DOCSLIB.ORG

Martha's Vineyard Regional Transportation Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Martha's Vineyard Regional Transportation Plan Martha’s Vineyard Regional Transportation Plan 2011 Update Prepared by the Martha's Vineyard Commission on behalf of the Martha's Vineyard Metropolitan Planning Organization This Regional Transportation Plan was prepared by the staff of the Martha's Vineyard Commission on behalf of the Martha's Vineyard Metropolitan Planning Organization, made up of: The Massachusetts Department of Transportation, The Martha's Vineyard Commission, and The Martha’s Vineyard Regional Transit Authority. Martha's Vineyard MPO c/o The Martha's Vineyard Commission P.O. Box 1447, Oak Bluffs, MA 02557 Telephone: 508-693-3453 Fax: 508-693-7894 E-mail: [email protected] Martha’s Vineyard Regional Transportation Plan – 2011 Update 2 Table of Contents Preface 4 1. Introduction 5 2. The RTP Update Process 8 3. The Island and its People 18 4. Livability in Transportation on Martha’s Vineyard 31 5. The Regional Transportation Network 37 6. Water Transportation 39 7. Air Transportation 50 8. Road Network and Congestion Management 54 9. Buses and Taxis 69 10. Bicycles and Pedestrians 74 11. Freight 84 12. Intermodality and Information 89 13. Safety 91 14. Security 95 15. Environmental Considerations 97 16. Climate Change 104 17. Projects and Implementation 110 18. Conclusion 116 Appendices A1 Air Quality Conformity Documentation 117 A2 Participants and Meetings 130 A3 Transportation Glossary 133 A4 Endorsement 136 A5 Supporting Documents 137 Martha’s Vineyard Regional Transportation Plan – 2011 Update 3 Preface The Martha's Vineyard Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is updated every four years as required by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), a federal statute intended to facilitate the development, management and operation of our nation’s transportation system. The RTP outlines Martha’s Vineyard’s transportation issues, and offers proposals to improve the transportation system. The Martha’s Vineyard Commission serves as one of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ thirteen Regional Planning Agencies (RPAs). Ten of these thirteen regional planning agencies are federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO). The federal regulations require that an MPO be formed in urbanized areas with a population of 50,000 or more. While Martha’s Vineyard, Franklin County, and Nantucket do not meet these criteria, the Governor of Massachusetts designated these areas MPOs in the 1970s, and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) provides funds for transportation planning in these MPOs. The Martha’s Vineyard MPO consists of a Committee of Signatories that decides on transportation planning goals, projects, priorities, and funding. Martha’s Vineyard Committee of Signatories’ members are the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, and the Martha’s Vineyard Regional Transit Authority. This document will refer to the Committee of Signatories as the Martha’s Vineyard MPO. In its role as an MPO member, the Martha’s Vineyard Commission follows federal transportation planning regulations, including the establishment of a citizen advisory group, known as the Joint Transportation Committee (JTC), to participate in transportation planning activities. The Committee consists of appointed representatives of the six Island towns, transportation providers, and members of the public. The JTC guides regional transportation decision-making, serves as a forum for discussing transportation issues, and advises the Committee of Signatories. This Regional Transportation Plan update, as did those in the past, deals primarily with the Island of Martha’s Vineyard. The Town of Gosnold, part of Dukes County and represented by the Martha's Vineyard Commission, comprises the Elizabeth Islands, a largely uninhabited chain. Presently, a village of mostly seasonal dwellings on the island of Cuttyhunk, with a year-round population of about 100 people, is served by ferry service from New Bedford. The village has about three miles of roads, used mainly by golf carts. Naushon and Penikese islands also have small, primarily seasonal, populations. Martha’s Vineyard Regional Transportation Plan – 2011 Update 4 1. Introduction Transportation on Martha’s Vineyard faces special challenges: - As an island, it is only accessible by boat or air; - As a summer resort, there is a four-fold fluctuation in the number of people on the Island with seasonal patterns leading to congestion, safety problems and straining of infrastructure capacities; - As a predominantly rural or semi-rural area, the land-use pattern makes it more challenging to offer alternative means of transportation to the car; - As a locality of unique environmental, scenic, and historic qualities, there is ongoing concern about the impact of transportation on these important features of the Vineyard. The Island’s explosion in popularity over the past generation has resulted in rapid growth that threatens the very qualities of the Island that many find so attractive. Transportation deficiencies have been one of the most readily apparent symptoms of rapid Island growth. The economy depends heavily on people who are drawn to the Island’s scenic beauty; but the Island’s burgeoning popularity could threaten the very attributes that make it attractive. Without good transportation planning, future population growth holds the specter of increasing congestion or inappropriate engineering solutions. In 1995, a special task force on transportation outlined a vision for major improvements. There has been much progress since then. Since 1997, the Steamship Authority (SSA) has limited the summer car capacity to the 1995 level by limiting vessel capacity and number of trips, turning the ‚lifeline‛ into a control valve. Although this led more seasonal residents to keep cars here permanently, it appears to have discouraged shorter-term visitors from bringing cars. The Vineyard Transit Authority (VTA) has been a success, going from a limited, seasonal service transporting 71,000 people in 1997 to an Island-wide, year-round, service that carried 1.1 million people in 2009 and 2010. Since the last update of the Regional Transportation Plan in 2007, many of the recommendations in that plan were completed or are currently underway. These include the following: - Improvements to the network of bike paths and pedestrian facilities including the creation of an additional mile of shared-use path (SUP) on Herring Creek Road in Edgartown, and extensive pedestrian and bicycle improvements in the congested heart of Oak Bluffs. - Operational or physical improvements were made to, or are planned for, most of the critical roadway locations identified in the 2007 Regional Transportation Plan, including improvements to the intersection of State and Old County Roads in West Tisbury, plans for a roundabout at the intersection of Barnes and Edgartown-Vineyard Haven roads, and plans for construction of a system of connector roads in Tisbury which should relieve congestion at the intersection of State and Edgartown-Vineyard Haven roads and on upper State Road. Martha’s Vineyard Regional Transportation Plan – 2011 Update 5 - A temporary drawbridge has been constructed to replace the aging and dilapidated drawbridge over the Lagoon Pond between Tisbury and Oak Bluffs. A permanent bridge is in the advanced planning stage. Construction on two smaller replacement bridges over the Sengekontacket Pond Inlets in Oak Bluffs and Edgartown serving the popular State Beach were completed in the spring of 2011. - In the last four years, the MVC has undertaken an extensive Island-wide planning effort, called the Island Plan, to address the consequences of likely future trends and potential development. According to its mission statement: ‚The Island Plan charted a course to the kind of future that the Vineyard community wants, and designed a series of actions to help us navigate that course.‛ This major planning effort focused on a variety of topics including transportation, and this update of the Regional Transportation Plan reflects that exercise. The planning process was coordinated by a twenty-member Steering Committee of concerned Island citizens, with the assistance of a Network of Planning Advisors with approximately 550 members. The Island Plan Transportation Work Group held a series of meetings and public forums to generate recommendations. The 2011 Update of the Regional Transportation Plan considers regional transportation needs in a continuing, cooperative and comprehensive manner. Based on analyses of travel, demographic, and land use data, combined with the opinions of Island residents and property and business owners, it outlines the current status of transportation issues on the Island and provides a framework for the upcoming transportation and related planning work. A fundamental purpose of the Regional Transportation Plan is to promote the development of intermodal transportation facilities including roads, public transit routes, terminals, bicycle and pedestrian paths, and parking. Another crucial task of the Plan is to consider the concept of ‚livability‛ as it relates to transportation. Livability essentially means creating communities that offer alternatives to automobile usage. Martha’s Vineyard has been putting this concept into practice long before it had this name, but this iteration of the RTP addresses livability directly. This update of the Regional Transportation Plan is organized as follows: - Section 2 describes the administrative and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pond and Lake GEIR Appendices
    APPENDIX I WATER QUALITY PROGRAMS AND FUNDING SOURCES NOTE TO READER: Because of ongoing changes in programs and funding sources, the information in this Appendix has been omitted. The most up-to-date information on funding sources can be found at the web site of the Massachusetts Nonpoint Source Management Plan: http://www.state.ma.us/dep/brp/wm/nonpoint.htm and by contacting other agencies and entities or consulting their web sites. Appendix II 2 APPENDIX II TABLE OF CONTENTS LOCAL PERMITS AND REGULATIONS: II.1 SSC- STATE ENVIRONMENTAL CODE and TITLE 5 (BOH) II.2 Zoning-ZONING REGULATIONS (ZC) II.3 WPA-WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT (ConComm) II.4 RPA-RIVERS PROTECTION ACT (ConComm) STATE PERMITS AND REGULATIONS: DEM II.5 ACEC AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (DEM) II.6 ODS-OFFICE OF DAM SAFETY (DEM) DEP II.7 DRINKING WATER PROTECTION (DEP) II.8 GWDP-GROUND WATER DISCHARGE PERMIT (DEP) II.9 SECP-SEWER EXTENSION OR CONNECTION PERMIT (DEP) II.10 WMA-WATER MANAGEMENT ACT (DEP) II.11 NPDES -NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT (DEP) II.12 SWP-SOLID WASTE PERMIT (DSW) II.13 ORW- OUTSTANDING RESOURCES WATERS (DWM) II.14 LAC-LICENSE TO APPLY CHEMICALS (DWM) II.15 WPP-WETLAND PROTECTION PROGRAM (DWW) II.16 WRP-WETLAND RESTRICTION PROGRAM (DWW) II.17 C.91-WATERWAYS REGULATIONS CHAPTER 91 (DWW) II.18 401- 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION (DWW) DFA II.19 PESTICIDE BUREAU LICENSE (DFA) DFW II.20 DFW-DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE (DFW) II.21 NHESP NATURAL HERITAGE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (DFW) EOEA II.22 CZM-MASSACHUSETTS COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT (EOEA) II.23 MEPA -MASSACHUSETTS ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (EOEA) MDC II.24 MDC-METROPOLITAN DISTRICT COMMISSION (MDC) MHC II.25 MHC-MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION (MHC) FEDERAL PERMITS AND REGULATIONS: II.26 NPDES - NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION PERMIT , U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Efforts Underway to Preserve Historic Landmark
    Free by request to residents of East Brookfield, West Brookfield, North Brookfield, Brookfield, Leicester and Spencer SEND YOUR NEWS AND PICS TO [email protected] Friday, July 31, 2020 Officials urge caution Efforts underway to preserve amid increase in local historic landmark COVID cases BY KEVIN FLANDERS idents to use caution and not STAFF WRITER let up on efforts to control the SPENCER – Officials are urg- spread of the virus. Multiple ing residents to stay vigilant sources told the New Leader a after a recent rise in COVID- large party occurred in town 19 cases, including a transfer earlier this month, and some station employee who tested officials believe it may have positive. contributed to the rise in active Town Administrator Thomas cases. Gregory confirmed that the “I can confirm that there was transfer station employee, who a gathering in town at some is not a resident of Spencer, point in the recent past. I have tested positive last week for no information about date, COVID-19. location, and number of people “All safety protocols were fol- attending,” Gregory said. lowed – and continue to be fol- Statewide, positive test rates lowed – at the transfer station,” increased from 1.7 to 2 percent Gregory said. “These protocols over a seven-day average end- require employees to wear ing on July 26. State leaders masks and gloves, and require are attributing the increase pri- contact points to be disinfected marily to social gatherings and on an hourly basis during the out-of-state travel. hours of operation.” “Obviously we would prefer The employee is currently in to see zero new cases of COVID, quarantine, Gregory said.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Flora of Worcester, Massachusetts
    Vascular Flora of Worcester, Massachusetts Robert I. Bertin Special Publication of the New England Botanical Club Availability of this Publication: Electronic or paper copies are available at cost. Direct inquiries to the Special Publications Committee, New England Botanical Club, Harvard University Herbaria, 22 Divinity Ave. Cambridge, MA 02138-2020 About the Author: Robert I. Bertin is a professor of biology in the Biology Department at the College of the Holy Cross. He teaches a variety of courses, including ecology, environmental biology and field botany. His academic interests include the flora and natural history of New England, the sexual systems of flowering plants, and the ecology of invasive species. Additions and Corrections: Communications concerning mistakes in this flora or potential additions to the species list are welcome. Any substantive modifications will be posted under the author’s name on the Biology Department web page at the Holy Cross web site. The author can be contacted through the Biology Department or at [email protected]. Cover Illustrations: Pictured are three species portraying different aspects of the Worcester flora. Acer platanoides, or Norway maple, is a non-native species and the most commonly planted street tree in Worcester. It is prominent in many City woodlands, where it competes with native species. The grass Elymus villosus is a state threatened species. The Worcester record is the only known occurrence of the species in Worcester County. The orchid Calopogon tuberosus, a native bog species, is known in the City only from historical records. Figures reprinted from Holmgren et al. (1998) Illustrated Companion to Gleason and Cronquist’s Manual, with the kind permission of the New York Botanical Garden.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Conservation & Recreation, Boston, MA | 2014
    Department of Conservation and Recreation dC r NPDES Storm Water Management Program Permit Year 11 Annual Report Municipality/Organization: Department of Conservation and Recreation EPA NPDES Permit Number: MARO43001 MaDEP Transmittal Number: Annual Report Number & Reporting Period: No. 11: April 2013— March 2014 Department of Conservation and Recreation NPDES P11 Small MS4 General Permit Annual Report ) Part I. General Information Contact Person: Robert Lowell Title: Environmental Section Chief Telephone #: (617) 626-1340 Email: [email protected] Certification: I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction olsupervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on myinquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathing the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant pealties for submitting false information, includin the possibility of fine and imprisonment r knowing violations. Signature: Printed Name: John P. Murray Title: Commissioner Date: 30 2o ‘— 5/1/2014 Pa2e2 Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) NPDES Storm Water Management Program Permit Year 11 Annual Report For Coverage Under National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) Department of Conservation and Recreation 251 Causeway Street Suite 600 Boston, MA 02114-2104 Submittal: May 1, 2014 5/1/2014 Department of Conservation and Recreation NPDES Storm Water Management Program Permit Year 11 Annual Report Municipality/Organization: Department of Conservation and Recreation EPA NPDES Permit Number: MAR043001 MaDEP Transmittal Number: Annual Report Number & Reporting Period: No.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Annual Town Report
    SHREWSBURY TOWN REPORT NO. 293 FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS Accountant .......................................................................................................330 Alcohol Beverages Licenses .............................................................................143 Balance Sheet Transfers from Reserve Fund ...............................................................331 Combined Balances Sheet of All Fund Types & Account Groups ........332 Revenue................................................................................................336 Non-General Fund Account Balances .................................................340 Year-To-Date Budget Report ................................................................349 Board of Assessors ...........................................................................................129 Board of Selectmen ...........................................................................................133 Building Inspector .............................................................................................144 Commission on Disabilities ..............................................................................148 Conservation Commission ................................................................................150 Council on Aging ...............................................................................................154 Cultural Council .................................................................................................160
    [Show full text]
  • Survey Report Lake Quinsgamond Quinsigamond
    Survey Report: Lake Quinsigamond Quinsigamond State Park Part of a series of monitoring reports for DEM lakes and ponds February 1995 Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Department of Environmental Management Office of Water Resources Lakes and Ponds Program William F. Weld, Governor *Aj%eo Paul Cellucci, Lt. Governor • Trudy Coxe, Secretary • Peter C Webber, Commissioner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - 1994 Lake Ouinsipamond Monitoring Report A lake monitoring survey of Lake Quinsigamond was conducted on August 30 and 31,1994 as part of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management's (DEM) Lakes and Ponds Program. The purpose of the survey was to (1) provide updated data on physical/chemical water quality, aquatic vegetation, and general watershed characteristics, and (2) identify management options for consideration in the DEM capital budget The limitations of this study (ie., limited sampling parameters, single sampling episode) constrain the extent to which conclusions and recommendations can be developed from the data and analyses in this report However, problems identified included: (1) nutrient loading from Billings Brook and North inlet, (2) high specific conductance levels from Coal Mine Brook and O'Hara's Brook, (3) structural improvements needed at dam structures and at Lake Park Beach, (4) excessive macrophyte growth in many coves, including several non- native nuisance species. Management recommendations are as follows: (1) Target Pollution Sources: a) Sources of high total phosphorus measurements at Billings Brook and North inlet should be investigated for remediation. b) To determine potential pollution sources leading to unusually high specific conductance measurements, more in-depth investigation and testing of Coal Mine Brook and O'Hara's Brook should be conducted.
    [Show full text]
  • Open PDF File, 163.51 KB, for Massachusetts Great Ponds List
    Massachusetts Great Ponds List Any project located in, on, over or under the water of a great pond is within the jurisdiction of Chapter 91. A great pond is defined as any pond or lake that contained more than 10 acres in its natural state. Ponds that once measured 10 or more acres in their natural state, but which are now smaller, are still considered great ponds. This is a county-by-county listing of great ponds in Massachusetts, according to a 1996 Waterways Program Study. This listing was last revised in September 2017 (updating ponds in Hopkinton, Milford, and Upton). Barnstable County Barnstable: Garretts Pond Upper Mill Pond Hamblin Pond Walkers Pond Hathaway Pond (lower portion) Long Pond Bourne: Lovell's Pond Middle Pond Great Herring Pond (Plymouth) [Added to Mystic Pond Bourne 2006] Red Lily Pond/Lake Elizabeth (added 1/30/2014) Round Pond Chatham: Rushy Marsh Pond (originally tidal) Shubael Pond Emery Pond Wequaquet Lake (includes Bearse Pond) Goose Pond Lovers Lake Brewster: Mill Pond Schoolhouse Pond Baker's Pond Stillwater Pond Black Pond (Harwich) White Pond Blueberry pond Cahoon Pond (Harwich) Dennis: Canoe Pond Cliff Pond Baker's Pond Cobbs Pond Eagle Pond Elbow Pond Flax Pond Flax pond Fresh Pond Grassy Pond (Harwich) Grassy Pond Greenland Pond Run Pond Griffith's Pond Scargo Pond Higgin's Pond Simmons Pond Little Cliff Pond White Pond (Harwich) Long Pond (Harwich) Lower Mill Pond Eastham: Pine Pond Seymour Pond/Bangs Pond (Harwich) Depot Pond Sheep Pond Great Pond Slough Pond Herring/Coles Pond Smalls Pond Minister
    [Show full text]
  • Role of Aquatic Invasive Species in State Listing of Impaired Waters and the TMDL Program: Seven Case Studies
    ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INSTITUTE The Role of Aquatic Invasive Species in State Listing of Impaired Waters and the TMDL Program: Seven Case Studies Environmental Law Institute May 2008 The Role of Aquatic Invasive Species in State Listing of Impaired Waters and the TMDL Program Seven Case Studies The Environmental Law Institute® May 2008 The Role of Aquatic Invasive Species in State Listing of Impaired Waters and the TMDL Program i Acknowledgments This report was prepared by the Environmental Law Institute, with funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under Assessment and Watershed Protection Program Grant Cooperative Agreement AW-8324340-1-0. The report was written by Adam P. Schempp and James McElfish, with additional research by Kathryn Mengerink and assistance from Michael Dudkin and Anne Davis. We gratefully acknowledge the information provided by Christine Ruf and U.S. EPA Watershed Branch staff, as well as Jason Baker, Kim Bogenschutz, Susan Braley, Chad Brown, Jeff DeShon, Coby Dolan, Naomi Feger, Dorena Goding, Kathy Hamel, Arthur Johnson, Darryl Joyner, Joe Karkoski, Ken Koch, Richard McVoy, Trinka Mount, Jeff Myers, John Navarro, John Olsen, Steven Sanford, Don Schmitz, Craig J. Wilson, and Chris O. Yoder. U.S. EPA commented on drafts of the report; however, the views expressed in the report are solely those of the Environmental Law Institute, and no Agency endorsement should be inferred. About ELI Publications— ELI publishes Research Reports that present the analysis and conclusions of the policy studies ELI undertakes to improve environmental law and policy. In addition, ELI publishes several journals and reporters—including the Environmental Law Reporter, The Environmental Forum, and the National Wetlands Newsletter—and books, which contribute to educa- tion of the profession and disseminate diverse points of view and opinions to stimulate a robust and creative exchange of ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Quinsigamond, Worcester/Shrewsbury
    Lake Quinsigamond, Worcester/Shrewsbury General Information Useful Links: Lake Quinsigamond is an 800-acre great pond located in the heart of Worcester County between the city of Worcester and the Town of Shrewsbury. The lake is Get your Fishing License comprised of two distinct sections: the deep narrow northern basin and the shallower southern basin, with its many coves and islands. From the southern basin, Freshwater Fishing Lake Quinsigamond is connected to Flint Pond, a large, shallow pond in Shrewsbury. The northern basin averages 36 feet and contains the deepest spot at 90 feet, while the southern basin averages 21 feet. The shores of Lake Quinsigamond are highly Trout Stocking Information developed with many private homes, commercial establishments, and marinas. The northern basin is used extensively by local colleges for rowing practices and events Freshwater Sportfishing Awards and contains a semi-permanent gridded buoy system to delineate racing lanes. Lake Program Quinsigamond can become very busy during the summer months. Recreational Access The town of Shrewsbury maintains two boat ramps on Lake Quinsigamond. The First is located on the east side of the northern basin off of North Quinsigamond Ave. (71°45'20.614"W 42°17'27.376"N). This is a large double concrete ramp with an associated parking area suitable for 53 trailers. There is also a large ramp located on Flint Pond off of Route 20 (71°44'14.682"W 42°14'33.645"N); see the Flint Pond map for details. The Shoreline may be accessed in areas adjacent to these boat ramps and in Quinsigamond State Park which is located on the western shores of the northern Learn more: and middle basins.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Resources of Massachusetts (-G---+
    Water Resources of Massachusetts (-G---+ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 90-4144 Prepared in cooperation with the ’ ~ALTHOF.~SSACHUSETTS . DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, DIVISION 6~ WATER RESOURCES WATER RESOURCES OF MASSACHUSETTS By Alison C. Simcox U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 90-4144 Prepared in cooperation with the COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, DMSION OF WATER RESOURCES Boston, Massachusetts 1992 i . L U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can he write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Division Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Bldg 8 10 Massachusetts - Rhode Island District Box 25425 28 Lord Rd., Suite 280 Denver, Colorado 80225 Marlborough, MA 01752 . -1 CONTENTS Page Abstract ..................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................. 1 PurposeandScope ......................................................... 1 Physiographic setting ....................................................... 2 Glacialhistory ............................................................. 2 Geohydrologic setting .......................................................... 2 Hydrologiccycle .............................................................. 4 Surfacewater
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline for the Community Preservation Committee
    TOWN OF GRAFTON GRAFTON MEMORIAL MUNICIPAL CENTER 30 PROVIDENCE ROAD GRAFTON, MASSACHUSETTS 01519 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Application Instructions for Community Preservation Funding This packet contains all of the information an applicant needs to apply for Grafton’s Community Preservation Act (CPA) funding, including: 1. An explanation of the annual timeline for the Community Preservation Committee 2. Scoring Criteria 3. Instructions for submitting a full application Timeline The Community Preservation Committee (CPC) will make recommendations for funding both at Annual Town Meeting which occurs in May, as well as Semi-Annual Town Meeting, which typically occurs in October. While applications are accepted throughout the year, the following timeline provides deadlines by which applications must be received and presented to the CPC in order to be included in each Town Meeting. Timeline Step Approximate Timeline/Deadline Optional Grant writing Workshop Annually on First Thursday of November Applications must be received for Spring Town On or by February 1 Meeting Applications presented to CPC Annually on Fourth Thursday of March Optional Grant writing Workshop Annually on Fourth Thursday of April Annual Town Meeting Annually on Second Monday in May CPC Annual Hearing on Community Needs and Annually on Fourth Thursday of June Priorities Applications must be received for Semi-Annual TM On or by July 1 Applications presented to CPC Annually on Fourth Thursday of August Semi-Annual Town Meeting Annually on Third Monday in October Applicants are encouraged, but not required to attend a Grantwriting Workshop in the fall or spring to assist in preparing applications for the following Town Meeting. Applicants may also request a meeting with the CPC at any time to ask questions or obtain input on projects for which they would like to seek funding.
    [Show full text]
  • Massdot Is Committed to Improving the Quality of Stormwater Runoff from Its Highways
    MassDOT is committed to improving the quality of stormwater runoff from its highways. Through the “Impaired Waters Program,” MassDOT addresses stormwater runoff from its roadways draining to impaired water bodies as part of compliance with the NPDES Phase II Small MS4 General Permit. Stormwater best management practices (BMPs) are implemented to the maximum extent practicable through two methods: retrofit projects and programmed projects. Retrofit projects are tracked within the MassDOT Impaired Waters Program Database, while programmed projects are tracked through this Water Quality Data Form (WQDF). The goal of the WQDF is to raise awareness of the necessity to implement stormwater BMPs during programmed projects and to capture information about stormwater BMPs that are implemented. There are two WQDFs required as part of each programmed project. One is specific to the 25% design stage, and the other is specific to the 75% design stage. Please download the latest version of the WQDF from the MassDOT website. Please fill out the tab titled “75% Design Form,” and check the box at the bottom of the form to ensure that all questions have been answered adequately. Please submit this form in Excel format only and name your file with the convention WQDF25_projectnumber.xlsm. Submit the form to your MassDOT project manager as part of the project's electronic submittal. An interactive web map is available to aid in filling out the WQDF. It is available at http://mass.gov/massdot/map/wqdf. If MassDOT has requested that the form be revised and resubmitted, resubmit the form using the naming convention WQDF75_projectnumber_rev.xlsm.
    [Show full text]