Baltimorelink Baltimorelink2.0
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Get Charmed in Charm City - Baltimore! "…The Coolest City on the East Coast"* Post‐Convention July 14‐17, 2018
CACI’s annual Convention July 8‐14, 2018 Get Charmed in Charm City - Baltimore! "…the Coolest City on the East Coast"* Post‐Convention July 14‐17, 2018 *As published by Travel+Leisure, www.travelandleisure.com, July 26, 2017. Panorama of the Baltimore Harbor Baltimore has 66 National Register Historic Districts and 33 local historic districts. Over 65,000 properties in Baltimore are designated historic buildings in the National Register of Historic Places, more than any other U.S. city. Baltimore - first Catholic Diocese (1789) and Archdiocese (1808) in the United States, with the first Bishop (and Archbishop) John Carroll; the first seminary (1791 – St Mary’s Seminary) and Cathedral (begun in 1806, and now known as the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary - a National Historic Landmark). O! Say can you see… Home of Fort McHenry and the Star Spangled Banner A monumental city - more public statues and monuments per capita than any other city in the country Harborplace – Crabs - National Aquarium – Maryland Science Center – Theater, Arts, Museums Birthplace of Edgar Allan Poe, Babe Ruth – Orioles baseball Our hotel is the Hyatt Regency Baltimore Inner Harbor For exploring Charm City, you couldn’t find a better location than the Hyatt Regency Baltimore Inner Harbor. A stone’s throw from the water, it gets high points for its proximity to the sights, a rooftop pool and spacious rooms. The 14- story glass façade is one of the most eye-catching in the area. The breathtaking lobby has a tilted wall of windows letting in the sunlight. -
Finding Your Way: Baltimore Transportation
O FF C AMPUS Finding Your Way: Baltimore Transportation By Jack Dobson For many students, going to due to new policies City Circulator’s coverage of college means making a big or in- creased de- Baltimore is second only to change in their lives. Some mand in a particular area, but the government-owned Mar- have moved once or twice, for the most part are searcha- yland Transit Administration others around the country ble through typing in your des- (MTA). many times, and yet still there tination on the apps them- are some who can claim to selves. The only downside is Baltimore’s publicly funded have been a lifelong resident that they don’t typically offer a transportation system is oper- of their hometown for their student discount, save for at ated by the MTA and its infra- whole lives. Whether you are the beginning of the year. For structure contains a bus, light making a trek up I-95 north into a cheaper option, the Col- rail, subway, and commuter the mid-Atlantic, or you are legetown Shuttle Network is a rail system that spans from the migrating south to take refuge free bus service that connects malls up in Hunt Valley to from Jack Frost, Loyola Univer- the universities of Baltimore to Washington’s Union Station. sity, and in turn Baltimore City, each other, as well as to the Loyola is directly serviced by are bound to become your Towson Town Center mall, the routes 11 and 33 (soon to be new hometown for the next Loch Raven Plaza, and Balti- LocalLink routes 51 and 28, four years. -
Tier Ii Group Transit Asset Management Plan (Tamp)
LOCALLY OPERATED TRANSIT SYSTEM (LOTS) TIER II GROUP TRANSIT ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN (TAMP) 2018 RELEASE DETAILS Release Date 7/19/18 Filename 20180718_MD Tier 2 LOTS Group TAMP (FINAL v4.3) Name Margaret-Avis Akofio-Sowah, PhD Author Elyssa Gensib Title Consultants, WSP USA Name Jeannie Fazio Reviewed Title Deputy Director, MDOT MTA OLTS Version Control Version Date Author Comment 1 04/13/2018 M. A-Sowah Initial draft of TAMP for MDOT MTA review E. Gensib 2 05/02/18 M. A-Sowah Draft for LOTS review E. Gensib 3 06/13/18 M. A-Sowah Final Draft for MDOT MTA Review E. Gensib 4 06/29/18 M. A-Sowah Final for LOTS Approval 5 07/12/18 M. A-Sowah Incorporating MTA Core feedback 6 07/18/18 M. A-Sowah Minor updates from OLTS Maryland Tier II LOTS Group Transit Asset Management Plan Page i DOCUMENT APPROVAL (LOTS ACCOUNTABLE EXECUTIVES) This Asset Management Group Plan has been approved by the following Accountable Executives with receipt of a signed letter of approval. Greyed out names indicate approval has not been received. Allegany County Name Elizabeth Robison-Harper (Allegany County Transit) Title Transit Division Chief Annapolis Name J. Rick Gordon (Annapolis Transit) Title Director Anne Arundel County Name Ramond Robinson (Anne Arundel Transit) Title Director of Transportation Baltimore City Name Colby McFarland (Charm City Circulator) Title Transit Services Administrator Baltimore County Name Karen Bode (CountyRide) Title CountyRide Manager Calvert County Name Sandra Wobbleton (Calvert County Transportation) Title Transportation Division Chief Caroline/Kent/Talbot/Dorchester Counties Name Santo A. -
Transit Optimization Plan September 2017
Transit Optimization Plan September 2017 Prepared by: Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................6 Goals and Focus ........................................................................................................... 6 Study Process ............................................................................................................... 7 Report Contents ........................................................................................................... 8 Existing Conditions .....................................................................................................................9 Market Assessment ...................................................................................................... 9 Population ..........................................................................................................................9 Employment .......................................................................................................................9 Development Patterns ........................................................................................................9 Regional Growth ............................................................................................................... 10 Growth in Senior Population ............................................................................................. 10 Transit’s Role in Mobility .................................................................................................. -
Part 1: Downtown Transit Center and Circulator Shuttle
Howard Research and Development Corporation Downtown Columbia Downtown Transit Center and Circulator Shuttle Feasibility Study: Part 1 - Downtown Transit Center & Downtown Circulator Shuttle (Part of CEPPA #5) DRAFTDecember 2011 Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. iv Chapter 1. Downtown Columbia Transit Center ....................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Downtown Columbia Circulator Shuttle ............................................................................................... 12 Appendix A. Regional Transit System Evaluation .............................................................................................. 21 Appendix B. Regional Transit Market Analysis .................................................................................................. 46 Appendix C. Transit Circulator Design ................................................................................................................ 64 Appendix D. Transit Center Site Evaluation ...................................................................................................... 764 Appendix E. Transit Development Plan ............................................................................................................... 79 DRAFT Page i• Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Table of Figures Figure 1 Existing -
Smart Location Database Technical Documentation and User Guide
SMART LOCATION DATABASE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION AND USER GUIDE Version 3.0 Updated: June 2021 Authors: Jim Chapman, MSCE, Managing Principal, Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. (UD4H) Eric H. Fox, MScP, Senior Planner, UD4H William Bachman, Ph.D., Senior Analyst, UD4H Lawrence D. Frank, Ph.D., President, UD4H John Thomas, Ph.D., U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization Alexis Rourk Reyes, MSCRP, U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization About This Report The Smart Location Database is a publicly available data product and service provided by the U.S. EPA Smart Growth Program. This version 3.0 documentation builds on, and updates where needed, the version 2.0 document.1 Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. updated this guide for the project called Updating the EPA GSA Smart Location Database. Acknowledgements Urban Design 4 Health was contracted by the U.S. EPA with support from the General Services Administration’s Center for Urban Development to update the Smart Location Database and this User Guide. As the Project Manager for this study, Jim Chapman supervised the data development and authored this updated user guide. Mr. Eric Fox and Dr. William Bachman led all data acquisition, geoprocessing, and spatial analyses undertaken in the development of version 3.0 of the Smart Location Database and co- authored the user guide through substantive contributions to the methods and information provided. Dr. Larry Frank provided data development input and reviewed the report providing critical input and feedback. The authors would like to acknowledge the guidance, review, and support provided by: • Ruth Kroeger, U.S. General Services Administration • Frank Giblin, U.S. -
Experience the Charm of Charm City Visit, Shop, and Enjoy Baltimore’S Neighborhoods
ACRL 2017 Carrie Bertling Disclafani and Jennifer C. Hill Experience the charm of Charm City Visit, shop, and enjoy Baltimore’s neighborhoods altimore, often referred to as Charm City, opened in 1980 as a flagship for the down- Bhas more than 250 neighborhoods, each town revival. It’s comprised of several local with its own unique quirks and personal- shops like Hats in the Belfry and McCormick ity. There’s something here for everyone. World of Flavors, which offers unique spices Whether you want to enjoy homemade pasta and blends not often found at grocery stores. in Little Italy or thrift shop in Hampden, It also includes many national retailers that you’re bound to find hidden treasures as you may be familiar with, such as H&M and you explore Baltimore’s historic streets and Urban Outfitters. There is additional indoor diverse neighborhoods. shopping located directly across Pratt Street Several of the most popular neighbor- in the Gallery Mall. If you want a break from hoods are within walking distance of the Con- shopping, check out the National Aquarium vention Center or easy to or the Maryland Science get to by public transit. Center. Need advice or The Charm City Circula- directions? The Balti- tor (charmcitycirculator. more Visitor Center (401 com) is a free bus that Light Street) is also locat- hits most of the down- ed in the Inner Harbor. town neighborhoods. Taxis and Uber rides Walk a few blocks east of the Inner are also easy to get throughout the city. Harbor along the waterfront and across the For a more scenic view, you can ride the pedestrian bridges to find Harbor East, Baltimore Water Taxi (baltimorewatertaxi. -
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. -
Chapter 12: Transportation Page 231 CITY of WESTMINSTER Transportation 2009
Transportation 2009 2009 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Transportation 2009 Chapter 12: Transportation Page 231 CITY OF WESTMINSTER Transportation 2009 What is the Transportation Element? Community Vision for At the 1997 session, the General Assembly passed five Transportation pieces of legislation and budget initiatives known collectively as "Smart Growth." Maryland has adopted the principles of Smart Growth to be incorporated into the According to the 2008 Community Survey, Comprehensive Plan. Westminster drivers are concerned with the difficulties they encounter turning on and The following Smart Growth principle relates to the Transportation Element: off roads due to issues with visibility or merging. Some residents suggested that the Facilitate an adequate mix of transportation modes City should consider the addition of lanes, roundabouts, or left turn signals. A second To reduce traffic congestion throughout the City challenge with driving in Westminster is the To coordinate land use and transportation high volume of traffic. Residents describe traffic to be an issue on Route 140 during To create resiliency, and connectivity within the City commuting times in the early morning or road networks early evening because of the high number of To ensure connectivity between pedestrian, bike, commuters that leave Westminster everyday to work outside of Carroll County. transit, and road facilities From the timing to the synchronization, Revitalize existing neighborhoods into safe, residents listed challenges with traffic lights walkable, and livable communities throughout Westminster. In some cases, it is not the use of a traffic light, but rather the To mix land uses and build compactly, thus reducing lack of a traffic light that most concerned trips and make walking a more viable alternative residents. -
May 18 2016 TC Presentation Revised
Transportation Commission WORK SESSION May 18, 2016 2016 Transportation Long Range Plan Work Session Proposed Schedule April Overview / Guidance / Methodology for LRP update (Study Session) May Review draft of new LRP projects / Removed projects (Study Session) June Initial screening of projects July Finalize screening of projects (Draft LRP) Sept. Public Hearing Adoption of LRP by Transportation Commission 3 Removed Projects • #15-21 – S. Van Dorn Street Improvements • #15-23 – West End Commuter Hub 4 Projects moved to Developer Contingent List • #15-4 - Pedestrian / Bicycle connection from Potomac Yard to Four Mile Run Trail • #15-18 – Library Lane Extension • #15-22 – Elizabeth Lane Extension • #15-26 – New road to Four Mile Run Park 5 Consolidated Projects • #15-5 – Mt. Vernon at Russell Road New 01 • #15-6 – Mt. Vernon at Four Mile Road • #15-7 – Mt. Vernon at E/W Glebe Road New • #15-24 – Van Dorn at Braddock Road 02 • #15-25 – Beauregard at Braddock Road • #15-28 – Quaker at Seminary (Consolidate with New project #10) 6 Studies for Removal • #15-7 – Edsall from Van Dorn to S. Pickett • #15-8 – Commonwealth Ave / Reed Ave Signal Studies to be Consolidated • #15-3 – Feasibility of a pedestrian connection between the Braddock Metrorail station and the Northern gateway through Braddock Place development • #15-4 – Feasibility of a walking route along the road parallel to the Metrorail embankment to also include transit and bike New Study • #New 02 – Braddock Road Multimodal Connections (Removed from CIP) 7 2016 LRP New Projects • Two -
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. -
Maryland State Rail Plan
Larry Hogan, Governor Boyd Rutherford, Lt. Governor Pete K. Rahn, Secretary of Transportation April 2015 www.camsys.com Maryland Statewide Rail Plan prepared for Maryland Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4800 Hampden Lane, Suite 800 Bethesda, MD 20814 date April 2015 Maryland Statewide Rail Plan Table of Contents 1.0 About the Plan ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Plan Development ...................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Plan Organization ....................................................................................... 1-3 1.3 Purpose of the Rail Plan ............................................................................. 1-3 1.4 Federal Compliance .................................................................................... 1-4 2.0 Maryland’s Rail History .................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Amtrak and Conrail ................................................................................... 2-3 2.2 MARC ........................................................................................................... 2-3 2.3 Short Lines ................................................................................................... 2-4 2.4 Summary ...................................................................................................... 2-5 3.0 Mission, Vision, and Goals ..............................................................................