HomeMy WebLinkAboutH_1975_TransportationInventoryrm T
,,r-N.-Np rv,;F,,.C:;3 Fiem
�� EMIL \ Mftk \
rmz
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Com xehestaive Ptan
Ei:ements -
Compnehen6.ive Ptan
A aynopeic6 o6 Goa.t6 and 061ective6,
PnobZema and Oppontunitie6,
Potici.ee, Action Ranh and
Compoe.i to Ptan Map6
Pian Etement6
Land Llae Wateit and Tumpontati.on Hou6.ing Communi4 Faci.£.i.ti.e6 PoAk6 and Open Soti.d Waste
PPan Sewerage Ptan Ptan, and Sehv.ice6 Ptan Space Plan Ptml
Plan
i Back-wund S.tudi.e61
H.i.Mide H.iAtoni.cat rhe NatuAat The Ube o6 CommWtiity
Deve£opment Peupeetive6 Envi onment Babe Open Space Land FaciGiUea
Env.iAonmentat and Sehvcceb
90 F4 T T Mi N
—
AN 'NUENTV
WA!!k IH ml N T N WR49pv
ALANN'NG� CeRA M'SS!eN
VINOINiw
Honorable Martin L. Snook
Board of County Commissioners
for Washington County
Court House Annex
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Dear Commissioner Snook,
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
33 WEST WASHINGTON STREET
HAGERSTOWN, MARYLAND 21740
The Washington County Planning Commission is pleased to submit this report
entitled Transportation Background Study to the Board of County Commissioners
for Washington County as a preliminary phase of the revision of the Comprehen-
sive Plan.
The purpose of this document is to recognize the transportation systems of
Washington County, as required to update The Plan for the County.
This report, in conjunction with subsequent reports, is designed to be
used as a guide for future development and will provide a sound basis for the
Comprehensive Plan.
DRF:dac
Sincerely,
S" Q . W a > ( "ne. �
Donald R. Frush
Chairman
I
The preparation of this report was financed
in part through a Comprehensive Planning
grant from the Department of Housing and
Urban Development as administered by the
Maryland Department of State Planning.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
THE WASHINGTON COUNTY
BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Martin L. Snook, President
W. Keller Nigh, III, Vice President
R. Lee Downey
William J. Dwyer
Burton R. Hoffman
Contributors
Robert B. Garver, Project Planner
THE WASHINGTON COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
Donald R. Frush, Chairman
William E. Dorsey, Vice Chairman
Terrance W. Bache
John C. Herbst
W. Keller Nigh, III
Sidney Salitsky
Barbara B. Whitcomb
Alan R. Musselman, Planning Director
Thomas E. Van Dyke, Assistant Planner, Photography
Bonnie V. Lewis, Draftsman
Denise A. Coley, Secretary, Organization, Clerical
II
Table of Contents
TransmittalLetter........................................................ I
Acknowledgements..................................................... ..... it
Tableof Contents......................................................... III
Listof Tables............................................................ VIII
List of Charts and Figures ................. IX
Listof Maps.............................................................. XI
Preface................................................................... 1
Geography,History, Economics, and Land Use ................................ 5
Transportation - Historical Sketch ........................................ 16
Highways............................................................. 18
The C & O Canal ...................................................... 23
The Railroads........................................................ 25
Trolly Cars.......................................................... 27
Airplane............................................................. 29
Highway Systems........................................................... 31
Interstate Highways .................................................. 36
State Highways....................................................... 38
III
County Systems.......................................................
39
MunicipalSyst.ems....................................................
39
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ..........................................
42
TrafficVolumes ......................................................
47
Trip Generators......................................................
53
Capacity.............................................................
57
Levels of Service ....................................................
58
Factors Effecting Capacity and Service Volumes .......................
61
Design...............................................................
63
StreetSystems.......................................................
66
Speedand Accidents ..................................................
69
SpeedLimits.........................................................
70
Accidents............................................................
71
RoadConditions......................................................
73
TruckTraffic........................................................
101
Parking..............................................................
109
International System of Traffic Control Systems ......................
109
IV
Alternate Transportation Systems ...........................................
117
Bikeways.............................................................
119
Pedestrian Facilities................................................
127
Definitions..........................................................
128
AirTransportation........................................................
131
Historyand Development ..............................................
133
LandUse.............................................................
142
Zoning...............................................................
144
ExistingFacilities..................................................
146
Airwaysand Navaids..................................................
150
Activityand Traffic.................................................
152
FlightService.......................................................
154
Instrument Approaches................................................
154
Commuter Activity....................................................
155
AirCargo............................................................
160
BasedAircraft.......................................................
163
Relationship to Surrounding Airports.................................
164
Service Area........... ..... ................................ I........
169
V
Service Area Population..............................................
169
Wind Analysis........................................................
172
WindData .............................. ............................
173
ObstructionAnalysis ................. . ...........................
178
Noise Rating Contours................................................
182
Definitions..........................................................
186
Abbreviations........................................................
192
Rail Transportation.......................................................
193
Conrail..............................................................
197
ChessieSystem .......................................................
197
Norfolk and Western..................................................
200
RailAbondonments....................................................
200
PassengerService ....................................................
201
MassTransit..............................................................
205
History of Mass Transit................0.............................
207
TrolleyCars.........................................................
209
Buses................................................................
212
Existing Mass Transit System .........................................
220
VI
TaxiService......................................................... 232
RailPassenger Service ............................................... 232
AirService.......................................................... 233
Transportation for the Aging and Handicapped ......................... 233
Epilogue.................................................................. 235
TransportationReference Index ....................................... 238
Bibliography.............................................................. 246
VII
List of Tables
1.
Socio -Economic Statistical Profile .....................................
14
2.
Motor Vehicle Registration .............................................
34
3.
Highway Mileage Between Hagerstown and Selected Locations ..............
34
4.
Licensed Drivers.......................................................
35
5.
State -Federal Route Designations, Location and Extent of Svstem ......••
40
6.
Urban Mileage Tabulated ................ ...............................
43
7.
Streets and Roads Geometric Design Criteria .......... .................
67
8.
Geometric Design Criteria (Standard Plate No. 'A') .....................
68
9.
Speed Limits...........................................................
70
10.
Surface Pavement Inventory by Highway System ...........................
84
11.
Historic Bridges Nominated to the Federal Register .....................
91
12.
Bridge Inventory.......................................................
96
13.
Local Trucking Firms ...................................................
101
14.
Percentage Truck Traffic ...............................................
104
15.
History of Public Inprovements - Hagerstown Regional Airport ...........
139
16.
Annual Operations......................................................
153
VIII
List of Charts and Figures
1.
Temporal Distribution - Major Modes of Transportation ................
30
2.
Vehicular Moving Information .........................................
64
3.
Vehicular Clearance Information
65
......................................
4.
Street Design........................................................
69
5.
Stopping Sight Distance .................. „ _.................._......
75
6.
Sight Distance Analysis (Vertical) ...................................
77
7.
Sight Distance Analysis (Horizontal) .................................
80
8.
International System of Traffic Control Signs ........................
112
9.
Typical Basic Bicycle Dimensions .....................................
123
10.
Bike -Pedestrian Space Requirements ...................................
124
11.
Bike Control Signs ...................................................
126
12.
Enplaned and Deplaned Passengers .....................................
158
13.
Cargo Statistics.........................................0...........
161
14.
Wind Rose............................................................
174
15.
All Weather Wind Rose ................................................
176
16.
County Commuter - Passenger Trends by Month ..........................
228
IX
17. Monthly Operations ...............................................«... 153
18. Instrument Approaches to Hagerstown Regional Airport ................. 155
19. Henson Aviation Flight Schedule ...................................... 157
20. Commuter Passengers .................................................. 157
21. Air Cargo............................................................ 160
22. Peak Day/Busy Hour Activity - 1973 ................................... 162
23. Based Aircraft....................................................... 164
24. Hagerstown Regional Airport Service Area Population .................. 171
25. Obstruction Analysis ................................................. 179
26. Obstruction Analysis - Runway 2-20 ................................... 181
27. Amtrak Service....................................................... 203
28. Potomac Valley Service - B & 0 ...... ,........... ...........«......... 204
29. Transit Fleet - Antietam Transit Company .«.«...........:.«..... ..... 215
30. County Commuter Routes and Schedules ....... .................«........ 220
31. Ridership History .................................................... 226
32. Summary Financial Indicators ................................«........ 230
33. Actual Financial and Operating Data .................................. 231
34. Organizations Using Non-ambulatory Transportation Services ........... 234
35. Transportation Reference Index ....................................... 238
List of Maps
1.
The Region............................................................
8
2.
Transportation Facilities .............................................
19
3.
Highway Interchanges - Location and Configuration .....................
37
4.
General Highway Map ...................................................
44
5.
Average Daily Traffic Counts ..........................................
45
6.
Traffic Volumes.......................................................
48
7.
Major Traffic Generators ..............................................
54
8.
Traffic Accidents Locations ...........................................
72
9.
Bridge Inventory and Inspection Report ................................
98
10.
Transportation Systems Inventory ......................................
99
11.
Highway Deficiency Locations ..........................................
102
12.
Car Parking Accumulations Locations ...................................
110
13.
Hagerstown Region Airport .............................................
143
14.
Zoning Vicinity Around Hagerstown Regional Airport ....................
145
15.
Airways and Navaids...................................................
151
16.
Existing Airports .....................................................
168
XI
17. Potential Service Area................................................ 170
18. Generalized Land Use and Noise Rating Contours ........................ 183
19. Region Rail Generators and Corridors.................................. 196
20. Railway Systems....................................................... 199
21. Existing County Commuter Bus Routes and Service Areas 223
22. Existing County Commuter Bus Routes and Service Areas (Hagerstown) .... 224
XII
AI���ACE
Preface
The purpose of this inventory is to provide background data, informa-
tion, and analysis of transportation systems in Washington County. An analysis
of the types and extent of the transportation systems provides an indicator of
the levels of transportation services offered to the County. Furthermore, in
developing a Comprehensive Plan, a thorough knowledge and understanding of the
transportation systems is imperative. An analysis of transportation character-
istics, both historical and current trends plays an important role in defining
the future transportation system for the community.
The study has been developed to be a comprehensive inventory of all
modes of transportation. Categories include Highway Systems, Alternate Non-
vehicular Transportation Systems, Air Transportation, Rail Transportation, and
Mass Transit. The inventory is intended to provide background data of the
aforementioned components of transportation in development of the Transportation
element of the Washington County Comprehensive Plan. The Plan will compare and
analyze the data presented in this text with anticipated need in order to plan
and program transportation facilities and services in the future.
3
The study places primary emphasis on an inventory of the types, extent,
and possible deficiencies of the transportation systems, including a brief his-
tory of transportation development in Washington County.
4
1HY ,
IH IN 9F v I
Pq RAINes,
AND LANA .1
5E
Geography, History, Economics, Land Use
Washington County is located in the west -central part of the State of
Maryland, and together with Allegany and Garrett Counties is regionally referred
to as "Western Maryland."
Physiographically, Washington County is situated in the Blue Ridge,
and Ridge and Valley Provinces. As the titles of these provinces imply, the
topography of the County is quite varied. The easternmost Appalachian range is
the Blue Ridge, which forms the eastern boundary of the "Great Valley." The
"Hagerstown Valley" as it it refered to locally, consists of nearly half the
land area in the County and is predominately level and moderately sloping. The
Valley "is bounded on the west by steep mountainous and narrow valleys which
characterize the Ridge and Valley Provinence." A significant factor is that
approximately 30 percent of Washington County has a greater slope than 15 per-
cent, which is generally accepted as a practical limitation for moderate density
development. Land with greater slope than 25 percent is normally considered as
unbuildable, and is usually reserved as open space. In Washington County there
are approximately 8,000 acres that have a greater slope than 25 percent.
7
SWMaM
• `�
'9Cs�R�ET
GARRETT
ST V
THE REGION
BEDFORD'`
we Is"
a ord
FULTON
FRANKLIN
B�rkll�
0RGTN7
Harrismx
ADAMS
GetUsborg
Isboro
PE NNA.
§y MARYLAND
FREDERICK CARRML
v *Mar' r:
14F
%LOUDOUN
VIRGINIA
N
a
�o
a
MONTGOMERY
r�
w
D. a,
Politically, Washington County is bounded by three states, and/or
nine counties, which include Franklin and Fulton of Pennsylvania; Jefferson,
Berkley, and Morgan of West Virginia; and Loudon County of Virginia. Within
Maryland, Allegany County borders Washington County on the west, and Frederick
County to the east. Washington County's regional location can be further
defined in the approximate distances to the major metropolitan areas:
Baltimore, Maryland ..............
70
Boston, Massachusetts ............
474
Cleveland, Ohio ..................
290
New York City ....................
240
Norfolk, Virginia ................
260
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania .......
150
Pittsburg, Pennsylvania ..........
165
Raleigh, North Carolina ..........
310
Roanoke, Virginia ................
220
Washington, D.0 . .................
70
The geography and the County's proximity to eastern markets, has
shaped the socio-economic history of Washington County.
In September 1776, only sixty days after Maryland became a state,
Washington County was created by an act of the Constitutional Convention of
that year. Carved from Frederick County, Washington County of 1776 also
included present day counties of Allegany and Garrett. Thirteen years later
in 1789, Allegany County was created and Washington County's boundaries took
on the approximate dimensions as exists today.
D
In 1790, the United States federal government conducted the first cen-
sus. Washington County was populated by 15,822 people, representing approximately
0.4% of the United States total population of that year. At the time of the
second census in 1800, Washington County contained 5.4% of the population of the
State of Maryland and had increased by nearly 18% over the 1790 figure. Between
1810 and 1820, Washington County's population had increased 23%. This growth from
a percentage standpoint, was the largest growth ever experienced in the County.
This was due, in part, to the establishment of trading centers along the National
Pike, as it was extended as far west as the Conococheague Creek in 1817 and then
to Cumberland in 1820. Authorized in 1806 by the federal government, the National
Pike (U.S. Route 40) greatly facilitated the westward movement of increasing num-
bers of people destined to populate portions of the "American Midwest." Up to the
mid -1800's, agriculture was the dominant economic activity. Because of the
inherent natural fertility of the soils of the Great Valley, farming flourished.
To compliment the agricultural activity, small trading centers developed. This
provided an opportunity for farm produce to be exchanged for items that could not
be grown or made on the farm. Nearly all the towns that exist today in Washington
County, originally functioned as agricultural trading centers. Hagerstown and
Williamsport also grew to become commercial and manufacturing centers.
10
On July 4, 1828, at Georgetown, construction of the Chesapeake and Ohio
Canal began. It was built westward along the Potomac River to Cumberland by the
year 1852. The Canal had considerable impact on Washington County. Freight
which had formerly been carried by the National Pike was now carried by canal
barges, thus causing a decline in business along the highway. The population
percentage of growth for Washington County between 1810 and 1820 was 23%;
apparently, the National Pike provided the economic stimulus for population
growth. During the next four decades, however, Washington County experienced 9.5,
14.2, 6.9, and 1.8 percent growth rates, respectively. This erratic but obvious
decline can be attributed to the increasing freight traffic on the Canal and a
decline of freight traffic on the National Pike.
Probably the most important freight item that was shipped via the C & O
Canal was coal. The coal shipped eastward was a significant portion of Washington
D.C.'s total supply. This supply route took on major importance during the Civil
War, and there were numerous attempts by the Confederacy to cut off Washington's
coal supply.
11
Washington County's location was important during the Civil War because
of the C & O Canal, situated linearly along the County's southern boundary, and
because of the Great Valley. This valley was a broad avenue extending northward
into Pennsylvania and southward into Virginia. Confederate troops made their way
northward through this valley. On one occasion, Confederate troops were con-
fronted by Union forces near the town of Sharpsburg. The ensuing battle, the
Battle of Antietam, has been termed the "bloodiest single days' battle of the
Civil War."
Following the Civil War, a national depression occurred. Washington
County, like many areas of the nation at this time, watched families leave in
search of new opportunities and sources of employment. However, by 1867, the
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad began to serve the County. By 1872, the Western
Maryland Railroad began its operation and complimented the service of the B & O.
The decade from 1890 to 1900 saw further extensions of the railroad, which in
turn gave impetus to the manufacturing industry. By 1900, Washington County's
population had grown to 45,133. This growth continued into the next two decades
as more manufacturing firms located in the County and population continued to
12
increase. As a result of industrialization, the city of Hagerstown began develop-
ing as a Regional Center of manufacturing and employment. Although Hagerstown's
population was only slightly in excess of 13,000 by 1900, it had more than dou-
bled in size by 1920 with a population of 28,064. The Great Depression of the
early 30's temporarily slowed the population growth of the County. But, during
the following three decades, Washington County increased it's population by more
than 10% per decade. Although the 1950-1960 decade was marked by severe cut-backs
in employment in the aircraft industry, which had been a significant aspect of
the County's employment base, population growth continued. In the 1960's, the
construction of Interstates 70 and 81 and their convergence, as major north -south
and east -west corridors near Hagerstown, has had a strong influence on growth and
development, the rural landscape, and the economy of Washington County. The
immediate ramifications of the new highways was a vastly improved accessibility to
and from the Baltimore and Washington metropolitan areas, improved accessibility to
rural land, an expansion of the trucking, wholesaling and warehousing sectors of
the economy, and generally, a reestablishment of the "Hub City," a title borne in
the railroad era.
13
A review of the table, Socio-economic Statistical Profile of Washington
County, identifies and compares the County to Statewide County statistics. The
comparative value column gives Washington County's rank in each of the twelve
indicators as it compares among Maryland's 24 counties. In comparision to other
Maryland Counties, Washington County compares favorably in almost all categories,
except in unemployment rates and average growth rate in median family incomes.
Washington County's economic development, therefore, is progressing favorably in
comparison with other counties in the State of Maryland.
Socio-economic Statistical Profile
Washington County
Population (1970)
Population Per Square Mile
Median Age
Percentage Urban Population
Labor Force Participation Rate
Unemployment Rate
Percentage White Collar Employment
Per Capita Income
Percentage Households Below Poverty Level
Net Migration Rate
Average Annual Employment Growth Rate
Average Growth Rate in Median Family Income
Comparative
Statistical Value
103,829
7th
226.0
8th
29.2
11th
40.4%
8th
37.8%
14th
4.30
7th
40.6%
13th
$2,797
13th
12.5%
14th
4.1%
12th
1.9%
12th
5.5%
20th
* 7th highest in the State
Source: Economic Development in Western Maryland
14
Washington County consists of 462 square miles, and is the eighth lar-
gest County in the State of Maryland. Approximately 65 percent of the 462 square
miles are devoted to agricultural production. Despite the trend of decreasing
agrarian land use and increasing urban land, Washington County is primarily
agricultural in character. However, due to migration and development, areas once
considered agricultural are now becoming urbanized. Commercial and industrial
land use consist of 1.1 percent and .5 percent respectively. Residential, both
low density and high density comprise 8.4 percent, while institutional consists
of .7 percent, governmental 3.9 percent, recreation 5.7 percent, and vacant
represents 12.5 percent of the land use in Washington County.
Existing and planned land use will significantly influence community
growth and development. This may be accomplished through adequate reservation
and diversity of land use, functional safe design and distribution of land use,
effective use and development of land uses, adequate employment to meet demands,
and adequately programmed public facilities.
15
TQANSA9pA9F feN-
N01s9FeQ1e,e,6 MF IH
Transportation - Historical Sketch
Transportation - Highways
The first half of the 19th century was a period dominated by turnpike,
bridge and canal construction in Washington County.
"Under the Jefferson Administration the National Road building program
came into full flower. As early as 1806 Congress passed its famous bill for a
Federal Road 'from the navigable waters of the Atlantic to the Ohio River.' The
dream of George Washington, who at age fifteen. had caught the Potomac fever, was
at last to be fully realized."
"When the road and bridge building project began in earnest about
1811-12, the newly created banks of the State and County were forced to partici-
pate in fund-raising under the threat of losing their charters. Ultimately,
charters were renewed as each bank acceded to the stipulation that it subscribe
certain specified sums toward the building of not only the National Road but
also those turnpike roads which were to lead into it."
18
HA
Major Highways
Interstate
Railroads
Airport
Terminal (Truck)
Bus Depot
Switching Yards
I fCLEAR S PRIN
WI LLIAMSPORT
WASHINGTON COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
Source State Highway Administration
i�
SMrrHB
• UNKSTOWN f
•� ii
IOONS80ROy
JSl EEDYSV ILLE
-Y-010 (I
IARPSBURG
l
1
0 1 2 3 4
SCALE
"By 1835 the National Road, after being repaired with crushed stone
and after toll -houses and been erected was taken into custody by the States of
Maryland and Pennsylvania."
"During the long years of uncertainty, a revised plan for construction
of bridges of Washington County had been approved by the Secretary of War.
Covered wooden bridges were to be erected in place of the formerly agreed upon
stone bridges. This proposal was firmly rejected by the State of Maryland.
Marylanders, maintaining that their Legislature had 'authorized the change in
the location of the road through the state, provided the brill es were all made
of stone,' remained adamant. The high upkeep of wooden bridges, even when
built on stone piers, was cited." Maryland won a resounding victory when the
handsome stone bridges were eventually erected.
"The two major streams, the Antietam Creek and the Conococheague Creek,
had posed major problems for both residents and travellers for a full century
before the stone bridge program was begun. But once initiated, more than 30 stone
bridges were constructed in Washington County between the years 1819 and 1863,
with the major construction being engaged in during the 1820's and 1830's. In
20
National Pike - Western Maryland Railway and C & O Canal at Hancock
21
the 1820's, when the National Road was first opened to traffic, the new stone
bridges which had been erected by the Army Engineers were regarded with awe as
'the wonders of their day.'"
"Although there was much speculation as to their hardiness, among
both engineers and laymen, they have survived not only a century or more of use,
but have even withstood the stress of the modern tractor -traversed era of the
1900's."
By 1940, automobiles and trucks were exceeding the capacity of Washing-
ton County's streets and highways. Although there was a bridge construction
program, there had never been any large scale improvements to roadways in the
rural areas. Most roads closely followed the terrain, no matter what sharp
curves and steep grades resulted. Therefore, during the succeeding decades
reconstruction of rural arterial roadways was of prime consideration. Then in
1956, the Congress passed the Federal Aid Highway Act, increasing the annual
authorization level for the Interstate System; thus accelerating the construction
of Interstates 70 and 81 in Washington County. The Interstate System is the
22
most sophisticated vehicular system yet devised, having full access control,
elimination of sharp curves and grades, and the incorporation of maximum safety
design.
The C & O Canal
The Potomac River Canal had been conceived well before 1800. "In
the 18201s, after favorable reports on the Erie Canal, a continuous canal
paralleling the Potomac River was proposed. President John Quincy Adams broke
ground for the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal on July 4, 1828. Construction pro-
gressed rapidly at first but slowed considerably in Washington and Allegany
Counties." The canal had been completed to Harpers Ferry by 1833 and not until
1850 was the canal complete to Cumberland.
The C & O Canal Company, employing its own engineers, constructed in
Washington County five notable aqueducts and seventy-two culverts all of stone
and all between 1832 and 1840.
The Canal had considerable impact on the Potomac River towns of Han-
cock and Williamsport. The transport of agricultural products increased and
coal being shipped from Western Maryland to Georgetown reached a million tons a year.
23
_ � . ��� ��i.. ' _ ° 4 ! ��`._ ^`� �_ a �•_ - .
r
' � � � � nr a.- - J� � r_. , r �• of -�•
S '! tri � • - k. .�i `` ' °"� P - , �
3�►. a°+. a M - - �" 1� s
4
lit,
The canal, towpath and adjacent lands are today, the C & O Canal
National Historical Park and as such, will be preserved.
The Railroads
As the plans for the C & 0 Canal had neared completion, two Balti-
moreans were promoting another transportation link with the west: a railroad.
In February of 1827, twenty-five men met in Baltimore to plan an interstate
railway to the Ohio River, and within fifteen days of this meeting, the General
Assembly of Maryland had chartered the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company. A
year and a half later, on the same day that President Adams broke ground for
the C & 0 Canal, Charles Carroll laid the cornerstone for the B & 0, thus
beginning the railroad era that dominated the nineteenth century.
The main line of the B & O extended westward reaching Harpers Ferry by
1834, Cumberland by 1842 (before C & O Canal completion) and the Ohio River by
1853.
In 1838, the Cumberland Valley Railroad was completed between Hagers-
town and Harrisburg, and was extended to Martinsburg in 1874.
25
The first action looking to the construction of a railroad connecting
Hagerstown to the main line of the B & O at Harpers Ferry was taken in 1857,
when a convention was held at Hagerstown. In 1864, the Legislature passed an
act incorporating the Washington County Railroad which eventually failed before
construction was complete and the B & O came to the aid and finished construc-
tion. Regular passenger and freight service between Hagerstown and Baltimore
began in 1867.
The road extends from Hagerstown to Weverton, a distance of twenty-
three miles.
"Of all the railroads that center at Baltimore, the Western Maryland
was the last to be completed. Although projected in 1830, its trains did not
enter Hagerstown on its own tracks until 1873."
The construction of the Western Maryland Railroad on the west side of
the South Mountain was begun in 1866. "In that year the legislature passed an
act authorizing the County Commissioners of Washington County to subscribe
$150,000 to capital stock of the Western Maryland Company, the money was to be used
in grading the road from the western slope of the mountain to Hagerstown.
26
Baltimore City and Washington County furnished the greater portion of
the capital.
As early as the 1870's passenger excursion trains were stopping at Pen
Mar for the view from High Rock. The scenery on the railroad made passenger
travel a pleasurable experience.
The railroads sucessfully competed with both the canal and the National
Turnpike. Hotels and Inns along the turnpike began to decline and barges carried
predominately coal and grain on the canal.
The cultural importance of the railroad can be seen in the sizes and
elaborate design of the depots.
Trolley Cars
Trolley cars in Washington County were initiated August 7, 1896. The first
lines ran between Hagerstown and Williamsport and other intercity loops, although
within eight years trolley tracks had been extended to Funkstown, Frederick and
other outlying areas. The trolley extended the commuting distance of residences,
27
A Hagerstown Railway Company Trolley Entering West Washington
Street at "The Square" - 1915
PX 3
therefore encouraging development in sururban areas•of the County. But in the
1920's, the bus was winning popularity due to mobility and compatibility with
other street vehicles. Although the local trolley company remained in business
until 1954, the last trolley to run in Washington County was in August 1947.
Airplane
The Hagerstown Municipal Airport, as first termed, is located on U.S. 11,
4.5 miles north of Hagerstown. The existing airport is the site originally
owned by the Kreider-Reisner Aircraft Company, which was later purchased by the
Fairchild Corporation. The year 1936 saw the completion of the hard surface
runways exceeding two thousand feet and a terminal. Expansion of the now
Hagerstown Regional Airport have included extension of runway, aprons, and
taxiways. Other improvements consist of enlargement of the terminal, construc-
tion of a FAA Control Tower, and lighting systems. Presently the airport is
scheduled for additional runway and terminal expansions.
29
AUTOMOBILE
AIRPLANE
BUS
TROT L EY
RAILROAD
CANAL BARGE
HORSE -PULLED
COACH or WAGOI
RIVER TRAVEL
HORSEBACK
FOOT TRAVEL
Washington County
Temporo/ Distribution - Major Modes Of Transportation
NON - RECREATION
1750
13850
1900
1950
IHNI RIHWAV SYST
EMS
Highway Systems
Population growth, its distribution, economics, and location are sig-
nificant factors in the development of transportation demands and the systems
that have been provided to meet those demands. Presently, there are an estimated
110,000 people living in Washington County, of which 65,730 are licensed drivers,
having 66,769 registered motor vehicles.
Motor vehicle registration for Washington County in the past had been
increasing at a lesser rate than that for the State, although within the last two
years the percent increase within the County has exceeded that for the State.
The following table titled Motor Vehicle Registration illustrates a ten-year
history and comparison of State and local vehicle registration. In the ten year
period of 1965 to 1976 vehicle registrations increased 60 percent. A related
characteristic is the average number of vehicles per family and per capita. In
1970 there were 2.04 vehicles per family and a corresponding 1.88 vehicles per
capita. Concurrently, motor vehicle registration has increased 22 percent since
1970.
33
Motor Vehicle Registration.
* Change in methodology of tabulation.
Source: Motor Vehicle Administration
Highway Mileage Between Hagerstown
and Selected Locations in Maryland
Annapolis
Washington.
County
Percent
Increase
State of
Maryland
Percent
Increase
1965
45,229
4.3
1,446,692
5.6
1966
47,704
5.5
1,540,669
6.5
1967
50,111
5.0
1,621,048
5.2
1968
51,567
2.9
1,703,120
5.1
1969
54,342
5.4
1,807,820
6.1
1970
54,940
1.1
1,890,314
4.6
1971
56,473
2.8
1,980,173
4.8
1972
55,956
*
1,956,240
1973
59,164
5.7
2,072,129
5.9
1974
62,529
5.7
2,185,624
5.5
1975
66,769
6.8
2,320,774
6.2
* Change in methodology of tabulation.
Source: Motor Vehicle Administration
Highway Mileage Between Hagerstown
and Selected Locations in Maryland
Annapolis
103
Frederick
25
Baltimore
72
Oakland
117
Cambridge
156
Ocean City
217
Chestertown
147
Point Lookout
149
Crisfield
220
Salisbury
188
Cumberland
68
Solomons
137
Elkton
123
Washington, D.C.
70
Source: State Highway Administration
34
Not only is there an increase in motor vehicle registration in Washing-
ton County, but there has been a corresponding growth in licensed drivers:
Male
Female
Total
1976
35,636
30,094
65,730
1975
34,804
29,000
63,804
1974
33,893
27,724
61,617
1973
32,943
26,415
59,358
1972
28,756
23,033
51,789
As may be ascertained, the number of licensed drivers in Washington County has
increased 26.9 percent from 1972 to 1976.
As previously discussed, Washington County is located in Western Mary-
land at the convergence of Interstate 70 and 81. In addition to the Interstate
SystErn, the County's highway network consists of State, County and municipal
roadways. Within Washington County there is a total of 1,185.85 miles of highway.
The extent of the various systems may be itemized accordingly:
1.
Interstate
2.
State
3.
County
4.
Municipal
35
50.96
miles
248.35
miles
709.82
miles
172.72
miles
Interstate Highways - the Interstate system provides for movement of
large volumes of through traffic between metropolitan areas and other centers
of major regional importance. Access to the Interstates is fully controlled
and is allowed only at specified intersections and/or interchanges. Interstate
70 and Interstate 81 transverse and intersect in Washington County.
The Washington County highway system was substantially improved with
the completion of the Interstates. The Interstate Highway is one type of highway,
having been designed with the capability of carryina a capacity of traffic and has
become essential to the economic growth of Washington County. Interstate 70 Fasses
through the County in a northwest -southeast direction. The western -most inter-
change is at Hancock with U.S. 40, near the Maryland -Pennsylvania state line.
Subsequent interchanges going east, as delineated on the following map titled
Highway Interchanges Location and Configuration, occur at Big Pool on Maryland
Route 56, Clear Spring on Maryland Route 68, north of Williamsport on Maryland
Route 63, west of Halfway at the intersection of Interstate 81, south of
Hagerstown on Maryland Route 65, southeast of Hagerstown on U.S. 40, and at
Beaver Creek on Maryland Route 66. Interstate 70 provides Washington County
with a good east -west access to Baltimore -Washington to the east and Pittsburg -
Cincinnati to the west.
36
-, c
4
!_' [i',mom
4fdl (I f� it a"•,i:*;
hwk 41L
�r Irl1A : i�oakow n i '� �,r zwo
� � �' �. � ►li .�y� � w r _R t _ , . �.
�*^'� nr. 1� <:` ��; air^ "►.K � aR k• •"�' . ,...,, � f j
r ..
Fite,-,
Ed
REE'A ma
•W.
.10
'top 1, f
`mac'�►',�`,KIM
1!'
OWL
Vr
OVA
�, .� • , � ! t ''�..�: .'�w fir
r Y 40Tw
'All l[9l lWAIL IlSflfl►12[Cl V1:J!\■[f
Interstate 81 transverses Washington County in a northeast -southwest
direction. The southern most interchange is at Williamsport near the Maryland -
West Virginia border, on Maryland Route 68. Subsequent interchanges going
north as identified on the Highway Interchange Location and Configuration map
occur at Virginia Avenue, U.S. Route 11, west of Halfway at the intersection
of Interstate 70, at Halfway Boulevard, at Cedar Lawn, west of Hagerstown on
U.S. 40, at Maryland Route 58 (Cearfoss Pike), at Maugansville Road, and with
the Showalter Road and State Line interchanges providing excellent access to
the Hagerstown Regional Airport. Interstate 81 provides Washington County with
good north -south access to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and Roanoke, Virginia.
Together Interstate 70 and Interstate 81 provide access for motorists and
truckers to numerous other Interstate networks. This in turn makes many metro-
politan areas such as New York,Philadelphia, Pittsubrg, Cincinnati, Cleveland,
Richmond and Atlanta easily accessible to Washington County.
State Highways - State highways provide for the movement of large
volumes of through traffic between centers of major regional importance, provide
access to Interstate Systems, and provide access to abutting lands. State
maintained highways in Washington County are U.S. Route 11, U.S. Route 40,
U.S. Route 40A, U.S. Route 340, U.S. Route 522, Maryland Routes 34, 56, 57, 58,
60, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 77, 144, 180, 418, 491, 494, 550, 615 and 632.
These State Highways compliment the function of the Interstates and assist in
the movement of traffic both within the County and external locations. Although
these routes are predominantly located in rural areas, significant traffic pro-
blems occur when these routes pass through densely populated areas such as
Halfway, and Pennsylvania Avenue corridor. The extent and location of Inter-
state and State Routes has been tabulated in the exhibit titled State -Federal
Traffic Route Designations, Location and Extent of System.
County Systems - the third type of highways are catergorized as County.
These roads and streets, normally titled by geographic designations, provide for
inter -community travel within the County, connecting towns, unincorporated popu-
lation centers, rural agricultrual areas, provide connections to State and
Interstate Highways, and provide access to abutting property. County roads func-
tion as a feeder system tying together large population centers and dispersed
suburban and rural communities.
Municipal Systems - municipal road systems provide for inner -community
travel. These street systems provide access to subdivisions and abutting
Me
State -Federal
Traffic Route Designations, Location and Extent of System
U.S. 11 Pennsylvania State Line, Hagerstown, Williamsport, to West Virginia State
Line - 12.65 miles
Md. 34 Boonsboro, Keedysville, Sharpsburg, to West Virginia State Line - 10.04 miles
U.S. 40 Allegany County Line, Hancock, Clear Spring, Hagerstown, to Frederick County
Line - 48.27 miles
U.S. 40A Hagerstown, Funkstown, Boonsboro, to Frederick County Line - 12.79 miles
Md. 56 U.S. Route 40, Big Pool, Big Spring, to Maryland Route 68 - 9.56 miles
Md.. 57 Maryland Route 494 to U.S. Route 40, at St. Pauls Church - 4.06 miles
Md. 58 Hagerstown to Cearfoss - 3.49 miles
Md. 60 Hagerstown, Leitersburg to Pennsylvania State Line - 7.32 miles
Md. 62 Route 64, Chewsville to Route 60, Leitersburg - 3.94 miles
Md. 63 Maryland Route 65, Downsville, Williamsport, Huyetts Crossroads, Cearfoss,
to Pennsylvania State Line - 17.15 miles
Md. 64 Hagerstown, Chewsville, Smithsburg, to Pennsylvania State Line - 13.50 miles
Md. 65 Hagerstown, Lappans, to Sharpsburg - 11.73 miles
Md. 66 Boonsboro, Beaver Creek, to Smithsburg - 12.95 miles
Md. 67 Boonsboro, Brownsville, to U.S. 340 at Weverton - 12.33 miles
40
Md. 68 Clear Spring, Williamsport, Maryland Route 65, to Boonsboro - 18.66 miles
I-70 Interstate, Pennsylvania State Line, Hancock, Clear Spring, Hagerstown,
Funkstown, Frederick County Line - 38.84 miles
Md. 77 Smithsburg to Frederick County Line - 3.10 miles
I-81 Interstate, Pennsylvania State Line, Hagerstown, Williamsport, to West
Virginia State Line - 12.12 miles
Md. 144 Hagerstown -Cedar Lawn to U.S. Route 40 Break - 1.93 miles
Interstate 70 - Hancock to U.S. Route 40 - 5.78 miles
Md. 180 U.S. 340, Sandy Hook to U.S. 340, Frederick County - 1.48 miles
U.S. 340 Frederick County Line, Weverton, to West Virginia State Line - 2.31 miles
Md. 418 Leitersburg, Ringgold, to Pennsylvania State Line - 4.69 miles
Md. 491 Smithsburg, Frederick County, to Cascade - 4.78 miles
Md. 494 Cearfoss, Fairview, to Pennsylvania State Line - 6.90 miles
U.S. 522 West Virginia State Line, Hancock, follows Interstate 70 to Pennsylvania
State Line - 1.38 miles
Md. 550 Frederick County Line, Cascade, to Pennsylvania State Line - 2.05 miles
Md. 615 Interstate 70 to Pennsylvania State Line - 4.35 miles
Md. 632 Downsville, Maryland 68, to Hagerstown - 6.68 miles
41
A
GENERAL HIGHWAY MAP
Source / Washington County Planning Commission
� •� . r' f 6 .�, fir"'" � �,' �'� - '� "" `� r ''' �r4 , r 't � - ri ' " 5� /�� ^ • � r (`-`
� r
e _ J
i`
H
a J{I f� � .wa , � • f^ t ,.�.?'� � i 1- w : vu.+ /"� ` IY' ',i ;.� ..1 n i�
.� SPRING. .,.,• l� I i, \.r ,� ) 1�
y4f .•
�'"YATti In ', Lwvax Gk � 6e.p ' �'•' Lao rah l �. � � • Ff l '
,
,
w
f _
r
/• l r
1
*, '� , n' ► � ry � �� ' • tyv `'e Ve - �"o - 1 '� � � aa.aiwr � �'•+�
.• 1WILt1AH9P0 �Y;x. / fiery � . I J 1,!' + • '�2 �
41
� 1 I w..,fr ,: j'•
f: r:
}� ' awn r � . f �,; I � p _ j1•.
u•+ F i _ t f i�a-
1 peeke.! � 1e
Scale
Feet A /pQ0 aMn aaa rano mnoa Waal
_ •; ::h Miles i
iy
properties. Movement of traffic is low speed and becomes congested in population
centers, business districts, and employment centers. Municipal systems in
Washington County are those of Boonsboro, Clear Spring, Funkstown, Hagerstown,
Hancock, Keedysville, Sharpsburg, Smithsburg and Williamsport. The extent of
each municipal system, and type of pavement is identified in the chart titled
Urban Mileage Tabulated.
The identification and location of all Interstate, State, County and
major municipal corridors is illustrated on the superseding General Highway Map
for Washington County.
Average Daily Traffic - Average Daily Traffic (ADT) or Annual Average
Daily Traffic (AADT) is defined as the number of vehicles passing an identified
point in one day. Counts are generally calculated by taking the total volume
of traffic during a given time period (in which days greater than one day and
less than one year) divided by the number of days in that time period. Samples
should be of a lengthy duration as to compensate for error due to factors such
as season, weather, and days of the week. The superseding map titled Average
Daily Traffic Counts - 1975 identifies locations and diurnal traffic counts on
major corridors within Washington County.
43
URBAN MILEAGE TABULATED
Percent Miles
Total
Maintained By
hard -surfaced streets maintained
by municipalities (Col. 5) ...
Town or
172.37
Total
Urban
Special
by County (Col. 7) ...........
.57
Municipality County
Taxing
Rural
roads regardless of surface type
... .. .....................
79.90
704.83
Area
Total
State
Earth
Paved
Earth Paved
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6) (7)
Boonsboro
9.20
1.72
.00
6.09
.00 1.39
Clear Spring
2.65
.43
.00
2.22
.00 .00
Funkstown
4.63
.72
.00
3.91
.00 .00
Hagerstown
132.78
5.16
.00
126.73
.00 .89
Hancock
15.39
4.49
.00
9.78
.00 1.12
Keedysville
5.61
2.54
.00
3.07
.00 .00
Shaprsburg
7.25
1.17
.35
5.73
.00 .00
Smithsburg
4.87
.00
.00
4.75
.00 .12
Williamsport
11.76
.20
.00
10.09
.00 1.47
TOTAL
194.14
16.43
.35
172.37
.00 4.99
Percent Miles
Total
Urban
hard -surfaced streets maintained
by municipalities (Col. 5) ...
19.53
172.37
Total
Urban
hard -surfaced streets maintained
by County (Col. 7) ...........
.57
4.99
Total
Rural
roads regardless of surface type
... .. .....................
79.90
704.83
Total
Urban
hard -surfaced streets and County
rural mileage ................
100.00
882.19
Source: State Highwav Administration
44
Average Daily Traffic volumes may be interpreted and analyzed as travel
desire lines in terms of existing highways. Annual average traffic volumes are
used in the review and analysis of the following:
1. Measuring and establishing trends in traffic volumes as to evaluate
present traffic flow with respect to existing highway systems,
2. Determination of annual travel in vehicle miles for economic
programming of capital improvement expenditures,
3. Measuring the present demand for service on the highway,
4. Computation of accident rates,
5. Estimating highway use revenues,
6. Establishment of priorities according to need, and the planning
of those highway systems to rectify existing traffic conditions.
45
Traffic Volumes
A visual interpretation of the map titled Average Daily Traffic Volumes,
one may readily determine the most highly traveled highways in Washington
County. The interpretation of the traffic volumes may be classified into a
category, according to comparative analysis of Average Traffic values. The fol-
lowing values have been established as to ascertain and compare the 1975 traffic
counts:
1. Highest Volumes - greater than 20,000 ADT
2. High Volumes - values of 5,000 - 20,000 ADT
3. Medium Volumes - values of 2,000 - 5,000 ADT
4. Low Volumes - values of 0 - 2,000 ADT
Excessive Volumes
The Highest Traffic Volume area in Washington County is the
entire length of Interstate 70. This area of excessive volume exists due to
regional traffic desire lines transversing the County, with peak levels occuring
at principal interchanges located contiguous to the Hagerstown Metropolitan Area.
46
966 315 391 12100 50 908 478 �w .499
- •• .. `�. i ! r . i .�aov� ' t. +.._. '1 0 J1 `� + 4700 S Q t 2 i5fi,. �r� 'M 3 •ter n-
4 � � r �� ® � 9 •' � � W"IT
r-
+:` a/ *, • /,� � t F y „7 y } t , �, �, .n.la.. nn --y� a • .� y6�Y.4. h 1` I . 4 •�912�-.y4.3�3
t / [rrrr' i ` \ • • � 1 M . x �m15 4 t I • � � +I I
r
'�
• J19
•� Y , - . — � •� 1 '� 1%'�Q•I b . w 184Qfl r4 •4
� ,�•:� :, T 5fl0
f 20000 925 s..wa
r ae�R 2E�y rrn. . 2300 179fl0 �a.R<�/ 1100` 310ry +5 +r
{I I •� 1 Q a Fr SPR NG � .. M msj,�sy,� 11. { �•W. .A � /.ilFFV19 t 3V �.,�•.�K1() K l
•� " { / � e i' t,p •o"w , S7 f7tJ, n.Mn. 5 - 4 5+,. ..Y ] �'nN \ ,.,,}. 1
.. • f
10
112
T2 7245 1
k Ry r r 4144 t 1 i I r 600 i- HAG TciW N
- _ 1QQ`. # w 60
350 I '• 850
r. . ; 24100 10100
16Q4 z r{ `
�, +^-i \ �� �e v+•< +'225 5 6'�S] a `"7570 ,� 275
+:' • al F /ter.. to =' 1..,.. 24 f 604 r,!� (1206
Y a.
7$' 200, 412i 1000 $
W,,, "AuyPlJRi
3175154
l k7�200 1194 _16Z 1500 1450—�
3275 108* 3500 ii ^• /
`•.: 425 �
10400 2 1775
r „9100. - - 9�0"S 25r5b 16900 ! N
+: 1
14
7 ` 0 125fl 200
WASHINGTON COUNTY600 2�
y • �, e.` � V y ,
! rt fl0 y
X5600 �
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT ,
# R bo0.
470
ti600
932 s t
+ V
+1350 r= l� • • r .. � -
Source: State Highway Administration
Washington County Engineering Department
I
Scale
Feet
------------------------------------------
Miles
-f r."r• - 725' .,N
X
rY«a 1875
1075
High Volumes - 1975
The High Volume Highways in Washington County, excluding Interstate 81,
generally consists of the newer orad, having adequate site distance, good road
surface and conditions, and higher operating speeds. These high volume highways
are itemized as follows:
1. U.S. 11 from north of Williamsport Town Limits to Hagerstown
Regional Airport, of which the Average Daily Traffic ranges from
7,075 to 16,000 south of the Hagerstown City Limits. Volumes
exceed 15,000 at locations along U.S. 11, north of the City Limits.
2. U.S. 40 from west of Huyetts Crossroads (Md. 63) to the Interchange
at Interstate 70. Average Daily Traffic counts on U.S. 40 range
from 5,800 to 16,700, with peak counts located along the "Dual
Highway" segment.
3. U.S. 40A at Funkstown and the section transversing Boonsboro from
Millpoint Road to Maryland 67. ADT's range from 5,900 at Funkstown
with a peak of 8,000 at Boonsboro.
4. Maryland 58 - Hagerstown City Limits to just south of Interstate
81 with a peak ADT of 6,600.
5. Maryland 60 from north of the Hagerstown City Limits to intersec-
tion with Maryland 418 at Leitersburg. Average Daily Traffic
Counts range from 7,700 at Leitersburg to a peak of 15,400 at the
Hagerstown City Limits.
6. Maryland 64 from Hagerstown City Limits to Cavetown. ADT counts
range from 6,000 at Cavetown to 10,000 at the City Limits, with a
peak located at the junction with Robinwood Drive.
7. Maryland 65 from Hagerstown to Lappans Crossroads (Md. 68).
Average Daily Traffic Counts range from 9,600 at Oak Ridge Drive
to 5,100 just north of Lappans.
8. Interstate 81 from West Virginia to Pennsylvania State Lines with
ADT's of 10,400 - 12,000, respectively, with peaking occuring
between Showalter Road and Williamsport. Maximum ADT on Interstate
81 is 17,800.
49
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
TRAFFIC VOLUME
,r
1000's OF VEHICLES PER DAY fr�
22{) 15 14210
8 Fs 2 •�•• ,� ; ] a.�r+PAop2r
WASHINGTON COUNTY
ADT — 24 Hour Counts � • .
i
F� �..- : , -;� PLANNING COMMISSION
Source State Hiyhwoy Administration
1. �✓. fir• r, 7
Scale
Feet aa •
Y �+ .t •... Miles 1
*'�
F
1 INV i.q'• .%
+moww
�iyr�`Y
.�r'1�.-•�...-�"3
�,,
.{,,�.• _'i�^,p�— nY� wo i'..—
.4�•
\� .„� t
r•
..�'
.,.'
yt
y ,�
_�IeiT—.,�
iRMY
:.�:.�..
E`EN
�� �
�, ,,,•, r.•.,
rrr• �•.
,.�
`,�'
�;;
'
•A.
w..
•±
,.
�-�i Y•4s
�r
I'"
#
'•4 i•�' 1 1� ' '.
�
•�•i 3.4
A"lam
,Y.
�7,p1
o [ ?' CLL#n
i gpnlHO.
�
,§ .1
G•""
} '
fµ}
n�
�'•
I
fW
�
tRix�
4
run rt4
f /' ���
5M icy
.,
•'��� 1{ mow;
r �`y{ �_
�, �
•JF -
. '
:�
2IN
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
TRAFFIC VOLUME
,r
1000's OF VEHICLES PER DAY fr�
22{) 15 14210
8 Fs 2 •�•• ,� ; ] a.�r+PAop2r
WASHINGTON COUNTY
ADT — 24 Hour Counts � • .
i
F� �..- : , -;� PLANNING COMMISSION
Source State Hiyhwoy Administration
1. �✓. fir• r, 7
Scale
Feet aa •
Y �+ .t •... Miles 1
*'�
F
1 INV i.q'• .%
9. Maryland 144 from Hagerstown to U.S. 40 with a peak ADT of 9,300
at the City Limits.
10. U.S. 340 from Virginia State Line to Frederick County Line with
ADT of 8,241.
11. U.S. 522 from Hancock Town Limits to West Virginia State Line,
with an ADT of 6,500.
12. Maryland 632 from Hagerstown to Doub Road with subsequent ADT
counts of 6,774 and 6,500.
13. Long Meadow Road from U.S. 11 to Maryland 60 having ADT counts
from 5,689 to 6,100 at Pennsylvania Avenue.
14. Maugans Avenue from U.S. 11 to Interstate 81 having an ADT count
of 10,011.
15. Mt. Aetna Road from U.S. 40 to Edgewood Drive having an ADT count
of 10,053.
16. Edgewood-Robinwood Drive from U.S. 40 to Maryland 64 having ADT
counts ranging from 7,586 to 8,063.
51
17. Oak Ridge Drive from Maryland 65 to Halfway Boulevard with ADT
counts of 6,665 and 6,774, respectively.
18. Halfway Boulevard from Interstate 81 to U.S. Route 11 with an
ADT count of 9,159.
19. Marsh Pike from Maryland 60 to Long Meadow Road having an ADT
count of 8,534.
Medium Volume - 1975
Extending from the pattern of High Volume Highways is the tenacle
pattern of Medium Volume Routes as may be decerned on the Traffic Volume Map.
These routes form the pattern of collectors that eventually develop into a
High Volume route. These corridors, as growth continues, will gradually trans-
form from a Medium Volume route to a High Volume route. Those corridors
identified as having medium density Average Daily Traffic are generally located
in the rural areas and communities consisting of Maryland 34, parts of U.S. 40
and U.S. 40A, Maryland 58, sections of Maryland 60, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 77,
180, 418 and 632. County roads classified as having medium volume are Marsh
Pike, Maugans Avenue, Showalter Road, Antietam Drive, and Halfway Boulevard.
W
Low Volume - 1975
Low volume routes are those principally used for local thru traffic.
Most of the Low Volume roads are County roads and some secondary State roads.
These roads provide access to abutting properties and generally have a low
speed movement of traffic. It may be assumed that all roads, not previously
mentioned, have Low Volume traffic movement.
Trip Generators
Any trip has both an origin and a destination or a zone where it was
produced and a zone where it was attracted. Generally, trips are generated at
residences and are attracted to destinations or non -residences. Thus, trip
production is equated to residential trip generation and trip attraction to
non-residential trip generation. Variables in determining trip generation are
such demographic factors and economics, population, number of household units,
average family size, and average automobile ownership per household.
Major traffic generators and/or attractors include residential areas,
commercial areas, industrial -warehousing facilities, institutional facilities
53
and recreational areas. Furthermore, a specific entity may be a portion of the
avenue for regional traffic generators. The map entitled Major Traffic Generators
depicts those land use types in Washington County that are considered primary
traffic generators and attractors. In addition, it identifies regional destina-
tions that are readily accessible from Washington County.
Several facilities, due to their size and innate attractiveness will
be discussed according to land use type.
Commercial Centers - both Center Business Districts (CBD) and Suburban
Business Districts (SBD) generally attract high numbers of trips as compared to
other land use types. Factors influencing trip generation include the amount,
type and quality of merchandise available, season of the year, distance or travel
time to the district, amount of parking, and finally the weather. Commercial
centers generally have a consistent generation of traffic, although peaking may
exist at seasonal times of the year (i.e. Christmas).
Employment Centers - generally include industrial, warehousing, and
government or institutional land use types. These centers may be producers of
significant traffic congestion due to peak loading factors. Loading factors
54
..
To
11
To Breezewood, Pittsburgh, Penna. To McConnellsburg, Penna. To 9, To Wayn
-0 �, Mercersburg Penna. -•. , HaChambers
b' .._ _
,,,,-. f,v �n �"` + +. �+�4g ♦. r�+�M�'w+li,�f'. y�9 �e�a � A ee��r�
•'�:. n'!�+�1. ,4�` 48• ri*p*+�f y+��r �, �g,Yliily /- � i •��i
s. i•+ _* x s*�i� i� +�s�• `•. QCs. � � n, ;i • i' R;�
To Highfield,
:fir W� '-�� r� 41� � .� �' +x'.,,a_ � =, � � w.+,. "+` t, •r - _ Maryland
p- To Berkley Springs, W. Va. "`' i z. ; f �+ y ., ". t t` ,f • , a
To Winchester, Va.
fit cr.ean • , �+.•
3 � •nwrvr..
'��. `�•' - �• � _ � � n err., uy N E +-
i ` ,r �t►�o grs7owN F4 �' '-'To Thurmont
MAJOR TRAFFIC GENERATORS' i': raw ; • \
' 2
Commercial � High Density Residential
TO Martinsburg, W. Va.
Longmeadow Shopping Center North Spring � ;j
South End Shopping Center Hunter Hill To Winchester, Roanoke, Va,
Valley Mall - Valley Plaza Woodcrest
Zayre Shopping Center Milestone r•r S J
Washington Center Oak Ridge _
Edgewood!
industrial - Warehousing
Government Institutional
Airport Industrial Park t •• r
Carborundum Company Maryland Correctional Institute., i' } s,r"� �•
Earley Industrial Park Fort Ritchie
Danzer Metal Works Company Brook Lane Hospital rr
Fairchild Republic Company Hagerstown Regional Airport
Gilbert Industries Washington County Health Department "^• ,
Horner Manufacturing Western Maryland Hospital' To Frederick,
i f /
Mack Truck, Incorporated Washington County Hospital I r
Marquette Cement Manufacturing Company North Hagerstown High Schaal j, Baltimore, Md. $
•`r+� j ` �5!" , r
—00 /: Washington, D. C.
Londontown Corporation South Hagerstown High School 1
Doubleday and Company Career Studies Center 4 r �•• _
W. D. Byron and Sons Williamsport High School „•rte �` ✓�
Roadway Hagerstown Junior College LY f', ; .eeur�vrtisa ;
Western Maryland Railroad r f ;
Recreation t
Residential t r t r
City Park
Fountainhead
Greenbrlar ,
Orchard Hills For Frederick ,•� + s., rra ''' °' f �.J
Colonial Park
C d 0 Canal ,
Brightwood Acres Washington Monument t '••
Spring Valley Gathland State Park l wi' y '
Mougansvllle Antietam National Battlefield ` -
Claverton Harpers Ferry National Historical Park
Cedar Lawn Indian Springs Wildlife Management Area ��� ` • e IIS
Jefferson Boulevard Corridor
Sideling Hill Wildlife Management Area t ';z•w _ _
To Shepardstown,
Funkstown i
Halfway Charlestown, W.Vp _
Van Lear Manor
Mt. Tammany
Scale
Feet c wa um wo- r wane naw
Miles r r
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
HAGERSTOWN MARYLAND'+
r17 • , ��
To Frederick, Md.
z r
Tn r.hnrlocfnurn_ W Vn
become apparent when an entire shift of plant employees are released at the same
time that other smaller establishments are closing for the day. Factors influ-
encing trip generation at employment centers include the size of the centers,
the site, the employees, the region, and type of center. Major industrial -
warehousing land use types generating significant peak periods of traffic are
the Airport Industrial Park, The Carborundum Company, Earley's Industrial Park,
Danzer Metal Works, Fairchild Republic Company, Gilbert Industries, Horner
Manufacturing, Mack Truck Incorporated, Roadway, and the Interstate Industrial
Park. Government and institutional centers include Maryland Correctional
Institute, Fort Ritchie, Hagerstown Regional Airport, Washington County Health
Department, Hagerstown Junior College, and the numerous education facilities
located throughout the County.
Recreation Centers - trip distribution at recreation centers due to
peak loading may produce significant traffic congestion. Factors influencing
recreational generation include the type of facility, the weather, the period
of the day and of the week, and the season of the year. Principal recreational
generators in Washington County include Greenbriar State Park, the C & O Canal
and the Antietam National Battlefield.
56
Residential Centers - the residential areas are the origin of the
trip generators. All major residential areas, urban, suburban, and rural
develop and generate traffic destined to some identified location. Major resi-
dential generators are located in and around the Hagerstown Metropolitan area,
and include numerous rural communities as delineated in the Traffic Generator
map.
Capacity
Road capacities are difficult to determine on a constant basis due
to variations in speed, alignments, surface conditions, interruptions, lane
width and the number of lanes. Under ideal roadway and traffic conditions, the
fundamental capacities for uninterrupted flow conditions for different types of
highways are as follows:
Type of Facility
Two-lane, Two-way Roadways
Multi -lane Roadways
Capacity
2,000 Total, Both Directions
2,000 Each Lane, Average
For interrupted flow conditions, it is not feasible to define funda-
mental capacities under ideal conditions due to the numerous variables involved.
57
In general, the following limitations may be applied:
1. Rarely does a traffic lane on an urban arterial carry volumes
exceeding 2,000 vehicles per hour of green signal, even with
ideal progression.
2. When queing exists, rarely will the vehicles move away from the
interruption at a rate greater than 1,500 vehicles per hour
per lane, based on an average departure headway of 2.4 seconds.
Levels of Service
Parameters established for measuring levels of service represent a
range, the extremecf which is defined by the maximum volume limit and the mini-
mum speed limit.
The six levels of service are generally defined as follows for simple
uninterrupted flows.
Level of Service A - This is a condition of free flow, accompanied
by low volumes and high speeds, Traffic density will be low, with uninterrupted
M
flow speeds controlled by driver desires, speed limits, and physical roadway con-
ditions. There is little or no restriction in maneuverability due to the
presence of other vehicles, and drivers can maintain their desired speed with
little or no delay.
Level of Service B - This occurs in the zone of stable flow, with
operating speeds beginning to be restricted somewhat by traffic conditions.
Drivers still have reasonable freedom to select their speed and lane for operation.
Reductions in speed are not unreasonable with a low probability of traffic flow
being restricted. The lower limit (lowest speed, highest volume) of this level
of service has been used,in the design of rural highways.
Level of Service C - This is still in the zone of stable flow, but
speeds and maneuverability are more closely controlled by the higher volumes.
Most of the drivers are restricted in their freedom to select their own seped,
change lanes, or pass. A relatively satisfactory operating speed is still
obtained, with service volumes suitable for urban design practice.
Level of Service D - This level of service approaches unstable flow,
with tolerable operating speeds being maintained, though considerably affected
59
by changes in operating conditions. Fluctuations in volume and temporary
restrictions to flow may cause substantial drops in operating speeds. Drivers
have little freedom to maneuver, and comfort and convenience are low. These
conditions can be tolerated, however, for short periods of time.
Level of Service E - This cannot be described by speed alone, but
represents operations at lower operating speeds, typically, but not always, in
the neighborhood of 30 miles per hour, with volumes at or near the capacity of
the highway. Flow is unstable, and there may be stoppages of momentary duration.
This level of service is associated with operation of a facility at capacity
flows.
Level of Service F - This describes a forced -flow operation at low
speeds, where volumes are below capacity. In the extreme, both speed and
volume can drop to zero. These conditions usually result from queues of
vehicles backing up from a restriction downstream. The sectioncf highway UT12C study
will be serving as a storage area during parts or all of the peak hour. Speeds
are reduced substantially and stoppages may occur for short or long periods of
time because of the downstream congestion.
M
Factors Effecting Capacity and Service Volumes
It is seldom that traffic and roadway conditions are ideal, and there-
fore, fundamental capacities must be decreased to take into consideration the
many factors that adversely affect traffic flow. Service volumes are affected
in a similar way. The various factors affecting capacity and service volumes
are as follows:
Lane Width - Twelve -foot lanes are considered ideal for heavy volumes
of mixed traffic, and a lane of narrower width will restrict capacity.
Lateral Clearance - Objects closer than 6 feet from the edge of the
pavement reduce the effective width of the roadway. The magnitude of the effect
depends upon the closeness of the objects to the pavement and their frequency.
Adjustments for lane width and lateral clearance are combined into one correction
factor which is applied to the capacity under ideal conditions.
Shoulders - Adequate shoulders must be provided as a refuge for
stopped vehicles if capacities are to be maintained on the through lanes.
61
Auxiliary Lanes - These include parking lanes, speed -change lanes,
turning and storage lanes, weaving lanes, and truck -climbing lanes. Each of
these lanes provides additional pavement width to accommodate special uses,
helping to maintain the capacity of the through roadway.
Surface Conditions - Poor pavement surface conditions may influence
the attainment of high speed, thereby affecting the better levels of service,
but capacity may be very little affected.
Aliment - Poor alignment prevents the attainment of high speed,
thereby affecting the better levels of service, It also affects capacity on
two and three lane roads when passing sight distance is restricted to less
than 1,500 feet.
Information regarding roadway factors is located in the supplemental
reference index, which is an inventory of all County and State roads located
within Washington County. The inventory denotes surface type, number of lanes,
and the width of the road.
62
Design
Design factors influencing roadways relate to the function of motor
vehicles (the characteristics of vehicle user) and the capacity to channel traf-
fic distribution. Road standards vary according to the design speed of the
roadway and according to the intended use of the roadway. As highway geometrics
are increased, the design speed and capacity will change proportionally. Minimum
design standards are devised to accommodate the predominant vehicular volumes and
to provide maximum safety. A review of the chart titled Vehicular Moving Informa-
tion depicts the design criteria of vehicles predominantly traveling within
Washington County. Geometric design criteria are established to accommodate numerous
types of vehicles of which include subcompacts, standard automobiles, fire, refuse,
moving vans, school buses, and their appropriate displacements. The succeeding
chart titled Vehicular Clearance Information illustrates the minimum width of
roadway surface for safe convergence of two vehicle types traveling at minimum
design speeds. In review it may be ascertained that the minimum width for safe
clearance is seventeen (17) feet, although encounters with other types of
vehicles requires a total road surface of approximately twenty (20)feet for
adequate clearance.
63
VEHICULAR MOVING
INFORMATION
(DESIGN CRITERIA)
TYPE OF
VEHICULAR CHARACTERISTICS
WIDTH OF
LENGTH
WIDTH
HEIGHT
11��IwCLEARANC
VEHICLES
MOVING LANE
MOTOR
213.2'
5
44
22
2' '
VEHICLE
19'
6.5'
6.5'
2 5'
2'
"'',
-86
FIRE
r
30'
7.5'
10'
45'
2'
N
keVEHICLE
,
48'
8'
10'
40'
2'
REFUSE
30'
8'
11.4'
30'
2'
8'
410.
VEHICLE
SNOW REMOVAL
10
30'
2'
PLOW
VEHICLE
P°
lx' -14'
MOVING
a
35'
8'
12.5'
40'
2'
N
55
8'
13.5'
23'
2'
a`
VAN
�
SCHOOL
w
30'
8'
if
40'
2'
N
R!1
40'
8'
11'
45'
2'
,
BUS
,
VEHICULAR
CLEARANCE INFORMATION
MOTOR
SNOW REMOAL
MOVING
REFUSE
FIRE
SCHOOL
VEHICLE
VEHICLE
VAN
VEHICLE
VEHICLE
BUS
MOTOR
VEHICLE
r= 1
2' f
2a 1
1 2'
1
C>
1 2'
15'
18' 6°
16' 6"
16 6"
16' 6"
17'
20,6
18' 6"
18,6
18' 6,
1g'fi"
SNOW
F7
REMOVAL
VEHICLEI'222
2' 1
2' 1
2'
20`
20'
20'
20'
2 2'
22'
22'
2 2'
MOVING
VAN
2' 1'
2`
1 2'
I B'
18'
18'
— 18'
20'
20'
20'=ll
20'
REFUSE
VEHICLE
2'
1 2' 1
2'
18'
18'
18'
20'
20'
2 0'
FIRE
VEHICLE
18
18'
20
— 20'
SCHOOL
BUS
a
18
'JOE PROBABILITY OF ENCOUNTER — LOW 65
Contained with the Statement of Washington County Policies are the
road and street standards and specifications, which illustrates the cross-sections
for all new road and street construction. The following charts titled Geomet-
ric Design Criteria and Standards depicts design criteria for new roads and
street construction in Washington County as adopted by the Board of Washington
County Commissioners.
Street Systems
The term street refers to the roadway that generally serves residen-
tial subdivisions. Street design is developed in a configuration as to accom-
modate single lot access, and service residential communities. The following
diagrams depict the two most frequent types of residential subdivision design,
rectilinear and curvilinear. These types of street design form the collector
system of residential traffic.
S T R E E T S A N D R 0 A D S
G E O M E T R I C D E S I G N C R I T E R I A
I T E M
S T R E E T S
1 30
R 0 A D S
LOCAL
MINOR
COLLECTOR I
COMM/IND.
LOCAL
SECONDARY
I PRIMARY
DESIGN SPEED
25
1 30
35
35
35 45 1 50
PAVEMENT WIDTH SEE STANDARD PLATE NO "A"
SEE STANDARD PLATE NO. "A"
SHOULDER WIDTH SEE STANDARD PLATE NO. "A"
SEE STAA'DARD P ATE NO. "A"
MINIMUNI PARKING LANE WIDTH (1) 81 81 8' 10,
91 1 91 101
MINIMUM TURNING LANE WIDTH_ 2'
' '
MIN. MEDIAN WIDTH (WITHOUT TURNING LANE) 6'
-- --
MIN. MEDIAN WIDTH (WITH'TURNING LANE) -- -- -- 16'
-- 14' 16'
MINI!fUM BRIDGE PAVEMENT WIDTH -- -- -- --
26' 30' 32'
MINIMUM HORIZONTAL CURVATURE RADIUS 150' 250' 300' 400'
400' 500' 700'
MIN. TURNING FLARE RADIUS AT CONNECTIONS 30' 35' 35' S0'
35' 35' S0'
MIN. CUL-DE-SAC PAVEMENT RADIUS 40' '
401 -- --
STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE 175' 200' 235' 235'
235' 315' 350'
'MINI'•TUI 1 ROADWAY GRADE 0.51. 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
0.5% 0.5%
50"
M.NXI'',,VM ROADWAY GRADE 15% 12% 10% 8%
15% 10% 6%
INTERSECTION APPROACH GRADE (2) 8% 6% 6% 6%
8% 6% 4%
ROADWAY PAVEMENT SLOPE 3/8"/ft. 3/811/ft. 3/811/ft. 3/811/ft.
3/8"/ft. 3/8"/ft. 3/811/ft.
ROADWAY SHOULDER SLOPE 3 4" ft. 3Z4"/ft. 3 4" ft.
3 4" ft. 3 4"/ft.3/4" ft.
SUPERELEVATION -- -- '/ft. 0.04' ft.
0.08'/ft. 0.08'/ft. 0.08'/ft.
�tININ..M SUPERELEVATION RUNOUT -- _- 5' 200'
A. A. S. H. 0. STANDARDS
t3/4'1/ft.
MINIMUM RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH 50' S0'0' 60'
S0' 80' 150'
MIN. RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH AT CUL-DE-SAC RADIUS 60' --- 70'
60' --
NOTES: (1) FOR CURBED ROADWAYS ONLY
(2) MAX. ALLOW. ALGEBRIC DIFF. -- CONNECT. GRADE WITH PAVE. CROSS SLOPE
Source: Washington County Engineering Department
67
G E 0 WE T R I C D E S I G N C R I T E R I A
S T R E E T A N D R 0 A D S T A N D A R D S
CLASSIFICATION
MAXIMUM
A.D.T.
PAVEMENT
WIDTH
SHOULDER
WIDTH
SHOULDER
TYPE
CURBED
PAVEMENT
WIDTH
PERyITTED
ZONING
DISTRICT
REMARKS
S T R E
E T S
LOCAL
100 18'
6'
Earth
INot Allowed C A & RR
See Note No.
4
LOCAL
100 18'
6'
Stabilized
34' C A RR RS
See Note No.
4
DiINOR
2S0 20'
6'
Stabilized
36' All
COLLECTOR
S00 22'
7'
iStabilized
38' All
LI
COMM./IIND.
--- 24'
8'
IStabilized
44' & B
See Note No.
5
R 0 A D S
LOCAL
2S0 20'
6'
Stabilized
38' All
See Note No.
5
SECONDARY
S00 22'
7'
Stabilized
40' All
PRIK,kRY
--- 24'
8'
Stabilized
44' All
PRIMARY (DIVIDED) --- 2 @ 24'
8'
Stabilized
2 @ 24' All
See Note No.
6
NOTES: (1)
A.D.T. = Average Daily Traffic
- based
on actual counts or 4 vehicles/day/residential lot.
(2)
Curbed Pavement Width based on
face to
face of curb,
(or flow line to flow
line).
(3)
Shoulders not required for curbed roadway sections.
(4)
On -street parking prohibited,
except when curbs are
used. Deeds and Permits
to require
provisions for off-street
parking
for minimum 4
vehicles/unit.
(5)
On -street parking prohibited unless curbed
roadway section
is used. -
(6)
Minimum 16' wide median to be
used on
all divided roadways unless turning
lane is used.
Source: Washington County Engineering Department
68
moi,
Speed and Accidents
Curvilinear Plan
Safety characteristics of a road and/or intersection can be inter-
polated from an analysis of operational speeds and accident history, since there
is a direct correlation between these factors and the physical road condition.
Accident information is helpful in the identification of highway problem areas
within the County.
Ilk
V.
Rectilinear Plan
Speed and Accidents
Curvilinear Plan
Safety characteristics of a road and/or intersection can be inter-
polated from an analysis of operational speeds and accident history, since there
is a direct correlation between these factors and the physical road condition.
Accident information is helpful in the identification of highway problem areas
within the County.
Speed Limits
Speed limits are posted on all State Highways in Washington County
according to Maryland State Law and existing design considerations. Speed
Limits on Maryland Highways, unless posted, are as follows*:
Business
Two-lane Highways 30 MPH
Divided Highways 30 MPH
Interstate Highways
Outlying Open
Sections Country
30 MPH 50 MPH
35-45MPH 55 MPH
55 MPH
Posted speed limits in Washington County are primarily limited to State and
municipal roads. __Speed limits on State roads are generally 50 MPH, and in most
cases, drop to 25 or 30 MPH where the road passes through a community.
County roads are generally unposted, and those speeds assumed on
roads where posted speeds are non-existent, consists of a 50 MPH maximum speed.
These speed limits are subject to road and alignment condition. Unless posted,
there is no general designated speed for densely settled areas.
*Speed limits may be altered according to unique or specific traffic conditions.
70
Accidents
Washington County accident statistics are compiled by the Maryland
State Highway Administration and the Maryland State Police, in both report
form and by distribution location. Information recorded includes the total
accidents, severity index, fatal accidents, persons injured and property
damage. The following map titled Traffic Accident Locations - 1972-1974
identifies accident locations according to reporting sources. The map delin-
eating accidents in the period 1972-1974, two types of accident areas prevail:
specific routes and spot areas. Specific routes encompass those roads that
experience a generally uniform accident pattern throughout segments of the
entire length. Spot areas consits of accident groupings or clusters at certain
locations along specific routes, or at specified intersections. Both inter-
section and non -intersection high accident locations may be identified by
location of accident clusters, which generally designates some form of a
traffic conflict point.
71
TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS LOCATIONS
1972 - 1974
a a "MCI«ttl,
• Designates Accident Location
l
Source Bureau of Accident Statistics and Analysis — Traffic
State Highway Administration �' �t
Scale
Feet o laws w¢a •nw •,uoa roam r<uao
Miles a `
rh {I.
7-1'tF
I u•
'
.
I1
� -
a
i' S � � 't .•
_.—ljt
��
�
•
R,
�
f. f
-i
_
..
rt
�1
+
[
�
� `
.y M
.
�"
, � [
IA�r •
I
°i,.
� ��
I
/
�-
+
Ma.+a r Y 1 Irl
`
dy
�!�
-
SlnanlaG
� I
• ,
'�
'
yNk-
AcMEIRtiTOWN,
•�
j
1+ '•� Ys.• ..'ice
•+s
•
Q � r
z
TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS LOCATIONS
1972 - 1974
a a "MCI«ttl,
• Designates Accident Location
l
Source Bureau of Accident Statistics and Analysis — Traffic
State Highway Administration �' �t
Scale
Feet o laws w¢a •nw •,uoa roam r<uao
Miles a `
rh {I.
Road Conditions
As previously discussed, Washington County's road network consists of
State, municipal, and County systems. Most of the State and municipal road sys-
tems have evolved through new construction or reconstruction of existing align-
ments. Therefore, those systems are not characterized as having the numerous
inadequacies as the County system.
Washington County's road system evolved to serve a predominantly
rural area having low volumes of traffic. Today, however, with increased
development taking place throughout the County, these same roads now function as
a suburban use, carrying increasing traffic volumes, that are anticipated to con-
tinue to increase in the future. Most of these rural corridors are characterized
as having poor sight distances, excessive grades, numerous curves and narrow
pavements.
Numerous deficiencies exist in the County highway system and will be
discussed under the following classifications: horizontal and vertical sight
distance, clear roadway, shoulders surface or pavement conditions, poor inter-
sections, insufficient right-of-way, poor design, inadequate bridges, and at
grade rail crossings.
73
Sight Distance - sight distance is the length of highway ahead which is
visible to the driver. The drivers ability to see ahead is important in safe and
efficient operation of highways. Sight distance must be of sufficient length so
as a driver can avoid striking an unexpected obstacle on the traveled way. This
sight distance is refered to as minimum safe stopping distance or the non-passing
sight distance. The minimum safe stopping distance consits of two factors (1)
the distance traversed by a vehicle from the instant the driver sights an object
to the instant the brakes are applied and (2) the distance required to stop the
vehicle from the instant the brakes are applied. The following graph titled
Stopping Sight Distance (minimum) delineates the algebraic difference (total per-
cent of grades), minimum stopping distance according to assumed design speed of
the highway, and the length of the vertical curve in feet.
Vertical Sight Distance - vertical sight distance along a highwav is
measured from the drivers eye to some object on the traveled way when it first
comes in view. The height of the driver's eye above the pavement is considered
to be 3.75 feet. The height of the object or obstacle used in measuring the
minimum stopping sight distance is assumed to be six (6) inches. The following
74
O t170 7O0 W 400 500 600 700 800 9w 100o wo 200 1300 1400 400 wo 1760 1800 1900 2o00
L - Length of Verticle Curve.- Feet
STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE
Minimum
Source: Engineering Department
A Statement of Washington County Policies
Assur d Dcsisn
Min. Sfa pirsa
. q&,*A of W- hwau
w hi D -5 -rant¢
6;61 y ,mss
rr —
30._._.. ____.........--• _ _-zoo
40..... .... _........
_—•___27 s
So.. _....-•--• •-- • •-----.350
(S«)
4—",4 L zs- I ��
CKar} basad on:
we sht 0; objsc.t ; G'
tac a73'
A- /U9sbro�c D4�sr�xs
in studs X
photograph and
accompanying cross-
section depict a
location on Antie-
tam Drive having
inadequate sight
distance. By
obtaining a total
algebraic dif-
ference of 18 and
cross-referencing
to the graph Stop-
ping Sight Distance,`rr. .7J
one may determine
the minimum length of the vertical curve according to assumed design speed of 30
miles per hour will be assigned. Through interpolation of the graph, at a 200
foot minimum stopping distance, one may determine that the minimum length of the
76
15/5
ALGEBRAIC
DIFFERENCE - 17
5/O
Baltimore and Ohio Rai/road olc>
sg
505
i
500 / LOCATION OF
/ PHOTOGRAPH
F Western Mary/and Rai/road
t0
,n
m
Op-
In co
t0
V t0 N
t0
ti
tiI,
0
1495
N 0
0
p
O
NN
NNN
PAMM 'oI
� 0` t' I
in 1
101
in,
Li101
in I ZZ
31
+13+19
32
33
+23
+37
SCA I- E / = 50' HOR/Z.
/ =
5' VERT.
+28 +42
5/51
5/0
a
rl-
D O O O
O, 10. K
34 I 35 495
LENGTH OF EXISTING VERTICAL CURVE
77
2501
vertical curve should be at least 550 feet. At this particular location on
Antietam Drive, the maximum length of vertical curve, using the existing
alignment is 250 feet base to base or 300 feet deficient of the minimum length
of the vertical curve. Therefore, it is established that this location had an
inadequate length of vertical curve and therefore, inadequate sight distance
according to adopted engineering design criteria.
Horizontal Sight Distance - an element of horizontal alingment design
is the sight distance along the inside of curves. As a vehicle travels around a
horizontal curve, any obstruction near the inside edge of the road blocks the
drivers view ahead. Typical obstructions include walls, embankments, structures,
wooded areas, farm crops, signs, fences, and utility poles.
The following photograph and sectional diagram of Hopewell Road, just
north of the Halfway Boulevard intersection, illustrates a segment of the roadway
having inadequate horizontal site distance. In this instance, the degree of the
curve in the roadway limits the drivers headway. The limited sight distance is
M
further obstructed by
an embankment, trees,
and numerous utility
poles.
Clear Roadway - clear
roadway is the outer
limits of the roadway
corridor not having
any obstructions.
Obstructions may con-
sist of trees, signs,
utility poles, fences,
mailboxes, rock out-
croppings, ditches,
embankments, etc. The photograph of Lehmans Mill Road illustrates deficient
clear roadway. Within this section there exists numerous trees and a narrow
causeway which obstructs roadway clearance and reduces the time of the
79
66'L8" CEDARS ALONG
FENCE
PEH16348/�
�\ WOODS
\�
IN,
�\
IN
N.
\
0A \ LOCATION OF PHOTOGRAPH
CaP62
\ \ 18°LOC. 18LOC.
cap 81
TO ROUTE 40 10" LOC
22
LOCUSTS LSC. S C6 OAK f
PIE 7281
C a P 6 WOODS!(
20 TWIN 18 APPLE E [a" \ 24" LOC.
APPLE ��i
i
SCA L F : 1"z 30
80
l
1
l
,. r..�
� ,t �.�'` i'. i � . '•,.••� :•gin'-.�=��` � _-,�'�_.
the shoulder slope and side slope planes. Graded shoulders are the predominant
type of shoulder along most State highways and some County highways. Surfaced
shoulder is the width outside the through traffic lane having an all-weather sur-
face. Highways having surface shoulder include U.S. 40, Maryland Routes 64 and
432, and County roads including Longmeadow Road, Halfway Boulevard, and Edgewood
Drive. The usable shoulder is the actual width adjacent to the road that may be
used for an emergency stop. Some County roads may be classified as having
usuable shoulders although most do not have any shoulders at all.
Shoulders are a design element that is generally incorporated into any
roadway having an appreciable volume of traffic. The functions of shoulders are
as follows:
1. Space provided for emergency stops off the traveled way. Vehicles
stopping on the roadway introduce a high accident potential.
2. Space provided for as a decelerattion lane, for turning movements,
and as a passing lane for left turning vehicles.
3. Space provided for drivers to recover safely should they lose con-
trol of the vehicle.
M.
4. A sense of openness contributes to driving ease.
5. Sight distance is improved.
6. Highway capacity is improved.
7. Space provided for maintenance operations.
8. Structural support of the through traffic pavement is enhanced.
Shoulder widths vary according to the type of highway. Shoulders along
State and County highways vary in width although minimum widths of 4 to 8 feet are
desirable along most highways. Interstates 70 and 81 have minimum shoulder widths
of 12 feet. Existing new County road construction standards require a minimum
shoulder width ranging from 6 to 8 feet.
Surface or Pavement Conditions - poor pavement surface conditions may
influence the attainment of high speeds, and thereby could affect a better level of
service. Road surfaces consist of bituminous concrete and portland cement con-
crete. The mileage of road surface types by State, County, and municipal systems
are as follows:
83
State System
Miles
Low type bituminous .18
High type bituminous 287.12
Portland cement 12.01
County System
Miles
Unimproved 1.69
Soil, gravel, or stone surfaced 84.05
Low type bituminous 49.44
High type bituminous 573.11
Portland cement 1.53
Municipal Systems
Miles
Unimproved .19
Graded and drained .16
Soil, Gravel, or stone surfaced 7.75
Low type bituminous 122.21
High type bituminous 34.70
Portland cement
Source: State Highway Administration
Pavement widths vary, generally 12 feet is adequate for lane width. Most State
Highways meet or exceed pavement width design standards. Pavement widths and
surface types of County roads are itemized in the supplemental section.
Poor Intersections - An intersection is the area when two or more high-
ways join or cross. The prime operational function of the intersection is to
provide for changes in travel direction.
The intersection is an important part of the highway since much of
the effeciency, safety, speed, cost of operations and capacity depend on its
design. Types of intersections include at -grade and grade -separated. In
Washington County at -grade is the predominate type of intersection. Grade -
separated intersections, except at Halfway Boulevard, are confined to the
Interstate interchanges.
Numerous intersections in Washington County have certain design
deficiencies that consist of poor sight distance, acute angle of intersection,
jogs or offsets, and areas having high traffic conflict points due to access
and turning movements. The following photograph of Greenhill Drive and
Jefferson Boulevard (Md. 64) exemplifies a location having poor horizontal
sight distance. The area circled denotes an obstruction to sight distance as
the driver seeks
access to Maryland
64. In addition,
signs and the
vertical sight
distance along
Maryland 64 at
this location
further obstruct
the drivers vision
Numerous other
intersections in
Washington County
are encumbered as
having a deficiency in intersection design. Such design deficiencies include
intersections at the peak of the parabolic curve, adjacent to the base of the
curve, jogs or offsets (Longmeadow Road and Maugans Avenue), acute angles of
access (Mt. Aetna Road and U.S. 40), and areas having concentrations of single
lot access (U.S. Route 11), thus creating numerous traffic turning movements
and conflict points.
M-
7
a
Insufficient Right-of-way (ROW) - insufficient R.O.W. is characteristic
generally of single lot strip development that has encroached on the existing
roadway alignment, since adequate right-of-way was not established. Right-of-
way areas are reserved for the accommodation of pedestrians, location of
utilities, placement of signs and other traffic control devices, and provide
an adequate area for the further expansion or reconstruction of the road sur-
face. Right-of-way reservations are generally established according to the type
of facility, anticipated maximum traffic volume, and the ultimate development
potential within the region served by their facility. U.S. Route 11 (Pennsyl-
vania and Virginia Avenues) is a facility that has developed and has exceeded
its original design capacity. To increase the capacity would constitute the
construction of additional traffic lanes. But due to inadequate right-of-way
and the encroachment of both residental and commercial facilities, expansion
of the existing facility will be cumbersome.
Poor Design - Lane Use Interrelationships - strip or ribbon develop-
ment is usually characterized by roadside oriented business and residential
subdivisions along primary corridors. The negative effect of strip development
along a highway can be measured as aesthetic, accident, and congestion impact.
�l
Traffic is generated at access
points and enters the highways
at a number of closely spaced
intersections. Furthermore,
access for internal development
is restricted, therefore
creating a potential for poor
intersection design. The
accompanying aerial photograph
of Virginia Avenue in Halfway
illustrates the single lot
access points along the corri-
dor. These access points
create numerous turning move-
ments and a proportionate
amount of traffic conflict
points• The succeeding photo-
graph taken at road level
M
gives another
perspective from
a driver's view-
point of the
number of traf-
fic conflict
points along a
traffic corridor
(Jefferson Boule-
vard). The most
significant
detrimental im-
pact of strip
development is
the reduction in the original design capacity of the highway caused by decelera-
tion turning and crossovers. Primary highway corridors in Washington County
having significant amounts of strip development are U.S. 40 west, Maryland 64,
segments of Maryland 65, U.S. 11, and segments of Alternate U.S. 40.
•
Inadequate Bridges - numerous bridges located in Washington County
were constructed during the middle 1800's and early 1900's. These causeways
were designed for horse and buggy travel and not vehicular traffic. Today,
most of these bridges still exist and are being functionally used on a day-to-
day basis. Most of these antiquated bridges are within the County's road
system. Only two bridges on Route 68 and Alternate U.S. 40 still exist as a
part of the State system. The following list itemizes all historic architec-
tural bridges located within the County that have been nominated to the County
Federal Register. The succeeding chart has inventoried all bridges in the
County Road System and denotes the estimated permissible highway loading and
estimated years remaining (life). In review, there are thirty-three (33)
structures with a ten ton or less rating, and thirty (30) structures with a
life expectancy of ten years or less. Out of 84 structures listed only four
would totally meet the State's requirements. The location of these bridges
may be identified by crossreferencing to the map titled Bridge Inventory and
Inspection Report - 1975. The map titled Transportation System Inventory
itemizes the Bridge Repair and Replacement Program. Identified are sixteen bridges
that are in a critical state of repair, and must be either (as noted) replaced
1. WA -II -122
Keedysville-Bakersville Road
Antietam
Hitt Bridge - also known as "Upper Bridge;" built in 1830. It is associated
with early milling operations, played a significant role in the Battle of
Antietam, is located on the possible route of General Braddock in 1755 over
a road which was in use as early as 1737.
2. TIA-II-033
Harpers Ferry Road
Antietam
Antietam Ironworks Bridge - built in 1832 by John Weaver. A 4 -arch span at
the site of a Colonial and Revolutionary period iron operation. It also has
Civil War significance.
3. WA -I-306
Broadfording Road
Conococheague
Broadfording Bridge - built in 1829 by Lloyds. A 5 -arch span of the Conoco-
cheague Creek, it carries an important early road to the West which was in
use as early as 1747. Also associated with early milling industry.
91
4. WA -II -017
Route 68
Beaver Creek
Devil's Backbone Bridge - built in 1824 by Jabez Kenney. The only bridge
in the County known to have been built by Kenney, also one of the oldest.
Single arch span, Beaver Creek.
5. WA -I-358
Poffenberger Road
Antietam
Claqqetts Mill and Mill Race Bridqes - 1840-41 by John Weaver. A pair of
bridges at an early mill site and the National Register property, Valencia.
Unusual "outshot" bridge wall.
6. WA -II -119
Barnes Road
Antietam
Roxbury Bridge - 1824 by James Lloyd. One of the County's oldest bridges,
associated with early mill and distillery.
7. WA -I-009
Route 68
Antietam
Booth's Mill Bridge - 1833. Associated with mill of John Booth and his home.
92
8, WA -I-028
Oak Ridge Drive
Antietam
Funkstown Bridge, Oak Rid a Drive - 1833 by George Wever. Associated with
an 18th and 19th century mill complex.
9. WA -I-347
Garis Shop Road
Antietam
Rose Mill Brid e - 1839 by John Weaver. Unusual feature is the "outshot"
wall which accommodated the adjoining Rose Mill.
10. WA -I-291
Cearfoss Road
Conococheague
Price's Bridge - 1832 by Charles Wilson. A 5 -arch span, one of the County's
few documented bridges.
11. WA -II -121
Keedysville-Bakersville Road
Little Antietam
Pry's Mill Bridge - Ca. 1835, near an early mill; possible significance
during the Battle of Antietam.
93
12. WA -II -130
Keedysville
Little Antietam
Hess Mill Bridge - at site of one of the County's oldest mills.
13. WA -I-176
Leitersburg-State Line Road
Antietam
Leitersbur Bridge - built in 1839 by John Weaver. Near the site of Strite's
Mill. One of the few 2 -arch bridges in the County.
14. WA -I-104
Old Forge Road
Antietam
Old Forge Bridge - 1863, 1893, at historic Old Forge Mill and Iron producing
area.
15. WA -II -044
Dog Street Road
Little Antietam
Felfoot Bridge - Ca. 1850, is located on an early pioneer road which was pos-
sibly used by General Braddock in 1755.
94
16. WA -III -016
Valley Road
Israel Creek
Israel Creek Bridge - late 19th century, distinct from other County bridges
employing different stone and techniques of construction.
17. WA -I-029
Alternate U.S. 40
Antietam
Funkstown Turnpike Bridge - built in 1823 by James Lloyd. One of the oldest
bridges; on the National Pike. Has been extensively altered.
18. WA -I-020
Route 68
Conococheague
Conococheaque Bridge, Williamsport - 1829, built at the site of the early
Conococheague settlement and near an important Colonial and early U.S. town.
Moderately altered.
19. WA -II -042
Route 40-A
Beaver Creek
Kline's Mill Bridge - associated with National Pike and early mill. Exten-
sively altered.
95
Road Name & Structure Number
Ashton Road, W1011
Barnes Road, W5351
Battletown Road
Beards Church Road, W2383
Beaver Creek Church Road, W3421
Beaver Creek Road, W3431
Bovd Road, 110751C
B:oa:_Jr Ona Road, W0752C
B=cLdfordinc Road (under design), W0821
:c -:svillc• R --ad, 116171
Burnside Bridce Road, W5851
Burnside Bridge Road, W5852
Oaarles Mill Road, W2432
Clo_par Road, W2521
Cofer. -an Road, W6371
College Road, W5621P
Dan 'S Road, :•:0991
Dc -street Road, W5931
Doc_c-eet Road, r15932P
Dogstreet Road, 115933
Gardenour Road, W2431
Gardenour Road (Edgemont Road), W2451
Garrett's Drill Road, W6231
Garris Shop Road, W4021
Gossard rill Road (bridge destroyed), W0822
Gove nor Lane Boulevard (Industrial Park), W7001C
Govenor Lane Boulevard (Indistrial Park), W7002P
Greensburg Road, W2601
Halfway Boulevard, W0911*
Hal x•av Boulevard, W0912
Halfway Boulevard, W6661*
Hanging Rock Road (Lanes Run Road), W0611
Harpers Ferry Road, W5731*
Har:::mars Ferry -Sandy Mile Road (RR), W5801*
Germanv Road, WO011
Hopewell Road, Ti4731C
Hopewell Road, W4732C
Independence Road, W1061
Indian Springs Road, W0481
Bridges - Washington County
Election
Estimated
Permissible
(Life)
District
Crossing
Highwav Loading (ions)
Estimated Ye s R?^oitirs3
4
Little Conococheague Creek
11
15+
6
Beaver Creek
8
10
9
Antietam Creek
10
5
7
Little Antietam Creek
10
15+
16
Beaver Creek
9
15+
16
Beaver Creek
3 (Gross
Load Only)
1
4
Camp Spring Run
10
15+
4
Little Conocheague Creek
15
15+
13
Conococheague Creek
10
5
8
Israel Creek
8
5
1
Sharmans Creek
3 (Gross
Load Only)
1
1
Antietam Creek
20
15+
14
Little %xitietam Creek
15
15+
9
Antietam Creek
10
15+
19
Little Antietam Creek
15
10
2
St. James -Marsh Run
15
15+
4
Little Conococheague Creek
15
15+
19
Little Antietam Creek
10
15+
19
Dog Creek
15
15-t-
5+6
6
Dog Creek
15
15+
7
Little Antietam Creek
15
15+
7
Little Antietam Creek
15
15+
11
Israel Creek
15
15+
10
Antietam Creek
10
5
13
Rockdale Run
Bridge
Destroyed
Bridge Destroyed
2
Unnamed
20
15+
2
Semple Run
20
15+
7
Little Antietam Creek
12
5
26
Western Maryland Railway
20
15+
26
Conrail
20
15+
26
Underpass Way
20
15+
15
Lanes Run
10
5
1
Antietam Creek
10
5
11
B & C Railway
15
10
5
Sideling Hill Creek
15
15+
2
Semale Run
15
15+
2
Semple Run
15
15+
23
Unnamed
10
10
15
Lanes Run
15
15+
90021 ..NFA I R3L
r
c
BRIDGE INVENTORY
AND
INSPECTION REPORT
1975
LEGEND
Federal Aid System -
County System •
.. ., .
rr...•. _ _ _ 16
1s 1141 T J- fel • l _ o
` � � :"" a� �'+. � � � • o-. M 1 as � _ �, � � j.O � � J S � a � � 3 3 � � w.„
w.r `fin n 04 ? ..1.,� -wtlnw « �•' �`. ', J
w�
2
r �
/ • .W 61
• xmy:.. +1 f a ,�' > ,. � r I $2f t .rar + �� e w t � '� ! � f . tl L ,
05071 ' tl. r � .; • 741 • 1 • � ; "` � � {�� �: r � ...,,,,, , I r252W r�` •y. '»:L 2�J� 2 d
'>cW • f, r` J• 08� � 07620 " � � � ' �+ ., '°..""' � •' - . 2 $3 492. -
3,„..�; � '` ; f 04 I F• � i." �f •r 106 f �c��' r ` aew.a.a • '..s„�. ._ W 2�$ f �
CLEAR a / tl
SPRING ,.. _ J r •rl
621 r.. a.10 uw` „ �,`c>.'i",dr, " �:°" , • • ii 381 i W 3 ar 1
`� � W08 � ,tl .• M ,,,1,3sRG�e t::'
w
. . • ,
4
` II-Ak`
n �er
Sp - � • . s, . , � .. +- - --r- • �i raw v...d„
Wash
09911 `o 2 "� v. 310►Fr
ti I
f W . A7002Fr 401E 012-
001 C
12 -001C
ar vlr 021 3 2r C i
W 34X
5621P �1
•. a. �– ! N
}: W:&J�1
w 1 "` to 5351 .
i
—.7, W5431 r ,.
`�. •f �y'• I K'c t.YaH.I �.E' r,` ..
•I w 5 �^ 71
5rx52 W596
1-'i.':`�`'" a.. �• 5
_� r �• • � sae
W
1N 5651
i Scale
Feel rwp �cao moo , +orr! �r000
11 i r. t •� Miles n
Source -, Washington County Engineering Department';
Prepared By: Washington County Planning Commission`
W45e01
I
Road Nano & Structure Number
Keefer Road, 140521
Lanes F,un
Kretsinger Road, W2461
Little Antietam Creek
Leitersburg-Smithsburg Road,
W2291*
Laitersbur3-State Line Road,
W2292
Licking Creek '.cad (closed),
W0471
T__ k4ng Creek Road (closed),
W0472
Licking Creek Road, ji0473
Licking Creek
Manor Church Road, W5431
Antietam Creek
.:arble Quarry Road, •16091
Little Antietam Creek
Marble Quarry Road, W6082
Little Antietam Creek
..arble Cuarry Poed, W6083
Little Antietam Creek
!-cersburg Road, W0741C
Little Conococheague Creek
_'_lcrco:c Poe' .:5981
Little As.tietam Creek
_ �trook RQaG, W5982
Little Antietam Creek
Millbrook Road, W5983
Little Antietam Creek
Killer's Church Road, W2261
Antietam Creek
Monroe Road, W5432
Unnamed
mount Lena Road, W3051
Beaver Creek
_::� t Aetna Road, 513101P
Beaver Creek
load, W-1,21
Braver Creek
Road, ;;5961
Dog Creek
0:!k Ricca Drive, :14001•
Antietam Creek
Old Fcrge Road, W2381
Marsh Run
Old Forge Road, :12382
Old Route 40 East (Timber Ridge Road), W0381
Old Route 40 gest (Sideling Fill Creek), W0021
Old Route 40 West (Bear Creek), W0022
013 Fcxbury Road, 145371
Old Rcxbury Road, W5372
Pearre Road, 'x:0211
�ect::nville Road, W0501
Poffenlergar Road, W4011
Poffenberger Road, W4012
Pry's dill-Keedysville Road, W5651
Prv's Mill-Keedysville Road, W5652
Ridge Road, WOell
Route :16 (under design), W1141*
Rowe Road, W2391
Sprecher Road, W5661
S=recher Road, W5662
Tors Road, W5331 -
Unger Road, 142384
Warner hollow Road, W3001
Wolfsville Road, W3221*
Waod.:.,jat Road, W0231
Bridges (continued)
Election
District Crossing
15
Lanes F,un
14
Little Antietam Creek
9
Little Antietam Creek
9
AntietLm Creek
15
Licking Creek
15
Licking Creek
15
Licking Creek
12
Antietam Creek
8
Little Antietam Creek
8
Little Antietam Creek
8
Little Antietam Creek
4
Little Conococheague Creek
8
Little As.tietam Creek
8
Little Antietam Creek
8
Little Antietam Creek
9
Antietam Creek
6
Unnamed
7
Beaver Creek
16
Beaver Creek
6
Braver Creek
6
Dog Creek
10
Antietam Creek
18
Marsh Run
18
Antietam Creek
5
Tonoloway Creek
5
Sideling [Till Creek
5
Rear Creek
6
Antietam Creek
6
Beaver Creek
5
Sideling Hill Creek
17
Licking Creek
10
Antietam Creek
10
Antietam Creek
19
Antietam Creek
19
Little Antietam Creek
23
Brook Creek
13
Conococheague Creek
7
Little Antietam Creek
12
St. Janes -Marsh Run
12
St. James -Marsh Run
6
Beaver Creek
9
Little Antietam Creek
7
Appalachian Trail
7
Beaver Creek
5
Little Tonoloway Creek
* Federal aid System
Estimated Permissible (Life)
Highway Loading (Tons) Estir„ata? Years Rrnai.ni�g
15
10
Temporary Bailey Bridge
10
Bridge
Bridge
5 (Gross
10 (Gross
4 (Gross
(Gross
Closed
Closed
15
Load Only)
15
10
10
15
10
15
7
10
10
15
15
15
10
15
10
10
15
10
10
15
10
Load
Load
10
10
10
i5
i5
10
15
15
15
Load
15
10
10
Only)
Only)
15+
15+
Temporary Bailey Bridge
15+
Bridge Closed
Bridge Closed
15+
5
15+
10
5
15+
15+
15+
5
8
15+
15+
15+
15+
15+
15+
15+
5
15+
8
15+
10
5
15+
5
15+
15+
10
15+
15+
5
15+
15+
15+
Only) 1
15+
5
15+
15+
or repaired. In
addition, a sup-
plemental section
titled State
Maintained Struc-
tures inventories
and analyzes all
State bridge
structures
located in
Washington County.
At Grade Rail Crossings - all at grade railroad crossings have been
inventoried and identified on the map titled Trans2ortation Systems Inventory.
These crossings represent a conflict between diferent modes of travel. At grade
crossings restrict proper traffic flow in the urbanized areas, and present safety
hazards in all locations. The incidence of hazard at railroad crossings maybe projected
• •
x.r„�-,-- „!. s ^ 'G 1.. - a +�''� ,� `w ��j,. •' -rt . )rr .�. .. .��..� ,.L "" n I `:,,+„�r� a— �w ,`F'� `w { u • L�"'fj'^� w '�' -
{'• a .•� Af+COCII - y � � s r .fib y wa0,yr � � — f - 14 v *,Q • y p "�J' t � T �I • W
'r '•� ►J•ry+ r ,� •,� - �` � � f D'� r �.. � F g°wa yr' w1< / e � ''f i .'/
_ P
•W
•
y •
• � � r � � CLEAR .e • il,~,.,n i . �a.^ . � ... � roar, wry i yti' r•
111 � SPRING Y
� C.o!. 5r•rA{ +fir l
.. �. • ,. k.. r , j• bI ., � •` I ' , w`^i 1. rn+erNSHuaG
.j • I. ,. •' t' big ice. '� •� g ,/. y s., H/StiEl�$TCiWMi f .,... ""' - •
•: �� + '•a� •y�= o.sN»,r x .. . : ` "., nrna� � e: .�,•r: :� �, JI..r ••- f.�
ate,. � � � e r .i. J• n% ++ a �` .�� K,a+riy ! f s• �, 1 f
-. �.. ����° b � A F • .lV ' a °. _ •1 � i+Ar h � } y 14.,6,,.Y �
Bridge Repair 8; Replacement Program
Washington County , Maryland ' """"$"
ADT
0 Barnes Road (REPAIR) FAS 214
BO Beaver Creek Church Road (REPLACE) County 138
Burnside Bridge Road (REPLACE) FAS 245
DO Gossard Mill Road (REPLACE) FAS 291
Leitersburg-St. Line Road (REPLACE) County 409; ; *'S N
' f � F: tea` r a ,,.
Licking Creek Road (REPLACE) County 191
Manor Church Road (REPLACE) County 166
HO. Marble Quarry Road (REPAIR) County 172
lO, Millers Church Road (REPLACE) County 130
JO Old Route 40 (REPAIR) County e7
Pearre Road (REPAIR) FAS 78
Pectonville Road (REPLACE) FAS 128
MO Roxbury Road (REPAIR) County 200
vl
Toms Road (REPAIR) County 170
OO Old Route 40 (REPAIR) County 87 `r• ` 71 A Nr[ur JVL
Harpers Ferry Road (REPAIR) FAS
LEGEND ���:•.� ,a I,' - • - '.v:i •� � �°�,�
FAS Federal Aid Secondary
ADT Current Traffic - Vehicles Per Day
Signalized Intersections (County Only)` -�
0 - '
At Grade Railroad Roadway Intersections f��!•
- Intersections Having Poor Site Distance or High Traffic - R.R. Conflict
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS INVENTORY MAP
Scale
'wa
F n My ,f Feet a aun woc mou rocas ion
+ ? }G Miles 6 r
Source: Washington County Engineering Department i r. 777
Washington County Planning Department
y "`
`•,r ,..�,-'..1" •ter p ' 1 i
Y[
r,�
according to the ADT of the traffic corridor, peak hour traffic loading factors,
and daily usuage of the railroad.
Highway Deficiency Locations - the following map titled Highway
Deficiency Locations is a composite delineating numerous locations throughout
the County having some type of design deficiency or having a high incidence of
accidents. The inventory consists of locations having poor sight distance, at
grade railroad crossings, bridge approaches, and alignment and geometric problems.
Truck Traffic
With two Interstate highways intersecting in Washington County, and
the proximity to eastern metropolitan areas, freight transportation by truck
has become a major industry. The numerous motor freight locations throughout
the County, serve as a major truck traffic generator and attractor. The motor
freight operations that are located within the County providing both inter -County
and interstate freight service are:
1. B & P Motor Express, Inc. - 76 West Lee Street
2. Bowman D. M., Inc. - East Oak Ridge Drive
3. Charlton Brothers Transportation Company - 552 Jefferson Boulevard
101
4. Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc. - Security - Jefferson Boulevard
5. Consolidated Freightways - 351 East Antietam Street
6. Hagerstown Motor Express - Middleburg Pike (U.S. 11)
7. Hall's Motor Transit Company - Halfway Boulevard and Hopewell Road
8. Hemingway Transport, Inc. - 235 Mill Street
9. Mason and Dixon Line, Inc. - Mason-Dixon Lane
10. Overnite Transportation Company - 82 West Lee Street
11. Preston Trucking Company - 1095 Jefferson Boulevard
12. Roadway Express - East Oak Ridge Drive
13. Ryder Truck Line, Inc. - Airport Industrial Park
14. Tri-State Tank Line, Inc. - 1219 West Washington Street
Other motor truck traffic generators consist of industrial centers, warehousing
centers, and distribution centers located within the City of Hagerstown, industrial
parks, and readily accessible locations adjacent to the Interstate systems. (Note:
See Economic Base Study - Washington County Planning Commission, 1975.)
Since commercial vehicles (vehicles with dual tires on one or more axles)
under all conditions exceeds the displacement and weight of a passenger car will
therefore, have a corresponding proportional effect on highway and bridge loading
capacities. The propensity of commercial vehicles on a highway system will effect
both its capacity and level of service.
102
,Eli
��f�'t•�a'arr.�.. -
6
` Y
HIGHWAY DEFICIENCY LOCATIONS
NOTE: Inventory Includes High Accident Locations,
Sight Distance Problem Areas, Intersection
Problem Areas, Etc.
Source Washington County Planning Commission
Washingfon County Engineering Department
State Highway Administration
i1fTTw
l�
f
r
�
�
� 1,
=.�1�q
��w
�►a'..
' �� j iRiFi � i�
'����'
.r�r
Ipop
442
I
"Owl
.'
,���i:
-
1'1W �'
���'
� {
ems, �.
R•. `i. �F . r P`. � i _,'g'4Y
J
....:'
`i
i
1'
The following chart titled Percentage Truck Traffic gives a percentage
of the total ADT and peak hour volumes of truck traffic on selected highways in
Washington County at random dates and locations. The Interstate systems are the
main corridors carrying truck traffic, although most of this is through traffic.
Locally, most truck traffic transverses access routes to the Interstate systems
(i.e. U.S. 40, U.S. 11, Maryland 65 and Maryland 63).
Percentage Truck Traffic
Percent
Truck Traffic
Peak Hour
Peak Hour
Route No. and Location
ADT
Volume
ADT(%)
Volume(%)
1.
Mt.
Aetna Road - Antietam Creek
3,346
388
5
3
2.
I-70
- Pennsylvania Line, Hancock
7,130
856
21
16
3.
I-70
- North of U.S. 40, Hancock
12,332
1,364
12
9
4.
I-70
- East of Millstone
21,158
2,498
11
9
5.
I-70
- West of Interstate 81
8,965
1,072
20
18
6.
I-70
- East of Interstate 81
16,539
1,700
14
14
7.
I-70
- Southeast Hagerstown
10,090
1,086
19
20
8.
I-70
- East U.S. 40 Interchange
17,639
1,320
26
17
104
Route No. and Location
Percent Truck Traffic
Peak Hour Peak Hour
ADT Volume ADT (%) Volume (%)
9.
I-81
- Pennsylvania Line
7,993
1,072
22
14
10.
I-81
- 2 miles South Pa. Line
12,710
1,012
28
15
11.
I-81
- North Maugans Avenue
11,509
1,408
16
11
12.
I-81
- North Maugansville Road
13,910
1,826
16
10
13.
I-81
- South of Maryland 58
15,488
1,843
13
11
14.
I-81
- South of Maryland 144
13,023
1,603
18
12
15.
I-81
- South of I-70
8,606
1,071
18
12
16.
I-81
- West Virginia Line
11,956
1,362
18
16
17.
U.S.
11 - South Pennsylvania Line
3,229
408
7
6
18.
U.S.
11 - North of Hagerstown
7,042
905
6
4
19.
U.S.
11 - South of I-70
4,890
604
6
3
20.
U.S.
11 - West Virginia Line
6,599
725
23
14
21.
U.S.
40 - West I-70, Hancock
2,835
328
14
11
22.
U.S.
40 - East of Indian Springs
1,161
180
7
4
23.
U.S.
40 - East of Maryland 63
5,006
574
10
11
24.
U.S.
40 - West of Hagerstown
4,978
591
9
2
25.
U.S.
40 - South of Maryland 64,
9,058
1,200
8
3
Cleveland Avenue
105
Route No. and Location
26.
U.S.
40A
- North of Marland 68
27.
U.S.
40A
- Frederick County Line
28.
U.S.
340
- North of Potomac River
5,736
635
12
Bridge
29.
U.S.
522
- West Virginia Line
30.
Md.
34 -
South of Alternate 40
31.
Md.
57 -
North of Dry Run Road
32.
Md.
57 -
North of U.S. 40
33.
Md.
58 -
East of Md. 63
34.
Md.
60 -
North of Hagerstown City
3,190
451
5
Limits
35.
Md.
60 -
Southwest of Md. 62
36.
Md.
60 -
Pennsylvania Line
37.
Md.
62 -
South of Md. 60
38.
Md.
62 -
North of Md. 64
39.
Md.
63 -
Pennsylvania Line
40.
Md.
63 -
North of U.S. 40
41.
Md.
63 -
South of U.S. 40
Percent Truck Traffic
Peak Hour Peak Hour
ADT Volume ADT (o) Volume (% )
4,440
625
6
3
1,518
226
10
4
9,597
957
11
4
5,736
635
12
9
1,826
215
9
3
300
36
12
3
290
60
14
7
2,635
364
10
7
12,021
1,469
4
1
5,479
784
6
3
3,190
451
5
3
671
89
4
0
777
94
9
4
686
80
9
3
1,419
161
17
12
1,629
200
17
11
106
107
Percent
Truck Traffic
Peak Hour
Peak Hour
Route
No. and
Location
ADT
Volume
ADT(%)
Volume(%)
42.
Md.
63 T
Between
I-70 and U.S. 40
1,319
176
13
11
43.
Md.
63 -
West of
Md. 65
201
29
12
10
44.
Md.
64 -
East of
Hagerstown
8,498
1,022
4
2
45.
Md.
64 -
East of
Md. 62
4,989
594
5
4
46.
Md.
64 -
North of
Md. 418
854
121
6
4
47.
Md.
64 -
Pennsylvania
Line
1,043
173
7
5
48.
Md.
65 -
North of
I-70
6,986
950
8
4
49.
Md.
65 -
South of
I-70
5,637
773
6
5
50.
Md.
65 -
North of
Md. 68
3,490
482
7
5
51.
Md.
65 -
North of
Md. 34
2,654
543
7
2
52.
Md.
66 -
North of
Mt. Aetna Road
1,449
184
14
7
53.
Md.
66 -
North of
I-70
1,676
199
15
6
54.
Md.
66 -
South of
U.S. 40
1,754
207
20
17
55.
Md.
67 -
South of
Alt. 40
1,727
193
7
12
56.
Md.
67
North of
U.S. 340
611
79
10
9
57.
Md.
68 -
West of Md. 56
321
39
19
10
107
Percent Truck Traffic
Peak Hour
Peak Hour
Route
No. and Location
ADT
Volume
ADT(o)
Volume(%)
58.
Md.
68 -
East of Md. 56
403
59
13
3
59.
Md.
68 -
Between 63 and I-81
2,041
263
11
14
60.
Md.
68 -
West of Md. 65
748
112
12
5
61.
Md.
68 -
East of Md. 65
706
92
7
7
62.
Md.
68 -
Northwest of Alt. U.S. 40
516
214
5
3
63.
Md.
418
- West of Md. 64
2,118
277
7
4
64.
Md.
491
- East of Md. 64
997
121
6
2
65.
Md.
494
- Pennsylvania Line
427
62
8
2
66.
Md.
494
- West of Md. 63
960
128
7
7
67.
Md.
522
- North of I-70
427
62
8
2
68.
Md.
632
- North of Md. 63
751
96
8
5
69.
Md.
632
- North of Md. 68
1,618
184
7
9
Parking
The following map titled Car Parking Accumulation Locations in Washing-
ton County delineates locations used as origin for car pooling to regional
employment centers. Employment centers consist -of Baltimore, Frederick, Washing-
ton, Martinsburg, Chambersburg and Winchester. Car accumulations are generally
located near Interstate interchanges and/or commercial endeavors having large
parking facilities (i.e. Valley Mall, Long Meadow Shopping Center, Zayre Shopping
Center, Sheraton Motor Inn, and Holiday Inn). The number of vehicles parked at
various locations range from 5 to approximately 60 at the I-70 - Md. 66 Interchange.
International System of Traffic Control Signs
The United States is gradually adopting an international system of
traffic control signs which emphasizes pictures and symbolic signs rather than
written messages. Symbolic signs have several advantages over work messages.
They provide instant communication with the driver since they can be understood
at a glance without having to read. Furthermore, the color and shape of the sign
is significant. Red indicates stop or a prohibition, green shows movement per-
mitted or gives directional guidance, blue is for signs leading to motorist
109
A-% F,
V
I —BUR
—1AGE
"TOWN
o
N
CAR PARKING ACCUMULATION
LOCATIONS IN WASHINGTON COUNTY Ix
(CAR POOL,
Source., Washington County Planning Commission
services, yellow indicates a general warning, black on white indicates regulatory
signs such as those for speed limits, orange conveys construction and maintenance
warnings, and brown is for public recreation and scenic guidance. Diamond shaped
signs signify a warning, rectangular signs with the longer dimension vertical
provide a traffic regulation, and rectangular signs with the longer dimension
horizontal contain guidance information. An octagon means stop, an inverted
triangle means yield, a pennant means no passing, a pentagon shows the presence
of a school, and a circle warns of a railroad crossing.
of traffic control signs are as follows:
111
The international system
Regulatory Signs
SPEED
LIMIT
50
(RED AND WHITE)(BLACK AND WHITE)
NO U
TURN
NO LEFT
TURN
YIELD
(RED AND WHITE)
PASSING
ZONE
(BLACK AND YELLOW)
(RED, BLACK AND WHITE)
112
NO RIGHT
TURN
(RED AND WHITE)
KEEP
RIGHT
Warning Signs
(BLACK AND YELLOW)
� 1 2= 6'
i
CATTLE _DEER � FARM tow SIGNAL
XING XING MACHINERY CLEARANCE AHEAD
I /jR
Ilk
<<4iA
TWO WAY DIVIDED { DIVIDED
MERGE TRAFFIC } HIGHWAY
PED,rl HIGHWAY , ENDS '
113
BIKE
X I N G I
SLIPPERY HILL
WHEN WET
NO
BICYCLES
(BLACK AND YELLOW)
(RED, BLACK AND WRITE)
114
LANE ENDS
MERGE
LEFT
RIGHT
4 LANE
ENDS
Where sudden changes In the
number of highway lanes occur,
motorists need to be alerted in
advance so that the proper
maneuvers can be completed.
The three signs, above appear
in a series to serve as a repeating
reminder to merge into the
adjacent lane.
115
Services Signs
The blue color of these signs indicates
that they provide direction to motorist
service facilities. Word message signs
also will be used to direct motorists to
areas where service stations,
restaurants, and motels are available.
Guide Signs
The green background signs indicate
that the message is providing directional
information. Diagrams on some signs are
being introduced to help motorists find
the correct path through complicated
interchange ramp networks.
Roadside mileage markers will assist
in trip planning and provide locational
information.
New directional signs will point to bike
and hiking trails.
116
The brown background sign provides
similar information as it pertains to
access routes to public parks and
recreation areas.
L
CKY MOUNTAIN
NAT'L PARK
6 MILES
TRAIL.
The brown background sign provides
similar information as it pertains to
access routes to public parks and
recreation areas.
L
CKY MOUNTAIN
NAT'L PARK
6 MILES
L
L
L
L
L
t
L
L
L
L
LI
L
L
L
L
69F N 9F r=
TI�ANSAeI�TATTeN
Bikeway
The bicycle as we know it today is a product of the 19th century. By
the 1980's, cycling had become extremely popular both as a participant and
spectator sport, as well as to some extent, a utility form of transportation.
With the increasing dependence of society on the motor vehicle, the bicyle was
relegated to a secondary form of transportation. During the late 1960's and the
early 1970's there was a sharp resurgence of cycling activities. Today, the
bicycle is used for both utility trips as well as for recreational activity.
With this growth in bicycle popularity and utilization there has
become a demand for good and safe recreational and utility oriented facilities.
To meet the demand of the growing popularity of cycling in the State of Maryland,
the General Assembly in 1972, passed enabling legislation giving the State High-
way Administration the authority to construct bikeways within the State highway
rights-of-way.
The bicycle may be used not only as a means of recreation, but as an
alternative mode of transportation. The following locations have greatest
119
potential for non -recreational opportunities:
1. College Campus Communities - excellent potential for high use
bicycle areas, where a large number of young people congregate.
2. Planned Unit Developments and New Communities - the opportunity
for bike trails has great potential in planned unit developments and new com-
munities. The mix of land uses in new communities and proximity to adjacent
marketing areas. Trails should be close to schools, shopping centers, libraries,
parks and recreation areas to achieve maximum proficiency.
3. Employment Centers and Shopping Centers - these centers provide
good locations as terminous for bikeway travel due to proximity to adjacent
residential development.
There are numerous opportunities for recreational cycling. Bikeways
may be located along rights-of-way for gas lines, overhead utilities, distribu-
tion mains and railroad rights-of-way. In addition, an often overlooked
opportunities are local streets which in many cases have low traffic volumes
and adequate pavement width. The interconnection of these corridors should be
designated to construct a looping, continuous system of bikeways.
120
Bikeway Classifications
Bikeways are classified according to the degree of exclusiveness of
which the facilities are reserved for bicycle use. Bikeways are generally
classified into three categories:
1. Class I - a bikeway physically seperated from any roadway
designated for the exclusive use of bicycles. Crossflows by pedestiians and
motorists are minimized. Although the Class I bikeway is the safest type of
facility, it is by far the most expensive and time consuming to construct.
2. Class II - a restricted right-of-way, or portion of the roadway
designated for the exclusive or semi -exclusive use of bicycles. A class II
bikeway is seperated by a paint strip, curb or similar device. Through travel
by motor schools or pedestrians is not allowed, however, crossflows will exist
as to gain access to vehicle oriented facilities.
3. Class III - a shared right -of way or existing roadway designated
as such by signs placed on vertical posts or stenciled on the pavement. Any
bikeway which shares its through -traffic right-of-way with moving vehicles or
121
pedestrians is considered a Class III bikeway. Class III bikeways are the most
expensive for construction.
County:
Presently there are three Class II bike routes located in Washington
1. Maryland 63 - north of U.S. Route 40 to Williamsport - 4.8 miles
2. Maryland 418 - Maryland 60 north to Pennsylvania State Line - 4.7
miles
3. Maryland 419 —Maryland 64 east to Frederick County Line - 4.8 miles
Bicycle Facility Design Standards
The following design standards define the space occupied by the bicycle
and additional lateral space requirement since the bicycle does not travel in a
tri straight line but tends to weave along its projectory and, therefore, requires
an additional shy clearance space from lateral obstructions. Applying these
basic standards,the minimum desirable width for a single bike lane facility would
be slightly over four feet. In Class II, this distance allows for bikeways a
right hand shy distance between the bicycle and the curb or parked autos, with
a left hand shy distance assumed to be included in the width of the motor vehicle
122
BASIC DIMENSIONS
TYPICAL BICYCLE
DIMENSIONS
r �
2
I 1 r
I I
OPERATING SPACE PLUS
MINIMUM CLEARANCES
travel lane. While four feet appears
to be the minimum acceptable dimen-
sion for bikeway facilities, greater
1
r ; width is desirable to allow passing
1 �
1
within the designated cycle facility
1 i �
and to provide a margin of safety, a
L 24'.J
� 1
recovery space for avoidance of
BICYCLE OPERATING SPACE accidents. On sidewalk bikeways,
where delineated bicycle and pedestrian
I-- goo' .-1 facilities are provided, dimensional
l i a I requirements can be defined by com-
bining the cyclist space module and
I a I f 1 1 8
i a similar pedestrian module as
r , R
I : t
illustrated in the diagram on the
succeeding page. Joint pedestrian-
1---
TYPICAL BICYCLE bicycle facilities should have a
PATH DIMENSIONS
minimum width of six feet with addi-
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
123
tional lateral clearance to obstruc-
tions such as fences, post, curbs, etc.
BIKE—PEDESTRIA_T1 SPACE REQUIREMENTS
I �
76'
i
I
I
24
Physically
Occupied
Space
6..
6 6
J6
Occupied Space
Plus "No Touch" Zone
I I
r--- I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I Bike ; I
I (Operating I
I ( Space I i ea
! [ I I
XXX
I I ! I
C I I I
I I
!�
Bike Module Plus Pedestrian
"No Touch" Space
I I
I I
I I
1 f
I � i
I f
I #
I #
I #
I #
I I
I I
9-
42 -
Occupied Space Plus
"Personal Comfort"Zone
33 60*
I act•
l I I 1
I I �
I t I #
I I 1 #
I I Bike I I
! IQperatingl #
I I Space I I
I I I I
I I I f
92 -
Bike Module Plus Pedestrian
"Personal Comfort" Space
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
124
Design Speed
Travel speed achievable
on a bicvcle on level terrain
ranges to more than 30 mph , with
higher speeds possib10- on down
grades. Bicycle speed is affected
by numerous factors, including air
resistance, weather (wind, tempera-
ture, wet or dry roadway surface,
type of bicycle [gearing, weight,
maintenance)), roadway conditions
and the cyclist's personal physical
condition and motoration.
Generally, bikeway design
standards recommend a design speed
of 20 mph with grades between +3%
and -7%.
Bikeway Graphics
The following illustration identifies bike route designations and motor
vehicle warning signs. These bikeway signs, like other street and highway
graphics have an unequivocal meaning and are understandable at a glance.
Adequate signing should be deployed at all decision points along bike-
ways. This includes signs informing the cyclist of directional changes and
confirmation signs to ensure that the route change has been correctly perceived
by the cyclist.
Continuity
Whether a bikeway system is an area wide network or a set of single -
strand routes, the network or each route should have continuity with minimization
of disruptive gaps, terminations and strained transitions. presently there are
three recreation bikeways located in Washington County, consisting of 14.3 miles
This figure does not include numerous pedestrian -bike paths located adjacent to
educational facilities. presently these systems are not continuous, and not
interconnecting, having termini located in remote locations of the County.
125
MOTOR VEHICLE DIRECTED AND WARNING SIGNS
r
r -
BIKE
XING
Black on yellow Backc round
(Uniform Manual W 11-1)
BIKE
LANE
ONLY
be
TURNING
VEHICLES
YIELD TO
BIKES
Black on white Background
BIKE ROUTE DESIGNATION SIGNS (White on green Background)
EN D
3'
TO
126
Standard Route Sign
(Uniform Manual D 11-1)
Message Plates
To be mounted above the official
marker to designate the beginning and
ending of the bike route, and to
trailblaze to the bikeway.
Directional Plates
To be mounted below the official
marker to guide cyclists along the
bikeway and to trailblaze to the
bikeway.
System Inadequacies
Presently, State and County highways, excluding those already desig-
nated as bikeways, have impediments which create problems for safe bicycling.
Most undesignated highways do not have paved shoulders, and some have poor site
distance and narrow alignments creating dangerous situations for cyclists.
Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities in Washington County are presently limited to
walkways adjacent to commercial and employment centers. Pew pedestrian walkways
exist in Washington County in residential subdivisions. Pedestrian -vehicle
conflicts exist along numerous internal residential streets, since roadways or
the linear right-of-way area adjacent to the roadways are utilized as walkways.
Furthermore, few existing walkway facilities are designed as to facilitate the
handicapped. Adequate walkway systems -reduce vehicle -pedestrian conflicts and
enhance the safety, comfort and convenience of primary pedestrian facilities.
127
Definitions
Mixed Use - Bicycles and motor vehicles or bicycles and pedestrians sharing space
with no provisions for segregation of traffic.
Bike Route - A street or system of street and ways with signs denoting them as a
"Bike Route." The signs warn motorists to anticipate bicycles on these streets
and indicate to cyclists a desirable routing because of low traffic volumes or
good grade profiles, a possibility of scenic views or continuity to activity cen-
ters. Most commonly, "Bike Routes" imply streets in mixed usage but they may
include segments of the various types of exclusive bicycle facilities described
below. In non -capitalized form, "bike route" indicates the bicycle's line of
travel to reach a specific destination. (A Class III facility.)
Bikeway, Cyclew - Generic terms encompassing all of the exclusive bicycle facility
treatments described below. Both most commonly denote bicycle facilities which are
off the street or highway pavement but not necessarily separate from the roadway
right-of-way.
128
Bike Lane - An on -street treatment in which separate auto and bicycle travel
lanes are designated visually by signs and street markings. (A Class II facility.)
Protected Lane - An on -street bike lane in which a positive physical separation
is placed between bicycles and moving motor vehicle traffic. Separation may be
achieved through striped buffer areas, raised and possibly landscaped mediam
strips or by placing the lane between parked cars and the curb. (A Class Ilfacility.)
Bike Path, Pathway - Generic terms denoting bicycle facilities off the roadway
surface, though not necessarily out of the roadway right-of-way.
Sidewalk Path of Wide Sidewalk Treatment - A bike path within the roadway right-of-
way which may be used by pedestrians as well as cyclists. (May be Class I, II, or
III.)
Independent Path - A cycle facility in its own right-of-way, entirely separate
from streets and highways. Includes pathways specially provided for bicycles, park
and green belt trails, service roadways along utility rights-of-way, drainage and
irrigation canals, etc. (Class V.
129
Mall Treatment - A block or blocks of city streets closed to motor vehicle traf-
fic with the exception of emergency, and possibly, service, vehicles, public
transit vehicles, and bicycles. (Mav be Class II or III.)
130
I
Lt-
A�I� TQANSAeQTATT�N
Hagerstown Regional Airport*
History and Develo ment
The Hagerstown Regional Airport located on U.S. 11, 4.5 miles north of
the City of Hagerstown, was first established by the Kreider-Reisner Aircraft
Company in 1928.
Incorporated in 1926, the Kreider-Reisner Aircraft Company, was origi-
nally located at 805 Pennsylvania Avenue, Hagerstown, Maryland, initially operated
a flying field on the land lying between Pennsylvania Avenue and the New York
Central Iron Works (now the present site of Burhans Boulevard). No more than 600
feet in length, the field was bounded by high voltage electrical lines on the
north and Angle's Quarry on the south. As production of the C-2 Challenger,
3 -place biplane, increased in late 1927, the limitations of the field became
severely restrictive, and Kreider-Reisner began a search for an alternative flying
field.
Previously, Mayor Charles E. Bowman had spearheaded a drive for develop-
ment of a municipal flying field on the 100 acre farm owned by the City in the
* The following text is substantially reproduced from Master Plan Report, Hagerstown Regional
Air rt, 1975. w —
133
southern section of Hagerstown. Mayor Bowman's enthusiasm for an airport to com-
pete with the Martinsburg, West Virginia municipal airfield, unfortunately, was
not shared by his council and the project never materialized. (The Martinsburg
airfield, at this point, was handling as many as 50 flights a day.)
After seriously considering moving their aircraft production facilities
to another city which operated an existing airfield, Kreider-Reisner elected to
remain in Hagerstown and develop a company-owned flying field. Accordingly, on
April 7, 1928, Kreider-Reisner purchased a 60 acre plot from Robert A. and Emma
J. Brumbaugh for a price of $9,000, consisting of $7,500 in cash and 15 shares of
the preferred stock of Kreider-Reisner Aircraft Company, Inc. with a par value of
$100.00 per share. This plot is the site of the present Hagerstown Regional Airport.
In 1928 Kreider-Reisner erected a service hangar on the north side of
the tract with access from the Brumbaugh lane and U.S. Route 11. A white, wooden
building, approximately 72 feet by 67 feet, the hangar contained a mezzanine floor
and enclosed a total area of 5,519 square feet. Airplanes constructed at the
Pennsylvania Avenue plant were trucked to the flying field, wings installed, and
tested prior to customer flyaway. The Challenger Flying Service, Inc., owned by
134
Kreider-Reisner operated from this hangar. Pilots, other than Amman H. Kreider,
President of Kreider-Reisner, included Carl Strickler and Howell Eurich.
In April 1929, Kreider-Reisner was purchased by the Fairchild Aviation
Corporation and during the year volume production of the Kreider-Reisner C-2,
C-4, and C-6 series biplanes continued. With the stock market crash in the fall
of 1929, production dropped to almost nothing the Kreider-Reisner plant all
but closed its doors. Throughout the year 1930, the airfield was idle. In 1931
Richard Henson reopened the Hagerstown Airport for Mr. Arthur Pottorff.
Fairchild resumed aircraft production in the spring of 1931, intro-
ducing two new designs: the Model 22 and, a year later, the Model 24. The
production run for the latter machine continued uninterrupted for some 15 years.
As before, aircraft were built in the Hagerstown plant and delivered after test
from the flying field.
The year 1931 also saw the formation of Henson Flying Service which was
begun by Richard A. Henson, an employee of Kreidner-Reisner, with a C-2 Challen-
ger biplane. Henson, who learned to fly under Pottorff's instruction, subsequently
135
became the Fairchild company pilot and during his 33 years with Fairchild, per-
sonnally tested all the protype designs produced by the company. Henson Flying
Service has continuously operated the airport in Hagerstown some 43 years although
the company, on reorganization in 1940, changed its name to Henson Aviation, Inc.
The development of the Hagerstown Airport was, as might be expected,
intimately tied to the fortunes of the Fairchild Aviation Corporation, owner of
the property. When, in 1933, Fairchild won a contract from Pan American Airways
for the construction of six all -metal amphibians, known as the Fairchild Model 91
Baby Clipper, the company seriously considered moving the entire Hagerstown manu-
facturing operations to an off -water site in Florida. The City of Hagerstown, as
an inducement to the company to remain in its present location, agreed to buy the
airfield tract and lease it to Fairchild, a transaction which would have the
effect of providing Fairchild with additional financing. At this point in time,
there was also a desire on the part of the Hagerstown mayor and council to have a
municipal airport.
Accordingly, a contract of sale was drawn up between Fairchild and the
City of Hagerstown by which the City agreed to pay Fairchild $13,000 in cash and
136
to assume a mortgage of $5,000 for a total selling price if $18,000. Other terms
included: an agreement by the City to purchase 21 additional acres of land for
the airport; an agreement by Fairchild to build the Pan American planes at
Hagerstown or repurchase the airport; an agreement that all airport property and
equipment should go to the City except the Fairchild service hangar; and an
agreement that the City would lease the airport to Fairchild for five years for
demonstrating, testing and delivering airplanes.
Under the administration of the City of Hagerstown, improvements in the
Municipal Airport began the dear following its acquisition. For the planned
improvements, Hagerstown architect, A. J. Klinkhart, was asked to design a larger
hangar, and in May 1935 his completed plan comprised a square brick building
approximately 100 feet and a clear opening of 90 feet for the hangar doors. The
waiting room and airport manager's office were included in a 16 foot by 40 foot
brick structure appended to the east wall of the hangar. In conjunction with the
CAA District Airport Engineer's office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, two hard sur-
face runways were proposed: A north -south runway of 2,400 feet and an east -west
runway of 2,420 feet. Previously, only sod -covered runways were available.
137
City Engineer, Samuel Greenawalt, presented the overall airport improve-
ment plan to the Mayor and Council on September 5, 1935, and, in addition to
discussion of the plan, Greenawalt outlined the financing of the project: the
Federal Government, under the Works Progress Administration (WPA), would assume
approximately 85 per cent of the overall cost, and the City of Hagerstown 15 per-
cent.
The Council adopted the plan unanimously following an adress by Sherman
M. Fairchild, president of the Fairchild Aviation Corporation, who pointed out
the necessity for airport improvement if the City of Hagerstown really desired to
attract any volume of air traffic both from general aviation and scheduled airlines.
With the approval of the plan and the allocation of Federal funds, the
construction of the hangar and the runways were completed in 1936.
Further improvements to the Municipal Airport were considered in succeed-
ing years, but it was not until the outbreak of World War II that anything of
consequence was initiated. On the expiration of the Fairchild lease in 1939,
Henson Flying Service assumed the airport lease on an agreement to pay the City of
138
HISTORY OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
HAGERSTOWN REGIONAL AIRPORT
1.
1934
City of Hagerstown
Original Airport Property Purchase
$ 18,000
2.
1935
Works Projects Administration
Construction of Runway 9-27
Unknown
3.
1936
Works Projects Administration
Construction of Hangar and Terminal
Unknown
4.
1942
City of Hagerstown
Runway Extension, resurfacing, taxiway
430,000
construction
5.
1942
U.S. Army Corps
Same as Item 4
970,000
6.
1952
City of Hagerstown
Extension and paving of Runway 9-27
52,420
7.
1952
Federal Aid to Airports Program
Same as Item 6
52,420
8.
1958
City of Hagerstown
Reconstruction of Runway 9-27, moving of
381,170
U.S. Route 11
9.
1958
Federal Aid to Airports Program
Same as Item 8
381,170
10.
1959
City of Hagerstown
Land Acquisition, Runway extension and
212,492
reconstruction 9-27
11.
1959
Federal Aid to Airports Program
Same as Item 10
212,492
12.
1961
City of Hagerstown
Expand and connect Aprons taxiway
47,300
13.
1961
Federal Aid to Airports Program
Same as Item 12
47,300
14.
1969
City of Hagerstown
Expand Aircraft Parking Apron
39,980
15.
1969
Appalachian Regional Commission
Same as Item 14
57,600
16.
1969
Federal Aid to Airports Program
Same as Item 14
101,600
17.
1970
City of Hagerstown
Mall installation, Runway 9-27 resurfacing
and reconstruction, VASI
25,100
18.
1970
Appalachian Regional Commission
Same as Item 17
37,600
19.
1970
Federal Aid to Airports Program
Same as Item 17
62,700
Total:
$3,129,344
City of Hagerstown
$1,206,462
ARC
$ 95,200
FAAP
$ 857,682
U.S. Army Air Corps
$ 970,000
139
Hagerstown 10 percent of profits as a rental fee. In actual practice, however,
operation of the flying service was not all that profitable in the post war
years and Henson's annual payment to the City was approximately $600.00.
By 1942, however, use of the airport had grown considerably; most
notably because of the Fairchild production of primary trainers for the U.S. Army
Air Corps. At the height of its PT -19 production run, the Fairchild Company,
which had only recently constructed a large manufacturing facility adjacent to
the airport, was turning out more than 150 aircraft per month. To handle this
increased usage, the existing airport runways were extended and taxiways were
surfaced. By the end of the 1942 improvement program, the total cost of the
airport (beginning with the purchase in 1934) slightly exceeded $1,300,000. The
City of Hagerstown, however, had invested only $200,000.
For its increasing use of the airport facilities, the Fairchild Company
began making annual payments to the City of Hagerstown early in 1943 for main-
tenance of the airport although no formal agreement existed. Henson Flying Service
and the City negotiated various short term operating leases during this time span.
141
These short term leases continued in a very irregular pattern until
1957. Henson Flying Service, later to be known as Henson Aviation, continued to
operate from the Hagerstown Airport with no lease agreement until 1972. During
this time span Henson gradually increased his annual rent to the City to $6,000.
Henson gradually assumed more of the operating expenses of the airport and at the
end of this term was basically supporting the normal day to day requirements of
grass cutting, snow plowing, runway lighting, etc.
In 1972 Henson Aviation was awarded a Fixed Base Operating contract and
an Airport Management Agreement.
T.�-A TT cc
Existing land uses in the immediate vicinity of the Hagerstown Regional
Airport are largely industrial and highway usage. The airport is located 4.5 miles
north of the city limits of Hagerstown, within one mile of the Pennsylvania State
border. It is sandwiched in between Interstate 81 to the west, U.S. Route 11 to
the east and Showalter Road to the south. U.S. Route 11 has already been relocated
in the past to accommodate the expansion of the airport.
142
Reference to the Land Use Patterns map contained in this report will
reveal that there are several industries in the immediate vicinity of the air-
port, notable among these is Fairchild Republic Aircraft Company which has its
plant on the southern boundary of the airport. There is an industrial park
bordering the airport to the northeast. This park has 5 lots in it, all of
which are occupied. The presence of I-81 explains the relatively high amount
of land use for highway development. There is a small amount of residental
development on all sides of the airport.
Airport expansion is greatly hindered by the presence of I-81 to the
west, U.S. Route 11 to the east and Showalter Road to the south. These highways
cannot be economically spanned or vacated. However, these roads do make ready
access to the airport. This fact together with the nearby industry have in the
past and should continue in the future to afford the airport area a tremendous
catalyst for growth.
zoning
Present zoning in the vicinity of the airport is very compatible to
airport growth (see zoning map). With minimal residential development the
144
ON M/ NO on ON M am
Zoning — Vicnity Around Hagerstown Regional Airport
ZONING DISTRICTS
C
Conservation
IR
Industrial, Restricted
A
Agriculture
IG
Industrial, General
RR
Residential, Rural
IM
Industrial, Mineral
RS
Residential, Surburban
PR
Planned Residential
RU
Residential, Urban
PB
Planned Business
RM
Residential, Multi -Family
PI
Planned Industrial
BL
Business, Local
HI
Highway Interchange
BG
Business, General
HP
Historic Preservation
AP
Airport
P
Public Owned Lands
wa
490
my
U4 1
en
Ws
rn
Ln
'd'
r -I
majority of the area is zoned for industry, highway, public and airport itself.
The importance of insuring clear approach zones to both ends of the east -west
runway has been effectively controlled by designating a large amount of land as
airport district. What residential development is nearby is low density rural.
Local business has also been zoned within the vicinity of the airport as is an
area planned for an industrial park.
Careful regulation of the present zoning surrounding the Hagerstown
Regional Airport seems to be compatible with the future development of the Air-
port. Reference to the accompanying zoning map shows that most of the land
immediately surrounding the airport is zoned for industrial, agricultural or
highway usage with scattered residential areas.
Existing Facilities
The Hagerstown Regional Airport is located approximately 4.5 miles
north of the City of Hagerstown, Maryland at an elevation of 704 feet above
sea level at a latitude of 39°42' and a longitude of 77044'. It is easily
accessible through the use of I-81, U.S. Route 11 or I-70.
146
Landing facilities include 2 paved runways, stub taxiways, partial
parallel taxiways and exit taxiways and an apron area. Runway 9-27 (east -west)
is 5,449 X 150 feet with non -precision marking and medium intensity lighting. A
A MAL/SR (Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System with Runway Alignment
Indicator Lights) and a VASI (Visual Approach Slope Indicator) have been installed
on this runway and can be operated by keying 121.7 within 5 miles of the airport.
A 2,500 X 50 foot parallel taxiway is located on the western end of this runway
beginning 1,400 feet from the end of the runway. Runway 2-20 (north -south) is a
3,490 X 100 foot with basic utility marking. A full parallel taxiway serves
this runway. All taxiways are marked but are not lighted.
An FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) control tower operated daily
between 6:00 A.M. and 10:00 P.M. and a unicom operates between 6:00 A.M. and
8:00 P.M. and Sunday when it is operating between 7:00 A.M. and 10:30 P.M. Local
weather is available. In addition to these services, a VOR (Very High Frequency
Omni Range) instrument approach and an airport beacon are available. Weather
and Flight Services are available on a local weather line to Martinsburg, West
Virginia.
147
i''�
+T4 r
�j
UA
� r
a
^
- Y
3
�� F� .. a yy ` �. — \ u,• : {
i `•
•efa }
r
00
e
A terminal building is located in the northeastern section of the air-
port property. This terminal houses the Fixed Base Operator, Car Rentals and
Allegheny Commuter. Servicing of the commuter is performed by airline personnel
using joint FBO (Fixed Base Operator) and airline equipment such as power units,
de-icing equipment, tugs, towbars, etc. Loading facilities are adequate for the
near future. All aircraft are hand loaded.
A Fixed Base Operator, Henson Aviation, Inc., has a full service opera-
tion which provides fuel sales, 3 fuel trucks, aircraft sales, aircraft maintenance,
avionics sales and services, flight training, aircraft parts, line service, tie
downs and hangar storage.
Alphin Aircraft offers an aircraft rebuilding shop, aircraft painting
shop, aircraft engine overhaul shop and general aircraft maintenance on land
adjacent to the airport.
Hangar space is presently available for 44 aircraft. A 100 X 100 foot
FBO hangar houses a work shop, parts storage, office space and commuter air car-
rier usage. There are five individual "T" hangar complexes; 2 units of 10 each,
149
1 unit of 7; 1 unit of 4 with 2 end units converted into a corporate facility and
1 unit of 10. One large 120 X 100 foot hangar on the east side of the field is
used for the storage of large corporate aircraft. This land is City owned.
Airways and Navaids
The Hagerstown Regional Airport is located nearly 20 miles from any
other airport facility and, consequently, activity around this airport does not
conflict.with the approaches or activity at any other airport. Reference to the
accompanying airways and navaids map will show this relationship as well as the
location of enroute airways, nearby VORTAC facilities, (omni -directional VHF
navigational facility, with distance measuring equipment) and NDB's (non -direc-
tional beacons). These facilities are used by pilots for navigation in the
vicinity of the Hagerstown Regional Airport.
The Hagerstown VOR is located 6.72 miles from the H.R.A. Several air-
ways pass directly over this facility. These airways facilitate cross country
navigation. Minimum enroute altitudes on these airways range from 3,300 to 5,000
feet over the Hagerstown segment. Most IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) or instru-
ment flights in the area will follow these airways at altitudes greater than the
minimum.
150
54 � CHAMBER
Sl. ThOn►Ot
H5.0 TNS
I -WOOD
-YKA SESVtLLE■ AiR P4R7
_Pa. __
78'+ a /09.9 HGR
PpTOYAC
AYRPORT
� � wRLL1eMs
ERICEM
SPRIMM
0.MTIN7-
0 -sups
V
NSBURG
BIGLERVILLE4
A-
GETTYSB
GETTYSOURG-CMARM�/
TLE AIR Piz ITA r,T //
... MONTEREY
TOWN
• T S84AJi
FieA•.fef
1050 FDIC
DERICK
/IP.I ARB
C_r1aRLE5-�j
TOWNS
9
NCALC 10 ■IL(III
q • 2 O 10
AIRWAY S and NAVAL D S
14 314LATIGI To
HAGERSTOWN REGIONAL AIRPORT
151
The airport can be located
by pilots flying under instrument con-
ditions by using the Hagerstown VOR.
Approaches to and departures from the
Hagerstown Regional Airport are con-
trolled by the Washington County Center.
Published navigational charts
provide bearings and procedures for
approaching the various runways by using
combinations of the facilities available
at the airport. Each approach procedure
has its own ceiling and visibility limi-
tations, approach altitudes, and minimum
descent altitude depending upon the
sophistication and reliability of the
equipment being used. In all cases, how-
ever, if the pilot cannot see the runway
when the minimum descent is reached, he
must execute a missed approach, try again
or land at an alternate airport.
Activity and Traffic
In order to properly determine the future needs of the Hagerstown Regional
Airport, the existing activity at the airport must be carefully researched, tabu-
lated and analyzed. Consideration must be given to commuter, military, itinerant,
local and air taxi operations. This information will then be used as the base upon
which forecasts of future activity and requirements are made.
The figures used from 1971-1973 are estimates, based on the information
available from the Fairchild -Hiller Tower operated until September, 1974, five days
a week from 8:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. In September, the FAA Control Tower began
operating from 8:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. seven days a week. The following operations
from 1971 to 1973 represent estimates, using the available tower records as a base,
of the total activity at the airport. These estimates were made by the airport and
manager and others closely associated with the airport and are based on the assump-
tions that Saturday and Sunday equal 1.3 times normal daily operations: the hours
between 1000 and 1800 equal 1.5 times normal hourly operations; and the hours
between 2100 and 0600 provide an additional 5% of the daily operations. The 1974 to
1975 data are actual operations as reported by the FAA Control Tower seven day opera-
ation.
152
153
Annual
Operations
Month
Year
Commuter
Military
Itinerant
Local
Total
1971
3,752
5,964
46,661
35,182
91,559
1972
3,529
9,073
39,496
31,-032
83,130
1973
3,779
7,259
45,682
34,284
91,004
1974
2,057
3,340
26,163
18,669
50,2.2.9
1975
4,013
5,111
38,962
26,659
74,745
153
Monthly Operations - 1975
Month
Commuter
Military
Itinerant
Local
Total
January
177
241
1,885
1,198
3,083
February
176
3Q8
1,981
1,189
3,179
March
208
197
2,273
1,618
3,891
April
202
265
2,440
1,07
3,537
May
213
492
2,605
1,614
4,219
June
309
648
3,206
2,096
5,302
July
476
417
4,670
3,551
8,221
August
443
399
4,061
3,227
7,288
September
480
585
4,367
3,184
7,551
October
457
464
4,230
2,556
6,786
November
416
565
4,2-45
3,357
7,602
December
456
430
2,998
1,972
4,971
TOTAL
4,013
5,111
38,962
26,659
74,745
Maximum
Month
480
648
4,670
3,551
8,221
Average
Month
334
426
3,247
2,222
6,229
153
Flight Service
Since September 1973, the Federal Aviation Administration has operated
a control tower at the Hagerstown Regional Airport. The tower is in operation
seven days a week between the hours of 0800 and 1600. Prior to this date
Fairchild -Hiller operated their control tower 5 days per week between 0800 and
2100.
A flight service station is operated by the Federal Aviation Administra-
tion at the nearby Martinsburg Airport. A toll free local number to this station
is available at the Hagerstown Regional Airport.
Instrument Approaches
During the last four calendar years, the following number of instrument
approaches were made to the Hagerstown Regional Airport:
154
Instrument Approaches to Hagerstown Regional Airport
1969-1975
The Federal Aviation Administration is presently planning the installa-
tion of a complete instrument landing system at the airport. When this ILS system
becomes operational, it should increase the total instrument approaches considerably
because of the increased reliability and lower minimums of this system.
Commuter Activitv
The first Allegheny Commuter was born in Hagerstown on November 15, 1967,
through an agreement between Allegheny Airlines and Henson Aviation, Inc. The
155
1975
January -
312
February -
276
March -
366
1969
Total
- N/A
April -
332
1970
Total -
1,305
May -
483
1971
Total
- 1,612
June -
569
1972
Total
- 1,615
July -
788
1973
Total
- 11871
August -
740
1974
Total
- 4,300
September -
877
1975
Total -
6,715
October -
811
November -
540
December -
621
TOTAL
6,715
The Federal Aviation Administration is presently planning the installa-
tion of a complete instrument landing system at the airport. When this ILS system
becomes operational, it should increase the total instrument approaches considerably
because of the increased reliability and lower minimums of this system.
Commuter Activitv
The first Allegheny Commuter was born in Hagerstown on November 15, 1967,
through an agreement between Allegheny Airlines and Henson Aviation, Inc. The
155
commuter was established to economically provide a service tailored to the air
travel needs of Hagerstown and introduced an entirely new concept of air travel -
the use of small aircraft to provide high frequency service from small communi-
ties to the major hub airports. Service began with four daily round trip
flights between Hagerstown and Baltimore's Washington International Airport,
using a none -passenger Beech Queen Airliner. On May 26, 1968, the Queen Air
was replaced with a special Beech 99 commuter aircraft with a 15 passenger
capacity and on June 1, 1969, Hagerstown to Washington service was inaugurated.
The sucess story of the Hagerstown commuter can be shown by the passenger
boardings. In the 12 months prior to the initiation of the service, 7,210
Hagerstown passengers flew Allegheny Airlines. Zn 1973 Hagerstown -Allegheny
commuter passengers totaled 24,643 on seven daily round trip flights.
Commuter service is now offered from the Hagerstown Regional Airport
to Baltimore, Maryland; Washington, D.C.; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and
Salisbury, Maryland in accordance with the following schedule:
156
Henson Aviation Flight Schedule - June 1, 1974
* City and Airport Codes used above are as follows:
BAL - Baltimore, Md. - Baltimore -Washington International Airport
DCA - Washington, D.C. - Washington National Airport
HGR - Hagerstown, Md. - Hagerstown Regional Airport
PHL - Philadelphia, Pa. - Philadelphia International Airport
SBY - Salisbury, Md. - Salisbury-Wicomico Airport
157
From Hagerstown
Flight
Number
From
Leaves
To
Arrives
Stops
Frequency
2
HGR
6:30
A.M.
SBY
8:00
A.M.
BAL,
PHL
X
Saturday & Sunday
27
HGR
6:45
A.M.
BAL
7:50
A.M.
DCA
X
Sunday
24
HGR
10:35
A.M.
SBY
12:27
P.M.
BAL,
DCA
X
Sunday
6
HGR
11:55
A.M.
SBY
2:15
P.M.
BAL,
DCA
Daily
PHL
25
HGR
2:28
P.M.
SBY
4:35
P.M.
BAL,
DCA
X
Saturday
10
HGR
4:35
P.M.
SBY
6:32
P.M.
BAL,
DCA
X
Saturday
PHL
23
HGR
6:55
P.M.
SBY
9:10
P.M.
BAL,
DCA
X
Saturday
To Hagerstown
22
SBY
8:30
A.M.
HGR
10:21
A.M.
BAL,
DCA,
X
Sunday
PHL
28
DCA
10:00
A.M.
HGR
11:05
A.M.
NONE
X
Sunday
6
SBY
11:55
A.M.
HGR
2:05
P.M.
BAL,
DCA,
Daily
PHL
25
SBY
2:30
P.M.
HGR
4:10
P.M.
BAL,
DCA
X
Saturday
10
SBY
4:05
P.M.
HGR
6:30
P.M.
BAL,
DCA
X
Saturday
32
SBY
6:25
P.M.
HGR
7:48
P.M.
BAL,
PHL
X
Saturday
17
PHL
7:45
P.M.
HGR
10:10
P.M.
DCA,
BAL
X
Saturday
* City and Airport Codes used above are as follows:
BAL - Baltimore, Md. - Baltimore -Washington International Airport
DCA - Washington, D.C. - Washington National Airport
HGR - Hagerstown, Md. - Hagerstown Regional Airport
PHL - Philadelphia, Pa. - Philadelphia International Airport
SBY - Salisbury, Md. - Salisbury-Wicomico Airport
157
In 1973, Henson Aviation, Inc., had an average of 7 passengers per
operation with 10 operations daily. An operation is either a take -off or a land-
ing. The passengers carried during 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, and 1975 have been
tabulated on the following page.
35
30
25
i
0
20
15
4
e
10
M
1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975
ENPLANED AND DEPLANED PASSENGERS
158
Total
Enploned
�Daplara�d .�
Commuter Passengers
Month
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
January
1,117
1,479
1,878
2,151
2,305
February
1,016
1,261
1,650
2,185
1,979
March
1,236
1,700
2,081
2,568
2,422
April
1,289
1,515
1,986
2,328
2,473
May
1,368
1,759
2,058
2,314
2,650
June
1,163
1,916
2,296
2,474
2,914
July
1,326
1,787
2,163
2,422
2,982
August
1,425
2,012
2,290
2,566
2,861
September
1,361
1,750
2,009
2,471
2,748
October
1,463
2,036
2,274
2,653
3,060
November
1,471
1,853
1,998
2,480
21'584
December
1,321
1j680
1,96.0
2,179
2,543
TOTAL
15,556
20,748
24,643
28,741
31,521
Max./Month
1,471
2,036
2,274
2,653
3,060
Ave./Month
1,296
1,729
2,054
2,395
2,627
Passengers/
Passengers
Operations
Operation
1971 Total
31,521
4,013
7.9
1972 Total
28,741
2,057
14.0
1973 Total
24,643
3,779
6.5
1974 Total
20,748
3,529
5.9
1975 Total
15,556
3,752
4.1
159
The previous figures show that the Allegheny Commuter Operations at the
Hagerstown Airport are growing and becoming more efficient. The average passengers
per operation grew from approximately 4 in 1971 to nearly 6 in 1972 and as men-
tioned above is presently 7 passengers per operation.
Air Cargo
In addition to passengers, the commuter also carries air cargo. The
following figures and graph show the importance of this factor in the commuter
operations. They analyze the amount of cargo carried since 1969.
Year
Freight
Air Express
Mail
Total
1968
633,373
292,443
52,970
978,786
1969
572,664
229,163
59,079
860,906
1970
618,894
269,365
56,241
944,500
1971
427,683
298,206
74,185
800,074
1972
410,719
369,789
147,600
928,109
1973
437,953
580,206
133,934
1,152,093
1974
342,912
692,139
128,922
1,163,973
1975
371,804
171,844*
88,279
631,927
* Reduction due
to cessation of Railway
Express Agency (REA)
160
161
The trend in the past
few years at Hagerstown Airport
has been towards an increase in
air cargo carried by the Alle-
gheny Commuter. The general
decline in air freight and
increase in air express is a
national trend and is simply a
matter of classification of
shipments. It is expected that
air express will eventually domi-
nate air freight altogether.
The average pounds carried per
flight has increased since 1971
as shown below:
1971
1500-
500
Mail Freight ----
Air Upress --- TOTAL
1972
1000
pounds
1973
950-
pounds
1974
900
pounds
850
.-
a00
v
750
'0
a
"6
"6
700
660-
50
600
0
`0
550
500
0
400
N�
V
400-
00350
350-
�r
300-
30fl250
250-
zoo-
2o0150I0o5001568
150-
100 -
50 --
0968
1969 19 1 1 1 9'7 2 i973 19 4
CARGO STATISTICS
HAGERSTOWN REGIONAL AIRPORT
161
The trend in the past
few years at Hagerstown Airport
has been towards an increase in
air cargo carried by the Alle-
gheny Commuter. The general
decline in air freight and
increase in air express is a
national trend and is simply a
matter of classification of
shipments. It is expected that
air express will eventually domi-
nate air freight altogether.
The average pounds carried per
flight has increased since 1971
as shown below:
1971
- 213
pounds
1972
- 262
pounds
1973
- 305
pounds
1974
- 337
pounds
It is also interesting to note that total pounds carried during the first six
months of 1974 show a large increase over figures for 1973. However, on some
heavy passenger flights cargo is sent by truck.
Peak Da /Busy Hour Activity 1973
Peak day and busy hour operations have been estimated as follows:
Operations
Peak Day Peak Hour
Commuter 14 2
Military 25 5
Itinerant 150 15
Local 117 24
Air Taxi 5 1
TOTAL 311 47
Commuter flights are spaced evenly throughout the day. In order to evaluate these
flights, load factors for each flight in February 1973 are shown. This indicates
the most popular or peak flights.
Flight
Outbound
No.
Passengers Load
Factor
2
9..9
66%
24
7.2
48%
6
5.7
38%
25
10.0
66%
10
8.9
59%
23
4.5
30%
51.1%
Average
162
Flight
No.
22
3
6
25
10
17
Passengers
4.7
3.0
7.0
6.8
10.8
10.0
Load Factor
31%
20%
46%
45%
72%
66%
46.6%
Average
Maximum loading or a "full airplane" is fifteen passengers, plus about
five hundred pounds of baggage and cargo. Because of the new equipment recently
purchased by Henson Aviation, reservations are now open to all 15 passengers.
Only very rarely under extreme IFR conditions where alternative air-
ports are long distances away would any off load for fuel be necessary. Most
likely this off load would be cargo or baggage and not passengers.
Based Aircraft
A total of 107 aircraft are based at the airport including 81 perma-
nently based aircraft. In addition to the based aircraft there are 26 semi-per-
manent aircraft tied -down at the Hagerstown Regional Airport the majority of the
time. Of this total, 8 are regularly tied down on the City Ramp, 10 are tied
down on the City Airport near the Alphin Hangar facilities and 8 are military
helicopters. Although not officially listed as based aircraft, these aircraft
generally operate out of Hagerstown and contribute to the based aircraft
activity. Therefore, for purposes of this report, they are considered as based
aircraft in our analysis and preparation of forecasts. Based on this assumption
163
a summary of based aircraft is as follows:
Hangared 48 Single Engine 75 71%
Tied Down 51 Twin Engine 10 9%
Turboprop 10 9%
TOTAL 107 Jet 3 3%
Helicopter 9 8%
TOTAL 107 100%
Based on the existing tablulation and making no allowance for frequency
of use, the types of business aircraft using the Hagerstown Regional Airport can
be summarized as follows:
Single Engine 9 20%
Twin Engine 16 34%
Turbo Prop 11 23%
Jet 8 17%
Helicopter 3 6%
47 100%
Relationship to Surrounding Airports
Reference to the existing facilities plate will show that activity at
Hagerstown Regional Airport is influenced by 5 surrounding airports. The
164
theoretical areas of influence of each airport are designated graphically on the
existing facilities map by circles, varying in size to reflect the facilities
and services available at each airport. The influence of these airports on the
Hagerstown Regional Airport will be in direct proportion to their distance from
Hagerstown and also to the facilities and services provided at these airports in
comparison with the facilities and services at the Hagerstown Regional Airport.
The distance factor can be determined directly from the map. Facilities and ser-
vices have been evaluated as follows:
Eastern West Virginia Regional Airport - is located approximately twenty-six miles south-
west of Hagerstown Regional Airport in the State of West Virginia. Two concrete
runways, one 7,000' and the other 5,000' are in use. The airport has an approved
instrument approach, runway lights, and beacon operated during hours of darkness
and weather information is available through an FSS on the field. Flight instruc-
tion and charter service are available. A restaurant and taxi service are operated
at the airport. Lodging is located nearby as are resorts. The airport is attended
during daylight hours and at night on call.
165
Potomac Airport - is approximately twenty-four miles directly west of Hagerstown. Facili-
ties include a 5,000' bituminous runway, runway lights lit on request and
available weather information by phone. This is a private airport and is used at
the pilot's own risk.
Frederick Municipal Airport - is located approximately twenty- seven miles south-east of
Hagerstown. The runway configuration consists of two asphalt runways, 4,000' and
3,800' and a 1,600' sod runway. Runway lights and an airport beacon are operated
during hours of darkness. An approved instrument approach is in operation at the
airport and weather information is available. Ground services include fuel, food,
taxi and car rentals, major repairs, unicom and restrooms. Charter service is
available as is flight instruction. Hangars and tie down storage are located on
the airport site. The airport is attended 8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. Lodging is
available close to the airport's facilities and there are several nearby resorts.
Chambersburg Municipal Air rt - located in Pennsylvania, this airport is approxi-
mately twenty miles north of Hagerstown and has an asphalt runway 2,700' long. Fuel
is available and minor repairs are carried out. Ground accommodations include a
courtesy car, taxi, car rental, food and restrooms. Landing facilities include a
166
beacon and runway lights, during the hours of darkness. Weather information is
available by phone and a unicom is in operation. Charter and flight instruction
are available. The airport is attended from 7:00 A.M. until dark. Lodging and
resorts are close by.
Gettysburg-Charnita Airport - Landing facilities include a SE/NW 2,750' macadam
runway. Navigation facilities available are a windsock, beacon and runway lights
by prior request. The airport is open during daylight hours seven days a week.
Minor repairs, fuel including jet, Unicom, rental, charter, instruction, soaring,
and helicopter are available. Accommodations include a pilots' lounge, restaurant,
taxi, courtesy car, lodging and resort facilities. Tie down areas and hangar
space are also located on the premises.
Of the five airports described above only two, Frederick Municipal and Eastern
West Virginia Regional, have facilities to accommodate exectuve jet aircraft.
These airports have 4,000 feet and 7,000 feet runways respectively and both air-
ports have approved instrument approaches. One of the above airports is a private
facility providing limited service to the public. The other two, though having
shorter runways, do provide a wide range of facilities and services for general
167
aviation. None of the above airports
presently provides any scheduled air-
line or commuter service although
Eastern West Virginia Regional is in
the process of initiating such service.
An analysis of the Hagers-
town Regional Airport in relation to
these surrounding airports indicates
that Hagerstown had equivalent or, in
most cases, better facilities. All of
the surrounding airports are from 20
to 30 miles between them. Because of
this and the fact that the Hagerstown
Regional Airport already has developed
a very active commuter service with a
wide range of services and facilities
available to airport users, we can
reasonably assume that the Hagerstown service area has a radius of approximately
20 miles.
Service Area
The theoretical service area outlined on the accompanying map illustra-
tions graphically the area of the surrounding counties which are more adequately
served by Hagerstown Regional Airport than by other surrounding airports. Access,
area travel habits, population distribution, proximity of other airports, extent
of available air -oriented services and facilities and reliability (e.g., whether
or not the airport is an all weather facility), are the major factors analyzed in
determining this service area. It is possible that the actual service area would
encompass a greater area to the northwest, as air service is still very limited in
this region. However, in order to provide a realistic, conservative, long-term
justification for improvements to this airport, this area has not been included in
the detailed analysis.
Service Area Population
In order to determine the size and character of the theoretical service
area outlined on the accompanying map, each county has been listed along with the
169
HUNTINGDON
Huntingdon
4 39,106
BEDFORD '}
Bedford 42,353 FULTON FRANKLIN
10,776 V 100,833
C UM B F_ R L AN D
Carlisle 158,177
1f,4
ORK
Hanover
272,063
:ADAMS
ysbur
A L L E GA NY WASHINGTON
Cumberland
CARROLL
�+ Hagerstown•
103,829
84,044Q{G��
Westminster
W%v4s
• fir%eg,!01 8ERKELEY FREDRICK
69,006
Martinsburg 11>
Q Fredrick 84,927
♦Lip, 36,359uJ
HAMPSHIRE
Romney �+ry ,,
Q.
HOWARD
♦♦ Rockville
11,710 �A
Ellicott City
_ 0 522,809
61,911
1 N
MONTGOMERY
SCJ1L! W MILE!
ie 12 e 4 O is
POTENTIAL SERVICE AREA
HAGERSTOWN REGIONAL AIRPORT
170
approximate percentage of the popu-
lation served by the airport. These
percentages have been determined by
analyzing the amount of land within
the service area as compared to the
total amount of land in the County
and also by studying the land use
patterns in the respective counties,
such as major population centers or
strip development along major high-
ways. These populations are estimates
to be used for planning purposes only
and should not be misconstrued as
exact figures for the areas studied.
These figures are as follows on the
succeeding page.
Counties % of Population 1960 1970 % Change
Maryland
Washington
80%
72,970
83,060
14
Frederick
5%
3,600
4,270
19
Pennsylvania
Franklin
20%
17,630
20,170
14
West Virginia
Berkeley
Negligible
TOTAL
94,200
107,500
14
Although the airport does serve portions of two West Virginia counties,
Berkeley and Jefferson, the amount of land served in these counties is negligible
and therefore it is not included in the study. Furthermore, for the analysis of
background data we have used only Washington County, Maryland, in this study.
Washington County is believed to be representative of the service area and since
the majority of the people in the County are also in the service area this is the
most feasible way to obtain the background data necesary to complete this report.
However, in order to better forecast activity at the Hagerstown Regional Airport
171
it is necessary for us to determine the future population of the overall service
area.
Wind Analysis
Allowable Crosswind
In determining runway utilization, allowable crosswind is of prime
importance. There is a requirement, for the certification of aircraft that there
is no uncontrollable ground looping tendency in a 90 degree crosswind up to a
velocity of 2.0 Vso (stall speed in landing configuration) at any speed at which
the airplane may be expected to operate on the ground. Recognizing this and also
the fact that less runway is required when landing or taking off into the wind,
runways are oriented to minimize crosswind effects and a limiting value of cross-
wind velocity is established for design purposes. This value is approximately
12 miles per hour for single engine aircraft and light twins, 15 miles per hour
for turbopropos, 20 miles per hour for executive jets and up to 30 miles per hour
for large aircraft over 12,500 pounds. The crosswind value or velocity for any
runway orientation is the component of the surface wind which acts at 90 degrees
to the runway centerline.
172
Where prevailing winds are consistently from one direction, runways
would best be oriented in that direction. In many cases, however, a high degree
of consistency of wind direction is not found. This situation may then require
more than one runway orientation to obtain an acceptable wind coverage.
At a single runway airport, the runway should be oriented with respect
to prevailing winds so that 95 percent of the time the crosswind component
affecting the runway does not exceed the limiting value of crosswind velocity
(12 mph for small aircraft).
Where a single runway does not provide a usability factor of at least
95 percent, the combined system of runways at the airport should provide at least
95 percent usability with crosswind components that do not exceed the limiting
values.
T.T 4 - A T1-, J- -
The most accurate and long-term wind data available should be acquired
for making an analysis to determine runway utilization. The more reliable the
data is in picturing prevailing wind conditions, the greater will be the usability
173
WIND ROSE
^-4
0 5 10 15
111111 I -Lill III II-LI111 liff III III
PERCENTAGE OF TIME
174
5-8 9-12 1 > 13 I
MILES PER HOUR
DATA:
HAGOLSTOWN ,
MARYLAND
JAN. - DEC. 1965
of the runway oriented with relation to the data. It is desirable to have wind
data covering a period of at least five years. Such data is not available for
Hagerstown but the available wind data for the Martinsburg, West Virginia Airport
covers a period from January 1954 to December 1958 cr a total of five years with IwEnLy-four
observations per day. Ceiling and visibility information is also available for
this same period permitting the analysis of wind conditions under instrument as
well as all-weather conditions. Therefore, Martinsburg wind data has been used
because this airport is less than 30 miles from Hagerstown and is situated on
similar terrain. Limited wind data is available for a two year period at Hagers-
town but is not sufficient for a complete analysis. However, it does compare
favorably with the Martinsburg wind data. (See accompanying wind rose data.)
The principal method of analyzing wind conditions at an airport as it
relates to runway orientation is by using a wind rose as shown in the accompanying
sketches. This is a convenient manner of plotting wind data for a particular
location and provides ready visualization of logical runway orientation. Wind
roses can be used to analyze individual runway orientation as well as the com-
bined wind coverage of a system of runways. Wind data are represented on the
175
z 16 % CALMS 0.1 M -PH.
WIND ROSE DATA FROM
HAGERSTOWN REGIONAL AIMORT
MASTER PLAN
DRAWING NO. 60-002-02
COMBINED E -W B N -S
RUNWAY COVERAGE 96.8%
WIND ROSE BASED ON LIMITED
HOURLY OBSERVATIONS FOR THE
YEARS 1953 AND 1954.
176
wind rose in terms of percentage of time
winds of different velocities blow from
various compass directions. The concen-
tric circles on the wind rose indicate
wind velocity in miles per hour. The
radial lines on the wind rose define the
various compass directions from which
the winds originate. The numbers within
the segments are the percentages of time
the wind blows from that direction within
the indicated velocity ranges. All of
these numbers, including calms, should
total 1000.
In addition to the all-weather
wind rose a separate IFR wind rose has
also been included in this report. Wind
coverages have been calculated for both
of these wind roses using allowable crosswinds of 12, 15, 20, and 39 miles per
hour. Reference to the wind rose diagram will reveal the coverage for various
combinations of runways. As previously stated these wind roses have been
derived from data collected at the Martinsburg, West Virginia, weather station.
In addition, for purposes of comparison, wind coverage with an allowable cross-
wind of 15 mph has also been shown using the limited Hagerstown wind data.
You will note that the wind coverage with allowable crosswinds of 12
mph and 15 mph for the primary runways (9-27) is below the 95% criteria estab-
lished by the FAA, indicating a need for a crosswind runway for light and
turboprop aircraft. When the existing crosswind runway (2-20) is combined with
runway 9-27 the total wind coverage is improved to 96.58% or slightly better than
the FAA minimums for all weather conditions. For allowable crosswinds of 20 mph
or over the wind coverage for runway 9-27 is adequate and a crosswind runway is
not needed. Therefore, the crosswind runway need only be a general utility run-
way of sufficient length to accommodate general utility aircraft under crosswind
conditions.
177
Under IFR conditions wind coverage on runway 9-27 is adequate for
allowable crosswinds of 15 pmh or over. However, light aircraft do not have
adequate wind coverage on this runway. Under low visibility crosswind condi-
tions light aircrafts could use a non -precision approach on the crosswind
runway to permit landings. After installation of an ILS approach on the pri-
mary runway consideration may be given to a non -precision approach for runway
2-20 if it is felt that it is necessary.
Obstruction Analysis
Existing, as well as possible future obstructions at the Hagerstown
Regional Airport, where located within an approach, primary or transitional
surface. All terrain, trees and structures falling within these surfaces are
obstructions and are set forth below. They have also been identified on the
accompanying map, Existing Obstructions.
Runway 9-27
This runway has been designated as the precision instrument runway
for the airport and as such, must meet instrument clearance criteria. Therefore,
178
a 50 to 1 approach to both ends of the runway and a 1,000 foot wide primary sur-
face have been evaluated with obstructions determined as follows:
Approach
Primary
Transitional
R/W Surface
Surface
Surface
9 None
3 large and several small
Several groups
groups of trees (both sides)
of trees
Ground (both
sides)
Fence (both sides)
Edge of building
(Fairchild)
Ground (both sides)
Control Tower
27 Small ground area
Fence (south side)
3 groups of
trees (south side)
Ground (south side)
1 ground area
(south side)
Several small
Fire and Crash Building
1 building
groups of trees
(south side)
(Fairchild)
Fuel farm (south side)
Airport Beacon
As can be seen, a 50:1 approach can be cleared on either runway with
only minor difficulty. However, it has been decided that a 50:1 approach to
179
runway 9 is not necessary. Therefore a 34:1 approach has been designated on this
end. With these approaches, the primary surface contains quite a few more obstruc-
tions and must be clear for its entire length for approaches in either direction.
This involves extensive clearing and grading and the relocation of Fairchild's
fire and crash building and fuel farm.
The structures associated with the fuel farm could be lowered rather
than requiring the relocation of this facility. Much of the clearing and grading
in the transitional areas is not on airport property and will require purchase or
easement. The beacon will be lighted until such time as its planned relocation.
The Fairchild buildings and the control tower will remain in place and should be
properly marked and lighted.
Runway 2-20
The analysis of runway 2-20 considered both a 20:1 and a 34:1 approach
study. The primary surface to runway 2-20 was analyzed with a 500' width in
accordance with non -precision general utility criteria.
RM
R/W
Approach
Primary
Surface
Transitional
Surface
2 20:1 - Tree tops, 15' road i Several trees (Schindel
clearance i property)
34:1 - Additional trees
3 buildings (Showalter
Farm)
20 20:1 - Road and nearby ground
2 utility poles, most
trees for a distance
of 1,400' from the
runway end
34:1 - 13 buildings, many
additional trees
Buildings (Fairchild)
Scattered trees around
houses
Utility poles
2 buildings, considerable
additional clearing,
utility lines
Note: All obstructions within a 20:1 approach
are also obstructions iri a 34:1 approach.
From an analysis of runway 2-20, it can be seen that major obstructions
exist within a 34:1 approach to either end that would be difficult to remove. A
20:1 approach would be much easier to establish and maintain. There are roads at
both ends of the runway which are obstructions. This is the major obstruction to
181
a 20:1 approach. A 34:1 approach to runway 2 affects the Showalter and Schindel
farms. A 34:1 approach to runway 20 has 15 buildings within the approach which
are obstructions, and would require the relocation of approximately ten families
and one industry.
There are a series of Fairchild buildings within the transitional sur-
face of runway 2-20 which would be difficult and costly to remove. A waiver
should be obtained to permit these buildings to stand if they are lighted.
Noise Rating Contours
The overall noise effect of the airport is minimal and not considered
to be too disagreeable or incompatible with the anticipated land use and
development of the surrounding area. The zoning ordinances in the area sur-
rounding the airport are reasonably compatible with the development planned for
the airport. Much of the land immediately surrounding the airport is zoned
industrial and for highway interchange usage. There are several residential
areas in the vicinity that include Cearfoss, Maugansville, and Orchard Hills.
182
LEGEND
i Eialnp B Proposed Public
4^"r Esiatma B Proposed Commercial �'-
`�, Ex sing a Proposed Industrial
®
Esst ig SProposM Residenliol
( Recorded Subdivisions) Esialmq Arport Properly
O Untler 10 Lols Proposed A,,p,rt Properly
'}�10 to 50 Lots Co poo,, Name Ro, Sc Lonlours
`--! " O ever 50 Lots c0 L«Hasptl I Church ,School,
NOTES
G I.f Base Mop US.G,.P, Topo9raphtc Maps 5m ill—a , Md -Pa Hagerstown, -53 Mason D don 68-71,
f fl WOYnesboro ,Pa Greencpslle Po. and Wdltamson, Po. Quadrangle 1944-53 phalorev sed 1968 -TI.
Lono Use shown was delerm ned from Plan for the County"preparetl for the Washington county
x a f Planning Cort�m n , W,,h not C Y Maryland- --
71
tir a
.� II
f00-pNi(y
I _�.. CMR �fw 7 � °;." ��"�` � l � •''�; `� � ( ` }
r i ,
W.t pA; a
VV 4
y B
`�.k- iii 'r J ^ s ,:� .�'`• � �. ) Y I = ' .� ( _ .�` //� 4,
i +. i p:4 y i. I'r., _ - I" �l ,�."r�..- [A .1♦i'' n
-y HAGERSTOWN REGIONAL AIRPORT
HAGERSTOWN, MARYLAND
GENERALIZED LAND USE AND COMPOSITE NOISE .r.
RATING CONTOURS r
The generalized Land Use and Composite Noise Rating Contours Map
graphically represents the critical CNR zones for the Hagerstown Regional
Airport. These zones are based on the most critical CNR sets tabulated and
represent the worst noise conditions anticipated for the airport in the
year 2000. This map is intended to be used only as a guide and not as a
means of determining the absolute noise levels at any particular location.
It represents activity levels from the present to 25 years in the future
and does not take into account the many extenuating factors that might exist.
The CNR zones shown on the generalized Lane Use and Composite
Noise Rating Contours Map represent the following Perceived Noise Decibel
(PNdB) levels:
Zone 1 - less than 100 PNdB
Zone 2 - 100 to 115 PNdB
Zone 3 - over 115 PNdB
Most of Zone 3 is located within airport property. That portion not
within airport property contains four residences. These residences are located
on the outer extremities of this zone at a much lower altitude than the air-
port. These factors combine to minimize the harmful effects of the noise on
the people living there.
184
Zone 2 encompasses approximately 325 residences. The majority of
these homes are scattered throughout the zone and do not lie directly on the
extended runway centerline and therefore the full effect of the noise is not
felt.
Zone 1 is less than 100 PNdB and is not considered to present any
environmental problems.
It should be noted that the noise from these operations will last
from 15 to 20 seconds per operation or a total of 13 to 18 minutes per day or
1.5 to 2 hours per week.
185
Definitions
Aerial Easement - The acquisition of aerial rights over a property to insure that
no building, tree or other structure extends into the approach, transitional,
horizontal or conical surface as set forth in FAR, Fart 77, and as defined herein.
Air Carrier Runway - A runway that is constructed for and intended to be used by
air craft carrier aircraft including those operated by the major airlines.
Air Traffic - Aircraft operating in the air or on an airport surface, exclusive
of loading ramps and parking areas.
Approach Surface - A surface longitudinglly centered on the extended runway cen-
terline and extending outward and upward from each end of the primary surface.
An approach surface is applied to each end of each runway based upon the type of
approach available or planned for that runway end.
Apron - A defined area on an airport prepared for the parking, loading, unloading,
fueling or servicing of aircraft.
Building Restriction Line - An imaginary line parallel with the runway center-
line beyond which buildings are not permitted. It helps to assure that
structures will not project above the imaginary transitional surface along the
primary surface as required by FAR (Federal Aviation Regulations) Part 77, and
it provides wingtip clearance for airplanes on operational areas of the airport.
Clear Zone - That area of the approach surface which is less than 50 feet above
the end of the runway or is less than 50 feet above the ground, whichever is
smaller.
Conical Surface - A surface extending outward and upward from the periphery of
the horizontal surface at a slope of 20 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 4,000
feet and extending to a height of 350 feet above the airport elevation.
Horizontal Surface - A horizontal plane 150 feet above the established airport
elevation, the perimeter of which is constructed by swinging arcs of specified
radii from the center of each end of the primary surface of each runway of
each airport and connecting the adjacent arcs by lines tangent to these arcs.
187
Non -precision Instrument Runway - A runway having an existing instrument approach
procedure utilizing air navigation facilities with only horizontal guidance, or
area type navigation equipment, for which a straight -in non -precision instrument
approach procedure has been approved or planned, and for which no precision
approach facilities are planned or indicated on an FAA planning document or
military service's military airport planning document.
Operation - Either a takeoff or a landing at an airport.
Precision Instrument Runway - A runway having an existing instrument approach
procedure utilizing an Instrument Landing System (ILS) or a Precision Approach
Radar (PAR). It also means a runway for which a precision approach system is
planned and is so indicated on an FAA approved airport layout plan; a military
service's approved military airport layout plan; any other FAA planning docu-
ment, or military service's military airport planning document.
Primary Surface - A surface longitudinally centered on a runway. When the run-
way has a specially prepared hard surface, the primary surface extends 200 feet
beyond each end of that runway; but when the runway has no specially prepared
hard surface, or planned hard surface, the primary surface ends at each end of
that runway. The width of the primary surface of a runway will be that width
prescribed in Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) for the most
precise approach existing or planned for either end of that runway. The ele-
vation of any point on the primary surface is the same as the elevation of the
nearest point on the runway centerline.
Runway - A defined area on an airport prepared for landing and takeoff or air-
craft along its length.
Runway Safety Area - The runway safety area is a cleared, drained, graded, and
preferably turfed area symetrically located about the runway. The width is
established by FAA for each class of runway, and the length is always 400 feet
longer than the runway length (200 feet on each end). The runway safety area
performs the same function as a landing strip. The runway safety area provides
an area suitable for an airplane to overrun, should it accidently veer off the
pavement. An analysis of statistics of aircraft running off the side of runways
reveals that an acceptable level of safety will be provided by the dimensions
established by FAA.
Taxiway - A defined area on an airport prepared for the surface movement of air-
craft to and from the runway. From a use standpoint, taxiways can be classified
as exit, parallel or hangar and apron access.
"We
Threshold - Area of a runway where an aircraft can begin its touchdown upon
landing.
Touch and go - Any landing immediately followed by a takeoff where an aircraft
does not leave the runway area or stop its motion during the operation. A touch
and go counts as two operations.
Transitional Surface - Slopes upward and outward seven (7) feet horizontally for
each foot vertically beginning at the sides of and at the same elevation as the
primary surfaced and the approach zones, and extending to a height of 150 feet
above the airport elevation. In addition to the foregoing, there are established
height limits sloping upward and outward seven (7) feet horizontally for each
foot vertically beginning at the sides of and at the same elevation as the
approach zones, and extending to where they intersect the conical surface.
Where the precision instrument runway approach zone projects beyond the conical
zone, height limits sloping upward and outward seven (7) feet horizontally for
each foot vertically shall be maintained beginning at the slides of and at the
same elevation as precision instrument runway approach surface, and extending
to a horizontal distance of 5,000 feet measured at 90 degree angles to the
extended runway centerline.
190
Transport Runway_ - A runway that is constructed for and intended to be used by
transport type aircraft which are larger than utility aircraft and include
business jets.
Utility Runway - A runway that is constructed for and intended to be used by
propeller driven aircraft of 12,500 pounds maximum gross weight and less.
Visual Runway - A runway intended solely for the operation of aircraft using
visual approach procedures with no straight -in instrument approach procedure and
no instrument designation indicated on the FAA approved airport layout plan,
military service's approved military airport layout plan, or by an planning docu-
ment submitted to the FAA by competent authority.
191
Abbreviations
ADAP
Airport Development Aid Program
ADF
Automatic Direction Finder
ALS
Approach Lighting System
ARC
Appalachia Regional Commission
ASR
Airport Surveilance Radar
CNR
Composite Noise Rating
DME
Distance Measuring Equipment
FAA
Federal Aviation Administration
FAR
Federal Aviation Regulations
FBO
Fixed Base Operator
FSS
Flight Service Station
HIRL
High Intensity Runway Lighting
IFR
Instrument Flight Rules
ILS
Instrument Landing System
MALSR
Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System with
Runway Alignment Indicator Lights
MIRL
Medium Intensity Runway Lighting
MITL
Medium Intensity Taxiway Lighting
NDB
Non -Directional Beacon
PANCAP
Practical Annual Capacity
PENNDOT
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
PGP
Planning Grant Program of the Federal Aviation
Administration
PNdB
Perceived Noise Decibel
REIL
Runway End Identifier Lights
R/W
Runway
TACAN
Tactical Air Navigational System
T/W
Taxiway
UNICOM
Radio Facilities for Communication with Aircraft
VAST
Visual Approach Slope Indicator
VFR
Visual Flights Rules
VOR
Very High Frequency Omni Range
VORTAC
Combination VOR and TACAN
192
I�AfL TQANSAemTAT'eN
Railway Transportation
All of the 118.5 miles of railroad network located in Washington County
is privately owned. Freight rail service in Washington County is provided by
these railway systems: Conrail, the Chessie System (the B & O and the Western
Maryland), and the Norfolk and Western. The following map titled Major Rail
Corridors and Regional Generators identifies Washington County and its proximity
within the Eastern rail network.
Since the early 1800's, when the General Assembly of Maryland chartered
the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, rail has had a vital influence on Mary-
land's and Washington County's economy. Today the lines of the Chessie System,
Conrail, and Norfolk and Western transverse Washington County. These routes tie
Washington County to regional markets including Pittsburg, Harrisburg, Philadel-
phia, Baltimore, Washington D.C., Richmond and Charleston, West Virginia. As
previously discussed, rail was first completed in Washington County in the 1830's
and with expansion and extensions later being completed in the latter half of the
nineteenth century.
195
� J
Q
P E NNSYLVANIA o
U
0 H 1 0
I PITTSBUFi
fWHEELINGO
CUMBW 4TER
HARRISBURG
SHIPPENSBURG
CHOR
HOVER,..
HAGERST
- a-mow.4s
PRRKERS9UR V, WINCHESTER
WEST
VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON
/ STAUNTON
/ C,85,0
VIRGINIA
.� LYNCHBURGH
NSW •�
do e ROANOKE
J
U
co
6 G
J
I
ALLENTOWN
READING �•
TRENTON
PHILADELPHIA
NEW
_ WILMINGTON
JERSEY
3EDERIC
BALTIMORE I
DOVER
�% I
WASHINGTON
� I
`MARYLAND ----
1
RICHMOND 2
C�
O
PETERSBURG REGIONAL GENERATORS
N$tp AND
NORFOLK CORRIDORS
Source : Md. Dept. of Transportation
—I�I—
Conrail
Conrail in Washington County, originally the Cumberland Valley Branch,
extends from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania to Winchester, Virginia, where the system
connects to a branch of the Southern Railroad. The length of the single track
system in Washington County is 14.1 miles. Maryland industries served by this
line are located in Hagerstown and Williamsport, including the Washington County
Industrial Park. The Conrail line, formerly the Penn Central, has considerable
traffic traveling from industries in Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia,
and in addition, unit coal trains, loaded at West Virginia points and moving to
central and eastern Pennsylvania use the lines through Hagerstown. Some of these
coal trains are also operated by the Reading Railroad.
Chessie System (Baltimore & Ohio - Western Maryland)
The B & O has a single track branch line, formerly called the Washing-
ton County Railroad, that connects with the main line at Weverton near Brunswick,
Maryland. The total length of track of the B & O in Washington County is 30.1
miles, with the length of the Weverton-Hagerstown Branch being 27.3 miles.
197
Nearly all industrial development on this line is located on the 6.09 mile sec-
tion north of Interstate Route 70. There are two industries located to the south
of I-70 on the B & O line. The B & O line which transverses the southern part of
the County at Weverton, runs from Washington, D.C. to Cumberland, Maryland and
points west.
The Western Maryland Railroad was completed from Baltimore to Hagers-
town in 1872. Presently, the Western Maryland Rail network in Washington County
consists of 60.5 miles of dual track, running from Highfield to Hagerstown via
Smithsburg, termed the East Subdivision. From Hagerstown, the system called the
West Subdivision, extends 29 miles to Hancock and eventually terminating at Cum-
berland, Maryland. In addition, the Western Maryland System has a dual line, the
Lurgan Subdivision, running from Hagerstown to Shippensburg, Pennsylvania, where
it intersects with the Reading Railroad. The Western Maryland Railway operates
and maintains a switching yard located in the western section of Hagerstown.
Most industrial development contiguous to the Western Maryland is located in the
proximity of the Hagerstown area, and in addition, there are numerous industrial
parks located adjacent to these lines.
198
PENNSYLVANIA
TO ENOLA, PA.
TO WAYNESSORO PA. TO YORK, PA.
"L, HANCOCK
a
t a
ALLEGANY
COUNTY
CLEAR SPRING
Western
SMITHSBURG
_
µasyla d
3 FUNKSTOWN
�µJ
C
WILLIAMSPORT
WEST
VIRGINIA
a
CJ
BOONSBORO
WASHINGTON COUNTY.
z
r... -�>
-i(EEDYSVILLE
RAILWAY SYSTEMS
SHARPSBURG c:
Railroadsf
1.
Abandoned ` ' ., s I ° 11
Proposed:.......:..::.......}:......N .
:'{:
Abandonment "'+
•F
0 1 2 3 4
ro
��`' FR��ks
Source: Mary/and
Department of
Transportation
SCALE
The Chessie System has the most intensive rail system in Washington
County consisting of 90.6 miles of track and connecting Hagerstown regionally
to Harrisburg, Pittsburg, Cincinnati, and including port cities such as Balti-
more, Washington and Philadelphia.
Norfolk and Western Railway
The Norfolk and Western Railway operates 13.8 miles of single track
in Washington County, including a switching yard located just south of Hagers-
town. This yard is operated jointly with Conrail. This section of track
termed the Shenandoah Division runs from Hagerstown to Sharpsburg and eventually
terminates in Roanoke, Virginia. Most industry contiguous to the N & W line
located south of Hagerstown, which includes several industrial parks. In addi-
tion, there are numerous industries sporadically located throughout the County.
Rail Abandonments
The map titled Washington County Railway Systems delineates those
portions of rail that are anticipated to be abandoned. Both segments are lines
of the Chessie System: one of the Western Maryland and the other of the B & O.
200
Western Maryland
That portion of the Western Maryland that is abandoned runs parallel
to the B & O tracks in West Virginia from Hancock to Cumberland, Maryland. The
abandonment within Washington County consists of 10.5 miles.
Baltimore and Ohio
Originally, the requested abandonment was to terminate all operations
on this line, although after reconcillation and new industry development, it is
now proposed that the segment of the B & O to be abandoned is the segment running
from Hagerstown to Security, a length of 3.9 miles, and the segment running from
Roxbury to Weverton, a length of 20.9 miles.
Passenger Service
Passenger service to Washington County is very limited. Amtrack Ser-
vice on "The Blue Ridge" runs daily from Washington, D.C. to Cumberland, Maryland.
Stops accessible to Amtrack Service by Washington County residents include Han-
cock, Maryland, and Martinsburg and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia.
201
The B & O commuter service has two trains each weekday, with one run
east and west, stopping at Harpers Ferry, West Virginia. The following schedules
give the Potomac Valley Service by both Amtrack and the B & O Railroad.
202
1
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Amtrak Service
WASHINGTON, HARPERS FERRY, CUMBERLAND
(Read Down) (Local Time) (Read Up)
705
701
703
Train Number
702
704
The
The
The
The
The
Blue
Blue
Blue
Train Name
Blue
Blue
Ridge
Ridge
Ridge
Ridge
Ridge
Sunday
Mon. thru
Sat., Sun.
Monday
Sat., Sun.
and
Fri.
and
thru
and
Holidays
(Ex. Hol.)
Holidays
Miles
Frequency of Operation
Saturday
Holidays
9:00 PM
4:50 PM
11:00 AM
0
Dp Washington,DC Ar
8:30 AM
7:05 PM
9:12 PM
5:02 PM
11:12 AM
7
Silver Spring, MD
8:15 AM
6:50 PM
16
Rockville, MD
8:02 AM
21
Gaithersburg, MD
7:55 AM
9:55 PM
5:45 PM
11:55 AM
49
Brunswick, MD
7:25 AM
6:07 PM
10:05 PM
5:55 PM
12:05 PM
55
Harpers Ferry, WV
7:15 AM
5:57 PM
10:29 PM
6:19 PM
12:29 PM
73
Martinsburg, WV
6:50 AM
5:31 PM
f6:47 PM
12:57 PM
96
Hancock, MD
f6:19 AM
5:00 PM
12:05 AM
7:55 PM
2:05 PM
146
Ar Cumberland, MD Dp
5:14 AM
3:55 PM
f- Stops on signal to receive or discharge passengers.
Holidays - New Year's Day, Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor
Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day.
203
The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company
POTOMAC VALLEY SERVICE
Martinsburg, Harpers Ferry, Brunswick, Washington, Baltimore
P
EASTBOUND (Read Down) WESTBOUND (Read Up)
38
52
60
40
39
61
37
53
Mon.
Mon.
Mon.
Mon.
Mon.
Mon.
Mon.
Mon.
thru
thru
thru
thru
thru
thru
thru
thru
Fri.
Fri.
Fri.
Fri.
Fri.
Fri.
Fri.
Fri.
Ex.
Ex.
Ex.
Ex.
Ex.
Ex.
Ex.
Ex.
Hol.
Hol.
Hol.
Hol.
Mi.
Local Time
Hol.
Hol.
Hol.
Hol.
AM
AM
AM
AM
PM
PM
PM
PM
....
5:45
....
....
0
Lv Martinsburg, W.VA. .. Ar
,...
....
....
8:03
....
f5:58
....
..
12
Duffields ...........
....
....
....
f7.44
....
6:13
....
...
18
Harpers Ferry,W.Va.
.,..
..
7.36
5:25
6:30
6:38
6:50
24
Brunswick, Md. ......
6:26
6:45
7:18
7:24
5:34
....
6:47
7:00
31
Point of Rocks ......
6:16
....
7:08
....
5:41
....
....
7:09
38
Dickerson ...........
6:07
....
6:59
....
5:45
6:48
....
7:13
40
Barnesville .........
6:03
....
6:55
....
f5:49
..,.
....
f7:17
4-3
Buck Lodge ..........
f5:59
....
f6:51
....
5:52
....
....
7:20
44
Boyd ................
5:56
..
6:48
....
5:56
7:03
7:24
47
Germantown ..........
5:52
6:20
6:44
..
6:03
7:00
7:11
7:31
52
Gaithersburg ........
5:46
6:12
6:38
6:52
6:06
....
....
7:34
53
Washington Grove ....
5:42
....
6:34
....
6:14
7:08
7:20
7:42
57
Rockville ...........
5:36
6:03
6:29
6:43
6:21
....
7:28
7:49
61
Garrett Park ........
5:28
5:55
6:22
....
6:25
....
7:34
7:54
63
Kensington ..........
5:25
5:49
6:19
....
6:28
7:20
....
7:57
64
Forest Glen .........
5:20
...
-6:15
....
6:33
7:25
7:43
8:02
66
Silver Spring, Md. ..
5:16
5:40
6:11
6:30
6:50
7:38
7:58
8:18
73
Ar Washington, D..C. .... Lv
5:00
5:25
5:55
6:15
f -Stops on signal to receive or discharge passengers.
Holidays - New Years Day, Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanks-
giving Day,,and Christmas.
2n4
MASS TF4 MIT
Mass Transit
History of Mass Transit
Historically, mass transit in Washington County existed in the form of
passenger trains as far back as the late 1870's. The Western Maryland Railway
built Pen Mar Park to spur excursion trade and consequently opened up the north-
eastern part of the County to development. First "ordinary" people flocked to
the "Coney Island of the Blue Ridge" to see 2,000 square miles of scenery visible
from High Rock and to enjoy the amusements. Then the "upper crust" turned the
whole surrounding area into a fasionable vacation area. From Blue Ridge Summit
and Monterey on the east to Blue Mountain on the west, seven hotels and 100
boarding houses and vacation cottages were in simultaneous operation within a
decade or two. The mountain air lured vacationers from points as far away as
Norfolk. The railroad was carrying more than a half -million people to the area
annually at the turn of the century.
Meanwhile,
the
railroad running
down the
Valley from
Pennsylvania into
the Hagerstown area
had
the hardest birth
pangs.
On February
3, 1841, the first
207
Franklin Railroad train arrived in Hagerstown, cutting travel time from Chambers-
burg to a mere two hours. This line, encountering financial difficulties,
eventually became part of the Cumberland Valley Railroad and later was absorbed
into the Pennylsvania Railroad System.
Hagerstown's central position in the railroad network became firmer in
1873 when the Martinsburg and Potomac Railroad opened, forming a natural extension
of the Cumberland Valley line into West Virginia.
In 1900, the Shenandoah Valley Railroad ran its first passenger train
from the Valley of Virginia into Hagerstown. Offices were maintained here for
several years before the line expanded southward. The last major passenger ser-
vice improvement came in 1906 when the Western Maryland Railway tracks were
constructed to Cumberland.
By then the mini -railroads had suddenly begun to operate in Washington
County, electrified and serving towns never visited by steam locomotives. The
trolley cars had arrived.
1
71
l
208
Trolley Cars
The first trolley ran between Hagerstown and Williamsport, starting
August 7, 1896. Before Christmas of that year, new lines were functioning in
Hagerstown, on the South Potomac Street, West Washington Street, and Loop
routes. Within eight years, trolley tracks had penetrated the wilderness to
Funkstown, Frederick, and Shady Grove. Patrons could connect at Frederick to
reach a number of other towns in Frederick County, or they could visit Pen Mar,
Waynesboro or Greencastle via Shady Grove, Pennsylvania. There was talk of
early creation of through trolley service to the Baltimore or Washington areas.
Unlike full size railroads, trolley cars did most of their business
with passengers, rather than freight. Even after the auto was rolling in this
County, the Hagerstown and Frederick Railway was carrying nearly four million
passengers annually during the decade between 1910 and 1920.
Trolley tracks also helped to decide how Hagerstown would grow. They
encouraged developers to create wide streets in new residential sections like
Summit Avenue and Wilson Boulevard. A whole town, Halfway, sprang up between
209
Trolley Car No. 62 at the Corner of North Potomac and North Avenue in Hagerstown - 1926
210
Hagerstown and Williamsport, as far out as passengers could go from Hagerstown
without paying an extra trolley fare. Consuming lots of electricity, trolley
cars had a major effect on the creation of the Hagerstown Municipal Light Plant
and the trolley company evolved into the Potomac Edison Company.
But in the 19201s, the auto bus was winning popularity, autos were
finding it hard to survive on the same streets with trolley cars, and PE began
to convert trolley lines to bus routes. It started in 1927 when the Washington
Street route was changed. Symbolically, PE closed in that year an enterprise
that was the trolley rider's version of Pen Mar, Electric Park near Funkstown.
The Williamsport trolley survived longest in this county, making its
final run on August 4, 1947. Technically, the local company remained in the
trolley business until 1954, when it closed down its Frederick-Thurmont run. For
a decade or longer, the company had become nationally known for operating the
last interurban trolleys in the East.
By the 1940's the great age of the big railroads as a major economic
factor was declining in the County. The dozens of passenger train arrivals and
211
departures in Hagerstown daily in the early years of the 20th century dwindled to
two or three round trips on each railroad. Pen Mar Park was losing money by 1929
and was dismantled with World War II and gas rationing.
The War gave a temporary boost to railroad patronage but passenger
trains continued to grow fewer and fewer after VJ-Day. Some passenger stations
had been razed in Hagerstown by the time the last passenger train stopping in
Hagerstown ended regular service on February 25, 1962. Ironically, it was the
Hagerstown -Harrisburg train, on the route that had the worst troubles getting
started, which provided the last chance for passengers to arrive and leave a
station in Washington County, and the very first route through Washington County
still carries the only passenger cars in this county on the B & O main line.
Buses
The Potomac Edison Company continued to convert and replace trolley
lines to bus routes and eventually in 1947, the system became totally bus operated.
Potomac Edison continued to operate the bus system until 1957 when it sold its
operations to the Antietam Transit Company. From 1957 to mid 1970 local bus
212
7
7
7
11,
7
The Original Fleet of Blue Ridge Transportation Buses Obtained with the Purchase of the
E. V. Bus Line - 1923
213
service in the County was provided by the Antietam Transit Company, Inc., a pri-
vate operator whose garage and offices were located on East Baltimore Street in
Hagerstown.
A total of seven buses were required to operate the service. The
average speed of the system was approximately 11 m.p.h. Generally, service was
provided between the hours of 6:30 A.M. to 6:30 P.M. although several routes
operated until 10:00 P.M. on Fridays.
The latest detailed figure in the fleet of Antietam Transit were in
1966, and are shown in the following table. In that year, Antietam had 53 coaches,
most of which use gasoline. In 1968, Antietam reported owning 54 coaches, 40
with a seating capacity of 36-41 and 14 with a seating capacity of 42 or more.
While exact figures were not available on the average of the fleet, most of the
coaches were old. At least 20 buses were 1950 or older models. The majority of
the fleet was used for charter work instead of regular line service.
l
1
214
Transit Fleet
Antietam Transit Company
1966
Bus Type
Year
Number of
Unite
Use
Local or
Inter -City
Gasoline
or Diesel
ACF
1946
5
Local
Gasoline
GMC
1949
8
Local
Gasoline
ACF
1949
3
Local
Gasoline
ACF
1946
1
Local
Gasoline
ACF
1947
2
Local
Gasoline
GMC
1950
1
Local
Gasoline
ACF
N/A
1
Local
Gasoline
ACF
N/A
4
Local
Gasoline
GMC
N/A
2
Inter -City
Diesel
GMC
N/A
6
Local
Gasoline
ACF
N/A
6
Local
Gasoline
ACF
N/A
1
Local
Gasoline
Buses Purchased in 1966
GMC
N/A
2
Inter -City
Diesel
GMC
1966
3
Local
Gasoline
GMC
N/A
3
Local
Gasoline
ACF
N/A
4
Local
Gasoline
TOTAL
53
N/A - Not Available
Source: Public Service Commission
Baltimore, Maryland
In March, 1970, Washington County lost its bus system when the private
operator, Antietam Transit Company, abruptly ceased operations. Because of this
cessation of service, the residents of the County who were using the system were
forced either to find other modes of transportation or to make certain trips pre-
viously made on the bus system.
215
In March, 1971, the County Commissioners of Washington County created a
Transportation Feasibility Committee (TFC) for the expressed purpose of investi-
gating the feasibility of restoring public bus transportation to the areas. The
committee membership consisted of a group of citizens representing a balanced
cross-section of the community. The TFC unanimously recommended that the restora-
tion of bus service was feasible and that the County should seek professional
guidance. Through the cooperative financial efforts of the local businesses, the
Mayor and Council of the City of Hagerstown and the County Commissioners of
Washington County, a private transit management firm was engaged to perform a com-
prehensive mass transit study and submit its recommendations to the TFC and to
the County Commissioners.
In November, 1971, the consultant submitted its report entitled "An
Action Plan for Transit in Washington County," which outlined the steps and finances
necessary to implement and maintain a publicly owned bus system.
Pursuant to the report and to the authority in Chapter 618 of the Laws
of Maryland, 1971, the County Commissioners created the Washington County Transpor-
tation Commission (WCTC) on April 4, 1972, and engaged ATE Management and Service
216
Company, Inc., to implement and manage the bus system. Through the efforts of
the WCTC, the Management Company, and the Public Service Commission of Maryland,
a building and buses were leased, fareboxes and garage equipment were purchased,
schedules and a system map were published, and service was inaugurated on May 17,
1972.
The report recommended that the WCTC seek federal assistance for capi-
tal expenditures through the Urban Mass Transportation Administration of the U.S.
Department of Transportation. As an interim measure, the WCTC leased fourteen
(14) 45 passenger buses from the Mass Transit Administration of the Maryland State
Department of Transportation, leased garage and office space and purchased the
minimal equipment required to operate the bus system.
On November 27, 1973, the Washington County Transportation Commission
(WCTC) submitted to the Maryland State Department of Transportation (Md. DOT) and
the Urban Mass Transportation (UMTA) a final application to assist in financing
a capital improvement project, including the purchase of fourteen (14) new 19-23
passenger transit vehicles. The total cost of the project was $501,380 and WCTC
requested a grant from Md. DOT of $75,206 or 75% of the remainder of the net pro-
ject cost after UMTA participation.
217
M
218
The New "County
Commuter," is one
of fourteen tran-
sit buses, is
smaller, air con-
ditioned and car-
ries twenty-three
passengers.
L
L
LOn May 8, 1974, it was announced that the WCTC has been given a grant
Lof $396,698 to improve the operation of the "County Commuter." The grant paid
80% of the cost of fourteen (14) new transit vehicles, a new garage and office
C
r
complex and some additional equipment for the system. Later in 1974, the Washing-
ton County Transportation Commission purchased its present facility at 1000 West
Washington Street and received shipment of fourteen 23 passenger, air conditioned
Flexible transit buses.
Other Bus Lines
1. Greyhound - Service is provided by the Greyhound Bus Lines to not
only the City of Hagerstown but to other County municipalities. They are Hancock,
Clear Spring, Funkstown and Boonsboro, located on U.S. Route 40 and alternate
Route 40. In Hagerstown the Greyhound Bus Lines Terminal is located at 31 East
Antietam Street.
2. L & L - A bus line known as Litton and Litton Motor Lines provides
service from Brunswick to Hagerstown. The route is Maryland Route 67 and alter-
native U.S. Route 40 with no passenger service between Funkstown and Hagerstown.
Charter service is also available by the L & L Motor Lines.
219
3. Valley - Mr. Charles Eberly operates the Valley Bus Line from
Hagerstown to Waynesboro, Pennsylvania, as a Saturday service only. The route is
Maryland Route 60 and includes Leitersburg.
4. Everly Charter Service - This service leaves Hagerstown every
afternoon and travels Maryland Route 65 through Sharpsburg to West Virginia and
the Veterans' Hospital. Service is also extended to Keedysville on Saturdays.
Existing Mass Transit Systems
The operations of the Washington County Transportation Commission are
reviewed in this section. The discussion considers current route and schedule
operations, ridership history, ridership survey and profile, capital improvements
and financial history.
1. Routes and Schedules
The Washington County Transportation Commission through its operating
agency, the County Commuter, currently operates six regularly scheduled services:
220
C
C
C
C
C
L
L
L
L
L
Route 1 - Long Meadow Shopping Center -Public Square -Valley Mall
This route services the two largest shopping complexes in the Hagers-
town area. The route operates from Long Meadow Shopping Center in the
northeast corner of Hagerstown through the downtown area to the Valley
Mall on the southwest. The route carries approximately 40% of the
system's daily ridership.
Route 2 - West End -Public Square -Jefferson Heights-Stnithsburg
This route provides service to the West End of Hagerstown and operates
through the Public Square, east along Jefferson Boulevard to Jefferson
Boulevard and Smithsburg. This route carries about 14.5% of the daily
system ridership.
Route 3 - West End -Public Square-Funkstown
This route also services the West End of Hagerstown and operates through
the Public Square, and southeasterly along Frederick Street to Funkstown.
Ridership on this route constitutes approximately 9% of the daily system
patronage.
221
EXISTING "COUNTY COMMUTER" �.
BUS ROUTES 8► SERVICE AREAS
WASHINGTON COUNTY
LEGEND
EXISTING ROUTES
EXISTING SERVICE AREAS
Source : Washington County P/onning Commission
z
f
`;
0 t 2 3 4
SCALE
1
Route 4 - Williamsport -Public Square-Maugansville-Airport
The route originites in Williamsport southwest of Hagerstown, then
operates along the Williamsport Pike to the Public Square. The north-
ern portion of the route operates along Pennsylvania Avenue with
alternate trips serving Maugansville and the Hagerstown Municipal Air-
port. The route carries about 330 of the daily system riders.
Route 5 - Public Sauare-Hagerstown-Community College
This route provides direct service between the Public Square and the
Hagerstown Community College located southeast along Robinwood Drive.
Only 3.5% of the system riders use this service.
Route 34 - Hagerstown-Boonsboro-Keedysville-Sharpsbur
Each Saturday a "Shoppers Special" service is operated to these rural
communities in Washington County. The routing is south of Funkstown
along Frederick Road to Boonsboro then along the Boonsboro -Shepherds-
town Pike (Maryland 34) to Sharpsburg then north along the Sharpsburg
224
Pike to downtown Hagerstown. This service carries about ten (10) pas-
sengers per week.
2. Ridership History
Operation of a public transit system began in Hagerstown in May, 1972,
after the cessation of services by the private operator, Antietam Transit Cpmpany,
at the end of 1970. This seventeen (17) month gap in transit service caused sub-
stantial difficulties in attracting patrons to transit. However, over the past
four and one-half years ridership has risen steadily. The table titled Ridership
by Month (1972-1975) shows the actual ridership by months and the accompanying
chart summarizes these figures graphically.
The latest annual figures reveal that there were 422,397 passengers in
1975 as opposed to only 381,122 in 1974. This is a relative increase of 10.8%.
These ridership figures indicate an increasingly positive response to public tran-
sit in Hagerstown. With service improvements, increasing gasoline costs and -
decreasing supplies it is evident that increasing utilization of the County Com-
muter will continue.
225
WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
RIDERSHIP BY MONTH
1972-1975 (Calendar Year)
May, 1972
7,425
June, 1972
19,032
July, 1972
18,796
August, 1972
22,112
September, 1972
20,-136
October, 1972
21,920
November, 1972
23,208
December, 1972
24,212
Total 1972 156,841
January, 1973
22,167
February, 1973
21,153
March, 1973
25,896
April, 1973
24,904
May, -1973
28,425
June, 1973
28,109
July, 1973
27,227
August, 1973
27,818
September, 1973
25,101
October, 1973
29,747
November, 1973
31,538
December, 1973
34,330
Total 1973 326,415
226
Ridership by Month (Continued)
January, 1974
32,598
February, 1974
29,846
March, 1974
31,636
April, 1974
32,351
May, 1974
32,548
June, 1974
25,058
July, 1974
30,-201
August, 1974
32,156
September, 1974
31,553
October, -1974
35,744
November, 1974
33,457
December, 1974
33,974
Total 1974 381,122
January, 1975
34,727
February, 1975
33,-326
March, 1975
36,.Q23
April, 1975
35,600
May, 1975
35,114
June, 1975
33,280
July, 1975
33,217
August, 1975
33,600
September, 1975
34,729
October, 1975
38,095
November, 1975
35,002
December, 1975
39,684
Total 1975 422,397
Source: W.C.T.C.
227
WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
40,000-
30,000-
20,000—
ITALskim-
12
a
s�
a
v
a
M J J A SONDI J F M A M J J A S 0 N D I J F M A M J J A S 0 N D I J F M A M J J A S 0 N D
PASSENGER TRENDS BY MONTH
MAY 1972 DECEMBER 1975
Years 1972 1973 1974 1975
SOURCE WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSPORWION COMM/SS/ON
228
low
Years 1972 1973 1974 1975
SOURCE WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSPORWION COMM/SS/ON
228
3. Financial History
The following table presents the financial history of the Washington
County Transportation Commission from 1972 to 1975.
Quite obviously the operation has generated substantial operating loses
over the past two and one-half years. In part, the responsibility for the large
deficit is the slow growth in passenger revenues. The federal and state govern-
ments have assisted the financing of these deficits through the Public Employment
Program (PEP) .
While the absolute size of the deficit is disappointing, there are
indications which reveal that the situation is improving. The following table
lists some summary statistics for 1972, 1973, and 1974. The most dramatic changes
have been the 33% decline in cost per passenger carried and the 44% decline in
subsidy required per passenger carried. Furthermore, the cost per mile figures
indicate substantial managerial integrity. For, in a period of spiraling wage
and price inflation, the Washington County Transportation Commission has held
costs virtually constant. Passengers carried per mile of service operated has
229
Statistics
WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
SUMMARY FINANCIAL INDICATORS
1972-1974
% Change
1972 1973 1974 1975 (since 1972)
1. Cost/mile operated
$.6624
$.5859
$.6727
$.6548 - 2%
2. Cost/passenger carried
$.9752
$.7733
$.7372
$.6600 -33%
3. Subsidy/passenger carried
$.7338
$.5037
$.4582
$.4173 -44%
4. Passenger/mile operated
.6792
.7576
.9125
.9921 +46%
230
WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
ACTUAL FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA
Operating Revenue
Passenger
Special
Advertising
Other
TOTAL
Oneratina Expenses
Equipment
Transportation
Station
Traffic & Adv.
Insurance & Safety
Administrative & General
Operating Rents
Taxes
TOTAL
Total Deficit
Subsidies
Federal
S tate
TOTAL
Other Income
Net Deficit
Passengers
Miles (Schedule)
FY 1973
FY 1974
FY 1975
FY 1976
69,828
94,531
99,738
104,751
914
1,064
2,357
2,561
52
3,135
741
1,759
70,794
98,730
103,692
109,070
33,210
53,542
70,664
76,505
120,184
129,888
138,475
152,437
1,349
3,591
914
4,083
18,502
16,080
18,791
9,058
40,095
42,377
44,768
44,315
20,332
17,941
5,400
58
10,226
950
720
873
243,898
264,369
279,732
287,329
(243,898)
(165,639)
(176,040)
(178,259)
112,193
65,670
53,561
13,643
--------
------
37,530
100,000
112,193
65,670
91,091
113,643
735
1,151
803
1,241
(60,176)
(98,818)
(84,146)
(63,375)
279,390
359,798
411,295
439,248
399,189
424,755
416,384
441,613
231
risen some 46%. All of these indicators suggest a very efficient management of
a difficult transit environment.
The decision to conduct public transit operations suggests the need for
financial assistance. Progress has been made through effective operations manage -
dent to assure that the funds invested in public transit in Washington County
receive their maximum productivity.
Taxi Service
In Washington County taxi cab service is limited to two cab companies
and several independent operators. Existing cab service is provided by Local
Cab, located at 200 West Franklin Street, and Turner's Taxi, located at 655 West
Washington Street. Both offer twenty-four hour service and are radio dispatched
There are a .total of fifty-six (56) taxicabs serving the Hagerstown vicinity.
Rail Passenger Service
Rail passenger service to Washington County is offered by both Amtrack
and the B & o Commuter. Amtrack Service on "The Blue Ridge" runs daily from
Washington, D.C. to Cumberland, Maryland. Scheduled stops that are easily acces-
232
sible to Washington County residents include Hancock, Maryland, and Martinsburg
and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia.
The B & O Commuter offers Potomac Valley Service twice each weekday,
with one run east and west, stopping at Harpers Ferry, West Virginia. Further
scheduling information for both Amtrack and the B & O Commuter service is located
in the rail transportation section of this document.
Air Service
The Allegheny Commuter was originated in November, 1967, through an
agreement with Allegheny Airlines, who was providing existing passenger service,
and Henson Aviation, Inc. Presently the Allegheny Commuter service is offered
from the Hagerstown Regional Airport to Baltimore, Maryland; Washington, D.C.;
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Salisbury, Maryland. Additional scheduling
information may be obtained in the Air Transportation section of this document.
Transportation for the Aging and Handicapped
The Community Action Council of Washington County (C.A.C.) has pre-
sently three vehicles in operation providing service for the elderly and
233
non-ambulatory. Clients of this service are predominantly low-income or fixed-
income families and individuals, including the elderly, and/or handicapped adults
and children, who have little or no resources to provide themselves with trans-
portation to necessary health, medical, educational, recreational and general
care services. Present facilities consist of two Maxi Vans, one having a seating
capacity of fifteen (15) passengers. The other is equipped with a raised roof
modification and hydrolic lift for transporting wheelchair passengers (has four[4]
wheelchair positions). The other vehicle consists of a nine (9) passenger sta-
tion wagon for smaller capacity trips. Total miles traveled by both vehicles in
1976 was 4,477, that included the following organizations requesting service:
Chewsville Retarded Center
Mt. Lena Activity Center
Coffman Home for Aging
Garlock Nursing Home
Reeder Nursing Home
Washington County Blind Association
Walnut Towers Kitchen Bank
Potomac Towers Tenant Association Activities
Walnut Towers Tenant Association Activities
Golden Years Club Activities
Smithsburg Nutrition Program
Walnut Towers expanded Nutritional Program
Child Development Center Handicapped
Western Maryland expanded Nutritional Program
Office of Aging Transportation
Senior Citizens Organization
234
M,
ff- 06 MW
Epilogue
Transportation facilities in Washington County serves a wide and
diverse range of services for County residents. In general, they serve to make
commutation in Washington County a safer and more satisfying experience.
The ability of the various types of transportation facilities to
fulfill their functions is measured by the condition, availability, and adequacy
in terms to provide intended services to the community. This inventory will be
further examined and evaluated in the Transportation element of the Comprehen-
sive Plan. At that time, State and national standards will be used as compara-
tive indicators of the adequacy of transportation facilities as they exist in
the County today.
It is intended that this study will provide a base of knowledge and
understanding of the evolution of transportation facilities in Washington County.
It has been based upon the most comprehensive and detailed current information
available.
237
Transportation Reference Index
ATa+innal
American Road Builder's Association
ARBA Building
525 School Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20024
Bureau of Highway Traffic
Pennsylvania State University
State College, Pennsylvania 16801
Highway Research Board
National Research Council
National Academy of Sciences
2101 Constitution Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20418
United States Department of Transportation
800 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, D.C. 20590
Traffic Institute
Northwestern University
405 Church Street
Evanston, Illinois 60204
American Society of Traffic and Transportation
547 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Transportation Association of America
1101 17th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
238
Transportation Institute (shipping)
923 15th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20005
Transportation Association of America
1101 17th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Institute of Traffic Engineers
1815 North Fort Myer Drive
P.O. Box 9234
Arlington, Virginia 22209
International North American Highway Association
Box 688
Ely, Nevada 89301
International Road Federation
1023 Washington Building
Washington, D.C. 20005
International Taxicab Association
222 Wisconsin Avenue
Kake Forest, Illinois 60045
National Bus Traffic Association
506 South Wabash Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60605
National Tank Truck Carriers
1616 P Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Traffic Safety Institute
Eastern Kentucky University
Richmond, Kentucky 40475
239
American Association of State Highway and Transpor-
tation Officials
341 National Press Building
Washington, D.C. 20004
American Public Transit Association
1100 17th Street, NW, Ste. 1200
Washington, D.C. 20036
Northwestern University Transportation Center
1818 Hinman
Evanston, Illinois 60200
Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control
Box 55
Saugatuck Station
Westport, Connecticut 06880
National Parking Association
Suite 906
1101 17th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20015
Institute of Traffic Engineers
2029 K Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20006
Federal Highway Administration of America
1101 17th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Highway Users Federation for Safety and Mobility
1776 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
240
Urban Mass Transportation Administration
400 Seventh Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20590
Transportation Research Board
National Research Council
2101 Constitution Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20418
Transportation Systems Center
Kendall Square
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142
Highway Users Federation
1776 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Office of Transportation and Land Use Policy
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
Transportation Studies Program
Urban Institute
2100 M Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20037
American Institute of Planners
1776 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Federal Aviation Administration
800 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
Federal Railroad Administration
400 Seventh Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20590
241
State
Transportation Safety Division
Office of the Secretary
Maryland Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 8755
Baltimore -Washington Airport, Maryland 21240
Department of State Planning
State Office Building
301 West Preston Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21201
Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 8755
Baltimore -Washington Airport, Maryland 21240
State Aviation Administration
P.O. Box 8755
Baltimore -Washington Airport, Maryland 21240
Motor Vehicle Administration
6601 Ritchie Highway, NE
Glen Burnie, Maryland 21061
Maryland Port Administration
19 South Charles Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
Mass Transit Administration
1515 Washington Boulevard
Baltimore, Maryland 21230
State Highway Administration
P.O. Box 717
300 West Preston Street
Batlimore, Maryland 21203
242
District Engineer (Allegany, Garrett, Washington)
Braddock Road
Cumberland, Maryland 21502
Western Regional Laboratory
P.O. Box 27
Hancock, Maryland 21750
Federal Highway Administration
206 Federal Building
31 Hopkins Plaza
Baltimore, Maryland 21201
Local
Washington County Planning Commission
County Office Building
33 West Washington Street
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Washington County Engineering
County Office Building
33 West Washington Street
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Washington County Roads Department
601 Northern Avenue
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Washington County Economic Development Commission
Court House Annex
24 Summit Avenue
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
243
Washington County Division of Tourism
Court House Annex
24 Summit Avenue
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Hagerstown -Washington County Chamber of Commerce
14 Public Square
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
City of Hagerstown Planning Commission
City Hall
North Potomac and Franklin Streets
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
City of Hagerstown Engineering
City Hall
North Potomac and Franklin Streets
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
City of Hagerstown Signal Department
City Hall
North Potomac and Franklin Streets
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
The Potomac Edison Company
Community Services Department
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Motor Vehicle Administration
Hagerstown Regional Office
237 East Franklin Street
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
244
State Highway Administration
Resident Maintenance Engineer
Rowland Avenue
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Hagerstown Regional Airport
Regional Airport
Middleburg Pike
Hagerstown, Maryland 221740
245
C
c 6ml IR IHV
C
C
L
C
L
t
L
Bibliography
Highway Systems
1. Metropolitan Transportation Planning; John W. Dickey, Senior Author; Scripta
Boo- Company, D.C.
2. Site Planning, Second Edition; Kevin Lynch; M.I.T. Press, Cambridge,
r Massachusetts; 1973.
3. Transportation and Traffic Engineering, Institute of Traffic Engineers; John
E. Baerwald, Editor; Prentice -Hall, Inc., Englewood Clifts, New Jersey; 1976.
4. Traffic Engineering - Theory and Practice; Louis J. Pignataro; Prentice -Hall,
Inc., Englewood Clifts, New Jersey; 1973.
5. Maryland Transportation Plan; Maryland Department of Transportation, Baltimore -
Washington International Airport; 1976.
6. Urban Planning and Design Criteria, Second Edition; Joseph DeChiara and Lee
Koppelman; Van Nostrand-Reinhold Company, New York; 1975.
7. The New Look in Traffic Signs and Markings; U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.; 1972.
8. A Policy on Geometric Design of Rural Highways; American Association of State
Highway officials, Washington, D.C.; 1966.
Alternate Non -vehicular Transportation Systems
9. Bikeways - State of the Art; U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, Washington, D.C.; 1974.
248
Air Transportation
10. Master Plan Report - Hagerstown Regional Airport; City of Hagerstown;
L. Robert Kimball, Consulting Engineers, Ebensburg, Pennsylvania; 1975.
11. Ha erstown Air ort - Outline for Action; Appalachian Regional Commission,
The Research Croup, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia; 1971.
12. Maryland Aviation System Plan; Maryland Department of Transportation,
Baltimore -Washington International Airport; 1975.
Rail Transportation
13. State Rail Plan; Maryland Department of Transportation, Baltimore -Washing-
ton International Airport; 1975.
14. State Rail Plan - Amendement I; Maryland Department of Transportation,
Baltimore -Washington International Airport; 1976.
Mass Transit
15. Mass Transit - A Five Year Plan; Washington County Planning Commission;
Fox and Associates, Consultants, Hagerstown, Maryland; 1975.
249
ABSTRACT
Title:
TRANSPORTATION - AN INVENTORY
Author:
Washington County Planning Commission
Subject:
Review, analysis, and inventory of transportation systems for the revision of the
Comnrehensive Plan
Name of Planning
Agency:
Maryland Department of State Planning
Name of Local
Agency:
Washington County Planning Commission
Sources of Copies:
Maryland Department Washington County Planning Commission
of State Planning County Office Building
State Office Building 33 West Washington Street
Baltimore, Maryland Hagerstown, Maryland
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Regional Office
Baltimore, Maryland
HUD Project No.:
MD. P-1013
Series Number:
Pages:
249
Abstract:
This report inventories and evaluates the transportation systems within T-Tashington
County, Maryland, in terms of historical trends and comparative analysis. This
report is intended to be a guide for transportation development, and to provide
local decision makers the transportation information so as to ascertain existing
and future programs and policies for community transportation development.
An attempt is made in this report to avoid technical discourse, and instead use
"everyda'7" language. The priirnary concern here is that the information contained
in the report may be understood by as many average citizens as possible; although
in the analysis of these sacLto:=s, it is intended to show the interrelationships
that exist within comprehensive planning, thereby increasing opportunities for
citizen understanding and, hopefully, participation.