ARMS FOREST Trails Scoping Study
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Prepared for the City of Burlington Department of Parks, Recreation & Waterfront by SE Group in collaboration with Timber and Stone, LLC
Table of Contents 1. Introduction & Overview
4
2. Existing Conditions & Analysis
7
3. Community Engagement
14
4. Trail Recommendations
16
5. Trail Maintenance Guidelines
26
6. Trail Signage
30
3
1 Introduction & Overview
4
Introduction Arms Forest is a very special place in the City of Burlington. It provides extremely important recreational opportunities and is home to very unique ecosystems and socio-historical resources-- all of which require careful planning and management. Its current recreational opportunities include hiking, dog walking, mountain biking, cross country running, and Nordic skiing,--among others. The forest also provides immense educational values, with the Burlington High School, the Rock Point School, the Crows Path program, and a myriad of other educational programs all utilizing the space. In addition, Arms Forest is home to rare natural communities, important geological features, and provides excellent habitat for a wide range of wildlife including large mammals, cavity-nesting birds, and forest amphibians like the spotted salamander. Amazingly, this is not all the small forest is home to—it also contains a wealth of historical and cultural resources from farming, to quarrying, and beyond. With all these diverse values at play, a clear and comprehensive roadmap for the redevelopment of the trail system in the forest was needed as the City and its partners work to enhance this important community asset. Creating this roadmap through a robust, community-driven trail design process is the overall intent of this plan and project.
Background The land known and managed as Arms Forest is collectively owned by the City of Burlington, the Burlington School District (Burlington High School), the North Avenue Alliance Church, and the Episcopal Church in Vermont (Rock Point). Since 2012, The City of Burlington, through the work of the Conservation division within the Burlington Parks and Recreation Department, has been working with the landowners and neighbors of Arms Forest to develop consensus on a shared management philosophy. The Lake Champlain Land Trust also holds legal interest in the lands owned by the Episcopal Church in Vermont (20 acre portion) through a conservation easement put in place to help protect the site’s natural and cultural resources into the future. The Elks Club of Burlington also owns lands the public has used as part of “Arms Forest” but they have not been part of the management agreement with the other landowning partners and their lands are not included as part of this plan. People have been walking, recreating, and spending time in the forest “behind the high school” for decades. The property has traditionally not been signed, and public access has been provided through trails leading Point/Episcopal Church lands. Management of the forest lands has not always been consistent across landowners and a number of trails have been built traversing the property over the years. Some of these have been “social” or user-created trails and others that have been built and/or improved upon by the City or its landowning partners. Some management information is found both on the site and online, but the level of information has not been commensurate with the forest’s unique history and ecological value. In 2018, the Rock Point and Arms Forest Coalition – which includes the Parks Foundation of Burlington, the Lake Champlain Land Trust, the Episcopal Church in Vermont, and the City of Burlington – recognized the need for collaborative management of the site to protect the its important natural resources and keep it open to the public. The coalition announced a goal of permanently protecting the critical shoreline forest and improving public access to the 163-acre forest block in the heart of Burlington. In addition, funds were contributed through the City’s Conservation Legacy Fund, supporters of the Coalition groups, the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board, the State of Vermont Recreational Trails Program, and private donors. An Arms Forest Ecological Mapping Report was generated by the Burlington Wildways Arms Forest Working Group in 2018, which inventoried the landscape features and priority habitats and natural communities in the forest. Following that report, an RFP was issued in early 2019 for an “Arms Forest Multi-Use Trail Scoping Study and Design,” of which this document is the result. from the City and its landowning partners, the overarching goal of creating an ecological improvement to the site was established for all future trail concepts. It was also recognized early on that a robust public engagement process was needed to gauge community preferences, share information, and vet ideas for the site.
5
Public Process and Development of Alternatives Two public meetings were held in May of 2019. One of the public meetings was primarily organized for residents of the Killarney neighborhood while the second was open to the general public. Over 120 residents attended the meetings. An online survey asking many of the same questions as the public meeting was also distributed and received 232 responses. There was overwhelming agreement throughout both public meetings and the online survey that the naturalness and forest-based character of the site should be maintained. Trail improvements should tend towards lower key, low intensity trail development to maintain a natural, wild feeling. Walking, snowshoeing and cross-country skiing were supported nearly unanimously, while support for mountain biking and dog walking—both historical uses of the site—was much more split. Members of the community unanimously valued through connectivity on the site, continued use by the high school teams and programs, and increased protection and awareness of natural resources. Feedback from the public was then shared in stakeholder meetings with each of the landowning partners and decisions about what to explore in the trail concept alternatives were made by staff from the City and its landowning partners. Members of the City and project team also met with the Elks Club of Burlington prior to concept development to discuss potential partnership opportunities and/or coordinated management, but the Elks Club representatives declined to participate in the planning process, including coordinating public access through their lands. Exploring the scale of trail redevelopment (how much trail should be reclaimed vs re-routed/improved) was an overarching goal in developing trail concept alternatives. Various schemes were discussed and agreed upon to explore, focusing on access points and trail location and character (materials, width, etc.). This allowed the consultants, the City, and the landowning partners to focus on the needs and function of the forest and the trail system first, before turning to the allowed uses. Throughout the project, support for bicycle use was split. In terms of mountain biking it was decided that at least one trail concept alternative would exclude bicycle use from the concepts to be shared with the community at the next public meeting. This held true on the part of the public and of the staff of the City and its landowning partners, so exploring this through the trail concept alternatives was critical. In October 2019, three trail concept alternatives were shared with the community at a final public meeting and an online survey. Approximately 20-25 residents came to this second meeting and 65 survey responses were received. The concept that retained the most miles of trails and mountain biking use was indicated as preferred by the most people. However, the combined tally for the two other concepts, both of which showed a pared down and minimal trail network, was slightly larger. As a result, the consultant team and City staff chose to pursue a final concept that strikes a balance between the three concepts.
Preferred Trail Concept The preferred trail concept creates an ecological improvement to the site, ensures sustainable public access, maintains connectivity to the Greenway and North Avenue, and serves the needs of the high school cross-country team, educational programming, and other community users of the forest. Trails that are not well-designed, constructed or located are rerouted and trails that unduly impact natural resources are closed and slated for reclamation. Low impact, low key signage is recommended to provide management information and interpretation, so rules and protections are adequately understood and followed. The design of the trails, signage and other improvements are intended to direct use in appropriate areas of the forest and prevent users from going off trail and creating new unsanctioned trails and pathways. Given the feedback heard throughout the project, the scale of bicycle use is limited to the main pathways through the forest (Universal Access and Natural Surface Interpretive Trails) at this time. The biking experience provided on these trails will be very different than what has been provided in the forest historically. For this reason, it was acknowledged that education on why the policy decision was made will be important for compliance, as will working with the affected groups to determine other locations within the City to provide a much-sought bicyclng experience within Burlington. It was also acknowledged that there may be the potential to open up some of the proposed hiking-only trails to be multi-use trails in the future if initial trail reroutes, closures, and efforts to ensure compliance with policies are successful.
6
2 Existing Conditions & Analysis
7
Natural Resources of Arms Forest • Arms Forest combined with Rock Point creates the largest contiguous forest in the City of Burlington at over 200 acres. • Arms Forest is an ecologically functional landscape that includes several state and locally significant natural features. • This keystone landscape creates a bridge between the lakeshore communities and the extensive riparian habitats along the Winooski River • Ledges and outcrops are made of a nutrient-rich limestone called dolostone. This unusual geology supports the growth of uncommon plants that require abundant calcium.
Yellow Ladyslipper
Cypripedium parviflorum
• The stream on the southwest edge of the property exists where surface water has eroded through thick delta sand and silt layers to the underlying impervious clay layer. • Arms Forest provides wildlife habitat and a wildlife travel corridor for many of the large mammals that live in Burlington. • Two state significant natural communities, Mesic Maple - Ash - Oak Hickory Forest and Transition Hardwood Limestone Forest comprise the forest canopy.
Wood Frog
• The ledgy, thin-soiled nature of the property prevented its cultivation, allowing the forests to escape some of the agricultural clearing pressure experienced later in the area during the 20th century. Older pines and oaks on the property have been aged at 100-120 years old. • Arms Forest includes a vernal pool and other scattered small wetlands. Vernal pools are small ephemeral pools within upland forests that provide breeding habitat for Spotted Salamanders, Wood Frogs and other species. wildlife travel corridor for many of the large mammals that live in Burlington.
Arms Forest is Designated as an Urban Wild Urban Wilds are defined as lands that provide habitat for rare and endangered plant and animal communities, wetlands and other riparian systems, flood plain, unique geological and hydrological features, important wildlife habitat and travel corridors, areas important for scientific research and education, scenic vistas, trails, passive recreation, sustainable forest communities, and cultural features. 8
Red Fox
History of Arms Forest Generations of Dairy Farming • This forest was part of a large, 400-acre 19th century farm. The Manwell Farm stretched from the Episcopal Diocese property on the west, across North Avenue, and down to the Winooski River on the east. • The Manwells cultivated a successful dairy farm for forty years. The fertile Intervale lowlands provided exceptional soil for growing silage corn and hay for cows, while the forested uplands on the western side of the property provided excellent pasture and fuel wood. The farm’s location along North Avenue provided convenient access for buying, selling, and transporting goods.
The Fletcher/Manwell/Arms farmstead formerly at the corner of North Avenue and Institute Rd. Courtesy of the Arms family.
• The property transferred in 1921 to Burlington resident and UVM alum Willard Arms. • In addition to producing raw milk and cream, the farm housed a processing and bottling plant. On College Street, in the storefront west of today’s Leunig’s Bistro, locals enjoyed fresh ice cream at the Arms Dairy Bar long before Ben and Jerry would arrive downtown. • Willard and Florence were both graduates of the University of Vermont, and major supporters of environmental conservation. Willard served as the chairman of the Champlain Valley Soil and Water Conservation Service, and Florence was known for supporting local movements for the protection of urban open lands.
Jersey cattle and Intervale Jersey Farm billboard depicting hillside behind Burlington High School. Courtesy of the Arms family.
Burlington’s First and Last Marble Quarry • At the southwestern corner of the Manwell Farm in 1887, a portion of outcrop was quarried to build Bishop Hopkins Hall at the nearby Rock Point School. This excavation revealed a dolostone formation beautiful enough to be considered marble by industry standards. • The Burlington Marble Company’s 20-year lease ended in 1925, and due to the high cost of processing combined with the departure of Burlington’s marble manufacturers, the quarry was permanently closed.
Excavated blocks left in abandoned dolostone “marble” quarry. Photo: Sean Beckett
9
City Acquisition of the Land • In 1962, the expanding population of Burlington necessitated a new high school, and the Arms property was chosen as the prime location. Willard and Florence Arms agreed to sell their farm for the construction of the high school with the stipulation that the land behind the school remain undeveloped for recreation and education. • Since acquiring the land in 1962, the City and its managing partners have learned more about the ecological importance of Arms Forest. Recreation demand surrounding Arms Forest has also grown in recent years and this growth is expected to continue into the future, commensurate with population and recreation trends in the city and nationwide. • Recognizing a need for improved management and to ensure the long-term conservation of the site the Arms Forest Coalition formed in 2018, which includes the City, the Burlington School District, the Parks Foundation of Burlington, the Lake Champlain Land Trust, the Fellowship of the Wheel, and the Episcopal Church in Vermont. The coalition signed a formal joint use agreement and fundraised with many generous donors to support the current planning process to develop a thoughtful and comprehensive plan for managing trails and public access on the site.
Site Analysis Designated as an Urban Wild, Arms Forest represents a unique block of open space in Burlington, and the current network of trails and unmanaged use represents an unsustainable condition that undermines sensitive ecological areas of the site. In many cases, the trails do not conform to current best practices for trail design. A full assessment report found in Appendix 5 includes notes and recommendations (keyed to the Trail Assessment Map) that address the current uses, which include hiking/walking/running and mountain biking. Winter activities include cross-country skiing and snowshoeing. Some typical trail issues identified in Appendix 5 include: • Trails passing through sensitive ecological areas • Unsustainable trail alignments (erosion issues, wet/muddy areas, trail widening, steep grades) • Multiple social/unsanctioned trails leading to private property • Numerous entry points but no official trailheads • Current “accessible” trail sections do not meet ADA accessibility standards and connectivity of the sections that have been improved for accessibility is lacking and does not provide a usable facility for persons with mobility challenges.
10
LE
EW
EAC
HD
E
AG
ILL
V
E
O
R
N
GR
A AR
D
O
O
D
PK W
Y
LN
DR CR EST OA K
DR
Y
NE
R LA
May 15, 2019
Legend
North Avenue Alliance Church
TR
ENT EX
DR
"
L KI
""
WY
WN H AMP TO
Arms Forest Boundary
Parcel Boundary
Existing Trail
Existing Social Trail
Existing Signage
Vernal Pool
Prepared by:
E
ST
E
AV
RE
E
TL
LIT
Y
BA
H
HC
AV
Elks Lodge
RT O
LA KE W
E
L AG
S
RD
N
AC
Existing Conditions Overview
TO
O
BE
GA
Arms Forest Trails Master Plan AD TE ES
TB
W LL TA
EN
DR
Ethan Allen Park
M HO
ESC
O
LE
LE
ST
CR
D
RK
PA
ST
EN
SH
F RD
O
Y DD
Leddy Park
R NA
L AL
O
D
RD
N HA ET
SUR
W
ILD
INE DYW BRAN
E OR
DR
W
DG
RD
OO
LEN PKWY
RI
D
RD
ETHAN AL
DA
"
Arms Forest
BI
KE
PA
TH
Burlington High School
RO
CK
Episcopal Diocese of Vermont
PO
INT
RD
E
UT
IT
T NS
Donahue Sea Caves
RD
I
Rock Point School VT UT
RO 27
Rock Point
E1
North Beach Campground
North Beach Park
Lakeview Cemetery
311 North Ave New City Park Contour Interval = 10’ SCALE (ft)
N 0
150
300
450
600
11
BE
RR
T YS
LZ
VO
ST
EY
N
AR
LL
Legend
14 0
KI
Arms Forest Trails Master Plan Existing Trails & Natural Resources
DR
13 0
North Avenue Alliance Church
180
TH
19 0
E
GL
EA
RD
P
P
Existing Parking Wetland
T
Trail Connection
TH
Existing Trailhead/ Access Point Vernal Pool
Riparian Wildlife Connectivity
Uncommon Species
19 0
200
LI
Off Property Trail
Parcel Boundary
190
E TL
190
Elks Club Property NO PUBLIC ACCESS
Existing Trail
Stream
190
15 0
16 0
Y BA
Arms Forest Boundary
0 19
180
Mesic Maple Ash-Oak-Hickory Forest
200
190
Transition Hardwood Limestone Forest
Vascular Plant
0 20
Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species
Arms Forest
Vascular Plant
N
October, 2019
H
RT
O
Prepared by:
E
AV
0 15 0 15
190
18 0
TH
150 15 0
17 0
TH
0 19
130
160
230
240
0 24
250
260
270
14 0
150
190
0 27
15 0
170
TH Former Quarry Site
O GT
TH
N
RO
250
IN
PO
TH
RL
CK
170
BU
IN
T
0 18
0 15
RD
TH
160
EE GR W
N
17 0
0 17
Data Sources:
TH
ck Point To Ro
• Base data provied by the City of Burlington and VCGI (Vermont Open Geodata Portal - http:// geodata.vermont.gov/)
AY Episcopal 170 Diocese of Vermont
230
190
Burlington High School
170
14 0
I
E
UT
IT
T NS
Rock Point
220
RD
• VTANR Open Data ( https://anr.vermont.gov/ maps/gis-data) • Significant Natural Communities • Uncommon Species and Other Features • Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species
Contour Interval = 10’ SCALE (ft)
N 0
50
100
150
200
12
Principals of Sustainable Trails Key Factors for Developing Sustainable Trails Three key factors common to all sustainable trails are Physical Sustainability, Ecological Sustainability, and Engendering Stewardship. For a trail to be sustainable, each of the following factors must be considered in its planning, design, and development. The factors are also complementary, whereby trails that are the most physically sustainable also tend to be the most ecologically sustainable and appealing to use. This, in turn, encourages appropriate trail use and trail users taking personal responsibility for stewardship to ensure continued access. This basic concept is fundamental to all trail development projects. Physical Sustainability Designing trails to retain their physical form over years of use and natural forces acting on them is important.
Ecological Sustainability
Ecological Sustainability Minimizing the ecological impacts of trails, especially in sensitive areas. Engendering Stewardship A sense of individual responsibility for stewardship is fostered when trail users:
Physical Sustainability
• Use trails in an appropriate manner • Avoid impacts to surrounding ecological systems • Educate others about sustainable ethics and practices • People protect what they value and trails should be designed considering users’ interests.
13
Engendering Stewardship
3 Community Engagement
14
Public Workshops & Stakeholder Meetings Visioning Over the course of two months, SE Group conducted two public meetings and received feedback from five stakeholder groups. One of the public meetings was primarily for residents of the Killarney neighborhood while the second was open to the general public. In addition to the public workshop, the City of Burlington conducted a survey that asked many of the same workshop questions. The survey received 232 responses. Stakeholder meetings were held with each of the landowning partners and the Elks Club of Burlington, who has not agreed to cooperative management system and whose lands have not been included in this plan. The stakeholders reviewed community input to date and discussed concerns about the current uses and existing conditions, future management of the site, restricted uses, site access, parking, management balance, and stewardship. For detailed feedback results see Appendix 6 -May 15 Community Engagement Summary
Concept Refinement On October 17, 2019, Burlington Parks, Recreation and Waterfront (BPRW) and SE Group hosted a second public engagement session at the Miller Community Center. The session allowed for community members to drop-by, learn about proposed trail concepts, and provide their feedback on three conceptual design alternatives. Approximately 20-25 community members attended. After the meeting, the same information was made available online and an online survey was open through 11/22/19 which also asked community member to provide feedback on the conceptual design alternatives. 65 responses were received on the online survey. The three conceptual design alternatives are available in Appendix 8. For detailed feedback results see Appendix 7 -October 17 Community Engagement Summary.
15
4 Trail Recommendations
16
EY
N
AR
LL
Legend
14 0
KI
Arms Forest Trails Master Plan Final Concept
DR
15 0
0 19
180
16 0
13 0
North Avenue Alliance Church
180
Upgrade existing trail to universal access trail, stonedust surface
EA
2
3
0 20
Trails in this area are recommended for decommissioning due to steep slopes, sensitive ecology and connection to Elks Property
Short section realignments to meet universal access grade requirements
190 0 19
160
4
7
Study for possible bike access
7 9 190
150
13
1
1
12
170
250
Trail realigned to minimize steep grades and avoid parking lot, natural surface
Former Quarry Site
N O
GT
RO
IN
PO
13 270
RL
CK
10
BU
IN
T
RD
New hiking trail connection creating internal loop avoiding Diocese field
1
EE GR
220
P ck Point To Ro
TH
AY
W
N
17 0
0 17
250
260
0 27
170
6
0 18
New trailhead access from bike path, natural surface and sections of elevated boardwalk, new bridge 15 0 160 over stream. Long range project. 0 15
Episcopal 170 Diocese of Vermont
230
190
Burlington High School
170
14 0
N
Contour Interval = 1’ SCALE (ft) 0
75
150
225
300
17
TE
U IT
ST
IN
Rock Point
Poposed Natural Surface Trail (Hike Only)
December, 2019
240
0 24
14 0
TH
Prepared by:
Study for possible bike access 230
7
6
Proposed Natural Surface Interpretive Trail (Multi-Use)
E
3
17 0
Proposed Trail Universal Access Trail Standards (Stonedust Surface)
Existing Trail to be Closed
AV
5
Trailhead Kiosk
Trailhead/ Access Point
Existing Natural Surface Trail (Hike Only)
H
15 0
4
130
Parking
Existing Natural Surface Interpretive Trail (Multi-Use)
RT
1
Parcel Boundary
Existing Trail Upgraded to Universal Access Trail Standards (Stonedust Surface)
10
8
Off Property Trail
O
4
150
1
Stream
Trails by Proposed Typology
N
0 15
New bridge 75’ - 100’ long 50
TH
10
Arms Forest 18 0
P
Close Trail to Vernal Pool
11
Arms Forest Boundary Trail Connection
Potential Universal Access Trail, re-route around sensitive area on hillside, stonedust surface
3
1
190
200
19 0
2
TH
190 19 0
B
200
LI
Elks Club Property NO PUBLIC ACCESS
RD
190
E
L TT
E GL
AY
P
190
Parking area moved closer to entry, new trailhead kiosk sign, new universal access trail through edge of woods, stonedust surface. Trailhead would require approval and a negotiated easement from N. Ave. Alliance Church
RD
Trail realigned to minimize steep grades, natural surface, new trailhead parking and kiosk
Trail Recommendations The following recommendations provide a road map for the future of Arms Forest. Based on recognition of the truly unique and sensitive natural resources on the site, the overarching goal of the master plan is to achieve an ecological improvement to the site through trail reroutes, trail enhancements, trail closures, and increased management and communication on the part of the City and its partners. While these recommendations provide guidance for future trail improvements, our staff will carefully evaluate the onsite conditions and approval will be acquired from the appropriate land or easement holder before implementation. Guidance on permitting, signage, trail design, phasing, and costs are also provided.
Guiding Principles for Trail Recommendations To respond to the social and environmental sensitivities on the site and ensure sustainable trails into the future, the following principles have been established to guide the trail system recommendations at Arms Forest:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Protects the unique ecological and cultural assets of the site Provides ongoing stewardship of the trails and adjoining natural systems Requires minimal maintenance, restoration or decommissioning of unsustainable trails Uses control points to minimize disturbance to sensitive areas Follows natural contours to minimize erosion, avoids fall lines Uses thoughtful design to keep users on the trail and out of sensitive areas Provides a variety of user experiences
Overall Recommendations include: • Corridor Trails (Universal Access and Interpretive Trails) will allow multi-use access, with all others being hike/ski/snowshoe only. • Formalize trailheads at Burlington High School, North Avenue Alliance Church, and along the Burlington Greenway. Improvements include formalized parking, trailhead kiosks, directional signage to the trail system, and creation of a new link to the Burlington Greenway that does not utilize Elks Club land. • Close and re-naturalize unsustainable trails. • Re-Route trails from the High School to reduce steep grades and avoid travel through the upper parking lots. • Install trail directional signage. • Install interpretive signage about the significant natural resources and history of Arms Forest. • Create a new trail link to the Burlington Greenway.
18
Trail Recommendation Details Trail section details and typology information can be found in Appendix 1. Phasing maps are found in Appendix 4.
Trail 1 Trail Typology: Interpretive Trail - 48” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 3,660’
Trail Length (New Construction, Re-Route of Existing): 1,550’
Trail Length (Existing to be upgraded): 393’
Notes: A new trailhead at the High School will provide an opportunity to realign sections of the existing trail to minimize steep grades with an average slope of 8% or less. A trailhead kiosk at the entrance should include information about Arms Forest and a map of the trail system. The new alignment joins with an existing section of trail that may need some tread widening, re-grading and resurfacing. A second re-route moves the trail out of the upper parking lot, providing a consistent trail experience along the upper slopes of the hillside behind the High School. This section realigns the existing trail to reduce steep grades along this rocky hillside above the former quarry site where possible. The lower portion of Trail 1 will maintain it’s current character and alignment. There are a few wet sections that may need to be addressed with stone turnpiking. There are a few sections where the trail goes over ledge that should be regraded/resurfaced along the ledge and the tread defined to encourage people to stay on the trail and reduce any trail widening. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Relevant Trail Sections/Details: 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, Appendix 1 Recommended Installer Type: Professional Build, See Appendix 2 for cost estimate
Trail 2 Trail Typology: Universal Access Trail - 60” wide, stonedust surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1
Total Trail Length: 1,637’
Trail Length (New Construction, Re-Route of Existing): 551’
Trail Length (Existing to be upgraded): 1,086’ Notes: A 60” wide stonedust surfaced trail that will provide access for all users. Trail 2 maintains the alignment of the existing trail except for a few short sections that will need realignment to conform to slope requirements. This trail can be constructed with a lolly pop turnaround at the junction with Trails 3 and 4 in phase 1 and be expanded to create a loop or through trail in future phases. There is a section of Trail 2 that has been upgraded to a stonedust surface, this section should be widened to 60” to maintain a consistent trail profile and conform to accessibility standards. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Relevant Trail Sections/Details: 3, 4, 8, Appendix 1 Recommended Installer Type: Professional Build, See Appendix 2 for cost estimate
19
Trail 3 Trail Typology: Universal Access Trail - 60” wide, stonedust surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 2,487’ Trail Length (New Construction, Re-Route of Existing): 1,297’ Trail Length (Existing to be upgraded): 1,190’ Notes: Trail 3 creates a new trailhead access point at the North Avenue Alliance Church. Public access parking is moved closer to the church entrance and a new trail segment along the wood-line provides universal access to the trail system. Trail 3 joins with Trail 2 to create a continuous universal access loop. installed and include information about Arms Forest and a map of the trail system. Recommended Phase: Phase 2, Requires ongoing negotiation with N. Ave Alliance Church Relevant Trail Sections/Details: 3, 4, 8, Appendix 1 Recommended Installer Type: Professional Build, See Appendix 2 for cost estimate
Trail 4 Trail Typology: Interpretive Trail - 48” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 1,462’ Trail Length (New Construction, Re-Route of Existing): 1,009’ Trail Length (Existing to be upgraded): 453’ Notes: Trail 4 is a long range option that connects the Arms Forest trail system to the bike path. Segments of this new access point include sidehill natural surface tread along the hillside, elevated Recommended Phase: Phase 3 or later Relevant Trail Sections/Details: 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and Boardwalk Designs, Appendix 1 Recommended Installer Type: Professional Build, See Appendix 2 for cost estimate
Trail 5 Trail Typology: Hiking Trail - 36” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 734’ Notes: Trail 5 is the current access route to the bike path and should be maintained in it’s current state. Signage is recommended to state users are leaving Arms Forest. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Recommended Installer Type:
Trail 6 Trail Typology: Hiking Trail - 18” - 36” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 1,385’ Notes: Access to Arms Forest from the Diocese property should be maintained but is not recommended as a main public trailhead. Trail users can connect to the Rock Point Trails from here. Trail 6 passes through a consistently wet area that has been upgraded with puncheon for much of the trail. Gaps exist along the trail where puncheon should be installed. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Recommended Installer Type: 20
Trail 7 Trail Typology: Hiking Trail - 18” - 36” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 884’ Notes: Short hiking trail with a few rugged rock outcrop sections. A few wet areas may need to be addressed with puncheon or turnpiking. Maintain as needed. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Relevant Trail Sections/Details: 5 & 6 Recommended Installer Type: Staff Maintained
Trail 8 Trail Typology: Hiking Trail - 18” - 36” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 374’ Notes: Short hiking trail with a few rugged rock outcrop sections. Maintain as needed. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Relevant Trail Sections/Details: n/a Recommended Installer Type: Staff Maintained
Trail 9 Trail Typology: Hiking Trail - 18” - 36” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length (New Construction): 642’ Notes: New trail connection that creates an internal loop and re-routes people around the Diocese field. Recommended Phase: Phase 2 Relevant Trail Sections/Details: 1 & 2 Recommended Installer Type: This project could be professional or staff built. For professional build, see Appendix 2 for cost estimate.
Trail 10 Trail Typology: Hiking Trail - 18” - 36” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 1,622’
Trail Length (Existing to be upgraded): 278’
Notes: Existing loop with gentle rolling terrain. The southern section of the trail has some wet sections that should be addressed with turnpiking. Maintain as needed. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Relevant Trail Sections/Details: 5 & 6 Recommended Installer Type: Staff Maintained and Built
21
Trail 11 Trail Typology: Hiking Trail - 18” - 36” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 714’ Notes: Existing trail that follows rolling terrain around some ledge sections and passes through some areas with sensitive plant communities. A spur trail to the vernal pool leads off this trail and should be closed to protect that area. Maintain as needed. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Relevant Trail Sections/Details: n/a Recommended Installer Type: Staff Maintained
Trail 12 Trail Typology: Hiking Trail - 18” - 36” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 309’ Notes: Spur trail to the base of an old rock quarry. This would be a good site to provide some interpretive signage about the history of the quarry. The trail leading to the quarry has some wet sections and is overgrown. Turnpiking or puncheon should be installed to prevent trail widening. The segment of trail leading into the Diocese field should be closed. Maintain as needed. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Relevant Trail Sections/Details: 5 & 6 Recommended Installer Type: Staff Maintained
Trail 13 Trail Typology: Hiking Trail - 18” - 36” wide, natural surface, see Trail Typologies Appendix 1 Total Trail Length: 1,249’ Notes: A rugged natural surface trail that creates a short loop at the high point of Arms Forest. Maintain as needed. Recommended Phase: Phase 1 Relevant Trail Sections/Details: n/a Recommended Installer Type: Staff Maintained
22
CREATING SUSTAINABLE TRAILS A best practice for trails is to build them sustainably. On a grand level, this means providing recreational trail opportunities while limiting impact on natural and cultural resources especially of protected landscapes. On the ground, this means building trails that are long-lasting, at grades that will not erode easily, do not impact existing drainages, and are not easily affected by runoff. Trails can meet these conditions through elements of proper location, design, and structures that mitigate the impact of water. Choosing Locations for and Designing Sustainable Trails Building a trail in the proper location can reduce maintenance costs far into the future. Elements of proper location and routing include a sustainable grade, an optimal cross slope, a curvilinear alignment, and other location considerations. There is an optimal cross slope range and profile grade combination for building sustainable trails. Trails that climb at gentle grades and are less than one quarter of the prevailing cross slope will last longer and have lower impact on soils. Many trail teams consider 8% to be an optimal profile grade. Above 12%, trails are prone to erosion. In areas where the cross slope is less than 20%, water can pool and drainage improvements may need to be considered. Drainage is less of an issue for cross slopes between 20% and 70%. Routing trails on a curvilinear route that matches the terrain not only helps the trail blend into the landscape, it helps water flow over trails, lessening the impact to both the existing drainage and the trail. Where there are drainages crossing the trail, the trail should dip into and out of the drainage, not block it. Other location considerations include soil types, the slope aspect of the trails, and the vegetation types encountered on the trail. Soil types that have a lot of clay contribute to muddy conditions during shoulder season. Those with too much sand are prone to erosion. Trails on south-facing slopes are preferred as they dry out more quickly. Trail builders should avoid building trails in areas with lots of weeds or invasive species. If this cannot be avoided, alleviating the trail corridor of weeds and invasive species will prevent these plants from spreading along the trail corridor. Using Structures in Sustainable Trail Building Structures should be considered a last resort in sustainable trail building. Not only do they add to future maintenance costs, they take away from blending the trail into the scenery. However, they can contribute to the enjoyment of the trail, provide safe crossing of waterbodies, provide access, and help mitigate drainage issues. Types of structures built on trails include: • Bridges • Retaining Walls • Waterbars – made of rock or log • Drainage dips
23
Trail Closures Total Trail Closure Length: 10,320’ Numerous trails are being recommended for closure within Arms Forest due to the sensitivity of the landscape, trail conditions, or undesirable access points to neighboring properties. Trail closures should reclaim and restore the tread surface to discourage future use and return the impacted area to it’s natural state. Signage will be important to help educate trail users about what is happening and that the trails are being closed for ecological restoration. Some trails may need a physical barrier like a split rail fence or large rocks along with signage to discourage future use and allow the trail to re-naturalize. Closures should be monitored and beefed up with a barrier if needed. Trail closures can be done by City staff along with volunteer help.
Trail Closure Best Practices To ensure trails are returned to their natural state it is important to decommission them at all junctions with other trails. Sections of trail not visible from active areas of the site can receive less intense renaturalization. Levels of decommissioning include stabilization, scarification, and naturalization. It is important to avoid the introduction of exotic/invasive plants along the trail closure corridor and care should be taken minimize this risk.
24
Stabilization • Stabilization of the trail tread is necessary to stop any further erosion of the tread surface and allow the area to naturalize. This should be done along the whole trail corridor and is the minimum step needed for closure. • Drainage control measures such as check dams will be needed along any slopes over 25% (see Appendix 1 for detail). waterbars and drainage dips can be used along less steep sections to control stormwater runoff and prevent further erosion. • Any structures that would require maintenance such as boardwalks, bridges or culverts should be removed. Exposed metal such as rebar used to pin steps should be removed or cut flush with the ground. • Brush from downed trees should be placed within the tread corridor to discourage people from walking/riding on the closed trail. The brush should look tangled and haphazard creating a visual and physical barrier that would be unpleasant to walk through. The brush will also provide a stable area for vegetation to re-grow. Brush placement perpendicular to the tread should be especially thick near trail junctions. Using large diameter vegetation such as downed trees will discourage people from just moving the brush out of the corridor. Rocks can be interspersed with the brush to further stabilize the tread.
25
Scarification • Compacted soil will inhibit vegetation from establishing itself and will need to be loosened for the area to be naturalized. The soil should be left loose to allow plants a place to sprout. • The tread surface can be loosened by hand using a pick mattock, McLeoud, fire rake or rouge hoe, or pulaski. Areas where the trail is cupped or recessed should have the edges of the trail knocked down so it will bend into the original landform. Naturalization • Naturalization will help accelerate the process of blending the closed trail back into the surrounding landscape. Seeding with local plants and organic material from the surrounding landscape will help reduce the introduction of invasives. • Leaf litter and sections of top soil from the surrounding area should be placed over the loosened soil especially in areas visible from active trails. • Material excavated from new trails or re-routes within the forest can be used to help with the renaturalization of closed trails. The top layer of organic material should be collected and redistributed along closed trail sections. • Planting or transplanting a few native trees or shrubs will also help naturalize the trail and send the message that the corridor is being decommissioned. To avoid introduction of invasive plant species: • Using top soil and leaf litter from the surrounding area will minimize the introduction of invasives. • Any imported soil, if required, should be certified to be weed free. • Hand harvest and transplant trees and shrubs from the surrounding forest. • In especially sensitive areas use only leaf litter from the surrounding area and allow for natural regrowth. • Monitor trail closures for invasive plants and eradicate as needed.
26
5 Trail Maintenance Guidelines
27
TRAIL MAINTENANCE Routine maintenance and assessment of the entire trail network on a seasonal basis will keep trails clean, safe, and maintained at a high standard in both the short and long-term. Maintenance can include everything from removing downed trees to installing new drainage structures or repairing steps and bridges. It also includes the upkeep of trail signage and parking, the removal of trash, and an assessment of trail conditions. This assessment is best kept in a database that also includes a list of short-term and long-term projects and repairs.
Tasks to be checked/completed each spring and fall: Vegetation • Remove blowdown • Remove hazard trees • Remove leaf litter and weeds in tread Drainage/Tread • Clean waterbars, ditches, and dips • Clean culverts Trail Clean Up Each spring and fall it is advised to get a volunteer crew out on the trail network to pick up litter. This can be done in conjunction with assessing damage and repair needs for the other maintenance categories.
Tasks to be checked/completed each year: Vegetation • Brushing/clearing of overgrown sections • Brush in herd paths/switchback cuts • Remove invasive species Drainage/Tread • Replace damaged drainage structures • Repair damaged tread, such as washouts, slumping, spot surfacing • Monitor closed trails for use and invasive species, restore closed area and beef up barrier if needed Structural Maintenance • Examine tread, railings, and ramps on all structures Signage • Check for missing trail markers or directional signs and replace as needed Trailhead Parking: • Assess drainage and repair where necessary • Ensure trail can adequately be accessed from the trailhead
Tasks to be checked/completed as needed: Vegetation • Mow and weed a two-foot buffer on each side (on appropriate trails June-September as needed)) Drainage/Tread • Install new drainage structures where needed 28
• Knock down outslope berms to maintain drainage • Restore backslope on sidehill trails • Clean up transition areas where two types of surfaces meet • Repair turnpikes and checkdams • Clear hazardous roots, stumps, and rockfall debris Structural Maintenance The following should be assessed yearly, and completed as needed: • Repair or replace railings and guardrails • Repair bridges and boardwalks • Replace bridges that exhibit structural damage • Repair cribbing and retaining walls • Repair or replace any steps that exhibit damage • Repair or replace bicycle racks and parking that exhibit damage • Clean any vandalized structures • Repair light fixtures and replace light bulbs in fixtures • Repair or replace gates, fences, and fence posts • Repair or replace shelters that exhibit damage Signage • Repair or replace damaged signs and sign posts • Mark or blaze trails where needed • Repair cairns where needed Trailhead Parking: • Repair and update maps and kiosks • Replace missing or damaged signs
29
6 Trail Signage
30
Trail Signage A signage and wayfinding interpretive system should be developed for this natural setting. Images below are for reference of potential sign character. A signage plan is also included to indicate potential locations for the various sign types. These should include entry signs, trailhead kiosk signs, directional signage and interpretive signage.
wetland ecology
Central Area Outer Loop
Trail Directional Sign Example
Trail Directional and Interpretive Sign Example
Plant Identification Sign Example
Small Interpretive Sign Example
Plant Identification Sign Example
31
N
AR
LL
Arms Forest Trails Master Plan Signage Plan
DR
Legend
14 0
KI
EY
15 0
0 19
180
16 0
13 0
North Avenue Alliance Church
180
Elks Club Property NO PUBLIC ACCESS
190
B
200 19 0
I 200
0 20
Historical and Cultural Interpretive 230 Signage
0 24
190
I D
14 0
D
190
150
170
Quarry Site Interpretive Signage
K 250
I
220
TH
PA 17 0
0 17
ck Point To Ro Episcopal 170 Diocese of Vermont
230
190
Burlington High School
170
14 0
Contour Interval = 1’ SCALE (ft) 0
75
150
225
300
32
TE
U IT
ST
IN
Rock Point
N
Interpretive Signage - Facts about the history & ecology of the site - Information on the stream vernal pool - Information on the unique geology of the site
Prepared by:
Former Quarry Site
KE
RO
170
BI
CK
0 18
T
IN
PO
250
0 27
160 0 15
RD
240 260
270
D 15 0
I
E
D
D
K
Directional Signage - Directional signs for trails and directions to significant destinations - Trail markers
AV
D
D
0 19
160
D
D
H
17 0
130
Natural Surface Trail (Hike Only)
Kiosk - Add site map of trails - Include information on Arms Forest
RT
D
D
Wildflower Interpretive Signage
Interpretive Trail
K
O
0 15
15 0
I
I
Natural Surface Trail (Multi-Use)
Entry sign
N
D
0 15
D
Arms Forest
Universal Access Trail
E
D
I
18 0
Parcel Boundary
Trails by Proposed Typology
E
Final Kiosk location TBD
Urban Wild Interpretive Signage
190
Significant Waterway Interpretive 15Signage 0
K
D
D
Site Geology Interpretive Signage
Off Property Trail Trail Connection
190
19 0
RD
Stream
190
LE
TT
LI
E
GL
EA
AY
Arms Forest Boundary
RD
December, 2019
