DOCSLIB.ORG

Project Scores - Updated February 18, 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Project Scores - Updated February 18, 2021 FY 2022 (Round 4) Project Scores - Updated February 18, 2021 Crash Disadvantaged Enviro Econ Dev Intermodal Travel Time Land Use Land Use Inc Project Throughput Delay Crash Rate Acces to Multimodal Air Quality Score Divided by SMART SCALE $ SMART SCALE SMART SMART SCALE App Id Area Type District Submitted By Title DGP HPP Frequency Access to Jobs Impact Support Access Reliability Efficiency Efficiency Benefit Project Total Cost Score Score Score Jobs Score Access Score Score Total Cost Request Score SCALE Rank District Rank Score Score Score Score Score Score Score Score Score 4th Street at Holston Road Turn Lane 6886 D Bristol Wytheville Town x x 0.00 0.00 2.03 28.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.34 0.00 0.00 3.02 $ 2,531,180 11.93 $ 2,531,180 11.93 39 1 Improvements 6966 D Bristol Richlands Town Realignment of 2nd Street Approach x x 0.00 0.04 1.86 11.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.31 $ 1,533,931 8.57 $ 1,533,931 8.57 74 2 6996 D Bristol Wise County US58 East of Tacoma Mtn Median Barrier x x 0.00 0.00 3.53 10.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.72 $ 2,541,035 6.78 $ 2,541,035 6.78 94 3 Mount Rogers Planning 6848 D Bristol I-77 Northbound Truck Climbing Lane x 27.80 6.57 1.01 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.58 0.09 0.00 18.41 0.02 7.79 $ 16,816,599 4.64 $ 16,816,599 4.64 130 4 District Commission 6997 D Bristol Wise County US23 Safety Improvements x 0.00 0.00 6.11 9.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.02 2.10 $ 5,083,482 4.13 $ 5,083,482 4.13 143 5 Hawthorne Drive to 11th Street 6679 D Bristol Norton City x x 0.00 0.00 0.97 1.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.03 0.40 $ 1,075,591 3.70 $ 1,075,591 3.70 160 6 Improvements 6927 D Bristol Smyth County US Route 11 at Rifton Drive x x 0.00 0.01 0.65 2.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.24 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.28 $ 782,026 3.64 $ 782,026 3.64 162 7 6926 D Bristol Smyth County US Route 11 / SR 660 Roundabout South x x 0.00 0.11 1.28 19.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.03 0.00 0.00 1.96 $ 5,710,062 3.43 $ 5,710,062 3.43 167 8 US 460 at Leatherwood Lane Offset Left- 6923 D Bristol Bluefield Town x x 0.00 0.00 5.10 3.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.79 0.00 0.00 1.57 $ 4,594,934 3.42 $ 4,594,934 3.42 170 9 Turn Lanes 6888 D Bristol Wytheville Town W Monroe St at US 11 Realignment x x 0.00 0.00 1.10 10.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.46 0.00 0.00 1.25 $ 4,211,758 2.97 $ 4,211,758 2.97 184 10 6801 D Bristol Tazewell County US460 at SR610 intersection Improvments x x 0.00 0.00 2.23 19.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.57 0.13 0.00 0.00 2.21 $ 9,358,603 2.36 $ 9,358,603 2.36 216 11 6829 D Bristol Dickenson County SR 83 at SR 637 Roundabout x 0.00 0.84 2.60 9.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.24 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.37 $ 5,824,065 2.35 $ 5,824,065 2.35 217 12 6936 D Bristol Russell County US 19 EB Super Elevation Improvements x 0.00 0.00 2.85 4.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.97 $ 4,941,660 1.97 $ 4,941,660 1.97 245 13 Thompson Drive and Stanley Street 6712 D Bristol Abingdon Town x 0.51 0.09 0.51 9.05 0.01 0.01 0.59 0.43 0.28 0.02 0.00 0.00 1.00 $ 5,246,993 1.91 $ 5,246,993 1.91 248 14 Roundabout 6917 D Bristol Scott County US 23 at US 58 Intersection Improvements x x 0.00 0.49 1.57 4.61 0.27 0.23 0.00 0.00 1.36 0.22 1.23 0.03 0.87 $ 4,771,075 1.82 $ 4,771,075 1.82 251 15 6959 D Bristol Richlands Town 221 - US460 Intersection Improvements x x 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.26 $ 1,571,631 1.65 $ 1,571,631 1.65 257 16 6859 D Bristol Bristol City Widen US Route 11 Western Section x x 1.04 0.39 4.47 7.32 0.16 0.10 3.97 1.30 0.13 0.43 0.30 0.03 2.04 $ 13,616,787 1.50 $ 13,616,787 1.50 266 17 6919 D Bristol Scott County US 23 at Hilton Road Access Modifications x x 0.00 0.00 1.81 1.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.32 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.44 $ 3,077,901 1.43 $ 3,077,901 1.43 269 18 College Avenue Access Management & 6924 D Bristol Bluefield Town x 0.36 0.01 0.35 0.89 0.19 0.17 0.42 0.31 0.10 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.33 $ 2,572,670 1.29 $ 2,572,670 1.29 275 19 Sidewalks Bristol Metropolitan 6864 D Bristol Widen US 11 Eastern Section x 0.49 0.45 4.77 4.59 0.17 0.11 1.89 0.62 0.14 0.39 0.19 0.04 1.69 $ 13,395,677 1.26 $ 13,395,677 1.26 280 20 Planning Organization 6875 D Bristol Big Stone Gap Town Gilley Ave at Carter Street Turn Lanes x x 0.00 0.00 0.36 1.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.25 $ 2,166,125 1.15 $ 2,166,125 1.15 289 21 Bristol Metropolitan 6882 D Bristol I-81 Frontage Road x 8.99 11.42 10.04 2.59 0.18 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.17 0.71 0.00 3.45 $ 30,937,909 1.12 $ 30,937,909 1.12 291 22 Planning Organization 6900 D Bristol Wythe County US 52 at Apache Run Realignment x x 0.00 0.00 0.10 1.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 $ 1,912,372 1.00 $ 1,912,372 1.00 302 23 6680 D Bristol Norton City Park Avenue & 11th Street Improvements x 0.72 0.00 0.49 0.43 0.04 0.04 1.65 0.00 0.80 0.76 0.00 0.04 0.35 $ 4,002,654 0.88 $ 4,002,654 0.88 312 24 US 58 at Delhart Rd Turn Lane 6920 D Bristol Grayson County x x 0.00 0.00 0.41 2.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 $ 3,998,188 0.86 $ 3,998,188 0.86 315 25 Improvements Bristol Metropolitan 6878 D Bristol Cook Street Extension x 8.33 10.31 0.00 0.00 1.79 1.72 0.24 0.17 0.16 0.28 0.00 0.00 1.22 $ 15,783,692 0.77 $ 15,783,692 0.77 322 26 Planning Organization 6863 D Bristol Bristol City MLK Jr Blvd at Moore St Roundabout x x 0.00 1.05 0.29 2.74 0.68 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.43 $ 5,625,459 0.77 $ 5,625,459 0.77 323 27 U.S. Route 58 at U.S. Route 11 6744 D Bristol Washington County x x 0.00 2.64 1.91 4.25 0.44 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.97 $ 13,144,721 0.74 $ 13,144,721 0.74 325 28 Roundabout 6760 D Bristol Tazewell Town BUS 19 TWLTL x x 0.00 0.02 1.06 2.09 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.16 0.00 0.02 0.42 $ 9,309,199 0.45 $ 9,309,199 0.45 345 29 6860 D Bristol Big Stone Gap Town E 5th at Gilley Radius Improvements x x 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.08 $ 1,945,055 0.41 $ 1,945,055 0.41 351 30 6958 D Bristol Lee County US58 Between Mulberry and River Bend x x 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.17 $ 4,430,354 0.38 $ 4,430,354 0.38 357 31 US 460 and US 19 Intersection 6681 D Bristol Tazewell County x x 0.00 1.14 0.43 2.34 0.08 0.06 0.00 0.00 2.05 0.10 1.10 0.00 0.36 $ 15,232,719 0.24 $ 15,232,719 0.24 364 32 Improvements US 58 Alt Turn Lane Improvements at 6945 D Bristol Russell County x x 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 - $ 2,229,244 - $ 2,229,244 - 388 33 Sundown Drive 6946 D Bristol Grayson County US 58 at SR 94 Turn Lanes x x 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 - $ 3,433,163 - $ 3,433,163 - 388 33 Charlottesville-Albemarle 7088 B Culpeper Metropolitan Planning Hydraulic Road and 29 x 6.76 9.41 23.67 4.18 3.11 3.30 25.86 14.15 1.09 0.68 1.91 0.70 79.00 86.23 16.51 $ 24,030,488 6.87 $ 5,730,488 28.81 10 1 Organization 6895 B Culpeper Albemarle County Route 250 East Corridor Improvements x x 1.76 0.00 6.08 1.42 0.00 0.00 2.02 0.00 0.20 1.99 0.00 0.31 86.39 91.00 10.28 $ 5,939,563 17.31 $ 3,939,563 26.10 11 2 Old Lynchburg Rd/5th St Extended 6906 B Culpeper Albemarle County x x 1.45 0.31 5.65 14.56 0.12 0.17 5.56 3.04 0.01 1.04 0.00 0.00 81.99 89.78 11.12 $ 7,263,075 15.31 $ 5,263,075 21.12 13 3 Intersection Improvements 7017 B Culpeper Charlottesville City Ridge Street Safety Improvement x x 11.82 14.78 4.17 3.73 2.55 2.61 27.13 19.80 0.96 2.26 0.23 0.09 79.63 85.25 15.13 $ 8,738,020 17.32 $ 8,738,020 17.32 21 4 Thomas Jefferson Planning 7002 C Culpeper Exit 107 Park and Ride Lot x 0.58 0.30 0.36 0.00 0.16 0.13 2.22 24.40 1.19 0.00 0.00 37.83 4.57 $ 3,380,941 13.52 $ 3,380,941 13.52 28 5 District Commission Rio Road E & John Warner Parkway 7060 B Culpeper Albemarle County x x 2.44 4.30 3.08 3.46 0.70 0.66 9.33 5.10 0.06 0.22 0.00 0.00 82.28 85.44 10.67 $ 10,126,306 10.54 $ 8,126,306 13.13 29 6 Roundabout 6894 B Culpeper Albemarle County Rt 20/Rt 53 Intersection Improvements x x 1.55 0.70 3.37 5.70 0.58 0.45 3.57 2.60 0.98 0.75 0.00 0.03 88.66 91.32 10.57 $ 9,536,258 11.09 $ 8,536,258 12.39 34 7 W Main Streetscape Ph 3 - 8th St NW to 6674 B Culpeper Charlottesville City x x 9.52 0.00 1.37 0.02 0.94 1.36 36.43 19.94 1.13 2.31 0.00 4.23 78.17 84.10 13.44 $ 10,874,697 12.36 $ 10,874,697 12.36 35 8 Roosevelt Brown Ave Preston Ave.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Countywide Bus Rapid Transit Study Consultant’S Report (Final) July 2011
    Barrier system (from TOA) Countywide Bus Rapid Transit Study Consultant’s Report (Final) July 2011 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COUNTYWIDE BUS RAPID TRANSIT STUDY Consultant’s Report (Final) July 2011 Countywide Bus Rapid Transit Study Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. ES-1 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Key additional elements of BRT network ...................................................................... 2 1.1.1 Relationship to land use ........................................................................................ 2 1.1.2 Station access ...................................................................................................... 3 1.1.3 Brand identity ........................................................................................................ 4 1.2 Organization of report .................................................................................................. 5 1.3 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................ 5 2 Study Methodology ............................................................................................................. 7 2.1 High-level roadway screening ...................................................................................... 9 2.2 Corridor development and initial
    [Show full text]
  • Biennial Report
    1 Bethesda Transportation Management District Bethesda Transportation Solutions Montgomery County, Maryland BIENNIAL REPORT FY2008 – FY2009 Operating under a contract between Montgomery County, Maryland and the Bethesda Urban Partnership Executive Director Director David Dabney Danielle Milo Contributing Staff : Rachel Porter Anne Kaiser Allison Kemp Tom Robertson Jennifer Zucker Bethesda Transportation Solutions Biennial Report FY2008 - FY2009 MARCH 2010 2 Bethesda Transportation Management District Montgomery County, Maryland Biennial Report FY2008 – FY2009 Completed: March 2010 Prepared by: Bethesda Transportation Solutions Request additional copies from: Bethesda Transportation Solutions 7700 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, MD 20814 Telephone: (301) 656-0868 Fax: (243) 223-0200 Email: [email protected] www.bethesdatransit.org www.bethesda.org Bethesda Transportation Solutions Biennial Report FY2008 - FY2009 3 Table of Contents I. Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 7 II. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 11 III. TMD Operations, Programs & Services....................................................................... 13 A. TMD Objectives ....................................................................................................13 B. TMD Operations ...................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • RTS Calendar
    *REDUCED CITY SERVICE/ NO CAMPUS OR LATER GATOR SERVICE RTS Calendar #HOLIDAY SERVICE FOR ROUTES 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 13, 15, 16, 20, 26, 35, 43, 75, 711 December 30, 2019 NO SERVICE OUTSIDE OF THIS to May 3, 2020 SCHEDULE SERVICE DECEMBER 2019 JANUARY 2020 FEBRUARY 2020 S M T W H F S S M T W H F S S M T W H F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 29 30 31 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 MARCH 2020 APRIL 2020 MAY 2020 S M T W H F S S M T W H F S S M T W H F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 30 31 26 27 28 29 30 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 *Reduced service is indicated on RTS route time schedules with an “R” in the far right column under each route direction column section.
    [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]
  • Operations and Financial Analysis
    OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS APRIL 22, 2015 PREPARED BY: LOUIS BERGER WATER SERVICES TABLE OF CONTENTS A) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY B) OPERATIONS ANALYSIS C) FINANCIAL ANALYSIS D) APPENDICES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction Louis Berger was tasked by the Baltimore City Department of Transportation (BCDOT) to evaluate the Charm City Circulator (CCC) bus operation and analyze financial performance, and develop route operations alternatives that maximize ridership while minimizing costs. Objective The objective is to develop and evaluate alternatives to eliminate the annual deficits while providing maximum service to riders within existing financial resources. Description of Current System Existing Condition The CCC consists of four routes, Purple, Orange, Green and Banner providing “Fast. Friendly. Free.” service throughout downtown Baltimore 362 days per year, with hours of service varying by day type and by season. Key characteristics of each route: Purple Route- runs north - south from Federal Hill to Historic Mount Vernon. Ten (10) minute headways require six (6) buses to operate. Heaviest ridership of all the routes. Orange Route- runs east – west from Historic Fell’s Point and Harbor Point in the east beyond University of Maryland, Baltimore in the west. Ten (10) minute headways require five (5) buses to operate. Ridership is second best in the system. Green Route- roughly U shaped route serves Johns Hopkins University Hospital East Baltimore Campus (JHUH) connecting south to Harbor Point and Harbor East, then northwest to park and ride lots, looping down near City Center then back around. Ten (10) minute headways require six (6) buses. Longest route, least productive in terms of riders. Banner Route- angles southeast of the city past Federal Hill to Fort McHenry.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Construction Program
    2019 Construction Program PennDOT Engineering District 1 SERVING CRAWFORD, ERIE, FOREST, MERCER, VENANGO, AND WARREN COUNTIES Tom Wolf, Governor Leslie S. Richards, Secretary of Transportation James A. Foringer, P.E., District Executive Contact Information PennDOT Engineering District 1 255 Elm Street PO Box 398 Oil City, PA 16301 (814) 678-7085 Business Hours: 8:00 AM — 4:30 PM Monday — Friday PennDOT’s Engineering District 1 is responsible for the state-maintained transportation network in this region. This includes 3,689 miles of roadway and 2,064 bridges in the six-county area. 2 Overall 2019 Construction Program • Projected 2019 Program: $125.44M • 2018 Program: $92.84M 3 District 1 2019 Construction Program Thank you for your interest in the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation District 1 Construction Program for 2019. This publication is intended to provide a general overview of projects that currently are under construction, and those scheduled to be awarded or begin construction in 2019. The 2019 Construction Book is divided into seven sections: one representing projects spanning the entire district or multiple counties and one representing each of the six counties in the district. Award dates, expected completion dates, project descriptions, project locations, costs, and maintenance of traffic are listed. The listed estimated cost for a project is for the construction phase only. County maps have also been included for reference. Please keep this book on hand throughout the upcoming construction season. Note: All information is correct as of the distribution date of this booklet. However, all dates and costs are estimated and, therefore, are subject to change.
    [Show full text]
  • Route(S) Description 26 the Increased Frequency on the 26 Makes the Entire Southwestern Portion of the Network Vastly More Useful
    Route(s) Description 26 The increased frequency on the 26 makes the entire southwestern portion of the network vastly more useful. Please keep it. The 57, 60, and 61 came south to the area but having frequent service in two directions makes it much better, and riders from these routes can connect to the 26 and have much more areas open to them. Thank you. Green Line The increased weekend service on the Green line to every twenty minutes is a good addition of service for Campbell which is seeing markedly better service under this plan. Please keep the increased service. Multiple Please assuage public concerns about the 65 and 83 by quantifying the impact the removal of these routes would have, and possible cheaper ways to reduce this impact. The fact is that at least for the 65, the vast majority of the route is duplicative, and within walking distances of other routes. Only south of Hillsdale are there more meaningful gaps. Mapping the people who would be left more than a half mile (walkable distance) away from service as a result of the cancellation would help the public see what could be done to address the service gap, and quantifying the amount of people affected may show that service simply cannot be justified. One idea for a route would be service from winchester transit center to Princeton plaza mall along camden and blossom hill. This could be done with a single bus at a cheaper cost than the current 65. And nobody would be cut off. As far as the 83 is concerned, I am surprised the current plan does not route the 64 along Mcabee, where it would be eq..
    [Show full text]
  • History of MDOT MTA and the Lots System
    History of Transit Organization in the Baltimore Region Transit Agencies and Service Development in the Baltimore Region OVERVIEW The Baltimore Regional Transit Governance and Funding Study will develop alternatives for how the region could structure, organize, and fund regional transit services. The approach to developing these alternatives includes working with the Baltimore Regional Transit Board (BRTB) through an iterative process of research, analysis, and stakeholder input to ensure that the alternatives are grounded in experience, respectful of history and constraints, but creative enough to recognize opportunities. This technical memo, the first in the series, focuses on the history and development of transit services in the Baltimore Region. The first step involves focusing on the history and development of transit Image from Creative Commons: ETLamborghini services in the Baltimore region to understand how the existing service network came to be and provides the context for why some regional services are operated by the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) and others by Locally Operated Transit Systems (LOTS). Our goal is that by understanding the historical perspective, we will understand the transit network, its origins and evolution and its current form. The overview and historical perspective include the development and evolution of: • State leadership for local transit services in the City of Baltimore. • State leadership for regional transit services, including the MARC commuter rail system and the Commuter Bus program. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | KFH Group | KPMG | Tamar Henkin 1 History of Transit Organization in the Baltimore Region • County leadership for local services in the counties surrounding Baltimore through the Locally Operated Transit System (LOTS) program.
    [Show full text]
  • Prince George's County Transit System Map Thebus
    M ON TG MA D OM IN R ERY S ILL ST T M ND BO GORMAN 5 AV 2 N E M RD MANGU D C V 201 A !( A P P L InsetT 1 B E S L E 1 T D 5 IL M C N O Prince George's County TransitHER Anne Arundel County H US FederalN Courthouse RY W S LN T Y O E N C N GreenbeltV H L E ER A R A Southern District R P Y V D LN R A A R T T S I A D " 1 R G H R D 5 RO 3 T A C E I M 5 LT N BE W EN S GRE " Laurel Regional E N T Greenbelt L v® Hospital T T R P C TheBus System Map E VA K N N D N US Y E Metrorail Station A N C D T RD O 11 I R R S N D L E A T U G D L E J E E ID O R V O O R A R D !(197 C IVY LN W S D 11 15X 16 A E E P G W N D 2 B 5 E E O V E H O A L IVY D T D LN D O D R R I R 3 L R O R QU 5 N E O S £1 IS P H D ¤ S R W N I T N Y W L G HU H O D R D IL T R D O 15X N P O L E N SC S O D RE 11 R N T R N C L B U R W Y R A G 197 C O E K !( R T D E N R O N A D O P A E L S L YW H L I R N E M D B O C ER L L Muirkirk I D E 95 H E A C T B I H R §¨¦ M L I E G n¤ D C G N MARC Station G K T H S I Y O E A N R R N K I V H E G A N Y A R P R M W D R S I P H LA N S T Y K V S T E V P O O IE I R R O W T N I N C BREEZEWO N O I L OD CT F R A G R C R R R M T K H W A AP E L L P S D I D I E N L P W T O L M L N O UIRKI T A B N D E RK RD L E C E C B N T E T RD P B E N K E O L L B L A N M E T K E T D 1 BRE 16 A N £¤ A EZE D A E R N WOO I E M D DR S M L K E E O M H N A O N A E E C R N S I S M O H I R T T L T H S O W W I G M D L T N Y O E D C V A U T A L B E R PARATRANSIT DISTRICT 1 O N A D P S T K R O D B IT H E M L E W Y C O I A L L D L F R L Beltway Plaza 495V A E E E D ¨¦§E I R A R S R R BR
    [Show full text]
  • Walk Across West Virginia Route Descriptions
    WWAALLKK AACCRROOSSSS WWEESSTT VVIIRRGGIINNIIAA RROOUUTTEE DDEESSCCRRIIPPTTIIOONNSS Few of us have the time to actually Walk Across West Virginia (WAWV), but we can do a virtual Walk Across West Virginia by walking a distance equal to walking across the state. On the following pages are descriptions of five routes across West Virginia. Two are existing trails, two are hypothetical straight line routes through the geographical center of the state and one is a combination of trails and public roads. The longest route across the state is 281 miles. If you walked 5.5 miles a week or 21.5 miles a month, in your local neighborhood, you would equal the longest distance in less than a year. So why not set a personal goal of Walking Across West Virginia this year! Record the date you reach a specific mileage point on one of the routes to track your progress. You can use the mileage tracking chart found on the WAWV website to track your accumulated miles. Include your family members in your trip. You might enhance the “virtual” experience by actually walking parts of the existing trails nearest you, or by visiting some of the areas traversed by the hypothetical routes. The West to East route across the state also includes “trivia questions” about West Virginia. See how much you know about West Virginia.! Allegheny Trail Milage Listing Date Mileage Elevation Description _____ 0.0 2182 Pennsylvania/West Virginia State Line close to Bruceton Mills on Local Route 4 _____ 8.0 1495 Cross under I-68 _____ 13.3 1693 Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Baltimorelink Implementation Status Report
    BaltimoreLink Implementation February 2018 Status Report Report to the Maryland State Legislature Joint Chairmen’s Report J00H01 BaltimoreLink Performance Report to the Maryland State Legislature Executive Summary BaltimoreLink, implemented on June 18, 2017, is the complete overhaul and rebranding of the core transit system operating within Baltimore City and the greater Baltimore region. The purpose of this document is to provide the Maryland State Legislature with a summary of BaltimoreLink performance in its first full six months of operation (July 2017 to December 2017) based on three key metrics: Ridership, On-Time Performance, and Customer Satisfaction. An analysis of safety has also been provided. The analysis begins with July 2017 when a full month of data was available. The performance analysis consists of an evaluation of performance at an MDOT MTA system-wide level as well as an evaluation of performance at the route and route category level (CityLink, LocalLink, Express BusLink). Further, the system- wide analysis also includes a comparison to data for the same six-month evaluation period in 2016. Executive Summary ES-1 BaltimoreLink Performance Report to the Maryland State Legislature Ridership Ridership Performance Snapshot Average Daily Ridership by Month: 2016 vs. 2017 Average Daily Ridership – 2016 vs. 2017 Monthly ridership declines in 2017 compared to 2016 reflect the overall declines in ridership during the 6-month evaluation period. However, there is a growing convergence in monthly ridership between 2016 and 2017 in the Weekday, Saturday, and Sunday ridership declined in 2017 when compared to 2016 later months of the year, especially for weekend ridership. for the six months evaluated.
    [Show full text]
  • Biennial Report FY06 – FY07
    2 Bethesda Transportation Management District Montgomery County, Maryland Biennial Report FY06 – FY07 Completed: March 2008 Prepared by: Bethesda Transportation Solutions Request additional copies from: Bethesda Transportation Solutions 7700 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, MD 20814 Telephone: (301) 656-0868 Fax: (243) 223-0200 Email: [email protected] www.bethesdatransit.org www.bethesda.org Bethesda Transportation Solutions Biennial Report FY2006 - FY2007 3 Table of Contents I. Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 7 II. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 11 III. TMD Operations, Programs & Services....................................................................... 13 A. TMD Objectives ....................................................................................................13 B. TMD Operations ...................................................................................................13 TMD Staffi ng TMD Funding TMD Advisory Committee C. TMD Marketing Programs .................................................................................15 Super Fare Share Fare Share Commuter Information Days Newsletters Banners D. TMD Events ............................................................................................................20 Walk & Ride Challenge Bike to Work Day BTS Participation in BUP Events Employer Recognition Events
    [Show full text]