public meeting summary report rv2 - dart.org · 2016. 2. 11. · public meeting summary report d2...

Public Meeting Summary Report D2 Project Development Kick‐Off Public Meetings held on December 16‐17, 2015 February 3, 2016

This Report was prepared for DART General Planning Consultant Six Managed by HDR

Public Meeting Summary Report

February 3, 2016 | i

Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) sponsor this

work.

The content of this report is draft material, specific to Project Development for the Dallas CBD Second

Light Rail Alignment (D2) project and does not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of DART or

FTA at the time of publication. This report does not constitute a contract, standard, specification, or

regulation.


February 3, 2016 | ii

Contents

1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Purpose of Report ........................................................................................................................ 1

2 Public Meetings ..................................................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Notification Efforts ....................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Meeting Format ........................................................................................................................... 4

2.3 Attendance and Comments .......................................................................................................... 4

Appendices

Appendix A. Meeting Notifications ................................................................................................................ 6

Appendix B. Meeting Materials ..................................................................................................................... 7

Appendix C. Sign-In Sheets .......................................................................................................................... 8

Appendix D. Public Comments Received as of 1/15/16 (Comment Cards & Emails) .................................. 9

Appendix E. Meeting Minutes Q&A ............................................................................................................. 10


February 3, 2016 | 1

1 Introduction

Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) held two public meetings on December 17, 2015 regarding

its Dallas CBD Second Light Rail Alignment (D2) project. The purpose of the public meetings

was to update the public on current status of the D2 project and to provide information on

upcoming efforts and schedule for the Project Development phase of the project. This also

included a presentation on recent policy action by both the DART Board of Directors and

Dallas City Council regarding resolutions adopting a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)

alignment and two design options for the eastern segment of the project.

1.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to summarize the public meeting discussion, public questions,

and responses provided during the two public meetings. DART held public meetings and

advisory committee meetings between December 16, 2015 and December 17, 2015,

regarding the kick‐off of Project Development for the D2 alignment and Supplemental Draft

Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS). This report is to document the public meetings

and comments during this time. These materials will be also be incorporated by reference

into the SDEIS.

The two public meetings were structured as “kick‐off” meetings introducing to the public

the next phase of the D2 project, Project Development. Project Development activities were

launched in November 2015, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

guidelines for their Capital Investment Grant Core Capacity Grant program. One of the

primary purposes of these two public meetings was to inform and describe to the public

recent action taken by the DART Board of Directors on September 22, 2015, approving a

Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) alignment for the Dallas CBD Second Light Rail Alignment

(D2) project. In addition, a key objective of the meetings was to obtain feedback on

potential issues to address in the SDEIS.

The LPA is Alternative B4 Lamar‐Young with a Modified Jackson Alignment (see following

figure), which incorporates an alignment shift from the original B4 Alternative east of Dallas

City Hall to address potential impacts along Young Street. The resolution passed by the

Board states that:

DART will continue to examine LPA routing options and station locations as required by

the federal funding process.

DART will continue to review feasibility for an extension of D2 (a tunnel spur to the

south), as well as other options, to provide access to the Dallas Convention Center and

High Speed Rail.



DART staff will advance these elements into Project Development including Preliminary

Engineering (PE) and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

documentation.

D2 Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)

2 Public Meetings

Two public meetings were held on December 17, 2015. The times and locations for the

public meetings were as follows:

12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. – DART Headquarters, 1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas

6:30 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. – First Presbyterian Church of Dallas, Byrd Hall, 1835 Young Street,

Dallas, Texas

The format for each public meeting was identical. An open house format, intended to be

informal and allow one‐on‐one discussion with project technical representatives, was held

for the first 30 minutes of the meeting. This was followed by an approximate 30 minute

presentation by DART staff, followed by a question and answer discussion with the meeting



attendees. Meeting attendees were encouraged to complete written comment cards

allowing their comments to be included in meeting documentation. Copies of the submitted

and mailed comment cards are included in Appendix D of this report.

Public Meeting at DART Headquarters, December 17, 2015, 12:00 p.m.

Public Meeting at First Presbyterian Church, December 17, 2015, 6:30 p.m.



2.1 Notification Efforts

Notifications for the public meetings were posted across multiple media platforms, in both

English and Spanish. The public was notified by newspaper, rider alerts, and DART

publications and social media sites (DART website, Twitter, and Facebook). Appendix A

contains copies of meeting notices and publications, which included:

Advertisements in The Dallas Morning News, Al Dia, Dallas Weekly, Dallas Chinese

News.

Press Release to Media Outlets (TV, radio), and to more than 200 Public Information

Officers (PIO) of organizations within the DART Service Area.

Social Media notifications via Twitter, Facebook, Nextdoor.

Notices via DART text alert services and the DART Daily blog.

12,500 Rider Alerts were distributed at DART facilities and on DART buses and

trains.

Meeting notices posted on the DART Website: www.DART.org, www.DART.org/D2.

2.2 Meeting Format

Project Development kick‐off meetings were held at DART Headquarters and at First

Presbyterian Church of Dallas. Display boards were available both before and after the

presentation and general Q&A, so that individuals could meet with project team members

individually or as small groups for specific questions. After the presentation, a general Q&A

was held and attendees were encouraged to view display boards up close and take

comment cards to provide feedback. Attendees were also encouraged to use the

[email protected] email platform for providing feedback throughout the Project Development

phase. The presentation, display boards and other meeting materials are attached in

Appendix B of this summary report.

2.3 Attendance and Comments

Public meetings were held at 12:00 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. on December 17, 2015. The 12:00

p.m. meeting was held at DART Headquarters and 82 people attended. The 6:30 p.m.

meeting was held at First Presbyterian Church of Dallas and 72 people were in attendance.

As a result of these meetings, several comment cards and emails were submitted. Appendix

D contains a summary of the comments. Meeting minutes with Q&A for each meeting are

attached in Appendix E of this report.



General themes of comments at the meeting were:

Administrative questions regarding the availability of reports and work products.

East End segment timing of evaluation and decision.

Alignment specific questions related to options considered during the Alternatives

Analysis process and below vs. at‐grade opportunities for the LPA.

Technical questions related to water table depth; earthquake issues, tunneling

method.

How property impacts are assessed and what is the schedule for property

acquisition.

Relationship to the Streetcar and High Speed Rail.

Traffic issues, including, will D2 alleviate special event congestion, and how would

LRT and automobiles operate within the same street.

Noise impacts and mitigations and how this is monitored over time.

Good urban design is essential.

D2 will bring increased activity to West End/Metro Center Stations; safety is of

concern.



Appendix A. Meeting Notifications

Dallas CBD Second Light Rail Alignment (D2) Public Meetings

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) have initiated the Project Development (PD) phase for the D2 project, which includes preparation of a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) and Preliminary Engineering (PE). The D2 Project consists of approximately 2.4 miles of at‐grade and below‐grade light rail alignment with up to five new light rail stations in the Central Business District of Dallas.

The purpose of the SDEIS is to evaluate the impacts of the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) alignment and of additional design options that will likely be identified as part of this process. These design options may result in new potential environmental and social impacts that were not explored in the original DEIS circulated for comment in March 2010.

Two Public Meetings will be held on Thursday, December 17, 2015: 12:00 p.m. •DART Headquarters, Board Room • 1401 Pacific Ave. • Dallas, TX 75202 6:30 p.m. • First Presbyterian Church, Byrd Hall • 1835 Young St. • Dallas, TX 75201

More information of the project and how to provide input on design options and potential environmental and community impact issues can be found at www.DART.org/D2.



Appendix B. Meeting Materials

Dallas CBD Second Light Rail Alignment (D2)

Project Development Kick-Off Meetings December 17, 2015

1

Agenda

• Welcome/Introductions • Project History • D2 Project Overview • Project Development (PD) Phase – Preliminary Engineering (PE) – Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

• Your Role in PD • Schedule • How to Stay Involved

2

Why are we Here?

• To kick off the 2-year Project Development (PD) phase for the D2 project

• To explain what Project Development entails and how you can be involved

• To collect your comments on issues for consideration during the environmental process

Number of Options

Level of Project Detail

Planning Engineering Project Development 3

Project Team

• DART Team Members – Steve Salin, Vice President – Ernie Martinez, D2 Project Manager – Chris Walters, D2 Community Engagement

• Consultant Team Members – Tom Shelton, Program Manager – Steve Knobbe, Project Manager – Michelle Dippel, Environmental Lead – Israel Crowe, Engineering Lead

4

Project History

5

Locally Preferred Alternative

6

DART Board Resolution • Direction included: – DART will continue to examine

LPA routing options and station locations as required by federal funding process

– DART will continue to review feasibility for an extension of D2 as a tunnel spur to the Convention Center and proposed High Speed Rail

– DART staff will advance these elements into Project Development

d

7

Project Development Phase

• Project Development is the first phase of the federal funding process federal funding process

Project Development Phase

• What is Project Development? – Two year phase of the FTA process – Preliminary Engineering (PE) to a 30% level – Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in accordance

with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) • Why is it important? – Establish Project Budget for the Federal Grant – Identifies Project Impacts and Mitigation

Commitments – Refines the project for Engineering and Construction

Phase 9

Project Development Phase Preliminary Engineering (PE)

• PE is the first stage of design – Project will be developed to 30% level

• Alignment • Tunnel section • Utilities, Subsurface • Station Design • Street Modifications • Right-of-way requirements • Construction approach

– Future phases will do final design from 30-100% 10

Project Development Phase Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

• Original Draft EIS published in March 2010 – Initial assessment of potential impacts for multiple

alternatives • Supplemental Draft EIS will be prepared for the

D2 Project – Why? – To address public, agency, stakeholder comments on

the DEIS – To use more current data to reassess potential

impacts within the project corridor – To assess potential impacts of additional options in

the East segment not included in 2010 DEIS

11 12

Environmental Categories

13

parks

14

Historic

15

N/V

16

Traffic

17

How will East Segment design options be assessed in the EIS process?

• Supplemental DEIS will: – Assess Full LPA Corridor, Design Options, and tunnel spur

• SDEIS Review Period – 45-day comment period and Public Hearings

• Final EIS will: – Document the Full Project with final alignment – 30-day notice of availability

0 day ot ce o a a ab ty

18

19

Overall Project Schedule

20

How to Stay Involved

• Attend project meetings • Request Group/Organization briefings • View materials and progress on

www.DART.org/D2 • Comments? Email [email protected] – Provide comments early on key issues that DART

should address in the process

21

What we need from you today • Review presentation

materials and displays – Schedule/Process – Environmental Issues – Traffic/Engineering

• Share your comments with D2 team members

• Provide written comments – Turn in comments today

or mail to DART – Email comments to

[email protected] 22

23

DALLAS CBD SECOND LIGHT RAIL ALIGNMENT (D2)

DART launched the D2 Study in 2007 to identify and evaluate a range of transit improvements in the Dallas Central Business District (CBD). The D2 Study focused on identifying the second phase of major transit improvements in Downtown Dallas. The improvements will ensure high quality transit service as the DART system expands to meet growing needs by providing additional capacity and operational flexibility in the Central Core. In addition, it is about improving mobility and circulation to, through and within the CBD, serving local and regional mobility needs.

The D2 Study was advanced and completed in two phases. Phase One of the study included an Alternatives Analysis (AA) and four alternatives were selected for further study and included in a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The AA/DEIS effort was completed in May 2010 after a 45-day comment period on the DEIS. Phase Two continued the AA effort due to public and agency comments on the AA/DEIS and changed conditions in downtown Dallas. These changed conditions include the new Dallas Streetcar and the proposed High Speed Rail, which led to new and refined alternatives. The Phase Two effort culminated with the selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative (see Page 2) after an evaluation process and public comment.

D2 Pro jec t Development Phase

PROJECT BACKGROUND

DECEMBER 2015

PROJECT HISTORY

D2 STUDY LAUNCHED BY DART AND FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA) TO EVALUATE A RANGE OF TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS, INCLUDING A SECOND LIGHT RAIL ALIGNMENT.

DART INITIATED PHASE TWO OF THE PROJECT TO CONTINUE THE AA STUDY BASED ON PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE AA/DEIS AND CHANGED CONDITIONS. NEW D2 ALTERNATIVES, AS WELL AS REFINEMENTS, ARE CONSIDERED.

DART HELD PUBLIC MEETINGS TO PRESENT THE ALTERNATIVES AND REFINEMENTS.

PHASE ONE OF THE STUDY INCLUDED AN ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS (AA) AND CONCLUDED WITH A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS).

THE DART BOARD APPROVES THE LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE (LPA) AS B4 - LAMAR/YOUNG/JACKSON STREET.

2010

2013

ECONOMIC DOWNTURN RESULTS IN THE D2 PROJECT BEING DEFERRED TO POST YEAR 2030.

FTA GIVES APPROVAL TO DART TO INITIATE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (PD) FOR THE D2 PROJECT.

D2 PROJECT IDENTIFIED AS CANDIDATE FOR NEW FTA CORE CAPACITY FUNDING PROGRAM.

2007

2015 DART HELD PUBLIC MEETINGS TO PRESENT EVALUATION RESULTS FOR THE PHASE TWO AA EFFORT.

OVERVIEW OF PROJECT CORRIDORThe DART Board of Directors approved the Locally Preferred Alternative for the Second CBD Light Rail Alignment (D2) on September 22, 2015. The LPA is Alternative B4 Lamar-Young with a Modified Jackson Alignment (see figure below), which incorporates an alignment shift from the original B4 Alternative east of Dallas City Hall to address potential impacts along Young Street. The resolution passed by the Board states that:

• DART will continue to examine LPA routing options and station locations as required by the federal funding process.• DART will continue to review feasibility for an extension of D2 (a tunnel spur to the south), as well as other options, to

provide access to the Dallas Convention Center and High Speed Rail.• DART staff will advance these elements into Project Development including Preliminary Engineering (PE) and Supplemental

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) documentation.

For this effort, the study area will be divided into three segments: West, Central, and East. The SDEIS will address a no build alternative to serve as a baseline, the full project corridor, and design options in the East segment. A description of each segment is below:

WEST SEGMENT | VICTORY STATION TO METRO CENTER STATIONThis segment includes the alignment between Victory Station and the proposed Metro Center Station. The alignment follows the DART owned right-of-way to the proposed Museum Way Station immediately north of Woodall Rodgers Freeway and then generally follows Lamar Street in a below-grade alignment to the proposed Metro Center Station in the vicinity of the existing West End Station.

CENTRAL SEGMENT | METRO CENTER STATION TO GOVERNMENT CENTER STATION, INCLUDING THE CONVENTION CENTER TUNNEL SPURThis segment continues under Lamar and transitions back to the surface in the vicinity of Field and Young and ends at the proposed Government Center Station near Dallas City Hall. This segment also includes the proposed below-grade light rail connection under Lamar to the existing Convention Center Station and proposed High Speed Rail.

EAST SEGMENT | GOVERNMENT CENTER STATION TO DEEP ELLUM STATIONThis segment is the longest and includes the LPA corridor and two design options. From the Government Center Station, the at-grade LPA alignment transitions Jackson Street and continues to IH 345. The two design options between Ervay Street and IH 345 include Wood Street and Young Street. The SDEIS will evaluate all three corridors and the inclusion of up to two potential stations between Government Center Station and the Deep Ellum junction.

DALLAS CBD SECOND LIGHT RAIL ALIGNMENT (D2) | DALLAS, TX

WHY ARE WE DOING A SDEIS?

The original Draft EIS identified the need and purpose of the project, a range of alternatives to be considered, and the potential social, economic and environmental impacts of the alternatives. Positive, negative and temporary impacts were evaluated. The DEIS was an initial assessment of the project and key issues - such as noise impacts, economic effects, historic resources, air quality, parks, and traffic.

FTA and DART are initiating the development of a SDEIS for two primary reasons. First, based on comments received from the public and stakeholders, additional alternatives analysis has been conducted and as a result, new design options on the east end of the project as well as a potential connection to the Convention Center need to be considered and evaluated. Second, the AA/DEIS was published over five years ago and the project area conditions have changed since that time. The data used to analyze the impacts identified in the AA/EIS may need to be updated and incorporated into the SDEIS.

WHAT IS PROJECT DEVELOPMENT?

Now that an LPA has been approved, DART has been authorized by the FTA to enter the Project Development phase. Project Development is an approximately 24-month effort and will include preparation of the SDEIS to assess the benefits, impacts and costs of the project and of routing options in the eastern end of downtown. The SDEIS will be made available to the public for review and comment, during which time DART will hold public meetings and a formal public hearing on the project. Based on the SDEIS and public input a single project will be documented in a Final EIS/Record of Decision (ROD). The Final EIS/ROD will outline mitigation commitments to address identified impacts, and following approval from FTA, the environmental process will conclude. A mitigation monitoring program will be established and incorporated into Engineering and Construction as the project proceeds.

The FTA Process is shown below:

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING

FULL FUNDING GRANT

AGREEMENT

Complete environmental review process including developing and reviewing alternatives, selecting locally preferred alternative (LPA), and adopting it into the fiscally constrained long-range transportation plan

Gain commitments of all non-New Starts funding

Complete sufficient engineering and design

Construction

LEGEND FTA Approval FTA Evaluation, Rating & Approval

UNDER MAP21

Project Development will be kicked-off through a round of public meetings in December. Project updates will be provided as well as details regarding the Project Development phase and the proposed schedule for D2.

Project Development Kick-Off MeetingsThursday December 17, 201512:00pm - 1:30pm | DART Headquarters, Board Room, 1401 Pacific Ave6:30pm - 8:00pm | Downtown Dallas First Presbyterian Church, Byrd Hall, 1835 Young Street

In addition to Public Meetings, DART will be holding regular meetings with a Stakeholder Working Group. This group consists of agency and city staff, property owners, and developers, as well as others with a specific interest in the project. An inter-agency meeting focused on the issues to be assessed in the SDEIS willalso be held in December.

If you prefer, you can e-mail comments to [email protected] or visit www.DART.org/D2 for more information.

Anyone who has an interest in the D2 Project isencouraged to participate in Project Development. DART will use your input to refine the LPA and analyze the potential impacts and benefits of the proposed project. Please submit written information and comments to:

COMMENTSAttention: Ernie MartinezDART PlanningP.O. Box 6601631401 Pacific AvenueDallas, Texas 75202-7232 [email protected]

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION HOW CAN I PROVIDE COMMENTS?

DEC

17

Additional meetings and opportunities for public and stakeholder comment will be providedthroughout the process. Project Development will focus on developing more detailedPreliminary Engineering (PE) to support the SDEIS. The PE/SDEIS effort will refine the preferred alternative, as well as evaluate additional routing options along Young, Wood and Jackson Streets within the EIS process.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE?

The FEIS/ROD is expected to be approved in the Summer of 2017.

2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6 2 0 1 7

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PHASE

PUBLIC & AGENCY INVOLVEMENT

PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

10-20% PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

30% PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

SUPPLEMENTAL DEIS

EXISTING CONDITIONS

IMPACT ASSESSMENT

MITIGATION OPTIONS

FULL CORRIDOR & DESIGN OPTIONS

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

FINAL EIS

FULL CORRIDOR & SELECTED DESIGN OPTION

MITIGATION COMMITMENTS

FTA RECORD OF DECISION

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM*

PD KICKOFF MEETINGS

PUBLIC MEETING: EXISTING CONDITIONS/ISSUE IDENTIFICATION AT 10% PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

IMPACT ASSESSMENT FINDING/ MITIGATION OPTIONS AT 20% PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

PUBLIC HEARING FOR SDEIS

ANTICIPATED KEY MILESTONE MEETINGS

*THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM WILL CONTINUE THROUGH PROJECT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION.

Dallas CBD Second Light Rail Alignment (D2)

Meeting Display Boards

December 2015 Meetings

Does not include scroll plot maps used at the meetings.



Appendix C. Sign-In Sheets



Appendix D. Public Comments Received as of 1/15/16 (Comment Cards & Emails)

General Public Comments Received through January 12, 2016

Commenter Last

Name

Commenter First

Name Comment Date Comment Format Comment Summary

Melton Bud 12/17/2015 Comment Form

Concerns regarding "gap" between Harwood and Ellum. Any

chance of considering a trolley into Deep Ellum?

Cartwright Dianne 12/17/2015 Comment Form

Consideration should be given to an alternate route that

does not bisect FPC and the Stewpot ministry.

Flores Cynthia 12/17/2015 Comment Form

Consider an alternative along Jackson St. by the Farmer's

Market; least path of resistance.

Otto Eleanor 12/17/2015 Comment Form

Advocates for the B4 alternative; concerned about FPC

ministry to the homeless if the rail separates the church

from the properties to the south.

May Dallas 12/21/2015 Email

Concerns regarding service reliability in the event of an

accident and at at-grade crossings.

Emery Bob 1/12/2016 Email

Material included in the December 2015 meetings did not

include the Santa Fe #1, #2, #3, and historic properties.


The sounding of the train’s horn will introduce a quality of

life issue for residents and businesses adjacent to the rail.


The proposed alignment would introduce vibration issues to

the structure of Santa Fe #3. SoCo lofts proposed an

Alternate West Alignment.


The proposed alignment would introduce vibration issues to

the structure of Santa Fe #2 and is below ground parking

structure. SoCo lofts proposed an Alternate West Alignment.


The proposed route would require the demolition of the

Aloft Hotel's conference space and introduce vibration into

the structure of Santa Fe #4. SoCo lofts proposed an



The closure of Wood St. and proximity of the D2 alignment

exit tunnel would block the only access to the below grade

parking of Santa Fe #2. SoCo lofts proposed an Alternate

West Alignment.


Closure of Wood Street and the D2 alignment may result in

the potential loss of access to Griffin Street Parking Garage.

SoCo lofts proposed an Alternate West Alignment.


The proposed D2 alignment exit tunnel blocks pedestrian

traffic between Santa Fe #2 and #4 and #3 and #4. SoCo lofts

proposed an Alternate West Alignment.


The proposed route at the southwest corner of the D2

alignment negatively impacts Wood St. by closing it to

through traffic between Griffin and Field St. SoCo lofts



Proposed D2 alignment would impact the below grade

residential parking structure of Santa Fe #2. SoCo lofts



The proposed line creates an obstruction that would limit

future development opportunities. SoCo lofts proposed an



The proposed route would require the demolition and

removal of the Aloft Hotel's conference space. SoCo lofts



Proposed alignment would impact the below grade

residential parking structure of Santa Fe #2. The proposed

route has the potential to demolish portions of this

structure. SoCo lofts proposed an Alternate West Alignment.


The proposed D2 alignment exit tunnel blocks pedestrian

traffic between Santa Fe #3 and Santa Fe #4. SoCo lofts



The proposed D2 alignment exit tunnel blocks vehicle

through route to access the entry canopy and disabled

access to Santa Fe #4. SoCo lofts proposed an Alternate

West Alignment.


The proposed line creates an obstruction that would limit

future development opportunities. SoCo lofts proposed an



The proposed alignment would cut through revenue

generating businesses and would lose leasable space as a

result. SoCo lofts proposed an Alternate West Alignment.


Comment is to raise awareness of the utility lines that serve

Santa Fe properties #1, #2, #3, and #4. SoCo lofts proposed

an Alternate West Alignment.

Note: This list only includes comments received within a month of the December public meetings. Comments received after that date are not included

in this public meeting summary but will be tracked and addressed as part of the SDEIS development.


February 3, 2016 | 10

Appendix E. Meeting Minutes Q&A

Meeting Minutes Project: DART D2

Subject: Project Development Kick‐Off Meeting, 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.

Date: Thursday, December 17, 2015

Location: DART, 1401 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, TX

Attendees: Steve Salin, DART Ernie Martinez, DART Chad Edwards, DART Kay Shelton, DART John Hoppie, DART Chris Walters, DART

Tom Shelton, GPC6 Program ManagerSteve Knobbe, GPC6 D2 Project Manager Luke Bathurst, GPC6 Deputy Program Manager Michelle Dippel, GPC6 Environmental Lead Israel Crowe, GPC6 D2 Engineering Lead Ian Bryant, GPC6 Engineering Team

Following a welcome and introductions, DART Staff made a PowerPoint presentation, which was

followed by a comment and Q&A session.

Question: Why can’t the proposed Government and Harwood stations be below grade?

DART Answer: As part of Alternatives Analysis (AA), the alternatives ranged in cost from $300‐400

Million to $1 Billion and it was costly to develop tunnel options whose stations were below grade

through this area.

Question: Is it possible to use the existing tunnel under City Hall near Marilla?

DART Answer: A subsurface cavern exists in 3rd level below City Hall; however it cannot be used within

the B4‐Lamar/Young/Jackson Alternative.

Question/Comment: Concern that proposed alignment will repeat mistakes made on first Bryan/Pacific

alignment. Why not subway?

DART Answer: Light Rail Transit (LRT) is not heavy rail and is an alternate to a deeper subway system,

and has flexibility for integration into urban areas. That is why DART selected LRT as technology many

years ago.

Question/Comment: Map shows potential Farmers Market Station on some alignments but not the

Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA).

DART Answer: the proposed station along LPA route would be on Jackson, east of Ervay. New routes on

Jackson or Wood were explored for a limited amount of time before the LPA was selected. This process

now will further study the LPA and options. DART Board Resolution included direction to continue to

consider design options in eastern segment to ensure feasibility. DART will also continue to review

feasibility for spur to convention center.

Question: For 50 year historical mark, when does the 50 years start for a resource to be considered

historic?

DART Answer: Date depends on service begin date, which is late 2021 for this project. So 1971.

Question: On future maps, can you show existing and future streetcar to understand how the whole

system works together. How does Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) take into account safety and

noise requirements?

DART Answer: Both safety and noise are addressed in the EIS. DART will work with all parties (City,

TxDOT) to identify and mitigate impacts. Also will work with stakeholders in downtown for input specific

to certain properties.

Question: Why can’t there be a below ground station at City Hall?

DART Answer: Options considered earlier used 3rd level of parking structure at City Hall for use as a rail

station. However, that only worked with some alternatives which were costly and had residential

impacts.

Question/Comment: Concern about utilities like Oncor in the downtown area.

DART Answer: DART is also meeting with all utility companies in technical work groups to collect data

and input for this project. Will work to discover what is known and not known to gain further knowledge

during Preliminary Engineering. Crews will begin surveying almost immediately as project kicks‐off.

Question: Which carries more weight, cost or environmental impacts?

DART Answer: Both are balanced. The alignment cannot be so expensive that it is not feasible, but must

be balanced with reasonable anticipated impacts and mitigation.

Question/Comment: Letter written by Statler Hilton concerning new alignment affects on the hotel and

new construction.

DART Answer: DART is continuing dialogue with the owner. We are learning more about this new

construction and their plans and needs since the LPA was adopted. DART will continue to refine the

project so we can establish a workable, feasible alignment through that area.

Question: How does building underground affect properties above ground and their foundations?

DART Answer: There are many geologic conditions to be considered as part of our research.

Underground rail would fall within existing streets to minimize impacts. The Austin Chalk formation,

which is a good tunneling material, is in part of downtown.

There are two ways to tunnel and all options are being reviewed and considered at this point. The

design team will also reach out to the contracting community for dialogue and input.

Cut and cover: cut open ground, put rail in and cover. Tunnel will be 60 feet down at Metro

Center.

Tunnel boring: bore with a machine.

Question: What is present length of the proposed tunnel?

DART Answer: The tunnel itself is approximately a half‐mile with quarter‐mile transition zones on each

side.

Question: What is the present diameter of the proposed tunnel?

DART Answer: Diameter is not decided yet, discussion of single tunnel versus double bore and other

factors will be considered.

Question: Where is the water table and will tunneling affect table?

DART Answer: Depth of water table not known yet, but data will be collected.

Question: If water table is above tunnel, are there concerns water getting in tunnel?

DART Answer: There are various methods for design and construction to mitigate risk. Subsurface

geotechnical investigations will be done to collect data.

Question: How is Austin Chalk affected by moisture?

DART Answer: DART is not concerned at this point since research and design is not yet underway, but

happy to do a one‐on‐one discussion for further information.

Question: It seems like DART is in a rush to get things done? Is there time to do things more

environmentally friendly?

DART Answer: Project Development is two years, but we are also not starting from scratch. 18‐24

months is reasonable for the stage of the project we are in. Project Development includes an update to

the Draft Environmental Impact Statement completed in 2010.

Question: What happens if a possible “doomsday” scenario happens where no alignments work?

DART Answer: FTA provides oversight and DART has a conservative financial plan to help mitigate any

major issues. There is a shelf life for the environmental document, so if “the worst” happens, there

would be additional work done down the road to re‐evaluate, which means project delay and moving to

the back of the funding line.

Question: When will the High Speed Rail (HSR) train be built from Dallas to Houston?

DART Answer: HSR is expected to be completed in 2021‐2022, south of convention center; however it is

not a DART project and is being led by Texas Central Railway.

Question: What is the dashed line on the LPA map?

DART Answer: This line is a spur that branches off from D2 and stays in a tunnel under Lamar to the

Convention Center/Hotel and in the direction of the HSR line and its Dallas station. This will be

extremely useful during special events as it would link the American Airlines Center to the Convention

Center.

Meeting Minutes Project: DART D2

Subject: Project Development Kick‐Off Meeting, 6:30 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.

Date: Thursday, December 17, 2015

Location: First Presbyterian Church of Dallas, Byrd Hall, 1835 Young Street, Dallas, TX

Attendees: Steve Salin, DART Ernie Martinez, DART Chad Edwards, DART Kay Shelton, DART John Hoppie, DART Chris Walters, DART

Tom Shelton, GPC6 Program ManagerSteve Knobbe, GPC6 D2 Project Manager Luke Bathurst, GPC6 Deputy Program Manager Michelle Dippel, GPC6 Environmental Lead Israel Crowe, GPC6 D2 Engineering Lead Ian Bryant, GPC6 Engineering Team

Following welcome and introductions, DART Staff made a PowerPoint presentation, which was followed

by a comment and Q&A session. A summary of the Q&A session is provided below.

Question: What do you do to monitor noise as mats break down and trains get older?

DART Answer: As mitigation requirements are established, they are required to be maintained for the

life of the system. Maintenance is a high priority for DART and DART budgets for ongoing maintenance.

DART utilizes the Capital Asset Management system to sustain the system in a state of good repair.

Question: As alignments turn east, would they share the road with cars or would there be a physical

separation?

DART Answer: They would be separate; trains and cars would not operate in the same lane. Currently

many types of separations are in use. There are several blocks of transit only traffic, some streets have

parallel but separated one‐way traffic for cars to get to parking garages. Also, there are places where the

rail uses a median with traffic on both sides, as well as dedicated guideways from cars to maintain a

separation.

Question: Do you see this alignment alleviating congestion during special events?

DART Answer: Yes, this second alignment will provide a tremendous asset and flexibility for special

events (example: Texas/OU weekend). DART is also in the process of designing modifications to 28

stations to be able to accommodate 3 car trains, which could accommodate 50% more riders system‐

wide.

Question: Will the underground tunnel be difficult to do and maintain?

DART Answer: Understanding the subsurface geology will be imperative. Austin Chalk is known to be in

this area, which is a great material for tunneling.

There are two ways to tunnel and all options are being reviewed and considered at this point. Design

team will also reach out to the contracting community for dialogue and input.

Cut and cover: cut open ground, put rail in and cover. Tunnel will be 60 feet down at Metro

Center.

Tunnel boring: bore with a machine.

Question: Regarding the Wood and Jackson alternatives, are these surface level routes? They seem

narrow for rail, car and pedestrian traffic?

DART Answer: First, Jackson Street is part of the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA); Wood Street is a

design option. Part of the project development phase is working to review the LPA on Jackson to see

what can fit within the right‐of‐way, and then Wood and Young options to review these issues.

Question: Can you tunnel on Wood/Jackson?

DART Answer: This was ruled out due to cost for tunneling in this area.

Question: There has been a sink hole in the Aloft parking lot for several months, how does this affect

this project?

DART Answer: It does not affect it. We are aware of the underground tunnel at that location.

Question: Besides the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), what other printed materials are

available for review?

DART Answer: As we go through project, information will be made available for review and public

comment. Most documents will be considered working documents as they feed into the DEIS.

Question: What is the DART staff preference on the alignment? There seems to be a preference for

Young.

DART Answer: DART Staff does not have a preference on the alignment. Federal requirement is for the

project to define the most feasible/prudent alternative. We have one LPA and two design options to

asses so we can understand the issues better.

Question: Why don’t you start over on the DEIS rather than a Supplemental?

DART Answer: We talked with FTA about this. The DEIS evaluated most of the LPA corridor so updating

the 2010 document seemed to be the best approach. Planning phase work was only to a 1‐2% level, this

current phase will take project to a 30% design level with much greater detail which we can include in

the Supplemental DEIS.

Question: When should we start to see studies on the project?

DART Answer: Most likely March to May for beginning studies and working drafts, key materials will be

made available on the D2 website and at public meetings.

Question: What if none of the alternatives are viable or there are other changed conditions?

DART Answer: FTA provides oversight and DART has a conservative financial plan to help mitigate any

major issues. There is a shelf life for the environmental document, so if “the worst” happens, there

would be additional work done down the road to re‐evaluate, which means project delay and moving to

the back of the funding line.

Question: How will train lines be operated, and will DART communicate with users on the second

alignment to eliminate confusion?

DART Answer: The second alignment will offer operational flexibility and DART will work to effectively

communicate the services and how trains may switch lines under a new operating plan.

Question/Comment: There is a need for an express connection between DFW and the Convention

Center.

DART Answer: DART will look at options to provide more direct service (without transfers) between

these areas with the implementation of the second rail alignment, but in general the LRT system is not

set‐up to skip stops for express service.

Question: What is being done about increased earthquakes in Irving?

DART Answer: Structures are designed to fall within earthquake design requirements. These

requirements are strict enough to cover any potential activity in this area.

Question: Why can’t space at City hall that was excavated be used for an underground alignment and

station?

DART Answer: The Alternatives Analysis that was just completed evaluated an alignment that used the

3rd level cavern below City Hall as an option, but it was not recommended due to costs associated with a

longer tunnel and impacts to Farmers Market residential areas.

public meeting summary report rv2 - dart.org · 2016. 2. 11. · public meeting summary report d2...

Documents