cotton belt regional rail - dart.org belt regional rail ... table of supporting engineering...

Prepared for Dallas Area Rapid Transit General Planning Consultant Managed by URS Corporation

Cotton Belt Regional Rail 5% Preliminary Engineering Design Report

August 26, 2013

Final

Cotton Belt Regional Rail

Final 5% Preliminary Engineering Design Report i

Revision Record

Project/Report Name: Cotton Belt PE/EIS URS Project Number: 25338804

PM: Dan Meyers PIC: Jerry Smiley

Revision Number: Date:

Draft

Final

Originator: Peng Zhao Date: 26 August 2013

Comments by:

Distribution Name Department Firm

John Hoppie DART Rail Planning DART


Final 5% Preliminary Engineering Design Report ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF COTTON BELT CORRIDOR ......................................................................... 1

2.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................ 1

2.2 Reference Documents ....................................................................................................................... 1

2.2.1 Aerial Photography and Base Mapping ....................................................................................... 2

3.0 DESIGN CRITERIA .................................................................................................................. 2

4.0 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ALIGNMENT ........................................................................... 3

4.1 Horizontal Alignment......................................................................................................................... 4

4.1.1 Section 1 - CB1 ............................................................................................................................. 5

4.1.2 Section 2 – CB2............................................................................................................................. 6

4.1.3 Section 3 – CB3............................................................................................................................. 6

4.2 Vertical Alignment ............................................................................................................................. 8

4.2.1 Section 1 - CB1 ............................................................................................................................. 8

4.2.2 Section 2 – CB2............................................................................................................................. 8

4.2.3 Section 3 – CB3............................................................................................................................. 9

4.3 Trackwork 11

5.0 RIGHT-OF-WAY ..................................................................................................................... 14

6.0 UTILITY MODIFICATIONS ...................................................................................................... 15

6.1 Section CB-1 ....................................................................................................................................... 15

6.2 Section CB-2 ....................................................................................................................................... 17

6.3 Section CB-3 ....................................................................................................................................... 18

7.0 BRIDGE AND STRUCTURAL DESIGN ..................................................................................... 21

7.1 Bridge Design ..................................................................................................................................... 21

7.2 Section 1 - CB1 ................................................................................................................................... 22

7.3 Section 2 - CB2 ................................................................................................................................... 23

7.4 Section 3 - CB3 ................................................................................................................................... 24

8.0 DRAINAGE ......................................................................................................................... 26

8.1 Section CB-1 ....................................................................................................................................... 27

8.1.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 27

8.1.2 Areas of Importance .................................................................................................................... 28

8.2 Section CB-2 ....................................................................................................................................... 28

8.2.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 28


8.2.3 Hydraulics ..................................................................................................................................... 28

8.3 Section CB-3 ....................................................................................................................................... 30

8.3.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 30


8.3.3 Hydraulics ..................................................................................................................................... 30

9.0 STATION DESIGN .................................................................................................................. 33

9.1 Section CB-1 ....................................................................................................................................... 33

9.2 Section CB-2 ....................................................................................................................................... 33

9.3 Section CB-3 ....................................................................................................................................... 34


Final 5% Preliminary Engineering Design Report iii

10.0 TRANSPORTATION CROSSINGS .......................................................................................... 34

11.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................ 37

11.1 Land Use…. ...................................................................................................................................... 37

11.2 Socioeconomic Characteristics including Environmental Justice .................................................... 38

11.3 Acquisitions and Displacements ...................................................................................................... 38

11.4 Parks and Recreational Facilities ..................................................................................................... 38

11.5 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................................... 38

11.6 Geology….. 39

11.7 Floodplains ...................................................................................................................................... 39

11.8 Water Quality .................................................................................................................................. 40

11.9 Noise and Vibration ......................................................................................................................... 40

11.10 Air Quality ...................................................................................................................................... 41

11.11 Hazardous Materials ...................................................................................................................... 41

11.12 Water Resources ........................................................................................................................... 42

11.13 Biological Resources ...................................................................................................................... 42

12.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................. 43

13.0 SYSTEM ELEMENTS ........................................................................................................... 43

13.1 Positive Train Control ...................................................................................................................... 44

13.2 Wayside Signals ............................................................................................................................... 44

13.3 Highway Grade Crossing Signals ...................................................................................................... 45

13.4 Communication Systems ................................................................................................................. 45

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4-1 Corridor Section Breakdown .................................................................................................... 4

Figure 4-2 Typical Section of Track Structure .......................................................................................... 12

Figure 4-3 Typical Section of Direct Fixation Track ................................................................................. 13

LIST OF TABLES Table 6-1 Cotton Belt Phase I Trench Area Utility Crossings .................................................................. 19

Table 10-1 Summary of Grade Separation Thresholds ........................................................................... 36

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Cotton Belt Existing Utility/Crossing Lists ................................................................. 47

Appendix B: Cotton Belt Transportation Crossings ....................................................................... 62

Appendix C: Existing Freight Operations Exhibit ........................................................................... 67

Appendix D: Traffic Volumes ..................................................................................................... 6968

Appendix E: Bridge Structures List ............................................................................................ 7776

Appendix F: Table of Supporting Engineering Documents ........................................................ 7978


Final 5% Preliminary Engineering Design Report 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) is preparing preliminary engineering plans for the Cotton Belt

Regional Rail Corridor from Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW Airport) to its

terminus in Plano. When completed, the regional passenger rail within the Cotton Belt Corridor

will provide service to DFW Airport, air passengers and other commuters in the North Central

Texas region. In addition, it is proposed to provide connection to the DART Orange, Red and

Green lines. Once the preliminary engineering is completed, DART and its partners will have a

preferred alignment for the Cotton Belt Regional Rail.

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF COTTON BELT CORRIDOR The Cotton Belt Corridor is an existing east/west freight rail corridor for which a regional

passenger rail is being proposed. The DART Cotton Belt project corridor is located on DART right-

of-way (ROW) and runs from just north of DFW Airport to central Plano. It passes through Collin,

Dallas and Tarrant Counties and includes the cities of Grapevine, Coppell, Carrollton, Addison,

Dallas, Richardson and Plano.

2.1 Project Description

The Cotton Belt project corridor is approximately 26 miles in length and generally runs in a

northeasterly direction from north of DFW Airport to its proposed terminus in Plano. The

proposed passenger rail will largely follow the existing freight rail within the corridor. The

corridor moves northeasterly, passing through an industrial area in Coppell. It then parallels Belt

Line Road through Coppell into Carrollton. The area adjacent to the Carrollton segment consists

of a mix of commercial and residential developments. As the corridor crosses IH 35E, it passes

under the DART Green Line and then veers away from Belt Line Road. It runs through residential

and industrial areas moving east along the southern edge of Addison Airport in Addison. It

crosses over the Dallas North Tollway (DNT) and enters Dallas City Limits going through mostly

residential areas in North Dallas. It continues east, entering Richardson, and runs on the north

side of the University of Texas - Dallas (UTD) campus. From here to its terminus it runs mostly

through commercial areas. In north Richardson and Plano, it traverses east over US 75 and

under the DART Red Line. Two alternatives, the North Alternative and the South Alternative are

included in the east terminus alignment alternative study.

2.2 Reference Documents

Data was collected from DART, Fort Worth T, North Central Texas Council of Governments

(NCTCOG), Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and other entities to identify major

constraints and possible conflicts within the corridor. There are several projects in the

planning/design phase within the corridor area. Information shown for these projects is subject

to change and will require continued coordination as the projects advance. Project documents

that have been collected include the following:

City of Carrollton:

Carrollton Downtown Rail Station Master Plan Phase I 2006

Carrollton Downtown Rail Station Master Plan Phase II 2009



City of Dallas:

Cypress Waters Development 2010

City Council Resolution No. 061835 June 2006

Dickerson Street January 2009

City of Plano

Cotton Belt Corridor Study April 2010

Fort Worth T

TEX Rail Project RFP January 2013

NCTCOG

Conceptual Engineering & Funding Study April 2010

NTTA

PGBT Segment IV Bridge, Utilities, Roadway Plan Set October 2002

TxDOT:

DFW Connector

IH 35E Bridge, Utilities, Roadway Plan Set February 1970

IH 35E Reconstruction Preliminary Engineering Plans Fall 2010

IH 35E Draft Design-Build Construction Plans by AGL Constructors July 2013

Luna Road Reconstruction June 1999

US 75/PGBT Interchange November 2012

2.2.1 Aerial Photography and Base Mapping The aerial photographs used in the plans were obtained from two sources. On March 29, 2010

the corridor was flown by Martinez Geospatial. This resulted in aerial photography that follows

the Cotton Belt corridor with imagery showing 1,000 feet to each side. The remaining aerial

images are from the NCTCOG. These images are from a spring 2007 flight. It is strongly

recommended that DART conduct aerial mapping as well as planimetric updates along the

preliminary engineering alignment during final design. The updated base mapping along with

current planimetrics would produce the most accurate final alignment design and earthwork

quantities.

3.0 DESIGN CRITERIA The alignment alternatives were developed in accordance with American Railway Engineering

and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA) standards, DART Design Criteria Manual and the

draft Cotton Belt Regional Rail Design Criteria Manual. Any proposed street or utility

modifications will be designed in accordance with DART’s design criteria or the local jurisdiction

design criteria/standards: the more stringent standards will prevail.

Continued development of the proposed design will require the selection of a design vehicle to

establish the appropriate design criteria.



Refer to Appendix F for the Cotton Belt engineering documents that supported the 5%

Preliminary Engineering design.

4.0 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ALIGNMENT The design team divided the entire project corridor into three separate sections as shown in

Figure 4-1. Section 1 begins at DFW Airport and ends at the Elm Fork of the Trinity River. Section

2 begins at the Elm Fork and extends through Downtown Carrollton, terminating just east of the

DNT at the southbound frontage road. Section 3 begins at DNT southbound frontage road and

extends to the Terminal Station just east of US 75. The separation of the corridor allowed the

design team to work simultaneously on the project alignments, which in turn shortened the

design timeline. The 5% submittal set will include three separate volumes of plans for DART

review.



Fig

ure

4-1

Co

rrid

or

Se

ctio

n B

rea

kd

ow

n



4.1 Horizontal Alignment

The proposed Cotton Belt Regional Rail alignment will mainly consist of double track along the

entire corridor, with track centers of 16 feet in areas where there is no active freight traffic and

18 to 20 feet in areas where there is active freight traffic. The alignment will be designed for a

maximum speed of up to 80 miles per hour. The majority of the horizontal alignment follows

closely to the existing freight track alignment based on aerial photography and planimetrics

described in section 2.2.1.

Lower design speeds were utilized in areas where existing constraints would not accommodate

larger radius curves. The alignment will consist of at-grade, retained fill, retained cut and aerial

structures. The centerline of the northbound (NB) track is used for the alignment control and is

referred to as the “control track.” The final section designers should confirm the existing track

tie-in locations and elevations during final design.

4.1.1 Section 1 - CB1 Section 1 of the Cotton Belt Regional Rail alignment begins approximately one mile to the west

of SH 121 and 3,400 feet north of SH 114 and proceeds due north to the proposed Cotton Belt

DFW North station. This station will allow effective connection between operations of the

Cotton Belt and the T’s TEX Rail. The alignment then continues in a northeasterly direction to

enter the existing Cotton Belt right of way, where the existing freight track is to remain in place,

with the addition of a second track at a standard offset of twenty feet to the south. The

alignment travels generally in an easterly direction and is designed to run parallel with the

existing freight track. The alignment travels under SH 121 and IH 635. The alignment crosses

Royal Lane and Freeport Parkway at-grade. It traverses further east, parallel to Southwestern

Boulevard, and crosses S. Coppell Road with an at-grade crossing. The alignment continues

easterly grade separating S. Denton Tap Road on an aerial structure. The alignment then runs

parallel to Belt Line Road within the existing DART right of way. The alignment crosses Moore

Road, Mockingbird Lane, MacArthur Boulevard and Fairway Drive at-grade. Section 1 alignment

then ends at the City of Coppell/City of Carrollton city limit, at the Elm Fork of the Trinity River.

Section 1 has two alternatives that deviate from the base alignment in the vicinity of North Lake

and the planned Cypress Waters mixed-use development.

• Cypress Waters Southwestern Boulevard/Belt Line Road Median Alternative: This

alternative begins at South Coppell Road as a single track alignment that veers off the

existing DART right of way in a southeasterly direction, until it intersects Southwestern

Boulevard, where it parallels the center line of Southwestern Boulevard and eventually

enters the median of the existing Belt Line Road. It is on an aerial structure over Grapevine

Creek and grade separates South Denton Tap Road on an aerial structure. The alignment

then descends to existing grade and turns northeast to rejoin the existing Cotton Belt

alignment at Moore Road.

• Cypress Waters South Alternative: This alternative begins at South Coppell Road as a single

track alignment that veers to the southeast, similar to the Southwestern Boulevard

Alternative; however, this alternative is located about 500 feet south of Southwestern

Boulevard and Belt Line Road. It is on an aerial structure over Grapevine Creek and is grade

separated at South Denton Tap Road with an aerial structure. The alignment then descends

to at grade and turns northeast to rejoin the existing Cotton Belt alignment at Moore Road.



Both of these alternatives require Belt Line Road to be relocated and reconfigured. The

Southwestern Boulevard/Belt Line Road Median alternative minimizes potential ROW takes for

the properties south of the Belt Line Road. However, the alignment along Southwestern Blvd

may cause traffic issues for the elementary school north of Southwestern Boulevard during

school drop off and pick-up hours. The South Alternative avoids the potential traffic issues in the

school zone but it requires substantial ROW acquisition south of Belt Line Road and

Southwestern Blvd. The Southwestern Boulevard/Belt Line Road alternative was included in the

Final 5% Preliminary Engineering design as the Cypress Waters Alternative.

4.1.2 Section 2 – CB2 Section 2 of the Cotton Belt Regional Rail alignment begins at the City of Coppell/City of

Carrollton city limit at the Elm Fork of the Trinity River, traveling within the existing DART right

of way, crosses under the PGBT then crosses Luna Road at-grade. The alignment continues east,

crosses Hutton Branch Creek, travels under the aerial bridges of IH 35E and crosses Broadway

Street and the Dallas, Garland and Northeastern Railroad (DGNO) track at-grade. IH-35 is

currently being redesigned as part of the TXDOT design build project by AGL Constructor and the

current design has been reflected in the 5% Final Engineering Plans. It has also been

communicated to the IH-35 design team that sufficient horizontal and vertical clearances to the

proposed bridge structures must be maintained within the existing Cotton Belt and Madill Sub

right of ways to allow for future double track alignments within both corridors. The station at

Downtown Carrollton will serve as the interface location with the DART Green Line.

Dallas, Garland and Northeastern Railroad (DGNO) and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)

operate on the Madill Sub (Madill) freight track through the Downtown Carrollton area. A future

Frisco to Irving passenger rail is being planned for this rail corridor. Double tracks will be

required in order to add passenger rail services to this busy freight rail corridor. To avoid an at-

grade crossing between the Madill freight track and the proposed Cotton Belt passenger rail

operations, the Madill horizontal alignment was adjusted by shifting the freight track south

which results in a smoother operation through the yard because the existing Madill-Cotton Belt

diamond crossing is eliminated and a new diamond installed 1600ft east of the existing DART

Green Line light rail transit bridge location. This shift allows sufficient distance for the Cotton

Belt SB track to elevate and grade-separate the BNSF track. This SB track will be limited to

Regional Passenger Rail only, due to vertical alignment constraints. This issue is further

discussed in the Vertical Alignment section of this report. The alignment continues east, crossing

all the cross streets at-grade, except for Midway Road, where the SB track is proposed to be

grade separated on aerial structure. Due to vertical design constraints, this SB track will be

limited to Passenger Rail operations only. The NB track will remain at grade but will be limited to

freight operations only. Through this area, track centers vary between 20 feet and 30 feet to

eliminate impacts to existing storage tracks in the Addison industrial area. It is noted that

several existing spur tracks in Section 2 (CB2) will need to be rebuilt/rehabilitated due to the

proposed second track. The Section 2 alignment ends at the SB frontage road of the DNT.

4.1.3 Section 3 – CB3 Section 3 of the Cotton Belt Regional Rail alignment begins at the SB frontage road of the DNT,

at the boundary line between Addison and Dallas. This section will extend approximately 8.4

miles generally within the existing DART right of way in a northeasterly fashion, crossing three

cities - Dallas, Richardson and Plano. The Section 3 terminus will be approximately 580 feet east



of Shiloh Road in Plano. It is proposed that Section 3 will be double tracked for the entire

section. The alignment from DNT to Waterview Parkway was designed for 16 feet track centers

since there are no freight operations within this area.

East of Knoll Trail Drive, the NB and SB track offset will vary from 16 feet to 33 feet to avoid

potential impacts to existing bridge columns at Preston Road and to accommodate the center

platform configuration of the Preston Road Station. East of the Preston Road Station, the NB and

SB track offset will then transition back to 16 feet. The centerline of the proposed NB and SB

tracks will be offset approximately five feet south of the existing Cotton Belt centerline to allow

for future construction of a 15-foot wide trail on the north side. This potential trail will be

constructed by others and is proposed to extend from Preston Road to Meandering Way. The

alignment crosses several roads within the North Dallas area, including Davenport Road,

Campbell Road, Davenport Court, Hillcrest Road, McCallum Boulevard, Meandering Way and

Coit Road. From about 2000ft west of Preston Rd to 1500ft east of Meandering Way, 3 profile

options were designed with the intent to satisfy the City of Dallas Resolution 061835. These

profile option are discussed in detail in Section 4.2.3 below.

As the alignment enters the City of Richardson, east of Waterview Parkway, the track centers

will increase from 16 feet to 35 feet to allow the placement of a center platform for the

UTD/Synergy Park Station and avoid impact to the existing KCS Railway bridge columns. East of

Synergy Park Boulevard, freight operations begin where the existing KCS Railway tracks merge

with the existing Cotton Belt track. The proposed Cotton Belt alignment will be maintained at a

20-foot offset on the south side to allow for active freight traffic on the existing Cotton Belt

track.

The Section 3 alignment continues due east, until Alma Road, west of the PGBT and US 75

interchange, where two alignment alternatives are being considered – the North and the South

alignment alternatives.

The North Alignment Alternative proposes a new track on the south side of the existing Cotton

Belt track that follows the existing Cotton Belt alignment within the existing DART ROW. On the

west side of the PGBT and US 75 interchange, the track centers will increase from 20 feet to

approximately 35 feet to eliminate potential impacts to the existing PGBT bridge columns as the

alignment travels under PGBT. The proposed Cotton Belt track will grade separate the US 75

frontage roads, main lanes and Plano Parkway. The alignment will transition back to existing

grade before Avenue F and travels along the existing DART right of way until the DART LRT Red

Line, to the proposed at grade 12th

Street Station. A proposed aerial DART Red Line station will

be built on the existing DART Red Line aerial structure to allow interface with the Cotton Belt.

The terminus of the North Alignment Alternative is approximately 1000ft east of Avenue N.

Beyond Ave N, the Cotton Belt Section 3 alignment continues east another 11,300 feet along the

existing Cotton Belt alignment to its terminus at Shiloh Road. To accommodate the Cotton Belt

double tracks and station platform, the existing Cotton Belt freight track will be shifted about

15ft to the north from Avenue N to the terminus at Shiloh Road. A minimum of 18ft track

spacing will be provided between the freight track and the nearest Cotton Belt track.

The South Alignment Alternative begins at Alma Road and veers in a southeasterly direction

outside of the existing DART right of way. The alignment crosses the Spring Creek floodplain and

US 75 on a 3000ft long aerial structure in an easterly direction then veers north, paralleling the



existing DART LRT Red Line tracks on the west side. The proposed PGBT Station will serve as an

interface with the existing DART Red Line station. The alignment then parallels the existing DART

Red Line on the west and travels due north under PGBT after which it grade separates Plano

Parkway and reduces from a double track to single track alignment that follows the existing spur

track alignment on the west of the DART Red Line due to limited right of way. The single track

alignment then curves east under the DART LRT Red Line aerial structure. For the South

Alternative, it is proposed that the 12th

Street Station will be an aerial platform to allow for ease

of access to the proposed DART Red Line aerial station. The terminus of the South Alignment

Alternative is approximately 1000ft east of Avenue N.

4.2 Vertical Alignment

4.2.1 Section 1 - CB1 The Cotton Belt Regional Rail Section 1 vertical alignment begins north of SH 114 on an aerial

structure over SH 114. This aerial structure will be designed and constructed by the Fort Worth T

as part of the TEX Rail project. This grade separation avoids impacts to Cottonwood Branch and

the associated floodplain. The profile gradually descends onto retained fill to existing grade

before the Cotton Belt DFW North Station. North of the station, the profile matches existing

grade closely and ties in with the existing Cotton Belt. The profile continues at-grade under the

existing aerial structures of SH 121 and IH 635. The profile closely matches the existing grade as

it crosses Royal Lane, Freeport Parkway, S. Coppell Road, and crosses over the Grapevine Creek

on an aerial structure. It is on retained fill until it crosses S. Denton Tap Road, where the SB track

is on a grade separated aerial structure and then descends back to at-grade for the crossing of

Moore Road. Due to active freight track operations, the NB track will remain at grade as it

crosses South Denton Tap Road. Continuing east, the Section 1 profile is on aerial structure

crossing Grapevine Creek and then crosses Mockingbird Lane, MacArthur Boulevard and Fairway

Drive at grade. The profile gradually ascends on retained fill to aerial structure over two

floodplains west of the Elm Fork of the Trinity River.

4.2.2 Section 2 – CB2 The vertical alignment of Section 2 starts on structure over the Elm Fork of the Trinity River. The

profile stays at-grade on retained fill until it crosses the second Elm Fork on aerial structure. The

alignment crosses beneath aerial structure of Segment IV of the PGBT and crosses Luna Road at

grade. The profile grade then ascends on retained fill and aerial structure to cross the Hutton

Branch Creek. The profile matches the existing grade as it continues east under IH 35E. The

proposed design build IH 35 E plans show that the existing frontage roads and Belt Line Road will

be elevated to grade separate the Cotton Belt and BNSF tracks, which allows the tracks to

remain at grade.

East of IH 35, the NB profile follows the existing Cotton Belt profile and crosses underneath the

DART LRT Green Line structures, crossing the existing DGNO Track and Denton Drive at grade as

it follows the existing Cotton Belt freight track. East of the proposed Downtown Carrollton

Station, the NB Cotton Belt track will cross Denton Drive at grade and will require two diamond

crossings when it intersects the realigned BNSF and DGNO tracks.

The SB profile differs from the NB profile design just east of the proposed Downtown Carrollton

Station and Denton Drive at-grade crossing. The SB profile begins to ascend steeply on retained



fill and transitions to aerial structure to allow grade separation of the existing BNSF & DGNO

tracks. Farther east, the SB profile descends on retained fill and ties back to the existing track

elevation just east of Unnamed Tributary of Hutton Branch. The Section 2 profile then slowly

increases in grade following existing at-grade crossings at Perry Street, Josey Lane, Kelly

Boulevard, Marsh Lane and Surveyor Boulevard.

At Midway Road, the SB track will be limited to passenger operations only as it increases on a

3.43% grade to grade separate Midway Road, while the NB track remains at grade to allow

freight operations. Both NB and SB profiles crosses Addison Road, Quorum Drive and Spectrum

Drive and the DNT frontage roads at-grade. Section 2 terminates before the grade separation of

the DNT main lanes.

4.2.3 Section 3 – CB3 The Section 3 vertical alignment begins at the DNT frontage roads where it matches closely the

existing grade. The profile is grade separated over the main lanes of the DNT. The profile follows

the existing Cotton Belt profile closely until west of Preston Road, at which point 4 profile

options were studied (at grade, shallow trench, tunnel and deep trench). The deep trench

option was deemed unfeasible and therefore only the 3 remaining profile options were

considered. The limits of the profile options are based on Dallas City Council Resolution 061835,

also known as the Natinsky Plan, from 2,000 feet west of Preston Road to 1,500 feet east of

Meandering Way (approximate length of 2.60 miles).

Profile Option 1: At-Grade The At-Grade Option follows the existing Cotton Belt profile closely with consideration given to

maintaining vertical tangents at proposed station locations and at grade street crossings. There

will be 3 creek crossings and 7 at grade street crossings within this profile limit, with the last

street crossing being Dickerson Street which will be an at-grade crossing.

Profile Option 2: Shallow Trench The Shallow Trench option consists of a combination of open cut trench that is typically 4 to 12

feet below grade with 6 to 10 feet above-grade screen walls. Within the trench limits, there will

be three creek crossings (McKamy Branch, Osage Branch Crossing 1 and 2) and six grade

separated street crossings. The profile begins to descend to approximately 12 feet below grade

starting at 2,000 feet west of Preston Road. The profile crosses under the Preston Road Bridge,

and then ascends slightly to cross McKamy Branch Creek one foot above the existing conditions

100-year water surface elevation. East of McKamy Branch, the profile descends back into a five

to 12-foot open cut trench, with a depth that is just above the projected Osage Branch 100-year

water surface elevation on the north side of the tracks. Davenport Road, Campbell Road and

Davenport Court are all proposed to be elevated to provide 18’ minimum vertical clearance

above the tracks. East of Davenport Court, the profile crosses Osage Branch Crossing 1 and 2,

maintaining a one foot freeboard above the Post-Project 100-year water surface elevation. The

profile remains in a five to 12-foot deep trench crossing under Hillcrest Road, McCallum

Boulevard and Meandering Way. These 3 streets are proposed to be elevated above the tracks

to provide 18’ minimum vertical clearance. East of Meandering Way, the profile rises to match

the existing grade before Dickerson Street. The profile then crosses Dickerson Street at grade.



Profile Option 3: Tunnel The tunnel profile includes a 0.7-mile west portal, a 0.3-mile east portal and a 1.6-mile double

barrel tunnel, with each barrel having a 26ft inside diameter. It is anticipated that the majority

of the soil classification within the tunnel limits will be limestone rock formation. Due to the

double barrel tunnel configuration, the track centers will need to be 51ft apart and will be

contained within the existing DART ROW, therefor no additional ROW is anticipated. The tunnel

crosses under 3 creeks: McKamy Branch, Osage Branch Crossing #1 and Osage Branch Crossing

#2. The depth of overburden above the tunnel crown ranges between 20 and 40 feet. The

shallow cover areas are near the portal structures and below the creek crossings, with a

minimum 10ft overburden. The tunnel profile option terminates west of Dickerson St as the

profile rises to cross Dickerson St at grade.

Profile Option 4 (Eliminated): Deep Trench The deep trench concept would depress the rail alignment at least 15 feet below grade in the

North Dallas area. The handling of storm water drainage at creek crossings is the most critical

challenge for this option. Implementation of a deep trench option would require that water in

all three creeks be pumped past the trench. In 2012, a study was performed to evaluate the

feasibility of the deep trench option. Based on the study, it was concluded that the deep trench

option is not a feasible option due to significant capital costs, operating and maintenance costs,

and risk associated with pump failure due to lack of proper maintenance or power outages

which typically occur during major storm events. As such, the deep trench profile option is not

included in the 5% Final Engineering design.

As the Section 3 profile emerges beyond the limits of three profile options west of Dickerson

Street, the profile remains about 5 feet below existing grade to provide 18 feet minimum

vertical clearance under Coit Road which is proposed to be on aerial structure above the tracks.

East beyond Coit Road, the Section 3 profile then closely matches existing grade up to Alma

Road, where the North and South Alternatives begin.

For the North Alignment Option, the proposed profile will match the existing Cotton Belt profile

closely, crossing Synergy Park Boulevard, Prairie Creek, Renner Boulevard and Spring Creek on

aerial structure. The profile will ascend to grade separate at the US 75 Frontage Roads, the main

lanes and Plano Parkway on aerial structure, before descending to cross F Avenue at-grade. The

remaining profile to the terminus at Shiloh Road will match closely the existing Cotton Belt

profile.

For the South Alignment Option, the proposed profile will match the existing Cotton Belt profile

closely up to 1,000 feet west of the PGBT and US 75 interchange. At this point the profile will

transition to a long aerial structure in order to cross Spring Creek, its associated floodplain and

over the US 75 ramps and main lanes. The profile will transition from aerial structure to retained

fill to eventually match the existing ground as it approaches the Red Line’s Bush Turnpike

Station. Travelling north along the existing DART Red Line from the Bush Turnpike Station, the

South Alternative profile matches the existing grade at the PGBT frontage roads before

ascending to cross over Plano Parkway on an aerial structure. Once past Plano Parkway, the

remaining profile returns to match existing grade at 10th

Street. As the profile crosses under the

DART Red Line structure, the South Alternative profile ascends steeply in order to grade

separate Ave K and Municipal Ave. The 12th

Street aerial station will be at about the same

elevation as the proposed DART Red Line aerial station to allow a smooth interface. East past



the 12th

Street aerial station, the profile descends to a retained fill and eventually matches the

existing grade to the end limit of the South Alternative.

4.3 Trackwork

The Cotton Belt Corridor is a shared corridor except for the area between the DNT and the KCS

Crossing. Freight operations have been abandoned in this North Dallas section. The operation

may be governed by Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) rules and may require DART execute

a Memorandum of Understanding with FRA, to comply with track center spacing, fouling in the

event of derailment, graded crossing protection and signaling interfaces with freight railroad

operation. Passenger rail vehicles not complying with FRA requirements may not operate on the

general railroad system unless the FRA has issued a waiver. DART must establish comprehensive

guidelines so the design criteria can be developed to obtain the maximum useful life from the

track components while providing a high quality transportation alternative to the surrounding

community. DART is in the process of selecting a design vehicle for passenger rail operation in

this corridor. The selection of the vehicle will establish track loading, clearance requirements,

operating speeds, braking distance requirements and many other design considerations. In the

absence of this, the track design is developed using elements of DART Design Criteria and

AREMA Commuter Rail Design Criteria. The track design shall be reevaluated during the final

design phase for the determination of rail section, concrete ties, ballast section, premium rail

section on sharp curves and turnouts and special track components that 3produce the most

comfortable riding track.

In the typical detail of track structure (see Figure 4-2) certain assumptions have been made to

develop order of magnitude costs for trackwork in the corridor. These assumptions will require

further review and refinements during subsequent design phases.



Fig

ure

4-2

Ty

pic

al

Se

ctio

n o

f T

rack

Str

uct

ure



Also, Direct Fixation Track is proposed in the Shallow Trench section of the alignment between

just west of Preston Road and west of Dickerson Street. A typical section detail of the proposed

Direct Fixation track is as shown below.

Fig

ure

4-3

Ty

pic

al

Se

ctio

n o

f D

ire

ct F

ixa

tio

n T

rack



Special trackwork components will be required along the alignment for the movement of trains

from mainline to station passing track, from freight main to regional rail main, and also to

provide access to industrial sidings. For this purpose, turnout numbers 8, 10, 15 and 20 are

proposed to be used depending upon the speed requirements. Where necessary, double

crossovers and diamond crossings will also be considered. These special track units are expected

to use concrete ties and elastic fasteners.

Cotton Belt Vehicle Selection Criteria A major study component in the design development of the subject corridor is the

determination of an acceptable “Design Vehicle.” The vehicle selected should be a cost-

effective, efficient passenger rail vehicle sensitive to the needs and concerns of communities

located within the corridor. In order to initiate the design process of the corridor, the type of

vehicle must be evaluated and the “Design Vehicle” must be determined. The corridor design

will hinge on the selected vehicle and its ability to operate on the existing and proposed track.

The key elements in the design of the alignment are: curvature requirements; suitable gradient

to be considered for track profile design; vertical clearance requirements; acceleration,

deceleration and braking distance requirements; speed capabilities; wheel loads; and other

considerations to determine the vehicle.

A detailed study is required to determine which vehicle is most suited for operation on the

Cotton Belt Corridor. The study may consider the input from stakeholders and various agencies,

including the DART Board of Directors.

Freight Operations Local freight service is provided by short line and regional carriers. As passenger rail service is

developed in the corridor, consideration of local freight service is essential.

Four freight railroad companies operate within the corridor, through agreements, on DART-

owned tracks. Various agreements control the freight service activities within the Cotton Belt

Corridor. The Union Pacific Railroad has track usage rights on the entire corridor but operates no

trains. The corridor can be viewed as having three service areas with three freight service

providers. These freight service providers are: the Fort Worth and Western Railroad (FWWR) the

DGNO and the KCS.

Regional rail service and freight service operations would coexist within various Cotton Belt

Corridor segments. It is assumed one track would be dedicated for regional rail service and a

shared track would be maintained for both regional rail and freight service. However, some

sections may have a single track to minimize impacts if service can be accommodated within the

operating plan. Please see Appendix C, Existing Freight Operations Exhibit.

5.0 RIGHT-OF-WAY DART owns the Cotton Belt ROW. Property acquisitions will be required for proposed station

locations. Additional properties may be needed to expand some segments of the ROW to

achieve design speed, and to allow drainage, utility, structural and other guideway

improvements.



6.0 UTILITY MODIFICATIONS Existing Utility Composite drawings have been prepared for the 5% submittal using record

drawings and Geographic Information Systems data obtained from the City of Coppell, City of

Grapevine, DFW Airport, Explorer Pipeline Company, Atmos Energy, Chesapeake Energy,

Verizon, Time Warner Cable, Oncor Electric, Sprint, Qwest Communications and other identified

utility owners. Another source of information used for the project regarding existing utilities is

DART documentation of utility license agreements. These agreements have been executed with

utility owners for the use of the Cotton Belt ROW for utility location and construction purposes.

The consultant team has coordinated with DART personnel and has received a list of known

license agreements associated with utilities that affect the project corridor.

One last source of information that has been used to document existing utilities in Section CB-1

of the project is the Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) investigation performed as part of

DART’s GEC-III Contract No. C-1013219. The limits of the SUE investigation extend from

downtown Fort Worth near NE 28th Street to IH 35E in the City of Carrollton. The SUE

investigation was documented on a set of drawings titled “Cotton Belt Composite Utilities, Mile

Post 603.50 to 632.27, Contract No. C-1013219” created by Gorrondona and Associates and

dated 12-27-2010. The SUE investigation includes up to Quality Level B utility location services

and determined approximate horizontal and vertical position of some of the underground

utilities within the corridor.

The completeness and accuracy of all information obtained regarding existing utilities have not

been fully verified. This information should be used for planning purposes only. The final

designer for the regional rail line system should verify and obtain accurate horizontal and

vertical information for existing utilities using subsurface utility engineering or other methods as

required to obtain appropriate information necessary for the design. Also, the contractor is

responsible for the verification of the location and elevation of all existing utilities affected by

the project prior to construction.

Utility and drainage modifications drawings have not been developed at the Final 5% Design

submittal. Due to limited scope of services after the May 18, 2011 Draft 5% design submittal,

the Existing Utility Composite Drawings were not updated with the most current rail alignments.

Therefore, the Utility Crossings lists contained in Appendix A reference the Guideway Plan and

Profiles drawings which contain the most current rail alignments as of the Final 5% design

submittal.

6.1 Section CB-1

A preliminary existing utility crossing list for Section CB-1 has been included in Appendix A of

this report. The most significant utility crossings and/or possible utility modifications that may

be required for the design and construction of the Cotton Belt Regional Rail in Section CB-1

include:

• Oncor 138 KV overhead (OH) electric transmission lines running longitudinally along the

southern half of the ROW between Stations 1163+81 and 1265+20

• An Explorer 12.75-inch petroleum line running longitudinally along the northern half of

the ROW from Station 1130+38 to the end of line section CB-1 and crossing the existing

tracks twice near Stations 1384+49 and 1385+20.



• Sprint fiber optic and Qwest fiber optic lines running longitudinally along a meandering

path for the entire length of section CB-1

• 2 Chesapeake pipeline crossings, 12” gas line and 10” saltwater line, at approximately

Station 1025+00.

• Chesapeake gas valve station at approximately Station 1025+00.

The utilities listed above are discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs.

Existing Oncor 138 KV overhead electric transmission lines run longitudinally along Section CB-1

of the project between Stations 1163+81 and 1265+20 from Freeport Parkway to west of Moore

Road for approximately 1.92 miles. Oncor OH electric transmission high mast poles are located

on the south side of the existing freight rail line as well as the proposed regional rail line. The

horizontal clearance between Oncor OH electric transmission high mast poles and the proposed

regional rail line varies from approximately zero to 20 feet. Horizontal clearance requirements

must be evaluated for each of the 20 high mast poles associated with this OH electric

transmission line to determine how many of them must be relocated. At approximately Station

1217+80 the proposed rail crosses Denton Tap Road on an aerial structure. The vertical

clearance between the Oncor OH electric transmission lines must be evaluated to determine if

sufficient clearance exists at that location.

An existing Explorer 12.75-inch petroleum pipeline (approximately 19.5 miles long) is located

inside the Cotton Belt corridor generally parallel to the existing freight for most of the project

limits. This line extends from Royal Lane in the City of Coppell near the west end of the project

to US 75 in the City of Richardson near the east end of the project. The petroleum pipeline is

generally located approximately 32 feet north of the centerline of the existing freight tracks

throughout Section CB-1.

The proposed regional rail line in Section CB-1 is proposed to be located on the south side of the

existing freight line to avoid possible conflicts with or relocation of the Explorer petroleum

pipeline.

The Explorer petroleum pipeline crosses the proposed regional rail line twice in Section CB-1

near the intersection of Belt Line Road and Ledbetter Road near Stations 1384+49 and 1385+20,

respectively. Record drawings show that at both crossing locations the Explorer petroleum line

is inside an 18-inch O.D., 0.25 W.T. steel casing pipe.

Existing Qwest fiber optic and Sprint fiber optic lines run parallel to the corridor along a

meandering path for the entire length of Section CB-1. There are various locations where either

the Sprint or Qwest fiber optic line does not meet DART’s horizontal clearance requirements.

Between Stations 1010+00 to 1315+00 for approximately 5.8 miles, there are several locations

where the Qwest and Sprint fiber optic lines are located directly beneath or less than 15-feet

away from the centerline of the proposed regional rail line or proposed spur tracks realignment.

Horizontal clearance requirements need to be evaluated to decide the locations where these

fiber optic lines will be relocated.

The Qwest fiber optic line is less than 15-feet away from the centerline of the proposed regional

rail line between Stations 1029+00 and 1066+00 for approximately 3,700 feet, 1119+50 and

1131+00 for approximately 1,150 feet, 1172+00 and 1182+00 for approximately 1,000 feet,



1204+00 and 1211+00 for approximately 700 feet, 1218+00 and 1219+00 for approximately 100

feet, 1242+00 and 1255+00 for approximately 1,300 feet and 1258+00 and 1314+00 for

approximately 5,600 feet.

The Sprint fiber optic line is less than 15 feet away from the centerline of the proposed regional

rail line between Stations 1104+50 and 1117+64 for approximately 1,314 feet, 1244+00 and

1269+00 for approximately 2,500 feet, 1278+00 and 1297+00 for approximately 1,900 feet, and

1385+30 and 1386+30 for approximately 100 feet.

Existing Chesapeake gas facilities impact the alignment at approximately Stations 1025+00. At

this location there are a 12” gas line and a 10” saltwater line that cross the alignment.

Additionally, a gas valve station exists at this location that directly conflicts with the proposed

rail alignment.

6.2 Section CB-2


this report. The most noteworthy utility crossings and/or possible utility modifications that may

be required for the design and construction of the Cotton Belt Regional Rail in Section CB-2

include:

• An Explorer 12.75-inch petroleum pipeline running longitudinally along the ROW

throughout Section 2 and crossing the existing and proposed rail lines at various

locations

• Qwest, Sprint and Verizon fiber optic lines running longitudinally along meandering

paths throughout the ROW for the entire length of Section CB-2


The Explorer 12.75-inch petroleum pipeline exists longitudinally within the Cotton Belt Corridor

throughout all of Section CB-2. The pipeline crosses the proposed regional rail multiple times in

this section. It crosses once between the two branches of the Elm Fork Trinity River near Station

2018+00, once just west of IH 35E near Station 2092+00, several times across the various tracks

in the Downtown Carrollton Mercer Yard area, twice just west of Kelly Boulevard near Stations

2200+50 and 2204+75, once west of Surveyor Boulevard near Station 2304+50 and once east of

Surveyor Boulevard near Station 2314+25.

It is anticipated that the Explorer petroleum pipeline will require relocation in areas where the

existing utility is located closer than 20 feet to the proposed regional rail line or associated

proposed tracks. There are several segments of the petroleum line that fall within this 20 feet

minimum recommended separation distance. Those segments include the area near IH 35E and

Broadway Street between Stations 2097+00 and 2109+00, the portion of the line near the east

end of the Mercer Yard between Stations 2121+00 and 2134+00, and 85% of the length of the

petroleum line between Josey Lane and Spectrum Drive between Stations 2175+00 and

2379+50.

Quest, Sprint and Verizon fiber optic lines exist longitudinally within the Cotton Belt Corridor

throughout Section CB-2. These lines cross the track at various locations but are predominantly

longitudinal with the track. Significant portions of the Sprint lines will require relocation



between Stations 2094+50 to 2106+00, 2123+00 to 2125+50, 2132+50 to 2137+50, and 2152+50

to the end at 3010+00. Additionally, Sprint fiber optic lines are mounted on the existing bridge

structures between Stations 2010+50 to 2013+20, 2036+11 to 2040+29 and 2077+34 to

2079+14. A majority of the Quest and Verizon fiber optic lines are outside the minimum

recommended 15 feet separation distance and can remain in place, except in the area along

Cecil Drive.

6.3 Section CB-3


this report. There are several noteworthy utility crossings and/or possible utility modifications

that may be required for the design and construction of the Cotton Belt Regional Rail in Section

CB-3 include:

• An Explorer 12.75-inch petroleum pipeline running longitudinally along the ROW

throughout most of Section CB-3 and crossing the existing and proposed rail lines at

various locations

• Qwest, Sprint and Verizon fiber optic lines running longitudinally along meandering

paths throughout the ROW for the entire length of Section CB-3

• Most utilities located in the area of the proposed Shallow Trench beginning west of

Preston Road and ending near Coit Road between Stations 3065+00 and 3216+00


The Explorer 12.75-inch petroleum pipeline exists longitudinally within the Cotton Belt Corridor

throughout most of Section CB-3 from the DNT to US 75. The pipeline crosses the proposed

regional rail three times in this section. It crosses once just east of the KCS railroad near Station

3284+00, once east of West Renner Road near Station 3307+00 and once east of Alma Road

near Station 3381+50 at which point it exits the rail ROW and does not return again within the

limits of the eastern end of this project.

Again, it is anticipated that the Explorer petroleum pipeline will need to be relocated in areas

where the existing utility is located closer than 20 feet to the proposed regional rail line or

associated proposed tracks. There are several segments of the petroleum line that fall within the

20 feet minimum recommended separation distance in Section CB-3 of the project. Those

segments include an area near White Rock Creek between Stations 3036+00 and 3042+00, an

area between Chalfont Court and east of Preston Road between Stations 3052+00 and 3087+00,

and most of the line from Waterview Parkway to east of Synergy Park Boulevard between

Stations 3261+00 and 3298+00 and between Stations 3288+50 and 3298+00.

Quest, Sprint and Verizon fiber optic lines exist longitudinally within the Cotton Belt Corridor

throughout most of Section CB-3. These lines cross the track at various locations but are

predominantly longitudinal with the track. Significant portions of the Sprint lines will require

relocation. A majority of the Quest and Verizon fiber optic lines are outside the minimum

recommended 15 feet separation distance and can remain in place.

The Sprint fiber optic line is less than 15 feet from the proposed alignment from Stations

3010+00 to 2014+00, 3020+00 to 3049+00, 3053+00 to 301+00, 3148+50 to 3160+00, 3260+00

to 3283+00, and 3314+50 to 339+50. With the new alignment of the freight line, the Sprint fiber



optic line is less than 15 feet from the proposed freight alignment from Station 13+00 to

152+50.

The Qwest fiber optic line is less than 15 feet from the proposed alignment from Stations

3034+00 to 3037+00, 2108+00 to 3110+50, 3192+50 to 3201+00, 3239+50 to 3262+50, 3288+50

to 3294+50, 3311+00 to 3351+00, 3378+00 to 3392+50, 3397+00 to 3399+00, 3402+50 to

3404+00, and 3420+00 to 3442+00.

The Verizon fiber optic line is less than 15 feet from the proposed alignment from Stations

3381+00 and 3391+00.

The Oncor overhead electric line is less than 15 feet from the proposed alignment between

Stations 3020+00 to 3043+00 and 3063+00 to 3071+50. The Oncor underground electric line is

less than 15 feet from the proposed alignment from Station 3357+50 to 3377+50.

Most utilities located in the area of the proposed Shallow Trench between Stations 3065+00 and

3216+00 will be affected by this project and will require modification. A list of utilities in this

area is provided below. An “X” in the “Shallow Trench Conflict” column indicates the utility is

anticipated to require adjustment as part of this project:

Table 6-1

Cotton Belt Phase I Trench Area Utility Crossings

STATION UTILITY / CROSSING SIZE OWNER SHALLOW TRENCH CONFLICT

3216+57 SANITARY SEWER 10" CITY OF DALLAS

3215+55 GAS 4" ATMOS

3215+51 WATER 16" CITY OF DALLAS

3215+41 UG CABLE TV / INTERNET TIME WARNER




3181+25 WATER 48" CITY OF DALLAS X

3179+85 GAS 4" ATMOS X


3172+52 SANITARY SEWER 8" CITY OF DALLAS X



3157+35 UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE SPRINT X

3151+06 SANITARY SEWER 12" DALLAS



3137+71 UG ELECTRIC ONCOR X




Table 6-1

Cotton Belt Phase I Trench Area Utility Crossings



3126+13 UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE VERIZON X




3098+72 GAS 6" ATMOS


3098+37 UG ELECTRIC ONCOR

3098+06 UG ELECTRIC ONCOR


3086+86.68 UG TELEPHONE SPRINT X

3070+00 to

3086+00 PETROLEUM LINE 12.75" EXPLORER X

3081+12 GAS 12" ATMOS X




In addition to the previously described utilities, there are hundreds of other existing utility lines

that cross the Cotton Belt. Since the corridor currently includes or has previously included an

active freight rail line along most portions of the proposed alignment, most of the existing

underground utilities have already been installed in accordance with typical railroad crossing

criteria. This means that most existing utilities have an acceptable level of ground cover above

the utility line and below the existing rail elevation. Also, most existing utilities have been

installed inside an encasement pipe underneath the existing tracks and outside the area of the

existing tracks for a certain horizontal distance.

Although our utility research has verified this is the case in most circumstances, this project will

still require adjustments to many existing utilities in many areas of the project. This is true

because many existing utilities were not encased from ROW line to ROW line across the entire

railroad corridor. Instead, they may have been encased for only a distance of 50 or 75 feet

centered on the existing track. In this situation, the encasement pipe would have to be

lengthened in areas where this project is proposing a new rail line parallel to the existing one.

Also, existing utility lines may have been constructed with adequate ground cover below the

existing rail, but may no longer have sufficient cover in areas where this project is proposing

new parallel rail lines at different elevations.

Finally, there are numerous at grade utilities, predominantly at street crossings, that conflict

with the new alignment and will need to be relocated. Most of these utilities fall into the

following categories: light posts, traffic signal posts, crossing gates, railroad control utilities and

in rare instances water and sanitary sewer manholes.



Early coordination with the utility owners will be critical to planning for the modification of

utilities as part of this project. Power, water facilities and petroleum lines cannot be taken out of

service without regard to the time of year and the demand for service. Normally, large water

mains and electric power facilities can be shut down during the winter months when demand

for water and electricity is at its lowest. Coordination with gas and petroleum line owners is

equally important. Early coordination with the utility owners will be crucial to keeping the

project on schedule.

Potholing and additional SUE efforts are recommended during the final design effort and prior

to the commencement of construction activities in order to locate existing utilities more

accurately and to verify existing cover and pipe encasement characteristics. All utility crossings

will need to be reviewed for compliance with DART’s utility crossing requirements. Water and

sanitary sewer mains will need to be encased. Utilities that cross on a diagonal will need to be

realigned to cross the tracks perpendicularly where possible. Acceptable amounts of cover over

crossing utility lines must be provided.

7.0 BRIDGE AND STRUCTURAL DESIGN

7.1 Bridge Design

All the bridges along the Cotton Belt Corridor were designed in accordance with the latest

version of AREMA Manual for Railway Engineering (to be called “AREMA Manual” hereafter).

The existing Cotton Belt Corridor single track is an active freight train corridor, with the

exception of the north Dallas segment where the freight train operations have been abandoned.

The proposed Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Line will be a double-track corridor for the

mixed traffic (freight train and passenger train). The existing Cotton Belt Corridor single track

will be rebuilt to be one of the two proposed tracks, while the other new track will be built

parallel to the existing track.

All structures/bridges were designed in accordance with the AREMA Manual and DART Design

Criteria with the train loads defined as follows.

• Train loading of Cooper E-80 as specified in the AREMA Manual for most of the

proposed bridges which may be shared with freight operations and are located over the

portion of the alignment where the current track is still active for the freight train

operation. These bridges are located in Section 1 – CB1 and Section 2 – CB2.

• AREMA Cooper E-40 train loading for all bridges, which are located over the portion of

the alignment where the existing track is not currently used for freight train operations.

These bridges include all the proposed new bridges located in Section 3 – CB3.

• AREMA Cooper E-40 train loading for the bridges, which are proposed for the passenger

rail operations only. These bridges include those bridges located in Section 1 – CB1 as

DFW International Airport Access Bridge, the grade separation bridge at S. Denton Tap

Road, and the bridges located in Section 2 - CB2 as Downtown Carrollton Rail Station

overpass bridge and the Midway grade separation bridge.



7.2 Section 1 - CB1

All the existing bridges along the current single-track corridor are either river-crossing or creek-

crossing bridges or roadway overpasses. The existing bridge typically has open deck track, which

is supported on steel beam or even wooden beams. The existing bridge beams are mainly

supported on steel pile piers or wooden trestle piers. All the existing bridges have a maximum

span length of 30 feet or the existing piers are located no more than 30 feet apart. Each existing

bridge has multiple piers located inside the river or creek channels.

The field inspection of the existing bridges indicates the existing bridges are very old and appear

to be in unsound structural condition or not in compliance with the current AREMA Manual

requirements for freight operations. Therefore, most existing bridges are to be replaced with

new bridges.

There are a total of eight bridges proposed for Section 1. The approximate locations and main

features of these bridges are listed below:

• Cottonwood Branch crossing, west of SH 121, 80 feet long from Stations 1051+34 to

1052+14, direct-fixation dual-track, steel through girder bridge. Design loads: AREMA

Cooper E80.

• Unnamed channel crossing, west of SH 121, 65 feet long from Stations 1060+11 to

1060+76, direct-fixation dual-track, steel through girder bridge. Design loads: AREMA

Cooper E80.

• Grapevine Creek Crossing I, west of S. Denton Tap Road, 140 feet long from Stations

1198+25 to 1199+65, ballasted dual-track, prestressed concrete box beam bridge.

Design Loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• S. Denton Tap Road, 476 feet long from Stations 1216+29 to 1221+05, single-track, two-

span of steel plate girder bridge over the roadway and five spans of prestressed

concrete I-beam bridge. Design Loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• S. Denton Tap Road for Cypress Waters Option, 295 feet long from Station 1217+15 to

1220+20, ballasted dual-track, three spans of steel plate girder bridge over the roadway.

Design Loads: AREMA Cooper E40

• Grapevine Creek Crossing II, west of Mockingbird Lane, 132 feet long from Station

1294+47 to 1295+79, direct-fixation dual-track, steel through girder bridge. Design

loads: AREMA Cooper E80.

• Trinity River Elm Fork west channel crossing, east of Fairway Drive, 1,020 feet long from

Stations 1362+40 to 1372+60, ballasted dual-track, prestressed concrete box beam

bridge. Design Loads: AREMA Cooper E80.

An existing timber bridge roughly 70 fee long from approximately Station 1220+30 to 1221+00

will remain. An existing timber bridge roughly 910 feet long from approximately Station

1336+26 to 1345+36 will be demolished and will be replaced by embankment.

The Cotton Belt Corridor access to DFW Airport will share a bridge over SH 114 with the T’s Fort

Worth TEX Rail commuter rail. The design and construction of the bridge will be done by the

Fort Worth T.

The superstructures of the new bridges over the creeks or river channels are designed to have a

minimum one foot freeboard above the 100-year flood elevation. The low chord of the



superstructure has a minimum clearance of 16-feet 6-inches over the roadway for the S. Denton

Tap Road grade separation bridge.

The overall length and span lengths of each new bridge are designed to be the same or longer

than the existing bridge at the same river or creek location in order to maintain the current

discharge capacity of the river or creek.

Each of the dual-track concrete beam bridges will have an identical and separate new bridge

superstructure while the single united substructure will be supporting two bridge

superstructures. The dual-track bridges will be built in two phases as described below:

• Build the bridge for the proposed new track first while maintaining the operation of the

existing bridge during the construction

• Shift the train operation to the new bridge after its construction is completed

• Replace the existing bridge with a new bridge as outlined above

7.3 Section 2 - CB2

All the existing bridges along the current single track corridor are either river or creek crossings,

except for one existing bridge over an unnamed dirt road. The existing bridge typically has open

deck track, which is supported on steel beams, concrete box beams or even wooden beams.

The existing bridge beams are mainly supported on steel pile piers or wooden trestle piers. All

the existing piers are located at no more than 30 feet apart or all the existing bridges have a

maximum span length of 30 feet. Each existing bridge has multiple piers located inside the river

and creek channels or over the unnamed dirt road.

The field inspection of the existing bridges indicates that they are very old and appear to be in

unsound structural condition or not in compliance with the current AREMA Manual

requirements. Therefore, the existing bridges are to be replaced with new bridges.

There is a new passenger-rail-only bridge proposed to cross over the existing BNSF line in

downtown Carrollton, span over a small creek just east of downtown and then cross over

Midway Road. Each of the three bridges carries one track, which is parallel to the adjacent at-

grade existing corridor track.

Seven bridges are proposed for Section 2. The approximate locations and main features of

these bridges are listed below:

• Elm Fork Branch of the Trinity River main channel crossing, 265 feet long from Station


Design loads: AREMA Cooper E80.

• Elm Fork Branch of the Trinity River East channel crossing, 418 feet long from Station



• Unnamed minor road crossing, 35 feet long from Station 2057+97 to 2058+32, ballasted

dual-track, prestressed concrete box beam bridge. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E80.

• Hutton Branch of the Trinity River crossing, west of IH 35E, 180 feet long from Station





• BNSF flyover bridge at downtown Carrollton, 880 feet long from Station 2119+68 to

2128+48, ballasted single-track (Southbound), prestressed concrete box beam bridge.


• Unnamed stream crossing at downtown Carrollton, 75 feet long from Station 2132+77

to 2133+52, ballasted single-track (Southbound), prestressed concrete box beam bridge.


• Midway Road grade separation bridge, 600 feet long from Stations 2330+92 to 2336+92,

ballasted single-track (Southbound), two steel plate girder spans over Midway Road and

prestressed concrete box beam spans on either end of the steel spans. Design loads:

AREMA Cooper E40.

The bridges over the creek, river channel or dirt road as listed above will be built in the manner

similar to that for those bridges over the creek as proposed for the corridor alignment Section 1.

The dual-track bridge will have the separate bridge superstructure and shared substructure.

The low chords of the new bridge superstructures over each creek or river crossing are designed

to have a minimum one foot freeboard above the 100-year flood elevation. The low chord of

the superstructure has a clearance of about 14 feet, 0 inches over the unnamed minor road

while the adequate clearance as required will be provided for the bridges over the existing BNSF

track and/or highways.

Prestressed concrete box beams, prestressed concrete I beams, or steel plate girders are utilized

for all the bridges along Section 2 – CB2.

7.4 Section 3 - CB3

All the existing bridges along the current single track corridor are river crossings, creek-crossings

or roadway grade separation bridges. The existing bridge typically has an open deck track or

closed deck. The bridge decks are supported on steel beam, concrete beam, concrete box

beam, wooden beam, steel truss or steel through girder. The existing bridge beams are mainly

supported on steel pile piers, concrete piers or wooden trestle piers.

The field inspection of the existing bridges indicates that:

• Some of the existing bridges appear to be in good condition and they are tentatively

considered to be preserved to support one track of the corridor. These existing bridges

are located at North Dallas Tollway, Synergy Park Boulevard, W. Renner Road, Spring

Creek and US 75.

• All other existing bridges are very old and appear to be in unsound structural condition

or not in compliance with the current AREMA Manual requirements. Therefore, all these

unsound existing bridges are to be replaced with new bridges.

New grade separation bridges are proposed to cross over Coit Road, US 75 and Plano Parkway.

There is a new bridge proposed for crossing over US 75 at different locations for the North

Option and South Option as well, while the new bridge proposed to cross Plano Parkway is for

the South Option only.

The approximate locations and main features of the bridges for Section 3 are listed below:



• North Dallas Tollway, 124 feet long from Station 3010+53 to 3011+77, direct-fixation

single track (Northbound), steel plate girder bridge. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• White Rock Creek Crossing, 140 feet long from Station 3046+19 to 3047+59, ballasted

dual-track, steel plate girder bridge. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• McKamy Branch Creek Crossing, 180 feet long from Station 3101+55 to 3103+35, direct-

fixation dual-track, steel through girder bridge. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• Osage Branch Crossing 1, 140 feet long from Station 3128+22 to 3129+62, direct-fixation

dual-track steel through girder bridge. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• Osage Branch Crossing 2, 50 feet long from Station 3149+79 to 3150+29, direct-fixation

dual-track, steel through girder bridge. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• Coit Rd. Roadway Bridge, 180 feet long, 90 feet wide at approximate Station 3216+00.

Design loads: ASHTO HL-93.

• Synergy Park Boulevard, 194 feet long from Station 3292+88 to 3294+82, direct-fixation

single track, ASHHTO Type IV girder bridge. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• W. Renner Road, 581 feet long from Station 3299+68 to 3305+49, ballasted single track

(Northbound), multi-span prestressed concrete beam bridge. Design loads: AREMA

Cooper E40.

• Spring Creek Bridge for the North Option, 320 feet long from Station 3387+88 to

3391+08, ballasted single track (Northbound), multi-span, prestressed concrete beam

bridge. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• US 75 Bridge for the North Option, 1,212 feet long from Stations 3404+85 to 3416+97,

ballasted single track (Northbound), four steel plate girder spans over the US 75 main

roadway and service roadways in addition to multi-spans of prestressed concrete beams

on each end of the steel span. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• US 75 Bridge for the South Option, 3,050 feet long from Stations 3388+27 to 3418+17,

ballasted dual-track, steel plate girder span connected to multi-span prestressed

concrete beams on each end of the steel span. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• Plano Parkway Bridge for the South Option, 480 feet long from Stations 3447+37 to

3452+17, direct fixation dual-track steel plate girder and ballasted concrete girder span

bridge. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

• 12th

Street Aerial Station Bridge, 955 feet long from Station 3497+00 to 3488+55,

ballasted dual-track, typical concrete girder spans and two steel plate girder spans

crossing Avenue K and Municipal Avenue. Design loads: AREMA Cooper E40.

The approximate length, width and location of roadway bridges for Shallow Trench option are

list below.

• Davenport Rd. W Bridge, 340 feet long, 90 feet wide at Station 3098+00. Design loads:

AASHTO HL-93.

• Campbell Rd. Bridge, 458 feet long, 90 feet wide at Station 3110+00. Design loads:

AASHTO HL-93.

• Davenport Rd. E Bridge, 390 feet long, 50 feet wide at Station 3127+00. Design loads:

AASHTO HL-93.

• Hillcrest Rd. Bridge, 132 feet long, 90 feet wide at Station 3163+00. Design loads:

AASHTO HL-93.

• McCallum Blvd. Bridge, 132 feet long, 65 feet wide at Station 3171+00. Design loads:

AASHTO HL-93.



• Meandering Way Bridge, 132 feet long, 50 feet wide at Station 3179+00. Design loads:

AASHTO HL-93.

• Coit Rd. Bridge, 180 feet long, 90 feet wide at Station 3216+00. Design loads: AASHTO

HL-93.

The low chords of the new bridge superstructures crossing each river or creek are designed to

have a minimum one foot freeboard above the pre-project or post-project 100-year flood

elevation. The low chord of the superstructure has a minimum clearance of 16 feet, 6 inches

over all the traffic roadways.

Each bridge superstructure is designed based on the bridge site features and condition. As a

result, the steel through girder, the prestressed concrete beam, steel plate girder or a

combination of two span types are utilized for those proposed bridges.

The bridges over the floodplains will be designed with single spans, where possible, without

piers in the creeks or as multi-span bridges with a minimum number of piers to minimize

impacts on the floodplains.

The concrete drilled shaft foundations are used for all the proposed bridges along all three

sections (CB1, CB2 and CB3).

See Appendix D, Bridge Structures List table for a summary of bridge information for the project.

8.0 DRAINAGE Drainage features have been added to the Existing Utility Composite Drawings prepared for the

5% submittal. Items were identified using record drawings obtained from the Cities of Grapevine

and Coppell, the Town of Addison and the Cities of Carrollton, Dallas, Richardson and Plano. Due

to access restrictions, limited field observations were made prior to this submittal to verify

locations and sizes of existing drainage structures. The final designer should verify and obtain

accurate horizontal and vertical information for all existing drainage structures using on-the-

ground survey and field investigations.

Drainage area maps for the Cotton Belt 5% submittal were prepared using a combination of

existing drainage area maps provided by the local municipalities listed above and aerial

topography provided by DART. Drainage areas have been verified using NCTCOG’s aerial

topography for areas outside the DART topographic limits. Due to the limitations in the scope of

work for the preliminary engineering, only off-site drainage areas were identified. Local wall

drain and track drainage areas will be determined during final design.

Drainage discharges have been calculated for a 100-year storm event to provide adequate

drainage facilities in accordance with DART design criteria and the design criteria for the

appropriate city. Times of concentration were calculated for each sub-area using formulas from

the DART Design Manual. Discharges for drainage areas smaller than 200 acres were determined

using the Rational Method. For major creek crossings hydrologic information was taken from the

existing study or hydraulic and hydrologic models.



Although no utility modification sheets are included in the 5% plans, drainage modifications will

be required as a part of this project. Drainage facilities that cross under the existing Cotton Belt

rail are included in the Existing Utility Matrix provided as Appendix A.

Existing drainage structures on the proposed alignment shall be examined and analyzed to

determine whether or not a full replacement or additional culverts and/or extensions are

necessary to convey design flows. Additionally, the structural integrity of the existing drainage

crossings must be evaluated with respect to design loadings prior to any final decision on their

suitability for use in the final design. Storm sewers and culverts shall be provided for increased

runoff due to any drainage sub-areas created by the work performed to construct the line. New

drainage structures at track crossings will meet current storm drainage design requirements.

These proposed storm sewers will be connected to existing systems, which will not be improved

beyond the DART ROW or limits of construction unless determined otherwise by the final

section designer.

8.1 Section CB-1

8.1.1 Overview Generally, Cotton Belt Line Segment 1 crosses sub-basins contributing to Grapevine and

Cottonwood creeks. Most of the Cotton Belt Line Segment 1 neither changes drainage areas nor

alters overall runoff characteristics of major basins crossing the proposed alignment. Minor

changes to the existing drainage, flow paths and runoff characteristics should be expected along

and adjacent to the DART ROW. Construction of Cotton Belt Line Segment 1 will have limited

impact on existing drainage patterns.

This submittal demonstrates intermediate designs utilizing combinations of open channels or

ditches with culvert crossings and includes storm sewer relocations. Complete underdrain

systems design was not included as part of this preliminary design; however, it will be the

responsibility of the final section designer. Open channel ditches located within the DART ROW

will be utilized to carry 100-year storm runoff. Areas along the alignment where the permanent

railroad ROW is limited will require additional drainage easements for constructing planned

drainage ditches or storm structures as incurred from this design. Ditches will generally have a

depth of two feet and a minimum bottom width of two feet, with maximum 3:1 fore slopes and

4:1 back slopes. In areas along the alignment where it is required to reduce the DART easement

width or additional drainage easement widths due to constraints by manmade or natural

features, low height reinforced concrete flumes may be used pending the condition that design

capacity can be achieved. Proposed ditches will generally have the same profile as the vertical

alignment grade of the track, with some exceptions of the proposed ditches connecting to

existing ditches or structures, or the need to create an artificial high point that causes grades to

flow against the grade of the track. All cross-sections and Utility Modification Composite final

design sheets will reflect the horizontal and vertical location of drainage ditches.

In areas along the alignment where planned drainage ditches intercept storm runoff from large

drainage areas, underground storm systems and inlets may be required in addition to open

channels and flumes to convey storm runoff to existing creeks and tributaries. These

underground storm systems will be designed by the final section designer.



8.1.2 Areas of Importance During final design, the hydraulic capacity of existing creek and tributary crossings will be

calculated and compared to the expected storm runoff. Hydraulic studies shall be performed for

creek crossings at Stations 1051+35 and 1060+17 on Cottonwood Creek and at Stations 1198+34

and 1294+44 on Grapevine Creek using HEC-RAS modeling to determine 100-year water surface

elevations, and cross-sections shall be developed to determine the water surface limits. The

vertical alignment of the track at these crossings will be determined using DART design criteria

with respect to the 100-year water surface elevations and limits. Limited or no modifications

shall be planned for creeks beneath proposed aerial rail crossings with the exception of slope

stabilization that may be required as determined by the final section designer.

The existing aerial crossing of a drainage channel at Station 1220+68 shall be replaced with a

proposed culvert rail crossing. All existing inline culverts shall be utilized for ditches crossing

existing roads, private driveways and similar utilities. A summary of existing culvert structures

and crossings is listed in Appendix A. Replaced and/or relocated storm sewers and inlets

including but not limited to systems concentrating along the proposed rail will be connected to

existing systems and shall be reflected in the Utility Modification Composite sheets.

8.2 Section CB-2

8.2.1 Overview The Cotton Belt Line Section CB-2 neither changes drainage areas nor alters the overall runoff

characteristics of major basins crossing the proposed alignment. Open ditches run along both

sides of the existing rail. Where possible, the existing ditch will be shifted to accommodate the

proposed rail. Where this is not possible due to ROW constraints or other conflicts, an enclosed

storm drain system will be proposed. Proposed ditches will generally have the same profile as

the existing ditches in order to minimize off-site impacts. The hydraulic capacity of major ditches

will be evaluated to ensure adequate freeboard. Smaller ditches will be designed by the final

section designer.

8.2.2 Areas of Importance The areas of importance for the CB-2 line section are related to the two creek crossings.

Portions of the downtown Carrollton area are in the 100-year floodplain of Hutton Branch.

Where the proposed alignment is at-grade it is important to ensure there is adequate freeboard

above the 100-year water surface elevation.

Both Addison and Carrollton are largely developed along the corridor. In both communities

there are several spur tracks that provide freight access into nearby warehouses. Special

attention will be given to the drainage across the spur tracks to ensure that existing drainage

patterns are maintained and that freight rail design criteria are met. Additionally, there are

several cross culverts that will potentially need to be replaced in order to accommodate the

proposed alignment.

8.2.3 Hydraulics Line Section CB-2 crosses two major water courses; the Elm Fork of the Trinity River and Hutton

Branch. Both of these waterways have been studied and have floodplains mapped by the

Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA). Additionally, the Elm Fork is identified as



being in the Regulatory Zone of the Trinity River Corridor, as designated in the Trinity River

Corridor map. The following summarizes the waterway crossing for CB-2. A more detailed

discussion of the hydraulic modeling, design requirements and permitting requirements will be

provided at the 10% level in a separate Hydraulic Report.

Elm Fork Trinity River The Cotton Belt alignment crosses the Elm Fork of the Trinity River in Carrollton 120 feet

upstream of Belt Line Road. The latest HEC-RAS model (modified August 2010) was obtained

from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and utilizes HEC-RAS Version 4.1.0.

There are three bridge crossings of the Elm Fork – one bridge over the main channel and one

each in the left and right overbanks. The existing main channel structure is modeled as 237 feet

long with two 8-foot diameter piers and a section depth of four feet. The existing structure over

the left overbank is modeled as 392 feet with seven 10-foot diameter piers and a section depth

of 2.8 feet. The existing structure over the right overbank is modeled as 1,013 feet with eight 17-

foot diameter piers and a section depth of 2.8 feet. The 100-year water surface elevation is

441.58 at Section 87541. The Elm Fork floodplain influences the proposed Cotton Belt regional

rail from CB-1 Station 1360+00 to CB-2 Station 2053+00.

Any changes or improvements within the Elm Fork floodplain must comply with FEMA

regulations and with the requirements associated with obtaining a Corridor Development

Certificate (CDC), as well as any local floodplain requirements. The requirements having the

most impact on this project are: no rise in 100-year water surface elevation (within four-

hundredths of a foot), no significant increase in the Standard Project Floor (SPF) water surface

elevation and 0% and 5% maximum allowable valley storage loss for the 100-year and SPF

events respectively.

A modified conditions HEC-RAS model was developed to include areas of ineffective flow in the

downstream and upstream cross-sections of the existing right overbank bridge that were not

included in the existing model. This was done in agreement with the USACE and verified with a

map they provided, which shows the ineffective flow delineation. An additional cross section

upstream of the bridge (87551) at DART’s ROW limit was added to this model as well.

The modified model was used to develop a preliminary proposed conditions model to show the

impacts of the proposed Cotton Belt alignment on the Elm Fork. In the proposed conditions, all

three bridges have been modeled with 4-foot piers spaced approximately every 50 feet and a

40-foot deck width. The results indicate that excavation upstream might be required to prevent

increases in water surface elevation for the 100-year storm event. Also, a minimum low chord

elevation of 447.7 feet might be required in order to prevent significant increases in the SPF

water surface elevation.

Hutton Branch Hutton Branch influences the Cotton Belt Regional Rail alignment in two places. The first is at

the creek crossing west of IH 35E, at rail Station 2078+00. The second area is in Downtown

Carrollton, where the alignment parallels Hutton Branch.

The Cotton Belt crosses Hutton Branch midway between Luna Road and IH 35E. The HEC-RAS

model used in the FEMA map modernization effort was obtained from the City of Carrollton. The



model utilizes HEC-RAS V3.1.3 and fully developed discharges. The existing bridge is modeled as

13 spans supported by 24-inch diameter piers for a total length of 179 feet, with a section depth

of 1.8 feet. The 100-year water surface elevation is 443.32.

In the Downtown Carrollton area, the rail alignment is parallel to Hutton Branch and crosses

through a portion of the Hutton Branch floodplain. Any fill placed within the effective flow area

of Hutton Branch will impact the 100-year water surface elevations and velocities. Additionally,

any fill placed within the floodplain of Hutton Branch must be mitigated to ensure that there is

no loss of valley storage. The alignment crosses an unnamed tributary to Hutton Branch at Rail

Station 2133+00. A new HEC-RAS model of the tributary was created to determine if the

proposed improvements impact the 100-year water surface elevation. Results showed that the

100-year flow is contained to the channel and there are no impacts to the unnamed tributary.

8.3 Section CB-3

8.3.1 Overview The Cotton Belt Line Section CB-3 neither changes drainage areas nor alters the overall runoff

characteristics of major basins crossing the proposed alignment. Open ditches run along both

sides of the existing rail. Where possible, the existing ditch will be shifted to accommodate the

proposed rail. Where this is not possible due to ROW constraints or other conflicts, an enclosed

storm drain system will be proposed. Proposed ditches will generally have the same profile as

the existing ditches in order to minimize off-site impacts. The hydraulic capacity of major ditches

will be evaluated to ensure adequate freeboard. Smaller ditches will be designed by the final

section designer.

8.3.2 Areas of Importance There are several areas of importance in Line Section CB-3. The first is in the North Dallas area

between the DNT and Coit Road. There are a couple of alignment alternatives in this area, and

all of them require consideration of the flood elevation of nearby creeks. The alignment crosses

three creeks, and the floodplain runs along the rail for several thousand feet. The creek

hydraulics are discussed in Section 8.3.3. A large amount of storm runoff crosses under the rail

east of Knoll Trail Drive. Before development occurred, this stream was the Addison Branch of

White Rock Creek. In order to meet freeboard requirements, the existing culverts need to be

replaced to provide additional capacity. The hydrology at this crossing will be examined for the

10% submittal to ensure there are no negative impacts downstream of the crossing. There are a

number of smaller cross culverts in the area that must be adjusted to accommodate the

proposed alignment at the following rail stations: Station 3086+81, Station 3095+44, Station

3121+50, Station 3193+00 and Station 3208+00. Additionally, shallow ditches or flumes will

intercept runoff before it gets to the proposed retaining walls. These will follow the existing

ground alignment and outfall at a creek or cross culvert.

8.3.3 Hydraulics

White Rock Creek Line Section 3 of the Cotton Belt crosses White Rock Creek in the North Dallas area. The

alignment runs through the White Rock Creek floodplain on fill and spans the main creek

channel. The White Rock Creek hydraulic model was obtained from Halff & Associates, and the



model has been approved by FEMA. FEMA is in the process of updating the flood maps to reflect

flood elevations obtained from the model.

The existing bridge is a single span structure. Addition of just one bridge pier, which is likely to

be needed, causes significant increases in the 100-year water surface elevation upstream.

Channel improvements will be required in order to offset the increase in water surface elevation

and to protect this reach of channel from erosive velocities. To address this issue, different

alternatives were investigated with preliminary hydraulic modeling including: excavation to

increase the area of flow and resurfacing the channel to decrease its roughness.

Excavation decreases the water surface elevation and increases velocities outside of DART’s

ROW. Additionally, the hike and bike trail and a golf cart path on the creek’s right over bank

would have to be relocated.

Resurfacing the channel bottom with concrete to about an elevation along the banks five feet

above the flow line, and continuing to the top of bank with gabions creates an increase in water

surface elevation immediately upstream of the bridge, but no changes in velocity or water

surface elevation further upstream.

The recommended improvements based on these preliminary results would be to resurface the

channel in the segment underneath the bridge as described above. Even though an increase in

water surface elevation is expected, it would occur within DART’s ROW. A cross-section was

added in the model at the upstream ROW boundary to ensure that no changes occur outside of

DART’s property if this alternative is selected.

McKamy Branch The McKamy Branch crossing is upstream of the confluence of McKamy Creek and White Rock

Creek at CB-3 Station 3102+00. McKamy Branch runs along the south ROW from Station

3087+00 until the rail crossing. An existing HEC-RAS model for McKamy Branch was obtained

from the City of Dallas. The elevations in this model closely match those on the FEMA Flood

Insurance Studies.

Immediately downstream of the rail crossing McKamy Creek passes under Davenport Drive. The

hydraulics of the Davenport Drive crossing directly impacts the 100-year water surface elevation

at the rail crossing. Improving the bridge structure at Davenport Drive lowers the flood elevation

at the rail. However, the lowered water surface elevation results in increased upstream

velocities and a decrease in valley storage for the 100-year event. The proposed low-chord

elevation of the regional rail structure also impacts the upstream water surface elevations and

velocities. If the preferred alignment alternative results in an increase in erosive velocities it will

be necessary to provide erosion protection for the limits of the increase. This is especially

important between the rail and Davenport Drive where the creek abuts residential properties. In

order to minimize the impacts of the proposed improvements, a structure at the upstream ROW

is recommended to return the upstream water surface elevations and velocities to the pre-

project state.

Osage Branch The Cotton Belt crosses Osage Branch in two locations, and runs alongside the creek between

Station 3116+00 and Station 3158+00. The latest available hydraulic model for Osage Branch is a



HEC-2 file. The water surface elevations in the output file are in the general range of the FEMA

Flood Insurance Rate Map elevations, but do not appear to match exactly. The HEC-2 model was

imported into HEC-RAS V4.1 for this study. The difference in water surface elevation in the

project area has a maximum increase of 0.06 feet, which is within the 0.50 foot FEMA allowance

for model conversion.

After importing the model into HEC-RAS, the model geometry was compared to available

topographic maps. It was noticed that an existing bridge was not included in the model. Spanky

Branch Court crosses Osage Branch upstream of the first Cotton Belt Crossing. The bridge at

Spanky Branch Court was added along with an additional cross-section at the downstream face

to create the pre-project geometry. The addition of the bridge causes an increase in water

surface elevation of 1.13 feet at the upstream face. This increase tapers down to zero

downstream of the second Cotton Belt crossing, and therefore does not affect the design of the

Cotton Belt structure.

As with McKamy Creek, the rail crossing is immediately upstream of the creek crossing at

Davenport Drive. Improvements to Davenport Drive lower the 100-year water surface elevation

at the rail crossing, but result in increased erosive velocities upstream of the project ROW. There

is also a loss of valley storage associated with the lower water surface elevation.

Prairie Creek Prairie Creek crosses the Cotton Belt alignment in Richardson. A HEC-RAS model was obtained

from the City of Richardson. The City is in the process of updating the model hydrology, and

provided several discharges. Since the updated discharges have not been finalized, it was

suggested that the Fully Developed Flows developed by Halff & Associates in 1987 be used,

since they were higher than the more recent ones. This would help ensure that the Cotton Belt

impacts would not be under calculated.

The HEC-RAS model provided by the City of Richardson did not include the existing Cotton Belt

bridge structure. The structure was added to the existing geometry to create a pre-project

geometry. Since the existing bridge has over 20 feet of freeboard to the 100-year water surface

elevation, the only hydraulic impact is the bridge piers. The addition of the bridge causes a two-

hundredth of a foot increase in the 100-year water surface elevation between the upstream

face of the bridge and an existing weir approximately 175 feet upstream.

Spring Creek The existing Cotton Belt alignment crosses Spring Creek upstream of SH 190. The City boundary

between Richardson and Plano is the center of SH 190. The City of Richardson provided a HEC-

RAS model for Spring Creek that ends upstream of a drop structure that is downstream of SH

190. The City of Plano does not have a hydraulic model for Spring Creek. A hard copy of the

current FEMA model in HEC-2 format was obtained. This model pre-dates SH 190, so the SH 190

bridges are not included in the model.

In order to create a pre-project model, the sections from FEMA’s HEC-2 printout were added to

the Richardson HEC-RAS model and evaluated utilizing HEC-RAS version 4.1. The piers of the SH

190 bridges were added to the pre-project model as blocked obstructions since the bridge deck

elevation is well above the floodplain. Cross-sections were also added to this model



downstream and upstream of the current rail bridge over Spring Creek in order to more

accurately determine the impact of the SH 190 improvements.

Preliminary proposed models were created to investigate the impact of the Cotton Belt

alignment on Spring Creek’s hydraulics. Results indicate that adding a bridge with 4-foot

diameter piers spaced at 50 feet will result in impacts to the 100-year water surface elevations

and velocities upstream of the crossing. These impacts will have to be mitigated. The use

gabions or other type of channel protection will be necessary where the proposed

improvements result in an increase in erosive velocities. Increases in the 100-year water surface

elevation caused by fill placed within the floodplain are not permissible, so mitigation

alternatives such as excavation or channel lining will have to be evaluated.

9.0 STATION DESIGN Preliminary Stations were placed at key locations along the Cotton Belt corridor to provide

accessibility and convenience to the community. These station locations were determined after

numerous meetings with stakeholders, accessibility and land availability. Currently, 13 possible

stations have been identified including locations at or near DFW Airport, Carrollton, Addison,

North Dallas, UTD Campus, Plano and Richardson. These key locations provide access to DART

Orange, Green, and Red Lines, as well as the future Denton County Transportation Authority’s

“A” train extension line to Belt Line Road in Carrollton. Preliminary station site plans as well as

can be found in the Final 5% Preliminary Engineering Cotton Belt Regional System Station Site

Plans Package.

9.1 Section CB-1

In Section CB-1 there are two proposed stations: DFW North Station and North Lake Station.

DFW North Station is located north of SH 114 and is intended to serve as an interface with the

TEX Rail’s proposed commuter rail station. The DFW North station consists of a pair of side

platforms, Kiss & Ride spaces, bus bays and 297 Park & Ride spaces.

For the Cypress Waters alternative in section 1, the North Lake Station is proposed exclusive to

this option. The station is located in Dallas, Texas, on the northern edge of North Lake. It

consists of side platforms, Kiss & Ride spaces, bus bays and 184 Park & Ride spaces.

9.2 Section CB-2

In Section CB-2 there are two proposed stations: Downtown Carrollton Station and Addison

Transit Center Station. The Downtown Carrollton Station has a pair of side platforms, Kiss & Ride

spaces, bus bays and 222 Park & Ride spaces. The station is centrally located east of IH 35E and

DART LRT Green Line, and just north of Belt Line Road in Carrollton, Texas. This station will serve

as an interface with the future Denton County Transportation Authority’s “A” train extension

line and also the Frisco-Irving alignment. The Addison Transit Center Station is located just west

of Quorum Drive, adjacent to the existing DART Addison Transit Center in Addison, Texas. This

station will utilize existing Kiss & Ride spaces, Bus Bays and Park & Ride spaces.



9.3 Section CB-3

In Section CB-3, there are nine station options. Knoll Trail Station is located just east of Dallas

North Tollway, it consists of just a pair of side platforms. No Kiss & Ride spaces, bus bays nor

Park & Ride spaces are planned for this station location. Preston Road Station is located just east

of Preston Road in Dallas, Texas. The station consists of center platform. No Kiss & Ride spaces,

bus bays nor Park & Ride spaces are planned for this station location as well. There are two

station design options for the Renner Village Station. Renner Village Station West Option is

located east of Dickerson Street in Dallas, Texas. This station layout includes a pair of side

platforms, Kiss & Ride spaces, bus bays, and 324 Park & Ride spaces. Renner Village Station East

Option is located just west of Coit Road in Dallas, Texas. This alternative includes Kiss & Ride

spaces, bus bays, and 193 Park & Ride spaces. The UTD/Synergy Station is located just east of

KCS Railway in Richardson, Texas. The station has a center platform design. This station also

consists of Kiss & Ride spaces, bus bays, and 142 Park & Ride spaces.

For the South Alternative, two stations are proposed exclusive to this option. The first is the

proposed President George Bush Turnpike Station located west of the existing DART LRT Red

Line PGBT station, south of the President George Bush Turnpike in Richardson. The station

layout includes a pair of side platforms with no parking spaces, nor bus bays. The second station

is the 12th Street Aerial Station. This station will be on aerial structure, grade separating Avenue

K and Municipal Avenue in Plano. The elevation of the proposed aerial station will coincide with

the proposed aerial Red Line station. The 12th

Street station layout consists of a pair of side

platforms, Kiss & Ride spaces, bus bays and 179 Park & Ride spaces.

For the North Alternative, only one station is proposed exclusive to this option; the 12th Street

At-grade station. This station is located just east of DART LRT Red Line in Plano, Texas. The

station layout will be the same as that for the South Alternative, and will consists of center

platform, Kiss & Ride spaces, bus bays and 179 Park & Ride spaces.

The last station of the project is the Shiloh Station. It is located just west of Shiloh Road, consists

of center platform, Kiss & ride spaces, bus bays and 663 Park & Ride spaces

10.0 TRANSPORTATION CROSSINGS The proposed Cotton Belt Corridor crosses 69 transportation facilities. The 69 crossings consist

of 64 roads (52 at-grade and 12 grade separated), two passenger rails (both grade separated),

two freight rails (one at-grade and one grade separated) and one bike path (at-grade). Of the 64

road crossings, two are closed (barricades in place), two are future roads and four are

driveways. Additionally, two of the crossings would be new crossings of Belt Line Road if the

Cypress Waters Alignment Option is selected. See Appendix D for information about each of

the crossings.

Grade Separations There are a total of 15 existing grade separations consisting of 12 roadway and 3 railroad grade

separations along the proposed Cotton Belt Corridor. Constraints that are associated with the

existing grade separations are the horizontal and vertical clearances. The proposed passenger

rail design shall take into consideration the existing structures. Existing abutments and bents

may provide a constraint to the placement of the proposed passenger rail horizontal alignment.

It may be necessary to provide crash walls at existing bents due to limited horizontal clearances.



When setting the profile for the proposed passenger rail, the low chord elevations of the

proposed bridge shall maintain an appropriate vertical clearance over the existing facilities.

For this analysis a preliminary review was conducted to determine if existing at-grade crossings

will require a grade separation. The Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE’s) Light Rail

Transit Grade Separation Guidelines (ITE Journal, January 1993) provides guidance for

determining the need for a grade separation. Based on assumed 20 minute headway for the

passenger trains, the ITE thresholds are summarized in Table 10-1.



Table 10-1

Summary of Grade Separation Thresholds

Threshold ADT for 2 lane

roads

ADT for 4 lane

roads

ADT for 6 lane

roads

1. At-grade crossing is acceptable < 8,500 < 17,500 < 26,000

2. Site specific conditions should be

analyzed to determine the feasibility

of traffic signal preemption and at-

grade crossing desirability

8,500 - 15,000 17,500 - 35,000 26,000 - 52,000

3. Grade separation is necessary

(unless train can be delayed) 15,000 - 22,000 35,000 - 44,000 52,000 - 66,000

4. Grade separation is required > 22,000 > 44,000 > 66,000

Traffic volumes for various roads were collected from the NCTCOG, TxDOT, cities along the

corridor, as well as field studies (see Appendix D).

In summary, Table 10-1 is a screening tool. No analysis is necessary for a crossing with daily

traffic volumes below the first threshold (where an at-grade crossing is considered to be

acceptable). Those crossings that fall within the second, third and fourth threshold will require

further analysis to determine whether an at-grade crossing is feasible according to DART’s Grade

Separation Policy, as described below. Consistent with DART’s policy, grade-separations are not

determined on volume alone. The exceptions in this case are locations with relatively low

volumes as shown in the first threshold range.

DART has specified that, subject to a determination that other reasonable and effective traffic

mitigation measures are not feasible, two specific warrants can effectively measure if a street

intersecting a rail line should be grade separated. These grade separation warrants are:

• Queuing impacts: If the presence of DART’s rail line causes vehicular traffic on streets

adjacent to the rail line to queue through adjoining intersections or queue through the

LRT intersection a queuing impact may exist

• Level of Service impacts: If the presence of DART’s rail line causes the level of service on

streets adjacent to the rail line to drop two or more levels or cause the street to have a

level of service of “F”, a level of service impact may exist

The Grade Separation Policy was developed during the early planning stages of DART’s light rail

system but DART has indicated that this policy should be treated as a guideline for the Cotton

Belt Line even though the transit technology will not be light rail.

The consultant team completed a detailed traffic analysis that contains an analysis of each at-

grade rail crossing location that meets either threshold two or threshold three using Table 10-1.

In all, 21 locations were classified as threshold two and two locations were classified as

threshold three. Based on current and projected volumes, no locations fall into threshold four.



The grade separation recommendations in the draft report based on traffic analysis are made

using a combination of:

• The ITE Grade Separation Policy to determine which intersections need further

evaluation and,

• The DART Grade Separation Policy to determine if grade separation is necessary.

Therefore, based on projected 2030 traffic volumes, roadway geometry and location of the at-

grade rail crossing, the following roadway crossings are recommended for grade separation:

• Midway Road (threshold three)

• Coit Road (threshold three)

• Denton Tap Road (threshold two)

• Plano Parkway (threshold two)

• Luna Road (threshold two)

Although the traffic analysis for the Luna Road crossing suggests a need for a grade separation,

physical constraints given the presence of the adjacent PGBT overpass do not permit this

separation.

11.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS An Alternatives and Environmental Considerations Report (AECR) was prepared for the

proposed Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail project. The AECR outlines the alternatives

considered and environmental analyses conducted to date. The AECR identifies the

environmental resources and existing conditions surrounding the Cotton Belt corridor from the

DFW Airport to Shiloh Road in Plano, Texas; provides background data for consideration of the

proposed project alternatives to be evaluated during the future National Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA) phase of the project once funding for project construction has been identified; and

identifies potential social, economic and environmental impacts of the proposed project.

Options for potential mitigation measures are also presented in the AECR. The AECR is

supported by a series of technical memoranda and reports prepared as part of the

environmental evaluation of alternatives and are appended to the AECR. Future designer should

review these documents for environmental concerns and consider any mitigation measures

specified within those documents. The following is a summary of environmental considerations

identified during this phase of the study.

11.1 Land Use

Residential areas comprise over 17 percent of the land use (2005 land use) in the study area.

Commercial and government/educational categories each comprise over 13 percent of the land

use in the corridor. Over 26 percent of the study area is classified as undeveloped which

includes under construction, vacant, parking, expanded parking and gravel. Remaining land use

in the corridor includes industrial, infrastructure, airports, dedicated (parks, landfill and flood

control) and water. The majority of the proposed Cotton Belt Regional Rail would follow the

existing Cotton Belt rail corridor. Therefore, there would not be a need to permanently impact

the land use of most of the project area. Since most development along the corridor occurred



after the existing rail corridor was constructed, several industrial and warehouse areas were

developed along the corridor to have direct access to the rail for the transportation of goods.

11.2 Socioeconomic Characteristics including Environmental Justice

There are approximately 40 major employers (250 or more employees) within one-half mile of

the proposed rail stations and within one-quarter mile of the alignment. Major activity centers

in the study area include DFW Airport, Addison Airport, the University of Texas at Dallas (UTD) in

the City of Richardson and Addison Circle in the City of Addison.

Environmental Justice (EJ) populations have been identified within the Cotton Belt Corridor. EJ

populations include minority, low-income and Limited English Proficiency populations. At this

time, it is known that there are EJ populations near the proposed Downtown Carrollton Station,

Renner Village Station, UTD/Synergy Park Station and near US 75 to the eastern terminus at

Shiloh Road. Therefore, the proposed project would need to be evaluated for disproportionately

high and adverse human health or environmental effects to minority or low-income populations.

A final environmental justice determination would be made as part of future environmental

reviews under the NEPA process.

11.3 Acquisitions and Displacements

As described above, DART owns the Cotton Belt ROW; however, it is anticipated that property

acquisitions would occur. A preliminary assessment of properties that may be affected by

implementation of the proposed project is currently underway. Please refer to the Acquisitions

and Displacements Technical Memorandum.

11.4 Parks and Recreational Facilities

Numerous community parks, neighborhood parks, golf courses and recreational facilities are

adjacent to or located near the Cotton Belt Corridor rail alignment. Three regulations apply to

the use of parks and recreational facilities for transportation projects: Section 4(f) of the U. S.

Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation

Fund (L&WCF) Act, and Texas Parks and Wildlife Code Title 3 Chapter 26. Publically owned

properties covered under Section 4(f) that may be affected by the proposed project include

Kelly Athletic Facilities, “City of Dallas Floodway Management Area 2” and “City of Dallas Public

Use Area” Future stages of project development should consider alternatives or methods to

avoid these properties. The proposed project has been reviewed for Section 6(f) involvement

and would not cause the conversion of any land acquired, planned or developed with funds

from L&WCF.

11.5 Cultural Resources

The proposed project would be constructed adjacent to the existing rail line and within the

current railroad ROW. The reconnaissance survey recorded 68 historic-age architectural



resources within the project area of potential effect (APE) (refer to the Cultural Resources

Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum). Of these, none are currently listed in the National

Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and one (Addison State Bank - Resource 44) is listed as a

Registered Texas Historic Landmark. In total, three resources are recommended individually

eligible for inclusion in the NRHP: Addison State Bank (Resource 44); Carrollton Depot (Resource

21); and White Rock Creek Bridge (Resource 45). In addition, Resources 21 and 45 are

recommended as contributing resources to the Cotton Belt Railroad Thematic Corridor. Historic-

age resources that are within the APE, but outside the current railroad ROW would not be

impacted by the proposed project. One resource (White Rock Creek Bridge) located within the

ROW is recommended individually eligible for listing in the NRHP and recommended as a

contributing resource to the potential Cotton Belt Historic Railroad Thematic Corridor. Section

4(f) of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966, would also apply to the “use” of

White Rock Creek Bridge and may require additional evaluation pursuant to Section 4(f).

At present, no archaeological resources occur within the proposed Cotton Belt Corridor Regional

Rail ROW. Therefore, no known archaeological resources would be impacted by the proposed

actions. It should be noted, however, that an intensive archaeological survey within a defined

APE for archaeological resources has not been completed. Given the distribution and context of

previously recorded archaeological sites within the archaeological study area, the present

understanding of the occupational history of the region, and the occurrence of soils suitable for

the preservation of archaeological deposits, the proposed Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail

ROW has the potential to contain previously unrecorded archaeological resources.

11.6 Geology

Four geologic types underlie the project area – the Eagle Ford Formation, alluvium, fluviatile

terrace deposits, and Austin Chalk. One proposed alternative for the project would include a

tunnel which would pass through the Austin Chalk formation. Austin Chalk is known for

producing small-scale faulting. The formation is also susceptible to weathering due to erosion.

The occurrence of fossils in this formation is not common. Because Austin Chalk is a hard

formation with soft layers and faulting/weathered sections, special structural design measures

may be needed to strengthen tunnel walls in the vicinity of faults or layers (if the tunnel

alternative is selected).

11.7 Floodplains

FEMA floodplain maps were consulted for the project area (Map ID 48439C0115K,

48439C0120K, 48439C0110K, 48113C0135J and 48113C0345J, 48113C0155J, 48113C0160J,

48113C0180J, 48113C0185J, 48085C0485J, 48085C0505J, 48113C0065J, 48085C0390J, and

48085C0395J). According to the maps, three 100-year floodplains exist within the western half

of the project area. One crossing is a 100-year floodplain associated with Cottonwood Branch;

approximately 1,313 linear feet of this floodplain is crossed by the proposed project. The second

crossing is the 100-year floodplain associated with Grapevine Creek; approximately 3,350 linear

feet of this floodplain is crossed by the project. The third crossing is the 100-year floodplain

associated with Elm Fork Trinity River; approximately 9,488 feet of this floodplain is crossed by

the project. A crossing in the eastern half of the study area is the 100-year floodplain associated

with White Rock Creek; approximately 1,112 linear feet of this floodplain is crossed by the



project. The tributary of White Rock Creek has a 100-year floodplain associated with it;

approximately 1,739 linear feet of this floodplain is crossed by the project.

A Trinity River Corridor Development Certificate (CDC) is required for projects located within the

Trinity River Regulatory Zone and is intended to minimize flood risk by regulating development

within the Trinity River Corridor in North Central Texas. The Trinity River Regulatory Zone is

consistent with the 100-year floodplain for the Trinity River, of which the Elm Fork of the Trinity

River is crossed by the project.

11.8 Water Quality

The study area is located within the Trinity River basin, which drains approximately 17,969

square miles. For the purposes of monitoring water quality, the Texas Commission on

Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has divided the Trinity River basin into 41 discrete segments. The

proposed project is located within Segment 0822 – Elm Fork Trinity River Below Lewisville Lake,

Segment 0822B – Grapevine Creek, and Segment 0827A – White Rock Creek. Defined uses of

Segments 0822 and 0822B include aquatic life use, contact recreation use, general use, and

public water supply. Defined uses of Segment 0827A include aquatic life use and contact

recreation use. According to the 2012 Section 303(d) list, none of the segments are listed as

impaired.

In Texas, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program is

administered by the TCEQ, as part of the Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES).

Stormwater runoff resulting from the proposed project would be addressed through compliance

with the TPDES Construction General Permit. More than five acres of earth disturbance would

occur as a result of the project; therefore, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP),

construction site notice, and Notice of Intent (NOI) would be required. Implementation of Best

Management Practices (BMPs) during construction, including erosion controls, sediment

controls, and/or post-construction total suspended solids controls, would reduce impacts to

water quality.

11.9 Noise and Vibration

The noise and vibration for the proposed was conducted is in conformance with the procedures

and criteria included in the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidance manual “Transit Noise

and Vibration Impact Assessment” (Final Report No. FTA-VA-90-1003-06, May 2006), and in the

DART policy document “Environmental Impact Assessment and Mitigation Guidelines for Transit

Projects” (May 2012).

The results of the noise impact assessment identified noise impacts at a total of 3880 receptors

without mitigation, including 2652 severe impacts and 1228 moderate impacts for the Baseline

Alternative with the At-Grade Alternative through North Dallas and the North Alignment

Alternative. Without mitigation, the primary cause of potential noise impact for the Cotton Belt

Corridor is noise from train horns that would be sounded at the numerous at-grade crossings

along the alignment. Thus, the primary recommended mitigation measure is the

implementation of quiet zones throughout the project corridor. Over 95 percent of all noise



impacts would be eliminated with the implementation of quiet zones throughout the corridor.

Remaining noise impacts can be mitigated through various measures for reducing noise impacts.

The results of the vibration impact assessment identified potential ground-borne vibration

impact at a total of five receptors without mitigation for the Baseline Alternative and at two

receptors with the Cypress Waters Alternative. For the North Dallas Tunnel Alternative, a total

of 32 potential ground-borne noise impacts are identified. There are no vibration impacts

predicted for the South Alignment Alternative with Aerial Station and Depressed Freight. There

are various vibration mitigation measures that can be implemented. Additional analysis should

be conducted during later stages of the project to determine specific vibration mitigation

measures.

11.10 Air Quality

An air quality impact analysis was not conducted during this phase of the project. If the

proposed project advances, an air quality impact analysis may be required based on the criteria

defined by the FTA environmental process. A project-level conformity determination is also

required for the project because it is a nonexempt project in a non-attainment area for ozone.

FTA cannot approve funding for project activities beyond preliminary engineering unless the

proposed project meets EPA transportation conformity regulations at the project level. The

project is included in the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) Transportation

Conformity. In addition, NCTCOG has demonstrated that Mobility 2035: The Metropolitan

Transportation Plan for North Central Texas and 2011-2014 Transportation Improvement

Program for North Central Texas – 2011 Amendment meet all transportation air quality

conformity requirements of the CAAA, the air quality plan, the transportation conformity rule

and transportation conformity related provisions contained in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,

Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (NCTCOG, 2011).

11.11 Hazardous Materials

A search of the regulatory databases for sites that handle, generate, transport, store, or dispose

of hazardous and/or regulated materials was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc.

(EDR). The EDR report was generated for the one-half mile radius of the Cotton Belt corridor and

was reviewed for potential hazardous site. From the database a total of 26 potential Hazmat

sites were identified. However, out of 26 sites, two sites are rated high risk due to chlorinated

solvent contamination in the soil, eight as medium risk, and the remaining 16 were rated as a

low potential to impact construction activities. Based on the current alignment, it appears that

none of the identified high or medium risk sites are within the construction area where

subsurface soil would be disturbed during the construction activities hence, should not pose a

risk. However, if current alignment changes, then further evaluation of the sites may be

required to determine the Hazmat risk. There may be a potential for a Hazmat risk area near the

US 75 intersection if subsurface soil is disturbed during construction activities. There are two

Hazmat sites (Refer to the Hazardous Materials Technical Memorandum, August 2013, Map ID

42 and 48) on either side of the US 75 which are in medium risk category. Map ID 42 site,

located at 810 North Central Express Parkway, is a dry cleaning facility and the site soil is

contaminated with chlorinated solvents. Map ID 48 is a Leaking Petroleum Storage Tank (LPST)

site located at 625 North Central Express Parkway and the site groundwater is contaminated.



The existing DART railroad track goes over US 75. If the existing bridge is replaced and

subsurface soil is disturbed for pillar construction, then there is a potential for the Hazmat risk.

From the site reconnaissance conducted on November 13, 21, 29, and December 3, 2012, no

significant environmental impact related to hazardous materials was observed along the 26-mile

Cotton Belt Corridor, either on existing DART right-of-way property or adjacent properties.

However, a few spills and stains were observed on the track as well as household trash on

properties adjacent to the right-of-way.

11.12 Water Resources

The water resources study area used for the assessment of potential impacts included a one-

quarter-mile corridor centered on the project centerline. A Preliminary Draft Jurisdictional

Determination report, August 2013, was prepared during this phase of the study to identify,

delineate, and describe jurisdictional wetlands and other waters of the U.S. Conclusions

contained in the draft report are subject to confirmation by the USACE. Twenty-seven potential

waters of the U.S., including three wetlands, lie within the proposed right of way. The proposed

project has the potential to affect approximately five acres of waters of the U.S. within the

proposed right of way. Impacts to waters of the U.S. resulting from the discharge of dredged or

fill material are regulated by the USACE under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. If a linear

transportation project places less than 0.5 acre of fill into waters of the U.S., it would typically

be authorized under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14; impacts of more than 0.5 acre require an

Individual Permit. Impacts authorized under a NWP-Linear Transportation Projects which equal

or exceed 0.1 acre require Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) to the USACE; impacts to

wetlands (of any amount) would also require PCN.

Section 408 of the Clean Water Act requires that projects which would take possession of, use,

or cause injury to harbor or river improvements be reviewed and approved by the USACE. No

facilities subject to Section 408 have been identified within the proposed right-of-way.

11.13 Biological Resources

Existing literature and mapping were reviewed for the project area to identify soils, potential

vegetative communities, potential wildlife assemblages, potential wetland areas, and

threatened or endangered species of potential occurrence.

Detailed field investigations were performed in March 2013 to assess the specific vegetation

types and species occurring within and adjacent to the project corridor. In general, the project

corridor contains vegetation commonly found in the Cross Timbers and Blackland Prairie Natural

Regions. No crops were found in the project area. The proposed project corridor crosses the

communities of Grapevine, Coppell, Dallas, Carrollton, Addison, Plano, and Richardson. All of

these municipalities have tree protection ordinances in place. According to the ordinances,

removal or alteration of trees on public property require permits from the city in question.

Some of these cities also have protection provisions in place for trees on private property. Any

tree removals would need to be done in accordance with city ordinances and permits would

need to be obtained if necessary.



According to data obtained from the Natural Diversity Database from Texas Parks and Wildlife

Department, one rookery utilized by Snowy Egrets (Egretta thula), Little Blue Herons (Egretta

caerulea), and Cattle Egrets (Bubulcus ibis) has been reported to occur within the central portion

of the project area. During field investigations, no rookeries were noted within or adjacent to

the project corridor.

Federally listed species and their habitats are protected under the Endangered Species Act of

1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat. 884), as amended. No potential habitat for federally listed

species was identified within the project area, therefore it is anticipated that the proposed

project would have no effect on federally-listed species for Tarrant, Dallas and Collin Counties.

Eight state-listed threatened species could occur in the project area including the alligator

snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii), canebrake rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus), Bald Eagle

(Haliaeetus leucocephalus), White-faced Ibis (Plegadis chihi), Wood Stork (Mycteria Americana),

Louisiana pigtoe (Pleurobema riddellii), Texas pigtoe (Fusconaia askewi) and the Texas

heelsplitter (Potamilus amphichaenus). The latter three species (Louisiana pigtoe, Texas pigtoe,

Texas heelsplitter), all have element of occurrences within 0.7 – 8 miles from the project area.

The project may impact these eight state-listed species if they are present within the project

area. The proposed project would have no impact on any other state-listed threatened species.

Five state-listed species of concern could occur in the project area including fawnsfoot (Truncilla

donaciformis), little spectaclecase (Villosa lienosa), Wabash pigtoe (Fusconaia flava), Texas

garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis annectens) and plains spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius

interrupta). The Texas garter snake has two element of occurrences (ID 432) 9.3 miles south of

study area and (ID 434) 7.1 miles north of the project area.

Replacement of bridges over rivers may impact water species. However, use of BMPs would

avoid or minimize water quality impacts to the river, thus avoiding impacts to the species.

State law prohibits direct harm for state-listed species, but does not currently provide for

habitat protection. If any individuals of state-listed species are encountered within the project

area during construction, care should be taken to avoid harming them.

Several swallow (unknown species) nests were identified under the President George Bush

Turnpike along the South Alignment in Richardson. Although these species are not listed as

threatened or endangered, they would fall under the protection of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act

and any work done in this area would need to be avoided during nesting season.

12.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS Soil borings and geotechnical analysis will be performed after the Cotton Belt 5% PE submittal.

The geotechnical information will be provided in the 10% PE design package.

13.0 SYSTEM ELEMENTS The methodology provides an integrated approach to design, construction, and commissioning

with emphasis on ensuring a systematic and detailed coordination effort linking all design

disciplines starting at the earliest design stages. The real challenge with systems engineering is

not only designing the specific systems elements, it is in integrating systems and sub-systems

together to make them function seamlessly as one comprehensive system.



The Cotton Belt systems planning scope consists of conceptual design for the following primary

systems and sub-systems: Positive Train Control (PTC), Wayside Signal, Highway Grade Crossing,

and Communication Systems.

The following is a general overview of the design methodology and criteria for these systems

that will be required for the Cotton Belt Regional Rail Project. Guidance documents with typical

design details are included in App

13.1 Positive Train Control

The Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008(RSI08) requires all railroads providing regularly

scheduled intercity passenger service to implement a fully functional PTC Signal System by

December 31, 2015. RSI08 was enacted in response to several recent high profile train accidents

involving multiple fatalities.

Positive Train Control (PTC) systems are integrated command and control, communications, and

information systems that operate together to control train movements ensuring safety, security,

precision, and efficiency of rail operations. PTC systems improve railroad safety by significantly

reducing the probability of railroad accidents including: train collisions, train intrusion into

established work zones, collisions between trains and on-track equipment, and over speed

derailments.

PTC systems are comprised of digital data link communications networks, continuous and

accurate positioning systems such as NDGPS, on-board computers with digitized maps on

locomotives and maintenance-of-way equipment, in-cab displays, throttle-brake interfaces on

locomotives, wayside interface units at switch machines, wayside detectors, and control center

computers and displays.

13.2 Wayside Signals

There are three basic types of wayside signal systems: Automatic Block Signal (ABS), Interlocking

(INT), and Traffic Control System (TCS) commonly called Centralized Traffic Control (CTC). On rail

lines equipped with Block Signal Systems, wayside signals located along the tracks generally

display indications to a train engineer to proceed, slow down, or stop. Signal indications are

commonly displayed by illuminated green, yellow, or red aspects respectively (or an equivalent

scheme including some that are not colored). The wayside signal systems provides additional

information regarding: rail integrity (broken or missing rail), train occupancy (a train in the

“block” or section of track governed by the signal), and/or the position of track switches in the

block.

The wayside block signaling sections use fixed wayside signals at interlockings and Automatic

Block Signals (ABS) between interlockings. Signals are spaced to provide required design

headways. In CTC territory signals at each control point can be managed directly by a dispatcher

located at the Train Control Center (TCC). Dispatchers can control routes for specific trains;

remotely control track switches, and operate signals to display the desired proceed indications.

CTC technology utilizes vital wayside signal system logic to ensure that route integrity is



preserved and appropriate signal locking logic is provided prior to signals displaying proceed

indications.

Vital wayside train-control functions are generated utilizing vital microprocessors. Vital plug-in

relays are used for specific applications. All non-vital functions performed using non-vital

microprocessors. The Signal System technology ensures safe and reliable control of the

operation of trains utilizing the rail system. The system design shall be fail-safe and provide safe

degraded operating modes. A vital function is any circuit or software logic that can affect the

safety of train operations. All vital functions shall meet fail safe design principles. Fail Safe

Design Criteria - Vital logic design shall be based on closed loop circuit principals with the train

operator considered as an active element.

13.3 Highway Grade Crossing Signals

Signal systems at highway grade crossings will include all signs, signals, warning devices, and

their supports located within the rail right-of-way. The function of these systems will permit safe

and efficient operation of commuter trains, on track equipment, highway traffic, and

pedestrians over level grade crossings. Grade crossing warning devices shall be designed in

conformance with the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TXMUTCD), TXDOT,

and the recommended American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way (AREMA)

practices.

Highway rail grade crossing warning systems shall be maintained to operate in compliance with

the design of the warning system, but in no event shall they provide less than 20 seconds

warning time for the operation of through trains before grade crossings are occupied by rail

traffic.

13.4 Communication Systems

This section describes the functional and interface criteria to be designed into all Commuter Rail

Communication Systems. System provisions shall meet the requirements of all applicable

standard and directive drawings and shall be coordinated with the agency. Subsystems shall be

compliant with federal, state, and local laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

and applicable National Fire Prevention Association (NFPA) codes and standards relating to

public transportation and communications systems.

The Communications System shall consist of the following subsystems:

• Communication Transmission Subsystem

• Radio Subsystem - Rail

• Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Subsystem

• Public Address and Visual Message Board (PA/VMB) Subsystem

• Telephone Subsystem

• Administrative Telephone

• Passenger Emergency Call

• Emergency Telephone

• Wayside Telephone

• Fire Detection Subsystem



• Intrusion Detection Subsystem

The Communications Transmission Subsystem provides the medium for point-to-point, shared

voice, and data transmission. It consists of transmission, multiplexing and inter-connect

equipment and provides interfaces for all terminal equipment requiring connectivity from field

communicating sites to the Operations Control Center (OCC).

1. The Radio Subsystem shall consist of the following parts: Two-way communications to

support rail operations, maintenance and public safety, and project build-out.

2. CCTV shall be provided at all passenger stations to enhance operations and security. The

design shall adequately accommodate signal, power and control cabling.

3. PA/VMB shall be provided at all Passenger stations. PA/VMB equipment shall allow

communication with patrons or employees, as appropriate during emergency or

interruptions of train service equipment shall be designed to comply with ADA

accessibility guidelines.

4. The Telephone Subsystem shall provide emergency and administrative voice and dial-up

data services to communications devices throughout the rail system. These devices

include administrative telephones, passenger emergency call (PEC) units, elevator

emergency telephones, wayside telephones, and digital communications alarm

transmitter (DACT) units. The system shall allow communications between and among

various field facilities and the Operations Control Center and enable communications

between Commuter Rail field facilities.

5. All fire detection equipment shall conform to the latest requirements of National Fire

Protection Association NFPA Codes Section 12A, 72, 72-90 and 130.

6. Intrusion Detection Subsystem shall provide intrusion detection and alarming

equipment at communications houses, interface cabinets, facilities and rooms.



Appendix A: Cotton Belt Existing Utility/Crossing Lists



Cotton Belt Section CB-1 Existing Crossing List

DWG. NO. Station Utility/Crossing Size Owner

CC2-1005 1022+50 Overhead Line

CC2-1005 1023+00 Drainage Pipe Culvert 60” City of Grapevine

CC2-1005 -

CC2-1048 1026+00 1387+96 Fiber optic longitudinal Sprint

CC2-1005 -

CC2-1048 1026+00 1387+96 Fiber optic longitudinal Qwest

CC2-1005 1024+56 Gas pipeline crossing 12" Chesapeake

CC2-1005 1025+03 Saltwater line with 16" steel casing crossing 10" Chesapeake

CC2-1005 1026+46 Fiber optic crossing Qwest

CC2-1007 1042+17 Petroleum pipeline crossing 8" Explorer Pipeline

CC2-1008 1051+35 Cottonwood Creek Crossing (Bridge) 80-feet City of Grapevine



CC2-1009 1060+12 Cottonwood Creek Crossing (Bridge) 64-feet City of Grapevine

CC2-1010 -

CC2-1029 1065+38 1217+29 Fiber optic longitudinal Verizon Tel

CC2-1010 1067+47 Lighting OHE crossing

CC2-1011 1070+11 Lighting OHE crossing

CC2-1011 1072+96 Two - Pipe/Box culvert across the existing rail. 2 - 30" City of Grapevine

CC2-1011 1072+96 Drainage crossing

CC2-1011 1074+34 Gas pipeline high pressure crossing 4" Atmos

CC2-1012 1078+96 UG telecommunication conduit crossing 3" Verizon Tel



CC2-1013 1091+99 Drainage crossing 2 - 24” City of Grapevine

CC2-1014 1101+59 Gas pipeline high pressure crossing 4" Atmos





CC2-1015 1105+79 Drainage Pipe Culvert 2 – 27” City of Grapevine

CC2-1016 1113+35 Drainage Pipe/Box Culvert across existing rail. 60” City of Coppell

CC2-1017 1122+20 Drainage Pipe Culvert across existing rail. 24” City of Coppell

CC2-1018 1129+41 Water line crossing 16" City of Coppell

CC2-1018 1129+50 Storm Drain 39” City of Coppell

CC2-1018 1129+33 Drainage Pipe Culvert parallel to rail on the North 30” City of Coppell

CC2-1018 1129+33 Drainage Pipe Culvert parallel to rail on the South 27” City of Coppell

CC2-1018 1129+72 Two UG 1.25" FO cables with 4" steel casing crossing 4" Time Warner Cable

CC2-1018 1129+76 Sanitary sewer crossing 12" City of Coppell

CC2-1018 1129+80 Two UG telecommunication cables crossing 4" Verizon Tel




DWG. NO. Station Utility/Crossing Size Owner CC2-1018 1129+84 OH Electrical 13.8/24.9 KV crossing Oncor

CC2-1018 1130+00

Fiber optic crossing

Qwest

CC2-1022 -

CC2-1035 1163+81 1265+20 OH Electrical138 KV transmission longitudinal Oncor

CC2-1022 1163+90 UG telecommunication cable crossing Time Warner Cable

CC2-1022 1164+04 UG FO conduits crossing 8-1.5" AT&T

CC2-1022 1164+17 Water line with 28" steel casing crossing 16" City of Coppell


CC2-1022 1164+70 UG telecommunication cable crossing Verizon Tel

CC2-1022 1164+76 UG FO conduit 4" AT&T

CC2-1022 1164+77 UG 14.4/24.9 KV electrical crossing Oncor

CC2-1022 1164+78 UG FO cable crossing 1.5" Fiberlight

CC2-1022 1164+87 One FO cable crossing 360Networks


CC2-1024 1181+35 Gas pipeline crossing 4" Atmos

CC2-1024 1181+37 UG FO conduit with 10" steel casing crossing 4" Time Warner Cable

CC2-1024 1181+39 Aerial FO cable crossing Time Warner Cable

CC2-1024 1181+39 OH Electrical crossing Oncor

CC2-1024 1181+44 Drainage Pipe Culvert parallel to rail on the South 54-inch City of Coppell

CC2-1024 1181+47 Water line crossing with 30" steel casing crossing 16" City of Coppell

CC2-1024 Abandoned Water line crossing 8" City of Coppell

CC2-1024 1181+55 FO cable crossing AT&T

CC2-1024 1181+89 Communication conduit crossing 4" City of Coppell

CC2-1024 1181+94 Water line crossing 2" Dallas County

CC2-1024 1181+96 Abandoned gas pipeline Atmos

CC2-1027 1198+34 Grapevine Creek Crossing (Bridge) 123-feet City of Coppell

CC2-1027 1199+83 Abandoned Coppell 12” sanitary sewer


CC2-1029 1217+25 UG duct crossing Verizon Tel

CC2-1029 1217+30 Gas pipeline crossing 4" Atmos

CC2-1029 1217+34 Drainage Pipe Culvert parallel to rail on the North 24-inch City of Coppell

CC2-1029 1217+34 Storm Drain parallel to rail on the South 48-inch City of Coppell

CC2-1029 1217+41 UG FO conduits with 8" steel casing crossing 3-1.5" Abovenet

CC2-1029 1217+71 Two UG Traffic signal high voltage cables crossing City of Coppell


CC2-1029 1218+38 Aerial 24 FO Telephone cable crossing 0.5" Grande Comm.

CC2-1029 1218+41 OH 14.4/24.9 KV Electrical crossing Oncor

CC2-1029 1218+43 Aerial FO cable crossing Time Warner Cable

CC2-1029 1218+47 Sanitary sewer crossing with 20" steel casing 15" Coppell

CC2-1029 1220+10 Abandoned sanitary sewer crossing 8" Coppell

CC2-1029 1220+34 Drainage Channel/Creek Crossing (Bridge) 66-feet City of Coppell





DWG. NO. Station Utility/Crossing Size Owner CC2-1032 1241+06 Drainage Pipe/Box Culvert 60” City of Coppell

CC2-1033 1246+76 Sanitary sewer with 14" steel casing crossing 8" City of Coppell

CC2-1034 1254+76 Fiber optic crossing Sprint

CC2-1034 1256+00

Storm drain

City of Coppell



CC2-1035 1267+90 High Pressure gas pipeline crossing 24" Atmos

CC2-1035 1268+64 Drainage Pipe/Box Culvert 42” City of Coppell

CC2-1036 1270+66 High Pressure gas pipeline crossing 16" Atmos


CC2-1036 1271+88 Aerial cable crossing Verizon Tel

CC2-1036 1271+88 Aerial FO TV cable crossing Time Warner Cable

CC2-1036 1271+89 OH Electrical crossing Oncor

CC2-1036 1271+93 UG FO TV cable with 4" steel casing crossing 2 - 1.25" Time Warner Cable







CC2-1039 1294+44 Grapevine Creek Crossing (Bridge) 130-feet City of Coppell


CC2-1039 1298+01 OH Electrical 345 KV transmission lines crossing Oncor

CC2-1039 1298+65 Drainage crossing City of Coppell

CC2-1039 1298+84 UG Electrical cable crossing Oncor

CC2-1039 1298+98 UG FO cables crossing 2 - 0.5" City of Coppell


CC2-1039 1299+47 UG cable crossing Verizon Tel


CC2-1040 1303+30 Storm drain 24” City of Coppell




CC2-1042 1318+52 Storm drain City of Coppell

CC2-1042 1321+28 OH Electrical transmission lines crossing Oncor

CC2-1042 1321+95 Water lines crossing 42" Private

CC2-1042 1322+29

OH electrical transmission lines crossing Oncor

CC2-1042 1322+79 OH electrical transmission lines crossing Oncor

CC2-1042 1323+19 UG 14.4/24.9 KV electrical crossing Oncor

CC2-1042 1323+92 Storm drain City of Coppell

CC2-1043 1326+18 RCCP water line with 72" steel casing 54" City of Irving




DWG. NO. Station Utility/Crossing Size Owner CC2-1043 1326+50 Water line crossing 54" City of Dallas

CC2-1043 1330+72 UG cable crossing Verizon Tel

CC2-1043 1330+73 UG FO cables with 4" steel casing crossing 3 - 1" AT&T

CC2-1043 1330+74 Gas pipeline with 10" casing 6" Atmos

CC2-1043 1330+80 UG traffic signal conduit crossing 2 - 2" City of Coppell

CC2-1043 1331+36 UG traffic signal conduit crossing 2 - 2" City of Coppell

CC2-1043 1331+74 D.I. water line with 36" steel casing 24" City of Coppell

CC2-1043 1331+83 UG HDPE FO conduit crossing 1.5" Carrollton-FB ISD

CC2-1043 1331+90 UG communication cables crossing Verizon Tel

CC2-1043 1333+92 D.I. sanitary sewer with 24" steel casing crossing 12" City of Coppell

CC2-1044 1336+26 Begin Valley Storage Bridge 910-feet City of Coppell

CC2-1044 1338+23 Aerial communication cable crossing Time Warner Cable

CC2-1044 1338+23 OH 14.4/29.4 KV electrical crossing Oncor

CC2-1047 1361+34 Sanitary sewer with 18" steel casing crossing 12" City of Coppell

CC2-1047 1362+38 Begin Valley Storage Bridge 1008-feet City of Coppell

CC2-1049 1381+55 PVC telephone conduit with 1-200 pair cable crossing 4" Verizon Tel

CC2-1050 1382+91 Water line crossing 8" City of Coppell

CC2-1050 1384+48 Petroleum pipeline 12.75” Explorer

CC2-1050 1385+22 Petroleum pipeline 12.75” Explorer

CC2-1050 1385+95

OH Electrical line crossing

CC2-1050 1387+14

OH Electrical line crossing with pole on alignment

CC2-1050 1388+60

Trinity River Crossing (Bridge) 246-feet City of Coppell






CC2-2002 2017+32 Underground Telephone Qwest

CC2-2002 2018+24 Petroleum Line 12.75" Explorer

CC2-2002 2018+86 Water 12" City of Carrollton

CC2-2002 2019+55 Sanitary Sewer 10" City of Carrollton

CC2-2006 2043+91 2050+43 Overhead Electric Oncor

CC2-2006 -

CC2-2007 2050+45 2054+12 Underground Electric Oncor



CC2-2007 2055+13 Overhead Electric Oncor

CC2-2007 -

CC2-2010 2059+14 2081+35 Sanitary Sewer 33" City of Carrollton

CC2-2007 2059+21 Gas 8" Atmos

CC2-2007 2059+60 Storm Drain Crossing 60" CMP City of Carrollton







CC2-2011 -




CC2-2012 2079+58

Telephone

Verizon

CC2-2012 2097+65 Underground Telephone Verizon


CC2-2013 2101+00 Storm Drain Crossing 33" RCP TxDOT

CC2-2013 2101+14

Gas 4" Atmos

CC2-2013 2101+36 Gas 4" Atmos

CC2-2013 2101+36 Underground Telephone

Williams

CC2-2013 2101+42

Water 6" City of Carrollton


CC2-2013 2101+81 Overhead Electric / Telephone Oncor And Verizon

CC2-2013 2105+45 Petroleum line 12.75" Explorer


CC2-2013 2105+85 Storm Drain Crossing 30" RCP DART

CC2-2013 2106+00

Underground Telephone

Verizon


CC2-2013 2106+44 Water 66" City of Dallas

CC2-2013 2107+17 Storm Drain Crossing 27" RCP DART






CC2-2014 -





CC2-2014 2112+65 Gas 4" Atmos






CC2-2016 2124+08 Underground Telephone Sprint


CC2-2018 2144+00


Qwest

CC2-2018 2144+20 Storm Drain Crossing Unknown Unknown


CC2-2019 2151+03


Verizon





CC2-2020 2156+64 Underground Telephone Qwest

CC2-2022 2172+52 Overhead Electric And Cable TV / Internet Oncor And Time Warner


CC2-2022 2173+27 Gas 6" Atmos

CC2-2022 2173+48 Water 60" City of Dallas








CC2-2027 2213+27 Underground Fiber Optics Carrollton-FB ISD






CC2-2031 -

CC2-2042 2249+00 2335+29 Underground Telephone Sprint

CC2-2032 2254+36 Gas 3" Atmos










CC2-2036 2286+76 Gas 6" Atmos


CC2-2036 2287+53 Underground Cable TV / Internet Time Warner







CC2-2039 2308+35 Sanitary Sewer 8" Town of Addison

CC2-2039 2308+42 Gas 2" Atmos

CC2-2039 2308+66 Storm Drain Crossing 30" RCP Town of Addison

CC2-2039 2308+67 Sanitary Sewer 21” Town of Addison

CC2-2039 2308+88 Water 12" Town of Addison





CC2-2040 -


CC2-2040 -




CC2-2042 2333+60 Storm Drain Crossing 2-48"

CMP Town of Addison

CC2-2042 2333+68 Gas 6" Atmos




CC2-2042 2334+43 Storm Drain Crossing 3 - 48"

CMP Town of Addison

CC2-2042 2334+47 Underground Electric Oncor


CC2-2043 2345+56 Storm Drain Crossing 2 - 4'x2.5'

RCB J. L. Williams & Co.


CC2-2043 -

CC2-2045 2343+50 2372+00 Petroleum Pipeline 12.75” Explorer






CC2-2045 2361+71 Gas 4" Atmos






CC2-2046 -

CC2-2047 2364+45 2374+00 Underground Telephone Sprint







CC2-2048 2387+40 Storm Drain Crossing 7'x7' RCB Town of Addison




DWG.NO. Station Utility/Crossing Size Owner

CC2-3001 3010+00 Water 12” Town of Addison

CC2-3001 3010+12

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3001 3010+14

Sanitary Sewer 12" Town of Addison


CC2-3001 3010+31

Storm Drain Crossing 36" NTTA

CC2-3001 3010+54 Underground Telephone XO Communication

CC2-3001 3011+43


CC2-3001 3011+85


CC2-3001 3011+99


CC2-3001 3012+01

Underground Electric

Oncor

CC2-3001 3012+06

Water 36" City of Dallas

CC2-3001 3012+10

Underground Cable TV / Internet

Time Warner

CC2-3001 3012+18

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3001 3012+19

Gas 4" Atmos

CC2-3001 3013+77

Fiber Optic

Sprint

CC2-3002 3019+19


Oncor

CC2-3002 3019+27


Oncor

CC2-3002 3019+36


Oncor

CC2-3002 3019+64


CC2-3002 3019+69

Overhead Electric And Cable TV / Internet

Oncor And Time Warner

CC2-3002 3020+34

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3002 3020+86

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3003 3028+15

Storm Drain Crossing 66" Unknown

CC2-3003 3028+30

Storm Drain Crossing 10' x 8' Unknown

CC2-3003 3028+86

Sanitary Sewer 12" City of Dallas

CC2-3003 3030+83

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3004 3035+00

Storm Drain Crossing 4' x 3' Unknown

CC2-3005 3040+63 3048+21 Underground Telephone

Sprint

CC2-3005 3047+02


CC2-3006 3055+38


CC2-3007 3057+86


Sprint

CC2-3008 3069+99

Petroleum Line 12.75" Explorer

CC2-3008 3071+55

Storm Drain Crossing 18” Unknown

CC2-3008 3072+14



CC2-3008 3072+20


CC2-3008 3072+93

Gas 6" Atmos

CC2-3009 3076+00


CC2-3009 3079+68

Storm Drain Crossing 18" Prestonwod

Development Co.

CC2-3010 3081+11

Gas 12" Atmos





CC2-3010 3081+69


CC2-3010 3086+81


Development Co.

CC2-3010 3087+00


Sprint

CC2-3010 3087+41


CC2-3011 3091+89


Development Co.

CC2-3012 3094+00 Overhead Electric 13kv Oncor

CC2-3011 3095+45


Development Co.


CC2-3012 3098+12

Storm Drain Crossing 30" City of Dallas

CC2-3012 3098+36


Oncor

CC2-3012 3098+55


CC2-3012 3098+67

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3012 3098+72

Gas 6" Atmos


CC2-3012 3099+00

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3012 3099+53

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3012 3100+08

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3012 3102+29


CC2-3013 3110+65

Gas 4" Atmos

CC2-3013 3110+74


CC2-3013 3110+74


CC2-3015 3121+52

Storm Drain Crossing Unknown Unknown

CC2-3015 3126+13


Verizon

CC2-3015 3126+29



CC2-3015 3126+80


CC2-3015 3126+95

Gas 3" Atmos

CC2-3015 3128+64


CC2-3017 3137+66


Oncor

CC2-3018 3149+26


Sprint

CC2-3018 3150+89


Sprint

CC2-3018 3151+06

Sanitary Sewer 12" Dallas

CC2-3019 3157+69


Sprint

CC2-3020 3161+82

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3020 3162+77


CC2-3021 3169+73


CC2-3021 3170+74


CC2-3021 3171+31



CC2-3021 3172+47


CC2-3022 3179+66


CC2-3022 3179+72

Gas 4" Atmos





CC2-3022 3179+83



CC2-3022 3180+32

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3022 3180+92

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3022 3181+26


CC2-3023 3191+26

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3023 3192+96


CC2-3024 3194+62


CC2-3024 3194+75


CC2-3025 3208+04


CC2-3025 3208+12


CC2-3025 3208+48


CC2-3026 3215+33



CC2-3026 3215+45


Time Warner

CC2-3026 3215+54


CC2-3026 3215+62

Gas 4" Atmos

CC2-3026 3215+93


CC2-3026 3216+04


CC2-3026 3216+60


CC2-3026 3216+65


CC2-3026 3216+67

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3030 3244+75

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3031 3251+85


Verizon

CC2-3031 3252+05


CC2-3031 3252+17

Sanitary Sewer 10" City of Richardson

CC2-3031 3253+32

Water 12" City of Richardson


CC2-3032 3263+79


Sprint

CC2-3033 3268+08

Gas 8" Atmos

CC2-3033 3268+90

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3034 3280+18

Overhead Electric / Telephone

Oncor And Verizon

CC2-3034 3280+92


CC2-3035 3282+17


Verizon

CC2-3035 3282+94

Underground Telephone 4" SCH 80

PVC Sprint

CC2-3035 3283+76


CC2-3036 3293+57


CC2-3036 3293+60


CC2-3036 3293+93


Oncor

CC2-3037 3297+00

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3037 3303+37


CC2-3037 3304+15

Storm Drain Crossing 36" City of Richardson

CC2-3038 3305+07


Verizon





CC2-3038 3305+79


Oncor

CC2-3038 3307+25


CC2-3038 3310+11


CC2-3039 -


Sprint

CC2-3041 3331+97


CC2-3041 3335+28

Storm Drain Crossing 5' x 3' City of Richardson

CC2-3041 3335+79


CC2-3041 3335+86


Time Warner

CC2-3041 3335+89

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3041 3336+26


CC2-3041 3336+60

Gas 6" Atmos

CC2-3041 3336+73

Gas 6" Atmos

CC2-3041 3336+89

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3041 3336+90


Verizon

CC2-3043 3349+31


CC2-3043 3350+32


Oncor

CC2-3044 3355+95

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3044 3359+77


CC2-3044 3361+25

Gas 2" Atmos

CC2-3044 3361+81

Storm Drain Crossing Unknown City of Richardson

CC2-3045 3368+76

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3046 3369+96


CC2-3047 3378+50

Storm Drain Crossing 18" City of Richardson

CC2-3047 3381+10

Overhead Electric

Oncor


CC2-3047 3381+45


Level 3



Qwest

CC2-3048 3390+77


Sprint

CC2-3048 3391+59

Sanitary Sewer 36” City of Plano

CC2-3048 3392+39


Level 3

CC2-3049 3400+23

Sanitary Sewer 42" City of Plano

CC2-3050 3408+36



CC2-3050 3408+53

Water 18" City of Plano

CC2-3051 3414+07

Storm Drain Crossing 36" TxDOT

CC2-3051 3416+07



CC2-3051 3416+53


CC2-3052 3417+21

Gas 2" Atmos

CC2-3052 3422+74



CC2-3052 3422+90


CC2-3052 3423+46

Gas 2" Atmos





CC2-3052 3424+53

Gas 3" Atmos

CC2-3053 3432+90


CC2-3054 3434+22

Storm Drain 18” Unknown

CC2-3054 3434+35


CC2-3054 3434+68

Overhead Cable TV / Internet

Time Warner

CC2-3054 3435+02

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3054 3435+61

Overhead Electric

Oncor


CC2-3054 3439+78

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3054 3440+04

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3054 3440+05 Sanitary Sewer 6” City of Plano

CC2-3054 3440+27


CC2-3055 -


Sprint

CC2-3055 3442+24


Level 3

CC2-3055 3443+31


Level 3

CC2-3055 3443+90


CC2-3055 3445+95

Storm Drain Crossing 60" City of Plano

CC2-3055 3446+06

Gas 8" Atmos

CC2-3055 3448+48


Verizon

CC2-3055 3448+65


CC2-3056 3449+12

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3056 3452+36

Storm Drain Crossing 2-18" x

28.5" RCAP City of Plano

CC2-3056 3453+52



CC2-3056 3453+66


CC2-3056 3453+85


CC2-3056 3454+06


Verizon

CC2-3057 3464+82


Time Warner

CC2-3057 3464+85

Water 12” City of Plano

CC2-3057 3464+94


Level 3

CC2-3058 3465+03

Gas 2” Atmos

CC2-3058 3465+17

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3059 3476+02


CC2-3059 3479+19


Sprint

CC2-3061 3494+30


CC2-3061 3494+41

Gas 4” Atmos

CC2-3061 3494+76

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3062 3501+25


CC2-3062 3501+30



CC2-3062 3501+35


XO Communications

CC2-3062 3502+30

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3062 3502+40

Gas

Atmos





CC2-3067 3541+17


CC2-3069 3553+24

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3069 3553+32

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3069 3555+76


CC2-3069 3556+16

Gas 4” Atmos

CC2-3069 3556+20

Water 14” NTMWD

CC2-3069 3556+30

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3069 3556+95

Overhead Electric

Oncor

CC2-3069 3557+31


CC2-3069 3557+41

Overhead Electric

Oncor



Appendix B: Cotton Belt Transportation Crossings



Appendix B

Cotton Belt Roadway Crossings Inventory

Street Name City/Agency

Existing

Crossing

Type

Functional

Classification

Existing/Proposed

Typical Section

Pavement

Type

Existing

Traffic

Control

Device

Dooley St Grapevine AG Collector 2 Lanes, curb &

gutter Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Texan Trail Rd Grapevine GS Major Arterial 6 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete N/A

SH 121 (Int'l

Pkwy) DFW Airport/TxDOT GS Expressway

6 Lane Divided w/

Aux Lanes Asphalt N/A

County Line

Road (Closed) Coppell AG

Not Defined

(Local) Single Lane

Dirt,

Unimproved None

IH 635 Coppell/TXDOT GS Freeway 6 Lane Divided Concrete N/A

S. Royal Ln Coppell AG Principal

Arterial

4 Lane Divided,

Curb/6 Lane Divided,

Curb

Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Freeport Pkwy Coppell AG Collector 4 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Coppell Rd Coppell AG Collector 2 Lane, No Shoulder Asphalt 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Denton Tap Rd Coppell AG Principal

Arterial 6 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

W Belt Line Rd

(Future) Dallas None

Principal

Arterial

4 Lane Divided,


Curb

Concrete N/A

W Belt Line Rd

(Future) Coppell None

Principal

Arterial

4 Lane Divided,


Curb

Concrete N/A

Moore Rd Coppell AG Collector 2 Lane w/ Left Turn

Lane, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Mockingbird Ln Coppell AG Collector 2 Lane w/ Left Turn

Lane, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

MacArthur Blvd Coppell AG Principal


2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Fairway Dr Coppell AG Collector 2 Lane w/ Left Turn

Lane, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Driveway -

Industrial

Businesses

Coppell AG None

(Driveway)

2 Way approx 36'

wide Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Driveway -

Dallas Pistol

Club

Carrollton GS None

(Driveway)

2 Way approx 12'

wide

Dirt,

Unimproved N/A

President

George Bush

Turnpike

Carrollton/NTTA GS Freeway 6 Lane Divided Concrete N/A

Luna Rd Carrollton AG Arterial 6 Lane Divided w/

Left Turn Lane, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals



Appendix B


Driveway Carrollton GS None

(Driveway)

2 Way approx 12'

wide

Dirt,

Unimproved N/A

Hutton (Future) Carrollton None None None N/A N/A

I.H. 35E SBFR Carrollton/TXDOT AG Arterial 2 Lane, curb &

gutter Asphalt Gates/Signals

IH 35E/US 77

Main lanes Carrollton/TXDOT GS Freeway

6 Lanes, Urban

Section Concrete N/A

IH 35E NBFR Carrollton/TXDOT AG Arterial 2 Lanes, curb &

gutter Asphalt Gates/Signals

N. Broadway St Carrollton AG Collector 2 Lanes, curb &

gutter/4 Lane Asphalt

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

DGNO Railroad Carrollton/DART/DGNO AG N/A 1 Track N/A N/A

DART Green

Line Carrollton/DART GS N/A 2 Tracks N/A N/A

N. Denton Dr Carrollton AG Collector 2 Lanes, curb &

gutter Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Perry Ave

(Future) Carrollton None None None N/A N/A

N. Perry Rd Carrollton AG Collector 2 Lanes, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

N. Josey Ln Carrollton AG Arterial 6 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Kelly Blvd Carrollton AG Arterial 4 Lanes, Curb/4 Lane

Divided Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Driveway - The

Honors Golf

Club

Carrollton AG None

(Driveway)

2 Way approx 24'

wide, Curb Concrete Crossbuck

Marsh Ln Carrollton/Addison AG Arterial 6 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Surveyor Blvd Addison AG Commercial

Collector

2 Lanes, curb &

gutter Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Midway Rd Addison AG Principal


2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Addison Rd Addison AG Minor Arterial

4 Lanes w/ Left Turn

Lane, Curb/4 Lane

Divided

Asphalt 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Quorum Dr Addison AG Minor Arterial 4 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Spectrum Dr Addison AG Residential

Collector 2 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

S. Dallas Pkwy Dallas/NTTA AG Arterial 3 Lane, Curbed Concrete Gates/Signals

DNT Main lanes Dallas/NTTA GS Freeway 6 Lane Divided,

Curb, Urban Section Concrete N/A

N. Dallas Pkwy Dallas/NTTA AG Arterial 3 Lane, Curbed Concrete Gates/Signals

Knoll Trail Dr Dallas AG Minor Arterial 4 Lanes, Curb/4 Lane

Divided Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

SH 289/Preston Dallas GS Principal 6 Lanes Concrete N/A



Appendix B


Rd Arterial

Davenport Rd Dallas AG Collector 4 Lanes, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Campbell Rd Dallas AG Principal


2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Davenport Rd Dallas AG Collector 2 Lanes, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Hillcrest Rd Dallas AG Principal

Arterial 6 Lane Divided Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

McCallum Blvd Dallas AG Collector 4 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Meandering

Way Dallas AG Collector 4 Lanes, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Bike Path -

Preston Ridge

Trail

Dallas AG None 2 Way Path Concrete None

Dickerson St Dallas AG Local 2 Lanes Asphalt Crossbuck

Coit Rd Dallas AG Principal


2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Revielle Run Rd

(Closed) Dallas AG None N/A N/A N/A

Waterview

Parkway Richardson AG Arterial 6 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

KCS Railroad Richardson/KCS

Railroad GS None N/A N/A N/A

Synergy Park

Blvd Richardson GS

Major

Collector 4 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete N/A

W. Renner Rd Richardson GS Arterial 6 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete N/A

Custer Pkwy Richardson AG Arterial 6 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

Alma Rd Richardson AG Arterial 4 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

President

George Bush

Turnpike

Richardson/Plano/NTTA GS Freeway 6 Lane Divided Concrete N/A

US 75 SBFR Plano/TXDOT AG 3 Lane, Curbed Concrete Gates/Signals

US 75 Main

lanes Plano/TXDOT GS Freeway

8 Lane Divided, 2

HOV, Aux Lanes,

Urban Section

Concrete N/A

US 75 NBFR Plano/TXDOT AG 4 Lane, Curbed Concrete Gates/Signals

E. Plano Pkwy Plano AG Major

Thoroughfare 6 Lane Divided, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

F Ave Plano AG Secondary

Thoroughfare 2 Lanes, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

10th St Plano AG Local 2 Lanes, Curb Concrete 2 Quad

Gates/Signals

DART Red Line Plano/DART GS None 2 Tracks N/A N/A



Appendix B


K Ave Plano AG Major

Thoroughfare 3 Lane, Curbed Concrete Gates/Signals

Municipal Ave

(L Ave) Plano AG

Major

Thoroughfare 3 Lane, Curbed Concrete Gates/Signals

N Ave Plano AG Secondary

Thoroughfare 2 Lanes, Curb Concrete

2 Quad

Gates/Signals

AG - At-Grade; GS - Grade Separated

Source: URS



Appendix C: Existing Freight Operations Exhibit



Appendix D: Traffic Volumes



Appendix D

Traffic Volumes

ADT

Roadway Source Date From To Direction Direction

Total

Daily

Total

Royal Lane

Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 6,881

Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks S 6,263

NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 23,380

Freeport Parkway Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 6,460


Coppell Road Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 1,689


S. Denton Tap Rd

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 Bethel Rd Belt Line Both 44,571

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Bethel Rd S'western N 15,065

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Bethel Rd S'western S 15,065

City of Coppel 7/21/2009 S of RR Tracks - N 14,703

City of Coppel 7/21/2009

N of RR

Tracks - S 14,647



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 43,840

Belt Line Rd

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030

Denton Tap

Rd MacArthur Both 38,669

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Southwestern Moore Rd Both 13,036

City of Coppell 3/28/2005

Denton Tap

Rd Moore Rd Both 15,869

Parsons 11/2/2010

Denton Tap

Rd Moore Rd E 6,737

Parsons 11/2/2010

Denton Tap

Rd Moore Rd W 6,618

NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 37,970

Belt Line Rd

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030

Denton Tap

Rd MacArthur Both 38,669

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Moore Rd

Mockingbird

Ln Both 14,648

City of Coppell 1/8/2003 Moore Rd MacArthur Both 11,918



Appendix D

Traffic Volumes

Parsons 11/2/2010

MacArthur

Mockingbird

Ln E 7,540

Parsons 11/2/2010

MacArthur

Mockingbird

Ln W 6,950

NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 36,780

Moore Road Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 2,784


Mockingbird Lane Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 1,640


S.MacArthur Blvd

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 Riverchase Belt Line Both 36,129

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Riverchase Belt Line N 11,194

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Riverchase Belt Line S 11,194


N of RR

Tracks - N 11,601


S of

Riverchase - S 10,636



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 24,130

Fairway Drive Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 1,962


Driveway(Ledbetter) Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 570

Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks S 479

Luna Rd

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 Belt Line I.H.-35E Both 44,829

Thoroughfare

Assessment

Program 9/13/2006 Belt Line Capital N

7,973

Thoroughfare

Assessment

Program 9/13/2006 Belt Line Capital S

7,995

City of Carrollton 8/22/2001 Belt Line - N 6,351

City of Carrollton 8/22/2001 Belt Line - S 6,373



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 50,590



Appendix D

Traffic Volumes

IH 35E SBFR Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks S 9,552

IH 35E NBFR Parsons

11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks

N 9,301

Broadway Street Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 2,270


Denton Drive Parsons 11/30/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 1,403


Perry Road Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 1,875


N. Josey Ln

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 RR Tracks RR Tracks Both 37,102

System

Investment

Grade Studies 2/9/2006 Keller Sprngs

Keller

Springs N

13,530

System

Investment

Grade Studies 2/9/2006 Keller Sprngs

Keller

Springs S

15,994

City of Carrollton 6/21/2001 McKamy - N 19,099

City of Carrollton 6/21/2001 McKamy - S 18,823



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 36,420

Kelly Boulevard



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 24,670

Driveway-Honors

Golf Club

Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 61


Marsh Ln

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030

Research

Keller

Springs Both 38,339

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Keller Springs Arapaho N 19,914

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Keller Springs Arapaho S 19,914

City of Addison 10/27/2009 Arapaho RR Tracks N 16,638

City of Addison 10/27/2009 Arapaho RR Tracks S 16,829





Appendix D

Traffic Volumes

NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 35,050

Surveyor Boulevard Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 2,025


Midway Rd

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 Lindberg Arapaho Both 54,301

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Lindberg Arapaho N 25,441

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Lindberg Arapaho S 25,441

City of Addison 10/27/2009 Belt Line Lindberg N 17,188

City of Addison 10/27/2009 Belt Line Lindberg S 17,085



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 61,500

Addison Road

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Lindbergh Arapaho Both 22,073



Quorum Drive Parsons 12/7/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 4,255


Spectrum Drive Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 1,685


DNT SB FR

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030

Keller Springs

Airport

Pkwy S 29,922

System

Investment

Grade Studies 11/3/2005 Airport Pkwy Arapaho S

13,771


DNT NB FR

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030

Bent Tree

Forest

Keller

Springs N 29,727

System

Investment

Grade Studies 11/3/2005 Arapaho

Keller

Springs N

13,039


Knoll Trail Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 3,265


Davenport(South) Parsons 12/7/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks E 2,327



Appendix D

Traffic Volumes

Parsons 12/7/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks W 2,406

Campbell Rd

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 Keller Sprngs Davenport Both 29,387

Thoroughfare

Assessment

Program 1/30/2007 Keller Sprngs Davenport NW

8,960

Thoroughfare

Assessment

Program 1/30/2007 Keller Sprngs Davenport SE

8,019

City of Dallas 10/29/2001 Keller Sprngs Davenport Both 20,729

Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks E 7,436


NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 29,020

Davenport(North) Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 2,224


Hillcrest Rd

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 McCallum McKamy Both 23,344

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

McCallum McKamy N 8,051

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

McCallum McKamy S 8,051

City of Dallas 1/22/2001 McCallum McKamy Both 17,656



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 23,540

McCallum

Boulevard



Meandering Way Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 1,365


Dickerson Street

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

McCallum Frankford Both 1,291



Coit Rd

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 Frankford McCallum Both 53,274

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Frankford McCallum N 23,961

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Frankford McCallum S 23,961

City of Dallas 1/22/2001 Frankford McCallum Both 42,950




Appendix D

Traffic Volumes


NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 52,870

Waterview Parkway

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 Synergy Park Frankford Both 38,905

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Synergy Park Frankford N 10,629

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Synergy Park Frankford S 10,629

City of

Richardson 4/7/2009 Synergy Park S.H. 190 N 9,900

City of

Richardson 4/7/2009 S.H. 190

Synergy

Park S 11,000



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 32,820

Custer Pkwy

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 SH190 EBFR Renner Both 28,114

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

Renner SH190 EBFR NW 7,664

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

SH190 EBFR Renner SE 7,664

City of

Richardson 4/2/2009 Renner SH190 EBFR NW 8,000

City of

Richardson 4/2/2009 SH190 EBFR Renner SE 8,000



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 26,820

Alma Road



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 18,330

N. Central Expy

SBFR

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030 Plano Pkwy Renner S 13,323

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

S


N. Central Expy

NBFR

NCTCOG - Unmet 2030

SH 190

WBFR Plano Pkwy N 19,890

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 2004

SH 190

WBFR Plano Pkwy N 4,152




Appendix D

Traffic Volumes

Plano Parkway



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 38,800

F Avenue

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 10/20/2004 RR Tracks RR Tracks Both 2,543



10th Street

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 10/20/2004 RR Tracks RR Tracks S 18,467

Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks E 589

Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks W 921

K Avenue

Saturation Count



L Avenue Parsons 11/2/2010 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 7,118

N Avenue

Saturation Count




NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 2,230

Jupiter Road

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 10/20/2004 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 14,434



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 37,780

Shiloh Road

Saturation Count

Program, TxDOT 10/20/2004 RR Tracks RR Tracks N 6,581



NCTCOG(Mobility

2030) 2030

Both 46,720



Appendix E: Bridge Structures List



Appendix F: Table of Supporting Engineering Documents



Appendix F: TO 4 and TO 42 Cotton Belt Supporting Engineering Documents:

Name of File Date Submitted to DART Status

DRAFT – Design Criteria Manual

(Volume 1 of 2)

July 2010 (revised

January 2011)

Submitted on July

14, 2010

Draft PDF

CADD File Management Manual September 2010 Draft PDF and MS Word

DRAFT – Existing Freight Operations

TM

October 11, 2010 Draft MS Word

Systems Integration TM November 24, 2010 Draft MS Word

Safety and Security Certification (SSCP)

TM

November 24, 2010 Draft MS Word

Existing Track Assessment Report February 28, 2011 Version 1.2 Draft PDF

Existing Signals Assessment Report February 28, 2011 Draft; PDF

Design Criteria Volume 2 February 28, 2011 Version 1.1. Draft PDF

Systems Preliminary Engineering –

Sketches Report

March 17 & 18,

2011

Draft; PDF Version 1.1

Grade Separation Analysis Report August 2011 Version 3.0 Draft PDF

has some track changes

Final Preliminary Engineering 5%

Design Report

August 2013


Design Cost Estimate

August 2013


Design Station Layouts

August 2013