REQUEST FOR SHPO CONSULTATION: Projects Subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and/or the Antiquities Code of Texas

Transcription

1 REQUEST FOR SHPO CONSULTATION: Projects Subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and/or the Antiquities Code of Texas Submission of this form only initiates consultation with the Texas Historical Commission, the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for Texas. The SHPO may require additional information to complete the review for some projects. FCC projects: this form should not be completed when submitting Form 620 or 621 for communications towers. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their undertakings on historic properties and to consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the undertaking. An undertaking is any action by or on behalf of a federal agency that has the potential to affect historic resources and includes funding, permits, or other approvals. Federal agencies are required to identify historic resources that may be affected and to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any adverse effects. The Section 106 regulations are codified in 36 CFR 800 and are available from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation website at Regulations allow 30 days upon receipt for SHPO review. The Antiquities Code of Texas (Title 9, Chapter 191 of the Texas Natural Resources Code) is intended to protect historic and archeological landmarks and is applicable to public lands owned by the state of Texas or a political subdivision of the state, including state agencies, counties, cities, school districts, and public colleges and universities, as well as other public authorities. Notification of the Texas Historical Commission is required before breaking ground at a project location on state or local public land. This is a new submission Complete all pages of this form and include required attachments. This is additional information relating to original submission made on or about Complete only the first page of this form and add any new information, including attachments. 1. Project Information PROJECT NAME PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT CITY PROJECT ZIP CODE(S) PROJECT COUNTY OR COUNTIES PROJECT TYPE (Check all that apply) Road/Highway Construction or Improvement Site Excavation Utilities & Infrastructure New Construction Repair, Rehabilitation or Renovation of Structure(s) Addition to Existing Structure(s) Demolition or Relocation of Existing Structure(s) None of these BRIEF PROJECT SUMMARY: Please provide a one or two sentence description to explain the project. More details will be provided separately in Part 5, the Project Work Description Attachment. 2. Project Contact Information PROJECT CONTACT NAME TITLE ORGANIZATION ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP PHONE For SHPO Use Only Track Review to: Date Stamp Below: Archeology Division: Reviewer: History Programs Division: Reviewer: Architecture Division: Reviewer:

2 3. Federal Involvement Does this project involve approval, permit, license, or funding from a federal agency? Yes (Please complete this section) No (Skip to next box) FEDERAL AGENCY FEDERAL AGENCY CONTACT PERSON ADDRESS FEDERAL PROGRAM, FUNDING, OR PERMIT TYPE: PHONE Has the federal agency (if other than HUD) formally delegated authority to consult with SHPO on the agency s behalf? Yes (Please attach delegation letter) No 4. State Involvement Does this project involve approval, permit, license, or funding from a state agency? Yes (Please complete this section) No (Skip to next box) STATE AGENCY STATE AGENCY CONTACT PERSON ADDRESS STATE PROGRAM, FUNDING, OR PERMIT TYPE: PHONE Will this project involve public land owned by the State of Texas or a political subdivision of the state? (State Agency, County, City, School District, Public Authority, Public College or University, etc.) Yes No CURRENT OR FUTURE OWNER OF THE PUBLIC LAND 5. Project Work Description Attach a detailed written description of the project that fully explains what will be constructed, altered, or demolished. Include architectural or engineering plans, site plans, specifications, or NEPA documents, as necessary, to illustrate the project. 6. Identification of Project Location and Area of Potential Effect (APE) The APE includes the entire area within which historic properties could be affected by the project. This includes all areas of construction, demolition, and ground disturbance (direct effects) and the broader surrounding area that might experience visual or other effects from the project (indirect effects). 1. Attach map(s) indicating the location and specific boundaries of the project. Road names must be included and legible. Identify the project location, boundaries, and APE on the map(s) as precisely as possible. Suggested maps may include USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle maps (or relevant portions thereof), tax maps, satellite images, etc. The number and types of map(s) will depend on the nature and complexity of the project as well as the extent of the APE. Projects involving ground disturbance must include the appropriate 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle. 2. Attach a brief written description of the APE, including a discussion of the potential for direct and indirect effects that might result from the project and the justification for the boundaries chosen for the APE. PROJECT NAME VER 0110

3 7. Identification of Historic Properties within the APE (Attach additional materials as necessary) A. Archeological Resources Does this project involve ground-disturbing activity? Yes (Please complete this section) No (Skip to Structures section) Describe the nature, width, length, and depth of the proposed ground-disturbing activity. Describe previous land use and disturbances. Describe the current land use and conditions. B. Structures Are there any structures, buildings, or designed landscape features (park, cemetery, etc.) 45 years old or older within the project area or APE? Yes No Is the project located within or adjacent to a district that is listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places? Eligible districts may include locally designated districts or areas identified in historic resource surveys. Yes, name of district: No Do not know If the Texas Historic Sites Atlas ( has been consulted, were previously identified architectural resources identified within the project area or APE? Yes No Did not consult Atlas If the answer to any of the above questions is yes, use the space below or provide an attachment indentifying each structure, building, designed landscape feature, or district within the APE that is 45 years old or older. Include an actual or estimated date of construction and the location of each of the features. Does the project involve the rehabilitation, alteration, removal, or demolition of any structure, building, designed landscape feature, or district that is 45 years old or older? Yes No If yes, include information with the attachments for Part 5: Project Work Description and Part 8: Photographs. 8. Photographs Attach clear, high-resolution color photographs that illustrate the project area and APE as defined in Section 6. Images from the internet are not acceptable due to low resolution. Photography should document the project area and properties within the APE, including clear views of any buildings or structures. Please number and label all photographs, and include a map or site plan labeled to show the location and direction of each view. Where applicable, include photographs of the surrounding area from the project site and streetscape images. Should your project entail the alteration of existing structures, please also provide photographs of the existing conditions of sites, buildings, and exterior and interior areas to be affected. 9. Consulting Parties/Public Notification (Section 106 only) Attach a description of the actions taken to notify the public or invite consultation with parties other than SHPO. Provide a summary of any consultation and comments received from consulting parties or the public. The SHPO is only one consulting party under Section 106. Refer to 36 CFR for information about other participants who are entitled to comment on the Section 106 process, including Native American tribes, interested parties, and the public. Consultation with the SHPO is not a substitution for consultation with Native American tribes. When identifying historic resources within the APE and determining the effect of an undertaking, applicants should consider consulting with the county historical commission and the local historic preservation officer, if any. PROJECT NAME VER 0110

4 10. Applicant s Determination of Effect (Section 106 only) An effect occurs when an action alters the characteristics of a property that qualify it for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, including changes to the property s location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Effects can be direct or indirect, and can be physical, visual, audible, or economic. They may include a change in ownership or change in use. No Historic Properties Affected based on 36 CFR 800.4(d)(1). Please provide the basis for this determination. No Adverse Effect on historic properties based on 36 CFR 800.5(b). Please explain why the criteria of adverse effect at 36 CFR 800.5(a)(1) were not found to be applicable for your project. Adverse Effect on historic properties based on 36 CFR 800.5(d)(2). Please explain why the criteria of adverse effect at 36 CFR 800.5(a)(1) were found to be applicable to your project. You may also wish to include an explanation of how these adverse effects might be avoided, minimized, or mitigated. In the space below or as an attachment, please explain the effect of the project on historic properties. Submit Completed Form and Attachments to: Via mail: Mark Wolfe State Historic Preservation Officer Texas Historical Commission PO Box Austin, TX Via hand delivery or private express delivery: Mark Wolfe State Historic Preservation Officer Texas Historical Commission 108 West 16 th St. Austin, TX Faxes and are not acceptable. For SHPO Use Only PROJECT NAME PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT CITY PROJECT ZIP CODE(S) PROJECT COUNTY OR COUNTIES PROJECT CONTACT NAME TITLE ORGANIZATION ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP PHONE VER 0110

5 July 17, 2012 Mark Wolfe Executive Director Texas Historical Commission P.O. Box Austin, Texas RE: Request for Initiation of SHPO Consultation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 for the Area Rapid Transit Cotton Belt Regional Rail,,, and Tarrant Counties, Texas. Dear Mr. Wolfe: URS Corporation (URS) is providing support to Area Rapid Transit (DART) to develop preliminary engineering and environmental documentation. The project consists of approximately a 26 mile section of track running in a northeasterly direction from north of /Fort Worth International Airport (DFW Airport) to central Plano. It passes through Tarrant,, and counties and includes the cities of Grapevine, Coppell, Carrollton, Addison,, Richardson, and Plano (see Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor, Project Location: Map Page 1 and 2). DART is taking a lead role and has contracted with URS for engineering and environmental tasks. DART is proposing to advance the project with a Local Environmental Assessment (EA) under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) procedures and fulfill requirements under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq., as amended). This letter is intended as coordination on the project for the Texas Historical Commission (THC), a request for establishment of proposed areas of potential effect (APE), and survey methodology for historic resources. The Cotton Belt Regional Rail alignment is designed as double tracking within the existing single track corridor. The alignment will have a 20 foot track center offset and a maximum design speed of 80 miles per hour with the majority of the horizontal alignment following closely to the existing freight track alignment. Lower design speeds were utilized in areas where existing constraints would not accommodate larger radius curves. The alignment alternatives will consist of at grade, retained earth, retained cut sections, tunnel sections, and aerial structures. The general vicinity of each station has been determined. However, it is undecided as to the type of design (i.e. Kiss and Ride, Park and Ride, Bus Lanes, etc.) for each station. This effort will be coordinated separately. URS Corporation 1950 N. Stemmons Freeway Suite 6000, Texas fax

6 July 17, 2012 Page 2 At this time, only 5% of the design is complete and has been submitted to DART and construction activities are anticipated to begin in The majority of the project area runs along existing tracks through commercial and industrial districts, as well as residential developments. The location of the project area is shown on Map Page 1 and 2. For your review, we have also enclosed a set of aerial maps with the proposed APE (Map Page 1 6). These maps do not illustrate previously recorded resources adjacent to or within the corridor. Description of Undertaking The URS design team divided the entire project corridor into three separate sections: Section 1 Section 1 begins on DFW Airport property, north of the central terminal area, and would connect with the proposed Fort Worth Transportation Authority (TEX Rail) route alignment on the Cotton Belt corridor. DART s Cotton Belt regional rail proceeds northeast and connects to the existing Cotton Belt freight track. It then heads east and crosses the Cottonwood Branch and its floodplain on aerial structure and continues under International Parkway, under Interstate Highway (IH) 635, and crosses Royal Lane and Freeport Parkway at grade. It continues east and crosses South Coppell Road at grade and is on an aerial structure over Grapevine Creek. It is on retained fill until it crosses South Denton Tap Road, where it is a grade separated aerial structure. The alignment then runs parallel to Belt Line Road and crosses Moore Road, Mockingbird Lane, MacArthur Boulevard, and Fairway Drive at grade. The profile gradually ascends on retained fill to aerial structure over two floodplain areas just west of the Elm Fork Branch of the Trinity River. Section 1 alignment then ends just before the Elm Fork Branch of the Trinity River. Section 1 has an additional alternative that deviates from the existing alignment in the vicinity of North Lake and the planned Cypress Waters mixed used development. The Cypress Waters alternative begins at South Coppell Road as a single track alignment on new location and veers to the southeast, generally following Southwestern Boulevard and relocated Belt Line Road. It is on 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. Section 2 Section 2 begins on structure over the Elm Fork Branch of the Trinity River, it then continues to run just north of Belt Line Road and under the President George Bush Turnpike and crosses Luna Road at grade. The alignment continues east, crosses the Hutton Branch of the Trinity River, then travels under IH 35E aerial bridges as well as under the DART Green Line aerial bridges. In the downtown Carrollton area, the northbound track alignment will have a 33 foot track center offset from the southbound track alignment to accommodate a center loaded platform configuration at the Downtown Carrollton Station. The station at downtown Carrollton will serve as the interface location with the DART Green Line. The alignment continues east toward Addison crossing the intersecting streets at grade. The alignment offset varies between 20 and

7 July 17, 2012 Page 3 30 feet to eliminate impacts to existing storage tracks in the Addison industrial area. In Addison, the alignment is on aerial structure over Midway Road. The Section 2 alignment ends at the southbound frontage road of the North Tollway. Section 3 Section 3 begins just west of the North Tollway and remains grade separated over the main lanes. It continues as double track and the centerlines are set at 16 foot track centers. The alignment crosses Knoll Trail Drive at grade, crosses over White Rock Creek, and then traverses slightly to the northeast so the alignment does not impact the existing Preston Road bridge columns. At this point, three profile options will be considered through a 2.6 mile section between Preston Road and Meandering Way in the North area. At grade option: This option would operate at grade through North and would use bridges at the three creek crossings locally known as McKamy Branch, Osage Branch Crossing #1, and Osage Branch Crossing #2. The alignment would cross the roadways of Davenport Road (twice), Campbell Road, Hillcrest Road, McCallum Boulevard, and Meandering Way at grade. Shallow trench option: This option combines a maximum trench depth with walls and berms to maintain a top of wall 15 feet over the rail with the use of culverts instead of bridges at the creek crossings of McKamy Branch, Osage Branch Crossing #1, and Osage Branch Crossing #2. The roadways of Davenport Road (twice), Campbell Road, Hillcrest Road, McCallum Boulevard, and Meandering Way would be grade separated over the rail alignment. Tunnel option: This option proposes a 2.6 mile tunnel section that starts west of Preston Road and ends west of Coit Road. It includes a 0.7 mile west portal, a 0.3 mile east portal, and a 1.6 mile tunnel. The tunnel would be located entirely within a limestone rock formation. Generally, the tunnel runs parallel to and below an unnamed tributary to White Rock Creek, which splits into the McKamy Branch and the Osage Branch. The tunnel crosses under the creek three times at McKamy Branch, Osage Branch Crossing #1, and Osage Branch Crossing #2. The depth of overburden above the tunnel crown is between 20 and 40 feet. The shallow cover areas are near the portal structures and below the creek crossings. After passing through the North area where three options are being considered, the alignment would pass under grade separated Coit Road. The alignment continues east and would cross Waterview Parkway, KCS Railway, Synergy Park Boulevard, Renner Road, and Custer Parkway at grade. The track centers vary between 16 and 33 feet to allow the placement of the center platform station that is located between Waterview Parkway and KCS Railway. The final piece of the Section 3 alignment begins at Alma Road and currently has two alternatives. The existing alignment alternative simply follows the Cotton Belt track alignment, travels under the existing President George Bush Tollway Bridge, crosses over US 75, interfaces with the DART Red Line and travels east terminating near Shiloh Road. The south (Richardson) alternative deviates from the existing alignment and veers southerly away from the President George Bush Tollway, crosses the floodplain and US 75 on an aerial structure, then changes direction and travels north and parallel to the DART Red Line. Near 12 th Street, the alignment

8 July 17, 2012 Page 4 then takes a sharp right turn to rejoin the existing Cotton Belt alignment just east of the DART Red Line and travels east terminating near Shiloh Road. Background Information for Historic Resources The Texas Historic Sites Atlas (THSA) was consulted to determine if any NRHP listed or previously documented buildings, structures, objects, or state historic markers lie within or near the proposed study area. An area extending approximately one half mile from the center of the existing and proposed right of way (ROW) was investigated. Table 1 presents the results of this research. Table 1. Previously Documented Historic Properties, THSA COUNTY ADDRESS NAME DESIGNATION DISTANCE 752 South Coppell Road, Coppell Residence at 752 South Coppell Road no designation (surveyed 1982) 457' 1038 South Elm Street, Carrollton Gravley Hardware (1910) no designation (surveyed 1982) 430' 1101 West Belt Line Road, Coppell Boatwright House (1905) no designation (surveyed 1982) 415' 1000 Denton Drive, Carrollton Dr. Blackburn House (1900) no designation (surveyed 1982) 538' 1011 Jackson Street, Carrollton 1201 Carroll Avenue, Carrollton 1203 Carroll Avenue, Carrollton 1319 Walnut Street, Carrollton 1101 Clint Street, Carrollton Residence at 1011 Jackson Street (1900) no designation (surveyed 1982) 747' Residence at 1201 Carroll Avenue (1900) no designation (surveyed 1982) 1140' Residence at 1203 Carroll Avenue (1900) no designation (surveyed 1982) 1140' Residence at 1319 Walnut Street (1915) no designation (surveyed 1982) 645' Residence at 1101 Clint Street (1915) no designation (surveyed 1982) 1282' 1501 Walnut Street, Carrollton A.T. Stewart House (1915) no designation (surveyed 1982) 1282' 1400 Rosemon Avenue, Carrollton J.C. Davis House (1915) no designation (surveyed 1982) 654' 1407 Rosemon Avenue, Carrollton 1208 Clint Street, Carrollton Residence at 1407 Rosemon Avenue (1910) no designation (surveyed 1982) 654' Residence at 1208 Clint Street (1910) no designation (surveyed 1982) 788' 1810 North Perry Road, Carrollton Hilltop Memorial Park Cemetery 400' 1805 North Perry Road, Carrollton Perry Cemetery (1897) Historic Texas Cemetery (2005); Historic Texas Marker (2005) 675' 1509 North Perry Road, Carrollton Perry Homestead (1909) Historic Texas Marker (1976) 275' 4803 Broadway Street, Addison Julian Street, Addison Commercial Building at 4803 Broadway (1905) no designation (surveyed 1982) 200' Residence at & Julian (1905) no designation (surveyed 1982) 50'

9 July 17, 2012 Page 5 COUNTY ADDRESS NAME DESIGNATION DISTANCE Julian Street, Addison 6800 McCallum Boulevard, Frank Jackson, Frank Jackson, 7659 Newt Drive, 7700 Ronnie Drive, Dickerson, Dickerson, 7758 Ronnie Drive, 7759 Ronnie Drive, 7767 Ronnie Drive, Address unknown, Plano Residence at Julian (1920) no designation (surveyed 1982) 100' Residence at 6800 Block McCallum (1910) no designation (date unknown) 745' Residence at Frank Jackson (1920) no designation (date unknown) 917' Institutional Building at Frank Jackson (1915) no designation (date unknown) 746' Residence at 7659 Newt Drive (1920) no designation (date unknown) 687' Residence at 7700 block Ronnie (1920) no designation (date unknown) 328' Commercial Building at Dickerson (1925) no designation (date unknown) 832' Institutional Building at Dickerson (1925) no designation (date unknown) 325' Residence at 7758 Ronnie Drive (1930) no designation (date unknown) 305' Residence at 7759 Ronnie Drive (1925) no designation (date unknown) 305' Residence at 7767 Ronnie Drive (1910) no designation (date unknown) 305' Old City Cemetery, (date unknown) Cemetery adjacent to track H Place and 12th Street, Plano Plano Cemetery Texas Historical Marker (1980) 1091' Recommendations for Historic Resource Investigations The proposed historic resource APE for the Cotton Belt Regional Rail line is 175 feet from the centerline for existing ROW. For areas requiring new ROW, the APE will be adjusted to 250 feet from the centerline. This APE will take into account potential physical and visual impacts that may result from the proposed undertaking. To date, the types of stations have not been determined. Therefore, it is recommended that coordination for the APE of the station locations be completed when engineering documents become available. It is recommended that a reconnaissance level survey of historic age resources within the proposed APE be performed for the Cotton Belt Regional Rail line. Per previous discussion with THC (personal communication between Linda Henderson and Erica Howard on March 18, 2011), URS recommends a survey of: all historic age resources that are at least 45 years from the let date of 2016 (construction date of 1968 or older); any civic buildings, projects, or structures, commercial, and institutional projects built in and before 1985; and

10 July 17, 2012 Page 6 any notable architect designed residences or neighborhoods; in lieu of documenting each individual tract house within a development, the development would be outlined and considered a district and given only one resource number. The reconnaissance survey will be performed by an architectural historian meeting the Secretary of Interior s qualifications. The resulting survey report will include, but is not limited to, the following information: Project description; Project area background and historic context, which may include research carried out at the following places: o local and county histories (obtained at the and Fort Worth public libraries, and municipal libraries in the project area); o,, and Tarrant County Appraisal District online records; o,, and Tarrant county plat records; o various internet resources; and o maps and aerial photographs (including USGS maps). Previously documented historic age resources within and immediately adjacent to the APE; Documentation of each historic age resource within the APE; including: o Address or location; o Historic and current name, if any; o Date of construction; o Style; o Historic and current use; o Property type and subtype; o Preliminary NRHP eligibility recommendations; o Condition; and o Digital photographs (minimum of two views) of each historic age resource. Summary and Recommendations. A draft report will be submitted to the THC for comment. Upon receipt of these comments, a final report will be drafted and sent to the THC. We are also recommending no reconnaissance level survey for station locations until the design of each station is determined. Station locations will then be surveyed as a future effort and will be coordinated with the THC. Request for Concurrence On behalf of DART, URS respectfully requests the concurrence of the THC regarding the recommendation of a historic age resource reconnaissance level survey, within a recommended APE of 175 feet from the centerline for existing ROW. For areas requiring new ROW, the APE will be adjusted to 250 feet from the centerline. In addition, URS requests station locations to be coordinated separately.

11 July 17, 2012 Page 7 If the proposed undertaking is altered such that the project has the potential to affect the adjacent historic age resources either physically, or by changing the setting in ways not covered by this coordination letter, DART will cease construction activities and not proceed with their undertaking until additional review and clearance by the THC has been completed. It is recognized that this letter does not meet coordination requirements for the archaeological survey. That effort is to be coordinated separately by the URS archaeological team. Sincerely, URS Corporation Brian Piascik Program Manager General Planning Consultant, DART C Cc: Steve Salin, DART John Hoppie, DART File Attachments References Texas Historic Sites Atlas (THSA) 2012 Various. Accessed 11 July 2012, available at

12 Denton Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Project Location Map Page 1 UV 190 Proposed Station Locations Cotton Belt Alignment Project Start North Lake Station Downtown Carrollton Station DFW Alignment Cypress Waters Alignment South (Richardson) Alignment 35E UV 121 Tarrant UV 26 DFW North Station 635 UV 114 UV 97 ± Miles Kilometers UV 12

13 Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Project Location Map Page 2 Denton n n 190 V U n UTD/Synergy Park Station 12th Street Station n Shiloh Road Station President George Bush Turnpike Station n Project End Proposed Station Locations Cotton Belt Alignment n Renner Village Station DFW Alignment Cypress Waters Alignment South (Richardson) Alignment n n n Preston Road Station Knoll Trail Station 75 Addison Station ± 1 2 Miles Kilometers 2

14 Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Proposed APE Map Page 1 of 6 S. Denton Tap Rd. UV 26 UV Royal Ln. Freeway Pkwy. Coppell Rd. Southwestern Blvd. Belt Line Rd. E. Beltline Rd. Sanders Loop Proposed Station Locations (to be coordinated at a later time) Cotton Belt Alignment DFW Alignment Cypress Waters Alignment South (Richardson) Alignment Cotton Belt Alignment 175-foot Centerline Buffer Alignment 250-foot Centerline Buffer Northwest Hwy. DFW North Station UV 114 UV UV International Pkwy. 635 ± 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet Miles

15 Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Proposed APE Map Page 2 of 6 Sandy Lake Rd. 3 Belt Line Rd. MacArthur Blvd. Luna Rd. S. Denton Tap Rd. E. Belt Line Rd. President George Bush Turnpike Sanders Loop Freeway Pkwy. Coppell Rd. S. Moore Rd. North Lake Station Mockingbird Ln. 2 Fairway Dr. Proposed Station Locations (to be coordinated at a later time) Cotton Belt Alignment DFW Alignment Cypress Waters Alignment South (Richardson) Alignment Cotton Belt Alignment 175-foot Centerline Buffer Alignment 250-foot Centerline Buffer Southwestern Blvd. E. Beltline Rd. 635 ± 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet Miles

16 Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Proposed APE Map Page 3 of 6 President George Bush Turnpike Downtown Carrollton Station Josey Ln. 3 Kelly Blvd. Marsh Ln. Keller Springs R Belt Line Rd. 35 Luna Rd. Midway Rd. Proposed Station Locations (to be coordinated at a later time) Cotton Belt Alignment DFW Alignment Cypress Waters Alignment South (Richardson) Alignment Cotton Belt Alignment 175-foot Centerline Buffer Alignment 250-foot Centerline Buffer Valwood Pkwy. ± 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet Miles

17 Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Proposed APE Map Page 4 of 6 Davenport Rd. Renner Village Station Marsh Ln. Keller Springs Rd. Midway Rd. North Tollway Addison Station Knoll Trail Dr. Knoll Trail Station 4 Preston Rd. UV 289 Davenport Rd. Preston Road Station McCallum Blvd. Hillcrest Rd. Meandering Way Campbell Rd. Coit Rd. Proposed Station Locations (to be coordinated at a later time) Cotton Belt Alignment DFW Alignment Cypress Waters Alignment South (Richardson) Alignment Cotton Belt Alignment 175-foot Centerline Buffer Alignment 250-foot Centerline Buffer Belt Line Rd. ± 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet Miles

18 75 Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Proposed APE Map Page 5 of 6 UV th Street Station UTD/Synergy Park Station Custer Pkwy. President George Bush Turnpike 5 UV 190 Renner Rd. Alma Rd. Plano Pkwy. President George Bush Turnpi Proposed Station Locations (to be coordinated at a later time) Cotton Belt Alignment DFW Alignment Cypress Waters Alignment South (Richardson) Alignment Cotton Belt Alignment 175-foot Centerline Buffer Alignment 250-foot Centerline Buffer Davenport Rd. McCallum Blvd. Renner Village Station Waterview Pkwy. Synergy Park Blvd. UV 5 Hillcrest Rd. Meandering Way Campbell Rd. Coit Rd. enport Rd. ad Station ± 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet Miles

19 Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Proposed APE Map Page 6 of th Street Station Jupiter Rd. 6 Shiloh Road Station Los Rios Blvd. Proposed Station Locations (to be coordinated at a later time) Cotton Belt Alignment DFW Alignment Cypress Waters Alignment South (Richardson) Alignment Cotton Belt Alignment 175-foot Centerline Buffer Alignment 250-foot Centerline Buffer Plano Pkwy. Shiloh Rd. Alma Rd. President George Bush Turnpike Station Rd. UV 5 ± 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet Miles