DOCSLIB.ORG

Building Communities with Transit Oriented Development Table of Contents Purpose

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Building Communities with Transit Oriented Development Table of Contents Purpose Commercial Landscapes Series Building Communities with Transit Oriented Development Table of Contents Purpose . 4 Introduction . 5 Where We Are Now . 6 Benefits . 6 Obstacles . 8 Overview of Chester County TOD . 10 The Vision For TOD in Chester County . 13 How Do We Get There . 14 Organization . 15 Regulatory Guidance . 19 Physical Improvements . 25 Conclusion . 27 Published April 2017 Chester County Board of Commissioners Michelle Kichline Kathi Cozzone Terence Farrell 2 Acknowledgements - Task Force and Partners Municipality Representatives Consultant Representatives Chester County Planning Zach Barner, Tredyffrin Township Tom Barton, Barton Partners Commisson Board Steven Brown, East Whiteland Township David Brant, Organizational Leadership/SRA Matthew Hammond, P.E., Chairman Derek Davis, West Goshen Township John Fessick, Wells Fargo Douglas Fasick, Vice-chairman Mimi Gleason, West Whiteland Township Mike Fili, Aqua America Danial DiMucci, RLA, ASLA Scott Greenly, East Whiteland Township John Lister, JL Architects Judy DiFilippo Michael Heaberg Jean Krack, Phoenixville Borough Agency Representatives Joe Scalise, Kennett Square Borough Kevin Kerr Pat Bokovitz, Chester County Department of Steve Sullins, Downingtown Borough Community Development Molly Morrison James Thomas, Parkesburg Borough Guy Ciarrocchi, Chester County Chamber of E. Martin Shane Mike Trio, City of Coatesville Business and Industry Joseph Tarantino Dottie Ives-Dewey, West Chester University Karen Versuk, Penn Township Chester County Planning MaryFrances McGarrity, Chester County Developer Representatives Economic Development Council Commisson Participating Staff Brian O’Leary, AICP, Executive Director Dan Daley, E.B. Walsh & Associates, Inc. John Meisel, Transportation Management Association of Chester County David Ward, AICP, Assistant Director George Hasenecz, Brandywine Realty Trust Ashley Orr, Chester County Health Department Susan Elks, AICP, Planning Services Director Eli Kahn, E Kahn Development Roger Richardson, Chester County Chamber of Jaime Jilozian, AICP, Community Planner James Mazzarelli, Liberty Property Trust Business and Industry Sean O’Neil, AICP, Community Planner Tony Nichols, Liberty Property Trust Donna Siter, Western Chester County Chamber Justin Smiley, AICP, Urban Planner Mike Pia Jr., Kennett Square Realty of Commerce Rachel Griffith, RLA, Transportation Planner Timothy Smith, Pennsylvania Real Estate Andrew Svekla, Delaware Valley Regional Investment Trust Planning Commission Madeline Schueren, GIS Planner Rich Wilson, Arcadia Land Company Diana Zak, Graphics Supervisor Chris Bittle, Graphics Specialist Polly Chalfant, Graphics Specialist Liz Kolb, Graphics Specialist 3 Purpose This document is one of four in a planning This document presents a set of guidelines and series known as “Commercial Landscapes” strategies to assist in the implementation of (Office Parks, Transit Oriented Development Transit Oriented Development for communities (TOD), Brownfields, and Greyfields) . The series in Chester County . The purpose is to educate serves as a collaborative effort between county communities on the importance of TOD and agencies and county stakeholders focused on provide guidance and processes on how to improving critical commercial areas located implement a successful TOD . throughout the county . The goal is to provide a planning tool that offers guidance to municipal officials and professional planners, developers, and property owners about how to maximize the value of these commercial areas today and in the future to better implement the goals in municipal and county policy documents (Landscapes2, the County’s Comprehensive Plan and VISTA 2025, the County’s Economic Development Strategy) . This series will also play a major role as a planning tool for Landscapes3, the County Comprehensive Plan update . 4 Commercial Landscapes · Building Communities with Transit Oriented Development | Purpose Introduction What is Transit Oriented Development (TOD)? TOD is a compact, mixed use “development within an easy walk of a transit station. Its pedestrian-oriented design encourages residents and workers Transit Oriented Development is not a population will grow an additional 146,344 to drive their cars less and ride mass new topic when it comes to planning and people by 2045, much of which will occur transit more. These “transit villages” are development in Chester County . It is a viable in urban and suburban areas . Development smart growth development option that options such as TOD can guide population usually moderate to high density, and can provides great opportunities for development growth and encourage development in the be new construction or redevelopment. adjacent to public transportation centers and county’s growth areas, while helping to Mixed uses typically include residential, stations located in growth areas . The principles preserve the county’s open space . Many of TOD encourage people to use transit or walk centers within the region are building compact commercial, and office, or some to get to their destination rather than relying walkable development, such as TOD, to combination. solely on the automobile . TODs can also be a accommodate both Millennials and Baby ” catalyst for sustainable economic development Boomers . – Delaware Valley’s Regional Planning Commission by providing a sense of place with a mixture of (DVRPC) definition of TOD uses, housing options, and amenities that cater The Chester County Planning Commission with to all generations . the assistance of the Commercial Landscapes Taskforce have developed key strategies and To date, there has been limited use of TOD recommendations to better understand TOD in Chester County . This may have to do with and the steps it takes to implement them while perceptions of TOD and the misconceptions dealing with the issues that impede them and that come with it, which include but are the effects they have on the community . not limited to the following: density, traffic congestion, fiscal impact, and crime. Recent trends have indicated that Chester County’s Commercial Landscapes · Building Communities with Transit Oriented Development | Introduction 5 Where We Are Now Benefits Transit Oriented Development improves mobility and stimulates economic activity, particularly in the urban and suburban setting . When done correctly, TOD provides a number of environmental, economic, quality of life and transportation benefits which include but are not limited to the following: Environmental benefits • Reduces vehicle miles traveled and lowers energy use by reducing greenhouse gases and the reliance on individual automobiles . • Improves air quality, by reducing auto usage in urban and suburban areas . • Reduces the need for the expansion of public infrastructure, such as sewer/water systems, and maximizes existing capacities . • Reduces land consumption and helps to preserve open space and undeveloped land by directing higher density development to developed urbanized areas . 6 Commercial Landscapes · Building Communities with Transit Oriented Development | Where We Are Now Economic benefits Quality-of-life benefits Transportation benefits • Creates an economic development catalyst • Provides a mixture of uses and amenities that • Provides transportation choices for residents by using the existing infrastructure more promotes pedestrian/bicycle mobility that and reduces auto-dependency and allows efficiently and making surrounding area more leads to better health . access to a variety of destinations when marketable . multiple transportation modes are available . • Encourages a sense of community and • Raises local tax revenues by promoting creates and/or enhances places, such as • Increases transit ridership, by providing mixed-use infill and redevelopment of parcels village centers and parks where people meet higher density development, and by adjacent to transit center/stations . and interact . improving the sense of place at or adjacent to a railroad station or transit stop . • Attracts various household incomes, which • Increases safety by creating extended hour in-turn increases adjacent land and home activity centers due to mixture of uses at or • Reduces the need to make large investments values . adjacent to the station . in highway enhancements . • Increases disposable household income, by reducing auto dependency and ownership costs . Commercial Landscapes · Building Communities with Transit Oriented Development | Where We Are Now 7 Obstacles There are a number of limitations associated with TOD, particularly how it is perceived . Acceptance of a highly dense, mixed-use style of development can be difficult to achieve if the following obstacles impede or are not thoroughly planned for when implementing a TOD . Perceptions Concern about density DVRPC’s Realizing Density: Strategies for Reluctance to adopt change Overcrowding, decreased property values, Compact Suburban Development u Other obstacles experienced when consuming open space, traffic congestion, implementing TOD is the way the public increased building height, crime, fiscal impacts interprets the project and the perception of (particularly schools) are just some of the words how it would change the existing community used when people think of density . In most character . Some TOD projects are not welcome cases actual built developments with higher by the public due to a resistance to change, densities are just the opposite of the above even when a project that has the support of buzz words . Municipalities
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CVT Map Poster 24.Indd
    CHESTER VALLEY TRAIL MAP 76 100 401 29 Twp. Building Twp. E. Whiteland Battle ofthe Clouds Park Phoenixville Pike Exton Park Exton Park Whitford Rd. Exton Park Ecology Valley Albert C. Miller Battle Park Creek Memorial Park Swedesford Rd. of the Park P P P Meadowbrook Clouds line match 10 mi. Park 9 mi. EXTON Manor Park 11 m i . Mill Lane Station GREAT VALLEY Church Farm School Ln. BUS 12 mi. 30 Exton Mall 8 mi. Swedesford Rd. 13 mi. Mill Ln. Swedesford Rd. 202 Penn State Commerce Dr. Ship Inn Great Valley Cedar Hollow Park DOWNINGTOWN P 6 mi. Main Street FRAZER Conestoga Rd. 7 m i . Valley Creek Blvd. 5 mi. Twp. Building Building Twp. at Exton Whiteland W. Church Farm School LINCOLN HIGHWAY People’s Light 30 Ship Rd. Uptown Worthington 30 & Theatre Co. Whitford Station Exton Station AMTRAK/SEPTA RAIL Paoli Hospital 202 352 Cedar Hollow Rd. H 100 W. Central Ave. Boot Road Malvern Station Park MALVERN 30 Paoli Battlefield SCHUYLKILL RIVER TRAIL 422 23 Valley Forge Rd. Schuylkill River Valley Forge National Historical Park 202 MONTGOMERY COUNTY NORRISTOWN W. Valley Forge Rd. CHESTER COUNTY Yellow Springs Rd. PHILADELPHIA 202 76 23 KING OF PRUSSIA 252 UNT Bill SmithBlvd match line match Chesterbrook Blvd. Valley Forge Rd. CHESTERBROOK The Village at King of 422 Valley Forge Prussia 276 Wilson Mall Gateway 202 Farm Park 202 Shopping Center Swedesford Rd. 276 4 mi. 3 mi. 2 mi. 1mi. Westlakes 0 mi. P P Devon Park Dr. South Gulph Rd. Westlakes Old Eagle School Rd. Swedesford Plaza West Valley Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Planning for the Philadelphia–Harrisburg “Keystone” Railroad Corridor
    VOLUME I Executive Summary and Main Report Technical Monograph: Transportation Planning for the Philadelphia–Harrisburg “Keystone” Railroad Corridor Federal Railroad Administration United States Department of Transportation March 2004 Disclaimer: This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation solely in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof, nor does it express any opinion whatsoever on the merit or desirability of the project(s) described herein. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Any trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. Note: In an effort to better inform the public, this document contains references to a number of Internet web sites. Web site locations change rapidly and, while every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of these references, they may prove to be invalid in the future. Should an FRA document prove difficult to find, readers should access the FRA web site (www.fra.dot.gov) and search by the document’s title or subject. 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FRA/RDV-04/05.I 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Technical Monograph: Transportation Planning for the March 2004 Philadelphia–Harrisburg “Keystone” Railroad 6. Performing Organization Code Corridor⎯Volume I: Executive Summary and Main Report 7. Authors: 8. Performing Organization Report No. For the engineering contractor: Michael C. Holowaty, Project Manager For the sponsoring agency: Richard U. Cogswell and Neil E. Moyer 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft PA State Rail Plan
    7. References Photo: PennDOT Proposed Passenger Rail Projects This page left blank intentionally Appendix D: Proposed Passenger Rail Projects Project information was collected from a variety of sources. Identified schedule and costs are subject to change. The list of projects is not fiscally constrained. The key at the bottom of the table provides explanation for the corresponding codes associated with public benefit, funding source and project type. Table D-1: Current Pennsylvania Proposed Passenger Rail Projects, Sorted by Implementation Year (Project Open Year) and Project Sponsor Planned Project Project Service Implementation Cost Public Funding Project Number Sponsor Type Corridor Project (Project Open Year) ($M) Benefit Source Type 1 SEPTA Commuter Regional Rail Vehicle Overhaul Program (near- 2021-2024 $335.8 D A, B A, B term) 2 SEPTA Commuter Regional Rail Grade Crossing Enhancement Ongoing $12.0 B B E Program 3 SEPTA Commuter Regional Rail Critical Bridge Program Ongoing $69.2 D, G B A 4 SEPTA Commuter Regional Rail Interlocking Improvement Program Ongoing $120.5 D, G B E 5 SEPTA Commuter Regional Rail Track & ROW Rail Service Ongoing $19.3 D, G B A Improvements 6 SEPTA Commuter Regional Rail Safety & Security Shop, Yard and Ongoing $39.5 B B D Office Hardening 7 SEPTA Commuter Regional Rail Regional Rail Stations – Ongoing $11.3 B B C RRD Station Roof Program 8 SEPTA Commuter Regional Rail Positive Train Control 2020 $167.0 F, B A, B F 9 Amtrak, Intercity and Keystone, 562 Upgrade PARK to THORN 2020–2024 $20.0 C F D PennDOT,
    [Show full text]
  • SEPTA Status Updates
    DVRPC Approved Projects for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Pennsylvania Transit Projects - SEPTA Status Updates MPMS County Project Title Project Description Amount * Let Date Award Date Award $ Comments 60655 Bucks Intermodal Facility SEPTA intends to provide advanced intermodal station improvements at the Croydon Station, R7 Trenton Line. The $8,500,000 N/A 3/1/2009 $8,018,862 - Improvements (B) (R7 improvements include new high level platforms, expanded parking, and realignment of adjacent street to improve traffic flow. Croydon Regional Rail Station Rehabilitation) 60540 Chester Parking Expansion SEPTA intends to construct a new (90) space parking lot at the Elwyn Station, R3 Media/Elwyn Line, on a parcel of land $1,690,322 7/28/2009 8/26/2009 $856,299 - Program (R3 Elwyn currently owned by the Elwyn Institute. There is currently insufficient parking at this station. Parking) 84643 Chester Malvern Station and SEPTA intends to construct a new pedestrian underpass, new energy efficient lighting, intertrack fencing, and related exterior $12,475,988 N/A N/A $0 - Pedestrian Tunnel improvements at the Malvern Station, R5 Paoli/Thorndale Line, including expansion and improvements to the existing parking Improvements lot. All work will be completed in accordance with ADA requirements. 60557 Delaware System Improvements SEPTA intends to install fiber optic cabling along the Routes 101 &102, MSHL. This will permit installation of Audio Visual $4,890,190 N/A 7/1/2009 $2,818,264 - (Media-Sharon Hill Public Address (AVPA) devices at all passenger stations and improve power substation control. The design work is by Parsons.
    [Show full text]
  • April 2010 Bulletin.Pub
    TheNEW YORK DIVISION BULLETIN - APRIL, 2010 Bulletin New York Division, Electric Railroaders’ Association Vol. 53, No. 4 April, 2010 The Bulletin NYC TRANSIT’S HUGE BUDGET DEFICIT Published by the New We checked the Internet and we found that On weekends, service would be re- York Division, Electric NYC Transit is having difficulty balancing the duced on other lines because of con- Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated, PO Box budget. struction work. At the present time, 3001, New York, New In December, 2009, MTA-wide revenue pro- trains often operate on a 12-minute York 10008-3001. jections from fares, tolls, government sub- headway. The new schedules would sidy, and dedicated taxes worsened appre- adjust scheduled headways to match ciably. This was caused by a reduction of those required by construction work. For general inquiries, contact us at nydiv@ $143 million in 2009 state subsidy, lower Service would be reduced from an 8– erausa.org or by phone revenue from dedicated state taxes, and a to a 10-minute headway on D, F, G, at (212) 986-4482 (voice cumulative 11.3 percent three-year wage in- J, M, N, Q, and R on Saturdays mail available). The crease to certain union-represented employ- and , , , , , , , and Division’s website is A D E F G N Q R www.erausa.org/ ees. Therefore, the budget deficit was ex- on Sundays. Headways on 1 would nydiv.html. pected to be $383 million in 2009-10 and be reduced from 6 to 8 minutes on Sat- $297 million in 2011. (This number has since urdays and Sundays.
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2022 Capital Budget and FY 2022-2033 Capital Program Proposal
    FISCAL YEAR 2022 CAPITAL BUDGET and FISCAL YEARS 2022-2033 CAPITAL PROGRAM PROPOSAL Including Reduced Funding Capital Program Scenario FY 2022 CAPITAL BUDGET AND FY 2022-2033 CAPITAL PROGRAM Proposal April 26, 2021 FY 2022 CAPITAL BUDGET AND FY 2022 - 2033 CAPITAL PROGRAM Table of Contents Executive Summary…............................................................................................................. 1 Introduction to SEPTA............................................................................................................ 4 SEPTA Forward - 5-Year Strategic Business Plan…............................................................. 8 Impacts of SEPTA's Capital Program……………………………................................................... 9 SEPTA’s Projects of Significance ……………………………………………....................................... 12 Sources of Capital Funding..................................................................................................... 15 FY 2022 Capital Budget and FY 2022-2033 Capital Program: Current Funding Level Program……..……………………………………............................ 20 Neshaminy Substation Reduced Funding Level Program……...…………………………….................................. 22 Capital Program and Project Descriptions 28 Bridge Program.............................................................................................................. 29 Communications, Signal Systems and Technology..................................................... 34 Financial Obligations.....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NEC Capital Investment Plan
    Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2020-2024 March 2019 (amended July 2020) Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The Commission also includes non- voting representatives from freight railroads, states with connecting corridors and several commuter operators in the Region. Contents Letter from the Co-Chair 1 Executive Summary 2 1. Introduction 5 2. FY20-24 Capital Investment Plan 7 Project Information Appendix 19 A. Capital Renewal of Basic Infrastructure 20 Figure A-1. Amtrak FY20-24 Baseline Capital Charge Program 22 Figure A-2. Metro-North Railroad FY20-24 Baseline Capital Charge Program 23 Figure A-3. Connecticut DOT FY20-24 Baseline Capital Charge Program 24 Figure A-4. MBTA FY20-24 Baseline Capital Charge Program 26 B. Special Projects 28 Figure B-1. Summary of special project funding requirements 29 Figure B-2. Special project listing by coordinating agency 34 Figure B-3. Amended special projects by coordinating agency1 145 1 On December 9, 2019, the Commission amended select project pages in the FY20-24 Capital Investment Plan to ensure alignment with applications to be submitted for the Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair Grant Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Paoli/Thorndale Line Riders
    ATTENTION PAOLI/THORNDALE LINE RIDERS Adjustment To Friday Late Night Trains Inbound Train #1500 Outbound Train #1595 Friday, July 12, 2019 Due to Amtrak construction, Late Night trains #1500 (Inbound) & #1595 will be running on a modified schedule. There will be opposite side boarding for train #1500 from Thorndale to Paoli stations. Please refer to the timetables and information below. INBOUND TRAIN #1500 (TOWARDS CENTER CITY) OUTBOUND TRAIN #1595 (TOWARDS THORNDALE) • Train #1500 will operate 10 minutes later from Paoli • Train #1595 will operate 10 minutes later from Jefferson Station to Jefferson Station Station to Malvern Station • Train #1500 will board from the OUTBOUND side at Thorndale, Downingtown, Whitford, Exton, Malvern & Paoli Stations FRIDAY JULY 12, 2019 Fare Services Train Number 1595 FRI FRIDAY JULY 12, 2019 Zone Stations ONLY Fare Services Train Number 1500 C Temple University — FRI Zone Stations ONLY C Jefferson Station 1:31 4 Thorndale 11:54 C Suburban Station 1:36 4 Downingtown 11:58 C 30th Street Station 1:40 4 Whitford 12:03 2 Overbrook 1:49 4 Exton 12:05 2 Merion 1:51 4 Malvern 12:11 2 Narberth 1:53 4 Paoli (Rt 204, 205, 206) 12:15 2 Wynnewood 1:54 3 Daylesford 12:27 2 Ardmore 1:56 3 Berwyn 12:29 2 Haverford 1:58 3 Devon 12:31 3 Bryn Mawr 2:00 3 Strafford 12:33 3 Rosemont 2:02 3 Wayne 12:35 3 Villanova 2:04 3 St. Davids 12:37 3 Radnor (STN*) 2:06 3 Radnor (STN*) 12:39 3 St.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft PA State Rail Plan
    7. References Photo: AECOM Appendix F: RSIP Analysis – Passenger Short-Range and Long-Range Projects This page left blank intentionally Appendix F: RSIP Analysis – Passenger Short-Range and Long-Range Projects Passenger Rail Capital Program Needs by Category (Short-Range) Short-Range Passenger Rail Capital Program Needs by Category (2021–2024) in Millions of Year of Expenditure (YOE) Dollars Table F-1: Short-Range Passenger Rail Capital Needs (2021–2024) in Millions of YOE Dollars – Equipment Proposed Total Cost Project Corridor Funding Source 2021 2022 2023 2024 (YOE) Gwynedd Valley Station Parking Regional Rail State/Local $2.6 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $2.6 Railroad Substations - Lansdale, Hatboro and Regional Rail State/Local $0.0 $36.0 $0.0 $0.0 $36.0 12th Street/Portal Switching Station Regional Rail Multi-Level Car Acquisition Regional Rail Federal/State/Local $0.0 $184.9 $0.0 $0.0 $184.9 Vehicle Overhaul Program Regional Rail Federal/State/Local $262.8 $270.7 $278.8 $287.1 $1,099.4 Total $265.4 $491.5 $278.8 $287.1 $1,322.8 Table F-2: Short-Range Passenger Rail Capital Project Funding Needs (2021–2024) in Millions of YOE Dollars – Facilities Proposed Total Cost Project Corridor Funding Source 2021 2022 2023 2024 (YOE) Chestnut Hill East ADA Improvements Regional Rail State/Local $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $12.6 $12.6 Fern Rock Transportation Center Safety Regional Rail State/Local $0.0 $21.7 $0.0 $0.0 $21.7 Improvements Frazier Rail Shop and Yard Upgrade Regional Rail State/Local $0.0 $0.0 $151.9 $0.0 $151.9 Harrisburg Line Station Improvements: Keystone
    [Show full text]
  • Railroads of West Chester: 1831 to the Present James Jones West Chester University, [email protected]
    West Chester University Digital Commons @ West Chester University History Faculty Publications History 2006 Railroads of West Chester: 1831 to the present James Jones West Chester University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcupa.edu/hist_facpub Part of the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons Recommended Citation Jones, J. (2006). Railroads of West Chester: 1831 to the present. , 1-147. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.wcupa.edu/ hist_facpub/9 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the History at Digital Commons @ West Chester University. It has been accepted for inclusion in History Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ West Chester University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Edition Commons Digital Railroads of West Chester 1831 to the present A history of the construction and consequences of the greatest invention of its age as viewed from a small town in southeastern Pennsylvania. Edition Written and designed by Jim Jones, Ph.D., Professor of History, West Chester University. Printed by Taggart Printing, 323 S. Matlack Street, West Chester, PA 19382. Front cover: 1960 American Locomotive Company DR3-18U of the West Chester Railroad. Photo by Jim Jones. Commons Copyright 2006, 2013 by Jim Jones Digital All rights reserved. Edition Dedicated toalternativesautomobiles, and toeveryonewhousesthem. Commons Digital TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Abbreviations iv Foreword vi Introduction 1 Part I: A local
    [Show full text]
  • Passenger Rail Stations
    #1–05 January 2005 Passenger Rail Stations Technical Memorandum An Element of Connecting Landscapes—the Transportation Plan for Chester County PREPARED BY THE CHESTER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION C CPC The Chester County Planning Commission is developing a long range transportation plan as was recommended in LANDSCAPES, the County’s comprehensive policy plan. Connecting Landscapes will review all modes of travel and make recommendations for strategies and improvements. As the transportation plan develops, between 20 and 25 technical memorandums will be published and made available for pub- lic review. Different modes of travel will be addressed with background information, analyses, discussion of issues, and recommendations. When all technical memorandums are completed a final report will synthesize the recommendations into a plan element. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Carol Aichele Andrew E. Dinniman Donald A. Mancini Table of Contents Summary . .1 Background . .2 Methodology . .3 Conclusions . .3 Recommendations . .4 Station Profiles and Recommendations . .7 Parkesburg Station . .8 Coatesville Station . .10 Thorndale Station . .12 Downingtown Station . .14 Whitford Station . .16 Exton Station . .18 Malvern Station . .20 Paoli Station . .22 Daylesford Station . .24 Berwyn Station . .26 Devon Station . .28 Strafford Station . .30 Chester County Stations without Regular Passenger Service . .33 West Chester Station . .33 West Chester University Station . .33 Westtown Station . .33 Columbia Station . .33 Maps Map 1 | Passenger Rail Stations
    [Show full text]
  • Phase Ia Archaeological Survey
    Ardmore Transit Center Project Ardmore, Lower Merion Township Montgomery County, Pennsylvania PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY ER# 05-3231-091 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Ardmore Transit Center Project Ardmore, Lower Merion Township Montgomery County, Pennsylvania PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY ER# 05-3231-091 by Kenneth J. Basalik, Ph.D and Philip Ruth Cultural Heritage Research Services, Inc. North Wales, Pennsylvania Prepared for: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation December 2005 ABSTRACT This Phase Ia Archaeological Survey report evaluates the potential impact of the proposed Ardmore Transit Center Project, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania on potential archaeological resources. The Area of Potential Effect (APE) is situated within the Piedmont Upland Section of the Piedmont Physiographic Province of southeastern Pennsylvania. The Ardmore Transit Center Project is part of a plan to revitalize Ardmore. The revitalization of Ardmore, in Lower Merion Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, and the transformation of the community into a destination place through redevelopment efforts have undergone years of planning. The Ardmore Redevelopment Plan, approved by the Montgomery County Planning Commission on March 9, 2005, is influenced by the Ardmore Transit Center Master Plan, prepared in 2003 with three main goals: economic revitalization of the Ardmore Business District, modernization of the existing train station, and an increase in the availability of parking. As proposed, the Ardmore Transit Center Project features mixed-use development on several public parking lots, a new train station with nearby commuter and public parking, new public plazas, several major traffic improvements, and property acquisition along Lancaster Avenue.
    [Show full text]