DOCSLIB.ORG

Anne Arundel County Corridor Growth Management Plan Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Anne Arundel County Corridor Growth Management Plan Final Report FINAL REPORT Anne Arundel County Corridor Growth Management Plan July 20, 2012 LEGEND Baltimore City US 50 MD 2 South MD 2 North Howard County I-97 MD 32 MD 100 4.6-Miles MD 295 MD 3 MD 607-MD 173 14-Miles 2.5-Miles 16-Miles Benfield Blvd. 13-Miles MD176 14-Miles 17-Miles MD170 4.6-Miles MD 713 Ridge Rd. 11-Miles AACOBoundary Anne Arundel County 17-Miles 7-Miles 19-Miles 4-Miles Prince George's County Prepared by: µ 0 1 2 4 Miles a Joint Venture 7055 Samuel Morse Dr., Suite 100 | Columbia, MD 21406 | 410.741.3500 Corridor Growth Management Plan Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 CHAPTER 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................1-1 1.1 OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................ 1-2 1.1.2 Project Costs .......................................................................................... 1-2 1.1.3 Alternatives Tested ............................................................................... 1-2 1.1.4 Priorities ................................................................................................ 1-4 1.1.5 Next Steps ............................................................................................. 1-4 1.2 US 50 .................................................................................................................. 1-4 1.3 MD 2 - NORTH .................................................................................................... 1-7 1.4 MD 2 - SOUTH ..................................................................................................... 1-9 1.5 I-97 ...................................................................................................................... 1-9 1.6 MD 32 ............................................................................................................... 1-10 1.7 MD 100 ............................................................................................................. 1-13 1.8 BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON PARKWAY/ MD 295 ............................................. 1-15 1.8.1 MD 3 .................................................................................................... 1-15 1.9 MAGOTHY BRIDGE ROAD/ HOG NECK ROAD/ FORT SMALLWOOD ROAD ...... 1-17 1.10 SECONDARY CORRIDORS .................................................................................. 1-17 2 CHAPTER 2: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................2-1 2.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 PURPOSE AND NEED........................................................................................... 2-2 2.3 TRANSIT NODE IDENTIFICATION AND MODE INVESTIGATION .......................... 2-3 2.4 ALTERNATIVE SCREENING/ MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS/ PRIORITIZATION .. 2-3 2.5 STAKEHOLDER AND PUBLIC OUTREACH ............................................................. 2-4 2.6 REPORT ORGANIZATION .................................................................................... 2-6 3 CHAPTER 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS DOCUMENTATION ............................................3-1 3.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES .............................................................................. 3-1 3.2.1 US 50 ..................................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.2 MD 2 South ............................................................................................ 3-2 3.2.3 MD 2 North ............................................................................................ 3-2 3.2.4 I-97......................................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.5 MD 32 .................................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.6 MD 100 .................................................................................................. 3-2 3.2.7 MD 295 .................................................................................................. 3-3 3.2.8 MD 3 ...................................................................................................... 3-3 July 2012 i Corridor Growth Management Plan Table of Contents 3.2.9 MD 173/ MD 607 ................................................................................... 3-3 3.2.10 Benfield Blvd.......................................................................................... 3-3 3.2.11 MD 176 .................................................................................................. 3-3 3.2.12 MD 170 .................................................................................................. 3-3 3.2.13 MD 713/ Ridge Road ............................................................................. 3-4 3.3 EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE ............................................................................... 3-4 3.4 PREVIOUS STUDIES ............................................................................................. 3-4 4 CHAPTER 4: TRAVEL FORECASTING ..........................................................................4-1 4.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 MODEL VALIDATION ........................................................................................... 4-1 4.2.1 US 50 (freeway) ..................................................................................... 4-2 4.2.2 MD 2 South (primary arterial) ............................................................... 4-2 4.2.3 MD 2 North (primary arterial) ............................................................... 4-2 4.2.4 I-97 (freeway) ........................................................................................ 4-3 4.2.5 MD 32 (freeway).................................................................................... 4-3 4.2.6 MD 100 (freeway).................................................................................. 4-3 4.2.7 MD 295 (special freeway) ...................................................................... 4-3 4.2.8 MD 3 (primary arterial) ......................................................................... 4-3 4.2.9 MD 173/ MD 607 (minor/ primary arterial) .......................................... 4-4 4.2.10 Benfield Blvd (primary arterial) ............................................................. 4-4 4.2.11 MD 176 (minor arterial) ........................................................................ 4-4 4.2.12 MD 170 (primary arterial) ..................................................................... 4-4 4.2.13 MD 713/ Ridge Road (minor arterial) .................................................... 4-4 4.3 MODE INVESTIGATION, LAND USE, AND TRANSIT NODE IDENTIFICATION ....... 4-4 4.3.1 US 50 ..................................................................................................... 4-6 4.3.2 I-97......................................................................................................... 4-8 4.3.3 MD 2 (North) ......................................................................................... 4-8 4.3.4 MD 295 ................................................................................................ 4-11 4.3.5 MD 100 ................................................................................................ 4-12 4.3.6 MD 32 .................................................................................................. 4-12 4.3.7 MD 3 .................................................................................................... 4-15 4.3.8 MD 2 South .......................................................................................... 4-15 4.3.9 Fort Smallwood Road/ Magothy Bridge Road/ Hog Neck Road .......... 4-15 4.4 RELATIONSHIP TO LAND USE ............................................................................ 4-17 4.5 TRAVEL FORECASTS AND LEVEL OF SERVICE .................................................... 4-17 4.5.1 No Build - Existing + Committed (E+C) Scenario ................................. 4-17 4.5.2 Roadway Widening Only – CLRP Plan Scenario ................................... 4-17 4.6 CORRIDOR CLRP IMPROVEMENT ..................................................................... 4-18 4.7 MANAGED LANE AND ENHANCED TRANSIT SCENARIO ................................... 4-19 July 2012 ii Corridor Growth Management Plan Table of Contents 4.8 SUMMARY OF FORECASTS ............................................................................... 4-20 4.8.1 US 50 ................................................................................................... 4-21 4.8.2 MD 2 North .......................................................................................... 4-21 4.8.3 MD 2 South .......................................................................................... 4-22 4.8.4 I-97....................................................................................................... 4-22 4.8.5 MD 32 .................................................................................................. 4-22 4.8.6 MD 100 ...............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Capital Budget and Program I S C a L
    F Capital Budget and Program I S C A L Y E A Appendix 2 of 4 R Roads and Bridges Traffic Control Storm Drains 2 Waterway Improvement 0 Janet S. Owens 0 County Executive 3 Roads & Bridges Class Project Title Page Appendix Project Title Page Appendix Arundel Mills Tax District 91 2-180 Hospital Drive Extension 70 2-137 Arundel On The Bay Rd 72 2-141 Hwy Sfty Improv (HSI) 86 2-170 Brockbridge Rd Brdg/Patuxent 79 2-155 Idlewilde Road 92 2-182 Cap St Claire Rd Wide 76 2-150 Jennifer Road Ramp 74 2-145 Catherine Ave/MD 100 82 2-161 Jumpers Hole Rd 3 67 2-133 Catherine Avenue Widening 95 2-188 Magothy Bch/Magothy Brdg Con 78 2-154 Chesapeake Center Drive 82 2-162 Masonry Reconstruction 87 2-172 Chg Agst R & B Clsd Projects 66 2-131 MD 175/Odenton Town Center 73 2-144 Chstnt Tre/Grn Holly 77 2-151 MD 214 @ MD 468 Impr 98 2-194 Countywide Sidewalks 71 2-140 MD173/MD177 Connection 74 2-146 Crestwood Sidewalk,Curb,Gutter 90 2-177 Medical Boulevard 68 2-135 Dicus Mill/Severn Run 80 2-157 Mjr Bridge Rehab (MBR) 86 2-169 Dorchester Tax District 88 2-174 Morgan Road Extended 67 2-132 Dundee Rdway,Sdwk,C&G 94 2-185 National Business Pk 84 2-166 East Park Drive 93 2-183 Odenton Marc Enchance Phase II 97 2-191 East-West Blvd. 65 2-129 Odenton Rd Sdwk-So 89 2-176 Farmington Vill Tax Dis 89 2-175 Odenton Rd Sidewalk 66 2-130 FBRM Project Plan 75 2-148 Parole Intermodal Transit Fac.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the COURT of APPEALS of MARYLAND No
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 94 September Term, 2005 _________________________________________ SDC 214, LLC v. LONDON TOWNE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., et al. __________________________________________ Bell, C.J. Raker Wilner Cathell Battaglia Greene Eldridge, John C. (Retired, Specially Assigned), JJ. __________________________________________ Opinion by Eldridge, J. _________________________________________ Filed: November 9, 2006 This case concerns the interpretation of a restrictive covenant which states that a six-acre parcel of land in Anne Arundel County “shall be undeveloped, except for educational facilities in conjunction with the Anne Arundel County Board of Education.” The disputed issue is whether the quoted language means that the Board of Education was required to have been involved in the planning, design or construction of the educational facilities, or, on the other hand, whether the Board’s involvement in the use of the educational facilities is sufficient to permit such facilities under the covenant. I. The parcel of land which is the subject of this dispute is approximately six acres, located in the south east quadrant of the intersection of Maryland Route 2 and Maryland Route 214 in the Edgewater area of Anne Arundel County. The parcel had been part of a 1390-acre tract of land which a developer, Rose of Annapolis Limited Partnership, intended to develop “as a mixed-use community known as South River Colony.” In 1988, the developer Rose of Annapolis entered into a “Development Agreement and Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions” with each of several community associations representing “citizens who reside in the general vicinity of the Property.” The respondent London Towne Property Owners Association, Inc., was one of these associations entering a Development Agreement and Declaration -2- of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions with the developer.
    [Show full text]
  • War of 1812 Travel Map & Guide
    S u sq u eh a n n a 1 Westminster R 40 r e iv v e i r 272 R 15 anal & Delaware C 70 ke Chesapea cy a Northeast River c o Elk River n 140 Havre de Chesapeake o 97 Grace City 49 M 26 40 Susquehanna 213 32 Flats 301 13 795 95 1 r e Liberty Reservoir v i R Frederick h 26 s 9 u B 695 Elk River G 70 u 340 n Sa p ssaf 695 rass 83 o Riv w er r e d 40 e v i r R R Baltimore i 13 95 v e r y M c i 213 a dd c le o B R n 70 ac iv o k e R r M 270 iv e 301 r P o to m ac 15 ster Che River 95 P 32 a R t i v a 9 e r p Chestertown 695 s 13 co R 20 1 i 213 300 1 ve r 100 97 Rock Hall 8 Leesburg 97 177 213 Dover 2 301 r ive r R e 32 iv M R 7 a r k got n hy te Ri s a v t 95 er e 295 h r p 189 S e o e C v 313 h ve i r C n R R e iv o er h 13 ka 267 495 uc 113 T Whitehall Bay Bay Bridge 50 495 Greensboro 193 495 Queen Milford Anne 7 14 50 Selby 404 Harrington Bay 1 14 Denton 66 4 113 y P 258 a a B t u rn 404 x te 66 Washington D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Storm Data and Unusual Weather Phenomena - September 2010
    Storm Data and Unusual Weather Phenomena - September 2010 Location Date/Time Deaths & Property & Event Type and Details Injuries Crop Dmg ATLANTIC NORTH CHESAPEAKE BAY N OF POOLES IS MD COUNTY --- 2.1 E PHILLIPS ARMY AIRFIELD [39.47, -76.13] 09/16/10 15:30 EST 0 Marine Thunderstorm Wind (EG 40 kt) 09/16/10 15:30 EST 0 Source: Other Federal Agency Wind gust of 46 mph measured at Aberdeen Proving Ground. TIDAL POTOMAC KEY BRIDGE TO INDIAN HD MD COUNTY --- WASHINGTON NATIONALS PARK [38.87, -77.01] 09/17/10 00:09 EST 0 Marine Thunderstorm Wind (EG 34 kt) 09/17/10 00:09 EST 0 Source: Mesonet A wind gust of over 30 knots was observed at the Washington Nationals Park. TANGIER SOUND AND THE INLAND WATERS SURROUNDING BLOODSWORTH ISLAND COUNTY --- BISHOPS HEAD [38.22, -76.04] 09/17/10 02:06 EST 0 Marine Thunderstorm Wind (EG 34 kt) 09/17/10 02:07 EST 0 Source: Mesonet Wind gusts of over 30 knots were observed at Bishops Head. A decaying band of showers and thunderstorms crossed the Blue Ridge and produced isolated strong winds along the Tidal Potomac River in the Washington DC metropolitan area. CHESAPEAKE BAY SANDY PT TO N BEACH MD COUNTY --- 0.9 SE GREENBERRY POINT [38.96, -76.45] 09/22/10 19:10 EST 0 Marine Thunderstorm Wind (MG 34 kt) 09/22/10 19:10 EST 0 Source: Buoy Wind gust of 34 knots measured at Annapolis CBIBS buoy. CHESAPEAKE BAY SANDY PT TO N BEACH MD COUNTY --- 0.8 N US NAVAL ACADEMY [38.99, -76.49] 09/22/10 19:33 EST 0 Marine Thunderstorm Wind (MG 38 kt) 09/22/10 19:48 EST 0 Source: ASOS Wind gusts from 34 to 38 knots were measured at the Annapolis Naval Academy.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Cincinnati
    UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date:_November 2, 2007__ I, __Aaron Cowan___________________________, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of: Doctor of Philosophy in: History It is entitled: A Nice Place to Visit: Tourism, Urban____________ Revitalization, and the Transformation of Postwar American Cities This work and its defense approved by: David Stradling, Chair: ___David Stradling______________ Wayne Durrill __ Wayne Durrill_____ ________ Tracy Teslow ___Tracy Teslow _______________ Marguerite Shaffer Marguerite Shaffer Miami University Oxford, Ohio A Nice Place To Visit: Tourism, Urban Revitalization, and the Transformation of Postwar American Cities A Dissertation submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in the Department of History of the College of Arts and Sciences 2007 by Aaron B. Cowan M.A., University of Cincinnati, 2003 B.A., King College, 1999 Committee Chair: Dr. David Stradling Abstract This dissertation examines the growth of tourism as a strategy for downtown renewal in the postwar American city. In the years after World War II, American cities declined precipitously as residents and businesses relocated to rapidly-expanding suburbs. Governmental and corporate leaders, seeking to arrest this decline, embarked upon an ambitious program of physical renewal of downtowns. The postwar “urban crisis” was a boon for the urban tourist industry. Finding early renewal efforts ineffective in stemming the tide of deindustrialization and suburbanization, urban leaders subsidized, with billions of dollars in public finances, the construction of an infrastructure of tourism within American downtowns. By the latter decades of the period, tourist development had moved from a relatively minor strategy for urban renewal to a key measure of urban success.
    [Show full text]
  • In the United States District Court for the District of Maryland
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND TERRI ENDICOTT, * Plaintiff, * Civ. Action No. RDB-18-3824 v. * VIDEO PIPE SERVICES, INC, * Defendant. * * * * * * * * * * * * * MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Terri Endicott (“Plaintiff” or “Endicott”), pursues this action against Defendant Video Pipe Services, Inc., (“Defendant” or “Video Pipe”).1 Endicott was struck by a pick-up truck owned by Video Pipe and operated by a Video Pipe employee and asserts a single count of motor vehicle negligence against Video Pipe under vicarious liability principles. (Compl. ¶¶ 5-6, ECF No. 1-2.) Video Pipe filed a Third-Party Complaint against employees, Robert O. Smith, II and David Clark Smith (“Third Party Defendants”), alleging that the employees negligently used the company vehicle in an unauthorized manner. (ECF No. 16.) Presently pending is Defendant Video Pipe Services, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 50.) The parties’ submissions have been reviewed and no hearing is necessary. See Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md. 2018). For the reasons that follow, Defendant Video Pipe Services, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 50) is GRANTED. 1 In its corporate disclosure statement, Defendant notes that its name has changed to Mobile Dredging & Video Pipe, Inc by virtue of merger. (ECF No. 2.) BACKGROUND In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, this Court reviews the facts and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 378 (2007). On January 13, 2016, plaintiff was struck from behind by a truck owned by Video Pipe and operated by third-party defendant, Robert Smith.
    [Show full text]
  • All Hazard Mitigation Plan • Mitigation Actions
    2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Calvert County, Maryland Calvert County Maryland All-Hazard Mitigation Plan June 1, 2017 Page | i 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Calvert County, Maryland This page intentionally left blank. Page | ii 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Calvert County, Maryland All-Hazard Mitigation Plan Calvert County, Maryland June 12, 2017 Prepared For: Calvert County Department of Public Safety Division of Emergency Management 175 Main Street Prince Frederick, MD 20678 Acknowledgements: This All-Hazard Mitigation Plan was prepared under the guidance of the County’s Department of Public Safety and the Division of Emergency Management with the participation of the Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee. Members of the Steering Committee are listed in Chapter 1. This plan was funded by a grant from the FEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant. This plan is an update of the original 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan. As such, certain sections of the plan, such as the county background and geography, have been retained for continuity. Prepared By: Vision Planning and Consulting, LLC Eastern Shore Regional GIS Cooperative 8171 Maple Lawn Blvd. Salisbury University Suite 245 1101 Camden Avenue Fulton, MD 20759 Salisbury, MD 20801 Deepa Srinivasan, AICP, CFM Dr. Michael Scott, GISP 888.872.9626 410.543.6456 [email protected] [email protected] Page | iii 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Calvert County, Maryland This page intentionally left blank. Page | iv 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Calvert County, Maryland Table
    [Show full text]
  • Bulletin 19 of the Department of Geology, Mines and Water Resources
    COMMISSION OF MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY S. JAMES CAMPBELL Towson RICHARD W. COOPER Salisbury JOHN C. GEYER Baltimore ROBERT C. HARVEY Frostburg M. GORDON WOLMAN Baltimore PREFACE In 1906 the Maryland Geological Survey published a report on "The Physical Features of Maryland", which was mainly an account of the geology and min- eral resources of the State. It included a brief outline of the geography, a more extended description of the physiography, and chapters on the soils, climate, hydrography, terrestrial magnetism and forestry. In 1918 the Survey published a report on "The Geography of Maryland", which covered the same fields as the earlier report, but gave only a brief outline of the geology and added chap- ters on the economic geography of the State. Both of these reports are now out of print. Because of the close relationship of geography and geology and the overlap in subject matter, the two reports were revised and combined into a single volume and published in 1957 as Bulletin 19 of the Department of Geology, Mines and Water Resources. The Bulletin has been subsequently reprinted in 1961 and 1966. Some revisions in statistical data were made in the 1961 and 1968 reprints. Certain sections of the Bulletin were extensively revised by Dr. Jona- than Edwards in this 1974 reprint. The Introduction, Mineral Resources, Soils and Agriculture, Seafood Industries, Commerce and Transportation and Manu- facturing chapters of the book have received the most revision and updating. The chapter on Geology and Physiography was not revised. This report has been used extensively in the schools of the State, and the combination of Geology and Geography in one volume allows greater latitude in adapting it to use as a reference or textbook at various school levels.
    [Show full text]
  • BWI/Linthicum Small Area Plan
    BWI/Linthicum Small Area Plan Adopted November 3,2003 By County Council Bill No. 48-03 County Executive Janet Owens County Council Edward Middlebrooks, Chair Ronald C. Dillon, Jr., Vice Chair Pamela G. Beidle Bill D. Burlison Edward R. Reilly Barbara D. Samorajczyk Cathleen M. Vitale BWI/Lintbicum Small Area Plan Table of Contents futroduction................................................................................................. 1 Vision.......................................................................................................... 5 Key Recommendations................................................................................ 6 Community History.......................... ........................................................... 9 Demographics ............................................................................................. 14 BWI Airport .......... ...... ........... ............................. .......... ....... ....................... 20 Land Use, Zoning, and Economic Development.. ......................................... 22 Natural and Historic Resources ................................................................... 57 Transportation ............................................................................................ 71 Education and Community Facilities ............................................................ 86 Public Utilities ............ ............. ............................... .............................. ...... 98 Glossary.....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BYLAWS and ARTICLES of INCORPORATION
    GLEN BURNIE IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION BYLAWS and ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION As Amended April 10, 2012 Bylaws Committee Nancy Brown, Chairman Beth Behegan Candy Fontz Brenda Kelly Barbara Sabur ARTICLE I - Name This Association shall be known as the "Glen Burnie Improvement Association, Incorporated". ARTICLE II - Objectives The objectives of this Association shall be: A. To secure concert of action in all matters pertaining to the development and improvement of Glen Burnie. B. To promote the general welfare as defined in the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws of this Association. C. To assist in preserving law and order. ARTICLE III – Members Section 1: Qualification for Membership Any citizen of the United States who is at least 18 years of age and who lives within the boundary lines of this Association, as set forth in Article IV, may apply for membership in this Association by submitting a signed application and one (1) dollar for lifetime dues. Membership applications shall lie on the table for one (1) month before being voted upon at a regular meeting. Applicants may be elected to membership by a majority of the members present and voting at the meeting. Section 2: Termination on Membership and Reinstatement Any member who moves his or her residence beyond the boundaries as set forth in Article IV hereof shall automatically forfeit membership in this Association. Former members may be reinstated under the provisions of Article III, Section 1. Section 3: Honorary Membership A. Any citizen of the United States who has distinguished himself or herself by exceptional effort or achievement in the field of child, community or general public welfare may be recommended by the Board of Directors for honorary (non-voting) lifetime membership in this Association.
    [Show full text]
  • CT-1295 Drum Point Railroad Bed, (Baltimore and Drum Point Railroad)
    CT-1295 Drum Point Railroad Bed, (Baltimore and Drum Point Railroad) Architectural Survey File This is the architectural survey file for this MIHP record. The survey file is organized reverse- chronological (that is, with the latest material on top). It contains all MIHP inventory forms, National Register nomination forms, determinations of eligibility (DOE) forms, and accompanying documentation such as photographs and maps. Users should be aware that additional undigitized material about this property may be found in on-site architectural reports, copies of HABS/HAER or other documentation, drawings, and the “vertical files” at the MHT Library in Crownsville. The vertical files may include newspaper clippings, field notes, draft versions of forms and architectural reports, photographs, maps, and drawings. Researchers who need a thorough understanding of this property should plan to visit the MHT Library as part of their research project; look at the MHT web site (mht.maryland.gov) for details about how to make an appointment. All material is property of the Maryland Historical Trust. Last Updated: 02-04-2016 MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR Eligible: yes ')(_ DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY FORM no roperty Name: Drum Point Railroad Bed Inventory Number: CT-1295 Address: 125 Main Street (Behind Dowell House #3) Historic district: yes X no City: Prince Frederick Zip Code: 20678 County: Calvert USGS Quadrangle(s): Prince Frederick ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Property Owner: Mohler Carolyn Dowell Et al Tax Account ID Number: ~~~~~__,;.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 004909 Tax Map Parcel Number(s): 418,419 Tax Map Number: 24 ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~- Project: MD 231 at MD 765A Community Enhancement and Safety Agency: Maryland State Highway Adminstration Agency Prepared By: Parsons Brinckerhoff Preparer's Name: G.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 10024-0018 (Expires 5/31/2010) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name Quarter Place other names AA-0276, Moreland House, Woodbourne Farm 2. Location street & number 216 Marlboro Road (216 Mt. Zion Marlboro Road) • not for publication city or town Lothian • vicinity state Maryland Code MP county Anne Arundel code 003 zip code 20711 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this E3 nomination • request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property S meets D does not meet the National Register criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant D nationally • statewide M locally.
    [Show full text]