Chapter 5 - Implementation 69 Chapter 5 Chapter Implementation

Chapter 5 - Implementation 71 $5,000 $50,000 $50,000 $75,000 $2,500/acre $2,500/acre $6,500/acre $10,000/acre $75,000/mile $40,000/mile $25,000/mile $400,000/mile $0 to $1,000/acre $10,000 - $35,000/acre - $10,000 Estimated Cost Estimated $$$ = $100,000 to $500,000 $$$ = $100,000 to $1,000,000 $$$$ = $500,000 to $$$$$ > $1,000,000 $ < $50,000 $ < $50,000 $100,000 $$ = $50,000 to through will be developed costs refined More as a work pre-design or other studies feasibility for advancement is selected particular project for now from or more be a decade (which could costs generalized 1 presents Table some tasks). in this estimates used as a basis for were that plan. substantial infusion of funding. For planning For planning of funding. infusion substantial using range a cost purposes, and comparison has been ($$$$$) dollar signs five one ($) to the Using this method, tables. in the presented as follows: are values Implementation Action Table 1. Generalized Cost of Greenway & Open Space Implementation Space Open & Greenway of Cost 1. Generalized Table 10' wide trail other Design-PennDOTTrail Engineering Trail Engineering Design non-PennDOT Feasibility Studies Park Master Plan Construct canoe/kayak area launch Zoning Ordinance Amendment Conservation Easement Perpetual Buffer Easement Riparian 10' wide trail to PennDOT standards Farmland Preservation Easement Conservation Land Acquisition Public Park Land Acquisition Buffer PlantingRiparian - - - -

evaluation. Some strate Some evaluation. cost little or no gies have the administra beyond respon time of the tive while others sible entity a more will require range, potential funding, and timing of the potential range, Conservation are: The categories priority. Land and Outreach; Education Measures; Trails and Recreation and Parks Preservation; Under Transportation. & Non-Motorized of agencies, heading is a list the Partners work could that and others organizations outcome. the desired achieve to together of plan, many a county-led Although this was are dependent priorities the implementation non- of and cooperation on the involvement including municipalities, private entities county l a n d o w many n for In fact, others. e r s , s not is county the actions, t a t e a lead a critical considered g e n c i e spartner. , l a n d t rfor imple estimates Cost u s t s , can strategies mentation a n d and are be wide-ranging as a serve to intended for project point starting Implementation Implementation Strategies are strategies The implementation each and category by tables into organized of the description a brief includes table cost action, possible partners, recommended ------

he previous chapters in this plan provided in this plan provided chapters he previous of at the benefits look a an introduction, portant open space, and to develop greenways, greenways, develop space, and to open portant and trails. parks, tary land conservation, land use planning, land pub land conservation, tary among and outreach and education lic policy, im land, protect agricultural preserve to others is a multi-faceted approach that relies on a va relies on a that approach is a multi-faceted such as volun approaches, of concurrent riety vance the priorities that have been identified. been identified. have the priorities that vance here presented structure The implementation and open space resources. A dedicated and A dedicated and open space resources. multiple will be needed among effort concerted ad to decades several the next over partners the long-range goal of seeing the ideas mate goal the long-range the vi forth carry that projects real into rialize greenway and enjoy connect, preserve, sion to Creating the plan is only an initial step toward toward step initial the plan is only an Creating will implement the greenway and open space the greenway will implement in this and the recommendations framework document. the recommended greenway and open space and greenway the recommended a series of presents This chapter framework. completed, when and actions that, strategies goals, an analysis of key trends, the county’s ex the county’s trends, of key an analysis goals, inven conditions, an future expected and isting and opportunities, and resources county of tory greenways and open space, an overview of open space, an overview and greenways and the vision statement process, the planning

Introduction T Chapter 5 - Implementation 72 ties, the county, andotherorganizations to DCNR fundinghasbeenobtained by municipali to conservation, greenways, trails, andparks. and design)development activities related for certain pre-construction (plans, studies, which fundsupto 50%ofeligibleproject costs (DCNR) CommunityPartnerships Grant Program ment ofConservation andNatural Resources A fundingstaple hasalways beentheDepart resources shouldbesought. represent anexhaustive list andotherpossible Also thefundingopportunitiesidentified donot existing programs are reduced oreliminated. quickly asnew initiatives are launchedand the projects listed even thoughthiscan change made to identify potential fundingsources for implementation tables an attempt hasbeen last 20years to supporttheseinitiatives. Inthe funding available today thanat any timeinthe open space,parks, andtrails there ismore state and county. For greenways, landconservation, ical climate oftheCommonwealth, theregion, dependent upontheeconomic, fiscal andpolit Funding isalways amoving target andisoften qualities ofeachindividualproperty. county andare uniqueto thelocation andthe however, real estate costs willvary across the public utilitiesandno zoning restrictions; an acre for developable forest landwithout vancy was appraised at approximately $12,000 quisition in2015 by theMerrill W. LinnConser standards in2011.Landfor aconservation ac $3,000,000 to construct ninemilesto PennDOT the Buffalo Valley (BVRT) cost nearly For additionalperspective, the first phaseof - - - - - Also at thestate level, thePennsylvania De- tion inUnion Township. a portionofthe costs ona recent landacquisi was successful inaccessingthisgrant to cover $250,000. TheMerrillW. LinnConservancy eligible costs for amaximum total award of funding source, DCEDwill cover upto 85%of Economic Development (DCED).Withthis through theDepartment ofCommunityand and Trail Program, whichisadministered monwealth FinancingAuthority’s Greenway A newer program inrecent years isthe neering design. trail development, landacquisition,andengi lation, youth sportsfields, feasibility studies, support parkrehabilitation, playground instal Com - - - - Land Preservation Program, whichiscurrently sourceprimary offundingfor theAgricultural Department ofAgriculture (PDA) hasbeen the For farmland conservation, the quires a30%match. funding isadministered by DCED andalsore to PennDOT, another$30millioninmulti-modal PennDOT andtheSEDA-COG MPO. Inaddition cessed over $500,000inTAP funding through The second phaseoftheBVRT successfully ac which islimited to alternative transportation. Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) is required. Thisisinaddition to the Federal be usedfor trail projects, buta30%local match tion fundingannuallythrough Act89that can nearly $30millionofmulti-modaltransporta partment ofTransportation (PennDOT) awards - - - Chapter 5 - Implementation 73 - - - PA DCNR (PA Department of Conservation and of Conservation Department DCNR (PA PA Resources) Natural Pro of Environmental Department DEP (PA PA tection) Game Commission) PGC (Pennsylvania Alliance) Land Trust (Pennsylvania PLTA Extension) State PSE (Penn MPO (Susquehanna Economic COG SEDA Council of Govern Association Development Planning Organization) Metropolitan ments Partnership) SGP (Susquehanna Greenway Land Agriculture UCALPB (Union County Board) Preservation District) Conservation UCCD (Union County Society) Historical UCHS (Union County Service) Fish and Wildlife States (United USFWS - Voters - WREN (League of Women LOWV Network) Education Resources Water BCWA (Buffalo Creek Watershed Alliance) Watershed Creek (Buffalo BCWA Authority) Recreation Valley (Buffalo BVRA of Forestry BOF - Bureau Own Woodland Susquehanna Central CSWOA Association) ers District) School Area LASD (Lewisburg Partnership) Downtown LDP (Lewisburg Corporation) Neighborhoods LNC (Lewisburg Watershed Creek Penns (Lower LPCWA Association) Revitalization and Heritage MHRA (Mifflinburg Association) (Merrill Linn Conservancy) MLC Conservancy) Pennsylvania NCPC (North Central Park Service) NPS (National Conservation Resources (Natural NRCS Services) of Community and Department DCED (PA PA Development) Economic • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ------) year, ) year, th ) to tenth (10 tenth ) to th ) year following adoption of the plan. of the adoption following ) year th for public use. public for and partners of potential a number that Note in the imple abbreviated are funding sources These include: tables. mentation extremely high priority, but the timing of com but the timing of high priority, extremely will Prioritization as long-term. is listed pletion in this Chapter. later be addressed 12 listed, strategies Of the 54 implementation 18 medium, and 24 long-term. short term, are this is a general that It should also be noted on this con move may tasks guide as certain arise or that tinuum, depending on challenges presented. are that opportunities new due to of the Shikellamy protection example, For pri conservation has long been a high Bluffs and Linn Conservancy ority of the Merrill W. the 1993 Nat from emerged that the county It is also a priority in this Inventory. Areas ural circum and unexpected new plan, but due to remaining portion of the a significant stances while conserved was area bluffs unprotected The other take- being developed. the plan was be literally can long-term is that message away here the case as was or more, 20 years 10 to to years 10 which took and also with the BVRT phase open the first having an idea to from go (5 be imple then would strategies Medium-term in the sixth (6 mented happen to expected are projects and long-term a strategy out. Timing of years (10) or more ten priority sta with the be confused should not is an a recommendation tus. It is possible that - - - - ) to fifth ) to st plan, a short-term ranking suggests that the that suggests ranking plan, a short-term (1 the first in be implemented strategy each implementation task presented in terms in task presented each implementation or as a short, medium, it is viewed of whether purposes of this the For endeavor. long-term ty must be completely local. be completely ty must is the timing of in the table column The last must be incurred. There are also some tasks also some tasks are There be incurred. must not eligible or are not be grant simply may that responsibili enough so the funding competitive ect costs, but this is the exception rather than than rather but this is the exception ect costs, match times than not local the norm and more tical for implementing the recommendations in recommendations the for implementing tical funding different instances, this plan. In limited 100% of proj cover be aligned to can streams It is anticipated that grants from the agencies the agencies from grants that It is anticipated will foundations private and from above listed prac extent the greatest and used to be sought such as new extensions to the BVRT and the the BVRT to extensions such as new Bluffs. of Shikellamy protection the county has reserved the use of these funds has reserved the county that projects on with taking partners assist to community, in the legacy a lasting do create Fund that, by law, must be used for greenway, greenway, be used for must law, by Fund that, date, purposes. To and open space related trails Finally, Union County receives a limited amount amount a limited receives Union County Finally, Legacy Marcellus the through revenue 13 of Act do so. To date, PDA has contributed millions millions has contributed PDA date, do so. To than 8,000 more preserving towards of dollars in Union County. of farmland acres funds. The Gregg Township Board of Super Board Township The Gregg funds. the to a year $5,000 also contributes visors to only municipality and is the program county matched annually with $125,000 of county of county $125,000 with annually matched Chapter 5 - Implementation 74 Conservation Measures Education andOutreach No. C-8 C-7 C-6 C-5 C-4 C-3 C-2 C-1 E-4 E-3 E-2 E-1 open spaceefforts house/coordinator ofgreenway, landconservation, and Develop a“CouncilofConservation” to actasaclearing dents Establish anoutdoor mentor program for urbanresi cation, erosion, vegetation management) practices for improved water quality(i.e.chemical appli Help landowners better understand best management Educate thepubliconproper bicycling andwalking rules non-residential developments vious coverage andto create more openspacewithin Revise minimumparkingstandards to reduce imper areas andexisting developments Use planters andothermeasures to green downtown to identify conservation prioritiesand trail routes Use OfficialMaps asperthe PAMunicipalPlanningCode county for game andnon-game species Protect andenhancewildlife habitat throughout the an forest buffers through conservation easement Permanently protect 200milesofnewly-installed ripari impaired reaches, to improve water quality Susquehanna River andcounty streams, particularly Install 200milesofriparianforested buffers alongthe and impaired streams fers usingeasements withapriorityonheadwater areas Permanently protect 250milesofexisting riparianbuf conservation innew developments Traditional NeighborhoodDevelopment andopenspace Provide incentives for compact development, suchas Implementation Action ------Conservation District, Watershed Associations, Municipalities Watershed Associations, NRCS, DEP Linn Conservancy, Conservation District, Watershed Associations Linn Conservancy, Conservation District, Media, Watershed Associations, DEP Linn Conservancy, Conservation District, NRCS, School Districts Media, Local Police Departments, BVRA, ciations, Conservation District Municipalities, UnionCounty, Watershed Asso (MHRA) flinburg Heritage & Revitalization Association Lewisburg Downtown Partnership (LDP),Mif Conservancy Municipalities, UnionCounty, DCNR,Linn Conservation District, NRCS, Landowners PA GameCommission,PA FishCommission, Landowners DEP, LinnConservancy, NRCS, Farm Bureau, Conservation District, Watershed Associations, Landowners Watershed Associations, Farm Bureau, NRCS, Conservation District, LinnConservancy, DEP, Landowners DEP, LinnConservancy, NRCS, Farm Bureau, Partners - - $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$ Cost $$$ $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Linn Conservancy Conservation District, Linn Conservancy Conservation District, Voters -WREN DEP, LeagueofWomen Conservation District, ments, Schools BVRA, Police Depart Union County Donors LDP, Private MHRA, County Municipalities, Union Commission, NRCS, DEP Game Commission,Fish DEP DEP, DCNR,NRCS DEP Municipalities Potential Funding - Timing M M M M M M M S S L L L Chapter 5 - Implementation 75 L L L L S S S S S S S S S Timing - Potential Funding Potential County, Land Trusts County, Union County DCNR, Union DCED, Land Trusts County, DCED, Union County, DCNR Linn Conservancy Union DCNR, DCED, Municipalities County, DCNR, DCED Linn Conservancy, DCNR, USFWS Conservation District, District, Conservation Linn Conservancy DEP, Founda UCHS, Private tions District, Conservation DEP Linn conservancy, Linn Conservancy Municipalities Union DCNR, DCED, $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$$ $$$ Cost $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$ - Partners Linn Conservancy, DCNR Linn Conservancy, US Fish DCNR, Landowners, Linn Conservancy, Service (USFWS) and Wildlife Heritage Associations, Museums, Bucknell Associations, Heritage Linn Conservan NRCS, District, Conservation Watershed DCNR, Service Forester, DEP, cy, UCHS Associations, Land Trust Pennsylvania Linn Conservancy, Alliance Planning Commissions, Municipalities, District Conservation Union County, Landowners, Linn Conservancy, DCNR Linn Conservancy Union County, Land Preservation Agricultural Union County Linn Conservancy Board, Conservation Linn Conservancy. Union County, District Agricultural Union County Linn Conservancy, Board Land Preservation Municipalities, DCNR Union County, SGP, Linn Conservancy, Conservation District, District, Conservation Linn Conservancy, Planning Commission, Associations, Watershed Bucknell (UCHS), Society Historical Union County Implementation Action Implementation Protect 50 acres +/- of floodplain, floodway, and +/- of floodplain, floodway, 50 acres Protect in Mifflinburg Easement Koons to next wetlands of conservation easements of conservation and multi-purpose greenway a permanent Establish Susquehanna River Branch along the West county in the identified areas priority natural Protect and Linn Conservancy by Inventory, Heritage Natural and corridors open space blocks create this plan to Invest in agriculture and viewshed protection in protection and viewshed in agriculture Invest areas priority conservation designated and land preservation fund for permanent Create efforts conservation the use through land conservation voluntary Encourage Amend local ordinances to establish conservation goals conservation establish to ordinances Amend local preservation) forest for (i.e. sliding scale from community and cliff Bluffs Shikellamy Protect and development alteration land in the 1.5 miles of riverfront protect Permanently Commons Stream Great public for conservation and preservation conservation public for land of private understanding landowner Improve easements conservation such as options, conservation and other benefits. Educate the public on the benefits of greenways and of greenways on the benefits the public Educate open space including the interpretation historic and cultural Provide period pre-Colonial and financial such as technical resources Publicize and the landowners to available are that resources L-9 L-7 L-8 L-4 L-5 L-6 L-1 L-2 L-3 E-8 E-5 E-6 E-7 No. Land Preservation Education Outreach (con’t) Outreach Education Chapter 5 - Implementation 76 Parks andRecreation Land Preservation (con’t) P-10 L-11 L-10 No. P-9 P-8 P-7 P-6 P-5 P-4 P-3 P-2 P-1 national standards central UnionCounty to reduce deficit underminimum Add 110acres ofcommunity parklandineastern and into acommunity park Convert former New BerlinElementary Schoolproperty on Penns Creek andtheSusquehannaRiver Establish fishingand strategic canoe/kayak accesspoints health parks withneighborhoodsto promote community Develop greenways andtrails that connect existing Implement Bull RunGreenway Plan north ofAllenwood Develop formal river accessat Great Stream Commons community parks diers Park, East Buffalo pondarea) andupdate existing Develop parkmaster planswhere needed(i.e.Sol Great Stream Commons Develop aparkmaster planfor theriverfront landsat in East Buffalo Township for new parks Determine feasibility ofusingexisting publicopenspace Avenue orsouthofSR44river bridge Establish acommunity parkinAllenwood at Columbia spring including outcroppings, George Longproperty, and Protect openspacealongPenns Creek at New Berlin Run andalongWhite DeerCreek) PApublic lands(e.g. American Water landnearSpruce Make strategic additions to theState Forest andother Implementation Action - (PGC) Linn Consrvancy, DCNR,PA GameCommission Municipalities, DCNR,UnionCountyBVRA, New BerlinBorough, DCNR Muncipalities, SGP LPCWA, Landowners, Bureau ofForestry, Hospital Municipalities, BVRA, Evangelical Community Corp. (LNC),DCNR,Bucknell,USFWS Lewisburg Borough, Lewisburg Neighborhoods Corporation, Northcentral Conservancy, SCP Union County, Warrior RunCommunity Municipalities, DCNR, UnionCounty BVRA, Union County, Gregg Township, DCNR East Buffalo Township, DCNR BVRA, Gregg Township, DCNR Linn Conservancy, New BerlinBorough Partners $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$ Cost $$$ $$$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $ palities, UnionCounty DCNR, DCED, Munici palities, UnionCounty DCNR, DCED, Munici DCNR, NPS palities DCNR, DCED, Munici USFWS DCNR, DEP, DCED, County DCNR, DCED, Union DCNR, DCED County DCNR, DCED, Union falo Township BVRA, DCNR,East Buf Township DCED, DCNR,Gregg Private Donors DCNR, DCED, PGC Potential Funding - - - - Timing M M M M L L L L L L L L Chapter 5 - Implementation 77 L L L L L L L L S S M M M M Timing - - Potential Funding Potential DCED DCNR Union County, DCNR, Union County, Donors Private DCED, PennDOT Munici Riverwoods, palities Municipalities LASD, PennDOT DCNR, DCED, DCNR, LPCWA DCNR, BVRA, PennDOT, PennDOT, DCNR, BVRA, DCED DCNR, Union & Ly Counties coming DCED, DCNR, PennDOT, Counties Bucknell BVRA, Union County Lewisburg BVRA, PennDOT, Borough, DCNR, DCED DCNR, PennDOT, BVRA, $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$$ $$$ $$$ Cost $$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$ Partners Lewisburg Area School District (LASD), Kelly, (LASD), Kelly, School District Area Lewisburg PennDOT Townships, Buffalo East and Buffalo, PennDOT Municipalities, BVRA, Association Watershed Creek Penns Lower Linn Landowners, of Forestry, Bureau (LPCWA), Conservancy Greenway Partnership (SGP) Partnership Greenway SGP County, Lycoming Union County, Mifflinburg Bucknell University, BVRA, Landowners Borough, Municipalities PennDOT, Union County, Borough Lewisburg BVRA, SGP BVRA, SCP Bucknell University, Union County, Creek & BUffalo Lewisburg Union County, SGP Bucknell University, Railroad, MPO SEDA-COG PennDOT, Borough, Lewisburg Township, Kelly PennDOT University, Bucknell Riverwoods, Buffalo Valley Recreation Authority (BVRA), Authority Recreation Valley Buffalo Municipalities DCNR, PennDOT, Susquehanna County, Lycoming Union County, - - - Implementation Action Implementation Street to the Susquehanna River in St. John’s in St. John’s the Susquehanna River to Street th Plan for wider shoulders on state-designated bike routes routes bike on state-designated wider shoulders Plan for Koons Trail in Mifflinburg Borough) in Mifflinburg Trail Koons and trail water Creek a Penns and implement Develop access plan St. Anthony Street bridge as a safer link to Riverwoods Riverwoods link to as a safer bridge Street St. Anthony concept along with riverwalk and soccer complex High Lewisburg new of connecting feasibility Explore etc House Commons, BVRT, Penn Linntown, School to (e.g.to BVRT link to the connections north/south Create Winfield Village to Northumberland Borough to Northumberland Village Winfield connect tail trail or rail with trail for potential Monitor Village Winfield to Lewisburg in ing BVRT access on pedestrian of improved feasibility Evaluate from 5 from corridor Street the Susquehanna over bridge railroad BVRT Rehabilitate in and trail SR 405 greenway link with proposed to River Northumberland County from trail a multi-use of creating feasibility Evaluate Evaluate feasibility of extending BVRT west of west BVRT of extending feasibility Evaluate Road Swengel to SR 45 across Mifflinburg connect for and off-road both on-road routes, Explore the Cherry Run Trail to ing the BVRT extension BVRT of Engineering, design and construction US 15 corridor study. Engineering design, permitting, Engineering design, study. US 15 corridor and construction from a multi-use trail of developing study Feasibility along river Borough Montgomery to Village Allenwood Vil of Allenwood Engineering, design and construction trail multi-use riverfront Borough Montgomery to lage Buffalo Valley Rail Trail (BVRT) US 15 crossing as per the crossing US 15 (BVRT) Trail Rail Valley Buffalo T-8 T-9 T-6 T-7 T-4 T-5 T-1 T-2 T-3 No. T-14 T-13 T-12 T-11 T-10 Trails and Non-Motorized Transportation and Non-Motorized Trails Chapter 5 - Implementation 78 were thehighest priorityoverall. however, itisworth noting that riparianbuffers in eachcategory ofimplementation strategies; The following list shows thehighest priorities that might actuallyimpedeimplementation. were, regardless ofcosts andotherchallenges how important they felt theindividualprojects Committee completed the ranking basedon 54 implementation strategies. TheSteering evaluating thelevel ofpriority for each ofthe using aranking tool, was tasked with process, theproject Steering Committee, implementation. Aspartoftheplanning high prioritydoesnotequate to immediate priorities intheplan.Rankingaproject asa partners, itisbeneficial to identify thehighest resources at thecounty andamonglead Given theconstraints onfundingandstaff degrees ofcost anddifficultyof execution. implementation strategies that have varying As previously noted, thisplanincludes54 Implementation Priorities Trails andNon-Motorized Transportation (con’t) T-17 T-16 T-15 No. in New BerlinandLimestone Township Develop George LongTrail alongPenns Creek frontage reopen theShamokinMountain Trail Determine feasibility withlandowners thepotential to structure throughout thecounty Improve West Branch Susquehannawater trail infra Implementation Action Land Preservation Education andOutreach Conservation • • • • • • • • • - in priorityconservation areas Agriculture andview shedprotection easements Encourage theuseof conservation Stream Commons Protect theriverfront at theGreat owners for conservation resources available to property Publicize technical andfinancial conservation easements Improve landowner understanding of quality management practices for water Help landowners withbest conservation development Promote andincentivize TNDand additional riparianbuffers Install andprotect 200milesof existing riparianbuffers Permanently protect 250milesof ship Landowners, LinnConservancy, UnionTown SGP, LandTrusts, DCNR vancy, DCNR,LPCWA Landowners, New BerlinBorough, LinnConser

Partners Trails andNon-Motorized Transportation Parks andRecreation - - • • • • • • Cost Allenwood to Montgomery trail BVRT westerly extension BVRT US15crossing (SeeFigure 1) Commons riverfront landsat Great Stream Develop aparkmaster planfor the promote community health Use greenways to connect parks andto Great Stream Commons Develop formalized river accessat $$$ $$ $ Berlin Borough, DCNR Private Donors, New Union County Park (NPS) Service DCNR, DCED, National Potential Funding Timing

M M M Chapter 5 - Implementation 79 ------The conservation easement, unlike land acqui unlike easement, The conservation ownership. the land in private sition, leaves main two fall into easements Conservation in Historically and donated. types: purchased Land Preserva the Agricultural Union County, of has been the only purchaser tion Program partment of Conservation and Natural Resourc and Natural of Conservation partment their inventory. to acreage add es to pur Linn Conservancy the Merrill W. Recently on Shikellamy of forestland chased 36 acres Park Over State the Shikellamy bordering Bluffs conservation of this high look. The acquisition through made possible was priority property The land grants. state and two donations local as an the Commonwealth to will be donated was the first Park. This to the State addition has used this approach, time the Conservancy sig the be challenging due to to which proved of the land and the timing of the cost nificant An issue with land acquisition revenues. grant officials with be the sensitivity of elected can Once the rolls. the tax from property removing it no ownership, public into land is transferred the county, for tax property generates longer and school district. municipality, Easement Conservation most expensive forms of land conservation and and conservation of land forms expensive most prop important extremely for reserved is often con other resort when as a last erties and/or ruled out. In been have techniques servation has to and is not donated the land cases, most this approach In Union County, be purchased. the like agencies state by used often is most De Game Commission and the Pennsylvania Land acquisition is exactly that; land is acquired land is acquired that; exactly Land acquisition is from a sale or donation a negotiated through a public as park and then is retained landowner an easement also have could It area. or natural although this is not placed on it and be resold, is one of the done. Land acquisition typically effective zoning, the official map, mandatory zoning, map, mandatory the official effective of open space, and education. dedication Land Acquisition -

have been highlighted in this section including been highlighted have easements, conservation land acquisition, of tools will be needed by local governments, governments, local will be needed by of tools to and landowners organizations conservation of these tools Several results. tangible achieve Given the number and diversity of imple the number and diversity Given in this plan, and the actions noted mentation them, a variety achieve to needed investment Implementation Tools Implementation Figure 1. Schematic of US 15 Crossing of the Rail Trail Rail of the of US 15 Crossing 1. Schematic Figure Chapter 5 - Implementation 80 served usingthistechnique. As noted previously, 8,000acres have beenpre a goal ofpreserving 40,000acres inthecounty. ricultural LandPreservation Board originallyset The UnionCounty Conservation District andAg $2,500 anacre. purchase aneasement hasbeenapproximately easement inplace.Most recently thecost to the property to thevalue ofthelandwithan by comparing thedevelopment potential of The value oftheeasement isdetermined tected lands. productivity soilsandproximity to otherpro ranking system that gives preference to higher conservation easement on farmland. Itusesa to acquire thedevelopment rights andplacea ing fundsto leverage state andfederal funding (PACE) program. Thisprogram useslocal match Purchase ofAgricultural Conservation Easement conservation easements through the statewide - - - - in thisplanthat are notundereasement now acres ofpriorityagricultural areas identified Just to purchase easements onthe 17,000 account increasing future prices. ing 32,000acres ofthegoal, nottaking into additional $80million to preserve the remain At thecurrent priceperacre, itwould take an land trust, suchastheMerrillW. LinnConser- easement, whichcan begranted to aqualified Another option isthedonated conservation may never rank highenoughto beselected. ment purchased. Thereality ismany farms on agrowing waiting list to have theirease than funds available, leaving many landowners The program hasalways proved more popular costly from animplementation standpoint. agricultural operation, they are nonetheless of cash to thelandowner to reinvest into the ments are permanent andprovide aninfusion would cost $42.5million.Whiletheease - - - lands from uncontrolled housingdevelopment. considered effective asitwillnot protect those residential development on1-acre lotsisnot zoning district regulations that allow unlimited tion zoning. Agricultural or forest preservation protection. The key here is “effective” conserva tion program work to establish perpetual land trusts, landowners, andthefarmland preserva blocks oflandfrom development while land and forest conservation zoning can protect large nent like aneasement. However, agricultural of thelocal governing bodyandisnotperma rary, sinceitcan bechanged by amajorityvote important conservation tool. Zoning is tempo Effective zoning atthemunicipal level isanother Effective Zoning the cost. prominent tool dueto thevalue compared to donated easement willneedto become amore blocks, includingpriorityagricultural areas, the vation for greenway corridors andopenspace easement. Inorder to maximize landconser than ifthelandowner was actuallypaidfor the efits. Insome cases, thismight be worth more receive substantial Federal tax deductionben However, theproperty owner can potentially front costs associated withthistool. donated by thelandowner, there are fewer up a multi-county region. Sincetheeasement is habitat andfarmland from development in nently protect 1,440acres ofuniqueecological used thistool almost exclusively to perma program. TheMerrillW. LinnConservancy has vancy, or to theAgricultural LandPreservation ------Chapter 5 - Implementation 81 ------nance and is a declara governing by the tion or mu body of a county the nicipality of areas will even community public tually need for identifying purposes. By the specific lands on which public projects the mu envisioned, are nicipality is announcing acquire to its intent municipal the land for other purposes prior to occurring. development It should be made clear an official map is that eminent not equal to options available, often confused with the zon with the confused often available, options and dis map is separate ing map. The official zoning map and it does the adopted tinct from land use zones. into not divide a municipality of locations geographical it identifies Instead, and other facilities. trails parks, streets, future future land for private reserve be used to It can or open farmland preserve public use and to space. ordi by an The official map is accompanied The Official Map Official The tool land use yet another map is The official Pennsylvania IV of the Article by authorized MPC) that (PA Planning Code Municipalities space imple and open greenway facilitate can un one of the most perhaps This is mentation. of the planning misunderstood and derutilized - - - tional trends for this style of community style of for this tional trends TND was recommended as a strategy for imple for as a strategy recommended TND was comprehen county and the municipal menting has not been part, the most plans, but for sive ordinances. municipal zoning into incorporated seeking in the county developers As a result, to growing responsive and be innovative to na to plan and not be permitted building would neighborhoods, mixed-use walkable construct municipalities in the three ironically, except, zoning. do not have that mixed-use developments that are attractive attractive are that developments mixed-use enjoy can they where to people and inviting offices, shops, homes, access to convenient the is there facilities, and public schools, parks, and pres the demand reduce to opportunity and important prime farmland develop to sure areas. conservation - - - - Eleven Eleven 1 . higher densities than in the agricultural areas. areas. than in the agricultural agricultural zoning as zoning that as zoning zoning agricultural designated growth areas and by allowing more more allowing and by areas growth designated Develop Neighborhood Traditional compact and denser walkable creating (TND). By ment Other ways municipalities can positively in can positively municipalities Other ways the use of through conservation fluence land higher densities within permitting is by zoning Development tural and forest conservation areas. conservation and forest tural Neighborhood Traditional residential estate lots. It is recommended that that recommended lots. It is estate residential that criteria ordinance consider townships density” both agricul in a “true rural for result zoning district. In addition, some agricultural some agricultural In addition, district. zoning which minimum lot sizes, 10-acre have zones and large fragmentation in farm result can One exception is Gregg Township, which ad Township, is Gregg One exception conservation the forest for a sliding scale opted forest zoning districts. Many zoning ordinances ordinances zoning Many districts. zoning forest much at permit development land on forest However, not all townships have implemented implemented have not all townships However, density” and a “true rural in the agricultural ordinances and the majority of townships have have majority of townships and the ordinances of agricultural form a sliding scale implemented zoning. for non-agricultural use to a true rural density, rural density, a true use to non-agricultural for 20 acres dwelling unit per such as one zoning municipalities14 have UnionCounty’s of and Economic Development (DCED) defines (DCED) defines Development and Economic effective of lots and sizes number of dwellings limits the The Pennsylvania Department of Community Community of Department The Pennsylvania Chapter 5 - Implementation 82 to pay what isessentially animpact fee. new developments oralternatively allow them land for community parks and/or trails within can beusedto require developers to set aside division andlanddevelopment ordinance. This of whichcan beenacted through thelocal sub of landfor recreation orpayment of fees inlieu (11) ofthePA MPC, isthemandatory dedica nism inrural areas, authorized by Section503 Another seldomusedimplementation mecha Mandatory Dedication ofLand the officialmap,see PennDOT Publication 703. space conservation. For more information on creating official maps for greenway andopen and thecounty shouldexplore thepossibilityof lized thistool to date, butothermunicipalities Union County, onlyNew BerlinBorough hasuti and onecounty have adopted anofficialmap.In In Pennsylvania, more than60municipalities easement for atrail. street shown ontheofficialmapordonate an So, for example, thedeveloper might build the to, oraspartof, thelanddevelopment process. gotiate amutually-agreed uponsolutionprior happens isthemunicipalityanddeveloper ne this isgenerally notthecase. Typically what volved withacquiringlandsontheofficialmap, Although onemight assumeahighcost in not boundto actbecause oftheofficialmap. decline thisright to acquire theproperty andis property. Thelocal government may exercise or ilarly to a“right offirst refusal” to acquire the notice of reservation and intent andactssim moredomain. Theofficialmapserves asa - tion - - - - - ship andLewisburg Borough could dothisif now, onlyEast Buffalo Township, Kelly Town tle growth itisoften not worth it.Asit stands it worthwhile; incommunities seeing lit very to beenoughdevelopment occurringto make this to bedonelegally. Additionally, there has a formally adopted recreation planinorder for One obstacle isthat amunicipalitymust have the county municipalities. mentation tool at thistime forthemajorityof fore thisdoesnotappearto beaviable imple potential for future residential growth. There ship would likely benefit themost, given the ordinances. Ofthesethree, East Buffalo Town incorporated standards into theirsubdivision recreation planthat was donein2008and they officiallyadopted theirmulti-municipal - - - - - water quality. Iffuture education andoutreach ment practices like riparianbuffers toimprove same cannot besaidinterms ofbest manage easements, especiallyifcompensated, the place properties under restrictive conservation While somelandowners have beenwillingto Unfortunately theresults have beenmixed. and non-profit conservation organizations. a majoremphasisofstate andcounty agencies tion in conservation programs have longbeen the answer. Education and voluntary participa the future, education efforts alonewillnotbe costs. However, ifthepast isany predictor of potential long-term value compared to delivery Finally education has to play a role given its Education inConservation ences. intended audi message to action inspiring an effective and der to deliver tailored inor calculated and be carefully of partners and diverse array to involve a they willneed be successful, efforts are to - - - - Chapter 5 - Implementation 83 - - - the financial impact considerably to the point to the point considerably the financial impact implement to required dollars the local where still in the plan, while costs the non-recurring A overwhelming. as won’t be quite significant, not fis is definitely a year million plus dollars level at the local sustainable or politically cally an important this does raise However, today. of an annual terms in realistic is What question. community conservation, to contribution local $500,000 Would and trails? greenways parks, the tax to or $250,000 annually be acceptable for allocated since $125,000 is already payers regional organization be created to address to address created be organization regional needs. these the at looking only surface, on the Overall is for bleak picture a fairly this paints costs, about excited people get so many sues that grants Fortunately a passion for. and have soften likely will most and funding allocations ------3 A new 10-acre community community 10-acre A new 4 sign parks to be less maintenance intensive, intensive, be less maintenance to sign parks 75%. It by this amount reduce which could is no current there that should also be noted for managing and main established entity though network trail an expanded taining or county a that been suggestions have there both annual routine maintenance and eventual eventual and maintenance both annual routine life the end of the at replacement major capital Con Trails the Rails to by A 2015 report cycle. notes maintenance trail on annual rail servancy $2,000 per mile, of $1,000 to cost an average the with experience the local which mirrors averaging are costs maintenance where BVRT per mile per year. $2,000 close to costs, to installation in addition Therefore, an approx will carry mile of trail new every ongoing of $2,000 per mile for cost imate This means if 11 miles of a new maintenance. developed are trail Susquehanna Greenway with the balance in Nor in Union County, $22,000 of additional thumberland County, This is be created. needs would maintenance open Similarly-developed one example. just an esti require parks, community space, like proper for each year acre $6,000 per mated maintenance. annual $60,000 in necessitate park could de to ways are although there maintenance, the years ahead. the years or above included not factor cost The other long-term of is that of strategies in the list conservation like Some actions, maintenance. require monitoring which have easements, maintenance no ongoing to little have ments, require parks, and new trails like Others, costs. ------This after This after 2 of public

funding question and others will need to be an will need and others funding question and public officials in the citizenry by swered enough to make a difference, goals are not met not met goals are a difference, make enough to the road down is kicked can and the proverbial with. This to grapple generations future for able? There is also the cost of inaction, which is of inaction, which is also the cost able? There even can be equally or but to quantify, difficult doing nothing, By or not burdensome. more Is this fiscally responsible and balanced, given given responsible and balanced, Is this fiscally avail and public funding on private limitations year in a county where the annual local contri the annual local where in a county year less than 10% causes is typically to these bution figure. of that services. Even over a 30-year period, this would this would period, a 30-year over services. Even per than $1.6 million dollars more to equate the non-open space and greenways needs that needs that the non-open space and greenways and water roads, for in our communities exist and a variety infrastructure, sewer Such a staggering figure in today’s dollars, dollars, today’s in figure Such a staggering and inflation withtime which will onlyincrease all considering seems overwhelming ary forces tential projects that was considered based on based considered was that projects tential the public input received. preservation, parks and recreation, trails, con trails, recreation, and parks preservation, and education. measures, servation of po list a much larger from selection careful over $50,000,000 for completing the majority completing $50,000,000 for over land for strategies of the 54 implementation Plain and simple, a lot of money will be needed will be needed simple, a lot of money Plain and imple to and beyond of this plan life the over require could it that estimated it. It is ment and Benefits Long-Term Costs Costs Long-Term Chapter 5 - Implementation 84 50% ofallthecosts that have beenidentified, plan, andassuminggrants could besecured for municipal) were allocated to implementing this If $500,000peryear oflocal funds(county and nursing homeresidents, andchildren. ty students, correctional inmates, county. Thisnumberexcludes BucknellUniversi there are 25,000contributing adults inthe approximately $500,000 annuallyassuming Using $20perperson peryear would generate space, parks, trails, andrelated conservation. or more ayear insupportofgreenways, open while nearly60%indicated they would pay $50 of respondents supported paying $20ayear, a survey that was posted for thisplan,whichwas for theseinitiatives. In response totheon-line to imposehigherfees andtaxes onthemselves since 1988. 79% ofmeasures have passedinPennsylvania voters to decide,nearly75%have passedand conservation ballotmeasures have gone to the Historically, intheUnited States, whenlocal zenry supporthigherlevels ofinvestment? agricultural landpreservation? Would theciti The Survey Says.... limited samplesize andself-selected, 75% greenways, openspace,andrelated conservation. 5 Over halfoftheresponders supportpaying $50annually. Three-quarters ofsurvey responders supportpaying $20annuallyto maintain Yes, voters have typically chosen - - costs. priorities emerging inthefuture orincreased two scenarios account for new projects and tation would take acentury. Neitherofthese ered more reasonable, thenfullimplemen If $250,000oflocal annualfundingisconsid ty ofimplementation actions. it would take 50years to complete themajori tion costs is by more volunteerism onthepart One way to significantly reduce implementa trails. outreach isthelowest cost item, followed by buffers, and community parks. Education and measures like securingandinstalling riparian agricultural landpreservation, conservation tions more closely, thehigher cost items are Looking at theimplementation recommenda orities beeliminated due to unaffordability? plan at areduced cost orshouldcertain pri lar amount, are there ways to implement the robust approach. Inlight oftheprojected dol between doingnothingandaneven more egies proposed are seenasthemiddleground current local levels, keeping inmindthestrat mentation willnecessitate fundingbeyond It isevident that moving forward withimple ------cannot beignored interms ofecosystem, com- benefits ofgreenway andopenspace resources On theothersideofbalancesheet, the prehensive manner. widespread environmental concerns inacom unteer, orfinancial resources to address these organizations simplydonothave the staff, vol measures. Local governments andnon-profit Pennsylvania through incentives and regulatory efficiently addressed bytheCommonwealth of implementation could bemore effectively and met, perhaps water qualityissuesandbuffer the Chesapeake Bay Watershed are notbeing for nutrient andsediment reductions within and time to recover. Alternatively, since targets Riparian areas are resilient ifgiven thespace would reduce theneedfor buffer planting. areas to revert to amore natural state, this Similarly, iflandowners were to allow riparian plan. farms isthehighest implementation cost ofthis be tremendous sincepurchasing easements on right thingto do, thesavings to taxpayers would participate because they believed it was the conservation easements. Ifmore people would of property owners through thedonation of - - Chapter 5 - Implementation 85 Allenwood to Montgomery Greenway Greenway Montgomery to Allenwood 3) (See Figure and Trail Develop conservation marketing marketing conservation Develop materials River accesses at Great Stream Stream Great accesses at River Street George Commons and St. on Select Installation Riparian Buffer Segments Stream Impaired and restoration Urban stream development greenway 5. 2. 3. 4. 1. tration project. On the other hand, installing installing other hand, On the project. tration map in Figure 2. map in Figure s an existing within access kayak and a canoe would lands on publicly controlled greenway qualify. projects the demonstration are below Listed Committee Steering the project by selected on the presented locations with the general - - - This is consistent with prior with This is consistent 10 11 Attract both local and regional use and and both local Attract and attention; of implementa- a high probability Have condensed project tion success and delivery. Create momentum for future expan future for momentum Create space and open sion of the greenway system; of awareness Be visible and increase nat of local and benefits the presence resources; ural

1. 2. be more readily achievable with fewer chal with fewer achievable readily be more For implementation. for overcome to lenges need would that and trail a greenway example, properties multiple private across be routed to opposition landowner is known there where as a demon- candidate not be a good would Demonstration Projects Demonstration actions implementation The 54 recommended identified including those reviewed, were which to determine as being high priorities, as early implementation be highlighted could Demonstration projects. or demonstration the following meet should typically projects criteria: 3. 4. would projects ideally demonstration Potential protected open space had been incorporated incorporated had been space open protected prices commanded homes neighborhoods, into those without higher than 29 percent 20 to open space. values property that documenting research and greenways to based on proximity increase open space. - - - -

- In Union 6 A study by Colorado State State Colorado by A study 9 7 More established and longer trails, like like trails, and longer established More 8 in financial benefits. permanently where that found University region. County, in Lycoming Rail Trail the Pine Creek year to $5 million per $3 an estimated generate crease property values. In the first year the Buf In the first values. property crease estimated open, it was was Rail Trail Valley falo the impact to economic had a $478,000 have to In addition, greenways, open space, parks, and open space, parks, In addition, greenways, and in other investment visitors, attract trails States Census of Agriculture, the market value value the market Census of Agriculture, States sold in Union County products agricultural for $135,970,000. was land brings considerable economic value to the to value economic land brings considerable United recent the most to According region. and farmland was on the lower end of the end of the on the lower was and farmland and crops cultivated for $66 per acre at scale agricultural However pasture. for $46 per acre Wetlands had the most annual value at $1,252 at annual value had the most Wetlands lands had no value while developed per year and air pollution removal benefits. removal and air pollution have would forests public and private County, of $96 million. an annual value $790 per acre value derived from stormwater stormwater from derived value $790 per acre and sequestra storage carbon management, quality protection, water control, tion, erosion per acre value of land by cover type. For exam type. For cover of land by value per acre an annual lands as having forest show ple, they analy Land has conducted Public for The Trust annual for the figure a dollar sis and estimated There are annual and long-term benefits that that benefits long-term and annual are There are best, at that, resources these accrue from recognized. must be but to quantify, difficult munity health, and positive economic impact. impact. economic and positive health, munity Chapter 5 - Implementation 86 Figure 2.Locations ofSelected Demonstration Projects Chapter 5 - Implementation 87 Figure 3. Allenwood to Montgomery Greenway and Trail Greenway Montgomery to 3. Allenwood Figure Brady Township, Gregg Township, Lycoming County, County, Lycoming Township, Gregg Township, Brady Gregg Township, Brady Township and Montgomery and Montgomery Township Brady Township, Gregg Secure funding for construction. construction. funding for Secure trail. Construct trail maintenance and management. management. and maintenance trail final engineering. Complete Conduct a feasibility study for the Union County portion to portion Union County the for study Conduct a feasibility Commons Stream Great through routing the preferable determine County the Lycoming and update Village Allenwood and into study. feasibility secure to with partners work is determined, Once feasibility for framework and create design work engineering funding for In collaboration with Lycoming County create a four (4) mile rail rail (4) mile four a create County Lycoming with In collaboration Construction: $250,000 (Union County segment) $250,000 (Union County Construction: Feasibility Study (Union County portion): $12,500 Study (Union County Feasibility Engineering Design: $100,000 (4) (5) (3) (2) (1) Cost Estimate: Estimate: Cost Delivery Steps: Steps: Delivery Lycoming County Resource Management Services, Montgomery Borough, Borough, Services, Montgomery Management Resource County Lycoming Susquehanna Resources, and Natural of Conservation Department PA Authority Regional Branch and West Union County Partnership, Greenway Borough Partners: Potential for an additional loop trail on Great Stream Commons open space areas. areas. open space Commons Stream Great on loop trail an additional for Municipalities: Project: the potential with Borough Montgomery to Village Allenwood linking trail Allenwood to Montgomery Greenway and Trail and Greenway Montgomery to Allenwood Chapter 5 - Implementation 88 Cost Estimate: Delivery Steps: m a e r Community Corporation t S t a e Natural Resources, UnionCounty, r andWarrior Run G t a Conservancy, PA r Department ofConservation and e v i R Potential Partners: a n n a h e u q s u Municipalities: S h c n a r B t Commons. SeeFigure 4. s e W e h t Project: Great Stream CommonsRiver Access Construction: $50,000 Site Design:$10,000 (5) (4) maintenance arrangement andexecute it (3) (2) RunCommunityCorporation. (1)

Construct the river access andamenities (i.e. parking). Complete site designandengineering. accordingly. Finalize theownership, management, and Determine finallocation forthe Pennsylvania Conservancy andWarrior Reopen discussionswithNorthcentral o t s s e c c a k a y a k d n a e o n a c d e z i l a m r o f a p o l e v e D Gregg Township Northcentral Pennsylvania access point.

Figure 4.Artist’s Rendering ofAccess to Susquehanna River at Great Stream Commons Chapter 5 - Implementation 89 Figure 6. Artist’s Rendering After Riparian Buffer Rendering After 6. Artist’s Figure Figure 5. Before Riparian Buffer Riparian 5. Before Figure Buffalo Creek Watershed Alliance, Lower Penns Creek Penns Creek Alliance, Lower Watershed Creek Buffalo Multiple Secure project funding. project Secure and monitor. riparian buffer Install impaired stream segment segment stream impaired etc. easement, agreement, riparian buffer execute terms and Negotiate fencing,stream exclusionary including livestock Design riparian buffer and other treatments. crossings, Partner organizations identify cooperating landowner on agriculturally agriculturally on landowner cooperating identify organizations Partner Install ¼ mile riparian buffer on an agriculturally impaired stream stream impaired an agriculturally on buffer ¼ mile riparian Install 1) Miscellaneous: $2,500 Buffer Permanent Easement: $19,500 Easement: Permanent Buffer $7,500 Planting: Buffer (4) (5) (3) ( (2) Cost Estimate: Estimate: Cost Delivery Steps: Steps: Delivery Department of Environmental Protection, PA Fish and Boat Commission, PA Commission, PA Fish and Boat Protection, of Environmental Department and US Fish and Wildlife District Conservation Union County Game Commission, Service. Potential Partners: Potential Service, Conservation Resource Natural landowners, Association, Watershed PA Conservancy, Pennsylvania Northcentral Linn Conservancy, Merrill W. Municipalities: Project: 5 and 6 See Figures location. in a visible segment Riparian Buffer Installation on Agriculturally Impaired Stream Impaired on Agriculturally Installation Buffer Riparian Chapter 5 - Implementation 90 Cost Estimate: Delivery Steps: District, andUSFishWildlife Service. Commission, PA GameCommission,UnionCounty Conservation PA Department ofEnvironmental Protection, PA FishandBoat Conservancy, PA Department ofConservation andNatural Resources, Buffalo Township, Lewisburg Borough, Northcentral Pennsylvania Potential Partners: Municipalities: riparian buffer Project: Development Urban Stream Restoration andGreenway Construction: $100,000 Planning &Design:$10,000 (4) (3) (2) (1) Construct stream restoration project andmonitor. Secure project funding. Conduct restoration designandpermitting. planning, Identify andselect candidate stream segment(s). Restore urbanstream segment to natural conditions witha

East Buffalo Township andLewisburg Borough Buffalo Valley Recreation Authority, East other best management practices. measures suchaseasements, riparianbuffers, habitat improvement, and governments, andschoolsaboutthevalue andbenefits of conservation attorneys, agricultural landowners, general public,homeowners, local program ofmulti-mediamaterials andmessaging for distribution to Project: Develop Conservation Marketing Materials Cost Estimate: Delivery Steps: public andprivate schools,andUnionCounty Conservation District. Merrill W. LinnConservancy, Lower Penns Creek Watershed Association, Environment, Conservation Union,Buffalo Creek Watershed Alliance, Potential Partners: Municipalities: Marketing Materials: $20,000 Consultant: $5,000 (6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1) Monitor andmeasure effectiveness ofmessaging. and distribution. Work withmarketing consultants to finalize materials, production, Select apreferred marketing approach. with developing conservation education andmarketing options. Engage ateam ofmarketing andoutreach professionals to assist Identify target audiences, key focus areas, anddesired outcomes. marketing initiative. Organize acore group ofpartners to oversee development ofthe Implement acomprehensive andeffective conservation marketing All Bucknell University Center for Sustainability and the

Chapter 5 - Implementation 91

http://www. http://cloud.tpl.org/ http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012/Full_ . 2015 Rail to Trails Conservancy. Conservancy. Trails . 2015 Rail to Notes Pine Creek Rail Trail 2006 User Survey and Economic Impact Analysis. 2006 User Survey and Economic Pine Creek Rail Trail Buffalo Valley Rail Trail 2012 User Survey and Economic Impact Analysis. Economic Trail 2012 User Survey and Rail Valley Buffalo https://tpl.quickbase.com/db/bbqna2qct?a=dbpage&pageID=8 Maintenance Practices and Costs of Rail Trails of Rail Costs and Practices Maintenance 2012 United States Census of Agriculture. USDA National Agricultual Statistics Service. Statistics Agricultual National USDA of Agriculture. Census States 2012 United Trust for Public Land. Pennsylvania’s Return on Investment in the Keystone Recreation, Park, and Conservation Fund. 2013. Conservation Park, and Recreation, in the Keystone on Investment Return Public Land. Pennsylvania’s for Trust Colorado State University. 2013. http://www.parjustlisted.com/neighborhoods-with-protected-open-space-bringing-higher-sale-prices-study- 2013. http://www.parjustlisted.com/neighborhoods-with-protected-open-space-bringing-higher-sale-prices-study- University. State Colorado Colorado State University. 2013. http://www.parjustlisted.com/neighborhoods-with-protected-open-space-bringing-higher-sale-prices-study- 2013. http://www.parjustlisted.com/neighborhoods-with-protected-open-space-bringing-higher-sale-prices-study- University. State Colorado Nichols, Sarah & Compton, John. Michigan State University and Texas A&M University. The Impact of Greenways on Property Values: Evidence Evidence Values: on Property The Impact of Greenways A&M University. and Texas University State John. Michigan & Compton, Nichols, Sarah PA DCED Governor’s Center for Local Government Services. https://palocalgovtraining.org/retained/factsheets/AgZoning-LandUse_2013.pdf Government Local for Center DCED Governor’s PA Oswald, Kinnaman, Burkhart, Nicholson. Kinnaman, Burkhart, Oswald,

LandVote. Trust for Public Land. for Trust LandVote. National Recreation and Parks Association 2015 Field Report. http://www.nrpa.org/uploadedFiles/PageBuilder_Proragis/Content/common_ http://www.nrpa.org/uploadedFiles/PageBuilder_Proragis/Content/common_ Report. 2015 Field Association Parks and Recreation National

Knoch, Carl and Tom Sexton. Sexton. Carl and Tom Knoch, The $50 million cost estimate includes $12 million for preserving 5,000 acres of the 17,000 acres of priority agricultural land. Another $30 million land. Another agricultural of priority of the 17,000 acres 5,000 acres preserving for $12 million includes estimate million cost The $50

11 http://agrilifecdn.tamu.edu/cromptonrpts/files/2011/06/4_2_7.pdf 2005. Texas. Austin from 10 finds/ finds/ Nichols, Sarah & Compton, John. Michigan State University and Texas A&M University. The Impact of Greenways on Property Values: Values: on Property The Impact of Greenways University. A&M Texas and University State John. Michigan & Compton, finds/ Nichols, Sarah http://agrilifecdn.tamu.edu/cromptonrpts/files/2011/06/4_2_7.pdf 2005. Texas. Austin from Evidence Knoch, Carl and Patricia Tomes. Rails to Trails Conservancy. Conservancy. Trails Rails to Tomes. Carl and Patricia Knoch, railstotrails.org/resourcehandler.ashx?id=3487 9 Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_County_Level/Pennsylvania/st42_2_001_001.pdf 8 pubs/benefits-pa-keystone-roi-report.pdf 7 6 elelments/FieldReport.pdf 5 3 4 would be required to protect the 12,000 acre balance. Similarly riparian buffer installation is included only for priority impaired stream stream priority impaired for included only is installation buffer Similarly riparian balance. 12,000 acre the protect to be required would $15 million. an additional would necessitate goals riparian buffer implement completely To reaches. 1 2 Photo Credits

Photo Credits 95 . . . License: http://www.123rf.com/license.php?type=free https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/legalcode. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/legalcode. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ . License: . Goodenow, W. Geoff. 2016. Geoff. W. . Goodenow, . 2015. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/legalcode . License: www.flickr. com. License: com. License: www.flickr. . 2016. Chapter 1 - Introduction Chapter www.flickr. com. License: com. License: www.flickr. www.flickr.com . License: . License: Canoeist . 2016. . 2010. . 2013. . 2007. Union County Planning Department. . 2007. Union County www.flickr.com 2008. Union County Planning Department. Planning County Union 2008. . 2015. www.flickr.com . 2008. Union County Planning Commission. Planning County . 2008. Union KIds in Leaves Berlin Stream Day New Enjoying . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County , Lewisburg. 2006. Union County Planning Department. County 2006. Union , Lewisburg. Farmstead Buffalo Township. Buffalo Farmstead . 2003. Union County Planning Commission. . 2003. Union County Black-Eyed Susan Black-Eyed . 2008. Susquehanna Valley Visitors Bureau. Visitors Valley . 2008. Susquehanna WB River . 2008. Union County Planning Department. Planning County . 2008. Union White Deer Creek White . 2008 Union County Planning Department. . 2008 Union County . 2008. Susquehanna Valley Visitors Bureau. Visitors . 2008. Susquehanna Valley . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County Hand with tree growing from pile of coins Hand with tree growing . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County . Nigel. 2011. . Nigel. . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County Susquehanna Greenway Partnership. Partnership. Susquehanna Greenway Geoff. W. Goodenow, Goodenow, W. Geoff. Geoff. W. Goodenow, . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County tate Park Fishing Park tate – – – Dale Engle Walker House Walker Dale Engle Tonelli, Nicholas. A. Nicholas. Tonelli, Steven. Reynolds, Amish Biking on the Rail Trail. on the Rail Biking Amish Duck Wood S Boy Farmer Little – – – – – – – http://www.123rf.com/stock-photo/spending_money.html?mediapopup=5073416. http://www.123rf.com/stock-photo/spending_money.html?mediapopup=5073416. Squirrel Tree the BVRT Enjoying Family Canoeing Gazebo in Hufnagle Park Gazebo Farm at Brookpark Creative Thoughts Fishing Park State Amish Buggy Tomatoes Lewisburg Boat Launch Lewisburg on Rail Butterfly Field at Sunset 2 Kilmer Trail Joyce Page 12 – Stock Photo - Photo 12 – Stock Page Page 7 – Page 8 – Page 9 – Page Page 7 – Page 7 – Page Page 6 – Page 6 – Page 6 – Page Page 5 – Page 5 – Page Page 3 – Page 4 – Page Page 1 – Richard, Christophe. Christophe. 1 – Richard, Page Nicholas. A. 3 – Tonelli, Page 3 – Page Quote Page Page Quote Page Quote Page Quote Title Page Title Page Title Page Title Page Title Page Title Page Title Page Page Title Title Page Title Page Page Title Photo Credits 96 Page 40–Ruhrfisch. Page 40– Page 38–Tonelli, Nicholas.A. Page 37–Tonelli, Nicholas.A. Page 37– Page 34– Page 31– Page 29– Page 26– Page 26– Page 25– Page 25– Page 23– Page 21– Page 21– Page 17–Tonelli, Nicholas.A. Page 17– Page 15– Page 47– Page 47– Page 45– Page 44– Page 44– Page 42– License:https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed. en. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Susquehanna_Ordnance_Depot_Bunker.JPG. Dale’s RidgeTrail 6 Walking theBVRT Mifflinburg Community Park1 PHMC Evangelical Church NRHC MifflinburgBuggyMuseum2 Dale’s RidgeTrail Shikellamy Overlookto NorthumberlandCounty andtheSusquehannaRiver. Wetlands atGreatStreamCommons Blue Heron Mountain Road. West Buffalo Township Vista Lewisburg Playground Lewisburg Playground Bicyclist ontheRailTrail Horse andBuggy Barn Mifflinburg Street inMifflinburg Red Barn. Sunflowers . 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. Bunker fromtheformer SusquehannaOrdnance DepotinState GameLands252,GreggTownship. . 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2009UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2016.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2005.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment . 2013.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. Hook NaturalArea Cooper MillVista (Revisted) . 2009.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. Halfway LakeHalfway Dam . 2007.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2006UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2015.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2008UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. Chapter 3–Green &OpenSpaceResources . 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. . 2012.www.flickr. com. License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ legalcode . 2012.www.flickr. com. License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ legalcode Chapter 2–County Overview . 2012.www.flickr. com. License: 2008.UnionCounty PlanningDepartment. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/legalcode 2006 Photo Credits 97 2010. . www.flickr.com 2009. Participants at Public Meeting. at Public Meeting. Participants Chapter 5 – Implementation 5 Chapter . 2008. Union County Planning Department. Planning County . 2008. Union . 2015. Union County Planning Department. . 2015. Union County 2013. www.flickr. com. License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ legalcode https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ com. License: 2013. www.flickr. 2015. www.flickr. com. License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ legalcode https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ License: com. 2015. www.flickr. . 2015. Union County Planning Department. . 2015. Union County . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County http://www.lewisburgpa.com/ Chapter 4 – Greenway and Open Space Framework Space Open and Greenway 4 – Chapter . 2015. Union County Planning Department. . 2015. Union County . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County 2016. Spring Creek. . 2015. Union County Planning Department. . 2015. Union County Cowbell Hollow. Cowbell Forest. State Tunneled Mile Run Road, . 2015. Union County Planning Department. . 2015. Union County . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County . 2008. Union County Planning Department. . 2008. Union County . 2008. Union County Planning Department. Planning Department. . 2008. Union County . 2016. Union County Planning Department. . 2016. Union County Mixed-Use Building in New Berlin Building in New Mixed-Use Structure at Kidsburg Rock Run Sign Spruce 2 Butterfly West Buffalo Township Vista Township Buffalo West Sign Laurel Run Activity Complex Union County Park, Sand Bridge State Buffalo Creek Canoe Buffalo Bee Balm Berlin Flag New Vista Union County Penns Creek at New Berlin Memorial Park Berlin at New Creek Penns Pennsylvania. Lewisburg, Tonelli, Nicholas. A. Tonelli, – – – – License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/legalcode

Page 82 – Page 83 – Page 84 – Page Page 80 – Page 81 – Page Page 69 – Page 73 – Page Page 68 Page 68 Page 68 Page Page 60 – Tonelli, Nicholas. A. 60 – Tonelli, Page 67 – Page Page 58 – Tonelli, Nicholas. A. 58 – Tonelli, Page Page 51 – Pearson, Samantha, Lewisburg Neighborhoods Corporation. Corporation. Neighborhoods Lewisburg Samantha, 51 – Pearson, Page 52 – Page 58 – Page Page 49 Page