POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PA
PREPARED BY: DRAFT REPORT December 2013 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Robert J. Birch Candyce Fluehr Chimera Michael J. Fox Jeffrey W. McDonnell Joseph P. Walsh ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Vere Archibald Barry Baker Jeffrey Gibbons Jeanine Hurry Mahbubur R. Meenar Beth Staab Terry Wilson OPEN SPACE COMMITTEE Kim Greene Jay Glickman Laurence Poli Roy Rodriguez Beth Staab PARK& RECREATION BOARD Mark Angelone Linda Brooks Angelo Grasso Kim Greene Michael Okino Al Quasti Anthony Ruggieri PLANNING COMMISSION Michael Beatty Jay Glickman Steve Krumenacker Leon McGuire James Rall Ellen Reynolds Jonathan Trump PAGE This project funded through the Delaware Valley Regional 2 Planning Commission’s (DVRPC’s) Regional Trails Program. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION -PROJECT SCOPE -REGIONAL CONTEXT -PROJECTED USE -TRAIL CHARACTERISTICS
INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS -PHYSICAL CONDITIONS -USAGE FEASIBILITY -LEGAL FEASIBILITY
METHODOLOGY -EXISTING PLANS AND FIELD INVENTORY -PUBLIC PARTICIPATION -DESIGN CRITERIA
RECOMMENDATIONS -TRAIL ALIGNMENT -PROPOSED EASEMENTS -OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE -IMPLEMENTATION -OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -FUNDING -PERMITTING AND COORDINATION
APPENDIX -PHOTO REFERENCE SHEETS -MONTGOMERY COUNTY PRIMARY TRAIL NETWORK PLAN -PENNSYLVANIA BIKE ROUTE S PLAN
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 3 INTRODUCTION PROJECT SCOPE The purpose of the Montgomery also exist. The Route 202 Parkway trail is a Township Power Line Connector Trail nine (9) mile multi-use trail that runs from Feasibility Study is to evaluate routing Doylestown to Montgomeryville. The other options that will best connect the recently significant trail network that is proposed constructed Route 202 Parkway Trail within the Township is the Power Line Trail. to the partially constructed Power Line This proposed seventeen (17) mile trail Trail. Both of these trails are identified on will extend from Evansburg State Park in Montgomery County’s proposed primary Skippack Township to the Pennypack Trail trail network plan, which was prepared and Cross County Trail in Upper Moreland by the Montgomery County Planning Township. The Trail follows a PECO utility Commission. Feasibility criteria include corridor. Approximately five (5) miles of pedestrian safety, physical barriers, the trail has been constructed in adjacent financial consideration, connectivity to Horsham Township. residential populations and to existing and proposed amenities within Montgomery Township as well as surrounding municipalities.
REGIONAL CONTEXT Montgomery Township is situated on the eastern edge of Montgomery County, bordered by Horsham Township, Lower 202 PARKWAY TRAIL SEGMENT WITH DEDICATED BIKE LAND AND SIDE TRAIL Gwynedd Township, Upper Gwynedd Township, Lansdale Borough, Hatfield In addition to these regional, off Township and New Britain Township, road trails, Pennsylvania Department of Bucks County to the East. The Township Transportation’s Bicycle PA Bike Route S is densely populated and composed of utilizes portions of Route 309, Hartman a large range of residential and non- Road, Horsham Road and Kenas Road residential uses. In addition to the within Montgomery Township. This on- multitude of existing sidewalk networks existing throughout the Township, several existing and planned regional trail routes
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 4 INTRODUCTION
road bike route extends four hundred PROJECTED USE sixteen miles in length, beginning at Montgomery Township anticipates the West Virginia state line just west of the Power Line Connector Trail to be West Alexander and extending east to a Multi-Use trail, utilized by bicyclists the New Jersey state line in Washington and pedestrians for transportation and Crossing. Although the Bicycle PA routes exercise. The proposed Trail system do not necessarily provide specific bicycle will provide a multitude of recreational facilities, they are intended to provide opportunities for the Township and experienced bicyclists with a guide to Surrounding Communities by linking available highways and rail trails to traverse residents to regional trail networks. These across the state. trail networks provide access to various parks, open space, commercial areas and cultural/historical sites. Implementation of the trails will also open up opportunities for enhancement of natural areas. PROJECTED USE
BICYCLE PA ROUTES
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 5 INTRODUCTION TRAIL CHARACTERISTICS This feasibility study considers which are physically separated from several types of trails to create the link vehicular traffic, as well as On-Road cycling between the Parkway Trail and the Power routes are noted as potential routes. Line Trail. Multi-Use, or Shared Use trails
TYPICAL SEPARATED MULTI-USE TRAIL TYPICAL ON ROAD SHARED ROUTE OFF ROAD
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 6
INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Land Use The land that exists between the 202 Parkway Trail and the proposed connection to the Power Line Trail is primarily urbanized land with rolling topography. Land uses include a wide range of Industrial, Commercial and Mid-
16F Density Residential.16F16F16F 16E 16E16E16E
1AD1AD1AD 1AD 16D 16D16D16D 16C 16C16C16C 16B16B16B 16A 16B 16A16A16A 169 169169169 168 168168168 D0 D0D0D0
166166166 167 166 167167167 164 164164164
162 162162162 165 165165165 D1 D1D1D1 161161161 161
160 145145145 146 160160160 145 146146146
D2 147 14A D2D2D2 144144144 147147147 14A14A14A 144 147 14C 14C14C14C D8D8D8 D8 148 148148148 1AC D3D3D3 1AC1AC1AC D3 143 143143143 D4 D4D4D4 D5D5D5 D5 F2 14D F2F2F2 14D14D14D 135 14D 135135135
137 137137137 D7D7D7 110 D7 DB 110110110 DBDBDB 112 112112112 D6D6D6 D6 DA DADADA 15E DDDDDD 15E15E15E DD D9 D9D9D9 DE DEDEDE 15D15D15D DF F1F1F1 15D DFDFDF F1
10F E2E2E2 E0 10F10F10F E2 E0E0E0 10F E1 E1E1E1 10E 10E10E10E 10D 10D10D10D 10C10C10C 50 10C 505050
132132132 E4 132 E4E4E4 F4F4F4 51 131 E4 F4 515151 131131131 F3F3F3 131 F3 130 E3 10B10B10B 130130130 E3E3E3 10B 4F4F4F 130 E3 4F F5 12F F5F5F5 12F12F12F 4E 4E4E4E 11A 11A11A11A 525252 12E 52 12E12E12E 656565 4D 65 117 4D4D4D 12C 117117117 12C12C12C 117 66 118118118 666666 118 53 116 108 535353 116116116 108108108 646464 10A 64 10A10A10A 4C 11B 107 4C4C4C 11B11B11B 107107107 4C 4A4A4A 62 4A 626262 11C 11F 11C11C11C 11F11F11F 120 125 120120120 125125125 106106106 125 106 127 122 127127127 122122122 414141 126 41 126126126 129129129 4B 606060 129 4B4B4B 60 616161 12B 61 12B12B12B 474747 113113113 47 E6E6E6 105 113 E6 105105105 114 114114114 484848 5F 48 5F5F5F 40 F8F8F8 49 404040 F8 45 494949 40 FA 454545 FAFAFA 43 434343 104104104 104 F9 F9F9F9 444444 44 5E F7 5E5E5E 42 E5E5E5 F7F7F7 424242 E5 F7 676767 42 46 67 464646 5D5D5D 54 5D E8E8E8 55 545454 E8 555555 F6 F6F6F6 565656 5C 686868 56 5C5C5C 68 E9 797979 E9E9E9 57 79 575757 59 595959 696969 58 69 5B 585858 5B5B5B EF 5B 78 EFEFEF 787878 EA 5A 78 EAEAEA 5A5A5A EEEEEE EE 6F EC 6F6F6F 777777 ECECEC 6F 77 EDEDED 6A 6D6D6D ED 6A6A6A 6D 158 158158158 6E 767676 158 6E6E6E 76 157157157 EB 157 EBEBEB 156156156 156 E7 E7E7E7 6B 6B6B6B 155 747474 155155155 74 F0 707070 757575 F0F0F0 70 75
13F13F13F 154154154 13F 154 142 142142142 153 71 153153153 717171 Montgomery Twp 13E 13D
Neighborhoods Streets Features
1D5 1D51D51D5 Streams
1D2 1D21D21D2
1CC 1CC1CC1CC 1CD1CD1CD 1D11D11D1 1CD 1D1 1CE Buildings 1CE1CE1CE 1D3 1D31D31D3
1CB 1CB1CB1CB
1CA Parcels OverView 1CA1CA1CA
1C5 1C51C51C5 Zoning Layers 1C9 1C91C91C9
1C6 Zoning Overlays 1C8 1C61C61C6 1C6 1C81C81C8 1C71C71C7 B 1C7 ECPOD HLI HLI II
1DA1DA1DA Zoning 1DA
1D61D61D6 1D6 1D91D91D9 BP 1D9 1DB 1D8 1DB1DB1DB 1D81D81D8
1DC C 1DC1DC1DC 1ED 1DD 1ED1ED1ED 1DD1DD1DD 1DE CA 1DE1DE1DE 1DF 1DF1DF1DF 1E0 L1 1E01E01E0 1E2 1E21E21E2
1EC 1E11E11E1 1E3 MHP 1EC1EC1EC 1E1 1E31E31E3 1E4 1E41E41E4 1E51E51E5 1E5 1E61E61E6 1E6 1E8 R1 1E81E81E8 1A9 1A91A91A9 1AA R2 1AA1AA1AA 1A8 R3 1A81A81A8 1AF R3A 1AF1AF1AF R3B 1A7 R5 1A71A71A7 1C3 1C31C31C3 1A5 1A6 1A51A51A5 R6 1A61A61A6
1A3 1A41A41A4 1A31A31A3 1A4 1A2 1A21A21A2 1A1 RS 1A11A11A1
1C1 S 1A0 1C11C11C1 1A01A01A0 PAGE1C1 1A0 19F19F19F 19F POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 19E19E19E 19E 1BD 1BD1BD1BD
19D 19D19D19D 1BE 1BE1BE1BE
19C19C19C 7 1BF 19C 1BF1BF1BF
19B 19B19B19B INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
Natural Areas and Parks are located on this property, including a Due to the highly urbanized and stone-bank barn which was constructed in densely populated condition of the project 1820, a cottage built in 1929, The Thomas area, there are limited Natural Areas. There Wilson House and The John Roberts House. is a vegetated corridor that follows the The land was originally owned by William path of the Little Neshaminy Creek which Penn and was granted to Richard Pearce, flows through the project site as well as who then sold a piece to William Morgan. vegetated tributary areas. These tributary Joseph Amber acquired the property after areas exhibit signs of the highly urbanized the death of William Morgan. This site is environment in which they are located, full of history and charm. having eroded banks from high velocity Another important site in the flows. project area is the Montgomery Township Municipal Complex. The Township complex is home to the Township’s Government, Administration and Police. There are existing trails and open space on this site as well. This complex has ample parking, and could serve as a trail head for the Connector Trail. Looking to the future, there is one more notable site within the Connector Trail project area. The approximately twelve LITTLE NESHAMINY CREEK (12) acre site is located on the south side of There is a Township Park located within Horsham Road, to the east of Stump Road. the project area. Whispering Pines Park is This is the future home of the Montgomery located at Orchard and Stump Roads. Township Community Center. This will Notable Sites be a wonderful asset to the community, The area of the Connector Trail providing programs and amenities for contains several notable sites that were residents of all ages. The facility will also influential in the recommended trail have ample parking and could serve as a routing. The first site is The Joseph Ambler trail head for the Connector Trail. Inn property. Several historic structures
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 8 INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
USAGE FEASIBILITY LEGAL FEASIBILITY
The Connector Trail connects into Proposed Easements will be the existing network of sidewalks that necessary to obtain from all properties not reach into densely populated residential owned by Montgomery Township or within neighborhoods, providing the necessary Township road rights-of-way, including hierarchy of access to the available PECO and PennDOT. The recommended regional trail systems and their associated routes, as described, utilize Township amenities and resources. The proposed owned property where possible to limit trail route avoids roadways with high the number of easements that would be volume vehicular traffic where possible to necessary from private property owners. create a safe, inviting environment for trail Trail construction and maintenance users. In addition to the access provided to easements would need to be executed. residential properties, it is also important to recognize the proximity to the many employees that work in the Commercial and Industrial sites within the project area. This creates opportunities for before-work, lunch break and after-work use of the trail system. Pedestrian commuting is also a potential benefit to employees living and working in close proximity to this trail network.
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 9 METHODOLOGY
EXISTING PLAN AND DESIGN CRITERIA FIELD INVENTORY There are several guidelines for the The Montgomery County Trail Plan design of Multi-Use Trails, the most current which was prepared by the Montgomery of which are still in draft form as of the County Planning Commission identifies date of this report. The following chart the Power Line Trail and 202 Parkway Trail provides a comparison between the most within the Township. current recommendations as provided This Feasibility Study was prepared by the Architectural and Transportation utilizing aerial imagery flown in 2005, Barriers Board (Access Board) and the and obtained from the Delaware Valley American Association of State Highway Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). as well as Geographical Information These criteria were considered during the System (GIS) parcel data obtained from the preparation of this feasibility study and Montgomery Township GIS database. shall also be utilized to guide the detailed Potential Trail Routes were walked design and engineering of the Connector and a photographic inventory of conditions Trail. was taken. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Official’s PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (AASHTO) current guidelines for Shared The Draft Plan and Routing Options were Use Paths recommend a minimum width presented publicly at the Township’s Plan- of ten (10) feet for a two-directional Shared ning Commission meeting in April 2013, Use Path. A graded, shoulder area of at the Park & Recreation meeting in June least three (3) feet should also be provided. 2013, the Environmental Advisory Com- These guidelines also recommend a mittee meeting in September of 2013 and minimum lane width of fourteen (14) the Open Space Committee meeting in feet for Shared Lanes on roadways, in October of 2013. General consensus was conjunction with proper signage and reached to support the proposed trail roadway markings. routes.
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 10 METHODOLOGY
Shared Use Trail Design Guidelines Trail Type Required Width Agency/Guideline Signage Markings Off Road 10' minimum with 2' American Association of State High- Part 9 of MUTCD Solid/Broken Retrore- clear shoulders having way and Transportation Officials flectorized Yellow line 6:1 max. slope (3) (AASHTO) Design of Shared to clarify the direction 5' clear shoulders shall Use Path (Feb. 2010) (DRAFT) of travel and organize be provided where pathway traffic there is an adjacent water hazard or down- ward slope of 3:1 or greater Off Road (Adjacent to Roadways) 10' minimum with a American Association of State High- Part 9 of MUTCD Solid/Broken Retrore- minimum of 5' clear to way and Transportation Officials flectorized Yellow line adjacent roadway (AASHTO) Design of Shared to clarify the direction Use Path (Feb. 2010) (DRAFT) of travel and organize pathway traffic On Road (Shared Lanes) Minimum of 14' lane American Association of State High- W11-1 & W16-1P Bike Lane Symbol Mark- width. (1) way and Transportation Officials (Share the Road) ing Placement imme- (AASHTO) Design of On-Road R4-11 (Bicylces May dately after an intersec- Facilities (Feb. 2010) (DRAFT) Use Full Lane) tion and at intervals not greater than 250 ft. On Road (Bike Lanes) Minimum of 4' where American Association of State High- R3-17 (Bike Lane) & 4" Solid White Line and no curb and gutter and way and Transportation Officials R3-17aP/bP (Ahead/ Bike Lane Symbol Mark- there is no on-street (AASHTO) Design of On-Road Ends) Spaced as ing spaced as needed, parking Adjacent to Facilities (Feb. 2010) (DRAFT) needed, based on based on context On-Street Parking: 6' context r e c o m m e n d e d ( 5 ' m i n . ) 7' Adjacent to Nar- row Parking Lane w i t h H i g h Tu r n o v e r 6-8' In Area of High Bicycle Use On Road (Paved Shoulder) 4' with no vertical American Association of State High- W11-1 & W16-1P W11-1 & W16-1P (Share o b s t r u c ti o n s a d j a c e n t way and Transportation Officials (Share the Road) the Road) R4-11 5' with vertical obstruc- (AASHTO) Design of On-Road R4-11 (Bicylces May (Bicylces May Use Full tion adjacent Facilities (Feb. 2010) (DRAFT) Use Full Lane) Lane) Path within a Public Right-Of-Way Public Rights of Way Accessibility functioning as a sidewalk Guidelines (PROWAG) Shared Use Path in Independent Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Corridors Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas (ADOGA)
(1) Less than 14' may be designated for bicycles with adequate sigange and markings (2) Shared Lane Marking not to be used on roadways having a speed limit greater than 35 mph (3) 8' width is allowable in rare cases/physical constraints
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 11 RECOMMENDATIONS TRAIL ALIGNMENT Multiple potential trail alignments scenic route and safety concerns utilizing were explored and evaluated through the the highly trafficed State roadway. The trail process of determining the feasibility of the would then connect to the existing paved connector trail. The various trail options are trails north of the parking area for the described below. municipal complex. Safety improvements such as signage and striping would be Option A - Off-Road: (Route shown inRED needed to better identify the pedestrian on the overall trail feasibility diagram on crossing of the driveway which provides Page 17 and shown in detail on Pages 18- access to the municipal complex from 20) Stump Road. The trail would then follow Route A proposes to connect to the existing the existing access drive and traverse along stub trail that currently connects to the 202 the eastern side of the municipal building Parkway Trail at the western property edge and meet the intersection of Horsham and of the Joseph Ambler Inn property. The Stump Roads. Gated access and fencing trail follows along the northern property is recommended to secure the access area line of the Joseph Ambler Inn, heading and storage tanks. east towards the Montgomery Township Pedestrian crossing buttons exist at Municipal Complex. Easements will need to the intersection of Horsham and Stump be secured to cross the Joseph Ambler Inn roads. These signals and curb ramps should property. The trail would extend across the be closely evaluated to ensure they are fully western property line of the Montgomery compliant with Penn-DOT requirements Township Municipal Complex into a since they fall within Horsham Road’s right- wooded area. A stream crossing would of-way, which is a State road. Continental be necessary to traverse over the Little crosswalk striping should be implemented Neshaminy Creek, which flows through the to create better vehicular awareness of Township property and under Horsham the pedestrian crossings. The trail would Road. An alternate to this stream crossing then continue east along Horsham Road would be a routing out to Horsham Road and follow the vacated road parcel which to utilize the existing road crossing. The is located between two storm-water negatives of this routing would be a less management facilities, the eastern facility
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 12 RECOMMENDATIONS
being located on the site of the future crossings. The trail continues between Montgomery Township Community Center. the TEVA and Hartman Corporate Center Routing the trail though the Community properties until it reaches Hartman Road. Center site is a great opportunity to The trail then advances across the entrance connect to a major Community Amenity. drive to the Harman Corporate Center The trail would continue east, along the and continues south along Hartman Road. southern property line, following the A five (5) foot wide concrete sidewalk existing tree line. The trail then crosses exists along portions of this stretch of over several properties where easements the proposed trail. There are also several would need to be obtained. The first is the obstacles to traverse along this stretch, Cedar Run Landscapes property. There including existing culvert crossing head are existing storage areas and bulk mulch walls, wet areas, utility poles and slopes. bins located in the area where the trail The trail will intersect with the PECO power is proposed. Once past the Cedar Run line corridor which is the future location property, the trail accesses the property of of the Power Line Trail, heading towards TEVA Pharmaceuticals. The TEVA facility Horsham Township to the east. A mid- is completely enclosed by an eight (8) foot block crossing will be needed to cross high chain link fence. There is lawn and Hartman Road at this location. landscape area between the property line Preliminary discussions with property and the chain link fence that would be owners along this Route, particularly in ample to support the ten (10) foot wide the vicinity of the TEVA parcels, which trail. Following the perimeter of the TEVA indicated that this route would likely not property, the trail crosses over to the be a viable option due to security concerns parcel to the south of TEVA, the Hartman as well as potential future development. Corporate Center property. Again, ample Therefore, an alternate route is also shown area exists between the parking area for on the plan, which would basically become the Hartman Corporate Center and the a side trail along Horsham and Hartman TEVA fence line. This route provides a Roads. There are existing concrete continuous trail which is not impeded by a sidewalks which could be widened or significant number of roadway or driveway replaced to accomodate the multi-use trail
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 13 RECOMMENDATIONS
width that is required. This option appears a tot lot, basketball court, street hockey to be viable with the drawback of the court and opens lawn. Signage, street proximity to the high volumes of vehicular markings and bicycle safe storm drain traffic along Horsham Road. grates are needed to properly mark the shared roadway. The walkway continues Option B - On-Road (Shown in ORANGE along the western side of Commerce Drive on the overall trail feasibility diagram to eliminate the need for a crossing at located on Page 17 and shown in detail on Domorah Drive, along Hartman Road, in Pages 21-23) order to connect with the Power Line Trail. Route Option B traverses through the A culvert extension would be necessary industrial complex. This route proposes where a piped tributary currently exists. to separate the walkers from the At the intersection of Domorah Drive and cyclists. Evaluating this route identified Hartman Road, the ten (10) foot wide multi- approximately twenty (20) access use trail would head south on the western driveways would need to be crossed side of Hartman Road and connect to the in order to move through the campus. future Power Line Trail system by way of a These crossings would create dangerous mid-block crossing with a pedestrian refuge conditions for cyclists, in particular. The island in Hartman Road. The intersection of proposed routing utilizes the existing thirty the Township’s Connector Trail and Power (30) foot wide paved cart way as an on-road Line trail would have a kiosk containing shared roadway. In addition to the shared information and maps of the various trail roadway for cyclists, a five (5) foot wide systems for users to utilize to determine walkway would be located on the south their desired route and identify amenities side of Commerce Drive. The walkway and destinations along the trails. would be continued along the east side of An alternative to the continuation of Stump Road to fill in the sidewalk gap that the route as described above is to divert the exists in that area, which connects to an trail through the secondary PECO power existing mid-block crossing, connecting to line corridor prior to Domorah Drive. The The Village Shopping Center. Once on the difficulty with this routing option is the west side of Stump Road, this also creates ability to safely navigate through the Public a link to Whispering Pines Park, which has Works area to connect with the primary
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 14 RECOMMENDATIONS
PECO power line corridor. Significant for several reasons: changes to the parking and vehicle access 1. Duplicate Routing. Option A routing would need to take place to accommodate would provide convenient trail access to the a safe pedestrian route through this area. Terrace at Montgomery residents, however they currently have access to the 202 Option C: (Route shown in BLUE on the Parkway trail that runs parallel , just to the overall trail feasibility diagram on Page west. An existing sidewalk network and 17) crosswalks provide convenient, safe access This route explores the use of an existing to the 202 Parkway Trail where it intersects privately owned open space/utility with Stump Road. easement adjacent to The Terrace at 2. Bypass Notable Township Sites. Routing Montgomery residential development. This Option A would parallel the 202 Parkway area is to the east side of the development, and Route 309 corridors, rather than following the existing Little Neshaminy connect to the Township’s historic and Creek stream corridor. This corridor, at cultural resources, including the Joseph first blush, appears to be a promising Ambler Inn, Montgomery Township opportunity due to the fairly flat terrain and Municipal Complex and future Community lack of mature trees and vegetation. This Center. route would also need to traverse some 3. Financial Consideration. Trail Routing steep slopes, cross the Little Neshaminy Option A does not allow for utilization of Creek, provide a mid-block crossing existing infrastructure and Township owned of Stump Road and navigate through properties. This will increase the cost and an existing auto dealership property. complexity of acquiring easements and Evaluating the overall feasibility and value constructing the necessary infrastructure to to the Township and its residents, we do support trail implementation. not feel this route provides the most value
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 15 RECOMMENDATIONS PROPOSED EASEMENTS Proposed Easements will be of easements that would be necessary necessary to obtain from all properties not from private property owners. Anticipated owned by Montgomery Township or within easements will be necessary from the Township road rights-of-way, including following property owners/parcels: PECO and PennDOT. The recommended routes as described utilize Township owned property where possible to limit the number
List of Potential Easements Needed to Facilitate Connector Trail (On-Road Route)
Parcel Block and Unit # Owner Name Approximate Easement Area Required Block 15, Unit 10 N/L Joseph Inn Real Estate 13,125 s.f.* Block 18A, Unit 9 N/L Lloyd, William P 4,800 s.f.** Block 18, Unit 63 N/L PECO 3,100 s.f.** Block 18, Unit 62 N/L Ambrose, Francis J. & Freida 3,500 s.f.** Block 18, Unit 61 N/L Lansdale Realty Assoc. 2,650 s.f.** Block 18, Unit 60 N/L Vink & Beri LLC 2,150 s.f.** N/L RMS Development Company, 7,700 s.f.** Block 18, Unit 59 LP
*Based on a 15’ wide easement across the length of the property. ** Based on a 10’ wide easement across the length of the property.
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 16 LEGEND
PREFERRED ROUTE RECREATIONAL TRAIL VEHICULAR TRAVEL 1
PLAYGROUNDS JOSEPH AMBLER INN OBSERVATION AREAS
MONTGOMERY RAIN GARDENS TOWNSHIP BUILDING PARKWAY TRAIL COMMERCE DRIVE 1 MEADOW/LAWN AREAS 4
WETLAND AREAS
FUTURE COMMUNITY INFORMATIONAL KIOSKS CENTER
2 4
SEWER EASEMENT
5 HARTMAN CORPORATE CENTER 2 SEWER EASEMENT 5 ENTRANCE DRIVE
3
6
LEGEND
ROUTE OPTION A (OFF ROAD ROUTE)
ROUTE OPTION B (ON ROAD ROUTE)
ROUTE OPTION C (UTILITY EASEMENT)
SECONDARY PECO CORRIDOR EXISTING 202 PARKWAY TRAIL THROUGH MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP FUTURE POWER LINE TRAIL (TO HORSHAM) 3 PUBLIC WORKS 6 POWER LINE
PAGE 17 MONTGOMERY GREENE VILLAGE OF HORSHAM ROAD 6. NESHAMINY 463 FALLS
2. 3. 4. 5. US 202 i i 7. 1. EASEMENT NEEDED
i JOSEPH HARTMAN ROAD HARTMAN AMBLER INN MONTGOMERY 8. TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL COMPLEX CONNECTION 9. TO EXISTING RT 309 202 PARKWAY
TRAIL STUB 10. STUMP ROAD STUMP
LOCATION REFERENCE PLAN HORSHAM ROAD SCALE: 1”=1500’ i
FUTURE LEGEND DEVON CT. 11. COMMUNITY PROPOSED MULTI-USE TRAIL (OFF STUMP ROAD CENTER ROAD ROUTE) EXISTING MULTI-USE TRAIL PAINTED CROSS WALK i RED HAVEN DRIVE EXISTING PAVED TRAIL 12.
GENERAL HANCOCK BLVD SHARE THE ROAD BIKE ROUTE 202 US AMY CT. PROPOSED SIDEWALK/PEDESTRIAN THE ORCHARDS CONNECTION TRAIL US 202 PARKWAY EXISTING SIDEWALK THE TERRACE AT MONTGOMERY EXISTING CROSS WALK COMMERCE DRIVE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE JOSHUA CT. ORCHARD DRIVE PROPOSED EASEMENT NEEDED SIDEWALK 1. PHOTO REFERENCE CONNECTION i KIOSK/INFORMATION EXISTING CROSSING TO THE VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER PAGE 18 HORSHAM ROAD 33. HORSHAM ROAD 463 ALTERNATE ROUTE i ALTERNATE ROUTE 34.
US 202 CEDAR RUN LAND- 35.
SCAPES HARTMAN ROAD HARTMAN
13. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS
RT 309
STUMP ROAD STUMP ALTERNATE ROUTE ALTERNATE LOCATION REFERENCE PLAN
SCALE: 1”=1500’ HARTMAN ROAD HARTMAN
ROUTE NOT FEASIBLE: POTENTIAL FUTURE EXPANSION i LEGEND 14. 15. 16. PROPOSED MULTI-USE TRAIL (OFF SECONDARY PECO POWER LINE CORRIDOR ROAD ROUTE) EXISTING MULTI-USE TRAIL PAINTED CROSS WALK EXISTING PAVED TRAIL HARTMAN 17. SHARE THE ROAD BIKE ROUTE CORPORATE CENTER PROPOSED SIDEWALK/PEDESTRIAN
CONNECTION COMMERCE DRIVE COMMERCE EXISTING SIDEWALK EXISTING CROSS WALK PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE MONTGOMERY 18. CROSSING EASEMENT NEEDED
1. PHOTO REFERENCE i KIOSK/INFORMATION
CORPORATE DRIVE
PAGE 19 HORSHAM ROAD 463
US 202 HARTMAN ROAD HARTMAN 21.
22.
CORPORATE DRIVE CORPORATE COMMERCE DRIVE COMMERCE
RT 309
HARTMAN ROAD HARTMAN STUMP ROAD STUMP
LOCATION REFERENCE PLAN SCALE: 1”=1500’ 23.
LEGEND SECONDARY PECO POWER LINE CORRIDOR
PROPOSED MULTI-USE TRAIL (OFF REGENCY DRIVE ROAD ROUTE) EXISTING MULTI-USE TRAIL PAINTED CROSS WALK MONTGOMERY EXISTING PAVED TRAIL OAKS SHARE THE ROAD BIKE ROUTE DOMORAH DRIVE PROPOSED SIDEWALK/PEDESTRIAN 19. CONNECTION EXISTING SIDEWALK EXISTING CROSS WALK PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE 20. DRAKE LANE EASEMENT NEEDED
1. PHOTO REFERENCE i KIOSK/INFORMATION i FUTURE PRIMARY PECO POWER LINE CORRIDOR 24. POWER LINE TRAIL TO HORSHAM PAGE 20 MONTGOMERY GREENE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OVER LITTLE NESHAMINY
HORSHAM ROAD 6. 463 VILLAGE OF 2. 3. 4. NESHAMINY
US 202 5. i FALLS EASEMENT NEEDED i 1. 7.
i CONNECTION TO EXISTING TRAIL STUB HARTMAN ROAD HARTMAN MONTGOMERY 8. JOSEPH TOWNSHIP AMBLER INN MUNICIPAL COMPLEX ALTERNATE ROUTE 9.
RT 309
ALTERNATE ROUTE 10. STUMP ROAD STUMP
LOCATION REFERENCE PLAN HORSHAM ROAD SCALE: 1”=1500’ i
FUTURE DEVON CT. LEGEND COMMUNITY 11. PROPOSED MULTI-USE TRAIL (ON CENTER ROAD ROUTE) EXISTING MULTI-USE TRAIL
PAINTED CROSS WALK US 202 US EXISTING PAVED TRAIL
SHARE THE ROAD BIKE ROUTE TRAIL US 202 PARKWAY AMY CT.
PROPOSED SIDEWALK/PEDESTRIAN GENERAL HANCOCK BLVD THE ORCHARDS CONNECTION THE TERRACE AT EXISTING SIDEWALK MONTGOMERY 25. EXISTING CROSS WALK COMMERCE DRIVE ALTERNATE TRAIL ROUTE JOSHUA CT. i EXTEND SIDEWALK PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE TO CREATE LINK TO EASEMENT NEEDED SHOPPING CENTER
1. PHOTO REFERENCE 26. THE VILLAGE KIOSK/INFORMATION i SHOPPING
CENTER
ORCHARD DRIVE ORCHARD STUMP ROAD STUMP
RED HAVEN DRIVE PAGE 21 COMMERCE DRIVE
HORSHAM ROAD 463
US 202 26. SHARE THE ROAD ROUTE TO AVOID MULTIPLE DRIVEWAY CROSSINGS
HARTMAN ROAD HARTMAN THE VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER 27.
RT 309
COMMERCE DRIVE COMMERCE
ORCHARD DRIVE ORCHARD STUMP ROAD STUMP
LOCATION REFERENCE PLAN
SCALE: 1”=1500’ STUMP ROAD STUMP 28.
LEGEND WHISPERING PINES PARK PROPOSED MULTI-USE TRAIL (ON ROAD ROUTE) EXISTING MULTI-USE TRAIL PAINTED CROSS WALK EXISTING PAVED TRAIL SHARE THE ROAD BIKE ROUTE PROPOSED SIDEWALK/PEDESTRIAN ENTERPRISE ROAD CONNECTION
EXISTING SIDEWALK JONATHAN DRIVE EXISTING CROSS WALK ALTERNATE TRAIL ROUTE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE EASEMENT NEEDED
1. PHOTO REFERENCE DRIVE CORPORATE i KIOSK/INFORMATION
SECONDARY PECO POWER LINE CORRIDOR PAGE 22 HORSHAM ROAD 463
US 202
HARTMAN ROAD HARTMAN
COMMERCE DRIVE COMMERCE
CORPORATE DRIVE CORPORATE HARTMAN ROAD HARTMAN
RT 309 STUMP ROAD STUMP
LOCATION REFERENCE PLAN SCALE: 1”=1500’ SECONDARY 30.
REGENCY DRIVE PECO POWER LINE CORRIDOR LEGEND PROPOSED MULTI-USE TRAIL (ON ROAD ROUTE) EXISTING MULTI-USE TRAIL 29. DOMORAH DRIVE PAINTED CROSS WALK 31. 19. EXISTING PAVED TRAIL
SHARE THE ROAD BIKE ROUTE CULVERT EXTENSION TO i PROPOSED SIDEWALK/PEDESTRIAN PECO ALLOW WALKWAY CONSTRUCTION CONNECTION ELECTRICITY EXISTING SIDEWALK 20. SUB-STATION DRAKE LANE EXISTING CROSS WALK ALTERNATE TRAIL ROUTE i PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PRIMARY 24. FUTURE EASEMENT NEEDED ALTERNATE TRAIL ROUTE PECO POWER LINE CORRIDOR POWER LINE TRAIL 1. PHOTO REFERENCE TO HORSHAM 32. i KIOSK/INFORMATION CROSSING NEEDED
PAGE 23 RECOMMENDATIONS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE The long-term success of the trail will rely performed at the Township Park facilities. on a regular maintenance schedule. This The following list represents a generalized is important for the enjoyment of the trail list of maintenance activities that may user as well as the risk management of the pertain to the Connector Trail. A detailed Township, in its role as the trail operator. It trail maintenance manual and schedule is anticipated that the proposed trail route should be provided by the trail design will be maintained by the Montgomery consultant upon completion of detailed Township Public Works Department, design drawings for the trail. in conjunction with the maintenance
Trails Maintenance Checklist Activity Description Frequency Notes Maintain 4’ wide mow strip adja- Monthly During Grow- Use Flail-Type Mower Mowing cent to trail. ing Season Prune woody plant material to Annual. Check trail Treat & Remove inva- maintain 4’ clear adjacent to trail after severe storms. sive vines Pruning and provide 14’ vertical clearance.
Removal of hazard trees Annual. Check trail Tree Removal after severe storms. Signage Crack Seal/Resurfacing As needed Anticipated 15 year Trail Surface cycle Remove debris from inlets & swales Annual. Check trail Drainage Structures after severe storms. Trail-side litter pickup Monthly Encourage Carry In-Car- Litter Removal ry Out policy Trash Collection Empty Trash Receptacles Weekly Inspection by Professional Engineer Every 2 years Inspection conducted Bridge Inspection by Municipal Engineer
Graffiti Removal Painting/Graffiti Removal Annual/As Needed
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 24 RECOMMENDATIONS IMPLEMENTATION The total length of the proposed Connector Trail is approximately two (2) miles in length. Implementation is assumed to be completed in one phase. Depending upon the timing of construction of the Community Center, pieces of the trail could potentially be constructed in conjunction with that site work, independent of the remainder of the trail.
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST The total cost of the Connector Trail will potentially include easement acquisition costs, design costs and actual construction costs. Opinion of Probable Construction Costs have been prepared for both the Off- Road Option (Option A) and the On-Road (Option B) as described in this study. See charts on following page.
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 25 G GILMORE & ASSOCIATES, INC. RECOMMENDATIONS &A ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST CLIENT: MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP PROJECT NAME: POWERLINE CONNECTOR TRAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY - OPTION A (OFF ROAD) PROJECT NUMBER: DATE: 20-Nov-13 2013-03011
UNIT # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY PRICE AMOUNT 1 Easement Acquisition SF 16,500$ 1.60 $ 26,400.00 2 Mobilization LS 1$ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 3 E & S: 18" Silt Fence LF 16,800$ 1.50 $ 25,200.00 4 Clear/Grub SY 1,750$ 3.00 $ 5,250.00 5 Remove Concrete Sidewalk (4" Thick) SF 3,800$ 35.18 $ 133,684.00 6 Drainage Improvements/SWM LS 1$ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 7 Grading LS 1$ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 8 Seeding/Mulching SY 5,600$ 0.20 $ 1,120.00 9 Landscaping LS 1$ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 10 Pedestrian Bridge (12' Width, 80' Span) LS 1$ 200,000.00 $ 200,000.00 11 Bypass Pumping for Bridge Installation LS 1$ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 12 3" 19mm Superpave Wearing Course SY 9,500$ 16.50 $ 156,750.00 13 6" Aggregate Subbase SY 9,500$ 10.00 $ 95,000.00 14 PennDOT/ADA Compliant Curb Ramp EA 14$ 4,500.00 $ 63,000.00 15 Pedestrian Refuge Island EA 1$ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 16 Pedestrian Scale Stop Sign EA 18$ 150.00 $ 2,700.00 17 Wayfinding Signage EA 15$ 150.00 $ 2,250.00 18 Wayfinding/Information Kiosk EA 4$ 15,000.00 $ 60,000.00 19 Split Rail Fencing LF 250$ 75.00 $ 18,750.00 20 6' High Privacy Fencing LF 500$ 120.00 $ 60,000.00 LF 2,750$ 120.00 $ 330,000.00 21 Double Sided Guard Rail (Hartman Road Separation) 22 Segmental Block Retaining Wall SF 150$ 55.00 $ 8,250.00 23 Line Striping LF 8,400$ 3.00 $ 25,200.00 24 Painted Crosswalk (24") LF 620$ 100.00 $ 62,000.00 25 Pedestrian Warning Signal EA 1$ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 26 Pedestrian Warning Signage EA 4$ 200.00 $ 800.00
Subtotal: $ 1,466,354.00 15% Contingency: $ 219,953.10 15% Design/Engineering: $ 219,953.10
Total Estimated Construction Cost: $ 1,906,260.20
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 26 G GILMORE & ASSOCIATES, INC. RECOMMENDATIONS &A ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST CLIENT: MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP PROJECT NAME: POWERLINE CONNECTOR TRAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY - OPTION B (ON ROAD) PROJECT NUMBER: DATE: 20-Nov-13 2013-03011
UNIT # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY PRICE AMOUNT 1 Easement Acquisition SF 37,205 $ 1.60 $ 59,528.00 2 Mobilization LS 1$ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 3 E & S: Silt Fence 18" LF 17,600 $ 1.50 $ 26,400.00 4 Clear/Grub SY 1,750 $ 3.00 $ 5,250.00 5 Remove Concrete Sidewalk (4" Thick) SF 1,500 $ 35.18 $ 52,770.00 6 Grading LS 1$ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 7 Drainage Improvements/SWM LS 1$ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 8 Seeding/Mulching SY 6,000 $ 0.20 $ 1,200.00 9 Landscaping LS 1$ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 10 Pedestrian Bridge (10' Width, 80' Span) LS 1$ 200,000.00 $ 200,000.00 11 Bypass Pumping for Bridge Installation LS 1$ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 12 3" 19mm Superpave Wearing Course SY 3,500 $ 16.50 $ 57,750.00 13 6" Aggregate Subbase SY 3,500 $ 10.00 $ 35,000.00 14 PennDOT/ADA Compliant Curb Ramp EA 14 $ 4,500.00 $ 63,000.00 15 Concrete Pavement SY 3,150 $ 27.00 $ 85,050.00 16 Pedestrian Refuge Island EA 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 17 Pedestrian Scale Stop Sign EA 18 $ 150.00 $ 2,700.00 18 Wayfinding Signage EA 15 $ 150.00 $ 2,250.00 19 Wayfinding/Information Kiosk EA 4$ 15,000.00 $ 60,000.00 Double Sided Guardrail (Hartman Road LF 550 $ 120.00 $ 66,000.00 20 Separation) 21 6' Privacy Fencing LF 500 $ 125.00 $ 62,500.00 22 Line Striping LF 3,150 $ 3.00 $ 9,450.00 23 Painted Crosswalk (24") LF 1,160 $ 100.00 $ 116,000.00 24 Thermoplastic Sharrow Marking EA 40 $ 300.00 $ 12,000.00 25 Bicycle Safe Inlet Grates EA 10 $ 750.00 $ 7,500.00 26 Share the Road Signs EA 40 $ 150.00 $ 6,000.00 27 Pedestrian Warning Signal EA 1$ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 28 Pedestrian Warning Signage EA 4 $ 200.00 $ 800.00
Subtotal: $ 1,121,148.00 15% Contingency: $ 168,172.20 15% Design/Engineering: $ 168,172.20
Total Estimated Construction Cost: $ 1,457,492.40
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 27 RECOMMENDATIONS FUNDING Trail development continues to be a high priority for grantors. It is recommended to discuss the project with Regional Advisors from each potential funding source to have the best opportunity to secure funds for implementation. The following represents a comprehensive list of current potential grant sources specifically for regional trail projects:
Montgomery County Open Space Funds Montgomery County has a history of supporting trail development throughout the County, dedicating over $2.8 million through 2016. Although most of this funding has already been allocated, the County’s commitment to regional trails indicates that future funding may become available. Due to the connectivity of the proposed connector trail to the 202 Parkway Trail and the Power Line Trail, there may also be opportunities for multi-municipal partnerships. http://www.montcopa.org/
Act 13: Marcellus Shale Impact Fees Act 13/Impact Fee provides for the imposition of an unconventional gas well fee (also called an impact fee), and the distribution of those funds to local and state governments. Act 13/Impact Fee also contains provisions regarding how the impact fee may be spent. A significant portion of the funds collected will be distributed directly to local governments to cover the local impacts of drilling. Also, several state agencies will receive funding to be used for a variety of other purposes. More information can be found at: http://www.puc.state.pa.us/filing_resources/issues_laws_regulations/act_13_impact_fee_. aspx
DVRPC Regional Trails Program This program, administered by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, with funding from the William Penn Foundation, aims to capitalize upon opportunities for trail development by providing funding for targeted, priority trail design, construction and planning projects that will promote a truly connected, regional network of multi-use trails with Philadelphia and Camden as its hub. The program will also provide technical assistance to trail developers, counties, municipalities and nonprofit organizations. Although funding is currently depleted, additional funding may be added due to the success of the program. More information can be found at: http://www.dvrpc.org/RegionalTrailsProgram/ PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 28 RECOMMENDATIONS
PA DCNR Bureau of Recreation and Conservation One of the priorities for these grants are regionally significant trail development in the state. Grant applications are slated to open January 15, 2014 and are due April 16, 2014. The grants typically require an 80-20 or 50-50 match. More information can be found at: http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/brc/grants/c2p2programguidance/index.htm
PA DCED Greenways, Trails and Recreation Grant Program Funding for projects which involve development, rehabilitation and improvements to public parks, recreation areas, greenways, trails and river conservation. Grants shall be awarded to eligible applicants for projects that do not exceed $250,000. Most projects require a 50% local match of the total project cost. Applications from municipalities with a population of fewer than 5,000 require a 20% match of the total project cost. Match may be cash or non-cash and must be directly related to the approved scope of work. More information can be fount at: http://www.newpa.com/find-and-apply-for-funding/funding- and-program-finder/greenways-trails-and-recreation-program-gtrp
MAP-21 Under MAP-21, programs continue for active transportation programs including Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to School and Recreational Trails programs. More information can be found at: http://www.fta.dot.gov/map21/
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) Transportation Alternatives (TA) are Federal highway and transit funds set-aside under the Surface Transportation Program (STP) for community-based “non-traditional” projects designed to strengthen the cultural, aesthetic, and environmental aspects of the nation’s inter-modal transportation system. The TE funding category, which has historically funded many pedestrian and bicycle supportive projects such as streetscape improvements, was originally established by Congress in 1991 under the IS-TEA transportation authorization legislation, and was most recently affirmed as TA under the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). The next selection cycle for the PA Transportation Alternatives Projects may occur in FY2014. More information can be found at: http://www.dvrpc.org/TA/ PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 29 RECOMMENDATIONS
Recreational Trails Program MAP-21 authorized funding for the Recreational Trails Program (RTP) as a setaside of the new Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) (23 U.S.C. 213). The RTP funding is the same as the FY 2009 amount (unless the State opts out; see below): whatever a State received for the RTP in FY 2009 (as revised) will be the RTP amount. This will be up to $84.16 million nationwide, annually, for FY 2013 and 2014. More information can be found at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/overview/map21.cfm
Safe Routes To School MAP-21 establishes a new program to provide for a variety of alternative transportation projects that were previously eligible activities under separately funded programs. This program is funded at a level equal to two percent of the total of all MAP-21 authorized Federal-aid highway and highway research funds, with the amount for each State set aside from the State’s formula apportionments. Unless a State opts out, it must use a specified portion of its TA funds for recreational trails projects. Safe Routes to Schools Program is an eligible activity under this program. More information can be found at: http://www.dot. state.pa.us/Internet/Bureaus/CPDM.nsf/SRTSHomepage
PECO Green Region Grants The aim of these grants is to assist communities in their efforts to acquire and improve open lands. Green Region grants are available to municipalities in amounts up to $10,000. The grants can be used with other funding sources to cover a wide variety of planning and direct expenses associated with developing and implementing open space programs, including consulting fees, surveys, environmental assessments, habitat improvement, and capital improvements for passive recreation More information can be found at: https://www.peco.com/Community/CharitableGiving/GreenRegion/Pages/GrantDetails. aspx and the Green Region Program Administrator, Holly Harper (610)353-5587.
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 30 RECOMMENDATIONS PERMITTING AND COORDINATION Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (Penn-DOT) will require permitting for all trail construction which occurs within a State owned road rights-of-way. State owned roads within our project area include: 1) S.R. 0463 (Horsham Road) 2) Hartman Road
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) will require: 1) Permitting for pedestrian bridge stream crossings. It is likely the General Permit Seven (GP-7) will be required for a Minor Road Crossing. 2) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit will be required for construction disturbance greater than one (1) acre in size. This permit is coordinated through the Montgomery County Conservation District in conjunction with the Erosion and Sedimentation Control permitting that is required.
Montgomery County Conservation District will require: 1) Permitting for Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures
Montgomery Township will require: 1) Grading Permit and review of proposed storm-water management design by the Township Engineer. 2) Approval of plans and specifications by the Board of Supervisors in order to authorize the solicitation of bids for construction.
PAGE POWER LINE TRAIL CONNECTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 31 APPENDIX
PHOTO REFERENCES: 1- 202 PARKWAY STUB 2- SWALE AT JOSEPH AMBLER INN 3- PARKING AT JOSEPH AMBLER INN 4- WOODED AREA AT JOSEPH AMBLER INN 5- POTENTIAL STREAM CROSSING LOCATION 6- EXISTING TRAIL SYSTEM AT MUNICIPAL COMPLEX 7- EXISTING MUNICIPAL COMPLEX ENTRANCE DRIVE 8- EXISTING ACCESS DRIVE AT MUNICIPAL COMPLEX 9- EAST SIDE OF MUNICIPAL COMPLEX 10- CORNER OF HORSHAM & STUMP ROADS 11- EXISTING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WEST OF FUTURE COMMUNITY CENTER SITE 12- SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE OF FUTURE COMMUNITY CENTER SITE 13- SOUTHERN SIDE OF CEDAR RUN LANDSCAPE PARCEL 14- SOUTHERN SIDE OF TEVA PARCEL 15- LAWN STRIP BETWEEN TEVA & HARTMAN CORPORATE CENTER 16- HARTMAN CORPORATE CENTER ENTRANCE DRIVE 17- HORSHAM ROAD AT POWER LINE LOOKING EAST 18- EXISTING WALKWAY ALONG HARTMAN ROAD 19-HARTMAN ROAD AND DOMORAH DRIVE 20- HARTMAN ROAD - SOUTH OF DOMORAH DRIVE 21- HARTMAN ROAD - ADJACENT WET AREA 22- HARTMAN ROAD - HEAD WALL 23- HARTMAN ROAD - UTILITY POLE AND SLOPE 24- LINK TO FUTURE POWER LINE TRAIL 25- STUMP ROAD AND COMMERCE DRIVE 26- MISSING SIDEWALK CONNECTION TO COMMERCE DRIVE 27- CROSSING TO VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER 28- COMMERCE DRIVE 29- DOMORAH DRIVE - EXISTING GRATE 30- COMMERCE DRIVE AND DOMORAH CONNECTION 31- PECO CORRIDOR 32- PECO CORRIDOR AND PUBLIC WORKS 33- EXISTING WALK ALONG HORSHAM ROAD AT TEVA 34- EXISTING WALK ADJACENT TO WETLANDS 35- EXISTING WALK ALONG HARTMAN ROAD AT TEVA 1. 202 PARKWAY STUB 2. SWALE AT JOSEPH AMBLER INN
3. PARKING AT JOSEPH AMBLER INN 4. WOODED AREA AT JOSEPH AMBLER INN EXISTING TRAIL SYSTEM AT MUNICIPAL 5. POTENTIAL STREAM CROSSING LOCATION 6. COMPLEX
7. EXISTING MUNICIPAL COMPLEX ENTRANCE 8. EXISTING ACCESS DRIVE AT MUNICIPAL DRIVE COMPLEX 9. EAST SIDE OF MUNICIPAL COMPLEX 10. CORNER OF HORSHAM & STUMP ROADS
EXISTING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WEST 11. 12. SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE OF COMMUNITY OF FUTURE COMMUNITY CENTER SITE CENTER SITE SOUTHERN SIDE OF CEDAR RUN 13. 14. SOUTHERN SIDE OF TEVA PARCEL LANDSCAPE PARCEL
15. LAWN STRIP BETWEEN TEVA & HARTMAN 16. HARTMAN CORPORATE CENTER ENTRANCE CORPORATE CENTER DRIVE 17. HORSHAM AT POWER LINE LOOKING EAST 18. EXISTING WALK ALONG HARTMAN ROAD
19. HARTMAN ROAD & DOMORAH DRIVE 20. HARTMAN ROAD - SOUTH OF DOMORAH DR. 21. HARTMAN ROAD - ADJACENT WET AREA 22. HARTMAN ROAD - HEAD WALL
23. HARTMAN ROAD - UTILITY POLE & SLOPE 24. LINK TO FUTURE POWER LINE TRAIL 25. STUMP ROAD AND COMMERCE DRIVE 26. MISSING SIDEWALK CONNECTION TO COMMERCE DRIVE
30' TYPICAL WIDTH
27. CROSSING TO VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER 28. COMMERCE DRIVE 29. DOMORAH DRIVE - EXISTING GRATE 30. COMMERCE DRIVE AND DOMORAH DRIVE
31. PECO CORRIDOR 32. PECO CORRIDOR AND PUBLIC WORKS 33. EXISTING WALK ALONG HORSHAM ROAD AT 34. EXISTING WALK ADJACENT TO WETLANDS TEVA
35. EXISTING WALK ALONG HARTMAN ROAD AT TEVA M ONTGOMERY C OUNTY Primary Trail Network
Lehigh County Bucks County
COUNTY LINE RD GERYVILLE Telford RD BETHLEHEM
Souderton OLD 332 Lower LIMEKILN Graeme SOU 202 611 DERTON RD Park BYBERRY Moreland RD GRAVEL DAVISVILLE
29
PIKE EASTON Hatboro AVE East Hatfield 16 BLAIR MILL RD 113 HUNTINGDON 5 Montgomery YORK HORSHAM 3 Greenville Salford COWPATH RD RD 463 Pennsburg Marlborough Hatfield 7Bryn P Horsham Upper E ALLENTOWN Borough Athyn Red N 9 N 263 S RD Y Hanover L PIKE Hill RIDGE VA Upper N PHILMONT IA
PIKE T RD Moreland KUTZTOWN U RD I-276 RN 152 P RD PIKE Franconia IK Lansdale E WELSH Green 563 N WELSH RD 63 O 63 RD Lane PIKE R 63 TH Park EA OLD S RD RD Lorimer T EASTON KNIGHT RD E E OLD Park
K
8 I X M AIN T PIKE ST P EN DEKALB 309
S Green IO E N SUMNEYTOWN L 63 Morgan NORRISTOWN 232 Lane L I Log House V
S North Lower Y BETHLEHEM FORT E Wales W Abington L A
R S 3 PIKE Gwynedd H
FORTY FOOT A 7 IN RD 63 PIKE
H 4 G 611 T Upper
SK - O I PPACK RD N
N YORK O Upper Dublin
T Towamencin E
R X Upper E P D Gwynedd R
U Lower E
FORGE Rockledge O S S Salford S Ambler W 15 A Salford Y LIMEKILN Upper RD Evans- Jenkintown Frederick 29 MORRIS Mumbower TOWNSHIP LINE RD Mill RD I-476 202 73 HOFFMANSVILLE Lower 9 PIKE 73
LAYFIELD Frederick The Highlands PIKE Peter Wentz PIKE 5 RD RD Farmstead PIKE Whitpain CHURCH Cheltenham 14 73 Hope Lodge CREEK Douglass 73 RD Pennypacker SKIPPACK 2 RD 73 BIG RD Mills Worcester Fort Schwenksville RD Washington 152 New State Park CHELTENHAM AVE TOOKANY PIKE D
ROAD E R K
Central I
P L
Hanover BUTLER
Perkiomen N L I
GRAVEL DEKALB R
U M
Valley Park D VALLEY
A Skippack STUMP RD T Springfield R R O Evansburg O 13 R E A U M State Park TOWNSHIP LINE RD I P T AR N A
E P BIG F A E M 5 V
1 A L Sunrise 12 RD G Y 0 S E 0 73 Mill Perkiomen East N T N A
BRIDGE D E E T S R P 8 X Norriton
P SWAMP E ROAD RD
363 WHITEHALL S L
R 14
L
E I 202 SWEDE
S V
S S Plymouth Whitemarsh T W 4 N Norristown R PLYMOUTH City of A 663 E Farm Park 202 GERMANTOWN PIKE Y
B PIKE ANTOWN PIKE L M
I GER G 113 Philadelphia
100 ST PIKE RIDGE PIKE 15
Norristown TOWNSHIP LINE TOWNSHIP AVE 3 Limerick ST SANDY HILL RD
RIDGE PIKE RIDGE PIKE West ST MARKLEY MAIN Norriton CONSHOHOCKEN RD Collegeville AIRY ST Upper Trappe 3RD AVE I-476 Lower ST Pottsgrove Lower 4TH Pottsgrove Conshohocken F SC A RD LEWIS Bridgeport H R D Providence RIVER U I-76 M KEIM ST Y
R LK I ILL 11 N RIDGE PIKE 11 P RD E Berks G O RD EXPR
T PARK T T L ESS S ST FAYETTE W O D T L AY
R O I D
N W N V R
D County A L E Upper E XP V E RESS CHARLOTTE I WAY G E F E W N EGYPT RD L I RD TRAPPE S West CO O BELMONT AVE NS L L Providence L HO FORGE HO L O 320 C Conshohocken K O H C 8 E S ATAW N H T A N N T A 23
N
John James R
Y 23 D
A T Upper S STA 422 TE E O Pottstown M 10 S T V 422 N Audubon
I E S D A R R Upper 1
6 T K Center at DEKALB PIKE Merion BLACK C M RO VALLEY Lower Schuylkill D S Mill Grove Y R T SW A ES AY HIGH ST Royersford Valley Park R P W Pottsgrove Lower X D Merion E S 11 SE R C Manor OND A Perkiomen I-276 S I-76 O VE 29 422 GULPH RD E AVENUE F R
Valley Park P BL LL A EGYPT RD KI X C YL S K U N E CH SPRING MILL RD O S Narberth CITY LINE AVE R Lock 60 at the S West O Schuylkill VALLEY T Y T Chester County C A G
N
K U Canal Park FORGE M LP
11 U Pottsgrove H
D 202
R R R O D 1 D NATIONAL GS
N C I -
WL HISTORICAL MONTGOMERY AVENUE PA D
PARK I 30 Delaware M LANCASTER County
Completed Trail 1. Chester Valley Trail 9. Power Line Trail In Design/Future Construction 2. Cresheim Trail 10. Schuylkill East Trail Proposed Trail 3. Cross County Trail 11. Schuylkill River Trail Montgomery Click on any red trail number/name or Freight Station 4. Evansburg Trail 12. Stony Creek Trail County green park/historic site name for a link to 0 1/2 1 2 Miles County-Owned Land 5. Liberty Bell Trail 13. Sunrise Trail Planning individual websites. State-Owned Land 6. Manatawny Trail 14. West County Trail Commission Montgomery County Courthouse - Planning Commission See individual trail brochures for trailhead Valley Forge National Historical Park 7. Pennypack Trail 15. Wissahickon Green Ribbon Trail PO Box 311 Norristown PA 19404-0311 access to parking, public transit, restrooms, (p) 610 278-3722 (f) 610 278-3941
Historic Sites 8. Perkiomen Trail 16. 202 Trail MCPC www.montcopa.org/plancom water, and other information. 0 0.6 1 Mil" Scale 1 1 1 1:66,000 I I 0 0.6 1