PLIAG : Capital Crescent Trail (CCT). Wednesday July 3, 2014 . Assumptions & Definitions . This presentation is an overview of the associated word document
PowerPoint Slideshow about ' PLIAG : Capital Crescent Trail (CCT)' - branxton
An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Ownership: Is it the case that the County will own the entire trail? Are there any exceptions? What county agency will own it?
Maintenance: Who is responsible for hard-scape (including the trail surface), the mechanical elements, signs, and warning gates. Who picks up the trash and maintains the trash receptacles? Finally, someone will have to maintain the landscape; mow the grass, and trim bushes and trees.
What are the responsibilities of state agencies, county agencies and the P3 partner? How can community groups and individuals efficiently communicate with these partners on trail issues?
All efforts to minimize noise to trail users should be taken into consideration. Noise mitigation measures to minimize the noise exposure need to be factored into the trail/transit design. Considerations:
Train speed is a significant contributor for the noise level and that noise levels decrease as train speed decreases. Decrease the speed of the trains.
Noise abatement for residences that will be exposed to horn soundings.
Sound-muffling from the traction power substations and overhead wires.
Current Proposal: Noise wall- transit line- fence- green space- trail- noise wall
Results of MTA noise analysis requested at last meeting?
Preference: Assuming that by placing the noise wall between the trail and the transit line does not increase noise to trail users or homeowners, then it is the preference of the MC Planning Board and the COPLN group, and their associated communities that the noise wall be placed between the trail and the transit way.
This design would block users view of the green track, which is aesthetically appealing to the trail users.
It would also create undesirable scenarios where CCT users are between two walls.
The green trail can be placed on either or both sides of the trail. As there is currently a tree buffer between homes and the trail, the MTA/MCDOT could consider a natural barrier between the homes and the trail.
As it is currently designed we have undesirable scenarios where CCT users are between two walls.
Importantly, this type of noise mitigation will significantly reduce noise exposure at the trail access points and for homes adjacent to these points.
Concerns: security reasons & light pollution into homes/yards.
Lighting at junctions, underpasses, and other critical locations
Additional $600,000 for lighting upgrades along the trail, which is intended to be the conduit for potential future wiring for lighting the entire trail.
The Council has not made a decision to light the entire trail, largely because of homeowner concerns. But if they do decide to light the entire trail, having the conduit in place means you have to tear up less of the trail, reducing costs and disruption.
The community does not support additional construction at a later time.
Light fixtures be solar powered for environmental and maintenance reasons, as well as ascetically pleasing.
Endangered species and due process of their protection
Water drainage and management
No standing water during or after construction (safety, tree protection, mosquitoes)
To the extent privately owned trees are damaged during the construction process, the land owner should be compensated for the value of the tree, the cost to have it safely removed, and the cost of planting comparable replacement trees.
A firm and detailed commitment to a tree-loss prevention plan and tree re-planting plan
New trees should have high CO2 conversion
Begin the tree canopy replacement program as early as possible.
Commit to a tree re-replanting plan that calls for the maximum number of trees that can be ecologically sustained in the remaining portion of the Georgetown Branch right-of-way not used for the trail or tracks, rather than the minimum required by state or local law.
The FEIS contains no survey of trees on private land adjacent to the Georgetown Branch right-of-way, nor does it analyze the extent to which such trees may be damaged or killed as a result of construction activity. Therefore, the government should:
Conduct a tree survey to identify trees on private property whose critical root zones overlap the construction impact zone;
Create tree protection measures (fencing, signage, etc.) in the plans and specifications for the construction contract; and
Enact a monitoring system to ensure trees identified in the survey are not impacted by construction operations.
The trail should be available, in its best form, for use for the greatest extent possible during construction. The Purple Line RFP should provide a strong incentive to keeping the trail closure to a minimum and phase trail closures in a logical sequence, consistent with construction phasing/schedules.
Comply with local noise ordinances of 65 dB(A) during daytime hours and 55 dB(A) during nighttime hours.
Construction access to the trail/transit right-of-way shall be from major roads such as Connecticut Avenue or Pearl Street
Planning and environments where it would be damaging.
B/w Lyttonsville & the Talbot Avenue bridge, minimize the amount of private property needed
Safe, secure ADA compliant access is needed at all access points
Include places along the trail where hikers and bikers can stop for food and drink, either from permanent shops or food trucks. Way finding signs indicating nearby commercial establishments should also be incorporated into the trail.
Incorporate bike share and repair facilities on the trail
Hot Topics and environments where it would be damaging.
The trail is restored/maintained as a park/path
RT is considered between Silver Spring and Bethesda.
Revised trail plans are submitted to the Planning Board, the public and the county.
The public must be made aware of this change, the new proposal and be given the opportunity (at least 4 opportunities, at least 2 of which should be in the evening or weekend) to comment to the county, MTA and County Council.