Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-637307 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_luzerne_county_levee_trai_637307_DRAFT_1.pdf 1. PROJECT INFORMATION

Project Name: Luzerne County Levee Trail Gap Date of Review: 8/7/2017 04:59:27 PM Project Category: Recreation, Trails & Trailheads (parking, etc.) Project Area: 10.77 acres County(s): Luzerne Township/Municipality(s): FORTY FORT; KINGSTON ZIP Code: 18704 Quadrangle Name(s): KINGSTON; PITTSTON Watersheds HUC 8: Upper Susquehanna-Lackawanna Watersheds HUC 12: City of Wilkes-Barre-Susquehanna River Decimal Degrees: 41.269634, -75.873594 Degrees Minutes Seconds: 41° 16' 10.6810" N, 75° 52' 24.9373" W

This is a draft receipt for information only. It has not been submitted to jurisdictional agencies for review.

2. SEARCH RESULTS

Agency Results Response PA Game Commission Potential Impact FURTHER REVIEW IS REQUIRED, See Agency Response PA Department of Conservation and No Known Impact No Further Review Required Natural Resources PA Fish and Boat Commission No Known Impact No Further Review Required U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service No Known Impact No Further Review Required

As summarized above, Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) records indicate there may be potential impacts to threatened and endangered and/or special concern species and resources within the project area. If the response above indicates "No Further Review Required" no additional communication with the respective agency is required. If the response is "Further Review Required" or "See Agency Response," refer to the appropriate agency comments below. Please see the DEP Information Section of this receipt if a PA Department of Environmental Protection Permit is required.

Page 1 of 6 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-637307 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_luzerne_county_levee_trai_637307_DRAFT_1.pdf

Page 2 of 6 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-637307 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_luzerne_county_levee_trai_637307_DRAFT_1.pdf

Page 3 of 6 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-637307 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_luzerne_county_levee_trai_637307_DRAFT_1.pdf 3. AGENCY COMMENTS Regardless of whether a DEP permit is necessary for this proposed project, any potential impacts to threatened and endangered species and/or special concern species and resources must be resolved with the appropriate jurisdictional agency. In some cases, a permit or authorization from the jurisdictional agency may be needed if adverse impacts to these species and habitats cannot be avoided.

These agency determinations and responses are valid for two years (from the date of the review), and are based on the project information that was provided, including the exact project location; the project type, description, and features; and any responses to questions that were generated during this search. If any of the following change: 1) project location, 2) project size or configuration, 3) project type, or 4) responses to the questions that were asked during the online review, the results of this review are not valid, and the review must be searched again via the PNDI Environmental Review Tool and resubmitted to the jurisdictional agencies. The PNDI tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer impacts than what is listed on this PNDI receipt. The jursidictional agencies strongly advise against conducting surveys for the species listed on the receipt prior to consultation with the agencies.

PA Game Commission RESPONSE: Further review of this project is necessary to resolve the potential impact(s). Please send project information to this agency for review (see WHAT TO SEND).

PGC Species: (Note: The Pennsylvania Conservation Explorer tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer species than what is listed below.)

Scientific Name Common Name Current Status Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon Endangered

PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources RESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concern species and resources.

PA Fish and Boat Commission RESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concern species and resources.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service RESPONSE: No impacts to federally listed or proposed species are anticipated. Therefore, no further consultation/coordination under the Endangered Species Act (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. is required. Because no take of federally listed species is anticipated, none is authorized. This response does not reflect potential Fish and Wildlife Service concerns under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act or other authorities.

* Special Concern Species or Resource - Plant or animal species classified as rare, tentatively undetermined or candidate as well as other taxa of conservation concern, significant natural communities, special concern populations (plants or animals) and unique geologic features. ** Sensitive Species - Species identified by the jurisdictional agency as collectible, having economic value, or being susceptible to decline as a result of visitation.

Page 4 of 6 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-637307 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_luzerne_county_levee_trai_637307_DRAFT_1.pdf WHAT TO SEND TO JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES

If project information was requested by one or more of the agencies above, upload* or email* the following information to the agency(s). Instructions for uploading project materials can be found here. This option provides the applicant with the convenience of sending project materials to a single location accessible to all three state agencies. Alternatively, applicants may email or mail their project materials (see AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION). *Note: U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service requires applicants to mail project materials to the USFWS PA field office (see AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION). USFWS will not accept project materials submitted electronically (by upload or email).

Check-list of Minimum Materials to be submitted: ____Project narrative with a description of the overall project, the work to be performed, current physical characteristics of the site and acreage to be impacted. ____A map with the project boundary and/or a basic site plan(particularly showing the relationship of the project to the physical features such as wetlands, streams, ponds, rock outcrops, etc.) In addition to the materials listed above, USFWS REQUIRES the following ____SIGNED copy of a Final Project Environmental Review Receipt

The inclusion of the following information may expedite the review process. ____Color photos keyed to the basic site plan (i.e. showing on the site plan where and in what direction each photo was taken and the date of the photos) ____Information about the presence and location of wetlands in the project area, and how this was determined (e.g., by a qualified wetlands biologist), if wetlands are present in the project area, provide project plans showing the location of all project features, as well as wetlands and streams.

4. DEP INFORMATION The Pa Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) requires that a signed copy of this receipt, along with any required documentation from jurisdictional agencies concerning resolution of potential impacts, be submitted with applications for permits requiring PNDI review. Two review options are available to permit applicants for handling PNDI coordination in conjunction with DEP’s permit review process involving either T&E Species or species of special concern. Under sequential review, the permit applicant performs a PNDI screening and completes all coordination with the appropriate jurisdictional agencies prior to submitting the permit application. The applicant will include with its application, both a PNDI receipt and/or a clearance letter from the jurisdictional agency if the PNDI Receipt shows a Potential Impact to a species or the applicant chooses to obtain letters directly from the jurisdictional agencies. Under concurrent review, DEP, where feasible, will allow technical review of the permit to occur concurrently with the T&E species consultation with the jurisdictional agency. The applicant must still supply a copy of the PNDI Receipt with its permit application. The PNDI Receipt should also be submitted to the appropriate agency according to directions on the PNDI Receipt. The applicant and the jurisdictional agency will work together to resolve the potential impact(s). See the DEP PNDI policy at https://conservationexplorer.dcnr.pa.gov/content/resources.

Page 5 of 6 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-637307 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_luzerne_county_levee_trai_637307_DRAFT_1.pdf 5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The PNDI environmental review website is a preliminary screening tool. There are often delays in updating species status classifications. Because the proposed status represents the best available information regarding the conservation status of the species, state jurisdictional agency staff give the proposed statuses at least the same consideration as the current legal status. If surveys or further information reveal that a threatened and endangered and/or special concern species and resources exist in your project area, contact the appropriate jurisdictional agency/agencies immediately to identify and resolve any impacts.

For a list of species known to occur in the county where your project is located, please see the species lists by county found on the PA Natural Heritage Program (PNHP) home page (www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us). Also note that the PNDI Environmental Review Tool only contains information about species occurrences that have actually been reported to the PNHP.

Page 6 of 6

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

MEETING NOTES Kingston / Forty Fort Project Project: SC 16095.10 Trail Feasibility Study No.:

Kingston Municipal Building Meeting 05.10.2017 Location: 500 Wyoming Ave Date/ Committee: 3PM - 5PM Kingston, PA 18704 Time: Public: 6PM - 8PM

Committee and Public Meeting Issue Re: Minutes 06.01.2017 Date:

ATTENDEES: Please see separate sign-in sheets

General Meeting Notes (for both meetings): 1. Bill Collins of Simone Collins (SC) started the meeting. 2. Bill stated that SC and members of the steering committee walked the site earlier in the day. 3. The project is partially funded by a mini-grant from the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) administered through Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC) Pocono Forest and Waters. 4. The project schedule includes two committee and two public meetings. The next round of meetings is September 7th. 5. Ryan Parisi of SC explained the project scope. The outcome of the project is to determine a feasible trail connection for the trail gap along the Luzerne County Levee Trail in Kingston and Forty Fort Boroughs. 6. The demographics within each borough are very similar. The age breakdown is also very even, which emphasizes the need to conceive a trail best suited to all user groups. 7. Ryan Parisi explained the project area and the various topographic and hydrologic constraints that exist. Photo images of the project area were used to familiarize the public with the site.

Levee Trail Gap Feasibility Study 1 8. SC presented information of various bikeway classifications from class 1 (off- road trails) to class 2 (bike lanes) to class 3 (shared cartways). 9. Current American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) standards will be used when designing the proposed trail alignment. 10. SC explained preliminary trail alignments that were conceptualized prior to site reconnaissance. 11. SC will revise alignments per meeting conversations and on-site reconnaissance.

Committee Meeting Notes (3PM - 5PM): 1. Chris Belleman at the Flood Protection Authority should be contacted. There are some constraints in terms of allowing recreation on the levee. 2. A multi-municipal regional authority is being organized with over 30 municipalities to create a pollution reduction plan (PRP). This organization would take a regional approach to addressing MS4 requirements. 3. The Regional Authority would site stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) across the region. Kingston Borough and Forty Fort Borough are in the heart of the region. 4. The Regional Authority would also maintain the BMP sites. 5. Gere Reisinger from Seneca Nation stated the historic significance of the wetland to the Native American community. Medicine used to be grown in the project area. 6. The area is very prone to flooding. 7. The water flow in this area is very stagnant and should be improved to allow better drainage out of the wetland. 8. The project should look at water quality improvements as well as the trail feasibility. 9. The idea of converting this area into a stormwater park was mentioned. This might assist with the MS4 compliance and clean up the wetland. 10. Edwards Landscaping owns land by the cross valley expressway. The study team met with Ed and he is a willing stakeholder in the project. 11. Security needs to be considered along the Levee. 12. Kingston Borough had a bike patrol. Paul Keating mentioned that Kingston Borough would be open to restarting this program again.

Levee Trail Gap Feasibility Study 2 13. Mine water drains under the river. Historically mining was done under the river, but the river broke into the mines and flooded the mine shafts. 14. There are sink holes throughout the floodplain caused by the mining excavations underground. 15. Gere informed the committee that the historic Native American Bridle Trail ran along the river. Evidence of this is found in Nesbitt Park. 16. There have been instances of crime reported along Nesbitt Park. 17. Ryan asked the committee for ideas of key persons that should be interviewed. The Study team will conduct 5-10 interviews. Potential Key Persons include: 1) Chris Belleman - Flood Protection Authority 2) Vinnie Cotrone - Riverfront Parks Committee 3) Army Corp of Engineers 4) PennDOT district 4 5) Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor (D&L) 6) Representative Aaron Kaufer 7) Ed Koppech - Owner of Edwards Landscaping 8) Abby Koral - Café 900 owner and businesswomen 9) Run Club 10) Upstate Velo

Public Meeting Notes (6PM - 8PM): 18. Representative Aaron Kaufer talked about the potential alignment of the trail through the wetland. He stated there appears to be a shelf along the cross valley expressway that could support a trail, this is above the wetland. 19. A cantilever, boardwalk, or bridge structure might be needed for an approximately 50’ to 100’ segment near the western end of the wetland (inland side). 20. Kings College was mentioned as a potential partner. The College has an outdoor class associated with their environmental science major. 21. Cabbott Oil and Gas might be a stakeholder willing to donate in-kind services. 22. UGI was mentioned as a potential stakeholder. 23. Giesinger Hospital donates yearly to local community projects and might be a good partner to promote healthy living. 24. A question was asked if there are other environmental hazards associated with the site. SC will look into these.

Levee Trail Gap Feasibility Study 3 25. Bill Collins discussed potential funding sources. 26. This project will likely take 5 or more years to implement. This is the first step in the process.

This report represents the Professional’s summation of the proceedings and is not a transcript. Unless written notice of any correction or clarification is received by the Professional within ten days of issue, the report shall be considered factually correct and shall become part of the official project record.

Sincerely, SIMONE COLLINS, INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

Ryan Parisi, ASLA Project Manager

Levee Trail Gap Feasibility Study 4

Kingston- Forty Fort Meeting Notes

Public Meeting 2 June 22, 2017 6:30pm Forty Fort Borough Hall Sign in sheet attached

Comment (name not captured) • FEMA-owned – flooding • Levee requires use of pesticides/herbicides to maintain • Would lights be required for a trail segment under the cross-Valley expressway ? • Who assumes liability of the new trail segment ? • Will there be a mudslide feasibility study ? • (We) want safe recreation • How would the trail connection be financed ? • River Street is a state route and has many tractor trailers

Chris (lives next to levee) • Turner Street Road improvements are good • A trail along the river (some people’s back yards) would be a severe detriment. • What is the level of demand ? • Not in favor of a trail

Linda (lives on Cayuga since 1972) • ACOE took riverfront program • No public access • Traffic on Cayuga • Parking – no signs for parking on river side • Flood Authority performs no maintenance behind yard • There is a gate for Authority access to levee access road to the south

Amy (Forty Foot Council)

Valerie • Home was robbed 8 months ago

Jill (Shew – sp?) • Attempted break-in at home at 11am two years ago • New sign – no public access • Cemetery – has dog issues • “Yield to Pedestian” signs – good on River Street

Dave R. (lives on Center Street) • Runner and cyclist • Need to look at alternatives • Don’t like riding on streets

Shannon (lives on Susquehanna) • Children riding on sidewalks • No traffic • Some residences back up on to the levee system • Fisherman are in this area • There are homeless in the area • Afraid of additional traffic • Afraid of crime at the Route 309 underpass • Not opposed to another route.

Molly Ryan • Has a pool near river bank • Crime in Kingston and Forty Fort • People are golfing in their yards • The levee gets no mowing / maintenance

Scott Smith (lives opposite “gate” house on Cayuga) • A new trail link represents a quality of life issue • Other issues living in Forty Fort include: o Airport useage o Airguns o Bass boats o Helicopters discharging on river o Flood Authority sprays herbicide, and performs no maintenance • Does not want access road / trail segment on the riverside below Forty Fort

Debbie (lives on West Turner) • Walks dogs on Susquehanna • Does not prefer 1A, C or D alternatives • Look for route to Kingston from Forty Fort • Want access across the mission link • Don’t want levee fee to go up • Between the River and Rutter – build a bridge over the Cross-Valley expressway • Must be safe • Good about the study

Jeff McLaughlin (Forty Fort Councilperson) • Looking for a safe alternative through the secluded area

Ken Johnson

David (72 years old) • Meeting is good • Bike lanes are important • Increase property values • There has always been a homeless issue in the park (in Kingston) • This is a study process • Like bike lanes • Prefer no trucks on River street

Ed (lives on River Street) • Many trucks currently use River Street • There is no parking • There is no connection through this area • Need additional bike route

Rob Swaback (lives on Susquehanna Ave) • Use alternative 3 • Tie in behind hursery

Public Meeting 2 September 7, 2017 6:30pm Kingston Borough Hall Sign in sheet attached

Dave • Lives near levee • Bedroom window overlooks, concerned people on service road / trail will look in • People playing golf in open, flat area of levee • County can’t pay for the levee • People pay $404 / year for levee fee • Local streets should not be uses for a “trail.)

Garret Collins (Kingston resident since 205) • Kids raised on the trail • Like alternative A+C • Don’t want to walk through Rutter intersection • Positive along trail, is an area amenity • Like flat trails • I pay taxes

Lisa Brown (live on Turner and River Streets) • Issue of parkin in the area • Has a garage on Rutter ave, use River Street to park

Comment (name not captured) • Prefer rout on Ritter • No to Alternative B • Residents should not have trees/lawn reduced

Mark Rutkovsky • Prefer off-road routes • Prefer Alternative A • Or a separate bike lane • Need curbs to separate bike lanes • Levee is not maintained

Mark Vukovich • Uses this “trail” • The “trail” is a perk for the area • Don’t want the alternative to infringe on neighbors • Want scenic route • Don’t want roadway traffic competition • Need physical parking solved for potential trail users

Amy Schwarts (Susquehanna and Rutter) • Appreciate bike “trail” • Didn’t speak to residents • Survey does not represent local residents • Only homes on west side of River and Susquehanna affected • Cross-valley – traffic, cars side-swiped • Dead end at grassed ramp at the end of Rutter Street • Met with Rep Aaron Kauffer – re: concern with intersection at Wells and Rutter Streets • The trail would not fix this intersection • Safety and parking issues

Jenna • Questions of crime, policing in survey • No negative language • What is the cost-benefit ?

Robert S • Use Rutter Street alignment with a trailhead

Sal Comitta • Project cost

Walt • Bike rider • Need traffic control at Wells Street • Feel safe on River Street

Gary K • Hours of “trail” operation – dawn to dusk is good • Access should be controlled • Surveillance in remote areas • Control when River level is up. • A trail under Route 309 would connect two sections of the existing levee • Any modification to the existing levee may affect flooding – design is important

David Bass (lives in Forty Fort) • Likes levee “trail” – to run and walk • C is the critical segment – to get under the Cross-county Expressway • Either Alternative A or B is OK

Chris • What are the environmental issues that need to be addressed ? • What are the costs of construction, operation, and maintenance ?

Brian • Trails increase property values • Examples are the Highline in NYC and Boulder Colorado trails • Segment C is the most important – getting around the high speed interchange at Rutter • Alternative B – needs a protected bikeline

Tim C (Kingston) • Commutes between Kingston and Wilkes Barre • Agrees that Segment C is most important • Cross-Valley Interchange is bad for ped-bike travel • Build C and then decide on Alternatives A or B

Mike Sgarlet • Segment C is best to create an off-road trail segment • Wells Street gets backed up • Congestion now on River, Rutter and Wells Streets • The are near the toll house is low • Alternative B will cause accidents • Parking regulations, permits, and enforcement can solve potential parking issues Jeff • River Street is 2-lane, 35 mph

Chris (Kingston) • See levee from window • Prefer Segment C • Possibly Alternative A – at a lower elevation (below residents view)

Committee Meeting 2 September 7, 2017 4:30pm Kingston Borough Hall Sign in sheet attached

Michele • Need Ped-bikes counts of Levee use (Market bridge, Commons) • D&L Corridor to connect D&L Trail to River Commons • LCPC applying for Ped-bike grants for planning

Key Person Interviews

Chris Belleman, Executive Director, Luzerne County Flood Protection Authority 6-22-17 3pm at LCFPA

• The Authority allows public use by walkers and cyclists on its levee service road sections in both Kingston and Forty Fort Boroughs. • The service road is NOT a trail. Sometimes the service road is closed to the public for maintenance, high water events and for other reasons. • Any modification to the exiting levee system to add sections of service road that might also be used as a trail would need to be reviewed and approved by ACOE. • The LCFPA currently has to maintain the section of levee rip rap in Forty Foot by hand to apply herbicide – where there is no service road benched into the embankment. • A new service road segment in the Forty Fort section might be beneficial to the LCFPA. • A trail connection under Route 309 could connect levee service road sections in Kingston and Forty Fort Boroughs. • Mr Belleman requested a presentation of the study project to his board – which happened on 8-15- 17, and included public comment.

Andy Turzinsky, Mayor, Forty Fort 7-13-17 by phone WC • The mayor described his experience as a cyclist is other regions of the country and supports the need to build a connection of the “levee” trail between Kingston and Forty Fort • The Mayor believes that the trail will be a benefit to the Forty Fort community and that all the important issues raised by residents can be satisfied through cooperation with Kingston Borough, the LCFPA, ACOE, DCNR and other partners.

Andy Cotrone / John Maday – Riverfront Parks Committee 6-22-17 9am at Nesbitt Park • Mr Cotrone is on the LCFPA Board. • Both gentleman serve on the Riverfront Parks Committee and support the need to build a missing trail link to connect the levee service road alignments on the north and south sides of Route 309, in Forty Fort and Kingston Boroughs respectively. • It was recommended that Chris Belleman, executive Director of LCFPA be interviewed (accomplished) • The following background information was offered: o Jim Brozenza was the former head of the LCFPA and conceived of the “levee” trail o According to Brozenza, a trail was originally conceived to use River and Rutter Streets, including signage to identify the “gap” route. o Issues along the riverside include: . Annual inundation at certain elevations . Route 309 . Remote area (under 309) . Possibly some privately-owned land . Some people have yards with back yards adjacent to the levee • Some people have issues with people who do not pay levee fees using the levee service road • Other information related included: o The levee elevation was raised in the 1990’s o There is a bass fisherman’s tournament on the Susquehanna annually o There is a boat launch at Nesbitt park o A 1920’s Olmstead-designed park is to the south in Kingston o Riverbend Park was redesigned in early 2000’s o Luzerne County divested of its parks in 2009, disbanding its parks department

Key Person Interview Questions

Luzerne County Levee Trail Gap Project: Project No.: Feasibility Study 16095.10

Meeting 6/27/2017 Location: Phone call: 570-954-4745 Date/Time: 1:00 PM

Topic: Key Person Interview Issue Date: 1/9/2018

NOTES: Gere Reisinger - Seneca Nation

1. Ryan Parisi of Simone Collins (SC) initiated a phone conversation with Gere Reisinger of the Seneca Nation. 2. Gere is an active member in the Seneca Nation and has assisted on numerous trail projects before. 3. Gere stated the historic Bridal Path trail use to run north from Nesbitt Park and through the project area. The wetland next to the Cross Valley Expressway is sacred ground. 4. Gere stated that crime along the waterfront and along the Levee Trail is a problem. The public has a serious concern about this spreading with the extension of the trail. 5. Gere informed SC that Mike Scarlat will be reaching out in the near future regarding the trail project. Mike owns land in a significant portion of the wetland area. He is an important point of contact. 6. Ryan stated that SC has met with Chris Belleman, executive director of the Luzerne County Flood Protection Authority (FPA). The FPA is open to the idea of a trail used as a maintenance road to access the levee on the riverside. Ryan stated that the FPA refers to the trail as a maintenance road. 7. Gere stated that there might be some bad relationships between the FPA and local residents. Some residents dislike the spraying of herbicides adjacent to their homes. He stated that the herbicide is toxic, and the residue can last a week. It is sprayed from their maintenance vehicles. 8. Gere stated that the landscape design in Nesbitt Park is a very efficient flood mitigation design. The area north of Nesbitt Park that is crime ridden, is full of invasive plant species. Gere recommends that the trees north of Nesbitt Park

X:\16095.00 Kingston Trail Study\Contacts\170630_KPI_GereReisinger.docx 1 be removed and a more open design with lawn be utilized. Gere asked Ryan what this type of landscape design is called? 9. Ryan stated that typical floodplain mitigation strategies encourage riparian buffers with lots of trees. The design at Nesbitt Park is more of an engineered approach that seeks to move the water through as fast as possible. This limits the amount of debris deposits, but creates additional flooding downstream. This type of flood mitigation is an older style that is not typically designed for anymore. SC will look into flood mitigation strategies. 10. Gere stated that in 2011, the flood led to lots of debris deposits. This might be improved with less trees in the floodway. Debris deposits caused damage to flood gates. Gere is looking for pictures and will send to SC. 11. Gere mentioned that the Seneca Nation wants to see the wetland cleaned up and the hydraulics improved. 12. Ryan stated that one of the ideas of the plan might be to combine trail funding with stormwater mitigation funding to improve the wetland and build the trail. 13. Gere stated that he liked the idea of a catwalk across part of the wetland, especially if the wetland hydraulics are improved. This could be a really spiritual and special place. 14. Ryan mentioned that SC will continue to reach out to key persons such as the Army Corp of Engineers and PennDOT. SC should also reach out to the Luzerne County Conservation District. 15. Gere asked if there were any maintenance grants available? Ryan stated that maintenance grants are not typical. Gere stated that when he worked in Edan Valley in Balwin, Iowa there were maintenance grants available. SC will look into the availability of maintenance grants. 16. Ryan asked what the preferred route is that Gere would like to see based on the preliminary alignments SC presented on 6/22/2017? Gere stated that he would like to see the trail along River Street and then turn down Turner Street. This would involve sidewalk improvements. 17. Ryan stated that there appears to be a lot of Right-of-Way available to make streetscape improvements. 18. Ryan asked if Gere would be opposed to a trail along the levee but lower down the embankment and away from the residences? Gere stated that he is not opposed to the idea, but thinks local residents will be.

(over)

2

This report represents the Professional’s summation of the proceedings and is not a transcript. Unless written notice of any correction or clarification is received by the Professional within ten days of issue, the report shall be considered factually correct and shall become part of the official project record.

Sincerely,

SIMONE COLLINS, INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

Ryan Parisi, ASLA Project Manager [email protected]

Cc: William Collins, RLA

3 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q1 What is the name of the municipality you live in?

Answered: 143 Skipped: 19

(no label)

0 10 20 30 40 50

FORTY KINGSTON CITY OF PLAINS WYOMING WEST SWOYERSVILLE LUZERNE PRINGLE EDWARDSVILLE LARKSVILLE COURTDALE KINGSTON FORT BOROUGH WILKES- TOWNSHIP BOROUGH WYOMING BOROUGH BOROUGH BOROUGH BOROUGH BOROUGH BOROUGH TOWNSHIP BOROUGH BARRE BOROUGH (no 53.15% 25.87% 4.20% 1.40% 0.70% 0.70% 8.39% 1.40% 0.00% 1.40% 0.00% 0.00% 2.80% label) 76 37 6 2 1 1 12 2 0 2 0 0

# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE 1 Dallas Twp 8/19/2017 1:34 PM 2 Thornbury Township 8/15/2017 9:49 AM 3 Exeter Borough 7/4/2017 9:39 AM 4 Dallas 7/3/2017 11:47 PM

5 Wright Twp (Mountain Top) 7/3/2017 11:06 PM 6 Dunmore 7/3/2017 10:44 PM 7 Dallas 7/3/2017 7:40 PM

8 Mountain Top 7/3/2017 6:01 PM 9 Laflin Borough 7/3/2017 5:46 PM 10 Mountain Top 7/3/2017 5:15 PM 11 Dllas Township 7/3/2017 5:10 PM

12 Dallas twp 7/3/2017 4:55 PM 13 Scranton 7/3/2017 4:39 PM 14 Plains township 7/3/2017 4:02 PM

15 Laflin 7/3/2017 3:36 PM 16 Plymouth 7/3/2017 2:08 PM 17 Wright Township 7/3/2017 12:56 PM

1 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q2 How many years have you lived in your current municipality?

Answered: 160 Skipped: 2

(no label)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

0-5 6-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51+ TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE (no label) 25.00% 9.38% 27.50% 11.25% 14.37% 5.00% 7.50% 40 15 44 18 23 8 12 160 19.38

2 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q3 What is your age

Answered: 160 Skipped: 2

(no label)

0 10 20 30 40 50

>12 13-18 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE (no label) 0.63% 0.63% 1.88% 13.75% 22.50% 27.50% 18.13% 15.00% 1 1 3 22 36 44 29 24 160 48.78

3 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q4 How many people currently live in your household?

Answered: 159 Skipped: 3

(no label)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE (no 12.58% 40.88% 11.95% 26.42% 5.03% 2.52% 0.00% 0.63% 0.00% 0.00% label) 20 65 19 42 8 4 0 1 0 0 159 2.81

4 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q5 Please indicate how many people of each age group currently live in your household?

Answered: 157 Skipped: 5

Children under the age of 5...

Children ages 6-12 years

Children ages 13-18 years

Adults ages 19-64 years

Adults 65+ years

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ NA TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Children 22.34% 6.38% 1.06% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 70.21% under 21 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 94 0.38 the age of 5 years Children 14.13% 14.13% 2.17% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 69.57% ages 6- 13 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 92 0.49 12 years

Children 23.16% 12.63% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.05% 63.16% ages 22 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 60 95 0.59 13-18 years Adults 17.69% 61.90% 5.44% 7.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.48% ages 26 91 8 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 147 1.88 19-64 years Adults 9.88% 19.75% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 70.37% 65+ 8 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 81 0.49 years

5 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q6 In the past 12 months, has any member of your household participated in any trail related recreation in or around the region? This would include any activity, such as walking, biking, jogging, dog walking, etc.

Answered: 140 Skipped: 22

Yes

No

Do Not Know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES

Yes 92.86% 130

No 7.14% 10

Do Not Know 0.00% 0 TOTAL 140

6 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q7 Which trails, parks, natural areas or open space areas do you visit for recreation purposes? (Please check all that apply)

Answered: 135 Skipped: 27

Luzerne County Levee Trail

Kirby Park - 160 Market...

Back Mountain Rail Trail

Frances Slocum State Park -...

Forty Fort Cemetery - 2...

Nesbitt Park - Kingston, PA

River Common - 133 N River...

Seven Tubs Nature Area ...

J. Charles Fields - 200...

Betty Mascelli Park - Shook...

Hickory Run State Park -...

Lehigh Gorge State Park -...

Moon Lake State Forest...

James S Keiper Memorial Par...

Bear Creek Preserve - 4...

Delaware and Lehigh Natio...

Lackawanna River Herita...

Pinchot State Forest - Bea...

Susquehanna Warrior Trail

Other (please specify)

George Ralston Field -...

Coal Street Park - Coal...

Susquehanna Water Trail...

Korn Street Park - Korn...

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES

Luzerne County Levee Trail 81.48% 110

Kirby Park - 160 Market Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA 68.15% 92

Back Mountain Rail Trail 61.48% 83

Frances Slocum State Park - 567 Mt Olivet Road, Wyoming, PA 18644 57.78% 78

7 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Forty Fort Cemetery - 20 River Street, Forty Fort, PA 50.37% 68

Nesbitt Park - Kingston, PA 48.15% 65

River Common - 133 N River Street, Wilkes-barre, PA 42.96% 58

Seven Tubs Nature Area - 900 Bear Creek Blvd, Wilkes-Barre, PA 39.26% 53

J. Charles Fields - 2009 Wyoming Ave, Forty Fort, PA 25.93% 35

Betty Mascelli Park - Shook Place, Forty Fort, PA 25.93% 35

Hickory Run State Park - 3613 State Route 534, White Haven, PA 23.70% 32

Lehigh Gorge State Park - S Lehigh Gorge Dr, Weatherly, PA 22.22% 30

Moon Lake State Forest Recreation Area - Hunlock Creek, PA 21.48% 29

James S Keiper Memorial Park - Hamilton Ave, Kingston, PA 17.78% 24

Bear Creek Preserve - 47 Rabbit Run Ln, Bear Creek Village, PA 15.56% 21

Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor (D&L Trail) - Bristol, PA to south of Wilkes-Barre 14.81% 20

Lackawanna River Heritage Trail 14.07% 19

Pinchot State Forest - Bear Lake Rd, Thornhurst Township, PA 11.85% 16

Susquehanna Warrior Trail 9.63% 13

Other (please specify) 8.15% 11

George Ralston Field - Wilkes-Barre, PA 7.41% 10

Coal Street Park - Coal Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA 5.93% 8

Susquehanna Water Trail (boating, kayaking, etc) 4.44% 6

Korn Street Park - Korn Street, Kingston, PA 2.22% 3 Total Respondents: 135

# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE 1 Lucerne County National Recreation Trail 8/15/2017 9:56 AM

2 Moosic mountai 7/3/2017 4:42 PM 3 Ricketts Glenn state park 7/3/2017 4:05 PM

4 Game Lands trails from Noxen to Ricketts Glen 7/3/2017 2:20 PM

5 We camp, bike, hike at many different PA State Park several times a year, in all seasons. 7/3/2017 1:07 PM 6 Ricketts Glenn State Park 6/22/2017 9:42 AM

7 Reese Park in Kingston Borough 6/6/2017 10:43 AM 8 Ricketts Glen 6/5/2017 12:04 PM

9 Rickett's Glen 6/4/2017 8:36 PM 10 none because I have mobility difficulties 5/31/2017 8:21 PM

11 Ricketts Glen 5/30/2017 4:07 PM

8 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q8 Thinking about members of your household who are in the age groups below, how many trips in total have the members of your household made to trails, parks, natural areas and open space areas in the past 12 months? For example, a family of 4 visiting using a trail equals 4 separate trips in the appropriate age groups below.

Answered: 138 Skipped: 24

Children under 5

Children 6-12

Children 13-18

Adults 19-64

Seniors 65+

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

1-5 6-10 11-20 20 OR MORE N/A TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Children under 5 8.00% 9.33% 4.00% 10.67% 68.00% 6 7 3 8 51 75 3.63

Children 6-12 4.11% 10.96% 8.22% 10.96% 65.75% 3 8 6 8 48 73 4.32

Children 13-18 5.13% 11.54% 6.41% 15.38% 61.54% 4 9 5 12 48 78 5.00 Adults 19-64 16.15% 10.00% 16.15% 49.23% 8.46% 21 13 21 64 11 130 13.45 Seniors 65+ 8.82% 2.94% 7.35% 11.76% 69.12% 6 2 5 8 47 68 3.93

9 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q9 Do you walk, run or bike on area trails?

Answered: 140 Skipped: 22

(no label)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

YES NO TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE (no label) 89.29% 10.71% 125 15 140 1.89

10 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q10 If you answered "yes" to Question 9, please list the three trails you utilize most frequently. Some examples include: Luzerne County Levee Trail, D&L Trail, Susquehanna Warrior Trail, Lackawanna River Heritage Trail, and others

Answered: 120 Skipped: 42

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES

1 100.00% 120

2 77.50% 93

3 59.17% 71

# 1 DATE 1 levee trail 8/27/2017 4:06 PM 2 Back mountain trail 8/27/2017 2:44 PM

3 Back Mt Rail Trail 8/20/2017 7:48 AM

4 levee maintenance road 8/15/2017 3:52 PM 5 Luzerne County Levee Trail 8/15/2017 3:34 PM

6 Pinchot Trail System 8/15/2017 9:56 AM 7 Luz. Co. Levee Trail 8/15/2017 9:50 AM

8 Levee Trail 8/15/2017 9:43 AM 9 Lucerne County Levee Trail 8/15/2017 7:41 AM

10 Luzerne County Levee Trail 8/2/2017 8:36 AM 11 Forty Fort Cemetery 8/1/2017 9:49 PM

12 Luzerne County Levee Trail 7/23/2017 8:53 PM 13 Back mountain trail 7/12/2017 9:22 PM

14 Back Mountain Trail 7/12/2017 9:21 PM 15 Luzerne County levee trial 7/8/2017 9:51 PM

16 River common 7/5/2017 2:37 PM 17 Luzerne County Levee Trail 7/5/2017 11:24 AM

18 Lehigh gorge 7/4/2017 10:52 PM 19 Luzerne County Levee Trail 7/4/2017 9:49 AM

20 Luzerne County Levee Trail 7/4/2017 12:06 AM 21 LRHT 7/3/2017 11:53 PM

22 Back Mountain 7/3/2017 11:49 PM 23 D&L Trail 7/3/2017 11:12 PM

24 Back mountain trail 7/3/2017 9:56 PM 25 Back mountain trail 7/3/2017 8:57 PM

26 Back Mountain 7/3/2017 8:19 PM 27 Luzerne county leve 7/3/2017 7:42 PM

28 Back Mountain Rail Trail 7/3/2017 7:11 PM 29 Luzerne County Levee 7/3/2017 6:35 PM

30 Back mountain trail 7/3/2017 6:12 PM

31 Forty levee 7/3/2017 6:11 PM 32 Luzerne levee 7/3/2017 6:06 PM

33 Luzerne County Levee trail 7/3/2017 6:06 PM 34 Seven Tubs Area 7/3/2017 5:49 PM

35 River Levee 7/3/2017 5:10 PM 36 Luzerne county levee trail 7/3/2017 5:05 PM

37 LC levee 7/3/2017 5:03 PM 38 Run 7/3/2017 4:49 PM

39 Lvha trail 7/3/2017 4:42 PM 40 Back Mountain Trail 7/3/2017 4:42 PM

41 Luzerne county levee 7/3/2017 4:10 PM 42 Levee trail 7/3/2017 4:05 PM

43 Forty fort cemetery 7/3/2017 4:05 PM 44 Lucerne co trail 7/3/2017 3:43 PM

45 Luzerne County Levee Trail 7/3/2017 3:39 PM 46 Moon Lake 7/3/2017 3:22 PM

47 Luzerne County Levee Trail 7/3/2017 3:07 PM

11 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

48 Luzerne County Levee 7/3/2017 2:51 PM 49 Luzerne county levee trail 7/3/2017 2:45 PM

50 Luzerne County Levee Trail 7/3/2017 2:20 PM 51 Dikee in Forty Fort, Kingston and Kirby Park 7/3/2017 2:11 PM

52 Lucerne levee 7/3/2017 2:10 PM 53 Luzerne County Levee 7/3/2017 1:38 PM

54 Back Mountain Trail 7/3/2017 1:35 PM 55 Back Mountain Trail 7/3/2017 1:18 PM

56 Levee Trails 7/3/2017 1:07 PM 57 Levee 7/3/2017 12:58 PM

58 Luzerne County Levee Trail 7/3/2017 12:52 PM 59 Luzerne County Levee Trail 7/2/2017 2:45 PM

60 Luzerene County Levee 6/27/2017 9:02 AM 61 Pinchot Forest 6/26/2017 9:51 PM

62 Luzerne county levee trail 6/26/2017 7:10 AM 63 Luzerne County Levee 6/22/2017 10:22 PM

64 Levee trail, but had a bad experience with a bad man that I met there. It needs to be patrolled. I 6/22/2017 9:37 PM will never go there again.

65 Luzerne County Levee Trail 6/22/2017 9:42 AM 66 Back Mountain Rail Trail 6/21/2017 8:26 AM

67 Luz county levee trail 6/21/2017 7:01 AM 68 Luzerne County Levee Trail 6/21/2017 6:06 AM

69 luzerne county levee trail 6/20/2017 6:38 PM 70 Luzerne county levee trail 6/19/2017 9:08 AM

71 Luzerne County Levee 6/19/2017 8:37 AM 72 Levee Trail 6/16/2017 11:25 AM

73 Luzerne county levee trail 6/14/2017 2:14 PM 74 Luzerne County Levee Trail 6/13/2017 10:06 PM

75 LUZERNE COUNTY LEVEE 6/13/2017 5:02 PM 76 Luzerne County Levee Trail 6/13/2017 3:37 PM

77 Luzerne County Levee Trail 6/13/2017 3:31 PM 78 Luzerne County Levee Trail 6/13/2017 2:21 PM

79 Luzerne county levee trail 6/7/2017 3:15 PM 80 Luzerne County Levee Trail 6/5/2017 12:19 PM

81 Back mountain Rail Trail 6/5/2017 12:04 PM 82 Back mountain trail 6/5/2017 8:45 AM

83 Luzerne County Levee 6/4/2017 9:18 PM

84 Luzerne County Levee Trail 6/4/2017 8:36 PM 85 Levee trail 6/3/2017 8:50 AM

86 Back mountain 6/3/2017 5:48 AM

87 Luzerne County Levee System 6/2/2017 12:56 PM

88 D and L trail 6/1/2017 10:36 PM

89 Back mountain trail 6/1/2017 12:11 PM 90 Luzerne county levee 5/31/2017 11:13 PM

91 Luzerne county levee 5/31/2017 9:01 PM

92 Seven tubs 5/31/2017 7:35 PM

93 Levee 5/31/2017 6:40 PM 94 luzerne county levee trail 5/31/2017 6:01 PM

95 Luzerne county levee 5/31/2017 3:38 PM

96 Kingston 5/31/2017 3:00 PM

97 Levee Trail 5/31/2017 1:41 PM 98 Luzerne County Levee Trail 5/31/2017 9:23 AM

99 Luzerne County Levee 5/31/2017 8:11 AM

100 Forty fort 5/31/2017 7:28 AM

101 Forty Fort cemetery 5/30/2017 11:04 PM 102 County levee trail 5/30/2017 10:03 PM

103 Luzerne County Levee Trail 5/30/2017 8:20 PM

104 Luz Co levee trail 5/30/2017 8:07 PM

105 Luzerne county levee 5/30/2017 7:53 PM 106 Levee Trail 5/30/2017 7:35 PM

107 Lu, Cty Levee Trail 5/30/2017 7:23 PM

12 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

108 Luzerne county levee trail 5/30/2017 7:08 PM

109 Luzerne County Levee 5/30/2017 5:53 PM

110 Back mountain Rail Trail 5/30/2017 5:52 PM 111 Luzerne County Levee 5/30/2017 5:22 PM

112 Luzerne county levee trail 5/30/2017 5:11 PM

113 Luzerne county levee 5/30/2017 4:38 PM

114 luzerne county levee trail 5/30/2017 4:37 PM 115 Luzerne County Levee Trail 5/30/2017 4:08 PM

116 Rickett Glen 5/30/2017 4:07 PM

117 Forty Fort Cemetary 5/30/2017 3:53 PM

118 Luzerne Levee 5/30/2017 3:52 PM 119 Luzerne county levee trail 5/30/2017 3:41 PM

120 Luzerne County Levee Trail 5/30/2017 3:29 PM

# 2 DATE 1 back mountain trail 8/27/2017 4:06 PM

2 Back mountain trail 8/27/2017 2:44 PM

3 francis slocum 8/15/2017 3:52 PM 4 Kirby Park 8/15/2017 3:34 PM

5 Appalachian Trail 8/15/2017 9:56 AM

6 Kirby Park 8/15/2017 9:50 AM

7 Lehigh Valley Gorge 8/15/2017 9:43 AM

8 Kirby Park 8/15/2017 7:41 AM 9 Frances Slocum State Park 8/1/2017 9:49 PM

10 Back Mountain Trail 7/23/2017 8:53 PM

11 Levee system kingston 7/12/2017 9:22 PM

12 Levee 7/12/2017 9:21 PM 13 Kirby Park 7/8/2017 9:51 PM

14 Back Mountain Trail 7/5/2017 11:24 AM

15 D&l 7/4/2017 10:52 PM

16 Lehigh Gorge State Park 7/4/2017 9:49 AM 17 Back mountain trail 7/4/2017 12:06 AM

18 D&L 7/3/2017 11:53 PM

19 Luzerne Levee 7/3/2017 11:49 PM

20 Lucerne County Levee 7/3/2017 11:12 PM 21 Luzerne county levie system 7/3/2017 9:56 PM

22 Levee trail 7/3/2017 8:57 PM

23 Levee 7/3/2017 8:19 PM

24 Back mountain 7/3/2017 7:42 PM 25 Frances Slocum Trail 7/3/2017 6:35 PM

26 Forty fort dike 7/3/2017 6:12 PM

27 Kingston levee 7/3/2017 6:11 PM

28 Lackawanna heritage 7/3/2017 6:06 PM 29 D&L trail 7/3/2017 6:06 PM

30 Back Mountain Trail 7/3/2017 5:10 PM

31 Forty fort levee by airport 7/3/2017 5:05 PM

32 Walk 7/3/2017 4:49 PM 33 Levee trail 7/3/2017 4:42 PM

34 Wyoming valley levee 7/3/2017 4:42 PM

35 Back mountain trail 7/3/2017 4:10 PM

36 D&l trail 7/3/2017 4:05 PM

37 Back mountain trail 7/3/2017 4:05 PM 38 Back mtn trail 7/3/2017 3:43 PM

39 Frances Slocum 7/3/2017 3:39 PM

40 Back Mtn.Trail 7/3/2017 3:22 PM

41 Moon Lake State Forest Recreation Area 7/3/2017 3:07 PM 42 Kirby Trail 7/3/2017 2:51 PM

43 Back mountain trail 7/3/2017 2:45 PM

44 Back Mt. Trail 7/3/2017 2:20 PM

45 D&l 7/3/2017 2:10 PM 46 Back Mountain Trail 7/3/2017 1:38 PM

47 Forty Fort Levee/FF Cemetary 7/3/2017 1:35 PM

13 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

48 Levi Trail 7/3/2017 1:18 PM

49 Francis Slocum 7/3/2017 1:07 PM

50 Black Diamond 7/3/2017 12:58 PM

51 River Common Wilkes-Barre 7/2/2017 2:45 PM 52 Back Mountain 6/26/2017 9:51 PM

53 Back mountain trail 6/26/2017 7:10 AM

54 Seven Tubs 6/22/2017 10:22 PM

55 Back Mountain Trail 6/22/2017 9:42 AM 56 Kirby Park 6/21/2017 8:26 AM

57 nesbitt 6/21/2017 7:01 AM

58 Francis Slocum 6/19/2017 8:37 AM

59 Frances Slocum State Park 6/13/2017 10:06 PM 60 Back Mountain Trail 6/13/2017 3:37 PM

61 Frances Slocum State Park 6/13/2017 3:31 PM

62 Kirby Park 6/7/2017 3:15 PM

63 Ricketts Glen 6/5/2017 12:04 PM 64 Luzerne county levee trail 6/5/2017 8:45 AM

65 Kirby Park 6/4/2017 9:18 PM

66 Back Mountain Rail Trail 6/4/2017 8:36 PM

67 Luzerne leave 6/3/2017 5:48 AM 68 Back Mountain Trail System 6/2/2017 12:56 PM

69 Back mountain 6/1/2017 10:36 PM

70 Frances slocum 6/1/2017 12:11 PM

71 D & l trail 5/31/2017 11:13 PM

72 Rickets glenn state park 5/31/2017 9:01 PM 73 Pinotch 5/31/2017 7:35 PM

74 back mountain trail 5/31/2017 6:01 PM

75 D & l trail 5/31/2017 3:38 PM

76 Forty Fort 5/31/2017 3:00 PM 77 D&L Corridor 5/31/2017 1:41 PM

78 Back Mountain Trail 5/31/2017 8:11 AM

79 Frances Slocum 5/30/2017 11:04 PM

80 Back mountain trail 5/30/2017 7:53 PM 81 Rails to Trails 5/30/2017 7:35 PM

82 Kirby park 5/30/2017 7:08 PM

83 Kirby park. 5/30/2017 5:53 PM

84 Luzerne Levee Trail 5/30/2017 5:52 PM 85 Forty Fort park 5/30/2017 5:22 PM

86 Back mountain trail 5/30/2017 5:11 PM

87 Luzerne to back Mt trail 5/30/2017 4:38 PM

88 Kirby Park 5/30/2017 4:08 PM 89 Luzerne County Levee Trail 5/30/2017 4:07 PM

90 J Charles Fields 5/30/2017 3:53 PM

91 Ricketts Glen 5/30/2017 3:52 PM

92 Back mountain trail 5/30/2017 3:41 PM 93 Forty Fort Cemetery 5/30/2017 3:29 PM

# 3 DATE 1 Back mountain trail 8/27/2017 2:44 PM 2 back mountain trail 8/15/2017 3:52 PM

3 River Common 8/15/2017 3:34 PM

4 Back Mtn. trail 8/15/2017 9:50 AM

5 Back Mountain 8/15/2017 9:43 AM 6 Back Mountain Rail Trail 8/15/2017 7:41 AM

7 Luzerne County Levee Trail 8/1/2017 9:49 PM

8 Frances Slocum State Park 7/23/2017 8:53 PM

9 Levee system forty fort 7/12/2017 9:22 PM 10 Kirby park 7/12/2017 9:21 PM

11 Warrior Trail 7/5/2017 11:24 AM

12 Black diamond 7/4/2017 10:52 PM

13 Back Mountain Rail Trail 7/4/2017 9:49 AM 14 Kirby park 7/4/2017 12:06 AM

14 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

15 Susquehanna warrior tr 7/3/2017 11:53 PM 16 Seven Tubs 7/3/2017 11:49 PM

17 Moon Lake Park Trail System 7/3/2017 11:12 PM

18 D&L trail 7/3/2017 8:57 PM

19 Frances Slocum 7/3/2017 8:19 PM 20 Lackawanna river heritage 7/3/2017 7:42 PM

21 Back Mountain Trail 7/3/2017 6:35 PM

22 Kirby park 7/3/2017 6:12 PM

23 Back mountain 7/3/2017 6:11 PM 24 Back mountain 7/3/2017 6:06 PM

25 Lackawanna River Heritage trail 7/3/2017 6:06 PM

26 Kirby Park 7/3/2017 5:10 PM

27 Back mountain trail 7/3/2017 5:05 PM 28 Bike 7/3/2017 4:49 PM

29 Frances slocum 7/3/2017 4:42 PM

30 Kirby park 7/3/2017 4:10 PM

31 Luzerne county levee trail 7/3/2017 4:05 PM 32 Bear Creek Preserve 7/3/2017 3:39 PM

33 Luzerne County Levee 7/3/2017 3:22 PM

34 Frances Slocum State Park 7/3/2017 3:07 PM

35 Back Mountain Trail 7/3/2017 2:51 PM

36 D & L Trail (Black Diamond Trail) 7/3/2017 2:20 PM 37 Lehigh Gorge 7/3/2017 1:38 PM

38 Frances Slocum 7/3/2017 1:35 PM

39 7 Tubs 7/3/2017 1:18 PM

40 Back Mountain Trail 7/3/2017 1:07 PM 41 Frances Slocum State Park 7/2/2017 2:45 PM

42 Luzerne county levee trail 6/26/2017 9:51 PM

43 Susquehanna warrior trail 6/26/2017 7:10 AM

44 Ricketts Glenn State Park 6/22/2017 9:42 AM 45 Kirby 6/21/2017 7:01 AM

46 Lehigh Valley Gorge 6/19/2017 8:37 AM

47 Back Mountain Trail 6/13/2017 10:06 PM

48 Seven Tubs 6/13/2017 3:31 PM 49 Francis Slocum 6/5/2017 12:04 PM

50 Kirby park trail 6/5/2017 8:45 AM

51 Hamilton Park 6/4/2017 9:18 PM

52 Seven tubs 6/3/2017 5:48 AM 53 Susquehanna Warrior Trail 6/2/2017 12:56 PM

54 Levee 6/1/2017 10:36 PM

55 Seven tubs 6/1/2017 12:11 PM

56 Back mountain 5/31/2017 11:13 PM 57 Francis slocum park 5/31/2017 9:01 PM

58 Kirby park 5/31/2017 7:35 PM

59 Francis slocum 99th 5/31/2017 3:38 PM

60 Wilkes barre 5/31/2017 3:00 PM

61 River Common 5/31/2017 1:41 PM 62 River Common 5/30/2017 11:04 PM

63 Kirby park 5/30/2017 7:53 PM

64 Susquehanna Warrior trail 5/30/2017 7:08 PM

65 Lake Trail at Francis Slocum 5/30/2017 5:52 PM 66 Frances slocom 5/30/2017 5:11 PM

67 Nesbitt Park 5/30/2017 4:08 PM

68 Kirby Park 5/30/2017 3:53 PM

69 Forty Fort Cemetery 5/30/2017 3:52 PM 70 Susquehanna warrior trail 5/30/2017 3:41 PM

71 J Charles Fields 5/30/2017 3:29 PM

15 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q11 How comfortable do you feel walking, biking, or jogging in the following scenarios?

Answered: 137 Skipped: 25

off-road trail (8' to 10'...

sidewalk (4' to 6' wide)

Bike lane (4' to 5' wide) ...

Share the road / travel lan...

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

VERY COMFORTABLE NEITHER UNCOMFORTABLE NOT TOTAL WEIGHTED COMFORTABLE COMFORTABLE APPLICABLE AVERAGE OR UNCOMFORTABLE off-road 51.09% 26.28% 10.95% 8.03% 3.65% trail (8' to 70 36 15 11 5 137 78.28 10' wide) sidewalk 59.26% 25.93% 9.63% 3.70% 1.48% (4' to 6' 80 35 13 5 2 135 84.44 wide)

Bike lane 24.26% 27.21% 15.44% 25.00% 8.09% (4' to 5' 33 37 21 34 11 136 58.64 wide) on the roadway

Share 9.02% 15.04% 12.03% 57.89% 6.02% the road 12 20 16 77 8 133 40.79 / travel lane with motorists

16 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q12 Generally, are your recreational needs being met in or around where you live?

Answered: 138 Skipped: 24

(no label)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

YES NO TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE (no label) 78.26% 21.74% 108 30 138 1.78

# IF NO, PLEASE IDENTIFY SPECIFIC AREAS WHERE YOU FEEL THIS COULD BE IMPROVED DATE 1 sharing bike lanes with motorists 8/15/2017 9:50 AM

2 More safe connections and access between trails . 8/15/2017 9:43 AM

3 I wish there was more trails 7/12/2017 9:22 PM 4 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey Recreational Habits 6. In the past 7/6/2017 10:07 AM 12 months, has any member of your household participated in any trail related recreation in or around the region? This would include any activity, such as walking, biking, jogging, dog walking, etc. Yes No Do Not Know 7. Which trails, parks, natural areas or open space areas do you visit for recreation purposes? (Please check all that apply) Luzerne County Levee Trail Kirby Park - 160 Market Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA Nesbitt Park - Kingston, PA James S Keiper Memorial Park - Hamilton Ave, Kingston, PA River Common - 133 N River Street, Wilkes-barre, PA Forty Fort Cemetery - 20 River Street, Forty Fort, PA J. Charles Fields - 2009 Wyoming Ave, Forty Fort, PA Betty Mascelli Park - Shook Place, Forty Fort, PA Korn Street Park - Korn Street, Kingston, PA George Ralston Field - Wilkes-Barre, PA Frances Slocum State Park - 567 Mt Olivet Road, Wyoming, PA 18644 Coal Street Park - Coal Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor (D&L Trail) - Bristol, PA to south of Wilkes-Barre Pinchot State Forest - Bear Lake Rd, Thornhurst Township, PA Bear Creek Preserve - 47 Rabbit Run Ln, Bear Creek Village, PA Seven Tubs Nature Area - 900 Bear Creek Blvd, Wilkes-Barre, PA Moon Lake State Forest Recreation Area - Hunlock Creek, PA Lehigh Gorge State Park - S Lehigh Gorge Dr, Weatherly, PA Hickory Run State Park - 3613 State Route 534, White Haven, PA Susquehanna Warrior Trail Susquehanna Water Trail (boating, kayaking, etc) Lackawanna River Heritage Trail Back Mountain Rail Trail Other (please specify) 8. Thinking about members of your household who are in the age groups below, how many trips in total have the members of your household made to trails, parks, natural areas and open space areas in the past 12 months? For example, a family of 4 visiting using a trail equals 4 separate trips in the appropriate age groups below. 1-5 6- 10 11-20 20 or more N/A Children under 5 Children under 5 1-5 Children under 5 6-10 Children under 5 11-20 Children under 5 20 or more Children under 5 N/A Children 6-12 Children 6-12 1-5 Children 6-12 6-10 Children 6-12 11-20 Children 6-12 20 or more Children 6-12 N/A Children 13- 18 Children 13-18 1-5 Children 13-18 6-10 Children 13-18 11-20 Children 13-18 20 or more Children 13-18 N/A Adults 19-64 Adults 19-64 1-5 Adults 19-64 6-10 Adults 19-64 11-20 Adults 19- 64 20 or more Adults 19-64 N/A Seniors 65+ Seniors 65+ 1-5 Seniors 65+ 6-10 Seniors 65+ 11-20 Seniors 65+ 20 or more Seniors 65+ N/A 9. Do you walk, run or bike on area trails? Yes No Yes No 10. If you answered "yes" to Question 9, please list the three trails you utilize most frequently. Some examples include: Luzerne County Levee Trail, D&L Trail, Susquehanna Warrior Trail, Lackawanna River Heritage Trail, and others 1 2 3 11. How comfortable do you feel walking, biking, or jogging in the following scenarios? Very Comfortable Comfortable Neither Comfortable or Uncomfortable Uncomfortable Not Applicable off-road trail (8' to 10' wide) off-road trail (8' to 10' wide) Very Comfortable off-road trail (8' to 10' wide) Comfortable off-road trail (8' to 10' wide) Neither Comfortable or Uncomfortable off-road trail (8' to 10' wide) Uncomfortable off-road trail (8' to 10' wide) Not Applicable sidewalk (4' to 6' wide) sidewalk (4' to 6' wide) Very Comfortable sidewalk (4' to 6' wide) Comfortable sidewalk (4' to 6' wide) Neither Comfortable or Uncomfortable sidewalk (4' to 6' wide) Uncomfortable sidewalk (4' to 6' wide) Not Applicable Bike lane (4' to 5' wide) on the roadway Bike lane (4' to 5' wide) on the roadway Very Comfortable Bike lane (4' to 5' wide) on the roadway Comfortable Bike lane (4' to 5' wide) on the roadway Neither Comfortable or Uncomfortable Bike lane (4' to 5' wide) on the roadway Uncomfortable Bike lane (4' to 5' wide) on the roadway Not Applicable Share the road / travel lane with motorists Share the road / travel lane with motorists Very Comfortable Share the road / travel lane with motorists Comfortable Share the road / travel lane with motorists Neither Comfortable or Uncomfortable Share the road / travel lane with motorists Uncomfortable Share the road / travel lane with motorists Not Applicable 12. Generally, are your recreational needs being met in or around where you live? Yes No Yes No If no, please identify specific areas where you feel this could be improved

5 Need more and safer bike trails 7/4/2017 9:49 AM

6 Would like more bike/pedestrian only areas and a bike lane in certain areas 7/4/2017 12:06 AM 7 I would like longer trails to run, but doing ok there. Would really like longer bike path for a road 7/3/2017 6:35 PM bike. I have 4 children and I am not willing to risk riding my road bike on roads around here. Too scary

8 Better trails and more trails - use the old rail bed for a trail 7/3/2017 6:11 PM

9 More trails for running and more bike lanes are needed. 7/3/2017 6:06 PM

10 We need more variety in our area. Some skate parks would be great! 7/3/2017 5:49 PM

11 We can benefit from more trails 7/3/2017 4:42 PM

17 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

12 The roads in luzerne county. We need bike more bike lanes and bike and running trails. 7/3/2017 4:10 PM

13 More bike lanes and better road conditions are needed 7/3/2017 4:05 PM

14 The break between Kingston and forty fort makes it hard, especially on a bike going across the 7/3/2017 3:43 PM rutted Ave/ cross valley ramp

15 yes, but they could be improved upon 7/3/2017 3:39 PM

16 Need more children activities 7/3/2017 3:22 PM

17 No easy access to good trails 7/3/2017 3:07 PM

18 Need bike specific lanes to ensure safety while commuting and road riding 7/3/2017 2:45 PM 19 If the proposed trail from Forty Fort to Kingston were complete! 7/3/2017 2:11 PM

20 Bike safety signage and education would be beneficial 7/3/2017 1:38 PM

21 There is a strong need for bike lanes and or pedestrian/rec. trail only. 7/3/2017 1:35 PM

22 Everywhere 7/3/2017 1:18 PM 23 More teen friendly areas are needed!! Especially where they can use skateboards without getting 7/3/2017 1:07 PM chased away.

24 Safety, trail maintenance, more organized activities 6/27/2017 9:02 AM 25 I would be happy if the lever were safer. After a very bad experience, I was told never to walk there 6/22/2017 9:37 PM alone. I very much enjoy walking alone to exercise and regroup, but I sure learned a lesson.

26 Connecting to levee trail between kingston and dirty fort will really improve that trail tremendously 6/14/2017 2:14 PM

27 GRASS IS NOT BEING CUT ON THE DIKE TRAIL 6/13/2017 5:02 PM 28 Somewhere to take dogs to run and play 6/3/2017 5:48 AM

29 Levee not long enough, could be wider. Too dangerous to travel on road to Kingston levee 5/31/2017 11:13 PM

30 connecting forty fort levee with kingston to lengthen distance for biking 5/31/2017 6:01 PM

31 Levee not long enough. Too dangerous to travel on road to Kingston levee 5/31/2017 3:38 PM 32 More walking trails for seniors 5/31/2017 3:00 PM

33 All streets should have bike lanes and sidewalks.. 5/31/2017 1:41 PM

34 Longer paved bike trails that don't involve share the road with motorists 5/31/2017 9:23 AM

35 Dedicated bike lanes on roads 5/30/2017 7:35 PM 36 Would love to be able to go from Kingston to Forty fort without using cross valley roadway. 5/30/2017 4:38 PM

37 Luzerne Country Levee Trail 5/30/2017 3:29 PM

18 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q13 In general, how important do you feel public trails are to the well- being and quality of life in your area?

Answered: 136 Skipped: 26

(no label)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

VERY IMPORTANT SOMEWHAT UNIMPORTANT VERY DO TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT/UNIMPORTANT UNIMPORTANT NOT AVERAGE KNOW (no 67.65% 22.06% 3.68% 2.21% 3.68% 0.74% label) 92 30 5 3 5 1 136 86.58

19 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q14 Would you like to see additional trails in and around your area?

Answered: 134 Skipped: 28

(no label)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

YES NO TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE (no label) 86.57% 13.43% 116 18 134 1.87

20 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q15 In your opinion, how well is the Luzerne County Levee Trail maintained? This includes trash/litter, the condition of the trail surface, adjacent landscaping, trailhead / parking area cleanliness, etc.

Answered: 136 Skipped: 26

(no label)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

VERY WELL WELL SOMEWHAT MAINTAINED POORLY VERY DO TOTAL WEIGHTED MAINTAINED MAINTAINED MAINTAINED POORLY NOT AVERAGE MAINTAINED KNOW (no 25.00% 44.12% 23.53% 2.94% 1.47% 2.94% label) 34 60 32 4 2 4 136 70.59

21 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q16 What type of areas would you like trail access too? (Please check all that apply)

Answered: 124 Skipped: 38

Naturalized areas / Open...

Municipal / County Parks

The surrounding...

Downtown businesses

Public Institutions

Other (please specify)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES

Naturalized areas / Open Spaces 79.03% 98

Municipal / County Parks 66.94% 83

The surrounding countryside (non-urban areas) 66.13% 82

Downtown businesses 37.90% 47

Public Institutions 25.00% 31

Other (please specify) 6.45% 8 Total Respondents: 124

# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE 1 None 8/27/2017 2:49 PM

2 Bicycle commute for groceries and other weekly needs. 7/3/2017 1:38 PM 3 None really, I'm satisfied with what is available. 6/26/2017 10:46 AM

4 Walking trails with at least one police officer on a bike 6/22/2017 9:42 PM

5 Through out the county 5/31/2017 11:17 PM

6 n/a 5/31/2017 8:24 PM 7 All 5/31/2017 3:02 PM

8 Other towns and municipal areas, rural areas. 5/31/2017 1:45 PM

22 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q17 Please rate the priority your local government should place on investing in the following facilities?

Answered: 126 Skipped: 36

Regional and local trails

Community and Regional Parks

Playgrounds

On-road bike routes (shar...

Hiking trails

Trails and sidewalks in...

Opportunities to access th...

Mountain bike trails

Sidewalks and trails to an...

Dog Parks

Team Sports Facilities

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 TOTAL SCORE Regional and 30.53% 13.68% 8.42% 9.47% 9.47% 4.21% 4.21% 3.16% 4.21% 5.26% 7.37% local trails 29 13 8 9 9 4 4 3 4 5 7 95 7.80

Community 17.24% 12.64% 11.49% 16.09% 5.75% 9.20% 5.75% 9.20% 3.45% 8.05% 1.15% and Regional 15 11 10 14 5 8 5 8 3 7 1 87 7.37 Parks

Playgrounds 5.43% 10.87% 17.39% 4.35% 10.87% 10.87% 13.04% 5.43% 7.61% 7.61% 6.52% 5 10 16 4 10 10 12 5 7 7 6 92 6.33

On-road bike 12.05% 13.25% 8.43% 8.43% 8.43% 7.23% 7.23% 6.02% 12.05% 6.02% 10.84% routes (share 10 11 7 7 7 6 6 5 10 5 9 83 6.30 the road and bike lanes) Hiking trails 5.81% 5.81% 3.49% 16.28% 16.28% 12.79% 11.63% 13.95% 5.81% 6.98% 1.16% 5 5 3 14 14 11 10 12 5 6 1 86 6.21

Trails and 7.29% 10.42% 10.42% 6.25% 7.29% 17.71% 6.25% 11.46% 7.29% 9.38% 6.25% sidewalks in 7 10 10 6 7 17 6 11 7 9 6 96 6.09 suburban and rural areas

Opportunities 2.27% 9.09% 15.91% 9.09% 12.50% 4.55% 9.09% 5.68% 18.18% 7.95% 5.68% to access the 2 8 14 8 11 4 8 5 16 7 5 88 5.91 waterfront

Mountain 4.82% 8.43% 6.02% 3.61% 14.46% 9.64% 12.05% 18.07% 9.64% 7.23% 6.02% bike trails 4 7 5 3 12 8 10 15 8 6 5 83 5.61 Sidewalks 7.62% 5.71% 8.57% 3.81% 6.67% 6.67% 13.33% 10.48% 11.43% 10.48% 15.24% and trails to 8 6 9 4 7 7 14 11 12 11 16 105 5.14 and within business and industrial parks and to area destinations

Dog Parks 6.25% 8.33% 3.13% 9.38% 3.13% 8.33% 11.46% 11.46% 10.42% 11.46% 16.67% 6 8 3 9 3 8 11 11 10 11 16 96 5.01

Team Sports 5.21% 4.17% 5.21% 11.46% 9.38% 6.25% 7.29% 8.33% 9.38% 18.75% 14.58% Facilities 5 4 5 11 9 6 7 8 9 18 14 96 4.91

23 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q18 Do you feel safe walking, jogging, or biking on area trails?

Answered: 132 Skipped: 30

(no label)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

YES NO N/A TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE (no label) 82.58% 13.64% 3.79% 109 18 5 132 1.86

# IF NOT, PLEASE SPECIFY WHY YOU FEEL UNSAFE DATE 1 Not enough police 8/27/2017 2:49 PM

2 During the day only. I think that it is just the world today - why I wouldn't go at night - but maybe if 8/11/2017 4:34 PM there was a good amount of light / lamps or police call boxes or patrols, I would feel more comfortable at night.

3 With a group and in most areas we feel safe, not alone in some spots, and some spots we avoid 7/3/2017 1:15 PM even in groups. We often see suspicious people near the Market Street bridge/Kirby park area, people obviously living there, liquor bottles, garbage, and signs of drug use everywhere. We have been avoiding that area lately because it feels unsafe.

4 Have had encounters with individuals that made me feel unsafe. 6/27/2017 9:04 AM 5 Yes and no. Mostly yes, but always aware that safety can be compromised 6/26/2017 10:46 AM

6 Somebody approached me, seemed safe. He was not. He found out where I lived and banged on 6/22/2017 9:42 PM my door so hard I was in great fear. Texting, stalking etc etc.

7 Loose dogs are a problem. Also, issues with guns being fired from the Plains side of the 6/21/2017 6:12 AM Susquehanna. I understand there are several farms in the Plainsville area that use noise to clear birds from their farm areas but it's different from the recreational shooting which is frightening at times.

8 There are certain spots on the luzerne county levee trail where shady people sometimes linger 6/14/2017 2:19 PM and I wish there were surveillance cameras there

9 The Back Mountain Trail can be a little spooky in some parts sometimes -- a bit isolated, shaded, 6/13/2017 10:12 PM too close to businesses and not a lot of walkers.

10 Generally yes but when isolated need to be alert 6/4/2017 9:22 PM 11 I am very aware of all people. Done not so desirable. 5/31/2017 3:02 PM

12 The Rutter St. (Kingston) / River Road (Forty Fort) bike lanes and running areas are incredibly 5/30/2017 4:15 PM unsafe.

13 Top of levee not wide enough for two bikes and two walkers meeting simultaneously. 5/30/2017 3:56 PM

14 Not for early morning or dusk to walk alone. 5/30/2017 3:35 PM

24 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

Q19 Please share any additional thoughts, comments, or ideas you have for the Kingston / Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Study.

Answered: 59 Skipped: 103

# RESPONSES DATE 1 We don't need any more trails. Stop spending taxpayers money on this 8/27/2017 2:50 PM

2 Trails should not be adjacent to residential 8/20/2017 7:52 AM

3 The roads in the small neighborhoods in Forty Fort can not handle the traffic or parking facilities 8/16/2017 6:12 PM for the trails and accesses proposed. Believe the best access route is Third Ave in Kingston as it has a parking lot and will not interfere with local traffic or neighborhood life.

4 If surveillance and security are not major players, this 2-3 million dollar project will end up a waste. 8/15/2017 3:58 PM The second the creep starts moving in, the good will dissipate, the bad will take over and this wonderful project and tons of money will have been wasted. Simply put; people will stop utilizing it in fear of their safety. Good luck! 5 All our family members residing the area are in unanimous agreement that the levee trail into Forty 8/15/2017 3:45 PM Fort needs to be completed. Bikers and hikers create minuscule problems for affected properties along trail.

6 Get it done! 8/15/2017 9:59 AM

7 stay away from motorists as much as possible 8/15/2017 9:53 AM

8 Living in Kingston, it would be great to take the LeveeTrail all the way to the small airport area out 8/15/2017 7:44 AM past FortyForty, but the existence of 309 interrupts that path.

9 Thank you for asking for our thoughts! We live in such a beautiful area, I am thankful that you are 8/11/2017 4:35 PM working on adding more trails to Kingston / Forty Fort.

10 Can't hurt 8/1/2017 9:52 PM

11 This would be would be a huge asset 7/12/2017 9:25 PM

12 I would like to see a safer connection between the the Kingston/Forty Fort Trail anything would be 7/4/2017 10:25 AM an improvement over how bikers currently connect but my preference would be to avoid as much vehicle traffic as possible. Thanks you for conducting this feasibility study and hopefully a successful outcome will be come of it.

13 N/A 7/3/2017 11:16 PM

14 There should be a safe connection between the Kingston and Forty Fort trail 7/3/2017 10:00 PM

15 I commute via bike every day from Shavertown to Wilkes University. Need to connect the existing 7/3/2017 9:02 PM trails so riding to other locations is easily possible. Would be nice to connect the airport levee to the Wilkes-Barre Reach.

16 I would like to see more trails in the area and connection of trails. 7/3/2017 6:16 PM

17 Think it is a great idea, would love to see it happen. 7/3/2017 5:13 PM

18 Please please link up the trails! It's dangerous to run/bike over the cross valley and down river 7/3/2017 5:08 PM street. Thank you!

19 Well lighted paved bike and walking trails 7/3/2017 5:06 PM

20 Trails improve quality of life 7/3/2017 4:44 PM

21 I feel it would make it safer for everyone . More people would use the trail . We need more trails 7/3/2017 4:23 PM for people to get out and enjoy. Feel safer biking , running , walking etc.

22 The current cross in extremely dangerous as the bike lane ends and turns into shared lane 7/3/2017 4:21 PM currently. An alternate and safe route needs to be built to keep people off of the busy thoroughfare to connect the current levee trails.

23 Use the money to cut the all grass at the soccer fields at the Forty Fort airport instead of adding 7/3/2017 4:11 PM more stuff you can't afford to take care of

24 I think this would be a great improvement to the trail system. I am comfortable using the road way 7/3/2017 3:43 PM but this would open the levee system to people less comfortable with traffic.

25 The area trails & levee system needs to be linked to gain access all over Luzerne County 7/3/2017 3:27 PM

26 More lighting for safety. 7/3/2017 2:53 PM

27 Trails bring better quality of life to urban and suburban areas. Desirable communities where people 7/3/2017 2:24 PM want to live have increased property values because their residents have access to these types of trails and parks. Progress shouldn't be impeded by a few landowners when the betterment and health of the entire community is involved.

28 I'm baffled by the opposition. This seems like a win for everyone. 7/3/2017 2:13 PM

29 Please keep the trail under the crossvalley expressway. Whenever possible don't mix road with 7/3/2017 1:23 PM peds unless a specific barricaded lane. The drivers in the area have a very hard time seeing the bikes and I feel it is rather dangerous recreating on area roadways. 30 Eliminating / Re-routing the bike route from over the Cross Valley Expressway is a must. It's just 7/3/2017 12:54 PM dangerous and difficult for cyclists.

31 Would love to see the levee trail extended (or some other trail) between River St. Forty Fort and 7/2/2017 2:48 PM Church St. Kingston.

32 Wish you all the best with moving this forward. Important asset to the area. 6/27/2017 9:05 AM

33 I think having a safe place for people to hike, bike, fish etc enhances the area in a great way. 6/26/2017 9:59 PM

34 No other trails infringe on residential communities in our area, Please follow suit. 6/26/2017 10:46 AM 35 Crossing over the cross valley on Rutter ave is dangerous. However if a trail would pass 6/26/2017 7:15 AM underneath, unless will trafficked or policed, I would be nervous about using it due to the vagrant and drug user population like the Forested side of Kirby park

25 / 26 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Feasibility Public Opinion Survey SurveyMonkey

36 Connecting the levee trail gap by way of the unused levee would endanger the lives of residents 6/21/2017 8:34 AM who live along the levee!!!!! 37 It would be great to incorporate our beaut iful river 6/21/2017 7:04 AM

38 I think the roads should be made safer for bikers but I don't want the trail extended in Forty Fort. It 6/21/2017 6:15 AM will not be patrolled & can lead to a higher incidence of crime for those of us living along the River.

39 wow 6/20/2017 6:41 PM

40 Please connect levee trail underneath cross valley to trail behind edwards landscaping. Why is 6/19/2017 9:13 AM there a gap on river st.? Please fill gap at oneida place with a trail.

41 I am really looking forward to the linking of the forty fort and Kingston trail!!! As it is now, it's quite 6/14/2017 2:21 PM dangerous to get from the end of the kingston trail and into the forty fort one. You know cars... they don't like to stop so much for the people crossing with bikes. Linking the paths will allow my kids to come with me on bike rides past kingston.

42 The Trail is fine just the way it is. This is a waste of taxpayer money. 6/13/2017 10:55 PM

43 The Luzerne County levee trail is one of the area's most precious assets. I walk the Forty Fort to 6/13/2017 10:16 PM Wyoming section nearly every day. It's clean. Well-maintained. A true treasure. One of the best things about that particular section is that it is not overcrowded. More people equals more money needed for maintenance and clean-up. It's perfect as it is right now. Plenty of width for walkers, bicyclists and rollerbladers to share.

44 Please contact and engage the individuals who have property near or effected by any proposed 6/5/2017 4:07 PM project 45 a couple access areas to fish the river 6/5/2017 12:22 PM

46 It would be nice to have a dog park somewhere in the Kingston forty fort area. 6/3/2017 5:52 AM

47 If the kingston and forty fort trail were connected it would be alot safer to bike and or walk. It is 5/31/2017 11:21 PM very dangerous to get from one trail to the other. PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTY ARE NOT BIKE FRIENDLY PEOPLE! Also, it would be a great help to have a right and left lane with some dotted lines on the current levee trail. That is done in Virginia and it works well 48 Great job with the parks 5/31/2017 7:38 PM

49 i walk the forty fort levee 4-5 days per week on average.. many people of all ages appear to enjoy 5/31/2017 6:10 PM walking/running/biking on the dike and adding additional distance will only increase the number of people utilizing the dike and getting a good cardio workout (as well as getting our levee fee money's worth)... i consider it my gym menbership... i think it would be a tremendous improvement to our area.. 50 It would be great to connect levee systems and provide security cameras at parking locations. I 5/31/2017 3:43 PM would be happy to pay additional taxes for this.

51 Connect the two sections without going out onto public roads, even if the trail gets flooded from 5/31/2017 1:45 PM time to time.

52 I realize it is a huge wish but a trail along the Susquehanna like the 27 mile Schuylkill River Trail 5/31/2017 9:36 AM would be awesome! 53 I look forward to new trims! 5/30/2017 7:56 PM

54 It would be great if the rail tracks between Swoyersville and Forty Fort could be made into a rail 5/30/2017 5:55 PM trail

55 Availability of biking to work would have been great when I was younger. Too dangerous with 5/30/2017 4:43 PM drivers and no bike lanes

56 It's dangerous to bikers / joggers to use the levee trail between the Kingston dike and the 5/30/2017 4:18 PM Wyoming Dike 57 Do not, under any circumstances, raise taxes to fund any additional parks/trails. 5/30/2017 4:10 PM

58 Sounds like a wonderful idea, please keep us informed on any progress. Thanks. 5/30/2017 3:57 PM

59 Expand FF Trail along Levee to connect with Kingston 5/30/2017 3:36 PM

26 / 26 Public Images of Susquehanna River Ice

Provided by Mr. Rob Swaback

Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Study Summary DRAFT 12/22/2017 Probable Cost of Development SC # 16095.10

Segment A - Riverside Alignment Work Item Cost Total Cost A.0 - A.1: Existing Maintenance Road (new 8' wide surface) $ 2,054 A.1 - A.2: New Levee Bench Access Road (new 8' wide surface) $ 1,214,248 A.2 - C.0: Existing Maintenance Road (new 8' wide surface) $ 10,868 Segment A - Riverside Alignment $ 1,227,170 Mobilization (10%) $ 122,717 Construction Surveying (2%) $ 24,543 Erosion and Sedimentation Control (5%) $ 61,359 Stormwater Management (20%) $ 245,434 Construction Contingency (10%) $ 122,717 Design and Engineering (12%) $ 147,260 Total Estimated Project Costs - Segments A $ 1,951,200

Segment B - River Street Alignment Work Item Cost Total Cost A.0 - B.1 North Entrance (All Scenarios) $ 1,850 B.1 - B.2: Protected Cycle Track with Parking (option) $ 740,828 B.1 - B.2: Protected Cycle Track (option) $ 100,382 B.1 - B.2: Bike Lanes (option) $ 78,080 B.1 - B.2: Multiuse Trail - 10' Wide (option) $ 231,852 B.2 - B.3: Turner Street Connection $ 2,300 Segment B - Protected Cycle Track with Parking option 1 $ 744,978 Segment B - Protected Cycle Track option 2 $ 104,532 Segment B - Bike Lanes option 3 $ 82,230 Segment B - Multi-use Trail option 4 $ 236,002 Mobilization (10%) varies Construction Surveying (2%) varies Erosion and Sedimentation Control (5%) varies Stormwater Management (20%) varies Construction Contingency (10%) varies Design and Engineering (12%) varies Total Estimated Project Costs - Segment B (protected cycle track with parking) $ 1,184,515 Total Estimated Project Costs - Segment B (protected cycle track) $ 166,206 Total Estimated Project Costs - Segment B (bike lanes) $ 130,746 Total Estimated Project Costs - Segment B (multi-use trail) $ 375,244

Segment C - South Alignment Work Item Cost Total Cost C.0 - C.1: New Levee Top Access Road (8' wide surface) $ 79,550 C.1 - C.2: New Levee Bench Access Road (8' wide surface) $ 541,807 C.2 - C.3: New Levee Top Access Road (8' wide surface) $ 12,009 Segment C - South Alignment $ 633,366 Mobilization (10%) $ 63,337 Construction Surveying (2%) $ 12,667 Erosion and Sedimentation Control (5%) $ 31,668 Stormwater Management (20%) $ 126,673 Construction Contingency (10%) $ 63,337 Design and Engineering (12%) $ 76,004 Total Estimated Project Costs - Segments C $ 1,007,052

Completed Alignments Total Estimated Project Costs - Segment A + C $ 2,958,252 Total Estimated Project Costs - Segment B1 + C $ 2,191,567 Total Estimated Project Costs - Segment B2 + C $ 1,173,258 Total Estimated Project Costs - Segment B3 + C $ 1,137,798 Total Estimated Project Costs - Segment B4 + C $ 1,382,295 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Study Riverside Alternative DRAFT 12/22/2017 Probable Cost of Development SC # 16095.1

Riverside Alternative - Estimated Costs of Development Work Item Quantity Unit Cost Total Item Cost Total Cost A.0 - A.1: Existing Maintenance Road (new 8' wide surface) 72 LF Sub Total $ 2,054 Site Preparation 864 SF $ 57 Strip Topsoil and Stockpile (200' haul by dozer) 96 SY $ 0.59 $ 57 Asphalt Trail - 8' Wide 72 LF $ 1,997 Grade Subgrade 64 SY $ 2.93 $ 188 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 11 CY $ 45.00 $ 480 Grade and Compact Aggregate Subbase 64 SY $ 0.93 $ 60 2" Asphalt Base Course 64 SY $ 9.55 $ 611 Tack Coat 64 SY $ 1.52 $ 97 1.5" Wearing Course 64 SY $ 8.10 $ 518 Seeding 2' shoulders 288 SF $ 0.15 $ 43 A.1 - A.2: New Levee Bench Access Road (new 8' wide surface) 2,355 LF Sub Total $ 1,214,248 Site Preparation 18,840 SF $ 40,271 Site Clearing and Grubbing 5.19 AC $ 4,275.00 $ 22,188 Fill 2,181 CY $ 7.40 $ 16,136 Grade and Compact Fill 2,093 SY $ 0.93 $ 1,947 Asphalt Trail - 8' Wide 2,355 LF $ 102,845 Grade Subgrade 2,093.33 SY $ 2.93 $ 6,133 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 349 CY $ 45.00 $ 15,700 Grade and Compact Aggregate Subbase 2,093 SY $ 0.93 $ 1,947 2" Asphalt Base Course 2,093 SY $ 9.55 $ 19,991 Tack Coat 2,093 SY $ 1.52 $ 3,182 1.5" Wearing Course 2,093 SY $ 8.10 $ 16,956 Seeding 2' shoulders 207,240 SF $ 0.15 $ 31,086 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate trail shoulders 174 CY $ 45.00 $ 7,850 Concrete Wall 2,355 LF $ 1,071,133 Concrete - CIP, 10' high incl footer 2,355 LF $ 369.00 $ 868,995 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 43.61 CY $ 45.00 $ 1,963 Galvanized Steel Pipe Railing 2,355 LF $ 85.00 $ 200,175 A.2 - C.0: Existing Maintenance Road (new 8' wide surface) 381 LF Sub Total $ 10,868 Site Preparation 4,572 SF $ 300 Strip Topsoil and Stockpile (200' haul by dozer) 508 SY $ 0.59 $ 300 Asphalt Trail - 8' Wide 381 LF $ 10,568 Grade Subgrade 339 SY $ 2.93 $ 992 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 56 CY $ 45.00 $ 2,540 Grade and Compact Aggregate Subbase 339 SY $ 0.93 $ 315 2" Asphalt Base Course 339 SY $ 9.55 $ 3,234 Tack Coat 339 SY $ 1.52 $ 515 1.5" Wearing Course 339 SY $ 8.10 $ 2,743 Seeding 2' shoulders 1,524 SF $ 0.15 $ 229 Subtotal $ 1,227,170 Mobilization (10%) $ 122,717 Construction Surveying (2%) $ 24,543 Erosion and Sedimentation Control (5%) $ 61,359 Stormwater Management (20%) $ 245,434 Construction Contingency (10%) $ 122,717 Design and Engineering (12%) $ 147,260 Total Estimated Project Costs $ 1,951,200 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Study River Street Alternative DRAFT 12/22/2017 Probable Cost of Development SC # 16095.1

River Street Alternatives - Estimated Costs of Development Work Item Quantity Unit Cost Total Item Cost Total Cost A.0 - B.1 North Entrance (All Scenarios) Sub Total $ 1,850 Signage: W11-15 and W11-15p (trail crossing) 2 EA $ 350.00 $ 700 Signage: Wayfinding (Decision Signs) 2 EA $ 200.00 $ 400 Detectable Warning Strip 1 EA $ 750.00 $ 750 B.1 - B.2: Protected Cycle Track with Parking (option) 2,245 LF Sub Total $ 740,828 Site Preparation 53,880 SF $ 3,532 Strip Topsoil and Stockpile (200' haul by dozer) 5,987 SY $ 0.59 $ 3,532 Site Preparation - Utility Work $ 202,072 Removal of Existing Utilities Poles 42 EA $ 300.00 $ 12,600 Excavation 2' wide, 2' deep 2,245 LF $ 2.67 $ 5,994 Underground Ducts, 6 @ 6" diameter 2,245 LF $ 63.50 $ 142,558 Remove Firehydrant 4 EA $ 680.00 $ 2,720 Fire Hydrant 10' offset, 4' deep 4 EA $ 9,550.00 $ 38,200 Stormwater Management System 2,245 LF $ 286,901 Relocate Existing Storm inlet 2 EA $ 10,000.00 $ 20,000 Excavation and backfill 20,205 SF $ 1.08 $ 21,821 Catch Basin - 24" x 36" frames and grate 15 EA $ 1,375.00 $ 20,579 Pre-cast Concrete Pipe 4,490 LF $ 50.00 $ 224,500 Cartway Expansion - 10' on Both Sides 44,900 SF $ 152,311 Grade Subgrade 4,989 SY $ 2.93 $ 14,617 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 831 CY $ 45.00 $ 37,417 Grade and Compact Aggregate Subbase 4,989 SY $ 0.93 $ 4,640 2" Asphalt Base Course 4,989 SY $ 9.55 $ 47,644 Tack Coat 4,989 SY $ 1.52 $ 7,583 1.5" Wearing Course 4,989 SY $ 8.10 $ 40,410 Existing Roadway Mill and Overlay 76,330 SF $ 27,648 Asphalt Milling, 1" to 3" pavement 8,481 SY $ 1.88 $ 15,944 Pavement Overlay, polypropylene 8,481 SY $ 1.38 $ 11,704 Road Markings $ 23,148 4" White Epoxy Lane Markings 10,950 LF $ 1.20 $ 13,140 4" White Epoxy Buffer Striping 4,215 LF $ 1.20 $ 5,058 Hot Thermoplastic Paint Legend, Bicycle with Arrow 18 EA $ 275.00 $ 4,950 Safety Enhancements $ 45,217 Roadway Delineators / Tubular Markers (15' O.C.) 150 EA $ 25.50 $ 3,817 Relocate Existing Signage 20 EA $ 200.00 $ 4,000 Crosswalk Striping 13 EA $ 1,100.00 $ 14,300 Detectable Warning Strip 26 EA $ 750.00 $ 19,500 Signage: W11-15 and W11-15p (trail crossing) 8 EA $ 350.00 $ 2,800 Signage: Wayfinding (Confirmation Signs) 4 EA $ 200.00 $ 800 B.1 - B.2: Protected Cycle Track (option) 2,245 LF Sub Total $ 100,382 Existing Roadway Mill and Overlay 76,330 SF $ 27,648 Asphalt Milling, 1" to 3" pavement 8,481 SY $ 1.88 $ 15,944 Pavement Overlay, polypropylene 8,481 SY $ 1.38 $ 11,704 Cartway Expansion - 2' Shoulder 4,490 SF $ 15,231 Grade Subgrade 499 SY $ 2.93 $ 1,462 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 83 CY $ 45.00 $ 3,742 Grade and Compact Aggregate Subbase 499 SY $ 0.93 $ 464 2" Asphalt Base Course 499 SY $ 9.55 $ 4,764 Tack Coat 499 SY $ 1.52 $ 758 1.5" Wearing Course 499 SY $ 8.10 $ 4,041 Road Markings $ 18,036 4" White Epoxy Lane Markings 8,820 LF $ 1.20 $ 10,584 4" White Epoxy Buffer Striping 2,085 LF $ 1.20 $ 2,502 Hot Thermoplastic Paint Legend, Bicycle with Arrow 18 EA $ 275.00 $ 4,950 Safety Enhancements $ 39,467 Roadway Delineators / Tubular Markers (15' O.C.) 150 EA $ 25.50 $ 3,817 Crosswalk Striping 13 EA $ 1,100.00 $ 14,300 Detectable Warning Strip 26 EA $ 750.00 $ 19,500 Signage: W11-15 and W11-15p (trail crossing) 3 EA $ 350.00 $ 1,050 Signage: Wayfinding (Confirmation Signs) 4 EA $ 200.00 $ 800 Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Study River Street Alternative DRAFT 12/22/2017 Probable Cost of Development SC # 16095.1

B.1 - B.2: Bike Lanes (option) 2,245 LF Sub Total $ 78,080 Existing Roadway Mill and Overlay 76,330 SF $ 27,648 Asphalt Milling, 1" to 3" pavement 8,481 SY $ 1.88 $ 15,944 Pavement Overlay, polypropylene 8,481 SY $ 1.38 $ 11,704 Road Markings $ 13,032 4" White Epoxy Lane Markings 6,735 LF $ 1.20 $ 8,082 Hot Thermoplastic Paint Legend, Bicycle with Arrow 18 EA $ 275.00 $ 4,950 Safety Enhancements $ 37,400 Crosswalk Striping 13 EA $ 1,100.00 $ 14,300 Detectable Warning Strip 26 EA $ 750.00 $ 19,500 Signage: W11-15 and W11-15p (trail crossing) 8 EA $ 350.00 $ 2,800 Signage: Wayfinding (Confirmation Signs) 4 EA $ 200.00 $ 800 B.1 - B.2: Multiuse Trail - 10' Wide (option) 2,245 LF Sub Total $ 231,852 Demolition and Site Preparation 26,940 SF $ 116,848 Tree Removal (26" to 36" tree diameter) 47 EA $ 600.00 $ 28,200 Demolition of Concrete 13,470 SF $ 6.45 $ 86,882 Strip Topsoil and Stockpile (200' haul by dozer) 2,993 SY $ 0.59 $ 1,766 Multi-purpose Trail (10' wide) 2,245 LF $ 65,255 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 208 CY $ 45.00 $ 9,354 2" Asphalt Base Course 2,494 SY $ 9.55 $ 23,822 Tack Coat 2,494 SY $ 1.52 $ 3,792 1.5" Wearing Course 3,326 SY $ 8.10 $ 26,940 Seeding 2' shoulders 8,980 SF $ 0.15 $ 1,347 Pedestrian Enhancements $ 35,650 Crosswalk Striping 13 EA $ 1,100.00 $ 14,300 Detectable Warning Strip 26 EA $ 750.00 $ 19,500 Signage: W11-15 and W11-15p (trail crossing) 3 EA $ 350.00 $ 1,050 Signage: Wayfinding (Confirmation Signs) 4 EA $ 200.00 $ 800 Planting $ 14,100 2" Cal. Tree 47 EA $ 300.00 $ 14,100 B.2 - B.3: Turner Street Connection 457 LF Sub Total $ 2,300 Pavement Marking (Share the Road) 4 EA $ 300.00 $ 1,200 Signage: W11-15 and W11-15p (trail crossing) 2 EA $ 350.00 $ 700 Signage: Wayfinding (Decision Signs) 2 EA $ 200.00 $ 400 Mobilization (10%) varies Construction Surveying (2%) varies Erosion and Sedimentation Control (5%) varies Stormwater Management (20%) varies Construction Contingency (10%) varies Design and Engineering (12%) varies Total Estimated Project Costs varies Kingston and Forty Fort Trail Study South Alignment DRAFT 12/22/2017 Probable Cost of Development SC # 16095.1

South Alignment - Estimated Costs of Development Work Item Quantity Unit Cost Total Item Cost Total Cost C.0 - C.1: New Levee Top Access Road (8' wide surface) 2,532 LF Sub Total $ 79,550 Site Preparation 31,638 SF $ 2,074 Strip Topsoil and Stockpile (200' haul by dozer) 3,515 SY $ 0.59 $ 2,074 Asphalt Surface - 8' Wide 2,532 LF $ 73,222 Grade Subgrade 2,251 SY $ 2.93 $ 6,594 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 375 CY $ 45.00 $ 16,880 Grade and Compact Aggregate Subbase 2,251 SY $ 0.93 $ 2,093 2" Asphalt Base Course 2,251 SY $ 9.55 $ 21,494 Tack Coat 2,251 SY $ 1.52 $ 3,421 1.5" Wearing Course 2,251 SY $ 8.10 $ 18,230 Split Rail Fence 115 LF $ 26.00 $ 2,990 Seeding 2' Shoulders 10,128 SF $ 0.15 $ 1,519 Asphalt Surface - 20' radius turnaround 1,254 SF $ 4,254 Grade Subgrade 139 SY $ 2.93 $ 408 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 23 CY $ 45.00 $ 1,045 Grade and Compact Aggregate Subbase 139 SY $ 0.93 $ 130 2" Asphalt Base Course 139 SY $ 9.55 $ 1,331 Tack Coat 139 SY $ 1.52 $ 212 1.5" Wearing Course 139 SY $ 8.10 $ 1,129 C.1 - C.2: New Levee Bench Access Road (8' wide surface) 895 LF Sub Total $ 541,807 Site Preparation 10,740 SF $ 110,443 Site Clearing and Grubbing 0.25 AC $ 4,275.00 $ 1,054 Fill 9,944 CY $ 7.40 73,589 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate trail shoulders 796 CY $ 45.00 $ 35,800 Asphalt Surface - 8' Wide 895 LF $ 24,288 Grade Subgrade 796 SY $ 2.93 $ 2,331 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 133 CY $ 45.00 $ 5,967 Grade and Compact Aggregate Subbase 796 SY $ 0.93 $ 740 2" Asphalt Base Course 796 SY $ 9.55 $ 7,598 Tack Coat 796 SY $ 1.52 $ 1,209 1.5" Wearing Course 796 SY $ 8.10 $ 6,444 Concrete Wall 895 LF $ 407,076 Concrete - CIP, 10' high incl footer 895 LF $ 369.00 $ 330,255 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 17 CY $ 45.00 $ 746 Galvanized Steel Pipe Railing 895 LF $ 85.00 $ 76,075 C.2 - C.3: New Levee Top Access Road (8' wide surface) 421 LF Sub Total $ 12,009 Site Preparation 5,052 LF $ 331 Strip Topsoil and Stockpile (200' haul by dozer) 561 SY $ 0.59 $ 331 Asphalt Surface - 8' Wide 421 LF $ 11,678 Grade Subgrade 374 SY $ 2.93 $ 1,096 6" PADOT 2A Aggregate Subbase 62 CY $ 45.00 $ 2,807 Grade and Compact Aggregate Subbase 374 SY $ 0.93 $ 348 2" Asphalt Base Course 374 SY $ 9.55 $ 3,574 Tack Coat 374 SY $ 1.52 $ 569 1.5" Wearing Course 374 SY $ 8.10 $ 3,031 Seeding 2' Shoulders 1,684 SF $ 0.15 $ 253 Subtotal $ 633,366 Mobilization (10%) $ 63,337 Construction Surveying (2%) $ 12,667 Erosion and Sedimentation Control (5%) $ 31,668 Stormwater Management (20%) $ 126,673 Construction Contingency (10%) $ 63,337 Design and Engineering (12%) $ 76,004 Total Estimated Project Costs $ 1,007,052