􀁾 G"mtham &ksociates, loc. Date: May 12,2005 To: Mr. Eduardo Ugarte -DART Cc: Mr. Steve Chutchian -Town of Addison Mr. Mike Tucker -Explorer Mr. Michael Floyd -Explorer From: Bruce Grantham, P.E. MEMO 1919 S. Shiloh Rd., Suite 310, LB 8, Garland, TX 75042 G&ANo: 334 Re: Lindbergh Drive Drainage Channel Comparison of Watershed Conditions between 1990 and 2004 At the March 1,2005 meeting, which included representatives from DART, Explorer, and the Town of Addison, DART raised a concern that development at or adjacent to the Addison Airport, subsequent to DART's purchase of the adjacent railroad in 1990, may have increased storm water runoff rates in the railroad ditch. In order to investigate the level of development at the airport between 1990 and today, we acquired aerial photographs of the site from February 1990 (see Exhibit 1) and 2004 (see Exhibit 2). A comparison between these aerials revealed only minor changes in the amount of impervious surface on the airport. For example, impervious surfaces were replaced with grass when the Keller Springs Tunnel was constructed. The aerials also show that Lindbergh Drive was constructed in its current location prior to DART's railroad purchase. The existing culverts under Lindbergh are undersized relative to Town of 􀁾􀁤􀁤􀁩􀁳􀁯􀁮 standards, consequently, they result in the detention of stormwater on the Airport. We respectfully request your consideration of the following two matters: 1. Does the information presented in this memo provide sufficient evidence to alleviate your concern that the Addison Airport development has increased stormwater runoff rates in the railroad ditch subsequent to DART's purchase of the railroad in 1990? 2. Can the proposed channel improvements prepared by our firm for Addison be considered by DART on their own merits, separate from the matter of historical upstream development? Please contact me if you have any questions. Tel: (972) 864-2333/FAX: (972) 864-2334/E-mail: Info@gra-ce.ilet EXHIBITl ADDISON AIRPORT 1990 AERIAL ADDISON AIRPORT ZOOt-AERIAL DART Notes Lindbergh Drainage Channel DART Comments: • Considers this project only beneficial for erosion control around their facilities • Grantham & Associates drainage report is not complete and doesn't take the affect ofAirport stormwater into account. • This project, as designed, will prevent DART from building future parallel line and changes water levels in this area. • Not very receptive to doing a "maintenance" project in lieu ofa permanent fix for future rail construction. • Wants stormwater detained with detention ponds on Airport property. • Considers water entering channel area at a higher rate than is acceptable. • DART parallel line is 15-20 years out. • DART prefers the project to be expanded to provide long term channel improvements that will not be tom out later and that addresses Airport water Issue. • Considers previous Airport improvements to have directed excessive stormwater to DART right-of-way, despite their written protests over many years. • DART doesn't want the Town to construct construct a "band-aid" repair project, when the issue ofexcessive water from the Airport still exists. Grantham & Associates, Inc. Comments: • Stated that water conditions existed prior to DART purchasing their right-of-way. DART representatives disagreed with this. • In order to meet DART's needs to contain additional water volume and lower water elevations, and much larger project in scope and cost is required, and is far beyond the limits ofthis project's intention. Summary: • Explorer Pipeline said that ifDART is building their new line to the north ofthe existing track, then Explorer may have to relocate their line in 15-20 years and do not want to spend their $90,000 participation at this time. • Explorer will field check their line to see ifit is out ofcompliance in terms of adequate cover. • DART will create a proposed cross-section that includes the location ofthe future parallel line and will include the existing Explorer line. • Grantham will re-study their drainage calculations. • Town stated that we are willing at this time to participate with Explorer to protect their pipeline and two ofthe Town's existing property owners that are experiencing flooding. • Town echoed the statement that the Airport stormwater issue is beyond the scope ofthis project and should be considered subsequently to the preparation ofa future Airport Drainage Master Plan. • All parties agreed to meet again to discuss the project in about two weeks. PREPARED BY THE ACT21 TEAM FOR THE DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM COTTON BELT Town of Addison Lindbergh Channel Drainage 28 March 2005 I.:: C» a.. 1&.1 a=:: a=:: 1&.1 1-1-1&.1 _I Doc. No. _ General Engineeling Consultants A Joint Venture of Carter & Burgess, Jacobs, STV Incorporated and KAI Alliance Section 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Table of Contents Title Introduction . Existing Site Summary . Project Design Criteria and Evaluation .. License Agreements . Conclusion .. Recommendations . Appendix: Earlier Correspondence 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Lindbergh Channel is a natural drainage ditch on the north side of the Cotton Belt tracks between Addison and Midway Roads. This ditch is located on DART right-of way for its entire length in this area. Flooding of areas adjacent to the Lindbergh Channel were first reported by the Town of Addison in 1998. The Town of Addison has proposed the installation of a lined channel which does not meet DART Design Requirements for storm drainage next to the tracks. 2.0 Existing Site Summary The discharge of storm water runoff from the airport and developments next to this channel have increased the amount of storm water runoff into this natural ditch. Development along this area has effectively reduced the width of the natural drainage channel. The current channel dimensions will not convey a 100year flood event in accordance with DART Design Criteria for the railroad track-way. The Town ofAddison has noted flooding of areas adjacent to the ditch. 3.0 Project Design Criteria and Evaluation Under Vol. 1 Chapter 7, Section 7.6 -Channels of the current DART Design Criteria Status: "Freeboard for roadbed ditches shall be the maximum of either 1.0 feet from the shoulder of a road without curb and gutter, or 1.0 feet from top ofcurb, and 1.0 foot from the bottom of the track-way sub-ballast for the lOa-year frequency storm." This track-way will eventually be used for DART Commuter Rail or Light Rail Transit operation. If the quantity of storm water runoff is not reduced, the rail tracks will need to be elevated several feet to meet the design requirements for a 100 year flood event next to the tracks. This increase of track-way elevation will require an increase in the top of rail elevation, which will result in raising the Midway Road crossing and any other grade crossing on either side of this location for several hundred feet. 4.0 License Agreements No license agreements were found which would allow the airport or any of the developed areas to discharge their increased storm water runoff directly onto the track-way. The Town ofAddison has proposed in their letter dated February 16,2000 (See Appendix) to direct the flow from the airport area into their proposed storm drain system under the Arapaho Road extension, which will reduce the flow into the Lindbergh Channel significantly. 5.0 Conclusion The major cause of impacts (erosion & flooding) to the existing ditch in DART Right-ofWay is the flow generated from Addison Airport area passing through the existing culverts (4-elliptical RCP) under Lindbergh Drive. It appears the proposed channel improvements will not lower the water surface in the channel significantly within the project limits. (Between Lindbergh Avenue and Midway Road) The top of rail elevation of any future Commuter Rail/LRT tracks along this DART Right-of Way will have to be raised three to four feet to meet the current DART Design Criteria. (The Design Criteria requires that the 100 year flood elevation to be a minimum of four feet below the top of rail which will provide a minimum free board of one foot below the sub-ballast level) Rerouting or detaining the runoff from the airport will allow for a Lindbergh Channel design in accordance with the DART design requirements, without elevating the tracks. 6.0 Recommendations We recommend the runoff from the airport be routed to an alternate storm drainage facility or detained in a means, which will not exceed the ability of the Lindbergh Channel to convey this water in accordance with the 100 year flood event design criteria for the track-way. The money earmarked for this channel ($250,000) would probably alleviate the flooding issues if it were spent in controlling the source of the flooding upstream of Lindbergh Avenue by means of a retention facility in the Airport boundaries. Further, we recommend DART consider an indemnification agreement from the Town of Addison to protect DART from any present or future flooding liabilities if the storm drainage is not rerouted or detained, as all the improvements are within DART ROWand will be perceived by the general public as a DART Project. Also, we recommend DART require the Town ofAddison to waive the the requirements for any future DART drainage improvements to accommodate offsite drainage according to present or future Town of Addison drainage criteria. APPENDIX. \'fs. 􀁊􀁾􀀱􀁊􀁬 􀁓􀁾􀁩􀁤..m;f Ri;hr-Of-􀁜􀁜􀁾􀁾􀁹 svlan;1gcnr(:!.H 􀁒􀁾􀀻􀀺􀁲􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁉􀀺􀀬􀁮􀁲􀁡 􀁾􀀱􀀻􀀧􀀻􀀻 􀁾􀀩􀁍􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀮 􀁁􀁮􀀺􀁾􀁡 F{apj;j 􀁔􀀺􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁩􀁴 􀁰􀀢􀁃􀁾􀀢 Be-x 660163 1.!O 1 P,rciiir: :\'-·"t:nue , U::Ha:.::. 'f 􀁾􀀮􀁜􀀧􀀺􀀻􀁪􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀮 752{;/.l; "L-iO 􀀯􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀭􀁩􀀧􀀺􀀾􀀡􀁣􀀿􀀬 􀀯􀀺􀁊􀀰􀀮􀁾􀀢􀁽 :"_-..t!"-£f';JZ-b./􀀯􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁦􀀮􀀺􀁦􀁬􀀭􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁩􀀻􀀩􀁏􀁦 􀁔􀁨􀀺􀁺􀁭􀁫􀀬􀁾 rH·: -for 􀀮􀁖􀁾􀀩􀁬􀁬􀀻􀀢􀀧 'C-.s· ' 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁩􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀯􀀮 or, 􀀳􀁟􀀺􀂷􀀮􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀺 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁻 􀁲􀀧􀂷􀂷􀂷􀁻􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀧􀁬􀀺 􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾 ''::;: ,:.."C: 􀀧􀁩􀀢􀀺􀀺􀀭􀁜􀀮􀀽􀀼􀀧􀀻􀀧􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀬 􀁩􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀡􀁾 􀁾􀁽􀁦 􀀻􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁬􀀺􀀭 􀁩􀁬􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁡􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀳􀀢􀀻􀀻􀁊􀀧􀁬􀀧􀀺􀀺􀁩􀀺􀀧 􀁾􀀢􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁰􀀻􀁩􀀺􀂷􀀻􀀧􀁽􀁮􀁬􀀮􀀺􀁟􀀺􀁭􀁾􀀮􀀻 􀁁􀀻􀁾􀀧􀀵􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁊􀁩􀀻 ',1'-; \'1,':.:" 􀀮􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀺 􀀺􀁾􀁜􀀧􀀻􀀡􀁾􀀮􀁩􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀮􀁥􀁰􀁾􀁮􀀻􀁪􀀬􀁾􀀮􀂷􀀺􀁦􀀻􀀭􀁾􀀬􀀺􀁾􀀺 r>/:,:r:.T. :.':..'.::-􀂷􀀮􀁉􀀮􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀻􀀻􀀢􀁾 :Ji.clS"e 􀁾􀀧􀀳􀁽􀀨 T'i"'!::': ,::.<.: 􀀹􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀭􀁾􀂷􀀿􀂷􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀻􀀵􀁓􀀭 􀀲􀀳􀁾􀀺􀁲􀁾􀀼􀀻􀀻 􀀺􀁾􀁩􀀧 􀁾􀀺􀁩􀀡􀀧􀀺􀀻 Jr\!. 􀁾 ..=-􀀬􀀺􀀬􀁈􀁾􀁙 􀂷􀀻􀁾􀁬􀁦􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀢􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁾􀁽􀀺􀀮􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺 ·'.IT.'.n:::::.:':: 2ici:;0:\,"il 􀁩􀁬􀀺􀀺􀁲􀁾􀁔􀁭􀀨􀁩􀁾 􀁩􀁲􀁾􀁪􀀧.. .-, OAR'l' " .' -.-, ;",-. "':J", __,. 􀂷􀁾􀀻􀀺􀁏􀀮􀀺􀁔􀁅 1 J\o1r. Jobn 􀁂􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁭􀁧􀁡􀁮􀁬􀀱􀁾􀁲􀀮FT Director of.Public 'Work;: TO'wn 'ofActilison P. n. Box 144 Addison; ·Tcxas 􀀧􀁟􀀷􀀵􀀰􀁾􀀧􀀱􀀱 Dc-ar 1\fr. BauragarITn.,-r: Upon :itL'-Jllc:ct.iolt 􀀺􀁯􀁦􀁪􀁾 􀀭􀁄􀀧􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁻􀁽􀁦􀁾􀀩􀁜􀁜􀀢􀁬􀁬􀁣􀁩􀁩 miita:m:€1 􀀧􀁲􀀡􀂥􀁩􀁩􀁉􀀧􀀮􀁬􀁩􀁦􀂷􀁷􀁾􀀮􀁹 􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁐􀀧􀀮􀀭􀁶􀀨􀀮􀁾􀁮􀂷􀁎􀁻􀁬􀁩􀁩􀁜􀀢􀀭􀀺􀁾􀀩􀂷 􀁒􀀺􀁜􀀻􀀧􀀩􀁾􀁨􀀺􀀱 􀁾􀁩􀁩􀀡􀁬􀀧􀁤􀁴􀁨􀁬􀀮􀀮􀁾 'f";..\:d' 􀀺􀁰􀁮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀧􀁦􀁲􀁾􀁲􀁴􀁹 retained :by ::DniOD .:Paeli". Ib.ilm...tt:it j( js ,'@'ltT 􀀬􀁾􀁟􀁰􀁭􀁴􀁩􀀱􀁮 􀀧􀀺􀁵􀁭􀁦􀀻􀁷􀁥􀁾 􀀧􀁬􀁦􀁬􀀧􀁱􀁾 􀁡􀁴􀁾 􀀭􀁴􀀱􀁣􀁲􀁵􀀻􀀮􀁲􀁾 􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁦 ·.im::mus-ed 􀀷􀁬􀁮􀀧􀀨􀀻􀀧􀀭􀁾􀁾 ,;urd. hydraulic "indfficienL3' ;_due 􀁊􀁊􀀩􀁤􀁫􀁾􀁟􀀮􀁜􀁩􀀺􀁴􀁩􀁩􀁮􀁰􀁮􀁉􀀧􀁊􀀡􀁩􀂷􀀵􀀧􀁡􀁾􀁩􀀮􀁩􀁡􀁾􀀺􀁥􀁮􀀡􀂷� �􀀮􀁯􀂷􀀺􀁴􀁩􀀨􀁴􀀬:ffiiIruurl 􀁾􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁾􀀨􀁪􀁲􀁔􀀬􀀬􀀢􀀢􀁡􀁹 -Addrr!i::sing trotb 􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁤􀁥􀁳􀀮 'of the iiglIt-of 􀁷􀁡􀁹􀁾 1he 􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁲􀁣􀁩􀁨􀁾 􀀧􀀬􀁜􀁖􀁩􀁌􀀮􀁩􀁪􀁩􀁭􀀱􀁨􀁥􀀮􀁉􀁴􀁲􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁌􀁾􀀭􀁭� �􀀬􀁤 .cooiiinr:U!'..􀀬􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁲􀁡􀁾􀁉􀁊􀁨􀁨􀁨􀀮􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀬􀁪􀁲􀁪􀁭􀀺􀁬􀁬􀁤􀁨􀁾􀁧􀀺􀀺􀀱􀁾 􀀮􀁭􀁮􀁬􀁬􀀸􀀰􀀺􀀢􀁾 'sh':Xt 'no't\ 􀀺􀀧􀁩􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁉􀀮􀁊􀁩􀀱􀁾 the ·s4jacent .'prop:eriic-s. 􀀧􀁾􀁔􀁨􀀺􀀺􀀭 􀀭􀀺􀀮􀁴􀁱􀁾 :niiloc:r "·:fiC! l'UOI ·-r;:.'-􀁩􀁩􀁨􀀢􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁻􀁮􀁰􀁭􀁾􀀮􀁬􀁴􀀮 􀁩􀁡􀁴􀀮􀀢􀀤􀁾􀂷􀁦􀀧􀁦􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁊􀀻􀀺􀁲􀁴􀁩􀀻􀀺􀀤􀀨􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀴􀁾􀁬􀁮􀁃􀀧􀁊 􀁴􀀰􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀻􀁡􀀻􀁲􀁤 􀀧􀁬􀁩􀁮􀀺􀀮􀁾 railroad :corr.JJ.oT..􀁬􀁬􀁻􀀻􀀢􀀬􀀬􀂷􀁣􀁶􀁣􀁲􀁾"lllc :i:1itiha 􀁾􀁡􀁮􀀺 􀁦􀁉􀁉􀁄􀁾 􀀧􀁩􀁌􀀺􀀤􀁾􀁲􀁲􀁾􀂷􀁾􀁴􀁯􀀻􀁮􀀮􀁜􀀡􀀺􀁾􀁭􀁲􀁲􀁬􀁔􀁯􀁯􀁮􀁴􀁴􀀢􀀢􀁩􀀮􀁨􀁴􀀺 􀀧􀁾􀁬􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁲􀁩􀀺􀁭􀀮􀁓􀁾􀀬􀀺􀀢􀁪 nne 􀁾􀁃􀀧􀀮􀀺􀁅􀁬􀁜􀀻􀁾􀁔􀁾􀀺􀁭..􀁴􀁴􀀮􀁾 drttumge disch.t'"lrgcd 􀁾􀀮 􀀬􀀺􀁴􀁬􀁵􀀺􀂷􀀬􀀡􀁛􀁾􀁕􀁉􀁄􀀡􀀮􀁌􀀧􀁬􀁩􀁴􀀺􀀮􀁲􀁵􀀺􀁬􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀨􀁴􀀧􀀺􀀺􀁉􀀧􀁲􀁮􀀱􀁜􀁭􀁴􀁦􀁦􀁩􀀺􀀮􀁵􀁭􀁩􀀻􀁪􀁪􀁬􀀧􀁥􀀢􀁆􀀳􀀮􀀬􀀮� �􀀢􀀶􀀻 􀀺􀀺􀁪􀁴􀁡􀀢􀁴􀀮􀁾 􀀻􀁡􀀮􀁊􀁬􀁤􀀬􀁾 􀁱􀁅􀀡􀀺􀀢􀁬􀀮􀁬􀁬􀁊􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀺􀂷􀀺􀀩􀁖􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁛􀀧􀀱􀀱􀀡 􀁬􀁬􀁲􀁯􀁪􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀢􀁾􀁾 \Ve have 'lTO ,record ';;)f::a1!remu7.rrifs frnnl (.tire >SL 􀀺􀁌􀁲􀁈􀀮􀁩􀁾 􀂷􀁾􀁒􀁬􀀮􀁬􀁬􀁔􀀱􀁨􀁾􀁳􀁊􀀻􀁣􀀺􀁮􀀺􀁦􀁵􀀳􀁩􀁨􀀢􀀬􀀢􀀧􀀢􀀳􀁾􀁾􀁣􀁲 'DART .i.e, 􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀨􀀧 􀀢􀁔􀁩􀀻􀀻􀀩􀀧􀁜􀁾􀁬􀁾 '{..{ 􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀨􀁤􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁯􀁮 .􀁰􀀺􀁲􀁯􀁾􀀻􀁪􀁩􀀻􀁬􀁩􀁵􀁧 􀁊􀁋􀁾􀁲􀀻􀀧􀀺􀁩􀁨􀁦􀁦􀁩􀁲􀁮􀀭� �􀁾 'fOT -,.nt1$e 􀀮􀀺􀁮􀁴􀁲􀁲􀁲􀀧􀀺􀁚􀀤􀁬􀁾􀀻􀁲􀁴􀁾􀁩􀁛􀁵􀁾􀀢􀀭􀁾􀁾 ""1ie...􀀱􀁩􀀧􀁴􀁜􀀧􀁉􀀮􀀺􀁾􀁜􀁐􀁬􀁝􀁾􀁾􀂷􀀭􀁩􀀻􀀺􀀷􀁩􀀮􀁲􀁬􀀱􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁅􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀻􀀻􀁤􀁾􀀬􀁧􀁲􀀭􀁪􀀮􀁲􀁙􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀧 typ.:cs 'of-nuf.fuJls, ,{]!A'fnr 􀀮􀁉􀁩􀁩􀁮􀁨􀁾􀁦􀀧􀁭􀀮􀁧􀀺􀀽􀁅􀁬􀀺􀀮􀁊􀁭􀁩􀀧􀀺􀀻􀁜􀀿􀁮􀀢􀁦􀀮􀁴􀁥􀁔􀁜􀀺􀁤􀁭􀀮􀁩􀁝􀀺􀁬􀁢􀀺􀁾􀀧􀁟􀀬m..ntl:l!p£tr:.:"a..rn 􀁮􀀮􀁝􀁔􀁇􀂷􀁪􀁦􀁦􀂷􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀿􀀢􀀧􀁾􀁔􀀺􀁴􀀢 :11:':: 􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁩􀁲􀁙􀀺􀁩􀀺􀀻􀀧 h' yew 􀁨􀀻􀀺􀀬􀂷􀁴􀁾 C\"lden.c;.">. of sut:h 􀁮􀀺􀀻􀁔􀁩􀁾􀁶..' 􀀧􀁩􀁵􀁲􀁤􀁾􀁦􀀮􀁉􀀧􀁾􀁭􀀱􀁭􀀻􀁩􀁩􀁲􀁭 􀀬􀀮􀀱􀀿􀀺􀁾􀂷􀀮􀀭􀂷􀁴􀁩􀁴􀁴􀀧.. 􀁭􀁪􀁬􀁮􀀺􀀺􀁡􀀱􀁌􀀡􀁾􀁩􀀨􀁾􀁾􀁪 􀀻􀁃 pTi....􀀢􀁬􀀬􀁩􀁾􀀮􀀻􀁪􀁣􀀭􀀺􀀮􀁩􀀺􀁩􀁩􀀮􀀺􀁳􀂷􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀧 􀁾􀀱􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀧􀀺 DA.RT's 'CQDlrauttrr 'wiH .wn.k...·(--:...􀁾􀂷􀁦􀁵 ::niiina.rl 􀀧􀁴􀀨􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀻􀁭􀁾􀁩􀁩􀀺􀁬􀁬􀀮􀀬􀀧􀁬􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀧􀀻􀁾􀁝􀁬 􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁲􀀢􀁾􀀧􀁩􀁾􀀺􀁽􀀮􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀻􀁥 􀀮􀂷􀀬􀂣􀁴􀁾􀀻􀀢􀀺􀁬􀀢􀁩􀁪􀁾 􀀢􀀱􀀮􀁜􀀧􀁟􀀺􀀧􀁝􀁩􀁾􀀺􀁩􀀺􀀮 􀁜􀁪􀁾􀀱􀀻􀀮􀁦􀀢..􀀧􀀼􀁩􀂷􀀺􀀽􀁾􀀺􀁾 􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀬 􀁲􀀱􀀧􀀺􀀢􀀢􀁾 􀀬􀁾􀀩􀁲 􀀧􀁬􀁾􀁣 strean\ "On cite 'siil.Urh 􀂷􀀧􀀮􀁳􀁾􀁤􀁩􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀢􀁩􀁊􀁲􀀭􀁕􀁾􀀬 ittarik.":". '1t 􀀺􀀧􀁛􀂣􀀰􀀺􀁌􀀱􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀱􀀮􀁰􀁪􀁬􀁕􀀺􀁾􀂷􀀻􀁪􀀷􀀱􀁾 􀂷􀀻􀀻􀀨􀁾􀀮􀀺􀁊􀁌􀁡􀀺􀀡􀁩􀀺􀀮􀁬􀁰􀀭 􀁊􀀺􀁴􀁾􀁴􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀭􀀬􀀺􀀻􀀧􀀺􀀧􀁾 􀀧􀁩􀁛􀀮􀁾 􀀬􀀻􀀮􀁬􀁮􀁩􀀧􀁾􀁲􀁂􀀮􀀺􀁬􀁫􀁲􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁮􀀮 􀀧􀀻􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀱􀀧􀁪 􀁾􀁊􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀺􀀧􀀧􀀱􀀱􀀧􀁴􀁓 􀁦􀁵􀁴􀁴􀁊􀁩􀁾􀀡􀀢 􀀧􀁥􀁲􀁯􀁾􀁩􀀺􀁇􀁮􀀧 !.􀀮􀀻􀀮􀁾􀂷􀁾􀀬􀁾􀀭􀁡􀀮􀁲􀁤􀂷 􀁩􀁩􀁴􀁾 􀁲􀁲􀁡􀁣􀀦􀁾􀁩􀁨􀀧􀁩􀀧􀀺􀁩􀁽 It is our 􀀧􀁾􀀩􀁰􀁩􀁮􀁩􀁯􀁮·tiuE :-iiu:' T::\;'"'.:1i 'cf.'A:.iUsrYi. 􀁾􀀮􀁾 􀁔􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁩􀁙􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀻􀁾􀀺􀁕􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀺 1:;\7 􀁨􀀬􀀺􀀬􀀬􀀺􀀧􀁾􀁜􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀧􀁬􀁬 􀁾 􀀻􀀱􀁨􀀮􀀮􀁾􀂷 􀂷􀀺􀁩􀁾􀀷􀁲􀁾􀁊􀁴􀁡􀁧􀀮􀁾􀂷 ';yn 􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬 􀁾􀁲􀀺􀀻􀀻􀀺􀀮􀁢 2.1ui iu: s':Juth s iti:c-s 'of 􀁾􀁨􀁾􀀧 􀀧􀁮􀁾􀁡 in 􀁪􀀡􀀧􀁡􀀺􀀺􀀧􀂷􀁾􀀻􀀭􀀺􀁩􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀧􀁫 􀁬􀀺􀀮􀀺􀁰􀁲􀁲􀁾􀀧􀀡􀀢..� �􀁮􀀺􀁾􀀦􀁈􀁮􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀻􀁾􀀺 􀂷􀁴􀁩􀁔􀁉􀀱􀁾􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧 􀀻􀁲􀀼􀀬􀁾 􀀧􀀱􀀮􀁩􀁾􀀻􀀻􀀮􀀬 􀁾􀀱􀁩􀀺􀀬􀁜􀀭􀀺􀀮􀀧􀀮􀁩􀀺􀁬􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀧 􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀭􀁜􀁾􀀮􀁾􀂷􀁩􀀺 -:i 􀁜􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁲􀀭􀀮􀀻􀀧 :.m::.-:' :h,:: 􀂷􀀺􀁾􀂷􀀺􀁲􀁲􀀡􀁾􀀵􀀧􀁈􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀺􀂷􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀺 􀁰􀀮􀁲􀀮􀀺􀀩􀁰􀂷􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁥􀁳 T·t;n;;:u.B.e 􀁾􀁾􀁗􀀮􀁲􀀺􀂷 􀀨􀀺􀀾􀂷􀁲􀁵􀁦􀀻􀁾􀁲􀁾􀀮􀁦􀀮􀁲􀀭􀀺􀀮􀁭􀀧􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀱􀀱􀀱􀁭􀀮􀀻􀁲􀀮􀁣􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀭􀁩􀀭__ 􀂷􀀧􀁾􀀻􀀭􀀻􀀢􀁊􀁊􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀻􀁾􀂷􀁩􀀮􀁌􀁊􀁔􀁾􀁲􀁩􀁩􀀧􀀺􀀢􀀢􀁊􀀢􀀮􀁬􀁇􀁪 􀀮􀁮􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁭􀀱􀁴􀀻􀁳 􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀱􀀱􀁾􀁩􀁊􀀬􀀡􀁧􀀺 􀁾􀀢􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀢􀀻􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀢 􀀺􀀺􀀭􀁩􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀺 ';::""i\ ':h:F: 􀁤􀁯􀂷􀂷􀀺􀁡􀁬􀁭􀁩􀁴􀀮􀀢􀀧􀀱􀁩􀀡􀁡􀁴􀁪􀁾􀀧􀀩􀁾􀀺 ·l:L;? 􀀧􀁲􀁭􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁣􀀮􀁾 􀁩􀁾􀁳􀁾􀂷 􀀺􀀮􀀢􀀡􀀧􀁾 􀂷􀁦􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀱􀁩􀁴􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾 􀀻􀀺􀀭􀁬􀁾􀁩􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀮􀂷􀂷􀁾􀁲 "o)t..􀀺􀁩􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀢􀀧 􀀮􀂷􀁾􀀱􀁥􀀻􀀺􀀻􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀻� �􀀬􀁾􀂷􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁾􀂷􀀺􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀮􀀧􀀻􀁕􀀭􀀧􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮 􀁊􀁬􀀻􀁬􀁬􀁾 􀁓􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀭􀀻􀀺􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁔􀀻􀀧􀁬􀁩􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀻 􀀬􀁾􀁾 >::' :-">··· " -. i 􀀧􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁗􀀻􀁉􀁲􀂷 .. 􀀭􀁁􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀻 :'N'.' 􀀮􀀱􀁾􀁛􀀩􀁄􀁬􀁓􀀰􀀱 Cletc) bel' 2, 1'998 r.clr. LnmlteB.bly:des..i1r. Vi ce President Commuter Rail & Raii1waJll\iiatiiligGmtmt DalbsAr.Ba H..apid TRJfliit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas. Texas 752·6-(l..:7::2]'O ;D'ALl:i\S AREA HAPlD TRANSiT RECEfltED oeT {) 7'1998 Dcar Mr. Blaydes: CDMJ\IlHTER RAIL & 'RAILROAD :M:4:NAGEMENT During the nim;10rrnon ·DctdIJL--r 􀁾􀀲 :l.'>'9,g,<->ti;iKK",'Jiv enl iJl m:umUBf of :complti1.rvtts 􀁔􀁥􀁧􀀻􀁡􀁲􀀮􀁤􀁩􀀺􀁲􀁾􀁧􀁬􀁨􀁥􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁶􀁥􀁹􀁻􀁴􀁮􀁣􀁥 of s1.orm"vttterwnI\g tbe 􀀧􀁃􀁄􀀱􀁴􀁭􀁮􀁂􀁤􀁴􀀺􀁲􀀮􀁡􀀺􀁩􀁬􀁜􀀧􀁩􀁮􀁮􀁤􀁉􀁔􀁾􀀶􀁢􀁊􀀭􀀧􀁦􀀺􀁩􀁦􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀡� �􀁴􀀧􀁩􀀱􀀧,A􀀱 dm£c;' west ·;;tkng the 􀁔􀁩􀁧􀁨􀁴􀁾􀁑􀁲􀁦􀀭􀀧􀀪􀁶􀁡􀁽􀂷.. Ofpaniculm concern isthenreab'et>NeeD.tffe railrca:tili ·Y::lr.d 􀁪􀁾􀁳􀁴􀀧􀁽􀀧􀁩􀀧􀀿􀁾􀀩􀀻􀀻􀁩 :nl.,Addi:son RoadanuiVhdvi'Uy .RDan. 1 had Dill PllDEc \VorksDirector JolmEkmuxgartr:Jnr,rci;i!:ilill.e 􀀻􀁦􀁵􀁣􀁇􀁯􀁭􀁪􀁄􀁨􀁵􀁬􀁾􀁴􀀵􀁡􀁌􀁜􀀮􀁤,1ii3db3en,e 􀀳􀀭􀁣􀁪􀀮􀁾􀁡􀀨􀀬􀀮􀀺􀀻􀀺􀁏􀀺􀁾􀁩􀀮􀁴 􀀻􀀬􀁊􀀬􀁾􀁜􀀧􀁥􀁩􀁻􀁊􀁲􀀺􀀺􀁮􀁥􀀺􀁭􀀺􀀺􀁳 '·;:i..􀀺􀁳􀀬􀀮􀁲􀀮􀀮 􀁦􀁴􀀧􀁜􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁌􀁩􀁲􀀺􀀬􀁴􀀱􀁮􀀺 􀁔􀀮􀁩􀁾􀁙􀀧...t,\T: 􀀻􀀮􀀻􀀩􀀮􀁩􀀧􀁁􀁤􀁪􀀺􀁸􀁮􀁵􀁤􀀮􀀭􀁥􀀺􀀺􀀻􀁩􀁮􀀮􀀺􀂷􀁾􀁾 '·'[:',:1 'jc.:Sig:';. 􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀺􀁜􀁧􀀱􀀱􀂷􀁬􀀧􀁥􀀺􀁥􀁲 .ani 􀀮􀀺􀁯􀀮􀀧􀀺􀁟􀀭􀀨􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀭� �􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀲􀀮􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀺 ',7:;:.1:-􀁪􀀮􀁴􀁲􀀡􀁾􀀩􀀢􀁲􀂷􀁾􀀩􀀮􀂷􀁾􀀧􀁥􀂷􀁮􀀱􀀭􀀲􀀮􀁔􀀡􀀮􀀭􀀺􀀵􀀭􀀭 :r:,_-· 􀀧􀁩􀀺􀁲􀁾􀀻􀀻􀁬􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀢 􀀺􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀺 􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁧􀀱􀀺􀀻 ·'-l:. 􀁬􀁩􀂷􀀻􀀬􀁾􀁲􀀺􀁾.. 􀀧􀁬􀀩􀀬􀁩􀁾􀀺 v,:,U 􀀨􀀾􀀧􀀺􀀭􀀡􀀧􀀻􀀻􀀺􀀮􀁾 􀀢􀁾􀀻􀀳􀁧􀀺􀁧􀀻􀀺􀀧􀀻􀁾􀀱􀀺􀀱􀁜􀁲􀀺􀁬􀀧􀁓 􀀮􀁩􀀺􀁾􀁮􀀺􀁪 􀀭􀀺􀀭􀂷􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀺􀀢􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀂷􀀻􀀧􀁲􀀻􀀬􀀡􀀢􀁊􀁔􀁦􀀭􀁥􀀮􀁲􀀺􀀧􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀨􀁾􀁮􀀳 tIt \:.1;:£' 􀁾􀂷􀁴􀀧􀀢􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀮􀁩􀀺􀁴􀀧􀁶􀀮􀀬 :-{. 􀀧􀀺􀁩􀀡􀀨􀁾 􀁾􀀮􀁪􀁴􀀭􀁲􀁬􀁾􀀧􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁾 􀀻􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀀺􀀺􀀱􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁩􀁬􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀺􀁊􀁣􀀮􀁜􀀺􀀮􀁊􀀬􀀮􀀺􀁪 􀁾􀁲􀀻 ::"l;j,i". 􀁮􀀺􀀺􀁔􀀮􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁮􀂷􀀮􀁳􀀮 􀁄􀁪􀁌􀁾􀀺􀀢􀁳􀀮􀁇􀀧􀁡􀀺􀀻􀀧􀂷􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁡􀁤 􀁾􀁭􀁲􀁩􀁊 􀁽􀀨􀁜􀀮􀀮􀀬􀂷􀀽􀀭􀂷􀀺􀁨􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀱􀀺􀀭􀁮􀀮􀁥􀁲􀁮 􀀮􀀺􀁮􀀮􀀻􀁾􀁤􀁨􀁾􀁾􀁹􀁡􀁉􀀺 􀀱􀀺􀀺􀁻􀁩􀀾􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀱􀁫􀀧􀀻􀀡􀀺 􀀧􀂷􀀺􀂷􀀢􀀬􀀢􀁥􀁾􀂷 􀁆􀀧􀀨􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁩􀀺􀁾􀀭􀀺 . ;.', 􀀻􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀭􀁯􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀢􀀺􀀭􀀺􀁊􀀻􀀱􀁾􀀺 􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺 􀁾􀀢􀀱􀀮􀁩􀀺􀀻 􀀺􀂷􀁮􀂷􀁾 􀀺􀀭􀁩􀁧􀀭􀁨􀁾 ';:.n:'. 􀁜􀁝􀀭􀁾􀁥􀁟􀀺􀀬 􀀬􀁊􀀮􀀱􀁲􀀺􀁾􀂷􀁪􀁨� �􀁳 􀂷􀀧􀁾􀁮􀁮􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁩􀀧􀁉􀁉􀁯􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁴􀁵 ..,il\;.. 􀀻􀀧􀀻􀁾􀀤􀀧􀁾􀀱􀁾􀀱􀁮􀁥􀁤 􀀮􀁮􀀺􀁡􀁩􀁮􀁴􀁾􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁮􀀱􀀮􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀺 􀀮􀁾􀂷􀀬􀀺􀀧􀀺􀁳􀀻􀀺􀂷􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁳􀀮􀁪􀁾􀀩􀁩􀁆􀁾􀁴􀀮􀁉􀀭 \\"-::. 􀂷􀀺􀁾􀂷􀀮􀁩􀁩􀀺 􀁚􀁾􀀮􀀻􀁾􀁰􀀷 􀀺􀁳􀀺􀀺􀀽􀀧􀀺􀁨􀀮􀀧􀁣􀁾􀁲􀀮 􀀻􀀺􀁮􀁊􀀺􀁈􀁾􀁧􀁣􀁮􀀱􀂣􀁲􀁴 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀧􀁪􀁴􀀺􀀻􀁾􀀺 􀂷􀁸􀀺􀂷􀁩􀀳􀁮􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁭􀁔􀁬􀀬􀀺􀀺􀁥􀀧􀀺􀀻􀀢􀁆 􀀧􀁜􀀢􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀬 􀀬􀀢􀀻􀀮􀀺􀂷􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀺􀁷􀀬􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀻􀂷􀁾􀁊􀁔 􀂷􀀺􀁨􀁾􀀺 􀁤􀁲􀂷􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁲􀁾􀀧􀀱􀀱􀁧􀀢􀀧􀁥 t\S'.X;;,S· i:,: 􀁾 􀁲􀀭􀁴􀁾􀀺􀀭 􀀼􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁟􀀻􀀻􀀢􀁾􀀧 􀂷􀀮􀀧􀀺􀀺􀁬􀁅􀁾 -', 􀁲􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀧􀀬􀀻 􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁲􀀻􀀺􀀺 􀁋􀁾􀀮􀀻􀀺􀁾􀁲􀀭 􀁾􀁪􀁾􀀬􀀺􀀭 fg;:i: 􀁜􀁾􀁦􀂷􀁬􀀮􀁦􀀻􀂷􀁾􀁙 􀁮􀁬􀁾􀀩􀀧􀀷􀀮􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀧􀁅􀁩􀁲􀁾􀁽􀁟 Trot:"":' 􀀧􀀻􀁪􀁔􀁪􀁾􀁾􀁮􀀺􀁅􀀺􀀨􀀻􀁴􀁪􀁬􀁫􀀢􀀺􀀭􀁇􀁴􀁾􀁮􀁧 ·1ti·t 􀁾􀁲􀁴􀀺 􀂷􀀺􀁪􀁾􀀡􀀺􀂷􀁜􀀮􀁾􀁴􀁬􀀧􀁥􀁓 􀀢􀀬􀁜􀀾􀀺􀂷􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁂 􀁾􀁙􀀺􀀭􀀧􀀺􀀺 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀧􀀬􀀺􀀺􀁲􀀭􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺 .􀁾􀀱􀀱􀀱􀁾 􀁾... 􀁬􀁾􀀧􀀨􀁪􀁨􀀭􀀧􀀻􀀢􀀧􀀺􀂷􀀬􀁴􀀻 --,l·"."Lt :.2 􀁾􀀮􀁴􀁔􀀺􀁾􀀺􀁬􀁬 􀀺􀀾􀀺􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁲􀀺􀀺􀁾􀀧 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮 ;.' '.;' ! 􀁾􀁾 j C:;; ············1 Pege .:: t\tr J.r:'!bp 􀁉􀁪􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀬􀁌􀀺􀁾􀁬􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁴􀁡􀀺􀁮􀁥􀁬􀁾􀁾 P_'E. 􀁆􀁥􀁢􀁲􀀿􀁊􀁾􀁻􀁲􀀺􀁾􀂷 F9, 􀁽􀀹􀁾􀀻􀀹 Tn ;::rdcr 􀀭􀀺􀁴􀁨􀀺􀁾􀁜􀁔 􀀧􀀮􀀻􀀺􀀬􀁜􀀺􀁾 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀡􀁈􀁾􀁙 􀁊􀀱􀁔􀁜􀀺􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁩􀀺􀁾􀀺􀁴􀁾.. 􀂷􀀮􀁮􀀱􀁔􀁬􀁬􀁕􀁾 ;unii 􀁬􀁉􀁬􀁾􀀺􀁬􀀺􀁈􀀮􀁴􀁴􀁾􀁬􀀬􀀧􀀺􀁴􀀺􀀭􀀮 jlii:s '2t:.lT.,irJ,n.':' .:-'Zrrf 􀀺􀀭􀁜􀀧􀁴􀁾􀀩􀁴􀁾􀁮􀁮􀁴􀀮􀀢􀁤􀁦􀁩􀀷􀁾􀁲􀁧􀁨􀀡 -;.1nJ pOtentIa! "t 􀁲􀀮􀁚􀀻􀀺􀀱􀀱􀁓􀁾􀀱 􀀺􀁕􀀧􀁪􀁴􀁾􀀮 􀀧􀀬􀁜􀁲􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁜􀁖􀁟􀁜􀀻􀁊􀁤􀁬􀁤 􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁈􀁊􀁾􀀮􀁰􀁲􀀺􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁈􀁴􀁲􀀺 􀁾􀀢􀁑􀁐􀁐􀀮􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁴􀁲􀀺􀁵􀀺􀁲􀁩􀁩􀁾􀀺􀁹 It::L) 􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀮􀀺􀁲􀀧􀀼􀀻􀀮􀀭􀁴􀁾􀀮􀁶􀀬􀀭 􀁟􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀧􀁩􀁔􀀧􀀮􀁩􀀬􀁤􀁫􀁾􀁐􀀢􀀱􀁮􀁴􀀺􀀱􀁩􀁬 􀀬􀁰􀁢􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀱􀀳 􀁪􀁾􀁊 􀀭􀁬􀁢􀁾 􀀺􀁮􀁅􀀧􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁲􀀧􀁥 as they 􀀺􀁾􀁴􀁮􀁰􀁡􀁃􀀺􀁴 :he 􀀢􀀺􀀧􀂷􀁂􀁾􀁬􀁲􀁯􀀺􀁮􀀮􀁤􀀻􀀺􀁔􀁬􀁧􀁢􀁾 􀀺􀀮􀁮􀁲􀂷􀀢􀀩􀁾􀂷􀁬􀀮􀁬􀁾 􀁲 􀁩􀀮􀁰􀁪􀁾􀀱􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁥􀀧􀁟􀁴􀁴􀁾􀀱􀀱􀁩􀁮􀁬􀁾􀁾:n"(:.:' Tn 􀀨􀁻􀀻􀀺􀀢􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀼􀁨􀁾􀀧􀁾 􀁔􀀭􀀴􀁆􀁉􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁾􀁟􀁾􀁬􀁙􀀷 􀀻􀁩􀁾􀁅􀀭 pF6il.h;IUs, 􀀻􀁒􀁊􀀺􀀧􀁳􀁾􀁾 :>," .''J .;" 􀀬􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀬 􀀺􀀭􀁦􀁾􀀯􀁊􀂷􀁜􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀂷 􀁌􀀮􀁾􀁲􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀻􀁌 •􀀮􀀮􀁲􀁾􀁾􀁔􀁟􀁌..􀁩􀀭􀀧􀀭􀁾􀁾􀂷 ......· . /:---j;ln Seidn;;;r· Manager. Railt:0iltIFuGilitit's 􀁻􀀺􀁻􀀩􀁾􀁪􀁵􀁮􀁵􀁴􀀢􀁥􀀮􀁲 􀀮􀁒􀁾􀁩􀁩􀀡 B:".RIulr:oll.d 􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁦􀁵􀀡􀁬􀁬􀀬􀁻􀀦􀀭􀀧􀀺􀁏􀁬􀁮􀀺􀁥􀁮􀁴 ]]vlS c_ 􀁌􀀮􀁜􀁊􀁮􀁮􀁩􀀭􀁥􀁊􀁽􀁢􀀻􀁾􀁹􀁤􀁥􀀧􀀭􀁾 Ridm:rdHrC'ViD [)u.\;id' 􀁉􀁾􀀮􀁹􀁟􀁥􀁾􀁔􀁮􀀺􀀺􀁬􀁮􀁮􀁾 􀀭􀁉􀁙􀁇􀀷􀁾􀁊􀁊 Pat'il Jones. Page 1 of2 Steve Chutc.lian From: Bruce Grantham [bgrantham@gra-ee.net] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 3:32 PM To: Jim Pierce Cc: Steve Chutchian; Mike Murphy; Katura Curry; Mike Tucker Subject: RE: Lindbergh Drainage Jim: To bring you up to date, I spoke with Mike Tucker last week. Mike confirmed Explorer's position regarding this project; that is they will contribute around $70k to the channel improvements. This is the bid amount they received from a contractor to lower their line, which is the alternative they have to participating in channel improvements. Mike said he would e-mail me the exact $ amount which I have not received yet However, he is not at liberty to increase their participation amount. Katura is back today from her holiday time off and we will visit regarding a submittal of the drainage report to DART. I would anticipate it could be this week subject to your okay on the items below. Given Explorer's position, your input on the following would be appreciated: 1. Do not still want me to schedule a joint meeting with Mike and, if so, what should I tell him is the purpose? 2. Do you have our latest Opinion Of Probable Cost for the concrete-lined channel plans we have prepared? 3. Do you want to confirm that the Town can fund this project as designed, and with $70k trom Explorer, prior to our submittal of the drainage report to DART? The hickup here could be getting DART approval on the report and a set of plans which would change if a less expensive channel project if needed. I am available Wednesday moming, Thursday afternoon, and all day Friday to meet this week. Regards, Bruce 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁏􀁲􀁩􀁧􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁬 Message-----From: "Jim Pierce" Sent: 1/3/2005 1:32 PM To: "bgrantham@gra-ce.net" Cc: "Mike Murphy" ; "Steve Chutchian" Subject: Re: Lindbergh Drainage Bruce: I would like to get in our 'Technical" meeting with DART before you leave. Jim. Jim Pierce, P.E. Assistant Public Works Director P.O. Box 9010 Addison, TX 75001-9010 972-450-2879 -----Original 􀁍􀁥􀁳􀁳􀁡􀁧􀁥􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 From: Bruce Grantham [mailto:bgrantham@gra-ce.net] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 8:19 AM To: Mike Murphy; Jim Pierce; Steve Chutehian; John Baumgartner; Chris Flanigan; Aaron Russell; Walter Shumac; John Baker; Robert Wunderlich; Donna Manhart; Michael Polacek; Tom Johnson; Mr. Daniel Tracy Cc: Katura Curry; Molly Pierson; Matt Kirk; Barry Williams 1/5/2005 Page20f2 Subject: G&A Staff News Please note that J am going to be out of the office for two weeks beginning Monday, January, 10. J will return to the office on Monday, January 24. During my absence, Katura Curry, P.E., and MOlly Pierson. P.E., will be the primary contacts on engineering projects. Matt Kirk, R.P.L.S., will be the primary contact on survey projectS. I will be in the office all next week if you anticipate needing to visit with me directly during the first part of January. upon my return. I hope to have the opportunity to introduce you to Barry Williams who has recently joined our firm as the Business Director. Barry is a key addition to our staff here at G&A. Regards. Bruce Grantham This e-mail and any files or attachments transmitted with it contains Information that is confidential and privileged. This document may contain Protected Health Information (pm) or other information that is intended only for the use ofthe individual(s) and entity(ies) to whom it is addressed. Ifyou are the intended recipient, further disclosures are prohibited without proper authorization. Ifyou are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, printing, or use ofthis information is strictly prohibited and possibly a violation offederal Of state law and regulations. Ifyou have received this information in error, please delete it and notify Hamid Khaleghipour at 972-450-2868 immediately. Thank you. 1/5/2005 \----\, \, \ \ 􀁄􀁾􀀯 􀁌􀁾􀁾􀁪 􀁛􀁩􀀺􀁊􀁾􀁗􀁾􀁮􀁥􀁒􀀾 􀁽􀁃􀀴􀁦􀁈􀁹􀁾 2 \6,--7 'If31V% Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 1401 Pacific Avenue Dallas, Texas 75266-7213 Doug Allen Executive Vice President Program Development (214) 749-2750 (214) 749-3662 Fax alien@dart.org Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 1401 Pacific Avenue Dallas, Texas 75266-7206 John E. Haenftling Assistant Vice President Technical Services (214) 749-2810 (214) 749-3320 Fax haenftii@dart.org EXTENSION SECOND NATURETM 0 RECYCLED FDR 􀀣􀀭􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀭__--;n 􀁍􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭� �􀀭􀁦􀀴􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁔􀀷􀀢􀀺 pSIGNED ":,; From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Steve Chutchian Wednesday, October 15, 2003 3:09 PM Mike Murphy Jim Pierce Lindbergh Channel Improvements LINDBERGH CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS • Our Engineer and Public Works staff have met on several occasions with the DART Engineering Department, in an attempt to obtain approval to perform the proposed improvements. • Unfortunately, we have been unable to satisfy their engineering staff, due to existing physical restrictions in the field. Specifically, we are unable to meet the 100 year flood design and include their required 1 ft. of free board. • Our only alternative consists of terminating this project, and leaving Explorer Pipeline and the Town's adjacent properties in a precarious situation. • The Town recently submitted the design for a concrete lined channel to DART. This design provided for protection of the existing shallow Explorer pipeline system within the DART easement and elimination of flooding to adjacent commercial properties. • The existing condition, as it is today, is an unimproved tributary, with extensive vegetation and other growth. • Properties to the north of this easement are sUbject to frequent flooding during minor wet weather events. • The design submitted is monumental improvement over existing conditions, and meets the Town's requirement of providing for the 100 year storm occurrence. • However, the design does not allow for a DART mandated 1 ft. free board, which is an increased height of channel above the depth required to meet the 100 year storm event. • In addition, this project will greatly benefit and protect the existing DART rail line. • This is a request that DART grant a variance to allow this project to move forward and permit the Town to meet all storm drainage criteria, except the 1 ft. free board. • The conditions that exist today, versus the proposed channel improvements will be extraordinary. All parties involved will experience a substantial benefit. g:a Grantham & Associates, Inc. , --''-::::0 MEMO 1919 S. Shiloh Rd., Suite 310, LB 8, Garland, TX 75042 Date: To: From: Re: October 15, 2003 Steve Chutchian, P.E., Town of Addison cc: Mike Tucker,, Explorer Pipeline " " Katura Curry, P.E. Lindbergh Drive Drainage Channel Project , History a'nd Current 􀁓􀁾􀁴􀁵􀁳 > • G&ANo.334 Pursuant to the request we received from you and Mike Tucker at our previous meeting on the Lindbergh Drive 􀁣􀁾􀁡􀁮􀁮􀁥􀁬􀀬 which extends from Lindbergh Drive to Midway Road parallel to the existing DART railroad tracks, we have prepared this memo regarding the current project status. In addition, we have outlined the channel benefits, the next steps and a project history as we understand it. Executive Summary .p' This project has been a moving target. When we entered into a'design contract with the Town in 2002, Explorer had previously furnished a verbal estimate of approximately $130,000, which their contractor had provided, for the 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁾􀁦􀁲􀁵􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 of a concrete blockpilot blockpilot channel. At this time, with Explorer offering to contribute $100,000 and the Town appropriating about $50,000, this appeared to be a financially viable project. During the design of this project, 􀁾􀁥􀁶􀁥􀀺􀁡􀁬􀁴􀁡􀁣􀁴􀁯􀁲􀁳 􀁡􀁲􀁯􀁳􀁾 which, in corr;tbination, now call into question this project's financial viability. These'factors 􀁡􀁲􀁾 summarized below: ,-' When G&A was asked by 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁔􀁯􀁾 to extend the limits of the concrete blocks beyond a pilot channel to convey a 100-year storm event without freeboard, and to maintain a minimum longitudinal slope of 0.5%, we focused on the engineering viability of these parameters prior to evaluating their impact on the project cost. In finding a way to ;neet these additional desigll parameterswe redesigned the project which increased the construction cost significantly. When DART's staff attended a project meeting at the Town earlier this year, they reiterated their desire to expand the limits of the concrete blocks ,e\Te;n further to provide freeboard freeboard within the lined portion of the channel, although they did indicate a willingness to reconsider the freeboard requirement. As a result of the DART meeting, Mike Tucker decided to determine the cost oflowering Explorer's line, rather than improving the channel, in order to provide 4 feet of cover over their line. Explorer's cost to lower their line has since been estimated at $65,000 while their contractor is now verbally estimating the construction cost ofG&A's current channel design to be over $600,000. Our latest Opinion of Probable Cost is closer to $300,000. Michael Floyd with Explorer has made a number of attempts to contact a decision maker at Bankston, without success, to find out if they are willing to help fund this project. (Bankston had apparently made such an offer to Explorer in the past). Tel.: (972) 864-2333 I FAX: (972) 864-2334/E-mail: Info@gra-ce.net Mr. Steve Chutchian. P.E. October 15, 2003 Page 2 We submitted a preliminary drainage report to DART in order to help them evaluate the need for freeboard, but no final determination has been made to waive the freeboard requirement to our knowledge. In our opinion, if the project were scaled back to a concrete block pilot channel, the order of magnitude of it's construction cost would be about $200,000. Channel Benefits Here are the benefits, as we see them, for finding a way to make the channel improvement project work: As the existing drainage ditch would be cleared in conjunction with the channel project, Explorer would have much better access to their line. In addition, if the currently designed concrete block channel were built, the Explorer pipeline would be protected from future erosion. o The Town would assist Bankston in resolving a long standing flooding problem on their property. DART would have a drainage ditch with much greater conveyance than the current ditch, and the Town would take over maintenance of the new channel. The question to be resolved by the Town, Explorer and DART is whether these benefits are sufficient for the Town and Explorer to increase their funding levels, and DART to allow a concrete block pilot channel to be constructed without freeboard. The Next Steps The following next steps were discussed in our recent meeting: The Town and Explorer will re-evaluate their funding limits for this project. o If it is determined that a $200,000 concrete block pilot channel can be funded, G&A will apply value engineering principles to this project through a meeting with Explorer's contractor to reevaluate the project design and confirm that the funds available are sufficient to construct the job. If the project can be constructed for the funds available, G&A will submit a revised design memo to DART in order to obtain approval for the pilot channel project. Project History To the best of our knowledge, the following summarizes previous drainage studies that have been performed on the existing Lindbergh Drive drainage channel. 1985± : 1994: 1999: 2000: Espey, Huston, & Associates, Inc. performed a study of the drainage ditch and the Bankston property flooding for the Town. Bankston contracted with Foerster Engineers to study the drainage ditch. They designed a grass-lined drainage channel from Midway Road to Lindbergh Drive. Shimek, Jacobs and Finklea, LLP (now Birkhoff, Hendricks, and Conway), under contract with the Town, designed a grass-lined grade-to-drain from Lindbergh Drive to downstream of Bankston near the abandoned railroad spur, in order to reduce the Bankston property flooding. GBW Engineers, Inc. prepared an Opinion of Probable Cost for the Town based on three alternatives to improve the existing drainage channel: Tel.: (972) 864-2333 /FAX: (972) 864-2334/E-mail: Info@gra-ce.net 2001: 2002: 2003: Mr. Steve Chutchian. P.E. October 15,2003 Page 3 1. Box Culvert: Opinion of Probable Construction Cost -$1.1 million 2. Fully Lined Concrete Channel: Opinion of Probable Construction Cost-$415,000 3. Concrete Pilot Channel: Opinion of Probable Construction Cost-$245,000 Additional details of these alternatives were summarized in memos provided to the Town. Explorer Pipeline approached the Town regarding a financial partnership to improve the subject ditch. Explorer is in the DART right-of-way and is required to maintain a minimum of 4 feet of cover. There are locations where erosion in the ditch has reduced the cover to less than 4 feet. Explorer obtained an estimated construction cost of $130,000 from their contractor to construct a concrete block pilot channel over the pipeline. The Town contracted with Grantham & Associates, Inc. (G&A) to design a concrete pilot channel over the Explorer Pipeline which will also reduce the Bankston flooding. The following events have occurred in recent months: At the request of the Town, the design scope was changed from a concrete block pilot channel to a channel with a minimum slope of 0.5% that would contain the 100-year storm without any freeboard. o Upon DART's review of the project, they requested that freeboard be added pursuant to their new design standards. On August 27,2003, Michael Floyd with Explorer indicated that their contractor had increased his estimate of the cost to construct the channel per G&A's plans from $130,000 to over $200,000. On September 5, 2003, per Michael Floyd, the Explorer contractor increased his project estimate to $375,000. o Later in September, Mike Tucker indicated that their contractor's estimate had increased again to $600,000, based on a verbal quote. Their contractor had also indicated that the pipeline could be lowered to achieve the minimum cover criteria for $70,000 to $100,000. o As of the end of September, Dan Warwick, the District Manager with Bankston, had not returned multiple phone calls from Michael Floyd with Explorer. Michael was trying to reach Mr. Warwick to discuss Bankston's willingness to help fund the project. Michael had previously spoken with Mr. Jim Smickless the General Manager who indicated that he did not have the authority to approve a financial contribution to the project; however, he did provide Mr. Warwick's name and phone number. G&A developed an Engineer's Opinion of Probable Cost for the project of approximately $340,000, including a 10% contingency. Tel.: (972) 864-2333 I FAX: (972) 864-2334 I E-mail: Info@gra-ce.net Lindbergh Drive Channel Drainage Improvements Town of Addison Engineer's Opinion of Probable Cost Item No. Item Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost 1 Mobilization LS 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 2 Clearing, Grubbing, Tree Removal LS 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 3 Remove /Dispose of Partial RCP LS 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 8 Unclassified Channel Excavation CY 3,000 $ 10.00 $ 30,000.00 4 Concrete Channel Block SY 4,755 $ 45.00 $ 213,975.00 5 6" Concrete Channel Lining (2500 psi) SY 810 $ 55.00 $ 44,550.00 6 24" Reinforced Concrete Pipe LF 412 $ 65.00 $ 26,780.00 7 Remove /Replace 33" R.C.P. LF 10 $ 80.00 $ 800.00 9 Hydro Mulch/Sod SY 5,910 $ 2.00 $ 11,820.00 10 Trench Safety LF 421 $ 2.00 $ 842.00 11 Stabilize Const. Entrance EA 2 $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 12 Erosion Control Devices LS 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Sub-Total $ 308,767.00 10% ContingencY $ 30,876.70 Total $ 339,643.70 Steve Chutchian From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Steve Chutchian Wednesday, October 15,20033:09PM Mike Murphy Jim Pierce Lindbergh Channel Improvements LINDBERGH CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS .. Our Engineer and Public Works staff have met on several occasions with the DART EngineerinQ Department, in an attempt to obtain approval to perform the proposed improvements. • Unfortunately, we have been unable to satisfy their engineering staff, due to existing physical restrictions in the field. Specifically, we are unable to meet the 100 year flood design and include their required 1 ft. of ** free board. • Our only alternative consists of terminating this project, and leaving Explorer Pipeline and the Town's adjacent properties in a precarious situation. • The Town recently submitted the design for a concrete lined channel to DART. This design provided for protection of the existing shallow Explorer pipeline system within the DART easement and elimination of flooding to adjacent commercial properties. • The existing condition, ·as it is today, is an unimproved tributary, with extensive vegetation and other growth. • Properties to the north of this easement are sUbject to frequent flooding during minor wet weather events. • The design submitted is monumental improvement over eXisting conditions, and meets the Town's requirement of providing for the 100 year storm occurrence. • However, the design does not allow for a DART mandated 1 ft. free board, Which is an increased height of channel above the depth required to meet the 100 year storm event. • In addition, this project will greatly benefit and protect the existing DART rail line. • This is a request that DART grant a variance to allow this project to move fOIWard and permit the Town to meet all storm drainage criteria, except the 1 ft. free board. • The conditions that exist today, versus the proposed channel improvements will be extraordinary. All parties involved will experience a substantial benefit. ** free board: Clearance distance between maximum water level and height of overflow of structure. 1 Steve Chutchian From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Steve Chutchian Wednesday, October 15, 2003 3:09 PM Mike Murphy Jim Pierce Lindbergh Channel Improvements LINDBERGH CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS It Our Engineer and Public Works staff have met on several occasions with the DART EngineerinQ Department, in an attempt to obtain approval to perform the proposed improvements. • Unfortunately, we have been unable to satisfy their engineering staff, due to existing physical restrictions in the field. Specifically, we are unable to meet the 100 year flood design and Include their required 1 ft. of ** free board. • Our only alternative consists of terminating this project, and leaving Explorer Pipeline and the Town's adjacent properties in a precarious situation. • The Town recently submitted the design for a concrete lined channel to DART. This design provided for protection of the existing shallow Explorer pipeline system within the DART easement and elimination of flooding to adjacent commercial properties. • The existing condition, as it is today, is an unimproved tributary, with extensive vegetation and other growth. • Properties to the north of this easement are subject to frequent flooding during minor wet weather events. • The design submitted is monumental improvement over existing conditions, and meets the Town's requirement of providing for the 100 year stonn occurrence. • However, the design does not allow for a DART mandated 1 ft. free board, which is an increased height of channel above the depth required to meet the 100 year storm event. • In addition, this project will greatly benefit and protect the existing DART rail line. • This is a request that DART grant a variance to allow this project to move forward and permit the Town to meet all storm drainage criteria, except the 1 ft. free board. • The conditions that exist today, versus the proposed channel improvements will be extraordinary. All parties involved will experience a substantial benefit. -free board: Clearance distance between maximum water level and height of overflow of structure. 1 Steve Chutchian From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: KCuny 􀁛􀁫􀁣􀁵􀁮􀁹􀁀􀁧􀁲􀁡􀁾􀁣􀁥􀀮􀁮􀁥􀁴􀁝 Wednesday, JUly 30, 2003 9:05 AM Steve Chutchian Bruce Grantham; Mike Tucker; Michael Floyd Lindbergh Drainage Channel Update Steve, I wanted to provide you an update on the Lindbergh Drainage Channel report. As you know, I sent out a draft version of the letter report to DART towards the end of last week. I have since received verbal comments from DART's engineer, Glenn Celerier. His comments were as follows: 1. Determine the elevation of the top of rail and the sub-ballast and provide freeboard information from the 100-year water surface elevation to the sub-ballast. If this difference is less than 2 feet in any location, we may be required to compute other frequency events to determine freeboard during those events, as well. Once I have obtained this information, I am to contact him to let him know the results. 2. Provide more detail on the values assumed during calculations, i.e. manning's roughness coefficients, etc. 3. Provide detail of the velocities in the channel. We are currently working on getting the information for him that is detailed in item number 1. Items 2 and 3 are a matter of adding text to the letter report and sUbmitting the appropriate summary tables that were already planned. If you have any questions or comments concerning this project, please contact me. Thanks, Katura ******************* Katura Curry, P.E. Grantham & Associates, Inc. Tel(972lB64-2333 kcurry@gra-ce.net 1 Steve Chutchian To: Cc: Subject: Mike Murphy Jim Pierce Lindbergh Channel Improvements LINDBERGH CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS • Our Engineer and Public Works staff have met on several occasions with the DART Engineering Department, in an attempt to obtain approval to perform the proposed improvements. • Unfortunately, we have been unable to satisfy their engineering staff, due to eXisting physical restrictions in the field. Specifically, we are unable to meet the 100 year flood design and include their required 1 ft. of free board. • Our only altemative consists of terminating this project. and leaving Explorer Pipeline and the Town's adjacent properties in a precarious situation. • The Town recently submitted the design for a concrete lined channel to DART. This design provided for protection of the eXisting shallow Explorer pipeline system within the DART easement and elimination of flooding to adjacent commercial properties. • The existing condition, as it is today, is an unimproved tributary, with extensive vegetation and other growth. • Properties to the north of this easement are subject to frequent flooding during minor wet weather events. • The design submitted is monumental improvement over existing conditions, and meets the Town's requirement of providing for the 100 year storm occurrence. • However, the design does not allow for a DART mandated 1 ft. free board, which is an increased height of channel above the depth required to meet the 100 year storm event. • In addition, this project will greatly benefit and protect the existing DART rail line, • This is a request that DART grant a variance to allow this project to move forward and permit the Town to meet all storm drainage criteria, except the 1 ft. free board. • The conditions that exist today, versus the proposed channel improvements will be extraordinary. All parties involved will experience a S!,Jbstantial benefit. 1 i:a Grantham &Associates, Inc. ----'>/,----MEMO 1919 S. Shiloh Rd., Suite 310, LB 8, Garland, TX 75042 Date: To: From: Re: October 15, 2003 Steve Chutchian, P.E., Town of Addison cc: Mike Tucker,, Explorer Pipeline • < Katura Curry, P.E. Lindbergh Drive Drainage Channel Project , Historya,'nd Current 􀁓􀁾􀁴􀁵􀁳 􀀮􀁾 . G&ANo.334 Pursuant to the request we received from you and Mike Tucker at our previous meeting on the Lindbergh Drive cpannel, which extends from Lindbergh Drive to Midway Road parallel to the existing DART railroad tracks, we have prepared this memo regarding the current project status. In addition, we have outlined the channel benefits, the next steps and a project history as we understand it. Executive Summary 􀁩􀀧􀁾 This project has been a moving target. When we entered into a'design contract with the Town in 2002, Explorer had previously furnished a verbal estimate of approximately $130,000, which their contractor had provided, for the con8,jITuction of a concrete block pilot channel. At this time, with Explorer offering to contribute $100,000 and the Town appropriating about $50,000, this appeared to be a financially viable project. During the design of this project, sevefaltactors 􀁡􀁲􀁯􀁳􀁾 which, in cOIl,lbination, now call into question this project's financial viability. These'factors are summarized below: ,.' When G&A was asked by 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀁔􀁯􀁾 to extend the limits of the concrete blocks beyond a pilot channel to convey a 100-year storI'J? event without freeboard, and to maintain a minimum longitudinal slope of 0.5%, we focused on the engineering viability of these parameters prior to evaluating their impact on the project cost. In finding a way to t'neet these additional design parameterswe redesigned the project which increased the construction cost significantly. When DART's staff attended a project meeting at the Town earlier this year, they reiterated their desire to expand the limits of the concrete blocks 􀀬􀁾􀁜􀁲􀀼􀀺􀀺􀁮 further to provide freeboard within the lined portion of the channel, although they did indicate a willingness to reconsider the freeboard requirement. As a result of the DART meeting, Mike Tucker decided to determine the cost of lowering Explorer's line, rather than improving the channel, in order to provide 4 feet of cover over their line. Explorer's cost to lower their line has since been estimated at $65,000 while their contractor is now verbally estimating the construction cost ofG&A's current channel design to be over $600,000. Our latest Opinion of Probable Cost is closer to $300,000. Michael Floyd with Explorer has made a number of attempts to contact a decision maker at Bankston, without success, to find out if they are willing to help fund this project. (Bankston had apparently made such an offer to Explorer in the past). Tel.: (972) 864-2333 /FAX: (972) 864-2334/E-mail: lnfo@gra-ce.net Mr. Steve Chutchian. P.E. October 15,2003 Page 2 We submitted a preliminary drainage report to DART in order to help them evaluate the need for freeboard, but no final determination has been made to waive the freeboard requirement to our knowledge. In our opinion, if the proj ect were scaled back to a concrete block pilot channel, the order of magnitude of it's construction cost would be about $200,000. Channel Benefits Here are the benefits, as we see them, for finding a way to make the channel improvement project work: As the existing drainage ditch would be cleared in conjunction with the channel project, Explorer would have much better access to their line. In addition, if the currently designed concrete block channel were built, the Explorer pipeline would be protected from future erosion. The Town would assist Bankston in resolving a long standing flooding problem on their property. DART would have a drainage ditch with much greater conveyance than the current ditch, and the Town would take over maintenance of the new channel. The question to be resolved by the Town, Explorer and DART is whether these benefits are sufficient for the Town and Explorer to increase their funding levels, and DART to allow a concrete block pilot channel to be constructed without freeboard. The Next Steps The following next steps were discussed in our recent meeting: • The Town and Explorer will re-evaluate their funding limits for this project. • If it is determined that a $200,000 concrete block pilot channel can be funded, G&A will apply value engineering principles to this project through a meeting with Explorer's contractor to reevaluate the project design and confirm that the funds available are sufficient to construct the job. If the project can be constructed for the funds available, G&A will submit a revised design memo to DART in order to obtain approval for the pilot channel project. Project History To the best of our knowledge, the following summarizes previous drainage studies that have been performed on the existing Lindbergh Drive drainage channel. 1985± : 1994: 1999: 2000: Espey, Huston, & Associates, Inc. performed a study of the drainage ditch and the Bankston property flooding for the Town. Bankston contracted with Foerster Engineers to study the drainage ditch. They designed a grass-lined drainage channel from Midway Road to Lindbergh Drive. Shimek, Jacobs and Finklea, LLP (now Birkhoff, Hendricks, and Conway), under contract with the Town, designed a grass-lined grade-to-drain from Lindbergh Drive to downstream of Bankston near the abandoned railroad spur, in order to reduce the Bankston property flooding. GBW Engineers, Inc. prepared an Opinion of Probable Cost for the Town based on three alternatives to improve the existing drainage channel: Tel.: (972) 864-2333 /FAX: (972) 864-2334/E-mail: Info@gra-ce.net 2001: 2002: 2003: Mr. Steve Chutchian. P.E. October 15,2003 Page 3 1. Box Culvert: Opinion of Probable Construction Cost -$1.1 million 2. Fully Lined Concrete Channel: Opinion of Probable Construction Cost-$415,000 3. Concrete Pilot Channel: Opinion of Probable Construction Cost -$245,000 Additional details of these alternatives were summarized in memos provided to the Town. Explorer Pipeline approached the Town regarding a financial partnership to improve the subject ditch. Explorer is in the DART right-of-way and is required to maintain a minimum of 4 feet of cover. There are locations where erosion in the ditch has reduced the cover to less than 4 feet. Explorer obtained an estimated construction cost of $130,000 from their contractor to construct a concrete block pilot channel over the pipeline. The Town contracted with Grantham & Associates, Inc. (G&A) to design a concrete pilot channel over the Explorer Pipeline which will also reduce the Bankston flooding. The following events have occurred in recent recent months: • At the request of the Town, the design scope was changed from a concrete block pilot channel to a channel with a minimum slope of 0.5% that would contain the 100-year storm without any freeboard. • Upon DART's review of the project, they requested that freeboard be added pursuant to their new design standards. • On August 27, 2003, Michael Floyd with Explorer indicated that their contractor had increased his estimate of the cost to construct the channel per G&A's plans from $130,000 to over $200,000. • On September 5,2003, per Michael Floyd, the Explorer contractor increased his project estimate to $375,000. • Later in September, Mike Tucker indicated that their contractor's estimate had increased again to $600,000, based on a verbal quote. Their contractor had also indicated that the pipeline could be lowered to achieve the minimum cover criteria for $70,000 to $100,000. As ofthe end of September, Dan Warwick, the District Manager with Bankston, had not returned multiple phone calls from Michael Floyd with Explorer. Michael was trying to reach Mr. Warwick to discuss Bankston's willingness to help fund the project. Michael had previously spoken with Mr. Jim Smickless the General Manager who indicated that he did not have the authority to approve a financial contribution to the project; however, he did provide Mr. Warwick's name and phone number. G&A developed an Engineer's Opinion of Probable Cost for the project of approximately $340,000, including a 10% contingency. Tel.: (972) 864-2333 /FAX: (972) 864-2334/E-mail: Info@gra-ce.net Lindbergh Drive Channel Drainage Improvements Town of Addison Engineer's Opinion of Probable Cost Item No. Item Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost 1 Mobilization LS 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 2 Clearing, GrubbinQ, Tree Removal LS 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 3 Remove /Dispose of Partial RCP LS 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 8 Unclassified Channel Excavation CY 3,000 $ 10.00 $ 30,000.00 4 Concrete Channel Block SY 4,755 $ 45.00 $ 213,975.00 5 6" Concrete Channel Lining (2500 psi) SY 810 $ 55.00 $ 44,550.00 6 24" Reinforced Concrete Pipe LF 412 $ 65.00 $ 26,780.00 7 Remove /Replace 33" R.C.P. LF 10 $ 80.00 $ 800.00 9 Hydro Mulch/Sod SY 5,910 $ 2.00 $ 11,820.00 10 Trench Safety LF 421 $ 2.00 $ 842.00 11 Stabilize Const. Entrance EA 2 $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 12 Erosion Control Devices LS 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Sub-Total $ 308,767.00 10% Contingency $ 30,876.70 Total $ 339,643.70 LAN/STV AJoint Venture of Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc. and STV Incorporated General Engineering Consultants to DART Dennis K. Henning, P.E. Deputy Program Manager -Design Support 1401 Pacific· P.O. Box 660163· Dallas, Texas 75202-7227 (214) 749-2946 • FAX (214) 749-3301 e-rnall address: dhenning@darLorg Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 1401 Pacific Avenue Dallas, Texas 75266-7208 GeorQe V. Avalos, P.E. Projecffv1anager III (214) 749-2858 (214) 749-3158 Fax gavalos@dart.org Mike Tucker Greerwille Area Manager 2856 Countty Road 2168 Caddo Mills, 1X 75135 Office 903-527-1262 • Fax 903-527-1270 Cell 214-533-7232 mtucker@expl.com 120 J Main Street Suite 800 Dallas, 1)( 75202 214-749-3947 Fax 214-749-5353 gcelerie@dart.org Glenn Celerier, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer Aa21 A Joint Venture General Engineering Consultant Accelerated Cost-effective Transit For The 2 Jst Century Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 1401 Pacific Avenue Dallas, Texas 75266-7210 Benjamin Claybour Right-of-Way Representative 214.749.2636 214.749.3609 Fax bclaybou@dart.org • Michael Floyd Project Engineer P.O. Box 2650· Tulsa, OK 74101-2650 (918) 493-5153· Fax (918) 493-5177 mfloyd@expl.com 􀀮􀁾􀁭􀁴􀁴􀁡􀁬􀁬􀁉􀂥􀁴􀀮􀁬􀁩􀀧􀀮 ii-ill'i",-􀀺􀁩􀀮􀁬􀁬􀁾􀀧􀁪􀁍􀁬􀁩•.fhil 07/24/2003 17:14 9728542334 GRANTHAM PAGE 01/07 Facsimile TranSl1littal Dare: "] l'24/􀁏􀁾 Fax To: _Ben C􀁾 hJw' > Of: 􀁾􀀱􀀭􀁌 _ Fax# ('214-) 74:3 -:?lam Ref: 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀴􀀬􀀮􀀮􀁌􀀮􀀮􀁌􀁯􀀻􀁾􀀮􀀮􀁣􀀺􀀺􀁉􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀾􀁯􀁬􀀺􀁲􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀺􀀡􀁯􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁌􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀢􀁾􀁾 # of Pages (including this sheet): -.l Comments: = from: Grantham & Associates, Inc. 1919 S. Shiloh Rd. Suite 310, L.B. 8 Garland, Texas 75042 Tel. (972) 864-2333 Fax (972) 864-2334 Email: Info@gra.ce.net 5L Fax From: ct 􀁦􀀬􀀭􀁹􀁾 LtNN C.tlE:RlEr2--A-c-;( 21 􀁲􀁾􀁾 􀀨􀀲􀀱􀀴􀀭􀀩􀀱􀀴􀀭􀁴􀀱􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁓􀀳 Cf..; 􀁾 -:;:. s-rIE.\l12-C1-\-UTL(--t I􀁾􀁎 􀁾 ADP \soN F¥ ( CiiL) 4--50-􀀲􀀮􀁾􀀳􀀱 tt \􀀭􀁾 M\\(IC TLJULt:-Q.. -'EXPLDl2-f32-. 􀁾 􀀨􀁾􀁄􀀾􀀮􀀿􀀩 􀁓􀁾j-I '2-10 _&¥ii¥i"J¥"li,! ,'Siil.i.f, 07/24/2003 17:14 July 21, 2003 9728542334 GRANTHAM DRAFT PAGE 02/137 Mr. Ben Claybour Dallas Area Rapid Transit P.O. Box 660163 Dallas, Texas 75266-0163 Re: Drainage Study for Lindbergh Drainage Channel Addison, Texas Dear Mr. Claybour: G&A No. 02-334 Per our recent meeting at the Addison Servi.ce Center, we are submitting to you this letter summarizing the design of the Lindbergh Drainage Channel project. TIle information provided with this letter should satisfy DART's Drainage Report criteria. Specifically, it will provide you with infonnation concerning the ptupose of the project, the design constraints, the design assumptions and the hydrologic and hydraulic computations. It is our expectation that this will provide an all inclusive document for your reference purpose. Project Location The Lindbergh Drainage Channel is located within the DART right-of-way, nortn of the tracks, and extends from the east side ofMidway Road to Lindbergh Drive,just south of the Addison Ail1lort. The drainage channel drains a portion of the airport property, the light industrial area just north of the channel, and a portion ofthe DART right-of-way. Project Purpose This project was initiated by Explorer Pipeline (Explorer) for the exclusive purpose ofproviding erosion control above its petroleum pipeline which is located within the DART right-of-way. As part of Explorer's agreement with DART, Explorer must maintain a minimum of 4 feet of cover over its pipeline in order to protect both DART and Explorer. Based on the survey perfonned for this project, there are locations which clUTently do not meet this minimum cover criteria. A secondary pUlpose of this project is to provide flood relief to the Bankston property, which is the last property on the north side of the DART right-of-way before Lindbergh Drive. This property is built low and experiences flooding dUring minor stonns, as well as large storms. Eliminating this flooding at the Bankston property creates the need for this project to be looked at at from the perspective of drainage as well as erosion control. As a note, the need for this drainage project was noted back in the 1980's. Since then, numerous analyses of this drainage channel have been performed in order to design improvements which would alleviate the flooding that Bankston experiences; however, as win be expanded upon later, the design constraints on this project make the project extremely complex.. Therefore, these previous projects were not lil• .z.JuIK".