Potomac River, VA River, Potomac Washington, D.C
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Montgomery County Council Resolution
Resolution No.: 18-1339 Introduced: November 27, 2018 Adopted: November 27, 2018 COUNTY COUNCIL FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND SITTING AS THE DISTRICT COUNCIL FOR THAT PORTION OF THE MARYLAND-WASHINGTON REGIONAL DISTRICT WITHIN MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND Lead Sponsor: County Council ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT: Approval of Planning Board Draft Bicycle Master Plan 1. On May 7, 2018, the Montgomery County Planning Board transmitted to the County Executive and the County Council the Planning Board Draft Bicycle Master Plan. 2. The Planning Board Draft Bicycle Master Plan amends the Master Plan of Highways and Transitways within Montgomery County; the General Plan (on Wedges and Corridors) for the Physical Development of the Maryland-Washington Regional District in Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties, as amended; the Rustic Roads Functional Master Plan, as amended; the Preservation of Agricultural and Rural Open Space Functional Master Plan; the Aspen Hill Master Plan; the Bethesda Downtown Sector Plan; the Bethesda-Chevy Chase Master Plan; the Boyds Master Plan; the Burtonsville Commercial Crossroads Neighborhood Plan; the Capitol View and Vicinity Sector Plan; the Chevy Chase Lake Sector Plan; the Clarksburg Master Plan and Hyattstown Special Study Area, as amended; the Cloverly Master Plan; the Countywide Bikeways Functional Master Plan; the Countywide Transit Corridors Functional Master Plan; the Damascus Master Plan; the East Silver Spring Master Plan; the Fairland Master -
The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2008 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND U.S. CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division Government of the District of Columbia Adrian M. Fenty, Mayor PREFACE PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's District Department of the Environment, Natural Resources Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). This report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2008 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Natural Resources Administration contributed to this report including the Fisheries and Wildlife Division and the Watershed Protection Division. Questions or comments regarding this report or requests for copies should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division 51 N St., NE Washington, D.C. 20002-3323 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................iii LIST OF TABLES........................................................... -
Hawlings River Watershed Restoration Action Plan
Hawlings River Watershed Restoration Action Plan December 2003 MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Montgomery County’s Water Quality Goals Montgomery County has a rich and diverse natural heritage, which includes over 1,500 miles of streams that provide habitat vital to aquatic life. To preserve this natural heritage, the County has adopted the following water quality goals (Montgomery County Code, Chapter 19, ArticleIV): • Protect, maintain, and restore high quality chemical, physical, biological, and stream habitat conditions in County streams that support aquatic life and uses such as recreation and water supply; • Restore County streams damaged by inadequate stormwater management practices of the past by re-establishing the flow regime, chemical and physical conditions, and biological diversity of natural stream systems as closely as possible through improved stormwater management practices; • Work with other jurisdictions to restore and maintain the integrity of the Anacostia River, the Potomac River, the Patuxent River, and the Chesapeake Bay; and • Promote and support educational and volunteer initiatives that enhance public awareness and increase direct participation in stream stewardship and the reduction of water pollution. What is the Countywide Stream Protection Strategy? The Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) first published the Countywide Stream Table 1. Montgomery County Stream Protection Strategy (CSPS) in 1998. The CSPS provides Resource Conditions County stream resource conditions on a subwatershed* (1994-2000) basis and recommends programs or policies to preserve, Percent Monitored protect, and restore County streams and watersheds. Condition Monitored Stream Miles Stream resource condition results for the year 2003 update Stream Miles are shown in Table 1. -
The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2012 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division i PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's District Department of the Environment, Natural Resources Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). The report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2010-2011 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Natural Resources Administration contributed to this report including the Fisheries and Wildlife Division, the Stormwater Management Division, and the Watershed Protection Division. The Lead and Healthy Housing Division, Environmental Protection Administration also contributed to this report. Questions or comments regarding this report should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division 1200 First Street, NE 5th Floor Washington, D.C. 20002 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ...................................................................................................................................... -
Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 139/Monday, July 21
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 42197 connection with the acquisition or experimental or laboratory sense. Because When these regulations are enforced, production of depreciable property to be $50,000 of Z’s costs to construct the new test certain restrictions are placed on marine used in the taxpayer’s trade or business bed was incurred for research and traffic in specified areas. This are limited to amounts expended for experimentation, the costs qualify as research rulemaking project promotes efficiency or experimental expenditures under section research or experimentation within the 174. Paragraph (b)(2) of this section applies by eliminating the need to produce a meaning of section 174 and paragraph to $50,000 of Z’s costs for the test bed separate rule for each individual (a) of this section. because they are expenditures for research or recurring event, and serves to provide (5) Examples. The following examples experimentation that result in depreciable notice of the known recurring events illustrate the application of paragraph property to be used in the taxpayer’s trade or requiring a special local regulation or (b) of this section. business. Z’s remaining $4,950,000 of costs is safety zone throughout the year. not allowable under section 174 because Example 1. Amounts paid to others for DATES: This rule is effective August 20, these costs were not incurred for research or research or experimentation resulting in 2014. experimentation. depreciable property. X is a tool ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in manufacturer. X has developed a new tool * * * * * this preamble are part of docket [USCG– design, and orders a specially-built machine (d) Effective/applicability date. -
Public Access Points Within 50 Miles of Capitol Hill
Public Access Points within 50 Miles of Capitol Hill Public Access Point Boat Ramp Fishing Swimming Restrooms Hiking/Trekking Location 2900 Virginia Ave NW, Thompson's Boat Center X X X X Washington, DC 20037 3244 K St NW, Washington, DC Georgetown Waterfront Park X X 20007 George Washington Memorial Theodore Roosevelt Island X X X Pkwy N, Arlington, VA 22209 West Basin Dr SW, Washington, West Potomac Park X X DC 20024 Capital Crescent Trail, Washington Canoe Club X Washington, DC 20007 600 Water St SW, Washington, DC Ganglplank Marina X X X X 20024 George Washington Memorial Columbia Island Marina X X X Parkway, Arlington, VA 22202 99 Potomac Ave. SE. Washington, Diamond Teague Park X X DC 20003 335 Water Street Washington, DC The Yards Park X 20003 Martin Luther King Jr Ave SE, Anacostia Boat House X Washington, DC 20003 700-1000 Water St SW, Washington Marina X X X X Washington, DC 20024 Anacostia Park, Section E Anacostia Marina X X X Washington, DC 20003 2001-2099 1st St SW, Washington, Buzzard's Point Marina X X X DC 20003 2038-2068 2nd St SW, James Creek Marina X X X Washington, DC 20593 Anacostia Dr, Washington, DC Anacostia Park X X X 20019 Heritage Island Trail, Washington, Heritage Island X DC 20002 Kingman Island Trail, Washington, Kingman Island X DC 20002 Mt Vernon Trail, Arlington, VA Gravelly Point X X 22202 George Washington Memorial Roaches Run X X X X Pkwy, Arlington, VA 22202 1550 Anacostia Ave NE, Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens/Park X X X Washington, DC 20019 Capital Crescent Trail, Jack's Boat House X X Washington, DC 20007 Daingerfield Island X X X X 1 Marina Dr, Alexandria, VA 22314 67-101 Dale St, Alexandria, VA Four Mile Run Park/Trail X X X 22305 4601 Annapolis Rd. -
Flood Risk Management Planning Resources for Washington DC
Flood Risk Management Planning Resources for Washington, DC January 20181 Flood Risk Management Planning Resources for Washington, DC January 2018 NOTICE: Usage: This is not a regulatory document. Updating: This document is current as of January 2018. It may be updated from time to time, at which point the dates will be changed. Disclaimer: Mention of a commercial company or product does not constitute an endorsement by the DC Silver Jackets or the National Capital Planning Commission. Cover Photo: The wake from a passing boat crashes over a flooded walkway on East Potomac Park during high tide on September 28, 2013. Credit: John Cochran 2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 4 2. Flood Risk Management Resources 10 3. Mapping Current Flood Risk 28 4. Riverine Flooding 36 5. Interior Flooding 40 6. Coastal Flooding 44 7. Summary 56 8. Appendices 58 3 1. Introduction 4 Document Purpose Washington, DC and the surrounding National Capital Region (NCR) have experienced significant river, coastal, and interior floods that have negatively impacted federal and local operations, land and facility assets, and supporting infrastructure. As a result, flooding is one of the hazards that property and asset managers must consider to ensure a more secure and resilient capital. This guide provides a short summary of key flood risks in the NCR, an overview of recent studies and tools that address current and future flood risks in the region, and brief descriptions of how these studies can be used in flood risk management. While much of the information addresses the entire NCR, the guide focuses on Washington, DC and its monumental core. -
Gazetteer of West Virginia
Bulletin No. 233 Series F, Geography, 41 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIKECTOU A GAZETTEER OF WEST VIRGINIA I-IEISTRY G-AN3STETT WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1904 A» cl O a 3. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. DEPARTMENT OP THE INTEKIOR, UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, Washington, D. C. , March 9, 190Jh SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith, for publication as a bulletin, a gazetteer of West Virginia! Very respectfully, HENRY GANNETT, Geogwvpher. Hon. CHARLES D. WALCOTT, Director United States Geological Survey. 3 A GAZETTEER OF WEST VIRGINIA. HENRY GANNETT. DESCRIPTION OF THE STATE. The State of West Virginia was cut off from Virginia during the civil war and was admitted to the Union on June 19, 1863. As orig inally constituted it consisted of 48 counties; subsequently, in 1866, it was enlarged by the addition -of two counties, Berkeley and Jeffer son, which were also detached from Virginia. The boundaries of the State are in the highest degree irregular. Starting at Potomac River at Harpers Ferry,' the line follows the south bank of the Potomac to the Fairfax Stone, which was set to mark the headwaters of the North Branch of Potomac River; from this stone the line runs due north to Mason and Dixon's line, i. e., the southern boundary of Pennsylvania; thence it follows this line west to the southwest corner of that State, in approximate latitude 39° 43i' and longitude 80° 31', and from that corner north along the western boundary of Pennsylvania until the line intersects Ohio River; from this point the boundary runs southwest down the Ohio, on the northwestern bank, to the mouth of Big Sandy River. -
The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2006 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND U.S. CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) Department of Health Environmental Health Administration Bureau of Environmental Quality Water Quality Division Government of the District of Columbia Anthony A. Williams, Mayor PREFACE PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's Department of Health, Environmental Health Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). This report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2006 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Bureau of Environmental Quality contributed to this report including the Watershed Protection Division and the Fisheries and Wildlife Division. Questions or comments regarding this report or requests for copies should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government Department of Health Environmental Health Administration Bureau of Environmental Quality Water Quality Division 51 N St., NE Washington, D.C. 20002-3323 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................iii ACRONYMS .................................................................ix -
Potomac Park
46 MONUMENTAL CORE FRAMEWORK PLAN EDAW Enhance the Waterfront Experience POTOMAC PARK Potomac Park can be reimagined as a unique Washington destination: a prestigious location extending from the National Mall; a setting of extraordinary beauty and sweeping waterfront vistas; an opportunity for active uses and peaceful solitude; a resource with extensive acreage for multiple uses; and a shoreline that showcases environmental stewardship. Located at the edge of a dense urban center, Potomac Park should be an easily accessible place that provides opportunities for water-oriented recreation, commemoration, and celebration in a setting that preserves the scenic landscape. The park offers great potential to relieve pressure on the historic and fragile open space of the National Mall, a vulnerable resource that is increasingly overburdened with demands for large public gatherings, active sport fields, everyday recreation, and new memorials. Potomac Park and its shoreline should offer a range of activities for the enjoyment of all. Some areas should accommodate festivals, concerts, and competitive recreational activities, while other areas should be quiet and pastoral to support picnics under a tree, paddling on the river, and other leisure pastimes. The park should be connected with the region and with local neighborhoods. MONUMENTAL CORE FRAMEWORK PLAN 47 ENHANCE THE WATERFRONT EXPERIENCE POTOMAC PARK Context Potomac Park is a relatively recent addition to Ohio Drive parallels the walkway, provides vehicular Washington. In the early years of the city it was an access, and is used by bicyclists, runners, and skaters. area of tidal marshes. As upstream forests were cut The northern portion of the island includes 25 acres and agricultural activity increased, the Potomac occupied by the National Park Service’s regional River deposited greater amounts of silt around the headquarters, a park maintenance yard, offices for the developing city. -
Foundations for Memorials and Monuments on the National Mall
Missouri University of Science and Technology Scholars' Mine International Conference on Case Histories in (2008) - Sixth International Conference on Case Geotechnical Engineering Histories in Geotechnical Engineering 14 Aug 2008, 7:00 pm - 8:30 pm Foundations for Memorials and Monuments on the National Mall Douglas W. Christie Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, New York, NY Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge Part of the Geotechnical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Christie, Douglas W., "Foundations for Memorials and Monuments on the National Mall" (2008). International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering. 4. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge/6icchge/session08/4 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. This Article - Conference proceedings is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars' Mine. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering by an authorized administrator of Scholars' Mine. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FOUNDATIONS FOR MEMORIALS AND MONUMENTS ON THE NATIONAL MALL Douglas W. Christie, P.E. Associate Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers New York, New York 10122 ABSTRACT As the western end of the National Mall in Washington, DC was made by filling in portions of the Potomac River, memorials and monuments have required deep foundations. The site history including stream channels, canals, and materials used in filling various areas has had a large impact on the development of the Mall. -
Buzzard Point, DC: a Brief History of a Brief Neighborhood
Buzzard Point, DC: A Brief History of a Brief Neighborhood Hayden M. Wetzel November 2014 (revised) Mid -1920s, from a glass-plate negative (HSW) Sachse, 1884 (LOC) Foreword This short study of the almost forgotten (but soon to be resurrected) area of southwest Washington DC known as Buzzard Point grew out of a landmark nomination for the Buzzard Point Power Plant researched and written in 2014 on behalf of the Southwest Neighborhood Assembly. There was no dedicated study of the history of this curious neighborhood beyond its very early years (after which chronicles of southwest Washington move to the more northerly parts), and I decided to continue the work to fill this hole. Due to the work’s origin in the power plant that part of our story has been given somewhat disproportionate attention but I have left it that way; the information is interesting and useful. (Sections on the history of electrical power generation in Washington and the design/construction company Stone & Webster have been removed here but will be found in the nomination on file with the city’s Historic Preservation Office.) The supporting material used in this study has been deposited with the Historical Society of Washington. The Capitol Riverfront BID and the Southwest Neighborhood Assembly generously underwrote the expenses of printing this booklet, and Mr. Baubak Baghi helped prepare the manuscript. I offer them my sincere thanks, as also to the institutions listed below. Illustration sources: Library of Congress, Prints and Maps Division (LOC); Historical Society of Washington, Kipplinger Library (HSW); National Defense University library, Special Collections (NDU); National Archives, National Capitol Planning Commission (NARA); author (HMW) Hayden M.