These corridors are often characterized by high linear population and employment density, with higher intensity nodes at stations. There
are a number of major land use corridors that can be clearly identified based on the 2030 Urbanization Index. Figure 4-4 highlights the corridors listed below: • North Central Corridor
The Telecom Corridor is found within this corridor (one of the regional activity centers found in Fig. 4-3). The North Central LRT line extends to Parker Rd. in Plano. Mobility Needs
Assessment DRAFT 31 l
r[rrr Lrl DART 2030 Transit System Plan • Stemmons Corridor The planned Northwest LRT line to Frankford Rd. in Carrollton is in this corridor. • Northwest Corridor This corridor connects
Las Colinas and DFW International Airport (two of the regional activity centers found in Fig. 4-3). The planned Northwest LRT line to DFW International Airport via Las Colinas is in
this corridor. • Dallas North Tollway Corridor This corridor connects the Galleria area and Legacy Park (two of the regional activity centers found in Fig. 4-3). There are additional
land use corridors that are somewhat less intense: • West Oak Cliff Corridor The West Oak Cliff LRT line to Westmoreland/Illinois is in this corridor. • Northeast Corridor The Northeast
LRT line to Garland and planned extension to Rowlett is in this corridor. • LBJ Corridor This corridor stretches from SH 78 (Garland Road) to the Dallas North Tollway. • President George
Bush Turnpike Corridor This corridor runs from east of US 75 to just west of the Dallas North Tollway. r[[[[[[[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 32
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 4-4: LAND USE CORRIDORS 2030 Land Use Corridors i . iiI . I [. iI :Planning & Development Mobility Needs Assessment NFreeways C DART Ser,,;ce Area
Urbani,ation Index 2030 per Acre 0°·16 .>16 DRAFT 6 Miles l!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Source: NCTCOG and DART Data May20,2003 33 rI
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 4.5 Rail Station Area Development Examples DART light rail stations have attracted more than $1 billion in new commercial and residential investment. The
Initial Economic Impacts of the DART LRT System, a study by the University of North Texas' Center for Economic Development and Research determined that values of property adjoining DART
light rail stations are 25 percent higher than for similar properties not served by the rail system. Because regional and local trends in economic expansion, population growth, and development
influence the efficiency of transit services, it is also important to recognize the many examples of successful developer and municipality-driven transit-oriented development in the
DART Service Area. Land use studies have shown that transit usage increases with the density of residential and employment development. With this relationship in mind, communities are
encouraging mixed use development that is transit-oriented. Table 4-4 lists existing developments at DART rail stations that serve as examples of successful transit-oriented development
in the region. TABLE 4-4: TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE DART SERVICE AREA Rail Line Development Description Cedars Station Red and Blue South Side on Lamar • 460 loft apartments
• Entertainment • Office • Retail • Police headquarters West End Station Red and Blue Awalt Building Converted saddle factory into 29 loft condominiums Akard Station Red and Blue • Davis
Building • $35 million redevelopmentresidential • Magnolia Building • $34 million redevelopment-hotel • Kirby Building • $22 million redevelopmentresidential • Wilson Building • $18
million redevelopmentresidential • Renaissance • Blockbuster Entertainment--Tower leases space for 1,000 employees in station area .; Pearl Station Red and Blue Crozier Tech Site $75
million value for surplus property beina held for futureuse' St. Paul Station Red and Blue • Bryan Tower • $80 million renovation to open transit mall frontage to retail " • Adams Mark
Hotel Hotel • $150 million conversion from Southland Center in Republic 􀀮􀁾􀀮 Towers into hotel Cityplace Station Red and Blue • West Village • $60 million development into 45 shops,
160 apartments • Fairfield • Residential development of $30-Residential 35 million value '., • $20 million investment into • Cityplace Market 200,000 sf retail • $11 million investment
into 14 • Loews Movie screens Theatre rI[.rrr [[[[[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 34
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Mockingbird Red and Blue • The Phoenix • $45 million investment into 450 Station lUxury apartment units • Mockingbird • $150 million investment into Station
183,000 sf retail space, 211 loft aoartments, 180,000 sf office Park Lane Station Red Tel Site 11 acres ready to develop Lovers Lane Red Shopping center Shared parking between station
and Station redevelopment shopping center LBJ/Central Red Proposed office East access for pedestrians; joint development of excess DART land Galatyn Park Red Galatyn Park Mixed use station
area development • 330 room hotel • 30,000 sf conference center • 1500 seat performing arts center • Totals $80-100 million develooment Downtown Plano Red • Eastside Village • $18 million:
230 apartments, I Phase I 16,000 sf retail/office • Eastside Village • $16 million: 242 apartments, Phase II 240,000 sf retail/office Source: DART, 2002 II .1: !I.: I[ Mobility Needs
Assessment DRAFT 35
rrr[[[' [[[ DART 2030 Transit System Plan Fi ure 4-5: DART Rail Stations Effective December 9, 2002 Legend Most member cities do not include specific transit supportive policies in their
land use plans. However, some local governments are recognizing the need for station area planning. For example, the amended 2000 Comprehensive Planning Guide for the City of Richardson
calls for transit-oriented development or redevelopment of land within close proximity to a transit facility. Recently, the City of Garland completed a Station Area Development Plan
for the Garland downtown rail station. The plan calls for retail, civic and pedestrian oriented development that would be within walking distance to the rail station. These are just
two examples of local governments responding to changes related to development around transit facilities. [1] NORTH [ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 36
DART 2030 Transit System Plan It is anticipated that as transit services develop further, more cities both inside and outside the DART Service Area will begin adopting land use policies
or programs for transit supportive development. For example: • The City of Farmers Branch is currently planning for a transit-oriented station area development for a light rail station
that is currently programmed to open for revenue service in approximately 2007. • The City of Irving is planning for several stations and looking at creating a transit mall within the
Las Colinas area, even though LRT revenue service is not programmed until 2009 or 2010. • The City of Addison has plans for development between the current Addison Transit Center and
the Performing Arts District for entertainment uses. This is in anticipation of a potential future rail station next to the Addison Transit Center. • The City of Richardson is looking
at an additional LRT station in the proximity of Beltline/Main Street and is working with landowners landowners and consultants to develop plans for a mixed-'use development. • The City
of Plano is re-evaluating the surrounding property at the Parker Road Station as well as beginning planning for a possible station at Spring Creek Parkway, about a mile north of the
Parker Road Station. • The City of Rowlett is in the early stages of beginning to formulate a downtown development plan that would incorporate a light rail station which is currently
scheduled to open in 2009. • The City of Dallas is working in conjunction with the University of North Texas regarding station area planning around the new UNT-Dallas campus when the
South Oak Cliff light rail line is extended in 2013. 4.6 Jobs/Housing Ratio The jobs-to-housing ratio is an additional important indicator of transit potential. The ratio is calculated
by dividing the number of jobs by the number of households within each TSZ. Areas with the highest values are those having more jobs compared to the number of households, whereas those
with the lowest values have fewer jobs compared to the number of households. Sub regionally in 2002, there are clearly more jobs per household in the northern areas of the DART Service
Area. ii . ! Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT
FIGURE 4-6: 2002 SUB-REGIONAL JOBS TO HOUSING RATIO DART 2030 Transit System Plan AN 2002 Jobs;Housing Ratio by Subregion rrr rr[Ll Source: NCTCOG and DART Data By 2030, the jobs-to-housing
index shows very little change in the ratios with the most jobs for every household still in the north and northwest portions of the study area, while the jobs-to-housing imbalance in
the southeast and southwest continues. 􀁾􀁯􀁢􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹 Needs Assessment DRAFT 38
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 4-7: 2030 SUB-REGIONAL JOBS TO HOUSING RATIO 2030 Jobs/Housing Ratio by Subregion In both 2002 and 2030, much of the study area is characterized
by very low values, but the highest values occur within the Northwest sub region. Higher ratios suggest significant employment densities that cause trip attractions as people travel
to get to work. Lower ratios suggest a high concentration of trip productions, as people commute elsewhere to work. As the above map illustrates, there exists a strong need for DART
to transport workers from the southern portion of the service area to employment opportunities in the northern sections, particularly the northwest. It may be conducive for DART to look
for ways in the future of improving service to this travel pattern by minimizing transfers and travel time. II! Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 39
5.1 Introduction DART 2030 Transit System Plan TABLE 5-1: DART'S EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES 5.0 Transportation Services and Facilities Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 40 Source: DART,
2002 The following table summarizes DART's range of transit service. DART serves Dallas with a growing network of light rail and commuter rail lines and a fleet of nearly 1,000 buses
and vans, moving more than 200,000 people a day across the 700-square-mile service area. DART has nearly doubled its ridership since 1996. GENERAL INFORMATION Geographic Service Area
13 cities, 700 square miles FY02 Operating Budget $291,500,000 FY02 System-wide ridership (bus, rail, HOV, 93.8 million passenger trips Para-Transit services and vanpools combined) Bus
FY02 route miles 1,455 Total vehicle fleet 877 Number of transit centers 14 Number of bus stops 11,961 Number of bus shelters 452 FY02 bus ridership 42.8 million passenger trips Average
Daily Ridership (10/02) 151,100 DART Light Rail Length of Light Rail Starter System (12/02) 44 miles Number of Lial-It Rail Stations 34 Total liaht rail vehicle fleet 95 FY02 light rail
ridership 13.7 million passenger trips Average Daily Ridership (10/02) 51,200 Trinity Railway Express (diesel commuter rail) LenQth of Line 34 miles Commuter Rail Stations 9 FY02 ridership
2.1 Million passenger trips Average VVeekday Commuter Rail Ridership (10/02) 7,800 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes Number of interim lanes 4 Number of freeway miles, FY02 31 FY02
Commuter trips 34.2 million Average weekday trips (11/02) 100,000 Para-Transit (van service for disabled customers Registered Participants (10/02) 6,900 FY02 Ridership 586,000 Number
of vehicles 170 rlr [[rl [.•....' [rE'·'.-<-􀁾 Ic, rrr[r[[" l,
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 5.2 Bus DART's bus services are classified into 5 service categories, which reflect their functional and operational characteristics: Local, Cross-town,
Express, Transit Center/Feeder, and Rail Feeder. The following table summarizes the historical ridership on DART buses. TABLE 5-2: .HISTORICAL BUS RIDERSHIP Fiscal Annual Bus 0/0 Year
Riders Change 1995 44,164,554 ---1996 42,918,961 -3% 1997 43,399,360 1% 1998 45,403,015 5% 1999 46,977,255 3% 2000 48,096,955 2% 2001 47,419,979 -1% 2002 42,154,017 -11% r! Source: DART,
2002 The current bus network consists of: • 877 buses • 131 routes • 1,455 route miles • 11,961 bus stops • 42.8 million annual passenger trips • 151,100 average weekday ridership (10/02)
.1r' iI II rI Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 41
rrr[r[r-· Lr DART 2030 Transit System Plan 5.2.1 Express Bus As part of its bus network, DART operates 10 non-stop express bus routes between transit centers or Park-and-Ride facilities
and downtown Dallas. An additional express bus route also operates between Plano/Richardson and Las Colinas. Express Bus service is direct, fast and makes limited stops. DART's express
bus service consists of: • 11 routes total • 2.7 million in annual ridership • 100 buses [r[[-" [[f.b[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 42
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 5-1: EXISTING DART BUS SYSTEM l 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 ---opper anyon Double Oak FlowerMound Grapevine Arlington on Gardens \ Ora d Pralirie DART Bus Route System
Jul 2002 (' I Allen /.II) Parker " ! Lucas Wyli ------.,. I , I II! . 'Planning &Development Local Express Crosstown Transit Center Feeder Rail Feede, Spe.ia'Shullle Se rvice Area SOURCE:
DART II The routes depicted in Figure 5-1 serve the transit center and park and ride facilities shown in Figure 5·2 as well as the rail lines and stations found in Figure 5-3. Mobility
Needs Assessment DRAFT 43
DART Transit Centers and Park and Rides December 2002 FIGURE 5-2: DART TRANSIT CENTERS AND PARK AND RIDES DART 2030 Transit System Plan 44 SOURCE: DART Park and Ride Transit Center "
.... 􀀻􀀯􀁾􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁦􀀱􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁧 &Development Servi ce Area 􀀬􀁉􀀺􀀢􀀻􀁾􀁩􀀡 _I, Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT rrI" . [rr: [[􀁌􀂷􀁾􀂷 ..... [rrr r: rL[Il
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 5.2.2 Trolley-Bus Circulator Service DART offers Trolley-Bus circulator service to help serve light rail connections throughout downtown Dallas; between
DART's Park Lane Station and NorthPark Center; among businesses, offices and entertainment destinations in Richardson's Telecom Corridor; within the Las Colinas Urban Center; along the
hotel, shopping and entertainment stops in Addison; around the SMU campus near Mockingbird Station; and in the Lancaster Road area in South Oak Cliff. The trolley-bus service has the
following components: • 8 routes • 22 trolley-buses • 1,100 daily riders 5.3 Rail 5.3.1 Light Rail DART has 44 miles of light rail transit in operation while 47 miles are in design and/or
planning. Light rail transit is an electrically powered transit vehicle relying on overhead power lines (an overhead -catenary system). Light rail is designed for medium-distance, medium-speed
service. Stations are typically one to two miles apart. It can operate with other traffic at street level, run in subways, or along elevated tracks. DART's current light rail system
consists of: • 44 miles in operation • 34 light rail stations -• 95 vehicles in the light rail 'fleet • 13.7 million annual passenger trips (FY02) • 51,200 in average daily ridership
(10/02) IIII· Ic-I[' IIf,. II MobilityNeeds Assessment DRAFT 45 II
Table 5-3 summarizes ridership trends on the light rail component of the DART system. FIGURE 5-3: EXISTING DART RAIL SYSTEM DART 2030 Transit System Plan 46 Red LRT Line BILle LRT Line
Trinity Railway Express Service Area SOURCE: DART DRAFT DART Light Rail and Commuter Rail System December 2002 'Planning &Development Mobility Needs Assessment The rail components of
the DART system are depicted in the following figure. [[[r[r[[ ...L[r􀁲􀁾􀂷 o.fr r[[l
DART 2030 Transit System Plan TABLE 5·3: HISTORICAL LRT RIDERSHIP Fiscal AnnualLRT % Year Riders Change 1996 1,413,563 ---1997 7,971,670 464% 1998 10,949,409 37% 1999 11,345,754 4% 2000
11,433,508 1% 2001 11,508,184 1% 2002 13,733,069 19% Source: DART, 2002. 5.3.2 Commuter Rail The Trinity Railway Express is a commuter rail service operated jointly by DART and the Fort
Worth Transportation Authority (The T). Service currently runs from Dallas Union Station to downtown Fort Worth. Commuter trains typically consist of diesel-powered locomotives pulling
one or two level passenger cars. Trinity Railway Express uses Bi-Ievel commuter coaches, which feature two decks. The coaches feature an attractive appearance and outstanding comfort.
The lower deck is wheelchair-accessible. Trinity Railway Express also operates self-powered diesel railcars (DMU's). Commuter rail service consists of the following elements: • 35 miles
in operation • 9 commuter rail stations • 4 cab cars • 10 coaches • 13 rail diesel cars • 4 locomotives • 2.1 million annual passenger trips • 7,800 in average weekday Ridership (10/02)
Table 5-4 summarizes historical ridership of the Trinity Railway Express. TABLE 5·4: HISTORICAL COMMUTER RAIL RIDERSHIP Fiscal Annual TRE 0/0 Year Riders Change 1997 189,596 --1998 455,514
140%. 1999 587,519 29% 2000 688,135 17% 2001 1,322,005 92% 2002 2,134,011 61% Source: DART, 2002 IIii(-il Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 47
In 1989 DART formalized an agreement with the Union Pacific Railroad to acquire a majority of the right-of-way required to implement the transit system plan approved by the DART Board
in that same year. DART has preserved 250 miles of right-of;.way, but the majority of the right-of way has not been planned or programmed for specific use. 5.3.3 Other DART Rail ROW
FIGURE 5-4: DART-OWNED RIGHT-OF-WAY 48 [f] NORTH -----, DRAFT LEGEND: _ DARTCURRENTLRT SERVICE .􀁾..co.... TRINfTY RAILWAY EXPRESS (TRE) COMMUTER RAIL SERVICE TRINITY RAILWAY EXPRESS
(TRE) OTHER ___ DART. SHARED RIGHTS _DARTOTHER DART RAIL RIGHT-Of-WAY 01123103 Mobility Needs Assessment DART 2030 Transit System Plan Flr 􀀨􀁾 . .":,,, [[[[rrrrr [[LLLr
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 5.4 HOV Currently, DART operates 31 miles of HOV lanes within the Dallas region (Figure 5-5). All the dynamic signs, lane control signals, changeable message
signs and cameras associated with the HOV lane facilities are operated from the ITS Satellite Control Center located at the former North Central Park & Ride facility. The HOV Transitway
Policy guides the development of Individual Interlocal Agreements (ILAs) between DART and the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) for all facilities. It also defines the roles
and responsibilities of each agency in the development, operation, and maintenance of the projects. All HOV lanes are jointly planned and designed by DART and TxDOT. They are constructed
by the State and DART is responsible for their management, operation, and enforcement. Maintenance is jointly performed by both agencies. Buses, vanpools, carpools (with two . or more
occupants), as well as motorcycles are eligible to use the HOV lanes. The locations of the HOV HOV lanes and a description are depicted in Table 5-5, and a summary of HOV Lane use is
included in Table 5-6. TABLE 5-5: DART HOV LANE DESCRIPTIONS HOV Lane Description 1-35E (Stemmons Northbound lane runs 6 miles Southbound lane runs 7.3 miles r Freeway) from 1-635 (LBJ
Freeway) to from just south of Round Grove I Trinity Mills Road. Road (FM 3040) to 1-635 (LBJ I Freeway). 1-35E {Stemmons The Interchange Bypass, a reversible HOV lane on 1-35E I Freeway)/1-635
{LBJ (Stemmons Freeway), provides a time saver at the 1-635 (LBJ I Freeway) Freeway) Interchange, operating southbound during morning peak Interchange Bypass periods (6-9 􀁡􀁾􀁭􀀮􀀩
and northbound during afternoon peak periods (3:30 p.m.-7 p.m.) on weekdays only. i 1-635 (LBJ Freeway) Westbound lane runs 6.1 miles Eastbound lane runs 9.5 miles from just westof Hillcrest
Road from Luna Road to near US 75. I to 1-35E. ..,' 􀁾 I 1-30 (East R.L. Thornton Westbound HOV lane runs 5.2 Eastbound HOV lane runs 5.2 Freeway) miles from just west of Jim Miller
miles from qowntown Dallas to I Road in East Dallas to just west of Jim Miller Road. l downtown Dallas. Open Open weekdays, 3:30 p.m. to 7 weekdays, 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. p.m. 1-35/US 67
(South R.L. Northbound lanes run from Southbound lanes run from Thornton/Marvin D. Camp Wisdom Road to downtown Dallas to Camp Love Freeway) downtown Dallas. The reversible Wisdom Road.
The reversible section from Loop 12 to section from downtown to Loop downtown is open from 6 a.m. to 12 is open from 3:30 p.m. to 7 9 a.m. for northbound traffic. p.m. for southbound
commuters. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 49
rrrr r·.· ..[rIL DART 2030 Transit System Plan Source: DART, 2002. TABLE 5-6: HISTORICAL HOV LANE USE Fiscal Annual % Year Riders Change 1996 2,693,638 ---1997 16,622,120 517% 1998 25,758,320
55% 1999 30,929,752 20% 2000 33,059,768 7% 2001 34,043,074 3% 2002 34,200,000 0.5% Source: DART, 2002. rr [[[:0'. r[[[, Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 50
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 5·5: EXISTING HOV SYSTEM DART HOV System December 2002 I . II IIII I.: i . II. iI ":;'Planning &Dl!ve.lopment Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT HOV
System Service Area SOURCE: DART 51 f. I
Source: DART, 2002 5.5.2 Van Pool 52 Fiscal Annual 0/0 Year Ridership Change 1996 692,944 ---1997 682,075 -2% 1998 724,316 6% 1999 542,265 -25% 2000 559,088 3% 2001 547,005 -2% 2002
586,000 7% DRAFT TABLE 5-7: mSTORICAL PARA-TRANSIT PARTICIPATION DART staff handles scheduling, dispatching, and administrative functions of the service. Para-Transit service is contracted
with two vendors who operate and maintain the fleet of vehicles. DART has approximately 7,000 eligible patrons in its database. Currently, DART provides about 2,500 trips daily across
its 700 square mile service area (Table 5-7). • 70 vehicles • 734 participants Mobility Needs Assessment DART's vanpool serves any destination within Dallas, Denton, or Collin County
whose trip does not originate within Tarrant County or other counties that are served by the rideshare program of the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T). DART's vanpool program
currently consists of: DART Para-Transit service provides curb-to-curb public transportation to people with disabilities who are unable to use DART buses or trains. Para-Transit services
are shared-ride services operated with a fleet of 200 vehicles. Eligible riders may schedule trips anywhere within the DART Service Area including DFW International Airport. Trips must
be scheduled in advance, and SUbscription service is available to regular users. DART also offers travel training to Para-Transit eligible individuals who have the ability to use DART
bus or rail services. 5.5.1 Para-Transit 5.5 System Specialized Services DART 2030 Transit System Plan rrrr [.'.•. C.' ,r[[r·.... llL·.•.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan The program benefits its participants by reducing driving costs, parking costs, drive-related stress, and commute time (some routes can take advantage of
HOV lanes). DART provides either an 8 or 15 passenger van along with gas and insurance to groups ofusers with common origins and destinations. 5.6 Other Transit Providers Some residents
of areas in and around the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area have access to transit services made available to them by transit providers other than DART. These transit providers focus
primarily on localized or specialized services and are not part of the DART system. Table 5-8 describes these other transit providers and the services they provide. TABLE 5-8: TRANSIT
SERVICE IN THE DALLAS/FORT WORTH METROPOLITAN AREAAnnual Agency Area Patrons Type of Type of Passenger Name Served Served Organization Service Trips CCART Collin County Elderly and Private,
non-ADA shuttle 78,500 (Collin County (excluding Medicaid profit Rural Transit) Plano) reciDients The Grand Grand Prairie Elderly and Municipal ADA shuttle 21,000 Connection disabled
MTED (Mesquite Mesquite, Elderly and Municipal (City ADA shuttle 20,800 Transportation Dallas, Balch disabled Senior Alert for the Elderly Spring, Program) and Disabled) Garland, Sunnvvale
SPAN Denton County Elderly and Private, non-ADA shuttle 48,800 (Services disabled profit Program for Aging Needs) , Lewisville Dial-Corinth, Double Elderly and Municipal and ADA shuttle
26,000 A-Ride Oak, Flower Disabled SPAN :1 Mound, , Hickory Creek, Highland Village, Lake Dallas, and Lewisville LINK City of Denton Denton residents Municipal and N/A 158,800 SPAN CTS
Ellis and Elderly and Public, county ADA shuttle 61,500 (Community Navarro Medicaid Transit County recipients Service) II{" iIri Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 53 ..
The Transit Erath, Somervell Demand-Public, county N/A 33,400 System, Inc. and Hood responsive County The Hunt and County residents Public, county N/A 15,400 Connection, Rockwall Inc.
County KART Kaufman County County residents, Private non-N/A 27,400 (Kaufman Area demand-profit Rural responsive (Kaufman Transportation) County Senior Citizens Service) Palo Pinto Palo
Pinto County residents Public, TxDOT, N/A 60,000 County County, Rural Transport-Weatherford Transportation Council, ation Grant Inc. Proaram PCTSI Parker County County residents, Private,
non-N/A 60,000 (Parker County demand-profit Transportation responsive Service, Inc.) Handitran City of Arlington Elderly and .Municipal ADA shuttle 101,500 disabled NETS Bedford, Public,
demand-Non-profit, N/A 21,700 (Northeast Colleyville, response Urban Transportation Euless, Service Service) Grapevine, branch of Haltom City, YMCA Hurst, Keller, North .Richland Hills,
Richland Hills, Southlake TAPS Rural Fannin, Public, demand-County N/A 145,000 (Texoma Area Area Grayson, response Para transit Cooke, ., System) Montague, Clay and Wise , counties,
and the Sherman-., -, Denison-Howe small urban area DART Para-13 member Service Area Regional Bus, rail, ADA 553,000 transit cities residents shuttle, HOV (Dallas Area Rapid Transit)
rr􀁴􀁾rr . 􀁲,􀂷􀀢􀀧"􀀮-􀁾:-􀀧 [[-' LlrL[[rl[[[..•.•'. r.".· l􀁦􀁾􀀮 L[ DART 2030 Transit System Plan Source: DART, 2002 Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 54
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 5.7 The Current Programmed Transit System-Rail/HOV Major capital projects programmed as part of the current Transit System Plan are shown in Figure 5-6
and Table 5-9. FIGURE 5-6: PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS iII '._-.-.._---,.....,. /"', "'-" .....----􀁲􀁏􀁮􀀩􀁾􀀢..􀀧􀀬 --::.... SOUk'CE D.';RT '--'-'--' Villi. 􀁾􀀭􀁟.•.􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀯􀀧 /'
! ,." /",. .' /' 􀀧􀁾􀀮 􀀢􀀢􀁉􀁾􀀬􀂷 I 􀁧􀀢􀀧􀁬􀁾􀀬􀁴􀁜 􀀡􀀻􀀭􀁮􀁾􀀮􀀻􀀬 ", 􀀬􀁾􀀭􀀮 -,.-j ..-'.'.. Ey.isting HOV pr:alln.;,d HOV 8lrJE LRT Lim? eiuc LRT Line E􀁸􀁴􀀢􀀬􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾 Red
LRT litH NW <lnQ Sf un Expar.siQns Ttilllty P.ailY/ay 􀁅􀁾􀁰􀁬􀀢􀁳􀁳 PI.I.o -=-} ... J. I ../I;>,••􀀺􀀮􀀶􀁾􀁫 I .... .. 􀁾"'􀀭􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀻􀀭 1 .< ../\<-. --'I-􀀭􀁾􀀭 􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀬􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁁􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀧�
�􀀮􀀮 Jr.....xJ,il. ------􀂻􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁰􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀢􀁾 .. 􀁏􀁯􀁾􀀮 􀁄􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀧 -􀀡􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀭􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀧􀀨__--==-,.._ 􀁾.". '. ' '. Programmed Improvements ) Planning &Development
Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 55 f'
[[LLr1 DART 2030 Transit System Plan TABLE 5-9: PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS Existing Future Light Rail 44 Miles 47 Miles Commuter Rail 34 Miles oMiles HOV 31 Miles 112 Miles
Source: DART, 2002. 5.7.1 Rail Plan In the fall of 2002, DART completed the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Impact Statements (PE/EIS) for two additional rail corridors. Timing
of the programmed expansions are dependent on funding, however, at the time this report was prepared, the following expansions were planned: The Southeast Corridor will extend LRT from
Downtown Dallas through Fair Park and then south along US 175 to Buckner (Loop 12) in Pleasant Grove. The Northwest Corridor, will extend LRT service northwest from Downtown Dallas to
Farmers Branch and Carrollton and to DFW International Airport via Las Colinas. Other improvements to the LRT system include an extension of the Northeast (Blue) Line to Rowlett, and
extension of the South Oak Cliff (Blue) Line from ledbetter Station to near 1-20 to accommodate a new new University of North Texas-Dallas campus. 5.7.2 Bus Plan DART's Five Year Action
Plan guides the short-term bus planning process. The Five Year Action Plan provides strategies to identify annual projects based on the following: After annual projects have been identified,
they are evaluated based on DART's subsidy per rider for route type, and on DART's transit supply and transit potential indices (these indices are discussed at the end of the Market
Assessment section). • Compliance with service standards, which are adopted by the DART Board. • Capital projects and openings in the five-year time frame. • Under-served travel patterns,
based on NCTCOG travel pattern data. • Areas of previous success. • Connecting routes to ligl"lt rail. • Improving cross-town connections. • Adding weekend service. • Connecting to service
employment. • Improving headways to meet community needs. • Simplifyil"\g routes and segments. • Conducting service area reviews, which are detailed needs assessments for sub areas and
member cities conducted every three to four years. These reviews identify improvement projects for consideration and evaluation. r[[[IfiI, [[r. t[...:. '. ," Mobility Needs Assessment
DRAFT 56
r'!r[. lf\I
6.1 Introduction 6.0 Market Assessment 6.1.2 Transit Implications of Economic Trends DART 2030 Transit System Plan Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 57 6.1.3 Demographic Trends The following
national trends will likely be experienced in the DFW Region with the exception of immigration and migration. The DFW region is experiencing both high levels of migration from the northern
states and immigration from Mexico. • Di'rficult to serve effectively with transit • Service employment sites dispersed • Service job hours and schedules require long service span •
Traditional low-income transit dependent population will grow • Ability to pay for transit still a factor • Part-time workers change place of work and time frequently • Need transit
over non-standard hours • Women's travel more likely to include linked (multi-stop) trips • Expanding service-based economy • Increasing income disparities • Increased work force flexibility
• Rise of women in work force 6.1.1 Economic Trends The following national trends are likely to be mirrored in the Dallas-Fort Worth Region: The Technology Review will document trends
in transit vehicle technology. A summary of economic, demographic, land use and IHe-style trends and transit implications is presented here. Any of the above could bring about a greater
concern for planning and the consequences of development decisions, and could thus promote the market for public transit. However, they could also adversely affect planning goals of
compact development and coordinated infrastructure. For example, if changes in communications reduced the need for travel and the traditional role of cities, there would be a corresponding
effect on the need for public transit. There are economic, demographic, land uses, and social trends and forecasts that have implications for transit markets on both a regional and national
basis. Some of these trends and forecasts can be categorized as follows: • The effect of technology on daily life and business • The increasingly global and interconnected economy and
financial structure • The aging of the population • Conflicts between sustainable practices and continued consumption of resources at existing rates • Changing ideas of communities and
individuals rrr[[[Lr.·.·.' [[rr[' [liU[􀁆􀀮􀁾 Ii C ",'. ., 􀁉􀀮􀀬􀀺􀁾􀀮 􀀧􀀺12
DART 2030 Transit System Plan • Growth of the aging population • Growth of single person and single-parent households • Growth in single-adult households • Migration and immigration
(migration and immigration will keep average age of metropolitan population lower 􀁴􀁾􀁬􀁡􀁮 in most metropolitan areas) 6.1.4 Transit Implications of Demographic Trends • .Growth in
requirements for aging population access, assistance and travel options • High population of young and middle age adults will increase transit .demand • Work trips lower proportion of
travel • Security of increasing concern • Increase in households increases trips and auto ownership • High total population growth in metropolitan area increases transit demand • Immigrant
workers increase demand for transit 6.1.5 Land Use and Development Trends The following national trends are likely to be similar in the DFW region. Generally, the suburban areas will
be in filled and become more urban. The Light Rail corridors should increase the intensity of land use around stations. • Residential development density low except in some urban activity
centers. • Employment density continuing to decline • More mixed-use urban activity centers • CBD's continue to be major employment centers • The proportion of total travel for works
trips has declined to approximately 30% 6.1.6 Transit Implications of Land use and Development Trends • Low residential density is difficult to serve with transit • Transit-oriented
development is occurring around LRT stations and will continue • Low density office parks difficult to serve with transit • Some activity centers are planning more intense, mixed uses
which represent a transit market opportunity • Travel growth is occurring in markets that are difficult to serve with transit • Diverse travel patterns 6.1.7 Life Style and Social Relationships
Trends The following national trends are likely to be experienced in the DFW region. • Increase in dependent population (young and old) and caregivers • Basic household responsibilities
shared more evenly between spouses • Concern for personal safety and security . Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 58 r, II[.
r􀁦􀀮􀂷􀁾􀀮􀂷 lrlf.·.''. .fl. 􀀧'􀁾. [[ .0 . ." [ DART 2030 Transit System Plan 6.1.8 Transit Implications of Life Style and Social Relationship Trends • Care-giving responsibility may
increase use of personal vehicles • Neither adult in household may find transit attractive • Segments of the market may resist use of transit because of security Concerns Transit markets
will change in the future and DART services should be adaptable to the changes. The transit dependent market is the largest share of the existing transit market a,nd it will continue
to be an important market in the future. However, demographic and economic changes will affect this market. . The 'senior citizen age group (over 65) will increase. However, the majority
of this group is likely to remain healthy and retain the ability to drive. The term senior citizen may: not have the same transit planning implications as in the past. For example it
may be more appropriately applied to an older age group, such as 75 or older. Changes in personal personal income are very important to the transit dependent market. For example an increase
in personal income possibly allows an individual to purchase and maintain an automobile. It is very difficult to accurately predict long-range changes in personal income. For this reason,
it will be difficult to quantify changes in the number of transit dependent persons in the DART Service Area over the long term. 6.2.1 The Process 6.2 Geographic Focus Groups The transit
choice market is made up of individuals who have an automobile available for a trip, but choose instead to use transit. As the number of individuals in this market segment increases,
the transit choice market will become more important to DART. DRAFT 59 • Focus group sessions assembled 8-10 randomly selected residents for a frank and open discussion of mobility needs
and travel preferences in the Dallas area. .. Five separate sessions were held the evenings of March 4-6, 2002. • Participants were compensated for their attendance, and were recruited
based on a variety of geographic and demographic screening criteria outlined by the project team, and summarized below. Mobility Needs Assessment As part of the 2030 Transit System Plan,
the project team conducted tive focus group sessions with randomly selected Dallas area residents from five geographic areas, on March 4-6, 2002. At each of the five sessions, 8-10 participants
discussed their current travel patterns and mobility needs and explored preferences for future transit system investments. The following synopsis presents an overview of the focus group
process and an analysis of the key findings.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 6-1: FOCUS GROUP STUDY AREAS -.... 6.2.2 Participant Profile The five focus groups were organized around five geographic areas of the Dallas region,
generally defined as north central, northeast, southeast, . _ ./_􀀧􀀮􀀢􀀢􀁾 -southwest and northwest. The map to the left _ illustrates the location of these areas (Figure 6-1). Each
session included participants whose home location was within one of these five areas allowing for targeted discussion of specific issues and needs in each of these areas. The home and
work locations (by city name and by zip code) for participants of each focus group were recorded. ..... "-Participants were recruited based on a variety of demographic factors to ensure
diverse representation. The following breakdown (Table 6-1) describes the demographic characteristics of the 46 participants in the five focus groups: TABLE 6-1: DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
OF FOCUS GROUP PARTICIPANTS Gender Age Female 48% 18-34 35% Male 54% 35-50 43% 51-65 22% Income Race < $25,000 6% African-American 30% $25,000 -49,999 37% White, non-Hispanic 57% $50,000
-74,999 26% Hispanic 11% $75,000 -99,000 22% Other 2% > $100,000 9% Education High School 20% Some college 37% College 39% Graduate Degree 4% rI Ii I· Participants were also selected
based on their current travel mode in order to add depth to the conversations. At each session, at least one participant regularly utilized a travel mode other than the single-occupant
vehicle to commute to work or school. II At the beginning of each session, participants were asked to record a few facts about their current household size, vehicle ownership, and commute
distance and length. The average number of working age residents per household was 2.2, with the average household owning two vehicles. The average participant reported traveling 15
miles between home and work, with an average 30 minute commute each way. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 60
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Participants were also asked the following question (which was also included as part of a recent DART telephone survey): FIGURE 6·2: SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
TO QUESTION 61 􀁾 Statement 1 CJ Statement 2 III Statement 3 o Statement 4 II Statement 5 Som.v hat Strongly IJsagree strongly IJsagree Agree DRAFT Response Score each statement from
1 to 5: • "5" -Very strongly agree with statement • "4" -Somewhat strongly agree with 􀁳􀁴􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴 • "3" -Agree with statement ' • "2" -Somewhat disagree with statement • "1" -Strongly
disagree with statement! Statement 1: "We have to change our attitude toward cars but I still want something fast and convenienf' Statement 2: ''The traffic is getting so bad I don't
like to drive, so I wish had better alternatives" Statement 3: "I know we'll have to change our attitudes about how we use cars, but I'm not sure I'm ready yef' Statement 4: "I love
my car and I don't want to change" Statement 5: "I'd only take transit if I had to" How well do the the following statements reflect your personal views? Strongly Agree Sorrew hat Strongly
Agree Focus Group Questionnaire 0, Mobility Needs Assessment 16-14-12-I::I:s) 10-iii >"C 8 S.l: CI 􀁾 6-42 rrr[[.'.•....' .. . j [..'􀁾 [r[rr rrL[[[l',[: J.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 6.2.3 Response Summary Table 6-2 summarizes the suggestions made by the respondents. A summary of the discussion held with each focus group follows. TABLE
6-2: SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESPONSES North Northeast Southeast Southwest Northwest Central. Travel Patterns Reasons for Special events Downtown Special events Special events Transit Use
recreation Frequency Full group: at Full group: at Full group: at least Full group: at I=ull group: at of Transit least once in least once in the once in the past; least once in the
least once in the Use the past; never past; half the .• two group past; never in past; never in .in the past six group in the members in the the past six the past six months past six
months past six months months months Reasons for Travel time, Travel time, Outside DART Outside DART Personal Personal convenience safety, Service Area, travel Service Area, control,
Vehicle convenience, cost, convenience convenience, fleXibility, Use travel cost travel cost convenience North Ctimtral Northeast Southeast Southwest Northwest Assessment of Services
Nature of Mostly positive Positive, en Generally favorable Confusing, Positive Prior (one negative route to inconvenient Experience response on downtown security) Comments Dislike for
Dislike for out-Familiar with Confusion over Unfamiliarity on limited service of-direction convenient transit bus routes and with bus stops Existing frequency and travel, lack of stop,
unfamiliar schedules near home and System service hours service in the with work, confusion (fear of being area, the need routes/schedules over bus stranded) to transfer. routing, Confusion
on confusion over method of method of payment. payment Attitude Difficulty Concern over Concern over Dislike for wait Favorable toward getting to and always having to service timeliness,
times and assuming mode Transit from transit connect through unpredictability, transfers that is Availability stations downtown safety & comfort convenient and direct Location of -From
Frisco to -To DFW -To DFW -To DFW -To DFW new service downtown To Arlington -To Arlington -Along the along Tollway Stadium -Within Frisco, Tollway -Along 635 -Along 635 Plano, Addison
-Along 635 -To DFW Modal Rail over bus Rail over bus Rail over bus Rail over bus Rail over bus preference (rail is safer (faster and more (cleanliness, (faster, safer, (more reliable:
and more comfortable) dependabilitv, more comfort, not subject to rr I , Il ,Ii [iI . I. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 62
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 6.2.4 Summary Results from the 5 Geographical Focus Groups Participants were asked about their current travel patterns, typical travel modes, and key criteria
in making travel decisions (cost, time, convenience, safety, etc.). Participants in the focus group of residents from the northwest sector lived and worked in the following communities:
63 Work cities: Carrollton (1) Dallas (5) Irving (2) Plano (2) DRAFT Home cities: Carrollton (1) Dallas (4) Farmers Branch (1) Irving (4) Northwest Focus Group • Ten of ten participants
had used DART at some point in the past, though none had used it in the last six months. Prior transit trips included trips downtown for court, trips to sporting events, to the fair,
and to the zoo. • The majority of the group drove alone for most trips, explaining that driving alone provided greater scheduling flexibility and personal control, greater convenience,
and faster travel times. The group also noted the need for trips during the day. Seven of ten ten used their car during the workday, and four of ten needed their car to travel to lunch.
Others noted the need to have a car during the day to attend to emergencies with children. • Overall, about a third of the group noted each of the following criteria as the primary basis
for their travel choices: Mobility Needs Assessment a. Existing Travel Patterns 6.2.4.1 dependable) travel time) environmental congestion) imoact is less) Other Add amenities -Add suburb
to -Park and rides -Balance -Promote suggestions · to rail vehicles suburb transit in are preferable to between employer-based and station east/west circulator buses roadway and transit
pass areas: coffee, configurations driving through the transit programs . phones, neighborhood investments is -Suggest more · headphone important transit in the connections suburbs to
-Develop.follow job reward system growth for frequent travelers -Integrate debit · card pass system r[rrr [[LLrrr F[[[[[[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 1. Personal control -for this group, driving alone offered more personal control over trip scheduling and meant that a car was always available (even if
this meant longer or less reliable travel times). 2. Travel time -this group was most interested in the travel option with the quickest travel time, and was somewhat less concerned with
other factors 3. Convenience -this group was most interested in an easy, comfortable trip, and was less concerned with other factors such as travel time. All participants noted the influence
of cost in travel decisions, but this was more likely to be a secondary decision factor. b. Assessing the Current Transit System Participants were asked to discuss prior experiences
utilizing DART rail or bus transit services. The majority of prior experiences with DART transit were positive. Several participants described trying the new rail service when first
available. • Most did not use the current transit system. Only a portion of the group was familiar familiar with the location of transit stops near their home or work. Many expressed
concern that they did not know where bus routes led, and that exact change was often needed to ride. Others explained that routes did not have frequent service in suburban areas. Some
noted that buses were subject to the same congestion and weather related delays as cars. • Though the group did not use transit, most were not definitively against taking transit. Many
participants were open to using transit if a convenient and direct route were available. Some expressed an interest in finding a better way to avoid traffic congestion and to save money
on transportation expenses. !II c. Designing System Enhancements Based on both personal travel needs and community-wide mobility needs, participants were asked to recommend future enhancements
to the transit system. • The group expressed an interest in new transit services to DFWlnternational Airport, along the Tollway, and along 1-635. Overall, the group noted that services
were currently oriented toward downtown, and that additional eastwest lines were needed. Employment concentrations along 1-635 were cited as likely targets for future service. • The
group described a general preference for rail service over bus service. Most felt that rail was more environmentally friendly, was less subject to congestion and weather, often had fewer
stops, offered faster travel times, and offered a more convenient system of payment. Rail limitations included less ability to access neighborhoods. • Generally, the group was open to
the concept of bus rapid transit (BRT), but expressed some skepticism that HOV lanes could be constructed in enough areas to provide a benefit. Some participants also noted that vehicles
in HOV lanes were also subject to accidents and weather delays. Overall, the group preferred the concept of using rail with distribution shuttles to the idea of BRT. I!IrJl Mobility
Needs Assessment DRAFT 64
6.2.4.2 North Central Focus Group DART 2030 Transit System Plan b. Assessing the Current Transit System Participants were asked to discuss prior experiences utilizing DART rail or bus
transit services. 65 Work cities: Addison (2) Dallas (4) Plano (2) DRAFT Home cities: Carrollton (1) Dallas (3) Plano (4) Mobility Needs Assessment • Most had somewhat positive perceptions
of current DART service, though one reported a negative experience involving a security issue. Other concerns with transit service included the difficulty of getting to and from transit
stations and limitations in hours of service and service frequency -leading to a fear of being stranded. • All eight participants expressed a preference for rail service over bus service.
Rail service was described as fun, sleek and quick; while buses were generally described as slow and unreliable. Participants noted a general perception that rail was safer than bus
service. 1. Travel time -the majority of the group was most interested in the travel option with the quickest travel time, and was somewhat less concerned with other factors like cost.
2. Convenience -a smaller proportion of the group was most attracted to an easy, comfortable trip, and was less concerned with other factors such as travel time. • Other general comments
included suggestions for improved transit education and visibility to encourage use; enhanced promotion of employer-based transit pass programs and tax incentives; enhanced transit investments
in the suburbs "where all of the jobs are moving;" suggestions to use existing rail lines for transit expansion; and general concern for deteriorating air quality. Participants were
asked about their current travel patterns, typical travel modes, and key criteria in making travel decisions (cost, time, convenience, etc.). • The majority of participants had used
DART rail or bus at some point in the past, primarily for special events. None currently used transit on a regular basis. • Four of eight participants commuted to downtown destinations.
• • The following factors were cited as the primary basis for participant's travel choices: a. Existing Travel Patterns Participants in the focus group of residents from the north central
sector lived and ,worked in the following communities: rL rr['Lr [[:.' .. .. :. [L[rre.: [-:-rrr􀁬􀀮􀁾 LL[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan c. Designing System Enhancements Based on both personal travel needs and community-wide mobility needs, participants were asked to recommend future enhancements
to the transit system. • In general, participants supported the addition of new rail service along the Tollway, from downtown to Frisco. Other options supported included lines to DFW
and along 1-635. One participant explained that developing transit lines into affluent suburbs would help erase the negative stigma of transit. • About half of the group supported a
focus on enhancing transit to downtown, while others preferred expansion to more suburban destinations. • One quarter of the group was open to the concept of BRT. The ability to match·
. the speed and service frequency of rail was appealing. However, others simply felt that buses still held a negative stigma that rail did not. A negative perception of the bus riders
and higher levels of pollution were noted. • Other general suggestions included adding amenities like coffee sales and phones at stations, adding headphone connections to transit vehicles,
developing a "frequent flyer" reward system for regular users, and integrating a debit card pass system similar to those used for the Tollway. 6.2.4.3 Northeast Focus Group [-III Participants
in the focus group of residents from the northeast sector lived and worked in the following communities: Home Cities: Dallas (2) Garland (5) Richardson (2) Sachse (1) a. Existing Travel
Patterns Work Cities: Addison (2) Dallas (7) Garland (1) , I Participants were asked about their current travel patterns, typical travel modes, and key criteria in making travel decisions
(cost, time, convenience, etc.). • Ten of ten participants had used DART rail or bus at some point in the past. Five in ten had used DART with within the last six months. Transit trips
over the last six months were for special event activities like sporting events and concerts at the American Airlines Arena and cultural destinations and restaurants in downtown. • •
The majority of participants drive alone for most trips, noting that driving alone is quicker and safer, and allows people to leave when they need to. Others described the ability to
chain trips while driving and the need to pick-Up and drop-off children. About half of the group needed to use their car during the day for work or for lunch. • The following factors
were cited as the primary basis for participant's travel choices: r '[[:II I[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 66
c. Designing System Enhancements b. Assessing the Current Transit System DART 2030 Transit System Plan Based on both personal travel needs and community-wide mobility needs, participants
were asked to recommend future enhancements to the transit system. DRAFT 67 1. Convenience -the majority of participants were primarily concerned with travel convenience, specifically
describing the importance of direct travel routes (low tolerance for transfers or multiple stops). 2. Travel cost -a number of participants prioritized the least expensive travel _ alternatives
over other factors like travel time (which for the group as a whole was closely associated with travel convenience). • Participants supported the addition of transit services to DFW,
to Arlington Stadium, and to destinations along 1-635. The airport was described as an important destination for both Dallas residents (to save parking expenses) and for visitors. •
Rail transit was generally preferred over bus alternatives. Rail was described as faster, more comfortable, and with fewer stops. • The group was somewhat skeptical of the concept of
BRT, noting that accidents in the HOV lane could create problems for service reliability. • Overall, the group supported transit enhancements in an east-west configuration along the
northern portion of the city. The group proposed rail investments along 1-635, intersecting with north-south rail lines oriented toward downtown. The group felt that the growth in the
northern suburbs would be an issue in the future. Without suburb-to-suburb services, transit trips would likely require transfers in downtown, which was not appealing. • In general,
the group agreed that transit investments were extremely important for the future of the Dallas area. They noted that large companies made location decisions based on efficient transportation
infrastructure, and that transit was needed to have a "world class" city. • . The majority of participants was familiar with DART service and had a generally positive impression of the
service, particularly for travel to downtown -destinations. -• However, none of the participants currently use DART service on a regular basis. Reasons noted included the need to take
kids to school, lack of transit service in their area, aversion to transfers, and general confusion regarding payment methods. • A number of participants described the need to travel
to destinations in north central and northwest Dallas, and expressed a concern with the potential need to travel out of direction and transfer in downtown. The concept of always having
to connect through downtown was not appealing. Mobility Needs Assessment Participants were asked to discuss prior experiences utilizing DART rail or bus transit services. [[..•......'
••• [rr·· -" . .-[' [rLr [' rrL[[[[(' ':,;
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 6.2.4.4 Southeast Focus Group Participants in the focus group of residents from the southeast sector lived and worked in the following communities: IrI
Home Cities: Balch Springs (1) Dallas (3) Lancaster (2) Mesquite (3) Work Cities: Cedar Hill (1) Dallas (3) Lancaster (1) Mesquite (1) Irving (2) Richardson (1) a. Existing Travel Patterns
Participants were asked about their current travel patterns, typical travel modes, and key criteria in making travel decisions (cost, time, convenience, etc.). • The entire group had
used transit somewhere in the country. Six of nine participants had used DART rail or bus in the past. Two of nine had used DART in the last six months. The remainder of the group had
used DART to travel to sporting events at American Airlines arena, or to travel downtown for other special events. Two members of the group were once regular transit users to access
jobs in downtown, but new jobs outside of downtown meant they now drove to work. The participants explained that transit allowed them to avoid congestion and parking expense in downtown,
and that their new worksite did not have convenient transit service. • Many of the participants in this group explained that they lived outside of the DART Service Area. For this group,
driving was really the only viable option for their mobility needs. • The following factors were cited as the primary basis for participant's travel choices: 1. Travel cost -more than
half of the participants prioritized the least expensive travel alternatives over other factors. This group was very sensitive to cost factors associated with both automobile and transit
options. One person noted that the cost of a premium transit pass was expensive. At the same time, the group felt that free or discounted transit passes from their employer would be
a major incentive to use transit (if available in their area). Several explained that passes would essentially increase their monthly salary. Two of nine participants currently received
discounted passes from their employers. 2. Convenience -other participants were primarily concerned with travel .convenience. Many simply did not have transit service near their home,
and others were concerned with direct routes (low tolerance for transfers or multiple stops). Iri1·-II rrI I. .[[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 68
DART 2030 Transit System Plan b. Assessing the Current Transit System . c. Designing System Enhancements Participants were asked to discuss prior experiences utilizing DART rail or bus
transit services. DRAFT 69 • Based on both personal travel needs and community-wide mobility needs, participants were asked to recommend future enhancements to the transit system. •
The group suggested an expansion in transit service to DFW International Airport. • The group addressed issues related to suburb-to-downtown versus suburb-tosuburb trips. While many
maintained that service to downtown was important, most felt the access to other suburban locations around the 1-20 /1-635 loop were equally important. Several participants seemed to
envision an ideal system of driving to a park-n-ride, taking rail either straight to downtown or around an outer loop, and then taking a small bus circulator shuttle to their destination
(if needed). • Several participants worked on the northern side of the city. For this group, transferring in downtown on rail was not ideal, but would be acceptable if transfers were
reliable (fear of missing connection) and protected from the elements. Traveling from south to north on a bus was only viewed as appealing if express bus service in HOV lanes could be
provided. Essentially, if express bus service rneant no transfer, that would be about equivalent to rail service with one transfer. • The group was open to the concept of BRT, but was
concerned about delays . once the bus left HOV lanes. One participant explained that they would rather not have buses circulating through their neighborhood, but that they'd rather drive
to a park-n-ride. . • The group felt strongly that improvements in transit service were important for the Dallas area as a whole, noting that an improved system was important to attract
major businesses to the area, to reduce pollution, to provide a bad weather alternative, and to provide alternatives for those without vehicles. • The group had a generally favorable
opinion of DART transit service. Many in the group suggested an interest in using transit to save money and reduce commuting stress, but most explained that convenient transit service
was not available for most of their travel needs. Six of nine participants knew the location of the transit stop closest to their work, but most of this group did not know the rOLites
or schedules of the buses that accessed these stops. • Concerns with using transit included service timeliness and. unpredictability, safety (specifically late in the evening), and overall
personal comfort. • Participants expressed higher regard for current rail service over bus service, noting that rail services were better able to avoid traffic delays, had fewer stops
than buses, and were generally cleaner and better maintained than bus services. Mobility Needs Assessment rr· [[rL: Ll. Lrr r[r[[rIi fT..•· b[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 6.2.4.5 Southwest Focus Group Participants in the focus group of residents from the southwest sector lived and worked in the following communities: Home
cities: Cedar Hill (2) Dallas (5) Duncanville (2) a. Existing Travel Patterns Work cities: Cedar Hill (1) Coppell (1) Dallas (4) Irving (2) Participants were asked about their current
travel patterns, typical travel modes, and key criteria in making travel decisions (cost, time, convenience, etc.). • A majority of the group had used DART rail or bus in the past, but
did not use the service on a regular basis. One person used DART regularly to commute to work downtown. About half of the group lived in areas outside of the DART Seniice Area. • The
following factors were cited as the primary basis for participant's travel choices: 1. Convenience -the majority of participants were primarily concerned with travel convenience, some
specifically noting that DART service was not currently available in their area. Others described convenience in terms of ease of use -figuring out how to use transit was often too cumbersome.
In this regard, convenience was closely linked with the desire to be personally in control of travel decisions. 2. Travel cost -a number of participants prioritized travel cost as the
most important consideration. Several participants noted the cost savings available in avoiding parking charges if traveling downtown. Free or discounted transit passes were also viewed
as a strong incentive to use transit (free transit passes were described as counteracting the hassle of transfers and longer travel times). [[rI b. Assessing the Current Transit System
.r Participants were asked to discuss prior experiences utilizing DART rail or bus transit services. • While the group relayed positive experiences in using transit for special events,
the majority explained that the current transit system was not convenient enough for their travel needs ("it doesn't go where I need to go."). Participants also expressed a sense of
confusion in using the system -including concerns with wait times and transfers and confusion about bus routing and schedules. A few participants expressed safety concerns (both on the
bus, and for vehicles at park-n-rides). [I Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 70
6.2.4.6 Wrap-up of Focus Groups c. Designing System Enhancements DART 2030 Transit System Plan Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 71 • The group suggested that continued growth in the northern
communities (Frisco, Plano, and Addison were cited) required additional transit investments. Others suggested new rail service to DFW International Airport and Arlington, along with
an improvement in east-west connections. • The ..group supported continued investments in lines connecting in downtown, while also supporting the addition of complimentary serVices serving
suburb-tosuburb trips (without the need to transfer in downtown). • The group felt that rail transit offered a more attractive. service. Rail was described as faster, safer, better environmentally,
and more spacious. Generally, the group preferred trips involving a rail-to-rail transfer to direct bus service. • Overall, the group strongly agreed that a balance in transportation
investments (road and transit) was extremely important for the Dallas area. Transit was described as a critical alternative and "back up" to the roadway network. Several members felt
that transit was critical for Dallas to become a "world class city." The fact that the majority of participants had tried DART service, and had a positive experience, offers a significant
opportunity. to increase future ridership. Only a small number of participants used (or recently used) DART for commute trips. Each of these participants worked in the downtown area.
All noted a desire to avoid parking costs and the confusion of driving on downtown streets (one-way streets, etc.). Among participants that did not use DART for commute trips, the majority
described a lack of transit service near their home and/or their work. The majority of participants worked outside of the downtown area, and were either unaware of how to use transit
to get to work, or·stated that multiple transfers would be required -making the option unattractive. • While the majoritv of participants have tried DART transit services to travel to
special events. this has not yet translated to regular transit use. All but a few of the focus group participants had tried DART rail or bus services in the last 1-2 years. The vast
majority had used DART to travel to special events, such as sporting events, cultural events, fairs, or the zoo. Participants used DART to attend these events in order to avoid parking
costs and activity area congestion, or for the "experience" of using rail transit. Others noted a lack of time pressure in attending these events (as opposed to the pressure to get to
work on time), which allowed flexibility to "figure the system out." Participants described their experiences using transit for special events as generally positive. All five focus groups
presented common themes that should be considered. The following four points represent an analysis of those common themes. Based on both personal travel needs and community-wide mobility
needs, participants were asked to recommend future enhancements to the transit system.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Opportunities exist to leverage use of transit for special events into more regular transit use like commuting trips. Participants revealed three key prerequisites:
1. Transit service expansion--The majority of participants worked at destinations outside of downtown, or lived in areas not yet served by DART. Many participants expressed a general
willingness to try transit for commute trips if service were more readily available near their home and work. Transit expansion priorities included areas not currently within the DART
Service Area and suburban activity centers along 1-635, 1-20, and the North Tollway. 2. Transit information and incentives--While many participants explained that DART did not serve
their worksites, a majority were simply not aware' of the location of transit stops near their worksite, did not know the routes of nearby bus lines, or had never seriously explored
using transit for commute trips. A majority of participants noted that receiving transit information from their employer would help overcome this barrier, and that receiving discounted
or free transit passes from their employer would likely lead to them trying transit for the commute. Participants described a hesitation to use transit the first time (learning the routes,
schedules, payment system, travel time, etc.), especially for work trips where being late was a serious concern. 3. Stressing convenience and cost-savings --In terms of key decision-making
criteria in choosing among travel modes, participants generally fell into four main categories: a. Control-this group prioritized personal control over travel decisions, including control
and flexibility in departure times, number of stops, routes, etc. b. Convenience-this group prioritized travel convenience as the most important factor in travel decisions. Convenience
included factors such as ease of use, route directness and simplicity, ease of payment, comfort, and safety. c. Cost -this group prioritized travel options that offered the lowest cost.
d. Time -this group prioritized alternatives that offered the fastest travel times. In discussing transit service alternatives (including both the current and future systems), the respondents
who prioritized either convenience or cost seemed most amenable to exploring transit options. For those most concerned with convenience (and thus somewhat less concerned with travel
time and personal control), transit potentially offers a travel experience that is more reliable and less stressful than driving in congested conditions. For those most concerned with
cost, transit offers opportunities to save money on monthly travel costs and vehicle wear and tear. Developing' and marketing transit services that meet the key criteria of these groups
presents an opportunity to improve transit's market share. • Frequent destinations were somewhat clustered in the northern half of the region. Focus group participants were asked to
note the five destinations in the Dallas area they most commonly traveled to in an average month (by adding dots to a Ir(Il I[. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 72 rI,
DART 2030 Transit System Plan The majority of participants expressed a low tolerance for transfers, and no tolerance for more than one transfer. However, transfers were somewhat acceptable
if they met the following criteria: (1) require only minor out-of-direction travel, (2) do not require significant or unreliable wait times, and (3) occur in a safe, comfortable, and
weather-protected area. . map of the Dallas metro area). A few trends were relevant. Participants from the northern sectors generally traveled to destinations in the northern portion
of the region (including downtown), and rarely traveled to destinations in the southern portion of the region. However, participants from the south generally traveled to destinations
throughout the region (including southern destinations, downtown, and northern destinations). At the same time, when pressed further, participants revealed a greater concern with service
characteristics, rather than a simple technology preference. Preference for rail was really based based on a perception of faster service, fewer stops, and more reliable travel times.
The majority of participants were open to the use of buses, if they could achieve these service characteristics, but many were skeptical. This skepticism carried over to discussions
regarding bus rapid transit. While most were intrigued by the concept, many expressed concern that buses would be subject to congestion, weather and accident delays (even in an HOV facility).
Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 73 This trend presents an important consideration for system planning, as participants from the northern sectors were generally concerned about direct
transit routes along the northern portion of the region (Le., along 1-635), avoiding out-of-direction travel and transfers through downtown. Participants from the southern sectors were
equally concerned with transfers through downtown for suburb-to-suburb trips, but many were open to downtown transfers that were convenient and reliable (as these south-north trips did
not necessarily involve significant out-of direction travel). • Participants see transit investments as critical to the long-term prosperity of the Dallas region. An overwhelming majority
of participants felt that further investments in transit service were critical to the long-term prosperity of the entire Dallas area. The groups noted that corporations often consider
transportation infrastructure in relocation decisions and that a balance between roadway and transit investments was critical to provide for travel choices. Participants also believed
that developing a strong transit system was required for Dallas to become a "world-class city" and they supported transit investments even if they personally did not plan to use them.
• Participants generally favored rail transit over bus transit. and were somewhat skeptical about bus rapid transit -but service characteristics were the primary concern. Rail transit
was generally perceived to be faster, safer, more direct, better for the environment, and less impacted due to weather and accident delays. Rail was also described as easier to use -routes
were described as easier to learn and payment options were seen as more convenient. In many cases, these preferences were described more as "perceptions" than they were based on reality.
Many suggested that bus transit carried a certain negative stigma. r[' r[[[rLLr r[[[[[[[[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 6.3 2002 DART Climate Survey The 2002 DART Climate Survey was conducted to determine the general public's awareness, attitudes, and perceptions about the
DART organization and its services. This study was designed and implemented by The Howell Research Group under the direction of DART's Advertising and Marketing Department. 6.3.1 Methodology
. The Climate Survey was conducted with 900 randomly selected adults (18 years or older) living in the DART Service Area. The interviews ·were conducted between February 22 and March
11, 2002 by InfoNet Research located in Dallas. . . .... The survey· sample was generated from a random digit methodology that includes . telephone number of persons with unlisted or
unpublishednumbers, as well as those listed in the directory. Quotas were established by ethnic group (Hispanics, African American and other minorities) to ensure that persons in these demographic
segments were represented in the survey proportionate to their actual population within the DART area.. The samplewas also stratified by city to ensure adequate sub-samples by geographic
area. Dallas accounted for 300 of the survey respondents while Irving, Plano, Richardson, Garland-Rowlett, Addison-Carrollton-Farmers Branch, and Park CitiesCockrell Hill-Glen Heights
accounted for 100 respondents each for a total of 900. However, the samples by city are not proportionate to each city's population. For example, Dallas accounted for 33% (300 out of
900) of the survey sample, but it represents 56% of the adult population in DART's service area. Thus, the subsamples by city were weighted to accurately reflect each city's proportion
of the total adult popUlation in DART. 6.3.2 Survey Findings • Use of DART Less than one-half of the residents (44%) claimed to have used at least one of DART's services within the past
12 months. The largest percentages said they had used HOV lanes (24%), local bus service (20%) or light rail (19%). Smaller percentages claimed to have used an express bus (5%), DART
service to sporting events (2%), commuter rail (1%) or Para-Transit service (1%). Use of most of these DART services has declined between 1997 and 2002. Decreases in the use of HOV lanes
(54% to 24%), light rail (44% to 19%) and local bus service (42% to 20%) were most noticeable during this time period. These survey results are perplexing since overall DART ridership
(measured by boarding's) has increased substantially hetween 1997 and 2002. A possible reason for this decline is that in 1997 there were a substantial number of firsttime trials of
the new light rail system, which would account for higher use of light rail and local bus. In terms of how frequently respondents rode DART (bus, light rail, or commuter rail) in 2002,
48% said they never used DART (up from 31% in 1997), 31% iI ilI·-Il irIrl rIl-[Ir Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 74 rI . Il
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Survey respondents were asked their feelings about using public transportation. The results are shown in Figure 6.3. Fourteen percent of respondents said
they were open and ready to use public transportation. This compares to fifteen percent who now use public transportation. rode less than once a month (down from 44%), 10% rode once
a month (down from 12%), while 11% rode more than once a week (down from 13%). Similarly, this primarily downward trend can be accounted for by the decrease in the novelty of the light
rail system since 1997. DRAFT 75 An "examination of 2002 ridership frequency shows some significant variances by "the demographic characteristics of respondents. For instance, Dallas
residents (28%) were more than twice as likely as suburban residents (12%) to. ride" DART once a month or more. In terms of ethnicity, African-Americans (45%) were far more likely to
ride DART at least once a month than Hispanics (25%), other minorities (24%), or non-minorities "(12%). .DART ridership frequency also declines with annual household income. "Persons
with incomes under $25,000 were far more likely (32%) to ride at least once a month than those "with incomes of $25,000 to $49,999 (18%), or $50;000 or more (14%). . 􀁾 ,. Survey respondents
were asked what type of transportation they normally use for making routine trips. The majority (67%) stated that they drive a car or motor vehicle while 14% rode as a passenger in a
car or motor vehicle. Thus, a car or motor vehicle is used by 81% of those making routine trips. DART is most often used by 14% of those making routine trips. Persons making routine
trips other than commuting to work or school were more likely (21 %) to use DART for these trips, especially persons whose routine trips were medical appointments. • Potential for Using
Public Transportation The 'potential for· using public transportation is higher for trips that are considered routine (same origin/destination and schedule). Nearly nine out of ten survey
respondents (88%) said that there was a particular trip they make at least three times per week within the Dallas metro area. DART residents were most likely to make routine trips for
commuting to work (63%), followed by commuting to school or college (12%). Medical appointments (4%), shopping/personal business (4%), visiting friends/relatives (3%), entertainmenVeating
out (2%) and transporting children (1 %) each accounted for a small percentage of the routine trips. Mobility Needs Assessment
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 6-3: OPINION ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Persons who used a car/motor vehicle for their routine trips (either as a driver or passenger) were asked if
they would ever consider using DART for these routine trips. Only 12% responded yes, but 27% said maybe. The majority (54%) responded no, while 7% didn't know. Persons more positive
about considering DART were more likely to be employed in clerical occupations (16%) or to be age 65 or older (20%). Persons who responded yes or maybe were asked what one thing DART
would have to change or improve for them to use it for their routine trips (results summarized in Table 6-3). In total, four out of ten of these respondents (41%) said there was "nothing"
that DART could do to get them to use DART for their routine trips. Thus, a more accurate measure of potential for using DART would be 23% (7% yes and 16% maybe) instead of 39% (12%
yes and 27% maybe). Iil ir -I--:1I[rII Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 76
TABLE 6-3: IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO USE TRANSIT 6.3.3 Demographic Characteristics of the Survey Sample DART 2030 Transit System Plan DRAFT 77 Elements Total Nothing 41% Better Security
17% LRT service .11% Faster service 6% Free service 5% Better sheltered bus stops 5% Lower cost 3% Better access for handicapped 3% Other 2% Make it easier to understand/use service
2% Closer bus stop 2% No transfers/direct service 1% More freauent buses/trains 1% Later eveninQ service 1% Mobility Needs Assessment The most frequently mentioned change/improvement
was "better security" (17%). Mention of this change/improvement did not vary significantly by where persons lived or their demographic characteristics. "Light rail service" (11 %) was
the second most frequently mentioned change/improvement, followed by "faster service" (6%), "better/sheltered bus stops" (5%), ''free service" (5%) and "lower cosf' (3%). The demographics
of the survey sample are generally consistent with the demographics of all adults liVing in the DART Service Area. As a group, regular DART riders (once a week or more) were more likely
(63%) to be between the ages of 35-54 than occasional/infrequent riders (50%) or non-riders (43%). Regular riders were far more likely (69%) to not have a motor vehicle than the occasional/infrequent
riders (8%) or non-riders (1 %). Regular riders were far more likely (87%) than either occasional/infrequent riders (53%) or non-riders (33%) to be an ethnic minority. Regular riders
were more likely (96%) to be employed full or part-time than occasional/infrequent riders (84%) or non-riders (80%). A higher proportion of the employed regular riders were employed
in service occupation compared to other types of riders. As a group, regular DART riders have lower household incomes (50% earn less than $25,000) compared to occasional/infrequent riders
(26%) or non-riders (23%). !l• rr [rr-· IL[[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 6.4 DART Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Focus Group The DART Citizen's Advisory Committee is a group of 15 members appointed by the DART Board of Directors.
They act as a liaison between the community and the DART Board. The group handles transportation issues that are important to the community and they meet regularly on the third Thursday
of each month. The following is a summary of the questions that were asked along with the respective responses. What are some specific things about the DART system that you think DART
is doing well and should be carried into the future? . • 'Courteous personnel/Good job of hiring drivers/Most drivers go out of the way to help • Moving people for a system as large
as DART • Good mix of modes: Bus, Rail, HOV, and Para-Transit. • DART appeals to a wide variety of people and communities • Expansion of service • Cooperation with other agencies • Operation
of the TRE • Maintenance and upkeep (cleanliness of facilities, less breakdowns of trains trains going into the Oak Cliff area) • Good job of interfacing buses with trains. • Public
Involvement is welcome in corridor planning and the location of stations within the system. • On-time performance of the buses • Good job on the design, aesthetics, and location of the
Light Rail • Marketing does an excellent job of getting their message out to the public. • On time /on budget for the construction of the light rail build-out. Accessibility: • Para-transit
for the mobility impaired still needs improvement, but has come a long way. DART does a good job to meet ADA requirements. • Accessibility to large business areas is really good. • Overcoming
job imbalance for a large city. Getting people from the southern sector to other places so that they will be able to make a living. Travel Time: • The increased headway frequency has
helped not only to get to work faster, but also helps increase ridership. Safety: • Mass transit in the Metroplex is perceived as safe. Safety also leads to improved cleanliness, although
some stations are still a problem. Most people 10-20 years ago would not ride the bus to get to the Dallas Zoo, but now, most mothers will take the train to the zoo. IrI rI· '.iIl !i
rl:. lij, Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 78 r' 'IL
Cost: Comfort: • People still think they are getting a good service for the price. Does anyone have any additional comments? DRAFT 79 • The personnel in the suburbs are good and courteous,
but I think it is a problem in Dallas. • A large percentage of the people, especially in the inner city, who ride the bus are transit dependent. Right now DART gets $2.00 for a day pass,
but you might be able to get $2.50 or $3.00 doilars. Once you expand LRT to Irving, Carrollton, Plano, and Richardson, the number of people riding will hopefully keep down the cost.
Some people will begin to reduce their number of trips because they cannot afford them. It's fine for people who make $200,000 a year and live in a certain part of the city, but they
only use it to commute downtown and that's the only time they use it. There are hundreds of thousands of people who use the service that are below the poverty line that depend on this
as their only form of transportation. • DART does a good job providing comfort. The TRE's new double-decker trains really help senior citizens and those with physical challenges. It
is much easier to board and de-board the train, and that adds comfort. • .Station planning and location are done really well. It appears that DART is putting stations where people want
them and that has improved economic • development. One problem is thatDART does not provide enough facilities (restrooms) at heavily used stations. • I think that we do need more rail
cars. For example, there are not enough cars from Oak Cliff, but if DART invested in more cars the riders would be happy with the cost if you want something good you are going to pay
for it. A lot a businesses are buying a lot of passes for their employees, DART will recoup the cost. Dallas in general has gotten use to· mass transit and we like it and people are
sick of being stuck in traffic all of the time. So, I think if you raise the fares, people are going to pay. • They are not being extravagant as long as they keep showing people that
the product is worth what they are paying for (also, reducing the amount of time that customers must wait for a train or bus can help). • The use of smaller buses on routes where there
is lower ridership is working out really well. It instills the public perception that funds are being used appropriately. • The Transit Education Program does a good job teaching students
about train safety as well as how to ride DART. Mobility Needs Assessment In terms of the cost associated with building the system. do you think that DART is being overly extravagant
or are they spending too little money? Do you think that the public would be happier if DART spent more in addition to riders paying more for services? DART 2030 Transit System Plan
rr. ··t[[_. '. ! . r[r[Lrr[[....􀁾, [' [􀁲􀁾 t, 􀁦􀀮􀁾􀀱􀀮 Ii II􀁾
DART 2030 Transit System Plan • As the system gets longer, people will be able to pay a higher fare. (For example: the TRE). What are some specific things about the DART system that
you think could be improved in the future? • Improve the cleanliness of the some of the transit centers and train stations. In some of the transit centers, DART does an excellent job
and others we aren't doing as much. When people are expected to congregate in certain locations, they are going to expect that these areas be clean. • DART needs larger Kiss n Ride parking
lots. Tliat really needs to start at our planning process. • There are areas that are not big business areas where transit is not accessible. For example, we use to have a large group
of people out of Valley Ranch who commuted to Downtown. We took away the direct service and now they have gone back to driving their cars. • DART needs to increase the security staff
on the trains, buses, and stations. I gave some suggestions that it would be nice to have plainclothes security on buses and trains. It is rare that anyone checks our passes. DART needs
better security. A police transit authority is the most desired. It has to be improved from the top down. They cannot hire because their image has been tarnished. The manpower is not
there. Overall security needs to be improved. Part of the reason that Boeing did not come to the city was because Dallas does not have 24-hour bus service. There is very limited bus
service on weekends for the suburbs and people are stranded. By 2025, we are going to need a better system since population will probably double. We also need a way to get a 24-hour
information system. • There needs to be a greater regional service. For example, one that would serve people who like to live out in the country, like Canton, and drive 100 miles a day
because they do not want to live in the city. Dallas cannot compete with cities like New York or Chicago if DART does not think regionally. DART does not think about where people live,
only about business areas. They also don't think about people who live outside the member cities. • DART needs to look for pre-existing areas for economic development. There are places
in Oak Cliff that are available for economic development opportunities. The City of Dallas does not have good planning like Richardson and Plano. • World Class and International Cities
have direct links from the airport to the. business districts. We are short of good, direct airport service. The code word "Cotton belf' would be packed everyday, since everyone needs
to fly. That would be a direct line into the northern side of DFW International . Airport. Get it out of the Dallas City Council. • Some type of intercity rail service to Houston would
be nice (Le., a service from Dallas to Houston, Dallas to Austin, etc.). • Early identification of extensions of service to large population centers. Find out early where apartments
are being built so they can have service. People cannot wait five to six years later for service. Getting DART to care. 1rl,,I!'.. fI .1 ,II .[.' Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 80
r: (. DART 2030 Transit System Plan People just don't want light rail, but bus service. The follow through of the planning staff is not very good. • DART does not blow it's own horn
enough. We don't tell people how well we are performing. DART does not promote itself enough. • They would like to see more of the new buses. The older buses are not equipped for the
physically challenged and people with disabilities. Improve access for the non-wheelchair patrons. In your opinion, what are the major barriers to making these improvements? 6.5 DART
Non-Rider Focus Group If YOU had to select the most important things about the DART system from the list the group generated, which ones would you choose? (Select 6 items from the things
that DART does well) . The Non-Rider Focus Group consisted of ten participants that were randomly selected from DART's database of service area residents. This focus group was held primarily
to ascertain what things DART might need to consider in the future' in order to get people that rarely or never ride our system to become regular users. The following is a summary of
the questions that were asked along with the respective responses. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 81 • Dallas City Council • The way the management system is set up within DART. It
depends on who is in it. DART has an extremely confident president. In between, there are these firewalls set up and the dedicated people who see the bad things that go on. They go to
their managers, who are causing all of these problems, and they don't do anything. You have to talk to the lowest levels. • Prejudice within the cities. The cities want to get people
to work in their cities, but they do not want them to live there. DART must create good will, so DART concentrates on businesses. • Affordable housing is needed where people work. •
Economic prejudice. • Not enough weight on safety and security. • Barrier to addition of new cities because the existing member cities do not bother looking at the area regionally. •
Inability of other cities to participate. • DART must look to other technologies. • Good Inter-modal Mix: providing something for everybody • Cooperation with other agencies • MOVing
people, improving mobility • Build-out of the LRT system on time, under bUdget • Location of stations and good community participation • Transit design and art [[..:.•..􀁾􀀮􀀧,. .. .;,;.'
r•'.'.·.'. L. [.•... -5 Lr [r[' [Iri. FIi 􀁲􀀮􀁾 t􀁾􀀧 􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾 of Ii t
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Have you tried transit? RAIL 2 BUS 1 BOTH 6 NONE 1 If you have tried transit. what was your experience? • It was fun • They like rail better than bus •
One person rode the bus to court • It is difficult to ride rail with a baby stroller • Once you are on rail, it is a great experience • It is unfavorable to have to change buses downtown
• Service and experience is good when riding rail to Stars games • It takes a long time to get to work on the bus, especially if you have to transfer • It's difficult to determine what
ticket to buy when riding rail • Transit doesn't go to the airport What is the primary purpose of most of your daily trips? • Grocery, school, shopping (2 responses) • Shopping, meetings
• Work, • Work and church • Work, school, church • School, errands • School, clients • Visit parents • Airport How do you get to your primary daily destination? Seven participants stated
that they drive theirown car alone. Another participant raised a concern involving kids and car seats (it is difficult to move these car seats around and this precludes them from carpooling).
How long does it take you to get to your primary daily destination? • 5 minutes (1 response) • 10 􀁭􀁩􀁮􀁵􀁴􀁥􀁾 (1 response) • 10-15 minutes (2 response) • 20 minutes (1 response) •
30-45 minutes (1 response) • 45-60 minutes (1 response) Why do you drive/carpool? • Transit doesn't go where I want it to go I1I , I! , IIiI fI Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 82
DART 2030 Transit System Plan • Haven't taken the time to learn the bus system • It's more convenient What do you find most satisfactory with your present commute? What transit services
are available and near to you? What transit or parking benefits does your employer offer? What do you find least satisfactory with your present commute? • Parking cost reimbursement
• Mileage reimbursement Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 83 • Traffic • Parking • Big SUV's • School Zones • Speeding Tickets • Road Rage • Cost/Nuisance associated with car ownership
(Le., maintenance, paid parking, gas) • Multiple stops • Speed • Come and go when we want • When there are things to carry (Le., groceries, books, etc.) • Don't have to walk 4-5 blocks
to the bus stop • Security • Driving prevents having to wait outside for a bus in the elements (badweather) • Driving is cheaper than transit for short trips • Driving is better in those
cases in which multiple trips are required • You don't have to plan your day in advance when you have the flexibility of your own car Rail• 1 mile (3 responses) • 2 mile (1 response)
Bus• 1/2 block (4 responses) • 1 block (3 responses) • 3 blocks (1 response) • 112 mile (2 responses) All participants, when asked about transit availability, believed that transit was
available to them. The following is a breakdown of the proximity between participants' residences and transit services: Lr rr [' ["' ......:, r-E":·:" ..·i Fi1.·..·'. r.· t [[' L
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Why don't you use transit if it is available? • Not convenient • Forget that it is a travel option • Doesn't go where they need it to go • Takes too long
• Need to learn the system/schedule • Unfamiliar/frightening • Not part of our culture • Frequency is not high enough • Bus route is not direct enough (takes you out of your way) • It
takes too long to download the route maps from www.dart.org , What changes might make you willing to use transit for some trips? • Increased bus frequency • If buses went directly to
rail stations (directness of travel) • If website was upgraded to allow it to plan your trip by providing astarting and ending address, and if route maps could be downloaded faster •
If all bus stop signs gave not only a route number, but also information on where the route actually goes (Guide-A-Rides) -• If the system were setup in more of a grid-type system instead
of a radial one. A couple of the participants originally from northern cities (Pittsburgh and Chicago were mentioned) felt that grid system based transit worked better there than the
radial system we have in Dallas. • If the fare was lower • If a free fare zone existed along the LRT in Downtown Dallas • Increased safety with regards to getting to a bus stop • If
people with baby strollers could use the handicap ramps to board the LRT • More weekend/evening service • More LRT in areas currently not served Before the meeting concluded. participants
were asked to provide additional input on what they "would like DART to know". The following list is a summarv of those suggestions: • Bus drivers are too aggressive and are not observant
enough • There is confusion about which side of the downtown platforms to be on when boarding the LRT (they would like better directional information) • The need for more station announcements
on the LRT (sometimes they are hard to understand or are not even announced) • More bus stops equipped with shelters • The need for more informative system maps, especially for new riders
• • Install more time schedules at bus stops (Guide-A-Rides) • DART is doing a great job of promoting new LRT station openings • Rail service is much preferred over bus service • Retail
development around LRT Stations needs to consist of more mid-range shopping opportunities instead -of only the higher dollar ones like at Mockingbird (II [.[[ {-Mobility Needs Assessment
DRAFT 84 rl
DART 2030 Transit System Plan From 2002 to 2030, the areas with the lowest median income category (under $10,000 per year) appear to lessen in intensity (Figures 6-4 and 6-5). The lower
income areas tend to remain in. parts of southeast Dallas, south Oak Cliff, west Dallas, east Dallas, the Medical/Market Center area, south Irving, northeast Dallas, central Garland,
east Plano, nearthe 1-635/Dallas North Tollway Interchange, as well as along the west side of 1-35E in Carrollton, Farmers Branch, and northwest Dallas. It is important to mention, however,
that the lessening intensity of the lowest median income areas could be due in part to median income being held constant between 2002 and 2030 for 􀁰􀁾􀁲􀁰􀁯􀁳􀁥􀁳 of this analysis (median
income levels tend to rise over time). • Transit education is neede,d for senior citizens • Airports (DFW) and Fair Park need to be served by the LRT (they were informed of the ongoing
NW and SE Corridor studies that are looking at providing these areas with service) • The need for more information on the different kinds of transit passes that are offered (Le., monthly
vs. daily, premium vs. regular) • Cross-town travel is difficult with the current bus system (they were informed that DART is aware of this problem and is looking to address this need
soon) 6.6 Transit Dependent Population . The transit market can be divided into segments based on demographic factors. The : most basic approach would be to consider whether potential
riders would be '. categorized' as either transit dependent or choice riders (non transit dependent). " Providing service to the transit dependent market has traditionally been a fundamental
.•. component of the mission of public transit. The transit dependent market includes people who do not drive because of age, disability, or lack of access to an automobile. Household
median income data from NCTCOG has been used to locate potential concentrations of the transit dependent population in 2002 and 2030. Median income is used because it is an indicator
indicator of where populations exist in which a car might not be affordable. It is also the only measure listed above that is forecasted by NCTCOG. Forecasts are not available for the
number of disabled persons or for those that are under age 15 and under or above age.65. rr r[r[LLtrr r: [[.'.'.'.. . , [.". : ",,' 􀁾􀀺􀀮 E􀁾􀀱􀀮􀀬 , 􀁾􀀮 " /, 􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀮􀀻􀀧􀀮 bfJ.:
L' Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 85
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 6-4: 2002 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME 2002 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME Source: NeTC 0 G Projected and DART Data t:I DA R.T8rrula Ale a 211ZUe:dlzn HousehOH
ncome 􀁩􀁄􀀮􀁴􀁡􀁾􀀱􀁉􀀱 1D,1I11·,2EI,l:lJD 2I1.l1I•• :J:I,trIa _:J:I,lII.·"',trIa • .a,Cllt-IIJ,£IJ1:I :10 BD,I:DJ 3 o 6 Miles August 22. 2002 [[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 86
[
As part of DART's recent Five Year Plan, a transit supply index was developed in order to identify the levels of transit service available throughout the DART Service Area. The levels
ranged from low to high and reflected transit service density. This index was then compared to the transit potential index· (which measures how87 3 6 Miles August 22, 2002 c::I DART
Son, i>t A,.. 3 o 2D3D Uedlaa 􀁈􀁏􀁕􀀺􀁉􀁕􀁏􀁾 lacome DD-1D,DDD 1!!!!I!I1D,DD 1 -:m ,DDD =2D,DDt-JII,DDD 􀁾􀁄􀀮􀁄􀁄 1 -lD ,DCD • ID,DD1-lllI,DDD 􀁾 8D,DOD DRAFT 2030 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD
INCOME Platln'ng & Development . Source: NCTCOG Pre·2D3D (Projeoted)and DART Data Mobility Needs Assessment 6.7 Transit Supply, Potential, and Opportunity FIGURE 6-5: 2030 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD
INCOME DART 2030 Transit System Plan [[lLr rr[[, 􀁾􀁾 lL[f: Il [;
DART 2030 Transit System Plan conducive an area is to transit service) in order to determine if transit service was being provided optimally. The result was a measure of transit opportunity,
or measure of transit supply versus transit potential. For purposes of this analysis, the DART Service Area was separated into 34 sub: areas. The transit supply and transit potential
indices were developed for each sub area based upon the summation olthe following individual indices: . Transit Supply Index Annual Miles/Sq. Mile + Annual Hours/Sq. Mile + Annual Trips/Sq.
Mile Transit Potential Index Median Income+ Pop/Sq. Mile + Employment/Sq. Mile + Percent of Persons >65 or <15 The individual indices listed above were developed for each sub area by
comparing each sub area's factor to the average for the DART Service Area. These indices were then added together to come up with overall indices for transit supply and transit potential.
As a result, this allows for comparison between sub areas based upon DART Service Area averages rather than disparate variables. If this were not done, for example, the Dallas CBD would
appear to have too much service if it were evaluated exclusively on the basis of revenue miles and hours. . I1flllr Figures 6-6 and 6-7 graphically depict transit supply and potential
while Tables 6-4 arid 6-5 show the underlying data. Each sub area was then assigned a numeric value (Horthe highest, 34 for the lowest)for transit supply and transitpotential so that these numbers could be compared. The Dallas CBDrated number 1· on both scales, indicating that supply and. potential were evenly matched.
In contrast, South Irving ranked number 22 in supply but 15 for potential indicating that the area is potentially underserved. In 2002, the top five areas for transit supply and potential
were: . . Greatest Transit Supply 1. Dallas CBD 2. Oak Lawn/Love Field 3. South Dallas 4. Addison 5. South Oak Cliff Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT Greatest Transit Potential 1. Dallas
CBD .2. South Dallas 3. Northeast Dallas 4. Oak Lawn/Lova Field 5. West Dallas 88
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 6-6: TRANSIT SUPPLY As Figure 6-6 indicates, the central areas of the DART S ank the highest in terms of transit supply. However, an e>tception i
Addison ich ranks high because it has a heavily utilized Transit Center co the Town's small geographic size. As for transit potential (Figure 6-7), the highest areas correspond quite
well with the areas having high transit supply, a situation which is desirable in Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 89 LEGEND: _ HIGH 􀁾 t o LOW TRANSIT SUPPLY BY AREA 􀁾􀁡􀀢􀀬􀀮􀁮􀁧 rL
1 . ",,1.rL[[rl [[[[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan terms of resource allocation. resources might be necessary. Where differences occur, some re-allocation of II FIGURE 6·7: TRANSIT POTEN1"IAL TRANSIT USE
POTENTIAL BY AREA. i LEGEND: _ HIGH 􀁾 t D lOW Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 90 Ii. l
DART 2030 Transit System Plan , Transit Supply Index --Five Year Action Plan 2002 -2006 Annual Annual Annual Area in Annual Miles! Annual Hours! Annual Trips! Sum of Miles Hours Trios
.so. Miles Ar"" in Sn. Mi Index Ar"" in Sn. Mi ladex Ar"" in Sn. Mi Index Indexes 1 CeD Dallas 4,707,456 276,380 249,392 1.62 2,898,679.80 22.19 170,184.73 20.81 153566.50 18.73 61.73
2 Oak Lawn/Love Field 2680,808 200,616 186,732 18.47 145,159.63 1.11 10862.90 1.33 10,111.11 1.23 3.67 3 South Dallas 1,481,377 113,520 129,258 13.05 113532.89 0.87 8,700.18 1.06 9906.34
1.21 3.14 4 Addison 475,257 32,880 50,381 4.40 107,939.40 0.83 7,467.56 0.91 11,442.33 1.40 3.14 5 South Oak Cliff 1,493,142 116,810 167,269 18.25 81,798.05 0.63 6,399.13 0.78 9,163.42
1.12 2.53 6 West Oak Cliff 2609654 194,843 205933 27.53 94 806.87 0.73 7,078.50 0.87 7481.41 0.91 2.50 7 East Dallas 1 419,276 115,821 140,731 17.89 79,337.90 0.61 6,474.41 0.79 7,866.89
0.96 2.36 8 Northeast Dallas 1522 243 120392 192,188 22.23 68492.38 0.52 5416.97 0.66 8647.40 1.05 2.24 9 West Dallas 1,283,414 89,074 91,737 18.90 67,919.88 0.52 4,713.91 0.58 4,854.83
0.59 1.69 10 Southwest Oak Cliff 1,076,305 71,704 69,829 15.91 67,658.12 0.52 4,507.41 0.55 4,389.56 0.54 1.60 11 North Dallas 923S37 66295 84256 17.15 53,868.93 0.41 3,866.47 0.47 4,914.06
0.60 1.48 12 Far East Dallas 1,290,822 89,701 81,048 21.45 60,169.75 0.46 4,18128 0.51 3777.95 0.46 1.43 13 Park Cities 288,166 23,780 27,264 5.9S 48,358.10 0.37 3,990.67 0.49 4,575.34
0.56 1.42 14 South Irvino 2,176,148 132132 67808 33.32 65,310.56 0.50 3965.55 0.48 2,035.05 0.25 1.23 15 Pleasant Grove 1,422,365 94,267 71,570 25.35 56,120.12 0.43 3,719.37 0.45 2,823.85
0.34 1.23 16 East Richardson 721494 43,760 60,190 17.63 40,935.81 0.31 2482.83 0.30 3,415.01 0.42 1.03 17 Far North Dallas 901573 62,663 72,165 24.47 36,848.52 0.28 2,561.12 0.31 2,949.47
0.36 0.96 18 Far South Oak Cliff 549,458 39,695 77,266 19.71 27878.56 0.21 2014.06 0.25 3,920.36 0.48 0.94 19 Farmers Branch 443,088 28,395 33,159 11.98 36,988.76 0.28 2,370.40 0.29
0.29 2,768.07 0.34 0.91 20 South Garland 908,921 57,427 80,176 27.66 32,864.04 0.25 2,076.39 0.25 2,898.93 0.35 0.86 21 Northwest Dallas 727,873 50,822 38,084 19.89 36,600.42 0.28 2,555.56
0.31 1,915.00 0.23 0.83 22 North Irvino 1,110631 66,007 76,947 34.22 32,452.78 0.25 1,928.72 0.24 2,248.39 0.27 0.76 23 South Central Plano 550,938 30,943 35,253 18.92 29,122.40 0.22
1,635.66 0.20 1,863.46 0.23 0.65 24 East Plano 488,706 26,042 28,448 16.48 29,660.01 023 1,580.53 0.19 1,726.56 0.21 0.63 25 North Garland 729,072 43,434 49.741 28.38 25,691.44 0.20
1530.55 0.19 1752.79 0.21 0.60 26 South Carrollton 348,930 21,976 25,124 17.24 20,245.44 0.15 1275.07 0.16 1,457.73 0.18 0.49 27 North Carrollton 419764 19,941 31145 19.45 21582.81 0.17
1025.30 0.13 1,601.36 0.20 0.49 28 West Richardson 156,804 11,125 14,934 10.36 15134.10 0.12 1,073.75 0.13 1,441.40 0.18 0.42 29 Glenn Heiohts 98,201 3,902 4,810 6.86 14,325.41 0.11
569.24 0.07 701.68 0.09 0.26 30 West Plano 134,047 7,471 15,282 17.03 7,871.21 0.06 438.69 0.05 897.36 0.11 0.22 31 Far West Oak Cliff 261,363 16,297 22,906 32.44 8,057.55 0.06 502.41
0.06 706.17 0.09 0.21 32 Rowlett 169,935 7.695 9.155 17.86 9,516.46 0.07 430.91 0.05 512.68 0.06 0.19 33 Far Southeast Dallas 134,497 8950 7,410 30.37 4429.20 0.03 294.73 0.04 244.03
0.03 0.10 34 North Central Plano 41,593 2,963 3,340 20.08 2,071.55 0.02 147.60 0.02 166.35 0.02 0.05 130,630.26 8,177.13 8,198.32 TABLE 6-4' TRANSIT SUPPLY INDEX rtl' :11. !lL. L TABLE
6-5: TRANSIT POTENTIAL INDEX r[r[[[[: Transit Potential Index --Five Year Action Plan 2002 -2006 Persons Median Income Total Area in Population Pop Total Employmn Emp % Age Sum of Income
Index Pooulation So. Miles ISo. Mile Index Emolovmn IS;'. Mile Index >65 <15 Index Indexes t CBD Dallas $26514.00 1.19 2,346 1.62 1.444.58 0.45 132.584 81640.39 16.21 10.89 0.34 18.20
2 South Dallas $9884.00 3.19 31.878 13.05 2.443.13 0.77 35.120 2691.60 0.53 38.47 1.21 5.71 3 Northeast Dallas $28053.00 1.13 159305 22.23 7.167.83 2.25 113400 5102.36 1.01 29.08 0.91
5.31 4 Oak LawnILove Field $26.507.00 1.19 73.574 18.47 3983.86 1.25 180825 9791.26 1.94 24.66 0.78 5.t6 5 West Dallas $12,596.00 2.51 29.777 18.90 1.575.84 0.50 93550 4950.78 0.98 31.79
1.00 4.98 6 East Dallas $24.731.00 1.28 107,089 17.89 5,986.30 1.88 86,162 4816.48 0.96 26.80 0.84 4.96 7 West Oak Cliff $21,008.00 1.50 147,964 27.53 5,375.43 1.69 54,741 t988.70 0.39
34.93 1.10 4.68 8 South Oak Cliff $16,003.00 1.97 61,444 18.25 3,366.06 1.06 23,184 1270.08 0.25 38.57 1.21 4.50 9 Far East Dallas $26,642.00 1.18 98,659 21.45 4.598.84 t.45 44,559 2077.05
0.41 36.73 1.15 4.20 10 Addison $32.211.00 0.98 13.606 4.40 3,090.17 0.97 36.715 8338.63 1.66 18.41 0.58 4.19 11 Northwest Dallas $31,588.00 1.00 78,627 19.89 3953.69 1.24 82,287 4137.73
0.82 33.40 1.05 4.11 12 Park Cities $52.784.00 0.60 32,171 5.96 5,398.72 1.70 19053 3197.35 0.63 35.97 1.13 4.06 13 Pleasant Grove $21,211.00 1.49 93.309 25.35 3,681.55 1.16 27,972 1103.65
0.22 37.07 1.17 4.03 14 Farmers Branch $32624.00 0.97 31727 11.98 2,64B.55 0.83 67,251 5614.07 1.11 34.67 1.09 4.00 15 South Irvino $27,046.00 1.17 134.837 33.32 4.046.73 1.27 59.572
1787.B8 0.35 32.26 1.01 3.81 16 West Richardson $37.276.00 0.85 39.715 10.36 3.833.12 1.20 29,416 2839.11 0.56 36.26 1.14 3.76 t7 Far North Dallas $40.781.00 0.77 130010 24.47 5,313.69
t.67 61,796 2525.69 0.50 23.33 0.73 3.68 18 Far South Oak Cliff $16.003.00 1.97 25,661 19.71 1,301.99 0.41 9,428 47B.36 0.09 3B.tl t.20 3.67 19 South Gartand $30.385.00 1.04 97,245 27.66
35t6.11 1.10 49.504 17B9.93 0.36 35.13 1.10 3.60 20 Southwest Oak Cliff $25.190.00 1.25 47,001 15.91 2.954.55 0.93 23.927 1504.09 0.30 33.56 1.06 3.54 21 North Dallas $51.899.00 0.61
51761 17.15 3.018.84 0.95 54.645 31B7.04 0.63 40.80 1.28 3.47 22 North Garland $34.900.00 0.90 110,160 28.38 3,8Bl.8B 1.22 35.032 1234.48 0.25 32.74 1.03 3.40 23 South Central Plano
$48 646.00 0.65 79,529 18.92 4,203.88 1.32 41.536 2195.5B 0.44 31.27 0.9B 3.39 24 East Richardson $42.801.00 0.74 46181 17.63 2.620.20 0.82 69547 3945.93 0.7B 32.11 1.01 3.35 25 South
Carrollion $34 905.00 905.00 0.90 4710B 17.24 2.733.28 0.86 48.662 2823.44 0.56 31.02 0.9B 3.30 26 North Central Plano $48 366.00 0.65 79.853 20.0B 3977.14 t.25 9.435 469.92 0.09 31.71
1.00 2.99 27 North Carrollton $36.400.00 0.87 55,810 19.45 2,869.56 0.90 14521 746.62 0.15 30.89 0.97 2.89 28 North Irvino $30.678.00 1.03 51190 34.22 1495.78 0.47 120,924 3533.41 0.70
19.09 0.60 2.BO 29 Far Southeast Dallas $22421.00 1.41 22,795 30.37 750.68 0.24 7.291 240.10 0.05 35.11 1.10 2.80 30 East Plano $39,735.00 0.79 34,785 16.48 2111.12 0.66 2B,3B6 1722.77
0.34 30.73 0.97 2.77 31 West Plano $42763.00 0.74 26719 17.03 1568.94 0.49 38999 2290.02 0.45 32.95 1.04 2.72 32 Far West Oak Cliff $30,808.00 1.02 29453 32.44 908.01 0.29 26.505 817.12
0.16 33.10 1.04 2.51 33 Rowlett $38.8B9.oo 0.81 27.611 17.B6 1,546.23 0.49 4.961 277.B2 0.06 34.85 1.10 2.45 34 Glenn Heiohts $30,994.00 1.02 5,637 6.86 B22.32 0.26 740 107.95 0.02 34.98
1.10 2.40 $31.565.94 2,104,537 652 3,182.02 1,732,230 5,036.39 31.81 [ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 91
DART 2030 Transit System Plan As mentioned earlier, comparing transit supply and potential indices helps to highlight areas that are potentially underserved by transit, or in other words,
where transit potential is higher than transit supply. The possibly underserved areas in this analysis were: • West Richardson I , I • Northwest Dallas • West Dallas • Farmers Branch
• North Central Plano • Northeast Dallas • South Carrollton • North Garland • Far Southeast Dallas • South Central Plano Transit supply and potential indices can aid project evaluation
by allowing staff to evaluate whether proposed service will add to a current surplus or increase service in an area that is currently underserved. Moreover, this type of analysis is
useful in identifying areas that are good candidates for new or improved service. This is indicative in Table 6-6 below as well as in Figure 6-8 which both illustrate levels of transit
opportunity. TABLE 6-6: TRANSIT OPPORTUNITY Transit Opportunity SUDDlv Index Demand Index Difference 1 West Richardson 0.49 3.76 -3.27 Hlahest Occortuni v 2 Northwest Dallas 0.98 4.11
-3.14 Hlahest Occortuni v 3 West Dallas 1.97 4.98 -3.01 Hiahest Occortuni v 4 Farmers Branch 1.06 4.00 -2.95 Hiahest Occortuni v 5 North Central Plano 0.06 2.99 -2.93 Hiahest Occortuni
v 6 Northeast Dallas 2.55 5.31 -2.75 7 South Carrollton 0.57 3.30 -2.73 8 North Garland 0.70 3.40 -2.70 9 Far Southeast Dallas 0.12 2.80 -2.68 10 South Central Plano 0.76 3.39 -2.63
11 Far South Oak Cliff 1.06 3.67 -2.61 12 South Garland 0.99 3.60 -2.61 3 South Irvino 1.23 3.81 -2.58 14 Pleasant Grove 1.45 4.03 -2.58 15 Far North Dallas 1.11 3.68 -2.57 16 Far East
Dallas 1.68 4.20 -2.52 17 West Plano 0.25 2.72 -2.47 18 Park Cities 1.64 4.06 -2.42 19 North Carrollton 0.56 2.89 -2.33 20 Far West Oak Cliff 0.24 2.51 -2.27 21 East Dallas 2.72 4.96
-2.24 22 Rowlett 0.22 2.45 -2.23 23 East Richardson 1.19 3.35 -2.16 24 Glenn HeiClhts . 0.31 2.40 -2.09 25 South Dallas 3.64 5.71 -2.07 26 East Plano 0.74 2.n -2.03 27 North Irvina 0.88
2.80 -1.92 28 West Oak Cliff 2.91 4.68 -l.n Lowest Occortuni v 29 North Dallas 1.71 3.47 -1.76 Lowest Occortuni Iv 30 Southwest Oak Cliff 1.88 3.54 -1.66 Lowest Occortuni Iv 31 South
Oak Cliff 2.89 4.50 -1.60 LowestOcDortunilv 32 Oak Lawn/Love Field 4.00 5.16 -1.16 Lowest OCDortuni Iv 33 Addison 3.59 4.19 -0.60 Lowest OCDortuni Iv 34 CBD Dallas 56.24 18.20 38.04
Lowest OCDortuni Iv IIII Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 92
One benefit of the transit opportunity analysis is that it can be compared to both existing and future transportation needs based on employment, population, and trip activity in order
to help identify areas that could profit most from the provision of transit services. FIGURE 6-8: TRANSIT OPPORTUNITY Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 93 TRANSIT OPPORTUNITY LEGEND: _
HIGH i 1 CJ LOW DART 2030 Transit System Plan [[[l:..-r[[Lrtl[[fr r[
. i . I(I. rII III·iiI III.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 7.0 Travel Pattern Analysis 7.1 Introduction The Travel Patterns analysis is intended to complement the demographic data presented in other System Plan
work tasks, by showing the effect of the growing population and employment on the regional transportation system. The analysis includes information on: • Congestion (Roadway Volumes
and Level of Service) • Local Desire Lines of Travel • Regional Desire Lines of Travel • Trip Productions Analysis • Trip Attractions Analysis • Regional Activity Center Travel Patterns
• Travel Time Contours • 2030 Baseline Transit Ridership The Travel Patterns analysis was performed using data from the North Central Texas Council of Governments (r\ICTCOG). The NCTCOG
data is based on updated demographic and trip information derived from the 2000 Census that reflects increased growth in the region. Because the travel patterns analysis is based on
regional data from NCTCOG, it covers the entire Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area and is not limited to the DART Service and Study Areas. In addition, even though this data covers
areas outside the Service and Study Areas, it has been included to show the relative volumes of commuter trips that begin or end outside the current DART Service Area and that utilize
the existing and planned transit network. 7.2 Methodology The travel patterns discussed here characterize transportation movements in the Dallas region according to specific measures:
Local Desire Lines of Travel: Traffic analysis and forecast models can predict trips from singular or aggregated zone clusters. Desire lines of travel depicting specific origins (by
TSZ) to specific destinations (by TSZ) were developed. The result is a map of high volume short trips showing circulation within a sub area or around an activity center. Roadway Volumes:
Roadway volumes resulting from baseline model runs for 2002 and 2030 are provided. Roadway volumes serve as indications of the most-traveled corridors and highlight areas where transit
may benefit from the existence of heavy travel patterns. Level of Service (LOS): Level of 'Service rates from baseline model runs for 2002 and 2030 are provided. They were produced for
freeway facilities within the Dallas-Fort Worth Region and identify corridors that will be experiencing heavy congestion. LOS rates are also useful for identifying areas where transit
may serve as a competitive alternative to the automobile based on travel times. [[' [[[, [L Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 94
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Regional Desire Lines of Travel: When traffic survey zones (TSZ's) are aggregated into zone districts, a view of regional trips emerges. A map of Regional
Desire Lines of Travel depicts the high volume, longer trips from one area of the study region to another based on 218 aggregated districts for the reglon. Longer trip lengths between
districts identify regional trips, however, specific origins and destinations are not represented. Trip Productions Analysis: Each TSZ was analyzed for the concentrations of trips emerging
from inside its boundaries, and compared to the size of the TSZ zone in order to develop the trip productions density of the selected zone. High trip production densities usually indicate
densely populated residential areas with a high potential to support transit investment in that area. Trip Attractions Analysis: Each TSZ was analyzed for the concentrations of trips
with destinations inside its boundaries, and compared to the size of the TSZ zone in order to to develop its trip attractions density. High concentrations of trip attractions are usually
attributable to employment centers because they are indicative of trips made on a consistent basis. Areas with high trip attraction density indicate excellent potential to support transit
investments because trips made to employment centers are consistently made during peak period transportation hours along known congested routes. Regional Activity Center Travel Patterns:
Centers are concentrations of land uses that serve as focal points in an urban area. Land uses within these areas typically include concentrations of employment, commercial uses such
as retail and restaurants, public or institutional uses, hotels, and in some cases residential use. A series of maps illustrating travel patterns to and from 6 selected regional activity
centers is included. Travel Time Contours: Travel time contours are graphic depictions of the land area that falls within a range of commute times. This analysis grouped travel time
contours by 0-15 minutes, 15-30 minutes, 30-45 minutes, 45-60 minutes and over 60 minutes. Selected activity centers located throughout the study area were identified to compare the
travel time contours for 2002 to those of 2030. 7.3 Analysis and Results Current demographic trends suggest a rapidly growing region in terms of both population and employment, with
increasing population and employment density occurring in and around already dense areas of population and employment. In order to characterize the growth in terms ,of impacts on the
transportation system, the NCTCOG Regional Travel Demand Forecast Model was used to estimate transportation patterns using 2002 and 2030 demographic data. Two model runs were conducted
using DART's existing and programmed transit network along with associated demographics for year 2002 and year 2030. The results of these model runs will serve as baselines that will
be used for comparison purposes later on when alternatives from the Corridor Opportunities Task are modeled. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 95
The problem illustrated in the table above is evident in the following maps (Figures 7-1 and 7-2) that depict 2002 and 2030 roadway volumes. The congestion data depicted in the table
applies to daily averages of travel on existing roadways and assumes the programmed projects that have been included in the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) as well as the Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP). According to the projections, the planned growth in roadway system capacity will not keep pace with the expected increase in daily vehicle miles traveled.
This will result in increased traffic congestion on our regions' roadways. TABLE 7·1: COMPARISON OF CONGESTION CHARACTERISTICS 7.4 Congestion Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 96 Roadway
Volumes Table 7-1 depicts the comparison between existing and forecast infrastructure and congestion. The statistics represent data for the entire metropolitan region, not just the study
area; however, the travel patterns will be indicative of the conditions that are expected to occur within and adjacent to the DART Service Area. DART 2030 Transit System Plan Congestion
Characteristic 2002 2030 Change Daily regional trips 13,312,386 22,679,104 9,366,718 70% Average daily 10.7 11.3 0.6 trip length (miles) 6% Trip density 2684 4573 1889 (trips/sq. mile)
70% Freeway 675 720 45 Centerline miles 7% Total roadway 9,121 9,375 254 Network centerline 3% miles Daily freeway 59,930,352 88,310,768 28,380,416 VrvlT 47% Daily freeway 88,785 122,653
33,868 VMT/freeway mile 38% Daily total VrvlT 129,206,336 240,019,280 110,812,944 86% Daily total 14,165 25,602 11,437 VMT/total 81% roadway network Percent freeway lane miles at LOS
62% 86% 24% D or below Percent total lane miles at LOS D or 40% 75% 35% below r[[􀁾 􀁬􀁾•. [[[. L[.•rr11r[[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-1: 2002 ROADWAY VOLUMES 2002 Trip Volumes -􀁏􀂷􀀲􀁾􀁏􀁏 25001 • 50000 -􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀰􀀱 • 75000 _ 75001· 131000 PlanRinli & 􀁄􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁾􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴 In
2002, the highest trip volumes occur along U.S. 75, 􀀱􀁾􀀳􀀵􀁅􀀬 1-635, along 1-30 east of 􀁴􀁾􀁬􀁥 Dallas CBD, and along 1-20 from Fort Worth to Southwest Dallas (Figure 7-1). By 2030,
trip volumes along the roadways will have increased (Figure 7-2). ffi IIIIl1I IIII iIi I Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 97
f•. -. 11IrL[It DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-2: 2030 ROADWAY VOLUMES Pre2030 Trip Volumes Pre2030 Trip Volumes 􀁾 0·26000 25001 • saoco 􀁾 &JODi· 76000 _ 7S001· 361000 Planning
& 􀁾􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁲􀁮􀁥􀁮􀁴 Freeway Level of Service (LOS) In 2002, the worst level of service conditions are primarily confined to the core metropolitan areas of Dallas, Tarrant, southern
Denton, and southern Collin Counties. To further illustrate the increasing congestion expected to occur in the DFW Region between 2002 and 2030, freeway Level of Service maps were produced.
A freeway's Level of Service (LOS) characterizes the operating efficiency of the facility and is often used to depict peak period travel conditions. Freeway segments operating at LOS
values E and F are considered heavily congested (see Figures 7-3 and 7-4). The highest trip volumes will not only occur in all the 2002 locations, but will also occur in areas along
1-30 from West Ft. Worth to East of Rowlett, Loop 12 from Texas Stadium to West Dallas, 􀀱􀁾􀀳􀀵􀁅 from Dallas to just South of Denton, the Dallas North Tollway from the Dallas CEm to
Frisco, along SH183 and SH 114 from Dallas to DFW International Airport, and along SH 360 from South Arlington to DFW International Airport. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 98 By 2030,
LOS values deteriorate to the point where freeway facilities are operating under E and F conditions into Parker, Johnson, Ellis, Kaufman, Rockwall, northern Collin, and northern Denton
Counties. r[tt[[L􀁾􀀮􀁾 􀁛􀀧􀁩􀁾
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-3: 2002 LEVEL OF SERVICE 2002 Forecasted Peak Hour Freeway Level of Service (LOS)Level of S e,vice (LOS) A,B,C ....-. E,F Mobility Needs Assessment
DRAFT 99
rrrr1 DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-4: 2030 LEVEL OF SERVICE 2030 Forecasted Peak Hour Freeway Level of Service (LOS) ffi IIII1H Local desire lines of travel are developed from
trip tables generated by NCTCOG's Travel Model. They depict short, high-volume trips that are made from an origin 7.5 Local and Regional Desire Lines of Travel f·· 􀁾 . LLrr· .'' . ",
[r[[[(. : 􀁾􀀮 􀁾􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁧& D_opmenl Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT l,evel of S elvlce (LO S) ,,, A.I,C -e,f 100
DART 2030 Transit System Plan tapzone to a destination tapzone. They depict where people start and end their trip regardless of the route traveled. The 2002 and 2030 local desire lines
of travel are shown on Figures 7-5 and 7-6. From 2002 to 2030, the volume of local trips intensifies significantly around Legacy, Denton, and between McKinney and Plano. New areas of
heavy local travel patterns develop around sections of Arlington and Grand Prairie. II Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 101
rrr1 DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·5: 2002 LOCAL DESIRE LINES OF TRAVEL 2002 Local Desire Lines of Travel All Trips--919 TAPZ's ffi IDIDI Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT L[JL
Lr[[[[[L[ Planning & Development LEGEND Daily Trips -.....-2000· 5000 ........ 5000· 34000 Freeways o TAPZones (GiG) 102
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·6: 2030 LOCAL DESIRE LINES OF TRAVEL 2030 Local Desire Lines of Travel All Trips··919 TAPZ's , Planning & 􀁄􀁾􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴 LEGEND Daily Trips
-...--2000 -5000 -...... 5000-122000 Freewa'YS TAPZones (91 g) ffi IlIIIIH I1_ riri! Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 103
104 SlJa·1maJ 1EDD1-Sl5D:!J o 􀁄􀁉􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁣􀁬􀁚􀁯􀁲􀁥 e"u::I....e (218;1 Legend \ DRAFT 2002 Regional Desire Lines of Travel All Trips--218 Districts II Mobility Needs Assessment Regional
Desire Lines of Travel are also developed from NCTCOG trip tables, but differ from local desire lines because they depict longer, high-volume trips. The 2002 and 2030 Regional Desire
Lines of Travel are shown on Figures 7-7 and 7-8. As is the case with local desire lines, regional desire lines illustrate where people want to begin and end their trips, not necessarily
the route traveled or the mode used to make the trip. From 2002 to 2030, the volume of regional trips intensifies throughout the study area. FIGURE 7-7: 2002 REGIONAL DESIRE LINES OF
TRAVEL DART 2030 Transit System Plan rL[[[[; [[[uro [IL.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-8: 2030 REGIONAL DESIRE LINES OF TRAVEL 2030 Regional Desire Lines of Travel All Trips--218 Districts ? \ XI' Legend Dall( nil' .••--!DIO· 'DODO
..... UIl01·SSaJ:I o Dl,r'cl Zon= el'u::I\l'1! (21. The most significant trends include: • Cedar Hili/DeSoto -Dallas CBD • South Oak Cliff -Redbird II f I Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT
105
l[[rr[[: DART 2030 Transit System Plan • Lewisville -Denton • Lewisville -Valley Ranch -Las Colinas • Frisco/Plano (Legacy) -Galleria • Allen -Grapevine • Rockwall -Dallas CBD • Wylie
-Plano/Richardson (Telecom Corridor) • President George Bush Turnpike • 1-635 from Garland to Farmers Branch • McKinney -Frisco/Plano (Legacy) • Balch Springs -Dallas CBD • DFW International
Airport -Dallas CBD DFW International Airport attracts long distance trips from throughout the region, with a significant number of these trips coming from the Dallas CBD. This would
indicate a potential need for higher speed (Express) service between the CBD and DFW International Airport. The Trinity Railway Express (TRE) currently provides highspeed service between
Dallas and Fort Worth with shuttle connections from the Centreport Station to the DFW International Airport Central Terminal Area (CTA). The DFW International Airport Rail Access Study
examined the need for direct rail access into the CTA from the TRE and determined it was not not justified. The same study determined that direct rail access from the east on the Cotton
Belt (potential high speed service) and the planned DFW International Airport/Irving LRT to Dallas CBD (potential medium speed service) would be justified. The DFW International Airport/Irving
LRT line is currently undergoing further analysis in order to determine the final alignment into the CTA. Transit service on the Cotton Belt will be evaluated as part of this Transit
System Plan update. Desire Lines of Travel -Work Trips Desire Lines of travel for work trips are also developed from NCTCOG trip tables. The work related desire lines of travel illustrate
where people want to begin and end their trips, not necessarily 􀁴􀁾􀁬􀁥 route traveled or the mode used to make the trip. Figure 7-9 depicts 2030 work trip desire lines using a regional
zone structure (the same one used The Legacy, Telecom, Las Colinas, and the Galleria activity centers primarily attract medium distance trips which would likely be adequately served
by a medium speed transit service. The programmed LRT build-out will provide this type of service to Telecom (2002) and Las Colinas (2009), but more study is needed to determine what
type of service might be justified to the Galleria and Legacy areas. The 2030 System Plan effort will look more closely at these two major activity centers and their potential for rail
transit service. The Dallas CBD also attracts long distance trips from throughout the DFW region. The trips come from all directions; however, the west and northwest quadrants produce
lower trip activity compared to the south, east and north quadrants of downtown. Highspeed regional rail service is now provided from the west-northwest by the TRE. The potential for
higher-speed service to the Dallas CBD from the north, east, and south remains an opportunity that will need more study, particularly given that the existing LRT system (medium speed
service) currently links these areas to the CBD. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 106 [['.' 􀀭􀁾 [[, [rrL· '";􀀢􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀺 [... 􀁾􀀮􀀧.....' ,-'':''
DART 2030 Transit System Plan for the regional desire lines found in Figures 7-7 and 7-8). The most significant trends include: • Cedar Hili/DeSoto -Dallas CBD • South Oak Cliff -Dallas
CBD • South Arlington -Dallas CBD • Northwest Dallas -Dallas CBD • 1-635/U.S. 75 -Dallas CBD • Garland/Rowlett -Dallas CBD • Sunnyvale/Mesquite -Dallas CBD • Balch Springs -Dallas CBD
• South Arlington -Centreport • Lake Dallas -Denton • Allen -North Carrollton • Far North Dallas -Frisco -McKinney • Wylie -Plano • Rowlett -Sachse -Plano • South Garland -Farmers Branch
• Sachse/Rowlett -Northeast Dallas • Balch Springs -Sunnyvale Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 107
The relative densities of trip productions and attractions affect local and Regional Desire Lines of Travel across the metropolitan area. High concentrations of trip FIGURE 7-9: REGIONAL
DESIRE LINES OF TRAVEL -WORK TRIPS DART 2030 Transit System Plan 108 l -fruwayl o 􀁏􀁬􀁮􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁚􀁯􀀧􀁥 Stl'1ct,re C218) DRAFT 2030 Desire Lines of Travel Daily Work Trips--218 Districts
Daily \III ork Trips 􀁾 SOO-750 ....... 751-2100 Mobility Needs Assessment 7.6 Trip Productions Analysis r ' "?rrrLLL[[rif·"-.' fT,·. -'· If'". -􀁾 Lr
DART 2030 Transit System Plan productions most likely indicate densely populated residential areas. High trip production densities can also signify areas with significant transit supportive
potential. The forecast trip production densities are depicted in Figure 7-10. Although the most densely populated zones are scattered (Dallas CBD; near the interchange of U.S. 75 and
Loop 12; near the interchange of U.S. 75 and 1-635; along the Dallas North Tollway between 1-635 and Beltline; and near the interchange of Loop 12 and 1-35E),there are several contiguous areas that generate between 30 and 75 trip productions per acre. Many of these lay along and between major roadway corridors. This is because employment
and commercial centers are often adjacent to roadway corridors, as is depicted in the trip attractions and employment density sections of this report. FIGURE 7-10: 2030 TRIP PRODUCTIONS
DENSITY 203Q Trip Production Density 7.7 Trip Attractions Analysis High concentrations of trip attractions are mostly attributable to regional employment centers. The distribution of
trip attraction density expected in 2030 is portrayed in Figure 7-11. Compared to the trip production density map, the trip attraction density :" il rIi Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT
109
[rrr rL DART 2030 Transit System Plan map depicts many areas within the metropolitan area that represent the highest possible trip attraction density level. Whereas only five areas depicted
greater than 80 trip productions per acre, numerous TAPZ's in the CBD, Uptown Dallas, Deep Ellum/Baylor area, along 1-35E in the Medical/Market Center area, and in between 1635 and the
President George Bush Turnpike generate more than 75 trip attractions per acre. There are also significant concentrations outside of the DART Service Area in parts of southern Arlington,
the Mid-Cities, and central Fort Worth. As for the 30-75 trip attractions per acre category, areas of contiguous zones include parts of southeastern and southwestern Dallas, along SH
114 through Las Colinas, along U.S. 75 from the CBD to the President George Bush Turnpike, and along 1-30 east towards Mesquite. FIGURE 7-11: 2030 REGIONAL TRIP ATTRACTION DENSITY SotJrCl'!l:
NCTCOG Travel Oaffiand Medsl L. rr[L[[[t 􀀮􀁾... Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT AII 1
10DART 2030 Transit System Plan 7.8 Regional Activity Center Travel Patterns A series of maps were produced in order to illustrate travel patterns involving selected regional activity
centers within the Dallas region. These activity centers were identified earlier in this report and are found again on Figure 7-12. Figures 7-13 and 7-24 depict the top 100 trip origins
and destinations for each activity center. This information is useful because it illustrates the magnitude and intensity of each activity center's travel pattern, and can also be used
for planning the locations of future transit corridors. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 111
r· .... rlr DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-12: REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS 2030 REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS· SERVICE AREA 􀁾 Souroe : NCTC 0 G and DART Data rt [ Planning .& Oevelopment
, DART Service Area NFreeways Source: NCTCOG and DART Daa JJly 11,2002 [ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 112
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·13: DALLAS CaD TRIP ORIGINS Daily Trips to Downtown Dallas in 2030Trips per Acre by TAPZ o 0-0.5 _ 0.5·1 _ 1-5 _ >5 . 'l Planning & Development
􀀬􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁊 The heaviest concentrations of trips destined for Downtown Dallas originate from areas within the 1-635 Loop. More specifically, these trips begin in areas of South
and West Oak Cliff, West Dallas, Uptown, the Park Cities, East Dallas, as well as Pleasant Grove. !. iII I1L [I Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 113
The heaviest concentrations of trips leaving Downtown Dallas are primarily bound for areas within Loop 12, including South and West Oak Cliff, West Dallas, the Medical/Market Center
area, Uptown, Deep Ellum, Fairpark, DFW Airport, Las Colinas, . the Galleria area, and along U.S. 75. FIGURE 7·14: DALLAS CaD TRIP DESTINATIONS ffi IIlIRIII 114 Trips per Acre byTAPZ
D 0-0.5 _ 0.5-1 _ 1-5 _ >5 DRAFT Daily Trips from Downtown Dallas in 2030 /JiNkE.;j': Planning & Devel:opment Mobility Needs Assessment DART 2030 Transit System Plan r􀁾􀀭􀀮 [[[[LL[[rl
rI . Irr
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-15: DFW AIRPORT TRIP ORIGINS DaiIy Trips to DFW Ai rport in 2030 􀀯..,.,􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀁣􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁌􀀭􀀮􀀯􀀭􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀬􀀻􀀮􀁣􀀻􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀺 ,i Trips per Acre
by TAPZ o 0-0.5 _ 0.5-1 _ 1-5 _ >5 -," Planning & Development The heaviest concentrations of trips headed for DFW Airport originate in areas such as North Arlington, Grapevine, Coppell,
North Irving, the Galleria, the Medical/Market area, Northwest Dallas, and parts of Far North Dallas along the President George Bush Turnpike. ri Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 115
r The heaviest concentrations of trips leaving DFW Airport are destined for areas such as North Irving, Las Colinas, Coppell, western Farmers Branch, the Galleria area, the 1-635/U.S.
75 Interchange area, as well as the Telecom Corridor. 116 Trips per Acre by TAPZ o 0·0.5 _ 0.5-1 _ 1·5 _ >5 DRAFT .;; 'Planning & Development A , -Daily Trips from DFW Airport in 2030
Mobility Needs Assessment DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-16: DFW AIRPORT TRIP DESTINATIONS rr[r[[[FL rrr
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·17: GALLERIA TRIP ORIGINS Daily Trips to the Galleria area in 2030 .\ Trips per Acre by TAPZ D 0-0.5 _ 0.5-1 _ 1-5 _ >5 rI,, ii I , 􀀮􀁾 Planning
& Dewfopment (h',. The Galleria area attracts the majority of its trips from the northern half of the DART Service Area. The heaviest travel origins include Northwest Dallas, Valley
Ranch, the Park Cities, North Carrollton, North Dallas, Central Plano, and areas around the 1635/U.S. 75 Interchange. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 117 !.
The Galleria area produces heavy trip concentrations that are destined for locales such as DFW Airport, Valley Ranch, western Farmers Branch, the 1-635 corridor from the Dallas North
Tollway to U.S. 75, and along U.S. 75 from Northwest Highway to the Telecom Corridor. FIGURE 7·18: GALLERIA TRIP DESTINATIONS 118 ffi IIIRIH Trips per Acre by TAPZ o 0·0.5 _ 0.5·1 _
1-5 _ >5 DRAFT Daily Trips from the Galleria area in 2030 ,>. .../rplanning & Development 􀀯􀀧􀀭􀁾.......... '.. Mobility Needs Assessment DART 2030 Transit System Plan fl.rr[[t. [[..
f;.·.·.;'.· 11 r1Tlr r[􀁲􀁾􀂷.􀂷􀂷.􀂷 ""-';
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·19: LAS COLINAS TRIP ORIGINS Daily Trips to Las Colinas in 2030 Trips per Acre byTAPZ o 0-0.5 _ 0.5-1 _ 1-5 _ >5 PJanning & Devtlopment The heaviest
concentrations of trips headed for Las Colinas originate from various areas including South Irving, Euless, DFW Airport, Grapevine, Lewisville, Coppell, Carrollton, Farmers Branch, the
Galleria area, as well as portions of Northwest Dallas. II Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 119
DART 2030 Transit System Plan r FIGURE 7-20: LAS COLINAS TRIP DESTINATIONS Daily Trips from Las Colinas in 2030 ffi IIII1H The heaviest concentrations of trips leaving Las Colinas are
destined for areas such as DFW Airport, Grapevine, Coppell, North Irving, Farmers Branch, the Galleria area, as well as portions of Northwest Dallas stretching from 1-635 south to the
Medical/Market area. 120 Trips per Acre by TAPZ o 0·0.5 _ 0.5·1 _ 1·5 _ >5 DRAFT Planning & Development Mobility Needs Assessment [Fr[[[[' rLr:
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·21: LEGACY TRIP ORIGINS Daily Trips to Legacy in 2030 Trips per Acre byTAPZ o 0-0.5 • 0.5-1 _ 1-5 _ >5 ( " I,Iiil Planning & Development I'. The
primary origins for trips destined for the Legacy business park area include the Galleria area, Far North Dallas, North Carrollton, West and Central Plano, Allen, and The Colony. Smaller
concentrations of trips also originate from Frisco and western McKinney. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 121
DART 2030 Transit System Plan ffi IIIIlII Trips per Acre by TAPZ o 0-0.5 _ 0.5-1 _ 1-6 _ >5 Daily Trips from Legacy in 2030 "",;,.j"PlanniRg & Development ....􀁾􀁲􀁾􀀧􀀮􀀢􀁈􀁬􀀺􀀬􀀪
FIGURE 7·22: LEGACY TRIP DESTINATIONS r•irI1 fL [f􀁾[rr[r;;",: "'.-Trips from the Legacy business park area are primarily destined for locales in Addison, the Galleria area, the Telecom
Corridor, Central and East Plano, and The Colony. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 122
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·23: TELECOM CORRIDOR TRIP ORIGINS Daily Trips to Telecom Corridor in 2030Trips per Acre by TAPZ o 0-0.5 _ 0.5-1 _ 1-5 _ >5 I[ II Planning & Development
iI Trips destined for the Telecom Corridor originate from a variety of areas. The heaviest concentrations occur from the Galleria area, along 1-635 from the Dallas North Tollway stretching
eastward toward Garland Road (S.H. 78), the Lake Highlands area of Dallas, along the President George Bush Tollway, Central and East Plano, Richardson, northern Garland, Sachse, and
Allen. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 123
Trips pe r Acre by TAPZ o 0-0.5 _ 0.5-1 _ 1-5 _ >5 DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-24: TELECOM CORRIDOR TRIP DESTINATIONS Daily Trips from Telecom Corridor in 2030 Planning &
Development The heaviest concentrations of trips leaving the Telecom Corridor are destined for Addison, the Galleria area, the 1-635/U.S. 75 Interchange area, Richardson, northern and
Central Garland, Central and East Plano, southern Allen, as well as to a lesser degree, DFW Airport. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 124
DART 2030 Transit System Plan 7.9 Travel Time Contours Increased travel congestion from 2002 to 2030 has resulted in a change to mobility travel times. To illustrate this, travel time
contour maps were developed. Travel time contours are a graphic depiction of the travel times around a certain landmark or activity center and are indicators of transportation access.
They represent use of roadway infrastructure, but also indicate where transit may be competitive. In the following maps, the pink area represents the locations within 15 minutes of the
activity center; green is 15-30 minutes away; orange is 30 to 45 minutes away; purple is 45-60 minutes away; and gray is over 60 minutes away. Figures 7-25 through 7-40 depict travel
time comparisons between 2002 and 2030 for the following locations: • Dallas CBD • DFW International Airport • Telecom Corridor • Galleria • Las Colinas • Legacy • 1-635/US-75 • Lewisville
• Love Field • Mesquite • Redbird • Six Flags • SMU • Allen • Garland The results show that travel times will increase in 2030. Stated another way, the destinations within a 2002 driving
distance will be fewer in 2030. II Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 125
[.... '.. [" fr[[ DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-25: CBD TRAVEL TIME CONTOUR COMPARISON, 2002 AND 2030 2002 2030 r[[L[[[: u: Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 126
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·26: CaD TRAVEL TIME CONTOUR COMPARISON r,III. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 127
2030 2002 /􀀮􀁾 .£.t •. .y "-l, r---. .. ,.? 'Vo'" V FIGURE 7-27: D/FW AIRPORT TRAVEL TIME CONTOUR COMPARISON DART 2030 Transit System Plan 􀁾 . ,r',,-rr ,Lif' :LIl;•.... if :< ,1 U,-_
rr rr [[L Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 128
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-28: TELECOM TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2030 II ; I ,i , II , [ ! i ; IIi , ! :I ,II :[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 129
r' 1i.·•.· I' Irr1 Lr DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·29: GALLERIA TRAVEL TIMES COMPARISON 2002 2030 r1rr tL[[[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 130
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·30: LAS COLINAS TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2030 Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 131 iiI
rfi.-'" rir rr [: DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-31: LEGACY TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2002 2030 FirL' r1: [[(-[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 132
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-32: 1-635/U.S. 75 TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 133
r1rIrr tr,􀁾 .. DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-33: LEWISVILLE TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2002 2030 r1r[[[[l[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 134
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7·34: LOVE FIELD TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2002 2030 I! Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 135
frr1 rrrr DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-35: MESQUITE TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2002 rr rL[[1:, ',.'.' l[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 136
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-36: RED BIRD TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2002 -I-. 2030 r! !i.· Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 137
·i1r[LLr."'. DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-37: SIX FLAGS TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2002 2030 r l.. r[LL[[[[ Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 138
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-38: SMU TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2030 II I· Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 139 I! 􀁾
rrrrr L[,,r.L DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-39: ALLEN TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2002 2030 [[r[[fI.... [: 􀁾L... Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 140
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-40: GARLAND TRAVEL TIME CONTOURS COMPARISON 2030 IIiI-I. I Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 141
L􀀱􀁾IL r[􀁲􀂷􀀮􀁾 .. [[(.. ... '.,'. DART 2030 Transit System Plan 7.10 2030 Baseline Transit Network Model Results A model run of the 2030 transportation system, including all programmed
improvements, was run using the NCTCOG Regional Travel Demand Model. Pre 2030 demographics were used. The results are shown on the following table and map. Table 7-2: 2030 Base Run Summary
of Ridership and Performance Measures System Plan 2030 Base Run Summary of Ridership and Performance Measures System Plan 2030 Base Run Pre2030 Demo! raphics Used May, 2002 Patronage
Local Bus Express Bus LRT Commuter Total Rail Total Transit Trips (Unlimited) 244,500 7,980 155,500 12,700 168,200 420,680 Transit Trips (Linked) 169,200 6,300 79,800 6,500 86,300 261,800
Transfers to Rail 48.7% 48.8% 48.7% Percentage Transfers 37.8% Rail Access by Mode (%) Walk 23.9% 22.8% 24.3% Drive 27.4% 28.1% 27.2% Local Bus 37.5% 37.7% 37.3% Express Bus 0.13% 1.4%
0.2% Rail 10.8% 1.4% 10.67% Passenger /Vehicle Miles 2.5 1.5 3.2 4.0 3.2 2.7 Passenger Miles (daily) 741,800 39,400 1,286,300 206,900 1,493,200 2,274,400 Passenger Hours (daily) 54,400
3,600 43,300 5,100 48,400 106,400 Average Passenger Trip Length (miles) 3.0 4.9 8.3 16.3 8.9 5.4 Average Passenger Trip Length (minutes) 13.3 27.1 16.7 24.1 17.3 15.2 Average Speed (MPH)
13.6 10.9 29.7 40.6 30.9 21.4 Transit trips unlinked come from the T20MRG Transit trips linked come from the systemriders worksheet Passenger miles and hours come from passenger miles
worksheet or total Tloads The numbers from the perfonnance section come from the Tnet wOrksheet or total the Pk and Offpk Tnet Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT' 142
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 7-41: 2030 BASELINE RIDERSHIP 2030 Baseline Ridership ..".., ffi I11I1II 􀁾􀀢􀀬􀀬􀀼􀀯􀀧􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁧 & DevelDpment /,.' Mobility Needs Assessment
May22.2002 Source: DART, NCTCOG Travel Model, NerCOG Pre2030 Demographios DRAFT 143 i
rrrr[L[ < .•.. '.. f<: 􀁾 -l DART 2030 Transit System Plan 8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 8.1 Study and Service Area Mobility Needs Mobility Needs Current and future mobility needs
for the DART Service Area and the study area are summarized in the Specific Mobility Needs discussed below. Other regional, intrastate, and interstate mobility needs and potential services
to meet these needs must also be considered in the context of the DART Transit System Plan. Interstate and Intrastate Interstate Amtrak service now uses the Union Pacific rail line that
enters Dallas from the east. The Dallas Terminal is at Union Station. Amtrak also uses the Union Pacific rail line from Union Station to Fort Worth. It is assumed this rail line will
continue to be used for this purpose in the future. This corridor is the planned interstate rail corridor in the Mobility 2025 Plan. There has been some consideration by Amtrak to use
the KCS rail corridor through Wylie, Garland, and Dallas to Union Station or the Cotton Belt to DFW International Airport for interstate rail service. The needs of interstate passenger
rail in the DART Service area must be taken into account in planning for the DART Transit System Plan. Figure 8-1 illustrates the Trans Texas Corridor concept, which is an intrastate
transportation proposal currently under consideration by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) that would include high-speed passenger rail and commuter rail as well as freight
rail and highway facilities. Although the priority corridors of the Trans Texas Corridor (TTC) would bypass the Dallas Fort Worth urban area, the need for high-speed rail and commuter
rail connections in the DART Service Area should be considered in the Transit System Plan. r[[[" [[[:,.'":..:: " ( ....:7..... '. 􀀺􀀺􀁾 Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 144
DART 2030 Transit System Plan I FIGURE 8-1: TRANS TEXAS CORRIDOR tllMtiPOIlT4rlJOtli FiI\.Wt(e MlOGllAlA"ll"H"O rn\Mlor,· M.POrg jII&lflt!'l 􀁾􀁭􀀬􀀬􀁾 _____ PIt-JIl'" Clllli=h., TEXAS
OEPAI'IT).16NT 􀁏􀁾 TflAN$.9·0A1 􀁁􀁔􀁉􀀨􀀩􀀧􀁾 Trans Texas Corridor 􀀮􀁾 ! Regional The region's Mobility 2025 Plan includes a network of planned commuter rail and staged rail lines
for the Dallas-Fort Worth Region. These are shown in Figure 8-2. Many of these rail lines are within the study area and DART Service Area. Potential transit service on these rail lines
will be considered in the DART Transit System Plan. There is also the potential for regional express bus service either as an interim service leading up to the rail service above or
as a long-range stand-alone service. This potential service will also be considered in the planning for the Transit System Plan. ,I Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 145
DART 2030 Transit System Plan rrrLrLr l: t' FIGURE 8-2: MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE-RAIL SYSTEM L ,: i 􀀭􀁾􀀧􀁲􀀭􀀬-----,----, , , . Mobility 2025 Update Rail System Legend _ Commuter Rail
_ LightRaii _ North Crosstown Corridor Study • Possible Eastern Terminus _ Staged Rail • ••• Special Events ••􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀮 Intercity Rail Corridor -Freeways/Parkways .. .••• Existing Rail
Corridors 'IIJ!@!': ' 1015 • 􀁎􀁯􀁴􀁬􀁨􀁾􀁯􀀱􀁔•••s N ..Jzr Counc:'11 of 􀁾􀁶􀁥􀁲􀁮􀁭􀁥􀁮􀀱􀁳 It TramportatlOn 􀁾 Existing Transit Planning Corridors are shown on Figure 8-3. These corridors
were originally developed in 1989 and are derived from transit trip forecasts that are in turn derived from demographic and socio-economic forecasts. Figure 8-4 depicts the Population
and employment forecasts for 2030 already indicate that transit services within the DART Service Area will have to be expanded. In order to further assess the demand for increased transit
services, the study team will analyze travel demand model results for transit alternatives in in order to project capacity needs. Specific planning corridor mobility needs and opportunities
are identified from analyzing the various data presented in the Travel Patterns Analysis section found earlier in this report. It was illustrated that many areas of the service area
and study area are forecasted to experience high levels of roadway congestion in 2030 (see Figures 7-3 and 7-4). This problem is indicative of too many cars with insufficient roadway
capacity. The region cannot build its way out of congestion with additional freeway capacity due to a lack of funds as well as deteriorating air quality. In fact, the Dallas-Fort Worth
Region is facing a potential downgrade of its non-attainment status for ozone from serious to severe. As a result of these considerations, public transit could become a more attractive
transportation choice not only for the transitdependent market, but also for the choice rider market if the services are reliable and provide travel-time savings. 8.2 Specific Planning
Corridor Mobility Needs Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 146 rl. [' 􀁛􀀧􀁾 '. i 􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀮􀁾 [' [[: fG [. f}o'. Ii [
DART 2030 Transit System Plan proposed Transit Planning Corridors for the 2030 Transit System Plan effort. These corridors were revised from the 1989 corridors based on updated travel
pattern data as well as land use and demographic changes that have occurred over the past decade. It is significant that the new corridor boundaries extend to areas outside of the current
DART Service Area. This is indicative of the fact that the DART system increasingly serves patrons who reside outside of the service area. lrl. ll·.. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT
147
DART Transit Planning Corridors (1989) Souroe: NCTCOG and DART Data February 12.2003 148 ffi I11I1II !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!i;;iiiiiiiiii6 Miles 􀁈􀁾􀁾􀀯 Planning & Development "",,,,",.,.,
Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT FIGURE 8·3: 1989 TRANSIT PLANNING CORRIDORS DART 2030 Transit System Plan rLl . iLr[:f,·..· , . r.• 􀁬􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀻[,.. ,. [lrLrr Lr
DART 2030 Transit System Plan FIGURE 8-4: PROPOSED 2030 TRANSIT PLANNING CORRIDORS DART Proposed Transit Planning Corridors Radial Corridors y 􀁾 􀁾fr iISouroe: NCTCOG and DART Data
February 10.2003 􀀬􀀮􀁾􀀮 ,j" Planning & Development 􀀮􀀢􀁜􀀬􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀧􀁪􀀬􀀻􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀭􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀮 The following is a summary of the predominant travel characteristics, service area needs,
and stUdy area needs expected to occur in each of the proposed planning corridors above by 2030. The predominant travel characteristics were derived from Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT
149
DART 2030 Transit System Plan the 2030 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips and Work Trips) maps found in Figures 7-8 and 7-9 respectively. 1. West Oak Cliff (U.S. 67/1-35E) Corridor
Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel pattern between southwestern suburbs (Duncanville, Cedar Hill, DeSoto, Ovilla, and Glenn Heights) and Dallas CBD. • High
volume northwest travel pattern between Glenn Heights and southwest Dallas. Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern between southwestern suburbs (Duncanville,
Cedar Hill, DeSoto, Ovilla, and Glenn Heights) to Dallas CBD. • High volume travel pattern between South Arlington/Mansfield to Dallas CBD. • No high volume desire lines of travel. Service
Area Needs Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) DRAFT 150 • Consider capacity needs of Glenn Heights and Red Bird Express Service to Dallas CBD. • Review capacity needs of planned
permanent HOV lanes on U.S. 67 and 135E. • Consider extension of HOV lanes on on 1-35E between the U.S. 67 merge and 120. • Consider increasing transit service availability in the West
Oak Cliff LRT Corridor and extending this corridor to Red Bird Lane. • Consider providing transit service between Glenn Heights and southwest Dallas (Red Bird area). • Study potential
impact of study area growth on service area services. • Potential demand for transit service from Midlothian and the southwestern suburbs to service area (Reserve ROW on BN-SF). • 1\10
high volume desire lines of travel. • Potential demand for extension of HOV lanes on U.S. 67 and 1-35E (this is being reviewed as part of the Southern Gateway Major Investment Study).
Mobility Needs Assessment Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) 2. Turnpike (1-30 West) Corridor Study Area Needs 􀁾 . 11 f' ;! It:.:-ILr1 . r{ r[[[[[[.
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Service Area Needs • Planned HOV lanes on 1-30. • Review HOV capacity needs. • Review Trinity Study transit recommendations. Study Area Needs • Potential
demand for HOV capacity. Although the desire lines of travel aren't indicative of it, heavy weekday peak period traffic volumes do occur along 1-30 eastbound in the AM and westbound
in the PM. 3. Northwest (S.H. 114) Corridor Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel pattern between Dallas CBD and Irving/DFW International Airport. Regional
Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • No high volume desire lines of travel. Service Area Needs • Documented in the Northwest Corridor Major Investment Study and the DFW International
Airport Rail Access and Implementation Study. • Review potential impact of study area growth on service area services. • LRT expansion is planned to the DFW International Airport Central
Terminal Area from the Dallas CBD via Las Colinas. • HOV lanes are also planned on S.H. 114 from S.H. 183 to DFW International Airport. • Double tracking of the Trinity Railway Express
(TRE) from Dallas Union Station to Centreport is planned. . Study Area Needs • Preserve rail ROW from TRE (Centreport Station) into Central Terminal Area of DFW International Airport.
• Potential demand for additional capacity on TRE. • Potential demand for transit service from northeast Tarrant County communities. 4. Stemmons (1-35E) Corridor Regional Desire Lines
of Travel (All Trips) • Moderate volume travel patterns between Dallas CBD and Carrollton. • High volume travel patterns between Lewisville and Denton. . II I rIIIIl Mobility Needs Assessment
DRAFT 151 III
rrL[r[rrL DART 2030 Transit System Plan Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern between the Dallas CBD and northwest Dallas. • High volume travel pattern
between Cor.inth and Denton. Service Area Needs • Documented in the Northwest Corridor MIS and the Northwest Corridor 'LRT . Line to Farmers Branch and Carrollton' Draft Environmental
Impact Statement. • LRT expansion is planned from the Dallas CBD to Frankford Road in Carrollton. • Review capacity of the above. LRT line. • Review potential impact of study area growth
and the proposed Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) on DART Service Area services. Study Area Needs • Documented in the Denton County Transportation Authority Service Plan.
5. Tollway Corridor Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel pattern between 1-635 and U.S. 380 north of Frisco (including Legacy Park area). • High volume travel
pattern between McKinney and Frisco (McKinney Hook). • High volume travel pattern between the Dallas CBD and 1-635. 6. North Central Service Area Needs Study Area Needs Mobility Needs
Assessment DRAFT 152 Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern between President George Bush Turnpike (S.H.
190) and U.S. 380 north of Frisco (including Legacy Park area). • High volume travel pattern between McKinney and Frisco (McKinney Hook). • Consider rail or rapid bus transit in Tollway
or Preston Road corridors from Legacy Park to 1-635 as well as to the Dallas CBD. • Potential demand for rail or rapid bus transit in Tollway or Preston Road (S.H. 289) corridors from
U.S. 380 to Legacy Park. • Potential demand for rail or rapid bus transit linking McKinney to Frisco along or between the U.S. 380 and/or S.H. 121 corridors. r􀁾. rt ..·rrr [[[􀁉􀁾 [
DART 2030 Transit System Plan • High volume travel pattern between Plano/Richardson and into Allen and McKinney. Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern
between the Dallas CBD and 1-635. • High volume travel pattern between Plano and Richardson (Telecom Corridor). Service Area Needs • Review capacity needs of North Central (Red) LRT
Line. • Review need for express service from Plano into the Dallas CBD. • HOV lanes are planned for U.S. 75 from downtown Plano to 1-635. Study Area Needs • Potential demand for rail
or rapid bus transit from Allen, Fairview, and McKinney. • Potential demand for HOV lanes from downtown Plano to U.S. 380 in McKinney. 7. Northeast Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All
Trips) • High volume travel pattern from Sachse and Rowlett to the Richardson/Plano area, northeast Dallas, Mesquite, as well as to the Dallas CBD. • High volume travel pattern from
Rockwall to the Dallas CBD via Rowlett (Also see 1-30 East Corridor). • High volume travel patterns from Wylie to multiple destinations in Allen, Plano, Richardson, and the Rowlett area.
Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel patterns from Rowlett to Garland and the Dallas CBD. • High volume travel patterns from Wylie to Richardson and Plano.
• High volume travel patterns from Sachse to Garland, Rowlett, Richardson, and Plano. Service Area Needs • Review capacity needs of Northeast (Blue) LRT Line. • LRT expansion is planned
from downtown Garland to Rowlett. • HOV lanes are planned on 1-635 from U.S. 75 to just north of 1-30. Study Area Needs • Potential demand for rail or rapid bus transit from Wylie, Sachse,
and the Rockwall area to the points in the service area including Richardson and Plano as well as to the Dallas CBD. I . ItI, II[I· IIii Mobility l\Ieeds Assessment DRAFT 153
rrrrLLL[L DART 2030 Transit System Plan • Potential for HOV lanes on President George Bush Turnpike linking Garland, Rowlett, and Sachse to the Richardson/Plano employment centers. •
Potential enhanced Bus Service on east-west corridor linking Garland and Rowlett to northeast Dallas. 8. 1-30 (East) Corridor Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume
travel pattern from Rockwell, Heath, Rowlett, Garland, Sunnyvale, MesqUite and East Dallas to Dallas CBD. Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern from
Rowlett to Dallas CBD. Service Area Needs • Consider potential to use the Union Pacific rail corridor as a high-speedcommuter rail corridor and/or possibly for inter-city rail (Amtrak). • Consider potential demand for rail transit along the Santa Fe from 1-635 to the Dallas CBD (The East Corridor MIS
is studying this). • Review capacity of planned permanent HOV lanes on 1-30. Study Area Needs 9. U.S. 80 Corridor Service Area Needs Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) Regional
Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) DRAFT 154 • High volume travel pattern from Sunnyvale, Mesquite, and East Dallas to the Dallas CBD. • High volume travel pattern from Sunnyvale, Mesquite,
and East Dallas to the Dallas CBD. • Potential to use the Union Pacific rail corridor as a high-speed commuter rail corridor and/or possibly for inter-city rail (Amtrak). • Potential
demand for HOV lanes on 1-30 from Mesquite to the current service area boundary. • Potential demand for rail or rapid bus transit from Mesquite, Sunnyvale, Heath, and Rockwall to the
service area (including Garland, Richardson, Plano, and the Dallas CBD). • Consider potential to use the Union Pacific rail corridor as a high-speed commuter rail corridor and/or possibly
for inter-city rail (Amtrak). Mobility Needs Assessment r[L[tLLr
DART 2030 Transit System Plan • Consider potential demand for rail or rapid bus transit in the Union Pacific/Scyene/Military Parkway corridor from the service area boundary (St. Augustine
Rd.) to the Dallas CBD. Study Area Needs • Potential demand for HOV lanes on U.S. 80 from Sunnyvale to the service area. • Potential demand for rail or rapid bus transit from Mesquite,
Sunnyvale, and Forney to the service area (including Garland, Richardson, Plano, and the Dallas CBD). 10. Pleasant Grove Corridor (southeast) Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips)
• High volume travel patterns from Mesquite, Balch Springs and Pleasant Grove (southeast Dallas) to the Dallas CBD. Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel
patterns from Mesquite, Balch Springs and Pleasant Grove (southeast Dallas) to the Dallas CBD. Service Area Needs • Consider potential demand for extension of the Southeast LRT Line.
• Review capacity needs of the Southeast LRT Line. • Consider potential demand for HOV Lanes on U.S. 175. Study Area Needs • Potential demand for extension of the Southeast LRT Line
into Balch Springs/Seagovilie. • Potential demand for HOV lanes along U.S. 175 into Balch Springs/Seagoville. 11. South Oak Cliff Corridor Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips)
• High volume travel pattern from the Lancaster Road/Loop 12 (Ledbetter) area into the Dallas CBD. Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel pattern from the
Lancaster Road/Loop 12 (Ledbetter) area into the Dallas CBD. IIIIIIIII[I.IlIIl Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 155
rr' r[L[.• ....: [..•.. "rl DART 2030 Transit System Plan Service Area Needs • Review capacity needs of South Oak Cliff LRT Line. • Consider potential demand for HOV lanes on 1-35E from
the U.S. 67 split south to 1-20. Study Area Needs • Potential demand for extension of HOV lanes along 1-35E into northern Ellis County. 12. S.H. 121 Corridor Regional Desire Lines of
Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel patterns occur along the corridor from Allen on the east side to Southlake on the west (cities in between include: Grapevine, Coppell, Lewisville,
Carrollton, The Colony, Plano, and Frisco). Regional activity centers in this corridor include Legacy Park and DFW International Airport. Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips)
• High volume travel patterns to Legacy Park from Allen, Lewisville, and Carrollton. Service Area Needs [ • This corridor lies primarily outside the DART Service Area. Study Area Needs
Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) 13. Outer Belt Corridor (President George Bush Turnpike-S.H. 190 and S.H. 161) • Potential demand for rail or rapid bus transit providing
high capacity service in the S.H. 121 Corridor. • High volume travel patterns stretching along the northern side of the corridor between Carrollton and Richardson/Plano. • High volume
travel· patterns stretching along the eastern and northeastern sides of the corridor between Mesquite/Sunnyvale through Garland and Rowlett to Richardson/Plano (The southern part of
this travel pattern is largely served currently by 1-635. In the future, a planned new Parkway that basically is an extension of the President George Bush Turnpike from 1-30 to U.S.
175 will serve it). Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 156 [[rLL[[[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume travel patterns from Balch Springs and south Mesquite to Sunnyvale and north Mesquite. • High
volume travel patterns from Rowlett and Garland to Richardson/Plano. • High volume travel patterns from Carrollton to the Legacy Park area of Plano. Service Area Needs • Study the need
for rail transit service from Downtown Plano to DFW International Airport. • Potential demand for rapid bus transit service and HOV lanes on the President George Bush Turnpike from Garland
to Carrollton. • Study potential impact of study area growth on service area transit services. Study Area Needs • Potential demand for rapid bus transit service on the new Parkway mentioned
above that will basically be an extension of the PGBT from 1-30 to U.S. 175. • Potential demand for rail transit service from Wylie to Downtown Plano. 14. LBJ (1-635) Corridor Regional
Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • High volume travel pattern from Mesquite and Garland ((1-30) to Farmers Branch (1-35E). Regional Desire Lines of Travel (Work Trips) • High volume
travel pattern along the north side of 1-635 between U.S. 75 to west of the Dallas North Tollway. Service Area Needs • Consider high capacity rail or rapid bus transit service along
the 1-635 corridor from just north of the 1-30 interchange (service area boundary) to 1-35E (HOV lanes already exist along most of this corridor and are planned from 1-30 to U.S. 75).
• Study the need for rail transit service from Downtown Plano to DFW International Airport. • Study potential impact of study area growth on service area transit services. Study Area
Needs • Potential demand for HOV Lanes on the eastern and southeastern portions of 1-635 along with rapid bus transit services. I\l.􀁉􀁾lII . (II rI II ·r·· I Mobility Needs Assessment
DRAFT 157
[FLrr [[," .:.; L DART 2030 Transit System Plan 15. Loop 12 Corridor Regional Desire Lines of Travel (All Trips) • . Medium volume travel pattern along the northern side (Northwest Highway)
between U.S. 75 and 1-35E. • High volume travel pattern along southern side (Ledbetter) between 1-45 and Spur 408 (Red Bird area). • Medium volume travel pattern along the western side
(Walton Walker) from the 1-35E/Loop 12 split to south Irving. Service Area Needs • Consider rail or rapid bus transit service along the southern, eastern, and northern sides of Loop
12. • Consider rapid or express bus transit service along the western (Walton Walker) portion of Loop 12. • HOV lanes are planned for the western portion of Loop 12, as it is an existing
freeway facility. Study Area Needs • There are no study area needs for this corridor as it lies entirely within the current DART Service Area. 8.3 Local Mobility Needs Red Bird Legacy
This major employment area is located just south of Loop 12 on the west side of U.S. 67. The current employment is 23,000 but it is forecasted to grow to 37,000 by 2030. The Red Bird
Industrial Park Area attracts trips from the surrounding area including areas just south of the DART Service Area. Local mobility needs can be identified by analyzing the 2030 Local
Desire Lines of Travel found in Figure 7-6. Local trips by automobile are more likely to use the arterial street system. These facilities will also be subject to some of the congestion
that will be evident on our freeway system in 2030. As a result, public transit could capture a larger share of this market. Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 158 This major employment
area is located south of S.H. 121 along both sides of the Dallas North Tollway. The current employment is 28,000 but it is forecasted to grow significantly by 2030 to just over 80,000.
The existing employment centers in Legacy attract large numbers of local trips from all directions. This indicates that many workers live in the surrounding area. A significant number
of these trips come from north of S.H. 121, which is outside the limits of the current DART Service Area. [" rr L[[[[
DART 2030 Transit System Plan Skyline This major employment area is located in east Dallas, just east of Loop 12 between the 1-30/U.S. 80 split and Scyene. The existing employment is
12,000 and is forecasted to grow to 20,000 by 2030. The Skyline Area local attracts trips from the surrounding area including areas outside the DART Service Area in Mesquite. Garland
Garland has one of the heaviest concentrations of local trips. Garland has a good balance of employment and population. Many local trips are also attracted to various locations along
the 1-635 employment corridor. Irving has a heavy concentration of local trips. Irving also has very high employment opportunities, which allows residents to find local employment. Denton
The Denton area has a high number of local trips. It also has a good employment to population balance and is home to the University of North Texas, which no doubt plays a part in this
heavy local trip pattern. However, Denton is not in the DART Service Area. McKinney/Alien McKinney and Allen have a high number of local trips. They also have a good employment to population
balance. However, McKinney and Allen are not in the DART Service Area. Lewisville The Lewisville area has a heavy concentration of local trips. It also has a good employment (retail,
commercial, and industrial) to population balance. However, Lewisville is not in the DART Service Area. South Arlington South Arlington has a lot of local trip activity. This area is
comprised of a large number of single-family residences that commute to employment areas located south and north of 1-20. However, Arlington is not in the DART Service Area. Central
Arlington Central Arlington also has significant local trip activity. The area is full of employment areas (industrial and commercial) and has a high population pool. However, Arlington
is not in the DART Service Area. r'II i Mobility Needs Assessment DRAFT 159 lII
rf· .. 5,: r[[[..... . . [" [ DART 2030 Transit System Plan Mid-Cities The western Mid-Cities (North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Watauga, and Hurst) area exhibits high local trip
patterns. The area has a good employment (retail and commercial) to population balance. However, this area is not a part of the DART Service Area. 8.4 Major Activity Center Circulator
Mobility Needs Circulator mobility needs cannot easily be identified by forecasts from the regional travel model because many trips within activity centers are intra-zonal. Indicators
of need include a high intensity of population and employment as well as a mixed-use land use pattern. The Major Activity Centers identified earlier in this report (Figure 4-3) are areas
with existing or future circulator mobility needs. Dallas CBD The Dallas CBD is in need of a circulator that would link it to surrounding areas such as Uptown, Medical/Market Center
and Deep Ellum. Because of the complexity of this area, a comprehensive circulator study is needed. The City of Dallas Central Business District Transportation Study is addressing these
circulator needs along with input from DART and the McKinney Avenue Transit Authority. Telecom rIS:.: The Telecom Corridor has circulator service. As the area further develops, the need
for circulator service will be reevaluated and adjusted to the growth. Planning for circulator service can be handled by periodic service reviews. Legacy Galleria Las Colinas Legacy
has not yet demonstrated a need for a separate circulator service. However, with the development of the urban center, the circulator needs should be reviewed. Mobility Needs Assessment
DRAFT 160 The Galleria area has existing circulator service. As the area further develops, the need for circulator service will be reevaluated and adjusted to the growth. Planning for
circulator service can be handled in the short-term by periodic service reviews. A more comprehensive circulator stUdy will be needed in the future to examine the potential use of the
Inwood rail corridor for transit circulator service. The City of Irving sponsored a land use study of Las Colinas that recommended a light rail alignment and station locations along
with an associated transit-oriented development plan for areas around the future DART Light Rail Stations. The Northwest Corridor DFW/lrving EIS/PE Study will review these recommendations.
This study will also examine the circulator role of the LRT in relation to other transit circulator service.
II . II , [ .il l. [l􀁾
.: -., .. ' Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas. Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 August 22, 2003 The Honorable Scott Wheeler Mayor Town of Addison 5300 Belt Line Rd. . Addison,
TX 75001-9010 Dear Mayor Wheeler: 􀁾􀁉􀁅􀁃􀁅􀁉􀀱􀁦􀀱􀀺􀀺􀀱􀁑􀀩 AUG 2 2 1D03 errv MANAGER The DART Board of Directors has authorized management to distribute the Proposed FY 2004 Business
Plan, which includes the Operating Budget, Capital Budget, Debt Service Budget, and Twenty-Year Financial Plan, for your 30-day review. The Proposed Business Plan provides the stakeholders
of our region with a comprehensive summary of DART's plans and commitments to improve regional mobility, enhance the quality of life, and stimulate economic development. Your input is
very important. We have scheduled a briefing for city managers and finance directors on Thursday, September 4, 2003, at 9:00 a.m., at DART Headquarters, 1401 Pacific Avenue, Conference
Room 1C. Because of sales tax shortfalls experienced during the FY 2003 Budget process, approximately $1.4 billion in approved capital projects were deleted from the FY03 Draft Twenty-Year
Financial Plan, and the Light Rail (LRT) Northwest and Southeast extensions were delayed two to three years. Due to the expected continuing economic downturn 'in FY 2004, it is anticipated
that the LRT expansion will be delayed up to an additional year. Of course, the delay will depend on actual sales tax receipts. Reductions in FY 2004 include $18.3 million in administrative
and non-operating costs, $16.4 million in bus service modifications, $1.7 million in rail operating expenses, and $2 million in program development expenses. These reductions will be
achieved through early retirement programs, a reduction-in-force, bus service changes based on ridership, elimination of contractor-provided bus services, and a reduction in rail service
frequencies. This approach is designed to minimize the impacts to our customers while increasing service efficiency.
The Honorable Scott Wheeler August 22, 2003 Page 2 As we implement these cost-saving measures and adjust our expansion plans, service quality remains our highest priority. DART is a
proven industry leader and has, without fail, always met the challenges it has faced. The DART team is fully prepared for the necessary changes in the year ahead, and we are 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁦􀁩􀁤􀁾􀁮􀁴
our organization will emerge stronger and more resilient. The accompanying Proposed Business Plan details the changes, the priorities, the financial and operational projections, as well
as a variety of other important information about the agency. We look forward to seeing your city manager and fmance director at the September 4 briefing. If you have questions in the
meantime, please call me at 214-749-3070 or DART's Chief Financial Officer, Sharon Leary, at 214-749-3148. Sincerely, 􀀯􀁃􀀳􀁾􀁣 Gary C. h as Preside xecutive Director Enclosure c: DART
Board of Directors {Ron Whitehead, City Manager Randy Moravec, Finance Director Sue Bauman Sharon Leary Nancy Johnson
Dallas Area Rapid Transit FY 2004 Business Plan (Including FY 2004 Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan)
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: August 8, 2003 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Gary C. Thomas SUBJECT: Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan I am pleased to present for your review and consideration
DART's proposed FY 2004 Business Plan, including our Operating Budget, Debt Service Budget, Twenty-Year Financial Plan, and Key Perfonnance Indicators. The Business Plan provides the
Board, elected officials, and the taxpayers of our service area a comprehensive summary of our Agency's plans and commitments to improve regional mobility, enhance the quality oflife,
and stimulate economic development. Responding to the economic downturn and its impact on receipts from the DART one-cent sales tax, the FY 2004 Business Plan reduces originally projected
annual operating expenses by approximately $37 million. This includes $16 million in administrative and non-operating costs, $15 million in bus service modifications, $5 million in rail
operating expenses, and $1 million in program development expenses. Because of sales tax shortfalls during the FY 2003 Budget process, approximately $1.4 billion in approved capital
projects were deleted from the FY03 Draft Twenty-Year Financial Plan, and the Light Rail (LRT) Northwest and Southeast extensions were delayed two to three years. Due to the expected
continuing economic downturn in FY 2004, it is anticipated that the LRT expansion will be delayed up to an additional year. Of course, the delay will depend on actual sales tax receipts.
DART's FY 2004 Operating and Capital P&D Budget has been reduced by $37 million (11%) from the anticipated FY04 Budget and by $19.7 million (6%) from the FY03 Budget --from $328.2 million
in FY 2003 to $308.5 million in FY 2004. This will be achieved through the implementation of early retirement programs, a scheduled reduction-in-force, bus service changes and the elimination
of contractor provided bus service, and reduced rail service frequencies. This approach of reducing less productive service minimizes the impact to our customers while increasing the
efficiency and effectiveness of our services. These reductions have assisted us in developing an FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan that depicts the affordability ofour long-range Transit
System Plan commitments. As we implement these cost-saving measures, service quality will remain a high priority. DART has proven itself to be an industry leader and has, without fail,
always met the challenges it has faced. The DART team is fully prepared for the necessary changes, and we are confident our organization will emerge stronger and more resilient. MIBPLN2004\bpln2004\G
aIy's lett....doc 08107/00
Board ofDirectors August 8, 2003 Page 2 The accompanying Business Plan details these changes, our priorities, financial and operational projections, as well as a variety of other important
information about our agency. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you for your leadership and input in this process. Enclosure M:\BPLN2004\bplD2004\Gary's letter.doc
08/07/03
􀁾p""""", FY 2004 Bu,;"", PIau (08I081<l3) Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors Officers Robert W. Pope, Chainnan City ofPlano Huelon Harrison, Vice Chainnan City ofDallas Mark
Enoch, Secretary Cities ofFarmers Branch, Garland & Rowlett Terri Adkisson, Assistant Secretary City ofDallas City of Dallas Joyce B. Foreman Linda Koop Beatrice Alba Martinez Jesse
D. Oliver William M. Velasco W. Richard Watkins City of Garland Angie Chen Button City of Irving Norma Stanton Cities of Addison, Highland Park, Richardson & University Park Raymond
Noah Cities of Carrollton & Irving Randall Chrisman Cities of Dallas, Plano, Glenn Heights & Cockrell Hill" Faye Wilkins
􀁾Propo"", FY 2004 Bu"n,,, Plan (0810&113) TABLE OF CONTENTS FY 2004 BUSINESS PLAN Section 1 -Introduction/Strategic Alignment Purpose of Business Plan SP-I Board and Policy Direction............
SP-I Overview ofDART's Leadership System SP-5 Management Action Plans and Performance Measurements SP-6 Employee Performance , SP-IO Business Planning Process SP-I0 Budget and Financial
Plan Approval and Amendments SP-12 Budget Basis and Presentation of Amounts and years................ SP-I3 Related Reports SP-13 Acronyms SP-13 Section 2 -Executive Summary Background
EX-I Business Plan Format EX-I DART-Key Performance Indicators EX-2 Focus on the Customer-DART's First Priority EX-2 FY 2004 Annual Budget and FY 2004 Financial Plan................
EX-6 Section 3 -Customer -Bus Overview BUS-I Bus Scorecard-Key Performance Indicators BUS-I Focus on the Core Business-Bus Ridership BUS-2 Subsidy Per Passenger BUS-12 Section 4 -Customer
-LRT Overview LRT-I Light Rail Scorecard-Key Performance Indicators LRT-I LRT Ridership LRT-2 LRT Expansion LRT-4 Light Rail Costs and Subsidy Per Passenger LRT-5 Section 5 -Customer
-Commuter Rail & Railroad Management Overview CR-I Commuter Rail-TRE Scorecard-Key Performance Indicators CR-2 TRE Ridership.................. CR-2 Commuter Rail-TRE Costs and Subsidy
Per Passenger CR-4 Commuter Rail-TRE Cost Model........................ CR-5 Section 6 -Customer -Paratransit Overview PAR-I Paratransit Scorecard-Key Performance Indicators PAR-I Scheduling/Control
Center Service Levels PAR-2 Paratransit Ridership , PAR-2 Paratransit's Productivity PAR-3 Purchased Transportation Contract PAR-4 Paratransit Costs and Subsidy Per Passenger PARS Paratransit
Cost Model. 􀁐􀁁􀁒􀁾􀀶􀀮 On-Call Service PAR-6 Seamless Service with Ft. Worth T PAR-6 -i-Table ofContents
􀁾Proposed FY 2004 B",""" Ph.. (08108103) TABLE OF CONTENTS FY 2004 BUSINESS PLAN Section 7 -Customer-HOV/General Mobility HOV Overview HOV-I HOV Scorecard-Key Performance Indicators............
HOV-I HOV Ridership HOV-2 General Mobility Overview and Vanpool Scorecard HOV-8 General Mobility-Road Improvement Programs HOV-8 LAP/CMS HOV-9 Section 8 -Business ProcesseslEmployee/Stakeholder
Overview ,. BP-I Improving Business Processes and Information BP-I Major Technology Projects to Improve Quality and Efficiency BP-3 Provide a Safe/Secure Service BP-8 Improving Employee
Productivity... BP-IO Maintaining a Thriving Internal Environment BP-IO Stakeholders' Perceptions are Critical.. .. , BP-12 Section 9 -FY 2004 Budget Overview............ BUD-I Revenue
Variance Explanations........................................ BUD-I FY 2004 Operating Expense Budget BOO-2 FY 2004 Capital Budget... BUD-9 FY 2004 Net Debt Service Budget...... BOO-9
Section 10 -FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Overview............ FP-I Sources of Funds FP-3 Uses of Funds FP-9 Capital Projects FP-13 Debt Program FP-16 Net Available Cash FP-18 Major
Financial Plan Assumptions FP-19 Potential Risks FP-20 Potential Areas for Improvement...... FP-21 Section 11 -Appendix -ii-Table ofContents
Section 1 Introduction/Strategic Plan Index of Exhibits Exhibit 1.1 DART System Plan Map (Current & Future Services) SP-3 Exhibit 1.2 Interrelationship of System Plan with Other Documents...
SP-4 Exhibit 1.3 Relationship ofFinancial Standards to Sources and Uses ofCash.... SP-5 Exhibit 1.4 DART's Leadership System and Strategic Alignment. SP-6 Exhibit 1.5 DART's Strategic
Plan SP-8 Exhibit 1.6 Strategic Performance Measurements... SP-9 Exhibit 1.7 Standard Business Plan Development Schedule SP-lO f:IJ =t..􀁾 II) I .... 􀁾 = (JQ .... _. .. ... = >Q, -=
--.f) (JQ .... = c' a = 􀁾 ..... =....
􀁾Propo.,d PY 2004 B"'""" PI"" (0./0./03) Introduction/Strategic Alignment Introduction/Strategic Alignment Purpose of Business Plan The FY 2004 Business Plan ("FY04 Plan") provides
the Board of Directors, taxpayers, and elected officials of our region a comprehensive summary of the Agency's plans and commitments to improve regional mobility, enhance the quality
of life, and stimulate economic development. This document consolidates the key elements of the FY 2004 Annual Budget, the FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan, the System Plan, the Five-Year
Action Plan, and the Agency's Strategic Plan. The resolutions adopting the FY 2004 Business Plan (see Exhibit APX.1) approve the funding levels for the FY 2004 Annual Budget and the
FY 2004 TwentyYear Financial Plan as required by DART's enabling legislation. Board and Policy Direction DART History -Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) is a regional transportation authority
of the State of Texas. DART was created on August 13, 1983, by a voting majority of the citizens to organize and provide regional public transportation to its member jurisdictions pursuant
to Article 1118y of Vernon's Annotated Texas Civil Statutes, as amended, and recodified into Chapter 452 of the Texas Transportation Code effective September 1, 1995. The enabling legislation
allows DART to collect a one-percent sales and use tax on certain transactions. DART currently consists of the following member jurisdictions: Addison, Carrollton, Cockrell Hill, Dallas,
Farmers Branch, Garland, Glenn Heights, Highland Park, Irving, Plano, Richardson, Rowlett, and University Park. The DART Service Area is approximately 700 square miles and includes approximately
2.1 million people. Mission Statement -DART's mission statement defines the purpose for which the Agency was created:To build, establish, and operate a safe, efficient, and effective
transportation system that, within the DART Service Area, provides mobility, improves the quality of life, and stimulates economic development. Board Goals -To achieve this mission,
the Board has developed five goals which have been consolidated into three focus areas or target groups for purposes of strategic planning. Customer Focus • Provide DART's customers
with services that are ever-increasing in quality, effectiveness, and efficiency. • Establish a common vision for transportation that is regionally accepted, progressively implemented
through a comprehensive system plan, and periodically revisited. SP-I
􀁾Pro"""" FY 2004 B",i."" PI.. (08108103) Introduction/Strategic Alignment Internal Focus (Employee) • Foster an internal environment that promotes teamwork, empowerment, accountability,
and positive self-image. External Focus (Stakeholder) • Sustain a multi-faceted outreach effort to promote dialogue with the public on DART's goals, services, and accomplishments; and
• Develop and enhance coalitions with all organizations that have a vested interest in regional transportation issues. Service Plan/Transit System Plan -DART has a Service Plan and a
Transit System Plan. The Service Plan is required by DART's legislation. It describes, in legal terms, where DART's facilities and rail alignments are physically located. DART's Transit
System Plan is a longrange planning tool that identifies and prioritizes major capital projects needed to improve regional mobility. The Transit System Plan is closely coordinated with
development of the North Central Texas Council of Government's Regional Mobility Plan and is revised every five to six years. The next revision is scheduled for completion in FY 2004
and focuses on transit needs and opportunities within the context of a 2030 horizon. The current Transit System Plan map is located at Exhibit 1.1. The affordability of the Transit System
Plan and the timing of service and capital expansion projects are determined by the Twenty-Year Financial Plan, which is approved annually by the Board. Exhibit 1.2 highlights the interrelationships
of the Transit System Plan with other key Agency documents. Financial Standards -DART's Financial Standards (Exhibit APX.2) are divided into three sections: General (FS-G), Business
Planning Parameters (FS-B), and Debt Service (FS-D). The purpose of the general standards is to ensure that DART prudently manages its financial affairs and establishes appropriate cash
reserves. The Business Planning Parameters (BPPs) provide management with a framework for developing the following year's budget and the Twenty-Year Financial Plan and establish future
business targets for management to achieve. The purpose of the Debt Service standards is to limit the level of debt that may be incurred and to ensure that debt assumptions are based
on financial parameters similar to (or more conservative than) those that would be placed on DART by the financial marketplace. The combination of these two policy documents provides
a framework within which management can formulate strategy and action plans to maximize return on investment (i.e., increase ridership and improve subsidy per passenger). Exhibit 1.3
higWights which Financial Standards correlate with the major sources and uses of cash included in the Annual Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan. SP-2
􀁾Prop",,," FY 2004 B",lo", PI.. (08108103)Exhibit 1.1 Current & Future Services " .. :' We'll Take You There. • 93 miles of light rail transit • 35 miles of commuter rail transit • 110 miles of high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes
• General Mobility Programs (Transportation System Management, Intelligent Transportation Systems, Travel Demand ManagementJRldeshare, Local Assistance Programs/Congestion Management)
I 􀀮􀀺􀁾 Introduction/Strategic Alignment --_._---_._. __._._._"" ----j 􀁾 .. RAILUNES & STATIONS 􀁾􀀧􀁽 .. }, 􀁾-:.. :mt: TRE &STATIONS M·UNE STREETCAR 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 --'-'-------􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾�
�􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭--1 .--ROUTES UNION STATIONI PRESTON CENTER FUTURE RAIL CORRIDOR o fUT1JRE TRANSIT CENTER! PARK &RIDE o BUS TRANSIT CENTERS fJ»rl;ingavailableJ SP-3 o BUS TRANSFER CENTERI
TRANSFER LOCATION ® PARKING AVAILABLE rARE ZONE BOUNDARY 􀁾􀁙􀀧􀀺􀀧 DART MEMBER OTY
􀁾Propo"," FY 2004 B",1."" PI.. (08108103) Introduction/Strategic Alignment Exhibit 1.2 Interrelationship of System Plan with Other Documents Transit System Plan Rft'...... J ..􀁮􀁾􀀺􀁊􀁉􀀮􀀱􀀹􀀹􀀮􀀡
􀁬 Junel995 LONG-RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN FIWAL SERVICE PLAN TRANSIT SYSfEM PLAN SERVICE PLAN REGIONAL MOBILITYPLAN OHlER SfUDIES ,---------,--------"'------. DART/City of Dallas Inter-Local
Agreement . . Including: Sl.Pplemert # 1--Planning & Zonng . St.pplElmElrt #-2,.. Dasigl &Constn,ctDn c;:::wricil Re501IJion#90-2ffi1 COO StetiClls FINAL DESIGN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
BUSINESS PLAN SP-4
􀁾Propooed FY 2004 Bu,""" PI", (08108103) Introduction/Strategic Alignment Exhibit 1.3 Relationship of Financial Standards to Sources and Uses of Cash Table Description Where Covered
Sources of Cash Sales Taxes FS-Bl Operating Revenue FS-B2 Federal Funding FS-Bll Debt FS-Dl to D8 Uses of Cash Operating Budget Fixed Route Service FS-B3 & B4 Paratransit Service FS-B6
Administrative Costs FS-B7 Total Expenses FS-B5 Capital Budget Gen. Mobility-Road Improvements FS-B9 Start-up/Capital Planning Costs FS-BIO Capital Projects FS-BIO Net Debt Service Budget
Debt Standards Cash Reserves FS-G5 & G7 Ending Cash FS-G6 Board Policies -The Board has a number of policies that provide direction to management for implementation. For example, the
Board has policies for real estate purchases, advertising on buses, and fare structure. DART's enabling legislation requires the Board to adopt an annual budget prior to the commencement
of a fiscal year. It also requires the Board to have a Financial Plan. The Financial Plan details the projected sources and uses of cash for five years and reviews the affordability
of DART's currently approved Transit System Plan for a twenty-year period. The Board's Bylaws require a two-thirds vote of the appointed and qualified Board Members to approve or amend
the Financial Plan. Budget and Financial Plan amendments are required for new operating programs or an increase to an existing operating program in excess of $500,000 per year and for
new capital programs in excess of $1 million. Overview of DART's Leadership System DART's leadership system is based on the concept of strategic alignment. This is the process used to
ensure that DART employees understand how their jobs and performance are linked to the Board's mission, direction, and goals. The leadership process is shown in Exhibit 1.4. Performance
measurements are critical and are incorporated into "scorecards" at different levels of the Agency. The major components of the leadership system are described in more detail in the
remainder of this section. SP-5
􀁾Propo",d FY 2004 B",""" Plan (08108103) Introduction/Strategic Alignment Exhibit 1.4 DART's Leadership System and Strategic Alignment Board Policy and Direction ....• iManag(!ln(!ntActi()Il
P1ilnS ••.• andPelformance Measurements Employee Performance Board Policies Broad direction on certain issues Vision Statement and Values Vision of success and how we treat each other
FY 2004 Business Plan Senior Mgmt's PMP* 1 • Projected operational ---Agency/modal scorecards & fin'l 􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁭􀁡􀀩􀁾 Departmental scorecards • Multi-vear work pro ra Work program
initiatives Strategic Plan I CompetenciesiKSAs-Mgmrs strategies to Oraanizational values achieve Board direction FY 2004 Budget I 1 t • Revenues and expenses I • Variance explanations
Employee PMP* FY 2004 Financial Plan Regular assignments other Strategic Input • 20 year projections (Div/Section scorecards) External climate review ··Sourcesluses of cash Work program
initiatives Surveys • Affordabilitv of plans CompetenciesiKSAs-Texas Quality feedback Organizational values Business results "PMP =Performance Management Plan Benchmark studies "'KSA
=Knowledge. Skills. & AltibJdes Management Action Plans and Performance Measurements Vision Statement -To help achieve the Board's mission and goals, a VISIOn statement was developed
in FY 1997 to address the Agency's three focus groups (customers, employees, and stakeholders). The vision describes what the Agency is trying to achieve. The key statements are incorporated
into the Agency's Strategic Plan (see Exhibit 1.5). DART's vision follows: DART is a welcomed, integral part of our region. We provide quality service. Our innovative accomplishments
benchmark DART as a transportation leader which is supported by a thriving internal environment. DART Organizational Values -As an adjunct to the vision statement, six core values were
developed in FY 1998 for DART's management and employees. These values demonstrate where focus and emphasis need to be placed on a daily basis. At DART, employees value being: • Focused
on Our Customers ./We are dedicated to meeting our customers' needs ./We strive for continuous improvement ./We deliver quality • Committed to Safety ./We expect safety to be the responsibility
of every employee ./We are committed to ensuring the safety of our passengers SP-6
􀁾Propo"," FY 2004 B",ffi,,, Pb", (08108103) • Professional ./We demonstrate a high regard for each other ./We take pride in our accomplishments ./We congratulate each other for our
successes ./We honor integrity and honesty • Dedicated to Quality Performance ./We strive for excellence ./We have high expectations ./We hold ourselves accountable for results ./We
coach, reinforce, and recognize our employees • Team Players ./We are committed and dedicated to DART ./We support each other ./We value our diversity • Good Stewards of the Public Funds
./We responsibly use public funds and property Introduction/Strategic Alignment Other Strategic Input -Annually, the Strategic Plan and Business Plan are modified based on an analysis
of business results; the results of employee, customer, and climate surveys; external events (such as issues being considered by the Texas State Legislature); and benchmark comparisons
with other transit agencies and private sector companies. Strategic Plan -The Board's mission, goals, and policy direction are integrated with the other feedback discussed above to develop
and update the Strategic Plan and Business Plan. The Strategic Plan is shown in Exhibit 1.5. The Strategic Plan identifies the key initiatives that must be completed to achieve the Board's
goals and the Agency's vision of success. Management is developing a leadership system whereby strategy and performance measurement drive the achievement of results and are the basis
for the creation of the Business Plan. The Strategic Plan identifies what needs to be accomplished; the Business Plan defines how management intends to achieve it. The key to success
is the development of performance indicators or "scorecards" that inform management how well their strategies are working. Exhibit 1.6 highlights DART's major strategic performance measurements
that are used in the Agency-wide, modal, and departmental scorecards. The leading indicators are the key financial, operational, and employee performance drivers that, if achieved, will
yield improved Agencywide performance. Measurement definitions are included in Exhibit APX.6. Management's goal is to develop business and information systems that provide critical information
regarding the leading indicators to key personnel so corrective or preventive action can be taken as soon as possible. The lagging indicators are more traditional in nature and typically
are not available until after month-end. They measure results but do not drive performance. SP-7
00 7' 00 Exhibit 1.5 Dallas Area Rapid Transit Strategic Plan I CUSTOMER I i T I Increase Effectiveness I I Increase Efficiency I I Optimize Ridership I-I Improve Subsidy per Passenl!er
I i i T i I STAKEHOLDER I Improve Customer Satisfaction (Cl.) Manal!eSystem Growth (C2.) Improve Efficiency (C3.) t 1. Improve service reliability 1. Market Services to optimize ridership
1. Reduce unproductive service/I Increase Stakeholder Satisfaction I 2. Provide a customer friendly +--2. Develop a seamless, fully accessible multi--improve productivity I DART is a
welcomed inteeral part of the community I environment modal system 2. Improve employee productivity i 3. Provide a safe/secure service 3. Integrate new transit services 3. Reduce admin/indirect
costs 4. Provide effective customer 4. Optimize fare structure 4. Maintain assets and improve asset Build Relationships with Stakehold,ers (S1.) : communication 5. Improve passenl!er
amenities and facilities management 1. Obtain timely public input on DART's service projects r 5. Maximize resources 2. Effectively communicate with stakeholders 3. Maximize Federal
funding 4. Address requirements of Bond Holders Improve Business Processes and Information (C4.) 5. Leverage Federal and State legislative resources 1. Continuously improve business
processes and supporting technology 6. Identify and develop strategic partnerships 2. Provide critical business information to employees on a timely basis 7. Pursue transit-oriented
development opportunities 3. Develop strategic partnerships with suppliers (fuel, parts, services) 8. Maintain legal and regulatory compliance 4. Use surveys to understand customers',
employees', stakeholders' needs 9. Create D/MIWBE economic development opportunity 5. Benchmark performance inside and outside of transit 10. Expand service area 􀁾lotil 8-"!1 -< IV
oo .j:o. cto til S' ell til til :s! § '0􀁾􀁾w '-' 818103 ___1__ EMPWYEE t Increase 'Em 10 ee Satisfaction DART has a thrivin internal environment Promote EmJlloyeeDevelopment and AIienment
(E1.) 1. Align Board goals, strategic plan, and employee performance 2. Support personal/professional growth & leadership through training/development 3. Compensate, reward, and recognize
excellent performance 4. Communicate continuously with employees (relationship of employee to organization through supervisor) 5. Improve Labor Relations 6. Promote excellence throueh
workforce diversity I 􀁾 I I I I #### Target Group Outcome to be Achieved Management Objective Strategy [c i􀁾 􀁾(S. 􀁾 <§. 􀁾
􀁾Prop,,,'" FY 2004 Bu,'"'' Phm (08108103) Introduction/Strategic Alignment t Exhibit 1.6 Strate!lcPertiormance Measuremen s Management Key Key Objectives Leadin! Indicators Lae:e:ine:
Indicators Customer Focus C I .. Customer Satisfaction * On time performance * Ridership * Accidents per lOOk miles * Passenger per mile/hour * Complaints per lOOk passengers * Customer
satisfaction surveys * Call abandonment rates/service levels * Response time * Miles between road calls * Missed trips C2 ..-Manage System Growth * Revenue miles/hours * Ridership *
Actual schedule vs. plan for system * Passenger per mile/hour expansion * Customer satisfaction surveys C3 _.. Improve Efticiency * Operator lost time claims * Subsidy per passenger
* Unscheduled absences * Administrative ratio * Pay-to-platform ratio * Sales taxes for operations * Average system speed * Unused financing capacity * Deadhead ratio * Timely replacement
of assets C4·· Jmprove Business Processes * Cycle time/process measurements * Sales taxes for operations and [nllmnation * Project implementation vs. plan * Administrative ratio * Benchmark
comparisons Internal Focus -EmDlovee E1 -Prol1lote Employee * Employee verbal feedback * Employee Satisfaction Survey Development and Alignl1lent * Number of grievances * Corrective
disciplinary actions * Retention/absenteeism External Focus -Stakeholder S I _.. Build relalionships with * Complaint/commendations * Climate Satisfaction Survey StakdlOldcrs * Press
clippings * Completion ofTSP commitments * Joint development created Business Plan -The Business Plan is the Agency's written document that outlines DART's performance projections and
commitments for the next five years for each mode of service and the Agency as a whole. The Plan includes two-year "scorecards" of key operating, financial, and quality measures and
identifies the work program (i.e., initiatives) necessary to improve performance and scorecards of projected passenger and subsidy per passenger targets. The Strategic Plan and Business
Plan are the basis for the FY 2004 Budget and the FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan and for measuring management and employee performance. Executive management monitors key scorecard
elements and work program initiatives on a montWy and quarterly basis. Exception reporting for key scorecard elements is provided to the Board on a quarterly basis in a green, yellow,
and red format. For more information on performance reporting, readers should obtain a copy of DART's Quarterly Operating and Financial Performance Report. SP-9
􀁾Propo,"" FY 2004 B",i.", Ph.. (OS/\lS/03) Employee Performance Introduction/Strategic Alignment A critical part of DART's leadership system is the link between the Business Plan and
employee performance. DART's Senior Management Team (assistant vice-presidents and above) is held accountable for achieving or exceeding the operating, financial, and quality targets
established in the Business Plan at the Agency-wide and modal levels. Scorecards and work programs are developed and cascaded down from the Agency-wide and modal levels to the department
and division levels. Scorecards at the department and division levels tend to focus more on internal process measurement since continuous process improvement is one ofthe Agency's core
values and therefore a major theme for management. The work program elements necessary to improve performance at all levels are then incorporated into individual employee Performance
Management Plans (PMPs). Some PMPs may be homogeneous for an entire group and will focus on achieving the expected business results for that section (such as claims processing). Other
PMPs will be project specific (or work program specific) and linked directly back to the specific initiatives in the Strategic Plan. Salaried employees review their performance with
their supervisors at least two times per year to ensure that schedules are being maintained and targets are being achieved. Exceptions are noted and adjustments are made to schedules.
Management places a significant amount of weight on achieving the performance expectations shown in the scorecard. The Agency uses pay-forperformance merit increases, a lump-sum bonus
plan, and other incentive programs to reward employees (or groups of employees) who achieve their objectives. See the Business Processes section for more detail on these processes. Business
Planning Process Exhibit 1.7 higWights the standard business planning compilation and approval process used at DART. Exhibit 1.7 Standard Business Plan Development Schedule Date Description
Jan-Feb Management reviews Strategic Plan Jan-Apr Management reviews and develops Financial Standards Apr-May Board reviews and approves Financial Standards May-Jul Staff develops Business
Plan (which includes the Annual Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan) for following year Jul Present draft Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan to Board Aug Board approves issuance
of Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan to Member Cities Sep Member Cities provide input Sep Board approves Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan SP-lO
􀁾Propo.ed FY 2004 Bu""'" Phm (08108103) Introduction/Strategic Alignment DART takes a top-down approach to business planning. It begins with the Board's Financial Standards which establish
parameters within which management must operate. The Business Planning Parameters were initiated as part of the Financial Standards in 1997. Targets are established, maintained, and
highlighted throughout the document. In January, management reviews the Strategic Plan, performs an environmental scan (see Exhibit 1.4), determines projected funding levels, and establishes
expected performance levels for the next several years. Next, the Board reviews the Financial Standards to determine that the business objectives are appropriate based on input from
management. Typically, the Board reviews projected business and financial results, including proposed new operating and capital programs beginning in May and June. However, due to the
projected shortfall in sales taxes, the Board became involved earlier in the spring. Based on on the direction of the Board and top management, departments prepare detailed budgets for
each of their cost centers. In doing so, programs are evaluated for effectiveness and efficiency. The next step in the process is for each department to have a budget hearing. A budget
hearing is an opportunity for the department head, the President/Executive Director, and the Budget Office to discuss the respective budgets as well as any changes. This year each department
had at least two hearings. The first was to discuss the range of target reductions and the second was to finalize any proposed changes. The President/Executive Director briefs the results
of these hearings to the Board of Directors. The Board may recommend changes at this time. The Finance Department then compiles the numbers, coordinates work programs to achieve strategies,
and publishes the Business Plan for the legislatively required 3D-day comment period by DART's member cities. The Board performs additional reviews in August and September, as necessary,
before it approves the Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan in late September. DART's legislation does not require public hearings. Capital Budgeting -Because of sales tax shortfalls
during the FY 2003 Budget process, approximately $1.4 billion in approved capital projects were deleted from the Twenty-Year Financial Plan, and the Light Rail (LRT) Northwest and Southeast
extensions were delayed two to three years. At that time, it was also decided that changes needed to be made to the capital project submission, review, and approval processes. The new
process is focused on ensuring that DART spends its available capital dollars on projects that provide the most benefit to the region and are done in the most cost-effective manner possible.
Capital projects are prioritized based on the following criteria: SP-ll
􀁾Prop"",. FY 2004 Bu,;no" Phm (08108103) • Compliance with government regulations; • Safety-related; • Interlocal Agreement (ILA) or other prior commitment; • Required to maintain existing
infrastructure; • Cost effectiveness. Introduction/Strategic Alignment Many dimensions of each project are required to be submitted with the project request, including: • Consequences
of not doing the project; • Effect ofthe project on Customers, Stakeholders, and Employees; • Compliance with long-range plans of the Agency, such as the Strategic Plan, Transit System
Plan, Twenty-Year Financial Plan, Information Technology Plan, etc. • Time criticality; • Life-cycle cost including capital expenditures, operating and maintenance expenses, and revenue
generation in comparison with current operations; • Other potential alternatives to the proposed project and associated life-cycle costs of each alternative; and • Concurrence from all
affected departments. For certain classes of expenditures (primarily infrastructure maintenance) discreet projects cannot be specifically identified or the timing of equipment replacement
cannot be accurately determined (run-to-failure equipment). In these cases, cash reserves were established for each major capital category based on historic spending patterns and projected
levels of new work (see Financial Plan section). Once a specific project is identified that relates to a particular reserve, that project is given its own unique code and the reserve
is reduced accordingly. According to current Board policy, any capital project that exceeds $1 million (or gives rise to more than $500,000 in annual operating expenses) requires a Financial
Plan amendment (discussed below). Budget and Financial Plan Approval and Amendments The Board generally approves two resolutions prior to the start of each new fiscal year (see APX.l).
The Board approves Operating Expense, Capital, and Debt Service budgets in one resolution. Management cannot exceed these individual budget totals without approval from the Board ((normally
in the form of a budget amendment). In a separate resolution, the Board also approves a Twenty-Year Financial Plan. An updated Twenty-Year Financial Plan was not approved in FY03. SP-I2
􀁾Prop.,'" FY 2004 B",1.,,", Plan (08108103) Introduction/Strategic Alignment Any major change to the Financial Plan that occurs outside of the normal approval schedule requires a Financial
Plan Amendment. A major change is defined as an increase of $1 million for capital programs and $500,000 per year for operating programs (see APX.2, FS-G9) and requires approval by a
two-thirds vote of the Board. Budget Basis and Presentation of Amounts and Years DART's Annual Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan are prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (GAAP), except that the budget does not include depreciation, amortization of Federal grants, or interest income and interest expense from leveraged lease transactions.
Each of these non-cash transactions, however, is incorporated into the projected balance sheet included in APX.5. Schedules are presented and rounded to millions and/or thousands (as
indicated), but are based on actual raw numbers. Consequently, certain schedules may not tie exactly or add due to rounding. In some cases, prior years' numbers have been restated to
conform to the current year's format. All schedules are in fiscal years unless otherwise stated. Related Reports Several related reports are referenced in this document. Readers may
wish to refer to these for a more comprehensive understanding of DART's plans and operations. These documents may be obtained from DART's Finance or Planning Departments. Transit System
Plan -provides detailed discussions of light rail, commuter rail, and HOV construction and service schedules, Intelligent Transportation Systems, and General Mobility commitments and
time phasing. Five-Year Action Plan -provides detailed discussions of DART's plan to increase bus and rail ridership through service improvements for a five-year period. Quarterly Operating
and Financial Performance Reports -provide updates on management's progress against financial and operating projections for the current year and provide status reports on ridership,
planning, and capital projects in progress. Acronyms Exhibit APx.7 is a description of acronyms used in this report. SP-13
􀁾Prop""" FY 2004 Bu,in,,, PI", (08108103) BLANK PAGE SP-14 Introduction/Strategic Alignment
Section 2 Executive Summary Index of Exhibits Exhibit 2.1 DART Scorecard ofKey Performance Indicators EX-2 Exhibit 2.2 Total System Ridership -All Modes EX-3 Exhibit 2.3 Fixed Route
Ridership EX-3 Exhibit 2.4 Strategic Initiatives to Increase Ridership EX-4 Exhibit 2.5 Subsidy Per Passenger -All Modes EX-5 Exhibit 2.6 Subsidy Per Passenger -Fixed Route EX-5 Exhibit
2.7 Strategies to Improve Subsidy Per Passenger EX-6 Exhibit 2.8 Subsidy Per Passenger Comparison EX-6
􀁾Propo"", FY 2004 Bu,m", PI.. (08108103) Executive Summary Background Executive Summary With revenues from the one-cent transit sales tax declining for the third straight year, the
DART Board of Directors and Management have worked hard over the past few months to strike a healthy balance between daily operations and long-term capital projects. During the FY 2003
Budget process, reductions included a $1.4 billion cut to DART's capital program; a two to three-year delay in the rail build-out schedule to Carrollton, Dallas, Farmers Branch, and
Irving; and $12.5 million.in reductions to the operating expense budget. Addressing the anticipated FY 2003 sales-tax shortfall of approximately $20 million was a top priority for the
entire Agency in preparation for the FY 2004 Budget process. Management had to balance the needs of DART's customers with those of its stakeholders, member cities, and staff. Target
priorities for FY 2004 were to: • Meet the rail build-out schedule, as best as possible • Maintain our fleet, facilities, and infrastructure at a serviceable level while still meeting
the needs of our customers • Provide efficient and effective transportation services based on ridership demand In so doing, Management responded with several key strategies for setting
the FY04 Budget targets: • Reduce administrative and non-operating support costs • Reduce inefficient bus, light rail, and commuter rail services • No employee merit raises; freeze Service
Incentive Pay at FY03 amounts • Initiate an early retirement program • Operate all bus service by DART rather than a contracted provider These strategies eliminated over $37 million
of planned operating expenses from the FY 2004 budget. Additionally, while the capital program remained intact, the rail build-out schedule may realize another one-year delay. Business
Plan Format The Agency's goals and Strategic Plan are based on satisfying the needs of three key groups: DART's customers, employees, and stakeholders (i.e., taxpayers and elected officials).
The FY 2004 Business Plan ("FY 2004 Plan") has been organized in a similar format. Sections 3-7 cover DART's strategic business units or modes (bus, light rail transit, commuter rail,
paratransit, and HOV/general mobility). These sections address DART's plans to become more effective and efficient and provide higher quality services. Section 8 addresses improvements
in internal business processes and technology, and the Agency's plans to meet its employees' and stakeholders' needs. Section 9 includes variance explanations between the FY 2004 Budget
and the prior year, while Section 10 covers the FY 2004 Financial Plan and affordability of longrange System Plan commitments. EX-l
􀁾Propo,"" FY 2004 BU'm,,' Plan (08108103) DART Key Performance Indicators Executive Summary Exhibit 2.1 is the DART Scorecard of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Fiscal years 2001
and 2002 are the actual values while fiscal years 2003 through 2005 are the budget values. Fiscal year 2003 quarter 3 is a four-quarter rolling average ending June 30, 2003. Each of
these indicators is discussed in more detail in this report. Exhibit 2.1 DART Scorecard of Key Performance Indicators Strate!!ic Priority -A!!encv KPI Measure FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY0303
FY04B FYOSB Ridership Total Ridership (M) 95.7 93.8 96.2 94.8 95.3 96.5 Fixed Route (M) 60.7 58.7 61.2 60.2 60.5 61.4 Efficiency Subsidv Per PassenQer $2.34 $2.76 $2.65 $2.81 $2.50 $2.53
Fixed Route Subsidv Per PassenQer $3.24 $3.93 $3.73 $3.74 $3.42 $3.46 Administrative Ratio 11.5% 11.2% 11.7% 10.6% 9.1% 10.0% Service Quality On-Time Performance -Bus 92.8% 92.8% 91.0%
92.4% 91.0% 91.0% On-Time Performance -LRT 95.2% 97.0% 97.0% 97.4% 97.0% 97.0% On-Time Performance -TRE 97.9% 97.2% 96.0% 97.5% 96.0% 96.0% Customer Satisfaction Comolaints Per 100 000
PassenQers 5.4 3.8 5.00 4.55 6.00 8.00 Managed Growth Sales Tax for Ooerations 59.6% 77.5% 75.4% 84.4% 76.1% 72.9% Focus on the Customer -DART's First Priority The Board's first goal
is to improve the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of the system. Effectiveness is achieved by increasing ridership and the number of passengers carried for each mile operated.
Efficiency is achieved by reducing the net cost to move those passengers (Le., subsidy per passenger). Effectiveness: Total System Ridership Projected to be 96.5 Million by FY 2005 -Exhibits
2.2 and 2.3 illustrate the ridership projections for total system and fixed route service. Ridership information is based on passenger boardings or trips (Le., if a person transfers,
it is counted as two trips). Total system ridership also includes paratransit, vanpool, and HOV ridership. Fixed route service includes bus, light rail, and commuter rail. Much of the
growth over the the next year will come from having rail service open to both Garland and Plano for an entire year. EX-2
􀁾Propo"" FY 2004 Bu••", PI,. (08108103)Exhibit2.2 Total System Ridership -All Modes Executive Summary FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY03 Q3 FY04B FY05B 62.0 61.0 60.0 59.0 58.0 57.0 Exhibit 2.3 Fixed Route Ridership FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY03 Q3
FY04B FY05B Consistent with the prior Business Plans, ridership is projected to improve in each fiscal year; however, overall ridership is lower than in last year's Draft Financial Plan
due to a significant decline in bus ridership. Total system ridership growth includes increases in HOV and the annualized ridership attributable to the opening of the Victory Station
in late 2004. EX-3
􀁾Propo'" FY 2004 B",in"" PI"" (08108103) Executive Summary Exhibit 2.4 is the section of DART's Strategic Plan that highlights the two management objectives and nine strategic initiatives
related to increasing ridership. .Exhibit 2.4 Strategic Initiatives to Increase Ridership Increase Effectiveness , Optimize Ridership T Improve Custoilier 􀁓􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁳􀁦􀁾􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 (CIS'
.', i •..... , . Manaee System Growth{C:2.) 1. Improve service reliability 1. Market services to optimize ridership 􀁾􀀮 Provide a customer friendly environment 􀀮􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀮 Develop a
seamless, fully accessible multi-B. Provide a safe/secure service modal system 􀁾􀀮 Provide effective customer communication 3. Integrate new transit services 4. Optimize fare structure
􀁾􀀮 Improve passen2er amenities and facilities Ridership is projected to increase from 0.5% to 1.5% per year over the life of the Financial Plan due to population growth, higher densities
around stations, and management's focus on strategies C2.1, C2.4, and C2.5 which provide for a seamless, fully accessible multi-modal system, concentrated marketing efforts, and improved
passenger amenities and facilities. Additionally, management will focus on strategic initiatives C1.1 through C1.4, which stress service quality that is instrumental in keeping new riders
once they try the system. DART's quality improvement initiatives are discussed in the modal sections. Efficiency: Subsidy per Passenger -Subsidy per passenger is defined as operating
expenses less operating revenues divided by passenger trips. Exhibits 2.5 and 2.6 compare the projections for system-wide and fixed route subsidy per passenger. Reducing expenses, increasing
operating revenues, and increasing ridership contribute to improve this ratio. The decrease in subsidy per passenger for all modes and fixed route was achieved through reductions of
less productive bus routes and reductions to DART's overall administrative and non-operating functions. EX-4
􀁾Propo"", FY 2004 Bumn"" Pion (08108103)Exhibit 2.5 Subsidy per Passenger -All Modes $3.00 $2.80 $2.60 $2.40 $2.20 $2.00 􀀭􀀫􀀭􀀱􀁉􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁾􀀮 FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY03 Q3 FY04B FY05B
Exhibit 2.6 Subsidy per Passenger -Fixed Route Executive Summary $3.00 􀁾􀁉􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁾􀁟$4.00 $3.80 $3.60 $3.40 $3.20 $3.93 FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY03 Q3 FY04B FY05B Exhibit 2.7 highlights
the two management objectives and ten strategic initiatives designed to improve subsidy per passenger. Management's focus over the next year will be to increase ridership, contain costs,
and maximize DART's revenue sources. These strategies are discussed in more detail in the modal sections. EX-5
􀁾Pro_FY 2004 Bu,"'''' PI", (08lO8I03)Exhibit 2.7 Strategies to Improve Subsidy per Passenger Executive Summary Increase Efficiency Improve Subsidy per Passenger f -+ Mana2eSystemGrowth·(C2.l
i '...•••.• . 􀀧􀀬􀀻􀀻􀁉􀁭􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁅􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁃􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁣􀁹􀀮􀀨􀁃􀀳􀀮􀀩. 1. Reduce unproductive service/improve 1. Market services to optimize ridership productivity 2. Develop a seamless,
fully accessible multi-􀁾 modal system 􀁾􀀮 Improve employee productivity 3. Integrate new transit services 􀁾􀀮 Reduce admin/indirect costs 4. Optimize fare structure 􀁾􀀮 Maintain
assets and improve asset management 5. Improve passenger amenities and facilities 5. Maximize resources Exhibit 2.8 compares subsidy per passenger by mode. Related discussions may be
found in the modal sections. Exhibit 2.8 arison FY05B $3.62 2.77 6.24 FY 2004 Annual Budget and FY 2004 Financial Plan Revenues -Total sources of cash for the period FY 2004 through
FY 2008 are $2.1 billion less than projected in the FY 2002 Financial Plan due to a decrease in projected sales tax revenues ($977 million) and a decrease in debt issuance ($1.3 billion)
related to DART's capital programs. Detailed information is included in the Financial Plan section. Service Reductions -The FY04 Budget includes a significant reduction in the level
of bus service to be operated. Four levels of potential bus service reduction were evaluated, ranging from $14 million in reduction to $29 million. Based on Board direction, the lowest
level of reduction will be implemented with service changes scheduled for October 6, 2003. A modification will be made to light rail midday service frequency from 15 minutes to every
20 minutes. The TRE service reductions are mainly early morning and late night weekday service, which will be replaced with special event trains and early morning Saturday service. EX-6
􀁾ProPO'OO FY 2004 B"'""'" Plan (08lO8I03) Executive Summary Fare Evasion Program -During the 78th Session of the Texas Legislature, a change to DART's legislation was enacted to allow
non-sworn fare inspectors to issue tickets for fare evasion on public transportation (Texas Transportation Code 452.0611 and 452.0612). This law becomes effective September 1, 2003 and
allows fare inspectors to check for valid fare from passengers and to issue citations to passengers without a valid fare. While these fare inspectors are not peace officers and do not
have the authority of peace officers, the law requires that they "work under the direction of the chief of police of the authority." DART Police Officers will begin to issue citations
under the new law in September 2003. The FY 2004 Budget includes 18 new fare inspector positions, and it is anticipated that these employees will begin performing their duties in January
2004. EX-7
􀁾Propo"" FY 2()()4 Bu,""" PI", (08108103) BLANK PAGE EX-8 Executive Summary
Section 3 Customer Focus -Bus Index of Exhibits Exhibit 3.1 Bus Scorecard-Key Perfonnance Indicators BUS-1 Exhibit 3.2 Trend in Dallas Area Employment.....................................
... BUS-2 Exhibit 3.3 Bus Ridership BUS-3 Exhibit 3.4 Local Route Ridership Trend BUS-4 Exhibit 3.5 Crosstown and Feeder Ridership Trend BUS-4 Exhibit 3.6 FY 2004 Service Reductions...........
BUS-6 Exhibit 3.7 Net Subsidy Per Rider; October 2003 Modifications BUS-7 Exhibit 3.8 Composite Customer Survey Results (April 2000 vs. April 2002)... BUS-9 Exhibit 3.9 Customer Satisfaction
Survey BUS-10 Exhibit 3.10 10-Year Bus Replacement Schedule BUS-II Exhibit 3.11 Bus Subsidy Per Passenger BUS-12 Exhibit 3.12 FY2004 Bus CostModel.. BUS-13 Exhibit 3.13 FY 2004 DART
Bus Transportation Cost Model-Bus Operations Only BUS-14 􀁾􀀮 ,..
􀁾ProJ'O"d FY 2004 Bu,;."" Ph", (08108103) Customer Focus -Bus Overview Customer Focus -Bus The purpose of this section is to provide infonnation on DART's strategic initiatives to improve
the quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of the bus system. Each initiative is linked to the Strategic Plan that is located in Exhibit 1.5. Readers should obtain a copy of the Five
Year Action Plan (Action Plan) to more fully understand the strategies for improving bus service. As a result of the significant decrease in bus service levels assumed for FY 2004 and
cost savings considerations, DART tenninated the contract with its service provider, First Transit, Inc. All DART service will be provided out of four DART-owned facilities (East Dallas,
Northwest, Oak Cliff, and South Oak Cliff). DART will operate a total of 710 buses and maintain a contingency fleet of 50 buses. In addition to bus, light rail, and non-revenue fleet
maintenance, DART maintains an extensive passenger amenity and facility infrastructure including: 11,961 bus stops, 742 bus shelters, 1,369 benches, 13 transit centers, 3 passenger transfer
locations, 22 enhanced shelters, 34 rail platfonns, 5 commuter rail stations, and 97 infonnation pylons, as well as all operating divisions, for a total ofapproximately 28 million square
feet. Bus Scorecard -Key Performance Indicators Exhibit 3.1 highlights the Bus Key Perfonnance Indicators (KPls) in scorecard fonnat. Exhibit 3.1 Bus Scorecard -Key Performance Indicators
Indicators FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY03Q3 FY04B FY05B Customer/Quality Indicators Fixed Route Bus Ridershio 47.5 42.4 41.2 40.8 40.1 40.7 Charter Ridership 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 Revenue
Miles 30.3 31.2 30.9 30.9 27.9 27.9 Passenl!ers oer Mile 1.58 1.37 1.35 1.32 1.44 1.46 On Time Performance 92.8% 92.8% 91.0% 92.4% 91.0% 91.0% Mean Distance Between Roadcalls 3783 3827
4200 4124 4,200 4200 Veh. Accidents Per lOOk Miles (All Service) 2.87 2.40 2.80 2.20 2.80 2.80 Avg # 00 Dnsch Abs. Davs 25.1 22.5 20.0 16.3 23.0 22.0 Financial/Efficiency Indicators
Revenues (M) $29.2 $27.2 $28.0 $25.6 $28.8 $29.1 Expenses -Fullv Allocated (M) $183.3 $205.1 $192.0 $191.3 $174.5 $177.5 Net Subsidy (M) $154. I $177.9 $164.0 $165.7 $145.7 $148.4 Subsidy
Per Passenger $3.22 $4.16 $3.92 $4.06 $3.61 $3.62 Cost per Revenue Mile $6.05 $6.57 $6.22 $6.20 $6.25 $6.36 Pav-to-Platform Ratio -Hours n/a n/a 1.29 1.29 1.28 1.28 BUS-!
􀁾Propo"," FY 2004B_=PI", (08108103) Focus on the Core Business -Bus Ridership Customer Focus -Bus Bus system ridership has been trending downward since mid-year 2001, with a more pronounced
decrease following the September 11,2001 terrorist attacks coupled with the subsequent impact those events had on the national and regional economies. Prior to 2001, bus system ridership
had been continually climbing with a 3.5% increase in FY 1999 and a 2.4% increase in FY 2000. During this time period unemployment levels in the North Texas area were below 3%. Since
2001, unemployment levels have grown to over 7%. Employment trends significantly impact transit ridership because an average of73% of transit trips are taken for work commute purposes.
Exhibit 3.2 provides a look at Dallas area employment trends since February 2001. Exhibit 3.2 Trend in Dallas Area Employment (Feb 2001 -Feb 2003) 97.5% 96.5% 95.5% 94.5% 93.5% 92.5%
91.5%«.qp 􀁾... 􀁾 Bus system ridership has also experienced decreases as a result of the expanded rail system (see Exhibit 3.3). Analyses of ridership since the December 2002 extension
of the Light Rail line to Plano and Garland have indicated that 46% of the decrease in bus ridership is directly attributable to bus routes eliminated within the new rail corridors.
A third factor that has had some impact on bus ridership is the change in fare structure and fare levels. In September 2001, free transfers were eliminated and the bus day pass was introduced.
While this change had minimal impact on passengers making a round trip, there was some impact for riders making one-direction multi-bus trips each day. In March 2003, base fares were
increased 25%; however, available data indicates this change had no impact on ridership. As additional data is collected, this will be reassessed. The decreasing bus ridership levels
combined with decreasing passenger revenues and increasing operating costs have resulted in significant growth over the past two years in the bus subsidy per passenger. We have also
seen an an increased number of bus routes falling below the minimum acceptable performance levels on the Route Performance Index. BUS-2
􀁾""""'00 FY 2004 B",h",,, Phm (08108103) Customer Focus -Bus Based on these declining trends in bus system ridership, together with indications of a slow economic recovery, the focus
in FY04 will be on improving service efficiency while maintaining service quality. This focus in FY04 will help position DART to respond to the challenges of economic recovery and associated
ridership demand in future years. Exhibit 3.3 Bus Ridership 50.0 48.0 46.0 V> s:: 44.0 S􀁾42.0 40.0 38.0 36.0 FYOIA FY02A FY03B Fiscal Years FY04B FY05B I--+-FP04 -Draft FP03 I '---------------------
-------------_------! Action Plan is Key Planning Tool (Strategies Cl.l; C2.2) -The Action Plan is the central element of DART's service planning process. It provides guidance for transit
system enhancements over the term of the plan and defines bus system strategies to respond to the changing needs of the area population and economy. Service reviews, which involve a
comprehensive look at the transportation needs of each member city, are conducted in each city every three to four years, providing a more detailed blueprint for service changes in specific
areas. Recommendations from these service reviews and other sources provide critical input into the Action Plan during the annual update process. The Action Plan is supported by the
bus fleet replacement plan described later in this section. The changing demographics and travel patterns within the DART Service Area are highlighted in the Action Plan because these
characteristics drive the future travel needs of our current and potential riders. The Action Plan documents the continuing trend toward the development of employment concentrations
outside of the downtown Dallas Central Business District (CBD), resulting in more diverse commute trip patterns that are often suburb-to-suburb or crosstown in nature. In addition to
the changing demographics in our region, changes in travel are also being fostered by the implementation of the light rail system. Trips that were previously made on radial bus routes
are now being made on light rail, together with connecting trips on crosstown or feeder bus routes. As reflected in the following ridership charts (Exhibits 3.4 and 3.5), these system
level trends are resulting in changes to the performance of the various elements of our service network. BUS-3
􀁾Propo"", FY 2004 B";n= PI", (08108103) Exhibit 3.4 Local Route Ridership Trend Customer Focus -Bus 95,000 90,000 85,000 80,000 75,000 70,000 65,000 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Exhibit
3.5 Crosstown and Feeder Ridership Trend 40,000 􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 35,000 +--------------30,000 -j------25,000 20,000 15,000 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
2002 􀁾 Crosstown -Feeder -Linear (Feeder) I BUS-4
􀁾Pro"""'" IT 2004 B";o= PI", (08I08I03) Customer Focus -Bus The Action Plan defines a number of bus system strategies to respond to these changes in our operating environment. Those
strategies include: • Productivity Improvements -assuring an efficient ongoing deployment of service resources. • Route Simplification -separating more complex and interlined routes
into segments which operate independently, allowing for improved matching of service levels to ridership and providing a more easily understood route system. • Linkages to employment
-assuring that connections are available to employment sites from the light rail and commuter rail systems, given that an average of 73% of DART's trips are for work-commute purposes.
• Non-Traditional Services -providing alternatives to fixed route bus service, particularly in areas where ridership levels do not warrant fixed-route, full-size bus operation. • Service
to new transit facilities -modifying the fixed route system to take advantage of new light rail or bus facilities. • Crosstown services -providing high quality crosstown linkages between
the radial light rail corridors to facilitate the increasing number of non-CBD oriented trips. • Bus corridor development -integrating and enhancing radial bus services in key non-light
rail corridors to tum around declines in radial bus ridership. (For a more detailed review, readers should obtain a copy of the Five Year Action Plan, 2002 2006.) FY 2004 will specifically
focus on the first four of these strategies: route productivity, route simplification, linkages to employment, and non-traditional services. Route Productivity • The FY04 Budget includes
a reduction in the level of bus service to be operated. Four levels of potential bus service reduction were evaluated; estimated savings ranged from $14 million to $29 million. Based
on Board direction, the lowest level of reduction will be implemented with service changes scheduled for October 6, 2003. • The specific service reductions were identified based on Board-adopted
adopted Service Standards relative to route performance, vehicle loading, as well as minimum service spans and headways. • Service reductions were prioritized, based on a calculated
"net subsidy per passenger" relating to the proposed change (essentially the reduction in cost from the proposed change divided by the number of riders that would be lost to the system).
• In order to minimize ridership loss from the service reductions, alternative services will be provided in a number of areas where fixed routes are to be eliminated. Service modifications
to be implemented in October 2003 range from route eliminations to minor three-to-five minute adjustments in schedule frequencies (see map at Exhibit 3.6). Exhibit 3.7 provides the net
subsidy per passenger for the October service modifications. BUS-5
􀁾Propo,"" FY 2004 B",in", Plan (08108103) Exhibit 3.6 Customer Focus -Bus FY 2004 SERVICE REDUCTIONS Refined Leve/1 ,I f 1""""....􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁲􀁵 "....t􀀮􀁾􀁾 Minor Change Planning &Development
, --.... -􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀭 ---. 􀁾􀁾􀁬 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 􀁾 --􀁾􀁾 --􀁾 --􀀭􀁾 --j BUS-6 Major Change Deletion
􀁾Pro"""d FY 2004 B.,;no" Phm (08108103) Exhibit 3.7 Net Subsidy Per Rider October 2003 Modifications Customer Focus -Bus $70 $60 $50 $40 ; $30 i $20 ! $10 : $0 ...,'􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁦􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁩􀁉�
�􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢 703 575 761 527 539 322 569 344 353 570 404 412 444 63 400 560 49 155 303 161 466 fRJ7 • Following the implementation of these service modifications in
October, the affected routes will be closely monitored to assess the impact of the changes on ridership and route performance and adjustments will be made where appropriate. • Route
Standards to be used in evaluating route performance for the balance of FY 2004 will be established by the Board as one component of a review ofthe 1995 Board-adopted service standards.
Route Simplification • As part of the October 2003 service modifications, five radial and crosstown routes (Routes 29,59, 161,404 and 453) will be split into shorter routes and simplified.
These route splits will allow for an improved matching of service levels to ridership, allow for easier communication ofthe service to new riders, and support improved schedule adherence.
BUS-7
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -Bus Linkage to Employment • The employer shuttle program (E/shuttle) more than doubled in FY 2003, and further growth in this
program is anticipated in FY 2004. Employer shuttles are a van-based service that link rail stations to employment sites that are not within walking distance. As with the Vanpool program,
DART supports provision for the vehicle, maintenance, and insurance, while the employer assumes responsibility for operations of the service. Additional funding for this type of service
is being pursued with the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), which already provides financial support for the Vanpool program. Non-Traditional Service • As part of
the October 2003 service modifications, three new DART On-Call service areas are being added to the current three areas as replacement service for discontinued fixed routes. • Site-specific
shuttle services will continue to provide critical linkages to a number of important destinations in the Service Area, including DFW International Airport, the Medical Market Center
area, and Texas Instruments. The level of financial support for several of these services has been reduced to meet FY04 budgetary targets. Reductions will be made based upon the relative
subsidy per passenger ofthese site-specific shuttle services. Service Delivery Changes -In addition to the changes in service to be provided, as described above, there will also be significant
changes in the way that DART delivers fixed route bus service. Since DART's inception, the suburban service component of DART's bus system has been operated through a fixed route contractor,
most recently First Transit, Inc. (FTI). As a result of the significant decrease in bus service levels for FY 2004 and a desire to improve the span of control and quality of bus service,
the decision was made to terminate the contract with First Transit Inc. and to directly operate all fixed route bus service, beginning in October 2003. Service will be operated from
the four DART-owned bus garage facilities; East Dallas, Northwest, South Oak Cliff, and Oak Cliff (which has previously been made available to the fixed route contractor for the provision
of suburban bus service). The Hightower garage in Garland, which is owned by First Transit, will be closed effective October 2003. In order to maximize the cost effectiveness of the
new services to be operated directly by DART, the Oak Cliff facility will operate as a satellite garage facility, with operations Monday through Friday only. Senior management staff
of the South Oak Cliff operating facility will have management oversight responsibility for the Oak Cliff operations, rather than hiring senior managers to oversee this facility. Transportation
will re-institute the use of part-time operators, due to the peak-intensive nature of the park-and-ride service that will operate from the Oak Cliff facility, again to ensure cost-effective
delivery of the service. The Maintenance Department will contract for the daily cleaning and servicing of the buses operated out of this facility. BUS-8
􀁾Propo"" FY 2004 Bu.n"" PI.. (08108103) Customer Focus -Bus Provide Customer-Driven Service (Strategies Cl.2; C4.4) -To establish a benchmark, in April 2000, DART implemented a semi-annual
research initiative to gauge and monitor customer satisfaction in five areas: service, operations, maintenance, communications, and safety. The latest Customer Satisfaction Survey was
conducted in April 2002 (see Exhibits 3.8 and 3.9). Exhibit 3.8 compares the results between the April 2000 and the Apri12002 surveys. Exhibit 3.8 Composite Customer Survey Results (April
2000 Vs. April 2002) I-APr-OO -APr-021 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Safety Communications Service Maintenance Operations As the latest findings indicate, DART has generally
done well in different areas, especially with regards to communications with the favorable score of 87% (see Exhibit 3.9). The survey identified five areas needing improvement. They
are: pass-bys 65% favorable score; safety at transit centers/Park & Rides 68% favorable score; bus cleanliness 72% favorable score; timeliness of transfers 78% favorable score; and safety
at bus stops and stations 79% favorable score. The Customer Satisfaction Survey is being conducted every six months. This has allowed management to monitor these indicators and address
these and other performance issues over time. Due to budget limitations, additional studies for Climate and Customer studies will be conducted on alternating years with the next Climate
Study occurring in FY04. BUS-9
􀁾Pro"",'" FY 2004 Bu","" Phm (08108103) Customer Focus -Bus Exhibit 3.9 Customer Satisfaction Survey IndexnDescription Favorable Unfavorable Service Index General Satisfaction 85% 15%
Better Service Than Last Year 78% 22% Operation Index Bus On Time 80% 20% Train On Time 92% 8% Transfer on Time 78% 22% Pass-bys 65% 35% Operator Courtesy 79% 21% Maintenance Index Bus
Cleanliness 72% 28% Train Cleanliness 84% 16% Facilities Clean 85% 25% Communication Index Telephone Information Center Helpful 80% 20% Schedule Readable 93% 7% Safety/Security Index
Bus Safety 83% 17% Train Safety 84% 16% Safety at Stops/Stations 79% 21% Security at Transit CenterslPark & Rides 68% 32% Improvements in Operations Quality Projected (Strategies C3.1;
C4.4) -On-time performance is critical for ensuring that buses meet at transfer time points as scheduled. There are two somewhat related efforts underway. 1) The customer input sources
(customer, satisfaction survey, quality assessments, and customer complaints) have been used to identify the five most critical customer service issues: vehicle operation, bus timeliness,
operator courtesy, security, and pass-bys. Service quality improvement efforts will focus on these areas in FY04. 2) A team is working to develop an operating division level reporting
system -to provide feedback to all team members about how their divison is performing on key indicators -on which they have some impact to increase employee ownership of organizational
objectives (KPls). Descriptions of these strategies are provided below. Addressing Key Customer Concerns (Strategy 4.4) -DART has three processes in place to support the gathering of
customer feedback regarding services that DART provides: customer complaints, customer satisfaction surveys, and quality assessments. Based on information from these sources, five key
customer concerns have been identified that management believes need to be the focus of improvement over the coming year. These five areas include: vehicle operation, bus timeliness,
operator courtesy, security, and pass-bys. Detailed action plans are being developed for each of these five areas; together with measurement systems to track action plan implementation
and resulting performance improvements. Progress on these five key areas of customer concern will be monitored by Executive Management at montWy Customer Satisfaction Committee meetings
and will be reported to the Board through the Quarterly Operating and Financial Performance Report, as well as through periodic briefings. BUS-IO
􀁾Pro"",,,, FY 2004 B"'",'" PI", (08108103) Customer Focus -Bus Division-Centered PerfOrmance Monitoring and Improvement (Strategies Cl.l; Cl.2; C3.1; C3.2) -Improved quality of bus
service delivery will require the active participation and commitment of front-line employees. While Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) provide management and the Board with an overall
scorecard for Agency performance, it is often difficult for front-line staff to relate their daily job performance to those high-level, Agency KPIs. In order to improve front-line employee
ownership and participation in meeting Agency performance goals, performance reporting will be initiated at the operating division level for key areas on which front-line employees have
the most impact. These areas include: service reliability/timeliness, courtesy, safety, security, ridership, and efficiency. A second phase of the effort will include the development
of division-based performance goals in these areas, together with supporting recognition programs. programs. A final phase involves the development of action teams at each division to
identify problem areas and develop/implement strategies to improve division performance to meet targeted objectives. It is expected that the roll-out of this strategy will be a two-year
effort, with most of the focus in FY04 on developing the division-level measurement and reporting systems, communication with front-line staff, completion of pilot program efforts, and
development of performance goals. Bus Replacement Schedule (Strategy C3.4) -On-time performance is also impacted by the number of mechanical bus failures while in revenue service. This
is measured by "Mean Distance Between Road Calls" (see Exhibit 3.1). To maintain this target, DART is working to maintain an average fleet age of six to seven years while attempting
to balance the remaining capital program commitments. The FY 2004 average age of the bus fleet is five years. Management Strategy C3.4 (Replace assets on a timely basis) is important
from both a cost cost and quality standpoint. Exhibit 3.10 is the current bus replacement schedule for the next five years. Exhibit 3.10 10-Year Bus Replacement Schedule The total active
bus fleet is projected to remain steady at approximately 710 buses with a consistent peak pull-out requirement of 592 buses throughout the term of this Plan. In an effort to remain ready
to respond to a recovering economic climate and the need for additional service, DART will maintain a fleet of approximately 50 buses in a contingency fleet. This fleet, which will be
maintained in a "ready" state, is available for deployment as additional services are warranted. With the scheduled delivery of the 80 suburban replacement buses in FY04, the all of
the active fleet will be equipped with automatic bus stop announcement systems that provide audible internal and external destination and location announcements for passengers with sight
impairments. BUS-II
􀁾Propo"", FY 2004B",m"" Phm (08108103) Customer Focus -Bus Provide Environmentally Friendlv Services (Strategy Sl.8) -The Agency is committed to providing environmentally friendly services. DART continues
its transit industry leadership by expanding its fleet of clean, reliable, and efficient vehicles. Of DART's 710 buses, 676, or 95%, are classified as Texas "clean-fuel" fleet vehicles.
All but 34 of these buses exceed state and federal emission standards through the use of liquefied natural gas, ultra-low sulfur diesel, and exhaust-gas recirculation coupled with particulate
filters. DART continues to work within the industry along with state authorities to develop and demonstrate other deployable emissionsreducing technologies. The Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality has sponsored a $7.5 million grant through the Texas Emissions Reduction Program (TERP) to provide the resources for DART, in cooperation with equipment and fuel suppliers, to
deploy technology that reduced nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions by 54% and particulate emissions by over 90% on 360 existing DART buses. DART remains committed to a target of deploying
zero-emissions buses in 2010. Until then, we will continue to deploy technologies that emit the lowest emissions possible while still maintaining the reliability of our service; and
will continue to work within available resources, with other industry leaders to further refine the infant zero-emissions technologies that exist today. Subsidy Per Passenger Exhibit
3.11 Bus Subsidy Per Passenger $4.50 􀁾 $4.00 .! '0 􀁾 $3.50 $3.00 FYOIA FY02A FY03B Fiscal Years FY04B Exhibit 3.11 is a comparison ofprojected bus subsidy per passenger between the
FY03 and FY04 Financial Plans. Subsidy per passenger projections are lower in this year's Plan due to reductions ofless productive bus routes and reductions to DART's overall administrative
and non-operating functions. BUS-12
􀁾ProP0"'" FY 2004 Bm",,,,, PI.. (08108103) Customer Focus -Bus Fuel Costs -DART continues to explore purchasing options for the different types of fuels used in delivering our services.
To date, we have modified both our Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and electricity contracts to lock-in favorable rates over a multi-year period. This type of purchasing strategy for these
two commodities has returned favorable savings while also providing a more predictable cost for planning the cost of future service deliveries. DART currently has a financial hedge in
place with an independent third party that protects DART against rising diesel fuel prices. This financial hedge expires at the end of December 2003. In the fall of this year, DART will
be monitoring fuel prices with the intent to execute a new financial hedge if the economics appear to be beneficial to DART. Bus Cost Model -Exhibit 3.12 is the cost model for the bus
system. DART-operated transportation cost is the most significant cost element of the bus mode. The majority of this cost element is directly related to bus operator pay and benefits.
Consequently, many ofthe strategies to reduce costs revolve around efficient use of bus operators. Exhibit 3.12 FY 2004 Bus Cost Model Bus 174.5 M* 11.0% oftotal cost 34.1% oftotal cost
4.1% oftotal cost *Total FY04 Bus costs, which include $17.3 million for administrative overhead allocation. BUS-13
􀁾Pro"""" FY 2004 Bu,;n,,, PI"" (08108103) Customer Focus -Bus Exhibit 3.13 is a further refinement ofthe bus model for DART-operated bus transportation only. Management closely monitors
the key indicators shown in the blue boxes. The deadhead ratio (Strategy C3.I) measures the percentage of revenue miles to non-revenue miles scheduled. Scheduled miles per hour measures
the average speed of the vehicle. These measures require longer periods of time to adjust due to their nature. Service Planning attempts to reduce these ratios with each change in service.
Pay-to-platform compares the total pay hours to the hours paid for actually operating the vehicle (Le., "time behind the wheel" or platform time). Total pay hours include platform time,
scheduled and unscheduled overtime, absences, and administrative and training time. Average pay rate is total operator pay (including overtime pay) divided by total pay hours. The benefits
ratio includes all paid benefits, including workers' compensation and short-term disability, but excludes paid absences (since these are already included in the payto-platform ratio).
The overall goal is to eliminate inefficiencies and to pay operators for working rather than not working. Exhibit 3.13 FY 2004 DART Bus Transportation Cost Model Bus Operations Only
-Peak to base ratio -Facility location -Route planning -Bus typellocation -Route planning -Recovery time -Layover time -HOVlanes -Absences -No. ofemployees -Work rules -Avg run time
-Trainin admin 1.28 PTP Hours Bus Onl 1,180 FT Operators 56 PT 0 erators Avg weekday run time: 9 hours 48 mins Avg Saturday run time: 9 hours 18 mins Avg Sunday run Time: 9 hours 36
mins BU8-14 -No. ofemployees -Turnover -Workers' comp -STD -Benefits packageI 40.53% Benefits Ratio
Section 4 Customer Focus -LRT Index of Exhibits Exhibit 4.1 LRT Scorecard-Key Performance Indicators '" LRT-l Exhibit 4.2 LRT Service Map LRT-2 Exhibit 4.3 LRT Ridership LRT-3 Exhibit
4.4 NW and SE Corridors Map LRT-3 Exhibit 4.5 LRT Planned Opening Dates LRT-4 Exhibit 4.6 LRT Subsidy Per Passenger LRT-5 Exhibit 4.7 FY 2004 Light Rail Cost ModeL LRT-6
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -Light Rail Transit Customer Focus -Light Rail Transit Overview The purpose of this section is to provide information on DART's
strategic initiatives to improve the quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of the Light Rail Transit (LRT) system. References to DART's Strategic Plan are included throughout this section.
The 20-mile Light Rail Starter System was opened in three phases from June 1996 through May 1997. The 24-mile extension from Mockingbird Station to Downtown Garland (the Northeast Corridor)
and from Park Lane Station to Richardson and Plano (North Central Corridor) was completed in November 2002 and December 2002, respectively. A 1.5-mile extension to Victory Station (NW-IA)
is under construction with a projected opening date in the fall of 2004. DART is in the planning phase of more than 43 additional miles of light rail that will extend Southeast from
the Dallas CBD through Deep Ellum and Fair Park to the Buckner Station, and Northwest from Victory Station to Farmers Branch, Carrollton, and Irving; as well as extensions from Downtown
Garland Station to Rowlett and from Ledbetter Station to 1-20 in South Oak Cliff, which should more than double ridership. Construction is currently underway to expand the capacity of
the Service & Inspection Facility to maintain and operate the expanded fleet required for the new line sections. The Agency is currently operating and maintaining a fleet of 95 vehicles,
which is adequate to cover the service needs through FY 2005. An additional 20 cars will be deployed in FY 2006. A map of the current light rail system is included at Exhibit 4.2. Light
Rail Scorecard -Key Performance Indicators Exhibit 4.1 highlights LRT's Key Performance Indicators (KPls) in scorecard format. Exhibit 4.1 LilZht Rail Scorecard -Key Performance Indicators
Indicators FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY0303 FY04B FY05B Customer/Quality Indicators Ridership (ODDs) 11.5 13.7 17.3 17.1 17.9 18.2 Revenue Car Miles 2.5 3.9 5.5 5.5 5.0 5.0 Passengers per Car
Mile 4.54 3.51 2.88 3.12 3.62 3.67 On Time Performance 95.2% 97.0% 97.0% 97.4% 97.0% 97.0% Mean Distance Between Roadcalls (OOOs) 177 6 10 60 35 35 Accidents oer lOOk Miles 0.51 0.37
0.56 0.21 0.56 0.54 Avg # of 00. Unsched Absence Days 23.7 12.5 18.0 19.8 17.4 16.8 FinanciaVEfficiency Indicators Revenues (M) $7.5 $9.5 $12.6 $10.3 $13.8 $13.5 Exoenses -Fullv Allocated
(M) $38.0 $47.7 $62.9 $55.6 $61.4 $63.9 Net Subsidy (M) $30.5 $38.2 $50.3 $45.3 $47.6 $50.4 Subsidv Per Passenger $2.65 $2.76 $2.91 $2.65 $2.65 $2.77 Subsidy Per Passenger Mile n/a nla
$0.47 $0.45 $0.32 $0.34 Cost oer Revenue Car Mile $14.97 $12.20 $12.94 $10.13 $12.38 $12.89 Pay-to-Platform Ratio -Hours 1.61 1.55 1.38 1.37 1.31 1.31 LRT-l
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 4.2 LRT Service Map _________,0;:------+-----------------.---.-􀁃􀁅􀁄􀁁􀁒􀁾􀁜􀁾􀁾􀁁􀁬􀁉􀀰􀁎 -:BO·-i....h:u'lllIDii 􀁙􀁊􀁴􀁦􀁩􀀬􀁾 \",--:.
lYlERIVERNONS.. TAlIO,," __ STH&CORINIH -------"5, \ $TAllON •.,.",., STATION \ \ iHAMPTON 􀁓􀁔􀁁􀁔􀁬􀁏􀀧􀀡􀁄􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀭 i 'MORRELL 􀁓􀁔􀁁􀁔􀁉􀁾 "" WBlMORELAND 􀀭􀁾 I ' )\S]AlION""
'. 􀀺􀀮􀀩􀁾 ILLINOIS STA110H //\ J '-,or KIBl STATION \ 􀀯􀁾􀁾 I "'" /\ .,." VA MEDICA!CfR\' ! ·---. .l 􀁌􀁾􀀡􀀡􀁄􀁎􀀮 \ 7' //􀀭􀀭􀁩􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀂷􀁅􀀡􀁉􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁜􀁜􀀲􀀢􀁾􀁅􀁒 \'\ • __L
􀁾􀀢􀀲􀁡􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 07 􀁾 ". ,/: ./'" 􀀮􀀯􀀩􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟..--􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭 '" ,'/􀁬􀁃􀁩􀀮􀀺􀁡􀁡􀁾􀀮􀀡􀁴􀀺􀁗􀁃􀁩􀁾􀀭􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀭􀀻 Customer Focus
-Light Rail Transit LRT Ridership Exhibit 4.3 reflects Light Rail ridership from FY 2001 through FY 2005. The significant increases in ridership in FY 2002 and FY 2003 were related to
service expansion to north and northeast Dallas, Garland, Richardson, and Plano. Key factors impacting LRT ridership projections for FY04 and FY05 include the annualization of ridership
for the section openings in FY 2003, the October 2003 modification of midday service frequency from every 15 minutes to every 20 minutes, and the opening of the NW-IA line section that
will extend LRT service to Victory Station by fall 2004. The midday frequency reduction will result in a modest reduction in passenger trips, while the opening of Victory Station will
increase the number of passenger trips. In addition to these factors, a continuation of some natural system ridership growth is anticipated through FY 2005. LRT-2
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 4.3 LRT Ridership Customer Foeus -Light Rail Transit 19.0 '" 17.0 Q ;5 15.0 􀁾 13.0 11.0 18.2. FYOIA FY02A FY03B Fiscal Years FY04B
FY05B [-.-FP04 -Draft FPQi] Light Rail Expansion (Strategy C2.3) -The next major expansion of light rail to the Northwest (NW) is planned for Carrollton, Dallas, Farmers Branch, and
Irving and Southeast (SE) to Deep Ellum, Fair Park, and Pleasant Grove (see Exhibit 4.4). Exhibit 4.5 provides the planned opening dates for these two extensions. Current ridership forecasts
are unknown at this time due to significant alignment changes in the Medical Center and Harry Hines areas. Management is approximately three to six months from having new models available
to run forecasts for these extensions. Exhibit 4.4 NW and SE Corridors LRT-3
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -Light Rail Transit Exhibit 4.5 LRT Planned Openin2 Dates Projected Line Section Openine Dates SE-l 2010 SE-2 2011 NW-IB 2010
NW-2 2011 NW-3 2011 NW-4 2011 IRV-l 2012 IRV-2 2013 IRV-3 2014 Rowlett 2013 The opening dates above are shown in calendar years and are predicated on assumptions that are detailed in
the Financial Plan section. Victory Station (Strategy 2.3) -DART is constructing an LRT station at the American Airlines Center with an anticipated opening date of fall 2004. The extension
will be from the West End to the new station at a projected cost for the station and alignment of $79 million. These funds have been advanced from the Northwest Corridor budget. Future
LRT Expansion Costs (Strategy 2.3) -The future cost of light rail expansion is approximately $3.1 billion. As part of the approval of the NW corridor through Irving, the City of Irving
agreed to fund $60 million (in 1999 dollars) of the incremental cost of moving the line from the Mafiana Spur to the "University of Dallas/Texas Stadium" alignment. These revenues have
been programmed into the Financial Plan in FY 2010 through FY 2012 to coincide with construction of the line. To finance this construction plan, DART projects that it will issue approximately
$2.4 billion of long-term debt and receive approximately $700 million of Federal funds. See Financial Plan section for more detail. Love Field -The current LRT build-out plan includes
two alternatives near Love Field. One alternative utilizes the existing right-of-way with provisions for a future connection to Love Field. The other alternative shows the LRT alignment
tunneling under Love Field at an additional cost of $160 million (in FY02 dollars) for a Love Field tunnel and station. Of this amount, $140 million would be funded externally, by the
City of Dallas and other sources. The funding for this alternative is subject to the approval of an ILA that is currently being negotiated between DART and the City of Dallas. LRT-4
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -Light Rail Transit Transit System Plan -DART's Transit System Plan is a long-range planning tool that identifies and prioritizes
major capital projects needed to improve regional mobility. The Transit System Plan is closely coordinated with development of the North Central Texas Council of Government's Regional
Mobility Plan. The Board of Directors adopted the current Transit System Plan in November of 1995. The 1995 Plan was an update of the 1989 Plan, both of which were oriented toward a
horizon year of 201 O. The Plan was updated in 1997 to allow for the acceleration of the DART North Central and Northeast rail extensions and updated again in August 2000 following a
public vote authorizing the use of long-term financing to accelerate the Northwest and Southeast Corridor extensions. The current update effort focuses on transit needs and opportunities
within the context of a 2030 horizon, and is scheduled for completion in FY 2004. Light Rail Costs and Subsidy Per Passenger Exhibit 4.6 compares subsidy per passenger for light rail
for FY01 through FY05. Exhibit 4.6 LRT Subsidy Per Passenger $3.20 $3.00 $2.93 $2,98. Vl 􀁾"0 $2.80 0 $2.80 $2.60 $2.40 FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY04B FY05B Fiscal Years -------_._-_.._-------------Exhibit
4.7 highlights the cost structure for light rail. Although LRT and bus have very different cost structures, the cost drivers for each cost category (transportation, vehicle maintenance,
and facility maintenance) are similar; they just have different weights. Light rail is more expensive per mile due to higher fixed costs for facilities, but less expensive per passenger
due to the higher capacity of light rail vehicles versus buses. On a relative basis, facility maintenance costs are more significant for rail, while transportation costs are less significant.
For example, rail facility maintenance costs represent 34.6% of the total LRT cost structure versus only 4.1% for bus. Transportation costs, on the other hand, represent only 19.1% of
the total LRT cost structure versus 50.8% for bus. For a full comparison, contrast the bus cost model from Exhibit 3.12 with the LRT cost model (Exhibit 4.7). LRT-5
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 4.7 FY 2004 Light Rail Cost Model Light Rail $61.4 Million * Customer Focus -Light Rail Transit 19.1% of total cost Vehicle Maintenance
$16.2 million 26.4% oftotal cost ROW & Facility Maintenance 34.6% of total cost * Total FY04 LRT costs, which include $6.2m for administrative overhead allocation. Develop and Refine
LRT Preventive Maintenance Programs (Strategy C3.4) -DART has extensive vehicle and facility preventive maintenance campaigns in place. Preventive maintenance is an essential component
of the Agency's strategy, which has allowed the Agency to achieve an average of 32,000 or more car miles without a failure. The FY 2004 Budget includes work programs for brakes, suspension
systems, and pantographs. In addition, consistent with the Maintenance Department's five-year business plan, the Capital Budget includes a fiveyear schedule for Original Equipment Manufacturer
(OEM) required rebuild and overhaul work programs for the entire LRV fleet (currently at 95 vehicles). LRT-6
Section 5 Customer Focus -Commuter Rail Index of Exhibits Exhibit 5.1 Map-TRE Corridor. CR-1 Exhibit 5.2 Commuter Rail-TRE Scorecard-Key Perfonnance Indicators........ CR-2 Exhibit 5.3
TRE Ridership CR-2 Exhibit 5.4 TRE Capital Projects> $1 Million CR-4 Exhibit 5.5 Commuter Rail-TRE Subsidy Per Passenger CR-4 Exhibit 5.6 FY 2004 Commuter Rail-TRE Cost ModeL CR-6
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -Commuter Rail Customer Focus -Commuter Rail & Railroad Management Overview The purpose of this section is to highlight the Commuter
Rail & Railroad Management Business Plan for the next five years, including the key indicators and strategic initiatives. References to DART's Strategic Plan are included throughout
this section. Passenger service is provided jointly with the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (lithe Til) pursuant to a 1994 Interlocal Agreement (ILA). The Trinity Railway Express
(TRE) is operated on a rail line that was formerly owned by the Cities of Dallas and Fort Worth (the Cities) and transferred to DART and the T in December 1999. Exhibit 5.1 is a map
of the TRE corridor. Pursuant to the Trackage Rights Agreements, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UP) pay a fee for operating freight
services on the corridor. In May 2000, TRE assumed corridor maintenance responsibilities from BNSF then assumed dispatch responsibilities in January 2001. DART and the T, acting as the
TRE, have jointly contracted with Herzog Transportation Services, Inc. (Herzog) to maintain and operate the commuter rail vehicles and the corridor. The Department's Railroad Management
Division has responsibility for management and maintenance of all DART-owned active freight rail lines, as well as the property management responsibilities for the TRE corridor. The
Division is also responsible for administering trackage rights agreements with freight railroads, and coordination with, and oversight of, those freight railroads that are fulfilling
DART's common carrier obligations in DART-owned corridors. Regional Rail Right-of-Way Company, a wholely-owned subsidiary of DART, holds the common carrier authority, and manages the
trackage rights agreements for the DART-owned active freight rail corridors. The Railroad Management Division undertakes management of the trackage rights agreements, and collects the
associated fees for these corridors on behalf of Regional Rail Right-of-Way Company. Exhibit 5.1 Trinity Railway Express Corridor CR-I
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -Commuter Rail Commuter Rail-TRE Scorecard -Key Performance Indicators Exhibit 5.2 highlights Commuter Rail-TRE's Key Performance
Indicators (KPIs) in scorecard format. The major increases in the FY02 column are the result of the expansion to Fort Worth and reflect consolidated TRE operations beginning in FY 2001.
Exhibit 5.2 Commuter Rail -TRE Scorecard -Key Performance Indicators Indicators FYOIA FY02A FYOJB FYOJOJ FY04B FY05B Customer/Quality Indicators Ridershio (M) 1.3 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.2
Charter/Flver 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.03 -Revenue Car Miles (M) 1.0 1.6 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.4 Passengers ner Car Mile 1.43 1.40 1.32 1.45 1.64 1.63 Scheduled Train Hours 15.6 16.8 22.9 21.9 19.4
19.4 On Time Performance 97.9% 97.2% 96.0% 97.5% 96.0% 96.0% Annulled Trios 13 24 32 5 32 32 Veh. Accidents Per lOOk Miles 0.18 0.11 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.31 FinanciallEfficiency Indicators
Revenues (M) $3.9 $4.2 $4.7 $5.3 $5.0 $5.1 Exoenses -Fullv Allocated (M) $16.2 $21.0 $18.7 $19.9 $18.6 $19.0 Net Subsidy (M) $12.3 $16.9 $14.0 $14.5 $13.6 $13.9 Subsidy Per Passenger
$8.92 $7.64 $6.94 $6.23 $6.21 $6.24 Subsidy Per Passenger Mile n/a n/a $0.35 $0.32 $0.34 $0.34 Cost ner Revenue Car Mile $16.74 $13.36 $11.58 $12.32 $13. 71 $13.87 TRE Ridership Exhibit
5.3 reflects TRE ridership from FY 2001 through FY 2005. 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 ._--_..._------"-_.-Exhibit 5.3 TRE Ridership <l ,., .,.􀁾.. c..I .... A u.../.2 .2 III' FYOIA FY02A
FY03B FY04B FY05B CR-2
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -Commuter Rail Since opening in December 1996, actual TRE ridership has more than doubled the original projection. Management
attributes this increase to excellent service quality with a special focus on the customer. Ridership has grown steadily to more than 8,000 passengers per weekday and 5,000 passengers
on Saturdays. TRE currently operates Monday through Saturday from Fort Worth's T&P Station to Dallas' Union Station, with seven intermediate stops. TRE also serves an additional special-events
temporary platform at the American Airlines Center in Dallas, which ultimately will be a joint station (Victory Station) with DART's Light Rail. Service at this location is on event-days
only, and results in ridership increases of approximately 1,000 passengers per day. Operating efficiencies and acceptable long-term performance will come with the development of a true
bidirectional commuter rail service (both Dallas and Fort Worth as destinations) including including access to the mid-cities market and adequate service to DFW International Airport,
commensurate with service requirements of airport users and employees. Weekend Service (Strategy Ci.n -Saturday service between Union Station and South Irving began in December 1998.
Saturday service to Fort Worth began in December 2001, with extension of service to Fort Worth. Sunday service cannot be implemented until more double tracking is added. Sundays are
currently utilized for required maintenance activities within the right-of-way. Ensure Service Quality with Fort Worth Service Expansion (Strategies i.3; C3.4) -With the expansion to
Fort Worth, the number of railroad on-line "meets" has increased dramatically and presents a much greater challenge to maintain on-time service. TRE has attained on-time performance
of almost 98% in FY03 and has generated an enthusiastic and loyal ridership base. This has been accomplished with the current 50-train schedule on a single-track railroad because of
very tight coordination with BNSF and UP, and the dispatching skills of our contractor. In FY04 and FY05 on-time performance is targeted at 96% due to heavy construction schedules. Constant
monitoring of the track and signal systems is the first step to ensure safe and continued operation of a railroad; but eventually, more sidings and double-tracking will be required to
maintain service reliability and support any service expansion. Exhibit 5.4 highlights the major projects proposed over the next few years for track upgrades, and other items necessary
to maintain and improve service quality on the east side of the TRE. Continued service reliability and expansion capability will require similar or greater investments in Tarrant County.
Reserves have been set up to provide for projects that have not been specifically identified at this time. These reserves will ensure the timely replacement of TRE assets as well as
allow for a certain amount of unexpected future capital requirements. CR-3
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 5.4 TRE Capital Projects> $1 Million (in thousands) Customer Focus -Commuter Rail PRQJECfNAME FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 5YrTotal
Beltline Grade Separation $5,629 $8,443 $6,013 $0 $0 $20,086 Trinity Bridge Elm Fork Repl 11,148 0 0 0 0 11,148 Ts Bi-level Fleet-llA** 3,081 0 0 0 0 3,081 Lisa to Perkins Double Track
3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 ROC Fleet Replacement -Phase I 1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500 Bridge Repl (Old Trinity River Cbannel) 1,300 0 0 0 0 1,300 Reserves & Smaller Proiects 2770 1.653 1036 1,094 1
159 7711 Total TRE Proiects $28.427 $10.096 $7049 $1094 $1159 $47826 ** Contmgent on Board approval ofILA Commuter Rail -TRE Costs and Subsidy Per Passenger Exhibit 5.5 provides subsidy
per passenger projections. Exhibit 5.5 Commuter Rail -TRE Subsid Per Passen er $9.00 $8.50 $8.00 􀁾 $7.50 :::::::: $7.00 8 $6.50 $6.00 $5.50 $5.00 Fiscal Years FYO IA FY02A FY03B FY04B
FY05B 􀁌􀁟􀁾 . [--.-FP04 ---Draft FP031 CR-4
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -Commuter Rail TRE Fare Structure -The DART and T Boards have adopted a zone fare system for TRE with base fares of $1.25 and
$2.25 for one and two zones, respectively. A one-zone fare exists for rides between Downtown Dallas and West Irving or between Fort Worth and CentrePort; a twozone fare is charged for
customers traveling across the zone boundary, located at the County line (between CentrePort and West Irving). Cost-Sharing Arrangement with the T Based on Revenue Seat Miles -DART's
ILA with the T calls for all revenues that are generated from TRE including fares, advertising, and special services to be used to pay for the service. The remaining subsidy is then
allocated to DART and the T based on a revenue seat mile formula. For example, if the shared cost to operate TRE is $100 and TRE collects $25 in fares and $10 from other sources, the
remaining $65 would be split based on the number of revenue seat miles operated in the DART service area and the T service area. DART and the T individually absorb their own staff, administrative,
and station maintenance costs. Currently, DART's share of the subsidy is approximately 51% in FY 2003. The midcities agreed to contribute $775,000 per year for three years, which began
in FY 2002, for services that their citizens utilize. The contribution from the mid-cities is retained by the North Central Texas Council of Governments to leverage additional federal
capital grants for the TRE. This arrangement resulted in a grant of $2.2 million in additional federal funds for the purchase of three new cab cars. Increase TRE Ridership (Strategy
C2.l) -During FY 2003, the Boards of Directors for DART and the T approved a fare increase and TRE service reductions, as cost containment measures. Additional service reductions are
scheduled for FY 2004. DART and T staff, working together as the TRE Coordination Committee, will place priority on implementing cost effective joint marketing and public information
campaigns to attract new riders to TRE service, as well as the connecting DART and T transit services. A key element of this effort will be to produce marketing. products that focus
on "branding" TRE, and reduce or eliminate any customer confusion related to the jointly funded/operated nature of the service. Commuter Rail-TRE Cost Model Exhibit 5.6 is the Commuter
Rail-TRE Cost Model. Costs are divided between TRE and railroad corridor management. The Department has responsibility for management and maintenance of all DART-owned active freight
rail lines, as well as the property management responsibilities for the TRE corridor. The Department is also responsible for the collection of land and signboard rental income (TRE Corridor
only), license fees, and trackage rights fees. Total revenues associated with corridor management for FY 2004 are budgeted at $3.7 million. The portion of the total corridor management
revenues and property management costs associated with the TRE corridor management are factored into the Commuter Rail-TRE subsidy per passenger calculations. CR-5
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -Commuter Rail Exhibit 5.6 FY 2004 Commuter Rail-TRE Cost Model 0.9% of tota I costs .Commuter Rail $18.6 Million * $.8 million
4.6% of TRE costs 4.4% of total costs • Total FY04 CRrrRE costs, which include $1.84 million for administrative overhead allocation. CR-6
Section 6 Customer Focus -Paratransit Index of Exhibits Exhibit 6.1 Paratransit Scorecard-Key Perfonnance Indicators PAR-1 Exhibit 6.2 Paratransit Ridership PAR-2 Exhibit 6.3 Paratransit
Passengers Per Hour PAR-3 Exhibit 6.4 Paratransit Total Costs and Net Subsidy PAR-5 Exhibit 6.5 FY 2004 Paratransit Cost Model. PAR-6
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan 08/08/03) Customer Focus -Paratransit Customer Focus -Paratransit Overview Paratransit Services is responsible for providing accessible, curb-to-curb public
transportation in accordance with the Board-approved Accessible Services Policy No. III, 14, which complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). This includes planning/scheduling,
dispatching, field supervision, contract compliance, rider eligibility, outreach, travel training, and other administrative functions. Additionally, the Department will assume management
responsibility for all segments ofDART's On-Call service in FY 2004. Service is currently contracted with ATCNancom, which operates and maintains a total of 100 vans and 57 sedans. Approximately
7,000 eligible riders are currently registered for Paratransit Services. The purpose of this section is to explain Paratransit's Business Plan, including strategic initiatives. References
to DART's Strategic Plan are includedthroughout this section. Paratransit Scorecard -Key Performance Indicators Exhibit 6.1 highlights Paratransit's Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Exhibit 6.1 Paratransit Scorecard -Key
Performance Indicators Indicators FYOIA FY02A FY038 FY0303 FY048 FY058 Customer/Quality Indicators Actual Ridershio (000) 547.0 585.7 595.6 582.9 605.1 605.1 Scheduled Ridershio (000)
n/a n/a 714.3 701.3 714.0 714.0 Revenue Hours (OOOs) 382.2 417.4 386.1 392.4 403.4 403.4 Paratransit Passengers oer Hour -Scheduled 1.76 1.71 1.85 1.79 1.77 1.77 Paratransit Passengers
oer Hour -Actual 1.43 1.40 1.54 1.49 1.50 1.50 On-Time Performance 87.1% 89.6% 84.0% 88.6% 85.0% 85.0% Accidents oer lOOK 1.05 0.47 2.00 0.29 1.00 1.00 PercentaE:e of Trios Comoleted
99.6% 98.4% 99.4% 100.0% 98.0% 98.0% Passenger Canceled Trios Ratio 14.3% 13.5% 13.0% 12.8% 13.0% 13.0% Passenger No Shows Ratio 4.1% 4.8% 5.0% 4.0% 5.0% 5.0% Service Level -Scheduling
(3 minutes) 89.0% 88.7% 80% 93% 88% 88% Service Level -Where's Mv Ride (2 minutes) 86.7% 87.8% 80% 92% 85% 85% Complaints oer Ik Passengers 5.4 3.8 5.00 4.55 6.00 8.00 FinanciallEfficiency
Indicators Revenues (M) $0.9 $0.9 $0.9 $1.0 $1.2 $1.2 Expenses -Fully Allocated (M) $23.2 $25.1 $24.8 $24.1 $26.6 $27.3 Net Subsidy (M) $22.25 $24.23 $23.95 $23.15 $25.37 $26.05 Subsidy
Per Passenger $40.67 $41.36 $40.93 $39.72 $41.92 $43.05 PAR-I
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan 08/08/03) Customer Focus -Paratransit Scheduling/Control Center Service Levels (Strategy Cl.l) The Key Performance Indicators for the Scheduling and Control
Center functions are referred to as call service levels. Service levels are defined as the percentage of calls handled (answered or abandoned) within an established time period. The
Paratransit Access Advisory Group, the Board-appointed paratransit customer focus group, helped DART establish these targets. By using service level standards, management can be proactive
in meeting service requirements. A key initiative for achieving the Scheduling Center service level target is the utilization of the X-Press Booking (XPB), an automated scheduling feature,
by Paratransit riders. Paratransit Services continues to market the availability of the XPB function. Effective October 1, 2003, management will reallocate existing resources to peak
call volume periods by closing the Scheduling Center on holidays and weekends, thus allowing allowing utilization of existing staffing levels to cover high call volume periods. Riders
wishing to schedule trips during times when the Scheduling Center is closed may still do so by using the X-Press Booking feature, or an automated voice mail system, which will be implemented
in FY 2004 and available from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Paratransit Ridership In accordance with the spirit and intent of the ADA, and due to the high cost of
demand responsive service (Le., Paratransit subsidy per passenger target for FY03 of $40.93 versus $3.73 for fixed route services), the Board and management desire to transfer those
riders who can use bus and/or rail service from paratransit to fixed route. Management will be challenged to continue this effort due to staff reductions, which will significantly diminish
the travel training program. Exhibit 6.2 compares actual and projected ridership from FY 2001 through FY 2005. The increase in ridership from FY 2001 to FY 2002 is attributable to the
zero denials mandate implemented in January 2001. More detail regarding the ADA mandate is provided later in this section. Exhibit 6.2 Paratransit Ridership 610.0 600.0 590.0 en 580.0
"'0 c: 570.0 «j en ;:l 560.0 0 550.0 ..0 t-< 540.0 530.0 520.0 510.0 Fiscal Years 605 595.6 .-585.7 • --kmo .)r J,'t.V .', ///, 􀁉􀁾 '\.:170 " FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY04B FY05B E=+-------'
u"""-?3] FP04 ---Draft FP03 PAR-2
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan 08/08/03) Customer Focus -Paratransit Paratransit Eligibility and Travel Training Program (Strategy C2.2) -The current eligibility program, initiated in
July 1999, requires paratransit applicants to be certified in person rather than by mail. The in-person process has resulted in registered Paratransit riders dropping from over 18,000
to just over 7,000, a 61.1% decrease. Management believes that this program is achieving the desired results of providing paratransit service to those who truly need it. In FY 2004,
the existing Assessment Center, a leased facility at 7920 Elmbrook, will be closed. Assessment Center staff will relocate to DART headquarters. Assessments will be conducted on actual
buses and trains instead of the current controlled environment. In order to meet budget targets for FY 2004, the eligibility assessment and travel training functions will be combined.
There will be a total staff of four doing the combined functions, currently performed by seven positions. The primary focus of the staff will be to assess individuals for Paratransit
eligibility. Travel Training functions will be done only as time permits. This will drastically impact the ability to transition Paratransit riders onto fixed route servIce. Paratransit's
Productivity Denials (Strategy C3.l) -Passengers per hour is one way to measure Paratransit's productivity. Exhibit 6.3 provides the actual and projected paratransit passengers per hour
for FY 2001 through FY 2005. Compliance with the ADA's zero denials mandate will impact Paratransit's efficiency, therefore lowering productivity. The Department of Transportation (DOT)
tightened its interpretation of the ADA in January 2001, stating that only forces outside the transit agency's control are viable as excuses for ADA paratransit trip denials. The DOT
has further stated that transit agencies cannot plan for the denial of trips to any ADA-eligible paratransit customer, even if the number of such denials is not substantial. In order
to achieve the zero denial mandate during FY 2002, DART incurred an additional $3.0 million in operating expenses over a ninemonth period. r-------------.-.---. Exhibit 6.3 Paratransit
Passengers Per Hour 1.60 1.55 1.50 1.45 1.40 1.35 1.30 1.54 /􀁾􀀮 /' 1.50 .....1.50 ., -.,-1.43 III------􀁾 1.45 􀁾􀀮􀀢􀁔 I 11 􀁁􀁾 1.40 '. FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY04B F_Y05B5B _ 'L Fiscal
Years _________J -+-FP04 -Draft FP03 I PAR-3
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan 08/08/03) Customer Focus -Paratransit Management is working on a solicitation for supplemental transportation service to accommodate all trip requests
for FY 2004. The cost of these services is estimated to be in the range of $2.1 -$2.2 million and is included in the FY 2004 Budget and Financial Plan. Manage No-Shows and Cancellations
(Strategy C3.l) -DART's second challenge for improving productivity is related to cancellations and no-shows. DART currently is scheduling 1.8 passengers per hour, but after cancellations
and no-shows are factored-in, productivity levels drop to about 1.5. DART has strictly enforced the No-Show Policy since April 2002, which resulted in the No-Show rate dropping from
5.4% to 3.8% as of June 2003. Based on new ridership projections, the type of supplemental services offered and a revised and more stringent Cancellation Policy in FY 2004, Management
feels the KPI ratio will remain in the 4% -5% range. Vehicle Business System (Strategies C4.l) -The Vehicle Business System was installed in January 2001 and has allowed for better utilization
of revenue vehicles in service. A potential future enhancement to the system includes an automatic call-out feature that will phone patrons when the vehicle is within a certain range
from the pick-up location. This feature would reduce No-Shows and dwell time of the vehicle, further improving productivity and on-time performance. Continue to Enhance Proficiency with
Trapeze Computer System (Strategy C4.1) -The Trapeze automated scheduling system has been working efficiently since full stabilization occurred in FY 1999. Potential enhancements include
the Certification Module, which would automate processes currently being done manually. Management is also researching the feasibility and impact of limiting Paratransit service to ADA
minimum requirements, which is a %-mile corridor around the fixed route service. Service beyond this limit is not required by ADA and may be considered as premium service. Paratransit
Services and Information Technology staff are working together to develop software to enable this modification. Purchased Transportation Contract A new purchased transportation contract
with ATCNancom was implemented in January 2001. Through a close partnership with DART, the quality of service improved for paratransit riders. Taking lessons learned from previous contracts,
management addressed prior deficiencies by ensuring that the proper controls were being placed into this contract. Improvements included a minimum hourly wage rate for operators and
higher dis-incentives for non-performance. Additionally, DART staff provides daily oversight at the contractor's facility to ensure all contractual obligations are being met. In order
to address FY 2003 budgetary constraints, new rates and decreased service levels were negotiated with ATCNancom. The reduced service levels resulted in a decrease of sedans operated
by the contractor, from the original 70 sedans to the current 57. DART is also purchasing the diesel fuel used by ATCNancom, which has resulted in decreased contract costs. In the FY
2004 Plan, as noted above, new rates and service levels for zero denials have been planned. PAR-4
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan 08/08/03) Customer Focus -Paratransit The base term of the current contract ends on December 31, 2005, with the provision for two, one-year options. Paratransit
Costs and Subsidy Per Passenger Exhibit 6.4 compares paratransit cost and net subsidy actual results for FY 2001 and FY 2002 with budgeted performance through FY 2005. Exhibit 6.4 Paratransit
Total Costs and Net Subsidy $15.00 $30.00 $25.00 $10.00 $5.00 $0.00 '" $20.00 =:5 iFiscal Years FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY04B FY05B I-Total Costs -Net Subsidy I 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽
􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 PAR-5
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan 08/08/03) Customer Focus -Paratransit Paratransit Cost Model Exhibit 6.5 is the Paratransit Cost Model. Exhibit 6.5 FY 2004 Paratransit Cost Model Paratransit
$26.6 M * Allocated Costs * Total FY04 Paratransit costs, which include $2.6 million for administrative overhead allocation. On-Call Service (Strategy C3.l) The Paratransit Services
Department will assume responsibility for oversight and management of existing On-Call services for Plano and Rowlett in FY 2004. On-Call service is provided in areas that do not meet
service planning standards for traditional fixed-route service. Use of demand response vans instead of larger buses operating on a defined schedule results in cost savings for the Agency.
On January 15, 2001, Lakewood On-Call service was implemented, which required the purchase of two additional vans. Paratransit staff has been providing oversight and ATCNancom has been
providing revenue service and vehicle maintenance. During FY 2004, ATCNancom will assume operations and maintenance functions for On-Call service for East Plano, Farmers Branch, and
North Dallas. Three additional vans will be purchased for this additional On-Call service. Seamless Service with Ft. Worth T (Strategy C2.2) Management is working with Paratransit staff
from the T to ensure that riders traveling between the two cities on the Trinity Railway Express are able to utilize each other's paratransit service without complications. PAR-6
Section 7 HOVand General Mobility Index of Exhibits Exhibit 7.1 HOV-Scorecard-Key Perfonnance Indicators HOV-l Exhibit 7.2 Annual HOV Ridership HOV-2 Exhibit 7.3 Interim/Immediate Action
HOV Projects HOV-2 Exhibit 7.4 Map-InterimlImmediate HOV Lanes HOV-3 Exhibit 7.5 Map-Pennanent HOV Lanes HOV-6 Exhibit 7.6 General Mobility Scorecard-Key Perfonnance Indicators HOV-8
Exhibit 7.7 General Mobility-Road Improvement Programs HOV-9 Exhibit 7.8 Projected LAP/eMS Program HOV-9
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility Customer Focus -HOV Overview The purpose of this section is to discuss expected business performance
and major initiatives for DART's High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Transitway services. References to DART's Strategic Plan are included throughout this section. DART's Transit System Plan
calls for implementation of an HOV Transitway program that includes five Interim or Immediate Action, as well as over 110 miles of Permanent HOV Transitways. The Board-approved HOV Transitway
Policy guides the development of the program by establishing the necessary framework to advance the projects through different stages of project development, construction, operations,
enforcement, and maintenance. Currently, DART operates, enforces, and maintains four Interim/Immediate facilities totaling 31.1 miles of HOV lanes. The East R.L. Thornton (1-30) contraflow
HOV lane utilizes movable barriers and operates during weekday peak periods from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. The Stemmons (I-35E), LBJ (1-635), and Marvin D. Love
(US 67) concurrent flow HOV lanes are buffer-separated facilities that are open 24-hours a day in both directions. DART also operates reversible HOV lanes along South R.L. Thornton (I-35E)/Marvin
D. Love (US 67), and at the Stemmons/LBJ freeways interchange with operating hours similar to the 1-30 facility. A map of DART's Interim/Immediate HOV network is included at Exhibit
7.4. Interim HOV projects are funded by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), DART, FTA, and the US Department of Transportation's (DOT) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ)
Program, which is administered by the Regional Transportation Council (RTC) of the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). All facilities are jointly planned and designed
by DART and TxDOT as each agency contributes 16.7% of the construction cost. Federal funds provide the remaining 66.6%. Once the facilities are built, DART is responsible for the operation,
enforcement, and management of the HOV lanes, while maintenance is the joint responsibility ofDART and TxDOT. HOV Scorecard-Key Performance Indicators Exhibit 7.1 highlights HOV Key
Performance Indicators (KPls) in scorecard format. Exhibit?l HOV Scorecard -Key Perfonnance Indicators Indicators FYOIA FY02A FY03B FY03Q3 FY04B FY05B Customer/Quality Indicators Ridershin
(OOOs) 34.0 34.2 34.0 33.4 34.0 34.0 Avg. Weekday Ridershio (OOOs) 104.6 104.5 100.0 102.7 100.0 100.0 Ooerating Sneed Ratio n/a n/a 1.50 1.69 1.50 1.50 Financial/Efficiency Indicators
Expenses -Fully Allocated (M) $4.1 $4.6 $6.0 $4.7 $5.6 $5.5 Subsidy Per Passenger $0.12 $0.13 $0.17 $0.14 $0.17 $0.16 HOV-l
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility HOV Ridership (Strategy C2.3) Exhibit 7.2 compares past HOV ridership with projected HOV ridership.
Exhibit 7.2 Annual HOV Ridership (In Millions) 35.0 -,--------------------------, 34.5+---34.0 33.5 33.0 FY01A FY02A FY038 FY048 FY058 Exhibit 7.3 highlights major capital project budgets
for the Interim/Immediate HOV Projects. The following paragraphs provide a more detailed description of these projects. Exhibit 7.3 Interim/lmmediate Action HOV Projects ($ In Thousands)
FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Total East RL Thornton Extension $297.9 $397.9 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $695.8 Stemmons 300.0 742.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,042.8 LBJ 292.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 292.0 Central (Immediate)
2,121.9 3,141.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5,262.9 SH 114 443.1 460.8 479.2 498.4 1,578.5 3,460.1 IH 635 (LBJ) 2,958.3 3,028.7 2,440.5 1,978.8 5,488.0 15,894.3 IH30 (Turnpike) 596.6 1,656.7 1,723.0
1,791.9 0.0 5,768.2 HOY Maint. Reserve 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 Police Motorcycle Replacements 0.0 0.0 581.2 0.0 0.0 581.2 Dynamic Message Sign along 1-35 300.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 300.0
HOY Stemmons Reversable Gates 1000.0 1,582.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2582.0 TOTALHOV $8.309.8 $11.009.9 $5.223.9 $4.269.1 $7.116.5 $35929.3 HOV-2
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 7.4 Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility 360 TRANSIT SYSTEM PLAN INTERIM /IMMEDIA TE HOV LANES , 􀀻􀀬􀁾􀀢 􀀮􀀬􀀬􀀺􀀻􀀬􀀭􀀺􀁾􀁜􀀡􀁾􀀻􀀮􀀧􀀢􀀭􀀾
􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁵􀀮􀀢􀁽 -. LEGEND: ..... HOV LANES IN OPERATION _ FUTURE HOV LANES HOV-3 ','-. MOBILITY PROGRAMS DEVELOPMENT
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility Stemmons HOV Ramp/Dickerson Blvd. Overpass -Advanced planning activities including schematics design
and environmental studies for two permanent reversible HOV lanes and a drop ramp from the Dickerson Blvd. overpass will be ongoing through the first quarter of FY 2004. This facility
will connect the I-35EHOV lanes to the Trinity Mills LRT Station as well as President George Bush Turnpike service roads. Final design and preparation of construction documents will
commence upon completion of schematics. The ramp will initially serve the Interim, and ultimately the Permanent, Stemmons HOV lanes. Construction completion is expected by mid-2006.
North Central (lnterim/lmmediate) HOV lane -The single reversible HOV lane is the fifth and final Interim/Immediate Action HOV lane of the DART Transit System Plan. Studies to identify
the limits, potential access/egress locations, and coordination with the North Central LRT and the US 75 reversible HOV lane between LBJ and Parker Road in Plano are complete. Project
Schematics and Environmental Assessment (EA) documents are also complete. Completion of the initial phase of the single reversible lane, with temporary connection to 1-635 is contingent
upon resolution of the required number and type of the HOV lanes. Average weekday ridership is projected at 13,000. Ramp connections at the Arapaho Center Station and Glenville Drive
are scheduled for 2005. Subject to the reconstruction schedule of the US 75/1-635 Interchange, estimated completion of the final phase, which includes a direct HOV connection ramp to
the permanent LBJ HOV lanes (budgeted as a Permanent HOV in Exhibit 7.5), is 2007. Transit Partnership Program (Strategies Sl.6; Sl.8) -In order to take advantage of the Transit Partnership
Program offered by the NCTCOG, studies are presently underway to identify potential locations for additional and/or expanded interim/immediate action HOV lanes. This program was initiated
to aid in the region's plan to comply with the air quality standards requirements by November 15, 2007. Several potential candidate projects have been identified, and their feasibility
is being evaluated. A final proposal will be made for consideration by all involved agencies later this year. Regional Value Pricing (Strategy 1.6) -A regional value or Congestion Pricing
study is underway to evaluate the feasibility of charging single-occupant vehicles to use the existing and future HOV lanes throughout the region. This federally-funded project is led
by the NCTCOG, and DART and TxDOT are among the project partners. Federal rules mandate that a study of this type be conducted prior to testing and/or implementing this concept. The
study will be completed during the second quarter of FY04. Permanent HOV Transitways -DART's Transit System Plan calls for implementation of 110 miles of permanent HOV transitways. DART's
share of the construction costs of these facilities is 10%. A map ofthe permanent HOV projects is included at Exhibit 7.5. HOV-4
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility Notice ofBoard Commitment -The Board's current HOV Policy commits DART to fund up to 100% of the construction
cost of the permanent LBJ, Stemmons, and North Central Expressway HOV transitways, if Federal funding is not available. This funding is not contemplated in this Financial Plan. IfDART
is required to provide additional funding for these HOV projects, it will have a significant impact on the capital expansion and financing assumptions included in this Plan. Major Investment
Studies -A Major Investment Study (MIS) for the 1-30 Freeway Corridor, east of Downtown Dallas, was initiated in 2001. All mode alternatives and alignments within the corridor are being
studied and evaluated to arrive at a Locally Preferred Investment Strategy for the corridor. The MIS will be completed by December 2003. SH 114 Permanent HOV Transitways -With the completion
of the Northwest corridor Major Investment Study, DART is advancing the permanent, barrier-separated HOV lanes along SH 114 from SH 183 to the Dallas County line as identified by the
Locally Preferred Alternative. Advanced planning activities including schematic designs and environmental studies will be in progress through FY04, followed by final design and preparation
of construction documents through FY08. The construction phase is expected to be from FY09 to FYI2. 1-30 HOV Turnpike -DART is advancing activities to implement a single reversible HOV
lane along 1-30, west of the Dallas CBD. Preparation of the scope of work for the project is complete and advanced planning efforts are underway. High-Five -Reconstruction of the I-635/US
75 Interchange (High-Five) is underway and expected to be complete by January 2007. The interchange will have five levels of roadway, and the fifth level will be a reversible HOV lane
connecting the existing 1-635 HOV lane with the US 75 HOV lane that is under design. The project includes an HOV T-ramp at TI Boulevard along with main lanes and frontage road construction.
LBJ Corridor -This project is a joint effort between TxDOT, DART, and other partners in the region. The LBJ Corridor project is comprised of two sections: the east section, which includes
the Mesquite section (US 75 to US 80), and the west section (from US 75 to Luna Road west of I-35E). The west section includes a tunnel from west of Midway to east of Preston. This project
will be designed and constructed in various phases. Target completion is FYI2. HOV-5
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 7.5 Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility TRANSIT SYSTEM PLAN PERMANENT HOVLANES LEGEND:DART PARTICIPATION '--_....1 NO DART PARTICIPATION
HOV-6 cJij. f'''c, ',., MOBILITY PROGRAMS IJEVELOPMENT
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility Ensure 1-30 HOY Lane Opens on Time (Strategy Cl.l) In April 1997, DART privatized the operation and
maintenance of the Barrier Transfer Vehicles (BTVs) that are in use on the 1-30 HOV Lane to ensure that the facility is open on-time every day. Since privatization, the HOV lane has
been open an average of at least 99% of the time. The purpose of this indicator is to determine if the facility is open as scheduled for the morning and evening operating hours. Operating
Speed Ratio (OSR) -In FY 2003, a new Key Performance Indicator (KPI) was added to the Business Plan called Operating Speed Ratio. This efficiency ratio is defined as the average operating
speed of vehicles using the HOV lane as compared to the speed of vehicles on the freeway main lanes. Management's objective is to increase this ratio above the set 50 percent target.
To-date, we have been able to exceed the set target of 1.5. New Barrier Moving Machines Improving Quality and Efficiency -DART is in the process of procuring two new barrier transfer
vehicles at a cost of $2 million. The BTVs will be delivered in FY 2003 and FY 2004. This is expected to have a positive impact on operating costs. Stemmons HOY Gates to Improve Safety
(Strategy Cl.3l This $2.4 million project will fund the installation of an automatic gate system for opening and closing each of the three ramps used on the Stemmons Reversible HOV Lane.
Engineering schematics for the project have been completed. Installation of these gates will eliminate the current procedure of manually placing pylons next to freeway traffic moving
at high speeds. This project will be 80% funded by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). HOY Service has Lowest Subsidy Per Passenger HOV is DART's most cost-effective mode of transit
at $0.17 per passenger trip in FY04. Subsidy per passenger is projected to decrease in FY 2004 relative to the incremental number of passengers in future years. HOV-7
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -HOY and General Mobility Customer Focus -General Mobility Overview and Vanpool Scorecard DART's General Mobility programs include
carpool matching, vanpool operations, and support for local Transportation Management Associations (TMAs). General Mobility also includes road improvement programs such as the Local
Assistance Program/Congestion Management System (LAP/CMS), the Transit Principal Arterial Street System program (Transit PASS), the Transportation System Management (TSM) program, and
the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) program. Exhibit 7.6 highlights Vanpool Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in scorecard format. Exhibit 7.6 General Mobility (Vanoool) -Key
Perfonnance Indicators Indicators FYOlA FY02A FY03B FY0303 FY04B FYOSB Customer/Quality Indicators Ridershio 344 360 409 409 475 495 Nwnber OfVanoools 66 72 80 79 85 90 FinanciallEfficiency
Indicators Revenues $0.7 $0.8 $0.8 $0.8 $1.0 $1.0 Exoenses -Fullv Allocated (M) $1.1 $0.9 $1.3 1.3 $1.2 $1.2 $1.3 Subsidv Per Passenger $1.29 $0.50 $1.09 $1.15 $0.56 $0.55 DART currently
offers 8-and I5-person vans through a contract with VPSI, Inc. This program is partially funded by the NCTCOG through a Congestion Mitigation!Air Quality grant. NCTCOG provides funding
to DART that covers 40% of the total cost of operations. An additional 50% of the total cost of operations is paid by the vanpool customers themselves through fuel expenditures and a
flat $488.50 per month per vanpool fare, paid to DART. DART recovers approximately 90% of the total cost of operations, with the bulk of DART's expense being in-kind expenditures and
staffing. Management's goal is to grow the program from 80 vans today to 85 vans in FY 2004. To accomplish this, management is instituting a vanpool incentive program, based upon customer
focus group input. A newsletter and e-mail communication network is also being implemented to better utilize the current vanpool customer base as a recruiting tool. General Mobility
-Road Improvement Programs The Road Improvement Programs shown in Exhibit 7.7 represent all ofthe Board-approved road programs with member cities and state agencies. Road improvement
programs are recorded as non-operating expenses in the Budget and Financial Plan because DART does not take an ownership interest in most ofthese mobility improvements. HOY-8
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility Exhibit 7.7 General Mobility -Road Improvement Programs (In Millions) FYOI FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06
LAP/CMS $9.2 $9.4 $8.1 $8.2 $0.0 $0.0 Transit PASS 1.0 0.8 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 TSM (includes street repair) 0.3 0.4 1.1 4.2 2.1 2.1 Regional ITS 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 DART/TxDOT ITS 0.0
0.0 0.8 2.9 0.0 0.0 Total $10.5 $10.7 $13.8 $15.9 $2.7 $2.1 LAP/eMS The current LAP/CMS agreement returns 15% of DART sales taxes collected in a member city to that city until a contract
is awarded for rail construction in that city. The revised program ends for all member cities in FY 2004 regardless of construction dates. Irving is included at a 7.5% funding level
because it is served by commuter rail. DART accrues the appropriate LAP/CMS amount at the beginning of each fiscal year. Cities then request LAP/CMS funds, as necessary, for projects
which enhance transit. On average, DART maintains a payable balance of two to three years of the annual annual allotment. Exhibit 7.8 reflects the current LAP/CMS payable to each member
city, projected FY 2004 LAP/CMS allocations, and the final projected year of LAP/CMS payments. The projected FY 2004 LAP/CMS allocation is the amount to be expensed in FY 2004. Exhibit
7.8 Projected LAP/CMS Program In Thousands 6/30/03 Projected LAP/CMS Member LAP/CMS FY 2004 Program City Balance Allocation Ends Addison $3,424 $1,290 2004 Carrollton 8,738 2,409 2004
Cockrell Hill 126 5 2004 Dallas County* 52 0 n/a Farmers Branch 3,719 1,600 2004 Garland 2,848 0 n/a Glenn Heights 66 17 2004 Irving 15,971 2,512 2004 Plano 3,090 0 n/a Richardson 584
0 n/a Rowlett 1,048 365 2004 University Park* 5 0 n/a Total $39,674 $8,199 * Balances 􀁲􀁥􀁭􀁡􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁾 from 􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁬 LAP 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁭􀀮 HOV-9
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility Transit PASS -The Transit PASS program is a $115 million program funded by DART ($30 million), TxDOT/FHWA
($55 million), and member cities and counties ($30 million). No new money is being allocated to thisprogram; however, approximately $3.5 million of DART's portion of this program remains unspent from prior years and will be rolled forward. TSM-Total TSM funding has been established
at approximately $11.6 million over the next five years. TSM funding is available to repair streets damaged by buses and for minor enhancements such as intersection modifications, bus
pads, and traffic studies/signal modifications. Funding for the street repair component was authorized by the Board in FY 1998. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) is an element
of DART's Transit System Plan. It includes Smart Vehicle, Smart Traveler, and Smart Intermodal Systems. DART is working with all other regional transportation providers, cities, counties,
airports, and national organizations in the development of a Regional Comprehensive ITS Program for the Dallas/Fort Worth Region. The purpose of this program is to review and, if necessary,
update the completed and in-progress ITS Plans for compliance with the ITS national architecture for interoperability and funding purposes. The program is aimed at prioritized implementation
of projects to improve transportation throughout the region focused on ITS elements for the metropolitan areas including: Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS), Advanced Public
Transportation Systems (APTS), and Advanced Traffic Management Systems (ATMS). The goal of this project is to facilitate information exchange between the various ITS systems and to create
a seamless intermodal transportation infrastructure across jurisdictional boundaries. Concurrently, work is underway to develop the Smart Traveler and the Smart Intermodal Systems of
the DART ITS Plan. DART's share of the program is estimated to be $1.2 million through FY 2005. An additional $2.8 million is programmed through FY 2005 for ITS programs to be implemented
in conjunction with TxDOT. As part of the ITS program, DART's development of the Vehicle Business System (i.e., Smart Vehicle) component of the program is ongoing. This effort will be
rolled into the overall DART ITS program, but will be funded by DART and the FTA. Please refer to the Business Processes section for more information on this program. Regional Comprehensive
ITS Program -This program will include the planning, design, construction, implementation, and operation of real-time traveler and transportation system information, from which partners
in the region are able to share and provide transit users with traffic information. This much needed exchange will also aid the region in dealing with major incidents. This project will
be comprised of two phases: Video and Data Regional ITS Project and Software Development Project. HOV-to
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility DART ITS Plan -DART's ITS Program will include smart vehicles, smart travelers, and smart intermodal
systems. Ongoing work for Smart Vehicles was incorporated in the DART ITS Plan while the entire ITS effort will be coordinated with the 2030 Transit System Plan. The ITS Plan focuses
on the existing transportation facilities, infrastructures, and operations of DART. It identifies the current status of ITS deployment within and outside of the Agency, defines nearterm
ITS initiatives to meet current Agency needs, identifies system deployment costs, presents an internal ITS Architecture which is consistent with the National ITS Architecture, and incorporates
an implementation phasing plan to guide the deployment of the recommended nearterm initiatives. These initiatives also position DART as the dominant provider of public transportation
services to support regional ITS initiatives involving multiple transportation providers and inter-modal initiatives. Completion date for this project is expected at the end of 2003.
Transit Signal Priority Study for LRT in Dallas CBD -DART is working with the City of Dallas to improve LRT operations in the CBD area without significantly degrading vehicular traffic
flow. DART's desire is to prevent accumulation of trains in downtown Dallas stations and have LRT travel between stations without stops. This project will also provide recommendations
to improve performance of DART LRT operations. Estimated completion date for this study is FY 2004. HOV-II
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) BLANK PAGE HOV-12 Customer Focus -HOV and General Mobility
Section 8 Business Processes, Employee, and Stakeholder Strategies Index of Exhibits Exhibit 8.1 Strategic Initiatives to Improve Business Processes........ ... ... ... ... BP-l Exhibit
8.2 Scorecard-Improve Business Processes and Information BP-l Exhibit 8.3 Sales Taxes for Operations BP-2 Exhibit 8.4 Administrative Ratio BP-3 Exhibit 8.5 FY 2004 DART Police Deployment
Plan BP-9 Exhibit 8.6 Strategic Initiatives to Increase Stakeholder Satisfaction BP-12 Exhibit 8.7 Rating of DART's Performance BP-13 ,..
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes Business Processes, Employee, and Stakeholder Strategies Overview DART's "balanced scorecard" approach to strategic planning
focuses on the three groups that the DART Board of Directors identified as key to DART's success: the customer, the employee, and the stakeholder. The strategic initiatives identified
within each core group center on continuously improving processes, technology, and communication to achieve DART's goals of attaining higher customer satisfaction, increased ridership,
and lower subsidy per passenger. The purpose of this section is to outline DART's strategies, key performance measurements, and major initiatives for the management objectives: (C4)
Improve Business Processes and Information; (E1) Promote Employee Development and Alignment; and (Sl) Build Relationships with Stakeholders. Improving Business Processes and Information
The Agency's vision states, "Our innovative accomplishments benchmark DART as a transportation leader." DART has worked diligently to accomplish this vision and has been recognized in
the industry as a transportation leader. The commitment to performance excellence and continuous process improvement is ongoing and keeps us on track to make this vision a reality by
developing efficient processes that are comparable to best practices used in the private sector. Exhibit 8.1 from DART's Strategic Plan highlights the key strategies for this management
objective: Exhibit 8.1 Strategic Initiatives to Improve Business Processes Improve Business Processes and Information (C4) 1. Continuously improve business processes and supporting technology
2. Provide critical business infonnation to employees 3. Develop strategic partnerships with suppliers (fuel, parts, services) 4. Use surveys to understand customers', employees', and
stakeholders' needs 5. Benchmark perfonnance inside and outside oftransit Exhibit 8.2 is a scorecard ofthe Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for key business processes in scorecard format.
Exhibit 8.2 Scorecard -Improve Business Processes and Information Key Performance Measurements -La22in2 Indicators Measurement FY01A FY02A FY03B FY033Q FY04B FYOSB Sales Taxes for Operations
59.6% 77.5% 75.4% 84.4% 76.1% 72.9% Administrative Ratio 11.5% 11.2% 11.7% 10.6% 9.1% 10.0% BP-l
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes Manage the Percentage ofSales Taxes Used for Operating Expenses -Sales taxes are DART's primary source of funding. The sales-tax-for-opera
tions calculation measures the percentage of sales tax that is required to cover those operating costs not covered by other sources (i.e., operating revenues and interest income). Management
strives to keep this measure as low as possible. This measure tends to fluctuate depending on the opening of new services. As new service comes online, the percentage increases, and
then begins to trend downward as the growth of sales tax revenue outpaces the growth of operating expenses. The measurement is at an alltime high in FY 2003 due to the current recession.
As the amount of sales taxes needed for operations becomes smaller, financing capacity for additional capital expansion grows. Refer to the Financial Plan section for a further discussion.
Exhibit 8.3 compares the percentage of sales tax used for operating expenses between the Approved FY 2002 Financial Plan and the Proposed FY 2004 Financial Plan. Exhibit 8.3 Sales Taxes
for Operations .._-----_._----80.0% 75.0% 70.0% 65.0% 60.0% 55.0% 50.0% 45.0%1 40.0% L---.. ---..􀁔􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁾 FY01A FY02 A FY03 B FY04 B FY05 B Minimize Administrative Costs
-Exhibit 8.4 compares the administrative ratio for the period FY 2001 to FY 2005. The administrative ratio measures administrative costs less administrative revenues (primarily advertising
income) as a percentage of direct costs. This definition was modified in FY 2000 to reflect advertising income, which may be used to offset advertising costs per Board policy. As DART
becomes more efficient with its administrative processes, this ratio will improve (i.e., decrease). The objective is for the percentage change in administrative costs to be smaller than
the percentage change in direct costs. The ratio has floated around 11.5%, ranging from 11.2% to 11.7% for the last three years. In FY 2004 the ratio will take a fairly dramatic drop
to 9.1 %. This drop is attributable to the reductions made to administrative expenses during the FY 2004 Budget process. BP-2
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 8.4 Administrative Ratio Business Processes 14.0% -,------.-,.----------.....,.---.....,.----,-------,--,--..,.." 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0%
2.0% 0.0% FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 Major Technology Projects to Improve Quality and Efficiency (Strategy C4.1) DART has made and plans to continue to make strategic investments
in technology and communications infrastructure to enhance DART's service quality and improve efficiencies. The following sections describe the major technology advancements and future
projects. InfOrmation Technology (IT) -Since the completion of the conversion project from old mainframe technology to newer client server technology in 1999, work on fully integrating
major systems to allow for seamless and automated operations has been the primary objective of the Information Technology Division. With the implementation of open systems architecture,
which allows integration between different core business applications, DART's technology teams have implemented services that have automated numerous business tasks resulting in improved
efficiency and effectiveness. Utilization of web technology has allowed the development of DART's internal communications and business automation intranet portal called DARTnet. DARTnet
has become the central focus of daily business operations with all major and routine Agency communications published via this venue. DARTnet also serves as a central portal for all business
transactions and core reporting of DART activity. Following are a few of the new automated activities that replaced costly paper and manual routing processes: • Invoice processing workflow
• Procurement card transaction processing workflow • Training class registration BP-3
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes • Timesheet automation • Open emollment automation • Budget system and reporting • Employee self-service Central to all major
technology systems designed for business operations is the collection and mass storage of data. DART has implemented a system called Storage Area Networks (SANs) that will meet data
storage requirements for years to come. The data storage system, when fully loaded with disk drives, will have the capacity to store over 14 terabytes of data (14 trillion bytes of data).
This new technology not only provides centralized data storage but also provides complete backups of all data and operating systems. Customer Service has been enhanced with the advent
of DARTorg. DART's Internet home page has been an unqualified success, with the number of unique visitors growing 47% during the first nine months of FY03 to approximately 3,000 unique
visitors daily. The home page not only provides a vast amount of information about DART and its services, but also provides interactive information portals for vendors and the general
public. Vendors can register their companies for procurement activities and access their invoice payment records. The general public can plan their own trip on the DART network through
the new automated DART Trip Planner and print out trip customized itineraries and timetables for bus, light rail, and commuter rail services. The trip planner is utilized by approximately
one-third of all visitors to DARTorg, making it the website's most popular feature. Data analysis and reporting has been improved and expanded since the implementation of client/server
technology and utilization of Oracle as the core database. By using data analysis tools such as Crystal Reports, Excel Pivot Tables, and Cognos, reporting on key performance indicators
is more timely and thorough. Initial development of informational data warehouses has begun and will be researched throughout the coming months to determine the cost effectiveness and
impact on Agency data reporting. New wireless network technology has been deployed in our Materials Management warehouses, utilizing new bar-coding and handheld material control data
collection devices. Wireless networking technology has also been installed in the 1401 Pacific Headquarters to support mobile computing for meetings and presentations, and for areas
where network wiring is not available. As this technology matures, it will save thousands of dollars annually in network wiring infrastructure changes and upgrades. A major strategic
initiative for FY04 will be the development of an IT systems and Agency departmental Disaster Recovery/Business Continuity Plan. One phase of this project will be an in-house effort
to identify key business processes and strategic recovery directives for each process. A second phase will be an analysis of disaster recovery and operations alternatives for the DART
network and telecommunications operations center. BP-4
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes Another major initiative for FY04 through FY05 will be the upgrading of desktop computing and laptop systems. This upgrade
is behind schedule due to budget reductions in previous years. Beginning in FY04, one half of DART's computers will be upgraded to new processing speeds and operating systems. The upgrade
program will be accomplished with part-time and in-house staff. The remaining systems will be upgraded in FY05. These and other technology improvements over the past three years have
proven to save the Agency money and to make us more efficient and effective in the delivery ofDART services. DART has an Information and Analysis Leadership Team composed of senior executives
to guide and monitor progress in this area. The following sections describe the major technology projects: Vehicle Business Systems (VBS) -This project will integrate onboard technology
on all of DART's vehicles, including: buses, light rail cars, commuter rail cars, paratransit vans, and DART police vehicles. The integrated systems include a central processing unit
(CPU), fareboxes, passenger counters, vehicle destination signs, and annunciators. The systems are managed and controlled by the operators through a state-of-the-art touch screen that
serves as a central control center for programming and collection and management of critical business data. DART has been able to integrate off-the-shelf products, that are readily available
in the marketplace, into a comprehensive VBS design that will improve customer service, provide timely business information, and simplify maintenance and operations of these systems.
Management has utilized innovative procurement practices (approved by the FTA) for this project. Rather than scoping the technology needed, DART identified the business requirements
that the system needed to fulfill and identified a desired system design concept. DART then contracted with companies to fully develop and test the systems before the final phase of
the procurement and installation to ensure that the system to be delivered meets all of DART's business needs. DART and the Fort Worth T have partnered to design, develop, procure, install,
and manage the VBS to provide customers with a seamless system within the region. The VBS is also integral to the Smart Passenger element of the regional Intelligent Transportation System.
The VBS project is being deployed in a three-phased approach: Paratransit VBS, fixed-route VBS, and fareboxes (with an option for smart card readers). The Paratransit VBS system has
been operational on all DART paratransit vehicles since January 2001. This tool replaces the operators' printed manifest and allows them to perform their route electronically through
the use of an interactive touch-screen and wireless data communications. In addition, the operator can use the VBS to communicate with the dispatcher; therefore, significantly reducing
voice radio traffic. The VBS mapping feature allows the dispatcher to locate vehicles and track route route performance (early, late, on-time), which improves schedule adherence. BP-5
􀁾􀂷􀀬􀀤􀀱􀁬􀁴􀀮􀁖􀀧 Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes The fixed-route VBS testing was completed in June 2002. The final phase of the procurement has been
delayed due to financial constraints. Some fixed-route VBS features include: • Video cameras on all revenue vehicles for increased safety, security, use in accident claims, and future
plans for DART police to receive real-time images in patrol cars. • Real-time information and data transmission utilizing the touch screen control head with Computer Aided Drafting and
Design (CADD)-quality mapping of routes, real-time text messaging, and schedule adherence information. • Advanced touch screens with CADD-quality graphics capabilities that will provide
vehicle operators the ability to program and manage information for the destination signs, fareboxes and smart cards, view video images throughout the vehicles, send and receive real-time
messages from dispatch, field supervisors, and other field personnel. • Integrated electronic fare payment system throughout DART and Fort Worth T revenue services with opportunities
for further regional applications. • Accurate passenger counting by stop (saving $500,000 per year in passenger counting services). • Daily ridership information for light rail. • Accurate
on-time performance information by bus stop that can be used to modify schedules to improve schedule adherence. • Real-time schedule adherence information that makes it possible to transmit
information to stations and transit centers to let customers know when the next bus or train will be arriving. • Direct link accessibility to the Customer Service Center where complaints
can be handled real-time, thus reducing the number of complaint action items sent to the Transportation Department. This will allow supervisors to spend more time responding to other
complaints and expedite responses to customers. • Accurate on-time performance information by operator. • Daily passenger mile data (which is superior to using revenue miles and passengers
passengers alone). • Exception reporting for dispatchers and field supervisors so they only see buses that are not on schedule or are off route. • Streamlined operator check-in procedures.
Management expects to move forward in FY04 with a limited VBS for light rail that includes automated voice announcements, automatic passenger counters, and Global Positioning System
(GPS) capability. The procurement of the fare box portion of this project is scheduled for approval during the first quarter of FY 2004. Installation is planned for the third quarter
of FY 2004. The fareboxes will have a ticket-issuing unit and magnetic reader. The procurement includes an option to purchase integrated fareboxes that communicate with the Intelligent
Vehicle Network (lVN) and Radio Systems, and are smart card ready. The benefits of this system are: BP-6
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes • Replaces a 17-year old farebox system, which should reduce maintenance road calls. • Allows DART to provide a day pass
and other longer term pass options such as 3, 5, 7-day and monthly passes through programmable media that can be used in numerous ways to improve marketability oftransit services and
convenience to the customer. • Ability to validate all passes and reduce fraud. • Significantly enhances average fare and ridership information to assist the Agency with pricing decisions
for companies and customers using monthly and annual passes. • Reduces pass distribution costs. • Provides DART with the flexibility to consider future fare structure changes. The DART
Police Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) and Record Management System (RMS) are planned for procurement in the third quarter of FY 2004. The procurement includes an option for a Mobile Data
Communication (MDC) system with GPS locators. These integrated systems will provide relevant, timely, and accurate information to all users. In turn, this will increase productivity,
reduce response time, and provide increased security to our customers and Agency personnel in detecting emerging incident patterns, correlating suspects with incidents, constructing
victim and suspect profiles, identifying potential incident targets, tracking and forecasting incident trends, and developing mandated statistical summaries and exception reports to
meet regional, state, and federal requirements. The benefits of these systems are: • Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD): ./Graphical representation of service area, incidents, and available
units ./Location history including hazard information ./Silent dispatch mode ./Unit recommendation • Record Management System (RMS): ./Event Tracking ./Report Tracking ./Property and
Evidence Tracking ./Citations and Warning Tracking ./Subpoena Tracking • Mobile Data Communication (MDC): ./Mobile Data Unit installed in each car ./Portable Data Unit for each officer
./Exchange data between dispatch and field units ./Self-initiated traffic stops or incidents ./Crime Computer Interface. Ability to access regional databases and TLETS/NCIC from the
field. The total cash reserve for VBS in the FY04 Plan is $11.7 million. Since the fareboxes are 80% funded by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the net impact on the Financial
Plan is less than $4.0 million. BP-7
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes Upgrade 0(900 MHz Radio System (Strategies Cl.3; C4.l) -The 900 MHz radio system has been in service since the early 1990s
and has not been significantly enhanced since initial installation. In May 2001, a study was conducted to determine what the Agency would need to do to support the existing 900 MHz system
platform for the next ten years, through 2011. Recommendations given in the study suggested replacement for some portions of the system over the next few years in order to achieve the
ten-year operational goal. We have adopted this replacement schedule by replacing inexpensive subsystems and increasing in-house maintenance activities to offset equipment failures.
The replacement plan has yielded some increases in reliability. The next step in the process is to conduct a study of our overall future communications needs. This study will look at
the 900 MHz system as well as the 800 MHz system. This study is included in the FY04 capital program. program. Upon completion of this study, an assessment will be made ofthe financial
resources available to support the various elements recommended as part of this service assessment review. We anticipate an approximate seven-year timeline to plan, design, and build
a new radio system or systems to satisfy DART's future communications needs. This plan is supported by our Financial Plan and is part of the overall $15.3 million communications reserve
through FY 2010. Provide a Safe/Secure Service (Strategy C1.3) DART Police Deployment Plan -A deployment team, made up of DART Police command staff and representatives from the Finance,
Internal Audit, and Planning & Development departments, was implemented in FY 2002 to address the following: • Develop meaningful information analysis that can support DART Police deployment
decisions; • Assure the development of "standards of coverage" for each assignment type, including bus, light rail, commuter rail, HOV lanes, passenger facilities, and the CBD Transitway
Mall; • Develop an initial plan for appropriate coordination between the various security resources, including transit police officers, contract security guards, fare inspectors (if
appropriate), security equipment (cameras), and other DART staff; • Identify an initial plan for desired DART Police staffing by assignment type; • Identify equipment needs (particularly
vehicle needs) to support the DART Police deployment plan; • Identify proposed mechanisms and procedures for clear assignment of duties for officers, security guards, and others, together
with appropriate monitoring of assignment completion; and • Identify staff and resource needs to support ongoing deployment analysis within the DART .Police Department. BP-8
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes The deployment plan resulting from the efforts of the deployment team will be used to prepare officer assignments. The deployment
reflects the following key elements: • A shift from functionally-based divisions to geographic-based divisions • Definition of near-tenn and longer-tenn geographic division boundaries
based on transit facilities, incidents, and mobility of officers • Standards-of-coverage that clearly define the patrol objectives for both rail and patrol-type assignments • An incident-based
allocation of officers by geographic area, time-of-day, and day-of-week • Initiation of an extraboard of officers to assure that all assignments are covered • Transition to ten-hour
shifts for both rail and patrol assignments • Initiation of "pocket schedules" for light rail patrol assignments to provide for improved coverage and police visibility on the light rail
system • Use of Fare Inspectors to ensure that users of the DART system have purchased purchased appropriate fare media Exhibit 8.5 is the FY 2004 Deployment Plan: Exhibit 8.5 FY 2004
DART Police Deployment Plan Positions Budl!eted Patrol 135 HOV 24 Special Assignment 8 Chiefs 2 Lieutenants 5 Sergeants 19 Civilian Staff 24 Fare Inspectors 20 Total Positions 237 DART
Safe Work Practices Policy -Thirteen standard operating procedures (SOP) were implemented on an Agency-wide basis as part of the DART Safe Work Practices Policy in FY 2001. The policy
voluntarily adopts the OSHA standards as DART's minimum standard for safe work practice. A comprehensive audit of those SOPs is being conducted during FY 2003. In FY 2004, the Safety
Section of the Risk Management Division (Safety) will focus on the audit findings, revise SOPs, and monitor implementation of accepted recommendations. A follow-up audit will be conducted
during the fourth quarter of FY 2004 to measure improvement with respect to the findings. BP-9
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes Although the audit has not been completed, some initial and recurrent training deficiencies have been identified and are
being addressed with the respective departments. Transportation Department supervisors are an important resource for accident scene investigation and safety monitoring in the field.
DART's Safety staff is certified to teach the u.S. Department of Transportation accident investigation curriculum. Training has been limited in FY 2003 due to budgetary constraints,
but the four-day course will be recommended to all Transportation Field Supervisors to enhance their on-scene evidence gathering and interpretation skills during FY 2004. Safety will
continue to advocate increased safety training activities for the Field Supervisory positions. Improving Employee Productivity (Strategy C3.2) Management introduced an incentive bonus
program along with alternative duty work rules in FY 2000 to reduce unscheduled absences and workers' compensation costs. During the first year, the program paid $375 per quarter to
eligible hourly staff having less than 8 hours of unscheduled absences in a quarter. The payment increased to $750 per quarter in FY 2001, and remains at that level through FY 2004.
Lost time resulting from workers' compensation claims continuesto be a critical measure for the Transportation Department. In FY 1999, lost work days due to workers' compensation claims averaged 14.2 per operator. A trend analysis oflost work days
after the FY 2000 initiatives were implemented indicate a reduction to 5.7 work days in FY 2001; an increase to 7.5 days per operator occurred in FY 2002. FY 2003 results through the
third quarter total 4.7 days per operator; a 60% decrease as compared to FY 2002. The bonus incentive and alternative duty programs have been successful in the Maintenance Department.
These programs have allowed the Maintenance Department to reduce its number of lost work days and return employees to modified work at a rate approximating 50%. Over twothirds of the
eligible Maintenance employees qualified for the bonus in FY 2003. The result has been an increase in productivity of 13% which has reduced the incremental cost of delivering services.
Maintaining a Thriving Internal Environment <Management Objective E.1) DART management is committed to continuously improving service quality, customer satisfaction, and employee satisfaction
even as it implements efficiencies to address current economic challenges. Following the example of successful business models, during FY 2003 the Agency took steps to flatten its structure
and streamline business processes. BP-IO
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes The Human Resources Department was restructured to increase its effectiveness in delivering core services and strengthen
its strategic workforce planning capabilities. The trend of moving key personnel transactions from a paper-based to web-based format will continue through FY 2004 as time and attendance
reporting, personnel requisition, job application and selection, and performance planning and appraisal move to Agency intranet workflow applications, resulting in significant savings
of office supplies and employee time. Strategic initiatives planned for FY 2004 will reinforce DART's vision of a thriving internal environment and enhance its position as a benchmark
transit agency. The initiatives include: • Development and implementation of a succession planning process, ensuring availability of candidates to fill future leadership vacancies; •
Expanded identification of job-specific competencies and their application to employee selection, promotion, and development; • Development and implementation of an Agency-wide career
advancement policy covering both managerial and non-managerial tracks; • Expanded use of statistical measurement and reporting within administrative areas to reinforce alignment of individual
performance with Agency-wide indicators; • Redesign of health and welfare benefits to a consumer-driven health care structure, allowing better control of future cost escalation while
optimizing employee satisfaction; • Design and implementation of an Employee Satisfaction Index as an Agency key performance indicator; • Exploration of performance standards and appraisals
for hourly employees. Promote Employee Development and Alignment (Strategies C4.2; El.2) -Employee training and development is more a priority than ever. In addition to leadership development
opportunities identified as part of the succession planning process, DART will initiate an orientation program for new supervisors and managers during the first quarter of FY 2004. Individual
development plans will continue to be stressed as part of performance management planning, and Human Resources staff will review the plans for employees whose performance is rated below
expectation in the preceding period. The Tuition Reimbursement Program will continue to be available for employees who wish to pursue educational opportunities. Competency gaps identified
through the Managers Training and Development Needs Survey, including business writing skills and project management, will be addressed through creative, cost-effective strategies. Increased
collaboration among DART's decentralized training functions will produce a new core curriculum for customer contact employees by the end of the first quarter. Many measures taken to
ensure productivity and cost-effectiveness in FY 2004, especially the priority on career and competency development, will support morale as employees adapt to a leaner workforce and
budget. In addition, management will give renewed emphasis to continuous communication with all employees and find opportunities to recognize and celebrate achievements. BP-ll
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes Additionally, a pilot program to support this initiative is being rolled out at our East Dallas Bus Operating facility in
the 4th quarter of FY03. This program strives to establish joint operating goals among all team members, salaried and hourly alike, within this facility (Maintenance, Transportation,
Materials Management, and Finance) to further improve the performance of this work unit. The intent is to roll this program out to the other work areas through FY04 and FYOS. Promote
Excellence Through WorkfOrce Diversity (Strategy El.6) -DART maintains a strategic advantage by encouraging a culture of inclusiveness and respect for all people. Management's strong
belief that diversity is a catalyst for future organizational success has resulted in a more positive climate and a heightened commitment to foster an environment that acknowledges and
values the uniqueness of each individual. DART's workforce is multi-cultural and consists of over 30 different ethnic groups. The Department of Diversity and Economic Opportunity (DEO)
serves as the "change agent" and promoter of diversity throughout the Agency. DEO is charged with the responsibility of developing, implementing, and monitoring aggressive Equal Employment
Opportunity, Affirmative Action, and Diversity programs for the Agency which recognize, respect, and advocate utilization of the full spectrum of diverse knowledge, skills, and abilities
of people and businesses in the community and service area. DART will continue to implement, monitor, and carry out the legislative, executive, and operational mandates for equal employment
opportunity. Stakeholders' Perceptions are Critical Exhibit 8.6 from DART's Strategic Plan highlights the key strategies for this management objective. Exhibit 8.6 Strategic Initiatives
to Increase Stakeholder Satisfaction Increase Stakeholder Satisfaction DART is a welcomed intel!ral part of the community Build Relationships with Stakeholders (S1.) 1. Obtain timely
public input on DART's service projects 􀁾􀀮 Effectively communicate with stakeholders 􀁾􀀮 Maximize Federal funding 􀁾􀀮 Address requirements of Bond Holders 5. Leverage Federal and
State legislative resources 6. Identify and develop strategic partnerships 7. Pursue transit-oriented development opportunities 8. Maintain legal and regulatory compliance 9. Create
DfMlWBE economic development opportunity 10. Expand service area BP-12
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes Using SurveyS to understand customers' and stakeholders' needs (Strategy C4.4) -DART traditionally perfonns a perfonnance
survey every two years. Exhibit 8.7 compares the FY 2002 survey with prior years. The Exhibit shows that DART is making progress in most areas, according to the public. R 1997 2002 wdoes
DA TD M Reliable/dependable public transportation 7.6 7.7 8.4 Developing light rail 7.5 7.5 8.1 Cost-efficient public transportation 7.4 7.7 7.8 Good customer service 7.1 7.4 8.2 Keeping
the public informed 7.0 6.9 7.8 Mobility through state-of-the-art system 7.0 7.1 7.9 Responsive to public's needs 7.0 7.3 7.9 Effective use of taxpayers' dollars 6.2 6.8 7.8 Providin
a safe transit s stem n/a 7.8 7.7 Employer Market Key to Increasing Ridership (Strategies Ci.4: C2.4) -Targeting the employer market has proven to be an invaluable strategy in generating
ridership since 73% of DART trips are work-related. DART currently has 132 companies emolled in in one ofDART's employer pass programs, up 36% from last year. Changes have been made
to DART's prepaid pass programs over the last year: the E-Pass program has been revamped and is now the DART Annual Pass Program featuring Platinum and Gold passes for companies choosing
to purchase passes for 100% of their employees and Silver and Bronze passes for businesses with less than 100% participation. Another major revision is the elimination of selling annual
passes to businesses on a prorated calendar. This allows companies to purchase a full 12 months of DART service no matter what time of the year they enter the program. Finally, we will
intensify the Employer Program campaign, promoting the benefits of DART's pass programs to employers and employees, along with new exclusive benefits for all annual pass program members.
Last year, overall prepaid pass sales reached a total of $11,772,979. The goal in FY04 is to achieve over $12,000,000 in total prepaid pass sales. Use Advertising to Increase Awareness
(Strategy C2.4) -DART's advertising awareness improved impressively from 39% recall rate in FY 2000 to 55% in FY 2002. The goals for this program for the upcoming fiscal year are to:
attract new riders; keep current customers infonned; maximize public acceptance of DART services and expansion; and to optimize revenues. BP-13
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes To achieve these goals, the Marketing & Communications Department will: • Maintain the DART Destination campaign that markets
the connectivity of the DART system, communicating the multitude of destinations served, the benefits experienced when riding all bus and rail modes along with financial rewards for
riding DART to over 500 destinations offering special incentives to our customers. • Market DARTorg and promote the services provided such as on-line trip planning, special offers, printable
coupons, sale of passes and retail items. • Maintain a cooperative advertising campaign with The Fort Worth T for the Trinity Railway Express extensions. • Increase the awareness and
utilization of the retail outlet network for DART pass sales with new sales incentives offered with the purchase of a pass. • Cooperatively raise the awareness of regional air pollution
issues with the North Central Clean Air Coalition, the Fort Worth T, and local sponsors, promoting transportation alternatives such as using mass transit. • Develop mutually beneficial
partnership, sponsorship, and cooperative advertising opportunities with regional businesses that may improve ridership and financial resources, incorporating the resources of advertising
revenue contractors. • Maintain a high awareness level of the 'DART Safely' safety campaign through various media elements. • Introduce and maintain communication programs for fare enforcement
and security. • Maintain 'DART Free Route of the Week' program to market low performing bus routes. • Heighten the awareness and utilization ofDART's HOV lanes and Ride-Share program.
Using Baldridge Criteria and Vying for the Texas Quality Award (Strategies C4.1; E1.1) -In 1996, DART embarked on a quality journey, utilizing the Malcomb Baldridge criteria to establish
its processes for operating the Agency and becoming involved in the state equivalent to the national Malcomb Baldridge Award, the Texas Quality Award. In FY 2000, DART filed a Level
III application and received a site visit. While DART did not win the award, only those organizations that are strong contenders receive site visits. After receiving the feedback report
from the Quality Texas Foundation, DART prioritized some of the areas identified for improvement, established teams to address those areas, and has been developing and implementing processes
that are consistent with the criteria. DART will file another application in the future to check our progress in these areas. Federal. State. and Local Government Relations (Strategies
S1.2; S1.3; and S1.5) -In FY 2000, DART was awarded the first Full Funding Grant Agreement under TEA-21 for a total of $333 million. DART continues its aggressive and comprehensive communication
efforts with elected officials. Government Relations staff, working closely with management, will support Board members, opinion leaders, and elected officials to gain the required federal
authorizations and annual appropriations for major capital investment projects, most notably a $700 million authorization for the Northwest/Southeast Corridor LRT project. Staff will
continue to maintain a strong presence in local government activities through regular attendance at council meetings and work sessions, and will manage the city effort between DART executive
management and city mayors. BP-14
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes Continue to Build Strong Relationships with Chambers and Business (Stratef!V Sl.6) -The chambers of commerce have proven
to be great business partners and have been very supportive of DART. DART will continue its strong communications with area businesses and chambers and will continue to promote DART's
employer programs, especially in transit or MIS corridors. Enhance Economic Development (Stratef!V Sl.7) -Two of the objectives of the Agency, as stated in the DART mission statement
are to improve the quality of life and to stimulate economic development through the implementation of the Transit System Plan. While these impacts follow rail development as a rule,
it has been both surprising and gratifying to see how quickly rail development has sparked innovative live-work-play developments up and down the rail lines. Even before rail opened
in Richardson, station-area residential, retail, and office development exceeded DART's cost by $23 to $1. With the opening of rail service to Plano and Garland in late 2002, the impact
of our joint development efforts now exceeds $1.3 billion. Management continues to actively support all transit-oriented development around DART stations for the purpose of increasing
transit ridership, reducing car trips on major thoroughfares, and receiving new sources of funds. ISO 14001 (Stratef!V Sl.8) -DART's Environmental Compliance Section of the Technical
Services Division of Project Management completed and was awarded ISO 14001 Certification on December 13,2002 by SGS International Certification Service, Inc. The certification process
entailed the development of an Environmental Management System (EMS) that was audited by SGS. ISO (International Organization for Standardization) is a world-wide, non-governmental organization
of 146 national standards institutes that was established in 1947. Various standards have been developed, but the ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 Series are the most widely known and successful.
ISO 9000 has become an international reference for quality requirements predominately in the private sector. ISO 14000 provides a mechanism for both the private and public sectors to
meet environmental challenges. The most significant of the Series is ISO 14001, which establishes an EMS that serves as a framework for an entity to better manage their environmental
compliance obligations. The benefits of ISO 14001 are: • Emphasis placed on prevention, rather than corrective action • Improved environmental awareness, involvement, and competency
• Better communication about environmental issues • Better relationships with regulatory agencies DART is one of only two transit agencies in the U.S. to obtain ISO 14001 Certification.
In addition, DART has been contacted by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to participate in the development of a statewide process, similar to ISO 14001. The Environmental
Compliance Section resides organizationally in the Technical Services Division of the Project Management Department. BP-15
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Business Processes Create DIM/WBE Economic Development Opportunity (Strategy Sl.9) -DART's DIMIWBE program is designed to involve disadvantaged,
minority, and women-owned businesses to the maximum extent possible in all facets of DART's contracting and purchasing activities. The Department of Diversity and Economic Opportunity
(DEO) positions itself as a bridge between DART and disadvantaged, minority, and women-owned businesses. To increase access to DART procurement opportunities, the DEO Department offers
and conducts various modes of technical assistance, outreach, seminars, educational training, and counseling in the understanding of federal and Agency procurement regulations. The DEO
Department aggressively seeks integration of D/M/WBEs in all DART procurement and contracting opportunities, and ensures that DART is in compliance with all appropriate federal and state
laws, regulations, and executive orders. BP-16
Section 9 FY 2004 Budget Index of Exhibits Exhibit 9.1 Sources of Funds BUD-l Exhibit 9.2 Uses of Funds BUD-2 Exhibit 9.3 Modal Allocations Summary , BUD-3 Exhibit 9.4 Operating Expense
Budget by Category BUD-4 Exhibit 9.5 FY 2004 Net Debt Service Budget BUD-lO
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Budget FY 2004 Budget Overview The FY 2004 Budget of $655.5 million is divided into three categories, which are approved individually
by the Board: Operating Expense Budget, $287.9 million (excludes capital planning and development costs); Capital Budget, $335.7 million; and Debt Service Budget, $32.2 million. These
expense budget limitations may not be exceeded without Board approval. The purpose of this section is to provide a detailed review of Sources and Uses of funds, and variances between
the Operating Expense Budget FY 2002 actuals, FY 2003 Budget, and the FY 2004 Budget. Revenue Variance Explanations Exhibit 9.1 shows sources of funding. Total revenues for FY 2004 are
projected at $680.1 million, $100.2 million (17.3%) higher than the FY 2003 Budget, primarily as a result of Debt Issuances and Federal Funds. Exhibit 9.1 Sources of Funds (In Thousands)
Federal Funds $125,803 18% Operating Revenues 􀀯􀀯􀁾 $50,541 ///70/0 Other Sources 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 􀀭 $13,803 Interest 20/0 Income $5,705 J 􀁾 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁯�
�􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 Debt Issuances $180,000 26% Sales Tax Revenues $304,268 46% BUD-l
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Budget Operating Revenues -Passenger revenues are $39.5 million (79.0)% of total operating revenues. Passenger revenues are based on
ridership and average fare for fixed route. Average fare for FY04 is $0.62, a $.05 (8.7%) increase over FY03, due to the fare increase implemented in March 2003. An additional $370,000
has been programmed for the new Fare Inspector program for fare evasions (citation revenue). More details can be found under the Executive Summary Section. Sales Tax Revenues -FY 2004
sales taxes are projected to be $304.3 million. Sales taxes as of February 2003 were down 7.3% and were used as the basis for the FY04 projection with an increase of 1.3% over the projected
FY03 year-end projection of $300.4 million. Management has modified the short-term projections to include a 5% increase for future years, which will be reflected in future Financial
Plans. Other Sources of Cash -Other Sources of Cash have been included to reflect the FY04 contribution made by the Fort Worth T towards Trinity Railway Express operations (estimated
at $7.2 million); the City of Irving contribution for Belt Line ($1.3 million), the reimbursement for the Southside at Lamar economic development project ($2.0 million), and Texas Emissions
Reduction Program (TERP) grant funds for bus emissions reductions ($3.3 million). FY 2004 Operating Expense Budget Exhibit 9.2 is a summary of our Uses of Funds. Exhibit 9.2 Uses of
Funds (In Thousands) ------------------------_. $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000$ Operating Expense $287,930 Capital & NonOperating $335,327 BUD-2 Debt Service $32,212
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Budget Exhibit 9.3 shows the modal allocation breakdown of the Operating Expense Budget. More details on each mode can be found in the
modal sections. This comparison shows how the operating expense budget is allocated over the various modes. As mentioned in the Executive Summary, due to shortfalls in sales tax receipts
DART has been faced with many challenges in completing a budget for the upcoming 2004 fiscal year. During the FY 2003 Budget process, $12.5 million in programs and personnel were removed
from the Operating Expense Budget. In order to accomplish goals set by the Board, the following assumptions were made for FY 2004. These assumptions eliminated approximately $20.3 million
of operating expenses from the FY 2004 Budget. 1) Levell service reductions with four DART-operated garages 2) Addition ofnew Fare Evasion Program 3) No employee merit raises 4) Service
Incentive Pay (SIP) frozen at FY03 dollars 5) No dollar increase to employee portion of benefits 6) Increase in projected Workers' Compensation costs due to increase in total number
of operational employees 7) Zero passenger trip denials for Paratransit Services Exhibit 9.4 breaks down the Operating Expense Budget by category and compares the FY 2003 Budget to the
FY 2004 Budget. A brief commentary follows the chart providing details about the various categories and the changes that are proposed. The reductions impact all areas of our business
on different levels. Details can be located in the various modal sections and the Executive Summary. BUD-3
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 9.4 -Operating Expense Budget by Category (In Thousands) FY 2004 Budget FY2002 I I FY2003 FY2004 I 􀁁􀁬􀀢􀁴􀁵􀁾􀁬􀁾 Cateaorv BmllJl't
Proi Bmlaet 􀁖􀁾􀁲􀁩􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁥 IVariance 0/0 Salaries & Wages (S&W) $31,291 Scheduled Work $32,388 $41,838 $9,450 29.2% 2,097 Unscheduled Work 2,198 2,002 (195) -8.9% 3,589 Scheduled Absences
3,679 4,140 461 12.5% 1,707 Unscheduled Absences 1,686 1,744 58 3.4% 834 Operator Training 552 715 163 29.6% 866 Administration 600 272 (328) -54.6% 369 Charter 475 199 (276) -58.2%
1,355 Operator Bonus Program 1,330 1,579 249 18.8% 94 Onerator -Other 120 112 (8) -6.5% $42 2011s&w -Onerators Payroll 1 $43027 $526021 $95751 22.3% $20,947 Wages $25,695 $27,492 $1,797
7.0% 1,086 Hourly Bonus Program 1,195 1,354 159 13.3% 1,920 Overtime -Hourly 1,306 1,429 123 9.5% Lanse Factor -Hourlv (l 128) (l025) 103 -9.2% $23 9521S&W -Non-Onerator Payroll 1 $27067
$292501 $21831 8.1% 56,712 Salaries 62,131 59,175 (2,956) -4.8% 34 Admin Bonus Program 43 28 ((15) -34.6% 2,098 Overtime -Salaried 1,744 1,367 (377) -21.6% 1,144 Part-Timeffemporary
305 62 (243) -79.5% Lanse Factor -Salaried (2036' (530) 1506 -74.0% $59 9881s & w -Salaried 1 $62188 $601031 ($2084)1 -3.4% $1261411Total Salaries & Wal!es 1 $132281 $1419551 $96741
7.3% Benefits $9,463 FICA $10,238 $11,016 $778 7.6% 10,687 Workers' Compensation 6,411 8,005 1,594 24.9% 180 Unemployment 120 738 618 515.1% 11,30 I Pension Plans 11,134 12,553 1,419
12.7% 15,936 Health Insurance 14,438 17,089 2,651 18.4% 986 Life & Disability Insurance 969 886 (82) -8.5% 2,065 Service Incentive Pay 2,189 2,043 (146) -6.7% 1,839 Paid Absences 1,447
900 (547) -37.8% 2,066 401-K 2,336 2,538 202 8.6% 1,078 Retiree Benefits 820 1,065 245 29.9% 31 Other Benefits 121 194 73 60.0% $55 630lTotai Benefits 1 $50224 $570291 $68051 13.5% BUD-4
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 9.4 -Operating Expense Budget by Category (Cont.) (In Thousands) FY 2004 Budget FY2002 I I FY 2003 I FY 2004 :I Actuals I Budl!et Proi
Budl!et Variance IVariance % Services $1,422 Transportation $1,149 $659 ($490) -42.6% 1,519 Security 1,466 1,329 (137) -9.4% 1,535 Vehicle & Equip Maintenance 1,279 1,037 (242) -18.9%
7,045 Facilities Operations -Services 7,476 7,105 (372) -5.0% 966 ROW Maintenance 867 915 48 5.5% 404 Planning 390 216 (174) -44.7% 739 Engineering & Real Estate Acquisition 807 495
(312) -38.7% 4,436 Marketing & Public Information 4,142 2,871 (1,271) -30.7% 1,456 Printing & Photographic 1,752 1,272 (480) -27.4% 795 Administration, Human Resources & MBE 1,021 1,363
342 33.6% 2,398 Contract Labor 2,058 1,083 (975) -47.4% 2,401 Computer & Communications 2,840 2,257 (583) -20.5% 404 Financial & Insurance 551 357 (194) -35.1% 992 Legal & Governmental
884 1,278 395 44.6% 1029 Environmental 783 1015 233 29.7% $27 5401 Total Services 1 $274631 $23.2511 23.2511 ($4212)1 -15.3% Materials & Supplies $10,827 Motor Vehicle Parts $8,691 $11,261
$2,569 29.6% 3,370 Diesel Fuel 4,351 7,213 2,861 65.8% 449 NRVFuel 480 480 -0.0% 2,717 LNG Fuel 2,472 3,095 624 25.2% 237 Lube 295 404 109 37.1% (236) Fuel Hedge Program (774) (193)
580 -75.0% 972 Tires & Tubes 988 1,403 415 42.0% 1,995 Facilities Operations -Material & Supplies 1,645 1,366 (278) -16.9% 984 Office Equipment & Computers 688 1,179 491 71.3% 1,044
Office Supplies & Postage 820 620 (200) -24.4% 852 Shop Tools & Supplies 793 386 (407) -51.4% 3,126 Light Rail Parts 4,490 4,048 (442) -9.9% 1,228 Uniforms, Tools & Shoes 1,087 1,198
III 10.3% 101 Credit Card Purchases ---n/a $27667 Total Materials & Sunnlies $26027 $32460 $6433 24.7% Utilities $2,982 Power & Light LRT -Vehicle $3,859 $3,194 ($665) -17.2% 2,316 Power
& Light -Facilities 2,117 2,311 193 9.1% 1,328 Communications 1,337 1,236 (101) -7.5% 447 Water & Sewer 616 610 (6) -1.0% 231 Natural Gas 378 429 51 13.6% $7303 Total Utilities $8308
$7781 ($527) -6.3% BUD-5
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit 9.4 -Operating Expense Budget by Category (Cont.) (In Thousands) FY 2004 Budget FY 2002 Actuals CateQ"orv I FY 2003 BudQ"et FY 2004
Proi BudQ"et Variance IVariance % Claims & Insurance $3,579 Liability Claims 2,279 Liability & Property Insurance 208 Other Insurance $6 066 Total Claims & Insurance Purchased Transportation
$40,030 Suburban Local/Express 1 118 Exoerimental Service $41 148 PT -Bus $16,860 Paratransit 15,876 Trinity Railway Express 710 TDM -Vanpool 752 HOV Services $75 347 Total Purchased
Transnortation $1,200 3,812 10 $5022 $36,338 1505 $37843 $16,331 15,272 898 1026 1 $71.370 $1,307 3,119 10 $4436 $0 1895 $1895 $18,441 14,368 898 816 $36418 $107 (693) ($586) ($36,338)
390 1$35948) $2,110 (904) (211) 1$34952) 8.9% -18.2% 0.0% -11.7% -100.0% 25.9% -95.0% 12.9% -5.9% 0.0% -20.5% -49.0% Taxes, Leases & Other $812 Fuel & Lube/Other Taxes 472 0& M Facilities
& Equip -Leases 328 Passenger Facilities -Leases 763 Admin Facilities & Equip -Leases 210 Service Vehicles -Leases 422 Dues, Books & Subscriptions 326 Employee Programs & Awards 408
Other 418 Public Information I 939 TrainiDldTravel $6 099 Total Taxes Leases & Other -Manaf!ement Reserve $331793 Total Oneratin!! Exoenses (w/oStarl-uplP&D) ($20,517) Capitalized P&D
(6804 Start-Uo Costs 1$27 32liiTotai Other $304 471 1Total Oneratin!! Exoenses Salaries & Wages I11I $957 683 260 6306 360 291 295 584 1534 $5600 1889 $328184 ($21,458) II 030 1$2248811
$3056961 $1,578 642 259 495I 350 193 244 184 1261 $5206 $308534 ($20,171) ($433\ 1$20604)1 $2879301 $621 (41) (1) (134) (6) (10) (98) (51) (399) (273) II 889) ($19650)1 1,287 597 $18841
1$17766)1 64.9% -6.0% -0.5% -21.3% -91.9% -2.9% -33.8% -17.4% -68.4% -17.8% -7.0% -100.0% -6.0% -6.0% -58.0% -8.4% -5.8% The Salaries & Wages category increased $9.7 million (7.3%) over
FY 2003. The increases are based on Level 1 Bus Service, which requires DART to hire an additional 247 positions to replace the service previously handled by the contract service provider.
Administration reduced 100 full time positions and various other temporary and part-time positions for a decrease of $2.1 million (3.4%). BUD-6
Benefits Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Budget Under the current assumptions, benefits costs will increase due to the addition ofnew employees. Benefits directly associated
with salaries such as FICA, Pension, and 401K all grew at the same rate as Salaries and Wages (approximately 7.5%). The additional increase to pension includes an increase of $740,000
for funding to the Defined Benefits Plan, under which 613 employees participate. The 24.9% ($1.6 million) increase to workers' compensation is due in part to the hiring of additional
operational employees and the increase in health care costs. Approximately 75% of all workers' compensation claims come from the Operating areas, with the remaining 25% spread over DART
Police and Administration. DART is self-insured for unemployment insurance. The increase of $618,000 is due to the reduction in force of approximately 100 salaried positions and 28 hourly
positions. Health Insurance remains to be the major cost driver of all DART benefits. DART is selfinsured and pays all administrative fees and claims. For FY 2003, there are approximately
2,700 employees who participate inour health plans. There are approximately 7,300 participants in our health plans, meaning an average of approximately 1.7 dependents per participating employee. The current plan allows
for a 5% growth in membership due to new hires who are eligible for benefits after 90 days of employment. One of the FY 2004 Budget assumptions is that the employee contribution will
not increase. The current cost-sharing allocation is 81% DART and 19% employee. Normally, the employee portion of the cost-sharing allocation would have been an increase of 7.0% or an
average of $100.00 annually. The $270,000 savings to staff will be absorbed by DART. The remaining $2.4 million increase is due to an increase in growth and healthcare costs. Management
is in the process of evaluating new providers and a Consumer Directed Healthcare program for FY 2005. A Health Benefits Committee was established in FY FY 2003 to evaluate our current
plans and make recommendations to contain benefits costs. Findings will be presented to Executive Management during FY 2004. Adjustments to Life & Disability benefits were minor due
to rates received from providers which resulted in a savings of$82,000 (8.5%). Services The FY 2004 Services budget is $4.2 million (15.3%) less than FY 2003. Following is a partial
listing of the programs and initiatives were reduced or eliminated. • reduction in ridership development programs; • reduction in outreach programs (senior citizen, public schools, external,
and vendor); • reduction in advertising; • reduction in outside legal consultants; • reduction in outside printing; • reduction in ridership data collection; • reduction in contract
labor; • reduction in janitorial services; BUD-7
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Budget • reduction in HOV lane maintenance services (sweeping and striping); • reduction in information technology services; • elimination
of internship program; and • reduction in security services. Materials & Supplies The $6.4 million (24.7%) increase in Materials & Supplies is due to the increase in miles of bus service
provided by DART. In previous budgets, dollars for these costs were in the Purchased Transportation category. Other increases such as the transition costs for ultra-low sulfur diesel
fuel and the ending of the fuel hedge program in December 2003 are included in this category. The areas that reflect decreases are due to reductions in office supplies, shop tools, and
facilities operations ($885,000). The reduction in light rail car miles due to an increase in headways and the decrease in the number of cars per train during non-peak hours resulted
in a slight reduction in light rail parts of $442,000 (9.9%). Utilities A decrease of $665,000 ((17.2%) over FY 2003 is due primarily to the reduction in Power & Light LRT -Vehicles.
As mentioned in the Bus section, we currently have a contract which locks-in favorable rates allowing savings in this category to be realized. The reduction in car miles and the number
of cars per train also impacts these costs. The increase of$193,000 (9.1%) in Power & Light Facilities and Natural Gas is due primarily to DART becoming directly responsible for the
Oak Cliff division. Other major reductions in this category include Communications: cell phones -$55,600; local and long distance phone calls -$50,000; and computer data lines -$25,000.
Claims & Insurance The $586,000 (11.7%) decrease in this category is due to the proposed rates projected for Property Insurance. Purchased Transportation The FY 2004 Budget includes
the assumption that DART will operate all bus service out of four garages and the contract with the service provider will be terminated. The $35.9 million (95.0%) decrease to Purchased
Transportation Bus is the total elimination of the costs associated with our fixed-route contractor. The dollars to operate this service are now spread among the other categories, which
include salaries and wages, services, materials and supplies, and taxes, leases and other. Details on the assumptions can be found in the Bus section ofthe Business Plan. The Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 requires that Paratransit Services operate a service that has no ongoing pattern of passenger-trip denials. In order to continue to meet this goal, an additional
$2.1 million (12.9%) increase is included in the Proposed FY 2004 Budget. Details on the assumptions for Paratransit can be found in the Paratransit section of the Business Plan. BUD-8
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Budget Trinity Railway Express, provided jointly with the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the T), offers heavy rail services from
Union Station in Downtown Dallas to downtown Fort Worth. The 5.9% decrease ($904,000) proposed for FY04 is a decrease in train hours, car miles, and special event services. TRE eliminated
late night service to add special trains for special events at the American Airlines Center. Some changes to the current service provider contract are being considered which may provide
additional savings to the FY04 budget. The estimated $7.2 million portion of expenses related to services for the T is budgeted in the revenue section under other sources of cash. The
reduction in maintenance in nov Services budget of $211,000 (20.5%) is due to the delivery of two new Barrier Transfer Vehicles, which are scheduled to arrive during the latter part
of calendar year 2003. Taxes, Leases & Other The Fuel and Lube and other Taxes increase of $621,000 (64.9%) is directly related to the increase in DART-operated bus service and incorporates
the changes reflected in the Bus Service Levell assumption. The remaining categories have all seen reductions for a total of$1.0 million (21.9%). Of those reductions the following areas
have been reduced significantly or eliminated: outside training, travel, employee programs and awards, participation in community events, job fairs, CDA Downtown Improvement Partnership,
and public information The DART Wellness program has been eliminated under the current proposed budget ($74,304). Management Reserve No funds have been budgeted in a management reserve
for FY 2004. FY 2004 Capital Budget The main components of the FY 2004 capital and non-operating budget include: the LRT expansion; bus and light rail vehicle system maintenance programs;
scheduled vehicle replacements including fixed route buses, paratransit vehicles, and non-revenue vehicles; and farebox replacements. A current funding level for FY 2004 has been established
at $335.3 million for capital and non-operating activities. A list of major capital projects recommended for inclusion in the FY 2004 Budget is located in the Financial Plan section
(Exhibit 10.12). FY 2004 Net Debt Service Budget In August 2000, the voters in DART's service area approved the issuance of$2.9 billion of longterm sales tax revenue bonds to be issued
over several years to accelerate future system expansion. DART also has an approved $450 million commercial paper program, but we are requesting the Board to authorize an increase to
$600 million to fund the capital expansion program. This budget assumes that DART will sell $180 million in commercial paper during FY 2004. Exhibit 9.5 is the FY 2004 Net Debt Service
Budget. BUD-9
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Budget Exhibit 9.5 Net Debt Service Budget In Thousands FY 2002 Category FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2004 Actuals Bud!!et Bud!!et IncHDec) $2,249
Commercial Paper Program Interest & Fee $2,687 $4,263 $1,576 20,362 Long-Term Debt Program Interest 25,167 24,632 (536) 220 Amortization of Issuance Costs 293 1,126 833 1,074 Financial
Advisor and Other Fees 1,220 247 (973) $23,906 Total Expenses $29,367 $30,267 $900 $0 Principal Repayments $855 $1,945 $1,090 $23,906 Total Expenses plus Repayments $30,222 $32,212 $1,990
(6,174) Less: Interest Income (11,857) (5,705) 6,152 $17,731 Total Net Debt Service Budeet $18,365 $26,507 $8,142 Organization Chart Exhibit APX.8 is DART's organization chart through
the Assistant Vice-President level. BUD-I0
Section 10 FY 2004 Financial Plan Index of Exhibits Exhibit 10.1 Five-Year Sources and Uses ofFunds Comparison FP-2 Exhibit 10.2 FY04-08 Sources of Funds Comparison FP-3 Exhibit 10.3
Sales Tax Growth Rate Components FP-4 Exhibit lOA Estimated Sales Tax Receipts by Financial Plan Comparison FP-4 Exhibit 10.5 Projected Sales Tax Growth Rates FP-5 Exhibit 10.6 Projected
Annual Sales Tax Receipts FP-6 Exhibit 10.7 Projected Fixed Route Average Fares FP-7 Exhibit 10.8 Anticipated Capital Grant Funding FP-8 Exhibit 10.9 Operating Expenses FY04-FY08 FP-9
Exhibit 10.10 Historic Growth vs. Projected Growth-Operating Expenses FP-10 Exhibit! 0.11 5-Year Capital Expenditures FP-12 Exhibit 10.12 Capital & Non-Operating Project Listing FP-13
Exhibit! 0.13 Projected Net Debt Issuances by Fiscal Year FP-17 Exhibit10.14 DebtAssumptions FP-17
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty·Year Financial Plan FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Overview The purpose of this section is to provide an overview of the
FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan (the "FY04 Plan"). The first year of the FY04 Plan corresponds with the FY 2004 Budget, and the first five years of the Financial Plan correspond with
the FY 2004 Business Plan. The purpose of the final 15 years of the Twenty-Year Financial Plan is to validate the affordability of DART's long-range Transit System Plan, which includes
the Agency's commitments for future system expansion and the issuance and repayment of debt. The FY04 Plan demonstrates that DART has the financial capacity to meet the Agency's Transit
System Plan commitments and to continue current levels of bus and expanded rail service. Each section of the FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan is described in detail: 1. Sources of
Funds a. Sales Taxes b. Operating Revenues c. Interest Income d. Federal Funding e. Debt Issuance f. Other Sources 2. Uses of Funds a. Operating Expenses (by mode) b. Capital and Non-Operating
Expenditures c. Debt Program 3. Net Available Cash 4. Debt Financing Information This section also provides definitions of terms, outlines the major assumptions used to develop the FY04
Plan, discusses changes from prior plans, and illustrates some potential risks (where actual results could worsen DART's financial condition) and some areas for potential financial improvement
(where the assumptions may be conservative and actual results could improve DART's financial condition). Exhibit 10.1 is a summary of the five-year changes in the sources and uses of
cash between the last approved Financial Plan (the FY02 Plan) and current draft FY04 Plan for the period FY 2004 through FY 2008. The entire Twenty-Year Financial Plan is included as
an attachment to the Board resolution, which is located at Exhibit APX.l. A copy of the full FY02 Plan, as amended, is included at Exhibit APX.3. FP-I
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Exbibit 10.1 DART FY 2004 -FY 2008 Sources and Uses of Funds Comparison (In MiJlions) Line DescriDtion FY02
Plan FY04 Plan Variance Percental!e SOURCES OF FUNDS 1 Sales Tax Revenues $2,660.7 $1,683.6 ($977.1) -36.7% 2 Operating Revenues 303.4 259.8 (43.6) -14.4% 3 Interest Income 39.5 78.2
38.7 98.2% 4 Formula Federal Funding 186.2 270.9 84.7 45.5% 5 Discretionary Federal Funding 213.6 255.9 42.3 19.8% 6 Debt Issuances 1,753.2 500.0 (1,253.2) -71.5% 7 Other Sources 57.5
98.1 40.7 70.8% 8 Total Sources of Funds $5.213.9 $3.146.5 ($2.067.4) -39.7% USES OF FUNDS Operating Expenses: 9 Bus $1,118.4 $911.9 ($206.5) -18.5% 10 Light Rail Transit 423.0 324.8
(98.2) -23.2% 11 Commuter Rail/RR Management 134.3 100.3 (34.0) -25.3% 12 Paratransit 112.3 144.4 32.2 28.7% 13 HOV Transitways 33.5 28.6 (4.8) -14.4% 14 General Mobi1itv -TOM 4.8 6.4
1.7 35.5% 15 Total ODeratinl! EXDenses $1.826.3 $1.516.6 ($309.7) -17.0% OneratinfT+P&D+Start Un $1974.5 $1623.2 ($351.4) -17.8% Capital Projects and Non-Operating: 16 Bus $235.1 $132.6
($102.5) -43.6% 17 Light Rail Transit 2,250.7 809.8 (1,440.9) -64.0% 18 Commuter Rail/RR Management 49.4 47.8 (1.5) -3.1% 19 Paratransit 18.7 16.7 (2.0) -10.9% 20 HOV Transitways 55.8
35.9 (19.9) -35.6% 21 Capital P & 0, Start-Up, Non-Opera 150.2 107.1 (43.1) -28.7% 22 General Mobilitv -Road Imor./ITS 35.7 23.8 (11.9) -33.3% 23 Total Canital and Non-OneratinlJ $2795.7
$1173.8 ($1621.9) -58.0% Debt Service 24 Principal -LT/ST Debt $452.1 $39.3 (412.8) -91.3% 25 Interest and Fees -LT/ST Debt 307.4 175.4 (132.0) -42.9% 26 Total Debt Service $759.5 $214.7
($544.8) -71.7% 27 Total Uses ofFunds $5.381.5 $2905.1 ($2.476.4) -46.0% FP-2
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan SOURCES OF FUNDS Total sources of cash for the period FY 2004 through FY 2008 have decreased by $2.1 billion
(39.7%) from the FY02 Plan, due primarily to a decrease in projected sales tax revenues ($977 million) and a decrease in debt issuance ($1.25 billion) related to DART's capital programs.
The reduction in debt financing is due to the delay of the Phase II LRT build-out schedule. Because of this delay, there will be fewer capital dollars spent during the 2004-2008 period,
and therefore, less debt issued. Exhibit 10.2 details the sources of funds in the FY04 Plan for the period FY 2004 through FY 2008. Exhibit 10.2 FY04-08 Sources of Funds Comparison Debt
Issuance 16% Federal Funding 17% Interest/. I 20pperatlng ncome 7p.. I"'(evenues 8% Other Sources 3% '\Sales Taxes 54% Sales Tax Revenues (line 1 of the Financial Plan) Sales tax revenues
comprise 54% of DART's total projected sources of funds through FY 2008 and 79% ofDART's sources excluding debt issuances and Federal Funding. The method for estimating sales tax revenue
is discussed in Financial Standard Bl (FS-Bl), which states: Sales tax revenue forecasts shall be based on a sales tax model developed specifically for the DART Service Area by an independent
economist, except for the most current year, which may be based on management's best estimate. To ensure a conservative sales tax estimate, the model's projections may be reduced by
1% for years 6-10 and by 2% thereafter, dependent on current economic trends. FP-3
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Sales taxes include both an inflationary component and a real growth component. The independent model used
by DART was developed by an independent economist, M. Ray Perryman, Ph.D. (the Perryman Model). The model's primary drivers are personal income in Dallas and Collin counties, the consumer
price index for the Dallas Metropolitan Statistical Area, and retail sales for the State of Texas. Exhibit 10.3 illustrates estimated sales tax revenues, projected inflation rates, real
growth rates, and the total growth rate through FY 2008. Exhibit 10.3 Components ofthe Sales Tax Growth Rate Year $ in Millions Inflation Real Growth Total Growth 2003 $300.4 2.51% -9.81%
-7.30% 2004 $304.3 2.47% -1.17% 1.30% 2005 $319.5 2.46% 2.54% 5.00% 2006 $335.5 2.50% 2.50% 5.00% 2007 $353.3 2.52% 2.48% 5.00% 2008 $370.9 2.51% 2.49% 5.00% The Perryman Model had been
reliable prior to FY 2001, particularly for long-term growth rates. However, neither the Perryman Model, nor any other source, predicted the events of September 11, 2001 and the accounting
scandals of several high profile companies. These factors have contributed to the length and depth of the current economic downturn that began in FY 2001. Exhibit 10.4 details the effect
of that decline. Exhibit 10.4 Comparison Estimated Sales Tax Receipts by Financial Plan (In Billions) --------------------------.---.-..-----..--.--.-....---------···-----------l $20.0
$15.0 $10.0 $5.0 $0.0 􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀮 􀁾 􀁾􀁣􀁯 􀁾􀁣􀁯 􀀬􀀬􀁾 ,,'" "bo. "co "co 􀁾 a,,'" I 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 I 􀁾􀀱􀁩..F.--.Y.-O..-.2..-.-·A.. ·pP􀀻􀁯􀂷􀁶􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁩􀀭P"la n • FY 0
3 D ra ft Pia n-I I _I!IIFY04praJt p.lan. 􀁾􀀮__ -----------􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾--------FP-4
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan As shown in Exhibit lOA, these declines have removed $5.9 billion in revenue from the FY04 Plan between FY
2004 and FY 2023. The revenue reduction also has a domino effect, requiring DART to issue more debt during the life of the Plan, and to issue it earlier than anticipated during the Phase
II build-out, further diminishing DART's financial capabilities. The long-term sales taxes projections in the Plan are based on the Perryman Model, conservatively adjusted by management.
The model projected $341.7 million in revenues in FY 2003 and $360.5 million for FY 2004. However, given the worse-than-budgeted experience in the current year, management believed that
these projections were too aggressive. Therefore, in an effort to obtain more reliable short-term forecasts DART contracted with another economist, for a two-year forecast covering FY
2003 and FY 2004. Based on the input from both economists and management discretion, a 20-year year sales tax revenue projection was developed which management believes is more realistic
than simply using the Perryman Model in conjunction with the FS-B1 recommended reductions. A comparison of sales tax growth rates under each scenario is shown in Exhibit 10.5. Exhibit
10.5 Projected Sales Tax Growth Rates --􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁉 -􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭 ---􀁾 --------------------􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀽􀁟
-=-i 0.0% 􀁾 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 10.0% 15.0% ,..J.,.t::::.'Q ,..J.,....t.::::. ,..J.,....'.1-,..J.,.....b< ,..J.,....<.O ,..J.,....'.Q ,..J.,.r6> 􀁾􀀧􀀱􀀭􀀧􀀱􀀭 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 ---------------..-.----
--_._.__._--------------10.0% . ----------.-------------. _􀁛􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀭􀂷􀂷􀂷 􀁾􀀭􀀺􀁾􀁰􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁤􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀭􀁾􀁦􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁧􀁾􀁦􀀽􀁾􀁟􀀽􀁟􀀽􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀮􀁟􀀺􀁆�
�􀁙􀀽􀀰􀀽􀀴􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁄􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀽􀁡􀀽􀁦􀁴􀀽􀀫􀀽􀁆􀀽􀁓􀀽􀀭􀀽􀁂􀀽􀀱:::JI As shown above, the growth rates that are used in the FY04 Plan (except in FY 2003 and FY 2004 which are down 7.3% and
up 1.3%, respectively), closely tie to the Perryman projections. Exhibit 10.3 shows that inflation accounts for approximately 2.5% of each year's sales tax increases. To further reduce
these projections by the stipulations in FS-B1, would essentially result in 0.5% real growth in sales taxes after 2014, which seems unreasonably low. These stipulations were enacted
in the past when long-term growth projections were above 6% and seemed unduly optimistic. Exhibit 10.6 shows the net sales tax receipts under each of the growth FP-5
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan rate scenarios illustrated above. Over the 20-year life of the Plan, the sales tax forecasts contained in
the draft FY04 Plan are actually more conservative than using the Perryman Model and incorporating the 1% and 2% deductions referenced in FS-Bl. However, management believes them to
be much more realistic. Exhibit 10.6 Projected Annual Sales Tax Receipts (In Millions) $1,200 -------$1,ax> ---------------------------sax> ----------------------------------------$2l)
-----------------------------------------------------1 Pl1l3 Pr04 Pl{E F'lt6 F'IU7 PIal F't1ll FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY.!l FY21 FY22 F't23 I -------------_..._------------
------------------' r -------------------------------------------------------------_1 -Perrymn -Perrymn+FS81 -F'Yt)l Dc;)l: F'Yt)l Dc;)l: +FS81 --"-----.-, .. _.. _---------------.'
._---------------'--_ .. ------------------.--_. -----_.----_._------Operating Revenues (line 2) Operating revenues include passenger revenue, advertising revenue, rental income, and
Federal assistance for vanpool, ozone, and DART police positions (COPS grant). Operating revenues are projected to contribute $259.8 million (8.3%) of DART's sources of funds through
FY 2008. This represents a $43.6 million (14.4%) decrease from the FY02 Plan, primarily due to declines in fixed route ridership. These declines were caused by service reductions and
the overall increase in local unemployment. Passenger revenues comprise approximately 79.3% of operating revenues between FY 2004 and FY 2008. In FY 2000, Business Planning Parameter
FS-B2 was amended to state, "the Board will consider fare modifications from time to time to achieve Service Plan, ridership, and subsidy per passenger targets and to maintain DART's
financial viability." In accordance with that change, the FYOI and FY02 Financial Plans contained assumptions that the average fare would grow by the rate of inflation each year. Because
fare revenue revenue does not behave in this manner, this year's Plan was adjusted to accommodate a fare increase every five years of approximately FP-6
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan the same magnitude as the change that went into effect in FY 2003 (17%). This change partially mitigates
the operating revenue reductions described above. Exhibit 10.7 details the programmed fare changes. Exhibit 10.7 Projected Fixed Route Average Fares Year FY02 Plan FY04 Plan 2003 $0.55
$0.62 2004 $0.56 $0.62 2005 $0.58 $0.62 2006 $0.59 $0.62 2007 $0.61 $0.62 2008-2012 $0.64 $0.73 2013-2017 $0.73 $0.85 2018-2022 $0.82 $0.99 2023-2027 n/a $1.16 Interest Income (line
3) Interest income is projected to contribute $78.2 million, or 2.5% of total sources of funds for the next five years. This represents an increase of $38.7 million (98.2%) over the
FY02 Plan. This increase is due to the delay in expenditures on the LRT Phase II build-out, which results in higher cash balances over the first five years of the Plan. Interest income
is calculated by multiplying average cash balance for each year, including reserves, by the projected interest rates. These rates are estimated at 100 basis points (1.0%) above the rate
that DART pays when it issues short-term debt (Commercial Paper). This differential increases to 150 basis points as Commercial Paper interest rates rise above 3.5% in FY 2007. Federal
Funding (lines 4 and 5) Federal funds are included in the following line items of the Plan: Formula Federal Funding (line 4) and Discretionary Federal Funding (line 5). Formula funds
include dollars received under 49 U.S.C. § 5307, fixed guideway modernization, and Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ) projects approved by the North Central Texas Council of Governments
(NCTCOG). Discretionary funds are authorized under 49 U.S.C. § 5309 and appropriated by Congress annually. Discretionary funding is provided primarily for new-start rail projects. The
FY04 Plan assumes the receipt of funding for LRT expansion plus funding for 30% of future bus purchases, which is substantially lower than what DART has historically received (80-83%).
FP-7
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Formula Federal Funding (line 4) Formula funds are $270.9 million, or 8.6% of total sources of funds through
FY 2008. This represents an $84.7 million increase from the FY02 Plan due primarily to increasing levels of Formula Funding allocations. Under the proposed Safe, Accountable, Flexible
and Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2003 (SAFETEA), it is anticipated that DART will receive Federal appropriations of $35 million in FY 2004 for §5307 and fixed guideway funding.
Projected formula funds after FY 2004 have been programmed at $35 million per year and not inflated, in accordance with FS-Bl1. Projected formula funds through FY 2008 also include $28.7
million of CMAQ funding and $62 million of other monies attached to such projects as bus replacements, the farebox procurement, and Victory Station construction. Discretionary Federal
Funding (line 5) Discretionary funding comprises $255.9 million, or 8.1% of total sources through FY 2008, which is a $42.3 million (19.8%) increase from the FY02 Plan. This change reflects
the cash flow impact of DART's decision to increase the amount of the Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) on the Northwest/Southeast corridor from an assumption of $500 million to an
assumption of $700 million. This FFGA request represents up to 50% federal participation on this project. By comparison, DART received an 18% Federal share for the Starter System and
a 33% Federal share for the Phase I LRT build-out. No Federal funding is assumed in the Plan for any other subsequent corridor, although additional funds might be requested for the Irving,
South Oak Cliff-3, and new CBD lines. FFGA funds have been programmed based on the expected Phase II cash flows. Exhibit 10.8 details the anticipated receipt ofFormula and Discretionary
Funds. Exhibit 10.8 Anticipated Capital Grant Funding (In Millions) $200 -.-------------------------, $175 -f----􀁾􀀭 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭
$150 f------􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 -----$ 1 25 -------$ 1 0 0 +_1-1-_._--$75 $50 FP-8
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Debt Issuance (line 6) DART plans to issue $180 million of commercial paper in FY04 and $500 million of debt
through FY 2008. This represents a $1.3 billion reduction from the FY02 Plan. This reduction is actually only a delay in debt issuance, due to the delay in the LRT Phase II build-out.
Additional details regarding DART's Debt Program are shown below under Uses of Funds. Other Sources (line 7) Other sources of funds total $98.1 million between FY 2004 and FY 2008 and
represent 3.1% of total sources of funds for that same period. This line item is predominantly composed of nongrant contributions from other public entities, such as the Fort Worth T's
contribution toward their share of the net cost of the Trinity Railway Express ($39 million), Irving's contribution for the Belt Line Grade Separation Project ($2.6 million), and the
total external contributions for the Love Field project ($50.3 million through FY08, assuming the Tunnel Option). USES OF FUNDS Operating Expenses (lines 9 through 15) Total operating
expenses for the period FY 2004 through FY 2008 are projected to be $1.5 billion, a $310 million (17.0%) decrease from the FY02 Plan. This decrease is due to a variety of factors including
the reductions in service that were approved earlier this year, substantial cuts to administration, and the delay in the LRT Phase II build-out which would have opened during FY 2008.
Exhibit 10.9 shows the modal distribution of total operating expenses for the period FY 2004 to FY 2008. Exhibit 10.9 Operating Expenses FY04-FY08 (In Millions) GM$6.4 HOV$28.6 Para$144.4
BusF $911.9 CRlRRM$100.3 FP-9
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Changes in projected operating expenses in future years are controlled from a policy perspective by Financial
Standards B3, B4, and B5 (see Exhibit APX.2). FS-B3 and FS-B4 relate to fixed route service which accounts for approximately 88% of projected operating costs over the next five years.
The primary cost drivers for fixed route service are the number of miles, hours, and vehicles in service, contract rates for purchased transportation, operator absences, and fuel prices.
The key efficiency measurement for DART is subsidy per passenger. Service levels and subsidy per passenger are discussed in detail in the Executive Summary and modal sections of this
report. FS-B5 places a limit on the total increase in operating expenses. Exhibit 10.10 compares the historical average growth rates of operating expenses with future projected growth.
Exhibit 10.10 Historic Growth vs. Projected Growth -Operating Expenses 5-Yearl to-Year I 15-Yearl 􀀱􀀹􀀹􀀹􀀭􀁾 2lm-nti 􀁊􀀮􀀹􀀹􀀺􀁉􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀀲􀁏􀁬􀀳 􀁎􀁦􀀩􀀮􀁾 2lm-E.8 􀁁􀁾􀁃􀁨􀀺􀁍􀁴􀁨􀁒􀁡􀁴􀁥
7.4% 0.9'/0 7.7% 3.'i% 7.9% 3.5% Nie>: 1h;se co:rpnism; are Q:mltiJl?;􀁾rnly arrl cb n::t 􀁩􀁮􀀺􀁉􀁾 GlPtal P&D 'Ire curert FY03 B..qJt of $305.7 rrillioo is t.mi fcr FY03 􀁾this year
is nt cctlliete. 'Ire chJrre in 1te hrlm: fiun FY03 to FY04 is a dxlire of $17.8 rrillim cr 5.8% In each modal line item, operating expense projections are based on service levels multiplied
by the cost per hour and mile, plus 90% of the inflation rates projected by the Perryman sales tax model, plus the incremental cost of operating new facilities and other approved programs.
Bus Expenses (line 9) Bus operating expenses for the five-year period ending in FY 2008 are $206.5 million (18.5%) lower than in the FY02 Plan because of a decrease in bus service (including
the elimination of one operating garage), the elimination of employee raises in FY04, substantial administrative cuts, and the change in assumptions related to certaincosts. Additional details are included in the Bus modal section. Light Rail Transit Expenses (line 10) This line includes the projected annual cost to operate and maintain DART's light
rail service. Light rail operating expenses between FY 2004 and FY 2008 are $98.2 million (23.2%) lower than the FY02 Plan because of decrease in service (increasing headways and cutting
cars during lower utilization periods), the elimination of employee raises in FY04, and substantial administrative cuts. More details are included in the LRT modal section. FP-1O
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Commuter Rail and Railroad Management Expenses (line 11) This line includes the consolidated cost to operate
the Trinity Railway Express (TRE) and railroad corridor management costs for DART-owned active freight rail lines. DART and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the T) contract with
an outside provider for the TRE service. Projected TRE operating expenses for the next five years decreased $34.0 million (25.3%) from the FY02 Plan because of reductions in off-peak
and weekend service. Please refer to the more detailed discussion in the Commuter Rail modal section. Paratransit Expenses (line 12) Paratransit expenses are budgeted at $26.6 million
for FY04 and $144.4 million over the next five years. This is an increase of$32.2 million (28.7%) over the FY02 Plan. These increases are predominantly caused by the recent FTA decision
which mandates zero trip denials. This mandate increases ridership and decreases productivity. Additional details are included in the Paratransit modal section. High Occupancy Vehicle
(HOy) Transitway Expenses (line 13) HOV costs are projected to be $28.6 million between FY 2004 and FY 2008, $4.8 million (14.4%) lower than the FY02 Plan. A more detailed discussion
ofHOV programs is included in the HOV/General Mobility section. General Mobility (GM) -Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Expenses (line 14) TDM programs consist mainly of vanpool
and carpool services and represent less than 1% of the total operating budget. Projected costs are $6.4 million over the next five years, which is $1.7 million (35.5%) higher than the
FY02 Plan. Additional details on General Mobility programs are contained in the HOV/General Mobility section. Capital and Non-Operating Expenditures (lines 16 through 23) Capital project
expenditures total $1.2 billion through FY 2008. This is a decrease of $1.6 billion (57.9%) over the same period from the FY02 Plan due primarily to the delay in the LRT Phase II build-out,
eliminated bus purchases due to scaled back bus service, and a reduction in Capital Planning & Development costs. Capital projects are organized into four classifications: Expansion,
Replacement, Maintenance, and Other. Expansion projects include the addition of new facilities and!or passenger amenities (e.g., transit centers), infrastructure for new services (e.g.,
light rail/HOVIcommuter rail), or the addition of new operating facilities and assets that enhance safety or customer quality. Replacement projects include like-kind asset replacements
for major vehicles and equipment. Maintenance projects include major maintenance and vehicle and facility rehabilitations that are scheduled at regular intervals. Other projects are
for those items that do not fit into any other category, such as planning studies, emission reduction programs, etc... FP-Il
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan FS-B10 requires that "the timely replacement of assets shall be the highest priority to ensure a safe system,
and that reserve levels shall be based on an independent assessment of asset condition (to be completed at least once every five years)." Such a study was completed in FY 2003 and is
the basis for much of the capital program. Exhibit 10.11 shows capital project distribution among the capital categories, by mode. Exhibit 10.11 5-Year Capital Expenditures (In Millions)
Agen:y-w.de** fu; lRT Ccmruter Rail Paratransit fDV Gn:ral Mlbili Total •OIl Mlintenance **Agency-wide includes Capital P&D. Please note that actual FY 2004 expenditures will exceed
the amounts shown above. Any dollars that are unspent as of September 30, 2003 that were allocated to approved FY03 projects will be rolled into the FY04 Budget. Capital Planning, Start-up
Costs, and Non-Operating (line 21) Capital planning and start-up costs are predominantly internal staff costs associated with planning, designing, constructing, and opening new capital
projects such as the light rail system. FS-B9 limits capital planning costs to no more than 7.0% of the total operating budget and startup costs to no more than 60% of the first year's
operating cost. This category of costs has decreased by $43.1 million (28.7%) for the five-year period ending in FY 2008 primarily as a result of cuts to the operating budget and the
delay in the LRT Phase II build-out, which delayed the associated start-up costs. Non-operating costs relate to projects/programs that are not accounted for as operating costs or capitalized
as an asset. These costs are charged through the income statement as a non-operating expense. Examples of non-operating costs are: consulting costs for the Transit System Plan revision,
the radio frequency utilization study, and the asset condition study. Total non-operating costs through FY 2008 have decreased $1.5 million (73.8%) from the FY02 Plan due to a reduction
in identified studies that are required through FY 2008. FP-12
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan General Mobility -Road Improvement Programs (line 22) FS-B8 limits General Mobility -Road Improvement Programs
to funding allowed under the terms of the approved Interlocal Agreements (ILA). Road improvement programs include the Local Assistance Program/Congestion Management System (LAP/CMS),
Principal Arterial Street System (PASS), Transportation System Management (TSM), and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) projects. These programs have decreased by $12 million (37.7%)
from the FY02 Plan because of a reduction in street repair programs and are discussed in the HOV/General Mobility section. Exhibit 10.12 lists all approved and requested capital projects
for the 20-year life of the Financial Plan, including projected expenditures in FY04, five-year totals (2004 -2008), 20-year totals (2004 -2023), and external funding related to each
project. Exhibit 10.12 Capital & Non-Operating Project Listing (In Millions) AGENCY-WIDE FY04 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Total Administrative Facility Maint $0.3 $0.5 $0.1 $0.3 $0.2 $1.4
CAD Automation 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 IT Reserves 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Agency WAN/LAN Upgrade 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.7 Technology Initiative Study 0.] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Private
Fiber Network 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.6 1.1 Voice over IP (Telecom) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 Disaster Recovery Site 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 Commerce Street -Reserve 1.3 0.0 13.1 0.0 0.0 14.4
Elm Street -Reserve 5.0 0.0 9.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 TOTAL AGENCY WIDE $7.5 $1.6 $22.6 $0.8 $1.5 $34.0 COMMUTER RAIL FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Total Lisa to Perkins Double Track $3.0 $0.0 $0.0
$0.0 $0.0 $3.0 TRE Vehicle Maintenance Progra 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 4.5 TRE ROW Maintenance Program 1.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 2.4 Bridge Rep] ( Old Trinity River C 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 Trinity
Bridge Elm Fork Repl 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 Beltline Grade Separation 3.5 10.5 6.0 0.0 0.0 20.1 Additional Irving Yard Storage Tr 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 Commuter Rail Cab Cars 0.3
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 T's Bi-Ievel Fleet-ILA 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 RDC Fleet Replacement -Phase I 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 TOTAL COMMUTER RAIL $26.3 $12.2 $7.0 $1.1 $1.2 $47.8 FP-13
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Exhibit 10.12 (cont.) Capital & Non-Operating Project Listing (In Millions) BUS FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08
Total Maintenance Equipment $0.3 $0.2 $0.3 $0.2 $0.1 $1.2 TERP -Bus Emission Reduction 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 Vehicle Maint Prog.(w/out body p 1.3 1.5 2.4 4.5 2.6 12.3 Nova Axle Repair
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 HVAC Rehab (CS/EOINW/4209) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Vehicle Lift Rehab (CS) 0.2 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 Service Station Rehab (ED) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Operating
Facility Maintenance 0.1 1.5 0.5 0.1 0.8 3.1 Methane Detection -EOSS 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 MLK Transit Center 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 Southern Sector Modifications 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 ELM/Lamar Patron Plaza 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 On Street passenger Boarding Fac 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.4 Farebox Replacement 9.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 Ledbetter Signalization 0.4
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Vehicle Business Systems 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 Low Emission Bus 31.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.2 Zero Emissions Bus Program 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <30' New Bus Purchase
Program 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.1 15.1 Sedan /min acces.class I 0.6 1.4 1.0 0.4 1.2 4.7 Sedan /Light trucks-class2 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.7 Heavy Trucks-class 3 0.2 0.7 0.0 1.0 0.4 2.2 Equipment
registered -class 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Equipment/non registered -class 5 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.2 1.0 Police Sedan/Vans-class 6 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 1.2 TOTAL BUS $58.0 $7.4 $5.8 $6.6
$20.8 $98.6 PARATRANSIT FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Total a $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 Van Replacements (100) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 14.3 Sedan Purchase (70) 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 2.4 TOTAL
PARATRANSIT $0.0 $0.0 $2.4 $0.0 $14.3 $16.7 FP-14
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Exhibit 10.12 (cont.) Capital & Non-Operating Project Listing (In Millions) LRT FY04· FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08
Total NWIAIPocket Track (Victory Sta $39.5 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $39.5 LRT Expansion Program-Wide 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -26.0 -26.0 Love Field 0.0 0.0 13.1 25.4 18.9 57.5 PHASE II LRT BUILD-OUT
132.7 116.3 87.0 48.3 255.9 640.2 CBD 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 SOC-3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Walnut Hill Station Parking 1.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 High Rail Equipment (Vehicles) 0.0 0.1
0.0 1.2 0.7 2.0 Light Rail Maintenance Equipmen 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.5 1.1 Bridge & Waterproofing 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 LRV Maintenance Progs (w/o Bo 0.9 2.5 2.2 1.2 1.1 8.0 S&I Expansion
-Phase II 5.9 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 LRT Operating Facility Maintena 0.0 0.2 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.6 NW S&I Facility 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FMB Yard Paving and Storage Fa 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3
FMB Annexes Upgrades 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Cedars/Lamar Landuse JV 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 LRV/ROW Systems Reserve 2.6 1.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 4.3 LRT Pass. Amenities Reserve 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5
0.7 1.7 Communications Reserve 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 Tunnel Delamination Study/Proje 1.5 1.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 3.8 SS Substation Pressurization 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 Vehicles (20) 10.4
20.0 20.0 9.7 0.0 60.0 TOTALLRT $198.5 $146.8 $125.0 $86.7 $252.9 $809.8 HOV FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Total East RL Thornton Extension $0.3 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.7 Stemmons 0.3 0.7
0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 LBJ 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 Central (Immediate) 2.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 SH 114 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.6 3.5 IH 635 (LBJ) 3.0 3.0 2.4 2.0 5.5 15.9 IH30 (Turnpike) 0.6 1.7 1.7
1.8 0.0 5.8 HOV Maint. Reserve 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Police Motorcycle Replacements 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 Dynamic Message Sign along 1-3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 HOV Stemmons Reversable
Gate' 1.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 TOTALHOV $8.3 $11.0 $5.2 $4.3 $7.1 $35.9 FP-15
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Exhibit 10.12 (cont.) Capital & Non-Operating Project Listing (In Millions) OTHER FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08
Total Capital P&D $20.2 $20.7 $21.2 $21.8 $22.3 $106.2 LAP 8.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.2 Other Road Improvements 7.7 2.7 2.1 2.1 1.1 15.7 Start-up Costs 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Non-Operating
0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 TOTAL OTHER $36.6 $23.5 $23.4 $24.0 $23.5 $131.0 GRAND TOTAL $335.3 $202.4 $191.4 $123.5 $321.3 $1.173.8 Debt Program (lines 6, 24-26, and 36-39) , With the passage
of the referendum on August 12,2000, DART received voter authorization to issue up to $2.9 billion of sales tax-backed long-term debt. DART will establish a two-tiered debt structure
in FY 2004: 1) commercial paper as the initial financing tool; and 2) long-term bonds. Each of these is discussed below: Commercial Paper Program -On January 23, 2001, the Board approved
a Master Debt Resolution, which authorized DART to pledge its sales tax revenues, on a senior subordinated basis, for the issuance of Senior Subordinate Lien Sales Tax Revenue Commercial
Paper Notes (Commercial Paper). Also, on the same day the Board authorized the issuance of up to $650 million in Commercial Paper to be issued to: A) fund its capital acquisition program;
B) refund $150 million in outstanding North Central Light Rail Project Notes; and C) fund its selfinsurance program. Upon the first issuance of Senior Lien Obligations (Long-Term Bonds)
the authorized amount of Commercial Paper was decreased to $450 million. The Commercial Paper program is backed by a liquidity facility supplied by Westdeutsche Landesbank, Bayerische
Landesbank, Landesbank Baden-Wurttemberg, and State Street Bank and Trust. The FY04 Plan includes the assumption that DART will issue $180 million of Commercial Paper in FY 2004 to partially
fund its capital program. It is projected that DART will have $315.6 million in outstanding Commercial Paper at the end ofFY 2004. Long-term Bonds -On January 23, 2001, the Board also
approved a Master Debt Resolution, which authorized DART to pledge its sales tax revenues, on a senior lien basis, for the issuance of up to $2.9 billion in Long-Term Bonds. The Long-Term
Bonds are issued to fund DART's capital program or refund Commercial Paper. The FY04 Plan assumes that no Long-Term Bonds will be issued in FY 2004. It is projected that DART will have
$495.9 million in outstanding Long-Term Bonds at the end of FY 2004. This is the remaining balance of the nearly $498.7 million in bonds that were issued in 2001-02. Exhibit 10.13 shows
projected issuances of short-term and long-term debt, and debt outstanding over time. FP-16
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Exhibit 10.13 Projected Net Debt Issuances by Fiscal Year Chart (In Millions) NetCP LTDebt Total LT EOYDebt
Issuance* Issuance Debt Issued Outstandin!! FY2004 $180.0 $0.0 $498.7 $801.9 FY2005 $82.0 $0.0 $498.7 $877.1 FY2006 $72.0 $0.0 $498.7 $938.7 FY2007 $47.0 $0.0 $498.7 $974.8 FY2008 $83.0
$36.0 $534.7 $1,084.6 FY2009 $0.0 $544.0 $1,078.7 $1,618.5 FY 2010 $0.0 $605.0 $1,683.7 $2,206.1 FY2011 $0.0 $391.0 $2,074.7 $2,571.3 FY 2012 $0.0 $230.0 $2,304.7 $2,768.6 FY2013 $0.0
$86.0 $2,390.7 $2,817.5 FY 2014 $0.0 $64.0 $2,454.7 $2,840.5 FY 2015 $0.0 $94.0 $2,548.7 $2,890.4 FY2016 $0.0 $216.0 $2,764.7 $3,058.5 FY2017 $0.0 $101.0 $2,865.7 $3,106.1 FY2018 $0.0
$34.0 $2,899.7 $3,082.3 FY 2019 $0.0 $0.0 $2,899.7 $3,020.7 FY2020 $0.0 $0.0 $2,899.7 $2,955.6 FY2021 $0.0 $0.0 $2,899.7 $2,886.7 FY2022 $0.0 $0.0 $2,899.7 $2,813.8 FY2023 $0.0 $0.0
$2899.7 $2736.8 * Excludes repayments and refundmgs Exhibit 10.14 summarizes the major commercial paper and long-term debt assumptions. For purposes of the Financial Plan, 30-year bonds
are assumed; however, shorter-term notes may be sold depending on interest rates and other considerations, as determined at the time of issuance. Exhibit 10.14 Debt Assumptions Commercial
Paper Lone-term Debt (LTD) Description FY2004 Future FY2004 Future Tenn < 5 years <5 years 30 years Up to 30 years Interest rates + fees 1.75% 2.75% -5.0% n/a 6.0% Credit enhancement
No No n/a Yes Principal and interest repayment Refund w/LTD Refund w/LTD Level Debt Level Debt Total debt issued $180M n/a $OM $2.9B Maximum debt outstanding $315.6M $600M $495.9M $2.5B
Year of maximum debt outstanding n/a FY 2009 n/a FY 2017 Cash reserves required Not required Not required No No Surety fee n/a n/a n/a 2% Issuance costs n/a n/a n/a 1% Uninsured Debt
Rating Assumed A1+/P1 A1+/PI AA-AAFP-17
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Financial Standard FS-D8 (see Exhibit APX.2) requires that DART maintain a coverage ratio (the Internal Coverage
Ratio) of 1.25x (1.25 times) for the first five years of the Plan and 1.5x planned coverage for years 6 to 20 of the Plan. DART's FY 2004 draft financial plan does not comply with this
standard between 2011 and 2021, dropping to a low value of 0.97 in 2014. Complying with this standard would result in an additional six-year delay to the LRT Phase II build-out. However,
DART does comply with its Additional Bond Test requirement in its external debt documents (the External Coverage Ratio) that Gross Sales Tax revenues must be at least two times the amount
of annual Debt Service. The lowest value for this coverage ratio is 2.46 in 2013. While the Internal Coverage Ratio is a Financial Standard, it is self-imposed and not a legal requirement.
The more important standard is the External Coverage Ratio, in which DART agrees that it will not issue additional debt when it does not comply with this covenant. DART is easily in
compliance with that standard throughout the life of the Plan. NET AVAILABLE CASH Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Change in Balance Sheet Accounts (lines 28-29) Based on each year's
projected sources and uses of cash, DART has projected its Balance Sheet for each year of the Plan. These line items reflect the net change in cash and non-cash working capital balance
sheet accounts. DART's projected Balance Sheet for each of the first five years of the Financial Plan is included in Exhibit APX.5. Cash Reserves (line 32) DART maintains several cash
reserves. FS-G5 requires a Master Insurance Reserve for claims and Board liability exposure ($9.0 million balance as of June 30, 2003). FS-G7 requires that sales tax collections that
exceed budget during a year be placed in a "Financial Reserve" account ($28.8 million balance as of June 30, 2003). These funds may be used for any of the following purposes, subject
to an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the appointed and qualified Board members: a. To reimburse the general operating account in any period when sales taxes fall below the amounts
included in the Approved Budget; b. To fund cost overruns on major capital projects; c. To reduce debt outstanding or reduce future borrowing requirements; d. To fund Transportation
System Management (TSM) projects; or e. To fund any other use as determined by two-thirds ofthe Board. The value in this line item represents the projected end-of-year value. FP-18
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan Working Cash Requirements (line 33) This line is included in the Financial Plan because of FS-G6, which states
"since sales taxes are received on a monthly basis, the unrestricted cash balance at the end of the year shall not be less than two-twelfths the difference between the subsequent year's
total sources of cash (excluding sales taxes) and total uses of cash as projected in the Financial Plan." The combination of the Financial Reserve and this working cash balance ensures
that DART always has a minimum of approximately three months of net expenditures on-hand. The value in this line item represents the projected end-of-year value. Net Available Cash (line
34) This line item represents the projected end-of-year value and is the bottom-line check regarding the long-term affordability of DART's programs. As long as this value is positive,
the Plan is affordable. In the FY 2004 Financial Plan, the minimum amount of Net Available Cash is $15.3 million in 2018. This amount is in addition to the reserves in lines 32 and 33.
MAJOR FINANCIAL PLAN ASSUMPTIONS • Sources of Funds o Sales taxes down 7.3% (to $300.4 million) in FY 2003; up 1.3% (to $304.3 million) in FY 2004; up 5% thereafter o Fare increases
every 5 years of 17% (the same magnitude as the FY 2003 fare increase) o Ridership increases (due to regional population growth): • Bus ridership increases by 1.5% per year through 2010,
then begins to taper down to 0.5% growth per year in 2018 and beyond • LRT ridership increases by 1.5% per year through 2014 (plus new openings), then begins to taper down to 0.5% in
2024 and beyond • Commuter Rail Ridership is flat in 2004, grows by 1% in 2005 and by 1.5% in 2006 and beyond • Paratransit Ridership grows by 1% per year through 2010 and then begins
to taper down to 0.1% in 2013 and beyond. o Advertising and other miscellaneous operating revenues grow by inflation each year o Investment portfolio yields remain 0.7% -1.5% above the
commercial paper rates through the life of the Plan o DART receives $35 million in Federal Formula money for Capital Preventive Maintenance every year for the life of the Plan o Future
bus procurements receive 30% Federal Funding o DART receives $700 million Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) o $600M in Commercial Paper (CP) capacity o $2.9B in long-term debt (up
to 30-year) capacity (all issued by 2018) FP-19
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan • Uses ofFunds o Operating Expenses • Operating budget (plus Capital P&D) of $308.5 million in FY 2004 (including
Level 1 Bus Service cuts) • Annual inflation of approximately 2.5% for the life of the Plan • Operating expense growth by 90% of inflation plus new service • 7l0-bus fleet for the life
of the Plan o Capital & Non-Operating • Gross cost of LRT Phase II build-out (including NWl-A) of $2.65 billion in 2002 dollars • Project Management will find $130 million in additional
savings off of the Phase II planning estimates shown in the bullet above • Delay of3-4 years in LRT Phase II build-out • Annual inflation rate of4% for LRT build-out costs • Love Field
tunnel funded with $20 million DART cost, $140 million in external contributions • No significant increase in the Capital Projects List -$1.4 billion was removed during the FY03 budget
process • Taper down the Capital P&D budget after major Phase II construction is completed completed (begins in 2011) o Debt Service • Long-term debt interest rates at 6% • Use of debt
and the type of debt issued will depend on DART's financial needs and market conditions POTENTIAL RISKS • Sales Tax receipts are unquestionably the most important estimate in the Financial
Plan, and therefore are the largest single area of risk to DART's ability to meet its goals and objectives. DART is projecting long-term growth rates of 5% per year after 2005. Because
DART's service area has been almost fully developed and most of the growth in North Central Texas will occur outside the service area, a 5% long-term growth rate may be difficult to
sustain. One factor that would help contribute to DART's attaining its long-term average growth rate projections is the very low level of current receipts. The current projection for
FY04 of $304.3 million is only 65% of what was projected for FY04 in the FY02 Plan, and as the metroplex comes out of the current recession, there is a rationale to expect a significant
rebound. • Projected ridership growth rates of 1%-1.5% for DART's fixed route services over the next 10-15 years may be difficult to sustain for the same reasons discussed above related
to sales taxes. But also as mentioned above, there is the potential for an economic recovery to boost ridership. This gives rise to an additional risk. If ridership increases as projected
and the increase is highly peak intensive, additional unbudgeted capital for an expanded vehicle fleet might be required. FP-20
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan • DART has programmed $700 million in Federal Funding for the Northwest/Southeast corridors of the LRT Phase
II build-out. It is distinctly possible that DART's request will not be approved in its entirety. If DART only receives $500 million, an additional twoyear delay to the LRT Phase II
build-out from the current schedule will be required. If only $300 in Federal funding is received, an additional three-year delay to the LRT Phase II build-out from the current schedule
will be required. • DART is constrained by FS-B5 to grow operating expenses by no more than 90% of the projected inflation rate, plus new programs and service. This limit on operating
expenses will be extremely difficult to attain. Approximately two-thirds of DART's FY04 Budget is composed of salaries, wages, and benefits. In the long term, these costs must at least
grow by inflation, or high performing employees will be motivated to leave DART for better paying jobs. • DART has attempted to identify all foreseeable capital projects, but every year
additional new projects are requested. If significant additions to the capital program (and associated operating costs) are required, this could cause affordability issues. • Based on
the Perryman sales tax model (and supported by the last 20 years of experience), inflation is estimated at approximately 2.5% per year for the life of the Plan. Because inflation affects
sales tax revenues and both operating and capital expenditures, it has many risks and many potential benefits associated with it. DART is at risk if either capital inflation is substantially
greater than general inflation, inflation declines, or the economy enters a period of deflation. DART stands to benefit if inflation increases substantially, particularly in the middle
years of the Plan after the majority of Phase II dollars have been spent and debt has been issued. • Current long-term debt interest rates are 5%. They are programmed into the Plan at
6%. DART is at risk if long-term rates rise above 6%. Conversely, if interest rates remain at or near their current levels, DART stands to benefit. • The current costs for the LRT Phase
II build-out are based on planning estimates. Project Management is currently in the process of determining the actual budget for the project. These estimates will be completed in the
next few months. The schedule is at risk if Project Management determines that the budget is significantly greater than the planning estimates. POTENTIAL AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT • As discussed
in the "Potential Risks" section above, DART stands to benefit if: o There is a significant rebound in sales taxes. Currently, the Plan is based on estimates that were done in the April
time frame incorporating a 7.3% drop in FY03. Through June, year-to-date sales taxes are only 4.5% below last year. Assuming all other growth rates remain as planned, this change adds
over $300 million into the Financial Plan. o Inflation increases and real sales tax growth remains the same. o Interest rates remain low. FP-21
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan • DART is projecting to receive $35 million each year in Formula Funds and, in accordance with FS-Bll, this
value is not inflated. Allowing this value to be increased by inflation adds approximately $175 million to the Plan. Even allowing for inflation is a very conservative estimate, as over
the last 10-year, these funds have averaged increasing by to-II% per year. If the Plan assumed a 5% annual increase, over $400 million in additional funds would be added to the Plan.
• While DART has programmed an aggressive $700 million FFGA, there are many areas where additional federal funds may be received that have not been programmed into the Plan, such as:
o No funds have been programmed for the LRT build-out for the Irving, SOC-3, or CBD line segments o Future bus procurements have only been programmed at a 30% federal funding level.
Prior purchases have generally been funded with 80-83% federal participation. o Inflation for the LRT Phase II build-out is programmed in the Plan at 4%. However, over the last 10 years,
the average inflation has been fairly consistent with consumer inflation (2.75% construction vs. 2.54% consumer). If construction inflation remains at this level, it will reduce Phase
II build-out costs by approximately $100 million. • DART may be able to build its sales tax revenue base through the addition of new cities to the service area. FP-22
Section 11 Appendix Index of Exhibits Exhibit APX.I Resolutions Approving FY 2004 Budget and Twenty-Year Financial Plan APX-I Exhibit APX.2 FY 2004 Financial Standards APX-4 Exhibit
APX.3 FY 2002 Financial Plan : APX-9 Exhibit APXA FY04-FY08 Changes in Sources & Uses of Cash APX-IO Exhibit APX.5 Five-Year Balance Sheet APX-II Exhibit APX.6 Glossary ofTenns/Definitions
APX-12 Exhibit APX.7 Acronyms APX-17 Exhibit APX.8 Organization Chart through Assistant Vice-President. APX-19 -->'1:1 '1.:.1=c. 􀁾􀀮
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Appendix Exhibit APX.l DRAFT RESOLUTION of theDALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT (Executive Committee) Approval ofFY 2004 Budget WHEREAS, the Board approved the Financial Standards (including the General Standards, Business Planning Parameters,
and Debt Service Standards) on June 24, 2003 (ResolutioriNo. 030077), which were the basis for compiling the FY 2004 Budget; and WHEREAS, the Board has been briefed on the assumptions
used to prepare the FY 2004 Budget; and WHEREAS, member jurisdictions have had 30 days to review the Proposed FY 2004 Budget in accordance with Section 452.113(3) of the Texas Transportation
Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors that the FY 2004 Budget is approved in the amount of $655,469,498. No funds may be transferred
between the following budget categories without Board approval: Operating Expense Budget $287,930,264 Capital Budget 335,327,232 Net Debt Service Budget 32,212,002 Total FY 2004 Budget
Budget $655,469,498 Prepared by: Approved as to form: Approved by: Sharon Leary Chief Financial Officer Office of General Counsel Gary C. Thomas President/Executive Director APX-l
\
􀁾Pro"""'" FY 2004 Bomn", PI"" (08108103) Exhibit APX.l (cont.) DRAFT RESOLUTION of the DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT (Executive Committee) Approval ofFY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plim
Appendix WHEREAS, the Board approved the Financial Standards (including the General Standards, Business Planning Parameters, and Debt Service Standards) on JWle 24, 2003 (Resolution
No. 030077), which were the basis for compiling the FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board has been briefed on the assumptions used to prepare the FY 2004 Twenty-Year
Financial Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors that the FY 2004 Twenty-Year Financial Plan as shown in Exhibit 1 is approved. Prepared
by: Sharon Leary Chief Financial Officer Approved as to form: Office of General COWlSel Approved by: Gary C. Thomas President/Executive Director APX-2
􀁾 w SOURCES OF FUNDS I Sales Tax RC\'cnucs 2 Opcraling Revenues 3 Interesl Income 4 Fonnula Fcdml Funding 5 Discretionary Federal Funding 6 Debt Issuances 7 Olhcr Sources B : 􀁔􀁯􀁴􀁩􀁬􀁓􀁯􀁰􀂷􀁾􀁾�
�􀀧􀀹􀀨􀀢􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀼􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀭􀂷 USE5 OF FUNDS Operating Expenses: 9 Bus 10 Light Rail Transll II Commuter RaiVRR Managcmel 12 Psratransit 1) HOV Transitways 14 GCSlCfilI Mobility·
TOM ··15::,I'tilialoti<..iiti>iib....i>i:,::::·:···· '.' Operor;nR,+P&D+SIlJrllh Exhibill Dallas Arta Rapid TriDsU DnR FV 2004 Flo.nd.1 Plaa Twenty YurSourtt'IDd Viti orCa,h ($ MllUOIU
-Innded DoUan) 304.l 319.5 335.5 35J.J 370.9 51,683.6 389.5 '09.0 429.4 450.9 '73A 497.1 522.0 548.1 575.5 60.2 634.4 6662 699.5 734.5 771.2 SIO,088.4 49.7 49.9 50.2 51.1 58.9 259.8
59.9 62.7 68.2 70.9 83.9 85A 86.4 87.5 88.9 102.1 103.7 104.6 105.6 106.5 122.9 1,599.5 5.7 11.9 14.9 21.1 2'.6 78.1 30.5 36.9 36.6 29.8 24.8 19.5 17.3 \5.0 14.4 11.3 10.4 11.1 13.'
11.5 14.0 374.8 111.0 44.9 40.4 35.0 39.5 170.9 35.0 85.' 35.0 90.0 35.0 57.0 40.4 55.7 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 113.5 35.0 1,017.9 14.8 75.9 70.3 25.0 700 155.9 80.0 80.0 80.0 80.0
80.0 65.0 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 745.9 180.0 82.0 72.0 '7.0 119.0 500.0 5.40 605.0 391.0 230.0 86.0 64.0 9'.0 216.0 101.0 34.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,865.0 14.7 8.8 19.3
30A 25.0 :IlIJ. 6•.8 84.8 69.0 43.7 10.3 10.7 11.1 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 1J.5 14.0 14.6 15.2 ID.li ;68U :::::::'$5.1,9:'" ::.<001.7 ::::.:::S 1,: .... 5107.9 ·$314H: .:SI20M :::Slm1r ··SI'IO'.1
::::::':·5995.'3 '" 5193:4 ::::·::519U.· 􀁾􀀶􀀮􀀱􀀺 .:.' S.33.S':'::···· 26.1 :::::::5799.7: 􀀺􀀺􀁓􀀷􀁾􀁥􀀻􀁳􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀬 '::S83G.s .::SS67.5 . "':3"I)S: :5958. S HGS;l' 174.5 178.3 182.4
186.3 190.5 sm.• 1.4.8 1".6 201.7 205.3 208.6 212.8 217.5 222.1 226.5 231.5 236.3 241.4 246.6 251.6 256.• 84,164.\ 61.4 63.1 65.1 66.6 68.0 324.8 69.5 18.8 103.1 125.2 154.1 167.1 170.7
174.4 187.2 191.2 195.2 1••.4 203.6 201.9 212.2 1,764.3 18.6 19.3 20.0 20.8 21.6 100.3 22.' 23.2 2'.0 24.8 25.6 26.5 27.6 28.6 2•.7 30.8 32.0 JJ.2 34.5 35.9 37.2 536.5 26.6 27.6 28.7
30.1 1I.4 144.4 JJ.O 34.5 35.7 37.2 38.7 40.4 '2.3 43.9 45.6 47.3 49.\ 51.0 53.0 55.0 57.1 808.4 5.6 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.• 18.6 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.8 6.• 7.1 7.2 7.' 7.5 7.1 7.8 8.0
133.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 I.l M 1.4 I., 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 \.6 1.7 1.7 1.1 1.8 1.8 Jll.l :,:328M:,:: ::'$19$,1 ::::::::::1303.2::: :: :snu,:, :,:::S31M ::::SI$16.6 '::SJ1U':': '::.8341:1,
'·M71;F: ::::_4::,:' '5.435:0 ·:::S45S.G:, 􀀧􀀬􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀧􀁓􀀴􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀬􀀺􀀺 ',':·5.417:5 '::549'1.6 ::::::::SSIlll,7 ,., snu "':':':S$34.3· .. ·SS41.1 􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀤􀁬􀀧􀁾􀀻􀁾􀀬 ::::::SS73.4::
::::SS·S36.1 8308.5 83/6.4 8324.4 83Jl.7 8U1.2 5/.613.2 33H.0 3375./M02.0 3430.2 3456.0 S468.6 M80.3 8495.3 35/2.5 3524.9 3m.4 mO.3 3563.5 3576.8 3590.6 38.9J9.8 I "'tl a '8CIla􀁾 IV
􀁾to c:: CIl 􀁾􀀧 CIl CIl "'tl §'000 25 00 25 w '-' Capilal ProjCt:1s and Non-Qperating: 16 Bus 565.6 58.9 528.4 57.4 522.3 5132.6 54.5 5173.2 5'.3 5187.3 54.8 578.0 521.7 $72.7 57.3
59.0 56.7 58.5 513.9 5266.8 58.6 S999.9 17 Light Rail Transit 198.5 146.8 125.0 86.7 252.9 809.8 m.8 695.7 560.8 228.5 1'3.7 69.6 104.4 187.2 103.9 6.1 3.6 7.0 5.8 3.5 6.3 3,668.7 18
Commulcr RaillRR Managcme 26.3 12.2 7.0 1.1 1.2 47.8 1.2 1.3 1.3 I.' I.' 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.1 72.0 19 Paralr.lonsit 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 14.3 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \7.4
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2\.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.8 81.1 20 HOV Trnnsitways 8.3 11.0 5.2 4.3 7.1 35.9 7.3 8.3 7.9 8.3 8.6 9.6 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 94.9 21 Cspilal P& 0, S13n·Up.
Non-20.1 20.8 21.3 21.9 22.' 107.1 25.9 32.5 29.9 30.0 21.2 B.8 14.1 17.9 IS. I 15.5 15.8 16.2 16.6 17.0 17.4 41)6.1 22 GCflernl Mobili\y . Road Impr 15.9 2.7 2.1 2.\ 1.1 W 1.0 1.0 1.1
1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 I.l 1.3 1.3 1.4 1A ill n 􀁴􀁇􀁴􀁩􀀺􀁩􀀭􀁃􀁩􀀭􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁩􀁬􀀪􀁬􀁩􀀢􀁩􀁦􀀺􀁎􀀢􀀮􀁳􀁩􀁴􀀻􀀨􀀩􀁢􀁣􀁲􀀮􀁩􀁴􀁄􀁬􀁩􀀺 ":':': S335;J <:::S281.4:' :SlllM "':':<sUJ;S
'$311:.1' ,'SU13:8, $1n.8 ··:','S91tl! 􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀼􀀤􀁾􀁍􀀧 ·".:S456.5· '.: SI9l1.1 <:,:,$113:7 sisn :::,:,:5280.6, Sl1l1.1:: 􀀢􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀬􀀺􀁾􀀵􀀺􀀵􀀼􀀺􀀧􀀬 ::S29.2::: . '$:14.9' . S39:5,
:,:,:,:S19LS 􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀤􀀶􀁴􀁾 ':'S5J64:4 Debt Service 24 Principal· LTIST Debl 51.. 56.' 510.5 510.8 5•.2 539.3 510.1 S17.4 525.• 532.1 537.1 541.0 $44.t 547.9 553A 557.8 561.6 565.1 568.9
5n.8 577.1 575/.1 25 lnlt'l'e5t and Fees· LT/Sf Debt JllJ. lU ill J.U ;IlU 􀁾 ill lW lllil J.illi lli.1 1lll lliU ill.2 .I.1l.B. lliJ J..l.l.1 l6U 􀁾 lliU lli.l Mill :'16:: TowlliblSOt;:t..:,::::::::
::·"" . "':::; ;",,:,:;:S)1,2: ,:::,:,S3U: :,:;::::::545;6:,:':: ::'541.7: :;:::::,m,f 'S2I4:1' :::':';Sl1.1:· 'SIlO.l :::>::S1$7.lI:' ·'SI81.3. :,:::::,$191;7.:': :::SI9&:8::,'," 5204:5,"
::·5215.B :::::::,S11U, ::< S13101·: " $13);3::::' :::S133J::, :":s233:3 '::513J.1::: :':::.$13JJ 831ll!lAJ :'11:: 􀁔􀁣􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁕􀀬􀁵􀀺􀁣􀁩􀀨􀂷􀁆􀀮􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁤􀁩􀀾􀀺􀂷􀂷 ...... ":::':'8655.5.:
:::8531<3, ::,::S540:1:: :::$481.0 ::::::::5690.1 51.905:1' '.'Sn77.1 SI 7M' ::;SlI35.4:· SI03U ::::'::::SS25.F· ':8817:4: :::,::'8811.0' ::':::897U ·:"81154.0 ·'·':'::.S797.3 ,::::::::578403
,'SS01-4 ::::::::5819:9 ··SIOllU ";':':SS68,1 S17090:4 28 Net Inc (Dec) In cash 524.7 555.6 562.5 580.8 517.1 S141.4 511.4 (511.6) (526.3) (S42.8) (532.5) (528.8) (S2'.8) (540.1) (517.3)
52.4 I 5122 528.0 547.6 (5104.3) S9O.2 S1I4.7 2. Change in Balance Sheet Accl1l 31.5 (4l2) (15.3) (22.1) 38.2 (IG.9) .1.7 13.7 (72.8) (41.8) (54.4) (7.2) (4.1) 23.9 (36.1) (21.2) (8.9)
(1.9) (2.4) 48.0 (51.1) (136.7) 30 Cash, Beg ofPcriod ! 238.5 294.8 301.2 354.4 4111 138.5 '69.0 592.1 594.2 495.1 410.5 J2J.6 287.6 258.1 2'1.9 178.6 159.8 163.1 189.2 234.3 m.o 138.5
31 Cash. EndafPeriod 294.8 301.2 35'.4 'Ill I 46•.0 469.0 5.2.1 5.4.2 495.1 410.5 323.6 287.6 258.1 241.9 178.6 15•.8 163.1 18•.2 234.3 178.0 216.5 116.5 J2 Less Cash Reserves & RcstriclM
Fu (31A) (37.6) (37.8) (38.0) (38.3) (38.3) (38.5) (38.7) (39.0) (3•.2) (39.5) (39.7) (40.0) (40.3) (40.5) (40.8) (41.1) (41.4) ('1.7) (42.0) ('2.3) (41.3) 33 Less Wort.lng Cssh Requirement
llliIl w.u W-!l UA.2l U2.1l U2.1l !1l!Jj lliJll WJl WJ.I lll2.I l2W l2ll1l Ulllill UI!!!.lI UJll2l U26.!l UJll2l ill2Jl u.u.>l LJ.iI.!I IU.UI :,34:::: 􀁎􀁣􀁴􀁁􀁶􀀮􀁩􀁴􀁩􀀮􀁢􀁬􀁥􀂷􀁴􀁵􀁬􀁻􀀺􀁾􀂷􀀺􀀭􀀺
􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷 ....-:<: :::,:,',S2ml: ···'.Sl!U ,:,:,:,:,$i1U :;:::.::S3l6:t ,:,:;:,:5371;1: , :::$321;1:. :':'::$48.l.S::.;: '5479.5::, ·:·S311.iL:: .$l87.0 :;:;:,',:SlllM,:,' :.:SI56.1'.'
.:SI2O:t ::::::: SlGU: ';::::.$31.1 ,:,:,:,:,:,115,) :':':':':':'16.6 :':::::::M9,i;:: :':':':':i..'U "::.:.:,:12U? ':::::S3l:!i.: ::""$32;9 DEBT FINANCING INFORMATION: 35 Sales Taxes
forOperaliol\!l 76.4% 73.2% 70.•% 67.6% 6l.5% oJ. 60.8% 59.4% 62.]% 66.5% 68.9% 70.4% 69.5% 68.4% 68.S% 65.5% 64.3% 62.8% 61.2% 60.2% 56.6% oJ. 36 Toul Debt 015 EOY (M) S801.9 5877.1
5938.7 S974.8 51,084.6 oJ. 51,618.5 52,206.1 52,571.3 52,768.6 52.817.5 S2,840.5 S2,890.4 S3,058.5 S3,106.1 53,082.3 53.020.7 52,955.6 52.886.1 52.813.8 52,7l6.8 oJ. 37 Internal Coverage
Ratio l54 l27 3.08 l31 3.58 oJ. 2.54 1.74 1.31 1.08 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.02 1.00 1.10 1.18 1.27 1.31 1.47 1.65 oJ. 3S Exlemal Co\'erage Ratio 9.45 8.16 7.36 7.41 7.41 oJ. 5.0' 3.39 2.12
2.49 2.'6 2.50 2.55 2.54 2.53 2.60 2.12 2.86 3.00 3.15 J.JI oJ. 39 Debt Debt as a%of Available Capital 89.4% 89.3% 89.2% 89.9% 57.6% oJ. 89.9% 90.0% 89.9% 89.6% 89.7% 89.2% 90.0% 89.7%
895% 81.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% oJ. , ->"d "d 􀁾;:l 0-X·
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Appendix Exhibit APX.2 FY 2004 Financial Standards Resolution No. 030077 The Financial Standards are divided into three sections: General, Debt
Service, and Business Planning Parameters. The purpose of the general standards is to ensure that DART prudently manages its financial affairs and establishes appropriate cash reserves.
The purpose of the debt service standards is to limit the level of debt that may be incurred and to ensure that debt assumptions are based on financial parameters similar to (or more
conservative than) those that would be placed on DART by the financial marketplace. Actual debt covenants may differ from these standards. Where this occurs, the Financial Plan will
reflect the-actual covenants in the Board-approved debt instrument. The Business Planning Parameters provide management with a framework for developing the following year's budget and
the twenty-year Financial Plan and establishing future business targets for management to achieve. Since DART's enabling legislation requires a two-thirds vote on debt and the Financial
Plan, approval or amendment of DART's Financial Standards will require an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the appointed and qualified Board members. Financial Standards -General G1.
Complete and accurate accounting records shall be maintained in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles as promulgated by the Government Accounting Standards Board.
DART's fiscal year-end for financial reporting purposes shall be September 30. G2. Funds of the Authority shall be invested within the guidelines of the Board's approved Investment Policy
and Investment Strategy, and in compliance with applicable State law, including Section 452.102 ofthe Texas Transportation Code, Article 717q V.T.C.S., the Texas Public Funds Investment
Act, and applicable Federal law. The Board shall approve the signatories for all Agency checking and savings accounts. G3. An independent accounting firm shall perform an examination
of DART's consolidated financial statements (including Single Audit requirements) and DART's retirement plan financial statements on an annual basis. The Agency's goal is to receive
an unqualified opinion on the financial statements and an opinion that DART is in compliance with Federal Single Audit requirements in all material respects. G4. An annual actuarial
analysis shall be performed on the Defined Benefit Plan. This Plan shall be funded in an amount sufficient to meet current actuarial requirements and to reduce the actuarially determined
unfunded liability to zero by 2017. APX-4
􀁾Propo"", FY 2004B_Phm (08108J03) Exhibit APX.2 (cont.) FY 2004 Financial Standards Appendix G5. Appropriate insurance coverage shall be maintained to mitigate the risk of material
loss. For self-insured retentions, a separately funded Master Insurance Reserve shall be maintained in an amount equal to the estimated liability for incurred losses and a reasonable
allowance for claims incurred but not filed. An actuarial review of selfinsured retentions will be made at least once every three years to ensure adequacy of the Master Insurance Reserve.
G6. Since sales taxes are received on a monthly basis, the unrestricted cash balance at the end of the year shall not be less than two-twelfths of the difference between the subsequent
year's total sources of cash (excluding sales taxes) and total uses of cash as projected in the Financial Plan. G7. Sales tax collections received during a fiscal year that are in excess
of the sales tax budget for that year shall be deposited into a segregated "Financial Reserve" account by January 1 of the subsequent year. These funds may be used for any of the following
purposes subject to an affirmative vote oftwo-thirds ofthe appointed and qualified Board members: a. To reimburse the general operating account in any period when sales taxes fall below
the amounts included in the Approved Budget; b. To fund cost overruns on major capital projects; c. To reduce debt outstanding or reduce future borrowing requirements; d. To fund Transportation
System Management (TSM) projects; or e. To fund any other use as determined by two-thirds ofthe Board. G8. The fiscal year of DART shall end on September 30 of each year. Two months
before the Business Plan is distributed to the Board, the Board should review and approve a set of Financial Standards that can be used by management as a framework for developing the
following year's Budget, Business Plan, and Financial Plan. The Board shall approve the Budget and Financial Plan by September 30 of each fiscal year. The Annual Budget shall be the
first year ofthe Financial Plan. G9. Financial Plan amendments shall require a two-thirds vote of the number of appointed and qualified Board members. An amendment is necessary when
the addition of a new capital project or the cumulative modification of an existing capital project is in excess of $1 million or the addition of a new operating program or increase
in an existing operating program is in excess of $500,000. APX-5
􀁾Propo,'" FY 2004 B",""" P1m> (08108103) Exhibit APX.2 (cont.) FY 2004 Financial Standards Financial Standards -Business Planning Parameters Appendix B1. Sales tax revenue forecasts
shall be based on a sales tax model developed specifically for the DART Service Area by an independent economist, except for the most current year which may be based on management's
best estimate. In order to ensure a conservative sales tax estimate, the model's projections may be reduced by 1% for years 6-10 and by 2% thereafter, dependent on current economic trends.
B2. Passenger revenue forecasts shall be derived from ridership and average fare forecasts based on the Board's approved fare policy and fare structure. The Board will consider, from
time to time, fare modifications to achieve Service Plan, ridership, and subsidy per passenger targets (see B4) and to maintain DART's financial viability. B3. The Board shall approve
annual fixed route service levels by mode for each of the next five years. Fixed route service levels levels shall be based on the Five Year Action Plan prepared by the Planning and
Development Department. Cost of service will be developed jointly by Finance and Planning. B4. The Board desires to steadily improve service efficiency over time. It is the Agency's
long-term strategy to achieve this by reducing the subsidy per passenger ratio (operating expenses minus operating revenues divided by passenger boardings). Subsidy per passenger for
fixed route service and for all modes may not be higher in FY 2002 than $2.85 for fixed route and $2.47 for all modes, respectively. B5. For fmancial planning purposes, total operating
expenses may not increase by more than 90% of the projected rate of inflation for the Dallas area, plus the incremental costs associated with the addition of new services, programs,
and/or facilities as approved by the Board. The projected incremental cost impact of new services, programs, and/or facilities shall be presented to the Board for approval as part of
the Financial Plan assumption process each year. B6. Paratransit costs are driven primarily by the number of revenue hours, which is based on passenger demand and productivity. Productivity
is improved by increasing the number of passengers capable of using fixed route service carried each hour. It is the Agency's long-range strategy to move paratransit riders from demand
responsive service to fixed route service. B7. Management shall use a consistent methodology for computing net administrative costs and direct costs. The administrative ratio (administrative
costs minus administrative revenues divided by direct costs) may not increase for two consecutive years and shall not be higher than 14.0%. APX-6
􀁾Prop"",. FY 2004 Bu,;",,,, Plan (08I08I03) Exhibit APX.2 (cont.) FY 2004 Financial Standards Appendix B8. General Mobility programs for road improvement programs such as the Local
Assistance Program (LAP), Principal Arterial Street System (PASS), and Transportation System Management (TSM) and Intelligent Transportation System projects shall be funded according
to the tenns of the approved Interlocal Agreements and recorded as nonoperating expenses in the Financial Plan. B9. Capital planning and development costs and start-up costs are the
internal staff costs associated with planning, designing, constructing, and opening new capital projects such as the light rail system. Management shall use a consistent methodology
for allocating costs between operating and capital planning. Capital planning and development costs shall not exceed 7% of total operating costs. Cumulative start-up costs for a line
section shall not exceed 60% of the first year operating costs ofthat line section or HOV lane. BI O. The Financial Plan shall include funding for asset replacement and expansion projects.
Capital projects in excess of $1 million shall be approved by the Board. Timely replacement of assets shall be the highest priority to ensure a safe system. Accordingly, the Financial
Plan shall include replacement reserves by major asset category to ensure adequate future funding. The reserve levels shall be based on an independent assessment of asset condition (to
be completed at least once every five years). Expansion projects shall be prioritized based on the project's cost, impact on ridership, return on investment, available funds, and other
relevant factors. An inflation rate of 4% shall be used for capital construction projects. Non-construction capital projects will be increased at the rate ofinflation. Bii. DART receives
fonnula and discretionary Federal funding. Fonnula funding shall be programmed primarily for bus replacement, capital maintenance (if available), vehicles, and passenger facility construction.
Fonnula funding for future years shall be forecast at the current year's funding level or at the minimum levels included in Federal authorizations to ensure a conservative forecast.
Discretionary funding shall be programmed primarily for major system expansion projects (e.g., LRT or new bus maintenance facilities). Discretionary funding levels shall be estimated
by project based on Federal criteria and the likelihood of obtaining congressional appropriations and require Board approval during the Budget/Financial Plan process. APX-7
􀁾Pro"",,,, FY 2004 B",ine" PI"" (08I08I03) Exhibit APX.2 (cont.) FY 2004 Financial Standards Financial Standards -Debt Service Appendix Dl. DART may not enter into a debt or financing
arrangement unless the transaction is in full compliance with all applicable provisions of the Texas Transportation Code and other applicable state and federal laws. D2. Long-term debt
may be included in the Financial Plan; however, no such debt shall be incurred without the approval by the voters ofthe Service Area. -D3. To avoid the need to roll-over short-term financing,
for financial planning purposes, in the year of issuance, beginning cash balance, plus total sources of cash, less total uses of cash, less ending reserves shall be sufficient to retire
each principal draw-down within five years. D4. Debt shall be issued for approved capital projects and insurance reserves. D5. Sinking funds shall be established to ensure that cash
is available to make timely debt service payments on fixed-rate debt issuances that have maturities of one year or more and have periodic semi-annual interest payments. DART shall deposit
on a monthly basis a prorated amount sufficient to fund the next principal and interest payment. D6. Reserve fund(s) that may be required by the financial markets for each debt issuance
shall be maintained. These reserves may be funded by cash and securities, insurance, or surety bonds, but shall not be accessed unless the sinking funds have insufficient money to make
the principal and interest payments as due. For financial planning purposes, reserve projections shall be based on the actual requirement on existing debt, plus the lower of maximum
annual debt service, 125% of average annual debt service, or 10% of principal outstanding on projected debt. D7. DART shall establish a legal security structure of liens, agreements,
pledged revenues, and other covenants which will be sufficient to (1) secure a rating of "A" or better on sales tax securities; (2) a MIGI or SPI rating on short-term notes; or (3) secure
Al or PI rating on other short-term debt, or if necessary, secure a credit enhancement from a financial institution with a rating of "AA" or better. D8. Certain debt service coverage
ratios are required to access the financial markets. For financial planning purposes, for long-term debt, sales tax 􀁲􀁥􀁶􀁾􀁮􀀺􀁵􀁥􀁳 plus operating revenues, plus interest income,
less operating expenses (excluding debt service and depreciation), for any twelve consecutive months of the prior eighteen months, must be sufficient to cover maximum annual debt service
and financing lease payments by 1.25 times. The same calculation for future years must be sufficient to cover maximum annual debt service and lease payments, including payments on any
debt to be issued, by 1.25 times for the first five years and 1.5 times thereafter. APX-8
DART Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Appendix 􀁾 􀁧􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁧􀁾 .. ;;; 􀁾􀁧􀀻􀀳􀁾􀁧􀁾 􀀺􀀻􀁾􀀺􀀳􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁬 e-;:;j 􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁾 􀁾 􀀲􀁾􀁾 􀁈􀁾 􀁤􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾 i 􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁈􀁾 􀁾 􀁾􀀺􀁭
􀁾􀁕 􀁩􀁾􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁩􀁩􀁬􀁧􀀻􀁝􀁾􀁾􀁾 .;. 􀁮􀁾􀁾 􀂧􀁾􀁾 ::: 􀁾􀁆􀁾􀁡􀁡􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁬􀀺 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁧􀁊 􀁾 􀁡􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀀢􀀢􀀮􀁯􀀮􀀢􀀺􀁬􀁾 .""9 􀁾 ."., 􀀭􀀬􀀬􀁾 􀁾􀁾 •• 􀁟􀁾
􀁾 􀀮􀀻􀁾􀀧􀀢 􀁾 􀁾􀀺􀀡􀀻􀁊 ga 􀁾􀀮􀁾 􀀡􀁾􀁅· i q "f: 􀁾 􀁾􀁩􀁾 􀁾 ;I 0; ;= 􀁾 :t:.. ;; I -:"! .. 0. 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 :l ·􀁾 ·; 􀁾 􀁾􀀽 􀁾 ;; • " 0 .. j 􀁾􀁾 g 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 ;l i 􀁾 •• ; 􀁾
i 0 E 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 :l 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾􀀻 􀁾 e " ·􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 ::l ·􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 ; 􀁾 3 􀁾 " ·􀁾 􀁾􀁃􀀱􀁃􀀱 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 ::l i , ; 􀁾 ; 􀁾 􀁾 􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁣 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 ;:l 􀁾 􀁾·􀁾
􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 -: 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 ;:l ·􀁾 •􀀻􀁾 ::l " -= 􀁾 ;; 􀁾 􀁾 ; 5! 􀁾 􀁾 :1 􀁾·i;·::l " 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 00E􀁾 􀁾 :l 􀁾 ·"·􀁾 ::l 􀁜􀁾 ::::.st •• ¥ : -" -􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 :l S􀁾·􀁾 : ::l 􀀼􀁾 ·"'!"'!
;:·5 􀁾􀁾 11 􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁧􀁩 :l , 􀁾􀁾 " -􀁾􀀢 􀁾 a-􀁾 **􀁾 􀁾 ::l §·-. 􀁾 􀁾 ::l "" 􀁾 •􀁾􀁾 􀁾 :l 􀁾 .. 0 "·::l 􀁾·-• j ;; ; 􀁾 􀁾 ;·;l " " •􀁾 ; ::l " a " •􀁾 0 g􀁾 􀁾·􀁾 􀁾 •• 􀁾 ::l
􀁾 • • a-·.;·*§ 􀁾 􀁾·:l ·E􀁾 􀁾􀁾·::l 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀮 "􀁾􀁾 i 􀁾 >l q .... 􀁾 §􀁾 :1 a • " a;; " ·􀁾 : ·*•§·:l ··􀁾 􀁾·::l J "• ;; E S 􀁾 " *􀁾 􀁾 :l 􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾 : ::l j •-· i "-·-: 􀁾 􀁾 :l
g-􀁾 "0 : 􀁾 ·􀁾 ·􀁾 g·::l 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾􀁾·:'l • -" 0; -·; .; 􀁾 gsg :'l 􀁾 􀁾·: :'l 􀁾 --· APX-9
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03)Exhibit APX.4 Dallas Area Rapid Transit Draft FY 2004 Financial Plan FY 2004 through FY 2008 Changes in Sources and Uses of Cash ($ Millions
-Innated Dollars) Appendix SOURCES OF FUNDS 1 Sales Tax Revenues ($163.9) ($180.5) ($198.0) ($210.3) ($224.4) ($977.1) 2 Operating Revenues (4.3) (6.9) (9.0) (12.2) (11.1) (43.6) 3 Interest
Income (9.3) 1.0 8.5 1-6.2 22.5 38.9 4 Formula Federal Funding 75.3 23.6 (18.8) 0.0 4.5 84.7 5 Discretionary Federal Funding 1.2 25.9 20.3 (25.0) 20.0 42.3 6 Debt Issuances 0.1 (334.8)
(358.9) (328.7) (233.9) (1,256.2) 7 Other Sources 8.8 3.3 13.6 24.5 (9.5) 40.7 USES OF FUNDS Operating Expenses: 9 Bus ($38.4) ($41.7) ($42.4 ) ($42.2) ($41.8) ($206.5) 10 Light Rail
Transit (12.0) (11.6) (12.0) (19.7) (43.0) (98.2) 11 Trinity Railway Express (4.2) (3.7) (9.0) (8.8) (8.4) (34.0) 12 Paratransit 5.6 5.7 6.1 6.9 7.9 32.2 13 HOV Transitways (0.6) (1.1)
(1.1 ) (1.1) (1.0) (4.8) 14 General Mobility -TDM 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.7 Capital Projects and Other Non-Operating 16 Bus 17 Light Rail Transit 18 Commuter RaillRR Management 19 Paratransit
20 HOV Transitways 21 Capital P & D, Start-Up, Non-Operating 22 General Mobility -Road Impr./ITS $22.7 ($33.4) ($52.8) ($9.3) ($29.7) ($102.5) (94.9) (271.4) (429.0) (453.8) (191.8)
(1,440.9) 11.6 (10.3) 4.0 (2.1 ) (4.8) (1.5) (3.1) (2.0) 2.4 0.0 0.7 (2.0) (0.1 ) 2.2 (4.9) (8.5) (8.7) (19.9) (3.0) (5.5) (8.0) (13.3) (13.2) (43.1) (4.4) (1.5) (2.2) (2.3) (1.5) (12.0)
Debt Service 24 Principal -LTIS T Debt 25 Interest and Fees -LT/ST Debt 28 Net Inc (Dec) in cash $43.6 $133.9 $73.5 $149.8 $5.6 $406.3 29 Change in Balance Sheet Accts 18.9 (48.6) (25.7)
17.3 55.5 0.0 30 Cash, Beg of Period (156.6) (94.1) (8.8) 39.0 206.1 206.1 31 Cash, End of Period ($94.1) ($8.8) $39.0 $206.1 $267.1 $267.1 32 Less Cash Reserves & Restricted Funds (1.0)
(0.9) (0.9) (0.9) (0.9) (4.7) 33 Less Working Cash Requirement 52.4 45.2 60.0 38.3 35.7 36.7 34···.· Net•.A"iiilable.•Caglt···.······· ...................................•.••....••...•.........•...•.
•········><54%;6 •••􀀾􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀮􀂷􀀩􀀮􀂷􀀮􀁳􀀳􀀵􀁾􀀵􀀾􀀼􀀮􀂷􀀮􀀤􀀡􀀱􀁪􀁨􀁦 􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀼􀀤􀀲􀀴􀀳􀁾􀀵 ···••••••·.·.5301;9) ····«·.·$299;2 APX-IO
􀁾Propo," FY 2004 Bm""" p"," (08108103) Appendix Exhibit APX.5 Draft FY 2004 Financial Plan Five Year Balance Sheet In Millions -Inflated Dollars I.TNF. nON 2/\/\4 2/\0!\ 20/\6 2007
200R ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS 1 Cash, Cash Equivalents and Investments $214 $225 $273 $318 $369 2 Sales taxes receivable 51 53 56 59 62 3 Transit revenue receivable, net 4 4 4 4 5 4 Due
from other governments 8 7 6 2 6 5 Material and supplies inventory 23 23 23 23 23 6 Prepaid transit expenses and other 2 2 2 3 4 7 Total Current Assets $301 $315 $365 $409 $469 8 Restricted
Assets $81 $83 $83 $98 $98 9 Property, Plant & Equipment, Net 2,529 2,606 2,674 2,673 2,870 10 Long-Term Investments Held to Pay Capital Lease Liabilities 417 417 417 417 417 11 Net
Pension Asset 3 3 3 3 3 12 Unamortized Long-Term Debt Issuance 5 6 7 8 10 13 TOTAl, ASSETS $3.337 􀀤􀀳􀀮􀀴􀁾􀁦􀁬 􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀢􀀧􀁬􀀹 $3.608 $3.867 LIABILITIES AND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES
14 Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $112 $89 $89 $78 $116 15 Current portion of long-term debt payable 2 7 10 11 9 16 Local Assistance Program payable 33 21 9 0 0 17 Retainage
payable 15 9 8 5 15 18 Other 3 3 3 3 3 19 Total Current Liabilities $165 $129 $120 $97 $143 20 Sales Tax Revenue Commercial paper Notes Payable $316 $397 $470 $517 $600 21 Senior Lein
Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Payable 494 482 468 457 482 22 Capital Lease Liabilities 417 417 417 417 417 23 TOTAI 1.14RTT,ITJF.S $1.392 $l42!\ U47!\ S14RR $1.642 EQUITY 24 Contributed capital
$831 $951 $1,062 $1,122 $1,232 25 Retained earninQs 1 114 1054 1013 998 993 26 TOTAl I'.lJl \' $1.945 $2.005 --$2.075 $2.120 $2225 APX-ll
􀁾_ FY 2004 Bm""" PI.. (08108103) Exhibit APX.6 Glossary of TermslDeimitions Appendix Accidents per 100,000 Miles -Measures vehicle accidents reported (bus and light rail) per 100,000
miles of actual fixed route mileage. Calculation = [(VehicleAccidents/Actual Mileage) * /OO,OOOJ Administrative Ratio -Measures administrative costs as a percentage of direct operating
costs. It is management's objective to reduce this ratio. Administrative costs include (but are not limited to) executive management, finance, purchasing, legal, internal audit, human
resources, marketing, board support, and administrative services. Administrative revenues include (but are not limited to) advertising revenue. Calculation = [(Administrative Costs -Administrative
Revenues) /Direct Costs + Start-up CostsJ Annulled Trips -The number of trips eliminated from the schedule prior to scheduled departure due to adverse equipment, track, or dispatchconditions. TRE does not include annulled trips as part of the on-time performance calculation. Average Fare -Represents the average fare paid per passenger boarding on fixed route modes
of service during the period. Calculation = [(Fixed Route Passenger Revenues -Commissions and Discounts) /(# OfFixed Route Passenger Boardings)J Average Speed -Represents the average
overall speed of the modal service as reflected in the schedule, with stops and recovery time included. This value reflects the composition of the service (Le., express and local routes
for bus mode) and the efficiency ,of the schedule (e.g., reducing recovery time in the schedule improves average speed). Calculation (for bus) = [Scheduled Revenue Miles /Scheduled Revenue
HoursJ Calculation (for rail) = [Scheduled Revenue Train Miles /Scheduled Revenue Train HoursJ Average Weekday Ridership -The average number of passenger boardings (or HOV users) on
a weekday. This measurement does not include ridership on Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays. Certified Riders -Passengers who have been deemed eligible for Paratransit services because
their disability prevents them from functionally accessing fixed route services. Eligibility is determined in accordance with the criteria outlined in the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990. Complaints per 100,000 Passengers -Fixed route quality ratio that measures the number of service complaints per 100,000 passenger boardings. Management's objective is to
reduce this ratio. Calculation = [(Service Complaints Received /Fixed Route Passenger Boardings) * 100,000J Cost per Revenue Mile -Efficiency ratio that measures the cost of providing
a revenue mile of service. This measurement is based on fully loaded costs and excludes operating revenues. Management's objective is to reduce this ratio.Calculation = [Total OperatingExpenses
/Revenue MilesJ APX-12
􀁾Propo'" FY 2004 B",,,,,, PIon (08108103) Exhibit APX.6 (Cont.) Glossary of TermslDeimitions Appendix Coverage Ratio -Measures the amount of financing that the market would allow DART
to borrow at any point in time based on "times coverage" which is related to DART's ability to repay. Per Financial Standard #D8, DART must maintain a 1.25 times coverage ratio during
the first 5 years of the Financial Plan, and 1.50 thereafter. To be conservative, this ratio is calculated for long-term debt at a 6.5% interest rate. Calculation = Sales Taxes + Operating
Revenue + Interest Income -Operating Expenses Total Debt Service Demand Responsive -Paratransit passengers call to request service; therefore, that seryice is provided on demand, and
is considered to be demand responsive, rather than scheduled service. In addition, some non-traditional demand responsive service has been added which may not be Paratransit related,
such as DART Oneall. Mean Distance Between Roadcalls -Quality ratio that measures the number of miles a vehicle operates before a roadcall occurs. Management's objective is to increase
this ratio. Calculation = {Total Miles Operated/Total # ofRoadcalls] Net Subsidy -Financial measurement for determining the tax subsidy required for each mode or combination of modes.
Management's objective is to reduce this number. Calculation = [Operating Expenses -Operating Revenues] On-Time Performance -Quality ratio that measures how often a service is on-time
(Le., at a designated pick-up spot within a predetermined timeframe). The timeframe differs based on mode and frequency of service. Bus operations currently uses 59 seconds early and
4 minutes and 59 seconds late. Light rail and commuter rail use 1 minute early and 3 minutes late. Management's objective is to increase this ratio. Calculation = [(# Scheduled Trips
Sampled -# ofTimes Late) /Total # ofScheduled Trips Sampled] Operating Revenues -Includes the revenues obtained from the farebox,special events service, advet:tising, signboard rentals,
leases, and miscellaneous income. Operating revenues do not include sales tax revenue, interest income, or gain on sale of assets. Operating Expenses -Includes the expenses required
to operate DART's revenue services, HOV, and general mobility projects. Operating expenses do not include the cost of road improvements or the staff costs associated . with DART's capital
programs. Passenger Canceled Trips Ratio -Measures the percentage of times that Paratransit users schedule a trip, then cancel the trip. Total scheduled trips include actual trips made,
cancellations, and no-shows. Calculation = [# ofCanceled Trips /Paratransit Total # ofScheduled Trips] APX-13
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Exhibit APX.6 (Cont.) Glossary of TermslDefinitions Appendix Passenger No-Show Ratio -Quality measurement for Paratransit service that measures
the number of times a Paratransit user makes a reservation and does not show-up for the ride. This measurement is different from a cancellation. Management's objective is to reduce this
number so that other trips can be scheduled in that timeframe. Users can lose the ability to access the Paratransit system if they have an excessive number ofno-shows. Calculation =
[# ofNo Shows /# ofTotal Scheduled Trips] Passenger per Car Mile -Effectiveness ratio that measures the degree to which the number of rail cars deployed on scheduled trains matches ridership
levels. Since power consumption and maintenance costs are driven by car miles, management strives to assure an appropriate balance between the number of cars deployed per train and the
ridership level on those trains. Calculation = [Actual Passenger Boardings/Revenue Car Miles] Passenger Trips -See Ridership. Passengers per Hour -Actual-The total number of Paratransit
passengers actually carried. Calculation = [Actual Passenger Boardings /Revenue Hours] Passengers per Hour -Scheduled -Quality ratio for Paratransit service that measures the number
of passengers scheduled per hour ofrevenue service. Management's objective is to increase this number. Calculation = [Scheduled Passenger Boardings /Revenue Hours] Passengers per Mile
-Effectiveness ratio that measures route productivity by comparing the number of passenger boardings to the number ofrevenue miles. Management's objective is to increase this ratio.
Calculation = [Passenger Boardings /Revenue Miles] Pay-to-Platform Ratio -Hours -This efficiency ratio measures, in hours, the total amount of time for which operators are paid as a
percentage of their platform time. Platform time is the time when the operator is on the bus/train operating the revenue vehicle, and includes revenue service, deadheading, and recovery
time. Other wage categories that may be paid to the operator include other scheduled time, scheduled and unscheduled absences, unscheduled work, safety and training, and administration.
Calculation = [Total Operators Hours Paid /Operators Platform Hours Paid] Percentage of Trips Completed -Quality measurement for Paratransit service that measures the number of times
DART does not miss a scheduled passenger pick-up. Management's objective is to increase this ratio. Calculation = [(# ofActual Trips -# ofTrips Missed) /# ofActual Trips] Revenue Car
Miles -Total miles operated by LRT or TRE trains in revenue service multiplied by the number of cars operated as part of each train. Power consumption and maintenance requirements are
driven by the number of car miles operated. As a result, one area of management focus is to optimize the number of cars operated per train based on ridership and Board-adopted loading
standards. Calculation = [# ofRevenue Miles operated * # ofcars within a train] APX-14
􀁾Propo"" FY 2004 Bu,in"" Ph'" (08108103) Exhibit APX.6 (Cont.) Glossary of TermslDeimitions Appendix Revenue Miles or Hours -Measures the number. of miles, or hours, that a vehicle
is in revenue service (i.e., available to pick up passengers) and includes special events service. This measure does not include "deadhead miles" which are the miles between the bus
maintenance facility and the beginning and/or end ofa route. Ridership -For the total system, this is the total number of passengers boarding a DART vehicle plus the number of people
in cars or vans using the HOV lanes. Transfers are included in total ridership and passenger boarding counts (e.g., if a person transfers from one bus to another bus or from a bus to
rail, this is counted as two passenger boardings). Fixed route ridership counts passenger boardings (including transfers) for bus, light rail, and commuter rail only. Sales Taxes for
Operations -Measures the amount of sales taxes required to subsidize operations. The inverse percentage is the amount ofsales taxes available for capital and road improvement programs.
Historically, the Board and Management have tried to manage this ratio as close to 50% as possible. Calculation = {(Operating Expenses -Operating Revenues -Interest Income) I Sales Tax
RevenuesJ Scheduled Miles Per Hour -Represents the average overall speed ofthe modal service as reflected in the schedule, with stops and recovery time included. This value reflects
both the composition of the service (i.e., express and local routes for bus mode) and the efficiency ofthe schedule (e.g., reducing recovery time in the schedule improves average speed).
Calculation (for bus) = {Scheduled Miles I Scheduled HoursJ Calculation (for rail) = {Scheduled Train Miles I Scheduled Train HoursJ Security Incidents per 100,000 Passengers -Quality
ratio for fixed route service which measures the number of security incidents reported by the Transit Police per 100,000 passenger boardings. Calculation = [(Security Incidents /Passenger
Boardings) * IOO,OOOJ OOOJ Service Hours -Paratransit service hours are also known as revenue hours. They are calculated from the time of the first passenger pick-up until the time of
the last passenger drop-off. Travel time to and from the garage is not included. Service Levels -Also known as Telephone Service Factor (TSF), measures the response to calls within a
specified period. This measurement is being used to monitor the effectiveness of the main call center (CI: 214-979-1111) within 1 minute, the response to Paratransit scheduling issues
within I minute, and the response to Where's My Ride inquiries within 2 minutes. . Calculation = (# ofCalls Answered or Abandoned Within the Specified Time Period) /(# ofCalls Received
Within the Specified Time Period) Start-Up Costs -Costs associated with the implementation of a major new light rail, commuter rail, or HOV service expansion that are incurred prior
to the service implementation (e.g., vehicle and system testing). Subscription Service -Paratransit passengers traveling at least three times per week to the same location at the same
time can be placed on "subscription service." This service is "automatically" scheduled for the passenger, and it is not necessary for the passenger to call and schedule the service.
APX-15
􀁾Prop""" FY 2004 B",in", Ph.. (08108103) Exhibit APX.6 (Cont.) Glossary of TermslDefinitions Appendix Subsidy per Passenger -Efficiency ratio which measures the tax subsidy required
for each passenger boarding for a mode or combination of modes. Management's objective is to reduce this ratio. Calculation = [(Operating Expenses -Operating Revenues) /Passenger Boardings}
Unscheduled Absences -Occurs when an operator is not available for his or her scheduled/assigned work and has not received prior approval to be absent. Zero Denial-A Federal mandate
that, in effect states that a provider cannot systematically deny trips on an ongoing basis. APX-16
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Appendix Exhibit APX.7 Acronyms OOOs Thousands IT Infonnation Technology ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ITS Intelligent Transportation
System APTS Advanced Public Transportation Systems IVN Intelligent Vehicle Network ATC American Transportation Corporation N Joint Venture ATIS Advanced Traveler Infonnation Systems
K Thousands ATMS Advanced Traffic Management Systems KPI Key Perfonnance Indicator AVP Assistant Vice-President KSA Knowledge, Skills & Attitude BNSF Burlington, Northern & Santa Fe
Railroad LAN Local Area Network BPP Business Planning Parameter LAP/CMS Local Assistance Program/Congestion Mitigation System BTV Barrier Transfer Vehicle LBJ "Lyndon B. Johnsgn" Freewav
CAD Computer-Aided Dispatch LNG Liauefied Natural Gas CADD Computer Aided Drafting & Design LPIS Locally Preferred Investment Study CBD Central Business District LRT Light Rail Transit
CDA Central Dallas Association LRV Light Rail Vehicle CMAQ Conl1:estion Mitil1:ationiAir Quality Quality LTorLTD Long-Tenn Debt COPS Community Oriented Policinl1: Services (l1:rant)
M Millions CR Commuter Rail MBE Minority Business Enterprise CS Central Services MDC Mobile Data Communication CY Calendar Year MHz Mel1:ahertz DART Dallas Area RlIDid Transit MIS Maior
Investment Study DEO Diversitv & Economic Ooportunitv MLK Martin Luther Kinl1: Boulevard Transit Center DFW DailasiFort Worth International Airport NCIC National Crime Infonnation Center
DIMIWBE DisadvantagedlMinoritylWoman-Owned Business NCLRT North Central Light Rail Transit Enterprise DOT Department ofTransportation NCTCOG North Central Texas Council ofGovemments
EA Environmental Assessment NOx Nitrol1:en Oxide ED East Dallas NRV Non-Revenue Vehicle EDSS East Dallas Support Services NW Northwest Corridor ERLT East R.L. Thornton Freeway NW-IA
Northwest LRT line section (West End Station to Victory Station) FFGA Full Fundinl1: Grant Al1;reement O&M Operations & Maintenance FHWA Federal Hil1;hway Administration OEM Original
Equipment Manufacturer FICA Federal Insurance Contributions Act OSHA Occupational Safety Hazard Administration FMB Facilities Maintenance Buildinl1: OSR Ooeratinl1: Speed Ratio FP Financial
Plan PASS Principal Arterial Street System FS-B Financial Standards-Business Planninl1: Parameter P&D Planninl1: & Development FS-D Financial Standards-Debt Service PEIEIS Preliminary
Enl1:ineerinl1:iEnvironmental Impact Studv FS-G Financial Standards-General PMP perfonnance Management Plan FTA Federal Transit Administration P&R Park & Ride FTI First Transit, Inc.
PTL Passenl1:er Transfer Location FY Fiscal Year Q Quarter FYxxA Actual year-end cost for FY(xx) ROC Rail Diesel Car FYxxB Budl1:et cost for FY(xx) RMS Record Management System GAAP
General Accepted Accountinl1: Principles ROW Right-of-Way GM General Mobilitv RR Railroad GPS Global Positioning System RTC Rel1:ional Transportation Council HOV High Occupancy Vehicle
(lane) SAFETEA Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act of2003 HR Human Resources SE Southeast Corridor HVAC Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning SH State
Hil1;hway IH Interstate Highway S&I Service & Insoection _. ILA lnterlocal Agreement SIP Service Incentive Pay IP Internet Protocol SOC-3 South Oak CliffLRT line section (Ledbetter to
1-20) ISO International Org;anization for Standardization SOCBOF South Oak CliffBus Operating Facility APX-17
Proposed FY 2004 Business Plan (08/08/03) Appendix Exhibit APX.7.. . Acronvms SOP Standard Ooerating Procedure TRE TrinitYRailway EXDress SRLT South R.L. Thornton TSM Transoortation
System Management SS Starter System TVM Ticket Vending Machine ST Short-Term (debt) TxDOT Texas Deoartrnent ofTransDortation TC Transit Center UP Union Pacific TCEO Texas Commission
on Environmental Qualitv US United States TDM Transoortation Demand Management USC United States Code TEA-21 Transportation Eauitv Act for the 21st CenturY VBS Vehicle Business System
TERP Texas Emissions Reduction Program VP Vice President TheT Forth Worth TransDortation Authority WAN Wide Area Network TLETS Texas Law Enforcement Telecommunications XPB X-Press Booking
-System TMA TransDortation Management Association APX-18
􀁾Propored FY 2004 Bu""",,, Ph", (08108103) Appendix APX.8 DART MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONAL CHART I Board of I Di=1Dr II DiftCWr &udI Directors II GeaerU Co••􀁾 ; S. ADgi. la.emll Aadit
Suppol1 I A. Bai. N. JObDIOD I PresideDt! I Executive Director I I CbiefofSllIfI" I G. Thomas I J. Davis -Exec Vice P....ideDti Exec Vice PresideDt Exec VICe Presideat CbiefofOperatiollS
Administratioa 􀁐􀁾DeYelopmeDtMSeDiorVP I V. Barke B.Gomez D. AlIeD 􀁍􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀧􀀺􀁾􀁡􀁉􀁴 I I I l I I I McKxy VP .1 VP II VP ,I Proca':mea, I 􀁰􀁡􀁮􀁵􀁖􀁐􀁾􀀻􀁴 􀁬􀁉􀁔􀁾􀁎􀁴􀁩􀁯􀀮 I MtiD:....1
VP 􀁽􀁾􀁤􀁾􀁐􀀰􀀶􀁥􀁥􀀱 􀁰􀁾􀁧 & II􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁖􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁲 I Ma_g& CFO Divenity& Hamill Communication FiDut:e 􀁅􀁣􀁯􀁄􀁏􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁏􀁰􀁰 Il<so..... Dcvdopmcat Rail BaDman Leary DIXon Men:er Doogle
JeDmago Hubbell J ....... Rodri2:aa. Vacaal Wata'! .--------' -AVP AVP AVP AVP AVP AVP AVP 􀁾 Dep.ty I AVP 􀁾􀁆􀁭􀁾􀁖􀀻􀁒􀁕􀁬 Marl<etiDg AVP Divenity Pn><u..-I Pamraalit Rail Fleet BRlAdmia.
Cba Mobi6ty AdvertisiDg T.......ry Eeoo.Opp. Sa..." Operatioas OperatioDS Serviees Serviees Serviees Pmgraml Sc:idDer C....y BaD... Caldwell Mo_ 􀁾 Gaul IIaIe Gib... Spiller OJya; AVP
AVP AVP AVP AVP AVP AVP AVP AVP &. AVP Facilities BusUlcss Contracts ParatnDlit Teeba;at Employee Service Communication Economic PritdIeU 􀁾􀀢􀀬􀁌􀁓􀁣􀁮 OperaDoDS Serviees Eagiaccriag
S.ri.gfd.... Solutions Opporto.;ty M..... Ser"t'H:es PlaDaiag U••l1c Mc:Cn.n WiegiDI 􀁾 Rooen Wioe Newbv AVP AVP AVP AVP S'ra1egie PI.g! -fVP_W' AVP IDltrim Systeln Eneroal AVP Sa.....
􀁓􀁃􀁉􀀧􀀱􀁬􀁃􀁬􀁕􀁾􀀦 AVP Engiaceria,: ommuaic:atioa Quality Oo.rueb ...-Ameuitics laf'onaatioD Cap.PID., DeM.... Coot.. =nr= T«baolOJ:)' Salin S"iDddI Pal. .......... Archibald Jarrett
AVP AVP _. Syse. PIa.. &: ReaJ _ 􀁾 AVP __I Grounds 􀁾 IliJk KII•• AVP OperaDoDS 􀁾􀁱􀁥􀁭􀁥􀁡􀁬 Tedl.N:aI Admiu. Reddiag AVP Services 􀁾 Ea>...... BacnftliDJ: DrwIDpawol 4PlaDniDg W'""""""
􀁾􀀨 COdArVucPt" Gollbofer 0&101103 APX-19
􀁾ProPO'''' IT 2004 B",",,,, PI.. (08108103) BLANK PAGE APX-20 Appendix
.-, Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 214/749-3278 July 2,2002 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town of Addison P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 Dear
Ron: Enclosed is a copy of DART's Quarterly Performance Report for the second quarter of FY 2002. Highlights of the quarter are: • Total passenger trips were 93.9 million for the four
quarters ending March 2002, a 2.5% decrease from the same period last year. Fixed route ridership was 59.0 million for the four quarters ending March 2002, a 3.0% decrease from the same
period last year. A sagging regional economy continues to negatively impact the Agency's FY 2002 ridership goals. • Total Operating Expenses are $3.9 million better than budget. Management
has established cost containment measures to ensure that this trend continues through the remainder of the year. • Sales Tax Revenues were $32.8 million lower than budget due to slowing
economic conditions and retail sales growth in non-member cities. Cost containment measures are addressing the decline in sales tax revenues. • Total Operating Revenues were $2.5 million
lower than budget. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding any information provided in this report (214-7493070). 2];;imas presi7Executive Director Enclosure c: Board
of Directors Sue Bauman Sharon Leary Nancy Johnson
Board of Directors Robert W. Pope -Chair Huelon Harrison -Vice Chair Mark Enoch -Secretary Terri Adkisson -Assistant Secretary Evelyn Hicks Linda Koop Dan Monaghan Raymond Noah Jesse
D. Oliver Brenda Reyes Norma Stanton William Velasco W. Richard Watkins Faye Wilkins NCTCOG Michael Morris Dan Rocha ITA Peggy Crist Bob Patrick Gail Lyssy Linda Thomas William Thomsen
Quarterly Performance Report Distribution List Member Cities Town of Addison -Ron Whitehead City of Carrollton -Leonard Martin City of Cockrell Hill -Rosa Rios City of Dallas -Ted Benavides,
Ryan Evans, David Cook City ofFarmers Branch -Richard L. Escalante City ofGarland -JeffMuzzy City of Glenn Heights -Dennis McDuffie Town of Highland Park -George Patterson City ofIrving
-Steve McCullough City of Plano -Thomas H. Muehlenbeck City ofRichardson -Bill Keffler City of Rowlett -Susan Thorpe City of University Park -Bob Livingston NC Mobility Task Force CliffFranklin
Walt Humann TxDOT Susan Hausmann Jay Nelson Charles Tucker
Table of Contents Section 1 -Operations & Financial O&F1 Highlights O&F2 General Information O&F3 Agency-Wide Operating Performance O&F4 Bus Operating Performance O&F5 Light Rail Transit
(LRT) Operating Performance O&F6 Commuter Rail Operating Performance O&F7 Paratransit Operating Performance O&F7 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane Operating Performance O&F8 Vanpool
Operating Performance O&F8 Miscellaneous Information O&F9 Revenues, Operating Expenses, and Net Financing Costs -FY 2002 Actuals vs. Budget O&Fll Capital and Non Operating Budget Summary
-Actuals vs. Budget O&FI2 Consolidated Balance Sheet O&F13 Statement ofRevenues & Expenses O&F14 Glossary Section 2 -Ridership Rl Introduction R2 Total System Ridership R3 Bus System
Ridership R4 LRT Ridership R5 Commuter Rail-Trinity Railway Express Ridership R6 Total Fixed Route Ridership 25-Month Trending R7 Average Weekday Fixed Route Ridership 25-Month Trending
R8 Passengers Boarding by Member City R9 Service Standards Monitoring Report R12 Crosstown and Express Routes Performance R13 Rail Feeder Route Performance R14 Transit Center Feeder
Route Performance R15 Local Route Performance Following Route Performance Index Charts 0-,·..,'.'1, 􀁾􀂭 ",·cc 1 First Quarter FY2002
Section 3 -Planning Progress P&DI Highlights P&D2 System Planning and Program Management P&D2 Transit System Plan (TSP) 2025 P&D3 DFW Airport Rail Study P&D4 Capital Planning and Development
P&D4 LAP/CMS Program P&D5 NCINE Corridor Mitigation Monitoring Program P&D6 North Central Corridor LRT Extension P&D7 Southeast Corridor P&D8 Northwest Corridor (Dallas CBD to Carrollton)
P&D9 Northwest Corridor (NW Highway to DFW) P&D10 Construction and Installation of Standard Shelters P&Dll Southern Sector Amenities P&D12 Mobility Programs Development P&DI2 East Corridor
MIS P&D13 SH 114 Freeway Widening Including Two HOV Lanes P&D14 Ferguson Road HOV Ramp P&D15 1-35EIUS 67 Interim HOV Lanes P&D16 North Central (US 75) Reversible HOV Lane P&D17 HOV Lanes
Operation P&D18 DART Personalized Public Transit (PPT) Operational Test P&D19 Regional Comprehensive ITS Program P&D20 Transportation System Management (TSM) Program P&D21 Elm Street/Commerce
Street Corridor P&D22 TRE at Belt Line Road Transit PASS Project P&D23 Service Planning and Scheduling P&D23 Five-Year Action Plan P&D24 Five-Year Action Plan Score Card P&D25 Service
Reviews P&D26 Bus Feeder Plan for NC Corridor LRT Extension P&D27 Bus Feeder Plan for NE Corridor LRT Extension P&D28 Quality Assurance Program P&D29 Employer Services Program 11 First
Quarter FY2002
P&D30 Employer OutreachlfMAs P&D31 DART Community Transit Program P&D32 Bus Corridor Development P&D33 Economic Development & Planning P&D33 Economic Development Section 4 -Project Development
Progress pmi Acronyms PMl Scope ofProjects PM3 LRT Buildout Phase 1 Map PM4 LRT Buildout Summary Control Schedule PM5 LRT Buildout Cost/Schedule Summary PM6 Real Estate PM7 Northeast
Corridor Facilities PMll North Central Corridor Facilities PM15 Service & Inspection Facility Expansion PM16 Track Installation PM17 􀁓􀁹􀁾􀁥􀁭􀁳 PM26 Systems Integration PM32 Systemwide
Landscaping and Amenities PM34 Facilities -Six-Month Look Ahead PM35 LRT Buildout Change Control Summary PM37 LRT Buildout Phase 2 Map PM38 Northwest Corridor Facilities PM39 Southeast
Corridor Facilities PM40 Rowlett Extension PM41 Additional Capital Development Cost Summary PM42 LRT Starter 􀁓􀁹􀁾􀁥􀁭 PM43 Additional Capital Development Summary Working Schedule PM44
Lake June Transit Center PM45 Livable Communities PM46 Richardson Underpass PM47 SH 190 Station PM48 Parker Road Station Phase 2 Parking PM49 Lancaster Road Train Detection System ,
::.:. 111 First Quarter FY2002 .
PM50 MLK Transit Center PM51 Victory Station Project PM53 Phase 3 Parking -Eighth & Corinth Station PM54 Northwest Plano Park and Ride PM55 Public AddressNisual Message Board System
PM56 Unity Plaza PM57 Additional Capital Development Six-Month Look Ahead PM58 Additional Capital Development Change Control Summary Section 5 -Quarterly Investment Report -March 2002
􀁮􀁾􀁾 iv First Quarter FY2002
DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT QUARTERLY OPERATING & FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT SECOND QUARTER FY 2002 January -March 2002
Second Quarter FY 2002 Highlights Total passenger trips were 93.9 million for the four quarters ending March 2002, a 2.3 million (2.4%) decrease from the same period last year. Fixed
route ridership was 59.0 million for the four quarters ending March 2002, a 1.8 million (3.0%) decrease from the same period last year. It appears unlikely that the Agency's FY 2002
ridership goals will be met. Total Operating Expenses are $3.9 million (2.7%) better than budget. Management has established a Cost Containment Process Team to help ensure that this
trend continues throughout the year. Sales Tax Revenues were $32.8 million (16.3%) lower than budget due to slowing economic conditions and retail sales growth in non-member cities.
This decline has resulted in a Sales Taxes to Operations ratio for the four quarters ending March 31 of 72.5% in spite of the stated operating expense underrun. Management is examining
cost containment measures, as referenced above, to counteract the decline in sales tax revenues. Total Operating Revenues were $2.5 million (10.3%) lower than budget, due to a combination
of lower than budgeted ridership and delays in hiring transit police funded by the Department of Justice (DOJ) Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program. Page 1 O&F Second
Quarter FY2002
General Information Reporting Period -DART's fiscal year begins on October 1. The second quarter for FY 2002 is January 1 through March 31, 2002. Operating Performance -Except where
noted, the Quarterly Report includes four-quarter trending of strategic operating information by mode for the past five quarters. Amounts represent four-quarter rolling totals. In order
to remove seasonality from financial and operating information, annual amounts are used. Management is continually striving to improve the reporting of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
Accordingly, prior period KPIs may reflect the most current methodology. This report also includes DART's KPIs in a scorecard format with a Green, Yellow, or Red status for each measurement.
Green -There is a high probability ofachieving the FY 2002 target. Yellow -Based on trending or other issues addressed in the report, it is uncertain if the FY 2002 target will be achieved.
If there is a difference, it is not anticipated to be significant. Red -There is a high probability that the FY 2002 target will not be achieved, and the difference is anticipated to
be significant. FY 2002 Actuals vs. Budget -This section of the Quarterly Report compares actual revenues and operating expenses against budget. Capital Budget Summary -This section
of the Quarterly Report summarizes actual capital expenditures by mode. Detailed cost summaries of major capital construction projects are located in the Project Development Progress
Report section. Reflected in the table below is the FY 2002 Budget, by category, approved September 25, 2001 (Resolution No. 010138). FY 2002 Budget Expense Budget Capital Projects Net
Debt Service Total Budget Budget $291,543,000 $299,749,000 $15,013,000 $606,305,000 Page 2 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Agency-Wide Operating Performance For the Four Quarters Ending FY02 Measurement Q2/01 Q3/01 Q4/01 QlI02 02/02 Tarl!et Status Total System (All Modes) Ridership (M) 96.2 97.1 95.7 95.2
93.9 100.7 Red Average Weekday Ridership (OOOs) 314.1 317.8 314.1 311.0 306.9 329.8 Red Subsidy Per Passenger $2.21 $2.25 $2.34 $2.39 $2.53 $2.40 Red Fixed Route (Bus and Rail Only)
Ridership (M) 60.8 61.3 60.7 60.3 59.0 64.1 Red Average Weekday Ridership (OOOs) 207.3 208.9 207.3 204.8 200.6 218.3 Red Subsidy Per Passenger $3.07 $3.14 $3.24 $3.31 $3.54 $3.36 Yellow
Revenue Miles (M) 32.8 33.4 33.8 34.5 35.0 36.8 n/a Passengers Per Mile 1.85 1.83 1.80 1.75 1.69 1.70 Green Vehicle Accidents Per lOOk Miles. 2.7 2.8 2.6 2.3 1.9 3.7 Green Security Incidents
Per lOOk Passengers 3.9 3.7 3.3 3.2 2.8 3.6 Green Service Level-214-979-1111 68.0% 70.7% 71.0% 75.5% 82.2% 80.0% Green Complaints Per lOOk Passengers 27.4 25.6 24.7 25.7 27.9 24.0 Red
Prepaid Fare -Employers 585 633 629 646 672 720 Yellow Average Fare $0.49 $0.48 $0.49 $0.51 $0.51 $0.53 Yellow Paratransit Passengers Per Hour -Actual 1.53 1.48 1.43 1.41 1.39 1.71 Red
FinanciallEfficiency Measurers Operating Revenues (M)* $39,962 $40,301 $42,253 $43,373 $43,901 $49,867 Red Sales Tax Revenues (M) $378,163 $367,058 $357,883 $354,433$335,024 $401,461 Red Operating Expenses (M)** $252,351 $258,777 $265,901 $270,712 $281,122 $291,543 Green Sales Taxes to Operations** 53.6% 56.4% 59.3% 61.2% 68.7% 57.3% Red Administrative
Ratio** 12.2% 11.8% 11.5% 11.6% 11.2% 11.1% Green * Target has been corrected. It was previously mIsstated. ** pI quarter operating expenses have been corrected, which affected the previously
reported Sales Taxes to Operations and Administrative Ratio. Ridership, Average Weekday Ridership -Year-to-date total system ridership is 3.7% less than last year, and is lagging the
budget by 4.8%. Ridership has been trending below budget targets for the past six months, due in large part to the economic recession. The reduction in economic activity has resulted
in higher unemployment, impacting work trips. In addition, analysis of the impact of the fare structure change, implemented September 24,2001, indicates that bus ridership has experienced
a 5.5% -6.5% decline due to the elimination of free transfers. The downturn in ridership negatively impacts Operating Revenues as well. Complaints Per lOOk Passengers -Complaints in
the second quarter were up 8% from the same quarter a year ago. The predominant increases were related to fixed route service provider vehicle maintenance, DART bus operations, and security.
Conversely, commendations for the second quarter were also up, rising 47% from 2001. Paratransit -Passengers Per Hour -Actual-for more infonnation see page O&F 7. Page 3 O&F Second Quarter
FY 2002
Management considers it highly unlikely that the Agency's Sales Tax Revenues target will be achieved this fiscal year, which will negatively impact the Agency's ability to achieve its
Sales Taxes to Operations objective. Management's cost containment efforts may not be able to fully compensate for the anticipated Sales Tax Revenue underrun. Bus Operating Performance
For the Four Quarters Ending FY02 Measurement Q2/01 Q3/01 Q4/01 QlI02 Q2/02 Target Status Customer Indicators Fixed Route Bus Ridership (M) 47.9 48.1 47.5 46.6 45.1 48.4 Red Special
Events Ridership (M) 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Green Average Weekday Ridership (OOOs) 165.4 165.9 163.8 159.9 155.0 167.2 Red Revenue Miles (M) 29.6 30.1 30.3 30.7 30.8 31.2 n/a Passengers
Per Mile 1.63 1.61 1.58 1.53 1.48 1.55 Red On-Time Performance 91.7% 92.6% 92.8% 93.2% 93.0% 90.0% Green Mean Distance Between Roadcalls 4,040 3,897 3,783 3,757 3,794 3,500 Green Vehicle
Accidents Per lOOk Miles 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.2 1.8 2.8 Green FinanciallEfficiency Measures Subsidy Per Passenger $3.05 $3.11 $3.22 $3.27 $3.53 $3.33 Red Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.93 $5.95 $6.05
$5.98 $6.18 $6.23 Green Deadhead Ratio -All Bus 19.4% 19.1% 19.0% 19.1% 19.1% 18.8% Yellow Scheduled Miles Per Hour 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.2 14.2 Green Pay-to-Platform -Hours 1.41 1.40
1.40 1.39 1.40 1.36 Yellow Average Operator Pay Rate -Total* $15.06 $15.12 $15.14 $15.21 $15.30 $15.07 Yellow Avg. # Op.Unsch.Abs.Days(Qtr.) 23.6 21.9 25.1 20.7 20.5 20.0 Green *The
original target has been modified to reflect the distnbution ofthe FY 2001 salary pool. Fixed Route Bus Ridership and Average Weekday Ridership -for more information see page O&F3. The
lower than expected performance for the Passengers Per Mile and Subsidy Per Passenger measures are a direct result ofthe overall decline in ridership. Page 4 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
LRT Operating Performance For the Four Quarters Ending FY02 Measurement Q2/01 Q3/01 Q4/01 Ql/02 Q2/02 Target Status Customer Indicators Ridership (M) 11.4 11.6 11.5 11.8 11.8 13.3 Yellow
Average Weekday Ridership (OOOs) 38.3 38.8 38.8 39.6 39.6 44.1 Yellow Revenue Car Miles (M) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.8 3.0 3.9 n/a Passengers Per Car Mile 4.58 4.57 4.54 4.26 3.95 3.43 Green On-Time
Perfonnance 95.8% 95.4% 95.2% 95.4% 96.0% 97.0% Yellow Mean Distance Between Roadcal1s (OOOs) 149.9 144.5 177.0 217.0 262.7 40.0 Green Vehicle Accidents Per 100,000 Miles* 0.54 0.46
0.51 0.69 0.66 0.55 Yellow FinanciallEfficiency Measures Subsidy Per Passenger $2.53 $2.56 $2.65 $2.76 $2.90 $2.84 Yellow Cost Per Revenue Mile $14.32 $14.51 $14.98 $14.84 $14.31 $12.57
Yellow Scheduled Miles Per Hour 12.9 12.9 12.8 13.2 13.6 14.5 Yellow Pay-to-Platfonn -Hours 1.61 1.60 1.61 1.54 1.53 1.52 Yellow Average Operator Pay Rate -Total $14.44 $14.61 $14.69
$14.75 $15.02 $14.98 Green Avg. # Op. Dosch. Abs. Days (Qtr.) 17.4 17.1 23.7 15.5 15.7 20.0 Green * The above table reflects a correction m pnor penod aCCident data. Management remains
optimistic about achieving the stated LRT targets. As more service is opened in the last two quarters ofFY 2002, Cost Per Mile is expected to drop to target levels, and Ridership is
expected to increase to target levels. DART"" PageS O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Commuter Rail Operating Performance For the Four Quarters Ending FY02 Measurement Q2/01 Q3/01 Q4/01 QI/02 Q2/02 Target Status Customer Indicators Ridership (M) 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.9
Yellow Special Events Ridership (OOOs) 51.3 51.4 58.7 59.7 65.2 70.0 Yellow Average Weekday Ridership (OOOs) 3.6 4.2 4.8 5.2 5.9 7.0 Yellow Revenue Car Miles (M) 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.2
1.8 n1a Passengers Per Car Mile 1.52 1.45 1.43 1.46 1.48 1.07 Green Scheduled Train Hours (OOOs) 12.4 14.2 15.6 16.5 18.6 24.0 n1a On-Time Performance 97.2% 97.1% 97.9% 97.8% 97.3% 98.0%
Green Annulled Trips 6.0 11.0 13.0 29.0 28.0 12.0 Red Number of Accidents Per lOOk Miles 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 Green FinanciaJIEfficiency Measures Subsidy Per Passenger $10.26 $10.21
$9.32 $9.14 $8.40 $7.45 Yellow Cost Per Mile $19.55 $17.98 $16.74 $16.09 $15.20 $11.19 Red The high number of Annulled Trips is primarily due to a combination of freight and construction
activity along the corridor and one serious accident that occurred last quarter. The Cost Per Mile has been negatively impacted by the delay in implementing new service from October
2001 to December 2001. A substantial cost of the Commuter Rail Service is a fixed cost; therefore, as the miles operated decreased, the cost per mile increased. Because of the positive
trends reflected above, Management believes that the FY 2002 targets for Special Events Ridership and Subsidy Per Passenger are is still achievable. Page 6 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Paratransit Operating Performance For the Four Quarters Ending FY02 Measurement Q2/01 Q3/01 Q4/01 QlI02 Q2/02 Target Status Customer Indicators Ridership (OOOs) 536.9 539.6 547.0 570.3
575.5 511.0 Red Revenue Hours (OOOs) 351.0 364.9 382.2 406.1 413.8 299.0 Red Passengers Per Hour -Scheduled 1.81 1.78 1.76 1.72 1.71 1.95 Red Passengers Per Hour -Actual 1.53 1.48 1.43
1.41 1.39 1.71 Red On-Time Performance 87.9% 87.2% 87.1% 88.4% 89.3% 92.0% Yellow Accidents Per 100,000 Miles 1.50 1.24 1.05 1.03 0.89 2.00 Green Percentage of Trips Completed 99.6%
99.6% 99.6% 99.8% 99.9% 99.9% Green Passenger Canceled Trips Ratio 14.0% 14.1% 14.3% 14.3% 14.2% 11.0% Red Passenger No-Show Ratio 4.6% 4.3% 4.1% 4.0% 4.3% 5.0% Green Service Levels
Scheduling (2 minutes) 92.2% 91.0% 89.0% 90.0% 89.3% 80.0% Green Where's My Ride (1 minute) 79.7% 85.5% 86.7% 84.9% 86.4% 80.0% Green Complaints Per 1k Passengers 5.9 5.8 5.4 4.2 4.0
5.0 Green FinanciaI/Efficiency Measures Net Subsidy $21.6 $21.6 $22.2 $23.0 $23.4 $21.0 Red Subsidy Per Passenger $40.26 $40.00 $40.67 $40.27 $40.69 $41.10 Green Ridership, Revenue Hours,
Passengers per Hour -Scheduled, and Actual, Passenger Canceled Trips Ratio, and Net Subsidy are all identified with a status of Red due to the zero denial goal implemented in January
2001, as a result of Federal Transit Administration rules and legal rulings involving other transit authorities. Options for service delivery based on the results of a study completed
by Paratransit, Internal Audit, Finance, and an outside consultant are being developed for Board review and selection later this fiscal year. Budget and Financial Plan amendments will
be requested to cover anticipated overruns in FY 2002. Measurement Customer Indicators Ridership (M) Average Weekday Ridership (OOOs) On-Time Performance FinanciallEfficiency Measures
Subsidy Per Passenger HOV Operating Performance For the Four Quarters Ending FY02 Q2/01 Q3/01 Q4/01 Ql/02 Q2/02 Target Status 34.5 34.9 34.0 34.0 34.0 35.8 Yellow 105.0 106.9 104.6 104.0
104.0 111.0 Yellow Yellow 99.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 99.5% Green $0.10 $0.11 $0.12 $0.13 $0.13 $0.15 Green While Ridership and Average Weekday Ridership are currently trending
below target, Management believes that both targets might yet be achieved this fiscal year. More will be known once a full quarter's data has been received and analyzed on the new South
R. L. Thomton/U.S. 67 HOV transitway. Page 7 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Vanpool Operating Performance For the Four Quarters Ending Q3/01 Q4/01 QI/02 FY02 Q2/02 Target Status 344.8 305.0 Green 69 82 Yellow $0.94 $0.75 Green 347.7 69 $1.15 344.5 66 $1.29 356.3
66 357.2 69 Measurement Q2/01 Customer Indicators Ridership (OOOs) Number of Vanpoo1s FinanciaVEfficiency Measures Subsidy Per Passenger* $2.13 $2.22 * The above table reflects a correction
in the Q1102 Subsidy Per Passenger calculation. The Subsidy per Passenger for the first two quarters of FY 2002 was below the stated FY 2002 target; consequently, Management is confident
that the FY 2002 target will be achieved. Other Miscellaneous Information End of Quarter Measurement Q2/01 Q3/01 Q4/01 QI/02 Q2/02 Average Diesel Cost (Unhedged) $0.91 $0.99 $0.88 $0.90
$0.86 Average LNG Cost $0.91 $0.72 $0.58 $0.50 $0.49 Revenue Vehicles DART Buses -Active 540 531 549 529 540 DART Buses -Inactive 30 53 53 16 72 First Transit Operated Buses 317 317
331 319 327 Total Bus 887 901 933 864 939 Light Rail 61 61 61 95 95 Commuter Rail 28 28 31 31 31 31 Paratransit -Contractor Operated 170 170 170 170 170 Total Revenue Vehicles 1,146
1,160 1,195 1,160 1,235 Non-Revenue Vehicles (NRVs) DART-Owned 286 282 292 293 290 DART-Owned Inactive 0 0 0 0 0 Contractor Provided 0 0 0 0 0 Total Non-Revenue Vehicles 286 282 292
293 290 Page 8 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Revenues, Operating Expenses, and Net Financing Costs Actual versus Budget Please refer to the following page for a summary ofmajor revenue and expense line items. Total Operating Revenues
were $2.5 million (10.3%) lower than budget, due to a combination of lower than budgeted ridership, and delays in hiring transit police which were to be funded by a Federal Community
Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant, which is responsible for most of the underrun in the Advertising and Other revenue category. Sales Tax Revenues were $32.8 million (16.3%) lower
than budget due to the decline in the economy. Salaries & Wages were $2.1 million (3.2%) less than budget, primarily due to higher than projected vacancies and hiring delays. Benefits
were $3.6 million (16.4%) higher than budget due to funding requirements for the defmed benefit program, paid absences, and high health claims. A delay in several major projects and
a change in the accrual process resulted in the underrun in the Services category of$3.2 million (21.0%). The underrun in Materials & Supplies of $1.2 million (9.0%) is primarily due
to fuel cost savmgs. Utilities were under budget by $1.0 million (22.4%) due to a change in the accrual process, and new competitive rates for electricity. The underrun in the Purchased
Transportation category of$1.3 million (3.7%) can be attributed to several factors: • Delay in service to downtown Fort Worth • Diesel fuel savings for TRE and the fixed route bus service
contractor • Delay in the some ofthe experimental service programs Capital Allocation was $1.9 million (16.9%) less than budget, primarily due to budget underruns in the Planning & Development
and Project Management departments. Page 9 O&F Second Quarter FY 2002
Revenues, Operating Expenses and Net Financing Costs Actuals vs. Budget Second Quarter, FY 2002 Dollars in Thousands YTD YTD YTD Better % Better Total Actual Budget (Worse) (Worse) Revenues:
Budget Bude:et Bude:et Passenger Revenues $15,569 $16,765 $(1,196) (7.1)% $34,912 Special Events Revenues 347 421 (75) (17.7)% 800 Advertising and Other 5,402 6,568 (1,166) (17.8)% 12,496
Paratransit Revenues 473 449 24 5.3% 899 Vanpool Revenues 263 381 (17) (30.8)% 761 Total Operatine: Revenues $22.055 $24584 ($2530) (10.3)% $49,867 Sales Tax Revenues $168,184 $200,939
$(32,755) (16.3)% $401,461 Other Non-Operating Revenues 3,567 5,531 (1,964) (35.5)% 11,751 Total Revenues $193,806 $231,055 ($37,249) (16.1)% $463,079 YTD YTD YTD Over % Over Total Actual
Budget (Under) (Under) Budget Operating Expenses: Budget Budget Salaries & Wages $61,560 $63,621 $(2,061) (3.2)% $128,867 Benefits 25,200 21,645 3,555 16.4% 41,883 Services 11,840 14,995
(3,155) (21.0)% 31,830 Materials & Supplies 12,360 13,583 (1,223) (9.0)% 27,061 Utilities 3,435 4,430 (994) (22.4)% 9,135 Claims & Insurance 1,724 1,928 (204) (10.6)% 4,121 Purchased
Transportation 33,645 34,947 (1,302) (3.7)% 70,984 Taxes, Leases, and Other 2,674 3,024 (350) (11.6)% 6,740 Capital Allocation (9,435) (11,353) 1,919 (16.9)% (22,707) LRT Start-up (3,127)
(3,444) 317 (9.2)% (6,887) Management Reserve 0 394 (394) (100.0)% 516 Total Operatine: Expenses $139877 $143,769 ($3,892) (2.7)% $291,543 YTD YTD YTD Over 0/0 Over Total Actual Budget
(Under) (Under) Budget Budget Budget Net Financing Costs Financing Costs $10,917 $12,595 $(1,678) (13.3)% $26,764 Interest Income 3,543 5,531 0,988) (35.9)% 11,751 Total Net Financine
Costs $7.374 $7064 $310 4.4% $15,013 Page 10 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Capital and Non-Operating Budget Summary The following chart highlights the FY 2002 Capital and Non-Operating Budget. Capital and Non-Operating Costs Actuals vs. Budget Second Quarter,
FY 2002 Dollars in Thousands Mode YTD Available FY 2002 Actuals Balance Budget Bus $18,716 $50,689 $69,405 LRT 51,739 99,598 151,337 Commuter Rail 2,121 22,230 24,351 Paratransit 24
(24) 0 HOV 446 6832 7278 Total Capital Projects $73,046 $179,325 $252,371 P&D/Start-up/Non-Ops $12,914 $17,265 $30,179 Road Imorovements/lTS 9845 7354 17199 Total Capital & Non-Operating
$95,805 $203,944 $299,749 Highlights Total expenditures for capital projects through the second quarter of the year represent 29% of the total FY 2002 Capital Projects Budget. When non-operating
activities are factored in, the expenditure rate is 32%. Budget underruns are due to the following: HOV project delays that are tied to TxDOT schedules, Commuter Rail project delays,
and delays in the delivery of the Nova buses. DART·· Page 11 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Consolidated Balance Sheet As of March 􀀳􀀱􀁾 2002 and September 30,2001 (In thousands) 3/31/02 Unaudited 9/30/2001* ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS Cash & Cash Equivalents -Unrestricted Investments
Sales tax receivable Transit Revenue Rec., Net Due from Other Governments Materials and supplies inventory Prepaid transit expenses and other TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS RESTRICTED ASSETS PROPERTY,
PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT, NET LONG-TERM INVESTMENTS HELD TO PAY CAPITAL LEASE LIABILITIES NET PENSION ASSET PREPAID LONG-TERM DEBT ISSUANCE TOTAL ASSETS $76,851 81,404 56,411 4,909 9,384
24,705 2,926 $256,590 $122,410 2,190,343 399,943 3,699 3,938 $2,976,923 $77,275 53,568 58,426 3,291 85,130 22,919 2,653 $303,262 $116,755 2,155,514 416,957 3,866 3,125 $2,999,479 LIABILITIES
AND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES Accounts Payable & Accrued Liabilities Current Portion of Commercial Paper Notes Payable Local Assistance Program Payable Retainage Payable Other Current
Liabilities TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES SENIOR LIEN SALES TAX REVENUE BONDS PAYABLE CAPITAL LEASE LIABILITIES TOTAL LIABILITIES EQUITY Contributed Capital Retained Earnings TOTAL EQUITY
TOTAL LIABILITIES & EQUITY *9/30/01 numbers tie to FY 2001 end of year audited fmancial statements. Page 12 O&F $49,687 $92,854 135,345 110,000 45,920 42,838 15,995 12,454 4,294 3,179
$251,241 $261,325 $395,575 $395,501 399,943 416,957 $1,046,759 $1,073,783 $531,597 $531,597 1,398,567 1,394,099 $1,930,164 $1,925,696 $2,976,923 $2,999,479 Second Quarter FY2002
Statement of Revenues & Expenses For the Two Quarters Ended March 31,2002 and 2001 (in thousands) 3/31102 3/31101 Unaudited Unaudited OPERATING REVENUES: Passenger $15,856 $15,410 Special
Events 820 816 Advertising and other 5,379 4,181 Total Operating Revenues $22,055 $20,407 OPERATING EXPENSES: Labor $61,560 $56,855 Benefits 25,200 17,559 Services 11,840 10,844 Materials
and Supplies 12,360 12,309 Purchased Transportation 33,645 31,849 Depreciation and amortization 38,177 35,211 Utilities 3,436 3,337 Taxes, Leases, and Other 2,674 2,571 Casualty and
liability 1,724 1,194 Transit system planning, development, and start-up costs (12,562) (11,859) TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $178,054 $159,870 NET OPERATING LOSS ($155,999) ($139,463) NON-OPERATING
REVENUES (EXPENSES): Sales tax revenue $168,184 $191,044 Investment Income 3,543 6,399 Interest Income from investments held to pay capital lease 11,967 14,287 Interest expense on capital
leases (11,967) (14,287) Local Assistance Program and Street improvements (9,845) 9,845) (9,905) Transit system planning and other development (12,562) (11,859) Interest and financing
expenses (10,917) (7,534) Net gain on capital lease transaction 6,199 Other revenue (328) (1,611) TOTAL NET NON-OPERATING REVENUES $138,075 $172,733 INCOME BEFORE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
($17,924) $33,270 CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS: Federal Financial Assistance $22,088 $0 Other Capital Contributions 304 TOTAL CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS $22,392 $0 NET INCOME $4,468 $33,270 Page
13 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Glossary of Terms/Def"mitions Accidents per 100,000 Miles -Measures vehicle accidents reported (bus and light rail) per 100,000 miles of actual fixed route mileage. Calculation = [(Vehicle
Accidents /Actual Mileage) * 100,000] Administrative Ratio -Measures administrative costs as a percentage of direct operating costs. It is management's objective to reduce this ratio.
Administrative costs include (but are not limited to) executive management, finance, purchasing, legal, internal audit, human resources, marketing, board support, and administrative
services. Administrative revenues include (but are not limited to) advertising revenue. Calculation =[(Administrative Costs -Administrative Revenues) /Direct Costs + Start-up Costs]
Annulled Trips -The number of trips eliminated from the schedule prior to scheduled departure due to adverse equipment, track, or dispatch conditions. TRE does not include annulled trips
as part of the ontime performance calculation. Average Fare -Represents the average fare paid per passenger boarding on fixed route modes of service during the period. Calculation =[(Fixed
Route Passenger Revenues -Commissions and Discounts) /(# afFixed Route Passenger Boardings)] Average Speed -Represents the average overall speed of the modal service as reflected in
the schedule, with stops and recovery time included. This value reflects the composition of the service (i.e., express and local routes for bus mode) and the efficiency of the schedule
(e.g., reducing recovery time in the schedule improves average speed). Calculation (for bus) = [Scheduled Revenue Miles /Scheduled Revenue Hours] Calculation (for rail) = [Scheduled
Revenue Train Miles /Scheduled Revenue Train Hours] Average Weekday Ridership -The average number of passenger boardings (or HOV users) on a weekday. This measurement does not include
ridership on Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays. Certified Riders -Passengers who have been deemed eligible for Paratransit services because their disability prevents them from functionally
accessing fIXed route services. Eligibility is determined in accordance with the criteria outlined in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Complaints per 100,000 Passengers -Fixed
route quality ratio that measures the number of service complaints per 100,000 passenger boardings. Management's objective is to reduce this ratio. Calculation =[(Service Complaints
Received /Fixed Route Passenger Boardings) * 100,000] Cost per Revenue Mile -Efficiency ratio that measures the cost of providing a revenue mile of service. This measurement is based
on fully loaded costs and excludes operating revenues. Management's objective is to reduce this ratio. Calculation = [Total Operating Expenses /Revenue Miles] Page 14 O&F Second Quarter
FY2002
Glossary of TermslDefinitions (Cont.) Coverage Ratio -Measures the amount of financing that the market would allow DART to borrow at any point in time based on "times coverage" which
is related to DART's ability to repay. Per Financial Standard #D8, DART must maintain a 1.25 times coverage ratio during the first 5 years of the Financial Plan, and 1.50 thereafter.
To be conservative, this ratio is calculated for long-term debt at a 6.5% interest rate. Calculation = Sales Taxes + Operating Revenue + Interest Income -Operating Expenses Total Debt
Service Deadhead Ratio -Efficiency ratio that measures the miles operated in non-revenue service as a percentage ofthe revenue miles operated for a particular mode. Calculation = [(Total
Scheduled Miles -Revenue Miles) /Revenue Miles] Demand Responsive -Paratransit passengers call to request service; therefore, that service is provided on demand, and is considered to
be demand responsive, rather than scheduled service. In addition, some nontraditional demand responsive service has been added which may not be Paratransit related, such as DART Oneall.
Mean Distance Between Roadcalls -Quality ratio that measures the number of miles a vehicle operates before a roadcall occurs. Management's objective is to increase this ratio. Calculation
= [Total Miles Operated/Total # ofRoadcalls] Net Subsidy -Financial measurement for determining the tax subsidy required for each mode or combination ofmodes. Management's objective
is to reduce this number. Calculation = [Operating Expenses -Operating Revenues] On-Time Performance -Quality ratio that measures how often a service is on-time (i.e., at a designated
pick-up spot within a predetermined timeframe). The timeframe differs based on mode and frequency of service. Bus operations currently uses 59 seconds early and 4 minutes and 59 seconds
late. Light rail and commuter rail use 1 minute early and 3 minutes late. Management's objective is to increase this ratio. Calculation =[(# Scheduled Trips Sampled -# ofTimes Late)
/Total # ofScheduled Trips Sampled] Operating Revenues -Includes the revenues obtained from the farebox, special events service, advertising, signboard rentals, leases, and miscellaneous
income. Operating revenues do not include sales tax revenue, interest income, or gain on sale ofassets. Operating Expenses -Includes the expenses required to operate DART's revenue services,
HOV, and general mobility projects. Operating expenses do not include the cost of road improvements or the staff costs associated with DART's capital programs. Passenger Canceled Trips
Ratio -Measures the percentage of times that Paratransit users schedule a trip, then cancel the trip. Total scheduled trips include actual trips made, cancellations, and no-shows. Calculation
=[# ofCanceled Trips /Paratransit Total # ofScheduled Trips] Page 15 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Glossary of TermslDefmitions (Cont.) Passenger No-Show Ratio -Quality measurement for Paratransit service that measures the number of times a Paratransit user makes a reservation and
does not show-up for the ride. Ibis measurement is different from a cancellation. Management's objective is to reduce this number so that other trips can be scheduled in that timeframe.
Users can lose the ability to access the Paratransit system if they have an excessive number ofno-shows. Calculation =[# ofNo Shows /# ofTotal Scheduled Trips] Passenger Trips -See Ridership.
Passengers per Hour -Actual-The total number ofParatransit passengers actually carried. Calculation = [Actual Passenger Boardings /Revenue Hours] Passengers per Hour -Scheduled -Quality
ratio for Paratransit service that measures the number of passengers scheduled per hour ofrevenue service. Management's objective is to increase this number. Calculation = [Scheduled
Passenger Boardings /Revenue Hours] Passengers per Mile -Effectiveness ratio that measures route productivity by comparing the number of passenger boardings to the number ofrevenue miles.
Management's objective is to increase this ratio. Calculation = [Passenger Boardings /Revenue Miles] Pay-to-Platform Ratio -Hours -Ibis efficiency ratio measures, in hours, the total
amount of time for which operators are paid as a percentage of their platform time. Platform time is the time when the operator is on the bus/train operating the revenue vehicle, and
includes revenue service, deadheading, and recovery time. Other wage categories that may be paid to the operator include other scheduled time, scheduled and unscheduled absences, unscheduled
work, safety and training, and administration. Calculation =[Total Operators Hours Paid /Operators Platform Hours Paid] Percentage of Trips Completed -Quality measurement for Paratransit
service that measures the number of times DART does not miss a scheduled passenger pick-up. Management's objective is to increase this . ratio. Calculation =[(# ofActual Trips -# ofTrips
Missed) /# ofActual Trips] Revenue Miles or Hours -Measures the number of miles, or hours, that a vehicle is in revenue service (i.e., available to pick up passengers) and includes special
events service. Ibis measure does not include "deadhead miles" which are the miles between the bus maintenance facility and the beginning and/or end ofaroute. Revenue Seat Miles -In
general terms, the number of revenue seat miles is arrived at by multiplying the number of available seats by the number of revenue service miles. Page 16 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Glossary of TermslDef"mitions (Cont.) Ridership -For the total system, this is the total number of passengers boarding a DART vehicle plus the number of people in cars or vans using
the HOV lanes. Transfers are included in total ridership and passenger boarding counts (e.g., if a person transfers from one bus to another bus or from a bus to rail, this is counted
as two passenger boardings). Fixed route ridership counts passenger boardings (including transfers) for bus, light rail, and commuter rail only. Sales Taxes to Operations -Measures the
amount of sales taxes required to subsidize operations. The inverse percentage is the amount of sales taxes available for capital and road improvement programs. Historically, the Board
and Management have tried to manage this ratio as close to 50% as possible. Calculation = [(Operating Expenses -Operating Revenues -Interest Income) /Sales Tax RevenuesJ Scheduled Miles
Per Hour -Represents the average overall speed of the modal service as reflected in the schedule, with stops and recovery time included. This value reflects both the composition of the
service (i.e., express and local routes for bus mode) and the efficiency ofthe schedule (e.g., reducing recovery time in the schedule improves average speed). Calculation (for bus) =
[Scheduled Miles /Scheduled HoursJ Calculation (for rail) =[Scheduled Train Miles /Scheduled Train HoursJ Security Incidents per 100,000 Passengers -Quality ratio for fIxed route service
which measures the number of security incidents reported by the Transit Police per 100,000 passenger boardings. Calculation = [(Security Incidents /Passenger Boardings) * 100,000J Service
Hours -Paratransit service hours are also known as revenue hours. They are calculated from the time of the first passenger pick-up until the time of the last passenger drop-off. Travel
time to and from the garage is not included. Service Levels -Also known as Telephone Service Factor (TSF), measures the response to calls within a specifIed period. This measurement
is being used to monitor the effectiveness of the main call center (CI: 214-979-1111) within 1 minute, the response to Paratransit scheduling issues within 1 minute, and the response
to Where's My Ride inquiries within 2 minutes. Calculation = (# ofCalls Answered or Abandoned Within the Specified Time Period) /(# ofCalls Received Within the Specified Time Period)
Start-Up Costs -Costs associated with the implementation of a major new light rail, commuter rail, or HOV service expansion that are incurred prior to the service implementation (e.g.,
vehicle and system testing). Subscription Service -Paratransit passengers traveling at least three times per week to the same location at the same time can be placed on "subscription
service." This service is "automatically" scheduled for the passenger, and it is not necessary for the passenger to call and schedule the service. Page 17 O&F Second Quarter FY2002
Glossary of TermslDefmitions(Cont.) Subsidy per Passenger -Efficiency ratio which measures the tax subsidy required for each passenger boarding for a mode or combination ofmodes. Management's objective is to reduce
this ratio. Calculation = [(Operating Expenses -Operating Revenues) /Passenger Boardings] Unscheduled Absences -Occurs when an operator is not available for his or her scheduled/assigned
work and has not received prior approval to be absent. Page 18 O&F Second Quarter FY 2002
Ridership Highlights Introduction This section ofthe Quarterly Report focuses primarily on fixed route ridership, although the first chart and table include summaries oftotal system
ridership. Ridership reporting is based on the number of unlinked passenger trips (i.e. passenger boardings are counted resulting in a transferring passenger being counted as two trips
or riders). The following information is included in this section ofthe Quarterly Report. 􀁐􀁡􀁾􀁥 Reference Description R2 Chart I System Ridership R3-5 Charts 2-4 Average Weekday Ridership
(Bus, LRT, Commuter Rail) R6 Table I Monthly Trending Report R7 Table 2 Weekday Trending Report R8 Table 3 Passengers Boarding by Member City R9-1 I N/A Service Standards Monitoring
Report Rl2 Table 4 & 5 Crosstown and Express Routes Performance R13 Table 6 Rail Feeder Route Performance Rl4 Table 7 Transit Center Feeder Route Performance Rl5 Table 8 Local Route
Performance Following Charts 5-9 Route Performance Index Charts Ridership statistics can be examined examined in several different ways: as totals, as averages and as ratios related
to service levels. Each reporting technique has its value in analyzing ridership and each presents data from a different perspective. Total ridership is an important measure. Total ridership
can, however, vary significantly from month to month because of seasonality and the variation in the number of weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays in a month. The use of average daily ridership
figures eliminates the issue of the number of days and makes direct comparisons of ridership possible. Average weekday ridership is the primary measurement used in this report. Bus ridership
is derived daily from automated fareboxes. Light Rail ridership is determined through statistical sampling on a monthly basis. Commuter rail ridership is manually counted on a daily
basis. HOV ridership is determined monthly on a sampling basis. Paratransit ridership compiled daily as actual trips are taken. The productivity ofDART services relative to the resources
used to supply those services is reported by ratios, which measure performance. Service Standards were adopted in 1995 and are updated annually to define the measures of performance
and to establish benchmarks against which to measure individual route performance. These statistics are compiled into a Route Performance Index that identifies those routes that are
performing above, at or below standard. The Service Standards Monitoring Report is included in this section of the Quarterly Report. -R1-Second Quarter FY 2002
Total System Ridership ISystem RidershipI Jul-OO Jan-Ol Jul-Ol Jan-02 10,000 9,000 ------------------------.....􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000
1,000oJan 99 Jul 99 Jan 00 -o-Total System Ridership 􀁾􀁔􀁯􀁴􀁡􀁬 Fixed Route Ridership o Total fixed route passengers include bus, light rail and commuter rail. Total passengers include
fixed route, HOV, paratransit and vanpool services. o Total system ridership in the second quarter of FY 2002 was just over 21.7 million riders, a decrease of 5.5 percent from the second
quarter ofFY 2001. o This decrease in ridership results from downward trends on the bus and light rail systems and the HOV lanes. The economic downturn has resulted in lower employment
levels, impacting transit ridership. Additionally, fare changes made in September 2001 have resulted in lower ridership. o Fixed route ridership totaled 13.8 million passengers in the
second quarter of FY 2002, a decrease of 8.5 percent from the second quarter ofFY 2001. o Trinity Railway Express ridership was almost 570,000 passengers in the second quarter, an increase
of 74.4 percent from last year. This increase is, in part, the result ofthe extension of service to downtown Fort Worth. o Paratransit ridership increased to over 143,500 trips in the
second quarter of FY 2002, an increase of 19.6 percent overFY 2001 levels. o Total HOV usage in the second quarter of FY 2002 was almost 8.0 million, about the same as in the second
quarter ofFY 2001. -R2-Second Quarter FY2002
Bus System Ridership IBus Average Weekday Ridership I 180,000 170,000 160,000 150,000 140,000 130,000 1-------------------------------1 120,000 N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 <:;' 0 0 <:;' 0 <:;'
0 0 0 cI: J:, 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 t: :; d.o 6.. t> 􀁾 <.> t: J:, 􀁾 '" <U '" c.. ::s ::s <U 0 <U '" ..., .... <U C<:I 􀁾 -< 􀁾 ..., ..., -< rrJ 0 Z Cl ..., .... 􀁾 o Total bus ridership in the
second quarter of FY 2002 was 10.2 million riders, a 12.8 percent decrease from the second quarter ofFY 2001. o Bus ridership in the second quarter was lower in each month of the quarter
with monthly decreases ranging from 9.6 percent to 16.9 percent. Total bus ridership in the quarter was 1.5 million riders lower than last year. o Average weekday ridership in the second
quarter was about 142,200 riders, an 11.9 percent decrease over last year's average. o Ridership on each route classification decreased in the first quarter. o Local bus routes experienced
a ridership decrease of 11.6 percent in March 2002 when compared to December 2001. Rail Station Feeder routes had a decrease of 14.1 percent for the same period. o The most heavily patronized
routes in the fourth quarter, by route classification, were: Crosstown Express Rail Feeder TC Feeder Local Route 466 Route 204 Route 583 Route 378 Route 44 -R3-4,914 1,202 1,796 1,585
7,439 Second Quarter FY2002
LRT Ridership jLRT Average Weekday RidershipI 42,000 41,500 41,000 40,500 40,000 􀁾􀁾 39,500 s:: a.> 􀁾 39,000 Q. 38,500 38,000 37,500 37,000 36,500 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 --------------------------1 ----------------------------1 Qtr2,2001 Qtr3,2001 Qtr4,2001 Qtrl,2002 Qtr2,2002 o LRT ridership in the second quarter totaled 2.84
million riders, a decrease of 0.6 percent from the 2.86 million riders transported in the second quarter of FY 2001. o Weekday ridership in the second quarter averaged almost 38,400
passengers, a decrease of 0.3 percent from the second quarter ofFY 2001. o Saturday ridership in the second quarter averaged 19,090 passengers, an increase of 4.7 percent from the FY
2001 level. o Sunday ridership in the second quarter averaged 12,292 passengers, an increase of 4.3 percent from the FY 2001 level. o The White Rock station opened in September 2001
and continues to serve about 1,200 daily riders. o The Red Line accounted for 57 percent of LRT ridership in the second quarter of FY 2002. The opening ofthe G-2 segment and the White
Rock station on the Blue Line increased its proportion ofridership to 43 percent. -R4-Second Quarter FY2002
Commuter Rail-Trinity Railway Express Ridership Commuter Rail Ridership 9,000 .C./.} 8,000 v OJ) 7,000 cvC/} C/} 6,000 (\:l l:l.. 5,000 .b "<; 4,000 Ci v 3,000 1...if v 2,000 ><1,0000
􀁾 A ,P 􀁾􀁾'--A 􀁾 J. u ...:r J 􀁾 J 􀁾 /"=>-_..-.I. 􀁾 N N N 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 c 1> til .:. >. c :; On c. <:> >-<> C 1> til '" ... c.. '" :s :s ... 0 ....., ... '" ...
"" 􀁾 <t:: 􀁾 ....., ....., <t:: Vi 0 Z Cl ....., "" 􀁾 􀁾􀁗􀁥􀁥􀁫􀁤􀁡􀁹 􀁾􀁓􀁡􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁤􀁡􀁹 o The Trinity Railway Express was extended to serve two new stations in Fort Worth in December
2001. These stations have contributed to remarkable ridership growth on the commuter rail service. The second quarter of FY 2002 saw a marked upturn in ridership as the new service began
to develop ridership. o In the second quarter, the TRE served a total of 569,354 passengers, an increase of 74.4 percent over the second quarter ofFY 2001. o Weekday ridership on the
TRE averaged almost 7,600 daily riders in the second quarter and averaged almost 8, I00 daily riders in March. o Saturday ridership in the second quarter averaged about 7,100 daily riders,
stimulated by customers trying the new Dallas/Fort Worth connections. Events at American Airlines Center continue to stimulate Saturday ridership. o Ridership to events at American Airlines
Center averages just over 1,000 passengers. This figure represents passengers using the temporary Victory Station platform and does not account for passengers who may arrive before events
to dine in the West End. These latter passengers use the Union Station platform. -R5-Second Quarter FY2002
Table 1 -Total Fixed-Route Ridership 25-Month Trending ___􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀬􀁟􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀬􀀢__􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁾______􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁟􀁾__""''''.'_J'·,,,,,,-,-,,-,,,-,,_''';__·/N''__·_>__-''.._
Monthly Trending Report Year Month Bus Monthly LRT Munthly Commuter Rail Munthly Total 2000 March 4098 991 60 5149 April 3783 920 52 4755 May 4086 955 52 5093 June 3895 935 54 4884 July
3767 963 52 4782 August 4418 1035 57 5510 September 4250 947 108 5305 2001 October 4517 1010 107 5634 NO\IelTber 3929 946 95 4970 DecelTber 3512 874 92 4478 January 3970 957 108 5035
February 3747 881 100 4728 March 4007 1018 119 5144 April 3943 971 106 5020 May 4180 1003 114 5297 June 3880 961 117 4938 July 3763 972 119 4854 Au9ust 4170 995 136 5301 September 3848
926 110 4884 October 4214 1147 137 5498 NoyelTber 3598 1027 121 4746 DecelTber 3261 950 192 4403 January 3588 974 198 4760 February 3295 887 173 4355 March 3325 977 199 4501 March 2002
vs March 2001 Increase (Decrease). -,58:': 􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁩 􀁾 80 -el t'2 % Change: :,'.;-;.:,'.;-;.0: 􀂷􀀴􀀮􀁜􀀩􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀧 67.2% -'12. 􀁾􀀢􀀡􀁾 -R6-Second Quarter FY2002
Table 2 -Average Weekday Fixed-Route Ridership 25-Month Trending Weekday Trending Report Year 1110llth Bus Weekday LRT "Veekday CR Weekday Total 2000 December 158.9 35.7 2.1 196.7 January
157.9 35.8 2.2 195.9 February 168.5 38.4 2.3 209.2 Much 160.1 37.2 2.5 199.8 April 164.2 38.3 2.4 204.9 fI.tIy 164.6 37.1 2.2 203.9 June 158.4 37.3 2.3 198.0 July 158.3 38.6 2.4 199.3
August 172.3 39.3 2.3 213.9 September 182.5 39.5 4.2 2262 2001 CX:tober 183.5 39.6 4.5 227.6 November 166.2 38.7 4.2 209.1 December 150.5 36.0 4.1 190.6 January 161.0 37.7 4.5 203.2
February 163.2 38.1 4.6 205.9 fI.tIrch 161.0 39.6 4.9 205.5 April 165.5 39.6 4.6 209.7 fI.tIy 168.1 39.3 4.8 212.2 June 159.4 39.3 5.1 203.8 July 155.1 39.4 5.1 199.6 August 161.7 38.0
5.2 204.9 September 170.1 39.6 5.1 214.8 2002 Q::tober 164.6 43.4 5.4 213.4 November 150.6 41.8 5.2 197.6 December 138.1 39.1 7.5 184.7 􀁄􀁯􀁣􀁥􀁭􀁢􀁦􀁦􀁬􀀰􀀰􀀲􀀬􀁾􀁄􀁯􀁣􀁥􀁭􀁢􀁦􀁦􀀲􀀰􀀰􀁊
1llcrea.ve (Decrea.ve): -12.4 3.1 3.4 -5.9 % Change: -8.2%, 8.6% 82.9% -3.1% -R7-Second Quarter FY2002
Table 3 -Passengers Boarding by Member City Dallas Area Rapid Transit Estimated Passenger Boardings By Member City For the Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2002, Period Ending March 31, 2002
In Thousands YTD YTO 0/0%% 2002 2001 Chanlle 166 205 -18.7% 309 391 -21.0% 81 99 -18.6% 1114 1197 -6.9% 92 97 -5.7% 813 959 -15.2% 397 428 -7.2% 407 463 -12.1 % 74 71 5.0% 3453 3910
-11.7% 17827 19772 -9.8% 21,281 23,682 -10.1% 5964 5686 4.9% 1019 621 64.2% 28,264 29,988 -5.7% 0.6%1 74.4%, 2856 326 14.906 2839 569 13.617 LIght RaIl /commuter Rail Qtr2 Qlr2 %%%(2)
Descriotion 2002 2001 Chanlle Bus Ridership (1) Addison 81 103 -21.5% Carrollton 150 197 -24.1% Farmers Branch 39 49 -19.6% Garland 552 607 -9.1% Glenn Heights 46 49 -6.3% Irving 380
460 -17.5% Plano 199 219 -9.3% Richardson 197 230 -14.4% Rowlett 37 37 0.0% Suburban Total 1680 1951 -13.9% Dallas Total (3) 8528 9773 -12.7% Bus Total 10,208 11,724 -12.9% ,Total Passenger
Boardings Qtr2 Qlr2 Inc TVDeofDav 2002 2001 (Dec) Weekdays 63 64 -1 Saturdays/Holiday 13 13 0 Sundays/Holiday 14 13 1 Total 90 90 0 YTO YTO Inc 2002 2001 (Dec) 127 127 0 26 26 0 29 29
0 182 182 0 (1) Effective March 1998, RidershIp allocations between member cities are based on an on-board survey, performed during a 4 month period ending January 31, 1998. (2) %Change
includes impact of revision to route allocations. % changes based on unrounded numbers. (3) Includes University Par1<, Highland Park, and Cockrell Hill. -R8-Second Quarter FY2002
Service Standards Monitoring Report Purpose and Approach DART's Service Standards require the preparation of a quarterly Service Standards Monitoring Report, which describes the perfonnance
of the DART bus system. Bus route perfonnance is measured using a Route Perfonnance Index (RPI). The RPI is calculated for each DART bus route. The RPI is based on comparisons of each
individual route's perfonnance against an adopted standard in each of three perfonnance measures. Those measures are passengers per mile, passengers per trip and subsidy per passenger.
The standards for each of these measures are defined for each of five route types, Crosstown, Express, Rail Feeder, Transit Center Feeder and Local. The standards adopted for FY 2001
were used in compiling this report. The Service Standards define an RPI of 0.6 or greater as satisfactory performance. Routes whose RPI value falls below 0.6 are targeted for corrective
action up to and including elimination. Routes with an RPI value between 0.6 and 0.8 are targeted for analysis in order to take a proactive approach to intervene and correct perfonnance
that is trending downward. Second Quarter Performance Crosstown Routes o Routes 428 and 409 are the best perfonning Crosstown routes with RPI values of 1.3. With over 4,200 daily riders,
route 409 is the second most heavily patronized Crosstown route. Route 428, with almost 4,200 daily riders ranks third among Crosstown routes. o Six of the eighteen Crosstown routes
had RPI values greater than 1.0. o Fifteen of the eighteen Crosstown routes perfonn above the 0.6 level. o The three Crosstown routes that perfonn below the 0.6 level include routes
475 (0.5),415 (0.5) and 412 (0.3). o Route 475 was modified in February 2002 to serve the new lake June Transit Center. Its perfonnance is expected to improve to acceptable levels. o
Route 415 is a new route inaugurated in September 2001. It is still within its development period. Ridership response to this new route serving south Oak Cliff has been positive. _ o
Route 412 serves Rowlett, including the Rowlett Park & Ride, and areas of south and east Garland. It is still within its development period and ridership is trending positively as well.
Modifications to improve this route's perfonnance are being evaluated. -R9-Second Quarter FY2002
Express Routes o Eleven of DART's fourteen Express routes had an RPI value of 0.6 or greater. o Route 278 (Red Bird) had the highest RPI value among Express routes with an RPI of 1.5.
o Three routes, 206 (Glenn Heights), 200 (Plano), 205 (Addison), 210 (Plano) and 201 (Richardson) had RPI values of 1.0 or greater. o Three routes had RPI values of less than 0.6. Route
281 (South Garland) fell to the 0.5 level. Routes 202 (North Irving) and 247 (Farmers Branch) fell to the 0.4 level. These lower performance levels appear to be related to ridership
decreases caused by higher unemployment. The performance of these routes is expected to Improve. o The opening of the White Rock rail station and the inauguration of route 581 impacted
route 281 ridership. Rail Feeder Routes o Of the 31 Rail Feeder routes, 21 had RPI values of 0.6 or better. Eight of the Rail Feeder routes performed at the 1.0 level or better. o The
top performing Rail Feeder routes were routes 582 (Richland College/Park Lane), 583 (RicWand CollegelLovers Lane) and 711 (CBDlUnion Station) with RPI values of 1.5. o Route 554 (Ledbetter
Station/Paul Quinn/Bonnie View) with an RPI value of 1.3 is the next best performing Rail Feeder route. o Among routes falling below the 0.6 level are routes 527 (LarmandaILovers Lane/SMU)
and 567 (Mockingbird station/North Central Transit Center). These routes had 0.5 RPI values. Route 527 has been modified to simplify its routing and to better serve the SMU campus. Route
567 will be modified when the NC-3 and 4 rail segments open in July. o Routes 516 (Red Bird/Tyler Vernon), 574 (Woods/Sugarberry/Westmoreland) and 706 (Downtown Trolley) performed at
the 0.4 level. Route 516 was created from the former route 156. It is still in its development period. Route 574 is being examined for modifications to improve its productivity. A new
downtown circulator route coordinated with the McKinney Avenue Trolley will replace route 706. o Routes 539 (Lovers Lane/Medical Center via Love Field) and 569 (AudeliaiFerndalelWhite
Rock Station) performed at the 0.3 level. Route 539 will be reviewed for opportunities to improve productivity. Route 569 will be modified with the opening ofthe G-2 rail segment. o
Routes 503 (HigWand Park), 504 (City Place/Mockingbird) and route 512 (Illinois station) performed at the 0.2 level. Route 503 is new Rail Feeder route representing modifications of
former Local route 33. Route 512 is a modification of former route 102. They are in their development period and will be monitored carefully for improvement. New route 504 began service
in September 2001 and is in its development period. -RlOSecond Quarter FY 2002
Transit Center Feeder Routes o Twenty-eight of the thirty-four Transit Center Feeder routes achieved RPI values of 0.6 or greater. Fifteen of those routes had RPI values of 1.0 or greater.
o Route 378 (South Garland/Lake Ray Hubbard/Garland Central) was the best performing Transit Center Feeder route with an RPI value of 2.2, the highest RPI value attained by any route
in the DART system. o Route 377 (South Garland/Garland Central) ranked second with an RPI value of 2.1. o Routes 301 (North Irving/West Irving/South Irving), 360 (North Central/Richardson/East
Plano) and 363 (Addison/Richardson) ranked third with RPI values of 1.3. o Route 378 (South Garland/Lake Ray Hubbard/Garland Central) was the most heavily patronized Transit Center Feeder
route (1,558 daily riders in March). o Routes 321 (Farmers Branch/Addison), 344 (Carrollton/Tollway), 703 (Telecom Trolley), 704 (North Irving Trolley), 707 (Addison) and 709 (Addison)
fell below the 0.6 level. These routes are being reviewed for appropriate corrective corrective action. o Route 703 will be replaced with new circulator routes when the NC-4 rail section
opens in July 2002. Local Routes o Twenty-seven of the thirty Local routes posted RPI values of 0.6 or greater in the second quarter ofFY 2002. o Route 44 (South Dallas/Medical CenterlNorthwest
Dallas) was both the best performing Local route with a 1.6 RPI as well as the most heavily patronized route. o Routes 19 (South Oak ClifflEast Dallas/South Garland), 26 (Harry Hines
Corridor/Cedars Station/Frazier Courts) and 76 (Oak Cliff) placed second among Local routes with RPI values of 1.2. o Routes 8 (Oak LawnlPreston Center), 46 (Illinois/Morrell stations),
60 White Rock/Fair Park) and 173 (Campbell/Park Lane/Downtown) had RPI values below 0.6. The route 8 is a new route separated from Route 2 in January 2001. It is in its development period
and is experiencing increasing ridership. Route 46 serves the residential areas near the South Oak Cliff rail line. It will be reviewed to identitY ways of stimulating additional ridership.
Route 60 will be modified to serve the new LBJ/Skillman station in May 2002. Route 173 will be reconfigured to serve the Spring Valley rail station when the NC-4 segment opens in July
2002. -Rll-Second Quarter FY2002
Dallas Area Rapid Transit Service Standards Monitoring Report Second Quarter FY 2002 Avg Avg IQ02 2Q02 Weekday Weekday Pass! Route Route RPI Pass Pass % Subl Pass! Rev Perfonnance Perfonnance
Point LINE Chin e Pass Index Tri Index Mile Index lodel $2.70 29.00 1.45 C 428 2,822 3.996 -29.4% $2.36 1.1 39.6 1.4 2.0 1.4 1.5 -0.2 C 409 2,812 4,482 -37.3% $2.89 0.9 46.2 1.6 1.9
1.3 1.5 -0.2 C 466 3,493 5,653 -38.2% $3.24 0.8 49.1 1.7 1.6 1.1 1,4 -0.1 C 445 1,519 2,362 -35.7% $2.88 0.9 24.4 0.8 2.1 1.4 1.2 -0.2 C 441 1,556 2,504 -37.9"10 $3.02 0.9 29.9 1.0 1.8
1.2 1.1 -0.1 C 438 174 5 3078.3% $4.49 0.6 40.1 1.4 1.5 1.0 1.1 -0.1 C 486 \,260 2,191 -42.5% $2.51 1.1 26.9 0.9 1.2 0.8 1.0 0.0 C 405 1,480 2,320 -36.2% $3.36 0.8 28.2 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0
-0.1 C 453 \,886 3,411 -44.7% $3.88 0.7 28.9 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 -0.1 C 410 668 980 -31.9% $2.35 1.2 17.7 0.6 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.0 C 451 751 1,175 -36.0% $2.5\ 1.1 17.5 0.6 1.1 0.7 0.8 0.0 C
488 564 1,031 -45.2% $3.70 0.7 17.0 0.6 1.1 0.8 0,8 -0.2 C 404 792 1,436 -44.9% $3.93 0.7 20.5 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.7 -0.1 C 400 837 1,882 -55.5% $4.28 0.6 18.4 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.7 -0,1 C 444 650
1,316 -50.6% $5.11 0.5 12.8 0.4 1.2 0.8 0.6 0.0 C 415 281 All $6.37 0.4 10.2 0.4 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.0 C 475 464 710 -34.6% $7.11 0.4 12.3 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.0 C 412 214 344 -37.8% $5.56 0.5
6.9 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.4 -0.1 II -----, 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁴􀀨􀀨􀁜􀁣􀀺􀀩􀀢􀀨􀁪 i Dallas Area Rapid Transit ,,;-/>., Service Standards Monitoring Report --Second Quarter FY 2002 Avg Avg IQ02 2Q02
Weekday Weekday Pass! Route Rou.. RPI Pass Pass % Subl Pass! Rev Performance Performance Point LINE Chan e Pass Index Tri Index Mile Index Index $2.85 19.00 1.00 E 278 520 778 -33.2%
$1.23 2.3 \4.1 0.7 1.5 1.5 1.4 0.2 E 206 487 764 -36.3% $2.19 1.3 19.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.0 E 200 584 944 -38.\% $2.46 1.2 18.8 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.0 E 205 390 712 -45.2% $2.43 1.2 14.3
0.8 1.0 1.0 0,9 0.1 E 210 656 945 -30.5% $2.64 1.1 18.3 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.1 E 20\ 461 768 -40.0% $2.61 1.1 15.0 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 E 283 696 1,104 -36.9% $2.75 1.0 13.5 0.7 0.9 0.9
0.9 0.0 E 204 878 1,515 -42.1% $2.99 1.0 13.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.0 E 207 302 439 ·31.2% $3.12 0.9 14.2 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.0 E 234 62 96 -35.2% $4.46 0.6 15.0 0.8 0.5 0.5 0,6 0.0 E 282
464 562 -17.5% $4.16 0.7 10.8 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.0 E 281 \43 642 -77.7% $4.38 0.7 7.9 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 E 247 79 130 -39.8% $5.45 0.5 6.8 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.1 E 202 564 1,183 -52.3%
$5.64 0.5 8.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 -0.1 -R12-Second Quarter FY 2002
􀀧􀀱􀀮􀁒􀀮􀁁􀀺􀁮􀁊􀁉􀁬􀀱􀁾􀁅􀁲􀁄􀀮􀁅􀁒􀀿􀀧􀁲 Dallas Area Rapid Transit IL"e·'"..",';.". .··.c::'',}.·.:·L ;·.c... :','0:., I Service Standards Monitoring Report ·"3//.//, Second Quarter
FY 2002 Avg Avg lQ02 2Q02 W<d<day W<d<day Pas.sI Route Route RPI Pass Pa.. % Subl Pas.sI Rev Perfonnance Performance Point LINE Chan e Pass Index Tri Index Mile Index Inde:l $3.60 9.50
1.80 FI 582 741 1,133 -34.6% $2.27 1.6 14.4 1.5 2.7 1.5 1.6 -0.1 FI 583 1,226 2,092 -41.4% $2.68 1.3 19.4 2.0 2,2 1.2 1.7 -0.2 FI 711 59 93 -36.9% $3.48 1.0 11.6 1.2 3.8 2,1 1.4 0.0
FI 554 587 818 -28.2% $2.34 1.5 10.6 1.1 2.2 1.2 1.6 -0.3 FI 702 163 254 -35.8% $2.36 1.5 3.4 0.4 3.2 1.8 1.2 0.1 FI 506 353 789 -55.3% $2.84 1.3 7.5 0,8 2,9 1.6 1.3 -0.1 FI 577 328
539 -39.2% $3.92 0.9 13.5 1.4 2.0 1.1 1.2 -0.1 FI 548 721 1,228 -41.3% $3.68 1.0 12.7 1.3 1.6 0.9 1.3 -0.2 FI 501 632 1,067 -40,8% $4.60 0.8 10.4 1.1 1.7 0.9 1.1 -0.1 FI 581 130 All
$2.59 1.4 6.1 0.6 1.3 0.7 0.7 0.3 FI 510 487 906 -46.3% $4.39 0,8 9.7 1.0 1.3 0.7 0.9 0.0 FI 538 719 1,249 -42.4% $3.75 1.0 6.5 0.7 1.6 0,9 1.0 -0.1 FI 502 207 320 -35.5% $4.08 0.9 5.5
0.6 1.9 1.0 0.9 -0.1 FI 555 364 732 -50.3% $3.92 0.9 7.0 0,7 1.5 0.8 0.9 -0.1 FI 568 613 1,107 -44.6% $5.54 0.6 10.4 1.1 1.2 0.7 1.0 -0.2 FI 515 640 1,176 -45.6% $5.23 0.7 10.3 1.1 1.I
0.6 0,9 -0.1 FI 522 432 718 -39.9% $5.51 0.7 8,0 0.8 1.2 0.6 0.8 0.0 FI 511 298 619 -51.8% $3,90 0.9 8.0 0.8 0.5 0.3 1.0 -0.4 FI 701 74 235 -68.4% $5,80 0.6 4.4 0.5 1.4 0.8 0.7 -0.1
FI 553 195 344 -43.4% $6.38 0.6 6.5 0.7 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.0 FI 549 462 1,018 -54,6% $8.86 0.4 8.9 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.7 -0.1 FI 567 216 381 -43.1% $8.95 0.4 6.7 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.6 -0.1 FI 527 162
231 -30,1% $6.87 0.5 4,8 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.0 FI 574 196 406 -51.8% $10.32 0.3 5.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.5 -0.1 FI 516 196 225 -12,9% $9.32 0.4 4.5 0,5 0,7 0.4 0.5 -0.1 FI 706 167 295 -43.4%
$10.19 0.4 3.8 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.0 FI 569 160 354 -54.7% $11.64 0.3 3.5 0.4 0,6 0.4 0.4 0.0 FI 539 169 302 -44.0% $1738 0.2 4.3 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.4 -0.1 Fl 512 30 54 -44.8% $16.40 0.2 2.2
0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.0 FI 503 83 126 -34.2% $20,79 0.2 2.8 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.0 FI 504 26 All $15.64 0.2 1.3 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.0 -R13-Second Quarter FY2002
Dallas Area Rapid Transit Service Standards Monitoring Report Second Quarter FY 2002 Avg Avg 1002 2002 Weekday W«kday Passl Route Route RPI Pass Pa.. % Subl Pass! Rev Perlonnance Perfonnance
Point LINE Chan e Pass Index Tri Inde:! Mile Index Index law Chan e $4.45 9.00 1.00 F2 378 1.076 1,558 -30.9% $1.81 2.5 23.6 2.6 1.5 1.5 2.0 0.2 F2 377 447 809 44.7% $1.43 3.1 11.6 1.3
1.8 1.8 1.9 0.2 F2 301 570 975 41.5% $3.84 1.2 17.4 1.9 0.9 0.9 1.4 -0.1 F2 363 365 634 42.5% $3.17 1.4 11.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.1 F2 360 568 996 43.0% $3.66 1.2 15.2 1.7 0.9 0.9 1.4 -0.1
F2 371 326 615 47.0% $2.96 1.5 10.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 2.8 -1.6 F2 341 254 453 43.8% $3.25 1.4 7.1 0.8 1.2 1.2 1.2 -0.1 F2 366 50 45 12.0% $2.79 1.6 6.6 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.1 F2 374 225 444 49.4%
$3.68 t.2 9.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2 -0.1 F2 350 338 687 -50.8% $4.01 1.1 11.7 1.3 0.8 0.8 1.1 -0.1 F2 372 267 518 48.5% $3.54 1.3 8.8 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.1 -0.1 F2 376 129 122 5.2% $4.04 1.1 7.3
0.8 1.1 I.l 1.2 -0.1 F2 322 338 541 -37.5% $4.72 0.9 10.7 1.2 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.0 F2 362 382 495 -23.0% $6.49 0.7 11.3 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 F2 361 206 358 42.5% $3.92 1.1 6.9 0.8 1.0 1.0
1.1 -0.2 F2 380 191 336 42.9% $3.86 1.2 7.3 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.0 F2 305 439 774 43.3% $6.36 0.7 12.4 1.4 0.5 0.5 0.9 -0.1 F2 309 165 331 -50.0% $4.29 1.0 6.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 1.0 -0.2 F2 310
225 437 48.5% $4.08 1.1 6.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.1 -0.3 F2 333 302 537 43.8% $4.66 1.0 7.7 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.1 F2 331 185 453 -59.1% $4.36 1.0 6.3 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.0 -0.2 F2 314 337 203 65.9%
$8.91 0.5 13.3 1.5 0.4 0.4 0.9 -0.1 F2 302 163 316 48.6% $4.67 1.0 5.8 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.0 F2 306 99 227 -56.2% $5.07 0.9 4.4 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.8 -0.1 F2 303 202 346 41.6% $6.67 0.7 7.0
0.8 0.6 0.6 0.7 -0.1 F2 358 191 352 45.9% $7.65 0.6 6.9 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.7 -0.1 F2 352 188 364 48.3% $6.01 0.7 4.9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 -0.1 F2 311 82 107 -23.3% $8.80 0.5 6.2 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.8
-0.2 F2 703 86 213 -59.5% $8.58 0.5 3.1 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 F2 321 101 230 -56.3% $8.73 0.5 3.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 -0.1 F2 709 86 72 18.2% $13.06 0.3 4.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.6 -0.2 F2 707 47
154 -69.5% $9.78 9.78 0.5 1.5 0.2 0.6 0.6 0.6 -0.2 F2 704 61 132 -53.8% $12.62 0.4 1.7 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.0 F2 344 57 226 -74.9% $19.28 0.2 1.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 -0.1 -R14-Second Quarter
FY2002
Dallas Area Rapid Transit Service Slandards Monitoring Report Second Quarter FY 2002 Avg Avg IQ02 2Q02 Weekday Weekday Pass! Routt Routt RPt Pass Pass % Subl Pass! Rev Performance Perfonnance
Point LINE Chan e Pass Jndn. Tri Index Mile Index Index 52.80 23.50 2.00 L 44 5,213 8,400 -37.9% $1.99 1.4 50.3 2.1 2.6 1.3 1.8 -0.2 L 26 2,920 4,583 -36.3% $2.25 1.2 26.7 1.1 2.6 1.3
1.3 -0.1 L 19 3,899 6,806 -42.7% $2.60 1.1 35.7 1.5 2.1 1.0 1.4 -0.2 L 76 1,205 1,872 -35.6% $3.96 0.7 33.9 1.4 2.7 1.3 1.2 -0.1 L 2 I,ll 1 1,599 -30.6% $2.17 1.3 18.5 0.8 2.6 1.3 1.2
-0.1 L 24 1,248 2,059 -39.4% $2.28 1.2 16.3 0.7 2.9 1.4 1.3 -0.2 L 39 999 1,693 -41.0% $2.56 1.1 16.5 0.7 2.5 1.3 1.2 -0.1 L 161 4,397 6,956 -36.8% $3.31 0.8 33.0 1.4 1.6 0.8 1.1 -0.1
L 11 2,559 4,335 -41.0% $3.08 0.9 27.4 1.2 1.8 0.9 1.1 -0.1 L 51 1,772 3,070 -42.3% $3.13 0.9 27.6 1.2 1.8 0.9 1.1 -0.1 L 1 1.937 3,155 -38.6% $2.95 0.9 21.0 0.9 2.0 1.0 1.1 -0.1 L 50
1,759 2,876 -38.8% $3.10 0.9 25.4 1.1 1.7 0.8 1.0 -0.1 L 12 932 1,750 -46.7% $2.75 1.0 15.4 0.7 2.2 1.1 1.1 -0.2 L 164 2.823 4,408 -36.0% $3.\9 0.9 22.8 1.0 1.8 0.9 1.0 -0.1 L 21 1,339
2,569 -47.9% $4.\5 0.7 27.9 1.2 1.5 0.8 0.9 -0.1 L 63 912 1,842 -50.5% $3.57 0.8 15.7 0.7 2.1 1.0 1.0 -0.1 L 29 1,924 3,078 -37.5% $4.46 0.6 27.2 1.2 1.3 0.7 0.9 -0.1 L 49 900 \,673
-46.2% $3.51 0.8 14.3 0.6 1.9 1.0 0.9 -0.1 L 155 632 1.\18 -43.4% $3.65 0.8 14.8 0.6 1.3 0.6 0.7 0.0 L 184 425 794 -46.4% $3.59 0.8 17.1 0.7 1.0 0.5 0.7 0.0 L 42 1.256 2,134 -41.2% $5.03
0.6 21.1 0.9 1.1 0.5 0,7 0.0 L 36 891 1.567 -43.2% $4.98 0.6 18.3 0.8 1.3 0.6 0.7 -0,1 L 3 800 1,295 -38.3% $3.82 0.7 8.5 0.4 1.7 0.9 0.7 -0.1 L 59 1,307 2,463 -46.9% $4.88 0.6 19.5
0.8 1.1 0.5 0.8 -0.1 L 31 963 1,738 -44.6% $5.02 0.6 18.2 0.8 1.1 0.6 0.7 -0.1 L 183 952 1,461 -34.9"10 $4.26 0.7 15.5 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.7 0.0 L 60 1,143 1,962 -41.7% $5.17 0.5 14.6 0.6
1.1 0.6 0.7 -0.1 L 173 434 757 -42.7% $4.06 0.7 9.6 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.0 L 8 352 451 -21.9% $8.36 0.3 7.4 0.3 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.0 L 46 254 516 -50.9"10 $7.66 0.4 5.7 0.2 0.8 0.4 0.4 -0.1
-R15-Second Quarter FY 2002
-a.. 0I0::: Cf) I I
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Second Quarter FY 2002 Quarterly Reports P&D1 Highlights P&D2 􀁓􀁹􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁾􀁊􀀺􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁮􀁩􀁮􀁧 􀀦􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁧􀁲􀁡􀁭 􀁄􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁐􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁮􀁴 P&D2 Transit
System Plan 2025 P&D3 DFW Airp()rt Rail Study P&D4 Capital􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀦 Development 􀀮􀁰􀁾􀁐􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀮􀀮 . 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁑􀁾􀂧􀀮􀁒􀀡􀁾􀁾􀁾__ .. _...u .. .._ _. · P&D5 NG/NEGorridor 􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁩􀁧􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 Monitoring Program P&D6 North Central Corridor
LRT Extension Planning P&D7 Southeast Corridor 􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾 ..__..... . -.. ". 􀀢􀀭􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀧􀁾􀀭 .'.•-,-,,-P&D8 Northwest Corridor (Dallas CBD to Carrollton) P&D9 Northwest
Gor.ridor(NW Hwy. to DFW) P&D10 Construction and Installation of Standard Shelters P&D11 Southern Sector Amenities P&D12 Mobility Programs Development P&D12 .East COlpdor Major Investment
Study P&D13 SH)14 􀁆􀁲􀁾􀁥􀁾􀁡􀁹 W.idening 􀁉􀁮􀁣􀁬􀁵􀁤􀁾􀀡􀀱􀀺􀁧 Two HOV Lanes P&D14 Fergllson R()::l.d HOV Ramp · P&D15 I-35E/US 67 Interim HOV Lanes P&D16 North Central (l.JS 75)
Reversible HOV Lane P&D17 .H()V 􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁬􀀮􀁉􀁬􀁾􀁳􀀹􀁰􀁾􀀡􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁉􀀱􀁟 P&D18 DART Personalized Public Transit (PPT) Operational Test P&D19 Regional Comprehensive ITS Program P&D20
Elm Street/Commerce Street Corridor .. ' '-.....-'.-..-.-. "_.-._"..----,-.__.' .-. ---,,--_..", ,--.. -_.-." ..._--,,, -'."". '_.'--'-" 􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀢 P&D21 TRE at Beltline Road Transit
PASS Project P&D22 􀁓􀁥􀁲􀁶􀁩􀁣􀁥􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁮􀁩􀁾􀁧 & Scheduling · P&D22 Five-Year Action Plan P&D23 Five-Year Action Plan Score Card -_.__, ._,. __••.•• • _. •• __••_. •• '.'._" __ •
0"_-__"'.'. ,__ ._••• ,_._._, ••_. __.•••••.•••• · P&D24 Service Reviews P&D25 Bus Feeder Plan for NC Corridor LRT Extension P&D26 Bus Feeder Plan for NE Corridor LRT Extension P&D27
Quality.AssuranceProgram P&D28 􀁅􀁭􀁰􀁬􀁯􀁹􀁾􀁲 Service Program Deyel()P.ll1ent 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀲􀀮􀀮􀀮 .􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁟􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁐􀀡􀀼􀀺􀀾􀁹􀁾􀀺􀁲􀀺􀁧􀁾􀀡􀁔􀁾􀀡􀁩􀀮􀁣􀁽􀀱􀁪􀁰􀁟􀁾􀁧􀁔􀁧􀁾􀀡􀁊􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀡􀀢􀀮􀀮􀁳􀀡�
�􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁳 P&D30 . Community Transit §ervice 􀁄􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁾􀁰􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴 P&D31 􀁂􀁵􀁾 Corridor 􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁣􀁥􀁰􀁴􀁄􀁾􀁹􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴 P&D32 Economic Devel()pment & Planning. P&D32 Econ0.ll1ic
􀁰􀁾􀁹􀁥􀁬􀀮􀁯􀁐􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁾􀁮􀁴
Planning and Development Department The scope of work of the Planning and Development Department includes the following responsibilities and functions: Direction of a broad range of
planning and development activities from ongoing refinement of DART's current bus system to conceptualizing future services and projects and advancing them through various levels of
development. Specific functions include short range bus service planning and scheduling, long range system planning, and capital planning for rail and bus passenger facilities. Planning
and Development is also responsible for planning and project definition of rail and bus passenger facilities from environmental impact analysis through preliminary engineering and for
planning, design, development, and operation of the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane system. Finally, the Department is responsible for providing planning support by encouraging and
promoting transit-oriented development surrounding or adjacent to DART properties. Highlights This Quarter • The System Evaluation and Mobility Needs work program was completed for the
Transit System Plan 2025. Staff conducted five Mobility Needs Focus Group meetings. • A LAP/CMS programming request was approved by the DART Board for the City of Farmers Branch for
reconstruction ofHutton Drive. • FTA approved the Environmental Study ofWalnut Hill Station Parking in March 2002. • The DEIS for the Southeast Corridor was published in February 2002.
• The Carrollton City Council passed a resolution supporting the Frankford Station south option for the Northwest Corridor (Dallas CBD to Carrollton); The DART Board approved the Service
Plan Amendment for the station in January 2002. • The Dallas City Council approved a resolution supporting the Love Field tunnel option and cost-sharing for 1/3 of the additional project
cost. • A total ofeight regular enhanced shelters have been installed. • Preliminary travel demand forecasts were completed for the East Corridor MIS for each of the mode options; results
presented at public meetings in March. • The I-35EIUS 67 HOV lanes, extending for 11 miles from Downtown Dallas to Camp Wisdom Road opened March 11, 2002. • The DART Board approved the
Bus Feeder Plans for NC-3, NC-4, and G-2 in February. • A new business plan was completed for the DART Vanpool Program in February. Ten new vanpools started in late March. • Employers/hotels
were contacted and meetings held regarding G-2, NC-3 and NC-4 in an effort to educate/promote the new stations and bus feeder plan alignments. • The next major bus service improvements
will be implemented in May and July 2002. • The DART Board passed a resolution supporting the Sustainable Development Grant for the Cedars/South Side Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvement.
P&Dl Second Quarter FY 2002
Transit System Plan 2025 System Planning and Program Development Strategic Plan Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C2.3 Open/Integrate new transit services.
The Board of Directors adopted DART's current Transit System Plan (TSP) in November 1995. The 1995 Transit System Plan was an update to the 1989 Plan, both of which were oriented toward
a horizon year of 2010. The current undertaking of the Transit System Plan 2025 intends to examine the transit needs and opportunities within the context ofthe year 2025. The TSP 2025
update includes Phase I (Preliminary Assessment) and Phase II (Development). An assessment of DART's previous System Plan (1989, 1995) and the framework development for the Transit System
Plan 2025 (Phase I) was completed during FY 01. Phase II is scheduled for completion by June 2003. January 2002 activities: • Discussed the Public Outreach Plan with cities of Garland,
Rowlett, and University Park. • Progress Report presented to the DART Board. • The System Evaluation and Mobility Needs work program was completed. • CAC Focus Group held. • February
2002: Member City meeting held re: the TSP. March 2002 activities: • Progress report presented to the DART Board. • Held five (5) Mobility Needs Focus Group meetings. None • April 2002:
Published first newsletter; held final Dallas CBD Workshop/Meeting; and held Focus Group (non-transit riders). • May 2002: Complete Travel Demand Modeling Analysis. May 2002: Technical
Report: Mobility Needs Assessment/Transit System Evaluation. . • December 2002: Conceptual 2025 Transit System Plan. • February 2003: Draft 2025 Transit System Plan. • June 2003: Final
2025 Transit System Plan. Jay Kline Deputy Project Manager: Jerry Tikalsky P&D2 Second Quarter FY 2002
DFW Airport Rail Study System Planning and Program Development Strategic Plan C2.3 OpenlIntegrate new transit services. Consideration Description The North Central Texas Council of Governments
(NCTCOG), the DallaslFort Worth International Airport (DFW), Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the "T") are undertaking a cooperatively funded
rail planning and implementation study for the DallaslFort Worth International Airport. The primary goal of this project is to identify the best method for connecting DFW to the regional
rail system. DFW is the project manager and NCTCOG is the contract manager for the consulting firm hired to assist in conducting this study. The consultant initiated work in May 2001.
A Project Steering Committee (PSC) consisting of the Executive Directors of the four agencies will guide the work. Staff assistance will be provided by DART's Planning and Development
Department. Accomplishments • Travel demand forecasting was revised and analyses of alternatives were refined. Issues Delay due to additional work on travel demand forecasts and refinement
of candidate alternatives. Schedule • April 2002: Revised travel demand forecasts. • April 2002: Refined candidate alternatives. • April 2002: Assemble systems and action plans. • April
2002: Prepare Strategic Action Plan. • May 2002: Review lead agency and funding strategies. • May 2002: Hold public meetings. • May 2002: Complete study. • June 2002: Select alternative.
• August 2002: Hold Public Meetings. • September 2002: Consultant completes work. Project Manager(s) Jerry Tikalsky P&D3 Second Quarter FY2002
LAP/eMS Program Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager Capital Planning and Development C3 Improve efficiency S1 Build relationships
with Stakeholders In August 1996, the Board approved guidelines for a new program called LAP/CMS. The purpose of the program is to return a portion of the sales tax receipts of member
cities for use in implementing mobility improvements that also enhance transit. Funds will be distributed to eligible cities until the fiscal year after rail construction begins in that
city. The DART Board approved programming requests for the following member cities between January 1,2002 and March 31, 2002: • City ofFarmers Branch: Reconstruction ofHutton Drive ($635,000).
The DART staff approved programming requests for Addison and Garland between January 1, 2002 and March 31, 2002. During this quarter, DART paid $2,623,000 to member cities for completed
projects. None at this time This is an ongoing activity Trip Brizell DART P&D4 Second Quarter FY2002
Nortb CentrallNortbeast Corridor Mitigation Monitoring Program Capital Planning and Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s)
C2.3 Open/Integrate new transit services C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities S1.7 Operate environmentally friendly services DART is advancing the development of LRT extensions
in the North Central and Northeast Corridors. The North Central Final Environmental Impact Statement (FElS, 1997) and the Northeast Final Local Environmental Assessment (LEA, 1997) identified
impact and mitigation measures. FTA requires preparation of Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) updates for federally funded projects. • Design of soundproof of house on 22nd Street
in Plano (NC5) is complete. • FTA approved the Environmental Study for Walnut Hill Station Parking facility in March. • Finalized the PE drawing of the Walnut Hill Station Parking layout.
• Awaiting the installation of soundproof windows on house on 22nd Street in Plano. • • Addition ofparking facility at Spring Valley Station. • Re-vegetation of Area 3 (off-channel -palustrine
emergent wetlands) G-2. • Installation of the I-foot berm to provide safety barrier for people using the bike path Area 3 (off-channel -palustrine emergent wetlands) G-2. • Installation
of the I-foot berm at Area 3 (off-channel palustrine emergent wetlands) G-2. • Re-vegetation of the construction access road to Area 1 (offsite -enhance hydroperiod of floodplain) to
preconstruction conditions. • Modifying erosion control and temporary seeding at Old Jackson Branch. The North Central and Northeast Monitoring Mitigation Program is ongoing. Victor
IbewuikeP&D5 Second Quarter FY2002
North Central Corridor LRT Extension Planning Capital Planning and Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C2.3 Open/Integrate
new transit services. The 12.3 mile extension of the North Central LRT project from Park Lane to the East Plano Transit Center includes 10 stations and will serve several major employment
and residential areas in Dallas, Richardson, and Plano. A federal environmental impact statement has been prepared for the extension. • PE for Walnut Hill Station Parking ongoing (anticipated
April 5,2002) • FTA approval of Environmental Study of Walnut Hill Station Parking (March 26, 2002) • Walnut Hill Lane Parking public hearing held February 15, 2002 • New Opening Date
for NC5: December 9,2002 • Spring Valley Station additional parking placed on hold to explore economic development opportunities • Theater Complex that leases DART parking at Park Lane
is for sale • April 9, 2002: Call for Public Hearing for Park Lane Station • July 2002: Park Lane to Galatyn Park • December 2002: East Plano Transit Center (Parker Road) John HoppieP&D6
Second Quarter FY 2002
Southeast Corridor Capital Planning and Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description C2.3 OpenlIntegrate new transit service. The Transit System Plan (Phase II) identifies a
transit corridor extending from the CBD through Deep Ellum near Baylor Hospital, by South Dallas, Fair Park and to Pleasant Grove. The committed MLK and Lake June Transit Centers are
both located in the vicinity of DART rail right-of-way, thus enhancing the opportunity to implement rail transit from the Dallas CBD to Buckner Blvd. FTA issued the Notice of Intent
to prepare the EIS in November 2000. DART received FTA approval to enter into Preliminary Engineering in July 2001. Accomplishments • Published DEIS: February 22, 2002 • Public Hearings:
March 12, 13, 14,2002 • Developed Local Support for filling Deep Ellum Tunnel • SHPO approval ofMLK TC: March 2, 2002 • Environmental Study for MLK TC to FTA Issues • Cullum Crossing
traffic mitigation • 4(f) Statement for Deep Ellum Tunnel and Fair Park • Memorandum of Understanding with SHPO for 4(f) Issues • Environmental Community expressed concerns about line
through Great Trinity Forest Schedule • April 8,2002: Close public comment period • Spring 2002: Prepare FEIS/4(f) Statement/MOA • June 2002: 4(f) Public Hearing • July 2002: Publish
FEIS Project Manager(s) John Hoppie P&D7 Second Quarter FY 2002
Northwest Corridor (Dallas CBD to Carrollton) Capital Planning and Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments C2.3 OpenlIntegrate new transit services. The
DART Board approved the Northwest Corridor Locally Preferred Investment Strategy (LPIS) on February 22, 2000. The LPIS includes implementation of Light Rail Transit (LRT) in the Northwest
Corridor. The project is currently nearing completion of the Preliminary EngineeringlEnvironmental Impact Statement (PEIEIS) phase. FTA issued the Notice of Intent to prepare the EIS
in November 2000. DART received FTA approval to enter into Preliminary Engineering in July 2001. • Held coordination meetings with the Cities of Dallas, Farmers Branch and Carrollton
on station locations, the 5% engineering drawings, proposed street modifications. • Continued internal coordination meetings with Project Management and RR Management to review progress
and resolve alignment/station issues. • Carrollton City Council passed resolution supporting Frankford Station south option; DART Board approved Service Plan Amendment for station in
January 2002. • February 2002: Transmitted Draft Request for Determination of Eligibility Report to State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) andFTA. • February 2002: Transmitted Preliminary
DEIS to FAA/FTA and coordinated review of comments. • March 27, 2002: Dallas City Council approved resolution supporting Love Field tunnel option and cost-sharing for 1/3 of the additional
project cost. • Coordinated with FAA and Dallas Aviation on Draft EIS language and stationILove Field Master Plan interface. • Developed two additional Medical Center design option alignments
to minimize real estate impacts/cost. • Developed new Market Center/Oak Lawn station layout to minimize residential impacts and displacements. • Coordinated with Medical Center community
for the alternative Parkland LRT Station on the Medical Center design option. • Developed three options for future Northwest Rail Operating Facility. P&D8 Second Quarter FY2002
Northwest Corridor (Dallas CBD to Carrollton) Capital Planning and Development Issues • Affordability, interlining with Southeast Corridor, CBD transit mall capacity, competitiveness
for federal funds. • Additional funding for Love Field tunnel option. • Real Estate impact issues along Medical Center design option. • Displacements at Bachman Station, including 160+
unit apartment complex. • Advance acquisition opportunities. Schedule • April 2002: Submit 2nd Preliminary Draft EIS to FTA for final review • April 2002: Fifth round of General Public
Meetings • April 2002: CWG and SWG Meetings to review preliminary Draft EIS findings and alignment/stations. • April 2002: Hold Service Plan Amendment public hearing for the Northwest
Rail Operating Facility • May/June: Publish, circulate and hold public hearings for Draft EIS and Service Plan Amendments for alignment/stations. Project Manager(s) Kay Shelton P&D8
Second Quarter FY2002
Northwest Corridor (NW Hwy. to DFW) Capital Planning & Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C2.3 Open/Integrate new
transit services. The DART Board approved the Northwest Corridor Locally Preferred Investment Strategy (LPIS) on February 22, 2000. The LPIS includes implementation of Light Rail Transit
(LRT) in the Northwest Corridor. The next phase of the project development process is the PEIEIS phase scheduled for completion by February 2004. • Coordinating with the City of Irving
on alignment and land use issues in the Las Colinas urban center through Supplemental Planning. • Attending montWy Chamber of Commerce and community meetings to update the public and
meet interested citizens. • Coordinating with DFW Airport, the NCTCOG, and the Fort Worth "T" regarding rail access and station location issues. • Consultant has submitted a new revised
scope of work and it is currently being evaluated. • DART and the City of Irving have completed the ILA although the $60 million contribution is still pending. • Alignment and station
issues in the Las Colinas Urban Center and at DFW Airport are continuing to be evaluated. The location of the Irving Convention Center has been resolved by the city but the alignment
in the vicinity is still being developed. • Light rail alignment adjacent to the Cistercian School may become contentious due to the proximity of the alignment to the school. • The DFW
Rail Access Study has been delayed until September 2002 due to the wide range of options still being evaluated. This may have some impact on starting the PEIEIS effort. • September 2002:
Initiate the PEIEIS pending authorization from FTA and resolution of Irving's $60 million contribution. Steve Salin DART P&D9 Second Quarter FY2002
Construction & Installation of Standard Shelters Capital Planning and Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C1.2 Provide
clean, safe, secure environment. C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities. The Standard DART Bus Shelter program is intended to provide additional amenities and a more comfortable
place to wait, where daily boarding activity is greater than 50 passengers or where a sensitive use is present. Amenity improvements identified in the Five Year Action Plan include a
total of 235 standard shelters. The plan is to construct and install 80-90 standard shelters each year for three to five years. • As of2ndQ02, 165 shelters have been installed out of235.
• Pad pouring and shelter installation continues for the remaining 70 shelters. • Current shelter contract extended to October 2002. • Process to procure new shelter contractor was initiated
in July 2001 and continues. • 40 shelters manufactured and delivered, of which 20 were installed and 20 stored. • Investigation to provide communication devices at bus shelters, including
installation of "smart" shelters was initiated in January 2002, and continues. • Contract authority issues and contractor performance delaying the pad pouring process. • Shelters installed
awaiting inspection, task to be assigned since changes occurred in Project Development. • September 2002: Procure new shelter contractor. • September 2002: NTP for new shelter contractor.
• October 2002: Complete installation of remaining 70 standard shelters. Abel WalendomP&DlO Second Quarter FY2002
Southern Sector Amenities Capital Planning and Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C1.2 Provide clean, safe, secure
environment. C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities. The concept of enhanced shelters was created in 1997 as an alternative to three PTLs in the 1993 Southern Sector Bus Passenger
Amenities Plan. The DART Enhanced Bus Shelter Program is intended to provide additional amenities and a more comfortable waiting environment. Some features of the enhanced shelter include
lighting, ventilation, infrared heaters, passenger information, and exterior landscaping. The requirement for placement of an enhanced shelter is a minimum daily boarding activity of
110 and significant transfer activity. Enhanced shelters include regular enhanced shelters (contractor/MagnaPrime) and Narrow R-O-W enhanced shelters (contractorlDay Tech). A Notice
to Proceed (NTP) was issued in July 2001 to Magnaprime to manufacture 15 regular enhanced shelters. • Installed six new enhanced shelters for a total of eight. • Initiated pad construction
at two additional locations and initiated pad design at three other locations. • Obtained agreement for full right-of-way shelters at two additional locations. • Initiated design for
roadway improvements for shelters at Trade Village and World Store. • Maximizing the number of regular enhanced right-of-way shelters versus narrow right-of-way enhanced shelters, subject
to property owner cooperation. • Oct. 2001 -Feb. 2002: MagnaPrime will install the first eight regular enhanced shelters. • Finalize construction of five pads in construction and design
in May 2002. • Place shelters on pads at two additional locations in May 2002. • Place shelters on seven pads in June 2002. Robert Parks P&Dll Second Quarter FY2002
East Corridor Major Investment Study Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C2.2 Develop a seamless,
fully accessible, multimodal system C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities The East Corridor Major Investment Study (MIS) is a comprehensive, multi-modal study of the transportation
problems within the area bounded by Downtown Dallas in the west, the Santa Fe RR/Ferguson Rd in the north, Military/Scyene/Union Pacific RR in the south, and Dalrock Rd/SH 352 in the
east. The study is expected to culminate with a staff recommendation and elected official and federal government approval of improvements that address these problems, referred to as
the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). To solve the transportation problems in this region, various modes of transportation will be considered including freeway, arterial, HOV/managed
lane, passenger rail, bus, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), ITS, TSM, TDM, bicycle and pedestrian improvements. During FY 200I, the Project Management Plan and Public Involvement Plan were completed;
and Executive Work Group was formed; the Evaluation of the Existing Corridor was completed; and, the travel demand model was validated. • Held the 2nd meeting ofthe Community Work Group
• Refined the Purpose and Need Report. • Completed preliminary travel demand forecasts for each ofthe mode options (e.g. No-Build, TSMlTDM, arterial, frontage road, HOV lane, managed
lane, express lane, freeway mainlane, BRT, and passenger rail). • Presented the results to the general public at the 2nd round of public meetings during March in Dallas and Garland •
None at this time. • FY 02: Complete Screening Analysis and Alternatives Analysis. • FY 03-04: Schematic Design and the Federal Environmental process (NEPA) phase. Ernie Martinez P&D12
Second Quarter FY 2002
SH 114 Freeway Widening Including Two HOV Lanes Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C2.3 OpenlIntegrate
new transit services A single reversible HOV lane plus one additional general purpose lane in each direction will be constructed on SH 114. The limits for this section are SH 183 and
Spur 348. SH 114 will be widened from four lanes to eight lanes with an addition of two reversible HOV lanes from Spur 348 to SH 121/County Line. The corridor is expected to include
two Park and Ride lots, located at or near International Parkway and Spur 348. Access/egress will be provided by using various methods such as T-ramp, slip-ramp, wishbone ramp and drop
ramp. Both decisions are pending completion of the D/FW Airport Corridor Rail Study. • Developed various alternatives for freeway and HOV widening on SH 114 (Tom Braniff Blvd. to Rochelle)
to accommodate LRT alignment within the Corridor for consideration by DART, TxDOT, and property owners. Prepared a decision-making matrix for the evaluation of the alternatives. • Coordinated
with TxDOT on the SH 114 project interchanges with Loop 12 and SH 121, which are the project tennini. • Location ofaccess/egress points and ramps. • Proposal to allow LRT within State
ROW so as not to significantly impact highway improvements and operations. • Need to re-evaluate the height of improvements planned for the SH 114/SH121 interchange within the vicinity
ofthe DFW Airport to respond to restrictions/comments made by Airport personnel and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) • FY 03: Complete EA and schematic drawings. • FY 04-06:
PE/final engineering phase. • FY 06-08: Utilities relocation/coordination and ROW • FY 08-12: Construction phase. Ali Rabiee P&D13 Second Quarter FY2002
Ferguson Road HOV Ramp Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C2.3 Open/Integrate new transit services
The project involves construction of a direct connection HOV ramp from the East R.L. Thornton contraflow HOV lane to Ferguson Road. DART buses and other eligible vehicles, which use
the HOV lane, presently have to weave across four freeway main lanes to access Ferguson Road. The project will provide a direct connection ramp from the median of the freeway to Ferguson
Road through the space between the bridge structures. The ramp will eliminate the need for DART buses and other eligible vehicles to weave across four freeway main lanes. • EA document
and schematics were completed and forwarded to TxDOT. • Design work is underway. Coordination with East Corridor MIS. • FY 02-03: Engineering/final engineering phase. • FY 03-04: Construction
phase. Mahesh KuimilP&D14 Second Quarter FY 2002
South R. L. Thornton/Marvin D. Love (I-35EIUS 67) Interim HOV Lanes Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description C2.3 Open/Integrate new transit services HOV
lanes on US 67 from north of 1-20 to I-35E and on I-35E from US 67 to CBD for a total of 11.1 miles. A portion of HOV lane on US 67 has a 3-foot buffer, creating concurrent flow HOV
lanes on either side of the median. Remainder of the HOV lane, on US 67 and the entire length on I-35E is a barrier separated reversible lane. In the morning, the HOV lane begins as
a concurrent flow lane northbound on US 67 from 1-20 to Polk St. The HOV lane turns to a barrier separated reversible lane in the median of US 67 and continues northbound on I-35E to
CBD. At the end of the lane, commuters have the option to continue on northbound I-35E (Stemmons) or exit to downtown via Jefferson St. In the evening, the HOV lane begins as a barrier
separated reversible lane southbound on I-35E with access from Houston St. and I-35E main lanes. The HOV lane continues southbound in the median of I-35E to US 67 and connects to concurrent
flow lane on US 67 in the vicinity of Polk St. The lane tenninates at Camp Wisdom Rd. Commuters who wish to stay on I-35E can exit the lane at I-35EIUS 67 merge. Accomplishments • The
entire facility was opened to the public on March 11, 2002. • The facility carried over 16,000 weekday passengers in March 2002. Issues • None Schedule • Project completed. Project Manager(s)
Koorosh Olyai DART P&DI5 Second Quarter FY 2002
North Central (US 75) Reversible HOV Lane Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C2.3 OpenJIntegrate
new transit services A single reversible HOV lane will be constructed in the median of US 75, north of LBJ Freeway to Parker Road in Plano. Southbound HOV lane will serve the morning
commuters while the operation will be reversed for afternoon. The reversible HOV lane will be connected to the proposed HOV lanes on LBJ Freeway, west of US 75, via a direct connector
ramp through the reconstructed US 75/I-635 Interchange. Access ramp locations are being evaluated for the Richardson Transit Center, East Plano Transit Center and other projected high
demand areas. • Schematics and EA document have been forwarded to TxDOT. • Potential location of access points and ramps· identified. • Preliminary engineering is underway. • The 2025
plan identifiesthe need for two lanes inbound and one lane outbound in the morning and the reverse for for the afternoon operating periods. • MIS is needed to address the additional HOV needs within
the corridor. • The project limits, presently, have been set from Midpark to south of SH 190. Phase II limits from SH 190 to Parker will be developed later. • 2004: Complete construction
ofthe single HOV lane. • 2007: Complete ramp connections from HOV lane. Mahesh KuimilP&D16 Second Quarter FY 2002
HOV Lanes Operation Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C1.1 Improve on-time perfonnance C1.4 Provide
friendly courteous service HOV lane system is DART's most cost efficient service with $0.12 subsidy per passenger and carrying over 35% of the total DART system ridership. 1-30, I-35E,
1-635 and I-35EIUS 67 HOV lanes carried 34 million commuters during FYOO. The LBJ HOV lanes are one of the most utilized facilities in Texas and ranks fourth in the U.S. DART currently
operates 31 miles of HOV Transitways along 130, I-35E, 1-635 and I-35EIUS 67 freeways. The HOV lane on 130 is a Contraflow lane which is created by borrowing the inside lane of the non-peak
direction and assigned to peak direction of travel. The HOV lanes on Stemmons and LBJ are buffer separated concurrent flow lanes, constructed using the inside shoulders of the freeways.
The HOV lanes on I-35EIUS 67 are a combination of concurrent flow and reversible sections. The following is HOV ridership infonnation for March 2002: • The four DART operated HOV lanes
carried 97,750 weekday daily commuters. • The HOV lanes along 1-635, I-35E, 1-30 and I-35E/US 67 carried 37,050, 24,450, 19,850 and 16,450 weekday passengers respectively. • HOV users
saved 7 minutes, 11 minutes, 9 minutes, and 15 minutes on East R.L. Thornton, Stemmons, LBJ, and South R.L. Thornton/Marvin D. Love HOV lanes respectively, on the round trip commute.
• On-Time Opening Perfonnance for East R. L. Thornton HOV lane was 100% during the last quarter. Additional public education and marketing efforts are necessary. Ongoing. Mahesh KuimilP&DI7
Second Quarter FY 2002
DART Personalized Public Transit (PPT) Operational Test Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C2.1
Improve service routing C4.2 Integrate information technology systems This is a federally funded Operational Test project under the ITS Program. University of Texas at Arlington (UTA)
is assisting with the performance of the test and Texas Southern University (TSU) will be the evaluator. The operational test will evaluate the concept of Personalized Public Transit
(PPT) along route 321 in Farmers Branch. The primary objective of the test is to evaluate the increase in ridership using advanced technologies to replace a fixed route service with
a fixed/flexible route service. Fixed route transit vehicles will be able to pick-up off-route passengers based on schedule allowances and convenience of point of pick-up. This service
makes use of existing AVL system on DART's transit vehicles to locate them on the selected test route. A GIS package will also be used to pinpoint the location of the off-route passenger
pick-up point, and an existing off-the-shelf traffic engineering software package will be used to provide real-time rerouting. • Field-testing has been completed. • Project evaluation
phase is nearing completion. Limited area of service impacted the project attractiveness and effectiveness. May 2002: Complete evaluation phase. Mahesh Kuimil DART P&DI8 Second Quarter
FY2002
Regional Comprehensive ITS Program for the DallaslFort Worth Region Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues C4.2 Integrate infonnation
technology systems An Executive Committee was fonned to provide direction and oversight in the development of the Regional Comprehensive ITS Program/or Dallas and Fort Worth. The Executive
Committee is comprised of the CEOs from DART, Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT Dallas and Fort Worth Districts), Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the "T"), North Texas Tollway
Authority (NTTA), North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), DIFW International Airport and Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC). The City of Dallas has indicated their
desire to join the coalition. The Executive Committee authorized fonnation of a Steering Committee to develop the program. Representatives from DART, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),
Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), area cities, TxDOT, NCTCOG, DRMC, NTTA, The "T", DIFW Airport, and others, are members of the Steering Committee,
which convenes monthly. During FY 2000, a Memorandum of Understanding to develop a Regional Comprehensive ITS Program was executed. Also, a Steering committee was developed and the Executive
Committee approved the Communications Analysis and Recommendations report. During FY 2001, three task forces were fonned to advance the program: Data Deployment Task Force for Centers,
SoftwareNideo Task Force for Centers, and Interagency Agreements Task Force. • Final Concept of Operation and System Specification was completed for DallaslFt. Worth Center-to-Center
communications network. • The Data and SoftwareNideo Task Forces have begun to define the system requirements for each-agency's needs. • The Region was instrumental in defining the State
data elements and requirements in order to develop the status and command/control interface control documents (version 3.0) using national standards for exchange of infonnation among
the agencies. None. P&DI9 Second Quarter FY2002
Regional Comprehensive ITS Program for the DallaslFort Worth Region Mobility Programs Development Schedule • 3rdQ02: Secure consultant to finalize the Regional System requirements. •
2002: Video and data design will begin. • 2005: Funding will become available for implementation. Project Manager(s) Koorosh Olyai/Abed Abukar P&D19 Second Quarter FY 2002
Elm Street/Commerce Street Corridor Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description X2.14 Implement LAP/PASS/TSM road improvement programs. Elm and Commerce Streets
are heavily used by major bus traffic, resulting in deterioration over time. Both streets are one-way; Commerce Street runs eastbound and Elm Street runs westbound. The asphalt overlay
has been done several times leaving a high center with the buses riding at a severe angle, creating an unsafe condition. The entire street section needs to be reconstructed. A comprehensive
planning study has been completed to consider creating a more pedestrian oriented streetscape with selected bus stops with shelters, landscaping and storm drainage away from curb line.
The limits of the projects are between North Central Expressway and Houston Street. Accomplishments • Completed preliminary engineering for Phase I reconstruction ofElm Street in December
2001. Issues • Funding the reconstruction of Elm. • Funding the design for Commerce Street. Schedule • July -Sept. 2002: Complete final engineering. • Construction plans will be prepared
in sections as funding becomes available. • Design will be implemented when funding is identified by City of Dallas. Project Manager(s) Abed Abukar P&D20 Second Quarter FY 2002
TRE at Belt Line Road Transit PASS Project Mobility Programs Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C3 Improve efficiency
SI Build Relationships with Stakeholders The project involves the grade separation of the TRE over the intersections of Belt Line Road, Briery Road, and Story Road; and replacement bridges
over Dry Branch Creek and West Irving Creek. The TRE tracks will be elevated and double tracked from Gilbert to Rogers Rd, for a length of 2 14 miles. The portions of Belt Line Road,
Briery Road and Story Road within the vicinity of the TRE Line and Rock Island Rd. will be reconstructed as part of this project. The project also includes an 8,200-foot long bridge
and a I,OOO-foot long retaining wall. The improvements are in the City of Irving and the project involves construction of bridges, tracks, paving, drainage, signing, striping, illumination,
signalization and aesthetic features. Additional ROW will be acquired by the City of Irving. Total estimated cost including ROW, engineering, and construction is approximately $25 million.
• DART revised the consultant scope of work for the extension of the project to go over Story Road. • Additional field surveying, geotechnical and subsurface investigation are underway
for the extension of the project to Story Road. • Phase II of the project, which includes preparation of PS&E and right-of-way maps, is 35% complete. • Conducted a community meeting
in Irving in November to update the community on the project issues and its status. • DART needs to commit additional funds to the project for the costs associated with the project extension.
• Current engineering contract for Phase II does not include the expenses associated with designing the extension and for the preparation of plans. . • DART and the City ofIrving are
pursuing Federal funding. • FY 03: Complete final construction/R-O-W plans (Phase II) • FY 03: Construction letting. • FY 2003-2005: Construction activities. Ali Rabiee P&D21 Second
Quarter FY 2002
Five-Year Action Plan Service Planning and Scheduling Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) Cl Improve quality. C2 Improve/add services.
C3 Improve efficiency. The purpose of the Action Plan is to provide guidance to the development and implementation of service improvements for a five-year period. The Board-adopted goals
for the Action Plan are to increase ridership and improve cost effectiveness. Since mid1997, the bus service improvements identified in the Action Plan have helped to turn around bus
ridership from a six-year decline. Bus ridership in the past three fiscal years has reflected growth from previous years; 5% in FY 98, 3.5% in FY 99 and 2.4% in FY 2000. Bus ridership
for FY 2001 showed a slight decline in comparison to the same period in FY 2000. Overall the 11-12% increase in bus ridership since approval of the Five Year Plan has exceeded expectations,
but annual ridership has fallen below budget targets in recent years. • Service improvements for the first four years of the Five-Year Plan were implemented with major changes in March
1998, June 1999, May 2000, January 2001 and September 2001. LRT improvements have included the extension of Blue Line service to Mockingbird Station and White Rock Station, additions
to midday, night and weekend frequency, as well as the opening ofthe City Place Station, serving both lines. • The next major service improvements will be implemented in May and July,
2002, with the opening of the LBJ/Skillman Station on the Blue Line and the opening of seven new stations on the Red Line. • Minor bus service changes were implemented during the quarter,
including the opening of the Lake June Transit Center and South R.L. Thornton HOV Facility in February and March 2002. • Innovative services are being developed as described in the attached
Score Card and individual progress reports. • Flattening of ridership growth; Below-budget sales tax • Analysis of reasons for flattening ridership An update of the Five-Year Action
Plan for the FY 2002 -FY 2006 timeframe is scheduled for presentation to the Board in April 2002. Tim Newby P&D22 Second Quarter FY 2002
FY 2002 Second Quarter Score Card Five-Year Action Plan Service Planning and Scheduling Objectives Services Activities INCREASE RIDERSHIP • Expand Services Bus ridership reflected year-to-year
growth in the first three years of the Action Plan; 5% in FY 1998, 3.5% in FY 1999, 2.4% in FY 2000. FY 2001 has reflected 0% growth from FY 2000. Overall 11-12% ridership qrowth has
exceeded initial projections. Increase of Frequencies The September 24,2001 Service Improvements included enhanced frequency of Sunday service on a number routes to meet a 60 minute
line-up. Additional Evening and Sunday service was improved from 80-minute line-Weekend Service ups to 60-minute line-ups, resulting in improved headways on a significant number of routes.
Reverse Commute Extensions and route modifications were made with the September, 2001 service improvements to provide transit connections to the new Pinnacle Park Industrial complex
(8,500 iobs at full build-out) Express Service Routes 206 and 278 were modified in March 2002 2002 to utilize the new South R.L. Thornton HOV facility in order to improve travel time
and schedule consistency. Feeders to Transit Centers Feeder bus service changes are being prepared for and Stations implementation for the G-2 and NC-3/NC-4 Line Sections of NC and NE
LRT Build-out. Service was modified in February 2002 to serve the new Lake June Transit Center. • Improve Customer Improved Bus Stop To date, 165 of 235 new standard shelters and eight
Waiting Conditions Amenities regular enhanced shelters have been installed. IMPROVE COST EFFECTIVENESS • Implement Efficiencies DART On-Call Non-DART On-Call services in Plano and Rowlett
are Traditional service approaching targets for ridership. Continued focus on ridership needed for the new Lakewood zone. Site-specific Shuttles On-going service partnerships with NorthPark,
SMU, DFWand U.T. Southwestern Medical Center; American Airlines Center and Dallas Arboretum; negotiating with Texas Instruments, Baylor Hospital and Southwest Airlines. 30-Foot Buses
Introducing new feeder routes with G-2 and NC-3/NC-4 that utilize 30-foot buses. Non-Traditional Vanpool Employer outreach in rail expansion corridors is Service (E-Shuttle) identifying
new E-Shuttle opportunities. Address low-performing September service change included modifications to routes address poor RPI performance on nine routes. Service Performance Analysis
initiated systemwide. P&D23 Second Quarter FY2002
Service Reviews Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) Service Planning and Scheduling CI Improve quality. C2 Improve/add services.
C3 Improve efficiency. DART's on-going service planning process includes completion of periodic detailed needs assessments in each member city or sub-area. These detailed needs assessments
help to identifY improvement projects for inclusion in the Five Year Action Plan. • DART's Service Planning staff is currently working on Service Reviews in three areas: West Dallas,
Northeast Dallas and Garland. • The reviews for Northeast Dallas and Garland are being integrated with the planning efforts for feeder bus service for the Northeast LRT Line, as well
as the North Central LRT Line. • The technical analysis portion of the West Dallas service review is complete and we expect to initiate review with representatives ofthat community during
the 3rd Quarter. • The Northeast Dallas and Garland service reviews are in the data collection collection phase. Completion of the technical analysis portion of these service reviews
is anticipated by the end of the 3rd Quarter, FY 2002. • Integration of Service Reviews with Rail Feeder Bus Planning Activities. • Resources for FY 02 are primarily focused on implementing
feeder bus service for the North Central and Northeast LRT corridors, resulting in limited resources for other Action Plan improvements in service. • Below budget sales tax revenues
may indicate the need to phase the implementation of new service and/or offset new service implementation with reductions in unproductive servIce. Completion of Technical Reports by
6/30/02 Janette HilVCameron Muhic P&D24 Second Quarter FY2002
Bus Feeder Plan for NC Corridor LRT Extension Service Planning and Scheduling Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) Cl Improve service
quality and effectiveness. C2 Improve service efficiency C3 Increase ridership by opening new services Develop a Bus Feeder Service Plan for the North Central (NC-3, NC-4, NC-5) rail
corridor. The plan will recommend modifications to existing bus service to connect to rail stations and addition of new service to extend coverage to residential and employment areas.
• January 2002: Staff conducted final round of public involvement (stakeholder meetings, open houses, and public meetings) prior to Board consideration. • February 2002: Board approved
Phase I (NC-3/NC-4) Bus Feeder Plan. • Staff finalized feeder plan recommendations and prepared Route Implementation Orders for distribution. • Staff presented Phase II (NC-5) Bus Feeder
Plan to management for review. None at this time. • April 2002: Phase II (NC-5) Stakeholder Meeting scheduled. • April and May 2002: Phase II (NC-5) proposed Bus Feeder Plan presented
to DART and FTI Operations and Supervisors. • May 2002: Staff completes route schedule review and various interagency briefings. • May 2002: Phase II (NC-5) Bus Feeder Service to Board
for approval. • July 2002: Implement Phase I (NC-3/NC-4) Bus Feeder Plan. • December 2002: Implement Phase II (NC-5) Bus Feeder Plan. Jennifer Jones NC Team Leader: Katharine Eagan DART
P&D25 Second Quarter FY2002
Bus Feeder Plan for NE Corridor LRT Extension Service Planning and Scheduling Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C1 Improve service
quality and effectiveness. C2 Improve service efficiency C3 Increase ridership by opening new services Develop a Bus Feeder Service Plan for the Northeast (G-1, G-2, G-3) Corridor LRT
Extension. The plan will recommend modifications to existing bus service to connect to rail stations and addition of new service to extend coverage to residential and employment areas.
• January 22, 2002: Conducted G-2 Public Hearing • Febmary 19,2002: Board Approval of G-2 Feeder Plans • On-going Service Change Process for G-2. • None • On-going Service Change Process
for G-2. • Spring 2002: Begin Service Change Process for G-3. • May 6, 2002: Implement G-2 feeder bus service. • June 2002: Conduct Community Open House for G-3 Feeder Bus Plan • December
2002: Implement G-3 feeder bus service. Jennifer Jones NE Team Leader: Curvie Hawkins P&D26 Second Quarter FY2002
Quality Assurance Progranl Service Planning and Scheduling Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) Cl Improve quality. C2 Improve/add
services. In response to needs identified in the Texas Quality Awards process, a quality assurance program was included in the FY 2001 Business Plan strategies. The program will focus
on utilizing customer complaint data, customer market research and quality assessment data to define customer requirements and assure that DART's processes are targeted at responding
to those requirements. An executive management level Customer Satisfaction Committee was initiated in January 2001 and meets monthly. Also, a Complaint Analysis Team and Complaint Process
Team were chartered to address specific issues and report back to the Customer Satisfaction Committee. The Quality Assessment Program kicked-off in May 2001. • New reporting capabilities
have been developed to facilitate the reporting and analysis of information. • A total of 11629 QA checks (Bus, Rail and Facilities) have been completed. • QA data is being used to assist
in assessing DART pass-by issue. Internal and External focus groups have been formed to create a solution for the problem ofpassengers being passed up at DART bus stops. • Program has
been extended to Non-Traditional Services including assessments of DART On-Call Service, Site Specific Shuttles • Development of improved analysis/reporting capabilities-will meet with
Division Senior Managers to discuss content of Reports • Working with IS to develop automated data collection for the Quality Assurance process • Reports to be developed and distributed
for reporting results • Continue to work on integration of information re: customer requirements (Customer surveys, Customer Comments and QA data collection) Program is in place and
on-going Pat Vidaurri P&D27 Second Quarter FY2002
Employer Service Program Development Service Planning and Scheduling Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C1 Improve service quality
and effectiveness. C2 Improve service efficiency. C3 Increase ridership by opening new services. The Employer Services Program incorporates services targeted at employers: The DART Vanpool
Program, Employer Shuttles (EShuttles), Site Specific Shuttles (circulators), Airport and other services in which DART partners with employers to provide innovative transit connections
between the DART system and potential trip generators. The first E-Shuttle (Campbell Centre EShuttle) was implemented February 1, 2000. Site-specific shuttle services are currently operating
at DIFW Airport, The UT Southwestern Medical Center, North Park Mall, and Southern Methodist University. • A new business plan was completed ahead of schedule for the DART Vanpool Program
in February 2002. • Vanpool Program Invoicing System was completely overhauled as as of March 15, 2002, with accurate information provided retroactively to October of2001. • Ten new
Vanpools started in late March 2002. • Preliminary discussions were held for a Site Specific Shuttle Agreement with Texas Instruments. • E-Shuttle management was taken over by\GDS Freight,
which has been negotiating for an increase in their prices. • Service Planning took over management of the DART Vanpool Program during December; a new business plan for the program will
be completed by February 28, 2002. • Texas Instruments Site Specific Shuttle Agreement to be approved by DART Board in April 2002, for implementation July 1,2002. Jeffrey D. PulisP&D28
Second Quarter FY2002
Employer 􀁏􀁵􀁴􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁾􀁨 in LRTCorridors/TMAs Service Planning and Scheduling Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C1 Improve
service quality and effectiveness. C2 Improve service efficiency. C3 Increase ridership by opening new services. Employer Outreach Efforts: In October 2001, a plan was developed and
initiated to contact all large employers in the rail build-out corridors for NC-3, NC-4, and G-2. The purpose of these efforts is to educate Employers on the new light rail and bus feeder
alignments, to introduce them to the benefits of DART's pass programs, vanpools, E-Shuttles, and other shuttle services. Initial contacts began in November 2001 with contacts to be continued
into 2002. Transportation Management Associations (TMAs): TMA's are designed to address issues of air quality and congestion in our region. They function to foster public-private partnerships
between transit agencies, city governments, and employers within defined geographic areas, and may also encourage pass programs, vanpooling, and various shuttle services. • RE: G-2 Blue
Line extension opening in May 2002: 28 employers were contacted and three meetings were conducted with representatives of approximately 500 employees. • RE: NC-3 and NC-4 Red Line extension
opening July 1, 2002: 112 employers were contacted and meetings were conducted with representatives of 14 companies and 7000 employees. • March 6: A group meeting was held with the hotels
along the Central Expressway Corridor to discuss connectivity between hotels and the new Light Rail Stations. • Initial contact with all firms in G-2, NC3, & NC4 corridors completed
on schedule. • Poor economy makes employers less interested In TMA formation. • Follow-up with firms for establishment of E-Shuttles, Site Specific Shuttles, and E-Pass to continue in
3rd Quarter John Quinn/Jeffrey Pulis P&D29 Second Quarter FY2002
Community Transit Service Development Service Planning and Scheduling Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) C1 Improve service quality
and effectiveness. C2 Improve service efficiency. C3 Increase ridership by opening new services. The DART Community Transit Program includes On-Call Cellular Dispatch Services, Late
Night/Weekend Demand Response services, and other non-traditional services designed to provide transit opportunities in areas where fixed-route service is unable to sustain ridership
or meet DART Service Standards. DART On-Call Service was implemented in East Plano on June 7, 1999, in East Rowlett on May 22, 2000, and in Lakewood on January 15,2001. • In March 2002,
average weekday ridership for DART On-Call Rowlett was 57.49 passengers. Plano averaged 55.20 average weekday riders, and Lakewood reached 48.24 with 1,013 trips in March, which was
its highest ever rate. • Negotiated a new Hunt County Committee on Aging (HCCOA) Interlocal Agreement, including a new hourly rate. DART Board will review it in April 2002. • Initial
meetings were held with all three On-Call Services to begin study of strategies for increasing mid-day ridership. • Late Night/Weekend Demand Response Pilot Program start date has been
postponed to October 2002 for budget reasons. • Subsidy per passenger trip data for DART On-Call requires a new analysis of pass revenue to be apportioned to service. • New contract
with HCCOA to be approved by Board in April Board Meeting. • Late NightIWeekend Demand Response Pilot Program tentative start date is now October 1, 2002. Jeffrey D. PulisP&D30 Second
Quarter FY 2002
Bus Corridor Concept Development Service Planning and Scheduling Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) Cl Improve quality. C2 Improve/add
services. C3 Improve efficiency. The Five Year Action Plan included a strategy of identifying principle bus corridors and targeting improvements in bus travel times, frequency, passenger
amenities and security to achieve a service level similar to that provided by light rail, but without the grade separated right-of-way. • Preliminary identification/analysis of three
potential bus corridors has been completed; Malcolm X, Harry Hines and Ferguson Road. • Plans for amenity improvements and an off-street transfer location have been identified for the
Malcolm X corridor. Feeder connections to the corridor have also been identified or already accomplished. • As a result of the Northwest Corridor MIS decision to implement light rail
within the Harry Hines corridor, further development of this bus corridor has been discontinued. • Significant data collection and needs identification has been completed. • An on-going
community advisory committee is being developed through the Ferguson Road Initiative (FR!) neighborhood coalition group. • The Ferguson Road Bus Corridor project is being coordinated
with the East Corridor MIS, which includes Ferguson Road within its study boundaries. • Additional potential bus corridors are being identified as part ofthe update to the Five Year
Action Plan. • Further refinement of definition and criteria for bus corridor designation. • Integration of DART's bus corridor development concepts with City ofDallas corridor overlay
zoning concepts. • Compatibility of near-term bus corridor development with longer-term light rail development within a corridor. • Incorporation of bus corridors in the Transit System
Plan. Plan Development for Identified Corridors by 9/02 Tim Newby P&D31 Second Quarter FY2002
Economic Development Economic Development & Planning Strategic Plan Consideration Description Accomplishments Issues Schedule Project Manager(s) S1.5 Identify and develop strategic partnerships.
S1.6 Advocate transit-oriented development. S1.9 Pursue joint development opportunities. The DART Mission statement specifies that the implementation ofthe Service Plan should "stimulate
economic development." • Board passed a resolution supporting the Sustainable Development Grant for the Cedars/South Side Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvement. • Staff gave members of
the City Council, Planning & Zoning Commission and Economic Development Board of Rowlett a tour oftransit-oriented development in Richardson and Plano • Staff is working with Project
Management to design additional storage for trains at the Payless Cashways property. In conjunction with this, also discussing with the City of Plano best uses for the potential commercial/retail
pad site at this location. • The structural issues at Monroe Shops have been resolved with the State Historical Society. • DART's ED&P AVP was appointed to the "Inside the Loop" Committee
by Dallas Mayor Laura Miller. • Apublic hearing was called regarding the purchase of additional parking at Park Lane Station. • Moving forward on the engineering and design for the pedestrian/bicycle amenities at the
Cedars/Convention Center and South Side area. • The Development Guidelines are nearing the final review stage and should be completed by summer. • Involved with the City of Richardson
regarding public meetings for the station area planning around Spring Valley and the possible Main Street stations. • As a member of the Rail-Volution National Steering Committee, DART
will be participating and organizing the conference in Washington DC scheduled for October 3-6, 2002. Jack Wierzenski DART P&D32 Second Quarter FY 2002
DATE: TO: SUBJECT: April 2002 Distribution PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROGRESS REPORT This document is the 2nd Quarter FY 2002 issue of the DART Project Development Progress Report. This report
addresses status of LRT Buildout activities and other Capital Development projects. Status reflects activities through March 31, 2002, including Change Control Summaries, Systems Integration,
and Real Estate. Timothy . McKay, P.E. Senior Vice President Project Management THM/ta
TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms pmi Scope PMl LRT BUILDOUT -PHASE 1 Map PM3 Summary Control Schedule PM4 Cost /Schedule Summary PM5 Real Estate PM6 Northeast Corridor Facilities Line Section
G-l PM7 Line Section G-2 PM8 Line Section G-3 PM9 North Central Corridor Facilities Line Section NC-3 PMll Line Section NC-4 PM13 Line Section NC-5 PM14 Service & Inspection Facility
Expansion PM15 Track Installation PM16 Systems Traction Electrification PM17 Signals PM20 Communications PM2l Fare Collection PM23 Vehicles PM25 Systems Integration PM26 Systemwide Landscaping
and Amenities PM32 Facilities -Six Month Look Ahead PM34 Change Control Summary PM35 LRT BUILDOUT -PHASE 2 Map PM37 Northwest Corridor Facilities PM38 Southeast Corridor Facilities PM39
Rowlett Extension PM40 ADDITIONAL CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT Cost Summary PM4l LRT Starter System PM42 Summary Working Schedule 􀁾 PM43 Lake June Transit Center PM44 Livable Communities PM45
Richardson Underpass PM46 SH 190 Station PM47 Parker Road Station Phase 2 Parking PM48 Lancaster Road Train Detection System PM49 MLK Jr. Transit Center PM50 2Q FY 2002
TABLE OF CONTENTS Victory Station Project PM51 Phase 3 Parking -Eighth & Corinth Station PM53 Northwest Plano Park and Ride PM54 Public Address /Visual Message Board (PAlVMB) System
PM55 Unity Plaza PM56 Six Month Look Ahead PM57 Change Control Summary PM58 􀀧􀁾􀀼􀀬􀀬􀀺􀀬􀁾 -.Rio' 2Q FY 2002
ACRONYMS ACIDC -Alternating CurrentlDirect Current ADA -Americans with Disabilities Act AWP -Annual Work Plan/Program CBD -Central Business District CCB -Change Control Board CCTV -Closed-Circuit
Television CPM -Critical Path Method DART -Dallas Area Rapid Transit DGNO -Dallas, Garland & Northeastern Railroad Company EMC -Electro Mechanical Correlations EMI -Electro Mechanical
Interference EMS -Energy Management System FEIS -Final Environmental Impact Statement FEMA -Federal Emergency Management Agency FDR -Final Design Review FTA -Federal Transportation Administration
G-l -Northeast Corridor (to Garland) Line Section 1 G-2 -Northeast Corridor (to Garland) Line Section 2 G-3 -Northeast Corridor (to Garland) Line Section 3 GEC -General Engineering Consultant
HVAC -HeatingIVentilation/Air Conditioning IEEE -Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IFB -Invitation for Bid ILA -Interlocal Agreement IRV-l -IrvingIDFW Corridor Line Section
1 IRV-2 -IrvingIDFW Corridor Line Section 2 IRV-3 -IrvingIDFW Corridor Line Section 3 KCS -Kansas City Southern Railway LNG -Liquefied Natural Gas LRT -Light Rail Transit LRVs -Light
Rail Vehicles NIEP -MechanicallElectricallPlumbing MKT -Missouri-Kansas & Texas Railroad Company MIS -Major Investment Study MSE -Mechanically Stabilized Earth N/A -Not Applicable NC-3
-North Central Corridor Line Section 3 NC-4 -North Central Corridor Line Section 4 NC-5 -North Central Corridor Line Section 5 NOA -Notice of Award NTP -Notice to Proceed NW-l -Northwest
Corridor Line Section 1 NW-2 -Northwest Corridor Line Section 2 NW-3 -Northwest Corridor Line Section 3 NW-4 -Northwest Corridor Line Section 4 OCIP -Owner Controlled Insurance Program
OCS -Overhead Catenary System pmi 2Q FY 2002
ACRONYMS P&Z -Planning & Zoning PA -Public Announcement PC/SI -Project Controls/Systems Integration consultant PTL -Passenger Transfer Location QA -Quality Assurance QC -Quality Control
RDC -Rail Diesel Car RFI -Request for Information RFP -Request for Proposal ROW -Right of Way RTU -Remote Terminal Units S&I Facility -Service & Inspection Facility SA -Supplemental
Agreement SCADA -Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition SDC -Systems Design Consultant SE-l -Southeast Corridor Line Section 1 SE-2 -Southeast Corridor Line Section 2 SMR -Senior Management
Review SOC-2 -Line Section South Oak Cliff-2 SOCBOF -South Oak CliffBus Operating Facility SOW -Statement ofWork SP -Southern Pacific Railroad Company The T -Fort Worth Transportation
Authority TBD -To Be Determined TC -Transit Center TDLR -Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations TPSS -Traction Power Substation TRE -Trinity Railway Express TVM -Ticket Vending
Machine TxDOT -Texas Department of Transportation TXU -TXU Lone Star Pipeline UPS -Uninterruptible Power Supply VAF -Vehicle Acceptance Facility pmii 2Q FY 2002
SCOPE OF PROJECTS LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT (LRT) BUILDOUT -PHASE 1 The LRT Buildout -Phase 1 consists of approximately 24 miles of light rail transit lines extending northeast to Garland (Northeast
Corridor) from the Mockingbird Station and north to Plano (North Central Corridor) from the Park Lane Station. The construction of this 24-mile system includes contracts for: facilities
construction for each line section (station and guideway construction); systemwide track installation; systemwide landscaping/amenities, and systems installation (traction electrification,
signals, communications, fare collection, and vehicles). The LRT Buildout also includes expansion of the existing Service & Inspection (S&I) Facility, construction of the Vehicle Acceptance
Facility (VAF completed August 1999), and finishout ofCityplace Station (completed December 2000). LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT (LRT) BUILDOUT -PHASE 2 The LRT Buildout -Phase 2 consists of approximately
47 miles of light rail transit lines extending northward from the Dallas CBD to the City of Carrollton (Northwest Corridor), including a branch from Northwest Highway out to DFW Airport
(IrvinglDFW Corridor). Phase 2 also extends the light rail transit lines southeasterly from the Dallas CBD to Buckner Blvd. in South Dallas and easterly from the Downtown Garland Station
to the Rowlett Park and Ride. The construction of Phase 2 will include facilities construction contracts for each line section, systemwide track installation contract, systemwide landscaping/amenitie
s, and a systems installation contract for each systems element. ADDITIONAL CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT LRT Starter System The LRT Starter System consists of approximately 20 miles of radially-oriented
light rail transit lines connecting the Dallas Central Business District with north activity areas (via Red Line to Park Lane) and south activity areas (via Red Line to Westmoreland
Station and Blue Line to Ledbetter Station). This project is essentially complete, with open items still remaining on a couple of line sections. Lake June Transit Center The Lake June
Transit Center is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Lake June Road and the existing DART ROW. The transit center includes initial parking for 447 cars with future
expansion capability of 330 cars. The transit center also includes a climate-controlled building for patron convenience, and provisions are made for the future construction of a light
rail station contiguous to the bus platform. Livable Communities The Livable Communities project consists of two elements. The first element is a defined walkway connecting the DART
Convention Center Station platform to the Dallas Convention Center. The other is a landscaped walkway (Pearl Street Connector) along Pearl Street connecting the East Transfer Center
to the DART Pearl Street Station. Richardson Underpass The Richardson Underpass will be a pedestrian connection under Greenville Avenue, which will provide access to the Arapaho Center
Station from the Richardson Transit Center in Line Section NC-4 of of the Buildout project. DART·' PMl 2QFY 2002
PROGRESS REPORT SCOPE OF PROJECTS SH 190 Station The SH 190 Station will be located just south of State Highway 190 (George Bush Turnpike) in the NC-5 line section. Parking for this
station may be provided under the SH 190 structure, with at-grade pedestrian crossings of the service road to access the station. Bus transfer and kiss-and-ride facilities will be in
close proximity to the station. Parker Road Station Phase 2 Parking Construction of Phase 2 Parking will occur adjacent to the existing East Plano Transit Center (Parker Road Station)
at the intersection of Archerwood Street and Exchange Drive in the City of Plano. This facility will provide 568 general-use parking spaces. In addition, the existing handicap parking
areas adjacent to the existing transit center will be revised to conform to current ADA and TDLR standards. Lancaster Road Train Detection System This project involves the installation
of a train detection system and traffic signal interface that incorporates "Train Coming" signs along the Lancaster Road portion of the Blue Line of the LRT Starter System. MLK Transit
Center The MLK Transit Center will be located near Fair Park in South Dallas and will include a bus platform with six bays, one paratransit bay, parking for 200 cars and a climate-controlled
building for patron convenience. Victory Station Project The Victory Station will be located adjacent to the American Airlines Center. Trinity Railway Express (TRE) partial service with
a temporary platform to the Center began on July 28, 2001, to accommodate the first event. LRT and full TRE service is anticipated by the end of 2003. Phase 3 Parking -Eighth & Corinth
Station The Eighth & Corinth Station is located south of the intersection of Eighth and Corinth streets in South Dallas. Phase 3 parking facility is proposed to be constructed on the
DART property located on the northwest comer of Eighth and Corinth streets across from the station to mitigate the parking congestion problem. Northwest Plano Park and Ride The Northwest
Plano Park Park and Ride will be located at the Dallas North Tollway near Spring Creek Drive. Current plans are for a bus platform with four to six bays and approximately 500 parking
spaces on 7Yz acres. Public Address /Visual Message Board (PANMB) System This project is the retrofit of the Starter System to include the same PAIVMB system that is being installed
in the Buildout. The retrofit will include the installation of a fiber optic system. Unity Plaza The Unity Plaza Projectwill be located southwest ofthe intersection of Central Expressway
and Haskell Avenue at the present location of DART's western entrance to the Cityplace Station and future location of the terminal for the McKinney Avenue Trolley. The project consists
ofthe reconstruction of the western entrance to Cityplace Station and the creation of a transit plaza surrounding the new building. A one-story glass and steel structure will serve as
the new western entrance, adjacent to a 150' tower with high-tech digital display wall serving as a landmark identifying the station. {':"t,-': 􀁾 PM2 2Q FY 2002
Map LRTRuildout Phase 1 ----. 􀁾􀁲􀁦􀁦􀁬 i NORTH . 􀁾 . '-..., 􀀧􀁾􀁾 "-,r--'-.-' .􀁾􀀮 􀁾􀀮 i􀁬􀁾􀀮 _ iOOWNTDIM< GARlAND I m 􀁾 I J 􀀯􀁾􀀧􀁟---+__ I'", -I-_-.._L 􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀽􀁔􀀢􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀮􀀮
􀁌􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁲􀀺􀀿􀀧􀀫􀁟􀀧􀁟􀀮􀁊􀀡􀁟-􀀺 -􀀬􀁾􀀬_;! 'l",. ''---'" . t 􀁾 ,; 􀁜􀁓􀁐􀁒􀁉􀁎􀁇􀁾􀁾 ;1 ii i c iii '! t,' "! 􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁜􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀮􀁣􀁥􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁟􀁉􀁟􀁾􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁦
'" Ii;'" 0 ! ! LB.J.tCENTRAL.'􀁬􀀧􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀺_ i􀁾.,. i 􀁾􀀧 i 􀁉􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁾􀂷􀁾􀂷 I . ) fOREST l>l I ,r-•••SERVICE &INSPECTION FACIUTY PROPOSED AReiA LRT $iAnON LRTSTARTER SYSTEM STATION
LEGEND @EXISTING TClPRQPOSED LRT STATION o PROPOSED LRT STATION ---LRT STARTER SYSTEM _ NORTH CENTRAl. CORRIDOR 􀁾 NORTHEAST CORRIDOR PM3 2Q FY 2002
Summary Control Schedule LRT Buildout Phase 1 LRT BUILDOUT SUMMARY CONTROL SCHEDULE _DeSiIFgEn Construction Systems 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 " LRV Acceptance il\ 􀁒􀁾􀁶􀁥􀁮􀁵􀁥
Service G-l 􀁾 G-2 " G-3 NC-3 􀁾 NC-4 l' NC-S S&I Expansion VAF Track Installation ,: ' .. Systems =l!I' 34 Vehicles cis LRV Acceptance Landscaping Art & Design Program Revised 0313
1102 PM4 2QFY2002
Cost/Schedule Summary LRT Ruildout Phasel I Cost Summary I (in millions of dollars) Control Current Expended Budget Commitment to Date (2) , LRT General (1) $ 80.5 $ 50.0 $ 41.1 Cityplace
Station Finishout (3) 24.9 24.9 24.2 Garland-l 52.7 50.2 50.2 Garland-2 84.0 79.0 82.1 Garland-3 97.6 91.3 82.2 North Central-3 118.0 100.9 90.0 North Central-4 81.1 78.8 72.0 North
Central-5 64.0 59.9 54.0 S&1 Facility ExpansionIVAF 31.0 31.0 30.0 Systems 158.7 139.5 97.0 Vehicles 151.0 151.0 148.1 Reserve for DART Finance (4) 67.5 0.0 0.0 LRT Buildout Total $1,011.0
$856.5 $770.9 Notes: 1) LRT General includes annual work programs for the Project Controls/Systems Integration Consultant, the Technical Services personnel, the professional liability
insurance program, OCIP, the CADD/computer equipment, LRV Management Services, and the renovation of the Project Management floor at DART Headquarters. 2) Expended to date values reflect
activity through 02/28/02. 3) At the direction of the DART Board, Cityplace Station Finishout was combined with the LRT Buildout. 4) Reserve for DART Finance is funding available for
other projects as a result of budget underrun. SCHEDULE SUMMARY Line Section G-l Line Section G-2 Line Section G-3 Line Section NC-3 Line Section NC-4 Line Section NC-5 S&I Facility
Expansion VAF Cityplace Station Finishout Contract Completion Dates 12/2000 (Complete) 08/99 (Complete) 1112000 PM5 Revenue Service Dates 9/2001 (Complete) OS/2002 11/2002 07/2002 07/2002
12/2002 12/2000 (Complete) 2Q FY 2002
Real Estate LRT Buildout Phase 1 Strategic Plan C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services Consideration C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities Description Acquisition
of property required for construction ofthe LRT Buildout. Status Northeast Corridor Real estate acquisition for this corridor is currently in progress. North Central Corridor Real estate
acquisition for this corridor is currently in progress. Issues Real estate issues are addressed in individual line section reports. PM6 2Q FY 2002
Northeast Corridor Facilities Line Section G-l LRTBuildout Phase 1 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services C2.6 Add needed
passenger amenities/facilities Line Section G-l extends northeasterly from Mockingbird Station to the south end of White Rock Lake Park on the former Missouri-Kansas and Texas Railroad
Company alignment. This section makes up 3.1 miles of the 11.2 miles of the entire Northeast Corridor. There is one station in this line section, White Rock Station, located north of
Northwest Highway on the former Missouri-Kansas and Texas Railroad alignment. The Line Section G-l project, performed· by Lane Construction, was completed in August 2000. Revenue service
began in this line section on September 24, 2001. The contractor alleges delays due to weather, changed conditions, delays in approving retaining wall backfill material, limitation of
Saturday work hours, limitation of haul routes, changes to traffic control plans, limited access access points, unanticipated support of utility structures, and lack of availability
of promised staging and storage areas. Resolution of these issues was escalated to the contract established Disputes Review Board, which met in May 2000. Their decision was received
in June 2000 and was generally in DART's favor. The contractor refused to accept the Disputes Review Board's decision and has requested DART's Contracting Officer's final decision. A
meeting to resolve all outstanding issues between the Contracting Officer and the contractor was held in August 2001. An offer to settle has been extended to Lane Construction and the
contractor has countered. The offer was extended with more detail to clarify DART's position. Another meeting was held on February 7, 2002, in which Lane recountered, withdrawing many
of their previous allegations. DART staff has reached a tentative agreement, subject to legal review and DART Board approval. PM7 2Q FY 2002
Northeast Corridor Facilities Line Section G-2 LRTBuildout PhaseJ Strategic Plan Consideration Description Statns C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services C2.6 Add needed passenger
amenities/facilities Line Section G-2 extends northeasterly from the south end of White Rock Lake Park to the KCS Railway Overpass on the former MKT Railroad Company alignment. This
section makes up 3.5 miles of the 11.2 miles of the entire Northeast Corridor. There is one station in this line section, LBJ/Skillman Station, located north of LBJ Freeway and Miller
Road. Provision for a future station is also included in this line section. The contractor, GLF Construction Corporation, continues working throughout the entire project. White Rock
Creek Bridge -This bridge is complete. Punchlist work on fireline supports is in progress. White Rock Creek Bridge to Church Road Bridge -Punchlist is complete. Church Road Bridge to
Royal Lane -Fence installation was completed in January. Punchlist on the fence is complete. Final seeding and sodding is in progress. The area is ready for the landscape contractor
to start work. Royal Lane to LBJBridge -Punchlist work on fences is complete. LBJBridge -Complete. LBJ Work -Complete. LBJ/Skillman Station -The contractor obtained a temporary certificate
of occupancy in January. Roof repair is almost complete. Only minor punchlist work remains. Work continues on wetlands construction and realignment of the hike and bike trail. Seed was
washed away by high water and the area must be re-seeded. The Line Section G-2 project is approximately 99% complete and is behind schedule. The contractor achieved substantial completion
in January. Issues The appearance of the LBJ/Skillman Station roof was unsatisfactory. Repair is nearly complete and appearance is much improved.. PM8 2Q FY2002
Northeast Corridor Facilities Line Section G-3 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities
Line Section G-3 extends northeasterly from the KCS Railway Overpass at LBJ Freeway to the existing Garland Central Transit Center on the former MKT Railroad Company alignment: This
section makes up 4.6 miles of the 11.2 miles of the entire Northeast Corridor. There are two stations in this line section: Forest/Jupiter Station, located southeast of Forest Lane and
Jupiter Road; and Downtown Garland Station, located across the street from the existing Garland Central Transit Center. Provision for one future station is included in this line section.
The contractor, Hensel Phelps Construction Company (HPCC), is completing punchlist items. Jupiter Road Bridge -The contractor is working on completion of punchlist items. Forest/Jupiter
Station -Installation of specialty sign foundations and plow rail is substantially complete. Installation of sidewalk is substantially complete. The contractor is working on completion
of punchlist items. Forest Lane Bridge -Complete. International to Downtown Garland Station -Complete. Downtown Garland Station -Concrete placement in the parking lot is substantially
complete. Crew room finishout work is substantially complete. Painting of windscreen is nearing completion. Installation of limestone panels and molding on columns is substantially complete.
Painting at sidewalk canopy and installation of the site sign is substantially complete. Roofing installation and paver installation are substantially complete. Installation of light
fixtures is nearing completion. Downtown Garland Transit Center -Sidewalk is substantially complete. The Line Section G-3 project is substantially complete. Issues The contractor has
had to excavate and remove large quantities of rock. DART has been notified that the contractor believes the removal and hauling of this rock was not included in the contract. DART has
responded stating that they believe this activity is already included in the contract. The next action is to be taken by the contractor who must provide documentation substantiating
their position. Depending on the resolution, this issue could have some cost impact to this contract. This issue is nearing resolution. PM9 2Q FY 2002
Northeast Corridor Facilities Line Section G-3 LRT Buildout Phase! Issues (Continued) Electrical modifications have been required at the stations to handle security equipment, including
PA and CCTV, and to improve conduit routing. These modifications may cause scheduling conflicts depending on fabrication times. Impacts are under review. The contractor has voiced concerns
over specified light poles and fixtures and has requested consideration for an alternate. The contractor has notified DART of a significant cost difference and is requesting an equitable
adjustment since the contractor believes the proposed product to be equal to the one specified. DART has directed the contractor to proceed with the specified products and are awaiting
additional substantiation from the contractor. Final design and the construction contract documents were based on an at-grade station in Downtown Garland; however, an agreement with
the KCS Railroad for an at-grade crossing of the railroad needs to be negotiated as soon as possible to confirm that an at-grade station is indeed appropriate for this location. If an
at-grade crossing agreement cannot be secured, then the atgrade station will have to be replaced by a grade-separated station when the line is extended to Rowlett. The Commuter Rail/Property
Management Department has decided to address this issue at a later date as the existing railroad traffic may lessen after the KCS Railroad revises its operations in the future. PMIO
2Q FY2002
North Central Corridor Facilities Line Section NC-3 LRTBuildout Phase 1 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services C2.6 Add needed
passenger amenities/facilities Line Section NC-3 extends northerly from the temporary Park Lane Station to Restland Road on the former Southern Pacific Railroad Company alignment. This
section makes up 4.1 miles of the 12.5 miles of the entire North Central Corridor. There are four stations in this line section: the permanent Park Lane Station, located north of Park
Lane across from the temporary Park Lane Station; Walnut Hill Station, located on Walnut Hill Lane between North Central Expressway and Greenville Avenue; Forest Lane Station, located
just south of Forest Lane on the former Southern Pacific Railroad alignment; and LBJ Central Station, located south of LBJ Freeway along the former railroad alignment. The contractor,
GLF Construction Corporation, continues working throughout the entire project. Bridge Work -Painting Painting continues on bridges. GUideway Work -Grading, fencing and slope protection
continues. Station Work -Station work is continuing at Park L(lIle, Walnut Hill, Forest Lane, and LBJ/Central. At Park Lane Station, roofing is about 80% complete. Electrical and mechanical
rooms are about 80% complete. Electrical work is in progress. Paving of the bus lanes is complete, and the east parking area is about 90% complete. Glass is installed in the windscreens.
The elevator cabs are nearing completion. The ornamental fencing is almost complete. At the Walnut Hill Station, electrical, fire protection and plumbing work is in progress. Bus lane
paving is complete. Sidewalks are in progress. Concourse painting is in progress. The canopy painting is complete. The roof is about 80% complete. Paving is about 90% complete. Warning
strips and platform waterproofing are in progress. Forest Lane Station concourse electrical/mechanical work is underway. Elevator glazing is complete and cabs are being installed. Paving
in the parking lots and bus lanes is about 95% complete. Some of the parking lot has been turned over to the landscape contractor to begin landscape work. Roofing is about 80% complete.
Warning strips and waterproofing on the platform are complete. Pavers will start soon. LBJ/Central Station pavement placement in the parking lot is about 95% complete. The landscaping
contractor has begun his work. Electrical work is in progress. The Crew Room is about 80% complete. The standing seam roof is about 95% complete and the ornamental fence is about 90%
complete. This contract is approximately 92% complete and is behind schedule. PM11 2QFY 2002
North Central Corridor Facilities Line Section NC-3 LRT Buildout Phase 1 Issues Clearance problems with conduits have required a redesign of column cladding at Walnut Hill and Forest
Lane stations. It is anticipated that the cladding wiIi be removed from the GLF contract and completed by the miscellaneous contractor. Walnut Hill White Rock Creek Bridge PMl2 2Q FY
2002
North Central Corridor Facilities Line Section NC-4 LRTBuildout Phasel Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services C2.6 Add needed
passenger amenities/facilities Line Section NC-4 extends northerly from Restland Road to Glenville Drive on the former Southern Pacific Railroad Company alignment. This section makes
up 5.2 miles of the 12.5 miles of the entire North Central Corridor. There are three stations in this line section: Spring Valley Station, located north of Spring Valley Road, west of
Greenville Avenue; Arapaho Center Station, located at the existing Richardson Transit Center on the northeast corner of Arapaho Road and North Central Expressway; and Galatyn Park Station,
located southeast of Renner Road and North Central Expressway. The contractor, Archer Western Contractors, Ltd., has completed the NC-4 facilities contract. A Certificate of Final Completion
has been issued. The City of Richardson has initiated the final design of the design requirements as approved by the DART Board. These design requirements include landscaping at grade-separated
crossings, landscaping at tertiary areas ofthe right-of-way and improvements to at-grade crossings. DART is coordinating with the City of Richardson to ensure minimal impacts to the
NC-4 construction contract. Issues None. PM13 2Q FY 2002
North Central Corridor Facilities Line Section NC-5 LRTBuiIdout Phase 1 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services C2.6 Add needed
passenger amenities/facilities Line Section NC-5 extends northerly from Glenville Drive to Parker Road in Plano on the former Southern Pacific Railroad Company alignment. This section
makes up 3.2 miles of the 12.5 miles of the entire North Central Corridor. There are two stations in this line section: Downtown Plano Station, located at 15th Street and Avenue J; and
Parker Road Station, located at the existing East Plano Transit Center, at the intersection of Park Blvd. and Archerwood Drive. Provision for one future station is included in this line
section. The contractor, Martin K. Eby Construction Co., is completing punchlist items. Downtown Plano Station Work -Work at this station IS substantially complete. Parker Road Station
-Crew room finish work and windscreen glazing and painting are substantially complete. Canopy light fixture installation and installation of furniture are complete. Standing seam roofing
is not acceptable and is awaiting a new subcontractor to remove and replace. Currently, the NC-5 project is substantially complete. Issues The contractor has submitted a request for
Equitable Adjustment due to changes and added work resulting in impacts, inefficiencies, and additional time and costs. Staff is reviewing the request. A change to the SH 190 access
road header and ballast walls construction has been added to this contract. This construction work has been completed, allowing access to the follow-on track and station contractors.
PMl4 2Q FY2002
Service & Inspection Facility Expansion LRTBuildout Phase 1 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues C1 Improve Quality C2 Improve/Add Services C3 Improve Efficiency The
S&IFacility expansion will service the maintenance needs of an expanded fleet of light rail vehicles. The expansion includes a new vehicle overhaul building with paved tracks, a new loading
dock, a new vehicle inspection area with new track, the extension of the vehicle cleaning platfonn, and the remodeling ofthe existing building's second floor. This project was accepted
as "substantially complete" on June 11, 200l. The contractor, Sedalco, Inc., continues to work to complete the punchlist, which is down to two remaining items. Total completion of the
remaining punchlist items is anticipated in April 2002. Final closeout is anticipated in May 2002. There are four items remammg in dispute with the contractor. The contractor has indicated
that he will request a Contracting Officer's Decision on these four items. No request for for the Contracting Officer's Decision has been made to date. PM15 2Q FY 2002
Track Installation LRTBuildout Phase 1 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services The track installation contractor will install
DART-furnished welded rail, special trackwork, concrete ties, and direct fixation rail fasteners in the Northeast and North Central Corridors. The contractor, Marta Track Constructors,
Inc., continues with the punchlist work on all line sections. All line sections are substantially complete. Line Section G-2 -The line section is substantially complete and Systems has
full access. Punchlist work is in progress. Line Section G-3 -The line section is substantially complete and Systems has full access. Punchlist work is in progress. Line Section NC-3
-The line section is substantially complete and Systems has full access. Punchlist work is in progress. Line Section NC-4 -The contractor has completed the track except for punchlist
work. Line Section NC-5 -The line section is substantially complete and Systems has full access. Punchlist work is in progress. The entire track installation project is 98% complete
and has used 119% of the contract time. Issues Negotiations are progressmg with Marta for acceleration costs m Line Section G-3. Negotiations are progressing with Marta to replace several
substandard crossing panels. PM16 2Q FY 2002
Systems -Traction Electrification LRT Buildout Phase 1 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services The North Central and Northeast
corridors that extend north to Plano and northeast to Garland from the existing North Central rail line consists of approximately 23 miles of light rail systems design and construction,
including the procurement of 55 additional LRVs. The Traction Electrification contractor, Powell Power Electronics Company, Inc. (PPECO) is continuing to work a few remaining submittals
including taper tubular pole hardware, conduit layouts for Garland substation, overhead catenary measurements, as-built drawings, and installation of two remaining substations and OCS
on Line Sections NC-5 and G-3-. Line Section G-2 -This line section was completed and energized in midFebruary. Clearance and energization tests were completed, and train operations
tests are continuing. Line Section G-3 -Site plans for all substations have been submitted. The substation foundations at Bronze, Jupiter, and Plano Road have been completed. All substations
have been manufactured and inspected, and Bronze has been installed. The remaining substations for Jupiter and Garland will be shipped and installed in April 2002. Ninety-five percent
(95%) of the OCS has been erected, and the first messenger wire was installed in late March. Line Section NC-5 -Substations for Plano Parkway, Plano East, and 18th Place have been placed
and energized. All OCS poles have been delivered and 30% have been installed. All poles and cantilevers will be installed in April. Line Section NC-4 -This line section is complete and
clearance and energization train tests were performed in late February 2002. Line Section NC-3 -The OCS connection between NC-2 and NC-3 was accomplished in mid-February 2002. All substations
are energized and the OCS wiring is complete. Clearance and live line tests were performed in late March and the OCS punchlist was completed. Issues Track relocation and OCS pole clearances
on Line Section G-2 created additional cantilever manufacture and, due to inadequate clearance, a pole had to be moved by the use of a catenary pole adapter plate. This work was completed
in early February 2002. This issue is resolved PM1? 2Q FY 2002
Systems -Traction Electrification LRT Buildout I Phase 1 Issues (Continued) On Line Section NC-3, some OCS pole anchor bolts on aerial structures were installed incorrectly and required
additional remedial work. The remedial work was completed, and this issue is resolved. NC-5 DCS foundations were inspected in early March and bent and broken anchor bolts were observed;
remedial work needs to be performed urgently or these foundations may impede DCS installation. The Change Request Package for Traction Power Substations for the Arena extension has been
approved by the Change Control Board. The Change Request Package for DCS needs to be approved. Placing TPSS TPSS Foundation at Downtown Garland Station PM18 2QFY 2002
Systems-Traction Electrification Setting Poles on NC-5 LRTBuildout Ph.ase I Line Section G-3 Line Section NC-3 PM19 2Q FY 2002
Systems Signals Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status LRTBuildout Phase 1 C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services The North Central and Northeast corridors that extend
north to Plano and northeast to Garland from the existing North Central rail line consists of approximately 23 miles of light rail systems design and construction, including the procurement
of 55 additional LRVs. The signals contractor, Union Switch & Signal, Inc. (US&S), is progressing on installation work. Factory testing for wayside equipment and instrument houses is
complete. Maintenance training has been suspended. Line Section G-2 -Installation and testing of all equipment was competed. Integrated testing has been completed. Lancaster Road -Train
coming signs have been installed by the miscellaneous contractor. Preemption problems were discovered and are being corrected. Upon correction of the preemption issues, the entire system
will undergo integrated testing. Line Section NC-4 -Installation of all equipment was completed during this period. Most integrated tests have been completed. Line Section NC-3 -Equipment
installation is complete. Contractor integrated testing is ongoing. Line Section G-3 -Full access has been granted to G-3. Installation of the foundations for the central instrument
houses has begun. Signal cases and foundation installation is ongoing. Ground equipment (impedance bonds, train stops, and switch machines) installation was also begun during this period.
Line Section NC-5 -Full access has been granted to NC-5. Survey and layout activities were begun. Issues Delayed access to line sections has greatly reduced the time available to complete
the work. Maintenance training was again suspended without cause. Resolution to this issue is being pursued. PM20 2Q FY2002
Systems Communications LRTBuildout Phase 1 Strategic Plan Consideration Description C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services The North Central and Northeast corridors that extend
north to Plano and northeast to Garland from the existing North Central rail line consists of approximately 23 miles of light rail systems design and construction, including the procurement
of 55 additional LRVs. Status The communications and central control contractor, Mass Electric Construction Company, appears to be having some sort of staffing issues with their subcontractor,
Sesco. The field technician level needs to be increased by fifty percent to eliminate adverse impacts on the schedule. Weekly and daily meetings with the prime contractor have commenced
to try to assist in the quick resolution to this issue. Principals have met with DART management and committed to resolve these issues. The contractor has taken all the available work
area on G-2, NC-3, and NC-4 and is progressing work as far as possible. The miscellaneous contractor has to provide some work prior to the communications contractor completing their
efforts. These delays are critical and may impact the required dates for follow-on testing. (See Issues.) Fiber optic cable is being installed along with inner duct and copper cables
for the three accelerated line sections (G-2, NC-3 and NC-4). The contractor continues work in the G-3 area. Work on the Garland Central communications site continues and the foundation
for the house has been placed and has met concrete strength requirements. This communications house will be installed in about four weeks. The rationale for this timetable is to keep
a concerted work force on the accelerated sections. The communications house at Forest/Jupiter has been set as well as both G-3 and NC-5 radio towers. The last communications house required
on the North Central line was damaged beyond repair while in transit to the site. A new house will require 10-12 weeks to fabricate; however, this should not impact the NC-5 schedule.
A new communications house manufacturer has been located to replace the damaged house. Staff is currently sourcing this vendor for validation of their capabilities. A decision as to
the acceptability of this vendor will be made shortly. Negotiations for accelerating Line Section G-2 and adding SH 190 work have been concluded. The negotiations for Line Section NC-3
have halted since no firm access dates can be set for the station areas. The Line Section NC-4 acceleration negotiation should be completed shortly. The contractor has been asked for
a rough order of magnitude cost to accelerate Line Sections G-3 and NC-5. Independent estimates will also be required for this acceleration. Request for estimates is in process. PM21
2Q FY 2002
Systems Communications Status (Continued) LRT Buildout Phase 1 The contract management office has received 349 submittals to date. Currently, 271 submittals have been reviewed and are
approved or approved as noted. Two submittals are under review. Ninety-four RFI's have been received to date, with 93 responded to and one under review. The contract is currently 80.93%
expended based on schedule, with 51.15% paid against the contract. This contract has expended to date $470,706.27 from a contingency of$1,601,496. Issues There is a concern for the highly
aggressive software integration requirements and the multi-faceted interfaces for meeting the programmed requirements. Highest on the concern level is the ability of the miscellaneous
contractor to finish the requisite work. Progress has been made this quarter with relation to the integration of other systems to the communications system. A plan was requested from
the contractor on how they plan to meet the schedule with its current compression. The contractor contractor has submitted a plan with cost to meet the required schedule. This plan is
currently under review by DART staff. A meeting to discuss proposed costs with the contractor was held on January 9, 2002, with favorable results. Negotiations are still ongoing for
NC-4. PM22 2Q FY2002
Systems -Fare Collection Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status LRTBuildout Phase! C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services The North Central and Northeast corridors
that extend north to Plano and northeast to Garland from the existing North Central rail line consists of approximately 23 miles of light rail systems design and construction, including
the procurement of 55 additional LRVs. Eight TVMs are installed at White Rock Station. All are functional; six are being utilized. Monitoring of the TVMs at White Rock continues to verify
the correction of software problems. Manufacturing and testing ofTVMs is ongoing. (See Issues.) Banking software development continues. (See Issues.) Four TVMs and SAVs were installed
at LBJ/Skillman Station ill preparation for G-2 revenue service. Maintenance training was performed during the month of March. Other training courses are to occur during the upcoming
quarter. Issues Environmental testing issues were solved and manufacturing of DART TVMs began during this period. Schlumberger states they can meet the current TVM installation schedule.
DART staff continues to discuss this weekly with the contractor to insure the dates are met. Three of the temporary TVMs at White Rock Station will be utilized by the contractor for
the NC-3 and NC-4 stations. One temporary TVM will remain at White Rock for monitoring the screen blackout issue. The need to change the required banking software has delayed the development
ofthe banking software. PM23 2QFY 2002
Systems-Fare Collection LRT Baildout Phase 1 NewTVM PM24 2Q FY 2002
Systems Vehicles Strategic Plan Consideration Description LRTRuiIdout Phase! C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services DART is in the process of testing the addition of a "low-floor
center section" (C-car) into an existing DART LRV to create a three-section, four-truck, double-articulated "Super LRV" to ease the entrance/exit of the vehicle for passengers. The trend
in light rail transportation systems in the last 5 to 7 years is to introduce "low-floor" rail vehicles into revenue operation. This configuration provides a general overall increase
in ease of entrance/exit of the rail vehicle for all passengers. Anticipating requests to review the advantages and disadvantages of "low-floor" rail vehicles, DART initiated discussions
with Kinkisharyo in early 2000 to conceptually discuss a low-floor configuration for a DART vehicle. The preliminary characteristics that were used as a starting point in these discussions
were: 1) the signature appearance ofthe DART LRV, and 2) the proven systems and equipment currently installed on the vehicle. The concept that emerged from the preliminary discussions
was the introduction of a "low-floor center section" into an existing DART LRV to create a three-section, four-truck, double-articulated "Super LRV" (SLRV). This configuration met the
initial criteria and still maintained a majority of the perfonnance characteristics of the DART LRV. The concept was progressed into the design and engineering phases to prove, on paper,
that the concept was viable. After completing this phase, DART and Kinkisharyo agreed to jointly build a center section for actual installation into a DART LRV to verifY the design and
perfonn actual in-service testing to gauge impacts on rail operations and acceptance by the passengers. While the concept of inserting a center section in an articulated rail vehicle
is not a new idea (successfully employed in several European cities), the DART C-car Project will be the first of its kind in North America and it will have the highest operating speed
of of any other similar vehicles. Status In early 2001, manufacturing of the C-car was initiated. DART provided material and equipment from spare parts for installation on the C-car.
Kinkisharyo provided the raw materials and manufacturing of the car body and installation of the equipment. In January 2002, the C-car was shipped from the factory in Japan. The C-car
arrived at the DART Maintenance Facility on March 14, 2002. The next step in this process is to insert the C-car into a DART LRV and perfonn static dynamic design verification tests
on the completed three-section SLRV. Currently the C-car is being stored at the DART Maintenance Facility, ready/waiting to be installed in a vehicle. Issues None. 􀀧􀁾􀀭􀁜􀀺􀀻􀀭 DART··
PM25 2QFY 2002
Systems Integration Strategic Plan C2.3 Develop/open/integrate new transit services Consideration Description Integrate systems operation for LRT Buildout. LRTBuildout Phase 1 Status
Systems Integration continues to interface with fmal design issues for facilities and systems. Interface is also provided with ongoing facilities/systems construction projects for areas
related to operations, maintenance, systems safety, quality assurance and integration. Interface issues coordinated this quarter include Convention Center expansion, Woodcrest signal
house access, conditional grade crossing approaches, use of "WOO signs, Signals seven-aspect modifications, crossover locations for Northwest Corridor, and lighting survey for Downtown
Plano pedestrian promenade. Design Interface Plans for SH 190 Station and NW-IA were submitted to Systems for signatures. Design review comments were submitted for the MLK Transit Center
40% submittal and Southeast Corridor preliminary engineering 95% submittal. Conditional Assessment Assessment and Development of Twenty-Year Capital Budget reports were submitted. In
addition, a CIP recommendation developed a CIP recommendation matrix. Systems contractor submittals were reviewed and input was provided to contractors for operations and safety. Revisions
to Design Criteria Volume 2, Chapters 10-12, were submitted and comments were dispositioned. Turnover activities coordination continued and the G-2 Systems documentation were provided
to Operations. A number of meetings with Communications were held to coordinate tunnel ventilation scenarios and minutes were submitted. In addition, a draft Functional Specification
for Updated Tunnel Ventilation Control and a revised Ventilation Operating Modes Study were submitted. Response was provided to a number of Signals RFIs. The O&M Cost Model spreadsheets
were submitted. Coordination meetings were held with Operations and Service Planning to review Buildout project status and minutes were submitted. Coordination effort continued with
System Planning on the future S&I Facility expansion and capacity analysis for a new facility. Systems Integration staff continued the G-2 and NC-3/4 Start-up Task Force meetings and
an updated start-up management plan was submitted. Systems Integration staff coordinated the activities for the NC-2/3 overhead cutover work. PM26 2Q FY2002
Systems Integration Status (Continued) A number of meetings were held with DGNO and Operations to discuss and incorporate comments on DART/DGNO agreement and minutes were submitted.
Coordination meetings were held to discuss bus bridge requirements. Coordination of contractor activities with Operations was provided. Systems Integration staff continued follow-up
discrepancy testing effort on G-l, G-2, and Starter System Communications. In addition, the SCADA integrated testing on the Starter System continued into January. Comprehensive integrated
test discrepancy list was submitted and updated. Live wire/clearance tests were conducted on G-2 and NC-4 line sections, as well as a clearance test on NC-3, and reports were submitted.
Staff coordinated all contractor testing on G-2 and NC-4. Coordination of track access between the DART Operations Department and construction contractors was provided. LRT safety training
was provided to these contractor employees. Safety Certification Committee meetings were held for G-l, G-2, Richardson Underpass, Cityplace, and NC-4. Updated checklist and minutes were
submitted. A pre-drill meeting for G-2 was conducted and minutes were submitted. Response to RFIs regarding safety signs on G-2 and G-3 was submitted. FirelLife Safety Committee minutes
were submitted for G-2 standpipe testing. Systems Integration staff continued audit efforts for Systems Contracting Officer's Representatives (CORs) and submitted audit responses for
TES, Signals, and Communications. NC-3 contractor audit closeout was conducted and report submitted. Audit finding report was submitted for Fare Collection. A comprehensive COR audit
matrix was developed and submitted. In addition, Systems Integration staff participated in the final walk-through for Lake June Transit Center, G-3 stations, G-2 guideway, and NC-4 traction
power substations. Issues None. PM27 2Q FY 2002
Systems Integration NC-3 Testing PM28 LRT Buildout Phase 1 2Q FY 2002
Systems Integration TBuildout Phase 1 NC-3 Testing LBJ Central Park Lane PM29 2Q FY 2002
Systems Integration Looking Toward Arapaho Center Station PM30 LRT Buildout Phase 1 NC-4 Testing Looking Toward Spring Valley Station 2Q FY 2002
Systems Integration PM31 NC-4 Testing LRT Buildout Phase 1 2Q FY 2002
Systemwide Landscaping & Amenities LRT Buildout Phase 1 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities The Systemwide Landscaping and
Amenities contract consists of landscaping and irrigation construction and maintenance for the North Central and Northeast corridors for the light rail system expansion, including all
13 stations. The work also includes the procurement and installation of bus shelters and bicycle lockers at the stations. The landscape contractor, Valley Crest, is maintaining Line
Sections G-l and NC-4 and a portion of G-3. Landscape work is progressing at Arapaho Center, Galatyn Park, and LBJ/Skillman stations and is nearing completion at Spring Valley Station.
Line section work on G-2 started in December 2001, and G-3 is scheduled to be completed in April 2002. Line Section G-l -Punchlist items are complete and maintenance is continuing. Line
Section NC-4 -Maintenance is continuing. Spring Valley Station -The work at this station is complete. Punchlist work is continuing. Galatyn Park Station -Landscaping installation is
complete. Punchlist work continues. Arapaho Center Station -All work is substantially complete except near the Richardson Underpass construction. Work is on hold at the underpass until
facility construction is complete. Line Section G-2 -Tree planting in the wetlands continues. The contractor has completed pruning trees away from the track. Irrigation installation
along the guideway continues. Excavation activities are complete at Church Road and the installation of graffiti protection vines is in progress. LBJ/Skillman Station -The contractor
is substantially complete. Punchlist work is continuing. Line Section NC-5/Downtown Plano Station -Shrub installation is complete. Bus shelters have been delivered and will be installed
after City of Plano installs the foundations. Parker Road Station -Excavation work and irrigation installation are complete. Victory Station -Two bus shelters are to be installed on
the temporary platform at the station. This contract is currently 64% complete and is slightly behind schedule due to late access to line sections. PM32 2QFY2002
Systemwide Landscaping & Amenities LRTBuildout Phasel Issues The contractor is requesting access to more areas. There is concern over late access to line sections. Water meter installation
at the TPSS areas in the City of Richardson is not complete. The internal milestone for the completion of NC-4 will not be met. Valley Crest is being delayed from completing their work
at the Richardson Underpass and at the TPSS areas. The amount of pruning required on Line Section G-2 far exceeded the estimates. PM33 2Q FY 2002
Facilities -Six Month Look Ahead LRTBuildout Phase! BUILDOUT FACILITIES -SIX MONTH LOOK AHEAD 2002 APRlL I MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER . I 􀁾􀁉 􀁾􀁥􀀺􀁵􀁾􀀽􀁣􀁥Br9/24/01 _ Construction
Completed G-2 I • Revenue Service -5/6/02 A Systems Installation Continues 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 Construction Completed G-3 I
A Systems Installation Continues 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁴􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 .....Q Construction Continues 110 Construction Complete NC-3 I A Systems
Installation Continues • Revenue Service -7/1/02 ------􀁾 􀀭􀀻􀁹􀀻􀁭􀁾􀁮􀁓􀁴􀁡􀁬􀁬􀂱􀁮 􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁐􀁉􀁾 -------------􀁾 ----------NC-4 I • Revenue Service -7/1/02 A Integrated Testing Continues
􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 A Systems Installation Continues NC-5 ..." I Integrated Testing Starts A j!""" Construction Complete 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭�
�􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 S&I EXPANSION Construction Compl ed 􀁦􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮
TRACK c:[ -􀁾 Track Complete -----------------1----------------------LANDSCAPING ..! -Construction 􀁾 -Manufacture A Landscaping Cotnues:s 1i"> .Constr.lManuf. Complete .... -Infonnation
Only PM34 • -Critical 􀁾 -Trending toward Critical _-Change • -Revenue Service Revised 03131102 2Q FY2002
Change Control Summary ..LRTBuildout Phase! ......... 0'1.1 I (!'l>lea ThroughSA#I59 .(!'l>lea Through SA #1A . (Notea ThroughSA#29 SIPDHYciAdNty 1Qs Periml& G.nrenIs 􀁾􀂷􀁟􀁦􀂷􀂷􀁟􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀨􀁍􀁮
􀁨􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀀲􀀰􀀰􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷..􀀲) I 0'1. 41% 0'1. .. 55"1. . 􀀮􀁾􀀮 tied .((M}'B) . 􀀮􀁾􀁊􀀬􀀲􀁬􀁯􀀬􀀼􀁬􀀺􀁘􀁊 0'1. . -.IID:: 􀀮􀁾.. AlI-.re 􀀵􀁬􀀺􀁾􀀬􀀲􀂣􀁉 l;3S8,IIll3
. $l 􀁾 glll2,6:lJ Cf.1. .. 􀁾􀀹􀀱􀀹􀀬􀀱􀀴􀁓 .....􀁾 􀁾􀀴􀀺􀁬􀁬 Sllll2,6:J: Aj:pvIed <:«mEt 􀁩􀁁􀁾 I.A!'l'SlY..... 􀁃􀁯􀀢􀀬􀁾 ...." .._.. ."',,-. "." OJnInIclor CB: =140 soc C-!);\IDJJI
PClSJ = 􀀮􀁌􀁒􀁖􀁾 I,1J( C97OCOl3l 􀀮􀁔􀁥􀀼􀀺􀁨􀁮􀁩􀁣􀀼􀁬􀁉􀁾 yoh C->I'iXOI39 Te"flltic"lSeIvict;> 􀁾􀁾􀁳􀁾􀁉 .. • '. ... C-I=I Svslem Ted1nicoJServices 8&t>1.-:\SS.oc. ... Cloo:JI!J3<l2
RaI Section' ..... 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁥􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁟􀀮 __.. ..􀀱􀁜􀁋􀀺􀁾􀀮􀁉􀁬􀁩􀁣􀁨􀁬􀁊􀁮􀁉􀁳􀀮􀀢􀀧..Lhdelpas.s .. 􀁾􀁉􀁲􀁬􀁃􀀬 S3,@,f>lIJ 􀁾􀁾 g,3IIJ,(;l! .. ... 􀁧􀁊􀀬􀁾 􀀮􀁓􀀳􀀬􀀲􀀳􀀿􀀬􀀱􀀡􀁾 s.P.J,?:ll'..1Cf.1<
. C·\OO1l61.Q1 9)%1···················································........ I 43% SO'I.1 ··········································· . 􀁾􀀸􀀷􀀸􀀬􀀷􀀷􀀮􀀮 .S3,fE},8Tl 􀁾􀀳􀀨􀁪􀁜􀁩􀁊􀁉􀁓􀁬􀁬􀁵􀁥􀁴􀁬
􀁓􀁴􀀼􀀾 􀁣􀁧􀁾􀁴􀁊􀀺􀀼􀀺􀁏􀁬􀁊􀀧 􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀨􀁘􀀩􀀻 C9Ill:Xl:ro .1\K:::l.C1\il'SouclISla. =12 S4Q.589.002 􀁾􀀰􀁓􀀸􀀬􀀹􀀺􀁬􀁊 $44.647.9.]; l>2,oq.4'I3S41.676.49: Sl971.40S 510/<
?'J'1.1 ································ I 􀁬􀀱􀁲􀁬􀁥􀁾􀁮 m.84I',.737 􀁬􀀾􀀲􀀬􀀰􀁬􀀴􀀬􀁾 􀁾􀀹􀀳􀀮􀁬􀀴􀀱􀀱 . §7.16.<l4i'gl,583.IK .. NC5Q\iVSouclISt<> 􀁾􀁉􀀨􀁉􀀱􀁬􀁹 C-9XlXXl78 .. 􀁃􀀾􀁉􀁃􀁬􀀧􀁾􀁓􀁴􀁡
C-= _. .•. ... 􀁇􀁾􀁾 . 􀁣􀁧􀁾􀁬􀀡􀀬..<:o.lJ' .. CrI'ri<b' .." . . .....G3(l\iVSouclISta .... l:i':<seJl'I1elps C9SIDXl59 . .... 􀀮􀁓􀀳􀀿􀀬􀀱􀀸􀁾􀀿􀀱􀀶 ..... $3,518,192 ... 􀁓􀀳􀀸􀀬􀁩􀁉􀁘􀁜􀁬􀁾
... 􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀿􀀬 ... $35.459.351 ..... '0/1< ?'J'I. 35"1< ... .. 9J.Y< Co!Jtrll<:t<:O"Pieted.a\\8iting final closeout 8% ?'J'I< .. ._. __..__􀁾􀁟􀀮__}!ID__ :!!Jl= ..__ -_._._.._1-._"__
----_ . Ot)pa:e§lati",Cl'iIIStruct ... ClaJk<:onlnlCt0lS SlllDcn C-oo:ro137 HIis..... '.. 􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀧􀁴􀀧􀁾􀁴 􀁾 . S&lFarillty O\iIISlrueturaI 􀁓􀀶􀁬􀀺􀁬􀁉􀁣􀁯􀀬􀁬􀁮􀁾 _im C-oo:roI56
YatlVl:A'.oFp&otri.., O\iIISlrueturaI .. . 1:i':<s.e1.!'helps . ...W ww c:.siriXii5i SI8.977.(0) .. Y.>.ir>8.836 Sl897.1UJ 􀁓􀁊􀁊􀀮􀀸􀀷􀀴􀀮􀁾 SlCOO,4Il3 g):;TJ.4\l3 s:sJ)fJ2 1'& 510.855.7.1:
S187383 510,656.21 5\99.501 Y.>.679.31 s;Qj,111 $9.3J2,491 SIi6,'irJJ 84"1< . 57"1< 1(lJ'1. Contrnct Dosed <An ..1" 00'1< ,O,, :llttraetOo,,s,,e. d <An ....1"0."0'1< O:llttroe"t' Dosed-.<.A,n.-.
.. Ill% .64'1< ...81% S7l.3OJ S8l7'452 gJ.Ol2,%] .. . Sl:V·013 ... · 􀁔􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀮􀀡􀁲􀁬􀁳􀀮􀁾􀁯􀀮􀀢􀀮􀀮 . 􀁾􀀮􀀡􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮 . S1.3:!!',/J!: 􀁟􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀮 􀀮􀁓􀀲􀀶􀀮􀁾􀁾 $2.56O)A5 .. 􀀤􀀲􀀵􀁾􀁾
. 􀁾􀁤􀀡 = ·'. . 1l>1d<"'Iling . =1 PM35 2QFY2002
Change Control Summary LRTBuiIdout Phase 1 􀁾􀂧􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁯.... c"nlrnctJ'ac.l<age .. ........... I AgrI>Ie<I.....AgrI>Ie<I IoC3I... 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 !'er<eJt
􀁾􀀼􀁩􀁁􀁤􀁩􀁜􀁩􀁴􀁹 ..(;oI1stillwJti 􀁾 .C<DiAI/·-=:' 􀁾 􀁾 Omlrzt Val · "" 􀁾 􀁾 <:l>1lrld 'lJjs.Peri.ods,.e...m.ns. . ... . ...􀁾􀁲 􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀽􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁪􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾
􀀽􀁾􀀫􀀭􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀽􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁬􀀭􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁵􀀺􀀭􀀮􀀮􀁳􀀽􀀫􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀻􀀻􀀺􀀽􀀮􀀭􀀴􀁾􀁁􀀯􀁾􀁉􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀺􀁥􀀽􀀧􀀭􀁬 __􀁾􀁕􀀾􀁃􀁕􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀭􀁬 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮 . 􀀨􀁾􀀲􀀰􀀰􀁚􀀩􀀮
·(A)'(B)·{Oo.t,+B)IDI .ffi:AIDY (F'B'DI (QiDB) I ... 􀁃􀁯􀁾􀀮􀁣􀁡􀁲􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳 l\fas.s.l3e<:tric S.l6,QI4,Sli4 . Silill,4I\S ,.S.17.646,.;c< ., 􀁾􀀬􀀿􀀢􀀮􀁓􀁉􀀶􀀬􀀴􀀸􀁬􀁬􀀬􀀹􀀡􀀺 SI.127,S28
3a'!< 􀁣􀀭􀁾􀂷 ..SlO:iJ::o mm; Pl.}.................................................. I •• . :rl1lClion.Be<:tJificalX>n. .. 1I:>v,e!J1I:>":"'.. . 􀁓􀀳􀀲􀀬􀁾􀁣􀁸􀁸􀀮 .Sl.,289,(£() S36,Ig,S,(i)
. 􀁓􀁬􀀮􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁩􀁬􀀬􀁾􀁬 􀁾􀀬􀀱􀁬􀀵􀀶􀀬􀀮􀀸􀀱􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁓􀀻􀁬􀀲􀀸􀀬􀀷􀀸􀀵 .. .39'1 C\3))J)41 7B'!<l . . . Trocl<.& MIIerilti l'r<x:=m:nt ... SignalSysrem .. C9SOO»l2 . 􀁉􀀡􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮 . L.Ja..f<><t"':
. C9!lXXXD1 S50,310,36: SS.I35,8Xl. S55.446,16 Sl,468,141 􀀮􀁓􀁓􀀴􀀬􀁾􀁉􀁉 . S42!\lXXl .S1 . IOCPA1 ··········..·················· IOCPA < .. ConcreteTIeS 􀁒􀁯􀁣􀁬􀁬􀀾􀀮􀁾􀀱􀁩􀁥 .. .,...
,.,... .. . C:siiXOi7i SS,9J8.17S .. . ..􀁳􀀮􀁑􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁓􀀵􀀬􀀹􀀳􀀸􀀬􀁉􀁾 .. ,sJ54,24< $5.783.931 􀁬􀀧􀀺􀁬􀁁􀁾 }i-i IOCP!<l························ . TOrAlS: $811:21&2271 l6J,015,1615ll&5;1
siril;[.SlO.OOiS1. $OO;748;M Sl8.400,,586 ".\I 􀁾􀁂􀁉􀀡 .' I Sl.9!IlI.25 $l48,554 PM36 2QFY 2002
􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾 t="=: 􀁾 Q", rI.l 0 􀁾 = N ..... ",.,' ,,It\\s. \£{ 􀁾􀁾􀀳􀂷 􀁲􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀢 I i i I L... : . 􀀬􀁾􀀺􀁾I. " .....-.... 􀁌􀂷􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀺􀁾 "... 􀁾.. " i. . ..-\.:.,.,,,...<
....'C."".......... \-. -', ... d······ ;.>1 '''.....··"...·.. ·... "t " ",,; 􀀬􀀬􀀻􀀬􀁾􀀬􀁟... , SOUTHEAST CORRIDOR \\, --, :_.w:"4t.....""". 􀁾􀀯􀀧 /.•lHJO.U rQ 􀀯􀁾􀀮 I 􀁲􀂷􀁱􀀮􀀢􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀢􀁬
""""""'.1> "'0,,,:.' ,>/......... ,., '''J ;.' ...􀀺􀀻􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀧􀁊􀀢 ..,/.􀀬􀁾􀁾 : '... 􀁾􀀮􀀯 "" 􀀧􀀿􀀺􀀺􀂷􀁲􀁾􀀭􀀺 \"" p 􀀮􀁾􀁟􀀮 .. ' •. 􀀬􀁪􀀯􀁲􀁾􀀬 ... ,p" NORTHEAST "<;:;/'/' CORRIDOR
,r'\\ ,..;>'<\";,. 􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁾 ! .",1ft" \ /f-.e'."" \-i" 1 ""'r 􀁾􀁔 LAXE »£: Ie 􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁃􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀢􀁾􀀧􀁜􀀬􀀢􀁜􀀢􀀮􀀻􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀬􀁟􀀺􀀭􀀭",􀀮.;.􀁜. 􀀭􀀺􀁾. '. 􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁉􀀼􀀧􀁉 􀁛􀀮􀀾􀁻􀁊􀀧􀀨􀁁􀁁􀁾
􀀢􀀭􀀢􀀣􀁁􀀢􀀮!􀁟􀁾:􀁾 1 􀁾􀀬􀁾.. L ("lAA:) 􀁬􀁬􀀨􀁬􀁾 ,. I. .. 41&i'l' ir> fl. ',' \ ...., , "",,, "''''' " ..-..-•......•.. f>1,,-1 •• 􀁾􀀮􀁉...tJ!. 􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀮􀁊􀁯􀁉􀁬􀀮􀁾 1 j ... 1
􀁾􀀻􀁔 \ •􀁾 Ii '\'1 \ .i \ 􀁾􀁬 \ P: ...... :-:'\" NORTH CENTRAL CORRIDOR .. ,,.·" X(I ,,-n \..... , 􀁬􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀭􀀢􀁉􀀧 􀁾􀀾􀀺􀀻 /" 􀀧􀀱􀁉􀁩􀀢􀀧􀁜􀀬􀁍􀀮􀁾 \U1r-.:o., ", .􀀮􀀨􀀻􀁾􀀢 ,;.".,,,,,.
I..., .." "􀁾􀀢􀀬􀁨 􀁾 ,m,; r-<""m", I 􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀻􀀧􀁦􀀬 ..·z\\ 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀩 ... I ,m"", r:..􀁜􀁾 , '.' 􀂷􀀧􀀻􀀻􀂷􀂷􀁾􀀮􀁉 . ,\ ..•..... 􀀧􀁊􀁾􀀭􀀬􀀺􀀢􀀬􀀬􀁾 . ;\' ',' '" i\ I 􀁷􀀬􀀬􀀺􀁾􀀢􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀢
􀁌􀁾 ... :.. 􀀮􀀮􀁊􀀬􀀮􀁜􀁜􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮 􀁾􀀧􀁵 .roy ••􀀬􀀬􀁾 " . 􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁊􀀰􀁜􀀩􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀬􀁾 I 􀁾􀀮..􀀬[ """'􀁾􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧 "'I􀀮"􀁾:􀀡,􀀬 I i􀁜\􀁜􀀧\􀁾􀁜 '\ 't. _'P'I_l.")'tl"..n.o'Al
I 􀀢􀁾􀀧􀁹􀁉 /. i 􀁾 •• 􀁾􀁾􀁊􀀩􀀮􀀮􀀴􀁛 <>," 􀀭􀁾􀀮 ..." LEGEND "\ 'i:c"f/l.;::J r u 􀁾􀁕􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀺􀁬􀁖􀀮􀁜􀀱 DFW 􀀯􀁬􀀿􀁙􀁉􀁾􀁇 COR!{DO;": SOUTHEAST CORRIDOR 􀀡􀀧􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁒 􀀡􀁪􀁾􀀧􀀬􀀬􀁻􀀡􀀾􀁾􀁾
.: 􀀧􀀭􀀾􀀼􀀻􀁾􀀧􀁩􀀻􀁇􀀺􀀻 NORTHWEST CORRIDOR 􀁓􀁔􀁁􀁒􀁔􀁾􀁒 SYSTrJ,I SERViCE & INSY(CnON rACll.llY LRT BUILDOUT PHASE 2 _ 8lJ;WOUT l'rlASF. I PHASE 2 : 1m. o LAY 􀁓􀁔􀁁􀁔􀁬􀁯􀀮􀁾 e
􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁬􀁾􀁌􀁍􀁊􀁾􀀺􀁔􀀱􀀰􀁎 hmRIIARY n 7000 /I>: /CART '" D/FW IRVING CORRIDOR 􀁾􀁾􀁾 .. '"'''' .. 1 ".'"" tv to 'Tj 0-< tv o13 '"d 􀁾w-...l .. 􀁾..,...•.. "
Northwest Corridor Facilities .. LRTBuildout Phase 2 Strategic Plan Consideration Description C2.3 Develop/Open/Integrate new transit services The Northwest Corridor extends from the
Dallas CBD northward along the TRE Corridor to the MedicallMarket Center area. It then continues in the median of Harry Hines Blvd. and transitions into the Union Pacific Railroad alignment
near Love Field. It then continues through the City of Farmers Branch to the City of Carrollton. The Northwest Corridor also includes the IrvinglDFW Corridor that branches from the Northwest
Corridor near Love Field, continues past Texas Stadium to Las Colinas and then on to DFW Airport. Status The Northwest Corridor is in the planning and development phase. The design phase
will begin after completion of the planning and development phase and is scheduled to begin on April 1, 2002, for NW-1; October 1, 2002, for NW-2; April 1, 2003, for NW-3; October 1,
2003, for NW-4; April 1, 2004, for IRV-l; October 1,2004, for IRV-2; and April 1, 2005, for IRV-3. Issues None. DAR'r... PM38 2Q FY2002
Southeast Corridor Facilities LRT Buildout Phase 2 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues C2.3 Deveiop/Openiintegrate new transit services The Southeast Corridor extends
from the Dallas CBD southeasterly from Bryan Street down Good-Latimer to the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) alignment. The corridor transitions from the UPRR alignment to Parry Street
at Fair Park. The corridor then transitions into the Southern Pacific alignment in South Dallas and continues on to Buckner Blvd. The Southeast Corridor is in the planning and development
phase. The design phase will begin after completion of the planning and development phase and is scheduled to begin on June 12,2002, for SE-l and December 12, 2002, for SE-2. None. PM39
2QFY 2002
Rowlett Extension Facilities . LRTBuildout Phase 2 Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues C2.3 Develop/Open/Integrate new transit services The Rowlett Extension will
extend easterly from the Downtown Garland Station to the Rowlett Park and Ride. This section will make up approximately 4.8 miles of the Northeast Corridor. There will be one station,
Rowlett Station, located adjacent to the Rowlett Park and Ride. The Rowlett Extension (Line Section R-l) is in the planning and development phase. The design phase will begin after completion
of the planning and development phase and is scheduled to begin on April 1, 2004. None. PM40 2Q FY 2002
Cost Summary Additional Capital Development I Cost Summary I (in millions ofdollars) Control Current Expended Budget Commitment to Date (1) LRT Starter System $855.2 $855.2 $855.2 Lake
JuneTC 7.3 7.3 6.9 Convention Center Connector 1.0 0.2 0.2 Richardson Underpass 4.4 4.3 3.4 State Highway 190 Station 12.5 9.7 2.2 Parker Road Station Parking 2.6 1.6 0.0 Lancaster Road
1.5 1.6 1.4 Victory Station Project 75.0 12.1 8.5 PANMB 6.8 0.6 0.6 Unity Plaza 3.5 1.2 0.8 Notes: 1) Expended to date values reflect activity through 02/28/02. PM41 2Q FY 2002
LRT Starter System Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues Additional·Capital Development Ongoing business Some open items still remain on the LRT Starter System, including
Line Sections CBD and SOC-2. Construction is complete, and the remaining construction contracts are in the process of being closed out. Regarding Line Section CBD, an arbitration date
for settlement of ThanksGiving Square disputed economic issues has not been set. A tentative resolution of the arbitration matter has been reached subject to final approval by the parties
involved. DART and Thanks-Giving Square have agreed in principle. Concurrence from the City ofDallas is pending. The SOC-2 contractor, H.B. Zachry Company, filed a Complaint for Equitable
Adjustment and Compensatory Damages with an administrative law judge. The decision was delivered in January 2002 in DART's favor with the exception of two items. DART Legal filed a "request
for reconsideration" in February 2002, asking the court to revisit these two items. PM42 2Q FY 2002
Summary Working Schedule Additional Capital Development ADDffiONAL CAPITALDEVEWPMENT SllMMARYWORKINGSCHEDULE 􀀮􀁾􀁧􀁮 CotEtruction n Re=tue Service 1997 1998 1999 2<XXl 2001 2002 2003
2004 • 􀁇􀁲􀁮􀁮􀁤􀁾 Lake June TC ...... ;·1 LiV<.lble Communities 􀁉􀁊􀁅􀁾 -(Convention Ctr Pedestrian Conn) Richardson Underpass I I SH 190 Station I Lancaster Rrod -Task Order #18
MLKTIaIlSit Center Victory 1REWalls & Roadbed .... I Victory Station & Bridges Eghth & Corinth Final 􀁾􀁧􀁮 QI Hold!Pending P1anninI Analysis Northwest Plano Park & Ride I Unity Plaza
Parker Road Station Parking -II -Revised 03131/02 PM43 2Q FY 2002
Lake June Transit Center Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues ... AdditionalCapital ·.DeV'ef()Plllellt . C2.3 Deveiop/Openiintegrate new transit services The Lake June
Transit Center is located on the southeastern quadrant of the intersection of Lake June Road and the existing DART ROW. This transit center will become a bus/rail facility when the Southeast
Corridor is implemented. The transit center consists of a building with climatecontrolled waiting areas, seating, restrooms, vending machines, telephones, drinking fountains, and a facility
attendant kiosk. Approximately 447 parking spaces are provided on site, with the capability of adding 330 spaces in the future. Site amenities include landscaping, light fixtures, trash
receptacles, and newspaper racks. The contractor, Archer Western Contractor, Ltd., continues to work on punchlist items. The Lake June Transit Center is substantially complete and began
revenue service on February 25, 2002. None. 􀁾... PM44 2Q FY2002
Livable Communities Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues Additional Capital Development C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities The Livable Communities project
consists of two elements. The first element is an at-grade pedestrian walkway connecting the DART Convention Center Station platform to the Dallas Convention Center. The other is a landscaped
walkway along Pearl Street connecting the CBD East Bus Transfer Center to the DART Pearl Street Station, which was constructed by PhillipslMay Corporation and opened to the public in
April 2000. Convention Center Pedestrian Connector -The design phase is wrapping up. The IFB package was released on March 4,2002. Bids will be due on April 4, 2002, and NTP is expected
in late April. Completion is expected in August 2002. Convention Center Pedestrian Connector -The Central Dallas Association and Dallas Convention Center will assist as needed in attempts
to secure funding. PM45 2Q FY2002
Richardson Underpass Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Additional Capital ·Ueyelopment C2.3 Develop/OpenlIntegrate new transit services The Richardson Underpass will be
a pedestrian connection under Greenville Avenue, which will provide access to the Arapaho Center Station from the Richardson Transit Center in Line Section NC-4 of the Buildout project.
The contractor, Rebcon, Inc., has completed this work except for testing. The contractor is waiting for TUE to connect the power to the station. The City of Richardson consultant is
developing the additional landscape plans to enhance the underpass entrance. The contractor achieved the milestone of February 1, 2002, to tum over portions of the project site to the
City of Richardson so that they may begin their work. The City's work is scheduled to be completed by May 31, 2002. The contractor anticipates achieving substantial completion on April
15, 2002. Issues None. ./'<>:.« DARr··· PM46 2Q FY 2002
SH 190 Station Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status AdditionalCapital· ... 􀂷􀀮􀂷􀀮􀁝􀀩􀁥􀁶􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁐􀁄􀁬􀁥􀁮􀁴 C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities The SH 190 Station
contract will provide a new station just south of State Highway 190 (George Bush Turnpike). This station was identified in Line Section NC-5 as a future station. Parking for this station
will be provided under the SH 190 structure. An at-grade pedestrian crossing of the service road to access the station will be constructed. Provisions wiII also be made for bus transfer
and kiss-and-ride in close proximity to the station platform. The contractor, Haws & Tingle General Contractors, Inc., continues with construction activities. The contractor continues
earthwork activities and underground utility work on both the parking lot and the station. The contractor has completed the station canopy column foundation. This contract is 15% complete.
Issues One parcel north of SH 190 is still required for easement rights for electrical power. Drive A has been removed from the project due to unavailability of its associated parcel.
An additional road crossing is needed south of the station for a new access road to be built by the developers. The contractor has obtained a utility permit from the City of Richardson.
The City has requested additional water lines and taps for future fire hydrant installations to serve future development of the area. The new layout has been completed and negotiations
with the City have been finalized. This request was approved by the DART Board on January 22, 2002. PM47 2Q FY 2002
Parker Road Station Phase 2 Parking Additional Capital Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities Construction
of Phase 2 Parking will occur adjacent to the existing East Plano Transit Center (Parker Road Station) at the intersection of Archerwood Street and Exchange Drive in the City of Plano.
This facility will provide 568 general-use parking spaces. In addition, the existing handicap parking areas adjacent to the existing transit center will be revised to conform to current
ADA and TDLR standards. NTP was delivered on February 28, 2002. The contractor, RogersO'Brien Construction, has delivered early submittals and has started work on light pole foundations,
storm drain inlets, and clearing. The job trailers for the NC-5 contract were moved in February, allowing the start ofwork on this contract. This issue is resolved. PM48 2Q FY 2002
Lancaster Road Train Detection System , Additional Capital Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status C1.2 Provide a safe, secure, and clean environment This project
involves the installation of a train detection system and traffic signal interface that incorporates "Train Coming" signs along the Lancaster Road portion ofthe Blue Line ofthe LRT Starter
System. The LRT Buildout signals contractor, Union Switch & Signal, Inc. (US&S) has completed train detection equipment installation. Work on the punchlist is complete. The traffic signal
work (Task Order No. 18 being perfonned by the miscellaneous construction contractor) has been completed. Signal visors will be installed when available. Issues Signal visors are under
procurement via Task Order No. 18. PM49 2Q FY 2002
MLKJr. Transit Center Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Additional Capital Development C2.3 Develop/OpenlIntegrate new transit services The development of the MLK Jr. Transit
Center is planned to facilitate access from Fair Park and the South Dallas community. Site 3 was selected as the location of the MLK Jr. Transit Center. Negotiations to acquire some
of the outstanding parcels have been successful. DART's Real Estate Department is now acquiring the remaining properties through the eminent domain process. The design architect/engineer
team headed by Alliance Architects submitted the in-progress 40% design in early February 2002. Work is progressing toward the pre-final 85% design submittal scheduled for May 2002.
The project is still scheduled to be completed in 305 calendar days from NTP. Issues None. PM50 2QFY2002
Victory Station Project Strategic Plan Consideration Description "', . , ,--,. Additional Capital Development C2.3 Develop/OpenJIntegrate new transit services The Victory Station will
be constructed adjacent to the American Airlines Center. Trinity Railway Express (TRE) partial service began on July 28, 2001, using a temporary station platform. LRT and full TRE service
to the station is anticipated to begin by the end of2003. The Victory Station project will be developed with the issuance of two construction contracts. Initially, a construction contract
will construct retaining walls and roadbed, to relocate the TRE tracks to the west. This effort will place the TRE tracks in their final location at the Victory Station and provide space
for the TRE and LRT platform construction. The second contract will construct the LRT line to serve the Victory Station including LRT/TRE bridge structures. This contract will also construct
the Victory Station including the TRE and LRT platforms, station plaza and pedestrian connector to the American Airlines Center. The systems work will be done by modifying the existing
contract for that work. There will be additional work by the TRE. The TRE, track installation and systems work will be coordinated and accomplished concurrently with the construction
contracts. Status TRE Walls and Roadbed Construction Contract The contractor, AUI Contractors, Inc., has installed about 75% of the MSE walls. Work on platform grade beams is complete.
Project completion is about 14 days behind schedule due to various changes. (See Issues.) Line Section NW-IA Construction Contract The line section contract IFB was issued on October
18, 2001, with bids received on February 12, 2002. It is anticipated that this item will be presented to the Board for approval on April 9 and that NTP will be issued on May 6,2002.
(See Issues.) LRT and full TRE revenue service is anticipated by early 2004. Line Section NW-IA Track Materials Procurement A contract was awarded to L.B. Foster Company in October 2001.
Submittals are in progress. Fabrication has not started. General SHPO concurred in January that there is no other feasible alternative to the removal and replacement of the existing
Continental Bridge. The removal and replacement of the Continental Bridge will be included in the NW-IA construction project. PM51 2QFY 2002
...... Victory Station Project Issues Additional·.Capital DeyeloPlDent THE Walls and Roadbed Construction Contract There was a conflict in the locations of the MSE walls and a TXU overhead
power line pole. TXU was able to relocate the pole such that the temporary notch in the wall was not necessary as previously planned. The project is being completed as designed. This
issue is resolved. A change has been issued to construct a ductbank for MCI prior to completing the MSE wall. This will result in some delay to the completion of the contract. This delay
is combined with the TXU pole issue. At this time, the contractor appears to be approximately 14 days behind schedule. The TRE wall contractor had discovered that the Platform 4 grade
beam could be built before the rail is moved and has now completed work on the grade beam. Milestone B was deleted from the contract. This issue is resolved. Line Section NW-IA Construction
Contract The bid date was revised from January 29th to February 12th to include the removal and replacement of the existing Continental Bridge, as this work has now been approved by
SHPO. Planning is developing a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with SHPO to outline the documentation requirements to remove and replace the Continental Bridge. Concurrence with this agreement
from SHPO and FTA is necessary to issue the NTP. It is anticipated that this effort will be completed to meet the May 6, 2002, NTP date. The Advisory Council of Historic Preservation
has chosen not to become involved in this local preservation issue. General An aggressive design and construction schedule requires coordination and cooperation of all DART support groups
to achieve DART's goal and desire ofLRT and full TRE service by early 2004. The Planning and Project Management departments are working concurrently on their respective items on this
project. PM52 2Q FY 2002
Phase 3 Parking -Eighth & Corinth Station AdditiollalCapital Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities The Eighth
& Corinth Station is located south of the intersection of Eighth and Corinth streets in South Dallas. Phase 3 parking facility is proposed to be constructed on the DART property located
on the northwest corner of Eighth and Corinth streets across from the station to mitigate the parking congestion problem. DART Planning is evaluating potential joint development options
with the interested developers. The start of fmal design is pending recommendation from the Planning Department on the land utilization and parking layout. Final design ofthis project
is on hold. PM53 2Q FY 2002
Northwest Plano Park and Ride II Additional Capital Development Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities The Northwest Plano
Park and Ride will be located at the Dallas North Tollway near Spring Creek Drive. Current plans are for a bus platform with four to six bays and approximately 500 parking spaces on
7lh. acres of property. The Planning Department and the property owner have reached an "Agreement in Principle" with the property owners. Project definition will follow. The procurement
process for the selection of an architectural/engineering firm for the design of the facility will begin in May 2002. None. PM54 2Q FY2002
Public Address /Visual Message Board System AdditionalCapital .·UevelopDlent Strategic Plan Consideration Description Status Issues C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities The
Starter System will be retrofitted with the same public address /visual message board (PANMB) system that is being installed in the Buildout, which includes the installation of a fiber
optic system. The bid process for procurement of the infrastructure upgrade for the Starter System has begun. Bids were received in August and exceeded the budget. Repackaging of bid
packages is underway. None. PM55 2Q FY2002
Unity Plaza Strategic Plan Consideration Description .Additional Capital ·:OevelQpment C2.6 Add needed passenger amenities/facilities The Unity Plaza Project will be located southwest
ofthe intersection of Central Expressway and Haskell Avenue at the present location of DART's western entrance to the Cityplace Station and future location of the terminal for the McKinney
Avenue Trolley. The project consists of the reconstruction of the western entrance to Cityplace Station and the creation of a transit plaza surrounding the new building. This will include
reconfiguring the entrance to face the turntable to the west and the design of the plaza and its interface with the trolley turntable. The new entrance, a one-story glass and steel structure,
will sit atop expanded foundation walls. The new entrance design incorporates a 150' tower that will serve as a landmark identifying the station and will include a high-tech digital
display wall. The HVAC and electrical systems will be upgraded to accommodate the new configuration. Status The selection process for the design team revealed that RTKL Associates, Inc.
is the best qualified contractor. The DART Board approved the design contract on February 19, 2002. The NTP was issued on March 12,2002. Coordination meetings with the other stakeholders
occurred on January 9, February 26, and March 26,2002. The next scheduled meeting will be held on April 24, 2002. Other parties with an interest in the Unity Plaza Project include the
City of Dallas, the McKinney Avenue Trolley Authority, and others involved in the planning and construction of North Central Expressway. Issues None. PM56 2Q FY2002
Six Month Look Ahead AdditionalCapital .. ....... ..... .. . .. .. Development ADDITIONAL CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT SIX MONTH LOOK AHEAD 2002 APRIL r MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER 􀁌􀁁􀁾􀁔􀁃􀁅􀀢􀁔􀁅􀁒__
􀀬􀀮􀀮􀁣􀀺􀀺􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁃􀁏􀁦􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁴􀁾􀁟􀁟􀁟 _ LTVABLE COMMUNITIES IlIIl ..., t;. Construction Begins 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁤􀁾􀁾􀁾 j _ 􀁾􀁃􀁾􀁾􀁎 􀁕􀁎􀁄􀁅􀁾􀁁􀁓􀁓 􀁾 􀁪􀁬􀁩􀁉􀀧􀁣􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁴􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮
Complet:... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ SH 190 STATION .-' Construction 􀁃􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁵􀁾 -anncipated to be comPletedj 11108/02 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁭􀁷􀁭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁊􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ---------------􀁾􀁫􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀺􀁾
􀁾􀁃􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁥􀁤􀀭􀀭􀀭 _ MLK TRANSIT CENTER • Design Connnues (NTP -Construction anticIpated on 12/04/02) 􀁬􀀡􀁥􀁔􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀻􀁔􀁾􀁾􀁡􀀺􀀬== -==􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀁃􀁟􀁯􀁴􀁩􀁍􀁣􀁦􀀧􀀮􀀧􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀱􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁟􀁾
===_====_= VICTORY STAnON .-' NIP -Construction, excluding Systems work, anncipated 􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁏􀁾􀁒 􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀺􀀽􀀽􀀽􀂷􀁾􀁦􀂷􀁟􀁢􀁙􀁉􀁖􀁉􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀽 􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁄􀁟UNITY PLAZA
• 􀁄􀁾􀁩􀁧􀁮 Continues -anticipated to be completed by 1/10/03 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁩􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁩􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 PARKER RD PARKING -II • Construction 􀁦􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁵􀁾
-anticiPatid to be completed on[8/28/02 .-' -Construction I􀁾. -_Construction Complete Revenue Servicerrumover to Operations • -Infonnation Only --Change • Senior Management Review PM57
• -Critical 􀁾 -Trending toward Critical Revised 03131/02 2Q FY 2002
Change Control Summary AdditionalCapital 'Ueyeloplllent I ·.·.....•.............................................. ·······················f·············,············· 􀀧􀁦􀀢􀁾 ..􀁾 TolliI·····
t .. Cbr=t ..􀁊􀀱􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁩􀁮􀁪􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮 --Facilityl Coll'lulblotl ..􀁾􀁾􀁉 ..􀁾...􀁾 ...􀁃􀁬􀀺􀁉􀀱􀁬􀁲􀀺􀁴􀁉􀀺􀁴􀁾􀀯􀁾 . .<:<tttra::t Coolract 􀁐􀁡􀁣􀁾􀀮􀀧 Cootrac1Or _ A11_ _ (hang..
Value AlI_ U<ed 􀁾 (A) T .fB)(OoA+Bl(Dl(E';;A.+D)(!';,a2[)) (OOB) 􀁾􀁯􀁦􀀬􀁜􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁩􀁴􀁹 This Period & Con:ments (Mrcb2002) ., l1lke.Jwe TrwmitQmu .... Consttuclion Ald1er Western
C 1000000.ol 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁩􀁧􀁮.. , 􀁾.. C9«OO140 $4,377;611 S5lt\7JO $4'SU4,J;1J $487,SR $4.865,21 S39,ISJ 93'% 95'1< I ....",:reg:J l:ftl: . 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀹􀀡􀀮􀁑􀀡􀁴􀀱􀁮􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀮 􀁾􀀮 lID
.. 􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾 ..1El)...... . 􀀬􀁾􀁃􀀢􀀧I . . i .... COllstructiorl:I'ellrl.&Conn""or ... 􀁾􀁃􀁯􀁲􀁰 C93756M1 ................􀁾􀁬􀁧􀁮􀀮 lID ...􀁾lID lED .., 􀁾 1El) m:,.􀁾c..,, . ,'IS:
. ... 􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀢..__......, 􀀢􀀺􀁬􀀡􀁥􀀻􀀬􀁾􀁲􀁳􀀮􀀬􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀢􀁬􀀺􀀲􀀬􀀹􀀬􀁊􀀿􀀬􀀺􀀻􀀺􀁣 ....􀀢􀁓􀀲􀀲􀀹􀀮􀀳􀀬􀁾 􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀲􀀳􀀳􀀬􀀴􀁓􀁃 􀁟􀀺􀀤􀀴􀀮􀁳􀀮􀀴􀁝􀀻􀀬􀁧􀀸􀀹􀀴􀀬􀁾 ,.,....S339,J.<g CI003174-01
PM58 2QFY 2002
DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT As Of March 31, 2002 Submitted by Authorized Investment Officers in Accordance with the Public Funds Investment Act Prepared by
Treasury May 7,2002
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO March 2002 Prepared by Treasury 1.'••:.I••􀁩􀁴􀁬􀀮􀁲􀀡􀁾 Market Value $279,204 $(4,105) Book Value $278,928 $(3,570) Net Unrealized Gain (Loss) $276 $(535) Accrued
Interest $1,084 $(130) Average Maturity in Days* 238 14 Average Yield* 2.74% .03% 􀀡􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁉􀁦􀀱􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁾􀀻􀀡􀀺􀀺􀀡􀀹􀁅􀂷􀁆􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁉􀀺􀀺􀁉􀁾􀁈􀁱􀀡􀀧􀁩􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀻􀁩􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺�
�􀀺􀀺􀂷􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀂷􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀱􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀱􀀧􀀱􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀩􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀱􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀬􀀱􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀱􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺
􀀮􀀺􀁪􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀱􀀺􀀱􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀱􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺 :::;:::·:::::·r:::::::i:l:i:i::t:::::::::·i:::,l}:'::ji!:.:·::·:·:::::::::'1)::::::.::::::::::;1;:::::::::::::::::::::
:::::;;:::.::::;.}.:::.:.:?::::::: DISTRIBUTION BY MARKET SECTOR DISTRIBUTION BY MATURITY 0.7 .-----------------..., 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 56% Treasury Agencies C.Paper Money Market
IIIMar 02 EI Mar 01 tl :::-:.::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::;;:::.:::::::::::.:::=:.:-:::::=:=:.;::::.;:;:;:;:;:::::::;.:::::=:. 0.8 .-------------------, 0.6 0.4 0.2o 1·90 days 91-365
days 1-3 years . 3-7 years IIIMar 02 EI Mar 01 􀁾􀀺􀁬 :.:.:::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::;:;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:::::::::;,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS BY FUND As of March, 2002 (in Thousands) General Financial Insurance DART FED Debt Service Operating Reserve Fund SEAF SEAF Funds TOTAL Par Value $156,791 $28,006
$7,850 $22,710 $55,728 $7,869 $278,954 Market Value $156,747 $28,284 $7,885 $22,710 $55,728 $7,850 $279,204 Unrealized Gain (Loss) $4 $238 $36 $0 $0 -$2 $276 Book Value $156,743 $28,046
$7,849 $22,710 $55,728 $7,852 $278,928 Accrued Interest 657 300 124 0 0 3 1,084 Total Book Value $157,400 $28,346 $7,973 $22,710 $55,728 $7,855 $280,012 Cash Balance $2,311 $0 $0 $0
$1 $0 $2,312 TOTAL FUND VALUE $159,711 $28,346 $7,973 $22,710 $55,729 $7,855 $282,324 Liquid Securities (Mkt. value) $77,786 Yield to Maturity (Adj for calls 2.82% 4.70% 5.24% 1.69%
1.75% 1.74% 2.74% Average Final Maturity 268 Days 22.0 Months 21.5 Months 1 Day I Days 44 Days 238 Days IKEV COMPLIANCF. TARGETS Minimum Requirement (2) $66,248 $25,000 $7,996 Maximum
Average Maturity 365 Days 30 Months 48 Months 90 Days 365 Days 3 Years N/A Is Fund in Compliance Yes Yes No (4) Yes Yes Yes Yes INVESTMENT COMPARISON 6-Month T-Bill (3) 2.04% 2.04% 2.04%
2.04% 2.04% 2.04% N/A (1) Maturity adjusted for callable securities cUll'ently priced to call date. (2) Operating =60 day cash requirement per Projections of Monthly Cash Balances Report
Insurance = GL liability for February 2002 plus Officers & Directors Liability (3) March 200 I average yield (4) Fund deficient by $57,000, at the next investment maturity on 5/15 an
additional $150,000 will be added. 05/07/02
Analysis of Callable Securities March 31, 2002 Financial 07/03/03 07/03/02 D/5 days F1ll..B 1.0 4.575 2.70 High Financial I 08/21/03 I 08/21/02 10/5 days I FNMA I 1.0 I 4.000 I 2.85
I High Operating I 10/24/03 I 04/25/02 10/5 days I SLMA I 3.0 I 3.200 I 3.00 I Low Financial I 11/07/03 I 11/07/02 10/5 days I FNMA I 1.0 I 3.125 I 3.30 I Low Operating I 12/10/03 I
06/10/02 10/5 days I FHLB I 5.0 I 3.020 I 3.35 I Low Operating I 12/19/03 I 06/19/02 IQ/5 days I FHLB I 5.0 I 2.550 I 3.35 I Low Operating I 3/26/04 I 09/26/02 10/5 days I FHLB I 3.0
I 3.600 I 3.70 I Low Financial I 04/08/04 I 10/08/02 10/10 days I FNMA I 1.0 I 3.125 I 3.70 I Low Insurance I 06/28/04 I 06/28/02 10/5 days I FHLMC I 1.0 I 4.000 I 3.75 I Low Financial
I 06/28/04 I 06/28/02 10/5 days I F1ll..MC I 1.05 I 4.000 I 3.75 I Low Operating I 06/28/04 I 06/28/02 IS/5 days I FHLB I 5.0 I 3.000 I 3.85 I Low Operating I 07/09/04 I 07/09/02 ID/5
days I FHLMC I 10.0 I 4.500 I 3.85 I Low Financial I 07/23/04 I 04/23/02 ID/5 days I FHLB I 2.0 I 4.250 I 3.85 I Moderate Insurance I 08/05/04 I 08/05/02 10/10 days I FNMA I 1.0 I 6.625
I 4.00 I High Operating I 09/27/04 I 09/27/02 10/5 days I FHLB I 2.5 I 4.030 I 4.00 I Low Operating I 09/2704 I 09/2702 10/5 days I FHLB I 2.5I 4.030 I 4.00 I Low Financial I 11/04/04 I 11/04/02 10/5 days I FHLB I 1.0 I 5.170 I 4.00 I Moderate Operating I 11/05/04 I 08/05/02 10/5 days I FHLB I 5.0 I 3.800 I 4.00 I Low Financial
I 11/22/04 I OS/22/02 10/5 days I F1ll..B I 2.0 I 5.375 I 4.00 I Moderate Insurance I 12/06/04 I 06/06/02 IQ/5 days I FBLB I 1.5 I 3.700 I 4.00 I Low Operating I 12/24/04 I 06/24/02
IS/5 days I FHLB I 5.0 I 3.250 I 4.00 I Low Insurance I 05/13/05 I 05/13/03 10/5 days I FHLB I 1.0 I 4.000 I 4.25 I Low Financial I 12/28/05 I 06/28/02 IQ/5 days I FHLB I 5.0 I 5.100
I 4.40 I Moderate Financial I 09/28/06 I 06/28/02 IQ/5 days I FHLB I 2.0 I 5.100 I 4.80 I Low EXPLANATORYNOTES: D = Discrete call; coupon dates only with required notice C = Continuous
call after initial call date with required notice. o = Once only call with required notice. S = Semi-annual call with required notice. Probability based on spread to yield curve and
period to call. Assumes Agency would call & reissue to reduce cost to same maturity.
Dallas Area Rapid Transit Change in Market Value Period Ended March 31,2002 Par Amount Dec 2001 Mar 2002 Change from Fund Security Type Coupon Maturity Call Date (000) Market Value Market
Value Prior Quarter Operating FHLB Coupon 4.125% 04124102 NA $4,000 $4,025,600.00 $4,005,200.00 -$20,400.00 Fncl Res FHLB Coupon 4.125% 04/24/02 NA $1,000 $1,006,400.00 $1,001,300.00
-$5,100.00 Operating FFCB Note 5.250% 05/01/02 NA $8,000 $8,084,000.00 $8,020,800.00 -$63,200.00 Insurance FHLMC Note 5.500% 05/15/02 NA $1,050 $1,063,230.00 $1,054,305.00 -$8,925.00
Debt Serv FNMA Discount 0.000% 05/30/02 NA $2,000 $1,985,250.00 $1,993,666.67 $8,416.67 FnclRes FNMA (Callable) 6.440% 08/14/02 NA $2,000 $2,053,800.00 . $2,031,400.00 -$22,400.00 Operating
Tenn Valley Note 6.000% 09/24/02 NA $8,000 $8,220,800.00 $8,146,400.00 􀁾􀀤􀀷􀀴􀀬􀀴􀀰􀀰􀀮􀀰􀀰 Fncl Res FHLB Note 4.640% 10/09/02 NA $2,000 $2,037,600.00 $2,025,200.00 -$12,400.00 Insurance
FHLB Coupon 6.250% 11/15/02 NA $1,000 $1,034,800.00 $1,023,900.00 -$10,900.00 Fncl Res FHLB (Callable) 2.455% 12127/02 03127/02 $1,000 $1,001,600.00 $999,400.00 -$2,200.00 Fncl Res FNMACoupon
5.000% 02114/03 NA $1,000 $1,029,100.00 $1,019,300.00 -$9,800.00 Fncl Res FHLB Coupon 4.500% 05/15/03 NA $1,000 $1,024,800.00 $1,015,700.00 -$9,100.00 FnclRes FFCB Note 5.720% 06103/03
NA $1,300 $1,345,240.00 $1,337,440.00 -$7,800.00 FnclRes FHLB (Callable) 4.575% 07/03/03 07/03/02 $1,000 $1,012,400.00 $1,006,300.00 -$6,100.00 Fncl Res FNMA Step up 4.000% 08/21/03
08/21102 $1,000 $1,011,800.00 $1,007,200.00 -$4,600.00 Operating SLMA 3.200% 10/24/03 04/25/02 $3,000 $2,989,200.00 $2,981,400.00 -$7,800.00 Fncl Res FNMA (Callable) 3.125% 11107/03
11/07/02 $1,000 $999,100.00 $993,300.00 -$5,800.00 Operating FHLB (Callable) 3.020% 12110/03 06/10/02 $5,000 $4,975,500.00 $4,948,500.00 -$27,000.00 Operating FHLB (Callable) 2.550%
12119/03 03/19/02 $5,000 $5,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $0.00 Fncl Res FNMA Callable 5.450% 02105/04 NA $1,500 $1,556,850.00 $1,541,250.00 -$15,600.00 FnclRes FNMA Callable 3.125% 04/08/04
10/08/02 $1,000 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $0.00 Operating FHLB (Callable) 3.000% 06/28/04 06/28/02 $5,000 $5,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $0.00 Fncl Res FHLMC Callable 4.000% 06/28/04
06/28/02 $1,050 $1,054,515.00 $1,045,695.00 -$8,820.00 Insurance FHLMC Callable 4.000% 06/28/04 06/28/02 $1,000 $1,004,300.00 $995,900.00 -$8,400.00 Operating FHLMC Step up 4.500% 07/09/04
07/09/02 $10,000 $10,139,000.00 $10,064,000.00 -$75,000.00 FnclRes FNMA (Callable) 6.250% 08/05/04 08/05/02 $1,000 $1,027,200.00 $1,015,300.00 -$11,900.00 Fncl Res FHLB (Callable) 5.170%
11/04/04 11104/02 $1,000 $1,023,600.00 $1,014,000.00 -$9,600.00 Fncl Res FHLB (Callable) 5.375% 11122104 OS/22102 $2,000 $2,025,600.00 $2,009,200.00 -$16,400.00 Insurance FHLB (Callable)
3.700% 12106/04 06/06102 $1,500 $1,485,900.00 $1,475,550.00 -$10,350.00 Operating FHLB (Callable) 3.250% 12124/04 06/24/02 $5,000 $5,001,500.00 $4,971,500.00 -$30,000.00 FnclRes FHLB
5.785% 02109/05 NA $1,000 $1,047,700.00 $1,036,100.00 -$11,600.00 Insurance FHLB 4.000% 05/13/05 05/13/03 $1,000 $990,700.00 $983,100.00 -$7,600.00 Fncl Res FHLB Note 5.590% 09/09/05
NA $1,000 $1,038,100.00 $1,026,600.00 -$11,500.00 Fncl Res FFCB Note 6.500% 11122105 NA $1,000 $1,068,500.00 $1,054,700.00 -$13,800.00 Fncl Res FHLB (Callable) 5.100% 12128/05 06/28/02
$1,000 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 Sub-total for Securities held as of 3/31102 % Change as result of market movement Holdings at 12131101 maturing during Q2, FY02 Holdings
at 12131101 called during Q2, FY02 Value of Money Market Mutual Funds Holdings at 3/31/02 purchased during Q2 FY02 $85,363,685.00 $84,843,606.67 $29,541,733.34 $14,237,660.00 $132,729,920.27
$156,644,912.53 $37,716,446.39 -$520,078.33 -0.61% -$29,541,733.34 -$14,237,660.00 $23,914,992.26 $37.716,446.39 TOTAL PORTFOLIO VALUE 517102 $261.872,998.61 $279,204,965.59 $17,331,966.98
A
Notice of Security Transaction Portfolio: * LIST: FUNDS * Transactions from: 01/01/02 to: 03/31/02 Page 1 Tran Date Sold Bought Mkt Sector Description Par Value Maturity Date Days to
Maturity BEY @Cost Call Date YTC @Cost Total Cost Port Name Broker Bond Id Tran Id 01/U/02 01/23/02 02/05/02 02/21/02 03/04/02 03/11/02 03/11/02 03/18/02 0:}j18/02 03/18/02 03/26/02
03/27/02 03/27/02 03/28/02 01/09/02 91/29/02 ., 03/12/02 03/21/02 03/22/02 03/28/02 01/10/02 01/15/02 oi/16/02 01/31/02 02/08/02 02/15/02 02/25/02 03/15/02 Bought US Agency Bought US
Agency Bought US Agency Bought US Agency Bought US Agency Bought Corporate Bought Corporate Bought Corporate Bought Corporate Bought US Agency Bought US Agency Bought US Agency Bought
US Agency Bought US Agency Call US Agency Call US Agency Call US Agency Call US Agency Call US Agency Call US Agency Matrd Corporate Matrd US Agency Matrd US Agency Matrd Corporate Matrd
Corporate Matrd US Agency Matrd US Agency Matrd US Agency I FHLMC FHLB Callable FHLB Callable FNMA Callable FHLMC GECC JPM/Chase GECC TransAmerica FHLB FHLB Callable FNMA Callable FNMA
Callable FHLB Calla.ble FHLB Step up FHLB FHLB Callable FHLB Callable FNMA Callable FNMA Callable GE CAP CORP. FNMA Coupon FNMA Colgate Palm TransAmerica FHLB FFCB Note FNMA Coupon 2,000,000
2,000,000 5,000,000 2,000,000 1,900,000 5,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 5,000,000 2,200,000 5,000.000 1,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000
5,000,000 5,000,000 1,000,000 5!000,000 5,000,000 3,000,000 1,500,000 4,000,000 05/31/02 07/23/04 11/05/04 09/22/04 OS/23/02 10/15/02 09/04/02 09/18/02 06/07/02 05/15/03 03/26/04 09/27/04
09/27/04 09/28/06 07/09/04 10/29/03. 12/12/03' 03/21/05 09/22/04 03/28/05 01/10/02 01/15/02 01/16/02 01/31/02 02/08/02 02/15/02 02/25/02 03/15/02 140 90 1,004 944 80 218 177 184 81 423
731 915 915 1,645 920 666 710 1,175 944 1,1829 14 15 30 38 45 55 73 1.725 4.250 3.800 5.089 1.822 􀀲􀀮􀀱􀁾􀀲 2.079 2.049 1. 935 3.000 3.731 4.030 4.030 5.100 4.750 3.250 3.500 5.510
5.089 5.089 5.500 2.283 4.170 5.049 2.307 2.538 5.031 5.751 4.180 04/23/02 08/05/02 03/22/02 09/26/02 09/27/02 09/27/02 06/28/02 01/09/02 01/29/02 03/12/02 03/21/02 03/22/02 03/28/02
1. 690 4.250 3.800 2.107 1. 790 2.090 2.030 2.000 1.900 3.000 4.110 4.030 4.030 5.100 4.. 750 3.250 3.500 5.510 2.107 5.500 2.240 4.170 5.049 2.260 2.480 5.031 5.751 4.180 1,986,855.56
2,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 2,005,240.00 1,892,442.22 4,936,719.45 2,970,057.50 2,969,333.33 2,987,175.00 3,050,730.00 2,992,500.00 2,500,000.00 2,500,000.00 2,000,000.00 5,000,000.00
2,200,000.00 5,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 2,005,240.00 1,000,000.00 4,973,866.6,? 5,083,100.00 1,013,000.00 4,967,041.67 4,954,188.89 3,054,330.00 1,487,812.50 4,041,240.00 DEBT SERVC FNCL
RES OPERATING OPERATING DEBT SERVC OPERATING OPERATING OPERATING OPERATING OPERATING OPERATING OPERATING OPERATING FNCL RES OPERATING OPERATING OPERATING FNCL RES OPERATING FNCL RES
OPERATING FED SEAF OPERATING OPERATING FED SEAF OPERATING FNCL RES I OPERATING BANCONE SALOMON/SMITH BANCONE SALOMON/SMITH BANC ONE WILLIAMS CAPITAL WILLIAMS CAPITAL WILLIAMS CAPITAL
BANK OF AMERICA SALOMON/SMITH BANK OF AMERICA SALOMON/SMITH BANC ONE PAINE WEBBER BANK OF AMERICA BANK OF AMERICA SALOMON/SMITH SALOMON/SMITH SALOMON/SMITH BANK OF AMERICA WILLIAMS CAPITAL
WILLIAMS CAPITAL WILLIAMS CAPITAL WILLIAMS CAPITAL SALOMON/SMITH BANK OF AMERICA SALOMON/SMITH SALOMON/SMITH 117 116 118 119 129 123 124 125 126 128 127 120 121 122 87 98 108 64 119
63 94 84 47 95 93 46 236 77 332 329 339 340 363 351 352 353 354 356 355 347 348 350 261 291 316 216340 215287 246 182 288 279 181 972 235
Notice of Security Transaction Portfolio: * LIST: FUNDS * Transactions from: 01/01/02 to: 03/31/02 Page 2 Tran Date Sold Bought Mkt Sector Description Par Value Maturity Date Days to
Maturity BEY @Cost Call Date YTC @Cost Total Cost Port Name Broker Bond Id Tran Id Grand Total: 02/20/02 28 items 85,600,000 04/18/03 422 3.453 05/16/02 3.309 85,570,872.79 Notes: Averages
weighted by Par Value Report Generated on 04/30/02 at 8:10 AM
<HELP> for explanation. NEXT HISHIRV DATE USED AS START DATE P233 Govt C 15 NEXT HISHIRV DATE USED AS END DATE HISTORICAL YIELD CURVE PAGE 1 [IF 2 DATE 􀁒􀁁􀁾􀁉􀁇􀁅 􀁾 IIDIIDiI MTY RANGE
mil !DlI ,..,.......,.....------;------,------.----------------------------;---,6 ... ..􀁶􀀮􀀧􀀺􀀢􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀭􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀺...... -:.' 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭:-.' 􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭
􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀧.-.' 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀮􀀧.-.' 􀁾􀀮􀀧.-.r. 5 􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀢􀀬􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀢􀀬 . .a' • 􀁾 . ./.; I • I If]" • , ': .J '. 3 .I '' , • I 􀁾 . 􀁾􀀮􀀯 ••• ; •....••'.....•..•••. 􀁾 •••.•..•.••.••••....
..••........•...••••..••.....•:. 2 .... : : --lIE-4/011'02 : : , . -8-1/02/02 . . • • • . . . • •• ". 􀁾 •• ,. . . . • • . . • . • . • • • • • • • • • • • • . . . • • . . • . . . . •
• . • . . . . . . . . . . • . . • . . . . • • • . ... 4 yIE LD • I • • I r.::::􀀺􀁉􀁾 􀁾:􀁾 􀁾:1-'-: : : : : : : : -: :1-:-: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
: : : : : : : : : : : : -: : : : :1-:: IllII. "" •••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • . • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • .00 I-L........L..._---'-
__---L .L..----L--' -.20 3 6 2 5 10 30 Australia 61 2 9777 8600 Brazil 5511 3048 4500 Europe 44 20 7330 7500 Germany 49 69 920410 Hong Kong 852 2977 6000 Japan 81 3 3201 8900 Singapore
65 212 1000 U.S. 1 212 318 2000 Copyright 2002 Bloomberg L.P. G659-575-1 07-May-02 8:30:34
2ND Quarter FY 2002 Defined Benefit Plan Summary Market Realized Unrealized Market Value Benefit Gain! Gainl Employer Employee Value 31-Dec-Ol Income Payments Transfers (loss) {!Qlli
Contributions Contributions Other 31-Mar-02 Equity Managers Large Cap: Washington Mutual $21,452,219 102,515 0 (40) 0 676,121 0 0 0 $22,230,815 Aeltus $11,418,389 (1,146) 0 0 (146,312)
(67,738) 0 0 0 $11,203,193 Small Cap: Atlantic Capital $6,720,793 (13,166) 0 0 49,167 176,352 0 0 (86) $6,933,060 Earnest Partners $10,683,934 (9,520) 0 0 219,829 452,659 0 0 2,666 $11,349,568
International: Morgan Stanley $18,405,026 (43,047) 0 (1,336,125) 422,769 153,153 0 0 0 $17,601,776 Fixed Income Managers Alliance Capital $20,360,898 (21,856) 0 (23) 3,621 (44,095) 0
0 0 $20,298,545 Deutsche $20,567,916 308,805 0 0 11,412 (316,555) 0 0 0 $20,571,578 Real Estate L&B Counsel $1,459,319 0 0 (94,328) 0 (180,790) 0 0 0 $1,184,201 Schroder $405,323 37
0 (14,531) 0 0 0 0 0 $390,829 Cash $922,548 (26,034) (1,909,760) 1,445,047 0 0 0 1,737 15,883 $449,421 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------_.._-----------..._------Total $112,396,365 296,588 (1,909,760) 0 560,486 849,107 0 1,737 18,463 $112,212,986
All Persons With Disabilities Invited To DART/ADA Meeting Effective October 25, 2003 Passengers with disabilities are cordially invited to the next ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act)
community meeting, Saturday, October 25, 10 a.m. -12 noon, at Bachman Recreation Center, 2750 Bachman Drive, in Dallas. Topics of interest to persons with disabilities will be discussed,
including bus and rail schedule changes, paratransit cancellation policy and operations update. There will be opportunity for public comments. Please plan to attend. Takedown Date: 10/27/03
Schedule Information DART.org or 214.979.1111 Schedule Information for the Deaf 214.979.0277 Customer Response Center 214.749.3333 Customer Response Center for the Deaf 214.749.3628
iIi . 􀁟􀁾 J Se invita atodas las personas con discapacidades a participar en la Junta DART/ADA Efectivo a partir del 25 de octubre, 2003 Se invita cordialmente a todos los pasajeros
con discapacidades a la pr6xima junta comunitaria de ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act -Ley Ley para Personas Discapacitadas), que se lIevarc3 a cabo el sabado 25 de octubre de 10
a.m. a 12 del mediodia, en el Centro Recreativo Bachman, 2750 Bachman Drive, en Dallas. Se discutiran temas de importancia para 􀁾􀁡􀁳 personas con discapacidades, Incluyendo los cambios
a los horarios de autobuses y trenes, politica de cancelaci6n en el servicio Paratransit y actualizaciones operativas. Los comentarios publicos seran bienvenidos. Le agradecemos su asistencia.
Fecha de eliminacion: 10/27/03
􀁅􀁦􀁦􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁥􀁊􀁵􀁬􀁹􀀲􀀶􀀬􀀲􀀨􀁊􀁏􀁾 •. 􀁾􀀧􀀬 ,;': .:. ,.: '.' --. ' -. "; -;,----',' , . . -."" --. 􀁰􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁴􀁓􀁥􀁲􀁖􀁩􀂧􀁥􀁳􀁣􀁧􀁲􀁤􀁩􀁡􀁬􀁲􀁹 .. 􀁩􀁮􀁶􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁳
. .􀁰􀁡􀁾􀁳􀁥􀁮􀁧􀁾􀁲􀁳 .with disabilities •t9'jts.·. next community ....·lT]eeting,.whico... willcqinci.de with .tne.·.•tqlhannlversaryo(the··.Americans With .• Disabilities.... Act.·
.·It Will be .. held Saturday, July 26,lOa.m.-.t2 noon, at the· Patty Granville .Arts ....·Center, . next to Downtown (jarland Rail Station, 330 North 5th Street. Theprografnwill feature
Victor H. Burke, DART executive vice president and cochairman of the Bus and. Paratransit Operations .Committee of the American Public .. Transportation Association. Refreshments will
be served. .There will also be an opportunity for public comments. A Spanish langHageinterpreter will be present. IfsignJ?nguageis required, .. please .oall 214.749.2543 one day in advance.
Takedown Date: 7/27/03 Proxima Junta DART/ADA Para celebrar el 130 Aniversario de ADA Los Servicios Paratransit invitan cordialmente a todos los pasajeros con discapacidades a su proxima
junta comunitaria, que coincidira con el 13° Aniversario de ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act -Ley para Personas Discapacitadas). Se lIevara a cabo el sabado 26 de julio de 10 a.m.
a 12 del mediodia, en el Centro Cultural Patty Granville, junto· a la estacion de tren Downtown Garland Station, 330 N. 5th St. Victor H. Burke, Vicepresidente Ejecutivo de DART y Presidente
Adjunto del Comite de Operaciones de los Servicios Paratransit y Autobuses de la Asociacion Americana de Transporte Publico, sera el orador invitado del evento. Se ofreceran refrigerfos.
􀁾 Asimismo, habra la oportunidad de hacer comentarios publicos y un interprete bilinglJe (ingles-espanol) estara 􀁤􀁩􀁳􀁰􀁯􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁢􀁬􀁥􀀮 Si requiere interpretacion con lenguaJe de
senas, por favor lIame al 214.749.2543 con un dfa de anticipacion.
,• t.iblR'􀁬􀁌􀁴􀁦􀁔􀁾 " Staff Reassignments, New Hours To Improve Service At DART Facilities To improve service, new operating hours and staff reassignments will take effect at DART
transit centers, rail stations and transfer locations on Monday, Nov. 10. NEW HOURS OF OPERATION 5a.m.-9 p.m. M-F, 10 a.m.-6 p.m. S-S * Addison Transit Center * Arapaho Center Station
* Downtown Garland Station * East Transfer Center * Hampton Station * Illinois Station * Ledbetter Station * North Irving Transit Center * Parker Road Station * South Garland Transit
Center * South Irving Station 5a.m.-10 p.m. M-F, 10 a.m.-7 p.m. S-S * West Transfer Center STAFF REASSIGNMENTS Station Monitors on duty 5-9 a.m., 3-7 p.m. M-F at: * Bernal/Singleton
Transfer Location * Cockrell Hill Transfer Location * Lake June Transit Center * Lake Ray Hubbard Transit Center * North Carrollton Transit Center * Red Bird Transit Center * Union Station
* West Plano Transit Center (With the exception of Union Station, these facilities will close after 7 7 p.m. on weeknights and all day on weekends. Where available, restrooms will not
be open between 9a.m. and 3p.m. and after closing.) Takedown Date: 11/21/03 Schedule Information DART.org or 214.979.1111 Schedule Information for the Deaf 214.979.0277 Customer Response
Center 214.749.3333 Customer Response Center for the Deaf 214.749.3628 DART Reorganizacion de Asistentes, Horario Nuevo Para Mejorar EI Servicio En Las Facilidades de DART Para mejorar
el servicio, el nuevo horario juntamente con la reorganizaci6n de asistentes tomara efecto en los centros de transito de DART, estaciones del tren y locales de trasbordo el Lunes, 10
de Noviembre. NUEVO HORARIO DE OPERACION 5a.m.-9 p.m. entre semana, 10 a.m.-6 p.m. los fines de semana * Addison Transit Center * Arapaho Center Station * Downtown Garland Station *
East Transfer Center * Hampton Station * Illinois Station * Ledbetter Station * North Irving Transit Center * Parker Road Station * South Garland Transit Center * South Irving Station
5 a.m.-10 p.m. entre semana, 10 a.m. -7 p.m. los fines de semana * West Transfer Center REORGANIZACION DE ASISTENTES Turno de Atendientes 5·9 a.m., 3-7 p.m. Lunes a Viernes en: * Bernal/Singleton
Transfer Location * Cockrell Hill Transfer Location * Lake June Transit Center * Lake Ray Hubbard Transit Center * North Carrollton Transit Center * Red Bird Transit Center * Union Station
* West Plano Transit Center (Con excepci6n de la Union Station, estas facilidades se cerraran a las 7 p.m. entre semana y todo el dia los fines de semana y donde disponible, los banos
no se abriran entre las 9a.m. y 3p.m. despues que cierren.) Fecha Para Quitarse: 11/21/03
􀀧􀂫􀁉􀁾􀁉􀀧􀁉􀁾􀁅􀁾􀁉􀂷􀁾􀀮􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁌􀁃􀁩􀁅􀁾􀁉􀀯􀁾􀁊􀁩fc«A 􀁾􀁟􀀮 ""...;.' <:'.1.... ' '.'./􀀢􀁾􀀧􀀢 lO-, __.:. 􀀼􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀁾􀀻􀀢􀀯􀀢􀀬􀀬 ..\1 ... 􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀴 =.'1. '. 􀁜􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀮􀀱􀀮􀂷
..'.... --"<," /,_ 1"_.',. j . ,." .1. \ .. -'.:-", _.. . ' \, , Public Meetings To Focus On Regional Transit Outlook In Year 2030 What will public transportation be like in the year
2030? You are invited to join DART staff in a discussion of mobility issues, transit alternatives and the evaluation process for the DART 2030 Transit System Plan during a series of
open house/public meetings this April. The schedule is as follows: Tuesday, April 6, 6:30 p.m. West Dallas Multipurpose Center -Lobby 2828 Fish Trap Road, Dallas (Mapsco 43-R) Thursday,
April 8, 6:30 p.m. Oak Cliff Chamberof Commerce 600 S. Zang Blvd., Dallas (Mapsco 54-H) Wednesday, April 14, 6:00 p.m. Irving City Hall (1st Floor Council Chambers) 825 W. Irving Blvd.,
Irving (Mapsco 31B-X) Thursday, April 15, 11:30 a.m. DART Headquarters -Board Room 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas (Mapsco 45-L) Monday, April 19, 6:30 p:m. City of Garland Council Chambers
200 N. Fifth St., Garland (Mapsco 19-V) Thursday, April 29, 6:30 p.m. Addison Conference Center 15650 Addison Road, Addison (Mapsco 4-U) For additional information, please contact DART
Community Affairs at 214.749.2543. DART
Juntas publicas sabre el panorama del transito regional para el ana 2030 (,Como sera el transporte publico en el ano 2030? Usted esta invitado a unirse al personal de DART en una discusion
sobre temas de movilidad, alternativas de transito y el proceso de evaluacion para el Plan de Sistema de Transito DART 2030, en el curso de una serie de juntas publicas y abiertas que
se lIevaran a cabo durante el mes de abril. EI programa es el siguiente: Martes 6 de abril a las 6:30 p.m. West Dallas Multipurpose Center -Lobby 2828 Fish Trap Road, Dallas (Mapsco
43-R) Jueves 8 de abril a las 6:30 p.m. Oak Cliff Chamber of Commerce 600 S. Zang Blvd., Dallas (Mapsco 54-H) Miercoles 14 de abril a las 6:00 p.m. Irving City Hall (1st Floor Council
Chambers) 825 W. Irving Blvd., Irving (Mapsco 31B-X) Jueves 15 de abril a las 11 :30 a.m. Oficinas Corporativas DART -Board Room 1401 Pacific Ave., Dallas (Mapsco 45-L) Lunes 19 de abril
a las 6:30 p.m. City of Garland Council Chambers 200 N. Fifth St., Garland (Mapsco 19-V) Jucves 29 de abril a las 6:30 p.m. Addison Conference Center 15650 Addison Road, Addison (Mapsco
4-U) Si desea comuniquese Comunitarios 214.749.2543. mas informacion, por favor con la Oficina de Asuntos (DART Community Affairs) al
Juntas para dar a conocer el Servicio DART On-Call en E. Plano, Farmers Branch y North Dallas Efectiva a partir de septiembre, 2003 DART On-Call, nuestro popular servicio de camionetas
de puerta a puerta, esta expandiendo su cobertura hasta tu vecindario, y DART quiere que 10 conozcas. Las siguientes juntas comunitarias han side ! programadas para ayudarte a aprender
a reservar un viaje, planear tu recorrido diario, y para contestar cualquier otra pregunta que tengas sobre el nuevo servicio que iniciara el lunes 6 de octubre en East Plano, Farmers
Branch y North Dallas. Martes, 23 de septiembre, 6:30 p.m. Plano City Hall (Bldg. Inspections Training Room) 1520 Avenue K, Plano, TX 75074 (MAPSCO 659-S) Area servida anteriormente
por las Rutas de Autobus 570, 575 Y761 Miercoles, 24 de septiembre, 6:30 p.m. Farmers Branch City Hall (Council Chambers) 13000 William Dodson, Farmers Branch, TX 75381 (MAPSC012-V)
Area servida anteriormente por las Rutas de Autobus 321 y 322 Jueves, 25 de septiembre, 6:00 p.m. Hillcrest High School (Library) 9924 Hillcrest Road, Dallas, TX 75230 (MAPSCO 25-M)
Area servida anteriormente por las Rutas de Autobus 503 &567 Para obtener mas informacion, por favor comunicate con el Departamento de Asuntos Comunitarios de DART aI214.749.2721. Fecha
de eliminacion: 9/26/03
... ------Presenled By:------DART Ollidal Tianspartllfian P.rovider "'PallaS Sidekicks 􀁾Sidekicks Sizzle Friday Sept 19 • 5pm -10pm Rain Day 9/20 Worthington St. (McKinney Ave. to Woodside
st.) 􀁁􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁲 Parties 10PM 'til 2AM 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾 Steel·Drume D. 􀀮􀁊􀁊􀁊􀁴􀁾 l0J:'m Avanti. Manhattan Bar It Grill 'f¥rtiee> to 2am ;Sohnny Orleans • Uptown Bar It Grill See Back of
Card For Site Map and Participating Merchants Free AdmISSIon! Everyone's InVIted!
m! s . 􀁾 T 21. . A 2J GE 􀀮.•.@•􀁾. ,' 􀀢􀀮􀁾 􀁬􀁾 QJJA.UT'l'mows· 􀁾􀁗 ··_P·UPQTOSWTN DART PROPERTIES 􀁄􀁬􀁬􀁫􀁩􀁯􀁬􀁔􀁦􀁡􀁾􀁲􀀱􀀰􀀢􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁐􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁦􀁬􀁤􀁴􀁲 Avanti 30hnny Orleans
Manhattan Bar II Grill Uptown Bar II Grill PRESENTED By: After 􀁃􀀻􀁐􀁾􀁲􀁲􀀣􀁥􀁾 10pm to 2am \JPTOWN 􀁎􀀡􀀧􀀦􀁈􀀮􀁾􀁏􀁏􀁦􀀾 􀁃􀂣􀁌􀁊􀁾􀁔􀁬􀁏􀁎 Cmoo ;SCil'l Us 01'1 􀁳􀁥􀁰􀁴􀁾􀁍􀁢􀁬􀁜􀁬􀁲
:I. 􀁾􀁴􀁨 5pm 􀁾 Wpm Hard Rock Cafe Entertainment, Food, Drinks and Lots 􀁏􀁾 Fun Manhattan Bar & Lounge Pizza, Mixed Drinks, Beer & Wine Avanli After Party 10PM -2 AM Johnny Orlean's
Cajun Style Gumbo, Etouffee, Frozen Trophy Fitness Club Strong Man Contest, Red Bull Hurricanes & Beer Dallas Symphony Free CD's, Win Symphony Tickets Pulled Pig Sandwiches, Hot Dogs
Krimson & Klover Jewelry, Clothes, and Shoes and merchandise Any Day But Valentines Custom Made Necklaces, Bracelets, Tacos, Flautas, Nachos, Margaritas Earrings Texas Toothpicks, Wings,
French Dip, Beer Cooistufffinder Free Chi Machine Massages, INDO Fun Games, Merchandise & Free Free Stuff Board Demo Sandwiches, Snacks, Soft Drinks McKinney Ave. Transit Free Passes,
Merchandise, Barber Ice Cream, Cups, Cones & Sundaes Authority (MATA) Shop Quartet Great Tasting Nutritional Drinks Race For The Cure Susan G. Kamen Foundation Contests, Games & Free
Stuff Uptown Run Sign up for the biggest race in Uptown Pueblo Arriba Restaurant Uptown Bar & Grill PD Johnsons Roly Poly Marble Slab Creamery Smoothie Factory State Street Spi rits
" '., '·········.·1· . ... .' I 􀁾􀀼􀀻 . < @@,.a····.··.········.·0·· '.=<<%>. GA􀁾 .. @, E . @)' 􀁾􀁉
Online Or Bv Phone Talking With DART Now Easier Than Ever Effective Fall 2003 You can now access valuable DART schedule and trip-planning information either online or by phone 24 hours
a day, seven days a week. Go to the DART Trip Planner at DART.org and plan your trip by following the easy steps. Do you have a question, concern or commendation? E-mail us at Custinfo@DART.org.
Schedules are also available through our automated IVR (Interactive Voice Response) system by calling 214.979.1111. Please be prepared to provide your route number, departure or arrival
location and time of travel. Customer Service Representatives are available to plan your trip or answer general information questions 6 a.m. -8 I p.m. Monday through Friday and 8 a.m.
-5 p.m. weekends and holidays. If you have a concern, commendation or recommendation, Representatives are available 7 a.m. -8 p.m. weekdays and ·8 a.m. -5 p.m. Saturdays. This service
is offered in both English and Spanish. Takedown Date: 12/31/03 DART
En linea a par fe/Mono Hablar can DART es ahara mas facil que nunca Vigente a partir del otono de 2003 Ahara puedes tener acceso a la valiosa informaci6n ,de horarios y planeaci6n de
viajes DART, tanto en linea como por telMono, los'siete dias de la semana. Entra a la pagina de planeaci6n de viajes "DART Trip Planner" en el sitio Internet DART.org y organiza tu viaje
siguiendo unos pasos faciles. GTienes alguna pregunta, duda 0 comentario? Envianos un mensaje de correo electr6nico a Custinfo@DART.org. Los horarios tambien estan disponibles en nuestro
sistema automatico de respuesta de voz interactiva IVR (Interactive Voice Response) si llamas al 214.979.1111. Debes estar preparado para dar tu numero de ruta, sitio de salida 0 Ilegada,
yhora de viaje. Nuestros representantes de servicio al cliente estan disponibles para organizar tu viaje 0 para responder preguntas generales de 6 a.m. a 8 p.m. de lunes a viernes y
de a a.m. a 5 p.m. en los fines de semana y dras festivos. Si tienes alguna duda, comentario 0 recomendaci6n, nuestros representantes estan disponibles de 7 a.m. aap.m. en dras laborables
yde aa.m. a 5 p.m., los sabados. La informaci6n se entrega tanto en ingles como en espano\. Fecha de retiro: 12/31/03
Thanks for rolling with our changes. Since taking over Suburban Express bus routes previously operated by a private contractor, we've been hard at work to give you the trip you deserve.
We're hiring new operators to get you where you need to go on time, every time. We're bringing in 80 new buses this spring -complete with the reclining seats, wide aisles and reading
lights you expect of a premium service. We're also upgrading the maintenance of our buses to improve their reliability, and monitoring the quality of your service every day. DART Representatives
are coming to these locations on the following days and times to answer your questions and hear your comments. Monday, Nov. 24 Lake Ray Hubbard Transit Center 4:00-6:00 p.m. Tuesday,
Nov. 25 Carrollton Transit Center 4:00-6:00 p.m. Monday, Dec. 1 Addison Transit Center 6:30-8:30 a.m. Tuesday, Dec. 2 Glenn Heights Transit Center 6:30-8:30 a.m. 􀁖􀁖􀁥􀁤􀁮􀁥􀁳􀁤􀁡􀁾
Dec. 3 North Irving Transit Center 6:30-8:30 a.m. Thursday, Dec. 4 VVest Plano Transit Center 4:00-6:00 p.m. Friday, Dec. 5 Red Bird Transit Center 4:00-6:00 p.m. For more information,
call 214.979.1111 or visit DART.org. Para mas informacion en espanal, /lame al 214.979.1111 a visite al DART.org. DART
III presented bY 􀁩􀁴􀀾􀁰􀁜􀁡􀁜􀁾 NMIOHAI.. S€.RIl;S 5PONSOllS: 􀁾 􀁾􀁯􀁦􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀱􀁯􀁬􀁷􀀬􀀬􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧 􀁾 􀁾 􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀧 􀁾 "VA 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮 silk 􀁾 if4 Mw)JOlonce 􀁀􀀺􀀡􀁩􀁾􀁙􀀻􀁾
"MlO"''''''''"ONO'''''' 􀁥􀀢􀁾􀀮􀀧 'RANeIE "'R'''" 5MI1" The Susan G.Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. KomeR Dallas Race for tbe cure® saturday, october 18, 2003 frolrt U,",p1 to finisb
DART .org We'll Toke You There. for trip-planning assistance or the neW edition of the popular oAR1 destination deals guide, visit DART.org or caH OAR1 customer \nformation at 214.919.1111.
qet ned\S' qet 􀁴􀁾􀁥 􀁾􀁴􀀧􀁎􀀬 􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁴 qU\Ge. {\ne 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁜􀀮 @1tJ\E.'t'l1S 􀁾􀀬􀁣􀁏􀀧􀀨􀁬􀁬􀁜 liQ,\!,I't'lJ>"J>" I<,;'i'tl0,1'0', 􀁾􀀼􀀻􀀮 Visit www.equityapartments.com online,
Keyword: RACE to print your free coupon and select your favorite Equity community. speda\ thanks to Equity Residentia\ and smoothie King for sponsoring DART Day Passes for registered
Komen Dallas Race for the cure® participants, '0'I " 'lisit ......,,,,,"'aftrnentS Yo ::: 􀁾 􀁥􀁾􀁕􀁜 .. , ...r 􀁾􀀯􀁬􀀭 l\.c.\: 'ffIJO'.j \Z.e'j\J\10fO·. \\.,... 􀁾􀀺􀀩􀁾􀀿􀀺 {..􀁟􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀬􀀬􀁟􀀬
􀀬􀁾􀀼􀀯􀁩 -rhe back of each oay pass is redeemable for free apartment rent at any of Equity Residential's 35 oallas/fortWorth communities, and $1.00 off any smoothie at area smoothie
King locations.
.., 􀀮􀁾􀀩􀀻,􀁷􀀡􀀧􀀡􀀧􀀡􀀧 􀀬􀁾 I:::;; -l-, ;:;; 􀁉􀁾 'EE ..􀁉􀁾 􀁾 ace ® Schedule · 7:45 a.m. 1 mile Fun Run/Walk 8 a.m. Komen Dallas Race for the Cur 8:15 a.m. Family Co-Ed 5K Run/Walk
9:30 a.m. 21 st Anniversary Celebratioat the Main Stage
OART;org (ustomer Information/Route (;. Schedule Information 􀁉􀁾􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁭􀁡􀁣􀁩􀁯􀁮 aC1ientes/lnf9rmacion de R4tas yHorarIos 214.919.1111 We'ff Take Yav There. (ustomer 􀁒􀀮􀁥􀁓􀁐􀀹􀁾􀁳􀁾􀀨􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁲
􀀨􀁲􀁾􀁱􀁵􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁳􀀬 commendatipns, concerns) (entro deR.espuestaal 􀁃􀀱􀁩􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁾 (peticiones, elogios, inquietudes) 214.749.3333 Lost &fpund I Objetos utraviados 214.749.3810 DART
police I Policia deTransito 214:.928·6300 Paratransit 􀁓􀁥􀁲􀁶􀁩􀁣􀁥􀁾􀁦􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁴􀁨􀁥 mObility impaired 􀁐􀁡􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁩􀁴 􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁡􀁐􀁾􀁲􀁳􀁰􀁮􀁡􀁳 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁬􀁮􀁣􀁾􀁰􀁾􀁣􀁩􀁤􀁡􀁤 de
Movimiento 214.515.n12 􀁑􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁓􀁮􀁡􀁲􀁥􀀯􀀨􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁵􀁴􀁥􀁲 Services 􀀨􀁣􀁡􀁲􀁰􀁯􀁯􀁬􀁬􀁶􀁾􀁮􀁰􀁰􀁯􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁭􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀩 S.ervicios deTransporte (ompartido/(plectivo (informacion
de carpool/vanpool) 214.141.RlDt 􀁄􀁁􀁑􀁔􀁍􀁦􀀡􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁾􀁴􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁾􀀮􀁾 OWe Ofi.cinas Administrativas de DART 214.749.DART DART 􀀨􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁾􀁡􀁣􀁴􀁳 Info Helpline Linea de Informacion
para (ontratos de DART 214.749,2560 DART Stores I Tiendas de DART Station .. .214.749.3282 . 214.749.3800 haci? cambios al servicio rarios y las rutas de autobus de DART cambiaran r
del 6 de octubre. Obten los detalles en nuestro Cambios al Servido de Tren yAutobus, disponible autobuses ytrenes de DART, estaciones y centros bordo, y en las Oficinas Generales de
DART en Akard Station. Tambien puedes visitar DART.org 0 Ilamar al 214.979.1111. [as 19 Y20 de septiembre, el hist6rico Camp ie Boulevard en Fort Worth se banara con las notas estival
Jazz By The Boulevard. Poncho Sanchez el e la Conga se presentara la noche del viernes. ien habra artesanias, obras de arte yalta cocina. te puede Ilevar, aborda el TRE (Trinity Railway
s) en Union Station en Dallas y viaja hasta Fort ITC Station y ahi aborda el autobus con servicio y gratuito hasta el Will Rogers Coliseum. Visita .org 0 I!ama aI214.979.1111 para consultar
rarios. hay ningun lugar como Y.O. Ranch Steakhouse en est End, para comer un jugoso, suave y delicioso te de res. Este legendario lugar combina un siglo autentica cocina a las brazas
y la la nueva magia culiIa. EI YO. es uno de los muchos excelentes lugares comer cerca de West End Station. S610 bajate del y deja que los aromas te guien hasta Y.O. en Ross ue y Market
Street. Muestra tu pase de DART y un 10% de descuento. los 􀁓􀁨􀁵􀁴􀁴􀁬􀁾􀁳 􀁤􀁾 DART hada 􀁾􀁡􀁩􀁲 yAhorra Zde dmuento en la entrada a State Fair ofTexas al los Shuttles de DART de
la Feria Estatal que operan ydomingos del 27 de septiembre al 19 de octubre. [ DART Rail hacia Cityplace Station y sal por la puerta este. Por s610 $2 por viaje redondo, los autobuses
te Ilevan volando, hacia y desde el parque de diversiones, cada 10 minutos de 9:30 a 11:30 p.m. Visita DART.org o llama aI214.979.1111 para obtener mas detalles. DART Rolls Out Service
(hanges DART bus routes and schedules are changing on October 6. Get all the details in our Bus £, Rail Ser Change brochure, available on DART buses and trains, at stations and transit
centers, and at DAR Headquarters at Akard Station. Also, visit DART. or call DART Customer Information at at 214.979.1 for details. Savor the lO. legend liet$Z off admission to the State
Fair ofTexas when you ride DART's State Fair Shuttles, operating Saturdays and Sundays, September 27 -October 19. Just ride DART Rail to Cityplace Station and exit through the east door.
For $2 roundtrip, State Fair Shuttle buses whisk you direct to and from the fairgrounds every 10 minutes from 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. Visit DART.org or call 214.979.1111 for more details.
Texans love athick, juicy steak, and no place like the Y.O. Ranch Steakhouse in the West End. Desc from the legendary Y.O. Ranch, the steakhouse ble century of authentic campfire cooking
with new cuJ magic. The Y.O. is one of many great eateries near [) West End Station. Just get off the train and follow y nose to the Y.O. at Ross Avenue and Market Street. your DART
pass for 10% off the price of your meal. J@!z it Up in 􀁾􀁀􀁲􀁴 Worth Fort Worth's historic Camp Bowie Boulevard flows with music September 19-20 during Jazz By The Boulevard. Conga
king Poncho Sanchez headlines Friday night, with other great acts playing big ban to modern jazz. There's also arts, crafts and great cuisine. Let DART take you there: Ride the TRE (Trio
Railway Express) from Dallas' Union Station to the Fort Worth ITC Station and catch afree shuttle bus Will Rogers Coliseum near the event. Visit DART.or or call Customer Information
at 214.979.1111 for schedules. Ridf DART 􀁓􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁾 􀁾􀁡􀁩􀁲 ShuttlfS and 􀁓􀁡􀁶􀁾 'I .-:. -
DART .org for details. breathe easier.
8 p.m. Wednesday through Saturday and 2 p.m. Sunday in the Bob I Theatre. Information: 214,768.2787 or meadows.smu.edu. Hockin Stiltion, then Route 21 Through Oct. IS The TlTAS Music
& Dance Series brings an exciting array of programs to SMU's McFarlin Auditorium this fall. Some highlights include: Sept. 19 -"Reflections of the Future" Sept. Z3 -"Philip Glass: Koyaanisqatsi:
Live" Oct. 18 -Ravi & Anoushka Shankar Information: 214,528.5576 or TITAS.org. l-loddngbird Station, then ill Through Oct. 31 The Out to Lunch Concert Series brings great to popular
outdoor venues in the heart of the city. Bring a sack luncl enjoy the following line-up: Oct. 3 Astrogin -West End Oct.1O Top -Dallas Museum of Art Plaza, Ross at Harwood Oct. 11 The
Limeliters -Pegasus Plaza Oct. Z4 Darrell Yancey & True CovenantThanks-Giving Square, Pacific at Ervay and Bryan Oct. 31 John Price -West End Information: 214.744.4819 Akard [, West
􀁾􀁮􀁤 Stations Sept. 20 Mexico 2000 Ballet Folklorico perform at the Granville Arts Center, 5'h and Austin Streets ir downtown Garland. This program features numerOl styles of traditional
Mexican dance and music, with new works including "Tabasco," "Fiesta en Jalisco,' "Calabaceado" and "Salon Mexico," Show time is 4:30 p,m., and til are $9 for adults, and $7 for seniors
and children under 10. Informa 972.205.2780. llowiltownliarlancl Station Oct. I Wynton Marsalis brings his virtuoso trumpet playing to I the Morton H, Meyerson Symphony Center, 2301
Flora Street, for aconcert with the Dallas Symphony Orchestra, Don't miss this rare"J\\ opportunity to hear the first jazz musician ever to win aPulitzer 11 Prize play pieces by Ellington,
Coltrane and Mingus. Information: I: 214,692.0203 or dallassymphony.com. Pearl Station Oct. 11 The Richardson Symphony opens its classical season with aconcert featuring three of Beethoven's
greatest works: "Overture to Prometheus," "Symphony l\Jo. 3, Eroica" and "Pianc Concerto No.4." The concert begins at 8 p.m. in the Eisemann Center's Hill Performance Hall, 2351 Performance
Drive in Richardson. Tickets are $10-$1 Information: 972.744.4650 or richardsonsymphony.org. Oct. 12 "A Sousa Spectacular" is the Richardson Community Bani salute to the March King.
Hear all your favorites in this concert at the Eisemann Center's Hill Performance Hall 2351 Performance Drive in Richardson. Tickets to the L concert are $6 for adults and $4 for children
and senic Information: 972.744,4650 or richardsoncommunity band.org. liaiatVIl Park Station Oct. 25 "A Romantic Tour de Force" with Alessio Bax and the Plano Symphony Orchestra features
the 2000 Leeds Competition winner Oct 17-19 "Little Shop of Horrors:' the lively musical tale of a giant carnivorous plant, is produced by the RCT Repertory Company in the Hill Performance
Hall at the Eisemann Center, at 2351 Performance Drive in Richardson, Show times and ticket prices will be announced soon. Information: 972.690.5029 or rctheatre.com, O:ialatyn fiarii
StctiOi] Oct. 22-Nov. 16 "The Glass Menagerie:' the classic play by Tennessee Williams, Williams, comes to the Dallas Theater Center's Kalita Humphreys Theatre, 3636 Turtle Creek Boulevard,
Information: 214,522.8499 or dtcinfo.org. Pearl Station to 􀁾􀁡􀁳􀁴 Transfer tenter, then Route 36 Oct. 2-12 "Our Country's Good," by Timberlake Wertenbaker, tells the story of the first
convict colony in Australia and the redemptive effect of theatre on their lives, The award-winning play is on stage at the Bob Hope Theatre at SMU. Show times are 8 p.m. Thursday through
Saturday, and 2 p,m. Sunday, Information: 214.768.2787 or meadows.smu.edu. Hodlinghird Station, then Route 21 Saturday 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., and Sunday 11 :30 a,m, to 5:30 p.m. Tickets
are $7,50 for adults, $4 for children. Information: 214.428.5555 or scienceplace.org, Union Station, Houte 611 Nov.19-Z3 The Fall Dance Concert of SMU's Meadows School of Art features
George Balanchine's graceful homage to Mozart, "Divertimento No. 15," and a tango-inspired piece by Larry White, assistant professor. Performances are Through Oct. 12 "Hedwig and the
Angry Inch" has been called "a ferocious rock and roll musical for the millennium," which makes it aperfect season opener for Dallas' innovative Kitchen Dog Theater, 3120 McKinney Avenue,
Performances are at 8 p,m. Wednesday through Saturday. Information: 214,953.1055 or kitchendogtheater.org. M-line Streetcar, Routes 21 [, 39 Joey Steakley as Hedwig Photography: Nicole
Nelson Sept. 30-0ct. 19 "Mamma Mia:' the Broadway smash hit, comes to the Music Hall at Fair Park for athree-week engagement. Through the storytelling magic of the songs of ABBA, a funny,
poignant tale of family and friendship on a mythical Greek island unfolds. Information: 214.691.7200 or dallassummermusicals.org. (itvplace Station, then State fair Shuttle (weekends
only); Union Station, then Route 611 Oct. 3-Nov. 15 "Fangs for the Memories" is the latest caper starring private detective Dick Dirk Spatula, who leads the audience on a POCKET SANDWICH
T.􀁈􀁅􀁁􀁔􀁒􀁅􀁾 rendezvous with the supernatural in 1ltil'fooifIIHe(l'vtd<Vt/la,-rioaFa&u-TKkWu-'I!@jJ mystenous New Orleans. Catch the fun at the Pocket Sandwich Theatre, 5400 East
Mockingbird, Information: 214.821.1860 or pocketsandwich.com. Moddngbird Station Oct. 9-26 "Lost in Yonkers:' one of Neil Simon's trio of autobiographical plays, is presented by the
Garland Civic Theatre at the Granville Arts Center, 5'h and Austin Streets in downtown Garland. Tickets are $15-$22. Information: 972.205,2790 or gariandcivictheatre.org. Downtown Garland
Station Quilt Mania Through Nov. 16 The Irving Arts Center presents three exciting exhibitions this fall: "Karl Umlauf Retrospective," through September 21. "Lay of the Land: Mosiacs
by Sonia King," through September 28. "Martha Simkins Rediscovered:' through November 16. Karl Umlauf Labyrinth XV Located at 3333 I\J. MacArthur Boulevard, the 1991, charcoal on Rives
8FK and wood, 56" x 48" x 4" Irving Arts Center's galleries and sculpture garden are open Monday through Friday 9 a,m, to 5 p.m., Thursday 9 a,m, to 8 p.m., Saturday 10 a.m. to 5 p,m.
and Sunday 1-5 p,m. Information: 972.252,7558 or ci.irving.tx.usiArts. Tllf to South Irving Station, then Route 303lweekdays onlvl Through Dec. 14 "Jacques Callot: The Miseries of War"
is an extraordinary exhibit depicting the artist's moving and poignant insight into the tragedies of war, showing in the European Galleries at the Dallas Museum of Art, 1717 N. Harwood.
Hours are 11 a,m, to 5 p.m. Tuesday through Sunday and 11 a.m. to 9 p,m, Thursday. Admission: $4-$6 and free on Thursday after 5 p.m. Information: 214.922.1200 or dm-art,org. St. Pau!
Station, Routes 8[, 39 Through Dec. 31 Quilt Mania is taking over the Metroplex as an unprecedented 11 museums collaborate for an exhibit about the history and art of quilting, Participating
venues are: The African American Museum, Dallas Museum of Art, Historic Mesquite Inc., Irving Arts Center, The McKinney Avenue Contemporary, Old City Park, The Science Place, The Sixth
Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza, South Dallas Cultural Center, ThankS-Giving Square and The Trammell and Margaret Crow Collection of Asian Art. Information: 214.979.6476 or quiltmania.org.
Use DART's Trip Planner at llART.orq for wnnectiofll to most venues Oct. 19 The Nasher Sculpture Center celebrates its grand opening in the Dallas Arts District, bringing into full public
view the world's most important private collection of modern sculpture 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀬 -from Paul Gauguin and Auguste Rodin to Richard Serra
and Joel Shapiro. Information: 214.242.5100 or nashersculpturecenter.org. 5(, Houtesil £, 39 Nov. 15-22 "Mystical Arts of Tibet" at the Trammell & Margaret Crow Collection of Asian Art,
2010 Flora, shows how Drepung Loseling Monks use ancient artforms to create asand mandala. Collection hours are Tuesday through Sunday 10 a.m, to 5 p.m., and Thursday until 9 p.m. Information:
214.979.6430 or crowcollection.com. St. Paul Station, Houtes 3£, 39 Nov. 22-30 Magic: Weird and Wacky Science -Family Days answers puzzling questions such as how does a rabbit get pulled
out of ahat, and how does a lady get cut in half and not get hurt? The answers can be found at The Science Place in Fair Park,1318 Second Avenue, Hours are Tuesday through Friday 9:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m" Oct. I-Nov. 9 Dallas Blooms Autumn: A Harvest of Cultures shows off the rich colors of fall and celebrates the rich diversity of cultures and traditions that make Dallas
an international city, at the Dallas Arboretum and Botanical Gardens, 8525 Garland Road. Open daily from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Admission is $6 for adults, $3 for children 3-12. Information:
214.515.6500 or dallasarboretum.org. 1'10ddngbird Sti:tiol1, then Rou'(e 519 Oct. 22-26 Deep Ellum Film and New Music Festival is one ofTexas' premier independent film festivals, featuring
local, regional and international works. Presented at venues around Elm Street, the festival is a great opportunity to check out Deep Ellum's eclectic scene. Information: 214.752.6759
or def2.org. union StiitiOlJ, thpnlloute 60 Sept. 19-21 Community Credit Union Plano Balloon Festival fills the North Texas skies with dazzling colors from more than 100 hot air balloons.
Oak Point Park, 2800 E. Spring Creek Parkway, is the launch site for this exciting festival. Information: 972.867.7566 or planoballoonfest.org. Parker Road Station, then DtlRI Shuttie
Sept. ZO Kidney Walk at the Dallas Zoo combines the annual fundraising walk with exercise, family entertainment, prizes and a free day at the zoo. Come take a walk on the wild side at
the Dallas Zoo, 650 South R.L. Thornton Freeway. Information: 214.351.2393 or nkft.org. Dallas loa Station Sept. 26-0ct.19 The State Fair of Texas, the biggest and best in the U.S.,
kicks off its 2003 run with the theme "Taste & See." And there's plenty to taste and see, from worldfamous corny dogs and funnel cakes to amazing demonstrations, creative arts competitions,
spectacular shows, games and prizes, and the giant Midway. It's all at historic Fair Park, 1300 Robert B. Cullum Blvd. Admission is $12 for adults, $8 for children and seniors 60 60
and over, and free for children 2 and under. Information: 214.565.9931 or bigtex.com. (itypiace Station, then State fair ShuUle and Sunday onlv); !lnion StiltiolJ, then Houte 60 Nov.
6-3 Chi Omega Christmas Market is an annual favorite for those who want a head start on holiday gift shopping and decorating. The market features more than 130 merchants and lots of
special events at the Dallas Convention Center, 650 South Griffin Street. Information: 214.890.8131. (DllVention tenter Station Oct. 9-12 Vistas Film Festival features 35 films from
around the world by or about Hispanics. Screenings are at the Angelika Film Center at Mockingbird Station, 5321 East Mockingbird Lane, and the Dallas Museum of Art, 1717 N. Harwood.
Information: 214.826.9560 or vistasfilmfestival.org. fnm §t Paul &39 for D2iH!is r·"hjs?urn 􀁯􀁾􀀺 tht .-:., -
􀁐􀁬􀁥􀁡􀁳􀁾 􀁮􀁯􀁴􀁾􀀺 􀁔􀁨􀁾 final 􀁤􀁾􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁾 􀁴􀁩􀁭􀁾􀁳 for mtbound TR( 􀁓􀁭􀁩􀁣􀁾 to Dallas will 􀁣􀁨􀁡􀁮􀁧􀁾 􀁾􀁦􀁦􀁾􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁶􀁾 Oct. 6. 􀁐􀁉􀁾􀁡􀁳􀁥 call ZI4.919.1II1 or
visit DART.org to 􀁧􀁾􀁴 return trip 􀁴􀁩􀁭􀁾􀀵􀀮 Sept. 21-Jan.7 "The Paintings of Joan Mitchell" at the Modern Art Musuem of Fort Worth surveys this artist's entire career as avisionary
among the second generation of Abstract Expressionist artists in New York. Her emotionally expressive paintings are among the most radiant works in postwar American art. The Modern,
at 3200 Darnell Street, Joan Mitchell is open Tuesday from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m., Bonjour Julie. 1977 d d d Oil on canvas, triptych We nes ayan Thursday 10 a.m. to 112 x 230" overall 5p.m.,
Friday noon to 8 p.m., Saturday 10 Lennon. Weinberg Gallery; New York a.m. to 5p.m., and Sunday noon to 5p.m. Information: 866.824.5566 or themodern.org. 􀁔􀁾􀁈􀁄 IT( Station, then i'!OlJir1
Oct.12-Jiln.18 "Painted Prayers: Medieval and Renaissance Books of Hours from the Morgan library" features 58 of the finest manuscript and printed books of hours (prayer books) from
the collections of the Pierpont Morgan Library. These treasures can be seen at the Kimbell Art Museum, 3333 Camp Bowie Boulevard. Museum hours are 10 a.m. to 5 p,m. Tuesday through Thursday,
12-8 p.m, Saturday and 12-5 p,m. Sunday. Information: 817332.8451 or kimbellart.org. 􀁔􀁾􀁛 to iT( Stotion, then Route 1 Nov. I The White Rock Half Marathon is only half the distance
but no less fun and exciting than the annual White Rock Marathon. The starting 􀁻􀁾􀀮􀁛􀁩􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀼􀀺 .£k gun for the 13.1-mile run sounds at 8:30 a.m: on 􀁾􀀿􀀬􀀿􀁊􀀢􀀻􀁻􀀬􀁾􀁊􀀿􀁴􀀿􀀧
the east shore of White Rock Lake. The finish Ime, 􀁾􀁾􀁾 and a post-race party, will be in downtown Dallas. 􀀮􀁯􀁾•.􀀬􀀮􀁾 It's an exciting day whether you're running the race or just
going to see the start and finish. Information: whiterockhalf.org. Villiite Roel, Station for starti Pearl Station lor finish Nov.7-9 The Texas Stampede brings heart-pounding championship
rodeo and some of the biggest names IIl i in country music to American Airlines Center, 2500 Victory Avenue. Information: 214.520.8874 or 􀁔􀁲􀀮􀀺􀁓􀁾􀁯􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀬􀁾􀀡􀀺􀁜􀀻􀁜􀀡􀁬􀀮􀁦􀀻􀁈􀁅􀀮
texasstampede.org. West {no Statioll, then American Airlines (entQI' Shuttle Nov. IS-Jan. II "Edward Weston: life Work" at the Amon Carter Museum presents a90-image survey of the pioneering
photographer's 50·year career. The museum is located at 3501 Camp Bowie Boulevard, and is open Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday 10 a.m.-5 p.m., Thursday 10 a.m. to 8 p.m., and
Sunday 12-5 p.m. Information: 817.738.1933 or cartermuseum.org. TR£ to IT(Sliltion, then ROllte1 Oct. 18 Race for the Cure, a national event that started in Dallas, will be held at NorthPark
Center with a full morning of events beginning at 6:30 a.m. with registration and continuing with a 1-mile Family Fun RunlWalk, a 5K Family Co-Ed Fun RunlWalk and the main event: the
5K timed race for women. There also will be a special 21" Anniversary Celebration. Information: 214.750.7223 or komen-dallas.org. Park lane Station, then NorthPark Shuttle Sept. Z1 The
State Fair SK and Big Tex Mile is agreat ""􀁾'\ ,\ 7'i',..., way to kick off the fair for serious athletes and families alike. "'" The Big Tex Mile begins at 8:30 a.m. on Exposition
Avenue, ";, """ with the 5K at 8:45. Registered participants get free tickets __ to the fair. Registration is $10-$25 online, at local Run j'J1,[,iFi',o'c':m"¥c On! stores, or at the
race. Information and registration: """".. Ill" "" """""" bigtex,com. then §t;lte fair Shuttle @omcasto Oct. I-Apr. I The Dallas Mavericks are coming off their best season ever and are
aiming to go all the way to the championship series and the title in 2003-2004. Catch all the exciting home game action at American Airlines Center, 2500 Victory Avenue. Information:
214.747.6287 or nba.com/mavericks. West l;nd Station, then ilmerinn AidinQ5 (enter §hultk Through Dec. 31 The Dallas Stars are a perennial NHL playoff contender and are always among
the early season favorites to skate home with the coveted Stanley Cup. The 2003-2004 season will find them heating up the home ice at American Airlines Center, 2500 Victory Avenue. For
home schedule information: 214.467.8277 or dallasstars.com. West fnd Station, then American Airlines 􀀨􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁾􀁲 Shuttle (lct. II Texas vs. Oklahoma is one of college football's longest-running
rivalries and a Dallas tradition, with all the pageantry and action unfolding at the Cotton Bowl Stadium at Fair Park. What's more, it takes place during the State Fair of Texas, so
there's plenty to see and do before and after the game as well. Information: 214-670-8400. Citv!,lace Station, thell Stale I:ilil' Shuttle performing Tchaikovsky's "Piano Concerto No.1."
The concert is at 8:15 p.m. in the Eisemann Center's Hill Performance Hall, 2351 Performance Drive in Richardson. Tickets are $9-$60. Information: 972.473.7262 or planosymphony.org.
lialatvn Pa,kStatiol1 OCt. 31-Nov. 8 "The Queen of Spades" is a tale of love set during a fierce Russian winter in the days of Catherine the Great. This lavish production by the Dallas
Opera is staged at the Music Hall at Fair Park, 909 Parry Avenue. Information: 214.443.1000 or dallasopera.org. Union Station, then Route 60 Nov. 21-23 The Moscow Ballet's "Great Russian
Nutcracker" brings the music and magic of this holiday favorite to the stage of the Majestic Theatre, 1925 Elm Street. Performances are Friday at 7:30 p.m., Saturday at 2 p.m. and 7:30
p.m., and Sunday at 1 p.m, and 5 p.m. Information: 800.320.1733 or nutcracker.com. St. Paul Station Sept. 20-Nov 29 The SMU Mustangs bring exciting NCAA football to the Dallas area every
fall. Support the home team by attending a game at Gerald J. Ford Stadium on the SMU campus. Information: 214.768.4263 or smumustangs.com. 􀁾􀀱􀁯􀁤􀁤􀁮􀁱􀁢􀁩􀁲􀁤 StatioA, then 􀁒􀁯􀁵􀁴􀁾
21 Ort.2s "A Romantic Tour de Force" with Alessio Bax and the Plano Symphony Orchestra features the 2000 Leeds Competition winner 8 p.m. Wednesday through Saturday and 2 p.m. Sunday
in the Bob Hope Hope Theatre. Information: 214768,2787 or meadows.smu.edu. Hoddngbird Stiltion, then !loute 21 Through Oct. 18 The TITAS Music & Dance Series brings an exciting array
of programs to SMU's McFarlin Auditorium this fall. Some highlights include: Sept. 19 -"Reflections of the Future" Sept. Z3 -"Philip Glass: Koyaanisqatsi: live" Oct. 18 -Ravi &Anoushka
Shankar Information: 214.528.5576 or TITAS.org. Mockingbird Stiltion, then Route 2: Through Oct. 31 The Out to lunch Concert Series brings great music to popular outdoor venues in the
heart of the city. Bring a sack lunch and enjoy the following line-up: Oct. 3 Astrogin -West End Oct.1O Top -Dallas Museum of Art Plaza, Ross at Harwood Oct. 17 The limeliters -Pegasus
Plaza Oct. Z4 Darrell Yancey &True Covenant Thanks-Giving Square, Pacific at Ervay and Bryan Oct. 31 John Price -West End Information: 214.744.4819 Akard &􀁗􀁾􀁳􀁴 bd Stations Sept.
20 Mexico 2000 Ballet Folklorico performs atthe Granville Arts Center, 5'h and Austin Streets in downtown Garland. This This program features numerous styles of traditional Mexican dance
and music, with new works including "Tabasco," U Fiesta en Jalisco," "Calabaceado" and "Salon Mexico." Show time is 4:30 p.m., and tickets are $9 for adults, and $7 for seniors and children
under 1O. Information: 972.205.2780. Downtown Garland Station OCt. I Wynton Marsalis brings his virtuoso trumpet playing to the Morton H. Meyerson Symphony Center, 2301 Flora Street,
for aconcert with the Dallas Symphony Orchestra. Don't miss this rare opportunity to hear the first jazz musician ever to win a Pulitzer Prize play pieces by Ellington, Coltrane and
Mingus. Inforrnation: 214,692.0203 or dallassymphony.com. Pearl StRtion Oct. II The Richardson Symphony opens its classical season with aconcert featuring three of Beethoven's greatest
works: "Overture to Prometheus," "Symphony l\Jo. 3, Eroica" and "Piano Concerto No.4." The concert begins at 8 p.m. in the Eisemann Center's Hill Performance Hall, 2351 Performance Drive
in Richardson. ·nckets are $10-$73. Information: 972.744.4650 or richardsonsymphony.org. {ia!atvn Pari, StaHr:: OCt. 12 "A Sousa Spectacular" is the Richardson Community Band's salute
to the March King, Hear all your favorites in this fun concert at the Eisemann Center's Hill Performance Hall, 2351 Performance Drive in Richardson. Tickets to the 2 p,m. concert are
$6 for adults and $4 for children and seniors. Information: 972. 744.4650 or richardsoncommunity band.org. {iillatvn Pad; Station Oct. 12 "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" called" aferocious
rock and roll musicai illennium," which makes it a perfect season ,r Dallas' innovative Kitchen Dog Theater, 3120 I Avenue. Performances are at 8 p.m. Wednesday ;aturday. Information:
214.953.1055 or 19theater.org. 􀁾􀁬􀀭􀁕􀁮􀁥 Streetcar, Routes Zl &39 Joey Steakley as Hedwig Photography. Nicole Nelson -Oct. 19 "Mamma Mia." the Broadway smash hit, comes to _, the
Music Hall at Fair Park for a three-week engagement. '" Through the storytelling magic of the songs of ABBA, a jl funny, poignant tale of family and friendship on a mythical Greek island
unfolds. Information: 214.691.7200 or dallassummermusicals.org. (itvplace Station, then State fair Shuttle IVJeeitends only); Union Station, then Route 50 2 "Our Country's Good," by
Timberlake Wertenbaker, tells the story of the first convict colony in Australia and the redemptive effect of theatre on their lives. The award-winning play is on stage at the Bob Hope
Theatre at SMU. Show times are 8 p.m. Thursday through Saturday, and 2 p.m. Sunday. Information: 214.768.2787 or meadows.smu.edu. l,loddngbird Station, then Route 21 lov.ls "Fangs for
the Memories" is the latest caper starring etective Dick Dirk Spatula, who leads the audience on a rendezvous with the supernatural in 􀁾􀁾􀁴􀁪􀁊􀀱􀁾􀁡􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀬􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁾 mysterious New
Orleans.. Ca.tch the fun at the Pocket SandWich rheatre, st Mockingbird. Information: 214.821.1860 or Indwich.com. 􀁾􀁬􀁯􀁣􀁫􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁢􀁩􀁲􀁤 Station no a.m. to 5:'.30 p.m., and Sunday
11 :30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. , $7.50 for adults, $4 for children. Information: 214.428.5555 􀁾􀁰􀁬􀁡􀁣􀁥􀀮􀁯􀁲􀁧􀀮 Union Station, !loute 50 6 "lost in Yonkers," one of Neil Simon's trio
of Iraphical plays, is presented by the Garland Civic Theatre 'anville Arts Center, 5'h and Austin Streets in downtown Tickets are $15-$22. Information: 972.205.2790 or ivictheatre.org.
lJowntown liadand Station ·19 "little Shop of Horrors." the lively musical tale 1t carnivorous plant, is produced by the RCT Repertory Iy in the Hill Performance Hall at the Eisemann
,t 2351 Performance Drive in Richardson. Show ld ticket prices will be announced soon. Information: ).5029 or rctheatre.com. lialatvn Parl'i Station -Nov. 16 "The Glass Menagerie," the
classic play by Tennessee 􀁾Williams, comes to the Dallas Theater Center's Kalita • Humphreys Theatre, 3636 Turtle Creek Boulevard. Information: • 214.522.8499 or dtcinfo.org. Pearl
Station to {ast Transfer (enter, 36 H3 The Fall Dance Concert of SMU's Meadows of Art features George Balanchine's graceful homage art, "Divertimento No. 15," and a tango-inspired y
Larry White, assistant professor. Performances are 􀀮􀀭􀁾
Tuesday, July 8, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. * DARTBoard Room 1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 Please visit wwwDART.org or call DART Customer Service at 214-979-1111 for complete details
on all bus route modifications. "'Spanish interpreter available. ublic Hearin Wednesday, July 2, 2003 • 12:00 p.m. '" DART Headquarters Board Room 1401 Pacific Ave, Dallas, Tx 75202
MAPSCO 45-K • (All Routes) Favor de visitar wwwDART.org 0 lIamar al Departamento de Servicio al Cliente de DARTal 214-979-1111 para obtener mas detalles sobre las modificaciones a las
rutas de autobUs. "'/nterprete en espanol disponible. Wednesday, July 2, 2003 • 7:30 p.m. Carrollton City Hall (Council Chambers) 1945 Jackson Road, Carrollton, Tx 75006 MAPSCO 3-N •
(Routes 331, 344) Wednesday, July 2, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. Rowlett City Hall (Council Chambers) 4000 Main Street, Rowlett, Tx 75088 MAPSCO 30-0 • (Route 412) Audiencia publica Monday, June
30, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. Farmers Branch City Hall (Council Chambers) 13000 William Dodson, Farmers Branch, Tx Tx 75381 MAPSCO 12-V· (Routes 321,322,400) Thursday, June 26,2003 • 1:00 p.m.
Addison Conference Center 15650 Addison Road, Addison, Tx 75001 MAPSC04-U (Routes 321,322,342,344,400) Monday, June 23, 2003 • 7:00 p.m. '" Granville Arts Center (Meeting Room) 300 N.
Fifth St., Garland, Tx 75040 MAPSCO 19-Z • (Routes 377,412,550,560) Thursday, June 26, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. Campbell Centre (Tenant Conference Room) 8350 N. Central Expwy, Dallas, Tx 75206
MAPSCO 26-X • (Routes 503, 527, 539, 567, 569) Monday, June 30, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. '" West Dallas Multi-Purpose Center 2828 Fishtrap, Dallas, Tx 75212 MAPSCO 43-R • (Routes 59, 549, 404,
453) Tuesday, June 24, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. Willie B. Johnson Recreation Center 12225 WillowdellDrive, Dallas Tx 75243 MAPSCO 16-T • (Routes 505, 585) Tuesday, July 1, 2003 • 6:00 p.m. Thurgood Marshall Recreation Center 5150 Mark Trail, Dallas, Tx 75232 MAPSCO 63-M • (Routes453,
161,518) Tuesday, June 24, 2003 • 7:00 p.m. '" Irving City Hall (Council Chambers) 825 W Irving Blvd., Irving, Tx 75060 MAPSC031B-W/X (Routes 103, 202, 303, 400, 404) Monday, June 23,
2003 • 5:30 p.m. '" Jaycee/Zaragoza Recreation Center 3114 Clymer; Dallas, Tx 75212 MAPSCO 42-L • (Routes 59, 549, 404, 453) ,",as scheduled the following Community 19S prior to the
Public Hearing to receive Jer feedback on the proposed bus service cations: (While meetings are targeted to :: route changes, attendees may speak to the proposed changes) as comunitarias
previasa la audiencia publica ha programado las siguientes Juntas nitarias previas a la Audiencia PUblica para comentarios de los usuarios sobre las :caciones propuestas para los servicios
de Jses: (Aunque las juntas estan dirigidas a :JS de rutas especfficos, visitantes pueden hablar untar sobre cualquieras de las propuestas :caciones a los servicios de autobuses) -Public
Hearin Communi Meetin 5 ' fay, June 17,2003 • 7:30 p.m. '" City Hall (Building Inspections -Tiaining Room) 4ve K, Plano, Tx 75074 CO 659-S • (Routes 353,570,575, 761) ay, June 10,2003
• 6:30 p.m. '" 􀁾 Public Library :verglade Road, Dallas, Tx 75227 CO 48-J • (Routes29, 161,475) fay, June 16,2003 • 7:00 p.m. 􀁾 of Columbus/Dallas Council #799 (Lower HalO )Shoreview
Rd, Dallas, Tx 75238 CO 27-V • (Route 569) fay, June 17,2003 • 6:30 p.m. nt Grove Christian Church Pleasant Drive, Dallas, Tx 75217 CO 58-M • (Routes 29, 161) lesday, June 11,2003 •
6:30 p.m. 'nd Hills Public Library )impson Stuart Road, Dallas, Tx 75241 CO 66-Q • (Route 155) :day, June 19,2003 • 12:00 p.m. ;sance Hotel (Prelude Room) . Lookout Dr., Richardson,
Tx 75082 CO 7-R • (Routes 703, 705) .':'. . ..,.
Juntas comunitarias previas a fa audiencia publica re-Public Hearin Communi Meetin 5 Tuesday, July 8, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. * DARTBoard Room 1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 ublic
Hearin Wednesday, July 2, 2003 • 12:00 p.m. '" DARTHeadquarters Board Room 1401 Pacific Ave, Dallas, Tx 75202 MAPSCO 45-K • (All Routes) Please visit www.DART.org or call DART Customer
Service at 214-979-1111 for complete details on all bus route modifications. "'Spanish interpreter available. Wednesday, July 2, 2003 • 7:30 p.m. Carrollton City Hall (Council Chambers)
1945 Jackson Road, Carrollton, Tx 75006 MAPSCO 3-N • (Routes 331,344) Audiencia publica Wednesday, July 2, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. Rowlett City Hall (Council Chambers) 4000 Main Street Rowlett
Tx 75088 MAPSCO 30-0 • (Route 412) Tuesday, June 24, 2003 • 7:00 p.m. '" Irving City Hall (Council Chambers) 825 W Irving Blvd., Irving, Tx 75060 MAPSCO 31B-W/X (Routes 103, 202, 303,
400, 404) Monday, June 23, 2003 • 7:00 p.m. * Granville Arts Center (Meeting Room) 300 N. Fifth St., Garland, Tx 75040 MAPSCO 19-Z • (Routes 377, 412, 550, 560) Monday, June 23, 2003
• 5:30 p.m. '" Jaycee/Zaragoza Recreation Center 3114 Clymer, Dallas, Tx 75212 MAPSCO 42-L • (Routes 59, 549, 404, 453) Thursday, June 26,2003 • 1:00 p.m. Addison Conference Center 15650
Addison Road, Addison, Tx 75001 MAPSC04-U (Routes 321,322,342,344,400) Thursday, June 26, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. Campbell Centre (Tenant Conference Room) 8350 N. Central Expwy, Dallas, Tx
75206 MAPSCO 26-X • (Routes 503,527, 539, 567, 569) Tuesday, June 24, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. Willie B. Johnson Recreation Center 12225 WJ1Iowdell Drive, Dallas Tx 75243 MAPSCO 16-T· (Routes
505, 585) DARTha programado las siguientes Juntas Comunitarias previas a la Audiencia PUblica para recibir comentarios de los usuarios sobre las modificaciones propuestas para los servicios
de autobuses: (Aunque las juntas estan dirigidas a cambios de rutas especfficos, visitantes pueden hablar y preguntar sobre cualquieras de las propuestas modificaciones a los servicios
de autobuses.) Tuesday, June 10, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. * Skyline Public Library 6006 Everglade Road, Dallas, Tx 75227 MAPSCO 48-J • (Routes 29, 161, 475) Wednesday, June 11, 2003 • 6:30 p.m.
Highland Hills Public Library 3624 Simpson Stuart Road, Dallas, Tx 75241 MAPSCO 66-Q • (Route 155) DARThas scheduled the following Community Meetings prior to the Public Hearing to receive
customer feedback on the proposed bus service modifications: (While meetings are targeted to specific route changes, attendees may speak to any of the proposed changes.) Monday, June
16,2003 • 7:00 p.m. Knights of Columbus/Dallas Council #799 (Lower HalO I 10110 Shoreview Ref, Dallas, Tx 75238 MAPSCO 27-V· (Route 569) --Tuesday, June 17, 2003 • 7:30 p.m. * Plano
City Hall (Building Inspections Training Room) 1520 Ave K, Plano, Tx 75074 MAPSCO 659-S • (Routes 353, 570, 575, 761) Tuesday, June 17, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. Pleasant Grove Christian Church
1324 Pleasant Drive, Dallas, Tx 75217 MAPSCO 58-M • (Routes 29, 161) Thursday, June 19,2003 • 12:00 p.m. Renaissance Hotel (Prelude Room) 900 E. Lookout Dr., Richardson, Tx 75082 MAPSCO
7-R • (Routes 703,705) Monday, June 30, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. Farmers Branch City Hall (Council Chambers) 13000 William Dodson, Farmers Branch, Tx 75381 MAPSCO 12-V· (Routes 321,322,400)
Monday, June 30, 2003 • 6:30 p.m. '" West Dallas Multi-Purpose Center 2828 Fishtrap, Dallas, Tx 75212 MAPSCO 43-R • (Routes 59, 549, 404, 453) Tuesday, July 1, 2003 • 6:00 p.m. Thurgood
Marshall Recreation Center 5150 Mark Trail, Dallas, Tx 75232 MAPSCO 63-M • (Routes 453, 161,518) Favor de visitar www.DART.org 0 lIamar al Departamento de Servicio al C1iente de DARTal
214-979-1111 para obtener mas detalles sobre las modificaciones a las rutas de autobUs. "'Interprete en espanol disponible. 􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀭 .•... 􀁾 ...-.. 􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀬 ....
,,-, -.'::,.
atice ofPublic Hearin .' , Aviso de Audiencia PUblica Aviso para personas con discapacidad audit visual: Si usted desea asistir a una audiencia pu! necesita interpretacion allenguaje
con senas, pc favor notifiquelo a DART con 24 horas de 􀁡􀁮􀁴􀁩􀁣􀁩􀁾 lIamando al numero TOD 214-749-3628 0 al Departamento de Asuntos Comunitarios de OAf 214-749-2543. Tambien habra
disponible, previc solicitud, una version de los materiales en sistema , Ruta 567 -Servicio al norte de Walnut Hill remplazado por DARTOn-Call. Ruta 569 -Separada en 2 rutas en Kingsley
Roa Ruta 570 -Servicio remplazado por DARTOn-C Ruta 575 -Servicio remplazado por DART On-C Ruta 585 -Eliminada. Servicio altemativo en Hamilton Park, remplazada por T.I. shuttle. Ruta
703 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por , rutas 360, 562 Y el servicio Employer Shuttle. Ruta 705 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por , rutas 360,371 Yel servicio Employer Shuttle. Ruta
712 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por numerosas rutas del centro. Ruta 761 -Servicio remplazado por DART On-C Ruta 823 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por ruta 569. Proceso para recibir
comentarios: EI Consejo Directivo de DARTinvita al publico a que compal sus comentarios la noche de la audiencia publica por escrito con antelacion. Aquellos que deseen hablar durante
la audiencia deberan contactar ei Departamento de Asuntos Comunitarios de OAf 214-749-2543 para registrarse. Los 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴􀁡􀁲􀁩􀁯􀁾 escrito que se hayan recibido antes de que se
lell la sesion, formaran parte del registro oficial de la audiencia. Estos comentarios deberan de ser presentados en persona durante la audiencia pu, Aquellos que envfen comentarios
por correa det incluir su nombre, direccion y numero telefonico comentarios por escrito deben de ser enviados a Para informacion adicional: Para informacion espano/, l/ameaI214-749-2721.
October2003 Bus Service 􀁍􀁯􀁤􀁩􀁦􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾 Public Hearing-7232 DARTCommunity Affairs P.O. Box 660163, Dallas, Texas 75266-01f Ruta 161 -Separada en 2 rutas en el centro de Dallas;
reduccion del numero de viajes en Glen Oaks, y la desviacion Pleasant Grove renumerada como 165. Ruta 202 -Servicio de fin de semana eliminado, incluyendo la extension 310 al aeropuerto
DFW. Ruta 303 -EI servicio al norte de North Irving Transit Center sera eliminado, sera reemplazado por 202 Valley Ranch. Ruta 321 -Servicio remplazado por DART On-Cally la modificacion
de la ruta 488. Ruta 322 -Servicio remplazado por DARTOn-Cally la modificacion de las rutas 31 y 331. Ruta 342 -Sera eliminada y remplazada por el servicio Employer Shuttle. Ruta 344
-Servicio reducido, exclusivamente para las horas de mas tratico. Ruta 353 -Eliminada. Trasporte compartido 0 Employer Shuttle disponible. Ruta 377 -Servicio dominical eliminado, frecuencia
reducida en horas de mas tratico. Ruta 400 -Reduccion del numero de viajes, la porcion Luna sera eliminada. Ruta 404 -Separada en 2 rutas en South Irving Station, reduccion del numero
de viajes entre South Irving y North Irving. Ruta 412 -Reducciondel numero de viajes. Ruta 453 -Separada en 2 rutas en Hampton Station, ruta modificada cerca de Medical Market Center.
Ruta 475-Servicio al norte de Bruton Road eliminado, ademas de todos los servicios dominicales. Ruta 503 -Servicio al norte de Lovers Lane eliminado, porcion remplazada por DARTOn-Call.
Ruta 505 -Servicio dominical eliminado. Ruta 518 -Eliminada. Servicio entre semana remplazado por la ruta 574 desde Westmoreland hasta Spur 408. Ruta 527 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado
por la ruta 569 y Mustang Express, Ruta 539 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por las rutas 8, 26, 31, 44, 51 Y503 en parte. Ruta 549 -Servicio al norte de la 1-30 eliminado, reduccion
de numero de viajes. Ruta 550 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por las rutas 410,372Y560 en partes. Ruta 560 -Servicio dominical eliminado. October 2003 Bus Service Modifications Public
Hearing-7232 DARTCommunityAffairs P.O. Box 660163, Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 214-749-2543 to register. Written comments received before the close of the public hearing will become part
of the official record. Comments may be submitted in person during the hearing as well. Those sending comments should include their name, address, and telephone number. Written comments
should be sent to: 􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 Notice for the hearing and visually impaired: Ifyou wish to attend this public hearing and need sign interpretation or special accommodations, please notify
DART24 hours in advance by calling the TTY number, 214-749-3628, or DARTCommunity Affairs at 214-749-2543. A Braille or taped version of the information will be made available upon request.
For additional information: Please contact DART Community Affairs at 214-749-2543. Las modificaciones propuestas para los servicios de autobuses se listan a continuacion (Numero de rota
y descripcion del cambio): Rutas 8, 31, 39, 49,63,444,466 -Cambios mfnimos en la frecuencia del servicio. Ruta 29 -Separada en 2 rutas en el centro de Dallas, la frecuencia de servicio
en Maple sera reducida de cada 15 a cada 20 minutos, las rutas de Pleasant Grove tendran el numero 37. Prairie Prairie Creek desviada a Holocomb y Pleasant al final de la linea. Ruta
59 -Separada en dos rutas en el centro de Dallas; el servicio al norte del centro tendra el numero 185. Ruta 103 -Eliminada. Ruta 155-Reduccion del numero de viajes. EI27 de mayo de
2003, el Consejo Directivo de DART autorizola realizacion de una audiencia para recibir comentarios publicos sobre las propuestas de modificaciones a los servicios de autobuses. Dichas
modificaciones son el resultado del analisis del presupuesto en curso. De ser aprobadas por el Consejo Directivo de DART, estas modificaciones seran implementadas el 6 de octubre de
2003. Process for receiving comments: The DARTBoard encourages public comments during the public hearing or in writing beforehand. Those desiring to speak should contact DART Community
Affairs at Route 453 -split into two routes at Hampton Station, frequency reduced, route modified near Medical Market Center; service from Hampton Station to Southwest Center Mall renumbered
to 556. Route 475-service service north ofHillburn Road eliminated, plus all Sunday service eliminated. Route 503 -service north of Lovers Lane eliminated, portion replaced by DART On-Call.
Route 505 -Sunday service eliminated. Route 518-eliminated, Route 574 to replace from Westmoreland Station to Spur 408 on weekdays. Route 527 -eliminated, Route 569 and Mustang Express
(Route 768) to replace. Route 539 -eliminated, routes 8, 26, 31, 44, 51 and 503 to replace in part. Route 549 -service north of1-30 eliminated, trips reduced. Route 550-eliminated, routes
410,372 and 560 to replace in part. Route 560 -Sunday service eliminated. Route 567 -service south of Walnut Hill replaced by DARTOn-Call. Route 569 -split into two routes at Kingsley
Road (north of Kingsley will become Route 534). Route 570 -eliminated, service replaced by DARTOn-Call. Route 575 -eliminated, service replaced by DART On-Cal/. Route 585 -eliminated
with alternate service provided in Hamilton Park area, T.I. shuttle to replace service north of LB) Central Station. Route 703 -eliminated, routes 360 and 562. An Employer Shuttle proposed.
Route 705 -eliminated, routes 360 and 371. An Employer Shuttle proposed. Route 712 -eliminated, service replaced with alternate downtown local routes. Route 761 -eliminated, service
replaced by DARTOn-Cali. Route 823 -eliminated, Route 569 to replace. The,proposed bus service modifications are as follows (Route and Description of Change): Routes 813fi 39, 49, 63,
444, 466 -minor service change i';'irlquency Route 29 -split into two routes in downtown Dallas, Maple trips reduced from every 15 to every 20 minutes, Pleasant Grove branches will be
renumbered Route 37. Prairie Creek branch re-routed to Holcomb and Pleasant at end of line. Route 59 -split into two routes in downtown Dallas; service north ofdowntown renumbered to
185. Route 103 -eliminated. Route 155-hours of morning and afternoon service reduced. Route 161 -split into two routes in downtown Dallas; Glen Oaks trips reduced, and Pleasant Grove
Branch renumbered to 165. Route 202 202 -weekend service eliminated, including 310 extension to DFWAirport. Route 303 -service north ofNorth Irving Transit Center eliminated, 202 Valley
Ranch to replace. 􀁾􀁒􀁯􀁵􀁴􀁥 321 -eliminated, service replaced by DART On-Call and modified Route 488. --""Route 322 -eliminated, service replaced by DARTOn-Call and modified routes
31, 331. 􀁾 Route 342 -eliminated, Employer Shuttle proposed. ,--"!1 Route 344 -reduced to rush hours only Route 353 -eliminated, Employer Shuttle proposed. Route 377-Sunday service
eliminated, peak frequency reduced (20 minutes to 30 minutes). 􀁾􀁒􀁯􀁵􀁴􀁥 400 -trips reduced between North Irving andAddison, service west of Luna Road on Belt Line will be eliminated.
Route 404 -split into two routes at South Irving Station, trips reduced between South Irving and North Irving (this portion will now be Route 507). Route 412 -trips reduced. On May 27,2003,
the DARTBoard of Directors authorized a call for a public hearing to receive public comments on proposed bus service modifications, The proposed bus service modifications are a result
of ongoing budget deliberations. If approved by the DART Board, these modifications would be implemented on October 6, 2003. ..􀁾􀀭
Comment Card Tarjeta de Comentarios Para informaci6n adicional: Para informaci6n en espano/, lIame aI214-749-2721. October2003 Bus Service Modifications Public Hearing-7232 DART CommunityAffairs
P.O. Box 660163, Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 Aviso para personas con discapacidad auditiva 0 visual: Si usted desea asistir a una audiencia publica y necesita interpretaci6n allenguaje
con senas, por favor notifiquelo a DARTcon 24 horas de anticipaci6n lIamando al numero TOD 214-749-3628 6 al Departamento de Asuntos Comunitarios de DARTal 214-749-2543. Tambien habra
disponible, previa solicitud, una versi6n de los materiales en sistema Braille. Ite 453 -split into two routes at Hampton ion, frequency reduced, route modified near iical Market Center;
service from Hampton ion to Southwest Center Mall renumbered to 556. Ite 475 -service north ofHillburn Road Jinated, plus all Sunday service eliminated. lte 503 -service north of Lovers
Lane eliminated, tion replaced by DART On-Call. Ite 505 -Sunday service eliminated. Ite 518-eliminated, Route 574 to replace from stmoreland Station to Spur 408 on weekdays. Ite 527
-eliminated, Route 569 and stang Express (Route 768) to replace. Ite 539 -eliminated, routes 8, 26, 31, 44, 51 f503 to replace in part. Ite 549 -service north of1-30 eliminated, trips
uced. Ite 550 -eliminated, routes 410, 372 and 560 to lace in part. IJte 560 -Sunday service eliminated. IJte 567 -service south of Walnut Hill replaced by RTOn-Call. IJte 569 -split
into two routes at Kingsley Road rth of Kingsley will become Route 534). IJte 570 -eliminated, service replaced by RTOn-Call. IJte 575 -eliminated, service replaced by RTOn-Call. ute
585 -eliminated with alternate service Ivided in Hamilton Park area, II. shuttle to replace vice north of LB) Central Station. ute 703 -eliminated, routes 360 and 562. Employer Shuttle
proposed. ute 705 -eliminated, routes 360 and 371. Employer Shuttle proposed. ute 712 -eliminated, service replaced with 􀁾􀁭􀁡􀁴􀁥 downtown local routes. ute 761 -eliminated, service
replaced by ,RT On-Call. ute 823 -eliminated, Route 569 to replace. )cess for receiving comments: The DARTBoard :ourages public comments during the public 3ring or in writing beforehand.
Those desiring to ?ak should contact DARTCommunityAffairs at 214-749-2543 to register. Written comments received before the close of the public hearing will become part of the official
record. Comments may be submitted in person during the hearing as well. Those sending comments should include their name, address, and telephone number. Written comments should be sent
to: October2003 Bus Service Modifications Public Hearing-7232 DART CommunityAffairs P.O. Box 660163, Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 Notice for the hearing and visually impaired: Ifyou wish
to attend this public hearing and need sign interpretation or special accommodations, please notify DART24 hours in advance by calling the TTY number, 214-749-3628, or DART Community
Affairs at 214-749-2543. A Braille or taped version of the information will be made available upon request. For additional information: Please contact DART CommunityAffairs at 214-749-2543.
􀀭􀁾􀀭 EI27 de mayo de 2003, el Consejo Directivo de DART autoriz6 la realizaci6n de una audiencia para recibir comentarios publicos sobre las propuestas de modificaciones a los servicios
de autobuses. Dichas mOOificaciones son el resultado del analisis del presupuesto en curso. De ser aprobadas por el Consejo Directivo de DART, estas modificaciones seran implementadas
el6 de octubre de 2003. Las modificaciones propuestas para los servicios de autobuses se Iistan a continuaci6n (Numero de ruta y descripci6n del cambio): Rutas 8, 31, 39, 49, 63, 444,
466 -Cambios minimos en la frecuencia del servicio. Ruta 29 -Separada en 2 rutas en el centro de Dallas, la frecuencia de servicio en Maple sera reducida de cada 15 a cada 20 minutos,
las rutas de Pleasant Grove tendran el numero 37. Prairie Creek desviada a Holocomb y Pleasant al final de la linea. Ruta 59 -Separada en dos rutas en el centro de Dallas; el servicio
al norte del centro centro tendra el numero 185. Ruta 103 -Eliminada. Ruta 155-Reducci6n del numero de viajes. Ruta 161 -Separada en 2 rutas en el centro de Dallas; reducci6n del numero
de viajes en Glen Oaks, y la desviaci6n Pleasant Grove renumerada como 165. Ruta 202 -Servicio de fin de semana eliminado, incluyendo la extensi6n 310 al aeropuerto DFW. Ruta 303 -EI
servicio al norte de North Irving Transit Center sera eliminado, sera reemplazado por 202 Valley Ranch. Ruta 321 -Servicio remplazado por DARTOn-Cally la modificaci6n de la ruta 488.
Ruta 322 -Servicio remplazado por DARTOn-Cally la modificaci6n de las rutas 31 y 331. Ruta 342 -Sera eliminada y remplazada por el servicio Employer Shuttle. Ruta 344 -Servicio reducido,
exclusivamente para las horas de mas tratico. Ruta 353 -Eliminada. Trasporte compartido 0 Employer Shuttle disponible. Ruta 377-Servicio dominical eliminado, frecuencia reducida en horas
de mas tratico. Ruta 400 -Reducci6n del numero de viajes, la porci6n Luna sera eliminada. Ruta 404 -Separada en 2 rutas en South Irving Station, reducci6n del numero de viajes entre
South Irving y North Irving. Ruta 412 -Reducci6n del numero de viajes. Ruta 453 -Separada en 2 rutas en Hampton Station, ruta modificada cerca de Medical Market Center. Ruta 475-Servicio
al norte de Bruton Road eliminado, ademas de tOOos los servicios dominicaies. Ruta 503 -Servicio al norte de Lovers Lane eliminado, porci6n remplazada por DART On-Call. Ruta 505 -Servicio
dominical eliminado. Ruta 518 -Eliminada. Servicio entre semana remplazado por la ruta 574 desde Westmoreland hasta Spur 408. Ruta 527 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por la ruta 569
y Mustang Express. Ruta 539 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por las rutas 8,26,31,44,51 Y503 en parte. Ruta 549 -Servicio al norte de la 1-30 eliminado, reducci6n de numero de viajes.
Ruta 550 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por las rutas 410,372Y560 en partes. Ruta 560 -Servicio dominical eliminado. Ruta 567 -Servicio al norte de Walnut Hill remplazado por DARTOn-Call.
Ruta 569 -Separada en 2 rutas en Kingsley Road. Ruta 570 -Servicio remplazado por DART On-Call. Ruta 575 -Servicio remplazado por DART On-Call. Ruta 585 -Eliminada. Servicio alternativo
en Hamilton Park, remplazada por II. shuttle. Ruta 703 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por las rutas 360, 562Yel servicio Employer Shuttle. Ruta 705 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por
las rutas 360, 371 Yel servicio Employer Shuttle. Ruta 712 -Eliminada. Servicio remplazado por numerosas rutas del centro. Ruta 761 -Servicio remplazado por DARTOn-Call. Ruta 823 -Eliminada.
Servicio remplazado por la ruta 569. Proceso para recibir comentarios: EI Consejo Directivo de DARTinvita al publico a que comparta sus comentarios la noche de la audiencia publica,
0 I por escrito con antelaci6n. Aquellos que deseen I hablar durante la audiencia deberan contactar el I Departamento de Asuntos Comunitarios de DARTal II 214-749-2543 para registrarse.
Los comentarios por 1 escrito que se hayan recibido antes de que se levante I la sesi6n, formaran parte del registro oficial de la I audiencia. Estos comentarios deberan de ser II presentados
en persona durante la audiencia publica. 1 Aquellos que envien comentarios por correo deberan I incluir su nombre, direcci6n y numero telef6nico. Los II comentarios por escrito deben
de ser enviados a: I11IIII1IIII1II 1,I111I ,I1 ,II October2003 Service Modifications Octubre 2003 Modificaciones al Servicio Name /Nombre: _ Address /Direcci6n: _ City /Ciudad: _ Zip
Code /Zona Postal: _ Telephone /Teleiono: ( ) _ E-mail/Correo Electr6nico: _ Comments /Comentarios: 142-034-03 5/2003 .',,:: . . 􀁾􀀮􀁾 -.:.-". --'
BUSINESS REPLY MAIL POSTAGE WILL BE PAID BY ADDRESSEE 􀁾Return completed survey in U.S. mail. FIRST-CLASS MAIL PERMIT NO.5379 DALLAS. TX NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IF MAILED IN THE UNITED
STATES " DART MARKETING RESEARCH-BIKE DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT PO BOX 660163 DALLAS TX 75266-9672 1111 II II 11111111111111111111111 II 11111111111111111 II '.", 'c :'-(. BUSINESS REPLY
MAIL 􀁾Devuelva 10 encuesta completada par correa. FIRST-CLASS MAIL PERMIT NO.5379 DALLAS. TX NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IF MAILED IN THE UNITED STATES 􀀮􀁾 ":􀁾􀀧\tI POSTAGE WILL BE PAID
BY ADDRESSEE DART MARKETING RESEARCH-BIKE DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT PO BOX 660163 DALLAS TX 75266-9672 1111 II II 11111111111111111111111 II 11111111111111111 II . , .. "
.-Comentarios adicionales _ 15. l Que Ie harfa considerar el utilizar los trenes y autobuses de DART junto con su bicicleta? D Si pudiera abordar el tren 0 autobus con mi bicicleta a
cualquier hora D Si DART tuviera "racks" porta bicicletas en los autobuses D Si mi empleador proporcionara areas con duchas D Otro _ 13. Si es asf, lque programa utiliza actualmente?
o Bicicletas en autobuses 0 Bicicletas en trenes D Otro _ 16. Si no, lporque? D No los uso 0 Los uso para viajar al trabajo D Los uso para recreaci6n D Otro _ 14. Si contest6 no, lPor
que? D No sabfa que podfa abordar los trenes yautobuses con mi bicicleta D Los horarios en los que DART permite abordar autobuses ytrenes con bicicletas no cubren mis necesidades D Otro
_ 12. l Conoce el programa de bicicletas a bordo de autobuses ytrenes de DART? o Sf 0 No 11. Si contest6 no, lPor que? o No estoy familiarizado con las rutas y horarios de DART· o No
hay servicio de autobus/tren a donde necesito ir o EI costo del transporte publico es muy alto o La parada de autobus 0 la estaci6n del tren estan muy lejos de casa o No me conviene
por el tipo de trabajo que tengo o No hay instalaciones para cambiar de ropa al final de mi viaje o La parada no esta 10 suficiente cerca de mi destino final o Otro _ 2. lPor que motivo
usa su bicicleta? o Social/Recreativo 0 Para ir a trabajar o Negocio personal 0 Escuela/Colegio o Compras o Otro 7. lActualmente utiliza el estacionamiento para bicicletas en las estaciones
de tren 0 en las terminales? o Sf D No 4. lQUe dfas utiliza su bicicleta? o Lunes -viernes D S610 domingo o S610 sabado D Sabado ydomingo o Otro _ 8. Si contest6 no, lPor que? o No sabfa
que existfan D No son faciles de usar o Estan muy lejos de las zonas de ascenso de trenes 0 autobuses o Otro _ 6. lSabfa usted que DART tiene estacionamiento para bicicletas en las estaciones
de tren yterminales? o Sf D No 5. lA que hora del dfa utiliza su bicicleta? ____ a.m. a p.m. 3. l Con que frecuencia usa su bicicleta? o Una vez por semana D 2 a 3 veces por semana D
4 a 7 veces por semana D S610 una vez al mes D Otro _ EI prop6sito de esta encuesta es conocer su interes por utilizar los servicios de DART con su bicicleta, ya sea en un paseo recreativo
0 como parte de su trayecto casa-trabajo. Los resultados Ie permitiran a DART considerar ciertos cambios en el programa actual sobre bicicletas y nos permitira prestarle un mejor servicio.
1. lEn que ciudad vive? [NCU[STA SOBR[ BICIClITAS Additional Comments 16. If not, why? D Not use them D Use them to ride to work D Use them for recreational purposes D Other _ 15. What
would cause you to consider using DART bus/rail in conjunction with your bike? D If I could bring my bike on board the bus/train at any time D If DART had bicycle racks on buses D If
my employer provided shower area D Other _ 14. If not, why? D Did not know Icould take my bike on board buses or rails D The schedules that DART allows bikes on buses/rails do not serve
my needs D Other _ 13. If so, which program do you currently use? o Bikes-on-buses 0 Bikes-on-rails o Other _ 12. Are you familiar with DART's bikes-on-buses/rails program? DYes 0 No
11. If not, why? o Not familiar with DART schedules/routes o No buslrail service where I need to go o Cost of public transportation too high o Bus stop or rail station too far from home
o Not convenient for the type of job I have o No facilities to change clothes at the end of my trip o Transit stop not close enough to my final destination o Other _ 6. Are you aware
that DART has bike racks at rail stations and transit centers? DYes 0 No 2. For what purpose do you use your bike? o Social/Recreation 0 Commute to work o Personal business 0 School/College
o Shopping o Other _ 7. Do you currently use bike racks at rail stations or transit centers? DYes 0 No 8. If not, why? D Not aware of them D Not user-friendly D Too far from bus or train
loading areas D Other _ 5. What time of the day do you ride your bike? ____a.m. to p.m. BIK£ SURV£Y 4. What days do you ride your bike? D Monday -Friday D Sunday only D Saturday only
0 Saturday and Sunday o Other _ 3. How often do you ride your bike? D Once per week D 2 to 3 times per week D 4 to 7 times per week D Only once per month D Other _ 1. What city do you
live in? The purpose of this survey is to gain knowledge of your overall interest in using DART in conjunction with your bicycle, either in a recreational setting or as part of your
home-to-work-commute. The results will enable DART to consider changes in the current bike & ride program and allow us to serve you better. ':.. ' 9. Are you aware that DART has bike
storage lockers at rail stations and transit centers? DYes D No 10. Do you use DART for part of your trip? DYes 0 No Thank you for taking the time to complete 􀁾 _ this survey. DART
values your comments! 􀁄􀁾􀁏􀁲􀁧 .--.-----;-.-.-'" ,--_.--.""':--, -"'";-;-;-;.--.-􀀭􀀬􀀭􀀻􀀭􀁾􀀢􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀻􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀻􀀮􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀻􀁟􀀻􀀭􀀺􀀺􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀬􀀷􀀢􀁲􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀮􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀮􀁾􀂷􀀬..􀀮.�
�􀂷􀁾􀀻􀀮􀁲 􀀭􀀢􀀬􀁯􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁯􀀻􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁯􀀭􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀻􀀭􀀭􀀻􀁾􀁟􀁟􀀺􀁟􀀮􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀭-􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 -9. lSabfa que DART cuenta con casilleros para guardar bicicletas en las estaciones de tren yterminales? o Sf D No 10. lUsted utiliza DART para ciertos tramos de su viaje?
o Sf D No Gracias por lIenar esta encuesta. DART toma en cuenta sus comentarios. , .'::'. 􀁾􀀮 􀀬􀀮􀁾......
Telephone Numbers I Numeros Telef6nicos DART Police/Policia de DART 214.928.6300 24 hours, daily/24 horas, diariamente Customer Information/Informacion al Cliente 214.979.1111 6a.m.'
8 p.m., Monday -Friday; 8a.m.. 5 p.m., Saturdays, Sundays & Holidays/6 a,m.. 8 p.m., Lunes a viernes; 8 a.m. -5p.m., Sabados, domingos ydias festivos Administrative Offices/Oficinas
Administrativas 214.749.3278 8p.m.· 5p,m" Monday· Friday Website/Sitio en Internet. , .. www.DARlorg 328-002-34 Due to the rail bombings in Spain, DART officials are stepping up patrols
of transit vehicles, stations and transit centers in cooperation with member city police departments and the u.s. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). DART 􀁏􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁣􀁩􀁾􀁬􀁳 Step
Up 􀁒􀁾􀁩􀁬􀀯􀁂􀁵􀁳 Security I; nosotros te IIevamos 214.919,1III weIll taKe you tnere 214,919.1111 Suspicious 􀁐􀁤􀀨􀁾􀁤􀁧􀁥􀁳􀀬 (ontdiners dna Devices Always take all personal items,
including trash, with you when leaving a train or bus. Most unattended packages are harmless, but if you you find a suspicious item or spilled substance, do not touch or move it. Notify
a uniformed DART employee, call DART Police at 214.928.6300 or dial 911. Use this checklist for reporting: • Are there unusual wires or batteries visible? • Are tanks, bottles or bags
visible, which may indicate that a chemical is a present? • Is a message attached to the article? • Is there asuspicious cloud, mist, gas, vapor or odor? • Is anything seeping from the
article? Is it oily? • Is the unattended article in an out-of-the-way place? • Was anyone observed abandoning the article and quickly leaving the scene? • Are people in the area showing
signs of sickness or distress?
Special measures incluae: • Periodic checks of DART Rail and TRE vehicles • Sweeps of rail vehicles at the end of the lines • Increased police presence at high-volume rail stations during
rush hours. • Special announcements to passengers to check around their seats prior to departing trains and to report any unattended or suspicious items • Constant communication between
police and bus/rail dispatchers regarding any suspicious persons or packages on DART vehicles or in passenger facilities. Safety &Security Begins With You When riding DART vehicles or
visiting passenger facilities, always take a few minutes to become more aware of your surroundings. In an emergency. always follow instructions of uniformed DART personnel. police and
fire officials. Reporting fmergencies or Inciaents On a DART Rail train: • Notify any uniformed DART employee present, or locate the emergency intercom on either end of the rail vehicle,
and use it to contact the train operator. You may also call DART Police at 214.928.6300 or dial 911. On a DART bus: • Notify your bus operator, call DART Police at 214.928.6300 or dial
911. At a DART Rail station or bus transfer center: • Notify any uniformed DART employee present, call DART Police at 214.928.6300 or dial 911. You may also go to the pay telephone and
dial *80 for assistance. Suspicious People Be aware of people who: • Appear lost • Loiter, stare or watch others • Pace or appear nervous or jumpy Report people who: • Act in a disorderly
manner, alarm or disturb others • Quickly exit an area after abandoning a package • Carry a weapon or suspected weapon NOTE: To assist us, take note of the person's movements and physical
appearance such as clothing, hair color, height, weight and gender.
, 􀀧􀁍􀁎􀀵􀁉􀁲􀁾􀁜􀁜 Let's count on each other for a safe ride sponsored by DART in association with the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) the Community Transportation
Association of America (CTAA) the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) 328-005-03 11/03 ..,.
.-:,
􀁾 C) 0-6' -I--' '---' \0j:-:::s OV'lCl"aV) -1-0 􀁴􀁾 .....S...,c.a\J II 􀁾􀁉 􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀽 􀁡􀁾 Q)l...... s Q)Q) I-􀁾 􀁾 i --'---' 􀁾 wV'l 􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁑 􀁾􀁾 wE c '"􀁾 FIt '" --􀁾 C3..s "-Q)
-I--' LU6 -w ...QQ) 􀁃􀀩􀁾 Q)'S' etc 􀁾􀁾 ::::::z:: 􀁾 :;. . 􀂣􀀹􀁌􀁏􀀭􀀹􀀹􀁾􀁓􀁬 Xl 'SVllva £9 L099 xog 'O"d 􀀱􀀱􀁓􀁎􀁾􀀱 􀁡􀁬􀁤􀁖􀁾 􀁖􀀳􀁾􀁖 SVllva 􀁾􀂣􀁵􀀭􀁓􀁾􀁉􀁖􀀺􀁬􀀺􀁬􀁖AlINnwwo:>
􀁬􀁾􀁶􀁡 :'-􀁾􀀮 􀀮􀁾; . . , 􀁾 NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IF MAILED IN THE UNITED STATES ,. BUSINESS REPLY MAIL 0' ';', PERMIT NO,5379 DALLAS, TX 11 •••1.1.11111.1.11'1111•• 1.1••• 11111
•••1•• 1.111•••1 POSTAGE WILL BE PAID BY ADDRESSEE FIRST-CLASS MAIL DART COMMUNITY AFFAIRS-7232 DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT PO BOX 660163 DALLAS TX 75266-9672 ,,􀁾 "(􀁾I. I
ast Corridor MIS Estudio sobre Grandes Inversiones en el Corredor Este Comment Card Tarjeta de Comentarios 􀁾􀁥􀁅􀁡􀁳􀁴􀁃􀁯􀁲􀁲􀁩􀁤􀁯􀁲 MajorInvestmentStudy --142-007-04 1112003 East
Corridor MIS Public Meetings Dec. 2003 Juntas PUblicas para el Estudio Principal de Inversiones (EPI) sobre el Corredor Este, Deciembre 2003 E-mail /Correo Electr6nico: _ Name /Nombre:
_ Telephone /Teletono: ( ) _ City /Ciudad: _ Comments /Comentarios: Address /Direcci6n: _ Zip Code /Zona Postal: _ [I] NORTH en eI214-749-2522 0 visite la pagina wwwdart.orgen Internet.
Juntas Publicas Martes 16 de diciembre a las 6:30 p.rn. Samuell East Grand Recreation Center 6200 Grand Avenue, Dallas, Mapsco 46-H Miercoles 17de diciembre a las 6:30 p.m. Bradfield
Recreation Center 1146 Castle Drive, Garland, Mapsco 19A-S Jueves 18 de diciembre a las 6:30 p.rn. Mesquite Art Center -Rehearsal Hall 1527 North Galloway Avenue, Mapsco 49A-L Public
􀁍􀁥􀁥􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁾 Tuesday, December 16 • 6:30 p.m. Samuell Grand Recreation Center 6200 East Grand Avenue, Dallas, Mapsco 46-H Wednesday, December 17 • 6:30 p.m. Bradfield Recreation
Center 1146 Castle Drive, Garland, Mapsco 19A-S Thursday, December 18 • 6:30 p.m. Mesquite Art Center -Rehearsal Hall 1527 North Galloway Avenue, Mapsco 49A-L MIS del Corredor Este EI
Transporte Rapido de Area de Dallas esta a punto de terminar un Estudio de Grandes Inversiones (MIS) que finalizara con la adopci6n y posterior implementaci6n de mejoras para solucionar
problemas de transporte a 10 largo y en las cercanias de los corredores de las vias 1-30 y US 80 en el condado de East Dallas. EI area del estudio esta comprendida aproximadamente entre
Ferguson Rd., Santa Fe RR y Garland Rd. por el norte; Scyene y Military Pkwy al sur; el centro de Dallas al oeste, y la linea del condado Rockwall y la SH 352 por el este; todas elias
situadas en sectores de Dallas, Garland, Mesquite, Rowletty Sunnyvale. Estado EI Equipo del Proyecto facilit6 varios comites de trabajo y realiz6 seis juntas publicas con el fin de dar
participaci6n al publico. A la fecha, el Equipo del Proyecto: • Defini6 problemas de transporte. • Identific6 posibles proyectos (por ejemplo: autopista, calle urbana, autobus, HOII,
etc.) para abordar dichos problemas. • Complet6 una evaluaci6n detallada de tales alternativas. ;Necesitamos sus comentarios! La 4a ronda de juntas publicas tendra lugar entre los dias
16y 18 de diciembre de 2003. En estas juntas, el Equipo del Proyecto presentara un resumen del trabajo realizado hasta la fecha, asi como los resultados de la evaluaci6n detallada y
las alternativas de transporte recomendadas. Sus opiniones y sugerencias sobre estas recomendaciones son fundamentales para solucionar las necesidades de la comunidad en el Corredor
del Este (es decir: los residentes, duenos de negocios, usuarios del sistema de transporte, etc). Para obtener mas informaci6n, dirijase al departamento de Asuntos Comunitarios de DART
The East Corridor MIS Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) is nearing completion ofa Major Investment Study (MIS) that will culminate in the adoption and eventual implementation of transportation
improvements that address transportation problems along and adjacent to the 1-30/US 80 corridors in East Dallas County. The study area is roughly bounded by Ferguson Rd/Santa Fe RR/Garland
Rd. in the north, Scyene/Military Pkwy in the south, downtown Dallas on the west and Rockwall county line/SH 352 in the east, all of which are contained within portions of Dallas, Garland,
Mesquite, Rowlett and Sunnyvale. Status The Project Team facilitated several working committees and held six public meetings to involve the public. To this date, the Project Team has:
• Defined transportation problems • Identified candidate projects (e.g. freeway, city street, bus, HOII, etc) to address those problems • Completed detailed evaluation of these alternatives
We Need Your Input! The 4th round ofpublic meetings will occur December 16-18, 2003. At these meetings, the Project Team will provide an overview of the work to date, present results
of the detailed evaluation and present the recommended transportation alternatives. Your opinions and suggestions on these recommendations are essential to addressing the needs of the
East Corridor community (i.e. residents, business owners, transportation system users, etc). For more information, contact DART Community Affairs at 214-749-2522 or visit DARIorg. ."':1.
Q) c:=:> $: .S L.L..""'" 􀁾 ............, '---I 􀁡􀁾 a 􀁾􀁾 a 􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀽 c: C"\J II 􀁣􀀺􀁩􀁬􀁾 ._ ClJ ... ::::::......., 􀁾 I-􀁾 ---'---I 􀁾 !o..... ro C"\J --0 􀁾 i II C """'0.. . c
'" --􀁾 OJ:::> 􀁾 ............, ro S: !o..... ::J c:=:> 􀁾 ...co c """'-0 ro ::z:::::: !oo......_ -. !o..... <:: C3 u t1°-" £9LO-99l;Sl Xl 'SYllVa £9 L099 xog "O"d 􀀱􀁉􀁓􀁎􀁖􀁾􀀱 􀁡􀀱􀁤􀁖􀁾
􀁖􀀳􀁾􀁖 SYllVa 􀁬􀀻􀂣􀁕􀀭􀁓􀁾􀁉􀁖􀀺􀁉􀀺􀁬􀁖AlINnwwo::> 􀁬􀁾􀁶􀁡 ,-􀀬􀁾 . , 􀁾 NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IF MAILED IN THE UNITED STATES .. " PERMIT NO,5379 DALLAS, 1)( 11 ••• 1.1.111.1.1.11
••• 11 •• 1.1 ••• 11111 •••1•• 1.111 •••1 POSTAGE WILL BE PAID BY ADDRESSEE FIRST-CLASS MAIL BUSINESS REPLY MAIL DART COMMUNITY AFFAIRS-7232 DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT PO BOX 660163 DALLAS
TX 75266-9672 '. ;􀁾􀀬 􀁾􀀬 􀁾Kl,;,,','.,.. ", .
m ortant Meetin Notice Aviso sobre Junta Importante Environmental Analysis to begin soon on Irving Light Rail Transit to DFWAirport. The Northwest Irving/DFW Corridor (west . branch
of the Northwest Corridor) is being advanced to the next level ofproject development. The Environmental Analysis process will provide more detailed definition about the project's alignment
station locations, operations, and the environmental impacts associated with the project. Corridor Background • 1983-Northwest Corridor identified in DARTFinal Service Plan. • 1989-DART
Transit System Plan includes rail to North Irving. • 1995-System Plan refines light rail line to N. Irving Transit Center. • 2000-Northwest Corridor MIS (Major Investment Study) approved
by DART Board, including an LRT line to serve N. Irving and DFWAirport in response to significant new developments in area. • 2002/2003-Alternative LRT alignments identified through
city of Irving and into DFWairport varying from MIS alignment. • 2004-lnitiate Environmental Analysis and conceptual engineering process. DART encourages you to attend the following
public meeting scheduled for . January 2004. This informational meeting, along with future update meetings, will provide an opportunity for public input and to better define the issues
to be addressed during the Environmental Analysis process. Corridor U{}date Meeting Wednesday, January 21,2004, 7:00 p.m. Irving Arts Center (Suite 200) 3333 North MacArthur Blvd. Irving,
Texas 75062 • MAPSCO 31B-A For more information, contact DART Community Affairs at 214-749-2543 or visit DARTorg. Farmers Branch -<> PotentiallRf Station Area -PotentiallRf Alignment
o Park & Ride Pronto se iniciara el Analisis Ambiental en el Sistema de Transito del Tren EI(xtrico de Irving hacia el Aeropuerto DFW. EI Corredor Noroeste de Irving/DFW (Ramal oeste
del Corredor Noroeste) avanzara hacia el siguiente nivel de desarrollo del proyecto. EI proceso de Analisis Ambiental brindara una definicion mas detallada sobre la alineacion del proyecto,
la localizacion de las estaciones, las operaciones y los impactos ambientales relacionados con el proyecto. Antecedentes del Corredor • 1983-EI Corredor Noroeste es identificado en el
Plan de Servicios Final de DART • 1989-EI Plan del Sistema de Transito DART incluye el riel hacia North Irving. • 1995-EI Plan del Sistema define la linea del tren electrico hacia N.
Irving Transit Center. • 2000-EI MIS (Estudio de Grandes Inversiones) del Corredor Noroeste es aprobado por el Consejo Directivo de DART, que incluye una linea LRT entre N. Irving y
el aeropuerto DFWen respuesta a nuevos e importantes desarrollos en el area. • 2002/2003-Se identifican alineaciones alternativas de LRT en la ciudad de Irving hacia el aeropuerto DFW,
que son diferentes a la alineacion del MIS. • 2004-lnicio del Analisis Ambientaly del proceso de ingenierfa conceptual. DART10 invita a asistir a la proxima junta publica que se realizara
en enero de 2004. Esta junta de caracter informativo, y otras juntas de actualizacion que se lIevaran a cabo en el futuro, brindaran la oportunidad de informar al publico y de definir
las cuestiones que se abordaran durante el proceso de Analisis Ambiental. Junta sobre el Progreso del Corredor Miercoles 21 de enero de 2004 a las z·oo p.m. Irving Arts Center (Suite
200) 3333 North MacArthur Blvd. Irving, Texas 75062 • MAPSCO 31B-A Si desea mas informacion, comuniquese con la Oficina de Asuntos Comunitarios de DART aI214-749-2543 0 visite el sitio
de DARTorg. Comment Card Tarjeta de Comentarios Northwest Irving/DFW Corridor Update Meeting, Jan. 2004 Junta sobre el Progreso del Corredor Noroeste de Irving/DFW, Enero2004 Name /Nombre:
_ Address /Oirecci6n: _ City /Ciudad: _ Zip Code /Zona Postal: _ Telephone /Telefono: ( J _ E-mail/Correo Electr6nico: _ Comments /Comentarios: 742-075-04 72/2003 ..::'. ...,.
DART Connections/Conexiones de DART O ·'. The 4:27 p.m. departure from Main & St. Paul '. : streets will be eliminated and a 4:42 p.m. departure added to the schedule. La salida de las
4:27 p.m. desde las calles Main y St. Paul sera eliminada, y se agregara una nueva salida a los horarios, a las 4:42 p.m. • .., .A 9:56 p.m. trip from North Irving Transit '. I Center
to Valley Ranch will be added to the ". . schedule. Se anadira un nuevo viaje desde North Irving Transit Center hacia Valley Ranch, a las 9:56 p.m. "Comb;na,;on/Comb;nadon Midday frequency
will be adjusted from 45 to 60 minutes. Las frecuencias de mediodia se cambia ran de 45 a 60 minutos. CD'. Inbound trips from 􀁾􀁤􀁤􀁩􀁳􀁯􀁮 Transit Center to ,downtown Dallas will leave
two (2) minutes . later to improve"'on-time performance. Los autobuses que lIegan al centro de Dallas desde el Addison Transit Center partiran dos (2) minutos despues para mejorar el
cumplimiento de los horarios. e· To improve transfer connections at North . '. Irving Transit Center, morning departures '. ..' from Parker Road Station will be adjusted to 5:17 a.m.,
6:16 a.m. and 7:16 a.m. The 4:30 p.m. departure from Decker Drive & O'Connor Boulevard will be adjusted to 4:36 p.m. Con el fin de mejorar las conexiones para transbordos en el North
Irving Transit Center, las salidas de la manana desde Parker Road Station se cambiaran para las 5:17 a.m., 6:16 a.m. y 7:16 a.m. La salida de las 4:30 p.m. desde Decker Drive y O'Connor
Boulevard se cambiara para las 4:36 p.m. Route, Schedule Adjustments Designed To Improve Bus, Rail Connections BUS MODIFICATIONS MODIFICACIONES EN AUTOBUSES Modi'ficaciones en rutas
y horarios para mejorar las conexiones en trenes y autobuses Effective Monday, January 26, 2004 • .. The first three southbound departures from " the East Transfer Center will be adjusted
to '" , ... 5:22 a.m., 5:33 a.m. and 6:07 a.m. respectively. Las tres primeras salidas en la calzada sur desde el East Transfer Center se cambiaran para las 5:22 a.m., 5:33 a.m. y 6:07
a.m. respectivamente. Vigentes a partir de/Junes 26 de enero de 2004 Con el fin de brindar conexiones para transbordo mas convenientes, y para mejorar la eficiencia general del sistema,
DART hara los siguientes cambios en rutas y horarios a partir del lunes 26 de enero. Por favor revise la lista que aparece a continuaci6n para saber si hay cambios en sus recorridos.
Para obtener informaci6n mas detallada, lIame a Informacion al Cliente DART al 214.979.1111, 0 consulte el sitio en Internet DART.org. Habra nuevos horarios de autobus a comienzos de
enero. • . The 7 p.m. departure from Elm & Lamar . '. streets to Red Bird Transit Center will be . adjusted to 7:15 p.m. La salida de las 7 p.m. desde las calles Elm y Lamar hacia el
Red Bird Transit Center se cambiara para las 7:15 p.m. To provide more convenient transfer connections and improve overall efficiency, DART will make the following route and schedule
changes on Monday, January 26. Please check the listing below to determine if your trip is affected. For more detailed information, please call DART Customer Information at 214.979.1111,
or consult our website, DART.org. New bus schedules will be available in early January. 􀁄􀁾􀁏􀁲􀁧 􀁾􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁴􀁩I􀁯􀁮 􀁾􀁥􀁡􀁾 get deals on: 􀁾􀁲􀁴 films, 􀁧􀁥􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁯􀀬 boutiques,
music, furniture, 􀁴􀁾􀁥􀁾􀁴􀁲􀁥􀀬 􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁩􀁱􀁵􀁥􀁳􀀬 􀁳􀁵􀁳􀁾􀁩􀀬 􀁢􀁾􀁲􀁢􀁥􀁱􀁵􀁥􀀬 􀁳􀁙􀁉􀁔􀁬􀁰􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁹􀀬 museums, bowling, coffee, zoo, booh, gihs, 􀁦􀁾􀁳􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀬 flowers, 􀁭􀁾􀁲􀁧􀁾􀁲􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁳
􀁾􀁮􀁤 more. visit DART.org for updates or (011214.919.1111 for more information grab afree DART destination 􀁤􀁥􀁡􀁾 guide 􀁳􀁾􀁯􀁷 your DART pass or 􀁴􀁩􀁣􀁾􀁥􀁴 􀁬􀁯􀁯􀁾 for 􀁴􀁾􀁩􀁳
decal (ustomer Informotion/Route &Schedule Informotion 214.979.1111 Informacion 0 (Iientes/lnformocion de Rutos y Horarios Customer Response (enter (requests, commendations, concernsl
214.749.3333 (entro de Respuesta al (liente (peticiones, elogios, inquietudesl Lost &Found 214.749.3810 Objetos Extraviados DART Police 214.928.6300 Policia de Tronsito Paratransit Services
for the mobility impaired 214.515.7272 Paratransit para Personas con Discapacidad de Movimiento RideShare/(ommuter Services (carpoollvanpool informationl.......214.747.RIDE Servicios
de Transporte (ompartido/(olectivo (informacion de carpoollvanpooll DART Administration Office 214.749.DART Oficinas Administralivas de DART DART (ontracts Info Helpline 214.749.2560
Linea de Informacion para (ontratos de DART DART Store/TIenda de DART Akard Station 214.749.3282
Southbound Red Line trains departing Pearl Station at 6:23 p.m. and 6:37 p.m. will continue to Westmoreland Station, and the southbound Blue Line train departing at 6:45 p.m. will continue
to Ledbetter Station. These trips will return northbound as far as 8th & Corinth Station. New rail schedules reflecting these changes will be available when current supplies run out.
Los trenes de la Red Line que parten por fa via sur desde Pearl Station a las 6:23 p.m. y a las 6:37 p.m. continua ran hacia Westmoreland Station, y el tren de la Blue Line que parte
por la via sur a las 6:45 p.m. seguira hacia Ledbetter Station. Estos trenes regresaran por la via norte hasta la 8th y Corinth Station. Habra disponibilidad de nuevos boletines con
los horarios que reflejan estos cambios, una vez que se agoten los actuales. RAIL MODIFICATIONS MODIFICACIONES EN TRENES " epartmg o m ree a or reet' 􀁬􀁒􀁔􀁾 AVO ---will follow Plano
Parkway and the North CentralExpressway Service Road, rather than t􀁾 Alma Drive. (I) 570, East Plana Plana DART-on·Call j. A fin de mejorar la puntualidad de los horarios, 15TH51[jJ
[[] los autobuses que salen de Collin Creek Mall hacia [[]350 􀁾 :: 572-15th Street viajaran por el Plano Parkway y la North ? :: Central Expressway Service Road, en lugar de hacerlo
760 : : por Alma Drive. 760 Map/Mapa .. : . I 􀁾 : < 􀁾 I "-􀁾 􀁾􀀮 ffi § (:i 􀁾􀁾􀁴 :: ... tz! NORTH :: 􀁾 :r: : '" 5e I PLANO 0z : 􀁾 [[]564 􀁾 # 􀀧􀁾 , 1-SYLVAN I 10VERGL/N 􀁾􀂥􀁏􀁯􀁻􀁬􀁾􀁲SHERRY
-􀁾 􀁾 0 w MIMOSA WILLOW 0 I--BRIAR 􀁏􀁏􀁾 I 'r-􀁾􀀰 \ 􀁾 Z----' 􀁾􀁉􀁾 u 􀀱􀁭􀀯􀁾 􀁾 􀀺􀀺􀀻􀁾 :) '<l' It L!) E] ,\ 18TH <-􀀨􀁾"r& ,,--0 r0-E] "-... t15z z LANE 0> 'So <{a 􀁾 􀁾 '-0
WII,g 00 􀁾􀁊􀁾􀁬􀁾 ... w CREEK =. '10RTH wI-􀁾 􀁾􀁾 llli 􀁾 ORES'T9-HE RICK 􀀺􀁾􀁾 􀁾 "-􀁾 􀁾 J;-' ---:..... WAY I w POR .'" 􀁾 :;: z 17TH '" 􀁾 "<' 􀀬􀀾􀀧􀀢􀀢􀁾 TIM 􀀬􀁵􀁾 . ' '0 :;:
< '" D:gz 􀁾􀁲􀀭G 􀁾 --, 16 H "-15TH PL U C , 􀁴􀀺􀀺􀁊􀀯􀁾 "-'l RIDGEWAY 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾I--t Iii 􀁾 􀁾 01l r 15TH /􀁾 w "". 􀁟􀁾 􀁾 " • 􀁾􀁾 wI .. 􀁾􀀼􀁊􀁬 _<:;: 0 ...J 􀁾􀁉 14TH PL 􀁂􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁊
􀁍􀁾 i i3 '-i$ it z 14TH « "", "'''''"'' M 􀁾 􀁾 f--.;f z I U --, => 13TH a::: 14TH f+ Ull 6 j' . Sf< '" W l GUtvD 􀁾 w :;: I---􀁦􀀭􀁪􀁾 􀁾 570 a::: I 􀁾 RIGSBEE Ul V ;t --, 14TH 2IH
0;: I-RESOURCE I ;;,--1 􀁾 􀁉􀁾 •" "c" To improve schedule reliability, buses 'd . C II' C k M II f 15th St '.•"',,' "The last three (3) weeknight trips will be . "adjusted to improve
connections with , DART Rail at Walnut Hill Station. Los ultimos tres (3) viajes nocturnos en dias habiles seran ajustados para mejorar las conexiones con el DART Rail en Walnut Hill
Station. 0'", All a.m. rush-hour departures from,Bush Turnpike Station -between 5:13 a.m. and '__ ' 8:43 a.m. -will depart 18 minutes earlier to coincide with class starting times at
Collin County Community College. Todas las salidas en horas matutinas de alto trafico vehicular desde Bush Turnpike Station, entre las 5:13 a.m. y las 8:43 a.m., seran adelantadas 18
minutos para coincidir con las horas de inicio de c1ases en el Collin County Community College. • Arrival times attimepoints between South ,• :, Garland and North Irving transit centers
will be adjusted on weekdays. Las horas de las paradas entre las terminales de South Garland y North Irving se ajustaran durante los dias habiles. • ',. Southbound p.m. rush-hour trips
will be , , • : adjusted for better connections with DART Rail , " at Westmoreland Station. Los viajes por la calzada sur en las horas de la tarde con alto trafico vehicular se ajustaran
para tener mejores conexiones con el DART Rail en Westmoreland Station. OA weekday northbound trip leaving Village " , ' ,Fair at 3:44 p.m. will be added to the schedule. Seagregara
un viaje por la calzada norte saliendo de Village Fair a las 3:44 p.m durante los dias habiles. 0', An earlier Saturday trip will leave Hampton • Station at 5:34 a.m. and arrive at Medical/.
, Market Center Station at 6:09 a.m. Un viaje mas temprano los dias sabado partira de Hampton Station a las 5:34 a.m. y lIegara a Medical/Market Center Station a las 6:09 a.m. • " The
weekday bus leaving American Way & " 'Camp Wisdom Road for Hampton Station at , 5:01 a.m. will depart instead at 4:59 a.m. to improve transfers to Route 453. On Saturdays, the I route
will offer an earlier trip leaving American Way & Camp Wisdom at 5:01 a.m. and arriving at Hampton Station at 5:32 a.m. I EI autobus que en dias habiles sale de American Way y Camp Wisdom
Road hacia Hampton Station a las 5:01 a.m. partira ahora a las 4:59 a.m. para mejorar los transbordos a la ruta 453. Los sabados, la ruta ofrecera un viaje mas temprano en la manana
saliendo de American Way y Camp Wisdom a las 5:01 a.m. y lIegando a Hampton Station a las 5:32 a.m. • ThiS route will be modified to serve , Downtown Plano Station instead of Parker
" , ",' Road Station. In addition, rush-hour trips will be added to meet passenger demand. Se modificara la ruta para lIegar a Downtown Plano Station en lugar de Parker Road Station.
Ademas, se agregaran viajes en las horas de alto trafico vehicular para satisfacer la demanda de los usuarios. 570 Map/Mapa .... e," All rush-hour trips will be adjusted five (5) , "
minutes earlier to improve transfer , ' connections at Addison Transit Center. Todos los recorridos en las horas de alto trafico vehicular se adelantaran cinco (5) minutos para mejorar
las conexiones para transbordos en el Addison Transit Center. • " ,To improve transfer connections at Addison , Transit Center, the bus currently leaving " , " Parker Road Station at
5:45 a.m. will depart at 5:37 a.m. Con el fin de mejorar las conexiones para transbordo en el Addison Transit Center, el autobus que normalmente sale de Parker Road Station a las 5:45
a.m. partira a las 5:37 a.m. • 'The bus currently leaving North Irving Transit , Center at 6:30 a.m. will be adjusted to depart , 'at 6:35 a.m. to accommodate passengers transferring
from Route 202. EI autobus que normalmente sale del North Irving Transit Center a las 6:30 a.m., ahora 10 hara a las 6:35 a.m. para recibir a los pasajeros que transbordan desde la ruta
202. 0"An earlier a.m. trip to Spring Valley Station : will originate at Waterview Drive & Arapaho '"" Road at 5:08 a.m. and arrive at the station at 5:19 a.m. Un viaje mas temprano
en la manana hacia Spring Valley Station saldra de Waterview Drive y Arapaho Road a las 5:08 a.m. y lIegara a la estaci6n a las 5:19 a.m. OTO improve transfer connections with " Route
210 at West Plano Transit Center, the " " bus currently leaving Communications Parkway & Parker Road at 5:21 p.m. will depart at 5:15 p.m. Para mejorar las conexiones para transbordo
con la ruta 210 en el West Plano Transit Center, el autobus que normalmente sale de Communications Parkway y Parker Road a las 5:21 p.m. partira a las 5:15 p.m. eTO improve transfer
connections at South , ,'", Irving Station, midday buses will depart on the half hour. A fin de mejorar las conexiones para transbordos en South Irving Station, los autobuses de mediodia
saldrim cada media hora. ....:..,-, ,. 􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ,':#-.
.,
·: 􀁔􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁾 􀁒􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁷􀁾􀁹 [xpress 􀁾􀁒􀁾 • The TRE -aservice of DART and the Fort Worth T-travels between Union Station in downtown Dallas and the T&P Station in downtown Fort Worth.
• The train operates weekdays, 5:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m.; Saturdays, 7:30 a.m. to 11 p.m. (no Sunday service). neTDUSeS -fort 􀁗􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁾 The bus routes listed in this guide all originate
from the Fort Worth Intermodal Transportation Center (lK). Bus service hours are 5a.m. to midnight Monday through Friday and 6a.m. to midnight Saturday. • Route 1-Travels to the Historic
Stockyards area Monday through Friday. • Route 7-Travels to the Cultural District Monday through Saturday. • Route 15 -Trolley to the Historic Stockyards area on Saturdays only. Los
Pases del Dia pueden comprarse en las maquinas expendedoras de boletos (TVM) localizadas en las plataformas de las estaciones del TRE 0 atraves del operador de autobus. Los Pases del
Dia son validos hasta las 3 a.m. del siguiente dfa. Los boletos sencillos solo se pueden comprar en las maquinas expendedoras y solo son validos para el servicio del TRE, "the T" y DART
Rail por 90 minutos a partir de la compra. Visita TrinityRailwayExpress.org para planificar viajes, consultar tarifas, mapas y horarios, 0 llama aI817.215.8600 para ser atendido por
un representante de servicio al cliente. (6mo ootener ofertas ael TR[ Los productos, descuentos y ofertas especiales enumeradas en esta guia estan sujetos a cambio sin previo aviso.
La Agencia de Transporte Rapido del Area de Dallas (DART) y la Autoridad de Transporte de Fort Worth (the T) no son responsabJes por la disponibilidad 0 calidad de cada oferta, que es
Iistada y proporcionada a criterio del comerciante 0 negocio participante. Cualquier negocio que desee ser incluido en la proxima guia debera comunicarse con Richard Maxwellllamando
aI817.215.8645 0 via correo electronico armaxwell@the-T.comydebera cumplir con 105 lineamientos establecidos por TRE Obten tus ofertas del TRE mostrando cualquier pase 0 boleto valido
de "the T", TRE 0 DART que muestre el dia, mes 0 ano en curso, dependiendo del pase que uses. lNecesitas ayuda para decidir como lIegar? Visita TrinityRailwayExpress.org 0 llama al 817.215.8600
de lunes a viernes de 5 a.m. a 10 p.m., fines de semana de 8 a.m. a 5p.m. para averiguar la manera mas conveniente de lIegar a cada destino. Cada estacion del TRE es facilmente accesible
por autobus, y casi todas tienen estacionamiento gratuito. i Explora tus oportunidades por todas partes de los condados de Tarrant y Dallas! Ooten un rase Mensual 􀁐􀁍􀁾 el TR[ Los Pases
Mensuales por $40 (una zona) y $70 (dos zonas) pueden ser adquiridos en las maquinas expendedoras de la plataforma del TRE, en el ITC en las calles Ninth y Jones, la oficina de "the
T" en 1600 E. Lancaster Ave. y en las tiendas Minyard, Carnival, Sack 'n Save y Fiesta Mart. Los Pases Mensuales tambien pueden ser comprados en linea en www.the-Tstore.com. [A\ ] Mapnotexaetfy
"I" toseafe NORTH TRINITY RAiLWAY EXPRESS los 􀁡􀁵􀁴􀁯􀁾􀁵􀁳􀁥􀁳 ae 􀁕􀁴􀁾􀁥 T' -en fort 􀁗􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁾 Las rutas de autobuses listadas en esta guia se originan en la estacion Intermodal
Transportation Center (lTC) de Fort Worth. Los horariosde servicio son de 5a.m. amedia noche de lunes aviernes, y los sabados de 6a.m. ala medianoche. • Ruta 1-Llega a la historica area de los Stockyards de lunes aviernes. • Ruta 7-L1ega
al Distrito Cultural de lunes asabado. • Ruta 15 -Trolebus ala historica area de los Stockyards solo los sabados. Consulta la parte posterior de esta guia para ver los consejos para
utilizar el TRE y los autobuses de 'T' en Fort Worth. ® Stations& Parking Intermodal Transportation Center For tips on riding the TRE and the Tbuses in Fort Worth, see the back of this
guide. DOWNTOWN FORT WORTH Historic Stockyards Museums & Will Rogers Complex ROUTE 1 ROUTE 15 ROUTE 2 ROUTE 7 Monday -Saturday Saturday only Monday -Saturday Monday -Saturday 􀁔􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁾
􀁒􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁷􀁾􀁹 [xpress 􀀨􀁲􀁒􀁾 • EI TRE, un servicio de DART yde "the T" en Fort Worth, viaja entre Union Station en el centro de Dallas yT&P Station en el centro de Fort Worth. • EI
tren opera entre semana de 5:30 a.m. a9:30 p.m.; sabados de 7:30 a.m. a11 p.m. (no hay servicio los domingos). ,
Day Passes can be purchased from ticket vending machines (TVMs) located at all TRE station platforms or from the bus operator. Day Passes are valid until 3 a.m. the next day. Single-ride
tickets are available only from TVMs and are good forTRE, the Tand DART Rail services for 90 minutes from purchase. Visit TrinityRailwayExpress.org for trip planning, fares, maps and
schedules, or call 817.215.8600 for acustomer service representative. 􀁾􀁥􀁴 a􀁔􀁾􀁦 􀁍􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁾􀁬􀁹 rass Monthly passes for $40 (one zone) and $70 (two zones) can be purchased at TRE
rail platform TVMs, the ITC at Ninth and Jones streets, the Toffice at 1600 E. Lancaster Ave. and Minyard, Carnival, Sack 'n Save and Fiesta Mart food stores. Monthly passes can also
be purchased online at www.the-Tstore.com. now to reoeem your 􀁔􀁾􀁦 oeals Redeem your TRE deals by showing any valid ticket or pass from the T, the TRE or DART displaying the current
day, month or year, depending on the type of pass used. Need help deciding how to get there? Visit TrinityRailwayExpress.org or call 817.215.8600 Monday through Friday, 5 a.m. to 10
p.m., weekends 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., to find the most convenient way to get to each exciting destination. All TRE stations are easily accessible by bus, and most feature free parking. Explore
your opportunities throughout Tarrant and Dallas counties! The products, discounts and special offers listed in this guide are subject to change without notice. The Fort Worth Transportation
Authority (the T) and Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) are not responsible for the availability or quality of each offer, which is listed and provided at the sale discretion of the participating
merchant or business. Any business wishing to be included in the next guide update should contact Richard Maxwell by calling 817.215.8645 or by email at rmaxwell@the-Icom and must meet
established TRE guidelines.
Museums8r. , wm Roge,. Complex I ROUlEZ Monday -Satwdoy (onsejos 􀁾􀁡􀁲􀁡 viajar en el 􀁔􀁾􀁦 1. Por favor, Ilega a la estaci6n de 3 a 5 minutos antes de tu hora estimada de salida.
2. Compra un boleto de tren en la maquina expendedora (TVM). 3. Aborda el tren que muestra el nombre de la ultima estaci6n de tu ruta. 4. Esta al pendiente de la estaci6n en la que bajaras
0 escucha el anuncio del nombre de la siguiente estaci6n. 5. Cuando viajes entre Dallas y Fort Worth, planea tu regreso a la estaci6n de origen antes de las 7:30 p.m. esa misma noche
(no hay servicio los domingos.) (onsejos para viajar en los autoouses ae 􀁉􀁪􀁴􀁾􀁥 r en tort 􀁗􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁾 1. Por favor, "ega a la parada de autobuses de 3 a 5 minutos antes de la hora
estimada de salida del autobus. 2. COl1firma que el numero de la ruta de tu autobus coincida con el de la parada de autobus. 3. Por favor, parate en un lugar en la parada de autobus
donde el operador te pueda ver. 4. Mira el numero y destino final de la ruta ubicados al frente de los autobuses. 5. Cuando vayas a transbordar, deja un margen de por 10 menDs 5 minutos
entre la hora de Ilegada y salida de los vehfculos. ror favor recueraa: e Los autobuses 5610 recogen pasajeros en las paradas designadas. .. Las variantes de trafico y abordaje de pasajeros
pueden causar retraso en la IIegada programada de los autobuses hasta de 5 minutos. .. Los autobuses pueden retrasar su salida 5610 cuando los vehfculos para transbordar esten a la vista
de la parada de autobus. .. Por razones de seguridad, los autobuses no pueden detenerse para ascenso de pasajeros despues de haberse retirado del area de ascenso. • Los autobuses marcados
"OUT OF SERVICE" no pueden detenerse para recoger pasajeros.
1. Please arrive at your station 3-5 minutes before your scheduled departure time. 2. Purchase a rail ticket from the ticket vending machine (TVM). 3. Board the train displaying the
name of the last station on your route. 4. Watch for your destination station or listen for the announcement of the next station name. 5. When traveling between Dallas and Fort Worth,
plan to board for your return to your originating station no later than 7:30 p.m. that evening (no Sunday service). 􀁴􀁩􀁾􀁳 for 􀁲􀁩􀁇􀁩􀁮􀁾 􀁴􀁾􀁥Tnuses in tort 􀁗􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁾 1. Please
arrive at the bus stop 3-5 minutes before your scheduled bus departure time. 2. Confirm that the route number for your bus is posted on the bus-stop sign. 3. Please stand in a location
at the bus stop where you are visible to bus operators. 4. Observe the route number and final destination located on the front of all buses. 5. When transferring, please allow at least
5 minutes between vehicle arrival and departure times. 􀁾􀁉􀁥􀁡􀁳􀁥 rememner: e Buses can pick up passengers only at designated stops. e Variations in traffic and passenger loading may
delay scheduled bus arrival times by up to 5 minutes. e Buses can delay their departure only when connecting vehicles are within sight of the bus stop. e For safety reasons, buses cannot
stop to board passengers after pulling away from boarding area. e Buses marked "OUT OF SERVICE" cannot stop to board passengers.
Union Stdtion ANTARES ATOP REUNION TOWER 20% off weekday lunch or weekday dinner and free observation-level access 300 Reunion Blvd. 214-712-7145 􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁩􀀨 􀁓􀁴􀁏􀀨􀁾􀁙􀁤􀁲􀁾􀁓
(via the TRoute 1and Route 15) BILLY BOB'S TEXAS $1 off nighttime admission 2520 Rodeo Plaza 817-624-7117 Centennial Cafe (2nd floor of Hyatt Regency Hotel) 300 Reunion Blvd. 214-712-7148
Cowtown Coliseum 12'1 E. Exchange Ave. 817-625-1025 FERRIS PLAZA RESTAURANT Free beverage w/entree 306 S. Houston 214-749-1068 The Dome (top floor of Reunion Tower) 300 Reunion Blvd.
214-712-7145 STOCKYARDS CHAMPIONSHIP RODEO Buy one general admission and get one for free for Stockyard Championship Rodeo or Pawnee Bills Wild West Show 121 E. Exchange Ave. 817-625-1025
Galvez Cafe 400 S. Record St. #1 214-741-2770 Stockyards Museum 131 E. Exchange Ave. 817-625-5087 HOUSTON STREET 15% off food only, not valid on coupons and gift certifica tes 302 S.
Houston St. 214-651-8101 TEXAS COWBOY HALL OF FAME Free child admission with paid adult (max of4per family) 128 E. Exchange Ave. 817 -626-7131 Parrino's Oven (2nd Floor of Hyatt Regency
Hotel) 300 Reunion Blvd. 214-712-7144 Record Grill 605 Elm St. 214-742-1353 􀁓􀁬􀁉􀁮􀁾􀁤􀁮􀀨􀁥 SqUdre (adjacent to the Fort Worth ITC) AMC Palace 9Theatre 220 E. 3rd St. 817-336-0431
AMC Sundance 11 304 Houston St. 817-654-4536 CASA DE REYES PARRILLA Free gourmet authentic Mexican dessert 1049 Rochelle W. 972-953-0830 BIG STATE DRUG STORE 10% off any soda fountain
and grill item 100 E.lrving Blvd. 972-254-1521 Fort Worth Convention Center 1111 Houston St. 817-570-2222 Four Day Weekend 312 Houston St. 817-226-4329 Hometown Galleries 302 Main St.
817-335-1140 Jubilee Theatre 506W Main St. 817-338-4411 Milan Gallery 408 Houston St. 817-338-4278 CIRCLE THEATRE $2 off Friday performances only 230 W. 4th 51. 817-877-3040 CITY STREETS
Buy one buffet ($3), get one free during happy hour Wednesday &Thursday 5pm-8pm, Friday 5pm-9pm 425 Commerce 51. 817-335-5400 BASS PERFORMANCE HALL 10% off gift shop merchandise during
performance hours only 330 E, 4th 51. 817-212-4300 214-630-9949 214-630-1210 972-253-0708 214-637-1212 ARBY'S 10% off 200 W. Irving Blvd. Whataburger Restaurants 2741 N. Stemmons Frwy.
NINFA'S MEXICAN RESTAURANT Free chili con queso with purchase of entree 2701 N. 5temmons Frwy, 214-638-6866 STEMMONS WOK 10% off 2635 N. 5temmons Frwy. 􀁓􀁯􀁵􀁴􀁾 􀁉􀁲􀁶􀁩􀁮􀁾 Stdtion
Denny's 1415 Motor St.
􀁾 istorie 􀁓􀁴􀁯􀁣􀁾􀁹􀁡􀁲􀁯􀁳 (via the TRoute 1 and Route 15) Buckaroo's Soda Shoppe 140 E. Exchange Ave. 817-624-6631 Riscky's Catch 140 E. Exchange Ave. 817-625-1070 Riscky Rita
140 E. Exchange Ave. 817-626-8700 Riscky's Steakhouse 120 E. Exchange Ave. 817-624-4800 White Elephant Saloon 106 E. Exchange Ave. 817-624-1887 Sunoance Square (adjacent to the Fort
Worth ITC) 8.0 BAR & GRIll 20% off food only; excludes tax, tip and alcohol 111 E. 3rd St. 817-336-0880 Angeluna 215 E.4thSt. 817-334-0080 Billy Miners Salon 150 W. 3rd St. 817-877-3301
Cabo Grande 115W.2ndSt. 817-348-8226 Cafe 400 W. 5th 51. 817-885-8766 Chili's Grill &Bar 515 Main 51. 817-885-8680 Chop House 301 Main 51. 817-336-4129 CITY STREETS Buy one buffet (53),
get one free during Happy Hour Wednesday 8< Thursday 5-8 p.m., Friday 5-9 p.m, 425 Commerce St. 817-335-5877 COfFEE HAllS 15% on; not good ali bulk coffee 404 Houston St. 817-336-5282
Union 􀁓􀁴􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 Chin's China 422 W. Pioneer Dr. 972-259-6171 Reunion Arena 777 Sports 51. 214-800-3000 Church's Fried Chicken 501 N. O'Connor Rd. 972-254-3753 GLORY HOUSE CATERING
10% off food and beverage price for catering services or free cookie with lunch order at take-out deli 1095. Main 51. 972-259-1123 972-254-1986 972-253-3545 Culinary Improv Restaurant
129 N.lrving Blvd. DANAL'S RESTAURANT Buy one entree, get one entree of equal value half price, not good w/any other discounts 508 N. O'Connor Rd. 972-254-2666 Gil's Restaurant &Elegant
Catering 137 5. Main 51. 972-253-1192 214-222-3687 American Airlines Center 2500 Victory Ave. Victory 􀁓􀁴􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 􀀨􀁳􀁰􀁥􀁣􀁩􀁾􀀱 events only) IRVING CITY LIMITS $1 off 132 W.lrving
Blvd. 􀁓􀁯􀁵􀁴􀁾 Irving Station JOE'S COFFEE SHOP 10% off total per individual pass 425 W.lrving Blvd. 972-253-7335 fort 􀁗􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁾 􀀨􀁵􀁬􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁾􀀱 District (via the TRoute 2 or 7)
Jack In The Box 502 N. O'Connor Rod. 972-254-6504 Amon Carter Museum 3501 Camp Bowie Blvd. 817-738-1933 long John Silver's 400 W. Irving Blvd. 972-253-6638 FORT WORTH MUSEUM OF SCIENCE
AND HISTORY $1 off any regular ticket, cannot be combined with other offers 1501 Montgomery 51. 817-255-9200 MAIN STREET PERKS $2 off small espresso drink (Iatte mocha cappuccino) 101
5. Main 51. 972-254-0246 Botanic GardenlJapanese Garden 3220 Botanic Garden Rd. Casa Manana 3101 W.lancaster Ave. Fort Worth Community Arts Center 1309 Montgomery 51. Kimbell Art Museum
3333 Camp Bowie Blvd. 817-871-7689 817-332-2272 817-738-1938 817-332-8451 McDonald's 302 W.lrving Blvd. Taco Inn 320 W. Pioneer Dr. fort 􀁗􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁾 􀁒􀁾􀁩􀁬 􀁍􀁾􀁲􀁾􀁥􀁴 (adjacent to
the Fort Worth ITC) 972-253-4492 972-253-7627 LOG CABIN VILLAGE 10% off all gift shop purchases 2100 log Cabin Village lane 817-926-5881 HOT DAMN, TAMALES! 10% off on all items 1401
Jones 51. 817-332-3244 Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth 3200 Darnell 51. 817-738-9215 SUPPENHAUS USA CORP. 10% off on all items 1401 Jones 51. #175 817-336-0852 NATIONAL COWGIRL MUSEUM
&HALL OF FAME $1 offadmission up to 6admissions, not valid with other offers 1720 Gendy Dr. 817-336-4475 SPIRAL DINER BAKERY 10% off on all items Scott Theater 1401 Jones 51.#180 817-874-1182
3505 W.lancaster Ave. 817-738-6509 PIZZA BY DESIGN 10% off on all items 1401 Jones 51. #190 817-334-0229 Will Rogers Memorial Center 3401 W.lancaster Ave. 817-871-8150
7-624-817-625-1221 317-626-i 601 817-624-2314 317-625-1822 817-882-8743 817-624-7775 817-625-2422 1O'/i; off' 1'0% off 24 {we, #132 tOf\lGHOHGi GENERAL STOnE ]'0% off SunOance 􀁓􀁾􀁵􀁡􀁲􀁥
(adjacent to the Fort Worth ITC) Barnes and Noble 410 W. Commerce 51. 817-332-7178 tONE STAr: \JVINES 10% of{ eveiything i40 E. Exchange Ave. STO(KV!;RD 􀁓􀁲􀁁􀁔􀁩􀁏􀁲􀁾 􀁇􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁬􀁅􀁮􀁙
10'/0 off on sale of S50 or 􀁯􀁶􀁥􀁾 ws('ounr-orlcerj items 817-624-7300 The Trading Post 122 E. Exchange Ave, 817-624-2370 Basket Mart 311 Main 51. Adair Eyewear Store #2 310 Main 51.
817-870-2221 STOGClMHl STATION TRMING POST i 10% orr everything 131 E, Ave, 817-624-4424 OLD TYN1E lVIERCAfffH,E 10% off iJEW WEST JUri'S 10% excluding special orders &sale herns 140
[ Exchange Ave, #112 817 -626-6633 HEAl.. SCENTED CANutE 10% off 140 Exchange 17 STOCKYARD STATION 􀁮􀁕􀀺􀁜􀁄􀀡􀁦􀁾􀁇 POST iliD% off everything 122 E, Ave, 817-624-2370 140 E. L,,,"a"y"
􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁉􀁃􀀬 JERSEV tiLLY SjlVER Sr STONE 20% off 104 E. 􀁍􀁊􀁾􀁖􀁅􀁈􀁋􀁋 1=INE 􀁜􀁩􀁖􀁅􀁓􀁔􀁅􀁈􀁩􀁾 WEAR 10% oil one pair of boots, sale merchandise excluded 100 E Ave tim 3i 7-626-1129
STOCKYAllD STATION 10% off in participating 5tockyarclStation stores and restaurants 130 E. Exchange !\ve, 317-625-9715 140 E, for amonth of unlimited rides *REDUCED FARE categoryfor
seniors 65yrs. and over, qualified student/youth and persons certified with disabilities -$15 monthly, $1 day pass. PREMIUM and LOCAL pass categories also available. EPASS -Annual fee
pass through employers -call 817-215-8700. 817·215·8600 www.the-T.com www.trinityrailwoyexpress.org They're transit pass holders receiving the benefit of unlimited rides on the Tand
DART local and express buses, trolleys and rail at aprice that would make anyone smile.Throw in the TPass Club, Guaranteed Ride Home Program and TREand DART Destinations Partners premiums
or discounts -and you'll be "grinnin' ear-to-ear" !
Ei\RTH BONES 15% off, not valid with any other oHer 308 Main St. 817-332-2662 Haltom's Jewelers -Downtown 317 Main 51. Hometown Galleries 302 Main 51. 817-336-4051 817-335-1140 DJ:IDDY
JACK'S LOBSTER &CHOWDER HOUSE 10% afffo ad and non-alcoholic beverages; excludes alwhol and gratuity 353 Throckmorton St. 817-332-2477 flYiNG SAUCER DRAUGHT EMPORIUM 20% oH food only;
excludes tax, tip and alcohol 111 E. 4th St. 817-336-7470 Kinkade Family Galleries 302 Main 51. 817-335-1140 􀁪􀁁􀁍􀁂􀁉􀁾 JUiCE $0.50 off 400 Niain St. 817-870-1001 Larry's Shoes 500
Main 51. 817-335-5247 La Madeleine French Bakery &Cafe 305 Main 51. 817-332-3639 Marie Antoinette's Flowers to Go 120W.3rd 51. 817-339-2555 MARBLE SLAB CREAMERY Free mixin' with any
ice cream purchase 312 Houston St. 817-335-5877 REIRO COlNBOY Free ice-cnld Dublin Dr Pepper l!vith 520 purchase; one purchase PAHFUMERIE MARIE "l,NTOINETTE 10% off candles and jewelry;
fragrances not included 101 W. 2nd St. 817-332-2888 PAPER TRAilS 15% off, not applicable to in-store discounted products 508 Main St. 817-877-4362 fvlilAN G,iIUERY 20% off signed lithographs
by Henrietta Milan or 10% off signed art book Quiet Contentment 408 Houston St. 817-338-4278 Mi Cocina 509 Main St. 817-877-3600 Pizzeria Uno 300 Houston 51. 817-885-8667 Razzoo's River
Shack 318 Main St. 817-429-7009 Reata at Sundance Square 310 Houston 51. 817-336-1009 Riscky's Barbecue 300 Main 51. 817-877-3306 Sammy's Pizza &Deli 402 Houston St. 817-348-0085 Zippy's
American Grill 400 Houston 51. 817-334-0999 Zolon 335 W. 3rd 51. 817-885-8440 817 -877-0479 406 Si. 8]/-338-119/) Pier 1Imports 501 Houston St. MAYFAIR ON fv1MN STREET 20% oH one item,
cannot be wmiJined with any other offer 316 Main St. 817-336-0989 SH) 􀁭􀁃􀁾􀁾􀁁􀁈􀁄􀀵􀀰􀁎 COllECTH}N OF VVESTERN t\RT STORE 15% off 309 Main St. 8i 7-332-6554
THE BRlT!SH ATTIC 10% off on all items 1401 Jones St. #185 817-332-0007 GO TEXAS! GIFT STORE 10% off on all items 1401 Jones St. #110 817-332-3338 817-624-8449 817-626-1713 817-624-6666
972-554-1964 972-721-1072 817-595-7900 􀁩􀁊􀁅􀁓􀁔􀁬􀁎􀁁􀁔􀀡􀁏􀁾􀁊 H. WORm 20% off regular-priced merchandise 140 E. Exchange Ave. 817-625-1254 Cowtown Cattlepen Maze 145 E. Exchange
Ave. ERNEST TUBI3 RECORD 􀁓􀁾􀁩􀁏􀁐 #6 10% off 140 E. Exchange #8-135 􀁾􀁩􀀨􀁮􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁾 􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁳 Station fiNCHER'S WHITE FRONT llilESTtRN WEAR 10% off 115 E. Exchange 817-624-7302 CANOY
BARREL 20% off regular-priced merchandise 140 E. Exchange Ave. 817-626-5536 'JBOO!{S: ETC iN THE 􀀵􀁔􀁏􀁇􀀼􀁖􀀮􀁄􀁊􀁾􀁄􀁓􀀻􀀡 10% of/: Valid thru 2003] excludes other special offers.
131 E. Exchange Ave #108 817-624-7766 AN f1NOENT 􀁴􀁾􀀮􀁂􀁔 SOAP CO. Buy 5bars Df soap: 140 E #136 PLANT SOURCE "AT mE RAIL MARKET" 10% off on all items 1401 Jones St. 817-335-1447 Tile
America Inc. (open to the public) 7337 Dogwood Park Tony's Auto Upholstery 441 E. Pioneer Blvd. 􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁩􀀨 􀁓􀁴􀁏􀀨􀁋􀁙􀁍􀁾􀁓 (via the TRoute 1 and Route 15) House of Blades 114-A
E. Exchange Ave. tort Wortn 􀁾􀀨􀁉􀁩􀁬 MMKet (adjacent to the Fort Worth ITe) TONY'S PAWN SHOP 10% off 305 E. Bivd. TRiCIA'S GIILDREN'S RESALE Buy fWo, get one free of equal or lesser
value 136 S. Main St. #102 972-259-3525
Meaical/Morket (enter Station CWTllES QUARTERIRESALE 25% off, excluding jewelry and knickknacks. Not good in conjunction with any other offer. 142 S. Main St. 972-259-1249 Bond Street
Collections -Jewelry Store 2599 N. Stemmons Frwy. Cowboy TIre Service 403 W.lrving Blvd. 972-259-6711 Boots For Less 2461 N. Stemmons Frwy. 214-951-0556 CROWN POOLS Free beach ball wi
any chemical or toy purchase '16 W.lrJing Blvd. 972-253-7665 GINGISS FORMALWEAR £40 off rental or 25% off retail 2707 􀁲􀁾􀀮 Stelllillons FrNy. mo 214-638-4300 GIBSON DiSCOUNT GARDEN
CENTER 10% off iiAiracle Gro plant food 500 N. O'Conno: Rd. 972-254-3989 􀁻􀀧􀁩􀀮􀁾􀁉􀁬􀀮􀀧􀁓 COIUCTIBl.ES AND ANTIQUES 10% off regular-priced merchandise-products marked firm 135 S.
I'vlain St 972-259-6116 Direct Action Uniforms 2707 N. Stemmons Frwy. #145 GLAMOUR'S JEWElRY 10% off total bill 2629 N. Sternnlons Frwy. ti215 Motor Street Mobil Gas Station 2606 N.
Stemmons Frwy. Motor Street Shell Gas Station 2607 N. Stemmons Frwy. 214-905-1491 214-905-8683 214-638-8240 214-638-8240 Genesis Jewelry 300 W. Pioneer Dr. Herb Shoppe 212 W.lrving Blvd.
972-259-1760 972-259-3058 PilJ'lIS FASHiON 10% ofi total bill 2629 􀁉􀁾􀀮 Stelllillons Frwy. #235 214-630-7622 IRVING lINT/QUE MALt 10% off except sale or firm items 129 S. Main St.
972-254-0339 Shalina's Jewelry Store 2629 N. Stemmons Frwy. #220 214-630-6792 Irving Lawnmower Shop 136 E. Irving Blvd. 972-438-8181 Western Warehouse 2475 N. Stemmons Frwy. 214-634-2668
IRVING SHOE REPAIR 10% off Mal bill on product only 144 SMain St. 972-254-6090 􀀿􀀨􀁜􀁦􀁜􀁊􀁕􀀨􀁾􀁐􀁈􀀨 FOOD STORE #2 5pedai on Durchase of Dr PeDoer 520 N. O'Connor Blvd. . , 972-253-7984
South 􀁉􀁲􀁶􀁩􀁮􀁾 Station PLUS STORE ZO% off 510 or rnote, excluding cigarette purchases 306 W, Pioneer Dr. 972-254-2268 Ken's Auto Parts Plus 503 E. Irving Blvd. Loan Star Pawn 202
E./rving Blvd. 972-438-1760 972-254-9445 II COrTAGE FlORiST Buy one, get 2nd at 112 off on floral arrangements; not valid Oil Valentine's Dayal' holidays 116 S. 0' Connor Rc 972-254-8839
IVilt KmOD MAin 10% off 520 or more, exe/udiiJCi tobacco purchases 􀁾 520 W. Sixth Street 972-254-8983 BiLl.Y SmAllS HAm DESIGN 10% offproducts 308 W. 2nd Street 972-254-1563 Al'S RHH-TO-OWN
Pay one week, yet one week free 115 S. Main SI 972-259-5741 Autotronix Sound &Security 411 E.lrving Blvd. Cardona &Campbell Jewelers 130 S. Main S1. 972-721-9605 972-254-9202 POlITER'S
ARMY 8i NAVY STORE rVlilitary doy tag wlpufchase of camo T-shirt 600 E.lrving Blvd. 972-579-1155 SlWERS COST PLUS Free authentic Mexican pastry 504 N. O'Connor Rd. 972-259-2440 􀁓􀁾􀁉􀁏􀁗􀀧􀁓
FLORiST Buy one rose, get one free, 3-5 p.m. daily, cash and carry only 120 S. Main St. 972-259-8544 Checkered Flag Convenience Store 401 E.lrving Blvd. 214-596-9554 Tony's Auto 609
N. Brittain Rd. 972-554-7220
EMRT·org October Service Modifications To Streamline Bus System Effective Monday, October 6, 2003 DART will implement significant changes in bus routes and schedules on Monday, October
6, to improve the overall efficiency of the DART System. In most instances, when routes are eliminated due to low ridership, alternate choices are provided. The popular DART On-Call
curbto-curb van service is being substituted for bus service in portions of North Da lias, Farmers Branch and East Plano, while vanpool and Employer Shuttle opportunities are becoming
available in other areas. Please obtain new customer timetables for all services listed in this brochure, available on DART buses and trains, at DART transit centers and downtown Dallas
DART stores, or by calling DART Customer Information at 214.979.1111. Route and schedule information is always available on DART's website, DART.org.
North Dallas DART On-Call The North Dallas DART On-Call zone will be bounded by Northwest Highway on the south, Preston Road on the west, Forest Lane on the north and North Central Expressway
on the east. Vans based at Walnut Hill Station will provide service to and from residences and specific businesses within the area. Hours of operation will be 5:30 a.m.-8 p.m. Monday
through Friday. Residents within the area can call 972.880.7772 for reservations at least one hour in advance. The premium fare of $2.25 one way will be in effect (reduced fare for students,
seniors and passengers with disabilities is 50\1 one way). 􀁾Trinity Railway Express (TRE) passengers are advised that changes will be made to both weekday and 11llNITYRAJLWAYEXPRESS
Satu rday scheduIes: Weekday Service • Four trains between Union Station and CentrePort/DFW Airport Station -two in the early afternoon and two in the late afternoon -will be eliminated.
• Some departure times will be adjusted. • The last evening service from Dallas to Fort Worth and from Fort Worth to Dallas will leave about 7:30 p.m. Saturday Service • Some early morning
trips will be discontinued. NORTHWEST HWY. Presbyterian Hospital NorthPark* Center . Victory Station Special Event Service • On weekdays, the TRE will run a special train from Victory
Station to Fort Worth following all scheduled Dallas Mavericks and Dallas Stars games and other selected events at American Airlines Center. This single train will leave Victory Station
20 minutes after the event's conclusion. Rutas Desviadas de AutoDuses • On Saturdays, regularly scheduled TRE trains will continue to provide Victory Station service to and from games
and other selected events at American Airlines Center. TRE service is not provided on Sundays. Las desviaciones establecidas para estas rutas a principio de ano se haran permanentes:
Rutas 310,341,344,438,451. Ajustes (] los tlorarios de Autobuses Las siguientes rutas s610 sufriran modificaciones en sus horarios: Rutas 2, 8,19,21,26,39,44,49,63,183,247,278, 311,376,385,444,466.
Medical City Hospital FOREST LN. Tom Thumb Minyard Food Store ROYAL Ca:: z􀁾In Wa:: c.. 􀁾c.. 􀁾..... <l: Walnut Hill := Station z􀁾 @--IWAoLNUT-HIL-L --+----...... a"". 􀁾􀁊􀁬􀁻 Preston
Center LEGEND o DART On·Colil s"rvice arca Destinmions served by DART On-Ca!1 during off-peak hours DeSliniltions serVi'd by DART On·(,I,'/ail day 􀁉􀁾 NORTH Ademas, todos las rutas
de autobuses serie500 con servicio al Tren DART tendran horarios ligeramente ajustados para coordinar con los nuevos horarios del Tren DART. 􀁾􀁾􀁯􀁤􀁩􀁦􀁩􀀨􀁡􀁤􀁯􀁮􀁥􀁳 alos Trenes
A los pasajeros del DART Rail se les avisa que la frecuencia del servicio durante el mediodfa de las Ifneas Red Line y Blue Line sera ajustado para que sea cada 20 minutos.
􀁾 A todos los usuarios del Trinity Railway Express (TRE) se les avisa que se haran cambios en "'NIlYIWLWAY"""" los horarios de lunes a sabado: Servicio Entre Semana • Seran eliminados
cuatro trenes entre Union Station y CentrePortlDFW Airport Station -dos en las primeras horas de la tarde y dos al final de la tarde. • Algunos horarios de salida seran ajustados. •
EI ultimo servicio nocturno desde Dallas hacia Fort Worth y de Fort Worth hacia Dallas saldra alrededor de las 7:30 p.m. Servicio Sabatino • Algunos viajes matutinos seran descontinuados.
Servicio para Eventos Especiales a Victory Station • Entre semana, el TRE ofrecera un servicio de tren especial desde Victory Station hacia Fort Worth despues de todos los juegos programados
de los Dallas Mavericks y Dallas Stars, y otros eventos especiales en el American Airlines Center. EI tren saldra de Victory Station 20 minutos despues de haber terminado el evento.
• Los sabados, los trenes del TRE regularmente programados continuaran dando servicio a Victory Station de y hacia los juegos y otros eventos en el American Airlines Center. EI TRE no
ofrece servicio los domingos. DART ConnectionsfConexiones de DART Customer Information/Route &Schedule Information 214-979-1111 Informacion 0 Clientes/lnformocion de Rutas yHorarios
Customer Response Center (requests, commendations, cancerns) 214-749-3333 Centro de Respuesta al Cliente (peticiones, elogias, inquietudes) last & Found 214-749-3810 Objetas Extraviadas
DART Police 214-928-6300 Palida de Transita Paratransit Services for the mobility impaired 214-515-7272 Paratransit para Personas can Discapacidad de Mavimienta RideShare/Cammuter Services
(corpool!vanpool infarmatian).......214-747-RIDE Servicias de Transparte Camparlido/Coledivo !informacion de carpool/vanpool) DART Administration Office 214-749-DART Oficinas Administrativas
de DART DART Contracts Info Helpline 214-749-2560 linea de Informacion para Contratos de DART DART Stores/Tiendas de DART Akard Statian 214-749-3282 Elm & Ervay streels 214-749-3800
Modifi(a(iones del Mes de O(tubre para Mejorar el Sistema de Autobuses Efectivo a partir de/tunes 6 de octubre de 2003. A partir del lunes 6 de octubre, DART implementara cambios significativos
en las rutas y horarios de autobuses para mejorar la eficiencia de su Sistema de Transporte. En muchos casos, cuando rutas son eliminadas debid.o al bajo numero d.e usuarlOS, se proveen
opclones alternas. EI popular servicio de camionetas de esquina a esquina DART On-Call sera sustituido por servicio de autobuses en partes de North Dallas, Farmers Branch y el este de
Plano; mientras opciones como el programa vanpool y el Employer Shuttle se ofreceran en otras areas. Por favor obtenga los nuevos horarios de todos los servicios listados en este folleto,
disponibles en los trenes y autobuses de DART, en las terminales de DART (Transit Centers), en las tiendas DART en el centro de Dallas, 0 lIamando al Centro de Asistencia a Clientes
de DART al 214.979.1111. Informacion sobre rutas y horarios esta siempre disponible en la pagina de Internet de DART, DART.org.
ffi NORTH i 1 TH AVE. MAP LEGEND _ Locol Service .... Points of Interest [fJ Transfer Points To Routes Indicated ,,(liTh Rail Servtce & Station 760 Este shuttle sera desviado en el area
del centro de Plano para reemplazar una porcion de la descontinuada Ruta 761. Desde Collin Creek Mall, los autobuses operaran sobre Plano Parkway, Alma Drive y 15th Street. This shuttle
will be rerouted in the downtown Plano area to replace a portion of discontinued Route 761. From Collin Creek Mall, buses will operate over Plano Parkway, Alma Drive and 15th Street.
Esta ruta sera descontinuada. Otras rutas-en particular las Rutas 8 y 60continua ran dando servicio dentro del area del centro de Dallas. This route will be discontinued and replaced
by the East Plano DART On-Call zone. (Please refer to the DART On-Call section at the beginning of this brochure for a map and more information.) Esta ruta sera descontinuada y reemplazada
por DART On-Call en la zona de East Plano. (Por favor vea la seccion de DART On-Call al principia de este folleto para el mapa y mas informacion.) a: UJ 0e:: 􀁾 PARKER ROAD STATION PARK
BLVD. :>.: 􀁾 􀁾UJ -J ;2 o-z 18th 􀀡􀀡􀀺􀁯􀁏􀁅􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁾 􀀪􀀮􀁾 *. Plano Municipal Center Collin Creek Mall farm{)rs Branch DART On-Call The Farmers Branch DART On-Call zone
will be bounded by the Interstate 635 service road, Myra Lane, Villa Creek Drive and the Farmers Branch city limits on the south; Denton Drive and Bee Street on the west; Spring Valley
Road, Fyke Road and Garden Brook Drive on the north; and Marsh Lane, Valley View Lane, Alpha Road and Midway Road on the east. Vans based at Farmers Branch Park & Ride will provide service
to and from residences and businesses within the area. Hours of operation will be 5 a.m.-9 p.m. Monday through Friday. Residents within the area can call 972.880.7786 for reservations
at least one hour in advance. The premium fare of $2.25 one way will be in effect (reduced fare for students, sen iors and passengers with disabilities is 􀀵􀀰􀁾 GARDE one way). FYKE
RD. DART On-(all en laZOl1a fast Plano Continued from previous page fast Plano DART On-Call (ontinuacion de 1(1 pagina anterior
t Map is located on next page E[ servicio DART On-Call en la zona de North Dallas estara delimitado a[ sur por NorthwestHighway; al oeste por Preston Road; al norte por Forest Lane; y a[ este por North Central Expressway. Las camionetas con base en Walnut Hill Station daran servicio de y hacia domicilios
y negocios especfficos dentro de esta area. Los horarios de servicio seran de 5:30 a.m. a 8:00 p.m. de lunes a viernes. Los residentes en el area de servicio pueden [lamar al 972.880.7772
para reservaciones por 10 menos con una hora de anticipacion. La tarifa premium de $2.25 por viaje senci[[o estara en efecto (La tarifa de descuento para estudiantes. personas de [a
tercera edad y discapacitados sera de 50¢ por viaje senci [[0). More information on these new DART On-Call services will be available soon. The East Plano DART On-Call zone will be bounded
by the Cotton Belt railroad alignment on the south, Shiloh Road on the east, Parker Road on the north and Avenue K on the west (extending to the North Central Expressway service road
between 18th Street and Park Boulevard). Vans based at Parker Road . Station will provide service to and from residences' within the area. Hours of operation will be 5 a.m.-8 p.m. Monday
through Friday. Residents within the area can call 972.880.5723 for reservations at least one hour in advance. The premium fare of $2.25 one way will be in effect (reduced fare for students,
seniors and passengers with disabilities is 50¢ one way). {ast Plano DART On-Call 􀁕􀁎􀀢􀀻􀁅􀁒􀁓􀁩􀁬􀁙􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀢 HUGHES·TRIGG ... STUDENT eTR. This service will be discontinued.
Audelia Manor residents will be able to ride Route 569. La ruta sera c1escontinuada. Los residentes de Audelia Manor podran usar la Ruta 569. The Mustang Express will be restructured
to serve Lovers Lane Station, replacing a portion of the discontinued Route 527 and to operate on a weekday schedule year-round. (See Route 527 for more details on service in this area.)
EI Mustang Express sera reestructurado para dar servicio a Lovers Lane Station, reemp[azando una porcion de la descontinuada Ruta 527 y para operar durante todo e[ ano con horario regular
entre semana. (Vea [a Ruta 527 para mas deta[[es sobre e[ servicio en esta area.) Bus 􀁒􀁯􀁵􀁴􀁾􀁳 􀀨􀁵􀁲􀁲􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁬􀁹 On 􀁄􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁵􀁲 The detours established on these routes earlier
in the year will be made permanent: Routes 310, 341, 344,438,451. Bus 􀁓􀀨􀁨􀁾􀁤􀁵􀁬􀁾 􀁁􀁤􀁪􀁵􀁳􀁴􀁭􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁳 These routes will experience schedule modifications only: Routes 2,8, 19,21,26,39,44,49,6
3,183,247, 278,311,376,385,444,466. In addition, all 500-series bus routes serving DART Rail will have timetables adjusted slightly to meet new DART Rail schedules. Rail Modifications
DART Rail passengers are advised that midday service frequency on the Red Line and Blue Line will be adjusted to every 20 minutes. !􀁾 l􀁜U􀀨􀁕􀁾i 1:1 li'lliU [:let ifil:l trifl Mapasclisponibl.es
en {M UYtiU [UJ .... r 􀀱􀁕􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀱􀁪􀁊 la slgulente pagma EI, servicio DART On-Call en la zona East Plano estara delimitado a[ sur por [as as vias de tren de Cotton Belt; a[ este por
Shiloh Road; al norte por Parker Road; y a[ oeste por Avenue [( (inc[uyendo [a extension de la latera[ del North Central Expressway entre 18th Street y Park Boulevard.) Las camionetas
con base en Parker Road Station daran servicio de y hacia domicilios y negocios especfficos dentro de esta area. Los horarios de servicio seran de 5:00 a.m. a 8:00 p.m. de tunes a viernes.
Los residentes en e[ area de servicio pueden I[a mar a [ 972.880.5723 para reservaciones por [0 menos con una hora de anticipacion. La tarifa premium de $2.25 por viaje senci[lo estara
en efecto (La tarifa de descuento para estudiantes, personas de la tercera edad y discapacitados sera de 50¢ por viaje sencillo). Mayores informes sobre estos nuevos servicios de DART
On-Call estaran disponibles proxima mente.
,/' SOUTH"V!sT CENTER . MALL.· 􀁾􀀯 KIEST BLVD. IT] 􀀻􀁪􀁾 -d /" ,:;;;."';: DANIELDALE RD. 􀁾􀀮 MOUNTAIN VEIW <;:OllEGE 􀁾 ILLINOIS A i\"'\"\, DALLA.S AUTO \\ /AUCTION 􀁾􀀮 \ WHEATLAND
RD. This route will be discontinued. On weekdays and Saturdays, Route 488 will operate between Forest Lane Station and LBJ/Central Station through Hamilton Park as part of its regular
route. On Sundays, New Route 536 will operate over the same route between Forest Lane Station and LBJ/Central Station only. Service to Texas Instruments will continue to be provided
by the TI Shuttle from LBJ/Central Station. See Route 551 for coverage to Blue Cross/Blue Shield. This route will be discontinued and replaced by the East Plano DART On-Call zone. (Please
refer to the DART On-Call section at the beginning of this brochure for a map and more information.) Esta ruta sera descontinuada y reemplazada por DART On-Call en la zona de East Plano.
(Por favor vea la secci6n de DART On-Call al principio de este folleto para el mapa y mas informaci6n.) Service will be rerouted between Westmoreland Station and Walton Walker Boulevard
along Kiest Boulevard to replace a portion of the discontinued Route 518. EI servicio sera reestructurado entre Westmoreland Station y Walton Walker Boulevard a 10 largo de Kiest Boulevard
para reemplazar una porci6n de la descontinuada Ruta 518. This route will be modified in the Lone Star Drive area to operate over Pipestone and French Settlement roads, serving an area
that was part of Route 441 prior to 10/6/03. Service along La Reunion Parkway between Norwich Street and Pipestone will be discontinued. Esta ruta sera modificada en el area de Lone
Star Drive para operar sobre las calles Pipestone y French Settlement, sirviendo as! un area que era parte de la Ruta 441 hasta antes del 10/6/03. EI servicio a 10 largo de Reunion Parkway
entre Norwich Street y Pipestone sera descontinuado. Sunday service will extend to Jeanne and Jonelle streets to replace service provided prior to 10/6/03 by Route 475. In addition,
rush-hour frequency will be adjusted to every 25 minutes. EI servicio dominical sera extendido hasta las calles Jeanne y Jonelle para reemplazar el servicio provisto por la Ruta 475
hasta antes del 10/6/03. Ademas, la frecuencia del servicio durante las horas pico se ajustara para ser cada 25 minutos. Rush-hour frequency will change to every 25 minutes and midday
and evening frequency to every 60 minutes. In addition, selected rush-hour trips will be extended to Keller Springs Road, replacing a portion of the discontinued Route 322. La frecuencia
de servicio durante las horas pico sera reducida a cada 25 minutos y la frecuencia durante el mediodia y la noche cada 60 minutos. Ademas, algunos viajes selectos en horas pico, extenderan
su servicio hasta Keller Springs Road, reemplazando una porci6n de la descontinuada Ruta 322. This route will be divided into 2 routes in the downtown Dallas area. The MAPLE portion
will operate over Lamar, Wood, Market and Commerce streets back to Lamar. There will also be a reduction in rush-hour frequency from every 15 to every 20 minutes. The SPRUCE VIA ST.
AUGUSTINE and SPRUCE VIA PRAIRIE CREEK portions will be renumbered Route 37, and inbound service will end at West Transfer Center (Bay A). These branches will no longer serve East Transfer
Center. Esta ruta sera dividida en dos rutas en el area del centro de Dallas. La porci6n MAPLE operara sobre las calles Lamar, Wood, Market y Commerce y de regreso a Lamar. Tambien habra
una reducci6n de la frecuencia de servicio en las horas pico de cada 15 a cada 20 minutos. Las porciones SPRUCE VIA ST. AUGUSTINE Y SPRUCE VIA PRAIRIE CREEK seran ahora la Ruta 37, y
el servicio de regreso terminara en West Transfer Center (Bay A). Estas porciones ya no daran servicio al East Transfer Center.
[1J NORTH Dcsllnillion, served by DART Oneilll all d:;y De,linallon:; ser:;:u by DARf 0:1-(,,11 uUllng olf.p':ilk hours o DART On'(illls(lrvice (][('i] Destinations served by DART On·
(all all day Destin,Hions served by DART On-Call during off-peak hours *@c=J DART On-Call service area [1J NORTH LEGEND :r 9:r VI El servicio DART On-Call en fa zona de Farmers Branch
estara delimitado al sur por la lateral de la Interestatal 635, Myra Lane, Villa Creek Drive y los I[mites de la ciudad de Farmers Branch; al oeste por Denton Drive y Bee Street; al
norte por Spring Valley Road, Fyke Road y Garden Brook Drive; y al este por Marsh Lane, Valley View Lane, Alpha Road y Midway Road. Las camionetas con base en el estacionamiento Park
& Ride de Farmers Branch daran servicio de y hacia domicilios y negocios especificos dentro de esta area. Los horarios de servicio seran de 5:00 a.m. a 9:00 p.m. de lunes a viernes.
Los residentes dentro del area de servicio pueden Ilamar al 972.880.7786 para reservaciones por 10 menos con una hora de anticipaci6n. La tarifa premium de $2.25 por viaje sencillo estara
en efecto (La tarifa de descuento para estudiantes, personas de la tercera edad y discapacitados sera de 􀀵􀀰􀁾 por viaje sencillo). N BROOK 􀁾􀁔􀁯􀁭 Thumb 14th .. Ole , Foods This route
will be discontinued. Other routes-in particular Routes 8 and 60-will continue to provide service within the downtown Dallas area. This route will be discontinued. Portions of the route
will continue to be served by Routes 360 and 562. The establishment of an Employer Shuttle van service is being discussed with area employers. La ruta sera descontinuada. Ciertas porciones
de la ruta seran cubiertas por las Rutas 360 y 562. La creaci6n de un servicio de camioneta Employer Shuttle esta siendo analizado con los empleaclos del area. This route will be discontinued.
Portions of the route will continue to be served by Routes 360 and 371. The establishment of an Employer Shuttle van service is being discussed with area employers. La ruta sera descontinuada.
Ciertas porciones de esta ruta seran cubiertas por las Rutas 360 y 371. La creaci6n de un servicio de camioneta Employer Shuttle esta siendo analizado con los empleados del area. Esta
ruta sera descontinuada. Durante los dias entre semana y los sabados, la Ruta 488 opera ra entre Forest Lane Station y LBJ/Central Station a traves de Hamilton Park como parte de su
servicio regular. Los domingos, la Nueva Ruta 536 operara sobre la misma ruta entre Forest Lane Station y LBJ/Central Station exclusivamente. El servicio para Texas Instruments continuara
siendo provisto par el TI Shuttle desde LBJ/Central Station. Vea la Ruta 551 para la cobertura hasta Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
I lAKE HIGHLANO AM/DDLE2c:12CJ.C£lc 􀁭􀁾 I 60, 569; 􀁾􀁾 jIIJ60,569 I Esta ruta sera dividida en 2 rutas en Kingsley Road. Las desviaciones de FERNDALE y CHURCH seran combinadas y ambos
viajes daran servicio a White Rock Station y Lovers Lane Station. La porcion de la ruta al norte de Kingsley ahara sera la Ruta 534 y operara en un circuito contrario a las manecillas
del reloj sabre Kingsley, Audelia y Ferndale. This route will be divided into 2 routes at Kingsley Road. The FERNDALE and CHURCH branches will be combined, and all trips will serve both
White Rock Station and Lovers Lane Station. The portion of the route north of Kingsley will be renumbered Route 534 and will operate in a counterclockwise loop over Kingsley, Audelia
and Ferndale roads. EI circuito que va sabre Sportsmans Parkway, Cherry Laurel Lane y Keeneland Parkway sera descontinuado, y los autobuses ahara usaran las laterales norte y sur de
Walton Walker Boulevard entre Keen land y Jefferson boulevards. ,/This route will no longer operate on weekends. The change will also impact the weekend extension of Route 310 into DFW
Airport. Service to and from the airport will be provided by the Trinity Railway Express (TRE) and airport shuttles on Saturdays and by Route 409 all weekend. Selected trips on the VALLEY
RANCH branch also will be modified along MacArthur Boulevard to replace service provided prior to 10/6/03 by Route 303. Esta ruta ya no operara los fines de semana. EI cambia afectara
tam bien el servicio del fin de semana de la extension de la Ruta 310 que va al Aeropuerto DFW. EI servicio hacia y desde el aeropuerto sera provisto par el Trinity Railway Express (TRE)
y los shuttles del aeropuerto los sabados y par la Ruta 409 todo el fin de semana. Algunos viajes selectos en la porcion de VALLEY RANCH tambien seran modificados a 10 largo de McArthur
Boulevard para remplazar el servicio provisto par la Ruta 303 hasta antes del 10/6/03. This route will be divided into 2 routes at West Transfer Center. The GLEN OAKS branch will terminate
at West Transfer Center and have reduced service frequency. The SCYENE, BRUTON and CHEYENNE branches will be renumbered Route 165 and will operate weekday and weekend evenings over a
combination route using Bruton Road, Masters Drive, Cheyenne Road and Lake June Road. Esta ruta sera dividida en dos rutas en el West Transfer Center. La porcion GLEN OAKS terminara
en el West Transfer Center y se reducira la frecuencia del servicio. Las porciones SCYENE, BRUTON Y CHEYENNE seran ahara la Ruta 165 y operara todas las naches de la semana can una ruta
combinada utilizando Bruton Road, Masters Drive, Cheyenne Road y Lake June Road.
The number of morning and evening rush-hour trips will be reduced. EI numem de viajes durante las horas pico de la manana y de la tarde sera reducido. This route will be discontinued.
For information about vanpool options to the DFW Airport area, please call 214.747.RIDE. Esta ruta sera descontinuada. Para mas informacion sobre opciones como el programa van pool al
area del Aeropuerto DFW, por favor Ilame al 214.747.RIDE (7433). Downtown Dallas routing will be extended to Union Station to provide a direct connection to Fair Park and Deep Ellum
on all except HOV trips. Buses will travel in both directions along Main Street and will no longer serve West Transfer Center. EI servicio del Centro de Dallas sera extendido hasta Union
Station para proveer una conexi6n directa a Fair Park y Deep Elum en todos los viajes excepto para los HOV. Los autobuses viajaran en ambas direcciones a 10 largo de Main Street y ya
no daran servicio al West Transfer Center. This route will be divided into 2 routes at West Transfer Center. The FARMERS BRANCH and BELT LINE branches will be renumbered Route 185 and
morning rush-hour frequency will be reduced. Esta ruta sera dividida en dos rutas en el West Transfer Center. Las porciones FARMERS BRANCH Y BELT LINE seran ahora la Ruta 185 y el servicio
en las mananas, durante las horas pica sera reducido. This route will be restructured to operate during morning and evening rush hours, plus one late evening trip between Shiloh Road
and Parker Road Station. The area will also be served by the East Plano DART On-Call zone. (Please refer to the DART On-Call section at the beginning of this brochure for a map and more
information.) Esta ruta sera reestructurada para operar durante las horas pica en la manana y en la tarde, mas un viaje nocturno entre Shilon Road y Parker Road Station. Esta area tambien
sera cubierta por DART On-Call en la zona de East Plano. (Por favor vea la seccion de DART On-Call al principio de este folleto para el mapa y mas informacion.)
oz5 a. VILLAGE GROVEVIEWw E ffi NTAGON a: I,. 􀁉􀁾 I INDUSTRIAL ' , 0 MELcjER I(fJ i 207.412. Rowfe;tt Dart on qal1 i 􀁾􀁧􀀻􀀻􀀦􀀷􀀺􀁾􀀯􀁴􀀺 ! I WALMARr HWY.66 /A This route will be
discontinued. Alternate service in the area will continue to be provided by Routes 410,372 and 560. ffi 557 ... Poinls of Interest NORTH rn Transfer Points To Routes Indicated • Transit
Cenfer D Pork and Ride 􀁶􀀮􀁾􀀺􀁩􀁜 Roil Service & Station 􀁾 I +-I I "0 I 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀂷􀂷􀀢􀂷􀂷􀀢􀂷􀀢􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁩􀂷􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁵􀀨􀁾􀁾 l . 􀁾 􀁉􀁾􀁾 'I J g 5IA4i9iJ ;􀁾:􀁉 􀁦􀀯􀁬􀀮􀁾􀀺 I f 8e'
! \ I !3 J rn 􀁾􀁉 􀁾 ;At" S j NO'TH 􀀫􀁾􀀮􀁦􀀺􀁩􀁩􀁬􀀧􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁾􀁾􀁜􀀮􀁆􀁾􀁾􀀣􀀮􀀡􀁙 I 377, 􀁾􀀷􀀸􀀬􀀺􀀳􀀸􀀰􀁪 i:::l /j I 1IJ400. tz.!486! 10 I i 􀁾 • 513, i 􀀬􀀵􀁾􀁏􀁒􀁛􀁉􀀭􀁉􀁁􀁾 ia..
A EfEMENTAJ?Y[fJ513 Esta ruta sera descontinuada. Servicios alternos seran provistos por las Rutas 410,372 Y560. The western portion of this route will be extended along Sherman Street,
Floyd Road and Prestonwood Drive to serve Blue Cross/Blue Shield, an area served by Route 585 prior prior to 10/6/03. La porci6n oeste de esta ruta sera extend ida a 10 largo de Sherman
Street, Floyd Road y Prestonwood Drive para dar servicio a Blue Cross/Blue Shield, area anteriormente cubierta por la Ruta 585 hasta antes de 10/6/03. This route will be extended along
Lakeview Parkway (Highway 66) to Kirby Road and Industrial Street to Rowlett Par & Ride, reaching an area previously without service. Midday service will be introduced. Esta ruta sera
extendida a 10 largo de Lakeview Parkway (Highway 66) hasta Kirby Road, Industrial Street y la estaci6n Rowlett Park & Ride, alcanzando un area anteriormente sin servicio. Se introducira
servicio al mediodia. .Weekend trips into DFW Airport as an extension of Route 202 will no longer be operated. Weekend service will continue between North Irving Transit Center and the
Royal Lane/Las Colinas Boulevard area. In addition, the route will begin serving Neiman Marcus from a stop on Customer Way and will no longer enter the facility grounds. Los viajes como
extensi6n extensi6n de la Ruta 202 hacia el aeropuerto DFW seran descontinuados. EI servicio de fin de semana entre North Irving Transit Center y el area de Royal Lane/Las Colinas Boulevard
continuara operando. Ademas, esta ruta comenzara a dar servicio a Neiman Marcus desde la parada sobre Customer Way ubicada en el exterior de las instalaciones exclusivamente. This route
will be discontinued and replaced by the Farmers Branch DART On-Call zone. (Please refer to the DART On-Call section at the beginning of this brochure for a map and more information.)
In addition, Route 488 will serve Brookhaven College on all weekday trips. Esta ruta operara solamente entre South Irving Station y North Irving Transit Center. EI servicio a 10 largo
de McArthur Boulevard que Ilega a Baylor Medical Center en Irving y al area de Market Center sera provisto con limitaciones mediante la modificaci6n de la Ruta 202 VALLEY RANCH (vea
el mapa de la Ruta 202). La parte sur sera desviada de Rock Island Road a Pioneer drive y O'Connor Road para reemplazar el servicio provisto por la Ruta 302 hasta el 10/6/03. This weekend-only
route will be moved .from O'Connor Road to MacArthur Boulevard between Grauwyler Road and Rochelle Boulevard to provide service to Baylor Medical Center at Irving. Esta ruta exclusiva
de los fines de semana sera desviada de O'Connor Road a McArthur Boulevard entre Grauwyler Road y Rochelle Boulevard para proveer servicio al Baylor Medical Center en Irving.
I􀁉􀁾 o'"«z :3 This route will be moved from Pioneer Drive to Rock Island Road to address requests from customers along Rock Island. La ruta sera trasladada de Pioneer Drive a Rock Island
Road a petici6n de los usuarios a 10 largo de Rock Island. This route will operate between South Irving Station and North Irving Transit Center only. Service along MacArthur Boulevard
to Baylor Medical Center at Irving and the Market Center area will be provided on a limited basis by a modification of Route 202 VALLEY RANCH (see Route 202 for map). The southern portion
will be rerouted from Rock Island Road to Pioneer Drive and O'Connor Road to replace service provided prior to 10/6/03 by Route 302. The loop over Sportsmans Parkway, Cherry Laurel Lane
and Keeneland Par way will be discontinued, with buses using the north and southbound service roads on Walton Walker Boulevard between Keeneland and Jefferson boulevards. This route
will no longer operate south of Walnut Hill Lane, with service in that area provided by the North Dallas DART On-Call zone. (Please refer to the DART On-Call section at the beginning
of this brochure for a map and more information.) Esta ruta ya no dara servicio a la parte sur de Walnut Hill Lane y el servicio en esa area sera provisto por DART On-Call en la zona
de North Dallas. (Por favor vea la secci6n de DART On-Call al principio de este folleto para el mapa y mas informaci6n.) Sunday service will be discontinued. In addition, service operating
on Miller Road during midday and late evenings only will be switched to rush hours only. EI servicio dominical sera descontinuado. Ademas, el servicio que operaba en Miller Road durante
el mediodia y en las tardes sera cambiado a horas pico solamente.
oz :'5 "-WALNUT ffi NORTH 488 503 Service will operate between Cityplace Station and Lovers Lane Station only. The area north of Lovers Lane will be served by the North Dallas DART On-Call
zone. (Please refer to the DART On-Call section at the beginning of this brochure for a map and more information.) La ruta dara servicio s610 entre City place Station y Lovers Lane Station.
EI area norte de Lovers Lane sera cu bierta por el servicio de DART On-Calf en la zona de North Dallas. (Por favor vea la secci6n de DART On-Call al principio de este folleto para el
mapa y mas informaci6n.) This route in the West Plano area will be discontinued. For information on van pool options, please call 214.747.RIDE. La ruta sera descontinuada en el area
de West Plano. Para mas informaci6n sobre opciones como el programa vanpool, por favor Ilame al 214.747.RIDE. Service will operate during rush hours only. Also, see the Routes Currently
On Detour section for more information on Route 344. La ruta dara servicio s610 durante las horas pico. Ademas, vea la secci6n de Rutas Desviadas para mas informaci6n sobre la Ruta 344.
This route will no longer operate on Sundays. Weekday rush-hour frequency will be reduced from every 20 minutes to every 30 minutes. Esta ruta dejara de operar los domingos. La frecuencia
del servicio durante las horas pico entre semana sera cada 30 minutos en vez de cada 20 minutos. The short-line trips previously added between North Irving Transit Center and Addison
Transit Center, as well as the Luna Road extension, will be discontinued. For information on vanpool options in this area, please call 214.747.RIDE. Los viajes cortos anadidos anteriormente
entre el North Irving Transit Center y el Addison Transit Center, al igual que la extensi6n de Luna Road, seran descontinuados. Para mas informaci6n sobre opciones en esta area, como
el programa vanpool, por favor Ilame al 214.747.RIDE. This route will be extended to serve the Wal-Mart at Marsh and Frankford Road. Also, see the Routes Currently On Detour section
for for more information on Route 341. La ruta sera extendida para dar servicio al Wal-Mart de Kelly Boulevard y Frankford Road. Ademas, vea la secci6n de Rutas Desviadas para mas informaci6n
sobre la Ruta 341. This service between Comp USA and Addison Transit Center will be discontinued. For information on vanpool options in the area, please call 214.747.RIDE. EI servicio
de esta ruta entre Comp USA y Addison Transit Center sera descontinuado. Para mas informaci6n sobre opciones en el area, como el programa vanpool, por favor Ilame al 214.747.RIDE.
This route will be discontinued. Service along portions of the route will continue to be provided by Routes 8, 26, 31,44, 51 and 503. La ruta sera descontinuada. EI servicio a Jo largo
de algunas porciones de la ruta continuara siendo provisto pOl' las Rutas 8, 26, 31, 44, 51 Y 503. This route will be discontinued and replaced by the Farmers Branch DART On-Call zone.
(Please refer to the DART On-Call section at the beginning of this brochure for a map and more information.) in addition, Route 331 will be extended to serve that portion of the route
west of interstate 35E (see Route 331 for map), and Route 31 will operate selected rush-hour trips to Keller Springs Road. Esta ruta sera descontinuada y reemplazada POl' el servicio
DART On-Call en la zona de Farmers Branch. (POl' favor vea la seccion de DART On-Call al principio de este folleto para el mapa y mas informacion.) Ademas, la Ruta 331 se extendera para
dar servicio a la parte oeste de la Interestatal 35E (vea el mapa en la Ruta 331), y la Ruta 31 operara viajes selectos durante las horas pico a Keller Springs Road. This route will
be extended west of Farmers Branch Park & Ride to serve an area that was served by Route 322 prior to 10/6/03. Overall service frequency will be increased from every 60 minutes to every
45 minutes midday and every 35 minutes to every 30 minutes during rush hours. Esta ruta se extendera hacia ei oeste del estacionamiento Park & Ride de Farmers Branch para dar servicio
al area que era cubierta poria Ruta 322 hasta antes del 10/6/03. La frecuencia del servicio sera mejorada de cada 60 minutos a cada 45 minutos al mediodia y de 35 minutos a cada 30 minutos
durante las horas pico. Esta ruta sera descontinuada y reemplazada pOl' el servicio DART On-Call en la zona de Farmers Branch. (POl' favor vea la secci6n de DART On-Call al principio
de este folleto para el mapa y mas informacion.) Ademas, la Ruta 488 dara servicio a Brookhaven College en los todos los viajes entre semana. Sunday service will be discontinued. EI
servicio dominical sera descontinuado. This route will be discontinued and the portion between Westmoreland Station and Spur 408 (Walton Walker Boulevard) along Kiest Boulevard replaced
by Route 574. Sunday service to Potter's House will be provided from Westmoreland Station by Route 549 (see Routes 549 and 574 for maps). Esta ruta sera descontinuada y la porci6n entre
Westmoreland Station y Spur 408 (Walton Walker Boulevard) a 10 largo de Kiest Boulevard sera reemplazada poria Ruta 574. EI servicio dominical a Potter's House sera provisto desde Westmoreland
Station poria Ruta 549 (vea los mapas de las Rutas 549 y 574). This route will be discontinued. Alternate service will be provided by a modified Route 569 through The Village Apartments
and by a new year-round Route 768 Mustang Express (see Routes 569 and 768 for maps). Route 519 PARK LANE STATION will continue to provide service in the Medallion Center area. La ruta
sera descontinuada. Un servicio alternativo sera provisto poria modificada Ruta 569 a traves de The Village Apartments y par la Ruta 768 Mustang Express que dara servicio todo e[ ano
(vea los mapas de [as Rutas 569 y 768). La Ruta 519 PARK LANE STATION continuara dando servicio en el area de Medallion Center. Service north of Interstate Highway 30 will no longer
be provided, and the route will be modified slightly in the Pinnacle Park area. Rush-hour frequency on the remainder of the route will be reduced. A Sunday extension to Potter's House
will replace a portion of the trips provided by Route 518 prior to 10/6/03. EI servicio al norte de la Interestatal Highway 30 ya no sera provisto, y la ruta sera ligeramente modificada
en el area de Pinnacle Park. EI servicio durante las horas pico del resto de la ruta sera reducido. Una extensi6n dominical a Potter's House reemplazara una porcion de los viajes realizados
poria Ruta 518 hasta antes de 10/6/03. ---,------------\ \ \
ITJ35 SINGLETON oZ' 􀁾􀁩 IH -30 '" Maps are located on next page Service north of Scyene Road to John West Road will be discontinued. A new northern loop will extend over Hillburn Drive,
Hume Drive, Prichard Lane, Scyene and Buckner Boulevard back to Hume. Sunday service also will be eliminated (see Route 42 for Sunday service over a portion of this route). EI servicio
entre el norte de Scyene Road hasta John West Road sera descontinuado. Se anadira un nuevo servicio extendido para· el circuito norte sobre Hillburn Drive, Hume Drive, Prichard Lane,
Scyene y Buckner Boulevard y de regreso a Hume. EI servicio dominical sera eliminado (vea la Ruta 42 para servicio dominical sobre una porcion de esta ruta). This route will be divided
into 2 routes at Hampton Station. The portion between the station and Medical/Market Center Station will be rerouted from Irving Boulevard and Mockingbird Lane to remain on Inwood Road
to Harry Hines Boulevard and will experience a reduction in service frequency. Between Hampton Station and Southwest Center Mall, the route will be renumbered 556 and will otherwise
remain unchanged. Esta ruta sera dividida en 2 rutas en Hampton Station. La porcion entre Medical/Market Center Station operara con frecuencia reducida y sera desviada de Irving Boulevard
y Mockingbird Lane y permanecera a 10 largo de Inwood Road hasta Harry Hines Boulevard. Entre Hampton Station y Southwest Center Mall, la ruta sera ahora la Ruta 556 y permanecera de
otra forma sin cam bios. Mapas disponibles en la siguiente pagina The western portion of this route will be rerouted to improve bus connections in West Dallas by continuing over Westmoreland
Road to Singleton Boulevard and Hampton Road. A portion of the route on Lone Star Drive and West Commerce Street will be discontinued and new service added on Postal Way. (Please see
Route 3S for service along Pipestone Road and La Reunion Parkway.) Thisextension of Route 441 will operate 7 days a week. La porcion oeste de esta ruta sera modificada para mejorar las conexiones de autobuses en West Dallas haciendo que continue sobre Westmoreland
Road hasta Singleton Boulevard y Hampton Road. La porcion de la ruta en Lone Star Drive y West Commerce Street sera descontinuada y se anadira un servicio nuevo en Postal Way. (Por favor
vea la Ruta 35 para servicio a 10 largo de Pipestone Road y Reunion Parkway.) Esta extension de la Ruta 441 operara los 7 dfas de la semana. The rush-hour extension to Carbondale Street
will be moved from Ledbetter Drive to Stag Road and Haas Drive to improve service in the area, as well as provide access to Ledbetter Station. La extension a Carbondale Street del servicio
durante las horas pico sera desviado de Ledbetter Drive a Stag Road y Haas Drive para mejorar el servicio en el area y ademas proveer acceso a Ledbetter Station.
La ruta dara servicio s610 durante las horas pico. EI servicio al mediodia entre Downtown Garland Station y la estaci6n Rowlett Park & Ride sera provisto por la Ruta 557 despues del
10/6/03. La ruta tambien sera desviada de Main Street debido a las obras de construcci6n, que duraran hasta abril de 2005. Los autobuses giraran a la derecha (este) en Melcer street
desde Rowlett Road hasta el estacionamiento Rowlett Park & Ride, continuando hacia el este sobre Industrial Street, dando vuelta a la izquierda en Kirby Road y nuevamente a la izquierda
en Highway 66 (Lakeview Parkway) de regreso a Rowlett Road. This route will be divided into 2 routes at South Irving Station. The portion between the station and North Irving Transit
Center will be renumbered Route 507 and operate on a reduced schedule. (Please note: The Fuller Road/Highway 114 loop will no longer be served, and service to Baylor Medical Center at
Irving will be provided by Route 303 on weekdays and Route 314 on weekends.) La ruta sera dividida en dos dos rutas en South Irving Station. La porci6n entre la estaci6n y el North Irving
Transit Center ahora sera la Ruta 507 y operara con horarios reducidos. (Nota importante: Ya no habra servicio en el Fuller Road/Highway 114 loop, y el servicio para el Baylor Medical
Center de Irving sera provisto por la Ruta 303 entre semana y por la Ruta 314 los fines de semana,) Service will operate during rush hours only. Midday service between Downtown Garland
Station and Rowlett Park & Ride will be provided by Route 557 after 10/6/03. The route also is being moved off Main Street due to major construction, expected to last until April 2005.
Buses will turn right (east) on Melcer Street from Rowlett Road to Rowlett Park & Ride, continue east on Industrial Street, turn left on Kirby Road and left on Highway 66 (Lakeview Parkway)
back to Rowlett Road. BRUTON : ffi "" "NORTH MAP LEGEND _ Local Service [jJ Transfer Points to Routes Indicated A-Points at Interest • Transit Center 475 A-􀁾 FIESTA Continuaci6n de
la pagina anterior "n P , 􀁾􀀶􀀶 ,,",,1 _ ,m SCYENE Continued from previous page IRELAND ElEM A-􀁾􀁾IZ􀁾􀁷􀁥􀀭 CD JEANE 􀁾CL 􀁾􀁾􀁲􀀺􀀺􀁲􀀭􀁾􀀢􀀢 "LAi<E,.JUNE This route will serve Hamilton
Park and LBJ/Central Station, replacing Route 585 on weekdays and Saturdays. (See Route 585 for description of Sunday service to Hamilton Park provided by New Route 536.) Service on
Forest Lane between Greenville Avenue and Forest Lane Station will continue to be provided by Route 486. In addition, service between Addison Transit Center and Brookhaven College will
be expanded from rush hours to every weekday trip, replacing discontinued Route 321. La ruta dara servicio a Hamilton Park y LBJ/Central Station, remplazando a la Ruta 585 entre semana
y los sabados. (Vea la Ruta 585 para una descripci6n del servicio dominical para Hamilton Park provisto por la Nueva Ruta 536.) EI servicio en Forest Lane entre Greenville Avenue y Forest
Lane Station continuara prestandose por la Ruta 486. Ademas, el servicio entre Addison Transit Center y Brookhaven College sera aumentado de s610 en las horas pico a servicio regular
entre semana, remplazando asi a la Ruta 321 que fue descontinuada,