ST9602-CS010628 Parsons CMAQ Program Office
Brinckerhoff 1701 N. Market Street
I00
YEARS Suite 410
Dallas, TX 75202
214-747-6336
Fax: 214-741-1937
June 28, 2001 E-mail.. cmaq@dlscmaq, com
Mr. Scott Young, P.E.
USA
8700 Stemmons Freeway, Suite 400
Dallas, TX 75247
Subject: Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Program
2nd Final Review and Mylar Request. Project 10
Dear Mr. Young:
The PM/E has received and consolidated all comments from the reviewing agencies pertaining
to the 2nd Final Review for CMAQ Project P10. A copy of this letter and the comments will be
E-mailed to you today.
Enter your responses on the electronic copy and return an electronic and a signed hard copy
to this office no later than July 9, 2001. If you feel that some review comments need further
discussion, notify this office immediately upon receipt.
After you have dispositioned your comments to this office, we will direct the preparation of the
final PS&E with the associated mylars. Since there are still items that need to be corrected,
'you will need to make sure you have a clear understanding before proceeding with the mylar
production. It is your responsibility to request a meeting or to visit with the reviewer to assure
you have a clear understanding. If you need to produce a few sheet(s) for review and want to
get feedback before proceeding, we will assist in that effort. In this project, extra care needs
to be taken to assure the Exhibit A meets the RR and TxDOT requirements.
If you have any questions, please contact this office at 214-747-6336 ext. 28 or Kimberly Burks
at ext. 29.
Sincerely,
Attachments: 2nd Final Review Consolidated Comments
cc: Don Cranford, P.E., Asst. Director, Trans. and Planning, w/o attachments
Suja Mathew, P.E., TxDOT Roadway Design Office, w/o attachments
Fraydon Nafissi, P.E., TxDOT Roadway Design Office, w/attachments
Byron Stephens, P.E., TxDOT Traffic Office, w/attachments
Dexter Hollabaugh, P.E., TxDOT Railroad Office, w/attachments
Barbra Leftwich, Leftwich & Associates, w/attachments
Don Penny, P.E., Penny & Associates, w/attachments
Over a Century of
Engineering Excellence
H:~°14CORR~P14-1OUT~10-Usa',2001~42 2nd Final Review & Mylar Request.doc
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DALLAS COUNTY CMAQ PROGRAM
CMAQ Project 10 Submittal2nd Final Review Date: June 28, 2001 I Sheet: 1 I of 8
Project::
Reviewer: Consolidated Organization: PM/E Reviewer Telephone Number: (214) 747-6336 x 28
Item I Page No. Comment- (state fully action required, i.e., clarify, change, Response Action
No.I Sheet No. add, delete, etc.
1. 10 I am very much aware that your previous comments state
that four inches of hot mix is an adequate sub-base for this
paving section. This is not consistent with what is required for
subgrade on arterial streets. My opinion is that the subgrede
should be reevaluated.
Resolve with Ken Griffin ~ 972-304-3679
2. 11 A. The number one note in the work sequence states
"adjust utilities by others". What utilities is this note
referring to and who are the "others"?
PM/E Comment: "By othere" refers to utility companies.
This work should normally be complete before the street
construction begins.
B. b. The ninth comment under the notes states "contrector
shall previde access to driveways at all times except
where specifically shown to be closed or as directed by
the engineer." Any restricted access to the driveway
should be coordinated with the property owner.
PM/E Comment: Add the additional comment to the
ninth comment.
Resolve with Ken Griffin ~ 972-304-3679
3. 13 This sheet shows that there is existing right-of-way at the
northwest corner of Bethel and Denton Tap to construct the
free right turn lane. Our notes indicate that right-of-way was
to be acquired from the property owner, Ms. Alexander. As of
this date, I have received no documentation that right-of-way
has been acquired from Ms. Alexander. If the right-of-way
has been acquired, please provide a filed copy of the
right-of-way instrument to the City of Coppell for our records.
Resolve with Ken Griffin @ 972-304-3679
PMIE Comment: At the time of construction, the
"proposed" Right-Of-Way will already have been
acquired and the plans correctly should show existing
v Action Codes Dispositioned By:
A - Agree, Designer will comply D - Delete, Reviewer Withdraws Comment Title:
C - Disagree, Designer and E - Exception, Resolution Required Date:
Reviewer Resolution Required N/A - Not Applicable
H:~P11FinallOO\P11-2Review\P lt3~2nd Final Review\Conselidated\PlO 2nd Final Comments. DOC
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DALLAS COUNTY CMAQ PROGRAM
Submittal2nd Final Review Date: June 28, 2001 I Sheet: 2 I of$
Project::
CMAQ
Project
10
Reviewer: Consolidated Organization: PM/E Reviewer Telephone Number: (214) 747-6336 x 28
Item I Page No' I Comment' (state fully action required ' i'e" clarify' change' Resp°nSeNo. Sheet No. add, delete, etc. IActi°n
Right-Of-Way.
4. 14 There is a comment concerning the relocation of an existing
telephone line to avoid conflict with the proposed inlet. Have
plans been provided to Verizon (GTE) concerning this
relocation? Our experience is that Verizon has a long lag
time on relocation of utilities.
Resolve with Ken Griffin (~ 972-304-3679
5. 15 The fifth note states "Police Department to direct traffic
during signal pole relocation." This is an incorrect statement.
While the Police Department may direct traffic during the
pole relocation, that needs to be a specific cost to the
contractor as part of their project. There also needs to be
some clarification on the length of time it will take to relocate
the pole and the length of time that it will be out of service.
But again, please be clear that a statement that the Police
Department will direct traffic is inadequate and costing should
be part of contractor's responsibility.
PM/E Comment: Change the note requiring the
contractor to arrange for traffic and to pay for the Police
services as required by the Police Department.
Resolve with Ken Griffin (~ 972-304-3679
6. 17 The proposed pavement markings show a right turn arrow
directing traffic into the proposed drive approach. This
appears to be a bad location for an arrow. Need to consider
relocation or removal of that arrow.
PMIE Comment: Remove the first arrow in the lane and
relocate the "ONLY" and arrow to the beginning of the
lane. This will be similar to the TMUTCD illustration.
Resolve with Ken Griffin (~ 972-304-3679
7. 19 I have the same concern about the stabilization beneath the
paving. Copied From Sheet 10 Comments: "1 am very much
aware that your previous comments state that four inches of
v Action Codes Dispositioned By:
A - Agree, Designer will comply D - Delete, Reviewer Withdraws Comment Title:
C - Disagree, Designer and E - Exception, Resolution Required Date:
Reviewer Resolution Required N/A - Not Applicable
H:~I 1Finall00~'l 1-2ReviewS10~nd Final Review\Consolidated~'10 2nd Final Comments. DOC
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DALLAS COUNTY CMAQ PROGRAM
Submittal2nd Final Review Date: June 28, 2001 I Sheet: 3 I of8
Project::
CMAQ
Project
10
Reviewer: Consolidated Organization: PM/E Reviewer Telephone Number: (214) 747-6336 x 28
Item I Page No. I Comment-(state fully action required, i.e., clarify, change, Response Action
No.I Sheet No.I add, delete, etc.
hot mix is an adequate sub-base for this paving section. This
is not consistent with what is required for subgrade on arterial
streets. My opinion is that the subgrade should be
reevaluated."
Resolve with Ken Griffin (~ 972-304-3679
8. 21 Need to insure that the left turn lane will be available and
useable during morning peak hour. A note to that affect
should be placed somewhere on the plans.
PMIE Comment: No change is needed on this sheet.
Move the vertical panels next to the saw-cut line on
sheet 21 and provide the left turn lane if possible. If
widths will work out for the left turn lane in peak hours,
show a Section C-C showing the lane widths. Nine
meters minimum is needed between the vertical panels
and the south curb.
Resolve with Ken Griffin (~ 972-304-3679
9. 24 A. Note 7 states "streetlights should be removed at the
beginning of project by TXU and replaced at the end of
project." Has TXU been notified and provided plans
concerning this project? The contractor should
coordinate the removal with TXU and more than likely
TXU will perform the work; however, the contractor
should be aware and notes should be placed on the
plans that there will be cost to the contractor for TXU
removing and replacing the lights.
B. There is a note that states "adjust various sprinkler
heads and valves". The note should be expanded to
include "irrigation lines". It is quite possible that cutting
into the median will expose the irrigation line and it may
need to be rerouted to avoid conflict. Aisc, it needs to be
very clear that any work associated with the irrigation
system will be subsidiary to the cost of this project and
the contractor's responsibility
v Action Codes Dispositioned By:
A - Agree, Designer will comply D - Delete, Reviewer Withdraws Comment Title:
C - Disagree, Designer and E - Exception, Resolution Required Date:
Reviewer Resolution Required N/A - Not Applicable
H:\P11FinallOO~l 1-2Review~lO~2nd Final Roview\Consolidated~lO 2nd Final Comments. DOC
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DALLAS COUNTY CMAQ PROGRAM
Project:: CMAQ Project 10 Submittal2nd Final Review Date: June 28, 2001 I Sheet: 4 of 8
Reviewer: Consolidated Organization: PM/E Reviewer Telephone Number: (214) 747-6336 x 28
Item I Page No. Comment- (state fully action required, i.e., clarify, change, Response Action
No.I Sheet No. add, delete, etc.
Resolve with Ken Griffin (~ 972-304-3679
10. 29 A. It appears that the minimum radius on the non-curbed
driveway is set up to be 4 feet to approximately 10 feet.
Please note our minimum curve return radius is 5 feet on
residential driveways.
B. Under Detail E, the typical concrete driveway section is
proposing wire mesh for the reinforcement. We do not
allow wire mesh in concrete within the right-of-way. This
reinforcement should be a minimum #3 at 24" on center.
PM/E Comment: Add a note or call-out clarifying
both of these items.
Resolve with Ken Griffin (~ 972-304-3679
11. 6 Change hay bales and silt fence item #'s to 5003 and 5012
respectively.
Resolve with Fraydoon Nafissi, TxDOT (214) 320-4434
12. 12 Show the sawcut line with corner clip.
Resolve with Fraydoon Nafissi, TxDOT (214) 320-4434
13. 13, 22, 23, 25 In the legend change the pavement description to "200mm
CPCD MOD WITH 1OOmm ACP (TY B)".
Resolve with Fraydoon Nafissi, TxDOT (214) 320-4434
14. 21 1. Delete signs 1, 3 and 4 on northbound approach
MacArthur.
2. Amend Section A-A to have 3 lanes, following the
principles used for section B-B.
Resolve with Fraydoon Nafissi, TxDOT (214) 320-4434
15. 28 Provide the sheet that contains the begin station of the
widening and pavement marking.
Resolve with Fraydoon Nafissi, TxDOT (214) 320-4434
16. Statewide Use ED(l-3)-00 instead of -98(M)
Standards All SMD sheets noted (1-1 to 1-5) should be -98(M).
Use RAMP-00B instead of -00A.
v Action Codes Dispositioned By:
A - Agree, Designer will comply D - Delete, Reviewer Withdraws Comment Title:
C - Disagree, Designer and E - Exception, Resolution Required Date:
Reviewer Resolution Required N/A - Not Applicable
H:~P11Finall00~P11-2Review~D10~2nd Final Review\Consolidated~P10 2nd Final Comments. DOC
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DALLAS COUNTY CMAQ PROGRAM
Project:: CMAQ Project 10 Submittal2nd Final Review Date: June 28, 2001 I Sheet: 5 I of8
Reviewer: Consolidated Organization: PM/E Reviewer Telephone Number: (214) 747-6336 x 28
Item I Page No. Comment-(state fully action required, i.e., clarify, change, Response I Action
No.I Sheet No. add, delete, etc.
I
Add WZ(BTS-1)-99(M) and WZ(BTS-2)-99(M)
Use TCSF instead of district standard "Controller Foundation
Details"
Add LD1-98(M)
Resolve with Byron Stephens, TxDOT 214-319-6413
17. District Remove "Controller Foundation Details". See above.
Standards Replace LD1-98(M) with "Signs (DAL)" or "District Details"
Use MA-D-00(M) instead of -96A(M).
Resolve with Byron Stephens, TxDOT 214-319-6413
Railroad Exhibit Comments
18. RR Exhibit A. Does this track belong to DART and the Ft Worth
Western RR is the operator.
B. I will find out who's name should appear on the EXHIBIT
A drawings .... I think Ft Worth Western.
C. DART may insist that you replace the whole crossing
with new concrete pads. They may not approve the
extension of a rubber crossing with a concrete pad.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
19. RR Exhibit A. These drawings are not to scale.
B. Some of the dimensions will scale and some will not. Fix
it.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
20. RR Exhibit A. For TxDOT to submit this as an "EXHIBIT A" for a
railroad agreement, certain things must be shown on the
drawings.
B. You must show gates and/or cantilever signals as,
existing to remain, existing to be relocated, new to be
installed.
C. Gate and cants must be placed on the drawin.qs to
v Action Codes Dispositioned By: ·
A - Agree, Designer will comply D - Delete, Reviewer Withdraws Comment Title:
C - Disagree, Designer and E - Exception, Resolution Required Date:
Reviewer Resolution Required N/A - Not Applicable
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DALLAS COUNTY CMAQ PROGRAM
Project:: CMAQ Project 10 Submittal2nd Final Review Date: June 28, 2001 I Sheet: 6 I of 8
Reviewer: Consolidated Organization: PM/E Reviewer Telephone Number: (214) 747-6336 x 28
ItemINo. Sheet Page Ne.No. Comment - (state fully action required, i.e., clarify, change,add, delete, etc. Response I Action
scale. Even the existing ones!
D. If you move an existing or install a new device, you must
show the dimension for the location relative to the c.l. of
the track and the face of the curb.
E. This will include any temporary placement during a
construction phase.
F. The placement of the warning devices must be shown
on your TCP.
G. You must show that all required warning devices, signs,
pavement markings, traffic signal preemption and other
elements have been considered. It is not enough to say
that "we are not doing anything to the timing, or the
signing or the striping or the pavement markings.
H. You can show it as existing to remain or proposed. But
show it.
I. When the EXHIBIT A is complete it will indicate that all
elements are in requirement with the railroad's and
TxDOT's requirement and standards.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
21. RR Exhibit You must show lengths for gates and cantilever arms. BOTH
proposed and existing.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
22. RR Exhibit Label all gates and/or cantilever signals as proposed,
relocated existing or existing.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
23. RR Exhibit Your GATE LOCATION DETAIL on the first sheet does not
show the distance "from the face of the curb" for the
cantilever.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
24. RR Exhibit If the gate shown to the right of approx station 9+960.00 is
15' from the track; then the .(:late that should be
v Action Codes Dispositioned By:
A - Agree, Designer will comply D ~ Delete, Reviewer Withdraws Comment Title:
C - Disagree, Designer and E - Exception, Resolution Required Date:
Reviewer Resolution Required N/A - Not Applicable
H:~P11Finall00~l 1-2Review~P10~nd Final Review\Consolidated~P10 2nd Final Comments. DOC
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DALLAS COUNTY CMAQ PROGRAM
CMAQ Project 10 Submittal2nd Final Review Date: June 28, 2001 I Sheet: 7 of S
Project::
Reviewer: Consolidated Organization: PM/E Reviewer Telephone Number: (214) 747-6336 x 28
Item I Page No. Comment - (state fully action required, i.e., clarify, change, Response Action
No.I Sheet No. add, delete, etc.
~)erpendicular (across the roadway) can not be 15' from the
track.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
25. RR Exhibit Concerning Pavement Markings and signing. See TxDOT
Standard Sheet RCPM-96. Then show all pavement
markings and signs installed (to scale) and in accordance
with the standard sheet and the TxMUTCD.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
26. RR Exhibit A. Concerning the proposed configuration of the median
nose at approx station 9+980.00;
B. Are you saying that you can pull the curb IN and the
existing gate will still be 4'-1" back of the face of curb?
C. It appears that you will need to relocate this gate to
attain the 4'-1" requirement.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
27. RR Exhibit A. Your General Note #1 must state the proposed of the
Existing timing settings for the railroad controller.
B. All wording in the GENERAL NOTES must be
ENGLISH ..... no KM/HR
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
28. RR Exhibit A. You will need to complete form 'Guide for Determining
Time Requirements for Traffic Signal Preemption at
Highway-Rail Grade Crossings. (form attached)
B. The completion of this form will decide the need for
advance or simultaneous preemption.
C. You must fill out this form and send it in with this
agreement.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
29. RR Exhibit Your Typical Section for the Railroad shows underdrains and
fabric membrane. Show these notes to say ". .... IF
REQUIRED BY THE RAILROAD" Some railroads do not use
v Action Codes Dispositioned By:
A - Agree, Designer will comply D - Delete, Reviewer Withdraws Comment Title:
C - Disagree, Designer and E - Exception, Resolution Required Date:
Reviewer Resolution Required N/A - Not Applicable
II \1'1 II illJll llJfl\l' I:1 :'11,vt~,w\l' I{l\:'~u I I hlld I luvh~w\(',l,l~4Jlhll,ll\l' Ill :'llll I Ilull f;l~lnn,,]lul ~f/f':,
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DALLAS COUNTY CMAQ PROGRAM
Project:: CMAQ Project 10 Submittal2nd Final Review Date: June 28, 2001 I Sheet: 8 I of 8
Reviewer: Consolidated Organization: PM/E Reviewer Telephone Number: (214) 747-6336 x 28
ItemINo. SheetPage Ne.No. IC°mment ' (state fully acti°n required ' i'e'' clarify' change'add, delete, etc. Response I Action
these drainage items.
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
30. RR Exhibit On the right side of the northbound lanes, you show the
railroad warning signals "in" the existing sidewalk. Is that
their true location?
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
31. RR Exhibit A. Railroad Controls Limited has indicated that a new,
longer cantilever signal may be required on the right of
the northbound lanes.
B. Check this with Scott Booker
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
32. RR Exhibit Jan Seidner comments at DART (214-749-2917):
A. The entire crossincl lenclth must be replaced in this
project. We can not add on a few feet of concrete to an
existing rubber crossing.
B. All railroad work on crossinq surface on this project must
be done by a STATE contractor. So all the GENERAL
NOTES referring to the work on the crossing surface will
say 'work to be done by the State's contractor'.
C. DART must appear on the Exhibit A drawings (this is
what the consultant has at this time).
Resolve with Dexter Hollabaugh, TxDOT 214-320-6232
v Action Codes Dispositioned By:
A - Agree, Designer will comply D - Delete, Reviewer Withdraws Comment Title:
C - Disagree, Designer and E - Exception, Resolution Required Date:
Reviewer Resolution Required N/A - Not Applicable
H:~P11Finall00~l 1-2Review~P10~2nd Final Review\Consolidated~10 2nd Final Comments. DOC