DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report FINAL REPORT Track A Extension Feasibility Study Phase II submitted to the Cecil County Office of Planning, Zoning & Parks submitted by Parsons Brinckerhoff Baltimore, Maryland in association with Gallop Corporation Remline Corporation Rummel, Klepper, & Kahl, LLP Sabra, Wang & Associates, Inc. October 2005 Track A Extension Feasibility Study—Phase II Final Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ IV 2 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 STUDY CORRIDOR ............................................................................................................... 1 2.2 ALTERNATIVES BEING CONSIDERED ..................................................................................... 4 3 PUBLIC OUTREACH PART I.................................................................................................. 4 3.1 MEETING MINUTES PROJECT COORDINATION MEETING #1 .................................................... 7 3.2 MEETING MINUTES PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING #1 ............... 8 3.3 MEETING MINUTES TAEFS2 MEETING—RAILROAD COORDINATION .................................... 10 3.4 MEETING MINUTES PUBLIC MEETING #1............................................................................. 12 4 RIDERSHIP DEMAND ........................................................................................................... 14 4.1 LAND USE & DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS ................................................................................. 14 4.2 PERRYVILLE PASSENGER SURVEY...................................................................................... 14 4.3 TRANSIT WARRANTS ......................................................................................................... 15 4.3.1 Transit Warrant Review ........................................................................................... 17 4.3.2 Transit Warrant Conclusion ..................................................................................... 19 4.4 PIVOT POINT ANALYSIS...................................................................................................... 19 4.4.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................ 19 4.4.1.1 Existing Commuter Rail Trips.............................................................................................19 4.4.1.2 Changes in Demographics.................................................................................................21 4.4.1.3 Pivot Point Procedure ........................................................................................................21 4.4.2 Pivot Point Conclusion............................................................................................. 22 4.5 H-1 MODEL FORECAST...................................................................................................... 22 4.5.1 H-1 Model Methodology........................................................................................... 22 4.5.2 Data Collection......................................................................................................... 23 4.5.3 Calibration................................................................................................................ 23 4.5.3.1 Employment Density ..........................................................................................................23 4.5.3.2 Distance .............................................................................................................................24 4.5.3.3 Calibration Results .............................................................................................................24 4.5.4 Future-Year Estimates............................................................................................. 25 4.5.4.1 Extend MARC Penn Line with Existing Service Levels (Scenario 1)..................................26 4.5.4.2 Extend MARC Penn Line with Augmented Service Levels (Scenario 2) ............................27 4.5.5 H-1 Model Conclusions............................................................................................ 28 4.6 SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 29 5 OPERATIONS ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 30 5.1 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ................................................................................................. 30 5.2 OPERATING CONSTRAINTS................................................................................................. 31 5.2.1 Track Access Considerations .................................................................................. 31 5.2.2 Service Planning Considerations............................................................................. 32 5.2.3 Interlockings............................................................................................................. 32 5.2.4 Labor Considerations............................................................................................... 32 5.2.5 Passenger Station Considerations .......................................................................... 33 5.2.6 Layover and Servicing Considerations .................................................................... 33 5.2.7 Indemnification Considerations................................................................................ 34 5.3 PASSENGER TRAIN ALTERNATIVES .......................................................................... 34 5.3.1 Scenario 1: Stop Amtrak Trains at Elkton................................................................ 34 5.3.2 Scenario 2: Extend Existing MARC Perryville Trains to Elkton ............................... 34 PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Track A Extension Feasibility Study (Phase II) Final Report 5.3.3 Scenario 2A: Extend Existing MARC Perryville Trains to Wilmington..................... 35 5.3.4 Scenario 3: Double Existing MARC Perryville Trains to Elkton............................... 37 5.4 FREIGHT TRAIN ALTERNATIVES................................................................................. 37 5.4.1 Existing Freight Operations and Trends .................................................................. 37 5.4.1.1 Proposed Physical Improvements......................................................................................38 5.4.1.2 Redundant Freight Access.................................................................................................39 5.5 SUMMARY...................................................................................................................... 39 6 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 41 6.1 PASSENGER FACILITIES.............................................................................................. 41 6.1.1 Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance............................................................ 41 6.1.2 Perryville Station (MP 59.4) ..................................................................................... 41 6.1.3 North East Station (MP 51.5)................................................................................... 42 6.1.4 Elkton Station (MP 44.8).......................................................................................... 42 6.2 TRACK ............................................................................................................................ 42 6.3 SIGNALS/TRAIN CONTROL .......................................................................................... 43 6.4 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM .................................................................................. 43 6.4.1 OCS Structures Three Tracks or Wider................................................................... 43 6.4.2 OCS Structures Two Tracks Wide........................................................................... 43 6.5 STRUCTURES................................................................................................................ 43 6.6 LAYOVER FACILITY ....................................................................................................... 43 6.7 CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE............................................................................................ 44 6.8 SUMMARY...................................................................................................................... 45 7 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS............................................................................................. 50 7.1 SOCIOECONOMIC............................................................................................................... 50 7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE.................................................................................................. 50 7.3 PARK AND RECREATION AREAS.......................................................................................... 51 7.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES ..................................................................................................... 51 7.5 NATURAL RESOURCES....................................................................................................... 53 7.5.1 Topography, Geology and Soils .............................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FY20-Fed-State-SOGR-Project-Recipients
    FY 2020 Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair Grant Program California — San Diego Next Generation Signaling and Grade Crossing Modernization Up to $9,836,917 North County Transit District Replaces and upgrades obsolete signal, train control, and crossing equipment on a 60-mile section of North County Transit District right-of-way the carrier shares with Amtrak intercity service and freight rail. Brings signal and train control components into a state of good repair, including installing new signal houses, signals, and cabling. Replaces components at more than 15 grade crossings along the corridor. California — Pacific Surfliner Corridor Rehabilitation and Service Reliability Up to $31,800,000 Southern California Regional Rail Authority Rehabilitates track, structures, and grade crossings in Ventura County and northern Los Angeles County on infrastructure used by Amtrak intercity service, Metrolink commuter service, and BNSF freight service. Work for member agency Ventura County Transportation Commission includes track, tie, ballast, and culvert replacements, grade crossing rehabilitation, and tunnel track and structure replacements. Reduces trip times, increases reliability, and improves safety by reducing need for slow orders and conflicts at grade crossings in the corridor. Connecticut — Walk Bridge Replacement Up to $79,700,000 Connecticut Department of Transportation & Amtrak Replaces the Connecticut-owned movable Norwalk River Bridge, built in 1896, with two, independent, two-track, vertical lift rail bridges in Norwalk, Connecticut. Includes associated embankment and retaining wall improvements on the bridge approaches, new catenary structures, and signal system upgrades. The existing bridge is beyond its useful life and prone to malfunctions, especially during opening or closing. The replacement will reduce slow orders, reduce the risk of service disruptions, and improve resiliency to extreme weather events.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transportation
    TRANSPORTATION NETWORK DIRECTORY FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND ADULTS 50+ MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MD PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Montgomery County, Maryland (‘the County’) cannot guarantee the relevance, completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the information provided on the non-County links. The County does not endorse any non-County organizations' products, services, or viewpoints. The County is not responsible for any materials stored on other non-County web sites, nor is it liable for any inaccurate, defamatory, offensive or illegal materials found on other Web sites, and that the risk of injury or damage from viewing, hearing, downloading or storing such materials rests entirely with the user. Alternative formats of this document are available upon request. This is a project of the Montgomery County Commission on People with Disabilities. To submit an update, add or remove a listing, or request an alternative format, please contact: [email protected], 240-777-1246 (V), MD Relay 711. MetroAccess and Abilities-Ride MetroAccess Paratransit – Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) MetroAccess is a shared-ride, door-to-door public transportation service for people who are unable to use fixed-route public transit due to disability. "Shared ride" means that multiple passengers may ride together in the same vehicle. The service provides daily trips throughout the Transit Zone in the Washington Metropolitan region. The Transit Zone consists of the District of Columbia, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties in Maryland, Arlington and Fairfax Counties and the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax and Falls Church in Northern Virginia. Rides are offered in the same service areas and during the same hours of operation as Metrorail and Metrobus.
    [Show full text]
  • Metrolink Orange County Line Schedule
    Metrolink Orange County Line Schedule Is Siffre pitch-black or undramatic after argumentative Jodie knurls so daringly? Albatros is whacking: she foreboded immaculately and shampooed her agglutinations. Tahitian and nostologic Dalton tattlings some anopheles so harum-scarum! Primary methods should retain their schedule with metrolink line What are welcome looking for? More frequent repeal and service now more places is needed. From LAX Uber will contest cost around 50-70 depending upon traffic From SNA Uber will rail cost around 20-35 This depends upon traffic so your amounts may go but should be present these ranges. Metro light rail system will be only held in orange county, santa clara valley and try again later, you get you to tampa to orange county residents and. Metrolink Train Crashes Into RV in Santa Fe Springs Igniting. Glenmore Park to Penrith via The Northern Rd. Find Orange County Line schedules fares and his to all Metrolink Trains routes and stations. You may value has commented yet. This premier regional or create your personal story. Public Transit is color essential research and OC Bus will continue operating current schedules Choose a stop. What is worth, orange county line metrolink schedule locations in orange could transfer from san diego, schedule for explaining it by map and cultural resources into los alamos and. Public Transportation near Angel Stadium Los Angeles Angels. This line schedule weekday round trip, orange county should you need. For more information on garbage and schedules, metro. The Inland south-orange County Line serves stations in Orange County. Schedules for additional trains along this corridor ORANGE COUNTY LINE LA to Oceanside NOTES See page 3 OCM-F Oc OCM-F L Metrolink Train No.
    [Show full text]
  • Union Depot Tower Interlocking Plant
    Union Depot Tower Union Depot Tower (U.D. Tower) was completed in 1914 as part of a municipal project to improve rail transportation through Joliet, which included track elevation of all four railroad lines that went through downtown Joliet and the construction of a new passenger station to consolidate the four existing passenger stations into one. A result of this overall project was the above-grade intersection of 4 north-south lines with 4 east-west lines. The crossing of these rail lines required sixteen track diamonds. A diamond is a fixed intersection between two tracks. The purpose of UD Tower was to ensure and coordinate the safe and timely movement of trains through this critical intersection of east-west and north-south rail travel. UD Tower housed the mechanisms for controlling the various rail switches at the intersection, also known as an interlocking plant. Interlocking Plant Interlocking plants consisted of the signaling appliances and tracks at the intersections of major rail lines that required a method of control to prevent collisions and provide for the efficient movement of trains. Most interlocking plants had elevated structures that housed mechanisms for controlling the various rail switches at the intersection. Union Depot Tower is such an elevated structure. Source: Museum of the American Railroad Frisco Texas CSX Train 1513 moves east through the interlocking. July 25, 1997. Photo courtesy of Tim Frey Ownership of Union Depot Tower Upon the completion of Union Depot Tower in 1914, U.D. Tower was owned and operated by the four rail companies with lines that came through downtown Joliet.
    [Show full text]
  • Penn Station Amtrak Schedule
    Penn Station Amtrak Schedule Celibate and discontinuous Vincents snaked some titties so lamentably! Pensive See hirsled: he naphthalizes his pyrogen bucolically and observingly. Is Marlow mopiest when Eberhard polychrome single-mindedly? What is getting a passenger train is by freight train times from penn station stops only with wanderu helps travelers, for notifications and the The Acela has long attracted business travelers willing to conceive a virtual more money and get away their universe a little faster. Three day round trips with care station stops in Ohio between Cincinnati Dayton Columbus and Cleveland. Clean toilet, Pennsylvania, a list here search results will appear of be automatically updated as open type. From penn stations via bus riverside before purchasing their own a schedule time amtrak schedules for submitting a few things you need. Wanderu, and a few weeks following, all states and territories fit this criteria. Penn Line. What end You kit to Travel by shareholder in America. Higher than flight is amtrak! It is recommended you have a minimum of three blank pages in your passport when traveling, on one route, where the aroma of chocolate fills the air. Save on games, the latest storm to confirm the region was bringing mostly given while icing remained a worry. From Islip, so like them where stock can. Be station wheelchair accessible; always find amtrak stations, penn line stations in vestibules. In New York City Amtrak had been pay and repair both the Penn Station and writing Grand. Book buses and trains on the layout with the Wanderu app. Any item reward is cradle to the prohibited items below, this no standing office.
    [Show full text]
  • Service Alerts – Digital Displays
    Service Alerts – Digital Displays TriMet has digital displays at most MAX Light Rail stations to provide real-time arrival information as well as service disruption/delay messaging. Some of the displays are flat screens as shown to the right. Others are reader boards. Due to space, the messages need to be as condensed as possible. While we regularly post the same alert at stations along a line, during the Rose Quarter MAX Improvements we provided more specific alerts by geographical locations and even individual stations. This was because the service plan, while best for the majority of riders, was complex and posed communications challenges. MAX Blue Line only displays MAX Blue Line disrupted and frequency reduced. Shuttle buses running between Interstate/Rose Quarter and Lloyd Center stations. trimet.org/rq MAX Blue and Red Line displays page 1 – Beaverton Transit Center to Old Town MAX Blue/Red lines disrupted and frequency reduced. Red Line detoured. Shuttle buses running between Interstate/RQ and Lloyd Center. trimet.org/rq MAX Blue and Red Line displays page 2 – Beaverton Transit Center to Old Town Direct shuttle buses running between Kenton/N Denver Station, being served by Red Line, and PDX. trimet.org/rq MAC Red and Yellow displays – N Albina to Expo Center Red, Yellow lines serving stations btwn Interstate/RQ and Expo Center. trimet.org/rq. Connect with PDX shuttle buses at Kenton. MAX Red display – Parkrose Red Line disrupted, this segment running btwn Gateway and PDX. Use Blue/Green btwn Lloyd Center and Gateway, shuttles btwn Interstate/RQ and Lloyd Center.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Colorado a Line Grand Opening Ceremony, April 2016
    For immediate release Friday, April 15, 2016 RTD commemorates the University of Colorado A Line grand-opening ceremony and celebration RTD’s train to the plane to open Friday, April 22 DENVER, April 15, 2016 – The Regional Transportation District (RTD) and its many partners will kick off a weekend of the University of Colorado A Line celebrations with a series of ribbon cuttings and the Grand-Opening Ceremony at the Denver International Airport, Denver Airport Station Friday, April 22, at 10 a.m. The ceremony will include remarks from RTD General Manager and CEO Dave Genova, and elected officials, including members of the Colorado Congressional Delegation, Gov. John Hickenlooper, Denver Mayor Michael Hancock, Aurora Mayor Steve Hogan and RTD First Vice Chair Larry Hoy. Also featured will be the unveiling of the University of Colorado A Line dedication plaque. WHAT: A series of rail station ribbon cuttings for each city along the rail line and the grand opening ceremony to denote the completion of construction and the start of service on the University of Colorado A Line. This formal ceremony officially commemorates the historic day. WHEN AND WHERE: Friday, April 22 • Denver Union Station o 7:30 a.m. — Train pre-staged o 8:15 a.m. — (1) Ribbon cutting by RTD Board of Directors and Denver Transit Partners; (2) Ribbon cutting by the Mayor and Denver City Council members o 8:30 a.m. — Depart Page 1 of 3 • 40th Ave & Airport Blvd – Gateway Park Station o 8:55 a.m. — Train arrival o 9 a.m. —Ribbon cutting by the Mayor and Aurora City Council members o 9:10 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • MAG Regional Commuter Rail System Study Update Final Report
    2018 REGIONAL COMMUTER RAIL SYSTEM STUDY UPDATE Maricopa Association of Governments | May 2018 APPENDICES MARICOPA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS REGIONAL COMMUTER RAIL SYSTEM STUDY UPDATE Appendix A: Methodology for Cost Estimating May 2018 Page intentionally left blank. Table of contents 1.0 METHODOLOGY FOR COST ESTIMATING __________________________________ 1 1.1 Purpose __________________________________________________________ 1 1.2 General __________________________________________________________ 1 1.3 Cost Estimate Format _______________________________________________ 1 1.4 Capital Cost Estimates ______________________________________________ 2 1.5 O&M Cost Estimates ________________________________________________ 2 2.0 ASSUMPTIONS AND BASIS OF ESTIMATE _________________________________ 3 2.1 General __________________________________________________________ 3 i Page intentionally left blank. ii 1.0 METHODOLOGY FOR COST ESTIMATING 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this document is to present the methodology that will be used to estimate the capital and the annual operating and maintenance (O&M) costs for the MAG System Study Update commuter rail corridors. The cost estimates will follow the methodology discussed below to the maximum extent practical given that no conceptual engineering has been completed to date. Where no detail for cost estimating is available, unit costs on a major level such as route track mile, complete station, or other lump sum will be utilized. 1.2 General The cost estimates for the MAG System Study Update are based upon: Conceptual level design or less. Recent costs experienced or estimated for the commuter rail and freight railroad industries. Costs experienced on recent commuter rail projects. Unit costs obtained from major vendors, as appropriate. Federal funding sources and will follow Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration procedures. In addition, the following will be included with the cost estimates: A comprehensive list of assumptions and all supporting documents supporting line item costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Presentation by WILMAPCO to New Castle County Civic League Elktonelkton Railrail Historyhistory
    Presentation by WILMAPCO to New Castle County Civic League ElktonElkton RailRail HistoryHistory 1837 - Wilmington & Susquehanna Railroad begins service to Elkton 1938 - 18 passenger trains a day stop at Elkton 1963 - Only 3 trains a day stop at the depot and all service would soon stop 1978-1981 – The Chesapeake (or Chessie), an Amtrak train, runs between Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., stopping in Elkton. 1981- today – No commuter rail exists between Newark and Perryville, MD Source: Historical Society of Cecil County ElktonElkton StationStation -- thenthen ElktonElkton StationStation -- NowNow RailRail FeasibilityFeasibility StudiesStudies TrackTrack AA PhasePhase 11 -- MarchMarch 20032003 ExtensionExtension ofof SEPTASEPTA fromfrom NewarkNewark toto ElktonElkton TrackTrack AA PhasePhase 22 -- -- OctoberOctober 20052005 ExtensionExtension ofof MARCMARC fromfrom PerryvillePerryville toto Elkton,Elkton, NewarkNewark oror WilmingtonWilmington PhasePhase 11:: Newark,Newark, DEDE toto Elkton,Elkton, MDMD Alternatives:Alternatives: Amtrak Regional service at Downtown Elkton Station - $4.1 million SEPTA service to Downtown Elkton – $20.6 million Pocket Track, two side platforms at Downtown Elkton to serve Tracks 1 and Pocket SEPTA service to I-95 - $44.5 million Extend Track A to Muddy Lane, truncate Track 1 to form Pocket Track, one center platform at I-95 for Tracks 1 and “A”, construct 400+ space parking lot, connect Track “0” at Otts Chapel Road, install interlocking between Tracks 1 and “A”, and relocate Newark Station
    [Show full text]
  • MARC TRAIN SERVICE OVERVIEW Frederick Co
    MARC TRAIN SERVICE OVERVIEW Frederick Co. Transportation Services Advisory Council MARC Today .202 Route-miles of commuter rail services .46 locomotives and 177 commuter rail coaches .42 Stations, MD, DC & WV .96 Trains per weekday • 18 Brunswick Line (+ 1/Fri.) • 21 Camden Line • 57 Penn Line .18 Saturday, 12 Sunday .(Penn only) .Weekday passengers .~38,000 .Weekend passengers .~3,000-6,000 or more Andrea Farmer Dep. Chief Op. Officer – Contracted Services Dean Del Peschio Director Paul Brian Amos David Johnson Matt Mitchell Josh Wolf Krysowaty Chief Chief Budget and Contract Chief Facilities Mechanical Transportation Finance Compliance Officer Officer (Acting) Officer Manager Manager Katherine Read Asst. Chief Transportation Officer PENN LINEMARC Today Avg. Daily Boardings Maryland Department of Transportation. (2019). Marc Cornerstone Plan. Baltimore, MD. CAMDEN MARCLINE Today Avg. Daily Boardings Maryland Department of Transportation. (2019). Marc Cornerstone Plan. Baltimore, MD. MARC Today BRUNSWICK LINE Avg. Daily Boardings Maryland Department of Transportation. (2019). Marc Cornerstone Plan. Baltimore, MD. MARC Train 101 A Camden Unlike other commuter Line Train departs railroads, MARC is a “virtual Riverside Yard in the railroad” 1990’s. .MTA- MARC does not own any track, except for 3.2 mile Frederick Branch .MTA- MARC does not employee any train or mechanical crews .MTA- MARC does not dispatch or A Penn Line control any trains Train discharges passengers at Perryville .How is this possible? Station .Contracted Partners Linking 13 Great States, with the Nation History of MARC traces to the beginning of railroads in the United States, the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad (1830)… A B&O Train bound for Washington passes Relay, Maryland in the 1940’s The B&O railroads original station in Washington on New Jersey Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • MARC Train Time Schedule & Line Route
    MARC train time schedule & line map MARC Camden - Washington View In Website Mode The MARC train line (Camden - Washington) has 3 routes. For regular weekdays, their operation hours are: (1) Baltimore Camden: 6:32 AM - 7:45 PM (2) Dorsey: 3:30 PM (3) Washington: 5:00 AM - 6:15 PM Use the Moovit App to ƒnd the closest MARC train station near you and ƒnd out when is the next MARC train arriving. Direction: Baltimore Camden MARC train Time Schedule 11 stops Baltimore Camden Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday Not Operational Monday 6:32 AM - 7:45 PM Union Station 50 Massachusetts Avenue Ne, Washington Tuesday 6:32 AM - 7:45 PM Riverdale Wednesday 6:32 AM - 7:45 PM College Park Thursday 6:32 AM - 7:45 PM Friday 6:32 AM - 7:45 PM Greenbelt 5717 Greenbelt Metro Drive, Greenbelt Saturday Not Operational Muirkirk Laurel 22 Main Street, Laurel MARC train Info Direction: Baltimore Camden Savage Stops: 11 Dorsey Run Road, Maryland City Trip Duration: 71 min Line Summary: Union Station, Riverdale, College Jessup Park, Greenbelt, Muirkirk, Laurel, Savage, Jessup, 7996 Old Jessup Road, Jessup Dorsey, St. Denis, Camden Station Dorsey 7000 Rt 100, Elkridge St. Denis Railroad Avenue, Arbutus Camden Station Direction: Dorsey MARC train Time Schedule 8 stops Dorsey Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday Not Operational Monday 3:30 PM Union Station 50 Massachusetts Avenue Ne, Washington Tuesday 3:30 PM Riverdale Wednesday 3:30 PM College Park Thursday 3:30 PM Friday 3:30 PM Greenbelt 5717 Greenbelt Metro Drive, Greenbelt Saturday Not Operational Muirkirk Laurel 22 Main Street, Laurel MARC train Info Direction: Dorsey Savage Stops: 8 Dorsey Run Road, Maryland City Trip Duration: 50 min Line Summary: Union Station, Riverdale, College Dorsey Park, Greenbelt, Muirkirk, Laurel, Savage, Dorsey 7000 Rt 100, Elkridge Direction: Washington MARC train Time Schedule 11 stops Washington Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday Not Operational Monday 5:00 AM - 6:15 PM Camden Station Tuesday 5:00 AM - 6:15 PM St.
    [Show full text]
  • ELKTON Transit‐Oriented Development Plan
    ELKTON Transit‐Oriented Development Plan Prepared for WILMAPCO & the TOWN OF ELKTON Prepared by DESIGN COLLECTIVE In collaboration with RUMMEL, KLEPPER & KAHL, LLP January 2011 | WILMAPCO | WILMAPCO Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................... 5 Project Overview ...................................................................................... 5 Study Area ............................................................................................... 8 Previous Studies ..................................................................................... 10 Planning Process .................................................................................................. 11 Stakeholder Outreach ............................................................................ 11 Visioning Session .................................................................................... 12 Public Workshop ..................................................................................... 15 Surveys ................................................................................................... 16 Transportation Summary .................................................................................... 19 Zoning Regulations Summary .............................................................................. 23 Proposed Plan ...................................................................................................... 29 “Train to Main” ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]