Baltimore & Washington 2025

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Baltimore & Washington 2025 Hunt Valley Pepper Rd McCormick Rd Gilroy Rd Greater Baltimore Warren Rd Timonium Owings Mills Timonium Business Park Old Court & Washington 2025 Lutherville Milford Mill Falls Rd Reisterstown Plaza Mt Washington Existing and Planned Rail Transit Rogers Ave Cold Spring Ln University of Baltimore/Mt Royal Perryville http://greatergreaterwashington.org/25709 West Cold Spring Woodberry Aberdeen Mondawmin North Ave Edgewood Penn-North Cultural Center Penn Station Martin State Airport Martinsburg Upton/Avenue Market Duffields State Center Bayview * Brunswick * Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Centre St Johns Bayview Campus * Harpers Ferry Frederick * Security Square Mall Lexington Market Lexington Market Hopkins Charles ShotCenter Tower/ Hospital Monocacy * Woodlawn Market Place Point of Rocks Highlandtown/Greektown * * I-70 Park and Ride Dickerson Inner Harbor * Harbor EastFells Point *Canton * Brewers Hill/Canton Crossing Barnsville Allendale * Rosemont Poppleton * Harlem Park* * Edmonson Village Baltimore St * Boyds * University Center/ Camden Yards Germantown West Baltimore Halethorpe Convention Center Hamburg St Metropolitan Grove * Gaithersburg Westport Cherry Hill Washington Grove Glenmont St Denis Patapsco Garrett Park Kensington Shady Grove Wheaton Dorsey Baltimore Highlands Rockville Jessup Nursery Rd Forest Glen * Twinbrook * * Woodside/16th St Savage North Linthicum * Connecticut Ave * White Flint * Lyttonsville Laurel Park BWI Business Linthicum * District * Grosvenor-Strathmore Laurel SilverSilver Spring SpringDale Library Dr * ManchesterLong Place Branch Piney * BranchTakoma/Langley Rd * Riggs Rd Transit Center * * Ferndale Medical Center Adelphi Rd/West Campus BWI Marshall Mukirk BWI Airport Cromwell Station/Glen Burnie Campus Center Rail Station * Ashburn Bethesda East Campus Greenbelt Takoma Friendship Heights * Broad Run College Park-U of Md Odenton/Fort Meade Tenleytown-AU Fort Totten West * Dulles Airport Hyattsville Prince George’s PlazaM Square * Bowie State Van Ness-UDC * Innovation Center Riverdale Park * Georgia Ave -Petworth Seabrook * Herndon Cleveland Park Riverdale Beacon Heights * * Reston Town Center Woodley Park Columbia Brookland-CUA Annapolis Rd/Glenridge * Zoo/Adams Morgan Heights Dupont Circle Wiehle-Reston East Rhode Island Ave New Carrollton Brentwood Spring Hill Farragut North U St Landover NoMa-Galludet U Greensboro African-Amer Civil Cheverly War Mem’l-Cardozo Tysons Corner Deanwood Shaw-Howard U McLean Legend Rosslyn Union Station Minnesota Ave -GWU Judiciary Sq Mt Vernon Sq Foggy BottomFarragutMcPherson West Sq 7th St-Convention Center Metro Rail Chinatown BenningCapitol Rd HeightsAddison RdMorgan BlvdLargo Town Center Seat Pleasant VT/UVA Metro Center Gallery Place Vienna Merrifield Archives Stadium-Armory Fairfax/GMU Dunn Loring Washington Metro Rail Clarendon Potomac Ave Ballston-MU Court House Federal Triangle West Falls Church Navy Mem’l-Penn Quarter Virgina Sq-GMU Smithsonian Federal CapitolCenter SouthEasternSW Market East Falls Church Baltimore Metro Subway Arlington Cemetery L’Enfant Plaza Light Rail Anacostia MTA Light Rail Pentagon Waterfront Congress Heights MTA Red Line (pending review, projected opening: 2020) Pentagon City Navy Yard-Ballpark Naylor Rd Southern Ave MTA Purple Line Suitland (pending review, projected opening: 2021/2022) Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport Branch Ave Broad Run/Airport Commuter Rail Potomac Yard * Manassas Park Crystal City All Day Service Burke Centre Backlick Rd Manassas Rolling Rd Braddock Rd Rush-Only Service (individual services not shown) King St-Old Town Streetcar DC Streetcar - H St/Benning (opening date unknown) Van Dorn St Eisenhower Ave Franconia-Springfield Lorton Huntington Map Key Woodbridge Rush-Only Service Rippon Quantico Rush-Only Station Brooke Transfer Station * Future Station Station Leeland Rd Fredericksburg Map by Peter Dovak & David Alpert * Spotsylvania Note: This map is not intended for navigation; It contains lines and stations that do not yet exist..
Recommended publications
  • Amazon's HQ2 Decision
    RESEARCH JULY 2019 AMAZON’S HQ2: AN UPDATE ON ITS IMPACT ON THE WASHINGTON COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE MARKET AMAZON HAS ARRIVED PROJECT’S PUBLIC COST AND INCENTIVES More than seven months after announcing its decision to locate one half of its “HQ2” in National Landing, Amazon’s plans for its new campus are • Amazon will receive $550 million in workforce cash grants coming into focus. Amazon has signed leases at four buildings in from the Commonwealth of Virginia for the creation of National Landing totaling approximately 585,000 square feet. Amazon 25,000 new jobs. Additionally, Amazon can receive up to has moved into 47,512 square feet at 2345 Crystal Drive as it quickly $200 million in grants if it delivers on an additional 12,850 begins its hiring process for HQ2, and will occupy 88,000 square feet at jobs beyond the initial requirement. 241 18th Street South, 191,000 square feet at 1800 South Bell Street and 258,000 square feet at 1770 Crystal Drive as renovations at each location • Amazon will receive a cash grant of $23 million from finish. Working with JBG Smith, the largest property owner in National Arlington County for the incremental growth of an existing Landing and Amazon’s development partner, property manager and retail local Transient Occupancy Tax over the next 15 years. leasing agent, Amazon has begun to build out its workforce. Amazon is investing upwards of $95 million in tenant renovations. Notably, 1770 • The Commonwealth of Virginia has pledged $250 million Crystal Drive, where it will occupy the entirety of the 258,000 square foot towards Virginia Tech’s $1 billion investment in a new building, will make up a majority of the renovations, accounting for $80 campus proximate to Amazon’s new headquarters, which million of the total amount.
    [Show full text]
  • [Title Over Two Lines (Shift+Enter to Break Line)]
    BUS TRANSFORMATION PROJECT White Paper #2: Strategic Considerations October 2018 DRAFT: For discussion purposes 1 1 I• Purpose of White Paper II• Vision & goals for bus as voiced by stakeholders III• Key definitions IV• Strategic considerations Table of V• Deep-dive chapters to support each strategic consideration Contents 1. What is the role of Buses in the region? 2. Level of regional commitment to speeding up Buses? 3. Regional governance / delivery model for bus? 4. What business should Metrobus be in? 5. What services should Metrobus operate? 6. How should Metrobus operate? VI• Appendix: Elasticity of demand for bus 2 DRAFT: For discussion purposes I. Purpose of White Paper 3 DRAFT: For discussion purposes Purpose of White Paper 1. Present a set of strategic 2. Provide supporting analyses 3. Enable the Executive considerations for regional relevant to each consideration Steering Committee (ESC) to bus transformation in a neutral manner set a strategic direction for bus in the region 4 DRAFT: For discussion purposes This paper is a thought piece; it is intended to serve as a starting point for discussion and a means to frame the ensuing debate 1. Present a The strategic considerations in this paper are not an set of strategic exhaustive list of all decisions to be made during this considerations process; they are a set of high-level choices for the Bus Transformation Project to consider at this phase of for regional strategy development bus transformation Decisions on each of these considerations will require trade-offs to be continually assessed throughout this effort 5 DRAFT: For discussion purposes Each strategic consideration in the paper is 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transportation
    TRANSPORTATION NETWORK DIRECTORY FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND ADULTS 50+ MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MD PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Montgomery County, Maryland (‘the County’) cannot guarantee the relevance, completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the information provided on the non-County links. The County does not endorse any non-County organizations' products, services, or viewpoints. The County is not responsible for any materials stored on other non-County web sites, nor is it liable for any inaccurate, defamatory, offensive or illegal materials found on other Web sites, and that the risk of injury or damage from viewing, hearing, downloading or storing such materials rests entirely with the user. Alternative formats of this document are available upon request. This is a project of the Montgomery County Commission on People with Disabilities. To submit an update, add or remove a listing, or request an alternative format, please contact: [email protected], 240-777-1246 (V), MD Relay 711. MetroAccess and Abilities-Ride MetroAccess Paratransit – Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) MetroAccess is a shared-ride, door-to-door public transportation service for people who are unable to use fixed-route public transit due to disability. "Shared ride" means that multiple passengers may ride together in the same vehicle. The service provides daily trips throughout the Transit Zone in the Washington Metropolitan region. The Transit Zone consists of the District of Columbia, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties in Maryland, Arlington and Fairfax Counties and the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax and Falls Church in Northern Virginia. Rides are offered in the same service areas and during the same hours of operation as Metrorail and Metrobus.
    [Show full text]
  • Hearing from You Michael S
    Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. CONTACT US: Governor Hearing From You Michael S. Steele For further information about this project, please contact: Lt. Governor Fall 2004 Open Houses Lorenzo Bryant, Project Manager En Español: Jose M. Vazquéz Robert L. Flanagan Maryland Transit Administration Maryland Transit Administration MDOT Secretary 6 Saint Paul Street, 9th Floor 8720 Georgia Avenue, Suite 904 Plan to Attend Almost 300 people attended seven Red Line Open Houses Silver Spring, MD 20910 held between October 26 and November 9, 2004. At the Baltimore, MD 21202 Upcoming Public Open Open Houses, participants received updates on the status Lisa L. Dickerson (301) 565-9665 of the project, provided input, and received information on MTA Acting Administrator Telephone: 410-767-3754 Houses on the Red Line alternatives under study. The Open Houses were advertised in a project mailer and the website, as well as local newspapers. 410-539-3497 TTY The Maryland Transit Administration (buildings, historic districts, archaeological Fliers were also distributed to locations along the Red Line (MTA), in cooperation with Baltimore City, or cultural sites) that are eligible for the corridor. Materials presented at the Open Houses can Email: [email protected] | [email protected] Baltimore County, and federal and state National Register of Historic Places. If be viewed by logging on to the project website, resource agencies, will be preparing a you are interested in participating in the www.baltimoreregiontransitplan.com. Website: www.baltimoreregiontransitplan.com Draft Environmental Impact Statement Section 106-Public Involvement process, (DEIS) for the Red Line Study. preservation specialists will be available at Major themes from the Open House comments received Alternate formats of Red Line information can be provided upon request.
    [Show full text]
  • 19-1189 BP PLC V. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore
    (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2020 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus BP P. L. C. ET AL. v. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19–1189. Argued January 19, 2021—Decided May 17, 2021 Baltimore’s Mayor and City Council (collectively City) sued various en- ergy companies in Maryland state court alleging that the companies concealed the environmental impacts of the fossil fuels they promoted. The defendant companies removed the case to federal court invoking a number of grounds for federal jurisdiction, including the federal officer removal statute, 28 U. S. C. §1442. The City argued that none of the defendants’ various grounds for removal justified retaining federal ju- risdiction, and the district court agreed, issuing an order remanding the case back to state court. Although an order remanding a case to state court is ordinarily unreviewable on appeal, Congress has deter- mined that appellate review is available for those orders “remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed pursuant to section 1442 or 1443 of [Title 28].” §1447(d). The Fourth Circuit read this provision to authorize appellate review only for the part of a remand order deciding the §1442 or §1443 removal ground.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 United States of America Department of Transportation Departmental Office of Civil Rights Federal Highway Administration Offic
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENTAL OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS BALTIMORE REGIONAL INITIATIVE DEVELOPING GENUINE EQUALITY, INC., and EARL ANDREWS, Individually, Complainants, vs. Docket No. STATE OF MARYLAND, MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, MARYLAND TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, and MARYLAND STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION; Respondents. COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 1 On June 25, 2015, Maryland Governor, Larry Hogan, announced that the State had cancelled construction of the Red Line, a light rail line set to run east-west through the Baltimore region, and that all state funding for it would be redirected to a newly-created Highways, Bridges, and Roads Initiative, focusing on road projects in rural and suburban parts of the state.1 In doing so, Maryland forfeited $900 million in federal funds designated for the Line and abandoned a twelve-year planning process on which the State and federal government had expended approximately $288 million.2 A transportation economist, using Maryland’s own travel model, found that whites will receive 228 percent of the net benefit from the decision, while African Americans will receive -124 percent. The decision to cancel the Red Line and divert the resources elsewhere was only the latest in the State’s long historical pattern of deprioritizing the needs of Baltimore’s3 primarily African-American population,4 many of whom are dependent on public transportation.5 1 Michael Dresser & Luke Broadwater, Hogan Says No to Red Line, Yes to Purple, Balt. Sun (June 25, 2015), available at http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md- hogan-transportation-20150624-story.html; Ex.
    [Show full text]
  • Approved Fiscal 2008 Annual Budget
    Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Serving the National Capital Region Approved Fiscal 2008 Annual Budget Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Approved Fiscal 2008 Annual Budget Serving the National Capital Region Table of Contents Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Approved Fiscal 2008 Annual Budget Serving the National Capital Region Table of Contents Table of Contents General Manager’s Letter......................................................................................3 Chapter 1. Introduction to Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority...............................................................................5 Metro Profile ...............................................................................................5 Metro’s Strategic Plan ................................................................................6 Metro Board of Directors and Agency Oversight ........................................7 Organization Chart .....................................................................................9 How to Contact Metro...............................................................................10 Chapter 2. Budget Summary..............................................................................13 Operating Budget .....................................................................................16 Capital Budget..........................................................................................17 Reimbursable Projects .............................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Divided Baltimore
    UNDERSTANDING DIVIDED BALTIMORE How Data, Especially Mapped Data, Informed the Course WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO • Divided Baltimore was a UB response to the events of April 2015. • We wanted to share information widely with students and with interested community members with hope that we could catalyze interest in learning how Baltimore became so divided. • Presentations built around a community forum • Graduate, undergraduate, and dual enrollment high school students were enrolled in sections of the course with their own instructor. THE NEW YORK TIMES CAPTURED HOW WE ORGANIZED THE COMMUNITY FORUM http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000003 973175/uniting-a-divided-baltimore.html October 20, 2015 - By A.J. CHAVAR - U.S. - Print Headline: "Uniting a Divided Baltimore“ USING DATA AND MAPS IN THE COURSE • Today, we want to report on how we relied on the good work of BNIA and many of you in compiling data and maps that help immeasurably in comprehending the issues we face in Baltimore in achieving a fair society. HISTORICAL DATA AND MAPS— BETSY NIX • UB History Professor Betsy Nix developed a lecture on the history of segregation in Baltimore that she has now presented to a range of agencies and groups from Annie E. Casey to OSI to the last round of Baltimore City Police recruits. 1860 212,418 residents 25,500 or 12% free people of color from Freedom’s Port 1937 Redlining Map The Baltimore Chop The Baltimore Chop Map from Study for East-West Expressway, 1957. Johns Hopkins University, Sheridan Libraries. Baltimore Neighborhood Indicators Alliance,
    [Show full text]
  • ANC6A Resolution No. 2021-002
    ANC 6A RESOLUTION NO. 2021-002 Resolution regarding ANC 6A support for completing the DC Streetcar from Benning Road Metro Station to Georgetown as Planned and Promised WHEREAS, Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) were created to “advise the Council of the District of Columbia, the Mayor, and each executive agency with respect to all proposed matters of District government policy,” including transportation and economic development; WHEREAS, public transportation is a shared public benefit and can only function as such when it’s shared with all neighborhoods; WHEREAS, ANC 7E recently passed a resolution of support for the streetcar extension to Benning Road Metro station; WHEREAS, the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) recently published its Final Environmental Assessment where it found the extension to Benning Metro Station is the preferred alternative and only feasible alternative from an engineering perspective; WHEREAS, the eastward extension to Benning Road Metro is the only feasible alternative that provides a multi-modal connection to Metro; WHEREAS, the eventual westward extension to Georgetown would establish the only east-west rail-transit option for travel all the way to Georgetown; WHEREAS, the eventual westward extension to Georgetown would be the first and only fully unified transit system from eastern portions of the District to Georgetown; WHEREAS, the full streetcar route from Benning Road Metro to Georgetown would provide an enjoyable and robust east-west transportation option for residents in ward 6 and
    [Show full text]
  • Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Project
    Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Project overview The District Department of Transportation (DDOT) has initiated the final design phase of the Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Project. This final design phase will continue the work to improve the Benning Road corridor to safely and efficiently accommodate all modes of transportation following the approval of the Benning Road and Bridges Transportation Improvements Environmental Assessment (EA) in November 2020. The draft EA was published in 2016 and modified during the preliminary engineering phase of the project in 2019 and 2020. The project will improve safety conditions and operations, address deficiencies in infrastructure, and provide additional transit options in Ward 7 and Ward 5 and along the approximately two miles of Benning Road NE from Oklahoma Avenue NE to East Capitol Street. This includes: • Enhancing safety and operations along the • Enhancing and installing pedestrian and bicycle corridor and at key intersections facilities • Improving transportation infrastructure conditions • Extending DC Streetcar transit service to the Benning Road Metrorail station • Rehabilitating roadways and bridges that cross the Anacostia River, DC-295, and CSX freight rail tracks Community needs, preferences, and input voiced during past studies—including the DC Transit Future System Plan, DDOT Benning Road Streetcar Extension Study, and Benning Road Corridor Redevelopment Framework Plan and EA—will help shape and inform the project to improve access, operations, and safety for all users along Benning Road Public involvement will be continuous throughout this next phase of the project, which seeks to connect Ward 7 and Ward 5 neighborhoods to employment, activity centers, the regional Metrorail system, and multimodal transportation services at Union Station.
    [Show full text]
  • MDOT MTA Purple Line Celebrates Winners of Elementary School Art Contest First-Place Selections to Be Displayed on Banners Along 16-Mile Purple Line Corridor
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE MEDIA CONTACTS: Gary Witherspoon Brittany Marshall Office: 240-825-4629 Office: 410-767-8367 Cell: 443-801-4318 Cell: 443-970-0424 [email protected] [email protected] MDOT MTA Purple Line Celebrates Winners of Elementary School Art Contest First-Place Selections to be Displayed on Banners Along 16-Mile Purple Line Corridor RIVERDALE, MD (January 21, 2020) – Students from four elementary schools who turned images of the Purple Line rail project into award-winning art will have their work reproduced on banners displayed at project sites near their schools, the Maryland Department of Transportation Maryland Transit Administration (MDOT MTA) announced. “There are many talented, young artists in Prince George’s and Montgomery counties, and it’s exciting to see the project through their eyes,” said Jeff Ensor, director of the $5.6 billion Purple Line project for MDOT MTA. “It was difficult to select the winners because of the quality of all the entries.” This past fall, third graders from seven elementary schools along the Purple Line’s 16-mile corridor were invited to participate in the art contest. Students were asked to draw either a colorful picture of themselves and their families on the light rail or what they saw during Purple Line construction. Four schools took part and produced 140 pieces of art. Purple Line staff reviewed and selected the first-place artwork, one from each of the schools: http://bit.ly/38og1Y0. Glenridge, Langley Park-McCormick, Riverdale and Woodlin elementary schools participated in the contest. Lesli Leath, a senior community liaison with the Purple Line project and contest organizer, said the winners were selected based on “originality, vibrancy and authenticity.” “Clearly, there’s real artistic talent in schools along the Purple Line corridor,” she said.
    [Show full text]
  • Mayor and City Council of Baltimore V. Baltimore and Philadelphia Steamboat Company, 65 A. 353, 104 Md. 485 (Dec
    Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Baltimore and Philadelphia Steamboat Company, 65 A. 353, 104 Md. 485 (Dec. 19, 1906) Russell K. George I. INTRODUCTION Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Baltimore and Philadelphia Steamboat Company1 concerns the condemnation by the City of Baltimore of properties owned by the Baltimore and Philadelphia Steamboat Company ("BPSC"). After the Great Fire of 1904, which destroyed most of the Baltimore business district, the City embarked on an effort to make various urban improvements. Among other things, the City endeavored to widen Pratt Street fifty feet to the south by condemning wharves at the corner of Light and Pratt Streets that were owned and leased by the Steamboat Company.2 The Burnt District Commission awarded the Company minimal damages for the property that was condemned, and instead assessed benefits against the Company for the widening of Pratt Street.3 The Company appealed to the Baltimore City Circuit Court, where Judge Henry Stockbridge essentially reversed the Commission awards, giving the Company much more compensation than it initially received. Both the City and the Company cross- appealed. The Maryland Court of Appeals rendered its decision on December 19, 1906, affirming Stockbridge's awards. The case represents a microcosm of the improvement efforts in Baltimore following the fire. The litigation pursued by the Steamboat Company shows how property owners posed an obstacle to urban improvements. Christine Rosen discusses this in The Limits of Power: Great Fires and the Process of City Growth in America, 1 65 A. 353 (1906). 2 See Diagram, attached. 1 concluding that the progressive nature of Baltimore, which had developed prior to the fire,4 helped the City to overcome various obstacles to change, including private property ownership and political deadlock.5 In addition, the case presents issues concerning the condemnation value of waterfront property, particularly the value of certain riparian rights and the question of whether they are to be included in the fair market value of the property.
    [Show full text]