DOCSLIB.ORG

Section5march05.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Section5march05.Pdf The existing environment and potential impacts of the Master Plan are complex. For each environmental topic, information on existing conditions and potential environmental consequences have been merged into one subsection to eliminate repetition of material, and for the convenience of the reader. The proposed action is a Master Plan or long range guidance document, and no physical development will actually occur under the proposed action. No direct impacts or consequences will occur as a result of the proposed action. Environmental consequences are conditional, and dependent on the extent to which proposed projects are actually implemented or built. This EIS presents an overview of the cumulative environmental consequences that would occur if all the proposed facilities were to be built. Actual cumulative impacts may range anywhere between those for the No Action Alternative and the Master Plan Alternative. 5.1 SOCIOECONOMIC/LAND USE 5.1.1 Overview The National Institutes of Health main campus is located in Montgomery County, Maryland, one of the largest jurisdictions in the Washington, D.C. region. As a result of expansion of the urbanized area, cross-commuting patterns, and other economic interrelationships, the federal Government recently designated a broader Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area for this region. This new CMSA encompasses both the Baltimore and Washington metropolitan areas, incorporating an area of nearly 9,600 square miles circumscribed by a 75 mile radius around downtown Washington, D.C. The limits of the CMSA extend from the Pennsylvania border to the edge of metropolitan Richmond, Virginia. On an east-west axis, the CMSA stretches from Queen Anne's County, Maryland, on the eastern shore of the Chesapeake Bay to Berkeley and Jefferson Counties, in the West Virginia panhandle (Population of Metropolitan Areas and Component Geography: 1980 and 1990 (6/30/93 definition), 1990 CPH-L-145, U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1993. The region is growing at a very rapid rate, with communities and employment spreading over an ever- widening geographic area. This spread is reflected in the residential location patterns of NIH employees and the broad area affected by NIH's "local" procurement. The population of the Washington-Baltimore CMSA in 2000 was 7.6 million, making it the fourth largest in the nation out of 280 designated CMSAs. It is also one of the most rapidly growing of the larger urbanized areas, with a population increase of 13 percent between 1990 and 2000. The MD-VA-DC Metropolitan Washington Area portion had 5.3 million people in 2000, an increase of 26 percent over 1990. Montgomery County is the second largest jurisdiction within the Washington-Baltimore region. With 873,000 people in 2000, it is second only to Fairfax County, Virginia, which has a population of 970,000. Baltimore County ranked third, with 754,000. Montgomery County's population represents about 16 percent of the total MD-DC-VA Metropolitan Area population, and about 11 percent of total CMSA population. Montgomery County has been one of the most rapidly growing of the larger jurisdictions in the region over the past decade. Population increased by nearly 116,000 between 1990 and 2000, or 15 percent. Only Fairfax County experienced a larger absolute growth with a 152,000 population increase during the same period. 5-1 Projections call for Montgomery County to continue to grow, albeit at a somewhat slower rate than over the past decade. Between 2000 and 2020, Montgomery County is expected to increase by about 145,000 people, bringing its total population to 1,018,000 (Preliminary Population Projections for Maryland’s Jurisdictions, Maryland Department of Planning, 2001. The County's land area is approximately 495 square miles, or about 320,000 acres. Between 1960 and 1991, the amount of developed land in the County more than tripled. As of 1960, about 49,000 acres, or 15 percent, of the County's land area had been developed; by 1991 a total of about 155,000 acres, or 48 percent, was urbanized. Residential land uses have grown most rapidly, with single family dwellings occupying the largest portion of the expanded urbanized area. In 1960, 23,000 acres, or 7.2 percent of the land area, was in single-family use, and by 1991, single family residential areas had increased to 86,800 acres, or about 27 percent of the County's land area. Multi-family residential land use has been clustered in a relatively few locations, utilizing far less land - 700 acres in 1960 and 6,700 acres in 1991, the latter scarcely over 2 percent of the County's land (General Plan Refinement Goals & Objectives: Then & Now, Supplemental Fact Sheets, Montgomery County Planning Department, January 1993). One of the largest concentrations of multi-family housing in the County is in Bethesda. Including local and federal government, land use devoted to institutional uses also increased, from 10,600 acres in 1960, to 22,800 acres in 1991. The National Institutes of Health main campus with its 310 acres is counted in this institutional category of land uses. Montgomery County had a total of nearly 296,000 housing units in 1990, having added over 8,000 dwellings a year in the two decades since 1970. The number of housing units nearly doubled during this period, exceeding the 56 percent growth rate experienced in the metropolitan region as a whole. During this period of rapid growth, the County's housing stock also changed significantly. Single family detached housing declined in share of the market from 68 percent to 52 percent, while townhouses increased from just 1 percent in 1970 to 17 percent (50,000 units) in 1990 (ibid). Multi-family units remained relatively constant with a 30 percent share of the mix. Montgomery County housing units increased to 334,000 in 2000. Growth in housing supply has basically followed the patterns established in the County's General Plan, known as Wedges and Corridors. That plan sought to avoid suburban "sprawl" by channeling growth into the County's radial transportation corridors - particularly I-270 and U.S. 29 - and into the more densely developed down-County area nearest the District of Columbia, known as the urban ring, while preserving the wedges in between the corridors for rural land use and open space. Bethesda and NIH are in the urban ring. Residential zoning under the General Plan has been "pegged" to growth projections for the year 2000. Undeveloped residential land under densities projected in the Plan could accommodate 144,300 new dwellings. At County absorption rates of the past 20 years, this would be an 18-year supply. Less than 10 percent of the total future residential development areas are within walking distance of Metrorail stations in the County. 5.1.2 Land Use and Regional Planning Montgomery County is divided into 37 planning areas. Master plans for each planning area provide a comprehensive set of recommendations and guidelines for growth and development while protecting existing land uses, community facilities and needs, and environmental and historic resources, and maintaining the transportation network. The area master plans are combined to form a general plan for the County, which in turn, is an element in regional planning for the Washington metropolitan area. Sector plans are prepared for local communities and heavily developed areas within the planning areas. 5-2 Master area and sector plans are prepared by the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) and pass through several stages of development before adoption: preliminary draft, final draft, and adopted plan. The NIH Bethesda campus is located in the Mid-Bethesda sector of Bethesda-Chevy Chase, Montgomery County Planning Area 35, the southernmost in the County (Figure 5-1). The applicable planning document for the area is the Bethesda-Chevy Chase Master Plan, M-NCPPC, 1990, which was approved and adopted by M-NCPPC in April, 1990. The purpose of the plan is to establish a policy framework that will guide the direction of Bethesda-Chevy Chase for the next 20 years. Bethesda was a suburban village until the 1950s, a focal point for shopping and community services on a limited scale. Now, it is the "downtown" or Central Business District (CBD) of the planning area with the greatest concentration of commercial and office development within the Bethesda Chevy Chase planning area. Planning for the Bethesda CBD is conducted in much greater detail, nearly on a parcel by parcel basis, in the Bethesda CBD Sector Plan. Planning for the two areas is coordinated and complementary. From 1990 to 1992, M-NCPPC undertook research and elaboration of preliminary proposals that were presented to the Montgomery County Planning Board in July 1993. A Citizen Advisory Committee, including representation from senior NIH staff, participated in formulating the Draft. After public review in hearings and work sessions, the Comprehensive Amendment to the Bethesda CBD Sector Plan was adopted by the County Council in 1994. The area master and sector plans are tied to County planning through the Annual Growth Policy (AGP) for Montgomery County (FY 00 Annual Growth Policy, Montgomery County Planning Board, 1999), which is updated each year. This document provides guidelines that translate needs indicated in local plans into capital improvements, not only for a specific area, but also County-wide. 5.1.2.1 Bethesda-Chevy Chase Master Plan The Bethesda-Chevy Chase (BCC) Master Plan establishes seven goals and objectives for the planning area: • Perpetuate and enhance the high quality of life which exists in the BCC Planning Area. • Achieve a level of future employment development that is in balance with a high quality of life and the transportation capacity of the Planning Area. • Provide for a balanced housing supply so that persons of varying income levels, ages, backgrounds, and household characteristics may find suitable housing appropriate to their needs.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Long Trails Project USP 549: REGIONAL PLANNING and METROPOLITAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT
    The Long Trails Project USP 549: REGIONAL PLANNING and METROPOLITAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning College of Urban and Public Affairs Portland State University Fall, 2012 Table of Contents I. Introduction and Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 2 II. History of Long Trails and Regional Trail Networks ..................................................................................................... 6 III. Long Trails in Northwestern Oregon...............................................................................................................................20 IV. The Demand for Long Trails-based Recreation ...........................................................................................................36 V. Long Trails and Community Economic Development .............................................................................................52 VI. Long Trails Implementation ...............................................................................................................................................76 I. Introduction and Acknowledgements The Oregon Department of Forestry and the Oregon Parks Team 3: The Demand for trails-base recreation; analysis and Department are currently engaged in a joint assessment of a new critique of SCORP and similar surveys; trails in the context of trail extending from Garibaldi, on the Oregon coast, to the crest other recreational opportunities;
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Crescent & Metropolitan Branch Trails
    Facility Plan for the capital Crescent & Metropolitan Branch Trails LardnerlKlein Landscape Architects, P.C. in association with Daniel Consultants Inc. Montgomery County Planning Board January 2001 The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission is a bi-county agency created by the Ge~eralAssembly of Maryland in 1927. The Commission's geographic - authority covers most of Montgomery and Prince George's counties. The Commission's planning jurisdiction, the Maryland-Washington Regional District, comprises 1,001 square miles; its parks jurisdiction, the Metropolitan District, comprises 91 9 square miles. The Commission has three major functions: (1) The preparation, adoption, and, from time to time, amendment or exten- sion of The General Plan (On Wedges and Corridors) for the Physical Devel- opment of the Maryland-Washington Regional District within Montgomery and Prince George's Counties. (2) The acquisition, development, operation, and maintenance of a public park system (3) In Prince George's county only, the operation of the entire county public recreation program. The Commission operates in each County through a Planning Board appointed by and responsible to the County government. The Planning Boards are responsible for prepa- ration of all local master plans, recommendations on zoning amendments, administra- tion of subdivision regulations, and general administration of parks. The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission encourages the involvement and participation of individuals with disabilities, and its facilities are accessible. For assistance with special needs (e.g. large print materials, listening devices, sign language interpretation, etc.), please contact the Community Rela- tions Office, (301) 495-4600 or T.D. (301) 495-1 331.
    [Show full text]
  • Inclusionary Trail Planning Toolkit
    Inclusionary Trail Planning Toolkit A guide to planning and programming equitable trail networks Funding for this report was provided by the Contents Foreword 1 Section 1: Introduction 2 Inclusionary Planning 2 Equitable Planning 3 Green Gentrification 4 Section 2: Case Studies of Inclusionary Trail Planning 8 Camden, New Jersey 8 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 11 Washington, DC 21 Examples of Successful Programming for Inclusive Trails 23 Section 3: Tools for Planning in Community 27 Community Organizing for Trail Planning 27 Forge Alliances and Building a Base 27 Establishing Buy-in 28 Leadership Development 29 Understanding the Community: Using Data 31 Understanding the Community: Community Mapping 32 Understanding the Community: Employing Social Justice Frameworks 32 Understanding the Community: Is My Community Prone to Gentrification? 33 Planning Events: Origins of Event 36 Planning Events: Outreach for Events 36 Planning Events: Event Logistics 37 Implementation of the Trail: Construction Phase 38 Implementation of the Trail: Celebrate the Opening 39 Implementation of the Trail: Program the Trail 39 Implementation of the Trail: Job Creation 40 Institutional Change 40 Appendix A: Resources for participatory planning events 43 Appendix B: Resources for Data Collection 46 Appendix C: Midwest Academy Racial Justice and Equity Framework 47 Appendix D: Race Forward, Racial Equity Impact Assessments 48 Appendix E: Addressing Gentrification in Communities 50 Appendix F: Training Resources 51 Appendix G: Summary of interviews 53 This report was prepared by Julia Raskin on behalf of the Pennsylvania Environmental Council. Special thanks to the Inclusive Planning Working Group for their expertise, guidance, and time: Shoshanna Akins, Eleanor Horne, Valeria Galarza, Rachel Griffith, and Daniel Paschall.
    [Show full text]
  • ALONG the TOWPATH Concerned with the Conservation of the Natural and Historical Environment of the C&O Canal and the Potomac River Basin
    C & 0 Canal Association ALONG THE TOWPATH concerned with the conservation of the natural and historical environment of the C&O Canal and the Potomac River Basin ~OLUMEX:Xll June 1990 Number 2 JUSTICE DOUGLAS REUNION HIKE HELD ON APRIL21 The rain was pervasive through the day, but this did After a cocktail hour, the bikers enjoyed a banquet in little to dampen the enthusiasm of the more than 100 hikers the evening catered by the Berlin Cafe and held at the who participated in the 10.4 mile trek from Noland's Ferry to Brunswick Fire Department. Speakers for the occasion were Brunswick on the Justice Douglas Reunion Hike on April 21. Brunswick's Mayor Susan Fauntleroy and park superinten­ In addition to commemorating the historic walk led by Justice dent Tom Hobbs, both of who impressed on their listeners how William 0. Douglas in 1954, largely credited with leading to important the occasion was as a reminder to continue efforts to the decision by Congress to establish the C&O Canal National preserve the canal. Historical Park, the Association members and guests on April 21 celebrated one day in advance Earth Day's 20th anniver­ sary. The hike began at Noland's Ferry with a brief ribbon­ cutting ceremony in the rain. C&O Association president Hal Larsen introduced Congresswoman Beverly Byron, from Maryland's Sixth District, who made a few remarks and then . cut the ribbon to start the hikers on their walk. Congress­ woman Byron also accompanied the group to Brunswick. ( . Lunch stop at Lock 29 Hal Larsen, in his capacity as president, presented the Justice William 0.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Corridor Analysis of the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail in Northern Virginia
    2015 Corridor Analysis Of the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail in Northern Virginia 0 http://www.novaregion.org/index.aspx?nid=299 Acknowledgements The Northern Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC) thanks the following individuals for their contributions to this report: • Donald Briggs, Superintendent of the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail for the National Park Service; • Ursula Lemanski, Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program for the National Park Service; • Mark Novak, Loudoun County Park Authority; • Debbie Andrews of Prince William County Department of Parks and Recreation; and • Members of the Potomac Heritage Trail Association. The report is an NVRC staff product, supported with funds provided by a cooperative agreement with the National Capital Region National Park Service (Grant Cooperative Agreement P14AC01704). Any assessments, conclusions, or recommendations contained in this report represent the results of the NVRC staff’s technical investigation and do not represent policy positions of the Northern Virginia Regional Commission unless so stated in an adopted resolution of said Commission. The views expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the jurisdictions, the National Park Service, or any of its sub agencies. Report prepared by: Corey Miles, Senior Environmental Planner Northern Virginia Regional Commission Debbie Spiliotopoulos, Senior Environmental Planner Northern Virginia Regional Commission Figure 1 Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail Corridor 1 http://www.novaregion.org/index.aspx?nid=299 The Northern Virginia Regional Commission 2015 Commissioners Listed by Jurisdiction (As of December 2015) Commissioners are appointed by and from the governing bodies of NVRC’s member localities on a population-based representation formula.
    [Show full text]
  • Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA District 1964-Present
    Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA district 1964-2021 By Jonathan Belcher with thanks to Richard Barber and Thomas J. Humphrey Compilation of this data would not have been possible without the information and input provided by Mr. Barber and Mr. Humphrey. Sources of data used in compiling this information include public timetables, maps, newspaper articles, MBTA press releases, Department of Public Utilities records, and MBTA records. Thanks also to Tadd Anderson, Charles Bahne, Alan Castaline, George Chiasson, Bradley Clarke, Robert Hussey, Scott Moore, Edward Ramsdell, George Sanborn, David Sindel, James Teed, and George Zeiba for additional comments and information. Thomas J. Humphrey’s original 1974 research on the origin and development of the MBTA bus network is now available here and has been updated through August 2020: http://www.transithistory.org/roster/MBTABUSDEV.pdf August 29, 2021 Version Discussion of changes is broken down into seven sections: 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA 2) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Eastern Mass. St. Ry. Co. Norwood Area Quincy Area Lynn Area Melrose Area Lowell Area Lawrence Area Brockton Area 3) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Middlesex and Boston St. Ry. Co 4) MBTA bus routes inherited from Service Bus Lines and Brush Hill Transportation 5) MBTA bus routes initiated by the MBTA 1964-present ROLLSIGN 3 5b) Silver Line bus rapid transit service 6) Private carrier transit and commuter bus routes within or to the MBTA district 7) The Suburban Transportation (mini-bus) Program 8) Rail routes 4 ROLLSIGN Changes in MBTA Bus Routes 1964-present Section 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) succeeded the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) on August 3, 1964.
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Crescent Trail (P501316)
    Capital Crescent Trail (P501316) Category Transportation Date Last Modified 05/17/20 SubCategory Pedestrian Facilities/Bikeways Administering Agency Transportation Planning Area Countywide Status Under Construction EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s) Total Beyond Cost Elements Total Thru FY19 Est FY20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY 24 FY 25 FY 26 6 Years 6 Years Planning, Design and Supervision 10,841 1,090 2,731 5,520 40 40 40 - 2,700 2,700 1,500 Land 873 415 458 - - - - - - - - Site Improvements and Utilities 2,308 8 - 2,000 - - - - 1,000 1,000 300 Construction 97,725 33,576 14,375 39,174 2,848 1,167 59 - 17,300 17,800 10,600 Other 4,350 - - 4,350 1,350 3,000 - - - - - TOTAL EXPENDITURES 116,097 35,089 17,564 51,044 4,238 4,207 99 - 21,000 21,500 12,400 FUNDING SCHEDULE ($000s) Total Beyond Funding Source Total Thru FY19 Est FY20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY 24 FY 25 FY 26 6 Years 6 Years G.O. Bonds 104,999 27,470 14,085 51,044 4,238 4,207 99 - 21,000 21,500 12,400 Impact Tax 11,098 7,619 3,479 - - - - - - - - TOTAL FUNDING SOURCES 116,097 35,089 17,564 51,044 4,238 4,207 99 - 21,000 21,500 12,400 OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT ($000s) Total Beyond ImpactImpact TypeType Total Thru FY19 Est FY20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY 24 FY 25 FY 26 6 Years 6 Years Maintenance 35 - - 5 10 10 10 Energy 35 - - 5 10 10 10 NET IMPACT 70 - - 10 20 20 20 APPROPRIATION AND EXPENDITURE DATA ($000s) Appropriation FY 21 Request 4,238 Year First Appropriation FY15 Appropriation FY 22 Request 4,207 Last FY's Cost Estimate 61,197 Cumulative Appropriation 52,653 Expenditure / Encumbrances 44,926 Unencumbered
    [Show full text]
  • Washington, DC
    Washington, D.C. ROUTE A journey westward along the Great American Rail-Trail will begin at the steps of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. The trail will travel among some of the most iconic landmarks in the nation’s capital along the National Mall, including the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial, where the trail heads north along the Rock Creek Park Trails. The route then picks up the Capital Crescent Trail in Georgetown, which flows into the towpath of the Chesapeake and Ohio (C&O) Canal National Historical Park stretching from Washington, D.C., to Cumberland, Maryland. RTC found and reviewed six plans in Washington, D.C., to better understand the district’s trail priorities. A full list of these plans can be found in Appendix A. Capital Crescent Trail in Washington, D.C. | Photo by Alice Crain TABLE 2 GREAT AMERICAN RAIL-TRAIL STATISTICS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. Total Great American Rail-Trail Existing Trail Miles in D.C. (% of Total State Mileage) 7.5 (100%) Total Great American Rail-Trail Trail Gap Miles in D.C. (% of Total State Mileage) 0 (0%) Total Trail Gaps in D.C. 0 Total Great American Rail-Trail Miles in D.C. 7.5 TABLE 3 GREAT AMERICAN RAIL-TRAIL ROUTE THROUGH WASHINGTON, D.C. Existing Trail Name Length in D.C. Along Great American Rail-Trail (in Miles) National Mall Trails 2.4 Rock Creek Park Trails 0.7 K Street/Water Street Cycle Track 0.6 Capital Crescent Trail 2.3 C&O Canal National Historical Park 1.5 Total Miles 7.5 Existing Trail Miles 7.5 Trail Gap Miles 0.0 railstotrails.org 13 GREAT AMERICAN RAIL-TRAIL ROUTE ASSESSMENT MAP 1: WASHINGTON, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Metropolitan Branch Trail Phases 1 and 2, MR2016021
    MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE MARYLAND-NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSION MCPB Item No. 6 Date: 05-19-2016 Mandatory Referral for the Metropolitan Branch Trail Phases 1 and 2, MR2016021 David Anspacher, Planner/Coordinator, [email protected], 301-495-2191 SW Scott Whipple, Supervisor, [email protected], 301-563-3404 TA Tom Autrey, Supervisor, [email protected], 301-495-4533 Pam Dunn, Chief, [email protected], 301-650-5649 Robert Kronenberg, Chief, [email protected], 301-495-2187 Completed: 05/10/2016 DESCRIPTION This project would complete the Metropolitan Branch Trail from the District of Columbia to the Silver Spring Transit Center. It would: Construct the remaining missing segment of the Metropolitan Branch Trail in Montgomery County (New York Ave to Ripley Street) Construct a new underpass beneath Burlington Avenue Construct a new trail bridge over Georgia Avenue Applicant: Montgomery County Department of Transportation SUMMARY Major issues for this mandatory referral include: Trail alignment and crossings at the Silver Spring B&O Railroad Station A trail width that is appropriate for the likely demand Staff recommends approval with comments on the Mandatory Referral for the Metropolitan Branch Trail Phase 1 and 2. COMMENTS Silver Spring B&O Railroad Station 1. Improve the proposed alignment around the B&O Station by: a. Reducing vehicular traffic crossing the trail and most importantly limiting vehicles backing up across the trail. b. Providing a raised trail crossing if vehicles are permitted to cross the trail. Warning signs and pavements markings, such as green thermoplastic, should also be provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Park & Ride Commuter Lots
    Park &RideCommuterLots Serving I–270 and US 29 Corridors in Montgomery County A Handy Guide to Free Parking and An Easier Commute to Work Effective July 2002 Tired of fighting the traffic ? Want to make your commute to work easier and less stressful? Spending too much money parking your car downtown? Need a place to meet your carpool or vanpool? Free Park & Ride Commuter Lots may be the answer to your quest. Commuters may park their vehicles in most of Montgomery County’s Park & Ride Lots at no cost. There are a few lots, however, that may require a parking permit and fee. You can meet your carpools or vanpools, or take public transit from these lots. Park & Ride...Make it easier for yourself. Use this brochure as a guide to Park & Ride Commuter Lots along the I-270 and U.S. 29 Corridors, including selected Lots in neighbor- ing jurisdictions. For more information on bus routes serving these lots, contact the following service providers. Montgomery County Commuter Services Free personalized assistance to help commuters join a carpool or vanpool. Promotes alternative trans- portation benefits for employees. The Commuter Express Store, located at 8401 Colesville Road, Silver Spring, sells fare media, such as Metrobus/rail passes, tickets, and tokens, and Ride On bus passes and tickets. Pick up timetables and transportation information (301) 770-POOL (7665) www.rideonbus.com (click on Commuter Services) Ride On Bus (routes, schedules, fares) (240) 777-7433 (touchtone) (240) 777-5871 (rotary) (240) 777-5869 (TTY/TDD) www.rideonbus.com (passes and tokens sold online) Prince George’s County THE BUS (301) 324-BUSS (routes & schedules) 1-800-735-2258 (TDD) Department of Public Works and Transportation (301) 925-5656–Office of Transportation www.goprincegeorgescounty.com CONNECT-A-RIDE A fixed route community–based bus service in the mid–Baltimore/Washington suburban area.
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Crescent Trail Concept Plan
    CONCEPT PLAN For The CAPITAL CRESCENT TRAIL Proposed By THE COALITION FOR THE CAPITAL CRESCENT TRAIL And GREATER BETHESDA-CHEVY CHASE COALITION DECEMBER 1988 Coalition for the Capital- Crescent Trail - Coalition Members American Forestry Association Montgomery County Road Runners American Hiking Society National Handicapped Sports and American Youth Hostels-Potomac Area Recreation Association Council National Institutes of Health Bicycle Appalachian Mountain Club (D.C.Chapter) Commuting Club Arlington County Bike Club National Parks and Conservation Audubon Naturalist Society Association Blue Ridge Voyageurs National Recreation & Parks Association Capital Hiking Club Northern Virginia Volksmarchers Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Association Pentagon Pacesetters Citizens Association of Georgetown Potomac Appalachian Trail Club Committee of 100 for the Federal City Potomac Boat Club Conservation Federation of Maryland Potomac Pedalers Touring Club District of Columbia Road Runners Club Rails-to-Trails Conservancy Greater Bethesda-Chevy Chase Coalition Sierra Club (Rock Creek Group) Maryland Association of Bicycling Virginia Volkssport Association Organizations Walkways Center Montgomery County Citizens Bicycle Wanderbirds Hiking Club Committee Washington Area Bicyclist Association Montgomery County Outdoor Education Washington Canoe Club Association Washington Women Outdoors Greater Bethesda-Chew Chase Coalition - Coalition Members Allied Civic Group Hamlet Place Owners, Inc. Cabin John Citizens Kenwood Citizens Association Association Kenwood
    [Show full text]
  • Foundation Document Overview W a R R I O R M O U N Referred to As Other Important Resources and Values.Program 28 170 T a I N
    Other Important Resources and Values NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Canal Place State Heritage Area No 68 ek rth Canal Terminus Cre Bran Feeder Dam 8 ills 0 1 5 10 Kilometers Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park contains ch Po W t Guard Lock 8 A I N omac R M O U N T iver CUMBERLAND W I L L S 0 1 5 10 Miles ALT Cumberland Visitor Center 220 28 43C North 28 other resources and values that may not be fundamental to Evitts Creek Aqueduct Canal and Other trail North Branch 180 towpath trail Evitts Creek Canal mileage Rapids and E V I T 20 Locks 73–75 T S M O U N T A I N marker hazardous area the purpose and significance of the park, but are important to Lockhouse 75 Irons Mountain Patterson Wheelchair-accessible Boat launch Creek Lock 72 68 Spring Gap Spring Gap Restrooms Drive-in camping area consider in management and planning decisions. These are Picnic area Hiker-biker campsite 51 Emergency telephone Foundation Document Overview W A R R I O R M O U N referred to as other important resources and values.program 28 170 T A I N Pigmans Ferry Creek Oldtown-Battie Mixon Lock 71 n South w Bra Oldtown o M O U N T A I N nch Locks 69–70 T P O L I S H offer visitors the opportunity to experience different eras of the P k oto ee mac Ri Cr ve r Potomac Forks Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park GREEN RIDGE Lock 68 ile STATE FOREST enm canal’s existence.
    [Show full text]