WRRC Report No

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

WRRC Report No WRRC Report No. 141, PROCEEDINGS WATER RESEARCH AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA A Technical Symposium Tuesday, April 28, 1992 D.C. WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH CENTER UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WASHINGTON, D.C. WRRC Report No. 141 PROCEEDINGS WATER RESEARCH AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA A TECHNICAL SYMPOSIUM Sponsored by THE WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH CENTER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TUESDAY, APRIL 28,1992 1:00PM to 4:OOPM VAN NESS CAMPUS, BUILDING NO. 44, ROOM A-03 WASHINGTON, D.C. The activities on which this report is based were financed in part by the Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, through the Water Resources Research Center, the University of the District of Columbia. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Department of the Interior, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute their endorsement by the United States Government. The University of the District of Columbia is an equal opportunity and affirmative action institution. Its programs, employment and educational opportunities are available to all qualified persons regardless of race, color religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, family responsibilities, matriculation, physical handicap or political affiliation. TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE...............................................................................................………... ...i. OPENING REMARKS ..............................................................................………. ii PROGRAM AGENDA ...................……….........................................................… iii PART I: PHYSICAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ........................................1 "Drilling Into the District of Columbia Ground Water" James V.O'Connor and Norris Etienne ......................................................…........ 2 "The Anacostia River: Ecological Studies of River Pollution Biology" Victoria C. Guerrero.............................................................................……..….......14 "Litter Layer Productivity and Decomposition" Winston Corona and Isidro Carranza .......................................................…......... 33 "A Survey of Street Drainage Inlets in the District of Columbia" Fred Chang and Julius Elui...........................................................................………39 "An Environmental Study of Melvin Hazen Park" Kathleen Robinson ..........................................................................…….……...........79 "A Preliminary Study for the Identification of Sediment Toxics in the Anacostia River" Harriette L. Phelps .........................................................................…………….........87 "Dry Weather Screening of Storm Water Outfalls in the District of Columbia" Clarence Wade................................................…………........................................….. 92 "Effect of Lime and Sludge on Metal Content of Vegetables" James Preer, Ahmed N. Abdi, Harkewal Sekhon, G.B. Murchinson, Jr................. 98 PART II: WATER RESOURCES PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ............…….... 107 "Citizens Attitudinal Survey on the District of Columbia" Y. Choi and H. Azani.......................................................................…………..........108 "Master Gardener and Extension Volunteers Program" Pamela Ann Marshall........................................................................………….........119 "FIFRA - How it Affects D.C. and the Role of UDC" Mohamed S. Khan...........................................................................……………...…..121 "Urban Land Use Activities and the Ground Water: A Background Survey" Jutta Schneider, Fred Chang, Clarence Wade and James V.O'Connor................. 123 "Urban Stormwater Management & Sediment Control Clearinghouse" Ham6 M. Watt and Mohammed Yusuf Mohammed .................................….......... 129 "The Forgotten Tributaries of the Anacostia River in the District of Columbia" James V. O'Connor and Norris Etienne..........................…….......…....................... 133 APPENDICES............................................................……...........…………................145 I. List of Participants......................................................……….........……................146 II. Background Brief........................................………...........................……..............148 PREFACE The D.C. Water Resources Research Center is proud, once again, to salute the faculty and students of the University of the District of Columbia, for their significant and long standing contributions in the field of water research and education, particularly as these issues impact on the health and well being of the citizens of the District of Columbia. These proceedings present the results of the second forum in recent years, sponsored by the DC WRRC, to focus on the work of UDC faculty and students in the areas of water research and water resources. Earlier, in April of 1987, a half day seminar was convened by DC WRRC on "UDC Science Research on the Anacostia River." This full day symposium reflects the broad range of current water research investigations and related activities engaged in by faculty members and students from several university colleges and by others from extension components such as the Agricultural Experiment Station, the Cooperative Extension Service and by members of the DC WRRC staff. It is noted that due to technical difficulties, we have not been able to provide all the papers or the pertinent remarks that were presented during the symposium. We do apologize for that and for potential errors or mistakes that might be found in these proceedings. OPENING REMARKS BY JAMES G. PETERS, PROJECT OFFICER Office of the Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) I will keep my remarks short so as not to fall victim to the time keeper. I am very interested in the type of academic research being done here in the District of Columbia in various aspects of hydrology. It is in light of this research that I will talk about the U.S. Geological Survey and its water-related program. Included in these programs is the Water Resources Research Institute program, which I will discuss later. As we all know, water-related issues are becoming an important concern on the part of national, state and local policy makers as public awareness has been refocused on the environment in recent years. The U.S. Geological Survey is the Federal Government's major scientific agency for evaluating natural resources. Within the last decade, water-resource issues have dominated USGS program growth, especially issues related to the quality of ground water. We anticipate this growth to continue well into the next century. The USGS, headquarters is located in Reston, Virginia about 25 miles west of here. If you have not visited us, I suggest that you do so. We are very active in the water-resources community in the DC area. This morning, in fact, I had the pleasure of meeting two ex-employees of the USGS who are attending this symposium. Briefly, let me mention that the work of the USGS in hydrology is in two broad areas. The first is data collection and applied research managed through offices in each state (usually located in the state capital) and usually done in cooperation with other federal and state agencies. Academic research is centered in Reston, Virginia; Denver, Colorado; and Menlo Park, California. This research provides new directions in the hydrologic sciences as well as support for the work of applied research in our state offices. For both programs, the USGS continues to give great emphasis The design and preparation of these proceedings was a joint effort of Mr. James H. Hannaham, Mr. Mohammed Yusuf and Mrs. Jutta Schneider and Ms. Joseline Castanos of the DC WRRC staff. We also wish to thank Mr. Tom Kelly of the UDC Office of Public Affairs, for taking on the task of reviewing and editing the papers. Finally, we wish to thank the authors who provided their papers as well as various other persons including Dr. Victoria C. Guerrero, who volunteered to review these proceedings. High among the charges of the USGS is the administration of the Federal Water Resources Research Institute Program. Although this program has existed for about 30 years, the USGS has been the program sponsor for only 5 years. Between $5 and $6 million dollars is allocated by the Congress each year, which is distributed equally among the 54 Institutes, located in every state, the District, and several trust territories. This amount provides about $100K annually to each Institute. There is a 2:1 matching requirement for these funds. Some Institutes do very well at securing additional research funds well beyond the Federal Program. For others the Program is their major funding source. But overall, the program provides a viable research institute at each location. Innovation in the use of Federal program funds is encouraged. For example, the Institute in Indiana is using all program funds for student assistantships. One individual present today who is funded in part by this program is Dr. Victoria Guerrero. So as not to usurp time from other speakers, I will stop at this point to answer any questions you may have regarding the Federal Institute Program or the USGS. Thank you. PROGRAM AGENDA INTRODUCTIONS: Hamé M. Watt, Director Water Resources Research Center, UDC James H. Hannaham Water Resources Research Center,
Recommended publications
  • The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment
    THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2008 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND U.S. CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division Government of the District of Columbia Adrian M. Fenty, Mayor PREFACE PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's District Department of the Environment, Natural Resources Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). This report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2008 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Natural Resources Administration contributed to this report including the Fisheries and Wildlife Division and the Watershed Protection Division. Questions or comments regarding this report or requests for copies should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division 51 N St., NE Washington, D.C. 20002-3323 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................iii LIST OF TABLES...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Final DC TMDL for Organics and Metals in Potomac Tributaries
    D.C. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH E nvironmental Health Administration B ureau of Environmental Quality Water Quality Division DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FINAL TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS FOR ORGANICS AND METALS IN BATTERY KEMBLE CREEK, FOUNDRY BRANCH, AND DALECARLIA TRIBUTARY AUGUST 2004 Doreen Thompson Senior Deputy Director for Environmental Health Administration DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FINAL TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS FOR ORGANICS AND METALS IN BATTERY KEMBLE CREEK, FOUNDRY BRANCH, AND DALECARLIA TRIBUTARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ADMINISTRATION BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY WATER QUALITY DIVISION AUGUST 2004 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1. TMDL Definition and Regulatory Information 1 1.2. Impairment Listing 1 2. Chemicals of Concern, Beneficial Uses and Applicable Water Quality Standards 3 2.1. Chemicals of Concern 3 2.2. Designated Beneficial Uses 5 2.3. Applicable Water Quality Standards 5 2.3.1. Narrative Criteria 5 2.3.2. Numerical Criteria 5 2.4. TMDL Endpoint 7 3. Watershed Characterization 7 3.1. Potomac River Small Tributaries 7 3.1.1 Battery Kemble Creek/Fletchers Run 7 3.1.2 Foundry Branch 7 3.1.3 Dalecarlia Tributary 7 4. Source Assessment 8 4.1. Assessment of Nonpoint Sources 8 5. Technical Approach 8 5.1. Seasonal Variations and Critical Conditions 8 5.2. Small Tributaries Models 9 5.3. Scenario and Model Runs 10 6. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Allocations and Margins of Safety 11 6.1. Battery Kemble Creek Loads and TMDL 11 6.2. Foundry Branch Loads and TMDL 11 6.3. Dalecarlia Tributary Loads and TMDL 12 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Naturalist Quarterly Winter 2017
    AUDUBON NATURALIST SOCIETY Naturalist Quarterly Winter 2017 ANSHOME.ORG 120 Year Anniversary - Leading with the Future by Lisa Alexander ANS NATURE ACTIVITIES & NEWS The Audubon Naturalist Society OFFICERS inspires residents of the greater PRESIDENT Leslie Catherwood (’17) Naturalist Quarterly Washington, DC region to VICE PRESIDENT Paul D’Andrea (‘17) appreciate, understand, and treasURER Scott Fosler (‘17) ANShome.org Winter 2017 protect their natural environment SecretarY Megan Carroll (‘19) through outdoor experiences, BOARD OF DIRECTORS education, and advocacy. Wendy Anderson (‘18), Cecilia Clavet From the Director 3 HEADQUARTERS (‘19), Alice Ewen (‘18), Allyn Finegold Woodend, a 40-acre wildlife (‘17), Mike Gravitz (‘17), Jennifer Judd 120 Year Anniversary - Leading with the Future sanctuary in Chevy Chase, MD Hinrichs (‘17), Diane Hoffman (‘19), Laura Hull (‘17), Jane McClintock (‘18), By Lisa Alexander 4 OFFICE HOURS Tim McTaggart (’18), Carolyn Peirce Monday-Friday 9 AM-5 PM (‘19), Nancy Pielemeier (‘19), Rebecca Testing the Waters...by Diane Lill 6 STORE HOURS Turner (‘18), Bonnie VanDorn (‘18), Larry Monday-Friday 10 AM-5 PM Wiseman (‘19) Children and Family Programs 8 Saturday 9 AM-5 PM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Sunday 12-5 PM Lisa Alexander Learning about Tales and Trails GROUNDS HOURS STAFF Dawn to dusk By Cathy Gruban 8 FINANCE ANS MEMBERSHIP Lois Taylor, Comptroller, Dupe Cole, Student $15 Senior Accountant/Benefits Manager; Rust Classes/Programs 11 Individual $50 Barbara Young, Accountant Family $65 Adult Programs 12 MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS Nature Steward $100 Audubon Advocate $200 CALENDAR 16 Sanctuary Guardian $500 AUDUBON NATURALIST SHOP Naturalists Council $1,000 Matt Mathias, Manager; Yoli Del Buono, Preservationist $1,000+ Assistant Manager Woodend’s Master Naturalists NATURALIST QUARTERLY is CONSERVATION By Alison Pearce 21 published four times a year by Eliza Cava, Director of Conservation; the Audubon Naturalist Society, Monica Billger, Virginia Conservation Water Quality Monitoring 22 8940 Jones Mill Road, Chevy Advocate; Chase, MD 20815.
    [Show full text]
  • Palisades Trolley Trail & Foundry Trestle Bridge Feasibility
    Appendix 5b December 2019 Palisades Trolley Trail & Foundry Trestle Bridge Feasibility Study Public Meeting Summary Report: Public Meeting #2 Contract No. DCKA-2017-T-0059 Category: L – Bicycle and Pedestrian Studies, Planning & Design Prepared for: District Department of Transportation 55 M Street, SE Suite 400 Washington, DC 20003 Prepared by: Commun-ET, LLC and Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Palisades Trolley Trail& Foundry Trestle Bridge P u b l i c M e e t i n g R e p o r t : Public Meeting #2 P a g e 1 | DRAFT 10/30/19 Table of Contents 1.0 Project Background ..................................................................................................... 3 2.0 Purpose of Public Meeting #2 ...................................................................................... 4 3.0 Public Meeting Location & Notifications ...................................................................... 4 3.1. Public Input Outreach Format & Comment Period… ……………………………………………………………5 4.0 Public Meeting Format & Summary ............................................................................. 6 4.1. Meeting Attendance & Survey Data Obtained………………………………………………………………………7 4.2. Information Station Meeting Process in Detail………………………………………………..……………………9 4.3. Exhibits & Presentations…………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 4.4. Written Comments Received at Public Meeting…………………………………………..…………………….12 4.4.1. Public Comments Captured at the Information Stations……………………………………..13 4.4.2. Title VI Comments Received from Public Meeting #2………………………………………….24
    [Show full text]
  • Final TMDL Fecal Coliform Bacteria Potomac River and Tributaries
    D.C. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH E nvironmental Health Administration Bureau of Environmental Quality Water Quality Division DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FINAL TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD FOR FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA IN UPPER POTOMAC RIVER, MIDDLE POTOMAC RIVER, LOWER POTOMAC RIVER, Battery Kemble Creek, Foundry Branch, and Dalecarlia Tributary JULY 2004 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FINAL TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD FOR FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA IN UPPER POTOMAC RIVER, MIDDLE POTOMAC RIVER, LOWER POTOMAC RIVER, Battery Kemble Creek, Foundry Branch, and Dalecarlia Tributary DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ADMINISTRATION BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY WATER QUALITY DIVISION JULY 2004 INTRODUCTION Section 303(d)(1)(A) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) states: Each state shall identify those waters within its boundaries for which the effluent limitations required by section 301(b)(1)(A) and section 301(b)(1)(B) are not stringent enough to implement any water quality standards applicable to such waters. The State shall establish a priority ranking for such waters taking into account the severity of the pollution and the uses to be made of such waters. Further section 303(d)(1)(C) states: Each state shall establish for the waters identified in paragraph (1)(A) of this subsection, and in accordance with the priority ranking, the total maximum daily load, for those pollutants which the Administrator identifies under section 304(a)(2) as suitable for such calculations. Such load shall be established at a level necessary to implement the applicable water quality standards with seasonal variations and a margin of safety which takes into account any lack of knowledge concerning the relationship between effluent limitations and water quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Swimmable Potomac Campaign
    SWIMMABLE POTOMAC CAMPAIGN P O T O M A C R I V E R K E E P E R N E T W O R K M A Y 2 0 1 9 - O C T O B E R 2 0 1 9 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 CITIZEN SCIENCE WATER QUALITY MONITORING RESULTS - 2019 8 CITIZEN SCIENCE VOLUNTEER MONITORING PROGRAM 10 SEA DOG FLOATING LABORATORY 11 LOOKING AHEAD TO 2020 12 WHAT CAN YOU DO TO HELP? 14 TECHNICAL APPENDIX 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Potomac River flows through the heart of our nation’s capital on its course to the Chesapeake Bay, providing drinking water for six million people and countless recreational opportunities to millions of residents and visitors drawn to its beauty. The popularity of the Nation’s River for recreation continues to grow, as anyone who has been to the DC waterfront lately can plainly see. People are coming to the river to kayak, row, fish, stand up paddleboard, and swim, encouraged by easy access, beautiful riverfront parks and public boathouses. The one key thing that’s been missing until now is accurate, timely data on whether the Potomac is clean enough to swim and paddle in. To answer the call, Potomac Riverkeeper (PRK) launched its Citizen Science Water Quality Monitoring Program in 2019. Water samples collected weekly by volunteers are analyzed in certified labs, including on our flagship vessel Sea Dog, and shared with the public every Friday on the free SWIMGuide app. While water quality has improved dramatically since the passage of the Clean Water Act nearly fifty years ago, the Potomac is still burdened with discharges of untreated sewage and polluted stormwater from D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Spring 2018 ANS Naturalist Quarterly
    AUDUBON NATURALIST SOCIETY Naturalist Quarterly Spring 2018 ANSHOME.ORG Nature for All - Creating a Thriving Natural Oasis at Woodend by Alison Pearce, Director of Restoration ANS NATURE ACTIVITIES & NEWS The Audubon Naturalist Society OFFICERS inspires residents of the greater PRESIDENT Scott Fosler (’20) Naturalist Quarterly Washington, DC region to VICE PRESIDENT Megan Carroll (‘19) appreciate, understand, and treasURER Alice Ewen (‘18) ANShome.org Spring 2018 protect their natural environment SecretarY Becky Turner (‘18) through outdoor experiences, BOARD OF DIRECTORS education, and advocacy. Wendy Anderson (‘18), Cecilia Clavet From the Director 3 HEADQUARTERS (‘19), Diane Hoffman (‘19), Ryan Matney Woodend, a 40-acre wildlife (‘20), Jane McClintock (‘18), Tim Nature for All by Alison Pearce 4 sanctuary in Chevy Chase, MD McTaggart (’18), Carolyn Peirce (‘19), Nancy Pielemeier (‘19), Rob Timmons OFFICE HOURS Children and Nature 7 (‘20), Bonnie VanDorn (‘18), Larry Monday-Friday 9 AM-5 PM Wiseman (‘19), Beth Ziebarth (‘20) STORE HOURS Conservation 8 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Monday-Friday 10 AM-5 PM Lisa Alexander Saturday 9 AM-5 PM Children and Family Programs 11 Sunday 12-5 PM OPERATIONS Amy Ritsko-Warren, Director of Operations GROUNDS HOURS Rust Classes/Programs 15 Dawn to dusk FINANCE ANS MEMBERSHIP Lois Taylor, Comptroller, Dupe Cole, Adult Programs 16 Student $15 Senior Accountant/Benefits Manager; Individual $50 Barbara Young, Accountant CALENDAR 20 Family $65 MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS Nature Steward $100 Caroline Brewer, Director
    [Show full text]
  • DC Citizen Science Water Quality Monitoring Report 2 0 2 0 Table of Contents Dear Friends of the River
    WAter DC Citizen Science Water Quality Monitoring Report 2 0 2 0 Table of Contents Dear Friends of the River, On behalf of Anacostia Riverkeeper, I am pleased to share with you our first Annual DC Citizen Science Volunteer Water Quality Report on Bacteria in District Waters. This report focuses on 2020 water quality results from all three District watersheds: the Anacostia River, Potomac River, and Rock Creek. The water quality data we collected is critical for understanding the health of the Anacostia River and District waters; as it serves as a gauge for safe recreation potential as well as a continuing assessment of efforts in the Methodology District of Columbia to improve the overall health of 7 our streams and waterways. As a volunteer program, we are dependent on those who offer time out of their daily schedule to work 8 Anacostia River with us and care for the water quality. With extreme gratitude, we would like to thank all our volunteers and staff for the dedication, professionalism, and enthusiasm to execute this program and to provide high quality data to the public. Additionally, support 10 Potomac River from our partner organizations was crucial to running this program, so we would like to extend an additional thanks to staff at Audubon Naturalist Society, Potomac Riverkeeper, and Rock Creek 12 Rock Creek Conservancy. We hope you find this annual report a good guide to learning more about our local DC waterways. We believe that clean water is a benefit everyone should experience, one that starts with consistent and 14 Discussion publicly available water quality data.
    [Show full text]
  • Government of the District of Columbia Mayor's Agent for Historic Preservation 1100 4Th Street Sw, Suite E650 Washington, Dc 20024
    GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MAYOR'S AGENT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1100 4TH STREET SW, SUITE E650 WASHINGTON, DC 20024 In the Matter of: APPLICATION OF WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY FOUNDRY BRANCH TRESTLE HPA No. 18-297 Square 1321, Lot 822 Square 1324, Lot 817 DECISION AND ORDER The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (“WMATA”) filed this application to demolish the Foundry Branch Trestle, an elevated railway track that traverses Glover Archbold Park and contributes to the Glover Archbold Historic District. WMATA argues that a failure to permit demolition of the historic trestle would impose an unreasonable economic hardship on it as the owner, within the meaning of DC Code § 6-1106(e). For the reasons explained here, the application is CLEARED. The Trestle was built in 1896 as part of the Washington and Great Falls Electric Railway Company trolley line connecting Georgetown and Cabin John, Maryland. It connects two plots of land owned by WMATA: Lot 817, which is accessible from Foxhall Road and Lot 822, which is surrounded land owned by the National Park Service and Georgetown University. The trolley service ceased in 1960, and the trestle became the property of D.C. Transit, which then operated local bus service. The trestle was largely ignored for many years and fell into disrepair. WMATA acquired the bus lines of D.C. Transit in 1973. In 1997, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit conveyed the trestle, along with more than $9 million and other D.C. Transit assets to WMATA to settle long-running litigation between the now-defunct D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Model Selection and Justification Technical Memorandum
    Technical Memorandum Model Selection and Justification Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................1 2. Purpose ....................................................................................................................................................1 3. Technical Approach................................................................................................................................ 2 4. Results and Discussion .........................................................................................................................15 Analysis References .................................................................................................................................................. …17 Attachments .................................................................................................................................................. 19 Comprehensive Baseline Comprehensive – , 2014 , December 22 December Consolidated TMDL Implementation Plan Implementation TMDL Consolidated Technical Memorandum: Model Selection and Justification List of Tables Table 1: Modeling Approach used in Mainstem Waterbodies for MS4 Areas ............................................... 4 Table 2: Modeling Approach used in Tributary Waterbodies for MS4 Areas ................................................ 4 Table 3: Modeling Approach used in Other Waterbodies for MS4 Areas .....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility Study
    Feasibility Study Palisades Trolley Trail and Foundry Branch Trolley Trestle Bridge Prepared by: Kittelson & Associates Jacobs Traceries Commun-ET FINAL: December 2019 Feasibility Study Palisades Trolley Trail and Foundry Branch Trolley Trestle Bridge Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary 2 1.1. Opportunities and Constraints ...................................................................................................... 3 1.2. Concept Design ............................................................................................................................. 5 1.2.1. Trail Alignment ...................................................................................................................... 5 1.2.2. New Bridges .......................................................................................................................... 8 1.2.3. Foundry Trestle Bridge .......................................................................................................... 9 1.2.4. New Connection to CCT ...................................................................................................... 10 1.2.5. Cost Estimates ..................................................................................................................... 11 2.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 12 2.1. Project Background ..................................................................................................................... 12
    [Show full text]
  • Site Surveys (Condition, Boundaries/Ownership, Utilities, Historic 2018 Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct 2019 Resources)
    STUDY OVERVIEW DDOT is conducting a feasibility study of the former Glen Echo Trolley line from St. Mary’s Place, NW to Galena Place, NW in the Georgetown, Foxhall, and Palisades neighborhoods. The study area includes the Foundry Branch Trestle Bridge in Glover-Archbold Park at Canal Road. STUDY PURPOSE The purpose of this feasibility study is to identify critical issues and challenges in developing a multi-use trail for pedestrians and bicyclists of all ages and abilities on the former Glen Echo Trolley line corridor (aka Palisades Trolley Trail). To determine the feasibility of the trail, the following questions will be answered: • Would the trail provide a transportation function for pedestrians and/or bicyclists? • Could the Foundry Branch Bridge be rehabilitated to be used as part of the trail? At what cost? • How would the trail connect to other trails, neighborhoods, and destinations? • What are the environmental steps and approvals needed to construct the project? • This feasibility study is a local DDOT project ONLY. Preparation of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) documentation will not be completed as part of the study. Public Public Meeting Meeting Final STUDY SCOPE + SCHEDULE #1 #2 Report • Site Surveys (condition, boundaries/ownership, utilities, historic 2018 Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct 2019 resources) Nov – • Structural Inspection of Foundry Branch Trestle Bridge April Study Area Survey • Concept Design Dec - Oct Environmental
    [Show full text]