DOCSLIB.ORG

Frederick County Master Transportation Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Frederick County Master Transportation Plan Transit Highways Pedestrians & Airport Bicycle Adopted December 2001 Prepared by Department of Planning and Zoning Division of Public Works Frederick County Master Transportation Plan Adopted December 18, 2001 Board of County Commissioners David Gray, President Terre Rhoderick Jan Gardner John Thompson Rick Weldon County Planning Commission Dick Floyd, Chairman J. Denham Crum Richard Stup Fern Hines Early Monroe Joan McIntyre Jan Gardner Department of Planning and Zoning Division of Public Works Steve Horn, Director Al Hudak, PE, Director Ed Gorski, Chief of Comprehensive Planning Tom Meunier, PE Jim Gugel, AICP, Project Planner Robert Shen, PE Charles Heath, AICP, Principal Planner Neil Spiller Sam Householder, Drafting Supervisor Tony Pelligrino k , E . , D Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 Purpose of the Plan Context with County Plans Multi-modal Approach to Transportation Planning Transportation Plan Elements 5 Transportation and Land Use Coordination Historic Transportation Facilities and Resources Highway Element Transit Element Bicycle and Pedestrian Element Airport Element Funding 45 Highways Transit Bicycle and Pedestrian Airport Next Steps 51 Action Recommendations Plan Update Process References and Resources List of Tables Frederick County Master Transportation Plan 1 page Table 1 County Highway Program – Short Term 14 Table 2 County Highway Program – Long Term 18 Table 3 State Highway Program – Short Term 24 Table 4 State Highway Program – Long Term 24 Table 5 Transit Program – Short Term 34 Table 6 Transit Program – Long Term 36 Table 7 Bikeways Program 39 Table 8 Airport Program 42 Table 9 Cost Summary 50 Frederick County Master Transportation Plan 2 Chapter 1 Introduction The history of transportation planning in Frederick County dates back to 1959 when the County adopted its first Land Use and Master Highway Plan. The Master Highway Plan consisted of a map depicting what would for today be considered an aggressive plan for new highways throughout the County. As has been the case in jurisdictions throughout the metropolitan area, subsequent updates of the highway plan have resulted in many of the proposed highways being deleted for a variety of reasons including environmental impacts and property impacts among others. Beginning in 1984 the County established a land use planning process based on planning regions that provided the basis for the detailed land use plans and highway plans. This regional approach has diminished somewhat the countywide perspective for transportation planning particularly with regards to the highway plans. Purpose of the Plan An obvious and perhaps the primary purpose of the this plan is to provide for a countywide focus for transportation planning. Aside from the countywide focus of the plan are a number of other goals that this plan will address. • Compile into one document the goals, objectives, policies, and projects of individual transportation plans, reports, and studies. • Improve the implementation of multi-modal planning in the County and ensure coordination efforts with county and state agencies. • Provide guidance to County officials with regards to transportation policy, funding decisions, and strategic planning efforts. • Identify a comprehensive list of short-term and long-term transportation projects. • Establish a basis for identification and analysis of additional transportation needs including the prioritization of projects in the short-term programs. • Address the transportation needs of the public and businesses. Frederick County Master Transportation Plan 3 Context with County Plans and Programs The Countywide Comprehensive Plan, last adopted in 1998, has provided for the general guidance regarding the various transportation elements including highways, transit, and bikeways. The Countywide Plan identifies a number of policies for the highway and non- highway transportation systems that are implemented through the regional plans and through plans and studies specifically addressing transportation needs. Existing policy and goal statements from current plans and studies are included in this plan as well. This Plan will supplement the current Countywide Comprehensive Plan and will provide a countywide context for the regional plans as well as for plans and studies addressing other transportation modes such as transit and bikeways. In 2000 the County initiated a strategic planning process that has identified specific goals and objectives related to long range financial planning, providing adequate funding for the County’s infrastructure needs, and assuring orderly growth. Update Process The Plan update process will be divided into an annual review for the short-term projects/priorities and a five-year update cycle that will address the long-term projects and the overall policy direction. Annual Transportation Priorities Review • Review would identify priorities that would be addressed in upcoming CIP preparations for highway, transit, bikeway/pedestrian facilities, and the airport. • The following groups would be part of the review process: County Planning Commission, Roads Board, Transportation Services Advisory Council, Frederick COG, State Delegation and the Board of Commissioners. Public input would be allowed via the individual meetings of these boards and commissions. • Identify revisions to the short-term projects based on current CIP programs from the County and the State. • Assess implementation of the action recommendations. Master Transportation Plan Update • Update would focus on the general policy direction and revisions to the long-term projects. The update would occur either as part of the Countywide Comprehensive Plan update that occurs every 7-8 years, or on a five-year update cycle on its own. • Assess implementation of the actions recommendations and identify new or revised recommendations. • Conduct countywide traffic modeling/travel forecasting study. Alternatively, this could be conducted as part of the individual region plan updates. Multi-Modal Approach to Transportation Planning An important purpose of this plan is the consideration of all modes of transportation in addressing the mobility needs of the County. This is a significant departure from the early Frederick County Master Transportation Plan 4 County plans that focused solely on highways. While this plan recognizes that automobiles will remain as the most prevalent means of transportation it also emphasizes the need to provide for a more balanced transportation system. This becomes more apparent when one looks at the proportion of the population that cannot make use of an automobile due to: age, too young and the elderly; having a physical or mental disability; or not being able to afford an automobile. Based on the 1990 Census approximately 35-40 % of the County’s population fit into one of these categories. For 2000 we would expect this proportion to be higher based on increases in the minimum driving age and continued increase in the elderly population. The focus of a balanced, multi-modal transportation system needs to be on providing mobility for people and not just automobiles. In many communities that have focused primarily on building additional road capacity this can be a significant departure in the mindset for addressing the increasing level of congestion. Many people, including planners, elected officials, and the public will agree that we will not be able to build enough road capacity to ever provide a significant relief to congestion. In many areas, and Maryland fits this category as well, the increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is far outpacing the rate of population growth and the ability of communities to increase road capacity. In Frederick County VMT on all roads, state and county, has increased by 145% since 1980 while the County’s population has increased by 70%. The difference is even more dramatic when travel only on County maintained roads is considered. The VMT on the County maintained road system increased by 214% since 1980, over 3 times the rate of population growth in the same period. This situation requires communities to improve transportation choices such as transit and bicycle facilities in an effort to address the shortfall in road capacity. To provide a balanced transportation system, that meets the needs of the transportation disadvantaged and others that are able to use an automobile, will require the County to focus on two basic approaches to transportation or mobility planning: travel demand management and support of alternative transportation modes. Travel Demand Management (TDM) Travel Demand Management (TDM) takes the approach that rather than continually looking to expand road capacity in an attempt to meet the travel demand, that strategies be implemented to reduce the demand for automobile use in the first place. It is important to note, however, that while the focus for TDM strategies have been on the typical work trip during the morning and evening peak hours, many communities are finding that non-work trips related to shopping, running errands etc. during the mid-day and on weekends represents a greater proportion of the total traffic. Some of the TDM strategies used by communities are listed below and are almost exclusively oriented to work related trips. • Employer sponsored carpool and vanpool matching • Stagger work schedules and flextime • Telecommuting • Subsidize transit fares • Provide bicycle racks and shower facilities for bicyclists • Provide preferential parking for
Recommended publications
  • CATOCTIN MOUNTAIN PARK a Resource Assessment

    CATOCTIN MOUNTAIN PARK a Resource Assessment

    ® 006 march 2 CATOCTIN MOUNTAIN PARK A Resource Assessment National Parks Conservation Association Protecting Parks for Future Generations® ® Center for State of the Parks More than a century ago, Congress established Yellowstone as the CONTENTS world’s first national park. That single act was the beginning of a remarkable and ongoing effort to protect this nation’s natural, his- torical, and cultural heritage. Today, Americans are learning that national park designation REPORT SUMMARY 1 alone cannot provide full resource protection. Many parks are com- promised by development of adjacent lands, air and water pollution, invasive plants and animals, and rapid increases in motorized recre- KEY FINDINGS 5 ation. Park officials often lack adequate information on the status of and trends in conditions of critical resources. The National Parks Conservation Association initiated the State of the Parks® program in 2000 to assess the condition of natural and THE CATOCTIN ASSESSMENT cultural resources in the parks, and determine how well equipped the 7 National Park Service is to protect the parks—its stewardship capaci- ty. The goal is to provide information that will help policy-makers, NATURAL RESOURCES 7 the public, and the National Park Service improve conditions in Park Provides Haven for Wildlife national parks, celebrate successes as models for other parks, and and Urbanites ensure a lasting legacy for future generations. For more information about the methodology and research used in preparing this report and to learn more about the Center for State CULTURAL RESOURCES 14 of the Parks®, visit www.npca.org/stateoftheparks or contact: NPCA, Park’s History Includes Prehistoric Center for State of the Parks®, P.O.
  • Department of Public Works and Environmental Services Working for You!

    Department of Public Works and Environmental Services Working for You!

    American Council of Engineering Companies of Metropolitan Washington Water & Wastewater Business Opportunities Networking Luncheon Presented by Matthew Doyle, Branch Chief, Wastewater Design and Construction Division Department of Public Works and Environmental Services Working for You! A Fairfax County, VA, publication August 20, 2019 Introduction • Matt Doyle, PE, CCM • Working as a Civil Engineer at Fairfax County, DPWES • BSCE West Virginia University • MSCE Johns Hopkins University • 25 years in the industry (Mid‐Atlantic Only) • Adjunct Hydraulics Professor at GMU • Director GMU‐EFID (Student Organization) Presentation Objectives • Overview of Fairfax County Wastewater Infrastructure • Overview of Fairfax County Wastewater Organization (Staff) • Snapshot of our Current Projects • New Opportunities To work with DPWES • Use of Technologies and Trends • Helpful Hyperlinks Overview of Fairfax County Wastewater Infrastructure • Wastewater Collection System • 3,400 Miles of Sanitary Sewer (Average Age 60 years old) • 61 Pumping Stations (flow ranges are from 25 GPM to 25 MGD) • 90 Flow Meters (Mostly billing meters) • 135 Grinder pumps • Wastewater Treatment Plant • 1 Wastewater Treatment Plant • Noman M. Cole Pollution Control Plant, Lorton • 67 MGD • Laboratory • Reclaimed Water Reuse System • 6.6 MGD • 2 Pump Stations • 0.750 MG Storage Tank • Level 1 Compliance • Convanta, Golf Course and Ball Fields Overview of Fairfax County Wastewater Organization • Wastewater Management Program (Three Areas) – Planning & Monitoring: • Financial,
  • Trip Schedule NOVEMBER 2013 – FEBRUARY 2014 the Club Is Dependent Upon the Voluntary Trail Policies and Etiquette Cooperation of Those Participating in Its Activities

    Trip Schedule NOVEMBER 2013 – FEBRUARY 2014 the Club Is Dependent Upon the Voluntary Trail Policies and Etiquette Cooperation of Those Participating in Its Activities

    Mountain Club of Maryland Trip Schedule NOVEMBER 2013 – FEBRUARY 2014 The Club is dependent upon the voluntary Trail Policies and Etiquette cooperation of those participating in its activities. Observance of the following guidelines will enhance the enjoyment The Mountain Club of Maryland (MCM) is a non-profit organization, of everyone: founded in 1934, whose primary concern is to provide its members and • Register before the deadline. Early registration for overnight or com- guests the opportunity to enjoy nature through hiking and other activi- plicated trips is especially helpful. Leaders may close registration early ties, particularly in the mountainous areas accessible to Baltimore. when necessary to limit the size of the trip. The leader may also refuse We publish a hike and activities schedule, with varieties in location registration to persons who may not be sufficiently strong to stay with and difficulty. We welcome guests to participate in most of our activi- the group. ties. We include some specialized hikes, such as family or nature hikes. • Trips are seldom canceled, even for inclement weather. Check with We help each other, but ultimately everyone is responsible for their the leader when conditions are questionable. If you must cancel, call individual safety and welfare on MCM trips. the leader before he or she leaves for the starting point. Members and We generally charge a guest fee of $2 for non-members. This fee is guests who cancel after trip arrangements have been made are billed waived for members of other Appalachian Trail maintaining clubs. Club for any food or other expenses incurred. members, through their dues, pay the expenses associated with publish- • Arrive early.
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form

    National Register of Historic Places Registration Form

    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NOV 0 ·~ 2013 National Register of Historic Places NAT. Re018TiR OF HISTORIC PlACES Registration Form NATIONAL PARK SERVICE This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional certification comments, entries, and narrative items on continuation sheets if needed (NPS Form 10-900a). 1. Name of Property historic name George Washington Birthplace National Monument other names/site number Wakefield. Popes Creek Plantation , VDHR File #096-0026 2. Location 1732 Popes Creek Road not for publication street & number L-----' city or town Colonial Beach ~ vicinity state Vir inia code VA county Westmoreland code _ _;_:19'--=-3- zip code -"'2=2:....;.4"""43.;;...._ ___ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this _!__nomination_ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property .K._ meets __ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: x_ b state ' Ide "x n J.VIA.rVI In my opinion, the property .x..._ meets_ does not meet the National Register criteria.
  • Board Agenda Item July 30, 2019 ACTION

    Board Agenda Item July 30, 2019 ACTION

    Board Agenda Item July 30, 2019 ACTION - 8 Endorsement of Design Plans for the Richmond Highway Corridor Improvements Project from Jeff Todd Way to Sherwood Hall Lane (Lee and Mount Vernon Districts) ISSUE: Board endorsement of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Design Public Hearing plans for the 3.1-mile Richmond Highway Corridor Improvements Project between Jeff Todd Way/Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and Sherwood Hall Lane. The purpose of the project is to increase capacity, safety, and mobility for all users. Improvements include widening Richmond Highway from four to six lanes; reserving the median for the future Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system; replacing structures over Dogue Creek, Little Hunting Creek, and the North Fork of Dogue Creek; intersection improvements; sidewalks; and two-way cycle tracks on both sides of the road. RECOMMENDATION: The County Executive recommends that the Board endorse the design plans for the Richmond Highway Corridor Improvements project administered by VDOT as generally presented at the March 26, 2019, Design Public Hearing and authorize the Director of FCDOT to transmit the Board’s endorsement to VDOT (Attachment I). TIMING: The Board should take action on this matter on July 30, 2019, to allow VDOT to proceed with final design plans and enter the Right-of-Way (ROW) phase in late 2019 to keep the project on schedule. BACKGROUND: In 1994, the Virginia General Assembly directed VDOT to perform a centerline design study of the 27-mile Route 1 corridor between the Stafford County line and the Capital Beltway. There was a continuation of the Centerline Study in 1996 and 1998.
  • Little Hunting Creek Bridge HAER No. VA-42D

    Little Hunting Creek Bridge HAER No. VA-42D

    Mount Vernon Memorial Highway: Little Hunting Creek Bridge HAER No. VA-42D Carries the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway over Little Hunting Creek along the Potomac, 8.6 miles south of 1-95 Mount Vernon Vicinity Fairfax County Virginia 3\ <*-> PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA Historic American Engineering Recoi National Park Service Department of the Interior Washington, DC 20013-7127 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD MOUNT VERNON MEMORIAL HIGHWAY: LITTLE HUNTING CREEK BRIDGE b~$ HAER No. VA-42D Location: Carrying the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway across Little Hunting Creek at the Potomac, 8.6 miles south of 1-95 and 1.1 miles north of Mount Vernon in Fairfax County, Virginia, UTM: 18/319650/4286750 Quad.: Mount Vernon Date of Construction: Designed 1929, Completed 1932 Architect: Gilmore D. Clarke Engineer: E.J. Budge, Resident Engineer F.M. DeWaters, Assistant Resident Engineer J.V. McNary, Senior Engineer, U.S. Bureau of Public Roads Contractor: Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corporation, New York, New York Present Owner George Washington Memorial Parkway National Park Service Department of the Interior Present Use: Vehicular bridge Significance: This parkway bridge is significant because it typifies the style of bridges which were designed for this new type of roadway. This bridge was designed to harmonize with the landscape by incorporating the natural shape of the arch, facing the bridge with native stone, and using careful attention regarding the plantings and landscape surroundin; the bridge. Historian: Elizabeth M. Nolin, 1988 LITTLE HUNTING CREEK BRIDGE HAER Mo. VA-42D (page 2) The final bridge on the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway (see HAER Mo.
  • Transportation Services Advisory Council Minutes of April 19, 2019 Meeting Transit Services

    Transportation Services Advisory Council Minutes of April 19, 2019 Meeting Transit Services

    Transportation Services Advisory Council Minutes of April 19, 2019 Meeting TransIT Services Members/Ex-Officio Present: Michael Levengood, Neil Fay, Dianne Lewis, Jaime McKay, Chris Hashemzadeh, Alderman Kelly Russell, Tim Davis, Sharon Suarez, Gunnar Pedersen, Ron Burns, and Nancy Norris. Staff and Guests: Kandese Holford, Darren Bean, Shayne Boucher, Roman Steichen, Joe Ortega, and Kendall Tiffany. Call to Order: Nancy Norris called the meeting to order at 8:05 a.m. Introductions: Attendees introduced themselves to the group. Approval of Minutes: The minutes from January’s meeting were not approved as there was no quorum. Elected Officials Report: Alderman Russell reported that The City of Frederick sent letters of support to the Maryland Legislature for transportation-related bills and all of those bills passed. Alderman Russell stated that one bill concerned the definition of electric low speed scooters so they can be regulated. Other bills related to defining three tiers of e-bikes based on the power and wattage of the bicycle, consistent State compliance with traffic calming devices in order to assist local agencies, and an amendment to the Complete Streets policy that will require criteria be included to provide access to healthy food and necessities. Old Business: • Golden Mile Transportation Alternatives Grant: Tim Davis provided an overview of the Golden Mile Multimodel Access Plan for members. Tim reported that the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will be presented to the Mayor and Board of Alderman on June 6 for signature; and once complete, the procurement process for design/engineering to perform the work can begin. • East Street Transportation Alternatives Grant: Tim Davis reported that the grant request is for final design funding from East Street at Family Meal Restaurant to Wormans Mill.
  • Catoctin Mountain Scenic Byway Plan

    Catoctin Mountain Scenic Byway Plan

    Corridor Management Plan for the US 15 Catoctin Mountain Scenic Byway April 2004 Prepared for: Prepared by: Frederick County, Maryland Lardner/Klein Landscape Architects, P.C. as part of in association with the State of Maryland Scenic Byway Program Daniel Consultants, Inc. John Milner Associates Bay Area Economics Watson Heritage Strategies Shelley Mastran Advisory Committee Marcel Aillery, Carollton Manor Land Trust Sister Joan Angermari, St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Shrine Robert Black, Catoctin Mountain Orchard Nancy Bodmer, President, Carrollton Manor Land Trust Don Briggs, President, Emmitsburg Business & Professional Association G. Bernard Callan, Jr., Fredrick County Historic Preservation Commission Sam Castleman, Resident Joy Clem, Resident Colin Clevenger, Curator, Children’s Museum of Rose Hill Manor Ray Compton, Frederick County Historic Trust John Concannon, Maryland State Highway Administration District 7 Dean Considine, Central Maryland Heritage League Judy Crum, Resident, Frederick County *Janet Davis, Frederick County Division of Planning Tim Davis, City of Frederick Jennifer Dougherty, Mayor, City of Frederick Dale Dowling, Architectural & Cultural Historian Sister Carol Durkin, St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Shrine Cynthia Ecker, Park Manager, Cunningham Falls State Park Richard Fairley, Headmaster, Director Of Development, Prospect Hall Mansion Doug Faris, Superintendent, C&O Canal National Hisotrical Park *John Fieseler, Executive Director, Tourism Council of Frederick County, Inc. Dean Fitzgerald, President, Frederick County
  • MARC Riders Advisory Council Meeting June 20, 2019 4:30Pm‐6:00Pm

    MARC Riders Advisory Council Meeting June 20, 2019 4:30Pm‐6:00Pm

    MARC Riders Advisory Council Meeting June 20, 2019 4:30pm‐6:00pm Phone: 1‐888‐407‐4198 Code: 77713445# **PLEASE ENSURE THAT YOUR PHONE IS ON MUTE WHEN YOU ARE NOT SPEAKING** I. Call meeting to order Steve Chan, Chair II. Introductions III. Review of May minutes Brian Love, Acting RAC Secretary for May meeting IV. Review of May performance data Katherine Read, MARC Assistant Chief Transportation Officer V. MARC Train preparation for summer high heat/weather David Johnson (DJ), MARC Chief Transportation Officer Amtrak and Bombardier Management VI. August 5 Penn Line schedule change and 2019 Penn Line Amtrak trackwork update DJ and Amtrak Commuter Operations management VII. Old Business VIII. New Business, including questions and comments from guests Upcoming meetings (all Thursdays, 4:30‐6:00pm) July 18, 2019 (in person) August 15, 2019 (teleconference) September 19, 2019 (in person) Reminder: E‐mail rail car or station defects to Katherine Read – [email protected] MARC Train Service On-Time Performance May 2019 Same Month Month Year to Date 2018 Brunswick Line Brunswick 94.16% 96.26% 85.95% Frederick 90.15% 95.00% 87.50% West Virginia 89.39% 93.88% 81.82% Total Brunswick 91.27% 95.06% 85.08% Camden Line Camden 77.06% 87.79% 88.29% BTS OTP 83.66% 91.15% 86.88% Penn Line Baltimore 91.36% 91.76% 84.33% Perryville 86.47% 83.36% 85.09% Amtrak OTP 89.81% 89.08% 84.57% MARC SYSTEM TOTAL OTP 87.44% 89.87% 85.43% MARC On Time Performance Summary May 2019 Penn Line Weekday 89.23% Month 88.46% Year to Date 91.29% AM Southbound (Trains 401‐423)
  • In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland

    In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland

    Case 18-11041 Doc 82 Filed 05/16/18 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND In re: * * THE BRANDENBURG FAMILY * Case no.18-11041-TJC LIMITED PARTNERSHIP * Chapter 11 * Debtor * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DISCLOSURE STATEMENT OF THE BRANDENBURG FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Brandenburg Family Limited Partnership (the “Debtor”), debtor and debtor in possession, provides the following Disclosure Statement in the above-captioned chapter 11 case. 1. INTRODUCTION. The Debtor is providing this Disclosure Statement (the “Disclosure Statement”) to the Debtor’s known Creditors and Interest holders in connection with the Debtor’s Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”) filed contemporaneously with this Disclosure Statement. The Plan has been developed based upon thorough review and analysis of the Debtor’s financial condition, business plan, and rehabilitation alternatives. The Plan provides for the liquidation of the assets of the Debtor and the payment of creditor claims in their respective order of priorities as established by Maryland Law and Title 11 of the United States Code. The Debtor has concluded that the Plan provides fair and equitable treatment of all classes of Creditors and Interest Holders and the greatest feasible recovery to Creditors and Interest Holders. Accordingly, the Debtor requests that all Creditors and Interest Holders in Impaired Classes vote to accept the Plan. 2. PURPOSE OF DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND PROCEDURE FOR PLAN CONFIRMATION a. Purpose. Pursuant to section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code, the Debtor submits this Disclosure Statement to provide Creditors and Interest Holders with adequate information to allow them to make an informed judgment about the acceptability of the Plan.
  • Forest Stewardship Plan

    Forest Stewardship Plan

    FOREST STEWARDSHIP PLAN for Frederick City Watershed also known as Frederick Municipal Forest c/o City of Frederick Dept. of Public Works 111 Airport Drive East Frederick, MD 21701 Location East Side of Catoctin Mountain, Six Miles Northwest of the City of Frederick Maryland Grid North 620, East 665 Latitude/Longitude North 39° 32’ West 77° 29’ In Frederick County On approximately 7022 acres Total including: 7006 acres Forest 16 acres Fields Prepared by: Philip Pannill, Regional Watershed Forester Paul Eriksson, RC&D Watershed Forester April 2005 AKNOWLEDGEMENTS The preparation of this plan took several years to complete, and involved the hard work and skill of a number of personnel from the Maryland Dept. of Natural Resources - Forest Service, including: Bryan Seipp, who began the preparation of the plan and directed the data collection and mapping during the first year, Georgia Guyton, whose contributions to the data collection and mapping through the first two years were invaluable, and Elizabeth D’Imperio, Andrew Mishler, Aaron Cook, and Cody Miller, who at various times assisted with the data collection, mapping and data processing. Individuals or agencies that contributed to certain portions of this plan are credited in that section. Thanks are due to Donald Rohrback, Wildlife Biologist with the Maryland DNR Wildlife and Heritage Service, who provided a great deal of assistance and input. The U.S. Forest Service, through the Potomac Watershed Partnership, provided funding that made this project possible. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Title
  • CSX Baltimore Division Timetable

    CSX Baltimore Division Timetable

    NORTHERN REGION BALTIMORE DIVISION TIMETABLE NO. 4 EFFECTIVE SATURDAY, JANUARY 1, 2005 AT 0001 HOURS CSX STANDARD TIME C. M. Sanborn Division Manager BALTIMORE DIVISION TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS DESCRIPTION PAGE INST DESCRIPTION PAGE 1 Instructions Relating to CSX Operating Table of Contents Rules Timetable Legend 2 Instructions Relating to Safety Rules Legend – Sample Subdivision 3 Instructions Relating to Company Policies Region and Division Officers And Procedures Emergency Telephone Numbers 4 Instructions Relating to Equipment Train Dispatchers Handling Rules 5 Instructions Relating to Air Brake and Train SUBDIVISIONS Handling Rules 6 Instructions Relating to Equipment NAME CODE DISP PAGE Restrictions Baltimore Terminal BZ AV 7 Miscellaneous Bergen BG NJ Capital WS AU Cumberland CU CM Cumberland Terminal C3 CM Hanover HV AV Harrisburg HR NI Herbert HB NI Keystone MH CM Landover L0 NI Lurgan LR AV Metropolitan ME AU Mon M4 AS Old Main Line OM AU P&W PW AS Philadelphia PA AV Pittsburgh PI AS.AT Popes Creek P0 NI RF&P RR CQ S&C SC CN Shenandoah SJ CN Trenton TN NI W&P WP AT CSX Transportation Effective January 1, 2005 Albany Division Timetable No. 5 © Copyright 2005 TIMETABLE LEGEND GENERAL F. AUTH FOR MOVE (AUTHORITY FOR MOVEMENT) Unless otherwise indicated on subdivision pages, the The authority for movement rules applicable to the track segment Train Dispatcher controls all Main Tracks, Sidings, of the subdivision. Interlockings, Controlled Points and Yard Limits. G. NOTES STATION LISTING AND DIAGRAM PAGES Where station page information may need to be further defined, a note will refer to “STATION PAGE NOTES” 1– HEADING listed at the end of the diagram.